kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
and then again a remain amendment the spellman amendment to take the no deal from the table won by eight votes!
against the backstop.
because that is what's happening today.
because if there is a close relationship deeper as michel barnier has indicated then the backstop will still exist but it will not be necessary to use it. it will be a theoretical insurance that it is in fact not necessary to apply.
mr president that was all very interesting but not entirely relevant to the procedural point that was moved which was to shift the debate and presumably the vote of course on this report to a subsequent part session on the grounds that there hasn't been enough time to consider this report.
it is subject to amendments in the usual way as with previous rules reports as indeed with most of our reports there are amendments that come up and new compromises that emerge at the plenary stage.
i wonder whether he's taking a leaf out of the book of mrs may about kicking the can down the road further and further and further until there is no time left to deal with it maybe that is what is intended by the efdd group?
we urgently need to see a positive proposal from the uk on how to break this deadlock.
we are now less than two months away from the uk leaving the eu.
we have always said and we repeat today that we want to see as close a relationship as possible between the united kingdom and the european union.
it is right that mps made clear that this is not acceptable.
if the uk needs more time we are open to it but we need a clear plan or proposal on how it will help resolve the issue.
we are united strongly united calm and firm behind our negotiator who will continue to follow the clear mandate given both by the european council and the european parliament.
preventing a hard border in ireland and protecting the peace process is not a partisan position and the single market integrity is a non negotiable free principle for the european union.
this might have temporarily united a political party but it has not provided any positive solution to the brexit deadlock.
the house of commons has voted it rejects a no deal brexit which is good but at the same time it has asked to replace the northern ireland backstop with alternative arrangements which is clearly not a workable option.
the backstop is a guarantee an option of last resort.
we have therefore to explain again why this parliament and the european council in their mandate to the eu negotiator have made clear that an operational and legally binding backstop is an essential pillar of a withdrawal agreement and that we will not give consent to any deal without it.
we have seen with surprise the same prime minister who just a few days ago said that the best backstop was an essential part of the best deal possible now calling for its replacement.
this is welcome a no deal would be bad for everybody but a disaster for the uk.
if their parliament is unable to do this then it should be put back to the british people.
if you want to ensure that the backstop is never used build a positive majority for a more ambitious relationship a customs union and at least a closer alignment with the single market.
we have to create the right conditions and we have to keep repeating that we mean it seriously.
so we have a problem in europe and we will have to find the right way to address
some kind of otherness'. and i realised that yes this was more than seventy years ago but it brought me back to the immediate present.
here. a lot of money has been invested and the results are very limited.
for that we also need to work on trust building through a true recognition and reconciliation process.
that we have access to electricity;
but in order to achieve this we need to continue the eu framework after two thousand and twenty and we need to do it in an approved format.
we have to mix the communities and we have to create trust.
that we do not have to live in fear.
i really appreciate your initiative to have the conference in bucharest.
this is crucial.
i would like to finish by thanking our commission colleagues the fundamental rights agency and also all the ngos for joining our fight for the realisation of the values compiled in our treaties throughout these years and thank you to the council.
we need to have a strategic eu framework with a wider set of priority areas clear targets timelines and indicators for monitoring.
that we roma have easy access to clean and safe drinking water;
that we will not be forced to move to another eu country and live on begging;
however the protection of members of the lgbti community must start here.
in front of blatant human rights violations the eu cannot merely wag a finger at the perpetrators.
in chechnya the lgbt community is persecuted and tortured in complete violation of human rights conventions and with the silence of the russian government.
these cases reveal that homophobia is seeping into public space and some people in power are actively enabling it.
still in brazil the sickening murder of marielle franco an lgb activist shocked the international community shining a light on the acts of violence against those who dare speak out against the bolsonaro fascist government.
as a british mep i want to voice my concerns for the members of the lgbti community post brexit as it's apparent that the standards of the charter of fundamental rights will be abandoned.
we must condemn homophobic governments and provide a platform for victims to raise their voices.
mr president i am deeply concerned by the harrowing threats faced by lgbt people around the world.
mr president according to international law one can argue that the republic of china often referred to as taiwan has never been part of the so called people's republic of china often referred to as china or mainland china.
the eu together with the united states should protect taiwan and its democracy.
i believe that the compromise reached between the colegislators fully meets this objective.
eu domain is available to five hundred million people and to businesses across the twenty eight countries of the european union as well as in iceland liechtenstein and norway.
eu domain regardless of where they live be it inside or outside the eu.
eu domain names including an assessment of how the registry may operate as the european union intellectual property office in the future.
eu toplevel domain respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in the charter of fundamental rights in particular the protection of personal data the freedom of expression and information and the protection of consumers.
this concludes what has been a very fasttrack process since the adoption of the commission proposal for a. eu regulation in april. two thousand and eighteen the political agreement of the colegislators strengthens the regulation on a number of important points.
it provides for additional safeguards against the abusive registration of.
in particular it clarifies that the legal framework for the.
it applies swiftly six months after the entry into force of the new regulation a new eligibility criterion which will allow all eu citizens to register a.
the commission fully supports the agreement.
today the.
our common goal is to establish a futureproof framework which allows the. eu to continue to grow and provide bestinclass services to eu citizens and businesses.
china must respect the choice of taiwan's twenty three million inhabitants to live in freedom and in a democratic system.
china must face the reality of the existence of the republic of taiwan.
the adoption of two new laws establishing an administrative court system we have very concrete questions about that.
mr president let me react to some of the things that were said. first of all those who are saying there's nothing to see here nothing's happening it's all a political game' let me just refer to what i said in my introduction.
the merger of more than four hundred media outlets without the competent authorities even being allowed to check whether this is in line with legislation.
the relocation outside of hungary of the us accredited programmes of the central european university somebody here said nothing's changed'.
this is not about a fight against countries who do not want migrants.
that's what we're looking at.
always democracy is then invoked as justification for not complying with eu legislation. that's not the nature of democracy.
article two and article nineteen of the treaty stipulate very clearly the separation of powers the independence of the media etc.
hungary chose fortunately and it was a wonderful choice hungary chose it is a sovereign choice to become a member of the european union.
if you choose to become a member of a treaty based organisation like the european union you by that choice say you will follow the rules of that treaty.
this is about holding countries accountable for something they chose to do without any pressure from anybody else a sovereign choice of countries to join the european union and that is the beauty of this organisation that this is a sovereign choice. by doing that hungary also had a lot of benefits a lot of benefits.
it also comes with obligations and the obligations are stipulated in the treaty and i think it is the duty of eu institutions the european parliament the council and the european commission to hold each other accountable as far as the application of eu law is concerned.
many other member states showed over the years huge solidarity with hungary so that it could catch up with the rest of the european union and prosper as every hungarian citizen deserves.
that's not the nature of how this european union works.
it was a choice and it was ratified by parliament and confirmed in a referendum by the hungarian people.
the european commission has been given the task of looking into whether member states follow the rules of the treaty and the rules of the treaty are very very clear on many issues and especially the rule of law is very clear.
this is not about attacking the democracy of a member state or the cultural diversity within the european union.
we will have questions about that.
well something has changed very drastically and we have questions about that.
the adoption of the new law on overtime a lot has been discussed about that.
but we must hold our nerve through this westminster chaos.
we are now the majority and as young people reaching voting age want to join us in improving our continent in mutual friendship so our numbers grow.
madam president westminster is in meltdown. the internal contradictions of brexit were laid bare last night. brexit was never anything more than a bunch of slogans. it could never be turned into a coherent negotiating position.
this choice must be given back to the people.
as we play out the end game and the brexit fraud is revealed its supporters dream up fantasy deals so that failure can be blamed on brussels.
the hostility of the supporters of brexit as we see here to such a democratic check proves that they are running scared because they know as i do that the will of the british people has changed and has turned against them and their brexit chaos.
a majority of uk citizens know that the best future for our country is inside the european union. here we can continue to be part of the world's most successful peace project and together we can tackle the huge crossborder issues we face most notably climate change.
now that mps have rejected no deal the clear choice is still between the deal negotiated between the uk and the eu and remaining in the eu.
that doesn't mean that we are any less engaged with taiwan a more than open and tolerant democracy and an important economic partner of the eu.
within the boundaries of the treaty we will make markets work for our climate and for our environment.
as this parliament says openness and fair competition benefit our entire industry. we need european champions but we need the right
only better taxation rules will close loopholes that are available to everyone.
your report makes the important point that markets should also deliver for our environment.
the report shows why competition is at the heart of politics and will be part of the debate in the upcoming european elections.
in the conference as in the more than one hundred written contributions the commission has received some issues kept coming up access to data;
we want to be confident that companies are giving us a fair deal and if we are in business we want our factories to grow not to be squeezed out by a dominant player or by a rival getting unfair subsidies. by keeping markets open we give everybody a fair shot at success.
and the possibility for platform businesses that are also users of their own platform to deny rivals a chance to compete.
for every company that wants to see a merger there are many european industries that buy their inputs such as steel or cement.
the commission is also reflecting on our digital future. this month in brussels commissioner vestager hosted a conference with leading experts on technology and competition. they discussed our digital world and what it means for competition.
threats to competition when big businesses buy innovative start ups and dodge the disruption they once caused to others;
this month the commission opened proceedings on nike's tax arrangements in the netherlands. in parallel the eu and its member states need to continue their efforts to reform their corporate taxation framework to make it both fairer and more efficient.
the commission will reflect deeply on all these issues because if competition fails if prices go up and quality falls we lose that fundamental promise of our digital world that tomorrow's technology will be better than today's.
for us the state aid rules are clear.
we agree and the commission's decision to approve the bayermonsanto merger was taken only after the companies committed to sell bayer's seed and pesticide business to a new rival so that farmers keep a choice of supplier and competition drives the businesses to deliver novel products that are safer for the environment.
most of which are european.
in those cases where there is serious doubt we have to have the possibility of examination where there is serious doubt and it warrants investigation.
you only need just over three of the membership. if you have that you have access to significant resources you can effectively help yourself to taxpayers' money.
but mostly there seems to be a high level of support for most of the proposals in my report.
that case went to the court.
on this question of political groups there is already a requirement in our rules there always has been that political groups have to have affinity as they do in most national parliaments.
we have already on one occasion dissolved a political group because it did not have political affinity.
the court ruled that parliament was right to dissolve such a group.
if you're not really a political group if you are a fake group set up just for that purpose then it's right that we defend the taxpayer against abuse.
so it's not unreasonable to check that this existing provision is actually applied properly and that we have a procedure for dealing with it.
the best thing that can now happen is if we have no deal on twenty nine march and that we leave under the withdrawal act and on wto terms. article fifty will have expired and the treaties will cease to apply.
the house of commons rejected the socalled deal and sent mrs may back to renegotiate with a commission that has already told us that it won't renegotiate.
or will the british political establishment manage to overthrow the result of the referendum altogether?
the commons may have rejected the amendment to extend article fifty but it knows very well that the withdrawal act itself allows that date to be put back and the council of the european union can extend article fifty if it so agrees.
if the british parliament prevents this happening then they will have put themselves in open rebellion against the british people and that will have profound consequences for any belief in democracy that is left in the united kingdom.
even when the prime minister actually gets a majority behind her and alright i accept she made a dreadful mistake by signing up to the backstop. you summoned her.
four fifteen in the morning she left downing street she went to meet the ultimatum that you've set her she signed up to something that has proved to be a disaster.
we now realise that mistake and actually the house of commons the country is overall looking for a deal but do you know something?
you guys are now household names and what we've seen is an appreciation in britain that unelected bureaucrats in brussels have been talking down to and humiliating the prime minister of our nation and we don't like it and even when she comes back
i think public opinion will be very very angry that there is no give today from anybody in brussels whatsoever.
why don't we prepare to go to the world trade organisation use article twenty four so that we can after we leave on march twenty nine have a two year period of no tariffs no quotas no restrictions of any kind no problems or difficulties with ireland whatsoever?
of course theresa may has made compromise after compromise way too many compromises in my view so i think we are beginning to think that the public will come to a view that no deal is better than the backstop and that's a big problem. it's a big problem for all of you who want to get re elected in a few weeks' time
no deal means the hundred million bottles of prosecco we buy every year from italy will become more expensive as will three quarters of a million german cars.
because no deal means no gbp thirty nine billion and your voters will be coughing up the money.
so why don't we all prepare sensibly for a no deal scenario?
i think many will say we're simply dealing with fanatics who are not prepared to be reasonable or make any sense of compromise'.
brexit will have been delivered you will have protected for at least two years your voters.
trying to be reasonable saying let's renegotiate you're not prepared to give an inch. the reason that a no deal brexit has got a little bit closer is because of the sheer language and attitude not just from the commission but from many in parliament towards the united kingdom.
but not because of what happened last night in westminster but because of the response gentlemen we got from you this afternoon.
before the referendum no one knew who the european commission were. that maoist barroso was a complete unknown.
she signed up to something that no country unless it had been defeated in war would have signed up to.
this issue has been on the agenda of the general affairs council in october november and december.
the romanian presidency and indeed all of us agree that the protection of the rule of law democracy and fundamental rights is essential in our union.
in december ministers had a first exchange of views on the next steps of the procedure.
at this stage i cannot prejudge or draw conclusions as regards the final outcome of this procedure.
indeed we take seriously into account the concerns expressed by the honourable members of this house.
let me conclude by saying that the issues raised in this debate go to the heart of our commitment to this union.
two thousand and eighteen at the twelve november general affairs council we received hungary's written response to parliament's reasoned proposal as well as a factual contribution from the commission on pending infringement procedures against hungary.
on eighteen september two thousand and eighteen the council received the european parliament's reasoned proposal under article seven calling on the council to determine that there is a serious risk of a breach by hungary of the values on which the union is founded.
both institutions and member states must therefore respect protect and promote them.
european voters have the right to know what their political leaders are going to do.
homelessness was made a punishable crime;
now that is not a surprise but now that this is official this demands that the romanian presidency come forward with its timetable.
they are flooding their colleagues in the council with paperwork and they suggest cooperating but what they're doing is stalling for time.
four hundred and fifty pro government media outlets were merged into a single conglomerate;
internal memos of the hungarian government became public yesterday and they show what we all know they are stalling for time.
hungarian citizens have the right to protection and the right to know what you're planning to do.
the central european university has to move to vienna because the agreement with the state of new york is not going to be signed;
so i ask you to take that responsibility to invite me to the council and start a real process. to my colleagues in the european people's party some of you are there i appreciate that a lot of you are not there i continue to appreciate that you voted for my report
a new administrative court is being set up overseen by the justice minister;
it was discussed in the negotiations.
it is not an operational solution. many in the house of commons both amongst those who voted for and those who voted against the amendment are aware of this.
we have no incentive nor desire to use the safety net but at the same time no safety net can ever truly be safe if it can just be removed at any time.
i will continue to be in close contact with prime minister may for whom i have the greatest respect and i will listen to her ideas but i will also be extremely clear about the position of the european union that i have presented today.
do you know that in hungary at the age of three you have to go to kindergarten?
i think it will be a rather swift and smooth one just like the one and only trilogue which lasted one hour and seventeen minutes.
the commission would like to point out that they solely concern the publication of meetings and so fall short of applying the conditionality principle not on the register no meeting.
the commission would welcome such a move in the context of our negotiations on the interinstitutional agreement. by contrast we are concerned about another amendment which would weaken the existing provision in the rules of procedure.
we remain concerned that some of the amendments on parliamentary questions could reduce the efficiency and quality of this important means of democratic accountability in particular with regard to the removal of the limit on the number of questions and the introduction of very tight target deadlines for replies.
with regard to the transparencyrelated amendments the commission looks at this issue from the angle of the negotiations on the draft interinstitutional agreement on a mandatory transparency register.
but i will flag just a few points. we welcome several amendments such as those on the transparency of intergroups the abolition of minor interpellations the improvements to public hearings and the unfinished business' rule as concerns citizens' initiatives and the threshold for the verification procedure for citizens' requests under the statute of european political parties.
other amendments seek to increase the information published about meetings with lobbyists.
i condemn all those who exploit and profit from the systematic discrimination of the roma.
today roma face discrimination in education health and social welfare systems so they need more than integration strategies.
thank you for putting this on the agenda.
within the framework of the european election cooperation network we are discussing what works such as good ways to reach out to citizens to build their awareness and to retain their trust.
we consider new ways to involve citizens in securing the democratic process itself as latvia recently demonstrated by inviting citizens to give examples of political ads which were thought to break national rules directly to the regulators.
politically motivated murders physical or other acts of hatred are shocking and directly contrary to our very core european values.