kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
i very much hope that when the commission does its assessment of the current state of negotiations with japan it will be able to come forward and say that we should move on and start negotiating a free trade agreement.
it is a market that is very similar to ours a mature economy with a number of elderly people significant debt unfortunately again not unlike us.
i think there is a win win situation in improving trade between japan and the european union but we can only move ahead with a free trade agreement if japan is serious about tackling non tariff barriers and actually making it possible for european companies to operate in japan on the basis of a level playing field.
this principle is important in order to limit the distortion of competition in the rail market.
in general i do not believe that this regulation amended in this manner could contribute to the opening and improving of domestic passenger transport.
for market opening to work infrastructure managers should be strengthened and their independence guaranteed to ensure fair and non discriminatory access to the network.
the commission proposal introduces the principle of mandatory competitive award of public service rail contracts while preserving the ability of member states to define public service obligations.
it will benefit railways but also the rail manufacturing industry that is so important for europe.
competition is not an end in itself but it is an important means to achieve better efficiency and quality of service.
clear governance rules requirements on financial transparency and powerful regulators are essential conditions to make sure that gradual market opening delivers more efficient rail services with better quality and cost.
i am also fully aware that parliament has been under intense pressure from some incumbents who want to protect their historic markets in different ways. however we should not forget that there are also many other parties with an interest in railways freight operators customers manufacturers new market entrants and of course passengers who need them to become more efficient. and i strongly believe that more efficient railways also mean more traffic and therefore more jobs and opportunities for rail workers.
the fourth package takes a consistent approach in addressing these challenges we must open markets de jure and eliminate regulatory technical and administrative barriers de facto.
this is the best way to get the highest value for money out of the huge public sums spent on rail transport in europe today.
ukip my party has been voting against this so called harmonisation for fifteen years now because we know it is difficult in the uk.
therefore the bill for this drive for harmonisation will fall on the british taxpayer and that i believe and my party believes is grossly unfair unneeded unwanted and that is why we are committed to scrapping hs.
in two thousand and two the eu took the british government to court because we were failing to fulfil our obligations under the trans european rail system directive and now we have high speed rail two.
we have a victorian network the oldest in the world but quite why brussels needs to harmonise the trains of the uk which is an island with the rest of the continent is anyone's guess.
but now we have hs two because the european union tells us we have to do so.
mr president the title fourth railway package' really says it all for me and that is that the eu is just no good at overseeing the railways of europe.
the eu sponsored hs two will be costly pointless and unfair because it will punish the many to benefit the few and i guarantee that those few will be the rich few. if hs two were such a good idea then the business community would come up with the money but of course they will not because they know it is just another expensive eu vanity project.
if they do want a more competitive railway industry greener transport reduced prices for passengers reduced charges for freight and a modal shift from road to rail they need to vote against those amendments that will undermine exactly these things.
it can only do this through a single market in railway certification and rolling stock through increased competition in services and strong rules of governance between the infrastructure manager and railway companies.
it is most likely that in every case infrastructure managers are going to favour their in house operators and to shut the door on new entrants.
some rail companies that could be interested in competing across europe and could offer a wide range of attractive options to passengers are not willing to do so because of the lack of independent governance.
mr president the fourth railway package needs to deliver a more competitive railway industry that provides for passengers and the economy alike by reducing costs and gaining market share particularly from the roads.
i hope colleagues will think twice on what they want to achieve with this package before voting tomorrow.
without a single market in railways railway safety certification and rolling stock this will mean that costs are much higher than necessary.
our regional authorities have made provision for suitable liberalisation of domestic passenger transport services by rail;
that said there is a requirement to increase rail capacity further to cope with the current and projected levels of traffic and to practically strengthen economic and social links with the rest of the european union.
currently member states choose to directly award public service contracts or organise competitive tenders.
this is yet another eu one size fits all imposition inflicted on the uk stopping any government from even considering alternatives to the current failed uk privatised model of railways.
so this eu package imposes one a dramatic cost escalation due to fragmentation;
three passengers facing the highest rail fares in europe; four minimal investment because profits are given to shareholders instead of reinvesting.
directly operated railways on the east coast mainline prove that publicly owned and operated railways deliver increased performance with much lower subsidy than private operators.
uk governments must have the freedom to implement alternative models in line with the interests of passengers and of taxpayers.
in the eu but the eu mobile network market remains fragmented.
mr. president i am very pleased that now we are finally there in our seven year battle to introduce roam like at home' for our citizens and i would like to thank all meps who voted in favour today five hundred and forty seven in favour twenty seven against fifty abstaining.
otherwise the prices would be sky high as mr hannan would like us to have.
mr president after years of negotiations after the informal agreement reached between the european parliament and the council in the last days of february this year today we have all together demonstrated our strong commitment to visa free travel to ukrainian citizens.
today we have embraced openness and we should be proud of it.
very soon ukrainian citizens will be able to travel in the eu for ninety days without having a visa.
this criticism comes before the upcoming comprehensive annual review which is envisaged in the privacy shield framework which ensures that the european commission and data protection authorities can monitor the functioning of the system and keep it up to date and so the claims in the report are therefore premature.
there is a competitive market and there was no obvious need for state intervention.
by privileging one particular type of tariff in other words that of the person who travels a lot we end up effectively requiring a subsidy from kids on estates who don't travel in order to subsidise people like us who do a lot of travel.
my point is that the reduction in international roaming charges is happening anyway is happening globally and has nothing to do with this legislation.
we politicians are not as important as we think we are.
mr president in fact for many years the european parliament has been at the forefront of efforts to protect citizens from the abuse of their personal data so i was therefore very pleased to vote for this important resolution on improving the eu us privacy shield and i do not agree that it is a burden on business.
this is not just a matter of human rights it is also a matter of consumer confidence and there are very real concerns about the scope of the protection within this agreement.
it is better than the us safe harbour protections but there are concerns about the use of data through automatic decision making and there are concerns about the remedies that will be available to eu citizens if there is a problem. so it is absolutely right that parliament has taken a firm stand here.
i also think that the commission should have allowed parliament to scrutinise this in a better way because the use of the implementing act procedure in this particular instance has not worked out to our advantage.
but overall i am extremely pleased with this resolution and it enables us to take forward our work in this area.
invest its savings into a ucits should receive essential clear and understandable information before taking his or her decision.
the commission is very pleased with the outcome of the codecision process as regards the chapters contained in its july proposal.
on these issues was the right
it is very important that we work together at a global level to try and resolve the problems. let me just say that today is a great occasion we celebrate the tenth anniversary of the euro currency which itself serves as an illustration of the importance of economic cooperation.
i believe it not only protects consumers but is also good for investors. as some speakers have already said an open market is a positive thing and can be a very good thing for all of us if it is well regulated. ucits revision is yet another recognition that the financial markets of today are so integrated that we need common rules and standards for the effective regulation and operation of the global financial services industry.
they described it at the time as a backward step.
i would like to remind some of the irish members in this house sinn fin in particular that if they had had their way we would not be in the euro.
it is fortunate that my own country ireland is a member of the euro zone as the current currency has been a source of stability for ireland and other countries at a time of unprecedented turbulence and during the current global recession.
further to allow ucits with different investment objectives to be able to merge more easily provided that the investor was adequately protected and informed of such changes.
tape. this must only be in the interests of the investor.
also on behalf of my colleague stefan eck i ask for your support to add this resolution to close the debate.
the current animal welfare strategy ends on thirty one december and the commission shows no sign of coming forward with a new strategy.
this is unacceptable. there are many issues concerning animal welfare in the european union which should be addressed and we want the commission to come forward with a clear roadmap to do that.
there have been many bills much legislation passed in this house in recent years but they are not coherent there is no complete strategy and there is not even a cohesive legislative framework within the european union today. that means also that the animals are suffering; it means that we have different regulations in different countries and it also means that we do not have when it comes to agricultural products a joint and common market.
in two thousand and twelve in a white paper on pensions the commission committed itself to launching work in this area in cooperation with the council and parliament.
reflecting the difficult compromise achieved in the council the scope of the directive has been reduced to workers who move between member states. at the same time the council and the commission together with the parliament have called on member states to apply the same standards to workers who change jobs within the country.
thirdly the directive provides that workers should be duly informed of the impact of any mobility on their pension rights and after leaving the pension scheme of the value of their dormant rights.
first it provides that pension rights must at the latest be granted irrevocably or vested if the worker has been with the employer for three years.
this offers tangible improvements compared to the present situation. currently workers in some countries have to stay with their employer for five or ten years or even until retirement to avoid losing out on future pensions. secondly occupational pension schemes will be obliged to preserve the accrued pension rights of former workers after they leave the employer.
that work resulted in an agreement late in two thousand and thirteen between the co legislators.
the rights must be treated fairly compared to active workers for instance through indexation against inflation.
two thousand and five we should have revised the proposal in two thousand and seven taking on board guidance from the first reading of the european parliament.
despite a legislative impasse the commission continued to look for a way forward. in two thousand and ten the consultation on the green paper on pensions confirmed a clear demand to improve the rules on acquisition and preservation of mobile workers' supplementary pension rights.
the use of best practices in a free and competitive market has always ensured the supremacy of the city of london in the financial services sector.
competition and innovation have ensured that british businesses have always led the way.
as the workforce becomes more mobile it is to innovators not legislators that we look to find the answers to the new challenges.
in any case the idea of having their pensions legislated by the same people who brought us the eurozone crisis would chill the hearts of most british people.
my message to the european commission is this to parody an old saying go and legislate on your own doorstep.
supplementary schemes are becoming more and more important in many member states so it is pertinent that an agreement in this area has finally been reached and that barriers to mobility such as vesting and waiting periods have been addressed.
if someone has worked hard in one eu country and has taken the decision to put money aside into a supplementary pension scheme they should be assured that they will not lose out by deciding to work somewhere else in the union or to live somewhere else in the union.
they should also be provided with the necessary information to make an informed decision.
this directive provides for that.
that is why the proposal was also included in the single market act.
i think it has been confirmed that this is a balanced proposal which offers tangible improvements to european workers without putting an excessive burden on pension funds or employers.
as the commission outlined in its white paper on pensions promoting safe supplementary pensions is highly instrumental in sustaining adequate pensions against the background of ageing populations and increasing labour mobility in europe.
ria oomen ruijten is very well known in this house and indeed outside it as a champion of the rights of cross border workers.
i thoroughly agree with her when she talks about the need for those taking up the right to free movement not to be penalised and to be able to maintain occupational pension rights. but we have seen the difficulties caused by long vesting periods and the implications this also has for age limits on
what we have on the table here while it is certainly not what many of us might have wished for is nevertheless better.
it has taken us a long time to get to this point.
nevertheless i think what we have before us is welcome and about time too.
perhaps it will begin a really serious debate about life and death children that are allowed to survive and abortion.
but this is a very welcome report.
it is not just a problem in some countries it is a global issue. so i would like to complement the work that has been done on this across the political groups.
there are parts of this report that i cannot support but i will support the overall theme of the report which is to highlight this issue of two hundred million missing women and to look at how this can be prevented.
there probably should be a full debate but at least we are here and it is on the table.
i would like to underline that today is only four days before the international day of the girl child so i think that this discussion is very timely.
in addition almost all the human rights counter strategies prepared by the eu delegations prioritise the issue of children and women.
violence against women is a structural and widespread problem.
on implementing its own guidelines on combating violence and discrimination against women and girls and the eu plan of action on gender equality through its delegations and the embassies of the eu member states around the world.
the eu is fully committed to playing an active role in this work to define the post two thousand and fifteen framework and to work inclusively with all countries and partners.
in the framework of rio twenty in the post two thousand and fifteen development agenda gender equality and empowerment are an integral and important part of the millennium development goals.
the guidelines of the plan of action establish a basis for the systematic inclusion of gender equality for including gendercide in the eu political dialogue with partner countries and for the involvement of women's organisations.
specifically in relation to children's rights and eu guidelines the commission communication a special place for children in eu external action' and the european union's action plan on children's rights support the development of an integrated approach to advance children's rights at international level.
in june two thousand and twelve the foreign affairs council adopted the new strategic framework induction plan on human rights and democracy in which concrete actions are envisaged to support initiatives against gender based violence and feminicide and to promote and protect children's rights. the european union continues to work
i think that one of the things that we will need to work on very much and i really appreciate the latvian presidency's focus on that is to make this year a european year a year of the european people and not only an institutional year.
this will give us europeans in particular the chance to work on our own internal responsibilities as most likely the post two thousand and fifteen agenda will also ask us to meet some goals internally we tend to forget that we also have problems of inequality poverty lack of access to
saying that we have a commitment to those who live in the poorest parts of the world is a fundamental aspect of who we are and the values that we should share.
specifically we have an opportunity now to ensure that member states deliver on their commitments for. zero seven of gni spending on development.
millions of people have been lifted out of poverty millions of people now have access to water and sanitation and millions of children are now going to school.
we will have the first chance in new york in september when we will get together to replace the mdgs by the sustainable development goals my.
so we need to see that same kind of commitment now to the sdgs so that after the end of this year we have laid the foundations for a real legacy of the european year for development.
finally we want to work with ngos which are vital to our work in this european year of development.
increased drought for example leads to crop failure and food insecurity reduces opportunities and boosts inequality around the world. when dealing with the issue of development we should strongly promote environmental initiatives energy efficiency exchange of technologies and best practices investment in public education and in disaster risk reduction and more generally emphasise low carbon emission development.
two thousand and fifteen will be a year of important negotiations on how to tackle global poverty.
we need to ensure that everybody plays a part based on shared responsibility mutual accountability and respective capacities.
the opening event of the european year for development in riga last week was a step towards achieving this goal.
it is symbolic that at this time a global alliance for the european year for development will be established that will bring together hundreds of european ngos. to conclude i would like to note that successful development cooperation leaves a positive impact on the well being of our partner countries.
we have a unique opportunity to address the global challenges of poverty education and sustainable development.
in may expo milan will open its doors to thousands of visitors involving them and inviting them to reflect on the theme of feeding the planet energy for life'.
we want to show that eu development cooperation is good not only for eu partner countries but also for eu citizens.
we will have the third financing for development conference in july in addis ababa the un post two thousand and fifteen summit in september and the global climate agreement at cop twenty one in paris in december.
the twelve thematic months will put a strong focus on some of the most important topics related to development education gender food security demography immigration human rights and governance to name but a few.
the discussions and exchanges between the european parliament and the council have always been constructive.
i would like to underline how well the european parliament the council the member states and the commission have worked together in preparing the european year for development.
hence we need to communicate more and better on what we do. the european year for development will highlight the results that the eu acting together with its member states has achieved and will continue to strive for in the future.
the member states will organise a large number of events and activities at all levels throughout the year.
several member states will officially launch their own programmes in the coming days belgium austria ireland and france are some examples.
this is something we can be proud of but it is also something which is unknown to many of our own citizens however supportive they are of development cooperation.
we will work to foster direct involvement and critical thinking on the part of eu citizens and stakeholders in development cooperation.
in addition to the riga event last week in march the latvian presidency will hold a high level conference in riga on gender women's economic empowerment and sustainable development in the post two thousand and fifteen agenda.
the riga event focused on good governance as a key priority for the eu both at home and in the post two thousand and fifteen process.
the programme of activities prepared by the european parliament will make a significant contribution to that success.
this is despite the current economic difficulties. at the same time eu citizens also demand that we use public funds effectively and efficiently to achieve concrete results in terms of reducing poverty and building a more stable
the eu institutions and member states but also local authorities ngos social partners and the private sector will be closely involved.
in two thousand and fifteen the international community will have to agree on a new post two thousand and fifteen development agenda.
i have no doubt that we will all continue to demonstrate the shared sense of commitment and implementation throughout.
the european year for development will enrich the debate on the challenges we face in shaping future eu development policies.
more than eighty five of eu citizens say that the eu should continue development cooperation efforts and sixty seven think that the eu should actually be giving more aid.
this will be another unique opportunity for the eu to showcase the achievements of its development policy.