kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
it is also an open invitation to the indonesian authorities and to our colleagues in the indonesian parliament to strengthen our relations and to discuss these issues with each other in a very open and frank manner.
unfortunately there are still many serious human rights abuses which involved the recent spike in the intolerance harassment and violence towards various minority groups in indonesia.
the government must put an end to discrimination by condemning and investigating all verbal and physical attacks on minority groups.
given our even closer partnership the eu should actively help indonesia to fulfil its human rights obligations.
the jailing of the governor of jakarta for blasphemy the public flogging of two homosexual men and the other negative developments taking place in indonesia seriously undermine our relationship.
of great concern are also the serious actions against the freedom of the media the physical abuse of journalists and general growing intolerance against minorities which are increasing together with the influence of fringe islamist groups.
i sincerely hope that for the sake of promoting a tolerant society indonesia will repeal all legal provisions unduly restricting fundamental freedoms and human rights which go beyond the provisions of the international human rights obligations it subscribed to.
at the same time parliament could decide not to force any political declaration on the council which is unacceptable to several key governments at this time.
i think the responsibility lies with both sides.
remaining three years to finance iter and a few other key projects.
delighted to see an agreement between the two arms of the budgetary authority. we feel that it is a shame not to have a budget after all these arduous conciliation talks because the five hundred million taxpayers in europe do not understand
i think that the belgian presidency is acting on the same assumption.
i am appealing to your sense of responsibility.
blocking funding for those who used eu money irregularly would give the european union enough resources to cover the noble causes that it claims it wants to support. at the same time it would also give the european bureaucracy a certain degree of credibility.
believe me this would be the best news we could give to british and all european taxpayers those who eventually fund both national contributions and a european tax.
we do not accept that single minded austerity is the way out. we do not accept that the crisis requires less europe or an anti european agenda.
so how can the solution to the budget problems suddenly be to restrict flexibility? how can the future of europe be to cut funding of mutually agreed priority programmes and not fund new ones iter is not the only priority or even the most important ones.
that is our red line.
i do not understand.
and twelve and two thousand and thirteen let us try to avoid that.
how can it be a problem to involve the european parliament in a constructive dialogue on the future financial framework and the next long term budget?
let us try again to find an agreement but we must find a solution to flexibility that is not less ambitious than what we already have in the interinstitutional agreement. we must find an open and constructive procedure on the next financial framework.
but we do not accept that the economic crisis will be here for ever and that the crisis should set the limits for the future of europe.
without reasonable flexibility we risk building up a mountain of problems for two thousand.
more concretely we have criticised the lack of flexibility in the european union budget for years and the commission agrees with us.
go for the future use your right of initiative and put a formal proposal on the table as fast as possible.
if on the contrary we go in the direction of own resources not governments but citizens will be in charge.
it is the basis for a modern european democracy.
flexibility is necessary indispensable otherwise we cannot finance a number of important issues.
whatever the format is a convention a conference an igc with or without national parliaments do not listen to the voices of the past.
own resources is also not a question of new competences.
let us all together the commission the council member states and the european parliament work out how in the next few years we can build a consensus for a changed and reformed europe in which the budget is a rational part of the future and not an unfortunate piece of horse trading.
on the figures let us be very clear.
mr president in december two thousand and five there was a prime minister who sat here in the house.
it is no secret that parliament could be ready to accept the council figures of course within a broader deal.
i think one thing we all learned is that we really need to see a seriously reformed budget for the future.
what mr blair said is the essential thing that parliament wants to achieve the engagement of the eu institutions and all involved parties to reinvent the financing of the union and to base this financing on rational grounds and not on a horse trading competition which is the case today.
it is a question of applying the existing treaties and it is a question of financing existing competences because the union was always meant to have its own revenue.
in short you could say that own resources for europe colleagues means more european democracy;
that was the basis of the financing of the union by the founding fathers.
i repeat we can only require genuine own resources which can also lead to what a number of countries want which is to have less national contributions. if we do not change the system governments and not citizens will stay in charge.
that is called business for the moment in the budget issues of the union.
therefore the issue of own resources must be reopened;
let me be clear that own resources is not a question of changing the treaties.
mr president this has been a most important debate particularly the political aspects of it but i think it is also important to talk about some of the practical parts of the debate.
i am the rapporteur for agriculture for the two thousand and eleven budget and there will be real implications if we do not reach agreement on the budget for the cash flow of member states who have made advance payments to their farmers in recent weeks.
right now we are debating the future of the common agricultural policy and we are asking that policy to deliver more for europe in terms of environmental issues food security and the territorial dimension and yet all of the debate thus far has been about how can we shrink the agriculture budget.
so there are very real and practical implications and this is just one of them.
would you accept that your comments in relation to corporation tax will harm rather than help this situation? rather than your disparaging remarks about the irish looking for help do you not accept that by helping ireland is the european union helping herself? i say that as an irish mammy because i think you used that comment. let us be very adult in this house about what we say about other nation states with respect.
another european country has yet again had to come up with a new national budget and for our friends across the irish sea it is an extremely difficult time.
for many months my group has warned that with member states facing such budget pressures at home it is vital that the eu show restraint in its own spending ensuring that every penny of taxpayers' money is well spent.
the last vote in the european parliament did not show such restraint and it is of course a good sign that there is now agreement on the numbers between parliament and the council though i think we could have gone even lower.
markets are nervous when there is uncertainty and i would urge members of this parliament to put aside political ambitions and get a budget agreed.
these are difficult times in member states and that is a reality that this house cannot ignore.
from talking to my constituents it is clear that they believe that those vocalising the need for budget increases are divorced from their economic reality and furthermore the whole issue is eroding confidence in european institutions.
the failure to agree a budget is not due to intransigence but is largely due to the federalist agenda and the pursuit of that holy grail the concept of own resources.
an eu tax is out of the question in my view.
in response to president barroso's declaration today that he will bring forward proposals for such a tax before june of next year i would call on prime minister cameron to clearly state that any move in this direction would trigger a referendum in the united kingdom.
the way i see it and i wonder whether colleagues would agree with me is that in a system of separation of powers and checks and balances the council actually represents nation states and whatever remains after the lisbon treaty of the sovereignty and independence of nation states.
we want to know whether this will have the visibility that the iee programme has had.
the commission has talked about continuing work in this area about mainstreaming it about strengthening it in future funding programmes.
if that programme were to disappear it would be a real loss to a huge variety of decentralised activities to promote renewable energy and energy saving.
as ms carvalho said the european local energy assistance facility has leveraged huge amounts of money from a very small investment to help businesses become energy efficient to retrofit social housing to improve public transport to design smart energy buildings and to connect
madam president the european union works best when it takes relatively small amounts of money to work with local authorities and other agencies in exchanging best practice and in part financing policy projects in its policy priority areas.
renewable energy production into electricity grids.
the intelligent energy europe programme and the european agency for competitiveness and innovation are outstanding examples of this in the field of combating climate change so the commission will understand the concern of members of this house when we learn of plans to discontinue a programme which encourages citizens to use energy more wisely and to help the union to meet its kyoto commitments.
i think at heart the question that members are asking is this has the commission lost its way when it comes to renewable energy?
why is it planning to pump money into gas distribution networks for the benefit of companies that are already making billions in profits rather than pumping money into the vision that it still professes of a renewable energy europe one where we can meet our commitment of cutting carbon by eighty
we want to know whether it will activate civil society and foster commitment in the same way.
commissioner oettinger was suggesting yesterday that intelligent energy europe might go into the horizon two thousand and twenty but we want to know whether there will be a dedicated programme still.
i can assure you that energy efficiency and energy renewable sources activities should be reinforced with more resources within the non growing budget.
this was the real proposal for the future to defend the budget as a real constant and really nominally frozen major spending blocks cohesion and agricultural policy.
implementation and details are coming
there is of course also the place for the executive agency for competitiveness and innovation.
but the major questions were not about the past and present but about the future. my answer is that we have to handle several targets energy efficiency and renewable energy sources is one of them a very serious one. however at the same time we have to respond to the question of energy security and solidarity.
it is simple it works and therefore at the very least we want its objectives to be maintained and enshrined in any future programme.
madam president i think the commissioner got the message from the house that we like this programme.
therefore he must reassure us that this will not be the case.
the concern we have is that we are not reaching our energy efficiency targets as it will take time for the mindset of the wider public to be engaged in this issue and therefore to change in an appropriate manner.
need. this is a common goal for the european union and has been so for quite some time. the need for common rules and greater solidarity is now even more pressing.
the commission has on many occasions reminded the greek authorities that failing to take urgent measures could lead to significant legal consequences but of course on a daily basis there are also very serious humanitarian consequences.
greece should trigger emergency mechanisms to provide immediate humanitarian relief to the migrants crossing the border area.
the commission will continue to provide strategic and targeted support for greece's efforts to reform its system.
progress needs to be immediate and sustainable.
for immediate needs we recently granted an additional amount of eur. three seventy five million under the european refugee fund to implement emergency measures and we are concerned about the possibilities for using that money as well. it is crucial to streamline the delivery mechanism at national level removing constraints and reinforcing management of the funds.
support will also be provided by the eu task force on greece established by the commission to assist and maximise the absorption of eu financial assistance and the implementation of the reform package.
this. as part of this effort the dublin system needs to be complemented with provisions addressing the root causes of crises and ensuring that deficiencies in one system or another in member states are remedied without delay so that they do not affect the entire system and lead to human rights violations.
the humanitarian situation in evros is not acceptable.
these activities will continue this year and will be further intensified.
these teams provide advice on reception conditions in the evros area which is the one that is the most problematic.
these are important steps.
so there has been progress but much more needs to be done.
this involves the provision of additional financial assistance and emergency support but also expertise on the ground in close collaboration with the national authorities the agencies the unhcr and the iom. greece is among the main beneficiaries of the solidarity and management of migration flows programme with a total amount of eur three hundred and nine million allocated so far. however there is a problem of absorption from the greek side so very little of this money has been used so far.
a dedicated expert was deployed to athens in december two thousand and eleven to advise the greek authorities directly involved in the implementation of these funds. i would also like to recall the commission's recast proposal for the dublin regulation which like the rest of the asylum package aims to increase the efficiency of the system and to improve protection of the applicants.
we are there to help as are the member states' numerous organisations and institutions but greece itself has the responsibility to act in accordance with international and union law.
the conditions in which migrant and asylum seekers are kept are particularly worrying.
they can use eu funding to do this and to renovate existing facilities and temporarily increase capacity by renting hostels for vulnerable groups as well as deploying habitable containers within the security perimeters in the region.
overall there are still lots of problems and indeed it does not help if now in the election campaign migrants are being used as bait in elections and unhelpful remarks are being made.
greece needs to do a few urgent things.
it needs to continue to work on the action plan to establish proper reception conditions where people can be screened registered and have their cases tried as quickly as possible.
there needs to be humanitarian assistance to those people who are now in the evros region and who are in a very difficult situation especially children and other vulnerable groups.
there are huge amounts of money available hundreds of millions of euros but they need to be used by the greek authorities. i am convinced that a lot of things can be done in order to speed up the procedures and the bureaucracy here.
in all these issues there has been progress but there needs to be more and in all these issues we will continue to assist greece.
we are assisting with money as i said.
some of you mentioned the staffing which is also really acute.
the economic situation is very difficult.
it will take time but there needs to be steady progress and this can only happen in partnership.
but the main responsibility to make sure that everything is in place is in the hands of the greek authorities.
so thank you very much for this debate.
it is up to the eu and nato to make it clear to russia that in the current world you cannot send tanks or amass military forces whenever you think things are not going your way.
there is a country in the region a neighbour of the eu which used to benefit from cooperation with european democracies but which for many years has been steadily preparing itself for military endeavours instead.
we all know the economic and social challenges russia now faces but this does not stop putin spending up to thirty four of the national budget on defence and security.
the military balance has significantly shifted towards entrenchment of russian military dominance in the black sea.
russia is testing the boundaries of our security.
the eu must stay firm on this principle because if the trend is not stopped in ukraine the limits of our security will be tested further.
thus the black sea area has become both economically relevant and politically contested as witness the geopolitics of the various pipelines crossing it and the efforts by russia and turkey to oppose outside penetration.
therefore the aim of this report is to increase the eu's awareness of the complex situation created in the black sea which could not and should not be either ignored or left entirely to nato to deal with.
as we move forward. the results of the black sea synergy to date reveal the practical utility and the potential of this eu regional policy approach.
we will not recognise the illegal annexation of crimea and sevastopol. we continue to condemn it and to fully implement our non recognition policy including a trade and investment ban.
there are projects underway to strengthen monitoring capacities of the black sea marine environment as well as in the areas of research tourism and culture.
there is no doubt that ukraine faces immense challenges in the security political and economic areas all at the same time.
the report before us focuses on the strategic military situation in the black sea basin following the illegal annexation of crimea and sevastopol to russia.
this document presents a snapshot of the progress in the main fields of cooperation in the black sea region during the last five years.
in its conclusions of eighteen may the council welcomed ongoing efforts to strengthen strategic and practical cooperation between the eu and nato with the overall objective of building a true organisation to organisation relationship.
the eu remains deeply concerned at the continuous military build up and deterioration of the human rights situation in the crimean peninsula including the denial of free speech and the persecution of persons belonging to minorities.
as you already know the eu's approach to the region is guided by the black sea synergy. this communication adopted in two thousand and seven sets out goals and tasks across a range of economic sectors and thematic areas based on the notion of the complementarity of various actors and actions.
the current eu double track approach as regards the ukraine conflict should be applied to eu russia interaction as a whole resilience and firmness together with dialogue and engagement.
the eu needs to remain closely attuned to its interests in the region including strategic political and economic interests and to further discuss how best they can be achieved.
we remain prepared for the long haul in the crisis with russia and are very conscious of the need to preserve eu unity also in the long term.
we take an active approach to the sea basins that surround us and the black sea is one of them. there are several reasons environmental transport maritime affairs civil society for the eu to play an active role in the black sea region.
the eu has interests and responsibilities in the black sea region.
also we have a substantial programme of cross border cooperation in the black sea region.
in this endeavour we count on the support of the european parliament and we look forward to views and ideas from the members of this house.
the european council in march explicitly linked the duration of sanctions against russia to the complete implementation of the minsk agreements.
the eu continues its cooperation initiatives under the black sea synergy as and where possible.
the eu is committed to bolstering ukraine's ability to deal with these challenges and is therefore delivering unprecedented financial support.
in january two thousand and fifteen the eeas and commission services reviewed the implementation of the black sea synergy and issued a joint staff working document summarising the lessons learned.
i will focus on our regional cooperation efforts and perspectives in this area.
the eu has also continued its efforts in the trilateral processes with ukraine and russia on energy and on the implementation of the deep and comprehensive free trade area as part of the eu's support for the broader comprehensive peace process.
it must therefore come when the ground has been well prepared.
the lessons learned highlighted in the document will inform the future development of the synergy. stronger partnerships between the eu institutions and member states increasing stakeholders' participation and better coordination with other regional and international organisations are among the lessons that we take on board
we do all that while increasingly engaging with the civil society and other regional stakeholders.
i expect the high representative vice president to come up with a comprehensive strategy addressing the new security challenges in the region in the near future.
that should be their option.
we are a project for freedom and this is one of the fundamental achievements of seventy years of european integration.
these two pose new security threats to the european union and to our eastern neighbours. the european union is now only some one hundred kilometres away from the war in eastern ukraine and less than three hundred kilometres away from crimea.
we should of course never jeopardise this fundamental achievement. precisely because of this we should act in a way which prevents escalation in the region and not only addresses it which would mean an additional level of escalation.
the fact is that russia is increasing its military spending and is ready to pursue military actions which we the european union are of course not ready to pursue.
what is happening by the way is not a surprise.
in fact the eu has been lagging behind in its reactions.
they could well be used for enhancing the security of the eu borders.
each day of the conflict costs ukraine over eur five million and therefore the achievement of peace in the east is not only vital for security and humanitarian reasons but also from the economic perspective. in the light of this we must reiterate that the eu condemns the annexation of crimea and we must continue to exert pressure on russia to respect the minsk peace agreement.
this negative outlook is the direct result of the continued fighting in the east and the military situation in the black sea region.
mr president clearly the black sea has turned into a focal point of confrontation involving strategic national security interests of the highest importance for the countries of the region.
this is a road to nowhere. what is needed is to take seriously each side's security concerns and to examine ways of diplomatically overcoming those concerns.