kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
this report talks about the monitoring of community law and that is a good thing.
but this lack of implementation and equal implementation is one of the biggest problems that people in this chamber who are not like me who are europhile rather than euro sceptic have to face in the future.
however i reject the direct implication within this report that the european union should replace the key member states as the major actor in this particular process.
we are being accused of all sorts of outrageous things and we are entitled to proper conduct and ethical behaviour by our colleagues here in this house and indeed outside the house.
this seems to me whether the allegations are true or false to be yet another example of wholly improper behaviour.
it may well be that the character involved would not have his credentials verified if the austrian electorate are foolish enough to support him.
i think we all agree that we need to tackle tax evasion but at the same time we need to understand that in the case of those entrepreneurs who work hard who create jobs and wealth for others and then are taxed heavily for doing so it is quite understandable when they legally want to transfer their money to lower tax regimes.
i think we all agree that we need to fight fraud but let us not crack down on legal transfers of money.
tomorrow it may be another member state.
it is one of those things which if used in an unnecessary inappropriate or disproportionate way instead of becoming an aid to the attack on organised crime which is very important in bulgaria and elsewhere in the european union becomes a weapon of the state.
as a community of values the issue is that raised by the commissioner i quote that interception must be used exceptionally'.
if you want to dispute the figures used by mr swoboda is anyone disputing that a disproportionate use of interception has happened?
i have not seen anyone on any side of the debate saying disproportionate use has not happened.
i have looked at many sources before speaking today because we have to speak carefully about such issues.
i genuinely looked into all the sources and figures and i would ask colleagues across the parties in this house is there anyone who is saying that an inappropriate or disproportionate use of interception was or was not used?
and why are we here today discussing the internal interception arrangements of the bulgarian government? not because of bulgaria but because we are a community of values.
this of course was very uncomfortable for me and for my government in the united kingdom but i took part actively in that investigation because it was necessary to do it in a european wide way.
while not a great lawyer like mrs wallis i am a lawyer and i know that you must only use interception exceptionally.
it does not matter which political party is originating this debate to move from discussing an attack on organised crime to using an instrument of the state disproportionately is a very serious matter for the european union and it is not exclusive today to bulgaria.
part of the reason i want to speak is a linked matter which relates to the citizen's initiative.
those in this parliament who know me and know the twelve years i have spent here will know that i intervene in such debates with a great reticence.
that said it seems to me as mr swoboda has already said that the current legislation that exists on phone tapping let us call it what it is appears to be correct.
there does seem to be an increase in the numbers and an increase in the numbers seems to indicate and i underline seems' that there is an easier or a quicker granting by judges of this possibility.
it is clear that our programme for justice has moved from an emphasis on security to an emphasis on justice and all of us in our member states have to get that balance right.
but over a year ago as a vice president of this parliament i was asked to visit bulgaria to speak about the stockholm programme for justice.
i remember from my visit to bulgaria the great interest of bulgarian judges in what we are doing and want to pursue at union level.
it appears that people feel that they are being pressurised to withdraw signatures.
the commissioner was very careful.
is it proportionate and fair that the proceedings are filtered by the ministry of the interior?
what does the ministry of the interior do with what is coming in?
apart from the legally authorised recording of certain communications in the course of lawful business practice such as commercial transactions further interception practice such as wiretapping is subject to specific conditions.
the conditions for exceptional interception practice must be provided by legislation and be necessary appropriate and proportionate within a democratic society to safeguard public objectives such as public security or combating criminal offences.
the law on special investigative means and the law on electronic communications already provide appropriate mechanisms for legal authorisation oversight handling and access to personal data and thus ensure respect of fundamental rights.
this is the directive concerning the processing of personal data and protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector.
the measure which is being attacked in this debate is a legitimate legal instrument which can be used in the fight against crime.
the measures foreseen in the law can be exercised in a legitimate manner and we expect them to be exercised in a legitimate manner. the law foresees that phone tapping can only be requested by public prosecutors or by law enforcement agencies such as the police and the national security agency if they suspect that the person in question is involved in criminal activity and after there is authorisation by a judge. the law on the use of special intelligence lays down a purpose limitation
stipulating that these measures can only be used for the purpose of fighting organised crime or for protecting national security.
the information collected must be kept confidential and must only be used for the purposes outlined in the law. there is also established parliamentary scrutiny of this legal system.
so it is clear that there are safeguards especially safeguards on the privacy of citizens and respect of data protection and there is no question as i see it of it being in breach of the law.
therefore attacking this instrument at this point would be tantamount to an irresponsible attack against the effort of a member state to try to fight organised crime and corruption.
this attack damages bulgaria greatly as this fight is of utmost importance for this country in the light of its cooperation and verification mechanism and also of its prospective entry into the schengen area.
the only plausible explanation for this debate therefore seems to be that it is politically motivated.
while caps may be effective in the short term i also welcome the structural measures in the legislation which aim to stimulate better competition in the eu roaming marketplace.
by opening up market access to competitors and by decoupling roaming services from national providers competition will hopefully improve and drive down prices even more.
so hopefully families and businesses across europe will no longer face the prospect of being ripped off every time they use their phones abroad and return to find astronomical bills waiting on them.
that will hopefully deliver a well functioning competitive marketplace which is the right solution to solve this problem in the longer term.
i particularly welcome the suggestion that those regional airports which are consistently running at low capacity could be used to relieve the congestion in the main hub airports which are severely congested as well.
i feel that this would help to create a more efficient eu aviation area as well as addressing the specific regional aviation issues.
i believe that better integration of regional airports into the transport network nationally and internationally really will bring added value in terms of encouraging other benefits for eu citizens. i also back the report's claims that the imposing of heavy luggage restrictions and especially the one bag rule imposed by some
airlines and the addition of certain unavoidable charges threatens revenue from vital retail sales at airports. this is particularly the case for regional airports which often have to negotiate extremely competitive landing charges in order to attract airlines in the first place.
following several cases of certain smart breeding methods for plants being brought before the enlarged board of appeal of the european patent office in munich i backed the conclusion of this resolution that the use of markers at molecular level should come under the exemption that precludes essentially biological processes for the production of plants. while i believe that the techniques used to create these markers may themselves be patentable the simple fact of using a marker does not differentiate the process sufficiently from one that is essentially biological.
mr president along with the rest of the ecr group i voted in favour of this report on roaming on public mobile communications networks.
i believe that it is very important that the current gap between roaming and national telecom tariffs should be reduced and i believe that the suggestions made in this report will make this happen.
separating the sale of roaming services from the sale of national tariffs will mean that customers will be able to purchase roaming services from a provider other than the one which provides their national tariff.
this will encourage more competition in the eu market.
keeping in place the price caps for retail and wholesale will also serve to offer opportunities for new entrants to the roaming market which again i think is extremely important for our citizens.
in. other words already back in two thousand and thirteen the commission was looking into it.
the digital market as you well know commissioner is developing much more rapidly than this.
it is not waiting for us and if you say two thousand and sixteen well by then so many small businesses will have gone down already because they cannot survive.
two thousand and sixteen why cannot you just start tomorrow?
now that was in two thousand and nine the commission has not even started to think about solutions but cd roms are no longer used for e books.
because i have also submitted a series of questions over the years and in the answer to one of my questions in two thousand and thirteen the commission replied that it is currently examining this issue blah di blah di blah and these elements will be taken on board in completing the impact.
so what are you waiting for?
on the positive side it has been really inspiring to see the creative enterprise that has been flourishing in my constituency and the wonderful potential there is for the digital economy to help us to build cultural and social links between the countries of our union.
they are now selling songs and teaching materials knitting patterns and recipes to customers in countries they may never have visited.
my understanding is that the commission originally proposed a threshold for micro businesses but that this was not taken up.
i know that many of these entrepreneurs are already closing down their export operations or sometimes their whole business because the vat regime is just too onerous.
mr president i would like to begin by thanking commissioner ansip for his attempts to build a digital single market and in particular for his willingness to listen to the problems of the many small business people in the uk who have faced enormous difficulties with the shift in the vat regime that came into force on one january.
but these businesses are fundamentally threatened as other speakers have said by the ending of the vat exemption.
i know that commissioner ansip has heard their cry for help but i would like to ask him to act swiftly and decisively to support the small businesses of the uk and other countries affected.
i can only think that the digital economy has advanced rapidly since that time and that politicians had not managed to understand how it was changing.
these businesses are often run by the very people we seek to encourage into starting small businesses especially women and those living in rural communities.
the mini one stop shop the vat moss was set up in order to aid businesses when selling abroad.
two thousand and six however that is almost a decade ago. i was pleased to hear what you said about e books and the treatment of e books in relation to printed books.
the current legislation was designed and agreed back in.
how can they adjust their prices accordingly if they do not know what the vat regime is in the country they are selling to?
the current tax treatment of eservices such as digital books and the digital press will be reviewed in this framework.
in general it is important that the vat system be applied fairly and efficiently without giving any sector or any business an advantage nor inviting the relocation of activities within the eu based on vat rules.
in the digital single market strategy the commission will come up with proposals in two thousand and sixteen to reduce the administrative burden on businesses relating to vat;
nobody is forced to use it.
let us emphasise however that the directive on the place of supply of services was approved by all member states and this parliament.
member states have had seven years to adapt to the new vat rules.
mr president if our economies are to prosper and grow we must support small businesses and make sure that the market is fit for purpose in the digital age.
i think the easiest solution is an exemption through a threshold for micro entities but that needs unanimous support from finance ministers.
our entrepreneurs need us now.
that means they are not earning any money and the authorities are not collecting any tax at all.
we need to sort this out and it needs to be done quickly.
the new rules for vat collection in europe do not do this.
i am looking forward to your vat proposal in two thousand and sixteen but meanwhile here is one suggestion why do you not propose an urgent single sentence amendment to the two thousand and six vat directive allowing digital books newspapers and magazines the same reductions already allowed for their physical counterparts?
the vat on ebooks i think is an excellent example where we can show that we are committed to this agenda and that we are able to deliver without delay to our citizens.
well eu vat action and enterprise nation who represent digital entrepreneurs tell me that thousands of their members are closing down.
a limit below which digital entrepreneurs could continue as before and then when their businesses grow larger bring them into this new system?
you have heard about the digital single market and you are excited to think that you can sell to customers not only in your own country but across the whole eu.
someone tells you that you can automate the process but you find the system either does not work or that you have to sell through an online marketplace that charges you a large fee and may interrupt your sales process to sell other products to your customers. so what do you do?
so if the eu is to be a place for aspiration and opportunity and we are to create this digital single market then we need to help them.
let us introduce a threshold or an exemption to save their micro businesses.
let us listen to the digital entrepreneurs asking for our help.
most great entrepreneurs started with nothing.
you know that you need to register for vat but when you look into it you find that you need to keep accounts for up to ten years and calculate up to eighty eight different vat rates set by the countries you sell to.
do you feel inspired by this new digital single market or do you give up and shut up shop?
let us not forget that every large business started as a small business.
how are you going to achieve a threshold given that you need the agreement of twenty eight member states?
so we do need to address this issue.
so when on one january two thousand and fifteen the new vat rules on digital products sold in the eu came into force which means that they are chargeable in the place of purchase rather than the place of supply this resulted in many eu businesses having to register an account for vat in every single member state.
they are struggling in terms of the cost of compliance especially if they trade across borders.
european smes also face distortions from vat free goods supplied by non eu businesses. so i welcome what you have said in terms of introducing legislation and simplifying measures but i do think it is important that we get the right level of threshold that enables a higher number of digital start ups and that means exemptions for them.
for example in the uk there are about two hundred and forty zero designers of knitting and sewing patterns which are sold as pdf downloads.
mr president commissioner ansip acknowledges that by creating a connected digital single market we can generate up to eur two hundred and fifty billion of additional growth in europe thereby creating hundreds and thousands of new jobs and a vibrant knowledge based society. but commissioner to achieve this we do need several regulatory reforms and one of these is the tax treatment of digital
i do support the need for alignment of vat rates to ensure we have a level playing field and to eliminate distortion of competition and tackling vat fraud should remain a priority but it is important not to forget the proportionality principle.
secondly what will the level of the threshold be?
the commission contends that the rules will introduce a level playing field as they mean that sellers will not be in a position to undercut competitors unfairly by using a lower vat rate.
however because there is no threshold the real impact is that the smallest companies and sole traders are going to be left unable to compete and they are going to face the stark reality of having to close their businesses down in some instances.
moreover it creates a divide between multinational companies who can very easily put in place systems to comply with the new rules and those small traders and small businesses that simply cannot do so.
small and medium enterprises as you are well aware commissioner are the lifeblood of many local domestic economies including my own and they cannot be disregarded when we are introducing measures such as this.
i can see the uk has a lot of problems with it;
we should just change it to dc because we no longer know what a book is or what it becomes and once you open it up you have live content and you are doing something else with it. so let us start thinking ahead of the curve forget the past and see where these things will be in the future.
the future will be a digital content single market.
we need to be proactive and not reactive.
make very simple decisions to simplify europe for businesses to understand how things work. whatever the tax is make it very easy so that they can pay it easily and not have to close down.
however the new rules could have counter productive effects and unintended consequences.
i am particularly referring to the microenterprises that actually make up the majority of the digital services. vat regulations may become real obstacles for users and providers of services especially for cross border operations.
therefore commissioner it is imperative to report as soon as possible on the functioning of the new provisions in order to make eventual adjustments if needed.
the introduction of the place of supply principle and the vat mini one stop shop should also lead to less regulatory burdens better and more cost effective digital services.
furthermore member states should enhance cooperation as regards the vat rate applied to digital services in order not to discriminate against consumers across the european union who might find themselves in the position of paying significantly different prices for the same services.
yes we need legislation but we also need implementation of the legislation.
i believe society must be prepared to pay that cost.
however we have to be pragmatic about how we deal with it.
it is not a straightforward case of proclaiming a principle.
as meps we frequently find ourselves bemoaning the failure of member states to enforce eu legislation.
i look around this chamber at the intelligent powerful and impressive women engaged in this issue.
where companies are failing to follow national legislation why do we believe that they will react any more favourably to the heavy hand of the commission?
in my many years of business experience i have been involved with this issue many times.
my problem here is not the principle involved but the issue of eu legislation.
painstaking work to benchmark equal value must take place and it comes with a cost.
the european gender pay gap information campaign which we launched in two thousand and nine is already a good example.
amongst other things the commission is further exploring the impact of part time work and fixed term contracts on equal pay.
four however the situation is very different from one member state to another and in some the gap is still widening.
you might have seen advertising in national newspapers and our web clip highlighting the absurdity of pay inequalities between women and men.
my colleague would like to explore this potential further in the future.
your report also mentions the need to improve the quality of statistics. eurostat constantly encourages the member states to provide their national data in a timely manner.
this is an untapped potential for the european union economy that is needed especially at a time when human capital is the key factor for our future and for competitiveness. with today's debate and the subsequent vote the european parliament will take a position on an important issue.
these activities are also open to organisations that facilitate training and dissemination of messages such as business organisations social partners and others.
finally with our exchange of good practices programme on gender equality we are working to foster closer coordination among member states.
some of our priorities for the coming years will be to monitor the correct application and enforcement of the equal pay provisions of the directive and to support member states and other stakeholders with a proper enforcement and application of the existing rules.
in this framework the commission organised in germany in december two thousand and eleven an exchange of views on instruments to tackle the gender pay gap.
the initiative will promote training activities and support the exchange of good practices on the business case for gender equality.
in addition on two march this year we held the second european equal pay day.
we are also following closely the pilot projects launched in some member states.
this campaign has created a real partnership amongst social partners ministries for employment social affairs and equality ngos in the field of gender equality and both private and public recruitment agencies who have acted as multipliers of the campaign messages.
equal pay is one of the commission priorities set out in its strategy for equality between women and men for.
i would like to thank you again for speaking up in order to address this truly important question.
the gender pay gap is also an expression of how our pool of well educated and highly skilled women is under exploited.
but business really does not need this not when one in five young people in the eu are out of work and when the eu share of gdp wealth is falling so alarmingly.
already the engine of our economies small businesses are suffering from too many unnecessary costly and over the top regulations such as the disgraceful out of control uk employment tribunal system where ninety of those laws come from the eu and which really acts as licensed blackmail.
civitas actually estimated that that directive alone cost gbp one hundred and fifty million in the service sector and two hundred and ten million.
we do not need the eu to dictate to sovereign nations yet more top down equalities legislation in yet another power grab. pay should not be set at the eu level.
we have to ensure that all intervention is constructive;