kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
mr president madam commissioner it has been a long time but finally we've got there and i have to say that i am very happy that we are about to start negotiations about free trade agreement with australia and new zealand for at least three reasons.
one is that what we have here are two like minded partners very stable countries and the fastest growing developed economies.
free trade agreements with them will definitely help to deliver jobs growth and investment and will benefit eu businesses and citizens alike.
secondly i see a window of opportunity for the entire european union to promote free trade worldwide after the united states became a bit more hesitant in that direction and i think that we should take advantage of that. and thirdly last but not least as a rapporteur for the free trade agreement between the eu and vietnam i can only welcome the fact that we are opening up new opportunities in the pacific region and
mr president honourable members as so many of you have said we are talking about two friends and allies new zealand and australia who share not only values our commitment to rule of law human rights and progressive trade but also a strong commitment to upholding international organisations and global rules when it comes to trade.
and in this world today that is not negligible we need friends like that.
our current exports to these countries are more than our exports to canada and they can be much bigger.
we have done very thorough preparatory work with both australia and new zealand they are aware of the debate here in europe;
they are aware of the political discussions in some of the countries relating to trade.
of course we cannot exclude the whole agricultural sector that makes absolutely no sense but we are aware of the sensitive parts of this.
and while for beef the small country specific quotas are almost entirely used the use of quotas for sheep meat and dairy have declined the past years and that means that australia and new zealand have found new other more attractive markets for their exports and have diverted their exports increasingly to other countries in asia where they have trade agreements.
sheep meat makes onethird of eu agricultural imports from new zealand and it already today enters dutyfree as a result of a historical and very large tariffrate quota.
in the case of australia agriculture is less than onesixth of our total imports and the biggest import is oilseed canola mostly used for biodiesel production in the eu.
but we also have offensive interest and not least if we can get new zealand and australia to accept the geographical indications which mean so much for our agricultural sector.
on transparency yes you can rely on the commission we will do this in utmost transparency continuing the tradition to publish documents and to liaise with you in different areas.
we sent the draft mandates from the commission directly to the national parliaments so that they can start yesterday looking into them setting up the different committees or sectors etc.
to be able to follow closely these relations and these negotiations.
of course they should be involved.
they don't necessarily have to vote in the end but they should be involved much more than in the past that is a national responsibility as well.
and as you know we are setting up a permanent advisory group for all our trade agreements where businesses trade unions environmental organisations and consumer organisations will be involved because we do want to listen to their advice and that is part of the new more inclusive trade policy.
new zealand and australia are of course two different countries different traditions different politics.
we started the process at the same time.
but each country will have their own path of negotiation.
thank you very much for this debate and i hope that you vote wisely tomorrow morning.
we need the long overdue reform of eu trade defence instruments.
we now need trade ministers to do their part and to stop blocking it. tomorrow they have an opportunity to make a key decision for our manufacturing industries. on their side china must deal with their massive overcapacity;
now we are being put under pressure to decide whether the eu should grant china market economy status in december risking the tools we currently have to deal with chinese trade dumping.
madam president trouble has been looming for fifteen years and for fifteen years our governments did nothing.
without real reforms in china there cannot be any recognition of what would really be a fictional market economy status.
the situation in the steel ceramics and other manufacturing industries demonstrates that these tools are not sufficient today to fully protect jobs and businesses against unfair competition.
some have suggested that if this was put in place it would support local producers and local farmers and ensure that people knew what they were eating.
however we still have some loopholes in relation to processed meat and this resolution today is an attempt to start or continue the conversation around how to ensure that consumers have sufficient information to make informed judgments without ensuring we have disproportionate costs.
with regard to milk and dairy produce there are some difficulties and i was disappointed that we did not recognise this by supporting amendment five which highlighted the negative effect mandatory labelling could have on dairies in border regions. we need to look at this issue but it is very important to remember that country of origin labelling often supports locally produced milk rather than the cheapest milk sourced from anywhere in the world.
we have another possibility called bonus months' where if the parents agree to share the parental leave they are given bonus paid weeks.
this is a crucial issue if we want parents but in particular fathers to use parental leave.
two seven of fathers take parental leave across the eu despite the fact that we have the option of fathers taking up to four months.
in ireland as of yet we have no paid parental or paternity leave.
finally let me say that once again this morning i called on the commission to put in place a carers leave directive and i am very anxiously awaiting the new start for parents and carers that commissioner jourov promised this morning.
a policy instrument called daddy quotas' where a part of the parental leave is reserved for the father has been successful in very many nordic countries.
therefore this debate today is a question of equality and a question of fairness as well.
steel dumping has damaged our industry unfairly and if china wants to be regarded as a reliable and trusted partner on equal terms with us it must act like one.
a potential turning point in global trade is just a few months away and we have no idea how the commission will tackle a situation that could cause irreversible damage to our industry and jobs.
the real question though is why has the commission seemingly been sitting on its hands doing nothing to anticipate a situation that has been fifteen years in the making?
madam president today's vote gives a clear signal that firm action must be taken against practices that are far removed from the fair competition and open trade that this house should champion.
focusing on protection of human rights trafficking from a gender perspective is a priority for the epp and it is important that we not only work to prevent human trafficking but protect victims of trafficking and work towards having better cooperation between member states when tackling these human rights issues. ireland is committed to tackling and preventing human trafficking and this report tackles that issue in a largely positive way which we are happy to support and hopefully we can help to move towards reducing and eventually eliminating this despicable practice.
it has happened in the case of solar panels tyres and shoes and now it is happening in the steel sector.
madam president today i voted in favour of the country of origin labelling resolution along with my fellow conservative meps and i am very pleased to see it passed.
the yorkshire post in my constituency has been campaigning to address the current situation whereby dairy products made with foreign milk can be labelled as british.
consumers want to support our dairy farmers but they can only do that if food is clearly labelled and after today's vote the commission must sit up and react.
if mandatory labelling is to be introduced in these instances the extra cost that would be put on producers must be taken into account by this parliament. if mandatory labelling is going to raise the cost of production beyond a feasible level it may not be the best course of action.
i would like to hear from the commission before any further action is taken.
mr president i had thought that after twelve years in this house nothing could faze me any more but i was shocked by the tone in which mr brok introduced his report yesterday.
he said in so many words that we have had to avoid the usual treaty revision procedure because otherwise it might have triggered a referendum in some member states!
what shocked me was not the arrogance or the disconnection from reality or even the disdain for public opinion but the flagrancy.
all of this happened under the noses of the ecb with interest rates that were totally inappropriate. irish citizens are expected to deal with all of this.
we do not just have a currency crisis; we have a banking crisis and we have a sovereign debt crisis.
yes they are hard decisions but these decisions will determine the future or the failure of the euro zone.
amendment thirty three which would have given the fund the ability to purchase bonds on the secondary markets was withdrawn.
and yet we persist in putting sticking plaster on deep wounds.
the parliament like the european council up to now refused to take the hard decisions.
we have been trying to buy time with bailouts.
nobody is prepared to face reality.
mr president one of the inherent problems of a single currency which has a number of different member states with economic cycles at different rates is that it is pointless having one set of interest rates if you have different spending decisions.
when governments do that and cook the books or do not fulfil the roles of economic governance and economic discipline the others get into trouble.
we want to continue to trade with countries in the euro zone.
mr president when my constituents ask me about the main benefit of being part of the european union my reply is always the free trade that exists between nations and the internal market that we are seeking to complete.
i therefore welcome this consumer rights directive.
i welcome it because it takes an albeit small step towards completing that single market.
it will give some benefits to consumers and small businesses.
the plea that i would make to the commission is that we need a framework for completing the single market as opposed to the rather disconnected series of initiatives that we have at the moment.
complex rules and controls of those rules inevitably mean that taxpayers' money is not spent efficiently.
furthermore the report advocates identifying the best and worst performing member states in its policy area with the best performing states being rewarded with a reduction in controls. now in some quarters this is being suspected of not being in accordance with the basic ideas of the union but let me underline that this fear is in vain it is indeed in accordance with those ideas.
a finnish farmer illustrated the absurdity perfectly by displaying next to each other all of the official forms demanded annually by the national authorities.
the key factor behind the thinking of the report is this simplification is inevitable.
and ease the burden of controls on farmers we cannot hope to attract new entrants to agriculture.
the promotion of performance based controls can be an answer to some of those questions.
should aim to organise on site checks in a way that would not subject the farmer to multiple annual on site checks by the national authorities the commission or the court of auditors.
but this is not just a matter of agriculture.
the report at hand insists that the definition of performance in respect of controls should primarily entail the quality of the member states' checks and administrative systems that is the efficiency consistency and reliability of the managing and certifying authorities. in order to ease the burden on the beneficiaries the authorities
this should be done by advancing and implementing the famous single audit scheme that we have been waiting for too long.
it will be a struggle to even retain the current beneficiaries.
the documents ended up stretching over thirty three metres in length. that is approximately the length of two full rows of epp members in this chamber and that is a long long line. if we do not manage to streamline the cap
as the rules and regulations governing the cap have only got more diverse and complex it is expected that monitoring costs of the almost eur fifty eight billion cap budget will only grow if nothing is done.
your rapporteur has been driven by the ultimate desire to release farmers from behind their desks into the fields and simultaneously provide better control for taxpayers' money.
the farmers face a never ending mountain of paperwork which has to be submitted to national officials with increasingly complex regulations and control measures.
even worse with inefficiency comes uncertainty about correct and responsible use of eu funds.
but we believe that member states could in so far as possible try to group their own controls with those resulting from cap obligations and perhaps they could also learn more from each other than they do today.
if the eu legislator or the member states has specified a conditional requirement to be respected before aid can be paid then there needs to be a check that this condition or requirement has been met.
the current legislation allows member states with reliable management and control systems to reduce the level of the spot checks.
and the commission will present more proposals in the coming months.
the commission services are working closely with them to ensure all conditions for this reduction are met.
any reflection that does not attempt to tackle this question would really be a missed opportunity.
taxpayers will want to be sure that their money is well spent.
most of the controls they are faced with result from national laws and from cross compliance requirements which do not originate from cap legislation. obviously to most farmers it does not make any difference whether a rule comes from brussels or from their own country they are faced with rules and they want fewer of them.
member states are also encouraged in the current legislation to organise their controls in a way that reduces the burden for farmers.
taxpayers have the right to know whether subsidies from the eu budget are being spent according to the rules and we will therefore not accept any proposal that might compromise the sound financial management of the eu budget. finally
they are absolutely right. they should be farming and not involved in constant bureaucracy.
we should ask ourselves whether an error rate of two is per se the appropriate benchmark for a complex policy such as the cap and more concretely rural development. in that context we should also raise the issue of the acceptable relation between the cost and the benefits of controls.
of course we want simple rules and better application but we also have a great responsibility in ensuring that taxpayers' money is not misappropriated and does not end up where it should not.
the common agricultural policy is and will remain a cornerstone of eu policies.
some member states have expressed interest in taking advantage of this possibility.
however we do not have to wait for new rules to impact on the number of controls farmers face.
as i said controls are and will remain necessary.
the more numerous or complex the requirements the more numerous or complex the controls.
the commission is still evaluating the case and will take the time needed to carry out an in depth assessment of the situation.
having said that the commission is still examining the applications concerned so no decision has been taken.
in two thousand and seventeen we have sponsored initiatives on counter radicalisation people trafficking preventive diplomacy and mediation.
we look forward to contributing to the summit's work as a partner and a friend.
we can be proud of what we have achieved over the last forty years.
there is much we can do together in terms of trade connectivity making the most out of globalisation as well as addressing together the imbalances it can give rise to.
thousand and eighteen to two thousand and twenty two all the key areas of common interest are covered including human rights good governance women's rights and the rule of law.
a seminar in rome allowed for a visit to the headquarters of operation sophia.
once finalised thousands of new jobs will be created and one billion people will be able to fly directly for lower prices and with the highest standards of security.
we have come a long way since.
after all as has been noted together we represent over one billion people and we are among the largest world economies.
these agreements could be the stepping stones towards a future region to region agreement.
the eu wants to contribute to the security of the asean region.
shortly the eu will co sponsor the fourth edition of the eu asean high level dialogue on maritime security this year with the philippines. we see the recent invitation to attend the november east asia summit as an acknowledgment of these efforts.
the eu remains committed to comprehensively upgrading the eu asean relationship.
i am glad that we adopted in august a joint statement to reaffirm that we stand by paris and we will push forward implementation.
today's challenges and crises very often have a global dimension a global impact. the situation in the south china sea and in the korean peninsula the fight against terrorism radicalisation to mention just a few examples are asean interests but they are our interests too.
we want to thank all asean members and in particular the philippines for inviting us.
today every day we see that many of our interests coincide as do many of the challenges we face.
it is also an appropriate way to celebrate this fortieth anniversary. europe and the asean region may be separated geographically but we remain closely linked.
we should not underestimate the joint potential of cooperation between eu and asean in a range of sectors.
forty years ago we took the first steps to build cooperation between the european union and asean.
the european union is the first foreign investor in asean and the second trading partner.
the impact of bilateral free trade agreements between the european union and singapore vietnam indonesia the philippines and thailand would be huge with great benefits for our companies and citizens.
the potential for greater engagement is huge. to turn this potential into reality in manila in august the eu and asean adopted a comprehensive plan of action to guide cooperation from two.
for the third year in a row we have invited asean partners to be acquainted with the eu's capabilities in common defence and security policies.
the eu has become one of the main contributors to the security related activities of the asean regional forum.
the same goes for other security and defence forums in southeast asia notably the asean defence ministers' meeting plus.
we should be ambitious about what we can do together in the years ahead.
both the eu and asean want to continue fighting climate change and to preserve the paris agreement.
i raised the issues that this parliament has raised condemning the atrocities committed in myanmar against the rohingya minority.
i was the only one apart from the indonesian head of delegation to do so.
afterwards delegates from many other countries came up and said they really did support this and that we had to do more to work together to stop these atrocities.
taking steps forward to the strategic partnership would certainly strengthen our economic trade political and security relations.
of course i regret that parliament did not adopt a motion for a resolution on the report on the state of the european carbon market in.
since then the commission has conducted a public consultation on the basis of these six options for structural measures and we are now in the process of reducing the six options to significantly fewer. for instance there appears to be a growing view among stakeholders that the eu ets needs some kind of objective and rule based mechanism to adjust supply
we should identify structural measures to enable the eu ets to address the imbalances in a sustainable manner.
thank you very much for the strong support for structural measures to address the current market imbalances in the previous resolutions thereby acknowledging that the eu ets is a flexible and cost effective measure.
korea china australia in the us at state level california but also many other states and some of the provinces in canada there are a lot that have actually set up their own systems some of which can be and will be linked to the eu ets.
three hundred but of course other models can be sought out to promote innovation and i take the message from the distinguished member.
it should remain a key tool to gradually decarbonise the eu power and industry sector.
but when it comes to europe and the ets as you know the commission already in the summer of two thousand and twelve undertook steps to correct the shortcomings of the eu emissions trading scheme and strengthen it based on a two step approach. on the one hand we should in the short term slow down the increase of supply demand imbalances by backloading part of the auction supply and on the other hand
and thereby strengthen market stability.
this was done through the carbon market report that should have come out only this year but we brought it forward and sent it out in november last year with six structural options included.
two thousand and fifteen linking different emissions trading systems however is challenging as significant differences in the design of such systems exist for example on the acceptance of international credits.
for instance we are working with the chinese on exactly how they should construct their upcoming scheme which has now started in some provinces.
so we should stick to it partly because that is what we can agree on.
do we really believe that the twenty eight member states would agree on that?
so i think that is what we should be working on.
i think that whether we want it or not most people would agree that we have a market based system we have an emissions trading scheme.
i do not think we will and i have to say i do not think we should. there is a reason why other major economies other states are trying now to implement emissions trading schemes. they are trying to learn from the european union.
i think we all know that.
if we had then of course we would just let things be and see what happens.
we have to deal with co two emissions and there has got to be common ground here.
and although he reigned for some two decades most young people anyway would remember him from the story of his trying to demonstrate the limitations of a king's power by trying to curb the incoming sea.
of course we have the background of the financial crisis and of growing unemployment concern about jobs going overseas and above all the lack of a global agreement the sense of why should we go it alone if the world is not playing fair with us?
because it seems to me that the high water mark for dealing with climate change in this parliament and in the european union was towards the end of two thousand and seven and that since then we have been trying to cling on to our ambitions and finding it more and more difficult to see them implemented.
i want to see businesses succeed.
with the way the economy is we are increasingly hearing from citizens that our policies are costing jobs and raising energy prices.