misclassified/meps_speeches_with_translation.csv huggingface dataset:
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium — Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Political group: Renew Europe Group
Date: 2021-01-20
Debate: Presentation of the programme of activities of the Portuguese Presidency (debate)

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madam President, I say to the Prime Minister: thank you for your clear commitment on the conference on the future of the European Union.
I know that there are still some problems in the Council, but I know your strengths. I think you are maybe the only one who can overcome that in the Council, and there is also good reason to do so, that conference, because it’s not because now that Trump is out and Biden is in that we can do business as usual.
We have reacted better to the COVID-19 crisis in comparison to the financial crisis – which was a disaster, because it took us 10 years to have the Banking Union and it’s still not there.
There are still weaknesses in the European Union. Migration is not solved. The problem of our geopolitical weakness in our relationship, for example, to Russia: not solved. The rule of law: a number of countries not biding by the rules. I think we need this conference urgently and I count on you, Prime Minister, to achieve that in the Council in the coming weeks if possible.
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium — Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Political group: Renew Europe Group
Date: 2021-01-19
Debate: The arrest of Aleksei Navalny (debate)

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madam President, at the end of the debate, I want to say something about the hypocrisy that I have heard here in this debate from Mr Zanni, the representative of the ID extreme right—wing group here. 
He is criticising the arrest of Navalny, but his master, Mr Salvini, is paid by Mr Putin, like Ms Le Pen is paid by Mr Putin. Half of the ID Group have links with Russia and Putin. 
And it’s not the end. Mr Putin is continuing his in—fight against Europe. Ponder, for example, that this right—wing Twitter thing is now using servers – because they are forbidden in the US – where? In Russia – Russian servers with their extreme right—wing policy. 
So my plea to you, Mr Borrell, is we need, as fast as possible, more sanctions, broader sanctions on more Russians, on the oligarchs. I think, even if I have never said it before, that even Nord Stream 2 has to be reconsidered in that respect.
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium — Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Political group: Renew Europe Group
Date: 2020-12-18
Debate: Future Relations between the EU and the UK (continuation of debate)

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madam President, I am an optimist by nature. 
I think that ultimately there will be a deal, because it is in the interest of both parties to have a deal. In the interest of the UK and also in the interest of the European Union, but let’s be a little bit realistic. Everybody talks now about how someday there has to be a deal possible. Hopefully, yes, but let’s be realistic. It could be that we need all the time to negotiate this the deal.
Then there could be solutions for that. A technical prolongation of the transition, a provisional application of the agreement, or even stopping the clock! That’s also done in such negotiations.
What is now the most important for us all is not to panic from the European side and to fully support our negotiator, Michel Barnier, and to have fair competition in the end. Because it’s about that. 
It will be far more devastating for our companies if the outcome of this negotiation is unfair competition to their disadvantage. That is the reason why we have to continue to be very clear on this. There has to be a level playing field: no unfair competition can be accepted. 
Also on fish. If they want us to eat their fish, well, we have to have the possibility to catch their fish, in their waters. That’s the bit.
One last remark that I want to make, is a request to Michel Barnier, and to the negotiation team, that is to do something on Erasmus. I know the cherry-picking attitude from the Brits, which is in fact devastating for Erasmus, but let’s take a unilateral measure towards the students in Britain that they can continue unilaterally to make use of Erasmus. 
It’s a pro-European generation this young generation and it’s this generation which will bring the UK back inside the European family in the next decades.
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium — Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Political group: Renew Europe Group
Date: 2020-12-16
Debate: Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 10-11 December 2020 – MFF, Rule of Law Conditionality and Own Resources – Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 – Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources – Regulation on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States (debate)

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madam President, all those here from the Eurosceptic side who have criticised this package are completely right. Indeed, this is a huge step in European integration, a historic step in European integration – EUR 750 billion in recovery funds paid with the EU’s own resources, financed by eurobonds, and that linked to the rule of law. 
But, let’s also be honest. There is one shadow cast over this and that is the way, naturally, Ms von der Leyen and the European Council have to ‘molest’ European treaties and principles to get over this blackmail by Hungary and Poland. I have here this fantastic opinion from the Legal Service – four paragraphs, no mention of one article of the Treaty, no mention of one court case, and saying exactly the opposite. The reality is that what the European Council did is not a coup d’état, but nearly a coup d’état. I think that the European Parliament anyway has to examine whether or not we go to court over this because there is one thing and I will conclude with that. You cannot save the rule of law in a Member State if you in fact ruin the rule of law of the Union itself.
(Applause)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium — Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Political group: Renew Europe Group
Date: 2020-11-25
Debate: Preparation of the European Council meeting of 10-11 December 2020 (debate)

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Madam President, first of all, I don’t want to intervene on Brexit. I think that we are in injury time, like we say in football, in these negotiations, but I’m still optimistic, Mr McAllister, because I do not think that this is like football. Footballers are tired in injury time, but politicians are not. I think that politicians are at their best in injury time. I am still optimistic, because it’s in the interests of both to have this agreement. 
On the rule of law, I want to simply echo what Luis Garicano and my colleague, Valerie Hayer, have said here in the debate. Ms Szydło, and Mr Zanni – sorry they are no longer here – can read the Treaty. The rule of law is not a question of subsidiarity, because that’s what they in fact are saying, that it’s a question of sovereignty. Freedom of expression, freedom of gathering, democracy, that is not a question of subsidiarity. Respect for the LGBT community in your country, that’s not a question of subsidiarity. That’s a value of the European Union, and that’s the reason we have to stick to the compromise we have found, even when I personally don’t think – and I’m grateful for the tenacity of Ms Merkel in still trying to find an agreement with Poland and Hungary – that there is a lot of room for compromise, because already in the text today you need to prove a link between the breach of the rule of law and the accounts of the European Union before the European Commission can act. So, if there is room for making it better, it’s to strengthen the system, not to weaken the system. If it is not possible – I repeat – there is only one way forward, which is enhanced cooperation inside the Treaty, based on Article 226 of the Treaty, like we did with the euro, like we did with Schengen and like we did with the European Patent. That is far better than to cave in to the blackmail of Orbán and Kaczyński. 
(Applause)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium — Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Political group: Renew Europe Group
Date: 2020-11-11
Debate: Multiannual Financial Framework (including Own Resources), Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism and the Recovery Fund for Europe (debate)

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Mr President, the word ‘historic’ has been used, I think, 100 times here in this plenary but for once, I think, we are using it in the right way, because my impression is that exactly 20 years after the launch of the Convention, this is a real big step. Why is this a big step? Because we are in fact breaking three long-standing taboos in Europe.
The first taboo was no eurobonds, no recovery bonds – that was impossible. That was the call of the Council and of everybody after the financial crisis. And what we will do now with this programme is launch nearly one trillion of these bonds on the market, and the first bond that has been launched is a huge success.
The second new thing we are doing concerns own resources. I have heard for years ‘no, it’s impossible to have new own resources’ – for 10 years we have fought for that. It’s there and it’s not taxing the ordinary citizen, it’s taxing Google, Amazon, the big tech companies in America, imported products from China, which are in fact bad for our environment, and so on. So I don’t know what Mr Eppink has against taxing Google and Facebook and Amazon – who is against it? Not the citizens, anyway.
And then there is the fact that there will no longer be money for authoritarians.
But I want to give two short warnings. The first is to the Commission. Mr Hahn, tell your colleagues to use now the tools. I hear already in the corridors, ‘now we going to use this and we’re going to try to find out if Hungary and Poland are in accordance with the system’... but you have to do nothing at all, that has already been proved! You have now to use it and not wait two or three years before doing it.
And my second warning is this: let’s not stop the reform of the European Union. There are other things to tackle: the lack of a European Defence Community, the unanimity rule, and the fact that we cannot elect our own leader. In America they can do it – not always easily – but we cannot do it.
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium — Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Political group: Renew Europe Group
Date: 2020-10-21
Debate: Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 15 and 16 October 2020, in particular the negotiations of the future relations with the UK (debate)

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Monsieur le Président, M. Bay du groupe ID n’est plus là parce que sa position frôle le ridicule. On doit s’arrêter de punir les Britanniques, on doit mieux reconnaître la souveraineté britannique mais quand il s’agit des poissons, ce n’est plus le cas, donc c’est vraiment ridicule, c’est n’importe quoi!
It’s the same with Mr Eppink. Mr Eppink is explaining to us that we do not have to do it in a European way, but we have to do a bilateral deal. Every country with the UK. The last time that you did this, you lost New York, I presume, when you got your negotiations with the British.
So, if I have a suggestion to make, Michel, it’s the following. If we make a deal with the British - and I hope that there is a deal in the coming weeks - then we put in this final agreement, in this treaty - it’s an international treaty - a disposition that automatically that treaty ceases to exist if the British don’t follow all the commitments that they have taken, including in the Withdrawal Agreement. In my opinion that is absolutely necessary because otherwise, if there is a deal, if there is an agreement, and the 27 will have ratified it, and they don’t follow their commitments, it will be a huge mess and it again be necessary for 27 decisions by the 27 Member States to stop that agreement. 
So I think that, after what has happened with the Internal Market Bill, it’s in the interest of the European Union to foresee such a disposition in that final agreement as fast as possible. I hope that there is a deal because it’s the only way to secure the Good Friday Agreement, to secure peace in Northern Ireland and to secure our internal market. 
(Applause)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium — Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Political group: Renew Europe Group
Date: 2020-09-16
Debate: State of the Union (topical debate) (debate)

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Monsieur le Président, c'est dommage que M. Bay ne soit plus là, lui qui donne des leçons à tout le monde, même sur le financement du fonds de redressement, à un moment où c'est lui, M. Salvini, Mme Le Pen et leurs amis autrichiens qui reçoivent de l'argent de M. Poutine. Peut-être qu'il peut s'occuper de repayer l'argent à M. Poutine. Je trouve ça personnellement scandaleux que des gens pareils soient en train de nous donner des leçons, alors qu’ils reçoivent de l'argent pour détruire l'Union européenne. C'est peut-être ce qu’il est en train de faire, je suppose, parce qu'il n'est plus là. 
My proposal, Ms von der Leyen, is that you repeat these 75 minutes of your speech, that I liked a lot, in the Council. Because let’s be honest, half of the issues that you raised are in fact blocked in the Council. 
When we talk about migration, the tragedy in the Moria camp. That’s the consequence of the impossibility to reform Dublin, to reform the Migration Policy. When we talk about Belarus, it’s 40 days after these elections were stolen by Lukashenko and we are not capable of putting sanctions on the table – 40 days later. 
When we’re talking about Turkey drilling in the Eastern Mediterranean, in Greek waters, no sanction, no action at all. When we talk about Hong Kong, when we talk about the minority of the Uighurs, words yes, but sanctions no, action no. 
And when we talk about the rule of law inside the European Union, let’s be honest, it’s 5...6 years that we are talking about that here in Europe and in the European Parliament. There are no sanctions against these authoritarian regimes. 
So my plea to you, is to repeat this as fast as possible, or in 75 minutes in the Council and let’s make a pact, a deal between us, that that is the priority for 2021 next to the Recovery Fund, Mr Frans Timmermans, and to the Green Deal, naturally. That is the priority. To end unanimity, to have a Magnitsky or Navalny Act as Mr Borrell named it. And to have a real rule of law mechanism, because I don’t want it to be that at the end, in a few years, we are calling you not the geopolitical Commission, but the geominimal Commission - that I want to avoid. (Applause)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium — Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Political group: Renew Europe Group
Date: 2020-07-23
Debate: Conclusions of the extraordinary European Council meeting of 17-21 July 2020 (continuation of debate)

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – (start of speech off mike) ... I have to tell you that we were with a few lone rangers that, since the outbreak of the financial crisis, started to say that eurobonds and new own resources were needed, and everybody said, ‘impossible, unrealistic, a dream that will never happen. This is Europe.’
Well, it is happening, and so I’m pleased with the outcome of this summit, and I think it’s historic. Yes, it’s historic. The first leap forward was the internal market; the second leap forward was the euro; the third leap forward is the fact that Europe will issue bonds for the first time and will increase its fiscal capacity in a dramatic way. So, I’m pleased and this is historic.
But there are also weaknesses in this plan, let’s be honest. And the most important weakness is due to what? Yes, the rule of unanimity. And that’s the reason why the pan—European projects have been gutted and that the direct transfers to the Member States and the rebates for the frugals are still there.
I think that – I will be very blunt here, in this House, and I think that I’m speaking for the whole House –this House will not give its green light for this package and for the MFF if this is not rectified, if we again do not have these pan-European projects as the priority in the MFF – and it’s easy to do! The easy way to do it is to start with its own resources earlier than foreseen in the plan. In the plan, it’s foreseen for 2023. My proposal is to start in 2021.
And finally, my last point, Madam President, before you use your weapon again against me – like every time. There needs to be a co-decision by Parliament. We’re going to spend and collect EUR 750 billion. That is only possible with democratic control. We are in Europe. We are not in China or in Russia.
(Applause)
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium — Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Political group: Renew Europe Group
Date: 2020-06-17
Debate: Conference on the Future of Europe (debate)

  Guy Verhofstadt,  on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, the reason for this resolution is very simple: it is not a resolution to the Commission, it is not a resolution to the colleagues in the Parliament, it is a resolution that is in fact made for the Council. I hope that the Council this time can reach an agreement so that we can launch this conference, because let’s be honest, it becomes more and more like the monster of Loch Ness. From time to time it appears, then it disappears, it is more like an illusion, like a fantasy and we must avoid that.
This is serious business, this conference is not one or other little instrument for the European Parliament. This conference is vital, it is crucial for the future of our European Union, because let’s face it, this Covid crisis is another illustration of it. This Covid crisis will change the world. It is a world that will be completely different, a world that will no longer be dominated, I think, by the United States of America who is withdrawing from the international scene for the moment. It may well be dominated by China who wants to become, and who already is, a world power and who wants to dominate the world and international scene. 
Between America and China there will be Europe stuck between them and if we don’t want to be stuck between the US at the one hand and China on the other hand, and if we want really the instruments to defend the interests of our citizens, we need another European Union. This European Union is not fit for purpose. Not fit for the future and we all know it. The Council knows it, the Commission knows it and certainly our citizens know it. So it’s time now to start really this exercise because we have not a lot of time, maybe we can tell that to your colleagues in the Council. There is the Covid crisis, there are precedent crises, tomorrow there could be another challenge. 
So my hope is that we can take a decision to make this common declaration between the three institutions and we can start this conference as early as possible in September.
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium — Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Political group: Renew Europe Group
Date: 2020-05-13
Debate: Conclusions of the extraordinary European Council meeting of 23 April 2020 - New MFF, own resources and Recovery plan (debate)

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Mr President, I have to tell you that after the intervention of Ms von der Leyen, I see only business as usual, and I hope that I’m wrong. But I have also seen the first documents circulating in the Commission – and it’s business as usual: it’s old tricks, it’s repackaging, massive frontloading, and then a multiplier – I have seen that the Commission will use a multiplier of 45! Even Jesus in the New Testament was not capable of doing that: a multiplier of 45 when he multiplied the fishes and the bread. But the Commission is on that track, and that’s not, I think, even the opinion just of the Commissioners. That’s typical, in bureaucracy, of how it works.
Ms von der Leyen explained today how they are going to do it: they are going to increase the headroom a little bit and ask more guarantees of the Member States. Well they should not think about doing that. All our Member States will be in deficit. All our Member States will be in debt. You cannot increase the national contributions of the Member States by asking for more guarantees in the future. What we need to do is create a new headroom, and a new headroom that is new own resources. That is not an invention. The financing of the European Union was always based on own resources, on VAT, on customs duties, and what we propose now is a digital tax and other taxes against pollution. It is because of the rebate we gave to Margaret Thatcher that in the 1980s we started to stop with these normal democratic finances and that we started to ask for contributions from Member States. Well it’s a good moment to stop that, definitely, and to create real financing for this Union.
So the problem is not so much, Mr President, where we are going to spend this – in politics that’s easy. The most important problem is how we are going to fund it. I ask the Commission – Mr Šefčovič, tomorrow in your meeting – to ask for new solutions as we have described here in this resolution.
Speaker: Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium — Open Vlaamse Liberalen en Democraten)
Political group: Renew Europe Group
Date: 2020-04-16
Debate: EU coordinated action to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences (continuation of debate)

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew).   – Mr President, I wanted to give a message to the President of the Commission, Ms von der Leyen, but she’s no longer here. Why? Because I think that, rightly, she has spoken about the duties that our nurses, our medical people are fulfilling. But are we politicians fulfilling our duty? I’m not so sure about that because we have already been discussing this European master plan for many weeks in a row. My question is, what is the European Commission waiting for? Why can she not come forward with this trillion-sized European reconstruction and recovery plan? What is she waiting for? Is she waiting for the European Council? Then we may be waiting eight years, as is the case of the Banking Union, because there is still no banking union after the financial crisis. The European Council is playing ping pong. In February, the Eurogroup could not agree on that plan. They sent it to the European Council. Then in March, the European Council sent it back to the Eurogroup. Then the Eurogroup, in April, a few days ago, was not in agreement with that part of the plan and sent it back to the European Council. 
My message to the European Commission is that this has to stop. You have the right of initiative. Take your responsibility and come forward with what is asked by the whole Plenary here, that is a trillion-sized European recovery and reconstruction plan, not based on mutualisation of that, not guaranteed by the Member States – they have no money anymore, they will all be in deficit – but based on new own resources.
It’s an historical moment for the European Commission. We need a large type of initiative. You remember Delors. There was a big crisis, an economic stagflation crisis, and he launched the single market and it lifted us out of the crisis. The same is needed now. The European Commission has to act and not wait for the outcome of a Council that will not decide next week.
(Applause)