kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
we are not working here to create a fund from scratch.
i wish i could have the possibility to call you one by one on the phone to inform
mr president northern ireland's fishing fleet operates in one of the most restrictive regulatory environments known to industry.
this has come through policies driven by a centralised bureaucracy in brussels and is in many ways gold plated by domestic fisheries administrations.
we are all concerned about ensuring a sustainable marine environment.
one element of this is ensuring that our fleet is economically sustainable as it contributes to the maintenance and where appropriate the recovery of the marine ecosystem.
the size of northern ireland's fishing fleet has been dramatically reduced over the past ten to twenty years.
the new common fisheries policy brings with it new challenges a land all policy accompanied by a drive to develop long term fisheries management plans.
it is therefore essential that the emff includes the necessary measures to help ensure the survival of northern ireland's fleet.
they wanted me to speak to them about how much better life could be outside the cfp.
it is disgraceful.
as for this report british taxpayers have to subsidise the building of spanish fishing boats to come and fish in what should be british waters. it is absolutely unacceptable!
young people have been mentioned and i think that is crucial. if you want the renewal of any industry you have to have young people coming into it.
we all want to stop the loss of biodiversity but in the real world this hunt for resources is frustrating our goals.
we need biodiversity for food shelter medicines clean air water and so on and so forth.
in this hunt chinese investors want to construct a highway through the serengeti national park to exploit the resources of central africa.
because people care about this. go through facebook to stop biodiversity loss and support this campaign.
that is the sense of urgency of the nagoya summit and that is the sense of urgency i expect from the ministers and commissioners who attend.
i will together with many colleagues present the thousands of signatures to the decision makers in nagoya to let them know that people depend on their perseverance and persistence to make nagoya a success.
madam president as we discuss the european position at the nagoya summit outside this house a hunt is being undertaken a relentless hunt for resources a hunt for oil and gas minerals timber food and water a hunt for resources that are all provided by nature.
we simply cannot survive without it.
that is reality. therefore the only way to stop the loss of biodiversity is by radically changing our behaviour.
i think it is extremely important that we understand
two thousand i think that natura two thousand will still give some advantages in the future but when we talk about our strategy i think we have to be ambitious as we are when we talk about when we are going out when we talk about international appearances. many of you mentioned financing.
because this has to be fundamentally understood so that we can share the understanding of biodiversity.
it will have to include a baseline which we currently finally have.
that. as some of you mentioned it is truly and fundamentally a moral and ethical question but for those who do not understand that it is becoming more than obvious that it is an issue of our quality of life and an issue of our economic success.
access to education is rapidly improving.
access to drinking water is increasing.
there is near universal access to electricity in north africa.
for the duration of the summit and at each side event i was gripped by the enthusiasm of my colleagues governments international organisations and the people on the ground who are committed to achieving the ambitious targets set in.
the indicators of biodiversity include inter alia the proportion of land area covered by forest co two emissions the proportion of total water resources used consumption of ozone depleting substances and the proportion of fish stocks within safe biological limits.
the urban poor also rely on biodiversity for ecosystem services such as the maintenance of air and water quality and the breakdown of waste.
many of us did not believe we would see the berlin wall come down in our lifetime.
within this goal there are several sub targets.
however although progress has clearly been made there is so much more that needs to be done.
two two million children die each year because they have not been immunised by vaccines that are so easily accessible in the developed world and which we have had for over thirty years.
one billion children live in poverty.
it will affect countries like tuvalu in the polynesian islands a country that is merely four and a half metres above sea level and the maldives where president nasheed held an underwater cabinet meeting this year to highlight the fact that by the end of the century his country could indeed be under water.
i have also highlighted the fact that programmes aimed at the protection of biodiversity and poverty reduction must address the priorities of the poor and put more emphasis on locally based environmental management ensure access to biodiversity resources land reform and acknowledgement of customary tenure.
i am calling on the member states and the commission to give new impetus to the global climate change alliance and its support facility in order to increase developing countries' capacity building and knowledge base on the expected impacts of biodiversity loss and to effectively integrate it into development plans and budgets.
goal seven of the millennium development goals is to ensure environmental sustainability.
one four million children die each year from lack of access to safe drinking water and.
it was put to us by an assistant secretary of the united nations that we really do need a dash to the finish' over the next five years.
now we take it for granted that the former soviet dominated countries are our eu partners.
the reduction in biodiversity loss is therefore a key component of the millennium development goals.
seventy per cent of the world's poor live in rural areas and depend directly on biodiversity for their survival and well being.
by two thousand and fifty there will be two billion more people on the face of the earth and ninety of these will be born into what is now the developing world. if we allow abject poverty to continue in those countries there will be massive migration from south to north and inequality could well be the cause of a world conflagration.
by two thousand and fifteen eighty six of those living in the developing world will be able to access clean drinking water up from seventy one in.
access to energy is increasing.
two thousand and seven if the eu is to have any credibility at all at nagoya or in the next cites meeting there can be no other option than the implementation of a total export and import ban on eels.
but what does the conveniently vague and ambiguous term biodiversity' actually mean?
let us be frank you have not got a clue.
if you are going to preach which is what you are doing look in the mirror first sort your own house out and let us start with the disaster which is the common fisheries policy.
oddly enough i think it does matter that you understand what you are talking about if you are making laws for the whole of the eu.
it should be done in nation states.
the two thousand and ten biodiversity target was incorporated into mdg seven already in two thousand and two and the eu itself has explicitly underscored the important linkages between biodiversity and development on many occasions.
we intend to explore ways and means to do this together with our partners in nagoya.
over the period two thousand and two two thousand and eight the european union provided over usd one billion approximately eur seven hundred and forty million for global biodiversity annually largely through the thematic programme on environment and natural resources under the development cooperation instrument but also the edf
it is actually a question of our quality of life and yet the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems is not seen as a development priority.
both the development cooperation instrument and the european development fund include provisions for addressing biodiversity.
this is vital if we are to prevent further species extinctions and enable biodiversity to continue providing the essential goods and services that we all depend on and especially the poor.
the first is the adoption of the new strategic plan for the convention for the period.
two thousand and six this is an expectation widely shared by developing country parties to the convention many of which see it as their top priority.
the second strategic priority for the european union is to conclude negotiations on the protocol on access and benefit sharing as a key contribution to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity beyond two thousand and ten and in line with the commitment taken by all the parties at cop eight in.
the third is to ensure that adequate resources are mobilised to enable the implementation of the post two thousand and ten biodiversity policy framework including the new strategy plan.
two thousand and eleven two thousand and twenty it should reflect the best available scientific knowledge about the state of biodiversity and provide an effective framework of implementation that is sufficiently ambitious to trigger step up action by all the parties to the convention.
two thousand and ten three issues stand out in particular as priorities for the european union.
the international study of the economics of ecosystems and biodiversity shows how costly biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation is to our economies including the economies in developing countries. so it is not any more a moral question;
it is hoped that teeb will go some way towards changing this situation so that more of our developing country partners give higher priority to biodiversity conservation and sustainable use in their development strategies but even where it is not a focus of action in country and regional support strategies european development policy nevertheless requires that environment and sustainable management of natural resources be treated as a cross cutting issue to be integrated into all development activities.
we also need to look at other ways of how we can contribute to enhancing implementation of the convention on biodiversity and help developing country parties deliver on their commitments under the convention in particular the new post two thousand and ten strategic plan that will be adopted in nagoya.
both of which include adequate provisions for biodiversity.
just last month in his statement during the high level event on biodiversity at the united nations general assembly president barroso remarked that our ability to end poverty and hunger and improve child and maternal health depends on the long term availability of fresh water food medicine and raw materials that nature provides.
to conclude with regard to mechanisms for ensuring the right of access to information and public participation in decision making related to biodiversity the eu fully supports the draft cop ten decision on the strategic plan which urges parties and other governments to enable broad and effective participation in the full implementation of the objectives of the convention and strategic plan.
madam president biodiversity is not some abstract word that is used by abstruse scientists to look after some environmental peculiarity.
that is about the size of the new york stock exchange.
if every year we lost an asset with the value of the new york stock exchange i am sure everybody in this room would be up and running around but because it is biodiversity nobody seems to care. that is an enormous amount of funding that would be required to replace the loss of oxygen that we cut down by cutting these trees.
that must change as we lead the world on these issues.
as mr mitchell brilliantly put it this wall of poverty and may i add deprivation must come down.
they must realise that the tin of tomatoes that they pick up in the supermarket would not be there if it were not for biodiversity.
i want to congratulate the commission on what they are doing but i want to inform the house that we in the eu lead internationally on these issues on biodiversity on climate change and indeed on the mdgs' poverty alleviation but interestingly at the un we are only given observer status.
we have the year of biodiversity but i would suggest that every year should be the year of biodiversity.
without public awareness and the raising of awareness nothing will change.
madam president the challenge we face in reversing the loss of unique species of life becomes depressingly apparent as this debate continues. a lot is going to be said at the biodiversity conference about the need to put in place the correct measures but if all we end up with is a pious declaration we will achieve very little.
i hope we can put in place a set of targets and the financial support mechanisms no doubt linked to access to biological resources to make them worth something.
i hope we can ensure that procedures are put in place to assess and confirm compliance and i hope that we can put in place arrangements for frequent review of the targets and for improvements to be made to the procedures as time progresses.
it is quite clear that this conference cannot possibly halt the loss of biodiversity;
the pace is simply too rapid.
however if we can at least put in place the mechanisms and the structure that can eventually slow and perhaps one day reverse that loss then it will be judged a success.
madam president i wonder if the honourable member would agree that we are losing unique forms of life on this planet each and every day and that there is a need for international action to try and counter that?
he also spoke positively about where improvements have been made.
in order to guarantee food security for the world we need sustainable agriculture in a sustainable environment.
we have failed to pay for it in the price we pay for our goods.
that is the way to harvest the health co benefits;
it has become more and more an economic debate an economic argument.
this very clearly indicates that there is a fundamental shift in the debate on climate policies.
we know when we are discussing a legislative proposal that in the council there will be no veto for any country any more.
so we also need to do something in the ets system to make sure we have the right price and really have the incentives to move to green technologies.
of course we are asking the commission to come forward with a proposal to move to twenty five reduction domestically.
or look at our oil dependency and the situation in northern africa the debate on oil dependency is becoming more and more important for our economic position in the eu.
if you look at how science has been evolving meanwhile the arguments for stronger climate policies have become stronger and stronger every day.
there are a lot of offsets still in the market so if you have twenty five domestically we are discussing thirty as a whole as well.
if you look at the new industries relying on climate policies they are asking for more ambitious climate policies.
the council is moving parliament will set out its position tomorrow and then it is up to the commission to come forward with a proposal.
so what is in the report?
it is not only a climate argument any more.
this is also a discussion on the adjustment of the emissions trading system.
that is also the way to really harvest the potential of energy savings.
those in britain who support international development recognise that we live on a common planet they recognise the importance of international cooperation and see the advantages of working together. they see it not as a choice between working together in europe and in the wider world but of both being mutually reinforcing. the case for international development is for britain to remain in the european union.
we know that the eu is a major and of course the largest provider of humanitarian financial expert assistance to the developing countries but the current migration crisis and many more like it in other regions have severely worsened the already drastic situation for hundreds of millions of people.
this is what we are currently working on in the context of the revision of the european consensus on development.
let me give you some examples of where our work has successfully influenced political decision making in favour of development objectives.
but we cannot do this alone we need to join forces.
you have consistently underlined the importance of the topic including by establishing the post of standing rapporteur and by issuing several important resolutions.
we should be encouraged by that.
one five billion people in this world who are still living in poverty who are deprived in ways that we in the west can only imagine.
the discussion of migration and development seems to spectacularly fail to take into account the way that the european union has in my view mismanaged the refugee crisis from start to finish.
so i would say that whilst i agree with the principle of the human duty that we have this report has spectacularly failed to achieve what it should have achieved.
we have a human duty to do what we can to help but to me this report is far from ideal in terms of identifying the problems at european union level and also in terms of seeking what solutions we should adopt.
the problems that arose are problems which could reasonably have been foreseen at the time and which many of us did in fact foresee and said on the record in this place at the time.
for example it mentions common asylum and immigration policy.
but we will not achieve that unless we see big changes in the international tax system unless we close down tax loopholes and illicit financial flows.
i think commissioner andriukaitis said something very important when he talked about the interconnectedness of things and how they should be reflected in the ways decisions are planned and taken.
but at the same time elsewhere something quite different is going on.
i have become aware of the fact that the commission and the external action service have now agreed that development cooperation money could be used to acquire and purchase weapons in those third countries where the eu is training the military.
i think it is outrageous to hear that we would do this at the cost of development financing.
before anything like this is undertaken we should definitely have more funds to use and we should make sure that these armies and military and police forces in developing countries get sufficient training in a human rights based approach and a democratic way of working.
all countries need to have development policy of course but when you have policies for coherence of development within the eu it is quite clear that this is just one of the many areas where despite the words of mr cameron and his crew of eu fanatics if you are in the eu then of course you are going to be subject to closer cohesion on a whole range of policies and to ever closer union.
mr president nowadays it is more than obvious that a coherent development policy is needed in order to successfully tackle the most urgent social problems across the globe and what is more to achieve peaceful just and inclusive societies.
the challenges of the past years have already shown us that building synergies between different eu policies leads to improved results. however a coherent policy management also demands a global framework which can deal with the complexity of the task to ensure coherence between many factors
global goals and national contexts;
international agendas and processes;
and between economic social and environmental policies.
the eu and its global partners have to constantly support an approach based on collaboration mutual accountability and human rights in order to ensure that economic environmental and social progress will be sustainable.
i do not think that is a good way forward. i want to try and persuade them of the value of this programme for the solidarity of the european union.
mr president i think the message from this house is very clear.
there are plenty of brains in this room to come up with a solution.
i was listening to the lengthy debate and i was just wondering whether those who benefit from meals at the food bank are troubled by the legal base under which the food they are eating comes?
i do not want to condemn the member states who are blocking this;
do they worry about the sort of detail that we worry about in this parliament?
i want to see a short term solution for the next two years but i would also like as jim nicholson has said to review what we might do post.
we want this programme to continue because of its humanitarian aspect.
we all know that the security of food supply is not there as it has been in the past and this is a tremendous challenge for us all.
while i recognise this has helped over eighteen million people and has done a tremendous job throughout the whole of the european union in many areas where it is implemented we are now in a position where the funding is seriously being questioned.
the council should work together with the commission and parliament to end this short term deadlock.
it is unacceptable that the poor should be taken hostage by this legal dispute and this inability of the council to find a common line.
that is why we will support the move proposed by the commission in its post two thousand and fourteen mff which seeks a long term solution to the problem and paves a way for a solution to be found when it is moved from heading one to heading.
two however the situation we face today concerning the next two years of this programme is completely and utterly unacceptable.
regardless of whether you believe the programme should be national or whether it should be moved to social policy there is a duty to find a way forward to solve the problem for the next two years and to find a transitional solution to unlock the situation for the coming two years.
we need to find a proper agreed solid basis for the long term future of this programme.
that is real and measurable assistance on the ground directly benefiting those who need it most and not just an aspirational goal.
many eu programmes addressing poverty and social inclusion are very well intentioned and well written but they often stay on paper without ever benefiting the eu citizens they are targeting. this programme directly assists organisations and currently provides food for thirteen million people suffering from poverty in nineteen member states and has distribution
now is not the time to be playing politics with such an important programme.
a little bit of common sense if not some compassion is required from eu leaders on this issue and i welcome the comments by the president of the commission on this earlier today and also the contributions from the commissioner and the minister earlier in this debate.
the eu should not hesitate to campaign on the issue.
i also welcome the recent adoption of the regional action plan for two thousand and seventeen two thousand and twenty one jointly by the african union and the united nations.
i welcome the reforms of the penal code in malawi.
already this vulnerable community is at risk of the medical consequences of albinism in the tropics including a high risk of fatal skin cancer but they are also now being murdered almost unbelievably to satisfy demand for traditional medicine that is more akin to medieval sorcery.
these criminal and discriminatory incidents involve violent attacks abductions human trafficking and killings.
that and the recent appointment of the first ever united nations independent expert on the enjoyment of human rights by persons with albinism are important steps towards increasing awareness of this issue. moreover the governments concerned are demonstrating
we stand ready for further engagement with our partners and through our delegations the eu will continue supporting local civil society efforts.
in recent years we have registered a worrying increase in human rights abuses against people with albinism in malawi and other sub saharan african countries.