kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
in theory that should work very well but examples have shown where it has failed us.
so we are trying to improve on this position.
it is a pity it takes a crisis to provoke action but already there have been huge improvements in the system.
you have had eleven to date and in two cases notified bodies have been asked temporarily to stop working. so when you check you get results.
that is what we are trying to do in reviewing the medical devices legislation.
i want to mention four key points one is to strengthen special notified bodies.
secondly we have an additional layer of scrutiny in particular cases where products demand that additional scrutiny and we have details in the text.
but we also need much tighter post market surveillance so that when a problem is detected there is feedback of that information right through the system and there is a rapid reaction to it.
i think that is crucial for the effective regulation of medical devices.
commissioner you mentioned the issue of the reprocessing of medical devices.
this is very complex and i think we need to stick closely to the commission proposal.
however i think we need more careful consideration of this.
some member states ban reprocessing others allow it;
some have standards others do not.
i would ask that you come back to us with a detailed proposal on that issue in the future.
the existence and indeed success of the customs union makes turkish membership of the eu leading to full political union with all the far reaching consequences that follow therefrom wholly and totally unnecessary.
only the eu could categorise turkey as a european country!
indeed monaco and andorra are the only other such countries.
let me make a key point.
well as a question of fact the total land area of the country that is turkey is over three hundred zero square miles and of that just three and a half percent less than ten zero square miles is actually in europe.
that is something which will be argued about in europe for some time to come.
as for the free trade agreements we need to involve turkey fully at the negotiating table since it too is very much affected by the free trade agreements. in general our relationship with turkey should be guided by fairness and that includes the very clear statement that the eu is committed to its promises and will welcome turkey as an eu member as soon as the copenhagen criteria are fulfilled.
i am also concerned and the commission will continue to press on these issues.
after more than two years of repeated requests turkey finally accepted recently to set up a working group to discuss ipr issues.
this is a positive first step and i hope that this working group will help in making progress on these important issues.
secondly on the problems faced by turkey in concluding free trade agreements turkey has been saying for years that it is suffering negative effects because of the difficulties of entering into ftas with some of the eu's fta partners.
however it should be highlighted that the number of critical fta difficulties is very limited.
as for visa issues these are not covered by the customs union. the commission is considering modalities to engage in a process to further simplify the mobility of people between the eu and turkey in particular by a swift implementation of the new eu visa code which will provide practical improvements for turkish visa applicants.
the commission will also underline that it is committed to engage in a dialogue that may lead to further improvement of mobility once the council has given its green light to do so.
i do not have to remind this assembly that turkey is a very important economic and political counterpart for the eu.
all of this accounts for a truly unique bilateral relationship.
the legal framework of eu turkey trade relations is the customs union.
however a number of difficulties remain many of which result from turkey's failure to properly and fully implement the customs union thereby causing major and increasing trade problems which have remained unresolved for many years. in contrast the european union has fully implemented the customs union.
the report clearly highlights those areas and measures taken by turkey that are not in line with the customs union.
i trust that this report will help motivate turkey to take the necessary positive steps to improve the overall functioning of the customs union and to come forward to negotiate additional agreements that would strengthen our bilateral trade and economic relationship.
in june this year the turkish state minister for foreign trade paid me a call and we agreed to stay in touch regularly.
he recently invited me for a meeting in ankara in the coming months an invitation i will accept in the hope that we will make progress in resolving quickly sustainably and in a friendly way the continuing trade problems.
mr president eu trade and economic relations with turkey are a matter of political significance too.
however in spite of recognising this fact the eu finds it increasingly difficult to avoid the impression that it is playing a game of who blinks first' with turkey.
not willing to pay the price of interrupting the admission negotiations it expects the turks to do so exhausted by their length and complexity.
the good news is that according to the latest data the turks are increasingly dissatisfied with the eu and in spite of the latter's leading position as turkey's major economic partner other partners like russia china united arab emirates the us and iran are catching up fast.
therefore success in our commercial relations with turkey should not obscure the need to finally make up our minds on whether or not to accept turkey into the eu given the impact of that decision on the international position of the eu.
what you said is true but what we see now in hungary and mr pittella referred to this is a scandal in itself because it goes against the.
my second point is on greece.
help? ' with the redemption fund everybody could have the same help in the
i think that we will have a deal.
it gives an unfair advantage to large corporations.
you ignored millions of citizens across europe who have legitimate concerns.
up. on a final note my heart goes out to the people of greece who are being impoverished by the european union.
to witness the cradle of democracy being threatened by the brussels bully boys is a truly sickening sight.
there are half a million migrants in the mediterranean waiting to make their way through europe and frighteningly there are another half a million making their way through africa and the middle east and what is worse is that we do not know who these people really
but this is nothing compared to what is to come.
mr timmermans i have a better suggestion. the answer is an australian style ring of steel which protects our borders and sends out a clear message that europe is not a soft touch.
let me make this clear ttip is a corporatist scam which will hurt workers consumers pensions farmers and small businesses.
on. if and when we reach another deal how long will it be before we are back here again in this chamber debating the same issues?
the greek government has to play its role and also behave responsibly as other group leaders have said. it is time to stop the sticking plaster.
it is time to start sticking to the rules.
if we look at the crisis in the mediterranean there is no easy answer despite what many people claim.
we cannot let no one in yet we cannot let everyone
in. but until we have a strategy we will simply be providing lifeboats plucking unfortunate desperate people from the sea. the commission's plan raises some important issues targeting traffickers processing applications and returning those not fleeing persecution; helping those in failing states on the front
line. but while some eu countries could probably do more to help proposing a quota system was a mistake because instead of cooperation the commission has proposed coercion.
so instead of solidarity we now have polarity.
instead of countries working with each other we have countries arguing with each
other. let us come together in a spirit of cooperation to alleviate the suffering of those in countries from which people flee to process genuine applications before they make that hazardous journey and to target the people traffickers who sell a false hope not another sticking plaster solution until a future summit. and on security and defence cooperation on coordination
not coercion should be the principle that we will abide
change. so as the british prime minister david cameron introduces ideas for reform do not see it as simply a shopping list for britain but seize it as a chance for genuine reform of
the problem is that there is a point where transparency comes into conflict with privacy and confidentiality so any regulation of transparency has to establish an equilibrium between the two between openness and confidentiality.
at the same time it must also pay heed to security and to those seeking to breach that security.
i think the report achieves this.
if we expect to represent our constituents properly in a democratic eu we need to make sure our constituents can see what we are doing and know that we have their best interests at heart.
when former commissioner barroso announced his job with a big bank last year i joined many colleagues to call for the commission's rules on conflicts of interest to be tightened and i am glad to see that demand being made once again in this report.
there is more work to do but at least we can demonstrate that we will keep on pushing forwards for more ethical politics.
the most effective means of countering fraud is to stop it happening in the first place i think we are all agreed about that.
however i believe we should focus on enhancing and implementing the many tools we already have at our disposal such as olaf eurojust europol the eio and the pif directive. we should not be committing more money more resources and more national sovereignty when instead member states and the commission should enforce what we already have available.
by simplifying the rules which govern the different sectors of the eu budget and improving the oversight of the budget we are best able to achieve that.
there is still a lot of work to do.
in fact if you compare it for example thirty eight issues were referred by the german government to the european fraud office in two thousand and thirteen compared to only four by the uk.
madam president our delegation is still formally reserving its position on the european public prosecutor's office because we have not yet had the chance to scrutinise the details of the drafts in council as was said earlier.
in the uk i am sorry to say in contrast to things you have heard earlier we do not take this issue seriously enough.
it is absolutely unacceptable that we do not have proper accounting lines within our indicators for statistics on eu fraud in the uk. the idea that the uk is a good example in this matter is completely untrue.
in addition i agree that we need clear rules on national competences as well as strong competences for the eppo.
the eppo's workload attribution should be organised based on objective criteria and its working procedures need to be in accordance with the treaties the charter of fundamental rights and the european convention on human rights. i plead that we all keep an open mind there is no template or precedent for the eppo; there are no ready made solutions which we could just replicate.
in the area of justice where the eppo will act as an indivisible and single european body there is no need for a duplication of judicial authorisations for investigative measures.
what we have proposed fully respects the right of effective judicial protection and the institutional position of the european court of justice as the supreme interpreter of union law.
this is an instrument with great added value for the judicial cooperation between the member states.
in our view the transfer of the competence to investigate and prosecute eu fraud requires a simple and efficient sui generis regime for the eppo's cross border investigations which operates in full respect of procedural rights and the charter.
but it seems less suitable for an eppo working as an indivisible european body as a single office.
it should reflect its operational needs and thus depart from the traditional intergovernmental cooperation instruments in particular with regard to the grounds for refusal and the regime of judicial authorisation.
the treaty allows and calls on us to create a specific system which is adapted to the eppo's specific nature.
we are not talking about a dozen cases a year we are talking about hundreds if not thousands of cases!
in this context the commission has doubts whether the cross border investigation regime applicable to the eppo should follow the regime established by the european investigation order directive.
a similar question applies to the proposal that it should be up to the european court of justice to ensure the judicial review of all eppo acts.
that regard i would like to thank you for supporting an open objective and transparent appointment procedure for members of the eppo.
and i am pleased that it is supportive of the commission's overall objective to create a european public prosecutor's office which will be able to make a decisive difference in combating fraud on the eu budget.
two thousand and sixteen creating this office will lead to a real change in how crimes against the financial interests of the union are tackled.
eu money funds the costs of the eu's own internal corruption.
it seems therefore that the wasteful eu baggage train will roll in and out of strasbourg just about forever and this waste would seem to be a suitable subject for the proposed prosecutor to address.
the president of france can go on being as contemptuous as ever.
those who drafted the lisbon treaty knew perfectly well that a proposal for a european public prosecutor would be unacceptable to national governments and indeed fourteen national parliaments have signified their veto.
however the report does remind us of the corruption and fraud relating to eu funds apparently more than eur three billion a year. what this demonstrates is that the eu is analogous to a species of parasite the eu feeds off the taxpayer and as the report says
i would be the first to criticise those agencies.
i criticise them regularly because i do not think that they are always doing the job that they are meant to do.
of course the protection of european monies and resources is a matter of some priority but i do not say that this particular idea and this new agency will make any difference probably to the need and the ability of those other agencies to fulfil their obligations.
so mr president please do not run away from reality.
not the army but democracy.
he calls catalan independence neither peaceful nor democratic. well what about him? so dear winners of the nobel peace prize what are you going to do about that?
he was announced as vice president and he is vice president twenty four hours a day seven days a week is he not?
however when it comes to the main topic of debate yet again the euro crisis we can see that the summit manifestly failed to deliver. both mr van rompuy and mr barroso spoke in this chamber after the previous summit in june.
it seems to me that they had one thing in common they had political courage the courage to stand firm to take political risks and to make sacrifices for what they believed in. what a sad contrast to the modern day europe of today where difficult decisions are delayed timetables slip and political realities are ignored.
to take a topical example that has been mentioned in this debate when the eu was awarded this famous nobel prize the bickering began immediately about who was going to collect the prize who was going to make the speech and who was going to talk at the dinner. i started thinking about all of those political leaders and organisations who actually really deserved to collect that prize for delivering peace in europe for holding firm during the cold war and for challenging the might of the soviet union.
so. it is not a message of congratulations to europe's leaders it is an act of charity.
the only significance of that summit with hindsight was that it represented yet another missed opportunity.
that was made clear in the citation itself in the announcement if you read
it. so let us put aside the self congratulations and let us forget the mutual backstabbing.
they said that these took europe a few more steps down the road to recovery.
the prize has not been given to the eu because it is strong and doing well. it has been given now because the eu is weak and doing badly.
well of course over the summer it became clear that some key member states had had second thoughts about what they agreed then and the few small steps forward were overwhelmed by some pretty giant leaps backwards.
it was sobering to note that that nobel prize was awarded to the eu not because we are dealing effectively with the current crisis but because we are failing to do
i have a lot of sympathy for both mediterranean europe and northern europe but we cannot go on with this stalemate with one side unwilling to hand over budgetary sovereignty and the other side unwilling to hand over its chequebook and its cash.
the window created by the actions of the ecb to enable political leaders to get ahead of the curve in reassuring the markets was lost then and it is lost now. no amount of fudging over the timetable for the supervisory mechanisms or the carefully chosen words about mutual support can cover up for the fact that this summit simply backtracked on what had been agreed.
i thought about the contributions of general de gaulle president reagan prime ministers kohl and thatcher nato and pope jean paul ii. no doubt everyone in this chamber has some figure that they want to put forward as contributing to that list.
the problem that we face is quite simply one of leadership.
they spoke about balancing solidarity with responsibility and described the results back then as significant'.
a tax on savings including mandates for agreements with third countries; professional qualifications;
as we have stated time and time again we do not need new walls in europe between the euro area and non euro area members.
union. at the same time we need to make sure that more democracy means more transparency and not more complexity.
however the reality is that this growth compact including an important investment package worth eur one hundred and twenty billion has not yet been fully implemented.
it is essential that by the end of this year there is agreement on the single supervisory mechanism for banks.
i hope that the governments will now respect the commitment they have taken at the highest level.
world. but openness is a vital element in facing the challenges of growth and we must not miss out on the opportunities for further trade liberalisation.
following the requests we have now received from ten member states this very afternoon the commission will make a proposal for a council decision authorising enhanced cooperation.
treaties. we must support the deepening of integration in the euro area as the basis for strengthening our currency
this is why we need to provide citizens with hope and a realistic prospect that growth and jobs will return and that the most vulnerable in society will not suffer.
union. it is indeed an honour to have this recognition for the project for integration and unity of this continent which has over sixty years brought
we will also present an action plan on tax fraud and tax evasion including tax havens before the end of the year.
level. once again this will be a critical test of our commitment to these
when talking about growth it is clear that the financial sector must also make a fair contribution to recovery.
first and foremost we must deliver on the compact on growth and jobs agreed in june. the reality is that the crisis is still with us too many of our member states are facing recession;
reforms. first we need to build on the existing institutional and legal framework based on the community
euro area. finally the european council discussed the external dimension of our actions with a focus on our strategic partners including china and the need for a proactive agenda
this would complement our efforts for a stronger and more binding framework for the implementation of key economic policies in particular in the euro area as one important means of preventing imbalances.
implementing the growth compact is therefore much more than a demonstration of our political will;
the european council also spelled out the need for rapid adoption of the provisions relating to the harmonisation of national resolution and deposit guarantee frameworks based on the commission's legislative proposals on bank recovery and resolution and on national deposit guarantee schemes.
we will also introduce a quality framework for traineeships to help young people in their transition from education to work.
one interesting idea in this context is that of contractual arrangements between the member states and the commission.
it is high time that proposals on negotiation tables became reality.
we need to definitively break the negative link between bank debt and sovereign debt and this is urgent.
e signatures we need to give a new political push in all these areas.
and let us also be clear about one thing reaching agreement on these issues is a fundamental precondition if we want to be credible in our further deepening of economic and monetary union.
that is why the commission put its proposals on the table within weeks of the june european council. delivering the single supervisory mechanism will give a very important signal to our citizens but also to our international partners and to investors in general.
we already have a very complicated system of decision making in
we are taking these measures to prevent a lost generation' in europe.
such arrangements could underpin the commitments taken under the country specific recommendations with specific support for their realisation.
i presented to the heads of state and government a detailed report describing what is on the table where the blockages exist and what the next steps are.
let us not forget why we are acting here we are advancing in our response to the crisis.
we must however be clear that this has nothing to do with the decisions on the next multiannual financial framework which we will hopefully be able to take in the coming
i welcome in particular the recent progress on a european financial transaction tax.
likewise i count on this house to assume its responsibility and play its part in finalising legislation on its elements.
together. there are also a few more key principles for these
for trade. it is crucially important that europe defend its interests in this globalising
this will be supported by the european social fund.
while much has been done here for instance through the six pack and the country specific recommendations further steps are crucial to combine specific conditions with specific incentives and to really make economic and monetary union sustainable.
the mff. i expect those governments which are always talking about the need for investment to promote growth and jobs to contribute their support for the instrument for investment at european
it is a question of fairness and equity. in some of our member states citizens are making major sacrifices because of the situation resulting from excessive debts in the public sector and irresponsible financial behaviour in the private sector.
secondly we need proper accountability at the level at which decisions are taken which for the commission clearly means to this parliament and maintaining the level playing field and the integrity of the single market.
this will be the first step in the process.
us so much. but it is also a responsibility and a challenge for us to show the courage de chaque jour' the everyday mundane courage to do the right thing and take the decisions we need
union. as i said in the state of the union address before this house to deliver lasting results we need to develop a fully equipped community economic governance together with a genuine credible community fiscal capacity.