kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
i would like to thank parliament for its constructive support of this initiative and look forward to the adoption of the interim report.
the whole structure is not clear. how would it work in reality with national delegates? investigations should continue to be carried out by national prosecutors to avoid any overlap that could undermine justice.
the mandate of the european public prosecutor should be limited to fraud against the financial interests of the european union and that is good.
the confusion of competences between national authorities and the european prosecutor undermines legal certainty.
however the commission proposal raises serious concerns regarding the division of responsibility between the member states and the european union and its added value is questionable.
although the prosecutors office will have no direct authority in the uk it will have de facto power by means of the use of these legal instruments.
as i said here last month those thirty five measures are the most important and the most dangerous to our traditional freedoms and liberties.
the tory led coalition government knows it cannot defend accepting the public prosecutor's office in the uk so it seeks to achieve the same thing by the back door. there is still time for the government to reverse its decision and opt out of the thirty five measures. but to fully protect ourselves we have to leave the european union.
as far as the united kingdom is concerned the government's decision to opt out of the public prosecutor's office is both worthless and dishonest. the prosecutors office will have at their disposal the use of all the existing legal instruments such as the european arrest warrant and the new ones such as the european investigation order.
however the government has already announced that it intends to permanently opt in to the thirty five eu police and criminal justice measures.
this is a clear signal of both the importance and the urgency of developing the best tools to protect the eu budget from the hands of criminals.
i want to thank all those who contributed constructively to this excellent interim report and i will listen to parliament with the utmost attention and will of course consider its recommendations very seriously in the context of the negotiations in the council.
the european public prosecutor's office aims to strengthen and help the member states in their fight against crime targeting criminals who violate the union's financial interests.
the proposal put on the table by the commission last july following a request from parliament is also part of a new framework which we have been putting in place. it includes the anti fraud directive and the whole set of procedural rights at european level
as well as a reformed eurojust.
we have proposed an integrated and decentralised model.
firstly in order to avoid the creation of a new heavy costly complex parallel structure and to rely on the national authorities' expertise in their respective legal systems and secondly to guarantee the independence and efficiency of the european public prosecutor's office which are
all activities of the european public prosecutor's office must be guided by the principles enshrined in the charter of fundamental rights including the protection of a fair trial and the equality of arms principle as well as the right not to be tried or punished twice for the same crime
i concur with the report's finding on procedural rights.
the respect of eu minimum standards in the fields of the rights of the individual in criminal proceedings in all member states is a key element for the proper functioning of the european public prosecutor's office.
the proposed regulation therefore aims to afford the highest standard of protection to suspects against whom criminal proceedings are instituted by the european public prosecutor's office. this is essential in order to counterbalance the powers of investigation and prosecution
we have therefore included as a key element of the proposal a robust system of protection for suspects' rights which relies on the union's acquis in this area as well as on national law.
the proposed regulation confers new rights directly to suspects which can be exercised in accordance with national law such as the right to collect and present evidence.
turning now to the judicial review judicial review by national courts and the possibility of preliminary rulings by the court of justice as foreseen in the proposal will ensure a comprehensive level of judicial scrutiny and uniform application of the regulation throughout the union.
nonetheless the commission is open to considering additional options to strengthen judicial review during the negotiations in the council including the possibility of a stronger role for the court of justice of the european union.
the greek presidency had skilfully put three questions to the ministers covering structure division of labour and procedural safeguards.
the discussions showed strong support for the objective and led to clear guidance for the follow up work at technical level.
i remain convinced that the more member states participate in this european initiative the better european taxpayers' money will be protected in all our member states.
the recent debate in the council indicated to me that there might be a chance to have many member states on board for the project.
i think that is good news.
the commission is therefore keeping an open mind in the ongoing negotiation process to seek a reasonable compromise.
the findings and the recommendations of your interim report will be conducive to advancing the discussions in this regard.
there are some preconditions.
for example if you want to say a that you want to have more cross border cooperation which is necessary then you also have to say b that we need to have common standards in the european union.
together here in the house with all the parties together we have achieved the right to information and the letter of rights and the right to interpretation and access to a lawyer all brought through the house here and through the council. i think therefore it is really disappointing that with regard to the next step the data protection directive there is a huge part of this house which does not want to go ahead with these standards.
this efficiency consists of finding the optimal balance between innovation fair competition secure payments and consumer protection.
the commission also welcomes the fact that the committee on economic and monetary affairs supports the extension of the scope of the directive in different areas for example by extending the scope to so called one leg transactions meaning that only one part of the transaction has to take place in the european union in order for the directive to apply. this will in particular benefit all those citizens who use money remittance services to send money to their home country outside the eu.
to conclude the commission welcomes the progress made on these important files.
will integrate in the same legal framework traditional market players and certain new providers of online payment services.
we hope that clear rules on interchange fees will also encourage new market entrants in the eu card market which remains dominated by very few actors.
the commission would therefore be open to revising its opinion.
this is an important contribution to the digital agenda and europe.
this would not be effective.
as the lower of the two amounts will apply the interchange fee for transactions of more than eur thirty five will be no higher than seven eurocents.
it would also ensure a safer level playing field between the different market players.
with regard to interchange fees for card based payments i am happy to note that the econ report broadly supports the proposed regulation.
the inclusion of tpps in the scope of the existing directive will ensure that all payment providers are subject to adequate regulation and supervision and ensure competition on equal terms between different actors providing payment solutions. the commission has noted with interest your proposal to provide a mandate to the european banking authority for the development of a single interface for the communication between tpps and other payment service providers.
whilst some operators have criticised it the proposal was particularly welcomed by consumers and retailers.
the commission has been working on this proposal for a long time.
in any event this is a matter that we will continue to look at during the legislative process.
the latter the so called third party payment service providers offer consumers the possibility to pay for their online purchase by means of simple electronic credit transfers. this is a good example of innovative payment solutions which are good for consumers and companies.
in addition the proposal provides the necessary legal certainty which some market operators have been asking for.
we are trying to create a true internal market where there is no difference between a national and a cross border transaction.
this approach would address the security concerns that have been raised by certain banks.
merchants and consumers will benefit from this approach which will contribute to encouraging the development of large scale electronic payments.
two thousand and twenty the majority of the amendments proposed by econ will clarify and strengthen the impact of the initial proposal.
i also share the view of econ that it may be useful to review the details of this extension after a certain period of time.
we hope that similar progress will be made in the council in the near future so that both legislators can work towards a speedy adoption of this package to the benefit of consumers merchants and the economy at large.
the econ report also proposes extending caps from consumer cards to commercial cards and to some cards issued by three party schemes.
efficient and secure payments are important for social inclusion but also for the promotion of growth and jobs. let me now briefly turn to the two texts first of all the revised directive on payment services this.
finally we believe that this proposal will encourage innovation around electronic card payments.
we need a modern and efficient european legal framework to respond properly to the rapid evolution in electronic payments to promote competition and implement sustainable rules. most of the amendments tabled for the vote tomorrow provide a major contribution to the achievement of these objectives so thank you very much for that.
and i will be particularly interested to find out whether the german authorities have effectively linked the provision of aid to a single bidder and if so to find out why they regarded that bidder's business plan as preferable from an industrial and commercial point of view.
and those principles will be my guidance in my assessment in the opel case.
this decision by the owners of opel has been supported by the german government.
concerning location of investments or the geographic distribution of restructuring efforts.
the european car industry as we are all aware suffers from considerable overcapacity.
moreover if the restructuring of a european company was determined by non commercial conditions attached to public financing there would be a risk that a company would not be able to restore its long term viability
access to finance in the current financial and economic crisis.
all the plans to save opel vauxhall presented by different potential investors have foreseen both plant closures and job cuts.
we will however be scrutinising the process very carefully to ensure that it is based on commercial considerations designed to sustain viable jobs and not protectionist motives.
mr president i intend to verify carefully whether this scheme can be used in this case and you will certainly understand that i cannot take a position at this stage since the deal is not yet finalised and by the way a number of aspects are still being negotiated.
however a social restructuring is the only way to ensure viable and stable jobs for the future and the commission cannot and should not try to dictate where such cuts will fall nor can it try to prevent them.
and that risk to viability is all the greater due to the current weakened state of the entire european car industry.
concerning the public financing of the gm magna transaction we have been informed that the german government intends to avail itself of a pre existing approved scheme under the commission's temporary framework for state aid measures to support
such conditions would create and i am quite clear on this unacceptable distortions in the internal markets and could trigger a subsidy race which would significantly damage the european economy at the present very delicate moment.
as you know last thursday the opel trust in which general motors and the german authorities have equal representation announced that it has approved the sale by gm of a majority stake in its european opel vauxhall operations to the consortium of magna international and sberbank.
mr president the commission has kept in touch with all the member states concerned throughout the process which led to this transaction and the commission is also aware of the controversies regarding the respective merits of the restructuring plans presented by different bidders
so a failed restructuring would result in great damage for the company and for its workers in negative spillovers for the whole sector and in a waste of taxpayer's money.
however at this moment it is quite important that i should outline to you the most relevant considerations. in particular i have to underline that state aid granted under the temporary framework cannot be subject de jure or de facto to additional conditions
in the short term it is a sad fact that because of the current state of overcapacity in the car industry any plan to restore the profitability of opel vauxhall will require job losses across the company as a whole and planned closures;
i will verify whether non commercial protectionist conditions are attached to public funding de jure or de facto and the commission will examine not only the legal conditions that may be attached to a final aid package but also the entire context in which the aid is
i assure you that i am looking forward to coming up with a proposal where we can say that we did our job we did it in a proper way and we can assure you that it is viable and that there are stable jobs for the future.
we need to be very careful about replacing an unhealthy but highly competitive industry with a cartel based on market sharing and price fixing as what we try to rescue will end up in a worse situation.
we will go as fast as the provision of information allows us.
they were quite clear and that statement is still in the treaty of rome.
to the commission under the eu merger regulation we will assess it carefully.
the temptation to use state aid in different situations is there and we are all aware of that.
we see examples of innovation in our newspapers each day but the industry as a whole fought against the introduction of catalytic converters wildly exaggerating their cost.
judged against the potential for environmental improvement its record has been shameful.
what we need is for the industry now to take a new attitude and the industry's representatives acea in particular.
currently it is trying to wriggle out of legal requirements that it uses air conditioning coolants with a much lower global warming potential than those used at present and already it is lobbying to try and weaken the commission's proposals on co two emissions from vans and light commercial vehicles.
huge sums of money have been put into propping up this industry.
but i am deeply depressed by the attitude of the car industry as a whole over the ten years that i have seen it work while i have been in this parliament.
we hear from the component manufacturers that the car assemblers are too low in their ambitions.
we need the industry to recognise that it has obligations to society as a whole and that its future is inextricably linked to environmental improvement.
it made an agreement with us to reduce its co two emissions and then reneged on it.
of course there are positive stories to be told.
the site has undergone radical restructuring and is considered a lean efficient and competitive operation as indeed is the luton site in the south east of england.
it must be based on fairness not favouritism not because one member state has pledged more finance than any others.
in july i wrote to commissioner verheugen and i was encouraged by receiving his commitment to ensure a level playing field in any restructuring plan for the european arm of gm.
i urge the commission to be vigilant and to ensure that any financial support is based on state aid rules and the ability of the european operations to be commercially viable and economically fit for the future. maintaining a strong european car industry means taking a pan european approach to maintaining vital and efficient infrastructure in all member states and all regions.
madam president i believe we all share the same objective to ensure the long term viability and competitiveness of the eu car industry and to maintain jobs in the sector.
and i am pleased that commissioner kroes recognises that there is no place for political fixes political strings or conditions in awarding state aid.
nobody wants job losses but any decision must be based on the viability and efficiency of plants.
for the bad decisions of a narrow rich corporate elite?
the second question is we were talking about discrimination in providing public funds geographically or between nations and states how about sectors?
yes it is unacceptable that so many of our young people are unemployed
not resolved i think the g seven has no other option other than to maintain that position;
only if you are so enclosed in your ideological view which is anti eu could you prefer the model that president putin has put in place for his country to the model which five hundred million europeans have
g. seven what i find surprising is that some members in this house representing parties who are always on about national sovereignty about non violation of borders
if there is such a flagrant violation of international law if you simply take away part of another country's territory there has to be a reaction. i think the g seven has taken the right reaction and as long as the reason for taking this reaction is
i think this is a message that came across quite strongly.
to the most successful peace project in european history which is the european union?
and i do believe that the onus here is very much on the russian federation and not on the
i also fully share the views expressed that if we want to really do something about the position of people in the workplace and about honest relationships in the economic chain we need to have a holistic approach to the issue and look not just at the situation outside of the european union but also at the situation
today; yes this is sometimes driving them to radicalisation;
and yes they have sometimes lost trust in the future.
the g seven is expected to discuss and take an ambitious position in support of the negotiations on the post two thousand and fifteen development agenda in new york and in view of the climate change conference of the parties in paris at the end of the year.
the g seven presidency has also sought to use the opportunity of this summit to shed international light on other important issues such as the protection of the marine environment marine governance and resource efficiency.
both president tusk and president juncker intend to engage in discussions with their international partners and to use the opportunity inter alia to share the latest information on major european projects and initiatives such as the investment plan for europe.
they will also highlight current efforts to build a european energy union and illustrate the key elements of the recent european policy on migration.
they will take stock of the situation of the global economy they will assess progress on the global trade agenda and on their respective bilateral negotiations and they will exchange views and seek common ground on the most pressing foreign policy challenges.
the eu will bring into this discussion its high expectations for both outcomes consistent with the positions expressed by this parliament.
against the backdrop of the rana plaza tragedy in two thousand and thirteen g seven leaders will recall the importance of respecting labour and other fundamental health and safety standards throughout the entire supply chain.
when you look at the real human suffering in greece when you look at youth unemployment when you see soup kitchens and rocketing suicide rates then russia could seem like a realistic option.
it is the old world versus the new and the old is losing.
world leadership is shifting to the bric nations and we have a choice. either we engage constructively with these powers or watch as more countries flock to bric.
they have built infrastructure projects in some of the world's poorest countries.
indeed russia and its partners china india and brazil have set up the bric network which is providing an important alternative pillar of political leadership in our world in comparison to the g.
they have pioneered high yield crops in africa;
and if the best that we can come up with is threats against greece then maybe the g seven needs a rethink.
madam president one of the main topics that will be discussed at the g seven is greece but even a high school economics student could tell you what is wrong in greece. greece is a member of a currency that does not work for a country with its economic profile and none of the debates promises or strategies the g seven will discuss will change this fact. the us delegation to the g seven has expressed concern that greece could turn to russia but can you blame a country that has been economically martyred on the altar of the euro for looking for alternatives?
meanwhile the g seven pontificates on the world's problems and it is mostly talk and not walk.
but it is also myanmar today and tomorrow it might be something completely different.
so i think this is a serious issue.
we also expect the g seven to strongly support the un negotiations to achieve an ambitious post two thousand and fifteen agenda for sustainable development to take action to promote women's economic participation and entrepreneurship and to step up its efforts in support of food security and nutrition.
the g seven supports african countries in their reform efforts and in their efforts to strengthen peace and security growth and sustainable development.
last but not least it is inevitable to note that for the second consecutive year this group meets without russia.
in schloss elmau the eu will advocate for the g seven to reaffirm the need for urgent and concrete action to address climate change to confirm its commitment to fighting protectionism to continue its engagement to strengthen health systems to fight antimicrobial resistance and neglected tropical diseases
the preparation of the summit is now entering the final phase. the eu hopes for high level deliberations and an ambitious communiqu where its strong positions can become g seven positions.
following the illegal annexation of crimea g seven leaders decided to suspend their participation in the g eight until russia changed course and the environment came back to a situation where the g eight would be able to have a meaningful discussion.
the g seven countries will therefore engage in dialogue with their guests on their common challenges including on food security and the empowerment of women.
we also hope that the summit will contribute to raising public awareness about the global challenge posed by marine litter in particular plastic litter about the opportunities and constraints of deep sea mining and about the importance of protecting and using efficiently natural resources.
and to learn lessons from the ebola crisis on how to respond to public health emergencies.