kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
however we do regret the position of the environment committee in favour of withdrawing many of the empowerments that in the past years have allowed the commission to maintain the current regulation in line with the actual needs of the market.
as regards the chapter on geographical indications we would prefer to maintain the current definition of spirit gi which is in line with the trips agreement meaning that geographical indications are all indications identifying spirit drinks linked to a geographical area and not only the indications which are already registered.
the spirit drinks sector is strategic for eu geographical indications and is a top gi export category.
given its importance and successful application the commission proposal did not seek to change the rules but merely to improve the legislative text and to simplify current lengthy and burdensome gi procedures in the spirit of simplification.
if the structure is too rigid we will not be able to respond to the needs of the sector as the commission has done by amending the regulation annually since two thousand and twelve always upon request of member states and always with the support of the sector. furthermore amendments to definitions and categories are already subject to the scrutiny of the parliament and the council.
turning to the proposal to introduce the possibility of using ethyl alcohol from beer in the production of spirit drinks the commission acknowledges the issues at stake.
in addition it was supposed to contain minor technical adjustments and replace the existing procedures for the management of geographical indications in the spirit drinks sector with new procedures modelled on the more exhaustive and well tested procedures for agricultural products and foodstuffs.
there are a few issues that affect my own country of ireland and these would need to be discussed further such as the system of aging or the issue of article.
i am fully aware that the spirits drinks industry is due to present a selfregulatory proposal for nutritional information but it is because of this rather than in spite of this that i am proposing the two amendments to include the nutritional declarations on spirit drinks and allow for other voluntary nutritional information on the labelling.
any sort of selfregulating proposal will not suffice when it comes to providing citizens with clear information on the products that they buy and we have an opportunity now to fulfil that. consumers' rights to information should prevail over business interests.
the commission's report in this matter from march last year identified a knowledge deficit for consumers regarding nutritional information on alcoholic beverages.
it also found that there were no grounds to exempt spirit drinks from the food information to consumers regulation and identified a clear desire among consumers for this information.
let me just mention what the commission sees as some of the main results.
a formal network of regulators will be established to ensure particularly that cross border traffic is adequately handled. the commission intends to play a very active role in this network.
firstly the compromise package significantly strengthens the power of national regulators with new independence requirements and increased areas of responsibility and means at their disposal.
we have worked in a constructive positive and pragmatic way and we will vote in favour of this final compromise.
we have reached an agreement which is not one hundred per cent what we wanted.
as a result the commission still has a lot of invoices unpaid from previous budgets.
madam president the yearly budget is not just about numbers or figures.
this means that almost two thirds of all payments cuts suggested by the council will negatively affect innovation research and small and medium sized enterprises areas with the largest potential for growth and jobs.
second the proposed reduction of payments appropriations in heading one a competitiveness for growth and jobs amounts to more than. one three billion.
we are talking about the backbone of the whole european project.
this is a dangerous situation which destabilises the investment process in member states and critically undermines the credibility of the european union.
first we are faced with a growing deficit of the budget partly due to faster than planned implementation of many eu financed projects but also partly because of late payments by member states.
as you know heading two for agriculture is one of the biggest in the eu budget.
the additional revenues that were indicated in heading two were transferred to all other headings on an annual basis because farmers are not able to use more money and resources than they are eligible for. heading two has the biggest margins of all headings.
ninety per cent of the budget is decided by member states.
so this whole process of discussion now as to whether we should cut more or less is actually about whether we should fulfil our obligations or not whether we want to pay our bills back or not.
this money was usually used to top up any direct payments that were legally eligible.
the only impact it will have is that some headings will have additional payment appropriations available at the beginning of the year when they are most needed but it does not create any additional restrictions to heading. two this amending letter does not change either the level of commitments under heading two or the level of payments available under heading.
i can assure you that the amending letter does not create any reductions in direct payments for farmers and it does not have any direct influence on the level of direct payments that the farmers will have received by the end of the year.
the crisis reserve is established by law on an annual basis by simple application of financial discipline.
it is not the commission that is trying to find new ways of spending money.
the same instruments were applied in every eu budget.
however it does not have a direct impact on the level of direct payments for farmers.
i therefore find it difficult to understand any proposal to cut european structural funds.
the same goes for the budget of the external action service as we need to provide further assistance to ukraine. as far as other institutions are concerned any new spending or creation of posts should be more carefully thought through as new posts create a snowball effect of new spending with
to deliver judgments on time as delays simply hamper the functioning of the single market.
a new need for offices and buildings.
i would also like to take this opportunity to thank the secretariat and in particular elena for her knowledge advice and guidance when we had just two weeks to timetable this opinion.
for the imco committee the new reality of the digital single market has focused minds and led us to prioritise the links between smes and consumer rights as it applies online.
it is the member states who on the one hand have the responsibility for spending eighty of the budget and who on the other hand restrict the size of the budget.
but unless that extra spending is matched by cuts in inefficient programmes and greater strategic prioritisation then twelve months from now we will be seeing a bigger pile of unpaid bills and ever increasing rows.
i am not calling for a bigger budget council was right to cap revenue but i am insisting that there is an urgent need for greater budgetary discipline and control.
furthermore should the three institutions prove themselves incapable of exercising that control should the commitments budget prove to be in excess of funding available or should this budget place the budgetary authority in an unlawful position is it not time that we came to consider the establishment of an independent office of budgetary responsibility?
the quality of eu research will go down and our smes will become less competitive.
that the council is enhancing eu competitiveness thus countering the effects of the crisis and making europe ready to face further tough globalisation challenges. in reality thanks to the council universities and research stakeholders will have to wait longer and longer in order to receive their eu funds.
for example on the necessity to finance a very cost intensive fusion energy plant which will only produce results in two thousand and fifty if at all.
they can count on our group's support in tomorrow's vote except for a few points where we have different views.
i do not intend to give a speech so much as to ask members a few questions about their consciences and about how they are going to vote in the light of the payments problem and the fact that the european union is currently spending money which it does not have.
will you vote to scrap the gentleman's agreement between the parliament council and commission that keeps costs for all three high?
i am going to vote in line with the wishes of my constituents not in line with the wishes of the euro elite.
sadly for many in this place i think i already know the answer.
the commission is quite right to point out that great enterprises bring in their wake consequential benefits new products new knowledge riches and inspiration for innovation as well as a few detriments of course.
however the real motivation is to confer authority and legitimacy on a political entity that might otherwise falter. in the words of the commission space serves to cement the eu's position as a major player on the international stage and contributes to the union's economic and political independence'.
the commission and the ecb have to somehow come to terms with how low inflation and low interest rates also give asset inflation.
i welcome estonia and i think they are doing the right thing.
i can support him in the general thrust of his comments and also in the concerns that he raises.
i would like to remind the house while i am on my feet that during the first ten years of the euro sixteen million jobs were created within the european area many more jobs than were created at the same time in the united states.
where would we be if we did not have the european central bank and the commission and the fellowship of the eurozone ministers in these difficult times?
we would be truly lost.
it is a beacon not just for the other countries in that region that aspire to join the european union but a beacon for the whole of europe to reinforce our confidence at this difficult time which will pass.
can i say in particular that we are able to admit estonia to the euro area because of sacrifices made by the estonian people and the leadership given by the estonian government and parliament. this leadership goes beyond simply putting their house in order and making the sacrifices that go with that.
this really is therefore an endorsement of the whole project at a time when it needs endorsement by a courageous parliament courageous government and courageous people.
the experience from my country another small country has been almost entirely beneficial.
i was raising this with the president of the european central bank for two years before it became popular to talk about it.
during this time of unprecedented economic turmoil across the globe following the financial crisis of two thousand and eight nine it is a testament to the financial skill and fiscal discipline of the estonian government that they have qualified for euro entry.
their ability to keep their public deficit in check despite the high pressures of unemployment is to be applauded.
we fully support his conclusions.
this surplus might result in the commission and the european central bank setting the kroon euro rate at too high a level.
the scicluna report congratulates estonia on replacing current and capital account deficits with current and capital account surpluses.
a country tied to a currency value that does not reflect the needs of its economy will find that any economic problems are aggravated.
this appears to be good news but there are dangers on the horizon.
the united kingdom found this when we were members of the predecessor of the euro the exchange rate mechanism. we found ourselves locked not only into a single currency value but also into a recession from which we escaped only when we left the erm.
if estonia then suffered a decline in the value of its exports relative to imports a recession and balance of payments deficit would follow from which it would not be able to escape.
the value of a country's currency must reflect the relative demand for its exported and imported goods and services as well as other monetary movements and must change according to need.
we need to work together in order to ensure the sustainability of public finances and thus sustainable growth and job creation in europe.
he said to me that he spent five years on the front to defend his country looking to the east but since then he had always looked to the west.
economic and monetary union.
on the basis of their own performance on their own merits and with full respect to the principle of equal treatment.
more importantly we need to keep in mind that these achievements were reached during the worst global financial economic and social crisis we have seen in our lifetimes. such achievements it must be said are the result of determined credible and sustained efforts by successive estonian governments and the estonian people.
therefore the government needs to maintain vigilance over prices especially during the changeover period.
as has been stated in the past it demonstrates a lack of respect for parliament. i admit that there have been some noticeable improvements as when the central bank and the commission met with the bureau and gave an oral explanation of progress.
i do not think it is appropriate.
as rapporteur i have been in constant contact with the commission the european central bank and the estonian government and visited estonia in the middle of may when the commission and the ecb published their convergence reports.
it is very significant that a small but highly determined eu member state comes knocking on the eurozone's door during such difficult times.
moreover despite the eurozone's recent difficulties public opinion in estonia is strongly in favour of joining the euro.
however i sincerely hope that this timetable will not be followed next time a country wishes to join the eurozone.
estonia's application to join is a significant symbol to its neighbours that joining the euro should be an attractive option for those countries which prepare themselves well.
to conclude i would like to thank my fellow shadow rapporteurs for their useful advice and meaningful amendments which i fully supported and inserted in the report.
i wish the estonian people well.
they have so far succeeded in proving the critics wrong. i now invite them to continue on the spot and keep full vigilance over their economy especially its competitiveness to ensure that their success will continue in the future as eurozone members.
i therefore commend this report to the house.
the interesting point about estonia's adhesion to the euro is that it is a vote of confidence in estonia and a vote of confidence in the euro.
the euro has come in for much criticism especially and predictably in the anglo saxon press.
the reality is that without the euro and without the budgetary discipline shown by countries like estonia there would be no hope for any of us.
a lot has been achieved and we hope to continue in the same spirit.
at a time when the so called citizen disconnect' is a recurring theme it is crucial that citizens' concerns are heard.
the positive trends of the first two years clearly suggest that we are witnessing the emergence of what has the potential to become a popular and possibly influential means for our citizens to get directly involved in the work that our institutions carry out.
may i say mr president that the commission is grateful for the constant support shown by the committee on petitions and by the european parliament more generally as regards the implementation of the european citizens' initiative which is an important complement to our more traditional representative democratic structures.
and to mention some others on the rights of disabled persons and the right of free movement without discrimination on any grounds. the petitions show that the citizens of the eu are conscious of the problems and concerns in a very concrete and tangible way.
two thousand and thirteen the commission finds that the work of the committee on petitions is of the utmost importance as it implements the right to petition which is one of the most fundamental rights of all european citizens.
the commission has examined this report with great interest.
it provides very interesting information about the activities of the committee. even though the nearly three thousand petitions that were received last year concerned a wide variety of subjects the report clearly points to the most topical and sensitive policy areas which formed the subject matter of petitions in.
more and more organisers are submitting requests for registration of their initiatives.
as with petitions this is a clear way for citizens who want to engage on eu issues to do so directly with the institutions and the commission counts on your continuing support.
just by looking at the list of topics it is very easy to understand why the citizens concerned are keen to get these problems solved.
as you know the commission contributes to the work on petitions.
it finds that it is extremely important to contribute when citizens use this concrete and established way of signalling their concerns.
i am convinced that more and more europeans will address petitions to the european parliament in the future.
the peti committee held a series of public hearings on major subjects of petitions such as citizenship and the importance of having single registration procedures for eu citizens in the national and european elections;
the second and third chapters entitled new horizons and working methods are basically proposals for new suggestions to make the committee's work more substantial and visible.
as we all know peti is the platform for citizens to voice their concerns and this enables dialogue.
one of these is the emphasis on collaboration with the other eu institutions and national authorities.
therefore it is very important to adopt final internal rules and to revise accordingly the rules of procedure of the european parliament to improve peti working methods.
on top of that there is a strong recommendation for the use of new information and video facilities for future peti committee meetings which will bring further cost savings in the organisation of its hearings.
the hearings on the impact of the economic crisis petitioners here have criticised the unwillingness of banks to provide investment funding for small businesses and the hearings on the rights of disabled people and more precisely of blind people. the conclusions seem clear
in two thousand and thirteen alone two thousand eight hundred petitions were registered.
this is what we have to accomplish in the next term.
two thousand and thirteen it is also an overview of the whole parliamentary term. the basic document is divided into three parts. the first part details the work of the committee and the summary of our achievements.
achieves results. sometimes it lets people down because we take on petitions that we cannot resolve and i was happy that one or two petitions could be returned to the irish parliament for consideration.
it would make it harder to ensure that multinationals do not have a competitive advantage over smes.
is it this place or is it westminster?
it would be transparent but it would provide no privacy.
on the one hand we could publish every detail of every person's earnings and every tax return.
it is very important in terms of transparency.
i think there is huge public support for his initiative and that of the commission when it comes to tax transparency. we should not however confuse tax competition on the one hand and tax transparency on the other.
it now has to be provided offshore by offshore as it were and also that would be crucially important for making sure that there is some confidence in the use of those companies wherever they have their operation.
it is perfectly logical that we can have both and we need to have both so that europe remains strong and we can compete against the united states and other regions of the world. i very much support the fact that in the proposals announced today the commission has set out its view that companies who operate in europe can no longer aggregate what they provide in terms of offshore locations.
finally i want to say this.
i take the general thrust of the comments very much as support for this measure.
of benefit for europe european taxpayers and european businesses.
i also think that there was an important set of remarks about balance and balance is what we have tried to strike with this proposal the balance between more transparency and wanting to defend and protect and promote the competitiveness of european businesses.
i do not accept that this work has been taken forward by the commission simply because of the panama papers and that that is what has belatedly prompted the commission to ask.
but to be clear this would capture ninety of the revenues of all multinationals so that is not an inconsiderable slice of the revenues from the multinationals.
what their strategies might be on rd to help them with their commercial strategies but also to third country tax jurisdictions so that european businesses might end up being taxed twice.
and so finally on timing how quickly can we take it forward?
he was saying earlier today that he would hope to be able to get that list together in six months.
in terms of the questions i was asked about the blacklist and how that process is being taken forward commissioner moscovici will be responsible for most of that work.
so it is more of a dynamic process where we hope to be able to make progress together.
the process to be clear is that all third country jurisdictions would be screened not automatically just homing in on any particular country or jurisdiction and then on the basis of that screening we would talk to the jurisdictions in question and ultimately depending on the severity of the problem in relation to one or more
again this comes back to the point of competition.
we have discussed it over many months.
i know that parliament will want to make progress as rapidly as possible and we will be seeking to make progress as rapidly as we possibly can with the member states so that we can get a measure implemented as soon as possible because i think that is part of how we can have a system of taxation in which our citizens have confidence but also so that our businesses can go about the task of rebuilding trust with our citizens.
i was also asked a question about the aggregated figure. why do we not have a disaggregated figure for outside the eu as well as within the eu?
we do not have the wherewithal to insist that companies outside the eu share for instance information between the united states and singapore and publish the same information that we could require companies within the eu to
i agree with the point made by mr hayes that the sooner we can get on with this the better.
because without businesses in which citizens have trust we will not have the tax revenues that we all want.
of those criteria we would put together a list based on that assessment.
finally a couple of comments on timing.
in terms of that process his intention here is to come up with one which is a fair but careful assessment using all those four criteria on which the list is based.
so that was why we have gone for an aggregated figure outside the eu and i think it was sensible to take that balanced approach.
as colleagues here will know we have been working on this proposal for a long time.
yes because it is consistent with the oecd approach and i think it is important to preserve an international approach on it.
the difference i think with the panama papers disclosures is that it has sharpened the focus of the proposal and has made us reconsider how we go about tackling the question of jurisdictions that do not have high standards of