kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
why is it important to try and pursue an approach in parallel? because if our companies were having to provide more information than was the case with companies outside the eu that could not only be of commercial advantage to their competitors who would have more information on european businesses to be able to find out for example
but we had been working on it and i think we share the sense of urgency that has been expressed by a number in this debate.
clearly i hear that there are some parts of the house which understandably want people to go further and to go faster but i think overall the support for the proposal from the commission is clear.
i think that links to the questions i have been asked about the threshold in particular because one of the principles that we have pursued not just on this proposal but more generally is to want to take our ideas forward in concert with international work with the work being done by the oecd and
twenty the reason for that is that this work in international fora has been taken forward over many years and i think the more we can do it in step the more we can ensure we can make progress and the more we can make sure that we can make progress that will be
this point about competition and the need to make sure that this proposal applies equally to non european multinationals and to european multinationals lies at the heart of the proposal.
it is important to recognise moments like this. i am proud to see the introduction of a measure i called for in my report last year supported by my labour and socialist colleagues though opposed by the uk conservatives.
but this is no time for complacency;
the eur seven hundred and fifty million threshold is too high and we need companies to break down their reports by every country in the world not just the twenty eight member states and a handful of the very worst tax havens.
but here we are today with the commission finally acting against the appalling injustice of aggressive tax avoidance and tax evasion.
with the backing of great efforts from civil society right across europe it goes to show that acting together in the eu we can achieve change.
the commission's proposals need improvement.
in some higher tax countries it is the case that some of the big multinationals can pay up to thirty less tax than would be paid by the smaller companies.
we have given careful consideration to the ideas that were discussed in this house for the shareholders' rights directive and we sought to strike a balanced approach one that does not harm the competitiveness of european businesses but that is nevertheless ambitious on greater tax transparency.
then that we should build on the major reforms already taken forward by my colleague commissioner moscovici and others to increase transparency and to fight tax avoidance.
the only change would be that large banks established outside the eu but doing business inside it would in future be required to publish a country by country report.
on a country by country basis they would in future need to publish the nature of their business activities;
so this legislation that we are proposing would require the biggest multinationals those with a global turnover above eur seven hundred and fifty million to publish information in a number of key areas.
pre dates the panama papers.
i think that as a result of that the college believes we have a simple proportionate way to increase accountability.
because this greater transparency will shine a light and help us ask whether we indeed have the right laws in place.
i think we heard from commissioner moscovici on both the range of the measures that have been taken and the passion with which he is pursuing this.
indeed for me it is this wish to protect the competitive position of our smes which lies at the heart of and is an important part of this proposal.
the commission consulted widely before bringing it forward.
in working on this proposal in recent months we have been guided by a number of clear principles.
we should be proportionate in what we do in two main respects first we should not undermine the position of european businesses vis vis their global competitors;
to the subsidiaries of non european multinationals doing business in europe as well as to large european multinationals.
with your help and the help of member states we need to seize this opportunity to promote fairer competition and to build trust not just in our tax system but also to build trust again in europe's businesses.
and second we should not burden small and medium sized european businesses the lifeblood of our economy which typically operate in one country.
it can help the public see whether companies are acting in the best long term interests of their shareholders from a reputational point of view.
we should bring forward measures that will affect all the biggest multinationals operating in europe not just the european ones.
the information would have to be made available for five years on the company's website so that anyone who is interested could see where multinationals are paying their tax and whether there is a level playing field for all businesses. to make sure european companies are not disadvantaged these rules would apply also
now our ambition is to get this agreed as quickly as possible.
we have listened to the views of all interested parties and fed them into our analysis.
our proposal builds on the work that has been taken forward by the oecd to require the sharing of information related to corporate income tax between tax authorities.
i say this as someone who is pro business but i would prefer businesses to be concentrating on their customers on the services they offer on product innovation on true competition rather than the competition of the creativity of their tax advisers.
clearly as we discussed in the last debate the panama papers have sharpened the focus but the proposal that the commission has brought forward today to require all large multinationals operating in europe to publish information on the tax that they pay country by country
in addition and this links to our last debate on the panama papers if they pay taxes outside the eu in countries that do not abide by international governance standards on tax matters so called tax havens multinationals would have to publish the same detailed information
in preparing this proposal we have looked at the rules already in place for the banks in extractive industries.
we think that taken together this information will give a clear idea of whether a large multinational is paying its tax where it makes its profits.
first that we should aim to be consistent with international work being taken forward by the oecd and endorsed by the g twenty.
european banks already have to comply with a specific transparency regime in the capital requirements directive that includes country by country reporting so they will not be affected by today's proposal.
it responds to the growing demand from european citizens for more transparency and fairness in tax policies.
i believe we are all keen to ensure as conducive a business environment as possible for european companies but at the same time we expect these companies to pay their fair share of taxes in our countries.
it also raises public awareness of tax issues and strengthens the sense of corporate social responsibility among european businesses.
our ambition should be to ensure that the eu becomes the most attractive and businessfriendly region globally.
consumer confidence plays a crucial role in economic growth.
two thousand and thirteen the commission outlined on this occasion further actions necessary to maximise its benefits for consumers.
third the commission is also developing a unified consumer law database. this database should become an important tool for legal practitioners in the field of consumer protection law.
first enforcement needs to be improved so that equal and high levels of consumer protection are ensured across the eu.
to this end the commission is organising thematic workshops with national enforcement authorities on key areas identified in the report. in addition we are reviewing guidance documents on the application of the unfair commercial practices directive.
and finally on eleven june two thousand and thirteen the commission adopted a communication and a recommendation on collective redress in which it recommends that member states have collective redress mechanisms at national level for injunctive and compensatory relief concerning violation of rights granted under union law.
to promote coordinated enforcement actions under the responsibility of commissioner mimica.
having launched a broad transposition check back in two thousand and eleven the commission is already engaged in a constructive dialogue with the relevant national authorities to ensure that the law is in place and that it is enforced.
second the commission will also seek to facilitate closer and more targeted cooperation between national authorities.
the commission will adopt a revised guidance document by the end of two thousand and fourteen to help enforcement authorities in their work.
a strong eu consumer policy can indeed contribute to strengthening european consumer confidence in the single market.
fourth we want to strengthen the effectiveness of the consumer protection cooperation network;
that is why the commission will keep monitoring legislative developments in the member states and ensure that national transposition measures are correct.
it is important that we fully take account of the sustainable development goals in the european internal and external policy framework and current commission priorities.
at the same time this resolution sends an important political message that the european parliament is actively engaged in shaping the future of the european union's development policy and is committed to eradicating poverty and achieving sustainable development by two thousand and thirty worldwide ensuring that no one is left behind.
this includes taxation policy where our actions against tax evasion tax base erosion and illicit financial flows in the eu should guide and inspire our external actions on the collect more spend better initiative within our partner countries.
the commission proposal provides the basis for the discussions ahead.
development policy in the form of a new european consensus on development can make a central contribution in this direction. therefore the consensus is to be taken and defined together with our internal actions on a sustainable european future and our internal policies implementation aimed at reaching sustainable development goals at home.
the commission is committed to working closely together with parliament and with the member states to ensure that the final consensus is exactly that a true consensus owned by all eu institutions and all our member states able to spur action that can change lives across the world for the better.
yes on the.
yes on making sure more tax revenue is collected.
your document is only one part of how the eu must address the sdgs.
the commission presented its proposal for a new european consensus in november which provides the basis for the discussions ahead.
it will also contribute to supporting the implementation of the landmark paris agreement on climate change.
the european union's global leadership in development is nowadays needed more than ever as underlined in the eu global strategy.
and enable us all to better respond to the more complex and interconnected challenges the world faces today.
under the setup of the lisbon treaty which aims at ensuring greater coherence of the union's policies and coordination with member states the principles of development effectiveness and policy coherence for development and the links with other policies such as migration security energy climate
your resolution like the commission's proposal contains a strong affirmation on poverty eradication as the primary objective of eu development policy.
there are also issues which we will want to discuss in greater detail in the context of the upcoming tripartite discussions. i see this resolution as an excellent contribution to this joint endeavour and i wish to thank once again the chair and the members of the development committee and in particular the co rapporteurs.
the resolution also recognises the challenges and opportunities posed by changes in the development landscape including global trends increased fragility and instability and the two thousand and thirty agenda.
these would also need to be systematically addressed by our new consensus.
this needs to come up clearly in the new consensus.
gain ever greater importance. there is so much here that we can agree on.
in this context among other things the resolution highlights the necessity to find new ways of achieving development priorities in fragile and conflict affected countries including by linking up more closely with humanitarian actors.
this would allow for signature at our flagship event the european development days in early june and would provide the opportunity to present our new consensus internationally at the united nations high level political forum for sustainable development in july.
the rest of the world expects ambition from us in the implementation of the two thousand and thirty agenda and its sustainable development goals an agenda based on openness multilateralism and the objective of shared prosperity. an ambitious new european consensus on development would be a very important part of our wider implementation of the two thousand and thirty agenda.
this resolution ably prepared by the development committee is an important contribution to that discussion.
i was glad to see this house calling the revision of the consensus timely and necessary.
representatives from this parliament and the european union member states are working together with the commission services and the european external action services towards a new european consensus on development. this would represent a paradigm shift in development cooperation under the two thousand and thirty agenda for sustainable development
a proposal for a shared vision and framework for action in development policy for the european union and its member states. the commission is looking forward to a successful conclusion of the discussions between the institutions within the first half of this year.
the fight against climate change is a global challenge that we must keep fighting together with our european partners.
young people are absolutely key to tackling climate changed as proved by the eco group from st christopher's high school in accrington also in my constituency.
the green summit follows extensive stakeholder consultation and brings together environmental experts interest groups partner agencies academics and local people to accelerate greater manchester's green ambitions.
they know that the uk cannot tackle climate change alone.
these informed passionate and creative young people are the leaders of the future.
madam president implementing the cop twenty one objectives must be a joint effort at all levels;
let me put you right on how this all started.
leave it to the market caveat emptor and let people get on with it without interference from politicians who frankly do not know what they are talking about.
it became illegal to inquire of a borrower whether he could or could not repay the loan and that is when you saw the invention of subprime mortgages which had never existed before.
that is how the market works.
it was political interference in the market which caused the subprime crisis. add to that the bubble in the property market created by criminal fraudulent central bankers printing money and artificially restraining interest rates as central banks are still doing now.
mr president investing in a property is the single largest financial decision that most people will ever make in their lives but property markets in europe vary very widely.
now one hundred and fifty amendments and three years later with help from people from other countries i have stopped that battle.
and european legislation can have unnecessary unintended consequences.
i think we have to protect consumers but we do not need a one size fits all approach to home ownership in europe.
it will i am afraid add more costs for the lenders and these will again be passed on to consumers.
i think we could have done more of this by looking at best practice through equivalence regimes and not having this rigid package.
we cannot have a one size fits all set of rules across europe for home ownership.
earlier drafts of this legislation would have completely shut down the uk private rental market that is five million households in the uk.
there was irresponsible information incorrect information sometimes misleading information and i am not opposed to efforts to try and give people better information but we do not need a very rigid key information package for people because fundamentally most people want to buy homes in the place that they want to live and they are not trying to compare offers across borders.
in hungary estonia and bulgaria i believe nine out of ten people own their own houses;
i would say that colleagues from other uk parties have been completely invisible in trying to protect these residents' interests in this discussion.
mr president coming from ireland i am particularly aware of the painful consequences of irresponsible lending not only for the lives of individuals and their families but also for our economy.
this directive brings in a set of new eu wide standards for responsible mortgage lending which curtail risky behaviour on the part of creditors and borrowers alike.
simple comparable information on loan conditions a period of reflection prior to being bound to a mortgage the ban on tying practices and the provisions on early repayments are only some of the provisions that will directly benefit our consumers.
the problems that stem from the property bubbles require a wide range of measures in the area of housing provision and financial regulation and this is a key step.
the commission has so far spent a further eur thirty five million to support flegt more generally and we will spend eur thirty five million more between two thousand.
society and communities.
we have also dedicated human resources to the implementation of
it will discourage unregulated unsustainable exploitation of forests.
it is important that both the european union and our partner countries endorse the vpas since illegal logging is a problem for all.
cameroon is very high in the corruption index kept by transparency international and in the republic of congo there has been horrific exploitation of some sections of the population notably the pygmy people although a new law has just been passed and people will wait to see what this does to protect indigenous people.
the logging industry in these countries is implicated in corruption and in the exploitation of workers and the deforestation involved is a huge threat to the livelihoods of the indigenous people.
it is for this reason that the original resolution of the european united left group calls for the logging industry to be in public ownership and under democratic control crucially involving workers in the industry and the indigenous communities in the forests affected by logging.
the left's resolution also points out that illegal logging is related to poverty levels in the countries concerned.
it can provide an income for individuals and their families who would otherwise go hungry and therefore ending illegal logging is also linked to ending the poverty and deprivation of many communities in the relevant countries.
the forests belong not only to the people of these countries but they are part of the ecosystem of the planet they are key to the life sustaining systems and they contain billions of tonnes of carbon. halting deforestation is one of the ways that we should be tackling climate change and governments around the globe have been trying to do this for years.
these two countries should be congratulated for their courage and foresight in signing up to these voluntary agreements with the eu.
however regulating and enforcing these agreements will prove a challenge.
heaven knows building in sustainable management of our own continent's resources is hard enough.
but the will is there and for that we should be very pleased.
careful management can bring down illegal and unsustainably imported timber.
at the moment the amount of timber that is illegally harvested and imported into the eu constitutes almost one fifth of the timber products on our markets despite parliament and others trying to tackle this.
enforcement will be made easier with the involvement of local people and civil society in these countries and we must ensure that their right to be heard and involved is maintained and listened to.
the widespread removal of tropical timber is driven by an insatiable appetite for products to grace our homes.
we should value this resource better and take greater care of the resource that not only sustains a whole host of plant and animal species but is slow growing and takes many years to reach maturity.
we must take care not to undermine our own efforts to fight deforestation and climate change by simultaneously providing the largest market for illegal timber products in the world.
the result of these agreements may mean that tropical timber reaches a higher price and that is something that we should not object to.
it is not only a limited resource but it is the only thing that local people have to sell.
they know the true value of their resource and with this agreement so will we.
these people are our eyes and ears in the forest and we need their help to enforce the agreements. they need us to support their ability to voice any concerns. these agreements are a two way process and we look to you commissioner to be able to enforce it.
we must ensure that the agreements work and that any breaches are monitored and addressed.
then we must look to other countries in africa asia and south america to sign up to similar agreements as soon as possible and i look forward to working with you and the commission to achieve this.
we all worked extremely well on this report and i am delighted as he has said that we managed to reach a broad consensus.
the agreements with congo and cameroon taken together with ghana means that some of africa's most vulnerable forests are now covered by voluntary partnership agreements.
the existence of these agreements as the two previous speakers have said is to be warmly welcomed.
they provide a mechanism for tackling the massive illegal trade in timber.
but while welcoming these agreements i nevertheless share with the rapporteur a number of concerns.
first and foremost the danger it is not the intention but there is a danger of agreeing such a framework is that it is seen as providing a framework for large scale exploitation of our forests leading to the opposite of the purpose of the agreement namely further degradation and further deforestation
thus contributing to the very destruction of the global environment we are trying to avoid.
what we want is an agreement that contributes to the conservation and sustainable management of our biodiversity resources.
secondly indigenous people who are so often the victims of environmental exploitation should benefit from this agreement.
the promise in the voluntary partnership agreement by the congolese government to promote a law ensuring that the rights of indigenous people are promoted and respected must be delivered upon.
again i urge the commission in their contact with the government to continually press for the delivery of this promise until it is there on the statute book in the congo.
thirdly we must ensure and i agree with catherine bearder who mentioned this that appropriate funds are available to properly implement this agreement. no matter how good an agreement is on paper without the resources to carry it out it is a meaningless piece of paper.
as has been indicated there are no financial packages attached to the agreement itself.
it is up to us both the commission to propose and parliament and council to put into the budget appropriate budgetary facilities to make this agreement work.