kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
this policy describes its procedures on the collection use and disclosure of personal information to third parties including when it is necessary in order to comply with laws regulations or legal requests from the us government.
this is particularly important nowadays when more and more data are in the cloud.
the eu's data protection directive does not apply to state activities in the area of criminal law nor does a framework decision on data protection in police and judicial cooperation apply in this case given that no eu member state authority is involved in executing the us court order
the global dimension of data processing should not however imply a lowering of the level of protection for eu citizens.
i would strongly recommend that operators be very transparent upstream with their consumers and that they indicate clearly that their service is operating primarily under us law as far as criminal investigations are concerned.
mr president i share the legitimate concerns of this house when it comes to the protection of the private data of european citizens.
we will ensure that these objectives are reached through our future legislative work and you have mentioned that.
we must remember that this issue does not stop at sites like twitter but can apply in cases of national jurisdiction.
i think it is a legitimate concern for all of us in this house that we have to explain to our constituents what protection they can have from the european union. what is the point of ensuring data protection standards for eu citizens if they can simply be lifted at the request of a us subpoena?
sites like twitter are subject to us legislation as their servers are based in the us.
until now framework directive ninety four forty six has provided very strong protection in the internal market but the time has come to review the directive increase the level of protection and extend the same protective measures to judicial and police cooperation.
will they talk to our american counterparts and try and get more information?
in the european union eu citizens no longer have any legal protection because twitter is us based.
i realise there is very little that we can do here but i would like to ask what the commission and the council will do to provide legal protection to eu citizens.
as well as the really important issues about the protection of our citizens' rights that we have talked about today.
i want to thank ms reding for the green paper on which that was based because i think that one of the core ambitious issues that she raised in there is at the core of what we have been discussing tonight.
that is a really ambitious programme.
i hope we can achieve that.
i would therefore deeply regret any action by the hungarian authorities aimed at shrinking the space of civil society organisations or any attempt to control or stigmatise their work.
for instance and i quote brussels wants to force hungary to abolish the reduction in public utility charges'. the reality however is that the commission shares the hungarian government's objective to have affordable energy for households.
ashes. we have built a unique union with common institutions strong values a community of peace freedom democracy human rights and the rule of law'. and i have to add to this on a personal note. as a young man i travelled regularly to hungary and i remember very well the sense of oppression i felt crossing the border from
civil society is the very fabric of democratic societies.
you will all be aware of the hungarian government's stop brussels' consultation. i am pleased to announce that the commission has decided to make public its own response in order to dispel misunderstandings and perhaps get the facts straight.
we have a shared responsibility to live up to our international obligations to protect people fleeing war and persecution and treat them fairly and with dignity.
it is the hungarian government that has decided to set the rate at twenty seven which is the highest in the
where the hungarian authorities engage in a dialogue with the commission good progress can be made and i want to be crystal clear about this.
i have already indicated earlier the commission's position.
that is at the core of the energy union proposals.
another allegation illegal immigrants heading to hungary are encouraged to illegal acts not by just human traffickers but also by some international organisations.
with regard to the transposition of the framework decision on racism and xenophobia we are pleased to see that in our discussions with the hungarian authorities our concerns have been addressed in recently adopted amendments to the hungarian criminal code.
that is the importance of civil society.
brussels? the fact that only one month after this declaration we are having today's debate on the situation in hungary gives us all the more reason to seek clarifications about the intentions of the hungarian government.
the protection of pregnant working women is another area we have raised formally with the hungarian authorities and as our concerns remain unanswered the college will shortly decide on the need for further action to ensure full compliance with eu rules on maternity leave and gender equality in employment.
there is no evidence whatsoever of ngos working with criminal smuggling networks to help migrants enter the
we will continue to monitor the situation on the ground.
the fifth allegation is that brussels is attacking hungary's job creating measures.
we also discussed asylum and respect for values of human dignity freedom and human rights tolerance and solidarity.
each and every one of those member states including hungary under signed the rules of the club.
one two hundred and ninety four these are not illegal immigrants.
the draft legislation tabled to the hungarian parliament at the beginning of april on the funding of so called foreign non governmental organisations is also on our radar screen.
but this proposal was opposed by the hungarian government.
cuts. the fact of the matter is that eu taxation rules must be agreed by all member states unanimously.
here we also had a lot of discussion and dialogue and following our technical discussions with the hungarian authorities the commission is awaiting for hungary to notify the recently proposed legislative amendments in this field.
the hungarian authorities themselves have reported that this contributed to creating more than one hundred and fifty zero jobs. the last issue on the questionnaire is that brussels is attacking our country because of tax
the commission has already expressed its concerns about the existing hungarian law.
several of the claims and allegations made in the consultation need correction.
for. this is something that was done by the hungarian people themselves striving for freedom protecting their freedom however it is now a common european task and we will have to fight for that. given this history given the rome declaration how can one reconcile this with a campaign to stop
if adopted it could raise concerns as regards the compatibility with the eu's internal market rules in particular the free movement of capital and the eu charter of fundamental rights including the freedom of assembly.
each and every one of those member states including hungary take both the responsibility and the credit for decisions we take collectively.
hungary is therefore asked to accept a very limited number of asylum seekers.
the eu has agreed only minimum vat levels.
as regards the values of equality and non discrimination the college continues to be attentive to the situation of the roma in hungary and in particular to discrimination against roma children in education.
the opposite is true. the eu is massively supporting job creation in hungary.
let me say in conclusion that i strongly thank parliament for supporting this but i also want to express my gratitude to prime minister orbn for coming here today and having this debate
if these discussions do not produce timely results the commission will not hesitate to take further action.
saving lives at sea and looking after vulnerable people who are in need of international protection is not the same thing as promoting irregular migration.
however of course practical implementation of national legislation is key and hate crime cases need to be investigated in practice.
the european union for its part has strict rules on transparency and lobbying of the european institutions.
with us. dialogue is the european way dialogue to solve misunderstandings but also dialogue when we
another allegation brussels wants to force hungary to let in illegal immigrants. again the reality is that the european union is fighting irregular migration and is actively helping member states to manage their external borders and return irregular migrants who have no right to stay in the eu but irregular migration needs to be distinguished from seeking asylum.
let me be very clear about this the european union has zero tolerance for human trafficking and it has taken action for many years to combat this heinous crime.
while the conditions under which non governmental organisations carry out their activities are in principle a matter of national law those conditions must be in line with eu law and the union's values.
yes ngos need to be transparent about their finances but the commission will continue to follow the draft legislation closely and will express its concerns on the draft law in the context of this broader political dialogue.
the best way to achieve this is to establish competitive energy markets and promote energy efficiency and innovation and to work together at european level to ensure security of supply.
austria into hungary the barbed wire the watchtowers the oppressive feeling in budapest that you had all the time. the biggest single miracle in my lifetime is the fall of the berlin wall the fall of the iron curtain and that hungary became one of the democratic nations
we would not be democracies without strong and free civil societies.
the european union is not and has never been about brussels the european union is a project driven and designed by its member states each of which has decided individually and democratically that this is the path they wish to adopt.
now let me be very clear. hungary in two thousand and fifteen was under incredible pressure incredible pressure which was extremely difficult to manage. given those exceptional pressures in two thousand and fifteen in september of that year the commission proposed to relocate up to fifty four zero asylum applicants from hungary to other member states
eu. honourable members on twenty three march the leaders of twenty seven member states and the eu institutions including the prime minister of hungary stated in the rome declaration and i quote sixty years ago recovering from the tragedy of two world wars we decided to bond together and rebuild our continent from its
mr president honourable members prime minister recent developments in hungary have got many people worried in the eu but also in the outside world.
the commission's analysis of the law confirmed our concerns with regard to its compatibility with internal market freedoms and the eu charter of fundamental rights.
the discussions allowed us to assess all the issues in an objective fact based and law based manner.
questions have been asked about the compatibility of certain actions of the hungarian authorities with eu law and with our shared values and also these questions were raised by this parliament with the commission.
surely since you yourself have said in the past that we need to get rid of a utopia called supranational europe it must become clear to you as it became clear to eurosceptics in the united kingdom that this set of organisations bound by their treaties are not open to reform.
mr president mr orbn not for the first time you sit here as the democratically elected leader of a great nation and you stand up and make a reasoned argument as to how the hungarians do things and how there are different cultures within europe.
you are a sinner in their eyes not just because you want to close down george soros' propaganda machine that masquerades as a university nothing to do with that.
i am beginning to wonder at what point sir do you as an intelligent man stop banging your head up against a wall?
now you were bold enough to call a referendum on the migrant quotas and eighty eight of those that voted agreed with you.
no you are not the leader of a nation and these people will go on interfering in the lives of hungarian people and you will never be forgiven.
you are prepared again and again to come back here and to be attacked and abused by non entities who want hungary to bow to their will and not to the will of the hungarian people or its leader.
are you really the kind of man who needs to paint an incorrect and exaggerated picture of brussels as the enemy only to look stronger at home? is your place among the autocratic leaders we see in our neighbourhood like putin or erdogan or do you belong to a europe based on the core values that you yourself fought for in? one thousand nine hundred and eighty nine the choice is yours but so are the consequences.
i stand here with pain in my heart in this debate pain in my heart because i also know the other hungary and i have to say the other fidesz the fidesz that was born in opposition to communism and the fidesz that participated in the pan european picnics showing that it wanted to overcome communism and become part of a europe that stands united.
but the real question of course lies with you prime minister.
eu. but instead of directing your anger at refugees themselves you should direct your energy towards your fellow eu member states so that they help you in welcoming them.
i would not be afraid of leading edge universities because they would nurture talent in my country and i would say even better if some of the funding comes from abroad because it enriches my country.
hungary will be a better place for its people by having a diversified free press strong democratic checks and balances a vibrant civil society and leading edge universities. i would like to conclude with one thing the refugee issue and of course you expected me to do that. mr orbn i must say that we are utterly appalled at the way your country has been treating refugees.
i would not be afraid of a vibrant civil society because it would help me spot problem areas that i need to solve.
the first reason is do these things be an open society because it is good for hungary.
your people trusted you and i just imagine you might laugh at me but if my party enjoyed a two thirds majority in any member state well three times i agree! i would not be afraid of an independent press because it would stimulate the public debate in the country and mobilise the collective intelligence we need.
i would not be afraid of a strong and independent judiciary because checks and balances is what we need in democracy.
hungary will be stronger.
' it is not just that i would not be afraid of these things i would cherish them because i think they would help to deliver a better society for my citizens.
true enough hungary sits in an uncomfortable situation at the outer border of the
well i must tell you one thing as a christian i find nowhere in the gospel that the stranger should be locked up and sent back.
mr orbn and you did it again today you often refer to christian values.
he once said that his big examples were putin and erdoan and indeed he is a very good copy of that. however i would like to address the european commission.
we should also recognise the contagion that is taking place in poland so if we fail to recognise that systematic nature then we fail to preserve the integrity of the european union.
i also recognise the limited instruments available but i think we should all recognise and i would also like to ask mr weber to recognise that we are not talking about single issues here.
we should address this in the systematic nature of the problem the systematic destruction of the democratic rule of law and fundamental rights.
i very much welcome the steps that have been taken by mr timmermans.
you changed.
what is the next thing?
even the left or the right in this house respect them.
not very courageous i should say and certainly not in line with a politician based on principles.
is it not the time to ask yourself in your soul how you wish to be remembered in the future? do you want to be remembered as somebody who liberated your country hungary from communism and you did that or do you want to be commemorated as an eternal enemy of our open european democratic society? that is the choice that you have to make now.
this is not the way we should have a debate about our common future.
since nobody reacted i want to react i was deeply deeply aggravated by the vile attack by ms von storch on stockholm and on sweden.
that is how we work in the european union.
regarding this debate we are not going to solve these issues only by taking legal steps.
we should cherish this academic freedom this exchange of ideas and this way of promoting a vision of the world that is open to other views.
we live in a european union where through the erasmus programme the cross fertilisation of young minds across the european union is one of the biggest assets of this european union and one of the biggest success stories.
i have to say that the only thing the central european university is asking is to be left alone to do what it does well.
i will be looking forward to the reply by the hungarian authorities to the notification we have sent on the law on higher education.
i know we live in a time when very often when we have strong opinions and they are not in line with the facts we assume that the facts must be wrong but on this specific case the commission will stick to the facts.
from the extreme right because of their lack of arguments we only get insults.
i would be grateful to the hungarian authorities if in their procedure on stop brussels' they would take into account the facts we have presented in reaction to the questions put to the hungarian population. i think we deserve that.
i think this is completely unacceptable.
that is their prerogative but mine is to stand up for the europe i believe in.
it is a collection of states that share the same intrinsic value system and that believe in sincere cooperation with each other.
when higher education institutes are targeted and vast sums are spent on disingenuous campaigns to stop brussels this runs contrary to the values we believe in.
pandering to populists at the very time when the world needs the opposite is not our way.
i am a proud member of the epp.
we will always defend those values whenever and wherever they are under threat whether it is the corruption of the socialist government in malta the watering down of the rule of law in romania institutions under pressure in poland or what is happening in hungary.
our values have stood the test of time and they are not up for negotiation not now and not ever.
we cannot just sweep out civil society.
we have to defend the people of hungary from the corrosion of the fundamental values;
that will happen tonight and we had tabled a request for that.
evidently a stable and permanent democracy is a precondition for eventual membership of the eu.
the first is turkey's history of military intervention in the political process. while the army is undoubtedly an important guarantor of secularism and stability any attempt to undermine an elected government would scupper turkey's eu ambitions for good. the second concern is the dominance of the akp in the political landscape which leads some observers to fear the gradual development of a de facto one party state.
madam president turkey's political system is sufficiently mature now to be considered a pluralist democracy.
until now the secular kemalist tradition has served turkey's euro atlantic leanings very well but its gradual decline due to demographic changes would tend to indicate that those who believe in the power of ataturk's vision have rather taken it too much for granted.
for the good of turkish society democracy needs to be pluralist secular and built on a bed rock of respect for human rights including those of its kurdish minorities.
there are now however perhaps two areas of concern.
provided that happens democratically we cannot object even if some have expressed concerns about the relatively high threshold for parliamentary representation at ten in turkey which of course squeezes smaller parties out of the parliamentary process. however the akp's mildly islamist leanings also give rise to concern in the views of some and the party's popularity tends to indicate a fundamental paradigm shift in the nature of turkish society.
we all recognise that terrorist organisations have political fronts and it is a fine judgment whether more damage is done by leaving a front alone or closing it down.
it is for these reasons that i believe we should be very supportive of turkey and not seek constantly to find ways of criticising her and sniping at her.
perhaps it is because it is three years since the death of hrant dink and there are still serious questions still to be answered in relation to that crime.
i also support the idea of turkey as a secular and united country that for over eighty years has looked to the west.
dink's death was of course a great tragedy and as a friend of turkey i did not hesitate to point out the damage to turkey's standing of restricting freedom of expression and being oversensitive about criticisms of the turkish state.
of course the pkk has its political fronts.
sources of funding.
what is clear is that the pkk continues not only as a terrorist organisation but also with its criminal networks which extend beyond turkey throughout europe.
the pkk is like a mafia with a structure carrying out criminal activity raising funds and bolstering support. it is involved in every aspect of organised crime tax evasion counterfeiting money trafficking of human beings and the narcotics trade of course is one of its key
i will just say a word about the pkk because it continues with its terrorist activities.
of course banning political parties is generally a bad idea although there are exceptions to that rule.
in this european parliament we should particularly regret the jailing of nine of the party's elected mayors and the banning of two of its mps. in our parliament as in theirs the reason that we have parliamentary immunity is so that we as representatives of the people can speak out without fear.
so finally a party whose turkish name translates as the democratic society party' is gone but its aim of a democratic society in a modern turkey must not be lost.
yet tonight parliament joins council and commission in expressing our deep concern that what is closed instead with december's constitutional court decision is the political party which commands the majority of the vote in the country's kurdish majority areas and is what the country's human rights association calls the natural negotiator' on behalf of the kurdish people.
i acknowledge that the closure of political parties was opposed by the turkish prime minister in his statement in the wake of the decision and today's turkish press reports the governing party's announced intention to prevent further unwarranted closures by bringing the constitution into line with article eleven of the european convention on human rights.
between seven hundred and one zero of the party's members are reported to be imprisoned many for simply speaking their own language in public.
madam president the announcement of the democratic opening last year gave hope of a genuine breakthrough in securing respect for kurdish linguistic cultural and human rights in turkey and closing the door on the years of terrorism and violence.
the fear that we have to combat for those of us intent on seeing turkey join the european union is the misplaced fear amongst some of the majority population that in a multi ethnic country what we call minority rights are a threat to the unity of the state.
in a democracy politics must be conducted through the ballot box not with bullets and bombs.