kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
soon after on eight june president putin signed into law restrictive amendments effectively limiting the scope for demonstrations.
there had been some encouraging initial steps in the spring towards further development of russia's democratic institutions notably the easing of party registration rules and requirements for presidential candidates as well as direct elections of regional governors.
in no way do these russian organisations become our or anybody else's agents;
taken together the package of legislation limiting the freedom of assembly restricting ngos curtailing the freedom of the internet the pussy riot case an upsurge in prosecution of activists including alexey navalny and the sentencing of mrs osipova the dismissal of an opposition minded duma deputy
they do an essential job in russia today and they are key to russia's modernisation.
their common aim seems to have been to further reduce the available space for independent civil and political activity in the country.
all russian ngos i know would undoubtedly prefer to receive russian funding but there is barely any public funding available for activities that could potentially be perceived as being critical of the authorities nor do many businessmen dare to offer support. i will not go into the details now of the laws on libel and internet freedom.
this trend raises serious questions on the state of the rule of law and in particular the use of legal and law enforcement structures and other instruments for political purposes which should be used to safeguard and protect the rights and freedoms of the citizens of russia.
to allow for a truly pluralistic parliamentary system without undue obstacles to the work of a viable opposition much more needs to be done. upon president putin's return to the kremlin we encouraged him to engage in a constructive dialogue with citizens and civil society to find the best way forward and ensure a good future for russia.
we have been offering our support to those in russia who share this goal.
on the same day i issued a statement to express my deep disappointment with the disproportionate sentence and recalled russia's commitments to respect its obligations to ensure fair transparent and independent legal process.
instead of stronger safeguards for the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms we have seen a string of measures that chip away at them.
we will pay attention to that.
russia is sometimes a challenging neighbour but it remains an important partner of the european union on many issues and in many fields.
a few weeks later another law was passed forcing russian ngos receiving foreign funding to present themselves as foreign agents' in all their activities.
mr president during the last exchange we had in this house in february on the conduct of the duma and presidential elections in russia we shared our concerns about the irregularities and violations of the electoral process and about the violence against
i stressed that the government should including via legislation guarantee freedom of assembly for citizens.
we all understand that this provocative stunt in the christ the saviour cathedral hurt religious feelings. but it was a non violent expression of political opinion.
we will continue to work closely with the government and ministries on these goals but we should not shy away from our responsibilities as a partner to express our concerns with recent developments.
i also cautioned that strong measures to curtail this right were likely to prove counterproductive.
as honourable members know most recently on seventeen august three young women members of the punk band pussy riot' were sentenced to two years in prison each for a peaceful less than one minute long performance.
we remain ready to work with russia in all the positive reform efforts to work closely together on the partnership for modernisation the integration of the international rules based system and the development of citizens' rights and freedoms that has to be the basis for stability and prosperity.
however these have been the only positive political reforms this year so far.
we do so because the european union has a strong interest in a stable prosperous and democratic russia.
under russian law it should have been sanctioned as a minor offence not as a serious crime.
by joining the wto russia took a major step forward in its ongoing integration into the international rules based trade system.
the key issue is how they will be interpreted and applied.
in conclusion i would like to stress again the importance of having an economically successful modern and democratic russia at the border of the european union.
we strongly supported that process and now expect russia to fully implement all the related agreements so as to reap the maximum benefit of membership of the world trade organisation.
but by doing it we neither impose our objectives on these russian organisations nor do we aim in any way to control their activities.
serious irregularities in the trial have been reported including the conditions of pre trial detention.
in the interests of russia they should be allowed to work freely and have the means to do it. we have supported some ngos in their activities and will continue to offer our support to their contribution to the modernisation of russia.
at least four major pieces of new legislation went through the duma at unusual some would say unconstitutional speed before the summer recess.
we saw russian civil society ready to engage in dialogue with the government and to play an active role in the development of political institutions in the country.
grassroots civil society movements be it human rights ngos or election monitoring organisations such as golos are important components of democratic society.
immediately after the inauguration of the new president on seven may a number of opposition leaders and activists who organised and participated in the six may demonstrations were arrested and fined.
i reacted to these developments with a public statement.
let me take my opportunity to express my gratitude to parliament in particular for your strong support for civil society cooperation between the eu and russia including of course in financial terms.
mr president the jailing of the three young women of pussy riot for two years in a prison colony is an absolute scandal.
it graphically reveals the repressive nature of the putin regime which will brook no opposition but it also demonstrates the fear that the regime has not only of pussy riot but of the mass demonstrations that have taken place against the election rigging and also the threat of a russian winter.
that is because all of the promises made to the people of russia at the time of the collapse of stalinism have been proven to be false.
they were promised economic growth and the benefits of that growth have gone only to the oligarchs while working people suffer.
they got only rigged elections and an absence of any real democratic rights the right to freedom of speech the right to protest.
in her closing statement at the trial one of the members of pussy riot yekaterina samutsevich accurately summed up the situation compared to the judicial machine we are nobodies and we have lost.
the whole world now sees that the criminal case against us has been fabricated.
i have already pointed to examples of that but i would again refer to the iran talks where russia is an important and key partner with us in trying to address the nature of the nuclear programme of iran.
it is an area of work both in terms of economic life and in terms of political life where we can do something. but the concerns that have been raised have been well said. the concerns about individuals and about what is happening in terms of the basis of this debate which is the political use of justice have been well noted.
i thank you for the support for what we are doing and look forward to continuing to work with you on this.
report. the following remarks pick up on some of the
the commission therefore considers that an interinstitutional dialogue is needed before presenting any legislative
the outcome. on the question of the adoption of the procedural code under article two hundred and ninety eight the commission understands that a working group has been set up in parliament to study the potential scope and content of such an
i would like to stress that the commission is fully committed to sincerely cooperating with the ombudsman.
case. nevertheless i acknowledge that the time taken for reaching this decision was excessive even if it was due to the failure of the third party to respond to the commission's proposal.
initiative. the commission also considers it appropriate to weigh the outcome of initial work on the overall issue before considering any more specific
key issues. concerning the provision of information on infringements the commission is in the process of implementing the new framework agreement with
for us. in doing this work the commission has to respect the confidentiality to which the court of justice has confirmed that the member states are entitled concerning the investigation of alleged application issues and potential infringement
what would have happened if we had not proceeded according to our legal obligations?
this is the first annual report presented to you since the entry into force of the treaty of lisbon.
by. eighty five the number of enquiries opened based on complaints received in two thousand and nine rose from two.
i have also continued my efforts to improve the quality of information provided to citizens and potential complainants concerning their rights under eu law through the european network of ombudsmen which greatly helps to facilitate the rapid transfer of complaints to the competent ombudsman or similar body.
this also means that complaints are resolved more promptly and effectively thus ensuring that citizens can fully enjoy their rights under eu law and also that eu law is properly implemented.
fifty five the sustained reduction is good news but this is still too many.
two thousand and eight this decline is encouraging news.
he aims to build trust through dialogue between citizens and the european union and to foster the highest standards of behaviour in the union's institutions'. it is within this spirit mr president honourable members this spirit of the commission statement that i will continue to work in carrying out the mandate which this august body has entrusted me with.
during two thousand and nine the guide was used by more than twenty six zero people.
in january two thousand and nine i launched an interactive guide on my new website which is accessible in all twenty three eu languages.
the most common allegation i examined in two thousand and nine was lack of transparency.
honourable members i developed and recently adopted a strategy to cover the whole period of my mandate. the document containing it was circulated during this past week to your bureau the conference of presidents and the committee on petitions for information.
three hundred and eighteen inquires seventy of which were completed within one year fifty.
i also intensified my efforts to reach out to potential complainants by organising a range of public events;
it is with a certain degree of concern that i note the continuing high percentage of such complaints.
on average inquiries took nine months to complete which was well within my standard goal of completing inquiries within one year. i am pleased to note that in two thousand and nine fifty six of all investigations were either settled by the institution or resulted in a friendly solution.
this is a task that must be tackled in tandem with the institutions.
reform of the financial regulation offers an additional excellent opportunity to put the fundamental right to good administration into practice.
i only deal with complaints against eu institutions whilst you can also examine what member states are doing.
parliament and the ombudsman both work to ensure that citizens and residents of the eu can enjoy their rights to the full but we do so in different ways.
in contrast my role is to help uncover maladministration and to attempt to put it right. unlike court rulings an ombudsman's decisions are not legally binding. i can only use the power of persuasion to convince the eu institutions to follow my recommendations or to achieve friendly solutions which can satisfy
furthermore parliament as a sovereign political body can deal with petitions that request changes in the law or new laws.
both sides.
all these outreach activities combined with the solid results obtained for complainants resulted in median coverage of the ombudsman's work increasing
this represents a large improvement over two thousand and eight when the percentage was.
to promote this goal with respect to the commission i am in close contact with the vice president of the commission responsible for relations with the ombudsman commissioner efovi who i thank for his presence here today and i am grateful for his close cooperation and support to date.
i believe that the relevant rules should provide guidance to officials as to how they should ensure both sound financial management and good administration.
this guide aims to direct complainants to the body best placed to help them whether it be my own services the services of national or regional ombudsmen in the member states or problem solving mechanisms such as the cross border online network solvit.
reducing the number of inadmissible complaints has been a long standing request of parliament. i attribute this result at least in part to the fact that more citizens are finding the right address to turn to the first time around.
the strategy is designed to implement the mission statement for my institution which i adopted in two thousand and nine and which reads as follows.
it is very important for citizens to be guided to the most appropriate complaint handling body from the outset and to be spared the frustrations and delays associated with having to identify the right institution on their own.
honourable members i make efforts to help every complainant who turns to the ombudsman even in cases where the complaint is not within my mandate.
in two thousand and nine i received a total of two three hundred and ninety two such complaints a six decline compared to.
the european ombudsman seeks fair outcomes to complaints against european union institutions encourages transparency and promotes an administrative culture of service.
i will continue to work in close cooperation with parliament in order to further our common goal of providing european citizens with the maximum possible benefits from their rights under the treaty acting always in accordance with my mandate as an independent and impartial investigator of alleged maladministration an independence and impartiality which applies equally to the complainant as well as to the institution complained against. in two thousand and nine my office closed
hundred and ninety three to three hundred and thirty five this increase must be at least partly attributed to outreach activities.
the most outrageous case is dealt with in mrs paliadeli's report which makes clear that parliament expects substantial improvement from the commission in this regard.
over the last three years i have also made strenuous efforts to raise awareness about the services i can offer to businesses associations ngos regional authorities and other target groups that is anybody who is involved in eu projects or programmes and who has direct dealings with the eu administration.
this is a significant improvement compared to two thousand and eight when i issued forty four critical remarks or even two thousand and seven when i issued.
furthermore i continued to strive to make certain that eu institutions adopt a citizen centred approach in all their activities.
of. two thousand and nine the treaty makes new promises to citizens concerning fundamental rights enhanced transparency and greater opportunities for participation in the union's policy making. it also makes the charter of fundamental rights including the right to good administration legally binding.
madam president perhaps the most disgraceful aspect of the commissioner's conduct which this report discloses over and above the appalling treatment meted out to the complainant in this case is that it was not an isolated case of maladministration.
rather it is a reasonable conclusion to draw that this sort of behaviour on the part of the commission is both quite deliberate and nothing less than a calculated course of conduct designed to thwart the hard work of the ombudsman and to trash the rule of law.
there was a time when if such shabby conduct on the part of public servants was revealed both functionaries and the minister responsible would fall on their swords. instead i expect we shall see here an arrogant and overweening commission doing what it does best thumbing its nose at the public whilst the guilty ones go unpunished.
some of the biggest problems and complaints we get are about our own member states.
citizens then complain as mr busuttil said directly to the commission who under this pilot scheme go back to the member state to try to have the matter resolved when the citizens themselves have failed.
that mechanism is not transparent and needs to be looked at.
we need a discussion on it in this house.
we have no remit in this area but it is a growing concern and we need to address it in some way.
lastly the irish ombudsman has issued two reports which our own government have rejected.
it is of deep concern that an ombudsman in any member state would have their work literally torn up. you are aware of that mr ombudsman.
i am glad that you are nodding approvingly. this must be addressed. it cannot be allowed to continue.
votes are split and then reunited; we have gone into the chamber confident that we have the latest most final version of the voting list only to find that it was superseded during the morning.
those meps in large groups who are content to be lobby fodder for their party leaders do not have to worry.
they simply follow the gesticulations of their party tic tac men. however for conscientious meps and those in the non attached group it is a nightmare.
the provision is fundamentally undemocratic and was imposed despite strong opposition from this parliament. despite a few token concessions in negotiation the commission and council have further diluted the powers of the european parliament in imposing this mechanism.
by linking investment co financing through european structural and investment funds to national deficits it imposes austerity policies on local and regional authorities for budgetary issues beyond their control.
we do not accept that the purpose of article twenty three is to achieve a more sustainable and efficient cohesion policy it is about imposing antisocial diktats to strengthen and deepen a failing monetary union.
forced re programming and suspension of funds under the provision will cause significant harm particularly to vulnerable regions and member states still suffering from the economic and social crisis.
the provisions of article twenty three of common provision regulation must therefore be used only as a last resort when it can be demonstrated that such measures are not detrimental for the objectives of the policy but are in fact beneficial.
madam president regional development and cohesion policies are exactly about preparing the ground for the united states of europe.
we spend meeting after meeting redistributing taxpayers' money to facilitate this state building.
am i to understand from your speech that you see this report as the key to socialist redistribution of wealth on a grand scale across the eu?
industry. all these elements are concrete improvements of our current tdi
first it will be more economically effective.
in such special circumstances with a threat of retaliation the commission can start an investigation on its own initiative.
this. trade defence measures are not a punishment but they should reestablish fair competition. at the same time such measures should be balanced and proportionate.
we are committed as you know to an open rulebased trading system.
we will facilitate the access of smes in the form of a tdi helpdesk that provides information but also addresses language barriers and we will reimburse importers where they have paid duties during an expiry review that results in terminating the measures.
this gives the markets time to adapt to the new situation and at the same time the law ensures that this possibility to adapt cannot be abused for stockpiling.
i would like to add the slovak presidency which actually did some work there as well to bring us all together.
unfair trade is threatening jobs in the european union. trade unions representing these workers now have full access to the investigation as interested parties and can prepare complaints jointly with our
the new rules enable us to do that better because we can factor in elements such as necessary investment research and development. moreover there will be a minimum target profit of six and this ensures that the calculations reflect economic reality.
the modernisation has significantly increased transparency and predictability.
system. the commission will consider third countries' action on multilateral environmental agreements and core ilo conventions before accepting undertakings by exporting producers.
the eu will take a more assertive stance against trade distortive measures by our trading partners.
from now on the commission will announce duties three weeks before they enter into force.
i think this has all been strengthened in our proposal. we have in the european union high environmental and social standards and we are committed to further improvement.
provisional measures will normally apply seven months after initiation and that is two months earlier than today.
this modernisation is a success.
trade has to be fair; the role of tdi is to ensure
i see three key messages in this modernisation.
third thanks to the modernisation we have strengthened our eu values in our trade defence.
now. the eu industry should have access to trade defence instruments without fear of retaliation in other markets.
however according to the new rules the industry is then requested to cooperate with the proceeding. secondly this is good for eu business.
is it to say wow great let's build cheap cars for our citizens and maybe even export them at a profit to china'?
imagine that the chinese leave us with five hundred million tons of steel at the european border for free just for us to pick up.
i hope that colleagues who know where i come from politically on this question can appreciate that i have tried to be an honest broker in this process.
i would have gone for the first option but if the responsibility had been jobs and wealth in europe i am not so sure. until the next time we discuss this topic i hope everybody has thought carefully about what would be best for europe in that case.
or is it the russian reaction which is to get angry send it back and say if you try to sell us more steel we will charge ourselves even more for that steel'?
what is the rational european reaction to that?
a lot has changed in the world during those twenty five years global supply chains the rise of china so this is long overdue and it feels good to be able to close the books on this thing.
for every job protected by anti dumping duties we always run the risk of potentially threatening some job in another part of the economy.
third don't target value added goods produced in europe. think about the global value chains.
this is what needs to be a compromise in what might be one of the most controversial areas of trade policy where different interests so clearly stand against each other european producers on the one hand who want tariff protection from what they see as unfair trading practices;
i will just make some pleas first obey the wto rules in every detail when implementing this because we cannot at a time when others don't respect the wto follow that example.
back in two thousand and six when peter mandelson first presented his green paper i started writing my first report on behalf of this house on how to reform the trade defence instrument.