kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
would the taoiseach agree that these talks at the very least should be suspended pending a full investigation?
this mff deal represents a major success of a highly effective presidency.
taoiseach you and your team earned our thanks and respect for handling a very tough negotiation and for delivering a successful outcome on time.
this deal is a sensible pragmatic agreement.
it reflects the efforts to contain and control costs of government within the member states.
the key now is implementation.
however i want to stress firstly that it is no substitute for discipline and secondly that it underlines the need to shorten the budgetary period a five year budget for a five year parliament. moreover i remain concerned that not enough has been done to address the ongoing budget deficit which will leave us with our ongoing rals problems.
finally i congratulate you taoiseach on your determination to address funding for youth unemployment and smes. frankly this catastrophe should have been addressed long ago.
you have demonstrated the will to provide the funds.
political agreements have been reached on a number of difficult issues the common agricultural policy the common fisheries policy and the mff and whilst i am still anxious to see the legal text i recognise that this is no mean feat.
i am however disappointed that there has been little or no focus on the resolution of the institutional dispute between the council parliament and commission with these matters now being settled in court.
fishermen from the united kingdom the republic of ireland and other european nations look at this political wrangling with frustration and anger but not disbelief they have become all too accustomed to the failure of brussels to act on their behalf.
i think they reflect his standing and his government's approach to the presidency of the european union we have discharged our presidential duty'.
i think many in this house should listen to those words and reflect on them.
because words matter i think also we must reflect on the words of ms anderson.
she may be wearing the green today but it is only on the outside.
i regard her comments with the contempt they deserve and i go back to congratulate our presidency minister creighton tnaiste eamon gilmore minister coveney.
i was one of the few negotiators from this parliament on the common agricultural policy on which full respect was given to this parliament's new codecision powers and where we got a political agreement.
that is exactly what the european union is about constant ongoing work for citizens.
therefore we expect russia to respect her international obligations and implement the constitutional rights of her own citizens.
the russian constitution provides a basis for a multi party system but de facto it has become a one party system with a marginalised parliament.
it would discredit the european union if we turned a blind eye to some severe offences in some countries while imposing sanctions on other countries for identical offences. we cannot continue normal relations unless concrete improvements are made in russia.
the russian authorities are evidently implementing unconstitutional law and order.
it is hard to envisage both foreign and domestic business investments in such a climate.
i would like to ask the representative of the council which punitive measures and sanctions will be applied against the russian officials who are directly responsible for human rights abuses and perversion of the rule of law.
this not only exposes the absurdity of russia's membership of the council of europe but also encapsulates why the council of europe is in my view increasingly ignored internationally.
why then is russia tolerated as a member of the council of europe? that is a very good question.
the european court of human rights has a backlog of twenty seven zero cases from russia alone yet a russian judge on the court is able to order the british government to give british prisoners the right to vote.
these are often offset by backward developments and overall have not been enough to achieve real improvements but we must not be discouraged.
violence harassment and intimidation against activists lawyers and independent journalists are of great concern to us.
all of these freedoms are enshrined in the constitution of the russian federation.
we are engaged in a serious dialogue with russia on human rights.
president medvedev has often spoken out against what he has termed the legal nihilism prevailing in russia.
at the same time we continue to receive reports about arbitrary arrests of peaceful demonstrators including opposition leaders at these very same authorised demonstrations as well as others across the country.
however there are positive signs in the situation of human rights in russia.
freedom of speech and freedom of assembly and association are preconditions for the development of modern societies.
the situation in the northern caucasus is particularly worrying and needs urgent action. we welcome the new strategy for economic and social development and the efforts by deputy prime minister khloponin but much more needs to be done to provide a lasting response to the
we very much welcome this decision.
such instruments should be wielded wisely on the basis of clear evidence. first of all we keep calling on russia to ensure a proper investigation.
international commitments.
us. we must encourage russia to seek a sustainable solution to this endemic problem in the region.
the european union must stand ready to support russia in these efforts.
any decision on restrictive measures would be for the council to take.
this affects russia's relations with the rest of the world and equally with its own citizens.
the relationship between russia and the west then is subject to uncertainty not to mention the complete absence of transparency and accountability.
where russia's own citizens are concerned they lead lives more affected by arbitrariness and violence than can be reconciled with the european union's commitment to universal human rights.
attempts to transform russia have failed so the european union has no alternative but to live with the awkward interface between its own legality and russia's non legality.
madam president many of us in this house see russia as part of the great family of european nations and had hoped that after the fall of the berlin wall we would see russia moving closer to the european union. sadly that has not been the case.
the current russian leadership has chosen its own path and it is one which causes great distress to those of us who wish to see freedom and democracy and the rule of law for the russian people.
the commissioner here today has more experience than most of us in dealing with russia and no doubt will have his own experience there but i hope that the commission will put pressure on the high representative to adopt a new policy towards any country whose leaders constantly flout the values we hold dear.
let us talk to them and engage with them on trade as we need to.
let us endeavour to discuss with them human rights as we should but let us not allow their leaders to launder their money through europe's banking systems to educate their children in our schools or universities or to take holidays in our holiday resorts.
the commission shares the view that gender equality must go beyond the level of political intentions and become a reality. the commission also welcomes the strong emphasis on teachers.
women are not making labour market gains commensurate with their educational achievements. while there are many more women graduates men still have a higher employment rate than women among recent graduates leading to a four gap at eu level.
women are being under represented in management positions including in higher education and men under represented in the teaching force.
we need to move from the identification of challenges to solutions.
the commission will continue to promote gender equality through its policies and programmes.
almost sixty of university graduates in the eu are women. in addition women's participation in previously male dominated study subjects is now significantly higher. yet despite important progress in recent years gender inequalities still persist in european education systems.
the commission is looking forward to seeing the impact of this report and of the resolution on policy debates and on policy action around europe.
for all these reasons the commission is pleased to see parliament's report in line with its work in this field.
gender equality was clearly and obviously identified as one of our core eu values that education ministers committed to strengthen and promote.
faster progress is possible.
this report underlines that education policies and practices are crucial in order to sensitise young people to gender equality and to combat gender stereotypes sexism and gender based violence from an early stage.
for example while women are more likely to have a higher education degree they are still under represented in science mathematics and engineering studies and careers in research.
the attitudes of teachers and teacher educators are crucial in facilitating change.
there are also strong gender imbalances in the teaching profession.
right now schools universities and teachers are rarely assessed in terms of their gender equality policies and practices.
such an agreement may entail large economic and commercial benefits for this country and tie its laws and standards to our single market.
there again the case of ukraine should serve as a lesson that the eu should not stand still and should be proactive.
as for azerbaijan the eu cannot consider negotiating a dcfta because this country is not a wto member.
on moldova and georgia i urge the commission to find ways to shield these countries from russian pressure they must be allowed to prepare for the signature and the application of the dcftas in the coming years.
but can the commission quote at least some signs of progress made by ukraine towards meeting our expectations for the economic reforms?
encouraging it to continue on this path should be the key to sustaining the vilnius momentum into two thousand and fourteen until the association agreement encompassing a dcfta is signed.
the commission clearly considers the artificial trade obstacles and cumbersome customs procedures recently adopted by russia towards ukraine as unacceptable.
our agreement with ukraine will mutually open our markets for goods and services.
given the current advanced stage of the process related to the association agreement the best support we could bring would be by implementing it speedily once it is signed. the eu has repeatedly confirmed its firm commitment to the signing of the association
our assistance to ukraine has accompanied the preparation of the agreement and will contribute to the shared goal of its implementation.
this is being done in a very complex political environment which as we have seen in the last few weeks is rapidly evolving.
however it should be clear that enhanced cooperation will be possible only in areas which do not contravene armenia's new commitments resulting from its intended membership of the customs union.
we will support this process but it will require constructive cooperation by all the members of the customs union.
its accession process has just resumed after a long pause and it will not be an easy one since important economic reforms are still pending.
to help the implementation of these agreements we also set transition periods for the approximation of legislation by the partner countries coupled with technical and financial assistance to support capacity building and infrastructure. support for the implementation
as regards our agreements with georgia and moldova the commission will put all its efforts including legal revision into enabling their signature before the end of this commission's term.
of deep and comprehensive free trade areas will remain a core objective under the new european neighbourhood instrument. as regards armenia we are in a difficult situation now.
hence the trade chapter of the association agreement would be limited to an upgrade of the trade chapter of the existing partnership and cooperation agreement in order to ensure that fundamental wto rules and principles apply in our bilateral trade relations.
in spite of this we remain committed to continue deepening relations with armenia and we are pursuing our internal reflection and consultations with armenia on the best practical way forward.
it will be a catalyst for political economic and social reforms and modernisation and will contribute to economic growth.
this is not to the detriment of economic operators in russia or elsewhere. indeed russia also stands to gain from the integration of its traditional trading partners into the wider european economy.
i want to take this opportunity to express my confidence that we in this house will make all necessary efforts to ensure that the liberalisation of the wine trade comes into effect as soon as possible.
we should ensure that the association agreement including the dcfta is signed and provisionally applied without delay.
we need this technical information to be able to make an independent judgement on what has happened.
to succeed we need your support to keep the level of ambition of this proposal.
we have proposed to change this and to enforce the current system.
these reports have been made available to the commission and to the general public at the same time.
law. i am ready to help in ensuring a coherent interpretation of the rules across the single market.
we all know that enforcement for now is the key problem to be urgently solved.
no position has been reached yet in the council.
conclude on the best way forward for the commission in its role as a legislator for the member states in their efforts to enforce the law and for the industry to be credible modern and environmentally conscious.
the data submitted by member states is incomplete and there are still many outstanding questions for which additional technical information is still needed.
way for the future.
the reluctance i would even say the resistance to necessary changes is discouraging not to say disappointing.
manufacturers and every type approval authority never questioned these rules or how they should be implemented. if they do not honour these rules there must be consequences because this is a
we are ready to help as much as we can but of course we expect and i also expect member states to be equally transparent and cooperative. the commission has invited member states to investigate the presence of defeat devices in the vehicles circulating on their territories and to report back to us. until now four member states the uk germany france and italy have prepared such reports.
otherwise a year of very intensive work will not be satisfactory in bringing tangible change.
we would like the work on the draft report of mr dalton and the internal market committee to proceed as quickly as possible but also to adopt the proposal as soon as possible.
the commission recently by the end of july transmitted to the european parliament a first overview on the national investigation. but unfortunately we do not have the complete picture yet.
for that reason i offered with my services to provide practical guidance to the national authorities on how to handle emissions control systems at type approval.
we face the current situation because of lenient enforcement and weak market surveillance.
a new supervisory system with commission oversight and mutual control between member states together with eu penalties is crucial for overcoming the problems we are facing today.
they have been prohibited in the eu for more than eighteen years now.
this was for both of us a period of very intense work both for parliament and for the commission.
the commissioner is absolutely correct when she says that we must use what we find out in this committee of inquiry to make sure that forthcoming legislation does not have the same mistakes and does not contain the same loopholes and opportunities for ambiguous interpretation of what must be very clear rules. finally i thank my colleagues from across the political spectrum on this.
you have member states blaming the european union you have the commission blaming the member states and you have the car companies in effect slipping through various loopholes taking advantage of loopholes and slipping through the net.
what we have found out so far is that there is a terrible discrepancy in the interpretation of existing legislation.
evidence as to the effects of diesel on public health. but of course part of the reason why that evidence was not forthcoming is the myriad of levels of responsibility that exist under the current frameworks ensuring that nobody can take full responsibility for what has happened.
it is an extraordinarily reflexive and self referential document.
mr president first of all i ought to congratulate colleagues because the debate as i am hearing it is a great deal more interesting than the interim report although that was unanimously supported by the committee.
had common courtesy prevailed had the committee requested rather than required we might have supported the report. as it is i am afraid we cannot.
it is no business of this parliament or of its temporary committee to require sovereign governments to take any action at all.
it is a very curious report since it is almost totally devoid of content.
we do see that there has been quite a weak implementation and enforcement of european legislation and that is something that we sincerely have to discuss very closely with the national ministers.
european democracy also means that national ministers are accountable for their position in europe.
we all know that it took many many more years and that is something that we have to dig into as well. finally it is one year since the scandal broke and since then we have done a lot but there are still millions and millions of diesel cars on the european roads that do not comply with current legislation.
i must say that since then the commission has considerably improved its cooperation and i hope that we can continue that way of working.
in two thousand and ten the commission work document said that it would take roughly two years for the technical exercise to develop this test;
there is however one strong political point in it and that is that we call upon the commission to better and more swiftly cooperate with the work of our committee of inquiry.
we spoke with car manufacturers producers of emission control technologies software experts academics ngos.
we are awaiting within weeks some infringement procedures but it is certainly something that we are still going to focus upon.
i am very much looking forward to the coming months.
that comes close to the twenty minute test cycle so we have seen that the problem is much bigger than just volkswagen and that is something that we have to explore further on.
very crucial also will be our focus on the member states;
well first of all we of course discovered that this is much more than just the volkswagen case. we have seen that other car manufacturers are shutting down their emission abatement technology when the temperature goes below seventeen c or after twenty two minutes.
we will also hear the american epa and the national type approval authorities.
most of the technical part we have done so far and we have just begun with the political part of our inquiry.
also the recall of vehicles that is still primarily based on a voluntary approach.
this interim report is primarily procedural and there was a reason for it because we only just started with our work.
we will conclude our report in march next year and i hope that we can draw not only conclusions about what happened in the past but also some conclusions some lessons for the future because that might be the most important part of our inquiry.
that is something that we have discussed yesterday with commissioner biekowska and i am very happy with her strong approach now.
another question that we are still digging into is why did it take so long to develop this new real driving emission test?
that was the case when we adopted this interim report in committee.
also we still have a lot of questions concerning the role of member states.
i am very much looking forward to the hearings with national ministers in the coming weeks and i sincerely call upon those ministers who have not yet confirmed their attendance to do so.
so let us be clear every administration in the world was fooled by volkswagen not just those in europe.
we need to deal with this as soon as possible even while the emis committee is examining specific lessons with a view to reporting back to us next year. we have a type approval system at national level with mutual recognition.
but the key is to make it as hard as possible to cheat and we need to do that as soon as we can.
it is the right system but it needs national administrations to enforce it as the commissioner herself said last night.
we can deliver it to protect consumers and the environment but we need to get on with it.
we need a proper peer to peer review system for member states and we need proper market surveillance both at national and eu level.
there is no reason for that.
i think if you just look at what we learned after half a year of the committee of inquiry what is very important is that all the technical experts say there is no technical reason at all to switch off any abatement technology.
still no other car manufacturer is being blamed for using defeat devices and action by the commission is urgently needed.
however in the interests of the industry today and i hope that the industry also starts to understand it i need to be tough we need to be tough and we need to be demanding on the industrial side.
adding insult to injury we were given the most ridiculous explanations for their noncompliance including the document was too large' and we didn't think the documents were relevant.
the need to strengthen parliament's investigatory powers was also highlighted by a former commissioner's refusal to even appear before the committee.
the commission's reaction to our request for documents has been unsatisfactory.
give us your information give it to us in full and give it to us now.
mr president at half time we have seen deficits with this committee's foundation on which its work is supposed to stand.
in april may two thousand and fourteen us authorities get detailed data showing discrepancies.
fifteen months later in september two thousand and fifteen us authorities say it's game over' and vw has to admit massive fraud.
you could act on recall.
so vw is cheating against consumers this time with the official logo of the german government.
we had it in winter.
we had the same information as the us years earlier.
this emis committee should also rebuild the trust in the european legislation but also in our european products.
but we were equally shocked because it was not our european institutions or our many type approval authorities or market surveillance bodies that discovered this fraud but it had been discovered in the states.
we have to take into account that we also have to readjust the situation as it is today.
in the next month we will focus on the member states and that will equally be very important. as the chair of the committee i sincerely hope that all of us together with the commission with the member states but especially in the emis committee can overcome differences between the political groups and stand as one to solve this problem.
cars with illegal defeat strategies are entering our markets daily letting them emit too much and that will cause extra pollution for the years to come.
of course the future of rde will solve part of the problem but madam commissioner we were very happy with your statements yesterday.
we are halfway now and we discovered that it is not only volkswagen but many other companies that overstretched loopholes the legal loopholes by switching off emission control under a broad range of operational conditions with the result that after ten years we have now more emissions and our legal system is being violated.
the actual standards and what they delivered on the road.