kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
efficiency means not only a suitable timetable but it also refers to the content of the legislation that we will adopt in the coming years and to the institutions that will be built upon in the future.
if we want the union to be more coherent we have to work towards a level of trust and mutual recognition in the judicial area or on police cooperation similar to the principle which has governed the eu single market.
to achieve it we need to shift our views on our legal traditions which should no longer be perceived used or misused to prevent us having minimum standards particularly in criminal law.
it is our duty to provide for this protection but we have to do it while fully respecting not only the rights of the victims but also those of the defendants as well.
we will be bold when entrusting eurojust with more power or when we have to protect the data of our citizens or when we will have to regulate on the asylum package.
my political group is determined to constructively work with the commission and the council and at the same time to persistently fight for the protection of human rights.
british courts have been stripped of their ability to protect british citizens from unjust arrest and imprisonment when they are extradited to a foreign country.
i know because i sat in the appeal court in the case of andrew symeou when two senior law lords were unable to prevent the extradition of mr symeou even though it was obvious to everybody in the court that the evidence was either non existent or fabricated by the police.
but of course that is the whole point because the court is not allowed to look at the evidence; they have no right.
it is the council that needs to come up with ideas on dublin on the reception directive on the eurodac system and on the qualification directive. we really are waiting for it.
the anti discrimination directive is something this plenary voted for and the greens are really waiting for that.
for example the competence to enter into negotiations for cooperation agreements with third countries is based on council decisions that date from a couple of years back.
i have been very active in the discussions in parliament because i truly believe that the stockholm programme is the best way forward to a citizen centred europe a europe for citizens with the people.
i therefore invite the commission to stick to the vision of the stockholm programme when presenting the specific proposals for the next five years.
the programme adopted represents a real balance between providing security to citizens while respecting their rights freedoms and integrity and strengthening their citizenship. on the action plan i particularly welcome the measures presented recently to combat trafficking in human beings
i also welcome the fact that the action plan includes a strategy to combat female genital mutilation domestic violence and violence against women.
we also need to encourage the participation of citizens during the process and ensure the transparency of decision making and the openness of documents.
i speak as rapporteur on the first of these measures on interpretation and translation for defendants on which i am pleased to say i reached provisional agreement with the spanish presidency this very morning and i hope that our respective institutions will endorse that result.
i do thank commissioner reding for her staunch support as we drew solidly on the commission proposal and commission representatives made a full contribution so my personal thanks to her.
we are finally a decade overdue but finally building the mutual trust necessary for mutual recognition.
my support for the european arrest warrant is qualified by my dismay and indeed anger at some miscarriages of justice and the way it currently operates such as in the cases of gary mann and andrew symeou that i am involved in.
if we had these measures in place a decade ago i believe those miscarriages of justice would not be happening.
some people say europe does not deliver. let us put it frankly is it europe that does not deliver or some governments that do not deliver?
if your country does not want to be in the european union do not speak on behalf of the others do not speak on behalf of poland that just today set their commitment to the community approach and to a stronger and ever closer european union.
some of you do not agree but the proposals were made by the european commission one year ago.
so when we speak about europe we have to be clear about what we mean by europe.
did you make the case for the
we need a community that matters a community spirit and a community approach to reinforce our common interests.
i think it is very important for all of us in the european commission to feel that support coming from the most important political forces in europe and for you who have been directly elected by our european citizens.
if you do not respect the institution to which you belong yourself this is not my problem.
regarding the services publiques the public services i have committed to present it before the end of the year and we will do
right. but we have to ask them did you make the case for europe?
we need to make the case for a stronger europe that is why i have highlighted the importance of the political leadership the political responsibility and i believe that we can unite ourselves in terms of the points i have
about tax evasion we have asked the council and so far we have not yet received a mandate to negotiate with third countries the issues of taxation because what is happening so far is that countries are negotiating alone.
today when some governments say we do not have enough support for the
that is very important today because we need to build this stronger support for a stronger europe in a spirit of confidence.
tax. so there is no lack of proposals.
this point is very important.
some of you do not agree but it is there our proposal.
this is the real question in terms of the european union. as i said one of the problems is political and political confidence and we need to make the case for europe.
we have delivered. every proposal i made today to you we will deliver and we need your support and not your doubts and your scepticism.
it. we are going to respect all our commitments and today i also put forward before you the financial transaction
we have put forward the tax savings directive.
you do not say to your loved ones your wife or your girlfriend your husband or your boyfriend i love you but' you say i love you i support you'.
made. the reality is honourable members we have different sensibilities around
others prefer to speak about growth. those who prefer to insist on responsibility and discipline others want to insist on solidarity and cohesion. we need all these ideas. we need to put together this vision of a common europe and the points i have made today to you and once again i want to thank you for all
euro? did you explain to your citizens what we have to lose if we do not keep our strong commitment to our common achievements? so we need to make the case for europe. and this is a collective task from the european commission of course from parliament and you have been elected and you can of course discuss this matter and i know you are doing it with your electors but also from our governments.
so i say to those of you that criticise me or the commission that we are ready to accept all your criticisms but the commission is proud of the work it has achieved.
mr president first of all let me start by thanking this house for the strong support given to my statement on behalf of the european commission.
we have tabled twenty nine proposals for the financial regulation.
because this is one of the problems in terms of the scepticism in europe.
the question today is to get the support not only of the parliament but also of our member states.
are we able to stand united in this crisis?
this is a crisis about the euro about the european union and in fact a crisis today about the existence the vital existence of the european union.
these are the questions that we need to face today.
we all know that the only way out of this crisis is a new transfer of powers to the european union and to the european institutions.
there is a second question that we have to answer today.
you have also said that you should reflect on the external single representation of the eurozone at international level.
that was the big idea in february two thousand and ten of the member states and the council.
the european council cannot
that should create the solution.
we have to abolish
today the spreads are ten times higher.
because the member states are reluctant to transfer new sovereignty and powers to the european union.
that? because otherwise they take their own initiatives in the council.
this must be solved not yesterday not today but in a short time period because it is unsustainable to continue like this.
you will have to repeat it there telling them that the intergovernmental method is a bad method that cannot work.
make him european minister of finance and then all this discussion of who is representing the euro would be over. secondly i missed one important element in your proposals.
i should say that the highlight of this bad approach to the crisis has been the casino deal of the real world.
first of all the organisation of the real economic government inside the commission. you have said here that we are the real economic government but the reality is different.
are we able to show real solidarity in this crisis and have we the vision to do so the courage to do so and the political leadership in the european union to do so?
mr president this morning's session reminded me very much of the congresses of the communist party of the soviet union in its dynamics especially as there is one man speaking from the podium and about ninety of those who watch him in front of their television sets
understand that what the man says has nothing whatsoever to do with reality and with their experiences yet their representatives applaud enthusiastically.
another similarity is that those who want fundamentally to protest and change the system have to face police brutality as we had to in hungary between two thousand.
so i am very worried about the whole root of this
room. goodness me even i am a president.
i think people will look back in astonishment that we have surrendered democracy.
past. and you now want this flag and a new anthem to replace nation states and you do not care how you get
there. if you have to crush national democracy if you have to oppose popular referendums you just sweep this aside and say that it is populism.
model. frankly you are all now yesterday's.
we have got you as president of the european commission we have a president of the european parliament;
it wants a europe where we can do student exchanges and we can work in each others' capital cities; it wants those
in fact you painted a vision that a new period of european renewal is upon us. as a former communist yourself you probably remember the old soviet leaders getting up to give their speeches and telling everybody that there was a record harvest or that tractor production figures were terribly good and they of course believed that history was on their side. in fact president khrushchev got up and said to the west we will bury you.
anybody who stands up here and dares to give a political view which is different from the received wisdom is written off as mad insane violent and fascist; we have heard it for years from these people.
so as an architect and you are one of the key architects of the current failure you say that even though everything to date has been wrong we are going to do more of the same. i thought that was a definition of madness.
know. but certainly when you take away democratic accountability it is clear that nobody really is in charge and it is developing as a union of intolerance.
but what you want to do is to say right we have a european union and what we have to do now is have more of it.
i cannot believe that this is a rational response to any situation in which you find yourself and far from it being a state of the union i would argue that the union is in a state because just look at the confusion.
things. but it does not want this european union
union. there is a new nationalism that is sweeping europe. you want to abolish the nation states in your case mr schulz perhaps because you are ashamed of your
the intolerance is so deep that when we get referendums in france the netherlands and ireland that reject your view you as a political class see it as a problem to be overcome.
so much did he believe in his own union.
we have got my old friend herman van rompuy who is the permanent president of the european council; we have got the poles they are now presidents temporarily of the european council; we have got presidents all round this
should replace national democracy?
funny that is it not? here is britain the world's fifth largest trading nation which is now prohibited from going into world trade organisation talks because all of that is done on our behalf by an unelected european commissioner.
mr duff the answer actually is that an independent britain that trades and cooperates with her european neighbours in an age of globalisation would be able to forge her own trade relationships across the world. it would make sense for a country like ours to start off with the english speaking world which shares common law our own kith and kin in the commonwealth who we turned our backs on so shamefully.
mr president this point is often made namely that a country like britain is only sixty two million people and are we not better off being part of a big european club so that we can have more of a voice on the world stage?
we welcome his proposal for stability bonds to lay the basis for future growth.
will he seek to extend the mandate of the european central bank perhaps to add the pursuit of sustainable growth to the goal of price stability?
many of us understand that germany has no wish to add to its public debt of eur two zero billion the underwriting of some eur three two hundred billion issued by the weaker countries of the union but does he foresee for the future a common budgetary programme for the eurozone so that common bonds might be issued for future borrowing?
mr president i am sure the house will wish mr barroso luck in aligning the individual interests of member states with the collective interest of the union.
parliament gave you its confidence in two thousand and four and two thousand and nine but confidence is not a blank cheque.
i would like to say you spoke beautifully i would like to congratulate you on your speech president barroso but we are not going to talk our way out of this crisis.
but here i would like to echo the words of my colleague sylvie goulard because for the last seven years you held the most powerful position in the european union and much of this crisis including the political crisis came about on your watch. so mr barroso the european parliament and my group in particular have made many concrete proposals today to get out of the crisis.
the reason why i mention those three the six pack correlation tables and the external financial instruments is very simple.
more support for the community method rather than intergovernmentalism;
the growth agenda is also at the very heart of the polish presidency programme where we are working very closely with the commission ahead of the october european council.
it is the eu institutions and the member states working together in the framework of eu two thousand and twenty which will ensure that we emerge stronger from the crisis.
the logic of the first step the bail out step is that the debts of some will be paid by the others and the second step will mean a further shift of national power to the european level and further diminishing of the role of member states. mr verhofstadt might like it i very much doubt that most members of his own group like it as much as he does
in normal situations at such a time countries would devalue their currencies to cope with those consequences but of course as members of the eurozone they cannot do that because they are not allowed to do so.
let us make one thing clear the euro currency was imposed on states of different development different purchasing power different gdp per capita different living standards different budgeting and different levels of competitiveness. it was done purely for political and ideological reasons because the euro should have served as a tool for further integration
i agree with you that fiscal consolidation curbing of public expenditure and financial rigour are necessary because markets are very sensitive and markets at the moment do not forgive any mistake.
no it is not a result of anti european propaganda it is just a result of people who see and think.
it sounds fine at first glance just a small fee for transactions but in the real world such a tax will lead to only one conclusion that countries and institutions will seriously reconsider their location and they will leave the european market and this will undermine further the european economy. it is very simple.
but again the most important thing is whether the people of europe like it and whether it will help to promote more pro european thinking amongst european nations.
if you think that it does you are wrong ladies and gentlemen. i can tell you in my own country a recent poll has shown that seventy five of people are against joining the euro and do you really think that this is a result of some anti european propaganda?
believe me you achieve none of these things with an old and outdated eu framework.
for instance another worse decision' you came with which you have just mentioned is the financial transaction tax.
however good intentions are not enough.
so the only solution remaining are firstly bail outs more bail outs and even more bail outs or whatever you want to call them and secondly transition of monetary union into a fiscal union and thus most importantly the debt union.
i think they have that right they have their sovereignty but i think the best way today to defend the interest of france and to defend the interest of germany is to defend the interest of the european union and to give more power to europe. that is their interest.
problems about the popular legitimacy of this house.
we have heard the scale of the economic nightmare we hear the supposed solutions and yet mr barroso we have heard you speak in this house on these things with these promises of solutions many times before.
that sense of dj vu was heightened for me when i heard one member actually say that after your speech you should be called barroso the lionheart'.
the political class in this house led by you and the presidents in this house should hang their heads in shame.
we have a monetary union that has been politically inspired.
it is an ideology that is not working and that is costing europe's citizens a significant amount of money as they suffer cuts and more and more depression and a greater downturn in economic growth.
as a european the question is how long will the experiment last?
it is of utmost importance to invest in education to boost the job market and to reduce the unemployment rate in europe especially among young people.
concerning the eu's finances we have to first ask the respective agents to take their responsibility.
the people who are anti the european union of the political construction like me are very pro europe.
we have since then created impressive political and institutional structures and are dealing with many different policies in the framework of the european union.
however our achievements are now being challenged as we face major internal and external challenges.
no matter how hard all of us have worked for democratic governance the legitimacy of the european construction is being questioned.
now is the time for action the numbers in our member states are terrifying.
i do not congratulate us however. every single day of every single year should be an international day of action against female genital mutilation.
female genital mutilation is an internationally recognised abuse of human rights children's rights and women's rights.
after fifteen years in this parliament i cannot believe that we are still standing here calling for action.
it can be addressed only if we recognise the holistic rights of women including sexual health and reproductive rights the right of a woman not a man and certainly not a cleric to decide what to do with her body. i have witnessed the physical effects of female genital mutilation and they are horrific.
madam president we stand here and congratulate ourselves that today is international day against female genital mutilation.
and let me say this commissioner because i know you listen we have to address our friends and those who do not want to deal with this issue face on.
we need that broad framework.
madam president i am very pleased to join this cross party debate and i am also pleased that we have abandoned the unacceptable old practice of talking about female circumcision. female genital mutilation much better conveys the full horror of the practice that it is child abuse even child torture.
it is completely unacceptable that this should be even remotely tolerated.
the press in the uk today is reporting that prosecution is imminent in the uk. well we have had it criminalised for decades in britain but there have been no successful prosecutions.
the estimates of girls at risk in the uk range from twenty zero.
i call on all meps to support the petition which is at endfgm.
fgm is a completely horrific practice and one hundred and forty million women have suffered globally.
we need to change mindsets because fgm can never be justified on the grounds of culture or religion. in december two thousand and twelve the un carried a resolution condemning the practice.
while legislation is necessary i think there does need to be an emphasis on prevention as well.
most eu countries now have legislation in place to ban fgm.
we need more support here in europe as well to support professionals teachers and social workers. we need data collection but most of all we need a concerted effort to support the end fgm campaign.
the commission action plan is a good start.
these resolutions were supported by all countries in the african union yet rates for fgm are more than ninety in the horn of africa.
this barbaric practice has nothing to do with culture tradition or religion;
it is a violation of fundamental rights and it affects thousands of women and girls living in europe.
i would like to know why the european union is not more vocal on this issue both in europe and with our international partners.
also what immediate action is being taken to help member states combat fgm in terms for instance of sharing best practice for outreach to those communities where the practice is most prevalent?
she has made it a uk government priority to end female genital mutilation in a generation both at home and abroad.
i would urge the commission and the external action service to continue to work with member states and to commit funding to sensitive local projects.
the best progress is made when projects take place on the ground in local communities with families coming out and declaring publicly that they have abandoned the practice of female genital mutilation. however as well as that action on the ground it is also important to take action at the highest diplomatic level. the eu needs to work with global partners such as the african union to build a global consensus on ending female genital mutilation.
i welcome what the commissioner said.
no girl should ever have to experience this traumatic breach of her rights.
i would also like to thank the parliament and the committee on women's rights and gender equality for their commitment to combatting violence against women and fgm in particular.
every day in europe women are raped or beaten or die just because they are women. this is not acceptable and nor is the fact that millions of young women are still subjected to genital mutilation every year.
they risk death and if they survive their injury they face the prospect of disability and very risky childbirth.