kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
chosen by political groups these meps will only be accountable to their party chiefs generating a greater distance between voters and elected meps.
in my lifetime our rights have been denied by unionism and by the british government and only recently the taoiseach said that we in the north will never again be left behind.
only fifty years ago the civil rights association in the north was campaigning for the right to vote. the brexit dup tory agenda will result in the fundamental denial of people's right to vote.
the joint report on brexit from december says that the people of the north of ireland who are irish citizens will continue to enjoy rights as eu citizens where they reside'.
i agree that we can apply the system starting in two thousand and twenty four but not in.
one vote is for a national candidate for a national list to keep the link between the citizen and his or her mep;
no political party can afford to participate in elections without putting all the countries on the transnational list.
federal states want it.
because in the proposal that you have before you people will have two votes.
it's because there is no single constituency that it is mr trump who is president and not hilary clinton who received three million votes more than donald trump.
and a second vote is for transnational candidates to strengthen the link between the citizen and the european union.
yes we do but in order to be credible we must show a european dimension in their everyday lives.
with seats given to unelected unselected meps occupying those transnational seats.
the extinguishing of national sovereignty is also well recognised.
we now have absolute clarity though with this proposal and the dangerous and thoroughly anti democratic suggestion of getting to that objective via transnational seats. the european union openly questions and frequently questions itself asking why there is a democratic deficit among member states. you've only got to look to this report and the detail within it to answer that question.
the goal of the united states of europe as a concept is well documented.
mr president welcome to the european union's two thousand and eighteen incarnation of georgia orwell's. one thousand nine hundred and eighty four this proposal completes the end stage of the european union project national sovereignty smothered and finally the first open and equally transparent step towards a truly federalist europe with a political governing body
we see all sorts of solutions and ideas being put forward to split up the seats that the uk will thankfully be vacating.
the real thing that should be happening here is that those seats should be left empty. the truth of the matter is that when you put forward ideas such as transnational lists what you actually do is take the semblance the pretence of democracy even further from the citizens.
it is hard enough to get around a huge region like my own in the west midlands and to be seen and to let people know they have got a representative.
do you really think you can represent people in different countries on the same mandate?
it is frankly impossible and it takes it further and further from the people.
of course what has been achieved by the negotiations between the eu and the nest of traitors in the uk government is a period called the transitional period where during that time eu rules and regulations will apply. british taxpayers' money will still come to the eu
but we will have no representation whatsoever. these seats should remain empty as a monument to the absolute betrayal of democracy and of the british people that is taking place. this could not be further from the dream
of governance for the people by the people of the people.
it is not happening.
the demos is not there.
this is not democratic.
you look to bring people to a parliament where if there is any semblance of debate you have to hold up a card.
how on earth can you kid anyone that this is democracy?
quite frankly the people of the united kingdom have seen what is going on and this year we the people in the united kingdom will rise and in a democratic revolution we will say no to this no to taxation without representation and no to further treatment of the uk as a vassal state of the eu.
the time is coming.
should one really start a discussion on european democracy with the implementation of degressive proportionality or with the reserving of a handful of seats?
should one start a discussion on the consequences of brexit keeping in mind that the uk is a net contributor with a claim for more seats in the european parliament?
i have to say no again. despite all good intentions this report does not help us in the discussion on european democracy or on brexit.
madam president transnational lists are a magnet that will draw power away from citizens and their parties in the member states and give it to the leadership of european parties. that is why some people like
them but this is not going to be good for democracy.
the european parties will decide who gets on the list.
the european parties will decide what manifesto they run on and the national parties will be under enormous pressure to align their policies with the policies of their european party.
in relation to the transnational lists many people our taoiseach included have outlined many good reasons why we should consider them but as othmar karas said this is theoretical at this stage.
will they be elected by everybody and accountable to no one?
if we took the words european' and union' out of this for a moment commissioner you say that immigration should be skills based i agree.
we need appropriate control from everywhere.
also you accept that there is a need for control rather than for uncontrolled immigration and again i agree. of course in terms of training up skills there is an awful lot more that we need to do.
it is the same issue to us whether people come from poland or pakistan whether they come from austria or australia whether they come from spain or senegal.
you say that sometimes there are times when it would take too long to train particular skills that we need in our economy for ourselves and again i agree.
one hundred and sixty seven so commissioner your arguments against uncontrolled immigration from non eu countries i say apply just as well to immigration from eu countries.
we believe that people should be treated the same.
it is not about migrants taking our jobs but it is about migrants contributing to. new
the sooner children go to school and migrants work and contribute to our society the sooner they will feel part of our society and respect our system and values.
it is a way to prevent people from risking their lives at sea in the hands of criminals who exploit them. i call on member states to fully implement the labour migration tools that exist the seasonal workers the intra corporate transferees and the students and researchers directives.
the time has come to change our rhetoric and recognise that europe needs workers to sustain our economy and our welfare.
skill development and access to the labour market are the highway to integration and early integration is key to effective integration.
we need to save and protect people fleeing conflict but not all migrants are refugees.
we have to move from crisis response to managing flows according to our needs.
in the global fight for talents europe needs common clear and simple rules to attract skilled workers and match the needs of our economies.
i want to be very clear the cost of non integration in the longer term will be higher than the cost of investing today in effective integration policies.
health. fifthly and finally the action plan also proposes to strengthen the coordination between the various actors working on integration at national regional and local level and proposes a more strategic approach towards the use of eu funds for integration
besides that we will still need more people to fill the shortages.
it will be easier to qualify for the eu blue card.
from the very beginning this house has valued the importance of having sound and forward looking legal migration policies which are the other important side of the coin of managing migration comprehensively and in an effective way. but legal migration
on the blue card the european union is increasingly competing with the growing number of other destinations for the same global pool of talent.
the recent inflow of third country nationals to europe and in particular of refugees represents an additional challenge but is also an opportunity and we have to seize this window of opportunity.
the key areas of action that we have identified are firstly support to third country nationals but also the communities that welcome them at the earliest possible moment in the migration process through pre departure and pre arrival measures. secondly
while on the one hand we will need to continue investing in the skills of our existing workforce and addressing unemployment the rapid ageing of the population in the european union will require us to attract skills from abroad to address shortages in specific sectors. i will give you two examples.
therefore the eu needs to establish a more efficient transparent and simpler scheme for attracting highly skilled workers. this will bring substantial benefits to the european union in terms of innovation transfer of technology
and done at national and particularly at regional and local levels it is also true that those levels across the european union are experiencing the same challenges.
on you to help us turn them into reality as soon as
goes beyond migration and mobility as such. it plays an important role in strengthening the eu's competitiveness and it can address demographic challenges and labour shortages.
it targets all third country nationals in the european union while including several actions that address the specific challenges faced by refugees.
we want to become more attractive than countries such as australia canada and the united states of america.
this is an essential element of living and participating in the european union and we should not shy away from addressing this question when we define what it means to live in and belong to europe. now while we fully recognise that integration policies are made
the scheme is also made more accessible if you have graduated recently or work in a shortage occupation. the eu blue card is also made accessible to highly skilled beneficiaries of international protection.
today's proposal aims at establishing an ambitious europe wide scheme.
let me also state another fact which i know is difficult to hear in the current context european societies are and will continue to become increasingly diverse.
so how can we change?
it is therefore high time to investment more on integration if we want to ensure that all third country nationals can fully contribute to our economies and societies.
education and training.
on the action plan on integration we are not starting from scratch on integration but we should learn from the past when looking at the future.
two thousand and twenty even if we upskill our labour force this takes time.
and increased investment flows.
on the other hand if we succeed in making integration a success story this will be highly beneficial both for the host countries and for the migrants themselves.
fourthly facilitating access to basic services such as adequate and affordable housing and
of course we need to actually do more to retain the highly qualified people that we have but this is never going to be a perfect match.
as the commission figures show there are major shortages. i would add engineers to his list and if we want to move further in terms of a just transition towards a low carbon economy engineers are people that we need.
but the group that we are talking about very much this afternoon are people who actually do have choices about where they go and some of the proposed changes to the blue card sound very positive.
but when this blue card was coming into place again at the beginning one of the things that we were told was that people who have choices were often put off coming to the european union because they actually perceived it as a place where they would experience racism where they would experience xenophobia and where they would not be made welcome.
would the commission like to comment on whether he feels that the european union has moved on to become a more welcoming environment or indeed whether the integration proposals that he has are going to work as part of a two way street?
we do need to look at the issues around social inclusion and at how the different funding mechanisms we have work together to actually make sure that no group is excluded.
i understand from your speech that we may have room for some agreement so i just wish to get some clarification from you.
would you agree with me that the only real benefit that comes to anyone from getting so many new people into the labour market so quickly goes to large employers who manage to drive down the cost of labour and stop people being able to earn the kind of money they once did and that is the real reason why there is such a drive to try and get more people into the labour market in europe?
mr president i would like to thank the commissioner for his statement and the proposals. they are very important proposals and indeed very brave coming at the time of the global migration crisis.
as we heard in the previous debate it is a global migration crisis.
if we do not manage migration and if we do not manage the integration of those whom we invite or of those refugees who are deserving of international protection we will pay the cost.
i think the commissioner has made that point.
but the commission the european parliament and of course the member states above all have to understand that integration is not an option.
we will pay the cost if we do not employ those integration measures that we can have at our disposal.
ultimately most integration measures are done at local level but we know from our discussions with the commission that there are key integration measures that we can advance with the commission in the labour market that are at our disposal.
we know that some countries like the united kingdom will opt out of those and i want to make that clear to those who are listening very carefully to that point.
on the question of the blue card many people throw around issues like the australian style points system.
well let us be very clear on the question of the blue card at the moment it is completely unsatisfactory.
the issue of managing migration which everyone wants to talk about across the political spectrum has to be worthy of the name.
if we are going to manage migration for the benefit of migrants in a proper respectful mutual partnership with those countries who are sending migrants then we have to have a proper well studied proposal like the seasonal workers proposal or the student proposal that my colleague ms wikstrm has finished.
legal migration must not be done on the cheap and on the quick. with the commission we must do it properly so that we have a proper mutual understanding with the sending countries no cherry picking a proper legal migration proposal that is worthy of its name.
i thank the commission for its proposal today.
with the presidential elections approaching there remain many areas that need to be improved. belarusian opposition activists and civil society must be guaranteed freedom of speech and freedom of political rights. in order for the elections to be considered free and fair the osce recommendation should be adopted and implemented.
then when the political climate is bad enough belarus steps up and frees some prisoners in order to get a reward from the european union.
just as a long winter is always followed by a spring one can hope that soon afterwards it might progress to summer.
the eu should of course be open to a new political direction for belarus and we must leave the door ajar diplomatically. we should not however lull ourselves into the false pretence that lukashenko is a democrat or interested in anything other than achieving his own political survival. as the report suggests the fighting in ukraine is now at its lowest level and we must thank the minsk agreement in part brokered by him as a way of beginning the process of ensuring lasting peace in ukraine.
i remember that ten years ago i called belarus the cuba of europe and i am afraid it still remains that today.
but ukraine needs more military and financial support in order to stabilise and ensure that the peace is permanent. furthermore whilst i welcome the release of political prisoners such gestures do little to alleviate the chronic civil and human rights abuses in belarus.
it is entirely possible that it is just a cold political calculation.
who encourage the european institutions to give positive feedback to the recent developments in belarus and who say that the eu should interact more with belarusian society at large through education technical cooperation exchanges and so on rather than just hoping that lukashenko will fall.
it is a fact that belarus continues to depend economically on russia's subsidies president lukashenko is willing to enhance military cooperation with russia possibly for the sake of avoiding any unpleasant hybrid surprises for belarus. but we should also listen to those pro european actors in belarusian society
yes there will be so called elections in belarus very soon but the country's electoral code has never been reformed contrary to our expectations.
yes today we welcome the release of six political prisoners but those freed have not been rehabilitated contrary to our demands.
over this period of time we have tested many things starting from sanctions travel restrictions and asset freezing and ending with re engagement or critical dialogue which seems to be the case at the moment.
four hundred short term observers are expected to be deployed.
civil and political rights such as freedom of association and assembly and freedom of expression and media remain restricted.
i am convinced that in addition to reacting proportionately to new events in the country and obviously remaining true to our values of democracy and human rights we should implement a longer term strategy focused on building links between the european union and belarus and on supporting the reforms the people of belarus
in this respect i looked with great interest at the european parliament delegation visit to minsk last june the first such visit since two thousand and two as far as i know and noted that the members of this parliament came back with a mixed and yet rather positive message tending in the same direction
for the first time since the end of two thousand and ten it is possible to imagine more constructive relations between the european union and belarus and i am convinced that it is worth seizing on this moment and embarking on a more positive agenda with one of the european union's immediate neighbours and a key country in the partnership. i am ready and willing to listen to the discussions today and to work with you along these
as a result several high level visits to belarus took place in the first six months of this year to build on these openings.
after the very difficult period of two thousand and eleven two thousand and thirteen eu belarus relations have been improving since the start of two thousand and fourteen and have intensified in two thousand and fifteen in the form of a number of positive developments pro active participation by belarus in the eastern partnership
i very much appreciate your long standing interest and our cooperation on this important neighbouring country.
in response to the release of political prisoners and in the context of the october presidential elections the conduct of which will be extremely important we need to send a clear signal to belarus.
the release of all political prisoners just two weeks ago represented a long sought step that was also welcomed by this parliament.
we wish to move towards a further improvement in our relations based on mutually encouraging steps.
it is important to ensure that all former political prisoners can exercise their full civil and political rights and of course that no new politically motivated imprisonments take place.
the recent resumption of the human rights dialogue and the country's constructive stance in the context of the crisis in ukraine.
in addition the country's economic and financial situation is extremely difficult. still in this context and taking a step back one can see that the european union's consistent policy of critical engagement over recent years has yielded some positive results and contributed to an improvement in eu belarus relations.
the call for keeping communication channels open resuming dialogue and working closely together.
in january in recognition of the opportunity to announce the european union policy of critical engagement vis a vis belarus the member states agreed a list of measures that could be implemented if the conditions were right.
belarus remains the only country in europe to still apply the death penalty.
at the same time we agree that there is a window of opportunity now that should not be missed.
obviously i believe any eu response has to be and will be accompanied by steps to increase cooperation.
these elections if free and fair may indeed bring the eu and belarus closer. but most importantly these elections will be a test for democracy in belarus a test for the authorities to show their genuine and unconditional commitment to the rights needs and demands of the people of belarus.
this opportunity must not be missed.
thank you for very much for this question.
my question is a what if' what if you find the democracy is complete full and fair elections everything is as you wish but then the democratically elected government still wishes to maintain as part of its mandate the death penalty?
let us think what we could do more and differently than we have done so
this means removing barriers and creating incentives to trade and investment by opening global markets fostering cooperation on economic governance regulatory convergence or a level playing field concretely supporting the internationalisation of eu businesses and improving the coherence and effectiveness of the external action of the eu in the economic field.
in a world where most of the future economic growth is expected to happen outside the eu we must make optimal use of all the levers at our disposal to promote eu prosperity in a global context.
to this end we need to develop a more cohesive and coherent approach that targets strong economic and political outcomes using our trade investment industry innovation foreign and development policies.
eu economic diplomacy also has a financial dimension and access to finance for business internationalisation should be boosted notably through eib actions.
the commission services the eeas and the european investment bank are already active in working towards removing barriers and creating incentives to trade and investment by opening global markets fostering cooperation on economic governance regulatory convergence or a level playing field with key economic partners.
and by deploying and financing initiatives to support the internationalisation of businesses and smes.
proper consultation coordination and unity must be ensured with parliament member states and industry as a united eu is stronger and has more leverage.
we are also reflecting on how to improve coordination with member states and eu industry to work the together on the same objectives and divide work in an optimal way including in respect of concrete support for the internationalisation of eu companies where we need to avoid duplication.
we need to pursue the same objectives and work together to defend eu economic interests abroad.
the fact that we are discussing this at a time when many in the eu are actually too inward focused allows us to look outward again and see not only threats from the outside world but frankly the many opportunities.
one of the strengths of the european union is of course our soft power.