kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
the media. we also appreciate georgia's progress in implementing judiciary reforms. the independence of the judiciary is at the heart of our association.
compared with the previous regime i believe that the reforms have continued and there have been results.
five years ago i personally would not really have believed that one day i could not stop the thought this country may indeed become a member of the european union.
of course at the moment this is still far away but i think the country is making a great effort and we have to support its european choice because as we know the long shadow of russia is on every eastern partner country.
mr president having just led on behalf of this parliament the first parliamentary association committee meeting with the delegation from this parliament with our counterparts in georgia may i firstly start by thanking my co chair and our counterparts in georgia and indeed all of my colleagues who played a very full part in all of those groups that were present for the duration of the meetings that we had there.
it was quite a challenging mission in many ways but i believe we achieved one thing and that was to move our relations beyond party political affiliations to a genuinely parliament to parliament level and i think we will serve ourselves well if future resolutions build upon the final statement that we were able to achieve.
i thank the commission for the report on the dcfta and the association agreement.
the next step of course must be towards visa liberalisation.
in terms of the georgian people that is their dream in terms of the immediate future.
there is a russian angle and it sends a very powerful signal to the people of abkhazia and ossetia that they must invest in this future direction as well.
we have of course elections approaching very soon and this is where it is essential that georgia shows its commitment to european values and that is best demonstrated by their commitment today to media freedoms.
next month.
mr president in the context of the current european neighbourhood policy i would like to make it clear that those countries that wish to pursue deeper relations with the eu should be fully supported.
at the same time it should be clear that such countries have to live up to certain standards.
the implementation of many of the actions of the roadmap and achieving interoperability of information systems will require certain legislative changes.
for instance in the third quarter of two thousand and sixteen more than two hundred zero messages were exchanged via the secure information exchange network application amongst the member states and between the member states and europol.
to ensure better compliance by member states an explicit obligation for the receiving competent authorities to take active follow up measures on such information is also introduced.
regarding the various legal instruments i would like to make the following points.
the political agreement on the directive envisages that member states will be obliged to exchange relevant information gathered in criminal proceedings wherever such information could be used in the prevention detection investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences
that parliament has just had a debate on the directive and will vote on it tomorrow.
the directive will strengthen the european union's legal framework to prevent terrorist attacks notably by criminalising acts such as training or travelling for terrorist purposes and it also reinforces the rights of the victims.
two thousand and sixteen the number of searches conducted in this database even set a new record in the third quarter of last year reaching more than one million searches for the first time.
improving information exchange and implementing the roadmap has been a priority of the previous presidencies and it continues to be a priority for our presidency.
i believe that based on available statistics it is fair to say that there has been substantive progress in increasing the information exchange both among the member states and with europol over the past year.
a swift implementation of all adopted union legislation in this field is key.
besides the enormous importance of collecting information it is equally important to join up the dots and make the best use of the information.
important work in this direction is ongoing in the highlevel expert group which the commission set up last april and in which the european parliament participates.
regarding the exchange of information on terrorism offences the council throughout the negotiations last year on the counterterrorism directive was actively engaged in seeking a compromise with parliament on strengthening the exchange of information. i am glad
the roadmap contains no less than fifty practical short and mediumterm actions and longterm orientations.
and irrespective of whether there has been a request to that effect.
i am aware of the fact that using the existing tools is only one part of the process.
at the same time parliament the council and the commission agreed that to ensure efficient and timely exchange of information on terrorism measures in a broader policy context are necessary. in a joint statement the three institutions underlined the necessity of making full use of all the existing union instruments channels and agencies to exchange information.
and more generally in the way that some of these systems are operating currently including how they operate with each other.
the commission assists member states in every possible way to ensure the proper implementation of our agreements but where necessary we do not shy away from enforcing the law including the use of infringement procedures.
another instrument that i want to pause on is the council framework decision referred to as the swedish initiative' well known to you here.
information sharing with europol and eurojust has increased significantly over the last year.
any proposals i think it goes without saying for amending the existing legal framework will of course need to be taken forward with you in the normal way.
forgive me in advance if some of this gets a bit technical.
we are focused on getting to full implementation of this system which as you know was agreed some years ago.
that is why the commission is currently looking at the member states' use of the swedish initiative and why we plan to launch a compliance study to look into this in more detail.
more generally the process we initiated last year with a strategy presented in april the setting up of the high level expert group allows us to address shortcomings in the eu information systems in an inclusive and transparent way.
that is why as i have just said in finishing the last debate in december the commission presented a set of proposals to improve the technical functioning of sis to streamline national processes and to strengthen data protection by introducing additional safeguards.
president juncker's state of the union address in september and the european council conclusions of december refer to the importance of overcoming the current shortcomings in information management and improving the interoperability and interconnection between existing information systems.
and we work to support the member states in doing this with funding expertise and by getting them to share best practice.
two thousand and sixteen the volume of data concerning foreign terrorist fighters shared with europol's focal point travellers europol's specialist team of analysts and experts who work on analysing information around foreign terrorist fighters increased almost threefold over the course of.
from the various improvements tabled i would highlight one in particular for the first time we propose to make it obligatory for member states to issue alerts in sis for persons related to terrorist offences.
we discussed the findings with some of you in the libe committee in january and i look forward to continuing a discussion on this important subject.
so i believe we are moving in the right direction but there is still a long way to go.
thanks to the work of the parliament the directive will make the exchange of information mandatory and include an obligation for the receiving member state to take appropriate action when they get information.
it is important that the co legislators work together for the swift adoption of these proposed measures.
first the group suggests ways to improve data quality in eu information systems.
the main instrument we have already touched upon it earlier this afternoon that i am going to address is the schengen information system it.
we are looking at their replies and in the light of those we will need to take a decision on next steps.
it defines a minimum base for what types of information should be shared with the two agencies.
as i have said on several occasions before this house eu instruments can only bring added value on the ground if and when they are fully implemented by the member states and applied in practice.
that is why for the first time in relation to a former third pillar instrument infringement proceedings were launched in september last year.
again this would seek to make better use of existing systems in full compliance with existing rules on access the use of data and data protection rules.
one well known tool is the prm framework for exchanging data regarding dna fingerprints and vehicle registration and for enhancing cross border cooperation against crime and terrorism.
second the group proposes to look at a european portal capable of searching simultaneously all relevant eu databases to which the person conducting the search has access rights.
is the most widely used information sharing system in europe and i believe it is a real operational success thanks in part to our collective and i include very much the work of the parliament here support and work to raise awareness.
we have also got the high level expert working group looking into the challenge of strengthening and improving the functioning of prm cooperation.
it requires member states to transmit information on terrorist offences to eurojust europol and other member states concerned unless this would jeopardise ongoing investigations.
i know that there are many experts here who can match indeed far exceed my technical expertise.
this is why a key aspect of our work towards an effective and sustainable security union is better application and implementation of existing eu instruments. it is one of the pillars of our work towards a stronger and smarter set of information systems and
this legislation again well known to you requires member states to designate contact points with responsibility for sending information on terrorist offences to europol and eurojust.
in parallel we are continuing to work with the member states to ensure the full implementation and effective use of all of our information exchange tools.
the commission welcomes this as information systems are really only as effective as the quality of the data they hold and we intend to pursue the proposals put forward by the group.
to take just one example there has been a significant increase in checks by and involvement of member state security services with this system.
an eight hundred increase in the discreet and specific check alerts issued by those services over the last two years.
the obligations in the council decision will be strengthened through the directive on combating terrorism which you are voting on tomorrow.
i hope you will support that and we stand ready to examine whether such mandatory obligations for information sharing could should be introduced for other eu databases.
today i would just like briefly to refer to the interim report's recommendations.
we need to make technical and operational improvements to the sis if it is to become more effective and efficient as we all want.
finally let me say a few words about our work on information systems and interoperability and the preparatory work at senior officials level that is currently being done by the high level expert group.
the commission has consistently called on member states to exploit fully the potential of the existing information systems at eu level.
but some member states use the swedish framework decision more extensively than others to put it politely and overall there remains room for improvement.
two thousand and sixteen now i take this progress to be encouraging but the level of engagement still differs between different member states.
in doing so we propose to turn the current council decisions on the sis which are pre lisbon instruments and part of the so called former third pillar into regulations to be adopted under the ordinary legislative procedures.
to accelerate the work of the high level expert group the chairman presented an interim report last december.
let me turn to some of the key instruments and give you a brief update on where we stand in terms of their implementation and their use.
it provides a common legal framework for the effective and expeditious exchange of information and criminal intelligence between member states' law enforcement authorities.
for instance the number of foreign terrorist fighters communicated to europol and entered into its europol information system increased from three seven hundred and forty entries in december two thousand and fifteen to seven eight hundred and eighty four entries in december.
on that and indeed all of these issues to do with information exchange i look forward to continuing the close dialogue that we have between the commission and the parliament because these subjects merit it.
it is a key part of the work of the high level expert group to assess various options and make recommendations to that end.
despite all the efforts we have made collectively there are five member states that still do not comply with the requirements of the prm decision.
it will help us to determine what is needed to ensure a better use of this important instrument.
the high level expert group will present its final report later this spring and on this basis the commission will consider if and if so what further measures might increase the effectiveness and help address the current security threats.
that invades our fundamental freedoms.
the commissioner mentioned the prm convention.
and that is the problem.
in fact the small number of members here in the chamber now are experts as you as you rightly identified.
we need to answer intelligently and with practicality in this house that we have also done our job.
i want to say to mr borg thank you to your jha council for keeping up the pressure and we as a parliament will want to see the council face to face because this is very much about the member states.
we are doing our work to ensure that this balance is created but the key as the commissioner said is implementation and evaluation and of course we will do our work in relation to fundamental rights.
this is the really important area when we see record numbers of searches on the sis database when we see records being made on the europol searches all of the things that the commissioner mentioned. the high level working group on interoperability is now one of the key challenges for us.
i only have two minutes so let me mention the prm convention.
there are experts here.
sadly we cannot match you for speaking time so i am only going to identify one or two of the issues that you spread over twelve to fourteen minutes.
all of the things he said were correct evaluation implementation ensuring that there is cooperation and ensuring at the bottom of this that there are fundamental rights the police directive. but in the end if the member states are not willing to share the basic information as we saw with the prm convention and as we now see with continuing infringement procedures by the commission then we don't have the genuine sharing of intelligence and police information
we are all agreed that it is absolutely crucial that we fully exploit the potential of existing information systems at eu level and that means making sure that all member states implement what they have agreed to do
we have expertise and we have the sharing of best practice.
we will continue to support all of those means.
we will also continue to look at what we need to do to plan for the future and to adapt the information tools we have to make them as effective as possible and that applies to the prm convention as well although i have to say in direct response to a direct question that right now as of today we do not have a proposal on lisbonisation.
that question remains open and if that can help effective implementation we will certainly examine it.
it maintains pressure on the member states as we have been discussing but frankly it also maintains pressure on the commission to continue the important work on implementation that we have all agreed is at the heart of making progress.
there is an urgent need to improve information sharing among and between the member states and for instruments such as the new so called police directive on data protection providing a high level structure for information exchange.
after immense pressure on this subject the eu commission has approved four more varieties of gm maize that they regard as a safe contaminant.
this problem will resurface again within a year or so.
this is a most unsatisfactory situation and creates an unnecessary crisis in the production of meat and eggs.
it is perverse that whilst there are small tolerances allowed for stones soil dead insects metal filings and wood chips there is no tolerance whatsoever for a single wholesome grain of maize.
at present there are also several gm flax and cotton products which can easily be inadvertently mixed in trace amounts amongst a large cargo of soya and they will also cause a shipment to be refused.
the uncertainty that this zero tolerance policy creates has resulted in steeply increased insurance premiums for shippers that get passed on to the livestock producer to say nothing of the angst generated when a producer is informed that his feed order cannot be fulfilled.
the cost to the shipper in such an instance amounts to gbp. two three million but there is also severe disruption down the line with lorries returning empty to feed mills who then have the problem of sourcing alternative protein at very short notice.
it can take several years for such approval to take place whilst meanwhile new gm maize varieties are being adopted by farms in america all the time.
i urge the commission to approach this whole issue in a more practical and sensible fashion by bringing in a tolerance level for gm admixture similar to that for other contaminants.
we need to look at both these sectors at how we are actually supporting them. can we do more for them? can we keep them there? because we should remember that many of these sectors such as sheep and suckler cows are in environmentally sensitive areas they are in mountainous regions and areas where there is no alternative and i think we need to have another look at how we are supporting those parts of the industry.
we are driving up the cost of feed which is hitting our pig farmers our poultry farmers and our beef farmers and speeding up those approvals would go a long way to helping the situation.
this is a very worrying trend.
in the light of these developments it would not be appropriate at this moment to take exceptional measures such as opening an intervention tender for maize nor to intervene with export refunds.
despite the good harvest forecasts the fourth in a row now stocks at the beginning of the harvest stood at a low level.
the financial and economic crisis has also had an impact on the agricultural sector.
two thousand and seven all in all i do not see sufficient justification for introducing an additional market instrument at the moment but i can assure you that we are monitoring this situation very carefully.
we have also created a legal framework enabling fruit and vegetable producers to influence and stabilise the market but there is a need for more bottom up action for which the commission cannot take the responsibility.
in the two thousand and seven reform we provided incentives for producer organisations to do this.
after the initial fall that we saw in autumn two thousand and eight this renewed drop in agricultural income can be expected to more than write off the exceptional income increases generated by the hikes that we saw in agricultural products
official estimates of agricultural income will only be available at the end of this week but we can already expect that the income will show a significant drop in two thousand and nine compared to the previous
two thousand and seven prices this year are lower than last year but at the same time and sometimes we have to look at it from the positive side we can see that feed prices are much more stable than back in two thousand.
this is a quick run through of the short term measures but let me assure you that we are also looking into the medium and long term issues in particular at matters like the distribution of the value added in the food chain and also how to deal with price volatility.
year given the relative development in the cost of production and the agricultural market prices.
the situation is slightly different for feed barley with reduced exports and low domestic prices but intervention as you know has just been opened and this should help the feed grain markets.
since then three consecutive satisfactory harvests and the economic crisis have led gradually to very low prices.
the economic crisis hit it at a time when it had not fully recovered from the difficulties experienced back in.
i agree that close monitoring of the situation is needed and that this will allow action where necessary.
we also equipped them with new crisis management tools like green harvesting or non harvesting which complement the traditional withdrawals.
they can associate into economically stronger units also on a transitional basis which is significant as today's crises do not recognise national borders.
we are all aware that the agri sector is beset by low margins and the least i think that eu farmers can expect is that the cost of inputs should not be increased by the failure of the eu to act sufficiently quickly to establish authorisations.
i sent a letter to president barroso signed by a number of meps and he replied that the commission have moved quickly to authorise three modified gm products and a fourth on the way. however we are still playing catch up.
in ireland since may of this year the extra cost of delayed authorisations has been eur twenty three million.
finally the issue of low level presence will always be with us and while speedy functioning of the authorisation system will improve the situation we still need a technical solution.
it is one thing to have poor output prices but it is a double penalty when inputs are not available at world market prices.
the problem next year will be brazil they have streamlined their approval system down to twenty two months and the problem will not go away.
so we need to go on being visible on the export markets and i think that for the future and i hope there will be full support from the european parliament we need much more money for promoting our high quality products on the new emerging markets.
others are more political related to the period after two thousand and thirteen but i am sure that you would find the proposals extremely interesting.
but new initiatives cannot be presented by a caretaker commission.
the council presented thirty nine different proposals and we can actually accept quite a number.
i expect the next commission to present such a proposal.
therefore the idea that we should now protect our own production would be damaging for our agricultural sector.
it is true that the european union is the biggest importer of agricultural products but at the same time the european union is the biggest exporter of agricultural products. this is because of the fact that we have an extremely good brand european products are considered
biodiversity i completely agree that this is important and that was exactly the reason why we included biodiversity in the new challenges when we agreed on the health check of the common agricultural policy in november.