natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Jeg vil dernæst spørge Sir Christopher Prout, om han på de britiske konservatives vegne er villig til at fordømme de racistiske angreb på en kommissær og på Fællesskabet.
I also ask Sir Christopher Prout directly whether on behalf of the British Conservatives he is prepared to condemn this racist attack on a Commissioner and on the Community. munity.
McMillan Scott (ED). — (EN) Jeg vil blot i tilslutning til, hvad hr. Prag sagde, sige, at der er intet, der kan undskylde de udtalelser, som Ridley er frem kommet med. men jeg håber, han vil blive opfordret til at besvare spørgsmål i sit eget parlament, måske allerede i dag. Dette parlament ved, at han ikke er den største diplomat.
McMILLAN SCOTT (ED). — Mr President, I just wanted to add to Mr Prag's remarks by saying that it is not possible to defend the reported remarks of Mr Ridley but I hope he will be encouraged to answer to his own Parliament sometime later today perhaps.
Hans udtalelser forekommer at være uovervejede og fremsat uden tanke på konsekvenserne. Det er udtalelser, der så at sige er faldet ham ud af munden, hvorefter de straks er kommet på tryk.
His remarks seem to me to be rather haphazard and obviously without great thought to their consequence and could best be described as off-the-cuff and on the record.
Bettini (V). — (EN) Hr. formand, det drejer sig om den stemmeforklaring, som jeg afgav til Larivebetænkningen om det videnskabelige samarbejde med østlandene, og som er medtaget i det udførlige mødereferat for tirsdag.
BETTINI (V). — (IT) Mr President, my point concerns the explanation of vote on behalf of my group appearing in the verbatim report of proceedings for Tuesday's sitting and concerning the Larive report on scientific exchanges with Eastern Europe.
Der står heri, at gruppen stemmer for, medens det ud fra konteksten klart fremgår, at vi ikke stemmer for.
The verbatim report states that the group will be voting in favour, when it is in fact clear in the context that we are saying that we shall not be voting in favour.
Jeg vil anmode om, at denne fejl bliver rettet.
PROUT, Sir Christopher (ED). — Mr President, I have not read the article which has been referred to this morning but I have read extracts from it.
Jeg håber, det er en trykfejl og ikke en tolkefejl.
I wish therefore to see that error corrected and hope that it is a misprint and not a misinterpretation.
Hr. Ridleys udtalelse om den tyske samling og den økonomiske og monetære union er ganske usædvanlig og skandaløs, og på min gruppes vegne tager jeg helt og fuldt afstand herfra.
I am happy to say that our record on the issue of both German unification and economic and monetary union in the European Community is beyond reproach and I am delighted for that reason to have been able to say what I have said.
Gollnisch (DR). — (FR) Hr. formand, kære kolleger, det er første gang, jeg hører tale om denne udtalelse af en britisk minister, og jeg må sige, at min gruppe ikke deler hr. Cots og forskellige andre taleres opfattelse.
GOLLNISCH (DR). — (FR) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, this is the first I have heard of this statement by a British minister, and I must say that my group does not share the feeling expressed by Mr Cot and by various other speakers.
Vi har altid haft en klar og udadlelig holdning til både den tyske samlingsproces og den økonomiske og monetære union, og jeg er derfor glad for at have haft lejlighed til at sige det, jeg har sagt.
Admittedly, the flabby dictatorship of this Assembly can scarcely be compared to that of the man who claimed to want to establish 'a thousand years of peace and the United States of Europe'.
Denne forsamlings bløde diktatur kan naturligvis ikke sammenlignes med diktaturet under den mand, der ville skabe »tusind års fred og Europas Forenede Stater«, som han sagde.
PANNELLA (NI). — (FR) Mr President, yesterday, on two occasions, the presiding officers at two sittings officially, and acknowledging the fact, decided not to apply — I am weighing my words carefully — our Rules of Procedure.
Men når alt kommer til alt, er han så ikke stadigvæk en af inspiratorerne bag denne kunstige udvikling, som vi er vidne til i dag.
Each of them said that a strict interpretation, a customary interpretation, would not have allowed them to do what they in fact did.
(Bifald)
The fact is,
Tilbagevisning til udvalget
Referral back to committee.
Oreja Aguirre (PPE), formand for Udvalget om Institutionelle Anliggender. — (ES) Hr. formand, jeg vil gerne efter debatten i går anmode om, at betænkningen af Giscard d'Estaing tilbagevises til udvalget.
OREJA AGUIRRE (PPE), Chairman of the Committee on Institutional Affairs. — (ES) Mr President, after yesterday's debate I should like to request that the report by Mr Giscard d'Estaing be referred back to committee.
Jeg mener, at dette vil være det mest fornuftige af hensyn til behandlingen af dette spørgsmål. Jeg anmoder derfor om, at man stemmer for tilbagevisning til udvalget.
I think this is the most appropriate way of dealing with the topic we have before us, and I therefore propose that we accept this referral back to committee.
Udvalget kunne så mødes i løbet af formiddagen i dag, og hvis der opnås enighed, vil vi kunne stemme i eftermiddag.
The Committee could meet this morning, which would enable us to see whether we can reach an agreement so as to be able to vote on the report this afternoon.
Giscard d'Estaing (LDR). — (FR) Hr. formand, forretningsordenen tillader en taler at tage ordet til fordel for tilbagevisning til udvalget.
GISCARD D'ESTAING (LDR). — (FR) Mr President, the Rules of Procedure allow one speaker in favour of referral back to committee.
Det vil jeg hermed gøre, for jeg støtter hr. Orejas forslag.
I shall be that speaker, and I support the proposal by Mr Oreja.
Hr. formand, hvis man, fordi en afstemning mishager et flertal eller et mindretal, bryder den regel, der siger, at man, når først afstemningen er indledt, ikke kan genindlede debatten, og hvis formanden og de, der har ansvaret for forretningsordenen, ikke fordømmer en sådan uregelmæssighed, så overdriver jeg ikke, når jeg siger, at vores arbejde er i alvorlig fare!
Mr President, if, when one sees that a vote may displease some people, be it a majority or a minority, one calls into question the dogma that it is not possible, once the vote has been announced, to reopen the debate and refer the question back until the circumstances are such that the outcome of the vote will be the one desired ; if, Mr President, that president, if the presidency of the Assembly, if those whose business it is to heed the Rules of Procedure, that is, all of us here, do not denounce this irregularity, we shall find ourselves, and I am not exaggerating, facing a new and most serious threat to our work !
Arbejdssituationen i udvalget har i realiteten været en sådan, at vi ikke har haft mulighed for i detaljer at behandle ændringsforslagene inden i går aftes, hvilket betyder, at vi ikke har fuldstændig klarhed over den ene eller anden gruppes eller det ene eller det andet medlems holdning.
As a matter of fact, it so happens that the conditions under which the Committee was working were such that we were unable to examine the amendments in detail in time for yesterday evening, and as a result, various Groups or Members may have had difficulty in making their precise position known.
Det er derfor ønskværdigt, at teksten atter gøres til genstand for en kort behandling i udvalget, så vi helt klart ved, hvad det er vi stemmer om.
The text should therefore be referred back to the Committee for a brief examination, so that people can be in a proper position to vote on it.
Pannella (NI). -- (FR) Hr. formand, artikel 103, første afsnit i forretningsordenen tillader ethvert medlem at foreslå henvisning til fornyet udvalgsbehandling, inden den endelige afstemning påbegyndes. des.
PANNELLA (NI). — (FR) Mr President, the first paragraph of Rule 103 allows a member to take the floor and request referral back to committee at any time before the final vote begins.
Jeg vil derfor anmode Dem om, hr. formand, klart at erklære, at det, der skete i går, navnlig da hr. Alber var formand, ikke kan danne præcedens. Og jeg vil også protestere mod en anden ting i går — hvor der var en regn af overtrædelser af forretningsordenen — nemlig at ordføreren forelagde en tekst som et kompromisændringsforslag, til trods for at det ikke var et kompromisændringsforslag.
I ask you then, Mr President, categorically to stress, to state and to declare that what took place yesterday, especially when Mr Alber was in the chair, has been formally ruled not to constitute a precedent.
Det var ikke muligt at forelægge teksten som et sådant. Jeg vil altså bede Dem om, hr. formand, at forsikre os om, at det der skete i går, ikke vil danne præcedens.
So I really must ask you, Mr President, to assure us that, come what may, what happened yesterday does not constitute a precedent!
Det er for mig klart, at vi ikke bør henvise dette spørgsmål til undersøgelse i noget udvalg, for det udgør en fare for vort arbejde.
I think we can insist, here and now, that there is no need to refer this question back to any committee for study, for to do so would constitute a threat to our work.
Hvis vi nu ser på protokollen fra i går, så forholder det sig sådan, at vi har stemt om alle ændringsforslag, og den endelige afstemning, det er ikke den sidste afstemning, men det er den afstemning, som vi havde påbegyndt.
We had voted on all the amend ments. So the final vote is not simply the last vote taken ; and we had already embarked on the final vote.
Når formanden for Det Institutionelle Udvalg anmoder om tilbagevisning til udvalget, så er det dikteret af politiske motiver uden hensyn tagen til forretningsordenen.
I consider, Mr President, that only political reasons, not respect for the Rules of Procedure, can now dictate this request by the Chairman of our Committee on Institutional Affairs.
I øvrigt, hr. formand, så mener jeg på baggrund af subsidiaritetsprincippet, sådan som jeg forstår det, og ikke som visse andre forstår det, at udtalelser af en minister i en medlemsstat til en avis og ikke til dette parlament frem for alt er en sag, der angår det britiske parlament.
For the rest, Mr President, I think that, thanks to the principle of subsidiarity, perhaps as others understand it and not as I understand it, remarks made by a minister of a Community state to a magazine rather than to a parliament are essentially a matter for the British Parliament.
Når man hidser sig op over noget sådant her i Parlamentet, så er en sådan antifascistisk politiindsats, som lanceres fra visse medlemmers side, udtryk for en hyklerisk fascisme fra antifascister uden magt, der på denne måde netop prøver på at ændre deres parlamentariske arbejde og gøre det til et stridserjob, og det siger jeg med stor respekt for stridserne, som jeg beder und skylde, når jeg på denne måde indblander dem i denne sag.
To get worked up about it here, as some are doing, like anti-fascist watchdogs, is simply the hypocritical fascism of impotent anti-fascists who are basically trying to turn their job as parliamentarians into a cop's job — and I say so with the greatest respect for the cops, and begging their pardon if I refer to them in this connexion.
Om de andre betænkninger har vi stemt.
We have voted on the other reports.
Der er mange, der har taget ordet til denne betænkning, og det med et vist hykleri, men det er ikke det, det drejer sig om.
On this report, I must say that many of us have held forth, just a little hypocritically, perhaps; but that is not the point: the point is that we had already created the situation in which we could no longer ask for this referral except by a subterfuge that infringed the Rules of Procedure.
Det, det drejer sig om, er, at vi var i en situation, hvor det ikke længere var muligt at anmode om henvisning til fornyet udvalgsbehandling, medmindre man gjorde vold på forretningsordenen.
And, Mr President, I am asking the presidency to announce that, whether or not our friend David Martin likes the fact, what happened yesterday evening does not create a precedent, since it is an infringement of the Rules of Procedure.
Hr. formand, jeg anmoder om, at man fastslår, at det, der skete i går aftes — hvad enten
(Parliament agreed to the request for referral back to committee)
(Bifald og blandede reaktioner)
DURY (S). — (FR) There is really no need for Mr Pannella to be a member of the Socialist Group in order to speak.
Martinbetænkningen bliver en best seller, ikke mindst i Skotland. Jeg tror imidlertid, at kendskabet til fransk er noget begrænset i Armadale, Broxburn, Morningside, Wester Hailes og Leith.
GOLLNISCH (DR). — (FR) Mr President, very briefly, I entirely share the feelings expressed by Mr Langer, and I am taking this opportunity to put a question.
Jeg vil derfor bede om, at man træffer de nødvendige foranstaltninger til at sikre, at hr. Martins vælgere og alle andre i Det Forenede Kongerige, der er interesseret i at se, hvad vi vedtog, får teksten på originalsproget.
Does the referral back to committee that has just been agreed on mean that, as would normally be the case, it will be possible to table new amendments ? Normally, that is possible.
Langer (V). — (IT) Hr. formand, jeg er ked af, at man ikke har fulgt dagsordenen.
LANGER (V). — (IT) Mr President, I regret to see that the agenda has not been respected.
Jeg troede, at mødet som sædvanligt ville begynde med godkendelse af protokollen, det vil sige med selve dokumentet.
I had thought that the sitting would open, as usual, with the approval of the minutes, in other words of that actual document.
I mellemtiden er der fremsat erklæringer om den engelske ministers erklæring, der har været diskussion om Præsidiets anvendelse af forretningsordenen i går, og nu har vi direkte mod sædvane fremsat et forslag, som der blev stemt om.
In the meantime, we have heard speeches on the statement by the British minister, discussion of the application by yesterday's President of the Rules of Procedure, and now we have gone so far, contrary to the accepted procedure, as to make a proposal which has been put to the vote.
Jeg gentager altså min kraftige protest mod denne manglende overholdelse af dagsordenen.
I wish therefore to reiterate my strong protest at this failure to respect the agenda.
Vedrørende protokollen fra i går står der på side 24: »stemmeforklaringer« til betænkning af Giscard d'Estaing, hvorefter der nævnes navnene på de med lemmer, der tog ordet for en stemmeforklaring.
Turning to the substance of yesterday's Minutes on the point of moving the inadmissibility of a matter, page 22 of the Italian version states : 'explanations of vote on the Giscard d'Estaing report', after which the names of members giving explanations of vote are listed.
Formanden. — Kære kolleger, formandskabet har fra de kompetente franske myndigheder modtaget anmodning om ophævelse af hr. Le Pens parlamen tariske immunitet.
PRESIDENT. — I have received from the French authorities a request for the waiver of Mr Le Pen's parliamentary immunity.
I overensstemmelse med forretningsordenen er denne anmodning henvist til Udvalget for Forretningsordenen, Valgs Prøvelse og Med lemmernes Immunitet.
But is is customary, when the parliamentary immunity of one of the members of this Assembly is at issue, at least to permit him to make a statement.
Dernæst står der, at Cot m.fl. tog ordet. Protokollen er på dette punkt forkert.
It also states : 'Mr Cot and others spoke'.
Der skulle efter Speroni stå, at formanden gik over til afstemning ved navne opråb efter at have erklæret afstemningen for påbegyndt.
They ought to state, and I formally request that this be the case, that, after Speroni, the President of the sitting proceeded to the vote by roll call after having declared the vote open.
Resultatet blev ikke meddelt, selv om der var afstemning ved navneopråb.
The result was not given, although this was a vote by roll call.
Da artikel 99 i forretningsordenen klart siger, at når afstemningen er påbegyndt, kan kun formanden tage ordet, vil jeg gerne anmode om, at man i hvert fald kan se, at det ikke skete.
Seeing that Rule 99 of the Rules of Procedure provides clearly that once the vote is open, only the President may speak, I wish it at least understood that this was not the case.
Le Pen (DR). — (FR) Hr. formand, jeg misbruger ikke min ret til at taget ordet som formand for min gruppe, mener jeg. Men der er tradition for, at når der er tale om anmodning om ophævelse af et medlems immunitet, at man så i det mindste kan afgive en erklæring.
I appreciate that yesterday's sitting was a difficult one to manage, but our group requested several times that we take things more slowly and that the motions should be read out to make clear what was being voted upon,... the motions were in fact presented orally.
Vi forventer, at Parlamentet i fremtiden ikke stemmer om mundtlige forslag, som bliver uklare selv for forslagsstillerne eller ordførerne eller for dem, der skal lede mødet under sådanne vanskelige betingelser.
We trust that, in future, this Parliament will not be called upon to vote on oral motions which then turn out not to be clear even to the proposers or rapporteurs or to whoever has to preside over the sitting in those difficult circumstances.
David Martin (S). -- (EN) Hr. formand, en lille rettelse til side 23 i den engelske protokol, hvor der refereres til debatten om betænkningen af Giscard d'Estaing.
MARTIN, D. (S). — Mr President, on a point of accuracy; on page 23 of the English minutes which refer to the debate on the Giscard d'Estaing report.
Der står her, at hr. Martin anmodede om delt afstemning om punkt 13, at hr. De Gucht sagde, at det som følge af vedtagelsen af ændringsforslag nr. 61 ikke længere var muligt at foretage delt afstemning om punkt 13, og at hr. Martin var enig heri. Der skal stå, at hr. Martin ikke var enig heri.
It says that 'Mr Martin requested a split vote on paragraph 13. Mr De Gucht pointed out that owing to the adoption of Amendment No 61 it was no longer possible to take a split vote on paragraph 13.
Jeg vil gerne gøre mine kolleger opmærksom på, at det nu er femte gang på mindre end et år, at den franske regering anmoder Europa-Parlamentet om at give den ret til at retsforfølge mig i et politisk spørgsmål.
I should like to point out to my colleagues that this is the fifth time in less than a year that the French Government has asked this Assembly for permission to prosecute me in connection with political issues.
I det foreliggende tilfælde er der tale om en klage på grund af en udtalelse om indenrigsministeren.
This time, proceed ings are being brought against me by the Minister of the Interior.
Men jeg vil gerne gøre opmærksoms på, at de franske ministre har total immunitet, da en anmodning om ophævelse af en ministers immunitet skal rettes til Højesteret, og en sådan anmodning kan kun fremsættes af det flertal i parlamentet, der støtter regeringen.
Now I would remind you that French ministers enjoy total immunity, since in order to challenge it one would have to refer the matter to the High Court of Justice, to which application can only be made by the majority in Parliament supporting the Government.
Det er således klart en kamp mellem David og Goliath, og som parlamentsmedlem har jeg ingen chance for at vinde, hvis min immunitet ophæves.
So what we have here is a case of the earthenware pot pitted against the iron pot, and as a parliamentarian, needless to say I have no chance of winning, were my immunity to be waived.
I en af Molières komedier er der en person, der siger: »Slå mig, mine herrer, jeg har seks børn«.
As a character in one of Molière's comedies says: 'Beat me, gentlemen, strike me; I've got six children.'
Jeg må også nævne, at hvis ophævelsen af min immunitet ikke straks fører til en retssag fra den
I would point out that, while a waiver of parliamentary immunity may not lead to assiduous prosecution by the French Government, it does at least lead to a considerable increase in interest in the National Front, of which I am Chairman.
McMahon (S). — (EN) Hr. formand, vedrørende side 64 i protokollen, der indeholder den tekst, der blev vedtaget i forbindelse med Martin-betænkningen.
McMAHON (S). — Mr President, on page 64 of the minutes, which shows the text actually agreed on the Martin report.
Jeg er enig i, at der er et stort behov for, at
In the English version page 64 is in French !
(Bifald)
Time
Formanden. — Næste punkt på dagsordenen er betænkning (dok.
PRESIDENT. — The next item is the interim report (Doc.
A3-183/90) af Donnelly for Det Midlertidige Udvalg om Virkningerne af Den Tyske Samlingsproces for Det Europæiske Fællesskab om konsekvenserne af tysk samling for Det Europæiske Fællesskab.
A3-183/90) by Mr Donnelly, on behalf of the Temporary Committee for the study of the impact of the process of German unification on the European Community, on the impact of the process of German unification on the European Community.
Formanden. — De interesserede, der ønsker deres spørgsmål besvaret, kan give formanden meddelelse herom.
BANGEMANN, Vice-President of the Commission. — (DE) I have heard that Members of this House were wondering yesterday what would happen with the unanswered questions after the cancellation of Question Time.
Han vil da viderebringe det til Kommissionen. sionen.
We would ask you to inform us which authors would like to receive a written reply.
Pannella (NI). — (FR) Hr. formand, De meddelte, at vi skulle drøfte Donnellybetænkningen.
PANNELLA (NI). — (FR) Mr President, you have announced that we are going to discuss the Donnelly report.
Hvis jeg ikke tager fejl, er Rådet ved at udvandre.
If I am not mistaken, the Council is in full retreat.
Der er ingen til stede.
There's no one there.
Det er mit indtryk, hr. formand, at Kommissionen er repræsenteret.
I have the impression, Mr President, that the Commission is here.
Vi skal nu i gang med forhandlingen.
We are going to begin this debate.
Vi må i høj grad beklage denne mangel på stil, det kan jeg ikke lade være med at sige til disse vigtigpetere, og også at Rådet er totalt fraværende, bemærk, at jeg siger totalt, netop når Parlamentet skal indlede forhandlingen om noget, der direkte angår det.
We must deeply deplore the lack of style, and I must also say to one of those two jokers, the absence of the Council, which is totally and utterly unrepresented at the moment when Parliament is about to begin the debateon a matter that is of direct concern to it.
Robles Piquer (PPE). — (ES) Hr. formand, hvis jeg ikke har misforstået det, så har hr. kommissær Bangemann netop formuleret et spørgsmål vedrø rende spørgetiden, som kræver et svar.
ROBLES PIQUER (PPE). — (ES) Mr President, if I am not mistaken, Commissioner Bangemann has just asked a question which requires an answer, concerning yesterday's Questions Time.
Jeg har forstået det sådan, at der er to muligheder.
But we shall have to adopt one or other of these two solutions : we cannot have both.
Enten bliver hele komplekset af spørgsmål udsat til næste mødeperiode, eller også giver Kommissionen et skriftligt svar på alle spørgsmål, som det ikke har kunnet besvare mundtligt.
Nor, apparently, is it necessary for those of us who had tabled questions to state now that we would like written answers. That is not necessary.
Men vi bliver nødt til at vælge én af fremgangsmåderne.
Someone must decide which of these two options is to be applied.
Det er heller ikke nødvendigt, at de, der har stillet spørgsmål til denne spørgetid, skal meddele, at de ønsker deres spørgsmål besvaret skriftligt.
The Council, leaving the Chamber this morning, gives exactly the wrong signals to this Houseon the way in which we will deal with this matter over the next few months.
Men det må fastlægges, hvilken fremgangsmåde der skal følges.
I hope, as President, you will express our concern to the Council.