kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
those are the type of things we should be doing when you see the disease and the way in which disease is being reduced in children allowing them to live and giving them life.
it is particularly difficult in the context of representing a member state which is high up on the list of net contributors to the european budget.
so i was delighted to be able to support this report which really deals with a subject where i am always consistently able to point at something that the european union has done for us. eu competition policy is one area where i can be truly enthusiastic.
constant update to processes is vitally important to maintain consumer confidence in what we are doing.
as a group we welcome the aims of the working group on accountability for and audit of disaster related aid namely to set out common standards of guidance and good practice and thus address the challenges of transparency and accountability in this area.
we are also keen to see more involvement of the beneficiaries of the aid in the process of aid planning and management in an attempt to prevent the negative effects of humanitarian aid that can occur without careful monitoring by all the parties for example the discouragement of local food production by the supply of surplus food aid coming from an unreformed cap of the european union.
i believe that there must be more conditionality as well as accountability with regard to the results and that more careful monitoring must be put in place to measure the output of humanitarian aid against pre set indicators.
it has become clear that the management of waste disposal is posing a political and social problem in many member states and the european commission has a fundamental role in controlling and guiding them to ensure the proper enforcement of the eu waste acquis at national level and raise greater environmental awareness among citizens.
we are as a group strongly in favour of the protection of national fiscal sovereignty in order to promote a low tax competitive business environment throughout the european union.
we do not believe that fiscal federalism will do anything to promote responsibility in tax management at a regional level nor do we believe that greater economic efficiency will be achieved as a result.
we agree with the sections of the report that address issues of transparency and believe that the number of loopholes in the system and the many uncertainties in the way it functions must be significantly reduced or reformed.
the call on the commission to work with those member states whose participation in the programme so far has been weak in the hope that all member states will be at a similarly reasonably high level in terms of their involvement is also one we support.
we should also support the move for the programme to focus more of its attention on the eradication of so called and rather shocking honour killings and female genital mutilation which sadly still goes on in some member states and should have absolutely no place whatsoever in a european society.
madam president targeted sanctions are an essential soft power economic mechanism against misbehaving states that the eu can deploy to enforce the combined political will of its member states.
i therefore welcome the watson report and especially its recommendations for developing a consistent and coherent sanctions policy in the council of ministers and its emphasis on the importance of acquiring wider international support such as the un for eu sanctions to give them even further punch and effect in future.
of course they have all kinds of things in common economically.
we have not shown here in the european union that we have the sophistication in foreign policy terms to develop and deal with these very varying political states in a sensible and sophisticated way.
that is what we should be concentrating on and if we cannot do that we should leave it to member states who can.
madam president parliament now has codecision on sporting matters and i am disappointed with the recommendations made in this first report. this weekend sees the start of the six nations championship where wales will proudly play their national sport.
as an avid rugby supporter i cannot help but see this as a missed opportunity for the parliament.
the report should have focused on the positive contribution that sports can have on both participants and supporters in terms of instilling values of respect fair play and social inclusion and should have focused on how the eu could help the development of grass root sports.
it instead concentrates on how the eu can take advantage of the increasing popularity of professional sport including how to develop a database to share information on hooligans which effectively duplicates the work already being conducted by europol.
the report proposes that all agents representing european sportsmen have their fiscal residence in the eu.
this clearly does not serve to promote sport across the eu and certainly not globally.
today's vote was undemocratic however when smaller groups requested roll call votes.
it is because they need to register disappointment on certain parts of reports.
today sadly that was denied by the president.
madam president we had some procedural problems with this vote today as you will have seen and i hope that they were nothing more than a mistake.
i can understand that sitting where you do is a complicated and difficult job;
there is an awful lot going on in the chamber and the rules of procedure are not easy to follow.
in what looked like a flagrant disregard for what the rules of procedure specify our request for separate votes was set to one side.
what alarmed me was that the president used the argument that as long as the chamber had decided by majority this was all right.
we are all bound by our rule book including the person who sits where you sit.
madam president the report on the eu's foreign policy towards brazil russia india and china the brics and other emerging powers including turkey indonesia and mexico rightly acknowledges the increasing role these countries play in our foreign policy and the increasing contribution they are making to the global economy.
we have also seen an increased participation in cooperation in the policies of the brics and the emerging powers on an international level and this is to be encouraged at all times.
it is for this reason that i support the report's proposal for the development of a coherent eu approach to treat the brics as a single bloc and to also seek to establish partnerships with each of the countries within the bloc which will prove to be invaluable when responding to global challenges such as climate change terrorism and of course the financial crisis.
it is only right that the commission focuses on strengthening programmes in member states which have so far limited participation in this programme to ensure that victims are not being overlooked wherever they may be in residence. i agree that more support is needed in developing programmes to eradicate honour killings particularly as there have been a number of high profile cases in the uk which indicates that more work needs to be done urgently on this emotive matter.
it is evident from this fact that in many member states directives are not being transposed or enforced in a satisfactory way.
we agree with the conclusions of the report that all illegal landfills should be closed secured and rehabilitated.
we also agree that guidance should be given as to the location of the landfill sites with relation to local housing schools and health facilities and that there should be better inspections and more consultation when waste facilities are in their planning stages.
furthermore i agree particularly now that there is clean high temperature incineration technology available that it is preferable to burn waste rather than placing it in landfill sites especially given the increasing proportion of our waste that is now being recycled and as i said the technological improvements which are now being developed in this area.
i have seen some of these sites where a lot of leaching was taking place and i believe better solutions can should and must be found where necessary.
madam president i welcome the report on a consistent policy towards regimes against which the eu applies restrictive measures.
if the eu and not national governments are deemed best placed to lead on a particular issue then consistency should be paramount.
it is important however that the eu should develop clearer definitions of what sanctions criteria are which should also be in line with the eu's strategy on human rights.
it is equally necessary to gain support for the eu sanctions policy from all of our international partners when they have been applied to third countries which would only strengthen the impact of the policy globally.
madam president i voted along with the rest of the ecr group where we were allowed to that is against the report on the european dimension in sport.
in my opinion the report focuses far too much on the commercial side of sport.
instead the development of grass roots in sport is overlooked in favour of developing means to take further advantage of the popularity of professional sport.
we should be giving more people the chance to learn a sense of discipline and self worth rather than focusing exclusively on introducing new eu legal rules on fiscal residence for sports agents as the report seems to suggest.
as the rapporteur has said the parliament team has done well and in the context of solvency ii;
i hope that member states will rise to the challenge when it comes to looking for better solutions on winding up.
i made the original amendment in part with the report on equitable life in mind but in the context of the financial crisis it has a wider resonance and i have achieved similar inclusions in the capital requirements and credit rating proposals.
group supervision is now made an inclusive process not winner takes all for the group supervisor although there has to be responsibility at a single end point ultimately.
proper understanding of models and underlying assumptions should be a more intensive way of supervising than tick boxes.
madam president i welcome the agreement for solvency ii and like others i regret the relegation of group support to a future review and the eventual inability on the part of the council to explore with us ways to make it workable taking into account some well founded concerns.
it must be absolutely clear that taking a risk based approach is not a soft option.
stress tests must challenge beyond the comfort zone of assumptions and correlation factors should remain under active review.
however there are instruments available that could achieve the objective and we recommended level two measures but now we are left to look for the future for ways to maximise safe economic use of capital in a group.
turning now to some of the things in the package changes to article twenty seven specified that supervisory authorities must have relevant expertise and capacity.
the role of ceiops is augmented and it is worth stressing that it was the discussion around solvency ii that led the way towards mainstream thinking on enhanced roles for the level three committees. importantly it is also clarified that there should not be conflicts between the mandate of a national supervisor and its role within ceiops. these amendments were somewhat prescient when made quite some time ago but have shown their worth as the financial crisis has developed.
so has the czech presidency.
eu acquis. for several reasons administrative burdens hit smes harder than bigger
solvency ii will bring about a regime for the insurance industry that can serve as a model for similar reforms internationally.
i repeat. at the same time small businesses are the backbone of our european economy and they are currently facing very difficult economic
this light. today only seven months after the proposal was put forward by the commission i am very pleased with this compromise even though the commission had gone even further in its original
vote. the current solvency regime is over thirty years
times. in the current difficult and challenging economic situation we cannot afford such impediments.
proposal. i look forward to parliament endorsing this compromise which will rapidly bring significant benefits to companies especially
companies. an expert report from two thousand and seven estimates that small enterprises spend ten times the amount that large enterprises have to spend in order to comply with information obligations imposed by legislation. ten times
the integrity of the rating process and an adequate management of conflicts of interest that existed before in the rating process.
report. thanks to the efficient work of the rapporteur ms weber it has been possible to identify a compromise on simplified reporting and documentation requirements in the case of mergers and divisions of public limited liability companies which will maintain a very significant part of the savings potential of the original commission proposal which amounts to eur one hundred and seventy two million per year. measurements and studies carried out in the context of reduction of administrative burdens show that company law is one of the most burdensome areas of the
ii. i would like to thank the rapporteur mr skinner and parliament for their work and their willingness to compromise in order to reach agreement in a single reading on this important subject. such an outcome will be widely welcomed by the eu insurance industry by supervisors and by stakeholders in
old. solvency ii will introduce an economic risk based regime that will deepen integration of the eu insurance market enhance policyholder protection and increase the competitiveness of eu
it is by this process and this process alone that we will be able to establish a proper and appropriate form of regulation.
amongst them is the issue of management of risk. i think it is not enough now that regulators simply tick boxes to establish whether or not the industry that they are meant to be guarding and protecting on behalf of the consumer is doing the right thing.
and how we have finally brought this now to parliament in order to be able to establish what i think will be a very concrete basis for regulation across the european union.
it is clear with the financial crisis and everything that has gone along with it that the insurance industry is something which cannot be left alone.
specifically to match the economic side of this particular approach.
we must also challenge regulators elsewhere in the world and recognise country to country regimes only.
it is the reporting of companies yes they will be doing things to tell regulators what they are doing but regulators will have to be involved.
it pushed it further than i think the council established and really wanted to go under the last two presidencies so i am very proud and pleased to have worked with the team that i have in order to be able to get the council to move. unfortunately we will not have the kind of group support that we initially envisaged that we should
similarly companies will manage to get economies of scale from this regulation because now they will be reporting only in one way to each of the regulators.
national industries one way or another so i cannot pretend that this has not been a very difficult dossier to try to negotiate with the council it has.
what they produce what they have to say what they do and how they report will not just be to one regulator but it could be to a college of regulators especially for groups because as insurance companies cross borders it is now important that regulators team up and work together to ensure that the appropriate levels of reporting the appropriate levels of figures and what information is supplied are brought to bear to make sure that the markets are best protected. it was during the discussion with the council that parliament saw some interesting and perhaps sometimes even deliberate ploys to move
and across twenty seven member states not each individual member state with their own separate rules now considering what they can apply in terms of that regulation but indeed they will be applying a standard formula of regulation across the european union which will lead frankly to the better consumer platform of protection that we expect.
but because we are able to insert a review clause in this directive we will be able to come back to group support and three years after the introduction of this particular directive i am hoping and i expect the commissioner to tell me that he will anticipate doing this as well to be able to bring back group support in one way or another
we want a regulation that is risk based and principle based but one that will also support the capacity of the industry and one that will promote the very best instincts of regulators across the european union and abroad.
i will just finish on this one note.
it is of course something which we are coming back to.
there are several measures which come about from solvency ii which i think have helped to make this one of the leading reports which will be a global leader at that.
madam president you caught me slightly unawares as i had not seen the complete change of the timetable today but i am very grateful for the chance to address the chamber about a very important issue of the financial services industry that is the insurance and reinsurance industry what we have done with the solvency ii report
it is essential that the day to day business of insurance and reinsurance companies is actually watched managed and monitored by regulators over a period of time.
what we are missing is leadership.
i would say to you that if the czech presidency or its successors is not capable of doing the job then it shows that we really do need lisbon we really do need somebody on a more permanent basis to give leadership to the european union.
i think we have got too much into the detail of saying oh we are going to build this fire station at some time in the future.
the czech presidency is a great disappointment and the president of the czech republic in particular is a great disappointment.
the european union and its institutions together with countries like china could do much more.
credit ratings are an opinion they are useful opinions they are expert opinions but they are only opinions so it is up to investors to take full responsibility for their investment decisions.
i was concerned that the rabidly hostile scapegoating of credit rating agencies would result in excessively intrusive and counter productive regulation with an overwhelming eurocentric protectionist and extraterritorial dimension.
clearly these agencies have made serious mistakes and some form of increased regulation was inevitable.
i am glad the scope is restricted to ratings used for regulatory purposes.
with no prior impact assessment these will almost certainly appear and therefore the review requirement in article thirty four is of vital importance.
but could the commissioner please confirm that this means that investors can still invest freely in stocks and bonds in third countries which are not rated in europe or which do not have equivalent status?
we must be on the look out for unintended consequences.
i am glad to see that we have moved away from equivalence and endorsement when dealing with third country ratings to equivalence or endorsement.
but who has not made mistakes not least the regulators themselves and can we be sure they are now above making any future errors?
we need to work hard to achieve a group system that will work for and in a truly european single market for insurance which is also effective with third countries we cannot have any more aig fiascos. i would also like to compliment rapporteur gauzs and the council on reaching a reasonable conclusion to the regulation of credit rating agencies.
the compromise i am glad to see has muted these tendencies to some extent but not to the extent i would have liked to have seen.
mr skinner and his shadows have displayed exemplary resilience and patience in achieving this.
can we do more?
maybe it is time to change it certainly not to make it softer but perhaps to bring it more in line with the current realities we are living through. if we want to be more efficient it is better to put our energy into being constructive and i think it is fair to say that
when one hears that small enterprises today have to spend ten times more than big companies in order to comply with eu legislation on reporting requirements it is normal to wonder why this is so and how we have come to have rules which through their effects may actually kill these small enterprises and why it has taken us so long
of course this is not the end of the story.
we will focus on the main drivers behind the cost and administrative complexities that are hampering a large scale introduction of financial participation schemes in particular in cross border scenarios.
and the resolution on employee financial participation. the resolution provides a comprehensive overview of concrete initiatives which should be considered by the member states and by the commission to encourage and facilitate employee financial participation across the european union. more than thirty years of research support the conclusion
that companies that are partly or entirely owned by their employees are more profitable create more jobs and pay more taxes than their competitors without employee share ownership.
smes constitute the vital texture of our economy and employee share ownership can help sustain the success of commercial and social enterprises. for all these reasons i welcome this resolution as an important contribution to the execution of the commission's inclusive growth strategy to ensure that we emerge faster and stronger from the economic and financial crisis.
secondly we will analyse in detail the possible regulatory and non regulatory actions that might be proposed or undertaken by the commission.
the purpose of this project is firstly to identify the reasons underpinning the wide divergences in approaches across member states.
it should be voluntary and employees should be provided with all the relevant information in order to make an informed decision.
in addition we recommend that a set of basic guidelines for successful efp schemes be developed. firstly the decision to implement a scheme should be taken at company level.
it promotes sustainability and long termism in decision making which can benefit both employees and employers. for employees it can enhance their commitment to the future success of the company and can give them an opportunity to participate in governance. for employers it can encourage investment in training by increasing the company's ability to retain skilled workers in the long term.
secondly there is a lack of national legislative incentive measures in some member states.
the concept of employee financial participation offers many advantages.
firstly there is a lack of information about how efp schemes operate and can be implemented.
it is a practical example of the inclusive growth referred to in the europe two thousand and twenty strategy and it can empower citizens through employment by allowing them to play an integral role in the company for which they work.
finally the report proposes the creation of a single information portal setting out the advantages disadvantages potential incentives and mechanisms of efp schemes.
these propositions would be of particular use to companies operating cross border.
the report makes reference to the current pilot project and to the benefits that a virtual efp centre and the tax rate calculator could bring in terms of augmenting available information.
it can assist in the transfer of a company to employees when a single successor cannot be found this is particularly useful in the case of smes and micro enterprises.
in the report i have looked at the reasons for this and at the potential obstacles to efp take up in the union.
the report makes a number of recommendations to overcome these obstacles and increase the number of efp schemes operated in the union.
answering these questions can be costly and burdensome for companies in particular smes and micro enterprises.