Formal sitting - Grand Mufti of Syria
President
Ladies and gentlemen, it is a special honour and pleasure for me today, in this European Year of Intercultural Dialogue, to extend a warm welcome to the European Parliament to His Eminence Sheikh Ahmad Badr El Din El Hassoun, Grand Mufti of Syria.
(Applause)
As I emphasised last week in Ljubljana at the opening ceremony for the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue, the European Parliament attaches great importance to this year of dialogue between cultures.
I am firmly convinced, as are many others, that it is both possible and essential for people from different cultures and religions to live together in peace, both within the European Union and in the world at large. Particular importance attaches in this context to our relations with the peoples on the opposite shores of the Mediterranean and in the Middle East. The fact is that the fruits of this dialogue will have a lasting effect on our common future. Together we must build an intellectual and cultural bridge across the Mediterranean, embedded in mutual enrichment and shared values.
We build this bridge when we engage in continuous, honest and open dialogue in which we listen to each other, exchange our opinions frankly and develop mutual understanding.
Tolerance is at the heart of intercultural dialogue. Tolerance does not mean indifference. Tolerance means putting forward our own points of view and hearing and respecting other people's convictions.
Where we find it impossible to accept another person's point of view, it is still necessary to treat such views with respect, to exchange ideas and opinions peacefully and, wherever possible, to pave the way for joint action and thereby defuse tension.
We must stress the things we have in common, including the substance of universal democratic values. Foremost among these are human dignity and the defence of inalienable human rights.
In the course of 2008 and thereafter, the European Parliament will take several opportunities to engage in such talks. Today's visit by the Grand Mufti of Syria represents the first of these opportunities. Ahmad Badr El Din El Hassoun, formerly Mufti of Aleppo, is regarded as an outstanding champion of inter-faith dialogue in a country where the religious communities in all their diversity still live and work together in peace.
This is clearly symbolised by the fact that the Grand Mufti is accompanied on today's visit by high-ranking religious leaders. That was his express wish, and may I make special mention of Bishop Antoine Audo, head of the Chaldean Catholic Church in Syria, and bid him a warm welcome.
Your Eminence, it now gives me great pleasure to invite you to address the European Parliament.
(Applause)
Ahmad Badr El Din El Hassoun
Grand Mufti of Syria. -
(The speaker spoke in Arabic. Below is a transcription of the English interpretation.)
Greetings to you all in the name of our Creator, who created mankind from the same soil and through whose soul we have been able to become alive. The source of energy that comes to us is from the one God, the Creator; we are his creation and, hence, I greet you as brothers on this planet, my brothers in spirit and in mankind.
Mr President, Ladies and Gentlemen, Honourable Members, I have come to you from a country which I had not chosen to be in, but heaven chose that I be one of its citizens. This land, which we call the 'blessed land', the land of Al-Sham, which includes Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Jordan and Israel, this land which has encompassed all the cultures of heaven: in our land, the Prophet Abraham walked, and the Prophet Moses lived happily there, and in our land Jesus (may God's blessings be upon him) was born, and from our land he was lifted to the heavens. Muhammad, the Prophet, came also from Mecca to our land to be lifted into the heavens. Therefore, I would like you to understand the meaning of that land, which was a source of light and enlightenment without which we would not have been Christians and followers of Abraham and Moses, and we would not have been Muslims and we would not carry the responsibility of conveying the divine message to the world.
Therefore, I thank you wholeheartedly and I thank the President of Parliament, who allowed me to open this cultural debate in a year which is the year of dialogue between cultures.
I say cultures, but really there are no separate cultures, there is but one single culture.
Cultures have had an impact and enriched the culture of mankind, and culture is from our own creation: we created culture. This Parliament was not built by a Christian or by a Jew or by a Muslim, but it was created by man. This is a symbol of culture, of its construction.
We all form one single culture, which is called the culture of mankind. Therefore we, in our region, do not believe in a conflict between cultures at all. It is a single culture in the universe, and it is not multiple. However, different cultures can exist or co-exist.
(Applause)
So, let us look at where there is conflict between cultures. Conflict exists where there is ignorance, terrorism and backwardness, but a cultured person, whatever his religion may be, will hold my hand so that we can build the culture of mankind together. When man reached the moon, the Soviet Agency at the time and NASA were not all Americans or Russians, they were also Europeans, Italians, Germans, French, Belgians and Arabs. They, together, built the civilisation that allowed mankind to reach space.
So let us have a look once again at the terminology or the term 'conflict' between cultures or civilisations. This is dangerous because civilisation cannot be built separately. Those who built the pyramids are our great-grandfathers, and those who built the pyramids in Chile are also among our great-grandfathers and therefore, as I said, civilisation is one.
A second point. Does civilisation have a religion? Or is it a human culture in which religion gives its moral values? There is no Islamic civilisation, or Christian civilisation, or Jewish civilisation. Religion gives civilisation its moral values, but culture is something that we built. God created religion, but we create cultures. This is what we have built, but religion is the work of God. Do not, therefore, limit civilisation because it is the result of our work, whereas religion, as I said, is the work of God.
Who creates civilisation? Mankind - you and I. Who are we, you and I? Are you different from me? No. You are not the other party. The animal might be the other party, but you are my brother or sister, whatever your religion or language, because my mother is your mother, my father is your father, and the land is our mother and Abraham is our father. Therefore, let us create a new generation that believes that 'the other' is the animal. But man, whatever his religion or wherever he comes from, is my brother or sister, and his blood is my blood. His spirit is mine and his ideas are mine and his freedom is my freedom, and his culture is different from my culture. So let us build civilisation together. We do not believe, in our region, in the multiplicity of religions: multiple religions do not exist.
Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad came with one single religion - the worship of God and the dignity of mankind. As for legislation and law, these differ from time to time and from period to period. There can be many legislations, but there cannot be many religions. Therefore, your God and our God are the same and single one and we all worship the same Creator. Hence there cannot be religious conflict. This brings me to say that there is no holy war. I do not believe in holy wars, because a war can never be holy: it is peace that is holy.
(Applause)
So let us teach our children in schools, churches and in religious places and in the mosques that what is really sacred in the universe is man and not the Kaaba or the Masjid al-Aqsa or the Church of the Trinity but mankind - mankind is the most holy and sacred thing in the universe, and this is more important than any other sacred thing.
(Applause)
Why do I say this to you, ladies and gentlemen? Because the Kaaba was created by Abraham, a man, and the Wall of Mecca was built by a Jew, and the Church of the Trinity was built by a Christian. But man - who created man? This is the creation of the Creator, and anybody who destroys the creation of the Creator should not be respected.
Any person who kills an Israeli or Iraqi child will be called upon to respond to his action before God because those children are the creation of God on this planet and we destroyed that creation. Can we bring life back to those persons? If the Kaaba were to be destroyed, our children could build it again and if the Masjid al-Aqsa were to be destroyed, we could reconstruct it. If the Church of Trinity were to be destroyed, the next generation would build it but, believe me, if one man is killed, who can give him back his life?
Hence I greet and commend Europe that invited me to come to this place. So I start with you and call upon you to ensure that the dialogue between civilisations has to be endless and open so that we create states based on a civil basis - not a religious or an ethnic basis because religion is a relation between you and God - but we must live together in this world peacefully. I do not impose my religion on you and you do not impose your religion on me. This is something between us and the Creator.
So, let us build a new generation that believes that the civilisation of mankind is a common work and that the most noble of all is mankind and freedom - after God, of course. If we would like to see peace in the world, let us start from the land of peace: Palestine and Israel. So we can tell people, as the Pope said years ago, rather than building the wall, let us build the bridges of peace, because Palestine is the land of peace. Considering how much it costs to build that wall, we could actually allow Christian, Jewish and Muslim children to attend the same school and to live as brothers and sisters in a school of peace.
(Applause)
Yes, we extended our hands to you in Syria last year. President Bashar-al-Asad extended his hands to the world and said 'I want a true peace'. I will not carry a weapon today but I will always carry the words of peace to stand before the world and say, no more war after today. The victor in war will be a loser if he is temporarily victorious because he killed people, but the real victors are those who become brothers to other people. It is not land that is holy but it is man that is holy. Let us make a holy world once man becomes the holy person.
Therefore, please do not believe the media, because the media on many occasions do not tell the truth. Many of you have visited me in Syria and have come to my mosque, and I went with them to the churches and they saw how we live as one single family, and that we do not believe in simple cohabitation but in living as a family. Whether we are Muslims, Jews or Christians we believe in the one house - the house of life.
I have lived, as you, as a Member of Parliament for 10 years in Syria and I felt, the moment I entered into Parliament, that I did not represent my political party or my group because I was independent; rather, I represented every person who has asked me to represent him or her and I represented every person who has not asked me to represent him or her, because he or she is my brother or sister, and I was a representative of everybody in the country. So, do you represent your countries or political parties or do you represent the human being? Please be representatives for us and your people, because mankind is unique in the universe.
Yes, you have to represent us on the issues of peace and truthfulness and belief. The Islamic world today witnesses war in many of its countries. This world must achieve peace, and it has always wanted peace and, if there are certain crises, that is because of injustice. Christianity came to ensure peace, otherwise we cannot understand what was the mission of the prophets, such as Moses, who called for the achievement of peace. Nobody wanted to kill anybody, and anybody who wants to kill a person would be contradicting his beliefs and religion. Do not use religion for killing; religion is for peace and life.
Yes, this is my message from my country, from a land that was blessed by the heavens and where all the prophets walked and lived in.
Woman is a great person in our land, and she is dignified, whether she is Jewish, Christian or Muslim, although she probably faced injustice because of men. Women participate at all levels of our country and the leaders of my country, including the President, call upon the participation of women in all fields of society.
This city is a title for peace. I saw how it was built and I said that the miracle of the 20th century is Europe. This miracle that witnessed the First World War and the Second World War, and then managed to destroy the Berlin Wall without shedding any blood - not one single drop of blood. All Europe came together, and its people came together in one Parliament. So, could you help us achieve such a parliament - a human parliament, a spiritual one, a universal one? Please help us, because Syria and the whole Islamic world are waiting for you, whether they are Muslims or Christians.
Finally, since Damascus is the Capital of Arab Culture this year and you started the Year of Intercultural Dialogue, I would ask you to agree to holding a meeting for cultures in the Capital of Arab Culture, Damascus, to say that the world is at one and that we are extending our hands to Lebanon, because Lebanon has one people, and we should all help the creation of one Lebanon and one true Palestine, one true Israel, one true Iraq, a land of peace for everyone.
(Sustained applause)
President
Ladies and gentlemen, your applause shows that this House is at one with me in sincerely thanking the Grand Mufti of Syria, Sheikh Ahmad Badr El Din El Hassoun, for his message of opposition to violence, war and terrorism. Human dignity is central to him, and that is the basis for cooperation between cultures. His is a tolerance which says that we have our own point of view, that we are not bound to embrace another's point of view, but we respect it and therefore live together peacefully in this world, recognising human dignity. Thank you, Your Eminence, for your address to us here in the European Parliament.
(Applause)


Autonomous Community tariff quotas on imports of certain fishery products into the Canary Islands (debate)
President
The next item is the report by Mr Galeote, on behalf of the Committee on Regional Development, on the proposal for a Council regulation opening and providing for the administration of autonomous Community tariff quotas on imports of certain fishery products into the Canary Islands, - C6-0153/2008 -.
Joe Borg
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, first of all allow me to thank the rapporteur, Mr Gerardo Galeote for this report, which I can fully support, and for his efforts in dealing with this file in the most diligent manner. I am also pleased to note the strong support of the Committee on Regional Development for this proposal.
The Canary Islands are one of the European Union's outermost regions and are characterised by their geographical and economic isolation. The European Union has long recognised the need to reduce, eliminate or temporarily suspend customs tariffs in order to encourage production in such regions by facilitating the supply of raw materials. Since 1991, the European Union has suspended, partially or in full, the common customs tariff duties on imports into the Canary Islands of a number of products. In the case of fisheries products, such measures applied only to raw materials to be used in products solely intended for consumption in the local market.
The import quotas at reduced tariff proposed now by the Commission follow on from similar measures laid down in Council Regulation (EC) No 704/2002 of 25 March 2002, which covered the period from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2006. The tariff quotas are to be seen, in terms of support to the Canary Islands' economy, as complementing other measures taken on the basis of Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty, in particular the scheme to compensate for the additional costs incurred in the marketing of certain fishery products from the outermost regions - implemented by means of Council Regulation (EC) 791/2007 of 21 May 2007. In order to align the proposed measures with the latter scheme, the Commission proposes that the tariff quotas should apply for seven years to cover the period 2007-2013. This is two more years than provided for under the previous Regulation and should come into force retrospectively as from 1 January 2007 in order to ensure continuity.
Turning to the report, I would like to comment on the amendments proposed. The Commission notes that three amendments relate to the fight against illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. In this regard, I would like to underline that the Commission has recently proposed a comprehensive system to prevent products resulting from IUU fishing activities entering the Community market, a proposal for which Parliament has expressed broad support.
The Commission considers that it is not in the proposed tariff quota regulation that measures to combat IUU fishing should be included. Therefore the amendments cannot be accepted. Instead of having a piecemeal approach, the Commission is of the view that the issue of illegally harvested products should be dealt with by means of horizontal instruments, applying to all products imported into the Community market, including the Canary Islands.
I would once again like to thank Mr Galeote for the report and the Committee on Regional Development for its attention on this very important issue.
Gerardo Galeote
rapporteur. - (ES) Mr President, the exceptional geographical situation of the Canary Islands in relation to the sources of supply of certain fishery products which are essential for domestic consumption entails additional costs for the sector in this region and, as the Commissioner has just said, since 1991 the European Union has tried to remedy this natural handicap by, among other measures, temporarily suspending customs duties on imports of the products in question from third countries.
This proposal for a regulation aims to guarantee that the measures set out in the 2002 regulation currently in force continue for the period 2007-2013. That regulation established a series of autonomous tariff quotas on imports of certain fishery products into the Canary Islands, for the period 2002-2006.
I would like to point out that the suspension of customs duties is only granted for products destined for the domestic market, and also say that this proposal was adopted practically unanimously in the Council and by a very large majority in the Committee on Regional Development.
The Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance has tabled four amendments which, Mr President, we cannot support, because they mix concepts of illegal fishing with the content of this regulation, whose operation in practice has shown that the control filters established by customs in Las Palmas have worked correctly.
This is endorsed by the report sent to the European Commission by the Spanish Government, which is of a different political persuasion than the one that I represent. The European Commission accepted this report, validated it and largely incorporated it into its proposal.
The current European Commission proposal specifically ratifies the existing protective and control measures to avoid diversions of trade. To summarise, the appropriate anti-fraud measures are being implemented, and along with the customs filters previously mentioned they constitute an adequate set of instruments, under the control of the Community institutions, for the correct functioning and monitoring of the Community quotas, which, as has been proven, have nothing to do with illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing.
To conclude, Mr President, the imports of fishery products included in the quotas for the Canary Islands are legal, reported and adequately regulated and therefore I ask for the European Commission proposal to be supported and for the amendments tabled to be rejected.
Fernando Fernández Martín
Mr President, the Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats will vote in favour of adopting Mr Galeote's report on imports of certain fishery products into the Canary Islands. As the Commissioner said, it is about continuing with an instrument that has already been in force for many years - since 1991 - that expired in 2006, thus filling a regulatory gap that existed until today.
From a legal and budgetary point of view this regulation is justified. It is also justified from a political and economic point of view in order to maintain an activity that is essential for the Canary Islands.
Since the loss of our fisheries in what were formerly known as the 'Canary Islands and Western Sahara fishing grounds', we have been forced to import products for domestic consumption, as in this case.
The activities of a significant fishery products processing industry have been lost in the Islands since then. On some islands this activity was essential in order to prevent them from being solely dependent on tourism.
With demagogic arguments and false accusations, the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance is tabling amendments against this regulation.
In the Canary Islands Regional Parliament there are no Green members; in the 88 councils in the Canary Islands there are no Green councillors; of the 29 councillors on Las Palmas City Council there are no Green councillors; the Greens are barely present on a couple of councils in the Canary Islands, where they are definitely in a coalition with the People's Party.
I think it would be good to have a greater political presence of the Greens in the institutions of the Canary Islands, but with initiatives like this, full of demagogy and false accusations, believe me, I would like to say to the Member tabling the amendments, you are going in the wrong direction and you will have less and less political and social support in the Canary Islands.
Manuel Medina Ortega
Mr President, on behalf of the Socialist Group in the European Parliament, I stand in support of Mr Galeote's report as well as the comments made by Commissioner Borg, and the information from Mr Fernández Martín.
I think that the regulation is absolutely necessary, because the Canary Islands is a region with 2 million inhabitants, that attracts many millions of tourists, and as Mr Fernández Martín said, having lost the Western Sahara fishing grounds the Canaries depend on fish imports to survive and to supply the tourist industry.
To suppose that at the moment, in the customs of the Canaries, that are subject to strict controls by the Spanish State and the European Union, products entering under a special tariff system are going to be diverted is a serious accusation against the functioning of the institutions of the Spanish State and also shows that those tabling the amendments know very little about the real situation in the Canaries. They should visit the Canary Islands and see how the port operations run before tabling hasty amendments.
I think Mr Borg said that the procedure, or the monitoring of the entry and exit procedures for fishery products, was going to be done by the Commission, and that is happening right now. If any anomalies are revealed, action will have to be taken accordingly. We should not, however, accept this type of amendment, that would result in the removal of the concessions that the European Union makes so that, in our region, this small and modest region, with a surface area of only 7 500 km2, and 2 million inhabitants, we can continue to survive.
If the amendments are adopted, those who have tabled them will have succeeded in putting up prices for the citizens of the Canaries and making the difficult task of maintaining the tourist industry still more difficult.
I therefore hope that, as occurred in the Committee on Regional Development, the plenary of the European Parliament will give overwhelming support to the proposal that Mr Galeote has put to us.
I would like to take this opportunity to say that within the European Union the difficulties faced by the outermost regions are not generally understood. We are currently also discussing the subject of emissions trading.
The measures that can generally be adopted by a central region of the European Union can have a devastating effect on the outermost regions of the Union. We are talking about small territories, in total a population of 4 million inhabitants, distributed in islands in the Pacific, the Atlantic and the Caribbean, which will find themselves in difficulty if special measures are not applied to them.
I therefore ask my fellow Members who tabled these amendments, before acting in this way, to find out what the real situation is and to understand the problems faced by these outermost regions.
Bart Staes
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. - (NL) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I take note of Commissioner Borg's statement that fraud involving illegally harvested fish is to be tackled by means of horizontal measures. To the Spanish Members who have alleged here in a particularly vigilant and occasionally even aggressive way that I am telling lies, I would say that they are really burying their heads in the sand. I do not obtain my information from just anywhere. I obtained this information from answers to parliamentary questions, from the Commission's answer to a question by a fellow Member.
To these Spanish Members I would say that the Commission has sent Spain a reasoned opinion on grounds that there is some manner of fraud taking place at all the country's ports. This includes Las Palmas. The Commission told me itself that the number of inspectors has been increased from two to seven, which it still regards as insufficient. Sources have told me that inspections only take place on working days between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m. I wish to investigate this further, and I shall undertake further parliamentary initiatives in order to find out how the fight against fraud is progressing throughout Europe and most particularly in Spain.
Joe Borg
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, from the debate it is clear that our objective is a shared one, both in terms of our support through the proposed measure for the outermost region of the Canaries, but also in our commitment to combat IUU.
I repeat what I have just said, that we are committed to fighting IUU and have proposed a comprehensive regulation which we hope will be adopted in two weeks' time in the Council meeting on 24 June. Therefore, we believe that the approach to IUU should remain horizontal and that, consequently, proposing amendments to this regulation is not the appropriate way of moving forward.
With regard to the comment made by Mr Staes, I would like to say that the infringement procedure, which is infringement procedure 2002/2184, is still active. The information received as a result of the various inspections carried out indicates that there have been improvements, though the Commission will further evaluate the situation and, more specifically, it will decide whether a final inspection is needed to bring this procedure to a conclusion. By this I mean to say that either the procedure will be brought to an end if Spain is found to comply, or we will continue proceedings before the Court of Justice in order to attain a decision on this whole question.
Gerardo Galeote
Mr President, I am going to be very brief because of the late hour, but especially because, firstly, the European Commission, which I assume is not suspicious, has been decisive in endorsing the controls established by the regional and national authorities and, in fact, here we are debating its proposal; secondly, because 27 of the 27 Member States have given it their support; and, thirdly, because the Committee on Regional Development adopted the proposal practically unanimously.
The attitude of Mr Staes reminds me of the mother who went to see her son at the passing out parade for his military service and said to the person beside her: 'Look how good my son is, because he is the only one who is marching properly, all the rest of his company are out of step'.
I would ask those tabling the amendments to think again. Could it be that in this case they are the ones who are mistaken and not the rest of humanity?
President
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on Wednesday 18 June 2008.


Databases relating to racial and ethnic origin in the EU (debate)
President
The next item is the debate on:
the oral question to the Commission by Monika Flašíková Beňová, Claude Moraes, Kinga Göncz and Sylvie Guillaume, on behalf of the S&D Group, on databases relating to racial and ethnic origin in the EU - B7-0553/2010),
the oral question to the Commission by Hélène Flautre, Raül Romeva i Rueda and Judith Sargentini, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, on databases relating to racial and ethnic origin in the EU - B7-0554/2010),
the oral question to the Commission by Renate Weber, Nathalie Griesbeck, Sophia in 't Veld, Sonia Alfano, Cecilia Wikström, Louis Michel, Sarah Ludford, Gianni Vattimo, Leonidas Donskis, Alexander Alvaro, Niccolò Rinaldi, Ramon Tremosa i Balcells, Metin Kazak and Marielle De Sarnez, on behalf of the ALDE Group, on databases relating to racial and ethnic origin in the EU - B7-0556/2010), and
the oral question to the Commission by Rui Tavares, Cornelia Ernst, Marie-Christine Vergiat, Cornelis de Jong, Nikolaos Chountis, Marisa Matias and Eva-Britt Svensson, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group, on Roma databases and discrimination - B7-0557/2010).
Monika Flašíková Beňová
According to recent media information, the French police are using the MINS database which focuses on Roma and travellers.
Non-governmental organisations have submitted complaints relating to the creation of illegal and secret databases for storing personal information in connection with racial and ethnic origins, and have stated that they are appealing to the relevant authorities. The French authorities, however, deny the existence of such a database. The Minister for Immigration has previously declared that biometric data on the deported Roma may be retained in the OSCAR database and in a new database that is under construction. It is said that even the Netherlands and other countries of the European Union are registering data on ethnic and racial origin. In connection with this, the Council is discussing a draft of the conclusions relating to mobile criminal groups in a very controversial way, and without informing the European Parliament of this initiative.
I would therefore like to ask you, Commissioner, what the Commission is doing, with regard to evidence on the existence of the MINS database in France, to verify such information. If the Commission finds that the database breaches the principle of non-discrimination, what measures will it adopt to correct the situation? Is the Commission considering bringing proceedings against Member States in connection with a breach of law, and with regard to recent developments in other Member States concerning the creation or existence of databases linked to racial or ethnic origin? Will the Commission launch investigations in order to obtain information on such databases and to verify whether they are lawful in relation to the principle of non-discrimination? I would finally also like to ask what the Commission is doing to ensure that Member States do not adopt ethnic profiling in their administrative and criminal law proceedings.
Hélène Flautre
Good evening Madam President, Commissioner. Mrs Reding, you are quite rightly delighted today that France has responded to the European Commission's infringement proceedings at the eleventh hour and has provided a legislative programme for establishing procedural rights as required under the directive on the freedom of movement.
According to your assessment, these promises are genuine and, as a result, the infringement proceedings have been put on ice - as opposed to cancelled. We have taken note of your comments but as Members of the European Parliament, we would also like to be able to monitor these commitments. That means having information about the promises made and the timetable provided by the French authorities. However, let us not forget that you also asked France about individuals who have been escorted to the border and required to leave the country, an enquiry intended to confirm that these administrative procedures were not discriminatory. What has happened to those enquiries? Have you received a response?
Just as the press revealed information about the villainous and discriminatory August circular, information was recently published about a file - a database - which contains personal information including details of ethnic or racial origin. Has this new twist not dented your confidence in the promises made by the French authorities and the accuracy of the information provided?
Mrs Reding, would you not agree that the logical next step is now to tell us the current state of play in the ongoing examination of the documents requested by the Commission, both on the alleged discriminatory practices in France, but also regarding the potential infringement of data protection standards as laid down in Community law?
I think that today's European citizens are entitled to demand a responsible Commission which may publicise its successes but will also be determined in persevering with proceedings against the French authorities. After all, this is what you are doing more generally for all EU Member States which, it is widely recognised, have fallen into bad habits in relation to the Roma.
I should also point out that the CNIL has itself confirmed the existence of four illegal files which contain personal data, in which the subjects are described as Gyppos, Gypsies or Roma.
Sophia in 't Veld
author. - Madam President, we know the Commissioner is a very determined and courageous person. Commissioner, you will not be easily held back by anyone and you do not usually need nudging. If you want something, you go straight for your goal. I wish you would be as determined in this particular case.
Just this week, you published the Commission communication on the effective implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The communication states that the Commission will make full use of its powers to ensure that the Member States apply EU law, in full respect of fundamental rights, and that you will not hesitate to initiate infringement procedures.
In the case of France, I wonder why the Commission relies exclusively on the declarations of the government when, as Hélène Flautre has just pointed out, there has been a series of declarations which, with hindsight, turned out to be unreliable. Why does the Commission not start its own investigation? We have asked for this before. You know that a majority in this House is behind you. We know that there is a lot of opposition from the Member States, but we are behind you, Ms Reding.
I should like to refer to the situation in France, the situation in Italy - which seems to be even more serious - and the situation in my own country. First of all, I would like to know whether the existence of these databases can be confirmed. Do we have proof that they exist or do not exist? Do we have a list? In the case of the Netherlands, I know there is a list because the municipalities which created the databases are quite proud of it; they think they have done a very good job. They probably did it with good intentions. If the databases exist, would you take the view that this is legal or illegal? If it is legal, we do not need a debate. If it is illegal, we need to start infringement procedures. It is that simple.
The Commission does not hesitate in other areas. For example, you tackled the opposition head-on when you wanted to sort out mobile phone roaming rates. If there are cartels, then the Commission does not hesitate for a second. In this case, I think that the Commission should act. Ms Reding, this is the time for the EU to prove that it is a community of values and that it will intervene if fundamental rights are being violated. Citizens are watching us.
Like Hélène Flautre, I would like to ask you to come to the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs to explain to us what the situation is and what action the Commission intends to take. I too, as a Member of Parliament and as a European citizen, expect to obtain full access to all the correspondence that has taken place with France and possibly other Member States.
Cornelia Ernst
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I will simply ask the question: what is the situation with regard to anti-discrimination and the equal treatment of Roma in Europe? When we now hear that ethnically motivated databases on the Roma - and I believe these databases as such are prohibited - are being set up by the French Gendarmerie, but also by other countries, and, to a certain extent, for preventative purposes, then that really is the limit. Both in France and in the EU, databases that are primarily used to compile personal data on the racial or ethnic origin of people are quite simply prohibited due to the high risk of them being misused and on account of the risk of discrimination. Only under very particular - purpose-specific - circumstances, which take non-discrimination into consideration, can the collection of data of this nature be carried out at all. The Roma must not be criminalised, and that is the crucial point. Ethnically motivated databases for the purpose of preventing crimes are unlawful. The Roma must not be the subject of the special collection of data on account of their way of life, and we expect the Commission, in other words you, Mrs Reding, to repudiate any form of ethnic or racist data collection and to work hard to ensure that this is indeed stopped in the relevant countries.
Frankly, I ask myself more and more what it is other than talk, talk, talk that actually happens in this Parliament and in the framework of the EU, and what, in practical terms, we have actually managed to do to improve the situation of the Roma in Europe other than talk, talk, talk. If we look at the collection of data, we see that the Roma have become scapegoats and people to push around in many Member States of the EU. They are being deported to Kosovo and, in doing this, France has been contravening EU treaties for months, the principle of anti-discrimination is being violated - and the Commission behaves as if it is satisfied - and I see this rather differently to the previous speaker - with the promise by the French Government to provide the legal basis for transposing the directive on freedom of movement by the beginning of 2011. In the interests of decency, however, it must be said that France has to put a stop to the deportations of Roma, and it is also important for those Roma who have been unjustly deported to have their return to France facilitated.
In connection with the databases, I would like to ask you: what definite information to you have, what initiatives will you take, if these databases actually exist in this way, and will you initiate treaty infringement proceedings in such cases?
Viviane Reding
Vice-President of the Commission. - Madam President, I believe it is against human rights that we are sitting here so late at night discussing important subjects which we should really discuss during the day and not in the middle of the night when normal human beings should relax at home and go to sleep.
Having said that, there have been many debates, many scandals and many actions in the last weeks, and I think this Parliament should look at what has happened in France and the reaction in the European Commission to what was some kind of a historical event. There has never been, so far, in the history of our European Union, a court case started because of rights.
We have started court cases because of commerce, because of the economy, because of finance, but this is the first time, on the basis of the Treaty of Lisbon and on the basis of the Charter of Fundamental Rights which is included in this Treaty of Lisbon, that the Commission has said enough is enough.
The Commission decided - all 27 Commissioners - on 29 September to start infringement proceedings against France on the basis of non-implementation of those rights of the human being, the rights of the individual citizen.
I do not need to tell you all the pressures which have occurred since that moment, but the Commission said unanimously that it will start court procedures and will put an ultimatum to France. If France has not answered in a positive, acceptable way before 15 October, this court procedure is going to be implemented. That is the normal way we proceed with all Member States.
Now, what has happened? Well, France has given an answer. And this was the first time, it was unique in terms of the way questions are handled, and I believe personally that it was the first moment of the European of the Citizens.
Let historians one day look at that. We are in the middle of the proceedings, we are in the middle of the fight, so we might see it from a different point of view.
Now, objectively, what has France done? France has done exactly what the Commission has asked it to do. Under the 2004 directive, there are material rights, we also call them procedural rights, which exist for the sake of protecting citizens against an unacceptable action by the authorities when they are imprisoned. And these procedural rights have not been implemented in French law. So we said to France: by 15 October, we need to know the ways in which you intend to change French law implementing the 2004 procedural rights and showing us a credible timetable of how you are going to introduce that into French law.
Well, we got it. We got it one hour before the end of the deadline, but we got it. Since 08.00 on Saturday morning, my experts have been looking at the papers and I have come to the conclusion today that all the points on the basis of law which the Commission asked for from France have been answered - though, of course, not yet applied in national French law, because first they have to go to the Senate and then be introduced de facto into French law and applied in real terms.
We decided we are happy with what the French authorities gave us, but we cannot close the case, because these promises, these elements of law, these proposed laws, are not yet implemented. So we have said that we are freezing the case, but are leaving it open. We are leaving it open until the moment the French Government has really applied this legislation de facto in day-to-day proceedings.
That is one thing that I think is some kind of a victory. Think about everything which has happened. Now the French will say there is no problem, there never has been any problem. Well, there was a problem and they are bringing us the law which they are going to change. Let us see if they do it. I believe they are going to do it.
There was a second question and that is how the individuals were treated during the summer period, and whether they had procedural guarantees as individuals, as European citizens, or were discriminated against.
Why did I not start infringement proceedings like those we started on the basis of the laws? Simply because if we want to act, we can only act on the basis of legal evidence. We cannot act just because we have a feeling, because we are persuaded something is wrong. We have to have the legal proof and that is why we have asked the French Government to supply us with the dossiers on the individuals.
Now we have got dossiers on individuals, several piles of them. My experts are analysing those and they have told me they will certainly have supplementary questions to the French Government, and they think they will finish this analysis with answers from the government in four weeks' time.
So, as of today, we have these two cases. This is, I think, a very important fact because I would also like to tell Members very frankly that the implementation of the 2004 directive on free movement is not brilliant. What we are seeing now, because the Commission has been strong, is that all the countries who are not perfect either - not imperfect to the extent of France, but not perfect - are starting to say that they are now going to implement it perfectly.
So something has happened. I think that all Europe has understood that we are not joking any more and that the rights of the individual, of our citizens, and the values of our society must be handled seriously.
That is enough about the French question, because a decision has been taken by the Commission on that matter, but it is not finished and is still an open procedure.
Now to the question on the database allegedly held by the French Gendarmerie and possibly containing ethnic elements. First, the Commission is closely following developments in these matters. We have again been given assurances by the French authorities that everything is all right, but a different system applies here, because there is a French law here on data protection and the handling of data which is checked in accordance with our rules by the French data protection authority CNIL. It is in line with the rules that CNIL has carried out an inspection and made a preliminary public report last week. You have seen CNIL's results. I have read them too. The way it is reported sometimes in the press is not complete, because CNIL has also said, very seriously, that there might not be ethnic elements, but there are certainly databases which have not been authorised by the authorities.
As regards compliance with EU legislation, the information provided has to make sure that the situation is covered by the Data Protection Directive. This might be the case only for immigration-related purposes. For immigration, there are a series of guarantees and safeguards which apply to what we call 'sensitive data'. Sensitive data can only be processed in exceptional cases, in cases of public interest; they are subject to suitable safeguards, and those suitable safeguards have to be provided by the country concerned.
Should the data processing not come under the Data Protection Directive, then the 2008 framework decision on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters could apply.
There, we still have a problem because this framework directive applies only as from 27 November this year. So, on the basis of this directive, the powers of the Commission are rather limited.
I will answer the very concrete questions which have been asked in addition to the French case. Are there other Member States where we could verify the possible existence of databases containing data on ethnic or racial origins?
Under the Data Protection Directive, the processing of such sensitive data is authorised by way of exception and has to be notified to the national data protection authorities. The data protection authority in France is CNIL. And these exceptions for reasons of substantial public interest also need to be notified to the Commission.
When such notification is made, the national data protection authority and the Commission are in a position to assess if the measures are in line with data protection rules, and here we have the result of the preliminary analysis by CNIL which clearly says that such authorisations have not been asked for. So, we should allow the judicial work in France to be done by the judicial authorities which are not just authorised, but also responsible, for doing this kind of work.
What about the Netherlands? There were several databases where the processing of sensitive data was provided for and was notified by the Netherlands to the Commission in 2005 and 2006. The most controversial database related to criminal activities of youngsters of Caribbean origin. This database has since been deleted.
Recently, one municipality in the Netherlands planned to create an ethnic file, but it cancelled its project in response to the recommendation of the Dutch data protection authority. This shows that the system under the directive - whereby the data protection authorities, the national data protection authorities, are responsible - works.
By the way, I would like to tell Parliament that I am working on the reform of the Data Protection Directive, partly with the aim of reinforcing the independence and the intervention opportunities of the national data protection authorities within a European framework.
That will have to be that for the time being: I have to shorten my speech because there is no interpretation after 24:00, so let us cut it off there.
Véronique Mathieu
Madam President, Mrs Reding, ladies and gentlemen, I was delighted to hear today that the College of Commissioners does not intend to pursue the infringement proceedings against France in relation to Directive 2004/38/EC. However, some time ago, in a meeting of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, I asked you a question on this matter, and I have already told you that France provided all the information in 2006 and 2007, together with the concordance tables for transposition of Directive 2004/38/EC.
Yet now you profess surprise, in 2010, at finding that the procedural rights are not adequate. You never did reply to my question, Mrs Reding, so I would like to have an answer today.
I have one thing to say on the subject of the Mens file. I think that the opposition and others are now beginning to tire of this debate. It is very easy to prove that there is no basis for these allegations. You have the conclusions of the CNIL report submitted to the prime minister. I imagine that you will also have received, as I did, the report from the Director-General of the National Gendarmerie, Mrs Reding. You have mentioned a number of points which you apparently consider unsatisfactory.
You champion human rights, but we should not limit ourselves to defending the rights of minorities. The rights of all humans need to be defended, and we are all entitled to respect. We are also honourable in France and I can guarantee that the Mens file has never existed. Mrs Reding, the CNIL has investigated, looking for various unpleasant keywords such as Gypsies, Gyppos, Roma, and has not found any evidence that the National Gendarmerie holds any such files.
The only criticism that can be levelled at the National Gendarmerie is the failure to declare this database, but the files do not contain genealogical information. It is just that the National Gendarmerie has a number of files which ...
(The President asked the speaker to conclude)
Please allow me to finish my remarks. I am the only speaker from the PPE Group, so I would like the opportunity to speak on behalf of my group.
These files contain information on groups of individuals who have no fixed abode and no home; they do not contain data on ethnicity. So although there has been no statement by the CNIL, I would at least like you to acknowledge that there is no ...
(Exclamation)
Yet it is true and I would like you to acknowledge the fact. I would also like you, Mrs Reding, to put aside your suspicions of the French Government. Your attitude is close to becoming an unhealthy preoccupation.
Sylvie Guillaume
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, ethnic profiling is not a new practice in the Member States, but it does appear to have intensified in recent years in the name of counter-terrorism operations, maintaining law and order, and even of combating illegal immigration. Recent revelations about the existence of a database on the Roma and travellers in France have demonstrated how important it is that the Commission should continue its investigations in order to obtain additional information about the existence of these databases but also to establish whether the databases are legal and compatible with the principle of non-discrimination.
Commissioner, I do not entirely share your enthusiasm regarding the answer provided by France a few days ago, but I do understand why you have expressed yourself in these terms.
You tell us that France claims to have plans to transpose the directive on freedom of movement and will provide a timetable. On the question of this much-discussed directive and its transposition, there are two possibilities. Either France has given a purely formal commitment, which would mean that the Commission has not received an answer and has forgotten past history, or, alternatively, France has given a full answer, in which case we would like to know the details. You mentioned a timetable, a timetable for transposition which is in progress. France is currently transposing the directive on freedom of movement as part of the fifth revision of its immigration laws in seven years. I can guarantee that the revision will extend far beyond European principles on freedom of movement. Consequently, I think that you will need to monitor the process very carefully.
Let me conclude by expressing my hope that the Commission will stand firm and uphold the principle of non-discrimination. I hope that you will not allow yourselves to be lulled by amicable agreements or mere promises, even when they are made by the French Government.
Nathalie Griesbeck
on behalf of the ALDE Group. - (FR) Madam President, Commissioner, I know that it is very late, but this evening's debate involves a fairly passionate clash of opinions. This morning, despite the very clear explanations which you have just given us, another new French information website has been found which contains a Roma database, illicit of course, which contains detailed and extensive information including surnames, first names, nicknames, parentage, social contacts, car registration numbers and models, and partners' names. Once again, the authorities have claimed that they were not aware of the existence of such files.
At the end of the day, irrespective of whether the information found on this site turns out to be true, there is still an underlying risk of discrimination linked to the existence of these databases in France and various other European countries.
So, Commissioner, in view of your comments and your reputation for strength of purpose, what do you intend to do? What other evidence do we need to provide in order for you to act and react given this failure to uphold the principle of non-discrimination? In other words, and without wishing to be controversial, let us try to uphold the law in France, in the Member States of the Union, and amongst those who make up this half-hearted European democracy.
We have heard about the expulsions in France this summer, the circular issued on the 5 August - which fortunately was later withdrawn - the Mens file, and more. We have listened with great interest to the arguments that you put forward this evening. You have told us today that you are happy with France's promise, made last week, to amend national legislation in line with the European directive dating back to 2004.
Like my fellow Members, I would like to be given access to these documents so that we can share your view and your commitment to reinstating the rule of law. From your comments this afternoon, it sounds almost as though you have capitulated.
To conclude this long debate, let me stress that it has served one purpose; it has shown us the overriding need to address the nub of the problem, by encouraging national efforts and European policies as part of the rule of law on which European democracy is based.
Raül Romeva i Rueda
Madam President, Commissioner, when you said your famous phrase, 'enough is enough', many people in this House, but especially in the street, applauded.
This generated a huge degree of expectation for all those of us who still believe in the European project. Finally, someone in the Commission was daring to stand up to a strong Member State on the issue of fundamental rights, which had always been the most important thing in terms of words, but not always in terms of actions.
This surprised us a little, and it was not, shall we say, properly understood that when the proceedings were brought, they would not be brought on the basis of discrimination but only on the basis of free movement. I believe that this was, to some extent, a deficit, but in any case, we continued to applaud your commitment at the time.
Today's decision has therefore left us a little confused, and that does not only apply to us but to all those people who were hoping to see a courageous response in this action on your part. This is particularly the case as we know that the confidence that you have in the French Government has been more than shown to be, at the very least, debatable.
Secondly, this is particularly the case because we know that in the review of the Free Movement Directive, alarmingly, some moves are being made in favour of introducing concepts and redefining the concept of travelling groups, which would, to some extent, allow these groups to be criminalised once again.
I believe that the frustration that some of us are feeling today should not be fuelled even further. We therefore ask you to please allow us to hold on to the hope that you gave us with your 'enough is enough' statement, because here, we still believe that the problem exists and that we need to stand up to the French Government on this issue, along with other governments.
Rui Tavares
Commissioner, this debate is about fundamental rights such as non-discrimination and free movement. Yet it has also become a debate on the crucial provisions that govern our work in the European institutions. This means knowing whether a Member State is acting in good faith, whether it is providing reliable information to the European institutions, and so on. Moreover, in view of this, it has also become a debate about whether we, the European institutions, are able to ensure that both these principles and provisions are respected, whether we are able to speak clearly, and whether we can be uncompromising in their defence if necessary.
I believe that we already have clear answers as to the question of good faith. There are Member States, particularly France, which have not acted in good faith. They repeatedly deny the existence of documents, copies of which later appear in public. This also occurred during the summer and it is happening now with databases. How can it be claimed that there are no databases when we have published a database called Roms on a French website on the Internet today, with the cities of origin and a variety of information about Roma people, including those from the EU: from Bucharest, Belgrade and Timişoara?
The answer to the other question is also very important. You said that we had an historic moment, Commissioner, and that historians will recognise that the Commission was clear for the first time. I doubt that greatly, Commission, and I am a historian. I have many doubts because even the journalists have doubts. The day after having gone to the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, some newspapers, like the Financial Times, wrote that the Commission will not prosecute France. Other newspapers said that it would. Even today, the news is that the case against France has been suspended or, elsewhere, that it has been dropped.
If the Commission is not speaking clearly - and evidently its words are not understood clearly - I would like to say that it will have a formidable ally in Parliament if it does want to speak clearly. If the Commission hesitates, Parliament will not neglect to pursue this case: it will not be a case that occurred during the summer and simply died. It will continue to be spoken of in this House.
Kinga Göncz
(HU) We can see that the crisis has undermined many European citizens' sense of security. This creates a good breeding ground not only for the development and dissemination of extremism, but also for political manifestations naming particular ethnic groups as threats to security and connecting minorities and migrants with crime. The French Government started to drive out the Roma from France on ethnic grounds, which is unacceptable. We have good reason to assume, as mentioned by several people, that the French Gendarmerie, as well as other European states, have not stopped the collection of ethnic data yet.
If this is proved, we sincerely hope that the Commission will truly act as a guardian of the treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and will initiate a procedure for breach of commitments. The police plays an important role in maintaining public order, but ethnic profiling cannot be allowed to become part of standard police practice. This undermines the minorities' trust in democratic institutions and can constitute grounds for discrimination. The majority of Roma people live in deep poverty in Europe, and in addition to poverty, they also have to suffer discrimination. While we have ambitious plans to combat poverty in the 2020 strategy, what we often see is a fight against the poor, which we must definitely stop.
Catherine Grèze
(FR) Madam President, Mrs Reding, you have told us today, with some enthusiasm, and I quote, that France's reaction demonstrates that the EU is an effective community of law, or, and again I am quoting, that we now need to work towards practical action and results based on our shared European values. I have a copy of the consolidated treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights in my hands, and I hope you will forgive me if I do not entirely share your enthusiasm.
What evidence does the Commission need to take the matter further? What evidence is required to denounce the discriminatory treatment, the expulsions, currently being meted out to the Roma in France and other European countries?
It is true that the Commission has introduced a whole raft of measures to promote Roma integration, notably using the Structural Funds. Yet by pursuing a policy of refusing to face the facts, I wonder whether the Commission has not effectively shot itself in the foot.
Marie-Christine Vergiat
(FR) Madam President, Mrs Reding, I have to admit that I, too, feel disappointed this evening. Many of us have taken note of your previous statements and have even supported you. We have now been given to understand that the freedom of movement infringement proceedings have merely been suspended. Yet the subject of today's discussions is discrimination. You want evidence, Mrs Reding, and you have asked the French Government, and the French Government alone, to provide that. You tell us this and have told us this each time that we question you.
I have to say, Commissioner, with all due respect, that I am beginning to wonder whether you care what we have to say. I was in Marseille this weekend where I met with the associations who work with the Roma community. I have been active in this field for many years and I have to say that I was appalled, Commissioner, by what they told me about the situation of the Roma in the Marseille area. Mrs Reding, the Roma in France are afraid, they have gone to ground. They do not dare to leave their makeshift encampments. Their children no longer dare to attend school. The associations are unable to locate them and therefore unable to monitor their social well-being and health. That is what the associations are telling us, Commissioner. That is the current situation of the Roma in France.
The Mens file. Let us drop the subject of the Mens file. The Gendarmerie has announced that it has been deleted. Yet if you read the report by the CNIL carefully, Commissioner, you will see that the inspections carried out by the CNIL referred to ethnic origin. So let us ask for the inspection reports. The CNIL is a reputable body. Ask for the records of all the inspections carried out by the CNIL and ...
(The President cut off the speaker)
Juan Fernando López Aguilar
(ES) Madam President, Commissioner, on 9 September, Parliament adopted a resolution that triggered a timely and necessary debate. Parliament did its job.
There are those who think that, based on the forceful nature of your subsequent statements - in line with Parliament's demands - and on the explanations that you are giving us tonight, our only conclusion can be disappointment that there are no proceedings against France. It should be pointed out that the debate was not on France, and certainly not against France; it was a debate in favour of fundamental principles of European integration such as the free movement of persons, because Europe does not only mean free movement of goods and capital, but, above all, free movement of Europeans by right and without discrimination, and, of course, without discrimination on ethnic grounds.
This means that if there is still something to investigate regarding ethnic records that have not been fully clarified, it remains the work of the Commission. What should be pointed out, however, is that this work has not been completed, because it also involves Parliament remaining vigilant against the temptation of populism, which looks for scapegoats for the problems of social exclusion rather than solutions or responses.
As well as tackling populism and its temptations, this work also involves working to integrate those who are excluded, those who have been marginalised for a long time, and, of course, the Roma population.
Parliament must sponsor a conference on the integration of the Roma community. Parliament must also say that the work is not yet done; in fact, it has scarcely begun, and we still have a long way to go. This means that even if the proceedings against France are ultimately not brought, this debate will have had a purpose, because it has been shown to be timely and necessary.
Ioan Enciu
(RO) As you are all aware, 2010 was meant to be the European year for combating poverty, social exclusion, discrimination and xenophobia. However, in actual fact, I think that the battle has been lost, at least this year.
The situation regarding fundamental rights within the European Union is becoming increasingly critical rather than improving. Against the background of the economic and financial crisis, governments in a few Member States are increasing the acts of discrimination: deportations and databases based on Roma ethnic criteria are actions which have already been highlighted. As long as the Commission is unable to guarantee the exercise of fundamental rights in the EU, its image as a defender of these rights will suffer. It is a risk which this institution cannot afford to run.
Vice-President Reding, is the Commission also going to look into and investigate the other cases of discrimination reported in Member States? Can the Commission still conclude its investigations, bearing in mind the political pressure it is subject to?
Csaba Sógor
(HU) Ethnic discrimination is clearly prohibited by EU and international law. In spite of this, certain Member States are often suspected of covert discrimination against minorities living in their territories. I do not wish to talk about covert discrimination at this point, but would like to draw your attention to an existing law which openly places an ethnic minority community at a disadvantage. While the new Slovak Government amended the law on national language protection in a good direction, the law still stipulates fines. Therefore, this law is perfectly able to intimidate and keep citizens whose mother tongue is not Slovakian in a situation of uncertainty. In its position on this law, the Venice Commission clearly explained that the law contradicts the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages and limits the use of the minority language to an unjustified extent. I would like to ask the Commission, the Commissioner and the European Parliament to examine thoroughly and condemn every practice in the territory of the EU that can be used for ethnic or racial discrimination.
Elena Băsescu
(RO) A month ago, the European Parliament expressed its concern about the mass expulsion of citizens of Roma ethnic origin and rejected any correlation between crime and immigration. For its part, Romania has promoted, since 2007, a European Roma inclusion strategy, an idea highlighted even at the European Council meeting in September.
I wish to stress that no satisfactory solution has been reached so far. On the contrary, media reports about the existence of the Mens file in France reignite the debate about respect for the principle of non-discrimination. I believe that the Commission must launch an inquiry in the relevant Member States to ensure that administrative procedures are not resulting from profiles produced according to ethnic criteria.
I wish to end by welcoming the official commitment made last Friday by the French Government to comply with European legislation on the freedom of movement. France and Romania must act together to facilitate Roma social inclusion and obtain the necessary funding.
Ulrike Lunacek
(DE) Madam President, Commissioner, today's debate demonstrates once again how important the decision made by the European Parliament on 9 September was, in other words that, in our opinion, France - a Member State - was violating fundamental rights in this instance by discriminating against people on account of their ethnicity, and we called on you to take action. You have told us very clearly and with enthusiasm and resolve about everything that you have done up to now, for which you have also received strong support from us. In our opinion, however, you have now taken a step backwards, because the call for treaty infringement proceedings to be initiated on account of there being discrimination on grounds of ethnic origin has just been supported once again by the documents that a few speakers have already mentioned and which have been referred to in French newspapers today. It is perfectly clear that there has been discrimination against the Roma on account of their ethnic origin and it was not only their freedom of movement that was violated. I therefore call once again for action to be taken and for proceedings to be initiated.
Jaroslav Paška
(SK) Security services, as an almost natural part of their preventative work, create databases of people who are involved in illegal activities.
The databases are created in accordance with national law, access to the collected data is restricted to authorised persons, and the information gathered can be used only for the purposes of protecting society from criminal activities. I am quite sure that, just like the security services in other countries, the services in France and the Netherlands are interested in security analyses only of that information which they really need for their work. Information on ethnic or racial origin is not normally included in that. Any possible over-zealousness of the security services can surely be investigated and, depending on the results, I imagine, sensitively handled in order for it to be acceptable to the European Union.
Csanád Szegedi
(HU) Ladies and gentlemen, the Movement for a Better Hungary (Jobbik) proposed as early as 2006 that it should be possible to indicate a person's ethnicity in the criminal records, so that when applicable, attention can be drawn to Gypsy criminals. We still maintain this position. At that time, the left-liberal media said that Jobbik was an extremist party. Four years on, we see lists drawn up in France in relation to the expulsion of Gypsies. We see that in Holland, they are considered a national security risk, and databases are coming to light there, too. Then we can also see that in Finland, the ethnic origin of Gypsy perpetrators is recorded in detention facilities.
And now let me put a question to one of the rapporteurs here, the Slovakian lady who laughed so loudly about the Hungarian victims. I find it extremely hypocritical that she condemns the data collection on Gypsies, while, as a Slovakian politician, she supports a racist language law that punishes people on ethnic grounds for speaking their mother tongue.
Viviane Reding
Vice-President of the Commission. - Madam President, in a nutshell, the case against France has not been dropped. It has been postponed because we need to wait for the implementation of law in practice and cannot pass judgment on legal proposals. The legal proposals are acceptable, but they need to be implemented so that we can close the case. The case is, therefore, still open.
Regarding the ethnic databases which the CNIL, the independent French data protection authority, is inspecting in accordance with French law, and, in this case, in accordance with the European directives, we have to rely on the independent national data protection authorities because they are responsible under European law for carrying out the analysis. I think that the French independent data protection authority has shown that it is very capable of doing so.
(FR) Having said all that, I do think it is very important to remind ourselves of the real issues at stake here.
Excluding those in France, there are 10 million Roma in Europe, who make up the largest minority in Europe. I myself come from a country with 500 000 citizens. There are 10 million Roma, so you can appreciate the scale of the issue. The Roma live in most of our Member States in extreme poverty. They face housing, education, health and work problems and to me, the real scandal is that these problems have still not been resolved. So I hope that the current activities will continue - I think that they are to be welcomed because we should not tolerate this kind of discrimination.
The current activities will at least have served as a wake-up call for Member States. I have not forgotten that at the ministerial meeting held in Cordoba in April of this year, only three out of twenty-seven Member States were represented at ministerial level. So, one year on, we will call another ministerial meeting after we have conducted a detailed investigation, in conjunction with the task force, into the situation of the Roma and the question of whether or not European funds are being utilised, so as to establish what is really happening. As I said, we will convene another ministerial meeting, one year on, in order to see exactly what commitments each Member State has made in terms of national strategies for the Roma within the wider European framework.
I hope that the current, rather ugly, situation will at least have served to ensure that the Roma are no longer sidelined when we come to formulate policies for tackling extreme poverty.
If we do not succeed this time round, now that we have an opportunity to do so, the next generation of Members of the European Parliament will find themselves having exactly the same discussions as we have had over the past few weeks. We do not want that to happen, so let us take action now.
President
The debate is closed.
Carlos Coelho
The creation of ethnic profiles is not a new practice in the Member States, but it has been on the rise in recent years, especially following the terrorist attacks in Madrid and London. However, the only Member State that has been addressing this matter and creating legislation on it is the United Kingdom. Creating profiles within the scope of specific databases can be legal and have legitimate purposes. However, when the criteria used to collect data focus exclusively on race, ethnicity or religion, they should be considered discriminatory, and thus illegal. It is legitimate for the authorities to carry out identity checks and monitoring in their respective territories as a way of safeguarding public order and security, and in order to prevent crime and monitor illegal immigration. However, the physical and ethnic characteristics of individuals should not be seen as an indication that they are criminals or that they are in the country illegally. Each person should be treated individually and there must be another reason, apart from the person's race or ethnicity, for their data to be entered into a database, or for them to be subjected to different treatment from the general public.


One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
President
The next item is one-minute speeches on matters of political importance.
Mairead McGuinness
Mr President, there is, as you know, a debate going on in Ireland on the Treaty of Lisbon as we have the privilege of voting as an electorate on this Treaty. But there is also - and today it intensified - a war of words raging between the agri-business sector and our Commissioner for Trade, Peter Mandelson, and it is with some regret that today that war of words has deepened and it is almost becoming intractable to separating concerns about the world trade talks from the vote on the Treaty of Lisbon.
I personally believe that we can pull back from this situation, but only if people are given the facts. What I really want to stress here this evening - and it is mentioned that this House is the heartbeat of democracy and the heartbeat of the European Union - is that we, as elected representatives, must be given the facts by the Commission. I have written to the Commissioner. I have now waited six weeks for a response. I rest my case. But the Treaty of Lisbon is important and it is a shame that these two issues have been linked together.
Marianne Mikko
(ET) Ladies and gentlemen, freedom of speech is the most important feature of democracy. It cannot be the subject of any compromise.
On 2 May, just one day before World Press Freedom Day, the bank account of the Moldovan newspaper 'Jurnal de Chisnau' was frozen by court order. This was done on the ground that the journal reported accusations of rape against the State Public Prosecutor. I repeat: it reported or gave an overview, it did what the media are supposed to do.
As a journalist of twenty years' standing and the current Chairwoman of the Moldova delegation I unreservedly condemn this action. Several international journalists' organisations have also expressed their concern. The court order is nothing more than a new means of violating freedom of speech in Moldova.
The European Union must continue to provide comprehensive support to Moldova. 21st century Europe is a Europe of freedom of speech. Anything else would mean democracy was in peril. We should not sit and wait as things get really bad. On the contrary, in the name of democracy we should subject anyone who tramples our most precious values under foot to a verbal onslaught. Democracy and freedom of speech are irreplaceable.
DanutBudreikait
- (LT) From reading the guide to the European Union I still remember it stating that the Member States' solidarity is one of Europe's most significant values, with small countries, i.e. the Benelux countries, being the real driving force behind the EU internal market. The interests of each country were considered to be equally important.
However, today the biggest countries' energy interests have dwarfed all EU values to such an extent that there is a danger that they will remain energy islands forever. If Russia cuts off the oil supply to Lithuania, the major Member States together with Russia will put the blame on Lithuania for having made Europe the hostage of the post-Soviet countries' energy interests. In other words, the post-Soviet countries are imposing an agenda that is unrepresentative of Russian-EU relations, which is in turn hindering strategic cooperation.
The EU seems not to have noticed that Gazprom's oil pipeline network has already covered practically the whole of the EU and very soon we will find out who is the master of energy supplies in Europe.
I would urge the European Commission and the Member States not to start negotiations with Russia until consensus has been reached with all the Member States, both large and small. The EU's double standards are a long-standing disgrace.
Mikel Irujo Amezaga
(ES) Mr President, yesterday the European Commission published a note in which it says that the special tax called 'special tax on retail sales of certain fuels' does not comply with Community legislation.
Among other grounds, the Commission considers that the main objective of the tax is to strengthen the autonomy of the regions, giving them the means to generate tax revenue.
Tomorrow, 8 May, the Advocate General in Luxembourg will give his opinion on the case, which will settle whether the Basque provincial councils or territories have the capacity to legislate.
As the Commission considers any distortion in tax rates to be State aid, it could be said that the Commission is against any entity other than the State having the capacity to set its own taxation rates.
I therefore call on Parliament to consider this matter and ask the Commission to change its political line, as it could end up limiting the autonomy that is granted to many territories that are not States.
Zdzisław Zbigniew Podkański
Mr President, I am pleased to note the review of the common agricultural policy and the first anti-crisis actions being taken in the food economy sphere.
The conclusions put forward and the decisions taken are, sadly, woolly and inadequate. It needs to be stated quite clearly that, in its present form, the common agricultural policy is leading to a loss of biological security in the European Union and a deepening of the global food crisis. Restrictions on agricultural production, orders, prohibitions, quotas and contingents are leading to a further diminution in food reserves, especially in the newly acceded countries. Before the start of the process of EU integration, for example, Poland used to produce twice as much food as it does now. It would produce a lot more now if it were allowed to.
The conclusion is very simple: if there is a shortage of food, let us allow those who have the potential to produce it to go ahead and produce, and that means the new Member States.
Diamanto Manolakou
(EL) Mr President, more than 30 thousand police with special military units, water cannons and tear gas have set about beating and butchering workers in the streets around Taksim Square in Istanbul and the headquarters of the workers' confederation DISK. As a result, there were more than 500 arrests and casualties among the demonstrators.
We express our solidarity with the working class and all of Turkey's workers in general. We demand an end to persecution for political and trade-union activity. The working class has the inalienable right to strike and demonstrate on 1 May. On this day we remember the workers who fell in the class struggle, defending and building on their achievements, and eliminating all human exploitation.
We wish to condemn the unacceptable prohibition and brutal suppression at the hands of the Turkish Government. At the same time, we support the right of the trade unions and political parties to organise their May Day gathering in Istanbul's historic Taksim Square where, on 1 May 1977, 34 workers were murdered.
Csaba Sándor Tabajdi
(HU) Mr President, it is with sincere warmth and the highest regard that I congratulate Chancellor Angela Merkel on being awarded this year's Charlemagne Prize. She has made an outstanding contribution to promoting the Lisbon Treaty and facilitating the integration of the new Member States. I also welcome the fact that Charlemagne Youth Prizes were awarded this year for the first time. I am especially delighted and proud that this first-ever Charlemagne Youth Prize went to Hungary, to a fantastic team of young Hungarians, the Ferenc Rákóczi II Foundation, for their 'Students without Boundaries' project. I warmly congratulate the Hungarian team, as well as silver medallists Great Britain and bronze medallists Greece. The Hungarian 'Students without Boundaries' project is unique in that it provides an opportunity for young people from Hungarian ethnic minority communities in the participating countries, Slovakia, Romania, Ukraine and Serbia, to exchange ideas on education and cultural issues in Europe. It is a milestone for such a distinguished European prize to be awarded in recognition of fostering links between segments of an ethnic group living in their home country and those abroad.
President
Thank you very much, Mr Tabajdi. You will surely be pleased to know that I had the honour of being part of the jury that awarded the Charlemagne Youth Prize. I am telling you this so that you will know that we made the right decision.
Marco Pannella
(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, believers should know this better than I do, non-believer as I am, but it seems that from 13 to 17 May, Vietnam celebrates an important festival in the Buddhist calendar: Wesak, or the birth of Buddha. It seems, certainly as far as we are concerned, that today in Vietnam, the Supreme Patriarch of the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam, Thich Huyen Quang, who for 26 years has been under house arrest in his monastery, and Thich Quang Do, his deputy, the candidate nominated by many of us, will not even be able to celebrate the rites freely. Mr President, over the past 26 years we, like Parliament, have asked for their release 15 times. I realise that the time is up, but Europe's time for shame is not up, it has come back, so beware, ladies and gentlemen.
Ilda Figueiredo
(PT) The genuine crisis situation affecting vast areas of northern Portugal as the result either of the closure of many small and medium-sized enterprises or the relocation of multinationals or even also because of the very low wages offered, has in recent years forced more than 100 000 workers to move to Spain and other EU countries, in most cases in order to work in construction. Frequently, however, those workers ended up in precarious situations, in many cases their jobs came to an end, others found their contracts were not fulfilled and promises made were not honoured, wages were below the legal minimum or working hours were unreasonably long; in short, the companies contracting them generally failed to fulfil their obligations. We therefore stress that effective monitoring is urgently required in countries where such situations prevail and that measures need to be taken against such illegal practices as a matter of urgency. For example, trade unions have suggested that construction companies that fail to respect workers' rights or fail to meet the requirement to provide monthly information with a full list of workers on their payroll, including those who have relocated, or that fail to fulfil their obligations, should have their licence revoked.
Silvia-Adriana Ţicău
(RO) Mr. President, on 9 May 2008, we will celebrate fifty one years since the creation of the European Union. For all its citizens, this is a good opportunity to look with confidence and commitment toward the future.
Today, at a European level, we are discussing the agricultural policy reform, the future common energy policy, the expansion of the Trans-European Network in the sectors of transport infrastructures, telecommunications and energy, climate change and the budgetary reform of the Union.
The Lisbon Treaty has already been ratified by the parliaments of 11 Member States, such as Romania. The new Treaty emphasizes the importance of the social market economy, with a high degree of competitiveness for the sustainable development of Europe. The functioning of the single market also favours the harmonization of the social systems existent in the Member States. The Charter of Fundamental Human Rights, which has legal power, confirms the fundamental rights. Starting from common values - social justice, equality and prosperity for everybody - the European socialists aim at building social democracy, a society that excludes nobody and where all citizens have equal chances. The essence of the social-democrat approach is the construction of a social Europe.
Marco Cappato
. - (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, like my colleague Mr Pannella, I would also like to draw the attention of Members to what is happening in Vietnam, and not just to the matter of the leader of the Unified Buddhist Church, who is over 80 and who has been under house arrest for more than 20 years, but also to the persecution of the Montagnards living in the Central Highlands of Vietnam.
We receive news from Kok Ksor and the Montagnard Foundation, for example on 28 April when Y-Tao Eban was killed by Vietnamese police and security forces, and on 15 April when two Montaguard Degar children were killed by four Vietnamese police officers. This is to ask for support for the letters circulated to all Members addressed to the Vietnamese regime and inviting the international community and European institutions to respond to the situation in Vietnam.
Pedro Guerreiro
(PT) In view of Morocco's deplorable and constant attempts to block and create an impasse in the negotiations for the realisation of the inalienable right of the Sarawi people to self-determination, currently being held under the auspices of the UN, I should like to take this opportunity to stress the need for full respect of the right of the Sahrawi people to self-determination, which is the only realistic, fair and lasting solution for the conflict, that is, for an end to the shameful colonisation. Furthermore, we must insist that international law and UN resolutions are respected, denounce and condemn Morocco's brutal repression in the occupied territories against Sahrawi patriots who are resisting colonisation and fighting for their people's legitimate right to self-determination, denounce the real humanitarian drama being imposed on the Sahrawi people who are obliged to live outside their country in refugee camps and we must call for urgent and appropriate international humanitarian aid.
Marios Matsakis
Mr President, the cyclone that hit Burma on Saturday brought devastation and suffering to the people of that country.
Up-to-date reports speak of 22 000 dead, 40 000 missing, hundreds of thousands injured and one million homeless. Yet, illogical and cruel as it might seem, international efforts of help have been hampered by the military dictatorship regime of Burma.
One example is the fact that, four days after the catastrophe struck, visas for foreign aid workers are still not issued in time, with the generals in Burma presenting ridiculously naive excuses which no intelligent person takes seriously.
Could the President of this House, in addition to his message of sympathy read out earlier on today, send a very stern warning to the junta of Burma and indirectly to their guardians in Beijing telling them to stop frustrating international assistance efforts and start at least trying to behave, if not democratically, at least humanely towards their own people?
Genowefa Grabowska
- (PL) Mr President, people in the European Union are getting older. Demographic forecasts paint an alarming picture of a fall in the working population by as many as 20 million by 2030.
It is not good for us to be in such a situation and we must therefore support an increase, including a natural increase. We have problems with infertility and we have problems with sterility. The World Health Organisation has recognised infertility as a disease, with the in vitro method being one of the ways of treating it. The number of couples for whom fertilisation by this method is their only chance of having offspring is growing year on year. This method is expensive, though, and not all countries refund the cost. For many couples these costs constitute a barrier that makes it impossible for them to undergo such treatment. It is a paradox that alcoholism, lung cancer and AIDS are treated in Europe, yet infertility is not treated in all countries.
This is why I am drawing attention to this fact, and I would like all EU citizens to have equal chances and a guaranteed opportunity to receive in vitro treatment on a level playing field and on the principle of equality of access to medical services.
Csaba Sógor
(HU) Thank you, Mr President. Ladies and gentlemen, this week in the European Parliament we are discussing matters relating to sport, among other things. Topical as it is, this issue has taken on a particular complexion in Romania. With the final of this year's football championships approaching, there has been enormous pressure over the past few weeks on teams and players who might be able to influence the final outcome of the championship. There have been televised disputes, intrigue, brawls, suspended matches, and all because some people have found it inconceivable that a team other than the one from the capital could be the winner. In the deciding match, the team from Cluj-Napoca held on to its lead. Let us hope that the main problem was not the fact that there are only a few ethnic Romanian players in the Cluj-Napoca team, or that it is owned by a Hungarian. The clash between police and fans happened in the same town where Hungarians have been beaten up with almost predictable regularity over the past two months for using their mother tongue. All this ties in with the anti-minority sentiments constantly being fomented by extremist politicians. In sports and politics alike, we have to get used to the fact that one or two influential or central politicians may try to sway decisions and results, but actual outcomes are determined by concerted teamwork, dedication and fair play. Thank you.
Czesław Adam Siekierski
- (PL) Mr President, during the last plenary session in Parliament we discussed the problem of rising food prices. That coincided with a serious discussion concerning a review of the common agricultural policy.
Today, when we have to face the problem of a food crisis on a world scale, we must ask ourselves where the causes of this state of affairs lie, and where we made mistakes.
For more than 30 years the EU's food market was reasonably stable, and that led to a certain dulling of our vigilance. During this period there was no proper monitoring of the processes that were occurring, and no analysis was made of the link between a rise in food production and overall economic development, between the rising affluence of some societies and increasing demand. Rapid economic development such as has taken place in China and in India has in effect led to a rise in consumption, with a consequent significant increase in the food requirement, bearing in mind the number of people. Recent times have also seen a rise in production costs, especially fuel and energy prices.
President
That concludes this item.