kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
the limitation and procedures for data retention should be as harmonised as possible to minimise the negative impact on the internal market while at the same time respecting the legitimate and varying requirements of national circumstances.
there is also and this is very important a need to be coherent between the obligation to require data retention in this directive the data retention directive and the possibility that member states have today to require or to allow data retention provided with the eprivacy directive.
all but two member states have now transposed the directive.
and a clearer purpose limitation for which the data may be used.
currently member states have this possibility in the eprivacy directive so this is a loophole. the commission has already announced that we will analyse the need to review the eprivacy directive once negotiations on the new general data protection framework are over.
we have continued to press member states to provide credible and comparable statistics and case studies to demonstrate this and we have received quite a lot of information.
these areas are set out very clearly and in the evaluation report and they have been further examined during consultation.
given the technical and legal complexity and the political sensitivity of this it is likely to take some time and i cannot give you a concrete timetable today.
however as has been pointed out by different stakeholders yourselves different representatives of the data protection community the industry ngos and different professional groups including journalists and lawyers the commission is also of the view that data retention has a significant impact on the right to privacy and the protection of personal data.
may i just come back to the question when will the commisson present its proposal?
i do not know if i understood you correctly but i think you said that you do not intend to table your proposal this year.
i am saying this because i would like to remind you that right now we are dealing with the personal data reform package.
i think we also need to harmonise the eu single market for telecommunications in this respect and it is also time to deal with the eprivacy directive you yourself mentioned.
so may i express the wish that the commission take a more dynamic and determined stance vis vis the members states even when so called sensitive issues for the member states are under discussion?
in the european parliament you will always find an enthusiastic ally in your efforts to better protect the personal data of eu citizens.
but while you can always rely on our full cooperation and support in this regard at the same time let me emphasise that the european parliament will also always be prepared to fight for and defend its principles and beliefs in favour of the protection of eu citizens' rights especially when fundamental rights are concerned.
it needs to be separated and shortened the transatlantic economic council issues could be shortened to maybe a ten point plan a three point plan or whatever so that we can actually use it when we finally go to speak to the administration and our congressional colleagues.
finally parliament must not wait for the administration to determine what we do in tec.
mr president i fully support the mann report.
i fully agree with paragraph twenty four which speaks about an end to a compulsory retirement age so that people can choose when they want to finish working but at the same time seeks to maintain a pensionable age so that people who want to retire can do so and receive their benefits.
i am however equally supportive of the european youth guarantee initiative which proposes that any young people who have been unemployed for four months or longer will be offered a job an apprenticeship or additional training etc.
i was particularly pleased to see that a number of my amendments on carers and family carers were taken into consideration in particular paragraph one hundred and twenty five which speaks about family carers including the right for them to choose whether they wish to care or not and also the ability to combine caring with paid work and to ensure that they have full access to social security schemes and old age pensions.
all of this to support their reintegration or integration into the workplace.
i am very pleased to see that we carried the amendment which asks the commission to deal immediately with the issue of adventitious presence of gmos in imported feeds. that is something we have control over and we should deal with it and we have been sitting on our hands and refusing to deal with it.
we also heard about the high cost of compliance with eu regulations so that we do not have a level playing field for third country imports.
but perhaps one of the most crucial issues is the whole area of the food chain.
yesterday the court of auditors issued a report on the sugar sector and one of their recommendations was that price formation be subject to regular monitoring by the commission and that the commission and the member states ensure that competition law is correctly enforced in the sector thus ensuring the treaty objective that supplies reach consumers at reasonable prices.
it is not only in the sugar sector that we need to do that.
we need to do it in the whole food chain.
mr hudghton's opinion deals with two very important issues first of all it makes express reference to the need to involve indigenous and local communities in relation to access something which is in the protocol but missing from the commission's proposal and secondly it recognises the possibility for the eu to extend the protocol's scope to activities taking place in international waters beyond the
only in such a case can you be part of negotiations at the next conference of the parties to the convention in october.
if we fail to establish compliance measures in the eu third countries may start to see us as an unsafe or uncooperative jurisdiction and become unwilling to give access to their genetic resources to european union users.
in this scenario member states at least some of them are likely to go ahead and establish their own national abs legislation in the interim with the result that we would have an abs patchwork in the european union.
i should also stress that a failure to adopt eu measures on abs in a timely manner would not mean as some seem to think that there would be no abs legislation at all in the european union.
including our credibility and influence at the upcoming conference of the parties of the convention as well as in other environment related fora.
the success of this legislative procedure ahead of the european parliament elections is critically dependent on ms blier getting the mandate so that the trialogues can begin as soon as possible.
not being able to actively participate in these important decisions would be seriously detrimental to european union interests including the interest of european union companies to access genetic resources abroad and thus produce bio based innovations.
reaching a timely agreement on abs regulation is without any doubt in the interest of the european union in the interest of all of us and not least in the interest of european industry.
i am confident that through the trialogues we will be able to find acceptable compromises and arrive at a good outcome one that is good for the european union for its researchers its businesses and also of course good for biodiversity. i still remember very well many of you enthusiastically
two thousand and fourteen we would only be observers and would have no voting rights.
that means we have to ensure the compliance of users of those genetic resources in eu territory so that the provider countries receive a share of the benefits.
i am grateful that the european parliament and many of its members have devoted so much time to the proposal for an abs regulation. i am aware that your internal discussions on this file and on the procedural way forward have not been easy.
of course now we do not negotiate any more.
and it strikes a balance between all the interests concerned.
i know this first hand since i was there as were a number of you.
we have to deliver on what was negotiated.
this is not surprising since this issue of access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits for their utilisation is a question which is far from easy.
on the other hand it has implications for economic values in which the european union has strong interests such as offering a favourable environment for innovation protecting business and so on. negotiating the nagoya protocol took a long time
the aim of the proposed regulation we are discussing today is to create this legal framework for compliance in the eu.
in turn for these countries to provide genetic resources under favourable conditions to european users we have to fulfil our part of the deal.
if we that is the european union and its member states are not able to ratify on time we will not sit at the negotiating table as a full party when the first meeting of the parties of the nagoya protocol takes place in october.
i am convinced that the report that has been presented to you and on which you will vote tomorrow would be a solid basis for negotiations between the eu institutions on the file even if i have to be clear that it will not be comfortable for the commission in some parts.
this would in substance have serious implications for our influence on how essential provisions of the nagoya protocol will be implemented.
the eu was instrumental in securing a deal on abs in nagoya in. two thousand and ten now is the time to remember those days again and to join forces again.
therefore delaying the process of ratification of the protocol would simply be against our own interests. moreover not having ratified the protocol on time would have a very detrimental effect on our international commitments and on our image with our international partners in the framework of conserving biodiversity
many countries may even stop allowing access to genetic resources to eu researchers and industry.
do many of them have second thoughts on the sharing of the benefits? that is not clear yet but a few things are important to notice first of all the target of this proposal is the users who are conducting research and development on genetic resources.
however the report can still be a solid basis for negotiation between the european union institutions.
focus is put on broadband because of the fact that it is considered to boost technological development and growth in the best possible way.
however this proposal was not part of the agreement on the financing of the recovery package reached in the trialogue discussions.
i think this is quite a good idea so you do not limit people that see special difficulties in the new challenges in some parts of the european union.
we had initially wanted eur. one five billion and we ended up with eur.
in order to avoid any delay in the final adoption of this package i believe we should take the opportunity to come back later this year when the rest of the financing of the recovery package has to be agreed.
as regards promotion of the recovery package the commission agrees that this is needed but it can be done within the existing tools already in our toolbox in rural development.
i would like to point out that these investments and activities are already widely supported within both the structural funds and the rural development funding.
nevertheless what we have here on the table today is without doubt better than doing nothing at all.
i would like to see more emphasis placed on youth unemployment.
i am also naturally very pleased that my own country will be receiving up to eur five hundred million of financing to promote offshore wind energy and carbon capture and storage projects.
we need to give the younger generation hope for the future.
however it is clear that the overall package proposed is lacking in both size and ambition.
labour meps will therefore support these measures although we are clear that a new economic recovery plan is needed.
the european economic recovery measures before us constitute an important package and i applaud the strong emphasis on green jobs and technologies that will help reduce our carbon emissions and promote energy security.
the package directs that stimulus to key objectives such as broadband development energy security and low carbon technologies.
two thousand and eight we are confident that the projects will be implemented as scheduled.
the commission provides reassurance in a comprehensive declaration that it will reconsider the situation in two thousand and ten referring expressly to the option of suggesting using uncommitted funds for measures in the area of energy efficiency and renewable energy sources.
never before has the european union agreed to dedicate such a significant amount to key energy projects.
the package is also an example of solidarity within the european union.
after the successful and rapid conclusion of the legislative procedure the commission will focus on implementation of the package.
the regulation on energy projects constitutes a significant tool to achieve two goals responding to the key security issues and environmental challenges in the energy sector whilst at the same time contributing to the recovery of our economy.
i know that some of you would have preferred to see more measures on renewables and energy efficiency projects in the package but i believe that the compromise finally found on this subject is a good one.
in particular the gas crises needed a quick response.
in november two thousand and eight the european commission proposed a comprehensive european economic recovery plan which was endorsed by heads of state and government in december. building on this a five billion package' to inject immediate stimulus into the eu economy was proposed in january.
the commission very much welcomes the agreement found on the package after difficult but constructive discussions within a very tight timeframe.
as regards the budget side and now i am speaking on behalf of vice president kallas the commission can accept the solution as now agreed by the three institutions though its approach differs from our initial proposal of december.
we could have built a real solidarity instrument where the vast majority of the funds would have gone to those economies most in need our friends in eastern europe.
before change can happen in europe we must change the president of the commission.
this outcome is very bad and it could have been avoided.
we could have enhanced the economic effectiveness of this package by using innovative finance instruments like loan guarantee funds and the public banks or the european investment bank.
but we are not leaving ourselves in a situation where there is no margin in the budget because of the reasons mentioned by mr mulder. if we run into a situation with an animal disease i can give a guarantee here today that we will not face a situation where there will be no money or insufficient money to solve these situations.
so broadband is one of the issues for the future.
i understand it is not always easy to get the council to agree to the money but we do need to know whether this money is going to be forthcoming in the end.
at this time of a real recession in the european union this is a stimulation package that if we can get the money out to the right areas and if we can get it out in time will make a real difference because we need to stimulate business.
only if we make full use of our policy and the financial instruments at hand. i want to see human rights underpin the implementation of the new eu global strategy just presented by the commission.
in addition we need to scale up our efforts in empowering civil society.
can this be effectively managed?
we must ensure that they are better protected from authoritarian governments and their restrictive laws and actions.
i believe yes but only if we ensure consistency between our words and actions.
human rights defenders and space for civil society are the main and often only catalysts for positive change.
global human rights threats and democratic challenges became even more pronounced.
they are a prerequisite for stability and democracy and therefore have to be systematically mainstreamed into the work in crisis regions such as the middle east africa or ukraine.
the report provides a clear picture of all our human rights activities and we have strived to be focused on the areas in which our action was particularly prominent following last year's suggestion from this parliament.
it would be good if all member states would do exactly the same in their bilateral relations as well.
we need to engage on a broad spectrum of actions from efforts at community level in the field of transitional justice to the international criminal court.
think of our teachers and aid workers fighting for everyone's right to good schools and good education. think of the men and women who challenge the culture of female genital mutilation in remote communities.
allow me to mention here the tragedy of giulio regeni which is particularly close to our hearts and to our daily work. it is time for us to take even more decisive action building on four fundamental pillars.
so last but not least we have to put human rights at the core of all our policy areas. this begins with migration and displacement.
over one hundred and sixty human rights defenders and their families have received support in two thousand and fifteen through dedicated funding for human rights defenders at risk.
as europeans we cannot tolerate xenophobia.
i think of our work on the peace deal between the colombian government and the farc.
the point is that our credibility starts at home and this is true even more than in all other fields when it comes to human rights.
there can be no sustainable peace if we do not mend the wounds of communities and societies.
i know that some of you maybe not those present here but others might not like to hear this because we always reflect on human rights thinking this is something outside of our borders.
but on the other hand it is so important for the activists and the human rights defenders or the victims on the spot to see that the european union speaks out for them and does not forget any single violation of human rights in the world.
we cannot tolerate violence and intimidation against any minority on any grounds.
such results owe much to the continuous dedication of our special representative for human rights stavros lambrinidis who i imagine you know well and who is with us today and we can now count also on the work of mara marinaki the first ever principal adviser fully dedicated to gender in the external action service.
they are behind a great deal of the migratory flows we are facing and behind the new peak in global displacement that was recorded this year by the un high commissioner for refugees.
this year we celebrate the tenth anniversary of the un human rights council and the fiftieth anniversary of the international covenants on civil and political rights and on economic social and cultural rights.
it does make a difference in so many places.
beyond that there is so much work happening off the radar.
every now and then results do come into the spotlight.
two thousand and fifteen was a difficult year also in this regard and we can only increase the pressure in all fora to wipe the death penalty off our world.
this is even more true as human rights and basic humanitarian principles are coming under increasing pressure.
in a world that is clearly in turmoil some believe that human rights can be a secondary concern that we need first to focus on fire fighting and crisis management and only then afterwards can we look at the human rights dimension as if it was a luxury element
we have seen how shortsighted this approach can be and our global strategy and the european union cannot be more explicit on this is that for our european union investing in human rights is a matter of values but it is also a matter of interests.
that we can afford tackling only when the situation calms down.
there is no way in which we can make our societies strong and societies in our neighbourhood and in the world strong and resilient also to crises if we do not focus relentlessly on human rights.
the space for civil society is shrinking in many parts of the world and very close to home as well.
today we are indeed touching upon the old spectrum of our foreign policies priorities and instruments so i am glad that we are also having our annual debate on human rights which is an opportunity for me to present our annual report on human rights and democracy in the world.
this is an investment in security and stability as well.
let me be very clear on the fact that the overall picture is clearly not rosy.
third we have to continue our work to preserve and to broaden the space for civil society to fight for the freedom of expression and of the press support human rights defenders sustain progress in electoral processes and let me thank this parliament for our precious partnership on electoral observation missions.
as you know very well i raise human rights issues with all relevant interlocutors with no exception always and everywhere even where this is more difficult to do.
they might not make the headlines in the international media but such patient work is making so many people better off. let me tell you that i appreciate this house recognising this kind of work constantly in particular with the prizes you give.
still the global situation of human rights does not leave room for much celebration.
we know that this is also an essential part of our work and of our responsibility.
our credibility as a global human rights champion depends on our actions and also on our words. we have a big responsibility and we have to exercise it to the full.
just months ago almost one hundred and fifty people from political parties and from civil society were pardoned in azerbaijan something that we have been working on for a long time and that is done.
i think of our work on the reconciliation process in myanmar.
we say also in our global strategy that our foreign policy starts at home.
you know how many statements we issue on this kind of cases and let me tell you that sometimes i personally feel a little bit of frustration about the statements because a statement does not change reality on the ground.
as europeans we cannot tolerate anti semitism and as europeans we cannot tolerate islamophobia.
when we work with them we promote accountability democracy justice for the victims and real peace which means real rights. we have also focused on individual cases.
we will not be a credible advocate of human rights worldwide if we do not preserve the highest and i underline twice the highest standards here in the european union.
first our action will still focus on conflict areas syria libya yemen the whole middle east and we will keep working on post conflict reconciliation as we are doing as i said in colombia and in myanmar.
let me tell you very clearly we need to step up our commitment and our work for human rights all along the routes of migration inside the refugee camps in africa and in the middle east across the desert at sea and here at home in europe.
there is no viable crisis management there is no crisis prevention if we do not address human rights violations properly.
we have just finished a discussion with china and that is a perfect example of this coherent work that let me stress is something that the european union constantly and coherently and consistently does.
second we need to keep in mind there is not only one way and one recipe for human rights.
attacks against human rights defenders activists and journalists are on the rise and in several cases european citizens were among the victims of torture and other abuses.
many of these initiatives are a concrete follow up to the eu action plan on human rights and democracy that was adopted just one year ago.
also because i noticed that only thirteen of you have stayed in the room after having posed very important vital issues and after also questioning the coherence or the dedication or the good faith or the good will of the work we do not only because we are paid for that but because we believe in what we are doing.