kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
i would like to place on record on behalf of the three of us our thanks to the french presidency for bringing us a common position in november which has enabled us to bring this improved package to you today in the last session of this mandate because it is vital for european consumers and the european economy that we give this a ringing endorsement in our vote tomorrow. as always with these complex issues i have had tremendous cooperation from my own shadow team
in this directive we have significantly improved the rights of consumers and users in the electronic space. consumers need to be empowered to make choices between the communication services on offer and to do that they are entitled to information. they are entitled to fair contract terms and conditions that do not tie
the most important thing is that it makes the package robust for the next decade.
i should like to congratulate the rapporteurs on their work and in particular my colleague pilar del castillo vera on making big improvements to the commission proposal for the regulators by turning it into this body of european regulators for electronic communications it.
another important aspect of this package is the enhanced consumer rights that have been delivered in particular number portability within one working day and greater transparency in contracts and billing.
i would like to compliment my colleague malcolm harbour for thrashing out a compromise text with the council over this vexed issue known as amendment.
what is easy to send in an instant is equally easy to delete in an instant but unfortunately too much time has to be spent scrolling down trying to find anything else other than spam.
is a pity that a debate about the internet and internet censorship and the legal powers of member states has distracted attention from the substance of this package.
one hundred and thirty eight if nothing else this part of the package has provoked a torrent of e mail lobbying and i have to say to those people who believe that large volumes of e mails and many words will prevail that they very quickly become counterproductive.
madam president it is fair to say that the telecoms sector is a success story within the eu which makes it all the more important that we set the right regulatory framework.
i very much hope that the regulators will feel fully equipped to bring about more competition a level playing field and much enhanced consumers' rights as well as striking the right balance to encourage investment and innovation to keep europe at the cutting edge.
our objective has been to allow traffic management procedures as long as they are necessary to ensure the best possible online experience for end users and as long as they do not restrict competition between service providers.
the provisions on traffic management policies were a controversial point in the report but i strongly believe that the compromise protects users' rights to access content and use services of their own choice.
the mobile telephony industry has been understandably very anxious to get access to the radio spectrum bandwidth currently reserved for gsm in order to maintain its global competitiveness.
i am afraid that private deals by leaders behind closed doors are not the way to make eu legislation.
previous spectrum related pieces of legislation such as the mobile satellite services decision have shown that many issues said by the commission to be technical do in fact have a political side to them.
what is technical may in fact affect principles of cohesion and access for everybody.
we do not know what prime minister brown got in return.
madam president i welcome the agreement on the telecoms package because this agreement brings in its wake another agreement on a less discussed issue the repeal of the gsm directive.
i will be voting for the telecoms package but i do so with a certain reluctance because i believe there has been a fundamental betrayal at the highest level of the basic principle of the telecoms liberalisation that this directive was supposed to achieve.
it smells a bit to me.
we have perfectly good copyright laws.
we have perfectly good data protection laws.
that should be enough.
madam president the internet has changed the world as we know it. information that would have been difficult or impossible to find is now only seconds away but the defining characteristic of the internet is not speed or technology;
it is freedom freedom to express opinions freedom to exchange ideas and freedom to share information.
some are advocating a restricted future one where free movement of data is stemmed where big business is allowed to stifle innovation and where internet providers become gate keepers.
we have seen this approach before in china.
i hope we choose to retain the freedom that has brought such success and changed our world for the better.
at a time when economies need all the help they can get we need to choose openness for progress not short term protectionism for profit.
on behalf of my constituents i will vote for our freedom of information and our future free access to internet for all lawful use.
in so doing i will vote for democracy and an economy with opportunities for everyone.
we are just trying to achieve the right balance.
they are important for every consumer.
coming up to the elections i hope that all of you will talk about the work you have been doing in this house for consumers in the internet world because it is absolutely crucial.
i think my second and important reflection is that the internet space itself electronic communications the sector itself is a thriving evolving and dynamic sector. our task as regulators is to allow that dynamism that innovation to continue.
we put in place a framework of regulation to ensure that consumers can engage with that to give them the right to know about those services to empower them to take advantage of that that is crucial.
but the internet is not the thriving place it is and you have seen how dynamic it is because of the mail you have been getting about this proposal it is not there because we have been restricting activity on the internet it is not there because we have been imposing new business models.
we want new entrants to come in we want small businesses we want large businesses we want investment. it is that sense of dynamism and urgency that we need to move forward.
mrs reding is right we must encourage member states to get these improvements in place as soon as possible.
we want the new berec operating; we want the new regulatory body to engage with us in parliament to ensure that these things happen as quickly as possible.
let us move on from here and look towards the future.
an increased number of educational resources will tackle ignorance and thereby correct the current lack of understanding surrounding the care and ownership of equidae.
such schemes could therefore safeguard the welfare needs of equidae while at the same time ensure businesses are viable and are able to adapt to changes in regulation elsewhere.
it is a win win for all involved.
for example knowledge transfer schemes as we see in ireland are one tool member states could utilise to share best practices as well as business models and to foster innovation and new ideas.
rather i firmly believe and this is a belief that fundamentally shapes the nature of this report that value can be added by tackling ignorance and by encouraging and facilitating the spread of best practice and good guidance.
tourists would be empowered to make choices which will not only reward those enterprises which properly care for their equidae but will also inform and provide peace of mind.
sometimes this is out of necessity as forms of transportation and agricultural assistance but other newer roles have also emerged such as in research therapy and rehabilitation.
these problems can be found across the breadth of the equid sector and occur due to a multitude of reasons ignorance lack of education over breeding and economic hardship.
mr president throughout european history the bond between equidae and humankind has occupied a very unique position within our societies.
however despite the varied roles close relationship and at times dependency we share with these animals in too many cases equidae are faced with a number of severe welfare concerns that serve to adversely impact the entire sector. such concerns include neglect overwork and inappropriate living conditions.
europe's citizens want to see more action on animal welfare.
i would like to take this opportunity to thank the shadow for all their support and constructive contributions and to thank eurogroup for animals who have been a valuable source of information throughout the process.
this will provide both commercial and recreational equidae owners with the tools and knowledge to better meet the needs of their animals.
i would like to emphasise at this point that this report does not intend to call for additional legislation but rather to improve existing provisions particularly their enforcement. in fact equidae are broadly covered by a number of legislative acts pertaining to their health and welfare and whilst better implementation and enforcement of existing law would help remedy some of these problems it is not clear within the scope of the existing treaties where added european legislation could or should add value.
this is especially important in light of the added emphasis on the need and in fact urgency to become more environmentally friendly a development that the equid sector is not immune to.
with this report i believe that we have a golden opportunity to not only substantially improve the lives of the seven million equidae currently living within the eu but also by better caring for these animals we have a chance to unlock the full economic potential of this sector and provide a much needed boost to the rural economy.
a recommitment from the commission to the development of a european charter for sustainable and responsible tourism would also be hugely beneficial.
the development of animal welfare indicators will provide the guidance needed to make compliance and consistent enforcement more achievable.
this report provides an overview of the role of equidae mainly horses in today's society and the importance of the equid sector in the eu economy.
the existing animal welfare legislation concerning the keeping transport and slaughter of animals provides a solid base for member states to protect the welfare of horses. the commission for its part will continue to audit the systems in place in member states to protect the welfare of animals and will act on its findings
as and when necessary.
health and welfare.
with the adoption of the regulation on animal breeding specific measures have also been introduced including for the preservation of the genetic diversity in livestock and equidae.
i must also mention the proposal for a regulation on official controls which we hope to conclude during this week's plenary.
the implementation of this new regulation will provide an opportunity to review the rules on traces and the collection and publication of data on the movements of animals and their products.
of the report as regards the administration of veterinary medicinal products to horses.
as rightly pointed out in the report guidance and education are variable supplements to legislation.
in this regard the commission actively promotes the exchange of best practices in particular in the field of animal welfare and has engaged in an enhanced stakeholder dialogue on relevant welfare issues.
the recommended preparation of guidelines on good practices in the equine sector can be considered after the legal framework has been established.
however given the wealth of available advice for keepers of horses and other equidae in almost all member states i would say that the eu added value of having such guidelines is not so apparent.
let me be clear the rising number of cases of compromised equine welfare is primarily caused by economics related choices rather than a lack of accessible information.
as regards the international dimension of the report the commission would refer to various international agreements to which the eu and the member states are party such as the wto agreement on the application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures.
meeting our international obligations should not prevent us from adopting higher standards where necessary to protect animal and public health and animal welfare but such higher standards should first and foremost be applied within member states.
overall i consider the report to be a balanced overview of the current challenges of the equid sector and note that most of the recommendations to the commission have already been broadly addressed and will be followed up together with member states relevant organisations and the equid sector.
indeed only in this year the arctic ice cap has increased by sixty which proves that it is as likely to grow as it is to shrink.
eu biofuels and the subsidies are all about buying farmers' votes and wielding power.
this is increasingly discredited as a climate theory.
it is practically taking food off the plate and putting it into the petrol tank.
what we want is to end this ugly spectacle of farmers reaping subsidies instead of food crops.
hopefully it will not be too little too late.
these subsidies are the hard earned taxes of the uk taxpayer.
the price of food in manchester in my constituency goes up and the price of food in morocco and mozambique also goes up all because of the eu's wrong minded policies.
many say that this is all in aid of fighting so called global warming due to man made carbon emissions.
they are not about putting power in fuel tanks at.
there is no question that biofuel production bears an important responsibility for the massive price hikes which have thrown millions into hunger and poverty.
mr president in two thousand and seven the un rapporteur for the right to food described the diversion of arable land to the production of biofuels as a crime against humanity.
the winners are agri business and the losers are those thrown off their land and those affected by deforestation and hunger.
ngos have explained that the amount of land required to fill a family car once with biofuel would provide enough food for a child for two hundred days.
but i wonder in other productions do we look at iluc?
to put something mandatory into legislation which is based on uncertain modelling is something that i would be very fearful of supporting.
this is clearly a technical debate but it is also a very emotional and emotive debate because hunger and our concerns around clearance of forest are there.
rather than be anxious about one policy direction or another we need a holistic use of our land across the european union.
i think we need to address this issue but to realise that the fundamental question is this land needs to produce food fuel and fibre into the future and we need it to do more and better while polluting less.
but can i just say in terms of the technical side that i was troubled last week when i heard one of the commission experts say at a hearing that the models in iluc are not certain.
there is an entire biofuel supply chain from the farmer to the consumer at stake in this debate. existing policy has led to the pendulum swinging too far in the direction of first generation biofuel usage.
it is absolutely essential that we reduce our greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector.
what is more the biofuels industry provided an important source of on farm diversification for the agriculture sector and helped to reduce the eu wide reliance on the import of protein and animal feed. however in the light of the serious iluc and food security concerns it has become essential that we re
it is extremely important that we facilitate production by arable farmers across the european union in order to meet the challenges of a growing global population and ensure that the demand is met for food feed and fuel markets while concurrently ensuring legitimate protection for the environment.
i do support measures to increase the proportion of biofuels from advanced technologies but rather than indulge in the smoke and mirrors methodology of multiple counting i would prefer to see a clear target by.
mr president like everyone else here i have certainly spent a lot of time looking at the details of this proposal.
the science behind it is still in its infancy and cannot be used to justify a major policy shift such as this.
two thousand and twenty this is the open transparent and honest way to proceed. in fact i believe that this one element alone could go a long way towards improving our biofuel mix in europe.
in order to justify changing these i would need to be convinced that any adverse effects were of a magnitude and scale necessitating immediate action.
we are not changing our position; we are making it clearer also for investors.
so what you are saying is not true.
this is why the commission maintains the inclusion of iluc factors in member states' reports under the renewable energy and fuel quality directives.
this is because it sends a clear signal to industry on the need to move to advanced biofuels that deliver substantial greenhouse gas savings while respecting existing investments.
is; it always will
may i just say that our scientific basis is robust and it is the best available science as requested in the current directive and recent studies have actually confirmed that the values used by the commission are based on good science and very much in line with the eu's normal principle
yes science is developing.
i also think that we can hear that in the debate that it invites too many rather different approaches.
in this context the commission has for example just as strong reservations about the need to increase multipliers for the use of renewable electricity by trains.
of course we should and that is also a priority in the new mff as has been mentioned by the commission.
but let me be clear. deleting the cap or increasing it to an unsustainable level as proposed in some of the amendments will mean that the iluc problem will continue to be largely unaddressed and further damage will take place.
there is a pressing need to agree on an effective approach to tackle iluc in order to mitigate the environmental impact as well as to provide clear signals to investors. accordingly the commission remains fully available to the parliament and to the council to help achieve progress with a view to finalising trialogue discussions before the end of the current term. just one final comment.
actually it is hard for us to see the added value in doing so.
i must also say on behalf of mr oettinger and myself that as we have been listening to this debate an interesting debate with very different views presented we have remained convinced that the commission's proposal presents the most balanced compromise between environmental and economic interests.
of course it always
in this context we firmly believe in the need to maintain the limit that conventional biofuels make towards the renewable energy directive targets at current consumption levels.
be. but we should not use that as an excuse for waiting for inaction and thereby continuing something that we already now know is unsustainable.
the commission is therefore not in a position to accept them. let me also stress that all the measures we introduce should of course be accompanied by suitable grandfathering provisions in order to allow for industry to adjust to the proposed changes.
we believe that these values stem from the best available science.
the eu's biofuel policy has been mostly influenced by the ten targets set for the renewable transport fields. this target has seen a significant scale up for such fuels in europe and also in the developing world.
it is essential that if used to meet a renewable target they must fulfil the carbon emissions reduction and social responsibility requirements expected of them.
i have been contacted by hundreds of constituents as i am sure many other members have too concerned about the devastating effects certain biofuels could have on fuel prices carbon emissions and land use rights for indigenous peoples and i have to say i share those concerns as do ngos and many others.
forests and large areas of agricultural land are being cleared for growing biofuels to keep up with europe's demand.
it has become clear that it is now necessary to take indirect land use change factors into account when calculating the greenhouse gas emissions savings attributable to biofuels.
i would have preferred and will continue to work for an even lower cap but will support a compromise as i believe action needs to be taken now.
we are in the middle somewhere and we have not found the right place to be.
yes it is right that we should be developing more alternatives within our own european union.
let us try and get something right at this moment in time.
i do not think we have.
mr nuttall you and ukip will no doubt be aware that for most farmers throughout europe it is impossible to grow continuous wheat crops.
oilseed crops are actually a very valuable break crop; they break the cycle in terms of weeds;
quite frankly this is british taxpayers' money. this is pushing up the price of food and it is wrong. we are in the middle of a recession and i put it to you that i would rather the price of food be reduced than line the pockets of rich farmers in the uk and actually not just the uk but right across europe.
what has just happened in this house is a travesty of democracy. to give us a vote in which the option is to vote yes' or to abstain is bad enough but when you look at rule seventeen of the rules of procedure of this house it does not provide for such a system.
there is nothing whatsoever in that rule that gives you the authority to hold a ballot where the choice is yes' or abstain'.
it is quite undemocratic and you might wish to reflect on giving members the opportunity to vote against.
thus giving us no opportunity to vote against. it is the most extraordinary procedure.
what bothers me as a citizen is that during the entire electoral campaign i was not able to post anything critical of the current president on my blog the europolis while public access to my blog was interrupted altogether.
i consider this unacceptable both because it represents censorship of the right to free speech and because it shows that the internet too is controlled by those in power and or their supporters.
mr president i want to deplore the deeply worrying decision of the turkish constitutional court on friday to close the democracy society party which represents largely kurdish interests and to ban from politics its leading mps.
this is a very retrograde step and will be used as a pretext to return to violence by extremists.
it closes off the democratic political option which the prime minister mr erdoan has said he wants to pursue.
so this is not in the interests of the government of turkey or its people.
the alde group will be calling for a plenary debate on this subject as early as possible in the new year because it is a really bad step backwards for turkey.
i recently visited a printing company in my constituency of london where i found out more about ink jet printing.
the complicated process used to recycle ink jet paper makes it an expensive operation and the use of additional bleach means it is not environmentally friendly.
companies such as the one i visited in london that use other forms of printing which are environmentally friendly need to be encouraged and incentives offered to make the process economically more even handed.
i would like to see a market driven solution supported by member states a solution where the industry self regulates with a code of practice taking the lead in environmental agendas.
we also fully share the report's emphasis on the end user and expected societal benefits. this is very much in line with the spirit and objective of the digital single market agenda promoted by the commission.