kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
however the failure to close guantnamo bay is disappointing and we must also look at ourselves in europe.
we are unwilling to take remaining inmates and we must get clarity on the participation in renditions and extrajudicial acts including torture on european soil.
yes we must hold ourselves to the highest standards and open these dark pages of recent eu history.
that means we must openly be able to talk about countries involved.
the eu and us need to work together not in violating human rights but rather to address the most pressing threats in our world.
we generally share core values but the difference in our position on the death penalty which i am proud to say is entirely banned in europe makes our joint voice less effective and less credible in the world.
mr president the ecr group believes that capital punishment is a personal conscience issue for each mep and although we acknowledge the eu's common position opposing execution in all circumstances the fact of the matter is that many millions of european citizens our constituents are still in favour of capital punishment.
furthermore this resolution refers to the potential death penalty being imposed on some of the most dangerous terrorists in the world who thought nothing of conspiring to murder thousands of innocent people.
the struggle against global islamic terrorism is an asymmetric war with unforeseen results and unprecedented consequences and new jurisprudence internationally is now needed to address this.
it is also a reflection on the fact that the united states is carrying a disproportionate share of the burden for the global war on terror.
i have never heard the european union described as a country before.
could he confirm whether this is the view of his group now that the european union is a country alongside india brazil america the great democracies of the world as it were?
this also applies whether they happen inside the european union or outside the european union.
i would like to emphasise that the european union remains strongly committed to the abolition of the death penalty everywhere.
here i think we are talking about guantnamo bay.
i think we are talking about secret prisons.
you have just heard from a member of the conservative party saying this is a good reason.
fifty clauses in this motion made sure that the nation states would have to be subject to the eu in all of those fifty clauses before they could make such decisions.
there is no clear labelling regime to ensure that the people of europe have the opportunity to choose the food that they want.
there is no clear opportunity for the people of europe to say no' to gm foods if they do not want them or yes' if they do.
madam president on the face of it this seemed an easy one for ukip. here was the opportunity to allow some power back to member states and we would have presumably voted in favour. but on a closer look at the thing it was anything but. the commission was going to be involved at every single stage
it will be very interesting to see in those member states which decide not to cultivate these crops whether they will ban their consumers from eating them when all the constituents are imported.
crucially though amendment twenty should have been voted on on its own because that genuinely did give some power back to member states.
i believe that my vote today in favour of this report is a positive step.
before today's vote the commission could approve gm crops even though a majority of member states disagreed.
now however we have the opportunity for member states to take those decisions individually.
ireland can take the decision to ban gms even though the commission might approve their use and this is surely the most democratic outcome.
fifty of the amendments were lumped together.
in fact the report is misleadingly entitled possibility for the member states to restrict or prohibit the cultivation of gmos'. however as is always the case with this place nothing is as it seems.
amendment twenty the only amendment giving any powers back was drowned out by the dozens of other amendments each reasserting eu supremacy over britain.
we actually voted on fifty two amendments not the legislation.
furthermore ukip is opposed to the eu seychelles agreement for fishing access to the mayotte waters as we consider this to be neo colonialist.
all i can say is this this parliament professes one thing and does exactly the opposite.
the british parliament and only the british parliament should make decisions about gm crops.
people are visceral as well as cerebral creatures; consumers might well have an objection that is not completely logical but that does not make it invalid.
it would be just as wrong to impose gm foods on an unwilling customer as to ban someone who wanted to buy it from doing so.
madam president it is a funny thing when we talk about climate change in this chamber we are constantly told that the vital thing is to venerate the scientific consensus.
ideally we would have that decision made consumer by consumer but at the very least let us make it through our national democratic mechanisms and procedures rather than imposing one set of rules on six hundred million europeans.
and yet the people who make that argument most insistently and most loudly play by very different rules when it comes to this question of genetically modified food.
madam president if we are to feed the world's growing population and combat weather changes and diseases then we must harness the best science in crop areas.
the stalemate on gm has gone on for far too long and for that reason i support this vote which returns decision making to member states.
crops that will reduce the need for chemicals but help feed the population.
it would have been best to have a science led solution across the single market but given that this has been stuck for so long we must allow those countries that support science to move forward.
so far no evidence shows risks for food security animal welfare or health.
i understand that many people are concerned but policy in this house should be based on science not on emotions.
the debate has instead been carried by green ideology;
it has created the fears that gmo is something artificial.
by letting member states so easily opt out we are fragmenting the single market.
how does this go along with a common agricultural and food security policy?
this report provided a great opportunity to protect european standards and the gmo status of countries like ireland.
this report could have acted in the best interests of citizens and instead it has moved towards the interests of biotech companies.
other groups and parties in this parliament may be willing to succumb to pressures from the council to basically rush through legislation but we in sinn fin and others cannot stand over this legislation or any that slyly offers dangerous loopholes to private companies.
i want to commend my party colleague lynn boylan who as shadow rapporteur on this report has clearly outlined the position of the vast majority of irish and european citizens.
we will continue to press for absolute clarity that member states will be in a position to ban gmos in the interests of our communities and of our local food and agriculture industries.
madam president when it comes to gmos we all want sensible decisions to be based on scientific evidence.
not all the countries here in the eu want to base their decisions on the hard evidence but this vote today will allow member states to make their own decisions on gm crops.
the uk will see decision making returned to it from the eu.
the excellent recommendations in this report on supporting volunteers strengthening and improving access to training education for coaches and athletes promoting traditional sports eliminating doping and tackling corruption in sport should not be overshadowed.
a european sports policy is not about harmonisation it is not about taking the soul of competition out of sport and it should not be narrowed down to a debate on the presence of the eu flag.
sport is a vehicle that delivers on broader eu aims across several policy areas such as community development active ageing and healthy and active living.
there are thirty five million amateurs involved in sporting organisations in europe.
the report has drawn attention from across a wide interest spectrum from athletes volunteers sporting organisations and the media. sport is intrinsic to the lives of european citizens it crosses social divides and borders it unites people and it enriches our lives.
it has a successful economic dimension and it is a social phenomenon that delivers an invaluable public good.
in this context i believe it is right to highlight the continuing problem faced by the irish football association the governing body of football in northern ireland which in recent years has seen several players declare allegiance to the republic of ireland despite being born in the united kingdom and having represented northern ireland throughout junior levels.
somehow or other i do not quite think that the flag of the eu would have warmed the heart or brought a tear to the eye in quite the same way as that ulster flag did on those very special occasions.
however i want to turn your attention to recital ah of this report tonight which states that international competitions continue to constitute a reference model and action should be taken against naturalisations of convenience.
i must also condemn the proposals to waste money on the european capital of sport at this time of austerity.
i had intended to talk today about the british women who are sporting heroes to millions such as rebecca adlington kelly holmes and paula radcliffe.
what i do not understand is why the eu should be meddling in the business of sport. the eu should focus on growth jobs and the single market.
i wanted to talk to you today about how excited my home constituency of london is to welcome the world's olympic and paralympics athletes later this year.
this report has been through seven committees and i have shadowed it on behalf of the ecr group in two of them.
because i have to use this speech to denounce this report's calls to fly eu flags at major sporting events and for the flag to be displayed on athletes' clothing.
being british i understand the important role that sport plays in our lives.
but as the commissioner mentioned and i was pleased to hear her mention it the mff and the budget are going to be crucial. one argument we can certainly put forward in this context is that sport implies directly or indirectly fifteen million people contributing.
also the possibility of growth in sports tourism and the european regional development fund and the european social fund to be used to develop infrastructure in sport particularly in indigenous sports of which the gaa as my colleague liam aylward mentioned is a shining example in my country.
but most damaging is the attempt to make national sports teams wear the eu flag on their shirts and to fly the eu flag at all sporting events. at first this was compulsory and now it is voluntary but the proposal to have the eu flag on national teams is still outrageous and unnecessary.
the eu is trying to impose an artificial european identity on us by forcing our athletes to wear its emblem.
the report also ignores the limits of eu power by proposing special tax regimes and impinging on the right of member states to decide on their educational curricula and touches on social security provisions.
not only does it generate billions of euros and many thousands of jobs but it also provides health and joy to millions.
the eu can have a role in influencing some aspects of sport the fight against doping and cross border gambling etc.
under the lisbon treaty parliament's new supporting competence in sport should have provided it with the opportunity to explore ways the eu could help grassroots sport through volunteering initiatives and community sports development etc. but sadly this report misses the opportunity. it has turned into a matter of how the eu can take advantage of the popularity of professional sport what sport can do for the eu instead of what the eu can do for sport. the report focuses mainly on professional football.
no it does not.
it takes little account of minority or grassroots sport where i believe the focus should have been.
sport has a very special place in the united kingdom and our national sports teams form a key part of our identities and our heritage.
therefore i look forward to cooperating with all of you who are great believers in sport and working together in order to achieve what we aspire for in sport.
violence match fixing sports agents and many issues are challenges with which we have to deal very urgently.
as a matter of fact i see that the members who raised this objection were in a hurry to leave the chamber but honestly we have many more important challenges in sport to deal with than this.
as we look to the future let us take encouragement from the commission's proposal for a new programme which gives us the tools and resources to develop a european dimension in sport.
that the commission propose an ambitious budget for sports policy under the future multiannual financial framework.
let me briefly mention some of the initiatives that the commission is or will be carrying out in line with the suggestions made in parliament's report.
several of the report's suggestions will be developed by the expert groups set up by the eu work plan in order to prepare concrete policy deliverables. in line with parliament's report the commission has been implementing a number of actions that were set out in our communications. these include recent studies on the funding of grassroots sport
these cover the following policy priorities health and participation anti doping statistics sustainable financing good governance education and training.
following on from the commission's communication on sport and the council's work plan parliament's new report completes a solid policy framework which will guide the eu as it develops the european dimension in sport over the coming years.
the commission will carefully consider all the suggestions made in the report.
racism and discrimination in sport and to promote good governance in sports organisations. these initiatives would not be complete if we were not able to secure sustainable multiannual eu funding to support our policy. parliament is right in requesting
the many and varied benefits of sport are i hope fully understood by the commission following today's debate and i look forward to progress in this area.
i come at this debate from a different angle as a former mental health professional of twenty five years.
mr president the debate this evening has pooled many valid and crucial reasons for the commission to up its game and back sport more effectively in the eu.
exercise advances self confidence and can afford someone a new lease of life.
' what right do you think the eu has to interfere in sport in such a way to encourage countries to break the rules?
the eu has never been so unpopular yet here you are wanting to stamp your flag on sporting stars in the hope that you can force the people to love you. but they will not.
they should not wear the flag of the european union.
it is hypocritical because the eu is in effect a political organisation.
what you propose also seems to break the rules of sporting competitions. for example under law four decision one of the fifa laws of the game it states the team of a player whose basic compulsory equipment has political slogans or statements will be sanctioned by the competition organiser or fifa.
in particular we are fully satisfied that the report voices the concern regarding support for traditional sport and games as an important part of our diverse cultural heritage.
i do not feel it is the right area to address this and it should not really be in it at all.
the report would be stronger without this voluntary or not voluntary'.
that is the reason why the european union must not lift the arms embargo on china.
mr president this house has long been critical of the people's republic of china for its treatment of ethnic minorities.
indeed the biggest problems in europe are found in the younger democracies like spain and hungary.
if the contours of the world economy are drawn in the computer campuses of west coast america in the call centres of india in the factories of china if major decisions can be communicated from beijing to brussels in a nanosecond we have become truly one global community and there is no room in this community for repression or subjugation on the basis of race or religion or ethnicity;
china's problems stem in this instance from the greying of the middle kingdom.
they need more young people to work elsewhere similar to the problems we face here in the european union.
the uighurs of xinjiang province have suffered more than most particularly since the occupation of east turkestan by the people's republic of china in.
we need to help the chinese people who are quite capable of living in democracy as taiwan and hong kong show to match their growing economic strength with a growing political maturity in developing democracy and help them develop the policies to match policies like erasmus mundus policies of which the commissioner has spoken to increase people to people exchange.
no room for islamophobia or for anti semitism or any other kind of hatred.
but the people's republic will find that it needs policies to protect economic migrants policies to recognise the legitimate demands of ethnic minorities just as we do. here mr bildt is a role for the european union. we know that as democracies mature so they become more willing to allow people self government and self determination.
for a european prime minister to refer to the reaction to the latest unrest as genocide' is perhaps an exaggeration but for the people's republic to complain of interference in internal affairs betrays a world view which is touchingly antiquated.
the chinese government quite properly deployed police and military personnel to quell the violence and stop the retaliatory attacks by the han population on the uighurs.
they mounted a violent attack that led to the deaths of one hundred and thirty seven han chinese.
so the vast majority of those killed were han chinese.
as we know certain militants among the uighur population of xinjiang are islamic fundamentalists who demand a separate state.
the eu enjoys a very good relationship with china and i think we have to take care that our discussions on the recent events in urumqi are accurate and based on fact.
the strength of our strategic partnership also allows for constructive and open exchange of views on issues where europe and china diverge.
on behalf of my colleague benita ferrero waldner who i have indicated is unfortunately travelling this week and cannot be here.
recently we expressed strong concern over the unrest in xinjiang deplored the loss of life and expressed our condolences and sympathy to the families of the victims.
china's policy of opening up its economy has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty and helped the world progress towards the important millennium development goals.
economic and trade relations have been transformed people to people contacts are multiplying and we are engaged in dialogue on an ever increasing range of issues. following the last eu china summit in may negotiations on a new partnership and cooperation agreement are proceeding well and we are able to take advantage of a growing number of high level contacts
we hope the situation can be resolved peacefully through dialogue without further bloodshed.
today we are naturally focused on global challenges including the economic and financial crisis and climate change as well as regional issues.
i do not need to remind this house of the huge progress we have made in relations with china since our first summit now ten years ago.
we have called on all parties to show restraint and bring an immediate end to all acts of violence.
including prime minister wen's highly successful visit to president barroso earlier this year and the meeting of the high level economic and trade dialogue which i co chaired with vice premier wang qishan.
the eu has tried over the years to convey to the chinese authorities its worries over the situation of ethnic minorities in china and to share its own experience many times painful on how to address the causes of marginalisation exclusion and discrimination that those minorities often face.
this can be on aspects of our trade relationship or human rights for example over tibet which i know is of particular interest in this house.
at the same time we have strong interests in the situation inside china where we witness many spectacular achievements but also developments that cause concern.
to achieve this we must continue to integrate china deeper into the international community and work on the development of our strategic partnership in the spirit of constructive engagement.
yet china is a huge country with considerable internal challenges and differences between its regions.
i will not go further into this question now but wish only to underline the concern that we have over developments without being able to assess those in every single detail because they are exceedingly complex our hope that they could be resolved peacefully and our readiness to engage with the chinese authorities in a frank dialogue on these issues
it also brings challenges of different sorts.
but let me also take this opportunity to take stock somewhat more widely of our relationship with china a country with which we have an extraordinary range of complex relationships. in fact when we decided in two thousand and three to set up those relationships within the framework of a comprehensive strategic partnership we were committing ourselves to an extremely ambitious enterprise and this is very much reflected in the broad and wide ranging relationship which we have with china today.
we have the annual summit meetings and we have fairly frequent meetings at the level of foreign ministers.
i think it is time for us to say that we attach great importance to human rights.
negotiations are progressing but still there is a potential to increase efforts on both sides in these negotiations.
i know that these events have been followed by many members of this parliament as well as our respective national parliaments throughout europe.
we also have the annual high level dialogue on trade and economic issues.
we also profoundly regret not only the loss of life but the destruction of property and everything else that we have seen happening and we can only condemn those that are responsible for it whoever they are.
we have also as a council expressed our concern over the reports on the unrest there and called for restraint on all sides and for the situation to be resolved peacefully.
we have a very clear interest in developing the relationship with china in all fields and that entails as i said the possibility for an open and frank dialogue also on issues where our values might be different and we know that such issues exist including human rights
complexity of course brings opportunities.
the basis for such an open dialogue is the shared interest that we have in developing our relationship our shared interest in global peace and stability. we pursue this through dialogue and through multilateralism.
but also to pursue the common interest that needless to say we have these days issues of global financial stability issues of how to deal with the climate change challenge are important.
what we have tried to do with this relationship is to open it up to the point where we can discuss frankly and openly any concern that we might have on either side.
i fully support the eu position expressed by the president in office to urge restraint on all sides and call on the government of china to respect freedom of speech and information as well as the right to peaceful protest.
if these acts were encouraged and perpetrated by outside forces particularly separatist fundamentalist forces then they should be indicted in the international criminal court.
the eu is a clear example of this.
we must live together.
supporting separatism anywhere in the world is against the spirit of the eu.