kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
let me give you a brief overview.
i can assure you that the commission will not hesitate to take action to ensure the proper transposition and implementation of the framework decision by hungary like any other member state.
interim payments to hungary from the european regional development fund for priorities one two and three of the operational programme economic development'.
the commission is also following how the judiciary in hungary is fulfilling its role of guarantor of the rule of
these issues were addressed by the commission's services in a letter sent on six october two thousand and fifteen to the hungarian authorities. a detailed reply from the hungarian authorities was received on four november which clarified a number of questions but did not remove all outstanding concerns.
the commission has also taken note of the opinion of the venice commission of twenty two june two thousand and fifteen on media legislation in hungary and is following the response of the hungarian authorities to the recommendations contained therein.
in these cases the commission issued injunctions prohibiting hungary from applying the progressive rates until the commission has concluded its assessment.
as regards migration the hungarian government formally announced on fifteen september two thousand and fifteen a crisis situation caused by mass immigration' on the basis of legislation that had entered into force that same day. a preliminary assessment of the hungarian legislation revealed a number of concerns and questions on substance and implementation
the meeting was part of a series of bilateral dialogues held during the past year with member states on this topic prior to the possible launching of infringement procedures.
today i would like to set out for the house what action the commission is taking to monitor the situation in hungary and to ensure that european union law and fundamental values remain respected there.
as regards the situation of civil society in hungary the commission expressed its concerns about the disagreement between norway and hungary and about the follow up to this dispute which may have a serious impact on a number of ngos working on the promotion of human rights in hungary and negatively affect the functioning of the european economic area and norwegian financial mechanisms.
these national rule of law safeguards' refer to all judicial and constitutional mechanisms and safeguards which aim to ensure the protection of democracy and fundamental rights in a member state.
also on this matter the commission's services started an eu pilot procedure and are following further developments again in the light of the directive on racial equality.
met. the commission will continue to monitor the situation in hungary closely including the functioning of the national rule of law safeguards referred to above.
during our previous debates i have always made it clear that the commission will be vigilant when concrete measures and actions are taken by the hungarian authorities.
the commission is actively pursuing infringement procedures against hungary in a range of other areas.
the commission's services started an eu pilot procedure and are assessing the matter in the light of the directive on racial equality which prohibits discrimination on grounds of ethnic origin in a number of fields including housing.
and you know that the commission has already done so in the past when it took hungary for instance successfully to court for the early retirement of judges or violation of the independence of the data protection supervisor.
the abolition of the death penalty is a condition which states are required to meet in order to become members of the council of europe or of the european union.
in the context of the european semester the commission noted continued shortcomings as regards corruption and lack of transparency affecting public administration decision making and public procurement in hungary.
as regards the debate on the reintroduction of the death penalty both commission president juncker and first vice president timmermans made clear statements on this article two of the eu charter of fundamental rights prohibits explicitly and clearly any person from being condemned to death or executed.
as regards the situation of the media the hungarian parliament amended on twenty seven may two thousand and fifteen its advertising tax law following an eu pilot procedure and an in depth state aid investigation launched by the commission.
other infringement procedures are related to economic discrimination in particular affecting the freedom of establishment the freedom to provide services or the free movement of capital.
the polish government is saying oh we think mr orbn is a perfect example to follow.
i really hope that with all the groups in this house we are going to elaborate the democratic governance pact which will serve to monitor and debate the situation in all member states to ensure that we will have or we will be this community of values.
but let us be fair and i think the commissioner would agree with me if we look at the state of hungary today is it a place where people are free happy citizens?
it has fired five judges and immediately appointed new ones.
the thing is listening to the commission not just now but during all the years in the past the commission is taking a fairly narrow legalistic approach and i understand that it does not have that many instruments to do anything else but the commission is only assessing whether there is a strict violation of european union laws.
i have serious concerns about poland as well.
this is about the european union being a community of values.
secondly can the commission provide the european parliament with its assessment of the situation of democracy the rule of law and fundamental rights in hungary today?
i am very much looking forward to the responses of the commission and the debate of members on these key questions.
including the combined impact of a number of measures exacerbating the state of democracy the rule of law and fundamental rights and evaluating the emergence of a systemic threat to the rule of law in that member state that could develop into a clear risk of a serious breach within the meaning of article seven teu'
two thousand and fifteen' so i put the following questions to the commission has the commission carried out this in depth monitoring process as requested by parliament?
with this in mind it is important that member states and all eu institutions work together to protect these basic european principles.
the aim of the resolution is not to single out a single member state or government but to call on eu institutions particularly the commission as the guardian of the eu treaties to fulfil an obligation to ensure the application of and compliance with the treaties and the charter of fundamental rights of the eu across the union.
in paragraph eleven of the resolution the european parliament urged the commission to activate the first stage of the eu framework to strengthen the rule of law and therefore to initiate immediately an in depth monitoring process concerning the situation of democracy the rule of law and fundamental rights in hungary assessing a potential systemic serious breach of the values on which the union is founded as per article two teu
the eu as we all know was founded on values of respect freedom democracy equality and rule of law as well as human rights.
if not can the commission explained the reasons for not having initiated such in depth monitoring?
on ten june parliament adopted a resolution in plenary on this situation where it asked the commission to assess the situation and to establish an eu mechanism to monitor democracy the rule of law and human rights annually across the eu.
third has the commission activated the rule of law framework as called for by the european parliament and if not can the commission provide a reasoned argument for not having done so?
all for freedom as long as it is the freedom to live within eu constraints. i saw disgraceful disrespect to the leader of a sovereign independent government when mr orbn came to strasbourg.
because he dared to consult with his people about immigration about law and order?
now he has upset you again by building a fence to keep out immigrants.
well you might not like it but this is the elected government of a sovereign state.
they should have the right to make their own laws. any attempt to change the situation in hungary would be a sinister eu regime change.
the people of hungary should follow the example of the people of the uk regain their independence and freedom and leave the eu.
mr president it is with great distress that we have witnessed the constantly worsening state of democracy and rule of law in hungary over the past years.
the freedom of the media has been curtailed through fidesz controlled media supervisors who have brought about fear and self censorship.
the court system has been politicised and the freedom of minorities is being trampled on by the government.
it was notable that although these posts were shared by many individuals the actions of the now fidesz run judiciary of hungary targeted its attacks at active members of the political opposition.
you are supposed to be the guardians of the treaties not the guardians of oppressive governments.
the people at the bottom end of the economic scale have experienced this directly.
as has proved to be the case. governments should protect the interests of their own citizens first and then help other countries to develop their economies by adopting sensible international trade policies such as britain used to do before we joined the european union.
in two thousand and three a study published by the dutch government said gdp will increase but this increase will largely accrue to the migrants in the form of wages.
that is why the only sensible policy for great britain is that of the uk independence party which is to leave the european union.
a report from the house of lords select committee on economic affairs in two thousand and eight said although possible in theory we found no systematic empirical evidence to suggest that net immigration creates significant dynamic benefits for the uk resident population'.
the overall net gain in income to residents is likely to be small and may even be negative'.
uncontrolled and unrestricted immigration into the uk has meant that the wages of native workers have been driven down while living costs have been driven up because of extra demand on housing.
let me refresh our minds about european history if we want to create a single market effectively based on the principle of the free movement of people goods capital and services;
these will have to be justified on the basis of sound economic data.
the alleged vulnerability or serious disturbances of national labour markets will have to be proven on the basis of rational figures and will have to be scrutinised on the basis of statistics and facts. if mr barroso wants to relaunch the single market then it is about time we acted according to our words.
if we want to avoid economic nationalism as a backlash against economic crisis;
the monti report identifies one hundred and fifty barriers within the european union that impede the free movement of people goods capital and services.
the commission has also repeatedly stressed that the transitional arrangements are by definition temporary and that member states should gradually open their labour markets instead of delaying the application of free movement of workers until the end of the seven year period.
there is also convincing evidence that nationals from the new member states have had undeclared jobs due to the restrictions they face in accessing the labour market of the old' member states.
although article eighteen of the treaty on the functioning of the european union prohibits discrimination based on nationality it does so subject to specific provisions contained in the other eu treaties.
the commission understands that the fact that bulgarian and romanian workers still face restrictions can be perceived as discrimination.
the commission does not intend to elaborate a specific study on the living and working conditions of the irregular labour force from bulgaria and romania or on its impact on the domestic labour markets notably due to the lack of information and difficulties of collecting such data.
these findings remain valid even in the current economic crisis.
as you are well aware for the first seven years of the eu membership of bulgaria and romania bulgarian and romanian workers cannot fully benefit from free movement of workers.
the commission does not have any formal role to play in ending the restrictions.
in addition the commission has always worked to ensure that the member states which apply restrictions do so in line with the conditions laid down in the accession treaty.
when bulgaria and romania joined the eu in two thousand and seven already ten of the twenty five member states decided to open their labour markets to bulgarian and romanian workers.
it is worth noting that among the ten member states several apply less strict conditions or procedures in comparison to those in place before bulgaria and romania joined the eu.
today this number has increased to fifteen and only ten member states continue to apply restrictions.
however the commission is as a matter of principle in favour of fully applying free movement of workers.
it is important to bear in mind that the decision as to whether to apply the transitional arrangements and restrict labour market access is the sole responsibility of the member state concerned.
the commission will continue to encourage member states to re examine their position on labour market access including by referring to the findings of the reports. there is no detailed information as regards the number or social situation of irregular workers coming from the member states that joined the eu recently.
in the two thousand and six and two thousand and eight reports the commission underlined that restrictions to free movement of workers do not necessarily result in protecting the national labour market and may delay labour market adjustments. what is more transitional arrangements can exacerbate the incidence of undeclared work. it has been shown that enlargement has contributed to bringing to the surface part of the underground economy constituted by previously undeclared workers from the new member states.
i would like to stress that transitional arrangements in the area of free movement of workers were applied in the majority of previous enlargements.
perceived by bulgarian and romanian workers who cannot work freely in the ten member states that still apply restrictions does not constitute discrimination in the legal sense of the term.
in addition the commission will continue to promote specific activities to combat undeclared work in cooperation with the member states.
however the issue of irregular workers' from bulgaria and romania will be covered as far as possible in any analysis the commission may develop in the future about the functioning of the transitional arrangements for bulgaria and romania if as foreseen by the transitional arrangements one of the two countries requests it.
this is in line with the findings that mobility flows are mainly driven by factors related to supply and demand conditions and that restrictions to free movement of workers delay labour market adjustments.
if we are not ready to open our markets including the labour market to all european citizens the losses will be higher than the gains.
past experience shows that workers from eastern member states fill a gap in the labour market and take jobs that are not wanted or are not fully covered by the local workforce.
to quote president barroso's speech of two days ago in this house we either swim together or sink separately.
moreover there is no way romanians and bulgarians will arrive in western europe to take advantage of its generous welfare system.
the truth is that there is no rational reason to maintain the labour barrier for romanian and bulgarian workers.
both countries have a highly skilled resilient workforce.
the commission will not only continue to monitor how member states apply these transitional arrangements but will also continue to promote specific activities to combat undeclared work in cooperation with the member states.
more importantly it will continue to encourage member states to re examine their decisions on restricting access to the labour market for bulgarian and romanian workers in the light of the situation of their labour markets.
these restrictions stimulate the creation of bad practices due to the vulnerability of the illegal workers who are easily exploitable.
as commissioner de gucht said this flow of people would not change if it was made official but the result would be that they would pay social contributions and taxes.
many people are leaving the country and many young people in particular cannot find employment.
looking at it in the long term the only way to guarantee true freedom of movement of workers would be to have common remuneration rates right across the european union and common social benefits.
that is a long way off and particularly in these recessionary times it is almost foolish to be talking about it.
ultimately that is the way to guarantee the situation and ensure the freedom that we long to achieve.
commissioner you mentioned that several studies have shown that after the accession of the countries from eastern and central europe the problems were not in the countries where the workers were accepted.
i have to confess that i was surprised when you said that it is up to the member states.
i believe we are getting towards that point with tidal power and we need to continue the research.
it is best to get the research and cost correct first and then introduce a new technology not the other way around.
we are already working on this.
we are also looking at promoting innovation in both emerging and more traditional maritime sectors.
finally i could not agree more that a global level playing field is needed to further strengthen the eu's position as a global leader in a sustainable blue economy.
i encourage you to contribute to this consultation.
for instance there are two specific articles in the european maritime and fisheries fund regulation which focus on innovation and sustainable development of fisheries and aquaculture;
it recognises the significant potential of the blue economy to create jobs and growth and stresses the importance of action by the eu and its member states to unlock this potential.
solid figures will no doubt also help us to measure progress in driving the blue industry forward.
keep the oceans free from pollutants and litter and apply the precautionary principle.
for example we are considering how to close the skills gap in the blue economy and calls for proposals will be issued in two thousand and sixteen to tackle this.
the report stresses that the sustainability dimension must be fully embedded in our approach and i can confirm that the commission is wholeheartedly in agreement with this approach. we must indeed protect restore and maintain coastal and oceanic ecosystems biodiversity resilience and productivity
we are also working on delivering some other key points of your report.
cross sectoral and inter disciplinary research and rolling out of innovation will be essential to achieve these goals along with support from member states.
we are also making progress on developing an information platform to make the results of marine and maritime research more easily available.
and horizon two thousand and twenty the framework programme for research innovation supports a considerable amount of research in the traditional sectors. the european fund for strategic investments also offers possibilities for projects with a higher risk profile. i was very happy to read that the report asks for a proper assessment of the size of the blue economy and appraisal of its financial needs.
we have now made some first estimates of the size of the blue economy and will be comparing notes with statisticians and economists from member states later this month.
the focus on marine knowledge and seabed mapping the creation of the marine research information platform and the work on developing skills will boost innovation and job creation over the whole varied range of interacting sectors including existing industries.
i have launched an international public consultation on what the eu needs to do to improve the governance of the oceans including ensuring a sustainable use of ocean resources and guaranteeing a level playing field.
mr president i just want to explain to the house the four reasons why i decided to object to the comitology measure and why my group is now supporting the resolution.
why then is the commission changing something fundamental so late now? people are suspicious and i think they are suspicious because we have seen attempts over recent years to deregulate meat inspection.
they said the head should be removed from the pig and that then you can move to a visual only inspection.
thirdly we are not alone.
now that the spotlight has been cast on meat in slaughterhouses we must guarantee that our response is based on the overwhelming scientific evidence available to us and ensure that we are not unduly influenced by misrepresentative public perception.
while i am conscious that these agencies' opinions should not be taken in isolation when farmers on the european food standards agency national food standards agencies and national veterinary experts speak with one voice i find it very difficult to take a contrary position.
my own experience on a farm lends credence to the move towards visual inspection as proposed by the commission.
the proposal does not advocate less inspection.
in fact visual inspection could ultimately free up veterinary competence to focus on inspection of live herds and where the risk needs to be controlled.
visual inspections by experts who are very well versed in the food safety warning signs should not be considered a light touch regulation. this is smart regulation in practice.
i apologise to this house for the delay in submitting the text for your scrutiny following the endorsement of the member states in the standing committee for the food chain and animal health last may.
it was certainly not the intention of the commission to make the work of the parliament difficult in any way.
meat inspection is a key tool towards ensuring food safety animal health and animal welfare.
that is why it must be effective and focused on the relevant risks.
the commission is fully aware of the limits of its power to act.
the essential elements of meat inspection can and should only be considered and discussed in the framework of the ordinary legislative procedure by the parliament and by the council.
let me also stress what is unquestionably the most important aspect.
this regulation will continue to ensure that all meat which reaches the consumer is of course fit for consumption.
contrary to some criticisms made about introducing measures such as visual inspection we are increasing food safety standards and avoiding contamination of the meat by systematic palpation and incision therefore reducing the risk to the consumer.
such measures can be introduced without compromising the effectiveness of meat inspection in relation to animal health and animal welfare. we can say this with certainty thanks to the risk assessment carried out by efsa and its clear advice on this matter.
members will certainly be aware that in addition to following efsa's recommendations the commission is also obliged to take account of other aspects such as technical and economic feasibility and other legitimate factors.
certain aspects of the efsa advice were not taken into account for this draft regulation.
because the current rules already contain measures which can address them.
however in order to give you additional reassurance i can announce that the commission is willing to put forward a new amendment which will stress the role of the official veterinarian and further clarify the criteria to be applied during visual inspection.