Dichiarazioni di voto orali

- Relazione: Miguel Angel Martínez Martínez (A6-0201/2009)

  David Sumberg (PPE-DE). - Mr President, I am grateful to you for calling me. I supported this report but, as I shall be leaving this Parliament in the coming elections, I want to use this as a final opportunity to underline the very powerful message that the President of the Czech Republic, the President-in-Office, recently gave to this Parliament: ‘We now seek a new people’s mandate’. The truth is, however, that the people are not really represented in this Chamber. As the President-in-Office said, there is no opposition here to the European project.

The people – the men and women in our constituencies, particularly in Britain – do not want a European Constitution, they do not want a treaty imposed on them. What they want is the right to vote and I hope, sooner rather than later, they will be given that opportunity.

− Relazione: Dimitrios Papadimoulis (A6-0208/2009)

  Richard Corbett (PSE). - Mr President, I welcome the adoption of this report. My group and I voted in favour. This is a very important signal that Parliament has sent. We must now, however, follow it up.

- Relazione: Marie Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou (A6-0120/2009)

  Ewa Tomaszewska (UEN). - Panie Przewodniczący! Patologiczne zachowanie pracodawców wypycha pracowników na samozatrudnienie, również pracowników będących kierowcami, świadczącymi usługi transportowe. Pracodawcy chcą tu zaoszczędzić na ubezpieczeniach społecznych i zyskać większą elastyczność, ale sprowadza nas to do sytuacji konieczności głosowania pod presją patologii.

Dlatego trzeba było odrzucić to sprawozdanie, ponieważ skala tej patologii jest nadmierna. Jej istnienie zagraża nie tylko higienie pracy pracowników, ale przede wszystkim zagraża bezpieczeństwu ruchu drogowego i może wpływać praktycznie na każdego z nas, na sytuację każdego z nas, kto znajdzie się na jezdni, czy to w samochodzie, czy jako pieszy przekraczając jezdnię. To jest wyraźny powód do tego, żeby tym problemem zająć się bardzo poważnie i żeby do niego wrócić, ponieważ zaproponowane rozwiązanie nie dawało szansy wyjścia z tej sytuacji.

- Relazione: Diana Wallis (A6-0118/2009)

  Michl Ebner (PPE-DE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, per dichiarare che ho votato in favore del rapporto nonostante il fatto che i nostri due emendamenti non sono stati accettati.

Credo che sarebbe stato molto opportuno prevedere e contribuire affinché gli Inuit potessero avere pace e tranquillità per quanto riguarda il loro modo di vita, il loro modo di vivere, il loro modo di cacciare e anche un rispetto maggiore per quanto riguarda i programmi LEADER della stessa Unione europea per i paesi scandinavi per quanto riguarda la caccia alle foche. E poi vorrei cogliere l'occasione di dire che quello che succede in Canada al di fuori degli Inuit non è una caccia come la intendiamo noi, ma è una macellazione di animali, non una caccia nel vero senso proprio, per cui credo che le due cose devono essere distinte, comunque poi siano le posizioni, e credo che questa tematica poteva essere meglio trattata in un periodo post- e non pre-elettorale come questo.

  Zuzana Roithová (PPE-DE). - Pane předsedo, já jsem také s radostí přivítala, že se Evropský parlament svým zákazem na dovoz výrobků z tuleňů do Evropské unie připojil ke Spojeným státům a také k Rusku. Jsem přesvědčena, že tím jasně dáváme najevo, že kanadská vláda bude muset změnit metody, jakými kontroluje dodržování zákona, pokud jde o humánní zacházení při lovu tuleňů s těmito zvířaty. Přitom jsem ovšem přesvědčena, že i náš návrh umožňuje, aby tradiční obyvatelé jak v Evropě, tak mimo Evropskou unii mohli dál provádět odlov tuleňů podle svých tradičních pravidel. Všem děkuji, a zejména českému předsednictví, že se podařilo mezi Parlamentem a Radou toho 24. dubna dojednat kompromis, který jsme mohli dnes odhlasovat.

  Richard Corbett (PSE). - Mr President, I am absolutely delighted that this report has been adopted by such an overwhelming majority and we can look forward to a ban on the import of seal products into the European Union.

I must say that I was saddened to see that our rapporteur, the Liberal Democrat Diana Wallis, was not fully in favour of this course of action. As rapporteur, she should have represented the views of the committee, where there was a very clear majority, and not sought in a number of ways to overturn what was clearly the will of a very large majority in this House. Nonetheless, I am glad that Parliament has shown such clear determination by such a clear majority to settle the issue in the way that we have now decided.

  Daniel Hannan (NI). - Mr President, this report presented me with something of a dilemma. There is something not strictly rational about singling out seals for special treatment. They are not an endangered species – even the WWF says so. We do not get anything like the clamour about hunting seals on behalf of wasps or woodlice or wolverines or worms.

Then again, democracy is not strictly rational. People are not always calculating machines. It may be, as evolutionary biologists would argue, that it is the childlike features of the baby seal – its large eyes and so on – that on a deep genetic level give us a predisposition towards empathy with them. I do not know. The point is that you open a dangerous door if you say that the voters are wrong simply because their objection to seal hunting is aesthetic rather than rational or ethical. Once you have started down that road, it is a short step to saying that they are wrong to be against the European Constitution or the Lisbon Treaty or whatever.

So, after a lot of thinking, I have reached this view about this report: because it is obviously such a sensitive and important issue for a number of our voters, it should not be decided at EU level at all, but should rather be determined properly through the national, democratic mechanisms and procedures of every Member State.

  Neena Gill (PSE). - Mr President, I rise with pride that this House voted for this report with an overwhelming majority. I voted for this report because I am pleased that we are making a strong statement, without loopholes, on the trade in seal products in the EU.

Many people in my constituency contacted us – and millions have got involved in this – to say that this was the most disgusting and cruelly-deployed killing of lovely creatures. I know some may say this is just because they are attractive, but when one sees videos of the methods used one realises that commercial seal slaughter, in particular, is unnecessary because many alternatives are available.

I am very pleased that we have voted in such large numbers to stop this cruel trade.

  Peter Skinner (PSE). - Mr President, this ban is great progress and represents a true victory for campaigners across the South East of England particularly – as you could imagine – and across the European Union, many of whom have written to us in the House to demand the end of this cruel trade.

The fact that a Labour chair of committee led this campaign, in the face of intense lobbying by the perpetrators of this cruel and obscene trade, is crucial in realising its success. It was not the watered-down original – as my colleague, Richard Corbett pointed out – but, after critical amendments were proposed by Arlene McCarthy, the ban was voted through in the committee and now in Parliament.

I was intrigued just now to hear Mr Hannan from the Conservative Party suggesting this should be a matter of national discussion and democracy. If we were to rely upon that particular route, only eight countries would be signing up to this particular ban, as opposed to the 27 by voting it through the European Parliament. It shows that trade and animal welfare are compatible and we should rejoice in that.

  Cristiana Muscardini (UEN). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, (…) della relazione Wallis costituisce un passo avanti per la difesa generale dei diritti degli animali, limitando notevolmente l'importazione nel territorio dell'Unione dei prodotti derivati dalla foca.

L'Unione ha fatto in questo campo una scelta di civiltà e speriamo che altri paesi la seguano, anche se noi avremmo preferito che il testo della Commissione fosse quello presentato sul mercato interno, che con molta chiarezza limitava le possibili eccezioni alla commercializzazione di tali prodotti solo in dipendenza della necessità di sussistenza delle popolazioni Inuit, mentre nuove eccezioni potranno aprire, se non controllate adeguatamente dalle autorità doganali di frontiera, varchi pericolosi per eludere questo provvedimento che sancisce, al termine di una lunga battaglia, l'inutilità e la crudeltà di certe pratiche dell'uomo che non hanno più il diritto di offendere le nostre coscienze.

Spero che il passo di oggi non resti isolato, che si possa riconsiderare anche con più forza di impedire che vengano da noi importati prodotti che derivano da animali che sono stati uccisi con incredibili sofferenze. E a questo proposito ricordo anche la grande nefandezza di continuare a sostenere che in Europa si possano abbattere gli animali da carne senza nessuno stordimento, lasciandoli morire dissanguati.

- Relazione: Neil Parish (A6-0240/2009)

  Hiltrud Breyer, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! So erfolgreich die Abstimmung über die Robbenjagd war – was mich auch mit Freude erfüllt –, so wenig erfreulich ist die Abstimmung zum Bericht Parish. Ich hätte mir gewünscht, wir hätten auch hier eine klare Tierschutzposition eingenommen, eine progressive Position, die nach vorne weist, die deutlich macht: Wir brauchen Alternativen zum Tierversuch. Tierversuche müssten der Vergangenheit angehören. Aber hier gab es offensichtlich handfeste Interessen seitens der Industrie – insbesondere der Pharmaindustrie –, und daher sind meine Fraktion und ich sehr enttäuscht, dass es nicht gelungen ist, dass die Doppelung der Tierversuche und die barbarischen Haltungsbedingungen von Tieren auch der Vergangenheit angehören.

Es ist leider nicht gelungen, den Kniefall, den die Kommission bereits beim klaren Verbot der Tierversuche an Menschenaffen gemacht hat, zu korrigieren. Das erfüllt mich mit Traurigkeit, denn eine Gesellschaft muss sich auch immer daran messen lassen, wie sie mit Tieren umgeht, und die Europäische Union darf nicht länger als Synonym für unnötige Tierversuche stehen. Von daher hätte ich mir gewünscht, dass der Bewertung von tierversuchsfreien Alternativen in diesem Richtlinienentwurf stärker Rechnung getragen worden wäre, denn nur die deutliche Unterstützung von Alternativen zu Tierversuchen wird dazu führen, dass diese barbarischen und unnötigen Tierversuche in der Europäischen Union ein Ende haben.

Das gelingt nicht mit Absichtserklärungen, das gelingt nur, indem die Bedeutung der Alternativen zu Tierversuchen herausgestellt wird und indem auch entsprechende Forschungsgelder bereitgestellt werden. Man kann nicht über Alternativen zu Tierversuchen reden, dann aber deren Entwicklung und deren schnelle Anerkennung nicht unterstützen. Es geht also nicht, dass die tierversuchsfreien Alternativen finanziell ausgetrocknet werden. Der gute Entwurf der EU-Kommission hätte mehr Rückendeckung im Parlament erfordert.

  Kathy Sinnott (IND/DEM). - Mr President, I was glad in the Parish report on animal testing that Amendment 170 passed. This prohibits the use of human embryos or foetal cells as an alternative to the use of animals in this directive, though there is little consolation for me that the amendment leaves the ethical decisions to the Member State, as the Irish Government and courts have consistently refused to protect embryos and I have been assured that in Ireland we also import aborted foetal cells for research.

We have protected the seal and this is good. We have taken some measures towards limiting and reducing animal testing and we must go further, but at no time can we forget the principle that we cannot use human beings as a substitute for other forms of testing. We must reduce animal testing, but humans are still not to be seen as the alternative.

  Richard Corbett (PSE). - Mr President, although today was a good day for animal welfare in terms of seals, it was a less good day in terms of the way we have just voted on animal testing.

Earlier this month, I had the pleasure of visiting a firm in my constituency, Simcyp, which has just won a national award from the Dr Hadwen Trust for developing alternatives to research on animals. That company has shown that it is possible to develop alternatives that work. Indeed, it has also shown that often the results of research on animals, when it comes to medical research, are not necessarily giving you data that it is reliable when applied to human beings.

Simcyp is pioneering alternatives to this. It is possible to go further. We should have gone further today. We have only made a small step. We need to do much more.

  Neena Gill (PSE). - Mr President, I abstained on this report because I am a long-term campaigner for animal rights. This is one of the issues that it is important for the EU to focus on if we are to balance justice with the internal market, and we must insist on market morality.

I have received a number of letters on this issue and constituents across my region express their dismay. They believe there should be greater protection for animals used for scientific purposes.

The reason I abstained is because I wanted to end the capture of monkeys from the wild for breeding purposes and I therefore support the Commission text. Also, amendments that remove the obligation for accurate record-keeping in the user establishment were not supported. Furthermore, I believe that amendments that reduce the commitment to the three ‘R’s – replacement, reduction and refinement – needed to be supported. I also believe that the accommodation should be tailored to the experiment and accommodation should be part of the project authorisation. I want to avoid animal suffering and ensure we have humane methods of killing or at least less painful. That is one of the reasons why I abstained because I did not feel the report went far enough.

- Relazione: Diana Wallis (A6-0118/2009)

  Inese Vaidere (UEN). - Paldies, priekšsēdētāja kungs! Kā bijusī Latvijas vides ministre es jau labi sen biju norūpējusies par to, kas notiek šajā jomā, par šo apbrīnojamo nežēlību pret dzīvniekiem, pie tam šī apbrīnojamā nežēlība izpaudās rūpnieciskos mērogos. Un es gribētu teikt, ka tam nav nekāda sakara ar inuītu tradicionālo dzīvesveidu, jo tradicionālais dzīvesveids neparedz dzīvnieku iznīcināšanu rūpniecības mērogā, lai apgādātu visu pasauli ar roņu produktiem. Es atturējos attiecībā uz papildināto priekšlikumu, bet atturējos tāpēc, ka šajā jautājumā, man šķiet, nekādi kompromisi nav vajadzīgi. Toties es stingri balsoju par likumdošanas rezolūciju, un esmu patiesi gandarīta, ka Parlaments ir pieņēmis Eiropas pilsoņa cienīgu lēmumu par šo roņu produktu tirdzniecības aizliegšanu.

- Relazione: Anni Podimata (A6-0146/2009)

  Inese Vaidere (UEN). - Paldies, prezidenta kungs! Runājot par Podimata ziņojumu, es gribētu norādīt, ka būtībā mēs varam atbalstīt gan Komisijas priekšlikumus, gan arī ITRE komitejas ziņojumus, gan arī „zaļo” un citu politisko grupu priekšlikumus, jo šajā ziņojumā kā galvenās intereses es redzu patērētāju intereses. Un primārais ir tas, lai patērētājs uzzinātu, runājot par šīm elektroiekārtām, kuras ir visekonomiskākās un kuras ir vismazāk kaitīgas apkārtējai videi. Tāpēc ar saviem balsojumiem es centos demonstrēt līdzsvarotu pieeju un šajā gadījumā pasvītrot Eiropas pilsoņa patērētāja intereses.

- Relazione: Vladimír Maňka (A6-0275/2009)

  Richard Corbett (PSE). - Mr President, as we speak, there is a live radio programme about the European Parliament on the British radio station 5 Live – it has been going all morning. There are people phoning in and one of the questions that they constantly raise is the cost of the European Parliament. How much does this Parliament cost, and can it justify its cost?

As I pointed out recently, if you relate the cost to the number of citizens, then the European Parliament costs GBP 1.74 per citizen per year, about the price of one pint of beer. By contrast, the House of Lords costs GBP 1.77 and the House of Commons GBP 5.79 per year, far more per citizen. Of course, this Parliament, with a wide electorate, spreads its costs widely. We have costs imposed on us by the Member States in terms of the three working places and the 23 languages, which no national parliament has to bear in its budget. Yet, despite that, we manage to provide value for money.

  Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE). - Mr President, I shall not dispute the figures that Mr Corbett has just read out. I do not particularly care if this Parliament costs less per capita than others – though I think there are one or two more people across the European Union than there might be in the United Kingdom.

My concern with this report is that it is a missed opportunity. It highlights many of the expensive regimes that we have all noticed in our time here – I have been here for 10 years, like you, Mr President. It is interesting, for example, that the European Parliament’s main library is in Luxembourg, where no one can access it, because the Members rotate between Brussels, Strasbourg and their home seats.

There are lots of missed opportunities in this place, and this report is most definitely one of them. At a time when all our constituents are having to tighten their belts, we should have signalled in this report that we were willing to tighten ours too, and we did not. It is a missed opportunity.

  Presidente. − Grazie on. Heaton-Harris, se ci sarà nella prossima legislatura ci aiuterà a migliorarci.

Dichiarazioni di voto scritte

- Relazione: Ilda Figueiredo (A6-0223/2009)

  Alessandro Battilocchio (PSE), per iscritto. − Il mio voto è favorevole.

Secondo il regolamento (CE) n.1234/2007 la carne di pollame può essere venduta sul mercato internazionale anche se ha subito trattamenti di carattere antimicrobico. Nel giugno del 2008 il Parlamento europeo, dopo vari tentativi, riuscì ad approvare una risoluzione che proibiva questo tipo di commercializzazione.

La Commissione però, visto che gli Stati Uniti esportano nell'UE solo carne di pollame trattato attraverso sostanze chimiche o antimicrobiche, non ha tenuto fede alla risoluzione. Questa strategia cozza con quelli che sono stati gli investimenti eseguiti dai professionisti del settore del pollame nel loro campo e realizzati in conformità alla legislazione comunitaria, la quale prevede che, al fine di ridurre i rischi di contaminazione delle carni, si debbano attuare solo metodi di protezione consentiti dall'UE, come il trattamento mediante freddo.

Sosteniamo, dunque, le seguenti proposte di modifica del regolamento (CE) n.1234/2007: 1) ritiro del considerando 5 della Commissione, il quale prevede che “il riferimento esclusivo al trattamento mediante freddo nella definizione di “carni di pollame” è troppo restrittivo rispetto all'evoluzione tecnologica. Occorre pertanto adeguare detta definizione”; 2) sostituzione del considerando 5 con un altro che preveda il monitoraggio di provenienza delle carni al fine di informare e di garantire la trasparenza al consumatore; 3) mantenimento del solo trattamento di protezione mediante il “metodo freddo”.

  Călin Cătălin Chiriţă (PPE-DE), în scris. − Am votat pentru acest proiect deoarece consider că este necesar să se extindă domeniul de aplicare al standardelor de comercializare a cărnii de pasăre și asupra preparatelor și produselor pe bază de carne de pasăre, precum și asupra cărnii de pasăre în saramură, care se comercializează într-o măsură din ce în ce mai mare.

Trebuie să luăm în considerare că, atunci când carnea de pasăre este vândută în stare „proaspătă”, consumatorul se așteaptă ca aceasta să nu fi fost niciodată înainte congelată sau congelată rapid, fapt care reprezintă pentru consumator o garanție de calitate. Prin urmare, principiul actual conform căruia carnea de pasăre vândută în stare „proaspătă” nu poate fi anterior congelată trebuie consolidat și extins pentru a cuprinde şi preparatele și produsele pe bază de carne de pasăre.

Este de remarcat că această propunere nu afectează bugetul comunitar.

  Šarūnas Birutis (ALDE), raštu. − Prekybos paukštiena standartais siekiama užtikrinti šio sektoriaus rinkos kainų stabilumą, palengvinti prekybą šiais produktais ir užtikrinti vartotojų saugą bei aukštus maisto kokybės standartus. Reikia peržiūrėti prekybos paukštiena standartus atsižvelgiant į technologijų raidą ir į juos įtraukti paukštienos pusgaminius, kadangi nuo 10 dešimtmečio pasikeitė vartotojų įpročiai. Pritariu siūlymui sugriežtinti principą, kad parduodama „šviežia“ paukštiena negali prieš tai būti sušaldyta, ir taip pat jį taikyti paukštienos pusgaminiams ir gaminiams.

  Edite Estrela (PSE), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente a proposta sobre a comercialização de carne de aves de capoeira. Esta proposta tem como objectivo actualizar as normas existentes desde 1990 sobre a comercialização de carnes de aves de capoeira, adaptando-se à nova realidade do mercado. Visa também salvaguardar a estabilidade dos preços de mercado neste sector, facilitar a comercialização dos produtos e velar pela segurança dos consumidores e por normas elevadas de qualidade para produtos alimentares.

Penso que o tratamento da carne de aves de capoeira com substâncias descontaminantes não é aceitável e por isso defendi o tratamento pelo frio.

  Hélène Goudin och Nils Lundgren (IND/DEM), skriftlig. − Vi har röstat ja till förslagen till ändringar från Europaparlamentets jordbruksutskott då de stärker skrivningarna om ursprungsmärkning av fjäderfäkött. Det tycker vi är bra.

Jordbruksutskottets ändringsförslag innehåller dock också skrivningar som vi anser borde handläggas på förvaltningsnivå. Eftersom allt röstas om i en enda omröstning har vi inte kunnat gå emot dessa förslag.

Vår ja-röst till ändringsförslagen om ursprungsmärkning innebär naturligtvis inte heller att vi på något sätt skulle stödja den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken.

  Véronique Mathieu (PPE-DE), par écrit. – Nous sommes parvenus à un bon compromis sur ce rapport, qui nous permettra d'obtenir un règlement équilibré et conforme aux exigences de l'Union européenne en matière de sécurité alimentaire.

En interdisant la commercialisation de viande de volaille congelée sous l'appellation de "produit frais", en refusant l'utilisation de substances toxiques, telles que le chlore, pour décontaminer les carcasses de poulet, et en optant pour un étiquetage clair de l'origine et de la date d'abattage de l'animal, nous avons privilégié le bon sens et fait le choix de défendre en priorité les intérêts du consommateur européen.

En adoptant la résolution de juin 2008, le Parlement avait déjà exprimé avec force son opposition à l'autorisation de commercialiser le "poulet chloré" sur le marché européen et il avait été suivi en cela par les ministres de l'agriculture à l'occasion du Conseil de décembre dernier.

Par le vote d'aujourd'hui, nous avons confirmé notre volonté d'assurer dans l'Union européenne, de la ferme à la table, l'alimentation la plus sûre possible au consommateur.

  Zdzisław Zbigniew Podkański (UEN), na piśmie. − Sprawa wydaje się jasna. Przedmiotowy wniosek jest już drugim z kolei zmierzającym do wprowadzenia do obrotu mięsa drobiowego z przeznaczeniem do spożycia przez ludzi, po poddaniu go obróbce przeciwbakteryjnej. Tym razem wniosek zaprezentowano w odpowiedzi na propozycję USA, które boją się wprowadzenia zakazu importu ich mięsa do Europy.

W sytuacji, kiedy użycie substancji bakteriobójczych, zgodnie z badaniami, nie przyczynia się do zmniejszenia liczby zakażeń bakteryjnych, a Europa walczy o zdrową żywność, musimy mówić jednym głosem. Podobnie zresztą jak w przypadku GMO. Szkoda, że tutaj, czyli w przypadku organizmów genetycznie modyfikowanych, sprawa nie jest już aż tak jasna dla wszystkich.

- Relazione: Reimer Böge (A6-0266/2009)

  Neena Gill (PSE), in writing. − I welcome this report because it concerns an issue I have been working on for some time now. On a visit to the Michelin factory in Stoke-on-Trent, management and trades unions explained to me their support for the mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund.

I have since written to the Business and Enterprise Minister in the UK, Lord Mandelson, to request he consider an application to the EU for the activation of the Adjustment Fund. It strikes me, as it did the people I met at Michelin, that this fund needs to be put in place as soon as possible. This is exactly the kind of thing the EU was set up for – to collectively help Member States, and most importantly, their workers, at times of difficulty.

Because the fund is not about simply bailing out companies – it is about supporting a strategy which will lead to sustainable growth and employment for the future. The report’s focus on the importance of small business for economic recovery, and the stress that the fund places on skills and training, will do much to ensure that people who lose their jobs will be reintegrated into the labour market.

  Hélène Goudin och Nils Lundgren (IND/DEM), skriftlig. − Vi är starkt kritiska till de tankegångar som ligger bakom inrättandet av en globaliseringsfond. Till att börja med utgår de från att globaliseringen som sådan utgör ett problem. Vi ser globaliseringen som en väg till ökat välstånd, inte minst för fattiga utvecklingsländer, förutsatt att betydande ekonomiska aktörer, såsom EU och USA, reformerar sina respektive protektionistiska handelspolitiska positioner inom WTO.

EU:s medlemsländer är förmögna att vidta nationella åtgärder för att bistå de sektorer som de anser är i behov av ekonomiskt stöd. En särskild EU-fond borgar för godtycke, ineffektivitet, byråkrati och omotiverade utgifter. Hur ska kommissionen på ett relevant sätt bedöma om en sektor har drabbats negativt av globaliseringen? Därtill kommer att de belopp som är aktuella visar att detta närmast är att betrakta som ett PR-jippo för EU.

Av dessa skäl har vi röstat nej till det aktuella betänkandet.

- Relazione: Dimitrios Papadimoulis (A6-0208/2009)

  Šarūnas Birutis (ALDE), raštu. − Jau keletą dešimtmečių pripažįstama, jog reikia siekti, kad oras būtų švaresnis – imtasi veiksmų valstybių narių ir ES lygmeniu, taip pat sudarant tarptautines konvencijas.

Mūsų oro kokybės gerinimas tebėra svarbiausias iššūkis, kurį reikia priimti. Oro taršos problemą galima išspręsti tik per ilgą laikotarpį ir tik Europos sistemoje, pirmiausia aktyviau imantis tarpvalstybinių priemonių. Komisijos pasiūlymas reikalingas, nes reikia toliau mažinti LOJ išmetimą ir regionų bei vietos mastu gerinti oro kokybę ir visuomenės gerovę, sėkmingai diegti II pakopos BGG sistemas visame pasaulyje ir gerinti technologijos pajėgumą 95 proc. sumažinti pilant kurą išsiskiriančių garų kiekį.

  Martin Callanan (PPE-DE), in writing. − This legislation represents another example of how the EU is targeting the car industry and the way in which the EU usually seeks to impose grossly disproportionate legislation to resolve a relatively minor problem.

The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety voted to bring forward the date for garages to comply with new measures to limit the amount of petrol vapour released into the atmosphere when cars are refuelled. The committee also voted to lower the threshold of petrol sales in order to bring many more garages into the scope of the proposed law.

Targeting small independent garages in this way would have a knock-on effect on other local businesses, generate hardly any environmental benefits and potentially increase exhaust emissions if drivers have to drive further away to refuel when a local station has closed. The cost of upgrading equipment in terms of capital expenditure and lost business owing to temporary closure would be substantial.

  Edite Estrela (PSE), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente o relatório sobre a recuperação de vapores de gasolina. A gasolina contém compostos orgânicos voláteis (COV) que se evaporam dentro do depósito de combustível, enchendo o espaço vazio por cima do combustível. Quando um veículo é reabastecido, os vapores são empurrados para fora do depósito pelo combustível que entra e, se não forem capturados, escapam para a atmosfera.

A proposta da Comissão tem como objectivo a recuperação dos vapores de gasolina que são emitidos para a atmosfera durante o reabastecimento dos automóveis ligeiros de passageiros. É de grande importância a implementação de sistemas de recuperação de vapores de gasolina nas estações de serviço, com uma eficiência de captura elevada, para uma melhoria da qualidade do ar.

- Relazione: Michael Cashman (A6-0077/2009)

  Šarūnas Birutis (ALDE), raštu. − Skaidrumas yra svarbiausias Europos Sąjungos principas. Tai aiškiai pabrėžiama Europos bendrijos steigimo sutarties 255 straipsnyje: „Visi Sąjungos piliečiai ir visi vienoje iš valstybių narių gyvenantys ar būstinę joje įregistravę fiziniai ar juridiniai asmenys turi teisę į prieigą prie Europos Parlamento, Tarybos ir Komisijos dokumentų“.

Šiuo metu galiojantis Reglamentas Nr. 1049/2001 buvo svarbus žingsnis siekiant didesnio viešumo. Per šešerius metus nuo jo įgyvendinimo prisidėta prie skaidresnės Europos institucijų administravimo kultūros sukūrimo. Mano nuomone, institucijos, užtikrindamos atvirumą, įgyja didesnį teisėtumą Europos piliečių akyse – taip skatinamas piliečių pasitekėjimas institucijomis.

  Carlos Coelho (PPE-DE), por escrito. − A transparência é um princípio fundamental da UE. As decisões deverão ser tomadas de forma tão aberta e tão próxima dos cidadãos quanto possível, conferindo desta forma, aos olhos dos cidadãos europeus, uma maior legitimidade às instituições, ao mesmo tempo que deverá contribuir para um aumento da confiança.

O Regulamento aprovado, em 2001, foi sem dúvida um passo significativo nessa direcção, mas são várias as alterações que se afiguram necessárias e que deverão contribuir para que o processo europeu de tomada de decisões se torne mais compreensível, para aumentar o nível de transparência e melhorar as práticas das instituições.

A presente iniciativa tem, assim, como objectivo introduzir essas melhorias. Porém, apesar de ter algumas propostas positivas, estas são lamentavelmente superadas por aquelas que o PE considera serem negativas.

De facto, a maior parte das alterações solicitadas pelo Parlamento, na sua Resolução de Abril de 2006, não foram tidas em conta, como é o caso, por exemplo, das propostas que diziam respeito às possibilidades de o PE exercer o seu direito de controlo democrático, através do acesso a documentos sensíveis.

Desta forma, apoio a proposta do Relator – Michael Cashman – no sentido de se reenviar esta iniciativa para a Comissão LIBE.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. − Da werden in allen Sprachen geführte öffentliche Debatten zum Lissabonner Vertrag budgetiert, aber das Nein zur reformierten EU-Verfassung nicht akzeptiert und Referenden umgangen. Und während auf den EU-eigenen Internetseiten die Bedeutung der Mehrsprachigkeit hochgepriesen wird, findet dies keinen Niederschlag in der eigenen Gestaltung des Webauftritts. Dieser ist nicht durchgehend in den drei Arbeitssprachen Deutsch, Englisch und Französisch gestaltet, mit denen man einen Großteil der Bevölkerung erreichen könnte. Auch der jeweilige Ratsvorsitz findet dies nicht der Mühe Wert. Nun zerbricht sich die EU den Kopf über Zugang zu ihren Dokumenten, aber will gleichzeitig die EU-Ausschreibungen in den nationalen Zeitungen und damit in allen Muttersprachen streichen.

Im vorliegenden Bericht scheinen nichtsdestotrotz einige gute Ansätze zur Verbesserung des Dokumentenzugangs auf, weshalb ich auch dafür gestimmt habe.

- Relazione: Marie Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou (A6-0120/2009)

  Guy Bono (PSE), par écrit. – J'ai voté contre ce rapport, présenté par ma collègue Grecque social-démocrate Marie PANAYOTOPOULOS-CASSIOTOU, sur l'aménagement du temps de travail des personnes exécutant des activités mobiles de transport routier.

Mon vote a été motivé par le fait que ce rapport, qui vise à aménager le temps de travail des personnes exécutant des activités mobiles de transports routiers, aurait abouti en fait à exclure les routiers indépendants de la législation européenne sur l'aménagement du temps de travail.

Je partage avec mes collègues socialistes l'idée qu'on ne peut pas accepter une législation sociale à deux vitesses: une législation qui en protège certains mais qui laisse les transporteurs routiers sur le bord de la route.

L'adoption de la proposition de la Commission aurait créé une discrimination inacceptable entre les routiers salariés, protégés par la réglementation européenne, et les indépendants. Le Parlement a pris acte de nos réserves. Il appartient désormais au Parlement prochainement élu de se prononcer lors de la nouvelle législature.

  Edite Estrela (PSE), por escrito. − Votei a favor da rejeição da proposta da Comissão Europeia sobre a organização do tempo de trabalho das pessoas que exercem actividades móveis de transporte rodoviário, pois considero inaceitável e discriminatório que esta proposta exclua os trabalhadores dos transportes rodoviários que trabalham por conta própria.

Todas as pessoas que exercem actividades móveis de transporte rodoviário devem ser protegidas pelas regras comunitárias que limitam o número de horas de trabalho semanais. Trata-se, pois, de assegurar a protecção da saúde e segurança destes trabalhadores, bem como a segurança rodoviária.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Foi muito importante que a maioria do Parlamento Europeu tivesse aprovado a proposta que subscrevemos de rejeição desta proposta de directiva que a Comissão Europeia tinha apresentado sobre a organização do tempo de trabalho das pessoas que exercem actividades móveis de transporte rodoviário. A proposta de directiva era um retrocesso relativamente à que está em vigor, seja quanto aos trabalhadores independentes e falsos independentes, seja quanto aos horários de trabalho actuais, designadamente nocturnos.

Já na Comissão do Emprego e dos Assuntos Sociais tinha apresentado essa proposta, que tinha merecido o voto favorável da maioria. Mas a relatora (PPE) insistiu em trazer o relatório a plenário, persistindo no ataque a direitos essenciais dos trabalhadores. Daí a importância desta rejeição em plenário, mantendo-se em vigor a actual directiva que obriga a aplicar aos trabalhadores independentes a mesma legislação laboral.

  Mathieu Grosch (PPE-DE), schriftlich. − Anlässlich der Debatte im Verkehrsausschuss habe ich zwei Abänderungen eingebracht, die alle Arbeitnehmer im Transport betreffen. Es ist in meinen Augen von Vorteil für eine harmonisierte Sozial- und Beschäftigungspolitik in Europa, dass Arbeitsbedingungen besonders die Beschäftigten unter gleichen Bedingungen angehen. Die Tatsache, Selbständige in eine Arbeitsrichtlinie zu bringen, ist unrealistisch. Es ist einfach unmöglich, Arbeitszeiten von Selbständigen zu kontrollieren. Was die Sicherheit angeht, sind alle Fahrer, auch die Selbständigen, den Fahrt- und Ruhezeitenregeln in Bussen und LKW über 3,5 Tonnen unterworfen. Wichtiger für die Sicherheit wäre die Ausdehnung der Lenk- und Ruhezeiten auch für Fahrer in LKW unter 3,5 Tonnen. Die Kommission sollte dies überprüfen, hat aber noch keinen Vorschlag eingebracht. Ich hoffe, dass das neue Parlament diese Vorschläge aufgreift.

  Pedro Guerreiro (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Saudamos a rejeição da proposta da Comissão Europeia, presidida por Durão Barroso, que visava a exclusão dos trabalhadores rodoviários, denominados de independentes, da directiva relativa à organização do tempo de trabalho das pessoas que exercem actividades móveis de transporte rodoviário – em resultado da proposta de rejeição que apresentámos.

Aliás já na Comissão dos Transportes e do Turismo do PE, em Fevereiro passado, tínhamos apresentado uma proposta que instava à rejeição desta inaceitável iniciativa da Comissão Europeia.

Esta é a melhor resposta a uma nova tentativa de intensificar a concorrência e exploração dos trabalhadores rodoviários, pondo em causa os seus direitos laborais e a segurança rodoviária.

O que se exige é a defesa e melhoria dos direitos e das condições de trabalho dos trabalhadores rodoviários, combatendo a precariedade, respeitando os períodos de pausa, repouso ou permanência – sem prejuízo das suas remunerações salariais – e a legislação laboral ou as convenções colectivas existentes em cada um dos Estados-Membros.

O que se impõe é que as regras de tempo de trabalho e de períodos de condução e de repouso se apliquem, de igual modo, a todos os condutores profissionais, incluindo os condutores independentes, por forma a garantir a sua segurança e a segurança rodoviária, evitando tempos de trabalho excessivamente longos e períodos de repouso ou padrões de trabalho inadequados.

  Carl Lang (NI), par écrit. – Le rapport de Madame Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou propose de rejeter la proposition de la Commission qui veut modifier la directive du Parlement européen et du Conseil relative à l'aménagement du temps de travail des personnes exécutant des activités mobiles de transport routier.

J'ai voté en faveur de ce rapport qui veut rejeter une proposition de la Commission européenne qui ne permettra pas de corriger les défaillances constatées dans la mise en œuvre et le contrôle des règles relatives aux temps de conduite et aux périodes de repos directement liés à la sécurité et aux droits sociaux. Par ailleurs, aucune clarification quant au champ d'application de cette directive et aux contrôles possibles n'est apportée. En tout état de cause, les États membres doivent rester seuls maîtres en ce domaine.

Enfin, cette proposition ne définit pas mieux la notion de "travailleurs mobiles" ou de "conducteurs indépendants". Et pour cause! Puisque c'est là que se trouve le véritable enjeu de cette directive. Faut-il exclure de cette directive tous les conducteurs indépendants? La question reste posée, car le problème est complexe.

En effet, il existe une pratique répandue des "faux indépendants", en réalité employés de sociétés qui, pour des motifs de rentabilité, contournent les règles relatives aux temps de conduite et aux périodes de repos.

  Mary Lou McDonald (GUE/NGL), in writing. − There are any number of reasons why the Commission proposal to exclude self-employed drivers from this Directive had to be rejected.

In voting to reject the Commission proposal I voted in favour of safety on the roads, to rule out discrimination in terms of health and safety, pay and working conditions for drivers, and to ensure fair play for employers and employees in the road transport sector.

  Δημήτριος Παπαδημούλης (GUE/NGL), γραπτώς. – Υπερψηφίζω την τροπολογία 54 γιατί αποτελεί ένα σημαντικό πολιτικό μήνυμα προς την Επιτροπή και το Συμβούλιο. Το Ευρωκοινοβούλιο υποστηρίζει τα δικαιώματα των οδηγών και αρνείται κάθε ανταγωνισμό μεταξύ των μισθωτών και των αυτοαπασχολούμενων οδηγών. Με την πρόταση αυτή θα εξαιρούνταν από το πεδίο εφαρμογής της ισχύουσας σχετικής οδηγίας οι αυτοαπασχολούμενοι οδηγοί και για πρώτη φορά σε ευρωπαϊκή νομοθεσία θα είχαμε μια προσπάθεια διαχωρισμού μεταξύ "πραγματικά αυτοαπασχολούμενου" και "ψευδο-αυτοαπασχολούμενου", που όμως και ατελής είναι και μπορεί να ανοίξει τον ασκό του Αιόλου για την ερμηνεία άλλων διατάξεων του κοινοτικού δικαίου. Είναι μια νίκη για την οδική ασφάλεια και την κοινωνική Ευρώπη.

  Биляна Илиева Раева (ALDE), в писмена форма. − Отхвърлената с гласовете на европейките социалисти, зелените и крайно левите ЕП Директива за организация на работното време на лицата извършващи транспортни дейности прави самонаетите транспортни работници по-неконкурентни.

Безотговорното отхвърляне на предложението на ЕК отнема смисъла на самонаетите да са самонаети. Те вече не са свободни да определят сами продължителността на работното си време.

Подобно регулиране не съществува в никой друг сектор. Това решение ще окаже неизменно негативно отражение върху конкурентоспособността на Европейката икономика.

Самонаетите в транспортният бранш за разлика от служителите не работят на базата на трудов договор и свободно определят клиентите и товарите си, а тяхната печалба не зависи от работните им часове, както е при служителите, а от броя и типа на превоза. Определянето на работното им време от новата Директива ограничава тяхната "предприемаческа" свобода.

С гласуването днес, на страните-членки бе отнета възможността сами да дефинират часовата рамка определяща нощното време и по този начин да оптимизират работните часове, за транспорт на пътници или товари, според вариращата дневна светлина в различните СЧ.

Отхвърлянето на директивата застрашава конкурентността. Малките превозвачи и еднолични търговци ще пострадат най-много. Те ще прилагат изискванията, валидни за служители на големите транспортни фирми, което неизбежно ще застраши техните позиции на пазара.

  Γεώργιος Τούσσας (GUE/NGL), γραπτώς. – Η απόρριψη της πρότασης Οδηγίας της Επιτροπής αποτελεί ελιγμό των δυνάμεων του "ευρωμονόδρομου", μπροστά στις ευρωεκλογές. Το ΚΚΕ αντιτάχθηκε από την πρώτη στιγμή στην πρόταση της Επιτροπής, την καταψήφισε στην αρμόδια επιτροπή του Ευρωκοινοβουλίου και στην Ολομέλεια. Ενημέρωσε τους εργαζόμενους, στήριξε τις κινητοποιήσεις τους. Η εξαίρεση των αυτοαπασχολούμενων εξυπηρετεί μόνο τις μονοπωλιακές επιχειρήσεις του κλάδου των μεταφορών, πλήττει τα συμφέροντα των εργαζομένων, των αυτοαπασχολούμενων επαγγελματιών, δημιουργεί τεράστιους κινδύνους για την οδική ασφάλεια. Θα επιδεινώσει ακόμη περισσότερο τις συνθήκες απασχόλησης των οδηγών, θα εκτινάξει τις ώρες εργασίας -οδήγησης ακόμη και σε 84 ώρες την εβδομάδα και θα εντείνει στο έπακρο την εκμετάλλευση των εργαζομένων οδηγών.

Οι κινητοποιήσεις των εργαζομένων και ο φόβος καταδίκης τους στις ευρωεκλογές, υποχρέωσαν ένα σημαντικό τμήμα των ευρωβουλευτών των κομμάτων του ευρωμονόδρομου να ψηφίσει υπέρ της απόρριψης της πρότασης. Ωστόσο, οι εργαζόμενοι πρέπει να γνωρίζουν ότι οι μονοπωλιακοί όμιλοι θα επανέλθουν για να επιβάλλουν τις απαιτήσεις τους βρίσκοντας τα κόμματα του κεφαλαίου πρόθυμα να τις ικανοποιήσουν. Η κατάκτηση αυτή δείχνει τη δύναμη και τη σημασία του αγώνα των εργαζομένων. Επισημαίνουμε όμως ότι μπορεί να αποδειχτεί προσωρινή, εάν το εργατικό και λαϊκό κίνημα δεν οργανώσει την αντεπίθεσή του, δεν βάλει τους όρους για ριζικές αλλαγές στο επίπεδο της εξουσίας και της οικονομίας.

- Relazione: Diana Wallis (A6-0118/2009)

  Jan Andersson, Göran Färm, Anna Hedh, Inger Segelström och Åsa Westlund (PSE), skriftlig. − Vi svenska socialdemokrater har valt att rösta för den kompromiss som förhandlats fram med rådet, då vi tolkar det som om de negativa effekter som vi befarat för den svenska jakten försvinner i och med undantaget i artikel 3.2. Vi har alla upprörts av bilderna från den kanadensiska säljakten.

De flesta konsumenter skulle därför välja bort produkter från säljakt som inte ens i närheten uppfyller krav motsvarande de som ställs på svensk jakt, leder till onödigt lidande och som sker i stor skala under okontrollerade former.

Vi är principiellt emot att EU direkt eller indirekt lägger sig i jaktfrågor som är en nationell fråga, särskilt när det kan undergräva väl fungerande svenska regler. I det här fallet har vi valt att göra en helhetsbedömning. Under dessa omständigheter har vi accepterat kompromissen, då den sänder en klar signal att parlamentet inte accepterar att man behandlar djur hur som helst.

  Šarūnas Birutis (ALDE), raštu. − Esu tvirtai įsitikinęs, kad reikia uždrausti ruonių medžioklę, paliekant tam tikras išimtis vietinėms bendruomenėms. Mes neturėtume ignoruoti ir fakto, jog įvairios nuomonių apklausos skirtingose ES valstybėse narėse rodo, kad didžioji dauguma ES piliečių prieštarauja didelio masto komercinei ruonių medžioklei ir jos būdams. Be to, akivaizdi piliečių dauguma pritaria tam, kad būtų visiškai uždrausta prekyba iš ruonių pagamintais produktais.

  Niels Busk, Anne E. Jensen og Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ALDE), skriftlig. − Vi har stemt imod forslaget om forbud mod handel med sælprodukter og det kompromis, der er indgået mellem Parlamentet og Rådet. Vi mener ikke, at et forbud mod handel med sælprodukter højner dyrevelfærden, og beklager, at forslaget vedtages på trods af manglende hjemmel i traktaten.

  Martin Callanan (PPE-DE), in writing. − I have been lobbied heavily by animal rights groups and constituents about this issue but I am very sceptical in principle about banning things. Ultimately consumers will decide if they want to buy seal products. I was proud to have contributed to the campaign to ban imports of cat and dog fur from China but the import of seal products is a very different issue based on traditional culture and practice over centuries.

Bullfighting and cockfighting are unsavoury spectacles but the EU recognises that they should be allowed to continue within the EU in regions where an unbroken tradition exists. It would therefore be hypocritical for the EU to ban seal products from Canada on the basis of animal cruelty. I am also hesitant to antagonise Canada, which is a great ally of the EU and shares our common values.

I reject animal cruelty but I believe this issue has been deliberately distorted in order to provoke an emotive response among MEPs. We should approach such matters in a more balanced and dispassionate way.

  Edite Estrela (PSE), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente o relatório sobre o comércio de produtos derivados da foca, uma vez que este assenta em dois pressupostos: a proibição na União Europeia do comércio de certos produtos derivados da foca e o respeito pelas tradições e culturas dos povos indígenas do Árctico.

Anualmente, são mortas no âmbito da caça comercial em larga escala cerca de 900 000 focas (este número não tem em conta os exemplares atingidos, mas não recuperados, nem os abates não declarados), das quais 60% no Canadá, na Gronelândia e na Namíbia. A Noruega e a Rússia são os outros países que se dedicam à caça comercial em larga escala destes animais. Na Comunidade, a Suécia, a Finlândia e o Reino Unido (Escócia) praticam uma caça à foca em pequena escala, principalmente por razões de gestão das populações de peixes e de controlo de pragas.

Penso que este acordo irá proteger as focas da crueldade e ao mesmo tempo irá proteger a cultura das comunidades Inuítes. Penso também que este regulamento assegura que o comércio sem escrúpulos irá acabar e serão criadas regras harmonizadas que mudarão todo o mercado interno.

  Glyn Ford (PSE), in writing. − When I was first elected to the European Parliament 25 years ago, it was shortly after an ‘initial ban’ on the trade in seal products in 1983. Unfortunately, despite revisiting the issue on a number of occasions, this is still unfinished business.

The situation, a quarter of a century on, is scarcely any better than back in 1983. We still see hundreds of thousands of seals culled in Canada in the most cruel and brutal slaughter. Hopefully today’s vote will be sufficiently overwhelming to finally achieve what we thought we had managed 25 years ago. Neither I nor the seals want us to be back here in 2034.

  Mathieu Grosch (PPE-DE), schriftlich. − Persönlich bedaure ich, dass die Vorschläge des Ausschusses, die sehr klar waren, nicht durch die Fraktionen übernommen wurden. Der Artenschutz – besonders unter den hier bekannten Bedingungen der Tötung – verlangt eindeutige Maßnahmen ohne Kompromisse. Die Beschäftigung, die mit diesem Handel verbunden ist, kann problemlos umorientiert werden.

  Małgorzata Handzlik (PPE-DE), na piśmie. − Decyzja Parlamentu Europejskiego o zakazie handlu produktami z fok na terenie Wspólnoty Europejskiej jest krokiem w kierunku zaprzestania brutalnych praktyk zabijania tych zwierząt, jakie są praktykowane przez niektóre państwa. Projekt wychodzi naprzeciw zaniepokojeniu opinii publicznej odnośnie do przestrzegania zasad dobrostanu zwierząt przy zabijaniu i skórowaniu fok.

Przyjęte rozporządzenie wprowadza także kilka wyjątków, dla tych, którzy tego potrzebują. W szczególności chodzi o wyłączenie zakazu produktów z fok uzyskanych w drodze tradycyjnych polowań prowadzonych przez społeczności Eskimosów i przyczyniających się do ich utrzymania.

Cieszy mnie, że Parlament Europejski tak wyraźną większością opowiedział się za przyjęciem tego rozporządzenia. Jest to bardzo wyraźny sygnał ze strony instytucji europejskich, iż obywatele europejscy nie godzą się na brutalne traktowanie i zabijanie zwierząt.

  Roger Knapman and Thomas Wise (NI), in writing. − We understand and share concerns about the trade in seal products. We have no problem with individual states banning seal products, but we believe that this should be a matter for individual states and not for the Commission. Therefore, we have been unable to support this proposal.

  Zdzisław Zbigniew Podkański (UEN), na piśmie. − Parlament Europejski w obecnej kadencji poświęcił stosunkowo dużo uwagi ochronie zwierząt.

Wprowadzenie na terenie Unii Europejskiej zakazu handlu niektórymi produktami z fok niewątpliwie wzmacnia tę ochronę. Daje też satysfakcję 425 posłom, którzy złożyli oświadczenie pisemne Parlamentu Europejskiego. Należy odnotować także, że Parlament w swojej rezolucji wyraził wolę szanowania kultury i tradycji autochtonicznych narodów. Jak w przyszłości będzie rozwijała się ochrona fok, zależeć będzie od wielu czynników w kontekście międzynarodowym i WTO. Niemniej inicjatywa posłów jest godna uznania i poparcia.

  Catherine Stihler (PSE), in writing. − I am pleased today that we voted to ban the EU trade in seal products.

  Marianne Thyssen (PPE-DE), schriftelijk. − België bande in januari 2007 als eerste Europees land alle producten verkregen op basis van zeehonden uit en werd nadien hierin gevolgd door een aantal andere lidstaten. De Belgische wetgeving voorziet wel een uitzondering voor traditionele jacht door Inuit-gemeenschappen. Het stemt me dan ook tevreden dat het Europees Parlement vandaag het Belgische voorbeeld volgt. Het voorstel om de invoer van zeehondenproducten toe te laten, mits een etiketteringsplicht, kon onze steun niet wegdragen. Als bonthandelaars uit Canada, Groenland, Namibië en Rusland de zeehondenpelzen niet meer verkocht krijgen aan één van de grootste afzetmarkten wereldwijd, betekent dit een enorme stap vooruit voor het welzijn van de diersoort. Een verbod is bovendien de meest efficiënte manier om een einde te maken aan de onmenselijke praktijken waar jaarlijks honderdduizenden dieren het slachtoffer van worden.

Het totaalverbod is mijn inziens de juiste aanpak. Om die reden heb ik het verslag van collega Wallis gesteund.

- Relazione: Neil Parish (A6-0240/2009)

  Alessandro Battilocchio (PSE), per iscritto. − Il mio voto è favorevole.

Fino ad oggi garante della tutela degli animali utilizzati a fini scientifici è stata la direttiva 86/609/CEE: essa, appena emanata, fu recepita e applicata in maniera diversa dai vari Stati membri. Bisognerebbe però effettuare una proposta di cambiamento di tale direttiva per garantire sia una totale unitarietà di intenti all'interno del territorio europeo, sia una maggiore protezione delle cavie da laboratorio che vengono utilizzate per scopi scientifici concernenti la salute umana e animale.

Molti dovrebbero essere i cambiamenti da effettuare, tra cui i più importanti, che auspichiamo in linea con gli ideali della Commissione, sono: 1) la creazione di una commissione etica per il benessere degli animali; 2) l'estensione del concetto di cavia anche a varie specie di invertebrati e forme fetali nell'ultimo trimestre di sviluppo, oppure a larve e altri animali usati nella ricerca di base e nella formazione; 3) l'utilizzazione di animali unicamente negli esperimenti per i quali sono stati allevati; 4) lo studio di metodi alternativi alla sperimentazione animale, riducendo al minimo il numero degli animali usati; 5) l'assicurazione del fatto che gli Stati membri dovranno avere come scopo principale quello di migliorare i metodi di allevamento, riducendo al minimo le sofferenze degli animali; 5) l' uso dell'anestesia totale o parziale.

  Derek Roland Clark and Nigel Farage (IND/DEM), in writing. − Although it contains much that my party (UKIP) would agree with, this report is tainted by its illegitimate and anti-democratic origins in the machinery of the EU. Consequently, I cannot support it.

  Christine De Veyrac (PPE-DE), par écrit. – Le texte de la Commission européenne est un contresens. Contresens contre la science, car il freine et pénalise la recherche. Contre le progrès médical, car les scientifiques qui ont recours à l'expérimentation animale travaillent au quotidien afin de trouver les médicaments et traitements qui demain guériront les nouvelles pandémies.

C'est enfin un contresens économique et social. Alors que nos groupes pharmaceutiques seront interdits de recherche, les laboratoires établis hors de l'Union européenne pourront les poursuivre! Le rapport Parish rééquilibre heureusement les choses, car je ne cautionnerai ni un affaiblissement de la compétitivité de notre industrie, ni un encouragement aux délocalisations.

  Kωvσταντίνος Δρούτσας (GUE/NGL), γραπτώς. – Η πρόταση οδηγίας για την προστασία των ζώων που χρησιμοποιούνται για επιστημονικούς σκοπούς αποσκοπεί περισσότερο στην ολοκλήρωση της ενιαίας εσωτερικής αγοράς, τον ανταγωνισμό και τον περιορισμό του κόστους στον χώρο της έρευνας παρά στην προστασία των ζώων.

Οι πολυεθνικές απαιτούν όλο και μεγαλύτερα κέρδη από την έρευνα. Τα ζώα που χρησιμοποιούνται σε αυτήν, θυσιάζονται και βασανίζονται κατά κανόνα με κριτήριο την αύξηση των κερδών και όχι την εξυπηρέτηση των επιστημονικών αναγκών. Κανείς δεν μπορεί να περιμένει φιλοζωική συμπεριφορά από το κεφάλαιο που κίνητρό του έχει την εκμετάλλευση και φέρεται απάνθρωπα και βάναυσα στους ίδιους τους ανθρώπους.

Η έρευνα απαιτεί πειράματα για την αντιμετώπιση των σημαντικών προβλημάτων της δημόσιας υγείας και πολλών και ανίατων ακόμα ασθενειών. Τα ζώα πολλές φορές είναι απαραίτητα για αυτές τις έρευνες.

Η προστασία των ζώων όμως, όπως και η προστασία της Δημόσιας Υγείας, απαιτεί αγώνα ενάντια στα μονοπώλια, ενάντια στην εξουσία του κεφαλαίου που κατοχυρώνει τα φάρμακα με πατέντες προκειμένου να εξασφαλίσει τεράστια κέρδη από την εμπορευματοποίηση της Υγείας.

Αγώνα που θα απεγκλωβίσει την έρευνας από τα δεσμά του κεφαλαίου και θα χρησιμοποιήσει τα επιστημονικά ευρήματα των ερευνών για την ικανοποίηση των λαϊκών αναγκών.

  Edite Estrela (PSE), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente o relatório relativo à protecção dos animais utilizados para fins científicos. A presente proposta abrange a protecção dos animais utilizados para fins científicos relacionados com a saúde humana ou animal ou com o bem-estar dos animais. Todos os anos, na UE, aproximadamente 12 milhões de animais são utilizados para fins científicos e, entre eles, 12 000 primatas não humanos.

A directiva prevê a obrigação de proceder a análises éticas e de submeter as experiências em que são utilizados animais a uma autorização. Com esta proposta passam também a estar incluídas determinadas espécies de invertebrados e fetos no seu último trimestre de desenvolvimento, bem como larvas e outros animais utilizados na investigação fundamental, educação e formação profissional.

Deste modo, penso que a proposta visa uma melhor protecção dos animais utilizados em experiências e um reforço das regras do bem-estar animal face à evolução da pesquisa científica.

  Martine Roure (PSE), par écrit. – Grâce à l'initiative de la Commission européenne, qui permet de réviser la directive en vigueur sur la protection des animaux utilisés à des fins scientifiques, l'UE peut jouer un rôle déterminant dans la recherche et le développement de tests et de technologies n'utilisant pas les animaux. La portée de cette directive doit d'ailleurs être élargie. Certains des amendements de la commission de l'agriculture, contraires à la protection des animaux de laboratoire, allaient à l'encontre de cet objectif. Il est essentiel que la recherche européenne n'en pâtisse pas et soit au contraire développée. Toutefois cela ne doit pas se faire au détriment du bien-être des animaux, ni du développement et de la validation de méthodes de substitution complète de l'usage des animaux. Le développement de ces méthodes substitutives exige un budget. Par ailleurs, il est essentiel que l'utilisation des primates non humains dans la recherche soit supprimée progressivement, qu'un contrôle soit exercé à cette fin et que la transparence soit renforcée en la matière.

  Lydia Schenardi (NI), par écrit. – Il était temps que les partenaires concernés se penchent sur le bien-être des animaux utilisés à des fins de recherche et sur l'arrêt du piégeage des singes sauvages au profit de fermes d'élevage: violence, stress durant la capture, puis confinement, séparation des groupes familiaux, groupes sociaux brisés, impact sur l'environnement, rupture de l'équilibre naturel de la population, retrait de femelles.

Nous soutiendrons donc l'objectif d'utiliser au maximum les animaux élevés à ces fins pour lesquels on connaît les antécédents génétiques et de santé, présentant donc une meilleure cohérence et une reproductibilité des données.

D'autre part, si les normes sur le bien-être des animaux utilisés à des fins de recherche avaient pour conséquence d'exporter la recherche, l'impact serait alors plus évident dans ces pays qui opèrent déjà sous des contrôles réglementaires stricts comme la Suisse ou le Royaume-Uni. Or, dans ces pays, l'industrie pharmaceutique n'a cessé de prospérer malgré 20 années de réglementation stricte. La réglementation n'a donc pas été un frein au succès de cette industrie. Les contrôles ont même amélioré les normes des pratiques scientifiques. Cela étaye donc la crainte de voir la recherche exportée suite aux réglementations.

  Brian Simpson (PSE), in writing. − I am disappointed at the Parliament’s position on the revision of Europe-wide rules on animal testing. In the end I decided to abstain on the final report. While I fully support the provisions on developing and pushing forward the use of alternatives to animal testing and the thematic biannual review of the use of primates, both of which I see as crucial in moving our research away from its reliance on animals, particularly primates, overall Parliament’s position has weakened many of the important animal welfare provisions proposed by the Commission.

The fear that has prevailed over the Parliament is that the research industry will leave the EU if too many demands are placed on our research establishments. However I believe that there are some demands that are essential if we in Europe are to ensure high levels of animal protection and I fear that today’s result goes against this thinking. Two crucial issues for me were to move Europe away from the use of wild-caught monkeys for breeding purposes and the absolute need for authorisation of all experiments involving animals, thereby cementing our commitment to the replacement and reduction of animals in experiments. Sadly the European Parliament missed the opportunity to take a strong line on animal protection today.

  Roger Knapman and Thomas Wise (NI), in writing. − We accept that experimentation on animals is sometimes necessary, but we also understand and accept that the necessity of some experimentation is questionable. We support the advancement of alternative methods of research, and would wish to see experiments on all live animals reduced to an absolute minimum and performed under the strictest possible humanitarian guidelines. We believe, however, that this should be a matter for individual states to decide on, and so regrettably we am unable to vote in favour of this proposal within an EU context.

- Relazione: Luis de Grandes Pascual (A6-0080/2009)

  Edite Estrela (PSE), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente a proposta relativa à poluição por navios, uma vez que penso ser essencial combater uma prática continuada no transporte marítimo, que são as descargas ilegais de substâncias poluentes no mar efectuadas por determinados navios.

Penso que esta proposta de alteração é absolutamente necessária para prevenir desastres ambientais e a degradação da qualidade da água, através de sanções penais suficientemente severas para dissuadir potenciais poluidores.

  Hélène Goudin och Nils Lundgren (IND/DEM), skriftlig. − Detta betänkande förordar att ett befintligt direktiv om föroreningar förorsakade av fartyg ska ändras. Detta för att möjliggöra straffrättsliga åtgärder vid föroreningar. Junilistan stöder åtgärder för att stoppa föroreningar från fartyg. Vi anser dock att straffrätten fullt ut ska vara en nationell fråga. Därtill kommer att utsläpp från fartyg på internationellt vatten bör hanteras på FN-nivå. Vi har därmed röstat nej vid slutomröstningen.

  Γεώργιος Τούσσας (GUE/NGL), γραπτώς. – Η περιβόητη Οδηγία που διαφημίστηκε από διάφορες δυνάμεις ότι δήθεν θα τιμωρούσε με ποινικές κυρώσεις τις εφοπλιστικές επιχειρήσεις για την θαλάσσια ρύπανση και θα προστάτευε το περιβάλλον κατέληξε ακριβώς στο αντίθετο. Προστατεύει το εφοπλιστικό κεφάλαιο από την επιβολή κυρώσεων σε βάρος του. Ακόμη και αυτή η ανεπαρκής πρόταση της Επιτροπής, έμεινε κενή περιεχομένου, ύστερα από την πρόταση του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου, να μην τιμωρούνται οι μικρότερης σημασίας απορρίψεις ουσιών στη θάλασσα. Ποιές είναι οι μικρότερης σημασία απορρίψεις, ποιός και με τι κριτήρια θα κρίνει το μέγεθός τους το γνωρίζει πολύ καλά ο λαός μας. Οι κάτοικοι της Σαντορίνης για παράδειγμα, που στις διαμαρτυρίες τους για το ναυάγιο του Ε/Γ -Τ/Κ Sea Diamond που παραμένει μέχρι σήμερα στα νερά του νησιού, έχουν χορτάσει από τις απαντήσεις της ΕΕ και της κυβέρνησης της ΝΔ - τα ίδια ισχυρίζονταν και το ΠΑΣΟΚ για αντίστοιχες καταστάσεις όπως για το Ε/Γ - Ο/ Γ ΕΞΠΡΕΣ ΣΑΜΙΝΑ κ.α.- ότι δήθεν τα ναυάγια δεν προκαλούν καμία ρύπανση!

Με το "παραθυράκι" της μειωμένης σημασίας απορρίψεων ουσιών στη θάλασσα, πλοιοκτήτες, εφοπλιστές, διαχειριστές, πράκτορες, ασφαλιστές, ναυλωτές, ιδιοκτήτες φορτίων και πλοίων, υπαίτιοι ναυτικών εγκλημάτων και περιβαλλοντικών καταστροφών, παραμένουν ατιμώρητοι.. Αντίθετα, με μεγάλη αυστηρότητα, πάλι οι ναυτεργάτες θα χρησιμοποιούνται ως εξιλαστήρια θύματα.

- Relazione: Anni Podimata (A6-0146/2009)

  Alessandro Battilocchio (PSE), per iscritto. − Il mio voto è favorevole.

Parlando di politiche relative al consumo energetico, l'UE dovrebbe prendere come modello guida delle sue scelte le dichiarazioni fatte dal noto economista inglese Nicholas Stern: “In periodi di recessione e di elevati prezzi del petrolio, ulteriori incentivi agli investimenti nell'efficienza energetica e spese per l'energia rinnovabile e per altri settori a basse emissioni di carbonio possono contribuire a stimolare l'economia”.

Quello che servirebbe, è cercare di creare una politica energetica capace di ridurre le emissioni di gas a effetto serra, di mantenere fede agli accordi presi in riferimento al protocollo di Kyoto e di sostenere il ruolo guida dell'UE nella lotta ai cambiamenti climatici. L'attuazione di tale protocollo apporterebbe un contributo molto importante sia al livello occupazionale, sia al livello di competitività in campo economico e sociale.

L'attuale direttiva sull'etichettatura energetica 92/75/CEE, seppur valutata positivamente dal settore industriale e dalle associazioni dei consumatori, non può essere considerata al passo con l'evoluzione tecnologica e con l'innovazione del mercato energetico in quanto, prima di tutto, bisognerebbe eliminare questa situazione di stallo in tutti i territori europei al fine di poter attuare per i fruitori una nuova dimensione di vita.

  Călin Cătălin Chiriţă (PPE-DE), în scris. − Am votat în favoarea Raportului referitor la propunerea de directivă a Parlamentului European şi a Consiliului privind indicarea, prin etichetare şi informaţii standard despre produs, a consumului de energie şi de alte resurse al produselor cu impact energetic (reformare). Consider necesară o informare mai bună în materie de eficienţă energetică a produselor. Orice publicitate care promovează specificaţiile tehnice ale aparatelor frigorifice, maşini de spălat sau cuptoare pentru uz casnic trebuie să indice consumul energetic al produsului.

Etichetarea energetică ajută consumatorii în a-şi evalua costurile de energie atunci când achiziţionează produse electrice de uz casnic, precum frigidere, maşini de spălat rufe sau haine, uscătoare sau cuptoare. Producătorii sunt obligaţi să indice consumul energetic, indiferent dacă produsele sunt „mai eficiente” (verde) sau „mai puţin eficiente” (roşu) din punct de vedere energetic.

Etichetarea se va aplica şi produselor consumatoare de energie pentru uz comercial şi industrial, cum ar fi camerele frigorifice sau  vitrinele frigorifice. Publicitatea trebuie să indice consumul energetic şi economisirea de energie.

Statele pot adopta măsuri de stimulare, inclusiv credite fiscale pentru produse foarte eficiente din punct de vedere energetic.

  Edite Estrela (PSE), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente a directiva sobre a indicação do consumo de energia por meio de rotulagem. As questões ambientais e, em particular, a eficiência energética, assumem uma grande importância e são fundamentais para o combate às alterações climáticas. A reformulação da directiva tem como objectivo permitir a rotulagem de todos os produtos relacionados com o consumo de energia, incluindo os dos sectores doméstico, comercial e industrial.

Tendo em conta que existe uma necessidade urgente de combater as alterações climáticas e que a União Europeia se propôs atingir a meta de aumento de 20% da eficiência energética até 2020, penso que uma rotulagem simples, clara e facilmente reconhecível pode influenciar os consumidores a tomar decisões mais sustentadas e contribuir para a promoção de produtos mais eficientes em termos energéticos.

  Hélène Goudin och Nils Lundgren (IND/DEM), skriftlig. − Junilistan anser att gränsöverskridande miljöfrågor är en av EU:s viktigaste uppgifter. Vi tycker att ändringsförslagen, på ett bättre sätt än kommissionens förslag, erbjuder slutkonsumenterna möjligheten att göra klokare val genom att förbättra informationen om produkters energiförbrukning och miljöpåverkan.

Vi är dock kritiska till vissa enskilda skrivelser i ändringsförslagen som eftersträvar en ökad detaljstyrning inom europeisk energipolitik. Ändringsförslagens goda intentioner överväger emellertid och vi har därför valt att stödja ändringsförslagen i sin helhet.