kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
we have all heard the predictions that china becoming the world's biggest and most dominant economy within the next twenty years is a fact.
we need to free up business from unnecessary regulation and artificial restrictions and let the european entrepreneurial spirit shine through.
of course we must heed these warnings and we must fight back.
this report calls on china to adopt european standards across areas such as intellectual property environmental protection and climate change mitigation.
of course we tend to use this it is the latest bogeyman that we talk to our children about.
i use the word fight' and the terminology of conflict advisedly. we are engaged in a struggle to maintain and improve our current standards of living in europe and to protect and promote our economic growth.
all well and good but how long is that going to take? we must also create conditions in europe to take the fight to china.
moreover the prospects of seeing an ftt implemented at eu level with twenty seven member states involved let alone at global level are extremely unlikely.
i am fully behind maintaining and developing further good relations with a state that will soon become the world's most powerful economy provided that we address the imbalances of the current relationship.
i must however point out that whilst supporting the report as a whole i do not support full reciprocity in trade relations with major emerging economies such as china.
there are a number of points therefore that i would like to support within this report. restrictions on rare earth exports of which china accounts for ninety seven of world production must be remedied. i welcome the call for china to accede to the multilateral agreement on government procurement so that european firms have the same market access as chinese firms. the chinese authorities should also do more to protect intellectual property so as to encourage not discourage european investors.
the campaign for a tax on financial transactions has always been about supporting the fight against poverty unemployment and climate change at home and abroad as well as stabilising the economy with a shift away from short term profit towards the needs of the real economy.
mr president the british labour delegation has worked with ngos and trade unions over a number of years to campaign for a fair tax on financial transactions. this has the support of two thirds of the british public.
yet today we had no option but to abstain on the final vote on the podimata report.
it was never intended to provide funds for the eu budget.
by including the issue of own resources the podimata report has hijacked a great idea and a great campaign.
whilst it is imperative that we move towards sustainable fisheries we must pay heed to the lessons which can be learnt from recovery plans applied elsewhere.
if i might quote from the commission's own scientific technical and economic committee for fisheries in their evaluation of the recovery plan for cod overall stecf concludes that the plan is not delivering reduced fishing mortality and additionally in many areas does not have stakeholders' support.
a plan with stakeholders' support is more likely to succeed because the stakeholder actions are needed to contribute to its success.
so if we are not unanimous why are we still talking about this tax?
the eu financial transaction tax is a tax on the city of london.
france and germany may well be willing to see jobs and businesses driven out of my constituency but i will not stand by and let london become the eu's whipping boy.
i support the existing rights of the standard european parliament committee of inquiry but much of what this report now seeks to achieve is and should remain the preserve of the national governments and the national parliaments of our member states.
i find that the new idea that a committee of inquiry of the european parliament should have the legal power to subpoena witnesses including member state officials to give explanations in the line of its inquiries is unacceptable and goes too far.
as my colleague julie girling has said we do not actually get much respect nor are we even seen as legitimate in many cases by our constituents so we are really pushing the issue far too far as far as the public of our countries are concerned.
mr president indeed more reciprocity is needed in trade between the european union and china.
perhaps the most harmful obstacle to balancing our trade with china is the difficulty that european companies face when trying to invest in china. without achieving the same terms for europe in this respect we are doomed
to an ever increasing imbalance in our economic relations with china.
equally important for us is fair market access.
european firms must have access to the chinese market on the same terms as chinese firms have access to the european market.
we also need new tools for greater transparency.
china sadly does not do enough in terms of fighting piracy stopping the production of counterfeit goods or improving labour rights animal welfare and most importantly human rights.
but that is another issue.
sadly china functions as a form of crony capitalism with massive state intervention and huge secrecy particularly in the banking sector which make the long term dangers of overheating of the economy or even serious malfunction all the greater.
the international commission for the conservation of atlantic tunas has clearly taken a very precautionary approach.
mr president i voted against the report on this proposal for a common system for taxing financial transactions on a number of grounds.
i have a fundamental objection to the concept of a proposed tax which is supposed to help us out of an economic crisis.
i simply fail to see any intellectual connection between those two things.
we should be concentrating on growth.
the consumer is the one who will pay leaving less money to spend on things that we wish them to spend it on the things we make the services we provide.
it will not be the bankers who are i presume the target of the left of this house.
we must resist that at all costs.
mr president the european parliament's right of inquiry report that we voted on today is a very interesting one for my constituents.
this report has provided an interesting insight into a fundamental division in this parliament.
there are those who believe that this parliament should promote itself as some kind of higher level chamber of inquiry for european citizens.
indeed the lisbon treaty a sordid deal stitched up by the european elite without consulting the citizens in many cases particularly in my own member state calls for just such a development.
this proposal would give the european parliament the power to summon government officials from member states to appear before it explaining themselves like naughty schoolboys. i cannot accept that this is a reasonable way forward.
we need to look again at the details.
the european parliament is not held in high regard in member states despite what many members may think.
many of my constituents question its right to exist or indeed its usefulness.
it is of crucial importance that the danube strategy be based on a bottom up approach.
this partnership should be followed up in the future development of cohesion policy programming documents. the active participation of local and regional stakeholders is a guarantee that they recognise as their priorities the actions and projects included in the strategy.
by this i mean real ownership of the process.
the willingness of the danube regions to allocate funds from their own programmes to common projects is a precondition for the successful accomplishment of their goals but they should also strengthen the coordination of the existing transborder programmes.
they are here illegally because there is no way that they can get out of their country which is at war in a legal way.
madam president briefly stated it was not possible to have a debate and presentation of the report and i would like to thank my colleagues in the other political groups who have supported my recommendation.
i want to inform the commission and the council that this is the start of parliament's campaign to win new rights for our citizens who are the victims of fraud.
pan european orders for the disclosure and freezing of fraudsters' assets are critical because currently the fraudsters walk away while the victims lose out and face expensive legal bills.
with this vote therefore we are asking the commission to urgently come forward with legislative proposals to redress this injustice and to give power back to our citizens the victims of crime.
as one of my colleagues has already said this is an essential question for the eu today.
mr president i would like to thank mrs srbu our rapporteur for the excellent work she has done on this report and for her cooperation with all the shadows.
perhaps it will be at a minute to midnight that europe and the world wake up to the realities of how insecure we are when it comes to food production.
this report is extremely welcome in our overall debate on this issue and in the context of our debate on reform of the common agricultural policy.
the idea that one form of production system is better than another that organic small local is better is not a good argument. we need all production systems to contribute to our food security.
we do need to address market volatility and speculation and i do not think we have all the answers yet.
the single key problem with agriculture is low incomes for farmers.
the mechanism must provide legal safeguards which balance the need to protect fundamental rights with the possible misuse of the right to complain.
if it were not for the european ombudsman we would not be here today discussing a recommendation to ultimately make such an important agency for our union better.
for those colleagues who are questioning the timeliness of this i want to thank you commissioner for accepting and listening to us and we look forward very much to the upcoming review of the frontex regulation.
there is a legal mandate for frontex to make sure that fundamental rights are observed in all its activities and what this report seeks to do is to properly institute the possibility for a person submitting a complaint to make sure that the complaint is actually received.
this report also says that this should not prejudice frontex's operations and its prerogatives to save lives.
of course this should not in any way jeopardise frontex's aim of ensuring the secure and effective management of our border controls.
and i took good note of the joint report recommending the inclusion of such provisions.
we agree that the fundamental rights officer could be given a crucial role in handling complaints covering all personnel directly involved in frontex operations.
the nature and the scope of such a mechanism will certainly be a subject for discussion in both parliament and the council.
it is my intention to provide for a mechanism whereby the fundamental rights officer as suggested by the co rapporteurs could receive complaints in a structural manner and whereby the appropriate workflows would be established
to deal with these issues internally.
but at the same time this is also a fundamental rights tool because we cannot forget that we are talking about people and ensuring that they are treated in a dignified way.
that is why i believe that such a mechanism could be helpful for the credibility of european external borders support operations.
at a time when common external border management and shared responsibility are even more important in rendering the european union's migration and asylum policy more effective we must also make sure that we are not a fortress europe'.
more security goes hand in hand with a stronger and efficient protection mechanism of the fundamental rights of people.
this exchange is extremely timely and i welcome the cross party support for your report. be assured that we are working to turn your proposals into concrete suggestions in the future legislation.
we should not sacrifice our values in the name of security and public order because they are actually both based on respect for human dignity and fundamental rights. the problem addressed in the special report by the european ombudsman is a shame for europe.
parliament has delivered a balanced and workable proposal that will hopefully duly be considered. as pointed out by the european ombudsman the legal vacuum that surrounds the deployment of thirdcountry officers during joint return operations and the lack of accountability in cases of human rights violations involving third country officers can be dangerous.
the mechanism proposed in the report could be a valid instrument to prevent the side effects of the current frontex structure. once again i would like to underline that fundamental rights are not optional.
the influx of refugees cannot be a reason for the eu institutions to accept and tolerate violations of fundamental rights against vulnerable people.
it is a report that will protect the human rights of refugees and migrants at our external borders better but it is also a report that will enable frontex to have a clearer picture about where human rights violation might occur and how to solve this problem. it is a win win situation. what we are proposing is to establish a complaints mechanism that refugees and migrants can use through which they can address their complaints to frontex if they feel that they have been mistreated in a frontex operation whether involving
frontex employees or guest officers of member states. all these groups are recognisable by their frontex armband and therefore we think that we cannot expect refugees to try to research which member state a specific guest officer might have been from.
of course this will need sufficient resources in frontex to handle the task because it is quite a new and significant task that we want to place in the trustworthy hands of the fundamental rights officer of frontex.
the consultative forum by the way is a body that the european parliament helped to create in the last review of the frontex mandate so our work here in the parliament is indeed essential to the functioning of our external borders agency. i believe that with this complaint mechanism we can take a further step towards ensuring even more human rights
at our external borders.
so it is only right and fair that frontex also has to do more on human rights.
we feel it would be appropriate to have a debate here in plenary to show the citizens that we stand for the protection of democracy the rule of law and fundamental rights.
indeed at the time you started drafting no one could have guessed what the world would be like today nor what challenges the countries and people of the entire arab region would be facing.
in line with our conviction that each country is different from the others the european union is responding to different situations with different adapted responses.
you heard cathy ashton yesterday on all these whether tunisia egypt libya yemen or bahrain the european union is faced with many critical choices and decisions. the report we are discussing this evening is focused on the gulf cooperation council and its countries some of which are also experiencing calls from their populations to take better account of their political social and economic aspirations. gulf governments are responding in different ways substantial financial packages to alleviate the most pressing and social needs announcements for political reforms ceding some legislative powers to elected bodies or openness to comprehensive
and inclusive national dialogues.
but we have also seen violence.
we have been following this closely;
she has raised her voice many times in calling for dialogue as the only way forward.
all of this has been done using a mix of public statements which you have seen and direct contacts with the authorities concerned.
it is also time for us europeans to stand ready to respond positively to any request we may get for europe to facilitate unprecedented dialogue leading to reforms.
we should not shy away from defending human rights and fundamental freedoms but we should not dictate or impose our models of democracy on others either.
i believe this is right also with the countries of the gulf cooperation council.
it is not for me to tell this parliament how to go about dealing with the report before it.
what i believe is that we need to think in strategic terms and for that dialogues and engagements are essential.
we are ready to provide political support to reform and also know how and expertise to address more specific issues.
we welcome any such opportunity but this can only happen if and when the countries in the region ask for our assistance.
i trust that when the right circumstances on the ground materialise we will be able to proceed on the basis of a common eu determination to further trade relationship objectives in relation to the gulf cooperation council.
needless to say stability is a necessary condition both for the political contacts between governments and citizens to be enforced and for trade flows and business to operate effectively. thank you for your attention and i would more specifically thank the rapporteur mr baudis.
today once again in this parliament president juncker spoke of the same pay for the same work in the same place.
i was pleased to hear him reiterate his view that equal pay for equal work in the same place is a focus for this commission.
i was also pleased to support the proposal of introducing national minimum wages across member states.
we have a minimum wage in ireland and i support the proposal that all member states in line with their national traditions and their practices introduce a minimum wage.
while i understand minimum wages are a member state competence we still know that decent wages across the eu will help to ensure social cohesion and social cohesion is the antidote to social dumping.
switzerland is a partner and friend of the european union duplicating on a bilateral basis some of the obligations that we have to undertake as eu member states but retaining the right to make its own laws.
that seems to me a useful model for countries that are in this part of the world but outside the jurisdiction of eu institutions.
too often such practices have wrongly fuelled local frustration xenophobia and hatred towards migrant workers contributing in our case to the brexit vote.
many of my constituents felt their livelihoods and living standards were being threatened by the undercutting of wages and poor labour rules.
that is why this report is so important and i supported it.
it is time to ensure the equal pay for equal work in the same place applies for all workers across europe.
if we do not tackle this issue now the consequences for the eu could be disastrous in the long term and i fear that it could threaten the very existence of this crucial union.
it is a more stable and peaceful place to live in as it emerges from a terrorist campaign that has seen many lives lost and many families bereaved.
however deep rooted problems remain. we have recently experienced the dangers of republican terrorism which resulted in the death of two young soldiers shortly before they were to be deployed to afghanistan.
the callous murder of two police officers and recent rioting just last week in belfast show how community tension can still erupt into violence.
the number of peace walls' separating communities has never been higher.
often these walls separate communities suffering from high and generational unemployment low educational attainment and poor health including problems with mental health and growing rates of suicide.
during a recent visit to northern ireland commissioner hahn was able to see at first hand the huge contribution that the european peace fund is making to people across northern ireland.
he spoke of his ongoing support for that fund and i hope that together in this parliament we will be able to make that fund continue.
european citizens are taking advantage of this right not only working in different member states but also building a new life career and families.
on the contrary it contributed to the economic growth of member states that opened their labour markets. once you work in a country you become a contributor to the budget of that country.
consequently you should legally receive social security benefits.
i thought you did a very good job.
in the field of asylum policy above all they feel they have lost that sense because it is increasingly determined by human rights codes by judges and by unaccountable bureaucracies.
i would go in completely the opposite direction instead of harmonising asylum processes across the eu i would give each interior minister or home secretary a discretionary right to admit one zero people every year to their member state.
i would not pretend that it was anything other than discretionary but that would be a way it seems to me of bringing this policy back within the orbit of public opinion.
most people accept that there is bound to be a measure of net inward migration into western developed countries but they want a sense of roughly whom they are admitting and roughly in what numbers.
it is discriminatory not only on an individual basis but also on a national basis.
the proposal from the commission to reduce payments to farmers receiving over eur five zero is being presented to us on the basis that it is both fair and equitable.
mr president the financial settlement for two thousand and thirteen requires a cut in payments to farmers across the eu.
the uk is being discriminated against with this measure which will only serve yet again to raise questions about the whole legitimacy of the common agricultural policy. the funds are there to support food production and increasingly to support the environment.
on the one hand we talk about cutting co two emissions yet on the other we are perfectly happy to maintain two parliaments and come here once a month with all the waste of co two emissions that involves. we talk about better use of resources and even ask for an increase in the budget yet we waste money on maintaining this parliament here.
there are different views on many issues but on this particular issue of having to make that monthly trek to strasbourg surely it is time that the governments of the eu listened to the parliamentarians in this chamber.
surely if we are to show that we are in touch with the people particularly at this difficult time it is time to close down one of the parliaments and make sure that we have one seat for european parliamentarians.
this transparency is crucial because it allows civil society and investors access to essential information which firstly allows them to hold governments to account;
these disclosures should be made on a country by country basis and for all those active in the extractive industries and primary logging on a project by project basis.
we have also included a small regime specific to smes which can potentially save them eur.
there will be a possibility to reintroduce border controls but as now only on a temporary exceptional and last resort basis.
four hundred and twenty million citizens will continue to enjoy the right to move freely without passport control but at the same time they will have more safety and protection within the schengen area.
the cost of the cap to taxpayers now stands at eur eighty seven billion eur fifty two billion of which is spent directly on subsidies.
the cap reform must lead to a deal which is good for consumers as well as farmers and it must not artificially protect jobs in the farming sector by sacrificing jobs in industry including in this cane refinery.
in my constituency of london europe's largest sugar cane refinery has been forced to cut back on production and make redundancies. is this fair when french sugar beet farmers receive up to eur two hundred and seventy million a year in direct payments?
this leads to higher prices for the consumer weakens food security and has a negative impact on production.
furthermore with the profitability of agriculture in the london green belt having increased in recent times the impact of the cap on britain is of personal interest to me.