kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
this means that serbia has to confront kosovo's independence and abandon illusions that somehow one day kosovo will again be a part of the serbian state.
thirdly while serbia has taken a number of steps in the direction of providing equal status for its non serbian minorities its citizenship concept is not yet sufficiently inclusive to provide full rights to some non serbian groups notably the romanian speakers of the timok valley and the bulgarian minority.
the model the good model developed in vojvodina of all minority councils should be extended to the rest of the country.
the next government will have plenty on its plate.
year. we need also to mobilise significant human resources to ensure the full success of such a large scale campaign. we are looking at it positively but we need to be absolutely sure that we as europe can deliver on this year before we
thirdly and very briefly the commissioner attended a launch on gendercide.
there needs to be some way for this parliament to speak with national parliaments and i urge the commissioner to use his influence to help us bring that about.
this means getting public expenditure in order making sure it is efficient and creating a healthy private sector as well as removing excessive burdens on smes small and medium sized enterprises.
in addition we need to protect and further develop property rights in order to also serve that agenda. that is what we will give people an ownership and a sense of the future. secondly we really do need to address the issue of policy coherence.
we can change that.
there are up to two hundred million women missing in the world because of gender based abortion and infanticide.
we cannot do that on our own but we can encourage that and we can talk about that and we can get involved with other politicians and try to get that on their agenda.
the first is that we need to ensure that there is a favourable environment in which economies in developing countries can grow.
it could be a continent of prosperity and it could be a continent of complete disaster.
aspects. it is not sufficient and i believe the agenda should be
first of all i want to thank the rapporteur for the excellent report and also to thank the commission for its engagement in the compilation of the report.
we very much welcome the stronger wording on a fairer distribution of wealth and particularly welcome the emphasis on sustainable and inclusive growth for all.
in relation to differentiation we do welcome the strong wording on political dialogue with emerging countries on the eradication of poverty through their own internal solidarity together with appropriate funding from our own side.
however we cannot abruptly stop funding especially for some of the so called middle income countries and particularly those in the caribbean and the pacific.
for impressive' i would substitute the word threatening' threatening to the manufacturing sectors of europe and particularly to that in my own country the united kingdom.
the report expresses surprise that their growth has failed to reduce their poverty but of course it is on their poverty and sometimes slave labour conditions that their growth has been based.
the commission concedes that the emergent economies should be eliminated from development assistance but only in the long term.
globalisation is applauded in the report on the doubtful ground that it reduces inequalities between countries which is another way of saying that the emergent countries are becoming richer at the expense of some of our workers.
yet as the rapporteur has rightly pointed out the political dialogue between international actors as well as the cooperation between member states the commission and the eeas is still in a quite disorganised state.
securing consistency between the different policies as well as the activities of the actors of the eu and its member states should be the responsibility of the commission.
i would therefore call on the commissioner to make further efforts to implement policy coherence for development. i would also like to point out that when discussing development policy we should be thinking of a much wider range of recipients than the acp countries only.
by that i mean understanding that global public goods will include international trade environmental and financial architecture within the context of global governance.
it is also important to have a human rights approach and i am in agreement with most of what the report says. we need a more holistic approach reflecting the outcome of the rio twenty conference on sustainable development and we need to develop the concept of development effectiveness a combination of development aid
it is important that the global goals and targets are tailored and adapted to national and regional contexts.
progress has been made but people around the world continue to suffer from poverty and hunger. there are still. one three billion people living in extreme poverty.
i think the irish presidency has made some progress particularly in the may conclusions. i recall what the commissioner said about a single voice for the eu and an integrated framework that is underpinned by human rights addressing issues of hunger nutrition and climate change.
a lack of growth has created twenty seven million people without work.
it is a very important aspect of the future that we have to look to.
do we have to look further than the european union itself?
if we can encourage growth and wealth creation in our developing country partners we will automatically eliminate poverty.
so if we can change the way we approach our development poverty elimination programmes to create the conditions for economic growth in our developing country partners we will succeed in creating that unique combination of self sustainable growth and poverty elimination.
one of the reasons why we have succeeded in achieving the mdgs is because of growth growth in the developing countries themselves.
drivers for inclusive and sustainable growth sustainable natural resource management good governance and peace and security.
equally however it presents us with a huge opportunity. it is increasingly clear and it is my personal conviction that efforts to end poverty must go hand in hand with global and national action on sustainability.
we are currently trying to develop such mechanisms so that eu aid can be leveraged and have greater impact. we will also continue to emphasise policy coherence for development to make sure that key policies such as trade climate health education and agriculture contribute to achieving the development objectives of a post two thousand and fifteen agenda.
they have raised awareness and increased action against poverty since their inception
pressure from civil society could enable this to be achieved in each and every society in each and every country.
second is the sustainability element.
we need to build a society that is just.
i said that i have not heard mr cashman;
we need to learn the right lessons from the past and have the right analysis for the future if we want the mdgs to be both politically acceptable and decisive in reducing poverty. there must be shared responsibility and universal application of the future framework.
health mdgs are lagging behind but they must remain a priority and we must include sexual and reproductive health rights which are a distinct component of health and indeed at its root.
there should be a limited number of goals with different targets for each country.
the mdgs are a part of this success and that needs to be stressed repeated and communicated. the mdg framework was adopted in a very different time in the late one thousand nine hundred and ninety s when the world was very different.
the hard work will now be with the council and it is important that we have a single voice from the eu when it comes to issues such as the mdgs not twenty seven separate voices plus one a single voice from the eu institutions.
there was more optimism about economic growth and what it could deliver. this is not the case anymore.
it should apply to all countries.
poverty has already been cut by half thanks to governments global agencies ngos the private sector and communities working together.
if we do not do that particularly in times of austerity we are not going to carry people with us for the next phase.
we need to achieve greater coordination between the union's institutions and the member states.
secondly disaster risk reduction.
i think we need to take stock and we need to tell people the good news about development aid.
much more needs to be done but let us build on the progress that has been made.
well done commissioner for the work you have done to date.
unborn children simply because they are females simply because they are women?
i have yet to hear you michael condemn gendercide.
do not be talking about elements within the epp why are there not elements within the socialist party that condemn this?
through education on rights about what people can do with their bodies what they can achieve working on the land information about empowerment of the individual.
this comes from working with ngos but it comes a lot from working on project based issues.
i have seen this myself in southern africa where we the eu bring added value into small communities that then ripple out into much larger urban communities.
the challenge is here but central to me on this issue is the recognition that everyone has the right to use their own body and to have access to goods health and services.
first of all mr mitchell has misled this house.
i ask you to go back to the debate in the last committee where it will be minuted that i condemn gendercide.
no one should ever terminate a child because of its gender.
yes you have beliefs and i respect your beliefs religious or otherwise but you never have the right to impose them on another individual when by imposing them you diminish their human rights and civil liberties by comparison to your own.
i need no lectures and let my record be repeated to you mr mitchell when you go back to the committee and look at the debate that we had on gendercide.
it has well been said that we do not need to teach the grass to grow we just need to get the rocks off the lawn.
too often the rocks on the lawn are rocks that we have put there.
in that context i would like to point to the vital role of energy and electricity in taking people out of absolute poverty.
poor people need electric light so that children can study in the evening; poor people need refrigeration so that they can store food and store vaccines;
poor people need electric cooking so they can be freed of the scourge of wood smoke in poor homes.
we have heard commissioner peibalgs speak of sustainability but unfortunately when we use the word sustainable' in this house we actually mean unsustainable'.
any efforts we make to deny access to cheap electricity fuelled by fossil fuels in the third world will do huge damage.
i am tired to death of hearing the proposition that poor people are most vulnerable to climate change nonsense!
poor people are most vulnerable to our policies designed to mitigate climate change;
if mr cashman can tell me that he chose to be born to his parents and his parents can tell me that they chose him as their child then i will argue about the right to choose.
the task force led by the commission and the eib with member states is currently identifying over a thousand projects which are ready to be assessed.
we are going to use a relatively small amount of public money to remove the fear factor and unlock the investment funds which are already there and waiting to be used.
at the same time there is a real demand for credible investment projects and yet investment is not happening.
we can only deliver a programme of this scale and ambition with the strong political support of this house. we count on your support for this investment plan to sustain its high level of ambition and to send a clear message to voters that their voices have been heard.
in addition to this we also look to the member states to use their eu structural funds better and to double the use of financial instruments such as loans and guarantees.
this is what investors are asking for.
this is our joint responsibility.
this is a very real additional public lending capacity of more than eur sixty billion which acts as a magnet to draw in real investment in real projects and create real jobs.
to achieve this we will launch a european fund for strategic investment together with the eib. this fund will be underpinned by guarantees from the eu budget and a capital contribution from the eib worth a total of eur twenty one billion.
on its own the plan is not a magic bullet to transform the european economy but and it is a very important but if we implement all three elements of our plan we will change the european investment landscape permanently and structurally for the better.
this is not about complex financial instruments for their own sake but about making investment happen.
the single market needs to be deepened in services and in public procurement.
we need to make long term financing available for projects that contribute towards our common priorities for europe energy digital transport and research and innovation.
it will also be used to finance long term strategic investment and to provide additional finance for smes and mid sized companies.
we want to create a single market in the energy digital capital public procurement and services areas.
own. if member states still believe these funds are not enough we invite them to make their own additional contributions.
it is a new approach at european level to change the way public money is used.
together they will enable us to start moving quickly and also to deliver sustainable investment for the long term. thirdly we want to remove barriers to investment by the private sector.
they have a single market in the united states but not here.
we need sound investments for the future not another bubble.
important as this is for me this is not enough in itself.
the next step is for national governments to step in and provide additional capital to the fund and we strongly encourage member states to do so.
together with the eib we are creating a transparent pipeline of trusted investment.
as i said in my hearing i do not want to just put numbers on a piece of paper or money on a table.
we need to make better use of this financing so that it goes further and has a real effect on the economy.
we want to give a european label for the most viable ones.
i am sure some will say that the money of this new investment fund is not enough.
i know that attention will be concentrated today on the additional financial capacity.
as a second pillar we want to make sure that this money reaches the real economy.
each of these three strands of the investment triangle is needed to make investment happen in europe.
the fund which is backed by a solid eu guarantee will bring in more money from investors in the public and private sector who will be reassured by a lower risk.
this is the choice we have made.
that is why we are proposing this combination of guarantees at eu level for higher risk investments along with longer term projects in line with our strategic priorities.
this is a robust conservative assumption based on previous eib and eu experiences.
there are many people who want to invest in the energy sector but until they have an energy union they cannot do so as easily as say in the food sector.
firstly we will ensure that every euro invested through this plan maximises its impact on the real economy.
we need just enough money to get the motor running.
to those who claim that this is not real money my reply is nonsense.
i will also support my fellow commissioners in completing the single market in energy the digital sector and transport.
we want to make sure that real investment happens in the real economy and that we create real new opportunities in europe.
there is money out there but investors tell us they need well structured high quality projects with access to clear and transparent information.
to succeed europe must be united and innovative.
we will be identifying viable projects at eu level and stepping up the necessary technical assistance to support project structuring and the use of more innovative financial instruments for member states.
for me this single market dimension the third side of the triangle is the most important part of our work and the one that really changes europe permanently. of course this will not happen overnight but we can make change together if we are determined.
today mr juncker's commission is fulfilling the first promise we made when we were appointed we are setting out an investment plan that will change the way public money is used for investment in europe.
what it is not is an expensive cash handout which will damage our public sector finances and have no longer term sustainable impact.
we need a financial sector which serves our companies better especially smes and reduces their dependence on financing from the banks.
so it is a serious and crucial question.
money. there are only public debts but no public money for the
if we still continue to have twenty eight supervisors in the digital market forget your broadband. first of all create your single supervisor in the digital market and then these investments can be productive.
investors. what do you receive for your money today? if you have some money in your bank maybe nothing at all because interest rates
we need not only this investment plan and package;
in it. there is no public
second thing i think that this programme needs to have a second part which is opening our markets liberalising our markets unifying our markets in digital in energy.
italy. so that is the way forward.
venture capitalists tell me they do not invest that the aifmd and other eu legislation make the eu less attractive to investment.
what we need are detailed answers to some of our questions and i have talked to a number of private investors in the past and asked them what stops them from investing.
and we know of projects in the middle of nowhere.
how do we avoid a situation where for private investors it is heads they win and tails taxpayers lose?
but the key to the package is how do we unlock this investment?
and let me give you a couple of examples.
they spent over eleven years trying to invest in an lng terminal a huge infrastructure project but they walked away after eleven years because of bureaucracy and frustration.
or think of another example castelln airport millions of euro of public money but still forty four months after being inaugurated it has not opened.
a few years ago i was talking to a british company which wanted to invest in brindisi in italy.
how do we make sure that this is not just talking about money? how do we make sure that we actually have the reforms as manfred weber was saying to make sure that we unlock these investments?
is the euro the key to that question?
so the questions we have to ask are how do we unlock this private investment without taxpayers taking on the burden of risk?
how do we make sure it is not a private irrigation system that is never turned on?
how do we make sure that we have projects that are attractive to private investors?
in euroland you lost several million jobs because greece italy portugal and spain were unable to follow suit.
mr president i thought that some deals in the city of london were highly leveraged but it turns out that is nothing compared to the european commission. the brutal truth is you do not have three hundred and fifteen billion euros to spend or anything like it and what you do have to spend means throwing good money after bad.
germany has the infrastructure the good industrial relations the excellent technical education economies of scale rd budget and the world's leading brands;
your imperial ambitions are robbing the peoples of the world's greatest continent of the chance to fulfil their potential.
there is a fundamentally deflationary bias brought about by the euro across southern europe.
it is just another eu turkey!
the extent of unemployment and youth unemployment in particular is a disgrace.
it prevents the weaker nations of the zone from using exchange rate depreciation as a mechanism for protecting economic activity in tough times.
in britain we saved probably a million jobs by allowing the pound sterling to depreciate after the two thousand and eight crash.
the euro is what motor traders in my country would call a lemon and it should be scrapped.
mr juncker this is not a new deal still less christmas coming early as you claimed.
southern europe is in a terrible state.
but to expect the southern eurozone members to live in the same exchange rate and same interest rate regime is pure folly.
twenty billion euros parcelled up to sound like three hundred billion will not change that.
it gives the lie to any claim you might wish to make that the eu in its present incarnation is a force for good.
of course one can only pay tribute to the fundamental strength of the german economy.
as the oecd has now admitted the eurozone has persistent stagnation tendencies.
what are the hurdles to investment?
we are firmly committed to tackling europe's investment gap head on.
world. ten per cent of our business goes outside the european union and we are a very necessary and valuable partner supporting the european union in its foreign development humanitarian energy and climate policies and other
they can be on the risk side we are going to address
it is essential to tackle these market failures that continue to prevent investment in higher risk infrastructure projects.
capacity for public spending for such projects is now reduced leading to underinvestment and jeopardising long term competitiveness. however in contrast to the darkest days of the sovereign debt crisis liquidity is no longer an issue and money is available for the safest projects.
the new proposal allows the eib to increase support for risky and more capital intensive projects.
i will propose to ecofin and to the european council that the eib contributes eur five billion to the new initiative.
we therefore have to put things in sequence identification of the investment gap identification of the reasons for these investment gaps not being filled and then the question of the instruments we are going to use.
areas. we believe that the proposed initiative can make a real difference to unlocking additional investment in
since two thousand and seven the eu bank has provided more than eur five hundred billion for investment across europe and by the end of next year we will have delivered eur one hundred and eighty billion of new investment following a capital increase recommended by the european council in. two thousand and twelve i was not sure in two thousand and twelve when i promised to the european council that we would make eighteen times as much out of these eur ten billion
we can look back at a history of the last seven years in the crisis.
but now i can tell you that probably when i come back next year in early december we will have overshot this target of eur one hundred and eighty billion additional investment in europe by
these will be addressed as part of the investment plan by the new fund which the president of the commission has just introduced.
it will be set up in the coming weeks and start to deliver in two thousand and fifteen using structures already in place.
by the way this is a case where one can show that one size fits all does not hold because the access to finance for smes is quite differentiated in the member states of the european union and we have to address it in a differentiated manner.
nonetheless some segments of the market are risk averse partly due to new capital and lending standards and in many countries sme access to finance remains a concern.
early. two thousand and fifteen to be clear this new engagement will not impact eib engagement outside the european union where the eib is a valued source of finance and expertise supporting projects around the