kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
we also believe that it is important from a budget point of view that this programme which redirects structural funds does not set a precedent for the future.
all these things are important. those are the type of structural reforms that i think we should be supporting.
when in some member states the structural funds have become almost the only source of public investment the way in which this money will be spent becomes absolutely crucial.
yes this proposal could have been shaped as a powerful instrument to say to these member states you go through difficult times and we will support you. unfortunately this chance has been missed.
for my group this proposal is far too unspecific in the aims it should reach for member states and could thus become a tool to impose unwanted structural reforms in the member states rather than supporting member states in difficult situations.
the commission will analyse those requests ensuring equal treatment;
how right he was and how that power has shifted. when kohl and mitterrand came here representing their countries twenty five years ago it was a partnership of equals. but no longer. france is now severely diminished trapped inside a currency from which frankly it cannot recover and the french voice in this relationship and in europe is little more now frankly than a pipsqueak.
well there is i think a bright star on the horizon.
i hope and pray that britain voting to leave the european union will be the beginning of the end of a project which however noble its original intentions has gone rotten.
it is called the british referendum and given that none of you want to concede britain the ability to take back control of our own borders a brexit now looks more likely than at any point in modern time.
and when we have a general election that says a country like greece wants to change direction well i am sorry but that now must be brushed aside because the germans do not want it.
in what must count as perhaps the worst piece of public policy seen in modern europe for half a century when you compounded the already failing and flawed eu common asylum policy by saying to the whole world please come to europe' and we saw frankly virtually a stampede and we learn that eighty of those that are coming are not syrian refugees in fact what you have done is to open the door to young male economic migrants many of whom i have to say behave in a rather aggressive manner quite the opposite to what you would ever expect to see from any refugee.
you said europe is not working so we must have more europe more of the same failing.
it is an irony is it not that a project that was designed to contain german power has now given us a totally german dominated europe.
day. so it was your decision to suspend the schengen rules and to open the german border and it was your decision to close the border
turning to the issue of migration and refugees again a similar
this has lasted long enough and it cannot go on forever.
we cannot really talk to one another using that kind of language.
will. i urge you to be more responsive to reality.
with? this is not the language of dialogue.
however it recalls that article two hundred and ninety is to be interpreted as meaning that the commission is autonomous in the preparation and adoption of delegated acts.
accordingly reference to consultation of experts should be contained in a recital not in the enacting terms.
mr president i think that we are all aware of the threat posed to public safety by terrorists.
the commission proposed this regulation two years ago.
however there is one institutional point of continued disagreement relating to the preparation of delegated acts and on this point i would like to make the following declaration on behalf of the commission.
the commission is ready to do its part notably by issuing guidelines on implementation before the new rules are applied which means eighteen months after the regulation enters into force.
today we are dealing with one aspect how to make it more difficult for violent extremists to obtain the ingredients for home made explosives.
the commission regrets that this principle was not respected and underlines that the present case cannot constitute a precedent. i hope however that tomorrow there will be a positive vote so that the council can formally adopt the legislation before the end of the year.
the commission takes note of the agreement reached by co legislators on article ninety one as well as the unanimity in council;
by acting at eu level we can guarantee a harmonised approach and create a level playing field for retailers and for the public.
the common understanding agreed between the three institutions is a reflection of that interpretation.
i do not need to recall the loss of life caused by indiscriminate attacks in recent years.
i think we have struck the right balance between safety and security which was our primary concern without adding red tape for companies for farmers or for hotels with swimming pools which need to be cleaned with chemicals.
transactions are reported and it is up to member states to define what kind of penalties will exist.
mr president this is an unusual example of the eu recognising a real problem which does need to be addressed internationally though not necessarily by the eu.
the problem with passing a law which prohibits people from purchasing something is that the longer the process takes the greater the chance of the purchasers in this case would be terrorists stockpiling the items in advance of the ban.
i think it would have been preferable initially to agree internationally to enlist the support of the industry in adopting a voluntary code of practice and then to encourage all countries including member states to pass legislation without delay.
mr president this report seeks to generate a regulation to restrict members of the public from purchasing and to require notification concerning sales of a large number of substances which are commonly used for legitimate purposes.
the uk does not need the eu to tell it how to manage the availability of such substances.
this is a regulation which seeks to extend the power and dominion of the eu using the prevention of terrorism as a pretext.
it will disrupt their plans to harm our societies. this regulation represents a clear improvement in public security and will also simplify matters for suppliers by establishing a harmonised set of rules across europe.
the commission will continue to work in other areas too to help reduce the threat from terrorism.
i will give you one example to explain what i mean and that is the work of the radicalisation awareness network which exchanges best practices between those who work on the ground with people at risk of being drawn into violent extremism.
there are many others which show that we should take these matters very seriously and tackle them from different angles.
i have to say that this is a very important eu innovation.
there are indeed new provisions in the regulation to make sure that interdependencies between social and safety aspects are adequately addressed by easa.
this mechanism enhances the cooperative nature of the oversight system in europe.
i have taken good note of your comments.
in the second part of the year we intend to issue reports on social issues in the aviation sector.
let me also inform you that the commission will continue to work on this during the year.
on the question of oversight let me say that the proposal includes a balanced and effective oversight support mechanism.
i believe that we have a common understanding in considering this compromise as the right answer to the need to maintain a high level of civil aviation safety under the current challenges of growing traffic while ensuring the competitiveness of european aviation.
first on social conditions this topic has not been forgotten during negotiations.
the agency is already working on those issues including in urban areas through the socalled urban aviation space or u space' as we normally call it.
it is driven by a clear timeline and planning of the activities and reserves the possibility to take further measures to ensure safety if necessary.
in the future easa will play a role in aviation security including cybersecurity and contribute upon request with its expertise to the implementation of rules in this area.
this new mechanism will represent an important instrument for a high and uniform aviation safety in europe. let me finally mention that the commission has prepared a declaration concerning the global navigation satellite system as previously announced during the negotiations.
this is in particular the case for the safe operation of drones with new provisions regarding registration of drones and drones' operations.
in practical terms we are changing the certification process to be more tuned in for innovation which means shortening time to market and keeping our industry more competitive. this regulation closes the existing gap in the regulatory system and introduces effective cooperative safety management processes. importantly it includes a system of pooling and sharing of resources between the member states and easa and establishes better governance for our aviation
allow me to underline other key benefits of the new regulation. it takes into account new technologies and market developments to ensure that they are efficiently integrated into the aviation system as well as subject to effective and proportionate oversights.
this will contribute to our common strategic objective of achieving a deeper and fairer internal market while fostering innovation with a strong positive impact on jobs and growth.
this new regulation is also a centrepiece of the commission's two thousand and fifteen aviation strategy for europe ensuring safe secure and environmentally friendly aviation for eu citizens.
a safe and competitive european aviation industry needs an effective and balanced legislation such as the one which you will vote on tomorrow.
it does so through a better use of resources the enforcement of risk and performance based requirements and by eliminating unnecessary administrative burdens.
i wish to thank again parliament and particularly mr marinescu for the strong support on this important topic.
another very important point for parliament was the establishment of an oversight support mechanism. this objective has been achieved.
this regulation also takes into account the interdependencies between aviation safety and aviation security.
you can compromise on a lot of things but transparency is fundamental.
why would you protect multinational corporations and not protect the small and mediumsized enterprises?
then we can discuss tax levels and so on.
we need to demand that companies report the full breakdown of their figures in each country not only in eu states and countries on a future eu tax blacklist which we know will be a very limited list.
madam president public countrybycountry reporting is the single most important action that we can take to lift the veil on profit shifting by multinationals which results as we know in eur five hundred billion in tax being lost each year.
the only people with anything to fear from tax transparency are tax cheats and their cheerleaders so why the question needs to be asked are you helping them?
and make no mistake its purpose is to continue to allow profit shifting to tax havens to go unhindered.
it should apply to those making more than eur forty million.
it is appalling i have to say that conservative groups in this house have introduced a socalled safeguard clause' on this global breakdown.
it is good that this information is to be publicly disclosed but it needs to be done in a sensible way.
this is a globalised economy that does not play by the same rules.
there is much agreement across this parliament on the measures to be taken.
in ireland's case the total take from corporation tax has doubled in the past three years now representing fifteen of the total tax take as against the oecd average of.
we must not give other regions of the world an advantage over the european union.
accepting these proposals would establish an uneven playing field with eu companies subject to more demanding requirements for public disclosure than their competitors from third countries.
with those considerations in mind we have worked hard to find a compromise that would be supported by all major political groups in parliament.
the ppe group has supported the commission's proposal from the very beginning.
we have made important concessions.
we do not want to discriminate against eu companies and that is why we oppose some of the rapporteur's amendments that simply put eu companies at a competitive disadvantage visvis their third country competitors and which would also make the business climate in the european union less friendly for investors. our objective is to strike a balance between the legitimate demand for more transparency on the one hand and the need to protect eu companies in order to guarantee more jobs and growth in europe.
the left side of this house insisted on much more radical proposals that would go far beyond the commission's draft and would undermine the oecd beps agreement.
and to put multinationals under pressure from public opinion to make sure that large companies pay their fair share of taxes in countries where they create value. this is yet another piece of european legislation aimed at eliminating the harmful practices of tax avoidance and tax evasion in europe.
the commission also paid attention to complement but not undermine the existing system of exchange of a country by country reporting by tax authorities.
first a growing public distrust in the fairness of the tax system and second the accountability of multinational companies towards our citizens.
mr rosati do you not feel ashamed to invoke competitive disadvantage for multinationals when our citizens are demanding fairness in taxation and when we see that there has not been any fairness and indeed that multinationals have been abusing our
frankly i don't understand your point.
i think the whole thing here is about public disclosure of tax information not about avoiding taxes or tax avoidance.
this tax avoidance is a task of tax authorities and we have to have trust in the national tax authorities that they do their job properly.
the other thing is that we have to take into account the uneven playing field.
if you put this requirement on eu companies and other companies american canadians japanese don't have the same obligation that would be harmful for our businesses.
but it raises more questions than it answers.
what for example does it tell us about the commission's future intentions?
we know the commission wants big companies to supply it with information on their eu and non eu operations for publication in an eu register.
the list is modest in length although no doubt it will cost companies a great deal of time and money to prepare the figures and also to have them audited as the proposal requires.
when the commission asks companies not just about tax they pay in different member states but also to disclose the nature of activities in third countries the number of employees in each location the related net turnover and accumulated earnings we can deduce that the eu aims to not only harmonise
corporation taxes but also to introduce taxes based on wealth capital and turnover rather than profits and to challenge existing tax residency and transfer pricing rules.
when multinational corporations realise this some of them will ask themselves why they should bother investing time effort and capital in the eu rather than somewhere else.
some will rightly conclude that markets are growing much faster elsewhere in the world and that bigger profits can be made without endangering themselves to the avarice of an eu commission running out of other people's money which is shortly about to have a budget crisis when its second largest net contributor the united kingdom leaves.
there are only so many eggs you can get out of a golden google!
with country by country reporting public authorities will have all the opportunities to fight tax fraud and tax evasion.
because in reality what is happening is that we are supporting international agreements in the framework of oecd and the proposal of the commission.
but our socialist friends are undermining these international agreements. come on tell us why are you undermining the international cooperation that is needed in order to fight tax fraud?
and how will it look in the future when the european union is not sticking to the international agreements and when other partners are saying it is not ideal to have agreements with you.
that is political fraud to undermine the international cooperation for fighting tax fraud and you should be ashamed or vote for us tomorrow.
i think that is something we have to be careful about.
vnuk is the law until it is changed. my country ireland along with other member states has not changed domestic law as it is required to do if this issue is not challenged.
in the meantime citizens all over europe who use motor vehicles on private land will have no clarity about whether they require third party liability cover for their vehicles.
the commission has itself acknowledged on several occasions that the ruling adopted by the ecj is a problem and that it requires a quick solution but the commission has tiptoed around providing a solution.
we now have a legal limbo which must be addressed quickly by the commission otherwise it will have dramatic consequences for farmers the construction industry and indeed motor sports enthusiasts who will pay a hugely unfair price for a hugely unfair ruling.
likewise insurance companies will take advantage of the vnuk ruling.
the fact that today we do not have an efficient tool to solve the problem cannot be an excuse for not taking a position on an issue which is so important for more than three hundred zero non citizens living in the baltic states.
i would like to counter disinformation that is spreading in this house.
the estonian constitution was adopted twelve years before we joined the european union.
the problem is the same voting rights of so called aliens.
therefore across europe privatisation of key public services has to be reconsidered.
this reminds me not just of the enron crisis but also of the last financial crisis an example of where profits were privatised and the losses nationalised.
over the last sixteen years the company continued to pay increases to its shareholders.
for now we must prioritise securing the jobs and pensions of the carillion workers affected in my constituency and elsewhere.
madam president i would like to call this house's attention to the british government's terrible handling of the carillion crisis. carillion one of the uk government's biggest private contractors based in my constituency has collapsed today threatening the jobs and pensions of more than forty three zero employees. despite three warnings last year the government still decided to award two billion of new contracts to this
madam president the schengen area is the embodiment of the principle of freedom of movement in the european union.
around a million united kingdom citizens live outside of the uk mostly in that area.
these are people who have chosen to make their lives in the european union and it is a life choice that is about a great deal more than work.
these uk citizens have been badly let down by the lame agreement that the united kingdom government has negotiated for their futures.
ironically these are the uk citizens most likely to be young least likely to have the five years' residential qualification and most likely to identify themselves as european.
madam president journalism is a cornerstone of democracy holding those in power to account. the appointment of editor in chief of independent news media stephen rae to the eu expert group on fake news beggars belief.
mr rae talks of the widespread damage done by the wilful dissemination of false information and social media platforms.
what about the damage done by mr rae's sacking of a journalist for trying to uncover the quashing of penalty points for influential people including possibly himself or the damage done by his newspaper when its reporting aided a vicious fake news smear campaign against a garda whistleblower or how about the damage done to another journalist who is hampered from writing about the now commissioner phil hogan?
and more still is the damage done to democracy by his paymaster denis o'brien who is reported as having a chilling effect on news gathering and reporting in the public interest.
it is behaviour like this that damages trust in mainstream media and aids the spread of fake news.
there has been a ruling in the arbitration court so what are we debating here?
i first of all want to congratulate the rapporteur on the presentation of her report on financial assistance for energy projects. i strongly welcome this initiative which provides for the creation of a dedicated financial instrument to support the development of energy efficiency and renewable energy projects. the financing of projects in this area will help to stimulate economic recovery in europe and indeed in my own country ireland and help to create new employment opportunities and also help in the fight against climate change.
madam president last december the portuguese attorney general closed the case on the purchase of submarines from a german consortium after nine years of investigation based on strong suspicions of corruption fraud and money laundering.
this will be a high priority for the presidency as we wish to respect the deadline set by the european council calling for a review and update of the internal security strategy by mid. two thousand and fifteen in december last year the council adopted conclusions
it also provides for a reinforced system of extended powers of confiscation or confiscation from a third party.
the new directive on the freezing and confiscation of proceeds of crime adopted by the european parliament and council in two thousand and fourteen provides broader opportunities for confiscating the proceeds of crime in cases where a conviction cannot be delivered because the person concerned has absconded from justice or has fallen ill.
one of these key principles is that the renewed internal security strategy should identify the main common threats and challenges.
criminal groups can amass huge profits from the various criminal activities and markets and it is generally agreed that disrupting and recovering the financial flows of a criminal group is an efficient way to stop crime
two thousand and fifteen the council attaches great importance to the eu anti corruption report which was issued for the first time by the commission on three february.
we believe it will provide further incentives for the member states to ratify and effectively implement the existing anti corruption instruments.
the council is looking forward to the commission's initiatives in this respect.
nonetheless during the negotiations leading up to the adoption of the instrument the council and parliament felt that still more could be done in this field.
six hundred organised crime groups were active in the european union. criminal organisations are becoming increasingly flexible and are diversifying their activities.
two thousand and ten this cycle ensures an operational response to organised and serious international crime through optimised coordination and cooperation between national law enforcement authorities eu institutions agencies and other relevant partners.
the council has been continuously engaged in a range of initiatives targeting organised crime and corruption and has been treating them as a matter of the highest political priority.
it is our obligation to guarantee our citizens a general area of justice freedom and security by preventing and combating serious and organised crime as well as corruption.
as a result criminal groups are increasingly capable of influencing the operation of the legal markets and even the institutional and political processes across the eu by engaging in corrupt practices.