kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
should there be a minimum percentage of votes that a party list has to attract before it acquires representation? in some member states there is no support for this but in the great majority it is accepted practice. the threshold helps to weed out frivolous contestants whose sole interest is in attracting attention.
madam president i listened to the opening statements outlining the goals proposed and attempting to justify them. quite frankly i was aghast to hear some of what i heard.
more control of the electoral outcome seems to be the goal even less democracy despite the calls for it.
just look at what happened recently in portugal in terms of the election outcome there!
people are today very critical towards the european union and for good reason but what they don't want to do is what britain did to leave the european union.
they voted for a radical change in france but also in europe and so the best thing to do is in fact to back his reformist agenda a reformist agenda that we all know now.
i want to talk about something that is related to brexit and that is the future of the european union and the reform of the european union because it would be a mistake to put all our energy only into brexit in the coming years. at least the same energy if not more energy has to be put into the reform and the future of the european union.
they say reform the european union yes;
don't misunderstand me;
that is the message of the people of the european union today.
thanks to this unity we will also be able together with the leaders to deal in the coming months first and foremost with the positive agenda for the union of the.
our unity is the most important condition for a positive outcome from the negotiations.
now that we have the guidelines we should be putting some flesh on them regarding no hardening of the border in ireland and fully upholding the good friday agreement in all of its parts.
it is a commitment not to allow irish and eu citizens like myself to be dragged out of the eu against our will.
madam president the council's guidelines on brexit give support to the good friday agreement in all of its parts and that is crucially important. this is a commitment by the eu to not allow for any hardening of the border between the north and the south of ireland.
there should be no weakening of this commitment in the negotiation directive that is to be adopted next monday.
it is a recognition that the north of ireland is not an internal matter for the united kingdom and a commitment that the people of the north will never again be left at the mercy of a ruthless and reactionary british government in london.
quite frankly the level of ignorance displayed in the comments made by mep colleagues has been astonishing and also frightening.
there is never any balanced or non partisan exploration of the brexit aspect the contribution the uk makes financially defence and security wise or why the vote went the way it did.
if you were the host and you had been treated like that by somebody that you thought was important and somebody you thought you could trust i think you would be asking yourself whether you were dealing with a reasonable person.
and then a few days later in a display of extreme petulance you even deride the national language of the host which by the way is looking a bit silly because last saturday's extravaganza known as the eurovision song contest saw ninety of the songs sung in english.
either we get some grown up reasonable demands from the european union or the united kingdom will be forced to walk away before the end of this year.
all that is needed is one bold and generous political act and british agencies must tear down the barriers they have erected which are causing daily frustration and fear for so many people.
this is about treating people with dignity allowing them to plan their lives their learning and their loves.
the british government must stop blaming and start acting governmental no posturing no calculating a right out of the gate' comprehensive agreement.
outside the convention of nothing is agreed till everything is agreed' we need a comprehensive right to reside agreement first and we need that very very quickly.
it is a state of anxiety for thousands of eu and uk citizens with seven reporting depression some even suicidal.
when a german president says that without the eu britain cannot have its voice heard in the world we will say listen to the sounds of a free britain an independent britain an outwardly looking britain trading growing and expanding in the world looking forward and not backwards.
' so when a french president says brexit is a crime we will say we will not be imprisoned by your rudeness.
on first glance it appears reasonable but like everything the eu says on closer inspection you can see the malevolent intent of an eu that tempers no opposition to its control.
but he never means anything serious till he talks about justice and right.
but for those in this chamber who want to bully us threaten us or demean us may i remind you of the english poem by rudyard kipling about a norman king warning his son about taking advantage of the english the saxon is not like us normans.
like a playground bully it says no member state can talk to the uk separately like an emperor it grants spain a veto over gibraltar and like a jilted spouse it says the uk cannot go out and get a new trade partner until the divorce is finalised or else.
mr president we now know how the eu twenty seven leaders plan to negotiate with brexit.
when a maltese president says the uk deal must be an inferior deal we will say no deal is better than a bad deal.
you are going to be annihilated in the polls.
leaders fully supported this logic. to ensure an orderly withdrawal we first and foremost need to address the situation of more than four million people whose lives will be directly impacted by brexit on both sides.
it is our particular responsibility to secure the best guarantees for citizens citizens of the union and for their families.
there is a need to act quickly and so we are ready.
leaders responded with the urgency that the situation requires. there will be very little time to conclude withdrawal talks within the framework foreseen by the treaty.
today it is too early to tell much more about our common future but we will make our guidelines more precise when the time comes namely when sufficient progress in the first phase is achieved.
it is clear that a free trade agreement between the eu and the uk which is what the uk has chosen even if it is ambitious and wide ranging cannot mean participation in the single market or its parts. and at the same
that is also why i welcome the fact that the commission has already listed a number of detailed requirements.
and it will be for the european council of twenty seven to assess and decide if and when we have achieved sufficient progress. when it comes to our future the european council shared the united kingdom's desire to establish a close partnership.
since the referendum in june last year we the eu twenty seven have been united consistent and demonstrated solidarity with one another.
these cover the three issues i have just mentioned plus a number of other matters that need to be addressed in the first phase of the negotiations.
only once there is sufficient progress on these priorities can we proceed to the next phase of the negotiations about our future relations.
the second priority in the first phase is the need to agree that all financial commitments undertaken by the eu of twenty eight will also be honoured by the uk. and thirdly in order to protect the peace and reconciliation process described by the good friday agreement we must aim to avoid a hard border between the republic of ireland
it is obvious however that the relationship between the european union and a non member state cannot offer the same benefits as eu membership.
now we must move from sharing objectives to actually ensuring that citizens get the necessary guarantees.
time is of the essence here and much is at stake.
time the uk must be aware that any free trade agreement will have to ensure a level playing field and encompass safeguards against unfair competitive advantages through inter alia tax social environmental and regulatory measures and practices.
sincere thanks and appreciation for your constructive assistance.
that means guarantees that are effective enforceable non discriminatory and comprehensive accompanied by simple and smooth administrative procedures.
this means simply that there will be no discussion of the framework for our future relations with britain before sufficient progress is made on ensuring an orderly withdrawal.
scotland will not be silent passive bystanders within this process. i would also urge you that while the people of scotland want to work with our friends and colleagues across the eu there is a deliberate wilful agenda within uk politics to misrepresent and demonise this process and the personalities involved within it.
this is them getting their excuses in early brexit would have gone great except for those bloody foreigners';
it is not in scotland's name.
actually it is four in scotland we saw them off handsomely with sixty two of the vote in favour of remaining within our european family and we remain in favour of remaining within our european family.
you could give real impetus to this by committing to an early agreement on this issue and we could make that work now for all of our citizens.
that is the narrative they are trying to kid the british people with. do not give them what they want;
we need a new generation of these trade agreements. again we need to address citizens' concerns when managing the migration and refugee crisis because we know that the real solution for this is to address the root of the problem by supporting neighbourhood development and peace building.
we need to build up welfare systems for the twenty first century.
when it comes to the roadmap for the future of european union the starting point to define the roadmap is to build up a convincing social pillar addressing the concerns of our peoples but particularly young people when they are dealing today with the so called digital revolution'.
we need to make sure they have a proper contract and full access to social protection.
then we also need to address our citizens' concerns when we set new trade agreements in order to protect proper social and environmental standards.
all of these must be translated into a community budget of the future.
madam president the european council guidelines set out much more clearly than anything the british government has produced what the issues are in these negotiations.
we still do not know nearly a year after the referendum what the british government hopes to achieve in terms of access to the single market and the customs union in terms of how it intends to protect british farmers if they are no longer part of a common market with an agreed system of subsidies across europe or what is going to happen to british fishermen.
we do not know what is going to happen to british participation in the various technical agencies the aviation agency the medicines agency chemicals and so on whose certifications are a requirement for selling in the single european market.
we only have silence from the british government yet there are nearly a thousand issues more than a thousand issues that need to be settled in this negotiation.
we still do not know what the british government's intention is.
far from providing strong and stable leadership ms may is actually providing desperate and deluded leadership to the british people.
if you did i do not think it is an appropriate word when you talk as a german mep talking about negotiation with britain about their freedom and sovereignty to use the word troops' given the damage troops and wars have caused to this continent. were the interpreters correct? if they were please withdraw the word troops'.
and apparently there is a process underway to decide what that change will be called the white paper on the future of europe.
however to know what the winds of change are and what direction they are going in you must consult with the people. we were told last march that we would be consulted with.
we were told that there would be a series of future of europe debates to harvest and harness the opinions of the desired way forward. last week i met commissioner hogan and he knew nothing about this process.
nobody can tell me. if the winds of change are coming surely we should talk to the people.
madam president i think it is very simple i think the best trade agreement for the uk is actually membership of the eu itself but they have excluded that option so we have to find a fair deal now for everybody.
we do not need to worry and concern so many people.
can i say to you that the common travel area does not resolve the brexit disaster that will happen in ireland and you should know that better than most.
that is a no go area and the common travel area does not solve the problem. you are deluding yourself if you think that is the solution.
but i want to also make clear that politicians in dublin or brussels do not speak for the people of northern ireland.
northern ireland will speak for itself and the people will decide for themselves. they are an integral part of the united kingdom and they will decide where their future will be nobody else and none of this process will do so.
but i am extremely concerned at the way in which this process is going.
i am very concerned that we now have megaphone diplomacy across the english channel instead of cool heads sitting down and realistically looking at how we are going to solve these problems in the future between us.
what he said was that the good friday agreement came into being on the assumption that both ireland and the uk would be in the european union and that we needed to reword it when the uk leaves.
the proposed changes will enable the transmission of confidential statistical information between all authorities responsible for supervision and macro prudential oversight.
and the other point refers to the publication of sanctions.
personally i understand the logic of that approach and i can see why the ecb might want this discretion. there is however a legal inconsistency with the ssm regulation which states that the ecb shall publish a sanction whether there has been an appeal or not.
so the commission has no serious concerns with the approach taken by the ecb in its recommendation and by parliament in its opinion.
so the commission fully supports the objectives of the ecb recommendation.
the commissions legal services have however detected two legal inconsistencies between the ecb recommendation and parliament's draft opinion on the one hand and the regulation on the single supervisory mechanism on the other. one of those points relates to a legal base issue and concerns the power to sanction not only the ecbs own decisions and regulations but also directly applicable union law
since sanctions can have a major financial and reputational impact on banks and can be subject to legal challenge the rules should be clear and consistent and provide legal certainty.
i think therefore it is worth having a look at this point in order to try to resolve it in a common sense way.
the ecb and parliament's opinion as we just heard proposed to grant the ecb the flexibility to delay publishing sanctions until after any appeal has been concluded.
the ecb sanctions recommendation is important because it is part of implementing the banking union and we need it because it will give the ecb the means to enforce eu banking law and its decisions.
we welcome the ecb's proposal to align the regulation on the collection of statistical information to the central bank's new competences in the area of prudential supervision of credit institutions.
in terms of next steps the commission will adopt its own opinion in the weeks to come and we will continue to work with the council the ecb and parliament to ensure that the ecb possesses all the tools necessary for the effective enforcement of the applicable eu banking rules.
we are talking about what should be done for example i believe we should focus on the issue of emergency liquidity assistance in the environment of the banking union.
it shows the significance of the implementation phase that we have entered into into this area of financial services and it underlines the old saying about the devil always being in the detail.
as i said at the beginning the commission has already adopted its opinion on the statistics recommendation and it will adopt its opinion on the sanctions recommendation in the coming weeks.
i have heard the comments made this evening by members some of whom are still here about the importance of data remaining confidential about proportionality in reporting about equal treatment for all and the need for good supervision and i will obviously reflect on those.
i am grateful to the ecb for having prepared the two recommendations which i think provide a sound base for the european parliament the european commission and the council.
i think it is essential that we have strong and legally sound sanctioning regimes in place.
as i indicated earlier there are some technical legal issues about the legal base of one of the recommendations so i will continue to work closely with the parliament the ecb and the council to see that we can get a balanced outcome which i believe is what
i have tried to continue working on this report using his methods and vision.
i would also like to thank the shadow rapporteurs from all the political groups for their cooperation on this report and despite some of the differences on minor parts of the report i hope this goodwill will extend to the overall report being voted through tomorrow.
in the last parliament we made an unprecedented change to the role of the european central bank.
instead of just acting as a central bank with power over monetary policy we gave it powers to supervise the largest banks in the eurozone with the option for those member states outside the eurozone to also join the single supervisory mechanism.
the banking union has fundamentally changed the role and responsibility of the ecb.
while the ecb should continue to be independent from political influence in terms of monetary policy it is imperative that in its new function as banking supervisor it is accountable.
during earlier trialogues the parliament tried to include scrutiny processes and transparency in the ecb's operations and was often rebuffed yet we did make some huge steps forward in terms of information sharing with parliament so some democratic accountability is present within the process.
i have tried in this report to continue in this vein adding accountability and transparency wherever possible.
in the initial draft of this regulation when the ecb imposed a sanction upon a financial institution it could decide whether or not this sanction was made public.
there were no conditions or time limits attached.
it was entirely within their mandate to decide on whether or not to disclose.
while i can see reasons why in some circumstances not immediately publishing the fact that they have been sanctioned might be necessary for example in the case of a wider financial crisis situation or indeed worries about bank runs this should not be the norm.
the normal operating procedure should be immediate public disclosure. the prospect of a fine may not faze large financial companies but being on the front page of every newspaper poses a much larger reputational risk.
for this reason we have a compromise between political groups to ensure a three year time limit so that the ecb cannot wait any longer to disclose the fact that they have sanctioned a financial firm.
i am a firm believer in the concept of innocent until proven guilty.
therefore if we consider that part of the punishment for breaking the rules is that of reputational damage using a naming and shaming' approach then it seems to me logical that if a decision is subject to an appeal and may still be overturned we should allow a longer time period before disclosure to the wider market.
i believe adding in this safeguard ensures the fairness of the disclosure process and will increase the effectiveness of the sanctioning regime which will then increase the effectiveness of the ecb itself when exercising its supervisory powers.
i therefore hope that the majority of the european parliament political groups can continue to support this centrist position calling for increased transparency.
specifically on the gualtieri report i have little to add because quality of regulation depends on quality of the statistics that the supervisors are working on.
i honestly believe that the only way we get good quality supervision is good quality data.
i appreciate that as has become fairly obvious tonight there is a matter outstanding that has proven to be very controversial that of whether or not an appeal should be allowed before public disclosure.
i am sure the commission will advise the council on how they might balance the need for information to be made public versus the right of a company to appeal also bearing in mind that they need to balance the requirements of the ssm legislation with this report and indeed the procedures for disclosure by listed companies throughout the eu and the possible market abuse regulation and directive requirements too.
i am sure the commission will find a solution to this and i call upon my members tomorrow to send a strong message on the need for public disclosure.
against any member state;
at this point i would like to raise our great concern regarding the ppe's amendment introducing a broader derogation which allows delaying in an open ended manner the publication of the decisions imposing penalties with the phrase until all legal means of appeal have been exhausted'.
you would need popular consent for massive and permanent transfer payments from the stronger parts of the zone to the weaker.
you would need to deploy ruthless political power to impose structural and indeed cultural changes on the non powerhouse nations.
you do not have any of this and i for one pray you never get it because the right outcome is to dismantle the euro and let national currencies presided over by national governments accountable to national populations come into being once again. that way interest rate decisions could be taken to suit national economies and the exchange rate could serve as an adjustment mechanism to protect economic activity in the weaker parts.
your wish to indulge in incremental deepening of the ecb is perhaps understandable in the circumstances but this is a bodged repair job on a fundamentally unsound vehicle.
it is time you allowed the peoples of europe to cut their losses.
and you give us general statements about the ecb. can we not stick to good parliamentary discussion?
can you not stick to the topic of this debate?
above all he would see what engels called the doctrine of false consciousness' that when people vote they do not understand their true interest and it is for us to impose a better system on them.
i put it to you that he might find a few things that would make him feel rather at home.
i am reminded of that terrifying closing scene of orwell's animal farm' where the animals look from man to pig and pig to man and find that they cannot tell which is which.
he would see that we are governed not by an elected president or an elected system but by a twenty seven member politburo called the european commission he would look and see this rubber stamp parliament that would make him feel a little nostalgic he would see the series of five year plans by which we administer our affairs he would even see the fleet of special limousines and even special reserve shops for employees of the system and members of the nomenklatura.
nonetheless i hope that this motion might prompt among some colleagues a measure of self analysis. look at it from the point of view of a former soviet apparatchik analysing the european union.
this is something we should also be considering in the india free trade agreement as india also has a big textile sector that needs attention.
a few days ago bangladesh moved over one million people out of danger from an approaching cyclone.