kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
controlling hybrid threats countering cyberattacks building resilience sharing situational awareness increased information sharing fighting terrorism and continuous improvement of cooperation on mission and operations at both strategic and tactical level represent concrete domains for collaboration between the eu and nato that were mentioned and supported in the report.
madam president eu macrofinancial assistance should of course support ukraine's commitment to values shared with the union including democracy the rule of law good governance respect for human rights sustainable development and poverty reduction.
so as a long standing friend of ukraine i wish to put on record that one of the things we must do is to guard against the continuation of an old boys' club.
but such a transformation requires men to step aside and to understand that when women take a seat at the table everyone wins.
the women and youth of ukraine are immensely talented full of ideas and energy and ready to step up to make the changes that are required in a twenty first modern democracy.
as we know this step change requires a strong civil society.
seventeen four million people that decided brexit was a brighter future for britain outside of the european union.
but i also do speak for those people up there who understand that there is a class war going on in europe as well.
as referred to by ms mogherini it is also right that due attention be given to the ease of mobility of allied forces across europe not just in times of tension but also for exercise purposes when necessary.
particularly at a time when there is some friction in transatlantic relations and as we approach july's nato summit it is doubly important that european nations signal to the united states our willingness to bear more of the defence burden.
just this local increase by the united states is more than the total defence spending of at least ten european countries. i suggest that european burden sharing is not improved by the creation of separate defence structures by the exclusion of major third countries from defence industrial projects or from pursuit of an elusive and illdefined eu strategic autonomy.
i met the human rights groups who documented the russian war crimes.
today south ossetia and abkhazia are still occupied territories and refugees have no place to return.
i urge those who are in the house of commons today and tomorrow and who will be voting on these issues to look at the eea amendment to support jobs support livelihoods and to support prosperity.
so for the future of my country if we are no longer going to be part of the single market through the eu we need to be part of the single market through the eea an option that is open to mps. i urge them to support the amendments today in the house of commons.
yet the uk could remain as part of the single market through an amendment on the eea.
madam president the internet should be a force for good a common space that promotes quality education and inspired learning better communication
creativity and intercultural dialogue.
mr president every year we evaluate the situation of human rights and democracy in the world.
it is upsetting to admit that not only are we making insufficient progress but we are also going in the opposite direction.
many governments have introduced repressive laws to curtail basic freedoms for citizens.
the first review of the eu action plan has shown positive results in mainstreaming human rights in our external action.
the next step is to make sure that each international agreement includes a human rights clause so that companies based in third countries as well as in europe comply with international standards.
in this regard the eu has a responsibility to act and be a global leader.
now more than ever we need to be at the forefront of the promotion of human rights and steer the wheel in the right direction.
i'm sure he'll do a great job.
if boris johnson has his way then the border in ireland will be hardened and strengthened.
and to buy a bit more time for the coalition agreement by the british government and their allies in the democratic unionist party the jurassic party agreements are torn up and rights are denied. enough is enough.
it is a message to the people of ukraine to its government and also to russia.
i admire the ukrainian civil society that has been the driving force behind many reforms in ukraine.
i commend the women and men in ukraine's public service who work hard on implementing these reforms.
i encourage all the ukrainian politicians to follow through on their promises to fight and prevent corruption.
work hard not to repeat the mistakes of the past.
i would also like to send a message to russia that building a democratic strong and independent ukraine remains our strategic objective.
but that will never be fully possible while we still have universities that have admissions systems that disadvantage young people from certain backgrounds while university fees are too high while we have erasmus opportunities not available to enough young people from working class backgrounds and while we still have the outrageous scandal of unpaid internships in this house in other political institutions and in other sectors as well. the best educational opportunities are not a luxury for the richest.
they must always be for the many and not the few.
it is obvious that any economic support from the eu to iran will go directly to the companies owned by ayatollah khamenei and his family and to the companies owned by the islamic revolutionary guard corps.
this report is a neat symbol of how the european union can't see anything that it doesn't want to regulate.
the idea that recreational fisheries something that has been selfregulating for as long as human civilisation has existed or indeed longer needs to be brought within the jurisdiction of the european union and subjected to the strictures of the common fisheries policy is a measure of the ambition that we have in these brussels institutions.
the european union i think has learned from the bad pr of the last time that it tried to do this when it was literally wanting to count every fish landed even from people fishing on the rocks.
it has now done what it usually does which is to pay for a lobby group supposedly representing the anglers who are in fact a group created by the commission and then pretend that the legislation is representative of the sector.
but stand back and ask the question why does any of this need to be regulated at eu level at all?
if we can't allow this kind of activity to be flourishing outside the sphere of political control then truly we have no limits whatever to our ambition.
there are challenges though and in order to avoid them we have to fulfil certain preconditions first to avoid duplication and therefore welldefined modalities of cooperation that are needed.
secondly the key importance of transatlantic cooperation despite tensions in other areas and cooperation with the uk after brexit.
especially we the eu have lately shown extensive efforts on defence with concrete steps for example additional investments and better capabilities to share the burden of peace security and defence equally.
finally let me express my deep appreciation for the very constructive and enhanced cooperation with this house.
in this challenging global context i find it more important than ever to ensure that we all speak with one voice in upholding democratic values and the universality of human rights.
and developing an euwide certification framework for cybersecurity. we also need to send a clear message to those who wish to cause us harm and in this regard we welcome the reference in the report to europol's role in coordinating the law enforcement response to cyberthreats.
this initiative will also bring together civilian and military training needs.
the eas and the european defence agency have in fact been engaged with member states for some years now to develop capabilities for cyberdefence.
the report also makes some recommendations on institutional reinforcement such as developing cyber aspects further in a white book for security and defence to invest more in cyberdefence in the next mff to strengthen the eu intelligence and situation centre and set up a new cyberdefence council.
i want to assure the rapporteur that we will consider all of these ideas very closely. further investment in cyberdefence has already been highlighted in the current discussions on the next mff.
it does an exceptional job in telling and teaching children about culture heritage and history and when i go into schools i am invigorated by the little ones telling me back what they are learning and they love it.
i recommend it to you and i will spread the word.
and thank you to the wonderful teachers who promote this programme.
the second is our own programme the ambassador school programme for secondary level pupils and here again the tremendous engagement in those schools that are part of this programme is just to behold.
it roots out cynicism and ignorance about the european union and promotes an absolutely wonderful ideal for europe which we have yet to attain.
i think we all agree that there is a strong link between parliamentary scrutiny and democratic legitimacy; this matters today more than ever.
we also believe that the less complex more efficient and more transparent the governance the more effective its scrutiny.
this relationship should be an underlying principle in the ongoing reforms. we also believe that an interinstitutional agreement between parliament the council and the commission could provide for better parliamentary scrutiny of different elements of economic governance.
in particular such an agreement could help with the better handling of the issues which require double legitimacy.
i would like to use these few minutes just to reassure you on the fact that first we will continue having a pragmatic realistic approach as mr danjean mentioned.
i believe we are beyond the ideological debate and we are focusing on the practical things we can and we have an interest in doing and that the work will continue on the european way to defence and security which is a particular one and which sometimes implies a military component but is never exclusively military.
we will continue doing this obviously in the council.
that i believe will contribute also to the good preparation of the nato summit for what concerns nato issues.
then there might be other issues coming up on the agenda that do not relate to defence and security strictly speaking.
i would also like to say that i believe that work will continue also in strong cooperation with other european institutions.
thank you also for the indications.
last point some of you mentioned the future relations with the uk.
let me say very clearly this will have nothing to do with relations between the european union and nato;
clearly so.
member states will come to that point later this year to define ways in which third countries might be invited to join some pesco projects but is not for now and it is not for nato.
we also need to develop our capabilities to ensure better attribution of cyberattacks enabling a stronger coordinated response to those specific attacks that impact all of us across europe.
the eu should also fulfil the role it plays so well in other areas namely leading the development of international laws and standards in this field.
in this room during this debate i doubt anyone questions the need to uphold values and principles.
but looking at the practice a more troubling picture emerges migration management' or countering terrorism' are increasingly blanket excuses to turn a blind eye to the rights of people.
and privatised law enforcement where private companies are filtering what people can and cannot see online without oversight is another area to watch out for.
i think it is essential that we don't fall into the trap of the short term populistic objectives also with an eye on the new mff.
for europe interests such as security and values such as human rights protection should never be traded off because they overlap.
so i urge for more political leadership that is unequivocal and that is not traded away at difficult moments.
i for one have had enough of meaningless speeches about addressing the immigration issue during council summits but then you do nothing.
frustration is understandable and i place the blame on those member states who want to do nothing about the immigration issue.
no member state except two malta and ireland fulfilled their allocation of quotas from italy and greece.
how can we explain to our voters that the european parliament the institution that wants to represent democracy in the eu does not have a say over the conditions in bailouts? this anomaly needs to be addressed otherwise if meps cannot decide on europe wide important issues why should people go to vote in the next european elections?
by excluding the european parliament from crucial decisions the ground is ready for the next generation of eurosceptics.
the second idea on the other hand it is important that the fiscal compact is implemented through eu law. i think it is a good moment to check how its application has worked in different member states and how we can improve it.
this has been a way to force cuts in welfare state and social policies.
similarly many local governments in spain with very low debt are not allowed by the central government to use the cash they have in the banks for investments on social policies.
the logic of fair insurance contracts concluded ex ante and paying out in times of economic shock big european unemployment insurance or banking union;
the logic of crisis management by strong institutions;
and last but not least the logic of democracy.
for the political sustainability of the common currency it will be essential that rules insurance contracts and strong crisis management capabilities strengthen democracy at the european and national level rather than weaken it. in practice this means proper accountability to the european parliament and it means that our architecture needs to be based on solid federalism by exception not an attempt to micromanage policies of member states at all times which would only serve as a permanent support programme for populists and nationalist political parties set on destroying the european project.
the solution is certainly not closing the borders but neither is the solution to keep open borders without protecting people. we need to have a europe which is open but protecting people.
this is too weak to ensure our unity. the same applies to the proposals to reform the eurozone because we don't have proposals to ensure strong investment to converge to ensure that the social pillar is really applied everywhere.
so this is missing and we want to strengthen european unity on the internal front with a united europe for us to be able to cope with external challenges.
so we now know more about the collaboration but also because she responded to some of the problems raised by my colleagues here and makes my task easier from this point of view.
so although we have the same report in front of us you saw how differently we present it.
indeed we worked very very well.
there were many amendments.
we found the compromises which are reflected in the report.
i cannot accept the continuation of old school militaristic thinking with priority afforded to military alliances and increased spending on defence budgets and militaries globally leading to tensions between countries.
as a feminist and a pacifist i call for a transformation towards a feminist security policy that puts human security personal integrity and safety from interpersonal violence at the centre of our defence and security agenda. for a safer world we need to invest in conflict prevention and mediation.
the eu is meant to be a peace project not a military project.
now we stand by georgia.
there are new countries waiting for accession.
in this context i would like to support the initiative submitted by the commission that aims at strengthening the general institutional infrastructure of the euro area.
i would point you again if i may presume to do so to the example of the imf that is the view that the imf has taken.
helps us in understanding the complexity of cyber threats in peace and war and the somewhat blurred border between both at a time of hybrid threats because cyber' is part of this
we put forward a package of proposals in december last year we put forward further proposals this may and we think it is now time to move from discussions to decisions.
it is an important economic tool supporting the efficiency of the single market and reducing costs for people and for businesses.
let me mention just two that i consider the most important.
i guess this is a good proposal.
while we work to preserve the nuclear deal we must never lose sight of the principles and values upon which this parliament was built. we must never stop standing up for those without a voice and holding those with power to account.
we must never stop in our efforts to promote democracy free speech the rule of law and the right to peaceful protest.
we will continue our work to build our cyberresilience and cyberdeterrence as well as to reinforce international cooperation and defence cooperation.
despite all of the pain of the financial and sovereign debt crisis europe has come back strongly. we are living through a jobs rich recovery.
that success is based on prudent budgeting new investment structural reforms and a commitment to stick to the rules of the fiscal compact.
firstly it is absolutely useless dreaming up new ideas if we're not delivering on what we said we would do already. let us deliver on our existing commitments. secondly if you're a small big or medium sized country the rules apply to everyone.
and thirdly whatever change is proposed it must be an inclusive format.
that means from our perspective no euro area parliament no railroading of small or indeed any member states.
so where do we go from now?
i see five areas of potential improvement.
i think we need to complete the banking union to deliver on the european deposit insurance scheme edis.
that means risk sharing and risk reduction must go hand in hand.
it means a credible resolution of the npl problem.
secondly europe must be open for business which means more trade deals delivering on the potential of the single market economy and freeing the eu economy of protectionism.
we also need a functioning capital markets union for new finance alongside juncker's the efsi plan.
turning the esm into a fully fledged european monetary fund makes sense but it needs to be accountable to this parliament. we also need to be prepared to reform and turn the european budget the multiannual financial framework mff into an instrument of innovation and growth.
could we do the impossible colleagues? that is agree a better budget by the time of the next european parliament elections.
we need to it would send out a powerful signal from this house were we to obtain that agreement.
finally i hope that once and for all the idea of having an eu finance minister is dropped.
it is a crazy proposal.
it sends out the wrong message to national parliaments to eu citizens.
it does not have national public support.
it is a weapon of euroscepticism.
it is time that it was finally discarded from the technocratic dreamworld from where it came.
indeed that is what matters and we must take measures to ensure that happens because rarely do we discuss the social and living standards of our citizens when we talk about high finance. so what can be done? number one the eu banking union must encompass a european deposit insurance scheme that would be powerful for our citizens. the commissioner also referred to the eu invest fund and i am pleased to say that i have been appointed rapporteur for that and i look forward to working with the commissioner and others to ensure that it benefits especially the smaller businesses right across the european union.
i also want to mention a few points that my colleague brian hayes mentioned.
we do not need a european finance minister.
indeed the word minister' is almost an exclusive competence for member states at this stage and it is almost an usurpation of their right to be talking about a minister at european level.
we do not want a eurozone parliament.
there is one parliament this is it.
and we must agree the mff before the next elections. finally i want to say that the rules must apply to all and it would be a good idea if we made it clear to populists when they are going for election what the consequences are for their citizens' standards of living if they break the fiscal rules. that might help to fight populism.
i know that those engaged in recreational fisheries are concerned also that the regulation we bring in will work for them.
while i have the floor in my support for this report there is a huge voluntary effort amongst fishermen and women both at sea and inland who look after our resources on a voluntary basis who teach and encourage young people into the skill and hobby of fishing.
lastly those whom i know who enjoy recreational fishing tend to have a good disposition so it does a great deal for the wellbeing of those who engage in this activity.
we want it to be sustainable we wanted it to continue.
it can be accessed by police authorities under certain conditions on an individual basis.
all this needs to be looked at together and that is why i cannot give you an exact timetable today on when we will do that.
this is data that has been kept for commercial purposes by companies.
europe has not neglected its responsibilities in this field; neither should it shy away from coolly assessing the effectiveness and proportionality of any security measures passed in reaction to serious threats. the rights at stake are no less serious.
in the post nine eleven world executives and lawmakers have been under extreme pressure to show strength and decisiveness in the fight against international terrorism and organised crime.
mistakes and abuses have abounded in the process but fortunately in the eu discussions on the best means to address serious crime benefit from a calmer and less polarised environment especially in comparison to the us.
so of course the commission and the member states say great law let's have more of it'.
so here is a law that was pushed through that does not serve a purpose that seems to be a violation of the constitution and of which there is widespread abuse.
it seems almost impossible to find a way to implement it in a way that is reconcilable with the constitution.
it was then deemed a violation of the constitution in many countries.
it should be repealed today.
is it useful?
all the statements about the necessity of this directive are based on assumptions and nothing else.
secondly does it serve a purpose?
that is why we got to vote on it that was the only reason.
we have yet to see any figures.
does it serve the purpose of harmonisation?
so we are working towards a reform of the data retention directive to be presented at the same time as the future revision of the eprivacy directive.
law enforcement and judicial authorities throughout the eu have repeatedly stressed the importance of knowing that data will be available if there is a need.
it is necessary to ensure that member states cannot use retained data for other purposes than the ones in the data retention directive.
there are a number of areas in the current directive that ought to be improved.
it was and remains necessary to guarantee that within the bounds of proportionality and subject to appropriate safeguards and controls these data are available for a limited period of time if police and prosecutors need to assess them.
we also need minimum standards for access and use of the data better accountability on the part of authorities for the data which they access and the statistics they provide stronger data protection and a consistent approach to reimbursing the operator's costs.
it was also necessary to have a solid european data protection level for this.
for instance a reduced and more harmonised data retention period; a scope which is clear and exhaustive in terms of the type of data to be retained;