kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
that is the question that we have to answer here today.
this goes for hungary as it goes for any other member state.
it is on this basis that appropriate decisions and the next steps should be taken in accordance with our rules.
the presidency is very well aware of the concerns which have been expressed by members of this house over some aspects of the legislation recently adopted in hungary including the new constitution.
member states' compliance with eu law must be ensured but the process must be based on a solid and fact based analysis and there should be a dialogue with the member state.
i therefore expect that hungary will meet the obligation it has accepted as a member of the european union and i am aware that the prime minister of hungary has sent a letter to the president of the commission. i hope that this letter and the work being done also in the debate today will ensure that a solution is found to this very
the presidency supports these actions.
the retirement age of judges and the independence of the data protection authority.
we all share a strong interest in hungary living up to its application under eu law and in the process for determining whether this is or is not the case being fair and thorough.
the commission has expressed a number of specific concerns and has taken steps to ensure that the hungarian legislation is brought into accordance with eu law. therefore it has decided to launch infringement proceedings on three issues the independence of the national central bank
the concerns that have been raised about the recent developments in hungary must be treated with the seriousness that the situation deserves.
at the same time it is sending a wider information request to the hungarian authorities on the issue of the independence of the judiciary.
it is the duty of all member states to act in accordance with these treaties.
we appreciate the thorough analysis the commission is undertaking.
if there are any doubts whether a member state's laws are in accordance with the eu rules the commission should examine and analyse the situation thoroughly.
let me be absolutely clear all eu member states must comply with the rules of the treaty.
it is the first time we have debated infringement proceedings of this nature in this institution and in the presence of the highest european authorities including no less than the prime minister of the country at the centre of the debate.
but it also means that we must distinguish between the legal process the due process and the public political debate.
we should therefore give time for the legal process to take place and hold back from jumping to conclusions until this process led by the commission is completed.
further action on our part at this stage is not just premature but could also do more harm than good because it would damage the respect that our institution enjoys with the hungarian people as much as it would damage the image of hungary.
this unprecedented situation calls for us to assume our respective responsibilities but also to respect each other's institutional role.
i would like to tell mr alvaro that we must also support the commission if it decides not to start article seven proceedings.
this house can very well express its political views but this is not a tribunal and it should not replace the legal and judicial process.
this means that we must allow time for the matter to be discussed and hopefully resolved between the commission and the hungarian authorities and the declaration of prime minister orbn in this sense is very much to be welcomed.
the time has come for this parliament directly elected and representing the eu's citizens to prove it is capable of sending the right political message.
the independence of the judiciary is under severe threat as the right to appoint judges and to promote them belongs to only one person the chief of the national judiciary office elected for nine years by a two thirds majority of the parliament which in fact means fidesz.
if we have to discuss the basic values of the european union i do not think it is a good thing to have the type of reaction we have seen today.
it is simply the summary of all the facts and all the complaints that you can find in official letters from official international authorities and official international organisations the president of the commission the secretary general of the council of europe
whether there exists a clear risk of a serious breach of our values.
mr president ladies and gentlemen hungary is not the reason for the complete failure of the european union and the collapse of your system.
it is you who made all those decisions which resulted in mass unemployment mass poverty and mass suffering across europe. so it is very interesting and very bizarre that you teach us democracy.
what is democracy about?
democracy is about representing your people.
do your people in greece in portugal and so on the poor the unemployed want you to sit here for hours and hours and spend all the resources of the european union on discussing the retirement age of hungarian judges and the hungarian data protection ombudsman or would they want you to confess your sins?
because they approve of the polish government and they disapprove of the hungarian government purely for ideological reasons.
because of the disease of double standards. but there is also another disease not to trust people.
many important issues were raised during this important debate.
the question is now how to ensure that hungary's legislation is in accordance with community law and principles in a process that is as fair and effective as possible.
as i said to begin with the concerns about the developments in hungary must be treated with the seriousness that the situation deserves.
the presidency strongly supports the work done by the commission.
it is also my clear expectation that the hungarian government will ensure that the legislation recently adopted complies with eu law and i welcome the statement by prime minister orbn today that the issues at hand
we need a legislative framework in place to keep up with the technological developments of the past twenty years.
the wording on the test methods for nanomaterials has been strengthened while taking into account environmental and consumer protection.
let me also comment on two other issues.
the regulation also makes it easier for traditional food from one or more third countries to be placed on the internal market. this is particularly welcome for developing countries attempting to export their traditional products.
rejecting the delegate deal with the council and commission would risk extending the shelf life of an old regulation that is no longer fit for purpose and that is slow to respond to market needs and safety concerns. our agri food sector is constantly changing constantly adapting and improving.
i am pleased with the substantial progress that has been made on a number of issues and i would like to thank the shadow rapporteurs the commission and all who worked on this to bring it thus far.
some did want novel food to be authorised by delegated acts but there is a confusion here. if we are a parliament representing the people of europe we have to act as a parliament it is up to us to set the legal framework not to implement it. we are the legislature
food consisting of isolated from or produced from cell or tissue cultures derived from animals plants micro organisms fungi or algae is now explicitly mentioned in the scope of the regulation.
not the executive branch of government. the concept of parliament deciding on authorisations for companies seems to me a very strange one.
it will not compromise our safety standards which are the highest in the world and we are rightly proud of them.
the transparency of the process has been significantly strengthened by obliging the commission to publish the summary of every application and through the fact that the list of rejected applications should be publicly available.
the novel foods regulation has had a long and arduous history.
the precautionary principle is explicitly mentioned in the articles as a main factor for the commission in deciding whether to propose to authorise a novel food.
nevertheless and quite rightly any food imported from these third countries must meet our high quality standards.
we must always be prepared for change.
to sum up i want the european food sector to continue to lead rather than follow.
for example with regard to nanotechnology and cell tissue cultures the new innovations must have a proper legal framework securing food safety standards.
on the environment this regulation should take into account a high level of protection and improvement in the quality of the environment.
in conclusion innovation will be facilitated without compromising on food safety.
to improve transparency the commission would also make available on its website a summary of applications as well as a list of applications that did not result in authorisation.
a good outcome.
this approach will ensure that innovation in the food sector can lead to the placing on the market of new scientificallyassessed safe foods.
we already know that these particles take on different characteristics to their bulk counterparts.
there may well be benefits to the technology but we cannot simply railroad through legislation without developing a fit for purpose safety risk assessment.
we must have longitudinal studies on the impact of this technology on the environment and human health.
mr president the eu has a proud track record of protecting consumers' rights and making sure that the food that ends up on our plates is safe to eat while keeping pace with innovation.
in the committee on international trade inta of the european parliament we safeguarded the precautionary principle when dealing with foodstuffs that are new to us but have traditionally been consumed safely in other countries. we called for parliament to retain the power to veto any decision to update the list of new foods authorised to access the eu market.
without these elements we risk losing the careful balance that we hold dear in the eu between innovation and safety.
i urge colleagues from all political groups to pursue legislation that helps the eu to keep us and our food safe.
therefore only safe nanotechnologies will be allowed.
this was indeed a technically difficult and politically sensitive report and it is quite a challenge to get the balance right on this one.
it is an important report reflecting the need to find a resolution which informs and protects consumers across the eu.
i believe that the compromise text goes some way to providing this and i would encourage this house to look carefully at the text before voting later on the report.
in relation to cloning i believe that this issue should be addressed outside the remit of the report and that ongoing discussions should be based on clear scientific evidence.
products should be clearly labelled and ensure that food safety is of paramount importance.
it is also important that the text of this report is reviewed regularly to take into account scientific and technical developments within the industry.
this will ensure that the regulation is fit for purpose and delivers for both consumers and processors.
this was a particularly delicate file to try to move forward and it was not easy at times. we had tremendous difficulties and it was tough but during that tough time we acted in a very professional way and i pay tribute to them.
i know there are many concerns about cloning but that is the responsibility of others;
that is the responsibility of another file.
quite clearly on nanomaterials the definition has been moved to reflect safety concerns of parliament and will be updated to reflect a scientific process through a delegated act.
the words used are that it should be appropriately labelled for the final consumer'.
regulation on novel foods is complex expensive and time consuming. it is a burden for the applicants and disadvantageous to the economies of member states and we believe that the extremely complex eu bureaucracy is interfering in decisions that should be made in our national parliament. why should britain support this authorisation procedure? this proposal which authorises the commission to decide on the entire authorisation procedure in addition to the removal of old food categories will compromise consumers' confidence while causing legal uncertainty for operators.
after those already concluded with georgia and moldova a new mobility partnership was concluded with armenia on twenty seven october.
two thousand and eleven of course the extra incentives will be given as a matter of priority only to those countries that are firmly committed to the process of transformation and political reforms.
on money we have overhauled our financial assistance to make our financial incentives more effective.
we are advancing in the preparation of the european endowment for democracy. in addition we have stepped up our engagement with civil society organisations in belarus and syria as they can best support the necessary reforms and political change in those countries.
as for mobility we have already launched comprehensive dialogues on migration mobility and security with tunisia and morocco which aim at preparing mobility partnerships including agreements on repatriation of irregular migrants
the commission has already provided eur twenty million to the european bank for reconstruction and development to ensure that it can swiftly start its operation in support of the private sector.
it is no longer business as usual.
this is why we need to be persistent in our support to our partners.
egypt and tunisia.
while i am fully aware that much remains to be done let me give you a few highlights of what has been achieved so far.
it is because our destinies are linked and our security depends so much on what happens in these countries.
this explains why for example we have doubled our financial support to tunisia this year a country that has organised truly democratic elections and has made tangible progress in the areas of freedoms of expression and association.
the renewed enp is not only a partnership with governments;
it is also a partnership with societies.
unlike other existing instruments this facility aims at empowering civil society to participate more actively in the reforms.
i hope that the european parliament will support this ambitious approach. as for access to markets the commission has asked the council for a mandate to negotiate agreements on deep and comprehensive free trade areas with morocco jordan
looking ahead it will be important to secure adequate funding for our neighbourhood policy under the next financial framework.
this is not only because historic events are taking place on our doorstep.
in the east we have made progress on the dcfta with ukraine and have also decided to launch negotiations on dcftas with georgia and moldova.
the funding of the european investment bank was increased by eur one billion and ebrd eligibility was extended to the southern neighbourhood.
we have been working hard to deliver on extra european union incentives that to quote your report should be given to the neighbourhood countries to engage in the common goal of building deep democracy'.
implementation of the new enp approach needs to remain at the top of our political agenda.
but also on facilitation of visas for legitimate travel.
this is to fully respect the principle more for more' which is at the heart of the new european neighbourhood policy approach.
we have set up a new spring programme of eur three hundred and fifty million for the southern partners and will create a similar one for our eastern partners.
i am in favour of strong external borders;
this is a priority we are promoting across the board and i am glad the european parliament report shares that vision.
it cannot expand for ever so we have to make choices. but let me make it absolutely clear that those funds we have already reallocated to the neighbourhood policy instrument from the development cooperation instrument came from allocations for middle
in the meantime i need all the interaction and all the support you can provide because we are talking not only about a new neighbourhood but also about a new commitment a new engagement
it is that operational steering which will help us to address a number of issues.
i hope to be able to inform you in more detail on that occasion about what we are doing to deliver on the renewed enp and the results of our policy.
our neighbourhood policy will help those trying to break the political economic and social barriers to equality through measures ranging from enshrining women's rights in new constitutions and laws to practical ways of supporting women in meeting their everyday challenges.
we worked very hard to remove the wall dividing our continent and we should not at the end of the process try to rebuild that wall around our external borders.
income countries where absorption was low.
how exactly is it going to work?
i am in favour of defending strong external borders;
the first point is the importance of our addressing the internal and the external challenges at the same time because whenever we try to forget
trade goes hand in hand with institution building. we see the success story with the customs union in turkey.
it has brought reforms towards the rule of law towards better governance.
let us start considering and putting seriously on the table the extension of the customs union starting with egypt tunisia and libya.
it is a source of aspiration for millions of young people;
we should not let them go.
without a job they will fall into despair.
they will come to our borders.
it seems that we are at what i would call an awkward juncture in the history and the development of the european union.
we are personally as far as the union is concerned clearly in a very difficult situation and in a situation which is such that some of our member states or most of our member states might be less inclined to show generosity and comprehension
i am personally slightly distressed when i learn that several member states are for instance very reluctant to open their market to agricultural products coming from some of our southern neighbours.
at the same time these same governments same populations are extremely demanding when it comes to the democratic criteria that those societies should be fulfilling.
when you cannot develop your economy because you cannot export the products you are best at producing for the time being it is very difficult to build development.
we are the ones who insisted on elections.
we are the ones who insisted on having elections soon.
madam president the european neighbour policy nobly aims to promote in our nearest neighbours democracy human rights and prosperity.
the idea is more for more that is to say the closer they get to us the more aid trade and political concessions they get from the european union.
there have been widespread popular protests across the mediterranean southern shores brought about by the fall of despotic regimes and to the east continuing tension between azerbaijan and armenia over nagorno karabakh and georgia with russia and a clear deterioration in the democratic values in ukraine with the arrest of the leading opposition figures.
for now we must carry on giving financial and technical support to all these countries to stabilise them and prevent civil unrest and mass migratory movements in our direction.
madam president with this report we prove our willingness to show our neighbours that we will no longer acquiesce on the defence of democracy human rights and especially social justice.
we will no longer focus on short term stability at the expense of the best interests of the citizens of their dignity of constantly defending them and of their individual and collective freedom with a particular focus on women's and children's rights.
we need to promote immediate economic assistance in order to foster the kind of economic changes which are preconditions for long term stabilisation and prosperity.
it is a fact that by helping to solve the economic problems of our neighbour partners in the south we will also be solving part of our migration problems. allow me a word on ukraine.
ukraine is a sovereign state and it is up to its people to decide their future which i will welcome if it is a european one.
dear colleagues in conclusion and thanking you for this inspiring debate i would just like to leave you with one final idea.
last year showed us that we all support the same ideas for a new neighbourhood policy in our union.
we finally have the means and listening to commissioners fle's announcements we also have the financial resources.
now it is time to act and the faster the better.
for the effective needs and aspirations of the peoples of our neighbouring countries tomorrow is always too late.
madam president much attention has been given to the arab spring events and rightly so but this should not serve as an excuse for self inflicted blindness when one looks east.
in other words our stance will be noted and judged by the freedom seeking peoples of russia ukraine and belarus.
this is the dry answer.
in cases where the right to family life or the rights of the children involved are allegedly violated by the norwegian child welfare services it is for norway including its judicial authorities to ensure that fundamental rights and especially the rights of the child are effectively respected and protected in accordance with their national legislation.
but the convention does not preclude adoption without parental consent. on norway and yes i expected to be asked about the situation and about the position of the european union i can only repeat that due to the fact that norway is not a member state of the european union and moreover as i said already before the functioning of child welfare services is not governed by eu law but by national law the commission does not have any competence to intervene with the member states and it is
we all agree that the best interest of the child belongs among our highest priorities and that the brussels iia regulation tries to tackle the situation of crossborder disputes and the cross border scope and character of the problems which fully authorises the european union to take further action and well targeted legislative solutions
but it can be generally noted that article twenty one of the united nations convention on the rights of the child imposes on participating countries to ensure that the best interests of the child is the paramount consideration with regard to adoption.
even more difficult in the case in norway when it comes to the functioning of child protection and welfare services.
it is our duty to address the situation with the proper legislative act.
from the legal point of view i can only assure you that i try every time when i am contact with the regional authorities to raise this problem informally and the answer is always the same that everything is happening according to norwegian legislation.
the parents concerned can seek redress at the national level only through the competent national authorities such as through an ombudsman or through the courts and at the european court of human rights once they have exhausted domestic remedies.
conventions.
overall there is i believe ample opportunity to improve the sharing of information between member states.
this is an investment not only in their future but also in the foundations of the union.
it is our duty to protect those most vulnerable including adopted children. at the same time and i repeat it is important to understand that the issue of the adoption of children is a matter which is not regulated at eu level but by national laws and by some international
to conclude it is important that eu member states work together to prevent children falling into the hands of criminals.
the question is what is the eu doing? i will give you just a few examples.
as i said earlier the council awaits with great interest the commission proposal amending the brussels iia regulation.
which aims at facilitating access to alternative dispute resolution.
the council may adopt measures concerning family law with cross border implications following article.