kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
as a modern institution the european parliament must demonstrate that it understands the many forms a family can take especially when failing to do so can be detrimental to the care of children as is the case in examples of international child abduction.
preparation is needed for the worst case scenario.
that's why the brits must clarify hopefully by the next council meeting what they want to achieve what they want to have in the future.
how helpful. it was also really helpful when you got these countries into the eurozone in the first place.
that was really really helpful of you. the only trouble is these countries these organisations economies and businesses are struggling within the constraints of that zone you so helpfully got them into and now rather than saying ok look it's not working out here.
ok these economies need to work out for themselves how to do it these businesses which are unprofitable need to collapse and be replaced' because that would be the market that would be free market capitalism and that's sinful isn't it?
i like to be helpful as well.
i'm a helpful person in a room of helpful people and what i would strongly suggest to you is that you need to understand you cannot book the market. you're forcing square pegs into round holes and all this is doing is wasting billions of taxpayers' money on impossible projects
they will not only help to deescalate rising tensions but also and more importantly would bring substantial benefits to eu businesses and consumers.
for instance the elimination of high tariffs on manufactured goods such as clothing and footwear would open up opportunities for eu exporters and increase the international competitiveness of our industries.
in addition our smes would benefit from the elimination of duplicate testing inspection and certification requirements that would be possible with a conformity assessment agreement.
we can only support such reflections about the future completion of the architecture of the emu.
let me add here one point all decisions concerning children should be covered notwithstanding the marital status of the parents.
we must remember that these rules were agreed by unanimity that the negotiations were not easy and that the text includes significant improvements.
in particular a great achievement is the abolition of the intermediate procedures to obtain cross border enforcement of all judgments the so called exequatur.
the new rules on enforcement of judgments will provide more legal certainty.
in child return proceedings i am very pleased that there will be shorter deadlines applied to different stages in the return procedure.
furthermore the compromise will provide clearer rules on the placement of the child in another member state by establishing an autonomous consent procedure for all types of cross border placement.
the rules also ensure more effective cooperation between central authorities which should continue playing a key role in supporting courts and competent authorities in applying the regulation.
lastly just one reservation we should not consider the emf as a competitor of the imf and i would urge the commission to design the whole solution in such a way as to still have access to and to benefit from the imf as an international institution.
it is essential to reflect on how we can transform the eu's economy in a way that ensures the best possible future for our environment our citizens businesses and industry. the eu has long been a front runner on climate action and it should continue to lead by example.
madam president none of the arguments in favour of the commission's package on non performing loans stand up to scrutiny.
its supporters say that it will contribute to financial stability but how does moving billions of euros of bad debt into the unregulated shadow banking sector achieve this?
its supporters argue that it will free up banks to lend to small businesses but all of the evidence shows that it's the lack of demand in the economy and not credit supply that is limiting lending.
its supporters say that we can achieve strengthened consumer protection in the directive but in reality the package will encourage the banks to throw their customers to the wolves through the mass sell offs of mortgages on family homes to vulture funds.
this is exactly what's happening in ireland right now and it has fuelled a housing and homelessness crisis on an unprecedented scale.
supporters of this proposal actually cite the irish example with bad debt as a model to be replicated across the eu when in reality it is an example of exactly what not to do.
the truth is that this package is about returning banks to the situation where they can make massive profits again without any regard to the rights of borrowers who let's not forget are european citizens.
we cannot support this package as it won't solve the problem of bad debt in the eu's financial system.
that means being firm and rapid in counteracting any new tariffs and measures taken by the us administration but at the same time to do our utmost to appease the tensions and avoid a trade war which could escalate and heavily impact on both sides.
but when we look at china we see a country not respecting trade rules and sadly now when we look at the united states we also see an administration that has unjustly labelled the eu as a national security threat in order to justify steel and aluminium tariffs while of course reminding us of our obligations under the nato
it doesn't quite add up and the escalations in our trade relations with the us have serious consequences.
it is therefore crucial to keep talking and to try to come to agreements.
for those in the house who do not want to support the european commission here i hope you understand that it will be gladly explained by ambassador sondland and other officials of the trump administration as proof of the eu's inability to make decisions and that is not in our interest.
i would also like to remind colleagues that they should not use the agreements we make with third countries as the weapons to beat those countries with while we in fact lack the foundations of a bilateral agreement or negotiations with countries that we do trade with think about china.
let us be clear about what is to gain here but also be very very mindful of what we could lose.
my group will support the european commission and i believe we have to be strong and united as europe especially when dealing with the confrontations of the trump administration.
despite the occasional obstacle the fundamental common interests of our relationship remain strong.
last year was clearly a low for our trade.
while responding firmly to the tariffs on steel and aluminium the eu at the same time showed it is willing to cooperate to find solutions.
the message was clear we need to work together;
we need this for our businesses and the jobs they create in europe.
our markets resources security and citizens are highly interdependent and this will only increase.
therefore i hope this parliament will clearly support the launch of the negotiations.
we also have the possibility of shortening the timeframe should a matter of urgency arise. and efficiency also in the sense that the regulation provides the commission with actual means to restore fair competition through the adoption of measures of a financial or operational nature.
so this is not protectionism.
i think we can talk to the us administration despite all of the differences we have because the us is much more than the current administration the trump administration; the us is congress where a lot of people fiercely disagree on the trade policy that this white house under trump is doing.
what i said is that europe is a trade superpower we uphold the rule of law when it comes to trade.
i am special and i do not know what you are so please don't interrupt.
it facilitates the mutual recognition of crossborder decisions in parental responsibility and child abduction. it improves the efficiency of judicial proceedings and gives more legal certainty.
for example when a crossnational couple splits up and one parent returns to the country of origin and brings a child without the other parent concerned the procedures to return the child are now simplified and accelerated.
this regulation affects the daily life of so many international families and children and child abduction has devastating and longlasting consequences on the child.
the longer the child is abducted the greater the impact is on the child's life and time is key to reduce the harm on the child.
therefore i welcome in particular the following major steps forward clear time limits for both the decisions taken by the judge and the enforcement restriction in the number of appeals that generally delayed drastically the return decisions and the obligation of the courts to hear and take into account
children's views in all proceedings concerning them.
and this is crucial to uphold the fundamental guiding principle of the best interest of the child as a primary consideration and it also recognises that the child is a right holder.
i regret however that member states could not agree on common standards regarding hearings proceedings.
ensuring that the child's voice is heard is not enough and this right can even become a burden for the child if it is applied without procedural safeguards and a child friendly practice.
as coordinator for the european parliament on children's rights handling many cases of parental abduction i have seen that court hearings can be intimidating with traumatic effects on children.
i therefore call on you commissioner on the commission and on the member states to develop common standards and to share best practices on safeguards for children. we need to avoid double victimisation and create a climate of trust and i'm also glad that mediation is given due weight.
it often remains the best way to seek longterm lasting solutions.
much more needs to be done to promote alternative dispute resolutions among parents and professionals involved in the crossborder family disputes.
mr president despite no one disagreeing on the urgent need for better eulevel laws for the benefit of disabled people this proposed legislation is a disappointment.
the uk government worked hard behind the scenes to water down its ambition and should be ashamed of its role.
in particular mandatory access requirements for buildings and physical infrastructure were excluded including for transport and vehicles.
on the other hand i welcome the positive elements to improve access for all to electronic services such as online banking and selfservice terminals as well as the technical annex and the strong penalties requirements and working group involvement of disabled people's representatives.
and as we just heard from the council environmental sustainability matters. if we fail to respond properly we're going to see our economy and our societies pay an ever increasing cost as we struggle to deal with the development and effects of extreme climate events.
if we think of the costs over the last year of forest fires floods storms et cetera and what that has taken out of the public budget and our public services the need to invest in resilient infrastructure and good strong public services and utilities is absolutely crucial.
for that we need the fiscal space to be able to carry out real investment.
to help families in difficult situations and to protect children in particular. so thank you once again for your support.
it has been a big mistake not to try to bring all the forces in the house together in the interests of the country.
we have a specific and particular responsibility to keep protecting all the european citizens in this process and to preserve the peace process in northern ireland.
we have also taken into account of course the uk government red lines.
let me repeat this this is the only withdrawal treaty that is possible and the only one that could command an approval in this house.
we always said that a closer eu uk relationship based on a customs union would not only benefit our economies but would also solve many of the concerns associated with the backstop.
it is time to stop party politics and to work constructively in the interests of citizens and the country and if this is not possible it is clear that the only alternative is to give the people the chance to change the government or to say no to brexit.
this is the debate we need to have not the debate on the length of the extension. this for us is clear the extension is a tool and all the options are on the table as long as there is a clear political reason and perspective.
mr president of course i have my written prepared talking points which say that the guidelines report contains many important priorities such as youth employment research as well as climate spending.
and now my final point is that on this very friday the school strike for climate comes to estonia for the first time.
years ago when there was no ryanair flights were costing hundreds and hundreds of euro.
represent an important step in the current process.
they form the basis for the work which will eventually lead to the adoption of the semester's country specific recommendations during the semester. when working on the european semester and debating the country specific recommendations we should always remember the importance of reaching as many citizens as possible to increase national
ownership.
i commend the initiatives taken in this regard including the increased dialogue in the capitals and the consultation with social partners. today's debate showed that while there are some differences there is a lot of common ground to build on.
this gives me confidence in our continued cooperation in looking at the challenges ahead of us and identifying appropriate solutions to tackle them.
i regret that sufficient progress has not been made in this respect.
without evidence of brussels bad faith the uk would have no internationally lawful means of exiting the backstop.
my party has always been clear.
we want an orderly exit from the eu and a brexit deal that works for both the united kingdom and the european union and indeed for our closest neighbours in the republic of ireland but that agreement must respect the constitutional and economic integrity of northern ireland.
there's been much talk of the rights of citizens and i agree that citizens should not be a bargaining chip in this negotiation.
the house of commons has already said that we should move to protect the rights of citizens in all eventualities.
mapping our critical infrastructure setting minimum standards enhancing cooperation between member states and agreeing on common sanctions against attacks on it systems are crucial steps in order to guarantee our digital security.
at the same time the free and open nature of the internet is to be fully respected.
we believe that this proposal which updates the existing regulations under the two thousand and five framework decision and increases the scope of the council of europe convention on cybercrime is a clear signal that the eu is taking all cyber threats very seriously as the commissioner said.
finally the text also seeks to improve european criminal justice and police cooperation by strengthening the existing structure of contact points including an obligation to answer urgent requests within eight hours and the obligation to collect basic statistical data on cyber attacks.
we also welcome that the report calls for the inclusion of a new aggravating circumstance when the offences are committed by misusing personal data of another person and causing prejudice to the rightful identity owner. we believe that including this specific measure is important
as you know the proposal builds on the existing framework decision and we welcome that your report retains the provisions put forward by the commission such as the definition of two new offences illegal interception and tools to commit large scale attacks
together with the adoption of the eu cybersecurity strategy and the launch of the european cybercrime centre with europol earlier this year this will mark an additional and a strong political signal that the eu is serious in combating cyber attacks.
the attack in estonia in two thousand and seven was the triggering event but the problem of cyber attacks has as everybody knows worsened since the estonian attack.
reporting is key in order to understand the scale of the problem and this measure is fully in line with the member states' commitment made in the eu policy cycle on organised and serious international crime.
we hope that the agreed text will now be swiftly adopted by both the european parliament and the council.
the primary purpose of the commission proposal was to prevent cyber attacks.
the urgency with which we need to deal with this problem is real and the directive is a necessary response to this.
and higher penalties for the general offences as well as new aggravating circumstances such as attacks committed against a critical infrastructure information system.
last but not least we welcome a new obligation introduced by the european parliament for member states to have reporting channels in place for reporting of the offences to competent authorities.
as it has become one of the most common ways to commit cyber attacks today.
fighting cybercrime on an eu level effectively depends on making sure that criminals are not gifted with the opportunity to set up shop in any member state which may have insufficient protection against cyber attacks.
obviously europe's defence against cybercrime is only as strong as its weakest link and frankly there are too many weak links. our work here in parliament and with europol in particular shows that we are finally trying to lead on this issue.
it damages jobs and businesses and puts government institutions at risk and it is therefore insidious.
this report identifies all these things and in my view and my group's view it offers a sensible and realistic way forward.
i hope that the parliament will endorse the proposals and the compromise agreements tomorrow so that the directive can enter into force and make a much awaited contribution to combating cyber attacks in the european union.
yesterday the swiss national federal council passed a resolution on introducing transparency for the extractive industries the canadian mining companies have now reached an agreement and i hope that this will serve as a call for action for next week's g eight for greater transparency across all industries in the world.
but it is important that we acknowledge the role of citizens and ngos such as publish what you pay global witness and the one campaign the role they have played over the last ten years in campaigning for change for communities to reap the benefits from the natural resources of which for too long they have been robbed.
mr president i will be brief. i just wanted to share the news that where europe leads the rest of the world follows and that is the case for greater transparency for the extractive industries.
the maturity of a country can be judged from its ability to assimilate that process move on and make its own corrective without needing to be told what to do from outside.
just as in ukraine and by the way just as when we have referendums in the european union you cannot treat democracy purely as a means to an end.
i did not particularly like it either but that is democracy.
i am shocked to hear people in this chamber and other western commentators cheering on a military government because they did not happen to like the election result.
sometimes people will vote in ways that you do not like.
but one point i want to make is that it ignores leisure and tourism and mr bennion and i mentioned that this morning.
i remember one woman talking about how her husband had been tortured to death in the village mosque with the muezzin's microphone turned on so that his screams would be broadcast to the entire community.
it is human nature when you hear that kind of thing to think that the response should be proportional to how upset you feel but that is a false equation.
we were fifty parliamentarians from twelve different countries and we carried out a social action programme there.
we can nudge the two sides together we can supply humanitarian assistance we can encourage people to talk but the idea that we can intervene militarily and decree a solution i am afraid that is self deceit.
the response needs to be proportionate not to the outrage but to the ability to get something done.
talking to the refugees was of course as you would imagine a very harrowing experience.
believe me listening to those things at first hand is not the same as listening to me recount the story here in the chamber.
i would much prefer a free trade arrangement to a customs union.
obviously we have our sympathies and i like everyone else in this house sympathise with people who want pluralism and the rule of law and personal liberty.
mr president i am sure it was not intended but we saw in the debate on this report an almost perfect demonstration of why the united kingdom in the long run cannot remain a member of the european union on current terms.
my colleague vicky ford proposed very moderately that costs relating to bailing out the eurozone should fall only on the participants in the single currency and the chamber rejected her proposal.
in the long run you cannot have a situation where countries which choose not to join the single currency are dragged into the common institutions created for it.
that would seem to me to make very good sense.
but rather than creating one from scratch why not make it this parliament?
why not have an arrangement where non participants simply do not turn up or perhaps turn up only when trade issues are being determined.
we can have the federal countries doing their thing while the others remain in a loose free trade area.
and i said to him no if everybody is criticising you that suggests to me that you are doing something wrong'.
there is the eternal gulf between the democrat and the brussels official.
bosnia has been turned into a kind of eu in miniature where democratic self determination is struck down so as to preserve at all costs the ideal of a multinational state right down to the blue flag with the stars on and the paraphernalia and symbolism that they have downloaded from brussels.
instead of which in order to prepare it for eu membership we are first teaching it to repress democratic self determination.
equality of all citizens under the law is a desirable precept but if i were putin i would be astonished to think that i am being criticised now for having literally got away with murder in the decades leading up to this moment the repression of journalists the autocratic system the way in which every contiguous country has felt the pressure of russian revanchism the baltics bulgaria the caucasian states in the case of georgia literally an invasion. this is not a question of internal repression;
the regime in the kremlin has crossed the border into breaking international law.
in the case of the litvinenko affair it collaborated to put it as neutrally as possible with the murder of a citizen living under the queen's peace in the united kingdom.
that really is unlike some of the other motions for resolutions that we have been discussing today a cause for us to take direct diplomatic international action to defend our legitimate interests.
we need to be able to get those humanitarian organisations back on the ground.
we cannot allow this situation to deteriorate even more and i urge the sudanese government to step back from the decision to expel thirteen leading non governmental organisations from darfur.
can you imagine the human suffering behind the united nations statistics?
the united nations has said that kicking out the humanitarian groups puts more than one million lives at risk. i stress the overriding humanitarian need to allow the agencies to continue with their lifesaving work.
the departure of the ngos could lead to even more loss of life due to the break in medical services and outbreaks of infectious diseases such as diarrhoea and respiratory infections.
the aid agencies in darfur run the largest humanitarian operation in the world.
two seven million internally displaced persons are in need of assistance.