kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
while i accept that approval for acaa is not technically an upgrading given that it is based on an existing association agreement in practice it does allow access for israeli pharmaceuticals to one of the most lucrative markets in the world.
our words must be followed up with actions if they are to have any real meaning or effect.
the eu has expressed the view time and time again that the actions by the israelis threaten to make the two state solution impossible.
how can it seriously be described as a technical agreement?
the single market is not a technical issue it is a political issue.
it was a commission report in two thousand and nine that said that the acaa's entry into force would mark the first step in israel's integration into the eu single market.
if there were to be cases of discrimination the palestinian manufacturer could lodge a complaint with the israeli judicial authorities. of course the commission could also use existing means under the association agreement to ensure that israel implements the acaa.
lastly we have other acaas in the pipeline with other countries where we would expect to face similar though not identical concerns.
so we are basically talking about mutual recognition of conformity assessment and inspection results which will reduce costs and time for economic operators.
its objective is to eliminate barriers to trade by allowing products covered by the agreement to enter the markets of the parties without additional conformity assessment procedures.
i would also like to react to recent concerns about parliament's role in the context of procedures to amend this acaa including by adding annexes for other industrial products in future.
moreover the commission will also abide by its obligations under the framework agreement to keep parliament fully informed before approving modifications to an agreement under article two hundred and eighteen of the lisbon treaty.
there could be a link between the certification process and the origin of the products in a situation where the israeli responsible authority goes into the occupied territories in order to certify products made in the settlements.
my understanding is that there were medicines on board that ship which hopefully will be delivered to the people in gaza.
let us also drop the pretence that it is anything to do with access to pharmaceutical products what about the right of the people in gaza to access pharmaceutical products?
it was because these people were simply trying to bring humanitarian aid to the people of gaza thereby breaking the illegal blockade imposed on the almost two million people in gaza who are forced to live in what is in effect an open air prison camp.
let us drop the pretence that this is a technical agreement that is absolute rubbish.
this time by attacking a ship the mv estelle carrying thirty activists from europe including many european mps hijacking their ship tasering and beating up to fourteen of these activists and now fourteen people are still in prison.
i have seen the hospitals that do not have even basic medicines.
i have spent a week in israeli prisons in inhumane conditions and i have been to gaza and seen the reality of the conditions that are imposed on the people of gaza by the choices made by the right wing israeli government.
i have seen the mass poverty up to eighty of people rely on humanitarian aid to survive and now the european commission and the right wing in this parliament would like us to pat israel on the back to congratulate it to welcome it into the single market.
consent will be interpreted by the netanyahu government as an endorsement of the oppression of the palestinians. it will embolden them to continue with forcing palestinians out of east jerusalem and demolishing their homes and to continue with the inhumane blockade of gaza.
i do not consider your assessment to be correct.
i really do think that it is mostly a technical matter and i do not see any simple and serious reason why we should block it further.
it is a process emanating from the barcelona process extended now to neighbourhood policy countries as stipulated in the association agreements;
it is based on the alignment of the legislative system of a country and its infrastructure with the eu.
after a deliberation of more than two and a half years we are finally having this discussion in the plenary session on acaa.
i am happy that there has been enough common sense among our colleagues in the inta committee to vote in favour of this agreement which is good for both the eu and israel and is part of the eu association agreement.
we have to ask ourselves whether rejecting this protocol would actually improve the lives of palestinians and i do not think it will.
to prepare myself for the vote today and for the text and the work on this protocol i have spoken to a number of organisations representing mostly those who care about the human rights of palestinians.
they come entirely from within israel itself.
do they not agree that this is completely ridiculous and are they aware that as far as i know and have had confirmed there are no manufacturers of medicine in the occupied territories or the settlements?
i fervently believe that the eu's role in promoting trade as a basis of dialogue and prosperity and its role in keeping its partners to democratic and human rights standards are part of a package not one set against the other.
we can press our partners close on trade and on human rights at the same time. i voted for the agreement on agricultural trade with palestine last year despite some shocking reports particularly on hamas abuses in gaza most recently by human rights watch and the carnegie endowment because i believe in strengthening eu trade and economic links with the whole region.
i think this whole approach of critics which sees trade relations with parties as a zero sum game is hopelessly unproductive.
as my colleague marietje schaake said exactly how would rejection of this acaa agreement actually improve the situation of palestinians?
this is not about patting israel on the back or rewarding it. it is not a political upgrade.
it is part of the steady development of a neighbourhood policy of engagement.
it is an endorsement of the oppression that the israeli state metes out to the palestinian people.
israel is not a properly functioning democracy you ask the arabs who live within israel if it is a properly functioning democracy.
i for one am keen to stress the overwhelming potential of this agreement for eu citizens i speak on behalf of many of my constituents in northern ireland who have been in contact with me on the matter.
there has been much speculation as to the potential impact of the acaa on the human rights of palestinians living in the occupied territories.
however as indicated by the commissioner this has been dealt with in the conditionalities in the association agreement between the eu and israel.
focus must therefore turn to the rights of eu citizens to effective and reasonably priced health care.
by allowing mutual recognition of goods certificates the eu israel acaa would erode several barriers to exporting pharmaceuticals from israel to the eu and vice versa allowing advanced medical supplies to reach those who need them most in a reduced timeframe.
in the light of the global economic climate eliminating the need for extensive product testing would also positively impact the operating costs of eu pharmaceutical manufacturers leading to savings in national health care services including the national health service in the united kingdom.
as a result the agreement represents an avenue through which i can remain true to two of my personal priorities as an elected representative for northern ireland consolidating public health and safeguarding jobs and for these very human reasons i am in support of it.
it is about trade and unblocking technical barriers which currently exist between producers and consumers one of the fundamental objectives of the european union for the record and for those who have raised the issue repeatedly i have received repeated assurances that there are no pharmaceutical products being manufactured in the settlements. supporting acaa does not endorse the expansion of settlements or indeed any other israeli policy neither does it increase goods with a provenance from the occupied territories.
israel is a global leader in producing cheap and safe effective generic medicines.
i visited the west bank earlier this month with my european free alliance colleagues in this parliament.
it was not my first visit but it was no less shocking for that.
we had many meetings and whether we discussed education freedom of movement planning prisoners housing land water or transport in fact whatever subject we discussed we heard the same story of discrimination and ill treatment of the palestinian people.
what we heard too and what we saw very clearly for ourselves was that the situation is worsening all the time.
we are not just talking about a technical agreement; we are talking about human rights justice and international law and we cannot put those issues aside when making this decision.
secondly the agricultural upgrade was relatively minor compared to the millions if not billions that could eventually be available to israeli companies if we approve this so called technical upgrade'. it is not a technical upgrade'.
this is not the time in my opinion to be upgrading our relationship with israel. if we believe in policy cohesion we have to have some interaction between our trade policy our human rights policy and our foreign policy.
mr murphy has rightly said that israel is engaged in the collective punishment of gaza against all human rights norms against all international norms.
there is no question about it;
even the israelis do not deny it.
for the misdemeanours of a few the whole of gaza is being punished.
we also know of course that israel has continued to expand its settlements in the middle east.
these settlements are illegal under international law and threaten to make a two state solution impossible.
there is no cohesion there there is no logic to such a position in the european union.
let me make it clear and other speakers have made it clear this is not about being anti israel.
he understands that my main role at the summit was to press the case for mandatory sustainability reporting by business. again paragraph forty seven of the summit's conclusions represented only a limited success. i made the case for voluntary calls for business to report.
the strength of paragraph forty seven is that it names governments and the un itself in calling for action on corporate sustainability reporting.
it specifically uses the concept of integration and seeks to build on not duplicating existing frameworks. i would specifically name the global reporting initiative and the international integrated reporting council in this respect.
we have earthquakes.
we have tornadoes where we never had tornadoes before.
i agree with the commissioner he has a very difficult job.
countries are looking to themselves and their own selfish independent interests rather than looking at the bigger question that is the global question.
we have floods where we never had floods before.
there are conflicting commercial interests.
that nothing has changed and that there is no need to take any steps in order to rectify the situation.
we have storms where we never had storms before.
on the one hand you have most of the people here the more sensible people who realise in fact that we are the custodians of the current environment and that the next generation will actually indict us unless we do something about the problem. i listened to ms de lange and she was absolutely right in relation to mr helmer from the ukip party.
in this respect the outcome document can hardly be seen as an instrument for the achievement of a green and socially inclusive economy and for growth.
i would like to start by thanking the members of the parliament who despite many difficulties decided to join the conference in their personal capacity.
it relates to changing the way we consume and produce today to adapt our economies to the boundaries of our planet and to allow future generations to meet their own needs.
this leads us to the means of implementation and that is also why the european union has taken the position that first and foremost each country must take the necessary measures to put in place an enabling environment of domestic policies that is designed to be self sustaining.
it will depend on what we do with it from this point in time in implementing it in full.
but this must be done with a sense of urgency because the planet and the poorest in the world cannot afford any delays.
the document also recognises the need for broader measures of progress to complement gdp in order to have more solid policy decisions as well as the importance of corporate sustainable reporting.
we are looking forward to the european parliament's view on how this can be best done and count on you to keep the ambition and positive energy generated in the run up to rio alive in the years to come at international national and also local levels.
i would also like to highlight that rio principle ten on access to information public participation in decision making and access to justice has been extended at rio twenty from environmental matters to sustainable development as a whole.
we will however continue to work together with our partners towards the creation of a fully fledged united nations environmental organisation to allow it to function on an equal footing with other un organisations.
we will keep working throughout the next reforms to increase their participation in the decision making process.
it will now have universal membership and must become our common home to set the global environmental agenda. in this new set up a truly global unep will have a new authority that will allow it to take actions that were until now beyond its reach.
on the goals targets and sdgs t he european union has made efforts to make the text more operational including by proposing goals and targets with timelines in several areas as you know.
in retrospect reaffirming the holistic vision was more important than we initially thought in view of the resistance from many sides to continuing to address these two matters in conjunction.
as you know the challenges are global as are in many cases the solutions and we need to continue working with our partners also in the future.
we have seen enormous engagement by the private sector in rio.
it should allow the regular participation of heads of state in reviewing the progress of all our commitments.
these are the european values we will never back off from.
on the institutional framework overall we welcome the agreement to reinforce the institutional framework for sustainable development.
i want to recognise up front that the rio twenty outcomes document is less ambitious than what the european union had planned and wanted. however after long negotiations the european union and its member states decided to support its adoption as a step in the right direction.
it is recognised as an important tool for achieving sustainable development for all countries.
we repeated our commitment to official development assistance but order alone is not the answer.
rio twenty has not gone as far as most europeans would have wanted but the key message today is that we agreed on many useful elements many more than first reactions would lead us to believe and this is why we should now focus on implementing them and building on them.
the private sector if given the direction and framework ensuring public goods can create investment prosperity and well being decent employment and green jobs and help to promote sharing of know how and development and diffusion of innovative technology.
to conclude at rio we reaffirmed that we share the same planet and that we share the same common responsibility towards future generations.
this applies for instance to setting concrete timelines for the specific commitments in the priority areas or to institutional aspects.
at a time when our society suffers widespread unemployment we are also satisfied that rio twenty was given a stronger social angle to sustainable development on matters such as decent work green jobs and social protection floors thereby enhancing the linkages between its three dimensions. we also contributed actively to highlighting that democracy
innovative sources of financing should be encouraged and emerging economies should take a stronger role proportionate to their evolving international status.
two thousand and fifteen it would be important to have an overarching framework for post two thousand and fifteen that encompasses the three dimensions of sustainable development with goals that address key challenges in a holistic and coherent way.
i appreciate the exchanges we had during the conference and i am pleased that you can now share your impressions of the complex negotiations with other honourable members too.
the outcome document acknowledges the important role of an inclusive green economy in achieving sustainable development and poverty eradication.
secondly progress towards sustainable development entails providing the right financial instruments.
these efforts of the european union to focus attention on key issues such as sustainable energy water oceans land and biodiversity food security and resource efficiency should also bear fruit in the next month in the process to develop sustainable development goals or sdgs.
this also applies to the european union but we have worked together with all the other countries to develop common ground and it is a fact that the document would be less ambitious and less concrete without hard work and also commitment from many who worked on the side of the european union.
this will be fundamental to the necessary mobilisation of all means of implementation from all sources.
there are number of areas where the european union would have hoped for a more ambitious outcome.
the outcome document provides the necessary basis to turn these words into actions at various levels.
public and private funding and business expertise should go hand in hand in establishing appropriate financing strategies.
this gives me hope that the top down endorsement even if weaker than we wanted and the strong bottom up movement will actually bring about change faster than we could have hoped for.
the eu has ensured that it will have most of the functions required and it will be important to make sure that this reform brings real change.
human rights the rule of law good governance and gender equality and empowerment of women are indispensable to achieve sustainable development.
so instead of repeating what rio did not deliver let us rather join forces find friends find partners who share our analysis and also our determination and start to deliver many of the ideas mentioned in the rio document in europe and also globally.
the inclusive green economy can bring fundamental changes to progress towards sustainable development because it will change the economic fabric.
in the new unep for instance we have agreed to ensure the active participation of all relevant stakeholders and to explore new mechanisms to promote transparency and the effective engagement of civil society.
the green economy can also make a real difference in the development and diffusion of green technologies to the countries having most natural resources.
indeed at rio twenty in spite of initial difficulties we have reaffirmed the need to put together our efforts to eradicate poverty and to secure sustainability within our planetary limits.
this is why we decided that it is better to have this agreement than no agreement at all.
it will enhance our ability to manage natural resources sustainably increase resource efficiency and reduce waste.
this is the key to moving away from focus on the official development assistance approach alone.
we have not obtained the timelines we sought with exceptions such as the commitment to achieve sustainable reduction of marine litter by two thousand and twenty five but the eu has achieved the integration of most of its proposed targets into the main text in the form of express commitments for example on future action concerning extending the protection of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
overall support for this was confirmed by a number of countries during months of preparations and by positive references to the green economy in the final statements made by most heads of state including heads of state from the majority of the developing countries.
thirdly moving towards more sustainable development also depends on skills know how and technology diffusion.
the european commission intends to do the necessary to build on what has been agreed at the highest level.
i would just like to remind you that the presence of leaders does not guarantee success.
interests different views on development.
billion. i will leave you to do the calculations but this was the commitment which was made by all european countries and i think it is important that we keep that commitment alive. on the other hand with the means of implementation we have to be clear that there is no public money which could
the top down. we have to work with them and we have to use the positive powers which
ahead. green capital accounting corporate sustainability reporting beyond gdp if we focus on that and if we get a solid background on which we can build political decisions then we can really move things forward.
the lack of trust. we should
consistent. so all incentives which you send into the systems need to be
secondly and i am still not certain whether this is really the case the eu might have realised too late that the rest of the world considered rio twenty a social summit instead of a sustainability summit.
i think that is a very promising development.
we had high hopes that rio twenty would deliver something that we need in this world but we have to be realistic. the rio twenty document is a huge disappointment and a huge missed opportunity.
i strongly believe that the eu needs a very pragmatic approach.
what is quite threatening is that the eu was totally isolated in rio. there were several reasons for this. first of all the developing world along with the united states of america does not want any restrictions on its growth ambitions.
future generations will look back at this period with horror and despair and they will never forgive us.
we are driving energy intensive businesses with their jobs and investment out of europe altogether.
countries like india china and the usa will not sacrifice economic progress for speculative and alarmist theories about climate change and our european taxpayers will no longer pay for it.
i commend to colleagues his important book the cold sun'. we are told that renewable energy will become cost competitive as the price of fossil fuels rises but the price of fossil fuels is not rising.
there has been no global warming for fifteen years.
how is europe supposed to compete with those prices?
the world is awash with natural gas.
mr president the rio summit failed utterly as did copenhagen and cancn before it.
the price of electricity in the usa has halved on the back of shale gas.
he has been an environmental regulator and most recently he was ceo of rwe renewables.
but after a lifetime of environmentalism he has looked again at the facts and concluded that carbon dioxide is not a significant driver of climate change.
professor vahrenholt has been for decades a german socialist politician and green activist.
the usa and china may soon become net exporters and beyond shale gas we have methane hydrates which offer more energy than all other known fossil fuel reserves put together.
we have to ask why and the truth is that nobody believes in climate change any more.
natural gas in the usa is one fifth of the price in germany.
new oil finds are coming on stream.
we have voluntarily made decisions on energy which will marginalise and deindustrialise europe.
we have chosen to impoverish our children and our grandchildren.
we are forcing households and pensioners into fuel poverty.