kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
therefore the sustainability and credibility of the control system as a whole is at
programmes. it will also co finance costs linked to eradication measures including through compensating owners for the value of their destroyed
risks. this precautionary approach would strengthen the current import requirements ensure preventive action wherever necessary and support our importers in satisfying the considerable eu market demand for plant products from outside the eu under safe
it will lead to micro management at a level which will just cause problems.
the commission proposal is that these should be levied. i believe very strongly that this should be fees may be levied'.
it is not the way i prefer to work and it is not the way i want to go but i have to say i felt that on all three reports it is a necessity because far from parliament making it easier and helping with the simplifying agenda which we are told is the motivation behind this framework legislation we were simply in danger of making them so complicated and in many cases contradictory within the text that we would end up with what we call in english a dog's breakfast.
i absolutely accept that member states must put into place adequate resources to carry out the functions that are required under this official control legislation but to require that fees must be charged when they are not currently charged is i think entirely wrong;
having made that point let me just make one or two points specifically on the reports. first of all on official controls my main point here is on fees.
we have already launched an action plan in this regard and one should also say that the proposal that we have before us is only one element of the eu's fight against antibiotic resistance.
the question which has been raised by some meps is should fees linked to official controls be mandatory or should we leave this question entirely in the hands of the member states?
so i think that because of this it was right and proper to initiate proceedings against russia through the wto arbitration procedure.
this regulation would replace complex existing legislation and much of its substantive content would certainly be beneficial.
whilst the rapporteur acknowledges that this is not primarily an animal protection law she quotes with approval the description in a parallel regulation that animals are sentient beings and has written that the legislation protecting live animals when travelling should be amended to reflect distances travelled rather than just borders crossed. sentient beings can feel pain and suffer from discomfort and fear.
food from such an animal will not of course be a hazard to human health but it will be a wound to civilised sensibilities.
this package of measures is crucially important for the european union farming sector. it is essential that we create legislation that is simple flexible and outcomes based.
i am a little alarmed that aspects falling outside the scope of the regulation such as cloning and animal transportation times have been included and that these may distract from the primary animal health concerns.
the movement of animals between northern ireland and the republic of ireland is vital to the agricultural industry on both sides of that border.
it is extremely important for on going trade that the proposed eu animal health regulation is not so prescriptive as to destroy generations of successful trade between two member states.
can the commission confirm that the recently adopted bovine eid regulation will be incorporated without change in the animal health regulations?
the thought process is i know what i'm doing i have done it before and it's not going to affect anybody else' and i have been guilty of this attitude personally despite knowing two people who died in farm accidents and two more who lost limbs.
i see here a similarity with the attitude to drinking and driving held by most of my peer group in my youth.
mr president one of the positive attributes of farmers is their can do' attitude in overcoming the challenges of limited weather opportunities or emergency machinery repairs.
the obverse of this though is a recklessness in undertaking activities that could result in death or serious injury.
using the right psychology a great deal could be achieved here. a family discussion about inviting a health and safety officer to come and visit the farm for a chat would send a very powerful message. changing attitudes is the key to reducing most farm accidents but money can play a part as well.
i've had some near misses myself getting away with minor injuries instead.
over the years social pressure has changed this attitude quite significantly and social pressure could play a part in reducing farm accidents.
it is true that far too many people on farms in my country and across the european union are killed while going about their daily lives.
it is a silent and hidden problem and it's something that we need to lift the lid on.
we hear anecdotal stories but we need the facts and we need to ask why this is happening.
commissioner we need a clear picture of what's happening on all farms across europe.
i think there's a lot of resistance among council and member states to actually work together to get accurate statistics counting the same things and i would have thought it's an issue that there should be some unity on so perhaps the commission could help us in that regard.
i know that recently we've had terrible weather conditions in many countries and that affects the physical well being of farmers and their mental well being and when people are tired and emotionally drained accidents do and will happen.
they are a very high risk group for lifestyle diseases and yet the image of farmers is that they work outdoors it's fresh air and it's healthy while in fact the reality for many farmers is that their health is not good and indeed in the research that i've looked at from the irish researchers shows that farmers in my country have significantly higher mortality rates from cardiovascular disease cancers and other causes of death compared with other occupational groups.
they will welcome your attempt to tackle unfair trading practices.
i'm not advocating that we move away from the family farm model but i think we do need to ask the hard questions that by not separating the business and the family we may be creating more difficulties around accidents and fatalities it is a question that we need to discuss.
it's a romantic notion and we defend it and we want to contribute to its survival and we hold it dear but we need to ask ourselves is the combination of family and farm part of the problem?
but there is another question that i think we need to address here this evening.
i dare say there are many farmers who are looking at this massive merger that's happening in the united kingdom between asda and sainsbury's and saying to themselves well that's something to look forward to!
there is a link in all of this. you can push people very far and too far and in my view the pressures in the food supply chain heap back on the producers and on farmers that's why we have the horror story of accidents and fatalities and something's got to be done about it.
i want to talk also about well being and health generally because in my own member state there are some very disturbing figures around the high incidence of occupational injury and disease amongst farmers.
when i talk to you about the pressures farmers are under and commissioner you know we talked about the european budget today so it's not a night to discuss it in detail farmers will be anxious about pressures on their budgets.
farms are now more intensive there are fewer people working on them and therefore one of the things i've tried to do when we talk about getting the facts on this situation is to get details into one of the files we're working on integrated farm statistics.
i was particularly struck by one of our own farm safety specialists in ireland and i'll read again the heading of an article which he contributed to where he said europe is being fed on the lives of one thousand farmers every single year' and he was angry because he also added that in europe we know how many calves are born we know about their welfare but we cannot tell how many farmers are killed every year and he described that as a disgrace and i agree with him.
i spoke about my own member state and the situation there is not good but we don't know with any great accuracy the level of fatalities and accidents.
is there relentless pressure on farmers today that perhaps is intensified because they are more isolated and farming alone more than in the past?
the objective was to improve the standard of safety on irish farms by providing grant aid for a number of specified investments.
and thirdly ensuring better enforcement of the rules.
last but not least i would like to stress the importance of further developing the monitoring tools as evidence based policies require high quality comparability and as ms mcguinness said timely data.
the second pillar of the cap provides for on farm investment which could be used for farm safety measures.
in this respect the european pillar of social rights emphasised the right of workers to a healthy safe and well adapted work environment.
our main priority is to help farmers and smes to meet their obligations under the eu acquis.
the cap is not necessarily the framework for setting rules on working conditions or occupational health and safety at work.
this year's long winter and frequent storms have heightened the risk to farmers working in poor light and unsafe conditions.
for that we need to work closely with our member states and our social partners to develop the tools and to improve the quality of the data.
they also have the obligation to provide if necessary personal protective equipment free of charge.
we need to get the member states to give us more data in order to have a more coordinated approach at eu level on how we can tackle this issue.
this was a proposal that has been in gestation for a considerable period of time and i think that the announcement today is certainly a very good attempt to mitigate the worst effects of what may have been proposed some months ago in relation to the budget.
over the years the eu has developed a comprehensive acquis on occupational safety and health which applies to all economic sectors including agriculture.
secondly supporting smes in complying with rules for occupational health and safety and again this applies to farms;
and of course as mr nicholson mentioned income pressure weather all the risks associated with agriculture contribute at various times towards putting additional pressure on our farmers and therefore it requires more care and attention in terms of how they farm and how they go about their business.
as far as the commission is concerned we will continue to focus on the actions that we mentioned in the two thousand and seventeen occupational safety and health communication which includes the updated carcinogens directive.
i think i can conclude from the debate that we all share the same concerns for the occupational safety and health of all our eu workers including our farmers and others working in the agricultural sector.
i think maybe the commissioner might want to take this on board because when finance is short corners are cut and that is also a danger so i think we should look maybe at pillar two to see how we can actually give some help to this particular area especially in slurry related accidents which have been very prevalent in my region.
i have to say there is no easy solution to many of the problems that arise but also many are avoidable.
i am left completely speechless at the scene of twenty eight powerful politicians selected for the political leadership of this continent but led by the nose by a civil servant.
it is about the total lack of political judgment of this commission and that also applies to the absence of mr juncker who likes to talk about his political commission but politics also means political accountability.
telling us about the wonderful new clothes of the emperor and expecting us to believe it is a stupid strategy and it just underlines the point that i want to make here today.
the appointment of mr selmayr was a grave error and it must be corrected and that is a precondition for our continued support for this commission.
maybe that part of the house could have the courtesy to hear me out selmayrgate destroys all the credibility of the european union as a champion of integrity and transparency in public administration.
if the commissioners are so easily intimidated by a civil servant if they act like helpless children when confronted with an unexpected staff decision then how can we expect them to stand up for the european interests against trump for example in a trade war or resist pressures from powerful lobbies or be firm with national governments that violate eu rules?
he should be here to be held accountable for a political decision.
in conclusion the commission will have to choose what is more important the career of mr selmayr or the credibility of the european union.
unfortunately we haven't received sufficient responses to them from the commissioner and i hope that he will still go back to those four questions.
mr commissioner there is a lot of interest surrounding that appointment and i think that you should do your best to come out with something which is trustworthy and you should avoid any feeling or any impression that it was a pre prepared politically motivated nomination.
and that the whole procedure for the appointment of the secretary general took just nine minutes where mr selmayr was first appointed deputy secretary general then the secretary general of the european commission resigned and then mr selmayr was appointed as the secretary general? my second question was he the only candidate or were there more candidates?
this is juncker's favourite bureaucrat a fanatic who is now the most powerful bureaucrat in the world and all of it done without an open procedure.
we cannot vote for them we cannot remove them and yet they have the sole right to make law and people need to understand how their money is being spent.
the commission has made a very senior appointment without following its own procedures adequately certainly as far as transparency is concerned.
if the commission is ready to ignore its own rules why should anyone pay a blind bit of attention to what the commission says about flaws in the rule of law in member states or anywhere else for that matter?
thank you very much for your speech.
that is why i am particularly pleased that we have made reference to those who are primarily affected by this.
i have rarely listened to someone on this side of the house sitting in her position that understands not only what we have done not only what we are doing but what we need to do to protect those who are most vulnerable.
sadly with aids and hiv the numbers are growing currently over thirty three million people are living with aids and hiv.
i just want to say this.
think of the lost generations lost lives lost lovers lost parents lost brothers and sisters lives often lost by the loss of the other. think of the waste the total abject waste of life
in our own near neighbourhood ukraine and russia as well as other countries there are epidemic levels.
it is however not all a negative story the eu has led on this and will continue to lead and i hope we will lead at the eighteenth annual conference in vienna.
behind all of those statistics of millions imagine that there is one life affected with the reality of living with aids and hiv.
that is why i am really pleased that the parliament has decided to take a rights based approach because once you have rights those rights can be enforced by you by civil society acting on your behalf or can be enforced by your government and i speak also as parliament's rapporteur on the review of the millennium development goals.
there are elevated levels of infections amongst sex workers men who have sex with men and deny their own sexuality because of a low esteem level transgendered people prisoners injecting drug users migrant populations refugee and mobile workers in nearly all regions.
we need to empower individuals about the choices they have about their bodies and about denying the rights that others wish to force upon them particularly men or those like transgendered people who are often sex workers and have no choice but to yield to the demands of others.
finally i also want to say that in doing that we need to work with the authorities on the ground. one thing i did notice in malawi i used to buy the paper every day and i read several articles which were critical of ngos because of their failure to work in conjunction with local groups.
thirdly and baroness ashton referred to this the elimination of certain practices based on the rights of certain mere individuals within tribes who have free access to do as they will with young girls and widowed women.
i think through the eu we might help in eliminating that traditional practice.
this has to stop and that has to be brought home to the tribes themselves.
one medical care firstly to try and prevent it secondly to treat it when it occurs. secondly education so again people will know how to prevent it and also have a more compassionate attitude to those who have contracted it.
we therefore welcome the recent modifications of the regulations in the us and in china as positive signs. in the last months eu representatives both in brussels and in partner countries have made several dmarches on this issue including voicing eu concerns about the criminalisation of sexual behaviour among consenting adults uganda burundi malawi or harassment of aids activists by police and judicial authorities in senegal.
the european union has been very active in promoting freedom of travel for people living with hiv.
the impact of hiv is worse in situations where human rights are not respected and we know that conflict situations can lead to an increase in hiv infections especially when sexual abuse against women and children is common.
human rights should empower individuals including people affected with hiv.
it is a timely debate as we are only eleven days from the opening of the eighteenth world aids conference which will take place in vienna.
affected people should not be discriminated against because of that status.
the european union has been at the forefront of the defence of the rights of hiv affected and infected people.
the recent adoption of an eu tool kit to help promote and protect the respect of human rights by lesbian gay bisexual and transgender people will further consolidate eu action in this area.
honourable members we know that hiv infection is used in some countries as a reason to exclude asylum seekers from their right to seek protection.
infected children are sometimes excluded from school.
the right of everyone to enjoy the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health implies that those who are affected by hiv must have access to information as well as to effective prevention and treatment options.
the spread of hiv continues to cause considerable suffering.
in the absence of proper anti discrimination laws people living with hiv are often too frightened to come forward for help because of fear of stigma. in countries where homosexuality is criminalised some face the additional fear of imprisonment and in extreme cases even the death penalty.
our stance is that hiv specific restrictions on entry stay and residence based on that status are discriminatory and do not protect public health.
the european council adopted conclusions in november two thousand and nine with an eu programme for action to confront hiv aids through external action including the need to address the human rights aspect.
there we can indeed emphasise how important it is that the european union is going to work with those countries who still have laws and policies which are real obstacles to taking care of people who have hiv aids.
in our resolution we state that there are still one hundred and six countries of this kind.
we have to tell these countries that it is not something that can be adopted on the basis of traditions and culture.
madam president i will wholeheartedly support what has been said by the three colleagues from three other political groups about hiv and aids and i would also like to thank the high representative for her approach to this question.
the resolution that we are going to adopt tomorrow will be a very important contribution to the eighteenth international aids conference which will be held in vienna later this month.
it is a major task in our foreign policy and our development policy to emphasise that we need evidence based approaches to hiv aids.
as we all know and as has been said by all of the speakers here that hiv and aids leads to the fact that people affected by it people infected are seen as people sidelined.
it is as has been said in the preparation of the eighteenth international aids conference in vienna which is my home town and which has as its topic right here right now'.
i would like to remind everybody that even the wto in its doha declaration in two thousand and one on trips made it clear that primacy of health has to come before commercial interests which is especially important in countries like africa where sixty of people infected are women and girls
as has been said before women and girls are more affected now than at the beginning of the epidemic when it was mostly gay men.
in the world context it is mostly women and girls who are affected and men as well.
those who traditionally have less access to health care and have less money.
it is about a rights based approach to hiv and aids something that has been missing in the past.
with very simple means and for free it does not cost a penny we could prevent so many cases of hiv aids.
we could prevent so much misery.
even within the european union there is still stigma.
or that there are still member states which against all the rules and all the principles that we stand for ask people for an hiv negative declaration before they allow them to enter the country even within the european union.
i am always shocked to find that there are still people in this house who feel that they cannot endorse the kind of resolution that we will be voting tomorrow because it makes reference to sexual and reproductive health rights and sexual autonomy for women.
if we simply recognised those principles and notions and if we had the support of all the members in this house then we could already eliminate so much misery.
recognise the fact that women are in charge of their own bodies and that they decide not only outside the european union but also inside the european union.
within the european union we consider that a basic human right which is also the theme of today's debate.
a healthy labour force is the first precondition for economic development let us face it.
let us invest in health.
i would therefore like to appeal to those countries who are currently considering cuts in their budgets for development assistance and in particular assistance to public health. that should be one of our priorities and we should not be talking about budget cuts. we should be talking about support to those countries not forgetting at the same time to appeal to the responsibility of the national
governments.
our dedication to defending these rights inside europe but also as part of our relations with third countries whether they are close to our borders or on other continents.
unfortunately i will be in the middle east so i will not be able to participate in the vienna conference but my colleague commissioner dalli who of course carries a portfolio for health and consumer policy will represent the european commission and will speak at the opening session of the conference.
many services of the commission from different sectors in health research and development will attend and if i may i would like to extend an invitation to any honourable members participating in the conference to meet with the services in the eu area where policies and actions that we take in the eu will be presented or indeed to join the satellite sessions which are being organised by the commission.