kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
technical dialogues and cooperation continue with the belarusian administration and we are keeping the country engaged within the multilateral track of the eastern partnership.
the outcome of the foreign affairs council also confirms the continuity of our established and consensus based policy namely the will to continue our policy of critical engagement and call for the immediate release and rehabilitation of all political prisoners
in conclusion and while fully acknowledging the challenges we face we believe that the european union is following a balanced approach which will allow us to have an impact on developments in belarus and enhance the prospects for future
it remains an essential aspect of investing in the future of belarus.
our financial assistance to civil society has increased five fold since the two thousand and ten post electoral crackdown and clearly this cooperation still has great potential.
we are not trying to isolate the belarusian people.
it is particularly regrettable that the authorities are not taking up our offer to negotiate visa facilitation and readmission agreements between the european union and belarus.
to this end one man's hubris has come at the expense of the hopes and dreams of a generation of belarusian people denied the opportunity to determine their own future in an atmosphere of fairness transparency and freedom from fear including fear of the kgb.
our only hope must be that the citizens of belarus will eventually be granted the chance to vote for their own leaders and live the lives that they choose. we in the european union and in this parliament should afford them every assistance to achieving that noble goal.
strong sanctions and eu support for the opposition must continue.
such trends must change.
its course should be to gradually raise the awareness of the belarusian people and belarusian society because change can be supported in brussels but it should be prepared and should happen in minsk.
this is the only reasonable explanation for why and how a country in europe can freeze itself in today's dynamic and interconnected world.
they apply to every country in the world and belarus cannot be an exception.
if we talk to them we do not talk to the belarusian people it is as simple as that.
everything has been tried so far with ups and downs but the final result is zero.
another is to follow an enhanced version of the current long term strategy a roadmap to democracy.
it looks as if the president of belarus has invented a time machine.
it is clear that under these circumstances we have every interest in seeking to increase the impact of our policies on belarus.
we will continue to call for the unconditional release and rehabilitation of all political prisoners and insist that the development of bilateral relations between the european union and belarus remains conditional on progress in the field of human rights the rule of law and democratic principles.
our policy of critical engagement with belarus is a long term challenge.
the european union's policies are principled and have the clear goal of including belarus in the family of democratic and open nations.
however we know that for political and economic reasons bigger changes in this country are likely to take time.
we discuss our policy of critical engagement towards belarus regularly and as you can see our policies and messages stay calibrated and balanced.
there have been a number of critical remarks but in addition to the critical remarks some concrete suggestions on which we will reflect.
i believe that with even greater involvement of the member states and with your support we can turn this dialogue into an effective instrument for change. let me add a personal remark. time is not on the side of political prisoners but i firmly believe that time is on the side of democratic change. change will come sooner or later. it is inevitable
i think the critical engagement policy presented by the commissioner is the right one.
the plenary has never had the opportunity to take a position on this important text as it was negotiated directly by the committee.
mr president in application of rule fifty nine paragraph three of our rules of procedure i would like to request on behalf of the alde group to vote on the amendments before the vote on the provisional agreement.
therefore i ask all my colleagues to vote in favour of this request which will simply allow all members to express their opinion.
if you pass these amendments you destabilise the whole negotiation and the benefits that we have brought in place for the legal owners.
if we adopt these amendments we will destabilise the entire agreement.
if these amendments go through it will move into a second reading where under the process of this parliament parliament has far less say and the voice of legal owners will therefore not be heard.
these amendments are the same as those that have been debated in committee discussed with the council and ultimately rejected by the member states and there is no reason to believe that the member states have changed their minds.
it will overturn the first reading position that this parliament has fought for and the hard work that we have done to secure practical solutions to allow sport shooters hunters collectors reservists and other legal owners to continue with their sports.
mr president as i understand it this is a request to vote on the amendments before we vote on the substantive vote and i am aware of the amendments that have been tabled by colleagues for today's votes.
if you vote through those amendments we lose all the hard work that has been done and the success that parliament has had in improving the text. the commission's original proposal was not acceptable but that is not what we are voting on today.
this is encouraging in view of our future work and the upcoming proposal.
first we should stimulate covered bond markets as a stable and cheap source of funding for credit institutions and in return banks should be able to better finance the real economy.
i am referring to the so called european secured notes.
the purpose of this the sole purpose of this is to test the compatibility of the agreement with our treaty
the effect of the reference will not be to suspend the present agreement.
this is decided by the conference of presidents and i would like to ask all colleagues to address this in their political groups so that we can avoid this in the future.
madam president everything has been said so in the end i would just like to thank all colleagues in the house especially those who are still present for an open and honest debate.
in the meantime we should all bring forward the good arguments that we have once again heard from the high representative but it is up to us to make it clear to the conference of presidents that we can organise this parliament better than we are at the moment.
i welcome the progress made since the adoption of the eu global strategy on foreign and security policy including the adoption of the european defence fund and the legislative proposal on the european defence industrial programme as well as the notification of the activation of pesco last november which is a major victory for the union and for our future defence and security
finally i would like to stress the importance of our transatlantic relations and our strategic and complementary partnership with nato as well as the importance of the enlargement process towards the western balkans for the security and stability of the union.
president erdoan of turkey meanwhile presses ahead with his reorientation of turkey in a middle eastern direction seeking a dominant role in regional politics and hollowing out democratic institutions at home.
this is set against a wider backdrop of increased global threats such as terrorism climate change migratory fluxes cyber attacks and a less engaged and isolationist america following the election of president trump.
i sincerely hope that phase two of the negotiations between the eu twenty seven and the uk will deliver such a deep and special partnership.
it is no surprise therefore that we see a renewed focus in demand by member states to work together more closely at eu level in the realms of foreign security and defence policies.
the illegal annexation of crimea by russia in two thousand and fourteen has sparked fresh tensions with the european union whilst war still goes on sadly in the east of ukraine.
furthermore despite continued progress and improvements in the western balkans euro atlanticist integration of that region still remains challenging.
the eu needs to have a clear plan that encompasses eunato cooperation on cyber defence cyber defence training and exercises the promotion of civil military cooperation and the applicability of international law to cyberspace.
it creates the much needed opportunity for twenty five member states to work together on defence projects to cooperate more in defence and security to invest in shared projects and to enhance the operational readiness and contribution of their armed forces.
in addition joint training exercises between the eu member states are vital in the area of cyber defence to build trust and understanding of possible cyber threats and challenges as demonstrated by the training organised by the estonian presidency.
it is quite sad for me to see that in one afternoon this plenary has eight points on the agenda on foreign policy.
what we are doing is not militarisation;
it's about the comprehensive approach bringing together different tools and instruments.
however if you look at the facts we are not talking about creating a european union army all twenty five member states that are launching the permanent structured cooperation are going to continue to keep their national forces.
for example investing in a european manner or buying in a european manner.
let me start by saying that i count on this common work to continue in the months and the years ahead. some of you were asking if we can be optimistic today.
so there are national decisions but the european union is the only one and nato and our american friends have understood this perfectly well that can change the fundamental factor of spending better on the european union side.
on the contrary when i say that our missions and operations will be even more needed in the months and the years to come it is exactly because the world needs more and more missions and operations like the european union ones which are working for peace in a cooperative manner on the ground.
on this there is a top priority for our citizens. this has also been possible and will continue to be possible which is even more important because we decided at a certain moment to move from the theoretical ideological approach and debate on european defence and security work to a practical useful and concrete approach consisting of single actions that could improve our work on security and defence
this is what is required.
this is a different approach the european way and this is what is needed in the world today.
the work on the european defence would be impossible because the political conditions were not there and because of this and that and we proved that political conditions can be created when there is determination and when there is the support of our citizens.
we are not turning this into a militarisation approach;
how much member states spend on defence is up to national governments and national parliaments.
i know that we are not used to that.
they are also going to continue to use their capabilities either in european union missions and operations or in nato if they are nato allies or in un peace keeping missions or in other ways.
when i say proudly that we have never worked so well and so much together with nato in the fields where nato doesn't have the instruments to work on some threats and that we have useful cooperation with nato as a military alliance i find it a bit strange to hear that this would mean that the european union would
i have the impression that we are putting strategic autonomy in practice in these times so maybe we might face the contrary problem down the road.
finally i would like to thank my shadow rapporteurs for the good and fruitful cooperation.
the european union as we all know is the biggest market in the world a major political and diplomatic power the first trade partner for most of the countries and regions in the world and the first humanitarian and development donor worldwide.
in an increasingly conflictridden and unstable international environment only a combination of effective multilateralism our soft power and our credible hard power can be capable of confronting those major security threats.
we have to scrutinise the current political and security environment and take measures to guarantee the security of our people and our territory. this will for most be achieved by stabilising our direct neighbourhood such as the western balkans by promoting reforms and tackling the root causes of armed conflicts.
firstly coordination of an assessment of the profound threats and challenges within the eu.
a final remark yesterday's agreement to establish the permanent structured cooperation marked a huge step forward towards an independent and strong eu security and defence policy and thus to a certain degree of hard power.
the second c' consolidation and deepening of the european project through enhanced eu capabilities.
the european union must continue to develop its strategic autonomy and to create its own capabilities to better address regional and international conflicts.
it was a pleasure to witness the largest political groups in this house collaborate closely towards a stronger common foreign and security policy for our union.
the different situations we are facing in our eastern neighbourhood in our southern neighbourhood in the middle east in large parts of africa in north korea or and how we will be able to convince ourselves at tomorrow's sakharov prize ceremony in latin america as well as our challenging relations with russia and china are all emerging as huge
i wonder if the people across europe were asked if for their defence they would prefer to rely on the eu institutions or on the nato alliance that engages the united states alongside the european nations.
the united states' commitment to european security is welcome and i would say essential;
and that brexit means the european union could lose britain's military capability and expertise and there is a need for a new uk eu defence cooperation relationship.
it is called nato but instead the european union is creating an entirely separate european defence union separate from nato but still involving most of the nato allies.
it's all about political integration and the long standing desire of a certain member state for so called strategic autonomy.
actually we don't need pesco we don't need edu;
what we need is for all the europeans to spend more on defence to address crises alongside all their key allies and to have the political will to participate in military action when required.
does that not underline the military ambitions the federal ambitions of this place?
what would you say to the citizens?
all the taxpayers' money the eu will be spending on defence will not be going into useful capabilities.
it will definitely not be used to beef up the nato alliance.
so let's be clear.
' i said no it won't be to protect the citizens.
yeah i've got your attention now. be afraid when they get their hands on the weapons!
madam president these reports are very timely reflections on the progress that is being made at a european level on foreign policy security and defence.
both the mcallister and gahler reports highlight the effectiveness of working together at an eu level towards peace and security in our increasingly troubled world.
contrary to earlier statements by europhobic politicians it is in the interests of all of us that the eu strengthens its position on the world stage.
i also welcome the fact that both reports are looking to achieve a defence cooperation relationship between the eu and the uk in future.
would it not be fair to say that this combined defence is really a united defence leading towards the united states of europe very much as former president schulz outlined in his recent speech and all this is primarily is a political project to bring the peoples of europe together in the united states of europe?
i am glad that we have moved quickly over the last year on security and defence policy.
to this end i would like to welcome yesterday's council decision on establishing pesco and the commitments given by the member states. i would like to congratulate the high representative for her work and dedication to this important project. security and defence has once again become the underlying issue of the eu integration project.
it is clear that no single member state can tackle the complex security challenges we are facing today alone.
in order for the eu to be able to respond in internal and external challenges we need to step up cooperation pool our resources and focus on strategy priorities.
however the first projects to come out of the initiative especially in the areas of training capacity development and operational readiness seem to be promising.
we know that the uk has never ever shirked its responsibility to europe.
whilst we may be leaving the eu we will never shirk our responsibility to keep europe free. we have an excellent defence alliance it's called nato. we work with the last remaining superpower in the world the united states to protect freedom in europe and other places.
despite the fact that our treacherous united kingdom government is deliberately and systematically running down our defences we still do not require a union such as this.
this is purely a political union to create a united states of europe that the people of europe were never consulted about. what i would say to you is very simple no british government should ever commit to this. no british money should ever be spent on this.
and not one single drop of british blood should ever be spilled in a cause that is not directly in the remit of for queen and country.
this was meant to be a peace project and now it is to become a never ending military project.
and you've said it yourself ms mogherini missions can only grow into the future.
will you be paying for them or will it be the ordinary people of europe who can barely feed themselves who will be paying for it?
it will be more cost more resources at a time in ireland where we have record homelessness figures where we have record hospital waiting lists. we then have a so called socialist an s d member suggesting that this should become the most ambitious project of the union.
what about food security?
what about climate change?
but no the most important thing is military weapons guns and bombs.
the language used by jeanclaude juncker was no better.
what's beautiful about this?
we should be spending the money on areas that need it not on guns on food on housing and health.
the eu has nothing to contribute that cannot be better achieved via existing institutions such as nato or of course through bilateral relations.
we give people the wretched choice between generals and mullahs which has been the curse of that region for two generations now. the people of egypt deserve better.
this repression does not become justified simply because sisi has made a good speech in cairo about the need for reform of islam or simply because he has normalised relations with israel.
on the contrary if we set up as the only antonym to islamism a basically autocratic government then we kill the prospects for the development of moderate conservative democracy in the muslim world.
i take note of your point and we will come back to discussing it.
it is hugely important that any queries or petitions or investigations are conducted in a timely and efficient manner.
the number of petitions continues to increase as indeed do the queries to the ombudsman's office.
i believe that citizens look to the ombudsman's office and the petitions committee as their conduit to the eu institutions.
this will lead directly to companies leaving the eu because it will become uncompetitive and stop growth and innovation leading to massive job losses. let us be clear we will stop you taking over the uk tax rates.
it is up to the individual nation states to seal their external borders.
i am heartened that the nation states are deporting migrants onto flights organised by frontex. i only wish my government would do the same.
ukraine will be a crucial first test for the juncker commission on improving foreign policy coordination.
mr president the need to send a strong signal on the situation in ukraine became clear once more when at least eleven people lost their lives on tuesday as a passenger bus came under heavy fire in eastern ukraine.
the fact that this week's kazakhstan summit had to be delayed because of failure to implement the ceasefire agreement is not only deeply worrying it is also an insult to the thousands of people who have already fallen victim to this conflict as well as to our own citizens whose well being is linked to the developments in ukraine.
we will be able to help bring this about only if we speak with a single strong coordinated voice.
it is important that the european institutions be very concerned about the actual number of complaints being received by the ombudsman's office and obviously one of the most common themes of complaints is the lack of transparency.
we are moving towards a very important period in the lifespan of this mandate.
there is a real threat to democracy in terms of international trade agreements and specifically the isds mechanisms and with a certain regard towards ttip.
mr president i supported this resolution because i believe a sustainable solution to the crisis in libya is long overdue and i sincerely hope that the new round of talks launched yesterday in geneva will allow all major stakeholders to reach a sustainable agreement on political transition and bring an end to the appalling humanitarian crisis.
it is crucial that we start working on a coordinated eu strategy that will allow us to assist a future united libyan government in bringing back stability especially as terrorist groups are increasingly finding a fertile breeding ground in libya posing a threat to citizens all over the world including the eu.
that may sound an obvious even a banal observation but it is worth stressing the consequences.
now i would argue that you find those values in plenty of places outside the european union in norway new zealand or whatever and in fact one place where you do not always find them is in the institutions of this union.
it is the old joke that if the eu were a country applying to join itself it would be turned down for being insufficiently democratic.
because people in ukraine as well as yearning for westernisation also have an aspiration to national independence.
i was pleased to vote with my group on all the amendments and obviously on the resolution here today.
for this reason in particular i am very glad to vote for this report.
in my view we do not have a democratic deficit in the eu so much as an enforcement deficit. citizens have vital rights that this parliament and its predecessors have voted through and whether it is passenger rights environmental safeguards the right to a paid holiday these are not often enforced in the way that they should be.
i am pleased that when member states and the commission do not take infringement proceedings as they should in some cases the ombudsman has had an impact in those types of processes indirectly.
mr president i voted in favour of this resolution but i would like to use the opportunity of my explanation of vote to raise once again the issue of the continued detention of ibrahim halawa.
and what we find in that period of time is that his trial has once again been postponed.
he has been declared a prisoner of conscience by amnesty international and the irish minister for foreign affairs charlie flanagan has expressed his deep concern about his detention.
his detention i believe is a violation of the eu egypt association agreement and is a clear breach of his human rights.
he is entitled to be tried as an individual.