kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
we must make the european union much more visible in the future. that's one lesson i've learnt from brexit.
the point is that we've rushed this. i'm not saying that we could never do something in this area but we've gone suddenly from a market that was about international services to talking about a very sensitive area where some member states are very different from others.
it should also include cannabis indica and cannabis ruderalis.
i believe that joint clinical assessment should be done at eu level in order to shorten the process and provide faster access to innovative drugs for all patients in the eu without jeopardising the final decision of the member states.
we amended the proposal so that health technology developers would have the possibility to request an update of the clinical assessment where additional evidence from clinical practices became available and we also asked for a flexible mechanism to introduce innovative technologies and treatments for patients.
revenue losses incurred by national budgets due to those tax abuses are estimated in hundreds of billions of euros annually.
our citizens expect us to take decisive actions against these malpractices.
for instance if we had this regulation in place today we could have come up with a more coordinated approach to some of the chinese companies huawei for instance.
some of the potentially problematic investments could come to several countries and it would be beneficial to share information on them.
it remains on a voluntary basis to set up a screening mechanism at a national level but there is no doubt that there are good reasons to control investments coming to very sensitive areas such as critical infrastructure defence and the security industry but also the media or very topical now telecommunications and new digital technologies such as artificial intelligence.
colleague is that it is men playing games with the lives of people around the world.
it is men and my point is that women's voices need to be heard at this level and it is women who make the peace and it is women who dismantled and got rid of the cruise missiles the us missiles they were on our land in the uk.
i refuse for us to be another us state.
this is unfortunate for its biggest beneficiary europe.
these developments indicate clearly that it is imperative to enhance cooperation between the western countries between nato and the european union to demonstrate the unity of the western world in response to russia and others on this issue. while the end of the treaty should be avoided by means of negotiations it also demonstrates that the more global approach is needed on this issue
since time has moved on and there are more players in the game like china and others.
foreign investment is investment which is good because it leads to economic stability activity and jobs.
moreover foreign investment promotes the international exchange of capital ideas business strategies and technologies which is good for the economy and for people.
madam president firstly let me thank the rapporteur for her excellent work on this proposal which is a real example of eu regulation working to cut costs and burdens and putting the consumer first.
the regulation ensures that the costs for cross border payments in euro from one eu country to another are the same as an equivalent domestic payment regardless of whether the countries are in the eurozone or not.
that means that customers should always be informed of the cost of their payments in a foreign currency within the eu.
they are saying that their clients are asking for more sustainable assets.
and this is exactly what the commission is working on at the moment. we have to let the financial sector act to change the world. they are willing to do it because their clients us and consumers are asking them to
ways to consume and more durable and repairable products.
it bulldozed the biggest british army barracks in north belfast and built the girdwood community hub and it invested millions in derry to build a peace bridge which joined the two traditions usually living apart together.
we should not forget about the social dimension of taxation that was much highlighted today.
at the same time i think there was an issue everybody touched upon which is to use qualified majority voting for taxation.
more thoroughly on these issues.
i would like to express on behalf of the council that we are confident that the member states will continue to find the best way forward together and we will do our utmost as presidency to contribute to this objective during our term.
this is why i will invite all of you to be cautious.
mr president i hate tax. i think tax is the arbitrary taking from companies from shareholders and from individuals of their hardearned money. however even from that point of view you must understand and i agree that there is a requirement for tax in a civilised state.
we need to look after those who require help the weakest in society and there need to be payments for defence law and order etcetera.
however when you take a position whereby you are redistributing through the will of the state the tax that is taken from people shareholders and companies into what you think are the right priorities you're taking away the freedom of the individuals involved to spend how they wish.
sometimes it may be the case that people want a government that will compete.
i personally would like to see the uk tax burden which is the highest since the war reduced and i would like us to have a competitive lower tax rate simplified to stop avoidance but lower.
i would like to encourage businesses and wealthy people to set up in the uk because we all benefit from the trade and investment that brings.
mr president i have approached the question of taxation as a strong supporter of both global tax justice and of tax sovereignty for national parliaments.
i support member states cooperating to set eu wide rules for tackling cross border corporate tax avoidance and i've pressed the irish government to stop facilitating industrial scale tax avoidance by some of the wealthiest companies in the world.
but tax justice is not the same as tax harmonisation and i am resolutely opposed to the proposals made by the commission to end unanimous decision making in the council.
millions of eu citizens especially those in less powerful states are concerned at this move towards qualified majority voting. let's be clear about what this means.
it means that a tax policy could be enforced on a country against the wishes of the democratically elected government of that state.
such a move would further alienate people of the eu from the eu institutions exactly the opposite of what's required.
what we need is to build consensus for tackling tax avoidance together.
madam president i'm really delighted i came in for this debate. we have here as i've been listening closely an electronic system a single onboard unit that can go anywhere in the eu cross border enforcement and information exchange modern smart technology with no toll booths no border restrictions
no issues of any such kind.
i think that what we're talking about here surely this technology could be at least looked at for a solution to the northern ireland backstop situation with brexit. it is very similar technology to what would be required.
instead of looking for people to charge tolls you're looking at cross border trade.
we've just seen here that there is no requirement for a hard border or a toll booth.
it is a very exciting idea. it may not be what you were envisaging tonight but i think that you may have stumbled upon the whole solution to the brexit discussion so i congratulate you.
meanwhile labour rights activists in singapore like jolovan wham face tough justice fighting for rights for the most vulnerable workers migrant workers.
information only leaves the car in the event of a severe accident and is not stored any longer than necessary.
however the ecall legislation will ensure that the system makes its way into all cars and vans in the future.
at the same time data protection and privacy concerns have been taken very seriously.
however until now precious time is often lost due to delayed or inaccurate information about the accident.
the european emergency call system ecall was developed to solve this problem.
ecall is an electronic system that automatically provides emergency services with the information they need immediately after an accident has happened and by doing so it can drastically shorten the time between an accident and the arrival of help.
this time can make a huge difference between life and death.
but despite these improvements road accidents still happen all too often and especially when a severe accident happens we want to be sure that help is on the way quickly.
as a result many more people will benefit from it.
for this reason the public ecall system limits itself to the data that is absolutely necessary for its purpose.
as it stands the text does not ignore the fact that private systems are already on the market and have proven their benefits.
therefore drivers can be assured that their personal data is protected and that ecall cannot be used to track their movements. i believe the compromise text can serve as an example of successful regulatory work on privacy and data protection.
however i remain convinced that unless optional the system seriously undermines privacy and civil liberties.
however we should direct our efforts at those strategies or mechanisms which are most effective and guaranteed to contribute to safety.
it is therefore not proven that the system will work in areas of limited reception. secondly it will require significant infrastructure investment to make it work.
as a result i and my delegation can only support a voluntary ecall system and not a mandatory one.
of course accidents will always happen unfortunately due to driving behaviour but no resources will be diverted or should be diverted by member states from road safety due to the fact that this is a technology that is included in the manufacturing process.
to establish the precise location and the precise detail of the accident.
it is not about personal details of any individual and this regulation provides the balance and safeguards on privacy that many of you were concerned about and concentrates on helping save lives following on from the accident.
the privacy of individuals is an important aspect for my group.
it requires a change of habits it means trusting new technology but technology such as ecall can help improve road safety.
i am happy that the final text includes new provisions to ensure that the ecall system is not misused and that more safeguards are in place to protect the privacy of individuals.
in this respect the report puts a special emphasis on the issue of data protection clarifying that information will only be used at the moment of a serious accident and not for the continuous tracking of the vehicle.
when talking about digital technologies and interconnectedness we always talk about protecting personal data.
it is among the best examples of how and why the european union brings value to its citizens.
unfortunately this money then comes from other lifesaving measures where the experts tell me it could have been better spent on improving the road system or more research so that the car did not go upside down in the first place.
it is also very prescriptive in the nature of its technology and i am concerned that we have not left it open for smart new innovations because it will be expensive.
mr president nearly twenty six zero people die in road accidents in europe every year and if you have ever been upside down in your car with your family like i was last summer then of course you want the emergency services to get to you as quickly as possible.
knowing that if you are in a serious accident emergency services will be automatically contacted and on their way to help can give all drivers and passengers across the european union peace of mind and reassurance for families when travelling abroad.
the european union is investing heavily in ict innovation and r d policies to advance the quality of life of our citizens and we see this with the internet of things.
this technology creates an ecosystem of smart applications and services which interact with each other.
e safety and ecall are some of the latest examples of smart mobility tools and as we see technology develop cars are amongst the first everyday objects in which we see the practical application of this directly.
mr president i see that there has not been a single speaker from the efdd group in this debate speaking on behalf of their group.
i appreciate that there have been significant improvements on the handling of the information being transferred in these systems.
day to day. resource efficiency is the name of the problem and resource efficiency is at the core of our future competitiveness
beginning. that is the fundamental and most important
in europe. if you do not believe me ask me in ten years'
that means the best waste is no
hope. at the end of the day we are talking about the health of italian citizens and the italian environment.
change. if they organise themselves in a proper way they can really
be. it will be evaluated by my services by the experts and i can assure you that it will be done in such a way that there will be the same treatment for italy as for any other member state because it is of fundamental importance that we keep that trust between member states on the table.
helpful. the idea is certainly not to impose
the commission is not satisfied with the measures that the italian authorities have communicated since the court's ruling because they do not include a detailed calendar indicating milestones for the construction works of the foreseen installations.
i am pleased that the european parliament has taken an active role in monitoring the waste management situation in campania as shown for example by the report adopted by the committee on petitions following the visit to campania which it carried out in april last year.
ensure implementation of separate collection in the whole region;
that the italian authorities still have a long way to go in order to execute the ruling. in particular they need firstly to expand and upgrade waste management facilities throughout the whole of campania and secondly
if there is no adequate and effective waste management plan the commission will return to the court and propose the imposition of fines.
it clearly demonstrates that with an appropriate waste management strategy landfilling can be reduced close to zero and that incineration could be dramatically reduced by increasing waste composting and recycling.
the decision on whether and when to open article two hundred and sixty proceedings against italy will depend mainly on the content of the waste management plan and the timing of the measures used to immediately address the problem in a convincing way.
however following the waste management crisis the commission decided to take specific measures in order to ensure that erdf funds allocated to campania were used properly.
secondly after the official notification to italy of the opening of the infringement procedure for waste management on twenty nine june two thousand and seven the commission informed the italian authorities that no further cofinancing would be acceptable for waste management.
and implement the necessary mitigation and also compensation measures.
so i really hope that this crisis will eventually be transformed into an opportunity by the competent authorities through the launch of serious separate collection and recycling schemes in campania. in brief the commission is hoping that the waste management plan for campania is convincing.
to the condition that the italian authorities adopt a regional waste management plan to be validated of course by the commission.
at this stage the commission does not have evidence of a breach of european union environmental law.
provide campania with the necessary composting capacity;
in addition to transforming waste into resources this creates jobs and economic activity while reducing the environmental impact of waste management.
tomorrow we will publish in the commission the report on the implementation of a thematic strategy on prevention and recycling of waste.
until we are certain of an effective plan setting up a system with the necessary infrastructure and have robust guarantees that projects will be implemented effectively commission funding of relevant waste management projects in campania is interrupted.
the fact that the landfill is situated in a nature protected area is not in itself a breach of eu legislation provided of course that other rules are applied and that the competent national authorities carry out an appropriate environment assessment
before deciding which is the safest way to dispose of them.
this report shows significant differences between member states in terms of waste management performance.
therefore we must closely assess the draft waste management plan that the campania authorities have just submitted to the commission and just' really means just' and monitor carefully that they actually adopt and implement the plan.
we think that the waste management plan for campania must be fully compliant with eu environmental law and must give priority to waste reduction re use and recycling;
to develop an effective management plan for urban waste in campania taking into account amongst other things the eu waste management hierarchy.
we conclude by committing parliament to introducing the treaty change necessary to give us that power.
support for membership of the eu is already wafer thin in the united kingdom and the continuation of the travelling circus is one of several issues that further undermines support for our membership.
if members approve this tomorrow we will have started an important process of reform.
i happen to think that strasbourg is one of the most beautiful cities i have visited. it is clean safe welcoming and has a rich cultural heritage.
we are here to represent our constituents and it is abundantly clear to me that they do not support the current position.
we will save thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide every year and most important of all we will save hundreds of millions of euros of taxpayers' money.
but times change and what was a symbol of reconciliation in one thousand nine hundred and fifty is now a symbol of waste a waste of time a waste of energy and a waste of taxpayers' money.
at a time of austerity at home when national governments are making painful spending cuts how can we justify that expenditure?
i do not think that there is anyone in this chamber who thinks the current arrangement of shuttling between the two cities is a good one.
it is a good question and i challenge anyone here to provide a convincing answer.
and we understand why the first european parliamentary assembly chose to sit here as well.
it was a symbol of reconciliation between france and germany.
we all understand why strasbourg was chosen as the seat of the council of europe after the second world war.
why do we spend eur one hundred and fifty million a year maintaining two parliaments and travelling between them?
we should not let that divide us.
the report before the house tonight is a genuine cross party effort. i want to thank my co rapporteur gerald hfner and also the shadow rapporteurs for their cooperation.
in contrast brussels can only boast one of those attributes.
however our personal views should not form the basis of our decision.
we will save hours of time and make this parliament more effective.
our travelling circus between brussels and strasbourg has become an object of ridicule across the eu.
if we pass this report and follow it up with our treaty change then we will compel the council of ministers to address an issue that it has evaded for too long.
we reached a broad consensus that two principles should guide us in determining the seat of the european parliament firstly the european parliament should have one seat and secondly it should be the european parliament itself that decides where it sits.
the eu's wanton misuse of taxpayers' money by financing the monthly trip to strasbourg is a problem that requires a solution.
and you are all saying how important you are and that you should be able to decide where you sit etc.
the local economy here in strasbourg benefits from the activity of one zero individuals permanently involved plus occasional big plenary events.
this whole thing is devised so that you are simply a fig leaf of democracy.
you have to bow and scrape in front of the commission and the european court of justice.
so why not let out this building to two suitable tenants the committee of the regions and the european economic and social committee?
this huge and costly building is used only for forty eight days per year.
if you believe in the wickedness of co emissions which most of you mistakenly do then you should hate the strasbourg circus for that reason.
but you are not important.
the french have the prestige of playing host to two eu institutions as well as the council of europe.
i would suggest that we should perhaps look at the location of all institutions so that we get a balanced and objective approach to the matter which matches the needs of the european project as it goes forward.
the monthly migration between brussels and strasbourg has become a symbolic negative issue for most eu citizens.
the report has been described as a key to unlock the process of a move towards a single seat.
this is a long overdue debate and at last the voice of over one and a quarter million citizens is actually being heard in this chamber.
others tonight have also spoken of the historic nature of strasbourg as a symbol of reconciliation.
there comes a time when countries and communities within those countries have to move forward and we can no longer rely on that as the excuse for continuing to waste taxpayers' money in these very difficult times.
that is positive.
this is a wasteful practice at a time when these institutions are demanding budgetary constraint in the member states. with ordinary families feeling the grip of tax increases this travelling circus for that is indeed what it is will cost taxpayers over eur one billion in the coming financial period.
mr president when strasbourg was established as a seat of the european parliament it was a symbol of hope a beacon for a new world without war. it saddens me to say that strasbourg today has become a symbol of despair representing an internal war between the few who wish to keep the seat and the many who can no longer justify its existence.
it now represents all that is wrong with the european union the waste the bureaucracy the absurdity so much so that parliament's presence here is often referred to as a travelling circus'.
and who needs to listen?
france needs to let go of the old dream and move towards a new europe.
if the travelling circus continues the big top may collapse on the european union once and for all.
mr president can i thank members for a very interesting and informative debate.
i also pay tribute to you mr president for your work for the single seat group.
i want to address the point raised by mrs le grip and others as to why in this report we only dealt with the seat of the european parliament.
but miraculously that was changed by the conference of presidents and who suggested that change?
we have had a lot of contributions tonight but interestingly only four members have spoken against the report and all four of them are french! i think it is quite amusing when french colleagues say that to attack strasbourg is to attack europe.
it is pro european to be pro reform because the issue of this travelling circus which is a bad joke with european taxpayers brings the eu into disrepute and french members here should confess what they are doing.
they are defending their selfish national interest and if the seat of the european parliament was in my home city of bristol i would do the same and i would do it proudly but i would not dress up that debate as being something to do with some wider interest. so please ladies and gentlemen french members be honest this is in your selfish national interest.