PRZEWODNICZY: JERZY BUZEK
Przewodniczący

(Otwarcie posiedzenia)

(Posiedzenie zostało otwarte o godz. 09.05)

  Przewodniczący. − Otwieram posiedzenie. Mamy dzisiaj ważną debatę - oświadczenie przewodniczącego Komisji: Stan Unii.

Po wczorajszej bardzo ważnej dla nas wszystkich dyskusji z przewodniczącym strefy euro, panem premierem Junckerem, to jest kolejna debata, która ma nas przybliżyć do rozwiązań najlepszych dla Unii dzisiaj i dać odpowiedź na najważniejsze pytania. Dlatego bardzo poważnie jako Parlament traktujemy tę debatę.

Welcome to the President of the European Commission, Mr José Manuel Barroso, the Vice-Presidents who are present with us, the full college of Commissioners, and representatives of the Polish Presidency. Minister Dowgielewicz is also with us.

I give the floor to the President of the European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso.

  José Manuel Barroso, Président de la Commission. − Monsieur le Président, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, Monsieur le Ministre, il nous faut être honnêtes et absolument clairs dans l'analyse de l'état de l'Union.

Nous sommes aujourd'hui confrontés au plus grand défi qu'ait connu notre Union, je le crois, dans toute son histoire. Il s'agit d'une crise financière, économique et sociale, mais aussi d'une crise de confiance, tant à l'égard de nos dirigeants en général, de l'Europe elle-même, que de notre capacité à trouver des solutions.

Les causes de la crise sont connues: l'Europe n'a pas répondu aux défis de la compétitivité. Certains de nos États membres ont vécu au-dessus de leurs moyens. Dans les marchés financiers, il y a eu des comportements irresponsables et inadmissibles. Nous avons laissé se creuser des déséquilibres entre nos États membres, particulièrement dans la zone euro. Et les séismes qui secouent l'ordre international, les pressions de la mondialisation ont encore aggravé la situation.

Le résultat est là: nos sociétés éprouvent de vives inquiétudes. Beaucoup de nos citoyens ont peur de l'avenir. Il y a comme jamais, un danger de repli national, pour ne pas dire nationaliste. Les réponses populistes remettent en cause les grandes réussites de l'Union européenne: l'euro, le marché unique, même la liberté de circulation des personnes.

Je crois que nous pouvons dire que la crise de la dette souveraine est aujourd'hui avant tout une crise de confiance politique. Et nos citoyens, mais aussi le monde extérieur, nous observent et se demandent: Sommes-nous vraiment une Union? Avons-nous vraiment la volonté de soutenir la monnaie unique? Les États membres les plus vulnérables sont-ils déterminés à faire les réformes indispensables? Les États membres les plus prospères sont-ils vraiment disposés à faire preuve de solidarité? L'Europe est-elle vraiment capable d'atteindre la croissance et de générer des emplois?

Je vous l'affirme aujourd'hui: oui, c'est une situation grave, mais il y a des solutions à cette crise. L'Europe a un avenir, si nous rétablissons la confiance. Et pour rétablir la confiance nous avons besoin de la stabilité, de la croissance, mais aussi de la volonté politique du leadership politique. C'est ensemble que nous devons proposer à nos citoyens un renouveau européen.

(Applaudissements)

Il nous faut traduire maintenant dans les faits ce que nous avons constaté dans la déclaration de Berlin, signée par la Commission, par le Parlement, par le Conseil européen à l'occasion du cinquantième anniversaire de la signature des traités de Rome – on disait à l'époque...

„Wir leben heute miteinander, wie es nie zuvor möglich war. Wir Bürgerinnen und Bürger der Europäischen Union sind zu unserem Glück vereint.“

"Aujourd'hui, nous vivons unis, comme jamais nous n'avons pu le faire par le passé. Notre chance à nous, citoyennes et citoyens de l'Union européenne, c'est d'être unis." C'est une déclaration, et les mots comptent! Il faut traduire cette volonté dans le courage de chaque jour. Avec nos institutions, et non contre elles, nous pouvons réussir. Pour certains, on le sait, c'est le besoin de stabilité qui l'emporte. Pour d'autres, c'est la croissance. Je vous le dis: nous avons besoin des deux! Certains prêchent la discipline, d'autres la solidarité. Nous avons besoin des deux! Il n'est plus question de solutions au coup par coup, ni de solutions partielles. Il nous faut une détermination pour des solutions globales, une plus grande ambition pour l'Europe.

Je crois vraiment que nous sommes aujourd'hui à une période charnière de notre histoire, à un moment où, si nous n'avançons pas dans l'intégration, nous risquons la fragmentation. C'est donc une question de volonté politique, une épreuve du feu pour toute notre génération.

Oui, il est possible de sortir de cette crise. Non seulement, c'est possible, mais c'est nécessaire! Le leadership politique, c'est cela: rendre possible ce qui est nécessaire.

(Applaudissements)

Let me start with Greece. Greece is and will remain a member of the euro area.

(Applause)

Greece must implement its commitments in full and on time. In turn, the other euro area members have pledged to support Greece and each other. As stated at the Euro Area Summit on 21 July: ‘We are determined to continue to provide support to countries under programmes until they have regained market access, provided they successfully implement those programmes.’ That is why I created the Task Force for Greece. We have just launched an action plan based on two major pillars: around 100 viable and high-quality projects, investing in all Greek regions, to make the best use of Greece’s remaining allocation of the structural funds, and a major drive to reduce bureaucratic procedures for European co-funded projects. EUR 15 billion remain to be spent in Greece from the structural funds. This will support the Greek economy with an urgent programme of technical assistance to the Greek administration. A programme of EUR 500 million to guarantee European Investment Bank loans to Greek SMEs is already under way.

The Commission is also considering a wider guarantee mechanism to help banks start lending again to the real economy. All of this represents huge support for Greece’s fight-back and Greece will have to deliver concrete results. It must break with counter-productive practices and resist vested interests. But we have to be clear about this. This is not a sprint, but a marathon.

The task of building a Union of Stability and Responsibility is not only about Greece. The economic outlook that we face is very difficult. We are confronted with the negative effects of an ongoing global reassessment of risks. It is therefore our responsibility to rebuild confidence and trust in the euro and our Union as a whole. We can do this by showing that we are able to take all the decisions needed to run a common currency and an integrated economy in a competitive, inclusive and resource-efficient way.

For this we need to act in the short, the medium and the long term. Let us start with the short term. The first step is to quickly fix the way we respond to the sovereign debt crisis. This will require stronger mechanisms for crisis resolution. We need credible firepower and effective firewalls for the euro. We have to build on the EFSF and the upcoming European Stability Mechanism. The EFSF must immediately be made both stronger and more flexible. This is what the Commission proposed already in January. This is what Heads of State and Government of the euro area agreed upon on 21 July. Only then, when you ratify this, will the EFSF be able to deploy precautionary intervention; to intervene to support the recapitalisation of banks and intervene in the secondary markets to help avoid contagion.

Once the EFSF is ratified, we should make the most efficient use of its financial envelope. The Commission is working on options to this end. Moreover we should do everything possible to accelerate the entry into force of the ESM. Naturally we trust that the European Central Bank – in full respect of the Treaty – will do whatever is necessary to ensure the integrity of the euro area and to ensure its financial stability.

But we cannot stop there. We must deepen economic coordination and integration, particularly in the euro area. This is at least as big a political task as an economic one.

Today, you will vote on the ‘six-pack’ proposals that we have put before you and the Council one year ago. This ‘six pack’ reforms the Stability and Growth Pact and widens surveillance to macroeconomic balances. We are now back very close to what the Commission originally put on the table. You have played a decisive role in keeping the level of ambition of these proposals, and I really want to thank you and congratulate you for that.

This legislation will give us much stronger enforcement mechanisms. We can now discuss Member States’ budgetary plans before national decisions are taken. This mix of discipline and integration holds the key to the future of the euro area. Only with more integration and discipline can we have a really credible euro area.

These are indeed important steps forward, but we must go further. We need to complete our monetary union with an economic union. We need to achieve the tasks of Maastricht. It was an illusion to think that we could have a common currency and a single market with national approaches to economic and budgetary policy. Let us avoid another illusion that we can have a common currency and a single market with an intergovernmental approach.

(Applause)

For the euro area to be credible – and this is not only the message of the federalists, this is the message of the markets – we need a truly Community approach. We need to really integrate the euro area; we need to complete the monetary union with a real economic union. And this truly Community approach can be built how? In the coming weeks, the Commission will build on the ‘six pack’ and present a proposal for a single, coherent framework to deepen economic coordination and integration, particularly in the euro area. This will be done in a way that ensures the compatibility between the euro area and the Union as a whole. Of course, we do not want the euro area to break the great acquis of the single market and all our four freedoms. At the same time, we can pool decision-making to enhance our competitiveness. This could be done by integrating the Euro Plus Pact into this framework, in full respect of the national implementation competences.

For all of this to work, we need more than ever the independent authority of the Commission to propose and assess actions that the Member States should take. Governments, let us be frank, cannot do this by themselves. Nor can this be done by negotiations between governments. Indeed, within the Community competences, the Commission is the economic government of the Union; we certainly do not need more institutions for this.

(Applause)

For the same reason the Treaties have created supranational institutions. For the same reason the European Commission, the European Central Bank, the European Court of Justice were created. The Commission is the guarantor of fairness. Moreover, the Commission, which naturally works in partnership with the Member States, is voted by and accountable to this House, the directly elected Parliament both of the euro area and of the European Union as a whole.

(Applause)

It is also time to have unified external representation of the euro area. In accordance with the Treaty the Commission will make proposals for this purpose. A Union of Stability and Responsibility built on this basis and with a common approach will also allow the Member States to seize fully the advantages of a bigger market for the issuance of sovereign debt. Once the euro area is fully equipped with the instruments necessary to ensure both integration and discipline, the issuance of joint debt will be seen as a natural and advantageous step for all, on condition that such eurobonds will be ‘stability bonds’, bonds that are designed in a way that rewards those who play by the rules and deters those who do not. As I already announced to this House, the Commission will present options for such ‘stability bonds’ in the coming weeks. Some of these options can be implemented within the current Treaty, whereas fully fledged eurobonds would require Treaty change. This is important because, we can do a lot within the existing Treaty of Lisbon. And there is no excuse for not doing it, and for not doing it now, but it may be necessary to consider further changes to the Treaty.

I am also thinking particularly of the constraint of unanimity. The pace of our joint endeavour cannot be dictated by the slowest. Today we have a Union where it is the slowest member that dictates the speed of all the other Member States. This is also not credible from the markets’ point of view; this is why we need to solve this problem of decision-making. A Member State has of course the right not to accept decisions. That is a question, as they say, of national sovereignty, but a Member State does not have the right to block the moves of others; the others also have their national sovereignty and, if they want to go further, they should go further.

(Applause)

Our willingness to envisage Treaty change should not be a way or an excuse to delay the reforms that are necessary today, but I believe that this longer-term perspective will reinforce the credibility of our decisions now.

A Union of Stability and Responsibility means swiftly completing the work on a new system of regulation for the financial sector. We need well capitalised, responsible banks lending to the real economy. Much has been said about the alleged vulnerability of some of our banks. European banks have substantially strengthened their capital positions over the past year. They are now raising capital to fill the remaining gaps identified by the stress tests in summer. This is necessary to limit the damage of financial market turbulence on the real economy and on jobs.

Over the last three years, we have designed a new system of financial regulation. Let us remember, we have already tabled 29 pieces of legislation. You have already adopted several of them, including the creation of independent supervising authorities, which are already working. Now it is important to approve our proposals for new rules on derivatives, naked short selling and credit default swaps, fair remuneration for bankers. These propositions are there; they should be adopted by the Council and by Parliament.

The Commission will deliver the remaining proposals by the end of this year, namely rules on credit rating agencies, bank resolution and personal responsibility of financial operatives. So we will be the first constituency in the G20 to have delivered on our commitment to global efforts for financial regulation.

In the last three years, Member States – I should say taxpayers – have granted aid and provided guarantees of EUR 4.6 trillion to the financial sector. It is time for the financial sector to make a contribution back to society.

(Applause)

That is why I am very proud to say that today the Commission adopted a proposal for the Financial Transaction Tax.

(Applause)

Today I am putting before you a very important text that if implemented may generate revenue of about EUR 55 billion per year. Some people will ask ‘Why?’. Why? It is a question of fairness. If our farmers, if our workers, if all the sectors of the economy, from industry to agriculture to services, pay a contribution to society, the banking sector should also give a contribution to society.

(Applause)

And if we need – because we need – fiscal consolidation, if we need more revenues, the question is where these revenues are coming from. Are we going to tax labour more? Are we going to tax consumption more? I think it is fair to tax financial activities that in some of our Member States do not pay the proportionate contribution to society.

But it is not only financial institutions who should pay a fair share. We cannot afford to turn a blind eye to tax evasion. So it is time to adopt our proposals on savings tax within the European Union, and I call on the Member States to finally give the Commission the mandate we have asked for to negotiate tax agreements for the whole European Union with third countries.

Stability and responsibility are not enough on their own. We need stability, but we also need growth. We need responsibility, but we also need solidarity. The common economy can only remain strong if it delivers growth and jobs. That is why we must unleash the energy of our economy, especially the real economy.

The forecasts today point to a strong slowdown, but significant growth in Europe is not an impossible dream. It will not come magically tomorrow, but we can create the conditions for growth to resume. We have done it before. We must and we can do it again.

It is true that we do not have much room for a new fiscal stimulus. But that does not mean that we cannot do more to promote growth. First, those who have fiscal space available must explore it – but in a sustainable way. Second, all Member States need to promote structural reforms so that we can increase our competitiveness in the world and promote growth. Together, we can and must tap the potential of the Single Market, exploit all the benefits of trade and mobilise investment at European level.

Let me start with the Single Market. Full implementation of the Services Directive alone could, according to our estimates, deliver up to EUR 140 billion in economic gains, but today, two years after the deadline for implementation, several Member States have still not adopted the necessary laws so we are not benefiting from all the possible gains from having a true services liberalisation in Europe. But we can also do more. We must adopt what is on the table. We have adopted the Single Market Act in the European Commission. A number of key initiatives are ready. We are close to having a European patent which would cut the cost of protection to 20% of current costs. I expect this to be concluded by the end of this year.

Moreover, for the Single Market Act, we should consider a fast-track legislative procedure. By the way, in many areas we should follow a fast-track legislative procedure because we are living in real emergency times. This will allow us to respond to these extraordinary circumstances. Growth in the future will depend more and more on harnessing information technology. We need a digital single market, which will benefit each and every European by around EUR 1 500 per year by using the possibilities of e-commerce to end for instance mobile roaming charges. An extra 10% in broadband penetration would bring us between 1 and 1.5% of extra annual growth.

In a competitive world we must be also well-educated, with skills to face these new challenges. We must innovate and we must act in a sustainable way. We have already presented detailed proposals on innovation, resource-efficiency and how we can strengthen our industrial base. Modern industrial policy is about investing in research and innovation. We need to accelerate the adoption of our efforts to boost the use of venture capital to fund young, innovative companies across Europe.

Sustainable jobs will come if we focus on innovation and new technologies, including green technologies. We must see that ‘green’ and growth go together. For example, the renewables sector has already created 300 000 jobs in the past five years in the European Union. The global green technology market will triple over the next decade.

We must focus our action on where it makes a real impact. Growth in the future means we must actively pursue also our smart regulation agenda, which will give a saving of EUR 38 billion for European companies, particularly for SMEs, but Member States must also do their part in reducing the administrative burden. But we also need investment. These reforms are important, but we also need some kind of investment at European level.

A Union of Growth and Solidarity needs modern, interconnected infrastructures. We have proposed for the next MFF (Multi-Annual Financial Framework) to create a facility to connect Europe – in energy, in transport, in digital. This innovative part of our MFF proposal has to be seen together with another very important innovative idea: the project bond. In the coming weeks the Commission will publish its proposals for EU project bonds. We are also proposing pilot projects, so that we can frontload growth. We can do it even before the MFF is adopted. In this way we can frontload some of the major infrastructure investments Europe needs.

The Union and its Member States should urgently consider how to allow our own policy-driven bank, the European Investment Bank, to do more – possibly much more – to finance long-term investment. To do so, we need to explore ways to reinforce the EIB’s resources and capital base so that it can lend to the real economy.

In the year 2000 there was EUR 22 billion of venture capital in Europe. In 2010 there was only 3 billion. If we want to promote entrepreneurship we must reverse this decline and we need that support namely for SMEs.

We can also get more growth out of the structural funds, by increasing absorption capacity, using the structural funds to support macroeconomic performance. They are essential for innovation, for training, employment, and for SMEs.

I would also like to urge this House to adopt by the end of the year the proposals we made in August to increase cofinancing rates to those countries with assistance programmes. This will inject essential funding into these economies, while reducing pressure on national budgets.

Reforms to our labour markets, public finances and pension systems require a major effort from all parts of society. We all know these changes are necessary, so that we can reform our social market economy and keep our social model, but it is imperative that we hold on to our values – the values of fairness, of inclusiveness and of solidarity.

Right now we need to give concrete hope to the one in five of our young people who cannot find work. In some countries, the situation of our young people is dramatic. I want to call on companies to make a special effort to provide internships and apprenticeships for young people. These can be supported by the European Social Fund. By getting businesses, the social partners, national authorities and the European Union level involved in a Young Opportunities Initiative, we can make a difference. This I believe is the most urgent social matter: to respond to the anxiety of our young people who cannot find a job. It is much better to have an apprenticeship, a traineeship, than to take their anxieties onto the streets expressing their lack of confidence in the Union as a whole.

(Applause)

We must accelerate the most urgent parts of our Growth and Jobs Plan, Europe 2020. The Commission will focus on the situation of young people in each and every Member State in its country-specific recommendations for next year. I believe we must give our future a real chance. But right now we also need to act to help the 80 million Europeans at risk of poverty. This means that the Council must finally approve our proposal to safeguard the programme for the supply of food for the most deprived persons.

(Applause)

I would like to thank this Parliament for the political support it has given to our proposed solution.

Fifty years ago, 12 countries in Europe came together to sign the Social Charter. To be precise, it was in October 50 years ago. Today, the Charter has 47 signatories, including all our Member States. To guarantee these fundamental values in Europe, I believe we need to boost the quality of social dialogue at European level. The renewal of Europe can only succeed with the input and the ownership of all the social partners – of trade unions, of workers, of business, civil society in general.

We should remember that our Europe is a Europe of citizens. As citizens, we all gain through Europe. We gain a European identity and citizenship apart from our national citizenship. European citizenship adds a set of rights and opportunities – the opportunity to freely cross borders, to study, to work abroad. Here again, we must all stand up and preserve and develop these rights and opportunities, just as the Commission is doing now with our proposals on Schengen. We will not tolerate a rolling-back of our citizens’ rights. We will defend the freedom of movement and all the freedoms in our Union.

(Applause)

Mesdames et Messieurs les parlementaires, les activités de la Commission couvrent beaucoup d'autres domaines, vous le savez bien.

Je ne peux pas tous les aborder ici, mais ils sont évoqués dans la lettre que j'ai adressée au Président du Parlement et que vous aurez tous reçue. Toutefois, avant de conclure, laissez-moi parler de la responsabilité externe de l'Union européenne. Je veux une Europe ouverte, une Europe engagée dans le monde. L'action européenne dans le monde est non seulement la meilleure garantie pour nos citoyens, la défense de nos intérêts et de nos valeurs, mais c'est aussi une action indispensable dans le monde.

Aujourd'hui, c'est à la mode de parler du G2. Je crois que le monde ne veut pas d'un G2. Les deux, eux-mêmes, n'auraient pas intérêt à un G2. Nous savons la tension qu'a a créée la bipolarité dans la guerre froide. Je crois que l'Europe est plus que jamais indispensable, si nous voulons un monde juste et un monde ouvert. Je crois que le monde en mutation que nous connaissons a besoin d'une Europe qui assume ses responsabilités. Une Europe influente, une Europe à vingt-sept, bientôt avec l'adhésion de la Croatie, une Europe à vingt-huit. Une Europe qui continue à montrer la voie à suivre, que ce soit en matière de commerce ou de changement climatique, alors que les grands rendez-vous nous attendent: de Durban à Rio+20. L'Europe doit garder sa position de leadership dans ces questions.

Tournons aussi notre regard et notre attention vers nos voisins du sud. Le printemps arabe, c'est une transformation profonde qui aura des conséquences très importantes, non seulement pour ces peuples, mais aussi pour nous, pour notre Europe. C'est pourquoi l'Europe doit être fière. Nous étions les premiers à être aux côtés des Tunisiens, des Égyptiens, des Libyens, qui voulaient la démocratie et la liberté. C'est pourquoi l'Europe soutient ces aspirations légitimes, notamment à travers notre partenariat pour la démocratie et pour la prospérité. Le printemps arabe, je l'espère, c'est aussi la porte ouverte à un espoir de paix pour l'ensemble de la région, à l'idée d'un État palestinien qui doit vivre en paix avec l'État d'Israël, comme l'Europe le souhaite.

(Applaudissements)

Mais tournons aussi notre regard et notre attention vers nos voisins de l'est. Vendredi, je vais participer à Varsovie au sommet du partenariat oriental. Je vais m'y rendre, porteur d'une ambition: une relation politique et une intégration économique plus étroite entre nous et nos partenaires de la région. L'Union européenne a un pouvoir de transformation extraordinaire, d'inspiration pour beaucoup de gens dans le monde. Et si ces pays font des réformes plus profondes, nous pouvons les aider et nous pouvons les associer plus étroitement, d'un point de vue politique, et aussi nous intégrer davantage d'un point de vue économique.

Enfin, ne délaissons pas les plus démunis de tous et soyons à la hauteur de nos engagements pour atteindre les objectifs du Millénaire pour le développement. Soyons également réalistes et reconnaissons que, pour que l'Europe exerce toute son influence, pour que l'Europe soit vraiment une puissance, il nous faut renforcer la politique étrangère et de sécurité commune. Il faut qu'elle soit crédible. Il faut qu'elle s'appuie sur une dimension de sécurité et de défense commune, si on veut vraiment compter dans le monde. Loin est le temps où certains pouvaient opposer à l'idée d'une défense européenne, la crainte qu'elle puisse nuire à l'Alliance atlantique.

Vous l'avez déjà remarqué; aujourd'hui, ce sont les Américains eux-mêmes qui nous demandent de faire plus en tant qu'Européens. Le monde a changé, le monde est en train de changer fondamentalement. Est-ce que nous voulons vraiment compter dans le monde? C'est pourquoi, au moment où les budgets de la défense sont sous pression, nous devons en faire davantage ensemble, avec les moyens dont nous disposons. La Commission prend en cela sa part de responsabilité en poursuivant les efforts vers un marché unique dans le domaine de la défense et en mettant à profit les compétences qui lui sont conférées par le traité pour développer une base industrielle européenne de défense. Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, ne soyons pas naïfs, le monde est en train de se transformer et, si l'Europe veut compter dans le monde et défendre les intérêts de ses citoyens, si elle veut compter et influencer l'avenir du monde, elle a besoin d'une dimension politique et d'une dimension de défense.

Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, je conclus. À la fin de notre mandat, du mandat de ce Parlement, en 2014, il y aura exactement un siècle qu'éclatait sur ce continent la Grande Guerre, période noire à laquelle a succédé la Seconde Guerre mondiale, une des pages les plus dramatiques de l'histoire de l'Europe et du monde. Aujourd'hui, je crois qu'on peut dire que de telles horreurs sont inimaginables en Europe. Elles le sont dans une large mesure parce que nous avons l'Union européenne. Parce que nous avons, grâce à la vision de l'Europe, à l'intégration économique et politique, construit la garantie de la paix sur notre continent.

(Applaudissements)

C'est pourquoi nous ne pouvons pas laisser mettre en danger cette grande œuvre. Nous l'avons reçue des générations précédentes. Ce ne sera pas notre génération qui va la mettre en cause. Soyons clairs: si on commence à fragmenter l'Europe, si on commence à revenir en arrière, à revenir sur les grandes conquêtes de l'Europe, notre objectif courra, sans aucun doute, un risque de fragmentation. Comme je l'ai dit, à l'origine de la crise que nous connaissons actuellement, il y a un problème politique. C'est notre volonté de vivre ensemble qui est mise à l'épreuve. C'est pourquoi nous devons approfondir l'Union européenne. C'est pourquoi nous avons construit des institutions communes. C'est pourquoi il faut garantir l'intérêt européen. Et la réalité aujourd'hui, c'est que la coopération intergouvernementale n'est pas suffisante pour sortir l'Europe de cette crise, pour doter l'Europe d'un avenir. Tout au contraire, je dois vous le dire très franchement: un certain intergouvernementalisme risque de mener à la renationalisation, à la fragmentation. Un certain intergouvernementalisme pourrait signer la mort de l'Europe unie, telle que nous la voulons.

(Applaudissements)

N'oublions pas que les décisions que l'on prend ou que l'on ne prend pas aujourd'hui vont façonner notre avenir. Il y a une chose que je voudrais vous avouer: je me sens réellement blessé lorsque j'en vois certains, ailleurs dans le monde, nous dicter à nous, Européens, avec un certain paternalisme, ce que nous devons faire. Je crois franchement que, si nous avons des problèmes, des problèmes très sérieux, nous n'avons pas à nous excuser de notre démocratie. Nous n'avons pas à nous excuser de notre économie sociale de marché. Je pense donc que nous devons réclamer à nos institutions, mais aussi à nos États membres, à Paris, à Berlin, à Athènes, à Lisbonne, à Dublin, un sursaut de fierté d'être Européens, un sursaut de dignité. Et nous devons répondre à nos partenaires: "Merci pour vos conseils, mais nous sommes capables d'agir ensemble. Nous sommes capables de passer cette crise." Je veux cette fierté d'être Européen.

(Applaudissements)

Et la fierté d'être Européen, ce n'est pas seulement la fierté de notre grande culture, de notre grande civilisation, de tout ce que nous avons donné au monde, ce n'est pas la fierté de notre seul passé, c'est la fierté de l'avenir qui sera le nôtre. C'est cette confiance-là qu'il nous faut recréer entre nous. Je crois que c'est possible. Certains disent : "C'est très difficile, ce n'est pas possible." Là, j'aimerais rappeler ce qu'a dit un grand homme, un grand Africain, Nelson Mandela : "It always seems impossible, until it is done. Let's do it". Nous pouvons le faire, nous pouvons le faire avec confiance, nous pouvons faire le renouveau de notre Europe.

(Applaudissements)

  Joseph Daul, au nom du groupe PPE. – Monsieur le Président de la Commission, cela fait chaud au cœur d'entendre un tel discours. Je vais, tout comme vous, faire peut-être une analyse, mais après ce discours, nous passerons ensemble aux actes.

L'Europe vit une crise de confiance et une crise de croissance. Comme si cela ne suffisait pas, elle traverse une crise de leadership.

Il est plus que temps d'apporter une réponse politique de l'Europe à la crise. Une réponse unie et forte, qui remette la politique à sa place, c'est-à-dire dans la cabine de pilotage; je regarde le Conseil.

Car enfin, de quoi parlons-nous? Nous parlons d'une monnaie – l'euro – créée il y a dix ans. Nous croyons réellement nous donner les moyens pour assurer sa gouvernance. Nous parlons de pays qui, pendant des décennies, ont vécu au-dessus de leurs moyens, toujours plus, sans toujours se demander si les dépenses engagées étaient créatrices de croissance et d'emplois. Nous parlons d'une Europe née pour prévenir des conflits internes et pour assurer la prospérité de ses peuples, et qui, jusqu'ici, a réussi sur tous ces fronts. Mais nous parlons aussi d'une Europe incomprise, voire décriée, parce que ses dirigeants n'ont pas su expliquer pourquoi le choix de l'Europe est le seul choix d'avenir et pourquoi la réponse aux enjeux globaux ne peut être qu'européenne.

L'Union européenne – on l'oublie trop souvent – est l'une des régions les plus avancées et les plus développées. Elle est la première puissance commerciale au monde. Notre devoir est surtout de faire en sorte qu'elle le reste! Quel est le problème, alors? Et comment y remédier? Le problème est que, même si les économistes s'accordent sur les raisons de la crise financière et économique, et sur les réponses à y apporter – à savoir un mix de rigueur et d'incitations à la création de richesses et d'emplois –, la classe politique n'a pas eu le courage de s'y atteler.

Les réformes proposées ces derniers mois par les États membres de l'Union et de la zone euro, en particulier, vont dans le bon sens. Mais elles sont, à l'évidence, insuffisantes, tardives et mal ou non expliquées. Elles procèdent de la méthode intergouvernementale qui – on le voit bien – paralyse l'Europe, tu l'as bien dit.

La méthode nationale, Mesdames et Messieurs, doit faire place à une méthode européenne. Nous ne voulons pas reprendre la subsidiarité ici, mais la méthode communautaire est la seule qui nous permettra de relever de façon unie et efficace les défis urgents et immenses qui sont devant nous. Je comprends que, dans un moment de crise, on ait l'intention de se replier sur soi. Non, il faut sortir et chercher la méthode communautaire. La méthode européenne, ce ne sont pas deux, trois ou quatre Présidents qui portent des messages différents, mais un plan de sortie unique et rapide.

Monsieur le Président de la Commission, vous êtes le chef de l'exécutif du gouvernement économique. Vous l'avez démontré, ce matin, dans votre discours. C'est pourquoi le groupe PPE vous demande instamment de jouer pleinement votre double rôle de proposition et de mise en œuvre des législations européennes décidées avec le Conseil et le Parlement.

La Commission a un rôle capital à jouer: celui de garant de l'intérêt général européen. Cela est difficile, exigeant mais cela s'impose: il faut faire front aux intérêts nationaux qui ne sont pas toujours compatibles avec l'intérêt commun.

(Applaudissements)

C'est indispensable. C'est pour cela que ce Parlement vous a accordé sa confiance au début du mandat et continue à vous l'accorder.

Monsieur le Président de la Commission, cher José Manuel Barroso, je vous demande d'aller plus loin encore dans vos ambitions, car il y a urgence. Il y a urgence à sauver l'euro, à démontrer notre solidarité à l'égard de la Grèce et à l'égard de tous les pays membres qui voient leurs marchés attaqués et leur note dégradée. Il est urgent dans le même temps que ces mêmes pays adoptent et mettent en œuvre des mesures à la hauteur des événements, car la solidarité européenne est à ce prix. Il y a urgence à agir, non pas dans les mois, mais dans les jours et les semaines à venir, pour prouver au monde la capacité des Européens à défendre et à stabiliser leur monnaie. S'ils ne le font pas, c'est l'ensemble de la construction européenne qui s'en trouvera durablement affectée.

La décision que – je l'espère – ce Parlement prendra aujourd'hui sur la gouvernance économique, le fameux six-pack, est un pas important dans la bonne direction. Il faudra maintenant l'appliquer au plus vite, tout comme il faut appliquer au plus vite les décisions du 21 juillet sur les fonds de stabilité.

Monsieur le Président Barroso, les entrepreneurs ont besoin de visibilité et de sécurité. Les marchés attendent de la zone euro et des pays de l'Union dans leur ensemble qu'ils prennent des mesures fortes et cohérentes de réduction des dépenses mais aussi de soutien à la croissance.

Sur le premier volet – celui de l'assainissement des dépenses publiques –, j'ai appelé, il y a quelques jours, à un big bang, à une décision commune des Dix-sept sur la convergence fiscale, budgétaire et sociale. Je réitère cet appel aujourd'hui. Il est très difficile pour un pays de prendre, de façon isolée, les mesures fortes qu'appelle la situation financière de la zone euro. Mais il faut reconnaître que les campagnes électorales qui s'annoncent dans plusieurs pays européens, dans les années à venir, ne seront sûrement pas propices à des mesures courageuses.

Je demande donc à la Commission de se saisir de la proposition de faire converger les taux de fiscalité, notamment pour les entreprises, mais aussi l'âge de la retraite et la durée hebdomadaire de travail. Les Européens ne seront solidaires les uns des autres que s'ils voient appliquer des règles comparables. C'est là qu'on peut se sentir européen.

(Applaudissements)

Je suis convaincu que des décisions fortes et rapides des Dix-sept sur cette triple convergence auraient un impact considérable et seraient un signe tangible de leadership de la part de l'Europe.

Mesdames et Messieurs, je le disais en commençant: autant la crise actuelle est une crise de confiance, qui appelle des décisions collectives, comme celles que je viens de décrire, autant elle est aussi une crise de croissance. Et sans croissance, l'Europe sera incapable de rembourser, ne serait-ce que les intérêts de sa dette. Sans croissance, l'Europe ne sera pas en mesure de se développer et de survivre à la concurrence des pays émergents.

Cette croissance passe par une compétitivité accrue, par un renforcement des moyens mis à la disposition de l'éducation et de la formation et par des efforts accrus dans la recherche, le développement et l'innovation. Je plaide pour un nouveau partenariat public-privé en vue de créer des pôles d'excellence dans la recherche et l'innovation et de créer – pourquoi pas? – un Erasmus du premier travail après le succès de l'Erasmus des universités.

Je souhaite que les décideurs politiques européens soient davantage à l'écoute des entrepreneurs et des partenaires sociaux, qui vivent la réalité de la mondialisation et qui peuvent nous aider à sortir de la crise. Car la croissance, chers collègues, passe aussi par une attention accrue à nos petites et moyennes entreprises. Il ne faut pas les piétiner. Ce sont elles qui nous apportent des emplois et qui nous aident à survivre à la crise. Or, elles doivent supporter beaucoup trop de charges administratives, fiscales et sociales. Si l'on veut qu'elles puissent se développer et embaucher, cette croissance passe par une flexibilité plus grande pour investir ainsi que pour maintenir et créer des emplois.

Le marché intérieur, Mesdames et Messieurs, a été la grande idée des années 1980. Avec le grand marché, l'Europe a gagné des points de croissance et nos industriels ont pu faire des économies d'échelle en accédant à un marché non plus national mais continental. Seulement, nous savons tous ici que le marché intérieur européen est loin d'être achevé, notamment dans le secteur des services.

Je demande à la Commission européenne de s'y atteler avec autant d'ambition et de détermination qu'elle a su le faire il y a vingt ans. C'est là qu'est la croissance. La croissance, chers collègues, ne se décrète pas. Elle se construit par toute une série de mesures structurelles, celles précisément que nous avons déjà approuvées dans la stratégie Europe 2020. Il s'agit maintenant de se retrousser les manches et surtout de mettre en application ces mesures.

Il est temps que l'Europe parle d'une voix haute et intelligible, non seulement pour contrecarrer les populismes, qui sont les ennemis des Européens, mais pour proposer des solutions à long terme, que nos citoyens comprennent et qu'ils attendent. Il est temps que nos élus nationaux acceptent que la souveraineté librement partagée est le seul avenir pour nos pays, et je dis bien le seul!

Je vous demande, José Manuel Barroso, de proposer au Parlement européen et au Conseil un plan de sortie de crise. Un plan qui puisse être une occasion pour les 500 millions d'Européens de repartir sur de nouvelles bases, de refonder leur projet.

Nous avons besoin d'actions et de propositions courageuses, comprises – je le redis – par nos concitoyens. L'Europe a toujours avancé dans les crises, encore faut-il faire les bonnes propositions et y croire. Je dis toujours qu'avant la crise et après la crise, rien ne sera plus comme avant. Cela sera autrement. José Manuel Barroso, nous devons proposer cet "autrement" à nos concitoyens pour qu'ils croient de nouveau en la politique et en l'Europe.

  Martin Schulz, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Kommissionspräsident Barroso hat die Lage der Europäischen Union realistisch beschrieben. Sie haben – das haben wir seit langem erwartet – sich endlich kämpferisch gezeigt als derjenige, der im Zentrum des Gemeinschaftsorgans, das Sie vertreten, steht und bereit ist – wie wir heute gehört haben, notfalls auch im Kampf –, die Gemeinschaftsmethode zu verteidigen. Dafür will ich Ihnen im Namen meiner Fraktion herzlich danken. Das ist der richtige Ansatz.

(Beifall)

Wir leben in einer Zeit, wo jahrzehntelange Gewissheiten nicht mehr bestehen. Es gab die Gewissheit, dass die europäische Integration immer weiter voranschreiten würde. Es ist schon 2005 bei den Nein-Stimmen zur Verfassung sichtbar geworden, dass das nicht mehr der Fall ist. Es gab die Gewissheit, dass das europäische Projekt unumkehrbar sei. Das ist nicht mehr der Fall. Es gab die Gewissheit von Generationen, dass Europa den Beitrag leisten würde, dass es ihren Kindern besser gehen würde, als ihnen selbst. Meine Eltern waren sicher, dass es mir besser gehen würde als es ihnen je gegangen ist. Das war so. Das war eine Gewissheit von Generationen. Und wir, die Jüngeren, wir wussten, dass es uns besser gehen würde als unseren Eltern. Das konnte man sehen. Das konnte man mit Händen greifen. Und dahinter stand die Idee von Europa.

Und wie ist es heute? Können wir sagen, dass es unseren Kindern besser gehen wird als uns? Sind nicht unsere Kinder diejenigen, die uns fragen: Wie wollt ihr eigentlich absichern, dass der Wohlstand, den ihr ein ganzes Leben hattet, auch unser Wohlstand sein wird?

Länder, in denen mehr als 50 % z. T. hoch qualifizierter junger Männer und Frauen arbeitslos sind, können nicht verbunden werden mit der Gewissheit, dass Europa, so wie es heute ist, die Voraussetzung dafür schafft, dass es wieder Vollbeschäftigung gibt, dass es soziale Sicherheit gibt, dass die Investitionen in Ausbildung – und Eltern investieren viel in die Ausbildung ihrer Kinder – Früchte tragen. Warum ist das so? Ist das so, weil der europäische Integrationsansatz falsch ist? Ich glaube, da sind wir uns alle einig: Nein, die Idee, dass Europa mit gemeinschaftlichem Handeln ökonomisch, ökologisch, sozial, kulturell, versehen mit dafür geschaffenen Institutionen, diesen Wohlstand sichern kann, ist nach wie vor richtig. Falsch ist, wie mit der Idee umgegangen wird. Falsch ist, wie sie gemanagt wird. Europa hat nicht eine Krise seiner Idee. Europa hat eine Krise seiner Führung. Deshalb war das, was Sie heute hier gesagt haben, richtig. Den Intergouvernementalismus, der in dieser Union blüht, kann man nicht einmal mehr als Intergouvernementalismus bezeichnen! Eines der Organe der Europäischen Union, über die wir nie reden, ist der Rat. Der Rat selbst – Sie müssen einmal mit Männern und Frauen, die im Rat sind, reden –, also das Organ der Regierungen der Europäischen Union, wird entmachtet. Kein Ausschuss der Ständigen Vertreter, kein ECOFIN, kein Rat „Allgemeine Angelegenheiten“ entscheidet noch irgendetwas. Wir haben es mit einem Rückfall in eine Hauptstadtdiplomatie zu tun, die Europa an den Rand des Zusammenbruchs führt.

(Beifall)

Und das angesichts der Herausforderungen, vor denen wir im 21. Jahrhundert stehen! Da kann man wirklich sagen: Das sind die Methoden des Wiener Kongresses im 19. Jahrhundert, wo die Mächtigen Europas, wie sie uns jetzt mitgeteilt haben, einmal im Halbjahr zusammenkommen wollen, um hinter verschlossenen Türen zu beraten und anschließend ihren erstaunten Untertanen mitzuteilen, worüber sie sich mal wieder nicht einigen konnten. Das, meine Damen und Herren, kann nicht die Zukunft Europas sein. Diese Patchwork-Demokratie, die die uns da vorsetzen wollen, bei der am Ende ja nicht etwa der gemeinschaftliche Geist entscheidet, sondern der politische Opportunismus der jeweiligen Hauptstadt! Die politische Taktik der letzten Oppositions- oder Regierungspartei, im großen oder kleinen Mitgliedstaat, ist am Ende wichtiger als die weltweite Stabilität des Währungssystems. Das ist die Krise in Europa, und dem müssen wir uns entgegenstellen! Ich glaube, wir haben heute einen ersten Ansatz gesehen.

Worunter leidet die Europäische Union? Sie leidet darunter, dass die Politik dieser Hauptstadtdiplomatie sich treiben lässt von den Märkten. Übrigens, die gleichen Märkte, und das haben Sie richtigerweise gesagt, die von den nationalen Haushalten vor wenigen Jahren stabilisiert werden mussten. Wenn wir von den Märkten reden, müssen wir einmal konkret werden, Banken, die Milliardenwerte verzockt haben in der Form eines uns ja immer noch – das werden wir heute wieder hören – als Nonplusultra angepriesenen angloamerikanischen Wirtschaftsmodells.

Drei Jahre nach der tiefsten Bankenkrise sind wir in der Situation, tatenlos mit ansehen zu müssen, dass ein Anfang-30-jähriger junger Mann das Geld einer Schweizer Bank in Höhe von 1,5 Milliarden Euro verzockt, verspielt! Der setzt sich an den Computer, tippt ein paar Zahlen rein, schwupp, schon sind 1,5 Milliarden weg. Drei Jahre, nachdem wird diese Spekulationsorgien erlebt haben! Das war eine Schweizer Bank, auf deren Konten – das unterstelle ich einmal – sicher auch Kapital liegt, das aus Griechenland herausgebracht worden ist, um es dort der Besteuerung zu entziehen. Da bin ich ganz sicher.

(Beifall)

Deshalb frage ich diese Regierungschefs: Wann kommen endlich die konkreten Vorschläge für die Marktregulierungen? Wann werden diese verheerenden Spekulationen – übrigens mit Finanzprodukten, die ja kein normaler Mensch mehr versteht – endlich verboten? Wann folgen den unzähligen Versprechungen, die gemacht worden sind, endlich Taten? Das sind die entscheidenden Fragen.

Es entsteht in Europa aufgrund dieses Verhaltens ein gefährliches Vakuum. Ein Vakuum, das durch das Nichthandeln der Regierungen entsteht. Sie haben heute angefangen – spät, wie ich finde, aber hoffentlich nicht zu spät –, Ihren Anteil zu leisten, um das Vakuum zu füllen, und wir, das Europäische Parlament, sind aufgerufen, in Kombination der Gemeinschaftsorgane Kommission und Parlament die gesetzlichen Voraussetzungen dafür zu schaffen, dass da, wo wir es beeinflussen können, diese Marktregulierungen geschaffen werden.

Denn es ist völlig klar: Wenn ich den Menschen in Deutschland, in Griechenland, in Finnland, in der Slowakei oder wo auch immer die Renten kürze, um anschließend als Regierungschef zu sagen, ich muss aber die Banken stabilisieren – deren Manager sagen, sie hätten von den Spekulationen dieses jungen Mannes nichts gewusst, um anschließend mit ihrem Nichtwissen mit millionschweren Abfindungen nach Hause zu gehen – da kann ich verstehen, wenn die Leute auf die Straße gehen und rebellieren! Das kann ich verstehen!

In das Vakuum des Nichthandelns und des Nichtregulierens dringt ein gefährliches Gemisch von Gefühlen ein: Hoffnungslosigkeit einer jungen Generation, Verzweiflung von Eltern, die sehen, dass das, woran sie geglaubt haben, ihr Projekt, nicht mehr liefert, was es bisher geliefert hat. Das führt zu einem gigantischen Misstrauen in unsere gemeinschaftliche Union und in unser gemeinschaftliches Wertekonzept. Diesem Misstrauen muss man begegnen durch konkretes, klares Handeln.

Das haben wir heute gehört. Sie haben Recht. Nicht irgendeiner, der in einem Hinterzimmer ausgekungelt worden ist – und wenn er noch so schön ist und Herman Van Rompuy heißt –, ist der Mann, der dieses Problem lösen kann. Wer die Wirtschaftsregierung in Europa will, der kann sie hier haben, da sitzt sie. Und wer will, dass sie demokratisch kontrolliert wird durch uns, der braucht nur in den Vertrag von Lissabon zu schauen. Da ist das beschrieben.

Was wir nicht brauchen, ist eine Hauptstadtdiplomatie neben den Verträgen. Was wir brauchen sind die europäischen Rechtswerke. Wir sind eine Rechtsgemeinschaft und kein Zufallsgenerator. Wer will, dass diese Krise gelöst wird, der muss die Gemeinschaftinstitutionen stärken, weil die Herausforderungen des 21. Jahrhunderts – Umwelt, Währung, Migration – nicht durch den nationalen Vorgarten gelöst werden können, sondern nur durch ein beherztes Auftreten der europäischen Gemeinschaftsorgane zusammen. Das ist unsere Aufgabe als Europäisches Parlament. Ich glaube, die überwältigende Mehrheit in diesem Hause ist dazu bereit, und die wenigen, die glauben, uns hier – ob mit Fahnen oder Worten – vorexerzieren zu müssen, dass der Nationalstaat die Lösung ist, das sind die Leute, die die Axt an die soziale und friedliche Zukunft der nächsten Generation legen. Deshalb sind die proeuropäischen Fraktionen aufgefordert, gemeinsam zu handeln.

(Beifall)

  Guy Verhofstadt, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, first of all I would like to thank the President of the Commission for his speech on the state of the Union and also for a number of his proposals.

Let us be very blunt about this. As you have recognised, the state of the Union is bad. Let us also repeat here in this House that this crisis is not about Greece and Greece’s debt. This is a crisis about the euro, about the European Union and, in fact, a crisis today about the existence – the vital existence – of the European Union. We are confronted today (shouting from the Chamber) – yes, the only difference is that you gave bad answers to that question, that is the problem – because the real questions we have to ask are: are we able to stand together in this crisis? Are we able to stand united in this crisis? Are we able to show real solidarity in this crisis, and have we the vision to do so, the courage to do so and the political leadership in the European Union to do so? These are the questions that we need to face today.

Let us start with the state of the Union. The state of the Union is bad, but I think we have to face today’s reality. We are in the middle – not at the end – of a crisis, really in the centre of it. Look at the reality. Mistrust of banks has again risen over recent days and weeks. Markets and stocks are at the lowest level since 2008. The International Monetary Fund yesterday lowered its growth forecast for Europe for next year to only 1.1%, down from 1.6%. Some economists are already talking about recession in the Union. Finally – this is important because we will come back to this later on – spreads: the tensions inside our markets have never been so high. Before the financial crisis, the spreads in the eurozone – that is the difference between the average of the obligations, the bonds of other countries (and Germany) – were only 19 – less than 20 – basic points. Today the spreads are ten times higher. The average of the bonds in the eurozone – NT bonds – is more than 200 basic points, with, naturally, Greece at 2 149 basic points of difference – a 21%-higher interest rate. In Portugal there is a difference of more than 1 000, as there is in Spain. In Italy there is a difference of 400 basic points. These are tensions that are not sustainable. This must be solved not yesterday, not today but in a short time period because it is unsustainable to continue like this.

There is a second question that we have to answer today. What solutions were provided for this crisis – mainly by the Council, as has been indicated, and mainly by the Member States? They were half measures, measures that have been seen as too little, too late. You will remember that the first Council initiative after the start of the crisis in December 2009 was to announce a European solution to the crisis by launching EUR 30 billion of bilateral loans to solve the crisis. That was the big idea in February 2010 of the Member States and the Council. No European answers, no: bilateral loans to a single country in the south of Europe. That should create the solution. What we saw was the crisis becoming more and more difficult to overcome.

I should say that the highlight of this bad approach to the crisis has been the casino deal of the real world. The decision was taken between France and Germany not to strengthen the Stability Pact but to weaken the Commission’s proposal on the Stability Pact. We were in the middle of the crisis on the Stability Pact and then the Member States came forward with a proposal, saying that they had a deal in Deauville, near the casino – which is not such a bad one, everybody wins there – and in the end the outcome was that we lowered the sanctions, we lowered the penalties and you could simply continue the game inside the Stability Pact. This has ruined the Stability Pact.

So, Mr Barroso, the most important conclusion of today has to be the message that you gave. You gave it here, very well and to much applause, but now you have to repeat it in another place, somewhere in Brussels, at the Council. I am no longer there, but I am sure we will know what you say there. You will have to repeat it there, telling them that the intergovernmental method is a bad method that cannot work. And why can it not work? Because it needs unanimity; the Polish know about that, as Poland disappeared in the 18th century because of the unanimity rule in the Polish Parliament: that is history and reality. The same could happen in Europe if we continue with this unanimity rule. We have to abolish it. Colleagues, this is the real problem. Why is there such a problem in this crisis? Because the Member States are reluctant to transfer new sovereignty and powers to the European Union. We all know that the only way out of this crisis is a new transfer of powers to the European Union and to the European institutions. That is at stake.

Mr Barroso, I am pleased with a number of the initiatives that you have announced today. They are key to my group. You have said that we shall take an initiative in the coming weeks on eurobonds. You have already found a new name: stability bonds. No problem. You can call them what you like – eurobonds, stability bonds – if they are bonds to mutualise debts and, as you have indicated, to make and create more discipline – not only solidarity – in the Union. Very well, we look forward to this in the coming weeks. You have said that we shall put proposals on the table to organise economic governance beyond the six pack. I think this is necessary and is a first step to real economic and fiscal union. You have also said that you should reflect on the external single representation of the eurozone at international level.

However, what I am asking is that you go further than this and that in the coming two weeks, at the European Council on 17 October, you put a global plan on the table of the Council. Why do you have to do that? Because otherwise they take their own initiatives in the Council. You have the right of initiative; they do not. If you do not use your right of initiative by putting a document on the table with these different initiatives in it, others will fill the vacuum.

This should be done on three specific topics. First of all, the organisation of the real economic government inside the Commission. You have said here that we are the real economic government, but the reality is different. Mr Juncker, Mr Van Rompuy, Mr Rehn, Mr Barroso, the President of the European Central Bank, we have at least five people who represent Europe. We need one, and it can only be a senior Commissioner that you have to appoint. Make him European Minister of Finance and then all this discussion of who is representing the euro would be over.

Secondly, I missed one important element in your proposals. There is a European plan to recapitalise the European banks. The problem of the European banks has not been solved, and we shall not recover from this recession or the stagnation or economic downturn if we do not first of all recreate trust between the banks and recapitalise them. Only a European solution can solve this. I know that Mrs Merkel refused that proposal on 4 October 2008. She heard on the radio that there were some problems with a German bank. So you see what history can signify: if she had heard that news maybe three hours before, she would have accepted the solution of a European rescue plan for banks.

But let us come back to this. Mr Barroso, my request to you is that you put all this in a document on the table of the Council in two weeks’ time. We cannot do it as a European Parliament. The European Council cannot do it. You have the power, you have the right of initiative, and I can tell you that this whole Parliament will be behind you if you take such an action.

(Applause)

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))

  William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFD). - Mr Verhofstadt, do you accept that the French and German Governments, to which you referred in your very eloquent speech, have the absolute right to make decisions in what they judge to be their own national interest?

  Guy Verhofstadt (ALDE). - I think they have that right, they have their sovereignty, but I think the best way today to defend the interest of France and to defend the interest of Germany is to defend the interest of the European Union and to give more power to Europe. That is their interest.

(Loud applause)

  Jan Zahradil, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, how are you, President Barroso, how do you feel? I must admit I feel a lot of sympathy for you because I genuinely believe that you are aware that the situation is serious. At the same time, I have to admit that I do not share many of your views. I agree with you that fiscal consolidation, curbing of public expenditure and financial rigour are necessary because markets are very sensitive and markets at the moment do not forgive any mistake. However, good intentions are not enough.

Let us make one thing clear: the euro currency was imposed on states of different development, different purchasing power, different GDP per capita, different living standards, different budgeting and different levels of competitiveness. It was done purely for political and ideological reasons because the euro should have served as a tool for further integration, not primarily as a single currency per se.

(Interjection from Mr Cohn-Bendit)

Then came public overspending, lack of discipline, and this directed some countries to the verge of collapse. In normal situations at such a time countries would devalue their currencies to cope with those consequences but, of course, as members of the eurozone, they cannot do that because they are not allowed to do so. So the only solution remaining are firstly bail-outs, more bail-outs and even more bail-outs, or whatever you want to call them, and secondly, transition of monetary union into a fiscal union and, thus, most importantly the debt union.

The logic of the first step, the bail-out step, is that the debts of some will be paid by the others, and the second step will mean a further shift of national power to the European level and further diminishing of the role of Member States. Mr Verhofstadt might like it, I very much doubt that most members of his own group like it as much as he does but, again, the most important thing is whether the people of Europe like it and whether it will help to promote more pro-European thinking amongst European nations. If you think that it does, you are wrong, ladies and gentlemen. I can tell you in my own country a recent poll has shown that 75% of people are against joining the euro, and do you really think that this is a result of some anti-European propaganda? No, it is not a result of anti-European propaganda, it is just a result of people who see and think. They simply do not buy into this idea any more of a federal Europe – that is very simple.

I ask you frankly, President Barroso, do you concede that it may come to a situation where, as the only solution to the current problems, it might be that one or more of the eurozone members would have to leave the monetary union? Secondly, would you admit that some other still non-eurozone members could re-evaluate their thoughts about joining the eurozone or not? Please do not get me wrong. If it comes to that, my feeling is that it will not mean the fall of the euro, because none of us wishes that, but the mentality of the euro at all costs is precisely the way to destroy the euro.

I understand that, if it comes to a reduction of the eurozone, that might be a political disaster for those who invested a great deal of their political capital into that idea, into the idea of a United States of Europe, but that is their problem. President Barroso, I can agree with you when you stressed the necessity to reinforce competitiveness, to complete the single market, to improve the legal background. Believe me, you achieve none of these things with an old and outdated EU framework. Mr Schuman, Mr Monnet, they were undoubtedly nice guys but their ideas are 50 years old. So please let us stop thinking in these terms because now, President Barroso, unfortunately for you, you have almost no choice between bad decisions and even worse decisions. For instance, another ‘worse decision’ you came with, which you have just mentioned, is the financial transaction tax. It sounds fine at first glance, just a small fee for transactions, but in the real world such a tax will lead to only one conclusion: that countries and institutions will seriously reconsider their location and they will leave the European market and this will undermine further the European economy. It is very simple. We need a new EU paradigm for the 21st century. Unfortunately, there is very little chance, almost no chance, of this new paradigm being born in this very building, in this very assembly.

The longer I am here, the more I feel that this assembly is more a part of the problem rather than a part of the solution. I am sorry to say that, I am sorry for you President Barroso, but anyway I wish you good luck.

  Rebecca Harms, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Herr Barroso, sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich glaube, es sitzt hier fast keiner im Raum, der nicht gerne gehört hat, wie Sie uns erklärt haben, Herr Barroso, dass Sie jetzt bereit sind, zum großen Sprung nach vorn für Europa anzusetzen. Sie haben das am Beifall schon ablesen können. Bevor wir uns über die nächsten Abschnitte dieser Sprünge verständigen, möchte ich nochmals etwas zu der Analyse der Situation sagen, wie wir sie sehen. Herr Verhofstadt hat gesagt: Europa ist in einer schlechten Verfassung. Ich würde sagen, wir haben – was Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise angeht – bisher den worst case verhindert, wir haben aber noch längst nicht alles unter Kontrolle. Wenn wir in die Mitgliedstaaten schauen, stellen wir fest, dass das, was wir immer wieder gesagt haben, nämlich dass wir mit zu kleinen Maßnahmen zu spät dran sind, heute immer noch stimmt. So wird in einigen Mitgliedstaaten jetzt über den EFSF abgestimmt – was nicht verkehrt ist, aber man muss sagen, wenn man das in Zeit und Raum einordnet, dann müsste eigentlich schon über den dauerhaften Krisenmechanismus und seine Architektur und das wirkliche Aufbauen einer Wirtschaftsregierung entschieden werden.

Dieses „zu spät“ und „zu wenig“ trifft aber nicht nur für das Agieren im Rat zu. Wenn ich an das Paket zur wirtschaftspolitischen Steuerung denke, das hier zur Verabschiedung steht, dann muss ich auch da sagen: Wir haben uns Zeit gelassen. Dafür gab es gute Gründe. Trotzdem verpassen wir jetzt einige Chancen, was dieses Paket angeht. Es ist nicht der Sprung nach vorn für gute Entwicklung. Die Unwucht – und auch darüber haben wir schon unglaublich oft geredet – zwischen Stabilisierungspolitik und Politik für Aufbau und für Wege heraus aus der Krise ist auch in diesem Paket nicht in Ordnung.

Das, was ich für das eigentliche Thema der politischen Krise in der Europäischen Union halte, wird weder mit unseren Vorschlägen zur Finanzkrise noch mit unseren Vorschlägen im Rahmen des Sixpacks gelöst. Unser eigentliches Problem ist, dass wir in verschiedenen Bereichen mit verschiedenen Maßnahmen in den letzten Jahren mehr Ungerechtigkeit geschaffen haben. Wenn wir das nicht korrigieren, werden wir die Fliehkräfte, die es ja nicht nur wegen der Hauptstadtdiplomatie gibt, sondern die es auch gibt, weil die Bürger das Vertrauen in die Funktionstüchtigkeit verlieren, nicht kontrollieren und nicht beenden können.

Zum Thema Ungerechtigkeiten: Ich glaube, Herr Barroso, dass wir das so nicht weiterlaufen lassen können, dass viele Jahre lang an den Finanzmärkten wahnsinnig verdient worden ist, bis es zum Knall gekommen ist und dann entschieden worden ist: Wir vergesellschaften die Probleme und lassen die Gewinne bei denjenigen, die fröhlich spekuliert haben. Ich glaube, dass das ein großes Problem ist und dass die Bürger auch verstanden haben, dass die Stabilisierung bisher insgesamt zu ihren Lasten geht. Ich glaube, dass wir in der zunehmenden Notwendigkeit, in der Schuldenkrise zu handeln, auch wieder Dinge tun, die zu noch größerer Ungerechtigkeit führen. Wir können nicht allein auf Einsparmaßnahmen setzen. Wenn Sie sich anschauen, was in Griechenland passiert, was in Irland passiert – allein so eine Zahl wie der Anstieg der Selbstmordraten in diesen Ländern treibt einem doch die Schamesröte ins Gesicht. Man kann nicht einseitig Haushalte sanieren und sparen, man muss das, wofür meine Fraktion sich in der Verhandlung um das Paket zur wirtschaftspolitischen Steuerung die ganze Zeit eingesetzt hat, gleichzeitig machen. Wir müssen überlegen, wie wir die Armut in der Europäischen Union bekämpfen. Wir müssen klären, wie wir in Bildung investieren können. Und wir müssen auch wirklich in nachhaltige wirtschaftliche Entwicklung investieren, sonst werden wir keine Zustimmung für mehr Europa unter der Mehrheit der Bürgerinnen und Bürger finden.

(Beifall)

Ich möchte drei Monate, bevor aus diesem Parlament eine Delegation nach Durban zur nächsten Weltklimakonferenz reisen wird, an dieser Stelle noch einmal ausdrücklich betonen, Herr Barroso: Auch wenn Sie in Ihrer Rede sogar von erneuerbaren Energien und Investitionen in nachhaltige Entwicklung gesprochen haben – es ist wirklich irre, wie vergesslich europäische Politik ist. Wir haben uns in den Jahren 2007 und 2008 darauf verständigt, dass es teurer sein wird, nicht in ehrgeizigen Klimaschutz zu investieren, als wir das bisher ermessen können. Generationengerechtigkeit mit unseren bisherigen Austeritätsmaßnahmen herzustellen, ohne einen klaren Plan, wie man nachhaltige Entwicklung mit den Schwerpunkten Klimaschutz und Ressourceneffizienz organisiert, werden wir so nicht schaffen. An dieser Stelle sind Sie leider sehr schwach.

(Beifall)

Ich wollte eigentlich noch etwas zum Süden des Mittelmeeres sagen. Das streiche ich jetzt. Ich wünsche Catherine Ashton, dass es ihr gelingt, unsere Vergangenheit, die europäische Vergangenheit im Süden des Mittelmeeres zum Thema zu machen. Und ich wünsche viel Glück für die Verhandlungen um Israel und Palästina, denn diese Zwei-Staaten-Lösung und der Frieden dort ist ein weiterer Schlüssel für eine bessere Entwicklung in der arabischen Welt.

Abschließend, Herr Barroso, zu Ihrem angekündigten großen Sprung: Sie wissen, dass wir wollen, dass Sie der Mann sind, der jetzt dafür sorgt, dass etwas, was wir schon die ganze Zeit Wirtschaftsregierung nennen, tatsächlich angegangen wird. Ich glaube, Ihnen werden in den nächsten Wochen – wenn Sie das so konsequent verfolgen, wie sie das hier versprochen haben – manchmal die Ohren klingeln. Und wenn Sie mit der deutschen Bundesregierung oder auch den Niederländern darüber diskutieren, dann werden Sie an Guy Verhofstadt denken und sich fragen, warum er seine liberalen Kollegen in den Regierung nicht stärker gemacht hat.

(Zwischenrufe)

Lieber Guy, wir lieben deinen europäischen Esprit, aber er fehlt uns manchmal, wenn wir mit deinen Kollegen zu tun haben!

Ich möchte noch einen Punkt ansprechen und mich an die andere Seite dieses Hauses wenden. Die polnische Ratspräsidentschaft, Herr Barroso, könnte für diesen Ansatz, den Sie verfolgen, sehr wichtig sein. Mit ihrer Haltung zu Europa und mit ihrer Haltung gegen die Hauptstadtdiplomatie, die bisher stattgefunden hat, könnte die polnische Ratspräsidentschaft einen wirklichen Vorstoß machen in Richtung Vorbereitung einer erneuten Vertragsveränderung und guter Grundlagen für das, was wir uns unter Wirtschaftsregierung vorstellen.

(Beifall)

(Die Rednerin ist damit einverstanden, eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu beantworten (Artikel 149 Absatz 8 GO).)

  Alexander Graf Lambsdorff (ALDE). - Herr Präsident! Liebe Rebecca, würdest Du zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass der niederländische Premierminister ja vorgeschlagen hat, einen Kommissar – Olli Rehn, um konkret zu sein – als den quasi europäischen Finanzminister vorzuschlagen? Eine Idee, von der wir der Meinung sind, dass sie richtig und gut wäre.

Die zweite Frage, die ich an Dich habe, ist folgende: Du hast hier von Unwucht gesprochen und von Investitionen, die man machen muss. Wie erklärst Du, dass Rot-Grün hier und heute gegen einen verbesserten, ertüchtigten, gestärkten Stabilitätspakt stimmen wird, um Stabilität für die Eurozone zu erzeugen, während wir in Berlin von Rot-Grün wunderbare Ratschläge bekommen?

(Beifall)

  Rebecca Harms (Verts/ALE). - Herr Präsident! Mir ist durchaus bewusst, dass die holländische Regierung sich zum Teil anders positioniert als die deutsche Bundesregierung. Aber eines darf man wirklich nicht vergessen: dass dieses bedingungslose Bekenntnis zu weniger Intergouvernementalität und zu mehr Europa von den Regierungen, in denen auch die Liberalen sitzen, so wie Guy Verhofstadt es hier vertritt, nicht geteilt und nicht forciert wird.

Zweitens zu unserer Kritik an drei Berichten, die hier heute verabschiedet werden und die um Stabilitätspolitik und um den Umgang mit Haushaltsdefiziten kreisen: Wir sind wirklich fest davon überzeugt, dass man nachhaltige Haushaltspolitik machen muss. Unser Thema heißt auch bei Haushaltspolitik: Generationengerechtigkeit.

Aber die Art und Weise – und da können Sie jetzt sozusagen beispielhaft nach Griechenland gucken – wie da Haushaltspolitik gemacht wird, vertreten wir nicht mit. Wenn man nicht in der Lage ist, gleichzeitig für die jungen Leute Perspektiven zu schaffen, und wenn man nicht in der Lage ist zu sagen, wie denn die nachhaltige Entwicklung, von der immer wieder gesprochen wird, in Gang gesetzt werden soll, dann halten wir das für keinen Beitrag zur Generationengerechtigkeit.

(Beifall)

  Lothar Bisky, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Herr Präsident Barroso! Die Europäische Union steckt in ihrer schwersten Krise seit ihrer Gründung. Da sind wir uns sicher einig. Es geht natürlich um eine Wirtschafts-, Finanz- und Schuldenkrise, es geht natürlich auch um Griechenland, es geht auch um den Euro. Die Mitgliedstaaten und die Europäische Union haben keine hinreichend wirkungsvollen Finanzmarktregeln aufgestellt. Die Politik droht deshalb zum Spielball der Spekulanten zu werden.

Bisher getroffene Maßnahmen zielen auf Haushaltskonsolidierung durch Ausgabenkürzungen. Konkret bedeutet das vor allem soziale Einschnitte. Es bedeutet Kürzungen für Löhne und Transferleistungen, steigende Arbeitslosigkeit, sinkende öffentliche Investitionen, eine fallende realwirtschaftliche Entwicklung. Entscheidungen werden zunehmend auf intergouvernementalem Wege getroffen, ohne vorherige Abstimmung mit Parlamenten, eher in Abstimmung mit Bankenchefs. Damit verliert die Europäische Union zunehmend Vertrauen und Zustimmung. Europas Skeptiker – das sage ich der sachlichen Feststellung wegen – gewinnen an Boden. Wir stecken mitten in einer politischen Glaubwürdigkeitskrise der Europäischen Union. Ich glaube, da sind wir einer Meinung.

Herr Barroso, weder über die Analyse der Krisenursachen noch über die besten Lösungsvorschläge stimmen wir beide vollends überein. Bei aller notwendigen Kritik betone ich aber, dass wir Linken uns der Verantwortung für die Europäische Union bewusst sind. Die Idee der europäischen Einigung ist auch eine durchaus linke Idee, jedenfalls von vielen Linken in der Vergangenheit und in der Gegenwart verteidigt. Wir verteidigen diese Idee auch in der Zukunft, und wir werden darauf achten, dass sie nicht dem Profitinteresse der Märkte und Spekulanten überlassen wird.

Ich bin überzeugt: Europa braucht viel mehr Kooperation statt weiteren Rückzug in nationale Interessen. Europa braucht eine solidarisch gemeinsam abgestimmte, demokratisch legitimierte Wirtschafts-, Fiskal- und Sozialpolitik. Deshalb unterstützen wir Sie, Herr Barroso, wenn Sie endlich die versprochenen und von diesem Parlament eingeforderten Gesetzesvorschläge vorlegen als erste Schritte für eine umfassende Finanzmarktregulierung, für Besteuerung von Finanzmarkttransaktionen, für Eurobonds, die das Solidaritätsprinzip der Europäischen Union bekräftigen.

Den Wert und die dringende Notwendigkeit der Solidarität zwischen den Staaten und zwischen den Menschen werden wir immer wieder betonen. Solidarität meint nicht nur Finanzhilfen, sondern Solidarität meint auch Widerstand gegen den Kürzungswahn der Regierungen. Als oberster Vertreter einer genuinen europäischen Institution müssten Sie sich unserer Forderung nach Abkehr von diesem Kürzungswahn eigentlich anschließen können.

Bedrohlich erscheint mir zurzeit, dass die soziale Spaltung unserer Gesellschaften massiv voranschreitet. Die Politik orientiert sich auf die Rettung von Banken. Hier stellt sie Kreditrahmen von hunderten Milliarden Euro bereit. Für die kleinen Leute hingegen bleibt nur das Bezahlen der Zeche für die verfehlte Politik der Liberalisierung und Privatisierung. Ihnen werden massive Sparprogramme auferlegt, Sie müssen länger arbeiten, erhalten Kürzungen von Löhnen und Gehältern und Sozialleistungen. Sie sind den Sparprogrammen der Regierungen ausgeliefert.

Die soziale Gerechtigkeit ist völlig unter die Räder gekommen. Das kann so nicht weitergehen. Wir sehen das an Massenaktionen der Bevölkerung in Griechenland, Portugal, Irland und Spanien. Die zeigen das ganz deutlich.

Lassen sie mich zum Schluss feststellen: Entweder wird es einen gemeinsamen solidarischen Weg aus der Krise geben, dann kann die EU besser, sozialer, nachhaltiger, ja demokratischer aus der Krise hervorgehen, oder es gibt keine Lösung für die EU als Ganzes mit schwer voraussagbaren Folgeschäden.

(Beifall)

(Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu beantworten (Artikel 149 Absatz 8 GO).)

  Gerard Batten (EFD). - Mr President, and thank you, Mr Bisky, you mention in your speech that anti-Europe sentiment and feeling was gaining ground. Can I ask you to accept that there is a clear distinction between anti-European Union feeling and anti-Europe? The people who are anti the European Union of the political construction, like me, are very pro-Europe. Would you please accept that there is a clear distinction there and we should stop talking about anti-European sentiment and start talking about anti-European Union sentiment?

  Lothar Bisky (GUE/NGL). - Ja, das ist schon ein differenziertes Problem. Allerdings will ich ganz deutlich sagen, welche Gefahren ich sehe. Ich denke, das habe ich auch gesagt. Mit Rückzug auf die Nation lösen wir keines der Probleme des 21. Jahrhunderts.

(Beifall)

Deshalb verteidige ich auch die Gemeinschaftsmethode. Das wollte ich sagen. Ansonsten muss man natürlich bei all diesen Dingen stark differenzieren. Aber die Basis muss sein: Gemeinsam können die Nationen in Europa etwas lösen. Deshalb gibt es die Europäische Union. Einzeln und als Nationen können sie nichts und verfallen zurück ins Mittelalter.

(Beifall)

  Nigel Farage, on behalf of the EFD Group. – Mr President, Mr Barroso told us this morning that the European Union is an inspiration. Mr Barroso, whilst you admitted to there being one or two little economic problems, you made it perfectly clear that jobs and growth were to follow, that everything is going well. In fact you painted a vision that a new period of European renewal is upon us.

As a former Communist yourself you probably remember the old Soviet leaders getting up to give their speeches and telling everybody that there was a record harvest or that tractor production figures were terribly good, and they of course believed that history was on their side. In fact President Khrushchev got up and said to the West: we will bury you. So much did he believe in his own Union.

Now of course we look back at that and we laugh. I think that in our tomorrows people will look back at you and they will say: how on earth did this unelected man get all of this power and how did Europe’s political class sitting in this room decide that the Community method should replace national democracy? I think people will look back in astonishment that we have surrendered democracy.

But what you want to do is to say, right, we have a European Union and what we have to do now is have more of it. So, as an architect – and you are one of the key architects of the current failure – you say that even though everything to date has been wrong we are going to do more of the same.

I thought that was a definition of madness. I cannot believe that this is a rational response to any situation in which you find yourself and, far from it being a State of the Union, I would argue that the Union is in a state because just look at the confusion. We have got you as President of the European Commission, we have a President of the European Parliament; we have got my old friend Herman van Rompuy who is the permanent President of the European Council; we have got the Poles, they are now presidents temporarily of the European Council; we have got presidents all round this room. Goodness me, even I am a President. I am not sure what the collective noun for presidents is, perhaps an incompetence. I do not know.

But certainly when you take away democratic accountability it is clear that nobody really is in charge and it is developing as a Union of intolerance. Anybody who stands up here and dares to give a political view which is different from the received wisdom is written off as mad, insane, violent and fascist; we have heard it for years from these people. The intolerance is so deep that, when we get referendums in France, the Netherlands and Ireland that reject your view, you as a political class see it as a problem to be overcome. So I am very worried about the whole root of this Union.

There is a new nationalism that is sweeping Europe. You want to abolish the nation states, in your case, Mr Schulz, perhaps because you are ashamed of your past. And you now want this flag and a new anthem to replace nation states and you do not care how you get there. If you have to crush national democracy, if you have to oppose popular referendums, you just sweep this aside and say that it is populism.

But it is not, it is democracy. What is sweeping northern Europe now, starting off in April with that amazing result in the Finnish general election, is a new democratic revolution. It is not anti-European. It wants a Europe of trade; it wants a Europe of cooperation; it wants a Europe where we can do student exchanges and we can work in each others’ capital cities; it wants those things. But it does not want this European Union model. Frankly, you are all now yesterday’s men.

(Applause)

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))

  Andrew Duff (ALDE). - Mr President, I would like to ask Mr Farage what his answer is for little Britain to the challenges of globalisation.

  Nigel Farage (EFD). - Mr President, this point is often made, namely that a country like Britain is only 62 million people and are we not better off being part of a big European club so that we can have more of a voice on the world stage? Funny that, is it not? Here is Britain, the world’s fifth largest trading nation, which is now prohibited from going into World Trade Organisation talks because all of that is done, on our behalf, by an unelected European Commissioner.

Mr Duff, the answer actually is that an independent Britain that trades and cooperates with her European neighbours in an age of globalisation would be able to forge her own trade relationships across the world. It would make sense for a country like ours to start off with the English-speaking world, which shares common law – our own kith and kin in the Commonwealth who we turned our backs on so shamefully.

(Applause)

  Laurence J.A.J. Stassen (NI). - Voorzitter, geachte collega's, de Europese Unie is in feite al failliet. Dit trekt Nederland langzaam mee in een zinkend moeras. De euro moest en zou in landen als Griekenland worden ingevoerd, ongeacht de enorme risico's die vooraf bekend waren. Door die beslissing zitten we nu in een crisis die zijn weerga niet kent. Ondertussen mogen Nederlandse burgers de rekening hiervoor betalen.

De eurofielen die deze problemen hebben veroorzaakt, willen nu zelfs nog een stap verder gaan. Zo pleit voorzitter Barroso openlijk voor het invoeren van eurobonds. Het is een absurd idee, mijnheer Barroso. De eurocrisis is ontstaan doordat zuidelijke eurolanden te gemakkelijk geld konden lenen. Het laatste wat we nu nodig hebben zijn eurobonds waar het nog eenvoudiger wordt om schulden te maken. Dat is het recept voor een volgende crisis.

Wie denkt u eigenlijk te vertegenwoordigen, mijnheer Barroso? Het is toch bekend dat lidstaten als Nederland fel tegenstander zijn van deze eurobonds. Waarom steunt u niet de landen die de Europese Unie nog overeind houden? Voorzitter, het is wat ons betreft helder: de heer Barroso kiest partij voor de eurozondaars. Ondertussen worden landen die hun huishoudboekje op orde hebben, zoals Nederland, als een citroen uitgeperst om de rekening te betalen voor bijvoorbeeld het frauderende Griekenland. Mijnheer Barroso, wat de Partij voor de Vrijheid betreft kan u alvast uw bureau leegruimen en op zoek gaan naar een nieuwe baan. De voorzitter van de Commissie hoort de belangen van alle landen te behartigen. Wat de Partij voor de Vrijheid betreft bent u daar duidelijk niet toe in staat.

  Mikołaj Dowgielewicz, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, President Barroso, Commissioner, honourable Members, first of all let me thank you, Mr President, for the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Council in this crucial debate. I would like to thank President Barroso for his remarks, and I especially want to emphasise what he said about the need to restore growth in the European Union. This has been reflected in a number of interventions today. The growth agenda is also at the very heart of the Polish Presidency programme, where we are working very closely with the Commission ahead of the October European Council.

Here let me mention two elements: first of all, the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy. It is the EU institutions and the Member States working together in the framework of EU 2020 which will ensure that we emerge stronger from the crisis. Second, the negotiations on the multi-annual financial framework, which we started this autumn. There are, of course, very different opinions on the MFF to be reconciled. Everybody refers to the economic climate that underpins those discussions. In any case we will have to find compromises, and for the Council Presidency there are two elements which are absolutely crucial in those discussions.

First of all, we must have a comprehensive, profound debate on the basis of the proposal from the Commission. Secondly we must find consensus on the idea that the money should be spent on supporting Europe in its search for stable and balanced growth.

Mr President, let me use this opportunity briefly to say that we are looking forward to the very important vote today in Parliament: a very important vote for economic and monetary union and a very important vote for the European Union. This vote on the six-pack is a milestone on our way out of the debt crisis and towards more fiscal and economic transparency and discipline. This will also mean more power for the Commission, and I am happy that we have found support for these proposals in the Council.

I also want to acknowledge in this process the role that Parliament has played in making sure that the package is coherent and ambitious and the fact that you have shown flexibility and responsibility.

Another example, from the last 48 hours: correlation tables, where we actually enhance the role of the Commission as the guardian of the Treaties. This is also a way of showing that we are transparent in the implementation of European legislation and that the Union works.

Finally, another example from the last twelve hours: a compromise in the trialogue on the external financial instruments. The reason why I mention those three – the six-pack, correlation tables and the external financial instruments – is very simple. The message is: the Community method works. The sceptics can be proved wrong, and I address this to Mr Zahradil in particular, because I think people from your party in the Czech Republic and Poland do not read the facts, they just live in a dream that the European Union will crumble. I think you will be proved wrong.

To close, I just want to say that, concerning economic and monetary union, Schengen, foreign and security policy, the single market, energy and all the issues that President Barroso raised today, you can count on an approach by the Presidency which will include more Europe, not less Europe; more support for the Community method rather than intergovernmentalism; and finally, support for ever-closer union and not for ever-looser union. That is the only way to rebuild trust.

  Mario Mauro (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Presidente della Commissione, in tanti, forse tutti, prima di questo dibattito, abbiamo invocato più coraggio e da oggi credo che dovremo chiamarla "Barroso Cuor di Leone".

La crisi economica è anche crisi istituzionale ed è giusto, come Lei ha detto, che rilanciamo il progetto europeo cercando nuove soluzioni alla crisi che viviamo. La paura infatti è la forza trainante di una visione populista e nazionalista ed è il coraggio, che invece è il valore che ha creato l'Europa e le ha dato pace e prosperità.

Attenzione, però, signor Presidente, le nostre idee e le sue proposte sono antitetiche rispetto al populismo, ma i nostri elettori sono spesso gli stessi. Questo significa che se le riforme, cui lei ha fatto cenno, non verranno realizzate nel giro di pochi mesi, paradossalmente, diventeranno il pretesto per critiche euroscettiche. Lei ha aperto con un tris d'assi questa partita, signor Presidente, cali, adesso, l'asso di cuori del "Cuor di Leone", presenti subito le proposte al Parlamento e al Consiglio e ci aggiudicheremo insieme questa mano.

  Corien Wortmann-Kool (PPE). - Dank u wel, Voorzitter. Ik wil u danken, voorzitter Barroso, voor de manier waarop u daadkrachtig ook de gemeenschappelijke methode om onze gemeenschappelijke euro te redden hier hebt uiteengezet.

Straks is er een cruciale stemming over het sixpack waarin we de Europese Commissie als onafhankelijke autoriteit in de steigers zetten. Het heeft maanden geduurd voordat we ook de Raad zover hebben gekregen. Maar dit Parlement heeft stand gehouden. Het is nu cruciaal om met elkaar hier in dit Huis 'ja' te stemmen, want dan kunnen we daarop voortbouwen.

We roepen u echt op om met die ambitieuze voorstellen te komen, want we staan op een tweesprong. Wij kunnen vandaag beslissen om verder te bouwen op die gemeenschappelijke methode voor het economisch bestuur in Europa en dat te hervormen. Het alternatief is: chaos op de financiële markten en de regeringsleiders die het voor het zeggen krijgen. Ook dat is een keuze. Vervolgens moeten we ook in dit Huis, gezamenlijk met alle politieke fracties, verder werken aan de voorstellen die u vandaag heeft gepresenteerd om het verdere bestuur te versterken.

  Tanja Fajon (S&D). - Spoštovani gospod predsednik – moramo biti iskreni, ste rekli. Podali ste nekaj zelo pomembnih sporočil in hvala vam za to.

Želimo si več Evrope, a zdi se, da ne najdemo več skupne politične volje. Dobro ste rekli, da ima Evropa prihodnost, če vzpostavimo zaupanje, za kar rabimo stabilno rast in politično voljo naših voditeljev.

Ljudje so zaskrbljeni, prestrašeni. Živimo v času, ko mladi ne razumejo več smisla evropskega povezovanja. Zanima jih le, kako bodo lahko živeli svoje življenje. Napovedali ste poziv podjetjem, da ponudijo mladim priložnosti za delo in koristijo socialni sklad. Ni dovolj. Rabimo konkretna dejanja, mladi rabijo upanje.

Kriza zaupanja je enako resna kot ekonomska in finančna kriza. Če nam naši državljani ne bodo verjeli, nikoli ne bodo podprli naših potez. Prepozno in neodločno ukrepamo. Zgubljamo še tisto mlado generacijo, ki še verjame v Evropo. Zgubljamo pa tudi države, ki trkajo na vrata Unije, države Zahodnega Balkana, ki imajo evropsko perspektivo, a njihove prihodnosti, gospod predsednik, danes sploh niste omenili.

Torej pridobimo zaupanje ljudi in hvala lepa.

  Charles Goerens (ALDE). – Monsieur le Président, j'aimerais dire à Monsieur le Président de la Commission que l'Europe avait besoin de ce discours. Vous avez rarement été aussi en phase avec votre auditoire. Un diagnostic de plus? Oui, mais doublé d'une incontestable détermination. Cela contraste agréablement avec le rôle plutôt effacé qu'a joué la Commission au cours des dernières années.

Permettez-moi cependant, à mon grand regret d'ailleurs, de rester quelque peu dubitatif. Ceux qui, depuis des années, parmi nos États membres, freinent des quatre fers ne sont pas là aujourd'hui pour nous dire s'ils se rangent derrière les grandes lignes de votre discours.

Un orateur vient de dire que les idées de Robert Schuman et de Jean Monnet sont vieilles de plus de 150 ans. Permettez-moi de rappeler que, pour tenter de faire échec aux idées de Jean Monnet et de Robert Schuman, M. Zahradil, dont il est question, vient de mobiliser des idées vieilles de plus de 150 ans.

  Othmar Karas (PPE). - Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Herr Kommissionspräsident, Sie haben heute sehr klar gemacht: Sie sind kein honest broker, Sie sind der Chef der europäischen Regierung. Ihre Kommission ist die Wirtschaftsregierung. Daher lehnen wir jede Doppelstruktur ab. Wir sollten uns jetzt dafür einsetzen, die Kakofonie zu beenden und den Kommissionspräsidenten auch zum Vorsitzenden der Staats- und Regierungschefs der 17 zu machen und Olli Rehn zum Vorsitzenden der Eurozone, bis eine Vertragsänderung vorlegt.

Legen Sie uns eine Roadmap zur Schaffung der Wirtschafts- und Sozialunion vor! Machen Sie klar, dass Sie ein Budget benötigen, das die EU-Kommission handlungsfähig macht! Danke für die Eigenmittel! Danke für die Transaktionssteuer! Mehr Entschlossenheit, Ambition und Begeisterung wird die Jugend an Bord bringen und uns die Zukunft zum Freund machen.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE). - Senhor Presidente, queria naturalmente cumprimentá-lo por este suplemento de esperança que deu a todos os deputados europeus e, em particular, aos cidadãos da União Europeia, que nós aqui representamos. E, dito isto, queria dizer que nós esperamos agora da Comissão uma acção muito, muito determinada junto do Conselho para que se possa, no curto prazo, resolver esta crise da dívida soberana.

Sabemos que é uma maratona, mas são precisos sinais imediatos. E, por isso, sem prejuízo de começarmos já todos a pensar numa alteração dos Tratados que dê a tradução política a todo o projecto que aqui hoje trouxemos, sem prejuízo disso, é preciso algo que se faça já. Este conjunto de medidas e, porventura, um acordo, um acordo entre os Estados, aquilo a que temos chamado uma espécie de acordo parassocial que vá para lá dos Tratados e que possa, a partir deste momento, pôr em marcha todas estas ideias.

Muitos parabéns pela sua coragem e pela sua determinação. Creio que nós estamos no bom caminho e saímos daqui hoje com outra determinação.

  Liisa Jaakonsaari (S&D). - Arvoisa puhemies, herra Daul sanoi mielestäni aivan oikein, että mikään ei todennäköisesti ole tämän kriisin jälkeen samoin kuin nyt. Velkakriisi todennäköisesti muuttaa Euroopan asemaa, jos siihen ei saada ratkaisuja tulevaisuudessa.

Otan esimerkin: Eurooppa on tähän mennessä painostanut Kiinaa toteuttamaan ihmisoikeuksia ja oikeusvaltioperiaatetta. Nyt näyttää siltä, että Kiina alkaa painostaa Eurooppaa hyväksymään esimerkiksi Kiinan markkinatalousaseman. Se saattaa vaikuttaa siihen, että tulevaisuudessa Kiina painostaa Eurooppaa hyväksymään mitättömämmät ympäristönormit, heikon kuluttajansuojan. Sen takia velkakriisistä ulos pääseminen on ehdottoman tärkeää Euroopan tulevalle asemalle maailmassa. Siksi kaikki ne ponnistelut, joita komissio, te herra Barroso, olette esittäneet, ovat erittäin tärkeitä ja kunnioitusta herättäviä.

  Emilie Turunen (Verts/ALE). - Hr. formand! Hr. kommissionsformand – tak for din tale. Jeg må sige, at det faktisk er første gang i to år, at jeg tror på det, du siger. Jeg synes, du holdt en god tale i dag. Men når det er sagt, så vil jeg også sige, at vi står i en meget alvorlig krise, både politisk og økonomisk. Derfor er der brug for, at vi omsætter den tale til handling. Du skal vise os resultater, og du skal vise os konkrete forslag. Jeg vil komme med nogle bemærkninger i den forbindelse, for der er brug for noget, der rækker langt ud over det, der er på bordet lige nu. Der er brug for en samlet, koordineret kriseplan for Europa, der sikrer holdbarhed, bæredygtighed og social retfærdighed.

Vi har i den forbindelse brug for tre ting: 1) en resolut forsikring til markederne om, at vi står skulder ved skulder om euroen – der skal ikke være mere slinger i valsen, og det skal du sætte dig i spidsen for, 2) vi kan ikke spare os til ny vækst og beskæftigelse - der er brug for en investerings- og en jobplan, 3) der skal fokus på indtægtssiden igen i Europa. Tak for dit forslag til en finansiel skat – vi har ventet længe. Kære hr. Barroso, vi skal omsætte det, som du har sagt i dag, til konkret handling. Vi skal stoppe med at tro, at nedskæringer og forstillelse kan redde Europa. Vi skal have en overordnet samlet krisestrategi, og det er din vigtigste opgave de næste måneder.

  Alexander Graf Lambsdorff (ALDE). - Herr Präsident! Herr Kommissionspräsident, Sie haben eine sehr gute Rede gehalten! Worauf es jetzt ankommen wird, ist, sie auch umzusetzen, das follow-up, so wie Guy Verhofstadt es gesagt hat, dass da wirklich etwas passiert. Ich glaube, wir sind uns hier weitestgehend einig, wir brauchen mehr Europa, um dieser Krise Herr zu werden. Aber wir brauchen das richtige Europa, und das heißt für uns: Wir wollen eine Stabilitätsunion statt einer Schuldenunion. Wir brauchen eine Schuldenbremse in den nationalen Verfassungen der Regierungen. Wir brauchen – da bin ich anderer Auffassung als mein Fraktionsvorsitzender – weiterhin unterschiedliche Zinssätze, denn die wirken wie eine ökonomische Schuldenbremse. Wir brauchen auch geordnete Staatsinsolvenzen. Wir brauchen also Regeln dafür, was passiert, wenn ein Land zahlungsunfähig wird, damit wir es in der Eurozone halten können – das ist ja der entscheidende Punkt. Und wir brauchen einen Stabilitätspakt mit Zähnen, mit automatischen Sanktionen. Ich muss eines sagen: Dass Rot und Grün hier und heute gegen diesen ertüchtigten Stabilitätspakt stimmen wollen, ist die Fortsetzung der Politik von Gerhard Schröder von 2003, die Zerstörung der Stabilitätskultur in Europa.

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). - Señor Presidente, este debate sobre el estado de la Unión tiene lugar en un momento crítico, como se ha dicho: el peor en la historia de la Unión.

Por tanto, el estado no es bueno, pero me sumo a los que han expresado su convicción de que el malestar que recorre Europa no tiene como causa lo que Europa hace, ni mucho menos lo que Europa dice –que, a menudo, recibe aplausos en este hemiciclo– sino la falta de Europa, lo que Europa no hace, la contradicción entre lo que dice y lo que aplaude y lo que realmente hace.

Los Gobiernos hablan de tomar decisiones difíciles: son las que imponen a los ciudadanos, pero no las que se imponen a sí mismos. ¿Están en disposición de renunciar a su miopía, a su «cortoplacismo», a sus intereses estrictamente locales o nacionales en aras de las soluciones necesarias, de hacer lo que hay que hacer y no hacer poco, tarde, fragmentariamente y en la dirección equivocada?

Y, además, añado, que no es verdad que para hacer lo que hay que hacer haga falta reformar los Tratados. ¡No! Me sumo a los que están convencidos de que hubo un tiempo en que no, habiendo instrumentos, hubo determinación y voluntad. Ahora tenemos los instrumentos, sólo nos hacen falta la voluntad y el liderazgo.

(El Presidente interrumpe al orador)

  Jean-Paul Gauzès (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, il y a quelques jours, je vous avais dit, de façon amicale, un certain nombre de choses. Vous n'avez pas raté le rendez-vous d'aujourd'hui.

Nous avons entendu – enfin, je dirais – ces paroles fortes qui sont nécessaires pour faire face à la crise de la décision politique que nous connaissons, car au-delà de la crise économique, financière et sociale, que vous avez décrite, et de la crise de confiance, il y avait et il y a une crise de la décision politique.

En affirmant aujourd'hui haut et fort le rôle de la Commission et ses propositions constructives – dont certaines sont déjà mises en œuvre, sur la réglementation financière notamment – et grâce à ce Parlement, grâce à ce qui sera voté tout à l'heure, je l'espère, et grâce à ce travail en commun que nous pourrons faire à nouveau – comme l'a dit M. Schulz tout à l'heure –, je crois que nous pouvons faire avancer l'Europe dans le bon sens et vous apporter tout le soutien dont vous avez besoin, et que, désormais, vous méritez pleinement.

(Applaudissements)

  Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL). - Senhor Presidente, Dr. Durão Barroso, honestamente, há um ano, aqui, anunciou os eurobonds. Hoje repetiu-se, e suspeito que daqui a um ano volte a repetir-se. Pode mesmo chegar-se ao caso de se apresentar a todos nós dizendo: My name is Bond, Eurobond.

Sr. Presidente, nós todos queremos eurobonds, mas a verdade, e o problema, é que a agente de serviço que temos actualmente, a que tem planos secretos, aquela que tem a ordem para matar, é a Sra. Merkel. Ainda hoje ficámos a saber do plano Eureka. Se o Sr. Presidente tiver informação sobre este plano, gostaria muito que nos desse informação, porque nós também gostamos de saber sobre estes planos secretos para, supostamente, salvar a Europa da crise.

Mas, mudando de assunto, Sr. Presidente, quero perguntar-lhe se falou sobre a Palestina. Nós já sabemos que a União Europeia não tem uma posição comum sobre a Palestina. O que eu não percebo, e gostaria de compreender, é como é que a Europa quer ter uma palavra a dizer nas negociações do processo de paz, quando a proposta de apoio orçamental à Autoridade Palestiniana para 2012 representa metade do que foi executado em 2010 e um corte de um terço em relação a 2011. Peço-lhe, por favor, que o comente.

E, por último, aos jovens que se manifestam nas ruas e que referiu, Sr. Presidente, não lhes ofereça estágios. Ofereça-lhes políticas de emprego. Eles agradecem e nós também.

  Niki Tzavela (EFD). - Mr President, I would like to thank President Barroso for his inspiring Community speech. We in the south started as pigs and are now in a period of being guinea pigs. We do not object to that. If we have to be the guinea pigs for testing and finding out the methodology and the process of having a real coherence and a real unity within the European Union, we accept that, but how long will this experiment last?

As a Greek, I accept all the criticism and admit that we have made mistakes and are still making mistakes, but I will do so within my own Parliament and my country. As a European, the question is: how long will the experiment last? If we are to be the catalyst for having a real Union and for having a structural, institutional coherence we accept it. It is worth it.

  Diane Dodds (NI). - Mr President, there is a real sense of déjà vu in this House this morning. We have heard the scale of the economic nightmare, we hear the supposed solutions, and yet, Mr Barroso, we have heard you speak in this House on these things with these promises of solutions many times before.

That sense of déjà vu was heightened for me when I heard one Member actually say that, after your speech, you should be called ‘Barroso the Lionheart’. What nonsense. The political class in this House, led by you and the Presidents in this House, should hang their heads in shame. We have a monetary union that has been politically inspired. It is an ideology that is not working and that is costing Europe’s citizens a significant amount of money as they suffer cuts and more and more depression and a greater downturn in economic growth.

  Mirosław Piotrowski (ECR). - Panie Przewodniczący! Pan przewodniczący Barroso stwierdził dzisiaj, że Komisja Europejska jest de facto rządem gospodarczym Unii, można więc wnioskować, że będzie dążyła do sformalizowania tego stanu rzeczy. Na bazie kryzysu Unia chce się odbić do przodu, pogłębiając integrację, tworząc podwaliny super-państwa europejskiego. Mówiąc o kryzysie gospodarczym, nie zauważa się jednak kryzysu demokracji i kryzysu wartości. Zapowiedziano dzisiaj kolejne możliwości zmiany traktatu lizbońskiego, który przyjęto wbrew woli obywateli wyrażonej w referendum w kilku krajach Unii. Budując państwo europejskie, nie mówi się o najważniejszych wartościach, na jakich jest zbudowana Europa, czyli na wartościach chrześcijańskich. Co więcej, dostrzegamy próbę ich dezawuowania. Trzeba jasno i dobitnie stwierdzić, że żadna reforma nie odniesie sukcesu bez powrotu do prawdziwych europejskich korzeni.

  Sylvie Goulard (ALDE). - Monsieur le Président, vous avez dit beaucoup de choses très justes sur la pauvreté, sur la taxe sur les transactions financières et sur les eurobonds, que, grâce à Olli Rehn et à une coopération très fructueuse, nous essayons de faire progresser ensemble.

J'ai une question, Monsieur Barroso. Je la pose sans aucune animosité: pourquoi devrions-nous vous croire aujourd'hui? Pourquoi – vous qui êtes depuis sept ans à la tête de la Commission et depuis deux ans le pilote du bateau communautaire dans la crise – avoir attendu aujourd'hui? N'oubliez pas, en pensant notamment à tous ces jeunes que vous avez évoqués, que si vous décevez, votre responsabilité devant l'histoire sera immense, et ce sera aussi la nôtre si nous restons simplement à contempler le désastre.

  Wim van de Camp (PPE). - Voorzitter, ik wil de heer Barroso hartelijk danken voor zijn speech, en met name voor de vele concrete maatregelen die hij heeft genoemd.

Als Nederlander houd ik altijd mijn zorgen over het tempo. Ik heb de indruk dat de financiële markten meer tempo van Europa willen. Daarnaast hebben wij het spreekwoord in Nederland: 'er is een verschil tussen gelijk hébben – en de heer Barroso heeft gelijk – en gelijk krijgen'. Wij moeten gelijk krijgen.

De relatie met de Raad is al besproken hier vanochtend, maar ik vraag even aan de heer Barroso om te reflecteren op de kritiek van buiten Europa. Mijnheer Greithner was vorige week in Polen en meende opmerkingen te moeten maken over het tempo van Europa. Maar ook de BRICS-landen willen nu Europa helpen. Dat vond ik zelf een belediging voor Europa. Graag een reactie daarop.

  Tunne Kelam (PPE). - Mr President, my country, Estonia, is completing its ninth month in the turbulent eurozone, but I am still clear that the best way to defend the interests of Estonia or France or Portugal is to stand united and to defend first of all the interests of Europe as a whole.

Fingers have today been pointed at the Council. Its will and leadership in acting decisively and convincingly will be crucial to restore trust in the eurozone and the European Union as a whole. Continuing with intergovernmental methods is probably a certain way back to chaos. We now need to head towards an economic union whose speed cannot be dictated by its slowest members.

As for the financial stability facility, it has been tailored to address the crisis in the smaller states. Now the contagion has spread to the big states, and I wonder whether the competences of this authority should now be expanded.

  Jean-Pierre Audy (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, bravo Monsieur le Président Barroso, vous avez une vision équilibrée et juste de la gravité de la situation et des solutions communes à y apporter.

J'ai bien entendu les critiques sur les méthodes. Aujourd'hui, dans cet hémicycle, il y a des absents: nos chefs d'État et de gouvernement. Je voudrais faire un rêve: que nous ayons un grand débat politique sur l'état de l'Union, avec la Commission européenne dans son ensemble – c'est le cas –, les représentants des peuples, les chefs d'État et de gouvernement avec leurs représentants, et le Président van Rompuy. Mais je voudrais dire aux chefs de groupes politiques: Avons-nous invité M. van Rompuy? Avons-nous invité les chefs d'État et de gouvernement, ainsi que des représentants des parlements nationaux?

Nous avons un Conseil européen le 17 octobre. C'est un moment politique considérable. Nous devons mettre sur la table vos propositions, Monsieur le Président Barroso, il faut que nous ayons un grand débat politique avec le Président van Rompuy, qui pourrait préparer cette session du Conseil européen, à notre mini-session de Bruxelles le 13 octobre.

  Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D). - Barroso Úr! „Mi mindig mindenről elkésünk.”. Barroso úr, a magyar költő sorai jutottak eszembe. Ön elkésett ezzel a beszédével. Európa egyszerre foglya a pénzügyi banki körök zsarolásának, de foglya az európai politikai elitek döntésképtelenségének, tesze-toszaságának. Hol volt augusztusban az Európai Bizottság, Barroso úr? Holt volt az Európai Parlament? Lehet kritizálni a kormányfőket, de ők legalább visszajöttek a szabadságukról. Ilyen mentalitással nem lehet Európát irányítani. Sajnálatos, hogy a néppárti képviselők elhalasztották a hatos jogszabálycsomag végszavaztatását. Ami júniusban jó lett volna, mára már kevés, nem elegendő, többre van szükség. Nem elegendő a megszorítás politikája, az európai jobboldal, benne a magyar jobboldal, nem tud mást, csak megszorítani. Gazdasági növekedés munkahelyteremtés nélkül: Európa sose szabadul ki az adósság béklyójából.

  Μαρία-Ελένη Κοππά (S&D). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, σήμερα πρέπει να αναλογιστούμε αν η Ένωση είναι σε καλύτερη θέση απ’ ό,τι ήταν πέρσι. Δυστυχώς, η απάντηση είναι αρνητική. Η Ευρώπη, τόσο στα μάτια των ευρωπαίων πολιτών όσο και στη διεθνή σκηνή, δείχνει πιο αδύναμη και πιο ευάλωτη μπροστά στην κρίση. Στα οικονομικά κυριάρχησε η αμφιθυμία, η διπλή γλώσσα, η αδυναμία λήψης γενναίων αποφάσεων και, όταν αυτές, έστω και καθυστερημένα, λαμβάνονταν, ήδη από την επόμενη ημέρα ετίθεντο σε αμφισβήτηση. Στο ζήτημα του χώρου ασφάλειας και ελευθερίας, είχαμε μονομερείς πράξεις που αμφισβητούσαν απευθείας τη Συνθήκη Σένγκεν. Στο επίπεδο της κοινής εξωτερικής πολιτικής, η χρονιά αυτή έδειξε για άλλη μια φορά την αδυναμία της Ένωσης να εκφραστεί με ενιαία φωνή.

Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η Ελλάδα έχει δεσμευτεί να εκπληρώσει πλήρως τις υποχρεώσεις της αλλά, για να μπορέσει ο ελληνικός λαός να συνεχίσει το δύσκολο δρόμο των θυσιών, το μήνυμα της Ευρώπης πρέπει να είναι σαφές και καθαρό όπως το δικό σας σήμερα.

  Marielle De Sarnez (ALDE). - Je voudrais dire au Président Barroso que j'ai apprécié son discours et qu'il va tout à fait dans la bonne direction, mais j'aimerais que nous convenions ensemble que, depuis 18 mois, les institutions européennes n'ont pas vraiment été à la hauteur – c'est en tous les cas mon sentiment – de la crise, et qu'elles n'avaient pas réussi, pour le moins, à endiguer cette crise, au fond, de confiance, et cette crise de la dette et de la zone euro. Aujourd'hui, le résultat, c'est que notre Union européenne est affaiblie. Alors, est-ce qu'un sursaut est possible? Vous l'avez dit. Eh bien, je souhaite que vous ayez raison.

À cela, il y a plusieurs conditions: d'abord, il faut mobiliser l'ensemble des acteurs politiques et l'ensemble des institutions européennes dans le même sens. Ensuite, il faut réaffirmer haut et fort les principes qui ont fait l'Europe, c'est-à-dire la solidarité et l'esprit communautaire. Ensuite, il faut dire que le départ d'un seul pays de la zone euro n'est pas une hypothèse. Vous l'avez dit et c'est bien. Ensuite, il faut poser sur la table un paquet d'ensemble cohérent. Guy Verhofstadt l'a dit, il en a donné le détail, je ne vais pas revenir dessus. Enfin, il faut avancer vers une vraie gouvernance économique, mais il faudra progresser également vers une vraie gouvernance politique. Jamais, il n'y a eu autant de responsabilités.

(Le Président retire la parole à l'orateur.)

  Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE). - Senhor Presidente, o ano passado, eu disse-lhe que ainda não tinha acordado para a crise. Agora a crise está aí, fez-se sentir muito claramente e, de facto, acordou toda a agente. O meu medo é que seja demasiado pouco, demasiado tarde.

A Europa precisa de três coisas. Uma, que a sua moeda única emita dívida em seu nome, como qualquer moeda no mundo real. Não pode continuar com 17 dívidas diferentes.

Segundo, precisa que essa dívida seja utilizada num plano de recuperação económica, de emprego, de investimento público, de construção de infra-estrutura. Aí estamos de acordo.

Precisa de uma terceira coisa. Precisa de legitimidade política para usar essa dívida e para fazer esse plano de recuperação económica. E isso é uma coisa que o Presidente da Comissão pode garantir, tomando passos para que o próximo presidente da Comissão seja aquele, ou aquela, que elegerem os 500 milhões de cidadãos nas eleições de 2014.

Para que, finalmente, quando houver boas ideias em cima da mesa, elas não possam ser assassinadas pelos líderes de Paris ou de Berlim, numa cimeira à beira de um casino, e que a voz dos 500 milhões se faça ouvir para, de facto, ter uma União Europeia com solidariedade a sério. Não este tipo de solidariedade que temos agora, que de cada vez que oiço falar nela – confesso – me assusto mais um pouco.

  Miloslav Ransdorf (GUE/NGL). - Po berlínských událostech v roce 1953, kdy politbyro SED vydalo prohlášení, že lid zklamal důvěru politbyra, Bertolt Brecht prohlásil, že doporučuje politbyru, aby si tedy vytvořilo jiný lid, který nezklame jeho důvěru. Z vystoupení pana Barrosa a dalších řečníků jsem získal dojem, že evropské státy, evropské národy zklamaly důvěru Komise. A doporučuji proto panu předsedovi Barrosovi, aby si vytvořil jiný evropský lid, který nezklame jeho důvěru.

  Jaroslav Paška (EFD). - Napriek nesmiernemu úsiliu, ktoré Rada, Komisia i Európsky parlament vynakladajú na stabilizáciu európskeho menového systému, nemôžeme hovoriť o tom, že by sa nám výrazne darilo. Vzájomné osočovanie a prehadzovanie zodpovednosti za nedobrú situáciu na Radu a národné vlády, myslím si, nie je celkom férové.

Veď si len uvedomte, že žiadate napríklad od nových členských krajín, aby v mene svojich občanov prijali nové dodatočné záväzky na stabilizáciu dnes nesolventných štátov v situácii, keď výška priemerného dôchodku je napríklad na Slovensku necelých 400 EUR, čo je takmer štyrikrát menej ako v ťažko skúšanom Grécku, a priemerná mzda je okolo 800 EUR, čo je tiež niekoľkokrát menej ako v krajinách očakávajúcich finančnú pomoc.

Vážený pán predseda Komisie, keď ste taký frajer, skúste sa postaviť pred slovenských občanov a povedať im, že majú ešte viac šetriť a poriadne sa zadlžiť len preto, aby v bohatších, nesolventných krajinách boli naďalej zachované niekoľkonásobne vyššie príjmy. Myslím si, že na solidaritu sa v tomto prípade skutočne nemožno odvolávať...

(Rečník bol prerušený predsedom.)

  Jo Leinen (S&D). - Herr Präsident! Herr Barroso, Sie haben zu einer Renaissance der europäischen Idee aufgerufen. Ich glaube, wir sind uns einig: Die europäische Idee ist gut, aber sie braucht eine neue Begründung, sie braucht ein neues Profil, warum wir Europa – und mehr Europa – im 21. Jahrhundert brauchen. Als Vorsitzender des Umweltausschusses ist mir eine Idee klar: Europa muss eine Stabilitätsunion werden – auch in ökologischer Hinsicht und nicht nur in finanzieller Hinsicht.

Die jungen Leute vor allen Dingen begreifen, dass wir mit 9 Milliarden Menschen zur Hälfte des Jahrhunderts einen Kampf um Energie haben werden, einen Kampf um Rohstoffe, einen Kampf um Lebensmittel. Also schließen wir doch einen europäischen Pakt für ökologische Stabilität mit Energieeffizienz, mit Ressourceneffizienz, mit Nachhaltigkeit! Wir haben damit begonnen, und jetzt in der Krise darf das nicht verlorengehen, das darf nicht zweitrangig werden. Denn diese Probleme werden nicht weggehen, sondern sie bleiben erhalten oder kommen noch stärker. Ermutigen Sie Ihr ganzes Kollegium, dieses ökologische Profil der EU voranzutreiben. Die Jugend Europas wird uns dabei folgen.

  Karin Kadenbach (S&D). - Herr Präsident! Herr Präsident Barroso, Sie haben heute – und ich schließe beim Kollegen Leinen an – von einer Renaissance gesprochen. Renaissance heißt Wiedergeburt. Und wenn wir etwas wiedergebären, dann sollten wir auch wissen, in welches Umfeld dieses neue Projekt hineingeboren wird. Wir haben eigentlich nur in einem Bereich in Europa die vollste Zustimmung zu diesem Projekt Europa, das ist das Friedensprojekt Europa. So, wie im Moment die Politik betrieben wird, gefährden wir auch dieses Projekt und dieses Vertrauen.

Wir haben heute oftmals die Kritik gehört, dass offenbar die Flamme Europa nur noch in diesem Saal wirklich leuchtet und sehr viel Kindesweglegung betrieben wird, wenn wir an den Rat und an die einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten denken. Das heißt, es wird unsere gemeinsame Aufgabe sein – der Parlamentarier, Ihre Aufgabe als Präsident und vor allem auch die Aufgabe der Ratspräsidentschaft –, dazu beizutragen, dass diese Renaissance in einem Umfeld stattfindet, wo Vertrauen der Bevölkerung da ist. Dieses Vertrauen werden wir dann nicht haben, wenn wir diese Europäische Union nicht nur in Richtung Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion, sondern auch in Richtung Sozialunion vorantreiben. Das fehlt mir auch im Sixpack. Hier ist keine Garantie gegeben, dass nachhaltige Wirtschaft betrieben wird, dass Chancen für die Zukunft bestehen. Zukunft in Europa wird es nur geben, wenn die Menschen mit uns in die Zukunft gehen.

  Antonio Cancian (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Presidente Barroso, oggi l'abbiamo sentita carico e tonico, quindi ci fa ben sperare per questo prossimo futuro.

La crisi ci impone oggi scelte e tempi che forse non avremmo fatto in tempi normali. Non riesco e non voglio immaginare lo scenario che si presenterebbe con il fallimento dell'Europa e dell'euro. Quindi le scelte sono rivolte su tre punti: sulle riforme del modello organizzativo, il piano di uscita e attenzione ai tempi. Mi riferisco solamente al piano di uscita, questa va costruita, questa crescita. E qui c'è una grande partita e l'ha menzionata lei attraverso i project bond, relativa a questo piano Marshall, che potremmo chiamare un moderno vero "piano Barroso" che si riferisce a questi 1.600 miliardi di euro che vanno alla costruzione di questo grande piano delle infrastrutture.

Ci faccia essere ancora fieri di questa Europa, per chi ci crede come me e come tanti qua dentro, questo è l'obiettivo che dobbiamo avere subito, attenzione ai tempi, Presidente Barroso!

  Íñigo Méndez de Vigo (PPE). - Señor Presidente de la Comisión, hoy era un día importante y éste era un discurso importante. Creo que lo ha resuelto con buena nota, porque ha puesto usted tres ces: coraje, credibilidad y confianza.

Aquí se ha dicho que el método comunitario es un método anticuado. El método comunitario es el que nos ha permitido muchos años de paz y muchos años de prosperidad. En ese método comunitario la Comisión cumple un papel fundamental, está en el corazón de ese método comunitario.

Por eso, es muy importante que hoy, en un momento de crisis, en un momento de confusión, en un momento en que la gente pide que alguien la guíe, el Presidente de la Comisión Europea haya pronunciado un discurso comprometido.

Cuente usted, señor Presidente, con que, cuando esos compromisos se traduzcan en iniciativas, este Parlamento le va a apoyar políticamente. ¡Enhorabuena!

  Edite Estrela (S&D). - Senhor Presidente, eu gostaria de começar por felicitar o Sr. Presidente Barroso pelo forte discurso, pela mensagem de determinação que aqui nos trouxe, e por isso foi merecidamente aplaudido.

Falou da Europa dos cidadãos. Ora os cidadãos perguntam: como foi possível chegarmos aqui a esta crise, a tantos sacrifícios, quando a Europa tem 7 % da população mundial e 22 % do seu PIB?

Mas a grande questão é esta: como vamos sair daqui? E o Sr. Presidente sabe que os cidadãos estão fartos de palavras, querem é acção. E uma das acções que já deveria ter sido posta em prática era acabar com os offshores. O Presidente Sarkozy, durante a Presidência francesa, falou de acabar com os offshores, mas, até agora, nada foi feito.

Por outro lado, também é preciso proceder à harmonização fiscal, porque sem harmonização fiscal não há moeda única que resista. E acho que é importante que isso seja sublinhado e também que austeridade e responsabilidade devem rimar com solidariedade.

  Sophie Auconie (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président de la Commission, je voudrais vous parler plus spécifiquement du secteur des services publics, pour vous dire qu'il est essentiel pour l'économie de l'Union européenne. Je vous rappelle qu'il représente 26 % du PIB et un tiers des emplois dans l'Union européenne.

Que fait la Commission en la matière? Sous l'impulsion de Michel Barnier, elle a publié en avril dernier le Single Market Act – vous en avez parlé –, qui vise à relancer la croissance au sein du marché intérieur. Je salue cette initiative. Le commissaire Almunia vient, quant à lui, de publier, il y a quelques jours, une réforme des règles des aides d'État s'appliquant aux services d'intérêt général de nature économique. Son ambition de simplifier et de clarifier est soutenue par notre Parlement.

Au-delà de ces deux initiatives, Monsieur le Président, je considère que la Commission doit être beaucoup plus ambitieuse encore. Dès le début de la nouvelle législature, vous vous êtes engagé à proposer une communication sur ce sujet au Parlement, et ce, avant la fin 2011. Or, à ce jour, nous ne voyons rien venir.

Monsieur le Président, n'est-il pas, plus que jamais, utile de valoriser ce secteur? C'est important dans la période que nous traversons.

  Graham Watson (ALDE). - Mr President, I am sure the House will wish Mr Barroso luck in aligning the individual interests of Member States with the collective interest of the Union. We welcome his proposal for stability bonds to lay the basis for future growth.

Many of us understand that Germany has no wish to add to its public debt of EUR 2 000 billion the underwriting of some EUR 3 200 billion issued by the weaker countries of the Union, but does he foresee for the future a common budgetary programme for the eurozone, so that common bonds might be issued for future borrowing? Will he seek to extend the mandate of the European Central Bank, perhaps to add the pursuit of sustainable growth to the goal of price stability?

  Alfreds Rubiks (GUE/NGL). - Paldies, priekšsēdētāj! Barroso kungs, kad es sēžu šajā zālē un klausos Jūsu runas, man gribas aplaudēt, bet kad es aizbraucu uz Latviju pie saviem vēlētājiem un klausos, ko viņi man stāsta, man gribas raudāt. Latvija šodien izmirst. Latvija ir kļuvusi par vienu no visnabadzīgākajām valstīm Eiropas Savienībā. Pie visa tā, ko Jūs uzskaitījāt, manuprāt, es gribētu ieteikt vēl vienu aspektu — mums jādomā par to, lai mūsu darbi sakristu ar vārdiem. Mēs daudz runājam par solidaritāti, par taisnīgumu, par izlīdzināšanu, bet kā lai Latvijas zemnieks saprot vārdu „izlīdzināšana”, ja jūs esat ieplānojuši 2020. gadā Latvijas zemniekam maksāt tikai 52 % par hektāru, tas ir, no Eiropas Savienības vidējā [rādītāja]?

  Angelika Werthmann (NI). - Mr President, I would like to say to Mr Barroso that none of us actually knows the outcome of the current Greek crisis, although everyone is worried about the future of the euro and some even about the Union. To get out of this crisis we have to help and support Europe’s people first. It is of utmost importance to invest in education to boost the job market and to reduce the unemployment rate in Europe, especially among young people. Concerning the EU’s finances, we have to first ask the respective agents to take their responsibility. One thing has to be clearly understood, namely that Member States’ overspending must end since the consequences are taken out on our taxpayers. Finally, I would like to thank him very much for today’s speech but ask him to go ahead and do the work now.

  Anneli Jäätteenmäki (ALDE). - Arvoisa puhemies, Eurooppa on velkakriisissä, vaikka itse asiassa Euroopassa on kyllä rahaa. Kysymys on ennen kaikkea luottamuskriisistä, uskottavuuskriisistä. Arvoisa komission puheenjohtaja, ehdotitte sopimusten muuttamista. Tätä kriisiä ei ratkaista uusilla perussopimuksilla, vaan noudattamalla olemassa olevia sopimuksia, olemassa olevia sitoumuksia. Jäsenvaltioiden on saatava taloutensa tasapainoon ja vähennettävä velkaa.

Pelkään, että te, komission puheenjohtaja, olette johdattelemassa EU:ta talouskriisistä sopimuskriisiin. EU:lla ei ole varaa nyt uusiin kriiseihin, tämä täytyy hoitaa hallitusti niin, että nykyisiä sopimuksia noudatetaan. Arvoisa puhemies, en kannata myöskään eurobondeja. Ne johtavat vain uusiin kriiseihin, ne sallivat jäsenvaltioiden jatkaa holtitonta velanottoaan myös tulevaisuudessa.

  Andrew Duff (ALDE). - Mr President, it is great that we have to install a federal economic government and that this has been recognised by the Commission and acclaimed by Parliament, but I think that also poses problems about the popular legitimacy of this House. Would you agree with me that it is essential also to develop the European political parties to connect the citizen with the strengthened form, style and force of a government that we are going to have?

  Pervenche Berès (S&D). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président de la Commission, finalement vous écoutez parfois les socialistes puisque vous allez proposer une taxation des transactions financières et des eurobonds. Alors écoutez-nous encore un peu plus et mobilisez votre Commission pour que le pouvoir d'initiative communautaire soit mis au service d'une lutte efficace contre l'évasion fiscale plutôt que de laisser chacun des États membres négocier bilatéralement des accords avec la Suisse.

Puis, écoutez-nous aussi sur la question sociale car, avouez-le, ce matin vous avez été un peu bref. Qu'avez-vous dit d'une initiative dans le domaine de la restructuration des entreprises? Nous attendons des propositions fortes dans beaucoup de domaines où, manifestement, vous avez du mal à convaincre les États membres. Or, c'est votre mission et votre rôle.

Vous avez dit ce matin, aussi, que vous aviez demandé au Conseil les 400 millions manquants afin que les banques alimentaires puissent faire leur travail cette année dans le désastre économique que nous vivons.

Prenez votre bâton de pèlerin, faites votre travail pour aller convaincre chef d'État après chef d'État. C'est une mission essentielle que vous avez entre les mains, sinon, ceux qui sont dans la pauvreté seront victimes de l'Europe, et cela, nous ne pouvons pas l'accepter.

  Krisztina Morvai (NI). - Mr President, this morning’s session reminded me very much of the congresses of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in its dynamics, especially as there is one man speaking from the podium and about 90% of those who watch him in front of their television sets understand that what the man says has nothing whatsoever to do with reality and with their experiences, yet their representatives applaud enthusiastically. Why? Because there is a huge gap between the representatives and those whom they are supposed to represent. That is something that should immediately be changed.

Another similarity is that those who want fundamentally to protest and change the system have to face police brutality, as we had to in Hungary between 2006 and 2010. For example, the trade union leader Judit Szima has now been under house arrest for several months, and György Budaházy and Endre Szász, who are opposition leaders who tried to fundamentally alter the system, have been in prison for three years now.

  Philippe Lamberts (Verts/ALE). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président de la Commission, vous avez su trouver un ton que les indignés de la Puerta del Sol n'auraient pas renié lorsqu'il s'agit du secteur bancaire.

Nous aurions voulu retrouver cette indignation lorsque, le 21 juillet, vous acceptiez les conditions que les banques vous dictaient pour le deuxième plan d'aide à la Grèce. Nous aurions voulu retrouver cette indignation, lorsque vous adoptiez de nouvelles règles pour les banques. Or, le CRD IV n'est qu'une pâle copie de Bâle III. Quand allez-vous imposer aux banques la séparation des banques "casino" d'avec les banques qui, réellement, financent l'économie.

Enfin, je voudrais reprendre les deux chiffres que vous avez cités sur la taxe sur les transactions financières. Vous dites que les citoyens européens se sont engagés à hauteur de 4 600 milliards et vous annoncez fièrement que la Financial Transaction Tax rapportera peut-être 50 milliards par an. Je ne vois pas là de quoi être rempli de joie. Je ne vois pas là, en tout cas, le signe d'une véritable indignation vis-à-vis de ceux qui sont en train de mettre l'Europe à feu et à sang.

  Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz (PPE). - Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Az euró stabilitásával, valamint általában az Unió helyzetével kapcsolatos aggodalmak sajnos állandósultak. Bár a Bizottság, a Tanács, és az EKB jelentős lépéseket tettek a nemzetközi piacok megnyugtatása érdekében, azonban a gazdasági válság és a görög csődhelyzet megnyugtató kezelése még várat magára. Egyetértek Önnel: bizakodásra adhat okot, hogy az Unió a mai helyzet megoldásához hasonló, történelmi léptékű nagy ugrást már az utóbbi fél évszázadban végrehajtott. Jelenleg is ilyen történelmi helyzetben vagyunk, hisz ma szavazunk a gazdasági irányítás alapjait újraértelmező, a közös gazdasági sikerek zálogát is magába foglaló hatos jogszabálycsomagról, ami azonban értelmezhetetlen a közös fizetőeszköz kellő stabilitása nélkül. Valószínűleg az alapító atyák is meghökkenve köszönnék meg, ha több mint ötven évvel a Közösség megalakulása után a BRICS-országok segítenék ki az euróövezetet a válságból. Elnök úr, tisztelettel arra kérem, hogy nyújtsa be javaslatát mihamarabb.

  Elmar Brok (PPE). - Herr Präsident! Herr Kommissionspräsident, ich danke für die klare Aussage zur Gemeinschaftsmethode. Wir sollten es uns vor Augen halten: Beim Bruch des Stabilitätspakts, beim Bruch von Schengen durch Länder wie Dänemark wurde eines klar: dass es die Mitgliedstaaten über den Rat sind, die die Regeln brechen. Wenn wir Glaubwürdigkeit an den Märkten zurückgewinnen wollen, müssen wir die Regeln einhalten. Das können nicht diejenigen tun, die die potenziellen Sünder sind. Deswegen müssen die Gemeinschaftsinstitutionen gestärkt werden. Ich glaube, das muss auch der Öffentlichkeit deutlich gemacht werden, nicht der umgekehrte Weg. Ich danke Ihnen dafür.

Ein zweiter Punkt dazu: Die Ministerräte geben – wenn es schwierig wird – immer mehr an den Europäischen Rat ab. Jetzt soll noch dieser Europäische Rat der 17 eingeführt werden. Wir haben 25 Jahre lang in der Europäischen Union für die Mehrheitsabstimmung im Ministerrat gekämpft, und jetzt führen wir über den Europäischen Rat wieder das Einstimmigkeitsprinzip ein! Der Europäische Rat, die intergouvernementale Methode ist nicht nur die Methode der mangelnden Demokratie und der mangelnden Transparenz, sondern auch die Methode der Ineffizienz. Auch das müssen wir der Öffentlichkeit deutlich machen, und dafür danke ich Ihnen.

(Beifall)

  Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE). - Mr President, let me recall one of the ideas that our colleague Mr Zahradil has just expressed about the EU just turning into a debt Union. The debt of one becomes the debt of all. We may indeed consider that case, as debt will be covered by all without priority, without final consequences for a debtor.

It reminds me and some of us here as being analogous with the Soviet kolkhoz system, which was exactly the same or very similar: that of total irresponsibility by inefficient or corrupted kolkhoz management throughout the whole agriculture sector, because all wrongdoing or mistakes by individual managers and the political leadership were regularly covered by the state in the name of doctrine and a special sense of solidarity with an inefficient Soviet socialism.

(The President cut off the speaker)

  Zita Gurmai (S&D). - Mr President, European integration was born as a means of overcoming divisions and providing a framework for achieving economic prosperity and sustaining – even reinforcing – Europe’s role in the world. We have, since then, created impressive political and institutional structures and are dealing with many different policies in the framework of the European Union.

However, our achievements are now being challenged as we face major internal and external challenges. The euro crisis represents our greatest test so far. No matter how hard all of us have worked for democratic governance, the legitimacy of the European construction is being questioned. This puts a strain on Europe’s solidarity, something that has only made us stronger in the long run. This was our standing point and should continue to be our beacon, even during the crisis.

I would like to thank President Barroso for addressing us today and draw his attention to an important point. All things considered, we are working for the people – all European citizens. No matter how clever the economic solutions we propose, we need a good foundation. We have to respect a principle which ensures that not a single person is left behind.

  Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE). - Mr President, President Barroso is a bit distracted; I would like to say you spoke beautifully, I would like to congratulate you on your speech, President Barroso, but we are not going to talk our way out of this crisis. You rightly pointed out that we have most of all a political crisis. But here I would like to echo the words of my colleague, Sylvie Goulard, because for the last seven years you held the most powerful position in the European Union and much of this crisis, including the political crisis, came about on your watch.

So, Mr Barroso, the European Parliament and my group in particular have made many concrete proposals today to get out of the crisis. Parliament gave you its confidence in 2004 and 2009 but confidence is not a blank cheque. It has to be earned again and again. Mr Barroso, why should we have confidence this time that you will deliver and that you deserve our confidence in the next two years?

  Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE). - S-au exprimat astăzi aici o serie de îngrijorări în ceea ce priveşte viitorul Uniunii Europene, dar am avut parte şi de un discurs promiţător din partea executivului în ceea ce priveşte ieşirea din criză, dar şi viitorul Uniunii Europene. Din păcate, măsurile implementate de unele guverne în Uniunea Europeană s-au dovedit a fi ineficiente şi de aceea acum, mai mult ca oricând, avem nevoie de o mobilizare totală pentru a revitaliza economia Uniunii Europene.

În acest sens consider că trebuie ca Uniunea Europeană să acţioneze ca o entitate, trebuie să câştige competenţe în ceea ce priveşte coordonarea politicilor fiscale la nivelul Uniunii Europene şi, după caz, să implementeze o guvernare economică comună, dar cu un buget bine finanţat. Trebuie să fie în măsură să răspundă prompt nevoilor la nivel european şi trebuie să pună în aplicare cât mai rapid dispoziţii corespunzătoare pentru gestionarea situaţiilor de criză.

(Preşedintele a întrerupt oratorul)

  Νικόλαος Σαλαβράκος (EFD). - Κύριε Baroso ενθουσιάστηκα από την πίστη την οποία εκφράσατε για το μέλλον της Ευρώπης. Αν μη τι άλλο, εγώ επιθυμώ να σας συγχαρώ γιατί προσπαθείτε. Γνωρίζω τα προβλήματα που αντιμετωπίζετε. Δεν είστε μόνος, αλλά εσείς προσπαθείτε. Κι εδώ σταματώ.

Φοβάμαι όμως, ότι έχουμε ξεκινήσει μία νομισματική ένωση με λάθος τρόπο. Πώς μπορεί να υπάρχει ένα ενιαίο νόμισμα με δεκαεφτά διαφορετικές κυβερνήσεις, δεκαεφτά διαφορετικά κέντρα αποφάσεων, δεκαεφτά διαφορετικά κέντρα αγοράς ομολόγων και διαφορετικές πολιτικές. Άρα το επείγον κατ’ εμέ είναι ότι πρέπει να επιταχύνουμε τα βήματά μας για την οικονομική ένωση της Ευρώπης. Χωρίς την οικονομική ένωση της Ευρώπης, φοβάμαι, ότι μάταια θα προσπαθούμε. Και θέλω να σας πω και κάτι άλλο: ως νομικός, γνωρίζω ότι οι ανώνυμες εταιρείες κεφαλαιοποιούν τις υπεραξίες τους. Έχουμε καταγράψει, κύριε πρόεδρε, υπεραξίες έναντι του δολαρίου. Παρακαλώ κεφαλαιοποιείστε τις.

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − Mr President, first of all, let me start by thanking this House for the strong support given to my statement on behalf of the European Commission. I think it is very important for all of us in the European Commission to feel that support coming from the most important political forces in Europe and for you, who have been directly elected by our European citizens.

Of course I was not expecting unanimity. One Member of Parliament, a British nationalist, attacked me on the fact that I am not elected. I want to tell you that since the age of 29 I have always been elected by my own Parliament. I was Prime Minister of my country, I was leader of the opposition of my country and I am here, as President of the Commission, because this Parliament voted for me to be President of the European Commission.

(Applause)

If you do not respect the institution to which you belong yourself, this is not my problem. Regarding Britain, I would like to make this point to you. As far as I know, you have tried several times to be elected to your own British Parliament. How wise the British people are that they have never elected you to your own Parliament and sent you here.

(Applause)

If you want your country to leave the European Union, say it in London and try to get your country to agree. But do not say it here because, as far as we know, your institutions and your country want to remain in the European Union. If your country does not want to be in the European Union, do not speak on behalf of the others, do not speak on behalf of Poland, that just today set their commitment to the Community approach and to a stronger and ever-closer European Union. If Britain believes that it can, because of its past empire, or because of its dimension, defend its interests in the world alone, try to get that point across in your country. But I think the majority here believes, as was said, that to protect our interests, to defend our values in the world of globalisation, to speak with one voice with our American friends or China and Russia, we need a stronger European Union. This stronger European Union is also a way to reinforce our countries, the countries that we all represent around this House.

(Applause)

This point is very important. This is a point of substance, apart from the other funnier parts. How we build a European Union is a point of substance. Are we going to build a European Union against each other or with each other? That is why I welcome this message of support, not only from the most important political forces here and the consensus expressed, but also from the current Presidency of the Council, Poland. We need a Community that matters: a Community spirit and a Community approach to reinforce our common interests. We need to build a European Union with our Member States, but we also need to build a European Union based on the rassemblement of all the major pro-Europeans, the most important political forces of Europe.

I agree with Andrew Duff that we also probably need to reform some of our European political parties, so that we can also have a collective expression in the European public space of this European democracy. Today some of you said ‘yes, but’. Please, among pro-Europeans, do not say the ‘but’, just say ‘yes’. You do not say to your loved ones – your wife or your girlfriend, your husband or your boyfriend – ‘I love you, but’, you say ‘I love you, I support you’. We need your support to make Europe stronger because Europe’s real problem is, as I said, also a problem of confidence.

Let us be completely clear. The problems we have in Europe today did not arise because of the European institutions. The problems we have in Europe today arise because of narrow national interests that have prevented the European project from moving forward. So I say to those of you that criticise me, or the Commission, that we are ready to accept all your criticisms, but the Commission is proud of the work it has achieved. Today we have not only made a speech, but we have put forward a programme with proposals.

Everything I said last year in the European Sate of the Union I checked; we have delivered. Every proposal I made today to you, we will deliver and we need your support and not your doubts and your scepticism. That is very important today because we need to build this stronger support for a stronger Europe in a spirit of confidence. Today you are going to vote on the six-pack; some of you do not agree but the proposals were made by the European Commission one year ago.

We have tabled 29 proposals for the Financial Regulation. Some of the points you have made are already on the table for the Council. About capital of banks we have put forward a capital requirements directive. Some of you do not agree but it is there, our proposal. About tax evasion we have asked the Council, and so far we have not yet received a mandate to negotiate with third countries the issues of taxation because what is happening so far is that countries are negotiating alone.

We have put forward the tax savings directive. Regarding the services publiques, the public services, I have committed to present it before the end of the year and we will do it. We are going to respect all our commitments and today I also put forward before you the financial transaction tax. So there is no lack of proposals. The question today is to get the support, not only of the Parliament but also of our Member States. So when we speak about Europe we have to be clear about what we mean by Europe.

Because this is one of the problems in terms of the scepticism in Europe. Some people say Europe does not deliver. Let us put it frankly: is it Europe that does not deliver or some governments that do not deliver? This is the real question in terms of the European Union.

(Applause)

As I said, one of the problems is political and political confidence and we need to make the case for Europe. Today when some governments say: ‘we do not have enough support for the euro; we do not have some support for the European Union’, probably they are right. But we have to ask them: did you make the case for Europe? Did you make the case for the euro? Did you explain to your citizens what we have to lose if we do not keep our strong commitment to our common achievements? So we need to make the case for Europe. And this is a collective task from the European Commission, of course, from Parliament – and you have been elected and you can of course discuss this matter and I know you are doing it with your electors but also from our governments.

We need to make the case for a stronger Europe, that is why I have highlighted the importance of the political leadership, the political responsibility, and I believe that we can unite ourselves in terms of the points I have made.

The reality is, honourable Members, we have different sensibilities around Europe. We have those who like to highlight stability; others prefer to speak about growth. Those who prefer to insist on responsibility and discipline, others want to insist on solidarity and cohesion. We need all these ideas. We need to put together this vision of a common Europe and the points I have made today to you – and once again I want to thank you for all your support – are not only the points of a speech: they are the points of a commitment programme, and so let us work together to make it happen.

Let us work together to make Europe stronger, let us work together in a true community spirit with the respect for Community matters to deliver for our citizens a stronger, united and open Europe. I believe this is what we need in Europe and what the world needs from us.

  Przewodniczący. − Dziękuję bardzo, Panie Przewodniczący Komisji, za przedstawienie stanu Unii, za debatę oraz wszystkie uwagi i odpowiedzi, których Pan udzielił. Jesteśmy przekonani, że ta doroczna debata wrześniowa w Parlamencie Europejskim ma podstawowe znaczenie dla kształtowania przyszłości Unii Europejskiej.

Tym samym zamykamy punkt porządku obrad i przechodzimy do głosowań.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL). - Senhor Presidente, foi esta semana o terceiro debate em que participei, estive aqui desde o início, inscrevi-me para o catch-the-eye nos três debates, em nenhum desses debates me foi dada a palavra. E eu gostava de perceber a razão desta recusa de palavra no catch-the-eye. Será porque sabiam que eu ia ter uma posição diferente, que iria falar dos protestos de Portugal, dos trabalhadores portugueses, das manifestações do próximo sábado no Porto e em Lisboa?

E eu gostava de ter uma resposta para esta questão, e aqui fica, de facto, o protesto da população portuguesa contra estas políticas.

  President. − Ms Figueiredo, I had 56 colleagues’ names on the list, so 10 of you could not take the floor. You were one of the 10, that is all. I do not have any other explanation. We did not have enough time. I am very sorry about that.

Written statements (Rule 149)

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. – A crise a que assistimos hoje precisa de respostas céleres e corajosas. Como a situação na Grécia demonstra, é necessária uma agenda alternativa à austeridade extrema e uma protecção dos mais fracos e dos desempregados que nada têm que ver com a origem desta crise. Para tal, a Europa, para além da necessária consolidação orçamental, tem de assegurar a sua capacidade de investimento para crescer, criar serviços e manter os serviços públicos essenciais. O pacote de governação económica deve incluir um pacto para o crescimento, a fim de que os Estados apliquem investimentos produtivos, capazes de inverter a actual situação económica. A Europa também não mostra visão a médio e longo prazo, esgotando-se numa reacção austera à situação actual. Os objectivos orçamentais devem existir paralelamente aos objectivos da Agenda 2020. Os processos de decisão devem ser mais democráticos e mais fortes, sem nacionalismos, de modo a que a Europa responda mais rápida e eficazmente. Por outro lado, a Europa precisa de um sistema de euro-obrigações que ajude a estabilizar os mercados, de uma taxa sobre as transacções financeiras para obter novas receitas e limitar as formas de especulação, de um orçamento europeu mais forte e dotado de receitas próprias, bem como de acabar com os paraísos fiscais.

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. – Negalima nepritarti, gerbiamas Komisijos Pirmininke, Jūsų teiginiui, kad Europos Sąjungai būtina atsinaujinti. Tebesitęsianti ir gilėjanti krizė labai aiškiai rodo, kad esamas ES valdymo modelis nesugeba reaguoti į sudėtingas situacijas bei sutelkti politinės valios galbūt radikaliems, tačiau neišvengiamiems sprendimams priimti. Vienintelė išeitis mums išlikti kaip solidariai ir vieningai Sąjungai yra peržiūrėti iš principo visą ES valdymo modelį. Komisija privalo tapti ta institucija, kuri nubrėžtų bendras ekonomikos valdymo gaires bei turėtų visas galias prižiūrėti valstybių narių ekonomikas. Be aiškaus ekonominio valdymo struktūros, siūlomos ekonominio valdymo ir koordinavimo priemonės nesudarys prielaidų didesnei ekonomei integracijai ir valstybių narių ekonomikų koordinavimui ir finansinių rinkų priežiūrai.

  Ivo Belet (PPE), schriftelijk. – Met dit pakket ingrijpende maatregelen ('sixpack') leggen we de basis voor een sterk Europees economisch beleid en creëren we een dam tegen een mogelijke herhaling van financiële ontsporingen. We leggen de fundamenten voor een gezonde en sterke eenheidsmunt. Dit zijn de maatregelen die ons, die Europa in staat stellen om versterkt uit deze crisis te komen. Het is cruciaal dat de Europese Commissie hierbij de regie in handen krijgt, nauw erop zal toezien dat de regeringen deze maatregelen feilloos respecteren en lidstaten die de bocht uitgaan, tot de orde roept. Op basis van deze heldere regels moeten we nu verdere stappen zetten om de Europese economie in een hogere versnelling te zetten. De Europese obligaties en projectobligaties die voorzitter Barroso hier vandaag aankondigt, kunnen hierbij een cruciale rol spelen. En ook de lancering van een taks op financiële transacties (FTT) is een belangrijke stap vooruit. Europa neemt hiermee het voortouw en creëert een heel belangrijk instrument (55 miljard euro opbrengst per jaar) om de economie en de werkgelegenheid te stimuleren. De invoering van een FTT is tegelijk een sterk politiek signaal naar de Europese burgers. Europa maakt hiermee duidelijk dat ook de financiële instellingen zelf een substantiële bijdrage moeten leveren in tijden van hevige financieel-economische turbulentie.

  John Bufton (EFD), in writing. – The State of the Union address failed to acknowledge the disastrous year had by the EU and suggests forging ahead with deeper integration to prevent threats to key legislation such as the Schengen acquis and single currency. There are reasons why these have come under attack. They are unworkable and opposed by many within the EU. To adhere to them demonstrates how dismissive of public opinion and devoid of reason the Commission is. Regulating the financial market to resolve the outcomes of poor judgment by the Commission over the eurozone is thieving from the success of the City of London to feed the failures of the single currency. The naïve utopian view of the Commission is little more than a foolhardy path to failure. Such is the case with common migration policy. How can the Commission control and balance migration without impeding the liberty and mobility they claim are central tenets of the European vision? Expansion is laughable when the EU struggles to effectively operate in the extant Member States. Inking new FTAs undermines national variance and independence. Member States are being lead into a quagmire of interdependence where sovereignty will be an unattainable memory.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. – O discurso hoje feito pelo presidente da Comissão no Parlamento Europeu foi mais um número para mercados verem. Ao mesmo tempo, foi uma tentativa de calar as críticas que vinham acusando a Comissão e o seu presidente de inacção e de sistemática submissão ao directório alemão da Sra. Merkel. No final, os aplausos que uniram a direita à social-democracia são elucidativos e simbólicos de uma "união" que conduziu a UE e os seus Estados-membros à crise actual e que se mantém, como se constatou na aprovação do pacote da governação económica, saudada por Barroso. Um pacote que significa um reforço do PEC e das restrições a ele inerentes, que afectam sobretudo as economias mais débeis e que são em grande parte responsáveis pelo indigente crescimento económico português da última década. Quanto ao resto, o reforço do FEEF mais não representa do que a transferência de (mais) dívida pública detida pela banca para o sector público, isto é, para as costas dos trabalhadores e dos povos. O imposto sobre as transacções financeiras foi anunciado pela n-ésima. Ficam dúvidas sobre os seus efeitos práticos. Para já, poupam-se os produtos financeiros mais especulativos, como os derivados (com taxas irrisórias), enquanto os paraísos fiscais permanecem intocáveis. Poucos resultados práticos no combate à especulação portanto.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. – Perante a mais grave crise das últimas décadas, para a qual contribuíram as políticas neoliberais da União Europeia, a Comissão insiste no aprofundamento da integração capitalista e neoliberal, salpicada com umas pinceladas de demagogia, que não beliscaram o essencial do poderoso sector financeiro.

Não basta afirmar que se cria uma taxa sobre as transacções financeiras, com uma taxa ridícula, se os paraísos fiscais continuam a florescer e os mercados de produtos derivados continuam a alimentar a especulação com as dívidas soberanas dos países de economias mais frágeis.

Mesmo a medida de aumento da taxa de co-financiamento para os países com os programas ditos de assistência financeira, que há anos reclamávamos, peca por tardia e, infelizmente, nem sequer significa um reforço do orçamento comunitário.

Ao insistir nas mesmas políticas neoliberais e nas ditas políticas de austeridade, do reforço do PEC e da centralização do poder económico e político, o que teremos é o aprofundamento das assimetrias económicas e das desigualdades sociais, do desemprego e da pobreza, sem perspectivas de futuro para os cerca de 23 % de jovens desempregados ou para os mais de 100 milhões de pessoas em risco de pobreza.

Por isso, apoiamos as lutas dos trabalhadores e das populações para a ruptura e a mudança que se impõem, como teremos no próximo sábado, em Portugal, com as manifestações da CGTP.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne. – V poslednom období sa na nás valia katastrofické správy o situácii eurozóny, EÚ a európskej integrácie ako takej. Súhlasím, že situácia je kritická. Na druhej strane ale nezaškodí trocha historického nadhľadu. EU je stále úspešný projekt, ktorý za nie dlhú dobu svojej trvania dokázal zjednotiť európske národy a stal sa jedným z lídrov globálneho spoločenstva. Aj keď kroky v doterajšej histórii by sa dali kritizovať, ja osobne projekt EÚ doteraz beriem ako veľký úspech multilateralizmu a medzinárodnej spolupráce. Rovnako by som ale chcela dodať, že mám obavy zo scenárov, ktoré sa denne prezentujú v súvislosti so situáciou v eurozóne. Osobne sa hanbím za to, že práve slovenská vláda je tou, ktorá brzdí prijatie opatrení na zabránenie bezprostredne hroziacemu vypuknutiu ďalšej fázy krízy. A chcela by som preto apelovať na absolútne všetkých zúčastnených v dnešných rozhodovaniach, aby odložili svoje stranícke tričká, prestali sledovať krátkodobé politické a národné záujmy a pozreli sa na EÚ ako na celok v kontexte jeho histórie. Stav EÚ je zatiaľ v poriadku, iba perspektívy sú nejasné. Všetko závisí od našich rozhodnutí a ja dúfam, že pri najbližších hodnoteniach stavu Únie nebudeme musieť konštatovať jej úpadok alebo úplný rozpad. Vyvarujme sa historického omylu.

  Jiří Havel (S&D), písemně. – Vážený pane předsedo, bylo mi ctí vyslechnout si Vaši zprávu a chtěl bych tímto poděkovat za práci celé Komisi pod Vaším vedením. Odvádíte těžkou práci v nelehké době. Zároveň se však musím přiznat, že mne Vaše zpráva vedle pozitivních pocitů naplnila i značným znepokojením. Pokud jde o unijní budoucnost, zmínil jste potřebu dalších integračních kroků. Avšak Vaše následující teze, že patrně nikoli všechny země Unie budou moci v takovém posilování spolupráce postupovat stejnou rychlostí, je už pro mne zarážející a dokonce nepřijatelná. Chápu to tak, že Komise se hlásí k modelu dvourychlostní Evropy, že chce nadále Evropany dělit na občany první a druhé kategorie. Myslím si, že orgány jako Evropský parlament nebo Evropská komise mají Evropu sjednocovat, nikoli rozdělovat. Nechci být občanem druhé kategorie a nepřeji to ani druhým. Proto naléhavě žádám Komisi, aby primárně připravovala model budoucí sjednocené, a nikoli fragmentované Evropy. Jen taková Evropa může uspět v globální soutěži, může mít konkurenceschopnou práci, výrobu a měnu.

  Edit Herczog (S&D), írásban. – Ma, amikor Európában gazdaságpolitikáról beszélünk, akkor szinte kizárólag pénzügypolitikáról esik szó. Annak ellenére történik így, hogy a pénzügyi szektor a gazdaságpolitikának csupán egy nagyon kis szelete. Nekünk – az uniós döntéshozóknak és a hazai törvényalkotóknak egyaránt – az egészről kellene vitáznunk, és minden egyes eszközét mérlegelve kellene döntéseinket meghoznunk. A gazdaságpolitika ugyanis több a pénzügyi lépéseknél. Iránymutatásokat kell adnia az iparnak, teret kell engednie az innovációnak és a kutatás-fejlesztésnek, ösztönöznie kell a beruházásokat. A három „I”-ről kell gondoskodnia: innovation, industry, investment. Ha nem döntünk mielőbb az Európai Unió gazdasági szerepvállalásának irányáról, ezekben a válságban edzett időkben rettentő nehéz lesz a közös, hatékony és sikeres fellépést garantálni. Felelősséggel tartozunk a következő generációknak, nekünk kell biztosítanunk most az ő jövőjük biztonságát is, ehhez pedig innovációra, újra erős európai iparpolitikára és beruházásösztönzésre van szükség.

  Danuta Jazłowiecka (PPE), na piśmie. – Szanowni Państwo! Nikt chyba nie wątpi, iż Unia Europejska znajduje się obecnie w głębokim kryzysie. Co więcej, kryzys ten ma nie tylko wymiar ekonomiczny, który jest najbardziej widoczny, ale również polityczny, społeczny i tożsamościowy. Skupiamy się obecnie na ratowaniu wspólnej waluty, staramy się wypracować plan pomocowy dla Grecji i innych zagrożonych bankructwem państw. Jednak przede wszystkim powinniśmy sobie zadać pytanie – jaka powinna być Unia, licząca już niedługo 28 członków? Koncentrując się na reformach ekonomicznych, nie możemy zapominać, iż nasza Wspólnota ma dużo szerszy charakter, że nie jesteśmy jedynie unią gospodarczą i walutową. Wydaje się, iż kryzys budżetowy w niektórych krajach strefy euro przesłonił nam inne zagrożenia. Czy dostrzegamy narastającą falę ksenofobii w naszych społeczeństwach? Czy widzimy, że nasza gospodarka jest coraz bardziej spenetrowana przez Chiny, a Pekin rozgrywa poszczególne kraje członkowskie przeciwko sobie? Czy mamy strategię w stosunku do tego, co dzieje się obecnie w Afryce Północnej? Czy dostrzegamy, że Stany Zjednoczone przestają być już pewnym i stabilnym sojusznikiem? Czy na zadane pytania mamy dzisiaj odpowiedzi, czy mamy strategię, którą możemy wdrażać?

  Sławomir Witold Nitras (PPE), na piśmie. – Dzisiaj jest ważny dzień. Dzień, w którym poprzez głosowanie nad sześciopakiem PE mocniej wypowie się na temat kryzysu niż kiedykolwiek wcześniej. Wynik dzisiejszego głosowania pokaże, jaką mamy wizję UE i strefy euro oraz w którą stronę będziemy dążyć. Głęboko wierzę, że droga, którą wybierzemy, będzie drogą stabilnych finansów, niskich deficytów i spadającego zadłużenia.

Musimy jednak pamiętać, że samo zaciskanie pasa nie wystarczy. Następnymi decyzjami, jakie będziemy musieli podjąć, będą decyzje o sposobach na wzrost konkurencyjności naszej europejskiej gospodarki. Według mnie należy jak najszybciej zacząć wdrażać rozwiązania zawarte w pakiecie euro plus tj. przeprowadzenie odpowiedzialnych reform emerytalnych, przedsięwzięcie reform dotyczących indeksacji płac, zmniejszenie obciążeń pracy na rzecz VAT oraz zbudowanie prawdziwie wspólnego rynku. Kolejnymi kwestiami do rozwiązania są kwestie metody finansowania badań, edukacji, innowacji i infrastruktury.

  Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), na piśmie. – W debacie o stanie UE najistotniejsze są trzy kwestie: 1. Prawa podstawowe – w dorocznym raporcie ze stosowania Karty praw podstawowych Europejska Agencja Praw Podstawowych zaapelowała o zajęcie się zwłaszcza sposobem traktowania ubiegających się o azyl, wykluczeniem społecznym Romów oraz ochroną danych osobowych. Jeśli Unia chce dalej szczycić się mianem strażniczki praw podstawowych, musi pilnie stawić czoła tym problemom. Ponadto, dwa kraje Unii tj. Polska, sprawująca obecnie prezydencję, oraz Wielka Brytania nie przyjęły w całości Karty praw podstawowych.

2. Kobiety – równouprawnienie kobiet i mężczyzn jest jedynie formalne. W rzeczywistości kobiety są dyskryminowane politycznie, ekonomicznie, społecznie. Zarabiają średnio o 17% mniej niż mężczyźni, zajmują niższe stanowiska, trudniej im awansować i łączyć karierę zawodową z wychowaniem dzieci. Połowa Europejek doświadczyła przemocy, 1-2 mln doznaje jej codziennie. Kobiety są niedoreprezentowane we władzach ustawodawczych i wykonawczych wszystkich szczebli, w zarządach banków, organizacji gospodarczych i dużych firm, w nauce i badaniach naukowych.

3. Ubóstwo – prawie 84 milionom Europejczyków zagraża ubóstwo. Walka z ubóstwem i wykluczeniem społecznym musi być priorytetem. W czasie kryzysu ekonomicznego znacznie zwiększyło się ubóstwo wśród dzieci. W tym kontekście apeluję do Rady i Komisji o opracowanie i wdrożenie strategii, której celem będzie zmniejszenie ubóstwa dzieci o połowę do końca 2012 r.

  Nicole Sinclaire (NI), in writing. – President Barroso, To put a positive spin on the multiple crises that the EU is currently experiencing is a seemingly impossible task. But you did your best. You told us that the answer to the Eurozone crisis is the issuing of Eurobonds. You know full well, however, that Germany has rejected the idea. Eurobonds are going nowhere. We hear much talk about the need to address the democratic deficit in the EU. But you spoke to a parliamentary chamber that appeared to be less than half full. Your speech should have inspired, and shown the way to salvation, but MEPs could not even be bothered to turn up and listen. So do not be surprised if the people of Europe fail to report to the polling booths in large numbers, or if the level of citizen engagement is low. We hear much talk of the Commission's environmental concerns and priorities, and yet we, our staff, and the press corps had to come all the way to Strasbourg, as we do 12 times a year, to hear a speech that you could have made in Brussels. President Barroso, the EU is drifting ever further away from reality.

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. – O Presidente da Comissão Europeia afirmou hoje que a União Europeia se encontra num ponto de viragem crucial. O caminho para a recuperação económica continua longo e difícil e os efeitos da crise têm sido repetida e seriamente sentidos pelos nossos cidadãos. Subscrevo as suas declarações relativamente à necessidade de todas as forças pró-europeias congregarem esforços em defesa do projecto europeu e agirem no sentido de responder aos desafios através do aprofundamento da integração europeia. Aqui, o papel do Parlamento Europeu e a sua colaboração com a Comissão assumem particular importância. É fundamental um reforço da UE, nomeadamente através do apoio das suas instituições às propostas da Comissão para defender o interesse comum europeu e apoiar a integração europeia. Congratulo o Presidente Barroso pela sua determinação e pela sua coragem e conto com o seu Colégio de Comissários para que apresentem propostas concretas e com verdadeiro impacto até 2020. O Quadro Financeiro Plurianual terá aqui um papel fundamental, centrado nas áreas em que a UE pode fazer a diferença. É essencial unirmos esforços e que possamos construir uma União de estabilidade e de responsabilidade, uma UE de crescimento e de solidariedade, e com uma voz activa e eficaz na cena mundial.

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D), în scris. – Uniunea înseamnă, în primul rând, cei 500 de milioane de cetățeni europeni uniți prin dorința de pace și prosperitate și prin încrederea în modelul social european. Astăzi, în Uniune, 23 de milioane de cetățeni europeni sunt șomeri și 80 milioane de cetățeni europeni sunt expuși riscului sărăciei. Unul din cinci tineri europeni este șomer. Cetățenii europeni se tem pentru viitorul lor și al copiilor lor. Familiile europene se confruntă cu creșterea prețurilor, în special la energie, transport și alimente, și cu diminuarea veniturilor, ceea ce determină scăderea nivelului de trai.

Datorită crizei economice, guvernele statelor membre au redus bugetele pentru educație și sănătate, mii de școli și spitale au fost închise, iar personalul de specialitate disponibilizat.

De asemenea, statele membre aflate în proces de consolidare fiscală au dificultăți în asigurarea co-finanțării pentru proiectele europene, ele înregistrând o rată redusă de absorbție a fondurilor europene. Aceasta este, astăzi, starea Uniunii.

Uniunea și statele membre trebuie să investească cu prioritate în educație și sănătate, dar trebuie să asigure și dezvoltarea infrastructurii de transport, de energie și de comunicații, și, nu în ultimul rând, a agriculturii. Numai prin programe și politici curajoase putem crea locuri de muncă și îndeplini aspirațiile cetățenilor europeni.

  Przewodniczący. − Kolejnym punktem porządku jest głosowanie.

(Wyniki i inne szczegóły głosowania: zobacz protokół)

- Przed rozpoczęciem głosowania:

  Sidonia Elżbieta Jędrzejewska, sprawozdawczyni. − Panie Przewodniczący! Pozwalam sobie zabrać głos, ponieważ nie mieliśmy debaty na temat tego budżetu korygującego, a dotyczy on bardzo ważnej kwestii, a mianowicie dofinansowania działań Unii Europejskiej związanych z uchodźcami i migracjami. Także bardzo was proszę, szanowni koledzy i koleżanki, o poparcie tego budżetu korygującego, który dofinansowuje tę tak ważną politykę.

- Przed rozpoczęciem głosowania:

  Olli Rehn, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I can confirm to you that the Commission statement is accurately reproduced in Amendment 11, but as it is a very important statement I would like to read this for you to make sure: ‘Before the end of 2011, the Commission intends to present a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the setting up of a system of common issuance of European sovereign bonds (eurosecurities) under joint and several liability, in line with Article 8a(5) of the regulation on the enforcement of budgetary surveillance in the euro area’. These euro securities would aim to strengthen fiscal discipline and increase stability in the euro area through markets as well as by taking advantage of the increase in liquidity, ensuring that Member States enjoying the highest credit standards would not suffer from higher interest rates. The report will, if appropriate, be accompanied by legislative proposals.

In the context of its first report to the Parliament and Council on the application of this regulation as foreseen in Article 8a, the Commission intends to review the functioning of any successor mechanism to the European Financial Stability Mechanism and the European Financial Stabilisation Facility during the period covered by the report. This review will assess the contribution of this mechanism to the preservation of the financial stability of the euro area as a whole, to the reinforcement of budgetary discipline among Member States and to the improvement of economic governance and coordination at EU level. It will also assess the effectiveness of the institutional arrangements which govern the aforementioned mechanism and evaluate the possible benefits in terms of the effectiveness, efficiency and accountability of different institutional arrangements.

- Przed rozpoczęciem głosowania:

  Olli Rehn, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I would like to make the following statement on behalf of the Commission. The Commission welcomes the adoption of the regulation on the prevention and correction of macro-economic imbalances. The regulation recognises that the nature, importance and urgency of the policy challenges may differ significantly depending on the Member State concerned and that, given vulnerabilities and the magnitude of the assessment required, the need for policy action is particularly pressing in Member States showing persistently large current account deficits and competitiveness losses. It also recognises that in Member States that accumulate large current account surpluses, policies should aim to identify and implement the measures that help strengthen their domestic demand and growth potential.

In implementing the regulation, the Commission is fully committed to respecting this approach and will ensure that macroeconomic surveillance covers countries with current account deficits and surpluses with appropriate differentiation as regards the urgency of policy responses and the type of corrective actions required.

- Przed rozpoczęciem głosowania:

  Olli Rehn, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I would like to make a statement as adopted by the Commission.

‘The Commission recalls its commitment towards ensuring that Member States establish correlation tables linking the transposition measures they adopt with the EU directive and communicate them to the Commission in the framework of transposing EU legislation, in the interest of citizens, better law-making and increasing legal transparency and to assist the examination of the conformity of national rules with EU provisions.

‘The Commission regrets the lack of support for the provision included in the proposal for a Council directive on requirements for budgetary frameworks of the Member States which aimed at rendering the establishment of correlation tables obligatory.

‘The Commission, in a spirit of compromise and in order to ensure the immediate adoption of that proposal, can accept the substitution of the obligatory provision on correlation tables included in the text with the provisions encouraging Member States to follow this practice. However, the position followed by the Commission in this file shall not be considered a precedent.

‘The Commission will continue its efforts with a view to finding together with the European Parliament and the Council an appropriate solution to this horizontal institutional issue.’

- Pogłosowaniu:

  Przewodniczący. − Dziękuję i gratuluję pani Ford.

Zakończyliśmy głosowanie nad six packiem. Chciałem jeszcze raz pogratulować wszystkim sprawozdawcom komisji ECON, która włożyła ogromną pracę, a także komisjom, które składały opinię do tych sprawozdań. Myślę, że to była wielka praca i naszym sprawozdawcom, wszystkim koleżankom i kolegom, którzy włożyli w to tyle wysiłku i uzyskali dobry wynik, należą się jeszcze raz oklaski całej sali.

(oklaski)

  Przewodniczący. − Na tym kończymy głosowania i przechodzimy do wyjaśnień głosowań.

PRESIDE: ALEJO VIDAL-QUADRAS
Vicepresidente

Explicaciones de voto orales

Informe: Corien Wortmann-Kool (A7-0178/2011)

  Ramona Nicole Mănescu (ALDE). - Am votat în favoarea pachetului de reforme privind guvernanţa economică deoarece ne confruntăm cu o perioadă dificilă, iar acest set de măsuri reprezintă un pas foarte important în cadrul procesului de consolidare a supravegherii macroeconomice şi a disciplinei financiare.

Pentru a putea realiza în viitor obiective precum creşterea competitivităţii, promovarea ocupării forţei de muncă, consolidarea stabilităţii financiare sau îmbunătăţirea situaţiei finanţelor publice, trebuie să ne luăm angajamente mult mai ambiţioase şi mult mai concrete. Experienţa acumulată în prima decadă de funcţionare a Uniunii Economice şi Monetare a scos în evidenţă necesitatea urgentă a unei guvernanţe economice îmbunătăţite, care să implice atât o asumare reală la nivel naţional, cât şi un cadru mult mai solid de supraveghere a politicilor economice, naţionale la nivelul Uniunii.

Astfel, stabilind un set de cerinţe minime pentru cadrele naţionale, vom încuraja atât asumarea de responsabilităţi bugetare, cât şi eficacitatea procedurii de deficit. Şi, nu în ultimul rând, planificarea bugetară a statelor membre trebuie să aibă la bază previziuni realiste, acordând totodată o atenţie corespunzătoare sustenabilităţii sistemelor lor de protecţie socială.

  Gianluca Susta (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, io ho votato a favore, nonostante le indicazioni del mio gruppo, di questo pacchetto.

Credo che in un grave momento di crisi come questo, la cosa più importante che possa fare l'Europa sia rispondere con tempestività a una domanda che nasce dai cittadini. Credo quindi che questo pacchetto sia insufficiente, ma sia assolutamente necessario continuare su questa strada rafforzando gli strumenti per la crescita, ma mettendo sotto controllo i bilanci e dando più regole per poter governare lo sviluppo.

Immagino quindi che sia domani un giorno importante di attenzione verso quello che ha fatto l'Unione europea in questo momento, l'istituzione democratica più importante. Certo, molto resterà ancora da fare, ma questa è una prima risposta importante e non potevamo perdere l'occasione dopo anni di discussioni in cui non si è affrontata con la dovuta tempestività e fermezza la più grande crisi che abbiamo vissuto.

  Peter Jahr (PPE). - Herr Präsident! Die Überschrift in einer deutschen Zeitung war heute: „Stabi-Tiger bekommt jetzt Zähne, EU-Kommission wird bei Eurokontrolle gestärkt“. Ich habe deshalb allen Berichten auch mit ruhigem Gewissen zustimmen können, weil genau das eingetreten ist, was die Einhaltung der Defizite und die Verfehlungen betrifft. Dass wir jetzt einen halbautomatischen Sanktionsmechanismus besitzen, dass wir die Ungleichgewichte ab 2012 auch makroökonomisch überwachen, sind wichtige Schritte in die richtige Richtung. Man könnte auch anders sagen: Das Europäische Parlament hat jetzt gemeinsam mit der Kommission die Hausaufgaben für eine Stabilisierung der Eurozone und der Europäischen Union erledigt. Was jetzt fehlt, ist die aktive Mithilfe der Mitgliedstaaten. Ich möchte auch bitten, dass die Mitgliedstaaten sich der konzertierten Aktion anschließen und Beschlüsse in der gleichen Richtung fassen.

  Barbara Matera (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'esperienza di questi anni e l'attuale situazione di estrema difficoltà che stanno vivendo alcuni paesi dell'eurozona ha evidenziato il bisogno di una più efficace governance economica dell'Unione, fondata su un quadro di sorveglianza comunitario più solido rispetto alle politiche economiche nazionali.

Questo, al fine di concretizzare la stabilità macroeconomica e la sostenibilità delle finanze pubbliche permettendo una crescita durevole della produzione e dell'occupazione. Ritengo dunque fondamentale l'approvazione di questo pacchetto di sei atti legislativi che permetterà di evitare che in futuro si presentino le condizioni che hanno compromesso seriamente la stabilità della nostra economia.

  Giommaria Uggias (ALDE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ho votato a favore di tutto il pacchetto dei sei provvedimenti e quindi compreso di questo perché rappresentano un passaggio fondamentale per arrivare ad una vera governance europea.

Lo facciamo per assumerci la responsabilità e mettere sotto controllo i bilanci anche laddove i governi nazionali, i governi degli Stati membri, hanno fallito. Ed è questo il momento sul quale si gioca la credibilità delle nostre istituzioni, delle istituzioni europee. L'Europa si assume il dovere di far proprie le istanze dei cittadini, di assicurare quella stabilità, quel governo, per creare le condizioni di crescita senza le quali non ci sarebbe stato e non ci potrebbe essere futuro per i nostri cittadini e soprattutto per le nuove generazioni.

  Salvatore Iacolino (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, anch'io ho dato il mio sostegno a questo così come agli altri dossier che formano il "six-pack" perché convinto che in un momento di straordinaria crisi la risposta del Parlamento europeo complessivamente e delle istituzioni europee debba essere forte, decisa e soprattutto pronta sia sui temi della governance economica sia sui temi della coesione forte dentro le istituzioni europee e su una preventiva verifica delle politiche di coordinamento dei bilanci degli Stati membri.

È proprio lì che bisogna intervenire, stiamo attendendo che tutti gli Stati membri pongano in essere i provvedimenti concreti che al riguardo sono stati richiesti per un piano straordinario che possa rilanciare la competizione, l'occupazione reale, con un occhio ai poveri e all'emarginazione e all'inclusione sociale. Ecco, questi sono i temi su cui ci dovremo concentrare nei prossimi mesi.

  Salvatore Caronna (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, noi stiamo vivendo un passaggio decisivo per il futuro dell'euro e con esso di tutta la costruzione europea. Avere questa consapevolezza significherebbe uscire da una logica miope che subordina tutto ad una ideologica volontà di rigore dei bilanci dei conti.

Tutti vogliamo che i conti dei vari Stati siano in ordine, tutti vogliamo ridurre l'indebitamento. Tuttavia, è chiaro che senza un'intelligente politica di investimenti in grado di ridare fiato all'economia, non ci sarà nessuna possibilità di crescita. L'unico risultato chiaro in questa impostazione è che i prezzi più pesanti, come sempre, verranno pagati dai ceti più deboli. Per questo, insieme al gruppo dei Socialisti e Democratici, abbiamo votato contro questa relazione. Infatti, si prosegue in un'unica direzione che è quella di un rigore senza crescita, una direzione che si è rivelata fino ad ora sbagliata.

  Marian Harkin (ALDE). - Mr President, yesterday many of us saw the YouTube video of a trader describing how to make money out of default, out of collapse, out of people’s misery as they see their savings, their pensions, their hopes and their dreams fade in front of their eyes. That trader happily told us that Goldman Sachs rules the world. Not governments, he says. It is Goldman Sachs; it is the market.

Well one of the reasons I voted for today’s report is to say, no, it is not the markets that determine our future. It is a civilised, rules-based approach to economic governance. I refuse, I refuse on my own behalf and on behalf of Irish and European citizens, to cede power to the markets and to bow to the madness that is fuelled by profit. I do not have all the answers and yes, we are part of an unstable and badly constructed currency, but I will do all I can to ensure that past mistakes do not influence future outcomes.

The report gives us a roadmap to prevent the next crisis. It does not solve the current problems and yes, phrases like ‘horses bolted’ and ‘stable door’ come to mind. But if you believe the euro, which is on life support, has a chance of surviving, then this report represents another cylinder of oxygen. It is not the cure but it provides us with hope.

  Krišjānis Kariņš (PPE). - Paldies! Paldies, priekšsēdētāj! Mēs labi zinām, ka pasaulē, Eiropā plosās liela vētra — finanšu vētra, uzticības krīzes vētra. Un iemesls, kāpēc finanšu tirgi neuzticas mūsu dalībvalstīm, ir tas, ka netic, ka mūsu dalībvalstis spēs atdot to naudu, kas viņām jau ir jāatdod. Šodienas likumdošanas pakotne — finanšu uzraudzības likumdošanas pakotne, ko mēs kopīgiem spēkiem esam izstrādājuši un pieņēmuši, — ir viens ļoti svarīgs solis, lai mēs šo vētru varētu apturēt, lai mēs varētu atgūt finanšu tirgu uzticību mūsu tautsaimniecībām, mūsu valdībām, galu beigās tas nozīmē mūsu iedzīvotāju labklājību. Bet, kolēģi, es aicinu atcerēties, ka šī likumdošana, šī atrisinās un novērsīs nākotnes problēmas. Mums vēl paliek liels darbs šodien, un es domāju, ka ir Komisijai vietā nākt ar skaidrākiem priekšlikumiem, ko viņi izdarīs, lai novērstu šodienas problēmas, nevis tikai rītdienas. Paldies par uzmanību!

  Andreas Schwab (PPE). - Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich bin der festen Überzeugung, dass die Schlüsse für eine Strategie jetzt gezogen werden müssen, eine Strategie, die Europa insgesamt am Ende, nach der Krise, stärker macht, als bevor wir in die Krise eingetreten sind. Die entscheidende Frage wird sein, ob die nunmehr im Rahmen des Sixpacks beschlossenen Instrumente – insbesondere im Hinblick auf die Berichte der Kollegin Wortmann-Kool und des Kollegen Feio – eine solche tatsächliche Kontrolle wirklich sicherstellen können.

Der nun erreichte Kompromiss zum präventiven Teil des Stabilitätspakts sieht zunächst zwei Schritte vor: Zum einen wird im Rat über eine Empfehlung der Kommission zu Korrekturmaßnahmen im Haushalt eines Mitgliedstaats mit qualifizierter Mehrheit abgestimmt. Wird diese Empfehlung nicht angenommen oder gar nicht erst behandelt, dann kann die Kommission sie innerhalb eines Monats erneut auf den Tisch legen. Der Vorschlag gilt dann als angenommen, wenn der Rat diesen nicht innerhalb von 10 Tagen mit der umgekehrten, einfachen Mehrheit zurückgewiesen hat.

Ich bin vor dem Hintergrund dieser Regelung der Auffassung, dass dies ein Schritt in die richtige Richtung ist. Es bleibt allerdings abzuwarten, ob die Mitgliedstaaten sich diesen rigiden Vorgaben wirklich unterwerfen oder ob sie nicht wie 2003 versuchen werden, diese Regeln zu umgehen. Wir als Parlament müssen alles daran setzen, dass die Gemeinschaftsmethode hier wirklich ihren Vorrang behält und wir diese Regeln am Ende auch effektiv umsetzen können.

  Alajos Mészáros (PPE). - Elnök Úr! Kedves Képviselőtársak! A gazdaságpolitikák összehangolása az Európai Unió közösségébe vetett megerősített hitet jelenti. Ez az Unió hosszú távú válasza a jelenlegi pénzügyi, gazdasági és bizalmi válságra. E felügyelet elsőként vezet be általános szabályalapú nemzetközi makroprudenciális mechanizmusokat, és a fordított többségi szavazással a Bizottságot megerősíti, elismerve, hogy az egyensúlyt nemzetközi szinten kell felügyelni, de tagállami szinten kell kezelni. A kompromisszum, amit ma hozunk a közös értékeink, céljaink melletti elköteleződés. Szavazatommal az Unió integritásának megőrzése mellett tettem le voksomat. Az Unió ezáltal garantálja a tagállamok és az Unió versenyképességét, belső konvergenciáját, az erős monetáris uniót, a fenntartható szociális piacgazdaságot, és megakadályozza a jövőbeli válságok kialakulását. Ez a polgáraink, társadalmaink mai és jövőbeli jólétét biztosítja. Köszönöm, hogy ebben a kompromisszumban egymás mellé álltunk. Köszönöm a lengyel, de főként a magyar elnökségnek e cél eléréséért tett munkát.

  Daniel Hannan (ECR). - Mr President, since the financial crisis hit, the EU has responded with more spending and more debt. It has emptied the treasuries, it has exhausted its credit, it has turned the ECB into a bad bank and now where does it go for funds? Well, the financial transaction tax.

Let us leave aside for a second the idea that we can impose such a tax in isolation in Europe; let us leave aside the bankers having to pass on the cost to their customers. Ask ourselves and say where do most financial transactions in the EU take place? They take place in the city of London. In other words, yet again Britain is being sent the bill in order to prop up a currency which we declined to join. This has been the unhappy story of our association with the EU these past four decades. It is just like the common fisheries policy. We are expected to put more into the common pot from which others will be drawing and those are the two bookends. This has a somewhat manic fin-de-siècle feel about it, these unconstrained ambitions of so many European leaders expecting the peoples to pay, again and again. ‘There be many Caesars, ere such another Julius’ wrote Shakespeare in Cymbeline, ‘Britain is a world by itself and we will nothing pay for wearing our own noses’.

  President. − I am sorry to interrupt Shakespeare but you see time is time.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). - A Uachtaráin, níl mé ach chun óráid amháin a thabhairt ar na hábhair seo agus bhí áthas orm cuidiú leis an ‘six-pack’.

I think one of the down sides in democracy is that governments and opposition parties tend to by-elections if they can get away with it. Of course people respond in kind, the attitude being ‘never pay today what you can put off until tomorrow’. That excessive approach has led us in part, at least, to problems we find ourselves in at the minute. Thankfully, we are beginning to address it and get on top of the situation and, as my colleague Marian Harkin said, politicians are supposed to be in control, not the markets or agencies. This certainly goes a step, or hopefully six steps, in the right direction so that we can have more responsibility in the future.

  Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, abbiamo votato anche noi a favore del "six-pack".

Credo molto in un percorso che favorisca una più forte governance economica comune. È un passaggio decisivo quello che stiamo attraversando e quindi è un passaggio irto di difficoltà che non può non vederci consapevoli di quanto l'Europa abbia perso molte occasioni. Voglio ricordare che il 16 giugno il Presidente del Consiglio europeo Van Rompuy è venuto qui a soffermarsi sulla necessità di parlare di eurolandia piuttosto che di eurozona. A giugno i problemi sembravano più lessicali e terminologici che di sostanza.

Poi volevo ricordare che il Presidente Barroso – che ho molto apprezzato oggi per la determinazione e la pervicacia con cui ha condotto la sua relazione – assicurò nel 2008 che non c'era alcun motivo razionale di temere la recessione. Oggi viviamo un momento in cui un nuovo orgoglio europeo ed europeista porta, anche attraverso gli atti approvati da questo Parlamento, a una grande assunzione di responsabilità. E una governance economica più forte è anche una politica che si assume la responsabilità di guidare la crescita e lo sviluppo non delegando gli scenari economici alle speculazioni dei mercati.

Informe: Sylvie Goulard (A7-0180/2011)

  Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la crisi in corso ha dimostrato che il patto di stabilità e crescita non funziona come dovrebbe.

Sei Stati membri di cui tre della zona euro hanno problemi di bilancio e rischiano il default del proprio debito. È una situazione cui bisogna porre fine urgentemente. È importante però che lo si faccia in maniera sostenibile e orientata al futuro. Per questo ho votato a favore della relazione dell'on. Goulard, della quale condivido l'approccio sanzionatorio soprattutto nei casi di manipolazione dei dati finanziari, di statistiche fraudolente o informazioni fuorvianti da parte di uno Stato membro.

Al contempo, però, gli sforzi futuri dovranno essere indirizzati verso quello che è il cuore del problema, ovvero l'insufficienza dell'integrazione economica dell'Unione europea. Le sanzioni avranno un effetto dissuasivo circostanziato se non si provvederà a consolidare il legame delle singole politiche economiche attraverso un aumento delle missioni di sorveglianza da parte della Commissione e, nel medio termine, con l'ausilio degli eurobond.

  Roberta Angelilli (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, con l'approvazione del "six-pack" il Parlamento europeo ha dato finalmente il via libera ad una strategia concreta contro la crisi.

Le parole d'ordine sono stabilità, rigore, trasparenza nei bilanci e riduzione del debito. Ma come ha detto ieri Juncker e ha ribadito oggi Barroso bisogna anche investire su sviluppo e occupazione e pensare ai giovani che si aspettano molto da noi.

E oggi Barroso ci ha presentato le prossime tappe di una strategia veramente coraggiosa. Tra i punti importanti, la presentazione di una serie di proposte sugli eurobond e soprattutto una tassa sulle transazioni finanziarie, un'entrata di 56 miliardi di euro l'anno perché è giusto che anche le banche, forse soprattutto le banche, sostengano i costi della crisi e non solo imprese e cittadini.

  Janusz Władysław Zemke (S&D). - Panie Przewodniczący! Bardzo chciałem podziękować. To rozporządzenie jest nie tylko ważne dla państw, których walutą jest euro, ale jest ono także ważne dla całej Unii. Wydaje mi się, że najważniejszym problemem jest stałe i realne zainteresowanie, bardzo mocne instrumenty, tak by naciskać na państwa, które nie czynią postępów jeśli chodzi o konsolidację swego budżetu. Tolerancja w tym zakresie prowadzi bowiem do wielkich kryzysów, z których wychodzi się bardzo długo i za które płaci się dużą cenę.

Rozwiązania, które zostały przyjęte przez nasz Parlament osobiście wydają mi się tylko pierwszym krokiem. Jest to dobry początek, ale chcę podkreślić z całą mocą, że jest to dopiero pierwszy krok. Potrzebna będzie dalsza determinacja, dalsza konsekwencja i bardzo twarda polityka prowadzona przez poszczególne państwa.

  Giommaria Uggias (ALDE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, intanto vorrei fare i complimenti all'on. Sylvie Goulard per avere affrontato e portato a termine un dossier di questa difficoltà, che rappresenta anch'esso un passaggio fondamentale verso una governance europea.

Ed è un atto che il Parlamento compie in maniera concreta portando avanti quelle che sono le dichiarazioni che abbiamo sentito anche oggi in Aula, ma che spesso non trovano attuazione pratica. Questo è l'invito concreto, ripeto, che stiamo anche formulando nei confronti del Presidente Barroso. Perché quando si fa un'affermazione di principio si è tutti d'accordo. Quando è stato votato in questa sede il programma della Commissione si era d'accordo, ma si tratta di dargli attuazione. Questo provvedimento rappresenta un'attuazione verso quel programma.

  Marian Harkin (ALDE). - Mr President, I supported the report by Sylvie Goulard. As with other reports encompassing the six pack this morning, it does not purport to solve our current problems. Part of that roadmap was articulated by President Barroso this morning. I think, for the first time, we had some hope injected into the debate and some reality, but of course now what we need is action and we are still waiting for it.

As far as this report is concerned, I was happy to see that Article 9 of TFEU is included, under which the Union will take into account requirements linked to the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection and the fight against social exclusion. These are fine words of course, but we have a responsibility in this Parliament to do all we can to translate them into reality.

I was also very pleased to see flexibility in this report, where it states that a possibility will be provided by the Council to reduce or cancel the sanctions imposed on a Member State on the basis of a Commission proposal following a reasoned request by the Member State concerned. That kind of flexibility will be very important for Member States and, in this context, I would like to specifically mention my own country, Ireland.

  Daniel Hannan (ECR). - Mr President, in the debate this morning, President Barroso declared that he was going to raise the number of people of working age in employment from 67% to 75% by 2020. Who knew it was that easy? Why not just declare that we are going to raise it to 90% or 100%. This has been the story of the euro all along: this belief that communiqués from politicians trump any other reality; that wonderful moment just before the summer when there was a summit and the crisis was declared to be over, but the markets did not get the message and then President Van Rompuy wrote a very huffy article in the Guardian in London saying he was astonished by the behaviour of these markets: how could they be widening the bond spreads in Spain and Italy when they had obviously not been listening to what the EU leaders had said?

That has been the story of the euro all along, and people are entitled to make their own mistakes. Britain is not a member of the single currency – we should be looking on helpfully, but we should not be dragged into it. The problem with these six-pack votes that we have just voted through is that they do not distinguish between the eurozone and the EU as a whole. We are, as Winston Churchill said, ‘interested and associated but not absorbed’. We have our own dream and our own task, and ‘should European statesmen address us in the words that were used of old: “Shall I speak for thee to the King or the Captain of the Host”, we should reply with the Shunamite woman, “Nay sir, for we dwell among our own people”’.

  Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE). - Arvoisa puhemies, ensinnäkin olen erittäin iloinen komission puheenjohtajan Barroson puheenvuorosta, joka osoitti selkeää johtajuutta ja jossa viitattiin jatkotoimenpiteisiin, joita markkinoiden vakauttamista ja Euroopan tulevaisuutta varten tarvitaan.

Olen myös erittäin tyytyväinen siihen, että parlamentti hyväksyy omalta osaltaan sixpackin nyt tässä istunnossa ja – kiitos parlamentin toimenpiteiden – selkeitä askeleita saatiin otettua siihen suuntaan, että taataan vahvempi yhteisömenettely, vahvempi vastuu, parempi läpinäkyvyys ja parempi kontrolli talouden hoidossa.

Kuten kuulimme Barroson puheenvuorosta ja myöskin talous- ja raha-asioiden valiokunnan aikaisemmista kannanotoista, nämä toimenpiteet sinällään eivät vielä ole riittäviä. Tarvitsemme jatkopaketit rahoitusmarkkinoiden osalta ja niiden lisäksi myös talouden vakauttamistoimenpiteiden jatkotoimia.

Informe: Carl Haglund (A7-0182/2011)

  Francesco De Angelis (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'esperienza di questi anni ci fa dire che è necessario un quadro potenziato di governance economica, così come è necessario ampliare e rafforzare il quadro di sorveglianza, rendendolo credibile ed efficace, introducendo sanzioni che potranno rappresentare un deterrente efficace soltanto se la loro applicazione sarà effettiva.

Credo infine che l'Europa non possa rispondere all'emergenza economica e finanziaria esclusivamente attraverso i piani di austerità. È importante mettere a posto i conti, ma tutto questo non basta. Si può fare di più e meglio, soprattutto in termini di equità, di sviluppo e di lavoro ed è per queste ragioni che ho ritenuto di dovermi astenere sulla relazione Haglund.

  Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, con questa relazione abbiamo potuto constatare quali nuovi e importanti poteri il trattato di Lisbona ha messo a disposizione del Parlamento europeo.

Le proposte della Commissione per una migliore governance economica hanno un'importanza decisiva per la nostra crescita economica e nello specifico della zona dei paesi dell'euro. I miglioramenti per la creazione di un quadro normativo solido e coerente introdotti dal Parlamento europeo sono evidenti. Condivido l'impostazione generale di questa relazione e per questo gli ho dato il mio voto favorevole. Abbiamo nuove responsabilità di fronte a noi, il pacchetto di misure va ulteriormente migliorato e rafforzato.

Penso che dobbiamo riservare una maggiore attenzione alla prevenzione delle politiche fiscali e macroeconomiche non sostenibili, ma soprattutto dare un ruolo rilevante al Parlamento nel processo di sorveglianza, prevedendo regolari e sistematici dibattiti e audizioni pubbliche presso il Parlamento stesso.

  Giommaria Uggias (ALDE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, mi congratulo, anche qui, con l'on. Haglund per il lavoro svolto e al quale ho dato il mio voto favorevole, come per tutto il pacchetto.

La relazione definisce sanzioni per gli squilibri macroeconomici, ma c'è da dire che sono sanzioni che vanno irrogate solo ed esclusivamente se il paese membro dimostra di non voler adottare le politiche correttive necessarie, perché se non si migliora lo stato delle finanze non ci può essere, on. De Angelis, possibilità di sviluppo, o sarebbe una possibilità di crescita che sarebbe monca e che non porterebbe a niente.

Per questa ragione credo che il pacchetto che è stato approvato oggi sarà la base per avere quella crescita sulla quale tutti gli Stati devono oggettivamente puntare. Se ci fermiamo qui non avremo sicuramente raggiunto gli obiettivi che ci proponiamo, ma con questo passo potremo sicuramente raggiungere quell'altro obiettivo.

  Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL). - Mr President, the six-pack plan that has just been passed by Parliament represents the institutionalisation of an austerity shock doctrine at the heart of the European Union.

With the surveillance programme, the Commission has now effectively been appointed as a policeman for austerity right across Europe. Fines of hundreds of millions of euros face countries that break with neo-liberal orthodoxy or are deemed to have acted imprudently. In reality they will be placed into a category of miscreant states.

This is all about making working class people pay, through austerity policies, for an economic crisis that they are not responsible for. We do not need to look very far to see what the result of those austerity policies will be. The policies have already failed. Look at Greece – the collapse of its economy, shrunk 7% year on year in the second quarter of 2011 – look at Ireland, look at Spain, look at Portugal: austerity policies have already failed and they will fail again.

  Marian Harkin (ALDE). - Mr President, I supported the report by Carl Haglund which tells us that experience gained and mistakes made over the last decade show the need for improved economic governance. That governance needs to be based on commonly agreed rules and policies and, indeed, stronger surveillance. But of course that is not all it needs: whether it be eurobonds or stability bonds or a transfer union or the ECB becoming the lender of last resort, other mechanisms are certainly needed to support the euro.

We cannot say that what we have here today will solve our problems but it is part of an overall solution. Today I have mixed feelings. As we vote on these reports, on one level I feel irrelevant, in the sense that we are not actually working to find solutions to the current crisis and that is what concerns citizens. However, citizens also expect systems to work and we are trying to fix a broken system. It is not headline-grabbing stuff but it matters.

  Gerard Batten (EFD). - Mr President, the so-called ‘six pack’ imposes economic rule on the Member States via the European Union. The English Parliament established in the reign of King Edward I that its key reason for existing was control of the public finances. In 1642 the English fought a Civil War and then cut off a King’s head precisely in order to establish its sole right to levy taxes.

Now, not by means of an Act of Parliament, but by means of a regulation from the European Union, the British Government is expected to meekly accept financial control by the European Union. If it does, there can no longer be any pretence that Britain is a sovereign nation or a democracy. The British Government should reject and repudiate these regulations and defend the rights of Parliament. To do otherwise is abject surrender.

Informe: Elisa Ferreira (A7-0183/2011)

  Herbert Dorfmann (PPE). - Herr Präsident! Ich habe für den Ferreira-Bericht gestimmt, wie ich für das gesamte Paket gestimmt habe. Ich möchte die Gelegenheit nutzen, Frau Ferreira, der Berichterstatterin, herzlich für die Zusammenarbeit im gesamten abgelaufenen Jahr zu danken und ihr auch zum Stimmergebnis zu gratulieren.

Ich bin überzeugt, dass der Ferreira-Bericht und die damit zusammenhängende makroökonomische Aufsicht eine wirkliche Erneuerung darstellen. Im Bereich des Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakts haben wir ja nichts anderes getan, als letztendlich das zu verschärfen, was schon da war. Wir haben keine neuen Kriterien eingeführt, und wenn ein Teil des Hauses hier sagt, dass wir damit Wachstum abwürgen werden, dann muss ich umgekehrt fragen: War bei jenen, die den Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakt in den letzten Jahren nicht eingehalten haben, etwa Wachstum? Und war bei jenen, die ihn am wenigsten eingehalten haben, etwa am meisten Wachstum? Ich glaube, die Analyse der Ergebnisse in den Mitgliedstaaten in diesen Tagen zeigt, dass genau das Umgekehrte der Fall ist.

Aber das, was im Ferreira-Bericht steht, ist eine wirkliche Erneuerung. Es sollte uns helfen, zukünftig frühzeitig – und ich denke das ist grundlegend – zu erkennen, dass in manchen Staaten etwas schiefläuft. Wenn wir das frühzeitig erkannt hätten, dann wären uns Griechenland, Irland, Portugal, Spanien und vielleicht auch Italien erspart geblieben, und wir hätten vielleicht vor Jahren schon gesehen, dass dort etwas nicht so läuft, wie wir es uns eigentlich vorstellen.

Ich wünsche mir jetzt nur, dass dieses Instrument von der Kommission wirkungsvoll eingesetzt wird, dass es sein Ziel erreicht, das heißt zum Wohl der Union zu funktionieren und zum Wohl der Menschen, die in ihr leben.

  Francesco De Angelis (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, è importante che il patto di stabilità e di crescita, il quadro completo della governance economica, sostengano e siano compatibili con le strategie dell'Unione in materia di crescita ed occupazione, con l'obiettivo di incrementare la competitività e la stabilità sociale.

Occorre pertanto prevedere sanzioni per punire le frodi, versare le multe in un fondo centrale per il meccanismo permanente di crisi e regolare maggiormente i mercati finanziari. Ritengo infine che le misure di austerità oggi in discussione rischino di indebolire le politiche di equità sociale.

Non è il caso della relazione Ferreira che ho votato e che introduce apprezzabili elementi di equilibrio sociale. È il resto del pacchetto che non va perché punta solo ed esclusivamente sul rigore e sull'austerità e non promuove la crescita. L'Europa avrà un futuro solo se sapremo coniugare il rigore dei conti con gli obiettivi dello sviluppo, della crescita e del lavoro.

  Cristiana Muscardini (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la crisi mondiale ha determinato instabilità e incapacità di sopravvivere per le piccole e microimprese che caratterizzano gran parte del tessuto imprenditoriale europeo.

Le misure adottate oggi con l'adozione del "six-pack" saranno di aiuto a prevenire gli squilibri macroeconomici, ma occorre favorire subito le piccole e microimprese. Per questo, con colleghi di diversi gruppi politici, abbiamo presentato una proposta di risoluzione, affinché l'Europa dia vita ad un provvedimento che per tre anni stabilisca una franchigia fiscale per le microimprese fino a 30.000 euro di utili annuali ed un bonus corrispondente alla contribuzione previdenziale per le microimprese che assumono un giovane a tempo indeterminato.

Così riusciremo ad impedire l'uscita dal mercato di tante realtà che garantiscono occupazione e sviluppo e ridurremo la disoccupazione che ha raggiunto livelli eccessivi a danno della stabilità sociale. Ricordiamo anche al Consiglio la necessità di dar vita al trilogo col Parlamento per il regolamento per la denominazione di origine.

  Giommaria Uggias (ALDE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il regolamento che abbiamo votato per la prevenzione degli squilibri macroeconomici tra i 27 paesi rappresenta sicuramente un'innovazione rispetto alla situazione precedente. Stabilisce regole e controlli e, in particolare, introduce il concetto di simmetria per cui la Commissione deve valutare non solo i deficit, ma anche il surplus.

In pratica, contrariamente a quanto normalmente viene considerato, cioè che ci sono alcuni paesi cattivi, come la Grecia o come l'Italia, vengono ad essere messi sotto controllo paesi come Germania e Olanda per il fatto di avere consumi interni troppo ridotti. Inoltre il regolamento inserisce fondamentalmente una prospettiva federalista ed insiste quindi sul concetto di equità che rappresenta a nostro avviso uno degli elementi caratterizzanti in positivo del futuro dell'Europa e degli Stati membri. Equità e solidarietà che saranno i presupposti della crescita europea.

  Salvatore Caronna (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ho molto apprezzato il lavoro che ha fatto l'on. Ferreira con questa relazione.

Infatti, sul pacchetto di sei proposte legislative dedicate alla governance economica, solo su questo io e il mio gruppo abbiamo espresso un voto positivo. L'abbiamo fatto perché si è inserita, tra l'altro, una clausola di protezione dei diritti sociali a partire dalla contrattazione collettiva ed inoltre vi è un rafforzamento del ruolo del Parlamento nell'adozione degli atti delegati.

Dunque pur non potendo cambiare l'equilibrio complessivo del pacchetto di sei proposte, con questa relazione si fa sicuramente un passo in avanti, per avere, tra l'altro, un sistema di sorveglianza che tenga conto dei diritti fondamentali. E quindi, in questo contesto, fermo restando che una visione, a nostro giudizio, basata solo su una politica di austerità non produce risultati positivi, questa relazione sicuramente costituisce una nota positiva in controtendenza.

  Alajos Mészáros (PPE). - Elnök Úr! 2010. szeptember 29-én a Bizottság jogalkotási csomagot terjesztett elő, amelynek célja a gazdasági irányítás megerősítése az EU-ban és az euróövezetben. A csomag hat javaslatból áll. Ezek közül négy foglalkozik költségvetési kérdésekkel, köztük a stabilitási és növekedési paktum reformjával, míg két új rendelet az EU-ban és az euróövezetben felmerülő makrogazdasági egyenlőtlenségek feltárására és kezelésére vonatkozik.

Az utóbbi két javaslatban új elemek jelennek meg. Ezen elemek megelőző része magában foglalja az egyensúlytalanságok kockázatának a mutatók eredménytábláján alapuló rendszeres értékelését, valamint a részletes országelemzések elvégzését. A korrekciós ág azt helyezi kilátásba, hogy azok az euróövezetbe tartozó tagállamok, amelyek nem tartják be megfelelően a rájuk vonatkozó ajánlásokat, túlzott hiány esetén eljárás alá vonhatók, végső soron pedig éves pénzbírság formájában szankcionálhatók. Az egyensúlytalanságok kiigazítási rendszerének nem csak szankciókat, hanem ösztönzőket is tartalmaznia kell. Az elmulasztó tagállamoktól beszedett pénzbírságokat az EU hosszú távú beruházási és munkaügyi céljaira kell felhasználni. Én is örömmel megtámogattam a jelentést.

  Marian Harkin (ALDE). - Mr President, I supported this report as part of the economic governance package and I was particularly pleased to see in Article 1 that the coordination of economic policies in the Union will, among other things, aim at achieving sustainable growth and social cohesion. This is crucially important for all of us because our policies should in the final analysis achieve growth and social cohesion, otherwise we are wasting our time.

I support the proposals on the European Monetary Fund. They certainly go further than what is being accepted by the Council and I think finally begin to address the elephant in the room. It is crucial that we do this, otherwise we are just seen as irrelevant and we are just not dealing with the reality of the situation.

It is also important that in all of these proposals deliberations will take place in public and that citizens will have an opportunity to scrutinise what is happening and be aware of decisions taken in their name.

Finally, I agree with my colleague Mr Uggias, when he talks about fairness. This is not just about deficits, it is also about surpluses. If we are to be part of a common currency, then we have common responsibilities.

  Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, anche sulla relazione Goulard il nostro voto è stato favorevole, perché essa introduce meccanismi di prevenzione agli squilibri macroeconomici, fatti finalmente di regole e garanzie, di quelle regole e garanzie che fino ad ora sono mancate e di cui tanto in questa fase di crisi si è avvertita la mancanza.

Vi è una fase nuova di responsabilità, di controllo, ma anche di sorveglianza sui bilanci nell'area euro, con meccanismi che sono sì semiautomatici – e questa è una delle maggiori critiche che sono state avanzate – ma con sanzioni che finalmente vengono irrogate su tutti gli eventuali squilibri macroeconomici che si dovessero verificare.

È un passo decisivo che, se mi è permessa l'analogia, si completerà con quei passaggi successivi che, anche per una coincidenza fortuita ma importante, oggi il Presidente Barroso ha voluto annunciare: l'introduzione della Tobin tax, la tassazione delle transazioni finanziarie fa sì che i momenti di crisi e di difficoltà non siano pagati solo dalle famiglie, che la prevenzione delle crisi sia pagata non solo sempre e soltanto dai produttori di beni materiali, ma anche da chi opera nel mercato finanziario.

Informe: Diego Feio (A7-0179/2011)

  Giommaria Uggias (ALDE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la relazione Feio rivede il patto di stabilità e crescita e quindi stabilisce finalmente – vorrei ricordarlo, ora che siamo giunti alla conclusione dopo un anno da quando è stata presentata la proposta – un controllo che impone agli Stati che hanno un rapporto debito/PIL superiore al 60% una riduzione del 5%. Lo fa introducendo e chiarendo il criterio del debito e delle procedure rispetto al ritmo che deve essere seguito.

La Commissione dovrà tenere conto in questo contesto economico globale di una serie di caratteristiche prima di valutare e fare le proprie raccomandazioni al paese membro. Viene introdotto il principio fondamentale secondo cui, riducendo il debito, si hanno meno interessi da pagare e quindi si ha la possibilità di avere più massa di spesa per quanto riguarda gli investimenti e la crescita, che è il vero obiettivo sul quale ci dovremo concentrare nei prossimi mesi.

  Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL). - Mr President, one of the purposes of this Parliament from the point of view of the establishment in Europe is to act as a democratic facade on what is in reality a European Union dominated by big business interests and dominated institutionally by the Commission and the Council. But I think that facade may be beginning to crumble today when you look at what the Parliament has passed.

It has passed a series of measures, the six pack, that is purely neo-liberal and austerity-driven in content. It has opted to give more power to the Commission to act as an austerity policeman and it has used the notion of reverse qualified majority voting to mean that a simple majority in the Council will not be enough to vote against sanctions applied by the Commission to a miscreant Member State.

The limited democracy that exists within the European Union is now being trampled upon in the race to impose austerity. What is the European Union establishment afraid of? They are afraid of the working class, they are afraid of the movements of ordinary people, they are afraid of the general strike in Greece, the protests in Portugal on Saturday, the moves within Spain – and I think they are correct to be afraid. I think the movements have to link up and build a European-wide movement against austerity.

  Marian Harkin (ALDE). - Mr President, I supported this report and I particularly agreed with point 4a, where it states that this regulation does not address the current situation in the short term, but rather is a more structural approach for the medium to long term.

I also support the statement that we need a more integrated and social approach. Several times here today I have said that we are not putting forward solutions to the current crisis, but indeed one possibility that is contained in this report that could improve the situation is the achieving and maintaining of a dynamic internal market. I know this could generate significant growth across the EU and particularly in my own country, Ireland, where this has a significant impact.

Speaking of Ireland, I was pleased to see the statement that the medium-term growth and primary balanced targets of the catching-up countries will be taken into consideration. It also states that measures proposed to a given Member State for correcting imbalances should take into account the Union strategy for growth and jobs. This is certainly an instrument for achieving internal cohesion and also supporting recommendations to respect the Charter of Fundamental Rights and collective bargaining between social partners in Member States. I think all of these issues are important.

Informe: Vicky Ford (A7-0184/2011)

  Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la disponibilità periodica di dati di bilancio aggiornati e affidabili è la chiave per regolare la spesa pubblica e consentire l'adozione rapida di provvedimenti correttivi in momenti di crisi.

Condivido quindi l'esigenza di permettere alla Commissione di sorvegliare, con l'ausilio di un istituto fiscale, la conformità delle regole di bilancio dei singoli Stati membri. Ciò premesso, mi preme sottolineare che, in base al trattato, l'instaurazione di un quadro finanziario a medio termine lascia impregiudicata la facoltà dei nuovi governi eletti di modificare le scelte programmatiche precedentemente adottate.

Quindi è necessario che questa direttiva sia applicata fedelmente e che la Commissione vigili costantemente sulla sua applicazione. Ciò al fine di evitare che l'intervento non abbia un effetto cosmetico bensì concreto ed utile a raggiungere l'obiettivo precipuo della direttiva: il rispetto uniforme della disciplina di bilancio come richiesto dal trattato.

  Giommaria Uggias (ALDE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, oltre un anno fa, quando iniziarono a venire alla luce i primi problemi dell'economia greca e poi di quelle di altri paesi, venni intervistato dal canale europeo. E una delle cose che sollevai era proprio l'attenzione sui dati statistici che hanno consentito ad alcuni paesi di truccare i conti.

La relazione Ford che oggi abbiamo votato e sostenuto introduce invece criteri di trasparenza e indipendenza degli istituti statistici nazionali con sanzioni per coloro che commettono falsi e frodi. È una relazione fondamentale, in quanto mira a evitare la mancanza di trasparenza nell'elaborazione dei dati statistici e li rende uniformi. Questo consentirà al governo europeo e ai governi di tutti i paesi di procedere uniformemente, quindi di avere criteri non solo di conoscenza, ma uniformi anche in termini di azioni.

  Marian Harkin (ALDE). - Mr President, I supported this report and I certainly re-echo its sentiments when it says that a comprehensive and integrated solution to the euro area debt crisis is needed, because the piecemeal efforts that we have put in place so far have certainly not worked.

I think what we did today was to put in place one piece of the jigsaw. President Barroso proposed other pieces, among them the financial transaction tax and the beefing-up of the Europe Investment Bank so that it can offer greater assistance to SMEs. He also proposed, as did Commissioner Rehn, solidarity bonds or eurobonds. We need further clarification on this; such bonds may or may not require Treaty change, and I believe the details need to be spelled out.

As far as the flexibility within this report is concerned, we can see that the adoption of the multiannual fiscal planning does not deprive any newly elected governments within the time frame covered by the planning of the chance to modify previous policy options so that they can reflect their own priorities.

My final comment is that these reports are addressing a situation where 17 states are members of the eurozone. If one Member State threatens the stability of the currency and other Member States, we cannot ignore that; we have to try and deal with it in a fair and equitable way.

Propuesta de resolución B7-0523/2011

  Erminia Mazzoni (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, questa risoluzione richiama la dichiarazione resa dalla Vicepresidente Ashton in occasione della celebrazione della Giornata mondiale contro l'omofobia.

Con quella dichiarazione Catherine Ashton ribadì il forte impegno delle Istituzioni europee a favore di tutte le azioni che combattono la violenza nei confronti di ogni persona in ragione dell'orientamento sessuale e dell'identità di genere. Sono contenta che questo Parlamento, con la risoluzione che abbiamo votato, abbia deciso di fare altrettanto.

Volevo tuttavia far presente che il mio voto favorevole alla risoluzione ha un'unica ombra, la contrarietà che ho voluto e dovuto esprimere al paragrafo 11, laddove, ancora una volta, alcune forze politiche tendono in maniera surrettizia ad introdurre argomenti non coerenti, sbagliando sia nel metodo sia nel merito. Nel metodo, perché introdurre il riconoscimento di diritti che afferiscono al settore di competenza della famiglia vuol dire sbagliare, perché il settore non è di competenza di quest'Istituzione, e nel merito, perché nel momento in cui si vuole combattere, si vuole lottare contro ogni violenza, non si può parlare dell'introduzione di elementi di altro tipo.

  Andrea Češková (ECR). - Hlasovala jsem pro tento návrh usnesení, možná ze stejných důvodů, které teď kolegyně uváděla. Sexuální orientace a genderová identita je stále příčinnou závažného porušování lidských práv v řadě zemí. Osoby příslušející k této menšině jsou ve zvýšené formě oběťmi diskriminace a špatného zacházení. V řadě zemí je sexuální orientace a genderová identita důvodem nejen trestního stíhání, ale také nelidského zacházení, mučení či dokonce ukládání trestu smrti, což je pro nás naprosto nepřijatelné. Takovéto porušování lidských práv je neslučitelné se základními principy Evropské unie i Všeobecné deklarace lidských práv, podle které má každý člověk mít stejná práva bez jakéhokoliv rozlišování. Vítám proto také rezoluci Organizace spojených národů, která je jako vůbec první svého druhu věnována konkrétně porušování lidských práv na základě sexuální orientace a genderové identity a která tak prokazuje univerzálnost lidských práv. Podporuje otevřený dialog v rámci této oblasti a jsem přesvědčena, že Evropská unie by měla při vykonávání své vnější i vnitřní činnosti zastávat jednotný přístup k uplatňování lidských práv.

  Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, io sono tra quei poco più di cento colleghi che hanno votato contro questo provvedimento e non perché non condivida una piena e forte condanna dell'omofobia, o perché non condivida la necessità che l'Unione europea sia la prima a rispettare la sua Carta dei diritti fondamentali, ma perché ritengo al contrario che quanto introdotto – come diceva anche la collega Mazzoni – al paragrafo 11, sia un tentativo surrettizio che è un film che noi vediamo ripetutamente.

Perché ogni volta che si parla di argomenti che sono ampiamente o genericamente attinenti al problema del riconoscimento di genere, c'è sempre qualcuno che per finalità politiche o per far passare una legislazione che dall'Europa dovrebbe imporre, secondo l'idea di qualcuno, agli Stati membri di riconoscere altri generi oltre quello maschile e femminile, introduce elementi che non hanno nessuna attinenza con quello che si discute.

Io penso che questa Europa che vuole legiferare qualcosa di difforme dalle leggi della natura che ci hanno creati maschi e femmine sia un'Europa che debba cercare di rivedere le sue posizioni e che debba sforzarsi di più di garantire i diritti civili e sessuali di ciascuno e non di approfittare di ogni passaggio di questo genere per introdurre elementi che con questo non c'entrano nulla.

Pertanto, con grande disagio, ho votato contro questa relazione.

Explicaciones de voto por escrito

Informe: Sidonia Elżbieta Jędrzejewska (A7-0312/2011)

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Aprovo este relatório, chamando a atenção para a necessária consistência e coerência das dotações atribuídas aos instrumentos da União enquanto condições indispensáveis para uma utilização eficaz e optimizada, atributos muito desejáveis num ambiente orçamental de tensão e restrição.

  Marta Andreasen (EFD), in writing. − I voted against amending budget 2011 number 4 because I oppose the non-transparent way in which the transfer is completed. The payments are taken from an unused EERP energy project budget line which is unrelated to the funding required for management of migration flows. This money should come from reserves that are set aside for this purpose. It makes the EERP energy project line look like a hidden reserve intended for other purposes and in an audit would set alarm bells ringing.

  Roberta Angelilli (PPE), per iscritto. − Signor Presidente, lo scorso 13 settembre abbiamo votato la modifica del regolamento Frontex chiedendo alla Commissione di creare un piano operativo che aumentasse l'efficacia dell'agenzia e che le conferisse un bilancio adeguato, non solo a sostegno delle risorse umane, ma anche delle attrezzature di monitoraggio e di intervento.

A distanza di pochi giorni, votiamo la proposta di risoluzione che finalmente apporta l'incremento degli stanziamenti di impegno a circa 41,1 milioni di euro per la gestione dei flussi di migranti e rifugiati, destinando questi rispettivamente all'agenzia Frontex, al Fondo per le frontiere esterne e al Fondo europeo per i rimpatri e per i rifugiati.

Plaudo ulteriormente alla proposta perché seguendo i principi di logica e coerenza nel garantire un'allocazione ottimizzata e senza sprechi dei fondi comunitari, le nuove risorse derivano dagli stanziamenti sottoutilizzati relativi alla linea "progetti energetici a sostegno della ripresa economica".

  Sophie Auconie (PPE), par écrit. – Au regard de l’actualité internationale, la gestion des flux migratoires et de réfugiés constitue un défi auquel l’Union européenne doit apporter une réponse rapide. Le projet de rapport Jędrzejewska, auquel j’ai apporté mon soutien, va dans ce sens. Les pays européens de la Méditerranée, dont la France, sont les plus exposés au problème. Aussi, dans un esprit de solidarité, l’Union européenne s’est engagée à débloquer des fonds supplémentaires à hauteur de 43,5 millions d’euros pour aider les Etats membres les plus exposés à ces flux. Ainsi, l’Agence européenne pour la gestion de la coopération opérationnelle aux frontières extérieures des États membres de l'Union européenne (Frontex) et le Fonds européen pour les réfugiés en seront les principaux bénéficiaires.

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. − Pritariau Tarybos pozicijai, kuria beveik 41,1 mln. eurų didinamas įsipareigojimų asignavimų biudžetas, skirtas migracijos ir pabėgėlių srautams valdyti (per agentūrą FRONTEX, Išorės sienų fondą, Europos grąžinimo fondą ir Europos pabėgėlių fondą). Šis didinimas yra susijęs yra ES priemonėmis ir atsaku į politinius procesus pietinio Viduržemio jūros regiono šalyse.

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), per iscritto. − Il mio voto per questa relazione è stato decisamente favorevole, considerando che essa concerne direttamente una delle questioni più rilevanti per l'attività politica della Lega Nord, ovvero la gestione dell'immigrazione clandestina.

La relazione riguarda in particolare la ridistribuzione e il rafforzamento dei fondi europei destinati alla gestione del fenomeno, tenendo anche conto dei recenti sviluppi in Nord Africa e dell'impatto che essi stanno avendo sull'UE proprio in termini di immigrazione illegale.

La relazione pone come obiettivo il rafforzamento finanziario dell'agenzia Frontex e del Fondo europeo per i rimpatri, che costituiscono gli strumenti primari a disposizione dell'UE per affrontare l'immigrazione, per un totale di 41,1 milioni di euro. La proposta interpreta quindi le esigenze e le priorità della nostra linea politica in materia di immigrazione ed è per questo che ho scelto di esprimermi positivamente.

  David Casa (PPE), in writing. − The aim of draft amending budget No 4/2011 to the general budget 2011 is twofold: 1. add a reinforcement of Budget 2011 in commitment to manage refugees and migration flows further to recent developments in Northern Africa and 2. revise the forecast of traditional own resources, VAT and GNI bases, the budgeting of the corrections of UK rebate for the years 2006, 2007 and 2010. The reinforcement of commitment appropriations for the management of refugees and migration flows is crucial as it is a form of response from the EU to the political developments in Southern Mediterranean countries.

  Νικόλαος Χουντής (GUE/NGL), γραπτώς. – Ψήφισα κατά στη συγκεκριμένη έκθεση γιατί, επί της ουσίας, πρόκειται για χρηματοδότηση μηχανισμών που συστηματικά καταπατούν τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα. Για άλλη μια φορά, υποκριτικά, υποτίθεται ότι αυξάνουμε τη χρηματοδότηση που χρειάζεται για την αντιμετώπιση των προβλημάτων των προσφύγων, των μεταναστών και των τοπικών κοινωνιών αλλά, στην πραγματικότητα, ενισχύονται στρατιωτικοί και κατασταλτικοί μηχανισμοί, ενισχύονται οι απαράδεκτες πτήσεις τσάρτερ που τσουβαλιάζουν μετανάστες και πρόσφυγες και τους ξαναστέλνουν πίσω σε εμπόλεμες περιοχές με άθλιες συνθήκες διαβίωσης. Είναι απαραίτητο να σταματήσουν η υποκρισία και οι αυταπάτες. Με φράχτες, στρατούς και τάφρους, όχι μόνο δεν έχουμε δημοκρατικά κράτη μέλη και ΕΕ, όχι μόνο καταπατούμε διεθνή κεκτημένα, συμφωνίες και ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα, αλλά δεν δίνουμε και λύση στο πρόβλημα. Η χρηματοδότηση πρέπει να έχει στόχο την αξιοπρεπή και ισότιμη διαβίωση όλων μέσω της προστασίας των δικαιωμάτων και της ενίσχυσης της κοινωνικής συνοχής. Η χρηματοδότηση πρέπει να έχει στόχους πραγματικής βοήθειας στις αναπτυσσόμενες χώρες και να συνδυάζεται με τις ευθύνες και τον διεθνή ρόλο μια ειρηνικής και δημοκρατικής εξωτερικής πολιτικής της ΕΕ γιατί, όσο δημιουργούνται εστίες πολέμου, απολυταρχίας και φτώχειας στον κόσμο, τόσο θα εγκαταλείπουν τα σπίτια τους πρόσφυγες και μετανάστες.

  Carlos Coelho (PPE), por escrito. − Com este reforço de 43,9 milhões de euros para a gestão dos fluxos migratórios e de refugiados pretende-se dotar as agências e os instrumentos de apoio existentes nesta área com os recursos necessários para poderem estar aptos a apoiar a resposta multifacetada que a UE pretende dar face aos recentes acontecimentos no Sul do Mediterrâneo. A elevada pressão migratória sentida nessa região levou à necessidade de reforçar as acções da União abrangidas pelo Fundo para as Fronteiras Externas, pelo Fundo de Regresso e pelo Fundo para os Refugiados. Deverá ser reforçado o apoio aos esforços desenvolvidos pelos Estados-Membros mais directamente implicados, de forma a poder aliviá-los da carga considerável que sobre eles recai, dando expressão ao princípio fundamental que é o da solidariedade. Deverão, igualmente, ser melhoradas as capacidades da Agência Frontex, nomeadamente para poder efectuar actividades de vigilância marítima no Mediterrâneo.

Apoio este relatório que permite clarificar as posições contraditórias do Conselho, que, por um lado, na sua leitura do projecto de orçamento da UE para 2012, propôs um corte nos fundos atribuídos à gestão dos fluxos migratórios e de refugiados e, por outro lado, aprovou o reforço de várias acções e programas a serem levados a cabo pela Frontex, bem como outros instrumentos e mecanismos nesta área.

  Marielle De Sarnez (ALDE), par écrit. – Le budget 2011 de l'UE a été augmenté à hauteur de 52,2 millions d'euros d'engagements afin de mieux gérer les flux migratoires et les flux de réfugiés. Les fonds supplémentaires seront utilisés pour aider les États membres les plus touchés par ces flux, et pour renforcer les contrôles maritimes effectués par Frontex, l'agence européenne pour la gestion de la coopération opérationnelle aux frontières extérieures. Ce financement accru découle des conséquences du Printemps arabe en termes de migrations et d'une demande des dirigeants européens. Au-delà de cette augmentation, si nous voulons vraiment aider les pays, tant de l'Union européenne que du sud de la Méditerranée, alors il nous faut élaborer, enfin, une vraie politique en matière d'immigration. C'est la seule façon de traiter la question des migrations de manière sereine et responsable.

  Edite Estrela (S&D), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente este relatório por defender a necessidade de reforçar o apoio da União Europeia à gestão dos fluxos migratórios e de refugiados. O aumento natural dos fluxos migratórios necessita de uma resposta multifacetada da UE. Tendo em conta a evolução política nos países mediterrânicos do Sul, é fundamental aumentar a dotação orçamental da Agência Frontex, do Fundo para as Fronteiras Externas, do Fundo Europeu de Regresso e do Fundo Europeu para os Refugiados.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − A presente proposta de orçamento rectificativo pretende dar resposta aos fluxos migratórios e de refugiados na sequência dos recentes desenvolvimentos no Norte de África, sendo financiada através de reafectações e/ou de fundos adicionais. Face à situação excepcional com que os Estados do Sul da Europa se viram confrontados, apoio esta proposta.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − O orçamento da União Europeia, para o ano de 2011 foi aprovado, definitivamente, no dia 15 de Dezembro de 2010. Ao longo do primeiro semestre de 2011, a UE assistiu a alterações políticas (Primavera Árabe) em vários países do Sul do Mediterrâneo onde alguns povos, com o apoio da UE, derrubaram regimes totalitários que duravam há décadas. Estes acontecimentos originaram fluxos migratórios significativos em direcção a outros países, nomeadamente do Sul da Europa. Como não tinham sido previstas estas despesas excepcionais, em 17 de Junho de 2011, a Comissão apresentou, nos termos do artigo 314.º do TFUE, o projecto de orçamento rectificativo n.º 4, aprovado pelo Conselho a 12 de Setembro de 2011. Este projecto contempla um reforço de 41,1 milhões de euros (dotações de autorização e dotações de pagamento) para os seguintes Fundos: Fronteiras Externas, Europeu de Regresso e Europeu para os Refugiados, em ordem ao financiamento de acções transnacionais em situações de emergência, a que acresce um reforço de 54 milhões de euros para a Agência Frontex (vigilância marítima). Porque a UE tem de honrar os seus compromissos, sobretudo quando estão em causa os direitos humanos, congratulo-me com a aprovação deste projecto de orçamento rectificativo.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − O orçamento rectificativo hoje votado traduz-se num reforço orçamental para a rubrica que corresponde à gestão dos fluxos migratórios e de refugiados, reforçando e/ou estendendo operações de vigilância marítima no Mediterrâneo, referidas como necessárias para cobrir as necessidades suplementares decorrentes do aumento excepcional e imprevisto dos fluxos migratórios provenientes da África do Norte.

Parte substancial do montante agora mobilizado é direccionado para despesas operacionais da Frontex – 30 milhões de euros em autorizações –, a agência responsável pela implementação da política repressiva, de cariz securitário, da União Europeia no que diz respeito à imigração. Política que escamoteia as causas reais da imigração. Não refere o relatório, mas deveria fazê-lo, que o aumento excepcional e imprevisto dos fluxos migratórios provenientes da África do Norte é indissociável das agressões militares da NATO e de vários países da UE na região, semeando a guerra, a destruição e o caos.

Numa altura em que se aprofunda a crise económica e social na UE, é significativo e simbólico que este reforço do suporte à Europa fortaleza provenha de verbas não utilizadas do Plano de Relançamento da Economia Europeia.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Este orçamento rectificativo hoje votado traduz-se num reforço orçamental para a rubrica que corresponde à gestão dos fluxos migratórios e de refugiados, reforçando e/ou estendendo operações de vigilância marítima no Mediterrâneo, referidas como necessárias para cobrir as necessidades suplementares decorrentes do aumento excepcional e imprevisto dos fluxos migratórios provenientes da África do Norte.

Parte substancial do montante agora mobilizado é direccionado para despesas operacionais da Frontex – 30 milhões de euros em autorizações –, a agência responsável pela implementação da política repressiva, de cariz securitário, da União Europeia no que diz respeito à imigração, escamoteando as causas reais da imigração. Por isso, o relatório não refere, mas deveria fazê-lo, que o aumento excepcional e imprevisto dos fluxos migratórios provenientes da África do Norte é indissociável das agressões militares da NATO e de vários países da UE na região, semeando a guerra, a destruição e o caos.

Numa altura em que se aprofunda a crise económica e social na UE, é significativo e simbólico que este reforço do suporte à Europa fortaleza provenha de verbas não utilizadas do Plano de Relançamento da Economia Europeia.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne. − Najnovší vývoj v južnom Stredomorí spôsobuje vysoké migračné tlaky v tomto regióne. V súlade so závermi Európskej rady z marca 2011 navrhované posilnenie opatrení EÚ v rámci Fondu pre vonkajšie hranice, Európskeho fondu pre návrat a Európskeho fondu pre utečencov umožní podporiť úsilie bezprostredne najviac dotknutých členských štátov, ako aj posilniť kapacity agentúry Frontex na vykonávanie námorného dohľadu v Stredomorí. V základných aktoch týkajúcich sa Fondu pre vonkajšie hranice, Európskeho fondu pre návrat a Európskeho fondu pre utečencov sa predpokladá, že v rámci ich celkového finančného balíka sa istý percentuálny podiel vyčlení na takzvané „opatrenia Spoločenstva“ s určením na financovanie nadnárodných opatrení alebo opatrení, ktoré sú v záujme Spoločenstva ako celku, najmä s cieľom zvládnuť núdzové situácie, ktoré si vyžadujú urýchlené konanie. Mimoriadny rozsah súčasného diania v južnom Stredomorí znamená pre dotknuté členské štáty mimoriadnu záťaž a práve preto Komisia navrhla zvýšiť prídel určený na opatrenia Spoločenstva na maximálny objem stanovený v príslušných základných aktoch. Táto maximalizácia prídelu si vyžaduje zvýšenie rozpočtových prostriedkov pre všetky tri uvedené fondy a prostriedky je potrebné uvoľniť, predovšetkým pre Taliansko, Grécko, Maltu a Cyprus, v snahe uľahčiť zvládnutie vzniknutej situácie.

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), raštu. − Pritariau dokumentui, kadangi tai yra 2011 m. biudžeto įsipareigojimų pagal 3a išlaidų kategoriją didinimas siekiant valdyti pabėgėlių ir migracijos srautus po naujausių pokyčių Šiaurės Afrikoje. Tai finansuojama perskirstant lėšas ir (arba) skiriant papildomų lėšų įsipareigojimams ir visiškai perskirstant mokėjimus.

  Vladimír Maňka (S&D), písomne. − Zvýšenie viazaných rozpočtových prostriedkov na riadenie migračných tokov a tokov utečencov (prostredníctvom agentúry Frontex, Fondu pre vonkajšie hranice, Európskeho fondu pre návrat a Európskeho fondu pre utečencov) je súčasťou odozvy EÚ na politický vývoj v krajinách južného Stredozemia a v nadväznosti na vývoj v severnej Afrike. Sprievodné zvýšenie platobných rozpočtových prostriedkov je umožnené presunmi z nedostatočne čerpaných platobných rozpočtových prostriedkov.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I voted for this proposal for the reinforcement of commitment appropriations by nearly EUR 41.1 million for the management of migration and refugee flows (through the Frontex Agency, the External Borders Fund, the European Return Fund and the European Refugee Fund) as part of a multiform response of the EU to the political developments in Southern Mediterranean countries.

  Véronique Mathieu (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai voté pour le rapport sur la position du Conseil sur le projet de budget rectificatif. Le rapport approuve la position du Conseil. Cette modification du budget permet d'allouer plus de ressources à Frontex, au fonds pour les frontières extérieures, au fonds européen pour le retour et au fonds européen pour les réfugiés. Frontex remplit un rôle fondamental et il convient de lui donner les moyens de remplir ses missions. L'importance de ces divers fonds ne doit pas non plus être négligée. Cette modification permet de tenir compte des récents événements en Afrique du Nord et de gérer de manière appropriée les flux migratoires et de réfugiés en résultant. Les fonds affectés proviennent du poste consacré aux réseaux énergétiques relevant du plan européen pour la relance économique, qui a été sous-exécuté.

  Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – La proposition de modification budgétaire que la Commission nous propose de valider mélange honteusement le financement de la chasse aux immigrés et celui de l'accueil des réfugiés. Il m'est impossible de voter contre, voulant le second volet. Il m'est impossible de voter pour, refusant le premier volet. Je suis contraint de m'abstenir.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − Este orçamento rectificativo tem por objectivo encontrar fundos para responder aos fluxos migratórios e de refugiados na sequência dos recentes desenvolvimentos no Norte de África. Esta situação excepcional pode/deve ser financiada através de reafectações e/ou de fundos adicionais.

  Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − He votado en contra de este informe porque lo que propone es aumentar en 41,1 millones de euros el presupuesto para Frontex. Desde mi grupo parlamentario hemos sido siempre críticos con la política migratoria de la UE. Frontex es uno de los instrumentos principales de esta Europa fortaleza basada en la persecución e incluso la criminalización de los inmigrantes en lugar de trabajar hacia la integración de los mismos. Por este motivo, aumentar el presupuesto a la agencia Frontex supone elevar muros más altos para evitar la entrada de inmigrantes. En ningún caso podemos estar a favor de este tipo de políticas, por lo que he votado en contra.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − After studying the report it became clear that the European Parliament in its resolution approves the position of the Council on the strengthening of some budgetary programmes and a decrease in financial appropriations for the 2012 financial year. I support these changes.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. − Die anhaltenden Asylströme, vor allem auch der verstärkte Andrang aus Nordafrika, sorgen für eine wahre Explosion der Asylkosten. Das Gros der Mitgliedsstaaten ist nicht einmal in der Lage ausreichend auszuführen, wie hoch die anfallenden tatsächlichen Kosten sind. Die geplante Umverteilung nicht ausgeschöpfter Zahlungsermächtigungen bedeutet de facto nichts anderes, als dass den EU-Staaten aus dem EU-Budget weniger zurückerstattet wird. Es ist inakzeptabel, dass die Mitgliedsstaaten den Rotstift bei den Sozialleistungen für die eigenen Bürger ansetzen, auf EU-Ebene jedoch die Verpflichtungsermächtigungen für die Migration und Flüchtlingsströme ansteigen und gleichzeitig bei Kriminalitätsprävention und Kriminalitätsbekämpfung gespart werden soll, und das Ganze noch dazu via Mittel, die zulasten des Konjunkturprogramms für Energienetze umgeschichtet werden sollen. Ich lehne dieses Vorhaben ab.

  Claudio Morganti (EFD), per iscritto. − Questa relazione mi sembra di estrema puntualità e totalmente condivisibile. È giusto che l'Unione europea possa modificare l'utilizzo dei suoi stanziamenti, soprattutto per far fronte alla pressante emergenza che riguarda i paesi del Nord Africa e che ha pesanti ripercussioni, principalmente per le coste ed il territorio italiano.

Sono necessari adeguati finanziamenti perché l'Europa possa e debba fare la sua parte a salvaguardia dei confini meridionali del continente. Alla luce della ribadita necessità di fondi, risulta ancora più fuori luogo la recente presa di posizione del Consiglio, che propone parecchi tagli in ambito di tutela e difesa dei confini esterni per il prossimo bilancio 2012.

  Alfredo Pallone (PPE), per iscritto. − Gentili colleghi, per la risoluzione appena votata riguardo al rafforzamento del progetto di bilancio per la gestione dei flussi di migranti e rifugiati in seguito a quello che sta succedendo in Nord Africa non potete che trovarmi favorevole. Appunto perché stiamo vivendo un momento dove questo è uno dei problemi all'ordine del giorno, c'è l`assoluta urgenza di un intervento che sia forte e risolutivo, che veda unita tutta l'Europa nel suo sviluppo e appoggio e allontani qualsiasi altro approccio. E' opportuno, in futuro, evitare situazioni come quelle avvenute in Italia qualche mese fa, dove il paese si è trovato a dover fronteggiare una situazione fuori controllo, con un'isola come quella di Lampedusa invasa da uomini, donne e bambini i quali fuggivano da una realtà catastrofica e di guerra. In quei giorni, il concetto di solidarietà europea ha vacillato, quando invece deve essere una delle nostre priorità. Un'azione comune, concertata, con risorse dell'Unione europea per gestire i flussi migratori, non sarà di beneficio solo per le regioni costiere del Mediterraneo, ma sarà uno strumento efficace a beneficio di tutti gli Stati membri

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − Aprovei o presente relatório sobre uma alteração ao orçamento da União com vista a um reforço das dotações para autorizações inscritas na sub-rubrica 3a do orçamento de 2011 a fim de gerir os fluxos migratórios e de refugiados na sequência dos recentes desenvolvimentos no Norte de África e a uma revisão da previsão de recursos próprios tradicionais, das bases IVA e RNB e das correcções do RU relativas aos exercícios de 2006, 2007 e 2010. Tais alterações foram votadas com uma ampla maioria em sede da Comissão dos Orçamentos.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), por escrito. − O presente projecto de orçamento rectificativo visa, por um lado, reforçar as dotações para autorizações destinadas à gestão dos fluxos migratórios e de refugiados advindos do Norte de África (questão que ganhou renovado relevo, atendendo aos recentes acontecimentos políticos), e, por outro, rever uma série de rubricas relativas à contribuição dos Estados-Membros para o orçamento comum. Atendendo à tempestividade das alterações propostas, sem deixar de reforçar, muito embora, a necessidade de se adoptar uma linha de orientação política clara e previsível, votei em sentido favorável.

  Crescenzio Rivellini (PPE), per iscritto. − Mi congratulo per l'ottimo lavoro svolto dalla collega Jędrzejewska.

L'approvazione della modifica al bilancio per stanziare 43,9 milioni di euro extra per la gestione dei flussi di migranti e rifugiati dimostra che il Parlamento europeo è unito quando si tratta degli sviluppi politici nei paesi del sud del Mediterraneo.

I fondi aggiuntivi saranno utilizzati per aiutare gli Stati membri più colpiti dai flussi e per migliorare il pattugliamento dei mari da parte dall'agenzia europea per le frontiere Frontex, che riceverà fondi extra per 24 milioni di euro. Il resto andrà al Fondo europeo per i rifugiati (12,2 milioni di euro), al Fondo per le frontiere esterne (4,9 milioni di euro) e al Fondo europeo per i rimpatri (2,8 milioni di euro).

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. − Against. We firmly oppose the ever increasing funding for Frontex.

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho votato a favore di questo testo perché ritengo necessario stanziare maggiori risorse per far fronte all'eccezionale flusso di migranti e rifugiati provocato dai recenti eventi nei paesi del Sud del Mediterraneo.

In particolar modo concordo che questi fondi aggiuntivi vengano utilizzati per aiutare gli Stati membri più colpiti da questo fenomeno, soprattutto per il pattugliamento dei mari da parte dall'Agenzia europea per la gestione delle frontiere esterne Frontex.

  Rafał Trzaskowski (PPE), in writing. − This report grants additional funds for the management of migration and refugee flows via agencies such as Frontex. The European Parliament has shown that it is united when it comes to the political developments in Southern Mediterranean countries.

  Marie-Christine Vergiat (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – À la suite des révolutions démocratiques des pays arabes, l'Union a décidé d'augmenter la dotation de son budget pour la gestion des flux migratoires et des réfugiés (Rubrique 3a) pour 2011.

Par cette mesure, l'Union prend une de ses premières décisions concrètes en réponse aux soulèvements des pays arabes alors même que son soutien, dont on connaît le passé, à ceux-ci a été tardif et timoré, hors aide humanitaire. Les promesses d'aides financières, notamment à la Tunisie, sont longues à se concrétiser et restent pour l'essentiel de beaux discours.

Cette décision est d'autant plus contestable que cette augmentation est prélevée sur le budget "Réseaux énergétiques du plan européen pour la relance économique", qui aurait pu être utilisé autrement.

Elle porte sur le renforcement de Frontex et donc le contrôle aux frontières et l'aide aux réfugiés, dont on sait qu'elle a du mal à se concrétiser. Elle est révélatrice des contradictions de l'Union. J'ai donc préféré m'abstenir.

Informe: Barbara Matera (A7-0309/2011)

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau už finansinės pagalbos Danijai skyrimą. Europos prisitaikymo prie globalizacijos padarinių fondas įsteigtas siekiant teikti papildomą pagalbą darbuotojams, nukentėjusiems nuo didelių pasaulio prekybos sistemos struktūrinių pokyčių. Danija kreipėsi pagalbos dėl 813 atleidimo atvejų 6 įmonėse, kurios vykdo veiklą mašinų ir įrangos gamybos srityse. Ši paraiška atitinka finansinei paramai taikomus reikalavimus, todėl pritariu 3 944 606 EUR sumos skyrimui.

  Regina Bastos (PPE), por escrito. − O Fundo Europeu de Ajustamento à Globalização (FEG) foi criado em 2006 para prestar assistência adicional aos trabalhadores afectados pelas consequências de mudanças importantes na estrutura do comércio internacional e para ajudar à sua reintegração no mercado de trabalho. A partir 1 de Maio de 2009, o âmbito de aplicação do FEG foi alargado passando a incluir o apoio a trabalhadores despedidos em consequência directa da crise económica, financeira e social. Numa altura em que nos vemos confrontados com esta grave crise, de que se destaca o aumento do desemprego como uma das principais consequências, a UE deverá utilizar todos os meios ao seu alcance para reagir, nomeadamente no que se refere aos apoios a prestar às pessoas que ficaram sem emprego de um dia para o outro. Assim, apoiei o presente relatório que diz respeito à mobilização de 3.944.606 EUR do FEG a favor da Dinamarca com o objectivo de apoiar os trabalhadores despedidos por seis empresas da divisão 28 Fabrico de máquinas e equipamentos, na região de Midtjylland.

  John Bufton (EFD), in writing. − Although I have great sympathy for redundant workers wherever they are in the world, I believe that UK taxpayers’ money, which provides a significant contribution to the EU and thus Global Adjustment Fund budget, is better concentrated on providing jobs for unemployed workers in the UK. Unemployment in the UK continues to rise to unexpected levels. Many of our heavy industries have shut down and our workforce is inundated with EU migrants. It is a slap in the face to hardworking Brits who have lost their jobs in industries that have relocated to other EU countries under EU law to then find that their contributions as taxpayers are being spent by the EU in assisting unemployed people in Denmark. Increasingly the UK is becoming a hub for people who have fled their own EU Member States to try to earn more money or claim benefits in the UK, which they often send large proportions of back home rather than inject it into the local economy. As unemployment continues to rise in the UK, particularly blighting some of the former mining towns in Wales, I cannot justify assenting to aid newly unemployed workers abroad when long-term unemployed people continue to suffer in communities in my constituency.

  David Casa (PPE), in writing. − The European Union has set up the appropriate legislative and budgetary instruments to provide additional support to workers who are suffering from the consequences of major structural changes in world trade patterns and to assist their reintegration into the labour market. This proposal requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements in order to accelerate the mobilisation of the EGF. I support the rapporteur in this initiative, in hopes for greater efficiency, transparency, and visibility of the Fund.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − Muitas indústrias europeias conheceram, nos últimos anos, dificuldades decorrentes da globalização, agravadas pela crise económico-financeira que ameaça boa parte dos Estados do mundo. No caso em apreço, seis empresas dinamarquesas de manufactura de maquinaria e equipamento da região de Midtjylland despediram 813 trabalhadores elegíveis para receberem apoio do Fundo Europeu de Ajustamento à Globalização. Lamento que também estes trabalhadores sofram com o impacto da recente mudança de paradigma no comércio internacional e com a presente crise e faço votos de que a economia europeia possa encontrar um novo caminho para a prosperidade.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − A União Europeia, ao verificar as consequências sociais muito graves decorrentes da actual crise económica e financeira, criou o Fundo Europeu de Ajustamento à Globalização (FEG) para prestar um apoio complementar aos trabalhadores atingidos pelas mudanças estruturais no comércio mundial. O presente relatório debruça-se sobre uma proposta de Decisão do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho relativa à mobilização de 3.944.606 EUR do FEG a fim de apoiar a reintegração de trabalhadores dinamarqueses despedidos em consequência da actual crise económica e financeira. Esta candidatura, a décima quarta a ser examinada no âmbito do Orçamento da UE para 2011, foi apresentada pela Dinamarca em 11 de Maio de 2010 e respeita a 813 despedimentos ocorridos em 6 empresas da Divisão 28 da NACE Rev. 2 (Fabrico de máquinas e equipamento), na região de Midtjylland (DK04), na Dinamarca. Tendo em conta que se trata de um instrumento orçamental específico, e que o montante solicitado tem enquadramento legal e está de acordo com a proposta de Decisão relativa à mobilização do FEG a favor da Dinamarca, voto favoravelmente esta proposta e espero que ela contribua para minorar as dificuldades económicas dos habitantes daquela região e relançar a economia local.

  Marian Harkin (ALDE), in writing. − I support this application from Denmark to access Globalisation Funds of EUR 3.9 million from the redundant workers in Midtjylland Machinery. This submission was based on Article 2b and once again shows the need to ensure the continuation of the derogation on the crisis. It is crucial that the Council can reach agreement on this and allow redundant workers to access personalised packages that will give them an opportunity to find their way back to employment.

  Jim Higgins (PPE), i scríbhinn. − Vótáil mé ar son na tuarascála maidir leis an gCiste Eorpach um Choigeartú don Domhandú chun tacaíocht a thabhairt do mhuintir na Danmhairge. Le domhandú margaí tá sé tábhachtach go mbeadh an ciste ar fáil do mhuintir na háite seo. In Éirinn, táim sásta leis an EUR 35 milliún atá ar fail anois ón gCoimisiún dóibh siúd a bhí fostaithe sa tionscal togála. Caithfimid athoiliúint a chur ar fáil do na daoine seo.

San fhadtéarma ó thaobh cúrsaí airgid de, tá sé níos saoire don tsochaí an t-airgead seo a chur ar fáil anois, chun comhlachtaí nua a mhealladh níos sciobtha agus fostaíocht a chur ar fáil. Táim sásta go bhfuil na feisirí sa Teach seo ag léiriú a gcuid tuisceana leis an vóta seo ar son an togra le haghaidh cinnidh ó Pharlaimint na hEorpa agus ón gComhairle maidir leis an gCiste Eorpach um Choigeartú don Domhandú a úsáid.

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), raštu. − Pritariau dokumentui, kadangi Europos prisitaikymo prie globalizacijos padarinių fondas įsteigtas siekiant teikti papildomą pagalbą darbuotojams, nukentėjusiems nuo didelių pasaulio prekybos sistemos struktūrinių pokyčių. 2010 m. gegužės 11 d. Danija pateikė paraišką mobilizuoti EGF lėšas dėl darbuotojų atleidimo (813 darbuotojų) iš šešių įmonių, vykdančių (mašinų ir įrangos gamyba) veiklą Vidurio Jutlandijos regione. Vienas iš Komisijos vertinimo kriterijų – atleidimų ir didelių struktūrinių pasaulio prekybos pokyčių ar finansų krizės sąsaja. Šiuo konkrečiu atveju kalbama apie rimtą globalizacijos sukeltų struktūrinių pokyčių poveikį vėjo turbinų gamybos pramonei ES. Be to, pasak Danijos valdžios institucijų, sparčiai plečiantis pasauliniam vėjo energijos sektoriui nebuvo galima numatyti, kad užimtumas Vidurio Jutlandijoje sumažės. Į suderintą individualioms reikmėms pritaikytų paslaugų rinkinį, kurį ketinama finansuoti, įskaitant jo suderinamumą su struktūrinių fondų lėšomis finansuojamais veiksmais, įtrauktos aiškinamosios ir perorientavimo priemonės (siekiant išsiaiškinti darbuotojų tikslus ir planus), papildoma parama tolesniam švietimui ir lavinimui, naujovių laboratorija (čia ypatingas dėmesys bus skiriamas darbuotojų įgūdžių tobulinimui, kad jie būtų parengti ekologiškomis technologijomis grindžiamam pavyzdiniam darbui jau veikiančiose įmonėse), orientavimo programa, konsultacijos kvalifikacijų klausimais, išmokos, skiriamos ieškant darbo, ir judumo išmokos.

  Vladimír Maňka (S&D), písomne. − Európsky fond na prispôsobenie sa globalizácii bol zriadený s cieľom poskytovať dodatočnú podporu pracovníkom postihnutým dôsledkami veľkých štrukturálnych zmien vo svetovom obchode. Žiadosť sa týka 813 pracovníkov (pričom pomoc sa má poskytnúť 325 z nich) prepustených zo šiestich podnikov. Znižovanie zamestnanosti v regióne Midtjylland sa nedalo predvídať z dôvodu rýchleho rozvoja celosvetového odvetvia veternej energie. Koordinovaný balík personalizovaných služieb, ktorý sa má financovať, vrátane jeho kompatibility s opatreniami financovanými zo štrukturálnych fondov zahŕňa opatrenia na vyjasnenie a presmerovanie (na stanovenie cieľov a plánov pracovníkov), dodatočnú podporu ďalšieho vzdelávania a odbornej prípravy, inovačné laboratórium (zameranie na zvýšenie schopností pracovníkov, ktoré im umožní podieľať sa na vývoji prototypov v odvetví čistej technológie v súčasných spoločnostiach), odborné vedenie, horúcu linku pre kvalifikácie, príspevky na hľadanie zamestnania a príspevky na mobilitu.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I support this proposal which meets the criteria for the mobalisation of the Globalisation Adjustment Fund. One of the criteria for the Commission’s assessment was the evaluation of the link between the redundancies and major structural changes in world trade patterns or the financial crisis, which in this particular case is related to the serious effect of the structural changes brought about by globalisation on the wind turbine manufacturing industry in the EU.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − A UE é um espaço de solidariedade e nela se enquadra o Fundo Europeu de Ajustamento à Globalização. Estes apoios são fundamentais para o auxílio aos desempregados e às vítimas das deslocalizações que se verificam num contexto globalizado. É cada vez maior o número de empresas que se deslocalizam, aproveitando os reduzidos preços do factor trabalho, praticados em vários países, nomeadamente na China e na Índia, com efeitos nocivos para os países que respeitam os direitos dos trabalhadores. O FEG destina-se a ajudar os trabalhadores vítimas da deslocalização de empresas, e é fundamental para facilitar o acesso a um novo emprego. O FEG já foi, no passado, utilizado por outros países da UE, cabendo agora dar esse auxílio à Dinamarca, que apresentou um pedido de assistência relativamente a 813 casos de despedimento (325 dos quais são potenciais beneficiários de assistência) que ocorreram em seis empresas da Divisão 28 («Fabrico de máquinas e equipamento») da NACE Rev. 2 na região NUTS II da Midtjylland (DK04).

  Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − He votado a favor de este informe para destinar fondos provinentes del Fondo Europeo para la Adaptación a la Globalización (FEAG) en concreto para los 325 despidos que se han producido en seis empresas cuya actividad se desarrollaba en el marco de la división 28 («Fabricación de maquinaria y equipo») en Dinamarca. El FEAG proporciona ayuda adicional a los trabajadores que sufren las consecuencias de grandes cambios estructurales en los patrones del comercio mundial, así como para ayudarles a reintegrarse al mercado de trabajo. Dinamarca ha presentado solicitud de fondos del FEAG para despidos del sector de la automoción que se ajustan al reglamento del propio Fondo. Ahora debe garantizarse que el FEAG apoye la reintegración al mercado laboral de los trabajadores despedidos, a pesar de que la asistencia del FEAG no debe sustituir a las acciones que sean responsabilidad de las empresas en virtud de la legislación nacional o de convenios colectivos, ni a las medidas de reestructuración de empresas o sectores.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − In order to support the reintegration into the labour market of workers made redundant due to the global financial and economic crisis it is offered to mobilise a total amount of EUR 3 944 606 from the European Globalisation Fund for Denmark. It concerns 813 redundancies, of which 325 are targeted for assistance, in six enterprises during the nine-month reference period from 6 June 2009 to 6 March 2010. I support the mobilisation of the European Globalisation Fund.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − O Fundo Europeu de Ajustamento à Globalização foi criado para prestar um apoio complementar a trabalhadores atingidos pelas consequências de mudanças estruturais importantes dos padrões do comércio mundial. Em 11 Julho 2011, a Comissão adoptou uma nova proposta de decisão relativa à mobilização do FEG a favor da Dinamarca, a fim de apoiar a reintegração no mercado de trabalho de trabalhadores despedidos em consequência da crise económica e financeira mundial. Trata-se da décima quarta candidatura a ser examinada no âmbito do orçamento de 2011 e refere-se à mobilização de um montante total de 3 944 606 EUR do FEG a favor de 813 casos de despedimento (325 dos quais são potenciais beneficiários de assistência) que ocorreram em 6 empresas na região da Midtjylland, na Dinamarca, de nível NUTS II, durante o período de referência de nove meses, de 6 de Junho 2009 a 1 de Março 2010. Tendo sido feita uma análise do processo por todas as partes envolvidas, designadamente a Comissão Europeia, e estando a Comissão de Emprego e o Grupo de Trabalho sobre o FEG a favor da mobilização do Fundo a favor da Dinamarca, votei favoravelmente o presente relatório.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), por escrito. − O pedido apresentado pela Dinamarca para intervenção do Fundo Europeu de Ajustamento à Globalização (FEG) diz respeito a 813 casos de despedimento (325 dos quais são potenciais beneficiários de assistência) ocorridos em seis empresas da Divisão 28 da NACE Rev. 2 Fabrico de máquinas e equipamento, na região de nível NUTS II Midtjylland. De acordo com a avaliação da Comissão, esta candidatura preenche todos os critérios de elegibilidade definidos legalmente. Com efeito, por força do Regulamento (CE) n.° 546/2009 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 18 de Junho de 2009, que alterou o Regulamento (CE) n.º 1927/2006 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho de 20 de Dezembro de 2006 que institui o Fundo Europeu de Ajustamento à Globalização, o âmbito de aplicação do FEG foi temporariamente alargado, passando a estar prevista a intervenção do FEG em situações como esta em que, como consequência directa da crise económica e financeira mundial, se verifiquem "pelo menos 500 despedimentos num período de nove meses, em particular em pequenas ou médias empresas, numa divisão de nível 2 da NACE, numa região ou em duas regiões contíguas ao nível NUTS II". Votei, por isso, favoravelmente esta resolução, na expectativa de que a assistência aos trabalhadores despedidos possa ser disponibilizada de forma célere e eficiente.

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. − O Regulamento (CE) n.° 1927/2006 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 20 de Dezembro de 2006, instituiu o Fundo Europeu de Ajustamento à Globalização (FEG) com o objectivo de apoiar os trabalhadores que perdem os seus postos de trabalho devido a alterações estruturais no contexto da economia global. Concordo com o relatório em causa devido ao facto de ser sensível aos 813 casos de despedimento ocorridos em 6 empresas da área do fabrico de máquinas e equipamento, localizadas na região dinamarquesa de Midtjylland. Esta situação ocorreu devido à rápida expansão do sector da energia eólica e ao facto de a produção de turbinas eólicas ser realizada à escala global e não apenas na União Europeia. O montante de 3.944.606 EUR destina-se a financiar acções de assistência profissional a trabalhadores individuais, não sendo utilizado para reestruturar a empresa ou substituir as medidas que são da inteira responsabilidade da empresa por força da legislação nacional ou de convenções colectivas. Por fim, entendo que devem ser acelerados todos os procedimentos, por forma a que os trabalhadores despedidos possam ter rapidamente acesso a uma formação profissional que lhes permita uma rápida e eficaz reintegração no mercado de trabalho.

Informe: Barbara Matera (A7-0311/2011)

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau už finansinės pagalbos Vokietijai skyrimą. Europos prisitaikymo prie globalizacijos padarinių fondas įsteigtas siekiant teikti papildomą pagalbą darbuotojams, nukentėjusiems nuo didelių pasaulio prekybos sistemos struktūrinių pokyčių. Vokietija kreipėsi pagalbos dėl 778 atleidimo atvejų 5 įmonėse, kurios vykdo veiklą variklinių transporto priemonių, priekabų ir puspriekabių gamybos srityse. Ši paraiška atitinka finansinei paramai taikomus reikalavimus, todėl pritariu 4 347 868 EUR sumos skyrimui.