natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Inden jeg giver ordet til de forskellige talere, vil jeg afgive en erklæring vedrørende den episode, som fandt sted for lidt siden.
Before calling those Members who have asked to speak, I should like to say some words by way of explanation about the incident that took place a short time ago.
Hr. Graefe zu Baringdorf bad om jrdet til forretningsordenen, hvilket er hans ret.
Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf had asked to speak on a point of order, something which he was perfectly entitled to do.
Jeg gav ham ordet, men det fremgik straks, at der var tale om et indlæg i forhandlingen, idet han hen vendte sig til et andet medlem af Parlamentet og gav udtryk for sin opfattelse vedrørende de afstemninger, som havde fundet sted.
I called him to speak, and from the first few sentences he spoke it very quickly became appar ent that in reality he was going into the substance of the debate once again by arguing with another Member of the House and expressing his opinion of the votes that had taken place.
Vi vil sam arbejde politisk — vi har måske andre former end andre, men vi vil arbejde politisk — og ikke med forretningsordenen.
Like any Member of the House, he naturally can have this or that opinion on the votes that have been taken, but I cannot allow any Member, under the pretext of appealing to the Rules of Procedure, to reopen a debate contesting votes that have been taken.
Som ethvert andet medlem af Parlamentet kan han naturligvis have sin egen mening om de afstemninger, som har fundet sted, men jeg kan ikke tolerere, at man under påskud af et indlæg til forretningsordenen indleder en selvmodsigende debat om afstemninger ne.
On behalf of my group I may say that we have no desire to complicate the work of the Bureau, as long as our group's rights are also upheld. We want to cooperate politically — perhaps we do so in a different way from others, but we do want to do work on political issues — and not on the Rules of Procedure.
Jeg vil i denne forbindelse gerne komme med en mere generel erklæring.
In this connection I should like to make a more general statement.
Der fandt i går nogle beklage lige episoder sted i Parlamentet.
Already yesterday deplorable incidents were witnessed in this House.
Jeg var ikke person ligt til stede, men man har aflagt beretning for mig herom.
I was not present myself, but I was told of them.
Der blev medtaget skilte og transparenter i salen, og hr. Graefe zu Baringdorfs opførsel — und skyld, at jeg må sige dette — da- han lavede en vold som scene her foran mig, er ikke forenelig med Par lamentets sæd skik eller med dets forretningsorden.
Banners and posters were brought into the Chamber, and the conduct — forgive me for saying so — of Mr Graefe zu Baring
Med hensyn til episoden før må jeg sige, at jeg som gruppeformand har samme ret som alle andre gruppeformænd til at afgive en stemmeforklaring for min gruppe. Dette var min hensigt.
As regards the incident earlier, I must say that as group chairman I have the same right as all the other group chairman to give an explanation of vote for my group.
Derfor beder jeg Dem forstå min ophidselse over, at man pludselig lukkede for min mikrofon. En ting må De som formand og også de andre
I raised my hand to speak; your Secretary-General took note; I then drew his attention again by meeting his eyes.
De spurgte mig, om jeg i tilfælde af, at hr. Klepsch oversked sin taletid, ville fratage ham ordet. Ja, jeg ville naturligvis også fratage hr. Klepsch ordet, men jeg er sikker på, at det aldrig vil blive aktuelt.
You asked me whether I would withdraw the floor from Mr Klepsch if he were to exceed his speaking time.
tage til efterretning: hvis der er noget, jeg ikke tåler, så er det forsøg på, hvad jeg kalder at røvrende mig. Så bliver jeg vred, og det vil jeg ikke lade mig byde.
If ever I and my group are denied the same right as all the others, we shall do everything we can to defend ourselves, as I have just done.
Det var måske også en misforståelse fra Deres side, og dermed kan vi lade det være godt.
(Objections from the centre and right)
(Protest fra midten og fra højre)
President. — Please allow me to reply to Graefe zu Baringdorf.
Pearce (ED). — (EN) Hr. formand, jeg mener ikke, 11 sagen kan afsluttes, uden at der er nogen her i Parlamentet, der komplimenterer Dem for Deres afvikling af denne meget vanskelige situation.
Mr Pearce (ED). — Mr President, I do not think the incident can really be closed without somebody from the floor of the House congratulating you on your handling of this very difficult situation.
Det store flertal af medlemmerne er dybt rystet over det, der skete, og, giver Dem sin fulde støtte med henblik på at undgå lignende tildragelser fremover.
The vast majority of people in this House were disgusted by what happened and would like to offer you whole hearted support in preventing similar actions in future.
Selv om episoden rent proceduremæssigt er afsluttet, har den ikke desto mindre givet hr. Graefe zu Baringdorf rig lejlighed til at reklamere for sit parti og sig selv. Det er rent faktisk det, han har gjort, men jeg håber, at de folk, der læser herom i pressen, med rette forstår, at vi her i dag har været vidne til et eksempel på facisme...
The incident, although it has now been procedurally disposed of, has nevertheless given Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf a large opportunity to publicize his party and himself.
Der er måske tale om en misforståelse, men jeg vil gerne minde ham om, at hans gruppes medlemmer har samme rettigheder som andre.
Perhaps there was a misunderstanding, but I should like to assure him that Members from his group enjoy the same rights as all other Members.
Han mener, at han som formand for sin gruppe havde ret til at tage ordet til en stemmeforklaring.
As chairman of his group, he felt that he had the right to give an explanation of vote.
Det er der ingen, der bestrider, og det er ikke kun gruppeformændene, der kan tage ordet til en stemmeforklaring; det kan ethvert medlem af forsamlingen gøre.
No one would dispute that, and it is not only the group chairmen that can give an explanation of vote; any Member of this House can do so.
Som jeg sagde lige før, er den eneste forskel, at indlæggets varighed ifølge forretningsordenen varierer alt efter, om det drejer sig om en gruppeformand eller et andet medlem af Parlamentet.
The only difference, as I said just now, is that the duration of the speech is different, pursuant to our Rules of Procedure, according to whether it is a group chairman or another Member of the House.
... der mindede os om det, der skete i Tyskland i årene op til 1933.
. .. which reminded us of what happened in Germany in the years running up to 1933.
Jeg håber ikke, at det nogen sinde vil ske igen.
I hope that this will never happen again.
(Kraftig protest fra venstre)
(Loud protest from the left)
Formanden. — Hr. Pearce, jeg henstiller, at De be grænser Dem til det strengt nødvendige.
President. — Mr Pearce, please do not take the scope of your remarks beyond what is strictly necessary.
Vi vil ikke indlede en ny debat.
We do not want to launch a new debate.
I henhold til forretningsordenen skal jeg nu give ordet til de medlemmer, der har opført sig på listen for mindst en time siden, til en stemmeforklaring.
The Rules now oblige me to give the floor to those Members who, for at least an hour now, have had their names down to give an explanation of vote.
Schmid (S). — (DE) Til forretningsordenen, hr for mand: De har netop endnu en gang forklaret, hvorledes sagerne her i huset skal afvikles.
Mr Schmid (S). — (DE) On a point of order, Mr President. You have just explained once again how the business of this House should be conducted.
Hertil vil jeg gerne stille et spørgsmål.
Could I put one question on this?
Kan De forsikre Parlamentet om, at De fremover vil indtage en lige så streng holdning som førhen, hvor De simpelt hen lukkede for en gruppeformands mikrofon, også over for f.eks. hr. Klepsch, sir Fred Catherwood, hr. Le Pen eller hr. Arndt?
Can you assure the House that you will be just as strict as you were when you simply switched off a group chairman's microphone in future too, for example in the case of Mr Klepsch, Sir Fred Catherwood, Mr Le Pen or Mr Arndt?
Jeg spørger, fordi erfaringen har vist, at gruppeformænedene altid taler, hvornår og i hvilken an ledning de ønsker, og at ingen formand hidtil her i Parlamentet har benyttet anledningen til simpelt hen at lukke for en gruppeformands mikrofon.
I am ask ing this because experience has shown that group chairmen always speak when and on whatever subject they please, and that hitherto no President in this House has seen that as a reason for simply switching off a group chairman's microphone.
Hvis De venligst vil bekræfte, at De også vil gøre det ved alle de nævnte herrer fremover, er jeg indforstået.
If you will please confirm that in future you will do the same to all the gentlemen I have mentioned, I will be content.
Men jeg er bange for, at det, efter hvad der blev sagt i formiddags og under de nuværende forhold, vil være uforeneligt med vor stilling som Europa-Parlamentsmedlemmer over for de demokratiske principper og menneskerettigheder, uforeneligt med De europæiske Fællesskabers politiske filosofi og praksis, at slette det elementære demokratiske forbehold, som er inde holdt i punkt 2, andet afsnit.
Mr Tzounis (PPE). — (GR) I am pleased to have the chance, somewhat belatedly albeit, to explain the vote of the New Democracy Members on the second clause of paragraph 2 of the draft decision before us.
Da forhandlingernes varighed altid er begrænset, et det altså ikke udelukkende ud fra respekt for forretningsordenen, men derimod også for kollegerne, at alle bør overholde den taletid, de råder over.
As a Greek and a European I am the first to welcome the restoration of political and individual freedoms in
(Bifald fra venstre) af punkt 2, andet afsnit, og jeg er virkelig ked af, at jeg er nødt til at rette vor gruppeformand, hr. Klepsch' udtalelse om, at han talte for det europæiske folkepartis gruppe.
In the light of this I would like to make it clear in the most categorical terms that the Members belonging to New Democracy voted unanimously for the retention of the second clause of paragraph 2 of the draft decision, and I sincerely regret having to correct Mr Klepsch's assertion that he was speaking on behalf of the whole of the European People's Party.
Han talte for alle gruppens med lemmer undtagen grækerne, og han vidste det.
He was speaking on behalf of all of the members of the group minus the Greeks, and he knew it.
Plaskovitis (S). — (GR) Jeg ville anlægge en anden tone, hvis det var tilfældet, at det forslag til afgørelse, som angår nedsættelsen af delegationen for forbindelserne mellem EF-Tyrkiet, ikke var sat under afstemning. ning.
One of the Members has accused Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf of fascism. As a Dutchman I am a good judge of which Germans are fascists and which are not, just as I can also judge who is a fascist elsewhere in the world, in Turkey, for example.
Og for at understrege vor modstand mod forslaget til afgørelse, som det nu fremgår, er vi rede til at afstå fra afstemningen om det samlede forslag.
By way of underlining our opposition to the draft decision as it was previously formulated we were ready to abstain from voting on the draft decision as a whole.
Men jeg erkærer, at medlemmerne af Nyt Demokrati ville kunne stemme for forslaget til afgørelse i dets oprindelige form, og som det blev udformet efter kompromis mellem formændene for de politiske grupper.
However, I can now say that the New Democracy Members will vote for the draft decision as for mulated by you and as it has taken shape following the motion for a resolution of the chairmen of the political groups.
(Verbeek anmodede om ordet til forretningsordenen)
(Mr Verbeek asked to speak on a point of order)
Jeg tror, at den nye tekst logisk og formelt erstatter det forslag til afgørelse, som kollegerne fra højrefløjen forsøgte at presse igennem på en mindre parlamentarisk måde i Parlamentet.
I believe this new text logically and formally replaces the proposal for a decision which a short while ago colleagues of the Right sought, in a most unparliamentary manner, to get through this Parliament.
For hvis der, hr. formand, ikke forelå det forslag til afgørelse, som vi har vedtaget, og som, jeg gentager, jeg anser for at erstatte det oprindelige forslag til afgørelse, er jeg nødt til at sige, at det er komisk, for ikke at sige tragisk, at et demokratisk parlament som Europa-Parlamentet i formiddags fordømte Tyrkiets diktatoriske styre på grund af fuldbyrdelsen af døsstraffene, og i eftermiddag accepterer, at en interparlamentarisk delegation kan fungere som forbindelsesled mellem vort demokratiske parlament og Tyrkiets tilsyneladende demokratiske nationalforsamling.
Other wise, Mr President, if it were not for the motion for a resolution we have adopted and which, I repeat, I con sider to be a replacement for the proposal for a decision, I should be obliged to say that it is in the least comical, not to say tragic, that a democratic parliament such as this should at midday condemn the dictatorship in Turkey because of the executions and in the afternoon accept that an interparliamentary delegation linking this democratic parliament with the so-called democratic and representative Turkish National Assembly can function.
Vi ved alle under hvilken forfatning og under hvilke forhold, de, som udgiver sig for medlemmer af den tyrkiske nationalforsamling, er blevet valgt.
You knew under which constitution and conditions those who parade as members of the Turkish National Assembly were elected.
Og Fællesskabets demokratiske Parlament kommer til at acceptere en sådan udformning af forslaget til afgørelse og navnlig den måde, hvorpå hr. Klepsch ville presse det igennem.
And then the democratic par liament of the Community accepts a formulation like this, and, what is more, in the shape Mr Klepsch tried to pass off on us.
Jeg fordømmer den måde, hvorpå der blev gjort forsøg på at stjæle de andre medlemmers stemme, og hensigten, som måske ville være blevet skjult, således at man i morgendagens presse kunne have fremstillet et Europa-Parlament, der havde vedtaget den tekst, som man oprincelig forsøge at få vedtaget.
Mr Alavanos (COM). — (GR) When I wanted to make an explanation of vote a couple of hours ago I was going to say that we would vote in favour, while an hour ago we would have voted against.
Alavanos (COM). — (GR) I den stemmeforklaring, som jeg ønskede at afgive for to timer siden, var jeg klar til at sige, at vi ville stemme for, men for en time siden at vi ville stemme imod, og nu må jeg igen sige, at medlemmerne af Grækenlands kommunistiske parti vil stemme for.
Now I can say that those of us in the Communist Party of Greece will vote for the resolution.
Denne ustandselige ændring af vor stilling skyldes ikke vor ubestandighed, men noget som vi må fordømme, nemlig visse politiske gruppers formænds manøvrer.
This constant chopping and changing on our part is not due to any instability of ours but to something that we have to speak out strongly against, the chicanery and manoeuvring engaged in by certain chairmen of political groups.
Vi kan ikke acceptere, at en gruppeformand forelægger en tekst med sin underskrift og i fortsættelse heraf stiller et ændringsforslag, som ændrer hele tekstens indhold, fordi substansen ikke er, hvorvidt 15 personer vil besøge in dien som turister, men om den interparlamentariske delegation for forbindelserne EF-Tyrkiet skal træde i funktion straks, eller først når Tyrkiet i fuldt omfang har genindført demokratiet.
We cannot accept it when a chairman of a political group presents a text bearing his own signature and then tables an amendment which completely overturns the substance of the text, because, of course, the substance of the text is not whether 15 people will go on a beano to India but whether this interparliamentary link with Turkey will come into operation immediately or when democratic institutions are restored in Turkey.
Ud fra dette synspunkt mener vi, at De bør fordømme hr. Klepsch' opførsel.
In the light of this we think you should strongly condemn the position taken by Mr Klepsch.
Det sker, at De begrænser hans taletid, men jeg ved ikke, hvornår De bliver i stand til at begrænse hans manøvrer i Europa-Parlamentet.
You may be able to cut his speaking time but I do not know when you will be able to put a rein on the chicanery and manoeuvring
Europa-Parlamentets forhandlinger
So we agree very much with Parliament on that.
Nr. 2-317/ 167 om forøgelse af Fællesskabernes egne indtægter ikke skulle træde i kraft i tide (dok.
1­362/84) and Council regulation introducing reserve measures to cover requirements in 1985 should the new decision to increase own resources not enter into force in time (Doc. 2­367/84)
2-367/84) kategori, hvor vi simpelt hen forsøgte at indfri noget, som vi, Rådet og andre, allerede havde forpligtet os til.
It therefore belonged to a cat­egory where we were simply trying to catch up with something that we, the Council of Ministers and everyone, had already committed ourselves to.
Dette var den ene ting.
That is one category.
Det er noget helt andet med 1985, hvor vi påbegynder behandlingen af et budget, som vi kun lige har modtaget.
1985 is a completely different category where we are starting off with a budget that we had only just received.
Det forekommer os at være helt absurd, hvis man tager disse to sammen og behandler dem på samme måde.
To put these two together and deal with them in the same way seems to us be totally absurd.
Så dette kan vi ikke tilslutte os.
So we really do not agree with that.
Vi kan derfor ikke stemme for beslutningsforslaget.
We therefore cannot vote for this particular resolution.
Men vi vil heller ikke stemme imod, fordi vi erklærer os enige med alle de medlemmer, som ønsker en forøgelse af de egne indtægter, og som snarest muligt ønsker en tilbagevenden til en finansiering af Fællesskabet via
But we will not vote against it, because we agree very much with all our colleagues here who want the increase in own resources and who want to get back as soon as we possibly can to the proper financing of the Community from its own resources
For det første er det ifølge Kommissionen første gang, at et så alvorligt budget underskud er opstået.
Firstly, this is the first time, according to the Commission, that such a serious budget deficit has applied.
Og jeg formoder ikke, at det er sidste gang.
I believe it will not be the last time.
Og den hypotese, som Kommissionen forfægter som grundlag for fremsættelsen af disse for slag, er kun en hypotese og ikke andet.
Secondly, the hypothesis that the Commis­sion has used as a basis for putting forward these requests is simply a hypothesis and nothing more than that.
Den er baseret på en biancocheck-filosofi, som jeg ikke tror kan være i Fællesskabets interesse; dette tager simpelt hen sigte på et yderligere pengespild til bjerge af fødevareoverskud og interventionsopkøb.
It is based on a blank­cheque philosophy that I believe is not in the interests of the EEC and is simply there to fund further wasteful expenditure on moun­tains of surplus food and intervention buying.
Hvis der skal ske en omfattende nedbringelse af arbejdsløsheden og en fornyelse af vore industrier, så må Europa-Parlamentet klart give udtryk for over for Europas borgere, at vi er imod, at der smides penge ud ad vinduet og imod de principper, der kommer til udtryk i denne betænkning og dette beslutningsforslag.
If we are to make progress on an international scale in defeating unemployment and regenerating our indus­tries, then clearly we in this Parliament have got to be seen by the people of the EEC as being against such wasteful expenditure and against the principles enun­ciated in this motion and this report.
2-694/84) af Wolff og De Vries for den liberale og demokratiske gruppe om ændring af ECUens sammensætning og dennes anvendelse: vedtaget
2­693/84) by Mr Bon­accini and others, on the international monetary situa­tion and the role of the ECU: adopted
2-696/84) af Van Hemeldonck for den socialistiske gruppe om valutaspørgsmål mål
2­694/84) by Mr Wolff and Mr De Vries, on behalf of the Liberal and Demo­
Men til trods for alle vore protester i budgetudvalget har punkt 2 fået følgende ordlyd: »bekræfter sine vedtagelser af 13. september 1984«, når der nu var en afgørelse om at knytte tillægsbudgettet for 1984 og 1985budgettet sammen.
The rapporteur was : — IN FAVOUR OF Amendment No 5; — AGAINST Amendments Nos 1 to 4.
Van Hemeldonck skal Europas borgere kunne vide, hvad vi ønsker, og hvad vi træffer beslutning om?
We are voting on the resolution today — Thursday evening —. How do you expect the European elector to know what we want and what we decide?
en meget moderat form med det formål at gengive de forskellige målsætninger, der så ofte kommer til ud tryk her fra alle sider i Parlamentet, nemlig vor be kymring over arbejdsløsheden i Europa, vor bekymring over sulten i verden og vor bekymring over de fattiges skæbne i alle dele af verden.
Mrs Van Hemeldonck (S). — (NL) We tabled this motion for a resolution on the Socialist Group's behalf in a very moderate form with the idea of reflecting the various views that have so often been expresed on all sides of this House, that is to say, our concern about unemployment in Europe, our concern about hunger in the world and our concern about the lot of the poor in all parts of the world.
Derfor håber jeg inderligt, at der hersker enighed herom.
I therefore very much hope that the resolution will be unanimously adopted.
Fru formand, jeg er af den opfattelse — og jeg har stillet et forslag om, at arbejdsmetoderne ændres — at hver enkelt forhandling bør efterføltes af en afstemning.
I believe, Madam President, — and I shall lay before Parliament a motion for a change in its working meth ods — that each debate must be followed by a vote.
Pressen vil således kunne følge, hvad vi foretager os, vide hvad vi mener og være vidne til, hvorledes vi udfylder vor opgave over for vælgerne.
The media will then be able to relay what we want, what we think and to show how we play our part vis-à-vis the electors.
Formanden. — Fru Dury, Deres bemærkninger er taget til efterretning.
President. — Mrs Dury, your remarks have been noted.
Jeg foreslår, at De tager det op med formanden for Deres gruppe, med henblik på at han kan forelægge forslag i overensstemmelse hermed for Parlamentets præsidium.
I would request you to take it up with the chairman of your group, so that the group chairmen can discuss the way in which this Parliament is run and can then put proposals to the Bureau of Parliament.
(Forslaget til beslutning forkastedes)
(Parliament rejected the motion for a resolution)
Patterson (ED). — (EN) Parlamentet vil have bemærket, at min gruppe har stemt for alle de forslag i beslutningsforslagene, som går ud på en styrkelse af det europæiske monetære system.
Mr Patterson (ED). — Parliament will have noticed that my group has been voting for all those clauses in all these resolutions which call for the strengthening of the European Monetary System.
Dette gør vi med entusiasme.
We do so with enthusiasm.
Dette er en konkret måde — det kommer nu, hr. Seal! — hvorpå Fællesskabet kan bidrage til en styrkesle af ikke blot medlemsstaternes økono mier, men også hele verdens økonomi.
This is one precise way in which the European Community — wait for it, Mr Seal, wait for it — can help to strengthen not only the economies of the Member States themselves but that of the whole world.
Her i Europa kan vi bidrage til at eliminere de svingende valuta kurser, stimulere handelen og investeringerne og skabe arbejdspladser, hr. Seal.
Here in Europe we can help to eliminate exchange rate uncertainties, stimulate trade and investment and create jobs for the unemployed, Mr Seal.
Og vi kan gøre verdens økonomien mindre afhængig af dollaren og dens svingninger.
And we can make the world economy less dependent upon the dollar and its fluctuations.
2-697/84) af gruppen europæisk demokratisk alliance om de monetære problemer: vedtaget
2-697/84) tabled by the Group of the European Democratic Alliance on monetary questions: adopted.
Hvis vi skal styrke EMSen, må alle lande deltage fuldt ud.
If we are to strengthen the EMS all countries must be involved to the full.