kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
the eu has a strategic interest in further deepening our involvement with kazakhstan and in developing fully the potential for political cooperation; especially considering the rapidly evolving dynamics of regional integration.
as also called for by the report the commission services and the eeas are doing their utmost to ensure that the new agreement is a comprehensive one with emphasis on political legal economic and social reforms.
the european union in return is a very important trade and investment partner for kazakhstan more than half of the total foreign and direct investment in the country comes from eu investors.
this includes encouraging kazakhstan's efforts for legislative conformity with the eu acquis and wto rules. kazakhstan has the eu's full support for wto accession and in particular an early conclusion of the ongoing negotiations.
the eu has also called for the right to a free fair and transparent appeal process for mr kozlov and all other defendants.
two thousand and twelve we have seen several procedural shortcomings in the trial processes and fear that the verdicts given have been mainly based on political activism and the general involvement of the defendants in trade union or opposition movements.
in this endeavour we will continue to provide full information to parliament as we have been doing so far.
we fully support parliament when it calls on kazakhstan as a member of the venice commission and also as a newly elected member of the un human rights council to demonstrate its strong commitment to human rights including the freedoms of speech of assembly of
kazakhstan has been an important partner for the eu in central asia not only on trade and economic exchanges but as a stable country which has a proven track record of inter ethnic and inter religious harmony and tolerance.
kazakhstan is a pragmatic partner open to discussions and willing to explore opportunities.
this means that once the new agreement enters into force the violation of this essential element could lead to the suspension of parts or all of the agreement.
it is likely that the negotiations on the new pca will be concluded following kazakhstan's wto accession so the negotiations of the pca are based on this assumption.
over the past years we have increased cooperation have had frequent high level meetings and launched negotiations for a new enhanced partnership and cooperation agreement.
however as underlined by the vice president high representative on many occasions before the enhancement of eu kazakhstan relations is not independent of the advancement of domestic political reforms and the protection and promotion of human rights in kazakhstan.
this included the monitoring of the trials of the people accused of inciting or participating in the violent events of zhanaozen by the eu delegation in astana in line with the parliament's appeals to do so in its resolution of fifteen march.
we have already had a hearing on this and we have our research report.
he made a very strong point that part of the problem with the internal market is actually not the lack of legislation but the consistent enforcement and effectiveness of the existing instruments that we have in place to create the internal market. in the case of the mutual recognition of professional qualifications
that is the context of the question. we look forward to hearing the commission's reply to set the framework for that but this is just the beginning of the process and i am sure that the new commissioner will be able to take that forward and work with us to really develop this crucial piece of legislation and make the single market work better.
it is very appropriate that we are discussing this question to the commission this morning which is essentially to ask for an update on the progress in transposing the revised directive that my committee worked on back in two thousand and four two thousand and five and on how that is actually being implemented by the member states.
many people feel frustrated by the absence of clear decisions and also by the lack of contact between authorisation bodies in different member states.
we know from the statistics and the information and i am sure we will hear from the commission shortly that transposition of this instrument has been delayed in just about every member state.
as the text of our question quite clearly sets out we already know that a significant number of problems in relation to recognition of professional qualifications are encountered by citizens across the european union.
we know that the commission is due to review the mutual recognition directive in.
just to pull all these things together in the context of the work of the internal market committee over the next five years i am delighted that i think all the coordinators of the committee are here today and i want to thank them for the work they have done together with myself on shaping the forward agenda for this committee.
it is part of our feeling that the role of our committee is to continue to investigate to promote and to make recommendations about the future evolution of the key legislations the key building blocks of the single market.
this question of mutual recognition of professional qualifications is not just a one off.
it has taken much longer than people expected to bring this into operation and that of itself raises concerns about the complexity of the instrument itself.
it has one of the highest levels of complaints in the solvit mechanism that we very much support at member government level.
the free movement of professionals and the directive on the mutual recognition of professional qualifications are among the flagship issues that my committee is most concerned about in the whole construction of the single market.
one of the things that our own research has done and this committee commissioned research on this topic is to demonstrate the fact that there is nothing like enough coordinated activity on helping people to recognise their rights under mutual recognition.
two thousand and eleven we plan to have a meeting of national parliaments and national parliamentarians to discuss this proposal.
it is also very timely because professor monti came to our committee on monday to talk about his mission for the president of the commission on the future direction of the internal market.
these are the instruments that my committee can use and if the coordinators agree i am sure that we will be doing an own initiative report sometime in two thousand and ten to feed into this discussion that the commission will have.
the objective of the professional qualifications directive is to facilitate the free movement of our citizens in the internal market. two years after the end of the transposition period transposition is complete in twenty two member states and four member states will hopefully deliver by the end of the year.
let me now turn to the first question.
these professions have often even been regulated in federal or regional laws.
sometimes erroneous information is even given to migrants and they are invited to follow wrong procedures.
it will be up to the next commission to decide how to take this forward.
finally on the last question the commission is not in a position to assess whether there is a need for reform at the moment.
moreover the internal market information system has also provided a medium for supporting more than one two hundred information exchanges for many of the regulated professions this year.
to this end we have developed a code of conduct on administrative practices and a user guide addressed to citizens which will also promote more consistency.
this has brought about enhancements in day to day administrative cooperation between member states.
national contact points are now in place in all member states to inform and assist citizens and the commission expects them to be even more active in the future.
however the solvit network has proven to be effective in solving many of these problems.
on the third question the priority of the commission is to ensure correct and consistent implementation of the directive.
however this cannot be an excuse for any delays and the court of justice has not accepted such delays in six judgments so far.
at this stage i am however concerned about greece from which we have not received any transposition measure yet.
the transposition has constituted a challenge for member states mainly because it affects more than eight hundred different professions.
this is something we discussed recently at the canadian delegation which is a step in the right direction.
my question to the commission is connected to health care professionals.
an impaired professional risks putting patients' health at risk and in the most extreme cases can cause death.
is the commission considering a legal duty for competent authorities to proactively and effectively share information about struck off professionals to ensure that the mobility of health care professionals does not compromise patient safety?
the current internal market information system allows for the sharing of information but only when a competent regulator has a question about an applicant to its register so we have to have a better exchange to alert authorities when an individual has been struck off due to incompetence.
however for this europe must have standards when it comes to qualifications. so far the failure of member states to agree on the rules for this matter is limiting our ability to sell these same services across borders.
in addition to the full implementation of this directive it is crucial to introduce further measures applying to mutual recognition not only of diplomas but of health professionals' qualifications as well.
the provision of health services requires appropriate linguistic skills registration through national regulators and most importantly the ability to deliver safe and high quality care.
on these grounds the ecj has already approved additional national safeguards for the circulation of goods.
there is also a rationale for such measures applying to the provision of health services especially when new communication technologies allow controversial practices such as e doctor consultations.
we have to face the challenge of an ageing population and this will put even more pressure on the european health workforce.
while ensuring the mobility of health professionals we must also be able to guarantee to all european citizens accessible health services timely delivered with the highest quality standards. this is a responsibility for all of us.
i think that we have a common assessment commissioner.
as i stated in the draft annual report i published today the eu should officially suspend the accession process if the constitutional changes are implemented unchanged.
on the contrary despite the unfair electoral environment the intimidation of the no campaigners and the massive control of the media by the government half of turkey's population showed that they are ready to push back for the democratic future of their country.
but i am also realistic and acknowledge that this is unlikely to happen under the current political leadership in turkey.
there are millions of people in turkey who do share the same european values and millions who do want the eu to remain the anchor for reforms in their country.
to achieve this we can use the economic power of the eu as leverage for promoting reforms in turkey for instance by adding clear political benchmarks to the upgrade of the customs union.
i therefore welcome the commission's stance that it will insist on an independent investigation into the alleged irregularities.
the international observation mission was clear in its assessment this was not a fair election.
the controversial decision of the electoral council to allow last minute on stand ballots to be counted in also raised serious questions about whether these elections were free.
the eu must fiercely support those forces.
in turkey changes are possible in the future and i continue to believe in a joint future for turkey and the eu.
having said that we have to be vigilant that justified criticism of erdogan's policies does not turn into anti turkish sentiment as we sometimes unfortunately see in this house.
however that cannot be a value free transactional relationship only where human rights and democracy are no longer important.
but sixteen april was also a sad day for all democrats because it is clear that with such a constitution turkey cannot become a member of the eu.
we do not have so many tools in our hands but i think there is one very important one and that is the customs union because that is something that erdoan wants so we really need to use that one tool we have in our hands and by using it i mean let us not upgrade it right now. we should not upgrade it before there is substantial improvement on human rights.
we will continue to engage with you we will continue to support you and by us' i mean the european union but also the political groups and also us as individual citizens.
i think this would only help erdoan and it would close the door to the people we want to support.
but it is also a very important time right now to talk to the forty nine who have voted no' despite all the threats despite the very unfair procedure and despite lots of people being put into jail.
madam president right now is really the time for the european union to send a very clear message to turkey to erdoan specifically and we all agree that we cannot continue business as usual.
our message to them has to be we will not leave you alone.
despite a narrow majority being achieved overall those turks voting in europe voted by large majorities for mr erdoan's proposals.
but even so a large number of turks voted against democracy and in favour of a form of dictatorship.
seventy so in turkey while half the voters chose to vote for democracy those turks living in western liberal democracies voted by a large majority to abolish it.
the logical conclusion of this vote is that those turks living in europe who voted for dictatorship and against democracy should have the courage of their convictions to live by their decision.
they should migrate back to turkey to enjoy the benefits of what they just voted for.
you would have one country britain trying to leave and you'd have another country turkey that you would want to expel.
perhaps those turkish voters living in europe might vote for a form of islamic authoritarianism in europe given the chance.
now that is bad enough but what is interesting and highly disturbing are the voting figures for turkish citizens living in europe who had an overseas vote.
that application was supported by the eu and in the uk by the conservative labour liberal democrat and green parties.
we must continue to promote the values on which our union is based and help those who stand up for them.
again we must move away from the status quo which is only frustrating for both sides.
the months of campaigning before this vote cannot be considered as free or fair and the opposition and international observers have pointed out irregularities in the vote itself which have to be investigated.
madam president i have been to turkey four times since the coup last year and each time i have seen a deterioration of democracy and civil society along with a growing culture of fear in cosmopolitan cities such as istanbul and in the kurdish communities of diyarbakir and nusaybin in the south.
the last time i visited just this past weekend i spoke with representatives of civil society artists the media opposition parties trade unions dismissed educators and public health workers and minority groups such as the armenian community.
all were absolutely unequivocal in their belief that the european path is the correct future for their beloved country. it is not the turkish people with whom we have a disagreement.
it is erdogan and his bloated sense of selfimportance and his gross appetite for power.
first we share the very serious concerns of the venice commission with regard to the proposed constitutional changes.
the two sides did not have equal opportunities to campaign.
also the ongoing state of emergency has curtailed fundamental freedoms that are essential to a genuinely democratic process.
our constitutions define the common rules of the game if these rules are not recognised and accepted by everyone the whole system becomes weaker.
third the electoral campaign has left turkey's population deeply divided. the two sides disagree about the fundamental direction in which they would like to see their country move.
the close referendum result makes the need to seek a broad consensus all the more important.
i clearly see this as a way forward. accusations and rhetorical aggressions flourished between the two campaigning sides within turkey but also between turkish representatives and international actors. it is in the interest of turkey to mend such an internal division and it is in the interest of everyone to engage more constructively
on the international arena.
this work needs to be carried on and further deepened.
security and fundamental freedoms can go together and must go together in the interest of all turkish citizens. the question at stake now is what this means for eu turkey relations and their future. the time has come for an open and friendly discussion with turkey about the future of our relationship. we will have a first opportunity after the referendum to exchange views on the way forward together with the european union foreign ministers at the gymnich meeting in two days' time in malta. we therefore look forward to hearing your views and
if the turkish people decided to change their parliamentary system to a presidential one they are perfectly entitled to do so and there is nothing undemocratic as such in this decision.
however and this is my second remark we should express some concerns vis vis the state of freedom and democracy in turkey regardless of the results of the referendum.
maybe some speakers today will try to out compete each other in their condemnations or even as the previous speaker said their insults.
yes we all share concerns over press freedom in turkey.
yes we all share concerns over the treatment of the opposition and the conduct of the referendum;
and we all share concerns over president erdogan seeking to grab more executive power for what has up to now been largely a ceremonial presidency.
however many in this house also realise that at times we need to work with turkey.
we need to work with turkey when it comes to controlling the flows of refugees and migrants and we need to work with turkey on regional security as an important member of nato. we need to work with turkey as we share concerns over issues such as russian aggression. so in reality we are talking about a difficult balancing act and this balancing act needs two things.
firstly we need to be honest with turkey that it may never be a member of the eu.
there are too many concerns prejudice against a largely muslim population;
the prospect of voting weights in the council and here in this parliament;
secondly we need to have a more robust and critical relationship between turkey and the eu.
so while turkey is not ready for eu membership and it is not even ready for visa liberalisation completely turning our back on turkey is not an option.
this is why the ecr group welcomes calls for a different kind of relationship with turkey.
it will be a difficult balancing act requiring much diplomacy.
it may be a more difficult relationship but it will be a more honest relationship more cautious more critical focused more on cooperation and no longer on the distant goal of eu membership.
society is split and more than ever we have to reach out to the millions of turkish people who feel let down and abandoned by the european union.
which of those member states of the european union who joined were ready from day one of the accession negotiations?
we also need to use all our available policy instruments in order to guarantee that after the transition of these societies women's rights will be guaranteed and upheld.
it would be unacceptable not to raise our voices against these terrible atrocities being committed against women.
since the two thousand and six conference work has been ongoing on implementation of a common framework of action in particular through the pursuit of country priorities with a follow up mechanism and reports published by the european commission. the partners in the union for the mediterranean reaffirmed their commitments
to this at the second ministerial conference in marrakesh in november.
increasing awareness and visibility of the process was one of the big challenges agreed by almost all participants in the process. beyond this regional framework the european union's bilateral dialogue including through sub committees dealing with gender issues
women continue to endure discriminatory laws and deeply entrenched cultural inequality.
against this backdrop we strongly condemn the increasing reports of severe human rights violations including rape sexual assault and severe humiliation of women activists.
this is not sustainable as was made clear by the courage shown by tunisian and egyptian women during the recent events in their countries.
in the case of egypt for example the national committee formed to write the new constitution is composed only of men and even the new cabinet has only one female minister.
much more must be done to deter perpetrators and to hold them accountable for their actions.
in view of these commitments the euro mediterranean ministerial conference on strengthening the role of women in society held in november two thousand and six in istanbul started.
is an important method for addressing these pressing concerns.
two thousand and nine civil society was fully involved in the discussions.
the european union is committed to strengthening the role of women in political civil social economic and cultural spheres as well as to fighting against discrimination and impunity.
and securing respect for the human rights of both women and men.
as i said the european union has a number of instruments in place and will do everything to support greater participation of women in civil and political life free from threats intimidation and violence. i would also like to bring to members' attention some positive recent developments
such as the creation of a human rights office in the gulf cooperation council secretariat.
we should welcome such steps.
our support for international organisations not least united nations women and for civil society will be instrumental in supporting change from within.
the agency costs gbp twenty million a year an utterly ridiculous amount of money when in the uk we have our well functioning equality and human rights commission.
in two thousand and four a study carried out by the agency's predecessor on anti semitism in europe seriously massaged statistics to suggest that white nationalists rather than muslim youths were the main perpetrators of anti jewish racist incidents a ploy that the president of the european jewish congress cobi benatoff attacked as intellectual dishonesty and moral treachery.
a recent study on homophobia costing eur three hundred and seventy zero did not even have a mechanism to verify responses and as such could not deliver any conclusive report on attitudes and trends in europe.
so all this is needed but unfortunately as the rapporteur has already said the good work of the agency is being jeopardised as the council will not be in a position to adopt the multiannual framework for the agency by the end of december this year as required by union
in two thousand and twelve the agency adopted a roma multiannual programme running up to.
this again shows that the requirement for unanimity is not a great help in our institutional
but as you know when you have a unanimity rule you are blocked.
in gathering comparative data and we need such data as evidence to underpin our policies in the field of fundamental rights.
agency. the agency's work programmes are adopted each year by the management board within the thematic areas determined by the multiannual framework.