kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
i recognise that there are concerns over the natural disasters that have befallen japan but i have spoken to many japanese colleagues friends and others who believe that if we tread sensitively an eu japan agreement would send a signal that japan is back on its way and is on the road to recovery. if you look at the figures in two thousand and nine japan and the eu together represented more than a quarter of global gdp and more than twenty of world trade and had a combined volume of foreign direct investment of about eur two hundred billion.
but let us not forget that removing or reducing barriers to ict products from japan would be of benefit to the eu as well.
for companies within eu countries there would be gains if we could tackle barriers to public procurement to the medical devices market where there is insufficient recognition of international standards to services including financial services and postal services and access for smes. for the japanese there would be gains in the automotive and ict sectors.
for this reason i think we should actually be pressing ahead with an eu japan free trade agreement.
we all know that unlike some other eu partners in the far east we share common values of democracy human rights and the liberal market economy with japan making her a more natural partner for the european union.
both markets would benefit greatly from upgrading trade relations between the eu and japan especially keeping in mind innovation and technologies.
to identify options for the comprehensive strengthening of all aspects of the eu japan relationship in the political economic and sectoral cooperation fields.
discussions are still ongoing with japan.
once that has been done we would examine the results and decide whether or not to launch the negotiations.
i therefore welcome this debate and look forward to hearing your views on how we should shape this relationship in the years to come.
typical examples of these include cumbersome approval processes for medical equipment and certain food products and lack of convergence with internationally recognised standards for car parts and components. barriers in these areas have been in place in the japanese market for decades.
an open investment regime to achieve levels of foreign direct investment into japan comparable to those of other oecd countries;
i should also mention that if the summit leaders decide to go ahead with the option of a comprehensive bilateral legal framework this should include both trade and investment relations and political relations and cooperation.
on the trade side the high level group looked into ways of strengthening and integrating the economic relationship addressing all issues of interest to both parties.
however i think the omens are good that japan does want to tackle non tariff barriers. the japanese prime minister has called for an open japan' policy and that is partly because he recognises that japanese industry is stultifying in its present environment.
european companies have had improved access to telecommunications car manufacturing retail and the insurance sector in japan and that has not damaged the japanese economy but has in fact encouraged innovation and development in japan. so i think the omens are good.
these numbers are only set to grow in the coming years.
the fact is improved reporting and analysis of any occurrences inevitably enhances aviation safety.
it was vital that we emphasise the core message of the revision that of a just culture' as this is paramount to any transparent system.
it is unfortunate that we are still in a position where we cannot find a common definition of gross negligence' but this was always going to be rather difficult owing to the different legal interpretations across the eu.
employees should be able to report incidents in a confident and open manner which of course should be acted upon by the employer immediately.
the reason we have the safest aviation industry in the world is because we have worked on finding out the factual reasons for any accidents or incidents rather than blaming any single individual and long may that remain.
i hope that we can move forward on the voluntary reporting system which has been standard practice in some member states and particularly in the uk for more than twenty years.
and finally to conclude on a lighter note i am delighted that we have been able to remove costly and undue regulatory burdens for home built classic and vintage aircraft from the scope of this regulation and long may they continue to entertain the general public.
this was the reason in two thousand and three that as the rapporteur i was responsible for putting in place a system for mandatory reporting across europe.
in addition we also had thirteen new countries which needed to comply.
however we are still unable to address some of the challenges the differing legal systems bring us.
i hope we can continue to push for further improved standards.
however we should not stop there. with air traffic expected to increase in future decades our recent good safety record could be followed by more accidents and fatalities.
we therefore have a responsibility to provide a safety system that is more proactive and improves aviation safety even further.
by collecting and assessing appropriate safety information at industry level but also nationally and eu wide and making sure that safety initiatives are taken on the basis of that information the european union will have the appropriate means to prevent further accidents.
protecting the source of information should encourage more aviation professionals to report occurrences and other safety related information.
i was there two or three months ago.
their vulnerability makes them easy targets for bad treatment and exploitation.
for six years boko haram terrorism has been terrifying the people in and around nigeria.
we should strongly condemn the use of children as sexual slaves forced marriages recruitment for terrorist activities and any form of violence against children.
our hearts today should be with the victims and their families.
our message should be strong you are not forgotten and you are not alone.
but much more needs to be done to mobilise support in europe to join forces with the rest of the international community to support the nigerian government and the african union to protect children investigate these crimes and combat impunity. children should be given access to basic needs water food
shelter healthcare and schooling.
in next week's conference in new york heads of un member states from all across the world will sign seventeen development goals with one hundred and sixty nine targets. compare this to the eight millennium goals with twenty one targets that they signed only fifteen years ago.
if we have been unable to achieve the eight what makes anyone think that we can achieve the?
seventeen it is also unfortunate that the un has decided to focus on the long term rather than place its emphasis on what needs to be done right now.
the goals were noble and meaningful but not achieved.
first fleeing syria and then the camps themselves.
i know from having been in africa that people in the poorest countries are already living with climate change and it is they who will pay the price if we do not act.
finally a word on the cop agreement in paris.
this is simply not enough.
i am pleased commissioner timmermans that you have talked about how the eu will go ahead and implement that deal here inside the eu because there are two aspects as you said.
so the first task is to get the right indicators and to get a common methodology and i hope you will involve parliament in those discussions in the future.
we have to see the money.
so we have to get a proper commitment on the actual pledges on climate change.
they are thinking about it in terms of feet and inches of water taking over their land or indeed thinking of the beaufort scale and the winds that sweep across some of those islands.
i had the pleasure before the summer recess of hosting here at parliament two ambassadors one from the maldives and one from vanuatu and they were talking about the challenges that they face.
the reality is that that failure will be felt most keenly by those who can least afford to address the problems themselves.
those are the challenges which we must be able to recognise.
if you say you need to do everything you end up doing nothing.
but if you only leave the different silos on their own you might achieve something in one silo nothing in another etc.
in that context i think those countries which are now facing huge financial challenges because of the migration crisis had they decided a long time ago to follow the un's guidance and go up to.
let me come back to this point because i think it is crucial.
is going to be a landmark achievement i think because it has an inclusive nature already.
and we need a strong and inclusive follow up and review mechanism.
and up to eur fifty billion of investment through our blending facilities with our climate change windows being a key mobilising more climate finance from other public and private investors.
so i would urge through you all the member states finally to try and reach our objective which is still in my view a modest one.
there are seventeen sustainable development goals which follow and expand on the mdgs.
we are making a significant effort to reach this target and have actively contributed to the climate finance report the oecd is preparing for the special world bank and imf meeting in lima in october.
the european union had an instrumental role in shaping the agenda;
people migrate not because their country's economy is shrinking or in trouble but because the wealth in their country is unevenly distributed because they have no say because democracy is thwarted because their human rights are trampled upon.
parliaments will have to have an important role to play in that and governments as well but civil society should never be forgotten because integrating policies is actually better done mostly in civil society than at governmental level.
of course we need to look after the most vulnerable.
i want to point to the fact that one of the factors that will determine whether we will be successful with these policies is whether we are able to create coherence between the different elements and we lack coherence. we lack coherence in my institution we lack coherence in this institution
i think my first plea to you today would be let us work together to create coherence between the actions of the dgs in the commission the different committees in the european parliament.
i really want to make sure that we are coherent because sustainable development has three main aspects obviously environmental;
it is almost a year ago that in the course of the hearings in this parliament president juncker decided to hand me responsibility for sustainable development in a broad sense to create coherence in our policies.
but also economic and social.
in the council in the member states in the international world.
let us face it sometimes the policies that come out of different dgs and different committees have contradictions.
we have agreed a global partnership it is ambitious and i think we are determined to change to integrate our internal and external policies to make sure that also in the future of the europe two thousand and twenty strategy and other areas we are coherent with what we agree in new york.
second we are preparing to launch specific new climate relevant initiatives including a new phase of the global climate change alliance with a budget of at least eur three hundred and fifty million that will support adaptation to climate in vulnerable countries notably least developed countries and small island developing states.
if we do not look after the most vulnerable sooner or later they will draw the conclusion that they have no future where they are and will look for a future elsewhere which will exacerbate the problems with migration we already have.
a lot will be expected of the european union also in new york and president juncker has asked me to lead the delegation.
first we need to deliver the twenty of climate relevant finance for our development budget including the development cooperation instrument and the european development fund which will result in more than eur nine billion in climate finance between two thousand. and fourteen and two thousand and twenty this is more than double what was delivered during the previous period.
it is something the european union has been advocating for a long time and i think this time for once citizens parliaments civil society made the contributions not just governments and the way this parliament was involved in the process testifies to that different approach.
huge parts of the world that used to depend on aid and support are now self sustaining are going through incredible growth cycles incredible growth figures but very often this growth is very unequally distributed.
as i said they would have to integrate economic social and environmental dimensions as well as human rights gender equality the rule of law good governance and peaceful and inclusive societies.
all too often we are good at coming to agreements promising all sorts of things but we are weak at following up weak at presenting what we do and weak at being accountable for what we need to do so we need to put up that strong and inclusive follow up and review mechanism.
these elements have a role inside the european union and obviously worldwide and as long as we are not able to create coherence between these different dimensions our approach will not be successful enough and will if it continues to be contradictory also lead to a waste of financial resources human resources political resources. the adoption of the two thousand and thirty agenda for sustainable development
it would inspire the rest of the world if europe were also to lead in this area. it is not just about aid and support.
a holistic approach is what we need but there is always a big danger in a holistic approach.
so the challenge here is to be precise on the specific issues without ever forgetting that you need to integrate it with other policies.
i leave it to the governments to take care of their own problems but we as institutions should certainly cooperate in that field and i will be at your disposal to look for ways of improving that.
secondly i want to pick up on the point that we need to be coherent. i heard a lot of support for that point and indeed our internal coherence in the union will have to be reflected for instance in the way we present our plans for a sustainable economy that is for the circular economy in the way we develop the energy union in the way we use the tremendous possibilities of the european fund for strategic investment. if we are not coherent with these very important instruments then we will lose the effect on the outside world the effect we
i offer my cooperation to parliament to jointly break down silos. we both have that problem still today.
i have to say in some of these areas private companies private investors are more forward looking than politicians and governments because sometimes they take a longer view of the economic cycle than we as politicians do and in some areas strong cooperation with the private sector could help us be better at creating a sustainable economy and also in sustainable
many in business agree and want to do more.
bloomberg found that three in four companies do no sustainability reporting.
if governments were only encouraged to meet targets surely that would not be good enough.
as a result there is an onus on us as legislators because of the powers of codecision to ensure that the commission in particular is held to account.
thankfully that is now beginning to change hopefully not too late where the united kingdom is concerned.
you can only disclose what they wish to disclose and of course also and this is very important what you might start out with as a negotiating position might finish up entirely different when you actually finish the discussions.
i particularly welcome the new commission under president juncker who have made it very clear that they want to be more responsive they want to cooperate more and they want to work with parliament.
ttip has been mentioned and actually today was probably the first time i heard a balanced account of the need for publicity but also disclosure and transparency.
of the need in the interests of the european union and everybody for the commission to constantly inform and to constantly consult parliament regarding any international agreements.
there was nobody there to put the other side and parliament because it lacked power and lacked information was not in a position to actually put the other side.
over the years that unfortunately does not seem to have been the position and as a result sometimes incorrectly impressions were given right across europe through the media that everything bad was emanating from brussels.
in other words i fully support the implementation of additional and the reinforcement of the currently existing measures aimed at a fully functional operation of the system whose goal is to inform parliament on the negotiation process of international agreements. it is of course fully understandable that
not to mention that quite a few of them may get amended in the process as well.
but then again the european union itself is not a federation or a single state and parliament is essentially still a consultative assembly.
the uk will be much better off creating its own treaties with the rest of the world rather than having to allow twenty seven other nations to put their tuppence worth in as well.
with regard to international agreements in the uk ttip is now a major issue which worries all british citizens as it will harm our national health service and the national health service in great britain is the nearest thing to shinto it is practically a religion it is inviolable.
the british members of this parliament including myself have to sit on their hands while an unelected foreign commissioner or commissar takes decisions for us.
well i'm sorry this place looks more and more like the old supreme soviet and it makes it look positively libertarian in comparison.
surely madam you must agree with me?
lange says and quite frankly for him to even state that when it is quite patently the opposite is just bizarre.
all too often the european union raises the red flag and condemns secrecy breaches of openness and transparency elsewhere in the world.
he was even told that if he disclosed what he had read he would be punished penalised with a fine and also at the mercy of punishment from mr schulz the president of this chamber.
quite clearly the messages should be from us to the commission to the council put your own house in order abide by the transparency that you expect demand and even dictate from others but finally restore democracy within this organisation and stop the secrecy and withholding of vital information to which we are entitled which we are entitled to communicate to our voters and to which our european union citizens should be entitled.
the type of agreement the stage of the procedure and the relevant documents to parliament to this chamber!
if that is what defines the european union's definition of transparency and openness on this critical issue of negotiations on international agreements then quite frankly not only is that a farce it is unacceptable.
and thirdly european union scrutiny of its own processes and procedures.
yet here is the european union saying one thing but adopting the complete opposite in its own backyard and actually keeping or restricting any information to meps.
now we know that this debate stems from a libe question from the libe committee and it is essentially a question to the commission on the right to be informed appropriately when the european union is negotiating international arrangements and agreements. the question asks whether the commission will provide at the very least indications as to the third country in question
he had to sign a document stating that he would not disclose what he read he had to hand over electronic gadgets and cameras he was only allowed a pen no paper he was in a windowless cell and he was issued with special blank paper which could not be photocopied.
he also visited the ttip chamber. he also highlighted what was wrong and he got an email back from mr bernd lange a fellow mep who seem to think that these confidential documents can be consulted on the premises of the european parliament has been a great achievement for this institution' and enabled us meps to better exert our role of parliamentary scrutiny in negotiations. well i do not agree with what mr.
it should be of immediate concern to european union citizens that this is not already the case. let me cite the example of my colleague stuart agnew who happens also to be an agricultural spokesperson.
now it is absolutely farcical what we are faced with but let's be serious just for a moment.
and lastly in the particular case of concluded eu readmission agreements how is the commission planning to report to the libe committee which it should do at least twice a year as per the commission declaration annexed to the european parliament recommendation on the readmission agreement with pakistan?
however we understand that the practical implementation of these treaty provisions could be further improved and this on the basis of article.
second how does the commission aim to ensure that the regular transmission of all relevant information on negotiations contains at the minimum indications as to the third country in question the type of agreement the stage of procedure and the relevant documents such as those mentioned in point five of annex three of the framework agreement?
first what measures does the commission intend to take to fully live up to the treaty provisions and the case law in order to improve the current system of informing parliament on the negotiations of international agreements thereby guaranteeing that the required information is automatically transmitted to parliament in an exhaustive manner and this at all stages of the procedure?
is the commission preparing to set up a permanent mechanism in order to strengthen parliament's role in this very crucial and sensitive area?
the libe committee welcomes the information it has received from the commission services further to its request.
this case law has made clear that parliament's right to be informed is not limited to requests for information made just by parliament but obliges the other institutions to take the initiative. in september two thousand and fourteen in the written answers to the questionnaire in the preparation of the hearing on the selection process for commissioners
the framework agreement on relations between parliament and the commission details these provisions in paragraph twenty three and twenty four and in particular in annex three as further confirmed by the rulings of the court of justice of the european union for example in case c six hundred and fifty eight two thousand and eleven parliament v.
in my twelve years of working on international trade i have never seen such active interest.
moreover the framework agreement sets out clearly how this is to be done parliament must be informed by the commission at the same time as the council before a mandate is given during the negotiation and once an agreement is initialled or signed.
but the information was not complete we were left with a lot of question marks with information coming instead from the media.
the reason i mention the transparency initiative in the trade sector is because i believe that this model could serve as an inspiration in other domains in which the eu negotiates with third countries.
we the european parliament represent the people of europe and if we want to serve our citizens well we must be fully informed.
the european parliament shall be immediately and fully informed at all stages of international agreements.
we all knew that it happened when it happened and what the key points of it were.