Index 
Verbatim report of proceedings
PDF 4239k
Thursday, 12 May 2011 - Strasbourg OJ edition
1. Opening of the sitting
 2. Statement by the President
 3. Request for the waiver of parliamentary immunity: see Minutes
 4. Decisions concerning certain documents: see Minutes
 5. European fisheries sector crisis due to rise in oil prices (motions for resolutions tabled): see Minutes
 6. EU-Mauritania Fisheries Partnership Agreement (motions for resolutions tabled): see Minutes
 7. Public procurement (motions for resolutions tabled): see Minutes
 8. Documents received: see Minutes
 9. Report: Zver - Youth on the Move: – a framework for improving Europe's education and training systems - Report: Honeyball - Early years learning - Report: Schaake - Cultural dimensions of EU external actions - Report: Sanchez-Schmid - Unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries - Sarajevo as a European Capital of Culture in 2014 (debate)
 10. Statement by the President
 11. Cleanup in Europe and Let's do it World 2012 (written declaration)
 12. Voting time
  12.1. Youth on the Move: – a framework for improving Europe's education and training systems (A7-0169/2011, Milan Zver) (vote)
  12.2. Early years learning (A7-0099/2011, Mary Honeyball) (vote)
  12.3. EU-Mauritania Fisheries Partnership Agreement (vote)
  12.4. Public procurement (B7-0284/2011) (vote)
  12.5. European fisheries sector crisis due to rise in oil prices (vote)
  12.6. Small Business Act review (vote)
  12.7. Innovation Union: transforming Europe for a post-crisis world (A7-0162/2011, Judith A. Merkies) (vote)
  12.8. ILO Convention supplemented by a recommendation on domestic workers (vote)
  12.9. Antibiotic resistance (vote)
  12.10. Cultural dimensions of EU external actions (A7-0112/2011, Marietje Schaake) (vote)
  12.11. Unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries (A7-0143/2011, Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid) (vote)
  12.12. Sarajevo as a European Capital of Culture in 2014 (vote)
 13. Explanations of vote
 14. Corrections to votes and voting intentions: see Minutes
 15. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting: see Minutes
 16. Debates on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law(debate)
  16.1. Sri Lanka: follow-up of the UN report (debate)
  16.2. Azerbaijan (debate)
  16.3. Belarus (debate)
 17. Voting time
  17.1. Sri Lanka: follow-up of the UN report (B7-0324/2011)
  17.2. Azerbaijan (B7-0329/2011)
  17.3. Belarus (B7-0332/2011)
 18. Corrections to votes and voting intentions: see Minutes
 19. Written declarations included in the register (Rule 123): see Minutes
 20. Composition of committees and delegations: see Minutes
 21. Forwarding of texts adopted during the sitting: see Minutes
 22. Dates of forthcoming sittings: see Minutes
 23. Adjournment of the session
 ANNEX (Written answers)


  

IN THE CHAIR: MIGUEL ANGEL MARTÍNEZ MARTÍNEZ
Vice-President

 
1. Opening of the sitting
Video of the speeches
 

(The sitting was opened at 09:00)

 

2. Statement by the President
Video of the speeches
MPphoto
 

  President. – Given the tragedy that has struck the region of Murcia and specifically, the town of Lorca, I should like to express, on behalf of the Presidency, our solidarity with that community and with all the victims, several of whom have been killed. The President will convey, on behalf of Parliament, a message of solidarity and condolence to the victims and to the community affected.

 

3. Request for the waiver of parliamentary immunity: see Minutes
Video of the speeches

4. Decisions concerning certain documents: see Minutes

5. European fisheries sector crisis due to rise in oil prices (motions for resolutions tabled): see Minutes

6. EU-Mauritania Fisheries Partnership Agreement (motions for resolutions tabled): see Minutes

7. Public procurement (motions for resolutions tabled): see Minutes

8. Documents received: see Minutes

9. Report: Zver - Youth on the Move: – a framework for improving Europe's education and training systems - Report: Honeyball - Early years learning - Report: Schaake - Cultural dimensions of EU external actions - Report: Sanchez-Schmid - Unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries - Sarajevo as a European Capital of Culture in 2014 (debate)
Video of the speeches
MPphoto
 

  President. – The next item is the joint debate on:

- the report by Mr Zver, on behalf of the Committee on Culture and Education, on Youth on the Move – a framework for improving Europe’s education and training systems (2010/2307(INI)) (A7-0169/2011),

- the report by Mrs Honeyball, on behalf of the Committee on Culture and Education, on Early Years Learning in the European Union (2010/2159(INI)) (A7-0099/2011),

- the report by Mrs Schaake, on behalf of the Committee on Culture and Education, on the cultural dimensions of the EU’s external actions (2010/2161(INI)) (A7-0112/2011),

- the report by Mrs Sanchez-Schmid, on behalf of the Committee on Culture and Education, on unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries (2010/2156(INI)) (A7-0143/2011), and

- the oral question to the Commission on Sarajevo as a European Capital of Culture in 2014 by Mrs Pack, on behalf of the Committee on Culture and Education (O-000061/2011 - B7-0215/2011).

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Milan Zver, rapporteur. (SL) Mr President, first of all, may I say that, during the sitting this morning, we will see real evidence of the work of our Committee on Culture, Education and Young People. I am rapporteur for a dossier, a very important report on Youth on the Move, which is based on a communication from the European Commission. At this point, I would like to thank my colleagues for giving me the opportunity to prepare this report and I would also like to thank the European Commission, which has prepared this report and which has included the problems faced by young people amongst the fundamental priorities of the EU’s 10-year development plan.

When drawing up this report, I worked with many stakeholders, especially representatives of young people, both from Member States and the rest of Europe, for example, with the European Youth Forum. We have had quite a few meetings and conferences. I also worked with the Committee on the Regions and the Committee on Economic and Social Affairs, so the report is a product of many exchanges of opinion during the period of its preparation. I would also point out that, at the time when this report was being adopted, my fellow Members from other political groups showed quite a constructive stance. In that respect, I would like to thank the shadow rapporteurs, in particular, who have done a good job and, as a result, we have before us today the report in its present form.

I would like to point out that, according to various studies, young people who avail themselves of the opportunity to study or work abroad perform better in school, they are more successful and more competitive in terms of job hunting, and, moreover, in terms of their integration into society. However, politics alone cannot guarantee good schools, good education or good jobs for young people. What it can do, though, is create favourable conditions to help young people achieve these things. Those conditions are most certainly linked to the modernisation of school education systems. Europe, and Member States in particular, are facing the major challenge of improving, during this decade, vocational education and training, for example, and making it more attractive and improving its quality. The European economy very much needs vocational qualifications in the next decade. By as early as 2020, I estimate that as many as 50% of all jobs will require education and training of this kind. Therefore, vocational education and training remains one of the priorities of our policy, as well as of the policies of Member States.

However, continuing the reform of the Bologna Process is even more important. European universities should be even more in touch with the economy and society at large. European universities will become more competitive when they pay even greater attention to the needs of the market, the economy, and when they also manage to find additional sources of funding. It is a fact that, in Europe, we have too little funding for higher education. The European countries, Member States of the European Union, are underinvesting in students, and this is quite a big problem.

Obviously, as part of this priority, the European Union has also set other targets which must be achieved: to reduce the dropout rate, which, at 16%, is unreasonably high, so we need to reduce it to 10%. Similarly, we will need a more highly-educated labour force in this decade if Europe is to retain its competitive edge over other parts of the world.

Since my time is up, I will take two more minutes later, after the debate, to provide further information.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Mary Honeyball, rapporteur. – Mr President, I am very pleased indeed to have the opportunity to present my report on early years learning in the European Union, which is an extremely important aspect of education that we have not really given much attention to before now.

I would particularly like to thank Commissioner Vassiliou and her cabinet with whom we have worked very closely on this, and also the Hungarian Presidency, which had early years learning as one of its priorities. This has been a very fruitful partnership all round and has allowed us to do the work reflected in this report.

I would also like to thank all the shadows from the other political groups. We have worked extremely well, as Mr Zver said, on his report, and we adopted the early years learning report in committee unanimously, which just goes to show that there is support across the political spectrum for this.

We know why really: one of the main reasons is that early years are so important. Early years intervention can make all the difference to children’s life chances, not only as they go through the educational system, but also later on in life. The research which has been done, most of which I am afraid is not within the EU, shows that, if you give children support and what they need when they are young, it helps them in later life: it cuts down on crime, improves health and cuts down on unemployment, therefore benefiting all of us.

The children themselves will, in most instances, achieve better at school, they will get better grades, they will have high employment levels and better employment and their family relationships will be better – as will their health. So we have everything to do on this and it is all beneficial.

Within the EU, there are a variety of types of provision for early years and in my report, we have said that we want to respect and maintain that. Each Member State does it differently, because early years has grown up within their own systems. It is made even more complicated by the fact that the age when school children start statutory education also varies from Member State to Member State. So we have not been looking at a ‘one size fits all’ solution, but we have looked to establish values and principles and guidelines for Member States to develop a European framework of shared goals and shared values and shared entitlements.

So that is what this report is about: it is actually about setting the framework. In order to do that, we have, of course, started with the child. We have advocated a very child-centred approach to early years education and care, with the best interests of the child at the heart of this. We have drawn on research from around the world, and my report looks at the following issues: engagement with parents, which is very important for early years for young children; staff and the quality of services and qualifications required; and integrating early years services with the rest of the education systems in Member States. So we have covered these key areas, and these are what we should be focusing on in future.

Staff qualifications are extremely important and they are very lacking in this area. There seems to be a view that anyone can look after little children, while that is actually not the case. We need to think hard about qualifications, and qualifications which can be transferred and recognised across the EU. We also need to look at access, so that all of those who need early years education services can get hold of them.

I have finished my four minutes and I want to keep some time for the end of this debate, so I would just like to end by saying that in this time of austerity and times of economic difficulties, we must make sure that early years is still on the agenda and we still do what needs to be done in this important area.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marietje Schaake, rapporteur. – Mr President, before highlighting a few elements of this elaborate report on the role of culture in the EU’s external actions, I want to sincerely thank my colleagues from the Committee on Culture and Education for their constructive collaboration and for unanimously adopting our joint work in the committee vote. Of course, civil society and other stakeholders have also provided very helpful input.

Culture has intrinsic value in our liberal democracies. It enriches peoples’ lives. The EU is well known for its cultural diversity and, at the same time, it is a community of values which apply equally to each citizen. These European values, such as respect for human rights, democracy and fundamental freedoms, are also represented by our cultural products. Cultural identity, values and the EU’s position on the global stage are intertwined. European interests are served when cultural aspects are strategically devised through cooperation and partnership, both through cultural programmes and when cultural aspects form an integral part of economic, foreign and security and development policies. Through the sharing of literature, film, music and heritage, doors of understanding are opened and bridges between people are built.

The EU also has important experiences to share when it comes to overcoming conflict and building stability through shared interests and mutual understanding. In the development of the External Action Service it is important to mainstream and streamline the role culture has, and should have, in the EU’s external actions. It should be a vital and horizontally integrated element among the broad spectrum of external policies which make up the EU’s foreign policy, from trade relations to its enlargement and neighbourhood policy, and its development cooperation and common foreign and security policy.

Culture also has economic value. Europe’s cultural industries contribute to European entrepreneurship, innovation and business, and the EU’s diverse cultural landscape makes it the most attractive tourist destination in the world. Knowledge and international skills are crucial to education and employment, as indicated in the EU 2020 strategy, but culture can also be considered as a vehicle which helps to foster democratisation, freedom of expression, inclusion, development, education, reconciliation and much else.

This very wide variety of aspects of cultural relations vis-à-vis third countries has led to a fragmentation of policies, which needs to change to a more coordinated and coherent EU strategy. We have chosen to emphasise the organisational and policy frameworks that are needed for the optimal coordination of culture in the EU’s external actions. The filling in of such content should not be governed and regulated to too great an extent ‘from the top down’.

European citizens are best able to benefit if the EU acts as a global player on the world stage. This requires funds to be used more efficiently, and we have to be aware of Europe’s competitive position and the struggle to attract tourists, talent, artists, business and students. We must speak with one voice and be aware of the competition from cultural programmes by China and the United States, to name just two. But there is no need to reinvent the wheel. The EU has a number of best practices from the Member States, as well as from different cultural institutions such as the Alliance française and the British Council.

Another aspect that is very prominent in our 21st century is the ever-larger role played by the new technologies, both in culture and in international relations. People depend increasingly on the Internet for access to information and can only express themselves freely when this information, and their communications, are not censored. The right to cultural development and other fundamental rights is increasingly facilitated by these technologies. Access to cultural content happens through new media as well, and the opportunities for global connectivity around European cultural goods and content should be celebrated and facilitated, for example, through Europeana or websites of museums and festivals. It is important that the EU develop a strategy for Internet freedom. I will come back to some of the concrete recommendations of this report in the last part of my intervention.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Doris Pack, author.(DE) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, following on from Mrs Schaake, I would like to begin with a few words about the important report that she has drawn up. The cultural dimension of the EU’s external policy cannot be overestimated. We therefore need – as she has already said – a coherent EU strategy for culture within EU external policy.

Cultural diplomacy has an important role to play when it comes to building successful relations with third countries and, in many countries, there is a network of national institutes for culture, EUNIC, that we can make use of. There are many, many people who have linked in to the network and stand ready to help.

I am now pleased to turn to today’s second subject, which has also already been addressed by Mr Zver, namely, the subject of Youth on the Move, which, of course, is a flagship initiative of the Europe 2020 strategy. This flagship initiative is designed to encourage actors in the field of training and education to give more attention to these policy areas. We need better-qualified people. We need people who have experienced Europe thanks to improved mobility opportunities. We need to unlock the potential of our young people with the aid of our successful programmes. All of this has a major role to play in the competitiveness of a knowledge-based society.

When it comes to lifelong learning, our existing Comenius, Erasmus, Leonardo and Grundtvig programmes have given many people wonderful opportunities to discover Europe in its diversity, gain experience for themselves and improve their language skills. Moreover, in this context, the significance of the Youth in Action programme and of the European Voluntary Service should not be underestimated.

Today’s debate must also send a signal to the Commission that we must continue these popularly well-received programmes and opportunities in the next generation of education and youth programmes, too, and that they must be well funded in keeping with their significance. Every euro that we spend in this area repays the whole of society not that many years later.

I will now turn to another subject, namely Sarajevo. Sarajevo has a special place in European history and culture. By naming the city a European Capital of Culture in 2014, we could send an important signal for the multi-ethnic character of the city and the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which could also give the political class in that country cause to rethink their ideas. What is more, this is a city that makes it abundantly clear how badly Europe failed and how important it is to act together. There would be significant symbolism in such a step, as Sarajevo was the scene of the assassination that brought about the outbreak of the First World War in 1914. That is the reason for the date of 2014 – one hundred years after that historic event.

During the Bosnian war, between 1992 and 1996, Sarajevo suffered the longest siege of a capital city in modern warfare history. Allow me to remind you of one day in Sarajevo, 28 May 1992. The cellist, Vedran Smajovic, clad in black, was playing Tomaso Albinoni’s Adagio. His stage was the ruins of the devastated national library in Sarajevo; his audience consisted of a small group of people who had remained, despite the siege of the city, and who were listening to his music. For 22 days, he played in various locations in the ruins of Sarajevo. It was a requiem for the people who had been killed in those dark days. I was moved, and I was full of admiration for the brave and heartening behaviour of the cellist and his audience. What these people expressed through their behaviour, in the face of the horror and the loss, connected me forever with the city of Sarajevo.

The cultural life of the city has never stopped. The winter festival took place even under the most adverse of circumstances. People of all nationalities head there each year. Every year, there is a winter festival, a kids’ festival and a film festival. From Korea to Australia, Bulgaria to Sweden, film makers head to Sarajevo; co-productions take place. The city has retained an intercultural character, to which it tends – even as the political surroundings harden more and more into ethnic trenches. For that alone, this city deserves the chance to demonstrate its immense intercultural potential.

Sarajevo wants to apply for this title in connection with a derogation, and has already undertaken extensive preparations. We all know well that, if we adopt our proposal today, we will be asking for a derogation from the decision of the European Parliament and the Council. However, if this House were to demonstrate its backing for the candidacy of Sarajevo today, I would put my trust in the judiciousness and far-sightedness of the Council, as our arguments are actually irrefutable. Particularly at this point, Bosnia and Herzegovina and the city of Sarajevo need a sign that all is not lost and that Europe also supports their efforts.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid, rapporteur. (FR) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in our debate this morning, the issue is not simply about an economic model or a legal system. We are talking here about culture and civilisation.

What place does Europe want to give to culture? What influence do we want for our works and our creation? The digital revolution, linked to globalisation and growing trade, compels us to rethink our cultural and economic model. With the Internet and digital media, what do we want Europe to be moving towards? Politics is the art of anticipating, preparing what we would like so that we do not have to put up with what we do not want.

The American film maker James Cameron spent on his film ‘Avatar’ the equivalent of the European Union’s ‘culture’ programme for the 2007-2013 period. Will we be the consumers of cultural products that do not belong to us anymore, dependent on multinational oligopolies such as Google, iTunes, Amazon or Hollywood, without being able to defend our assets?

This morning, we are thinking about the challenges faced by culture in the globalised world of the 21st century. The European Commission, with the publication of its Green Paper last year, has at last taken stock of the potential of our creative and cultural industries. The European Union has a cultural heritage and cultural assets, as well as an extremely dynamic and lively film industry. The MEDIA programme is celebrating 20 years at the Cannes Festival this year and is supporting 20 of the competing films as well as festivals, performing arts and large exhibitions, which are taking place throughout the year and across Europe.

Furthermore, despite the recession, the sector of creative and cultural industries has been consistently making progress in the last decade. The figures speak for themselves. In 2003, this sector generated a turnover of EUR 654 billion. It contributed 2.6% of Community GDP and accounted for 3.1% of all jobs within the European Union, or 5.8 million people. In 2008, it already represented EUR 860 billion, 14 million jobs and nearly 7% of GDP. That is more than the automotive industry and the agri-food industry put together.

The dual nature of these industries, which are, at the same time, economic and cultural, makes them important levers for sustainable, intelligent and inclusive growth for Europe – in short, the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy. As well as being economic assets, they sustain and enrich cultural diversity. They contribute to social cohesion, to making regions attractive and to the European Union’s influence in the world. It is time to give impetus, at Community level, to a real momentum that would unlock their potential and stimulate their development.

Thus, I wanted to explore many lines of action to support the growth of these industries. These measures have several strands. Firstly, putting education and training at the heart of our strategy. On the one hand, Europe must encourage creative talents from a very young age, raise young people’s awareness of culture, and develop partnerships between universities and companies. On the other hand, it should enable those in the culture sector to be trained with regard to new technologies, entrepreneurship, and should stimulate the exchange of best practices and the transmission of know-how. Secondly, it is essential that we adapt copyright to the digital era. Indeed, the current procedure for acquiring copyright is too fragmented, too complicated.

The third vital component of our strategy should be the protection of creativeness. Intellectual property is a precious asset. Creativeness that is undermined is creativeness that is doomed to disappear. Creators’ mobility must be encouraged. The European Union must work to introduce a European status so that they can enjoy fair working conditions and social protection. It must facilitate the purchase, distribution and circulation of works, adapt taxation, for instance, with reduced VAT for cultural goods, and lastly, help with funding. Private investors are too often reluctant when it comes to funding SMEs. The opportunities offered by public funding, particularly the Structural Funds, are not fully exploited. Creativity and culture must be considered as crucial aspects in our policy and, in this respect, Europe owes it to itself to promote them.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, of course, you understand that I will take a bit longer than five minutes to reply to the five reports.

I would like to thank Mr Zver for his report on Youth on the Move. We really appreciate his efforts, as well as those of his co-rapporteurs, in dealing with this very important topic. As the report makes clear, the key objective of Youth on the Move is to help young people in Europe to gain the skills and experience they need to succeed in today’s increasingly internationalised knowledge-based economy.

Our goal is very much to create an environment in which every young person will be able to realise their potential. This is why the Commission has launched actions to support Member States in improving the quality and relevance of education and training from early childhood through to higher education. This is why we have set out measures to strengthen further the mobility opportunities available to young people and it is why my Commission colleague László Andor and I have placed so much emphasis on improving conditions for young people moving into the labour market.

To achieve this, as Mr Zver’s report makes so clear, sustained investment in education and training at all levels is necessary and, of course, Europe must play its part. That is why I am arguing so strongly for increased resources for the new generation of education, training and youth programmes for the period after 2013.

I want to take this opportunity to respond directly to two points in the report. Firstly, I would like to reassure you on our approach to improving the transparency of higher education systems. As the report argues, our ultimate goal is to improve the information available to prospective students and others on various aspects of institutions’ activities and performance. We want to develop a tool to overcome the shortcomings of existing university rankings by including a wider range of factors. We have no intention of publishing league tables of universities.

Secondly, in the light of the call in the report for steps to remove barriers to mobility, I would highlight the fact that a Council recommendation designed to encourage Member States to do precisely this is due to be adopted by the Council in the coming days. It will mark a further step in our ambition to extend mobility opportunities.

In conclusion on Youth on the Move, I would like to thank the rapporteur and the honourable Members once again for their support.

On the subject of early years learning, I would like to thank Ms Honeyball for her report and for the constructive approach she has taken to the issue of early childhood education and care. Education and care for young children, which are widely accessible, inclusive and of high quality, help first of all to reconcile family and working life. Secondly, they are the foundation for lifelong learning, social integration, personal development and employability later in life. Investing early is much more effective than intervening later.

The Commission therefore very much appreciates Parliament’s approach, focusing on the long-term benefit of investing in early years learning. The Commission shares the view expressed by Parliament that a more child-centred approach is needed. Besides the number of places available, we must also address the question of quality at European and national level. I am thinking, for example, of staffing and staff quality, the integration of care and education, and active engagement with parents, who are the first educators of their children. The Commission welcomes the call for more European research in the field and for more efficient use of the existing financial tools, such as the structural funds and the lifelong learning programmes. We also welcome the strong emphasis on the need to identify and exchange good practices at European level.

Turning to the Schaake report on the cultural dimensions of the EU’s external actions, I congratulate Ms Schaake for this excellent own-initiative document. It rightly underlines the role of culture not only as a bridge between peoples but also as a fundamental element in promoting our values in the world. At the same time, it calls for a more strategic approach to cultural cooperation between the EU and third countries. The report also makes interesting suggestions on how the European External Action Service could take up the challenge of developing truly European cultural diplomacy.

In this regard, Ms Schaake, I would mention two particular points in your report. Firstly, let me underline the relevance of your recommendation on a coherent and comprehensive strategy for cultural diplomacy at the level of the EU institutions. Secondly, let me refer to the idea of providing the European External Action Service with a real cultural diplomacy dimension. One of the aspects of this effort would be the establishment of cultural attachés in major capitals around the globe. The creation of such postings would allow increased coordination both between the present cultural attachés of Member States’ embassies and between those national institutes of culture with a local presence, particularly via the European Union National Institutes for Culture (EUNICs) network. I had the pleasure of meeting EUNICs in both China and Brazil recently and I heard from them how much they need cooperation and coordination in order to promote our culture in the countries where they serve.

As regards our emerging strategic partners around the globe, we have witnessed recently how culture can become an integral part of our external relations. I am more committed than ever to advancing further this very important dimension of our European agenda for culture.

I now come to the Sanchez-Schmid report on unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries. I would like to thank Parliament and, in particular, Ms Sanchez-Schmid, for this very good report. I am pleased to see that there is a strong convergence of views between your report and our analysis. We agree that the cultural and creative industries are a powerful motor not only for jobs, growth and export earnings, but also for social inclusion and cultural and linguistic diversity, as well as intercultural dialogue within the European Union and beyond. As you rightly say in the report, these industries have a vital contribution to make to the Europe 2020 strategy and must be given a more prominent place in the EU for the years to come.

We also share the view that their potential is not fully developed. If we want these industries to develop fully, we have to make progress on various fronts: skills adaptation and capacity building, access to funding, improving the business environment, support for cross-border circulation and new distribution models, maximising these industries’ potential for regional and local development, promoting their spillover effects in terms of innovation, and promoting a creative Europe on the world stage. This conclusion also emerges from the consultation launched by our Green Paper, which prompted reactions from 350 public authorities, the general public, civil society bodies and companies active in the field of culture across Europe.

I am pleased to see that our Green Paper has sparked, in Europe and within the European institutions, a very rich debate on the right environment to put in place to meet the specific needs of creating entrepreneurship in order to seize the new opportunities offered by globalisation, digitisation and cultural diversity. I am firmly convinced that our joint efforts will help to create a better environment in which these vital industries can play an important role in the discussions on EU funding mechanisms post-2013 and implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy.

Finally, I am very happy to see Parliament’s enthusiasm – and, in particular, that of my good friend Doris Pack – for the European capitals of culture and Sarajevo’s interest in holding the title. The Commission, of course, shares your view of the historic and cultural importance of Sarajevo. The city symbolises some of the darkest episodes in recent European history but also carries our hopes for a better future. In the face of repeated conflicts, Sarajevo has retained its multicultural spirit.

Let me say a few words about the rules governing the European capitals of culture. In 2006, Parliament and the Council adopted the decision on which the initiative is based. This legal text lays down all the rules concerning the selection of the cities, and you know better than I do that a decision of this nature can be changed only through a new initiative following the ordinary legislative procedure. The decision states that the initiative is open exclusively to the 27 Member States of the European Union. As an integral part of the decision, a chronological list indicates, for every year until 2019, the two Member States which are entitled to hold the title. Two cities have already been selected for 2014, and the Council is about to confirm the two cities for 2015.

The decision lays down the procedure for awarding the European capital of culture title, and the rules leave no scope for the Council to designate a city outside these procedures. The Commission is fully and solely responsible for implementing the decisions adopted by Parliament and Council. A derogation from the decision on the European capitals of culture in relation to a matter as fundamental as its geographical scope would simply break the rules that we have been asked to follow.

I believe it would be particularly difficult to justify an exception so soon after we have all agreed the rules of the initiative. Parliament and the Council adopted the current decision less than five years ago. That was the moment, surely, to make the case for the participation of non-Member States or to make provisions for exceptional cases. However, at that point, it was decided that the participation of non-Member States would not continue beyond 2010.

Looking to the future of the European capitals of culture, the Commission is currently working on renewal of the initiative beyond 2019. We launched a public consultation and are conducting an evaluation of the current scheme. We will then prepare a proposal, which we expect to adopt at the beginning of 2012. As part of our preparatory work, the Commission is exploring the idea of candidate countries joining the initiative after 2019. I would also inform you that a number of cities in other third countries have already shown an interest.

Allow me to finish by underlining once again how much I appreciate Sarajevo’s place in European history and its cultural significance. While the capitals of culture action is not available, the EU can offer other types of support for Sarajevo, in 2014 and beyond, through our cultural programme.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  William (The Earl of) Dartmouth, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on International Trade. – Mr President, I have abandoned my prepared text because I have to say something about the proposal to have EU cultural attachés. I could not believe I was hearing it: I have to say that this proposal from the Commission is one of the most bizarre and ludicrous ever to come out of a body which is celebrated for its bizarre and ludicrous proposals.

EU cultural attachés will simply mean more highly paid non-jobs for favoured EU civil servants paid for by the contributing countries. I have to also say that it is grossly insensitive of the Commission to make this ludicrous and expensive proposal for unnecessary cultural attachés at a time of universal economic hardship. Perhaps, for once, you will forget your own gold-plated salaries and gold-plated pensions and think of the reality of what these initiatives cost.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jutta Steinruck, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs.(DE) Mr President, let us get back on topic. As rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, I would like to thank everyone who worked on this report. In the committee, all the groups pursued the unanimous objective of making education and training possible for every young person in Europe and supporting their entry into a career, while no young person should fall by the wayside.

I did not base my opinion for the committee on the Commission report, as I found it too unspecific. It was important to me for very specific tasks, too, to be listed in the report. In some cases, I was unable to support the positions taken in the report.

In the view of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, one important aspect is the transition from school to career. It is a core interface. This transition must take place without time spent waiting around. We also found it important that young people’s entry into their careers should not be associated with social dumping and that it must not take place under conditions of dumping. We felt that the role of traineeships was important. They are important and they are necessary, but their abuse must be avoided and forbidden. We would like to see an initiative for a European qualifications framework laying down minimum standards for traineeships.

I will close with a request of Parliament and the Commission to ensure that the Youth in Action programme does not suffer financial cuts or even abolition in favour of the Youth on the Move programme. The work of youth associations is important for social engagement and helps young people progress, both in terms of substance and personally. That is also a major advantage for later working life.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Karima Delli, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs.(FR) Mr President, first of all, I shall deal with the cultural and creative industries. As rapporteur for the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, I wish to highlight the important role that culture and creativity play in the European economy and in reaching the targets of the Europe 2020 strategy, for a society based on knowledge and innovation, as well as the potential new jobs they represent.

In this report, particular attention is paid to the working conditions in the sector, in particular, irregular income and insecure working relations, which call for an in-depth debate in order to take account of specific aspects, for instance, by fighting against discrimination in terms of remuneration, and to improve the match between job held and level of qualification.

We want to make it easier for young people and the most vulnerable to access culture and creative content, and we want to encourage mobility and promote cultural diversity as well as the use and spread of free software and open standards.

Finally, we wish to stress the role of lifelong training in this sector, which is experiencing rapid changes. I now turn to the ‘Youth on the Move’ scheme. Things are tough for young Europeans: whether accessing employment, education, accommodation, social services, they undergo what is tantamount to the ordeals of a social initiation ceremony. We need to restore their confidence in the future by providing adapted and ambitious answers.

I welcome the fact that this text does not consider the inclusion of young people only through the lens of employment, but also through the lens of education and training. In this respect, I should like to stress the request, which I support, put to the European Commission, for a Green Paper on youth participation.

Our report also highlights the idea of mobility, which should be accessible to all, and I welcome that. Today, mobility essentially concerns students, but it should be encouraged for everyone, young workers and young people who are doing vocational training. It would be regrettable to categorise young Europeans as either an educated elite, multilingual and confident in the future, or as young people left behind on the grounds that they do not have a Masters degree or because they are only doing manual work.

I am especially delighted that in this text, we called for abolition of the discriminations linked to age, regarding access to the social protection scheme. I am asking for it here and, of course, I think that the minimum income scheme is a key element in guaranteeing young people’s autonomy.

Our report insists on the main desire of young people to be autonomous, to have access to healthcare in particular, and to have decent accommodation at a reasonable price. We all know that the young person who has no option but to work as well as study is heading towards failure in his/her studies.

Finally, I am delighted that, in this House, it has been recognised that work placements should no longer be jobs in disguise, fully-fledged jobs. Work placements must attract sufficient remuneration and social protection.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ivo Belet, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy. (NL) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I believe all of us are aware that we are facing very turbulent times in Europe, both economically and politically. Our solidarity is being threatened, as nationalist and populist movements are in the ascendant, as demonstrated by one of our British colleagues a moment ago, a member of the nobility, at that.

Ladies and gentlemen, the current trends pose a threat to the future of the EU and to the prosperity and well-being of Europeans. We have been elected to provide an answer to that. Commissioner, where necessary, that answer can and must also come from the cultural sector. We must definitely invest a lot more in the creation of a common European public space. Education, as has already been pointed out in this debate, could make a very important, if not crucial, contribution to that end. We firmly believe that we can make much better use of the cooperation between entrepreneurs in the cultural sector, on the one hand, and academia, both higher education – universities and higher education colleges – and secondary education, on the other, and that they offer a lot more opportunities than we are currently utilising.

Commissioner, you have just said it yourself: this is a sector with a major potential for our economy and employment, which is why we must take specific, stimulating measures, such as reducing the tax on online projects, because the current system, certainly the VAT rate, is out of step with the times and is absolutely unfair. Furthermore, entrepreneurs, managers of small and medium-sized enterprises in the creative sector, need better access to financing opportunities, because we currently have too little know-how and too little access to bank finance.

This report puts forward very specific proposals in that respect and, Commissioner, we are counting on both the Commission and the competent national and regional authorities to pick up the gauntlet and start implementing this proposal.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Oldřich Vlasák, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Regional Development. (CS) Mr President, the position of the cultural and creative industry forms part of the European strategy for innovation and the EU 2020 strategy, and is closely connected with measures aimed at the more effective use of monuments, museums and gallery collections, or urban and rural units in tourism and related activities. The digitisation of historical and cultural content represents the main opportunity in this regard. Digitisation should increase the access of the general public to materials that are essential for study, cognition and education, and strengthening cultural identity.

Investment in these areas brings an almost guaranteed return, not only in the area of tourism, which is surely a significant component of many regional economies, but also in foreign policy. It pays to develop awareness of the deep cultural traditions of European countries and, at the same time, to promote individual villages, towns, regions, Member States and the EU itself in a global context.

In the new programming period after 2013, we should therefore continue the funding of cultural projects from the European structural funds, strengthen the twinning programme for cooperation between local authorities and retain the independence of the community programme for projects in this area with the title of ‘Culture’.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Cecilia Wikström, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs.(SV) Mr President, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mrs Sanchez-Schmid, for her excellent work on this report. I am very pleased and very proud of the fact that the Committee on Legal Affairs submitted our opinion on which we were in total agreement and I find it gratifying that the majority of our views are included in your report. We look forward to broad support in this Chamber.

We are at a point in time when digital technology and the Internet are creating both huge opportunities and enormous challenges for Europe’s cultural and creative sectors. We must hold on to the foundation for defending intellectual property and, at the same time, take the necessary steps to be able to release the potential and creativity in modern technology. Europe’s cultural practitioners, technical innovators and, above all, Europe’s citizens deserve a well-functioning internal market, where creative content can flow freely and generously across our borders and where cultural practitioners are secure in the knowledge that they will receive remuneration for their work.

I would also like to thank the rapporteurs for including the proposal put forward by the Committee on Legal Affairs to provide increased access to books for those who are blind or sight-impaired. I hope that this will be able to help these people to an even greater degree to experience the pleasure and strength that literature provides. The freedom of speech must be available for everyone. Thank you.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – This brings us to the end of the round of speakers on behalf of the committees concerned, and I cannot resist the temptation to point something out.

In speeches such as these, delivered on behalf of the individual committees, it is my belief that the speaker must make an effort to represent the committee on behalf of which he or she is speaking.

There have been speeches in this debate which would have been perfectly legitimate if they had reflected the views of individuals, but which are totally inadequate when they are delivered on behalf of a committee which I am quite convinced has not felt represented by the words we have heard.

I believe this matter should be taken into consideration at least by Parliament’s Bureau, because we cannot allow some of the things we have heard here today to be said on behalf of committees representing so many members of Parliament.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marco Scurria, on behalf of the PPE Group.(IT) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would first of all like to thank, on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats), all the rapporteurs who presented reports this morning, as I believe that these reports allow us to lay the foundations for the Europe of the future. This morning, we are working on future generations, from children to our young people, whom we must guide into the world of work by means of the important flagship initiative entitled Youth on the Move. This morning, we are discussing expanding the Union towards the Balkans through culture, as well as developing cultural and creative industries.

At a time of great economic crisis, it is important to emphasise that the only sector not making a loss – in fact, its turnover is actually increasing – is the cultural sector. We would like culture to play a part in the external actions of the European Union, and not only, Lord Dartmouth and Mr Kuhn, through well paid officials, but rather by constructing a better process for peace, stability and understanding between different cultures.

Today, though, we must also seek to strengthen our programmes for culture, education and young people. For millions of Europeans, programmes such as Erasmus, Lifelong Learning, Comenius, Leonardo, Youth in Action, and many others besides, are not just labels but a symbol of the European Union’s existence. For many people, they mark the beginning of a European spirit, the first time they came into contact with colleagues and people their own age, really helping to strengthen the Union, and even more so given the new responsibilities for sport that the Union has assumed following the Treaty of Lisbon. We need to invest in all these programmes but, above all, we need to believe in them. Nobody is denying the importance of milk quotas, investment in industry and protecting the environment; but it is culture that will allow us to build Europe, and we will have to do this not with words, but with programmes and actions that we are able and willing to put into practice.

Mrs Vassiliou, the chords played by that violin in Sarajevo, the one Mrs Pack told us about, resonate more with our Europe than with a multitude of regulations. This is how Europe will be built, and at times it may even be necessary to bend those regulations a little.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Katarína Neveďalová, on behalf of the S&D Group. (SK) Mr President, I am delighted that the European Parliament has finally devoted one entire morning of its plenary session to culture and education. Education is one of the key issues in a time of crisis, and we must not forget that educated young people are our future.

I welcome the Commission’s Youth on the Move initiative and the fact that it has not forgotten about young people. Investing in education is the solution to the perennial problems of the EU, even in a time of belt-tightening. I would like to congratulate the European Parliament rapporteur for Youth on the Move, Mr Zver. I think his report is extremely good, particularly as it is the work of an entire committee sharing the common objective of benefiting young people.

The mobility of young people in the EU, and particularly the facilitation of this mobility, is important for European identity and European citizenship activities. As you all know, however, I was very critical of the original Commission initiative, and I would therefore like to emphasise several points which we have managed to include in this report.

It is surely important for us not to stop investing in mobility and youth programmes, such as the current Erasmus and Leonardo programmes, and the Youth in Action activities. This is surely one of the ways in which we can achieve the objectives we have set in our Europe 2020 strategy.

I also consider it very important to support lifelong learning and activities that are not just for young people. I would definitely like to emphasise equal opportunities for all, not only in terms of gender equality, but also for disabled or otherwise disadvantaged people. It is surely important to recognise informal education as another very important means for improving skills which young people can use in their future lives.

The dialogue between Member States and between regions is also very important, and I am delighted that we have managed to include a number of comments from the Committee of the Regions as well as other organisations, such as the European Youth Forum, for example.

There are so many of these that I could carry on speaking not just for two minutes but for 10 minutes, but I would like to end with one sentence. I would also be delighted to support – as one of the original authors – the initiative on Sarajevo, as it is very important for us to show the people of this region that the EU is here for them.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Hannu Takkula, on behalf of the ALDE Group. (FI) Mr President, I am pleased that this morning’s plenary is devoted to cultural matters: it is very important to speak about them, not just on one morning but more broadly. Nevertheless, it is good that we are dealing with these issues. It is something of a challenge to bundle all these reports together and give evaluations of them, but perhaps I can express a few views on them.

Concerning Mr Zver’s Youth on the Move initiative, it is very probably true that this mobility programme has proven to be a success story, and his report, to its credit, goes a lot deeper into the matter. I believe that it could lead to many success stories being documented in European history and on the subject of youth in the future. It is important to ensure that we have Europe­wide educational programmes in which young people can participate, and that multiculturalism can be strengthened as a result.

It is also very important to consider what Mrs Honeyball says in her report on early childhood education and care (ECEC). I would prefer to speak of early education and care rather than early years learning, as a person’s growth process is important. People must be allowed to grow, and education is just one part of that process. If we can bring our children and young people up to be good human beings and well­balanced members of society, that is a huge challenge. Obviously, the home has a crucial role here, but, as the report points out so well, it is also vital to ensure that those working in the ECEC field have a role to play and that there is a process of mediation, something which children and young people particularly need today.

Regarding Mrs Schaake’s report on the EU’s external actions, I think that we need a greater understanding of culture when we are laying down foreign policy. That is very important. There are many unfortunate examples of situations where ignorance of cultural backgrounds and the cultural context has led to failures in foreign policy, and that is why it is very important to make culture an integral part of the European External Action Service.

I would like to finish by saying that my opinion regarding the Sarajevo initiative, which Mrs Pack brought up today, is that it is quite true that five years ago decisions were taken on capitals of culture, but, as in science, a paradigm always has to be challenged anew. Now perhaps is the time to do so regarding this particular issue, to some extent at least, and try to find a solution where a change might be made with respect to Sarajevo. I believe that it could produce added value for the European Capital of Culture programme and the European Union as a whole.

To sum up, we should look at the bigger picture regarding cultural policy and try to understand its importance for the whole of the European Union. The internal market and foreign and security policy will not endure if there is no strong cultural base to support them. Culture is the basis of everything, the basis of the future for the European Union as a whole, and that is why it is important to ensure that it is acknowledged, not just in the light of GDP, but as a value in itself, both for people and societies, and, ultimately, for the entire European Union.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Emma McClarkin, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, in recent years, academic and political focus on culture and education has increased dramatically, with analysis consistently highlighting these areas to be crucial not only in encouraging economic growth and social cohesion, but also in facilitating mobility for young people across Europe. Unfortunately, in the current economic climate, with many Member States adopting austerity measures and budget reductions necessary to reduce deficits, these areas can often appear neglected and I wish this were not the case.

Investment in education and culture helps Member States to compete globally, equipping our young people for the challenges of tomorrow, and encourages creativity, innovation and mutual understanding. However, it is precisely in these areas where the Member States, rather than the EU as a whole, can act, and where they know how best to respond to the educational challenges they face. I am concerned with a number of aspects of the reports we have discussed this morning, especially regarding the intrusion on Member States’ subsidiarity in terms of educational targets and social policy. It is beyond the competence of the EU to dictate educational reforms to Member States, and we must ensure that this is respected.

In terms of culture, the EU can assist Member States in getting the best out of their policy priorities through exchanges of best practice and highlighting areas of importance, such as early years learning, the reduction of early school leaving and the promotion of vocational training. Another key to helping our young people secure opportunities is to allow flexibility in labour markets so that people can learn on the job. However, the arbitrary creation of new projects and organisations to facilitate these goals runs counter to the budgetary realities evident across the EU.

We must be mindful of this sad fact and try to deliver what we can for the real world that we face. Nonetheless, I am a great believer in the power of culture to ensure mutual understanding and to spur innovation and economic growth. We have a wealth of culture and creativity in Europe which needs to be fostered and developed. The creative industries add greatly to the EU’s economy and our cultural experiences. We need to give them the tools to continue their development and gain the rewards they deserve. It goes without saying that, the more we educate our young people across Europe, the more the future begins to look brighter in a challenging global environment.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Oriol Junqueras Vies, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group.(ES) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, as shadow rapporteur of the Youth on the Move report, and in view of the various amendments that have been tabled to the reports on the cultural and creative industries and on early years learning, I should like to share the following thought.

The economic crisis is being particularly harsh on young people. In many regions of the European Union, youth unemployment is above 40%. This is what makes an in-depth review of policies to get young people into work, such as the Youth on the Move report, so necessary.

I will focus on four – in my view – key aspects of the report.

Firstly, I believe it is of the utmost importance to promote mobility. It is an extremely valuable means of informal learning that favours cultural exchange and gives young people the tools they need to develop within a global professional environment.

Secondly, and in close relation to mobility, it is crucial that young people learn other European languages, for two purposes: to interact fluently in the European environment and to be fully integrated members of the communities where they live and work, or, in other words, for social cohesion.

Thirdly, I should like to stress the importance of policies to stimulate entrepreneurship. Indeed, it is essential to foster entrepreneurship programmes for university students. This will involve promoting forums where financial players and students with innovative ideas can interact.

Lastly, I believe it is vital to promote equal opportunities in access to university so that no fraction of European talent is wasted. We need young people to take an active part in the economy. We need young people to develop their full potential because they, too, have an essential role to play if we are to emerge from the crisis.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Rui Tavares, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group.(PT) Mr President, with only two minutes to talk about five reports and an oral question, I will restrict myself to two reports: the report by Mrs Sanchez-Schmid on creative industries, and the report by my colleague, Mrs Schaake, on the cultural dimensions of the EU’s external actions. I am doing this because, together, they give us the micro vision and the macro vision of what Europe needs in order to be able to turn this crisis around, with the help of the talent and imagination of Europeans.

In the case of the creative industries, I believe that it is very clear that Europe has probably the highest concentration of potential for the creative industries. This is true from the outset for our urban areas, our cities, which have, on the one hand, very good connectivity and, on the other, very strong and varied cultural personalities, with a great deal of diversity.

Some of our urban macro-regions also have elements that the creative industries need to be sustainable on their own: that is, intensive capital, a concentration of talent and knowledge, and a vast array of already established companies. We can see this, for example, in the region between Paris, London and Antwerp.

However, this is not true of the whole of Europe. In other words, in some peripheral regions of Europe, there is talent, there is history, and there are cities that could play a major role in relaunching the European economy, but they cannot get there without aid, whether at Union level or at Member State level.

Therefore, we cannot delude ourselves about this: until Europe puts its economic house in order, for example, by issuing bonds, nothing can be done. We are here in Parliament with very good ideas and, at the same time, the governments are tearing the euro to shreds and making recovery impossible.

As regards external action policy, and since I am already almost out of time, I should like to say that the European Union has a unique opportunity to develop a completely different type of foreign policy from those of the Member States. Moreover, culturally, this has nothing to do with creating a potential European identity and an illusory European identity, and subsequently exporting it or selling it overseas. Europe could, instead, position itself very well to use culture in external action as a two-way street, whereby we teach but also learn, and whereby we maintain fruitful dialogue with other great regional blocs such as Mercosur or the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

That is how best to benefit the rest of the world with the example of European democracy, but it also benefits the European Union, because we will be able to learn from others.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Giancarlo Scottà, on behalf of the EFD Group.(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to offer my contribution by stating the need for a new methodological approach, particularly in the heritage and cultural heritage sector, linked to the intelligent use of new technology. An awareness of the massive potential for improvement that new technologies can offer us, both in terms of efficiency and effectiveness, necessarily involves abandoning the ways we worked in the past. New technologies mean new working methods.

I myself have witnessed that by using technology intelligently in the monument protection sector, it is possible to obtain significant results, in terms of both the planning and restoration works. Additionally, as a simultaneous by-product, and without incurring additional costs, we can obtain highly accurate geometrical databases that can be used to monitor and manage the artefact in the event of natural disasters, as well as products for scientific education and for promoting the artefact on a global scale, fulfilling criteria for cultural understanding and exchange

What I think matters most is that we contribute to a plan of action, whose aim is to help us reach a new awareness of technology, so that new economic opportunities may be created for Europe. I believe especially in the need to train new people and in professional, young and highly qualified individuals, who are able to rise to the challenges posed by the new global market.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Dimitar Stoyanov (NI).(BG) Mr President, I will restrict what I have to say to the ‘Youth on the Move’ report.

I would like to congratulate the rapporteur because the report has managed to cover absolutely every aspect of this issue and this European policy. More specifically, I will restrict my speech to three issues.

Firstly, with regard to points 24 and 25 in the report concerning children staying at school and increasing their attendance at school, I would like to ask the following question. Incidentally, I also submitted a question to the Commission quite recently for a written reply. I am still waiting for this reply, but I am taking this opportunity to mention this problem which I have been raising for a long time. Many of the Eastern European countries from the last enlargement round face the problem that certain minority groups already follow a practice, which has almost turned into a tradition, where they stop their children going to school, who are then exploited by their parents. When measures are taken to change this process, these measures are usually described as discriminatory. This is why I am asking the question: whom are we discriminating against to be more precise? I wonder whether it is the parents, who are exploiting their children, or the children, who are losing, as a result, any opportunity to become integrated because they do not have any education, although, as you know, economic integration through work and resources provides a basis for any other integration.

Regarding point 27 of the report, this point again makes a very precise reference to a real problem. A leading university lecturer recently shared his view with me that, in actual fact, Bulgarian universities are not aware that there is also an Erasmus programme for teachers. Further measures need to be taken in this area.

Finally, on the subject of youth unemployment, which is mentioned under letters F and G of the report, this is also a significant problem. The problem to which I am referring is that when young people apply for a job, they already need to have had a traineeship. However, when someone has just left school or university, they cannot have already gained such work experience. Such a requirement is ridiculous and discriminatory and must be looked at closely. This is the procedure in both the public and private sectors. For that matter, one measure which can be taken in the public sector in particular is to impose strict rules for people to retire who have reached retirement age so as to free up jobs for young people.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Alajos Mészáros (PPE). (HU) Mr President, Commissioner, we have to thank Mrs Sanchez-Schmid for the report. EU institutions have set themselves the goal to take advantage more effectively of existing opportunities that lie within cultural and creative industries. This is an important task, because better industry terms would allow the EU to become a global market leader in this area.

Culture contributes to the fight against poverty and marginalisation, and plays a part in strengthening and preserving the common European spirit and heritage. By creating a clear path for creative thinking and the resulting ideas, we can all gain intellectual and economic advantages. Cultural and creative industries are already important motivators and influencers of the economy, even though their situation is not always favourable. While it is not possible to restrict creativity, it is possible to negatively influence people’s willingness to create. An uncertain entrepreneurial environment and an unfavourable legislative framework can dampen citizens’ creative spirit. We can rightly expect from a European strategy to help creative groups, which have been restricted until now, to express themselves on a European level. At the same time, it may promote a certain degree of opportunity balance amongst Member States, allowing us to experience the presence of an industry with five million workers, as well as the growth of their numbers in every Member State. In this area, we intend to assign an important role to small and medium-sized enterprises as well. Central Europe has a considerable number of bright citizens with a desire to create. The question is whether we can already provide everyone with the proper background today. Unfortunately, the answer is no, but an increasing number of targeted programmes have been set up to improve the situation, including, for instance, the Danube strategy.

This morning’s discussion also concerns youth. It is vital for future generations to receive from Europe full support in the areas of cultural learning, further education and artistic creation. We must find solutions that make artistic creation attractive within the European Union and, at the same time, secure a playing field in international competition.

In summary, it is of vital importance that we concern ourselves with cultural and creative industries, which is why we must create as soon as possible – for artists and creative minds alike – adequate conditions that take into consideration unique characteristics, in the areas of mobility, intellectual property rights and social protection.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Knut Fleckenstein (S&D).(DE) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, through its report on the cultural dimensions of the EU’s external actions, Parliament clarifies its aspiration to also put our own stamps on this developing policy field. The fact – and I want to put this carefully – that I do not see a representative of the External Action Service here today shows how necessary this report is.

The report quite rightly urges that, in future, cultural aspects should play a more significant role in external policy, into which they should be more systematically incorporated. For my group, it was important to call for a coherent strategy that more effectively coordinates existing EU external policy programmes with cultural components, thereby taking account of cultural diversity in the EU. Mrs Pack has already made reference to this, saying that the existing structures in the Member States and between them, such as the EUNIC network of national institutes for culture, must be incorporated and that civil society must be seen as part of European external cultural policy. The EU’s motto of ‘United in diversity’ should also come to bear on the image that the Union projects to the outside world. We should also make even better use of the new media as a communications platform to that end.

As we do all this, we need to make sure that art and culture do not become means to an end in external policy. It is our cultural values that characterise our European Community. It is therefore important and right that this cultural diversity and identity should also be disseminated outside the Union by its policies. I feel sure that we can achieve much more in this way, including in the debate about human rights and democracy, than through many cases of sabre-rattling, sometimes with absolutely nothing to back it up, in this House.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE).(DA) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we are in the middle of a fight, which is also reflected in the debate here today – a fight between the forces in Europe that want to weaken the European project and those of us who – in the midst of the crisis that we find ourselves in right now – want us to reef the sails and actually strengthen the European project. A great deal is currently being said about the economy and about integration and foreign policy, and that is clearly important, too. However, there is no doubt in my mind that if we are to preserve the European project and, in particular, if it is to find support among the people of Europe, who are currently sceptical about the whole idea, we need to invest in culture and we need to invest in young people. Therefore, I obviously very much welcome the debate here today and also the five reports that we are discussing.

I was shadow rapporteur for the report on Youth on the Move, and I would like to thank our rapporteur, Mr Zver, for his excellent cooperation. As time will not allow me to go into too much detail, I will just concentrate on two aspects. The first is the question of young people being able to move across borders. I believe that in this time of crisis, it is necessary for us to really focus, both politically and financially, on actually implementing and supporting this mobility for young people. Therefore, I am naturally very pleased that one of the things we are working on is strengthening what we are calling the European Qualifications Framework, in other words, the scheme that allows young people to use the points that they gain across borders. This is a small but tangible detail that it is important to promote so that young people do not experience problems in this regard.

Secondly, I would like to highlight what we are referring to as the Mobility Scoreboard, in which we indicate the barriers to mobility in the Member States. This is also something that I strongly support – I think it is a very good idea. These are just two specific examples that show that we are making progress and that the devil is in the detail. In specific terms, this is where we need to work to strengthen the opportunities for young people and, in so doing, invest in our young people. Finally, I would like to thank the rapporteur for his cooperation and to wish the Commissioner luck with the huge task – as I know – of making the other Commissioners in the Commission College aware of the importance of culture and young people.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR).(PL) Mr President, I would like to focus my attention on the cultural dimensions of external actions and the report drafted by Mrs Schaake. I would like to say that in several aspects, the report is worthy of support and congratulations. In paragraph 17, it condemns totalitarian regimes which use censorship. In paragraph 50, it objects to the use of cultural arguments to justify human rights violations, when we have problems with the exploitation of precisely this kind of supposed diversity in contacts with China, for example. It encourages the involvement of civil society in paragraph 39, and stresses the importance of democratic freedoms and fundamental human rights.

In all these areas, the report is worthy of support and praise. By the way, during the work of the Committee on Culture and Education, we were able to remove from the report the proposal to appoint a special EU ambassador solely for cultural affairs. These are the successes. Unfortunately, however, there are also matters which I would call problematic, which means that unfortunately, during the meetings of the Committee on Culture and Education, a change was made to the provision which said that this was about appointing a person who would be responsible only for cultural matters and nothing else. This is something to which attention should be called. The second thing – the report calls for additional training for European External Action Service staff in the fields of cultural and digital policies. In the Committee on Culture and Education, we did not want this provision to increase costs in this area, but unfortunately, that amendment fell. This is why my attitude to this report is simply one of ambivalence.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Malika Benarab-Attou (Verts/ALE).(FR) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the two reports by Mrs Schaake and Mrs Sanchez-Schmid remind us that culture is not a decoration motif but the fruit of complex interdependencies, showing that cultural questions should be addressed in a transverse manner and integrated into all European policies, internal as well as external, social as well as economic.

In this respect, I encourage you, Commissioner, to continue in this direction and to develop cooperation with the other committees, with the European Commission’s other services, as well as with Baroness Ashton’s European External Action Service.

Furthermore, I would like to come back to a point that has not been expanded on in these reports, concerning the mobility of artists and of professionals in the cultural sector. Indeed, this issue is of major importance for the emergence of a European cultural area. In this regard, two aspects seem to me to be important; namely, firstly, the dissemination by the European Union and Member States of clear and understandable information on regulations and procedures currently in force.

Secondly, the removal – as has already been said – of the regulatory and administrative barriers which impede the free movement, within the Schengen area, of those in the cultural sector, in particular, for third-country nationals, by introducing, for instance, common accelerated procedures within the European Union for short and long-term visas, as well as a single procedure for obtaining work permits in the Union. I strongly urge the Commission to continue its work in these areas.

Finally, in the context of a rise in power of a largely American global mainstream as regards cultural leisure, it is urgent to remind the European Union and Member States of the importance of providing themselves with tools enabling them to defend and promote the diversity of European cultures and of third countries. Therefore, Europe should reposition itself and not abandon the battle over soft power, since what is at stake here today is respect for cultural diversity as a tool for dialogue and as a guarantee of peace and stability worldwide.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marie-Christine Vergiat (GUE/NGL).(FR) Mr President, I would like to make a few general comments on all the debates that are being put to us this morning.

Unfortunately, issues relating to education and culture are not given enough importance in this Chamber. Yet they are vital for our future, the future of Europe, the future of our youth. The under 30s account for 20% of the European population, but unemployment of the under 24s has now reached nearly 21%, and almost 15% of 18-24s leave further or higher education before the end of the second cycle and do not follow any additional study or training. Worse, nearly 25% of young people under 15 have reading difficulties. We cannot accept these figures and, with the recession, they are getting worse in a number of Member States.

The ‘Youth on the Move’ report submitted to us is a step in the right direction on certain points and conveys a number of messages to the Commission and to Member States. The European Parliament reaffirms its will not to see our youth sacrificed on the altar of austerity policies implemented across Europe. Let us hope that these will not be empty words!

This report also contains a number of worrying aspects, particularly when it demonstrates the desire to reform higher education curricula solely on the basis of market requirements, without going to the trouble of reaffirming the more general role of higher education with respect to the overall training of tomorrow’s citizens.

We know that the broader young people’s training is, the better they can face life’s uncertainties, especially those uncertainties relating to work. Soon, we will have the opportunity to work on the issues involved in the Bologna process and I welcome that. All I would say is that our role is to listen to the growing worries – and the word is weak – in a number of States in relation to the reforms undertaken in the name of the Bologna process. We cannot sacrifice our youth; words are not enough in this regard.

I would like to add a few words to thank Mrs Honeyball for her report and the work we have been able to do on the issues around childcare. I fully support the guidelines of this report. Conversely, I cannot share the guidelines of Mrs Sanchez-Schmid’s report on cultural industries, since these guidelines would introduce a commercial rationale, subject to market forces, to cultural goods.

Finally, I would like to offer my resolute support to Mrs Pack for choosing Sarajevo as European capital of culture.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD). (LT) Mr President, I wanted to say a few words about the Youth on the Move initiative. This initiative has a very fine objective – to increase the education and training of youth through mobility and ease the transition of young people from education into the labour market. This is particularly important today for young people who are one of the social groups hit hardest by the global financial crisis. Young people must be supported to enter the labour market in order to secure their own futures, as well as contribute to economic growth and prosperity. It is vital for young people to be able to develop the competences, skills and knowledge that will allow them to actively contribute to the growth and sustainable future of the European Union over the coming years. I believe that it is essential to ensure that the education they are receiving is conducive with the needs of the labour market. It is also important to ensure that Europe’s young people are not deprived of the opportunity to develop themselves and to contribute to the prosperity of the European Union. Mobility does cause certain problems. Young people who have gained an education in another Member State most often stay and work there. Therefore, a country such as Lithuania, which faces a tough economic situation, risks losing, for some time, educated people, who are the basis for the country’s growth, and not just in an economic sense. True, this is our own internal problem and we will solve it ourselves. Generally speaking, it is excellent that we are trying today to address an issue that is very important for young people.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein (PPE).(DE) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, dear guests from Thuringia in the visitors’ gallery,

Mr President, to my colleague who is afraid of educated young people moving to another state, I would say that civilisation grows and develops when people move, and we ought not to be afraid of that. It happens wherever people from different countries meet and bring together their various experiences: the examples of this in Europe are very numerous and it is good that we have so much to say about mobility. This mobility will guarantee continued health and prosperity for Europe.

Mr Zver’s report draws attention to numerous barriers that act as disincentives to mobility in Europe, and I would like to highlight some of them. To take up what Mr Løkkegaard briefly mentioned, it is really not acceptable that young people who are studying, training or working abroad should encounter difficulties, when they move, with the most basic tasks such as accessing banking services or renting an apartment. What is more, they are penalised by roaming charges when they try to telephone home or access the Internet and search online for basic, necessary information. Data roaming is extremely expensive.

The Commission has proposed introducing a mobility scoreboard as part of the Youth on the Move initiative. This will permit systematic monitoring of Member States’ progress in dismantling barriers. The scoreboard should be comprehensive and straightforward so that it can serve as a real catalyst to Member States’ removing those obstacles. This would benefit both old and young, students and workers. I call on the Commission to present a detailed proposal on how this mobility scoreboard will be operated, and I hope it will do so as soon as possible.

In conclusion, mobility is a horizontal issue, and I therefore urge my colleagues, on the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, and also on other committees, not to lose sight of the mobility dimension in their work in all areas.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Silvia Costa (S&D).(IT) Mr President, in an ageing Europe that is struggling to find answers to the global challenges of the future, the European Union and its Member States must seize this strong stimulus from Parliament to demonstrate that they can be more courageous, investing in future generations, in education and in culture. With these four reports and the Sarajevo proposal, Parliament calls for these issues to be placed at the heart of the Europe 2020 strategy.

In particular, the economic advantages, as well as those in employment and innovation, are highlighted by the report on cultural and creative industries, which already account for almost 3% of Europe’s gross product and employ 5 million people – a figure which rises to 7% if ancillary industries are taken into account. As shadow rapporteur for this measure for the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists & Democrats in the European Parliament, I am pleased to see that the rapporteur, Mrs Sanchez-Schmid, has welcomed our amendments.

What did we propose? First of all, that cultural tourism and fashion should be added to the eight sectors already included. We also hope that the Commission – and I am sure that Mrs Vassiliou will take action to ensure this happens – will submit a White Paper on cultural and creative industries as soon as possible in order to strengthen this cross-sectoral strategy throughout Europe and the Member States. Cutting funds for culture and education at times of crisis – as my country is doing, on the grounds that culture is not essential to survival – means failing to invest in the future and in smart, inclusive growth; it means failing to understand that culture is essential for life.

The report states that the European status of artists and of those engaged in creative professions should be officially recognised, and that in cultural industry, small and medium-sized enterprises should be fully recognised as such for the purposes of access to credit and support when starting up, especially for young people under the age of 35. It also promises to protect jobs, and to introduce specific training and innovative financial instruments, bearing in mind that capital in the creative sector often consists of values that are intangible but nonetheless crucial for innovation in all sectors.

The Europe-wide cultural sector must be taken into consideration in the legal framework for international trade, certainly in the European dimension and in cultural diplomacy, in the internal market, in mobility …

(The President cut off the speaker)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Liam Aylward (ALDE). – Mr President, for strategies like Youth on the Move to be effective and deliver measurable results, there must be increased education and business cooperation. While I agree with the rapporteur that education should not only ensure employability but also encourage creativity, there is a need for a move towards integrating education and business objectives. University programmes must be brought closer to the demands of the labour market. Young people should be given the opportunity to acquire, without barriers, the experience, skills, knowledge and know-how to equip themselves for future career paths and entrepreneurship. In particular, it is necessary to improve opportunities for young people in vocational education and training to facilitate their mobility in the European Union and allow for apprenticeships abroad, thus expanding their skill set and employability.

Mobility programmes and the benefits of the experience of working and studying abroad must be accessible to all young people regardless of the type of education they have chosen. Youth on the Move has the potential to be successful, but it must also translate into concrete measures that will deliver benefits for our young people.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Kay Swinburne (ECR). – Mr President, my own constituency has a long history of combining the promotion of the Welsh language to the young generation with artistic and technical talents to produce animated programmes like Sally Mally, Super Ted and Sam Tân. Today, this past has been reinvigorated by new productions such as Dr Who and Torchwood, so that Wales is quickly becoming known as a centre for cultural excellence with regard to film and programme production, as well as being home to newer creative areas, like the hugely profitable gaming industry.

In order for this to continue, the most important thing we must now do is to provide the support that our creative industries need to continue to grow. We must focus on reducing the administrative hurdles that all small businesses face and look at ways to get real added value from the Single Market via cooperation on intellectual property rights, a European patent and realising the full potential of the Digital Agenda and, of course, eliminating inconsistencies in existing EU legislation, such as in the field of VAT.

Our EU budget should be used productively to develop the huge amount of creative energy around us into true wealth-creating businesses, providing sustainable jobs and a prosperous and rich future for our people in Wales and beyond.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Helga Trüpel (Verts/ALE). (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, in reality, we are holding a debate this morning about the significance of culture in the various policy areas – in foreign policy, in economic policy, in education policy and in social policy – and we all know that all of us benefit from culture being taken more seriously. The breaking out of democracy in the Arab countries would not be possible without this culturally-based desire for opening up, for cultural diversity, democracy and freedom of the press.

Creative industries are an important part of economic policy. In my home country, Germany, there are more jobs in the creative sector than in the automotive sector. That is something we must take note of. The result is that this is also an important part of the Europe 2020 strategy. The point I want to make, however, is that, if we want to bolster the creative industries, we have work to do, in particular, on digital development. We know that it is precisely the producers of creative content that form the base of the value chain for the cultural sector. On the one hand, therefore, we have a major interest in cultural diversity, bolstering creative people and easy access to creative content online. Yet, at the same time, we want artists to be fairly paid, something that is not always the case in today’s digital world. We therefore need to amend contract law in order to strengthen the bargaining position of our artists. We need to develop new social models in order to find a fair balance between easy access for users and proper payment for those who create new content.

I have one last point to make. It would be of major symbolic value and a major historic success for Europe if Sarajevo were to be a European Capital of Culture for 2014.

(The President cut off the speaker)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL). – Mr President, the report on Youth on the Move contains some good ideas, like the demand that the crisis must not be used as an excuse to cut education spending. However, the report accepts the Bologna Process, which has increased the stranglehold of big business and furthered the process of commodification of education.

The rapporteur referred to the fact that universities are underfunded, and therefore called for them to look for more funding from private sources. Surely the answer to underfunding is not to invite in the private sector with all the distorting effect that has on education, or to impose fees that block access to hundreds of thousands across Europe, but for state investment to provide free well-funded education at all levels. Furthermore, as a result of the brutal austerity, in many countries, it is virtually impossible for young people to get a decent job after finishing education. A quarter of young people in Ireland are now unemployed and 1 000 people emigrate every week, so for many Irish families, the very notion of Youth on the Move has a very different meaning. This unemployment crisis can only be solved on the basis of massive state investment to create decent jobs.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Derek Roland Clark (EFD). – Mr President, just when responsible people and governments are watching every penny, the Commission proposes more expense – Youth on the Move card, European skills passport, European Vacancy Monitor – through Europe 2020, all for cultural diplomacy and to get young people to travel when they do that already, backpacking their way round the world on their own initiative. What do we need expensive promotions for?

As for spreading European culture, well make the most of it, because the way this crazy EU is going, there will be none left, just a meaningless mantra: ‘United in Diversity’. Do you not understand that Europe is not a single state but a wide and glorious tapestry of attractive, distinctive but matching cultural panels, and to amalgamate them is to reduce them all to a grey amorphous mass, thereby destroying that which you say you admire?

Do not push EU culture; make Italian, German, French, Dutch, British and all the other cultures available for all who want to sample them, and the rest will follow.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marielle Gallo (PPE).(FR) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, since the digitisation of cultural and artistic assets, I believe that the question is the following: is Europe destined to become a land of consumption for the United States, and soon for emerging countries, or will it finally wake up and put resources towards developing its informational, cultural but also economic potential?

Naturally, I firmly believe in the richness and diversity of European culture, but I am talking today from a perspective of competitiveness to condemn a piece of nonsense and an absurdity. The piece of nonsense is free services that some people dream of, access to everything for nothing. If we were to go down that road, there would be no more investment in this sector. Creators and inventors would not be able to receive fair remuneration and they would gradually disappear. Therefore, the economic models that we are going to implement for the online movement of our cultural heritage exclude services that are free of charge.

The absurdity is the tax applied to dematerialised cultural assets from two aspects. First of all, there is a VAT distortion depending on the countries where the activity is based. For instance, American platforms have been enjoying a moratorium since 1998, which has led to their extraordinary boom. Secondly, there is a discrimination in VAT rates which penalises digital goods in relation to physical goods. I think that we need to address these two issues through legislation.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Maria Badia i Cutchet (S&D).(ES) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I also welcome the opportunity that the debate we are holding gives us, a debate about four reports that we are going to vote on at the end of this morning’s session. These are reports that I think deal with issues that are very important to address, to try to provide solutions to the central problems in the European Union; reports that deal with how to address early school leaving, youth unemployment, the economic crisis and migratory movements.

In this regard, firstly, I would like to make a brief comment about early childhood education. As Mrs Honeyball said, I believe it is one of the issues that has not been given the attention it deserves. We know – and every day we have more studies that confirm it – that it is during early childhood that the most intense development of our cognitive and emotional abilities takes place. For this reason, all the studies say that investing in the first years of life produces much better results than doing it later. I believe that it is time, beyond focusing on university studies or on professional training, as we have been doing, for us to concentrate on early childhood learning.

Another report that seems very important to me is Youth on the Move, one of the main aims of which is to address early school leaving. I believe that this issue is absolutely connected to youth unemployment, with the very high percentage of unemployment that we have in our Union. We must provide answers for the future of these young people, who are the future of the European Union.

To conclude, with regard to the report on the cultural dimensions of the EU’s external actions, I would like to highlight the importance of culture in our cooperation policies. It is important to create a better mutual understanding with third countries and, in these times of great upheaval to the south of our borders, I believe it makes a lot of sense to answer these questions.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marietje Schaake (ALDE). – Mr President, ‘if you want to know where hell is, ask the artist, and if you cannot find the artist, you know you are in hell’. I think this quote, which I found by an anonymous author in Sarajevo, summarises the importance of arts and culture not only for open societies but also for our relations with the rest of the world. Bosnia and Herzegovina, with Sarajevo as its capital, belongs to one of the black holes on the European map, and this is due to our history. Now, however, we have to look to the future.

The people of Sarajevo have come close to knowing hell, especially during the siege of that city, and arts and culture have helped people there to survive. The orchestra rehearsed while the city was being shelled, and the winter festival full of arts and culture continued. Sarajevo deserves a European spring. The next generation suffers from the wounds of history, and we have an important responsibility as Europeans to look to the future with them and to include them in the European horizon.

I fully support Ms Pack’s initiative and I want to ask Parliament to support it and to do everything we can to include Sarajevo as a European cultural capital. I believe that, if we all want this, it absolutely can be possible, because it would be very disappointing if our ideas and common sense were to be blocked by bureaucracy.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Paweł Robert Kowal (ECR).(PL) Mr President, the parts of Mrs Schaake’s report which speak about the need to increase the mobility of young people from European neighbouring countries are very important. While, on the one hand, it seems to me that over-involvement of the European Union in cultural activity in the Member States is not necessary, I think, on the other, that in view of what is happening today in Tunisia, but also in view of the events of two months ago in Belarus, it is important that the European Union, with its cultural message and its message about democracy and the rule of law, addresses itself to the young elite of neighbouring countries, and that money is found for youth exchanges, joint courses of study, travel, the establishment of universities and support for teaching programmes. Such programmes do exist in the Member States – at the Centre for East European Studies in the University of Warsaw in Poland, for example. This should be seen as an example, and it is to be welcomed that Mrs Schaake is pointing us in this direction today. Without this, we will not be able to achieve anything.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Heinz K. Becker (PPE).(DE) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, visitors in the gallery, it is a great honour for me, perhaps no longer as a youngster, but still as a new Member of this House, to be speaking here for the first time.

I would like to characterise the flagship Youth on the Move initiative, part of the Europe 2020 programme, as an excellent objective for the greatest possible improvement of the entry of young people into the labour market, with two main emphases. As well as early years education, it targets, firstly, the reduction of school drop-out rates and, secondly, increasing the number of graduates. As a result, to a not inconsiderable degree, of the setbacks caused by the economic crisis, but also, and above all, as a result of structural deficiencies in many – almost all – Member States in other areas, the Member States of the EU have completely different prerequisites.

Allow me to cite my own home country as an example: Austria has a school drop-out rate of just 8.7%, as compared to the EU average of around 14%, and it would certainly be worth examining Austria’s dual system of vocational training, which is supported by the social partners. Germany, too, is very successful in this area. Let us take that as the benchmark. Austria itself, however, should strive to achieve a benchmark when it comes to the unsatisfactory number of highly qualified graduates there. There are considerably higher numbers of qualified academics in other Member States, and we should study their systems. There is much that we can learn from each other in these areas.

The failures demonstrate very clearly that there is a need for action – we need to overcome the gulf between the education system and the labour market quickly and efficiently.

In closing, however, I would just like to offer my sincere thanks to Mrs Pack and to support her when I say that having Sarajevo as a European Capital of Culture is not a derogation, it is a must!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – Mr Becker, I did not want to cut you off as I know it is your first speech in this House and I wish to welcome you. I hope that in the future, the allotted time can be adhered to but, in any case, I wish you great success in your work as a Member among us.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Cătălin Sorin Ivan (S&D).(RO) Mr President, there are countries in the European Union which have a national unemployment rate of 20%, but a youth unemployment rate of 40%. It is not the case in just one country, but in very many countries, where the average youth unemployment rate is twice the average national level.

If we are talking about European integration or the future of these programmes and projects which we have in mind here, all these young people must feel European. All these young people must also find their future within the European Union’s borders. This is why I strongly feel that we ought to talk much more about providing young people with access to jobs and about the future these young people have in the European Union when we mention the ‘Youth on the Move’ programme.

I believe that the solutions we are providing to these issues are not good enough and that we should focus much greater attention on the way in which Member States implement the projects and programmes which we have in mind here. I believe that the European Commission’s role is to encourage more Member States to implement these programmes properly and meet young people’s needs.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ivo Vajgl (ALDE). (SL) Mr President, at a time when cultural differences between nations are leading bureaucrats to close borders – as most recently demonstrated by the Danes – and build high walls, they prefer to leave conflicts to be resolved with arms rather than with understanding and compassion. At a time when artistic achievements are becoming single-use goods and a major source of profit, when all-powerful global monopolies are being created, which are dictating trends and values, the report on the cultural dimension of our External Action Service and the cultural dimension of the European Union as a whole is more than just welcome.

The report talks us through the ways in which our common cultural image and the artistic achievements of small nations and Member States of the European Union in contact with the cultures of other nations can raise the standard of our public debate and even ease our diplomats’ and strategists’ burden in finding solutions to innumerable crises, at home and around us. By refusing to observe borders, new media and new technologies are opening up immense opportunities in the process. I would have liked the report to have devoted a word or two to books, to the idea, for example, that books should not be subject to taxation. We could speak of cultural management or about giving a new impetus to the one-time idea of Melina Mercouri for a European Capital of Culture. Ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, let us give Sarajevo a chance!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Valdemar Tomaševski (ECR).(PL) Mr President, the process of early childhood education is one of the most important duties both of parents and the state. In this context, it is important and appropriate that the resolution stresses the significance of the early teaching of regional and minority languages. Of particular importance is teaching using the mother tongue as the medium of instruction, because it is known that the language in which children think is also the one in which they more successfully assimilate knowledge. Therefore, it is unacceptable that in schools for indigenous national minorities, instruction in a language other than the mother tongue should be introduced from the first and second years, something which was recently decided by the Lithuanian Parliament. The compulsory introduction of bilingual instruction is understood unequivocally by the Poles who have lived in Lithuania for over seven centuries as discrimination which should be brought to an end.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Anna Záborská (PPE).(FR) Mr President, I am very sorry to hear the consequences of the earthquake in your country.

(SK) I would like to applaud the work of Mary Honeyball on the early years learning report. I can sense from the text the effort that has been made to overcome ideological prejudices and find a compromise across the political spectrum. This is right and proper, as it involves the family and the well-being of children. Parents have the main responsibility for raising and educating their children. This is also confirmed by the references made by the rapporteur to the articles of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The responsibility of parents is also mentioned in the General Declaration of Human Rights – parents have a preferential right to choose the type of education for their children.

I also share the belief that investment in education and in early years learning will bring a return in future prosperity. There is evidence that children already develop the foundations of responsibility, understanding and social behaviour in their early years. The report also emphasises that caring for young people is the best way to prevent future juvenile criminality. I go into these factors in greater depth in the report prepared on the contribution made to the fight against juvenile criminality by policies on gender equality and parental responsibility.

Just like the rapporteur, I, too, am opposed to artificially increasing the percentage of women on the labour market at any price. Many mothers would prefer to care for their young children rather than have formal employment. They do not have the freedom to choose, however, as society places little if any value on the work of women in the home and in caring for children. The submitted report contains no proposals for states to place a financial value on the work of mothers in raising and educating children, at least in proportion to the contributions states make to the running of pre-school facilities. The report as a whole is a step in the right direction, and future social developments will oblige us to pay more attention to this topic.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Chrysoula Paliadeli (S&D).(EL) Mr President, the ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative focuses on strengthening the mobility of young people, mainly for the purpose of employment. However, in times of economic crisis and when values are being questioned, the mobility of young people cannot be linked solely to preventing unemployment. With conservative trends threatening the unity of the European Union, and we heard some of them this morning, the mobility of young people can be used as an important instrument for strengthening European cohesion. The needs of the market should be taken into account as a secondary factor.

However, universities should maintain their independence and public character and their courses should retain their academic and research-based orientation. Higher education in the European Union should not be confined to reproducing models which created both the crisis and the loss of confidence. On the contrary, they should aim to create new standards of social cohesion and collectivity which the humanities and a European system of university classification based on them can develop in the right direction.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Sabine Verheyen (PPE). (DE) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, visitors, the cultural diversity of Europe is an important commodity that we need to preserve and even develop in future. In order to make that possible, we need to face the challenges of the digital age not only in the information and knowledge society, but also, above all, in the cultural and creative sector.

Cultural diversity is not just an ideal; it is also a significant economic factor. Around five million people in the European Union are employed in the cultural sector. That equates to around 2.5% of the total population. The cultural sector is a growth sector that is developing faster than many other areas in the economy. The development of information and communications technologies is driven just as much by the content offered by the cultural sector as the nature and quality of that content have been changed and developed through technology. We therefore need a framework for the cultural and creative sector within which it can develop sustainably in the face of the challenges of the digital age. We need a modern, accessible and legally certain system in which everyone can develop on an equal footing.

The cultural and creative sector is a driver for Europe. We therefore need to pay some attention to this area, including when it comes to education and training. We need to provide young people with cultural and creative skills – including within the scope of lifelong learning. However, we also need to improve the business skills of our creative artists and to give them a sound media grounding in new technologies.

We need to create a framework within which those engaged in the cultural sector can safeguard their livelihoods. We therefore need to work intensively on the issues of copyright, social security and intellectual property, but also on open access to information and content, in order to ensure the continued development of the creative and cultural sector in the future in a digital environment and in order to enable us to retain cultural diversity and the cultural heritage of Europe as a significant distinguishing feature of the European Union.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – Mrs Verheyen, during your speech, the interpreters indicated to me that they could not keep up with you. I did not interrupt you as it seemed to me difficult to do so and I apologise to the interpreters for this. I want to inform the Members that the system is changing so that instead of lighting the warning signal to the President, it will be lit for each of you when you are speaking. In this way, you can directly see that the interpretation teams cannot keep up with you.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Barbara Matera (PPE).(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, ‘Life is beautiful, my love. You look out on the world and it is already yours’. These first lines of a simple poem show how great life is, and remind us that we are responsible for the world we are building for our children. In the report presented, Mrs Honeyball offers a timely reminder that the future of our children is shaped right from the very first years of their life, years in which institutions must take on a key role if our children are to grow up as we wish.

I agree with all the points made by the report: it is important that the Member States and the Union should shoulder responsibility for measures to support children’s early learning, but they must claim a role that cannot be solely delegated to parents, or to those who work in the education sector. As I always maintain at meetings of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, parents living in poverty mean children raised in poverty. Children have the right to receive help and services from Member States and from the Union. If we are to overcome poverty, social exclusion and illiteracy, we must support our children from their first steps.

To this end, we must invest in care and education from the earliest childhood, and monitor the services provided and the proficiency of providers. All children must be able to access education, regardless of social background, and we must ensure that this opportunity is also available to the children of asylum seekers, refugees and all those who have permission, even if only temporary, to reside within the Union.

Mrs Honeyball emphasises research and the exchange of best practices, the wise use of Structural Funds and programmes such as Comenius, and, finally, the need for the States to reclaim their crucial role in the earliest years of children’s education, to ensure that objectives for smart, inclusive and sustainable growth are met.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Olga Sehnalová (S&D). (CS) Mr President, the report on early years learning is not and cannot be an attempt at the unified arrangement of this highly individual matter. I see it, however, as an important contribution to the debate on common European aims and values in pre-school education. The research in this area emphasises the significant role which pre-school care has for the healthy development of children and their further integration into society. It seems that pre-school education has a positive effect also on the further education of the child, and that investing in early years learning in the broadest sense of the word is more effective than any later intervention. It is therefore in our interest to support this type of education, also with a view to achieving, among other things, the objectives of the EU 2020 strategy and increasing the number of inhabitants with a high quality university education, while at the same time reducing the proportion of people who do not complete their studies. High quality pre-school education can bring us much closer to these objectives, perhaps more than we are willing to admit at the moment.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Roberta Angelilli (PPE).(IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, first of all, I would like to thank Mrs Honeyball for the work she has done. Ensuring that all children have access to education and support structures in their earliest childhood must become a right both for parents, especially for mothers, but, above all, for children themselves, because it means that they can lay solid foundations for their education, be supported in their social integration and personal development, and have a better chance of finding a job once they become adults.

More generally – as other fellow Members have reiterated – the Commission’s Communication on the EU strategy on the Rights of the Child states that, in 2009, more than 6 million young people dropped out of the school system, having barely completed lower secondary education and, of these, 17.4% did not go beyond primary school. These figures are worrying and lead one to think that the school and educational system is often neglected and does not receive the investment it needs.

Investing in the quality of education, right from the first years of life, represents not only an essential starting point for a child’s cognitive, sensory and motor development, but is also a prerequisite for building an inclusive society that offers a wealth of opportunities for future generations.

In addition, the improvement in the quality and number of nursery schools and structures for early childhood – as provided for in the objectives set out in the conclusions of the European Council meeting in Barcelona – allows working parents to balance home life and work. Unfortunately, however, the statistics show that many Member States still have a long way to go before they reach these objectives.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Nessa Childers (S&D). – Mr President, Youth on the Move contains many encouraging initiatives. These include, in particular, plans for a European student lending facility, the European Youth Guarantee, to ensure that young people are in either training or employment within four months of leaving school, and the recently announced Youth at Work plan, designed to build contacts between young people and businesses.

However, I feel obliged to urge a note of caution. In 2010, EU countries achieved just one out of five benchmarks set for education, and that does not augur well for Europe 2020. If Youth on the Move is to enjoy better success, its implementation and progress will have to be closely monitored on the ground and by Members of this House in our constituencies.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Piotr Borys (PPE).(PL) Mr President, today’s discussion is one of the most important and significant discussions to be held in the European Parliament. It concerns the entire culture and education sector, and, therefore, the foundation which permanently underpins our vast European home. We must remember this and attach enormous importance to this discussion, bearing in mind that not everything has been given us forever. We have to know that this huge European home, if it is to be a strong one, must have a strong foundation and be resistant to further potential crises and perhaps great changes which cannot be ruled out and may be waiting for us.

So I wanted to thank all the rapporteurs for these very good reports and, in particular, both Mr Zver and Mrs Honeyball, because for the first time, we are taking a comprehensive approach to education. We want to give outstanding and wide-ranging abilities to all our children, starting from the earliest years until they are in tertiary education. Today, if we want European society to be mobile and young people to be open, sensitive and competent, we should have a responsible approach to the whole area of education, and, after all, the indicators we have at present are alarmingly poor. One third of the citizens of Europe do not have any vocational qualifications.

As for the cultural dimension, I would like to thank the Commissioner for the information that the European External Action Service is going to have ambassadors and cultural attachés in all the countries of the world. I would like to thank Mrs Sanchez-Schmid, because support for culture means, above all, support for the business connected with culture, but, in particular, it means support for the inner aspect of culture. This is why cultural undertakings must have administrative support and need a reduction of bureaucracy in administrative systems, but they also need support with raising capital, which may also come from Union funds. We share this mission together, and this is why, as I close, I would like to ask the Commissioner to relate this serious and important discussion to the Council, which is absent today, so that in the forum of the Council, too, it will be possible to discuss these important tasks for Europe.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Monika Smolková (S&D). (SK) Mr President, as the shadow rapporteur in the Committee on Regional Development for the report on unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries, I consider it important that the cultural and creative industries have been recognised as an instrument for local and regional development. Plenty of regions are still lagging behind – for reasons that include the financial crisis – and cultural and creative projects will certainly help towards creating jobs and making these regions competitive.

It is important for Member States, regions and local authorities to make the best possible use of EU programmes supporting culture and creativity, political cohesion, structural policy and others. The definition of the funding options is important for the cultural and creative industries. Funding is the greatest obstacle to growth for many businesses. It is therefore also important for private capital and public/private partnerships to be brought into culture and the creative industries, as the rapporteur requests, and to emphasise the importance of sponsorship. I support the motion for a resolution.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Seán Kelly (PPE).(GA) Mr President, it is great that we are discussing this important matter this morning and it shows how serious we are about cultural and educational matters.

Culture and education are intrinsically valuable in themselves. Both have a huge part to play in creating a united Europe and in the development of our economies as we move forward. The initiatives we are discussing here this morning would facilitate that.

Youth on the Move is a wonderful initiative. Many have benefited from it already and will do so into the future, but one thing is vital and that is that there is mutual recognition in all Member States of qualifications and diplomas. This would facilitate greater movement, but also raise the standard in each of the institutions.

I also have to say – mea culpa – that I am a late convert to early childhood education. Like many, I thought it was basically a babysitting service, but now I know that it is the best investment and it gives the best return for investment in education at any level. Certainly it reflects an old Irish saying, ‘well begun is half done’, and it can be done at early childhood level.

I also want to emphasise the importance of intellectual property rights (IPR), in particular, for actors. Many of them are living on the breadline and they deserve to benefit from their genius and this certainly can be done by protecting the IPR online and offline environments.

I also want to put on my sporting hat and say that sport is a very important part of culture and education as well. I have called for an indigenous festival of sport in Europe. If we do that, then we can contribute greatly to sport as part of our culture.

My last point is that I visited Mannheim last year. There, under the one roof, was a music school which involved production, performance, education, the creation of instruments, etc. This is something that could be emulated in other places.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Enrique Guerrero Salom (S&D).(ES) Mr President, allow me to join in the words of support for the residents of Lorca, in Spain, that have been affected by this natural disaster. It is a land that has demonstrated its support many times and it will be able to appreciate the support shown by the European Parliament today.

Commissioner, in 1989, the then President of the Commission, Jacques Delors, stated that education and culture should be the soul of Europe. We now know that it is not only the soul, but the heart and muscles of Europe. Without equal opportunities, which improve the opportunities of all children and all young Europeans, without social cohesion, which provides education, without the ability to compete, which contributes to the spread of knowledge among all citizens, the European Union will be weak. However, with all of that and culture, it will have the place it deserves in the world.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Emine Bozkurt (S&D). – Mr President, in 2014, it will be 100 years since the murder of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, which triggered the start of the First World War. It was also in Bosnia and Herzegovina that we had a bloody war in Europe in the 1990s. It is important to mark those tragic events, which led to many deaths, suffering, division and horrors, but it is even more important to mark and celebrate European unity and peace today.

Sarajevo is a city which, despite everything that happened, has maintained its multicultural spirit and strength. In order to recognise this, it would be a strong symbolic gesture to name Sarajevo European Capital of Culture 2014, to reaffirm Europe’s message of peace and stability. It is a pity to miss out on this historic momentum by turning to the rules. It is only when we deal with our past, when we recognise and face history, that we can look openly to the future, so please give Sarajevo this possibility.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Kinga Göncz (S&D).(HU) Mr President, for an ageing Europe, it is vital that all young people make the most of their talents and succeed in the labour market later on This requires an education that, already in early childhood, aims to balance the disparity of opportunities; one that pays special attention to providing education, professional training, and employment advantages to every young person, irrespective of their financial situation, social and ethnic background, and disabilities or perhaps other health problems.

The 2020 strategy aims to raise the level of tertiary education to 40% and to reduce the share of early school leavers to 10%. To achieve this goal, every Member State must aim to go in this direction. There are places where nowadays, we see exactly opposing tendencies: a decrease in the age limit for compulsory education and a reduction in the number of state-funded higher education places.

Europe’s future sustainable growth and innovative capacity can be guaranteed only if everyone contributes their own efforts, and if every country travels along the same path.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE).(ES) Mr President, I, too, of course, would like to add my support for the residents of Lorca.

In this debate about education, I want to reiterate an important point: the need to include in secondary school studies a specific subject covering the history, aims and workings of the European Union.

I have already talked about this issue in the last term, in plenary, after the failure of Constitutional Treaty referenda. Fortunately, last year in this House, the Løkkegaard report on journalism and new media, approved in September, supported the introduction of this subject in paragraph 13. I myself submitted an amendment in this regard.

Recently in Spain, the Valencia regional government decided to include a subject for the next academic year. It is an initiative that other regions and countries should follow. I understand that the Commission, of course, supports and welcomes initiatives of this type.

Ladies and gentlemen, we only value, we only appreciate …

(The President cut off the speaker)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Wojciech Michał Olejniczak (S&D).(PL) Mr President, Youth on the Move is one of the most important initiatives of the Europe 2020 strategy. We must promote economic growth based on modern technologies, which can only be created by educated people. We must give the right support to children and young people. Foreign language instruction, sports and cultural activities, voluntary work and youth exchanges – these are programmes which should be accessible to children and young people in all regions of the European Union.

We must bring about an improvement in educational standards and reduce disparities – at all levels of education, from nursery to university – in every region of the European Union. In the opinion of Professor Jacek Kochanowicz, a lack of the ability to cooperate is one of the greatest problems for the development of Poland and the European Union – we must change this, too. Human capital comes from education, and social capital comes from trust between people. Investing in educational and cultural programmes ...

(The President cut off the speaker)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL).(PT) Mr President, first of all, we should look at the context in which we are having this debate. We need to compare the fine words we are hearing here on the importance of culture and education with the reality. The irrefutable reality is of a sharp divestment in these areas; a retreat of the state that threatens its social role and has the result of exacerbating inequalities in access to education, to knowledge and to culture. The result is the multiplication and deepening of social inequalities.

The reality in Member States such as Portugal is the closure of thousands of schools, thousands of teachers being without a job or a secure job, and the chronic underfunding of the state higher-education system and the increased cost of attending it. The reality is that budgets for culture are being slashed to penury levels.

Let us not, therefore, ignore this reality that investment is urgently needed: all the more so if the shameful and obscurantist intervention plan drawn up by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the European Central Bank (ECB) and European Commission is implemented.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD). (EL) Mr President, I should like to express my sympathy with your compatriots; we look on Spain as a friend and sympathise whenever anything happens there. The ‘Youth on the Move’ report is one of the most important initiatives included in the EU 2020 strategy for promoting and providing more opportunities for education and training for young people and helping them to make the transition from education to the labour market. Education, lifelong learning, innovation and culture certainly lead to progress. There is a Greek proverb which says that heads make capital, not the other way round, which is why we must identify, highlight and develop the skills and abilities of our young people, which we can do if we ensure that they can find employment in keeping with their qualifications and skills.

(The President cut off the speaker)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Andrew Henry William Brons (NI). – Mr President, these reports are at best bestrewn with paradoxes and at worst are full of hypocrisy.

They talk approvingly of diversity, but welcome the eradication of diversity between nations. The diversity that they promote within Member States involves the promotion of the cultures of recent arrivals, which are anything but European. As populations change, so will their cultures. Indigenous cultures will be displaced and lost. They talk about freedom of expression but are only convincing when they express their intolerance of those with whom they disagree.

They want to promote only cultural values of which they approve; those consistent with so-called ‘European’ values. In the political sphere, we saw on Tuesday this Parliament’s attitude to freedom of expression when it voted to hand over a Member of this House for a show trial in France for a thought-crime offence, without even being given the opportunity to defend himself.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Damien Abad (PPE).(FR) Mr President, the present situation of young people in Europe is very worrying – as you are aware – since there are five million young people out of work.

Today, I am delighted with the European Commission’s ambition to want to democratise young people’s access in Europe. However, I believe that we have to go beyond this ‘Youth on the Move’ programme and, above all, avoid the trap of wanting every young person to go to university. We need to be relevant to all groups of young people, including those who are the furthest removed from the European Union and especially, of course, apprentices. It is with this in mind, I believe, that we should urgently introduce a genuine mobility programme for these target groups, in addition to the Leonardo programme. I think that the Erasmus name, the Erasmus hallmark, should be used for all the programmes and in a variety of forms, in particular, for apprentices, so that we have the necessary ambitions to achieve our aims.

The second issue is that of funding. We must put in the resources because, as many of you have pointed out, youth and education should be the top priority for the Union’s future.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D).(PT) Mr President, this is an opportunity for an extraordinary commitment to the social mobility of young people and a decisive commitment to training a generation with an open worldview; a generation with skills that, because it has global vision and thinking, is capable of contributing to its regions’ development and to Europe’s progress. This is because, if all young Europeans have the experience of study, of a work placement or of employment in a different country, they will not just acquire more skills, greater independence and better vision, but they will, above all, gain enormous added value from contact with other young Europeans and exchanging experiences with them.

More than ever, Europe needs a generation of Europeans who know and trust each other, and who know and trust Europe, in order to carry the project forward. Therefore, allow everyone from Fajã Grande in the Azores, Europe’s westernmost point, to participate. We must ensure that no one be left out for financial reasons.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jaroslav Paška (EFD). (SK) Mr President, the report on early years learning includes a mention of the work experience approach to education for children from poorer families. Of these, the rapporteur identifies children from Roma families, who have very little access to early years learning, as the most at-risk group.

It is therefore very important for Member States to create specific conditions for access to early years learning for children whose families do not, for various reasons, provide them with the sort of material and family support that would enable them to take part in the standard education system without major problems. Special care for children from the more at-risk groups, however, must be provided in a very sensitive way, in order to avoid stigmatising these children or families, which might increase the risk of their social exclusion.

We must therefore systematically modify and improve the special care mechanisms for these children, so that we can successfully integrate as many children as possible from at-risk groups into our society.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Franz Obermayr (NI).(DE) Mr President, the first three years of a child’s life are crucial for the development of the brain and for language learning. Without a certain level of language acquisition, further learning is scarcely possible, as the language deficits can only be overcome with great difficulty with increasing age.

The report observes that most immigrant children in the EU are educated without adequate linguistic knowledge. At the same time, it declares that migrant families and minorities such as the Roma make much less use of the early years education offered than other families. We cannot allow it to be the case that the level of our schools continues to fall and fall because so many children quite simply cannot understand the teaching. In other words, every child – migrant or not – must have mastered the national language by the time they enter school to a degree that enables them to follow the teaching taking place there.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE).(PL) Mr President, the work on creating a European early years learning framework based on shared goals and values points us in the right direction for the harmonisation of our education systems. Stressing the importance of the first years of life in a person’s subsequent development and emphasising the potential inherent in early childhood is extremely important in the context of implementation of the 2020 strategy. To my mind, the subject we are discussing is exceptionally relevant to the current situation. In my country, a new law entered into force last month on forms of care for children up to three years old. The new law extends the range of childcare facilities and introduces several new forms of care: children’s clubs, day carers, legal nannies and workplace nurseries. These changes are meant to create favourable conditions for the proper development of children. The variety of educational possibilities allows this development to be assisted and stimulated in all areas while making use of the child’s own natural potential. Opening workplace nurseries will make it easier for parents to return to the labour market after a longer break.

(The President cut off the speaker)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Evelyn Regner (S&D). – Mr President, when referring to Youth on the Move, we are talking about money, but first of all we are talking about the future. Innovation, creativity, employability are topics that are really important for all of us in the European Union. It is good that the Commission has focused on this crucial moment of entering into the labour market, which is exactly what I would like to focus on too. Young people are confronted with the sad reality, with the bad working conditions of internships today, even with exploitation. And, of course, there is the stigma, when entering into the labour market, of wondering ‘am I really needed?’ when there are such high unemployment rates.

That really is my huge topic right now, so I urge the Commissioner to please keep on track and focus also on the future, to create something like a statute for internships which establishes rules against exploitation ...

(The President cut off the speaker)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I would like to start by expressing the Commission’s sympathy for, and solidarity with, the people of Lorca and its neighbourhood. As a child, I experienced a very strong earthquake in my home city, and I know how horrible the experience is.

As Europeans, we should not be satisfied with the situation of the European education system. We cannot accept that one in seven of our young people leaves school without the skills and qualifications that he or she needs in order to find employment and have a fulfilling life. Nor do I accept that one in five of our young children cannot read properly.

We have to really give our full attention to our education systems. We have to strengthen them by strengthening our mobility programmes, because through mobility, young children, students, workers and volunteers get the transversal skills that they cannot get through formal education. I think that cutting our budgets on education is a very short-sighted policy. Once again, I plead with the Member States and governments not to do that, especially in times of crisis, because this will have very negative repercussions in the future. We must work together to ensure that, in the next multiannual financial framework, the provision for education and mobility is higher than at present, because that is what we need in order to exit the crisis and give meaning to our people.

One honourable Member made a reference to subsidiarity. Let me assure you that all our policies and all our recommendations on education and culture fully recognise, and comply with, subsidiarity rules. We do not dictate to Member States. We simply make recommendations to Member States. We give them the platform to work together to exchange good practices and to learn from each other.

Cultural and creative industries are important – as many of you have mentioned – as a motor for development and for job creation. However, let us also remember that these creative and cultural industries have a value per se. Creativity and culture are values of the European Union which we have strengthened and have to maintain. After analysing the input that we have received on this topic from all the stakeholders, and following the public consultation with the stakeholders, we are about to put forward recommendations on how we should strengthen and support cultural and creative industries in order to develop and produce the results that we expect them to.

Regarding the external dimension of culture – culture in our external relations – I think we have a responsibility to do this. Let us not forget that we have all signed and adopted the UNESCO Convention on Cultural Diversity. We have to work with all the countries which have adopted the convention in order to ensure that it is implemented. Let me stress that such cultural exchanges with the outside world will be beneficial not only for them, but also for us, because we are enriching our culture, our knowledge, and our values in the world.

Finally, I have taken note of the strong support that you all expressed for Sarajevo getting the title for the 2014 Capital of Culture.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Milan Zver, rapporteur. (SL) Mr President, thank you for having conducted this debate with as much democracy and generosity as to enable many of my fellow Members to participate. The debate has, above all, been a high quality one and it has focused on the following: we want to strengthen and maintain our current mobility programmes which are part of the lifelong learning and Youth on the Move programmes. Our message to Member States is that they should pay more attention to, and also invest more money in, youth policies which span several sectors. We also want this debate to yield a further benefit; we want Member States to continue reforming their education systems and social policies, as well as their markets and the like.

I would like to respond to one objection which cropped up during the debate. The Youth on the Move dossier does not focus very much on the importance of the market; we actually wanted to avoid that question altogether, but we have emphasised in several places that education systems need to adapt to the needs of society and the economy, and that this large gulf, this large gap, should be reduced as much as possible and that young people should be enabled to enter the labour market with as few obstacles as possible. Interestingly, that is precisely what the youth organisations pointed out during the preparation of the report.

By way of conclusion, I would briefly like to emphasise the following: let us make use of all this positive energy that we have here in the European Parliament, the temple of European democracy, as well as in the European Commission, and let us do everything to ensure this report does not remain merely a dead letter.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Mary Honeyball, rapporteur. – Mr President, I should like to thank everyone for the helpful and constructive way that we have conducted this debate today. The overwhelming majority of you, with only one or two notable exceptions, were very much in favour of my report on early years learning and the other reports we debated today. I think we have really put down a marker for the future that education is extremely important. It is not only important for children, for the very young children I have been talking about and the young people that my colleague has been talking about, but it is also important for the future of Europe. I therefore strongly support what the Commissioner has said, that Member States should now continue to invest in education and should not be using the economic climate to make cuts, because making cuts in education would be the worse possible thing to do.

Education is about our future, it is about having adults who are employable, who are fit, who are healthy, who are not a drain on our social services. We understand that and we have got to convey that message back to our Member States so that they can exercise their subsidiarity to make sure that what we have been talking about here is actually put into practice.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marietje Schaake, rapporteur. – Mr President, I am coming back to you with some concrete next steps on the report on the role of culture in the EU’s external actions that we talked about this morning. I want to start with a quote from a Hungarian diplomat in the United States, Mr Simonyi, who said that ‘rock and roll, culturally speaking, was a decisive element in loosening up communist societies and bringing them closer to the world of freedom’. When we look, in particular, at today’s uprisings of the young generation in North Africa and the Middle East, we can see that, today, an open Internet is that decisive element for moving into the world of freedom. We need an Internet freedom strategy to facilitate free expression, press freedom, access to information and access to cultural and educational content.

This is a priority, but there are many more concrete suggestions in the report, for which the foundations are already laid down in both the Lisbon Treaty and the ratification of the UNESCO conventions. They now need practical implementation.

The External Action Service should coordinate the work of different Directorates-General and create a Directorate-General for cultural and digital diplomacy. EEAS staff should be trained, and a cultural attaché is needed in each EU representation. There needs to be coordination, streamlining and mainstreaming through an interinstitutional taskforce which should report back to the European Parliament.

We ask the Commission to adopt a Green Paper in 2011, followed by a communication on a strategy for cultural cooperation in the EU’s external actions. We also call for capacity-building through the funding of initiatives independent of government, and we want to promote EU cultural activities in the rest of the world on line also.

Existing programmes, such as the European Neighbourhood Policy and the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights, have cultural components which need to be coordinated and strategically deployed. We also need to protect and promote cultural heritage, such as through the Blue Shield programme, and we need to engage in cultural policy dialogues with third countries.

Human rights should be respected, and cultural arguments can never be used to justify violations of human rights. I would recommend that colleagues read the report. I think that this debate shows that we need many more discussions on culture in the EU.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid, rapporteur.(FR) Mr President, Commissioner, after all these speeches, I wish to thank my fellow Members, the shadow rapporteurs as well as the rapporteurs of the committees who produced opinions, who suggested to me many ideas and who have made it possible to improve the text that we are voting on today.

I would now like to look further down the road with you. How are we going to follow up on this report? We are asking the European Commission to draw up a White Paper, following on from its Green Paper, so as to perform a review leading to a genuine strategy for the creative and cultural industries. We are also eagerly awaiting legislative proposals on how cultural goods are taxed, on the governance of collective management societies, and on budget allocations for the programmes relating to culture, education and media.

We must turn our ambitions into specific measures. Why not introduce straight away a reduced VAT for all cultural products, whether they use a physical medium or are online? Disparities in taxation produce distortions that, without exception, run counter to the competitiveness of European companies. The Americans have had a competitive advantage for a long time thanks to a tax moratorium on these services. Will Europe do something about it? Why not also consider a single price for digital books across Europe? French politician, Edouard Herriot, once said: ‘Culture is what we are left with when we have forgotten everything’. Nevertheless, culture can be quickly forgotten if we do not protect it, if we do not maintain it, if we are not interested in it.

I hope that Europe will give itself the means to promote its culture, so that its model and heritage can exert influence, so that Europe can defend its identity and is able to grow its economy.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – I have received one motion for a resolution(1)tabled in accordance with Rule 115(5) of the Rules of Procedure.

The debate is closed.

The vote will take place today at noon.

Written statements (Rule 149)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elena Oana Antonescu (PPE), in writing.(RO) The future of the European Union rests on its young people, on their potential and ability to embrace the current EU project and take it to a new dimension of inclusion and cooperation between Member States. The first condition ensuring that the young people of today become Europe’s citizens of tomorrow is for them to get to know one another. This means them coming into contact with as many cultures as possible within Europe, moving around freely and studying in as many Member States as possible. With this in mind, I think that lifelong learning programmes, such as Erasmus or Leonardo da Vinci, must receive more substantial financial support from the authorities in the coming years. Europe needs an ever-growing number of its school pupils and students to come into contact with a new social, educational and cultural model. I believe that the mobility programmes aimed at young people will successfully bring about a real change in the attitude of Europe’s young people and create a shared vision for them about what Europe stands for, in areas from education, science and research to culture and our common values.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Dominique Baudis (PPE), in writing.(FR) This report sends a clear message: the European Union must incorporate a consistent and coordinated cultural strategy into its foreign policy. The bonds that unite more specifically Europe and the countries south of the Mediterranean are going through deep changes. A wind of freedom is blowing on the Arab world. Culture is a significant asset. It contributes to a living and long-lasting democracy. Cultural and educational exchanges encourage the emergence of an organised civil society. Cultural cooperation is also one of the keys to the Union’s success for the Mediterranean. It leads nations to share and interact with one another, respect and better understand each other every day.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Sergio Berlato (PPE), in writing. (IT) Ever since the 1990s, the European Union has seen an exponential increase in cultural and creative industries (CCIs), in terms of the number of jobs they have created and their contribution to gross domestic product. The nature of these industries is twofold: from an economic perspective, they help generate jobs and growth, and from a cultural perspective, they facilitate the social integration of citizens. The Commission’s Green Paper officially recognises the economic and social importance of this sector of the economy. However, whereas some of our international partners are already making extensive use of the many resources offered by CCIs, the European Union has not yet developed a strategy based on cultural activities. In my opinion, the challenges posed by globalisation offer these industries great opportunities for development, which are likely to increase economic and employment growth potential. In concrete terms, the ability of CCIs to boost social and territorial cohesion will depend on strategic investment. It will also be necessary to cooperate with local bodies, to pass on expertise and to exchange good practices. I also believe that the stronger safeguarding of intellectual property rights is an essential condition for protecting cultural diversity in Europe.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D), in writing. (LT) The European Commission communication entitled ‘Early Childhood Education and Care’ (ECEC) is a welcome initiative, because it examines problems in children’s education and aims to establish means of providing children with the best start for the world of tomorrow. However, in my opinion, this Commission document lacks analysis of research and data on children’s education, care and social protection, taking into account information from all 27 European Union Member States. Furthermore, I would like to highlight the close link between socio-economic disadvantage and opportunities to educate and teach children from an early age, because families on low incomes are much less likely to use ECEC services. Consequently, later on, some of these young people are neither employed nor in education or training. I understand the Commission’s efforts to encourage the Member States to exchange examples of good policy and practice, making use of the open method of coordination, but it would be much more useful and effective to draft and adopt common quality criteria. This would promote data collection and benchmarking in all European Union Member States, because data collection is particularly important for observing progress and measuring outcomes. I would like to point out that there is a particular lack of information on children from families with social problems, on children with special needs and disadvantaged children.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zuzana Brzobohatá (S&D), in writing. (CS) This own-initiative report is devoted to the issue of the study mobility of young people, which arises from the 2020 strategy. It is undoubtedly right to increase the competitiveness of young people by creating conditions within the framework of university education for them to spend at least one year in another Member State. Mobility, a system of recognising credits and other measures will limit the growth in unemployment among young people, which stands at an average of 21% in the EU today, which is an alarming figure. Personally I very much welcome the appeal to the Commission and the Member States regarding support for voluntary activities, and for measures to be introduced in legislation that would make it possible to recognise voluntary activity by the unemployed as time spent working. This measure will lead, particularly with young people, to a strengthening of work habits, to greater competitiveness and to greater motivation in seeking work. In my opinion, it is no less important to have a permanent link between the requirements of the labour market and professional education, a link that has to be highly flexible in this regard, so that future graduates can be best placed on the labour market, bringing about a gradual reduction in unemployment among young people.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ioan Enciu (S&D), in writing.(RO) I would like to emphasise my strong support for the ‘Youth on the Move’ framework, aimed at improving education systems and vocational training in Europe. I think that this is of paramount importance with a view to developing specific policies supporting youth mobility and facilitating a stable transition for them from the education system to employment. An important factor which needs to be considered is that young people are one of the social groups hit hard by the global economic crisis. We have a duty to support young people entering the labour market, both for their sakes and to support the European economy. Today’s young people are the leaders of tomorrow. This is why it is vital for them to have the opportunity to develop their skills, abilities and knowledge now so that, in the near future, they can make an active contribution to the European Union’s growth and development. We must lay the foundations for concrete policies which will support young people and provide them with greater mobility and opportunities to study abroad. The role of this mobility is not only to support the economy but, at the same time, to make an extremely important contribution to creating cultural cohesion at European level.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Kinga Gál (PPE), in writing.(HU) I consider our discussion devoted to education and culture to be an important one, and would like to add an approach that so far has been missing from numerous important considerations. Mutual understanding and respect for one another are fundamental conditions for traditional national communities, minorities and majorities living together harmoniously and prosperously. Education plays a vital role here. If the history and literature of minority communities were taught in majority schools, and if minority education efforts were to include majority culture, communities living together would get along with each other more harmoniously. Language education also has a prominent role in cultural understanding. This is true not only in the process of learning world languages, but also in the relationship between majorities and minorities living alongside each other. I believe that it is not only minorities who should have to study the language of the majority, but also vice versa. Everybody could live a richer life, allowing mutual respect for one another to manifest itself. At the same time, in knowing each other’s language, generations growing up would develop a much more positive attitude towards each other, allowing them to create relationships with their peers of the same age more easily, which would be decisive with regard to the future of these regions. And lastly, I find it important to mention the importance of a deep understanding of cultural heritage, so that communities living together can recognise and respect each other’s cultural values. I believe that the concrete task of the Commission is to promote all of these issues, while that of Parliament is to strengthen theoretical and political support.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Filiz Hakaeva Hyusmenovа (ALDE), in writing.(BG) Young people are the driving force of any society and its future. Their education, vocational training, qualifications and integration into the labour market provide the basis for achieving the Europe 2020 objectives aimed at smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. This is why I firmly believe that Europe must continue to invest in their development and initiatives like Erasmus, Leonardo and ‘Youth on the Move’ should be constantly developed further and made popular. Improving the quality of education and training, as well as young people’s access to it, are important steps on the way to reducing unemployment and developing the European economy. Unfortunately, Europe still has regions and social groups where there are limited conditions for this. Efforts must be coordinated to resolve this problem. It is also important for education and training programmes to be more closely linked to business needs and to stimulate young people’s potential and creativity so as to make them more competitive on the labour market. I support the efforts to encourage youth mobility, both during their education and in connection with their professional life. I think that this is an important condition for developing new skills and their self-awareness of their European identity.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), in writing.(PL) The cultural dimension of the EU’s external actions is one which is important and very much needed. Around the world generally, European culture is seen as attractive and desirable. It is more difficult to find acceptance for European values. Working in the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly, I have repeatedly experienced cultural differences and their consequences.

As Europeans, we try systematically to promote values and principles which, for us, are fundamental and inalienable. This quite often meets with a lack of understanding from our partners. Some of them see in this nothing less than a kind of cultural imperialism. This is precisely why it is so difficult to persuade our partners that the values promoted by the European Union are not an attempt to impose our way of thinking on others. The fact that we try to spread our ideals, for example, in the field of human rights, follows simply from a moral imperative. We respect difference and diversity, but we cannot give up principles which we consider to be fundamental. We will not accept discrimination, and we will not give up the protection of human life and human dignity. On this, the Union is united and in full accord.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ádám Kósa (PPE), in writing. (HU) I would like to congratulate Mr Honeyball on his excellent work, and for having noticed critical items that may not have received sufficient attention in the past. These include, in particular, recognising the connection between poverty, a disadvantaged situation, and poor school performance. I would like to remind my fellow Members that there is an additional connection: the disadvantaged situation is particularly pronounced in cases where the child is living with disabilities that the parents, who are inadequately informed, neither understand nor accept. I will pay careful attention to this problem in the report I am currently working on. The work carried out by Mrs Honeyball and, in particular, the adoption of a child-centred approach, will be an excellent reference base in the future. The draft report ‘draws attention to the general importance of studies before entering school, with particular emphasis on language learning as well as multilingualism and linguistic diversity’, which I support joyfully and enthusiastically. I agree that supporting the early development of disabled children and helping them acquire adequate linguistic competence is a basic human resources investment which represents a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. It is also important that in order to develop the linguistic competence of deaf children, they must first learn their mother tongue (sign language), which will allow them to become truly multilingual in the future. And this is an investment for reaching the EU2020 goals and for raising the level of employment, in order to achieve a more accessible, inclusive and sustainable society.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Paweł Robert Kowal (ECR), in writing.(PL) Support for youth mobility, especially for young people from the countries of the Eastern Partnership and the Union for the Mediterranean, is particularly important in view of recent events in Belarus and North Africa. The processes of democratic transformation which are currently beginning in Egypt and Tunisia can be strengthened thanks to the EU’s efforts to educate the citizens of these countries in the spirit of democracy and respect for the rule of law and human rights.

Educated citizens are the greatest enemy of dictators and totalitarian regimes. The experiences of EU Member States can be used when organising such programmes. In Poland, for example, there is the Konstanty Kalinowski Scholarship Programme, which is operated, among others, by the Centre for East European Studies in the University of Warsaw – an international study centre which enables students from the East and the Balkans to study in Poland. The Union should also intensify efforts to establish a University of the Eastern Partnership, modelled on the Euro-Mediterranean University in Slovenia. The EU should support the initiatives of young and talented people to promote particular political strategies. A good example of such activity is the website Eastbook.eu, whose founders supply thousands of Internet users every day with information about events in the countries of the Eastern Partnership and the progress of the programme. The EU should also give support to young people from Member States for study visits to neighbourhood countries. This helps break down cultural barriers. Worthy of praise here is the Eurobus initiative – a journey around Ukraine organised every year for young people from the EU’s Member States.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (PPE), in writing.(PL) The adoption in June last year of a new EU strategy, Europe 2020, is intended to help bring us out of the economic crisis and contribute to further development of the European Union. It is also a significant step in terms of maintaining and even increasing youth mobility.

One of the priorities of the Europe 2020 strategy is the Youth on the Move initiative, the aim of which is to improve the results of our systems of education and make it easier for young people to enter the labour market. This aim is to be achieved, as the name suggests, by developing the idea of youth exchange and helping young people to acquire new skills. Statistical data show that currently, as many as 15% of young people end their education early, and in so doing gain qualifications which do not meet the needs of the labour market. In addition, only around a third of people have completed tertiary education, and this proportion is significantly lower than in the United States or Japan, for example. Therefore, one of the most important challenges facing the European Union is the need to give particular attention and financial support to these two problems. However, the situation will not improve if both the Commission and the Member States do not follow the guidelines contained in the Europe 2020 strategy. Youth mobility is a key to the further development of Europe, and if we aspire to the status of the world’s most innovative economy, we must not neglect to invest in human capital, and particularly in young people.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ramona Nicole Mănescu (ALDE), in writing.(RO) In the context of the current economic crisis, the EU needs a global strategy based on innovation and creativity, which will contribute to economic growth and job creation. This is precisely why the cultural and creative industries must be encouraged. Consequently, I think that we need to ensure at the moment in Europe that there is a greater distribution of creative works and free access is provided to them online without, however, ignoring the fact that the artists and their works must be protected and receive fair remuneration. With this in mind, we must set up a legislative framework capable of supporting the development of these industries and of instilling confidence in consumers and those operating in the digital market, as this sector may facilitate the creation of new jobs, thereby capitalising on the European Union’s cultural diversity and its innovative potential. At the same time, I think that we need new business models which will support these industries, by leveraging the benefits offered by the single digital market. In conclusion, I believe that this report marks a first step in the development of this sector. However, the Commission and Member States must step up their efforts to turn the cultural and creative industries into a core sector of the European economy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Iosif Matula (PPE), in writing.(RO) I am pleased that, as part of the Europe 2020 strategy, we are focusing particular attention on young people, given the demographic challenges which our continent has to face. Against this background, ‘Youth on the Move’, a flagship initiative from the European Commission, offers concrete measures for raising the level of education and vocational training, including through mobility and facilitating access to employment. Apart from reducing the incidence of early school leaving and increasing the proportion of university graduates by 2020, I would like to highlight some aspects which may provide support to young people. The first aspect is the importance of devising more flexible educational programmes which will be compatible with holding down a job at the same time. The second aspect is the benefit of having a virtual mobility system to supplement geographical mobility. Another aspect is to encourage study grants offered to students by private companies. Support is also just as important for private youth initiatives, which can lead to job creation and, by extension, social integration.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Alajos Mészáros (PPE), in writing. (HU) Youth unemployment caused by the economic crisis is a considerable challenge across the EU, and so far, neither the EU nor the Member States have handled it properly. The employment situation of young people depends on general economic policy; Member States, therefore, should move towards investments and job creation. Unfortunately, the austerity measures which are also felt in Hungary and which affect, amongst other things, the education system, as well as the spending cuts affecting job creation, do not really help young people; on the contrary, their sense of isolation from society and the labour market could pose a long-term threat to the economy. The economic crisis should not be a reason for education spending cuts, because combating the impacts of the crisis requires that young people receive higher levels of education. The success and effectiveness of the ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative depends, to a large extent, on the attitude and key activities of Member States and the financial support they provide for the implementation of these programmes at a national level, which could contribute to the social integration of young people. The role played by local education institutions, as well as local and regional authorities in the area of education and mobility, is also very important, which is why I believe it is important to support the mobility of teachers and youth and education workers, since they are the ones who can motivate youth. In order to achieve these EU targets, a partnership approach should be created with local and regional authorities as well.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), in writing. (FR) I supported this report, which reaffirms our ambitions for young people in Europe. The Europe 2020 strategy puts the education of young people at the heart of its objectives and proposes targets for 2020: a reduction of early school leaving from 15% to 10% and an increase in the percentage of those having a higher education qualification from 31% to 40%. Nonetheless, I would like to insist on one point: obstacles to young people’s mobility. Currently, it is estimated that only 4% of European students receive an Erasmus grant during their studies. This is still too little when one knows that a CV can be greatly enhanced by a year abroad, in terms of learning – especially with regard to learning foreign languages – open-mindedness and skills. Three issues can explain this figure: the fact that many students are not even aware that these opportunities for studying abroad exist, the cost of an Erasmus year for a student’s budget and the complexity of recognising achievements. In all these areas, Europe and the Member States must commit themselves, so that the Erasmus programme, which is one of the EU’s greatest successes, becomes a success for everyone.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Csaba Sógor (PPE) , in writing. (HU) The principal goal of the ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative is to promote youth mobility and to break down barriers that are still standing in its way. However, I do welcome the fact that it also places increased emphasis on harmonising education and labour market needs. Perhaps the gravest concern of today’s graduate youth in particular is that, following the completion of their studies, they are faced with not being able to capitalise on their knowledge on the labour market. The alarming unemployment figures of young people support this; the effects of this phenomenon have a ripple effect towards a decreased willingness to have children and a drastic delay in starting a family, thereby strengthening negative demographic processes. The problem, of course, is known both at European Union and Member State level. However, the solution is primarily in the hands of the latter, as only they can reorganise and reform the national education systems and adjust them to the new socio-economic realities. The task of the EU is to create a framework for the processes and prevent Member States from losing track of the original goal while, at the same time, encouraging and motivating them to implement reforms that are difficult in the short term but certainly profitable in the long run.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Bogusław Sonik (PPE), in writing.(PL) At a time of economic crisis, when some Member States are reducing investment in education and training, I am pleased that Parliament has today adopted the report on Youth on the Move.

In recent years, it is, in fact, young people who have felt the effects of the crisis most acutely. The rate of unemployment among young people in the EU has exceeded 20%, which is twice as high as the rate for adults, and in some Member States, it has reached 40%. Budget cuts are having a direct effect on young people’s prospects and opportunities for development. The knowledge and skills of young people are essential for the achievement of intelligent and sustainable development. Youth on the Move, a flagship initiative of the Europe 2020 strategy, should aim to enhance the attractiveness of higher education in Europe, raise the quality of education and increase student and worker mobility. This initiative enables young people to acquire knowledge, skills and competences which are essential for work and life. These priorities and objectives will not be fully realised and achieved if the EU does not ensure long-term financial support in its budget. Therefore, it is so important that this programme be given high subsidies, not forgetting, at the same time, how important it is to continue to promote it and maintain an appropriate information policy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jutta Steinruck (S&D), in writing.(DE) This report shone the spotlight on an occupational category that is all too often neglected. What would European culture be without creative artists? While developing the creative industries economically, we must not forget those who work in this sector. As the shadow rapporteur for my group in the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the social situation and the conditions in which creative artists in Europe live are particularly important. Unfortunately, many of the 5 million people who make their livelihoods from the creative sector live in precarious conditions. Second and third jobs are not rare, as one job is often not enough to live on. A lack of health and pension insurance is on the agenda. Contracts are mostly uncertain, and many creative workers are scarcely able to plan more than a couple of months in advance. Moreover, a fair level of social security protection, with adequate insurance against unemployment, sickness and for old age, must be standard practice also for those working in the creative sector. I am very pleased to see that the rapporteur followed the position of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs in this regard and included it in the report. It is now time for the Commission and the Member States to remedy these social deficiencies and to promise the many creative minds of Europe that creative artists in Europe need not live as an underclass.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Emil Stoyanov (PPE), in writing.(BG) I would like to congratulate the rapporteur for his fine work and beneficial cooperation on this report. I want to highlight again the great economic and cultural potential, as well as the unique nature of the creative industries. They lie in a very delicate area between mainstream business and the creation of cultural products. It is gratifying that even in the current circumstances, this sector is one of the most dynamic and innovative in Europe. One other point worth mentioning is that it offers potential for growth and provides jobs for around 5 million people in the EU. Unfortunately, my suggestion urging the European Commission and Member States to discuss the opportunities for creating specialist European and national funds, which would have provided resources for borrowing under soft terms for these industries, was rejected by a small margin during the vote in the Committee on Culture and Education. Nevertheless, I firmly believe that this idea of mine will come to fruition and will be adopted in the near future. I think that this is extremely important for the support and development of the cultural and creative industries because, as they are not quite commercial activities, they need soft financing, which banks cannot provide nowadays in the normal way for other industries.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Rafał Trzaskowski (PPE), in writing.(PL) In the European Parliament, we are calling for specific action – for the European Commission to recognise the creative sector as one of the most productive areas of the Union economy and so to treat its development as an absolute priority. To achieve this, we want primarily to increase the possibilities of financing the creative sector, as a pillar of intelligent economic growth, from the Union budget. For it is possible to create synergy between Union programmes for the support of culture, such as Culture 2007-2013, for example, with existing Union research programmes (such as the Eighth Framework Programme, which supports the EU’s technological development), or to extend the possibilities for spending money from existing funds (such as the European Social Fund, for example). We also recommend supporting the development of new and innovative financial instruments (compilations of bank guarantees, returnable deposits and intelligent loans), thanks to which it would be easier for creators or small and medium-sized businesses from the creative sector to start their enterprises. Of course, money is not everything. Among other things, we propose strengthening cooperation between the cultural and creative sectors and European universities, increasing the number of specialist training courses for young people, and improving the mobility of all creators and people of culture. To this end, we intend to create a multilingual Internet platform which would be used for the exchange of experiences between creators and, as a consequence, for the creation of a still closer network of contacts between all those for whom the development of the creative industry in Europe is important.

 
  
  

IN THE CHAIR: JERZY BUZEK
President

 
  

(1)See Minutes


10. Statement by the President
Video of the speeches
MPphoto
 

  President. – Yesterday afternoon, an earthquake struck the Spanish province of Murcia. At least seven people were killed. Many were injured. Three hours ago, Mr Martínez Martínez made a statement about this. On behalf of the European Parliament, I extend condolences to the families of the victims. We wish all those who have been injured a rapid return to health. We also admire the immediate reaction and effort of the people of the province, who are helping in the rescue operation. I am just sending a letter of condolence to the Spanish authorities on this matter.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Cristina Gutiérrez-Cortines (PPE).(ES) Mr President, thank you very much for your compassionate and supportive words.

The Lorca tragedy is becoming clear. At the moment, we know that eight people have died, among them two pregnant women and a twelve year-old boy, more than 250 have been injured and 80% of houses are affected. That is to say, from now on and for the moment, many Lorca citizens will be homeless. A large portion of Lorca citizens have also lost their places of work and with them have gone their hopes, expectations and opportunities.

Lorca is a city of 70 000 inhabitants, of whom 20% are immigrants that the city has received, taken in and been able to give a new life with new meaning. I know that together, the old and new residents of Lorca, with help from the institutions and from everybody, will be able to begin a new journey in their lives. I also have to say and call on the European Union not to leave anyone behind and to be able to help those affected, recognise their pain and stand by their side, opening their arms and offering opportunities.

I would like to thank you all very much and to ask for a minute’s silence.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – I will ask everyone to rise. We will now observe a minute’s silence.

 

11. Cleanup in Europe and Let's do it World 2012 (written declaration)
Video of the speeches
MPphoto
 

  President. – Ladies and gentlemen, written declaration 0003/2011 submitted by Mrs Jordan Cizelj, Mrs Gomes, Mrs Lepage, Mrs Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė and Mr Tarand on Cleanup in Europe and Let’s do it World 2012 has been signed by the majority of Parliament’s component Members. In accordance with Rule 123, it will be forwarded to its addressees and published in the Texts Adopted of this sitting, together with the names of the signatories. As far as I know, Mrs Jordan Cizelj wanted to say something about this. Mrs Jordan Cizelj, you have the floor.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Romana Jordan Cizelj (PPE). (SL) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, first of all, I want to thank you for the support you have given to this written declaration. With this declaration, we have shown our commitment to a clean environment in this year’s European Year of Volunteering. However, I would invite you not to stop at just this signature, but to help ensure that next year, in 2012, this action, that is, the one-day action to clean up our environment, becomes a success in as many countries as possible, in even more countries than has been the case so far, and, in that way, to support environmental groups in your countries.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Indrek Tarand (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, I want to thank everybody for supporting this initiative. I will be very brief. It has been a pleasure to work under the surveillance of Ms Jordan Cizelj and in cooperation with Ms Gomes, Ms Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė and Ms Lepage. This is a genuine citizen’s initiative, and will show how citizens can guide Europe to a better future.

However, knowing the controversy around written declarations, and the differing opinions about their usefulness, I would like to apologise to those Members who felt offended by our campaign, and to repeat the promise I made to the chair of my subcommittee, Mr Danjean: I promise not to start a written declaration again during this parliamentary term.

I hope you will help me to keep my promise, and I hope we will all meet again on the Action Day in 2012.

 

12. Voting time
Video of the speeches
MPphoto
 

  President. – The next item is voting time.

(For the results and other details on the vote: see Minutes)

 

12.1. Youth on the Move: – a framework for improving Europe's education and training systems (A7-0169/2011, Milan Zver) (vote)

12.2. Early years learning (A7-0099/2011, Mary Honeyball) (vote)

12.3. EU-Mauritania Fisheries Partnership Agreement (vote)

12.4. Public procurement (B7-0284/2011) (vote)

12.5. European fisheries sector crisis due to rise in oil prices (vote)

12.6. Small Business Act review (vote)
 

- Before the vote on Amendment 9:

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Niki Tzavela (EFD). – Mr President, we, the co-authors, all agreed to a compromise yesterday that reads as follows: ‘Notes the growing illegal trade in all Member States in counterfeit and pirated products imported from third countries, which are threatening the competitiveness of European SMEs’.

We authors all agree to this.

 
  
 

(The oral amendment was accepted)

 

12.7. Innovation Union: transforming Europe for a post-crisis world (A7-0162/2011, Judith A. Merkies) (vote)
 

- Before the vote:

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D). – Mr President, I would like to ask colleagues to vote in favour of Amendment No 1 because it supports the idea of having more funds for innovation policy but delete the wording suggesting that funds from the common agricultural policy ...

(The President cut off the speaker)

 

12.8. ILO Convention supplemented by a recommendation on domestic workers (vote)

12.9. Antibiotic resistance (vote)

12.10. Cultural dimensions of EU external actions (A7-0112/2011, Marietje Schaake) (vote)

12.11. Unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries (A7-0143/2011, Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid) (vote)

12.12. Sarajevo as a European Capital of Culture in 2014 (vote)
 

- After the vote:

 
  
  

IN THE CHAIR: DIANA WALLIS
Vice-President

 

13. Explanations of vote
Video of the speeches
MPphoto
 

  President. – We now come to the explanations of vote.

 
  
  

Oral explanations of vote

 
  
  

Report: Milan Zver (A7-0169/2011)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Salvatore Iacolino (PPE). (IT) Madam President, there is no doubt that this report represents a step forward in the creation of new educational opportunities for young people. It advocates more research, more innovation, more EU 2020 strategy in a context that is becoming increasingly relevant. We need more education at school level, more training, but also more universities, so that we are working together with young people to ensure that the promotion of culture yields added value.

Building educational success is the focus of this report, and it is also the reason why we voted in favour. Greater mobility for young people, a greater capacity to develop opportunities for work, and a labour market that must take into consideration not only young people working in a given context, but all the sectors that provide opportunities for young people to grow.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Sergej Kozlík (ALDE). (SK) Madam President, I supported the European initiative Youth on the Move, the aim of which is to reduce the proportion of students leaving education early from 15% to 10% by 2020, and to increase the proportion of people with a university education from 31% to 40%. For the purposes of comparison, 40% of the population in the US have a university education, and 50% in Japan.

At present, 14.4% of young people in Europe aged 18 to 24 years have less than higher secondary level education, and almost 21% of young people are unemployed. I also support the fact that the Youth on the Move initiative aims to ensure education that will meet the needs of the labour market. It is estimated that by 2020, the proportion of jobs requiring a high qualification will rise from 29% to 35%.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jarosław Kalinowski (PPE).(PL) Madam President, European programmes which support young people call for unqualified support. The people who are the future of our continent are also the most defenceless, are they not? It is we who must ensure that they receive the right education, with access to the benefits of culture and, most of all, the opportunity to learn foreign languages, as well as the opportunity to make a free choice of where they would like to receive their education. Not everyone has the money and the opportunity to be able to arrange this for themselves. The good results achieved in many programmes for helping young people, such as Erasmus and Leonardo da Vinci, show this to be an effective investment. The greatest support is needed by young people living in rural areas, who often do not have the financial means to begin a course of higher education and also do not have the opportunity to find work outside of agriculture in the area where they live.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Hannu Takkula (ALDE). (FI) Madam President, I wish to say a few words about Mr Zver’s excellent Youth on the Move initiative. This is one of the success stories of EU policy. Even the Eurosceptics or those who are critical of it are of the opinion that it is because of these youth mobility programmes that a certain added value has been achieved that benefits everyone. The Bologna Process, the Copenhagen Process and other such initiatives are good examples of this.

Mr Zver’s report endorses this trend, one that has already been perceived as a welcome one, and which creates new opportunities and prerequisites for young Europeans studying in the different countries of Europe. It will be a way for us to be able genuinely to exchange best practices. I believe that in the long term, this will constitute one firm basis for economic growth in Europe, but more important than economic growth is to remember that it is via this process that people, young people, can grow as individuals and Europeans.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Daniel Hannan (ECR). – Madam President, across Europe, we are condemning generations of young people to emigration and poverty. We are condemning generations yet unborn and unbegot to debt – all in order to sustain this conceit of monetary union.

In Ireland, GDP is down 20% from its peak – an almost incredible figure. In Greece, we have riots in protest against the austerity package; and yet we know that it is not going to work.

When the bail-out was agreed a year ago, the idea was that it would be an immediate stop-gap, that it would be a short-term contingent measure, and that by now, Greece would be borrowing cheaply again as the crisis would have passed. We can see that it has failed. However, we are continuing with the same policy in Portugal and in Greece again, rather than admit our mistake.

What a high price we expect our constituents to pay for our conceit!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė (PPE). (LT) Madam President, I am pleased that today, we adopted the motion for a resolution entitled Youth on the Move: a framework for improving Europe’s education and training systems, because this resolution provides clear recommendations and key orientations that European Union countries could and should follow in order to improve education and training systems. Nevertheless, I would like to single out a few aspects: firstly, given that the Youth on the Move initiative aims to achieve the principal goal set in the Europe 2020 strategy of reducing the number of people leaving school without qualifications from 15% to 10%, it lacks measures and recommendations oriented towards raising teacher competences, qualifications or professional prestige. We must clearly understand that the teaching profession is the profession that creates the greatest added value for society, and must strive to ensure that teachers in European countries are the best. I very much agree with the call in the document for an all-embracing strategy to be submitted to the Commission, aimed at promoting non-formal education, and I would call for this document’s key recommendations to be directly linked to the multiannual financial framework.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Bernd Posselt (PPE).(DE) Madam President, today, we have with us the National Executive of the Sudeten German Homeland Association, including the Sudeten German Youth, which is energetically pursuing cross-border collaboration with the Czech Youth. In this regard, this report is of truly inestimable significance, as it covers three points: firstly, the networking of the universities, especially in the Euroregions and border regions; secondly, vocational training – as it is not just academic education that we need; and thirdly, and above all, the question of language skills.

I want to state quite clearly that I love the language of Shakespeare, but I do think it is a pity if our young people converse in but one language. It is precisely the learning of the language of our neighbours and the learning of the smaller languages that we ought to be promoting in particular in this framework. The truth is that you only really get to know the culture of your neighbours when you start to experience day-to-day life in their language. In this connection, we have a lot of work to do, but also major opportunities.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Sidonia Elżbieta Jędrzejewska (PPE).(PL) Madam President, I am extremely pleased that Youth on the Move is an integral part of the Europe 2020 strategy. I am pleased, too, that the report we have voted through today has given attention to the importance of non-formal education, understood as education by participation in youth organisations and non-governmental organisations and by volunteering. I am sure that non-formal education helps young people become active citizens, teaches teamwork, helps develop individual interests and gives them better chances of finding work – and that is something which is very important.

 
  
  

Report: Mary Honeyball (A7-0099/2011)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jarosław Kalinowski (PPE).(PL) Madam President, children are our future. They will be part of conscious society in Europe in the future, so it is very important to educate children from an early age. We must instil positive values and the right moral standards into our children from their earliest years. Education should be based on good, solid foundations and be provided by teaching staff with appropriate education and training.

We must strive to achieve equal opportunities, so that all children, regardless of whether they come from urban or rural areas, or from rich or poor families, have access to early learning. In the process of eliminating inequalities, we should pay particular attention to rural communities – where children have much poorer access to educational and cultural facilities.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Hannu Takkula (ALDE). (FI) Madam President, it is very important to focus on the early years of childhood and early childhood education and care (ECEC). That is why I warmly welcomed Mrs Honeyball’s report, for which I myself was shadow rapporteur.

With regard to this excellent report, I would like to make it clear that, hopefully, it is the importance of upbringing rather than education that needs to be emphasised when we are talking about small children. That is because all the essential ingredients of a person’s life are established during the first few years, and so it is probably true that if children have a secure basic upbringing, a secure living environment, they will also have the chance to succeed in the future.

We should therefore stress the importance of upbringing rather than education. There will be a time for education later on, but, as has been said, this report reviews different models that exist in Europe, and the basic premise is that we should ensure that, from early childhood, not one single young person is excluded: everyone should have an opportunity to live a good, full life.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Daniel Hannan (ECR). – Madam President, last summer, I had the pleasure of visiting your constituency, and one day I took my children to the beach. I remember watching my two little girls building a sand castle, oblivious to the incoming tide, so captivated were they with the shells and twigs with which they were decorating their work.

I had not the heart to point out to them that the tide was coming in, and today I felt rather the same way as I read through our voting list. We have these epochal events – this economic crisis on our border, this collapse in our share of world GDP – and here we are talking about early years learning, about our responsibilities to the International Labour Organisation, and about whether Sarajevo should be a European city of culture.

Let me give you the raw and scary statistics: in 1974, the nations of Western Europe accounted for 36% of world GDP; today it is 26%; in 2020 it will be 15%. While we are worrying about early years learning, putting out all our propaganda about drawing Europe together, and producing The Raspberry Ice Cream War, and while our children are being encouraged to read the unintentionally hilarious ‘Captain Euro’, our part of the world is being overtaken by more virile countries that have learned the benefits of decentralisation and the dispersal of power.

Surely the time is coming when all our pomp of yesterday will be one with Nineveh and Tyre?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė (PPE). (LT) Madam President, I would like to react to the misinformation provided by Mr Tomaševski during the debate this morning. He stated that children from the Polish minority in Lithuania are unable to study in Polish. For your information, Lithuania is home to around 200 000 Lithuanian citizens of Polish descent, and there are 62 schools where teaching is only carried out in Polish and 34 schools with Polish classes. Meanwhile, in Germany, where there are 2 million people of Polish descent, there is not one state school exclusively for Poles. It should be noted that only in Lithuania can citizens of Polish descent obtain an education in Polish from nursery to university. This is unique in the world. Lithuania is home to a subsidiary of Białystok University, the only department of a Polish university outside Poland. In a survey, 42% of representatives of national minorities in Lithuania cited insufficient knowledge of Lithuanian as a disadvantage when competing for jobs. It is strange to hear criticisms of the Lithuanian education law, which mirrors the law in Poland, and I would like to pose a rhetorical question: does Mr Tomaševski feel that national minorities are being abused in Poland too?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Anna Záborská (PPE). (SK) Madam President, I have already spoken in the debate and applauded the fact that Mrs Honeyball has tried to find a compromise across the entire political spectrum.

Despite this, I abstained from the final vote because I think that this report interferes in the affairs of nation states in many points. This can be seen most clearly from the fact that it welcomes the Barcelona objectives, despite the fact that the Barcelona objectives ended in a fiasco precisely because they were mere numbers dictated centrally by the EU to the individual Member States.

In my opinion, we must leave it to the Member States to decide how many pre-school facilities they need, because it is not just a question of numbers, but also a question of quality and the culture of a given country. I very much regret the fact that I was unable to vote for this report, but it fundamentally challenged a belief that is dear to me.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE). (SK) Madam President, childhood undoubtedly has fundamental significance for the physical, mental and social development of children. We must therefore understand that the return on investments into pre-school education is the guarantee of future growth. Apart from this, many studies have already shown that funding used in this way brings considerable economic and social advantages in the medium and long-term.

The best and most natural way to secure support of this kind is to protect the family as the basic unit of society. Parents are the first and most important teachers of their children, and thus the legal framework should not contain provisions which penalise parents for personally caring for their children, particularly in the early years. This agenda is within the exclusive competence of the Member States. It is more than desirable for the Union, through its coordinating role, to contribute towards improving the situation in the individual Member States.

 
  
  

Motion for a resolution B7-0193/2011

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Daniel Hannan (ECR). – Madam President, supporters of the common fisheries policy often point out that fish do not recognise national borders. They tend to tell you this as though it is an original insight – oh really, they swim around, well who would have thought it!

Yet the reality is that territorial jurisdiction and property rights are the only secure basis for conservation. If you look at the countries that have pursued successful conservation policies in fisheries – whether it is the Falkland Islands, Iceland, Norway, New Zealand – all of them have done so on the basis of giving skippers a sense of ownership so that they have an incentive to treat fisheries as a renewable resource. It is the basic wisdom of Aristotle that that which nobody owns, nobody will care for.

Unfortunately, the common fisheries policy defines fish stocks as a common resource to which all nations have equal access. Hence, the ecological calamity which has befallen stocks in the North Sea.

One point which is particularly timely is that we have seen in recent years a migration of mackerel from common fisheries policy waters into Iceland territorial waters. That, I am afraid, makes them Icelandic property. There is no point in complaining about this. It is our bad luck and their good luck. It may happen that it comes the other way round in a few years time, then it will be our good luck. In the meantime, the best and surest way to ensure that we treat fish as a supply that is always going to be there is to recognise the ownership rights of the people who have the water under maritime law.

 
  
  

Motion for a resolution B7-0297/2011

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Peter Jahr (PPE).(DE) Madam President, the rising global market prices for oil are not the only cause of the crisis in the fisheries sector, as the fuels are generally already exempt from tax and as the rising global market prices affect every fisherman in the world – in the European Union and beyond. As a second point, the raising of the de minimis thresholds should be seized as an opportunity to also help fishermen to be able to work – and fish – in a more environmentally sound and sustainable way. Thirdly, simply making the fuel cheaper will not achieve this aim. Put simply, I expect the Member States, too, to produce innovative and useful solutions in this regard.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE).(ES) Firstly, Madam President, I want to convey my support to all the people in Lorca, in the province of Murcia in Spain, to the eight people who died and their families, and to the 250 who were injured in yesterday’s earthquake.

I voted in favour of this joint motion for a resolution, not having gone along with my group, due to my concern about the difficult time the sector is experiencing and which has worsened due to the oil price increase.

The EUR 30 000 to EUR 60 000 increase of de minimis aid for companies for a period of only three years can help them in this complicated situation. In addition, I have to say that this increase does not imply any increase in the European Union budgets. Its application must also guarantee environmental and social sustainability, and should not distort competition between Member States.

However, the European Fisheries Fund must continue to support this sector in order to reduce fishermen’s dependency on fossil fuels, to make its activity more efficient and provide it with innovative proposals that must give new opportunities to the maritime sector.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Seán Kelly (PPE).(GA) Madam President, I was pleased to support these recommendations.

Fishing – like farming – is a very precarious occupation. It is open to the vagaries of the weather and subject to the quota situation and, of course, the vagaries of stocks and supplies. Now, added to this, we have the sudden increase in oil prices.

Ultimately, the solution will have to come from within the European Union, with it becoming more self-sufficient in terms of more general energy supplies, obviously including renewable energies. However, I also think that we need to look at exploring areas within Europe that have not been explored before because it was not economically viable to do so. Now that is changing. I think if we could increase the supply within Europe, that would automatically bring down world prices and also, of course, make us less dependent on non-democratic regimes for our supply.

 
  
  

Motion for a resolution B7-0286/2011

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE). (SK) Madam President, I fully agree with the demand for the assessment of the impact of all relevant bills on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to be performed systematically both at a national and at a European level, because these businesses are the real backbone of the European economy and, as such, provide more than 100 million jobs.

Current practice shows, however, that at a regional and local level, access to financial support for the initial stages of innovation and for supporting start-ups and small innovative companies is still very inadequate and patchy in the EU.

This heterogeneity is also confirmed by the finding that 75% of the overall EUR 21 billion assigned for financial support was made fully available through the intermediary banks, which was drawn on by just 50 000 out of the total of 23 million SMEs.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Gay Mitchell (PPE). – Madam President, Fine Gael members have asked me to speak on behalf of all four of us in the EPP on this issue.

We strongly support the main thrust of any provision such as this to support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). We know the importance of SMEs to the Irish economy and to the European economy. However, we do not see the case for including reference to the CCCTB in this report. It appears to me that we buy into the propaganda of whatever the flavour of the day happens to be. Currently in Germany, for example, they say they are having second thoughts about this whole CCCTB.

So let us assist SMEs, but let us not insert particular propaganda into provisions of this kind. There is a case for and against CCCTB. Let us not put ideology in the place of assistance. We should give every possible assistance to SMEs, but it is not necessary constantly to introduce these terms.

We voted against CCCTB, but we did not vote against the entire report because we did not want to retard the sort of support that is needed for SMEs, and I am glad of the opportunity to put that on record.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – Mr Mitchell, I am going to ask you a question. Could you tell us what those initials stand for?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Gay Mitchell (PPE). – Madam President, I am glad you said that. I thought you were going to ask me whether I was speaking in Lithuanian at the beginning! CCCTB stands for common consolidated corporation tax base.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – I felt sure that our visitors would appreciate knowing what we were talking about.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Reinhard Bütikofer (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, I just wanted to ask whether something could be called an ideology just because it is not liked in Ireland.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Gay Mitchell (PPE). – Madam President, this is not a question of what is liked or not liked in Ireland. We are Members of the European Parliament, and we will put our views forward. We will not be told what to do by any representatives of any other Member State. We are not obliged in this country to do what is liked in other Member States. Every Member State sends its parliamentarians here for them to put their views forward. Our views are that the case for the CCCTB, which is currently being denigrated in Berlin, is the sort of propaganda that came off the top of somebody’s head. The case for it has not been proven. There is a case for and against this, and we should not be bludgeoned into this by any flavour-of-the-day political correctness.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – This item concerns explanations of vote.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Hannu Takkula (ALDE). (FI) Madam President, as far as common corporate tax is concerned, it would be a very challenging prospect for the European Union, because its 27 Member States are all very different. Their economic structures are very different, though of course, as we are in the Single Market, it is very important to ensure that small and medium­sized enterprises, which actually make up the backbone of the European economy, have fairly equal opportunities for competition.

At present, that is not the case, and in that sense it is very important that a review of SMEs is now conducted. Being from Finland, for example, I realise very clearly that Finnish companies are a very long way from the heart of the internal market and, for that reason, logistical costs – transport costs – push up the prices of products considerably. We therefore need different systems of compensation via taxation even within the European Union, but also in other ways, so that the competition situation might be fairer for everyone.

It is very important that a report such as this one has been produced and that we should also aim to consider companies in remote areas in the north, for them to be able to compete on an equal footing with other European companies.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Seán Kelly (PPE).(GA) Madam President, firstly, I agree with what my leader, Gay Mitchell, said about the CCCTB and I voted accordingly. However, I want to focus on another point.

The point I want to mention is that it was notable that it took an oral amendment to raise the issue of counterfeiting with regard to this individual proposal. That is unfortunate, because counterfeited goods are doing huge damage to businesses right across Europe and this has not been highlighted or tackled enough.

Many of these goods come from third countries and are facilitated by the governments of those countries, which give safe haven to goods coming to Europe. We need to name and shame and take action against those countries because they are having a terrible effect on legitimate businesses within Europe. It is time that we said: No more!

 
  
  

Report: Judith A. Merkies (A7-0162/2011)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Adam Bielan (ECR).(PL) Madam President, more rapid development, efficiency, including cost-efficiency, and greater competitiveness are the best means for tackling economic problems. To achieve these objectives, we need to work together for innovation. Something which is very important, here, is the emphasis given to citizens’ creativeness, for example, by making room for employees to suggest how to improve work processes. Another factor which drives innovation is consumption, and a specific example of the way in which citizens’ creativeness can be combined with the desire to use modern technologies are the iPhone applications being developed by European consumers.

Strengthening the knowledge base by bringing together businesses, knowledge institutions and the citizens themselves is an important factor in achieving the goals of the Innovation Union. In this respect, it will be essential to achieve the full engagement of public and local authorities. A fundamental objective of innovation is to maintain a high level of prosperity in Europe. I hope the joining of forces which has been proposed will contribute to support for the process of innovation and help bring about economic stabilisation. Hence, I support the report.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Peter Jahr (PPE).(DE) Madam President, unfortunately, I never had an opportunity to speak in the debate yesterday, although I was present. I would like, however, to give my backing, in particular, to those speakers who stressed that innovation and research should and must take place in the agricultural sector, too. Agriculture is no ‘old economy’ – it is modern and it is also an environment where activity, research and innovation take place.

European agriculture faces at least three major challenges; namely, ensuring the feeding of the population, sustaining the environment and producing energy. These at times widely divergent aims require systematic scientific permeation both now and in the future.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Zbigniew Ziobro (ECR).(PL) Madam President, I endorsed the report on Innovation Union. Innovation is, of course, crucial for Europe’s development. However, in my opinion, something which is absolutely fundamental is support for innovation in the small and medium-sized enterprise sector in particular, especially in the European Union’s new Member States, which, in this respect, are some way behind. Indeed, it is events in this sector – as would appear from numerous analyses – which will decide if the European economy of the future will be competitive in relation to other major world economies.

It should be remembered – as is shown by research conducted by accountancy firm Ernst & Young – that three quarters of applications submitted by small enterprises in Europe for research subsidies and the purchase of new technologies are, unfortunately, rejected by the banks. Funding is a serious problem, so we should persuade individual Member States to support small and medium-sized enterprises in this area. Without this support, they will not cope with the growing competition in the world economy.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jacek Olgierd Kurski (ECR).(PL) Madam President, I endorsed the interesting and comprehensive report on transforming Europe for a post-crisis world. I did so in the hope that the course of action proposed in the report will reduce the growing disproportions in development between the different EU Member States and slow down the ‘brain drain’, which the report calls – too politely, in my opinion – intellectual mobility. Therefore, to secure the sustainable development of Europe, we must allocate increased funds to the development of innovation and to research projects in the EU’s new Member States.

We should encourage governments that as well as increasing budgetary means allocated each year to research, they should establish a percentage of their budget as a minimum threshold which must be used on research and development-type projects. However, the amount spent on research and development should not in any way reduce future budgetary plans for the European Union’s current priorities, such as the common agricultural policy or cohesion policy, because they are fulfilling their role well.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Lena Ek (ALDE).(SV) Madam President, despite the fact that innovations are so incredibly important for economic and social development in Europe, up to now, the EU has not had any collective regulations on innovations. The fact that this proposal has been tabled by the Commission and Commissioner Geoghegan-Quinn is therefore extremely important.

When we now lay down the rules that are to apply, we must try very hard, in this document and in the Innovation Union, to simplify and remove any unnecessary bureaucracy. Simplifying the rules is extremely important, because every researcher, every industry and every small business brings this up as the greatest barrier to using EU funds and working together in a focused way to improve the situation for innovations in Europe.

We also need to ensure that we have much more effective management. We need to focus on the really big projects instead of spreading the money over a large number of different areas, as we do in all other contexts. Finally, the Innovation Union can be a really good tool in our work to solve climate issues. Thank you.

 
  
  

Motion for a resolution B7-0296/2011

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Mitro Repo (S&D). (FI) Madam President, the everyday life of the domestic worker is often uncertain, undervalued and unofficial. They are treated unequally, unfairly and poorly.

In Europe, domestic workers are generally migrant workers, a large number of whom have arrived in the country illegally. They no not appear in any registers, they are at risk of being exploited, and they are at the mercy of their employers. The ILO convention on domestic workers and the common rules that would apply are a primary means of ensuring that the human rights of domestic workers and their employment and social rights are respected, supervised and developed.

It would be naïve to say that there were no illegal domestic workers in Europe. This is a kind of modern day slavery. These workers, who are frequently women, are the most vulnerable of all. They do not dare to complain about the fact that they are treated badly or about violence or sexual exploitation. The exploitation does not just apply to those from outside the EU: we are also exploiting our own citizens. Improving the situation of domestic workers should be a priority for the Europe 2020 strategy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Peter Jahr (PPE).(DE) Madam President, I will set out my views on domestic employment. First of all, I agree with those who say that those employed in this sector – and they are mostly women, of course – are entitled to fair pay and fair social services. I also very much agree with those who say that, in this sector in particular, many unbelievable things happen and there is much injustice.

I do ask, however, that attention be paid to red tape when implementing justified demands. In Germany, for example, the reality is that I, as someone who is covered by this legislation given my employment of domestic staff, need to call on the assistance of a tax advisor quite simply because there is so much red tape and the statutory stipulations are so complicated. This takes its toll on the nerves, takes time and costs money. Those who eschew the red tape mostly then pay their staff cash, thereby contributing – sometimes inadvertently – to illegal employment. That is why I am calling for attention to be paid to the amount of red tape involved.

 
  
  

Motion for a resolution B7-0295/2011

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Peter Jahr (PPE).(DE) Madam President, as a skilled farmer, I would like to add another couple of comments about these issues. The first is that it is right that it must be our aim to reduce the use of antibiotics in livestock production, in particular. ‘As little as possible’ should be the cornerstone of our action in this regard. My second point is that we need an analysis of the status quo, in other words, an analysis of the data covering what is actually happening on the ground in the Member States of the European Union. Obviously, all Member States need to take part in such an analysis. My third point is that we need further scientific studies in order to analyse the dangers and also in order to be able to counter those dangers effectively. Fourthly, what we do not need is ideological bogeymen. Ideology cannot replace science.

 
  
  

Report: Marietje Schaake (A7-0112/2011)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Mitro Repo (S&D). (FI) Madam President, this report is worthy of our support. It is with good reason that Europe has been regarded as an economic giant: it could also equally be a cultural giant.

In all its cultural diversity, the EU is a coherent yet varied community of values. In international policy, culture is of major importance. It is a human right and each person and nation has a right to enjoy it. Culture is also linked to human well­being and coping generally.

Cultural policy also allows the EU to connect with other countries with which no other form of partnership has been agreed on. Support for the cultural dimension in those countries in North Africa which are now building a new, more democratic society is also especially important. Bilateral development and trade agreements should always require not just elements of social responsibility but also cultural elements. There should even be cultural experts associated with the European External Action Service, so that culture can be made part of the EU’s foreign policy in a way that is more coherent and systematic.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Adam Bielan (ECR).(PL) Madam President, the cultural heritage of European countries is, in itself, something of value. Although there are many cultural differences between them, the Member States have already made a good name for themselves in the world, one which attracts the citizens of other countries who would like to draw on these cultural resources. The European Union’s political and economic position can be strengthened by promoting the Union’s identity and cultural value.

An important role in the area of culture is being played by new technologies, which also enable people to exercise fundamental human rights. Particularly in countries which are in the grip of censorship, the activity of citizens and access to information are maintained by the instrumentality of the Internet. The Union must, therefore, support freedom of the Internet in the world arena and make significant contributions to the development of culture and the awareness of people in closed societies. In addition, the young generation needs a consistent strategy on mobility for increasing development in the area of science and culture. I support measures for cultural diplomacy, which can also be helped by the work of parliamentary delegations. This is why I endorsed the report.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Zbigniew Ziobro (ECR).(PL) Madam President, the declarations and remarks contained in the report are exceptionally valuable and appropriate. In particular, I would like to refer, here, to the statements which point out that the European Union is obliged to take action throughout the world to promote respect for freedom of expression, freedom of the press and freedom of access to audiovisual media. Also very appropriate is the call for the European Commission to promote Internet freedom globally, in view of the threats to this freedom of which we increasingly read and hear.

Although I am pleased to note that we are calling for values which we Europeans consider to be fundamental, I also admit that it was with a certain sadness that I endorsed this report. I am aware that we sometimes call for these fundamental values to be upheld in other parts of the world, but forget that they are also being violated in some of the European Union’s Member States. An example of this is what is happening in Poland in relation to journalists who are critical of the government. They are being removed from public media en masse, and representatives of the government are trying to close down the independent, privately-owned daily newspaper Rzeczpospolita, which is the second largest quality daily in Poland and which is critical, incidentally, of the government’s position. While we are dealing with the matters raised in the report, this, too, should be opposed.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Hannu Takkula (ALDE). (FI) Madam President, it is very important that the cultural dimension is also included in the debate on foreign policy.

I think that we have reached this conclusion because, with the current turmoil in the Middle East, it has been realised that we had forgotten all about the cultural dimension for decades: for example, in the European Union’s relations with Syria. Since 1963, Syria has been under emergency law, which has allowed the execution of people without trial, but few European delegations, the EU delegation for example, have raised the issue. Trade and finance have taken priority over human rights.

Just as Mr Repo said just now, human rights are also a crucial part of the cultural dimension when we speak of the European Union. This is important to remember. Human rights, democracy, this hard core: this is what we must promote more vigorously in European foreign policy, instead of looking at things purely from the perspective of the economy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jacek Olgierd Kurski (ECR).(PL) Madam President, I endorsed the interesting report on the cultural dimensions of the EU’s external actions. How can one not be in favour of these statements on action which the EU is taking throughout the world to promote respect for freedom of expression, freedom of the press, freedom of access to audiovisual media and so on?

However, I have the impression that we care too much about the situation outside the Union and care too little about standards inside the Union, for example, in Poland, because it is in Poland that after the current governing coalition gained control of the public media, it began to dismiss large numbers of journalists and close down their programmes, all of which had one thing in common – criticism of the current situation. So, for example, such people as Jacek Sobala, Anita Gargas, Jacek Karnowski and Wojciech Leszczyński have lost their jobs. Journalists such as Joanna Lichocka, Tomasz Sakiewicz, Rafał Ziemkiewicz, Jan Pospieszalski, Grzegorz Górny, Tomasz Terlikowski, Bronisław Wildstein and Wojciech Cejrowski have lost their programmes – and these are just some examples among many others. The gagging of free speech in Poland is a disgrace to the entire European Union.

 
  
  

Report: Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (A7-0143/2011)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Hannu Takkula (ALDE). (FI) Madam President, first of all, concerning Mrs Sanchez-Schmid’s report, I wish to say that it is extremely important that we in the European Union acknowledge the impact that creative industry and culture also has on economic growth in the European Union. It is very significant: 2.6% of EU GDP comes specifically from creative industries, and they employ 3.1% of the EU’s workforce. You could therefore say that over the last few years, even decades, it has been a growth industry, and it will continue to be one in the future too.

When we speak of the cultural dimension, it is also important to remember that it is something other than just economic growth. It is also growth for humanity, and this should never be forgotten when speaking about culture. In this respect, the impact of culture should not be measured in terms of growth in GDP: we must also appreciate the fact that a person does not just generate growth in GDP by participating in the rat race, but by living a unique life of human values, and it is to that end that we must create the right conditions and circumstances. We, as members of the European Union, should remember this because, all too often, the Union presents us with a narrow picture of itself, as little more than a system of bodies of economic cooperation, and we forget the wider picture.

With respect to Sarajevo as Capital of Culture for 2014, I would like to say that I hope that this project goes ahead. For us on the Committee on Culture and Education, it has been an idea and project that we have all shared, as 2014 will mark the hundredth anniversary of the outbreak of the First World War, which began with an incident in that very city. It symbolises the developments that have taken place in Europe. We want to show that 2014 is the year that would mark the start of a long period of peace, or would continue the long period of peace that has already started. The Baltic countries should also, however, participate more robustly in this peace and stability development. It would certainly have greater significance for a wider Europe.

 
  
  

Motion for a resolution B7-0281/2011

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Hannu Takkula (ALDE). (FI) Madam President, with respect to Sarajevo as Capital of Culture for 2014, I would like to say that I hope that this project goes ahead. For us on the Committee on Culture and Education, it has been an idea and project that we have all shared, as 2014 will mark the hundredth anniversary of the outbreak of the First World War, which began with an incident in that very city. In a way, it symbolises the developments that have taken place in Europe. We want to show that 2014 is the year that would mark the start of a long period of peace, or would continue the long period of peace that has already started. The Baltic countries should also, however, participate more robustly in this peace and stability development. It would certainly have greater significance for a wider Europe.

 
  
  

Written explanations of vote

 
  
  

Report: Milan Zver (A7-0169/2011)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), in writing. (PT) I am voting for this proposal as this initiative aims to achieve the major objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy of reducing school drop-out rates from 15% to 10% and of increasing the percentage of people with tertiary education from 31% to 40% by 2020. The ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative also focuses on promoting learning mobility, with it also being essential to ensure that the education they are receiving is compatible with the needs of the labour market to equip them with the skills and knowledge they will need. Mobility is important to learn about other cultures, but also to better understand one’s own. Less than one third of the EU’s population has a higher education degree, compared with over 40% in the United States and over 50% in Japan, so Europe must increase these numbers in order to be able to make itself more competitive in an ever-increasing global economy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Roberta Angelilli (PPE), in writing. (IT) Recent years have seen the European Union become increasingly focused on creating a knowledge-based society that is able to compete with all other economies on a global scale. With its Youth on the Move initiative, the EU 2020 strategy has given young people a key role, with the aim of meeting the five main targets by 2020: employment, research and innovation, climate and energy, education and reduction of poverty. These targets are ambitious, given that the current situation is so unstable and forces young people to live in a perpetual state of uncertainty, far removed from the encouraging prospect of a stable job in the future and of their place in society. It will be impossible to consolidate the spirit of European citizenship, and to unlock the potential that young people represent, unless the tools available offer the resources that are needed for things to work well.

Member States should refrain from adopting austerity measures that involve making cuts to the educational system and employment. Instead, they should focus on establishing platforms that involve both employers and workers, universities, businesses and local and regional organisations, in order to offer opportunities in the educational and professional training sector, and to ensure that there is good mobility and that qualifications are recognised.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this report. Young people have suffered particularly badly from the crisis, and the average youth unemployment rate in the EU is over 20%, twice the average for adults, while in some Member States, it exceeds 40%. Owing to the economic crisis, Member States are cutting investment in education and training, directly affecting young people’s future prospects and the future of the EU. Investing in education is, without doubt, essential for sustainable growth and development and, even in times of economic crisis, financing youth programmes and education should not be regarded as a cost to be met now, but rather as an investment in the future of Europe. I feel that the Youth on the Move initiative provided for in the Europe 2020 strategy can contribute towards strengthening the existing education, mobility and employment programmes for young people and encouraging Member States to achieve the targets of the EU 2020 strategy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elena Băsescu (PPE), in writing. (RO) I voted for the Zver report. At the moment, too many young people are failing to utilise fully their potential in education and vocational training. These problems require harmonised action at EU level so that young people are better prepared for the labour market. We need policies which will cover the steps that young people have to take when making the transition from education to employment. I feel that it is vital for young people and the various youth organisations to be involved in the decision-making process. This will help reinforce their sense of belonging and of making an active contribution to a youth strategy. The key objective of the ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative must be to increase European cohesion. The EU must deploy its own financial instruments to help young people, by using the European Investment Bank and European Investment Fund more effectively.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Regina Bastos (PPE), in writing. (PT) The Youth on the Move initiative is part of the Europe 2020 strategy. It introduces 28 measures aimed at better adapting teaching and training systems to the needs of young people, encouraging them to make use of EU aid to study or take part in a training course in another country. This initiative aims to increase youth mobility by aiming to ensure that all young people in the EU have the opportunity to study abroad by 2020.

This report, which merited my vote in favour, warns of a series of situations worthy of particular attention. In order to avoid this initiative existing simply as a concept, it is necessary that the Member States commit to it both in terms of financial support and its implementation, and it is also important that an EU budget is adopted for it.

It is essential to overcome practical barriers and obstacles to mobility, and additional mechanisms should be put in place to ensure that people with disabilities are provided with the same opportunities as anyone else. The mobility of students in secondary education is no less important, and programmes such as Comenius should be better promoted in the Member States.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jean-Luc Bennahmias (ALDE), in writing.(FR) Although the European youth unemployment figures are extremely worrying – in January 2011, the unemployment rate among under-25s in the EU rose to 20.6% – the report on the 2020 strategy’s flagship initiative, ‘Youth on the Move’, calls on Member States to increase their investment in education, training and mobility. Policies relating to young people, whether they concern early, continuing or vocational education and training, must be seen as an investment, not a cost. Putting the emphasis on human capital is essential for the future of our European societies. Highlighting the synergies between the different agents involved, developing young people’s independence, taking action to stop young people leaving education early, reasserting the importance of vocational training and apprenticeships, adopting a binding European quality framework for training schemes: these are the kinds of good ideas that it is important for us to air now at national level. This is because the success of the 2020 strategy will depend on the initiative and the political will of the States responsible for implementing it, as these policies largely remain within national competences.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Sergio Berlato (PPE), in writing. (IT) Youth on the Move (YoM) is one of the flagship initiatives of the Europe 2020 strategy for the promotion of smart, sustainable and inclusive economic growth. YoM outlines key courses of action for increasing young people’s education and training by means of mobility, and thus for facilitating their entry into the labour market. According to recent figures, 14.4% of young Europeans aged between 18 and 24 years dropped out of school before completing their secondary education, and less than one third of the European Union’s population have a higher education qualification, compared with around 40% in the United States and 50% in Japan. It is essential that young people are able to develop the skills and abilities that will enable them to enter the labour market and to make an active contribution to the Union’s growth

I therefore wholeheartedly endorse and encourage the initiative that aims to reduce the school drop-out rate to 10%, and to increase the percentage of people with post-secondary education from 31% to 40% by 2020. Lastly, I believe that high quality education and training are indispensable for meeting the demands of the modern labour market.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE), in writing. (ES) I supported this report because of the need to promote a framework for the improvement of education and training systems in Europe. The Youth on the Move initiative has to be a political initiative to promote education, mobility and employment programmes for today’s youth and as an incentive for Member States to attain the aims of the Europe 2020 strategy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), in writing. (PT) I applaud the rapporteur’s vision regarding the investment that needs to be made in the future of young Europeans. Learning mobility, as well as improving European students’ chances of finding a first job, promotes increased European identity and citizenship, and consequently increases young people’s involvement in the Union’s democratic processes. That said, I support the efforts towards guaranteeing the quality and accessibility of learning mobility, and I would highlight the rapporteur’s mention of the importance of encouraging more Member States to sign up to the Commission’s Quality Charter for Mobility.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nessa Childers (S&D), in writing. – Youth on the Move is a fantastic initiative, and I strongly support the group in giving it my full support.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), in writing. (EL) The report refers to the ‘Youth on the Move’ programme, which allows young people and youth organisations to do more at European level (seminars, meetings, trips) and to take an active part in debates on policies relating to young people, with financial assistance from the EU. The positive points in the report include frequent references to the importance of access to education, opposition to cutbacks in spending on education and training and a call for increased funding for them so that, all other things being equal, everyone will be able to take part in this programme. It also gives young people from neighbouring countries the opportunity to take part and highlights the need to oppose discrimination in the workplace. Huge importance is attached to a pragmatic system of internships which will allow everyone to earn a decent wage and access social insurance, so that they do not replace real jobs. However, as there are certain points in the report which are typical of the Bologna policy on education, to which I am opposed, in that it refers to the need to formulate programmes in keeping with the ‘needs of the market’, which I consider may jeopardise the nature of the programme, I abstained.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Carlos Coelho (PPE), in writing. (PT) Young people are currently one of the groups hit hardest by the global economic and financial crisis. The EU and the Member States have an obligation to support specific, effective measures that enable the transition to be made to the labour market, through better education, training and mobility. The Youth on the Move initiative is in response to this very aspiration, offering answers to the challenges faced by young people and helping them to be successful in the knowledge economy.

In the face of unacceptable youth unemployment figures, I believe that the quality of education and training, adequate integration into the labour market, and a strong commitment to youth mobility, are key to exploiting the potential of all young people and to achieving the goals of the Europe 2020 strategy.

Moreover, although this initiative focuses on employment as the end result, it does not ignore issues linked to education, to youth participation, to active citizenship, to mobility, to language learning and to a whole series of skills that are essential to the area of non-formal education today.

I am voting for the tabled report, and I call for robust financing for the initiative, which is indispensable to sustainable growth.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Giovanni Collino (PPE), in writing. (IT) The ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative is an important point of reference for young European citizens. In financial terms first and foremost, as it represents another boost to European projects for the mobility of young students and improves European schools, stimulating research and debate about the significance of a united Europe and showing what it can offer. The contribution of ‘Youth on the Move’ to the debate on the definition of a European cultural model is no less important. Cooperation between the various institutes and learning in the various disciplines, which are taught differently in the various countries depending also on the political awareness of the ruling classes, also represents a key contribution to the definition of a European identity. We must ensure that through our young people, these identities are truly European and not allow the only educational model for our young people in the future to be the American one, although this has, of course, been an important point of reference until now. The European Union has all the tools it requires for offering the world its values and ideas of how it wants and will want its children to grow up.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Mário David (PPE), in writing. (PT) Young people are, to a large extent, characterised by their dynamism, by their enormous generosity, and by an enormous capacity for learning and assimilation. A Europe with a future, and one aiming to be increasingly competitive and dynamic, needs this important capital. The ‘Youth on the Move’ programme included in the Europe 2020 strategy is therefore an important collection of programmes to support the youngest people, with objectives that are ambitious but very clear, in which I see myself and in which I hope the people at whom it is aimed will participate significantly. This initiative advocates the need to give more young people improved access to the labour market, which is a very relevant goal given the level that youth unemployment is reaching in a number of Member States. I would also stress the attention given to the importance of mobility of young Europeans, during both their education and their working lives. This education in a variety of cultures and places will provide an education that is more complete and richer, whilst contributing to building a real feeling of ‘European ownership’, which will help to cement the concept of European citizenship included in the Treaties. To support and strengthen these measures, I am voting for this report.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marielle De Sarnez (ALDE), in writing. (FR) Student mobility programmes such as Erasmus, Erasmus Mundus and Comenius are attracting more and more candidates. However, there are still practical obstacles to mobility, especially for obtaining visas and medical papers in different languages, for transferring grants abroad, and for the recognition of qualifications gained in another Member State. In 2004, when the Erasmus Mundus exchange programme was launched, with the help of a large majority in this Parliament, I got the European Commission to agree to take the necessary measures to ensure quality in this programme. A ‘European Quality Charter for Mobility’ was even created. Only, seven years later, the same obstacles are still there. That is why the European Parliament has wanted to reiterate how much increased investments in education and training are needed. The opening of European mobility programmes to all young people, irrespective of their course or social background, is crucial in order to give them better access to the labour market. It is time for the Member States to genuinely commit in order to guarantee high quality training for all young Europeans.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Christine De Veyrac (PPE), in writing. (FR) Since young people are the future of Europe, and since it would be irresponsible not to make them a priority when they are experiencing an unemployment rate of around 20%, I enthusiastically supported the Zver report on improving education and training systems in Europe. For a number of students, confronted with ever higher demands on the part of employers, entering the labour market is often a genuine ordeal. That is why the European Parliament has very warmly welcomed the proposals in the ‘Youth on the Move’ report: increasing investment in higher education, developing international mobility programmes, recognising informally acquired competences, combating early school-leaving and supporting young people in entering the labour market.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Diogo Feio (PPE), in writing. (PT) Commitment to education and training to improve young Europeans’ qualifications is a key objective of the Europe 2020 strategy, and an instrument that I consider essential to combating unemployment and encouraging entrepreneurship. I therefore welcome the Youth on the Move initiative, in particular, its aspect of supporting and encouraging student mobility, and of recognising qualifications, as well as the importance ascribed to non-formal and informal education, which are often as important as formal learning or even more so.

If Europe wants to successfully achieve the ambitious objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, which place particular stress on innovation, research and training, it will have to invest in better qualified young people, opting for forms of education that are more geared towards future incorporation into the labour market and paying particular attention to knowledge that really prepares young people for the future.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), in writing. (PT) This report is on the ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative, which will eventually be, it is hoped, a framework for improving education and training systems. This is one of the seven flagship initiatives of the Europe 2020 strategy, whose interlinked priorities are smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. This initiative comprises 28 key actions and concrete measures to increase the education and training of young people through mobility and employability, working towards the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy to reduce the school drop-out rate to below 10%, to increase the level of tertiary education from 31% to 40% by 2020, and to reduce unemployment – youth unemployment in particular – that is currently at around 21%. Therefore, and as I am an advocate of the youth training scheme ‘Your first EURES job’, I could not agree more with the proposals outlined in the report, and I voted for it, aware that the EU should continue, and strengthen, all measures in support of our young people. That is the only way we will achieve a Europe that is stronger and more founded on solidarity and inclusiveness.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) The subject matter of this report and its scope mean that it inevitably ends up tackling important issues, in some cases correctly, in others, incorrectly or very insufficiently; it is contradictory in some places.

It mentions, specifically in the recitals, important issues like the decline of public investment in higher education, the increase in fees and the consequent widening social gap, but this issue is not properly taken up in the body of the resolution. It also mentions the problems many young people have in taking part in mobility programmes for financial reasons, the problem of high drop-out rates from school, and of unemployment and insecure jobs amongst young people.

This makes its contradictions more obvious: by endorsing the objectives of the so-called Europe 2020 strategy, it ends up advocating the path that leads to the problems it identifies, of unsecure jobs and unemployment for young people. On the one hand, it advocates the end of discrimination against young people in the workplace. On the other hand, its mention of work experience placements implicitly opens the door to a different status for these workers, and it is wrong as regards ‘protection arrangements for atypical and insecure jobs’.

For these reasons, we abstained from the final vote.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) It is not enough to express interesting principles if you do not take reality into account. A quality education from the earliest years of life is necessary to ensure the development of the human being and of societies. However, funds for quality public education are increasingly short, and students are faced with a lack of grants, unemployed families and dropping out of their studies, as is happening in Portugal with the restrictive policies that are being practised.

The reality, then, is a sharp divestment in these areas. In the name of the crisis, there is a retreat of the state that, here too, threatens its social role and has the result of exacerbating inequalities in access to education, to knowledge and to culture. The result is the multiplication and deepening of social inequalities.

The reality in Member States such as Portugal is the closure of thousands of schools, increasing youth unemployment and reducing the job security of thousands of teachers, as well as the chronic underfunding of the state higher education system and the increased cost of attending it. The reality is that budgets for culture are being slashed to penury levels.

The most serious aspect of all this is that the situation will be exacerbated if the aggressive programme of intervention drawn up by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the European Central Bank (ECB) and European Commission is implemented.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Pat the Cope Gallagher (ALDE), in writing. (GA) The Youth on the Move programme is an initiative that is central to the EU 2020 strategy. The aims of the Youth on the Move programme are to encourage higher education in the Union, to improve the quality of education and training, and to promote student mobility by improving the effectiveness of existing European programmes.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elisabetta Gardini (PPE), in writing. (IT) This report adds a key element to a European policy that must aim to provide young Europeans with the tools to be more competitive on a labour market that has become increasingly globalised. Focusing on student mobility has to be the first step in giving more employment opportunities to our young people. Unfortunately, the figures on youth employment in many Member States must be a cause for concern and reflection. Supporting young people by encouraging dialogue between the European institutions and youth organisations is a good start, but it cannot be considered the ultimate aim. We should be able to listen to them and to give them credibility and trust. Only this way will we be able to create a Europe which the new generations will see as an opportunity and not as a millstone.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Louis Grech (S&D), in writing. – I voted for the Zver report. In order for the EU 2020 ‘Youth on the Move’ (YoM) flagship initiative to be successful, EU Institutions must create a pragmatic, comprehensive and wide-ranging policy supported by all Member States which focuses on connecting the areas of vocational education, professional qualifications, lifelong learning and apprenticeship to the labour market so as to ensure that each Member State will truly take ownership of the EU’s education system. YoM is about making the transition from learning and training into the labour market easier for Europe’s young people. One of the goals of this policy initiative is to reduce the number of early school leavers and increase the proportion of people with tertiary education qualifications, the reason being that early school leaving runs counter to the dynamics and needs of the labour market and is also in direct conflict with Europe’s economic and social sustainability in general. Consequently, all labour market players, including those from the professional sectors, businesses, trade unions, ministries and public employment services, should engage in a structured dialogue on how to guarantee professional integration of the young, promote formal/informal training and ultimately develop an education system in the EU which is able to provide career security for our young people.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Mathieu Grosch (PPE), in writing. (DE) This report once again shows how important it is for European development to promote the mobility of our young people in all fields. The alignment of study programmes and corresponding mutual recognition must be achieved in all areas of training and education, in particular, in manual trades, where there is a lot of ground to make up.

There should also be more checking by the competent educational authorities in the countries concerned of whether additional barriers need to be removed where these have been built up at the administration level or at the level of the trade associations.

Mobility on the part of apprentices also leads to better recognition of many trades and impedes social dumping, as there is a progressive scale that means that, for the same level of training, the same pay is awarded.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Sylvie Guillaume (S&D), in writing. (FR) Popular common sense says that ‘travel broadens the mind’. It is from this perspective that I support the idea, defended in the Zver report, that the funding of young people’s education and mobility is an investment in Europe’s future, not an additional burden on the budget, this despite the current difficult economic situation. What is more, someone’s social background or financial situation should not restrict their accessing the opportunities of travelling abroad. Similarly, disability should not be an obstacle either, and that is why additional funding should be set aside for young people with disabilities. Finally, legally binding rights should be established in order to prevent the casual jobs and exploitation to which young trainees could fall victim.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this document because it recognises that it is essential to overcome practical obstacles and barriers to mobility and further promote recognition of time spent abroad and of qualifications from other EU countries. Moreover, it acknowledges that people with disabilities face even more barriers to mobility than those who are not disabled and additional mechanisms should be put in place to ensure they are provided with the same opportunities as anyone else. Furthermore, students with families (e.g. with children) should also be afforded additional support to overcome the unique challenges they will face in participating in educational mobility. Quality mobility is key to achieving intercultural learning, personal development and multilingualism for young people. The focus is on employment as an end result and, indeed, employment is a problem of education, but also of youth participation and active citizenship. Therefore, the existing programmes should continue to focus on active citizenship and the development of key competences, non-formal education and the promotion of European civil society. In order to avoid this new strategy from simply existing as a concept, it is essential that the Member States commit to it both in terms of financial support and its national implementation in their respective countries, and that an EU budget is adopted for it. Member States should see this as a long-term investment, not only in young people’s education, but in the future prosperity of their individual countries and of the EU as a whole.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Cătălin Sorin Ivan (S&D), in writing. (RO) My support for the ‘Youth on the Move’ programme goes without saying and is based on principle. However, we have tried to suggest additions to the Commission’s proposal, which we regarded as necessary.

Indeed, in the report adopted without any problem in the Committee on Culture and Education and during the European Parliament plenary session, we stressed how important it is for Member States to be involved in the implementation process and to be monitored by the European Commission.

We also called for successful programmes, such as Lifelong Learning, to receive more funding in the new multiannual financial framework, and for better coordination between programmes.

The appropriate attention should be focused on young people, who are at the heart of this umbrella programme, and jobs and opportunities for affirmation should be created for them because they are the European citizens on whom we will be depending in the future.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Giovanni La Via (PPE), in writing. (IT) In a Europe that looks to the future, thinking about young people must be a priority. Allowing them to follow the most suitable educational pathway, to make it easy for them to learn foreign languages, to approach the world of work equipped with the appropriate skills, or perhaps to enter a new educational or working environment, means building a future for all the countries of the European Union through the energies of university students and young workers, who come together in the same economic and cultural melting pot. Today, more than ever, I believe in one Europe – a hotbed of ideas and projects – which is why I voted in favour of the report by Mr Zver. In terms of the EU 2020 strategy, creating a network of knowledge and opportunities, not just for young people but also for teachers and for all those who work in education and training, means supplying oxygen to those energies that we must unleash, using the mobility of our young people, who must learn to live in the Europe of the future.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Constance Le Grip (PPE) , in writing. (FR) I voted in favour of Milan Zver’s report ‘Youth on the Move – a framework for improving Europe’s education and training systems’. Throughout this report, I think that it is important to support the various programmes that have been introduced at European level to facilitate youth mobility, which are beneficial both in terms of acquiring new knowledge and competences and in terms of developing a genuine European citizenship. At European level, it is important that, beyond 2013, we increase the credits allocated to European mobility programmes, such as Erasmus and Leonardo da Vinci, and make them permanent so more young people can benefit from them – not just students, but also trainees, young professionals and young farmers. I also think that it is necessary to move towards greater recognition of qualifications obtained through all the various types of apprenticeship, non-formal or informal, given the competences that can be acquired in this way. Finally, I want to stress that one of the key ways of combating youth unemployment is to keep adapting educational and vocational training systems to the constantly evolving needs of the labour market.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (PPE), in writing.(PL) The question of education and training systems is currently taking on a completely different and a new significance than was the case, for example, a decade or more ago. In different parts of Europe, we are faced with levels of education which are not the same, so the need to improve the situation in this area seems beyond question. It is important that young people have the chance to play an active role in the world of work, and also in civil society in its broadest sense. I myself am strongly involved in and support work related both to Youth in Action and the European Voluntary Service, which is one of the five operational actions of ‘Youth in Action’. Therefore, I think it is important for the European Parliament to be able to continue to support similar measures.

At the present time, we must not forget young people. They should be given the chance to develop and they should be helped, so that they can acquire new skills in an economy which is becoming increasingly international. Youth on the Move is not only an opportunity for young people to become active and to get into work, but is, above all, a way for them to overcome their own limitations and weaknesses, and is a chance to develop. This is why I endorsed Mr Zver’s report. Thank you.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. – I voted for this report. Youth on the Move (YoM) is one of seven flagship initiatives contained in the Commission’s Europe 2020 strategy to promote smart, sustainable and inclusive economic growth. YoM comprises 28 key actions and concrete measures to increase the education and training of young people through mobility and ease their transition from education into the labour market. This is particularly important today as young people, being one of the social groups hit hardest by the global financial crisis and simultaneously having had the smallest role in causing it, must be supported in entering the labour market in order to secure their own futures, as well as to bolster the economy. Young people are tomorrow’s decision makers, and it is vital that they are able to develop the competences, skills and knowledge today that will allow them actively to contribute to the growth and sustained future of the European Union over the coming years and achieve the goals set out in the EU’s growth strategy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Melo (PPE), in writing. (PT) In the context of the Europe 2020 strategy, young people’s knowledge and skills are essential if the objectives of smart, inclusive and sustainable growth are to be achieved. As such, youth has a key role to play in achieving the five EU headline targets for 2020: employment, research and innovation, climate and energy, education, and the fight against poverty. The ‘Youth on the Move’ flagship initiative of the Europe 2020 strategy aims to enhance the attractiveness of higher education in Europe, the overall quality of all levels of education and training and student and worker mobility through the more effective use of existing European programmes. It is therefore essential to vote for this initiative, so that in the future, we will have young people who are increasingly qualified and prepared to realise the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Louis Michel (ALDE), in writing. (FR) The ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative emphasises mobility for learning purposes, but it is also vital to ensure that the teaching young people receive meets the needs of the labour market and, as a result, it is vital to give them the skills and knowledge they will need.

Young people are, unfortunately, one of the social groups worst hit by the global financial crisis and should be given assistance to enter the labour market and to be able to shape their own future and support the economy. Education and training are key factors for greater prosperity and greater social cohesion in Europe. Student mobility is clearly a central component of the Europe 2020 strategy. It offers many opportunities for students’ intellectual emancipation, for combating early school leaving, unemployment and poverty, as well as for the development of international cooperation in higher education but also in vocational education and training.

Moreover, student mobility is one of the major challenges of European integration. Nonetheless, this mobility should take place with financial resources that measure up to ambitions and with the removal of the practical obstacles to this mobility.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), in writing. (DE) The effects of the global economic crisis were drastic for young people, in particular, right around the world, but also within the EU. Youth unemployment within the EU has reached a high of 21%. This is compounded by the fact that 15% of these young people dropped out of school and thus lack any qualifications for the labour market. The EU has a target of reducing this rate to 10% by 2020 and increasing the proportion of people with a qualification from a university or technical college from 31% to 40%. In order to be able to achieve these targets, there must be EU-wide recognition of education and training courses and qualifications. This is also the only way that greater mobility of our young people can be achieved, something which is also intended to help them become acquainted with new cultures and societies so that they also have the option of making a success of themselves beyond their home country in years to come. For that reason, barriers that are still in place need to be removed and procedures simplified, while existing programmes need to be expanded and promoted.

I abstained in the vote, as I believe that there has been no discussion of how to bring about mutual recognition of qualifications obtained through qualitatively differing methods of education and training. This especially applies to the skilled trades, for which there is no uniform standard across Europe against which qualifications can be measured.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Franz Obermayr (NI), in writing. (DE) For young people in particular, there were grave consequences of the global economic crisis, namely, serious rises in the youth unemployment and school drop-out rates. Young people often find themselves with no prospects. Against this backdrop, it is important to increase the mobility of young people in the EU so that, where necessary, they will have more chance of finding work on another labour market. The basis for this is the mutual recognition of qualifications and courses of education and training. I abstained from the vote on this report as it fails to propose any tangible solutions to the issue of how mutual recognition is to take place where, of course, in many fields, there are qualitatively highly differing methods of education and training.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Justas Vincas Paleckis (S&D), in writing. (LT) European Union Member States are facing a high rate of youth unemployment. In some countries, it is even touching 21%. That is double the average unemployment rate for adults. I voted in favour of this report because it provides guidelines on how to improve young people’s education and reduce the youth unemployment rate. I agree with the report’s provision that it is very important to focus on the creation of new programmes that would allow young people to combine work with studies. This is crucial for students who are seeking an education, but who have to support themselves financially. One of the programme’s key objectives is to reduce the number of people leaving school early, which increases the risk of future exclusion from both employment and society. We must increase support for people with disabilities and young people with children, so that they can participate in mobility programmes and take advantage of this opportunity to strike a study-work-life balance. Access to mobility programmes should be possible not only for university students, but also for young people with a low level of qualifications and school pupils. It is also vital for young people to gain more practical knowledge and experience through high quality compulsory traineeships.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Georgios Papanikolaou (PPE), in writing. (EL) The emblematic initiative ‘Youth on the Move’ is one of the seven flagship initiatives included in the European Commission’s EU 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. It focuses on the mobility of students, but its added value lies in the fact that it also anticipates education that corresponds to the needs of the labour market and provides the skills and knowledge needed. However, this initiative needs to be combined with the report entitled ‘An EU strategy for Youth’, which was adopted by the European Parliament in 2010 and which seeks to set out a new, strong, European strategy for the next ten years, so that, when it comes to youth issues, Europe can develop a single policy framework. Moreover, in order to ensure that it does not remain a simple pronouncement, the responsibility generally lies with the Member States and it is a pity that the recent national reform programmes do not tally with the objectives set in the EU 2020 strategy, despite the fact that we all recognise that investment in research and education is a long-term investment with a good return which clearly reaches forward into the future prosperity of European citizens.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), in writing. – (PT) This report is on establishing a framework for improving Europe’s education and training systems. This measure is one of the key actions of the ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative, which is part of the European Commission’s Europe 2020 strategy to promote smart, sustainable and inclusive economic growth. It aims, through concrete measures, to promote the education and training of young people through mobility, and through facilitating their transition from education to the labour market. This is a very current issue given that young people, as one of the social groups most affected by the global financial crisis and one of the groups least involved in causing this situation, must be supported in terms of labour market access in order to safeguard their future and to boost the economy. Indeed, mobility itself may function as an engine for the transition from education to the labour market. I therefore consider ensuring the provision of high quality education and simultaneously making it accessible to all young people to be among the most important aspects of mobility in education. For these reasons, I voted in favour of this report.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Phil Prendergast (S&D), in writing. – The Youth on The Move (YoM) programme represents an opportunity to unleash the potential of young people and enable them to contribute to smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in the EU. The YoM initiative supports lifelong learning and the ‘new skills for new jobs’ initiative of the European Commission. YoM looks to improve higher level education within Europe and to improve student and worker mobility through existing European programmes. Part of the EU 2020 strategy states that ‘by 2020, all young people in Europe must have the possibility to spend a part of their educational pathway in other Member States’. The current economic crisis has badly affected young people, and youth unemployment rates in the EU are twice the average for adults. This is one of the most difficult challenges facing Europe and it is vital that Member States do not respond by cutting investment in education. We need to ensure that our young people have opportunities to learn and to move abroad to continue their learning if they wish, as investing in education today will better equip the EU to face challenges in the future.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), in writing. (PT) At a time when young people are being hit particularly hard by the effects of the global financial crisis, everything must be done to ensure that they can develop the skills, qualifications and knowledge that will enable them to contribute actively to the growth and sustainable future of the European Union. The ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative is one of the seven flagship initiatives of the European Commission’s Europe 2020 strategy for promoting smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. It comprises 28 key actions and concrete measures to increase the education and training of young people through mobility and ease their transition from education into the labour market. It is therefore very important that conditions be created to ensure its effective implementation and the achievement of the objectives to which this initiative is devoted.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Robert Rochefort (ALDE), in writing. (FR) The recession is hitting European youth full in the face: whereas one young person out of five is out of work, 40% of young workers are on a part-time contract. In this context, I lend my support to Mr Zver’s report, which proposes a series of recommendations aimed at improving the education and professional training systems for young people. While we need to act in order to encourage the take-up of higher education by the greatest number and actively fight against early school leaving – only 31% of Europeans have a university degree, compared to 40% in the United States and 50% in Japan – we also need to make sure graduates are employable. This report contains several proposals to achieve this: improving communication between businesses and universities, making university programmes and structures more relevant to specific needs in the labour market, introducing into study programmes periods of high quality work experience that are fairly remunerated and respect the young person’s social rights.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. – Funding for programmes such as Lifelong Learning (Erasmus, Leonardo da Vinci, Comenius, Grundtvig), Marie Curie, Erasmus Mundus and Youth in Action must increase. The committee proposes to create international cooperation networks at universities, making use of virtual mobility. Mobility programmes should be available to vocational students, teachers and youth workers. We call for EU-wide recognition of school, vocational and university qualifications. We also insist on the importance of learning two non-native languages from an early age, including those of neighbouring countries. Finally, we call for extra support for disabled young people, young parents and those who wish to get back into education.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), in writing. (IT) I voted in favour of this report because it highlights how important it is for young people to have a multidisciplinary education, as far as the targets of the EU 2020 strategy are concerned. In this framework, it becomes necessary to encourage young people to continue their studies to university level. In fact, entering the world of work too early increases the risk of unemployment later on, and of a comparatively low standard of living.

This could therefore have high economic and social costs, as well as a negative impact on the Union’s sustainable economic growth and on its ability to improve its global competitiveness in the future. For the same reasons, I believe that a multicultural, multilingual and practical education is essential for shaping the citizens of the future, especially if this is achieved by means of mobility schemes such as Youth on the Move.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Oreste Rossi (EFD), in writing. (IT) Currently, too many young people are dropping out of school too early and not enough are taking advantage of higher education. This undermines the stock of qualifications that Europe will need in the future. Youth on the Move seeks to increase opportunities for educational mobility for all Europe’s young people by 2020, enabling them to progress more smoothly from education to the world of work, by giving them an education that prepares them for the demands of the market. For these reasons, we should make schools and businesses more aware of the need to create networks, improving young people’s practical knowledge by means of apprenticeships. This initiative is centred around young people, but we must not forget those young people with disabilities, who must be guaranteed the same opportunities for study and work.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), in writing.(PL) I endorsed the report on improving Europe’s education and training systems. I am in favour of extending the operation of all educational programmes for young people. Besides Youth on the Move, funding and political support should be given to programmes such as Erasmus, Leonardo da Vinci, Comenius, Grundtvig, Youth in Action and Marie Curie. These programmes have achieved great success in the Union. They involve a huge number of young people from various backgrounds (the number of Polish students who went abroad on an Erasmus grant between 1998 and 2010 was 93 807) and they contribute to the development of young people’s potential and the creation of a strong European civil society. They are very efficient programmes, where the cost for a single participant is very low but the funds are used by a high number of people. Promoting the mobility of young people requires practical barriers to be overcome.

Around one third of the students who have participated in the Erasmus programme have experienced difficulties arising from uncertainties over the system of education in other countries and the lack of correspondence and continuity between the subjects of study in the home country and abroad. The recognition of time spent abroad and of qualifications from other EU Member States should be promoted. Other matters which also need to be resolved include difficulties with obtaining visas, medical papers being in various languages and the portability of scholarships when going abroad. People with disabilities face even more barriers to mobility than those who are not disabled. Additional mechanisms should be put in place to ensure they are provided with the same opportunities as anyone else.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), in writing. (PT) The ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative is one of the seven that are part of the Europe 2020 strategy. It is made up of 28 key actions to improve the education and training of young people through mobility and bringing them into the labour market.

The relevance of this report in austere times for Europe is proven by the increasing proportion of young people who are unemployed in the various Member States, with the conclusion being that this age group is one of the hardest hit by the global financial crisis. As such, I consider it essential to apply measures to reduce early school drop-out rates, to increase the number of graduates, and to make education and professional training more attractive. Commitment to education should not be seen as a cost, but rather as an investment in the future.

I therefore believe that it is important to reinvest in already existing mobility and education/training programmes, and to establish European-level minimum conditions for work experience placements, since these should not be seen as employment, but rather as the acquisition of practical skills.

Finally, I would stress the need to coordinate measures with national, regional and local authorities, in the form of partnerships, in order to make the ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative a success.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Niki Tzavela (EFD), in writing. (EL) I voted in favour of the report by Mr Milan Zver on the Commission initiative ‘Youth on the Move’. Its objective is to ensure that measures are taken to combat the problems of early school leavers and to provide incentives to increase the number of Europeans with a higher education. Reference is also made to the huge importance of ensuring that the education provided meets the needs of the labour market and provides the skills and knowledge needed by the young people of Europe.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Viktor Uspaskich (ALDE), in writing. (LT) Creating a secure future for our young people is a subject close to my heart. Sadly, the prospects for young people in Lithuania today are rather bleak. In Lithuania, youth unemployment stands at 34%, almost 14% higher than the EU average. According to EU statistics, there are only two EU Member States where youth unemployment rates are higher than in Lithuania. Even those young Lithuanians who manage to find work are often forced to accept unfavourable employment contracts. We must make more effort to implement three key priorities: firstly, to promote entrepreneurship; secondly, to improve youth employability by adapting education to the needs of the labour market; and thirdly, to give young people an opportunity to play a more active role in society. The Youth on the Move initiative is one of the platforms which may help to promote youth employment. Work and study abroad may be beneficial to Lithuania’s young people and our country. However, it is much more important to give our young people a European future in Lithuania. It is possible to ensure this by developing contacts between young people and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). This would promote the need for young people among SME employers and would encourage young people to work for SMEs.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Derek Vaughan (S&D), in writing. – I voted in favour of this resolution because ensuring that young citizens can travel and work throughout the EU is essential in order to boost competitiveness. EU 2020 objectives can be achieved by investing in programmes that provide young people with a wide variety of opportunities and promote labour market mobility. By increasing the funding for projects that support youth mobility and increasing the focus on the cooperation between business and education, young Europeans will have a better chance of career success. It is also vitally important to support young people who are no longer in mainstream education by encouraging non-formal and informal education.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marie-Christine Vergiat (GUE/NGL), in writing. (FR) I abstained when voting on this report, despite the critical look it takes at European policies, particularly those carried out by the Member States, aimed at young people.

This report contains a number of positive proposals, in particular, regarding the participation of young people in the process of drafting European youth policies, the enhancement of informal and non-formal education, and an improvement to trainees’ status.

However, beyond the stated desire to encourage the Member States to step up their investments in the area of education independently from the financial crisis, the report is in the spirit of the policies aimed at liberalising higher education and subordinating it to the sole immediate interests of the market and thus of companies.

Some provisions, such as the introduction of a European system of loans for students, in partnership with the EIB, are even worrying given the objectives set in terms of access to university by the greatest number.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Dominique Vlasto (PPE), in writing. (FR) By voting in favour of the ‘Youth on the Move’ programme – a framework aimed at improving education and training systems in Europe – I wanted to support an ambitious action plan in favour of young Europeans. The Treaty of Lisbon has broadened the EU’s remit in the area of youth. In this respect, the European Parliament had a duty to reaffirm its support for this policy. Indeed, European identity only has meaning if it is endorsed by our young fellow citizens. Europe must take on this responsibility by proposing a concerted strategy in the areas of training and employment. I welcome the ambition of this report, which sets at 2% of GDP the investment in higher education. At a time when the European labour market has been affected by a major economic crisis, training must be our priority so that we are able to offer future prospects to young people and make accessing employment easier for them. The development of European exchanges (Erasmus, Leonardo da Vinci) will also be beneficial for young people, since these programmes offer real added value on a professional and personal level. Learning a new language and discovering another culture are both assets that should be accessible to all.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Angelika Werthmann (NI), in writing. (DE) Promoting smart, sustainable and inclusive economic growth necessarily implies the best possible opportunities and chances in education and training. Mobility whilst studying, facilitated by EU programmes such as Erasmus, Leonardo da Vinci and Comenius, promotes not only the aspects of formal education, but also personal and social development. I therefore voted in favour of this report.

 
  
  

Report: Mary Honeyball (A7-0099/2011)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), in writing. (PT) I am voting for this proposal, as pre-school end early-childhood education are provided in accordance with various traditions throughout the European continent, making the creation of a universal European system for early-childhood education difficult. It is easier to implement common goals and objectives in order to consistently harmonise practices.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elena Oana Antonescu (PPE), in writing. (RO) Children’s early learning lays the foundations for their successful lifelong learning. Children in their earliest years are particularly curious, receptive and willing to learn, with this being the age at which the ability to speak and express themselves is formed. It is also at this age that the foundations for children’s future educational and professional careers are laid, as well as for the development of their social skills. This period is critical for cognitive, sensory and motor development, affective and personal development and language acquisition, and also provides the basis for lifelong learning. I should stress that the early development of healthy lifestyle behaviours, such as good nutritional habits and appropriate and balanced exercise, can have a profound impact on physical and mental development.

The European Union is made up of a rich and diverse mix of educational traditions, with early years education provided in a number of different ways across the continent. I voted for this report which, although it acknowledges that an EU approach to early childhood education services would be difficult to implement, encourages the development of a single European framework comprising shared goals and values, including shared entitlements and structures.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this report. Children’s early learning lays the foundation for successful lifelong learning, which is central to the achievement of the Europe 2020 targets, which seek to create a knowledge-based society, raise employment, lower school drop out rates and reduce poverty. However, these objectives cannot be achieved unless all children are given an adequate start in life. The Member States must increase investment, ensuring accessible and quality early years education for all children, which can help reduce early school leaving, combat the educational disadvantages faced by children from vulnerable social and cultural groups and reduce the resulting social inequalities.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elena Băsescu (PPE), in writing.(RO) I voted for Mrs Honeyball’s report. Europe is made up of a rich and diverse mix of educational traditions. This necessitates the development of a European framework comprising shared goals, entitlements and values. The Europe 2020 strategy must be focused on creating an inclusive society by increasing employment. Lowering school dropout rates and reducing poverty can only be achieved by providing all children with a future paving the way to a better life. I wish to remind you of the importance of early years activities, especially foreign languages. Cultural activities are a vital source of enrichment for children by promoting intercultural dialogue. Last but not least, the variety of families’ differing living conditions must be taken into account. In this regard, we need flexible and innovative early childhood education programmes.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE), in writing. (ES) Early childhood education is fundamental. I totally support the aims previously set out to provide childcare services by 2010 to at least 90% of children between three years of age and the mandatory school age and to at least 33% of children under three years of age.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Sebastian Valentin Bodu (PPE), in writing. (RO) Europe is made up of a rich and diverse mix of educational traditions, with early years education provided in a host of different ways across the whole continent. There is a clear variation between Member States in terms of the quality and supply of their provision, rates of enrolment, approach to services, governance of services, and so on. For this reason, a ‘one size fits all’ approach at EU level to early childhood education and care (ECEC) services is not suitable and would be difficult to implement. However, the development of a common framework of shared goals and values, including shared entitlements and structures, is more than recommended. The period from birth to the age of three is critical for children’s brain development, physical and cognitive development, and for language acquisition. Furthermore, these early years lay the foundations for children’s lifelong learning. Poor families are less likely to use ECEC services, especially in privatised markets, compared with other groups. This is worrying, given that disadvantaged children are those who have been shown to benefit most from access to services of this kind.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nessa Childers (S&D), in writing. – This is a very pertinent issue, and I strongly support the group line in focusing on Early Years Learning.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Carlos Coelho (PPE), in writing. (PT) Building strong foundations in terms of education and care during children’s early lives, as a complement to the central role of the family, constitutes the crucial basis for success in terms of learning throughout their lives, social integration, personal development and future employability. Children’s earliest experiences are the basis for all subsequent learning, conditioning children’s development, and helping reverse potential situations of disadvantage and transmission of poverty from generation to generation. By giving children the ability to realise their potential, quality education and care structures can contribute significantly to achieving two of the major objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy: reducing early school drop-out rates below 10% and lifting at least 20 million people out of poverty and social exclusion.

I therefore support the development of a European structure composed of common goals and values that includes shared rights and structures, which will contribute to coming up with adequate early-childhood education and care services; these must benefit from effective and equitable financing.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (S&D), in writing. (RO) It is well known that children in their earliest years are particularly curious, receptive and willing to learn, with this being the age at which the ability to speak and express themselves is formed, along with social skills. Since children’s early learning lays the foundations for their successful lifelong learning, a key process for achieving the Europe 2020 objectives, I think that the Europe 2020 strategy, which seeks to create an inclusive society by increasing employment, lowering school dropout rates and reducing poverty, cannot be achieved unless all children are given an adequate start in life.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Edite Estrela (S&D), in writing. (PT) I voted for the report on Early Years Learning as I argue that parental leave is an essential component during the early years of a child’s life. Responding adequately to children’s needs necessitates the defence of improved maternity, paternity and parental leave conditions, thereby putting both parents at the very heart of their children’s education.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Diogo Feio (PPE), in writing. (PT) As I said regarding the Youth on the Move initiative, education is an essential instrument in ensuring the realisation of the ambitious objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy. That is not just true for secondary and tertiary education, but also for the first things learned, from the very beginning, in early childhood.

It is essential that European children have access to a quality education that prepares them in a challenging way for the basic skills of speaking their mother tongue, of mathematics and of one or more foreign languages. This education must also enable them to acquire the methods of work necessary to successfully pursue their studies, and to become as productive as we want young Europeans to be.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), in writing.(PT) This report is on early years learning in the European Union. We all know that you build a house from the foundations up. When the foundations are bad, there is a risk that the building might not be sound and could collapse. The same is true for education. An education with a robust, quality foundation guarantees Europeans a better future. Intervention during a child’s early years is crucial to its future, improving health and family relations, and enabling it to get a better job in the future. Early years learning is a very important issue that has not received the attention it is due from lawmakers. The preparation of human resources is more important than the quality of buildings. The quality of the professional services and the qualifications of those working in the sector need to be improved. I agree that values and parameters common to all the Member States should be set out, so I voted for this report.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) This report focuses on the crucial issue of early years learning, and its positive impact in terms of cognitive, motor, behavioural, affective and emotional development. These are determinants of children’s healthy and balanced mental and physical growth.

Some important issues are acknowledged in the report’s preamble, such as the link between a poor and disadvantaged background and low educational achievement, or the major difficulties many households have in reconciling family obligations with deregulated working hours and insecure jobs. Regrettably, these issues are forgotten further on: the proposals necessary to correct these situations are not made.

As something essential to social development and combating poverty, early years learning should be founded on the guarantee of a pre-school network that is public, free, high quality and accessible to all. Education cannot be at the mercy of the logic of the market. In order to provide the prospect of a better life and future, a public network of crèches needs to be created, covering a wider geographic area and more open to models of teaching that encourage the development of the child and of society, and that combat social segregation and discrimination.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) The issue of early years learning is the key subject of this report, which focuses on its positive impact in terms of cognitive, motor, behavioural, affective and emotional development. These are determinants of children’s healthy and balanced mental and physical growth.

Some important issues are acknowledged in the report’s preamble, such as the link between a poor and disadvantaged background and low educational achievement, or the major difficulties many households have in reconciling family obligations with deregulated working hours and insecure jobs. Regrettably, these issues are forgotten further on: the proposals necessary to correct these situations are not made.

As something essential to social development and combating poverty, early years learning should be founded on the guarantee of a pre-school network that is public, free, high quality and accessible to all. Education cannot be at the mercy of the logic of the market. In order to provide the prospect of a better life and future, a public network of crèches and nursery schools needs to be created, covering a wider geographic area and more open to models of teaching that encourage the development of the child and of society, and that combat social segregation and discrimination.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), in writing. (SK) Both the submitted reports and the debate so far consider culture and education from a variety of perspectives. I consider the development of creativity right from birth to be a very important aspect. The report by Mrs Honeyball points out that, from many perspectives, it is best to make a start with education in the early years. According to the human rights documents currently in force in Europe, children are fully and actively engaged citizens with their own rights. They have enormous creative potential. The period from birth to the age of three has a fundamental effect on the development of thinking, and on physical and cognitive development. The foundations for lifelong learning, which play an important role in achieving the Lisbon targets, are also laid in this early period. Poor families, often Roma, usually have worse access to services in the area of early childhood education and care. It is all the more sad for the fact that children from disadvantaged families should benefit the most from the opportunity to use these services.

We must ensure that education and care are available to all families and children, regardless of their origin or the financial situation of the parents. I very much dislike resorting to pragmatic, financial arguments in questions of human rights, and in matters that should be obvious and as independent as possible of the economic situation. However, it must be said that a decision not to invest in this area will actually give rise to costs that may not be immediately noticeable.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Bruno Gollnisch (NI), in writing.(FR) From time to time, this House produces reports whose titles leave no doubt about the fact that there will inevitably be nonsense in them! The Honeyball report is one of them. Pass over the usual paragraphs on the fate awaiting migrants, compulsory multiculturalism and the promotion of everything in the minority. The gem in this report is at paragraph 14. Fathers and mothers are thus ‘equal partners in early childhood education and care’. Did I read ‘partners’? Is it not their responsibility, first and foremost, to educate their own children? However it is true that, at paragraph 16, the rapporteur is calling for investment in parental education programmes. From the outset, parents are thus seen as incapable, irresponsible and childish. This impression is confirmed by paragraph 27, which stresses that, in the absence of adequate services for early childhood, our young children run the risk of falling into criminality and antisocial behaviour. Your trust in the human being is astounding and one wonders how mankind has been able to manage without you until now. No, really, the best favour you can do for our dear little darlings is to leave them in peace!

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this document, because the early years of childhood (pre-school) are critical for cognitive, sensory and motor development and language acquisition, and also lay the foundations for lifelong learning. It is therefore recommended that Member States consider introducing a compulsory year of nursery schooling before the start of schooling proper. The introduction and retention of innovative pedagogical models for language teaching is encouraged, particularly multilingual crèches and nursery schools which meet the objective set in Barcelona in 2002, which includes the learning of regional, minority and neighbouring languages. In an unstable economic climate, we must not neglect to invest substantially in early childhood education and care (ECEC) services. I feel that the Member States should devote appropriate resources to ECEC services. Quality early years education can help reduce early school leaving, combat educational disadvantages faced by children from disadvantaged social and cultural groups and reduce the resulting social inequalities, all of which affect society as a whole. Young people from vulnerable social groups are particularly at risk. We must care for future generations and the quality of their education.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Giovanni La Via (PPE), in writing. (IT) While we are aware that it is both inadequate and difficult to create an approach to the care and education of young children, it is important to look at the possible implementation of what is needed and the levels at which action needs to be taken. By young children we mean children up to the age of six. This is a delicate stage in children’s cerebral, physical and cognitive development, as well as their language. These are the years when children learn and become familiar with the tools that as adults they will use to elaborate cognitive mechanisms that are different, but necessary for their future education and work. I therefore voted for this report because we are talking about protecting childhood, the right of thousands of children to go to school or to be given the best possible conditions in which to learn. This subject is the key to the future and the development of the European Union, and for this reason we need to take the action described by Mrs Honeyball, who I would like to congratulate for her work.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE), in writing. (RO) It is of paramount importance that we support a standard policy and approach between EU Member States with regard to children’s early years learning. Access to this kind of learning has important economic, social and cultural benefits. Apart from having a standard EU-level policy, it is particularly important to ensure good collaboration and coordination locally between the various institutions and ministries involved in youth education programmes. These programmes are very important as during their early years, children have a particular ability to learn things, and they can determine children’s entire educational and professional paths.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. – I voted for this report. In 2002, the Barcelona European Council called for EU members to provide childcare to at least 90% of children between the age of three years and mandatory school age by 2010, and to at least 33% of children under three. These targets signalled a labour market approach to ECEC services, based on the need identified at the time of increasing the numbers of women in work. While it is vital to give due attention to the link between ECEC services and equality of opportunities for women, these targets are clearly problematic, and outmoded, since they fail to take into account many of the crucial qualitative aspects of a strong early education policy. ECEC centres are not simply a place to ‘park’ children so that women can work; they are of utmost importance in contributing to the well-being of children and improving their future life chances

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jiří Maštálka (GUE/NGL), in writing. (CS) The early years period of childhood deserves great attention and a careful approach in terms of the external environment. We must always remember that this is a unique and unrepeatable period of development, which forms the personality of the individual. There should be a more intensive focus on it, and it should never be undervalued or temporarily neglected in any way. Adults should be a role model, thus helping children to acquire different types of knowledge and ability. It is the period of development of the personality, when the learning process is, so to speak, unforced and natural, and the surrounding world is noticed, accepted and absorbed to the greatest possible extent. Although child development involves a number of contributing factors, whether genetically based or from the external environment, it is particularly the effect of the parents and the immediate circle of people that forms the personality.

I would also like to mention and to emphasise that we should not forget in this context adequate and all-round focused movement activity aimed precisely at this age group, which can assist in the development of the individual and contribute to better health in the future.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Iosif Matula (PPE), in writing.(RO) Early years education has far-reaching implications on children’s future development and their chances of success later on. Investments made during this period reduce the costs incurred later relating to health matters, the crime rate and antisocial behaviour. Nevertheless, the provision of early years education is unequal across the European Union. However, it would be difficult to implement a ‘one size fits all’ approach. I think that we need to focus rather on establishing a common framework with clearly defined objectives and values. According to the target set in 2002, EU Member States must offer early years education to 90% of children between the age of three and the compulsory school age. There is also an economic rationale behind this, given the rise in the number of women on the labour market. It is vital for us to involve the minority population in early years education programmes, especially the Roma population, which is often disadvantaged. We must also ensure that a sufficient number of childcare places are available so as to avoid long waiting times for enrolling children in this kind of institution. We must not overlook either the qualifications of the staff working with young children, who have a crucial impact on the quality of education provided.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), in writing. (FR) Ensuring all young children receive equal quality care and education, whatever their age and social condition, is a minimum. The Honeyball report, despite being otherwise commendable, dares not ask for this minimum. That is deplorable. However, since this text has no legislative consequence, it can be approved in spite of its serious shortcomings.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Melo (PPE), in writing. (PT) It is agreed that early years learning lays the foundation for successful lifelong learning. Children in their earliest years are particularly curious, receptive and willing to learn, and important skills such as the ability to speak and express oneself, as well as social skills, are formed at this age. It is also at this age that the foundations for the child’s future educational and occupational career are laid. We must therefore make the necessary efforts so that young children have access to the same learning conditions, without discrimination of any kind.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Louis Michel (ALDE), in writing. (FR) The learning undertaken by children during early childhood is the foundation of the success of their lifelong learning. This learning sharpens the child’s intelligence, stimulates his or her natural curiosity and develops his or her motor skills, puts a premium on manual work and is good for mental health. It socialises the child, develops his or her mother tongue and accustoms him or her to the sounds of a foreign language. It leads him or her to the rudiments of reading and of arithmetic.

Nevertheless, early childhood education and care takes on different forms in the various countries of the European Union, depending on the country’s interpretation of childhood. Early childhood education and care generally receives less attention and investment than the other education levels. All parents and children should be able to use education and care services, regardless of family origin or financial situation. Parents should, for their part, be the full partners of these services.

The pre-school period being the most important for the child’s emotional and social development, those working with these children should have the required qualifications. In all cases, the prime concern must be to consider the higher needs and interests of the child.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE), in writing. (SK) Early childhood is unquestionably of fundamental importance to the physical, mental and social development of children, and we must therefore understand that the return on investment in pre-school education is the guarantee of future growth. Apart from this, many studies have already shown that funding used in this way brings considerable economic and social advantages in the medium and long-term.

The best and most natural way to secure support of this kind is to protect the family as the basic unit of society. Parents are the first and most important teachers of their children, and thus the legal framework should not contain provisions which penalise families for personally caring for their children, particularly in the early years. Although this agenda is within the exclusive competence of Member States, it is more than desirable for the Union, through its coordinating role, to contribute towards improving the situation in the Member States. For the reasons mentioned, I support the position of the rapporteur.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), in writing. (DE) The motion for a resolution by the UK socialist MEP, Mary Honeyball, seeks to reduce the role of the mother and father of a child to that of equal partners in the State education system. Verbatim, the report states (in paragraph 14) that ‘[The European Parliament] stresses that parents, both mothers and fathers, are equal partners in ECEC [early childhood education and care]; (...)’. This wording expresses deep mistrust of the family and the globally recognised right of parents to care for and bring up their children. This is in direct contrast to the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, which states that ‘The care and upbringing of children is the natural right of parents and a duty primarily incumbent upon them’ (Article 6(2)). This report is a manifestation of the EU’s anti-family agenda and seeks to meddle in the social competences of the Member States.

Moreover, the motion recommends the introduction of a compulsory year of nursery schooling before the start of schooling proper, as well as developing and improving early years educational establishments In so doing, the report confirms the EU’s ‘Barcelona objectives’ which, as once upon a time in the Soviet Union, provide quotas for the state takeover of children’s upbringing. The well-being of the child is not central to this motion. The freedom of choice of parents in relation to bringing up their children is to be undermined. I therefore voted against this report.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Franz Obermayr (NI), in writing. (DE) The first three years of a child’s life are crucial for the development of the brain and for language learning. Language acquisition is the basis of logical thinking and contextual understanding. Without a certain level of language acquisition, further learning is scarcely possible, as the language deficits can only be overcome with great difficulty with increasing age. The report observes that most immigrant children in the EU are educated without adequate linguistic knowledge. At the same time, it declares that migrant families (and minorities such as the Roma) make much less use of the early years education offered than other families. We cannot allow it to be the case that the level of our schools continues to fall and fall because so many pupils quite simply cannot understand the teaching. Every child – migrant or not – must have mastered the national language by the time they enter school to a degree that enables them to follow the teaching taking place there. The report offers no meaningful attempts to solve this problem. Instead, it leans towards complete nannying of the parents and a state takeover of child-rearing. I therefore voted against this report.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Georgios Papanikolaou (PPE), in writing. (EL) The diversity in European educational traditions and, hence, in pre-school education, are both acceptable and welcome, as they reflect the different European cultural, historical and social aspects of a country. However, there is room to develop a European framework with common coordination denominators, common objectives and values and common rights and structures. Moreover, if the Barcelona objective stipulating that EU Member States must provide childcare for at least 90% of children aged between three and the age at which compulsory education starts, and to at least 33% of children under the age of three, is to be achieved, we need agreement between the Member States and, where possible, exchanges of information and best practices, especially by Member States with highly developed structures in pre-school education to partners with less experience in that sector.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), in writing. (PT) Early childhood care and education are made available in different ways throughout the European Union, with different definitions of ‘quality’, which depend significantly on the cultural values of each country and region, and on their interpretation of ‘childhood’. Early childhood learning is the basis for successful lifelong learning, which is central to achieving the goals of the Europe 2020 strategy. I therefore voted in favour of the report on early childhood learning which sets out common EU objectives in pursuing the aims of the Barcelona European Council: specifically, that, by 2010, the provision of childcare should be ensured for at least 90% of children between three years old and the mandatory school age, and for 33% of children under the age of three. Like the rapporteur, I call for even more ambitious goals. This is a child-centred approach which recognises that the early childhood years are crucial to cognitive, sensory and physical development, as well as to emotional and personal development, and for language acquisition, and that they also constitute the basis for learning throughout life.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Phil Prendergast (S&D), in writing. – Access to Early Years Learning is of vital importance to young children in terms of their receptiveness and willingness to learn, especially since important skills such as the ability to speak and develop social skills are formed at a young age. As well as this, there is a clear link between a poor and disadvantaged background and low educational achievement. Therefore, we should ensure that the targets set at the Barcelona European Council of providing childcare to at least 90% of children between the age of three and the mandatory school age, and to at least 33% of children under the age of three, are met. Addressing educational disadvantage by providing high quality early childhood education and targeted support, and by promoting inclusive education, are absolutely necessary to create a truly inclusive society.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), in writing. (PT) Early childhood is a time crucial to children’s development of a series of cognitive and social capacities, the effects of which will be felt throughout their lives. The aptitude for multilingualism should be remembered, for example. However, this stage of learning has been minimally studied, and little importance has been attached to it in the context of education overall. This has a negative impact on, for example, those raised in less well-off families, in which the cognitive development of children is often less stimulated. We therefore urgently need to increase early childhood education and care (ECEC). That is why I voted for this resolution.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Robert Rochefort (ALDE), in writing. (FR) The first years of childhood are crucial for children’s cerebral, physical, emotional and personal development, for acquiring language, and are the foundation of lifelong learning. Entirely in favour of the implementation of a common European approach for early childhood learning – while respecting the diversity of each Member State’s approach – I lend my support to Mrs Honeyball’s report, which recommends establishing a European framework for ECEC services, highlighting common values and objectives. Given the critical role played by parents as ‘main educators’, the report seeks to improve parental leave – which should be long enough to enable parents to play their leading role in educating their children in the early stages of their life – and encourages the Member States to invest in parental education programmes as well as provide other forms of assistance to parents who require additional help. Of course, this requires additional investment from all 27 Member States, and I am asking them to allocate adequate resources to ECEC services. For me, education must be a political priority.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. – Early learning in the EU follows a long and finely differentiated tradition in the different Member States. It seems important to define a framework of values and common objectives which could be set as a goal in all Member States, while the sharing of good practices remains the key to providing high quality service, with the child’s needs and care at the core of all endeavours. The report focuses its recommendations on the balance between the role of Member States and the Commission; the necessity to make early school a broader service inspired by good practices in Member States where ‘maternelles’ and kindergartens are a right of parents; inclusion of all children, whatever their social background (‘notion of public service’); caring for migrant children and their integration in early schools; the inclusion of arts and all tools to enhance the children’s creativity; training of educators for better intercultural skills; gender parity while working in structures for early learning; and creation of new and well qualified jobs.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), in writing. (IT) I voted in favour of this report because I believe that, within the European Union, individual Member States still deliver early education very differently from one another. We need to develop a common European framework that includes targets and shared values, as well as shared entitlements and structures. Children must be fully considered real, active citizens who are able to form and express their own opinions, enjoy certain rights, and who possess their own creative potential. In this framework, once again, parents must be considered the centre of their upbringing.

The natural family is the ideal place for a child to grow up and develop, and, once again, allowing parents an adequate amount of leave may help to reduce the demand for places in childcare facilities. We must therefore take concrete action, since very few Member States currently offer periods of paid leave that are long enough to meet families’ requirements.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD), in writing. (EL) A child’s early years learning is extremely important to its proper development and is the key to creating a stable and economically dynamic society. Investing in early years learning has long-term benefits for the future of our children. The efforts made in this report to examine the issue at European and national level are important. I welcome the call for more European research in this sector, the need to identify and exchange best practices at European level, and for proper use to be made of the structural funds and programmes in this direction.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), in writing. (FR) The European Council of Barcelona in 2002 had set the target of introducing, by 2010, support centres for at least 90% of children between three years of age and school age, and for at least 33% of children aged under three. Unfortunately, we are still a long way from these figures. Yet the number and quality of support centres for childcare are crucial for Europe. Indeed, from a very young age, caring for children, their learning and gradual awareness of their environment are of decisive importance for the next phase of their education. In addition, their parents do not have to give up their professional aspirations because of a lack of childcare support centres. Nonetheless, this report reminds us, and rightly so, that each country has a different conception of childcare and different models thereof, which we should respect. With this report, the European Parliament is proving that the EU, far from wanting to sacrifice childcare in the name of free competition of services, lets Member States choose their educational model.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Daciana Octavia Sârbu (S&D), in writing. – Early years learning profoundly affects the life-chances of every individual. In particular, development in the early years of healthy lifestyle behaviours, such as good dietary habits and regular exercise, are key determinants of physical and mental health. Like all policies which work on the principle that ‘prevention is better than cure’, early years learning is also relatively cost-effective to deliver. I congratulate the rapporteur on a comprehensive report which raises some key points for further discussion and action.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), in writing.(PL) I endorsed the report on Early Years Learning in the EU. I would like to call particular attention to three matters. Firstly, the early years of childhood are critical for cognitive, sensory and motor development. Therefore, when developing comprehensive early years policies and programmes, the Member States must take account of a number of different issues which affect childhood development, such as migration, gender equality and employment. Secondly, centres at local level should develop action programmes which take account of differing life situations and needs in the area of early childhood education and care. They must also have sufficient autonomy to enable the operation of programmes for children with uniqueness and creativity. The next matter is the need to improve early childhood education and care services. We should start here by developing mechanisms for evaluating provision and ensuring that quality standards are met.

My final observation concerns the need for universal access to childcare centres. Data provided by the Polish Ministry of Education show that in Poland, there are 8 400 public nursery schools and 1 600 private ones, and that there are around 1.6 million children aged from three to six years. This means there are nursery school places for barely 40% of these children, while there are 352 crèches in Poland, which are used by only 2% of children under three. This problem is one of the main reasons for the high unemployment among women.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Catherine Stihler (S&D), in writing. – I support this report as it is important to recognise the valuable contribution of early childhood education and how crucial it is to achieving the EU’s 2020 strategy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Niki Tzavela (EFD), in writing. (EL) It is a fact that there is diversity between the education systems in the EU Member States and, as a result, the research and exchanges of best practices which this particular report advocates will, in my opinion, bring about important results in terms of improving a child’s early years learning in the EU. In fact, due to the child-oriented approach of universal rather than targeted services, the involvement of parents and the improved integration of services, I voted in favour of Mrs Honeyball’s report on early learning in Europe.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marie-Christine Vergiat (GUE/NGL), in writing. (FR) I voted in favour of this report, which recommends public policies in favour of childcare that are a step in the right direction.

While taking into account the diversity of systems and traditions in terms of education and childcare in the EU, the report emphasises an approach centred on the needs of the child and on the impact that learning from a very young age will have on the child’s schooling and personal development.

It presents in a clear manner the issues concerning childcare and equal access to education for all and, in particular, the children of immigrant families – whatever their situation – and particularly stresses these issues within the context of fighting against poverty and social exclusion.

It also highlights the need to provide stable employment, quality training and fair social protection to staff working in childcare.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Angelika Werthmann (NI), in writing. (DE) I voted in favour of this report. The rapporteur correctly placed the needs of the child at the heart of this report. It is not surprising that the report should conclude that a single European solution is not possible. All the same, we do need a ‘framework’ at EU level in order to be able to coordinate early years learning with other EU-level programmes such as lifelong learning.

 
  
  

Motion for a resolution B7-0193/2011

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), in writing. (PT) I am voting for the proposal of the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament, which considers the Fisheries Partnership Agreement (FPA) to have seemingly contributed to the overexploitation of some stocks, particularly octopus, and has therefore reduced fishing opportunities for Mauritanian fishermen and given the EU industry a competitive advantage as a result of subsidised access fees for EU vessels, I welcome the European Commission’s proposal to open negotiations on the renewal of the protocol of the FPA between the EU and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania. I also welcome the European Commission’s proposal to introduce a human rights clause into the agreement, and call on the Commission to establish a dialogue with Mauritania aiming to help the country further develop a responsible fisheries policy which meets both conservation requirements and its objective to promote the economic development of fisheries resources. Moreover, I call on the Commission to take urgent measures to reduce by-catch by European vessels fishing in Mauritanian waters.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this resolution. The protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement with the Islamic Republic of Mauritania expires on 31 July 2012. The Mauritanian fisheries sector is extremely important to Mauritania’s economy, representing 10% of the country’s GDP and 35-50% of its exports. Therefore, the Commission intends to launch negotiations regarding its renewal. I welcome the renewal of this protocol, but it should include many important issues. Evaluations have concluded that most stocks in Mauritania are either fully exploited or over-exploited and, therefore, the Commission must discuss with Mauritania the development of long-term fisheries management plans that would include all fishery allocations by the Mauritanian authorities, to both their national fleets and third-country fleets, in order to ensure the sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE), in writing. (ES) I am voting in favour of this resolution because it is necessary to begin negotiations for the renewal of the protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania. These negotiations will allow EU-flagged vessels to fish in Mauritanian waters based on a principle of surplus stocks as described in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. It is also necessary that Mauritania ratify the relevant international fisheries instruments.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Slavi Binev (NI), in writing. (BG) I support the resolution on the renewal of the protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the EU and Mauritania because the agreement is based on the principle of surplus, which is compatible with the EU’s sustainable fishing strategy. Mauritania is also one of the poorest countries in the world, classified as a Heavily Indebted Poor Country. For this reason, this agreement is extremely important to Mauritania because the European Union is paying for this access, thereby providing additional income separate from financial aid.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), in writing. (PT) I welcome the Commission’s proposal to open negotiations on the renewal of the protocol between the EU and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania. This country has been losing value added because of the lack of opportunity to exploit its own fisheries resources. It is therefore necessary to study all the economic implications of this, particularly in economic and social terms. It is essential to bear in mind that the fisheries sector is extremely important to the Mauritanian economy, and that this is one of the poorest countries in Africa, which is financially dependent on foreign aid and subject to severe political instability. I voted for the motion for a resolution tabled today by the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) because of all these factors, which require the special attention given to them in this legislative text.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Edite Estrela (S&D), in writing. (PT) I voted in favour of this motion for a resolution on the EU-Mauritania Fisheries Partnership Agreement because I consider the renewal of the agreement, which should include a human rights clause, positive. I think it is necessary to continue helping the country further to develop a responsible fisheries policy which meets requirements regarding conservation of fisheries resources.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Diogo Feio (PPE), in writing. (PT) As the protocol to the current Fisheries Partnership Agreement will expire in the future, the Commission’s intention to open renewal negotiations with the other party is logical. Mauritania is a poor country that is highly dependent on the sector, so keeping the agreement with the European Union could be beneficial to both signatories. Like the rapporteur, I think that there is a need for rigorous assessment of the current state of stocks and of the various types of fish in Mauritanian waters.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), in writing. (PT) This joint motion for a resolution of the European Parliament concerns renewal of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, which expires on 31 July 2012. The European Commission, aware of the importance of the renewal of this partnership, and under the terms of the Council mandate, has launched a process aimed at renewing this protocol, fully pursuant to Article 218 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The current agreement with Mauritania has been contributing to the economic development of Mauritania, where the fisheries sector is one of the fundamental pillars of the economy, representing almost 10% of gross domestic product (GDP), 29% of national budget revenue and almost 50% of exports. However, it is also essential to the European Union, and to its fishing fleets in particular. I agree with this proposal, for which I voted, but I think that catch control needs to be scientifically monitored, navigation control systems need to be modernised and wrecks need to be cleaned. Surveillance should also be strengthened and illegal vessels impounded.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) This resolution raises a number of important issues, in line with our longstanding questions, criticisms and suggestions as regards fisheries partnership agreements; in particular, their serious lack of success with their development cooperation objectives.

We welcome the fact that a number of the points from our resolution have been included in this joint motion for a resolution. Amongst the most important aspects, we would stress: the need for a comprehensive and detailed evaluation of the reasons for the inadequate achievement of the objectives regarding development cooperation and the various lines of support for the fisheries sector in Mauritania; the advocating of support for the fastest possible construction of adequate facilities for landing fish along Mauritania’s central and southern coastlines, including Nouakchott, so that fish caught in Mauritanian waters can be landed at national ports rather than outside the country, as is often the case at present; and that fisheries agreements between the EU and third countries should be preceded by a wide-ranging debate in the countries concerned, allowing participation by the public, civil society organisations and national parliaments, thereby promoting greater democracy and transparency.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) We have a number of concerns about fisheries partnership agreements as they are currently undertaken and applied by the EU. In particular, their level of achievement of development cooperation objectives is clearly inadequate.

We advocate the principle, enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, that access conceded to the EU must relate to quantities that Mauritania’s fleet is unable to catch.

Apart from that, the resolution includes several positive aspects, such as:

- that fisheries agreements between the EU and third countries should be preceded by a wide-ranging debate in the countries concerned, allowing participation by the public, civil society organisations and national parliaments, thereby promoting greater democracy and transparency;

- that financial support for the Mauritanian multiannual fisheries programme must be in line with Mauritania’s needs for sustainable fisheries development;

- the need for a comprehensive and detailed evaluation of the reasons for the inadequate achievement of the objectives regarding development cooperation and the various lines of support for the fisheries sector in Mauritania.

For these reasons, we voted in favour.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Estelle Grelier (S&D), in writing. (FR) This resolution was adopted following the proposal by the Commission aimed at opening the negotiations on renewing the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and Mauritania. Voting in favour of a resolution is unfortunately the only thing Parliament can do to be heard in the negotiations of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement (FPA). At present, Parliament can only have its say once the negotiations have ended, which leaves it no other option than to either approve these agreements or reject their ratification, thus leaving it very little room for manoeuvre. Now, the Treaties stipulate that Parliament be ‘immediately and fully informed at all stages of the procedure’. Hence, it is essential and legitimate that we ask to be associated with the European Commission and Council during these negotiations. This issue is not new and raises regular questioning of the European Commission by the members of the Committee on Fisheries. It is regrettable that we are not able to make binding our opinion on our priorities relating to the provision of European funds to the countries concerned, in spite of the fact that Parliament has the power to exercise financial control.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this document because Mauritania is one of the poorest countries in Africa, classified as a Heavily Indebted Poor Country, and financially dependent on foreign aid, and has been characterised by considerable political instability. The current protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement (FPA) with the Islamic Republic of Mauritania expires on 31 July 2012, and the Commission intends to launch negotiations regarding its renewal, for which it has received a prescriptive mandate from the Council. The European Parliament welcomes the Commission’s proposal to open negotiations on the renewal of the protocol between the EU and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, while underlining that it should be maintained only if it is mutually beneficial, adjusted appropriately and implemented correctly. The European Parliament also welcomes the Commission’s proposal to introduce a human rights clause into this agreement.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. – I voted for this report and in doing so, urge the Commission to ensure that fishing activities that fall under the Fisheries Partnership Agreement meet the same sustainability criteria as fishing activities in EU waters. The report, moreover, calls on Mauritanian authorities and the Commission to ensure that strict sustainability criteria are respected by all vessels exercising fishing activities in Mauritanian waters (either from the EU, Mauritania or third countries).

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Melo (PPE), in writing. (PT) The current protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement with Mauritania expires on 31 July 2012 and needs to be renegotiated so that EU-flagged vessels can continue fishing in Mauritanian waters. As such, it is a good opportunity for us to improve the already existing agreement. Improvements in terms of infrastructure and of building adequate facilities for unloading fish along Mauritania’s central and southern coasts must be promoted, to enable the EU fleet to operate more efficiently, thereby facilitating the flow of investment and increasing this agreement’s impact on the local economy. As regards the actual catches, they should be limited to surpluses and to those stocks that cannot be caught by Mauritania’s fishing fleet, so that the environmental equilibrium can be maintained and the activity can remain sustainable over the years.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), in writing. (PT) Fisheries agreements with third countries should ensure a fair balance between economic interests and promoting sustainable fishing. As such, it is important that the EU use the fisheries agreements it establishes to ensure best practices are followed in other countries, fully respecting the key principles of the common fisheries policy (CFP).

Combating illegal fishing, creating jobs, reducing poverty levels in third countries and supplying the EU market with quality products for its consumers are the key objectives that should be guaranteed under this agreement with Mauritania.

We also urgently need to ensure that Mauritania requires that third countries with which it establishes other agreements should respect the same rules followed by vessels flying the EU flag, so preventing competitive inequalities that put the EU fleet at a disadvantage.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. – With this, the EP firstly welcomes the Commission’s proposal to open negotiations on the renewal of the protocol between the EU and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, while underlining that it should be maintained only if it is mutually beneficial, adjusted appropriately and implemented correctly; secondly, welcomes the Commission’s proposal to introduce a human rights clause; thirdly, insists that any and all access negotiated for EU-flagged vessels to fish in Mauritanian waters must be based on the principle of surplus stocks as described in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea; emphasises, in particular, that there must be a rigorous assessment of all stocks for which access is sought or which are likely to be caught by the EU fleet as by-catch; stresses that any access granted to the EU must relate to those resources which are unable to be caught by the Mauritanian fleet; emphasises that, should effort reductions be necessary, those third-country (EU and other) fleets causing the most environmental damage must be the first to make reductions;

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), in writing. (IT) The Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania must be considered a strategic document of understanding that is very important as far as relations between the EU and Africa are concerned. Today, therefore, we must implement a new protocol which is in line with the undertaking that European countries signed up to in 2002 and which is able to ensure a sustainable fishing practice that will also contribute to development in the countries concerned. The priority is now to resume the negotiations that were already under way, but based on new premises and involving States which have, until now, been excluded from these negotiations. We must also review some requests that go back to the negotiations on the original agreement, in which Mauritania, for example, made a last minute request for further biological rest periods on fishing in May and June, in addition to that already agreed for the months of September and October.

 
  
  

Motion for a resolution B7-0284/2011

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), in writing. (PT) I voted for this proposal because I believe that it will benefit the EU, since a properly functioning procurement market is of essential importance in order to foster the Single Market, to stimulate innovation, and to promote a higher level of protection of the environment and climate, as well as social inclusion, throughout the EU. Public procurement is of crucial relevance, serving as a catalyst for the revitalisation of the EU economy and, accordingly, for employment and welfare. This is particularly true given the need to overcome the financial and economic crisis, and to protect ourselves against any future crisis. I agree that a sound and well-considered process of optimising the legal framework for public procurement is of vital importance for the welfare of EU citizens, for EU consumers and businesses, and for national, regional and local public authorities, and thus for the acceptance of the EU as a whole.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this resolution. A well-functioning procurement market is particularly important for fostering the integrity of the Single Market and stimulating innovation, and for achieving optimal value for public authorities and tax payers. This market is a particularly important part of the EU economy and has huge potential, but procurement rules and principles vary across the Member States and prevent companies, particularly small ones, from gaining access to cross-border procurement. Similar restrictions also exist in terms of access to third-country tenders. Despite the fact that the EU has opened up its markets, our companies face huge problems if they want to access public sector markets in third countries. I feel that significant political attention must be given to this issue as a matter of urgency. The Commission should conduct a detailed analysis of the problems relating to restricted access for EU companies to other countries’ markets and take appropriate action against trading partners which benefit from the openness of the EU market, but do not open up their own markets to EU companies.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Regina Bastos (PPE), in writing. (PT) Public contracts represent important economic opportunities for companies, are very important in the promotion of the Single Market, stimulate innovation, and promote the protection of the environment and climate, as well as social inclusion. Public procurement policy should ensure that public money is used as efficiently as possible, and should keep public procurement markets open, thereby contributing to the relaunch of the EU economy, to job creation and to welfare. Public contracts also play a key role in the Europe 2020 strategy, and are one of the instruments to be used to achieve the proposed goals.

This motion for a resolution calls on the Commission to approach the issue of balanced access to public sector markets and to undertake the revision of public procurement and concessions, so allowing the involvement of the European Parliament, the Member States, and of citizens and businesses.

It also calls on the Commission to give priority to modernisation of public procurement rules. Equally important is its call for the Commission to go ahead with assessing the problems associated with extraordinary low bids and to propose appropriate solutions.

For all these reasons, I shall be voting in favour of this motion for a resolution.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Françoise Castex (S&D), in writing. (FR) I voted in favour of this report, not with the aim of putting up protectionist barriers, but because we can no longer have a situation in which the European Union is the only one respecting the rules of the game. We can no longer ignore social and economic dumping in emerging countries, China in particular, which are winning contracts with rock-bottom prices in the countries of the Union, without regard for social rights and legislation on State aid, whereas the markets of these countries remain inaccessible to European companies. We can no longer be naïve: the survival of our businesses and our jobs depends on this. Finally, I am pleased that the amendments submitted by the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament concerning respect, in the context of public contracts, for the labour, social and environmental standards in force in the Member States, have largely been adopted. That demonstrates real awareness and represents a positive and necessary change. It is now for the Commission to assess this call fully.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Diogo Feio (PPE), in writing. (PT) Given that public procurement represents millions of euro every year, its economic importance is in no doubt. For this very reason, although there is a long tradition of EU legislation on such contracts, it will never be going too far to call for better, more effective laws that guarantee the total transparency of procedures; that prevent all forms of corruption or manipulation of proposals to benefit one candidate; that put a ceiling in terms of numbers and of value on the number of awards without a call for proposals or without negotiation; and that guarantee proper competition on the Internal Market between candidate companies, irrespective of their country of origin.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), in writing. (PT) This motion for a resolution of the European Parliament addresses equal access to public sector markets in the EU and in third countries, and the revision of the legal framework of public procurement including concessions. The EU has adopted a number of documents on this issue: directives 2004/18/EC, 2004/17/EC, 93/13/EC and 2007/66/EC, resolutions (European Parliament Resolution of 18 May 2010), reports (Mr Monti, A new strategy for the Single Market  At the service of Europe’s economy and society), the European Commission communication ‘Towards a Single Market Act For a highly competitive social market economy’, and the European Commission Green Paper on the modernisation of EU public procurement policy.

In order to overcome the current financial and economic crisis, a perfectly functioning public procurement market is of crucial importance to revitalising the economy and ensuring equitable treatment. I hereby state that I voted for this resolution as I believe that it is in line with the principle of better law making, and prioritises the modernisation of the rules on public procurement and concessions, which constitutes a significant improvement in EU law.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) This is yet another attempt to push through the liberalisation of public procurement. This is a direction that the EU is doggedly following both at home and in third countries, using free trade agreements.

In all cases, the intention is the same: to prevent countries from protecting their own companies in public procurement, so as to make things easier for the big companies of the powers that also want to use competition, which is seen as the be all and end all, to dominate the awarding of public contracts.

We disagree with this approach. Nevertheless, we acknowledge that there are important changes to be made in this area.

Therefore, some aspects of the resolution deserve our support, specifically the criticism of the lack ‘of transparency with regard to the composition and work of the Commission’s internal advisory committee on public procurement (ACPP) and the role and competences of the Advisory Committee on the Opening-Up of Public Procurement (CCO)’. We also agree with the call for ‘the Commission to take steps to ensure that the composition of both this committee and the planned new advisory committee on public/private partnerships is balanced, including trade unionists and representatives of the business community, in particular, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and that they work in a transparent manner’.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) With this resolution, the majority in Parliament wants to call for the liberalisation of public procurement on the pretext of relaxing and simplifying the rules and defending small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Although there could be justification for this in some cases, in the majority of cases, it is not this that is at stake.

What they want is to prevent any country from protecting its own companies in public procurement, just to make things easier for the big companies of the powers that also wish to dominate the awarding of public contracts. That is why we voted against.

However, there is another aspect of the resolution with which we agree, specifically, the criticism of the lack of transparency with regard to the composition and work of the Commission’s internal advisory committee on public procurement (ACPP) and the role and competences of the Advisory Committee on the Opening-Up of Public Procurement (CCO). We also support the call for the Commission to take steps to ensure that the composition of both this committee and the planned new advisory committee on public/private partnerships is balanced, including trade unionists and representatives of the business community, in particular, SMEs, and that they work in a transparent manner.

It also seems the importance of strengthening anti-corruption mechanisms in the context of the European Union’s commitments in the field of international public procurement should be stressed, as should the need to focus efforts on ensuring transparency and fairness in the use of public funds. Moreover, we call for the European Parliament to be kept duly informed and receive all available information at every stage and at the end of the process.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Małgorzata Handzlik (PPE), in writing.(PL) Despite the openness of the EU public procurement market, access to third-country public procurement markets is still restricted to a large extent. In this situation, European businesses do not have equal opportunities for competing for public tenders in other countries of the world. For example, in 2009, the Chinese authorities adopted a system of accreditation of innovative local products, which restricted yet further access on the part of international businesses to the Chinese market. However, it is not only the Chinese market which is a problem, because highly developed economies such as the United States, Japan and Canada also pursue protectionist policies.

This is why I support the call for application of the principle of reciprocity in access to public procurement markets contained in the resolution which was adopted today and which I endorsed in the opinion of the Committee on International Trade, which I drafted. I would, however, like the future European Commission proposal on the principle of reciprocity to contribute in particular to the opening of the procurement markets of third countries, and not just to restrict access for businesses from third countries to public procurement markets in the European Union, which might have an adverse effect on competitiveness in the Union market.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this resolution, because a well-functioning procurement market is particularly important for fostering the Single Market and stimulating innovation. Public procurement is of crucial importance, especially for overcoming the financial and economic crisis and protecting against any future crisis, because it serves as a catalyst for the revitalisation of the EU economy, and consequently employment and welfare. The specific issue of safeguarding equal treatment and fair competition on public procurement markets in the EU and in third countries urgently needs more political attention, especially given current problems regarding access to public sector markets in third countries. In my opinion, the Commission should give priority to the modernisation of public procurement rules and dealing with service concessions in such a way as to avoid further fragmentation of EU public procurement law according to the principles of better regulation.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Constance Le Grip (PPE) , in writing. (FR) I am pleased at today’s adoption of the European Parliament joint resolution on equal access to public sector markets in the EU and in third countries and on the revision of the legal framework of public procurement, including concessions, a resolution of which I was a co-signatory. The good functioning of public procurement markets is essential for stimulating the Single Market. It is therefore important to clarify and improve the legislative framework regulating the awarding of public contracts, given their role as a catalyst for relaunching the economy of the Union. Regarding access to the European Union’s public procurement markets by businesses from third countries, the European Union has a duty to act realistically and pragmatically and, above all, without naivety. This is not about taking a stand against the opening-up of our markets, but rather the quite legitimate position of advocating mutual access in this area, not by closing our public procurement markets, but by ensuring that our partners outside the European Union open up their markets in an equivalent way and, if necessary, by developing appropriate mechanisms enabling us to achieve this objective of reciprocity and balance.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE), in writing. (RO) Equal access to public sector markets in the EU and the revision of the legal framework for public procurement are absolutely essential to boosting the Single Market in the Union and Member States, resulting in social and economic integration at EU level. Looking at the situation from the perspective of the economic and financial crisis, I think that the strategy proposed in this resolution is a necessity, in particular, the point about achieving greater coherence for the European common external trade policy. I should emphasise how important this legislative revision is in revitalising and stabilising the European Union’s economy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. – I supported this resolution as I believe the specific issue of safeguarding equal treatment and fair competition on public procurement markets in the EU and in third countries urgently needs more political attention.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), in writing. (FR) The calling into question of public/public partnerships, the scaling down of standards by public authorities (who are the guarantors of the general interest, need I remind you), the choices of these same public authorities leaning towards more competition … These are only a few examples of the wonderful ‘progress’ promised by the European Commission’s Green Paper on public procurement. Not content with endorsing such nonsense, this text makes the fight against any protectionist measure the central piece of its argument. So many policies that I object to. I shall vote against.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Melo (PPE), in writing. (PT) A properly functioning procurement market is of essential importance in order to foster the Single Market, to stimulate innovation, to boost employment, growth and competitiveness, to promote higher levels of environmental and climate protection and protect social rights throughout the EU, and to achieve optimal value for public authorities, citizens and taxpayers. With the objective of overcoming the financial and economic crisis, and of protecting against any future crisis, public procurement is of crucial relevance, serving as a catalyst for the revitalisation of the EU economy and, accordingly, for employment and welfare in the EU. Therefore, a sound and properly thought-out process of optimising the legal framework for public procurement is of vital importance for the welfare of EU citizens, EU consumers and businesses, and for national, regional and local authorities.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), in writing. (PT) A properly functioning procurement market is of crucial importance to promoting the Single Market, to stimulating innovation, to promoting a high level of environmental and climate protection, and of social inclusion across the EU, and to achieving the highest possible value for public authorities, citizens and taxpayers. For these reasons, I voted in favour of this European Parliament resolution on equal access to public sector markets in the EU and in third countries, and on the revision of the public procurement legal framework, including concessions. In this sense, I join the proponents of this resolution in calling on the Commission to prioritise the modernisation of the procurement rules and to address service concessions in order to avoid the further fragmentation of EU law on public procurement, in line with the principles of ‘better law making’.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Robert Rochefort (ALDE), in writing. (FR) Public procurement plays a vital role in stimulating the Single Market, promoting innovation, strengthening growth and supporting EU employment and competitiveness. However, to achieve this, these must operate effectively. For that to happen, as pointed out by the text of this resolution, which I endorse, it is important that the question of simplification and clarification of the rules for awarding public contracts finds answers quickly. It also seems essential to me that access to public contracts by SMEs – who account for 99% of all European businesses and over 100 million jobs – be improved as soon as possible. Moreover, in order to support their business, I invite the European Commission to implement the principle of reciprocity and to think of new ways of improving access by European companies to public procurement outside the Union, in order to ensure equal conditions for European and foreign companies who are competing for the allocation of public contracts.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. – We finally abstained due to the fact that several EPP and ECR amendments, inadmissible to us, were adopted.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Oreste Rossi (EFD), in writing. (IT) With a view to overcoming the economic and financial crisis, public procurement appears to be a catalyst for the revitalisation of the European economy, and of enterprise, employment and consumer welfare in Europe. Due to a gradual liberalisation of special sectors (water, electricity and gas), in order to protect the enterprises that operate in these areas, we need a qualification system for clients, aimed at ensuring that the competing enterprises are selected efficiently. I am in favour of the motion for a resolution, since it is necessary, in a transparent regime, to keep the fragmentation of EU public procurement law in order to achieve the highest possible levels of competitiveness and efficiency, as set out in our targets.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Daciana Octavia Sârbu (S&D), in writing. – Public procurement provides a unique opportunity to channel investment into projects for the common benefit of citizens whilst, at the same time, achieving wider public policy objectives. I would like to underline the importance of public procurement contracts in promoting environmental standards in buildings and transport, and the potential that this has to improve energy efficiency and therefore reduce carbon emissions, operating costs and air pollution. I urge the Member States to use public procurement contracts to pursue these objectives, which will have wide-reaching and long-term social, economic and environmental benefits.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), in writing. (PT) A properly functioning procurement market is of essential importance in order to foster the Single Market, and to stimulate innovation and investment. With a view to overcoming the economic and financial crisis, public procurement is of crucial importance in boosting the EU economy and it contributes to job creation. The European Union rejects the possibility of implementing protectionist measures, and seeks equal access to public sector markets in the EU and in third countries. As such, the EU firmly believes in the principle of reciprocity, mutual benefit and proportionality in this area.

To that end, I advocate better coherence between common trade policy and practices in Member States accepting exceptionally low bids from companies whose countries are not signatories to the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA), to the disadvantage of companies from EU Member States.

I therefore reiterate this House’s call to prioritise the modernisation of public procurement rules in such a way as to avoid its fragmentation and to encourage companies to choose this option.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Bernadette Vergnaud (S&D), in writing. (FR) This vote is important because the Commission has to take the necessary measures to prevent unfair competition and non-reciprocity of access to public contracts in relation to third countries. This is not about erecting protectionist barriers, but the Union can no longer be the only one to play by the rules. Indeed, we can no longer ignore the social and economic dumping practised by companies in emerging countries who are winning contracts in countries of the Union, in defiance of social rights and legislation on State subsidies, while, in the meantime, the markets of these countries are closed to European companies. However we must also not forget that the large industrialised countries, despite signing international agreements, do not play by the rules either!

After years of inaction, the Commission seems intent on acting, and that is necessary: the survival of our companies and jobs depends on it. Finally, I welcome the adoption of the amendments put forward by the Group of the Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament with regard to compliance, in the context of public procurement, with working, social and environmental standards in force in the Member States. It is now for the Commission to size up this call.

 
  
  

Motion for a resolution B7-0297/2011

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), in writing. (PT) I am voting for this joint motion for a resolution. I would highlight the measures I consider necessary: making use of all the possibilities and financial margins available under the EU fisheries budget in order to finance emergency support measures for this sector, thereby enabling it to overcome the difficulties posed by the rise in oil prices; continued European Fisheries Fund (EFF) aid to improve the selectivity of fishing gear and to replace engines on safety grounds, to protect the environment and/or fuel economy, above all, for small-scale coastal and traditional fishing; the drawing up by the Commission of a medium- and long-term plan aimed at improving fuel efficiency in the fisheries (including aquaculture) sector; and calling for the Commission to propose an action plan for coastal regions and islands which have an active fisheries sector to improve fuel efficiency in the fisheries and aquaculture sector.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this resolution. The recent rise in oil prices has affected the economic viability of the fisheries sector and European fishermen find themselves in a difficult situation. Furthermore, owing to the European Union’s high degree of dependency on imports from third countries (60%), producers have very little or even no influence on the price levels of fisheries products. I agree that the ceiling on de minimis aid should be raised from EUR 30 000 to EUR 60 000 per firm for a transitional period of three years, while ensuring that environmental and social sustainability are not undermined and that competition between Member States is not distorted.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), in writing. (PT) I should like to express my deep sympathy with European fishers, whose salaries have been directly affected by an increase in oil prices, which has seriously exacerbated the economic fragility linked to the irregular nature of activity in this sector. I consider it essential to introduce mechanisms that promote the boosting of prices paid at the production stage, whilst keeping prices paid at the final consumption stage as low as possible. I am therefore voting for the motion for a resolution tabled by the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats), which duly emphasises the above points.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nessa Childers (S&D), in writing. – While it is not a good idea to subsidise the fossil-fuel industry, fishermen across the EU are suffering due to the economic downturn and, unlike other modes of transport, they do not have any real alternative to fossil fuels.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (S&D), in writing. (RO) Energy accounts for a significant proportion of the fisheries sector’s operating costs and the recent fuel price increase has caused the situation of the fisheries sector to deteriorate, with a direct impact on production costs in this sector. In view of these facts, I believe that the European Commission must consider the means required to devise urgently and adopt suitable measures for easing the difficult economic situation which many European fishermen are in, also taking into account the financial difficulties currently facing a number of countries which have large fishing fleets.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marielle De Sarnez (ALDE), in writing. (FR) The Commission must adopt urgent measures to remedy the difficult economic situation in which many European fishermen find themselves following the rise in oil prices. In particular, it is about raising the de minimis public subsidy threshold from EUR 30 000 to EUR 60 000 per three-year period and per beneficiary firm. Beyond this compensation, we must put in place a longer term strategy to enable fishermen, but also professionals in other sectors, such as farmers and road hauliers, to reduce their dependency on fossil fuels. That is why the Commission must provide incentives, both at European and national level, for investment in new technologies, in order to increase energy efficiency in maritime, land and air transport.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Edite Estrela (S&D), in writing. (PT) I voted for the motion for a resolution on the European fisheries sector crisis due to the rise in oil prices, as it has affected the economic viability of the fisheries sector, with a direct impact on fishers’ incomes. Temporary emergency measures are needed that will enable European fishers to overcome their difficult economic situation, but the Commission should also draw up a medium- and long-term plan aimed at improving fuel efficiency in the fisheries sector, including aquaculture.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Diogo Feio (PPE), in writing. (PT) Fishing is an essential economic activity for the countries of Europe, particularly for maritime countries like mine. As such, Parliament should be particularly mindful of the conditions affecting professional fishers.

The increasing price of fuel – an unavoidable cost for those involved in fishing – has enormously affected fishers’ incomes. At a time of savage economic and financial crisis, in which there is little aid available to sustain companies and jobs, I welcome the proposal made in this resolution by my colleagues from the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) to support EU fishers by increasing the ceiling for de minimis aid from EUR 30 000 to EUR 60 000 per company for a three-year period. This will enable the fishing industry to face increased operating costs linked to the price of oil.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), in writing. (PT) This joint motion for a resolution of the European Parliament addresses the European fisheries sector crisis due to continually increasing fuel prices, which is having a very significant impact on the sector’s operating costs. This increase is being felt, above all, by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) – often family companies – whose workers are starting to see that their jobs are in danger. I therefore welcome the adoption of this report and hope that the Member States will soon be able to increase aid for fishers, and that the European Union, through the European Fisheries Fund (EFF), will increase its subsidies aimed at improving and modernising vessels and equipment, and will create a fund to which SMEs can turn if they are in trouble. Support for small-scale fishing is particularly important.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) It is positive that Parliament has adopted this resolution. The significant rise in oil prices has seriously exacerbated the crisis facing the fisheries sector and its economic viability, and has very significantly reduced the already scarce incomes of those working in the sector.

The current sales dynamic does not allow fluctuations in production costs, including oil, to impact on fish prices; the current import policy contributes to this, amongst other factors.

In many cases, average first-sale prices have been stagnating or dropping for a number of years, and this has not resulted in a decrease in price for fresh fish for end consumers.

The current common market organisation (CMO) for fisheries products has not managed to contribute sufficiently to improving first-sale prices or to better distribution of added value across the sector’s value chain.

The economic situation of a large number of companies has deteriorated in recent years, even leading to many of them going out of business. There is a real risk that thousands of fishing companies could go out of business and thousands of jobs could be lost because of increased oil prices.

Small-scale coastal fishing sectors are particularly vulnerable.

These measures need to be applied.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Pat the Cope Gallagher (ALDE), in writing. (GA) The fisheries sector is one of the sectors most affected by oil price increases, because fuel is a significant part of the operating cost of the fisherman, estimated at 30-50%. I fully support any measures that could be put in place to assist fishermen in this regard, particularly those engaged in small-scale fishing on coasts and islands.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Estelle Grelier (S&D), in writing. (FR) The adoption of a Parliament resolution on the European fisheries sector crisis due to the rise in oil prices is an opportunity for me to remind you how urgent it is for us to come to the aid of fishermen. In a context where recruitment is becoming more and more difficult, and where the practices that fishermen must adopt continue to become ever more restrictive, the increase in fuel prices makes conditions even more difficult in this crisis-hit sector. The substantial increase in oil prices is having a strong impact on fishermen’s operational costs, and this caused their revenue to fall between 2008 and 2010. As the elected representative of a port town, it is all the more incumbent on me to call on the Commission to authorise an increase in the ceiling of the de minimis aid. This measure would relieve the pressure on fishermen, thereby enabling them to make a decent living from their work without hindering the replenishment of stocks. The upcoming reform of the common fisheries policy will have to gain the support of fishermen. To show them today that the European Union is alert to their needs would be a good start.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this document because the recent rise in oil prices has affected the economic viability of the fisheries sector and left many fishermen worrying about how to offset these additional costs, as the rise in oil prices is directly affecting fishermen’s incomes. We need to make use of all the possibilities and financial margins available under the Community fisheries budget in order to finance emergency support measures for the industry, thereby enabling it to overcome the difficulties posed by the rise in fuel prices until such time as other types of measure are implemented. The European Fisheries Fund (EFF) should continue to grant aid to improve the selectivity of fishing gear and to replace engines on grounds of safety, environmental protection and/or fuel economy, above all, for small-scale coastal and traditional fishermen. In my opinion, the Commission must urgently propose investments, at both European and national levels, in new technologies in order to increase the energy efficiency of fishing vessels and so reduce fishermen’s dependency on fossil fuels.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Bogusław Liberadzki (S&D), in writing.(PL) The resolution is an expression of Parliament’s concern for the state of the fisheries sector, the financial condition of fishing firms and the market price of fish. It is an important sector, and fish is an important part of our diet. I think Article 3 of the joint motion for a resolution, which expresses the will to increase aid to fishermen, is crucially important. It is a solution which offers more advantages than the new guarantees proposed for the sector. I hope the Commission and the Council will give the resolution serious consideration.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. – I voted against this resolution because I do not believe the EU should increase subsidies for the European fisheries sector or any other sector on the basis of a rise in oil prices.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Melo (PPE), in writing. (PT) The recent rise in oil prices has affected the economic viability of the fisheries sector and left many fishers worrying about how to offset these additional costs. We cannot forget that the rise in oil prices is directly affecting fishers’ incomes. The incomes and wages of people working in the fisheries industry are insecure as a result of several factors, such as the irregular nature of fishing, the marketing approaches employed, and the way in which first-sale prices are set, which means that certain forms of national and EU public aid need to be maintained. Moreover, the financial and economic crisis is having an impact on industrial sectors and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in particular, and is jeopardising activity and employment in primary and secondary sectors. As in the past, we must now adopt temporary emergency measures to overcome the difficulties faced by the fisheries sector against the backdrop of rising oil prices.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE), in writing. (RO) I voted for the resolution and against all the amendments which were tabled. New support measures need to be adopted in the fisheries sector, bearing in mind the combination of two factors: on the one hand, the high price of oil and, on the other, the low price of fish at first sale. Fishing is an important economic sector for the European Union and needs to receive support at a time when the average price of a barrel of oil will remain at USD 80-100.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), in writing. (PT) The established global economic crisis, exacerbated by the political crisis in the Maghreb and the Middle East, has led to further oil price increases, with the price per barrel exceeding USD 100. Given the political instability that has been rocking the Arab world, this figure could still shoot up.

Its energy bill represents the fisheries sector’s most significant operational cost and, unlike other activities, the sector cannot offset the additional cost by increasing production because of the ceilings established by total allowable catches (TACs) and quotas.

Despite the diversity of opinions regarding how the sector should be managed, there is a point of agreement which it is important to stress: fishing is extremely important to the European population’s food supply and a source of employment for the majority of the EU’s coastal communities, where there are no other jobs.

In order to ensure the continuity of fishing, and avoid falls in supply and increased unemployment in the sector, the EU must raise the ceiling established by the De Minimis Regulation to closer to EUR 60 000, as well as adopting other measures capable of alleviating the recent oil price increase.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), in writing. (PT) The cost of fishing is very dependent on the price of oil. As such, and since the recent rise in oil prices has affected the economic viability of the sector, it is important to adopt emergency measures that will enable European fishers to overcome their difficult economic situation.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. (ES) The real problem with fishing today is that 70% of stocks in Europe are overexploited, as a result of the fact that our fleet is clearly oversized. It is an irresponsible mistake to spend public money to maintain this fleet. In the framework of the reform of the common fisheries policy, it is necessary more than ever before to restructure the European fishing fleet in order to discontinue the use of ships that use large quantities of fuel and release large amounts of CO2 emissions, and also of fishing gear and practices that clearly destroy the environment, so that we can make headway towards a model that is less energy dependent, less destructive, and more sustainable in environmental terms as well as in social and economic terms.

Awarding more money to this sector to compensate for the rise in oil prices will only be an even greater incentive for fishermen to use high fuel consuming ships, particularly at a time when the increase in these prices is not transitory but clearly structural.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Oreste Rossi (EFD), in writing. (IT) As a result of the deep economic and financial crisis that is affecting the industry and small and medium-sized enterprises, the price of a barrel of oil has increased, and its price is still uncertain because of the risk of political instability in the Arab world. This crisis has also profoundly affected European sea fishing, because we import 60% of our fish from third countries. I support the resolution because I believe it is important to strengthen the security of our energy supply, informing the markets and giving consumers greater guarantees about the state of oil reserves. I also think it necessary to implement a joint action plan in support of coastal regions active in the fisheries sector.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Dominique Vlasto (PPE), in writing. (FR) I was keen to vote in favour of this resolution, which calls on the Commission to take strong measures in support of the fishing industry. The rise in the price of oil is causing a real crisis in the sector. This crisis started off as a cyclical one but has now become structural and threatens the economic viability of the industry. Operating costs have rocketed and are having a serious effect on fishers’ incomes, to such an extent that the whole production sector and all coastal regions are now affected. Consequently, I welcome the call by our Chamber to introduce greater flexibility in the de minimis subsidy scheme. Despite a difficult budgetary context, fishermen would not understand if the Union failed to address their concerns. Furthermore, the resolution calls for special attention to be paid to small-scale coastal fishing and to the regions concerned. To my mind, this is indispensable since, although the whole sector is being affected, rising energy bills will have a greater impact on traditional fishing than on industrial fishing. I believe exceptional situations demand exceptional measures. Therefore, I shall remain alert to the proposals that the Commission will put forward to reassure and support our fishermen.

 
  
  

Motion for a resolution B7-0286/2011

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), in writing. (PT) I am voting in favour of this motion for a resolution of the European Parliament since it expresses its dissatisfaction with the Commission due to the fact that, by the end of 2009, only 75% of the total amount of EUR 21 billion worth of financial support had been made fully available for only 50 000 small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The excessive administrative bureaucracy that is an obstacle to the majority of SMEs must be removed. There is a need, not just for simplification, but also for an improved system for companies to access this financing.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Roberta Angelilli (PPE), in writing. (IT) The Commission is paying great attention to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs): the 23 million SMEs that form the EU’s economic fabric and are a source of innovation and creativity, allowing Europe to continue to distinguish itself in world markets. Little by little, red tape and legislation – which, until recently, nipped in the bud the development of innovative small companies – has been stripped away and young people are starting to see a glimmer of a stable future that is hopefully full of opportunities. Entrepreneurship, training, flexibility, smart regulation and access to credit are the key words of the Small Business Act, a framework that defines the EU policy for SMEs through targeted assistance and training activities for young people.

Now that many initiatives have been defined, it is the responsibility of Member States and the European Union as a whole to implement them properly, providing SMEs with a greater freedom in their actions, allowing them to participate in public tenders, adopting the single European patent in the future and quickly implementing the directive on late payments. Lest we forget, investments are necessary to avoid the efforts made so far being thwarted, because only investment can affect the proper functioning of the mechanism and European competitiveness.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elena Oana Antonescu (PPE), in writing. (RO) The Small Business Act is based on a number of pillars, such as access to finance and access to the Single Market, international markets and public procurement. The progress made within Member States in terms of taking concrete steps to improve the business environment for small and medium-sized businesses is variable and sometimes negligible, in spite of the declared political commitments featuring in this document. In the European Union, 23 million small and medium-sized enterprises, which account for around 99% of all businesses and provide more than 100 million jobs, make a fundamental contribution to economic growth, social cohesion and job creation. SMEs face significant problems in expanding their activities and improving their ability to innovate and their access to markets.

This is why I urge Member States to adopt without delay the proposal on the European Private Company Statute, which would enable SMEs to trade throughout the EU, while cutting costs and encouraging growth in this area, promoting a 25% reduction in administration and stimulating business. I voted in favour of this motion for a resolution.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this resolution. There are 23 million small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the EU, which account for around 99% of all businesses and provide over 100 million jobs. They make a fundamental contribution to economic growth, social cohesion and job creation, are a major source of innovation, and play a vital role in sustaining and increasing employment and helping to achieve the main aims of the flagship initiative EU 2020. The Small Business Act adopted in 2008 was a significant political step aimed at improving the business environment for SMEs, ensuring better and simpler regulation and simplifying market access. However, SMEs continue to face serious problems expanding their activities and innovative capacities and it is difficult for them to access markets, above all, due to difficulties obtaining financing and administrative obstacles, which should also be reduced further. The Member States should implement all the provisions of the Small Business Act as a matter of urgency in order to establish a clear and consistent business environment.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Regina Bastos (PPE), in writing. (PT) The Small Business Act (SBA) is the strategic framework for better exploitation of the potential for growth and innovation of EU small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). There are around 23 million SMEs in the EU, which account for around 99% of all businesses and provide over 100 million jobs, playing a key role in economic growth, social cohesion and job creation.

This resolution, for which I voted, acknowledges that several of the SBA’s initiatives have been launched. Nonetheless, much more can be done to help European SMEs, specifically: the swift implementation by the Member States of the Late Payments Directive; better Commission mechanisms for encouraging the Member States to apply the principles of the SBA; adoption by the Member States, without delay, of the last remaining proposal on the European Private Company Statute; the regular application by the Commission and the Member States of the SME test as part of impact assessments; the urgently needed reduction of the bureaucratic and administrative burden on SMEs; and putting ‘Erasmus for young entrepreneurs’ on a permanent footing, with a sufficient budget.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jan Březina (PPE), in writing. (CS) I voted for the draft resolution because I welcome the ‘Single Market Act’ initiative, and especially the legislative measures enabling small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to make use of all the advantages of the Single Market, such as the European rules for venture capital funds, the revised VAT regulations and the simplification of the directives on accounting. At the same time, I feel there is a need to strengthen dialogue between SMEs and public procurement bodies in order to simplify the involvement of SMEs in public procurement procedures. I would consider it appropriate in these circumstances to examine the options for helping SMEs to create partnerships and consortia, and to participate jointly in public contracts. The Commission should produce an assessment of the impacts and consider the possibility of increasing the ceilings for EU public contracts, which would allow SMEs to take part in contracts that would otherwise be subject to special requirements, on account of which SMEs would not be able to participate.

I would also like to call on the Commission to consider how it might be possible in Europe to improve the publication of all public procurement notices and to eliminate the administrative burden which prevents European firms from taking part in transboundary public contracts. The Member States then face the task of more systematically applying the European Code of Best Practices Facilitating Access by SMEs to Public Procurement Contracts.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), in writing. (PT) I welcome the creation and development of the Small Business Act (SBA), which, in my opinion, provides timely solutions for the main obstacles encountered by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) as regards expanding their activities and becoming established. Many of these obstacles are due to excessive bureaucratisation and difficulties in obtaining finance. The SBA calls on the Member States to improve the business environment for SMEs, so its principles should be duly implemented and adopted.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nessa Childers (S&D), in writing. – The Small Business Act has been one of the most proactive acts of the past three years, and it is important that the EU continues to focus on SMEs.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  George Sabin Cutaş (S&D), in writing. (RO) I voted for the European Parliament’s resolution on the Small Business Act Review as there are still further important steps to be taken to facilitate the proper operation of SMEs in the EU.

In economic terms, SMEs are what we call the ‘backbone of the EU’. Indeed, 99% of all businesses in Europe are SMEs, providing more than 100 million jobs. The European Union encourages their development. However, at domestic level, SMEs constantly encounter difficulties in obtaining financing or in coping with administrative tasks which often exceed the requirements under EU directives. This is why I voted in favour of Member States stepping up their efforts in terms of implementing properly the principles featuring in the SBA.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marielle De Sarnez (ALDE), in writing. (FR) SMEs are essential to the European economy’s dynamism. There are 23 million SMEs within the EU; they employ fewer than 250 people and their turnover does not exceed EUR 50 million; they account for 99% of European businesses and employ nearly 70% of the workforce in the private sector. In a context of difficult recovery and of increased international economic competition, establishing a European strategy would be welcome. The ‘Small Business Act’ is aimed at increasing entrepreneurship in Europe and helping businesses grow. Therefore, it is an absolute requirement that we reduce administrative formalities and put in place a modern administration adapted to the needs of SMEs. That is why the Commission must establish a unified system for setting up a business. It would also be useful to introduce an ‘SME test’ to assess the impact of all future legislation on SMEs and check that this legislation will not stifle the potential these businesses have for growth.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Christine De Veyrac (PPE), in writing. (FR) I welcome the adoption of the European Parliament’s resolution on the Small Business Act Review, which adapts the European support measures for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to the new context resulting from the 2008 economic crisis, and ensures that they are able to meet the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy. SMEs were the first to be affected by the financial and banking crisis that has taken place these last few years, which reduced their access to financing and to the markets. This new version of the Small Business Act must therefore give more support to innovation among SMEs by diversifying the financing instruments and by reducing as much as possible the administrative burdens that they face.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Diogo Feio (PPE), in writing. (PT) Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) on their own account for around 99% of all businesses and provide over 100 million jobs in the European Union. Their role in economic growth, social cohesion and job creation is therefore vital.

The Small Business Act (SBA) is based on key principles, such as access to finance, access to markets and better regulation. However, it is undeniable that SMEs continue to struggle against a series of problems, like the difficulty of expanding their activities, problems accessing markets, or the innumerable difficulties in obtaining financing.

As such, I welcome the conclusions of the Commission’s review, and I am very pleased to see the new proposals aiming to improve access to finance and markets, and to move forward with the process of cutting red tape.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), in writing. (PT) This motion for a resolution of the European Parliament concerns a review of the Small Business Act (SBA). The SBA is a series of political principles aiming to support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in terms of access to finance and markets, as well as of improved legislation. The social, economic and financial role of SMEs in the European Union is unquestionable. There are around 23 million of them in the EU, accounting for 99% of all businesses and providing over 100 million jobs. The current financial crisis has had a negative impact on these companies. That is why there is a need to review the current legislation, so as to facilitate access to financing; to reduce administrative costs and all bureaucracy; to encourage energy saving, as only 24% of companies currently recognise its importance; to improve businesses’ technology through eco-innovation; to promote improved levels of qualification, education and professional training; and to promote internationalisation and good governance. I therefore welcome the adoption of this resolution, and I hope that all SMEs will benefit from these measures and become prosperous, as all Europeans would benefit.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) We have another resolution full of contradictions before us. On the one hand, the appointment of the new Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SME) Envoy by the Commission is to be welcomed, and his mandate to monitor the progress of the Member States in the implementation of the Small Business Act (SBA) and to promote SMEs’ interests throughout the Commission, ensuring, in particular, that the ‘Think Small First’ principle is being applied effectively, is to be supported. It makes a positive recommendation by calling on the Member States to appoint national SME Envoys to coordinate SME policies and control the implementation of the SBA across the various administrations.

We also think that it is positive that it stresses that the administrative burden is relatively higher the smaller the company is, and therefore calls for differentiation between micro, small and medium-sized enterprises.

On the other hand, however, the resolution does not tackle – or fails to tackle sufficiently – a number of the constraints, direct and indirect, with which SMEs are currently burdened, many of which are the result of the policies dominant at EU level.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) On the one hand, it ‘welcomes the appointment of the new [Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SME)] Envoy by the Commission, and supports his mandate to monitor the progress of the Member States in the implementation of the [Small Business Act (SBA)] and to promote SMEs’ interests throughout the whole Commission, ensuring, in particular, that the ‘Think Small First’ principle is being applied effectively; calls on Member States to appoint national SME Envoys to coordinate SME policies and control the implementation of the SBA across different administrations’.

On the other hand, however, it does not criticise or propose alternatives to the neoliberal and restrictive policies of the Stability and Growth Pact, which are causing so many problems for SMEs and the general public.

Nevertheless, it is positive that it stresses that the administrative burden is relatively higher the smaller the company is, and therefore calls for differentiation between micro, small and medium-sized enterprises; and that it underlines that microbusinesses – with fewer than 10 employees – constitute 91.8% of all EU businesses and therefore deserve more attention and the corresponding tailored approach.

We will monitor how its implementation turns out.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Pat the Cope Gallagher (ALDE), in writing. (GA) There are 23 million small and medium enterprises in the European Union, and they employ over 100 million people. The Small Business Act is an important policy, and it aims to simplify access to funding and to the market and to improve regulation. A very important part of the Act is reducing the red tape affecting SMEs in Ireland and the EU.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Françoise Grossetête (PPE), in writing. (FR) Today, the European Parliament has shown support for the 23 million small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the European Union, which represent more than 100 million jobs and provide an essential contribution to economic growth, social cohesion and the creation of jobs.

The goal was to assess the progress made and to plan new actions with the aim of responding to the challenges associated with the economic crisis.

We can note a marked improvement in the situation of SMEs, but progress still needs to be made. SMEs continue to come up against considerable problems in expanding their activities, and sometimes even in surviving. It is therefore necessary to reduce bureaucracy through strengthening control and through intelligent regulation.

A decision must therefore be made quickly on the European Private Company Statute, and similarly we must urgently move towards adopting a single European patent. At the same time, we must make sure that the ‘SME test’ is applied properly in all new legislative proposals, particularly at national level.

Finally, SMEs play an essential role in European innovation. We should continue to simplify the financing of research and development in order to increase their capacity for innovation throughout the innovation cycle.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Sylvie Guillaume (S&D), in writing. (FR) SMEs represent 99% of businesses in the European Union. As a result, I voted in favour of the review to the Small Business Act, which is a resolution that recognises the crucial role of SMEs in the European economy. I support a strategic framework that goes even further in the help granted to SMEs in times of recession, and this in many areas. Thus, I welcome an intelligent regulation which lightens the administrative burden borne by these key economic actors and which facilitates their access to finance and to new markets, so that they are able to invest and grow. Finally, it is important to point out that research, innovation and training should be supported so that our SMEs can enjoy the full benefit from the Single Market.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Małgorzata Handzlik (PPE), in writing.(PL) As a representative of the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats), I took part in the work and negotiations on the Late Payments Directive, which is one of the key legislative proposals announced in the original version of the Small Business Act. I hope the Member States will take pains to implement its provisions as quickly as possible and correctly. The Small Business Act is a good proposal for small and medium-sized enterprises. However, I do have doubts over the qualitative assessment of work which has been done. As an example, I would like to mention the Annex to the review drafted by the European Commission. The Annex contains examples of some good practices, and among them, in the part concerning the Single Market, it mentions the fact that 22 Member States have set up operational one-stop shops (points of single contact). I would like to remind everyone that these points were set up pursuant to the Services Directive.

Barely three months ago, this House adopted a report on implementation of the Services Directive, in which we draw attention principally to the fact that the one-stop shops are not fully operational, that in most cases, they do not allow completion of formalities by electronic means and that they are not working in the way which businesses expect. I hope that drawing attention to individual one-stop shops which are good examples will be followed by greater efforts to improve the operation of all of them, so that they really will serve small and medium-sized enterprises.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this document because it welcomes the Commission review of the Small Business Act (SBA) and expresses support for the new proposals focused on further improving access to finance, enhancing market access and reducing the administrative burden, by strengthening governance and monitoring through smart regulation. I believe that the Member States should adopt without delay the last remaining proposals on the European Private Company Statute, which would enable SMEs to trade throughout the EU while cutting costs and encouraging growth in this area. We also need to promote the 25% reduction of administrative burden indicated in the SBA, which would contribute to the effectiveness of the SBA, would counteract any protectionist economic policies of Member States and stimulate business across the EU. Member States must swiftly implement the revised Late Payments Directive to effectively combat late payments and their negative impact, particularly on SMEs. Member States should also avoid ‘gold-plating’ by exceeding the requirements of EU legislation when transposing directives into national law. The administrative burden is relatively higher the smaller the size of the company – a disproportionate and incorrect provision which reduces the setting up of SMEs. There needs to be a differentiation between micro, small and medium-sized businesses. I believe that small businesses should be assisted to increase their ability to compete in international markets by enhancing their ability to export, disseminating information concerning programmes and initiatives facilitating international market access and penetration of SME goods and services, and ensuring that the interests of small businesses are adequately represented.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. – I welcome the Commission review of the SBA and express support for the new proposals focused on further improving access to finance, enhancing market access and continuing debureaucratisation through strengthened governance and monitoring and through smart regulation and measures such as the SME performance review

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Iosif Matula (PPE), in writing. – (RO) I voted to review the Small Business Act project as I think that the European Union needs to continue the process of strengthening its support mechanisms with a view to removing the obstacles blocking the sustainable development of small and medium-sized businesses so that their potential can be tapped to the full. Bearing in mind the crucial role which SMEs play in the European economy and their contribution to boosting economic growth, employment and social cohesion, measures must be implemented which aim at providing an ideal framework for the development of SMEs. In this context, I would like to stress that Member States need to step up their efforts in supporting the policies aimed at promoting entrepreneurship and creating a favourable business environment for SMEs. Consideration must also be given to the key role played by exchanging good practices within these policies. Improving SMEs’ access to funding and the Single Market, cutting red tape, as well as ensuring better implementation of the Small Business Act by Member States, must be priorities at national and EU level.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Mario Mauro (PPE), in writing. (IT) The review of the Small Business Act (SBA) and the new proposals it contains are necessary tools to strengthen and revitalise the 23 million European small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which have proved to be the real bulwark against the economic crisis. Within the European economy as a whole, SMEs account for 99% of all businesses and provide jobs for almost 100 hundred million Europeans. We need to continue working to strengthen and support SMEs to reinvigorate growth, while also focusing on improving competitiveness and innovation. These proposals faithfully reflect these needs. Of particular importance is reviving the SBA in accordance with the objectives of the EU 2020 strategy and all actions to facilitate SME growth through simplification and support, not only for investment, but also for the challenges that globalisation and climate change bring today.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), in writing. (FR) Yet another text seeking to lower the standards of public authorities for the benefit of entrepreneurs. The European ‘Small Business Act’ and its review are concerned neither about the general interest nor about SME employees. The only virtue of this resolution, which is supported by all political groups except mine, is to deplore this state of affairs and boast about energy efficiency that it undermines elsewhere by promoting unbridled exports. Hypocritical and malevolent. I am abstaining to encourage the intention and denounce the hypocrisy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Melo (PPE), in writing. (PT) We cannot forget that the 23 million small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the EU, which account for around 99% of all businesses and provide over 100 million jobs, make a fundamental contribution to economic growth, social cohesion and job creation, are a major source of innovation, and play a vital role in sustaining and increasing employment, and contribute to achieving the main goals of the Europe 2020 flagship initiatives. The Small Business Act (SBA) is based on a number of important policy pillars, such as access to finance, access to markets – the Single Market, international markets, public procurement – and better regulation. We must encourage the Member States to adopt its guidelines so as to help SMEs at this time of crisis.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Claudio Morganti (EFD), in writing. (IT) I am very positive about this resolution concerning the Small Business Act review, as it contains the correct measures to undertake in order to make it easier for over 23 million small and medium-sized enterprises to do business. The main points include the application of a new series of measures giving easier access to credit through public support for guarantee systems and a strong commitment to encouraging the cofinancing of micro-credit. More than a raft of incentives and targeted funding, our small and medium-sized enterprises need greater and simpler freedom of action, hence less bureaucracy, and also certain guarantees. On this latter point, we should call upon Member States to resolve the issue of late payments, which has created and continues to create serious problems and difficulties. Finally, I would like to underline that internationalisation may be the new frontier for relaunching small and medium sized enterprises, and therefore any tools for permitting expansion beyond their borders will be very welcome. It is a difficult challenge, particularly for smaller enterprises, and for this reason, it requires greater attention and more support from the European Union.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė (PPE), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this document because I believe that the incentives for small business set out in the Small Business Act are the way to increase the competitiveness of the European Union. In particular, I would like to draw attention to two aspects of the resolution we adopted. Firstly, attention to education and vocational training. It is precisely young people who will create and participate in the EU’s future. It is therefore particularly important for them to be enterprising and ready to create a vibrant and competitive EU economy. Efficient use of resources is another aspect also related to the future quality of life in the EU. We are always talking about this, but so far in practice, we have unfortunately taken too little action for our words to be translated into reality. On the other hand, efficient use of resources as a measure on its own is not enough – in general, there needs to be a sustainable attitude to the environment at every stage of business development. I therefore call on both the European Commission and the Member States to pay as much attention as possible to developing greater youth entrepreneurship and promoting efficient use of resources and other energy saving initiatives.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), in writing. (PT) This resolution aims to provide the European Parliament’s perspective on the analysis of the Commission’s ‘Small Business Act’. As such, Parliament is using this resolution to express its support for the new proposals aiming to improve access to finance and the markets for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs); for the measures to continue the process of cutting bureaucracy through strengthened governance and monitoring; for smart regulation; and for measures such as the SME performance review.

As I have previously stated, strengthening SMEs is key to promoting economic growth. In this regard, what Parliament is proposing in terms of research and innovation – specifically simplifying funding for research, development and innovation (R&D&I), and promoting appropriate programme management, especially for SMEs – is particularly important, as is strengthening innovation capacities over the full cycle, including non-technological innovation within the future financial framework for research and innovation. I also support investment intended to support local SMEs through, for example, the involvement of innovation centres, chambers of commerce, business associations and innovation clusters across the Single Market.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), in writing. (PT) Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) account for around 99% of all EU businesses and make a key contribution to economic growth: as well as a source of jobs and wealth, they are particularly suitable vehicles for innovation. As such, it is essential to continue offering them conditions to be able to develop and become secure in the market, by guaranteeing them access to finance and to the potential benefits of the Single Market. It is therefore important to congratulate the Commission on its analysis of the Small Business Act and support the new proposals put forward to pursue the objectives of supporting the SMEs.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Robert Rochefort (ALDE), in writing. (FR) Ninety-nine percent of European companies are SMEs. Two-thirds of jobs in the private sector are provided by the SME base. More than half of European added value is produced by SMEs. There will be no genuine recovery of the economy, or long-term economic growth, without substantial action on the part of public authorities, whether local, national or European, in favour of small and medium-sized enterprises. By adopting the ‘Small Business Act’ in 2008, the European Commission made the first decisive step towards small and medium-sized enterprises by introducing the ‘Think Small First’ principle in all areas of legislation. Despite the many proposals that have been seen through in the last three years – I am thinking of the Late Payments Directive in particular – a lot of progress remains to be achieved to make things easier for small and medium-sized enterprises, not only in respect of the administrative burden they have to deal with, but also the difficulty in accessing funding that they experience. The European Commission must continue on the path it defined with the SBA in 2008. This is what this resolution, which I lend my support to, calls for.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. – The resolution focuses, in particular, on: (1) the regulatory environment, calling for better implementation of the SME test – in particular, in Member States – and for a reduction in bureaucracy and administrative burdens; (2) improving SMEs’ access to finance through additional funding and instruments within the EIB (such as the RSFF and equity financing) and an enlarged (and independent) CIP; (3) improvements needed to ensure the participation of SMEs in public procurement; (4) simplification and better targeted R&D&I programmes to promote SMEs’ innovation management capacity, access to R&D&I services and knowledge-based business services, through, for instance, technology transfer centres and universities; (5) the need for more attention to be paid to skills needed and other social and labour market issues affecting entrepreneurship and SMEs’ capacities to fulfil their employment potential, in particular, managerial skills, digital skills and sustainability skills; (6) action to improve resource efficiency: sectoral SME projects to identify resource efficiency innovation in the value and supply chains; the adoption of an ambitious eco-innovation action plan and more funds for it through the CIP; more cost-effective energy efficiency measures to help SMEs reduce energy bills;

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Oreste Rossi (EFD), in writing. (IT) I support the report reviewing the Small Business Act as it aims to improve access to credit and access to the market for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). At this time of crisis for European businesses, we need to give assistance to SMEs, enabling them to increase their abilities and know-how, asking them to support management programmes designed to implement research, development and innovation. The report acknowledges the key role of SMEs in the transition to an economy characterised by resource efficiency and it is also essential to acknowledge the role of young entrepreneurs. For the latter, the EU should commit itself to institutionalising the Erasmus programme in order to give them an opportunity to develop.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marc Tarabella (S&D), in writing. (FR) I welcome the adoption of the resolution on the review of the ‘Small Business Act’ with a resounding majority of the European Parliament. SMEs, which represent 99% of European businesses, provide two-thirds of jobs in the private sector and generate over half of the added value created, in total, by businesses operating in the EU. SMEs play a key role in innovation, research and development. By adopting the ‘Small Business Act’ in 2008, the European Commission made the first decisive step for these SMEs by introducing the ‘Think Small First’ principle in all areas of legislation.

Many proposals have been seen through in three years, such as the Late Payments Directive. However, we still have a lot to do to make life easier for SMEs with respect to the red tape they are faced with and access to funding that is often difficult. This resolution appeals to the European Commission to continue on the path of greater consideration for the engines of prosperity and economic growth that are SMEs.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Viktor Uspaskich (ALDE), in writing. (LT) As the rapporteur accurately observed, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are the backbone of European society and the engine of our economy. This is also true of Lithuania, where 99.4% of Lithuanian companies employ fewer than 250 people. According to government statistics, in January 2011, there were more than 66 500 SMEs operating in Lithuania. What Lithuanians desperately need is smarter regulation, less bureaucracy and fewer administrative burdens. Obtaining planning permission is one of the greatest problems faced by investors in Lithuania. According to a report by the World Bank, 17 procedures need to be carried out in order to obtain permission and this may take 162 days. In this area, according to the World Bank’s classification, Lithuania ranks 59th in the world. Investor protection in Lithuania is an even greater problem; in this area, Lithuania ranks 93rd. This really is no good. I believe that a successful strategy for promoting innovative SMEs should not just be supported by subsidies, but by the creation of a business environment, where SMEs would have more freedom and improved access to various sources of financing. I also believe that SMEs should pay more attention to social and labour market issues, which have an impact on entrepreneurship and SMEs’ abilities to employ workers with the relevant skills.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Derek Vaughan (S&D), in writing. – I welcome this resolution, which warns against too much bureaucracy and red tape for SMEs. The 23 million SMEs in the EU provide over 100 million jobs and make a huge contribution to economic growth, social cohesion and job creation. We need to make sure that these vital businesses are not hampered by red tape and bureaucracy, and I agree that the EU needs to renew its efforts to reduce administrative burdens. I am pleased that almost all legislative proposals under the Small Business Act have been adopted but urge Member States to implement the revised Late Payments Directive without delay.

The resolution also outlines the energy savings potential that SMEs have – currently only 24% of SMEs are engaged in actions to reduce their environmental impact-energy efficiency; if SMEs applied cost-effective energy efficiency measures, they could reduce their energy bills and increase reinvestment.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marie-Christine Vergiat (GUE/NGL), in writing.(FR) I voted against the resolution on the Small Business Act Review, put forward by the European Commission in February 2011. This review – in particular, the reduction of administrative and bureaucratic costs and burdens – is consistent with the Act as it currently stands. Its proposal to harmonise taxation systems must not result in yet another reduction in taxes on businesses – admittedly, small businesses – while salaries are hit by the austerity plans. It is true that the review aims to improve SMEs’ access to financing, but it fails to mention social and environmental issues and does not even refer to the European Commission’s plan for a Social Business Initiative, announced for the end of this year. It is true that the Small Business Act Review, in making this proposal, moves us a little way towards a social economy, but it does so through its weakness with respect to the challenges associated with these other forms of action. Like the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, the Small Business Act Review does not learn the lessons of the Monti report for re-establishing citizens’ confidence in the European Union. It therefore still conforms to the same ultra-liberal logic of European integration that we have been condemning for years, a logic which is, first and foremost, centred on the market and its needs.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Dominique Vlasto (PPE), in writing. (FR) The small and medium-sized enterprises of Europe are the lungs of our economic activity. We must put their development, their modernisation and their competitiveness at the heart of our economic strategy. I therefore voted in favour of the resolution on the Small Business Act Review, the aim of which is to liberate the growth potential of SMEs. There is still much to be done to simplify the regulatory environment and the administrative procedures that are weighing too heavily on the activity and dynamism of our businesses. I welcome the actions proposed in this report, such as the creation of a European Private Company Statute. This would help our SMEs to draw the full benefits of the Single Market by allowing them to carry out their cross-border activities without requiring them to fulfil obligations which are often onerous and discouraging. I therefore call on the Council to give its opinion on this initiative quickly. Finally, we must come to the aid of innovative SMEs by facilitating their access to diverse forms of financing. That will be achieved, in particular, by significantly simplifying the use of European credits, which are still lacking in flexibility. These credits exist, and I think that they must be utilised in order to provide more effective support for the development of the real economy, innovation and employment.

 
  
  

Report: Judith A. Merkies (A7-0162/2011)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), in writing. (PT) I am voting for this proposal, as I agree with the rapporteur when she says that union is strength. Joining forces to innovate and solve common problems in Europe means faster developments, efficiency (cost-efficiency), and greater creativity. The Innovation Union should also increase Europe’s competitiveness, to help find a way out of the economic crisis. As Europe is very dependent on imports, the Member States are united in feeling the need to use intelligently and sustainably the raw materials and commodities required to generate energy or for use in industry or food production. The ageing of the population is another challenge facing nearly every country in the EU. With the aim of giving people more years of healthy life, with the appropriate care and medicines, but, at the same time, controlling costs, a joint approach may yield results more quickly. Europe’s economies have become so interlinked nowadays that it is not only the stability of the euro that requires a common approach: so do efforts to increase the competitiveness of the Member States. What is needed is a common path towards an equitable and stable economy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elena Oana Antonescu (PPE), in writing. (RO) Europe has been, is and will remain a cradle of global civilisation, education, research and culture. What is certain, and is also mentioned in the Commission communication, is that Europe does not lack in potential, whether human, technical, commercial or financial. My question is: what is Europe doing to utilise primarily its human resource potential? How does Europe intend to keep its human resources, which are so essential to innovation in Europe’s schools, universities and research centres? Before focusing on attracting experts from outside the European Union, I feel that our priority is to halt the exodus of researchers from Europe to other important centres across the world. Establishing a modernised education system throughout the whole of Europe, placing strong emphasis on substantive research results and, of course, simplifying access to cross-border research programmes in Europe can raise the level of innovation in the EU. However, to ensure that human resources remain here, Europe must focus on the following aspect: making researchers attractive offers, proposals which they cannot refuse. In fact, it must persuade them that, at every level, there is nowhere better than home.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), in writing. (LT) I endorsed this report. The Innovation Union flagship initiative is the most significant and targeted Community attempt so far to introduce a strategic, integrated and business-oriented European innovation policy to supplement Member State efforts, whereby innovation is steered and progress monitored at the highest political level. Innovations are particularly important for combating global challenges such as climate change, energy and food security, etc., where there is a need to innovate and reinforce the existing scientific and technological base. It is also necessary to modernise education systems and adapt them to the needs of the times. Member States must take action to improve the entrepreneurship and skills of young European citizens and entrepreneurs by incorporating entrepreneurship and innovation into all areas of education and improving human capital. Such action would enable them to play an active role in innovation.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jean-Luc Bennahmias (ALDE), in writing. (FR) The ‘Innovation Union’ initiative still remains the most important Union initiative for developing an integrated European strategy in relation to research and innovation. Increasing the pace of research and innovation is crucial for introducing a fair and competitive economic model, ensuring jobs for the future, moving towards sustainable resource management, facing up to energy challenges and stimulating a knowledge-based society. In terms of jobs, the environment and development, innovation is thus one of the major challenges facing the European Union and will have concrete repercussions on citizens. From now on, European citizens, as both the engines and the beneficiaries of innovation, must be able to participate fully in this ‘Innovation Union’ in order to ensure that it is successful, as we emphasised in this report. Finally, we wanted for that reason to highlight how essential an innovation policy is, as well as the added value of a coordinated approach at European level. In order to face up to the shared major social and economic challenges that European society faces, we need ambitious initiatives. Now, therefore, we await the legislative phase of the Commissioner’s actions on research and innovation.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Sergio Berlato (PPE), in writing. (IT) The concept of innovation is multidimensional: it includes not only scientific research and experimental and technological development, but also the development of new processes, methodologies and organisational and behavioural models. While welcoming the Commission communication on Innovation Union as a flagship initiative of the EU 2020 strategy for growth and jobs, I think there are still priority areas where we need a greater commitment to building capacities in science, technology and innovation: efficient resource use, recovery and recycling of waste, food quality and safety, and new epidemics. According to the conclusions of the 2009 European Innovation Panel, the recent economic and financial crisis has had disproportionate effects in different countries.

I am concerned that the current budgetary constraints imposed on Member States may lead to greater restrictions on investment in research and innovation, with obvious negative effects on European growth and competitiveness. I therefore call on the Commission to consider leveraging the resources of the common strategic framework for funding these sectors, particularly the research and innovation sectors of the European Union.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE), in writing. (ES) I have voted in favour of the ‘Innovation Union’ initiative because it represents the only possibility to overcome the crisis in a global world. Innovation means creating jobs, knowledge, technology, caring for the environment, extending social cohesion and public welfare. All of the Union’s Member States must make a firm commitment to innovation, and they must bolster it by working together, sharing good practices and improving the dissemination of successful experiences.

There is a future provided that there is innovation. Having said this, I have voted in favour of Amendment 1 because I am completely against using common agricultural policy funds to provide the resources needed for the programmes. The agricultural sector, which is also immersed in the crisis, deserves those funds to drive its own innovation. An innovative Europe can bring innovation to agriculture, so that it may build a future just the same as that of the other strategic sectors.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Slavi Binev (NI), in writing. (BG) Everyone is aware that economic growth is closely linked to technological progress, which, in turn, is generated by people’s innovative aspiration. However, this aspiration and potential are restricted by financial, bureaucratic and other kinds of obstacles. I fully support the report on the Innovation Union because I think that it will allow us to knock down the barriers preventing innovative thinking in the European Union. However, I feel that the most important aspect is for us to avoid the development of a two-speed Europe, which can be done, specifically by incorporating the Union’s economy into the common aspiration for innovation.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), in writing. (IT) The call in the report for the introduction of the single European patent and the satisfaction it expresses over the adoption of enhanced cooperation regarding the introduction of the patent prevent me from voting in favour. The introduction of an Anglo-Franco-German European patent is unacceptable for at least two reasons. First, trilingualism would have a negative impact on the competitiveness of companies in the Member States not represented in the system. These companies, including Italian ones, would have to await the completion of the translation process before being able to obtain the documents, at the expense of the ability to act quickly, which is of the utmost importance in business. They would also have to shoulder the additional costs of translation. In contrast, Anglo-Franco-German companies would not have to put up with any of these barriers, which would give rise to discrimination on the basis of language. Furthermore, the introduction of a trilingual system does not seem to conform to administrative requirements and does not even seem to reflect the demographic weighting of the Member States, because in that case, Italy should also be represented. Instead, it seems like an attempt to impose the prestige of Germany at the expense of the principles of parity and equality between Member States on which the EU is founded. I have therefore decided not to support the report.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jan Březina (PPE), in writing. (CS) I voted for the resolution on the Innovation Union because, apart from other things, I believe that we must adopt measures both at the European and national levels for improving the entrepreneurial skills and professional training of Europeans by incorporating business studies, creativity and innovation into all areas of education. It is necessary to make more use of Commission programmes such as ‘Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs’ and, at the same time, to protect skilled trades as a source of innovation. In my opinion, the Commission should cooperate more with Member States in drawing up medium-term and long-term outlooks in relation to the qualifications needed on the job market and in supporting partnerships between universities and the business sector, with the aim of making it easier for young people to enter the job market and helping in the creation of innovative companies based on knowledge, the development of applied research and better prospects for graduates on the labour market.

In this context, I support the proposal of the Committee of the Regions to create a ‘virtual network of creativity’ which would be open to all (businesses, local and regional bodies, the private sector and citizens) and would provide advice, support and access to venture capital and technical services. I would also like to draw attention to the current lack of improved and proactive interactions between universities and businesses, and I would like to call on the Commission to launch a new Europe-wide programme for professional training and education for senior staff at universities, and officials dealing with technology.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), in writing. (PT) I welcome the focus given in this report to research and innovation as a means of overcoming the economic and social crisis Europe is currently experiencing. In fact, new, sustainable ways for smarter and more efficient use of resources and commodities are increasingly necessary. We therefore need to create space for new ideas and, most important of all, to create the mechanisms necessary to implement these ideas. As such, I support the report tabled on Innovation Union, and would stress its importance with regard to the current situation and to European success in times to come.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Giovanni Collino (PPE), in writing. (IT) Innovation in many respects is the key to economic growth. Already by the second half of the twentieth century, the most respected growth economists had understood that innovation is one of the main variables for leveraging falling profits. This is how we made the transition from the growth models of the 1950s, according to which the economy sooner or later stabilises and loses its momentum, to the endogenous growth models of the 1980s, in which technology and the design of constantly different and innovative products allow the economy to maintain a positive growth rate over the long term. In order to set these leverage mechanisms in motion, which, from now until 2020, will take the form of research, energy efficiency and internationalisation targets, particularly in small and medium-sized enterprises, there needs to be a strong political desire to activate incentives and orientation mechanisms. These are the responsibility of the Member States, and European funding can provide them with valid support. Resources are limited due to the crisis, and the directives in Europe 2020 need to go hand in hand with strong fiscal and industrial policies on the part of the European governments.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  George Sabin Cutaş (S&D), in writing. (RO) I voted for the report on Innovation Union as it highlighted the importance of innovation in terms of laying the foundations for a sustainable, competitive economic model and creating new jobs in the European Union.

At the same time, I tabled an amendment to this report, along with other fellow Members, in which I expressed my disagreement about funding the innovation policy with money hitherto earmarked for the common agricultural policy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ioan Enciu (S&D), in writing. (RO) I voted for this report as I feel that it offers viable solutions for improving research and innovation in the European Union and, by extension, provides the conditions for a return to economic growth and the creation of new jobs.

Stimulating investments for research, facilitating access for SMEs to diverse sources of funding, and improving cooperation between universities, research centres and government are measures which will generate creativity and innovation in the medium and long term. Particular attention must be focused on balancing the innovation and research potentials between the various Member States and regions as, at the moment, there is a great disparity between them, which affects the whole Union.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Edite Estrela (S&D), in writing. (PT) I voted in favour of this report as it introduces a range of measures to successfully address a number of societal challenges, specifically climate change, energy and resource scarcity, population ageing, and problems accessing public services and quality healthcare. The EU must fully commit to achieving the proposed objectives. It is estimated that 3.7 million jobs can be created by 2020, and that annual gross domestic product (GDP) can be increased by around EUR 800 billion by 2025.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Diogo Feio (PPE), in writing. (PT) This own-initiative report follows in the wake of the Commission communication on Innovation Union and is one of the initiatives of the Europe 2020 strategy, whose objective is to encourage innovation and competitiveness by creating robust policies that stimulate the exchange of ideas and solutions to a number of problems that cut across all the Member States

The kernel of this idea is to encourage and promote activities that are efficient and competitive, both during and after the crisis, enabling the Union as a whole to overcome the weaknesses that a number of sectors are demonstrating, especially industry.

Undoubtedly, then, this is an ambitious report, given the issues it tackles, from intellectual property rights to increased cooperation among the Member States and the Commission. I would therefore congratulate the rapporteur on her commitment and hope that, with more such contributions, we will be able to achieve all the objectives proposed in the Europe 2020 strategy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), in writing. (PT) This report, drawn up by Mrs Merkies, proposes an Innovation Union as a means of preparing Europe for the world in the wake of the current economic and financial crisis. The unprecedented global crisis, which is stubbornly persisting and could threaten the European project, requires everyone and, in particular, the European Union, to take a firm stance that motivates the public. Therefore, as well as voting for this report, I should like to congratulate the rapporteur on her work, which provides us with an optimistic view of the future and calls for the innovation capacity that we all possess. It is important to implement the proposals advocated in this report, such as better access to credit and financial support, more investment in research and development, clearer legislation, less bureaucracy, a ‘one-stop shop’, better inter-regional cooperation, and a simple and cheap European patent.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) The report addresses the importance of innovation in all its forms to the development of societies. It does so whilst making significant contributions to a number of areas and making proposals – for example, on the increased dissemination and absorption of innovation in a number of sectors – which we consider opportune.

In the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, which I drafted, I sought to summarise the main points of our view and concerns in this area. On the basis of this draft opinion, it can easily be said that there are clear points of disagreement with the Commission communication. In particular, these focus on aspects also included in this report, which is where some of the contradictions it contains are to be found: the view of innovation as essentially a business opportunity; the emphasis given to the market, to competition, and to harnessing innovation for business purposes; the advocating of the Internal Market and EU patents. Those are the aspects with which we disagree.

As we said during the debate, another issue that was not tackled sufficiently was the risk – very clear from the results of the European Innovation Panel of 2009 – of an ‘innovation divide’ between the countries and regions that innovate most and the rest.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) The report sufficiently highlights innovation, which constitutes a necessary means of helping respond to many of the problems and challenges facing humanity today. It should be a key element of public policy in areas like the environment, water, energy, transport, telecommunications, health and education, and should help resolve problems like the scarcity and efficient use of resources, waste recovery and treatment, food quality and security, demographic changes, new epidemics, and conservation of nature and biodiversity.

However, the report includes a number of contradictions because it is founded on neoliberal ideas, defending the Internal Market and advocating EU patents, with which we disagree.

The constraints currently imposed on the Member States could result in increased restrictions on investment in science, technology and innovation (STI), particularly in the most vulnerable countries. Instead of the announced ‘Innovation Union’, the result could be a veritable ‘innovation divide’ between the countries and regions that innovate most and the rest.

Where there should be public interest, development, cohesion, progress and social welfare, what has ended up predominating are so-called business opportunities, the market, competitiveness, competition, and the harnessing of innovation for business purposes.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Pat the Cope Gallagher (ALDE), in writing. (GA) We must encourage third level institutions, research organisations and private sector companies to seize the opportunities available under the EU’s Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7).

FP7 is the largest publicly funded research programme in the world and we must continue to highlight the benefits associated with it for SMEs. From an Irish perspective, this FP7 programme is helping to develop research, research that is creating jobs and making goods and services available that are necessary and in demand. Irish organisations have already availed of EUR 270 million from this programme, in the agricultural, food, fishing, health, energy, transport and ICT sectors.

This is crucial for both Ireland and Europe, especially in the present difficult economic times.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Louis Grech (S&D), in writing. – I am in agreement with the Merkies report because I strongly believe that innovation and creativity are key to the economic recovery of the Union and that the importance of converting the Union’s scientific technological breakthroughs into new goods and services cannot be overstated. Moreover, I am convinced that in a post-crisis Europe, any Single Market strategy has to be formulated in such a way as to maintain and enhance social cohesion, ensure market integrity and economic sustainability and foster innovation. This is why I endorse the Commission’s initiative for a European Social Innovation pilot which ensures that innovative ideas for the creation of products, services and business models are linked to and, more importantly, meet the social needs of the EU’s citizens and consumers.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Françoise Grossetête (PPE), in writing. (FR) Confronted with a global economy which is in crisis, the European Parliament has stressed the importance of making Europe more innovative and efficient by adapting to the new challenges of the 21st century.

It is essential to encourage maximum involvement from all of the actors involved, including small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), industry, universities and governments. All have their role to play. Thus, we must, for example, modernise our education systems and fill in knowledge gaps in the sciences and in engineering.

We will only emerge from the crisis if we support innovation. The European Union must enable the creation of new financing instruments promoting research spending and private investments. Furthermore, collaboration between the public and private sectors, through the implementation of partnerships, is an important way of encouraging a more innovative economy.

I believe that it is essential to adopt the single European patent in order to encourage a move towards commercial exchanges outside the Union. Patents are currently far too expensive; we absolutely must reduce the costs associated with creating them.

Finally, faced with the ‘brain-drain’ phenomenon, it is important to encourage the retention of researchers in Europe. Without them, financing and other mechanisms are of no use.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Sylvie Guillaume (S&D), in writing. (FR) European scores in terms of innovation have remained rather poor until now. Yet innovation should help us rise to society’s main challenges, such as an ageing population, the need to manage resources sustainably, or economic recovery. That is why I voted in favour of this own-initiative report, which highlights, in particular, the concept of social innovation and emphasises the active role that regions and local authorities can play in innovation. Finally, we must promote a system for protecting intellectual property rights that is balanced and respects inventors’ rights while, at the same time, offering our citizens the widest possible access to knowledge: such are the challenges to be met and which innovation could contribute towards in future.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this document, because under Article 179(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Union shall ‘encourage undertakings, including small and medium-sized undertakings, research centres and universities in their research and technological development activities of high quality; it shall support their efforts to cooperate with one another, aiming, notably, at permitting researchers to cooperate freely across borders and at enabling undertakings to exploit the internal market potential to the full, in particular, through the opening up of national public contracts, the definition of common standards and the removal of legal and fiscal obstacles to that cooperation’. I am utterly convinced that the EU must take an offensive stance and take a firm front runner position in competitiveness, and must therefore invest in an innovation blast. The European Commission must translate the current ‘Innovation Union’ strategic document into an action plan with specific objectives and with measurable and time-framed targets. The Commission must monitor progress regularly, assessing obstacles and putting forward a mechanism to improve the regular provision of reports to the European Parliament and the Council.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D), in writing. (ES) The Spanish Socialist delegation has voted in favour of the Merkies report on the Innovation Union: transforming Europe for a post-crisis world, because we agree with and are committed to the fundamental principles the report sets forth, which lay down the groundwork for transition to an intelligent, sustainable and fair European economy.

Nonetheless, I wish to point out that our vote in favour of the report as a whole does not mean that we support the agreement reached by the majority of the Council on enhanced cooperation, as it excludes the Spanish language from the European patent. Our vote against the section introducing enhanced cooperation bears witness to our strong opposition to this matter. The instrument for enhanced cooperation will have a direct impact on the internal market, territorial cohesion and the right of the citizens of the Member States to an EU patent governed by language regulations that provide sufficient legal certainty.

Further to this, the proposal to create a European and Community Patents Court is ‘incompatible with European Union law’ according to the Court of Justice of the European Union.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE), in writing. (RO) Innovation may result in the development and reinvention of the European Union once the current crisis is over. However, we must be totally realistic and propose specific working instruments which will allow the correlation of innovation efforts at European, national and regional level. European innovation policy must be focused mainly on devising and specifically meeting objectives relating to the major challenges which the European Union is facing. I think that a reassessment is needed of the complexity of the tasks and responsibilities which local and regional government authorities have. In future, we will have to provide good quality technical assistance and financial support to ensure sufficient administrative capacity is available where required.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. – I voted for this report. Joining forces to innovate so as to solve common problems in Europe means more focus, more rapid development, efficiency, including cost-efficiency, and greater creativity. The Innovation Union is intended not only to provide an answer to shared problems facing our societies but, at the same time, to increase Europe’s competitiveness and point to ways out of the economic crisis.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Melo (PPE), in writing. (PT) Innovation is solving common problems in Europe, meaning greater focus, faster developments, efficiency (cost-efficiency) and greater creativity. The Innovation Union should not only provide an answer to shared problems, but also increase Europe’s competitiveness and find a way out of the economic crisis. As Europe is very dependent on imports, the Member States are united in feeling the need to use intelligently and sustainably the raw materials and commodities required to generate energy or for use in industry or food production. Europe’s economies have become so interlinked nowadays that it is not only the stability of the euro that requires a common approach: so do efforts to increase the competitiveness of the Member States. What is needed is a common path towards an equitable and stable economy. Only a united Europe will be able to realise the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), in writing. (DE) In the past, innovation has primarily been envisaged in the field of research. It should not be forgotten, though, that innovation can come from any EU citizen. These concepts – which often start out simply as ideas – should be supported at EU level by means of easier access to funding, simplified authorisation procedures and cheap and straightforward patents, amongst other things. That will enable the citizens themselves to exercise influence and help shape a sustainable society.

Moreover, innovations of this kind, where the focus absolutely should remain on research, would help to maintain high living standards in Europe. The report received my vote because allowing individual citizens to play a part in shaping society represents a positive step. Furthermore, the signs of the electronic era point more and more towards personal innovation, which is very much worth noting.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Georgios Papanikolaou (PPE), in writing. (EL) The report clarifies what goes without saying; that it is impossible to support innovation without supporting research and education. Although there are no foregone conclusions as to when the economic crisis will abate, the targets set by the Member States for 2020 in the research sector will not be achieved as things currently stand, just as the targets set in the previous European strategy, the Lisbon strategy, were not achieved. Data available to date illustrate that – roughly – a mere 2.7% of European GDP will be channelled into research at the end of the decade, despite the Member States’ clear commitment to spend at least 3% for that purpose. At the same time, the Member States are citing the crisis as the reason for cutbacks in spending on education. In other words, the two basic pillars of innovation are being undermined, rather than strengthened, and this should be a source of concern to national governments.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), in writing. (PT) This report ‘on Innovation Union: transforming Europe for a post-crisis world’ includes a series of measures that constitute major social challenges. The rapporteur introduces the key idea of creating a union between all Europeans for innovation. Indeed, as is argued, finding solutions for common problems in Europe is a challenge for faster development, greater cost efficiency and increased creative strength. Innovation Union also aims to boost the competitiveness of Europe as a whole, in order to find a way out of the economic crisis. Given the widespread dependence on imports, the Member States feel a common need to seek methods for the smart and sustainable use of those resources and raw materials needed to produce energy, as well as for industry or food production. The ageing population issue is another challenge being faced by almost all EU countries. A joint approach on issues like health could ensure a longer life, with proper care and medication, all while reducing costs. These are only the major examples of common standards among the 27 Member States, as encouraged by this initiative, and are the basis of my vote for it.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Phil Prendergast (S&D), in writing. – More investment in research and innovation is essential to guarantee a sustainable and competitive future for our economies. As a share of GDP, the EU invests less than the US and Japan in research and development, and venture capital investment is also lacking. We need to be able to hold on to our best researchers and innovators. Reaching our target of investing 3% of our GDP on R&D by 2020 could mean a return of 3.7 million jobs and almost EUR 800 billion. Given its importance for improving quality of life and well-being, there is a role for both public and private initiative in innovation.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), in writing. (PT) Innovation is essential to any area or community. In fact, the ability to recreate something offered to us and, on that basis, give rise to something new, is fundamental to the development of any economy and, above all, to achieving social welfare. That is why Innovation Union is one of the flagship initiatives of the Europe 2020 strategy. It is a path that clearly needs to be followed in order to establish Europe on the international stage and satisfy the needs of the European public. Those are the reasons why I am voting in favour.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Frédérique Ries (ALDE), in writing. (FR) Innovation is to European politics what education is to young people: a passport to the future, a virtually comprehensive insurance for a society that is making progress and preserving social cohesion. This phrase takes on its full meaning in this post-global recession period during which we are seeing speedier economic recovery in the United States and still unashamed growth in the emerging powers referred to as the BRIC group. One thing is clear: the European Union is lagging behind and the labour market is struggling to recover. The ultimate irony is that Switzerland, which is not a member of the EU, remains the European champion of innovation. That is why the call today by the European Parliament (the Merkies report) for a genuine ‘change in mentality’ is important, because innovation is not just about technological inventions or the number of patents filed per inhabitant. First and foremost, it is about building on the SME base, which is the main generator of wealth in Europe, through venture capital, guarantee facilities, assistance with loans and simplification of the legislative environment. On this condition, perhaps the aspiration of 3% of GDP to be devoted to R&D will become a reality?

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. – We broadly supported the draft report and submitted a series of amendments which have mostly been included, for instance: an emphasis on green priority objectives: energy and climate change, resource efficiency, regeneration of biological resources and promoting social cohesion; addressing eco-innovation at all stages, including design, through the adoption of a properly funded and ambitious eco-innovation action plan, as well as the adoption of a strategy for promoting product/service systems and function-oriented business models; promoting the use of open standards as drivers for innovation and open access to publicly funded research, as well as focusing public financing on socially valuable fields where knowledge is created as a public good, such as inducement prizes in the health sector (we also tried, with varying degrees of success, to propose better wording for IPR issues); we managed to retain the wording welcoming the Commission’s efforts to prevent IPR from constituting a barrier to competition and innovation.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), in writing. (IT) Europe has been emerging from a crisis in recent months and also has to deal with very strong global competition. In this context, innovation is a necessity but, above all, it is a priority. If we fail to transform Europe into an Innovation Union, the economies of the 27 Member States will, in fact, be destined to decline, resulting in a loss of talent and ideas. Innovation is the key to achieving sustainable growth and helping to create a more just and environmentally friendly society.

Innovation is essential to create a modern economy and it is the main tool for creating new jobs. We need a shared commitment to a deep-seated change in Europe’s capacity for innovation. Only then will we be able to create stable and well-paid jobs that can withstand the pressure and the competition inherent to globalisation. The Union is about innovation. It is not just a play on words but a real hope that must materialise.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Catherine Stihler (S&D), in writing. – I support this report as it is key to the post-crisis recovery and to addressing the major challenges in society.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marc Tarabella (S&D), in writing. (FR) During the vote on the parliamentary report on Innovation Union, I was keen to support the amendment rejecting the idea of controlling innovation by channelling towards innovative activities the resources from the structural funds and from certain sections of the common agricultural policy funds.

Of course, innovation should be encouraged, but this should not be done in a manner that is detrimental to other fundamental policies for the European Union’s future, such as the common agricultural policy. The CAP should be reformed by concentrating on a few fundamental objectives, but the only integrated policy of the European Union must not be plundered.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), in writing. (PT) The Research and Innovation Union scoreboard mentions that Japan and the United States invest a greater percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) in innovation than the EU, with the gap increasing over the last four years. Compared to the BRIC countries, the EU invests more, with the differential having decreased for Brazil and China, and increased for India and Russia.

I therefore consider it essential that the European Union adopt a true innovation strategy, taking into account the Europe 2020 strategy of smart specialisation, with a view to reinforcing support for research, development and innovation (RDI) as a key element of the Union’s future, extending it into all the areas, sectors of activity and social agents of which it is comprised.

An innovation policy that is consistent and integrated, and has a long-term vision will enable us to leverage strengths and resolve weaknesses detected at regional level. It is vital to adapt and simplify development policy, for example, the European Social Fund (ESF) and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). The new strategic agenda will enable the construction of an increasingly modern and competitive Europe that plays a leading role in the world. As innovation is a fundamental objective of regional policy, in future, Europe must adopt a strategic management approach, establishing appropriate policy instruments that will enable its evolution to be monitored and the necessary adjustments to be made.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Derek Vaughan (S&D), in writing. – I voted in favour of this report because I believe that the Innovation Union can help to address today’s societal challenges. It is also essential in increasing competitiveness as the EU overcomes the economic crisis.

I agree with the report that Member States should make use of the structural funds to support research, development and innovation (R&D&I) objectives that target social challenges, with the aim of increasing prosperity in Europe. Enhancing cross-border cooperation is also imperative, as is encouraging citizens to create innovative new businesses. This can be achieved by cutting red tape and establishing a simple and coherent system that focuses on societal challenges.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Dominique Vlasto (PPE), in writing. (FR) The Union has not been able to make up its shortfall in terms of innovation, in spite of the Lisbon strategy. In a context of budgetary restrictions – which rules out public money as a solution – and increased global competition, Europe must react in order to get itself back into the innovation race. I think that it is essential to focus on structural reforms that will eliminate the obstacles holding back the considerable potential for innovation in Europe. I therefore supported this report, which notably points the finger at the high costs associated with the filing of patents in all Member States, and calls for a speedy agreement on the single European patent. I am also pleased to see that proposals by my political family have been taken up – in particular, the creation of a European innovation fund, which will simplify access to European credits for our small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Liberating the capacity for innovation in Europe requires setting a minimum spending threshold, in terms of research and development, in each Member State. This would ensure an equitable division of efforts and prevent the development of a two-speed Europe, which would disrupt the cohesion and governance of the EU. This is essential if Europe wants to remain at the highest level of the global economy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Iva Zanicchi (PPE), in writing. (IT) I voted for Mrs Merkies’ report because the final version provides a better balance than the original version, which was too focused on the enabling roles of citizens instead of enterprises. Indeed, enterprises deserve a leading role in research and innovation, partly because we must remember that EU policies on the subject grew and developed through the promotion of policies aimed at strengthening collaboration between industry, educational systems and research institutions. I therefore believe that the report we have voted on represents a useful contribution to the ongoing debate on a future joint strategic programme to support research and innovation in the EU.

 
  
  

Motion for a resolution B7-0296/2011

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), in writing. (PT) I am voting for this proposal given that the crisis has been wiping out millions of jobs and has increased job insecurity and poverty; that 17% of EU residents are at risk of poverty; that 23 million EU residents are unemployed; that much domestic work takes place in the informal economy, under precarious employment conditions and/or as undeclared work and that, in addition to this, in industrialised countries, domestic work accounts for between 5% and 9% of all employment; that the vast majority of the people employed in that sector are women; that such work is undervalued, underpaid and informal; and that domestic workers’ vulnerability means they are often discriminated against and subjected to unfair or abusive treatment. I welcome and support the International Labour Organisation (ILO) initiative to adopt a convention supplemented by a recommendation on decent work for domestic workers. I call on the EU countries that are members of the ILO to adopt these instruments at the ILO conference in June 2011.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this resolution. The crisis has wiped out millions of jobs and has aggravated job insecurity and poverty – 17% of EU residents are at risk of poverty. In some countries, much domestic work takes place in the shadow economy, under precarious employment conditions and/or as undeclared work. The vast majority of the people employed in this sector are women and such work is undervalued, underpaid and informal. Domestic workers are often discriminated against and can easily be subjected to unequal, unfair or abusive treatment. I welcome the ILO initiative to adopt a convention supplemented by recommendations on decent work for domestic workers. The Member States must ratify and implement this convention and recommendations quickly, because its implementation would address the needs of one of the most vulnerable categories of worker and would tackle the problem of undeclared work.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jean-Luc Bennahmias (ALDE), in writing. (FR) While most domestic workers are precarious workers, who are often discriminated against and sometimes exploited, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs has decided to press for the adoption of a resolution while questioning the European Commission about its actions in relation to this category of workers. In June, the International Labour Organisation (ILO), which is to have its annual conference, should adopt a convention on domestic workers requiring that they enjoy equal treatment with other workers, and that all the conditions for dignified work are met. Through our resolution, we support the ambition displayed by the ILO. Note, however, that this is only the first stage: now we must ensure that the Member States ratify this convention once it is adopted.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE), in writing. (ES) I fully support the ILO’s initiative to adopt a convention supplemented by a recommendation on decent work for domestic workers. Many of these workers are undocumented migrants, which means that they are more likely to be mistreated, paid irregularly or subjected to violence. Moreover, undocumented workers do not dare to contact the authorities to seek protection, claim their rights or access health services because they fear being returned to their home country and/or punishment by their employer. All domestic workers, regardless of their origin, must have decent access to work.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Alain Cadec (PPE), in writing. (FR) The International Labour Organisation (ILO) is currently working on drawing up a convention on domestic workers. Adopting this ILO convention on domestic workers will be an essential element in ensuring that domestic workers’ human, social and employment rights are respected. Domestic work makes up between 5% and 9% of total employment. This work is often insecure, undervalued and undeclared.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Françoise Castex (S&D), in writing. (FR) I voted in favour of this report to enable the transformation of a report which is all too often about exploitation and the law, in an area which represents between 5 and 9% of all jobs within the European Union. All those who work with our elderly people must be able to enjoy freedom of association and rest time, and must not be subject to harassment and arbitrary practices. That is why we wanted to send a strong message of support to the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and the trades unions prior to the negotiations on the adoption of these new instruments, which will commence in June at the 100th International Labour conference. We regret, however, that the right is happy to express concerns about illegal domestic workers while refusing to recognise that all too often, such situations involve workers with no papers, who are the main victims of precarity and abusive practices.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Proinsias De Rossa (S&D), in writing. – I supported this resolution on the ILO convention on Decent Work for Domestic Workers. This convention aims to provide legal recognition for domestic work as work, to extend rights to all domestic workers, and to prevent violations and abuses. The European Parliament resolution further calls on the EU countries which are members of the ILO to adopt these instruments at the ILO conference in June 2011 and calls on the EU Member States to ratify and implement the convention and recommendation quickly. In some countries, much domestic work takes place in the informal economy, under precarious employment conditions and/or as undeclared work. In industrialised countries, domestic work accounts for between 5 and 9% of all employment, with the vast majority of the people employed in that sector being women. Indeed, the trend towards an increase in the proportion of non-standard or atypical contracts has a strong gender and generational dimension. The adoption, ratification and implementation of the ILO convention can have an impact by reducing the numbers of working poor and improve the position of the large number of women on the labour market.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Karima Delli (Verts/ALE), in writing. (FR) In Europe, close to two immigrant women out of three have low-skilled jobs, often in the sector of healthcare or domestic work. These women contribute to our economy, yet they suffer very poor working conditions and violations of their most basic rights.

The International Labour conference, which will take place in June this year, will be the chance for members of the International Labour Organisation to adopt a ‘Convention on decent work for domestic workers’. This instrument is a step in the right direction for the rights of workers across the world since it extends labour law standards to domestic workers, a category who, until now, were excluded from these standards. The ball is now in the court of the Member States, as they have to commit to ratify this convention.

At European level, we will also need to stop considering separately and systematically the immigration and labour policies. It is not right for domestic workers to be coerced into informal work, regardless of their rights, because of an immigration regulation that is too strict and ill-adapted.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Diogo Feio (PPE), in writing. (PT) It is well known that domestic work is often insecure and informal, and this insecurity and informality seriously jeopardises the rights of those providing these types of services, even though they participate in the economic activity of their respective countries and should be considered workers like anyone else.

The level of trust between employer and employee required by such activity makes it advisable not to overload the working relationship with excessive formality but, at the same time, means that the worker should be able to exercise their profession with dignity. The International Labour Organisation (ILO) convention, supplemented by a recommendation on domestic workers, could be another step in the right direction.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), in writing. (PT) This European Parliament resolution addresses the proposed International Labour Organisation (ILO) convention, supplemented by a recommendation on domestic workers. In June, another ILO conference will take place in Geneva at which the problem of domestic work will be tackled. Although the EU is formally barred from participating because it is the Member States that are members, it is aware of its responsibilities to cooperate with the ILO and did not therefore want to fail to contribute to an area that we could say comes under the heading ‘fundamental rights’. The importance of domestic work is indisputable. It is work carried out in the home – childcare and elderly-care facilities – that is included in the Europe 2020 strategy and represents 5% to 9% of all work undertaken in the EU, with the trend being towards growth. However, domestic workers – the majority of whom are women and immigrants – are often subjected to exploitation by their bosses, who do not guarantee their social rights. That is why I voted for this motion for a resolution.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) The adoption of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) convention, supplemented by a recommendation on domestic workers, is a significant step forward, and we view it positively. In the various Member States, as was clear during the debate, the majority of these workers are women, and an increasing percentage of them are illegal immigrants. These two groups are the most vulnerable and the most susceptible to violence or sexual abuse. It is important that measures be taken in this regard at the upcoming ILO conference. The severely exploitative and discriminatory conditions under which they work are well known. Many of these domestic workers work in scarcely decent conditions, are subject to intense exploitation, and are not guaranteed rights such as the right to social security, to health and safety protection, to maternity protection, working time limits, to rest, and to freedom of association and representation.

There is therefore an obvious need to regulate domestic work. As such, effective measures to combat insecure jobs, falsified invoices, undeclared work and illegal work urgently need to be taken.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) We consider it important to move towards the adoption of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) convention supplemented by a recommendation on domestic workers, the majority of whom are women, and an increasing percentage of them illegal immigrants. These two groups are the most vulnerable and the most susceptible to violence or sexual abuse and it would therefore be very positive if a decisive step were taken on this matter at the upcoming ILO conference.

The severely exploitative and discriminatory conditions under which many of those engaged in domestic work operate are well known. There is therefore an obvious need to regulate domestic work, so that they do not remain exposed to scarcely decent conditions, and are entitled to rights such as the right to social security, to health and safety protection, to maternity protection, to working time limits, to rest, and to freedom of association and representation.

As such, effective measures to combat insecure jobs, falsified invoices, undeclared work and illegal work urgently need to be taken. It is therefore essential to transform all unstable jobs into stable ones with rights and decent wages.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Sylvie Guillaume (S&D), in writing. (FR) I fully support the adoption, ratification and implementation of a convention on domestic work by the International Labour Organisation (ILO). For the most part, domestic workers work under precarious conditions, frequently find themselves in legally dubious administrative situations which make their situation even less stable, and are often victims of discrimination, inequality and unfair or abusive treatment. However, their services are essential to our society, from infancy to help for elderly people. We must obtain a legal framework which enables us to improve the rights of these workers and to promote decent working conditions.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this document because the crisis has wiped out millions of jobs and has aggravated job insecurity and poverty – 17% of EU residents are at risk of poverty and 23 million EU residents are unemployed. In some countries, much domestic work takes place in the shadow economy, under precarious employment conditions and/or as undeclared work. The vast majority of the people employed in this sector are women and such work is undervalued, underpaid and informal. Domestic workers’ vulnerability means they are often discriminated against and can easily be subjected to unequal, unfair or abusive treatment. Domestic work should be legally recognised as work, we should give all domestic workers more rights and prevent violations and abuses in order to establish a legal framework for all domestic workers and ensure that their work does not take place outside the regulatory framework. The adoption, ratification and implementation of the ILO convention would not only improve the position of a large number of women on the labour market for domestic work by guaranteeing them decent working conditions, but would also enhance their degree of social inclusion. It might be necessary to adapt legislation to create flexible and secure contractual arrangements which guarantee equal treatment.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. – I voted for this resolution which ‘considers that the problem of undeclared work needs to be tackled; states that the domestic work sector is characterised by a high level of informality and undeclared work, that many migrant workers are employed in this sector, and that their rights are often violated; further, considers it essential to combat precarious work in general, given that this problem affects migrant workers in particular, thus worsening their already vulnerable position’.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), in writing. (FR) The casualisation of male and female workers is at the heart of the oligarchy’s domination logic, in Europe as elsewhere. Among the various forms of organised insecurity, there is one that is more difficult to eradicate than others: domestic employees. This report supports the drafting of an ILO convention to protect the rights of these workers and especially of these hidden female workers. It also condemns the growing number of atypical contracts, a sign that work is increasingly becoming insecure. I give my vote to this initiative, while deploring the fact that this initiative will have no real impact.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Melo (PPE), in writing. (PT) Given that domestic work accounts for between 5% and 9% of all employment; that the vast majority of the people employed in that sector are women; that such work is undervalued, underpaid and informal; and that domestic workers’ vulnerability means they are often discriminated against and can easily be subjected to unequal, unfair or abusive treatment, solutions must be found to eliminate this type of situation. I therefore welcome this International Labour Organisation convention, which warns of problems involving domestic work.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), in writing. (PT) With this resolution, the European Parliament intends to express its support for the initiative of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) to adopt a convention supplemented by a recommendation on decent work for domestic workers. In fact, migrant workers accepting low-skilled temporary jobs on the edges of the labour market or jobs as domestic workers are exposed to multiple forms of discrimination. These workers are often exposed to poverty and irregular conditions, are more likely to be victims of mistreatment, paid irregularly, or subjected to violence or sexual abuse, and are less likely to approach the authorities to seek protection and claim their rights, for fear of being returned to their country of origin and/or punished by their employers. This situation is the reason why I voted for the resolution. I support the aim of the convention to take steps towards legal recognition of domestic work as a professional activity, extending rights to all domestic workers in order to prevent violations and abuse, and in order to establish a legal framework that guarantees that work cannot take place outside a regulated setting.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Phil Prendergast (S&D), in writing. – I support this resolution on the proposed International Labour Organisation convention on domestic workers. A significant part of domestic work is undeclared, precarious and underpaid, and domestic workers, mostly women, are vulnerable to abuse, especially when working abroad. The adoption of this ILO convention can help reduce the numbers of working poor, improve working conditions and facilitate the social inclusion of some of the most vulnerable workers. We need to apply core labour standards to domestic work and ensure that those performing it are entitled to social security and protection against abusive practices.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), in writing. (PT) Domestic workers are often penalised for the informal nature of their work. Therefore, since they are outside the formal structures of economic activity, there are often restrictions on their rights as workers. This situation must be fought determinedly.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. – With this, the EP: (1) welcomes and supports the ILO initiative to adopt a convention supplemented by a recommendation for decent work for domestic workers; calls on those EU Member States which are members of the ILO to adopt these instruments at the ILO conference in June 2011; calls on the EU Member States to ratify and implement the convention and recommendation quickly; (2) considers that the adoption, ratification and implementation of an ILO convention on decent work for domestic workers can have an impact by reducing the numbers of working poor; (3) considers that the adoption, ratification and implementation of such a convention would address the needs of one of the most vulnerable categories of workers;

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Alf Svensson (PPE), in writing. (SV) Yesterday, Thursday, 12 May, the European Parliament voted through the resolution on the proposed ILO convention supplemented by a recommendation on domestic workers. Throughout the world, and in poor countries in particular, domestic services are among the lowest paid jobs. These jobs often lack correct contracts and social benefits. Highlighting this service sector separately in a recommendation in association with an ILO convention is therefore right and proper. The reason why I voted against the European Parliament’s resolution is the wording in paragraph 13, in which the EU Member States are called on to ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, something that no EU Member State has done as yet. In my opinion, the six key UN conventions, which are universal and cover all people, do not need to be supplemented by further instruments. There would then be a high risk of the legitimacy of the conventions that have already been adopted being undermined, which is something that I do not wish to be party to. I would rather work to increase compliance with the key human rights conventions, the content of which clearly also applies to domestic workers. This is something that far too many signatory states seem to be ignoring today.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marc Tarabella (S&D), in writing. (FR) Domestic work, often insecure, undervalued and undeclared, represents 5% to 9% of total employment in industrialised countries. The majority of these domestic workers are women and immigrants, who are easier to exploit and underpay. Adopting this ILO convention on domestic workers will be an essential element in ensuring human and social rights are respected, by granting domestic work the same status as any other work and by providing a legal framework for domestic workers.

The parliamentary resolution adopted today sends a strong signal to all the Member States for them to sign this convention, which has the power, I sincerely hope, to strengthen workers’ social inclusion by granting them access to standard social rights to which all workers are entitled.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marie-Christine Vergiat (GUE/NGL), in writing. (FR) I voted in favour of the European Parliament’s resolution inviting the Member States to commit regarding the ILO’s draft convention on domestic workers. This convention will enable us to better fight against the unacceptable working conditions of too many employees in this sector, who are overwhelmingly women and, for many, immigrant workers, in particular, undocumented immigrants. It will supplement other conventions of the ILO or of other international organisations. The European Parliament also advocated the ratification by the EU and its Member States of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers. Nevertheless, I regret the fact that the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) managed to pass, in particular due to the abstention of a number of socialist MEPs, an amendment which refuses to put immigrant workers, especially undocumented immigrants, on an equal footing with other workers. This amendment is consistent with this ever more negative perception of immigrants which fuels xenophobia. It will then remain for the provisions of this convention to be actually implemented, which will not be easy, but let us consider nonetheless that the approach is positive.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Angelika Werthmann (NI), in writing. (DE) The International Labour Organisation (ILO) is a specialised agency of the United Nations and acts on behalf of social justice, human rights and workers’ rights. The main function of the organisation is to establish international labour and social standards. For the ILO, 2010 was the year of domestic workers. Minimum standards have therefore now been established, as domestic workers form the largest unregulated sector in the world.

 
  
  

Motion for a resolution B7-0295/2011

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), in writing. (PT) I am voting for this proposal, given that antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is an animal health issue for the European livestock sector, especially when treatment failure occurs; that guidelines on the prudent use of antimicrobials have already been issued in several Member States, which has led to a reduction in the usage of antimicrobials; that the livestock sector – dairy, beef meat, pig and poultry meat, eggs, sheep and goat milk and meat production – plays a major role in the European agricultural economy; and that farmers’ primary goal is to keep their livestock healthy and productive through good agricultural practices relating to hygiene, proper feed, appropriate husbandry and responsible animal health management. I therefore call on the Commission to develop a broad, multiannual action plan against AMR within the framework of the EU animal health strategy (2011-2015).

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elena Oana Antonescu (PPE), in writing. (RO) Antibiotic resistance is an animal health issue for the European livestock sector, especially when treatment failure occurs. Guidelines on the prudent use of these substances have already been issued in numerous Member States, which has led to a reduction in their usage. When used properly, antimicrobials are a useful tool to help farmers keep their livestock healthy and productive and ensure their well-being. Although these substances are prescribed for use in animals, they affect both humans and animals. The ultimate objective of this motion for a resolution is to maintain antimicrobials as an effective tool for combating disease, both in animals and in humans, while restricting their use to cases where it is strictly necessary. I voted in favour of this report.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Liam Aylward (ALDE), in writing. (GA) The main aim of farmers is to ensure the health and productivity of their livestock, and it is through employing good agricultural practices that they achieve it.

I voted in favour of this resolution because it requests that further research be done on antimicrobials and other options, which will help farmers to achieve the abovementioned objectives. An agenda must be established for sharing research, knowledge and best practices. I support the request that further research be done on animal welfare and agricultural practices, such as improving herd management, early prevention of disease and the breeding of robust varieties of animals.

It must be ensured, however, that the financial and administrative burden on farmers is not increased because of any increased surveillance and monitoring of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in food producing and companion animals.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this resolution. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major animal health issue for the European livestock sector. Given the huge importance of the livestock sector for the European agricultural economy, it is essential to address this issue properly. I agree that the Member States should perform regular systematic surveillance and monitoring of AMR in food producing animals, without creating additional financial or administrative burdens for farmers or other animal owners or veterinarians. The Food and Veterinary Office and the European Food Safety Authority should carry out further inspections and analyses in this field and submit recommendations. I agree that the Commission must hold talks at international level in order to ban antimicrobials as growth promoters in animal feed, and to bring this matter up in its bilateral negotiations with third countries.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Carlos Coelho (PPE), in writing. (PT) It is positive that a reduction in antibiotic use has been recorded, and the publication of guidelines on the prudent use of antibiotics in a number of Member States has contributed to this.

Any decision leading to the administration of antimicrobials, whether to humans or animals, should be carefully considered and take into account the potential threat of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). In fact, this resistance affects both humans and animals, and can be transmitted from human to animal and vice versa. I am well aware that AMR in humans is often caused by inadequate doses of antibiotic medicines and incorrect treatments, but it can also be through the transmission, via animals, of pathogenic bacteria carrying AMR genes, with serious consequences for public and animal health.

We are therefore faced with a truly cross-cutting issue requiring a coordinated approach at EU level that must seek to ensure that antimicrobials can remain an effective tool for combating disease, in both people and animals, must encourage prudent and responsible usage, and must limit any recourse to them to cases where it is strictly necessary.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (S&D), in writing. (RO) Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is an animal health issue for the European livestock sector, especially at a time when guidelines on the prudent use of antimicrobials have already been issued in several Member States, which has led to a reduction in the usage of these substances. Since farmers’ primary goal is to keep their livestock healthy and productive through good agricultural practices (hygiene, proper feed, appropriate husbandry, responsible animal health management), I think that more research needs to be carried out on the new antimicrobials, as well as on other alternatives (vaccination, biosecurity, breeding for resistance) and on evidence-based strategies for avoiding and controlling infectious diseases in animals, which are deployed in the European Union’s research framework programmes.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Edite Estrela (S&D), in writing. (PT) I voted for the motion for a resolution on antibiotic resistance because I believe that the Commission and the Member States need to adopt measures to address the growing problem of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in animals, given that the use of antibiotics in animal feed also contributes to antibiotic resistance in humans.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Diogo Feio (PPE), in writing. (PT) Resistance to antibiotics is a serious problem affecting the livestock industry, so I share the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development’s concerns on this issue and agree with its proposals, not just to reduce animals’ resistance to treatment with antibiotics, but also to encourage other means of combating animal diseases that do not necessarily involve the use of antibiotics.

As regards the use of antimicrobials as growth promoters in animal feed, I would draw attention to the fact that this endangers the health, not only of the animals, which become resistant to the antibiotics, but also of people, as products of animal origin enter the food chain, thereby affecting humans.

A study of the possibility of banning the use of antimicrobials in animal feed is therefore urgently needed, as is promotion of measures to reduce resistance to antibiotics, thereby ensuring better animal health and increased food safety.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), in writing. (PT) This European Parliament resolution tackles the problem of animal resistance to antibiotics, which is a situation with disastrous consequences. This issue has implications in terms of human health, particularly for those who work with these animals, but also of economics, as the competitive future of EU animal husbandry is at stake. Parliament has already debated this issue more than once and has adopted a number of initiatives, like the database, which should be continuously updated. However, the time has come to move from words to actions so that the legislation in force ceases to be a dead letter. Therefore, it is essential that the new common agricultural policy (CAP) takes this problem into account and encourages good animal husbandry practices. As such, I voted for this joint motion for a resolution, adopted by a broad majority in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, as it is a very balanced text whose proposals not only protect human health and defend animal welfare, but also ensure companies’ viability.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is an animal health issue for the European livestock sector, covering dairy, beef, pig and poultry meat, eggs, sheep and goat milk and meat production. Antimicrobials, when used properly, are a useful tool to help farmers keep their livestock healthy and productive.

AMR in humans is often caused by inadequate doses of antibiotic medicines. Transmission of pathogenic bacteria constitutes a particular threat to farmers and farm workers, who are in a daily contact with animals.

This report contributes to orienting joint data collection activities in this area, analysing results and proposing solutions. Its aim is to create a full picture of when, where, how and on which animals the antimicrobials are actually used today, without creating additional financial or administrative burdens for farmers or other animal owners, taking into account the fact that farming practice and intensity is different from one Member State to another.

We would stress the importance of developing systems for animal husbandry, which reduce the need for antimicrobials to be prescribed, as well as research into new antimicrobials. We consider the content of the resolution positive, as it is oriented towards the prudent and responsible use of antimicrobials.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is an animal health issue for the European livestock sector, covering dairy, beef, pig and poultry meat, eggs, and sheep and goat milk and meat production. Antimicrobials, when used properly, are a useful tool to help farmers keep their livestock healthy and productive.

AMR in humans is often caused by inadequate doses of antibiotic medicines, whose transmission of pathogenic bacteria constitutes a particular threat to farmers and farm workers, who are in daily contact with animals.

This document contributes to orienting joint data collection activities in this area, analysing their results and proposing their respective solutions. As such, its aim is to create a full picture of when, where, how and on which animals the antimicrobials are actually used today, without creating additional financial or administrative burdens for farmers or other animal owners, taking into account the fact that farming practice and intensity is different from one Member State to another.

It is also important to undertake research into new antimicrobials, as well as into other alternatives, and we would stress the importance of developing effective systems for animal husbandry which reduce the need for antimicrobials to be prescribed.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this document because the ultimate objective is to maintain antimicrobials as an effective tool to combat disease, both in animals and in humans, while only using antimicrobials when absolutely necessary. In my opinion, we need to establish good practices for animal husbandry which minimise the risk of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). These practices should apply, in particular, to young animals which are brought together from different breeders and thus increase the risk of communicable diseases. The Commission should work towards an international ban on antimicrobials as growth promoters in animal feed, and bring this matter up in its bilateral negotiations with third countries such as the United States. We must emphasise the logical connection between animal health and the use of antimicrobials, as well as the link between animal health and human health. Today, the most important thing is for us to ensure a maximum level of food safety.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elisabeth Köstinger (PPE), in writing. (DE) For a long time, antibiotics were seen as a wonder drug that cured infectious diseases. In most European countries, antibiotics are the most-used class of drugs after analgesics. Around 50% of the antibiotics prescribed in Europe are used in veterinary medicine. If antibiotics were not used, animal diseases and epizootics could quickly spread and become epidemics, causing enormous economic damage. Unfortunately, the uncontrolled use of antibiotics in both human and veterinary medicine comes at a very high cost. The excessive use of antibiotics leads to resistance and adaptation among pathogens. Many of the well-known antibiotics have today become either ineffective or unreliable. I therefore strongly endorse the resolution of this House that expressly calls on the Commission and the Member States to tackle the growing problem of antibiotic resistance amongst animals in a responsible way.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. – This resolution recognises that antimicrobials, when used properly, are a useful tool to help farmers keep their livestock healthy and productive and to ensure the animals’ well-being. However, it also acknowledges the need for tight control and monitoring, and I was therefore able to vote for it.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Melo (PPE), in writing. (PT) Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is an animal health issue for the European livestock sector, especially when treatment failure occurs. Guidelines on the prudent use of antimicrobials have already been issued in several Member States, which has led to a reduction in the use of antimicrobials. Despite positive results, there is still much to be done in relation to this problem. That is why common European policies leading to the eradication of this problem are needed.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė (PPE), in writing. (LT) Today, Parliament adopted an important decision on antibiotic resistance. In my opinion, it is very important to collect and analyse information on the use of animal health products, including antibiotic substances. It is also necessary to ensure that these products are used effectively and moderately and do not pose a risk to the effectiveness of measures for combating human illnesses when antibiotic agents are chosen as a treatment in medicine. Although, from 2005-2009 in the EU, tests for monitoring the residues of antibacterial agents in animals and animal foodstuffs show positive results, we can still say that there is no controlled trend towards reduction, only fragmented fluctuations. Particularly worrying is the fact that according to 2009 data, the majority of discrepancies as regards antibiotic agents were found in honey, rabbit and farmed fish samples, in other words, products that are frequently considered to be valuable foodstuffs and are often used in Europeans’ daily diet. Thus, the aim of carefully applying antimicrobial treatment and implementing comprehensive monitoring in order to better coordinate sources of human and veterinary research is very important for guaranteeing human health and animal welfare.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE), in writing. (RO) I voted in favour of this resolution. Every year, 25 000 people die across Europe from causes linked to or associated with antimicrobial resistance. Animals and food of animal origin could play a role in the transfer of antimicrobial resistance to people. This is why antibiotics need to be used with caution in animal husbandry. The measures proposed by this resolution on providing more information to vets and farmers must be implemented as vigorously as possible.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), in writing. (PT) The resolution on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) comes at a time when AMR represents an animal health problem for the European livestock sector, which needs to be able to rely on antimicrobial treatments being safe and effective in the near future.

The administration of antimicrobials to animals has to take into account the potential threat of AMR in humans, frequently caused by inadequate doses of antibiotic medicines, by incorrect treatments and through the constant exposure of pathogens to antimicrobial agents in hospitals.

I voted for the report because the transmission of pathogenic bacteria carrying AMR genes constitutes a particular threat to people, through the intake of said bacteria and/or through daily contact with animals. I believe that commitment to research is essential, as it contributes to the development of antimicrobials as an effective tool in the fight against diseases afflicting both people and animals. However, the use of antimicrobials should be limited to cases where it is strictly necessary.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Phil Prendergast (S&D), in writing. – Antibiotic resistance is a serious public health issue. Antimicrobial administration to both humans and livestock entails the risk of resistance when used incorrectly and at inadequate doses. Antimicrobial resistance can be transmitted from humans to animals and vice versa. Hospital patients and farmers are at particular risk of exposure to resistant bacteria. There is a need for better coordination of human and veterinarian research on resistance, as well as further research on new antibiotics, alternative treatments and animal disease prevention and control practices.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), in writing. (PT) Animal husbandry plays a key role in the European economy. Antibiotics are used frequently to ensure animal health. The problem that can arise is that both humans and animals can develop antimicrobial resistance (AMR), the human health impact of which could be serious. It is therefore necessary to adopt appropriate strategies as a precaution against such risks.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. – With this, the EP: 1. Welcomes the efforts made by the Commission and its agencies as regards joint data collection activities in this field, in particular, the initiative in 2009 to create ESVAC (European Surveillance of Veterinary Antimicrobial Consumption); regrets that not all Member States have yet joined the ESVAC network and calls on more countries to do so; calls on the Commission to provide the ESVAC network with sufficient financial resources to perform its tasks; calls on the Commission to without delay provide an adequate legal framework in order to give Member States the authority to perform an efficient data collection; 2. Calls on the Commission to strive for a data collection which is harmonised and comparable, also with activities undertaken in third countries such as the United States.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Angelika Werthmann (NI), in writing. (DE) Antibiotics are naturally occurring metabolic products of fungi or bacteria that are used to counter bacterial infections. Amongst other uses, they are fed to animals on a preventative basis. Resistance means the loss of an antibiotic’s ability to kill bacteria or inhibit their growth. In order to prevent this, it is necessary to follow medical instructions. Resistant animal germs can be passed on to humans, however, and represent a major health risk – the result may even be antibiotic resistance in humans. It was therefore only right to vote in favour of this report in order to finally promote livestock production that manages without antimicrobial substances.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Anna Záborská (PPE), in writing. (SK) It is common knowledge that, just like humans, animals that are given antibiotics are sometimes resistant to their effect. This resistance may be transferred from animals to humans, and thereby pose a risk to health, or complicate the treatment of some diseases. It is therefore important to monitor in detail the use of antibiotics in animal husbandry and the keeping of pets. This is about consumer protection and the security of food production, which must be ensured to an equally high standard in all EU Member States. It is appropriate for a European Parliament made up of the elected representatives of the people to demand that the Commission take action. We can react rapidly and effectively only if we know the true situation. I have therefore supported the report submitted and I expect the Commission to submit in the near future a proposal for measures to monitor the use of antibiotics in the animal husbandry sector.

 
  
  

Report: Marietje Schaake (A7-0112/2011)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), in writing. (PT) I am voting for this report because culture can be a key element in international relations by contributing to development, inclusion, democracy and conflict prevention. It should therefore be included in the development of the European External Action Service (EEAS).

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Roberta Angelilli (PPE), in writing. (IT) In this new digital economy, the cultural and creative industries (CCIs) represent great potential and are capable of encouraging the expression of European cultural diversity and the spread of economic and social progress. In addition, culture and creativity are the keys to safeguarding and enhancing our cultural heritage and landscapes and are useful in raising the cultural level of citizens. We should not underestimate the fact that these industries make up one of the most dynamic sectors in Europe and contribute 2.6% of EU gross domestic product by offering quality employment to some 5 million European citizens.

With the Green Paper published by the Commission one year ago, the cultural and creative industries obtained their rightful recognition, carving out a crucial role in a European vision of culture based on the information society, innovation and entrepreneurship. Unfortunately, a lack of investment, under-capitalisation of companies, the lack of a regulatory framework to set aside hurdles to the mobility of artists and creatives and the increasing prevalence of piracy are some of the factors that weaken the establishment of a European cultural space. We must not forget that the worldwide success of European industry is founded on the great professionalism and creativity of our artists, who should be protected and encouraged via tangible incentives to keep up their good work.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elena Oana Antonescu (PPE), in writing. (RO) The fundamental aspect of European culture is that it is not intended to be promoted in external relations in a simplified way, but as something vibrant and alive thanks to its particular features. Just as we talk about European values, rights and freedoms, we must also talk about Europe’s cultures, their diversity, creative plurality and the role of European ambassador which each creative element of national culture can play to promote Europe as a whole. Before we start promoting these cultures outside Europe, even we ourselves have to want to become familiarised with all those cultural elements which are typical of Europe. In this respect, I believe that every citizen of the European Union is the best ambassador for Europe’s cultures. The only condition is that they should be offered beforehand the simplest possible opportunity to find out about the cultural wealth in the area where they live.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this report. The EU is a culturally diverse community of values in which successive EU enlargements, personal mobility in the shared European area, established and new migratory flows and exchanges of all kinds with the rest of the world help foster that cultural diversity. Culture plays a role in bilateral agreements on development and trade, and through measures such as the European instruments for Development Cooperation, for Stability, for Democracy and Human Rights and for Pre-Accession, the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), the Eastern Partnership, the Union for the Mediterranean and the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR), which mostly allocate resources to various cultural programmes. I agree that there is a need to strengthen cultural and educational exchanges with third countries, which would strengthen civil society, foster democratisation and good governance, promote human rights and fundamental freedoms and provide building blocks for lasting cooperation.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Dominique Baudis (PPE), in writing. (FR) This report sends a clear message: the European Union must incorporate a consistent and coordinated cultural strategy into its foreign policy. The bonds that unite more specifically Europe and the countries south of the Mediterranean are going through deep changes. A wind of freedom is blowing on the Arab world. Culture is a significant asset. It contributes to a lively and long-lasting democracy. Cultural and educational exchanges encourage the emergence of an organised civil society. Cultural cooperation is also one of the keys to the Union’s success for the Mediterranean. It leads nations to share and interact with one another, respect and better understand each other every day.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jean-Luc Bennahmias (ALDE), in writing. (FR) It was important for the European Parliament to provide a strong reminder of how much we must promote diversity, heritage and cultural exchanges in all the EU’s external actions. As a creator of integration, tolerance and mutual comprehension, culture is an essential component of our societies which we must promote in our diplomatic efforts in favour of human rights and democracy. This report emphasises, however, that the cultural dimension of external actions still remains underdeveloped and undercoordinated, and that it is necessary to adopt a common and coherent strategy in this area. We have also renewed our support for a free Internet by condemning Internet censorship and the threats that it poses to human rights, as well as to access to and sharing of global cultural heritage. While European citizens share a range of common cultural values, we will be best placed to serve European interests if we speak with a common voice.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Sergio Berlato (PPE), in writing. (IT) The European Union is known for its variety of cultural forms. In my opinion, European values such as respect for human rights, democracy and fundamental freedoms, are also conveyed by our cultural products. Knowledge and international skills, as indicated in the EU 2020 strategy, are critical to the education systems. Multilingualism, e-skills and cultural awareness allow us to seize many opportunities offered by today’s global labour market. Culture should therefore be integrated across the board in the wide spectrum of actions that make up the EU’s foreign policy. A coherent, coordinated EU strategy on culture in the EU’s external actions does not currently exist. We also see fragmentation and diffusion, not only between Member States, but also between different departments and institutions of the European Union.

This fragmentation, without a common strategy, prevents the efficient use of resources and budget allocations for the cultural sector. I therefore urge the Commission to consider the integration and simplification of culture both in the EU’s external actions and within the European institutions.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE), in writing. (ES) I support this report by my group colleague because it underlines the cross-cutting nature and the importance of culture in all aspects of life, and argues that culture needs to be taken into consideration in all EU external policies.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), in writing. (PT) I consider the cultural aspect of European policies which strives for increased European cohesion important. I therefore welcome all cultural programmes whose objective is to create a European identity from shared values and mutual understanding. As such, I believe in the power that certain cultural initiatives can have on relations within the Union, as well as diplomatic relations with third countries. The cultural elements of the various countries can be used as bridges towards peaceful cooperation with a view to stability.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nessa Childers (S&D), in writing. – The cultural dimensions of EU external actions should not be overstated, and it is important that Commissioner Ashton continues to build this into her work with the EEAS.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Mário David (PPE), in writing. (PT) The entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon led to the establishment of the European External Action Service (EEAS), whose activities should include a coordinated and consistent cultural diplomacy strategy. This report, which I support in general, is on this important issue. In fact, many of the proposals included in this report, such as promoting exchanges for young people and strengthening ties with civil society organisations in third countries, are proposals that I advocated in my report on the Review of the European Neighbourhood Policy – Southern Dimension and were adopted by this House. From this report, I would also stress the respect for the preservation/promotion of linguistic/cultural richness in every Member State; the importance of disseminating European cultural values as a means of promoting fundamental rights, democracy and good governance; and, finally, the importance of there being a cultural ‘attaché’ in each of the EU’s representations abroad.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marielle De Sarnez (ALDE), in writing. (FR) There are many who wonder whether there is such a thing as a European culture, often contrasting it with a Europe of cultures or a ‘Europeanisation’ of cultures. For those, and I am one of them, who think that Europe has an identity, values, the answer is obvious: there is indeed a European cultural identity. It is this cultural dimension that the EU should take more into account in its diplomatic efforts, particularly with a view to promoting human rights, democracy and development in third countries. To achieve this, the High-Representative should set up a ‘Cultural diplomacy’ Directorate-General within the European External Action Service, and appoint someone to be responsible for cultural relations and for promoting European culture in every EU representation in third countries. At the same time, we should consider introducing cultural visas for artists and for all those working in the cultural sector.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Diogo Feio (PPE), in writing. (PT) As well as an economic power, the European Union is also a cultural power whose influence goes far beyond its borders. The fact that various countries have traditional historical ties with European Member States strengthens Europe’s ability to permeate other cultures and to make itself understood in other parts of the world. The importance of the factor of language as a vehicle for maintaining and deepening these contacts cannot be overstated.

I regret that, despite all the declarations of intent, the European Union continues not to understand the extent to which it should promote the teaching of the European languages that are particularly suitable for communication in its institutions. Instead, the EU has chosen an inward-looking language policy. I should like to see this trend reversed.

A foreign policy like the one that the Union is proposing to develop cannot neglect the cultural dimension, but rather must keep it in mind as an asset; as a value that is not always tangible but is particularly important in a world increasingly susceptible to the ‘soft power’ of states and international organisations. The European External Action Service (EEAS) will have an important role to play in this regard. I hope it will be up to the challenge.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), in writing. (PT) This report, by Mrs Schaake, is on the cultural dimensions of the European Union’s external actions. Although it may seem strange to talk about culture, which is a non-essential good, when many Europeans are faced daily with problems obtaining goods essential to their survival, we cannot neglect it: instead, we must think that, in addition to being fundamental to our quality of life, it can and must be an opportunity for economic development and creating jobs for young people, as well as being, obviously, a factor of unity and cohesion between peoples. The EU has to be a community of cultural values in which diversity is an asset, and a factor in unity and cohesion, or, as the rapporteur puts it, ‘an instrument for global peace and stability’. We therefore urgently need to review the lack of a foreign policy on culture. I am voting for this report, as I agree with its proposals and hope that culture helps find solutions for emerging from the crisis, and that it will be an asset to the welfare of the European public.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) This report confirms the understanding of culture current in the European Union: an exploitative vision of culture that considers it at the service of foreign policy through the concept of cultural diplomacy. In other words, culture is seen as a sort of vanguard for advancing and communicating the interests of the European Union and the Member States in the world (point 22), and look where this vision is headed: for promoting international trade (point 23). How often is this not synonymous with policies and practices that cancel out or disrespect each country’s identity and cultures?

This report also has an underlying fallacy that keeps cropping up in EU discourse on culture: that there is a single European identity and a single European culture, and, even more so, that it is based on values like liberty, democracy, tolerance and solidarity.

Culture, like all historical phenomena, is not founded on any homogenous and shared identity: quite the contrary, it is the expression of antagonisms, conflicts and situations of cultural domination. European culture is, as is well known, indebted to many cultures in various parts of the world, like the people subjected to European colonialism, for example.

This is a report that misrepresents and exploits the notion of culture.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), in writing. (PT) This report confirms the understanding of culture current in the European Union: an exploitative vision of culture that considers it at the service of foreign policy through the concept of cultural diplomacy. In other words, culture is seen as a sort of vanguard for advancing and communicating the interests of the European Union and the Member States, and promoting international trade. How often is this not synonymous with policies and practices that cancel out or disrespect each country’s identity and cultures?

This report also has an underlying fallacy that keeps cropping up in EU discourse on culture: that there is a single European identity and a single European culture, and, even more so, that it is based on values like liberty, democracy, tolerance and solidarity.

Culture, like all historical phenomena, is not founded on any homogenous and shared identity: quite the contrary, it is the expression of antagonisms, conflicts and situations of cultural domination. European culture is, as is well known, indebted to many cultures in various parts of the world, like the people subjected to European colonialism, for example.

The European Union cannot put our cultural diversity at risk, or misrepresent and exploit the notion of culture

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this resolution because cultural diplomacy is a cornerstone for building trust and long lasting relations with citizens in third countries. Culture should be a vital and horizontally integrated element among the broad spectrum of external policies which make up the EU’s foreign policy: from the EU’s trade relations to its enlargement and neighbourhood policy, to its development cooperation policy and its common foreign and security policy. Culture equally has economic value: Europe’s cultural industries contribute to European entrepreneurship, innovation and business and the EU’s diverse cultural landscape makes it the most attractive global tourist destination in the world. A vibrant cultural climate makes living in the EU attractive for businesses and people alike. A coherent, coordinated EU strategy on culture in the EU’s external actions does not currently exist and needs to be developed. It is not a luxury but a necessity to sustain and foster Europe’s attractiveness in a globally connected and competitive environment. Fragmentation and diffusion is seen not only among Member States, but also between different departments and institutions within the EU. This fragmentation without a common strategy hampers the full and efficient use of cultural resources and budgets. Consequently, this strategy is absolutely essential for the EU.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jarosław Kalinowski (PPE), in writing.(PL) Europe is the cradle of an exceptionally rich and varied culture. The European Union should make use of this heritage in the promotion of integration and cooperation in countries which do not belong to the Union. We should not forget that the European Union is made up of 27 very different Member States. It is important that we cultivate and preserve this multiculturality. I agree that a common European policy requires the development of a coherent strategy on external cultural actions. It is important for Europe to make good use of its potential in the process of promoting itself in the world.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Giovanni La Via (PPE), in writing. (IT) ‘United in Diversity’ is the motto that we all share as European citizens and that represents the sense of belonging to a great European community: a crossroads of peoples, cultures and customs that are united despite their economic, religious and other differences. My support for Mrs Schaake’s report is dictated precisely by the boost that we need to give to reinforcing this shared awareness. Culture should play a unifying role externally as well as internally, and therefore, in the relations of the Secretariat for Economic Monitoring (SEAE), European culture could be the standard-bearer of European values, which, through dialogue with cultures outside Europe, should contribute to peaceful cooperation and constructive understanding between peoples.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Bogusław Liberadzki (S&D), in writing.(PL) I would like to express my approval for the inclusion of cultural matters in the actions of EU diplomacy. It is important for the world to experience the culture of the EU’s Member States in the diversity of its content and form. Personally, I hope this presentation will be geographically balanced in character, so that the culture of each of the Member States will be present in the right proportion. To this end, the Commission should present a proposal for such actions, which will then be recast as an official document.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. – I voted for this report. Europe is a community of freedom, responsibilities and democratic values. Culture, identity, values and the EU’s position on the global stage are intertwined. European interests are served when cultural aspects are strategically devised through cooperation and partnership: both through cultural programmes and when cultural aspects are an integral part of economic, foreign and security and development policies.

Through the sharing of literature, film, music and heritage, doors of understanding are opened and bridges between people are built. European identity in all its diversity, as well as European values, are manifested through these cultural expressions. In addition, the EU has important experiences to share when it comes to overcoming conflict and building stability through shared interest and mutual understanding.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jiří Maštálka (GUE/NGL), in writing. (CS) The report on unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries is closely connected in many respects with the report on the Innovation Union. I would like, in particular, to draw attention to the significance that is given to the education of citizens, involving, among other things, a better understanding of the issue and respect for the protection of works involving intellectual property rights. We must strongly support and develop this broadly neglected area not just of education but also of training, both at the EU level and where Member States are concerned. I have reservations over the current labelling of cultural works as goods and services. This is misleading and can be seen as a manifestation of economic neoliberalism in the cultural sphere. For example, a literary work, or even a work of art or music is, first and foremost, an essential manifestation of the talent of the artist and a social response. It is not only philistine but also aberrant to regard them merely as goods or services.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Iosif Matula (PPE), in writing. (RO) Unfortunately, a coherent, coordinated strategy on the role of culture in the EU’s external actions does not currently exist. As is well known, our interests can be best served when we speak with one voice. Our common foreign policy must be based on cultural diplomacy as Europe’s position in the world can be strengthened through culture, as an integral part of its economic, development and security policies. We will provide a better understanding of our continent by means of distributing films, music and literature. Furthermore, the EU’s diverse cultural landscape gives us the distinction of being the most attractive tourist destination in the world. I welcome the concrete suggestions presented in this report for the involvement of civil society, artists, educators, students and entrepreneurs in shaping the content of external cultural relations. At the same time, we absolutely need to take into account the huge potential offered by new technologies, which are both a source of information and a channel facilitating the freedom of expression. I think that it would be useful for the European Parliament to include culture on the agenda of discussions with other parliaments in the world, in order to help establish a general practice for European external action.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Melo (PPE), in writing. (PT) Europe is a community of freedom, responsibilities and democratic values. Culture, identity, values and the EU’s position on the global stage are intertwined. European interests are served when cultural aspects are strategically devised through cooperation and partnership, both through cultural programmes, and when cultural aspects are an integral part of economic, foreign and security and development policies. Through the sharing of literature, film, music and heritage, doors of understanding are opened and bridges between people are built. European identity, in all its diversity, as well as European values, are manifested through these cultural expressions. In the development of the European External Action Service (EEAS), it is important to explore and anchor the role culture has and should have in the EU’s external actions. Mainstreaming culture can lead to mutual understanding, peaceful cooperation and stability, as well as to economic benefits.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Louis Michel (ALDE), in writing. (FR) If globalisation has incontrovertibly favoured the proliferation of exchanges, we must fight against the danger of a uniformity of cultures. Culture is a vector of openness and a motor of democracies, counteracting every nationalist reaction, racist temptation and the exclusions that are nourished by the economic and financial, and climate and food crises. Cultures have a calling to enrich one another in a spirit of mutual respect. They are a source of inexhaustible renewable energy. Most of the time, cultural creation describes or expresses a vision, a commitment, a taking of sides that can be pertinent or impertinent. It represents the exercising of a right, including the right to denounce. We have a great need of artists, of their critical view of the world, of their role as the educators of our societies. They anticipate the future and forecast the evolution of society, because they see more quickly and further than politicians. We must work to create a pluralistic world that keeps its aptitude for creation intact and that can give rise to the new and to diversity. We must rethink the system of global governance. We must create a new political space of global dimensions, taking account of the political dimension of cultural diversity.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), in writing. (DE) Europe’s cultural riches represent a precious commodity that it is important to preserve. We always hear that cultural diversity must be promoted. We have hitherto been concentrating far too much on promoting cultural diversity via the Muslim immigrant population without ensuring that our own culture, in turn, is recognised in the countries of the Islamic world. If European cultural aspects are to be more prominently included, as is proposed, as an integral part of economic, foreign, security and development policy, it depends on what explicit form this is to be given.

Certainly, there is no reason to oppose an exchange of literature, film, music and the like, but the expectations in respect of the Islamic world must not be overly inflated – you only need think of the ban on music, which stems from the Koran. What will be most important is to keep Christian roots in mind and to give greater priority in foreign and development policy to the protection of Christians in other countries, as they are, in the end, the most persecuted minority around the globe.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Georgios Papanikolaou (PPE), in writing. (EL) There can be no doubt that cultural diplomacy helps to build trust and cultivate lasting relations between citizens of the EU and citizens of third countries, and there can be no doubt that Europe’s comparative advantage in the culture sector is strong and is therefore a valuable political tool for its foreign policy. New technologies bring new opportunities to spread the European cultural heritage and strengthen transnational ties. As the Internet is a global meeting place, the EU should develop specific policies to promote European culture. The Europeana website is a move in this direction; unfortunately, however, it has not realised its potential as yet. Nor should the contribution of culture to the economies of the European countries be overlooked. It is estimated to account for 2.6% of European GDP at present. Clearly, countries with a rich history, tradition and culture, such as Greece, have nothing to lose by promoting their cultural heritage and values.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), in writing. (PT) This report is on the cultural dimensions of the EU’s external actions. I agree with the rapporteur in that we need a common strategy for the cultural dimension. It is not a question of more investment but rather one of better investment. To promote culture is to promote democracy. The proposed coordination may help ensure the more efficient use of resources, especially at a time when budget cuts are being made, particularly in the cultural sector. The existing European Union National Institutes for Culture network should function as an important partner for the sector. The members of this network have significant experience, not only of working in the field, but also of organising cultural activities with appropriate distance from the governments, which is crucial in this sector. In addition to coordination, there is also cultural diplomacy at Member State level. However, there are many third countries seeking to specifically address the European Union and not solely the individual Member States. As such, only a common strategy will prevent the existing fragmentation, which impedes the complete and efficient use of the resources and budgets dedicated to culture. For all these reasons, I voted for this report.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), in writing. (PT) Culture plays an extremely important role in the European Union, which is an area aiming to be ‘united in diversity’. First of all, we should stress its undeniable integrationist aspect, which enables the existence of shared areas: that is, points at which people with different cultural perspectives find themselves with shared representation. It is no accident that the report’s explanatory statement begins with an interesting citation: ‘Rock and roll, culturally speaking, was a decisive element in loosening up communist societies and bringing them closer to a world of freedom’ (Andras Simonyi). Secondly, the undeniable economic impact that could result from a commitment to disseminating European culture should be stressed. It is, then, a case of disseminating and protecting European values at global level, and of guaranteeing, on the widest possible range of levels, respect for their core aspects, such as freedom of expression on the Internet. Those are the reasons why I am voting in favour.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Robert Rochefort (ALDE), in writing. (FR) In voting for the report by Mrs Schaake, I am making a plea for the institution of a genuine European cultural diplomacy in order to promote our values outside the EU. Thinking of culture as a strategic element of foreign policy would, in fact, enable Europe to make up the deficit with regard to certain states. China, in particular, invests heavily in cultural diplomacy to improve its image and attract tourists. Europe must do the same if it is to continue playing a major role on the world stage. This report contains several proposals to achieve this: the proposal to designate a person in every EU representation in third countries, for example, to coordinate cultural relations and interaction between the EU and those countries, or the proposal that the draft European External Action Service (EEAS) organisational chart contain posts tailored to cultural aspects and that a coordination unit be set up. Moreover, it seems opportune that third countries be involved to a greater extent in EU programmes devoted to culture as much as mobility, youth, education and training: the accessibility to these programmes on the part of young nationals of those countries must be facilitated.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. – The report did envisage at first the field of external relations at the EU level almost exclusively under the new media perspectives. This is still quite present, as well as the idea that the EU should export its culture. The Greens insisted on the promotion of ‘cultural cooperation’ instead. Some of the recommendations adopted in the Committee on Culture and Education do not really create something new, like an information website on EU culture programmes and external relations, together with the calendar of EU events in the whole world plus contacts with Civil Society. Some articles, like Article 44 on supporting national efforts to implement the protection and preservation of cultural heritage, illegal trade of heritage or products of cultural creation, do not give much sense to the issue itself. In a nutshell, the report fails really to tackle the issue and assembles bits and pieces alongside the present existing possibilities to put culture on the agenda both for the EU and between the EU and third countries. It is a new chapter in an effort to fully use culture as a tool for peace.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), in writing. (IT) The sharing of cultural heritage between individuals is important both within the EU, for the consolidation of a European identity, and in terms of the Union’s relations with third countries. This is why I support strengthening external action in that direction. Resources for culture are often scattered across a host of projects. Efficient use of these funds is further hampered by political fragmentation. We therefore need the European External Action Service to immediately adopt a coherent and unified strategy of cultural diplomacy, including the appointment of an EU special representative to third countries.

Lastly, I believe that we should increasingly emphasise the use of new technologies, which can increase the number of ways to access cultural content. It is essential for the EU to play a leading role in this context, developing definite policies that can protect the Internet against forms of censure typical of repressive regimes.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), in writing. (FR) In 1990, in his book Bound to Lead, the eminent American professor, Joseph Nye, invented the concept of ‘soft power’. What does it mean? Soft power is the capacity an international player has to influence others by non-coercive means, such as cultural dynamism. Why, after a quarter of a century, does the United States remain the superpower that we know it to be? Because, besides its military arsenal, it succeeds in exporting its culture and its ideas and in making them attractive. Europe must do the same; it must defend its cultural model and its values on the international stage. Thanks to this report, the European Union is taking stock of the influence Europe can have if it succeeds in adding a cultural dimension to its diplomacy. I therefore support the recommendations contained in this report. It is the case that, in waiting for the implementation of a genuine common diplomacy and a genuine European defence policy, European soft power and its cultural diplomacy are some of the few means of influence at our disposal.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), in writing.(PL) I endorsed the report on the cultural dimensions of the EU’s external actions. In particular, I would like to stress the necessity of conducting a review of existing programmes with a cultural component and of drafting a Green Paper and a communication from the Commission outlining concrete policies for the role of culture in the EU’s external actions. Currently, cultural cooperation of Member States with third countries takes place on a bilateral basis. There is a lack of shared and coordinated principles and actions, which renders it impossible to make effective use of Europe’s cultural resources and the Union’s creative potential. A common strategy can foster the development of Europe’s cultural resources, the forging and deepening of social relations, the exchange of good practices and improvement of the EU’s cultural position in the international arena. I strongly support inclusion of cultural aspects in the draft organisation chart of the European External Action Service (EEAS). It is also important to provide for the appropriate training of EEAS staff with regard to cultural and digital aspects. Culture is also an important factor in the fight for human rights and the support of democracy.

Cooperation in this area will help to establish dialogue with societies from different cultures. I am also a supporter of what is called ‘brand Europe’, and the development and promotion of this, in such areas as support for talent, tourism and the propagation of universal values, for example, should be based on closer collaboration between the EU’s Member States.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Dominique Vlasto (PPE), in writing. (FR) I am pleased that the report on the cultural dimensions of the EU’s external actions, which affirms that culture must be at the heart of European diplomacy, has been adopted. For all their diversity, Europeans share a great number of strong values, such as respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law, which must be extended to the international stage. This ‘brand Europe’ must be borne by true ambassadors. I also welcome the new proposals, such as creating a cultural division within the European External Action Service or the nomination of a ‘cultural attaché’ for every Member State. It is by coordinating national initiatives that a cultural Europe will be able to emerge. The development of new information technologies is making culture accessible to the greatest number. The European Union must, in my opinion, seize this opportunity to assert its cultural uniqueness and encourage creativity. I am bound to vote in favour of this report, which regards our culture no longer as a heritage of the past but as one of the driving forces of the European diplomacy of tomorrow.

 
  
  

Report: Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (A7-0143/2011)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), in writing. (PT) I am voting for this proposal as I believe there is a need for EU-wide momentum to encourage cultural and creative industries (CCIs), which is why they must adopt innovative economic models and have access to new, legal on-line service provision. It is therefore necessary to create a genuine single market for on-line content and services, take specific measures aimed at increasing the role of the CCIs as catalysts for innovation and structural change, bring together actors at regional, national and European level and create new products and services to generate growth and jobs. In Europe, the cultural sector plays a key role and attracts citizens, enterprises and investment, thereby highlighting Europe as a dynamic, stimulating place to live and work. An energetic, growing cultural sector is clearly necessary for Europe’s success as a creative, knowledge-based economy. The cultural sector also attracts well-qualified, creative people. Cultural and creative industries are currently also important drivers of economic and social innovation in many other sectors.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this report. Cultural and creative industries (CCIs) should be at the centre of a new European policy agenda, in line with the economic needs of the sector and measures aimed at adapting to innovations in the digital age. I agree that in order to increase this sector’s potential, the European Digital Agenda initiative must be implemented successfully in order to enable European CCIs to benefit fully from, and to adapt successfully to, all the opportunities created by far-reaching, high-speed broadband and by new wireless technologies. It is very important to expand the European digital library and develop it as a focal point for Europe’s cultural heritage and creativity and to protect and support its cultural heritage.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jean-Luc Bennahmias (ALDE), in writing. (FR) The cultural and creative industries are crucial for European citizens because of their economic and cultural nature. This is because these industries, as well as participating in the promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity and the development of a European cultural heritage, also contribute to economic development by stimulating jobs, economic growth and wealth creation. Through this vote, we are clearly committing ourselves to a greater recognition of the cultural sector by emphasising that its potential remains great because it always copes with legal or economic obstacles. In order to increase this potential, therefore, we are proposing concrete solutions such as a pan-European licensing system and the improvement of access to credit and microfinancing. We also note the considerable progress that the Internet represents for our societies, even if it brings new challenges such as guaranteeing access for all and the economic model of the cultural sector. Thus, the European Parliament, which is aware of the crucial role of culture in European society, has made a clear appeal for increasing support for cultural actors.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE), in writing. (ES) It is important to unlock the potential of cultural and creative industries (CCIs). We need to analyse CCIs and the impact of their activities on the European economy, identifying, defining and describing them each in turn, in order to highlight their characteristics, better understand their goals and problems and implement more effective measures.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), in writing. (IT) I voted in favour of this report, which aims to acknowledge and enhance the economic and social importance of the cultural and creative industries (CCIs). Focusing EU attention on these industries and organising their potential through a coherent strategy, including funding, meets at least two of the priorities that Lega Nord has always upheld. These are, firstly, the promotion and revival of local cultural heritage, which may be linguistic, musical, architectural or artistic in the broadest sense, in order to safeguard diversity and individuality of intellectual horizons in an age of generalisation, or rather trivialisation and devaluation of the cultural message. Secondly, an institutional commitment to cultural and creative industries would enable talented young people to constructively channel their skills and ambitions, offering them launch platforms, some professional, that would then lead to new job opportunities, while saving them from frittering away their talents in areas that are culturally stagnant or simply unfit for purpose. I therefore support the report in question.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Sebastian Valentin Bodu (PPE), in writing. (RO) The cultural sector plays a crucial role in Europe and is a source of attraction for ordinary people, businesses and investment, thereby highlighting Europe as a dynamic, stimulating place to live and work. An energetic, thriving cultural sector is clearly necessary for Europe’s success as a creative, knowledge-based economy. The cultural sector also attracts well-qualified, creative people. The cultural and creative industries are currently also important drivers of economic and social innovation in many other sectors. There are states which are already tapping into the multifaceted resources of the cultural and creative industries to a broad extent. However, the European Union still needs to develop a strategic approach to make its cultural assets the basis of a powerful creative economy and a cohesive society. This is a good time for the European Commission’s Green Paper to prompt discussion on unlocking ‘the potential of the cultural and creative industries’, officially endorsing the importance of this sector. The growth of the cultural and creative industries in the European Union since the 1990s has been exponential in terms of job creation and their contribution to GDP.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Alain Cadec (PPE), in writing. (FR) I voted for the report by Mrs Sanchez-Schmid, which contains proposals for encouraging the development of cultural and creative industries. The report asks for the creation of the status of European artist, so that artists may be able to enjoy satisfactory working conditions and appropriate measures with regard to tax systems, their right to work, social security rights and copyright, in order to improve their mobility across the EU. I am also at one with the rapporteur in emphasising the need to preserve the specific nature of certain trades and the transfer of know-how, especially in the cultural, creative and crafts sector, and to guarantee mechanisms for knowledge transfer.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), in writing. (PT) I welcome the interest shown in the potential of cultural and creative industries (CCIs). I believe in the positive impact that their development can have both in economic terms, by creating jobs and contributing to gross domestic product (GDP), and in social terms, through the social and cultural integration of members of the public. I therefore welcome the intended support for the creative sector, because I think this is the right path towards the lasting and sustainable growth of the European economy, given the global situation these days. Innovation, structural cohesion and creating new products and services must be a priority that is considered when constructing any European policy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Christine De Veyrac (PPE), in writing. (FR) I welcome the adoption of the Sanchez-Schmid report concerning the development of the cultural and creative industries. With almost 14 million jobs involved, and with sustained growth even during the crisis, it remains essential to show unfailing support for these industries, so great is their economic and cultural contribution. Creating a European statute for artists, introducing a reduced VAT rate for cultural goods and improving the distribution of legal digital offers are appropriate and essential measures for ensuring the international cultural influence of the European Union.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Diogo Feio (PPE), in writing. (PT) In the last two decades, the growth of the cultural and creative industries (CCIs) has been exponential in terms of job creation and contribution to the gross domestic product (GDP) of the Member States. It is for that reason, and because of the extremely favourable time in which we find ourselves, that it is important to exploit and increase these industries’ potential. There is therefore a need to exploit the potential of the digital age, to create an EU-wide momentum, and to stimulate the cultural sector, in order to equip these industries with innovative economic models.

I should like, therefore, to congratulate the rapporteur and get behind her call for a more ambitious Commission Green Paper that leads to the appearance of a true Internal Market, making it possible to create jobs and guarantee greater social cohesion.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), in writing. (PT) This report, by Mrs Sanchez-Schmid, addresses how the European Union can unlock the potential of cultural and creative industries (CCIs). This is a debate launched by the European Commission Green Paper at a time when the digital age is invading our lives and globalisation is becoming a challenge for the CCIs. If the EU can create an EU-wide momentum that stimulates these companies by supporting innovation and modernisation, we will be able to promote employment and social cohesion and, as the rapporteur mentions, make the European Union ‘the economy which is founded on the most competitive and most dynamic knowledge-base in the world’. I therefore voted for this report, because I believe in the potential of these creative industries and in their promising future. Nevertheless, so that they are not in a position to be overtaken by international partners, there is a need to commit, quickly and firmly, to new technologies – in particular, information technology – and to development and innovation factors. The EU should also support and encourage artistic creation, as well as the mobility of culture professionals, so that it becomes increasingly universal and globalising.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this document because unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries necessitates the development, inter alia, of high quality artistic and cultural education, territorialisation, local partnerships, creation and creativity, the sharing of expertise, financing, public/private partnerships and the exchange of good practices. We must create competitiveness between cultural and creative industries (CCIs), whilst bearing in mind the characteristics of each branch and the fact that they require different forms of support. The European Union must introduce measures to support the creative sector. We would like to see this Green Paper having a short and long-term impact through specific developments at European level in such areas as taxation adapted to on-line cultural goods and services and the possibility of exploiting the financing facilities available through the EIB and the EIF. If cultural and creative industries are to maximise their role as a driving force, financing facilities backed up by solid expertise in the characteristics of cultural industries and an adapted taxation system must be introduced. Member States must be strongly committed to protecting and supporting their own cultural heritage. In view of the ever-increasing importance of CCIs, as well as the objective of strengthening this sector, which is of strategic importance for the achievement of the Europe 2020 goals, the Commission should draw up a White Paper which would unlock cultural and creative potential.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Giovanni La Via (PPE), in writing. (IT) I voted in favour of this report because I consider it essential that the Commission pursues its efforts to ensure a better definition of the creative cultural industries (CCIs) as part of their greater recognition by civil society. I foresee great potential for the CCIs, especially if we consider the possible and necessary cooperation with universities, research centres and art schools, with which we can set up a network of joint training programmes and lifelong learning. It is essential and important, ladies and gentlemen, to disseminate practices and know-how and enhance learning through ad hoc vocational training programmes dedicated to the cultural and creative sector. I think we need to ensure multi-disciplinary teaching programmes and insist on cooperation and partnership not only between educational institutions, students and professionals in the cultural and creative sector, but also between businesses of all sizes, between the public and the private sector, and between craftspeople and financial institutions.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE), in writing. (DA) The cultural and creative industries contribute in terms of both growth and jobs in the EU. They are part of the plan for meeting the 2020 objectives, and it is therefore important that we create good conditions for this sector – particularly within the area that I would like to highlight, namely copyright.

As pointed out in several places in the report, we should, of course, ensure that artists receive fair remuneration for their work. At the same time, it is absolutely crucial that we ensure that a large number of online services are available to consumers. The best way to do this is to create good conditions for legal, operationally sound alternatives. There are currently already several good examples, and they should be made more visible. Creating effective alternatives is the best way to combat piracy. At the same time, it is vital for the Commission to come up with an ambitious proposal on copyright – something that we look forward to with anticipation.

One of the things we point out in the report is that a pan-European approach should be taken. It is no good us operating with 27 different systems in this important area. I therefore believe that the Commission should take a holistic approach and look at the connection between licensing, private copyright fees and piracy. I hope that this report can help to get this started and I look forward to an ambitious proposal from the Commission.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. – I voted for this report because I believe this is a good time for the Commission’s Green Paper, officially endorsing the economic and social importance of the sector, to prompt discussion on ‘unlocking the potential of the cultural and creative industries’. The growth of cultural and creative industries in the European Union since the 1990s has been exponential in terms of job creation and of their contribution to GDP.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Iosif Matula (PPE), in writing. (RO) It is precisely the cultural aspect of our common heritage which differentiates Europe from the other regions in the world. At a time when we are faced with major economic challenges, it is important for us to think about ways in which to tap the potential offered by the cultural and creative industries, especially as a significant number of European citizens are involved in such activities. Let us not forget the significant contribution the creative sector makes not only to the development of information and communication technologies, but to economic and social innovation as well. However, this sector raises a number of issues which need to be clarified. One important aspect is the digitisation of cultural productions, along with the need to create a proper single market for online content and services which will generate additional jobs. In this same context, we also talk about resolving the issue of copyright, funding the cultural and creative industries, artists’ mobility or the release of cultural productions. One relevant example is cinematography, where European films, including a number of Romanian productions, have won prestigious prizes at high-profile festivals.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Melo (PPE), in writing. (PT) There is a need for EU-wide momentum to encourage cultural and creative industries (CCIs), which is why they must adopt innovative economic models and have access to new, legal on-line service provision. It is therefore necessary to create a genuine single market for on-line content and services, take specific measures aimed at increasing the role of the cultural and creative industries as catalysts for innovation and structural change, bring together actors at regional, national and European level, and create new products and services to generate growth and jobs. By developing the CCIs, we are contributing to sustainable economic development and job creation.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), in writing. (DE) It is doubtful, given the multiplicity of wrong turns taken by the EU, whether information and communications technologies are enough to create a European identity. Just as unconducive to this European identity is the EU’s democratic deficit and the unidirectional understanding of democracy among the Brussels elites, who simply let the populace keep voting until it gives the ‘right’ result. When it comes to direct democracy, the European Union could learn much from Switzerland, which stands up for democratic decisions even when the rest of the politically correct mainstream world criticises it to the hilt. It is doubtful whether, as it is so eloquently put in the report, an ‘energetic, growing cultural sector’ represents an ‘important driver of economic and social innovation’. Rather, a trend can be perceived whereby migration and migrants are being increasingly placed at the heart of support for culture while native culture and tradition are pushed to one side.

Yet the much-discussed topic of integration must not take the form of doing without Christmas, Easter, St. Nicholas’ Day and similar traditions in the name of adaptation to Muslim immigrants in our nurseries and schools – to do so would mean the loss of our cultural identity. We need to go back to paying more attention to ensuring that our customs, traditions and moral values are upheld, and respected by others. As this report fails to offer any reversal of the trend, I decided to abstain.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Georgios Papanikolaou (PPE), in writing. (EL) The culture and creativity sectors have a dual role: they have an economic role, by supporting employment, growth and the creation of wealth and, above all, they have a cultural role, by contributing to the social and cultural development of citizens. However, two basic conditions need to be satisfied if they are to realise their full potential. Firstly, we need to encourage the mobility and attractiveness of cultural factors, such as the mobility of artists, cultural workers and works of art and, secondly, we need to ensure that specific funding and economic support policies are put in place in the cultural sector, such as access to funds via the European Investment Bank.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), in writing. (PT) This report on ‘unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries’ (CCIs) is based on the European Commission Green Paper on the same topic and I voted for it, as it is official recognition of the economic and social importance of this sector. Within the European Union, and since the 1990s, the growth of the CCIs has been exponential in terms of job creation and its contribution to gross domestic product (GDP). Coordinating and leveraging synergies in this growing sector may be crucial to the EU’s economic development. The cultural and creative industries have great potential to be one of the engines of growth in the EU.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Phil Prendergast (S&D), in writing. – Cultural and creative industries are not only a source of wealth and employment but also contribute to Europe’s social and cultural fabric. Artistic trades are part of our heritage and this knowledge needs to be passed on. We should foster multidisciplinary education and allow for more exchanges between higher education institutions in this sector. The Commission needs to ensure legal security in information and communication technologies so as to protect consumers and innovative creators. It should also help local and regional authorities to develop networks to cooperate in the field of cultural tourism. Ireland, in particular Ireland South, has a rich cultural and creative history. We need to help to ensure that these cultural and artistic trades are encouraged and made available to a wider audience.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), in writing. (PT) The cultural and creative industries (CCIs) make a number of contributions. Firstly, their intrinsic value in the recreation of cultural templates and in contributing to the construction of a common European identity. Secondly, however, they constitute an economic activity that enables the creation of jobs and of products in circulation: in other words, it is a source of wealth in economic terms, too. Nevertheless, there need to be incentives for this type of activity, such as the recognition of the rights to exploit these products economically, whilst fully protecting the position of the creators. Moreover, it is a commitment that will allow the affirmation – and differentiation – of the added value that the EU is able to offer. Therefore, I voted in favour of this report.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Robert Rochefort (ALDE), in writing. (FR) The cultural and creative industries represent 5 million jobs and 2.6% of the EU’s GDP. They are also one of the principal drivers of European growth, since they create new jobs and stimulate innovation. They also bring an added value as a factor of social cohesion and play a major role in the promotion of the cultural and linguistic diversity of the EU. It is therefore crucial from an economic as much as a social viewpoint to support these industries. That is why I am voting in favour of this report. In this way, I should like to encourage Member States and the European Commission to promote both artistic and cultural education among all age groups, from primary education through to higher or vocational education, and the entrepreneurial skills of professionals in the cultural sector, including in the context of lifelong learning. In order to enable the deployment of these industries, it is equally essential to improve access to funding for professionals in this sector: to introduce microfinancing, develop patronage and public/private partnerships, consider introducing new, innovative funding instruments, and train professionals in the banking sector in the specific characteristics of these industries.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. – This is a good time for the Commission’s Green Paper, officially endorsing the economic and social importance of the sector, to prompt discussion on ‘unlocking the potential of the cultural and creative industries’. The growth of cultural and creative industries (CCIs) in the European Union since the 1990s has been exponential in terms of job creation and their contribution to GDP.

The challenge of globalisation and the arrival of the digital age are providing these industries with major new opportunities to develop, and can improve their hitherto largely untapped potential to create growth and jobs. There is a need for strategic investment to enable cultural and creative industries to invigorate cultural diversity, social and territorial cohesion, growth and employment. To this end, there must be adequate funding, support for CCIs to develop in their local and regional environments, and a move towards a creative economy by catalysing their spillover effects on a wide range of economic and social contexts.

The greater the availability of European audiovisual content, the greater the potential of characteristically European content to influence cultural diversity. In addition, the creative sector makes a significant contribution to the development of information and communication technologies, and plays a major role at local, regional and national levels.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), in writing. (IT) I voted for this report because I believe that the cultural and creative industries should constitute an added value for the Union. A European statute for artists based on favourable working conditions and tax regimes would promote Europe as a dynamic and challenging environment in which to live and work, making it attractive to skilled and creative individuals. Furthermore, a knowledge-based economy will help to protect European cultural diversity and to carry us towards social cohesion and employment. In this context, to unlock this potential as well as possible, we must facilitate both the transfer of creative knowledge to new generations, but also the mobility of artists throughout Europe.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Oreste Rossi (EFD), in writing. (IT) The cultural and creative industries sector is made up of enterprises with great economic potential because they generate employment, growth and wealth, and are responsible for the social and cultural integration of citizens. In accordance with the European motto, ‘United in diversity’, the presence of industries that use culture as an input is essential as they promote intercultural dialogue, thus safeguarding European diversity. Promoting these industries will create significant new opportunities for regional development, local partnerships and possible partnerships with the private and public sector.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), in writing. (PT) The European Commission Green Paper on unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries (CCIs) aims to contribute to the European Union’s economic growth and to job creation in its Member States.

In the report adopted today, the European Parliament advocates a genuine EU-wide strategy in this sector through the creation of new areas for experimentation, innovation and entrepreneurship; of support for mobility; and of promoting access to finance, to new financial instruments, and to greater involvement in regional and local collectives.

The rapporteur proposes the creation of pilot projects under the Erasmus and Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs programmes, as well as the creation of a European-level platform to promote the exchange of experiences. The initiatives, which are of great interest to the regional- and local-level crafts sector, also include the development of a best practices network for regional and local collectives, and the implementation of consultation services on finance, to offer the sector’s small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) better information on producing and distributing cultural and creative goods and services.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Rafał Trzaskowski (PPE), in writing.(PL) Today in the European Parliament, we have voted through the report on the potential of the creative industry. It is a report which shows clearly that the creative industry is responsible for 5 million jobs in the EU and for generating almost 3% of the EU’s GDP. The creative industry, in principle, influences every sector of the EU economy, instilling innovation wherever possible – the innovation without which it would be difficult to speak of an improvement in the competitiveness of the EU on the international arena, which we all desire so much.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marie-Christine Vergiat (GUE/NGL), in writing. (FR) I voted against this report, which draws cultural goods into a logic of the market and competition.

The ‘cultural industries’ and, as a consequence, the cultural goods that they produce, cannot be likened to enterprises like any other, on the grounds that they are producers of wealth and potentially job creators.

They must first, and above all, continue to be recognised as means of liberation for the greatest number of people and as instruments for sharing knowledge and know-how.

There is therefore an urgent need to reassert the principle of cultural uniqueness in all areas, if the fine phrases on the creative industries as driving forces, the recognition of the status of artist or the desire to find an equilibrium between the dissemination of digital works and fair reward for creators, are not to remain pious wishes in the face of the cultural desert that will ensue.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Dominique Vlasto (PPE), in writing. (FR) The evolution of our model of development, focused from now on on the knowledge economy, makes culture a strategically important sector. I welcome the adoption of this report, which proposes ways of making better use of European cultural resources. In my view, unlocking the potential of creative industries must particularly involve a reform of the European system of managing copyright, in order to enable the creative industries to draw a greater benefit from the single market. Licensing procedures, as the report emphasises, are far too complicated, and it calls for the introduction of a one-stop shop for the clearance of rights. It is also necessary, I believe, to stimulate creation by adopting a specific tax system for innovative products, such as digital cultural content. It is not right that these products should be subject to VAT at the full standard rate while other cultural products benefit from tax reliefs. With my vote, I wanted to call on the Commission and the Council to respond to the European Parliament’s demand for specific measures to enable us to enjoy the full benefit from the growth potential of this sector. Only an ambitious and joint approach can preserve the uniqueness of European culture.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Iva Zanicchi (PPE), in writing. (IT) I voted for Mrs Sanchez-Schmid’s report on the potential of the European cultural and creative industries, which has not yet been fully unlocked. These industries are an asset for the EU, partly because their exponential growth over the past 25 years has created tens of thousands of jobs. It is therefore necessary to build a European strategy for these industries in which they have the opportunity to express their potential and gain recognition for their dual role as bearers of culture and entertainment and as creators of business and jobs.

 
  
  

Motion for a resolution B7-0281/2011

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), in writing. (PT) I am voting for this motion for a resolution, and would express the same conviction as the rapporteur that awarding the title of European Capital of Culture to a city which was the site of such tragic events in the course of the 20th century would be an important step towards transcending historical European divisions and showcasing the new Europe.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), in writing. (LT) I endorsed this resolution. The European Capitals of Culture project helps to support the richness and diversity of European cultures and the features they share, as well as to promote greater mutual understanding between European citizens. Although the decision on the European Capital of Culture for the years 2007 to 2019 applies only to the EU Member States, I agree with the resolution’s call to award the title of European Capital of Culture exceptionally to Sarajevo in 2014. I believe that this would be an important step towards transcending past European divisions by awarding the title of European Capital of Culture to a city which was the scene of such tragic events in the course of the 20th century.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Diogo Feio (PPE), in writing. (PT) Anyone who followed with horror the events that made victims of the inhabitants of the martyr city of Sarajevo during the war in Bosnia, and which damaged its buildings, cannot fail to welcome the city’s designation as European Capital of Culture 2014.

Without forgetting what happened, I hope that this event will enable Europeans to have other, more agreeable memories of Sarajevo, and that it will contribute, above all, to bringing together the various ethnic groups of the country itself. I hope that the programme of Sarajevo Capital of Culture will celebrate life, and the human capacity for survival and rebuilding, and that it will prove to all of us the extent to which the human spirit can cultivate and transmit the good and the beautiful, even after experiencing the most profound suffering.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), in writing. (PT) This resolution addresses Bosnia and Herzegovina’s application for its capital, Sarajevo, to be considered European Capital of Culture in 2014. The EU initiative ‘European Capital of Culture’ was created to highlight Europe’s cultural richness and diversity, sharing it out and promoting mutual understanding amongst Europeans. In 1992-1996, Sarajevo – the martyr city where, in 1914, the First World War started – would become the victim of destruction during the time it was besieged. It now has images that are known the world over, like the one of ‘The Cellist of Sarajevo’ who, dressed in black and in the midst of the destruction of war, wanders the streets seeking to ease the suffering of a martyred people who cannot leave the city. Despite adversity, the city maintains its cultural spirit. I consider it positive and fair that Sarajevo be European Capital of Culture.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), in writing. (LT) I voted in favour of this document because a Community action entitled European Capital of Culture has been established in order to highlight the richness and diversity of European cultures and the features they share, as well as to promote greater mutual understanding between Europeans. In addition, it is noted that Sarajevo has a special place in European history and culture and will commemorate several important anniversaries in 2014, and the City Council of Sarajevo and local cultural operators have undertaken extensive preparations in their candidature for this title. I therefore believe that the Council should award the title of European Capital of Culture exceptionally to Sarajevo in 2014. This would be an important step towards transcending past European divisions and showcasing the new Europe by awarding the title of European Capital of Culture to a city which was the scene of such tragic events in the course of the 20th century.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. – I voted for this resolution which calls on the Council to award the title ‘European Capital of Culture’ exceptionally to Sarajevo in 2014. I believe that awarding the title to a city which was the site of such tragic events in the course of the 20th century would be an important step towards transcending past European divisions and showcasing the new Europe.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Louis Michel (ALDE), in writing.(FR) Sarajevo was a magnificent city in which three peoples, three cultures and three religions cohabited. The siege of the city and the ethnic and religious war which lasted for four years (1992-1996) profoundly disrupted this capital, which was ‘Islamised’ in religious terms and ‘Bosniakised’ in linguistic terms. Our challenge now is to rebuild the bridges between the communities. Culture can contribute to this. By the way, it was culture that helped them to endure four years of war. Culture is a vector of openness and a motor of democracies, counteracting every nationalist reaction, racist temptation and exclusion. It can help them now to achieve European multiculturalism once again. This mosaic-like city was and can once more become the living metaphor for Europe. We must work to create a pluralistic world that keeps its capacity for creation intact and that is able to give rise to novelty and diversity.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), in writing. (PT) I am using my vote in favour to express my support for the European Parliament’s call to the Council for Sarajevo to be named European Capital of Culture in 2014. In fact, I agree with what the resolution says about how awarding the title of European Capital of Culture to a city which was the scene of such tragic events during the 20th century represents an important step towards overcoming Europe’s past divisions and promoting the new Europe.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), in writing. (PT) Although the decision establishing a Community action for the European Capital of Culture 2007-2019 only currently covers EU Member States, the truth is that the opportunity to win the title of European Capital of Culture has already been granted to cities of third countries on a number of occasions. As such, and given the special place that Sarajevo occupies in European history and culture, I believe awarding it the title of European Capital of Culture 2014 would be justified, even for its symbolic value.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Robert Rochefort (ALDE), in writing. (FR) Sarajevo, a multicultural city embodying a genuine model of tolerance, incontestably occupies a particular place in history and in European culture. It was in Sarajevo that the assassination that sparked off the First World War in 1914 was carried out. It was also in this city that, between 1992 and 1996, during the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the longest siege that a capital city has endured in the history of modern warfare took place. As the city, which wishes to turn its back on the past and looks forward enthusiastically to its future in Europe, will be marking several important anniversaries in 2014, I should like to see Sarajevo designated as the European Capital of Culture for that year.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. – With this resolution, Parliament: (1) calls on the Council to award the title ‘European Capital of Culture’ exceptionally to Sarajevo in 2014; and (2) asserts its belief that this would be an important step towards transcending past European divisions and showcasing the new Europe by awarding the title ‘European Capital of Culture’ to a city which was the site of such tragic events in the course of the 20th century.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), in writing.(PL) As a member of the delegation from the Committee on Culture and Education to Sarajevo, I support the city’s candidacy as a European Capital of Culture 2014. Sarajevo deserves to be given the chance to demonstrate its huge potential. It is an exceptionally multicultural city. Sarajevo is surrounded by an atmosphere which is both multicultural and European. It is the only city in the world where in an area of one square kilometre, you can see buildings belonging to five religions: there are mosques, a Roman Catholic cathedral, an Orthodox church, a synagogue and a Protestant church.

Bosnians, meanwhile, are characterised by great friendliness and hospitality. I recently read the reminiscences of a Polish student who took part in a student exchange in Sarajevo – she did not meet a single foreign student who was there as part of the exchange who did not like Sarajevo. Since the end of the war in 1995, Sarajevo is also being rebuilt, mainly with financial assistance from the European Union. Sarajevo is looking to its European future with great enthusiasm. It wants to demonstrate its huge potential and promote itself to Europeans. There is no doubt that this city deserves this chance, and we should support it in this.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Artur Zasada (PPE), in writing.(PL) Sarajevo occupies a very important place in Europeans’ historical consciousness. I support awarding the title of European Capital of Culture exceptionally to the city in 2014. The initiative, which, for over 25 years, has allowed promotion of the riches and diversity of European cultures, will also help rebuild the city’s tourist industry and economic base. Sarajevo witnessed important historical events and was severely damaged as a result of the hostilities in the 1990s. It was also the scene of the murder which started the First World War. The 100th anniversary of that event falls in the very year we are talking about – 2014. Awarding the city the title of European Capital of Culture at this juncture would not only help in the cultural regeneration of the city and in improving the city’s image in other countries, but would also help to commemorate important aspects of European history and identity.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – That concludes the explanations of vote.

 

14. Corrections to votes and voting intentions: see Minutes
  

(The sitting was suspended at 13:15 and resumed at 15:00)

 
  
  

IN THE CHAIR: LIBOR ROUČEK
Vice-President

 

15. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting: see Minutes
Video of the speeches

16. Debates on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law(debate)

16.1. Sri Lanka: follow-up of the UN report (debate)
Video of the speeches
MPphoto
 

  President. − The next item is the debate on six motions for resolutions on Sri Lanka(1).

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Paul Murphy, author. – Mr President, in the brutal war of the Sri Lanka Government against the Tamil minority, at least 40 000 Tamils were killed within the space of a few weeks and hundreds of thousands were detained in open air prison camps. The UN report at long last publicly acknowledges the crimes that were committed against the Tamil people. Unfortunately, there should be no illusions that the report will change the conditions of Tamils in Sri Lanka.

The day after its publication, it was reported that the UN Secretary-General would only launch an international investigation if the Sri Lankan Government agrees or an international forum such as the UN Foreign Security Council calls for an inquiry. Given the nature of the Sri Lankan Government, it is obvious that it will not allow any international investigation. It highlights once again the need to campaign for a genuinely independent inquiry into the war crimes and for the Rajapaksa regime to be held responsible.

On 18 May, there will be protests around the world organised by many groups, including the Tamil Solidarity Campaign, to mark the second anniversary of this bloody war. A united struggle of Sinhalese and Tamil people is still needed to defeat this regime and fight for the right of self-determination for the Tamil-speaking people.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Geoffrey Van Orden, author. – Mr President, we only have to hear those opening remarks to understand why I very much regret that we are having this debate today. It is being promoted by extremist elements in the Tamil diaspora, the same people who have helped sustain the LTTE terrorist campaign over many years through political activity, and often from the proceeds of crime.

Of course, the final stages of the LTTE campaign were awful. The UN’s Darusman report, which is the immediate pretext for this debate, states clearly that in those final stages, the LTTE used the civilian population as human shields, intensified the forcible recruitment of civilians, including children, into its ranks, executed civilians who attempted to escape the conflict zone and deployed artillery in proximity to displaced civilians and civilian installations such as hospitals. This does not excuse the shelling of civilian targets, but it does put it into context and shows where the blame lies.

Instead of trying to bring together the peoples of Sri Lanka, there are those who seek to continue a campaign of hatred and division. They see this Darusman report as a weapon in this campaign, and just want to put the Sri Lankan Government in the dock.

This approach is malicious and counter-productive. The government of Sri Lanka and the Commission have set up the LLRC to investigate human rights allegations. Let us do all that we can to support them and the peoples of Sri Lanka, instead of attacking them.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Véronique De Keyser, author.(FR) Mr President, from the very first words, you have all understood that the debate would be quite lively and that there would be two views.

I should say that my group aligns itself neither with one side nor with the other, but simply with the side of justice and of reconciliation. I believe that there can be no reconciliation, in those countries, like Sri Lanka, but there are certainly many others, which have experienced atrocious wars, unless justice is done.

Well, what does this United Nations report to which Mr Van Orden refers do? It simply restates the facts and calls for there to be a mechanism for international justice, which one knows must be approved by the government. That is the very least. How would you like there to be reconciliation of a people? It is on both sides, Mr Van Orden. It is not only on the Tamil side. There have been crimes on both sides. Both sides are responsible. It is by both sides that justice must be done.

The report also states, and I apologise for this, that the reconciliation commission that has just been mentioned did not have an investigative element of a sufficiently high standard. Finally, I fear that a national organ of justice will not finally result in a clarification of the facts. That is why, quite simply and in the name of all those who have suffered on both sides, I say that this House can only support this report in order to shed more light and have more justice. That is the only message that I should like to pass on today. I shall not have used up all my allotted time, but that is the essential message for this House.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Thomas Mann, author.(DE) Mr President, in February, I went to Sri Lanka with the Delegation for Relations with South Asia. Whilst there, we witnessed the enormous efforts to overcome the consequences of a 25-year civil war. The European Union, the United Nations and NGOs are providing help, from the clearing of landmines by the HALO Trust through to the resettlement of the Tamils in their former home. We call on the government there to respond positively to the recommendations of the UN’s panel of experts, which highlighted war crimes and crimes against humanity on the parts of both the Sinhalese and the LTTE.

It is encouraging that the government has set up a commission to deal with reconciliation, establish legal jurisdiction, solve language problems and deal with former front-line soldiers. The consistent willingness to cooperate, the will to integrate minorities and the assurance of maintaining international legal norms form the basis for the development of a country that, without violence and terror, has a real future.

We emphatically call on the EU’s High Representative to support efforts of this kind.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Anneli Jäätteenmäki, author. – Mr President, the conflict in Sri Lanka may be over, but many questions remain unanswered. An end to a conflict does not necessarily mean that the conflict is over in people’s minds.

Victory is not the same as peace. It takes time, effort and especially commitment and strong will to overcome the scars of a conflict. Reconciliation is imperative. Justice is vital for a new beginning. Therefore, the Sri Lankan Government should immediately start investigations on the violations of international humanitarian and human rights law.

Both sides need to be investigated. International conventions to which Sri Lanka is a party require investigations on the alleged violations and the prosecution of those who are responsible. Only by means of an open and honest investigation and through justice can the Sri Lankan people heal the wounds of a long and difficult conflict and continue their lives in peace.

The ALDE Group applauds UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s report and initiative on Sri Lanka. We fully support the UN recommendations.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Heidi Hautala, author. – Mr President, on 23 May 2009, the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, and the President of Sri Lanka, Rajapaksa, signed a joint statement in which Sri Lanka agreed to guarantee accountability for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity during the war which ended in May 2009.

After this agreement was not honoured by the Sri Lankan Government, the UN Secretary-General appointed a panel of experts to advise him on modalities for an accountability process. The report, which was published very recently, made credible allegations that both government forces and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam failed to respect the norms of international law. The report stressed the need for accountability on both sides.

The Sri Lankan Government has dismissed the panel’s report, calling it illegal and biased. I believe that it is an objective reason for further investigations. At a time when the creditable and legitimate work of international human rights bodies is being discredited, it is for this House to step up and defend international law. War crimes must never go unpunished, no matter where they occur.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Eija-Riitta Korhola, on behalf of the PPE Group. (FI) Mr President, the civil war in Sri Lanka lasted 25 years and ended with the defeat of the Tamil Tigers. The last stages of the war were especially bloody and thousands died in its last few months.

According to the new report by the UN, it is very likely that the Tamil Tigers and government troops will be found guilty of serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights committed in the final stages of the conflict. The Tamil Tigers are suspected of shooting civilians trying to flee. The government killed civilians in shellfire. These are both serious crimes and they cannot be ignored. That is why it is important that the UN can carry out an impartial and open investigation into the matter.

Unfortunately, the Sri Lankan Government has been unwilling to allow the investigation to go ahead without its approval, unless the UN Member States unanimously insist. It is extremely important that Sri Lanka adopts a constructive attitude and is willing to cooperate. A sense of responsibility is vital for the reconciliation process. The EU must support efforts to strengthen Sri Lanka’s sense of responsibility.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ana Gomes, on behalf of the S&D Group.(PT) The conclusions of the Darusman report for the United Nations (UN) point to the massacre of tens of thousands of civilians, war crimes and crimes against humanity, alongside other terrible humanitarian law violations, committed by both the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and the Sri Lankan Government.

Carrying out an independent investigation and bringing those responsible to justice is not a political choice but an obligation under international law. The Reconciliation Commission established by the government does not meet basic requirements for independence. Therefore, the international community – specifically the European Union and the UN Security Council – must offer their unconditional support for the report’s recommendations and take urgent steps towards the creation of an independent international mechanism to monitor the Sri Lankan Government’s actions, ensure that crimes committed on both sides are investigated, and seek justice for the Sri Lankan people.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica, on behalf of the ALDE Group.(ES) Mr President, I wish to support this resolution on human rights violations and war crimes committed in Sri Lanka.

It is crucial, in addition to expressing our solidarity with the victims and condemning the violence, and given the concerns regarding the judiciary’s lack of independence, to promote a serious, impartial, transparent investigation to be undertaken by an independent body so that the people responsible on both sides of the conflict can be identified and punished.

Impunity for war crimes must end if we want to prevent them from being repeated in the future. In Sri Lanka, the civilian population was bombed, among other atrocities.

Seventy-four years ago in my own country, Franco’s troops bombed the town of Guernica, killing more than half of the population, an episode famously depicted by Picasso. Ever since, Guernica has been a universal symbol for peace and resistance.

However, it is everyone’s wish to make progress towards reconciliation. We must therefore encourage, help and also push the Sri Lankan Government to continue these prosecutions so that true peace and justice can be attained.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Karima Delli, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group.(FR) Mr President, the United Nations report, published on 11 April, throws light on the war crimes and the crimes against humanity committed in Sri Lanka in the conflict between the government forces of Mr Rajapaksa and the Tamil Tiger independence movement. The clashes in May and June 2009 gave rise to war crimes and crimes against humanity, and thousands of civilians lost their lives. We cannot accept the impunity of those responsible and of the authors of these crimes. The government of Mr Rajapaksa has done everything in its power to prevent publication of the UN report and it even contests its conclusions.

In Sri Lanka, the press is muzzled, and journalists are subject to intimidation and arbitrary detention. The main opposition Internet information site has had its access blocked by the judicial authorities, while access to refugee camps is still currently extremely restricted, including for the United Nations. The Tamil minority is the victim of a genocide that dare not speak its name. We must urgently send European Parliament observers to the north of Sri Lanka to see what is really happening there and reassert the principle of the self-determination of peoples.

(The speaker agreed to take two blue card questions under Rule 149(8))

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Charles Tannock (ECR). – Mr President: I heard it directly in French and the word used was ‘génocide’, which means ‘genocide’, and that has a particular significance in international law.

If such were the intent of the Sri Lankan Government, how come they have just released 200 000 Tamils who were prisoners? It is absurd to accuse the Sri Lankan Government of genocide. I would hope that the Member would retract that statement.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Karima Delli (Verts/ALE).(FR) Mr Tannock, I used that word by way of a metaphor, above all, to label the phenomenon. However, I have made it clear that it was not the name. The facts have to be established. In any case, what is happening to the Tamil minority cannot be shrugged off as a simply anodyne act.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Geoffrey Van Orden (ECR). – Mr President, the previous speaker mentioned that she is calling for some sort of commission to go to Sri Lanka to look at what is going on on the ground there. Could I just remind her that the South Asia delegation has just been to Sri Lanka – and I see several members of that delegation in the Chamber. Indeed, my colleague, Mr Mann, referred to the visit there: the previous speaker is obviously not listening to what is going on in this debate. People have been to Sri Lanka. They know Sri Lanka and they know what is going on. I do not know where Ms Delli is getting all this nonsense from.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Karima Delli (Verts/ALE).(FR) You are right, we have already sent a mission and I acknowledge the formidable character of that mission, seeing that you worked on it. However, we can also exert pressure, which means that we must absolutely repeat this type of operation.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marie-Christine Vergiat, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group.(FR) Mr President, Sri Lanka is a ravaged land. The civil war officially ended nearly two years ago, and we know in what conditions it took place. In that country, the United Nations failed badly. The reports from non-governmental organisations are damning. Thousands of civilians were killed between January and May 2009. Atrocities were committed by both camps, but it seems to be accepted that the pro-government forces knowingly shelled zones where they had encouraged the civilian population to take refuge.

Since that time, the Sri Lankan Government has been manoeuvring to exonerate itself and impede access to justice by those who must be called, at the very least, victims of war crimes. It has not ceased to try and underestimate the number of civilians present in the war zone while it has even deprived them of all humanitarian aid, including food, water and healthcare. The Tamil Tigers have their share of the responsibility for these horrors. They conscripted child soldiers and used the civilian population as a human shield, but that does not in any way alleviate the responsibility of the governmental authorities on the spot. It justifies nothing.

The UN waited for a long time before denouncing the situation in that country. What is worse, the Sri Lankan Government has multiplied its machinations to prevent the publication of the latest report in particular and to have its conclusions rejected. We can only welcome the report of 11 April. The resolution before us today is going in the right direction. For my part, I should have liked it to go even further. It is high time that international justice did its work, in Sri Lanka as elsewhere.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jaroslav Paška, on behalf of the EFD Group. (SK) Mr President, the long-running military conflict between the government forces and the armed groups of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, which has had very cruel consequences for the civilian population living in the conflict zones, came to an end in 2009. After the end of the war, the Sri Lankan President, Mahinda Rajapaksa, promised to investigate all suspected violations of military law and international humanitarian law during the military conflict.

The UN report published in April this year states that both sides in the conflict carried out military operations without taking steps to protect the rights and lives of civilians. Despite this, the responsible bodies in Sri Lanka have not held to account the people responsible for serious violations of humanitarian law, two years after the end of the war. The judicial authorities are, in many cases, inactive, and we therefore need to support through our resolution UN efforts to uphold the law and establish accountability for the killing and torture of thousands of civilians during the vicious fighting between the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam and government forces in Sri Lanka.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Filip Kaczmarek (PPE).(PL) Mr President, the dramatic events in Sri Lanka which are described in the UN report show what kind of problems can be caused by armed conflict. What took place there is further proof that solving differences by violence and force of arms generates other colossal problems. In Europe, there has, for centuries, been reflection about the concept of a just war. What is particularly painful is the fact that in the modern world, even a war which is theoretically just inevitably entails the suffering of innocent and unjustified victims. This happens irrespective of how we define a just war.

In the case of Sri Lanka, growing amounts of data show that the war was not a just one for either side. The victor is not always right, although they always try to prove they are right. If there is really to be a reconciliation, as the Sri Lankan Government has declared, then the basis of such a reconciliation must be the truth about what happened during the struggle with the Tamil Tigers. There will be no genuine reconciliation without exposing the war crimes which were committed, irrespective of which side it was that committed them. There will be no reconciliation if the sides consider their own sins to be taboo and do not allow them to be mentioned.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Claude Moraes (S&D). – Mr President, many in this Chamber have been involved in the politics of Sri Lanka, and indeed the politics of the diaspora of Sri Lanka and of the Tamil community.

What we are discussing today is a report by the Secretary-General’s panel of experts on accountability in Sri Lanka. I have not heard anyone in the Chamber as yet cast doubts on the intrinsic integrity of that report.

I have read the report and I have spoken to many about the report on both sides. If we are saying that we should leave the report on the table, and we should not have investigations into what happened between January and May, and indeed not open the door to investigate many allegations on both sides, what is the point of a report of this nature?

Indeed, I find it compelling that one diaspora organisation of the Tamil community, the Global Tamil Forum, has said that credible allegations against the LTTE – and they have made this very prominent – should also be investigated.

We have a report which ought to have a follow-up, and I speak firmly in favour of the need for a genuine process of accountability which would bring truth, justice and reconciliation to Sri Lanka following what will be a painful investigation, but an investigation which must happen.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Laima Liucija Andrikienė (PPE). – Mr President, it is appalling that during the protracted military conflict in Sri Lanka that ended in 2009, nearly 100 000 people were killed, including tens of thousands of civilians, most of whom died in the final phase of the conflict. The international community should demand a robust international investigation into credible reports of atrocities committed on both sides.

It is a pity that countries like China and Russia opposed discussion of the issue in the United Nations Security Council and the UN Secretary-General taking more robust action to investigate the crimes committed. The UN Panel of Experts clearly indicated that both the government of Sri Lanka and the Tamil rebels committed serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law, possibly amounting in some cases to war crimes and crimes against humanity.

So I fully support the immediate establishment of an international justice mechanism as proposed by the UN report.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Sari Essayah (PPE). (FI) Mr President, Commissioner, it is apparent from the UN report that in the final bloody months of the civil war in Sri Lanka, which went on for 25 years, thousands of civilians died in artillery fire from government troops. The UN also said that Tamil rebels had used more than 300 000 civilians as human shields and shot civilians trying to escape. Both sides therefore seriously contravened human rights and international laws in a war situation.

It is important now that reconciliation talks get under way, so that an impartial and independent investigation into war crimes can be carried out by the UN. Parliament’s resolution is well­balanced in its wording and will encourage the parties to achieve reconciliation and build peace.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  George Sabin Cutaş (S&D).(RO) Mr President, the conclusions from the UN report published on 25 April 2011 level serious accusations concerning the numerous violations of human rights and norms of international law, both by the Sri Lankan Government and by the rebel forces defeated in the civil conflict which lasted well over 28 years. Indeed, the report states that government forces killed tens of thousands of civilians by bombing populated areas, hospitals and even humanitarian aid centres belonging to the UN. On the other hand, the rebel forces used numerous civilians as human shields, with those who tried to escape the conflict zone being shot on the spot. Like other speakers before me, I think that an independent international mechanism needs to be created to investigate the war crimes in this country, as well as the other serious human rights violations. An impartial, transparent investigation is required, which will shed light on who is responsible for these crimes that have shocked the international community.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Graham Watson (ALDE). – Mr President, this well-researched report shows us – in addition to all its conclusions – that, once again, the first casualty of war is truth.

What it fails to do is to outline the policies needed to heal the hurts of that nation. Too many countries for too long turned a blind eye to what was going on. The right policies are needed now, through a concerted effort by the international community, to seek release and justice for all of those who have been so terribly affected.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, Mr Watson is quite right in saying that the first casualty of any war, and specifically this one, is truth.

Obviously, we also have to admit that the civilian population is a victim in this kind of conflict, and the UN panel has shown clearly that there are responsibilities on both sides: mainly that of the government but also that of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, and both need to be investigated.

What we are saying is that a proper inquiry is very unlikely if the investigating commission comes from the government. What we are asking for is an independent commission to investigate these allegations, identified by the UN panel, of war crimes and crimes against humanity. If we do not understand the need for this, we will not have a solution, because peace will come only when justice arrives; justice is possible only on the basis of truth; and truth will come only if we have an independent investigation.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Charles Tannock (ECR). – Mr President, finally, Sri Lanka is enjoying peace after a quarter of a century of terrorist insurgency, and the UN report on the Sri Lankan army’s defeat of the Tamil Tigers is heavy on criticism and light on substantive, proven facts.

The approach taken in the report seems to be undermining the efforts now undertaken by the government of Sri Lanka to promote truth and understanding, not least through the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, and the government actually having released more than 200 000 detained Tamil prisoners.

Of course, any deliberate atrocities against civilians by the military must be punished. I agree with that, but there is no clear evidence that this was deliberate government policy. I would like to remind the House that the LTTE refused a supervised international surrender offer and preferred instead to choose a bloodbath as their kind of exit strategy, which was appalling.

The consequences now of the international community’s ambivalence towards Sri Lanka are clear: a loss of influence and an inability to shape developments. Meanwhile, China has stepped into the breach and become Sri Lanka’s closest friend and defender at the UN. I hardly need remind colleagues here of China’s approach to human rights.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, on 25 April 2011, the United Nations made public the advisory report of the panel of experts appointed by the UN Secretary-General on accountability in relation to the armed conflict in Sri Lanka. The panel found credible allegations which, if proven, would indicate that serious violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law were committed by the Sri Lankan military and the LTTE, some of which would amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The panel also makes a series of recommendations to the UN Secretary-General and to the government of Sri Lanka which, in the panel’s words, will serve as the framework for an ongoing and constructive engagement between the Secretary-General and the government of Sri Lanka on accountability. Recommendations include the launch of genuine investigations by the government of Sri Lanka and the establishment of an independent international mechanism by the UN Secretary-General.

The UN has stated that the UN Secretary-General is carefully reviewing the reports, conclusions and recommendations, and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has urged the Sri Lankan Government to quickly carry out the measures suggested by the panel and ensure justice.

The government of Sri Lanka, on its side, has rejected the report in the strongest terms. Earlier this week, High Representative Catherine Ashton issued a declaration on behalf of the EU reiterating the EU view that an independent process to address these extremely serious allegations should contribute to strengthening the process of reconciliation and ensuring lasting peace and security in Sri Lanka.

The High Representative has stressed that the issue of accountability should be seen as an essential part of the process of national reconciliation. The EU therefore hopes that the government of Sri Lanka will recognise the constructive objectives of the report, and encourages it to engage with the UN Secretary-General on its contents.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – The debate is closed.

The vote will take place shortly.

Written statements (Rule 149)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Michèle Striffler (PPE), in writing.(FR) The conflict between the government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) ended in May 2009 and resulted in more than 90 000 deaths. Numerous Sri Lankans who had been displaced by the violence in their country have returned to their homes following the end of hostilities. However, there are still 75 000 refugees who continue to lead difficult lives in camps in Tamil Nadu, India. Sri Lanka has a double challenge to overcome. It has to recover from a long-lasting crisis. The United Nations’ experts’ report, made public on 25 April, found the allegations of violations of international humanitarian law and human rights credible. In the interests of justice and reconciliation in Sri Lanka, it is essential to set up an impartial, transparent and independent enquiry. It also has to prepare for the various natural disasters, such as flooding, landslides, cyclones and also drought, to which the country is exposed.

 
  

(1)See Minutes


16.2. Azerbaijan (debate)
Video of the speeches
MPphoto
 

  President. – The next item is the debate on six motions for resolutions on Azerbaijan(1).

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marie-Christine Vergiat, author.(FR) Mr President, this is another occasion when we find ourselves looking into the situation in Azerbaijan. The democratic situation in that country is dramatic enough. However, this is a country that is a not insignificant partner within the European Union’s Eastern Partnership.

Opposition parties and non-governmental organisations continue to denounce attacks on human rights and the political repression which is rife there, not to mention the corruption of the regime in power. The values of democracy and human rights form an integral part of the values of the European Union, in theory.

Should we not draw lessons from what is happening in what are called the Arab countries and not demand of our Eastern partners what we did not demand of some governments, notably those of Tunisia, Libya or Egypt? Should we not, Mr Andor, see to it that democracy can finally rule in those countries, that we have minimum requirements in the matter?

For my part, I find that the resolution we have before us is, at best, a resolution with as low a profile as it is possible to have. For this reason, we have dissociated ourselves from it and we shall make do with abstaining on the vote.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Charles Tannock, author. – Mr President, Azerbaijan is, regrettably, a one-party, semi-authoritarian state where political opposition to the dynastic rule of the Aliyev family is barely tolerated.

Last December’s elections predictably delivered an overwhelming majority for Heydar Aliyev’s New Azerbaijan Party. In response, the OSCE stated that the conduct of these elections overall was not sufficient to constitute meaningful progress in the democratic development of that country. The OSCE’s report went on to say that freedom of expression was limited and that normal political discourse was almost impossible, partly because of tight constraints on the media.

Now we are hearing new reports about the targeting of opposition parties and journalists. This is nothing new, but it is good from time to time in this House to remind ourselves of the true nature of the Aliyev regime. After all, this is a country which, like all EU countries, enjoys membership of the Council of Europe and is part of our eastern EU partnership.

Supposedly, Azerbaijan is committed to democracy, the rule of law and human rights. The truth is quite different. Azerbaijan spends countless petro-dollars trying to convince outsiders of the benign nature of the regime but I, for one, am not fully taken in.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Cristian Dan Preda, author.(RO) Mr President, I will begin with some encouraging news. I am referring specifically to the release of the two bloggers, Adnan Hajizade and Emin Milli, whom we have discussed in this Chamber. Otherwise, however, the situation is more than worrying in Azerbaijan. We are hearing about the harassment of journalists and the intimidation of human rights activists, who are facing criminal charges. In addition, there were 200 arrests made in the wake of the recent protests in Baku in March and April. All these incidents raise serious question marks with us, especially as we must not forget that Azerbaijan has signed up to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

The Azeri authorities have seemingly failed to understand that dialogue needs to be established between them and civil society, and not pressure being exerted by the authorities on society. Nevertheless, I hope that ultimately, we can establish cooperation within the Eastern Partnership and in the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marietje Schaake, author. – Mr President, while we welcome the release from prison of Adnan Hajizade and Emin Milli, the good news about Azerbaijan ends about there. The European Parliament is very concerned about the massive crackdown on freedom of expression and assembly carried out in Azerbaijan following the peaceful protest against the government in March and April of this year. Young people, civil society activists, media professionals and opposition politicians are being harassed and intimidated. Some demonstrators have been sentenced in mass trials which took place late at night and while people did not have access to a lawyer. Most of these lawyers, in turn, were not informed of the locations where the trials were being held. The Human Rights House of Azerbaijan has been closed down by order of the Ministry of Justice.

This climate of fear and intimidation and the breaches of human rights must end. The Azerbaijani Government is losing its credibility by breaching conventions it has itself signed up to, such as the Council of Europe and the European Convention on Human Rights. We want President Aliyev to keep his word. Europe also loses credibility if we do not act upon these breaches. They should have real consequences for the relations between the EU and Azerbaijan.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ulrike Lunacek, author. (DE) Mr President, a few days ago, we celebrated the grand opening of Euronest at the European Parliament in Brussels. Azerbaijan is a founding member of that assembly and as such, has committed itself to democracy, human rights, the rule of law and freedom of assembly and the media. This is also a fundamental element of the negotiations on an association agreement between the EU and Azerbaijan that have been taking place since July 2010.

In light of this, it is really quite staggering how the Azerbaijani Government has behaved towards peacefully demonstrating people over the last two months. Here we have young people – who organised themselves via social networks like Facebook – arrested and sentenced to up to two and a half years imprisonment because they peacefully demonstrated under the slogan ‘drug abuse’. Others are threatened with a similar fate. At least 30 people, who likewise protested peacefully, have been sentenced to five to eight days of imprisonment without being able to contact their legal representatives in a cloak and dagger operation that excludes the public.

Ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, that is unacceptable! In a joint resolution of the five largest groups in Parliament, we are calling for all these people to be released immediately and for the rule of law, freedom of expression and of the media to actually be ensured so that, as President Aliyev assured us years ago – in 2005 – ‘No journalist is persecuted in Azerbaijan’. He must finally keep these promises.

I really hope that, by the time of the inter-parliamentary assembly scheduled for June, we will succeed in having all these people released, including newspaper editor Eynulla Fatullayev, and that the government and the governing parties finally keep to their promises. Otherwise, there must be consequences.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Eduard Kukan, on behalf of the PPE Group. (SK) Mr President, the democracy and human rights situation in Azerbaijan is raising legitimate concerns. These include freedom of expression, media freedom, freedom of association and many other areas. We are monitoring incidents involving arrests and political pressure on democratic activists, journalists and the political opposition. Azerbaijan and other countries in the region need to get a clear signal that violations of human and civil rights cannot be tolerated under any circumstances. If they want to be partner countries of the EU, they must respect its values.

The debate on violations of human rights and democratic standards should therefore cover the entire region of the South Caucasus. In this context, I would also like to draw attention to the re-escalation of tension between Azerbaijan and Armenia in the region of Nagorno-Karabakh. This situation now represents a security risk for the entire region. It is therefore important for this reason as well to adopt the resolution now. The Union should take a more active and more responsible approach, not only in Azerbaijan, but also in the whole region. We should learn from the experience of the conflict between Russia and Georgia, and prevent a repeat of similar tragedies.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Kristian Vigenin, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, it is true that the situation in Azerbaijan is difficult, and we have reasons for concern. Here, I would specially mention the case of Mr Hajiyev. I think the authorities should understand that peaceful demonstrations are a natural part of political life in any democratic country and that the pluralism of opinions and political beliefs is a fundamental part of a democratic society.

On the other hand, I must say that it is rather unfortunate that we have put the urgent issues of Azerbaijan and Belarus one after the other – one week after Azerbaijan became – and was welcomed as – a founder of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly together with us, the European Parliament. We need engagement both with the authorities and with civil society, and we have to do more, in addition to adopting urgent measures and resolutions.

The Eastern Partnership and the Euronest Assembly are a good platform for such an engagement, and I feel that there is a new wind coming from Azerbaijan, a renewed wish for political dialogue. The PCC, which is going in June to Azerbaijan, should use this opportunity to raise the human rights issue but also to establish a more consistent dialogue with the country.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Graham Watson, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, I venture to suggest that were Azerbaijan known as Azeria, as with Georgia and Armenia, European citizens’ concern for democratic standards there would be higher.

However, my group cannot share Mr Vigenin’s view. The media in Azerbaijan is not free. Its elections are not fair. Its people are subject to arbitrary and sometimes violent treatment by officials. Peaceful demonstrations in recent weeks have met with repression more common to an Arab than to a European country, from an 18-year-old regime which has slowly stifled hope of progress. This country’s continued participation in the European Neighbourhood Policy must be made conditional on democratic reforms rather than on its willingness to supply oil for the Nabucco pipeline.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Heidi Hautala, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, democracy and respect for human rights and the rule of law are an integral part of the new association agreement which is currently being negotiated between Azerbaijan and the European Union.

Without respect for these principles, it is impossible to see how Azerbaijan can have a common future with its European partners. Let me also join those colleagues who point out that we need to be very clear and objective when we talk to our partners in the Eastern Partnership countries. We should not believe that we can get away with simply bashing Belarus, because there are severe problems in Azerbaijan and in several other Eastern Partnership countries, and I hope that the forthcoming study commissioned by the Subcommittee on Human Rights will give some guidance on how we should talk to these countries about their human rights situation.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jaroslav Paška, on behalf of the EFD Group (SK) Mr President, Azerbaijan is one of the special partners of the EU and a founding member of the Euronest grouping, and therefore benefits considerably from privileged relations with the EU.

As a country with such an exceptional status, however, it has promised, in the signing of mutual agreements as a partner of the EU, to uphold the principles of democracy, human rights and the rule of law, which are fundamental preconditions for such cooperation. The unjustified arrests of journalists, representatives of youth organisations and civil activists, the banning of peaceful protests and the use of physical force against protestors are therefore unacceptable.

I expect that the High Representative and Vice President of the Commission, Baroness Ashton, as well as the Commission itself, will convey and represent to the Azerbaijani Government our disquiet over the suppression of democracy in the country, and demand immediate corrective action. By adopting the drafted resolution, we will give both the Commission and the High Representative the necessary mandate for this.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Sari Essayah (PPE). (FI) Mr President, Commissioner, it is somehow grotesque that our Euronest partners, Azerbaijan and Belarus, are both being discussed in succession here as urgent human rights cases. Surely the partnership ought to require a respect for European values.

According to the human rights organisation, Amnesty International, the Azerbaijani authorities are trying to stifle critical voices with a view to preventing wider protests, the like of which have been seen in the Arab world in recent months. In the past few weeks, the Azerbaijani police have broken up several demonstrations in the country and have also arrested representatives of the opposition on trumped­up charges, frequently, the possession of drugs.

The Savalan case and the cases of demonstrators arrested recently show how basic rights in Azerbaijan remain weak and how far the authorities are prepared to silence dissidents.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, the situation in Azerbaijan is very disappointing. Here is a country that has not really moved forward in terms of political rights since the break-up of the Soviet Union. There are just too many examples of lack of freedom – freedom of speech and freedom of the press, which are fundamental to any properly functioning democracy – as well as evidence of the torture of prisoners, court cases where illegally acquired evidence is always admitted, and so on.

Because we have a close relationship with this country, we certainly have to engage in dialogue, but my position is closer to Mr Watson’s thinking: that we need to take a tough hand as well, because if you go ‘softly, softly’ on a continuous basis, you will get nowhere. So I would hope, yes, for dialogue and, yes, for engagement, but we have to up the ante in terms of making demands for freedom: freedom of expression, freedom of speech and, above all, freedom of the press.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Mitro Repo (S&D). (FI) Mr President, freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are universal fundamental rights and the cornerstones of a democratic society. It is sad that harassment, intimidation and arrests are used as a means of suppressing the diversity of civil society.

Azerbaijan is party to the European Convention on Human Rights and a member of the Council of Europe, and it has a responsibility to safeguard its citizens’ human rights and respect them. Bloggers, journalists and civil society activists are denied freedom of speech in Azerbaijan and peaceful protests are prevented. Young people are prevented from using new communications technology and social media, and are even punished if they do use them.

This is ironical, because the state would definitely benefit from an active and diverse civil society. Azerbaijan should be supported in its democratic and human rights development within the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy and the Eastern Partnership.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE). – Mr President, the resolution on Azerbaijan expresses our concern about eventual North African echoes in this, a European partnership country.

The leadership there should avoid, in its approaches to the opposition and peaceful protestors, any similarity with the regimes in North Africa, Russia or Belarus. That suggestion and warning can be read in the document before us, certain points of which could express that criticism with more clarity.

The wording on the worsening human rights situation and the increased number of incidents should be preceded by the word ‘recently’, as this is not about general developments over the years going from bad to worse. On the contrary, until the spring events, Azerbaijan was making relatively good progress and was not listed by Human Rights Watch among such poorly-viewed states as China, Iraq, Israel, Russia, Saudi Arabia or Uzbekistan. As it was not mentioned, Azerbaijan looked better, but now we need a little more balance.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (S&D).(RO) Mr President, not only as an active partner of the European Union within the European Neighbourhood Policy and Eastern Partnership, but also as a founding member of Euronest, Azerbaijan must fulfil the commitments it has made to the European Union. This includes having respect for democracy, human rights and the rule of law, as well as for the basic freedoms guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and other international treaties to which Azerbaijan is party. A country aspiring to become a globally recognised democracy cannot operate without allowing its citizens to demonstrate peacefully, especially young people. It is not normal either to ban them from taking their exams just because they hold different political opinions to those of the country’s current leaders.

We European partners would like to see in Azerbaijan an ongoing dialogue with civil society, a press which enjoys freedom of expression and can report without any political pressure so as to provide the public with correct information, as well as free, uncensored access to the Internet to facilitate communication between Azerbaijan and Europe.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Justas Vincas Paleckis (S&D). (LT) Mr President, there are two faces to modern Azerbaijan. On the one hand, Azerbaijan demonstrates impressive economic growth, which highlights the huge amount of oil, progress in negotiations with the European Union on an association agreement and participation in the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly. On the other hand, there are arrests, press restrictions, in other words, a situation that is dangerously reminiscent of the one in Belarus, which my fellow Members spoke about. I believe that the authorities in Baku must resolve to listen to public opinion, because sitting on the fence is not an option, and the European Union, with all its instruments, should help it choose the right direction.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, developments in Azerbaijan regarding democracy and human rights continue to be a matter of serious concern to all of us. Over the last few years, we have noted a worrying trend of increasing restrictions in this domain. Parliamentary elections held on 7 November 2010 were not sufficient to constitute meaningful progress in the democratic development of that country.

There are other areas where we believe that Azerbaijan needs to improve its record of meeting fully its Council of Europe and OSCE commitments. First of all, media freedom: overall, there is a lack of media pluralism. There are also reports of harassment of, and violence against, journalists, as well as questionable judicial proceedings against media representatives. Individual cases in this field remain a concern.

Freedom of assembly is another area where I am deeply worried. The recent months have witnessed several severe actions taken by the authorities vis-à-vis organised protests, as well as attempts to organise protests inspired by the Arab Spring revolutions. The detention of activists and other repressive measures against protesters are deeply deplorable.

The European Union has a responsibility to convey clear messages on the importance of democracy, human rights and respect for the rule of law. Such messages were passed on by President Barroso himself during his visit to Baku in January, and will be high on our agenda for future visits.

Human rights and democracy are cornerstones in our cooperation with Azerbaijan under the existing partnership and cooperation agreement. Last year, we established a new Subcommittee on Justice, Freedom, Security and Human Rights and Democracy. Democracy and human rights are also a central theme in our negotiations on a new association agreement.

I welcome the willingness of Azerbaijan to discuss these methods. I also welcome the role the European Parliament plays in advocating democratic values to the partners in Azerbaijan, including through its work in the EU-Azerbaijan Cooperation Committee.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – The debate is closed.

The vote will take place shortly.

Written statements (Rule 149)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), in writing.(RO) Anyone in Azerbaijan criticising the government is silenced. The European Parliament resolution and reports from human rights organisations highlight serious human rights violations. One such violation which I have drawn the Council’s attention to in a written question concerns the journalist Eynulla Fatullayev, who is still being held in detention, even though a decision was issued by the European Court of Human Rights for him to be released. I pointed this out then and I now urge the removal from the Criminal Code of the provisions concerning defamation, slander and insult (Art. 147-148). A recent report about Azerbaijan from Transparency International indicates that the government is not taking measures to combat corruption and that the independence of the judiciary is not guaranteed. Furthermore, the authorities responded to the recent protests which took place on 11 March and 2 April with arrests and harassment. Democracy is based on people’s freely expressed desire. I call on the Council and Commission to urge the authorities in Azerbaijan to respect human rights, especially those relating to the freedom of expression and peaceful demonstration, as well as to take concrete measures to combat corruption and reform the justice system. The European Union must support all those who risk their lives and freedom in this country for the values which we share.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Fiorello Provera (EFD), in writing.(IT) Azerbaijan actively participates in the European Neighbourhood Policy, is one of the EU’s six Eastern partners, and is among the founders of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly. The core values of these three initiatives are respect for democracy, human rights and the rule of law. These initiatives are intended to foster a continuous political dialogue that can deepen ties between member countries and enable Europe to accompany them along the path to reform. We believe that the instrument of the emergency resolution may be inadequate or even counterproductive to the achievement of the desired goal, namely, Azerbaijan steadily progressing towards its objectives of full and modern democracy. The institutions set up under the agreements reached at interparliamentary and intergovernmental level are intended to achieve these ends; these are the right place to demand explanations for possible infringements of rights and effectively encourage good behaviour and democratic reforms.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Tadeusz Zwiefka (PPE), in writing.(PL) Once again, we are calling attention to the question of free speech and freedom of the press and to the general policy of treating journalists in Azerbaijan. Reports from a variety of sources indicate that the situation of journalists and every kind of political activist in Azerbaijan is becoming increasingly difficult. As far back as 2005, the President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, pledged that all the rights of journalists would be respected and that they would be able to count on help in the event of any kind of danger. The facts reveal, however, that those words are just an empty promise.

As someone who, for many years, worked as a journalist and has a thorough knowledge of the job, this matter is of particular importance to me. In Azerbaijan, journalists are constantly hindered from fulfilling their basic role – the reliable and credible provision of information. It is unacceptable that journalists are carrying out their work under the threat of arrests and body searches. The Azerbaijani authorities have to realise that the activity of free and independent media is a clear signal to the international community that a country is a credible partner on the world stage.

The message given by the European Parliament should be clear – the benefits of economic cooperation with the European Union must not obscure expectations regarding the need to move towards European standards of respect for fundamental human rights, in particular, free speech and freedom of the press, which are a pillar of democracy and without which it is impossible for a modern democratic society to exist.

 
  

(1)See Minutes


16.3. Belarus (debate)
Video of the speeches
MPphoto
 

  President. – The next item is the debate on six motions for resolutions on Belarus(1).

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jiří Maštálka, author. (CS) Mr President, in evaluating, we must not forget that, just as we try to make an objective evaluation in our own countries, our partners or neighbours deserve exactly the same approach.

I would like to say as a doctor that violence is still violence, wherever it happens. It is contrary to our shared values. We must try to ensure that those who are currently in prison are provided with proper conditions from the perspective of health and dignified treatment, wherever they are in the world.

The newly established Euronest assembly should serve as an instrument of exchange and cooperation. In the case of Belarus, it is not possible to fulfil this aim in its entirety due to the measures adopted. The overall outcome of the decision means a breach of the Prague Declaration and a slowdown in potentially positive developments concerning mutual cooperation.

Our efforts are directed towards the creation of the single Europe which young people most of all deserve, including those in Belarus. We should therefore reconsider our position, and reconsider whether restrictions are the right instrument for leading civil society in Belarus to see us as a true friend.

In connection with the 25th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, I would like to ask you to try and see Belarus through a different lens, as a country that has suffered greatly. The disaster particularly affected Belarus and, in my opinion, it is an insult to this nation to prevent the people of Belarus from participating in the official act of remembrance.

I should like to address one further remark to Mr Tannock. I know how hard it is to speak quickly in English. I love English as the language of Shakespeare. Next time, try to speak quickly in the language of Johann von Goethe, and perhaps we will understand you better. I say that as a Czech.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Justas Vincas Paleckis, author. (LT) Mr President, in the five months since 19 December, the political atmosphere in Belarus has become dramatically worse. There is increasing repression of the democratic opposition, the free press and civil society. Belarus is also violating international treaties. I was always in favour of dialogue with Minsk, but under current conditions, it is becoming very difficult, if not impossible. All the more so, because arbitrary accusations addressed to the European Union are also coming out of Minsk, even harassment. The resolution calls for new measures to be found to help Belarusian civil society and the opposition, and this is only fair. Perhaps it is an illusion, but I think that even Moscow and Kiev could help by talking to Minsk about the release of political prisoners.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Cristian Dan Preda, author. (RO) Mr President, in the previous debate, I, too, along with a number of fellow Members, alluded to the session of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly held last week which the Belarusian MPs were absent from, as you are aware. Their absence is justified because MPs in Minsk are not elected freely. In addition, the human rights situation in this country remains more than critical.

I believe that we were all appalled by the repressive measures taken against the protesters in December. At the moment, six of the seven candidates who stood against President Lukashenko are still being tried and harassed. Many other people, including these candidates’ staff, are in prison simply for participating.

I think that two important things need to be done:

1. an independent inquiry must be held into the acts of repression

2. I think that the economic sanctions must be extended against Belarus, applying to the state firms in this country which play an important role in shaping the region.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Kristiina Ojuland, author. – Mr President, we are discussing the situation in Belarus for the fourth time this year, yet the political prisoners who were apprehended in December have still not been released.

We are grateful to the Council for reintroducing visa sanctions and an asset freeze on the high Belarusian officials, which demonstrated that our deep concern for the people of Belarus is not only empty rhetoric. Perhaps we have not been clear enough. Therefore, we are calling on the European Union to extend restrictive measures against Lukashenko’s regime. Well-advised, targeted, economic sanctions against state-owned enterprises will have an effect that the Belarusian authorities cannot disregard.

The criminal regime of Lukashenko relies greatly on the income from exports of chemicals, heavy industry and textiles owned by state enterprises. By cutting off the European market, we can demonstrate our determined intention to overthrow Lukashenko’s regime. It is within our capacity to make a difference. Regime transition is desperately needed for the people of Belarus. We should not deny them their long-awaited liberty.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Michał Tomasz Kamiński, author.(PL) Mr President, we are talking about politics and about human rights in the context of Belarus. I would like, today, to adopt a somewhat unconventional approach and recall the names of two people who are connected with this subject. One of them is my friend, Anatol Lyabedzka, a wonderful Belarusian and European, who only recently was released from prison after spending over 100 days under arrest, something which I am profoundly convinced was unlawful. Today, I would like to send him expressions of solidarity from this House – from the majority of MEPs, I am sure – because he is someone who definitely deserves this.

The second person I would like to mention is Andrzej Poczobut, a journalist who writes for Gazeta Wyborcza, one of Poland’s largest newspapers. I and hundreds of thousands of Poles would like to appeal for his release. He, too, is currently under arrest, and he, too, is being persecuted simply because the Lukashenko regime is afraid of free speech – it is afraid of free speech, which is the foundation of every democracy. I think that we Europeans, assembled in this Chamber today, have no option other than to say very loudly: ‘yes’ for a free Belarus, ‘yes’ for democracy in Belarus and ‘yes’ for the Belarusian nation in Europe.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Raül Romeva i Rueda, author. – Mr President, once again, I deplore the persisting climate of fear and intimidation towards political opponents in Belarus and the ongoing harassment and persecution of opposition figures since the presidential elections in December 2010.

Secondly, I strongly condemn all convictions resulting from the criminal charges of mass rioting and find them politically motivated and of a questionable nature. I would like to stress that the trials were held behind closed doors. Detainees were refused the opportunity to call their witnesses and to meet in proper conditions and on a regular basis with their legal representatives. The lawyers of the accused received several warnings from the Ministry of Justice and some of them have been disbarred. I consider that this conduct of the trials lacked impartiality.

Finally, I condemn the lack of respect for the fundamental rights of freedom of assembly and of expression shown by the Belarusian authorities and call for the immediate and unconditional release of the remaining protestors still in custody and for all charges against them to be dropped.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jacek Protasiewicz, on behalf of the PPE Group.(PL) Mr President, the situation in Belarus is indeed deteriorating, literally from one day to the next, in both political and economic terms. From the political point of view and in terms of civil liberties, we are seeing trials being started against the main opponents of Alexander Lukashenko in the last presidential elections, and we can see the scandalous procedure being applied in these trials. We are also witnessing the repression of independent media, including, in particular, the fact that Andrzej Poczobut has been detained for many weeks now. The economic deterioration can be seen in the redenomination of the rouble, the financial crisis and the problems with current payments. In addition, Alexander Lukashenko is losing control, not only over the situation in the country, but also over his own behaviour, which can be seen in the astonishing, shocking and offensive statements made in reference to the President of Ukraine and Mr Barroso.

Ladies and gentlemen, Commission, Council, it is time to stop the words and the appeals – it is time for action. Paragraph 8 of our resolution says clearly: it is time to introduce economic sanctions, because this is the only language which Lukashenko understands. If, today, we bring in economic sanctions, we can expect that the scandalous trials and the scandalous repression will finally end, because it is only this language which Lukashenko understands. It is, therefore, time to move to another and more resolute phase of reaction to what is going on in Belarus.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Mitro Repo, on behalf of the S&D Group. (FI) Mr President, Belarus is not called Europe’s last dictatorship for nothing. In Belarus, you can go to prison for standing for election or expressing your opinion publicly.

The last presidential elections were not democratic. Furthermore, the laws of Belarus do not permit freedom of assembly, let alone freedom of speech. Harassment of the opposition and of independent human rights groups have now become a chronic problem in the country. Workable democracy depends on the active participation of the opposition and of civil society in the political debate. Human rights are universal, inalienable and interdependent. Belarus has a responsibility to safeguard its citizens’ human rights and respect them.

Belarus must be supported in every way possible in its development of workable democracy and human rights within the framework of the EU’s Eastern Partnership. The EU needs to consider targeted sanctions and their use, since civil society should not be penalised given the current situation in Belarus.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Leonidas Donskis, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, there is not a single indication that the Belarusian regime will change by itself in the coming months or years. It is only under very strong European Union pressure that we can expect anything to happen.

Belarus keeps on violating all fundamental rights and civil liberties. Over the past month, we have seen the Belarusian authorities repeatedly demonstrating their disdain and contempt for the fundamental rights of freedom of assembly and expression.

We could talk here about the matrix of the unchangeability of Lukashenko and his regime, but we cannot end on that pessimistic note. We should understand that a proper response would be a signal to Belarusians – to the Belarusian nation – that they are welcome in Europe, with, at the same time, pressure on the regime and some very principled words about their violation of human rights.

We must not be misled by Lukashenko’s occasional making up to the European Union just to infuriate Russia temporarily, or vice versa. This is unacceptable. What is happening in Belarus has to be evaluated in a very principled way, and more pressure has to be applied.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Tomasz Piotr Poręba, on behalf of the ECR Group.(PL) Mr President, we have talked in this Chamber about what is happening in Belarus on average once every two months since the beginning of the year – this is now the third time. We have talked about cases of human rights violations, we have mentioned the names of opposition activists who have been put in prison and we have discussed how the ability of many civil and non-governmental organisations to operate is restricted. We should, indeed, condemn all these matters and we should protest very strongly against them. However, I think it is equally important, and perhaps even more important, for there to be specific and real involvement from the European Union in building civil society, providing financial support for non-governmental organisations and free media, and also in imposing economic sanctions. As for economic sanctions, I think the right moment has come and that we should introduce them as quickly as possible.

Today, we are going to vote on a resolution which is intended to give moral support to Belarusian society. In my opinion, this should be followed by specific measures, including financial measures and economic sanctions, which will allow the restoration of freedom and democracy in Belarus.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Krisztina Morvai (NI).(HU) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, two questions came to my mind during our discussion about the human rights situation in Belarus. The first one: what would you say if, one or two years from now, you were to see one of the members of the current Lukashenko government here in the European Parliament, in a place none other than the Vice-President’s chair of the LIBE Committee in charge of civil liberties and human rights? And my second question: when will we get to the point where, on these Thursday afternoon discussions, I will see on the agenda amongst non-EU countries the United States or Israel, for instance, particularly since we are already continuously discussing their human rights situations?

Let me mention a few additional details regarding these two questions in the remaining two minutes: There was the issue of the member of the Lukashenko government. Ladies and gentlemen, Kinga Göncz, member of the government of the Hungarian Lukashenko, Ferenc Gyurcsány, presides in the Vice-President’s chair of the LIBE Committee, and is lecturing the representatives of Italy, France and other democracies about human rights.

What was it exactly that made this Hungarian Lukashenko, Ferenc Gyurcsány, famous? The same things, and, to a certain extent, even more pronounced, that this report here is listing in relation to Lukashenko and Belarus to which you are raising an objection, setting the bar considerably higher for Lukashenko and Belarus, a country outside of the European Union, than the one you were using for Hungary and Ferenc Gyurcsány, including the fact that the Hungarian Lukashenko forcefully broke up every significant anti-government protest. I myself have now received compensation and an apology from the police for having shot me, a European Parliament candidate, point blank in the face with tear gas. The most stupefying fact is that there are people still in prison today, some of them serving final prison sentences and some under preliminary detention, who were leading figures of the anti-government protests.

My other question pertains to the United States. They have the death penalty as well, and the torture inflicted in Guantánamo is the same as in Belarus, to which you are objecting. Could it be that someone is intent on getting their hands on the national assets of Belarus? Is not this the reason for this country being randomly selected, especially in view of the fact that you are threatening to use sanctions against its national assets and state-owned companies?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Bernd Posselt (PPE).(DE) Mr President, I am not often of one mind with Mr Maštálka, but today I am. Firstly, I would like to say that all the parties need to fight for democracy and the rule of law to finally prevail in Belarus. Secondly, I want to make the case for multilingualism. Like him, I come from a mini-Europe, the former Habsburg Empire, which was no bad thing in many regards, but which fell apart because the biggest linguistic group – namely mine, the German speakers – always insisted on everyone speaking German. That meant the end of a multinational community. Charles, I hold you in a very high regard, but we are here for multilingualism and precisely for the rights of the minor languages.

Turning to Belarus, I want to say that, 20 years ago, Croatia and Slovenia became free countries – I was there – and in the August, the Baltic States, Russia and Ukraine followed. Nobody would have thought that, 20 years later, there would still be a dictatorship in Europe. Unfortunately, there is not only one. There is Belarus, there is a trend towards a dictatorship in Russia, there is a sliding backwards in Ukraine and there are problems in Moldova and Transnistria. We need to see, therefore, quite simply, that our entire eastern neighbourhood is facing a threat to its freedom to varying degrees. We therefore need to be very clear, think strategically and make freedom and the rule of law the yardstick for our relations throughout our eastern neighbourhood, and particularly when it comes to Belarus.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR).(PL) Mr President, I will begin on a personal note. The organisation Libereco Partnership for Human Rights has asked me to take over a prisoner’s godparenthood for an opposition activist imprisoned in Belarus. I have been asked to adopt Dmitry Bandarenka. I would like to suggest that all of you who are involved in these matters could ask this organisation to allow you to take on the personal patronage of repressed Belarusians and their families – this would be something of a response to the problem of what we can do for those who are, in fact, not far away, in a country which shares a border with the European Union.

However, I am sure that all of us support strong and clear steps. It has already been said in this Chamber that there must be sanctions and there must be strong words, because we can only talk to Lukashenko using a language he understands – well, he understands the language of his own interest, and he understands the language of strength. To rescue human rights, and to rescue democracy, we must use a language which is understood in Minsk.

I have the impression that although we have already spoken many times about this in this Chamber, not much has come from these words of ours. This is, of course, an appeal both to this House and to all bodies and institutions of the European Union, but it is also a challenge which I propose that you take back to your countries and national governments, because they have at least the same power to persuade Mr Lukashenko to establish democracy and freedom in Belarus as we do as representatives of the European Union.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE). FI) Mr President, following the elections in December, President Lukashenko of Belarus began purposely to crush the already weak political opposition and the independent media.

Around 40 people who had taken part in the demonstrations following the elections were charged with civil disorder, which can carry a maximum sentence of 15 years imprisonment. The anti­democratic power in Belarus is concentrated very much in the President.

Lukashenko is now in his fourth term of office, and for 16 years, he has shown that his moves in the direction of democracy are just a very cynical game. The restrictions on Belarus imposed by the EU are therefore fully justified and should even be stepped up.

I strongly support the call issued yesterday by Parliament to the International Ice Hockey Federation for Belarus to lose its right to host the 2014 World Championships unless it frees all its political prisoners. The EU should also impose targeted economic sanctions and intensify its support for NGOs in Belarus.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (S&D).(RO) Mr President, the international community, which also includes the European Union, has been appealing to the Belarusian authorities for a long time to respect the international commitments which they have assumed, to stop the repressive measures used against opposition representatives, to free the protesters arrested during various demonstrations, to end the repressive measures against the free press, civil society and human rights activists, and to allow fair, transparent trials to be conducted. The Belarusian authorities need to understand that if they fail to respect human rights and the rule of law, in compliance with the joint declaration made at the Eastern Partnership Summit on 7 May 2009, of which the Belarusian Government is also a cosignatory, the European Union will not be able to offer any commitment of support.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ulrike Lunacek, author. – Mr President, I asked for the floor because I wanted to refer to the words Ms Morvai used earlier. Kinga Göncz is not from my party but I am appalled by the way that Ms Morvai used a debate about the last dictatorship in Europe – Belarus under Mr Lukashenko – to discredit an honourable Member of this Parliament by calling her a Hungarian Lukashenko.

(Applause)

This is not in keeping with the values or the honour of our common European Parliament, to which we have all been elected.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Krisztina Morvai (NI). – Mr President, I wonder whether Ms Lunacek heard me while I was saying that Ms Göncz was a member of the Hungarian Lukashenko’s government – Mr Gyurcsány’s government.

Please answer the question, Ms Lunacek. What do you know about the massive human rights violations that were committed in Hungary in 2006? Please summarise it. They were no less serious and no fewer in number than those of Lukashenko, and as a human rights lawyer, I strongly condemn both – your comrades shooting at people’s eyes and arbitrary detentions, as well as Lukashenko’s violations of human rights. Both are intolerable and you, as Members of Parliament, should fight against both.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ulrike Lunacek, author. – Mr President, I guess the previous speaker was simply confusing facts. In Hungary, there is no Lukashenko party. I am not from Hungary and I am not from a Social Democratic party or group here, but I refuse to accept that a Member of this Parliament can criticise somebody else in this Parliament as being a member of a dictatorship party in another non-EU country.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Martin Schulz (S&D).(DE) Mr President, Mrs Göncz is an MEP in the same group as me. You can be against Ferenc Gyurcsány, or for him. You can disapprove of Mrs Göncz, or you can support her. It is absolutely up to every individual to decide for themselves, freely and independently, whether they are for or against a given person’s political conviction.

The debate that we are holding here concerns the last dictatorship left in Europe. We are holding it about one of the most brutal and bloodiest dictators on the continent of Europe. I find it totally unacceptable for a freely elected, democratic Member of my group to be compared with a bloodthirsty dictator. I feel that Parliament must also rebuff this, especially when it comes from the representative of a party that is characterised by a hate and persecution that it bestows on the Roma minority in Hungary that is unparalleled across Europe. If there is one person here who does not have the right to criticise Mrs Göncz, then that person is Mrs Morvai.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Charles Tannock, author. – Mr President, I will be talking about Belarus and not Hungarian domestic politics. It is 20 years since the Soviet Union collapsed, but for President Lukashenko of Belarus, it is as if nothing has changed at all. Political repression is as rife as it ever was in the Soviet days, and Lukashenko’s secret police – provocatively still called the KGB – are used as its enforcers.

As we remember from the post-election protests in December last year, Lukashenko is intolerant of dissent and seems to take pleasure in using violence and intimidation against pro-democracy activists. As this resolution today illustrates in graphic detail, Lukashenko has intensified his campaign for persecution and harassment against those who dare challenge his iron-fisted rule. We call on him to end this futile crackdown, to release all political prisoners and instead to restore Belarus to the path of genuine, pluralist, multi-party democracy.

At last week’s constitutive session of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly, representatives from Belarus were rightly missing. Belarus is the missing piece of Europe’s democratic jigsaw puzzle, and I long for the day when it rejoins the European family.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Alfreds Rubiks (GUE/NGL) . – (LV) Mr President, I fully support the insistence of the European Parliament and of the Members present that human rights not only in the European Union, but also throughout the whole of the world, are fundamental rights, namely, the foundations of life. However, I do not support broadly charging a country (without citing any specific examples), its leader or all of its people with crimes that they have not committed. If we are talking about the fact that someone in the opposition (and not only from the opposition, but others too) is arrested after certain events, and see in that circumstance some sort of dictatorship, then what is the purpose of courts in a democratic system? Let the courts deal with whatever happened there, and with who has been rightly and wrongly sentenced or arrested. The fact that you belong to the opposition is not yet grounds for allowing you to do whatever comes into your head. I ask for an extremely tolerant and balanced attitude towards everyone.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, the Commission is deeply concerned about the situation in Belarus and particularly the developments in the wake of the violation of electoral standards at the presidential elections on 19 December 2010.

The crackdown is now further intensifying, with a number of ongoing trials against ex-presidential candidates and most of the remaining detained activists. At the same time, proceedings are ongoing which could result in the closure of two of the remaining independent newspapers – Nasha Niva and Narodnaya Volya – and the harassment of the political opposition, civil society and the independent media continues.

Vice-President/High Representative Ashton has made a number of general and specific statements on the situation in Belarus. We have in clear words condemned the deteriorating situation and have repeatedly called upon Belarus to end the ongoing crackdown on the political opposition and civil society, release all political prisoners and discontinue the politically-motivated trials. We have also expressed our grave concern at reports of torture and other forms of ill-treatment, intimidation and court irregularities.

Let me also remind you that in January, the Council adopted restrictive measures comprising a travel ban and an asset freeze. The list now comprises 175 individuals – which should be compared to the 40 names put forward for an asset freeze and visa ban after the 2006 elections – and we stand ready to include further names, as warranted by developments. In addition, we are considering options for further possible measures, including on the economic side.

In our messages, we have made it clear that we want to continue our engagement with the Belarusian people and civil society. We are moving ahead on the issue of visa facilitation. Negotiating directives for visa facilitation and readmission agreements were adopted by the Council on 28 February, and we are encouraging Member States to make optimal use of the existing flexibilities offered by the Visa Code, in particular, the possibility of waiving and reducing visa fees for certain categories of citizens. In terms of assistance, the Commission is quadrupling its assistance to the Belarusian population and civil society.

We remain committed to a policy of critical engagement in Belarus. This was made clear by the 31 January conclusions of the Foreign Affairs Council. At the same time, it is clear that any deepening of our bilateral relations will depend on Belarus proving its willingness to respect the principles of democracy, the rule of law and human rights.

In conclusion, let me say that the situation in Belarus remains high on our agenda. I am glad to see that a large majority in this Parliament is committed to continuing a serious debate about this and to resisting distractions. We shall continue to monitor developments closely, and we stand ready to react as appropriate.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – The debate is closed.

The vote will take place shortly.

Written statements (Rule 149)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jacek Olgierd Kurski (ECR), in writing.(PL) For a long time, we have been witnesses to the European Union’s political impotence in the face of the tragic situation in Belarus. Successive appeals and resolutions have not been effective. The heavy-handed rule of Alexander Lukashenko gags the opposition, convicting its leaders and sending them to prison and to what are called ‘penal colonies’. In this context, one need only mention the names of opposition presidential candidate Andrei Sannikau, whose trial began a month ago, and Mikalai Statkevich, who is being held under arrest by the KGB. What has the Union done to secure their release? The key to a successful revolution in Belarus is Russia, which has always been an ally of the regime. It would, therefore, be a good idea at the next meeting with the leaders of the Kremlin to stop talking about a common zone of European security from the Atlantic to the Urals, as the leaders of France and Germany want, and to take up the real challenges which lie just over our border. The economic crisis in Belarus is the best time for change. All international aid should be made dependent on democratic change in Belarus.

 
  

(1)See Minutes


17. Voting time
Video of the speeches
MPphoto
 

  President. – The next item is the vote.

(For the results and other details on the vote: see Minutes)

 

17.1. Sri Lanka: follow-up of the UN report (B7-0324/2011)
 

Before the vote:

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Claude Moraes (S&D). – Mr President, speaking on behalf of Véronique De Keyser, I should like to move an oral amendment to paragraph 13, which would read:

‘Calls on the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Council and the Commission to support further efforts to strengthen the process of accountability in Sri Lanka and to support the UN report, in particular the immediate establishment of an international justice mechanism’.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Geoffrey Van Orden (ECR). – Mr President, we had long-drawn-out negotiations involving six political groups on this particular resolution. It is a compromise resolution and obviously it contains elements that many of us wish were not in it, and indeed it excludes elements that many of us wish were in it. But the agreement among the six political groups was that there would be no amendments – oral, written or in any other form – and therefore I think it is a breach of the understanding, and makes a nonsense of the negotiations, if we now have an amendment put forward in this way. We should therefore reject this amendment.

 
  
 

(The oral amendment was not accepted)

 

17.2. Azerbaijan (B7-0329/2011)

17.3. Belarus (B7-0332/2011)
MPphoto
 

  President. – That concludes the vote.

 

18. Corrections to votes and voting intentions: see Minutes

19. Written declarations included in the register (Rule 123): see Minutes

20. Composition of committees and delegations: see Minutes
Video of the speeches

21. Forwarding of texts adopted during the sitting: see Minutes
Video of the speeches

22. Dates of forthcoming sittings: see Minutes
Video of the speeches

23. Adjournment of the session
Video of the speeches
MPphoto
 

  President. – I declare the session of the European Parliament adjourned.

(The sitting was closed at 16:40)

 

ANNEX (Written answers)
QUESTIONS TO THE COUNCIL(The Presidency-in-Office of the Council of the European Union bears sole responsibility for these answers)
Question no 1 by Jim Higgins(H-000155/11)
 Subject: Discards and CFP reform
 

‘The Hungarian Presidency will pay special attention to the reform of the CFP. The simplification of the CFP that began in 2005, the Green Paper published by the European Commission, the consultations that started in 2009 and the Commission’s proposals that are to be published soon are all aimed at securing sustainable fishing and aquaculture. It is expected that the Hungarian Presidency will commence the political debate on this common policy of great significance. It will be up to Hungary to pursue the issue of extending temporary community regulations related to horizontal technical fishing measures.’

In relation to the above, how does the Council propose to deal with the issue of discards as part of CFP reform?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) The Council has already recognised the crucial importance of working towards eliminating discards . In its Conclusions on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament "A policy to reduce unwanted by-catches and eliminate discards in European fisheries" , adopted on 11-12 June (1), the Council endorsed the need to urgently examine ways of progressively […] eliminating discards and noted that such an approach could have many implications such as a 'discard ban', regulating what is caught rather than what is landed, and a move to results-based management. The Council also called upon the Commission, Member States and stakeholders to enhance research efforts in gear design, fishing methods and fishing practices in this respect.

The Council is awaiting with interest the Commission legislative proposals, expected in July 2011, in the framework of the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. The Council was informed that the Commission is determined to propose a discard ban in the forthcoming package reform of the CFP.(2).The Council will certainly take the opportunity to perform an in-depth analysis of these matters as soon as the proposals are on the table.

In the meantime, the Council and the Member States are actively engaging in regular exchanges of views on this issue.

 
 

(1)/07 PECHE 213.
(2)Commission's Summary of Proceedings of the High-Level meeting on eradicating discards, 4 March 2011, Ares 270302

 

Question no 2 by Georgios Papanikolaou(H-000156/11)
 Subject: Flagship initiative 'European Platform Against Poverty'
 

The Hungarian Council Presidency’s working programme for the current six months includes the statement that the Council will give special attention to the problem of child poverty. In view of the fact that 20 million of the 100 million children and young people under 18 are affected by the poverty risk, and since poverty is directly connected with the economic crisis and the phenomenon of early school-leaving, would the Council state:

Does it regard the flagship initiative as an adequate mechanism for combating child poverty?

As the poverty rate in most Member States has stagnated or even increased over the past year, would the Council also state whether in its opinion the continuing economic crisis in the European Member States is jeopardising implementation of the Europe 2020 Strategy targets for combating poverty and early school-leaving among young people?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) The Council Declaration on the European Year for Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion: "Working together to fight poverty in 2010 and beyond", adopted on 6 December 2010, stated that combating child poverty should be a top priority of the EU and of its Member States in the next decade and that financial consolidation and budgetary policies should duly take into account the need to protect all vulnerable people and to prevent social exclusion.

In this context, as the Honourable Parliamentarian rightly points out, tackling child poverty and promoting child well-being is one of the Hungarian Presidency's key priorities in the social area.

The Presidency will submit draft conclusions to the Council taking into account the Trio Presidency declaration adopted at the end of the Conference "Roadmap for a Recommendation on Child Poverty and Child Well-being", held on 2-3 September 2010, in which the Spanish, Belgian and Hungarian Presidencies presented a number of recommendations for future action.

Child poverty is a multi-dimensional phenomenon. A comprehensive approach is therefore needed to tackle it combining employment for parents, income support and access to social services, including childcare, as well as healthcare services and education. Such a comprehensive approach should involve the use of adequate human and financial resources and should be in line with the Treaties, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

It is therefore important that the Member States adequately emphasize the aspects of child poverty within their national policies and take them into consideration when drafting their National Reform Programmes, backing them up with adequate targets and resources, as well as monitoring and evaluation arrangements.

Tackling child poverty and promoting child well-being should be one of the key priorities addressed in the framework of the EU 2020 Strategy, which includes a EU headline target for the promotion of social inclusion, in particular through the reduction of poverty. In this respect, it is worth mentioning that the Council has, on 7 March 2011, welcomed the Commission's Communication on its Flagship initiative ("The European Platform against Poverty and Social Exclusion"), which proposes an integrated and innovative approach aiming at a joint commitment among the Member States at national, regional and local levels, as well as among EU institutions and the key stakeholders (social partners and NGOs), in their efforts to fight poverty and social exclusion.

 

Question no 3 by Marian Harkin(H-000160/11)
 Subject: Economic Governance Package
 

Given that one of the Council's priorities is to highlight the role of social dialogue, does it consider that sufficient progress is being made on this issue in the context of the Economic Governance Package?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) In view of the subject matter of some proposals of the Economic Governance Package, notably the Proposal on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances(1), the Proposal on the effective enforcement of budgetary surveillance in the euro area(2), and the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on enforcement measures to correct excessive macroeconomic imbalances in the euro area(3) the Commission suggested to consult the European Economic and Social Committee on an optional basis.

The Council consulted the Committee on 6 December 2010 and the Committee expressed its opinion at its plenary of 4 and 5 May 2011.

In its opinion the Committee considered, in particular, that mature and comprehensive political and social dialogue allows for the confrontation of social and economic challenges particularly those of a long term nature such as pension reform and health expenditure. In the Committee's view, in order for governments to achieve objectives such as fiscal sustainability and macroeconomic balance, there must be a strong degree of social partnership and collaboration, including political consensus(4).

It should be recalled that on 24 and 25 March 2011, at the occasion of the European Council, the euro area Heads of State or Government agreed that stronger economic policy coordination among euro area Member States and any others also wishing to participate addressing cost developments should be undertaken whilst respecting national traditions of social dialogue and industrial relations. Member States are thus responsible for determining their own specific policy actions, within their national traditions of social dialogue and industrial relations.

In addition to the full respect for national social dialogue arrangements, each Council Presidency schedules a meeting of the social partners under the macro-economic dialogue. This takes place in the margins of the (ECOFIN) Council and ensures a regular discussion between representatives of the social partners, at the EU level, of the main priorities for economic policy at the European level.

 
 

(1)OJ C 121, 11.4.2011, p. 26
(2)OJ C 121, 11.4.2011, p. 25
(3)OJ C 121, 11.4.2011, p. 26
(4)See opinion ECO/285, adopted at the EESC Plenary on 5.5.2011

 

Question no 4 by Zigmantas Balčytis(H-000163/11)
 Subject: Establishment of a permanent financial stability fund
 

The finance ministers of the Eurogroup countries have agreed to set up a permanent eurozone financial stability fund worth EUR 700 billion and a European stability mechanism for economic governance of the eurozone. This would contribute to strengthening cohesion, increasing competitiveness and stabilising the financial system, but only in the countries of the eurozone.

All Member States opened their internal markets when they joined the EU and many undertook to join the eurozone when the necessary criteria were objectively met (without any sleight of hand). The least economically developed Member States have been the worst hit by the crisis, but these decisions will deprive them of financial aid and the prospect of a quicker recovery.

Does the Council not believe that these decisions will create an exclusive club of countries, with the Member States outside the eurozone being excluded from the financial and economic recovery? Does it not think that the EU needs to see coordination between the economies of all Member States, the stabilisation of financial systems and the necessary financial measures to benefit the Member States outside the eurozone?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) Primary responsibility for economic policy lies with the Member States themselves. The EU monitors and coordinates them, in particular in the context of the Stability and Growth Pact and the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines.

The new economic governance package, on which the Council hopes to be able to reach agreement with the European Parliament by June, will establish a framework for a more effective surveillance and coordination of budgetary and macroeconomic policies of all Member States. The European Semester introduced this year will align the calendar for the presentation of the Stability and Convergence Programmes and of National Reform Programs in order to ensure consistency at all levels (budgetary discipline, macro-economic stability and growth) while keeping the individual procedures formally separated. Through this process, the coordination of budgetary policies will be conducted through an ex-ante mechanism, instead of the ex-post mechanism currently in place.

All these elements should help safeguard stability in the euro area and the EU as a whole. Should they prove not sufficient to achieve this objective, the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) will be able following a request by a euro area Member State experiencing severe imbalances and a decision by the ESM Board of Governors, to provide financial assistance to the Member State concerned.

For the cases when individual non euro area Member States experience particular difficulties that necessitate outside assistance, the Council established a framework with the Council Regulation (EC) No 332/2002 of 18 February 2002 establishing a facility providing medium-term financial assistance for Member States' balances of payments(1).

On the basis of that Regulation, the Council can adopt a Decision to provide financial assistance to the countries outside the euro area if they face difficulties or are seriously threatened with difficulties as regards their balance of payments, as foreseen by Article 143(1) of the Treaty of the functioning of the European Union. Since the outbreak of the global economic and financial crisis, three Member States - Hungary, Latvia and Romania have been granted this kind of assistance.

 
 

(1)OJ L 53, 23.2.2002, p. 1

 

Question no 5 by Vilija Blinkevičiūtė(H-000165/11)
 Subject: Implementation of the 'Agenda for new skills and jobs'
 

On 23 November 2010 the Commission launched its flagship initiative entitled ‘an Agenda for new skills and jobs’, which aims to reform labour markets and promote lifelong learning with a view to increasing workforce participation and better matching labour-market supply and demand. This initiative is due to be implemented at both national and EU level.

Hungary, which currently holds the rotating presidency of the European Union, undertook in its programme to pay close attention to these new skills requirements for new jobs. What specific measures has the Council therefore taken with a view to implementing this initiative?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) During the Hungarian Presidency, work related to the flagship Agenda for New Skills and Jobs has continued both in the area of employment and education/training.

At the informal meeting of employment ministers, organised between January 17-18, one of the subjects of the discussion was the Agenda for New Skills and Jobs, in connection with the employment and labour market integration of young people, the enhancement of employment-friendly economic growth, and the creation of more and better quality jobs.

At the opening session of the Tripartite Social Forum, on 10-11 March 2011, which brought together Member States, social partners and European Union institutions, the Presidency underlined the importance of partnerships in the implementation of the flagship initiative.

The Presidency has stressed the flagship initiative's links to youth employment during its other events. During a Conference organised by the Presidency on 4-5 April in Budapest, the role of skills anticipation and adapting education and training systems to labour market needs were highlighted. The Employment Committee provided a substantive contribution for this conference on what action would be needed, both at the national and Union level. In June, the Council (EPSCO) is due to discuss conclusions on the topic of youth employment, including considerations on how to further implement the flagship initiative Agenda for New Skills and Jobs.

Although the flagship initiative with the greatest implications for education and training under the Europe 2020 strategy is Youth on the Move, these areas also important in the Agenda for New Skills and Jobs, particularly in terms of developing skills to bring them in line with changing labour market needs and of promoting closer cooperation between the fields of education and employment. This role was fully acknowledged in the policy debate on the role of education and training in the Europe 2020 strategy, which was organised by the Hungarian Presidency at the meeting of the Council (EYCS) on 14 February.

In the debate, as well as in the Council conclusions, which were adopted subsequently(1), emphasis was placed on the fundamental contribution which high-quality and modern education can make to securing the EU’s long-term prosperity. There was broad agreement on the need to upgrade skills as a means of boosting employability and that, in order to achieve this, further progress was required to improve the identification of training needs, to increase the labour market relevance of education and training, to facilitate individuals' access to lifelong learning opportunities and guidance (particularly for the many young people currently struggling to enter the labour market on account of the economic crisis), and to ensure smooth transitions between the worlds of education, training and employment. Member States also recognised the need to make vocational training and adult learning more attractive, and welcomed the transition towards learning outcome-based qualification systems and the greater validation of skills and competences acquired in non-formal and informal contexts.

Another initiative being prepared by the Hungarian Presidency in support of these objectives is the adoption by the May Council (EYCS) of a Council Recommendation on policies to reduce early school leaving(2), which is expected to emphasise inter alia the importance of strengthening high-quality vocational pathways and increasing their attractiveness, and of reinforcing the link between the education employment sectors, in order to emphasise the benefits of completing education for future employability.

 
 

(1)OJ C 70, 4.3.2011, p.1.
(2)Commission proposal COM (2011) 19 final, 5242/11.

 

Question no 6 by Nikolaos Chountis(H-000167/11)
 Subject: Anticipated influx of migrants from Libya
 

Following the commencement of aerial bombardments under UN Security Council Resolution 1973 (2011), the humanitarian crisis in Libya is expected to worsen dramatically, triggering a fresh wave of migrants heading for Europe, this time from Libya. Given the manifest lack of resources and inadequate provision for migrants and asylum seekers, which is already causing what is being referred to as a ‘humanitarian crisis’ in southern Europe, matters cannot be expected to improve regarding capacity to deal with this fresh migrant influx.

In view of this, what measures has the Council taken with a view to spreading evenly responsibility for the anticipated wave of migrants into the EU Member States and ensuring that the rights of refugees and migrants are respected?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) The European Council has addressed the developments in Libya and the Southern Neighbourhood, including the migratory consequences, both at its extraordinary meeting on 11 March 2011(1) and its regular meeting on 24/25 March 2011.(2)

In its Declaration, adopted on 11 March 2011, the European Council stressed that the Member States most directly concerned by migratory movements require concrete solidarity and that the EU and the Member States stand ready to provide the necessary support as the situation evolves. It also urged Member States to provide further human and technical resources to Frontex, as required. It recalled that a comprehensive approach to migration should be promoted, consistent with the EU's Global Approach. Furthermore, in its Conclusions adopted on 24/25 March 2011, the European Council underlined again that the EU and its Member States stand ready to demonstrate their concrete solidarity to Member States most directly concerned by migratory movements and provide the necessary support as the situation evolves.

The Council has also reviewed the situation in North Africa, including in particular the migratory pressures being experienced in some Member States(3). The Council has had an extensive debate on the situation at its meeting on 11 April 2011 and has adopted Conclusions on the management of migration from the Southern Neighbourhood(4). In these Conclusions, the Council reaffirmed the need for genuine and concrete solidarity towards Member States most directly concerned by migratory movements and called on the EU and its Member States to continue providing the necessary support as the situation evolves, such as by assisting the local authorities of the most affected Member States in addressing the immediate repercussions of migratory flows on the local economy and infrastructure. The Council also stressed the importance of offering durable protection solutions to those in need of international protection present in the countries of the Southern Neighbourhood.

The Council will be keeping the situation under review. It should also be recalled that the situation in the Southern Neighbourhood will be addressed by the European Council at its upcoming meeting in June 2011.

 
 

(1)EUCO 7/11 CO EUR 5 CONCL 2.
(2)EUCO 10/11 CO EUR 6 CONCL 3.
(3)8741/1/11 REV 1, 7781/11.
(4)8909/1/11 ASIM 36 COMIX 226.

 

Question no 7 by Bernd Posselt(H-000168/11)
 Subject: Foreign policy in the field of energy
 

What is the Council’s position on the current state of progress of EU foreign policy in the field of energy, in particular as regards greater independence from Russian supplies and the diversification of sources of supply and supply routes?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) The Council in its conclusions of 28 February 2011 underlined the importance of a comprehensive energy strategy, in the light of the Commission Communications "Energy 2020: A strategy for competitive, sustainable and secure energy"(1) and "Energy infrastructure priorities for 2020 and beyond"(2). In particular, the Council stressed that the whole Energy Strategy 2020 should contribute to ensuring a strong and consistent EU position in external energy matters.

In order to improve the transparency, consistency, coherence and credibility of external action in energy matters the Council considered a need for:

Improved and timely exchange of information between the Commission and Member States;

Shared assessment of risks to the EU's energy security and adequate reflection of energy security concerns in other policy areas (e.g. European Neighbourhood Policy);

Making full use of multilateral fora dedicated to energy or with a strong energy component, and improving coordination in these fora in order to better exploit synergies between Member States and between the Union and its partners;

Enhance coordination of Member States and Union efforts in order to better protect and promote the EU's collective energy interests and policies

Diversification of Europe's routes and sources of supply, as well as continued efforts to facilitate the development of strategic corridors for the transport of large volumes of gas such as the Southern Corridor

Developing mutually beneficial strategic partnerships and comprehensive cooperation with key supplier, transit and consumer countries and regions and around strategic corridors. Besides addressing gas/oil/electricity issues these partnerships should:

promote energy efficiency and energy from renewable sources;

facilitate regulatory convergence i.e. through the implementation of EU energy market- related legislation in neighbouring countries, to promote market-based rules and develop measures as necessary to ensure a level playing field;

promote the highest standards for nuclear safety;

underpin EU ambitions in international processes, such as climate negotiations.

On 4 February 2011, the European Council concluded that work should be taken forward as early as possible to develop a reliable, transparent and rules based partnership with Russia in areas of common interest in the field of energy and as part of the negotiations on the post-Partnership and Cooperation Agreement process and in the light of on-going work on the Partnership for Modernization and the Energy Dialogue.

Moreover the European Council invited the High Representative to take fully account of the energy security dimension in her work.

We expect the above to be reflected in a Commission communication before the summer.

 
 

(1)16096/10
(2)16302/10

 

Question no 8 by Gay Mitchell(H-000171/11)
 Subject: Timeline for the resolution of the banking and debt crisis
 

Will the Council put forward a timeline for the resolution of the banking and debt crisis currently under way in Europe?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) As a follow-up to the comprehensive roadmap endorsed by the Council on 20 October 2009, on which work has been largely completed, the Council, at its meeting of 7 December 2010 endorsed a Roadmap on an EU-wide framework for crisis prevention, management and resolution that covers short and medium term objectives up to 2012. In this Roadmap, the Council foresees relevant timeframes for a continuous policy debate on the crisis prevention and resolution framework, which feeds into the preparatory work on legislative proposals, currently undertaken by the Commission.

The June 2010 European Council stated that the necessary reforms to restore the soundness and stability of the European financial system must be completed urgently and confirmed the urgent nature of the measures outlined in the Commission's Communication "Regulating Financial Services for Sustainable Growth" of 2 June 2010.

On 7 December 2010, the Council also stressed the importance of making progress in respect of the work strands set out in the Commission Communication on an EU Framework for Crisis Management in the Financial Sector.

The Council is therefore looking forward to the discussions on legislative proposals relating to framework for crisis management and resolution in the banking sector which the Commission is expected to table this summer. The Council also continues working on the legislative proposals already tabled by the Commission, and expect an early conclusion of the current and future negotiations with the European Parliament.

The new economic governance package, on which the Council is seeking agreement with the European Parliament by June 2011, should enable a more effective surveillance and coordination of budgetary and macroeconomic policies of all Member States. In particular, it aims to introduce a stronger focus on the debt criterion including a numerical benchmark according to which Member States should reduce their debt levels. Countries not complying with the debt criterion would be placed within the Excessive Deficit Procedure which could, for euro area Member States, eventually lead to sanctions.

Under the existing legal framework 24 Member States are currently subject to the Excessive Deficit Procedure. According to the deadlines set by the Council, while a number of Member States will have to correct their excessive deficit by 2011, for most countries the deadline has been set at 2013 at the latest. Only Greece, Ireland and the United Kingdom have received later deadlines. Correcting the excessive deficits in time will contribute to putting debt levels on a permanently declining path.

Moreover, the Euro Plus Pact, endorsed by all euro area and six non euro area Member States at the highest level in the frame of the March 2011 European Council, should encourage individual Member States to make ambitious national commitments in the areas of fostering competitiveness, fostering employment, the sustainability of public finances and reinforcing financial stability. These elements should all help safeguard stability in the euro area as a whole and therefore be conducive to tackling the debt crisis.

 

Question no 9 by Liam Aylward(H-000176/11)
 Subject: The establishment of the 116 000 hotline for missing children by 25 May 2011
 

Every Member State is obliged to make the 116 000 hotline for missing children operational by 25 May 2011. The hotline provides a single number for missing children and their parents to call for help anywhere in the EU. Having the same hotline everywhere in the EU makes it easier and faster for children and parents in trouble to get help.

Since a priority of this Presidency has been the protection of citizens’ rights and closing the gap between the institutions and the citizens of the EU, what measures has the Council in place to help the Member States establish this important service before the deadline?

Does the Council intend on giving policy priority to the establishment of the hotline?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) According to the revised Universal Service Directive(1), EU Member States shall make every effort to ensure that the 116 000 hotline is activated by 25 May 2011. Member States are responsible for the implementation of this requirement.

The revised Universal Service Directive moreover allows the Commission to adopt technical measures to ensure the effective implementation of the "116" numbering range, in particular the missing children hotline number 116000. This is without prejudice to, and shall have no impact on, the organisation of these services, which remain the exclusive competence of Member States.

The Council is informed(2) that the Commission continues to provide support to the Member States for the swift introduction and full functioning of missing children hotlines. The Commission has also indicated that if no further progress is made within a reasonable timeframe, the Commission will consider presenting a legislative proposal to make sure that the 116 000 hotline is fully operational in all Member States. Should the Commission take such an initiative, the Council would examine the proposal according to its role as legislator.

The Presidency has recently urged Member States in a form of a letter to implement the 116000 hotlines and will host together with the European Commission and “Missing Children Europe” (MCE), the European charitable association whose national chapters operate the 116 000 hotlines in the Member States, a European conference on 25-26 May in order to take note of the results in this field. This conference will not only discuss the introduction of the 116 000 hotline but also issues related to child alert system and child-friendly justice.

 
 

(1)Article 1(18) of Directive 2009/136/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 amending Directive 2002/22/EC on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services
(2)doc. 17296

 

Question no 10 by Laima Liucija Andrikienė(H-000178/11)
 Subject: Nuclear safety in Europe
 

Following the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan, EU Member States jointly agreed on 25 March 2011 on the need to conduct stress tests on nuclear power plants in the EU and called for a similar move worldwide.

Does the Council possess information on whether similar measures will be taken with regard to the plants already operating (especially those in operation for more than 20 years) in other European countries that are not members of the EU?

As regards new nuclear power plants in EU neighbouring states, does the Council have a plan on how to ensure that these new plants meet the necessary environmental standards and do not violate internationally recognised conventions, such as the Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) As rightly stressed by the honourable Member, during its meeting held on 24 and 25 March 2011(1), the European Council has stressed the need to fully draw the lessons from the recent events in Japan. The European Council has in this context made clear that the EU will request that "stress tests" similar to the ones put in place in the EU be carried out in neighbouring countries and worldwide, regarding both existing and planned plants. It noted that full use should be made of international organisations and that the highest safety standards for nuclear safety should be promoted internationally.

In this context, two positive developments on the international stage are worth noting. Firstly, the convening on 20-24 June of a high-level IAEA Conference on Nuclear Safety covering an initial assessment of the Fukushima accident, its impact and consequences; considering the lessons that need to be learned; launching the process of strengthening nuclear safety; and strengthening the response to nuclear accidents and emergencies.

Secondly, on the occasion of the 5th Review meeting of the Convention on Nuclear Safety last April, all Contracting Parties, including EU neighbours, agreed to analyse the accident at an Extraordinary Meeting of Contracting Parties to be held in 2012. Regarding the location of nuclear plants, this 5th Review meeting already discussed issues related to consulting Contracting Parties in the vicinity of a proposed nuclear power plants.

On 20-23 June 2011, the 5th session of the Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo Convention) will take place in Geneva. The provisional agenda for this meeting includes a Panel discussion on nuclear-energy related projects. The purpose of this discussion is to provide insights on how the Espoo Convention is applied to nuclear energy-related projects likely to have significant adverse transboundary impact. A report from the panel will be presented to the High-Level Segment of the Meeting and the Parties will be invited to consider possible follow-up actions under the Convention.

Within the EU, preparatory work for the above-mentioned meetings will be pursued, as per current practice, within the Council preparatory bodies and through a number of coordination meetings on the spot, so as to allow the EU and its Member States to act in a united and effective manner in Geneva.

 
 

(1)EUCO 10/11.

 

Question no 11 by Georgios Toussas(H-000182/11)
 Subject: Military operation in Libya
 

On 1 April 2011, the Council decided on the ‘EUFOR Libya’ European Union military operation in support of humanitarian assistance operations, appointing Rear Admiral Claudio Gaudiosi as EU operation commander and locating the operational headquarters in Rome. At its meeting of 12 April 2011, the Council confirmed its decision of 1 April 2011, instructing Rear Admiral Gaudiosi to draw up an operational plan for immediate intervention in close cooperation with NATO and indicating its willingness to include in the mission armed forces from third countries situated in the area. In the second half of 2011 (1 July to 31 December 2011), two EU battle groups will be in a state of preparedness for intervention, that is to say the EUFOR and the Balkans ‘HELBROC’ battle groups, the latter made up of armed forces from Greece, Bulgaria, Romania and Cyprus under Greek command with their operational headquarters in Greece.

Is the Council envisaging the intervention of ground forces in Libya? What will be the role of the Greek-led Balkans battle group (‘HELBROC’) in the ‘EUFOR Libya’ military intervention? Which third countries from the area will be participating in this operation?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) The EU has decided that it shall, if requested by UN OCHA, launch a CSDP operation, "EUFOR Libya", to support humanitarian assistance in the region, in full respect of the principles governing humanitarian action, particularly impartiality and neutrality and the internationally agreed MCDA Guidelines(1). To this end, the EU has already adopted the decision establishing the operation, has appointed an Operation Commander and designated an Operational Headquarters in Rome. The Council tasked the Operation Commander to pursue urgently further planning, in close cooperation and complementarity with the UN, NATO and others in order for the EU to be able to react quickly to developments as regards the humanitarian and security situation. As part of preparations, the EU stands ready to consider offers of contributions from third states including countries in the region, following PSC invitation.

In the event of such a request from UN OCHA, the parameters of any EU actions, including the geographical scope, would be decided on the basis of the request. Similarly the nature of the assets needed will depend on the request expressed by UN OCHA. It is not possible at this stage to prejudge the nature of the request and therefore the capacities that will be required.

 
 

(1)Guidelines on the use of Military and Civil Defence Assets to support UN Humanitarian Activities in Complex Emergencies, March 2003.

 

Question no 12 by Charalampos Angourakis(H-000184/11)
 Subject: Involvement of multinational security firm in human rights violations
 

According to recent information, Group4 Securicor (G4S), an international security firm, has signed a contract with the Israeli authorities for the provision of security equipment and services for use in prisons holding Palestinian political detainees in Israel and the West Bank and in the Israeli West Bank police headquarters, as well as proving security equipment and manpower a for operations in the settlements. The firm has also supplied maintenance equipment and services for the Israeli army checkpoint at the West Bank wall, which was declared illegal in the advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice on 9 July 2004. Given the resulting infringement of the fourth Geneva Convention, the firm, (together with the Israeli authorities) has been condemned for non-compliance with international law, as well as for its involvement in human rights violations and the Israeli occupation.

Does the Council condemn the contract signed by G4S with the Israeli Government and its collaboration with the Israeli authorities, given that the firm also operates in EU Member States and cooperates with the EU institutions?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) In its statement of 8th December 2009 on the Middle East Peace Process, the Council confirmed its position that the separation barrier, where built on occupied land, is illegal under international law, constitutes an obstacle to peace and threatens to make a two-state solution impossible.

However, it is not for the Council to comment on specific contractual relations between private legal entities and third parties.

As the Council stated in its conclusions of 13 December 2010 on the Middle East Peace Process, it wants to see the State of Israel and a sovereign, independent, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security.

 

Question no 13 by Mairead McGuinness(H-000188/11)
 Subject: Growing anti-EU sentiment
 

Is the Council concerned that the financial rescue packages for Member States are fostering growing anti-EU sentiment both among the recipients, which feel that the cost is too great, and the countries footing the bill?

The recent election results in Finland could serve as an example of disillusionment with the EU. Has the Council discussed this problem and what initiatives would it propose to combat the growing division between the so-called ‘core’ and ‘periphery’?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) Concerns raised regarding public opinion in both recipient Member States and those contributing to financial support actions are fully discussed in the process of agreeing any financial support and economic adjustment programme.

In this regard, certain aspects of the organisation of the framework for financial support should be borne in mind :

1. Financial support is only provided at the explicit request of a Member State facing financial difficulty.

2. Financial support is only provided to a euro area Member State in the interests of the stability of the euro area as a whole.

3. The granting of financial support to a euro area Member State is decided by unanimity.

4. Financial support is provided in the context of an economic adjustment programme, and in conjunction with the financial and technical involvement of the IMF.

In this context, a major reform of economic governance in the EU is well underway, with six legislative acts under negotiation - these will strengthen the framework for economic coordination within the EU. In addition the "Euro Plus Pact" has also been agreed, under which all euro area Member States, as well as any other Member States who wish to do so, will make specific commitments regarding economic policies which will be subject to peer review at the very highest political level.

The coherence and cohesiveness of the euro area, and of the EU economy as a whole, should be enhanced by these reforms and by the framework for financial assistance that has been developed in case of need in any Member State.

 

Question no 14 by Pat the Cope Gallagher(H-000189/11)
 Subject: The Eurozone crisis
 

Can the Council make a comprehensive statement on the discussions which took place at the informal meeting of Finance Ministers on 7-9 April 2011 in Budapest?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) Discussions at the informal meeting of Finance Ministers focused inter alia on the recent economic and financial stability developments in the euro area, the preparation of the G20 Ministerial meeting in Washington DC, developments in commodity markets, the new European Supervisory Architecture, stress tests.

Ministers and Central Bank Governors touched upon the issue of commodity markets and related financial derivative markets. There was agreement that increasing the transparency and integrity of both the physical and the derivatives markets are fundamental to ensuring that these fulfil their roles properly. Ministers and Governors had an exchange of views with invited guest speakers, Prof. Alexandre Lamfalussy, Mr. Jacques de Larosière, Ms. Sharon Bowles and the leaders of the new authorities on how the new European Supervisory Authorities and the ESRB may help to tackle the challenges we face today in the financial sector and on their vision for the new institutions. They also discussed issues related to this year's stress test exercise in the banking and insurance sectors, where emphasis was put on the need for transparency, credibility and need for governments to have well developed policy responses to stress scenarios.

Statement by the Eurogroup and ECOFIN Ministers acknowledged the Portuguese authorities' request for financial assistance. Ministers invited the Commission, the ECB, the IMF and Portugal to set up a programme and take appropriate action to safeguard financial stability. In the context of a joint EU/IMF programme, the financial assistance package to Portugal should be financed on the European side within the framework provided by the European financial stabilisation mechanism (EFSM) and the European financial stability facility (EFSF). The preparations by Portugal will start immediately to reach a cross-party agreement ensuring that an adjustment programme can be adopted by mid-May and implemented swiftly after the formation of a new government. The programme will be based on three pillars:

An ambitious fiscal adjustment to restore fiscal sustainability.

Growth and competitiveness enhancing reforms including an ambitious privatisation programme.

Measures to maintain the liquidity and solvency of the financial sector.

After an agreement has been reached with the Portuguese authorities and supported by the main political parties, the programme will be endorsed by the ECOFIN Council and the Eurogroup, in line with national procedures, on the basis of a Commission and ECB assessment.

At the Washington meeting, which was held from 14 to 15 April 2011, discussions were substantive and all major players showed genuine willingness to move the international economic agenda forward.

The most relevant deliverable was probably the agreement reached on the indicative guidelines, against which the indicators to detect those persistently large imbalances requiring policy adjustments from G20 members will now be measured.

This should not be regarded as a small outcome: behind this apparently technical agreement, there is a serious commitment by all major economies – both advanced and emerging – to bring forward a process of mutual assessment/peer review of the respective policies affecting global growth.

On the basis of the agreement reached on the indicative guidelines, the G20 should be able to deliver concrete results by the end of the year, namely a comprehensive action plan with country specific recommendations.

The Commission, the ECB and the Council Presidency are providing a very substantive contribution to the overall exercise, not least because the new governance system at international level presents in many respects similar features to those at the EU level.

 

Question no 15 by Brian Crowley(H-000191/11)
 Subject: Christian minorities in North Africa and the Middle East
 

Violence against Christians and other religious minorities has intensified in North Africa and the Middle East over recent months. Can the Council outline what concrete actions it is undertaking to protect Christian and other religious minorities living in North Africa and the Middle East?

 
  
 

The present answer, which has been drawn up by the Presidency and is not binding on either the Council or its members as such, was not presented orally at Question Time to the Council during the May 2011 part-session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

(EN) The promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief without any distinction is a high priority within the EU’s human rights policy. This strong commitment was reaffirmed by the Council at its meeting in November 2009. Furthermore, the February 2011 Council adopted conclusions that condemn recent violence and acts of terrorism in various countries including in North Africa and the Middle East, against Christians and their places of worship, Muslim pilgrims and other religious communities. The Council confirmed the need by the international community to consolidate its collective response to those who want to use religion as an instrument of division, fuelling extremism and violence. The EU will engage with partner countries as well as multinational forums, particularly the UN, to rally cross-cultural support in the fight against religious intolerance.

Following the 2009 Council Conclusions, the High Representative was invited by the Council to report on the measures taken on freedom of religion or belief. The EEAS is to monitor more closely restrictions to freedom of religion or belief throughout the world, which will be addressed in the next EU annual human rights report. The issue of freedom of religion or belief is increasingly raised during human rights dialogues urging countries to eradicate discrimination and intolerance. Contacts with local human rights defenders working on this issue are established and maintained. Where available, project funding opportunities under EIDHR (European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights) country-based support schemes are offered.

In parallel with country-specific measures, the EU continues to play an active role in pushing for freedom of religion or belief in multilateral forums. The EU was the driving force behind the UN General Assembly resolution on the elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief, adopted by consensus in December, 2010. The EU rallied strong cross-regional support for an initiative on freedom of religion or belief in the UN Human Rights Council in March, 2011.

 

QUESTIONS TO THE COMMISSION
Question no 29 by Liam Aylward(H-000177/11)
 Subject: Agriculture and greenhouse gas emissions
 

The agriculture sector is responsible for 13.5% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. In the EU the agriculture sector accounts for 9% of emissions. European and Irish farmers have made significant progress in implementing greener measures, reducing emissions and in using pasture lands and clover pasture as carbon dioxide sinks wherever possible.

Since the European agriculture sector is already operating effectively and environmental sustainability and conservation policies and measures are already in place, it would be very difficult for this sector to make any further progress.

Since this sector can make only limited progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, what can the Commission do to help farmers reduce greenhouse gas emissions further and to ensure that the sector isn’t penalised in pursuit of the EU’s ambitious objectives.

 
  
 

(EN) Agriculture contributes around 9% of total EU greenhouse gases (GHG), and although emissions have decreased since 1990, further efforts are possible and required to meet the ambitious EU climate and energy agenda.

EU climate change policy does not set targets for individual sectors, such as agriculture. In the 2050 low carbon Roadmap(1) the Commission has however indicated the range for agriculture's cost-effective long term contribution. The Effort Sharing Decision (ESD) 406/2009/EC(2) aims to reduce GHGs by 10% from sectors not included in the EU Emissions Trading System. Through the mechanism of burden sharing Member States contribute according to their relative wealth (GDP/capita), targets range from –20% to +20% in 2020 compared to 2005. Therefore, it is their responsibility to limit emissions of the ESD sectors and to determine the effort made by agriculture and other sectors.

Emissions and removals of CO2 related to land use change and forestry (LULUCF) are not yet part of current commitments. The 2008 climate and energy package requested the Commission to assess and make a legislative proposal, as appropriate, for its inclusion in the EU reduction commitment by mid-2011. Extensive consultation of the public, businesses, NGOs, Member States and experts over the last year shows that the majority supports an inclusion of LULUCF, at least if the overall target is stepped up beyond 20%. The Commission plans to publish a Communication in summer 2011. Inclusion could strengthen the environmental integrity of climate commitments, ensuring that all emissions are covered. This could also enhance the visibility of efforts by land managers to increase sinks through sustainable land management practices in response to any incentive schemes under a post-2013 Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).

The current CAP instruments address climate change, mainly due to the multiple co-benefits between agri-environmental policy and climate action. A reformed CAP through a greener pillar one (with non-contractual, annual environmental actions that go beyond cross-compliance) and a more focused climate related pillar two, supported by a professional farm advisory service, could be tailored towards helping farmers to increase efficiency and thus strengthening competitiveness of the EU agriculture while at the same time contributing to climate action (mitigation) and becoming less vulnerable to climate change (adaptation). It is clearly not the Commission’s intention to penalise the farming community, but to help and encourage them to produce safe and emission efficient produce "promoting sustainable management of natural resources", as per the "The CAP towards 2020" Communication(3). EU producers are among the most carbon efficient producers in the world and can become world leaders in demonstrating the production of emission efficient agricultural produce which can reduce the global agricultural emissions.

 
 

(1)COM(2011) 112 final
(2)OJ L 140, 5.6.2009
(3)COM(2010)672 final

 

Question no 31 by Iliana Malinova Iotova(H-000166/11)
 Subject: Application of Directive 2009/138/EC
 

On 25 November 2009, Parliament and the Council adopted Directive 2009/138/EС on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of insurance and reinsurance (Solvency II). The directive is officially scheduled to come into force in the EU Member States on 31 December 2012.

Do the exceptions listed in the preamble to the directive (in recitals 4, 5, 6, 19, 20, 84 and 85) and the exclusions from its scope provided for in Title I, Section 2, Article 4 apply to the voluntary health insurance associations in Bulgaria?

Can these associations be added to the list of institutions, in Title I, Section 2, Article 8, to which the directive shall not apply?

Is the directive automatically applicable to the associations or do they fall within the group of exclusions?

Is it possible for the associations to remain within the scope of the Bulgarian health insurance law and to be subject to the provisions of national healthcare legislation, rather than those of the Insurance Code, even after the directive’s transposition?

 
  
 

(EN) Bulgarian insurance undertakings providing voluntary and commercial health insurance are not covered by the exemptions in Article 8 of Directive 2009/138/EC, which refers to a limited number of institutions with very particular features(1). The Commission does not believe that this Article needs to be amended.

In principle, this means that the EU insurance legislation applies to the Bulgarian voluntary health insurance sector. However, some of these undertakings or parts of their activities may be covered by other exemptions, as referred to under Title I, Chapter I, Section 2 of Directive 2009/138/EC.

Directives are binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each Member State to which they are addressed, but leave to the national authorities the choice of form and methods, as to their implementation.

 
 

(1)OJ L 335, 17.12.2009

 

Question no 32 by Gay Mitchell(H-000172/11)
 Subject: Large-scale nuclear catastrophe
 

The Commission has been very successful in coordinating EU assistance in Japan following the devastating earthquake and tsunami. However, how is the Commission prepared for a potential large-scale nuclear catastrophe in Japan?

 
  
 

(EN) The honourable Member has raised the issue of the nuclear accident in the Fukushima daïchi nuclear power plant, following the devastating earthquake and tsunami which struck Japan on 11 March 2011. The European Commission and the European External Action Service are following the situation very closely. We have kept in close contact with the Japanese authorities and been kept informed about the ongoing efforts to stabilise the situation, contain the spread of radioactive materials and monitor the related environmental conditions.

Discussions will continue at the next EU-Japan Summit to take place on 28 May 2011 in Brussels, as well as at upcoming international meetings (the International Atomic Energy Agency, G8/G20, etc).

As regards the question of how the EU could respond in the hypothesis of a nuclear accident in a third country where the scale of the accident overwhelmed the capacities of the country concerned to deal with the accident, the EU has different tools at its disposal which could be mobilised in such a case, e.g.:

1) The EU Civil Protection Mechanism. The precise types of assistance mobilised would depend on the type of nuclear accident/incident, on the request made by the affected country, and the capacities available from Member States. Generally, this assistance can cover inter alia the phases of initial assessments, sampling and predictions; search and rescue activities; mass decontamination facilities and may include technical equipment, e.g. for the secure and safe containment of waste, as well as nuclear expertise, through the relevant pool of civil protection experts.

2) The nuclear safety co-operation Instrument (NSCI, Council regulation ( Euratom- n° 300/2007 of 19 February 2007). NSCI provides financial aid to support third countries in improving the level of nuclear safety and radiation protection, ensuring safe transport, treatment and disposal of radioactive waste. This programme is implemented by EuropeAid with the collaboration of the European External Action Service, the European Commission’s Directorates in charge of energy and transport as well as with the technical support of the Commission’s Joint Research Centre.

3) The Instrument for stability (Regulation (EC) No 1717/2006 of the Parliament and of the Council of 12 November 2006(1)). This instrument can also be used to finance short-term and long-term initiatives such as measures to respond immediately to natural or man-made disasters, such as internally displaced persons monitoring and placement, nuclear safety and security, clean up measures, critical infrastructure protection, energy distribution, emergency response and support to first responders.

 
 

(1)Regulation (EC) No 1717/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 November 2006 establishing an Instrument for Stability, OJ L 327, 24.11.2006

 

Question no 33 by Gilles Pargneaux (H-000173/11)
 Subject: Possible conflicts of interest concerning aspartame
 

In its answer to my question No H-000072/2011 of 8 March 2011, the Commission stated that it would not re-evaluate aspartame before 31 December 2020.

Could the Commission please indicate what quantity of food or medicines would need to be consumed to reach the Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) of 40 mg/kg?

Should the EFSA statement of 28 February 2011 not be called into question in light of the fact that Dominique Parent-Massin, an expert on the EFSA Panel on Food Additives, was under contract to Coca-Cola, a drinks company which is a major consumer of sweeteners, and Ajinomoto, the world’s largest producer of aspartame?

What is the Commission’s reaction to this latest conflict of interests?

 
  
 

(EN) Following the recent discussion which took place in Parliament Committee ENVI on the honourable Member's previous oral question H-000072/2011(1) related to aspartame, the Commission is currently reflecting on the possibility to advance a full re-evaluation of aspartame to an earlier date than the planned re-evaluation, which is foreseen at the latest for December 2020 according to Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010(2) setting up a programme of re-evaluation for food additives.

Aspartame is authorised as a food additive in a number of different food groups at different maximum permitted levels. As a general rule, the potential intake of food additives through the diet depends on a number of criteria, e.g. the relative contribution of the various food groups to the daily intake and the concentrations of the food additive used in each of these food groups. In addition, it is important to indicate which population is targeted (children or adult), as the quantity of a specific foodstuff (containing a food additive) necessary to reach the acceptable daily intake (ADI) will depend on the weight of the targeted population, bearing in mind that the ADI is defined per kilogramme (kg) of body weight. The potential intake of aspartame through a medical treatment also depends of the number of doses per day and the age of the patients. Moreover, the treatment may be indicated for a limited number of days only. Therefore, this question cannot be answered in a general way.

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) confirmed in its opinion of 2006 that the potentially ingested amount of aspartame(3) through the diet would be well below the ADI of 40 miligrammes per kg body weight day, even in the case of high consumers.

Under the rules of EFSA on a possible conflict of interest, like any other expert, the expert quoted in the honourable Member's oral question signed declarations of interest that have been evaluated by EFSA. In accordance with the EFSA rules on conflicts of interest, this expert did not take part to the discussions conducted on aspartame by the EFSA Food Additives and Nutrient Sources Added to Food (ANS) Panel. In addition, the EFSA statement of 28 February 2011 was drawn up by EFSA and not by the EFSA-ANS Panel. Hence, the Commission does not see any conflict of interests in this case.

 
 

(1)http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/home.do?language=EN.
(2)Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010 of 25 March 2010 setting up a programme for the re-evaluation of approved food additives in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 of Parliament and of the Council on food additives Text with EEA relevance, OJ L 80, 26.3.2010.
(3)Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids and Materials in contact with Food (AFC) on a request from the Commission related to a new long-term carcinogenicity study on aspartame The EFSA Journal (2006) 356, 1-44.

 

Question no 34 by Jacek Włosowicz(H-000174/11)
 Subject: Daylight Saving Time
 

A year ago, I asked the Commission about the usefulness of changing from summer time to winter time (Question H-0103/2010). I should now like to ask whether the Commission’s position is still the same as it was at the time.

Is the Commission aware of the latest research in the energy field, which points to the changeover having no impact on the energy balance?

Is it aware that the latest medical research indicates that the changeover has an adverse effect on people's health?

What view does it take of the fact that further countries have decided to abandon the practice of changing the clocks?

Are the above factors not sufficient reason for the Commission to change its stance, thus making life healthier and more economical for EU citizens?

 
  
 

(EN) As explained by the Commission in its reply to oral question H-000103/2010 of March 2010 session on the same subject(1), the report on the impact of the current summer time regime adopted by the Commission in 2007 concluded that the summer time regime has no negative impacts and generates some energy savings. The current arrangements do not constitute any cause for concern in the Member States of the EU, which have introduced summertime on a national basis and never questioned this decision since then.

The Commission has no indication that the situation has changed since the publication of the report and notably since it responded to the above oral question of 2010.

In particular, the Commission is not aware of any new representative evidence showing negative impacts of the current summertime arrangements in the EU.

The Commission has taken note that Russia recently decided to abandon the practice of changing the clock.

 
 

(1)http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/

 

Question no 35 by Rareş-Lucian Niculescu(H-000175/11)
 Subject: Shortage of phosphate-based fertilizers
 

According to a recently published scientific report entitled ‘A Sustainable Global Society’, supplies of phosphate rock (which is used to produce the principal fertilizers for the cultivation of wheat, rice and maize) could be exhausted within the next 30 years. Australia, the world’s seventh largest wheat producer, is already facing difficulties as a result of markedly diminished phosphorus levels on farmland. The report indicates that investment is necessary to prospect for new phosphate reserves and develop technologies for extracting phosphates from water.

In view of this:

Is any information available regarding world phosphate rock supplies?

What have been the price trends over the last few years for phosphate-based fertilizers prices?

Does the Commission intend to promote research in this area with a view to discovering new sources of this commodity or possible substitutes?

 
  
 

(EN) A number of scientific studies have been published over the last few years on the question of world phosphate rock supplies. Whilst it is true that some of these studies have suggested a thirty year timeline for the remaining stocks, more recent data would seem to indicate greater reserves of phosphate rock, enough to supply current needs for a rather longer period(1).

However, this more recent data also indicates a significant concentration of these new reserves in one geographical area, raising questions around security of supply. In addition, there is some evidence to suggest that remaining reserves may be associated with increasing levels of cadmium and other heavy metals, thus posing a risk of greater costs required to eliminate these contaminants, or the potential pollution of soil from the use of lower quality fertilisers(2).

The information on prices available to the Commission indicates a sharp rise in prices of phosphate rock during 2008, followed by a stabilisation and then a more gradual rise in 2010/11.

The Commission has commissioned two studies in the past five years on this subject(3), as well as supporting research projects which address some aspects of the problem. Further research and innovation actions of relevance could be covered in the future as part of the overall approach to improving the sustainability of agricultural production and food security. There is no indication that it will ever be possible to substitute phosphorus in its essential use in fertilisers and feed supplements. Nor are there any alternative commodities that could replace phosphate rock.

However, information that was presented to the meeting of the Commission expert group on the sustainable use of phosphorus on 17 February 2011 indicates both that there has been a rise in prospecting for new phosphate reserves, and that there is significant potential to use this resource more efficiently. More efficient use would extend the availability of the resource while at the same time reducing environmental problems associated with overuse. Potential actions towards more sustainable use include more efficient prospection and extraction practices; greater processing of by-products; use of biotechnology to improve the efficiency of feed and fertiliser; modification of agricultural techniques to reduce inputs of fertiliser or losses of phosphorus (including better nutrient management planning at farm level); reducing the amount of food going to waste through modifying consumer behaviour and recycling of phosphorus from manure, waste water, sewage sludge and sewage sludge ashes.

The Commission intends to examine further this emerging resource issue within the context of the forthcoming road map on resource efficiency, foreseen for later in 2011.

 
 

(1)World Phosphate Reserves, International Fertiliser Development Council, 2010
(2)Sustainable Use of Phosphorus, Schroder, Cordell, Smit and Rosemarin, 2010
(3)Available at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/natres/phosphorus.htm

 

Question no 36 by Ivo Belet(H-000180/11)
 Subject: Checks on foodstuffs imported from Japan
 

Following the nuclear accident at the Fukushima plant, by means of its Regulation (EU) No 297/2011 of 25 March 2011 the Commission has laid down special conditions governing the import of foodstuffs and feedingstuffs from Japan. One of the new measures introduced provides for the performance of stringent, systematic checks on products imported from Japan. In addition, on the basis of a decision taken by the Commission and the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health (Standing Committee decision of 8 April 2011), the maximum permissible levels of radioactive contamination in foodstuffs have been lowered.

Does Regulation (EU) No 297/2011 require all foodstuffs from Japan to be removed from the EU market? Have Member States already submitted notifications under the Rapid Alert System concerning products showing an excessively high level of radioactive contamination?

 
  
 

(EN) The Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 297/2011 of 25 March 2011 imposing special conditions governing the import of feed and food originating in or consigned from Japan following the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power station(1), as amended Regulation (EU) No 351/2011 of 11 April 2011(2) does not require all foodstuffs from Japan to be removed from the EU market.

Only feed and food not complying with the maximum levels for different radionuclides in feed and food provided for in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 297/2011 has to be withdrawn from the market. On 2 May 2011, no notification was yet received by the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF) regarding a finding of high level of radioactive contamination of feed and food originating in or consigned from Japan.

In accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EU) 297/2011, Member States inform the Commission weekly of all analytical results obtained. On 2 May 2011, the Commission has received the analytical results of 98 samples taken from feed and food from Japan and most of the samples showed no detectable levels of the radionuclides Iodine 131, Caesium-134 and Caesium-137. In the few samples where a level of radioactivity was detected, the level was close to the level of detection and far below the maximum permitted level.

Moreover in some samples radionuclides other than Iodine-131, Caesium-134 and Caesim-137 were analysed and no levels of these radionuclides were detected.

 
 

(1)OJ L 80, 26.3.2011
(2)OJ L 97, 12.4.2011

 

Question no 37 by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou(H-000181/11)
 Subject: Guarantee packages to underpin the Greek financial system and real economy
 

In 2008, the Greek Government announced a support package for the Greek financial system consisting of a €5 billion preferred share issue, a €15 billion guarantee package and a €8 billion government bond issue. Subsequently, in 2010, guarantee packages of €15 billion and €25 billion were provided. Following the approval of the Commission, the Greek Government is now seeking the adoption of a further €30 billion guarantee package.

In view of this:

What is the Commission’s assessment to date of the functioning of the Financial Stability Fund (FSF) set up under the Greek economic support mechanism by the euro zone Member States and IMF with a view to stabilising the Greek banking system?

How does it assess its contribution to consolidating the capital adequacy of credit institutions underwritten by the Greek State?

Does it have information concerning the extent to which Greek Government guarantees have been channelled in to the real economy?

Have targets been set regarding the minimum percentage of guarantees to be earmarked for credit growth within the Greek economy?

 
  
 

(EN) The Hellenic Financial Stability Fund (HFSF) is functioning and has already received the first tranche of funding. The Board has been operational since October 2010. To estimate possible future needs for reecapitalisation by the HFSF the Bank of Greece conducts regular solvency forecast exercises for the Greek commercial banks. The HFSF serves as a backstop for the Greek banking sector and stands ready to support it if ever there would be a need for it.

The availabity of the FSF to act as a backstop for banks facing solvency shortfalls has contributed positively to financial stability in Greece. For example, a number of banks were able to raise capital from private investors (NBG, Piraeus) despite challenging circumstances. A number of banks have enhanced their capital adequacy through deleveraging (Eurobank, Alpha).

The new tranche of EUR 30 billion in Government Guaranteed Bank Bonds was approved in order to further enhance the the liquidity cushion in the system called for on account of deposit outflows and erosion of collateral pledged with the Eurosystem that is due to market volatility, downgrades of the sovereign debt and changes to the ECB collateral rules. The banks access to the new tranche is conditional on the adoption of medium-term funding plans, outlining bank-specific targets and measures to reduce reliance on the Eurosystem liquidity. At the same time, these plans have to be consistent with the macro-economic and fiscal frameworks under the Programme and the restructuring plans requested under the EU State aid rules.

According to the information made available to the Commission no such targets have been set. Credit growth in Greece, however, is assumed to be in line with the macro-economic framework of the Programme.

 

Question no 38 by Mairead McGuinness(H-000187/11)
 Subject: Expert Platform on Business-to-Business (B2B) contractual practices in the food supply chain
 

Can the Commission provide an update on the work of the High Level Forum for a Better Functioning Food Supply Chain and the work of the Expert Platform on Business-to-Business (B2B) contractual practices in particular?

Can the Commission comment specifically on the level of engagement by stakeholders in the B2B Platform, the next steps and likely outcomes? Does the Commission think that the constituent Expert Platforms of the High Level Forum are moving in the right direction and will ensure a satisfactory conclusion for all actors in the food supply chain?

 
  
 

(FR) During its first meeting on 16 November 2010, the High Level Forum for a Better Functioning Food Supply Chain, established by the Commission,(1) sought to begin technical work in four areas, namely business-to-business contractual relations in the food supply chain, the EU’s food price monitoring tool, competitiveness in the agro-food industry and agro-logistics. The Commission has already set up expert platforms on the first three areas and intends to set up a fourth on agro-logistics in 2011. The timetable of meetings held and to come is available on the Commission’s website(2).

Within the expert platform on business-to-business contractual relations in the food supply chain, the Commission has noted a commitment by the stakeholders involved in the debate to develop a common approach to the notion of fairness in business-to-business contractual relations. The expert platform is due to propose a definition of fair relations in September 2011, illustrated by practices that have actually been observed throughout the chain, with the most positive ones being emphasised where possible. The stakeholders have together developed a road map to achieve this objective. Depending on the progress made between now and June, the Commission could either approve this approach or propose a new working method to ensure that satisfactory results are obtained.

Furthermore, in line with the Communication ‘Towards a Single Market Act’(3) and with the report on the retail market monitoring report(4), in autumn 2011 the Commission plans to adopt a communication defining the problem of unfair commercial practices, presenting information concerning the national rules on these practices and their implementation, and highlighting possible courses of action. Also in autumn 2011, the Commission will present to the expert platform and the Forum a report on the work carried out by national competition authorities in the agro-food sector.

Drawing on these factual analyses, the expert platform on business-to-business contractual relations in the food supply chain is due to explore, during a second phase, possible actions and implementing tools with a view to possible recommendations by the High Level Forum.

The stakeholders in the expert platform on the food price monitoring tool have already given the Commission some useful suggestions on how to improve the tool. Furthermore, the platform is an important forum for developing synergies between the tool being developed at EU level and the price monitoring centres already operating in several Member States.

The expert platform on the competitiveness of the agro-food industry has the task of monitoring the implementation of a wide range of recommendations by the High Level Group that dealt with this issue in 2008 and 2009. Using the stakeholders’ contributions, the Commission proposed to focus the platform’s work on four topics to which a dialogue between the stakeholders in the Forum could bring considerable added value. The topics identified are: the social pillar of sustainable competitiveness, labelling, innovation and the internal market. This choice takes into account the work carried out in other forums involving various stakeholders, such as the European Food Sustainable Consumption and Production Round Table, and is intended to prevent the duplication of work. Each of the chosen topics will be the subject of a dedicated workshop. On 3 May 2011 a workshop was held on important societal issues in the food supply chain, and gave rise to a constructive debate on the role of corporate social responsibility and on the United Nations framework on business and human rights.

The expert platforms will report back to the High Level Forum. The Forum is due to meet for a second time in November 2011 in order to plan the technical work for the following year. Based on the progress made to date, the Commission believes that the High Level Forum will be capable of achieving satisfactory results before the end of its mandate in December 2012.

 
 

(1)Commission Decision 2010/C 210/03 of 30 July 2010 establishing the High Level Forum for a Better Functioning Food Supply Chain (OJEU C210 of 3.8.2010)
(2)Meetings already held: http://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/enterprise/hl-forum-food-supply-chain/meetings?a=lprv
Forthcoming meetings (provisional dates): http://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/enterprise/hl-forum-food-supply-chain/meetings?a=lftr
(3)Commission Communication ‘Towards a Single Market Act for a highly competitive social market economy – 50 proposals for improving our work, business and exchanges with one another’ COM(2010) 608 final/2
(4)Commission report: Retail market monitoring report ‘Towards more efficient and fairer retail services in the internal market for 2020’ COM(2010)355 final

 
Legal notice - Privacy policy