kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
however brexit presents a frightening prospect for the romanian diaspora in the uk who are increasingly on the receiving end of often violent racist abuse. indeed over night of twenty three june two thousand and sixteen a group of romanian children who regularly played out on the streets in manchester were called indoors by their parents who were worried for their safety in the increasingly hostile environment. to my knowledge those children are still deprived of the freedom to play out with other children. it's a sad indictment of brexit britain that people who suffered under totalitarianism now feel anxious and unwelcome in their adopted home.
this is something that will get even bigger and that we need to address.
this is really important when we have an internal market like the eu with many cross border transactions.
but one very important issue that is not covered by this reform but which the eu needs to look into urgently is the exemption of vat for the aviation sector.
online shopping is on the rise;
it is not coherent to exempt the aviation sector from vat when other sectors are subject to it especially when the commission presents a green deal and needs to make all its legislation aligned with the commitments taken during the cop twenty one in paris.
tax administrations need to be properly staffed to be able to fight tax evasion and unfortunately this is not always the case. this reform is part of a series of vat reforms to improve our vat rules in the european union.
but while citizens consumers and small and medium businesses do pay their share with effective tax rates that may go up to forty or even more sometimes many large multinationals do not and this is not acceptable anymore.
and third how is the commission preparing the implementation of the outcome of such international deals?
parliament expects an active role of the commission.
it deprives countries from their sovereign decision to tax corporate profits to finance public services;
we should not ring fence the digital economy but we should look at all multinationals that are increasingly finding ways to elude taxes.
this is simply not fair.
on behalf of the committee on economic and monetary affairs today i present a resolution and oral questions on these reforms and we urge the commission and member states to act and agree on a joint and ambitious eu position in these negotiations.
indeed according to the corporate tax statistics by oecd there are countries where the corporate tax rate is basically zero and we can't accept that anymore.
the second we encourage a minimum rate to be set at a fair and sufficient level to discourage profit shifting and prevent damaging tax competition.
we talk a lot about building a level playing field but what we have today on tax matters is not level at all.
the first one how does the commission intend to ensure a common eu position in the current international discussions on tax challenges posed by the digitalisation of the economy?
these situations not only create problems of social justice but also relevant market distortions and unfair competition.
i thank the commissioner for being here today to answer our questions.
europe can play a fundamental role in shaping this debate only if we are united only if we speak with one voice.
our citizens demand tax justice and it is time to give them an answer.
yes we want to reward efficiency we want to reward innovation but that should take place within a fiscal framework that applies the same tax rules to everyone. that is why we welcome the commitment of one hundred and thirty five countries that are negotiating at the oecd level a reform to address these challenges.
so let me conclude dear commissioner and dear colleagues by saying that it's time to modernise our tax rules to ensure that big companies pay their fair share of taxes where the value is created and where the economic activity is taking place.
the first one we should reform the allocation of taxing rights going beyond the concept of physical presence in order to include all large firms with an active engagement and interaction with customers and users also by digital means.
and most importantly it increases inequalities and puts most of this fiscal burden on less mobile taxpayers workers and consumers.
the current international fiscal regime creates competitive distortions among players;
and the second how does the commission intend to ensure that the ongoing international discussions around pillar one are coherent and consistent with eu proposals in this field?
for many countries this means losing huge portions of tax revenues that could be used to address increasing needs in education health care public services and pensions not to mention investments in physical and digital infrastructures in research and development
one is as many of you have said administrative cooperation will be key in this process and member states' tax authorities should make full use of the new and existing instruments.
we will work hand in hand.
i would like to inform you that the commission will organise a conference to discuss how tax compliance and the fight against fraud can be improved.
from this conference we will bring results to the new action plan on fighting fraud and ensuring compliance as i said before.
you can count on my full commitment to work with you in the next five years to ensure a fair tax environment in europe.
as you know the commission is not involved in the appointment process but for sure we appreciate the two new members of the executive board and their qualifications and we share the european parliament's commitment that was repeated here by several honourable members
to a more adequate gender balance in the bank and in all our economic bodies.
we have a great interest in listening to your views also on macroeconomic policy making in the euro area.
on this let me add just one remark. i think that in recent years the burden to stimulate the european economy has fallen excessively on monetary policy in the euro area.
for a more balanced and more effective policy mix it should be supported by structural reforms and fiscal policy.
fiscal policy whilst bearing in mind debt sustainability especially in highly indebted member states can provide a boost to domestic demand and raise inflation expectations.
model so for this reason i think that the discussion was useful.
we have to cooperate with the presidency because they are formally leading in this discussion and i think we will have a very good cooperation with the croatian and then german presidencies. i will be very clear;
we are fully committed to a global solution.
it is not something that we are doing without real commitment despite the difficulties in these times of all multilateral negotiations that we have to know and recognise but we are fully committed.
this doesn't mean that we don't have alternatives so as i've said before the task i was given by the president is to work on this global oecd solution with all our tools and commitment
i do not hear your question.
madam president we know that the ecb going into next year's financial or strategic review is a house divided.
i welcome the new president's call for fiscal stimulus to be used to complement monetary policy.
but the irony isn't lost on any of us who have been at the receiving end of its threats and blackmail that the ecb has been the chief enforcer of austerity over the past decade. now that the manufacturing base in the northern states is threatened it seems that the tune is changing.
the ecb review needs to be more than just a bun fight between the so called hawks and doves.
we need a serious analysis of the consequences of ecb policy and its impact on people right across the eurozone including the dangerous housing bubbles pricing a generation out of the market.
so all options must now be on the table going forward including direct payments to households and a direct green investment scheme.
it's not getting enough clicks the engagement rate is pathetic and in general there is a lack of good content.
i want to give you all here direct feedback.
first the storylines don't make any sense in one episode we are saying the eu stands for peace and in the next we are rushing to build up our military.
second the characters are hard to follow i don't know any of you.
if ratings don't improve the whole thing will soon be cancelled.
we expect the european central bank its executive board from its president to those who are now appointed to play their role in the european priorities. we have to move forward being able to agree on smaller things but also on the hard reforms.
we cannot keep betting on the prolongation of this economic cycle without doing anything else.
we cannot rely solely on monetary policy which is of the utmost importance but is not sufficient. we need a strong investment plan and we have to build a budget for the stabilisation that we know we'll need in the difficult moments that eventually will come sometime.
we need to act on the climate and on the economy but also on social cohesion.
the ecb has an important role and we have to analyse its mandate taking into account modern european priorities.
but we will also hold these executive board members accountable for its president's pledge to keep the previous stance of monetary policy throughout this next term because this is where it will make a difference if we have from the european central bank and from its executive board the trust that monetary policy will keep its adaptive stance.
and then we have to do the rest on the rest of the economic policy.
monetary policy has successfully used the instruments at its disposal to stimulate the economy and as a result it has averted a serious threat of deflation. i'm glad to see a discussion on your agenda on these two appointments specifically for two reasons.
firstly for reasons of democratic accountability.
the treaties enshrine the independence of the european central bank and this is a principle that the commission defends wholeheartedly but independence and accountability are two sides of the same coin.
secondly as you can see from the composition of the college and the cabinets of commissioners this commission is committed to the promotion of gender equality. it is my conviction that public institutions such as the commission and the ecb have a particular responsibility in this respect.
as you were very right to point out in your resolution earlier this year all of us working in the economic field need to move to do more on this front. however we need to be careful to facilitate the functioning of the ecb in these important times not least when the institution is not to blame for faults in the nomination process.
it should also be highlighted that the ecb itself has stepped up its efforts on that front in recent years.
i know you will make sure that it continues to strive for gender equality under the leadership of president lagarde.
you gave us power and freedom to shape our own lives.
you gave us tougher carbon targets to try and protect us from dangerous climate change.
you stand up for us on the global stage.
and most critically of all when the north west was starved of opportunity you believed in us.
this is not the end.
the north west of england is still best served by living in an open tolerant country working with our neighbours and the eu and it breaks my heart that we're walking away from all of this.
mr president i just wanted to underline the fact that the council has already confirmed that it will approve the european parliament position if parliament adopts its position on the first reading
in such a case the process will be on track to be completed less than four months after the commission presented the proposal.
i think that such swift decision making on a crisis instrument like macro financial assistance is very relevant in general and is absolutely needed for jordan.
do you want to address this before i speak?
it's not because of vladimir putin or donald trump or little green men from mars. it's because at every step the eu has chosen to give less when it could have offered more.
instead of being generous to david cameron theresa may or margaret thatcher john major or even tony blair it has chosen to make life difficult and the result is that the fifth largest economy on the planet a permanent member of the un security council a founding member of the council of europe is leaving.
german french and scandinavian taxpayers will now have to pay more.
many eu members will get much less.
european influence in the world will decline.
mr johnson looks forward to negotiating a fantastic deal with the eu but the eu again wants to offer less restricting trade and self determination. please learn the lessons of brexit.
our nations and citizens have always achieved most when we've embraced a free market free trading culture.
so be generous do a fantastic deal support my constituents' democratic wishes in the east midlands and in return the uk will support our european friends to be greener safer richer and happier.
i wish that the member states would finally do their duty and accept that there is an obligation to use the existing systems rather than every time it turns out they failed to share information coming up with something new.
have a system in place and member states are not using it they are not feeding information into it and they are not checking it.
finally and this was also one of the priorities of parliament we wanted equal treatment of land air and sea borders and we did not get it.
i also think that the justification used namely the paris attacks is a very strange one because what turned out to be the case was that member states were not sharing information and terrorists were able to cross internal borders without problems;
i think this is crazy because if everybody is submitted to systematic checks at airports but there can be exceptions for land and sea borders then you do not need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that next time you take the car.
it seems the commission does not consider that necessary when it is about security and fundamental rights.
so again we are finding solutions to the wrong problem.
we wanted risk assessment at the european level based on common european criteria but that was impossible.
we also wanted a risk based system proportional and necessary rather than the default setting of systematic checks.
the eu will provide financial assistance to member states to help them implement the new rules and in turn like others here i trust that the member states will do their utmost to be ready on time and that the new measures will translate into immediate and tangible results.
however if a systematic consultation of databases leads to a disproportionate impact on the flow of border traffic then member states will have the option of carrying out targeted checks against the databases provided that they first carry out an appropriate risk assessment.
as we have just heard these checks are vital to stopping amongst others potential terrorists not just from coming into the eu but also to prevent them from travelling to conflict zones.
in the case of airports again as we have just heard this option is generally only available for a transition arrangement of six months unless an airport has specific infrastructure problems in which case an exception can be made to extend that transition period up to eighteen months.
the amended schengen borders code together with the european border and coast guards are crucial in our bid to preserve freedom of movement within the schengen area and to ensure the security of our citizens.
we now need to press ahead with work on reinforcing the management and security of the eu's external borders including the work on the entryexit and etias proposals.
the amendment will oblige member states to carry out systematic checks on all persons crossing an external border.
this obligation will apply at all external borders air sea and land both at entry and exit.
controls at external borders are key to ensuring proper freedom of movement and security within the schengen area because in our opinion one simply cannot exist without the other.
in recent years europe has learned some very difficult lessons.
we must have more security on our external borders while ensuring that our controls are efficient and secure.
we cannot allow terrorists to hide behind the protection afforded to them by their european passports.
we must have modern legislation in place to respond to new and evolving threats.
the reinforcement of checks will make it easier for our law enforcement agencies to identify those people at the border.
the measures being proposed are a clear and important response in terms of keeping our citizens safe.
as we have seen the phenomenon of foreign fighters continues to plague our communities.
because we haven't had an impact assessment by the commission.
i know you weren't there commissioner when we started debating that but this is something which the commission hasn't proven it hasn't given us any proof that this will really make us more secure.
for me and for us as greens this revision is not necessary and it is not proportionate as others have already said.
let me give you one example because the problem is that member states don't feed all the information they have into the schengen information system.
i can give you a very concrete example.
they had an alert but they didn't say it was because of terrorism.
so we have to solve that first before we control each and every eu citizen coming in and out.
everybody wants european citizens to be safe but this regulation would not have prevented the attacks that took place across europe.
it will not work because the massive collection of data is not targeted. it is an infringement of the civil liberties of eu citizens and residents.
the commission has not even made an impact assessment to justify the regulation before pushing it through.
if europe wants to prevent terrorism it needs better use of existing data better cooperation between member states police and public prosecutors and it needs to promote conflict resolution instead of fanning foreign conflicts and wars.
since then we have seen the impact of that across her nation.
we have even now seen her making apologies for the mistakes that she said she made.
on this side of the house you heard people say that you needed to have border controls checks to ensure that the people coming into the country were not terrorists could not commit crimes.
and yet here in this paper today and i quote from its own line says that border controls are in the interests of member states.
those of us on this side of the house who have been saying that for years are now vindicated.
only the people of europe are saying why did it take you so long to come to the same conclusion?
madam president as we all know europe is facing huge security concerns from the current terrorist threat and the introduction of systematic checks at the eu's external borders is a tool that can contribute to dealing with the increase in foreign terrorist fighters.
so i support this targeted response in order to increase the security in europe and i welcome this report from my colleague ms macovei. however this approach can only work if there is access to reliable data in eu databases such as the schengen information system and national and international databases.
so strengthening information systems and working towards interoperability is vital to the success of these checks.
i also welcome the flexibility in the regulation that will allow targeted checks.
overall this is not a silver bullet but if implemented properly it can play a useful part in shoring up europe's security at the point of entry in order to detect threats from terrorism and serious organised crime.
well the whole idea in a democracy is that the powers of public authorities are limited to what is necessary and proportionate and that also applies to things like privacy for example or other fundamental rights.
if we are all talking about the need for more security then why don't we tackle the real problem namely the insufficient sharing of information between member states in some cases the actual refusal of member states to share information rather than creating new it systems the whole time paid for by public money incidentally if we know that it is not going to solve the problem?
well i agree with your last point that we should not be spreading fear and i think that having necessary and proportionate responses to the very threats that are creating insecurity amongst our citizens would be one way of doing that.
and i really believe yes that politicians who would like to send a very strong message in order for our citizens who vote for us to be in these positions to feel safer that we should be the ones to respond.
not with hysteria not with far and extreme populism but in order to send a very necessary and proportionate response.
as we heard in the previous discussion security is one of the major concerns of our citizens and we believe that the reinforcement of checks against relevant databases will reinforce our external borders and strengthen our knowledge about who enters and leaves our
shared space and that can have an impact.
i have seen myself at charles de gaulle airport where they already implement the systematic checks the impact that that can have in terms of the increased knowledge about people who are arriving and in a significant number of cases there the controls that they were able to conduct as a result of that knowledge.
we are not in these proposals creating new databases.
this is about checks against the relevant specified databases.
but i do agree completely with those who have underlined how important it is that those databases are properly used and properly supplied by the member states in particular the most important and significant of these databases i believe the schengen information system;
which is precisely why in the proposals that the commission brought forward in december which you are going to be discussing we have made a number of suggestions for strengthening the schengen information system and for the first time we are proposing the introduction of an obligation on member states to
share information with that system regarding terrorism.
i hope that you will support that.
i agree that we need borders that are not just resilient but also functioning and that is why as a number of speakers have underlined there are elements of flexibility that are included in these proposals and those depend
on risk assessment.
so i hope you will support those elements of the proposal as well.
we do need to be very careful about effective implementation;
on this as on all of the issues relating to this area of the security union.
that is why i am glad that the commission has undertaken to present an evaluation on the implementation of these proposals to parliament within two years following the entry into force of the regulation.
the new entity has to be efficient and sustainable but it also has to guarantee media pluralism.
we also agree with honourable members on the importance of public broadcasting.
therefore i would just like to insist again that the commission has not called for the closure of any particular entity in the context of the second economic adjustment programme for greece.
prices have started falling in recent months and inflation is well below the euro area average. this together with an improved wage flexibility is helping to restore the competitiveness of the greek economy and the current account balance is clearly improving as well.
according to our spring forecast the recovery is expected to start by the turn of the year. government bond spreads have fallen markedly in recent months and the june economic sentiment indicators stayed broadly at their may level when they showed sentiment up. sixteen five points in one year to a five year high.
investors are showing renewed interest also attracted by the significant improvement in the ease of doing business over the last year.