misclassified/meps_speeches_with_translation.csv huggingface dataset:
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2021-03-11
Debate: Long-term vision for rural areas (debate)

  Niklas Nienaß (Verts/ALE).   – Mr President, I say to Mr Wojciechowski: I want to let you in on a little secret. Come close, it is very simple. Not everyone living in rural areas are farmers. And I think it’s important to respect that and to understand that. Actually a majority of people in the villages don’t even work in agriculture. And still we combine agriculture and rural development. And this is one major conflict which often goes out in favour of big farmers and against a majority of people. 
The CAP is the main reason why the rural areas have seen the destruction at the moment. And your meetings show that as well. Sixty-seven meetings with agriculture organisations, none with representatives of rural policies. The long-term vision for the rural areas should rethink the structure as we make development of rural areas. And it should increase the funds for leader programmes and small farmers, as well as ensure that any development is sustainably ensured by democratic bottom-up processes so that the people, those people who actually improve their villages and make them a livelihood again, that they get the power back. 
(Applause)
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2021-02-11
Debate: Human rights situation in Kazakhstan

  Niklas Nienaß (Verts/ALE).   – Madam President, actually I wanted to respond to Mr Krah, who just left, which is great. But last year we were in Kazakhstan. Exactly one year ago the delegation for Central Asia went to Kazakhstan and we all looked at everything there and we met with officials there and we actually asked how the reforms were going. They were shown to us, and it’s great to see that there were reforms undergoing, and we support this. We want to see more of that, and we are thankful that the government is going in this direction.
But at the same time, we also really had to demand a meeting with human rights defenders and with civil society, and the only place where we could actually meet them was on neutral ground, which was the EU embassy there, and that was devastating for me. We talked to them, and on the day we left, one person died in prison and others that we just talked to were imprisoned the very day we sat on the flight back. And that is the instance where we criticise in the European Union the question of human rights. And, dear government of Kazakhstan, if you want us to not publish resolutions like these, it’s very easy: follow human rights.
One last thing I want to mention to Mr Mariani, Mr Krah, and especially Mr Martusciello, who is the Chair of the EU Delegation to Kazakhstan. You are there to represent EU values, not your own personal profits.
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2021-02-11
Debate: Political situation in Uganda

  Niklas Nienaß,  on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, I am 28 years old and, at that age, I’m one of the youngest Members of the European Parliament but, by Ugandan standards, I am quite old because Uganda is one of the youngest countries in the world.
I want to take a stance for this generation, for the young people in Uganda. It’s this young generation that demands change, democracy, fairness and some fresh new ideas. It is this generation that was stripped of these ideals, that was stripped of justice, democracy and liberty. Therefore, we must stand up for this generation and help it conquer the rights that it has. I think it is important that we take a stance, as the European Union, to do so and to deliver, but I also have to give you a quote from a young man from Uganda. He said, ‘The situation in Uganda has reached the European Parliament plenty of times, but still there is no effect here.’
I say to the Commission, Mr Schmit and Mr Borrell, this is dramatic. This is something that we need to change. This is something that the Commission has to deliver on because we must stand, not just with words, but with action for what we demand, and that is freedom and democracy.
To the young Ugandans out there, one last word to you, to this generation that has fought so bravely and so hard and so peacefully. Stay strong, stay brave and continue this fight for democracy, for justice and a government that works for the people, and also for some new fresh ideas. This is not just a privilege, but this is your right.
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2020-12-15
Debate: Additional resources in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: REACT-EU (debate)

  Niklas Nienaß (Verts/ALE).   – Madam President, it is just and right that the EU is there to help in these times of crisis. The goals for the recovery funds are to help swiftly and unbureaucratically and to overcome the economic crisis, while at the same time fostering European cooperation. In this regard, it was a good idea to use the framework of already existing programmes like the European Social Fund (ESF) and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), which we know work well in the regions.
REACT-EU follows the logic of swift, easy, productive and European. However the Recovery and Resilience Facility does not. It is shameful to see that the vast majority of the recovery money, EUR 670 billion, is being spent with little to no European agenda behind it.
I also have to say: that REACT-EU has no obligation for the usage of Interreg is a pity. How the fact that in the first draft of REACT-EU, Interreg wasn’t even mentioned, is shameful and unworthy of a European Commission.
After images of closed borders and failed European solidarity at the peak of this crisis, after months of isolation and for thousands of families, also months of loss and mourning, we need the European coronavirus aid to be used to bring Europeans back together. We need our funds to be spent in a European way, a way that increases European exchange, cooperation and solidarity, and that benefits our citizens. Here’s how to do it.
Instead of transferring EUR 670 billion to the Member States, use them to top up these tools that foster European cohesion – top up the ERDF, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the ESF, and then use the EUR 50 billion that are now planned for REACT-EU to top up the programmes that support European exchange, European culture and European education: to support Interreg, Erasmus and Creative Europe.
This is the way we should spend our European money. To enable Europeans to study, work, celebrate life, live and laugh together, until once again this crazy pandemic is finally over.
REACT-EU is not bad. It is one of the better programmes of the Next Generation EU funds, and probably the best that we can get from a Council like this, but for me as a member of the next generation of Europeans, one good programme is not enough. The overall spending is not climate-just enough, it is not social enough, and it’s definitely not European enough.
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2020-07-10
Debate: Cultural recovery of Europe (debate)

  Niklas Nienaß (Verts/ALE).   – Madam President, I am asking that this debate be extended because this is the first debate being held on the issue of culture. You are allocating 30 minutes for this, which is just a plain joke to have a decent debate. We’re not allowed to use blue cards and you’re just pulling us through here like a herd. This is just not efficient enough or sufficient enough for the very important issue that...
(The President cut off the speaker)
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2020-07-10
Debate: Cultural recovery of Europe (debate)

  Niklas Nienaß (Verts/ALE).   – Frau Präsidentin! Da die Europäische Union im Bereich der Kultur relativ begrenzt zuständig ist, möchte ich mich auf den Rat spezialisieren – der heute durch Abwesenheit glänzt. Als Bundeskanzlerin Merkel am Mittwoch ´hier das Programm der deutschen Ratspräsidentschaft vorgestellt hat, hat sie genau einen einzigen Satz gesagt, der irgendetwas mit Kultur zu tun hatte, nämlich den zweihundertfünfzigsten Geburtstag Ludwig von Beethovens erwähnt. 
Deswegen möchte ich mit einem Zitat von ihm starten: „Und die Welt muss ich verachten, die nicht ahnt, dass Musik höhere Offenbarung ist als alle Weisheit und Philosophie. Sie ist der Wein, der zur neuen Erzeugung begeistert.“ 
Wer Beethovens Vermächtnis feiert, aber nicht einmal über die Förderung von Kunst und Kultur in diesen Zeiten der Krise redet, wäre von dem alten Meister mit viel Verachtung gestraft worden. Weder die Kanzlerin noch die Kommissionspräsidentin haben durch Worte oder Taten erkennen lassen, dass sie verstehen, in welcher desaströsen Lage sich der europäische Kultur- und Kreativsektor befindet. „In Vielfalt geeint“ ist das europäische Motto, doch diese Vielfalt droht zu verschwinden, wenn dem gesamten Kultur- und Kreativsektor in ganz Europa nicht geholfen wird.
Um den Kulturministern und den Staats- und Regierungschefs auf die Sprünge zu helfen, was das bedeutet: Wir brauchen ein unbürokratisches Grundeinkommen für Künstlerinnen und Künstler. Wir brauchen lokale Kulturgutscheine, um den Konsum anzukurbeln, und eine europäische Sozialgarantie für Künstlerinnen und Künstler. 
Wer das Vermächtnis eines toten Künstlers bejubelt, aber den Lebenden in solch einer Krise nicht umfassend hilft, der hat die Verachtung aller Künstler verdient.
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2020-07-10
Debate: The role of cohesion policy in tackling the socio-economic fallout from COVID-19 (debate)

  Niklas Nienaß,  on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, I would like to thank the Commissioner Ferreira for coming here to us today. I think we have all seen that we needed to take very swift measures in order to help the regions, and I think we did so very well by using three one and two, or three one and plus. But now I think we are in a different stage and we need to follow a good procedure in order to help the most. This procedure, as always, is to evaluate the previous measures, define what we want to achieve and then rethink how we achieve it the best. Therefore I have questions for you. For the evaluation, we know that 60 regions have already applied to change to amend the operative programme and therefore we want to see is there a correlation between those who are using the flexibility measures and those regions affected most by COVID. Are these measures that we have taken actually using them, helping them? 
My second question: when we want to achieve something for the future we need to take a strategic approach, and therefore I want to ask you, how can we define a strategic approach and how can we ensure it then in REACT-EU, to actually have the strategic approach where I think less flexibility and more – sorry I’m missing the words here – but you know what I mean, that this is needed, very much.
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2020-02-12
Debate: Gender Equality Strategy (debate)

  Niklas Nienaß (Verts/ALE),  blue-card question. – Thank you for this statement. I have one personal question: what do you think men can do to encourage women, and do you think that there’s more action needed by men? Do you think that men should step down more, or do you think that woman should improve? What is your personal opinion on this issue? Since we are all politicians, what can you do to increase the number of women politicians in your party as well?
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2020-01-15
Debate: European Parliament's position on the Conference on the Future of Europe (debate)

  Niklas Nienaß (Verts/ALE),  blue-card question. – Mr Verhofstadt, you said that you want to enable a bottom—up approach. So, there are some rumours going on that certain parties already agreed on who should be leading the conference and your name was mentioned on that as well, so I wanted to know from you, presented right now here, that those rumours are not true and that the conference itself should decide on who leads the conference.
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2020-01-15
Debate: European Parliament's position on the Conference on the Future of Europe (debate)

  Niklas Nienaß (Verts/ALE).   – Madam President, sorry, but I have to challenge your decision on the blue cards, because we have one hour in between the end of this debate and the next debate. I see your point that you have to discuss in the Chamber, but you have enough presidents to do that without one, and I think that you can continue this debate. We have seen so far that this debate really lived through the usage of blue cards. Therefore, I want to challenge your decision on discarding the debate by taking a decision in this plenary to continue with the usage of the blue-card system. 
(Applause)
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2020-01-15
Debate: European Parliament's position on the Conference on the Future of Europe (debate)

  Niklas Nienaß (Verts/ALE).   – Madam President, I think we have seen so far in this debate that we do face a crisis in Europe, and I think we have seen not just after the election, but already before, that there are two possibilities. Do we want less Europe or more? The Far Right have so far expressed their vision of this, but we, with a big majority of people who said we want more Europe, have won this election. So therefore, we now need to decide: how much more Europe do we want? And I think this question should be answered by the public, by everyone, by sitting together and answering this question.
And yes, the answer to this question can be that we want less, that the people want less Europe. But I say let us take the risk, because so far, I know that we have the better arguments. We know that Europe has brought unity of East and West, that it has brought freedom, that it has brought peace and prosperity. And so I see all the good arguments on our side, and I know that we will win this debate.
Talking of debate, let us continue to have a good debate in this plenary and make this the first European public sphere.
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2020-01-14
Debate: Sustainable investment plan, just transition fund and Roadmap on Social Europe (debate)

  Niklas Nienaß,  on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, I wish to thank everyone in the Commission who contributed to this proposal for a Just Transition Fund (JTF), in particular Commissioner Ferreira and Mr Timmermans.
I do sense the underlying spirit of a social just transition. People take centre stage and not companies, also a clear ‘no’ for subsidies for fossil fuels and nuclear power is just what the future needs.
This proposal for a JTF is a good starting point to help particular regions to cope with the transition. However, what I’m missing in the proposal is a clear commitment to European level climate targets. The people and the economy need a clear date when the last European coal plant will get off the grid. We need commitments by every single region to individual coal phase-out plans.
This must be a binding condition in order to receive support from the JTF, because funding a transition without the actual happening of a transition is pointless. And of course we have to talk about the money: EUR 7.5 billion, seven years, 108 coal regions. This roughly comes down to 10 million per region, per year. Is that enough to make the transition just for everyone?
And in your calculation you then add co-financing from other cohesion funds. But this can be very dangerous because we don’t want to shift money from one region in need to another one in need. You then multiply the JTF with potential private investments, but Mr Timmermans please: we both know that there is not 100 billion in that just transition mechanism, but 7.5 billion.
When street magicians try to trick their audience in such a way, we call that a sleight of hand. I’m sure the Commission doesn’t want to be seen a street magicians. So please come clear and let us fight together for a better consistent funding from own EU resources, so that coal workers are not at the mercy of MFF negotiations every seven years. We can support this proposal, though, if it stands for a clear and just transition with concrete phase-out plans for all coal regions.
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2020-01-14
Debate: Sustainable investment plan, just transition fund and Roadmap on Social Europe (debate)

  Niklas Nienaß (Verts/ALE),  Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Vielen Dank für Ihr Auftreten heute. Ich kann ja verstehen, dass Sie nicht ganz zufrieden sind, weil Ihre eigene Regierung ihre eigenen Menschen im Stich lässt. Aber müssten Sie nicht eigentlich in Großbritannien sein? Wenn Sie erst einen Austritt hier durchjagen, warum kommen Sie dann noch hierher? Also ich meine: Bleiben Sie gerne, wo Sie sind.
Speaker: Niklas NIENASS (Germany — Bündnis 90/Die Grünen)
Political group: Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
Date: 2019-11-26
Debate: EU response to extreme meteorological events and their impacts: how to protect European urban areas and their cultural heritage (debate)

  Niklas Nienaß (Verts/ALE).   – Madam President, Article 167 of the Treaty states ‘action by the Union shall be aimed at the conservation and safeguarding the cultural heritage of European significance’. How to fulfill this duty? Well the last weeks have proven that once again one of the solutions is tackling climate change.
What we do not need now is this religious-like belief that future technology will save us, is this bullshitting around of denying climate change or this useless discussion about what to do. We know what to do: stop coal until 2030; implement an ETS that covers all sectors with a limited amount of certificates; introduce additional carbon taxes on transport and travel; establish a border adjustment and use all the revenues for climate research adaptation and mitigation. But what we also need is more money to save our European culture. I call for a fund for the salvation of heritage sites with special significance for our common European history. We must protect our background, but also invest in a common cultural future or, as Robert Schuman put it in 1951, ‘much more than an economic alliance, Europe has to become a cultural union’.
Speaker: Rosanna CONTE (Italy — Lega)
Political group: Identity and Democracy Group
Date: 2023-11-21
Debate: Sustainable use of plant protection products (debate)

  Rosanna Conte (ID).   – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ecco l'ideologia, ecco ciò che ha mosso la maggioranza di questo Parlamento quando ha approvato riduzioni drastiche sull'uso dei fitosanitari, che sono addirittura più restrittive di quelle proposte dalla Commissione. 
La relatrice ha esultato e chissà se farà altrettanto quando comprenderà di aver messo a rischio l'intera filiera agricola: o forse era proprio questo l'obiettivo! Che lo dichiarasse chiaramente, perché queste norme così stringenti vanno nella sola direzione ambientale e non considerano le esigenze produttive, per non parlare dei seri rischi per la sicurezza alimentare a cui espongono tutta l'Europa. 
Siamo di fronte a norme fatte per distruggere l'agricoltura europea, perché, cari colleghi, i nostri agricoltori non hanno bisogno di consulenze gratuite sulle misure preventive ma hanno bisogno di poter usare gli strumenti necessari per lavorare, soprattutto in mancanza di alternative valide.
Speaker: Rosanna CONTE (Italy — Lega)
Political group: Identity and Democracy Group
Date: 2023-11-21
Debate: Packaging and packaging waste (debate)

  Rosanna Conte (ID).   – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, oltre 700 imprese a rischio, ripercussioni devastanti su migliaia di posti di lavoro e un impatto negativo su oltre il 30% del PIL italiano: ecco, sono solo alcuni degli effetti di questo assurdo regolamento per l'Italia che ha raggiunto un tasso di riciclo del 73,3%, ben nove anni prima dell'obiettivo definito dall'Unione europea. 
Eppure l'impegno profuso dalle aziende italiane non basterebbe per far fronte alle follie contenute in questa proposta che mira a sostituire il riciclo con il riuso. Il tutto senza considerare l'aumento dell'uso dell'acqua, dell'energia, dei prezzi per le aziende e i consumatori, oltre a possibili danni nel trasporto, nella conservazione e nella sicurezza di certi prodotti, soprattutto alimentari. 
Niente più vaschette per frutti rossi, buste di insalata, pellicole protettive, vasi di fiori, set di cortesia negli hotel, imballaggi per l'asporto. Per non parlare dell'impatto su vini e bevande. Il beneficio sarà davvero proporzionato all'impegno? 
No, questa è la via sbagliata e con il voto di domani abbiamo il dovere di stabilire un equilibrio tra la necessità di ridurre gli imballaggi e gli annessi rifiuti e le esigenze dei produttori.
Speaker: Rosanna CONTE (Italy — Lega)
Political group: Identity and Democracy Group
Date: 2023-10-16
Debate: Fisheries control (debate)

  Rosanna Conte,  a nome del gruppo ID. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, tutto cambia per non cambiare nulla. Mi complimento con la Commissione e con il Consiglio per aver completamente sprecato quattro anni di negoziati. A tal proposito, vorrei sapere dov'è il Commissario questa sera.
Dovevamo consegnare alla pesca un regolamento controlli più snello e di più facile applicazione. Invece, avremo norme contorte e punitive, maggiore burocrazia e mancanza di armonizzazione. Siete addirittura riusciti a imporre l'obbligo di installare le telecamere a bordo per controllare il lavoro dei nostri pescatori, peraltro sulla base del rischio di infrazione, non su infrazioni che realmente sono avvenute. È una vergogna.
E allora, Commissario, immaginiamo insieme: come reagirebbe se io ora puntassi questa telecamera sui Suoi appunti o sul Suo telefonino? O se La registrassi mentre discute con il Suo staff o durante i Suoi incontri? Si sentirebbe forse violato, magari un po' in soggezione, sapendo di essere controllato? Quindi, perché fate questo ai pescatori?
Così avete dimostrato che il vostro intento era quello di infliggere l'ennesimo colpo per vessare la pesca. Infatti, i negoziati ai quali ho partecipato come relatrice ombra sono stati scanditi dai vostri continui ricatti per sabotare un accordo giusto, nel rispetto dei tre pilastri della sostenibilità. Sono anni che strumentalizzate la sostenibilità ambientale e degli stock attraverso proposte assurde, come il piano d'azione che vuole distruggere la pesca a strascico, e con riduzioni di pesca insostenibili, come quelle del WestMED o della CGPM. Per cosa? Per favorire il pesce sintetico, il pesce importato, le alternative vegetali o gli insetti, perché è questo che resterà, se continuerete così.
La Lega dice no e vota contro, perché gli aspetti positivi che come Parlamento siamo riusciti a inserire nel testo non bilanciano il danno che subirà la pesca per le insidie di questo regolamento. Convintamente abbiamo chiesto il rigetto dell'intera proposta. I nostri pescatori sono stanchi della vostra ideologia e meritano chiarezza per il futuro.