kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
our current reputation is for ground breaking research but we know well that reputations are hard won and easily lost.
researchers are exploring photovoltaic technologies. today we discussed the successor programme horizon europe for. two thousand and twenty one two thousand and twenty seven now i appreciate that's rather far in the future for the british government who currently seems to only operate on an hour by hour basis but in or out of the eu we need to be in the horizon europe.
because what you have achieved and what you lined out as a vision of political change not diving into institutional discussions but how to change europe is manifesting the best we can do and they are representing the absurdity of not doing it.
you are the best of europe your country and our country and as a swede we are proud of having you as a neighbour.
however on the other hand to that there must be a defined legal route for people to claim asylum because all civilised nations accept the right to asylum for those who are being persecuted.
but having said that surely the solution to this is simply the rule of law.
so the rule of law is the solution to this.
if people seek to enter the european union illegally there should be a very firm and stern rule saying i'm sorry but you must be sent back.
that's why it is so important to put this legislation in place.
because on heavyduty vehicles it was really high time that as europe we started to regulate this because countries like the united states japan and canada already regulated that before us. so we are catching up and making sure that innovation and these new technologies will be done within europe creating the jobs within europe and at the same time delivering a decarbonisation of our transport sector which is so badly needed if we want to achieve the paris agreement with that.
twenty five so we are talking about a very important category which is on top of that even increasing whereas we know that by two thousand and fifty we should have decarbonised our economy.
that the european union is going to regulate co two emissions from heavyduty vehicles. it was as it was with the co two and cars legislation a tough fight with a lot of resistance but i think we managed in good cooperation with the different shadow rapporteurs and all the different groups whom i would like to thank for their contributions.
clearly from a green perspective we would have loved to see higher targets on the table but i think what is very important is that now manufacturers have clarity for the longer term so that they know where their investments need to go in order to make sure that the transport sector is also cleaning up and working towards decarbonisation.
we did not always agree but i think in the end we have come to a deal which everyone can support and feel that we are touching the importance of this file which is putting a co two reduction of fifteen in place for two thousand and twenty five and by two thousand and thirty a binding target
we also managed to close all the loopholes mainly around the super credits and shift that to a two benchmark of zero emission vehicles which also gives a clear signal to the manufacturers that they will not be able to stay only improving current combustion engine technologies but that they also need to invest in new technologies for the future which can be zeroemission emobility and also hydrogen. that is still open but this is a clear signal now to the manufacturers that this is the direction to
we will have reviews in place by two thousand and twenty two and i can promise you that by then we probably will look at the targets that we agreed upon tomorrow and we will conclude that we can do more because of the signals we gave to the manufacturers and the investments that will go into zero emission vehicles so that the market is also finally changing and we get new jobs and job creation also within the european union.
that is very important because it's a very clear signal for where to go.
i expect that the european union will increase its national determined contribution when we head off to new york.
it is an improvement compared with the initial proposal so i had to give you that answer.
so those three elements are crucial.
it will be a climate change election.
i spent some of those hours together with you and i have to say that at all times we had a good dialogue.
of course we had our moments when we didn't agree.
but these three things give a very clear signal to investors and to manufacturers that the future will be about zero and low emission vehicles and that just continuing with your current technologies will not do.
that is a crucial element.
and thirdly we improved the on road in service conformity to make sure that what we agree on paper is also going to be achieved in reality which is very important as you should know after dieselgate.
thus allowing for a cost effective implementation that will not create excessive burdens on individual public authorities.
not only on this file but also in the entire process.
many of our cities i can mention amsterdam berlin paris warsaw barcelona hamburg milan ljubljana and munich among others but there are many more have already made voluntary commitments going even beyond what will be required by the directive and we will now help
with the adoption of this revised directive we will introduce a clean vehicle definition and set minimum national targets for their public procurement including specific targets for zero emission buses.
the revision will also expand the scope of the directive to cover public procurement through practices such as lease hire purchase and rentals.
together these measures will help provide clear long term market signals and will allow public authorities manufacturers and investors to better plan for the transition towards zero emission mobility by mid century.
as you said the cooperation was not always easy but it was open very dedicated and we delivered.
this will ensure that the directive better reflects current practices in public procurement and it will help to achieve the expected impact on the market.
other cities follow their example.
in the implementation so that the directive's objective can be achieved without creating substantial administrative burdens for public authorities.
i'm confident that the agreement reached in the trilogue sets a stringent enough definition and realistic yet ambitious national targets. the text also leaves full flexibility in the way the effort is shared within a member state
because this might be one of the final times we speak in this parliament i wanted to say that the research activities of the european parliament and the people involved with me over the last twenty years in producing original research for legislation have been phenomenal.
we have to use the means available.
but no one is coming to rescue the people in need. operation sophia is not running any more.
in the long term we do need to have a civil sea rescue in the mediterranean organised at european level because member states are not willing to act.
nobody rescues from there.
so frontex can now still only rescue people within the limits of border surveillance operations and that currently means just thirty sea miles off the coast of sicily.
we here in the house all voted to make sure that frontex has a stronger mandate in search and rescue because of the humanitarian crisis that we see unfolding in the mediterranean every day. so i'm really happy that there was a majority in this house for that. but the member states saw it very differently.
that is not the place where we have the problem.
we know where they are.
their coordinates are clear.
people are drowning in the mediterranean sea right now while everyone is watching.
that's a very small area.
they have blocked the rapporteur's attempts to put search and rescue more strongly into the text of this legislation and that is really a problem.
ngos are being criminalised and their ships are being taken away.
they are known to frontex.
with that europe is violating its obligation to save lives by shifting it to a non existent libyan rescue centre.
but we cannot wait until then.
this procedure implies that the institutions exchange views and search for a compromise acceptable for all of them.
moreover this attitude is not compatible with the principle of sincere cooperation between the institutions that we all should respect and cherish.
this is not the way the consent procedure functions.
at stake here is a fundamental question of respect for the prerogatives of the parliament and for the institutional balance. it is fundamental that the council and the commission understand it.
the council demanded that the initial proposal of the european parliament should already contain the text acceptable for the council.
how would the council or the commission react if the european parliament refused even to discuss possible ways to reach an agreement on let's say the mff using the pretext that it does not like the proposal of the commission?
the commission proposal responded to long standing calls from the european parliament trade unions and business organisations for rules in this area.
the directive will enable companies to move and reorganise in the eu single market while providing necessary safeguards for employees and other stakeholders.
the eu's single market offers many opportunities for companies to move and grow.
the commission also welcomes the agreed provisions on employees' rights which include many of the issues raised in the european parliament's position.
it provides solid and fair rules for all parties involved in cross border operations while not making the procedure too cumbersome in practice.
emphasises and specifies the employees' rights to have a say in a cross border operation which was also essential for this house.
remembering the divergent positions when the negotiations started the commission would like to congratulate the co legislators on the solutions found. the compromise strikes a good balance and represents a huge step forward compared with the current situation.
the four fifths threshold for starting negotiations in all three crossborder operations the mandatory character of such negotiations and the provisions to protect the negotiated solution in the event of subsequent operations provide a very complete and comprehensive package of safeguards. in addition the new article on information and consultation
so at this moment we are at the end of a very difficult but i believe successful road.
and of course i have to very warmly thank the rapporteur ms evelyn regner and the council presidencies for their constructive approach and efficient work on this very important and complex proposal. i am very pleased that the european parliament and the council found a good and pragmatic compromise which can considerably improve the situation for both companies and their employees.
however often companies cannot make use of them in practice.
personally i'd rather be a populist than an un populist but there you are.
if i were living in the third world or any other part of the world that wasn't europe i'd want to come here too. who can blame those people?
later the lisbon treaty which we didn't like very much the eu rejected any reference to god or christian religion in europe. well this is something alien to the continent of europe.
i mean let's be honest this parliament is a bit of a eunuch. they want to be ruled by their own sovereign parliaments. at the moment our own parliament is dominated by an establishment which has been infiltrated over thirty years or more by members of the euro cult who are preventing a simple brexit something that could easily be done;
prime minister kari said we do not have to worry about migration and that many people want to come to a stable democratic continent.
but if the numbers change the philosophy and the democratic nature of the european continent that is neither in the interests of the people who live here or the people who are coming here.
bend with the wind or be crushed i think is the thing you've got to think about.
what they don't want is bureaucratic authoritarianism from unelected european bureaucracy.
thank god for them.
their rebellion against the spanish inquisition led to free thinking democracies in the low countries and in the united kingdom.
but the euro cultists decided otherwise including may i say our own prime minister mrs may who has misled the country in many ways.
the eu is as much a threat to european democracy in the same way the inquisition was in the sixteenth century to free thinking and democracy.
the eu itself with its project of aggressive secularism as roger scruton called it oikophobia is the rejection of our own heritage and culture which is the basis of our current cultural weakness and why many people throughout europe are more and more rejecting the european union.
i don't blame them.
citizens and employers will greatly benefit from the clear deadlines that we wish to introduce for cooperation between national administrations national authorities and i also mentioned the legal certainty that we owe to our citizens to workers and businesses that exercise their free movement.
i think we were able to realise a lot together and i want to thank you for all the achievements that we were able to make together.
so well in time and we launched the proposal because we need to preserve the social protection of the increasing group of mobile citizens.
the modernisation will provide the national administrations with better tools to fight fraud and abuses.
in the context of increased labour mobility and major demographic changes the existing rules must be updated to adequately protect citizens' rights.
please listen for a second.
now moving from the commission's original position and agreeing to binding targets was a tough job and negotiating with the council about introducing a zlev benchmark was definitely an achievement.
parliament's position set the right ambition something that we strongly need in order to be in line with our climate commitments and i believe that the future for cleaner vehicles including trucks will be driven by innovation.
i know that this was not an easy file and it is very positive that we have yet another policy in place to reduce co two emissions because for far too long we had no standards for heavy duty vehicles fully aware that these trucks have a major impact on global warming and that their climate impact is expected to further increase if we remain with the business as usual' scenario.
it is only strong incentives for the production of low emission and zero emission vehicles that will ultimately push this change.
it is high time that the eu adopts binding co two targets for heavy duty vehicles.
with this piece of legislation we are truly inviting european companies to the twenty first century.
so i can ask mr president to make an exception for statistical purposes perhaps can you note down two interventions from me my first and last in one?
russia has violated international norms and rules by illegally occupying many of the neighbouring states georgia parts of ukraine also moldova. what are your opinions on this and how do you see this difficult relationship that we have with russia due to their own actions developing in the future?
for me it's the first and the last in one as i'm a very new member only having joined about ten days ago.
so let me ask you about your opinion of the eurussia relationship.
but thank you prime minister and.
but in europe none of us has to go anywhere.
the original americans are not a people who have tremendous rights in the united states.
free will of participation by the member states free will of participation by the citizens and we see that if citizens change their mind no one is standing in the way.
that is you have no say you have no right to express your opinion there is no vote someone else decides and they push you out of the way as they're moving forward.
the best way is the way that this house does it we debate we listen to one another we respect one another but then at the end of the day we vote and we move forward.
i am happy and willing to engage with anyone who believes that the way forward is to work with one another.
the fact that we have been able to maintain individual sovereign national countries with strong identities distinct languages unique cultures independent and interrelated histories and yet at the same time that we can work together to open up the markets to trade to find a way to pool our common resources into a single and strong and powerful voice in the world.
this is the strength and the power of the eu.
there are two ways to deal with differences of opinion.
it's clear which is the best way.
there's another way to do it something that my country experienced for a very long time under the occupation of the soviet union.
the united states is a country based upon immigration.
the people that we call americans generally speaking have come from europe have come from africa have come from asia have come from everywhere with the acceptance that they leave something behind and become something together.
we can maintain our languages and identities yet come together on a political level and an economic level to further the interests of our own citizens.
contact point for inquiry. the new informal proposal also contains references to the regulation on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by eu institutions and to the framework agreement between the european parliament and the european commission.
two thousand and twelve the most important concerns are sanctions for non compliance with the provisions of the regulations;
notwithstanding these concerns i would like to stress the commission's continued willingness and commitment to engage in a constructive trilateral discussion with a view to finding appropriate solutions to the divergences that still exist between the three institutions.
certain aspects of the investigative means which would be in the hands of the committee such as on the spot investigations hearings of commissioners and former commissioners hearings of officials and former officials as well as hearings of natural persons;
the commission acknowledges that the new informal proposal is drafted in more precise legal terms and incorporates several improvements for instance as regards the rules on the setting up of the committee of inquiry the procedural rules applying to its investigation or the introduction of a central
however the non paper proposal still contains a number of legal and institutional concerns that have been at the heart of this discussion with the parliament and the council since.
and finally the provisions on sanctions.
in substance the council's position on these fundamental issues has not changed since the martin report and to be more specific let me mention among the most problematic issues this power to summon individuals who are not officials as witnesses and to enforce such a measure by sanctions;
efforts to reconcile the diverse positions such as the more recent work by the experts of the three legal services at technical level which held so many meetings the progress made on some less problematic provisions resulting from this work did not match and did not solve the most complex
two thousand and fourteen it meets some of the concerns expressed by the council on previous occasions and takes up some of the solutions which are jointly suggested by the legal experts of the three institutions.
the non paper indeed contains a number of improvements compared to the proposal of.
issues of a legal and political nature.
i want to thank from the bottom of my heart all of the members of the libe committee who i've had the privilege to work with.
it is my greatest hope that in the next term this legislation will be unfrozen and that the member states will understand what has been produced in this parliament the quality of the legislation the vision that has been produced and understand that this european parliament is not a rubber stamp.
mr president thank you very much for your sensitive handling of this session.
may i also just do what other colleagues have done with your indulgence.
it was not so much about the visa code as goodbye from many colleagues.
prolific legislative committee in parliament at the moment but we are dealing with some of the toughest issues because we are dealing with a very tough political climate.
it is full of high quality legislators who had vision and passion.
so we believe the committee has found a sound basis for this proposal and we believe it provides a sound basis for negotiation for the next parliament.
my political group has tried to keep the citizen as the person concerned in the language of the text at the centre of that approach and those citizens are not only workers family members students travellers but anyone covered by a social security system and in a crossborder situation.
and we've proposed the issuing of an open a one valid for three months so that an individual who travels often on business doesn't have to make multiple applications that are time consuming for the person concerned and the administration.
we believe that a cross border worker is entitled to equal treatment and that such a measure is not cost effective though some governments may find it politically expedient.
as regards the other amendments tabled we don't support the indexation of family benefits.
we welcome the clear inclusion of long term care in the updated regulation but we start from the belief that the overwhelming majority of citizens and their employers want to stay on the right side of the rules and thus protect their entitlements so it helps if the rules are clear and as easy as possible to follow with a degree of flexibility that reflects and assists daily life. it also helps if there is an effective administration that responds quickly and assists people rather than acting as a bureaucratic barrier that pushes people to take chances. generally we support the committee report. the only amendment amendment one hundred and ninety seven that we've reintroduced concerns this blessed a one form an attestation and not a permission
we also point out that this report strengthens the oversight possibilities for member states and they can always adopt bilateral measures if necessary which makes far more sense than trying to adapt the whole regulation to fix a bilateral problem.
i had hoped by the time i had finished my time in parliament to be voting through a similar agreement with council on the latest update but unfortunately that's not going to be the case due to big divisions in council.
because i believe this file has become a mix of narrow national political interests and people trying to use the regulation to fix problems which are not its core business.
a pan european army would be the ultimate eu disaster.
madam president in order to protect and defend socalled european citizens the juncker commission is willing to finance defence projects worth over eur thirteen billion drone technology satellite communication early warning systems maritime surveillance.
like our great former prime minister margaret thatcher used to say you have no source of money other than the money people themselves earn.
the eu commission is trying to present this evolving project under a peace perspective but it is clear that the eu and its supporters have in mind an eu army. french president emmanuel macron recently encouraged the creation of a european army to defend europe.
no good will ever come of it and i hope the meps elected for the new parliament will start to reverse this and respect the nation state and democracy.
my colleagues and i are strongly against the creation of an eu army and we hope that member states will soon realise that giving more power to the unelected eu commission in brussels in the defence field is a mistake.
in conclusion as my final speech in this parliamentary session i implore you to move away from creating this european superstate including an eu army.
in a moment when the euro is in crisis and there need to be tax cuts to encourage growth europe should worry about major citizens' concerns such as industry's lack of competitiveness carbon leakage and unemployment.