Rapporti verbatim tad-dibattiti

L-Erbgħa, 6 ta' Mejju 2009 - Strasburgu

16. Spegazzjonijiet tal-vot

Explications de vote orales

  Le Président. - Nous passons maintenant aux explications de vote de la journée. Je suis sûr que cela va vous passionner, mais j'ai de très nombreux inscrits, et je crois bien qu'ils sont présents.

- Rapport: Petya Stavreva (A6-0259/2009)

  Inese Vaidere (UEN). - Priekšsēdētāja kungs, nebija īsti skaidrs, par kuru ziņojumu tagad es varētu izteikties. Es pieteicos par G. Stauner, E. Maldeikis un R. Corbett ziņojumu. Jā, es vēlos izteikties. Vienkārši uzreiz nenoreaģēju.

Godātais priekšsēdētāja kungs! Šī piecu miljardu pakete, kuras lielu daļu novirza lauku attīstībai, — es īpaši gribētu uzsvērt to, ka liela nozīme ir skatīties nevis tikai uz formālajiem rādītājiem, bet uz lauku attīstības reālajām vajadzībām. Platjoslas internets ir nepieciešams visās dalībvalstīs, bet ir dalībvalstis, kā, piemēram, mana valsts, kurā ir nepieciešama arī ceļa infrastruktūras uzlabošana un citi pasākumi arī lauku ainavas uzturēšanai. Es aicinātu vairāk skatīties konverģences politikas virzienā, kohēzijas politikas virzienā un sniegt lielāku atbalstu tām dalībvalstīm, kuras ir nonākušas ekonomikas grūtībās un kuras ir varbūt zemākā ekonomikas attīstības līmenī nekā vecās dalībvalstis. Paldies!

  Zita Pleštinská (PPE-DE). - Správa kolegyne Stavreva je jednou z troch správ, ktoré boli začlenené do spoločného balíčka 5 miliárd EUR. V kontexte hospodárskej krízy vidíme, že nám chýbajú financie do investičných projektov do energetiky a na rozvoj vidieka, ktorý bol najviac zasiahnutý dôsledkami hospodárskej krízy. Vítam, že Európsky parlament v hlasovaní podporil návrh nariadenia v rámci plánu hospodárskej obnovy Európy, ktoré vyčleňuje 1,5 miliardy EUR pre všetky členské štáty prostredníctvom Európskeho poľnohospodárskeho fondu pre rozvoj vidieka.

Vidiecke oblasti si môžu realizovať projekty zamerané na rozvoj širokopásmového internetového pripojenia. Pôda zohráva v poľnohospodárskom sektore ústrednú úlohu. Využívanie a obhospodarovanie poľnohospodárskej pôdy je mimoriadne dôležité pri riešení nových problémov, ktoré prinášajú zmena klímy, obnoviteľné zdroje energie, nedostatok vody a biodiverzita.

Vyzývam členské štáty, aby nečakali a veľmi rýchlo upravili svoje národné plány, včas, podrobne a transparentne informovali o nových legislatívnych ustanoveniach a zároveň prijali zrýchlené a zjednodušené postupy, tak pre výdaje, ako aj pre ich vykazovanie.

  Neena Gill (PSE). - Mr President, my constituency in the West Midlands encompasses both urban and rural areas, and the broadband provision in the rural areas is downright appalling. Let me give the example of a town on the Welsh border, Knighton, where entrepreneurs are being let down by poor connections and are all saying ‘rescue me’. One of my constituents wanted to set up a business offering online services – which was particularly crucial as he has a disability, and working from home was the best way for him to do this. Unfortunately, owing to the monopoly, the connection is very slow and not conducive to running a business.

This funding is therefore crucial to rural areas and to economic recovery, and I wanted to ensure that it is distributed fairly across all the Member States, prioritising areas where there is unworkable broadband coverage. I call upon all parties to rapidly come together right now over this and, once and for all, bridge this unfair digital divide.

⁂

  Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE). - Mr President, on a point of order, you very rightly say that we are here late, and I thank the interpreters for staying behind. But it is not our choice to be here late: it was a ruling by the Presidency earlier today – which was an unbelievably arbitrary ruling which has never happened before – to put back the explanations of vote until after the debate instead of, as we have in our Rules of Procedure, after the vote has taken place.

So it is because the President in the chair at the time broke our own Rules of Procedure that we are here tonight, and all of us that are trying to make our explanations of vote are doing what we can legitimately do to raise our voices in a Parliament that does not really like to listen to minorities.

  Le Président. - Monsieur Heaton-Harris, je vous précise un point du règlement. C'est effectivement après le vote, mais pas immédiatement après le vote. La différence nous permet d'interpréter les choses.

Nous en venons à un rapport sur lequel je suis très content que M. Heaton-Harris ait souhaité s'exprimer, car il s'agit du rapport de Gérard Onesta.

⁂

- Rapport: Gérard Onesta (A6-0027/2009)

  Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE). - Mr President, I have bizarrely grown to respect the rapporteur of this report over the period of time and I wanted to talk about the petitions in general because they have been of great use to me. Whilst people do not understand the institutions of Europe and whilst people are slightly scared of them, sometimes they need a way of registering a dispute. The way we have registered petitions in this place in the past has been slightly cack-handed but has given them that chance to air a problem on a slightly different stage, when they might have exhausted many other opportunities. I have brought petitions to this place from people across my constituency; the ‘Earls Barton seven’ was one of my most famous cases.

The point is that the petitions process is probably the only process that is properly worth protecting in this place. Other rules and procedures and many of the other committees pale into insignificance when it comes to comparing them with the importance of the Committee on Petitions.

- Rapport: Richard Corbett (A6-0273/2009)

  Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE). - Mr President, like Mr Corbett, I would not like to anticipate the results of any second referendum in Ireland and I certainly would not like to anticipate the voting in the region of Yorkshire and the Humber in the coming European elections. But I wish Mr Corbett well in whatever he does after he leaves this place in July. I wonder what Parliament will do without its Rules rapporteur, the man who has almost single-handedly behind the scenes contrived to eliminate the powers of smaller groups and the voice of minorities in this place.

This report is, maybe, not so bad but, because it is not so bad, it is worthy of further examination because quite often the changes in the Rules, at face value, are completely fair. It is what they achieve in practice and how they are implemented by the Presidency and by the Bureau that really counts. When it comes to the package on the Rules of Procedure and their adaptation to the Lisbon Treaty, I do wonder whether he has overstepped the mark.

  Syed Kamall (PPE-DE). - Mr President, a few weeks ago we discussed the report on totalitarian regimes. At the time, I pointed out that there was indeed a common thread linking National Socialism and Soviet Socialism, and that was Socialism itself.

We know that the rapporteur, Mr Corbett, believes in the European project. He makes no bones about the fact that he believes in further political and economic integration; he wants a United States of Europe or a Federal Republic of Europe. However, in seeking to achieve these goals he is calling for the suppression of minority views and is almost single-handedly destroying the principle of freedom of speech.

I know he does not care much for the principle of freedom of speech. Looking at this report, any evil dictator from the last century would have been proud to have Mr Corbett by their side.

  Daniel Hannan (NI). - Mr President, since 2004 I have had many new colleagues from the accession countries here, some of whom I am proud to call my friends. When we talk about the bad times which they lived under, the thing that strikes me most is the way that they say that the really frightening thing, living in the Comecon states, was not the absence of democracy, nor the absence of property rights, but the absence of a secure rule of law. If you were a troublesome critic of the regime, you would not be put on trial. Your life would just be made difficult – your driving licence would mysteriously vanish in the post, your children would not get their place in university, you would be unable to find any but menial jobs.

What worries me is that a similar double standard is beginning to pertain within our institutions. When Václav Klaus came here, Members hooted and gibbered and panted at him like so many stricken apes, and no one was so much as told off. But when we protested in favour of a referendum, 14 of us were fined. Goody-goody Christian Democrats can commit almost open fraud and get away with it, but when an Austrian Eurosceptic photographed people signing in for a meeting which was not there, he was fined thousands of euros for effectively filling in a form incorrectly. You might think that it is not my place to say this. I did not live under that system, but Václav Klaus did, and when he warns against going back to it, I think we should listen.

  Richard Corbett (PSE). - Mr President, quite frankly, I have never heard more rubbish in my life than has been spoken about this report. ‘Dictatorship and manipulation’? Why on earth did it get such a huge majority if it was such a negative report?

The first mistake its detractors have made is that it does not mention the Lisbon Treaty or implementation of the Lisbon Treaty. That part was set aside for the next Parliament to deal with and not dealt with today. Its objectors do not even seem to have read the report.

As to saying that it is aimed at silencing minorities, there is not one single amendment in that report, or indeed or in any rules report that I have produced, that has that effect. This Parliament is a parliament of minorities, unlike some national parliaments that are dominated by a single party majority or by the executive. This is a parliament where everybody is a minority, and long may that diversity continue to apply.

As to the comments about shouting down Václav Klaus, which have nothing to do with this report, I know that a few Members walked out during his speech, but when the Portuguese Prime Minister was here, you lot tried to stop him speaking; you shouted him down. He was not even able to make his speech because you did not want him to get his pro-European message across.

So I utterly reject what has been said. I am afraid I have used up my time so I cannot give the explanation of vote I was going to give, which was to say I am glad that my report was adopted in its entirety, bar one little mistake, which I think was when the EPP got its voting list wrong. Hopefully we can correct that in the next Parliament.

  Inese Vaidere (UEN). - Priekšsēdētāja kungs! Es gribētu uzsvērt to, ka Eiropas Parlaments ir institūcija, kas veicina demokrātiju gan visā Eiropā, gan arī iekšējo demokrātiju Parlamentā. Diemžēl šajā ziņojumā bija vairāki punkti, vairākas tēzes, kuras es nevarēju atbalstīt. Kaut arī viscēlāko nodomu vadīti, es nedomāju, ka Eiropas Parlamentā vajadzētu atbalstīt likumu, kas ierobežo, kas ir vērsts pret vienu cilvēku. Tāpat es arī nedomāju, ka demokrātiju vairos tas, ka Eiropas Parlamenta prezidentam būs tiesības izlemt, vai dodama atļauja rakstiskai deklarācijai vai nē. Tomēr tās ir deputāta tiesības izteikties. Tāpat arī debates ar zilajām kartiņām, iespējams, var pārvērsties par partiju iekšējo rēķinu kārtošanu. Es diemžēl biju spiesta balsot pret šādiem Eiropas Parlamenta ierosinājumiem. Paldies!

- Recommandation pour la deuxième lecture Malcom Harbour (A6-0257/2009)

  Siiri Oviir (ALDE). - Mitte iga raporti eel ei ole meie meilboxid täis huvitavaid materjale nii poolt kui vastu, milles on nii muret kui teinekord ka ebaõiglust. Hääletasin antud ühispositsiooni vastuvõtmise poolt, kuna olen rahul, et toetamist leidsid ettepanekud, mille kohaselt peavad kasutajate internetile juurdepääsu mõjutavad meetmed austama põhiõigusi. Ka eraelu puutamatuse ja tarbijakaitseküsimused seoses elektroonilise sidega lahendati tasakaalukalt.

  Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE). - Mr President, this report goes to the core of what people think they are getting from the European Union. Many people in Britain thought they were getting a kind of economic, trade-based, Europe and that it was a Europe for jobs. Mr Leinen, earlier today, told us that it was actually more of a social Europe.

What we did in the Harbour and Trautmann reports was essentially to choose. We actually chose that we did not want to have a further single market measure. In fact, people who wrote in to us who were concerned about this report were actually missing the point concerning its being a single market measure.

If, before this report, you were downloading things illegally – like music or films – your ISP could just shut you down and terminate your account without any notice. With the report, the compromise proposal would have meant that it had to contact you and you could dispute this. Now, with the package that went though – which will probably end up in conciliation for years – we have a situation where you have to go to court to terminate what may be really illegal and disgusting sites, and that is surely not what the people of Europe wanted.

  Syed Kamall (PPE-DE). - Mr President, I would really like to explain my vote, particularly the part on the e-privacy part of the Harbour report. I think, at a time when we are trying to get the right balance between national security and civil liberties, I think many of us are fearful that more and more governments are collecting more and more personal data about us. Almost every day in the British press we read stories about our big brother Labour Government collecting more and more personal data about individuals and, even when they are proven innocent, refusing to give back that data. But, thanks to an ECJ judgment, some innocent people’s data will now be returned.

It is interesting that we also spoke about the fact that consumers need to be told if there is a breach of personal data on electronic communications networks. There is something missing in this in that we have not talked about what happens when information society services such as Google or Facebook lose personal data, and I am quite pleased that in this report we call for the Commission to investigate this further.

  Ewa Tomaszewska (UEN). - Panie Przewodniczący! Pakiet telekomunikacyjny był jedną z tych regulacji, które pobudziły niesłychaną aktywność obywateli. Internauci, zarówno w sposób zorganizowany, jak i indywidualnie, występowali zdecydowanie w obronie swoich praw do swobody dostępu do informacji i podejmowania działań w Internecie bez zewnętrznych ograniczeń. To sytuacja luksusowa dla parlamentarzysty, dzięki bezpośrednim sygnałom wiedzieć, czego oczekują od niego wyborcy. Dzięki nim właściwą wagę przywiązałam do tego głosowania. To nadzieja na obywatelski, a nie tylko urzędniczy charakter Europy. Dziękuję wszystkim, którzy wysyłali do nas pocztą elektroniczną listy w tej sprawie.

Niestety, wskutek kontrowersji w początkowej fazie głosowań dwukrotnie popełniłam błąd w głosowaniu, na szczęście nie miało to znaczenia w ostatecznym jego efekcie.

- Recommandation pour la deuxième lecture Catherine Trautmann (A6-0272/2009)

  Siiri Oviir (ALDE). - Just õigusliku raamistiku vastuvõtmine annab võimaluse kindlustada Euroopa elanikele kiire püsiühenduse ja traadita side valdkonnas edusammud, kiirendada innovaatiliste ja kõrge lisaväärtusega teenuste arendamist ning saavutada sajaprotsendiline kaetus lairibainternetiühendusega. Me vajame õiguslikke norme inimeste õigustele kasutada internetti. Need olid positsioonid, mis võimaldasid mul toetada proua Trautmanni raportit.

  Daniel Hannan (NI). - Mr President, I see that now Brussels wants to get its hands on the Internet. Commissioner Reding says that it is intolerable for the Internet to be regulated by a private company and, worse in her eyes, a private company with a contractual relationship with the American Commerce Department.

This is the same Commissioner Reding who, in a pretty crowded field, came up with what may be the single most fatuous argument I have heard from the Commission over the last term when she said that we needed a .eu common domain name in order to make the Internet more accessible to women.

The Internet works. The current system of domain names and registrations works brilliantly. Can you point to a single EU policy which is half as successful as the Internet? The common agricultural policy? The common fisheries policy? I think not. The prosecution rests.

- Rapport: Astrid Lulling (A6-0258/2009)

  Siiri Oviir (ALDE). - On ilmselge, et me peame tunnistama vajadust tõhusamalt rakendada võrdse kohtlemise põhimõtet FIEna tegutsevate meeste ja naiste ning neid abistavate abikaasade suhtes. 22 aastat tagasi võeti vastu vastav direktiiv. Euroopa Parlament ja komisjon on järjekindlalt kutsunud üles seda direktiivi läbi vaatama, sest elu on teinud oma korrektiive.

Ja täna jõudsime selleni, et said vastu võetud direktiivi muudatused, sai vastu võetud uus direktiiv, mis parandab abistavate abikaasade olukorda, olgu see siis põllumajanduses, käsitöönduses, kaubanduses, väikese ja keskmise suurusega ettevõtetes või vabakutselistes ametites. Ma tervitasin seda otsust ja toetasin raportit.

  Le Président. - À ma montre, nous venons d'attaquer le dernier jour de notre travail de la législature. Monsieur Heaton-Harris, c'est à vous que revient l'honneur.

  Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE). - Mr President, one issue that feminism has had an ongoing discussion about is that of the stay-at-home mother. Let me try and address this in contemporary terms, helped by a lady called Kristen McCauliff.

One issue that feminism has had an ongoing discussion of is that of the stay-at-home mother. In season three of the Simpsons, ‘Homer Alone’, the same issue is addressed. Opening on a stressed Marge, it shows a sped-up version of her daily routine. Like a perfect storm, the combination of practical jokers on the radio, heavy traffic, a rude tailgater and Maggie, who spills her bottle of milk all over Marge and the car, lead her to breaking point, stopping her car in the middle of a bridge and creating gridlocked traffic in both directions. Local newsman Kent Brockman shows up to report on the situation. It is at this point that the gender issues discussed in Ann Crittenden’s The Price of Motherhood are brought to light as Brockman states, ‘An overworked and under-appreciated housewife has snapped and parked her car on a bridge.’

Now I could go on about this particular Simpsons episode but, safe to say, there is actually no time for me to do so and I shall submit the rest in writing because it is worth a good read.

  Le Président. - Je regrette qu'on ne puisse pas avoir des explications de vote par vidéo, ce serait délicieux.

  Syed Kamall (PPE-DE). - Mr President, I will not even try to follow that, but will just congratulate Mr Heaton-Harris as this evening – or last night depending on how you look at it – he achieved his 100th speech in this place, and I know that you for one are grateful for that.

We all need to recognise the extremely important role played by women, and particularly spouses, in small businesses and, particularly, in respect of the self-employed. I myself, before I was elected, was self-employed and my wife played a vital role in that business.

It is absolutely right that we recognise this, and when talking about women in small businesses I would just like to end with the words of that great philosopher, John Lennon. He said, ‘Woman, I can hardly express my mixed emotions at my thoughtlessness. After all, I am forever in your debt. And woman, I will try to express my inner feelings and thankfulness for showing me the meaning of success’.

  Neena Gill (PSE). - Mr President, in the current economic climate, I think it is crucial that we do everything in our power to support those members of society who wish to contribute to our economy. This is why the EU, in the past, has brought in legislation for maternity and paternity leave.

Working nine to five is not an option for all. Therefore, there are many people who are self-employed – many of them women, who are often overlooked. Better maternity protection would help spouses in agriculture, commerce and small businesses and encourage women to become involved in these vital industries, where they are now currently under-represented.

It is now or never for them – spouses or life partners, who must be given clear, defined professional status and benefit from at least an equal status of social protection as self-employed workers. There is no ‘return to sender’ for them. Member States should ensure that assisting spouses can become members of sickness and invalidity insurance schemes and pension schemes.

We have to end the travesty of women losing rights when they care or bring somebody into life.

- Rapport: Gabriele Stauner (A6-0242/2009)

  Inese Vaidere (UEN). - Godātais priekšsēdētāja kungs! Es kopumā atbalstu Eiropas Globalizācijas pielāgošanas fonda līdzekļu izmantošanu, un ir labi, ja mēs varam palīdzēt tiem, kas ir nonākuši grūtībās. Tomēr es nezinu, vai vienmēr būtu tie, kas nonāk grūtībās, jāmeklē pašās attīstītākajās valstīs. Vai tie būtu Vācijas autobūvētāji vai Francijas autobūvētāji, vai Spānijas autobūvētāji, man šķiet, ka līdzīgas neražas, līdzīgas ķibeles piemeklē arī cilvēkus mazāk attīstītākās valstīs, arī mazajās dalībvalstīs. Un, ja darbu zaudē pāris desmit cilvēku, tad valstī, kurā iedzīvotāju skaits ir 2,3 miljoni, tas ir tikpat nozīmīgi kā tad, ja darbu zaudē desmit reizes vairāk cilvēku lielajās dalībvalstīs. Tāpēc es gribētu ļoti redzēt, ka šis fonds vairāk pievēršas tieši mazajām dalībvalstīm, dalībvalstīm ar zemāku dzīves līmeni un ar lielākiem bezdarba draudiem. Paldies!

⁂

  Richard Corbett (PSE). - Mr President, in view of what you said earlier about it being past midnight and the cost that this would entail for Parliament, I think I will desist. But I just wonder if you could give us a figure for what those three gentlemen have cost us tonight by their recitations of the antics of Mr Homer Simpson and other things that are totally irrelevant to our debates.

  Le Président. - Si je me rappelle bien la règle, à partir du moment où nous amis interprètes doivent travailler après minuit, ils ont droit à une récupération spéciale. Nous devons donc embaucher de nouvelles équipes pour leur permettre un repos bien mérité.

A 23 h 59, la règle ne s'applique pas, à 0 h 01, elle s'applique, mais le coût exact, je ne le connais pas.

⁂

- Rapport: Gabriele Stauner (A6-0242/2009)

  Ewa Tomaszewska (UEN). - Panie Przewodniczący! Popieram projekt sprawozdania pani Stauner, czemu dałam wyraz w wystąpieniu w debacie. Jestem zwolennikiem ułatwień w korzystaniu z Funduszu Dostosowania do Globalizacji. Bardzo niepokoi mnie, że dotąd wykorzystano tylko 3% tego funduszu. Moją intencją było głosowanie za sprawozdaniem, proszę o odnotowanie tego faktu. Na szczęście pomyłka nie zmieniła efektu końcowego głosowania. Wyrażam zarazem zadowolenie, że przyjęliśmy także sprawozdania pana Silva Peneda i pani Lambert.

- Rapport: Eugenijus M aldeikis (A6-0261/2009)

  Neena Gill (PSE). - Mr President, we supported this report because it is the right way to go about tackling economic difficulties. We need to use this situation, not to draw in on ourselves and say ‘rescue me’, but to develop new practices and technologies that will enable us to emerge stronger than yesterday.

Mr President, knowing me and knowing you, I know that the focus of my group, to invest in energy efficiency and support attempts to create smart cities represents a fantastic opportunity for all of us and presents a vision for the future. Combined with provisions on energy security, reduction of emissions and job creation, this report takes a holistic approach that will represent the best way for an economy to thrive in the future.

Some MEPs and some political parties reject the idea of large-scale investment at this time. Their short-sightedness of vision takes my breath away and will only do harm in the long run. We can see clearly now what needs to be done, so I urge the UK Government to do its utmost to make the money available through this package.

  Inese Vaidere (UEN). - Es gribētu, godātie kolēģi, ļoti atzinīgi vērtēt gan šo ziņojumu, gan ieceri tieši ekonomikas atveseļošanai izmantot Kopienas finansiālo palīdzību projektiem enerģētikas jomā. Skaidrs, ka ar enerģētiku saistītie projekti ir mūsu nākotne un tās valstis, kuras pielāgosies zemu izmešu ekonomikai, kuras pratīs labāk izgudrot un ieviest atjaunīgos enerģijas avotus, tās konkurences cīņā būs arī uzvarētājas. Šajā sakarībā nelielas bažas rada projektu iesniegšanas un izvērtēšanas īsais termiņš, kurš atkal varētu varbūt jaunajām valstīm radīt papildu grūtības. Tieši tāpat es vēlētos redzēt Komisijas priekšlikumus un pamatotu programmu, kā palielināt energoefektivitātes projektiem atvēlamās naudas summas. Tieši tāpat arī vajadzētu padomāt par ēku siltināšanu, kas ļoti palīdzētu ne tikai valsts, bet arī reģionālajā līmenī. Un es gribētu, lai tiktu atbalstītas gan vietējās, gan reģionālās, gan arī individuālās aktivitātes. Paldies!

  Daniel Hannan (NI). - Mr President, in all this talk of stimulus packages and recovery programmes, we are missing a rather important part of the picture. In order to pump money into an economy, you first have to suction that money out of the economy. The one-sided way in which we discussed this reached a pinnacle at the recent G20 summit, when leaders of the world boasted of having injected a trillion dollars into the world economy.

‘Into the world economy’: where did it come from, if not – in the broadest sense – from the world economy? Saturn’s rings? The red soil of angry Mars? So what we are really talking about is taking money out of taxpayers’ pockets and giving it to bureaucracies, national or international, to spend on our behalf.

If that really were the better way of proceeding, if we were all better off with state officials deciding for us how to spend our wealth, we would have lost the Cold War and we would be holding this debate in Russian.

- Rapport: Othmar Karas (A6-0139/2009)

  Syed Kamall (PPE-DE). - Mr President, can I end up by thanking all the interpreters and thanking you all.

I think it is important to recognise the report in the context in which it is set. This is going to be one of a number of reports we are going to see on the financial situation, yet, as my colleague Dan Hannan said, we seem to be missing the point.

How did the crisis start? Actually it started in the United States of America with the subprime problem. How did the subprime problem start? It is because banks were encouraged to lend or forced to lend to uncreditworthy customers. So what we did – across the world, not just the United States of America – we built up a mountain of debt.

When it comes to tackling that mountain of debt, rather than stimulus and extra financial regulation stifling innovation, I prefer the Jimi Hendrix approach. When he saw a mountain of debt, he said: ‘Well I stand up next to a mountain and I chop it down with the edge of my hand. I stand up next to a mountain and I chop it down with the edge of my hand.’ I think we can all learn from that.

- Rapport: Janusz Wojciechowski (A6-0185/2009)

  Siiri Oviir (ALDE). - Ma toetasin härra Wojciechowski raporti vastuvõtmist, sest minu arust kõrvaldasime sellega ühe eksisteerivatest kahepalgalisuse näidetest. Nimelt me seisame erinevate loomade elude eest väljaspool Euroopa Liitu, mis on muidugi kiiduväärt, kuid pöörame pilgud kõrvale sellelt, mis toimub meie endi koduõuel. Antud raporti eesmärgiks on just see vastuolu kõrvaldada ja nüüd on meil võimalik ühtlustada liikmesriikide õigusakte, mis seonduvad loomade heaolu standarditega tapmisel või siis surmamisel. Selles raportis kõlas hea südametunnistus.

  Daniel Hannan (NI). - Mr President, not for the first time and assuredly not for the last, I find myself asking what any of this has to do with the European Union.

Methods of slaughtering animals reflect differing cultural, national and religious traditions, and it shows an extraordinary presumption for us to trample into this sensitive area.

I want to use my remaining time – since this is as you say our last legislative day before the election – first of all to thank you, Mr Onesta, for your forbearance and your good humour throughout this session and to extend my thanks to the staff, to the ushers and to the interpreters. If this prolongation of the session beyond midnight has indeed led to this extraordinary extra cost, first of all I hope that some of it has gone into their overtime. They display a professionalism from which a lot of Members of this Parliament could learn. Secondly, I would ask the Presidency to look again at the Rules. The reason we are here is because the vote was not followed, as is explicitly provided for in Rule 163, by explanations of vote. This says that once the debate has concluded, every Member shall have the right to make an explanation of vote in not more than 60 seconds. It really alarms me that we have arbitrarily set aside what our Rules of Procedure plainly state.

If we want to change that rule, then that is fine. There is a mechanism for doing that. However, as long as that is what the rule says, it is incumbent on us to obey it in letter and spirit.

  Le Président. - Excusez-moi, mon cher Daniel, de vous contredire, parce que la commission des affaires constitutionnelles s'est posé la question il y a fort longtemps: "une fois le débat terminé", cela ne veut pas dire "immédiatement après la fin du débat".

Nous sommes bien, actuellement "une fois le débat terminé", mais je suis sûr que vous reviendrez à la charge pour faire modifier cette chose-là, je vous fais confiance.

  Ewa Tomaszewska (UEN). - Panie Przewodniczący! Rytualne rzezie zwierząt, generujące ich niesłychane cierpienie, są sprzeczne z naszą cywilizacją. Nie wierzę, by jakakolwiek religia mająca na celu dobro mogła czegoś takiego wymagać od swych wiernych. Są to raczej obyczaje dzikich, pierwotnych plemion. Nie powinniśmy się na to godzić. Jeśli argumentem ma być tolerancja religijna, to przecież są na świecie religie, w imię których rytualnie morduje się ludzi. Czy na to też będziemy się godzić? Czy jest to nasza wspólnota wartości?

Odrzucenie poprawki 28 dawałoby przynajmniej możliwość utrzymania lub wprowadzenia zakazu takich praktyk w poszczególnych państwach członkowskich. Jej przyjęcie odkrywa prawdziwe, krwiożercze oblicze tego Parlamentu. Głosując mimo to za całością sprawozdania uczyniłam to jedynie dlatego, że inne uregulowania poprawiają sytuację zwierząt rzeźnych.

  Neena Gill (PSE). - Mr President, the time of killing is one of the most important but potentially one of the most sensitive issues we can legislate for in this House. But we cannot just walk on by, because many of my constituents in the West Midlands are concerned that the legislation will affect their religious rights.

The decision about whether or not an animal should be stunned before slaughter is not something that should be decided here but at Member State level, through open dialogue and consultation with religious communities.

We need to walk, not run. This seems to me the best approach on this issue. The role of this House is not to impose norms and values but to represent and reflect the views of its constituents and get a balance. We can work it out together. While most MEPs would prefer it if all animals were stunned before slaughter, we should uphold the right of religious communities to eat meat killed in accordance with their religious beliefs.

Finally, Mr President, can I thank you for all those who are here tonight, because I think only the lonely are here tonight, and we are all hopelessly devoted to you because that is why we are here tonight.

- Rapport: José Albino Silva Peneda (A6-0241/2009)

  Siiri Oviir (ALDE). - Euroopa sotsiaalmudelid seisavad silmitsi mitmete probleemidega, nagu demograafilised muutused ja globaliseerumine, mis mõjutavad ka kõnealuseid mudeleid. Seetõttu tuleb Euroopa sotsiaalmudelid moderniseerida pikkaajalist perspektiivi silma pidades, aga säilitades samal ajal ka nende algsed väärtused.

Praeguse majanduskriisi kontekstis on ülimalt oluline, et sotsiaalpoliitika käiks käsikäes majanduspoliitikaga. Selleks, et need meetmed oleksid tulemuslikud, peaksid nad olema üles ehitatud demokraatlikult ehk siis alt üles põhimõttel ja neid tuleks teostada kohaliku tasandil, see tähendab kodanikele lähemal. Neist põhimõtetest oli resolutsiooni ettepanek kantud ja seetõttu oli võimalik toetada Silva Peneda juhtimisel valminut.

- Rapport: Jean Lambert (A6-0263/2009)

  Le Président. - Madame Oviir, vous ne me dérangez absolument pas, d'ailleurs j'ai le plaisir de vous annoncer que vous êtes la dernière oratrice, sur le dernier rapport.

  Siiri Oviir (ALDE). - Vahel on hea esimene olla, vahel viimane. Tahaksin nimetada järgmisi asju: nimelt on tänases rängas majanduskriisis Euroopa Liidu tööturul valitsemas reaalsus, et üha suurem hulk uusi inimesi koondatakse, mis suurendab omakorda vaesuse ja tõrjutuse all kannatavate isikute koguarvu Euroopas. Täna on vägagi oluline, et sotsiaalset kaasatust ja sellega seotud tööturupoliitikat taotletakse ka Euroopa majanduse taastamiskavas integreeritud ja ühtse lähenemisviisi kaudu.

Me oleme palju rääkinud tööturupoliitika paindlikkusest. On viimane aeg rääkida ka sotsiaalpoliitika paindlikkusest. Ma mõtlen siinjuures seda, et tööturupoliitika ja sotsiaalabi andmise poliitika peaksid omavahel haakuma. See on tänase olukorra nõue. Raport toetas tööturult tõrjutute aktiivset kaasamist ja ma leidsin olevat väga positiivse toetada hääletusel antud raporti vastuvõtmist.

  Le Président. - Madame Oviir, votre fan club est resté jusqu'au bout.

La prochaine séance reprendra tout à l'heure, parce que nous sommes déjà le jeudi 7 mai 2009, dernier jour de la sixième législature du Parlement européen.