Population and housing censuses (debate)
President
The next item is the report by Mrs Juknevičienė, on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on population and housing censuses - C6-0078/2007 - .
Meglena Kuneva
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, population and housing censuses are the central building block for all statistical reporting on the people that live in the European Union. In almost every policy area in which the EU is active, be it economic, social or environmental, high-quality population data are required to help formulate operational objectives and to evaluate progress. International, European and national institutions need census data to make valid comparisons between EU Member States.
Accurate data on the population are required to comply with important legislation. Examples are the qualified majority voting within the Council, or the distribution of Structural Funds (on the basis of 'GDP per head' figures.)
The purpose of the present regulation is to provide a clear European framework to achieve comparability of the results of the censuses conducted in the EU Member States. It clarifies the responsibilities and roles of the statistical bodies on the national and the European levels and sets common requirements concerning the quality and transparency of results, methods and the technology used.
This will be a major step forward to the harmonisation of demographic and social statistics. Population censuses have a long tradition in the countries of today's European Union, in some countries reaching back over centuries. For the first time there will be a European legislative framework for the censuses. The word 'historic' might well be appropriate to describe this development. The regulation will also be an important milestone for international cooperation in the area of population and housing censuses in which the European Commission, via Eurostat, has been active over many years.
There is a broad agreement across all the institutions involved - the Commission, the Council and Parliament - about the importance of the legislation. It is only natural and appreciated that the legislation about censuses raises debate. After all, you will decide upon the collection of data about all European citizens as well as upon the most cost- and burden-intensive statistical exercise.
The issue is politically sensitive and requires a considerable investment of taxpayers' money and citizens' goodwill in the Member States.
However, we should not forget that the absence of subjective and comparable census data would lead to negative consequences. The data are used for policy formulation and evaluation, administrative purposes and social research that increases the welfare of the people living in the European Union. The benefits of harmonised census data by far outweigh the efforts to collect it.
The Member States have been carrying out their national censuses for many decades. What we can achieve with this European legislation is to make their efforts pay off even better by ensuring census data that are of the highest possible quality and comparable between the regions of the European Union.
This is why the European Commission supports the debate that is still ongoing and sincerely hopes that a solution will be found that is acceptable to a broad majority within this House, as well as to the Member States represented in the Council. We appeal to all to support the rapporteur, Ms Juknevičienė, in her quest to find such a compromise.
Ona Juknevičienė
The Commissioner has just said that this regulation is a historical event. I would like to begin by saying that yes, it is a historical event, but at the same time it happens to be one of the most scandalous in Europe. Today, could we admit to ourselves, even though it seems obvious, that up to now we have had no reliable statistics and no idea about how many people live in the European Union and in what kind of accommodation. First of all, I would like to thank my colleagues, particularly the shadow rapporteurs, representatives of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and members of regional committees, for their close cooperation in preparing this document. Many thanks to the representatives of the Commission and the Council who took an active part in the discussions and participated in our joint efforts to achieve the compromise that only necessary information should be included in this regulation. Any unnecessary data that in some cases might be in breach of a person's right to privacy should not be collected.
The EU statistics and, accordingly, the regulation have a juridical basis, provided for in Article 285 of the EU Treaty. There is no doubt that the foundations for this document are in place. This article specifies the need to conform to very important criteria - impartiality, reliability, objectivity, scientific independence, cost-effectiveness and statistical confidentiality.
The main objective of the regulation is to provide a detailed account of population structure and characteristics with a view to analysing the data and using the results to develop a strategy in many EU policy areas.
The data from the annual population census is used, as the Commissioner said, to ascertain such important criteria as voting and establishing the majority of votes in the Council. High-quality regional data is necessary for the purpose of identifying regions that qualify for EU assistance, as well as for assessing progress in regional cohesion policy. Therefore, could any other document be of greater importance in terms of being able to compare and trust the data contained in it?
The regulation provides an opportunity to collect high-quality data on housing. This data is necessary to establish the number of consumers of water, energy and other commodities and to determine housing demand and supply and the necessary funding.
The last census, taken in 2001, was based on a gentleman's agreement and did not achieve any positive results. I believe the data are insufficiently thorough, unreliable, difficult to compare and relate to different time periods. That is why there is some doubt regarding whether EU funds have been distributed and used gratuitously. Of course, this makes it difficult to develop plans for the future too.
The proposed regulation would guarantee reliable, transparent and comparable results. It would also require only the essential information on certain issues.
Therefore, ladies and gentlemen, I am asking you to support the amendments I have proposed, which aim to relieve the Member States of the burden of collecting and storing unnecessary information.
The vote on this regulation has been adjourned until the next plenary session. It is very important to find a compromise. We need to get this regulation up and running in order to achieve our objectives.
We also need the support of EU citizens. It is important that they realise the importance of the census and support it. People need to be sure that the common statistics system is reliable and essential for their wellbeing. Most importantly, the information must be stored safely and used only for the correct purpose.
José Albino Silva Peneda
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, as shadow rapporteur for the Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats, I have been following the preparation of this report as well as the negotiations with the Commission. It is in fact a very important report with a view to the planning and assessment of regional and social policies in the various Member States and, in that respect, the socio-economic profile of the population of Europe and housing conditions are among the most decisive aspects for measuring the improvement in living conditions.
In our view the Commission seems to be taking the correct line, which we support, on the indicators that make this type of analysis possible. We therefore need to continue to improve the coverage, quality and reliability of this type of statistical data. We think, however, that care should always be taken to strike a good cost/benefit balance as regards the degree of detail in the information to be provided, while also bearing in mind personal privacy.
This report will be useful only if it helps to increase the frequency, comparability and accuracy of these data at EU level. For that it is essential to take very special care as regards the data supplied by the Member States, which needs to be consistent, complete and reliable. That is the only way to make comparative studies and analyses of the socio-economic situation at regional, national and Community levels. The way in which those data are processed is even more significant, since the classification of the regions for the purpose of applying the Structural Funds is based largely on such indicators, which means that in the normal course of events, this process leads to decisions that may have major consequences for the various European regions and for the Member States themselves.
I hope that, as a result of the negotiations with the Council, we shall achieve greater coherence, clarity and accuracy throughout. I should just like to place on record that the PPE-DE Group has maintained its original position on this report, even after hearing the explanations given by the Commission, in line with the rapporteur's position; I hope we shall maintain that position to the end. We are in favour in particular of deleting sections 1.3 and 2.3 of the Annex, as well as certain subsequent amendments that in our view are not consistent with the aims of improving the quality and reliability of the information.
Emanuel Jardim Fernandes
on behalf of the PSE Group. - (PT) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Mrs Madeira, who was to have spoken on behalf of the Socialist Group in the European Parliament, is unable to be with us because of transport problems. I shall therefore be presenting her views on the importance of this report and her concerns, which I share, and which I expressed previously in this plenary session regarding development policies.
The approval of the Treaty of Lisbon, which is to be signed this week by the Heads of State or Government, makes it absolutely vital to have reliable European Union population data. The new voting method included in that Treaty, which will henceforth take account not only of the Member States' vote, but also of the population figures, means that we must be aware that population censuses are crucial for the effective operation of the European Union. However, this regulation is important for other reasons apart from the voting method - it is important also for all indicators concerning employment, regional, structural or social matters that take account of the data provided by each of the Member States and that, often, in view of the discrepancies in the data collection methods used or in the reference periods, produce inadequate analyses and results of questionable validity. The last time this exercise was carried out, in 2000, the data were available only in 2005 and thus were of questionable validity.
The regulation under consideration today, purged of certain incongruities that shocked even the most inattentive reader, takes account of a series of factors that are essential in order to obtain good results from population and housing censuses and will enable us to have pre-defined reference years common to the Member States and listed questions that will allow reliable comparisons.
Finally, I repeat that I am in favour of including the non-obligatory topics in the regulation. Using questions not covered in the obligatory topics will not only give Member States a consistent and coherent list to serve as a basis for collecting further data rather than leaving it to them which might produce interesting but totally redundant results. The argument that censuses should be removed from the text because they cost money does not make sense. It is precisely because high costs are involved that we should clearly place topics to be analysed within a legal framework so that the results do not prove to be worthless for future use for various purposes.
Ewa Tomaszewska
on behalf of the UEN Group. - (PL) Mr President, the draft regulation on population and housing censuses is a document of considerable importance. Data gleaned from population and housing censuses provide an opportunity for rational drafting of development strategies and for intervention action to be taken. This is why it is so important for the data to be transparent and comparable. In that case, Community solutions will apply to real and well-studied phenomena.
Comparability is not just a matter of well-defined data; it also means that such data have been collected over identical periods of time. Clear specification of collection periods and updating, correction and publication dates is of great significance and this has been clearly stated in the document and amendments.
One important question is the way in which data on local communities are gathered. I support the amendment introducing a separate definition for this. I also support the amendment introducing environmental policies alongside regional ones. Regular statistical studies looking at family, social, economic and residential characteristics are undoubtedly needed in view of the demographic and social problems Europe faces.
This is why I think that the amendment deleting recommended topics for geographical levels, and in particular not derived topics such as location of schools and higher education institutions, means of getting to work or school, distance from work or school, number of children born alive, type of economic activity, duration of unemployment, main source of livelihood, income, housing conditions or disability, which describe families' actual living conditions, is wrong.
The emphasis on respect for national personal data protection rights in the text is important, and the principle of subsidiarity has rightly been retained in this area. I congratulate Mrs Juknevičienon a thorough piece of work on the draft report.
President
May I point out that we have been joined in our discussion by a Member who just yesterday became a full Member of the Chamber, Mr Krzysztof Hołowczyc, a very well-known figure in Poland. Welcome, Mr Hołowczyc! Please familiarise yourself with proceedings.
Mr Hołowczyc is a rally driver, very well-known in Poland, and on Saturday he won a legendary stage of the Barbórka Rally. My sincere congratulations! Here we practise a different kind of sport, though, so please change seats quickly if you would, Mr Hołowczyc.
Elisabeth Schroedter
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. - (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is right that the capture and harmonisation of statistics on the most important economic and social characteristics of the regions is essential for the European Union. The allocation of structural funds, one third of the budget, actually relies on this base data. What the Commission is proposing here in its regulation on population censuses, however, in reality has nothing to do with these necessities. The data that it wants to capture and harmonise in this statutory text, which directly applies to all EU Member States, is personal data on our fellow human beings, which is not really of any concern to the EU. Included in this are personal data on family and sex life, housing situation and religious affiliation. Furthermore, it also has the audacity to want to include this data by law in uniform standards without including any reference in the law to data protection.
It is therefore our duty as representatives of our citizens to stop any such intrusion into individual rights, particularly as there is no reason to harmonise data on family life, personal circumstances or the housing situation when this does not in any way fall within the competence of the European Union and is not provided for in the Reform Treaty. The EU cannot be allowed, through the back door, to claim competences here that should remain solely with the Member States, and the supervision of data collection would presume this. For us it is not a question of time or speed, but a question of the prime necessity that the protection of personal data has absolute priority. This Commission text does not guarantee this. I am happy that the rapporteur wants to delete the non-mandatory text here. We already backed this, even at committee level. Unfortunately, she had not obtained a majority for it at that time.
The citizens expect us to ensure that what the judgment now stipulates, namely adjournment, will actually compel the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs to make sure that data protection is checked here once again and that only then will the decision on Parliament's position and first reading be made. I would ask all groups to be true to their word here.
Jiří Maštálka
for the GUE/NGL Group. - (CS) Ladies and gentlemen, I believe that the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on population and housing censuses presented by the Commission is a step in the right direction, like the previous proposals on statistics on health and safety at work and on job vacancies. I also agree with the Commission's statement during the last population and housing censuses for 2001 that the collection of data from individual Member States based solely on 'gentlemen's agreements' is inadequate for achieving sufficiently comparable results. It is therefore necessary to adopt legislation at European level. Only in this way can we guarantee the reliability, transparency and comparability of the results.
On the other hand, I was alarmed when I saw the list of data requested by Eurostat in section 1.3 of the annex to the proposed regulation. Even allowing for the fact that these are only recommended indicators, I believe that the Commission went too far in this respect. There are no grounds for asking people intimate questions about their private life. I was even more taken aback by the fact that this data was only to be collected from women. I therefore wholeheartedly welcomed the decision of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs to remove these intrusive and inappropriate requirements from the Commission's proposal.
Such information is perhaps more appropriate in a medical centre. As far as the anonymity of this data goes, in my view it should be comparable to banking data. I think that in compiling any statistical information we must above all respect the protection of personal data and the privacy of individuals, and we must prevent a disproportional increase in the number of tasks required of the data providers. I will recommend that the GUE/NGL Group vote in this sense.
Derek Roland Clark
on behalf of the IND/DEM Group. - Mr President, on 20 November, in the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, I was pleased to support the rapporteur, Ms Juknevičienė, in her Amendment 32 to delete paragraph 1.3.2 so as to exclude the intrusive and offensive question about women's first sexual act, dressed up as 'consensual union'. The Commission representative at that time present in committee promised me that this 'insensitive question' would be removed and not come back. I took that as a victory for me, for my party UKIP, but, mostly, as a victory for common sense, and I was ready to congratulate the Commission on it. By the way, that retraction proves that I was right to describe it as being about the sex act because, if it was just cohabitation following, which it was claimed to be, why did the Commission representative promise to withdraw what was an innocent question? I am proved right.
Now, when I saw today that the vote on this proposal would not be held tomorrow as originally scheduled but postponed indefinitely, although the debate is obviously still going on, I smelled a rat because votes usually follow debates very closely. I was right. The latest version that I printed off from the computer just an hour ago shows as indicated on page 1, Text by the Commission, that a new Amendment 39 is here. It bears no relation to the original Amendment 39, which is an innocent thing about technicalities, but it is the old 1.3.2 - complete with the whole list of questions, including the intrusive question about women's consensual union.
At the time, in committee, I did not like the fact that, when votes came up the following day, the rapporteur had allowed her Amendment 32 to be somewhat watered down to Compromise A, which only deleted the list of questions in 1.3.2, and left the 1.3 and 1.3.1 preamble paragraphs, which was a peg, of course, to hang further questions on - and I was right to be suspicious of that.
This objectionable, intrusive and insulting question has been disgracefully reintroduced as Amendment 39 by the Commission - against the Commission promise to me in committee - and I am more angry, Mr President, than I have been at any time recently. I was promised that this would disappear and it has been brought back by the Commission - a disgraceful question which no woman should be asked to put up with. It is a disgrace to women; it is a disgrace to the committee which has to debate the thing. I therefore ask all colleagues to vote against Amendment 39 and - to make sure - vote against the whole of this rotten, distorted proposal.
Andreas Mölzer
(DE) Mr President, in view of the ethnically based conflicts which are constantly flaring up, manifesting themselves to excess in the most recent Paris riots, for example, it is pleasing to note that we in the EU seem to be finally awakening from our multicultural dreams and are wanting to ask questions on ethnic origin and religion in an EU-wide population census in 2011.
This data should definitely be collected so that we are better able to evaluate the risk potential in this regard. Cultural differences can - as we have seen increasingly in recent times - escalate all too easily. In this respect we in Europe - where some countries have boastfully declared themselves immigration countries - are sitting right over a powder keg that should not be underestimated, even in the metropolitan conurbations.
The most recent conflicts between the Kurds and the Turks have thus required massive police presence in our towns and cities, as is generally known. Statistics on the ethnic and cultural composition of the resident population could therefore be of paramount necessity and benefit for the prevention of violence.
Jan Březina
(CS) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the proposal on population and housing censuses is a completely new piece of EU legislation in an area that has not been previously regulated. The question arises as to whether there is any need for such legislation. The Commission's arguments concerning the need to guarantee comparability and quality of statistical data are relatively convincing, particularly on a general level. However, we must take a critical eye to the proposed areas of information to be collected and evaluated. The Commission's proposal contains a large group of data whose sustainability is highly questionable. I regard as controversial the collection of housing data based on the conclusions of the Laeken European Council. These can be only considered an expression of political will, not a valid legal document. Besides, the EU does not have any competence in the area of housing, and so the statistics obtained on housing, contrary to other data, cannot serve to support the implementation of existing policies, unless the results are intended to serve as a possible catalyst for introducing a new common housing policy. This would be, however, an abuse of power and a breach of the Treaty.
The proposal to collect a large amount of data on citizens' private lives is entirely without justification. From the point of view of implementation of common policies, there is no reason why the EU institutions should have access to data on the number of marriages and partners of each female citizen or the length of these relationships. This is more like playing 'Big Brother', interfering in peoples' private lives and improperly infringing their personal freedom. If some of the EU institutions are tempted to do so, it is right to intervene and lay down clear limits, which cannot be transgressed. In my view, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs did so by limiting substantially the areas of data to be collected and is to be commended for that. The most transparent solution is that proposed by my Group, the PPE-DE, which omits all references in the annex to concrete types of statistical data. I recommend that you give this proposal for your attention and your support.
Silvia-Adriana Ţicău
(RO) Mr. President, I would like to congratulate the rapporteur and to appreciate the importance of this proposal of regulation regarding statistics collected by Member States on housing.
Member States have to use a common system for the standard data to be regularly collected and reported. Accurate and precise statistics regarding housing allow the Union and the Member States to implement adequate policies in this field. Nevertheless, any data collection must observe the private life of individuals. The Union is not only based upon economic criteria, but we also have to build a social Europe.
Decent living obviously involves decent housing. Unfortunately, today, there are over 60 million citizens living below the poverty line in the European Union, and children are most exposed to the risk of poverty. Obviously, these people also have difficulties in getting decent housing.
The main social and demographic tendencies affecting subsidized housing policies are generated by population aging, migration of population inside the Union, migration of population from rural areas to urban areas and predominant development of urban areas.
Yet, there is no unique model applicable to all Member States: in some Member States, there is a big number of houses in which many generations of the same family live together. Austria, Finland, the Czech Republic and Poland have programmes for providing subsidized housing to young people. In France, Germany, Hungary, Spain and Great Britain, the number of houses with only one tenant has increased. In Romania, 95% of the houses are private property and only 5% of the houses are rented or are subsidized houses. In Denmark, 47% of the houses are inhabited by tenants or are subsidized houses, in Austria 42%, in Finland 37%, in France 44% and in Germany 57%.
Statistics represent only a starting point in developing adequate housing policies for each Member State. These policies depend on the allocation of public funds at national, regional or local level, as well as on the real estate market evolution. I believe Member States should also use the Structural Funds for building houses, especially those for regional development.
Yet, the issue of housing requires an approach based upon statistical data, as well as a global, multidimensional approach, based upon national and Community law. Nevertheless, a pragmatic approach, based upon the needs of the citizens, is also required. Unfortunately, there are European citizens who live in inadequate, unsafe houses, but there are also European citizens who have no house or even a roof over their heads. What is Europe's answer and support for the needs of these citizens?
Kathy Sinnott
Mr President, one of the more important services Europe can provide is to support the collection of reliable, comparable information. For this reason, I can give qualified support to the idea of a European census.
However, a few points need to be considered. First of all, there needs to be some recognition of national censuses in the report. Member States already hold censuses, and they will now be in a position of having to organise national and European censuses.
Taking a census is very expensive - it is a labour-intensive activity - and it is reasonable to expect that Member States are going to increasingly combine the national with the European census. This needs to be taken into account. It is very important that we allow Member States to use the opportunity of a European census to ask questions that are relevant to their own nation and to collate those questions separately from the shared questions or the exclusively European ones.
Further, more attention has to be given to the census questions. These questions must be chosen carefully and must not cross the line separating valid information from intrusion and attacks on privacy. We want to understand trends, to try to make policies more relevant; we do not want to pry into people's personal lives. Once respectful questions are chosen, then we have to be very careful that they must go through not just a linguistic process but also a cultural translation. As the report does not intend to harmonise the rules on census, this step must be taken to ensure that accurate comparability of data between Member States is achieved.
Lambert van Nistelrooij
(NL) Mr President, I should like to draw attention to the relationship between the objective of collecting data and the amount of data actually included in an analysis such as this, as something is clearly amiss in this respect. Something is wrong in the relationship between the tasks of the European Union with regard to housing policy, for example, and what we are now calling for. The Union does not have competence in this field. Nor does this Parliament have competence to discuss the relationship between religious beliefs, ethnic origin and possible integration issues; it is not for the European Union as a whole to make pronouncements on this.
What is up for consideration, however, is how we allocate funds, how we distribute our Structural Funds. The important thing here is having a precise insight into the number of inhabitants in the regions concerned, the regions under the NUTS classification of territorial units for statistics. Until there are precise data on this, and until orientation towards outcomes - in financial terms - is possible, this action is indeed necessary. Homogeneity and reliability are the primary considerations here.
I should like to make one more point, on which Mrs Novak made some very interesting proposals in the Committee on Regional Development. With regard to interference in the family circle, the private sphere of citizens, we shall be voting against the proposal if this is not removed from it. Perhaps these aspects will be removed during the trialogue - I am relying on the rapporteur in this regard. Only in that case will Parliament and the Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats ultimately be able to give it our support; only on this condition.
Maria Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou
(EL) Mr President, as has been mentioned by the rapporteur and almost all the speakers, it is important to compare the data from the Member States on population and the main social, economic, family and housing indicators, so that on the basis of that information, each Member State can better deal with the issues which concern it, within the framework of its policy. At European level, however, we need to target the data which will lead to a better cohesion policy and improved regional development, so that inequalities are eliminated and the gap between different social groups and different European regions is narrowed.
By laying down common definitions and indicators, the proposed regulation ensures the comparability of data and, as a result, promotes better practice in the Member States. However, there is a need for regular evaluation and corroboration of the statistics gathered by the competent agencies, and these agencies must undergo quality control and transparency checks. Objectivity, representativeness and accuracy of data are important issues. Paradoxically, although the Commission is revoking the annexes to the regulation, it is in favour of including recommended topics which may affect the clarity and accuracy of the data, since it is leaving it to the Member States to do as they wish. If the aim of the proposal is to adopt binding legislation establishing common definitions for the comparability of data, I believe these points should be deleted.
We must proceed with a cost-benefit analysis, as provided for in Article 5a, since the cost of collecting such data is particularly high for Member States which have limited capacity to analyse the details.
Lastly, I would like to point out that if the amendments are not approved, the draft regulation will touch on very sensitive issues relating to personal, family and private life, such as the request for collection of data on cohabitation - which must be deleted - or the temperature of the bathwater! Why should we collect information and details which are not related to European policies? Poverty is not controlled with numbers and data.
Ljudmila Novak
(SL) I support the regulation on population and housing censuses.
With the data collected on the basis of this regulation we will be able better to assess the socio-economic conditions in which the inhabitants of the European Union live at regional and national level, and at European Union level. Furthermore, with this data it will be possible to evaluate more accurately the effectiveness of the implementation of regional policy and progress in achieving regional cohesion, to which the EU is assigning an increasing amount of funds.
Two things must be ensured if we are to attain the desired objectives through the regulation: the volume of the data that we collect under this regulation must not be too great and the data collected must be of high quality and comparable. Data which do not create the necessary added value and merely increase administration and expense must be excluded. These are proposals which are to be found in Annexes 1.3 and 2.3 and on which the Member States should report of their own accord.
At the same time, care must be taken not to encroach excessively on the privacy of the men and women living in the European Union. Nor may we use the collection of these data to discriminate against one sex or another.
Comparability of basic data between Member States and reliability of the data collected from the census are necessary for the assessment of European policies and for the comparison of the results of national policies at European level. Therefore, the regulation must ensure that all the Member States use the same method and criteria in data collection.
Miroslav Mikolášik
(SK) Mr President, precise population data and reliable data on housing within the EU are at present an essential prerequisite for the correct evaluation of all areas of European policies, as well as for the formulation of operational objectives and evaluation of the progress in individual Member States.
Because they serve many fundamental objectives, I would above all like to underscore the importance of the reliability and quality of this data. Of the many examples where exact census data are relevant, I would like to mention two: the process of qualified majority voting by the Council and the allocation of resources from Structural Funds for the development of less-favoured regions. I believe that it is important that this area be regulated in a unified manner. In this way the data provided by individual Member States will be comparable at both European and regional level, as is often necessary.
As a member of the Committee on Regional Development, I would like to highlight the importance of the classification of statistical units. The quality and comparability of this type of information can only be guaranteed by a clear European framework, in other words European legislation on population and housing censuses.
I agree with the view that the legislation must be aimed mainly at the end results and not at the information being collected. This will reliably ensure the comparability of the statistical data, which, if missing, can lower data quality.
The Member States should be free to select the best census modes and methods in accordance, however, with certain binding standards and quality requirements. It goes without saying that the topics, as well as the time frames and the implementing deadlines, should remain the same for all countries. Only in this way will the census data be transparent, reliable and comparable, a fundamental factor in fulfilling many important objectives.
President
Before I give the floor to the Commissioner, I am reminded that about 2000 years ago King Herod instituted a census, but on that occasion it was boys only.
Meglena Kuneva
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, this will be a very encouraging start for me.
I am glad to announce that the Commission is ready to accept the majority of Parliament's amendments. As this debate has shown, there are currently negotiations under way that will address your concerns. A compromise could open the door to future development. The Commission supports the debate that is still ongoing and sincerely hopes that a solution will be found that is acceptable to a broad majority within this House, as well as to the Member States represented in the Council.
However, it should not be forgotten that the inclusion of new topics in a census takes in-depth and long-haul preparation. I am confident that the correct balance will be found between the very important reporting on the EU population and housing, and the cost and effort of collecting the data.
I would like to pay special attention to the question by Ms Schroedter. The main point was that this legislation does not sufficiently assure data confidentiality. My answer is that data confidentiality is being taken most seriously by Eurostat and all national statistical offices. There is framework legislation on data confidentiality on the national as well as on the European level. The proposal on censuses does not violate or modify any of this legislation. In contrast, it fully respects all provisions, be they national or European.
There is no need to repeat established framework legislation on data confidentiality within this specific proposal on censuses. No data transmitted to Eurostat allows insight into the data of any particular individual person. It is anonymous data. Moreover, the legislation in this current draft allows only the transmission of aggregated data, not of microdata.
President
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place at a later part-session.


Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (recast) (debate)
President
The next item is the report by Mr Simpson, on behalf of the Committee on Transport and Tourism, on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (recast) - C7-0111/2009 -.
As Mr Simpson cannot be here, Mr El Khadraoui will speak on his behalf.
Saïd El Khadraoui
deputising for the rapporteur. - Madam President, the Chair of the Committee on Transport and Tourism, Mr Simpson, is not able to join us today and has asked me to read out his statement.
The recast on the development of the guidelines of the TEN-T network seeks to bring together the various amendments adopted over the years to the guidelines and to incorporate amendments that take account of the enlargement of the EU to 27 Member States.
To give a bit of background to the report, the guidelines give direction to the development of the Trans-European transport network. The objective is to establish the network gradually by 2020 by integrating land, sea and air transport infrastructure networks throughout the Union.
Turning back to the report at hand, it is, strictly speaking, a codification of the legislative text, but, because the Commission made some minor changes to the annex, they were forced to do it via the recast procedure. The changes to the annex are to correct initial mistakes that were made during the accession of the 10 new Member States that joined in 2004. The changes are not about updating the maps or making any substantive changes.
The two changes the rapporteur has introduced to the report involve minor modifications in the recitals and some technical corrections to the maps. These are in line with the changes made by the Council and in line with correcting the guidelines.
Following the Commission's advice, the decision was taken, both by Council and by Mr Simpson as rapporteur with the backing of the Transport Committee, not to make any substantive changes to the guidelines. The rapporteur is, however, aware that the Greens have retabled their own amendments seeking to update the line between Munich city and Munich airport, but the rapporteur would like to reiterate the point that the changes we are making in this report are about correcting the text, not updating it.
The point of this recast is to bring everything into order ahead of the real revision of the guidelines during early 2011. It is important to ensure the clarity of the guidelines in preparation for the more substantial changes that will take place next year. We are all eagerly awaiting the real revision of the guidelines and the chance to further develop the TEN-T network but, in order to get to that stage, we need to get the current legislation right, and that is what we have done here.
Andris Piebalgs
Member of the Commission. - Madam President, I am very grateful to the speaker and rapporteur. This is exactly what we have been looking for, so that is why I have on this point nothing to add because I think it describes exactly what is at issue.
I will just concentrate on this measure revision, where we stand on it, because it is important to see it being the process. Based on the Green Paper of April 2009, the Commission has launched a public consultation with more than 300 answers and set up six expert groups, which help to work on the results of consultation in a new policy proposal.
In a very short time, there will be a proposal to the college, a document that will outline the methodology for establishing the new trans-European transport network. So we foresee that this could be presented to the college on 5 May.
Then this methodology will definitely be presented to this House and the Council. The Commission will then engage in the preparation of the proposals for the new TEN-T and its financing.
So, our expectation is that we will be able to adopt this in the college in the first semester in 2011. I am very grateful to Parliament for understanding the necessity for minor changes and I am looking forward to our having a very broad and strong debate on new outlines for the trans-European transport network in the months to come.
Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to thank those Members who, following the information imparted by the rapporteur and also by the shadow rapporteurs, have allowed the swift conclusion of the parliamentary process concerning this matter. They have desisted from tabling amendments which, although acceptable in terms of their content, would have been an obstacle to the adoption of this codifying text.
We are now in a position to give the Commission the basis for the programming of the TEN-T of the next decade. In a specific effort to make the timescales shorter, from the moment the rapporteurs took up this matter, they reached an agreement not to table amendments that were not agreed on with the Council. The Committee on Transport and Tourism has approved the technical modifications examined by the legal services of Parliament and of the Council, and the Council has stated that it can conclude at first reading if we vote along these lines, which is entirely acceptable.
The few changes made by the Committee on Transport and Tourism are consistent with this objective, and I regard them as appropriate and useful for presenting a coherent and accurate final text. Therefore, I support the amendments tabled, although I do not consider appropriate at this time the amendment tabled by the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance, which has already been rejected in the vote within the Committee on Transport and Tourism.
Although the content of the amendment - namely the modification of a map relating to Munich Airport - is acceptable, there will be an opportunity to table it again during the review of the TEN-T, which could even take place by summer, since the work in the European Commission is progressing quickly.
Silvia-Adriana Ţicău
This technical document allows Annex I to be updated by including the maps of all Member States and the target deadline to be changed to 2020. The in-depth debate on updating the list of TEN-T projects is planned for the end of the year. This list should include the development of Black Sea maritime corridors, road links with the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine, as well as the extension of the current priority projects 6 and 17 so that the high-speed railway line can reach Bucharest and Constanţa.
The eruption of the volcano in Iceland has highlighted to us the weakness of the European transport system. The European Union ought to have had an efficient system for redirecting passengers to other forms of transport. It is becoming absolutely vital for a trans-European transport network to be developed so that high-speed railway lines can serve not only all the Member States' capitals but other large European cities as well. Another increasingly important aspect is the development of transport along inland waterways and the European maritime corridors.
Eva Lichtenberger
Madam President, the trans-European networks are a topic which is keeping us busy in this plenary session, and which should keep us even more busy. We now have a recast, and some people - Mr Silvestris, for example - have been surprised that the Greens have put forward amendments proposing changes to the list of the trans-European networks, or what is considered to form part of this.
They must not forget that what we have suggested involves a special case: namely where the Member State itself has said that this part of the trans-European networks is only a feeder and will therefore no longer be relevant for us; this famous flight path - now I am talking like Mr Stoiber; I think this is contagious, and quite dangerous - is something we do not want to build any more; one would, so to speak, have built a feeder to Munich Airport. This is the reason for our amendment, therefore.
I also generally think, however, that we should apply ourselves with particular care to revising the trans-European networks, and we should consider a point which is particularly important to me. There is a study by a Dutch person - I will gladly pass it on to the Commissioner, when he is here - which, for me, is very relevant for the coming debate, and which shows that the costs of a large project - and it very often involves large projects - are, as a rule, underestimated by an average of 45%, and their benefit is always overestimated, since that is needed in order to implement the project. That means that we must completely rethink the cost estimate for trans-European projects, and I would call on you to do that. It is our responsibility to give our citizens good, clear information.
Jaroslav Paška
The definition of trans-European transport networks is a fundamental step towards improving transport connections for residential and industrial areas across Europe.
While in the North, West and South of Europe, railways and roads terminate at sea ports, roads and railways in the East have the enormous potential to continue eastwards across the whole of Asia to the shores of the Pacific.
Asian countries such as China, Japan and India are experiencing significant economic growth and are becoming major trading partners for European companies. It is therefore necessary, along with the construction of an internal European transport structure, to also open up transport routes to the East.
The broad-gauge railway line from Vladivostok reaches the border of the EU at Čierna nad Tisou. A project has been drawn up for this line to be continued to Vienna, linking it to the Danube, to the ports and, of course, to the European network.
In my opinion, projects such as this should also receive very significant support in the future. Thank you.
Franz Obermayr
(DE) Madam President, yes, I rather prefer 'non-attached'. Even though, at this point, we are only talking about a recasting of the guidelines, I would nevertheless like to take the opportunity to mention a project that is particularly problematic for Austria. The Brenner Base Tunnel is part of the high-speed rail axis from Berlin to Palermo and the trans-European transport network programme and it is intended to cross under the Innsbruck to Bozen axis.
The current situation is that the EU has left Austria, Tyrol, northern Italy and also southern Germany in a state of uncertainty and there is a risk of the tunnel becoming a black hole for billions of euros. The original cost estimate of EUR 4.5 billion from 2002 has long since been exceeded and experts expect higher construction costs in the region of EUR 16 billion. Moreover, the financing has still not been clarified. In principle, the project is supposed to be financed partly by the Member States concerned and partly by the EU. However, the EU refuses to make a legally binding promise for the period after 2013 and, as a result, is leaving the aforementioned countries in a state of uncertainty.
That is not all, however. Of course, in order to ensure that the tunnel is fully utilised, appropriate feeder lines also need to be established. The catchment area concerned stretches from Munich in the north to Verona in the south and, in this regard, the financing is totally unclear, including on the Italian side. My request is therefore that, when the TEN projects are launched, they must not be subject to insufficient planning by one party, leaving the Member States concerned to foot the bill. The EU must accept at least 50% of the costs, and the planning and the promises must be forthcoming with due speed.
Werner Kuhn
(DE) Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, these guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport networks initially sound very technical. However, the rapporteur, Mr Simpson, has already pointed out that they are, of course, vital from the point of view of future economic development in Europe.
Roads are the arteries of our economy. That is something on which we all agree. We also have to acknowledge time and again that, as an economic and trading centre, Europe is in competition with the large economic and trading centres of America and South-East Asia. It is therefore necessary for us to develop our inland transport systems for the domestic market while, on the other hand, of course also linking Europe's export capacity with the development of the trans-European networks and continuing to strengthen them further.
The purpose of traffic arteries is to take up originating traffic and turn it into terminating traffic and ultimately, to take it to where the customers are. The big issue in this regard is, of course, that the development of major traffic axes is also intended to provide access to the area and thus has an economic development role - we really must not forget that. Europe is a continent that has very many coastlines and very large ports and these ports need to be linked together - in this regard, mobility is essential. However, we must not simply take a 'just-in-time' approach. We also need to work in a cost-effective, environmentally sound and environmentally friendly way. This will be particularly important in future.
An absolutely crucial question will be: can we turn the north-south and east-west links that we currently have in terms of rail, road and inland waterway systems into a real network, because we have to acknowledge that there are bottlenecks here that we need to get round. In this regard, there are, of course, certain things that need to be taken into account. When it comes to the longest trans-European axis - from Palermo to Berlin - this should be extended further via Rostock in the direction of Scandinavia. These are things that we will need to take into account in future.
(The President cut off the speaker)
Inés Ayala Sender
(ES) Madam President, the text that we are concerned with today updates and consolidates the procedure for establishing trans-European networks, to prepare us for the definitive launch of the penultimate and final phases of the review, now in a Europe of 27 that is richer and more spatially complex and which has new, innovative mobility needs.
The Trans-European Transport Network Executive Agency is now almost fully up and running, we have almost all the coordinators for the corridors, and we hope that soon, we will have the remaining ones so that they can promote the corridors that we need.
Our neighbours, especially in the Mediterranean, also have enormous expectations regarding these networks and their own networks, and we are looking forward to receiving the communication that the Commission has promised us on the methodology, which will complement the consultation and the debates, before starting work on one of the most exciting exercises for our Committee on Transport and Tourism.
The mobility and cohesion network is becoming a reality and, for the first time, it will connect the EU-27 common area in an integrated and dynamic way. It will identify the essential hubs - ports, airports and logistical hubs - overcoming the border barriers. It will include, among other things - if you will allow me to mention it -breaking through the centre of the historical barrier of the Pyrenees with a low-level tunnel. It will thus achieve a plan for the future of 21st-century Europe that has such strength of conviction that it will secure the necessary funding.
That is our challenge, but for now, we will be more humble and limit ourselves to approving this first legislative polishing exercise, for which I would like to congratulate our Chair, Mr Simpson.
Michael Cramer
(DE) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the Transrapid system should not be included in these guidelines. It does not fit into the European landscape. It does not reduce the differences between the systems that we currently have; it increases them. We have paid out billions to create a uniform system, and here billions are being paid out at national level to counteract that. That cannot be allowed to happen!
Although the European Parliament had previously come out against the Transrapid system, it suddenly reappeared in 1996 as a project between Berlin and Hamburg. It then suddenly disappeared again - and no one knows why. In 2004, the Transrapid link between Munich airport and Munich Central Station appeared just as suddenly. That was then halted in Germany, with the additional support of the State Government of Bavaria. There was agreement about scrapping this project - no one wanted it any more. That is why it must no longer be included in these guidelines.
After leaving office, the former Minister-President of Bavaria, Edmund Stoiber, was appointed to campaign for a reduction in bureaucracy here in Europe. That is his responsibility. He is also the one who now has to take the decision that this Transrapid system does not belong in these guidelines. That is something that we should all take note of. We must get rid of this Transrapid system. It was a nice model from a scientific perspective, but it has no place in Europe. It does not belong here and, as such, does not belong in these guidelines.
Jörg Leichtfried
(DE) Madam President, I would like to take the opportunity to congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Simpson, and, at the same time, express my regret that he cannot be with us here today. We will manage, nevertheless. I would particularly like to express my congratulations for taking the approach of essentially leaving things as they are in these guidelines, because there is one principle that is very important, namely reliability and calculability on the part of the European legislator. That is certainly fulfilled with this report.
Secondly, I would like to mention that we also need a proposal for the future when we can once again decide what is really part of the TEN system and what is not. We could conduct the debate in the way that it is, to a certain extent, already being conducted. Some people are arguing charismatically in favour of linking a boot with an island and the others say that that absolutely must not be included. However, that is the wrong way to go about it. We need to look at what adds value for the European Union and European taxpayers. Moreover, support should clearly be provided in places where the Member States are already doing something, where something is happening, because then, something really will happen and we will not have a situation where TEN plans are made that are then never implemented. European citizens and passengers will benefit, as will those Member States that commit themselves ultimately to moving traffic away from the roads and on to the rail system.
Andreas Mölzer
(DE) Madam President, as a result of the fall of the Iron Curtain and of Central European integration, the Baltic-Adriatic Corridor is, as we know, currently regaining the importance that it had before the collapse of the Danube Monarchy. The EU has, of course, already confirmed the importance of the Baltic-Adriatic Corridor by giving priority status to the northern part from Gdańsk to the Czech Republic. However, it would be even more important to also give the development of the southern part via the Austrian Southern Railway to Italy the same level of priority.
In this network, in particular, which carries half of all goods and passengers, we need to neutralise a dangerous bottleneck situation. Only the Koralm Tunnel will be able to permanently eliminate the barrier posed by this bottleneck.
The people living along the transit routes are, as we all know, paying a high, and rising, price for the increasing volume of traffic. Only the complete development of this southern corridor will lead to the sort of switch from the road to the rail system that could not be expected to be achieved by any other infrastructure measures in Austria.
Elena Băsescu
(RO) At the moment when all the air traffic throughout Europe is experiencing severe disruption due to the volcanic eruption in Iceland, the need to develop pan-European transport networks is even more obvious than ever.
The European Union should be giving particular support to the development of the transport infrastructure and its interconnection with the main European transport routes in the countries which have joined the EU in recent years. Romania has three pan-European corridors crossing its territory, 4, 7 and 9, which are all closely linked to the Black Sea port city of Constanţa. I feel that particular attention must be focused on corridor 7.
The Danube is part of the main trans-European Rhine-Main-Danube transport waterway, which links the North Sea and Black Sea via the ports of Rotterdam and Constanţa. It could provide Europe with a proper transport backbone. However, cooperation must be established in order to raise the profile of these transport corridors as soon as possible.
Gesine Meissner
(DE) Madam President, the trans-European networks are indeed utilised for regular traffic in Europe. We could even say that the traffic is the absolute backbone of the entire European internal market, which is, of course, one of our main aims in Europe. Therefore, we absolutely must take care to ensure that all corridors are indeed developed and to discover where there is a need for financing and where the EU should concentrate its efforts.
Of course, it is clear that there are always national interests. We have seen it already today: some people talked about the Danube, others talked, in particular, about southern Europe and others still talked about the Brenner Base Tunnel. These traffic corridors are found all over Europe. The aim is for them to be generally continuous throughout Europe so that not only goods, but also people, can be transported from A to B. That is the task facing us. As I said before, it is natural for each of us to attach importance to our own regional requirements. We need to make sure that we avoid bottlenecks and, above all, that we have a truly functional network for all means of transport. That is what it is all about, and that is also what we will debate accordingly.
Herbert Dorfmann
(DE) Madam President, during this debate, the Brenner Base Tunnel and the new rail route from Munich to Verona have also been mentioned. Currently, around 50 million tonnes of goods are transported by road on this route and so this tunnel is urgently needed. However, it has also been said today in this Chamber that on both sides of the Brenner - in both Austria and Italy - it is difficult to finance the project. Financing on the Italian side would easily be possible by reallocating the revenue from the road tolls, from the Brenner motorway, to fund the rail route. For this to happen, however, it would be necessary for the concession for the Brenner motorway not to be put out to tender - as is the current intention as a result of pressure from Europe - but for the Italian State to be given the opportunity to extend this concession for at least another 50 years instead of it being awarded to private tenderers. Otherwise, there will be no cross-financing, which would mean that it would be extremely unlikely for the TEN route to be developed on the Italian side.
Inés Ayala Sender
(ES) Madam President, Parliament is going to adopt this recast on the trans-European networks, and I would like the Commission to tell me as specifically as possible when we are going to be able to have access to the communication on the methodology.
As you know, Commissioner, this is one of the Spanish Presidency's priorities, and we are now crossing the half-way mark. I would therefore like to know as specifically as possible when we will be able to have this text, as Parliament is going to adopt the recast now and will therefore be free to examine this new text.
Andris Piebalgs
Member of the Commission. - Madam President, again I would like to thank the Committee on Transport and Tourism for its support for this technical recast and I hope that the vote in plenary will confirm it.
Today's debate was on a broader scale and it will help to propose a methodology. Commission Vice-President Kallas will send the proposal to the college on 5 May. It took a bit of time because this new Commission has not been in place for long, and it takes some time for the new college to prepare proposals.
What I take away from this debate is that this House very strongly supports trans-European network policy. I believe that without a well-interconnected infrastructure, in transport or in energy or in telecommunications, it is very difficult to speak about Europe. I believe this debate will help us to shape our proposal for methodology, which basically means that the Committee on Transport will have a chance to speak about it if everything goes well in May.
Saïd El Khadraoui
deputising for the rapporteur. - Madam President, I would just like to thank the colleagues who have contributed to the debate today and reiterate my point that we are looking at correcting mistakes made in the past and not at making any substantive changes.
That will come later on with the real revision of the guidelines and, of course, we are looking forward to that debate. For this reason, the rapporteur, Mr Simpson, and myself, as coordinator for my group, will be instructing my own political group to vote against the amendment put forward by the Greens. We hope that the other political groups will be able to support us on this.
President
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place during the next plenary sitting in Brussels.


One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
President
The next item is the one-minute speeches on matters of political importance.
John Bufton
Mr President, thank you for letting me speak again. In view of what has been said here now, at very short notice, I would urge you to look again at that matter of voting at the next session on 5 and 6 May.
It is quite likely that most of the MEPs from the UK will not be present. It is our general election on 6 May. The whole country will not be here. You are going to discuss things which will not represent the United Kingdom. I urge you to perhaps look at 4 May - bring it back a few days - because, if you deny that vote, you are going to deny the United Kingdom a chance to oppose or support measures ...
(The President cut off the speaker)
President
If I may give you my answer: I will take what you have said very seriously. We have two days: 5 and 6 May. We will decide how to proceed with the votes scheduled for 5 and 6 May, and how to divide them.
President
Before we begin, I would like to make an announcement. As we all know, Rule 150 of the Rules of Procedure allows for one-minute speeches. Experience shows that we receive over two times more requests to speak than we can accept in view of the time available. The disappointment expressed by Members who were waiting for the opportunity to speak, and then did not have the opportunity, is inevitable. In order to avoid further uncertainty and disappointment, I am going to apply the following procedure in future for the one-minute speeches. Pursuant to Rule 150 of the Rules of Procedure, a list will be drawn up of 30 speakers, who will be chosen selectively so as to maintain a representative political and geographical balance. Priority will be given to Members who did not have the opportunity to make a one-minute speech at the two previous part-sessions. All Members who have requested the opportunity to speak will be told in advance if they have been chosen or not. Members chosen to speak will be expected to be present in the Chamber at the time when it is their turn to speak.
Jolanta Emilia Hibner
(PL) Mr President, I would like to draw attention to the question of genetically modified food. The European Commission is working on a proposal to change EU law, to give Member States greater freedom in deciding if they want to allow genetically modified organisms, because at the present time under EU law, it is not possible to introduce a ban on GMOs in Member States.
The European Commission is soon to propose that Member States be able to decide individually on the cultivation of genetically modified plants. However, decisions on the importation and processing of GMO seeds would still be made at EU level. In view of this, we should consider whether a special label should be introduced for GMO-free products. Such labelling should be clear and universally recognisable, so that European consumers will know the product they are buying has not been produced from animals fed with genetically modified feed. We should, therefore, think about a specific design of label.
Traian Ungureanu
Mr President, may I remind this House that one year ago, Communist abuses were met by a popular revolt in the Republic of Moldova. The protests brought to power a pro-European coalition and, one year on, the new government proved its European stance. The Moldovan Government needs immediate support from the EU, and there are three ways in which European support can help Moldova: quick financial assistance, abolishing of visas and the conclusion of an association agreement.
I also have to mention here the case of Ernest Vardanian, a journalist arrested, held incommunicado and indicted for high treason by the so-called authorities in Transnistria. It is a serious human rights violation. I am asking the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and the EU Head of Delegation to Moldova to act urgently for the immediate release of the detained journalist.
Anna Záborská
(SK) Mr President, Secretary General, Commissioner, I should now deliver the speech I have prepared, but there have been some exceptional circumstances. We all know that meteorological conditions do not favour us all meeting here in Strasbourg without difficulties. This has caused many fellow Members and officials a lot of stress and anxiety.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you, Mr President, and also the General Secretariat under the leadership of Klaus Welle, for leaving nothing to chance and providing us with the best possible working conditions.
From the first days of the aviation problem, Parliament set to work on the reorganisation of transport to Strasbourg, and I would therefore also like to offer sincere thanks on behalf of those who cannot be here today. Thank you very much.
Hans-Peter Martin
(DE) Mr President, I tried to attract your attention earlier when you were talking about the new rules for the one-minute speeches. Coming from Poland as you do, you will know what it means to have different classes of people and parliamentarians. I would, however, ask that the people in the back rows also be taken into account in connection with points of order.
I have some specific questions. Firstly, can you please clarify for me what you said earlier, namely whether, by the next two part-sessions, you mean the next two Strasbourg part sessions or whether you are also including Brussels in that?
Secondly, what will you do if - as has just happened - Members are not here for whatever reason, even though they have requested the floor? Will there perhaps be another few minutes of catch-the-eye?
Thirdly, in line with this new efficiency - which is to be welcomed - could you please make a start right away today by reading out the names of the 30 speakers you intend to give the floor to today?
President
Thank you for your remark. Application of the new rules will begin with the meeting in Brussels. The part-session in Brussels will be the first one held under the new rules.
Jörg Leichtfried
(DE) Mr President, the problem of stray dogs in Romania has become topical once again as a result of the planned lifting of the ban on killing these dogs that has been in place since 15 January 2008. I am pleased that Romania has again refrained from implementing these plans. However, the alternative that has now been chosen, namely to place dogs in mass animal shelters, is not the solution either. The only sensible thing to do is to implement a castration programme. Romania has refused to do this, however. When it comes to this matter - like any animal protection matters - the European Union really should do something - and not before time.
Mr President, that was my one-minute speech. I wanted to use the remaining time to explain once again what it was I wanted to say earlier.
George Sabin Cutaş
(RO) Mr President, when Simon Kuznets, the man who created the concept of 'gross national product', recognised how difficult it can be to measure a nation's well-being, based only on the size of its national income, I do not think he imagined that it would take three quarters of a century before five Nobel prize winners would work on a set of proposals for providing a more accurate assessment of economic performance and social product than that offered by GDP. This macro-economic indicator ignores the quality of products, fails to measure sustainable economic growth, and excludes other factors such as subsistence and suburban economies, household work and voluntary work.
Based on the outcome of the work carried out by this committee, summarised in the Stiglitz report, a proposal has been drafted for improving the national statistics system, defining the quality of life more accurately and including sustainable development in the calculation of the economic and social progress index.
In this context, I believe that we must have a coordinated system across the whole of the European Union for measuring quality of life, the extent to which economic growth can be sustained and, last but not least, social disparities. This step would signal that we have learnt the lesson from the recession which is having such a major impact on us.
Izaskun Bilbao Barandica
(ES) Madam President, last week, a court ruled that the closure of the Basque language newspaper Egunkaria, which I spoke about here a few weeks ago, was an unjust, illegal and arbitrary act.
The ruling states that neither the Spanish Constitution nor the Criminal Code allows a newspaper to be closed down, and that the whole charge was built on the premise that defending Basque culture means collaborating with ETA, which is absurd. It says that the people charged are completely innocent, that they do not belong to ETA, and that the newspaper has not funded ETA, nor has ETA funded the newspaper. The ruling also states that the detainees were held incommunicado, with insufficient judicial controls, which gives credibility to the claims of ill treatment and torture made by the detainees.
I would therefore like to make two requests: I would like us to take note of the consequences that demagogy and the manipulation of feelings and emergency legislation have in a democracy, and of the fact that in Spain, the main elements of the media and the main parties accused all of us who opposed this injustice of collaborating with ETA. I would also like us to work together to ensure that justice is done for these victims and that the case is closed fairly.
Michail Tremopoulos
(EL) Madam President, last February, the European Commission report edited by Reuter and Trautmann on global illicit drug markets from 1998 onwards was presented to the European Parliament. This report is a valuable database and its conclusions corroborate certain evaluations made to date about the ineffectiveness of drugs policies in the European Union and at global level.
The basic conclusion is that current policies have failed in their main objective, namely, to reduce the demand for and supply of illicit substances, and are a key factor in exacerbating the harm to individual users, their environment, the economy and society.
In 2004, the European Parliament approved a package of recommendations, such as the Catania report. We are therefore calling for this issue to be revisited, within a broader framework, so that no harm comes to users.
Ryszard Czarnecki
(PL) Madam President, my nation has been hit by a great tragedy. The President, the head of the Central Bank and military leaders have been killed. The funeral of the President and his wife was held yesterday. I would like to express my thanks for the expressions of solidarity which have been received from very many Member States of the European Union. The concept of European solidarity has proved itself, and this is, for us Poles, something very important. The Presidents of the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Germany, Lithuania, Latvia, Romania and Slovenia and the Prime Minister of Estonia attended the funeral. I regret that the head of the Council and the President of the European Commission were not there. They could not come, but the Prime Ministers of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia did come, for example, and they had a longer journey. I would like to thank everyone who was there for these expressions of solidarity.
Andreas Mölzer
(DE) Madam President, please allow me, in one minute, to make a few comments with regard to Serbia. Serbia's ambitions to join the EU seem to be putting wind in the country's sails. In any case, the country formally apologised recently for the genocide in Srebrenica - that is certainly not something that can be said about the controversial candidate country Turkey, where there is the threat of sanctions if a country merely debates the issue of the Armenian genocide.
The interpretation of the Copenhagen criteria is, in my view, arbitrary, if Belgrade is accused of a lack of cooperation with the International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague but the human rights violations by Ankara are considered unimportant.
However, it is nothing new for the European Union to apply double standards. In Bosnia, several ethnic groups are to be thrust into one multicultural state, whereas in Kosovo, it is suddenly legitimate for one ethnic group to split away from an existing state.
In contrast to Turkey, Serbia is historically, spiritually and culturally part of Europe and a key state for the security of the Balkans. Of course, we must not repeat the mistakes made in connection with the rushed accession of Bulgaria and Romania. All accession criteria must definitely be met, but Serbia is a European country and should become part of the Union.
Georgios Papanikolaou
(EL) Madam President, the recent dismantling of an important terrorist cell in Greece reminds us that violence and the threat to democratic institutions have no borders and are undiscriminating.
It is important to remember that the current economic crisis and the pessimism that it engenders in citizens feeds aggression and produces violence. No one disagrees that violence is reprehensible, whatever form it takes and wherever it originates. However, what we need to agree and put greater emphasis on is the importance of prevention rather than cure. That is why we need to put issues relating to SWIFT, the PNR and the strengthening of Europol and Eurojust higher up on the agenda.
Having said which, it is vital that we correct the chronic social pathogenies that give birth to violence. We need to strike at poverty and unemployment. There is no longer any margin for inaction. Last time the leaders of Europe backed away from the social challenges of difficult economic times, this continent sank into the depths of hatred and totalitarianism.
Jens Geier
(DE) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to draw the attention of the European Commission and of this House to the worrying developments with regard to the prices of raw materials. Duisburg, home of the largest steelworks in Europe, is in my constituency. Here, and in the other steel-producing locations in the EU, the employees are very concerned about their jobs because the three large suppliers of iron ore are forcing price increases of 100% on the steel industry. In future, the price of ore is to be traded on the London Metal Exchange instead of price security being ensured, as was previously the case, by means of long-term supply contracts. The workforce and its trade unions fear that this will result in an extreme rise in the price of the base material, steel. This comes at a time when the potential areas for savings by means of cost-cutting programmes and reductions in the workforce, particularly after the most recent restructuring in the steel industry, have been completely exhausted. In order to draw attention to this situation, works councils and Germany's Industrial Union of Metalworkers have directed an appeal on behalf of Duisburg to Chancellor Merkel and to President Barroso. I would ask the Commission to respond to this appeal.
Pat the Cope Gallagher
Madam President, travellers whose holiday plans have been ruined by the volcanic ash face confusion over insurance.
Although airlines will refund or rebook flights under the Air Passenger Rights Directive, many passengers face the cost of hotel rooms and car hire and perhaps alternative flight arrangements, but some travel insurance policies are expected to pay out for the losses.
There are others claiming that this is an act of God, but I would call on these companies to be pragmatic, to be reasonable and to reconsider that decision, bearing in mind that I, like many others, have numerous constituents who are at airports in various parts of the world, costing them money that they do not have.
I understand that the Package Travel Directive is being reviewed, and this must be done urgently.
In conclusion, it is essential that this travel directive ensures that there is a standard set of rules which applies to a situation of this kind. Even at this stage, I would ask the Commission to look at this.
Claudio Morganti
(IT) Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to propose in this, the democratic heart of the European institutions, a brief overview of the ultimate impact that European interventions have on communities, regions and individuals.
I believe that we must decide whether to present a universalist and globalist vision or, instead, to preserve the contribution and the identity of each individual. I believe that the second option is preferable; it is a broad vision in which the more unique dimensions deriving from specific vocations and traditions also have their place and their dignity.
Let us consider, for example, the effects of the 2006 Services Directive, the so-called Bolkestein Directive, on the Italian bathing resort sector. I do not believe that we should sacrifice, for the sake of a supposedly more efficient global system, the culture and the tradition of hospitality that have always characterised local communities.
I believe that, economically speaking, small enterprises are the most genuine expression of the cultural identity of local communities and that they should therefore always be safeguarded.
Hans-Peter Martin
(DE) Madam President, it is not easy these days to be a fervent pro-European. I would like, today, to mention the problem of Eurostat. It has turned out that Eurostat was much more aware of the real situation in Greece than it was generally thought to have been. There are reports of which only parts were published and which uncovered cases of fraud as long ago as 2002, and then, of course, there was the great report of 2008. However, it is totally unclear where the reports go, what the effects of these reports are, and who can be held responsible for them - in this instance, for not acting on them.
I would therefore like to suggest at this point that we deal constructively with Eurostat and not just with regard to the scandalous practices, which of course also existed in the past. Thus, my suggestion is that the Commission takes action here to ensure the independence of Eurostat and to provide citizens with the information that we so badly need in order to revolutionise our democracy.
Maria Da Graça Carvalho
(PT) Today, we are facing a natural disaster with unpredictable consequences. Science allows us to calculate the effect of the particles in the atmosphere on aircraft engines and avionic systems with reasonable precision. Science also allows us to calculate the movement of those particles in the atmosphere with a reasonable degree of precision. EU transport ministers are meeting today to decide how to deal with the air transport situation. The conclusions of this meeting should be based on scientific knowledge and the precautionary principle. The economy cannot take priority over people's safety. Europe must continue to act as a bastion of safety and quality of life. However, we expect swift, pragmatic solutions on alternative transport systems by land and sea.
Over the last year, we have been faced with a number of crises, natural disasters and an epidemic; in view of all that ...
(The President cut off the speaker)
Ioan Enciu
(RO) Madam President, at the end of this year, the Third Postal Directive is due to come into force, which will completely deregulate this market. The repercussions of the economic and financial crisis are well known, including on the postal market.
The effects of the crisis have multiplied following the implementation of the directive in Member States where the postal market has been completely deregulated. In this sector, the level of redundancies and the reductions in the incomes of the remaining staff are higher than average. There has also been a decrease in the number of transactions, an increase in postal rates, not to mention depriving citizens living in locations and areas which are difficult to reach of access to a means of communication and a universal service.
I believe that the social consequences resulting from the implementation of this directive must be assessed. It is our duty to prevent the occurrence of social dumping. I urge the relevant European institutions to examine the option of applying a minimum 2-year moratorium to the deadlines envisaged for implementing this directive, with some variation in each of the remaining Member States.
Cristian Dan Preda
(RO) I wish to speak to you today about the extremely delicate situation which a journalist called Ernest Vardanian finds himself in. He was arrested by Igor Smirnov's regime in the self-proclaimed Republic of Transnistria.
Ernest Vardanian is accused of high treason and espionage, which is not only absurd, but is completely laughable. Indeed, the journalist has been refused release on bail and is being kept in totally awful conditions. I would like to say that this action is used by the authorities in Tiraspol to intimidate Chişinău at a time when the new government which took office after last year's elections would like to move closer to the European Union and also resolve the Transnistrian conflict.
I am calling for the immediate, unconditional release of the journalist Ernest Vardanian, and I urge the authorities in the self-proclaimed Republic of Transnistria to make a move towards Chişinău in order to resolve the conflict there.
Czesław Adam Siekierski
(PL) The financial and economic crisis has hit the poorest people the hardest. To meet their needs, the European Union has declared the year 2010 to be European Year for Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion. It is estimated that in Europe, over 40 million people live in poverty, and nearly 40 million more are threatened with poverty. It is particularly regrettable that a quarter of this number - 20 million - are children. The problems they have to face concern not only a lack of food, medical care and clothing but, above all, the absence of the prospect of an improvement in the situation and an escape from poverty. Providing a high level of education is the most important step which can help change this tragic situation. This need can be seen most clearly in small towns and rural areas which are a long way from academic centres. Therefore, I think a key solution for change is to increase funding for scholarship programmes for young people from poor backgrounds.
Derek Vaughan
Mr President, I welcome the debate tomorrow on the air crisis because we need to remember that this has an impact not just on this Parliament, but on individuals and businesses across Europe. This is at a time when Europe, or most of Europe, is recovering from a deep recession. The UK, like many other countries - not all - is recovering from that recession, and that is due to the government intervening when the market failed and not standing on the sidelines as some would have us do.
There are many economic figures coming out in the UK in the next few weeks and I believe many of them will be positive. That is because the government has intervened. I think it is important for EU institutions also to intervene in difficult economic times. All the institutions of the EU should, in the future, make sure our budgets are aimed at helping individuals and businesses come through difficult economic times and to plan for the recovery.
Diogo Feio
(PT) The matter I am bringing before this plenary session today is the budgetary position of the various Member States. I am doing so now that the time for submitting the stability and growth programmes has ended. These programmes forecast the medium- and long-term positions of the various Member States. In the specific case of my own country, Portugal, the Commission has remarked that the programme submitted is a risky one. That is a worrying sign for the markets, but it was essentially a sign that it was looking at stability and the health of public accounts, when it is also important to look at the issue of growth. Again, here too, the figures submitted by my country are not satisfactory, and concern for issues such as simplification for businesses and the situation of tax competitiveness is, unfortunately, still lacking.
William
Madam President, it was actually two speeches back, but I would like to ask the gentleman over there who was advocating EU intervention how he thinks the EU should intervene against volcanic ash.
President
Supplementary questions using the blue card are not permitted during the one-minute speeches. Thus, it was not a point of order. Your fellow Member could perhaps answer your question on a one-to-one basis, but in any case not during the plenary debate.
Malika Benarab-Attou
(FR) Madam President, I would have liked you to bear in mind a male-female balance when giving the floor. You gave the floor to a man five times in a row.
President
Thank you very much. As you can imagine, as President of the High Level Group on Gender Equality and Diversity, equality is very important to me. We have a list of speakers and we did try to make it balanced. Who gets the opportunity to speak during the debate is, of course, also dependent on who is actually present.
That concludes this item.