lmms-lab-audio/europal-asr huggingface dataset:
Date: 2018-11-13
Mr President, I would like to address the Chancellor. Madam Chancellor, the German people have been very unfortunate in their leaders. Twice already in the last hundred years, they have plunged Europe into disaster. German militarism caused the First World War, destroyed the nations of Europe and ushered in Communism. The Second World War brought levels of depravity never seen before in Europe. Now you're bringing about disaster for a third time. European political and economic integration is disastrous but, worse than that, you have opened up Europe's borders to untold millions of migrants. Your decision to open Europe's borders to indiscriminately import millions of people will do untold damage to European societies for generations to come. The never-ending process of European integration will destroy democratic nation states. If Britain had a Prime Minister with any guts or backbone, we would have left long ago. Exit cannot come fast enough.
Date: 2018-11-13
Mr President, last but not least! I'd like to start by congratulating the rapporteur and by welcoming the proposal as the latter aims at strengthening national competition authorities, granting them more effective investigation, decision-making and sanctioning tools, considering that some national competition authorities do not have sufficient independence from political interference as well as all the tools they need to detect and tackle competition law infringements. I share the opinion that, in order to ensure protection of consumers and fair competition between companies in the internal market, strong and effective enforcement of EU anti-trust rules is of paramount importance. I believe that the new rules will ensure a level playing field in terms of powers and tools as all national competition authorities should have to properly enforce EU competition laws, investigate possible breaches and apply sanctions. Finally, dear colleagues, I would like to pinpoint that I support full independence of national competition authorities so they can carry out their work without undue influence.
Date: 2018-11-14
Madam President, I would like to thank colleagues for their contributions, some of which were more useful than others. I am particularly concerned at the attempts by one or two Members to roll into POPs discussions around agri-chemicals such as glyphosate. It is utterly irresponsible to stand up in this Parliament and imply that glyphosate is a POP. It is not. This legislation is far too serious to play those sorts of politics with. So, let's restrict ourselves to dealing with the persistent organic pollutants. As I said in my opening address, there is no disagreement here that we all would like to eliminate them. The point is about how we do it, the rate at which we do it and the methodology. For me, I would just make my point again, yes, it's true, as Ms Rivasi said, that there are studies that show that decaBDE , for example, has turned up in hair brushes. This is appalling, but I will bet my life that those hairbrushes were produced in the Far East. They were not produced in Europe, and they come from bad recycling. If we want to prevent that from happening, if we want the recycling to take place in Europe, by European companies bound by European rules, which will not then put the recyclates on the market for products like food contact materials and toys, according to our rules, then we have to take control of that process. Pretending that we're not going to recycle at all when we have legislation like the ELV Directive and the WEEE Directive in place is frankly ostrich-like. So, I ask Members yet again to re-examine their support of Amendment 30 or Amendment 37, and to look carefully at Amendment 30, which not only sets out recycling reductions because it takes four products, rolls them into five and gives the absolute maximum for all five, which is actually a reduction to 20% but it also has a review mechanism which would allow us in five years, if we can get best available technology in place in the European recycling industry, to recycle these products. It would allow us to be in a position where we could actually eliminate these. If you go ahead with Amendment 37, that is not an option on the table.
Date: 2018-11-14
Mr President, Mr Georgiou is in exile in the US for telling the truth. He communicated the correct numbers of the Greek economy at that time and the Greek public deficit figures. He shed the light on the biggest lies that led the Greek state and the EU into one of the most severe financial crises since the end of the Second World War. Even The Economist, two years ago, denounced the prosecution of Mr Georgiou as a violation of scientific freedom and human rights. Last October, the Financial Times reported that Mr Georgiou received an award for statistical integrity given by the world's leading statistical societies. Lastly, the think-tank Bruegel said last June: 'the European Union must defend Andreas Georgiou. The European Union also needs to reform its statistical framework to ensure a similar scandal cannot happen again.' What is at stake is the credibility of our European Union above the credibility of the Greek authorities. This is a very dangerous precedent. It is crucial that the statistical basis for our economic decision-making remains reliable and independent from political interference. What is at stake is the reliability and independence of the statistics office and authorities all across Europe.
Date: 2018-11-14
Very briefly, I am not an expert in the details of Greek politics, but I do not think that Mr Georgiou is guilty of causing the Greek crisis. A lot of things were done badly over many years, and the right way to proceed is not to prosecute civil servants who try to tell the truth. A precedent is being set for all EU Member States, so this is why we need to take action.
Date: 2018-11-29
Mr President, the Global Compact is important as it recognises that migration is a global challenge that requires a global response and solidarity. There is nothing binding. Richer countries have to share responsibility and, for example, do more resettlement. I regret that Trump turned them back but, even worse, that some Member States walked out. To just say 'go home and stay home' is no solution. No state can deal with migration alone. A common European response and global cooperation is the way forward to safe and legal migration because Europe must work with third countries, from prevention to combating trafficking, and to implement return. It is also crucial to invest in Africa in the long term. I was in Agadez in Niger with the European Parliament delegation and, thanks to the EU's effective action, we have reduced migration, we have saved lives, and we are combating trafficking: more of those partnerships. I look forward to participating, on behalf of the PPE Group, in the European Parliament...
Date: 2018-12-10
Mr President, when it comes to making legislation in this area, we should be guided by the principle of 'follow the science'. Independent science-led, evidence-based policymaking is, in my opinion, essential. Equally, citizens of the European Union are right to expect reasonable levels of transparency from our institutions. For the European Food Safety Authority , as for other agencies, increasing transparency will encourage and increase public trust in scientific decision-making and the safety of the food we eat. However, we must, of course, ensure that commercially sensitive material is adequately protected. If essential parts of confidential business information are not safeguarded, it would hamper innovation and have a particular impact on small and medium-sized enterprises. I also have sympathy for concerns about an increased national level of involvement in the EFSA risk assessment process, on the grounds that it could be subject to increased political involvement, particularly with regard to changes in how EFSA recruits its Management Board.
Date: 2018-12-11
Madam President, the decision to delay the meaningful vote at Westminster reflects widespread opposition to the Prime Minister's deal right across the political spectrum in the United Kingdom. Members of Parliament recognise that the backstop is a threat to Northern Ireland and the integrity of our Union. They recognise that it is an indefinite threat to the independence and sovereignty of the United Kingdom Parliament, and they recognise that without substantive renegotiation it cannot succeed in the House of Commons. Mr Tusk has said he wants to facilitate UK ratification without reopening the deal. Mr Juncker said this morning he is ready to offer clarifications. Quite frankly, to believe that this will succeed in the House of Commons is indeed magical thinking. So we face many questions. Is the EU serious about delivering a deal for all of its citizens? Is it genuine about avoiding a no-deal outcome? Is it sincere about protecting businesses and families in the Irish Republic relying on the Great Britain market? These questions matter.
Date: 2018-12-11
Madam President, terrorism is a major security challenge for European societies and European people. We have the obligation to protect our citizens' right to life and safety. Looking back to what happened in recent years, especially in Europe, I'd like to underline a few of the errors and failures in the European security system to counter terrorism, such as the weak security systems in some EU countries, intelligence failures, lack of intelligence sharing, problems with the different judicial systems, failures and low results in fighting radicalisation and fundamentalism, online recruitment, insufficient resources and, in many cases, a lack of police intelligence and security institutions' accountability and funding, and a lack of properly monitoring and defending EU external borders, especially not including countries like Romania, Bulgaria and Croatia, which defend the external borders mainly of the European Union. I welcome the report and I would like to add that the latter addresses the shortcomings measured earlier and focuses on strengthening the mechanism of cooperation information. Last, but not least, fighting terrorism has to stay as a priority of the Parliament.
Date: 2018-12-11
Mr President, I listened carefully to the Commissioner and I think we will have plenty of opportunities to explain the logic of some of our proposals, because clearly there are points that the Commissioner has difficulty with. On the other hand, I would have difficulty with a response, but we will have a dialogue and I am sure we will sort it out. I miss today some of our colleagues who have been very passionate in their contributions, those who have criticised the negotiations between the shadow rapporteurs and the rapporteur, or Mr Dalunde, who made a very passionate speech on the environmental and climate aspects. It's a pity that we did not experience some of that passion during the shadow rapporteurs' meeting. Some of us are more passionate in the debate in plenary, in front of the camera, and less passionate or, in the case of some of our colleagues, less present during the negotiations. I have just a couple of brief remarks. First, on the climate issues: yes, we can always include, in every single provision, a question on, let's say, climate proofing, or any other issue. But there is a clear-cut mention, it is there, it provides added value. What is not there is the definition of climate proofing, we are asking the Commission to look into the methodology and, of course, we will explore it. But is this legislation in which we should be defining, let's say, climate proofing, which clearly belongs somewhere else? And there are numerous examples of such cases. I actually think we have gone quite a way towards meeting some of the expectations so that, even on the environment and climate issues, this is a very solid proposal that we have. A final remark, on public procurement, just to give you an idea of something that we also looked at. We know that our companies have a problem of access to China, for example, so we have stipulated, in a clear provision, how we will treat, in tender procedures, offers in which, let's say, there is more than 50% participation of origin from a different state we know which state we are talking about and what we should do. So it is a very complex proposal that we are offering.
Date: 2019-01-14
Mr President, against because the S&D Group is open to having this debate, but we would prefer to have it tomorrow evening; not today. This will help us to have a more precise position during the debate. So we would like to have the debate, yes but tomorrow evening. There is a solution for this, because if you add this as a new item in the evening and you extend the session until 12.00 p.m., this is possible.
Date: 2019-01-15
Mr President, I would like to welcome Prime Minister Dăncilă. The Romanian Presidency will be that country's first presidency and the last presidency before the European elections. So this will be a very important presidency, and let me focus particularly on the Sibiu summit, because the Sibiu summit is our last opportunity to project another kind of Europe for all citizens across Europe before the European elections. So let me tell you what our expectations are, our wishes for the kind of Europe we'd like to project using the Sibiu summit. We think that you are coming up with the right priorities. In order to have strong unity among Europeans cohesion is certainly the key word as you said: economic, social, political cohesion. We are with you in this central priority and you can turn this into something very concrete. The first thing is a social pillar translated into European law and powerful European financial instruments. The second thing is a pre-agreement on the multiannual budget, on which cohesion is a central concern, both for all EU Member States and the eurozone. Then there is a third very important issue: yes Europe is counting on the European border, hopefully with Romania already included in the Schengen area. The fourth one is better partnerships with all our neighbouring regions, including our course Eastern partners, which are very dear to us. And then if we manage all these issues it will be easier to manage migration properly. Finally, if we have this kind of Europe we will have unity whatever happens with Brexit. So this is a very important historical task, but also an opportunity.
Date: 2019-01-15
Mr President, I think my colleague has missed the point, because I was talking about the problems of corruption in Romania as demonstrated by the Venice Commission, Transparency International and many others and the pardoning of corrupt politicians, which was just referred to by the Romanian Foreign Minister on the BBC. You're talking about someone congratulating the president of your country. Well, I must say I'm not very upset about that. You and the Socialists here should be just as strict towards Romania as we shall be towards Hungary and Poland, because misuse of power is always misuse of power. You will fight it and we shall fight it.
Date: 2019-01-15
Mr President, my thanks to the rapporteur and the Commissioner. Today when we are celebrating 20 years of the euro it is important to see how much things have changed recently. Financial markets are about analysing risks, taking risks and distributing risks, and by the different steps and cornerstones of the banking union, we have today a better opportunity to analyse risks. That is one of the advantages of the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive , but also the establishment of supervisory authorities. We have provided a more secure framework in which to take risks; but there will always be crises. The question is how are we to deal with them, and how capable are we of getting out of them? The establishment of both a backstop and better legislation, hopefully, coming out on the non-performing loans will be a part of that, and the BRRD as such also clarifies that all those who invest in a bank are taking a risk. And then we come to distributing risk, because the legislation we now have in place with capital requirements and a BRRD establishes a very good precondition for the economy of the European Union to face new upcoming crises and come out of them in better shape than we have previously been able to do. I would like to thank the rapporteur and the Commission. It is true that we still have a lot more to do, but let's not underestimate how much we have achieved.
Date: 2019-01-15
Mr President, amendments 97 and 98 speak on the impact of the UK's withdrawal on the EU economy, and it is topical because in the last hour we've seen the British House of Commons overwhelmingly reject Theresa May's Brexit deal in the biggest defeat for any government in British history. This is right. It is right to say that Brexit will impact the UK and it will impact the EU, and I do wish that there were a credible deal on the table. So I really don't know what to do when it comes to this vote on the Globalisation Adjustment Fund. Changing the name of the Fund won't change the issue. I'd love to be able to say that this covers the period 2021 to 2027, but this has not one iota of relevance to the UK. How can I say that British MEPs should simply abstain because it's none of our business what happens in the European Union post-Brexit and post-transition and we shouldn't be telling the EU what to do? How can I say that when anti-democratic forces in the UK have used May's appalling deal as an excuse to continue to campaign to erode that withdrawal itself? In this case, it's simply an inefficient use of taxpayers' money in Britain. The Globalisation Adjustment Fund simply means that we're sending money to the European Union to then apply for it back with strings attached, and then to lose two thirds of that from the following year's rebate. That, Mr President, simply makes no sense, and to me the whole premise of this Fund is fundamentally flawed.
Date: 2019-01-16
Mr President, thank you to those from the Commission and Council for their contributions. Last night in the House of Commons, MPs acted on behalf of the British people and decisively rejected the draft withdrawal agreement. In doing so, they defended the integrity of our precious Union, the constitutional position of Northern Ireland, the unity of the UK's single market and the UK's right to an independent future outside the European Union. Already in this House this morning, there is some confusion around the legal position in the United Kingdom, much talk about delaying Article 50 or another referendum. Let me clarify: it is the legal position that the United Kingdom leaves on 29 March 2019. This is the one clear element of law within this whole conundrum. There has also been much focus on the backstop proposal, much ill-informed talk and threats of violence if Europe doesn't get its way. Again, I repeat in this House, we in the DUP do not want to see a hard border, but the intransigence of Dublin and EU leaders in this House in demanding the backstop leaves a no-deal option on the table. By refusing to countenance legally viable changes to the draft withdrawal agreement, these institutions made the result of yesterday's vote inevitable. All sides have said that there can be no hard border under any scenario. We should now direct our energy to a positive and beneficial negotiation on trade which minimises all frictions at all borders without the controversy of the backstop. Ultimately, this is where the answer has been all along, and it is where progress will be unlocked.
Date: 2019-01-16
Mr President, I say to the Prime Minister: I share your concerns about the anti-EU rhetoric from the extreme right and the need to recover the legitimacy of the European institutions. This Parliament has been voting across political and national boundaries, constantly regularly for a single seat of the European Parliament. We want to be able to decide when and where to meet. Chancellor Angela Merkel and Sebastian Kurz showed leadership last year and took a clear public position in favour of one location for the European Parliament. Are you, as pro-European, willing to take a stand, to put it on the agenda of the Council, to talk to the people of Europe and of Spain during the election campaign about that and to engage in a constructive dialogue a pro-European, pro-democracy dialogue or are you going to ignore it and risk letting a symbol of peace, a reconciliation in Europe which is so dear to us all, to become a symbol of waste?
Date: 2019-01-17
Mr President, last but not least, even though some progress has been made in legislative and institutional reforms, considering the recent events which employed massive and deadly use of force, the overall democratic transformation of Sudan is very precarious, continuing to deny fundamental rights and freedom. I share the opinion that the EU and the Member States need to play a greater role in the region and to investigate these violations of human rights and humanitarian law. Moreover, every effort should be made to improve access by international humanitarian agencies to provide humanitarian aid to those in need. The EU should also intensify its efforts to promote freedom of expression through its external policies and instruments and to further strengthen financial support to human rights defenders and civil society organisations in Sudan, mainly under the European Development Fund. We should even have to take into account cutting funds to Sudan when necessary if these funds are used in an appropriate manner. Last but not least, complete transparency needs to be ensured concerning the projects in the security field with Sudan, including all planned activities and beneficiaries of EU and EU Member State funding.