Indeks 
 Forrige 
 Næste 
 Fuld tekst 
Procedure : 2018/0228(COD)
Forløb i plenarforsamlingen
Dokumentforløb : A8-0409/2018

Indgivne tekster :

A8-0409/2018

Forhandlinger :

PV 11/12/2018 - 21
CRE 11/12/2018 - 21

Afstemninger :

PV 12/12/2018 - 19.2
CRE 12/12/2018 - 19.2
Stemmeforklaringer
Stemmeforklaringer
PV 17/04/2019 - 16.13

Vedtagne tekster :

P8_TA(2018)0517
P8_TA(2019)0420

Forhandlinger
Tirsdag den 11. december 2018 - Strasbourg Revideret udgave

21. Oprettelse af Connecting Europe-faciliteten (forhandling)
Video af indlæg
PV
MPphoto
 

  Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest sprawozdanie sporządzone przez Hennę Virkkunen, Mariana-Jeana Marinescu i Pavla Teličkę w imieniu Komisji Przemysłu, Badań Naukowych i Energii oraz Komisji Transportu i Turystyki w sprawie ustanowienia instrumentu „Łącząc Europę” (COM(2018)0438 - C8-0255/2018 - 2018/0228(COD)) (A8-0409/2018).

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Henna Virkkunen, esittelijä. – Arvoisa puhemies, tässä Verkkojen Eurooppa -välinettä koskevassa mietinnössä todellakin kyse on teollisuus-, tutkimus- ja energiavaliokunnan ja liikenne- ja matkailuvaliokunnan yhteisestä mietinnöstä. Haluan lämpimästi kiittää kanssaesittelijöitäni jäsen Marinescua ja jäsen Teličkaa sekä kaikkia varjoesittelijöitä hyvästä yhteistyöstä.

Verkkojen Eurooppa -väline on yksi tärkeistä tulevan kauden ohjelmista, joiden tavoitteena on ennen kaikkea investoida eurooppalaiseen infrastruktuuriin sekä energian, digitalisaation että liikenteen alalla. Tiedämme, että kun haluamme vauhdittaa Euroopan kasvua ja kilpailukykyä ja varmistaa, että meille syntyy uusia yrityksiä ja työpaikkoja, on ehdottoman tärkeää, että meillä on nykyaikainen ja hyvässä kunnossa oleva infrastruktuuri ja että yhteydet toimivat myös jäsenvaltioiden välillä.

Erityisenä painopisteenä tulevalla kaudella tulee olemaan ilmastomuutoksen torjunta. Tästä Verkkojen Eurooppa -ohjelmasta 60 prosenttia on tarkoitus suunnata hankkeisiin, joilla voidaan torjua ilmastonmuutosta, ja se on erittäin tärkeä näkökulma. Energian osalta meillä on jo aiemmin määritelty ne kaikkein tärkeimmät eurooppalaiset yhteydet, joihin tätä rahoitusta tullaan käyttämään: kyse on Euroopan kannalta keskeisistä yhteysverkoista, rajatylittävistä yhteyksistä, ja tuota listaa tullaan tulevina vuosina luonnollisesti päivittämään.

Tällä kaudella painopiste on aika voimakkaasti ollut kaasuinfrastruktuurissa eli siinä, että olemme saaneet rakennettua kaasuputkiyhteyksiä eri puolille Eurooppaa. Olemme saaneet näin tehostettua omaa kaasumarkkinaamme. Mutta luonnollisesti nyt, kun isot kaasuprojektit alkavat olla valmiita, tulevalla kaudella vuodesta 2021 alkaen, kun tämä ohjelma astuu voimaan, painopiste tulee olemaan entistä enemmän sähkön siirtoverkoissa. Tähän on tarvetta myös sen vuoksi, että uusiutuvan energian määrä kasvaa koko ajan Euroopan alueella ja siirtoyhteydet ja rajatylittävät siirtoyhteydet ovat erittäin tärkeässä roolissa.

Uutena elementtinä tässä ohjelmassa tulee olemaan mahdollisuus myös rahoittaa jäsenvaltioiden yhteisiä uusiutuvan energiaan hankkeita. Komissio ehdotti, että tähän voitaisiin suunnata korkeintaan 10 prosenttia ohjelmasta, mutta Euroopan parlamentissa nostimme tuon osuuden 15 prosenttiin. Uusiutuva energia on tärkeä alue, jossa investointeja tarvitaan.

Digitaalinen osio tässä ohjelmassa tulee olemaan hiukan pienempi kuin nykyisessä ohjelmassa ihan siitä johtuen, että nyt meillä on aivan kokonaan uusi Digitaalinen Eurooppa -ohjelma, josta rahoitetaan näitä muita hankkeita, ja tämä digitaalinen osuus tulee nimenomaan keskittymään infrastruktuurihankkeisiin. Erityiseksi painopisteeksi parlamentti haluaa ottaa muun muassa 5G-verkot eli sen, että saamme kaikkein merkittävimpien liikenneväylien varrelle rakennettua nopeat 5G-yhteydet. Tärkeää on myös mahdollisuus rahoittaa merikaapeliyhteyksiä tämän rahaston ja Verkkojen Eurooppa -välineen kautta.

Ilman muuta kollegani kohta tulevat puhumaan liikennehankkeista enemmän, mutta tavoitteemme siitä, että ihmiset, tavarat ja palvelut liikkuvat yli rajojen Euroopassa, edellyttää tietenkin, että meillä on erittäin hyvät rajatylittävät liikenneyhteydet, ja nimenomaan tähän tämä ohjelma tulee keskittymään seuraavalla kaudella. On myös otettava opiksi siitä, missä tällä kaudella emme ole onnistuneet niin hyvin, ja se on ilman muuta ollut synergioiden hakeminen. Meidän on löydettävä jatkossa enemmän myös synergioita liikenne-, energia- ja digitaalisten hankkeiden välillä. Tätä osuutta parlamentti haluaa nyt jatkossa erityisesti painottaa. Se tarkoittaa muun muassa vaihtoehtoisten polttoaineiden jakeluinfrastruktuuria liikenneväylien varrella tai älyverkkoja energian osalta. Eli entistä enemmän halutaan synergioita digitalisaation, energian ja liikenteen välillä, jolloin saamme erittäin modernin ja nykyaikaisen infrastruktuurin Eurooppaan.

 
  
  

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. ANTONIO TAJANI
Presidente

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Presidente. – Interrompo un attimo la discussione per dirvi che c'è stato un attentato a Strasburgo. Abbiamo chiuso il Parlamento, nessuno può uscire, stiamo però facendo rientrare i parlamentari che intendono partecipare alla discussione, perché non è mia intenzione – e credo di interpretare anche il vostro sentimento – che questo Parlamento si faccia intimorire da attacchi di qualsiasi tipo, terroristici o meno.

Andiamo avanti, continuiamo a lavorare, non cambiamo il nostro modo di vivere, reagiamo con la forza della democrazia e della libertà alla violenza di chi vuole rovinare la convivenza civile in una delle capitali europee. Non pieghiamo la testa, non ci arrendiamo, continuiamo a lavorare come parlamentari, come rappresentanti dei popoli europei che non vogliono farsi mettere paura da delinquenti – credo che siano purtroppo terroristi – che hanno seminato il panico nel centro di Strasburgo (ci sono morti e feriti); noi andiamo avanti e combattiamo con la forza della democrazia la violenza del terrore.

Quindi credo di esprimere anche il vostro sentimento se la seduta del Parlamento di quest'oggi non si interrompe, e continueremo a far entrare i parlamentari che intendono partecipare alla discussione.

 
  
  

PRZEWODNICTWO: ZDZISŁAW KRASNODĘBSKI
Wiceprzewodniczący

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marian-Jean Marinescu, raportor. – Domnule Președinte, mulțumesc președintelui Tajani pentru această intervenție. Vreau să-mi exprim părerea de rău pentru ceea ce s-a întâmplat și încă se întâmplă acum în centru în Strasbourgului.

Mulțumesc, de asemenea, colegilor mei pentru colaborarea pe care am avut-o la elaborarea acestui raport. Cred că în Comisia TRAN s-a votat un dosar foarte bun, este o propunere echilibrată. În primul rând, propunem ca bugetul pentru infrastructura de transport în Europa să se ridice cu încă 6 miliarde, ceea ce cred eu că este absolut necesar. De asemenea, pentru mai multă predictibilitate și pentru a avea proiecte mult mai bine pregătite, propunem ca, din partea Comisiei, să vină în 2020 un program-cadru care să prezinte ceea ce se va întâmpla în următorii 7 ani, astfel încât statele membre și alți doritori, beneficiari să se poată pregăti foarte bine, pentru a depune proiecte foarte bine făcute.

De asemenea, am propus reguli pentru utilizarea banilor pentru mobilitatea militară, pentru că nu erau reguli propuse de Comisie, astfel încât să se asigure o utilizare justă a acestor bani pentru ambele scopuri - civil și apărare. Este foarte important acest lucru, în opinia noastră, și cerem, de asemenea, ca, dacă există încă sume neutilizate în acest scop, să se transfere către anvelopa generală.

Cerem, de asemenea, transparență, cerem ca pe site-ul Comisiei să existe în timp real o prezentare a proiectelor care sunt în lucru: cine le finanțează - Comisia prin CEF sau statele membre prin fondurile de coeziune și de dezvoltare regională și, bineînțeles, și din bugetele naționale, astfel încât să putem avea o imagine întreagă a completării coridoarelor europene. Este, iarăși, foarte important acest lucru.

Am reformulat propunerea Comisiei referitoare la sumele transferate din coeziune către politica de transport, către Mecanismul pentru interconectarea Europei, încât să dăm posibilitate statelor din coeziune să utilizeze banii conform anvelopei naționale pentru 2 ani și apoi, dacă nu au utilizat banii, să fie transferați către un fond comun pentru toate statele din coeziune și, pe un sistem competitiv, să se aloce acești bani pentru proiecte.

De asemenea, există o propunere în plen, care nu a fost votată în Comisia pentru transport, pentru o nouă cifră referitoare la transferul de la coeziune către politica de transport. Eu cred că, până la urmă, decizia finală trebuie luată de către cei din Comisia REGI, mă refer la poziția Parlamentului, pentru că ei decid ce sumă va fi alocată către politica de transport.

Deci, în concluzie, cred că este o propunere a Comisiei pentru transport care trebuie susținută în plenul Parlamentului, pentru că aduce mari beneficii atât transportului, cât și celorlalte sectoare - digital și energie.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Pavel Telička, Rapporteur. – Mr President, I would also like to join my two colleagues, the co-rapporteurs, in appreciating the interaction, and also the shadows; some of them, like Inés Ayala Sender, are present here today. It was in fact highly professional, enjoyable and I think we have a good result.

The Connecting Europe Facility is a success story. I mean, it is delivering results. Maybe it’s something that we should be better at communicating to the public but it is a success story, and I think that what we are aiming at is that we will be spending hopefully, as Marian-Jean Marinescu has said, a higher amount of money, that there will be a budgetary increase, but that we will spend it more effectively and efficiently than so far, and that was the objective which brought us through while working on the report.

Let me give you a few examples. I think it has already been referred to that we are looking for multiannual programming. This is something that should provide for greater transparency, predictability and planning, but also consistency. This is what is needed. At the same time we should be evaluating constantly its implementation and we have asked the Commission to work on qualitative indicators so that we would not just be assessing the kind of money we are spending, but what are the real results that we are achieving.

One element that I was also quite strong on was joint ventures. We have one TEN-T project where we have that experience and we know that a joint venture composed of entities from the countries concerned in a concrete TEN-T corridor provides for better coordination in terms of planning and projecting, but also in securing financing, constructing and also future implementation. What we were looking at is also that we would be providing additional stimulus, bonuses, so whether you provide for greater synergy or you provide for better utilisation of the funds by having a joint venture, this should be remunerated with a higher degree of co-financing from the European funds.

Now one question which I would like to also highlight, and it has already been referred to, is the cohesion envelope. I think that I would advise all colleagues to look very thoroughly into the compromise amendment that we have tabled on the TRAN part with Marian-Jean Marinescu because we think that it is a bridge between two diverging positions. One, let’s say, that was proposed by the Commission and one which was very strong also among some colleagues, MEPs, and I think that this is something that could be quite unfortunate in terms of implementation in the future, so that would be my plea and my advice.

Military mobility has been mentioned. May I underline that we are talking about dual use. I know that some colleagues in the Hemicycle, some Members of the European Parliament, will tend to put too much emphasis on the military and automatically present it as a major shift offset. That is not true. We are talking about dual use, and by the way, we need it in terms of increasing the security in the European Union of our citizens, of our own.

But this is not just about military, this is dual use, but it is also about managing crisis situations. We might be faced with a situation where we will have to move heavy equipment, let’s say, or a large number of people because of a natural disaster or whatever. So what we are proposing to you is, in my opinion, a well balanced report, one that got a vast majority in committee, and I think that the compromises that are put in front of you are, in fact, taking on board a number of important elements.

And one last remark, because there was strong – and I know that I’m over time – but also on the climate and the environment. Climate proofing is again a part of this package, so this is as good as we could have made it.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Violeta Bulc, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I would like to thank the co-rapporteurs, Ms Virkkunen, Mr Marinescu and Mr Telička, the Committee on Transport and Tourism, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the other committees, such as the Committee on Regional Development, for progressing this file in such a swift and efficient manner.

The Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) is key for Europe’s connectivity and efficiency in the strategic transport, energy and digital sector, to provide tangible benefits to European citizens and businesses and enable trade and exchanges across borders.

The current CEF programme is now supporting 1200 investment actions, corresponding to a total investment of EUR 54 billion. This is a tool that delivers jobs and growth, and we want to further reinforce it. I am glad to note that the key objectives of CEF are part of the report, and let me recall them for the three pillars of the CEF programme: transport, energy and digital.

First, for CEF transport the first objective is to deliver on the commitment to complete the core network by 2030 and move towards completing the comprehensive network by 2050, thanks to investment, with priority on cross-border sections and missing links. This will provide better access to businesses and citizens from all EU regions to markets and development opportunities. In other words, it allows all Member States to capitalise on the benefits of the biggest single market in the world.

Second, to support the transition to smart, sustainable, inclusive, safe and secure mobility. For this we propose a strong and a broad emphasis on the modernisation of the transport system. This is absolutely key to deliver on our vision zero – zero fatalities, zero pollution and zero paper, to save lives and provide the mobility services that citizens and businesses need.

Third, to promote a streamlining of the investment process with visibility on the pipeline and coherent eligibility criteria, we propose an efficient use of CEF, InvestEU and the Regional Development Funds to address the significant needs for investment to complete the TEN-Ts.

With streamlining we are overcoming the fragmented approach to financing and maximising the investment value delivered. With respect to the cohesion envelope, we need to ensure a balance between sufficient predictability of funds for each cohesion Member State and maximisation of EU value added, as well as a sound financial management with a ‘use it or lose it’ principle.

So let me clearly point out that the transfer of a part of the cohesion envelope to CEF is in the interest of the projects concerned because, under CEF, such projects can be co-financed to the tune of 85%, compared to only 70% in case of no transfer.

Fourth, to promote synergies between transport, energy and the digital sector as much as possible, to make our connectivity modern and fit for emerging needs. All three sectors are increasingly interrelated so joint projects are needed. We propose integrated, innovative approaches to mobility, combining efficient transport, clean energy and digitalisation.

Fifth, in line with the action plan on military mobility adopted in March 2018, we propose to support the critical development of civilian dual-use transport infrastructure to ensure an efficient use of taxpayers’ money.

So let me stress now the objectives for CEF energy. CEF will increasingly focus on electricity while keeping the window open for gas. In electricity, the objective is to complete the TEN-E electricity grid through the development of projects of common interest, and for the first time, we will open CEF towards supporting cross-border cooperation and renewable energy. This will allow the completion of the internal market to foster EU competitiveness and facilitate the clean energy transition while increasing energy security.

The new CEF will thus complement the legislative framework proposed and, to a great extent, already agreed under the clean energy for all Europeans packages.

Last but not least, the objectives of the CEF digital. CEF will contribute to the deployment of very high capacity digital network featuring a high level of security to support all innovative digital services, including connected mobility and other services of public interest. In addition, it will contribute to ensure that all the main socio-economic entities, such as schools, hospitals, transport hubs, providers of public services and enterprises have access to future broadband connections by 2025. Lastly, it will contribute to the overall connectivity of the EU, including that of the outermost regions to the internet.

I’m looking forward to hearing your views on these issues, which are of specific importance for you.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Mirosław Piotrowski, autor projektu opinii Komisji Rozwoju Regionalnego. –Panie Przewodniczący! Jako sprawozdawca opinii do omawianego sprawozdania Komisji Transportu i Turystyki dotyczącego ustanowienia instrumentu „Łącząc Europę” muszę stwierdzić, że Komisja Europejska do tekstu rozporządzenia wprowadziła postulat dekarbonizacji, czemu się przeciwstawiałem. Przypomnę, że dekarbonizacja nie pojawia się w porozumieniu paryskim. Komisja Rozwoju Regionalnego nie zgodziła się nawet na moją poprawkę o wsparciu technologii czystego węgla. Nieuwzględnienie tej poprawki może znacznie zmniejszyć bezpieczeństwo energetyczne w Unii Europejskiej.

Tekst Komisji jest także kontrowersyjny ze względu na przeniesienie środków z Funduszu Spójności. W mojej opinii uzyskaliśmy kompromis, który Komisja Transportu znacząco zmieniła, podwyższając kwotę do 10 miliardów euro (rozdział I art. 4 rozporządzenia), a czerpie te 10 miliardów z Funduszu Spójności. Propozycja Komisji jest, jak sądzę, nie do zaakceptowania przez kraje członkowskie, zwłaszcza te najbardziej korzystające z Funduszu Spójności. Straci na tym między innymi Polska, w tym takie regiony jak Lubelszczyzna, z której pochodzę.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Markus Pieper, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Überraschend, dass ich jetzt schon dran bin. Wir verbinden mit der Connecting Europe Facility Regionen, und wer Regionen verkehrlich vernetzt, der schafft Mehrwert.

Ich freue mich deshalb, dass schon der Kommissionsvorschlag für die CEF einen so hohen Stellenwert hat. Ich freue mich auch über die Position des Europäischen Parlaments, insbesondere bei Schiene und bei Wasserstraße noch einen draufzulegen. Wir unterstützen deshalb den Bericht, haben aber etwas Probleme jetzt mit den anstehenden Abstimmungen. Ich glaube, hier sollte es noch mehr darum gehen, dass die CEF-Gelder nicht jahrelang blockiert werden können. Wenn Länder nicht in der Lage sind, das Geld zu nutzen, müssen sie es für Ausschreibungen freigeben können.

Die finanziellen Ressourcen der CEF sind leider nicht so, wie es der bauliche Bedarf erfordert. Von daher empfinde ich das als ein wirklich destruktives Signal des Europäischen Parlaments, dass wir im Regionalausschuss die 10 Mrd., die uns eigentlich für die CEF zustehen, jetzt auf 4 Mrd. reduzieren wollen. Das zerstört die CEF in Osteuropa.

Ich bitte die Europäische Kommission und ich bitte auch den Rat, diesem destruktiven Votum des Parlaments nicht zu folgen, denn wir wollen die CEF in Osteuropa erhalten.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Inés Ayala Sender, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señor presidente, quiero agradecerle también su presencia a la comisaria y, sobre todo, agradecer a los ponentes, a la señora Virkkunen, aunque ella lo sea para el tema de industria, pero sobre todo a los señores Marinescu y Telička, la buena cooperación que hemos tenido en esta segunda edición —déjenme que lo diga así— de un nuevo Mecanismo para 2021-2027.

Gracias a la buena cooperación hemos hecho frente precisamente a algunos intentos de recortes; hemos mantenido el porcentaje del 50 % de cofinanciación para los estudios; hemos, también, conseguido que, para financiar sobre todo las horas de ferrocarril, se pueda llegar hasta el 50 % de cofinanciación, lo cual significa un poquito más de capacidad; también para los proyectos transfronterizos, que podrán contar con una financiación también mayor; y, sobre todo, creo que hay que destacar todo lo relacionado con la mayor participación de las autoridades locales y regionales y la mayor capacidad, también, para hacer de estos corredores realmente un elemento fundamental de futuro.

Y quiero decirles especialmente que, en los anexos, también hemos sido capaces de incluir un tramo ferroviario esencial para mi región —déjenme hacer este pequeño hincapié—, el tramo ferroviario entre Zaragoza, Teruel y Sagunto, con lo cual hemos hecho, por así decirlo, un poco más de justicia al incluirlo en el corredor prioritario «Mediterráneo». También he de decir que hay un enlace pendiente —el Pau-Huesca—, muy cercano a mi corazón, que también ha sido aceptado.

Lo único que les pido es que seamos capaces de hacer un voto final fuerte, potente. Los temas de financiación son posibilidades que luego tendremos que reforzar en el MFP, pero ahora mismo lo que necesitamos es la mayor capacidad posible de financiación, incluida la transferencia del Fondo de Cohesión. Nos ha ido muy bien así, y el futuro también será bueno.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Fabio Massimo Castaldo, relatore per parere della commissione per gli affari esteri. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, vorrei subito sottolineare come, a fronte di un impegno unitario e condiviso nella sottocommissione SEDE sulla mobilità militare, non sia corrisposto lo stesso interesse nelle commissioni ITRE e TRAN.

Questo mi ha portato a riproporre in plenaria un importante emendamento sulla necessità di avere un bilanciamento geografico per quanto riguarda la mobilità militare, un punto che era stato approvato a larghissima maggioranza nel parere di cui sono stato relatore nella sottocommissione SEDE. Non si capisce infatti perché durante le negoziazioni dell'MCE i tre relatori non abbiano voluto tenere in conto questo importantissimo suggerimento.

Il bisogno di un approccio geograficamente bilanciato a livello di mobilità militare è dettato soprattutto dalla velocità di cambiamento degli scenari di crisi, scenari spesso imprevedibili e che per questo richiedono un approccio multidirezionale ed equilibrato, in grado di fronteggiare efficacemente anche quelle minacce ancora oggi non troppo evidenti.

Non possiamo permettere che il futuro sviluppo della mobilità militare favorisca alcune regioni a scapito di altre, solamente per contingenze del momento e senza una visione di lungo periodo, incapace di apportare un vero e proprio valore aggiunto per tutti gli Stati membri.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Dominique Riquet, au nom du groupe ALDE. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, je voudrais d’abord remercier les rapporteurs pour leur très bon travail. Le mécanisme pour l’interconnexion en Europe est un dispositif si pertinent qu’il a été reconduit pour ce prochain cadre financier. Je ne reviens pas sur ses mérites, ni son bon fonctionnement et tout ce qu’il va permettre de faire, ce qui a été développé par mes collègues.

Je voulais simplement dire que c’est un fonds et que, comme fonds, le plus important c’est sa dotation budgétaire et, moi, je suis inquiet. Je suis inquiet, d’abord parce que cette dotation ne sera réellement fixée que dans le cadre financier pluriannuel, c’est-à-dire qu’elle sera fixée à terme, mais pas maintenant. Ensuite, il y a une menace – on en a parlé – sur les fonds de la cohésion et, effectivement, ce serait probablement au détriment des pays de la cohésion si ce fonds, ce transfert était minoré.

Je regrette que l’on n’ait pas accepté ma proposition de transfert des 20 milliards du FEDER car on voit qu’il y a une énorme distorsion entre les besoins, 500 milliards, et les fonds à disposition. Compte tenu à la fois des nécessités et des mérites, l’insuffisance du fonds est quand même un problème qui est relativement préoccupant. Il faut insister sur la qualité de sa gestion centralisée. J’espère que les dotations seront à la hauteur des besoins et de nos ambitions.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Tania González Peñas (GUE/NGL). – Señor presidente, me gustaría decir que este nuevo Mecanismo «Conectar Europa» para los próximos siete años, tal y como nos ha llegado a este Pleno, es para nuestro Grupo bastante decepcionante. Además de la rudeza con la que se han conducido las negociaciones entre los ponentes alternativos, nos parece que este Mecanismo significa perder muchas oportunidades de progreso.

Por un lado, declina establecer estándares sanitarios y medioambientales para evitar la contaminación electromagnética.

Por otro, sigue financiando energías y tecnologías productoras de CO2, consagrando aún el absurdo principio de neutralidad. Señorías, sabemos que el gas natural licuado, el gas licuado del petróleo, va a estar en el mix energético a corto plazo, pero de ahí a ser neutrales en cuanto al fomento de la tecnología o las infraestructuras, me parece que es hacernos trampas al solitario, porque en pocos años las energías de cero emisiones son las que van a primar.

En tercer lugar, obvia reforzar los criterios climáticos de los proyectos, lo que nos impide cumplir el Acuerdo de París, y encima seguirá financiando macroestructuras ampliamente rechazadas por la población, como el túnel bajo los Alpes para el TAV entre Lyon y Turín.

(La oradora acepta responder a una pregunta formulada con arreglo al procedimiento de la «tarjeta azul» (artículo 162, apartado 8, del Reglamento interno)).

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Indrek Tarand (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, I actually have a question. We are all aware of the evil events at the Christmas market in Strasbourg. We are continuing to establish here the important Connecting Europe Facility, but unfortunately we are not allowed to leave this building. I would like to protest with all my heart against this kind of arrangement. We are not cowards. We are not intending to disturb any police operation. We are free people.

(The President cut off the speaker)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – Please, this is not a blue-card question. This is a point of order. You do of course have the right to put a point of order, but it is not a blue-card question. We will continue our discussion.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jakop Dalunde (Verts/ALE). – Herr talman! Fonden för ett sammanlänkat Europa avgör hur EU:s investeringar i transport och energi kommer att se ut bortom år 2020. För att nå Parisavtalets åtagande krävs att vi investerar i transporter som ger nollutsläpp och inte i utveckling av gasledningar eller motorvägar.

Trots att EU-kommissionen nyligen uttryckt att EU ska bli klimatneutralt, ligger det nu ett förslag på bordet som om dessa beslut inte hade tagits. Det är obegripligt att majoriteten i det här parlamentet vill utforma Fonden för ett sammanlänkat Europa på ett sätt som är helt oförenligt med kommissionens egen klimatstrategi och Parisavtalet.

För att hålla jordens uppvärmning till maximalt 1,5 grader måste EU investera i gränsöverskridande projekt som främjar förnybar energi och hållbara transportsystem. Det är genom investeringar i en fossilfri framtid som vi har en möjlighet att modernisera våra samhällen och åstadkomma det klimatneutrala projekt som vi alla vill se. Det borde vi fatta beslut om i morgon!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Mario Borghezio (ENF). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, volevo dire e comunicare all'Aula che le autorità hanno comunicato che l'attentatore era schedato con la "fiche S", un sospetto appartenente al terrorismo islamico.

Questo è un ammonimento: oggi abbiamo discusso sul problema del terrorismo islamico e mi permetto di richiamare l'attenzione della Commissione sulla necessità di provvedimenti finalmente seri e concreti per individuare, colpire e stroncare questo fenomeno, tenendo conto del numero, indicato nella relazione, di 30 000 guerrieri di Allah nelle nostre città, che sono un pericolo per la sicurezza di tutti, immigrati compresi.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Przewodniczący. – To był raczej komentarz niż uwaga do porządku obrad. Myślę, że będziemy kontynuować mimo wszystko. Tu jesteśmy bezpieczni, w samym budynku nie dzieje się nic dramatycznego, natomiast rzeczywiście należy wyrazić przede wszystkim wielki żal z powodu ofiar, a także potępić ten zamach. I również podzielam zdanie Kolegi, że powinniśmy terroryzmowi, zresztą o każdym podłożu, również o podłożu islamskim, rzeczywiście przeciwstawiać się z całą siłą.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Dario Tamburrano, a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, non posso fare a meno di essere assai deluso e sconcertato di fronte a questo testo in votazione, assai carente in ambizione e visione.

Si avvallerebbe quindi il finanziamento di infrastrutture energetiche che ci legheranno per venti o trent'anni ancora, o forse più, a un modello energetico fossile da superare quanto prima.

Queste scelte appaiono schizofreniche nei riguardi degli obiettivi su clima ed energia che la stessa Unione si è data per il 2030 e il 2050 ed irresponsabili di fronte alla gravità degli ultimi dati sul clima dell'IPCC, un vero schiaffo in faccia alle generazioni future, verso le quali noi decisori politici di oggi abbiamo un'enorme responsabilità.

Riguardo al digitale, per quanto condividiamo con forza la necessità di un rafforzamento delle infrastrutture in Europa, nello stesso tempo riterrei che sarebbe opportuno ascoltare i sempre più numerosi ricercatori e medici a livello mondiale che ci stanno mettendo in guardia, con sempre crescente vigore, sui potenziali rischi per la salute umana e l'ambiente derivanti da un'esposizione e da una copertura diffusa, prolungata, continua e combinata di più tipi di onde elettromagnetiche, di alcune delle quali sappiamo poco o niente.

Eppure il principio di precauzione dovrebbe essere il pilastro delle politiche dell'Unione, ma non è stato inserito nel testo neanche in uno scarno considerando, quando, al contrario, la tutela della salute umana dovrebbe essere sempre e comunque la priorità assoluta di ogni legislatore.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Massimiliano Salini (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signora Commissaria, è imbarazzante e difficoltoso parlare nelle condizioni in cui ci troviamo in questo momento, con morti e feriti fuori dal Parlamento, ma credo sia giusta la decisione di non bloccare i lavori della democrazia, affinché sia dato un segnale chiaro contro la follia imperversante che oggi ha colpito Strasburgo e speriamo non colpisca più.

Un commento veloce, quindi: l'MCE è una grande opportunità e io, al contrario di quanto diceva legittimamente il collega italiano poco fa, esprimo tutta la mia soddisfazione per la decisione di investire fortemente su reti infrastrutturali strategiche di ogni genere.

Abbiamo deciso, come Unione europea, stiamo decidendo di dotare l'Unione europea di infrastrutture che ne garantiscano lo sviluppo. Magari il mio governo capisse questa lezione e capisse che senza infrastrutture e senza grandi opere la parola crescita diventa vuota di contenuto.

Le grandi operazioni che stiamo cercando di finanziare con questi finanziamenti sono operazioni che non servono la ricchezza ma aiutano la crescita e producono i loro principali effetti sulle fasce più deboli della società, perché solo grazie a uno sviluppo reale, e non raccontato, anche i più poveri avranno un'occasione da giocare e una possibilità, finalmente, di ripartire insieme all'intera comunità alla quale appartengono. Che piaccia o no, questa comunità si chiama Europa.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Przewodniczący. – Niektórzy koledzy mają wątpliwości, czy powinniśmy kontynuować obrady. Ja muszę powiedzieć o swojej młodości – przeżyłem kiedyś stan wojenny w moim kraju i mieliśmy wtedy takie hasło, że trzeba robić swoje. Trzeba robić to, co do nas należy, niezależnie od okoliczności, dlatego uważam, że powinniśmy te obrady kontynuować.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Miapetra Kumpula-Natri (S&D). – Mr President, it is a good decision to continue our democratic work together for a better Europe, despite this violent event that we all condemn in Strasbourg city.

I think that the money we are now seeking to invest is really improving the lives of citizens, it’s improving Europe and it is money that we need to invest in modern infrastructure – investing for the future, not for the past. What we need is digital infrastructure as well. Digital infrastructure means connecting Europeans and I will be happy if Parliament can include our proposal to add 5G, not only along the roads, as the Commission proposed, but also digital investment in 5G for so—called social hubs, schools, universities and hospitals around our continent.

Also this week, we hope to receive news from Katowice about the climate agreements at global level. And what can we do?

I travel there tomorrow as part of the European Parliament delegation, and I want to take with me the message from this House that we will support infrastructure for the next century and for clean energy solutions. We need interconnections for electricity and we also need to invest in renewables. We no longer need much for gas in the next century, so I really hope that we can improve the safety of the infrastructure networks, and also that we can really concentrate on, and invest our money in, renewables and then in electricity, in order to save our climate.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Karima Delli (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, il y a des moments où le débat politique, les débats politiques n’ont pas lieu d’être. Les citoyens de Strasbourg vivent en ce moment une situation dramatique alors que nous, nous sommes confinés dans le Parlement. Je ne peux que leur apporter mon soutien et leur souhaiter tout le courage possible. En ces moments particulièrement pénibles, j’aurais aimé que nous suspendions nos débats.

Mais je vais revenir sur le débat, parce que je sais que j’ai deux collègues, M. Pavel Telička et M. Marian-Jean Marinescu, qui ont fait un travail extraordinaire. C’est un texte majeur que nous votons, puisqu’il décide pour les dix ans à venir, jusqu’en 2027, comment l’Europe va financer ses infrastructures de transport. Les dix prochaines années seront cruciales pour la transition écologique et sociale, parce que nous n’avons plus le choix. Il faut rendre la mobilité bas carbone, propre et inclusive, aussi bien pour les banlieues que les zones rurales.

À ces défis de long terme, j’en ajoute un autre, c’est celui du Brexit. Nous sommes en grand danger, nous l’avons encore vu hier, avec le report du vote britannique. Le risque accidentel d’un no deal augmente.

J’en appelle donc à des mesures exceptionnelles sur les transports, pour renforcer les liaisons entre l’Irlande et le continent par tous les moyens – c’est cela la solidarité européenne –, pour accompagner les ports et les compagnies maritimes qui font du transmanche et enfin pour aider financièrement les territoires qui verront apparaître une nouvelle frontière extérieure.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Violeta Bulc, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honorable Members, let me first also condemn all the violence, especially in the light of the horrible events that have taken place in Strasbourg today. I would like to make sure that everybody hears that the EU will always stand up against such violence and protect democracy, which I dare to say that we have been able to develop at most in the world and we will continue to do so. I’d like to make a very strong statement that dialogue should always be our tool – to find solutions for differences no matter how big they are and no matter how painful the process of dialogue and negotiation is. This is what the EU stands for, and will continue to do so, regardless of the challenges that we have to face over and over again.

But let me now focus back on today’s debate. I am glad that Parliament has clearly confirmed its support for a reinforced CEF (Connecting Europe Facility) programme in the next programing period, and today’s discussion has confirmed that we agree on many of the aspects that will allow us to deliver.

This proposal is crucial to implement our ambition for Europe to complete the TEN-T network and move towards zero—fatality, zero—emission, zero—paper immobility solutions.

It is also an essential instrument to deliver the gigabyte infrastructure required for a smarter and more innovative Europe. The forthcoming vote will be a significant step for European social and territorial cohesion, the European single market, and for Europe’s global competitiveness, allowing a strong Connecting Europe Facility to address connectivity needs across the entire EU.

As regards the cohesion envelope, we have taken good note of the interesting compromise proposal tabled by the rapporteurs regarding Article 4(8). So far, the Council has not taken a final position on this specific subject. But let me stress one more time regarding the transfer: the experience of the transfer of the cohesion envelope to CEF during this financial period is extremely good. All national envelopes have been allocated in the first three years and projects have started on time and are well followed up. So we want to continue this – including the high co—funding rate proposed for the next MFF of 85% – to ensure that the entire TEN-T network is delivered by 2030, which is our common goal for already very clearly stated reasons.

So, once all positions are known and the Commission will favour a solution that ensures the best possible management of CEF cohesion envelopes, including through higher co-funding rates alongside increased competition amongst projects. And here, let me stress again that we are paying special attention to evaluation. We proposed a common approach for all programmes to be included in this common evaluation model. This will ensure compatibility and compliance with the better regulation agreement. We agree with close monitoring. We are already doing it largely and plan to improve it even further. But I would ask for cautious thinking before we call for a fully-fledged evaluation every two years because this might be too costly and disproportionate.

Let me add additional comments on the Multiannual programming. Our proposal allows for the adoption of multi-annual work programmes and our intention is that the first work programme covers two to three years in order to provide predictability for project promoters. However, requesting a detailed programming for seven years would be too rigid and adds additional steps in the implementation process which we believe might not be necessary.

So, let me conclude with saying that following the vote in plenary this week and the Council partial general approach adopted last week, the Commission will fulfil its role as a facilitator in the legislative process in order to quickly find an overall agreement on this proposal.

As a final remark, let me express once more my deep appreciation for the work you have done and your proposals. I am confident that the position adopted by the European Parliament with CEF is a solid basis for the negotiations with the Council and I really look forward to a positive vote on your report tomorrow.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Pavel Telička, Rapporteur. – Mr President, I listened carefully to the Commissioner and I think we will have plenty of opportunities to explain the logic of some of our proposals, because clearly there are points that the Commissioner has difficulty with. On the other hand, I would have difficulty with a response, but we will have a dialogue and I am sure we will sort it out.

I miss today some of our colleagues who have been very passionate in their contributions, those who have criticised the negotiations between the shadow rapporteurs and the rapporteur, or Mr Dalunde, who made a very passionate speech on the environmental and climate aspects. It’s a pity that we did not experience some of that passion during the shadow rapporteurs’ meeting. Some of us are more passionate in the debate in plenary, in front of the camera, and less passionate – or, in the case of some of our colleagues, less present – during the negotiations.

I have just a couple of brief remarks. First, on the climate issues: yes, we can always include, in every single provision, a question on, let’s say, climate proofing, or any other issue. But there is a clear—cut mention, it is there, it provides added value. What is not there is the definition of climate proofing, we are asking the Commission to look into the methodology and, of course, we will explore it. But is this legislation in which we should be defining, let’s say, climate proofing, which clearly belongs somewhere else? And there are numerous examples of such cases. I actually think we have gone quite a way towards meeting some of the expectations so that, even on the environment and climate issues, this is a very solid proposal that we have.

A final remark, on public procurement, just to give you an idea of something that we also looked at. We know that our companies have a problem of access to China, for example, so we have stipulated, in a clear provision, how we will treat, in tender procedures, offers in which, let’s say, there is more than 50% participation of origin from a different state – we know which state we are talking about – and what we should do. So it is a very complex proposal that we are offering.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Edouard Martin (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, j’interviens dans un débat qui n’est pas le mien, je n’avais pas prévu d’intervenir. Mes chers collègues, Madame la Commissaire, nous sommes à Strasbourg aujourd’hui, où des événements dramatiques sont en cours. Il y a un tireur fou dans les rues de Strasbourg, il y a deux morts et huit blessés, selon les dernières informations, et le tireur n’est toujours pas arrêté.

Je suis député de cette circonscription, je devais débattre plus tard sur le Fonds européen de la défense, et je peux vous assurer que je n’ai ni les pensées, ni le cœur aux débats. Mes pensées et mon cœur sont plutôt tournés vers les victimes, vers les forces de l’ordre qui essaient d’attraper ce terroriste, vers les Strasbourgeois.

Donc je souhaiterais que nous puissions arrêter les débats ce soir, parce qu’il y va aussi de l’image qu’on renvoie. Nous sommes à Strasbourg, je ne sais pas comment les Strasbourgeois vont réagir demain, lorsqu’ils vont savoir qu’ici au Parlement européen à Strasbourg, les débats ont continué comme si de rien n’était.

Je ne veux pas faire le donneur de leçons, je dis simplement que moi, à titre personnel, je me retire de ce débat pour ce soir et que ce serait quand même bien que nous marquions le coup, au vu des événements dramatiques qui sont en cours, ici à Strasbourg.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Przewodniczący. – Wyrażam Panu współczucie, jednak wydaje mi się – i taka jest chyba wola większości kolegów – że powinniśmy kontynuować tę debatę. Niestety, nie możemy pomóc ofiarom ani nie możemy pomóc siłom porządkowym w schwytaniu tego osobnika. Wszystko, co możemy zrobić jako posłowie –myślę, że Europejski Fundusz Obronny jest tematem na czasie – to zwiększyć obronność zarówno wewnętrzną, jak i zewnętrzną Europy i bronić demokracji.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Henna Virkkunen, esittelijä. – Arvoisa puhemies, keskustelun aluksi puhemies Tajani kävi nimenomaan kertomassa siitä, että olemme päättäneet jatkaa istuntoa ja työskentelyä normaalisti. Pidän sitä myös itse oikeana ratkaisuna. On tärkeää, että viranomaiset ja poliisi tekevät nyt omaa työtään, ja varmasti meidän ajatuksemme ja myötätuntomme on uhrien ja heidän omaistensa kanssa, mutta samaan aikaan on tärkeää, että jatkamme omaa demokraattista työtämme paremman Euroopan rakentamiseksi.

Haluan kiittää kaikkia kollegoita ja komissaaria hyvistä näkökulmista ja puheenvuoroista täällä istunnon aikana. Todellakin tämä CEF-ohjelma tulee olemaan aivan keskeisessä roolissa seuraavina vuosina, kun teemme sitä työtä, jolla pyrimme rakentamaan yhteistä digitaalista sisämarkkinaa Eurooppaan ja jolla pyrimme rakentamaan yhteistä energiaunionia. Ne molemmat edellyttävät, että meillä on erittäin toimivat ja hyvät yhteydet, jotta saamme tehokkaan sisämarkkinan aikaan. Totta kai myös liikenne, josta omat esittelijät täällä myöskin nostivat näkökulmia esiin.

Aika moni on kiinnittänyt täällä huomiota koheesiorahojen osuuteen. Se on erittäin iso ja merkittävä potti, 10 miljardia euroa. Komissio ehdottaa, että siirrettäisiin koheesiorahoja tähän Verkkojen Eurooppa -välineeseen, ja kuten komissaari Bulc totesi, se on erittäin hyvä myös koheesiomaiden kannalta, koska niillä on mahdollisuus saada korkeampaa rahoitusosuutta hankkeisiin tätä kautta.

Itse pidän tätä komission ehdotusta erittäin hyvänä samoin kuin sitä, että tuosta rahasta 30 prosenttia olisi kilpailtuna koheesiomaiden välillä, koska se mahdollistaisi, että voisimme todellakin rakentaa isoja merkittäviä eurooppalaisia liikennehankkeita ja huolehtia siitä, että veronmaksajien raha tulee mahdollisimman tehokkaasti käytetyksi. Tulemme äänestämään tästä huomenna, ja toivon, että saamme mandaatin parlamentilta edetä kohti neuvotteluja. Näissä isoissa hankkeissa on todella tärkeää, ettei meille tule mitään viivytyksiä, vaan pääsemme nopeassa tahdissa hyväksymään tämän ohjelman ja suunnittelemaan ja toimeenpanemaan sitä, koska kaikki viivytykset isoissa hankkeissa maksavat rahaa.

 
  
  

PŘEDSEDNICTVÍ: PAN PAVEL TELIČKA
místopředseda

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marian-Jean Marinescu, Rapporteur. – Mr President, I would like to thank the Commissioner for her intervention and especially that she is supporting the committee proposal regarding the spending of the cohesion money transferred from cohesion to the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF).

We are glad that there is already a general approach, a partial one but there is a text in the Council so we are ready to start the negotiations anytime in January. As you have seen, we are a strong team, together with the shadows here, so we shall negotiate very hard. I can tell you that we do not accept that part of the text of the CEF was introduced in the negotiating box, in the MFF. We are in co—decision, so we have to respect the Treaty. We shall try to negotiate all the text in our discussions and not wait for a decision of the European Council. This is the second time that the Council has tried this; six years ago they did it already, but this time I think that Parliament will be tougher than six years ago.

I hope that we shall get a mandate tomorrow. The result doesn’t matter but we shall have a mandate – I was speaking about the details – and again, we are ready to start negotiations in early January. Thank you again to all colleagues, to co—rapporteur Mr Telička and all the shadows, I think that we have done a very good job.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – Thank you. From a different seat, I would like to reciprocate.

Before closing the item, may I outline that we have already had two or three initiatives seeking postponement of the debate? I will not take any more points of order in this respect. By the way, we would need to have a high threshold to be able to place it and then to decide on it. So, regardless of what is going on outside, as tragic as it is, we will continue our business as usual and no points of order or comments will be taken by the Chair from now on.

The debate is closed.

The vote will take place on Wednesday, 12 December 2018.

Written statements (Rule 162)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Barbara Kappel (ENF), schriftlich. – Die Fazilität „Connecting Europe“ (CEF) ist ein wichtiges Finanzierungsinstrument der EU zur Förderung von Wachstum, Beschäftigung und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit durch gezielte Infrastrukturinvestitionen auf europäischer Ebene. Sie unterstützt die Entwicklung leistungsfähiger, nachhaltiger und effizient vernetzter transeuropäischer Netze in den Bereichen Verkehr, Energie und digitale Dienste. CEF-Investitionen helfen maßgeblich mit, die fehlenden Verbindungen in Europas Energie-, Transport- und digitalem Backbone herzustellen. Dabei kommen CEF-Investitionen den Menschen in allen Mitgliedstaaten zugute, da sie das Reisen einfacher und nachhaltiger machen, mithelfen, die Energiesicherheit in Europa zu erhöhen und das Portfolio erneuerbarer Energien erweitern sowie die grenzüberschreitende Interaktion zwischen öffentlichen Verwaltungen, Unternehmen und Bürgern erleichtern.

Neben Zuschüssen unterstützt CEF Projekte auch durch innovative Finanzierungsinstrumente wie Garantien und Anleihen. Diese Instrumente schaffen einen erheblichen Hebel bei der Verwendung von EU-Haushaltsmitteln und wirken als Katalysator für die Gewinnung zusätzlicher Finanzierungen vom privaten Sektor und von anderen Akteuren des öffentlichen Sektors. INEA ist seit Januar 2014 das Tor zur Finanzierung im Rahmen der CEF. INEA führt den Großteil des CEF-Programmbudgets aus, insgesamt 27,4 Mrd. EUR von 30,4 Mrd. EUR (22,4 Mrd. EUR für Verkehr, 4,7 Mrd. EUR für Energie und 0,3 Mrd. EUR für Telekommunikation).

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (PPE), na piśmie. – Kontynuacja instrumentu „Łącząc Europę” to doskonała wiadomość dla mieszkańców Polski, a przede wszystkim Podkarpacia – to doskonałe narzędzie rozwoju sieci transportowej, energetycznej i cyfrowej. Unia Europejska potrzebuje nowoczesnej i wydajnej infrastruktury przyczyniającej się do dalszej integracji Unii oraz lepszego komunikowania się przez obywateli i przedsiębiorstwa ze wszystkich krajów członkowskich i regionów. Sieci transeuropejskie i pełna współpraca transgraniczna mają zasadnicze znaczenie dla prawidłowego funkcjonowania jednolitego rynku. Do kompromisów zostały włączone wszystkie moje poprawki, co oznacza, że korytarz transportowy z Katowic przez Rzeszów zostanie przedłużony aż do przejścia granicznego z Ukrainą w Medyce. To nowe inwestycje i miejsca pracy, a także ważny szlak handlowy. Do rozporządzenia włączono także możliwość starania się o dofinansowanie przez lotniska regionalne, co jest istotną i dobrą innowacją. Będę głosować za przyjęciem sprawozdania w obecnej wersji.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Carolina Punset (ALDE), por escrito. – El Mecanismo MCE no es sólo transporte, un sector, por cierto, que genera más del 20 % de las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero y que causa casi medio millón de muertes prematuras en Europa por contaminación. El Mecanismo MCE es además energía. Por ello, la Comisión pretende gastar más 70 000 millones de euros en infraestructuras de gas y combustible fósil con emisiones equivalentes a la quema de gasolina, pero que más bien equivale a la quema carbón, dadas las fugas que se producen, siendo 80 veces más potente como gas de efecto invernadero que el propio CO2. Esto se contradice con la reciente Comunicación de la Comisión sobre la estrategia europea para alcanzar la neutralidad climática, donde la presencia del gas se minimiza en los escenarios planteados por la propia Comisión para alcanzar los objetivos de París. La Comisión se obstina en financiar millonarias infraestructuras de gas, cuando en sus propios escenarios reconoce que es una fuente que se dejará de utilizar.

 
Seneste opdatering: 22. maj 2019Juridisk meddelelse