kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
so far only two member states portugal and italy have ratified the convention so let us continue encouraging the others to complete their ratification processes.
the commission is assisting member states in this respect and will monitor the effective implementation of these important tools which will particularly protect women victims of gender based violence. the commission is also committed to continuing to support projects at grass roots level to combat violence against women.
all these measures be they legislative awareness raising campaigns work on reliable data or support for grass roots projects complement each other in order to bring about real change on the important matter of violence against women.
at eu level we address violence against women in a solid and comprehensive framework of concrete actions.
three seven million in funding to support member states' activities.
the commission is actively involved in the campaign to eliminate female genital mutilation.
improving eu wide data collection based on reliable national data on all forms of violence against women is a must and is still a challenge.
a systematic registration and common recording of complaints need to be assured.
it will make a difference on the ground.
we have made significant progress in adopting concrete legislative proposals to support women against violence.
since two thousand and eleven the council of europe convention has set legally binding standards to prevent violence against women and domestic violence in order to protect the victims and punish the perpetrators.
recent examples include the lunch debate on femicide and gender violence with the g six ministers of the interior on twelve september in rome or the meeting of the european network of eu ministers for gender equality organised on thirty september in brussels by the french and belgian ministers for gender equality.
the eu is not competent for provisions of the convention requiring harmonisation of definitions and criminal sanctions relating to the forms of violence. it is up to the member states to implement these specific provisions.
however it is no secret that we are opposed to further legislation at eu level.
the british prime minister is committed to addressing the question of violence against women.
since coming into power in two thousand and ten the conservative led government has adopted a new equality strategy.
i am pleased the british government has signed the istanbul convention and has expressed its intention to ratify.
we have ratified the conventions on disabilities child protection and human trafficking.
it is their responsibility to initiate and implement policy and laws to tackle violence against women and girls.
the ecr group wants member states to make policies which will help eradicate violence against women.
what we must do in this house is to share best practice and encourage each other to support women and eradicate violence.
and the uk government intends to criminalise forced marriage.
mr president i am happy to support this oral question. we need to put a stop to violence against women and girls.
we have coordinated the g eight 's adoption of the declaration on preventing sexual violence in conflict.
david cameron's government has placed women's rights high on the political agenda.
in fact in its latest review of discrimination against women the united nations praised the united kingdom for a number of positive developments.
we believe instead that individual member states have a responsibility for their own legal systems.
it will also closely monitor their effective implementation.
i have to say that the commission does not intend to adopt any specific criminal legislation on violence against women as violence against women is not among the so called euro crimes' that are listed in article eighty three of the lisbon treaty and in principle is not a transnational form of crime.
eu member states need to be at the forefront of the crisis and ratify the convention so that it can enter into force as soon as possible.
the eu and the council of europe must be able to send a strong message to other countries saying this is a fundamental issue and we are stepping up'.
they need to be implemented and i call on the member states to fully and correctly enforce them and respect the deadlines.
as many of you have said prevention is also very important including raising awareness and education.
we need to do more together on gender stereotypes on stigmatisation on discrimination to empower women and to promote equality.
too many women and children continue to live in fear and uncertainty and the time has come to help them break the silence break the isolation break the loneliness.
i will continue to be committed to zero tolerance for impunity and to encourage member states and the commission to come up with a comprehensive and clear strategy for the eradication of all violence against women and children.
we have heard in this house reasons why we should go ahead but all i hear from some member states is that the language does not suit them.
continuing violence is happening now against women simply because they are women often because they are viewed as objects to be owned.
if not then it cannot be right for others.
let us not forget that violence also targets women because they are lesbian bisexual or transgender.
it is scandalous that in many countries in the eu for example they still require transgender women to undergo forced sterilisation simply to be who they are.
this is unacceptable and as i said we need to stand up against any opposition on the basis of the principle of subsidiarity.
there can be no such principles when we are dealing with human rights and women's rights are human rights.
we must shield all our citizens from domestic violence. domestic violence is a widespread persistent and elusive problem but we must succeed in our work.
by identifying and eliminating remaining obstacles at national level.
we are very pleased that political agreement was reached on this very important file.
the new legal framework will strengthen its mandate for collecting analysing and further disseminating information to ensure that all relevant authorities effectively and consistently supervise the risks of money laundering and that they cooperate and share information.
given the serious cases we recently had in europe involving european banks.
the authority's power to act where union law is breached has also been clarified and enhanced so as to guarantee that action can be taken immediately when anti money laundering rules are broken at national level.
as you know this proposal of two thousand and seventeen was further developed in september two thousand and eighteen with a distinct element to better address anti money laundering and redefine the role of the three supervisory agencies in this respect.
the new rules will ensure that powers related to the prevention and mitigation of risks of money laundering in the financial sector will be centralised at the european banking authority.
in today's larger modern and more integrated eu a purely national approach to taxation no longer works and unanimity is not an effective way of decision making.
to make sure that the unused money in the structural funds will be very quickly used to help those citizens of europe who are not receiving the eu money being spent on them because there are difficulties in the bureaucracy and therefore they will be evicted.
truly integrated capital markets can only work properly to the benefit of the economy and consumers if rules are applied in a similar way in all member states.
moreover as a political agreement it is an important step forward to improve the eu's anti money laundering framework broadly matching the ambition of the amended commission proposal of september.
i also welcome the strength and focus of the three authorities on consumer protection on environmental social and corporate governance considerations in finance and on financial technology.
in my view this political agreement is a significant step towards complementing the single rulebook by more convergence of supervisory practices across the eu.
as part of the compromise on the material scope we foresee a review of the implementation of the directive at the earliest possible time.
' to conclude by agreeing on these standards the eu is demonstrating its commitment to transparency good governance accountability and freedom of expression which are values and rights on which the eu is based and this is a clear and important signal that we are sending to the citizens and stakeholders
this gives effect to the commission's commitment to put stronger focus on enforcement to serve the general interest as set out in its two thousand and sixteen communication on eu law better results through better application. moreover as this is a directive with common minimum standards the commission encourages the member states to extend the directive's rules to other areas and to establish comprehensive frameworks for whistle blower protection.
yes i agree with the rapporteur the negotiations were not easy but we all knew that we were working on something very very important and the commission considers the agreement reached is a well balanced compromise both in terms of ensuring robust
but and i know this was an important issue for this house whistle blowers will also have the free choice to report directly to the competent authorities as they see fit in light of the circumstances of the case. they will be fully protected when doing so.
by protecting whistle blowers through these rules we can better detect and prevent harm to the public interest such as fraud corruption corporate tax avoidance and damage to people's health or the environment.
whistle blowers are encouraged to use the internal channel first where the breach can be effectively addressed within the organisation they work for.
after consulting the social partners where appropriate in accordance with article.
that means in two thousand and twenty five four years after the transposition of the directive and in this context to assess specifically the issue of including the social policy area in the material scope of the directive.
accordingly the commission will make the following political declaration to be annexed to the directive at the time of the review to be conducted in accordance with article twenty seven of the directive the commission will consider the possibility of proposing to extend its scope of application to certain acts based on articles one hundred and fifty three and one hundred and fifty seven of the treaty on the functioning of the european union
this compromise ensures high standards of protection widely available reporting channels and a broad personal and material scope.
on the eve of the european elections.
the availability of easily accessible internal channels both in the public and the private sector and in all companies with fifty or more employees will provide this possibility to whistle blowers.
this possibility for member states is now explicitly reflected in that text.
the broad material scope guarantees that the directive will strengthen enforcement in key areas of eu law and policies.
this was just another missed opportunity to spare us the indignity of funding and implicitly supporting the ever hastening moves towards an eu army that all too many in this house pursue.
instead we will defend irish neutrality in order to save our taxpayers millions keep our citizens safer safeguard our international reputation and allow us to play a positive role in peace building across the world.
and this at a time when public services in countries like ireland are stretched to breaking point. military neutrality is an important plank of irish foreign policy.
sinn fin will play no part in these games.
last week fianna fil and fianna gael rejected a sinn fin motion that will allow the irish people the chance to enshrine neutrality in our constitution.
sinn fin will oppose increased irish contributions to an eu budget that is concentrating on developing a war machine.
i would give you one example of this careful balance.
they are also an important tool to channel private savings into the economy and increase funding for european companies. but today the markets for investment funds are mostly national.
this is about the values laid down in article two of the treaties that concern us all regardless of party political colour.
and what has he done over the last five years?
the special section for investigations which puts pressure on the judges and prosecutors has to be stopped.
as my epp colleagues i am extremely concerned about the state of the rule of law and the recent developments in romania. we cannot accept the romanian government's continuous attempts to make changes to the romanian penal code through emergency ordinance which aim at decriminalising corruption progressively. we cannot accept the continuous
where is the romanian presidency? i don't see them either.
the european union was founded in order to prosper peace democratic principles and the rule of law.
all in all defending the rule of law and urging the romanian government to stop acting against the core values of the european union should be considered as top priorities for all of us.
attempts to interfere with the independence of the judiciary.
however i am concerned that this exercise could become meaningless if we do not tackle the issue of money laundering with greater vigour so i welcome the comments by commissioner jourov.
these european supervisory authorities reforms are an important step forward as a single rulebook with a consistent supervisory approach across the eu by the european supervisory authorities and will i believe contribute significantly to well functioning of the capital markets.
european banks have lost eur twenty billion in stock market value in the last six months due to money laundering.
but what is critical is that this reform will entrust the esas with greater consumer protection powers that will ensure that toxic financial products will be prohibited and with additional responsibilities in their mandate on environmental social and governance factors.
given the powers to tackle this increase significantly i am mindful that we still have not struck the right balance between the european level and the national level. this is of course a very fine line but it does mean that the member states have to move on from the status quo.
this is something we have in order to achieve two fundamentally important things first of all to clarify to everyone that you have risk when investing in a bank.
happy that we achieved a discretionary cap from parliament's side meaning that you don't punish banks with a high level of own capital but also meaning that you can set the level of mrel and tlac depending on the risk structure of the bank.
this means that this will be easier we are facilitating that but it also means that the markets will be much more alert and avoid banking getting into crisis. that is of course the most important thing. the fact that everyone who invests in a bank now knows that you are risking something means that we will have thousands and thousands of supervisors
i would like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs and the commission who have helped us through with this.
together with the tools of a bridge bank or mergers of banks we added the bail in procedure meaning that if you have invested in the bank you also risk losing the capital you have invested.
this is what we have achieved and i think that we are now facing the fact that if i may phrase it that way never have we had such good opportunities for those who will have the responsibility to resolve banks in bad times because
securing that you have the right level of capital and the right level of mrel in the banks they are providing capital to.
different events that can come.
the point is that the arguments i always hear against do not make the matter any better because the image that we have here is of a complete mess and what we need is the rule of law not just for the european union but for the people in romania because young people are craving a country that is stable where the government is reliable and clean and all the stories saying oh you know
i've got thirty seconds and half of it has already gone. what i do know first of all is that the court has already allowed ms kvesi to travel and to speak.
i just have to share the view that in romania we might get into the situation of irreversible changes in the judiciary system the systemic breach of rule of law where the independence and impartiality of the judiciary is endangered.
i was happy about the reform going in the right direction and at the same time i was very scared about the changes which started to go in a very wrong direction and this is where we are now.
not for a single second did i believe that any judge in my country would send me to jail after indictment in the court. i believed in independent justice in my country and by the way the case never got to the court because there was not the slightest evidence.
so again the debate the dialogue is ongoing.
in all the member states we saw a very long process which led to the well balanced constitutional system with a very strong independent judiciary as the main part of it or one of the main parts.
the independent judiciary is a very important pillar of the democratic state and it is something which is being developed over decades.
the second comment the commission does not interfere in individual cases in romania.
we are looking at a systemic situation at the situation in the legislation and that's why we are addressing the recent legislative changes which we see in romania because the cumulative potential of the individual changes might lead to the breach of the rule of law in romania.
so we would like to help romania.
but it can be destroyed literally overnight and this is what the commission doesn't want to happen in romania.
two thousand and six i was accused of corruption in two thousand and six with a very dirty political case. it was purely motivated by political interests and it was a charade for the media and i still remember that when sitting in the jail
this country gave me a chance to provide my knowledge and expertise and that's why i should be the last person who could be accused now of doing something against romania.
i was following closely what romania is doing through the cvm exercise.
it was just politically initiated a dirty game for the media.
i must also say that i'm happy to achieve this.
a lot of things have already been said here tonight but i think it's fair to say that now the landscape is different.
the european banking sector is today much more robust but also much more ready to act when there is a crisis.
that doesn't mean that all the problems ahead of us are solved but i think we have created the mechanism for those who are responsible in each and every situation to do the best they can in order to solve those situations.
while i'm congratulating both of the rapporteurs for pushing the member states further and about the significant steps that we have taken in this direction unfortunately i have to take up the issue that we are not yet in that place and it is really hard and heart breaking for me to see the resistance from the member states on creating a proper european financial supervision.
all of these reforms together will make our banks more stable and solid.
so it's a very important step forward in risk reduction and now it's time to move also on risk sharing.
firstly we must collectively ensure that our public finances are sustainable and secondly we also need to ensure a fair distribution of the tax burden. we can be proud of what has been achieved together on this file but we are also aware that the work is unfinished.
just read the minutes of this house the attitude of this group has been completely solid.
we have to be very critical of what happens in romania.
if the epp had been equally solid on mr orban we wouldn't be in the situation that we are in with hungary.
we do this with a heavy heart because indeed there are many years of political friendship.
you've got it completely wrong.
the romanian presidency is not here that is unbelievable.
fighting corruption is crucial in the rule of law and we've got a country that is seriously backsliding and that is chairing the european council right now.
everybody has said it but it's incredibly disappointing.
i welcome this reform as a critical step.
so four years on this flagship project will finally reduce some barriers increase transparency and remove overly complex and burdensome national rules.
it is really very sad a beautiful cathedral.
it is a win for the investors getting more choice better value and protection.
three we should remember that the oecd and the us federal deposit insurance corporation recommend a leverage ratio of at least five for institutions that are systematically important.
madam president i welcome many of the important developments in the capital requirements package such as the new anti money laundering provisions and restrictions on pay and dividends for breaches of capital requirements.
the fact that a decade after the financial crisis legislators have failed to achieve this is an absolute indictment in my view on all eu institutions and a total failure to meet the expectations that european citizens had placed in us all.
the most effective way to achieve the objective of risk reduction is to separate retail from investment banking.
the introduction of tlac has been hailed by some as a sufficient solution to solve the problem of too big to fail banks but i don't believe that's possible without bank structural reform and a larger binding leverage ratio.
so we are allowing effectively eu banks' desire to compete with their american counterparts to put financial stability at risk.
from the beginning of the process of negotiating the package we have expressed serious concerns over the capital leverage ratio being set at just.
the draft we presented showed that eu action on whistle blowers is possible.
one of our goals was to ensure that trade secrets cannot be weaponised against whistle blowers as was the case with luxleaks whistle blower antoine deltour. in two thousand and fifteen he was awarded the european citizen's prize but a year later a luxembourg court found him guilty of disclosing trade secrets a bogus charge that was meant to intimidate.
now the commission and the parliament have really risen to the challenge.
with this directive whistle blowers like antoine deltour will finally be able to rely on eu protection and i would like to thank the commissioner the rapporteur and all the colleagues who worked on this.
this draft was the result of a concerted effort from civil society journalists and politicians and it was a reaction to the trade secrets directive that had just been adopted and has been a threat to whistle blowers ever since.
the draft directive we are about to adopt makes explicit what we demanded in two thousand and sixteen that whistle blower protection take precedence over trade secrets.
it coincided with the luxleaks trials which showed more clearly than ever that such protection is also needed.
the legal hoops he had to jump through for a court to dismiss this verdict were long and taxing.
it should thus help these firms support the flow of investment in the union and promote deeper and more integrated capital markets.
this is the last session before the european elections.
i should inform members that for this debate there is no catch the eye procedure and no blue cards will be accepted.
as a socialist i have higher demands from my own political family and that is why i have not been shy in criticising what's going on in romania and i am relieved to see that finally my group has had the courage to suspend the romanian psd while this criminal capture persists. as commissioner jourov said this is about the rule of law not only in romania but in the eu.
and if you want to back all these romanian citizens who braved the harsh winter demanding indeed the rule of law then we have to back them in the fight against corruption.
i also would like to encourage you to vote in favour of the compromise reached on the proposal.