kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
instead of facing the issue our prime minister spends his time addressing rallies calling us traitors claiming he is defending malta even from europe.
the situation is desperate.
because we know that there can be no rule of law without law enforcement that there can be no true democracy with a shackled media and that there can be no justice when those exposing crimes are the ones targeted.
daphne caruana galizia was executed assassinated and her killing exposed the urgency of the situation in malta where the ruling party has used its majority to ride roughshod over the rule of law.
to this house i would say you have become the last bastion of hope for the people we represent and this is what the eu means to us hope and a guarantee that the rule of law will always be protected because joining the eu was our way of ensuring that no politician with delusions of grandeur would ever
malta has recently had big financial and economic success with online gambling and i would like to say on behalf of our group that there is nothing wrong with online gambling as such but there is a problem if the cross border provision of these services is based on hyper low taxation and secondly on the illegal provision across borders through the internet which allows financial companies to make at least eur one billion just for the transfers to the respective societies.
today again the council has not answered the questions concerning the rule of law we have raised in our resolution and therefore i was very disappointed by your response.
mr bannister is at the same time the vice president of the financial development agency of malta?
while the commission today has given much clearer answers than last time i would like to stress that several issues are still open and mr timmermans i hope your notebook is open for these issues. how is it possible that the head of the financial services authority
this is basically saying that the boss of the supervisors is at the same time the boss of those who should develop the sector. therefore the commission should take action to clarify what the status of a financial supervisor is and what conflicts of interest in that area mean.
the last discussion focused also in the response by the council and the commission very much on the precise death and murder of daphne caruana galizia but we did not discuss seriously the wider issues.
so the question is isn't there a hole in the application of national and european law in the area of online gambling?
this murder has become a symbol of the fight against corruption and lack of activity and transparency of the maltese government is completely unacceptable in an eu member state.
we did not deem it possible that this could happen here.
something is terribly wrong.
we know that ms caruana galicia was trying to join the dots with regard to the panama papers and the possible enmeshment of government officials in the affair.
since she was murdered before the paradise papers became public we do not know what else she might have discovered.
i am very concerned when i hear that foreigners have been buying maltese passports just like that a couple of tens of thousands of euros and the door to the european union becomes wide open. this is unacceptable.
the circumstances of her murder must be scrutinised until every stone is turned and everything is laid bare.
i support the decision by the maltese government to get both europol and the fbi involved in the investigation.
the rule of law must not be compromised.
madam president this house prides itself on being strong in the defence of human rights and the rule of law according to our common human european values but to remain strong the action it takes must be based on due process that collects facts as evidence puts them in context and assesses them as a whole.
it has shocked us all.
justice needs to be done.
in the investigation the maltese government has called upon the dutch and us police authorities as well as europol for help but the outcome of one murder investigation whatever and whenever it is cannot be held to reflect on the rule of law here or wherever.
malta is being assailed for perceived deficiencies in the rule of law on the basis of jumbled facts and semifacts unproven allegations taken at face value innuendos and issues irrelevant to the rule of law.
is this being done as a titfortat related to processes about the rule of law that other member states are being subjected to?
yet the maltese government has repeatedly agreed to receive delegations of this parliament to investigate issues that are raised and it is still doing so.
partisanship over the rule of law will undermine the moral basis of this house when it has to raise issues related to it.
yet that government has just been reelected with an absolute majority possessed by no other party that is represented in this house.
attitudes in a debate like this should be objective.
traditional journalism was about fearlessly and objectively holding authority to account about protection of the interests of the masses about exposing wrongdoing especially at the highest level.
modern journalism is about fearfully and subjectively kowtowing to authority about protection of the interests of the powerful few about burying wrongdoing especially at the highest level.
i can think of many so called journalists whom that would describe.
people who aren't just writing and speaking to defend those named and shamed in the panama papers and the paradise papers but in some cases are actually on their payroll owned and controlled.
i hope daphne's death was not in vain but given how this place works i fear it will be.
are the cornerstone of the european union.
each member state must therefore respect protect and promote them.
we all condemned this barbaric crime and expressed the expectation that the perpetrators would be brought to justice.
for this reason freedom of expression media freedom and pluralism are guaranteed in the eu charter of fundamental rights. they are among the core basic democratic values on which the european union is founded.
in october the council held its annual rule of law dialogue which was an important opportunity to take a critical look at the rule of law situation in the member states and the union.
this year the dialogue was about media pluralism in the digital age and about the challenges that the digital age brings to the rule of law.
in the context of that debate all member states agreed that free reliable and pluralistic media underpins effective democracy.
our core values are put to the test every day.
our societies are still facing multiple interrelated crises be it in the area of migration or internal security.
discussions such as the one today are important.
our citizens must be able to have trust in the functioning of our democratic institutions.
we commend the maltese government for having acted immediately as news broke of the assassination to ensure that justice is done. the maltese authorities also opened up their investigations and sought international assistance. the police force asked for assistance and teamed up with the american fbi dutch and italian forensic forces as well as europol to make sure that no stone is left unturned in the investigation.
malta has shown that its institutions are wellfunctioning in responding to this challenge.
ensuring the rule of law is an absolute priority and has to be our joint commitment of the member states and of eu institutions together.
we are confident that the maltese law enforcement authorities are capable of upholding the rule of law in the face of recent developments.
the maltese citizens seem to believe that as well according to a recent opinion poll. one observation of a more general nature the eu is much better at dealing with the political issues between the member states
it is also worth remembering that the effectiveness of the eu rests on the delicate balance between respecting the sovereignty of its nation states and cooperating together to make states stronger together.
nevertheless it is clear that all member states have to comply with fundamental democratic standards and the rule of law.
speaking on behalf of the council and in the name of all its members i am not in a position to state more at this stage.
the commission condemned this brutal assassination in the strongest words possible.
the rights of a journalist and blogger to investigate to ask uncomfortable questions and to report effectively is at the heart of our values and needs to be guaranteed at all times.
the commission takes the view that ensuring an independent and thorough investigation of the facts and bringing those responsible to justice must be the top priority for the maltese government.
the maltese authorities and institutions must deliver on their clear commitment to do everything in their power to ensure that the perpetrators will be brought to justice.
more generally malta needs to show to europe and indeed the world that its rules and regulations are healthy and robust.
this is why it is important that the maltese government has indicated that the investigation and prosecution should be allowed to run their full course regardless of the consequences.
i want to add that on every occasion that i have to talk to members of the maltese government i make this point and it is acknowledged by them that they will do so and that they will commit to that.
but this also includes making sure that the rules that we agreed at european level are implemented on the ground.
the guiding principle was to identify quality and reliable data.
in this context the commission recently sent a letter to the maltese authorities regarding follow up investigations to recommendations after the maltese financial intelligence and analysis unit published its report and we are now carefully studying their comprehensive reply.
as part of our efforts in the fight against money laundering moreover we are making sure that all member states including malta adopt the necessary provisions to transpose the fourth antimoney laundering directive.
the commission decision on infringement proceedings against those member states which have not yet notified their national transposition laws is imminent. we encourage those member states to adopt the necessary rules now without further delay.
the commission regularly collects data on the functioning of the judicial systems of all member states in the eu justice scoreboard and we are monitoring corruption in member states as part of the european semester.
the revision of the fourth antimoney laundering directive currently under negotiation between parliament and the council will enhance the powers of the competent authorities to prevent and fight money laundering.
i hope that this legislation will be adopted soon.
finally the commission encourages malta to swiftly join the european public prosecutor's office.
this would send a strong positive signal of malta's commitment to working actively together in the area of freedom security and justice.
to make sure that these things are implemented to the full and also to make sure that those responsible for this atrocious crime are brought to justice.
and only a few months later she was assassinated.
mr president i think that this strategy should mobilise all of us to make sure that all those responsible are brought to justice and that such a tragedy never happens again.
rather it is an opportunity for malta itself as a sovereign nation to expunge the taints of gangsterism. malta has proven itself in the past to be a proud and brave nation and this is an opportunity to show that it is still that nation
but the other aspects are also very much present.
my second point is yes it is true europe today accounts for around eleven of global emissions but when you account for eleven of global emissions that does not mean that you do not have a responsibility to deliver your fair contribution to the international table. but
whereas we have heard several argue in favour of less. that is how it looks that is the political picture and i would only say to those of us who want ambition including ambition in fighting climate change that the test is whether we can also get it through
not one.
well it might be difficult to combine but to do exactly that combining what is ambitious with what is realistic is basically what politics is all about.
twenty three twenty four one quarter of that will come through offsetting.
now we are saying that without offsetting we are going to forty in the following decade.
so that europe can very soon send a signal to the world and play the role that we must play if the world is to try to get an international framework to combat climate change in place by.
i also have to say in this parliament that in the commission we have not heard one government arguing in favour of more than forty domestic.
that is not the only reason why the commission has presented this package.
there are more reasons than just the international climate negotiations why we should address these kinds of issues and if you read the package that we presented from the commission it is clear that this is one aspect;
that is why it makes a lot of sense economic sense as well as sense when it comes to competitiveness and jobs that we get a better energy policy for europe that we focus more on efficiency on renewables and on alternative sources. it is somehow strange that those who are so preoccupied
economic policies and climate policies go hand in hand.
i urge this parliament to endorse legally binding targets for greenhouse gas emission reduction renewable energy and energy efficiency.
if you do not believe in all those subsidies etc.
i can see that there are amendments from parliament on this issue both those that seek to achieve a higher target and those that are trying to delay any action by the eu until after an international agreement may have been concluded.
they need to know where we are going
so that is why i think this is ambitious yet realistic.
i think that everyone who has looked through and lived through the whole issue surrounding back loading will understand why this is important.
two. two without going into detail that just means that one of the more structural options are also addressed in this paper.
here we have a legislative proposal it is already there;
an important step in the international process is ban ki moon's climate summit scheduled for september two thousand and fourteen in new york. there the european union should be able to provide a strong signal to the international community to also come forward with ambitious contributions for an international agreement.
he was referring to this package.
right it is extremely important to get the diagnosis right so that we can get the
finally let me congratulate the two co rapporteurs and the shadow rapporteurs for their intense
it will of course also enable the european union to speak with one voice in the international climate negotiations.
work. i know that in a very short time you have produced a very fine paper and thank you very much for that.
your approval of the report is a key step in the process of reaching an inter institutional agreement on the two thousand and thirty climate and energy policy and being able to exercise eu leadership internationally.
the report from the european parliament also calls for an urgent structural reform of the ets to be proposed this year.
as part of our package the commission has proposed the introduction of a market stability reserve in the eu emissions trading system. the market stability reserve would provide an automatic adjustment of the supply of auctioned allowances downwards or upwards based on a pre defined set of rules and would improve resilience to market shocks and enhance market stability.
now we come to the more transformational issues changing our energy systems and many more things like that.
what we are doing is finding the most cost efficient and smoothest trajectory to achieve what we have already agreed
for one it is in the interests of european investors the business community and others.
what are the costs?
and what is our energy situation?
give us a greenhouse gas reduction target and then the markets will deliver'.
she is saying that this is ambitious but realistic which is a strange combination because it is difficult to combine.
thank you very much and i am happy to answer them.
i think the problem is that you have been working so long on back loading that you are now also back loading climate action because the only thing that the commission is proposing with its forty is that it is a linear reduction until two thousand and thirty of.
then the discussion on renewables and energy efficiency this is more to mr oettinger or maybe more to my british colleagues who always say let the markets decide;
this is just a british excuse to be against european action.
as mrs hall said at a time when the evidence of climate change is all around us our citizens understand what it means.
i was thinking back to five years ago when we had just adopted the climate package and had a clear ambition across all the mainstream parties here about what we needed to do.
i am very disappointed about the targets but also disappointed about something that nobody else has mentioned the fqd the food quality directive.
mr president i think it is a good report and i hope it will get support tomorrow from across the house.
that is not the way to lead in the world;
so maybe instead of bashing them you should send them a bit of a thank.
mr president we need affordable secure and sustainable energy policies. in the past decade europe's industrial policy has been neglected in favour of climate policies.
member states must be free to choose their own energy mix nuclear renewables ccs shale and energy efficiency too.
de industrialising europe is not the solution.
four companies have relocated to countries with cheaper energy.
we need to work with industry and enable investment in infrastructure.
they take jobs with them and this does not make for a cleaner planet.
an eu emissions target is a good sign to others and an important sign of a global bargain.
in seven years our energy prices have risen by forty but in the usa they are down by.
do you want renewables or do you want nuclear?
first on the internal market i think that concern about the current energy market in the eu which is going in all different directions is exactly why we need stronger european energy policies and therefore stronger guidance from the eu on which energy mix we want.
i want to have that discussion together with all the colleagues in the national parliaments because i believe that economy and climate friendliness should be at the forefront.
do you want to have coal?
so many of our constituents have suffered extreme weather events in recent years and the urgency of that battle is now well understood.
mr president this report sends an important political signal in the last few months of parliament to the commission to the council and to our own constituents.
but let us not be naive most individuals and governments who want a single greenhouse gas target want it because they hope it will ensure that nothing much happens at all.
without a binding two thousand and twenty target for energy efficiency progress has been far too slow despite the fact that there is a political consensus that energy efficiency is vital for economic efficiency and i welcome commissioner oettinger's promise of further proposals on energy efficiency later this year. i am in no doubt that some individuals and governments supporting a single greenhouse gas target sincerely want to see an ambitious level of greenhouse gas reduction and a market driven push to a low carbon economy made possible by a high carbon price.
we should make clear that meps are committed to leading the battle to control climate change.
the most important lesson to learn from the twenty twenty twenty climate package is that binding targets work;
parliament should also show that it understands the economic necessity of using energy more efficiently and of developing secure sustainable indigenous european energy sources.
over the course of thirty five years the british subsidy for nuclear will amount to twice the subsidy for off shore wind despite the fact that off shore wind is a very new technology and nuclear has been around for about seventy years and according to the french court of auditors who have reason to follow these things closely has got increasingly expensive over that period.
i would ask the commission to look at that when it comes forward with its legislative proposals later in the year.
member states need flexibility about how best to achieve the co two reductions.
they need to be forced to come forward with some ideas about how that is going to be achieved if they are to start putting in place the building blocks for it.
two years ago parliament supported my report calling for a competitive low carbon economy and i have to say that i believe that setting a european renewables target is the wrong way to achieve that balance.
we all want not to be tied to one particular technology in every circumstance with ridiculous subsidies in some cases. the way forward is as the commission proposed just last week national plans national targets which will then become legally binding. i have always supported a role for renewables but i believe that some members here have lost sight of the objective which is to achieve a low carbon economy at the lowest possible cost.
i did think my colleague mr davies was going to try and ask you to explain why the german subsidy for renewables is currently about a hundred times greater than the cost of the co emissions it prevents because surely that is a subsidy to be aware of.
there has got to be flexibility as to how best to achieve our goals.
but one thing is very clear.
there are different views on how we do that.
mr president on energy policy we like to talk about three objectives energy security competitiveness and sustainability although the technologies we use to pursue sustainability are clearly unsustainable.
for years we have focused obsessively on green policies and renewables and we have totally ignored both competitiveness and security of supply.
on competitiveness we are creating what industry commissioner tajani has called an industrial massacre in europe.
we are driving energy intensive businesses away off shore taking their jobs and their investments with them.
often they go to jurisdictions with lower environmental standards so we are increasing global emissions while driving jobs out of the eu.
on security of supply we are doing little better countries like germany once had excellent power supplies but now teeter on the brink of disaster.
we are closing nuclear power stations in germany and coal fired power plants across europe.
the commission's proposal fails to address these problems.
it will do nothing to enhance jobs or prosperity.
we know what we want to achieve.
i do not see support for a high carbon price which would be necessary if a single greenhouse gas target were to deliver what people want it to deliver.
if mr eickhout wants to point the finger at my country will he recognise that while my country's share of renewable energy is probably about third from the bottom of the european list that of the netherlands is about fourth from the bottom?
there is not a great deal to pick between the two of us. is he proud of that?
the only thing that i could probably add to your question and this is more advice to the uk tories is that it is maybe an unwise strategy to go for the only technology in the world which is getting more expensive while being used more.
i am really worried about smes because just in the past few months i have been hearing from the glass industry from the cement industry and from the fertiliser industry about how other operators are opening up on our borders and moving their plants to other parts of the world plants that are not cleaner plants that are not more energy efficient but which are just taking jobs and growth with them.
big companies can relocate to places that are cheaper but small companies often end up shutting down.
so the costs for the smaller companies are even more acutely felt.
we have had three failed wars against afghanistan in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries;