kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
thirdly we should ask catherine ashton to appoint a special representative to enter into dialogue with the chinese the russians and the united nations to keep the pressure up on north korea.
just because north korea has decided to be the greta garbo of the international community we want to be alone' it does not mean we should leave them alone.
they have no protection from the authorities in either china or north korea and there is little recognition of their plight from the international community.
women are particularly vulnerable to prostitution rape arranged marriages and bride traffickers. many victims of trafficking are unable to speak chinese and are held as virtual prisoners. the legal status of north koreans and the chinese government's policy of detaining the refugees and sending them back to north korea increase the refugees' vulnerability to trafficking for purposes of forced labour and sexual exploitation.
china must change its law to protect the victims of trafficking instead of returning them to north korea.
the changes in china including in the human rights area may not be sufficient for us but are a good example and perhaps china can use its relations to promote some changes in north korea.
we all remain extremely concerned about north korea.
also the recent sinking of a south korean naval vessel was undoubtedly a deliberate attack by the north. in this respect the prc needs to assume its responsibility as a member of the un security council by exerting pressure on north korea.
it has been said that while the eu has been a net contributor the new member countries have been net recipients for which of course their peoples cannot be blamed.
five nine increase proposed.
a money terms cut or a freeze would probably be more appropriate.
we have seen our rebate reduced by a third in the last year alone making us even more of a net contributor than we were.
in light of that undeniable fact would it not be madness to continue to pursue expansion to include even poorer and undeniably burdensome countries like turkey which are not by any stretch of the imagination even european?
is it reasonable for the uk to make military spending cuts while its net contribution to the european union will increase from around gbp six billion to gbp eight billion in the next couple of years?
if i find it stunning that in times of crisis this eu is looking to increase its own budget i find it more difficult to explain that the european parliament wants to double its own entertainment budget.
argue that extra funding is required to cover the new competences arising from the lisbon treaty.
this failure is linked to the irregularities identified by the european court of auditors every year.
this is simply unacceptable for the british people.
looking at the underspend for the past few years it is clear that the eu does not succeed in producing an efficient budget.
are we saying that the uk is axing child benefits and university funding postponing school building schemes and making other painful cuts just to fund more champagne and oysters for the european parliament?
thank you for your comments.
what matters most is the structure of the budget and the effectiveness of spending. sharp focus on innovation rd higher education selected areas of energy transport agriculture and rural development will do.
the eu budget is small compared to national ones and rightfully so.
it should focus only on investments in the common european future.
we have enough debt at the national level and even more unfunded liabilities.
the ecr agrees with the priorities of the two thousand and eleven budget as stated by the rapporteur youth education and mobility but if we take these goals seriously it logically follows that what our young people need is definitely not a greater fiscal burden in the age of adverse demographics but more solidarity and investment in our common future.
that is why our group feels strongly that the eu budget does not need to grow.
taxes at the eu level would not substitute but inevitably supplement national taxation increasing further the tax disadvantages of the european area compared to the rest of the world.
we do not need additional layers of debt which would destroy the future of european youth and make europe's terminal decline irreversible.
the eu budget should be regarded as a capital budget rather than a current one.
debt securities imply debt and would open the door to deficits building up debt.
but there is a fundamental misunderstanding in this concept.
this is related to the fact that many people think that quantity is quality namely the bigger the spending the better its impact on the european economy and society.
our budget is completely dissimilar to national budgets which have very little discretionary spending.
it does not need to grow in order to perform its functions.
mr president the two thousand and eleven eu budget is the first to be prepared under the lisbon treaty but it is not the first in the age of austerity. the global financial crisis has revealed the deep structural weaknesses of the european development model based on high taxes high fiscal redistribution inflexible labour markets and unnecessarily extended welfare provisions.
at a time when the british government is proposing the most wide ranging budget cuts in a generation we as conservatives have been calling for a freeze on european spending.
second mr commissioner while saying yes' we need more flexibility and yes' we want to have more emphasis on the results and the inputs how is that compatible with calling for a ten year financial perspective when we see the results of a mid term review are entirely fruitless in this kind of exercise that we are going through?
we should be calling for a net cap on our contribution until we have a fair system for the eu budget.
furthermore we have tabled amendments to the budget resolution where we want clarification in three specific areas on the costs for example of parliament's external offices in the member states;
we believe that the european union budget must be used to add genuine value in areas such as securing economic growth now and recovery in the future stability in the eu and around the world reducing global poverty and fighting the shared challenge of climate change.
we cannot set figures in stone ten years ahead when we do not even know what the european economy is going to look like in two years.
firstly we believe that this is not an opportune moment to think about additional own resources in the midst of the worst financial crisis in the last seventy years.
why should it be any different this year?
where spending is unnecessary we should oppose it. this is true for the general budget as well as the budget of the european parliament.
whilst member states want to cut their way out of the crisis we believe we can help create a different strategy a strategy based on growing our way out of difficulties such as debt deficit and growing unemployment.
when extra spending is justified we should support it.
because we need to find funding for these priorities we need of course to monitor unnecessary spending and administration costs.
these items should not be seen as unnecessary spending but as investments in our future.
the reason for that is that they tabled their proposals for the budget in another form rather than actually tabling a formal opinion.
if we do not get our amendment through we will face a huge problem next year in the budget and there will be cuts across all of the budget lines in agriculture. we cannot allow that to happen as a parliament and we must call for your support right across the political groups for this amendment. i want to thank the committee on budgets for their understanding and support for the agriculture committee's amendments on the dairy fund on our funding for the school milk and fruit scheme for the bee populations and the deprived persons programme.
i hope the commission is right in its optimism on dairy markets.
the council have used creative accounting to find eur four hundred and twenty million.
a flexibility instrument in the banana accompanying measures will help producing countries face new challenges and will benefit eu consumers and the least developed countries. trade related assistance such as epas and aid for trade will stimulate growth through trade not only with the eu but also
six members of the commission and the secretary general of the commission participated in very lively discharge hearings.
this would be an important building block towards an improved assurance chain between the management and control bodies in the member states and the commission services.
the discharge authority will be informed about these recommendations. however their publication remains subject to the conditions set in the legislation on public access to the eu institutions' documents.
the provision of reliable and complete financial information and audit data by the member states is one example of an area where improvements are necessary.
as a consequence by the end of the year we should have all necessary information to hand to provide you with an analysis per member state and a comprehensive evaluation of the use of financial engineering instruments.
i would like to highlight the implementation of financial engineering instruments as one example where the commission has proactively taken into account the outcome of the discussions we had.
several new measures included in our proposals for the next generation of eu spending programmes were inspired by the european court of auditors and the discharge authority. the commission will demonstrate its firm commitment to achieving all possible improvements.
the rapporteur mentioned four priority actions for the commission and i would like to stress that the commission is fully aware of your concerns and your expectations vis vis the commission but also vis vis other financial actors.
in some areas we have gone backwards in tackling mis spending.
year after year nothing changes and european taxpayers' money continues to be wasted. the stark truth is that in two thousand and twelve we are still being asked to grant discharge to accounts which the court of auditors has condemned.
such an important role cannot be a part time job if we are serious about protecting taxpayers' money. it is also good news that the committee agreed with us on refusing to grant discharge to three agencies but we should not have granted discharge to any of the agencies until they could demonstrate responsible management of public money.
ecr meps believe that taxpayers have a right to expect their money will be spent properly so today we will be voting against the discharge.
the error rate in structural funds has increased significantly which is particularly disappointing given the commission's rhetoric on improving the situation in regional policy.
but we demand of you as a part of this discharge procedure to use the tools you have more effectively.
nobody cleaned the house and then we stood there blaming each other.
that does not mean that the commission is without responsibility.
i think it is high time that the council debates this amongst themselves;
it is your taxpayers it is your money.
the problem here is shared management and shared management is exactly the same as it was when i was a kid and my sister and i had the shared responsibility of cleaning the house.
they have the responsibility to control and sanction those who do not play by the rules.
the problem is not all over the place.
you lack some tools but you do not use the tools which you have effectively enough. therefore we have a responsibility in the upcoming programming period to give you the tools which you need now when we are co legislators. that goes for the council as well.
the reason that i decided to propose to grant discharge is because i heard your sincere wish to change the way you work with sanctions suspensions and interruptions and that is the reason we give you discharge.
advisers experts and board members.
this is almost an annual budget and we definitely need clearer accountability and greater transparency with regard to operations under these instruments.
we call on the bureau to review all control mechanisms in order to guarantee the most competitive prices for the services and goods offered.
first public procurement.
their use is continually increasing and they are indeed useful but we do not know to what extent.
i urge all my colleagues not to accept any appeals to reject this resolution but on the contrary to support it.
first i want to congratulate rapporteur christofer fjellner for his excellent work and energy during the whole procedure.
we need to assess them better using appropriate indicators and to establish a clear link between inputs and results.
we need clearer rules.
this year again the court of auditors has not been able to issue a positive declaration of assurance on the union budget.
i will briefly address three points which i consider important in this report.
the eu budget guarantees loans and the balance of payments in the european financial stability mechanism for a maximum of eur one hundred and ten billion.
we want action in all of these areas in exchange for discharge.
thirdly pre financing;
as a result of our deliberations the committee required that the commission deliver a political declaration in which it accepts its final and overall responsibility for the implementation of the budget including the part which is implemented under shared management.
let me turn to the most important question of any discharge procedure whether or not to grant discharge.
the commission is now being asked in particular to objectively and critically evaluate the use of those instruments and report back and to assess the specific risks attached to the use of these instruments.
i would also like to take this opportunity to thank the opinion giving committees for their input.
the court of auditors found severe weaknesses in the implementation of these instruments especially in the area of cohesion.
specifically the following four points for action will be addressed by the commission and i hope it will confirm this today firstly financial engineering instruments;
secondly the commission's accountability instruments;
some people make it sound like these instruments are some kind of alchemy that create gold out of nothing but we see risk and we see costs and we want them to be evaluated so that we know exactly what consequences they will have.
discharge is one of the main prerogatives of the european parliament and it is important that we all try to take part in it in one way or another.
we need these to be improved and we need them to actually show more than they hide.
as you can see in the report adopted in the committee which followed my recommendation to grant discharge to the commission for the financial year two thousand and ten this was not an easy decision.
the financial engineering instruments kept us busy for most of the time.
and fourthly the commission's supervisory role in the cohesion area.
to the four priority actions that the commission needs to address in the upcoming months.
therefore the council has made a proposal to the european parliament on the discharge procedure and the council has asked the european parliament to appoint a formal delegation to discuss this proposal and to solve the outstanding issues.
i can assure you that the council presidency will make all possible efforts to make progress on this issue and i have noted that many of the council's priorities are also those of the european parliament;
it encouraged the commission to fully assume its responsibility in the implementation of the budget to reinforce its supervision and control structures and to strengthen its cooperation with and its guidance to member state authorities.
payment should be interrupted and suspended whenever significant deficiencies are identified and until corrective action is fully implemented.
in that context i would like to mention that minister vestager has informed her colleagues in ecofin about the issues raised by the committee on budgetary control during the debate.
i would like to take this opportunity to thank mr geier and the rest of this house for its very warm reception of the danish presidency.
on twenty eight february my colleague minister vestager was in the european parliament's committee on budgetary control to present the council's recommendation to give a discharge to the commission in respect of the implementation of the budget for.
this applies especially in times of economic and financial crisis when many member states have to cut their national budgets and keep their expenditure under strict control and when european citizens and taxpayers pay even closer attention to the correct use of public funds
not only at the national but also at the european level.
two thousand and ten on that occasion she was able to participate in a very interesting and fruitful debate on the implementation of the eu budget which concentrated in particular on its implementation under shared management by the commission and member states.
we therefore both addressed the fact that a large share of payments from the eu budget is still materially affected by error and we both follow the overall aim of attaining an unqualified audit opinion from the european court of auditors.
the council recalls in this context the importance of recoveries and financial corrections which are an essential element in protecting the union's financial interest and in improving the management of eu funds.
the council would like to see more progress in the financial management and control of eu funds.
finally i have to say a few words on the disagreement between the european parliament and the council on the discharge procedure between our institutions. the council is of the opinion that it is important to find a durable solution to this recurring problem and that this solution should be based on three principles accountability transparency and reciprocity.
the ongoing negotiations and the revision of the financial regulation are a perfect opportunity to improve and simplify procedures and to reasonably strengthen supervision and control without creating any excessive administrative burden.
the commission seems to have little control over them which means that in the discharge reports one sees the same stories again and again conflicts of interest and a revolving door to outside employers at least as efficient as the ones in this building.
this house is happy to approve the management's performance.
how can we tell taxpayers that their money has been properly spent when we have this situation?
madam president the procedure whereby we in this house approve the use of the eu budget by the commission and the other institutions is our greatest responsibility as representatives of the citizens of the member states. yet year after year while the court of auditors fails to give the eu spending a clean bill of health
so dear taxpayers nobody actually cares how your money is spent.
yet while this house is prepared to turn a blind eye to the deficiencies of those responsible for most of the budget including itself it puts great energy into refusing to approve the management of the council's budget.
the auditors' report for the year two thousand and ten reveals that the error rate a fine name for the irregular use of funds has grown from.
then there was the commission memo issued by dg trade in two thousand and nine which encouraged officials to conceal information from public scrutiny.
the court believes that this first evaluation report represents an initial step in the right direction and provides parliament the council and the commission with an opportunity to discuss and agree how it can be made useful to the discharge authority as an instrument for european union transparency and accountability.
it is also important to ensure there is adequate provision for transparency.
in particular we emphasised the need to set smart objectives and milestones for the new programming period.
it helps provide citizens with assurance as to what european funds were spent on whether they were used correctly and what was achieved with them. the primary responsibility for answering these questions lies with those responsible for managing european funds the commission and the relevant national authorities. they need to put in place systems capable of doing so. the court's role
for the financial year two thousand and ten the court concluded that the european union accounts prepared by the commission do provide a reliable picture of what european union funds were spent on. we noted however that the commission does not yet provide a complete and reliable set of information on whether european union funds have been correctly raised and spent.
we also concluded that systems were only partly effective overall and that there continued to be risks in the other areas of expenditure which need to be managed and disclosed. the court recommended that due account should be taken of these risks when revising the legislative instrument for the next programming period.
in particular the court stressed that reforms should focus on both reducing errors and improving the results we achieve with the funds of the european union.
is to provide independent assessments of the quality of their financial management and reporting systems.
this is a point we also stressed in our recent opinions on the new legislative proposals governing the main areas of expenditure for the period
the commission's reporting on results achieved needs to be improved.
mr president it is not primarily our job to give an opinion on whether the money was spent as we would wish or in agencies of which we would approve. it is of course to decide whether or not it was spent in accordance with the authority given to the agency in question.
some of these reports contain few if any criticisms and the criticisms are minor.
assuming the rapporteurs were provided with accurate information and that they took account of that information then parliament should attest to that.
but her report on the budget for the european environment agency does provide some evidence for suspicions of overlaps of spending i will speak cautiously in that way with ngos or pressure groups with which staff of the agency had rather too close a relationship. her report on the budget for the food safety agency was unexceptionable in itself
but i am concerned about amendments that would seek to water down the recommendations of the original report to prevent conflicts of interest.
i would like to start by saying that the work has changed and we must follow these changes.
once again we took this opportunity to call on the council the commission and the member states to revise the way they appoint members of the management boards of the agencies as well as the directors.
i believe that the postponement will also help the agencies to finish the clearing or at least to have in place in an irreversible way a structured policy against conflicts of interest.
once again this is nothing to do with the work of the agencies.
i am sure that this will continue.
since the codecision procedure applies here the european parliament will be fully involved in the negotiations on this new proposal. the council will shortly begin consideration of this new proposal and looks forward to working closely with you.
the second is that we respect fully the human rights and the dignity of migrants and members of their families.
its provisions now have to be transposed by member states into their national law within a deadline of two years. this overall legal framework underlines our strong commitment to ensuring that third country nationals who are held in detention for the purpose of removal are treated in a humane and dignified manner and that their fundamental rights are fully respected.
we need to do this internally in order to establish our own common standards and rules in the area of asylum and migration but we also need to act externally in partnership with countries of origin and transit in order to manage migration flows more