kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
the main legal and political issues raised by the measures taken by france this summer have been well summarised in a detailed note which commissioner andor commissioner malmstrm and i presented to the college of commissioners last week and which was endorsed today.
fifthly we will also call on the member states to look into the issue of human trafficking to which roma are particularly vulnerable with the assistance of the commission and if necessary with europol and eurojust where appropriate.
fourthly i will call on future presidencies of the council to address the priorities identified in the roadmap agreed last june by the european platform on roma inclusion.
first of all thanks to a very intense dialogue between the commission and the french authorities over the past weeks i see an important development. i viewed it as crucial that it was made clear in france that there was no intention to target actions against the roma community because such targeted action would have been incompatible with the fundamental values and rights on which the european union is founded.
he assured us publicly that the french authorities would treat all citizens in the same way that there was no targeted action against the roma or any other group and that the french authorities would do their best to act scrupulously in line with eu law.
it goes without saying that other member states which are in a similar situation will also get similar assistance.
that council meeting should be followed by yearly meetings at ministerial level because we have had cold experience of member states not taking responsibility for changing things on their territory for themselves.
secondly we will establish a roma task force at senior level which will analyse the follow up given by member states to the commission's strategic roma communication of seven april.
i have told you what the ministers told the commission.
like you i condemned very clearly the rhetoric which has been utilised not only in france but in many other member states too.
we have all the measures in our hands. why are those measures not
the situation of the roma is a serious matter.
here for. we have had the communication and the action
the european commission will watch over this.
national decision makers have an important role to play to ensure both public order and the social integration of all europeans who choose to live within their territory.
if you look at the papers that are available on who spends what for the roma population then you will understand that in the main our governments are not utilising funds to invest in a better life for the roma population though i will leave
that was all from the twenty seven governments.
' so that was the official declaration by the commission. however the commission refuses to look at the roma question in black and white and to make a party political issue of this.
problem. why
because europe is not just a common market it is at the same time a community of values and fundamental rights.
that done. i need your help but not for party
like you i believe that freedom of movement is one of the basic freedoms of our european union. the whole commission supports this.
rhetoric that has been used in some member states in the past weeks has been openly discriminatory and partly inflammatory.
it should be on the agenda not just in august but throughout the year and it should be treated carefully and responsibly by policy makers.
plan. we have the roma platforms.
we have made this clear and that is why the ministers came to brussels to have a very frank and very clear discussion with the commission.
in order to have this balance between rights and obligations put into practice we have been in contact on a daily basis with the french authorities.
like so much eu legislation it has turned out to be an absurdity in practice.
french governments have always been enthusiastic about the european union.
they are now finding out the hard way that they cannot have the eu without the roma.
it is very clear that the roma in france are not being expelled on an individual basis and i wonder how you can fail to see that. it is very scary that the commission the guardian of the treaties does not dare to say this aloud does not dare to guard the treaties and the charter of fundamental rights.
it is also important to talk about how the realities in the member states can be adjusted so that they fit the needs of the roma people but i think that is not the topic at issue today.
and we expect you to stand up not for european governments but for european citizens and if you do not like what you see then you should not close your eyes to what is happening in europe you should act.
one of the main reasons for that is that the commission is very tough in enforcing the market rules.
i wish however that the commission were equally tough when it comes to enforcing fundamental rights in europe.
but we need to have a long term strategy.
we have to have a long term strategy.
we are speaking about ten million people many of them living in impossible situations. it is not true as i heard in one of the statements today that these people were never integrated.
it starts with early childhood education and continues with a proper preparation for participating in the labour market.
and there are other meetings which are destined to tackle this.
you said that freedom of movement is not limitless in europe and you are juridically right but that it can be restricted on an individual basis. what evidence do you have that this kind of deportation is being performed on an individual basis and how can you contradict the information that we have both from the press and from the ngos that have been following this that
mr president the critical issues for this parliament are the core issues of poverty and social exclusion of the roma and we will take our responsibilities seriously.
but no one is in any doubt that the reason we are here today in this chamber and that the commissioners are here present with the council is to find out what the commission the guardian of the treaties thinks of the french collective action as mrs reding said against the roma.
now if it is the case that she wishes to delay and tell us at a later stage that is fine.
if there is a weak and confused response as to whether there has been collective punishment the words that you used or whether there has been action on a case by case basis which is required under the eu free movement directives then we need to know this.
when we have that answer we will be in a position where we understand that other countries may not use as a precedent the collective punishment of an ethnic minority one of the biggest in the european union.
this is a critical factor for us today and i ask you to be more specific to be a guardian of the treaties.
only then can we move on to the roma strategy which everyone in this parliament seems to want to have which is to cure the core problems that lead to the export of poverty and social exclusion issues across the eu.
we believe they are illegal and we believe you have delivered a weak and confused response.
i agree with my group's chairman micha kamiski who this morning said that this continent must never revive the ghosts of past nationalism and that the eu is a zone of freedom and tolerance is its greatest achievement.
we should be proud of that but we must never fool ourselves into believing that we do not still have massive problems.
undoubtedly this issue requires debate consideration and action on how we treat minority groups how we can better integrate the roma people and proportionality between the rights and the powers of national governments and the eu.
however i also believe that our union is built on the rule of law.
whilst it is a parliamentarian's right to raise justified concerns in this debate i would also ask us to wait until the commission as the guardian of the treaties actually makes a formal ruling on this issue.
and so it is not just for my country the dissolution of the eu customs union would be a huge plus for the whole world.
doha or no doha the european union is a roadblock to free and freer trade.
the people adversely affected are some of the poorest in the world.
secondly and more damagingly the european union dumps agricultural over production occasioned by its misallocated agricultural subsidies onto the world market and the effect of this is that farmers and food growers in the world outside especially in those countries that have a large primary sector are severely damaged.
to give one example which was just previously touched upon european protectionism in food production has direct consequences which harm the developing world.
mr president to get one thing in perspective the european union began as a protectionist construct it remains a protectionist construct it will always be a protectionist construct.
eu protectionism hurts and harms consumers in the european union itself.
we may be sure that in other member states the figure would not be dissimilar.
yet it is important to recognise some of the other ambitions that doha was looking to meet such as efforts towards making it easier for developing countries to gain access to the international trading market in turn providing real opportunities for economic development.
so we need a new reinvigorated agenda at the wto level one which is not associated with the failures of the past and which can build from the bottom up so that we may look upon the wto as an organisation that works in the interests of its members.
we live in a globalised world and our citizens and consumers want the barriers to trade removed.
within this the eu must use the influence that it has so that we can push this multilateral agenda forward to achieve real success for all.
until then parties will be forced to work at the bilateral and plurilateral levels which will be essential to maintain growth and jobs in this globalised world.
instead we have to make progress in areas that we are able to agree upon but it looks likely that this will have to come under the framework of a different agreement.
mr president i believe that trade reduces poverty empowers women and provides opportunities for our young people.
but there needs to be greater engagement of all members to bring some meaningful results from these talks even if these are less than we originally hoped for.
secondly after this is done in order to recommit ourselves to a multilateral trade agenda we need a new plan on how to progress within the wto trade agenda that is not just a repeat of the same old ways.
if we want europe to be strong we must support all measures to ensure the removal of barriers both within the wto framework and outside.
firstly we must finish this round in some form to keep the multilateral agenda moving. i hope that the european union will continue to be at the forefront leading this discussion.
i believe we can do this within the wto but only if we adopt a new strategy and a new vision for it as an institution.
eu. without them it would have been impossible to achieve a situation where we table a joint agricultural proposal with brazil.
together with the government of brazil and a few other wto members the european union has tabled a formal proposal for a comprehensive solution addressing agricultural export subsidies but also export credits and other similar measures.
they can only be effectively addressed by multilateral solutions trade distorting domestic support in agriculture rules or regulatory issues for instance but we need to approach these issues with fresh ideas as the old approaches have clearly not delivered the result and in this connection large emerging countries must assume greater responsibilities.
this is really important if the wto is to remain relevant and at the centre of global rulemaking.
secondly we also need to make sure that we can deliver for the benefit of the poorest and most vulnerable wto members the least developed countries.
wto. achieving consensus on these issues will be linked to the need for an agreement on the path forward for the wto after the ministerial conference.
such conference in bali and the adoption of the trade facilitation agreement there were high hopes that we would advance towards a comprehensive agreement on the doha development agenda and the eu worked really hard to achieve this. unfortunately many countries have not been able or willing to look for a compromise on cutting the trade distorting subsidies they provide to their farmers. in nairobi we need to free the machinery of the wto from the constraints that have been holding it back for so many years. we need to move ahead. the ministerial conference needs to take decisions on parts of the doha round and agree on what to do next. we are now working in geneva intensively to create convergence around three main outcomes that are attainable and where we all see that there are development credentials.
so we are now working on this in geneva to gather support.
the third item where we need to deliver is an outcome strengthening notification and transparency requirements in the
this is going to be challenging.
similarly we need to aim to ensure that the ministerial conference begins the process of opening the organization to considering new issues and acknowledges the possibilities for wto members to negotiate issues within smaller groups of interested members.
event. it will have a strong bearing on the future of the multilateral trading system.
the first one is to aim for an agreement to discipline the use of all forms of agricultural export support which is an important long standing and pro development issue that needs a coherent balanced and multilateral solution.
clear. the wto needs to continue the work on unresolved issues.
there are so many issues that we need to discuss at global level so we need to free energy for that in the future.
we have tabled proposals to address agricultural export subsidies because they are indeed very damaging to the poor world.
and we are also looking at increasing the transparency of the system.
we are working hard.
we need to make sure that there is an outcome but it is not certain yet.
but that is not enough;
we do not use export subsidies for our food today and that is why we are pushing for their abolition in nairobi together with brazil and many others.
we will do whatever we can until the very last moment in nairobi to achieve an agreement on the way forward. and yes
this is not easy.
there are three more weeks.
we are looking at different development related issues such as duty free quotas free rules of origin cotton services etc.
and that is why we are looking at export competition.
the british people will decide whether they believe they should remain a member of the european union or not very soon and indeed if we have those trading powers back we will be able to do deals ourselves.
and we can see that as a consequence of free trade we have fewer extremely poor people in the world now than ever before.
we should see this as an opportunity to put development firmly back on the doha development round and emphasise as much as possible development items during the course of the ministerial conference. firstly i hope the eu will continue its support for special and differential treatment and put that at the core of some of our debates during the ministerial conference particularly trying to target the least developed countries ldcs to ensure that they benefit from the opening up of trade.
as others have said this afternoon we all welcome the conclusion of the trade facilitation agreement.
we should aim to try and get that signed before the ministerial conference and i know the commissioner is working on that.
the european union institutions have largely delivered on the commitments made at gleneagles a number of years ago;
the member states have almost universally failed to do so.
so we need to press them in this regard.
finally although it is not a matter for the wto ministerial conference i would like to take this opportunity to thank the commission for the position it recently took at the wto trips council on the extension of ip exemptions for medicines for ldcs.
is it not more likely that the sum of all of these member states would result in higher tariffs as it is a fact that the two european countries that are not members of the european union switzerland and norway actually have higher tariffs on agriculture and higher subsidies for agriculture?
thank you for your question and i agree that we are now at a milestone in the wto negotiations.
i think we need the engagement not only of the european union but of all the members of the wto because it is crucial that we move the global trade agenda forward.
it is not enough to have bilateral or biregional negotiations.
but the fact of the matter is that if there are subsidies and particularly agricultural subsidies these are much better determined at national level.
if they were determined at national level it is much more probable that the interest of the consumer would be heeded.
the proposed provisions support the structural reform of the world trade organization.
this reform will hopefully contribute to a better and more open trade system a more non discriminatory trade system based on shared and applied rules.
i believe that the wto system must change to be more efficient and better suited to reality to the real problems and better suited to fulfil its role in helping smes and micro enterprises and also innovative start ups.
i hope that this resolution will embrace the specific interest of the low income developing countries and the least developed countries as well because it supports the establishing of appropriate definitions of lowincome developing countries and emerging economies as well.
we would also like to see that both parties respect each other's right to regulate including on the provision of public services that fair competition rules are agreed to maintain a level playing field between foreign and domestic service providers and especially state owned enterprises that strong provisions are agreed on transparency and dispute settlement to enhance legal predictability and
i also hope that mutual and beneficial agreement will be reached by the end of this year.
certainty that both parties are committed to the enforcement of intellectual property rights and sanitary and phytosanitary safety and last but not least that both parties would promote respect for compliance with and enforcement of international standards in the area of human rights labour rights and environmental agreements.
of course we have the obligatory nods towards human rights access to medicine animal welfare and the promotion of corporate social responsibility here and there but in essence it is a roadmap for so called mutual market opening further liberalisation and privatisation for fair conditions of competition to be guaranteed between vietnamese and european undertakings'. it calls for an investor to state dispute settlement mechanism giving corporations the right to sue the government if it interferes with their insatiable greed for profit.
it is under such a mechanism that the us oil company occidental petroleum sued the state of ecuador and was awarded usd.
it is not corporations in vietnam that need their rights strengthened but rather it is workers.
mr president essentially this resolution is a free ride for european big business and an attempt to push through the speedy conclusion of a free trade agreement with vietnam.
it is part of our own drive to use international trade and investment to boost growth at home.
they are a stepping stone for our ultimate goal of achieving an agreement with the whole region.
as in previous negotiations which have already been finalised there will be a clear link between the trade provisions and the political provisions of the association agreement.
the commission hopes to swiftly advance and conclude these negotiations ideally before the end of this tenure by the end of october this year so that business in europe and vietnam can reap the benefits as soon as possible and stimulate growth in both economies.
mr president i welcome this trade negotiation but have to say that unlike my colleague i believe it must be about more than just simply opening up markets. firstly we have to make sure that any agreement promotes fair growth in vietnam.
in particular we have to deal with the issue of land grabbing which is already a significant problem in vietnam and we would not want any free trade agreement to encourage further land grabbing by european or other companies.
secondly like other colleagues i insist that in any such agreement we have a robust development and human rights chapter.
on animal welfare we think it is important that we include animal welfare in any agreement with vietnam.
the situation of animals in vietnam is appalling.
we already have the korean agreement as a template for this.
so if we can do it with korea we can do it with vietnam.
this excludes china as it will not provide transparency on the issue.
the distinction between those countries that have capital punishment and use it and those that retain the power but do not actually carry out the death penalty is not as dramatic as one would first assume.
we should concentrate on addressing those cases as well.
madam president whilst i rise under the umbrella of the ecr group my comments are entirely based upon my personal convictions. i welcome the debate that is taking place in this house today as it is quite clearly a display of our commitment to a fundamental value of our union.
so whilst we have this debate it is a very personal one.
last year at least seven hundred and fourteen people were executed by states.
it is not just about those who are facing conviction and the death penalty but along with them all the many others that are affected their families and so many other people in society simply because those people face execution without any opportunity of a fair trial.
many of the states that still have the death penalty as a punishment tool do not have the mechanism to deliver fair trials to those that they accuse of capital punishment crimes.
the figure i stated earlier does not include all those who sit waiting to see what their fate may be many of whom are actually innocent and have been denied the possibility of a fair trial.
it is the reason why we need to continue in our efforts and step up the struggle against this practice.
since the european parliament is the first eu institution to engage in this effort it is our duty to influence other states in order to reach a universal abolition.
the world day against the death penalty reminds us that there are still countries in the world that continue in the practice of capital punishment.
for the european people's party the fight against the death penalty worldwide is a key priority of our external human rights policy.
saying that i would also like to call on the high representative the commission and the member states to keep encouraging the countries that have not ratified the second optional protocol to the international covenant on civil and political rights to do so.
in negotiations with candidate member states and in our dialogues with other countries whether it is the united states or whether it is iran we consistently push for the abolition de jure or de facto of this most inhumane punishment.
while there should not be impunity for the most serious crimes the death penalty in and of itself constitutes a human rights violation according to the right to life as declared in the universal declaration of human rights.
we believe in prosecuting crimes under international law but always under fair trial and with due process.
too often this is not the case and in any case the united nations has established that drug related crimes do not qualify as the most serious crimes.
the united nations has also spoken out in favour of a moratorium on the death penalty and this is an important statement.
at the same time the un is struggling for its credibility when iran is among the members of the women's rights council.
the eu should still speak with one voice and operate more strategically when it comes to addressing important human rights topics such as the abolition of the death penalty.