kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
if this does not happen livestock producers across the european union will have to cope with rising prices volatility and uncertainty for a long time to come.
so we have got to have security of our own food supply within europe.
madam president the livestock sector is an important traditional farming industry which represents the livelihood of thousands of producers across the eu. this sector is central to the socio economic contribution made by agriculture to the rural areas of the european union.
in particular the high cereal prices exacerbate the problems for profitability amongst winter beef finishers who have a higher dependency on cereal based feed imports.
action is also needed to close the gap between prices paid by consumers and prices received by producers.
secondly it is essential that the commission steps up measures to support the livestock sector in less favoured areas in particular.
the next cap reform must focus on the special vulnerability of certain livestock sectors and the significant production costs that farmers undertake.
under the next cap the excessive bureaucratic burden on livestock farmers must be addressed and reduced.
lastly european producers comply with the most stringent regulations in the world in terms of food safety and quality the environment and animal health and welfare.
these high standards must not put them at a disadvantage in comparison to third country competitors. it is crucial for the long term viability of the livestock sector overall that the commission ensure that their actions on trade and agriculture do not compromise european farmers but support the sustainability and viability of the european livestock sector into the future.
the logical consequence of the court ruling should be to leave investment out of the singapore free trade agreement and proceed as quickly as possible with a goods only agreement.
i think a majority in this house is willing to grasp that nettle. i am not yet convinced that the commission is and i am very worried that we have had radio silence from the european council on this matter.
in future the council should not artificially add to the mandate for free trade agreements in order to maintain mixity.
that could be ratified very speedily and it would also take a toxic matter out of the agreement.
i am afraid that nothing the commissioner has said tonight has given me hope that this would be different.
that is the first thing the commission will have to do to try and get this implemented as soon as possible.
indeed the commission is working on a new framework for that and i agree completely with the last speaker ms hautala that if the member states are to be involved in future they are involved at the early stages as soon as possible and not to be allowed to hold up agreements as we have seen in the past especially in relation to ceta.
so this is actually a good result provided the commission has the courage to take the result in their hands and do what they are being given the competence to do and make trade work for european citizens.
therefore we have now a unique opportunity to put the governance of the eu trade policy on a more stable and effective footing allowing the eu to remain a credible negotiating partner that can better deliver for citizens.
intellectual property;
competition;
trade and sustainable development;
therefore and despite the majority of the agreement being considered as coming under the eu's exclusive competence and the remaining parts as shared competence the court considered that the agreement as it stands cannot be concluded by the eu alone.
this discussion will need to take into account the legal and political implications deriving from the court's opinion in particular we will need to respond to the questions as to whether we consider that the status quo meaning a similar ratification process as in the case of the fta with canada ceta is sustainable or not. or should we rather use the clarity provided by this opinion to move to a more credible and efficient ratification process taking into account that the eu has exclusive competence for the full scope of our new generation progressive trade and investment agreements but not for certain elements of investment protection and isds?
last but not least we will need to explain collectively that whatever path may be chosen the eu's trade and investment policy decision making process is and will continue to be a fully democratic one by the european parliament and the representatives from the democratically elected governments of the member states in the council.
we all want to make the eu's trade and investment policy to be more stable effective and credible for the benefit of our eu citizens.
the annual stakeholders' conference in tallinn on fourteen and fifteen october of this year will offer an opportunity to learn the lessons of the first months of the strategy and to make further proposals if needed.
several speakers referred to transport which is of course another important issue that has to be considered in a comprehensive way.
its results will give us a feel for the added value that this new working method can bring.
the commission is very committed to keeping up the momentum we have achieved so far with this strategy.
perhaps i should pick up especially on two.
we have strong relationships with all the countries that we call the brics.
i think the work that we do together in developing and enhancing our bilateral trade work is very significant.
this is an area that i think we need to consider working on further where we are able to collaborate and use our contributions more effectively by thinking through the strategy of how we work on our development priorities.
it is not unusual to be meeting with ministers many times in the course of a year.
but it is also about them as partners in development.
but i accept that when they coordinate they create in a sense a collaborative approach on certain issues.
in our delegations as the honourable members know we have officials from the commission who work on these issues as their priority and this is how they spend their time while they are in country.
as i said at the beginning when i laid out my own priorities for my work strategic partnerships were critical not just for the bilateral relationships which so many have spoken about but also because of their significance as partners as we tackle some of the global challenges.
these are important because they keep us in touch as well as serving as regular contacts.
with others such as india we are in the final stages of trying to close a free trade agreement.
we certainly need to be able to respond to that approach while recognising that primarily they are distinct and separate countries with different histories and traditions and certainly different relationships with us.
my fellow commissioners also spend a great deal of energy on developing those strong links on some of the issues that honourable members have raised whether it is climate change or development education or other areas of work.
it appears to have come at the end of the match when fans went onto the pitch. i have already sent condolences directly to the foreign minister of egypt for which i have had his thanks and acknowledgement but i am sure the honourable members would want to be informed and of course would want to join me in expressing our condolences and shock at this terrible incident.
with others such as china we are developing those links that are so important if we are to tackle some of the issues for example intellectual property rights and the level playing field of trade and investment that are so critical to european industry and business and our future. so it is extremely important work not just with ministries but with chambers of commerce and supporting industry.
so all of these areas are ways in which we can continue to develop our individual bilateral relations.
we have enormous engagement with all these countries in two different ways.
talking with our colleagues in brazil we have worked hard to develop how we can work together for example in delivering our development in africa.
so although the engagement may change and may not be in the way that it used to be it is about engaging with them to provide support for example with climate change energy and some of the key areas of work where the commission has played such a vital role and will continue to do in the future.
i have already indicated some of the ways in which we work with them individually.
with some countries like brazil it is all part of a broader strategic approach in mercosur.
it is named the phenomenon has been named so it does exist.
past. in the eu we should think strategically.
in some cases they were jointly challenging the current system of international governance.
in the policy towards the brics we should avoid the creation of coalitions of the lowest common denominator on democracy and human rights.
in this framework the contribution of the brics and particularly of china in a specific imf special purpose vehicle would significantly increase imf firepower and robustness in dealing with the sovereign debt crisis of the eu and tomorrow who knows of the united states.
the cake is common worldwide.
we need to correct east west monetary imbalances the deficit in the west and the surplus and trillions of reserves in the east by deciding on upper limits of deficit and surplus and by fighting protectionism.
global solutions are necessary for international security political economic monetary and ecological stability as well as for access to raw materials and rare earths. the financial crisis in europe had its origins outside the union but to put our house in order and avoid negative externalities the cooperation of the rest of the world is necessary.
the west is the market of the east while stability and prosperity in the east are necessary for the security and healthy economy of the west.
others seem to be less interested but that should not discourage us.
europe which has created a modern international system is now facing a double challenge.
mr president the report we are now debating is strategic comprehensive and sophisticated addressing europe's challenge generated by the changing distribution of power within the international system a process accelerated by the current world crisis.
mr president i am glad that lady ashton decided to participate in this debate. it is an honour for us and especially important because the eeas has now been in action for a year and the time has come for the first reviews and summaries of the service's existence.
the report goes beyond the individual country by country approach when thinking about brazil russia india china and south africa and tries to see in what senses their common points of interest have brought them together. one such common item is the feeling of marginalisation on the global level especially when it comes to brics participation in the key institutions of global economic and financial governance.
that is why the brics countries have decided to strengthen their cooperation on political and foreign policy issues.
it could be called a mutual support network but one that can be a convenient fall back option when the situation requires concerted action.
in most cases the brics take positions opposed to those of the european union and they contest our positions and policy. are we ready to react and to act? those countries enjoy some of them to a special degree especially democracies like india and brazil a privileged relationship with us.
at the same time they will not give the union the right to speak in the united nations.
baroness ashton in your report you praise the geographical desk structure of the eeas as the leading source of advice and briefing on respective countries. the report which i submitted encourages a coordination mechanism within the
eeas which would allow geographical desk officers responsible for particular brics countries to exchange and coordinate information and positions in cases where concerted action on our side can be expected. such cooperation would have added value for you and your officials in devising future strategies. the mechanism i suggest does not require a modification of the current eeas structure and can be of a purely functional nature. i was told that the first time such coordination took
i am glad to hear that as it is the best proof that the report has already brought some results.
european values must always take precedence over economic interests.
the eu and the eeas should make sure that constructive partnership with brics and other emerging powers brings about the spill over of democracy human rights civil liberties the rule of law and gender equality.
if we cannot engage them positively they might become extremely difficult competitors for the eu in economic terms while disregarding human values.
the eu india free trade agreement for instance will have massive implications for india's small farmers fishermen fisherwomen and other poor people.
what matters is that economic clout is translated into political clout into self confidence and ambition for the role that can be played.
each of them has a strong and deep relationship with the european union.
it is incredibly important that we invest in our relationship with these countries and be active and creative in our engagement with them.
and of course indonesia and others but i want to concentrate for the purposes of this debate on the five that we call the brics.
one of the advantages if you like of the many hats i wear in this post is that i can move between the foreign ministry and the defence ministry in many countries and can express the views of the european union with both.
we have also been talking of course in india in the last two weeks again trying to break new ground in developing the strength of our relationship particularly on some of the security issues that are so important and on joint work to develop the capacity to deliver on the world food programme as well as tackling some of the global issues that we and they face and recognising the significance of india in the region. this weekend i travel to brazil and then on to mexico
our ambition here again being to strengthen the relationship we have and to talk about issues of importance between us.
and in mexico where they have played such an important role in recent days on climate change and on some of the challenges that they face in their part of the region.
i should mention too south africa.
we have just discussed our relationship with russia.
in each of these countries we are trying to invest in developing a strong bilateral relationship.
as you stressed there are major differences economically politically and socially and anyone looking at those countries would see how significantly different they are but whether they manage to coordinate their position depends on where their interests coincide.
so my proposal is that we need to invest in these countries as strategic partners in a very strong and dynamic bilateral relationship finding the themes and issues on which we can work closely economically and politically bilaterally and internationally.
it is important that we recognise the significance of our relationships with each of these countries and find the common ground where they should be with us and we should be with them on many of the issues we face.
yes. individual relationships absolutely critical.
it is its transformative nature impacting all levels of government and various public policy domains that has great potential to bring significant benefits. the smart use of ict by governments can help deliver better policies and decisions to tackle the pressing social and economic challenges of our times.
the commission is taking its commitment seriously and also offers member states local and regional administrations and other stakeholders financial support to accelerate the digital transformation of government.
madam president we are now seeing a giant international cyber attack wreak havoc on private and public computer systems across the world including the national health service in the uk.
this is a wakeup call on the need to invest in our e government systems and cyber security.
in the meantime there is a real risk to our very democracy that comes from harvesting and analysing online data.
new technologies enable secretive private companies to target social media users and determine what information they see.
the guardian journalist carole cadwalladr has exposed worrying links between the far right the brexit leave campaigns donald trump the russian government and technology companies owned by the conservative billionaire robert mercer.
it appears that the funding of electoral campaigns is opaque and under the radar provoking legal questions.
as we seek to protect our governments and democracies we must take action to adapt our laws in order to prevent such unethical manipulation of voters online and instead use online platforms for open and transparent democratic debate.
whilst i sympathise with the concerns which inform much of the resolution i oppose the calls to undermine the clear position of subsidiarity that the eu has in relation to the member states having competence in this area. the right of the member states to deal with this issue in their own manner is absolutely vital.
mr president the title of this report reindustrialising europe to promote competitiveness and sustainability reflects the concerns felt by many commentators across europe that the financial crisis of two thousand and eight and the subsequent euro crisis have had disastrous consequences in the union highlighting in the process the competitiveness weakness that is so pertinent in the face of emerging economies such as china.
a revitalised industrial sector built on the foundations of a skilled work force and flexible employment laws and underpinned by a strong research and development base is what europe needs for the future to maintain its competitive edge.
the most recent fta concluded on fifteen april two thousand and thirteen was between iceland and china and is expected to boost exports while eliminating tariffs on the import of manufactured goods. so much for the idea that you need to be part of a big bloc in order to sign ftas.
there is one other part of this report that i think deserves a little bit of attention.
precisely because iceland was outside the euro it was able to use its monetary policy in order to stimulate a recovery. there is now not a single icelander who would swap places with the stricken mediterranean eurozone states.
it is noted that because iceland is small and has what it calls limited defensive interests it was easier to conclude a free trade agreement with bigger trade partners.
the stubborn independence of that small and brave country has been a standing rebuke to some in this place who argue that you cannot survive other than as part of a multinational union.
we are dragged into a common european tariff and are therefore unable to exploit what iceland with its population of two hundred and thirty zero people does which is to maximise its prosperity by trading openly.
this becomes especially galling when added to the fact that many eu migrant workers are using the posting of workers directive to avoid paying higher taxes in their host country while still using its public services a number which astonishingly totalled.
not doing so will only increase the calls for a migrant quota system to be introduced on a pan european basis.
the eu must work to find a compromise that accepts that the differing levels of social welfare income inequalities and tax regimes that the eu member states operate must be taken into consideration.
mr president the right to freedom of movement to seek work is a founding principle of the eu and one that is important to the workings of the single market.
one two million in two thousand and eleven throughout the union.
it should be a basic principle that before you start drawing from a welfare pot you should have had to put something into it.
they want to distinguish between people who come to work and people who come to claim benefits.
despite that my constituents continue to recognise that a contribution can be made by people who come from elsewhere in the european union to work in the united kingdom.
after fifteen years in this place i barely notice that kind of tone anymore;
in exchange they want a sense of roughly whom we are admitting and in roughly what numbers. they want to control those things.
the first may be a founding principle of the european union the second is a creature of judicial activism by eu institutions.
but it is worth just putting on the record that my country has assimilated four million inward migrants over the last twenty years.
mr president we like to tell ourselves in this chamber that the justification and the boast of the european union is that we spread democracy and yet in kosovo we maintain a protectorate.
well i think we all know the answer because full democracy would result in ethnographic borders as indeed has happened on the ground.
but rather than allow the de facto border to become the de jure one or to put it more blatantly rather than allowing people to decide under which government they want to live we sustain the full apparatus of a foreign government a dictatorial state in which we deny the people the right to self determination.
i am afraid we do it because if we admitted that people want to live within their own language groups the intellectual justification of the entire european project would collapse.
you can have national sovereignty you can have democracy or on the other hand you can have federalism. it is increasingly clear that you cannot have both.
mr president the decision of malta to introduce a market for selling citizenship is indeed problematic. the right of individual member states to confer citizenship and issue passports is of course their sovereign prerogative and is not something to do with the eu.
nevertheless there is a difficulty here when such action confers treaty rights upon the holder to draw social security and live in other member states.
today's joint resolution denounces the idea of citizenship being subject to a purely monetary transaction.
it is the practical implications that i am concerned with. with this in mind i welcome the resolution's call for the commission to issue guidelines regarding access to eu citizenship via national investor schemes which normally as in my country the uk relate to only selling the right to residency.
it is my view that some compromise needs to be reached as to what eu wide freedoms individual member state governments can legitimately extend via such commercial citizenship schemes.
it is no longer a question of countries being able to sustain the obligations of the free market;
we are increasingly making demands that touch on their judicial systems and their foreign policies.
i will take the same attitude to serbia that i took to croatian accession and that i would take to any of the other south slavic or balkan countries.
if i were serbian i would be very reluctant to surrender the advantages of a relatively educated workforce and relatively cheap exports to assimilate the corpus of eu social and employment law but that is their decision.
if they vote to join i will support it as i did in the case of croatia.
i do have to wonder though at the lack of historical imagination here on our side that in this centenary year of the austro hungarian memorandum to serbia we think nothing of making it a precondition that serbia puts foreign powers in charge of its judicial system.
that is why i and many other people were reluctant to extend the category of citizenship to a european level in the maastricht treaty to remove the decision over the granting of citizenship from democratic elected and accountable national politicians.
how about this? i am very happy to let malta sell eu citizenship to whomever it wants provided there is an equivalent and reciprocal right for my citizens in the united kingdom to renounce theirs.