kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
it is also important that we are equipped to deal with situations like this in the developing world which is why i want to make a case for a strong independent separate commissioner for development aid who will have his or her own clear budget and remit and who will be accountable to this chamber through our
ninety per cent of that increase will be in what is now the developing world where up to eleven million children die each year about five million of them for want of medicines that have been available in what we call the west for over thirty years.
it is crucially important that the high representative minister for external affairs whatever title you want to give that person will have a lot on his or her plate much to do but there is one single issue which commands and must command our particular attention.
has it occurred to you that in the ten years of debates you and your colleagues have simply failed to convince enough people and that is why you and your colleagues have had to resort to the blatant manipulation to which i referred earlier to get the treaty through?
indeed he indicated that never before had so much money been owed by so few to so many people and with so little real reform. mr king went further to indicate that regulation of the banks was not enough but that there was a moral dilemma
however this morning i want to direct your attention minister in particular to the financial crisis that continues to dog europe.
this is a very serious charge minister and comes from one of the banking world's own leading members.
i know that it might not be popular in this house but it is my genuinely held belief that in the united kingdom there should be a referendum on the treaty.
at the heart of this banking crisis in that financial and banking institutions knew that they were too big to fail and that the taxpayer whether in the united kingdom or in any of the other regions of europe would always have to help them out no matter what the crisis.
i do not understand why both conservatives and labour are unwilling to give that.
at the same time it is right to push ahead now with the work on implementation and to be ready for the entry into force of the treaty.
there are less than fifty days to go to copenhagen.
first copenhagen must show that the drive to cut emissions is on its way;
i am pleased to be cooperating with you to ensure that the benefits of the treaty will come into play as quickly as possible.
the copenhagen agenda is not just about climate change.
the lisbon treaty is the treaty for the europe of the twenty first century with strong institutions which are able to deliver concrete results in the europe of twenty seven and more members in the future.
we only need to see the process of ratification completed in the czech republic. of course the constitutional procedures under way in the czech republic must be respected so too must be the need to respond to the democratic will to see the treaty enter into force.
we must carry forward the work we agreed at the
i am confident that this will continue to be the case in jumping this final hurdle to seeing the treaty enter into force after the strong support given to the lisbon treaty by the people of ireland.
this will be a major commitment especially at a time when public budgets are already under pressure but we all know that the longer we wait the higher the costs will
i have already set out to this parliament the importance of minimising delays in the nomination of the european commission.
i know there have been concerns from the outset that the eas will be some kind of intergovernmental body floating outside the european union system but the service should be firmly anchored in the european union system.
if it can work with the democratic underpinning of this parliament the council's connection with national administrations and the commission's expertise and european vision that service can truly become a powerful tool for the european union to achieve its goals on the global stage.
it falls again to the european union to show leadership and to keep up the momentum. the targets we have put on the table have provided an inspiration for others to step up their actions but we all know that to galvanise real global action we need to take a further step.
this is the best way to make the case for the kind of active europe that the lisbon treaty brings driving ahead with an agenda that shows that the european union brings concrete benefits for its citizens.
we need to be able to push ahead with an agenda this parliament supported when it elected me president for a new term.
a successful outcome at copenhagen remains a primary concern for europeans and a major task for the global community.
i know that this afternoon you will be debating elmar brok's report on the european external action service.
we need to help developing countries with concrete ideas on finance as the european commission proposed last month.
to have an ambitious agenda we need to have an effective institutional framework and i come back to my first point.
the report starts from exactly the right basis to ensure that the service like the rest of the treaty's innovations makes our community system even stronger and better performing.
domestic finance namely from the large emerging economies developing but emerging economies and the carbon market should cover a large part of this but large scale international public finance should also be forthcoming with the european union paying its fair share.
that democratic will was clearly shown by the parliament of the czech republic so i hope that no artificial obstacles and no artificial delays will now cause more difficulties before full ratification.
it should inevitably work very closely with all the institutions the commission first and foremost. the decisions it prepares will be taken by the commission or by the council in cfsp matters.
in fact i am convinced that its success will depend on this to ensure that the european union's external action is more than the sum of its institutional parts.
for many years we have known that the ratification of a new treaty is not an easy business. we have had many setbacks and some disappointments but every time the overriding case for the treaty has won through the compelling case for a democratic and effective europe.
a communautaire european external service a service based on the community method will be a strong service for europe and a strong tool for a united europe projecting its influence in the world.
i know that this parliament is fully committed to this work.
progress in the negotiations remains slow.
second it must show that we are prepared to help those ready to take that step.
there are many areas in which this parliament has already begun its work and has made a major contribution crystallising ideas in areas like the european citizens' initiative.
this is of course the main target but the climate is also a question of a development and we should not forget that very important dimension.
however most european citizens are far more concerned about what the eu is doing to deal with the current economic crisis rather than the detail of lisbon.
mr president firstly i am pleased to see my former colleague cecilia malmstrm here particularly in light of the convincing yes' to lisbon in ireland followed by the signature of the democratically elected polish president.
this is a real opportunity for the eu to be responsive to the real needs of its citizens but we need greater investment.
in this context i want to speak about the progress microfinance facility which will give those who are unemployed a chance of a new start and open up the way to entrepreneurship.
we have seen how unstable the carbon price has been in the eu ets and how long it is taking for a proper carbon market to emerge.
what is blocking energy efficiency in our own member states is the lack of up front funding mechanisms yet we are assuming that developing countries can find their own money.
mr president the swedish presidency and the commission both refer to the importance of an eu agreement on the financing of climate change measures for developing countries.
a further major flaw is the assumption that developing and emerging countries will be happy to fund their own energy efficiency measures.
but the offer on the table from the commission is a smoke and mirrors proposal which developing counties have every reason to question.
but there is no certainty that the international carbon market will deliver eur thirty eight billion a year in financial flow to developing countries.
from that there will be consequences.
very soon they will be wringing their hands.
to quote they are ringing the bells now;
all the moves so far towards your european superstate have taken place by stealth or manipulation and in the case of the lisbon treaty the manipulation has been so shameless and so blatant that the treaty lacks democratic legitimacy.
job creation should not be about creating jobs for former prime ministers to be president of the council or for globetrotting aficionados to be high representatives for foreign affairs.
the laudable aims in the laeken declaration were not then put into practice and now the lisbon agenda faces the same lack of purpose and achievement.
two thousand and ten now that should have made a real difference in the lives of millions of people and provided a firm foundation for our economic future and yet as mr reinfeldt himself said the lisbon agenda has been a failure.
what we need of course is the lisbon agenda not the lisbon treaty. the lisbon agenda has a noble objective an objective of creating the most dynamic and competitive knowledge based economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs greater social cohesion and respect for the environment
and institutional changes do not help with climate changes.
thousands of pages of text most of it too complicated for our citizens ever to understand simply consumes the trees that we need to protect.
those two jobs will hardly help hard pressed small and medium sized businesses in any of our countries.
they will not ease the crisis being borne by millions of families right now.
let us put pressure on the world community to come together to save the planet for future generations not on those who do not fully share the enthusiasm of some people for the european institutions.
why can we never actually get results that matter to our citizens?
mr president may i first of all congratulate the swedish government on its presidency in general and particularly on the way it has attempted to advance the very important issues of climate change and dealing with the economic and financial crisis that faces us.
so near mr president but so far and again initiatives relating to the economies of member states must be clearly understandable to ordinary people.
we all know that the political process of approval has now been concluded in all member states.
we of course hope that the czech republic will very soon be in a position to ratify the treaty.
it is a challenge to draw together the different players in the field of external relations and the overall aim has to be to achieve a diplomatic synergy.
i strongly believe that the setting up of the external action service can be a success if council parliament and the commission work closely together.
we must also respect the fact that it is for the high representative and vice president of the commission to make a proposal in agreement with the commission.
i agree with those who said that there is no room for complacency.
the employment situation is such that we all need to do more at european but also at national level.
this thursday the commission will adopt a very far reaching communication on administrative burden reduction.
that communication will set out what has been achieved so far and what still remains to be done.
a complete new supervisory framework must be set up at eu level and we are pleased to see that some progress has been achieved.
there is broad agreement in the council on the commission proposal on the systemic risk board for macro prudential supervision.
we hope parliament will give its support to this.
i think several of you have touched upon what will be the core issue which will determine success or failure. i would call it climate justice because this is about the relation between developing and developed countries and the will to present a credible proposal for the financing of both mitigation and adaptation measures and the way we also show our willingness to lead the way.
i am sure it will not be enough but it is the first step and hopefully it will also make the others come up with their own efforts and put something on the table that we will be able to negotiate in copenhagen.
we will of course continue to be fully active and not lower our level of ambition but instead encourage all other parties and partners to take a full part and take a seat at the table including the united states for the first time so that we can respond to all the concerns of citizens.
that is why we need for europe's progress and credibility in the world not necessarily good conductors of affairs but real statesmen strong democratic leaders having a vision and authority to bring about a change also in europe.
therefore we need a clear commitment to and practical implementation of european common institutions.
the commission is grateful for the attention paid to financial assistance in the area of the rule of law in the enlargement countries and agrees with the importance attached to these areas. this report sheds additional light on these key priorities in the accession process.
the commission would like to underline the very good cooperation with the rapporteur and the high quality of the report which was adopted unanimously in the committee on budgetary control. as the report mentions the launch of the new approach' endorsed by the council
these chapters are now among the first to be opened and the last to be closed once a solid track record of reform implementation has been achieved.
mr president the epp group understands that this is a very important issue for all our groups and our citizens.
the commission proposal of last week cannot be seen in isolation.
on these issues the role of this parliament is critical as a player in the co decision process.
these are matters that are controversial and sensitive and we believe that this is all the more reason to make sure that our discussions are well prepared and our procedures are respected.
as was pointed out in his report from last year the crucial work is about building citizens' trust in the eu and we can all subscribe to that. we all have an important role to contribute to that important work both as institutions and as individuals. relations between the commission and the ombudsman have always been very good and very constructive.
through his inquiries the european ombudsman and his team have done a lot to help develop and reinforce a culture of service within the commission.
very important lessons have been drawn from critical remarks made and we also see an increase in the willingness to achieve friendly solutions.
this development should continue and i know the commission will continue to follow closely the ombudsman's activities and welcome his proposals.
the years to come are going to be interesting and challenging for the ombudsman.
i am in no doubt that the ombudsman will enhance his contribution to strengthening democracy in europe.
the tools are transparency and service minded institutions.
we all have a responsibility to support him in that work.
ensuring quality education at all stages including lifelong learning possibilities regardless of age must be an absolute priority for us.
this is why i for one would be extremely glad to see european semester recommendations on minimum levels of investment in education and training as well as minimum levels of education quality in member states that lag behind.
let women and men compete for jobs equally and do not force companies into a quota system.
we all live in a fair and free society and the best way to keep it that way is to allow people to get jobs and positions based on their merit and nothing else.
mr president honourable members on behalf of commissioner borg i will present the commission's position on this matter. the commission has proposed to restrict the use of one health claim on carbohydrates and their contribution to the maintenance of normal brain function'
mainly to foods containing complex carbohydrates.
these conditions of use would allow the claim to be made on products low in sugars and on products which contain natural sugars fruits and fruit juices for instance.
the conditions of use would prohibit the claim from appearing on a packet of sugar for example or on products which contain added sugars such as cakes biscuits or soft drinks.
at this point i must point out that this health claim at present already appears on the market without any restriction on the sugar content of foods bearing this claim.
and according to the provisions of the legislation food business operators may continue to use this claim until a final decision by the regulators is adopted.
that is why it is important that the commission proposal to restrict its use should be supported. the commission considers that the claim should be authorised subject indeed to strict conditions of use in line with authoritative scientific advice and recommendations of national authorities on dietary intake. the proposed conditions of use for the claim in question have been extensively discussed with member states and have been agreed almost unanimously.
allowing the claim for products containing added sugars would have a promotional effect for such products and would thus run contrary to current advice on nutrition strategies.
let me underline that the objective of the tabled resolution is unclear given the two distinct and polarised opinions it comprises.
on the one hand a number of meps supported their resolution in the committee on the environment public health and food safety on the grounds that the commission exceeded its delegated powers by setting restrictive conditions of use maintaining that no restrictions for the use of the claim on carbohydrates should be set which would allow the claim to be used for products containing all carbohydrates including added sugars.
on the other hand another group of meps supported the resolution on the grounds that the claim is misleading and ambiguous for consumers because it promotes sugar consumption and therefore should not be authorised.
this group would therefore like to see the claim prohibited for all foods.
if it is then the regulation allowing the claim under the strict conditions proposed by the commission would not be adopted and the claim would remain on the market without any restriction on the sugar content of foods bearing this claim.
for these reasons my colleague mr borg and the commission would urge the honourable members not to support this resolution which if adopted would allow the health claim in question to continue to be used.
briefly chairman can i say that this type of debate almost puts me off my dinner if we actually get dinner this evening because we talk about food in ways that really confuse people.
and i could agree with the last speaker where he said we don't want ridiculous labels on food and yet in many cases we have ridiculous labels on food.
it is very clear though that citizens are more and more confused.
despite the extra information we give them there is huge confusion around what constitutes healthy eating and healthy diets and it seems to me that when we pinpoint a particular food as being a good food that puts people off everything else.
so i think we need to be extremely careful with the information we give to consumers and extremely clear in a very simple message which our grandmothers gave us that a little bit of what you like will do you good and variety is the spice of life.
and sometimes our labels take away from that very basic premise.
in ireland volunteering in grassroots sports organisations offers sporting and leadership opportunities to thousands of young people.
there are many possibilities under the youth in action programme and any measures to enhance its aims and to encourage and support young people in the eu should be sustained and strongly encouraged.
however switzerland has for a long time shown interest in our education and youth programmes.
furthermore switzerland has participated in the bologna process and the creation of the european higher education area.
switzerland has also followed closely albeit from the outside the debate on education policies in the european union. switzerland will be the first country to take part in our programmes that is neither an eu member state nor a member of the european economic area
the agreement will allow swiss education and youth organisations as well as individual students teachers and young people to participate in the eu's youth in action and lifelong learning programmes on completely equal terms with eu citizens.
projects and initiatives submitted by participants from switzerland will be subject to the same conditions rules and procedures that apply to projects from member states. switzerland has established a national agency to coordinate implementation of the programmes at national level. it will make an annual financial contribution to each of the programmes
and will attend programme committee meetings as an observer for the points that concern switzerland.
the commissioner mentioned they will have to pay.
of course they will have to pay but normally non members pay more than members of clubs. however i will bow to the superior wisdom and experience of doris pack in saying that this may be the way forward.
we could either say that eu member states are not seen to be friends for germany or we could say that she does not mean her words that she does not take her words seriously.
i think that this is exactly the point for all the heads of state.
my opening speech was rather dry and modest because i only said that we do not have enough evidence on the table.
we want to see the rules and the competences which are varied on the american side but we also want to obtain very concrete guarantees from the american authorities that the rules are going to be obeyed and fulfilled.
let me start by saying that many details still need to be confirmed.
the area is within the sole competence of the member states and thus exempt from the applicability of eu law including the charter of fundamental rights of the european union as the charter only applies to member states where they implement eu law.
having said this the concept of national security needs to be interpreted restrictively when used by a member state in order to claim the non applicability of eu law.
the case law of the court of justice also clarifies that in such a case the member state needs to substantiate such a claim.
it is not sufficient to simply invoke it.
against this deeply unnecessary spying. spying against terrorism and our genuine security needs is important but as the commissioner said here we are dealing with companies in western europe and dealing with potential violation of in this case german law and european law.
what are we talking about?
we are talking about what the washington post and der spiegel said was a very big deal indeed.
while i am loathe to deal with individual member states just as i had to deal with my own member state in relation to the nsa inquiry we must as a parliament deal with the protection of our citizens against unnecessary violations of their privacy.
that is what we are doing today.
we must ensure that we have oversight procedures.
we do not have competence in this area but as we said in the nsa inquiry we must ask the member states to make progress in this area.
they are clearly not doing this and we are serving a reminder today that we must ask the member states to make concrete steps ahead.
i also remind people that it was the bundestag and the individual member state that made progress here not just journalists.
it was individual members of the german parliament who tried to make progress and uncovered many of these revelations.