kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
i would like to reciprocate them by thanking many of you for the good cooperation over the years.
it could be that one of the reasons why we have higher energy prices in europe than in other regions is that we have to import around sixty of our energy meaning that today we are spending around eur four hundred billion each year.
now just one comment i know that mr helmer has gone and i know that even if he had been here i would not be able to persuade him about climate change.
we will have a meeting of the progressive countries.
on financing and other key issues.
maybe that could also be an argument for european citizens being interested in knowing where their money is going. finally thank you very much for the many kind words.
the us government's climate power plan is a real step forward and i really do welcome that this summer.
it is high time that the tone was changed and that the moral high ground ceded to a spirit of true global cooperation and recognition of mutual benefits.
as i understand it the climate summit will concentrate on highlighting the benefits of taking action not just the cataclysmic armageddon style warnings but looking at the real positives for the future of climate action.
i know people talk about that as leadership but there is another way of looking at that which is isolation.
i think ban ki moon's initiative in new york has the opportunity to engage the imagination of the public in a much more meaningful way. i look forward to that because i think it could have real political influence.
in the ecr we recognise that developed countries need to take a leading role in the reduction of emissions but we have always questioned the sense of forging too far ahead too quickly with unilateral action.
that action may disadvantage the eu economy without any real impact on greenhouse gas emissions.
i am pleased to say that i think this rather lonely position seems to be changing.
i think it is fitting as a venue as we see at long last some real and meaningful action from the us government.
so it seems that the new york meeting will be taking us in that direction and i wish it every success.
we just need to look at the energy market as an example of where those two issues have become juxtaposed i think to the benefit of us all.
china that other giant economic power is committed to implementing a carbon market by two thousand and twenty along with tangible targets for emissions reductions.
we had floods we had sudden violent rainfall and the human and economic consequences of all this are enormous. when we look at the future the consequences of a warming planet with competition for water and for farmland with rising sea levels we will see climate refugees
so how will we explain all this to our children and grandchildren?
we know there is enough free and eternally renewable energy around for us to build a new clean society that we can be proud of and that is what i want to be able to tell my children and grandchildren that.
i would like to say to the council that we all know that the only way of making renewable energy and smart energy savings lucrative for the industry is if the eu sets binding targets that will drive global innovation and investment in this direction so we can eventually leave the cheap and dirty coal in the ground.
and there will be enormous economic and human consequences.
that the burning of brown coal was just so cheap that it was not profitable to switch to renewables?
unfortunately however given past experience i have serious doubts that the right actions will be taken at the right time;
time which we are letting run through our hands.
as the global poor suffer from a climate crisis not of their doing developed regions such as europe must take the lead on this issue and it is regrettable therefore that the european commission has not adopted a more ambitious position.
well i do not know the details of energy prices in your country but i do know that europe as a whole has the most expensive energy prices of any major economic area.
i know that the reason for that is gross over investment in inefficient and intermittent renewables.
and we have to compete with america which has cheap shale gas;
first of all i would like to point out that the council presidency is not in a position to make any comments about an allegation that a member state's secret services carry out secret surveillance of lawyers and their clients.
the council is therefore not informed of any surveillance activities carried out by the national departments responsible for safeguarding national security.
in the course of an activity concerning national security. for the same reason the presidency is not in a position to express itself as to the compatibility of these alleged activities with the charter of fundamental rights.
the eu directive on the right of access to a lawyer states that member states shall respect the confidentiality of communication between suspects or accused persons and their lawyers in the exercise of their right of access to a lawyer.
under the lisbon treaty the maintenance of law and order and in particular the safeguarding of internal security are responsibilities of the member states.
two thousand and twelve and recently on the right of access to a lawyer.
of communication between suspects or accused persons and their lawyer in the exercise of the right of access to a lawyer.
this is why it clarifies in its recitals that confidentiality applies only to genuine communication in the exercise of the rights of defence between the lawyer and a suspect and or accused person.
the right to privacy including communication between clients and lawyers as protected by article seven and the procedural rights protected by articles forty seven and forty eight of the charter are of the utmost importance in the eu.
where the charter does not apply the national systems provide fundamental rights protection procedures that are applicable in these cases.
since two thousand and nine we have made considerable progress in this direction with the adoption of three directives on the right of interpretation and translation in;
these fall outside eu law.
that being said the exemption clause needs to be interpreted strictly.
however it should be pointed out that the charter is applicable only to the member states where eu law is implemented. the matter of national security remains within the competences of the member states so where the member states initiate secret surveillance activities for national security reasons
consequently the charter is generally not applicable.
the commission also aims at a high level of protection of fair trial rights in the european union.
in the light of settled case law of the court of justice any member state which seeks to take advantage of an exemption needs to prove that it is necessary to have recourse to it in order to protect the state's essential security interests.
the directive on the right of access to a lawyer needs to be transposed by member states by twenty seven november two thousand and sixteen and the commission will closely monitor this process. article four of the directive clearly sets out the principle of respect for the confidentiality
however it should be underlined that the directive focuses on the rights of suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings.
unfortunately in ireland we know all too well what can happen when the state tries to prevent human rights lawyers from carrying out their work.
the arrest on monday of sixteen individuals including twelve lawyers representing basque political prisoners was contemptible.
this needs to be done if the member states do not want to do it.
however as i said at the outset the council has not discussed the specific issue which is the subject of this debate and has certainly not taken a view on it for the reasons which i have already explained.
the suggestion that we should engage with civil society particularly in these countries is a very good one.
it is easy enough when your neighbouring countries are equally friendly and stable and democratic.
also the suggestion that we should have regular hearings especially with civil society from undemocratic regimes is a good one so that they can hear what we have to say and we can hear directly from them.
some partner countries want to progress as far as they can towards the european union indeed as far as accession but others prefer to make the most of other benefits of the neighbourhood policy.
now we are preparing for the wider communication on the results of the review which is due to be published in may.
i want to take this opportunity to thank members for their input into the consultation which took responses from partner countries eu member states academics and civil society groups.
i am pleased that our thoughts are along the same lines.
next the need for improved mobility between partner countries and the european union since there is no better way to promote european values than through sharing experience person to person.
its promise lies in developing concrete economic projects with a focus on employment innovations and growth.
in the south the union for the mediterranean has the potential to make a real difference but frankly it has not yet done so and must be revitalised.
finally the desire expressed in the consultation by many partner countries for greater political engagement with the european union.
the forthcoming communication will offer more detail on the approach towards the two sub regions of our neighbourhood.
i am thinking in particular of free and fair elections freedom of expression and association judicial independence the fight against corruption and security sector reform.
a thriving civil society gets citizens involved and helps to hold governments to account so the european union will complement its relations with governments with much closer engagement with civil society.
a successful dfcta has a transformative power.
i would like to mention briefly three other elements brought to light by the review which will be key to the revised neighbourhood policy first the role of trade and economic integration to help advance stability and prosperity in partner countries.
regulatory reforms made by a partner country are encouraged through trade.
the most significant vehicle to achieve this is the deep and comprehensive free trade area.
they should find their expression in stronger joint commitments to the elements indispensable to democratisation.
as highlighted in both reports the revised neighbourhood policy will also recognise and act on the importance of the civil society. non governmental organisations have the expertise and experience to deliver democratic and market oriented reforms from the bottom up based on shared values.
closer and more substantial political dialogue across all areas of our relationship will help us resolve difficult issues in a spirit of mutual confidence.
so it will deliver more for more in a specific and differentiated way alongside stronger political steering of our relationship with our partners.
this is also important at a regional and sub regional level where for example the eastern partnership civil society forum has been making good progress.
the neighbourhood policy will seek improvements to mobility without losing sight of security.
it will spell out how we see the eastern partnership developing further in the wake of the summit under the polish presidency.
in fact over the past nine months the commission has undertaken a review of the policy.
you will have noticed that the results of our previous discussions on neighbourhood policy are already reflected in the communication on a partnership for democracy and shared prosperity of eight march.
a key outcome of the review is a new emphasis on differentiation of the neighbourhood policy according to the needs and wishes of each partner country. while the policy will continue to offer engagement to all partners every neighbour is different and has different aspirations.
we should become in our policy generous towards societies and much more demanding and severe towards governments.
there is a new momentum to substitute sometimes preferred real politics in our neighbourhood by an ambitious and much more proactive policy based on our values.
about money? absolutely
very clear. but is it only
accepting that we have not always had the values in the same place as our interests. our communication of eight march was an attempt to answer some of those questions to be absolutely frank with you the easy questions
how far we are ready to go to deal with the situations like the one we face in libya and how long we should make compromises here and there and associate stability with autocracy
process. no change is easy but compared to its predecessor this is to be an ongoing process where the review capabilities or if you like
in countries such as egypt tunisia and libya we should concentrate our efforts on consolidating nascent democratic awakenings into a lasting legacy of stable secular and enlightened governance.
it would be perverse to reward them for this progress by denying them the resources and support to maintain their pro western trajectory simply on the basis that the southern dimension has more acute need of the eu's attentions now. on libya i strongly support the no fly zone and the pressing need for regime change. i support recognition of the transitional national council and the unfreezing of eu frozen gaddafi assets and releasing the money to the benghazi pro democracy forces to buy supplies and yes even to buy arms.
in syria we should be more supportive of democratic opposition to president al assad who is clearly no friend of the west as we have seen from his efforts with north korea to develop a nuclear weapon and his political support for iran and for terrorism.
however this should not happen at the expense of our partners in the eastern dimension. some of those countries have also embarked on a long term process of democratic transition openness and reform.
madam president the middle east and north african countries of the southern neighbourhood clearly need the eu's long term political and where appropriate financial support.
the creation of a fully fledged eu operational headquarters within the european external action service possibly through permanent structural cooperation;
let me outline our vision as we move towards the european council in december.
there is one essential theme a comprehensive approach.
member states have been involved in this process both through consultations and their active contributions as presidencies of the council or sharing written contributions.
the eu needs to be a reliable security provider and continuous efforts need to be invested in building the capacity and the will of the twenty eight to act as a union as this is undoubtedly our greatest potential and strength.
both reports provide concrete guidance on how to strengthen our security within and outside the eu's borders and i very much welcome the energy and effort behind these comprehensive documents.
it must be secure to prevent the seas and oceans from becoming areas for international disputes or safe havens for terrorism or organised maritime crime.
they are feeding the debate in which we engaged when security and defence were put squarely on the agenda of the december european council.
we cannot achieve our political aims by using one military or civilian security instrument alone.
it would also mean taking money from civilian programmes.
the report mentions more projects to be financed by the eu budget such as the defence college defence agency and the satellite centre.
in our view the report promotes the development of and investment in the european drones programme. in paragraphs thirty four and thirty five the report promotes joint eu ownership of drones.
in our view more money would only support the continuation of a system that does not work.
therefore i also believe that we will be much more efficient if we develop further collaborative opportunities in order to preserve and enhance the required defence capabilities.
much has been achieved the most important being the changes in mindsets and managed initiatives are ongoing on external dimensions.
we all agree that maritime security matters and hand in hand with the commission and member states we are working hard on a comprehensive strategy for this.
we need your support for this work. therefore i am particularly grateful for the report presented by ana gomes whom i thank again for the quality of the work and the value that it brings.
the horn of africa provides viable proof that we can progress only when we seek comprehensiveness and synergies based on sound and prudent strategies.
military aspects of csdp and defence in general form a major part of our daily activities.
supranational bodies that gain a capacity to wage war without the express consent of member countries become by stealth sovereign states.
it refers with approval to the two thousand and eight european council meeting at which the objective was set to be capable of deploying a force of sixty zero in sixty days.
i am afraid i cannot be sanguine about the possibility of a trigger happy eu deploying an army of that size.
but of course that is the idea. the report seems to look back at previous involvement in conflicts with a degree of nostalgia and bemoans the fact that the eu does not have a clear common security and defence policy.
everything which is suggested operational headquarters pooling and sharing coordinated defence planning support for defence rd improved isr assets development of uavs strategic lift air to air refuelling tackling piracy is all being done already
this would complement nato and might actually be useful. how refreshing it would be for the eu at its so called defence council in december to announce that it will forthwith put its energies into civil action and encourage eu member states to play a full military role in nato.
a change from the ambitious rhetoric of a year ago and i would like to think that the penny is beginning to drop; a realisation that there is neither the political appetite nor the resources for some sort of european federation strutting the world's stage stressed in khaki and navy blue.
and the most brilliant idea the one that would create yet another category of ins and outs among european allies is for the more ambitious federalists to create their own little army through permanent structured cooperation.
why does the eu not try to get its act together and concentrate its crisis management efforts on civil and humanitarian contributions instead of trying to play soldiers.
now the only problem is that no one wants to pay for any of this and few want to take on the tough military challenges and in any case and most importantly it is all being done already at nato.
yet the two reports on csdp that we are now considering repeat the old grandiose mantras of eu military headquarters eu battle groups sixty zero man deployments indeed eu armed forces with admiral gomes' dream of great eu flagged armadas roaming the oceans
i wonder if everyone else does.
i think the nato alliance is our primary defence alliance it should have first bite at the cherry.
one of the great strengths of nato is that a crisis can be discussed around the table not only with european allies but with the united states and canada as well.
nato should decide whether or not it is going to address a crisis. i see no reason whatsoever why in nato structures we should not have a decision that ok this is something where our european allies within nato should take the lead'; they have the full support of other members of the alliance but they should take the lead.
what i object to is this duplication of structures and capacity and capability and this whole fiction that is invented as if somehow or other the eu is just doing stuff on its own and the rest of the world does not exist.
i do not agree with you ms giannakou on your proposal that we should use the eu budget to finance all kinds of defence projects including buying drones together.
but what really upsets me is the gomes report.
from my point of view this is a report from fantasyland.
this report earnestly proposes that the eu should seek global naval power protection from the arctic to the antarctic.
which eu is she talking about?
the strong maritime dimension of csdp should put the eu in a position of acting internationally as an effective international arbiter.
if we adopt this report we will be making ourselves a laughing stock in international security circles.
madam president in my community of lancashire there are women earning up to twenty seven less than men for the same work.
at its heart it is a problem of basic dignity at work for women everywhere.
this is a holistic problem that touches education affordable childcare support for carers and boardroom gender equality.
in fact the national centre for social research named two communities in my constituency in the ten worst local economies in the uk to be women. the eu and member states acknowledge the problem but we are crippled by slow progress.
in this context let us focus on two important aspects.
the effective application of the existing legal framework on equal pay remains a challenge in all member states.
it is first and foremost related to the way women and men share caring responsibilities in our society.
the main objective of our proposal for a directive on work life balance of working parents and carers is to address women's under representation in the labour market.
four combating gender based violence and protecting and supporting victims;
the proposed directive is complemented with non legislative measures with the objective to promote the development of formal care services;
the second aspect to focus on when it comes to the economic empowerment of women is closing the gender pay gap.
we are also developing the relevant indicators in order to be able to measure progress in all these areas.
the gender pay gap has been decreasing only slowly and seems to have stabilised at sixteen over the last years as a result of pervasive segregation on the labour market persistent stereotypes fuelled by inadequate work life balance policies and discrimination all of this combined with a lack of transparency.
the enforcement of the rules with regard to dismissal; protection for pregnant women; and removing economic disincentives for second earners to work.
one increasing female labour market participation and the equal economic independence of women and men;
the proposed directive aims at modernising the current eu legal and policy frameworks for family related leave and flexible working arrangements.
this gap is not related to professional qualifications or academic achievement where women more and more out perform men.
women's equal participation in the labour market and in economic decision making are preconditions for women's empowerment.
the commission has developed an extensive package of measures contributing to the economic empowerment of women.
and five promoting gender equality and women's rights across the world.
it will aim in particular at improving the application of the equal pay principle combating segregation in occupations and sectors combating vertical segregation and recognising women's skills efforts and responsibilities.
first closing the gender employment gap. women remain significantly under represented in the labour market.
the commission constantly monitors whether eu law on equal pay is applied correctly and supports member states and other stakeholders in the proper enforcement of the existing rules.
not least that more men or more women might be more interested in a particular job or have different life and career goals and in my view society should not measure that it is none of the state's business how we choose to approach work but what we should do is stand against illegal and unfair discrimination.
i do not agree with everything the report says may i say but i hope she has looked into the bbc the british broadcasting corporation an organisation which consistently trumpets its left wing credentials and dare i say progressive whatever that might mean and in spite of that the salary differentials in the bbc between ladies and gentlemen are absolutely blatant.