natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
(Forslaget til beslutning vedtoges)
Resolutions are put
Formanden. - (FR) Jeg vil foregribe begivenhederne lidt og spørge kollegerne, om der er nogen indsigelser.
President. - I am going to anticipate slightly, and ask our colleagues if there are any objections.
For at hr. Schulz trækker sit ændringsforslag nr. 1 tilbage, forud sætter det som nævnt, at han opnår forsamlingens tilsagn om, at det godtager det mundlige ændringsforslag til nr. 1.
For Mr Schulz to be able to withdraw his amendment 1, you must understand that this implies that he has our Assembly's commitment that it accepts the oral amendment to amendment 11.1 am therefore asking the Assembly, in slight anticipation, whether it has any objection to there being an oral amendment to amendment 11.
(Der var ingen indvendinger imod forslaget)
(The Assembly did not oppose the proposal)
Formanden. - Altså, hr. Schulz, De trækker så Deres ændringsforslag tilbage.
President. - Mr Schuiz, you may therefore withdraw your amendment.
Cohn-Bendit (V). - (DE) Fru formand, hr. Schulz, der er kun én ting, jeg gerne vil forstå. De sagde: Hverken ETA eller IRA eller alle mulige andre vil være beskyttet.
Cohn-Bendit (V). - (DE) Madam President, Mr Schulz, there is just one thing I am not clear about.
Men der findes på retsområdet det princip, at enhver anklaget har retsbeskyttelse, indtil han er dømt.
But there is a principle in law that every defendant is entitled to the protection of the law until proved guilty.
La présomption d'innocence kalder man det på fransk, for lige at udtrykke det europæisk. Derfor er det jo...
The French call it la présomption d'innocence, to use a European term for once, so it is...
Formanden. - (FR) Jeg kan ikke åbne en debat.
President. - We cannot get into a debate.
Ændringsforslag nr. 1 er altså trukket tilbage.
Amendment 1 is therefore withdrawn from the vote.
Crowley (UPE). - (EN) Fru formand, med hensyn til det mundtlige ændringsforslag stillet af hr. Schulz.
Crowley (UPE). - Madam President, regarding the oral amendment proposed by Mr Schulz.
Har jeg forstået det rigtigt, at det er hr. Schulz' hensigt, at man skal nægte juridisk beskyttelse til personer, der anklages for terrorisme? Det var sådan, det lød i tolkningen.
Am I correct in understanding that Mr Schulz's intention is that legal protection will be denied to people who are accused of terrorist crimes?
Betænkning (A4-0383/96) af Izquierdo Collado for Udvalget om Forskning, Teknologisk Udvikling og Energi om foreløbig rapport fra Europa-Kommissionen i henhold til artikel 8 i Rådets beslutning (94/78/EF, Euratom) om et flerårigt program for udvikling af fællesskabsstatistikker over forskning, ud vikling og innovation (KOM(96) 0042 - C4-0247/96)
Report (A4-0383/96) by Mr Izquierdo Collado, on behalf of the Committee on Research, Technological Development and Energy, on an interim Commission report according to Article 8 of the Council Decision (94/78/EC, Euratom) establishing a multiannuai programme for the development of Community statistics on research, development and innovation (COM(96)0042 - C4-0247/96)
Formanden. - Kære kolleger, vi stemmer ikke om hr. Schulz' intentioner.
President. - My dear colleagues, we are not voting on the intentions of Mr Schulz.
Hr. Schulz har foreslået at trække sit ændringsforslag tilbage på to betingelser: at PPE-Gruppen godtager et mundligt ændringsforslag til nr. 11, og hr. Schulz har redegjort for det mundtlige ændringsforslag.
Mr Schulz has proposed the withdrawal of his amendment on two conditions: that the PPE accepts an oral amendment to his amendment 11, and he has made this oral amendment quite explicit.
Ordføreren, fru Reding, hai- givet sit samtykke, naturligvis under forudsætning af at der ikke gøres indsigelse imod, at det mundlige ændringsforslag sættes under afstemning.
Mrs Reding, the rapporteur, gave her agreement, on condition, of course, that there was no objection to this oral amendment being put to the vote.
Det vil derfor blive sat under afstemning samtidig med ændringsforslag nr. 11. Det ligger nu fast.
Therefore it will be. at the time we vote on amendment 11.
Forhandlingen vedrørende substansen er nu afsluttet.
The debate on the content is now over.
Betænkning (A4-0001/97) af Schaffner for Udvalget om Retlige Anliggender og Borgernes Rettigheder om Kommissionens trettende beretning om kontrollen med gennemførelsen af fællesskabsretten (1995) (KOM(96) 0600 - C4-0363/96)
Report (A4-0001/97) by Mrs Schaffner, on behalf of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Citizens' Rights, on the Thirteenth Annual Report on monitoring the application of Community law (1995) (COM(96)0600 -C4-0363/96)
Schulz (PSE). - (DE) Fru formand, jeg har forståelse for, at kollegerne ønsker at komme videre.
Schulz (PSE). - (DE) Madam President, I quite, under stand that Honourable Members would like to move on.
Men fordi netop den debat, som vi nu fører her, har givet anledning til megen røre i visse EU-medlemslande, vil jeg gentage én sætning: Man behøver ikke her at præcisere det specielt, at en retsstat også skal overholde sine retsstatsuge grundlag i retsplejen, uanset hvem det er over for.
But as the debate we are holding here at present has caused a great deal of tumult in some Member States, I should like to repeat one sentence: we do not need to make a special point here of saying that a State that is governed by the principles of the rule of law must also observe those principles in its legal organization, no matter who the accused may be.
Det ved hr. Cohn-Bendit også, i denne henseende var hans indlæg på skrømt.
Mr Cohn-Bendit. too, is well aware of that, and his request to speak was merely for show.
Men det er vigtigt, at vi slår fast her: Ingen terrorist og ingen terroristisk organisation kan opnå politisk legitimation på grundlag af...
But it is important that we should make this point here: no terrorist and no terrorist organization can derive any political legitimacy from a law...
(Forslaget til beslutning vedtoges) opholdstilladelse.
(Parliament adopted the resolution)
Le Gallou (NI). - (FR) Fru formand, vi har naturligvis stemt imod denne betænkning, som sigter mod at indføre et meningstyranni og hjernevask, bl.a. gennem medierne.
Report (A4-0396/96) by Mr Valverde López, on behaif of the Committee on Institutional Affairs, on the report of the European Council to the European Parliament on the progress of the European Union in 1995 (pursuant to Article D of the Treaty on European Union) (C4-0409/96)
Det kan endvidere konstateres, at der i den vedtagne beslutning anmodes om, at bekæmpelsen af racisme gøres til et fællesskabsanliggende, og at der tilkendegives en støtte til oprettelsen af et »europæisk overvågningscenter for racisme og fremmedhad«, hvad der efter vores opfattelse ikke kommer noget, som helt konkret ud af ud over en øget administration og øgede udgifter.
Le Gallou (NI). - (FR) Madam President, obviously we have voted against this report, which aims to set up thought policing and brainwashing through the media, in particular.
Dette er baggrunden for, at vi har stemt imod beslutningsforslaget. forslaget.
But, while taking account of that and of an. amendment which was adopted, we are rather surprised that there were
Men vi er lidt overrasket, både over dette og over et ændringsforslag, som er blevet vedtaget, især fordi der var så mange »ja«-stemmer og så få »nej«-stemmer og »stemmer ikke«.
This year, this rejection will take on a particular meaning and profile, with the official announcement, on 31 January, of: 1997, European Year Against Racism, in The Hague.
Det kræves nemlig i det vedtagne ændringsforslag nr. 5, som dermed indgår i beslutningen i dens endelige form - » at indvandrere fra tredjelande ligebehandles med hensyn til økonomiske og sociale rettigheder, anerkendelse af de borgerlige, kulturelle og politiske rettigheder, især stemmeret ved lokalvalg for dem, der har boet mere end fem år i en medlemsstat«.
so many votes for and so few votes against and absten­tions. Indeed, amendment 5, which was adopted, and which therefore figures in the final resolution, demands, I quote 'that immigrants from outside the Community should receive equal treatment regarding economic and social rights, recognition of civil, cultural and political rights, particularly the right to vote in local elections for non­European foreigners residing in Europe'.
I år sker dette på .en helt speciel baggrund, idet 1997 den 31. januar i Haag officielt blev udpeget som Det Europæiske År mod Racisme.
That is why we should support the step which the European Union is taking in the symbolic expression which has led it to declare a year against racism. It is democracy which is at stake.
Det ville være interessant at vide, hvordan kollegerne fra Den Kristelig-Demokratiske Gruppe og Gruppen Union for Europa, der har undladt at stemme eller har stemt »ja« til betænkningen, vil forklare deres vælgere, at de dermed har stemt for at give borgere fra tredjelande stemmeret ved lokalvalg.
Weil, it would be interesting to see our colleagues from the Christian Democrat and Union for Europe groups, who abstained or voted for the report, explaining to those who elected them that they voted for the right to vote for nonEuropean foreigners in local elections in this way.
Jeg tror, deres vælgere vil blive noget overrasket, når de erfarer dette.
I am sure their supporters would be very surprised to learn which way they voted.
Jeg vil her bekræfte mit stærke engagement i kampen mod den racistiske og fascistiske virus, der spreder sig over hele Europa under mange forkellige og altid farlige for mer.
Regarding this, I am disappointed by and condemn the attitude of the British government in opposing the creation of a European observatory for racism, an element which could have been decisive in determining the success of this year.
Berthu (EDN), skriftlig. - (FR) Det årlige beslutningsforslag om racisme, således som det blev indgivet af Europa-Parlamentets Udvalg om Borgerlige Frihedsrettigheder og Indre Anliggender, og i den form det blev forelagt i formiddag, syntes at have undergået visse forbedringer i forhold til de tekster, der er blevet vedtaget tidligere år.
Berthu (EDN), in writing. ­ (FR) The annual motion for a resolution on racism, as prepared by the Committee on Civil Liberties and Citizens' Rights of our Assembly, and as presented this morning, seemed to show an improve­ment on texts of previous years.
Man havde nemlig for en gangs skyld omhyggeligt und gået at sammenblande »racisme« og »indvandringskontrol«.
Indeed, for once, the usual amalgam of 'racism' and 'control of immigration' was carefully avoided.
Desværre holdt de gode intentioner ikke stand synderligt længe over for de ændringsforslag, der blev vedtaget i plenum.
Sadly, these good intentions did not last for long against the amendments which have just been voted in in the plenary session.
Racisme er en snigende sygdom, der trives, overalt hvor der hersker utilfredshed, og den giver sig udslag i jagten på syndebukke.
Racism is an ill which infiltrates itself insidiously and which feeds on the accumulation of reasons for unhappi­ncss, which result in the search for scapegoats.
Det er derfor med rette, at Europa-Parlamentet regelmæssigt tager afstand fra racisme; det bør imidlertid gøre alt, hvad det kan for at øve en indsats, der kan mærkes i unionsborgernes hverdag, i kampen for menneskeliv værdighed, frihed og demokrati.
So yes, Parliament is right to attack racism on a regular basis, but it must do all it can to contribute to this struggle, at the level of European citizens, for human integrity, freedom and democracy.
Det fremgår heraf, at Europa-Parlamentet ønsker at »vise det positive bidrag, som indvandrerne yder til det europæiske samfund« (ændringsforslag nr. 8), at det »opfordrer medlemsstaterne til at udvikle deres indvandringspolitik i nær tilknytning til en fyldestgørende integrationspolitik« (ændringsforslag nr. 2), en integrationspolitik, der er nær mere defineret i ændringsforslag nr. 5, hvor Europa-Parlamentet »kræver, at indvandrere fra tredjelande ligebehandles med hensyn til økonomiske og sociale rettigheder, anerkendelse af de borgerlige, kulturelle og politiske rettigheder, især stemmeret ved lokalvalg for dem, der har boet mere end fem år i en medlemsstat...«.
We note in it that the European Parliament wishes to 'point out the positive contribution which immigrants are making to European society' (amendment 8), that it 'calls on the Member States to develop their immigration policy in close connection with an adequate integration policy' (amendment 2), an integration policy which is itself made explicit by amendment 5: the European Parliament 'calls for non­Community immigrants to enjoy equal treatment with regard to economic and social rights, and the recog­nition of civic, cultural and political rights, including the right to vote in local elections for those who have been resident in a Member State for more than five years...'.
Europa-Parlamentet - vi selv - bør derfor tage afstand fra fascistiske udtalelser og handlinger - hvad enten de kan betegnes som neofascistiske eller ej - men også og især fra fascisternes kumpaner, som man meget ofte finder inden for »langt pænere« politiske grupperinger, ja selv inden for regeringskredse.
It should, we should therefore denounce the discourse and actions of fascists, whether 'neo' or otherwise, but also, and particularly of their accomplices, who can often be found within 'much more respectable' political groupings and even governments.
Den daglige racisme, racismen i hverdagen er indbegrebet af den racisme, vi tager afstand fra i vores beslutninger.
Everyday racism, common racism, is the breeding ground for the racism we are denouncing in our resolutions.
Den bør jages ud af alle sine skjulesteder, herunder de talrige sæder i denne forsamling.
This should lead to all kinds of actions in a European frame­work to combat racism, xenophobia and anti­Semitism in a more co­ordinated and effective way.
Denne holdning forekommer os helt uacceptabel.
This position seems to us totally unacceptable.
For det første er den blind for selve karakteren af den form for indvandring, der foregår i dag, som hovedsagelig skyldes den økonomiske selvdestruktion, visse tredjelande udøver, og som snarere er en tung byrde end en chance for EU-landene.
To start with, it underestimates the reality of contemporary immi­gration, which essentially is motivated by the economic self­destruction of certain third party countries, and which constitutes a heavy burden, rather than an opportunity, for members of the European Union.
For det andet bør de indvandrere, der grundet disse særlige omstændigheder søger til EU-landene, ikke automatisk betragtes som kandidater til en permanent
Secondly, the immigrant population which arrives accidentally in our countries under these condition, must not be considered as having a vocation to stay here for good.
Diez de Rivera Icaza (PSE), skriftlig. - (ES) Det er af største vigtighed, at Unionen udnævner 1997 til »Det Europæiske Ar mod Racisme«.
Secondly, you will note that the resolution voted in asks for European competence for combatting against racism, as well as the creation of a 'European observatory for racism and xenophobia', which, in our opinion, v/ould definitely not bring about any further concrete achieve­ments, other than administration and additional expense.
Det vil tilskynde til iværk-
Holm, Lindholm and Schörling (V), in writing. ■­ (SV) Racism must be fought at all levels and in every way.
Diez de Rivera Icaza beslutninger kan være påvirket af motiver, der intet har med sagen at gøre.
Holm, Lindholm and Schörling actions against racism to the First Pillar and the strength ening of legal instruments.
sættelse af aktioner inden for en europæisk ramme og således bidrage til en bedre koordineret og mere effektiv bekæmpelse af racismen, fremmedhadet og antisemitismen. men.
But we are all agreed on the fact that we wish to assist wholeheartedly in the fight against racism and the resolution does contain many good and important points.
Fundamentalistiske ideologier, som giver sig udslag i skræmmende voldshandlinger, som leder tanken hen på holocausts rædsler.
If Parliament wishes to increase its support to combat forest fires there is already a budget entry for this and if we wish to support forestry in developing countries this is best done through the normal channels for development aid.
Ahlqvist, Andersson, Theorin og Wibe (PSE), skriftlig. - (SV) Vi mener ikke, det på nuværende tidspunkt er nødvendigt at fastlægge en fælles skovbrugsstrategi.
Lindqvist (ELDR), in writing. - (SV) There is no need for a joint forestry policy in the EU.
Til pasningen af landbrugs- og regionalpolitikken i forbindelse med østudvidelsen stiller i dag Unionen over for store problemer.
Nor is there any need for a joint 'Forestry Strategy' described in the report, which is just another term for a future forestry policy.
Under de omstændigheder er det uhensigtsmæssigt at indføre en fælles strategi for yderligere et område, navnlig i betragtning af at de enkelte lande allerede har en effektiv skovbrugspolitik.
The financial aid which would be allocated for this ' forestry strategy' would not benefit Scandinavia, but primarily the countries of the Mediterranean and their former colonies.
Medskyldig tavshed, den »vi vidste ikke-holdning«, som så mange borgere nu som før retfærdiggør sig med, forpligter os til at gøre noget og igen og igen at fastslå, at det 20. århundredes europæiske kultur i vid udstrækning er en raceblandingens kultur, og at det netop er dette, der gør den så righoldig.
Medina Ortega (PSE). - (ES) In respect of the vote which we have just held on the Fisheries Council, my Group welcomes approval of Amendment No 5 tabled by the GUE/NGL Group, but 1 am personally upset that Amendment No 7 tabled by the same Group was not approved.
Desuden foregår der et omfattende internationalt samarbejde på det skovpolitiske område, bl.a. inden for rammerne af FAO og ECE. Der finder også et velfungerende internationalt samarbejde sted om kortlægning af skaderne på de europæiske skove.
Both amendments refer to the Fisheries Agree ment with Morocco which is one of the most important of the Community's Agreements, and which in my opinion has been tantamount to an abandonment of responsibilities by the Commission in accepting the extension of the biological moratorium period from two to four months without sufficient guarantees - or rather without any guarantees at all - that Morocco will actually comply with that biological moratorium.
Holm, Lindholm og Schörling (V), skriftlig. - (SV) Racisme må bekæmpes på alle planer og i alle sammen hænge.
The report prepared by the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development is much better than lhe Commission's proposal.
Vi har derfor stemt for beslutningsforslaget, på trods af at det indeholder en række punkter, som vi har en helt anden opfattelse af.
In order to stop further drives by the Commission in this and similar matters, as the EU takes on more and more areas, it is best to say no.
Viljen til og ønsket om at bidrage aktivt til kampen mod racismen er vi dog enige om, og beslutningsforslaget indeholder mange gode og væsentlige punkter.
Titley (PSE), in writing. - I am glad to vote for this excellent report by my British Labour colleague David Thomas.
En fælles skovpolitik vil være af tvivlsom værdi, da problemerne er så forskellige i unionslandene. Afgræsning er f.eks. et stort problem i Middelhavsområdet, mens man i de nordiske lande bevilger penge til at forhindre, at åbne vænger og græsmarker vokser til igen.
Therefore, I hope that the Commission will pay more attention to this subject and in the future will look very carefully into any concessions which it might make, bearing in mind that at this very moment Morocco is the beneficiary of major aids from the European Community.
Endelig finder vi det unødvendigt, at Unionen i og med dette dokument påtager sig nye udgifter.
Although I would be called in a 'townie' in Britain, and despite the fact that I represent a mainly urban constituency, I have good reason to support forestry's future.
Hvis alle forslagene går igennem, vil det medføre en årlig forøgelse af Unionens udgifter på ca. 350 millioner ecu.
The Redrose Forest in my constituency is a wonderful example of the way in which forestry can help meet a variety of important needs.
Det mener vi er forkert.
It creates jobs in an area which has suffered from industrial decline.
Lindqvist (ELDR), skriftlig. - (SV) Der er ikke behov for en fælles skovpolitik i EU.
Ahlqvist, Andersson, Theorin and Wibe (PSE), in writing. - (SV) We do not see the need to adopt a joint forestry strategy at this point in time.
Der er heller ikke behov for en fælles »skovbrugsstrategi«, som det hedder i betænkningen; dette er en omskrivning for en fremtidig skovpolitik.
The Union currently faces enormous problems adapting its Agricultural and Regional Policies to allow for an enlargement Eastwards.
De bevillinger, som den fælles »skovstrategi« ville kræve, ville ikke komme Norden til gavn, men først og fremmest Middelhavslandene og deres tidligere kolonier.
It is inappropriate to adopt a further joint strategy in another area, particularly as there are already well developed Forestry Policies in the individual countries.
Medina Ortega (PSE). - (ES) Med hensyn til den netop gennemførte afstemning om resultatet af samlingen i Rådet (fiskeri) glæder min gruppe sig over vedtagelsen af ændringsforslag nr. 5 fra Den Europæiske Venstrefløjs Fællesgruppe/Nordisk Grønne Venstre, og personligt beklager jeg, at samme gruppes ændringsforslag nr. 7 ikke er blevet vedtaget.
So I welcome this report's ideas about information and awareness campaigns, to make sure everyone recognizes that forestry has a positive impact on their life - and that of the planet.
Den europæiske fiskerisektor for tjener beskyttelse, og man kan ikke lægge vore fiskeres skæbne i hænderne på den marokkanske regering, hvis
There is also considerable international cooperation on Forestry Policy within the FAO and ECE for example and well developed international cooperation concerned with mapping forest damage in Europe.
Derfor har jeg også stemt imod denne betænkning.
Reding report (A4-0368/96)
Europa-Parlamentets forhandlinger
Secondly, Amendment No 11 which was
De europæiske befolkninger har forskellige opfattelser af, hvordan deres samfund skal indrettes rent strafferetsligt.
Crowley orally amended, was in contravention of the right of the presumption of innocence to all.
Vi bør hjælpe udviklingslandene med at afveje deres behov for økonomisk vækst over for vort fælles behov for at ånde!
With this in mind, I have voted against the report.
Lindqvist (ELDR), skriftlig. - (SV) Terrorisme er uacceptabel i et retssamfund.
Eriksson and Svensson (GUE/NGL), in writing. - (SV) We have voted against Mrs. Reding's report.
Den må bekæmpes med lovlige midler på alle niveauer.
We are strongly opposed to terrorism and all forms of terrorist act.
Et demokratisk, åbent samfund er den bedste måde at modvirke terrorismens næringskilder på.
Under no circumstances could we support any movement which uses terrorism to promote its aims.
Et problem i betænkningen er, at den ikke definerer terrorisme; det vil kunne sætte retssikkerheden ud af spillet.
But the problem with this report is it risks setting aside the rule of law, as several points are not sufficiently clear.
Crowley (UPE). - (EN) Jeg har to grunde til at afholde mig ved sidste afstemning om denne betænkning.
Ahlqvist, Theorin and Wibe (PSE), in writing. - (SV) There are two important reasons for voting against this report.
For det første er der det forhold, at ændringsforslag nr. 7, som eksplicit ville have respekteret menneskerettigheder for alle, blev forkastet.
Practically every point places the emphasis on increased supranationality within the EU.
For det andet er der ændringsforslag nr. 11, der blev ændret mundtligt, og som er i modstrid med alles ret til at blive anset for uskyldige, indtil deres skyld er bevist.
Terrorism must be more clearly defined. In addition, we must clarify who will define those movements which are to be considered terrorist and which are the 'support circles' for terrorism mentioned in the report.