Home 

Do you live in Eryl's area?

Contact

Eryl's work

Biography

All about Europe

News

Forthcoming engagements in the UK

Young people in Europe

Links

Site map

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 4 SEPTEMBER 2003

Liberia

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, corrupt and ruthless dictators continue to exploit and impoverish many countries in Africa. Decades of international aid, especially EU aid, have been undone and destroyed. Consequently millions suffer from avoidable diseases or are maimed and shot. The EU must condemn these dictators and it must be ready to act promptly. In cases like Liberia, where ECOWAS and Nigeria have taken the initiative. I hope the EU will do more than just provide the EUR 15 million that it is has pledged.

I am pleased, of course, that the EU is involved and I want to ensure that this Parliament is aware of the continuing problems in Africa, because it is European taxpayers who in the end become impatient if we are seen not to take appropriate action.

I hope Commissioner Nielson will do his best and keep Parliament informed, because we need to show that Liberia can recover and can perhaps be a model for other African countries. We need to build it anew and ensure there is prosperity and peace.

SITTING OF WEDNESDAY, 3 SEPTEMBER 2003

Developing countries

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, knock on any mud hut in any poor country and ask the poor family inside what it needs most of all. There is only one answer: water. Not democracy. Not human rights. Not medicines. Nothing else, just water.

If the European Union has allocated EUR one billion for water aid – and I believe Commissioner Nielson has been instrumental in this – I must congratulate the EU and the Commissioner. What a fantastic job. This is what these people need. Sadly, it is not enough. We need to do more and I ask the Commissioner to please make sure that this Parliament has a say in formulating water aid policy so that it is not lost in the clouds like the EDF. Parliament needs to be involved.

I want this to happen. I hope you will assure us of this because I do not want my colleague here to persuade the PPE-DE Group to vote against the Lannoye report tomorrow. I understand what you are doing and I have confidence in it.

I would like to say a quick word about trade. The poor countries need to process their products, not simply to export the raw products so that the value added is not received by them. That is the key to trade. I know Commissioner Nielson understands this and I know he is working for it. I hope he will do more.

SITTING OF WEDNESDAY, 3 SEPTEMBER 2003

Participation of non-state actors in EC development policy

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, the role of NSAs – non-state actors – in helping development has been acknowledged and I agree with Commissioner Nielson in what he said. If you look at the United Nations, there are 72 000 registered NGOs drawing EUR 7 billion every year. Certainly, the NGOs have got their act together. They know what to do, where to go and source the founds.

On the other hand, private companies – and they are non-state actors too – do not enjoy the same status, privilege or funding. I am very much in favour of tilting the balance to established private corporations with a good track record in development and in developing countries, so that they may also receive aid that would be very well utilised.

We also have two categories that the EU has never considered. I know they are slightly off-track and perhaps Parliament has discussed this. One of them is service clubs, such as Rotary Clubs, which do a fantastic job at a very low cost. Others are missionaries, particularly in Africa. Very selective use of mission work in developing countries can bring substantial benefit to the very poorest in these countries for very low sums of money. I have personal experience of both Rotary Clubs and missionaries working in East Africa for very little money. They provide substantial support for local communities.

But today I am going to focus on accountability. It is known that a large percentage of money received by non-state actors, particularly NGOs, is spent on administration, including high salaries, first- or club-class fares, and bills for expensive hotels. There are so many seminars which now, with information technology, are totally unnecessary. Transparency International is supposed to monitor the role of such bodies, but it has not done the job it is supposed to have done.

I am pointing out these things for this Parliament and for Commissioner Nielson to put at the back of their minds because much has already been said and will be said. But I want to highlight one thing and I hope Commissioner Nielson will take note of this. Whenever the EU gives any aid to any poor country, please let us inform the population what we are doing: how much money we are giving for each sector and to which actors or players or stakeholders this money is being given. Because the poor will be the best invigilators, the best inspectors, the best reporters to our EU delegations if they find that this EU money is being misused. If money has been given to the government through budgets and not spent in an appropriate manner the people will know and will report. If money is given to NGOs and it is not utilised people will know. But if they do not know what the EU gives, for what sectors, there is no inspection, there is no vigilance and there is no feedback.

I want to say one last thing. There is aid fatigue and it is important that whatever the EU gives, which is very generous, it is spent well. I wish Commissioner Nielson much luck in what he is doing. He has my full support.

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 15 MAY 2003

Democratic Republic of the Congo – the Ituri region

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, it seems that Africa is neglected by the UN and the rest of the world. Two tribes, the Hemas and the Lendys have been fighting in the town of Bunia in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Hundreds of people have been injured. Many people have been killed and yet, despite the presence of French troops and UN troops in DRC, they are still fighting, they are still killing and there is much trouble and displacement of the population.

The key to all this, as I have said many times before in Parliament, is that until rural areas in Africa have security in terms of land, the economy, rural assets and rural development, there will always be conflict. There will be no democracy in Africa until people have something they can call their own, a stake in the local economies. We are trying to encourage democracy in these countries. Democracy cannot filter from the presidential palace down to the rural areas. It has to grow from rural areas and until we improve the economies of the rural areas, until we provide security for these people through land tenure, through police, a chamber of commerce, political representation, local schools, local hospitals – assets that they can call their own – conflict will continue. We seem to turn a blind eye to this.

I have been an MEP now for four years. I have lived in Africa for many years. My family has been there for 170 years and I know what it is like in the rural areas. It is about time the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers recognise that Africa is not like the US or Europe, where democracy can be understood. You knock on any mud hut in any part of Africa and tell the inhabitant that you have come from the European Parliament. Tell him: 'here are your rights, rights for your women, rights for your children, rights for you to assemble, to worship, to have democracy in your parliament.' As I found out with Mr Goebbels and Mr Van den Bos when we went to Ethiopia, these people ask only for water, seed, peace and security. At the moment they have no stake in their economies. Any rebel leader can come along and say: 'I will give you a hundred dollars, come with me, let us go and plunder, let us go and loot, let us go and fight', and they of course fall prey to that.

We see this in Uganda, we see this in Somalia, we see this in Ethiopia and Eritrea, we see it in Kenya, we see it in Central Africa.

SITTING OF TUESDAY, 11 FEBRUARY 2003

Question Time (Commission)

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Firstly, it is a great pleasure to have the Commissioner here. I have been listening to the debate on the television in my office and I heard your answers to my colleagues.

I want to follow up on Mr Fatuzzo's question because it is in my report on information and communication technology and its impact on SMEs. I hope you will agree with one of the recommendations I made in the report, which is that there are many older people who have retired at 55-plus who would be delighted to return to employment if there was some financial incentive for them to do so. Information and communication technology is an area where we could use them, if there were financial incentives to train them. Afterwards, if they were working, it would be important not to tax them on their income because they have a pension as well.

This would have two impacts. Firstly, it would allow older people to work and still use their skills. Therefore their disposable incomes would have an impact on rural economies because they would tend to spend that income. Secondly, we would not be so dependent on imported labour. Obviously a high birth rate is a good thing, but it would take years before this was reflected in the labour force. My recommendation would provide a quick solution. I should like to hear the Commissioner's view on it.

SITTING OF TUESDAY, 11 FEBRUARY 2003

Information Society eEUROPE 2005

Khanbhai (PPE-DE), rapporteur. – Mr President, first of all thank you to Commissioner Liikanen, it is a pleasure to see you here. I always think of him as the Commissioner for innovation who is friendly to SMEs, and I have certainly found him to be both of those, so we are very lucky to have him.

The Lisbon European Council dream for the EU to be the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world by 2010 cannot be realised unless we stimulate and I mean stimulate SMEs. SMEs drive economic growth; they train people with poor skills; they identify local needs and respond by producing or processing the products required. They create employment, wealth and security for the local community.

What are the hindrances, difficulties and bottlenecks facing SMEs in the EU? Why are they not growing as fast as those in the USA? Excessive red tape, high direct and indirect taxation, expensive and inadequate access to loans and grants, insufficient allowance for 'upskilling' workers and a lack of sponsored apprenticeships.

Papas and Mamas in Europe in their fifties and sixties own and manage their businesses traditionally. They are reluctant to invest in new technology because, firstly, they suspect that the investment will not offer sufficient advantage. Secondly, they do not understand the scope and function of new technology in increasing productivity and expanding sales. Thirdly, they are concerned about security of supply, quality, payment and legal liability.

My report has analysed the problems facing SMEs and offers a programme of action to stimulate them, so that they can compete globally. I would like Commissioner Liikanen to take very careful note of this summary, which is what I think the EU needs to do and do now.

- Review existing regulation of the e-economy and cut drastically whatever burdens small businesses.

- Reduce the administrative burdens on businesses by simplifying data collection, especially tax collection.

- Cut red tape, especially for self-employed people.

- Tackle on-line security issues by reinforcing the dependability and reliability of networks used by enterprises.

- Establish easy and affordable access to legal advice.

- Encourage cross-border trade to ensure a European e-economy. That is very important.

- Use benchmarking to promote and establish best practice, to integrate SMEs in the e-economy.

- Allow Member States to offer low interest loans and tax incentives to support SMEs. I know Commissioner Monti might have a problem with that but I think it is essential.

- Establish close cooperation between business, the educational sector and government agencies in order to close the IT skills gap.

- One of the most important aspects is to offer financial incentives to the unemployed and the elderly, those who are retired. I am not asking Member States to change their rules on retirement, but I am asking for the EU to consider that people who are already retired should have financial incentives to train and acquire skills. When they work using those skills they should not be taxed at all, that is my preference. You might wish to impose a nominal tax, but preferably no tax at all. This actually reduces the import of labour, and also immediately pumps in money to people who are likely to spend their money in rural areas and therefore boost rural economies.

- To offer financial incentives to technical support companies to allow SMEs affordable access. This is one of the weakest things that we have in the EU: people are quite happy to buy equipment and technology, but where is the technical support if anything goes wrong? It is very expensive and very unreliable and we need to offer financial incentives in that respect.

I hope we will soon have every EU citizen wearing what I would like to call the ‘Hand C’ not a ‘PC’, a wristwatch that is a combination of a PC, mobile phone and an LCD screen that will enable us to communicate audiovisually, process data, buy, sell and pay by voicemail, watch any sport and listen to our favourite music. Technology can offer us this today, Commissioner Liikanen, let us produce more with ease, let us have less stress and more fun.

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 25 APRIL 2002

Debt burden of poor countries

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Madam President, I was one of the five Members of Parliament who went to Monterrey and I want to put it on record that what Mr. Nielson did before the Monterrey Conference was extremely good. He persuaded the 15 Member States of the European Union to make a commitment that by 2006 their contribution for development finance will be 0.33% of GDP. Many Member States are currently contributing much less than this. This achievement embarrassed the United States, because it realised that its contribution is very small indeed.

The European Union gives USD 25 billion: it is the largest donor in the world. The United States gives USD 10 billion. This is a very small sum when you think that the United States has given its military establishment USD 100 billion since September last year, and that is why President Bush promised a further USD 5 billion in development finance by 2006. That would bring the US contribution up to USD 15 billion, which is still very low indeed when you think that people like Bill Gates give USD 1 billion as personal donations.

Because Mr Fischler is here, I would like to say that EU agricultural subsidies are killing the poor farmers in the Third World. He knows this and I know he is in favour of persuading Member States to do something about the food mountains that we create. This was widely discussed in Monterrey with the International Fund for Agricultural Development. I and my colleagues met with the President of IFAD. It was made very clear that unless we invest this development finance in the rural economies of poor countries and boost their agricultural production, we will have a breeding ground for deprivation, terrorism and internal conflicts. This is because these are the people, the majority of them living in rural areas, who are too poor to grow their own food and too poor to buy the EU's surplus food.

I would like to make one other point about HIV, AIDS, TB and malaria. The Monterrey conference did not discuss these issues at great length, and did not commit itself to allocating funding to them in a special category.

SITTING OF WEDNESDAY, 24 APRIL 2002

Meeting of Euro-Mediterranean Foreign Ministers in Valencia of 22/23 April 2002

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, almost all ordinary citizens of Israel wish to live in peace in their own country. They wish to have a country with secure borders and normal diplomatic relations with all its Arab neighbours. How can we help extinguish the fire that has devastated Palestine and reduced the people to a life of humiliation, fear and deprivation of the basic amenities of life?

Jewish people, Muslims and Christian Palestinians worked and lived together for centuries before Israel was established. The Jewish people dreamt about their own country and they got it, and rightly so. The Palestinians, both Muslims and Christians, dream and wish to have their country as well and they will not rest until they have a secure and viable state based on a just and fair settlement. How can the EU help?

Let us stop being polite and politically correct. To my delight today is the first time in my two and a half years as an MEP that I have heard Members of this House address this topic with such confidence. We have been gagged for all this time. Let us spell out what is needed for such a fair and just settlement; things that we all believe in but are too afraid to say. Firstly, Israel must have the right to exist with a secure border and it must be fully recognised as a state by all its neighbours. Secondly, Israel must respect international law and its own national laws, as well UN Security Council resolutions. Thirdly, Israel must accept neutral international observers under UN sponsorship to facilitate a ceasefire.

Ordinary people, Jews, Muslims and Christians, are fed up with their politicians. They want peace now. Let us help them with courage and confidence and say clearly what most of us privately believe, that for Palestine to be a viable state, to allow that state to take back the millions of refugees, there is only one border and that is the border as it was before 1967. That is what Israel has to pull back to. Until that happens there will be no peace in the Middle East and that brings the terror, fear and difficulties that we now see in the European Union.

It is time that we spelt out the way it should be.

(Applause)

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 13 DECEMBER 2001

Zimbabwe

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – When Mr Mugabe became the first President of Zimbabwe some 40 years ago, that land-locked country in Africa was a rich nation that could feed its population and export food to neighbouring countries. About 1000 white farmers, owning most of the land, produced the food and the surplus. After independence in Zimbabwe, the Lancaster House Agreement between Britain, as the colonial power, and Zimbabwe allowed for land redistribution to black families and appropriate compensation to white farmers without any loss of production.

Mugabe has failed in implementing these reforms. He has failed to settle the poor black families. Since independence, Mugabe has had much time to establish real democracy, rule of law and prosperity for all. Instead, he has enriched himself, his friends and destroyed his country's economy. He has made the poor even poorer. He has intimidated, looted and deprived the white farmers who produced so much wealth for his nation.

Zimbabwe needs a free and fair election now. Mugabe should not fear. He will be judged on his record. If he is a statesman, like Mandela, then he should step down with dignity and let someone else from Zanu-PF contest the election. If he is still a Catholic, then he should listen to Archbishop Ncube of Zimbabwe who has also condemned him regularly without fear. Mr Mugabe cannot and will not be remembered in Africa unless he gives his countrymen a chance to breathe, walk without fear and seek opportunities to enhance their quality of life. I have a simple message for Mr Mugabe – be an African elder and retire gracefully to your village.

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 13 DECEMBER 2001

The Congo

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, the Democratic Republic of Congo is neither democratic nor a republic. It is a country with fertile land, vast mineral wealth, populated by people who are poor, sick and starving. These people have been plundered by cruel and corrupt dictators who continue to enrich themselves. Soldiers from neighbouring countries such as Rwanda and Congo continue to loot, rape and kill civilians at random. Villages and towns are destroyed. Over 2 million people have been killed and 1 million people live in fear in refugee camps.

The UN passed resolution 1376 on 7 November 2001. It advocates disarmament and demobilisation, repatriation, resettlement and reintegration of armed groups. These measures are essential. How are they going to be implemented? Who will lead this action? The EU, the USA or the UN? Or will this be yet another UN resolution for filing in some dusty cabinet.

Last month I attended in Ghana a conference of African politicians. A veteran politician from DRC was there. He had had great difficulty in leaving the DRC, and this is what he asked me: how can African countries like the DRC be free from governments run by crooked dictators? I could not answer. He asked a second question. Do we need to breed terrorists who will attack Europe and the USA to precipitate effective action like in Afghanistan? I could not answer that either. Let us make sure that we take action before poor people become so desperate.

SITTING OF WEDNESDAY, 28 NOVEMBER 2001

Global Fund to fight HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – At the G8 Summit held in July 2000 in Okinawa, the rich industrialised G8 countries pledged substantial funds to fight communicable diseases and help the sick in poor countries. In September last year the Commission held a conference on the subject in Brussels but no action followed. Four million of the poorest people died in one year. In July 2001 another meeting took place in Genoa and Mr Prodi announced to the world's media a donation of EUR 120 million.

My report, unanimously approved on 4 October this year has been sitting on the shelf collecting dust. The Council adopted a proposal for a legal basis for the fund to be implemented but so far not one euro has been given, and a further 2 million people have died. When terrorist bombs cause death the victims attract money very fast but the 3-4 million people who die from diseases are not in our minds.

Why does it take the Commission so long to present a plan for implementation when they know that every day 10 000 people are dying? We promise with pride but we fail to deliver. Do these people not matter to us?

The Commissioners have gone. There is no interest. Look at the audience in this Chamber, hardly anyone is here. That shows what priority the European Union gives to such an important project. This is not FYROM or Macedonia. This is AIDS affecting the poorest people in the world and it is about time that the EU contribution is not just EUR 20 per person dying, not just 1% of what is required, but that it is EUR 6 billion per annum.

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 4 OCTOBER 2001

Poverty reduction (combating the major transmissible diseases)

Khanbhai (PPE-DE), rapporteur. – Mr President, a family in a mud hut in rural Africa without access to clean water, electricity, hospital or community centre is simply devastated when it discovers that a member of the family is suffering from any one of the three diseases HIV/AIDS, TB or malaria. The patient has no access to a clinic nearby that can test, diagnose and treat him and, even if there is one, he cannot afford the treatment. The patient's family is in crisis, not only because of illness but also because it has to find the money for treatment that will include the cost of transport and additional nutritional requirements. This is the reality!

Therefore, my objective was to produce a report with recommendations that would support a programme of action that is possible to fund, practical to implement, and most beneficial to those who are the poor victims of such infections. Such a report requires wide consultation with colleagues from all political groups, the European Commission, the pharmaceutical industry, UN agencies, NGOs and civil society, so that a consensus based on facts can be achieved and appropriate action taken to target the problem, making most efficient use of limited resources.

I had that wide consultation, and I want to thank all colleagues who were so helpful, in particular Dr Fransen and her team and Commissioner Nielson's department. Dr Fransen has worked in Africa herself, so she was a mine of information. I also want to thank all colleagues from all political parties, especially in the Committee on Development and Cooperation, related committees and, of course, the secretariats, who were extremely helpful.

The report promotes the following: a global fund financed by G8, the EU, oil-rich nations and others to finance access to and supply of medication and treatment; a global strategy to implement a programme of action to treat and prevent communicable diseases; tiered pricing of medicines from the pharmaceutical industry to ensure wide access to treatment; support for health infrastructure to scan, diagnose, treat and monitor patients, as supply of medicines in itself is inadequate; use of incentives – both financial and legislative – to enhance research and development to produce new medicines and vaccines by both industry and the public sector; the European Commission to work closely with the governments of developing countries, UN agencies, NGOs and civil society to implement the programme. It promotes appropriate future legislation to give more flexibility in the implementation of TRIPS to encourage transfer of technology for local manufacture of essential medicines wherever this is viable.

There are four paragraphs in the report which require minor changes because of errors or difficulty in implementation. My intention in paragraph 14 was to ensure that if we are to find the lowest prices for medicines for poor countries and for the patients in these countries, we must ensure that the developing countries do not impose import duty and taxes on imports of essential medicines.

Developed countries – the EU and the USA – do not impose export taxes when they export medicines from their countries. So there is a mistake in paragraph 14. I want to make an oral amendment, which I hope colleagues will accept. It should read: "Calls on developing countries to abolish tariffs and taxes on imports of essential drugs and equipment in order to make health care more affordable;". This paragraph really refers to import taxes in developing countries.

I also want to make an oral amendment to paragraph 9 to replace "10%" with the word "appropriate", because you cannot dictate to the European Commission and the Committee on Budgets what exact percentage of money should be spent – there are budget lines, which are already agreed in other committees and in other reports. So "appropriate" is the word, rather than "10%".

In paragraph 20, I would like to propose an oral amendment, which I hope Members of this House will support, to delete the second part which begins "in which a doubling of the budget ....". Again, the same problem applies: you cannot in a report like this put a fixed percentage when other committees have agreed budget lines and the Commission has budget appropriations fixed by the Council of Ministers for doing the job it is doing. These are minor changes.

Finally, I wish to clarify the issue of the patent life of medicines, as some colleagues have expressed concern. A new drug costs about USD 500 m to research, test and bring to market. Unless this sum is recoverable, nobody will invest in research and the development of drugs for diseases of the poor. No government can finance such investment so we must encourage the pharmaceutical industry to continue to finance research. Their patent is in any case irrelevant after seven or ten years as new drugs are developed and doctors will change a treatment regime, thereby precipitating the fall in price of that medicine still under patent. The real trick – and this is what I have been trying to do in this report – is to secure tiered pricing for all medication – new and old – so that the poor patients benefit whilst the industry continues to pay for research and development.

My Amendment No 1 addresses this problem and I have inserted the word "review" to replace the word "reduce", in order to cooperate with colleagues concerned about this issue. So I am not throwing it out of the window, I am asking us to review it in WTO. If there is justification for amending it, so be it.

I hope that this House will give me full support for this report, which I did not try to make political. It concerns something that we must do for the poor so that we can tell the world, especially the poor, that the European Union is concerned about their problems and will take the lead in fighting disease and poverty throughout the world.

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 4 OCTOBER 2001

VOTE

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Madam President, there is a mistake in the Spanish text, paragraph 6, with reference to the word 'parents', which should come before primary and secondary schoolteachers. I hope that translation will be corrected in the Spanish text.

Although there is widespread support for some other oral amendments which I was going to make, I understand there is opposition from the Greens so the only oral amendment that I wish to make now concerns paragraph 14. There is a genuine error and it should be amended to read, 'Calls on all developing countries to abolish tariffs and taxes on import of essential drugs and equipment in order to make healthcare more affordable.' There is no tax when we export medicines from Europe or the United States, so the current paragraph is factually incorrect. I hope Members will support this.

SITTING OF TUESDAY, 2 OCTOBER 2001

Political and humanitarian situation in Afghanistan

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Madam President, I condemn without reservation terrorism and murder. I agree with my colleagues that there is no reason for it and no-one has a right to carry out such acts. Terrorists choose violence rather than the ballot box, inflicting death and pain on innocent civilians, justifying their actions by flying the banner of religion, race or political sovereignty.

Islam, like other great world religions, such as Judaism and Christianity, is a way of life for over one thousand million people in this world. These millions of Muslims, from Indonesia to Nigeria, from Central Asia to the leafy suburbs of California, knew nothing about Osama bin Laden before 11 September. For these millions and for Islam there is no place for terrorists like him or any others, whoever they are and wherever they come from.

These terrorists have no authority to act on behalf of any people, race or religion. Therefore, we must fight terrorism and act against terrorists, not innocent civilians who pursue their lives peacefully and who should have the freedom to believe in a religion of their choice. Human life is precious and the death of innocent civilians, wherever it occurs, is simply not acceptable. Reason without passion is sterile, passion without reason is heat. Let us be firm and decisive. Let us target terrorism: let us remove the causes that conceive, feed and sustain terrorism.

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 6 SEPTEMBER 2001

Zimbabwe

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, there are 4 500 farmers of British, Dutch, German and Greek origin who own 8.3 million hectares of land in Zimbabwe. Nine white farmers and 360 black farm workers have been killed in the chaos over the last few months. Thousands of black farmers have lost their jobs and their homes and the farms are unworkable.

Zimbabwe depends on the success of agriculture and the contribution of these farmers is vital to sustain its economy. There is money available from the United Kingdom government under the Lancaster House Agreement and there is a willingness among the white farmers to give up 80% of their land to settle the black families. Mugabe must accept such a solution.

In 1970, Tanzania nationalised sisal farms, businesses and real estate, killing its private sector. The same happened in Uganda in 1972, when the Asians were expelled, and those two countries' economies have been bankrupt ever since. I sympathise with the farmers and farm workers of Zimbabwe, as my family was a victim of similar confiscation and nationalisation.

My family has lived in Tanzania for 166 years, much longer than many white farmers in Zimbabwe. We bought land from Deutsch-Ostafrika in 1876 and I still have a title deed. We lost land and property through nationalisation without compensation and I know what that means. I share the grief of the silent black majority in Zimbabwe, who continue to live in poverty. The poorest in Zimbabwe do not want to shoot, kill, loot and burn crops. They are hungry and unemployed. They need food, education, health, employment and shelter.

It was the vision and quality like Nelson Mandela that at last set an example for Africa that reconciliation, cooperation, democracy and respect for all people, irrespective of their colour, is the only way to govern a developing country the only way to help the poorest to be free of poverty and disease. President Mugabe must follow Mr Mandela and accept reconciliation and democracy, allow the white farmers to thrive and continue farming and accept that Zimbabwe belongs to the people of Zimbabwe and nobody has the right to deprive them of a decent life based on peace and democracy.

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 6 SEPTEMBER 2001

Human rights

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, Mauritania is a vast country and almost 90% of its land is desert. Water is a scarce resource and its 2.2 million people are poor and live in rural areas. It depends on its exports of iron ore and fishing – just two things. I was invited in May of this year to lead a small delegation of MEPs and visit Mauritania, which I did. I spent a week with parliamentarians, all the ministers, President Taya, civil society and NGOs. We travelled up and down the country – a week is a long time to be in Mauritania. Mrs Sudre and Mrs Langenhagen came with me. I was impressed by what President Taya has done over the years in a country as poor as this.

I am astonished – and I want to embarrass him and his government, which I shall do at the ACP Conference when their delegates come – that there is now this sad case of locking up the opposition. There is no reason for it, there is no need. He is quite strong, he is quite popular. He has done well. He can do well without locking up his opposition.

As far as slavery is concerned, it is actually banned in Islam and Mauritania is a Muslim country. There are Moors, there are blacks and various mixtures of these two. I saw their lifestyle. I did not see any slaves, though that is not to say they are not there. What I shall certainly do is embarrass the government of Mauritania at the ACP Conference to make sure this practice does not continue and the opposition is allowed to operate freely so that there is accountability of the ministers. It is better for the president of the country and the people of the country.

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 5 JULY 2001

Human rights

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, Hutus of Bantu origin form the majority tribe in Burundi with a population of 6 million. The Tutsis of Nilotic origin are the minority tribe, but they dominate the government and the army. Such tribal polarisation as we often see in Africa has been a major factor in the internal conflict, not only in Burundi but in neighbouring states.

In 1993 Burundi's Hutu President was assassinated and within a month over 100,000 civilians were killed. A further 150,000 civilians have been killed since then. More than half a million are refugees in Tanzania's refugee camps to this day. The Democratic Republic of Congo has experienced similar conflict and almost 2 million civilians have been killed there or are missing over the last two to three years. In the Horn, East and Central Africa covering 12 countries, there are 20 million displaced persons, displaced from their homes and their villages.

These people were poor before. They are even poorer today. They have no education, no access to health care, no employment and no shelter. They depend totally on the World Food Programme for their food and they fear those who run the refugee camps where they live. It is not surprising, therefore, that these refugee camps are breeding grounds for disease, discontent and disorder. Young men and women are lured by the warlords to join their unruly gangs. These innocent and desperate people, who were ordinary civilians before, probably farmers, are easily persuaded to train and be armed to support the greed and power struggle of the warlords. The Lusaka and Arusha peace accords have failed to end the violence and internal conflict. Repatriation of refugees is not satisfactory as the people are simply afraid to return to villages devastated, overrun and terrorised by the terrorists or the warlords.

How can we allow these displaced millions, these desperate refugees, to live in their camps as beggars for life. How can we extinguish the fires of conflict and civil war in these developing countries? Containers full of medicines, tents, food, blankets and other such things bring temporary relief, but this is not enough.

We must be more active and rethink our strategy. We must first of all give the poor a stake in their rural economies so that they may own their own land and have an opportunity to build their lives. Secondly, we must give them the appropriate technology – third world technology – which they can then use to start local enterprises to break this cycle of dependency on us. We must rethink our strategy and reassess the quality of people that we have in place as our ambassadors and representatives, their experience, and see how we can perhaps use local experts with international reputation and competence to advise us, to act on our behalf, to use the limited resources that we have to its best effectiveness.

We must embark on this with great urgency. I have great confidence in Commissioner Patten to lead this, and Commissioner Nielson, and I hope that they will get together and make sure that the EU's next decade is much better than the last 40 years, a period in which, I consider, much time and resources were wasted.

SITTING OF WEDNESDAY, 4 JULY 2001

Human rights in the world and EU fundamental rights

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, does a peasant suffering from AIDS have the right to access medicine and treatment that he cannot afford? Does a child born in poverty have the human right to receive basic education and appropriate vaccines to protect him from killer diseases? Does a peasant farmer devastated by natural disasters such as drought, pests and soil erosion have the right to our assistance? Do millions of people living in misery for political reasons in isolated countries like Palestine and Iraq have any rights? What do we mean when we talk about human rights?

I urge every colleague concerned with human rights to visit, unannounced and informally, any peasant in any poor country and ask him about our views on human rights, political freedom, economic freedom, religious freedom, free access to education and health services. That peasant will look at you in bewilderment and plead: "All I need is a supply of fresh water to my house. All I need is a source of energy so that I can light my house and cook the next meal".

Internal conflict and civil war resulting in violation of human rights will continue to impoverish the poor until we help them to do the following. Firstly, to have a stake in their rural economies. They need to own their own land, their home and their farm. And secondly, to acquire the technology to break the cycle of dependency on us and seize the opportunity to be self-sufficient, self-reliant through their own local enterprise. When the poor have an economic stake, then civil society and democracy will take root. These people will see the need for law and order and political representation. Then you will see the courts replacing the bullet – and that is when we will see human rights.

SITTING OF WEDNESDAY, 2 MAY 2001

EU/UN partnership on development and humanitarian issues

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Commissioner Nielson's department have produced an excellent communication and programme for action for communicable infectious diseases, HIV Aids, TB and malaria. It is not possible for the EU to fund that programme alone and therefore I would like to ask, is he going to take the lead in initiating and establishing a global fund in cooperation with the UN and other agencies so that this can be done? I am the rapporteur for that report and I hope this Parliament will put it on fast track so that it can be debated before the UN international conference on the subject in the third week of June. I saw a lot of time wasted this afternoon. This is an important subject and those responsible in this House should put that on the agenda for fast track debate, so Members of this House can debate it and the European Parliament's view can go to that conference for consideration.

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 15 MARCH 2001

Access to medicaments for AIDS patients in the third world

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, combating AIDS is not just a matter of the price of the drugs. You need funding for infrastructure, to test the patient, to diagnose and to monitor his progress. Then you have the access to medication. Of course price is important. The pharmaceutical companies have brought their prices down. But what is important, even if it is USD 10 for medication, do we have the will to fund the procurement? We are getting too emotional about this. Let us be sure that we have a strategy for funding the purchase. Governments in these poor countries do not have the funds, even if it is only USD 10 for treating a patient.

The good news is that the prices have come down and they can come down even further if we get the pharmaceutical companies on our side. The bad news is that we need the funding to be organised. I hope, as rapporteur, to devise a package that is deliverable and will benefit the poorest who are suffering, without being emotive, without recommending a solution that requires billions in funds, which I know will not be forthcoming.

SITTING OF WEDNESDAY, 28 FEBRUARY 2001

Development policy

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – The EU has been a willing donor but has, in the past, and I emphasise in the past, failed to deliver effective help when it is required and where it is most needed. Such failure has left many countries poorer today. Fortunately, and I disagree with the last speaker, the Gemelli report strengthens the Commission proposals. Commissioner Nielson and his team have done a great job and Mr Gemelli’s report – an excellent report – reinforces those new proposals. The acid test will be whether the next ten or twenty years of EU aid will reduce poverty substantially – I disagree with the last speaker, we will never eradicate poverty. The aim is to reduce substantially the poverty and misery experienced by so many.

The Gemelli report attempts to take a fresh approach, a bold approach. Out with theory, the models which did not produce results. In with practical ideas to promote real development: development of human resources, so that indigenous people acquire technical skills; development of vocational skills for rural production, so that people can grow, harvest, process, package and sell their goods for added value with which they can then buy their education, health and homes; building capacity through transfer of technology to SMEs, promoting use of sustainable energy, application of information technology, enhancing awareness of social education, health and human rights. These are the ideas in the Gemelli report which support Commissioner Nielson’s report and good work.

Therefore, this important report should be fully approved by this House because it should improve the efficacy of EU aid. It will be a blueprint for other donors and I hope that all Members from all sides will support this report and the Commission as well.

SITTING OF WEDNESDAY, 31 JANUARY 2001

Situation in the Middle East

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, Members who have been elected to this House have been elected by people of Europe to speak for Europe, to determine what role Europe can play on the international scene.

I am encouraged by the statement of Mr Danielsson, the confidence of Mr Solana and the excellent analysis of Commissioner Patten of the situation on the ground. I was horrified to witness in the delegation last week the extent to which Palestine is a military occupation. People of Europe have no idea of this. It is unbelievable that there is a situation where the Palestinian Legislative Council cannot even meet.

Mayors of towns like Hebron were not able to escort us to places that our ambassador had arranged for us to see. There is wrong on both sides, of course there is. What I am against is the 33 years of negotiations which have led to nowhere, no solution, no peace.

Therefore, I believe that we in the European Union should take a more active role: supportive – not to replace the Americans in the peace process – but to support and give confidence to both sides that we are a fair, just, impartial broker. We should also support the United Nations and the resolutions, because if UN resolutions are to be respected by countries like Iraq and Cuba, then they must also be respected by Israel and the Palestinians. That is something that I hope Mr Solana and the Council will impress on both sides: if there are international agreements where there is international law, then both sides should abide by them.

(Applause)

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 7 SEPTEMBER 2000

Burundi

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, over one hundred years ago, European colonial powers divided tribal lands in Africa to establish national boundaries. African countries inherited the legacy of tribal conflict as major tribes sought to dominate national politics. Some examples are the Afars and Issas in Djibouti, the Kikuyu and Luo in Kenya and the Hutu and Tutsi in Rwanda and Burundi.

I believe the EU has to focus on how the ruling elite, the Tutsis in Burundi, can be persuaded to reconcile and cooperate with the majority Hutu to achieve peace. The EU must insist that neighbouring countries do not interfere in Burundi and EU aid to them should be conditional on their cooperation.

This Parliament and the European Commission can help Burundi and this resolution is a very good step in that direction.

SITTING OF MONDAY, 4 SEPTEMBER 2000

EC investment partners financial instrument

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, as somebody keen on helping countries to create jobs and transfer technology, I have to say that the ECIP programme is extremely good and, in principle, that was the objective. But as my colleague and friend, Mrs Theato, has mentioned, it is full of worms. It is almost as if the project was a wonderful, beautifully-wrapped box of chocolates, but inside was absolutely packed with worms.

The reason for that is simple. If you look at Facility 1, it grants up to EUR 100 000 for simply identifying a potential joint venture. So, clearly, when you look at Facilities 2, 3, 4 and 1b, you soon realise that the work was not done by somebody who was a banker, but by somebody who perhaps was a bureaucrat and knew nothing about finance and lending to projects which could be viable. In short, I would say if such an instrument is ever to be invented and devised, it should be done with bankers and industrialists, people who know what they are talking about, not bureaucrats sitting in the European Commission. Therefore, the sooner this project is wound up and the European Union saves money that is being wasted, the better.

I feel very strongly that such investment projects should be very carefully thought out with input from industry and bankers so that maximum jobs are created where they are needed and where there is wide coverage and public accountability and transparency. When I was a member of the Budgetary Control Committee and met the people who were managing this project, I was not at all impressed with the knowledge that they had of running such an enterprise, and I come from an industrial and financial background.

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 6 JULY 2000

Human rights

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, Iraq was at war with Iran from 1980 to 1989. During this time the USA and EU supported Iraq since we perceived Iran as the real threat to the Middle East. Iraq invaded Kuwait on 2 August 1990. This was wrong and unacceptable. The UN responded by passing Resolution 661 to impose sanctions on Iraq. The UN action was justified. The USA and Britain imposed a no-fly zone in April 1991. In 1994, Iraq recognised the territorial integrity of Kuwait. From 1991 to 1997, UN inspectors – UNSCOM – systematically and comprehensively inspected, destroyed and verified Iraq's capacity to produce weapons of mass destruction. The UN representative reported to the UN in 1997 that UNSCOM's work had covered virtually everything about Iraq. In 1998 the International Atomic Energy Agency declared that Iraq no longer had a nuclear capacity.

The oil for food programme started in 1996 has been excessively bureaucratic and incompetent, resulting in long delays in procuring essential medicines and food supplies. Of the USD 28 billion worth of oil revenue over three years, only USD 7 billion has been utilised for imports and USD 12 billion remains frozen in a bank in New York.

If the sanctions were intended to destroy Iraq's military capacity, then they have done the job. If the sanctions were intended to dislodge Saddam Hussein, this has not still been achieved after ten years.

However, ten years of sanctions have caused enormous suffering and hardship for the 22 million people of Iraq. High infant mortality, decreasing life expectancy, increased incidence of cancer and treatable diseases, continue to devastate the social fabric of a country that once enjoyed a high standard of living. The intellectual embargo has deprived doctors, teachers and other professionals of the advances in science and technology.

I believe the European Union must reassess its position in helping those suffering acute hardship. There are six EU States – Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece – represented diplomatically in Iraq today. These diplomats share the view of the UN Office in Iraq, WHO, Red Cross, and other NGOs that the EU can, through its diplomacy, achieve a breakthrough. Our parliamentarians and Commission officials should go on fact-finding missions to Iraq to meet members of the Iraqi Parliament, EU diplomats, international agencies and NGOs. Such dialogue will help to establish the facts as they are today and help identify how this deadlock can be broken so that sanctions can be lifted for non-military suppliers. I hope that this House will vote in favour of this resolution.

SITTING OF WEDNESDAY, 14 JUNE 2000

Special UN conference: Women 2000

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, on a point of order. Many friends and women who are colleagues in this Parliament have just pointed out that my name appears as one of those who signed against women's rights. I want to put on record that I am not against women's rights. I have always supported women's rights. It must be an error. Sometimes colleagues bring petitions from delegations and we sign them. I am sorry about that.

SITTING OF WEDNESDAY, 12 APRIL 2000

Famine in Ethiopia

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, misery and death in Ethiopia were on our screens four years ago. The cameramen left but misery and death did not leave Ethiopia. Starvation and death continue today. The population of Ethiopia pray for rain. Sadly they see only a rain of bullets. People crave water, food and medicine. Sadly all they see is their land and their homes blown to pieces by the tanks and planes our governments supply to the Ethiopian and Eritrean politicians.

These politicians are hungry for power: politicians who argue over territorial boundaries whilst their people die. These politicians fly their national flags on their parliaments and presidential palaces, but sadly the only flag their people see is the flag of death. Famine, disease and death remain the hallmarks of these countries. Hunger for power must not be allowed to override the hunger for life.

Mr Patten has listed a number of measures the EU has taken to help. Such help has been received with gratitude, but let us put it into perspective. Sixteen million people are starving today; 15 000 tonnes have been delivered. I accept the difficulties of the logistics but that means less than a kilo per person. No time limit is given, in other words it is a kilo that has to last forever. These measures are palliative. They only relieve the symptoms; they do not cure the disease.

The EU must take the lead in curing this serious problem and the only way to do it is firstly to stop arms reaching all the warring parties and make sure we use our influence with those who supply them; and secondly teach these people how to grow food and harvest, store, package and process it so that they can be independent and self-reliant, not beggars for life.

SITTING OF TUESDAY, 11 APRIL 2000

1998 discharge, budgetary control

Khanbhai (PPE-DE), rapporteur. – Mr President, my report is about the European Coal and Steel Community and how that fits in with Mrs Stauner's report and the discharge.

We have decided to give the discharge on three conditions, and the conditions are clearly spelt out. We hope that by 15 August those concerned will give us the information that is requested. What I find extraordinary is that EUR 2 billion are being managed by this vestige – the last remainder of the European Coal and Steel Community, which, of course, was very important historically but is not important any more. It is being wound up and it is remarkable that such an instrument should continue with that budget and 145 staff. I believe such an instrument should be wound up as quickly as possible so that it is incorporated in perhaps a reformed European Investment Bank: a European Investment Bank that is transparent and accountable.

Such investments can and should be made by professional banks rather than the little outfit that we have at the moment. The number of people employed for the amount of money being invested is again quite disproportionate. I am hoping that this can be wound up speedily and incorporated in either the EIB or the European Investment Fund, because that would be a better way of using the money and resources.

This is for the social and research fund, but again these objectives could be better addressed by a bank that would ask other banks to manage investments so that we have the highest return.

I hope that the three conditions, the conditional discharge and the obligations on those concerned to address these conditions will be taken seriously. Far too often in the past we have found that promises have been made and not kept. So I hope that the answers will be given to Parliament and to the Committee on Budgetary Control.

I think that is about all I need to say. On that basis I recommend to this House a discharge.

SITTING OF TUESDAY, 11 APRIL 2000

EU – Africa Summit (Cairo, 3 and 4 April 2000)

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, ordinary people in most African countries are poorer today than when their countries became independent. Poverty, therefore, is a disease inflicted upon innocent populations by evil dictators, greedy and corrupt politicians. Natural disasters, including climate change, have aggravated the problem. The Touareg in the desert in northern Niger, the Makonde in Tanzania or Mozambique take their families and put their meagre possessions in a little basket if they wish to move. They are poor, insecure and exposed to the elements. They have no water, sanitation, energy, medicine, education or reliable shelter. Such desperate people cannot think of democracy and human rights in the way we do from our houses and leafy suburbs in the West. They have no stake in their village, regional or national economies. Such rootless people, desperate people, are easy prey to evil political manipulation, and that is why we see so much conflict and civil unrest in those countries.

We here in this Assembly offer these people open and free access to our EU markets. We invite them to be part of the global economy, so that they can come and sit at the tables in Seattle for the WTO discussions. What does this mean to these poor people, the majority of whom live in the bush, who have no knowledge, no means of efficient cultivation, harvesting, processing, packaging even what little they grow? They cannot even market it in their own countries let alone sell it abroad.

So I suggest, let us teach them to be self-reliant and independent, by teaching them the means to grow and harvest what there is in those countries. Let us give them the technology transfer that makes sense, before we say our markets are open to them.

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 16 DECEMBER 1999

Human rights

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, Djibouti has a population of half a million comprising two Muslim tribes, the Issas and the Afars. Djibouti's national assets are its port and its strategic position in the Horn of Africa. Western powers, including France, exploit its strategic position. Ethiopia uses its port. Trapped in the conflict between the Afars and the Issas and the problems of the neighbouring countries, and with the desires and strategic policies of countries which dominate its strategic position, it is caught in a situation where it is desperately poor and, of course, undemocratic.

The leader of Djibouti today is doing things that we absolutely abhor. The Afars' leader is in jail, without trial, with his supporters in abominable conditions. He is going blind. Such conditions exist in Djibouti today that we really have to look at our policy because it is part of Lomé, it receives aid from the EU and one of our Member States, France, is very strategically placed and has considerable influence in Djibouti.

This sort of dictatorship, this sort of terror of civilians and abuse of resources by unnecessary expenditure on arms for a country of that size is totally inexcusable. It ought to be like the Singapore or Hong Kong of Africa. It should really be a very prosperous place. So I hope that you will all support this resolution condemning the abominable conditions of prisoners and civilians in Djibouti.

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 18 NOVEMBER 1999

Rwanda/Burundi

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, Commissioner and Colleagues, as someone who has worked in and known Rwanda since 1984, as someone born in Tanzania where I lived for many years, as someone speaking the main African language of the Great Lakes region, I speak on this subject with experience and knowledge.

Genocide in any country is evil and must be condemned without reservation. Whoever is responsible for such genocide must be indicted, and justice must be seen to be done. There cannot be any immunity for anyone from such prosecution. The International Criminal Tribunal in Arusha must do its work efficiently, and we hope that those doing this work will take measures to bring this process to a just and speedy end.

Only four trials have been completed in five years, and this delay has allowed some perpetrators of genocide to go free on technicalities. This is not acceptable. We need to evaluate the work of the tribunal to identify the weaknesses so that we can furnish appropriate assistance to ensure high standards of justice without wasting time and resources. The innocent victims of genocide and conflict cannot wait for ever to rebuild their lives in order to live in peace in their own villages and in their own homes.

This resolution, agreed by all political groups in this Parliament, expresses clearly our concerns, hopes and expectations. It is now up to the government of Rwanda and those of neighbouring countries to take serious action to bring about genuine peace in the area. They need to cooperate fully with the EU special envoy, the EU, the United Nations, the OAU and all humanitarian aid agencies in doing what is needed to support peace and stability in Rwanda and the Great Lakes region in general.

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 18 NOVEMBER 1999

Losses under loans for projects outside the Community

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – Mr President, Mrs Rühle has produced an excellent report on this subject. I am the newly appointed rapporteur on the EIB, the European Central Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

I agree with the amendments proposed by Mrs Rühle as they express clearly real concerns about the EIB's transparency, efficacy, accountability and conformity with the Community's objectives and policies. I will address briefly each of these concerns.

Firstly, there is widespread concern about the EIB's transparency. My predecessor from the Socialist Group, Mr Freddy Blak, Mrs Rühle, the author of the report, many Members of Parliament and the Court of Auditors have all expressed their opinion about the lack of transparency in the operations of the EIB. Even the World Bank and the East European NGO called Bankwatch have publicly stated this view.

Secondly, let me turn to efficacy. Mrs Rühle states the need to evaluate the effectiveness of EIB operations. I, as the new rapporteur for the Bank, requested Sir Brian Unwin, the President of the EIB, for an initial meeting to set out a framework to assess the efficiency of the Bank. I am sorry to report to this House that Sir Brian has not even bothered to ring me or arrange to meet despite numerous telephone reminders. Such disregard for this new European Parliament will erode, yet again, public respect and confidence in the European Union.

Thirdly, what about public accountability? In May 1999, my predecessor, Mr Blak, Vice-President of CoCobu, asked 26 specific questions about alleged fraud, mismanagement, corruption and cover-up – I mean cover-up – in the Bank's activities, including in treasury operations, over the period 1993-1998. The questions are specific, detailed and relevant. They require a written response from the Bank. I have asked Sir Brian for such a response but, once again, he has chosen to ignore my request. I have been told by Mr Martí, one of his vice-presidents, that the EIB is owned by the Member States and, as such, according to the Treaty, it is not an EU institution obliged to respond to the European Parliament, the Court of Auditors or OLAF. Only matters relating to loans to non-EU countries where the Community gives loan guarantees can be discussed with Members of Parliament.

I ask this House, what are the Member States? Are they not the governments of the people who live, work and pay taxes in the countries that we call Member States? Are we not, as the only elected representatives of the people of these Member States, expected to safeguard the interests of the people who live in the Member States? Does the Treaty specifically forbid the European Parliament from having access to information? Certainly not. Therefore, if the EIB is confident that it functions well and has nothing to hide, why is Sir Brian Unwin, its president, denying access to Parliament, the Court of Auditors and OLAF?

Clearly, the Treaty needs to be amended to specify such access in bold print. I suggest that those involved in the IGC take note. Clearly there is support for this as Ecofin, in its meeting on 8 October in Tampere, reinforced its previous criticisms of the EIB's management and performance by directing it to open its doors to OLAF and the Court of Auditors. I have seen the decision taken by the EIB concerning this directive and according to paragraphs 5 and 6 of the decision taken by the Bank it will not open its doors to OLAF. It is about time this House told the Bank to open its doors to OLAF and the Court of Auditors.

SITTING OF TUESDAY, 16 NOVEMBER 1999

Question Time (Commission)

Khanbhai (PPE-DE). – My interest is to assess the efficacy of the EU in giving development aid to any of the third world countries. So will the Commission answer my questions if I take one of the third world countries as a model and try to assess how effectual our aid is and what the delegation does?

SITTING OF WEDNESDAY, 6 OCTOBER 1999

State of relations between Turkey and the EU

Khanbhai (PPE). – Mr President, in a historical context the European Union is a baby. In its infancy it questioned the eligibility of British membership and rejected its application to join. At that time many thought Greece or Spain – I suppose these days all that is forgotten – would never qualify for membership.

Over the last ten years we have witnessed huge changes. Membership has expanded to 15 Member States, Parliament is beginning to acquire political power and will, I hope, cease to be a mere talking-shop.

Turkey’s application has to be judged on the basis of the following criteria: Turkey’s strategic geographic and economic position and how this impacts on Europe; Turkey’s crucial role as a member of NATO and how this membership could be sustained if the door is permanently shut in its face; Turkey, which as a future responsible member of the EU could be the fire extinguisher for the fires of discontent that burn in the Middle East and beyond.

I appreciate the fears of those who worry about Turkey’s Islamic population. The reality is that there are large numbers of Turks living in Germany and France, large numbers of Muslims – including Turkish Cypriots – who live in Britain. The populations of Kosovo and Albania are predominantly Muslim. The religious complexion of Turkey is a matter of historical accident, like Spain under the Moors for a few hundred years. Turkey’s culture is distinctly European and its religious complexion should not devalue its European identity.

Let us look ahead over the next 10, 15 or 25 years and examine what is in Europe’s best interest: what will contribute to the prosperity and peace of this family of nations that we call the Europe of today. Let us not be hypocritical, and let us ask ourselves what is the intellectual basis for excluding Turkey. Young Europeans, socially mobile and far less religious than us, expect us to develop a Europe of opportunities for work and prosperity that we can all enjoy.

Turkey cannot join the EU today; but geography, culture, history, security and common sense . . .

(The President cut the speaker off)

SITTING OF THURSDAY, 16 SEPTEMBER 1999

10th EC-UNRWA Convention (1999-2001)

Khanbhai (PPE). – Mr President, it is a great pleasure to speak on Palestine. It is extremely important and it is a subject in which I have been very interested for many years. Mrs Morgantini has produced an excellent report which I and my group support and the two amendments are very important because they ask for an annual report and for access to the sites and information on the aspects of the financing.

I should like to raise a few points. One is that we are helping 3.5 million refugees. I accept that these are people in refugee camps now and I hope that the European Union will play a very positive role in helping them to rehabilitate once they come across from neighbouring countries into Palestine for resettlement. I hope the European Commission will take the initiative, with the close cooperation of Parliament, in being more of an active player in the Middle East and not take a back seat and let the Americans lead.

When we look at the aid we are giving, EUR 40 million, that is not a lot of money. I accept it is quite a large part of the EUR 120 million that are being given and 85% of our budget of about EUR 40 million per annum is for education, which I consider the right way forward. We are helping to educate half a million children.

I hope that this proposal will be acted upon quickly because as Mrs Morgantini pointed out there is urgency, teachers are losing their jobs or not being employed and education and medical help is essential. I hope that the Commission will do its best to speed this on.

Mrs Morgantini has really covered this subject extensively. I do not want to waste Parliament’s time and I thank the President for giving me the opportunity to speak on this subject.