kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
this is a very important decision and conclusion for all europeans.
i will say that i too prefer light touch regulation but if it is necessary we will make sure that the market works well that it is fit for the twenty first century and that we ensure that there is no abuse of the market position by telecom operators or other companies.
to lay a good foundation through the telecom single market for an ambitious digital single market that puts people first.
i am very glad that we as liberals we as the european parliament we as european lawmakers have pushed very hard to put consumers and the public interest first;
i would strongly encourage telecom providers to keep that in mind.
we will keep the pulse and we will have a review after two two and a half years.
in two months people travelling across europe will pay no more extra costs for using their phones. soon roaming charges will be a thing of the past and people will not even remember their existence. it is satisfying indeed that europe has managed to deliver on its promise to abolish roaming charges.
this is the end of a very long battle for the parliament which started almost six years ago a battle which was faced with a lot of opposition from different sides.
the pieces of the puzzle leading to meet the fifteen june deadline to abolish roaming charges are now all in place.
however for me the fight is not over.
the rules agreed were significantly lower caps designed to allow mobile phone operators to offer free roaming to their customers without increasing domestic prices at home. the caps will also have a direct impact on how much mobile data a consumer can use when abroad. the lower the cap the larger the amount of data. this was the last stumbling block standing in the way of ending roaming charges as of fifteen june of this year.
this agreement has taken ten years.
if the european union had allowed for a truly free and competitive market then the charges would have been zeroed probably decades ago. as ever the eu has drummed up regulations and we have heard already from a number of previous speakers that all will happen is that income revenue for the companies will then be derived from charging domestic customers much much more.
that is why light touch legislation around the world is so much more effective.
this was technically complicated and involved finding an adequate political balance.
thanks to all our efforts together the roam like at home' system is now fully designed and predictable.
with this deal we should not forget that we have achieved a much more vibrant digital single market.
we have shown people across europe that the eu institutions can deliver also in difficult times. the widespread positive media reaction reflects that.
it brings many new possibilities that will benefit all of us if they are used properly. the commission therefore strongly urges the european parliament to adopt the new regulation on wholesale roaming markets.
this is the result of more than ten years of regulatory effort by the eu institutions.
mr president i welcome this proposal which is the final piece of legislation required to ensure that mobile roaming charges will be removed by this coming june something we have promised for a long time and something that the eu has delivered for its citizens.
will we never learn that regulatory intervention in market prices almost always produces unintended and perverse consequences?
look at the ets scheme in europe that has failed for ten years to deliver the sort of prices that the regulators want.
it is the european union's cynical pursuit of any measure that looks vaguely like a benefit for voters or of generating any positive headline.
first we regulate retail prices now we come back and regulate wholesale prices.
be sure this proposal that we are voting on today or tomorrow will have unintended consequences which will come back and bite our ankles.
this is an important step but if we want to build a real digital market we should be encouraged and pursue this in other sectors. that is certain.
so please explain for us all how things could have been faster without the european union and how this could have been achieved without the european union.
i think this is a tremendous occasion to tell us all.
the point that i made was that the lobbying power in brussels which is actively encourage actively interacted with by the european union has proved to be a drag anchor.
that was the critical point that i was making.
i was also making the point that across the world a lighter touch in terms of regulation one that does not involve trilogue council commission to the parliament and then back all the way round things would not have achieved where we are.
the point i am making therefore is let us just put together three components stop the lobbying stop the drag anchor and stop the trilogue.
the result in the uk has been beneficial to big corporations an endless supply of cheap and compliant labour but terrible for pre existing working class communities with pay and conditions undermined and competition for public resources such as social housing and school places greatly intensified.
yet the commission permitted only short term transitional controls and the uk did not even take advantage of those.
suddenly countries with wage levels only a fifth of those that pertained in the more established members were part of the club.
rather than tailor controls to the long term closing of the living standards gap the ideology of european integration took precedence and immigration soared.
without major restriction of the right of free movement the outcome was inevitable vast migration from poorer countries to richer ones and the undercutting of wages and conditions.
britain will soon have within its grasp the national controls needed to support working people and ensure their wages and conditions are not grievously undermined but other countries of northern and western europe will have no such powers.
freedom of movement seemed to work okay when only a few countries were in the club and all were at similar stages of economic development but following the various rounds of enlargement particularly with the arrival of the a eight and a two countries all that changed.
is how today we are talking about social dumping instead of enforcing existing single market regulation.
what we see today however are attempts by old member states to introduce a pick and choose variety of competition and single market depending on what suits perceived interests or populist political approaches better. this happens be it through attempts to restrict the rules on the posting of workers or be it through the fabrication of an ill defined notion with highly negative connotations which
in a fight that is about neutralising less developed countries' main competitive advantage lower wages the next logical step would be to set higher tariffs on goods imported from there.
while it is true that there is no legally recognised and universally shared definition of social dumping i agree with you that it is crucial to ensure a level playing field and fair competition across the european union. i welcome mr balas your call to member states to increase efficiency and secure appropriate staffing levels and resources for their control bodies.
i am glad that you welcome the newly established european platform on undeclared work.
we vowed to put people at the heart of our policymaking and we have already taken action to defend our social values and strengthen fairness in our common market.
this platform will soon formally adopt its working programme and then the first activities to exchange information and best practices engage in joint crossborder action and develop knowledge and capacity can start.
as you know fourteen national parliaments from eleven member states raised concerns in relation to compliance with the principle of subsidiarity triggering the socalled yellow card procedure. we analysed the concerns voiced by the national parliaments and concluded that no subsidiarity issue subsists with this proposal.
this is one of the main objectives of the european pillar of social rights which is now the subject of a broad consultation.
its underlying vision is one of fairness on the european labour market and social protection systems.
i am now looking forward to discussing my proposal and possible amendments with you and to working with this parliament and with the council in order to come to an agreement as soon as possible.
therefore we decided to maintain the proposal unchanged.
it should be seen as a reference framework expressing essential principles common to participating member states for the conduct of employment and social policy and it should serve to screen the performance of participating member states and to drive the process of reforms at national level in the light of twenty first century realities.
this will contribute to turning undeclared work into declared work and ensure social protection for millions of europeans who are losing out through various kinds of risky job arrangements.
for me this is very clear there is no place for unfair working conditions and social dumping in the european union.
i take note of your call to the commission and the member states to ensure more effective implementation of the existing legislation.
member states are responsible for enforcing labour law rules for the posting of workers rules on free movement and on health and safety at work and yes mr balas national labour inspectorates need sufficient resources to do that. we have already put in place several instruments that offer national authorities more and better tools to make sure that free movement is fair and well managed and that abuse is prevented.
we have the enforcement directive on posting of workers that introduces measures to prevent and penalise any abuses or circumventions of european rules on posting.
so let us continue to work together.
it is therefore the explicit obligation of the commission to ensure full use of the new platform to tackle undeclared work from its very next session in september as a most valuable venue to develop just such cooperation.
i very much welcome your introductory words commissioner to that effect.
as to the particular challenges regarding transport a sector of particular importance for bulgaria with over three thousand personnel providing vital income for their families it is imperative that there must be no further liberalisation of cabotage until implementation of the current legislation is ensured together with the necessary guarantees for equal access to the single transport market.
this is not about moving the objective from development to security.
on the contrary it is to fulfil sdg no sixteen that links development and security and asks all international players also to dedicate resources to guarantee that the security conditions are there for the development work to be effective.
the legal services of all institutions also in this parliament were very reluctant to approve the proposed legal basis and in the committee on legal affairs in july the legal basis of this proposal was pushed through by minority votes while the majority of the committee was voting against or abstaining.
article two hundred and nine on development cooperation and development cooperation instrument funds cannot be used to finance military capacity building abroad.
this regulation would create the precedent that development aid and non common foreign and security policy instruments and funds are used for military purposes and development funds are used for capacity building for the armed forces.
we should not turn a blind eye when a common foreign and security policy instrument is masked to look like development policy.
there can hardly be development without security but that should not mean that legal bases are interchangeable.
we have to make clear that also internally we respect the rule of law in the european union institutions.
mr president as all the votes seem to be close and as you seem to be checking every single one why don't we just do them all electronically directly?
who would like to speak against?
both the commission communication of two thousand and eight and the council conclusions of two thousand and nine ask the commission to explore the possibility of establishing a new arctic information centre.
it also consolidates the eu's balanced approach to the arctic combining its protection and its sustainable development.
this is totally in line with the eu principles of protecting the arctic and firmly asking for the highest environmental standards.
fifthly the commission adopted in two thousand and ten a communication on offshore drilling which should guide our actions across the world including the arctic region.
and the prominence of this point was maintained in the council conclusions of.
our cross border cooperation and european instrument for democracy and human rights programmes are supporting the sami people of north west russia and other indigenous peoples of the barents region.
it promotes a cautious approach that we will also apply in the arctic.
despite the challenging nature of the environment in the arctic the rising price of oil has stimulated international interest in drilling in that zone.
a two thousand and eight us geological survey estimated that areas north of the arctic circle have ninety billion barrels of undiscovered oil technically recoverable oil and forty four billion barrels of natural gas liquids.
we seek to promote a safer sustainable arctic.
we are pleased to see that these areas are covered by parliament's high north report along with valuable proposals on how to proceed in the future.
we are now opening a new phase in the development of eu arctic policy. parliament's report will become the third pillar of its basic architecture following the two thousand and eight commission communication and the two thousand and nine council conclusions.
our reporting will be addressed to both institutions council and parliament and we hope that it will be to your joint satisfaction.
access to the arctic and the exploitation of its resources we must live up to our reputation as a responsible consumer of raw materials and energy resources adhering to the highest safety and environmental standards.
secondly we pursue solid environmental and maritime policies.
we would like to participate in the arctic council as a permanent observer to share our solid experience in international regional cooperation and we are particularly grateful for parliament's endorsement of this endeavour.
the high north report will give the european external action service and the commission a robust stimulus in our external action concerning the arctic region.
and fourthly we continue to take action in favour of indigenous peoples worldwide including those living in the arctic.
in particular i would like to acknowledge the norwegian russian delimitation agreement on the barents sea which was signed last year as a reference point for long term peaceful cooperation in the overall circumpolar arctic region.
we respect the international agreements and arrangements and would like to cooperate in their development and enhancement.
the european union would like to see a reinforced and efficient arctic council in which key decisions on the future of the region are agreed and implemented.
while we acknowledge that our dialogue with all circumpolar arctic indigenous peoples could be improved two thousand and ten has witnessed the beginning of a fruitful and wider process of interaction which we will certainly pursue in the years to come. when dealing with
these three texts are consistent and offer a responsible and positive message to the arctic partner countries and the people living across the region.
the various perspectives are present in the final report demonstrating the european union's commitment to listen to and work with all arctic stakeholders.
this is an example of how to put things in a congenial form for our wide range of different constituencies.
we can finally say that we have come up with a decent document allowing us the european union to proceed in a fairly reasonable manner taking into account all the interests of all stakeholders.
requires a precautionary and scientifically robust approach to be taken to any future development in the arctic. that is why we called for further scientific studies within the framework of a multilateral agreement to be completed to inform international understanding and decision making for the arctic ecosystem before any further major development goes ahead.
even though the greens justifiably think that we should be even more radical we are still glad that this report takes our worries and concerns into account such as the proposals we made to the rapporteur concerning the fact that scientific data clearly demonstrates that the arctic ecosystem is currently going through massive climate related changes and that this situation
we thank the other groups for accepting that.
i would also like to thank my fellow green members for their cooperation and contribution.
there are some sceptics in this room who have stated that the arctic region does not deserve our attention but it does particularly with iceland likely to become the twenty eighth member of the eu.
but in dealing with the high north it is important that we are seen to be diplomatic not didactic; cooperative not coercive;
there seems to have been a very subtle shift an undertow in our thinking towards security security of energy supply and security to use resources.
as the commission and other commentators have persistently pointed out there are many many regulatory gaps in the arctic.
the eu's environmental footprint there is not light.
the regulation is piecemeal and unfocused.
the field is open to multinational companies.
we could do better. we previously said we wanted to do better.
national enforcement authorities can rely on data from the digital tachograph to check compliance with driving times and rest periods.
the commission received the first reports in december. two thousand and thirteen it has started analysing them and it will soon report on its conclusions. member states who have failed to report may soon face infringement procedures.
to give enforcement officers access to information about undertakings abroad member states have to connect their register with the european register of road transport undertakings.
thank you for your interest in this important topic.
coming to your second and third questions about cross border enforcement and controls the commission together with the member states is working with great persistence to improve their effectiveness.
as mentioned before the commission cooperates with member states to better enforce driving time and rest periods.
in addition the commission requests member states to carry out individual checks on road haulage undertakings whenever it obtains evidence those companies are failing to meet their obligations including the one on stable and effective establishment.
however the commission depends on information from the member states when it comes to the number of letterbox companies closed down.
this includes the adoption of guidance notes clarification notes recommendations and training manuals for enforcers.
most recently the commission has taken action following a written question submitted by a member of the european parliament ole christensen.
one of these conditions is stable and effective establishment. letterbox companies should not be set up or if they exist they must be closed down.
the commission therefore considers that this requirement could be strengthened.
effective enforcement is an essential part of a well functioning road transport market.
the commission has started infringement procedures against these members states seven of these are still pending.
member states have to carry out concerted checks with other member states at least six times a year.
it is not easy but we are committed to improving the situation which members have painted.
the enforcement directive sets minimum requirements for controls and defines a common range of infringements against social rules. it also provides member states with tools to target checks and make them more efficient.
according to the relevant regulation member states must report every two years their enforcement activities including the withdrawal of road haulage licences.
of course when we talk about transport we talk about a major important and complex economic activity one it is not easy to monitor but as many of you have underlined we have to do it better.
the commission will continue to support member states in correctly enforcing the road transport acquis.
we look forward to your support in creating a culture of compliance throughout the sector and i thank you again for your question.
member states are not required to provide specific information on the enforcement of the stable and effective establishment letterbox criterion.
two thousand and thirteen so the commission very much welcomes any input from honourable members who received substantive evidence of cases infringing european union legislation.
i have taken note of your comments and will make sure that they are taken into account by the commission in its future work.
it is the classic social dumping model.
however despite the calls there is no data about the extent of the phenomenon that could prove that certain member states fail to meet their obligations on this regulation.
two years into the full application of this regulation evidence shows that letterbox companies continue to exist and to proliferate.
how many letterbox companies have been closed down in the last two years per member state and what information can the commission provide regarding national control and enforcement measures or what we believe to be a lack of them?
in search of a better future for themselves and their families drivers get caught in the system.
what measures has the commission taken against those member states who have so far failed to adequately implement this regulation and indeed in some cases are actively encouraging going against it?
they are subject to dubious employment schemes that block their access to social and labour rights they spend their nights and weekends in their lorries or in substandard accommodation such as improvised barracks feed on canned food have no access to basic facilities such as toilets and showers and drive around europe on low wages the clear victims of social dumping.
this is unacceptable and must end.
that sector is road haulage.
however there is evidence that letterbox companies not only continue to exist but are expanding.
indeed some member states hosting letterbox companies show a deliberate lack of interest in cooperating in cross border investigations control and sanctions even on specific request from other member states.
amongst other things the regulation is meant to ensure that undertakings have an effective and stable establishment as part of a set of conditions and have the status of good repute and the necessary community licence to operate within the internal market. the regulation came into force in december two thousand and eleven
it is also difficult to track down and challenge the part of the business which is legally responsible for the prejudices brought against drivers.
they are the main channel for organised systematic social dumping in the road transport sector. letterbox companies are used in order to recruit professional drivers from member states with lower pay and working conditions with a view to making them work within countries with much higher standards.
there is no information on measures taken by the commission to develop the necessary level of cross border enforcement needed in order to fulfil the aims and objectives of this regulation.
making so called letterbox companies illegal.
due to their complex and untransparent construction letterbox companies make it difficult if not impossible for the driver to claim rights or access benefits to which they are entitled and it is difficult to get unpaid leave unpaid wages health care medical insurance unemployment and pensions.