kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
the liberal democrats believe that a common eu number plate is completely unnecessary but that is not the point the story in the british press was completely wrong and i hope the british press will recognise that.
this is totally illegal and must not continue.
this current proposal clarifies the formalities of moving motor vehicles from one member state to another and will greatly simplify those procedures.
this is crazy and it makes legitimate business very difficult to conduct in a cross border context.
when we finally reach agreement on this dossier and i believe we can i think we will solve many of those problems in regard to trade plates and vehicle registration.
madam president i would like to thank the rapporteur and shadows. the purpose of this report is to reduce red tape by making it easier quicker and cheaper for people and companies to re register their vehicles when moving across eu borders.
the changes in this report have the potential to make it simpler for citizens and make our roads safer.
these are positive measures which we should be focusing on and fighting for.
sadly instead some members on the right of this house have chosen to deliberately distort this technical file for their own ends.
let me be very clear uk number plates will not be axed by the eu;
there will be no compulsory eu number plate and yes people in scotland will still be able to put the saltire on their number plates if they choose.
i hope that in the future in the next parliament we will see a speedy resolution and it is a pity that the council walked out of this chamber when we were starting to discuss this.
but everyone is recognising that regionalisation is in the best interest of the stakeholders and especially of the fishermen themselves.
i also agree with linna engstrm that with healthy stocks everyone benefits whether this is the leisure or the commercial industries so both have to take on responsibilities when it comes to sustainable management.
the ranges of fishing mortality will provide us with an additional instrument for addressing choke situations as well.
mr president i would like to thank all the honourable members for their interventions and valuable views and i promise that i have taken due note of this very interesting debate. i would like to make some comments and let me start with leisure fisheries because this was mentioned by a number of speakers.
as long as we have shared stocks we also have a shared responsibility. we have to have the best management framework to work for sustainable fisheries with or without brexit.
others spoke about the issue of choke and this is indeed one of the main purposes of the plan.
i think that recreational fishing must be taken into account when setting fishing opportunities without unnecessary intervention.
hudghton also reminded us that apart from the cfp there are also international obligations to be complied with by everyone including the uk after brexit. i also agree with mr kuhn when he mentioned as well that we need to start looking at the interaction and the impact of one species over other species and we will be moving in that direction when we start
such an approach must ensure that we continue to fish sustainably while also ensuring a flexible management approach. whatever the political context may be we will need to have a multi annual plan in any case to enable us to put in place a modern management framework for sustainable fisheries.
there are also elements that were not dealt with to the extent needed in the baltic plan and where we need to find a way forward. specifically we have to find a way to deal with mixed demersal fisheries.
we all have to work together in order to ensure that multi annual plans are in place for our key mixed fisheries when the landing obligation comes fully into force in the year.
i would just like to ask the member what he proposes to do on behalf of the rest of the european fleet when the united kingdom takes back control of its exclusive maritime economic zone stretching up to two hundred miles from the british coast as it is entitled to under international law.
if we do not do something then it will grow and grow and overgrow our possibilities. the third issue is the fmsy. there is pressure to accept fmsy upper.
we are for regionalisation but we need a backstop. if the regions do not understand how to make their decisions then we will run into a very problematic situation. this is coming up in several files and therefore even if you do not like the commission
thirty we have lost one and a half hours because of bad handling of the discussion.
i do not think that is an acceptable way of handling this issue.
when this debate started after lunch my speaking time was at around.
brexit must mean that this never happens.
keep out all foreign boats make fishing flags of convenience impossible be properly policed by the royal navy this is a real north sea plan and we hope for the sake of british fishermen that david davis is not stupid enough to be taken in or gulled by yours.
instead there must be a united kingdom fisheries plan.
thank you ian for taking my question.
i just want to ask you do you now recognise that we are leaving and scotland is leaving the european union and that fishing will be managed by britain and not by the european union and that because of all that we have been telling you forever that we need to get out of the european union to protect scottish fish and protect scottish fishermen and their fleets that now in the north east of scotland people are building boats training young lads to go fishing and there is now a boom
commissioner hogan has already announced that two thousand and eighteen will bring more change further agricultural reform to try to undo some of the many mistakes of the last reform. furthermore we already see scope for new mistakes to be made to replace the old ones.
if the last reform was working then omnibus would be totally unnecessary certainly on this size and scale.
that's why we're having this debate on something called omnibus. so now almost sneakily and by the back door begins the process of trying to undo what we were doing in the last term.
is allowing collusion and price fixing really a solution or will this turn out to be yet another case of further regulation reinforcing earlier failure with ever more complexity?
young farmers now will be able to get five years of payment irrespective of when they apply as long as it is within the first five years of their taking over the farm.
that needs to change if you want more young farmers.
first we are not discussing an fta.
since the beginning it has been said that there should also be humanitarian aid.
it is partially yes.
i would simply like to stress a couple of points.
the number of products selected is limited.
these trade preferences would liberalise about a quarter of pakistani imports to the eu and be available for two years with a possible extension for another year.
let me now turn to some of the amendments that have been proposed.
however this is not reflected in the european parliament amendments and as a result of the consultation with wto members it might be necessary to subject a few more products to tariff rate quotas.
i know that there are requests for making the granting of autonomous trade preferences conditional upon pakistan respecting certain fundamental principles. i understand the concerns that may exist in that respect and you are aware that human rights issues are an integral element of our long term relationship with pakistan.
let me also reassure you that the commission will conduct an annual impact assessment on the autonomous trade preferences granted to pakistan and present it to parliament and the council and that is another reason not to reduce the duration of application of this instrument.
our human rights dialogue in the context of our partnership and cooperation agreement with pakistan is the appropriate forum to address such issues with pakistan and reach sustainable solutions.
on the other hand we could agree to the introduction of a mechanism allowing the imposition of limits to duty free imports for pakistan tariff rate quotas where volumes of imports of products liberalised increase beyond certain levels.
moreover we cannot prohibit pakistan through this regulation from implementing measures that are consistent with its international obligations.
i also agree that preferences should be removed for any product causing or threatening to cause serious difficulties to a union producer of like or directly competing products as determined by an investigation carried out by the commission.
as regards provisions that would oblige pakistan to abstain from maintaining introducing or increasing duties or charges having equivalent effect or any other restriction on the export or import of certain products i believe that such conditions would seriously undermine the granting of the preferences and are contrary to the spirit the nature and the purpose of our regulation.
the images of people having lost their livelihoods might not be present any more in everyone's mind but we should not forget the immense cost of those devastating floods both in terms of humanitarian needs and economic devastation.
however given the temporary nature of the waiver to address an emergency situation the commission believes those conditionalities would not be appropriate.
however ambitious trade measures are essential for the sustained economic recovery of pakistan's economy and should be part of our medium term response to those unprecedented natural disasters. i therefore hope that parliament will support the proposal.
this compromise became the basis for the subsequent request for a wto waiver.
i will not go into detail on all of them but let me highlight the most important ones.
i think that would be very problematic.
the commission proposal aims at the introduction of a unilateral and temporary suspension of import duties on seventy five export items from pakistan.
the european union is aware that such trade concessions especially in sensitive sectors such as textiles might have an impact on eu industry and therefore we have ensured that a balance is kept between the needs of pakistan and the interests of our own industry and other supplier countries.
we have set a ceiling on the liberalisation of very sensitive items and liberalisation would only be of limited duration. in the meantime we have also requested the world trade organisation to grant us a waiver of the applicable wto rules
as you know we are still discussing this issue with other wto members and hope to come to a solution soon.
finally i think this really does point to the acute need to look at how the wto works and to transform it into a properly democratic body whose proceedings are transparent and whose members are accountable.
however emergency trade preferences are a politically controversial measure both in the context of pakistan and the region.
so speaking personally i am concerned that these emergency trade preferences will appear to reward the pakistani government for its lack of action in this respect. i am also worried that secular democratic bangladesh also a country prone to flooding will suffer as a consequence in terms of unfair competition and it too is heavily dependent on textiles.
one thing was absolutely clear. we needed to think outside the box.
we needed to come up with a new solution to provide help.
not only aid but trade was the answer as a short term measure to assist.
but i am afraid some of the amendments to which the commission has already made reference take away from the spirit of our initial intentions and the initial way in which we reacted.
at wto level objections have been registered to our eu proposal.
on the one hand india says that this should not be a part of the eu india fta. i agree. there should not be a link.
that is the right approach.
but at the same time it is asking for relaxation in trade directly from pakistan. there is a contradiction in its approach. i ask them to reconsider.
i believe this house should reaffirm the commission position.
we have the guarantee of annual impact assessments.
the credibility of the eu is at stake.
give the commission proposal your support.
mr president it is now eight months since the council proposed a sensible package of measures to help pakistan following the devastating flooding.
i regret that eight months later we are still debating it and not implementing it.
aid of course is very important to pakistan but the idea of this trade package was to provide an incentive to entrepreneurs to start rebuilding factories and reinvesting in the textile and other industries that were literally swept away by the flooding.
demonstrating there was a market for their products.
unfortunately our response has been very curmudgeonly.
one year will not give the space for the investment that is necessary.
i also regret that india has been less than supportive in the wto but i hope as mr rinaldi mentioned that the so called cricket diplomacy is going to lead to a solution and that india will recognise that both on humanitarian grounds and in the interests of security it is important to help pakistan create jobs and investment in the future.
this reflects the great progress made by this country in its economic and political reforms including in the field of labour rights. duty and quota free treatment will contribute to the country's economic development as has already been the case with other beneficiaries of this scheme.
in addition it is important that eu businesses actively contribute to the national effort to establish better living conditions for all.
but since two thousand and eleven the country has been undertaking a programme of openness and reform which has brought unprecedented positive results and work to further raise standards continues.
judging by the interest received we have indications that this is happening.
you can most certainly make a significant contribution through development aid but this will not be enough.
the commission expects that preferences will help increase exports and the income of people in myanmar burma.
on the same occasion the eu suspended restrictive measures for one year which have all now been lifted except for the arms embargo. in the meantime in june two thousand and twelve the ilo conference recognised the progress of myanmar burma towards eradicating forced labour and lifted restrictions which excluded the government of the country from receiving ilo technical cooperation.
but we also have to recognise that the country has started this process from an incredibly closed and repressive situation.
in order to continue to benefit from trade preferences burma will be required to maintain and improve democratisation and respect for human rights and of course it is our task to continue to monitor that progress. sanctions have been in place between the eu and burma since.
of course we should welcome investment in burma to help modernise the country but we have to ensure that european union industries and european companies that move into burma respect freedom of association encourage civil society participation and do nothing to exacerbate the ethnic conflict that exists within burma.
the proposal we have before us tonight is to reinstate trade preferences.
after such a long period of suspension it was difficult to assess whether we should carry out this action and therefore we have had to take our guidance as the rules anyway suggest we should from the international labour organisation and the ilo has concluded that forced labour the original reason for removing burma's preferences is no longer i quote a serious and systematic problem in
and while it has come a long way it still has a long way to go in terms of opening up and modernising and democratising the country.
gsp is a carrot and stick approach to trade policy.
but of course they will only apply to extractive industries so we need wider controls.
at the same time as we have the opening of this fragile country with a precarious human rights situation we see what can be described as almost an unseemly rush by developed countries' industries to move into burma.
that is not excusing the strife that exists there but simply saying we are now getting it reported.
when you take the lid off a kettle some of the steam is going to come out.
the situation regarding religious and ethnic minorities in particular the rohingya muslims in kachin state is terrifying.
this is all worrying and it confirms my view that it is too early to take a decision on gsp reinstatement.
there are reports from the trade union movement that the riot police have used military issue white phosphorus grenades to disperse protesters recently.
it is clear that myanmar is rich in natural resources and situated in an extremely important strategic location.
there is no question that there have been important improvements and reforms in myanmar but the point is that they are definitely not irreversible.
the political sphere and society at large are suddenly enjoying a degree of openness never experienced before.
mr president the reform process initiated by the burmese leadership two years ago is astonishing by many accounts.
launching a human rights dialogue is simply not good enough. we have tabled amendments asking the commission to submit to parliament and the council an assessment of the situation with regard to the human rights situation in burma by the end of the year in order to confirm or otherwise that the situation is sufficiently acceptable for us to continue granting gsp.
the reform process in burma is too fragile too recent and too incomplete and the human rights situation is still too worrisome for a risky policy u turn.
secondly we have to ensure that european union companies operating in burma act responsibly and we have to keep some sort of check here in the european union on how they are behaving.
i am trying to do here what i think is in the best interests of ordinary people in burma. listening to ordinary people on the ground in burma for example the minorities who are continuing to face very extreme repression i think we have to look at what signal we send. i would ask you what interests you are representing here.
is it the interests of the multinationals who want to get access and are using an improvement that is real and is taking place as a pretext for pre existing economic interests?
the only interest that we should be looking at here is what is in the interests of people in burma.
how did you come to the conclusion that you know better than her what is right for burma?
these are indeed key elements for raising public acceptance.
however safety must never be compromised.
work in the united nations economic commission for europe is already under way on the international framework.
finally a few remarks regarding testing and inspection procedures and vehicle type approval.
the amsterdam declaration endorsed this morning in the framework of the transport informal council is very clear on this point and sees this as a prerequisite for the elaboration of a european strategy on connected and automated driving.
road construction will probably be affected if we want to maximise benefits from this new technology. these aspects are being assessed also in the c its platform and the results will be fed into the gear two thousand and thirty initiative.
there will be one data protection law applicable across the european union.
the first question referred to the challenges posed by automation. the existing legal framework defining the rules of behaviour for road users will need to be adapted to allow automated driving and to ensure safety for all road users.
several initiatives are taking place on security in the framework of the digital single market strategy in terms of privacy under the new general data protection regulation.
i want to be very clear that the process towards automation should ensure that it will provide clear road safety benefits by removing not adding risks.
data protection has been addressed also in the framework of the so called c its platform. concerning liability the gear two thousand and thirty initiative on highly automated vehicles is now taking up the issue with the aim to understand if and what is changing with further levels of automation.
also the upgrade of the relevant cellular communication networks is being discussed in the context of the relevant high level round table on connected and automated driving.
the commission has launched a dialogue with member states public authorities and private stakeholders through the cooperative intelligent transport systems platform the c its platform to the gear two thousand and thirty and the high level round table between the telecoms and automotive industries
highlyautomated vehicles can to a large extent already comply with conventional type approval requirements for instance general construction and emissions.
with a strong spirit of partnership the commission is working towards a shared european strategy on connected and automated driving as part of the energy union research innovation and competitiveness strategy.
it is crucial to ensure the highest possible level of security of communications and the protection of data and privacy at all times.
vehicle automation technology has developed very quickly from increasingly sophisticated driver assistance systems intended to improve road safety and indeed driving comfort already on the market to fully automated vehicles that could participate in normal traffic in the short and medium term.
this includes a review not only of the international conventions on road traffic in particular the vienna road traffic convention but also the member states' highway codes.
mr president i would say to the commissioner that we have heard all about the wonders of what automated driving can bring. i personally am very much looking forward to seeing my car fully connected and self driving in the future but as legislators for all the excitement there are so many questions that must not be overlooked in the design of our regulations.
how do we best adapt our industrial policy? how do we ensure that these vehicles are safe both on the road and from cyberattacks? how do we protect consumer rights while sharing more data?
how do we deal with liability?
our traditional car industry must be part of any dialogue as we create a harmonised legal framework which is much larger than the technical aspects and we must do this in partnership with all stakeholders.
the industry itself however must proactively think about issues like privacy cyber security data management road management and new business models.
the future of connected vehicles our business growth and our economies as a whole will be based on how we use technologies to improve citizens' experiences and their lives in general.
for all these reasons we can make the driving experience better and our towns safer.
it is also a personal commitment of the vice president high representative.
the active engagement of the european parliament on this important human rights and international justice topic is crucial.
it is also in the context of the kampala pledges that the eu has committed to produce a practical guide book on how to better integrate the fight against the most serious crimes into relevant eu rule of law and development programmes based on existing good practices the so called complementarity tool kit. on this basis the eu will continue to support the icc both politically and diplomatically as well as logistically and financially.
the commission views an effective court as an indispensable instrument of the international community to combat impunity and to promote a law based international order.
as the report rightly points out eu action is currently very much focussed on the implementation of the four pledges it made at the icc review conference in kampala.
when it comes to the concrete steps towards ratifying and implementing the rome statute and related instruments it is of course parliamentarians who play a key role considering their prerogative as law and policymakers.