kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
research in these areas aims to create innovative solutions which will enhance the quality of life in europe as well as the sustainability of our economic model and of the entire planet.
this programme will help shape europe's future.
in the context of a knowledge based society researchers will be able to work together and exchange and develop ideas that will offer solutions which can act as a catalyst for economic growth. there will in particular be a significant increase in support for the extremely successful european research council and marie
the new programme includes a second pillar industrial leadership' to help companies and support business research and innovation including key enabling technologies such as ict nanotechnology and biotechnology and support for innovation in smes.
the european institute of innovation and technology will also continue to strengthen the innovation capacity of the european union and its member states by integrating the elements of the knowledge triangle' of higher education research and innovation.
we particularly appreciate the efforts of this parliament to spread excellence and help unlock the potential for innovation as well as to ensure that science becomes an integral part of our society.
of course my heartfelt thanks go to the commissioners as well.
the economic crisis has affected europe's competitiveness.
this new instrument will help fill existing funding gaps and encourage innovation.
this will encourage high level research and mobility for the benefit of european citizens.
we are undermining industrial competitiveness abandoning industrial leadership driving businesses out of the eu entirely so that they take their jobs and their investment with them and choosing poverty for our children and our grandchildren.
it is also disastrous because we are forcing up energy prices to create what commissioner tajani has called an industrial massacre.
our over reliance on ineffective and intermittent renewables is now threatening our security of supply.
it is doomed because while we agonise over emissions there are twelve zero new coal fired plants in the global pipeline including a couple of dozen in germany.
just wait until the lights go out.
madam president horizon two thousand and twenty talks in bold optimistic language about excellent science industrial leadership and societal challenges like climate change although in fact we have not seen very much climate change for the last twenty years. yet the action we are taking on climate is both doomed and disastrous.
we are forcing households and pensioners into fuel poverty this winter european citizens will die as a result of our climate policies.
it is time to face the truth that global emissions will keep rising for decades and there is nothing that we can do about it.
mr president in our member states we need ideas ideas that will become innovations innovations that will become products and products that will ultimately drive our competitiveness.
results in this area can really make a difference to people's lives.
i hope that we can achieve this with horizon.
it is also pleasing to see specific mention of cultural heritage and the inclusion of research into sport and health.
i have long argued that research funding should form a larger part of an overall reduced eu budget providing support for our universities and innovative enterprises so that they can work together to make the most of each other's resources.
ahava dead sea laboratories has a factory located in an illegal settlement in the occupied west bank. ariel university is also based in an illegal settlement.
what do all of these institutions have in common apart from being active participants in the act of oppression and occupation against the palestinians?
they all received tens of millions of euros of european taxpayers' money under the previous research framework programme.
that money makes the eu complicit in israeli war crimes and it makes a joke of the supposed honest broker status of the eu.
the guidelines to ensure that no more money goes to institutions involved in the occupation are welcome but we have seen very strong pressure from john kerry and others to water them down to delay them and to have sensitive' implementation which in reality would mean no implementation.
investment in science in research and in innovative industry will drive our growth and is vital to keeping our competitive edge.
and in my region i have seen people working on everything from curing cancer to wiping out crop diseases from delivering cleaner energy to developing clearer communications. researchers from across europe have told me their good news and have also told me of their problems.
i would like to thank them for their ideas and i hope that we find them some solutions.
increasing participation is important but not at the cost of excellence because money must go to the best projects.
too often in the past participants have struggled with over bureaucratic rules and in some cases they have not even received money that they should have got.
our amendments taken together should make the process simpler decisions should be faster and everything should be more transparent.
furthermore because innovation happens in businesses big and small we have tried to get a balance and the first funding calls for small businesses are going to be open really soon so they had better get ready.
please commissioner will you make sure that everyone involved follows a transparent process?
climate change is happening and what you are doing is cynical and irresponsible.
a fairer single market means saying no' to hacking cheating and economic espionage as business practices.
the new eu rules will contribute to building such trust as they will ensure that the risk of sharing information diminishes.
they will also result in a simpler legal framework facilitating the life of enterprises.
on the contrary it serves to safeguard fundamental rights and freedoms and the legitimate interest of citizens consumers employees honest competitors journalists and public administrations.
thousands of eu companies most of them smes are innovating out there sharing confidential information.
this directive is not only about protecting businesses holding trade secrets;
this directive is also about the fairer and deeper single market one of the priorities of this commission.
a deeper single market because the new rules will provide for more predictability and legal certainty.
at the same time rules will reduce unfair competition from rogue competitors who are cutting corners by not respecting the rules.
companies will no longer need to research and analyse twenty eight different and disparate national laws;
eu businesses will have better tools to fight against unfair and dishonest behaviour that threatens the value of their intellectual capital. this is an important step forward in allowing our creators and innovators to get profit from their hard work and intellectual efforts.
these voices cannot be ignored.
dear colleagues let us postpone the vote on this directive until we have actually seen a whistle blower protection law presented by the commission.
the editorial committees of the german public broadcasters say that it will intimidate journalists and hinder editorial work.
this directive will expand corporate secrecy and contrary to the claims of some previous speakers it will endanger and deter whistle blowers and investigative journalists.
the unintended consequences if we do however promise to be dire.
we must not now turn around and dismiss his concerns.
we must get the balance right and this directive at this point clearly does not.
let me tell you european voters will not understand if two weeks after important revelations we respond to the panama papers by strengthening corporate secrecy.
companies used trade secrets laws to fight against their exposure threaten journalists and go after whistle blowers.
there is absolutely no urgency about going ahead with a vote tomorrow.
those are not just my concerns.
i would like to remind you that this parliament awarded mr deltour the european citizens' prize just last year for his contributions.
i do not think that simply asking for it without putting on any pressure is going to do any good.
madam president the panama papers dieselgate luxleaks what do these scandals have in common? there are two things. one they uncovered secret corporate activities that the public had a right to know about;
we must not put more whistle blowers in court or discourage them from coming forward in the first place.
the luxleaks whistle blower antoine deltour says it will not protect cases like this leak of massive tax avoidance.
the eu appears to consider that within the cloak of the single market if i understood correctly it can unilaterally tackle a global challenge.
the two key areas of threat as i understand it in terms of protecting business knowhow trade secrets and business information are actually internal theft and internal release and access of information coupled or secondly in the area of cybercrime.
none of what i have heard so far this evening is even beginning to look at that.
we seem to be completely and utterly focused on whistleblowers.
it certainly does not have the resources and it is a challenge that faces the global business world in every business sector. to suddenly start picking out things like the panama papers or even the global pharmaceutical world i really do not think is the right approach and one that we ought to be taking. so for once and it is not often that i am in agreement with a fellow colleague this evening i do believe we ought to delay this directive.
their trade secrets are their main asset.
i believe that this new law manages to strike the balance between protecting trade secrets and ensuring that procedures are not used to hinder competition and innovation.
trade secrets are particularly important for competitiveness and for the innovationrelated performance of european businesses.
this directive is one way of providing researchers as well as those who invest in research with much needed protection.
it will enhance the value of innovation and research by providing legal certainty where none existed to date over research which is not at a stage of being registered for protection or published.
to date european researchers have depended heavily on uncertain ways to protect their work from being unjustifiably taken by others.
european researchers were in limbo on safeguarding their work until it was advanced enough to entitle them to register it or publish it under their name.
this situation has prejudiced cooperation between researchers and stakeholders and has also negatively impacted the opportunities of individual researchers smes and start ups.
the proposed directive will bring about legal certainty and protection where there was none.
it will make collaboration and cooperation between researchers institutes and companies more feasible.
this will also place european researchers on a more equal platform of protection with their counterparts outside the eu.
most importantly this directive will give value and recognition to what otherwise would have been considered to be merely confidential information'. this will provide smes and start ups with protection of their research and innovation at a point where registration is not possible even due to prohibitive costs.
this is a waste of taxpayers' money.
we are told the availability of reliable comprehensive european statistics is an important public good.
telling us that the eu rates of economic growth are up and unemployment down disguising from the public that youth unemployment in southern europe is still between forty and.
but the commission in its explanation of the purpose behind the statistical programme refers to these statistics as indispensable' if europe is to be understood by the general public.
we should stop using propaganda to put forward statistics are not true.
well that's their true purpose.
propaganda ladies and gentlemen propaganda. it was after all the eu that changed the definition of the gross national income to include the black economy on drugs and prostitution and by doing so increased member state contributions to the eu based on the size of their economy. and by sleight of hand it is the eu that averages statistics
have expressed today.
there were still a number of gaps that needed to be filled in order to better support eu policies. moreover the statistical infrastructure was also not yet flexible enough to deliver new data when needed.
the programme will also deliver more detailed and faster statistics for other important policy areas such as the energy union and will support the monitoring of the sustainable development goals at union level.
in the regulation we envisage advances in areas such as migration social and environmental statistics as well as energy and transport statistics.
let me stress the main issues we take on this regulation migration is certainly a key topic.
the european parliament has always been supportive of the european statistical system and has highlighted the need for european statistics to be as comprehensive comparable accurate and timely as possible.
this should give a better picture of the migration phenomenon thanks to the valuation of other variables like education level and integration in the labour market.
special attention has been devoted also to the production of indicators on income consumption and wealth distribution in particular indicators such as the gini index as well as data on inequality of access to basic goods and services.
moreover indicators should also include data on gender divides and wage gaps as well as the measurement of pockets of high unemployment including high unemployment in cross border regions.
with respect to the statistical measurement of the situation of refugees further cooperation with the eu and international organisations is foreseen in order to provide increased availability of data.
i recognise the important effort that eurostat has made in the last number of years regarding better communicated statistics and improving its website for example by including interactive visualisation maps and infographics.
mr president i would like first to express my appreciation for the excellent collaboration i had with the maltese presidency the acting director general of eurostat and their respective staff and i would also like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs for their cooperation.
to be able to detect such developments we need statistics that are close to the bone and relevant to the issues.
on that basis one should be able to distinguish what is causal and what is contingent on developments between regions nations the north south and east of the union.
the text stresses rightly the social aspect of the data that will be needed.
in that context a priority area for statistical improvement would be labour data that captures the extent of precarious work in work poverty youth and other under employment of migrant workers.
you can do anything with statistics.
well would you not agree with me that you can tell any lie with statistics?
two thousand and eleven a system of common rules for calculating the tax base across the eu is expected to significantly improve the business environment in the single market.
i would also say that there is no economic evidence which suggests that a weight of ten for the sales factor is a better option.
it will contribute to the efforts for bringing the union back to growth and prosperity.
my main concern is that this is transgressing national competence.
about ten of the amendments go too far. furthermore we are block voting so few choices are available.
i do not believe we have done so on this occasion.
while my country ireland has constructively engaged in the ccctb process to ensure that all the arguments are looked at closely i would like to stress two issues of eu law.
one the treaty requires unanimity in matters of taxation policy and two the principle of subsidiarity allows member states to keep taxation within national legislation.
mr president i will say two things one very realistic and one extremely idealistic.
i think every cloud has a silver lining and here i see such a case where economic crises have led us from talk to action.
this act does not have anything to do with harmonising the tax rates but perhaps one day it will be seen as the first step towards that.
your strong support and constructive approach in this area is an important signal for the member states. as you may know the technical work in the council progresses.
the presidency hopes to have a progress report on the ccctb for the may ecofin.
as i have already mentioned the commission is well aware of the burden that this would involve for companies that do not wish to operate cross border.
again i wish to thank you honourable members of the european parliament for your broad support in moving forward with this initiative.
i personally feel reassured and willing to pick up on the strong encouragement to progress in this area for which i thank you.
push for cross border activities in their field.
in general i think that the development in committee has taken this report in the right direction.
we can of course debate whether it is a good decision or not to make this scheme compulsory for companies but if we want to actually succeed i am convinced that the voluntary scheme is not necessarily going to activate as many companies as one would hope.
but that is another report.
a demand for a common consolidated tax base can be seen simply as a different example of the same tic another obsessive desire for greater political integration. this morning it was integration by coordination of the social security system;
later this evening the target for integration will be taxation on electricity and energy products.
do these people dream about greater political and economic integration?
when they are invited to parties if they are and see an attractive member of the opposite sex or the same sex if you prefer do they try to sweep them off their feet with coded references to political and economic integration possibly coupled with an unpleasant leer?
mr president at this time of crisis parliament should bring forward proposals that assist growth and job creation and instead we have a proposal to harmonise the corporate tax base.
it stops them taking too much money from the productive sector of our economy and we in the eu should aim to keep corporate taxes as low as possible.
this proposal also treads on the powers of the nation states.
we should remember in this place that it is for the nation states to decide what taxes to levy on their citizens.
like vampires they prey upon ordinary folk sucking the lifeblood out of the economy and for what?
the baltic states ireland and fellow entrepreneurial ex warsaw pact countries would slip back into the abyss.
athens and madrid would become dublin and warsaw but i suspect that before that time ordinary folk will have cried enough and the parasites will have to head for the hills as well they may.
for certain the irish i suspect will have their own way of dealing with them when they eventually awake from their slumber.
you cannot have them both and the european union in the coming weeks months will have to choose what to do.
now these are very important issues and we have achieved some valuable progress on several chapters for instance on rules of origin and services investment.
within a fortnight but they are also anxious not to put an end to the negotiations because they see the political consequences of this.
it is clear that the current approach has reached its limits as recognised by both sides at the end of the last negotiation round.
in times of crisis we need to ensure new sources of growth for eu citizens and businesses.
but so far mercosur has been unable to agree internally and to respond to us on how to move towards an exchange of market access offers.
i would first want to discuss this with us at the highest level.
such an agreement could generate very considerable gains for both regions.
are we going to continue pressing pushing waiting?
the eu has argued that the best way to make progress now would be though an exchange of market access offers on goods services and investments and public procurement.
however so far these negotiations have mainly focused on the normative part of the agreement that is to say the ground rules and principles that should provide the basis for commitments between both sides to open up their respective markets.
however the negotiations have not yet gone into the heart of the matter namely on the additional access that we have to give to each other for industrial and agricultural products services investments and public procurement through the reduction of tariffs or the dismantling of other barriers.
but i think they have to make up their mind.
by contrast in the uk the professional politicians from the establishment parties repeat incessantly that the forty of uk trade with the eu which incidentally is not only in substantial deficit but is proportionately declining is of itself an entire justification for britain to be in a political union with the member states of the eu.
however there is a critical difference between brazil and the uk.
on trade thirty seven of brazil's trade is with other countries in latin and central america.
there is nobody absolutely nobody in brazil who considers brazil's thirty seven of trade with the other mercosur countries to be any sort of reason at all for brazil to enter into a political union.
can you give us and the farmers that i represent in northern ireland an assurance that in the harsh economic climate which they face with rising input costs static farm gate prices and lower profit margins on top of a potentially reduced cap budget and a commission proposal which puts little emphasise on food production
this morning i want to remind you that the potential impact of this trade agreement for northern ireland and other countries which rely on agriculture and especially the beef sector could indeed be devastating.
commissioner i want to have your assurance this morning that agriculture will not be sacrificed when you start or make the decision on market access officers.
you said specifically in your opening statement this morning that you want a balanced ambitious and comprehensive agreement with mercosur.
that is not on the agenda for the time being.
both sides must be willing to open up their markets in a mutually beneficial manner and it is in this vein that i condemn recent protectionist measures taken by some mercosur countries.
we must continue to encourage open markets and i call on the support of the parliament and member states against unjustified economic actions.
however it is regrettable that we now find ourselves no further forward almost three years since the relaunch of negotiations.
this is of course unacceptable.
mr president the potential benefits of an agreement between the eu and mercosur are enormous a combined market of over eight hundred million citizens.
for example there is a strong case to be made for repeated and systemic violation of wto rules by argentina including cases where the wto should rule in favour of the eu.
both parties need to give significant political backing in order to move negotiations forward.
it has the ambitions that all cosmopolitans and neo liberals have of a borderless undifferentiated world in which goods services and people will move without let or hindrance.
the result of this is not only that eventually all distinctive peoples and therefore cultures will disappear but that all wage rates and standards of living will approximate to the same level which would not be the level that modern europeans enjoy.
the theory of international trade is that the world as a whole will be richer as the result of comparative advantage.
i had the opportunity a number of years ago to go to brazil and see for myself that despite what the commission were telling us at that time despite all the assurances they were giving that brazil was the perfect place for producing beef we found something totally to the contrary.
the traceability issues for brazil and argentina must have the same standards as those imposed within europe not equivalent;