Rapporti verbatim tad-dibattiti

L-Erbgħa, 11 ta' Marzu 2009 - Strasburgu

1. Ftuħ tas-seduta

VORSITZ: HANS-GERT PÖTTERING
Präsident

(Die Sitzung wird um 9.00 Uhr eröffnet.)

2. Dikjarazzjonijiet mill-Presidenza

  Der Präsident. − Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich möchte zum Tag der Opfer des Terrorismus gerne eine Erklärung abgeben. Heute begehen wir zum fünften Mal den Europäischen Tag der Opfer des Terrorismus. Es ist ein Tag, den wir im Gedächtnis behalten müssen, um all der Menschen zu gedenken, die unschuldig Opfer des Terrorismus wurden. Erst an diesem Wochenende wurden zwei Soldaten in Nordirland, in Antrim, Opfer der Real IRA, und an diesem Montag ist erneut ein Polizist in der Grafschaft Armagh erschossen worden. Der verstorbene Polizist war verheiratet und hat Kinder. Dieser Akt des barbarischen Terrorismus hat erneut eine Familie zerrissen und unermessliches Leid mit sich gebracht. Und erst gestern sind mindestens zehn Menschen durch einen Selbstmordanschlag im südlichen Sri Lanka ums Leben gekommen, mehr als zwanzig Menschen schweben noch in Lebensgefahr.

Im Namen des Europäischen Parlaments möchte ich meine Empörung über diese abscheulichen Anschläge auf unschuldige Menschen zum Ausdruck bringen und den Familien aller Verstorbenen mein tief empfundenes Beileid aussprechen. Ihr Andenken wird uns immer im Gedächtnis bleiben.

Heute sprechen wir uns als Europäisches Parlament laut und deutlich gegen die blinde Gewalt des Terrorismus aus. Wir verurteilen aufs Schärfste die sinnlose Vernichtung von Menschenleben, den Tod ganzer Familien aufgrund fanatischer und verblendeter Überzeugungen, die Menschen dazu bringen, ihre Mitmenschen umzubringen und die Würde des Menschen mit Füßen zu treten. Terrorismus ist ein direkter Anschlag auf Freiheit, Menschenrechte und Demokratie. Terrorismus ist der Versuch, durch blinde Gewalt unsere Werte zu zerstören, Werte, die uns in der Europäischen Union und in unseren Mitgliedstaaten verbinden.

Dieser Terror erschüttert uns alle. Er zerreißt unsere Herzen in tiefem Schmerz, aber er kann und wird nicht das Fundament unserer auf gemeinsamen Werten basierenden demokratischen Gesellschaft zerreißen.

Terrorismus ist ein Verbrechen, das keine Milde kennen darf. Terrorismus stellt eine der größten Gefahren für Sicherheit, Stabilität und die demokratischen Werte der internationalen Gemeinschaft dar, er ist ein direkter Angriff auf unsere Bürgerinnen und Bürger, auf uns alle. Das Europäische Parlament beteiligt sich aktiv an der Bekämpfung des Terrorismus und an der Unterstützung der Opfer der Terroranschläge, und wir können nicht oft genug wiederholen, dass es keinerlei Rechtfertigung für Terrorismus geben kann. Deshalb müssen wir in diesem Kampf auf der Grundlage des Rechtsstaats und mit der ganzen Kraft des Gesetzes gemeinsam vorgehen. Heute im Europäischen Parlament gelten unsere Gedanken und unsere Solidarität allen Opfern des Terrorismus, wo immer in der Welt sie ums Leben gekommen sind. In Erinnerung an die Opfer der Real IRA und des Selbstmordanschlages in Sri Lanka darf ich Sie bitten, in Stille der Opfer zu gedenken.

(Das Parlament erhebt sich zu einer Schweigeminute.)

Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, vor dreißig Jahren, am 16. März 1979, ist der große Europäer Jean Monnet, einer der Gründerväter des Europäischen Einigungswerkes, verstorben. Anlässlich dieses 30. Todestages möchte ich zu Beginn dieser Plenarsitzung des Europäischen Parlaments sein Lebenswerk für die europäische Einigung und sein Erbe ehren und kurz würdigen.

Heute gedenken wir des unschätzbaren Vermächtnisses eines Mannes, der mit Robert Schuman, einem der Meister der Versöhnung zwischen Deutschland und Frankreich, den ersten Schritt zur Errichtung einer auf Frieden, Verständigung, Demokratie und Zusammenarbeit basierenden Schicksalsgemeinschaft zwischen den Menschen in Europa getan hat. Heute, zu Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts, haben die von Jean Monnet hervorgehobenen Grundsätze und die zu ihrer Umsetzung angewandte Methode nichts von ihrer Aktualität eingebüßt. Im Gegenteil, ihre Gültigkeit erscheint offenkundig. Gerade die mit der Globalisierung, der Wirtschafts- und Finanzkrise sowie der Erderwärmung verbundenen großen Herausforderungen müssen die Europäer veranlassen, immer enger zusammenzuarbeiten, um unsere gemeinsamen Werte und Interessen in der Welt wirksam zu verteidigen. Natürlich würde Jean Monnet die im Vertrag von Lissabon enthaltenen Fortschritte in Richtung auf eine demokratische und handlungsfähige, den Herausforderungen des 21. Jahrhunderts angepasste Europäischen Union begrüßen.

Und abschließend: Es war das von Jean Monnet gegründete Aktionskomitee für die Vereinigten Staaten von Europa, das unter anderem die Direktwahl zum Europäischen Parlament vorschlug. Dieser Traum hat sich in den letzten dreißig Jahren seit dem Tod von Jean Monnet mit dem Aufbau der parlamentarischen Dimension der Europäischen Union beeindruckend verwirklicht. Wir alle sind die Erben dieses großen Europäers Jean Monnet. Sein Werk ist dauerhaft. Es hat die Beziehungen zwischen den europäischen Staaten tiefgreifend verändert und beeinflusst bis heute das Leben all ihrer Bürgerinnen und Bürger.

Anlässlich des 30. Todestages von Jean Monnet möchte ich an unsere Aufgabe und Verpflichtung für die Zukunft erinnern, das von Jean Monnet eingeleitete große, aber noch unvollendete Werk der Einigung unseres Kontinents engagiert fortzusetzen.

  José Manuel Barroso, Président de la Commission. − Monsieur le Président, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, "entre pays séparés, l'avantage de chacun est limité aux résultats de son effort isolé, aux gains qu'il obtient sur son voisin, aux difficultés qu'il réussit à lui transférer. Dans notre Communauté, l'avantage de chacun des membres est l'effet de la prospérité de l'ensemble". Ce sont les mots que Jean Monnet a prononcés en 1954. Ils n'ont rien perdu de leur actualité, au contraire.

Ce mois de mars, comme vient de le dire le président Pöttering, marque le trentième anniversaire de sa mort, en 1979. C'est pourquoi je tiens à rendre hommage à ce père fondateur de l'Europe que nous aimons, ce grand Européen dont l'héritage ne peut que nous inspirer en ces temps de crise.

Récemment, et aussi pour marquer le cinquantième anniversaire de la Commission européenne, nous avons décidé de dédier la salle du Collège – la salle principale de la Commission – à la mémoire de Jean Monnet dans une cérémonie très simple, mais pleine de signification, pendant laquelle j'ai eu le plaisir et l'honneur d'avoir à mes côtés non seulement le Président du Parlement européen, Hans-Gert Pöttering, mais aussi le Président en exercice du Conseil européen, Nicolas Sarkozy.

Ceci pour vous dire qu'à la Commission, nous sommes fiers de l'héritage immense de Jean Monnet qui, en tant que premier président de la Communauté européenne du charbon et de l'acier, était en fait le premier président de l'institution à l'origine de notre institution, la Commission européenne, qui fait de son mieux pour maintenir bien vivants les idéaux de Jean Monnet, qui sont les idéaux de tous les Européens aimant la paix, la démocratie et la solidarité.

(Applaudissements)

  José Ribeiro e Castro (PPE-DE). - Eu junto também a minha palavra às homenagens a Jean Monnet, mas eu pedi a palavra para saudar o Senhor Presidente pela declaração que fez a propósito do Dia Europeu em Memória das Vítimas do Terrorismo. Foi por minha proposta que, há cinco anos, adoptámos esta orientação que o Conselho consagrou numa reunião, em 25 de Março, a seguir aos trágicos atentados de Madrid. Mas a minha intervenção era um apelo. O Parlamento tem sido sempre fiel à celebração desta data, mas infelizmente esta data ainda não teve no conjunto das instituições europeias e dos Estados-Membros a projecção que deveria ter. Eu creio que a celebração desta data é um dos instrumentos mais importantes que temos para homenagearmos as vítimas, como o senhor Presidente fez, mas também para levantarmos o nível de consciência da opinião pública. Sei que há hoje umas celebrações em Madrid mas pouco mais.

Portanto, o apelo que faço à Comissão, à Presidência checa, é que todos os Estados-Membros celebrem condignamente esta data no futuro.

3. Tħejjija tal-Kunsill Ewropew (19-20 ta' Marzu 2009) - Pjan Ewropew ta' rkupru ekonomiku - Linji gwida għal politika dwar l-impjiegi tal-Istati Membri - Politika ta' Koeżjoni: investiment fl-ekonomika reali (dibattitu)

  Der Präsident. − Als nächster Punkt folgt die Gemeinsame Ausspracheüber die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission: Vorbereitung des Europäischen Rates (19_ und 20. März 2009),

den Bericht von Elisa Ferreira in Namen des Ausschusses für Wirtschaft und Währung über ein europäisches Konjunkturprogramm [2008/2334(INI)] - (A6-0063/2009),

den Bericht von Jan Andersson in Namen des Ausschusses für Beschäftigung und soziale Angelegenheiten über den Vorschlag für eine Entscheidung des Rates über Leitlinien für beschäftigungspolitische Maßnahmen der Mitgliedstaaten [KOM(2008)0869 - C6-0050/2009 - 2008/0252(CNS)] - (A6-0052/2009),

den Bericht von Evgeni Kirilov in Namen des Ausschusses für regionale Entwicklung über die Kohäsionspolitik: in die Realwirtschaft investieren [2009/2009(INI)] - (A6-0075/2009).

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, let me first join you in paying tribute to Jean Monnet. We are in a time of crisis, and I think this is exactly the time when we need a strong institution, and it is a great opportunity to raise the importance of Jean Monnet as one of the founding fathers of European integration.

However, the purpose of today’s meeting is to discuss the upcoming European Council. This Council, as we all know, comes at a critical time for the Union. We face very significant challenges as a result of unprecedented stresses on our financial systems and our economies as well.

This issue, together with energy security, climate change and the financing of the mitigation and adaptation to climate change, will be the focus of next week’s meeting.

As this Parliament certainly knows, a wide range of measures have been taken by the Union and the Member States in the face of the financial crisis. We have avoided a meltdown of the financial system.

Our top priority now is the restoration of credit flows to the economy. We have to deal in particular with the ‘impaired assets’ held by banks, since these discourage them from resuming lending. At their meeting on 1 March, the heads of state and government agreed that we should do this in a coordinated manner, in line with the guidelines provided by the Commission.

We also need to do more to improve the regulation and supervision of financial institutions. This is a clear lesson from the crisis, and prevention is no less important. Cross-border banks hold up to 80% of Europe’s banking assets. Two thirds of European banks’ assets are held in only 44 multinational groups. Strengthening supervision is, therefore, important in itself. It will help prevent future crises, but it will also send a message of confidence to consumers and markets.

Important work is under way in that respect. The Presidency is fully committed to working closely with the European Parliament with a view to the rapid adoption of the Solvency II Directive (on insurance), the revised Credit Requirements Directive (on banks) and the UCITS Directive (on undertakings for collective investment in transferable securities). We are also working to get rapid adoption of the regulations on the protection of bank deposits and on credit-rating agencies.

However, we probably need to go further. The High Level Group, chaired by Mr de Larosière, has produced, as you know, very interesting recommendations, and the Commission’s communication of 4 March also paves the way for significant reform in this area. So the European Council must send a clear message that this is a priority and that decisions need to be taken as early as June.

As you are well aware, Member States’ budget deficits are growing fast right now. Of course, deficits inevitably swell in times of economic recession. Automatic stabilisers can, to some extent, play a positive role. The Stability and Growth Pact was revised in 2005 precisely for that reason, to allow for sufficient flexibility in difficult times. But this flexibility needs to be used judiciously, taking into account different starting points. Restoring confidence also requires governments to give a clear commitment to sound public finances, fully respecting the Stability and Growth Pact. Some Member States have already made efforts towards consolidation. Most will do so from 2010. This will also be an important message from next week’s meeting.

The financial crisis is now affecting the real economy. Member States have launched significant recovery programmes, which are now well under way. The overall stimulus this offers represents, as was agreed, 1.5% of the GDP, but, if you include its automatic stabilisers, it comes to 3.3% of the EU’s GDP. Of course, Member States’ responses are different. They face different situations and have different margins for manoeuvre. But they are coordinated and are based on common principles defined in the European Recovery Programme, which was agreed last December. This is important if we are to ensure synergies and avoid negative spill-over effects.

Specific and targeted action has been elaborated on in a synergic way between the Commission and the Member States and the Presidency. That enabled us to both keep the level playing field and, at the same time, face in a concerted and efficient manner the aggravations in some of Europe’s key industrial sectors, such as the automotive industry.

The European Council will assess the state of implementation of this programme. Here too, the Commission’s communication of 4 March sets out a number of important principles which should guide the action of Member States. They include the need to maintain openness within the internal market, ensuring non-discrimination and working towards long-term policy goals, such as facilitating structural change, enhancing competitiveness and building a low-carbon economy.

As far as the Community part of the Recovery Programme is concerned, the Presidency is working very hard to reach an agreement in the European Council on the Commission proposal to finance energy and rural development projects. As you know, there have been discussions within the Council over the precise list of projects to be supported by the Community and how they should be funded.

Given the important role of Parliament, as one of the branches of the budgetary authority and as co-legislator in this matter, the Presidency is committed to close cooperation with you over the coming weeks, with a view to reaching an agreement as soon as possible.

In addition to the short-term measures, long-term efforts are needed if we are to ensure the competitiveness of our economies. Structural reforms are more urgent than ever if we are to promote growth and jobs. So the renewed Lisbon Strategy remains the right framework within which to promote sustainable economic growth, which will, in turn, lead to the creation of new jobs.

At the moment, our citizens are particularly worried about the effect of the economic situation on levels of unemployment. Next week’s European Council should agree on concrete orientations on how the EU can contribute to mitigating the social impact of the crisis. This issue will also be the focus of the special summit which will take place in early May.

Let me be clear on one point: we will not protect jobs by creating barriers to foreign competition. At their meeting 10 days ago, the heads of state and government were clear that we have to make the maximum possible use of the single market as the engine for recovery. Protectionism is clearly not the right answer to face this crisis – quite the opposite. More than ever, our companies need open markets, both internally within the Union, but also at the global level.

Which leads me to the G20 Summit meeting in London. The European Council will establish the Union’s position in advance of the G20 Summit. We want this summit to be ambitious. We cannot afford it to fail.

Leaders will be looking at prospects for growth and employment and at reform of the global financial system and of the international financial institutions. They will also be looking at the particular challenges facing developing countries. The EU is active in all these areas and should be in a strong position to ensure that the international community takes the right decisions.

The other major item on the agenda of next week’s European Council will be energy security. The recent energy crisis demonstrated all too clearly the extent to which we need to increase our ability to resist future supply problems, as we could see earlier this year.

The Commission has provided some very useful elements in its Second Strategic Energy Review. On the basis of this review, the Presidency intends that the European Council agree on a set of concrete orientations aimed at enhancing the Union’s energy security in the short, medium and long term.

In the short term, this means having available concrete measures which can be called on if we are suddenly faced with a new disruption of gas supplies. It also means taking urgent steps to launch infrastructure projects to enhance energy interconnections – this is certainly essential.

In the medium term, it means adapting our legislation on oil and gas stocks to ensure that Member States act with responsibility and solidarity. It means taking adequate measures to improve energy efficiency.

In the long term, it means diversifying our sources, suppliers and routes of supply. We have to work with our international partners to promote the Union’s energy interests. We must create a fully fledged internal market for electricity and gas. As you know, this is legislation which the Presidency very much hopes can be completed before the European elections.

Next week’s meeting will also discuss the preparations for the Copenhagen Conference on Climate Change. We remain committed to a global, comprehensive agreement in Copenhagen next December. The Commission’s January communication is a very helpful basis. It is very clear that climate change is a challenge which can only be tackled through a concerted global effort.

Finally, the European Council will also launch the Eastern Partnership. This important initiative will help to promote stability and prosperity on the whole continent. It will also contribute to accelerating reforms and to deepening our commitment to work together with those countries.

The partnership includes a bilateral dimension which is adapted to each partner country. It foresees the negotiation of association agreements, which might include deep and comprehensive free trade areas.

The multilateral track will provide a framework in which common challenges can be addressed. There will be four policy platforms: democracy, good governance and stability; economic integration; energy security; and, last but not least, contacts between people.

You will appreciate from this presentation that next week’s European Council has many substantial issues to address. We are facing many serious challenges, not least the current economic crisis. The Czech Presidency, through the leadership of Prime Minister Topolánek, intends to ensure that the meeting next week demonstrates through practical action that the European Union remains committed to its ideals and that it faces these challenges together in a coordinated manner and in a spirit of responsibility and of solidarity.

(Applause)

  José Manuel Barroso, Président de la Commission. − Monsieur le Président du Parlement européen, Monsieur le Président du Conseil, Monsieur le premier vice-ministre Vondra, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, la période que nous vivons nous met à l'épreuve.

Une crise économique de cette ampleur fait sentir ses effets sur les familles, sur les travailleurs, sur toutes les catégories de population et sur les entreprises, aux quatre coins de l'Europe. Elle fait perdre des emplois, elle sollicite la résistance de nos modèles sociaux. Elle exerce aussi une forte pression politique sur tous les responsables.

L'Union européenne n'est pas à l'abri de ces tensions. C'est pourquoi elle a décidé de faire jouer tous les leviers dont elle dispose pour prendre la crise et ses conséquences à bras-le-corps, en utilisant ce qui fait sa force: des institutions européennes et des États membres qui travaillent ensemble dans une communauté de droit pour apporter des solutions collectives à des problèmes communs.

Mesdames et Messieurs, nous avons déjà fait beaucoup ces six derniers mois pour combattre la crise que nous vivons. Nous avons évité un effondrement du système financier à l'automne; nous avons contribué à lancer un processus international avec le G20; nous avons été parmi les premiers à mettre l'accent sur l'économie réelle en nous accordant sur un plan de relance en décembre, un plan dont la recommandation numéro un – une stimulation budgétaire sans précédent au niveau européen – commence à être mise en œuvre. Ce soutien à l'économie réelle correspond à un total de 3,3 % du PIB et comprend une vraie contribution du budget européen.

Le plan de relance prévoit, par exemple, une accélération des avances sur les fonds structurels pour une enveloppe de 6,3 milliards d'euros en 2009, qui viennent s'ajouter aux 5 milliards d'euros déjà prévus.

Les actions menées dans les six derniers mois s'inscrivent pleinement dans la stratégie de Lisbonne pour la croissance et l'emploi. Les réformes de structure, qui ont bien contribué au renforcement de nos économies, doivent être poursuivies car elles contribuent aussi à soutenir la demande à court terme, mais nous devons maintenant passer au stade suivant pour un déploiement plus complet des mesures pour combattre la crise.

Nous avons besoin d'une plus grande coordination et d'effets plus larges. C'est le moment de passer à la vitesse supérieure dans notre réponse à la crise. Je crois qu'il faut vraiment comprendre que c'est une crise d'un type nouveau et que nous n'avons jamais envisagé une crise avec cette dimension, cette ampleur, cette profondeur.

Ce sera la mission du Conseil européen la semaine prochaine. Avec le très fort soutien de la présidence tchèque, dont je salue l'engagement et la parfaite coopération avec la Commission, je suis convaincu qu'il y aura des avancées dans quatre domaines que la Commission a définis il y a quelques jours dans sa communication: les marchés financiers, l'économie réelle, l'emploi et la dimension sociale ainsi que la dimension globale avec le G20.

Le sommet informel du 1er mars, dans une très large mesure grâce à la présidence efficace du premier ministre Mirek Topolánek, a déjà jeté les bases d'un Conseil européen fructueux. Je suis fier de constater que le travail préparatoire de la Commission a trouvé un accueil aussi favorable. Nos lignes directrices sur les actifs dépréciés, notre communication sur le secteur automobile et le rapport que j'avais confié à Jacques de Larosière et son groupe de haut niveau ont permis aux États membres de construire un consensus pour qu'ils puissent se rassembler autour de positions communes.

Je suis heureux du large soutien qui se dessine autour de ces pistes d'action au Parlement européen. J'en prends pour témoin les rapports dont nous débattrons ce matin, le rapport Ferreira sur le plan de relance économique, le rapport Andersson sur les lignes directrices pour l'emploi et le rapport Kirilov sur la politique de cohésion.

Ces rapports et les résolutions que votre Assemblée votera cette semaine, notamment celles du groupe de coordination sur la stratégie de Lisbonne, apportent une contribution que je crois essentielle au Conseil européen. Ils ne peuvent que renforcer la position de l'Europe sur la scène internationale à la veille du sommet de Londres, et je m'en félicite.

Mr President, I would like briefly to pick out three themes which I believe must guide this European Council’s work: stabilising financial markets, revitalising the real economy and helping people make it through the crisis.

Look at the financial system. Yes, we need immediate action to address immediate problems. After our initiatives on recapitalisation and guarantees, our guidance on impaired assets targets the major obstacle now identified as blocking the flow of credit. I believe, and it is in our communication, that without cleaning the banking system, we will not see the restoration of credit flow to the real economy.

But, as has often been argued in this Chamber, we also need to rebuild confidence through a major overhaul of our regulatory regime. That is why we have set out a detailed calendar of new regulatory proposals. Next month the Commission will come forward with new proposals on hedge funds, on private equity and on executive pay.

But we must also revamp supervision. As you will have seen from the communication the Commission adopted last Wednesday and which I had an opportunity to discuss with your Conference of Presidents the following day, the Commission is keen to accelerate implementation of the de Larosière report. We will present the overall architecture at the end of May for endorsement by the European Council in June, and we will come with legislative proposals in the autumn.

In more general terms, beyond financial systems, using short-term action to target our long-term goals will pay double dividends. It will make us stronger when the upturn comes, ready to face the challenge of competitiveness and a low-carbon economy.

Just look at energy security. The fact that we are in an economic crisis does not make our problems of dependency disappear. On the contrary, and I welcome the decision of Prime Minister Topolánek to have a discussion on this issue. This is central to what we are doing. Investing in infrastructure brings a stimulus today, and it is badly needed for the European economy. But it also makes us stronger and more competitive tomorrow. That is why your support, the European Parliament’s support for the EUR 5 billion stimulus to energy and broadband projects is so valuable – the more so as I am rather concerned, to be honest with you, about the state of play in Council, where we are not making the progress I would wish to see.

Of course we all know that the Community budget, at less than 1% of GDP, can only make a limited contribution to a European-wide stimulus. The money has to come, essentially, from national budgets. But we need to deploy all national levers in the European perspective in order to be effective. The single market is the best possible platform for recovery. In 2006 alone, Europe was richer by EUR 240 billion, or the equivalent of EUR 518 for every European citizen because of the single market.

The European Council should cement its place at the heart of our recovery strategy by agreeing principles that should shape the European recovery, including a shared commitment to openness and a level playing field internally and externally, so clearly rejecting protectionism but of course protecting the single market, the bedrock of European prosperity.

Most importantly, though, we must acknowledge that this is not a question of economic theory or dry statistics. This crisis is having a major impact on people, namely the most vulnerable across Europe – now, today. That is why my number one concern – by far the most important test we face – is the social impact of this crisis, namely the problem of rising unemployment.

We have to focus our energy on employment and on helping people make it through the crisis. This requires determination and imagination. We need to help companies to keep workers on their books, to use training imaginatively to serve long- and short-term needs, and we need to bring help to those already unemployed. We need to be sure that we make the most of national actions to help the most vulnerable. But we need also to make the most of the European instruments we have, from the Social Fund to the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund.

Launching a process now which takes us up to the Employment Summit in May gives us two months of intensive efforts to put plans in place and, if possible, to develop new and more ambitious strategies to tackle the unemployment problem. We need to use this time well.

Though time is short, I believe we should try to organise a much more inclusive process in the run-up, involving social partners, civil society and parliamentarians. It is particularly important that we take advantage of your privileged insight into what is really happening on the ground. If we follow this approach of pooling our resources and coordinating action at all levels – at European level, at national level, at regional level, at social partners’ level – we will emerge from the crisis quicker and, I believe, stronger.

We will also carry more weight on the global stage. It is no coincidence that the proposals we have made for the European Union’s G20 position have a strong echo of our approach within Europe. They are based around the same principles. With a unified European Union voice in the G20, they will carry a lot of weight and the European Union will be – if the Member States are ready to really work together – in a very good position to shape the global response to this crisis.

Europe today has to find its strength in cohesion, in coordination, in real practical solidarity. For that we must all work closely together and stay in close touch as the task of recovery unfolds, including, of course, with this Parliament.

I look forward to making this a reality as we all work for recovery in the coming weeks and months.

  Elisa Ferreira, relatora. − Senhor Presidente, Senhor Presidente da Comissão, caros Colegas, a actual crise é a maior que algum dia a União Europeia conheceu. Ela está infelizmente longe do seu fim. As falências ainda não estão contidas e o desemprego está a continuar a crescer. Nunca até hoje o projecto europeu esteve sujeito a uma prova tão dura. E da nossa resposta comum vai depender não só a robustez do relançamento, mas provavelmente a própria continuidade do projecto europeu, pelo menos a celeridade do nosso aprofundamento e alargamento.

Não criámos a União Europeia para em tempo de prosperidade a limitar a um grande mercado, nem para, em tempos de crise, regressarmos aos egoísmos nacionais do “cada um por si”. O projecto europeu é um projecto político, é garante de paz, liberdade e democracia, mas em termos económicos assenta tanto na concorrência como na solidariedade e na coesão. E ele vive mesmo da capacidade de dar qualidade e oportunidades de progresso a todos os cidadãos, seja qual for a sua origem.

Hoje, nesta crise, os cidadãos esperam da Europa a protecção e a acção que os ajude a passar com urgência, sem rupturas sociais graves, a actual fase crítica que os ajude a reencontrar o seu futuro, a relançar o emprego e as empresas em torno de novos e mais sustentáveis vectores de desenvolvimento.

A Agenda de Lisboa, os compromissos em matéria ambiental são desígnios inspiradores, mas é preciso de facto dar-lhes com urgência corpo e acção. Neste sentido, a voz deste Parlamento para o Conselho e para a Comissão é clara, ela é forte, ela é audível. A convergência que atingimos na votação em Comité Económico e Monetário ilustra esta vontade comum. E eu espero que a votação, que hoje terá lugar aqui, continue a provar isso mesmo.

Trabalhamos em conjunto, os vários relatores, os vários partidos, e espero que esta mensagem passe e seja percebida pela Comissão nesse sentido.

Gostaria de saudar, neste contexto, os relatores-sombra em particular o Sr. Hökmark e a Sra. in 't Veld e espero que com essa mesma determinação a votação hoje nos leve à concretização e ao avançar dessa mensagem.

Sobre as causas desta crise, hoje interessa mais do que tudo extrair lições. É, de facto, um guia muito importante que nós temos de assumir, o relatório de Larosière. Ele é uma boa base de trabalho, ele recupera muito do que aqui já tínhamos proposto. As suas conclusões têm, no entanto, de gerar, de facto, acção imediata e calendarizada por parte da Comissão. E é importante uma presença determinada da União Europeia nesta matéria na próxima reunião do G20.

Penso que, neste contexto, há elementos que são simbólicos e espero que o Parlamento, hoje, vote inequivocamente o combate aos “offshores” e aos paraísos fiscais. Não basta, no entanto, corrigir erros do passado, nomeadamente em matéria de supervisão e de regulação financeira. Hoje o mal está feito e é preciso um programa de relançamento à altura das responsabilidades da União. Nós saudamos a rápida iniciativa da Comissão, mas temos consciência, e temos que ser claros, que os meios e instrumentos de intervenção são manifestamente insuficientes.

O Parlamento dá um voto à Comissão de apoio a toda a flexibilização, antecipação, agilização dos instrumentos disponíveis, mas não podemos esquecer que 85% dos recursos que hoje estão disponíveis assentam nas mãos dos diferentes países que compõem a União Europeia. Ora, os países da União nunca foram tão diferentes entre si como hoje. Alguns países têm poder, têm instrumentos para intervir, outros estão completamente vulneráveis e a sua caixa de ferramentas está completamente vazia. Há países sem margem de manobra nacional, há países incapazes de resistir à violência das forças, simultaneamente do mercado interno, da moeda única e da globalização, e, entre estes, os novos países que acabaram de se juntar ao projecto europeu estão entre os mais penalizados.

Senhor Presidente, caros Colegas, penso que, neste momento, a nossa mensagem, do Parlamento, se desagrega numa quantidade de mensagens muito claras, muito precisas, mas numa ideia comum, e essa ideia comum é o objectivo: são os cidadãos, é o emprego, são os meios nacionais, mas têm também de ser os meios europeus, para relançarmos como os cidadãos esperam, a dinâmica, o crescimento e a solidariedade no espaço europeu.

  Jan Andersson, föredragande. − Herr talman, rådsordförande, kommissionen! Det har funnits en diskussion om huruvida sysselsättningsriktlinjerna behöver ändras eller inte. Det är ingen särskilt viktig diskussion, för inom sysselsättningsriktlinjerna så finns alla möjligheter att agera. Problemet nu är bristen på handlingskraft. Vi har nu haft och har en finansiell kris som gått över till en ekonomisk kris, och nu slår sysselsättningskrisen in och vi kommer att få sociala problem i framtiden.

Det är bra att ett sysselsättningstoppmöte anordnas i maj, men vi får inte isolera sysselsättningsfrågorna från de ekonomiska frågorna. Därför måste de integreras i diskussionen. Jag tycker att man har agerat för lite och för sent. 1,5 procent av BNP i medlemsländerna – det var riktigt när man sa det, men idag är krisen värre än vad vi trodde då. Vi behöver fler insatser, mer samordnade insatser – säkert över 2 procent – för att klara av den. Risken att inte göra tillräckligt och att göra det för sent är mycket, mycket större än att göra för mycket, för det kommer att resultera i ökad arbetslöshet och det kommer att resultera i minskade skatteintäkter, vilket kommer att påverka de sociala problemen ute i medlemsländerna.

Vad ska vi göra? Vi vet det ganska väl. Vi ska binda ihop det som är kortsiktigt bra när det gäller kampen mot arbetslösheten med det långsiktiga. Det handlar om miljöinvesteringar, det handlar om nya infrastrukturprojekt, det handlar om energieffektivitet i bostäder och det handlar om utbildning, utbildning och utbildning.

Vi har pratat om det livslånga lärandet. Vi har aldrig gjort tillräckligt, men nu har vi chansen att kunna göra en kraftig utbildningssatsning. Vi ska också stimulera efterfrågan, och då ska vi vända oss till de grupper som kommer att använda medlen för konsumtion: arbetslösa, barnfamiljer, pensionärer och andra som kommer att använda en ökad mängd pengar för att konsumera.

Vi ska göra vad vi kan på EU-nivå och vi försöker att snabbt behandla Socialfonden och Globaliseringsfonden så att medlen kommer ut i medlemsländerna. Men ska vi vara riktigt ärliga så vet vi att de stora ekonomiska medlen finns i medlemsländerna och om inte medlemsländerna agerar tillräckligt och tillräckligt samordnat så kommer vi inte att lyckas. Tittar vi runt och rensar det som medlemsländerna gjort så är det bara ett land som kommer upp i 1,5 procent, och det är Tyskland, som först inte var det land som stod i frontlinjen när det gällde att agera. Övriga länder, t.ex. de nordiska länderna, där jag kommer ifrån, gör mycket små insatser för att agera trots att deras ekonomiska situation är god.

De sociala konsekvenserna. Ni har nämnt dem och de är synnerligen viktiga. De påverkar inte bara de sociala trygghetssystemen, utan också den offentliga sektorn. Den offentliga sektorn är dubbelt viktig. Det handlar om att ge människorna barnomsorg, äldreomsorg, social trygghet men den är också viktig för sysselsättningen. Massor av människor finns i den offentliga sektorn och vi måste se till så att den har tillräckligt med ekonomiska medel.

Jag ska också ta upp ungdomarna. Ungdomarna går nu ut i arbetslöshet direkt från studier. Vi måste skapa möjligheter för ungdomar att få sysselsättning eller vidareutbildning eller vad det nu kan vara. Annars drar vi på oss problem för framtiden. Avslutningsvis måste vi agera. Vi måste agera samordnat med solidaritet, vi måste agera nu och inte vänta och vi måste agera med tillräckliga insatser.

(Applåder)

  Евгени Кирилов, докладчик. − Благодаря, г-н Председател, уважаеми Министър Vondra, уважаеми г-н Barroso. Подготовката на доклада "Кохезионната политика и инвестиране в реалната икономика" протече в много кратък срок. Независимо от това постигнахме един съгласуван и единодушно подкрепен документ. Този добър резултат нямаше да бъде възможен без участието и съдействието на колегите от комисията, докладчиците в сянка и на сътрудничеството между всички политически групи, за което благодаря на всички.

Бих искал да се спра на основните послания на доклада. Първо, във всички случаи този доклад подкрепя предложените от Европейската комисия мерки за ускоряване и опростяване на прилагането на структурните фондове, сред които са увеличаването на авансовите плащания, въвеждането на по-гъвкави схеми за отчитане на разходите и др. Тези мерки наистина са ни необходими сега, когато се нуждаем от адекватен отговор на икономическата криза, от инвестиране в реалната икономика, от съхраняване и създаване на работни места, и от насърчаване на предприемачеството. Тези мерки обаче не са единствено израз на необходимостта да действаме по-ефективно и ефикасно. Предложенията за опростяване на правилата са отдавна желани и чакани от ползвателите на еврофондовете и са в отговор на препоръки от наша страна и от страна на Европейската сметна палата.

Второ, политиката на сближаване е политика на солидарност. Нуждаем се обаче не само от декларирана солидарност, а от солидарност в действие. В условията на взаимозависимост на европейските икономики отрицателните ефекти на кризата засягат всички. За противодействие на тези ефекти трябва да се постигнат положителни резултати, които ще водят до широка полза и които са в изпълнение на поставените цели за растеж и развитие в Лисабонската стратегия. Същевременно е важно да се запазят социалните стандарти на гражданите на Евросъюза, да защитим социално слабите и същевременно да не се нарушава конкуренцията и да не се отстъпва от защита на околната среда. В този смисъл солидарността и сближаването са нужни в най-голяма степен, за да успеем заедно да намерим по-бързо изход от кризата.

Трето, важно е да извлечем уроци от настоящата криза и мерките, които ще бъдат предприети, да не останат изолирани. Анализирането на грешките и натрупания опит трябва да продължи. Също така не трябва да спира дотук процесът на опростяване на процедурите. Правилата трябва да се направят по-ясни, информацията - по-достъпна, административната тежест - по-малка и процедурите - по-прозрачни. Само така ще намалеят грешките и ще се ограничат възможностите за нарушение и корупция.

Накрая бих искал да призова Съвета да приеме във възможно най-кратък срок предложените мерки за ускоряване и опростяване на използването на структурните фондове. Обръщам се също така и към членовете на Европейската комисия, от които очакваме да наблюдават ефекта на новите мерки и да дават нови предложения заедно с целия процес. И, не на последно място, искам да подчертая основната роля на страните-членки, от които зависи изпълнението и постигането на реалните резултати от прилагане на политиката на сближаване. Ще завърша пак с въпроса за солидарност в действие.

  Salvador Garriga Polledo, Ponente de opinión de la Comisión de Presupuestos. − Señor Presidente, en nombre de la Comisión de Presupuestos queríamos indicar fundamentalmente que este plan de recuperación económica tiene una dimensión mucho más intergubernamental que comunitaria y que muestra los límites financieros reales de la Unión Europea.

Vamos a utilizar, desde el punto de vista comunitario, 30 000 millones de euros que van a ser prácticamente movilizados por el Banco Europeo de Inversiones, y en la parte estrictamente perteneciente al presupuesto comunitario de 5 000 millones nos encontramos con grandes problemas.

No existen nuevos recursos, sino que lo que se produce es una redistribución de los recursos ya existentes. En cuanto al Banco Europeo de Inversiones, estamos completamente de acuerdo en que se recurra a él, pero hay que señalar que estamos preocupados porque le encomendamos muchas obligaciones sin tener la garantía de que las pueda llevar adelante.

Finalmente, lamentamos la incapacidad del Consejo para llegar a un acuerdo sobre esos 5 000 millones de euros que van para interconexiones energéticas y para la banda ancha rural.

Lo que creemos es que no se deben utilizar los márgenes no utilizados, sino que lo que tienen que hacer la Comisión Europea y el Consejo es volcarse en los recursos que les da el propio Acuerdo interinstitucional.

  Elisabeth Morin, rapporteure pour avis de la commission de l'emploi et des affaires sociales. − Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président de la Commission, c'est la voix unanime de la commission de l'emploi et des affaires sociales que je voudrais vous apporter ce matin, parce que nous souhaitons, à travers ce plan de relance, que la cohésion sociale soit vraiment mise en valeur. Elle passe par l'intégration professionnelle; c'est donc d'abord le maintien dans l'emploi de l'ensemble des salariés et le retour dans l'emploi de ceux qui sont au chômage que nous voulons porter à travers, notamment, le fléchage du Fonds d'ajustement à la mondialisation vers des formations nouvelles, de sorte que la main-d'œuvre soit préparée à la sortie de crise.

C'est donc, à court terme, maintenir dans l'emploi; à moyen terme, mieux former les salariés pour la sortie de crise; et, à long terme, innover, y compris dans les organisations sociales à travers les groupements d'employeurs.

L'Europe est condamnée à innover pour survivre dans cette globalisation.

  Joseph Daul, au nom du groupe PPE-DE. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, le Conseil européen de la semaine prochaine ne doit pas être un sommet comme les autres. Il ne doit pas être un sommet de routine. Les Européens en attendent des signaux concrets, et mon groupe parlementaire aussi.

Ce sommet doit être celui de l'affirmation de la force et de la détermination de l'Europe dans la crise. Cette force, l'Europe l'a prouvée en adoptant, par le passé, les règles de l'économie sociale de marché, qui limite les dommages d'une crise sans précédent qui affecte toutes les régions du monde en même temps. Et cette force, l'Europe en a fait la preuve en se dotant, il y a dix ans, d'une monnaie, l'euro, qui traverse sa première grande épreuve, mais qui tient bon.

Mais l'Europe forte ne doit pas être une Europe protectionniste. L'Europe qui protège, du fait de ses règles, ne doit pas être une Europe forteresse, car la sortie de la crise ne passera pas par le repli sur soi, mais par l'ouverture et l'affirmation de qui nous sommes. La force de l'Europe dans la tempête, plus encore que par beau temps, c'est d'agir pour nos concitoyens et, pour les plus démunis d'entre eux, en premier lieu de façon unie.

Avec la Commission, avec José Manuel Barroso, dont je salue le train de mesures inspirées du rapport de Larosière, l'Europe se bat pour sauver le système bancaire.

Elle se bat et nous nous battons avec elle non pas, comme certains veulent le croire, pour sauver les emplois des traders, mais pour éviter un crash généralisé de l'ensemble de notre économie et parce qu'il n'y aura pas de reprise durable sans un système bancaire sain.

L'Europe se bat de façon efficace, et je salue l'accord intervenu hier soir sur la TVA réduite pour la restauration et la construction, pour mettre en place une véritable supervision des marchés financiers, pour sauver des emplois, pour sauvegarder ou rétablir la confiance et pour assurer un avenir aux Européens.

Chers collègues, j'ai parlé de force, j'ai parlé d'unité, j'ai parlé d'efficacité, mais la raison d'être, la motivation de tout cela, c'est bien la solidarité. C'est cela l'Europe de Jean Monnet et de tous les pères fondateurs. À quoi cela aurait-il servi de faire l'Europe au lendemain de la dernière guerre, si c'était pour renoncer et pour faire du "chacun pour soi" 60 ans plus tard, à l'occasion de la crise économique la plus grave depuis 1929?

Nos concitoyens se demandent parfois à quoi sert l'Europe. À nous de montrer que l'Europe est solidaire vis-à-vis de ses 500 millions de concitoyens, dont beaucoup vivent cette crise dans l'angoisse, et solidaire aussi vis-à-vis des pays de l'Union – je pense à l'Irlande, je pense à la Hongrie, je pense à d'autres qui éprouvent des difficultés particulières.

Je demande, au nom de mon groupe, à chacun des chefs d'État et de gouvernement des Vingt-sept de ne pas céder à la tentation de l'isolement qui serait, et je le dis bien, suicidaire pour tous nos pays.

Je demande à M. Vondra, à M. Barroso, et à vous aussi M. Pöttering, qui interviendrez au Conseil européen au nom de notre Parlement, de faire le choix de la solidarité et de l'innovation. Oui, je dis bien de l'innovation, car je suis convaincu que nous ne sortirons de la crise que par des moyens nouveaux et par des investissements massifs dans l'économie de la connaissance, dans la recherche et dans le développement.

Il faut mettre à profit, le plus vite possible, l'immense potentiel dont dispose l'Union européenne en matière de nouvelles technologies environnementales car ces éco-innovations doivent être intégrées dans toutes les politiques européennes, ce qui donnera un véritable élan industriel pour la reprise économique.

De même, les obstacles réglementaires sur le marché intérieur, qui entravent encore le développement de ces technologies, doivent être levés au plus vite, et un réel marché intérieur des énergies renouvelables, avec des règles du jeu claires, doit être mis en place car, dans une crise, rien ne sera plus comme aujourd'hui et il faut préparer cet "autrement". C'est tout le sens de la stratégie de Lisbonne et, à présent, post-Lisbonne.

Mon groupe parlementaire, à l'image du centre-droit en Europe, est une force politique responsable. Nous sommes pour une économie dotée de règles, nous sommes pour une économie sociale de marché. Cela nous interdit la démagogie et le populisme. Cela nous oblige à parler vrai aux Européens. J'espère que le prochain Conseil européen s'inspirera de cette démarche.

(Applaudissements)

  Martin Schulz, im Namen der PSE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Bei allem Respekt vor Ihnen, Herr Minister Vondra, dass in einer Situation wie der, in der wir uns befinden, der Ratspräsident hier nicht anwesend ist, ist nicht akzeptabel. Es zeigt aber auch, welches Verhältnis er zur aktuellen Situation hat.

(Beifall)

Wir haben jetzt viele altbekannte Sätze wiederholt gehört. Das alles hören wir jetzt seit Monaten. Daraus kann man Textbausteine entwickeln. Dir, lieber Joseph, möchte ich sagen: Wunderbare Rede! Wenn Du so weiterredest, dann kommen sie in Lipsheim, in Pfettisheim noch auf die Idee, Du wärest in die KPF eingetreten – alles wunderbar, das hört sich alles toll an. Nur ist jetzt Liefern angesagt. Jetzt müssen die notwendigen Beschlüsse gefasst werden. Auf dem Europäischen Rat muss mehr getan werden. Die Krise verschärft sich. Arbeitsplätze gehen verloren. Wir haben 40 Billionen Euro vernichtete Werte in den letzten sechs Monaten! Das heißt vernichtete Existenzen. Das heißt Arbeitsplätze, die verlorengehen. Das heißt Unternehmen, die in ihrer Existenz bedroht sind. Das heißt, Volkswirtschaften, die in ihrer Existenz bedroht sind. Und dann gibt es die schönen Beschlüsse bei Ihrem Rat, 1,5 % des Bruttoinlandproduktes dieses Jahr bzw. nächstes Jahr – drei Staaten haben es bisher erreicht, das heißt 24 Staaten nicht. Großbritannien, Deutschland und Spanien haben das erreicht – alle drei im Übrigen unter dem Druck von Sozialdemokraten und Sozialisten – die anderen nicht. Sie müssen mehr tun! Richten Sie das Ihrem abwesenden Ratspräsidenten aus!

Sie, Herr Kommissionspräsident, haben wunderbar geredet, das ist toll, das unterstützen wir alles. Die Solidarität zwischen den Mitgliedstaaten ist zwingend erforderlich. Solidarität ist für uns als Sozialdemokraten, als Sozialisten der zentrale Begriff in dieser Situation. Solidarität zwischen Menschen in den Gesellschaften, aber auch Solidarität zwischen Staaten. Solidarität in der Eurozone und die Solidarität der Eurozone mit den Staaten, die nicht dazugehören. Es ist eine wichtige Aufgabe, dass die Kommission die Staaten anhält, diese Solidarität zu üben.

Es ist auch wichtig, dass die Kommission jetzt die Richtlinienentwürfe liefert, die wir brauchen, um private equity und Hedgefonds zu kontrollieren, dass wir Rating-Agenturen transparent gestalten können, dass wir Managergehälter begrenzen können, dass Steueroasen geschlossen werden können. Diese Initiativen müssen jetzt kommen. Wir hoffen und setzen darauf, dass Sie das jetzt liefern. Und wenn das nicht mehr in dieser Wahlperiode gemacht werden kann, dann werden wir am ersten Tag des neu gewählten Parlaments mit all diesen Forderungen wieder zurückkommen. Denn wenn ich die Manager der Citigroup höre, die jetzt wieder einen Gewinn gemacht haben, wenn ich Herrn Ackermann von der Deutschen Bank höre, die jetzt im ersten Quartal wieder einen Gewinn gemacht hat, glauben die Herrschaften, jetzt, wo der Staat sie gerettet hat, sie könnten so weitermachen wie vorher? Nein, die Transparenz und Kontrolle muss jetzt von uns durchgesetzt werden, damit sich nicht wiederholen kann, was die Herrschaften angerichtet haben.

Ein dritter Punkt: Wenn ich Euch von der PPE-DE zuhöre, bin ich ganz fasziniert. Das ist wunderbar – Ihr redet so, wie wir jahrelang geredet haben und wo Ihr immer dagegen gestimmt habt. Jetzt auf einmal seid Ihr wach geworden. Aber wenn es darum geht, dass wir beim Änderungsantrag 92 wollen, dass hier beschlossen wird, mehr zu tun, nämlich 1,5 Prozent Bruttoinlandsprodukt für alle bei den Investitionen, dann stimmt die PPE-DE nicht mit! Der Änderungsantrag 92 ist also der Lackmustest für Euch bei der Abstimmung heute Mittag. Zur Frage der Solidarität: Du hast gerade selbst gesagt, Joseph Daul, im Namen Deiner abwesenden Fraktion, toll. Da wollen wir mal gucken, ob Ihr dem Änderungsantrag 102 zustimmt, wo wir die Solidarität fordern.

Eine letzte Bemerkung, die für unsere Fraktion von zentraler Bedeutung ist, betrifft den Änderungsantrag 113. Da geht es um Steueroasen. Die Männer und Frauen, die uns hier in den Restaurants bedienen, die Fahrer, die uns hier fahren, das Bodenpersonal am Flughafen, das unsere Koffer auspackt, das sind alles Steuerzahler, die mit ihren Steuern für den Bankrott der großen Bankunternehmen einstehen müssen, weil die Regierungen und die Parlamente es von Ihnen verlangen. Das sind diejenigen, die die Schutzschirme für Banken und Unternehmen bezahlen müssen. Und die Manager dieser großen Banken, die jetzt noch – wie bei der ING, wo riesige Milliardendefizite da sind – sich Millionen Boni auszahlen lassen, sollen die Möglichkeit haben, in Steueroasen ihr Geld unterzubringen und da die Steuern nicht zu bezahlen! Das ist Klassenkampf von oben, den wir jedenfalls nicht mitmachen wollen! Deshalb ist die Frage, ob wir heute beschließen, dass das Europäische Parlament gegen Steueroasen ist, eine entscheidende Frage für die Glaubwürdigkeit für die EVP-ED und der Liberalen. Ihr redet wie die Sozialisten, dann wollen wir aber auch mal sehen, ob Ihr wie die Sozialisten heute Mittag abstimmt.

Diese drei Forderungen haben wir hier auf dem Tisch und ich sage ganz klar: Wenn Ihr dem nicht zustimmt, dann gibt es keine Gemeinsame Entschließung dazu. Dann ist ganz klar angesagt: Soziale Gerechtigkeit gibt es mit uns – große Worte gibt es mit der EVP-ED!

(Beifall)

  Graham Watson, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, over recent months our Union has had more summits than our former colleague Reinhold Messner, and our Parliament has had a string of reports on improving the economy. But what those summits and those reports have done is provide Member States with stepping stones across the river of recession. Now we need the Council to cross without fear or flight, and I congratulate the authors of the Andersson, Ferreira and Kirilov reports. They offer a consistent and pragmatic perspective written in the light of the unemployment avalanche on our horizon. And their underlying message is this: jobs, jobs, jobs.

The Lisbon Strategy, employment guidelines, cohesion policy – these have always argued for flexicurity in our economies, for public investment in research and development, for the rapid transition to the knowledge economy. They are the foundations on which a healthy, dynamic and secure job market is built.

And from today’s vantage point, one thing is clear to everyone – except, perhaps, some on the benches to the left. It was not the Lisbon Strategy that brought hardship to our kitchen tables, rather it is the Member States which ignored it that are suffering the deepest and will suffer the longest. So now is the time to put our foot on the floor and drive forward a ‘Lisbon plus programme’ and employment guidelines that reflect the realities of our Union.

National parliaments, regional governments, city halls: each must be empowered to rise to that challenge, and named and shamed when they do not. Nor should we accept heel-dragging over the need to protect the planet. The Council will consider the EU’s negotiating stance for the Copenhagen climate conference. Just how much money, Mr Vondra, will the 27 allot to adaptation and mitigation in the developing world? Climate change will not stop as the economy slows, and the poorest countries will suffer – still – from our carbon consumption.

So recession must not mean inaction. Member States must commit the cash to counter climate change and to create green-collar jobs in the process, perhaps by using the money we have, as Claude Turmes suggests, to leverage more through the EIB or the EIF. But the Council knows that the ravages of recession will return without root and branch reform of the financial system.

Next month’s G20 is tasked with recasting the mould, and I welcome the tone taken by European leaders when they met in Berlin. The IMF should be financed effectively, tax havens should be subject to scrutiny, and financial institutions should be regulated robustly, with an effective European financial services authority overseeing the system: not to drag our economies back into the past, but to create an open, honest and transparent system of trade that is free and fair.

London, Paris, Berlin: each is keen to stress that Europe stands united. But the President of the Council tells us that differences persist. I hope the President of the Council will be here to report back to us from this summit, because he should be here today. If differences persist, it will not do. We need Europe to be strong in mind, fleet of foot and united in purpose over the weeks and months ahead, ready to strip out the toxic assets that are crippling bank balances, ready to reform bank practice to restore creditworthiness, and ready to accept that the current stimulus package may not be enough. Because it is no good topping up the IMF if there is no global financial system to support, and while it is rough justice that responsible Member States must mitigate against default by those who lived it up, that may be the price to pay to avoid the contagion of economic meltdown.

Put simply, we need Council, Commission and Parliament to work together: coolly, calmly, collectively, preventing procedure from getting the better of purpose. Europe can fight fire no longer. The time has come for the fundamental reform that will provide jobs now and security in the future.

  Cristiana Muscardini, a nome del gruppo UEN. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, "rafforzare la vigilanza" ci ha detto il Presidente in carica: ma vogliamo avere un dato su quanti sono gli OTC che in questo momento appartengono ancora a banche europee, a quanto ammonta la bolla a livello planetario. È immaginabile che la Commissione ed il Consiglio decidano di arrivare a un congelamento dei derivati, almeno a proporlo a livello mondiale, e a sospendere la loro contrattazione. È possibile che nelle banche che sono state nazionalizzate questi derivati siano ancora un bene negativo ma ovviamente anche preoccupante per lo sviluppo? Rafforzare la vigilanza significa anche che noi non solo dobbiamo, come dice la Commissione, avere la capacità di fare un repulisti nel sistema bancario e una revisione del sistema di controllo, ma anche dare proposte nuove.

Allora, se ci siamo occupati della crisi automobilistica, dovremmo anche occuparci della piccola e media impresa e cioè di quella concorrenza sleale che arriva entro le nostre frontiere e per la quale ancora oggi il Consiglio non si è deciso a ratificare e a promuovere l'etichettatura d'origine, unico sistema per non fare del protezionismo ma per proteggere i consumatori e i prodotti, come lo stesso Presidente Barroso ha appena detto nel suo intervento. Per aiutare le imprese occorre anche, oltre che promuovere nuove linee di credito, dare alle piccole e medie imprese un accesso più celere e meno costoso alla mobilità, se vogliamo che queste imprese si convertano e non chiudano. In questo momento moltissime hanno il 50% in meno degli ordini, il che vuole dire che devono ricorrere al credito bancario. Ma le banche non danno soldi e le azioni delle banche sono crollate per colpa dei derivati. È un cane che si morde la coda. Uscite da questa confusione, cercate di dare soluzioni reali e non solo proposte inutili.

  Rebecca Harms, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Anlässlich der fünften Debatte in dieser Legislaturperiode über die Erfolge oder Misserfolge der Lissabon-Strategie möchte ich einmal die Frage stellen, wie es sein kann, dass wir jedes Jahr beteuert haben, dass das eine erfolgreiche Strategie ist, diese Erfolge auch bilanziert wurden und wir plötzlich, als wenn das ein Naturereignis wäre, in der tiefsten Krise aller Zeiten aufwachen. Das kann überhaupt nicht sein, und eine unehrliche Bilanz dieser Lissabon-Strategie ist, glaube ich, eines dieser Probleme, aus denen wir herauskommen müssen.

Wir haben als Europäisches Parlament die Kommission vor einem Jahr in derselben Debatte aufgefordert, für die Stabilität der Finanzmärkte zu sorgen, weil wir Krisenzeichen gesehen haben. Auf diese Aufforderung, Herr Kommissionspräsident, ist überhaupt nichts passiert. Und jetzt debattieren wir, wie Martin Schulz gesagt hat, seit Monaten über den Zusammenbruch des Systems, ohne neue Regeln tatsächlich verbindlich zu machen. Meine Analyse hierzu sieht ein bisschen anders aus als die der Kollegen. Ich glaube, dass viele in der Kommission und auch in den nationalen Regierungen immer noch der Überzeugung sind, dass ein deregulierter Markt und starke Akteure, Spieler auf diesem Markt sich selber regulieren können. Wenn wir uns darauf beschränken, das Bankensystem wieder flott zu spritzen und öffentliche Garantien zu geben, ohne eine neue komplette Finanzmarktarchitektur zu bestimmen, dann werden wir scheitern und aus dieser Krise nicht herauskommen, uns nicht wirklich erholen.

Genauso inkonsequent ist die Diskussion um die Verbindung von Klimapolitik, Nachhaltigkeitsstrategien und dem Krisenmanagement. Auch dazu haben wir jedes Jahr viele beteuernde Reden gehört. Wenn man sich die aktuellen Konjunkturprogramme auf europäischer und nationaler Ebene anschaut, kann man nur sagen: Viele große Worte, aber das Ziel von Nachhaltigkeit, Klimaschutz, Ressourceneffizienz wird nach wie vor nicht ernst genommen. Diese Konjunkturprogramme dienen nicht dazu, die europäische Wirtschaft zukunftsfähig zu machen, sondern sind eigentlich nur mehr vom Alten.

  Jiří Maštálka, za skupinu GUE/NGL. – Dámy a pánové, společný program pro růst a zaměstnanost neboli Lisabonská strategie vznikla v roce 2005. Píšeme rok 2009 a přes to všechno se potýkáme s růstem chudoby, hospodářskou a finanční krizí, která nemá v historii obdoby. Navíc nejnovější prognózy předpovídají zvýšení počtu nezaměstnaných v Evropské unii v roce 2009 na téměř 3,5 milionu lidí. Přes všechna dosud přijatá opatření nezaměstnanost roste. Nejen podle mého názoru tedy něco není v pořádku. Současná situace ukazuje na selhání dosavadní politiky, která podporuje hlavně akumulaci velkých zisků velkými hospodářskými a finančními skupinami, vytváření velkých monopolů a zhoršování životní úrovně pracujících a obyvatel. Evropa se musí vydat jiným směrem. Rada by měla na svém jarním zasedání přijmout evropskou strategii pro solidaritu a udržitelný rozvoj a nový soubor hospodářských, sociálních a environmentálních politik na podporu investic zejména do kvality práce, zlepšování kvalifikace, podpůrných programů infrastruktury, politiky soudržnosti, ochrany životního prostředí i zlepšování ochrany zdraví při práci. Velkým problémem, kterému čelí členské státy včetně České republiky, je přesídlování firem. Evropská unie by měla zřídit regulační rámec, který by penalizoval přesídlovaní firem a podniků, např. i tím, že by získání finanční podpory Společenství bylo podmíněno splněním takových závazků, jako je ochrana práce a místní rozvoj. Zejména teď v době finanční a hospodářské krize potřebujeme nejen solidaritu, ale i přesná a rychle fungující pravidla a instrumenty pro společnou obranu proti krizi. Tím také důstojně navážeme na dědictví Jeana Moneta, jehož jsme dnes vzpomněli.

  Nigel Farage, on behalf of the IND/DEM Group. – Mr President, the term ‘European solidarity’ has been bandied around this morning as if it were a given. I want to call that into question.

We cannot sign a blank cheque to bail out the countries of eastern Europe. We do not have the money. Economically the plan is quite unsound and, most important of all, it is politically unacceptable to the taxpayers in France, Britain and Germany that we should do so. Yet the British Chancellor of the Exchequer, Alistair Darling, seems now to be an advocate of this plan. He has lost his marbles! He says that this is the time for Europe to build on shared values of cooperation, as if we are one big, happy family.

Well, the Hungarian Prime Minister, Mr Ferenc Gyurcsany, rather blows that idea of European solidarity apart. He demands that the European Union bail out countries such as his to the tune of EUR 180 billion, and he says that, if we do not do that, he promises us that five million unemployed migrants will head west into our countries. That is nothing other than blackmail, and it shows the folly of having allowed countries like Hungary into this political Union and highlights even more deeply the folly of having open borders.

The only response I really hear in this House today is that somehow we have to have more European Union – that more power will work! Well, look: you were sent a message by the voters in France, by the voters in the Netherlands and by the voters in Ireland. You do not have the legitimacy to take more power for the European Union. The economic crisis will, I believe, be what voters will vote on in the European elections this year, and I hope this time they send you people a message that is so big and so loud that, for once, you simply will not be able to ignore it.

  President. − Nigel Farage, we might not always be happy in our European family, but you belong to the family as well.

  Jana Bobošíková (NI). - Dámy a pánové, na rozdíl od svého předřečníka jsem přesvědčena, že nadcházející Evropská rada by měla plně dostát heslu současného českého předsednictví, kterým je Evropa bez bariér. Doufám, že nepřítomný předseda Rady Mirek Topolánek nepodlehne pod tlakem Obamovy administrativy pokušení nových regulací a sypání peněz daňových poplatníků do ekonomiky.

Nadcházející Rada by měla také zamítnout zeleno-lobbyistický plán Barrosovy Komise na masivní mnohamiliardovou podporu obnovitelných zdrojů energie. Ekonomická teorie i historií prověřená praxe jasně říká, že nic z toho nepřinese zmírnění hospodářského propadu ani zastavení růstu nezaměstnanosti. Naopak. Krizi to jen prohloubí a přidá do budoucna další riziko, a tím je, dámy a pánové, inflace. Věřím, že žádný rozumný politik nechce přispět k masivnímu růst cen a znehodnocení úspor občanů. Doufám, že předsednictví bude nadále pevně obhajovat liberalizaci a odstraňování obchodních bariér a protekcionismu.

Dámy a pánové, jak víme, zásadní roli v příčinách současné krize hrají vládní regulace hospodářské politiky USA. Namísto toho, abychom se z tohoto faktu poučili, schválily od 1. července loňského roku, tedy za devět měsíců, orgány Evropské unie neuvěřitelných 519 nařízení a 68 směrnic. Pokud české předsednictví chce být ve svém heslu Evropa bez bariér kredibilní a užitečné, mělo by namísto pořádání dalších summitů okamžitě prověřit veškerou unijní legislativu a zrušit nejrůznější ekologická, genderová, sociální a pracovní omezení. Rada by se také měla zamyslet nad tím, jak zbrzdit zbytnělý sociální stát a snížit vysoké daně a pojištění. Jen tak se podaří urychleně nastartovat racionální lidskou a tržní aktivitu, bez kterých současnou krizi prostě překonat nelze.

  Klaus-Heiner Lehne (PPE-DE). - Meine sehr verehrten Herren Präsidenten, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren Kollegen! Manchmal glaubt man ja nicht, was man hört. Lieber Martin Schulz, die Initiative zur Regulierung und zu Transparenzregeln bei Hedgefonds und Private Equity stammt aus dem Rechtsausschuss.

Im Jahre 2006 sind wir als EVP-ED-Fraktion im Rechtsausschuss in der Frage aktiv geworden und wollten Regeln haben. Der legislative Initiativbericht, den wir damals beauftragt haben, ist deshalb nicht zustande gekommen, weil die Vorsitzende des Wirtschaftausschusses, die bekanntlich der Sozialistischen Fraktion angehört, damals einen völlig überflüssigen Kompetenzstreit vom Zaun gebrochen hat mit dem Ergebnis, dass wir Monate, ja Jahre gebraucht haben, bis eine Einigung erzielt war und wir dann endlich die legislativen Initiativberichte zu der Frage im September des letzten Jahres in Gestalt des Berichts Rasmussen und des Berichts Lehne beschließen konnten.

Derjenige, der sich im Rat gegen die Regulierung in diesem Bereich ausgesprochen hat, war Gordon Brown, der gehört bekanntlich auch nicht der EVP-ED an, sondern gehört zu Eurer Fraktion. Merkel und Rasmussen haben sich bei allen Debatten sowohl im Europäischen Rat in den zurückliegenden Jahren als auch im Rahmen der G8 immer für die Regulierung dieser Bereiche ausgesprochen.

Das Problem ist, dass die Sozialisten – das ist ein Fakt – in dieser Europäischen Union immer ein entscheidendes Hindernis gewesen sind, auch diese nicht regulierten Bereiche zu erfassen. Die Meinung ist erst vor kurzem geändert worden, und das hat dazu geführt, dass wir da stehen, wo wir heute stehen. Das gehört auch mit zur historischen Wahrheit in diesem Bereich. Ich will nur sagen, es gibt einen großen Unterschied zwischen der Rhetorik, die hier geübt wird, und der Realität der zurückliegenden Monate und Jahre, das ist leider so.

Lassen Sie mich zum Schluss noch zu einer Reihe von Gemeinsamkeiten kommen, die ich auch noch erwähnen möchte. Die Atmosphäre zwischen den Fraktionen war heute bei der Vorbereitung der Entschließung zum Lissabon-Prozess in der Lenkungsgruppe ausgesprochen gut. Wir haben deshalb in fast allen Bereichen Einigung erzielt und, wie ich glaube, eine gute Entschließung zustande gebracht.

Man sollte das jetzt nicht zerreden, sondern deutlich machen, dass es hier eine Gemeinsamkeit gibt. Auch die Bevölkerung erwartet von uns, dass wir in dieser Krise gemeinsam handeln und uns nicht gegeneinanderstellen.

(Beifall)

  Poul Nyrup Rasmussen (PSE). - Mr President, this is the worst crisis since 1929 and it is getting worse: unemployment is in free fall now.

What I said to the President of the Commission a couple of months ago was: ‘Please do not oversell what the European Council decided in December 2008. Please do not paint too rosy a picture of Europe.’ However, that is exactly what you are doing. You have not made a financial stimulus of 3.3% in Europe – you have not! When you talk about automatic stabilisers, it is already in the prognosis. According to the Commission in January, the prognosis is -2%; now the European Central Bank tells us it is -3%. When you talk about a financial stimulus of 1.5%, it is not 1.5%, because, according to the Bruegel Institute, it will be 0.9%, which is documented.

Now we have the following situation: we are not taking care of employment, unemployment is in free fall, and your stimulus in Europe is not 3.3% but 0.9%. If you are now telling us to wait for better times and if you agree with Jean-Claude Juncker, who said yesterday that we have done enough, then I say: you have not done enough – people expect more from Europe than you are saying today.

My point is the following: in a few weeks you will meet Mr Obama, the new President of the United States. He is coming with an investment package of 1.8% to his gross national product. We are coming with less than half. How could you imagine that Europe would put itself in a position where we are the ones who are doing less than our American friends, and where we are the ones who are demanding more of our American friends? How could you imagine respect for the European Union?

What I am saying is that we need to do more and we need to devise a comprehensive plan, which will cover the summit on 19 March – which is nine days from now – the summit in London, on 2 April, the summit on employment in May in Prague and the June summit. I appeal to you, President of the Commission, to make a comprehensive, new recovery effort. If we do not do that, we will lose. It is not about getting better times next year: this is a fundamental world crisis that we need to take seriously.

My final point concerns solidarity. The time has come not to accept new demarcation lines between those who have been members of the European Union for many years and those who came to the European Union with a promise that this would be a better time for ordinary people. Let us now avoid new economic demarcation lines between the new ones and the old ones. Let us show solidarity in real terms. That is why I ask you, President of the Commission, to consider new financial possibilities to help our new friends – Eurobonds is one possibility, the European Investment Bank is another. Please, take it seriously and let us not do too little too late, like they did in Japan, but let us show that Europe is about people, Europe is about showing solidarity with the weakest countries in this Union.

  Jules Maaten (ALDE). - Voorzitter, nu de oorspronkelijke termijn van de Lissabon-strategie op zijn eind loopt, kan er vastgesteld worden dat de doelen die de regeringsleiders in 2000 gesteld hebben, onvoldoende zijn gerealiseerd. Maar juist met de huidige economische crisis is het van groot belang dat de Lissabon-strategie serieus wordt genomen. Wanneer dat was gebeurd, was Europa waarschijnlijk beter in staat geweest weerbaar te reageren op economische tegenslagen.

Een van de belangrijkste akkoorden uit de Lissabon-strategie is het streven om 3% van het bruto binnenlands product aan onderzoek en ontwikkeling te besteden: twee derde gefinancierd door de privé-sector en een derde door de overheid. Die doelstelling wordt door vrijwel geen enkel land in de Europese Unie gehaald, en dat is een rem op de innovatie in de Europese Unie. In een wereldwijde crisis zal Europa moeten proberen zelf de kracht te vinden om de economie weer op peil te brengen.

Tegelijkertijd is het natuurlijk raar dat een fors deel van de EU-begroting bijvoorbeeld de landbouw en regionale fondsen - dus nog steeds teveel de oude economie - subsidieert, terwijl de doelen voor investeringen in onderzoek niet gehaald worden. Er zijn mogelijkheden genoeg. Denk maar eens aan schone milieu- of medische technologieën of aan de groeiende sector van bijvoorbeeld Europese computerspellen. Hier is gerichte ondersteuning doelmatig.

Voorzitter, door een dynamisch en sterk op innovatie gerichte economie is het mogelijk nieuwe industrieën, technologie en producten te helpen van de grond te komen. Dat is juist wat je nodig hebt om uit het dal te kruipen. De crisis geeft ons de mogelijkheid en zelfs de plicht om broodnodige hervormingen door te voeren.

Ik roep de lidstaten op hun eigen afspraken serieus te nemen, want wanneer er grote doelen worden gesteld, moet de intentie er zijn om deze te halen. Anders verliest de Europese Unie haar geloofwaardigheid. Een gemeenschappelijk beleid vraagt iedereen zijn beste beentje voor te zetten en staat niet toe dat lidstaten de kantjes eraf lopen.

  Mirosław Mariusz Piotrowski (UEN). - Panie Przewodniczący! Wszystko wskazuje na to, że cele strategii lizbońskiej nakreślone na 10 lat zakończą się fiaskiem. Ani ta strategia ani stale przywoływany traktat lizboński nie stanowią realnej odpowiedzi na globalny kryzys gospodarczy. W trakcie najbliższego szczytu Rady premier Irlandii poinformuje o podjętych krokach celem wprowadzenia traktatu lizbońskiego. Wzorem Francuzów i Holendrów Irlandia odrzuciła w referendum zmienioną wersję eurokonstytucji. Nie zdołano przekonać obywateli tego kraju do zrzeczenia się części suwerenności na rzecz zbiurokratyzowanej struktury pod nazwą Unia Europejska. Obecnie zamiast poczekać na orzeczenie niemieckiego Trybunału Konstytucyjnego, który może ostatecznie pogrzebać traktat, próbuje się przekonywać Irlandczyków obietnicami przywilejów, których w przedłożonym dokumencie nie ma.

W obliczu ogromnego ekonomicznego kryzysu apeluję o przerwanie bezprzedmiotowych wewnątrzunijnych sporów i podjęcie konkretnych działań w oparciu o istniejące traktaty w duchu solidarności.

  Claude Turmes (Verts/ALE). - Monsieur le Président, en ces moments de crise, nous avons besoin d'une impulsion forte au niveau européen.

Les États-nations seuls ne seront pas à même de donner une réponse assez forte et assez coordonnée. Nous avons donc besoin d'urgence d'un élan de la part de l'Europe. Mais qu'est-ce que l'on constate aujourd'hui encore? Une Commission fatiguée, à l'image de son Président, qui manque de vision et est dénuée de courage politique. Un plan de relance de 5 milliards qui n'est pas un plan de relance car 50 % des projets de la liste ne verront aucun investissement être réalisé en 2009 ou 2010 parce que les autorisations pour la séquestration de carbone n'existeront pas, par exemple!

Eh oui, M. Daul a raison. C'est un moment où nous devons faire preuve de solidarité et d'innovation. Or, si la Commission donne raison à Margaret Merkel – I want my money back – et fait une liste qui donne plus d'argent aux économies fortes qu'aux collègues des pays de l'Est qui ont besoin de solidarité en ce moment, on ne pourra pas avancer.

Donc, nous devons innover sur deux choses. Premièrement, ne pas dilapider ces 5 milliards en aides d'État, mais les concentrer sur la Banque européenne d'investissement. La Banque procède actuellement à une augmentation de capital de 76 milliards d'euros. Elle négocie avec la Banque centrale européenne pour faire mieux sur les liquidités. Donc, plaçons la majorité des 5 milliards comme fonds de garantie pour faire un leverage sur 20, 25, 30 milliards d'investissements publics et privés. Deuxièmement, nous devrons ouvrir ce plan de relance sur les écotechnologies, sur les énergies renouvelables et sur les investissements dans les bâtiments des villes en Europe.

En ce moment, Obama consacre dix fois plus de venture capital aux écotechnologies que l'Europe. Nous sommes donc en train de perdre la bataille sur la prochaine nouveauté au niveau de l'économie.

  Sahra Wagenknecht (GUE/NGL). - Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die entscheidende Frage bei den ganzen Konjunkturprogrammen, die jetzt europaweit geschnürt werden, ist natürlich: Wer bekommt letztlich das Geld? Werden den Banken noch weitere Blankoschecks ausgestellt, obwohl die rasche Verstaatlichung für den Steuerzahler letztendlich wesentlich billiger wäre? Sollen die Konzerne und die Bezieher hoher Einkommen noch weiter entlastet werden, obwohl sie schon jahrelang in ganz Europa durch Steuergeschenke gemästet wurden? Je mehr Geld für solche Zwecke verschleudert wird, desto absehbarer werden solche Programme scheitern und desto wahrscheinlicher wird es, dass die europäische Wirtschaft in einer sehr gefährlichen Abwärtsspirale immer weiter nach unten versinkt.

Die jahrelange Politik der Privatisierung, Deregulierung, Liberalisierung – genau diese Politik hat die Einkommen immer stärker bei den oberen Zehntausend konzentriert, und es war diese Politik, die verantwortlich ist für die aktuelle Krise, in der wir uns heute befinden. Wer glaubt, dass er diese Krise dadurch überwinden kann, dass er genau diese Politik mit geringfügigen Modifikationen weiter betreibt, der hat gar nichts verstanden. Das genaue Gegenteil davon ist vonnöten. Statt den Banken faule Papiere abzukaufen, sollten Steuermittel für die Sanierung von Schulen, von Krankenhäusern und für den ökologischen Umbau der europäischen Wirtschaft verwendet werden. Sofern private Unternehmen öffentliche Mittel bekommen, muss gelten, keine Steuergelder ohne Beschäftigungsgarantien und vor allem auch keine Steuergelder ohne den Erwerb öffentlicher Eigentumsrechte, damit der Staat und vor allem auch die Allgemeinheit der Bürgerinnen und Bürger später auch an den künftigen Erträgen beteiligt werden können. Das allerbeste Konjunkturprogramm wäre eine radikale Umverteilung der Einkommen und Vermögen von oben nach unten. Der Hungerlohnsektor in Europa muss zurückgedrängt werden, statt ihn immer weiter zu fördern. Wir brauchen höhere Mindestlöhne, wir brauchen bessere Sozialleistungen in Europa. Wir brauchen Steuern, die sicherstellen, dass die Millionäre und die Profiteure der vergangenen Finanzmarkt-Party jetzt auch die immensen Verluste tragen, die entstanden sind, und nicht die große Mehrheit der Bürgerinnen und Bürger, die von dem ganzen Finanzboom nie etwas abbekommen hat. Ich denke, das sozial Gerechte ist gegenwärtig auch das wirtschaftspolitisch einzig Vernünftige. Es ist die einzige Möglichkeit, die verheerende Krisendynamik zu durchbrechen.

  Nils Lundgren (IND/DEM). - Herr talman! Lissabonstrategin tillhör EU:s bästa projekt. Medlemsländerna ska frivilligt reformera sina ekonomier för att skapa välstånd och god förmåga att anpassa sig, både till förutsedda förändringar som åldrande befolkning och till oförutsedda förändringar som kollapsande finansmarknader. Strategin går ut på att främja effektiva marknader, entreprenörskap, utbildning, forskning och stabila statsfinanser, och nu testas vi.

Om vi alla när finanskrisen kom hade haft ett flexibelt näringsliv, rätt penningpolitik och sunda statsfinanser skulle Europa ha klarat sig mycket bättre. Men det har vi inte haft. Lissabonstrategin har inte genomförts, och samtidigt har euron medfört en alldeles för lätt penningpolitik för Irland, Spanien, Italien och Grekland. Därtill kommer att flera länder har kunnat vansköta sina offentliga finanser i skydd av euron. Därför är obalanserna gigantiska. Lissabonstrategin är en god idé som har förfuskats. Euron är en dålig idé som har förvärrat problemen.

  Bruno Gollnisch (NI). - Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, c'est dans cette période de crise que se révèlent la valeur et l'utilité des structures, et cette crise montre que l'Europe de Bruxelles ne sert à rien. Le plan de relance, pompeusement qualifié d'européen, est en fait l'addition des financements décidés par les États membres. La contribution du budget européen n'en représente qu'une très faible partie.

Quand on consacre 200 milliards d'euros de soutien à l'économie réelle et à l'emploi, on en donne 2 000 aux banques, sans garantie que celles-ci les utiliseront pour financer les entreprises et les particuliers. Privatisation des profits, socialisation des pertes, tel est le dernier mot de ces politiques économiques, qu'elles soient libérales ou socialistes.

La solidarité européenne ou le soutien aux États? Le sommet informel du 1er mars a refusé en bloc la conditionnalité des aides au secteur automobile, au nom du marché et de la concurrence. Aucun changement de politique, aucun changement de logique, aucune rupture avec le système qui nous a menés à la catastrophe! Nous sommes au bord du gouffre et, dans quelques jours, les chefs d'État et de gouvernement vont nous proposer de faire un grand pas en avant.

  Lambert van Nistelrooij (PPE-DE). - Voorzitter, als coördinator van de PPE-DE-Fractie voor het regionaal beleid, stel ik vast dat de gewenste flexibilisering en de duidelijkere gerichtheid op investering en werkgelegenheid werkelijkheid wordt. Juist in deze crisistijd heeft het cohesiebeleid zijn waarde als het gaat om communautaire investeringen. We zetten nu per jaar ongeveer 50 miljard euro in, en 65% daarvan gaat naar de prioritaire gebieden in de Lissabon-afspraken. Daarmee leveren we een actieve bijdrage, kwalificeren we werknemers en nemen we allerlei regionale initiatieven voor de jaren na de crisis.

De PPE-DE wil deze geïntegreerde financiële aanpak handhaven en niet verder versnipperen. De flexibiliteit richt zich op een versnelling van de uitgavenschema's, een vereenvoudiging van de goedkeuring en een gemakkelijke afwerking van de voorbereidingskosten, forse uitbreiding van de EIB-mogelijkheden met concrete programma's, o.a. met de duurzame reconstructie in de stedelijke omgeving en meer mogelijkheden voor energie-efficiëntie, ook in de oude lidstaten. Dames en heren, ik juich deze intensiveringen en flexibiliteit toe.

In maart II zullen we in deze plenaire vergadering een prioritair debat hebben over de aanpassingen van het cohesiebeleid. We zullen dan ook de verordeningen voor de fondsen aanpassen, en de basis leggen voor een nieuwe cohesieformule: de territoriale cohesie, het kader voor de periode na 2013.

We zetten in - ik hoorde dat zojuist ook - op hoogwaardige activiteiten, zoals clusters, O&O, innovatie, plattelandsontwikkeling, en we zorgen ervoor dat de kenniseconomie en de concurrentiekracht in Europa een boost krijgt. Dat geldt, dames en heren, voor alle regio's, voor alle lidstaten. Zo blijft Europa zichtbaar en dragen we bij aan een meer solidair Europa, ook na de crisistijd.

  Edit Herczog (PSE). - Mr President, I would like to start by responding to Mr Farage. If so far it was not certain that Parliament would be united, I think Mr Farage convinced all of us that we must remain united as a European Union.

The systematic crisis has hit the EU and we have to ask ourselves why our Lisbon Strategy of 10 years could not save us. Could we have a better target? Could we have a better delivery? Could we do it in a more cognate manner, or were we waiting for somebody to do it instead of us?

The Socialist Group answer is that it is right to have a single, comprehensive strategy for the future, to drive competitiveness and social and environmental sustainability in one single strategy. The Socialist answer is that we need delivery on Lisbon targets for all of Europe and we need it for all Europeans, including the most vulnerable, the poor ones.

We need to stabilise the financial markets and reduce the risk of similar crises for the future. But we will not support policies which drive our resources to tax havens and to the bank accounts of the few. We need to stabilise real economies throughout Europe for all sectors, and especially the small and medium-sized enterprises, but we have to take the responsibility of supporting employment and not just allow those companies to generate profits.

We need to go for R&D innovation and the digital switch-over, as well as building up skills to enable all citizens of Europe to use those technologies. We will commit funds to save knowledge throughout IPR policies. We need to stabilise Europe as a whole but we have to look beyond Europe to even more vulnerable parts of the world and we will not build new demarcation lines within the European Union.

We need to mobilise actors to act. Action, action, action, and delivery. Words alone will not drive us to succeed. It is not enough to do a lot but it is necessary to do enough. We ask the Commission, we ask the Council to go beyond the spring summit and deliver our messages to the G20. This is what people in the street are waiting for from us. Let us act together.

  Ona Juknevičienė (ALDE). - Noriu atkreipti dėmesį į keletą aplinkybių, kurios man atrodo svarbios sprendžiant išsaugojimo ir naujų darbo vietų kūrimo klausimą. Pirma, tai pasaulio ekonominė krizė, kuri verčia mus permąstyti, naujai vertinti užimtumo strategiją. Antra, privalome labai kritiškai įvertinti tai, ką jau esame sukūrę ir mūsų pačių priimtų strategijų įgyvendinimo efektyvumą. Todėl raginu Komisiją labai kritiškai įvertinti, kaip Bendrijos narės naudoja užimtumo skatinimui skirtas lėšas. Iki šiol galiojanti praktika daugiausiai lėšų skirti kvalifikacijai, perkvalifikavimui, įvairiems mokymams, mano galva, yra neefektyvi. Investavimas į smulkų ir vidutinį verslą, mikrokreditai yra veiksmingiausia naujų darbo vietų kūrimo priemonė. Tam galima būtų efektyviau naudoti ir socialinio, ir globalizacijos fondo lėšas. Valstybės narės turi pateikti socialinio fondo lėšų panaudojimo ir globalizacijos fondo lėšų panaudojimo ataskaitas, ypač parodydamos, kiek naujų darbo vietų sukurta. Už neefektyvų naudojimą turi būti baudžiama. Atsiranda vis daugiau vadinamųjų savo noru atleidžiamų darbuotojų. Jie lieka be darbo, be socialinės paramos ir finansinės paramos. Todėl čia turėtume įtraukti profsąjungas, kad jos apgintų mūsų žmonių interesus. Raginu Komisiją ir Bendrijos nares susitelkti ties šiuo svarbiu klausimu.

  Guntars Krasts (UEN). - Paldies, prezident! Pašreizējos krīzes apstākļos labāk ir darīt vairāk, nekā nogaidīt. Tāpēc noteikti ir atbalstāmi piedāvātie instrumenti ekonomikas stimulēšanai. Tomēr jaunajām dalībvalstīm Austrumeiropā, ar nedaudziem izņēmumiem, starptautiskie kredīttirgi ir aizvērušies, notiek kapitāla aizplūšana, un Rietumeiropas bankas, kas ieņem lielāko tirgus daļu reģionā, savu neseno ekspansīvo kreditēšanas politiku nomainījušas pret nogaidošu. Šo dalībvalstu iespējas izmantot finanšu un fiskālos instrumentus ir ierobežotas vai vispār nepastāv. Arī vidējā termiņā vairumā no tām valstīm, kas gatavojas pievienoties eiro zonai, ekonomikas stimulēšanas pasākumus ierobežos pievienošanās kritēriji. Vienīgais reālais instruments ekonomikas stimulēšanai un Lisabonas stratēģijas ieviešanai šīm valstīm ir Eiropas Savienības fondu finansējums. Taču fondu apguvei var pietrūkt līdzfinansējuma nodrošināšanai, un var tikt kavēti fondu apguves termiņi. Ekonomikas stimulēšanai Austrumeiropā nepieciešams steidzami vienoties par Eiropas Savienības fondu apguves noteikumu izmaiņām. Būtiski jāatvieglo procedūras fondu saņemšanai, jāsamazina valsts un privātā sektora līdzfinansējuma apjomi un jāpagarina līdzekļu apguves termiņi. Jāatrod reālas iespējas izmantot Eiropas Investīciju bankas un Eiropas Rekonstrukcijas un attīstības bankas finansējumu fondu apguvei. Šie lēmumi būs nozīmīgs signāls tirgus atdzīvināšanai un stabilizēšanai Austrumeiropā. Paldies!

  Elisabeth Schroedter (Verts/ALE). - Vielen Dank, Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen, sehr geehrte Herren Kommissare! Wir müssen die Chancen der Finanzkrise ergreifen und die europäische Wirtschaft radikal ökologisieren und damit die Klimakrise aufhalten.

Die Kommission lässt jedoch diese Chance ungenutzt und setzt auf ein Rettungspaket für veraltete Konzepte, auf Straßenbau und Autoindustrie. Selbst Investitionen in marode Wirtschaftsstrukturen sind nicht ausgeschlossen. Das ist kein zukunftsorientiertes Konzept, welches den Menschen ihre Existenzängste nimmt. Die Erleichterung beim Einsatz der Strukturfonds muss allein auf nachhaltige, ökologische Investitionen ausgerichtet sein. Ohne einen solchen Klimacheck darf es keine Erhöhung der Kofinanzierung, der Mittel geben.

Sehr geehrte Herren Kommissare, ich kann es auch als zynisch bezeichnen, dass Sie die Finanzkrise dazu nutzen, die Rechte der Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer abzubauen. Die Entsenderichtlinie muss die Arbeitnehmerrechte stärken und darf nicht zu ihrer Schwächung beitragen. Eine Erneuerung in diese Richtung ist überfällig. Das, was Sie in dem neuen Dokument dazu bieten, ist inakzeptabel.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL). - A neoliberal Estratégia de Lisboa tem sido um dos instrumentos essenciais da União Europeia para promover a desregulamentação financeira, privatizar serviços públicos, liberalizar mercados e o comércio mundial, desregulamentar as relações de trabalho e prejudicar os direitos dos trabalhadores, de que são exemplos as propostas relativas à directiva relativa ao tempo de trabalho e à flexigurança.

Não tem sentido continuar a insistir no seu aprofundamento quando se agrava a crise económica e social que a aplicação desta estratégia ajudou a criar. Por isso, o que se impõe é a ruptura com estas políticas do capitalismo neoliberal responsável pelo agravamento do desemprego, do trabalho precário e da pobreza e que tem agravado as desigualdades sociais, regionais e territoriais. O que se impõe é uma estratégia europeia integrada para a solidariedade e o desenvolvimento sustentável que aposte na defesa dos sectores produtivos e no investimento público, através do efectivo reforço dos fundos comunitários para apoio aos países de economia mais frágil, que seja respeitadora da natureza e criadora de empregos com direitos, que promova os serviços públicos, aumente o poder de compra e faça uma repartição justa dos rendimentos para diminuir a pobreza. Exactamente o contrário do que a Comissão e o Conselho se propõem fazer.

  Johannes Blokland (IND/DEM). - Voorzitter, de afgelopen jaren drongen we er in het debat over de Voorjaarstop bij de lidstaten op aan om werk te maken van het Lissabon-proces. Immers, economische groei en een lage inflatie boden ruimte voor hervormingen. Hervormingen waren en blijven noodzakelijk in de competitie met opkomende economieën.

De huidige crisis laat zien dat lidstaten die gehoor gaven aan die oproep nu beter presteren dan andere. Die andere lidstaten hebben grote begrotingstekorten, en het afwentelen van die tekorten door de lidstaten die geen gehoor gaven aan onze oproep, bedreigt nu de stabiliteit van onze munt.

Ik wil de Commissie vragen erop toe te zien dat de lidstaten zich houden aan het Stabiliteitspact. Alleen zó wordt voorkomen dat de kosten van deze crisis uit de hand lopen. Tijdelijke stimuleringsmaatregelen die voldoen aan de duurzaamheidstoets kunnen dus op beperkte schaal worden toegepast. Naast alle nieuwe plannen, is het nakomen van oude afspraken evident.

  Sergej Kozlík (NI). - Západná Európa rada hovorí o potrebe pomôcť krajinám stredovýchodnej Európy pri prekonávaní krízy. Avšak tými istými ústami, presnejšie ústami pána Sarkózyho, hovorí o týchto krajinách ako o čiernej diere, ktorá predstavuje pre Európsku úniu riziko. Odmietam takúto triviálnu paušalizáciu problému, ktorý sa úplne rovnakou mierou dotýka aj západných krajín. Dôsledkom takýchto vyjadrení je pokles dôvery v inštitúcie krajín stredovýchodnej Európy a miesto pomoci predstavuje nôž do chrbta.

Minulý týždeň európski lídri odmietli protekcionizmus, ktorý by znamenal vytvorenie novej železnej opony v zjednotenej Európe. Na druhej strane však Európska komisia potvrdila mohutnú štátnu pomoc pre francúzske automobilky. Nerovnaký diskriminačný prístup sa však prejavuje aj v ďalších oblastiach. Vypuklé je to najmä v poľnohospodárstve. Európa sa stáva dvojtvárna a euroskeptikom kvitnú ruže.

  Gunnar Hökmark (PPE-DE). - Mr President, this debate is about jobs, and jobs and new prosperity. That is why I am a little surprised to hear, from the Socialist Group, criticisms of those who have been responsible for realistic policies in Europe, because the Socialists, more than anyone else, called for lower interest rates at the peak of the economy, just as they implemented monetary policy in the US. It is lax monetary policy, more than anything else, that has eroded the US economy. Mr Schulz should feel thankful that Europe and the European Central Bank did not listen to him, because, if it had, the European economy would have been much worse off. I appreciate we can agree on that point.

That also goes for the policy that you are recommending today, because now you are talking about Eurobonds which, among other things, would lead to higher interest rates for the countries of Central Europe. That is not solidarity in a time of financial crisis, and we would do well not listen to Mr Schultz this time either.

We need to take action, but we need to take the right actions in order not to deepen the crisis and to secure stability.

(Interjection from the floor)

No, you have not been in power, but you are guilty of a lot of things too, and if we had listened to you we would have been worse off. That was an agreement between you and me, was it not? I appreciate the consensus in Parliament that your policy was wrong.

Mr President, what we need now is stability. We need to abide by competition rules and state aid rules in order to secure open barriers and trade, because exports need more imports and imports need exports. That is the way we can achieve more jobs.

  Guido Sacconi (PSE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in un minuto si può fare solo un telegramma. Al mio, a quello che io invio al Consiglio europeo, il titolo ce l'hanno già messo Schulz e Rasmussen, dicendo che bisogna fare di più soprattutto rispetto all'emergenza sociale con nuove forti politiche finanziarie e fiscali. Io aggiungo un messaggio integrativo: è importantissimo certamente come si attraversa la crisi minimizzandone i danni sociali; è anche importante tenere ferma la rotta per sapere come uscirne, se cioè in testa o in coda della classifica mondiale della competizione, che sarà sempre più giocata alla ricerca di una nuova economia verde e intelligente, a basso contenuto di carbonio.

Dunque, bisogna che tutte le azioni a tutti i livelli, da quelle locali a quelle europee, siano coerenti con questa opzione. Bisogna che il Consiglio dia un mandato forte per il negoziato verso Copenaghen per non perdere quella occasione, anche economica, e perché dunque si sostenga quel mandato anche, con i necessari finanziamenti ai Paesi in via di sviluppo per poterli alleare con noi.

  Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE). - Voorzitter, deze crisis is een test voor Europa. Burgers verwachten nu daadkracht van Europa, en daarom is het dan ook onbegrijpelijk dat veel nationale leiders zelfs nú blijven steken in een "ieder voor zich"-politiek. Europa is niet de optelsom van 27 maal het nationale belang. Daarbij zou het ook een kapitale fout zijn om Europa opnieuw te verdelen in oost en west.

Voorzitter, de Liberalen willen geld steken in de toekomst, niet in de fouten van gisteren. De doelstellingen van de Lissabon-strategie moeten niet op ijs worden gezet, we moeten juist zwaarder inzetten op onderwijs en onderzoek, innovatie, duurzaamheid en een sterke Europese markt.

Voorzitter, bankiers die ons geld verbrassen, zijn verachtelijk. Maar, meneer Schulz, politici die nu tekorten en schulden onbekommerd laten oplopen en de rekening doorsturen naar jongere generaties, zijn net zo onverantwoordelijk. De ALDE-Fractie onderschrijft de kernboodschap van het verslag-Ferreira. Alleen met daadwerkelijk Europese en toekomstgerichte oplossingen kunnen we deze crisis het hoofd bieden. Het is nu of nooit voor Europa.

  Dariusz Maciej Grabowski (UEN). - Panie Przewodniczący! Unia potrzebuje prawdziwej strategii naprawy gospodarki jak powietrza. By strategia ta była skuteczna, trzeba spełnić następujące warunki – po pierwsze, Unia potrzebuje rosnącego budżetu, a nie malejącego z 1% do 0,8% PKB, jak deklarują niektóre kraje. Po drugie, należy przywrócić swobodę polityki budżetowej i podatkowej, poniechać prób narzucenia i ujednolicenia tych polityk. Po trzecie, należy odstąpić od nacisków na kraje nowo przyjęte, by wstąpiły do strefy euro. Po czwarte, należy wprowadzić precyzyjną kontrolę przepływów kapitału finansowego i powstrzymać transfer kapitału z krajów nowo przyjętych do bogatych. Dziś ten rabunkowy proceder idzie w dziesiątki miliardów euro i rujnuje kraje nowo przyjęte. Po piąte, wsparcie i pomoc powinny być adresowane przede wszystkim do państw i regionów najbardziej dotkniętych, a nie tak jak dziś zamyka się stocznie w Polsce, a broni we Francji i w Niemczech. Po szóste, program inwestycji infrastrukturalnych powinien być skierowany na likwidację różnic i zacofania, szczególnie w krajach nowo przyjętych.

  Csaba Őry (PPE-DE). - Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Mindnyájan tisztában vagyunk azzal, hogy a kialakult gazdasági válság körülményei között a foglalkoztatáspolitikai és a lisszaboni célkitűzések jelentősége megnőtt, ezért nekünk, európai jogalkotóknak és döntéshozóknak azon kell fáradoznunk, hogy a foglalkoztatáspolitikai iránymutatások gyakorlatba való átültetését minél hatékonyabbá és eredményesebbé tegyük. Amint az a foglalkoztatási bizottság szavazási eredménye is mutatja, a pártok között teljes egyetértés uralkodik a tekintetben, hogy a 2008 és 2010 közötti időszakra vonatkozó foglalkoztatáspolitikai iránymutatások az elérendő céloknak megfelelő, ugyanakkor kellően rugalmas keretrendszert jelentenek. E kereteken belül a tagállamok feladata az, hogy a sajátos helyzetükhöz illeszkedő súlypontokat meghatározzák, és valódi tartalommal töltsék meg az egyes iránymutatásokat. A keretrendszer tehát jó eszköz, melynek megalkotása a mi közös európai sikerünk. A tagállamok feladata pedig az, hogy ezt a kitűnő eszközt valóban alkalmazzák is a gyakorlatban.

Tehát két előfeltétele van a sikernek: a helyes célok kitűzése, majd ezt követően a célkitűzésekhez illeszkedő politika gyakorlati megvalósítása. Az első előfeltétel – vehetjük úgy – már teljesült, ezért megítélésem szerint a következő időszakban arra kell a figyelmünket összpontosítani, hogy a foglalkoztatáspolitikai iránymutatások tagállami szinten történő tartalmi feltöltését, alkalmazását nyomon kövessük. Nem hagyhatjuk figyelmen kívül azt a tényt, hogy a tagállamok eltérő államháztartási helyzete, adóssági mutatói országonként eltérő mozgásteret biztosítanak a foglalkoztatási- és humánerőforrás területekre való beruházás mértékét tekintve. Abban azonban egységesnek kell lennünk, hogy minden tagállam lehetőségeihez mérten növelje a foglalkoztatáshoz közvetlenül kapcsolódó beruházások szintjét. Látni kell, hogy a tagállamok által elindított gazdaságélénkítési csomagok sikere és az uniós célkitűzések elérése egymással szoros összefüggésben áll. Ez indokolja, hogy a gazdaságpolitika területén az eddiginél nagyobb mértékben kell összehangolni elképzeléseinket, és ennek a fényében a politikai csoportok közötti egyetértésben bízva, kérem, hogy támogassuk az Anderson-jelentést, fogadjuk el a szavazáskor.

ΠΡΟΕΔΡΙΑ: ΡΟΔΗ ΚΡΑΤΣΑ-ΤΣΑΓΚΑΡΟΠΟΥΛΟΥ
Αντιπρόεδρος

  Pervenche Berès (PSE). - Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Président en exercice du Conseil, Monsieur le Commissaire, si l'Europe le veut, elle peut beaucoup! Mais pour cela, il faut qu'elle fasse le diagnostic juste: or, aujourd'hui, elle sous-évalue la crise. Il faut qu'elle mette en œuvre les moyens adaptés; or, aujourd'hui, le plan de relance n'est pas suffisant. Et il faut qu'elle dégage les moyens financiers nécessaires: or, aujourd'hui, le débat sur les Eurobonds est bloqué; il faut le débloquer. Si elle veut agir intelligemment sur la scène internationale, elle doit aussi montrer l'exemple en matière de régulation et de supervision des marchés financiers.

Monsieur Barroso, vous avez lancé utilement, intelligemment, exceptionnellement, les travaux du groupe Jacques de Larosière. Ils sont maintenant sur la table. Faites du Delors, utilisez cette base de travail comme une base à mettre en œuvre!

Ce rapport a été adopté à l'unanimité alors que le groupe était composé de cultures et de personnes d'origines très différentes. Donc, le consensus européen que nous recherchons depuis des années, il est là.

Si vous laissez les nations se déchirer derrière ce résultat, il n'y aura pas de supervision européenne des marchés financiers.

  Филиз Хакъева Хюсменова (ALDE). - Приносът на политиката за сближаване става още по-значим в условията на икономическа криза. Основни проблеми за държавите-членки остават банковият сектор, закриването на производства, липсата на свежи пари, свиването на пазара на труда. И досега политиката на сближаване разполагаше със свои финансови инструменти, но кризата налага рационализиране на подходите и иновационни решения.

Сега подкрепата с европейски средства следва да се насочи към визираните области. Уместно е структурните фондове да бъдат използвани по-активно и в по-голямо съответствие със ситуацията. Държавите следва да насочат вниманието си към умението на бенефициентите да усвояват средствата. Надявам се по-скоро Комисията да облекчи процедурите по структурните фондове, което не трябва да стане за сметка на контрола при разпределянето и разходването. Вярвам, че докладът относно политиката на сближаване и инвестиране в реалната икономика ще даде идеи за справяне с кризата и че ще бъде полезен за следващите мерки за стимулиране на икономическия живот, които очакваме от срещата на върха на Европейския съюз. Благодаря.

  Rolf Berend (PPE-DE). - Frau Präsidentin, Herr Ratspräsident, verehrte Kommissare, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es geht in dem Bericht des Kollegen Kirilov im Wesentlichen um die Änderung von drei Strukturfondsverordnungen 2007-2013 mit dem Ziel, den Mittelabfluss und die Liquidität in den Mitgliedstaaten zu verbessern. Eine Maßnahme, die gerade zur Bewältigung der Wirtschaftskrise uneingeschränkt zu begrüßen ist.

Die Mitgliedstaaten sind nun angehalten, beispielsweise die Möglichkeiten für die Unterstützung von Investitionen in Energieeffizienz und erneuerbare Energien im Wohnungsbau – überhaupt diese neuen Investitionsmöglichkeiten im Wohnungsbau – umfassend auszuschöpfen. Tragen doch diese angedachten Maßnahmen zur Beschleunigung, Vereinfachung und Flexibilisierung des Einsatzes der Strukturfonds und des Kohäsionsfonds bei. Und Kollegen, was betont werden muss, sie laufen dem freien Wettbewerb, den Sozialstandards und der Umsetzung von Umwelt- und Klimaschutzauflagen der Gemeinschaft keinesfalls zuwider.

Es liegt nun an den Mitgliedstaaten, die Kofinanzierung für diese in den Europäischen Strukturfonds bereitgestellten Mittel sicherzustellen, um diese auch voll auszuschöpfen. Zu begrüßen und zu unterstützen ist im Bericht die Forderung nach einer weiteren Vereinfachung der Verwaltung und Ausführung der Fonds.

Verehrte Kommissare, wir sind auch gespannt auf weitere diesbezügliche Vorschläge der Kommission im Jahr 2009. Letztendlich ist die Bedeutung von Maßnahmen zur Stützung der Beschäftigung und der Unternehmen für einen erfolgreichen wirtschaftlichen Aufschwung hervorzuheben. Werden doch die Mitgliedstaaten aufgefordert, in breitem Umfang auf die Strukturfonds zur Förderung oder Schaffung von Arbeitsplätzen in kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen zurückzugreifen.

Unsere Änderungsanträge wurden im Ausschuss weitestgehend berücksichtigt. Diesem Bericht ist uneingeschränkt zuzustimmen. Herzlichen Glückwunsch, Herr Kirilov.

  Enrique Barón Crespo (PSE). - Señora Presidenta, señor Presidente en ejercicio del Consejo, señor Vicepresidente de la Comisión, Señorías, el mejor homenaje que podemos rendir a Jean Monnet es actuar con unidad, con decisión y con perseverancia, como él hizo organizando el esfuerzo logístico durante las dos guerras mundiales, el esfuerzo de los aliados que permitió ganar la guerra. Eso significa que los Veintisiete hemos de actuar conjuntamente.

Los socialistas insistimos en que eso supone tres acciones prioritarias: por una parte, reforzar nuestro plan de estímulo, de relanzamiento en el terreno presupuestario y también en el terreno de la supervisión y de la organización de Europa.

En segundo lugar, hacer real la solidaridad entre los Veintisiete. Yo no sé si el Gobierno checo y su Parlamento, que están sentados sobre el Tratado de Lisboa, saben que en el artículo segundo del Tratado de Lisboa aparece por primera vez la palabra solidaridad.

Y, en tercer lugar, luchar contra los agujeros negros de la globalización que son los paraísos fiscales.

  Chris Davies (ALDE). - Madam President, I want to refer to our strategy and preparations for the Copenhagen Conference on climate change later this year, where we have taken a leadership role but one which is threatened by the economic recession and demands that we relax our standards. Let me give you one example.

More than three years ago we agreed that new requirements would be placed on car manufacturers to change the air conditioning refrigerants they use, which currently have a global warming potential 1 400 times greater than carbon dioxide. We said that should take place in all new car models from 2011.

But now we hear that some manufacturers – led, I understand, by Ford and General Motors – are trying to exploit loopholes to get out of that obligation. Later this month there is a meeting of the national type approval authorities. It is very important that Commissioner Verheugen takes a lead and makes it clear that we are not going to relax our standards, and that these refrigerants must be replaced by 2011.

If we weaken now, we open the floodgates to lobbying from industry across the board, and our leadership role on climate change will be seriously undermined.

  Costas Botopoulos (PSE). - Madam President, these three very extremely important reports have been drafted by Socialist rapporteurs. This of course is not by chance. The thrust of these reports, the amendments that will be presented by the Socialist Members to improve them and also I think today’s debate show very clearly that there are distinctive policies: distinctive right-wing and Socialist policies towards the crisis. The right-wing policy is pretty simple: the crisis is a bad thing but we need to be patient, it will pass; we need to take some technical measures and things will calm down by themselves and we must express our sympathy to the people who will be hit.

The Socialist position is much more complex. We say that we must attack the roots of the problem, the roots of the crisis, that we must radically change the economic paradigm, that we must change and that we must curb all the speculation that has led us to this financial crisis. This has not been a neutral crisis but a crisis inflicted by specific policies, mostly by right-wing governments.

  Jean-Paul Gauzès (PPE-DE). - Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, mes chers collègues, nos concitoyens, en ces temps de crise, attendent beaucoup de l'Europe. L'Europe ne doit pas les décevoir.

Bien sûr, le réalisme amène à constater que les moyens financiers de l'Europe sont limités, une réflexion doit être engagée pour les améliorer. Néanmoins, l'Europe peut mieux exister, mieux réussir, avec une plus grande volonté politique.

D'abord, bien sûr, en catalysant les actions et les efforts des États membres, mais aussi par une approche coordonnée au niveau européen. Le plan de relance est essentiellement une boîte à outils pour favoriser les restructurations. Le rôle de la BEI doit être renforcé.

L'Europe doit agir et définir une stratégie économique claire et novatrice. Les agents économiques ont besoin de perspectives et de stabilité juridique. Il importe d'abord de mettre de l'ordre dans les services financiers afin que les institutions bancaires jouent leur rôle principal, qui est de financer le développement économique.

Les textes actuellement en préparation doivent y contribuer: directives sur les fonds propres des banques et des assurances, règlements sur les agences de notation. Sur ce dernier texte, nous devons tirer les conséquences du dysfonctionnement constaté.

Il est également urgent d'organiser une supervision européenne des activités financières qui sont réglementées. Le rapport du groupe de Larosière formule des propositions utiles et opportunes qu'il faut rapidement mettre en œuvre.

Il faut également donner à l'Europe une politique industrielle véritable, efficace et moderne. À cet égard, nous devons concilier les impératifs de développement durable et la nécessité d'un tissu industriel de qualité, producteur de richesses et fournisseur d'emplois.

Il convient, dans les temps de crise que nous vivons, de ne pas perturber les secteurs qui fonctionnent par la production de règles ou de réglementations dont l'efficacité n'est pas formellement établie. Par exemple, dans le secteur automobile, qui connaît aujourd'hui de graves difficultés, il est important que le règlement d'exemption de la distribution automobile, qui expire en 2010, soit prorogé.

Il faut également, par exemple, être vigilant dans la négociation de l'accord bilatéral avec la Corée, qui pourrait être très favorable à notre industrie.

  Brian Simpson (PSE). - Madam President, my contribution today will be one that highlights the need for investment: investment in jobs; investment in our environment; and investment in all our economies. In that regard, investment in our transport infrastructure, and in particular in our railway infrastructure, is crucial not only in providing us with a world-class rail network but also in protecting and creating jobs and social cohesion.

Let us prioritise the electrification of our rail network, giving us both transport and environmental gains. Let us invest in our TENS transport network, let us have a recovery plan with substance and with action, and not just words.

Doing nothing and letting the markets decide has failed. The time for concerted European action is now based on putting people first and vested interests last. We on this side of the House are not prepared to play Pontius Pilate, washing our hands of the problem. We want to act and we want to act decisively.

  Péter Olajos (PPE-DE). - Meggyőződésem, hogy a jelenlegi gazdasági válság gyökere a túlfogyasztásban, az ökológiai válságban gyökerezik, ide kell leásnunk a megoldás érdekében is. Fontos időszak vár ránk az éghajlatpolitikában, hiszen az év végén Koppenhágában meg kell állapodnunk a globális felmelegedés elleni küzdelemben az új közös célokról. A tét tehát nagy, nem hibázhatunk, nem is késlekedhetünk. Az előttünk lévő joganyagok nemcsak a kereteket határozzák meg, a fő irányvonalat jelölik ki, a tényleges, konkrét lépések még csak ezután következnek. Ahhoz, hogy a tudósok által ajánlott 25-40%-os üvegházhatást okozó gázcsökkenést 2020-ra elérhessük, ahhoz, hogy a biodiverzitás fogyatkozását megállíthassuk, ahhoz nagyon komoly pénzügyi forrásokra van szükségünk.

Az utóbbi években volt szerencsém parlamenti delegációkkal meglátogatni Bangladest, Kínát, Indiát, legutóbb Guayanát, és ebbéli meggyőződésem csak erősödött. Egyfelől támogatnunk kell a fejlődő országokat, de ezt csak átlátható, jól ellenőrizhető beruházásokon keresztül, emellett az uniós kibocsátáskereskedelmi árverések jövedelméből szintén támogatni kell a fejlődő országokban az alkalmazkodást segítő intézkedéseket is. A Környezetvédelmi Bizottság összességében 30 milliárd eurót javasol erre a célra 2020-ig. Ez az összeg hatalmas, jól felhasználni nagy feladat.

Másfelől az éghajlatváltozás elleni küzdelem Európának nagyszerű lehetőség új technológiák, új munkahelyek létrehozatalára az energiabiztonság növelésére. Az ENSZ és az új amerikai, illetve több európai kormány is felismerte, hogy a globális válságból való kilábaláshoz nemcsak egy friss, hatékonyan teljesítő húzóerőre lenne szükség, hanem egy új szervezeti elven működő motorra. A jelen gazdasági recessziója ugyanis elfedi az emberiség, és Európa igazi nagy problémáját, azaz az ökológiai válságot. A zöld „new deal” történelmi lehetőség mindkét válság egyszeri megoldásának irányába.

  Gianni Pittella (PSE). - Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, io credo sia stato un errore sottovalutare inizialmente, soprattutto da parte della Commissione, la portata della crisi, ed è oggi un errore ripetersi in vertici che producono dichiarazioni di principio a cui non seguono decisioni unitarie e concrete. Le risposte che danno le relazioni dei colleghi ai problemi gravissimi dei cittadini europei sono convincenti e all'altezza dei bisogni.

Ma l'Aula è chiamata a colmare un vuoto, a introdurre lo strumento degli Eurobond, ripetutamente richiesto dal collega Mario Mauro, dal sottoscritto e da quasi 200 colleghi, e capace – forse l'unico strumento – di raccogliere le risorse finanziarie che il nostro bilancio esangue non ha, per finanziare le risposte alla crisi, le infrastrutture transeuropee, le energie pulite, la ricerca e la banda larga, la lotta alla povertà, gli Erasmus per i giovani. Il grande maestro Jacques Delors – ho concluso – ci ha indicato la strada: perseguiamola con coraggio.

  Avril Doyle (PPE-DE). - Madam President, with the backdrop of the global economic and financial crisis and the multi-billion stimulus packages, there is a huge opportunity to increase energy efficiency, to increase energy security from reliable renewable sources and to drive green technology in a green ‘new deal’. In other words, to turn this crisis into an opportunity, and to the benefit of us all in the long term.

I welcome the two alternatives for innovative funding for combating global climate change in the recent Commission communication. As the original author of the resolution on today’s paper, I urge Member States to act on these proposals and also, at next week’s summit of heads of state and government, to honour the declaration of the summit of 12 December last, which should be put officially on the record, preferably along with the final text of the EU-ETS report, as otherwise it will not appear in the Official Journal.

For this – and I urge the President-in-Office, the Commissioner and Madam President to remember this – we need a tripartite declaration from all three institutions. This December declaration states: ‘The European Council recalls that Member States will determine, in accordance with their respective constitutional and budgetary requirements, the use of revenues generated from the auctioning of allowances in the EU emissions trading system. It takes note of their willingness to use at least half of this amount for actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, mitigate and adapt to climate change, for measures to avoid deforestation, to develop renewable energies, energy efficiency, as well as other technologies contributing to the transition to a safe and sustainable low-carbon economy, including through capacity-building, technology transfers, research and development.’

It continues. ‘In the context of an international agreement on climate change in Copenhagen in 2009, and for those who wish so, part of this amount will be used to enable and finance actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change in developing countries that will have ratified this agreement, in particular in least-developed countries. Further steps are to be taken at the spring 2009 European Council in this regard’.

I await eagerly an honourable outcome of the declaration from next week’s meeting of heads of state and government.

  Harlem Désir (PSE). - Madame la Présidente, trop peu, trop tard, insuffisamment coordonné, insuffisamment solidaire, sous-dimensionné: c'est vraiment le sentiment que donnent le plan de relance de l'Union européenne et les propositions de la Commission à ce stade.

Pour une raison déjà simple, c'est qu'au regard des prévisions qui avaient été faites initialement, nous sommes tous obligés de constater que la profondeur de la crise avait été sous-estimée, qu'il s'agisse de la baisse très spectaculaire de la production industrielle, par exemple au Royaume-Uni ou en France, de la baisse du commerce international et des exportations allemandes ou des prévisions d'augmentation du chômage. Je crois donc véritablement qu'aujourd'hui, nous sommes très loin d'une réponse qui soit à la hauteur de ce que met en œuvre, par exemple, l'administration Obama aux États-Unis.

Il y a encore une fois un sentiment d'absence de solidarité, mais aussi de très grande timidité. Nous voyons l'Ecofin qui refuse, au mois de mars, d'augmenter les plans de relance ou les pays d'Europe de l'Est qui en sont réduits à faire appel au FMI, ce qui est un échec lamentable de la solidarité européenne; on laisse s'additionner les plans de sauvetage du secteur industriel par pays et on en est réduit juste à appeler à l'absence de protectionnisme. Or, la seule vraie réponse, ce serait un plan de sauvetage européen de relance du secteur automobile.

Je crois qu'aujourd'hui, la demande des socialistes est extrêmement claire: nous voulons que l'on investisse massivement. À titre de comparaison, par exemple, puisqu'on fait souvent référence à la crise de 1929, le New Deal de Roosevelt, c'était 3,5 % du PIB pendant sept ans. Cela signifierait, pour l'Europe, aujourd'hui, l'équivalent de 400 milliards d'euros par an pendant plusieurs années. Nous pensons donc qu'il faut effectivement avoir recours à l'emprunt et aux Eurobonds, qu'il faut investir massivement dans l'innovation verte, dans l'isolation des bâtiments, dans les transports modernes, dans le secteur énergétique, et qu'il faut également un plan de soutien aux victimes des restructurations et du chômage, et indiquer comment on va aider tous ceux qui vont être confrontés au chômage, en étendant par exemple l'utilisation du Fonds européen d'ajustement à la mondialisation.

  Cornelis Visser (PPE-DE). - Voorzitter, in deze periode van economische crisis moet het Europees Parlement een waakhondfunctie vervullen. Een waakhondfunctie, als het gaat om het voorkomen van protectionisme.

Met elkaar hebben we de interne markt tot stand gebracht. Deze interne markt heeft ons veel welvaart gebracht. Niet alleen in West-Europa, maar ook in Centraal-Europa hebben de landen hier volop van geprofiteerd. We moeten deze verworvenheden niet met de eerste de beste tegenwind uit onze handen laten glippen. Voorstellen, zoals die rond het ondersteunen van de Franse autoindustrie, waarvan andere Europese landen de nadelen zouden ondervinden, moeten we als Europees Parlement bestrijden.

Het Parlement moet ook een waakhondfunctie vervullen, als het gaat om de kracht van de euro. We kunnen niet accepteren dat landen ongelimiteerd hun staatsschuld laten oplopen. We hebben in Europa het zogenaamde Stabiliteits- en groeipact afgesproken. We weten dat we door de financiële crisis tijdelijk meer ruimte moeten laten aan de ondersteuning van de banken. Maar dit moet een uitzondering zijn.

Andere sectoren in de economie dienen niet structureel te worden ondersteund. Daarvoor hebben de lidstaten het geld niet, en wanneer ze daarvoor zouden lenen met Eurobonds, worden toekomstige generaties met de schuldenlast opgezadeld en wordt de euro zwak. Ik ben daartegen.

Kortom, we moeten een waakhond zijn, als het gaat om het bestrijden van protectionisme en het beschermen van de waarde van de euro.

  Libor Rouček (PSE). - Dámy a pánové, ve svém krátkém příspěvku se dnes soustředím na jednu důležitou oblast, která bude, doufám že s úspěchem, diskutována a řešena na zasedání Evropské rady, a tou je energetická politika. My všichni víme, že Evropská unie potřebuje posílit svoji energetickou bezpečnost a nezávislost, potřebuje posílit energetickou infrastrukturu, to znamená propojit a rozšířit ropovody, plynovody, energovody mezi jednotlivými státy a regiony, že potřebujeme navýšit zásoby ropy a zemního plynu. Chceme zvýšit podíl obnovitelných zdrojů, chceme zvýšit energetickou účinnost budov a výrobků, chceme zvýšit investice do výzkumu a do opatření na zmírňování dopadů klimatických změn. Já jsem přesvědčen, že právě opatření a investice, které je nutno přinést v oblasti energetické politiky, mohou řešit nejenom ty problémy v oblasti energetiky a klimatu, ale také právě v době ekonomické krize mohou velmi pozitivně a silně zapůsobit na nastartování ekonomického růstu a na zvýšení zaměstnanosti.

  Румяна Желева (PPE-DE). - Колеги, приветствам усилията на европейските институции да очертаят мерки за координирани действия на държавите-членки и Комисията за справяне с икономическата криза. Както е добре известно, политиката на сближаване на Европейския съюз има важен принос към европейския план за икономическо възстановяване и е най-големият източник на Общността за инвестиции в реалната икономика. Като израз на тези усилия Европейският парламент подкрепя промените в регламента относно Европейския фонд за регионално развитие, Европейския социален фонд и Кохезионния фонд, така че да се опрости и ускори финансовото управление на европейските средства. От това опростяване се надявам да спечелят бенефициентите - тези, към които наистина са насочени средствата. Това е особено важно за по-бедните държави в Европейския съюз.

Важна задача пред държавите-членки остава те да осигурят изискващото се финансиране, за да може европейските средства да отидат по предназначение. Без да нарушават правилата на свободната конкуренция и стандартите за добро управление, държавите-членки следва да се възползват от опростените процедури за финансиране на проекти. Благодаря Ви за вниманието.

  Atanas Paparizov (PSE). - Madam President, it is clear that the European aspect of the economic recovery plan and its financial backing is very negligible compared to the efforts of the Member States. I hope, however, that the Council will adopt a plan to support energy interconnections between countries so that a future gas crisis will be mitigated in its effects.

However, solidarity could be expressed by making more flexible the criteria for ERM2, the euro zone and the adoption of the euro for those countries wanting to join. It is clear that Member States that now have to make great efforts to maintain a stable currency exchange rate need more support to be able to pass all the necessary steps to become members of the euro zone and thus prevent the effects of the economic crisis. I hope that will be one of the decisions taken in the near future, bearing in mind that there is already flexibility for the existing Members.

  Danutė Budreikaitė (ALDE). - Iš esmės pritardama Europos ekonomikos atstatymo planui noriu atkreipti dėmesį į du klausimus: į euro obligacijų išleidimą ir euro zonos išplėtimą. Euro obligacijų išleidimas, skirtas euro zonos sustiprinimui, nėra tinkamas instrumentas ir tinkamas laikas finansinės, ekonominės ir socialinės krizės krečiamai Europai. Turime 16 euro zonos narių, kurių ekonomiką norima remti, kaip su kitomis 11 šalių? Siūloma leisti pirkti euro obligacijas tik už Švedijos ir Danijos kronas. Kokiame užribyje liktų naujosios valstybės narės, kurios dėl daugelio objektyvių priežasčių nėra euro zonoje? Kokią skolinimo kainą jos turėtų mokėti? Lietuvai nebuvo leista įsivesti euro dėl 0,07 procentų infliacijos rodiklio viršyjimo, nors nė viena euro zonos narė per 10 metų nėra įvykdžiusi visų rodiklių. Lietuvos litas susietas su euru jau 4 metai, ar ne laikas kūrybiškiau pažiūrėti į pokyčius pasaulyje ir išplėsti euro zoną tuo palengvinant visai ES išeiti iš krizės?

  Mieczysław Edmund Janowski (UEN). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Tytuł sprawozdania pana Kirilova – gratuluję mu – sugeruje, że można też mówić o gospodarce nierealnej. Pojawiły się więc wirtualna ekonomia i wirtualne pieniądze, ale rzeczywiste są podpisy bankierów i audytorów stwierdzające, że wszystko jest w porządku. Okazuje się, że to nie prawda, że to blef.

Dziś musimy stawić czoła wyzwaniom kryzysu gospodarczego i moralnego. W tym kontekście inwestowanie w rozwój i spójność regionów jest sensowne i potrzebne. To będą bowiem rzeczywiste kilometry dróg, zmodernizowane linie kolejowe, lotniska. Zainwestujmy w naukę i edukację, w innowacyjne rozwiązania, zwłaszcza w odniesieniu do małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw. Rzeczywiście ograniczmy biurokrację. To będzie owocować miejscami pracy dla tysięcy ludzi, to będzie dla nich chleb. Będzie to także faktyczna realizacja polityki solidarności, a nie protekcjonizmu. To będzie realizacja Lizbony.

  Εμμανουήλ Αγγελάκας (PPE-DE). - Κυρία Πρόεδρε, πρέπει να ληφθούν συγκεκριμένα μέτρα που θα κινητοποιούν κλάδους της οικονομίας ώστε να βοηθήσουν στην αντιμετώπιση της κρίσης είναι σημαντική.

Ειδικότερα, όταν αυτά σχετίζονται με την περιφερειακή πολιτική και την πολιτική συνοχής, είναι βέβαιο ότι αφορούν την πλειοψηφία των πολιτών και των επιχειρήσεων, ιδιαίτερα των μικρομεσαίων.

Πρωτοβουλίες για την απλοποίηση των κανονισμών του Ευρωπαϊκού Ταμείου Περιφερειακής Ανάπτυξης και των άλλων διαρθρωτικών ταμείων, μέτρα όπως η ενίσχυση επενδύσεων με χρήση ανανεώσιμων πηγών ενέργειας στις κατοικίες, η απλοποίηση των κανονισμών, η καταβολή προκαταβολών και επιλέξιμων δαπανών και κατ’ αποκοπήν ποσών είναι βέβαιο ότι θα βοηθήσουν στη διατήρηση των θέσεων εργασίας αλλά και στην επιβίωση των μικρομεσαίων επιχειρήσεων μέσα στο αβέβαιο οικονομικό περιβάλλον.

Η προσπάθεια πρέπει να συνεχιστεί πιο έντονα και με άλλες πρωτοβουλίες, τις οποίες αναμένει το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο, και θα συμμετάσχει ενεργά στη διαμόρφωσή τους. Η ανάγκη για λήψη μέτρων με άμεσο αντίκτυπο στην οικονομική στήριξη των πολιτών παραμένει.

  Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (PSE). - Az Európai Unió soha nem volt ilyen válságos helyzetben, mint most. Két alapelv kérdőjeleződik meg: a belső piac egysége a protekcionizmus miatt és a szolidaritás. Martin Schulznak teljesen igaza van, hogy semmi konkrét lépést nem tett az Európai Bizottság a piacok rendbetételére, a pénzügyi felügyeletre – és az az önzés, az a protekcionizmus szétverheti az Európai Unió egységét, ha a szolidaritást nem fogjuk megőrizni. Mert nemcsak az eurózónán kívül vannak problémák, az eurózónán belül is! Görögországnak, Magyarországnak és másoknak hasonló problémái vannak. És szeretném a Farage urat emlékeztetni arra, hogy a nyugat-európai bankok, a nyugat-európai vállalatok fölvásárolták az új tagállamok vállalatait, bankjait, és most nem szolidárisak, nem tesznek lehetőséget a pénzügyi alapok biztosítására.

  Martin Schulz (PSE). - Frau Präsidentin! Danke, dass ich am Ende dieser Debatte eine persönliche Bemerkung machen kann. Die will ich gerne in Beantwortung der Bemerkungen meines Freundes Klaus-Heiner Lehne machen.

Ich habe verstanden, Klaus-Heiner, dass die Krise durch die Sozialisten in Europa verursacht wurde. Das wussten wir auch vorher, das ist das altbekannte Prinzip in Deutschland: Wenn morgens schon die Sonne lacht, hat das die CDU gemacht; gibt es aber Eis und Schnee, dann war es bestimmt die SPD. Das ist uns bekannt. Ihr könnt aber jetzt zeigen, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der EVP-ED, ob Ihr das, was Sie, Herr Kollege Lehne, angekündigt haben, , wo Sie mich ja hier attackiert haben, ich würde etwas Falsches sagen – es kann ja sein, dass ich mich geirrt habe –, auch wahr macht.

Deshalb bitte ich Sie jetzt: Sagen Sie uns doch bitte Folgendes: Bericht Ferreira, Änderungsantrag 113 – da geht es um die Solidarität zwischen den Mitgliedstaaten, bzw. darum, Steueroasen zu schließen. Wir beschließen hier, dass der G-20-Gipfel durch die EU aufgefordert wird, Steueroasen zu schließen. Stimmen Sie mit Ja oder Nein beim Ferreira-Bericht? Gemeinschaftssolidarität, die Eurozone mit den Staaten der Nicht-Eurozone und die Eurozone untereinander. Stimmen Sie mit? Und schließlich die Investitionsanreize von 1% bzw. 1,5% des Bruttoinlandsprodukts als Gemeinschaftsanstrengung zur Bewältigung der Krise. Stimmen Sie mit? Das sind die Änderungsanträge 92, 102 und 113 der Sozialistischen Fraktion. Wenn Sie da mitstimmen, dann entschuldige ich mich bei Ihnen, Herr Lehne. Wenn Sie nicht mitstimmen, muss ich Ihnen sagen, Sie sind es, der hier große Reden hält und anschließend anders abstimmt.

  Klaus-Heiner Lehne (PPE-DE). - Frau Präsidentin, vielen herzlichen Dank. Ich mache es auch wirklich ganz kurz. Zunächst einmal: Schuld an der Krise sind natürlich nicht die Sozialisten, das hat hier im Plenarsaal auch niemand behauptet. Wir wissen alle, wer schuld ist, das ist ja umfangreich analysiert worden. Ich habe jedoch zu Recht darauf hingewiesen, dass ein Zustandekommen von klaren Transparenzregeln in den Bereichen Hedge Fonds und Private Equity über Jahre hinweg auch an den Sozialisten in Europa gescheitert ist, und habe dafür Beispiele genannt. Das ist schlicht und ergreifend eine Tatsache.

Was die angesprochenen Änderungsanträge angeht, so möchte ich mich nur auf einen Punkt beziehen, die Thematik Steuerparadiese. Da sind wir uns vollkommen einig. Die Frage ist nur, an welcher Stelle dem zugestimmt wird. Wir werden heute bei der Entschließung zur Lissabon-Strategie einen Antrag 25 zu beraten haben, der sich genau mit diesem Thema befasst. Da wird die Fraktion zustimmen. Von daher habe ich mit den angesprochenen Fragen keine Probleme.

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, we have had a very long and useful debate, and the Presidency is grateful to all the Members of this House for their comments.

They have rightly identified the very significant challenges that we currently face, and in particular the consequences of the financial and economic crisis. As I pointed out in my introductory remarks, this issue will be at the centre of the debate at next week’s European Council meeting. Despite the scale of the crisis, the Presidency considers that the European Union can agree on the various components of an approach which will take us forward.

There is no other option than to work together in the face of this deep crisis. I therefore support the many calls this morning for greater responsibility and more intensive cooperation. I also consider that we not only can and must act together to solve Europe’s problems, but also that the European Union is well placed to be part of the global solution. This crisis may be deep, but if we work together Europe has the necessary intellectual, financial, human and regulatory resources to continue to define and implement the appropriate responses.

Joseph Daul said that the next European Council is not just another summit, and he is certainly right. Delivering on a global solution starts with playing a leading role in the G20 conference in London at the beginning of next month. At yesterday’s Council meeting, Ecofin ministers endorsed the terms of reference for the EU’s participation in that important meeting. They agreed, in particular, on the need for closer international coordination of macroeconomic policies and global financial regulations based on increased transparency and accountability – and that brings us back to our debate on hedge funds and other sensitive issues. They all agreed on strengthened cooperation between the financial authorities at international level, on strengthening the IMF and on the need to address the role of multilateral development banks in countering the effects of the crisis on the world’s poorest populations.

While we are talking about the need for solidarity, we have to be aware that this European solidarity must be accompanied by nationally responsible policies on sustainable financial development in Europe. It is true that the Americans are spending, but they are not asking for assistance from the IMF, and they do not have a Stability Pact ensuring the integrity of their currency zone. We have to invest in our future, but it must be done in a way that will not undermine the long-term sustainability of our public finances or the rules of the game on the internal market.

Many of you referred this morning to the very real concerns of citizens in the face of rising unemployment. Martin Schulz said that the issue is ‘jobs, jobs and jobs’ – and he is right. We do indeed need to maintain employment, and while many measures remain the competence of the Member States, there are certain things we can do. Let me give one example. Yesterday, Ecofin reached an agreement on reducing VAT in labour-intensive services sectors, such as restaurants etc. If you remember, this had been on the agenda for many years without a solution being found, and it was only yesterday, under the presidency of my country, that we were able to reach agreement on that sensitive issue.

Employment should be, and is, the key theme of the three reports before us this morning. We intend to address that issue at next week’s meeting. It is a key part of the Lisbon Strategy. I agree with those who say that the current crisis is not a reason for jettisoning the Lisbon Strategy. It is, in fact, all the more reason to ensure that we deliver on the Strategy’s key aims.

The Presidency is devoting particular attention to this issue, which is why we have called an additional meeting in early May on the problem of growing unemployment. Next week, we intend to agree some concrete orientations, which will create a basis for our discussions and possibly for the decisions to be taken in May.

Some of you also mentioned the need for reaching an agreement on mitigating and adapting to climate change, in preparation for the meeting in Copenhagen. Graham Watson asked how much we will have to pay. I think that is premature. There are some estimates – such as in the Commission communication on this particular matter, which contains estimates from the various NGOs and institutions – and these are pretty high. However, it would be premature to give an estimate now. We have to wait for the US and other stakeholders in the process to inform us of their plans, and that is what we intend to find out about at the meeting with Mr Obama’s Administration in Prague in early April. To open the account now would not be the correct tactical move.

We shall, of course, keep you fully informed of all aspects of the next European Council meeting, and I will ensure that Prime Minister Topolánek is fully aware of the views expressed here this morning. He will report to Parliament, at the next plenary session, on the outcome of the European Council, and I look forward to a constructive exchange of views on that occasion.

  Günter Verheugen, Vizepräsident der Kommission. − Frau Präsidentin, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren Abgeordnete! Ich stimme denjenigen zu, die gesagt haben, dass diese Krise lange Zeit unterschätzt und nicht richtig verstanden wurde. Darum ist es vielleicht ganz gut, wenn man in der Eröffnungsbilanz wenigstens darin übereinstimmt, dass wir nämlich nicht wissen, wie tief diese Krise noch gehen wird. Wir wissen nicht, wie lange diese Krise noch dauern wird, und deshalb wissen wir auch nicht, ob wir schon genug getan haben. Es tut mir leid, hier Jean-Claude Juncker ausnahmsweise widersprechen zu müssen.

Wir wissen ja noch nicht einmal, ob das, was wir getan haben, Wirkungen zeigen wird oder nicht. Noch nicht einmal das wissen wir in diesem Augenblick. Das Einzige, was wir wirklich wissen, ist: Wir werden aus dieser Krise nicht herauskommen, wenn es nicht ganz schnell gelingt, den Finanzsektor wieder zum Funktionieren zu bringen.

Das war der Beginn des Problems, und es ist inzwischen ziemlich klar, wie das alles zustande gekommen ist. Und wir wissen auch, warum die bisherigen Maßnahmen zur Stabilisierung des Finanzsektors noch keine Wirkung gezeigt haben – jedenfalls noch keine ausreichende –, weil nämlich die Banken wissen, dass noch eine Welle auf sie zukommt. Sie betreiben im Augenblick Risikovorsorge, weil sie wissen, dass noch nicht alle Risiken, die sie in ihren Büchern haben, bekannt sind, und darauf müssen wir uns politisch ebenfalls einstellen.

Aber eins ist auch klar: Für die Finanzwirtschaft gibt es kein Zurück in die Zeit vor der Krise. Wer die Vorstellung haben sollte, der Staat regelt das jetzt alles, und die Europäische Union regelt das, und danach geht es fröhlich weiter wie vorher, der irrt sich. Ganz klar ist, dass wir für die Finanzwirtschaft, für die Finanzinstitutionen eine robuste, langfristige und nicht nur europäische Aufsicht brauchen. Es ist ganz wichtig, dass wir das als ein System von global governance zusammen mit unseren Partnern zustande bringen, und wir werden das mit unseren Partnern nur dann zustande bringen, wenn wir als Europäer eine gemeinsame klare Linie vertreten. Je einiger wir in dieser Frage sind, desto größer sind unsere Chancen, tatsächlich etwas zu erreichen. Wenn die Signale, die aus den Hauptstädten Europas, in Washington, in Peking, in Tokio ankommen, unterschiedlich bleiben, haben wir wenig Aussichten auf ein vernünftiges System von global governance.

Wir sind uns auch darüber einig, dass die aktuelle Situation schwersten sozialen Sprengstoff enthält, und zwar ganz einfach deshalb, weil das, was wir tun können, um den Finanzsektor zu stabilisieren, nicht in dem Umfang geschehen kann, um Unternehmen der Realwirtschaft zu stützen, die als Folge der Finanzkrise in Schwierigkeiten geraten. Das wissen wir alle.

Die europäische Antwort auf die Krise in der Realwirtschaft, die Krise unserer Unternehmen, die Krise unserer Industrie, ist eine Antwort, die sich auf die Arbeitsplätze konzentriert. Es geht weiß Gott nicht um die Dividenden für die Anteilseigner oder die Boni für die Manager. Es geht darum, dass diejenigen, die für diese Krise am allerwenigsten, im Grunde überhaupt nicht verantwortlich sind – nämlich die Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer – ihre Jobs behalten können. Diese Jobs müssen sie deshalb behalten, weil ein selbstbestimmtes Leben in Freiheit und Menschenwürde sonst gar nicht möglich ist.

Wir wollen die Jobs in der europäischen Wirtschaft verteidigen. Deshalb waren die Ausgabenprogramme notwendig. Man kann sehr darüber streiten, ob sie größer hätten ausfallen können oder müssen oder nicht. Das Problem, das wir hier haben, ist, der Gemeinschaftshaushalt zeigt an dieser Stelle keine Flexibilität. Wir können im Europäischen Parlament, in der Europäischen Kommission leicht sagen, wir brauchen ein großes Konjunkturpaket, wir müssen viel Geld in die Wirtschaft pumpen, denn es wird nicht unser Geld sein, wir haben es nämlich nicht. Es kann immer nur das Geld der Mitgliedstaaten sein und vergessen Sie bitte nicht, dass dabei die nationalen Parlamente selbstverständlich auch eine Rolle spielen.

Wir haben versucht, dafür zu sorgen, dass die Ausgabenprogramme so organisiert werden, dass die kurzfristigen Notwendigkeiten nicht die langfristigen Ziele gefährden, präzise das, was mehrere Redner aus allen Fraktionen gesagt haben, nämlich dass wir uns in einer ökonomischen Transformation befinden, einer Transformation hin zu einer CO2-armen Wirtschaft, zu einer Ressourcen schonenden Wirtschaft und zu einer auf Wissen gegründeten Wirtschaft. Diese Transformation muss auch in der Krise weitergehen. Deshalb sagen wir den Unternehmen: Spart nicht bei Forschung und Entwicklung, spart nicht bei Innovation, haltet Eure Stammbelegschaften. Die Maßnahmen, die wir finanziell ergreifen, müssen diese Ziele stützen. Ich bin gerne mit all denen einverstanden, die sagen: Das hätte vielleicht noch etwas besser gehen können. Aber wir sollten immer daran denken, das Geld, das hier ausgegeben wird, ist nicht das Geld der Europäischen Union. Es ist das Geld der Mitgliedstaaten, und da spielen auch andere Dinge eine Rolle als die, die wir hier für richtig halten. Das ökonomische Leitbild der Lissabon-Strategie, um die es hier heute auch ging, ist nicht der sich selbst überlassene Markt. Die Lissabon-Strategie geht nicht davon aus, dass die beste Marktwirtschaft diejenige ist, die man ungestört im marktradikalen Sinne einfach sich entfalten lässt, sondern die Lissabon-Strategie geht von der festen Überzeugung aus, dass der Markt Regeln braucht, wenn er seiner sozialen und ökologischen Verantwortung gerecht werden soll. Für diese Regeln ist die Politik zuständig, und davon sollten wir uns nichts wegnehmen lassen. Deshalb glaube ich auch, dass die Ziele der Lissabon-Strategie unverändert sind und dass es die falsche Frage ist zu sagen: Wie kommt es eigentlich, dass wir trotz Lissabon in diese Krise geraten sind? Eine andere wirtschaftliche Strategie in Europa hätte die makroökonomischen Ungleichgewichte, die zu dieser Krise geführt haben, und das Fehlverhalten auf den internationalen Finanzmärkten auch nicht verhindern können.

Lassen Sie mich zum Schluss noch sagen: Wir wollen die europäischen Unternehmen möglichst heil durch diese Krise bringen, und möglichst auch alle. Dazu müssen wir ihnen helfen, was den Zugang zu Finanzmitteln angeht. Das scheint mir im Augenblick das Hauptproblem zu sein, die Kreditklemme betrifft die Großen und die Kleinen.

Die Europäische Investitionsbank tut, was sie kann. Wir haben Anlass, der Europäischen Investitionsbank für ihre große Flexibilität zu danken. Aber sie ist bereits jetzt an die Grenzen des Möglichen gestoßen. Schon jetzt steht fest, dass der Kreditbedarf der großen und kleinen Unternehmen Europas im zweiten Halbjahr dieses Jahres nicht befriedigt werden kann, weil die Europäische Investitionsbank bereits jetzt an ihre Grenzen gekommen ist. Jeder muss wissen, dass die Situation sehr ernst wird, und darum lohnt es sich, darüber nachzudenken, ob man die Lage der europäischen Unternehmen nicht auch dadurch verbessern kann, dass z.B. dieses Parlament die Vorschläge der Kommission, die darauf abzielen, überflüssige Kosten für europäische Unternehmen zu vermeiden, schnell aufgreift und schnell beschließt.

Wir haben inzwischen Vorschläge vorgelegt, die zu einer Kostenreduzierung von bis zu 30 Milliarden Euro im Jahr für die europäischen Unternehmen führen könnten. Das schnell zu beschließen, würde auch ein wirkungsvoller Beitrag zur Bewältigung der Krise sein.

Die Kommission ist davon überzeugt, dass wenige Tage vor diesem Gipfel die Chancen und Risiken der europäischen Integration in seltener Klarheit sichtbar werden. Die Chancen bestehen ganz eindeutig darin, dass, wenn wir unsere Kräfte zusammenfassen, wenn wir wirklich koordiniert und zielgenau handeln, wenn wir unsere volle Kreativität einsetzen, wir dann sogar die Möglichkeit haben, gestärkt aus dieser Krise hervorzugehen. Dann können wir die Tatsache ausgleichen, dass wir nicht wie die Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika zentral Entscheidungen treffen können, die dann überall umgesetzt werden, sondern dass wir uns unter 27 Mitgliedstaaten verständigen müssen.

Wir sehen aber auch gleichzeitig die Risiken stärker denn jemals zuvor. Die Risiken, die für uns alle entstehen, wenn nur einer oder einige in dieser Situation statt auf Solidarität und auf Gemeinsamkeit auf Protektionismus oder ökonomischen Nationalismus setzt bzw. setzen. Ohne einen gemeinsamen Kompass, der uns durch diese Krise führt, werden wir uns in dem Nebel, den diese Krise verursacht hat, leider alle gemeinsam verirren.

  Elisa Ferreira, relatora. − Senhora Presidente, Senhor representante da Presidência, Senhor Comissário, minhas Senhoras e meus Senhores, meus caros Colegas, a crise é mais profunda do que esperávamos e o desemprego será maior do que prevemos. Há boas razões para supor que o estímulo europeu previsto não é suficiente, mas é claro, já neste momento, que ele está a demorar demasiado tempo a chegar aos cidadãos.

A posição do Parlamento é forte e é clara, tem sido e espero que vá continuar a sê-lo. O nosso objectivo é manter o emprego e é criar novos empregos com coesão, com solidariedade, quer territorial, quer social. Neste momento de crise, os cidadãos não se podem conformar com uma Europa que não lhes dá resposta, com uma Europa que é impotente perante os problemas que estão a atravessar. O que é que o Parlamento vai pedir à Comissão? Pede, naturalmente, através destes relatórios que coordene as intervenções nacionais, pede-lhe que utilize todos os meios que estão neste momento à sua disposição para intervir e dá-lhe todas as condições, enquanto entidade orçamental, para que isso aconteça. Pede-lhe que lance uma clara iniciativa europeia para o emprego e diz-lhe que é importante ter uma agenda com calendário para implementar as medidas de regulação do mercado financeiro, bem como chegar com o crédito à economia real. Mas o que é que se pede ao Conselho? Pede-se ao Conselho que, sobretudo, reencontre a vontade política que está na essência da construção do projecto europeu. A União Europeia é concorrência, mas é igualmente coesão e solidariedade. E não pode haver um mercado único sem essa garantia, solidariedade e coesão. Foi para isso que nós todos delegámos no nível europeu as autonomias nacionais que tínhamos antes de aderir a este projecto.

  Jan Andersson, föredragande. − Fru talman! Krisen börjar nu bli verklig för människor, nu börjar arbetslösheten öka, och den ökar snabbt, och nu börjar vi se de sociala konsekvenserna av krisen. Nedgången blir större än vad vi trodde från början. Det blir högre arbetslöshet, det blir större sociala konsekvenser.

Jag skulle vilja säga något till den konservativa gruppen här i parlamentet. Hökmark är inte här, men Hökmark skyllde denna kris på socialdemokraternas förslag. Det är att skjuta på pianisten om man inte gillar låten. Det är ju så att vi har center- och högerregeringar i Europa. Det är de som visar brist på handling, det är de som visar brist på samordning, det är de som visar brist på solidaritet.

Nu gäller det jobben, nu gäller det de sociala trygghetssystemen och nu gäller det den offentliga sektorn. Jag säger till kommissionen och rådet inför toppmötet: Det gäller att agera nu, det gäller att agera samordnat, det gäller att agera med tillräckliga insatser och det gäller att agera med solidaritet. Det är nu det ska göras. Vi kan inte vänta på toppmötet i maj; sysselsättningsfrågorna måste stå högst på agendan redan nu.

(Applåder)

  Евгени Кирилов, докладчик. − Благодаря, госпожо Председател. Политиката на сближаване е доказала своя принос за преодоляване на социално-икономическите трудности и за осъществяване на структурните реформи в страните-членки и техните региони. Натрупаният досега опит и особено заделеният значителен ресурс - ние говорим за над 340 милиарда за 7-годишния период - са жизнено необходими при настоящата икономическа криза и изключително важно е тези пари наистина да бъдат използвани, и то използвани по най-добрия начин, в интерес на европейските граждани и на бизнеса. В момент, в който всяко едно евро е важно за съживяване на европейската икономика, не можем да позволим неправилно изразходване на средства, затова едновременно приветстваме опростяването на правилата, но и призоваваме за коректно изпълнение.

Господин Ферхойген, когато говори днес, каза нещо, което е вярно: ние не знаем колко време ще продължи кризата. Но ние би трябвало днес да кажем едно: решенията, които ще вземем, и естествено решенията, които ще вземе Европейският съвет следващата седмица, трябва да бъдат почувствани като резултат още тази година, аз бих казал, трябва да бъдат почувствани даже още това лято. Това чакат европейските граждани от нас, за да видят светлина в тунела, за да видят надежда за изход, по-бърз изход от тази криза.

И искам да кажа нещо, обърнат към малкото колеги, които се опитаха днес да поставят една икономическа разделена линия между старите и новите страни-членки. Аз смятам, че именно политиката на сближаване, това, което вземаме и днес като решение, контрира тези техни мисли. Струва ми се, че всичко това е страшно вредно и ние трябва да го преодолеем с общи усилия. Благодаря.

  Πρόεδρος. - Έχω λάβει πέντε προτάσεις ψηφίσματος⁽¹⁾που έχουν κατατεθεί σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 103, παράγραφος 2, του Κανονισμού.

Η συζήτηση περατώνεται.

Η ψηφοφορία θα διεξαχθεί σήμερα, Τετάρτη 11 Μαρτίου.

Γραπτές δηλώσεις (άρθρο 142)

  John Attard-Montalto (PSE), in writing. – Guidelines were adopted as part of the renewed Lisbon Strategy in 2008 and shall remain valid until 2010. All Member States including Malta had to set out their strategies to deliver growth in jobs. Employment guidelines were set out. Financing the same is essential and the European Social Fund can finance immediate actions to be taken by Member States with regard to both flexicurity and skills.

Flexicurity is an integrated policy approach that seeks to facilitate adaptability of workers and enterprises. Secondly, we have to make a massive effort in improving the level of skills. This improvement has to take place at all levels of qualifications.

Firstly the improvement in skill levels will be useless unless it matches the needs of a labour market.

Secondly, priority has to be given to three strategies:

- improving the adaptability of workers and enterprises;

- attracting more people into employment and retaining more people in employment so as to increase the labour supply and to make social protection systems workable;

- increasing investments in human capital through enhanced skills and better education.

  Adam Bielan (UEN), na piśmie. – Panie Przewodniczący! Przysłuchując się debacie nie mogłem oprzeć się wrażeniu, że na sali panuje atmosfera konkurencji polegającej na przeciąganiu liny - stare państwa członkowskie kontra nowe. Wydaje mi się, że obwinianie i wskazywanie się nawzajem palcami kto zasługuje na to by być w UE to nie jest panaceum na nasze problemy.

Przede wszystkim pamiętajmy, że przysłuchują się nam obywatele, którzy oczekują od nas ochrony. Oni chcą zobaczyć właśnie teraz czemu służy zjednoczona Europa. Przy okazji tej debaty powinniśmy zastanowić się jak ograniczyć skutki społeczne obecnego kryzysu.

Strategii Lizbońskiej mówimy 'tak' bo przynosi rezultaty; bo dzięki niej powstało w UE prawie 7 mln nowych miejsc pracy. Tylko jakie to miejsca pracy? Bardzo często jest to praca niestała, na niepełny etat, a tak naprawdę wskaźnik zatrudnienia, biorąc pod uwagę pełne etaty, nie ulega zmianie.

To tylko dowód na to, że Europa musi nauczyć się wykorzystywać swoje możliwości. Powinniśmy inwestować w wysokotechnologiczne produkty wymagające wysoko wykwalifikowanych pracowników, to jest nasza wartość dodana, sektor w którym jesteśmy bezkonkurencyjni. Wydłużenie terminów wykorzystywania środków pieniężnych czy ułatwienie procedur ubiegania się o nie, szczególnie dla nowych państw członkowskich są tutaj niezwykle istotne.

  Sebastian Valentin Bodu (PPE-DE), în scris. – Criza economică mondială ne-a luat pe toţi prin surprindere, fie că este vorba de bănci, companii multinaţionale sau chiar construcţii instituţionale transnaţionale. Este afectată economia mondială, iar miza este tocmai supravieţuirea sistemului financiar mondial. Nu cred că voi fi contrazis când afirm că amplitudinea actualelor probleme presupune un efort concentrat la nivel european, iar pentru traversarea prezentei crize se impune solidaritate.

Reprezint în Parlamentul European o ţară din sud-estul Europei, România, şi pot să afirm că efectele creşterii economice de peste 7% din 2008 pare ca se vor topi în faţa turbulenţelor economice care încep să muşte în forţă. Planul de revenire economică întocmit de Comisia Europeană trebuie să-şi producă efectele în toate colţurile vechiului continent. Anumite părţi ale Europei nu trebuie să se simtă abandonate, fără putere în faţa unui adversar pe care nu ele l-au provocat.

Cred că pentru Uniunea Europeană, proiectul politic cel mai îndrăzneţ din ultimele sute de ani, acesta este testul cel mai important: statele de pe tot continentul trebuie să arate că sunt o singură forţă. În cuvintele preşedintelui Comisiei Europene, José Manuel Durão Barroso: „Europa va fi în primul rând judecată după rezultatele sale”. Sunt perfect de acord cu această afirmaţie.

  Cristian Silviu Buşoi (ALDE), în scris. – Consider că iniţiativa unui Plan de relansare economică în contextul crizei actuale este binevenită. Uniunea are nevoie de o abordare comună, clară şi eficace, astfel încât efectele crizei să fie cât mai reduse atât ca intensitate, cât şi ca durată.

Avem nevoie de reguli mai clare pentru sectorul financiar, în special privind plasamentele cu grad ridicat de risc, cum sunt hedge fund-urile.

În prezent, solidaritatea între statele membre este de primă importanţă. Este de înţeles ca S.M. să ia măsuri specifice contextului economic naţional, însă acestea nu trebuie să fie în contradicţie cu piaţa internă şi cu UEM. Prioritatea trebuie să fie facilitarea creditelor, în special către IMM-uri, care sunt un motor de creştere economică şi care au capacitatea de a crea locuri de muncă. Măsurile de intervenţie a statului trebuie, însă, să fie temporare, după care regulile privitoare la concurenţă să fie respectate cu stricteţe.

De asemenea, măsurile de combatere a crizei trebuie să se încadreze într-o politică bugetară responsabilă. Deşi suntem în perioada de criză, consider deosebit de importantă respectarea, pe cât posibil, a Pactului de Stabilitate şi Creştere, întrucât adâncirea deficitului bugetar poate fi o soluţie dezastruoasă pe termen lung, mai ales în ce priveşte generaţiile viitoare.

  Daniel Dăianu (ALDE), in writing. – Comissioner Joaquín Almunia has said recently that member countries of the euro area that face big difficulties could benefit from assistance from other EU members. Why has this indication of collective response not been firmly signalled to non-euro-area new Member States? Arguably, there is something wrong with the assistance packages extended to Latvia and Hungary. Reducing very large imbalances is, fundamentally, sound. But how this is done does matter to the utmost. Are budget deficits to be compressed drastically while the private sector is cutting its activity dramatically? Pro-cyclicality has to be averted both during an upswing and a downswing. If public budgets are not the main explanation behind large external deficits, why should they bear the brunt of downsizing them? Just remember the lessons from the Asian crisis, a decade ago. Policy also has to think about how to discourage speculative attacks against the currencies of new Member States. Just cutting budget deficit drastically would not help much in this regard either. Hopefully, future Ecofin meetings would enhance better approaches regarding financial assistance. And, whenever the IMF is brought on board in assistance packages it should consider the suitability of its traditional approach in dealing with macroeconomic imbalances in view of the extraordinary current circumstances.

  Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (PSE), în scris. – Noile oportunităţi oferite de Fondurile structurale trebuie exploatate de România.

Autorităţile publice centrale şi locale din România trebuie să exploateze cât mai repede şi mai bine oportunitatea oferită de Comisia Europeană privind facilitarea accesului la Fondurile structurale comunitare şi să acceseze aceste fonduri pentru a crea noi locuri de muncă, pentru formarea profesională prin programele de perfecţionare pe tot parcul vieţii în vederea reconversiei profesionale, dar şi sprijinirea IMM-urilor.

Accelerarea şi simplificarea finanţărilor comunitare pot să contribuie la relansarea economică, graţie unui flux de lichidităţi în domeniile vizate. Aceste plăţi vor fi mai rapide şi mai suple şi va exista o singură plată, lucru care va permite punerea în aplicare în scurt timp a proiectelor dorite, în domenii precum infrastructură, energie sau mediu.

Pe de altă parte, autorităţile române trebuie să asigure, potrivit procedurilor europene, partea de co-finanţare aferentă realizării proiectelor, pentru realizarea lor în cel mai scurt timp de la primirea banilor europeni.

Propunerile executivului european vizează o serie de măsuri de accelerare a investiţiilor prioritare la nivelul naţional şi regional al statelor membre, cu simplificarea accesului la subvenţii şi majorarea disponibilităţilor financiare pentru întreprinderile mici şi mijlocii.

  Dragoş Florin David (PPE-DE), în scris. – Principalele trăsături comune ale ţărilor membre ale Uniunii Europene sunt democraţia, stabilitatea, responsabilitatea şi coeziunea. Raportul colegului Evgeni Kirilov referitor la politica de coeziune: investiţii în economia reală subliniază importanţa acestor trăsături comune ale ţărilor membre ca primă necesitate în strategia comună pentru continuarea politicilor sociale şi economice. Economia europeană suferă astăzi de pe urma consecinţelor crizei financiare mondiale şi ale celei mai extinse şi grave recesiuni din ultimii 60 de ani. Trebuie să încurajăm statele membre să examineze sinergiile dintre finanţarea din cadrul politicii de coeziune şi alte surse de finanţare comunitare TEN-T, TEN-E, cel de-al şaptelea Program-cadru de cercetare şi dezvoltare tehnologică, Programul-cadru pentru competitivitate şi inovare, precum şi finanţarea acordată de Banca Europeană de Investiţii şi de Banca Europeană pentru Reconstrucţie şi Dezvoltare. Totodată, statele membre trebuie să simplifice şi să faciliteze accesul la finanţările oferite prin instrumentele financiare JESSICA, JASMINE şi JEREMIE pentru a stimula utilizarea mai frecventă a acestora de către IMM-uri şi beneficiarii interesaţi. În încheiere, doresc să îl felicit pe raportor, domnul Evgeni Kirilov, pentru contribuţia la realizarea acestui raport.

  Bairbre de Brún (GUE/NGL), i scríbhinn. – Táimid ag maireachtáil i ré d’éiginnteacht eacnamaíoch. Tá dualgas ar an Aontas Eorpach a fheiceáil an féidir solúbthacht a cheadú d’údaráis náisiúnta agus réigiúnacha ionas go bhféadfar seilbh níos fearr a ghlacadh ar chistí an AE chun dul i ngleic leis an staid gan fasach.

Tá na bearta atá i bplean Choimisinéir Huebner "Cohesion Policy: Investing in the real economy" praiticiúil agus is bearta iad ar chóir d’údaráis sa bhaile glacadh leo gan mhoill.

Is féidir Ciste Forbraíochta Réigiúnaí na hEorpa (CFRE) a úsáid anois chun éice-infheistiú tithe lucht ísealioncaim a mhaoiniú i bpáirt, rud is cóir a úsáid chun poist a chruthú agus a choinneáil sa tionscal tógála – atá buailte go trom – agus ag an am céanna cabhrú linn teacht níos cóngaraí dár ngealltanais aeráide a chomhlíonadh.

Is féidir le híocaíochtaí aitheantais ó Chiste Sóisialta na hEorpa fíorspreagadh a thabhairt do na hearnálacha pobail atá ag streachailt agus ba chóir go mbainfeadh Fiontair Bheaga agus Mheánmhéide (FBM) tairbhe as na hathruithe atá molta chun sreabhadh airgid tirim a chur ar fáil níos fusa.

Is céim chun tosaigh iad sin. Is oth liom cuid den teanga i dtuarascáil Kirilov maidir le straitéis Liospóin.

  Adam Gierek (PSE), na piśmie. – Jak przeciwdziałać kryzysowi finansowemu? (Europejski plan naprawy gospodarczej) Kryzysowi finansowemu można zapobiegać doraźnie oraz długofalowo. Metoda doraźna polega na usunięciu narosłych w ostatnich kilkudziesięciu latach patologii prowadzących do: utraty przez banki płynności; obrotu „zainfekowanymi” papierami wartościowymi; braku koherencji sfery polityki finansowej ze sferą polityki realnej.

Państwa wspomagając finansowo banki nie likwidują przyczyn tego kryzysu. Podstawową przyczyną kryzysu jest - moim zdaniem - neoliberalny mechanizm funkcjonowania gospodarki, tj. m.in. nastawienie jej na doraźny zysk, z pominięciem długofalowego interesu.

Metoda długofalowa powinna zatem tak skorygować mechanizm funkcjonowania gospodarki, by nastąpiło zerwanie z dogmatami tzw. „wolnego rynku”. Państwa członkowskie i Komisja Europejska nie powinny zastępować zdrowych konkurencyjnie mechanizmów rynkowych, ale mają obowiązek zapobiegania patologiom. Chodzi o to, by po pierwsze: doraźny zysk nie przesłaniał interesów długofalowych, które wynikają z rozwoju infrastruktury, tworzenia obiektów socjalnych, ochrony środowiska naturalnego, poszukiwania nowych, czasami mniej zyskownych, źródeł energii itp.

Po drugie: należy wszystkie formy własności traktować równorzędnie, a o ich wyborze powinna decydować efektywność gospodarowania.

Po trzecie: państwa członkowskie i Komisja Europejska powinny przejąć funkcję koordynatora zarówno sfery finansowej, jak i realnej.

Po czwarte: państwa członkowskie i Komisja Europejska winny wypracować metody koordynacji międzynarodowego rynku walutowego i finansowego, który działając żywiołowo jest podatny na spekulację.

  Genowefa Grabowska (PSE), na piśmie. – Kryzys gospodarczy dotarł już do Europy. Najpierw dotknął gospodarki rozwinięte, a następnie rozprzestrzenił się na gospodarki rozwijające się i wschodzące. Najnowsze prognozy na rok 2009 przewidują wzrost gospodarczy na poziomie -1% lub niżej. Znaleźliśmy się więc w jednej z najpoważniejszych recesji, jakie kiedykolwiek dotknęły Wspólnotę Europejską.

Zgadzam się ze sprawozdawczynią, że indywidualne działania państw już nie wystarczą, nawet jeśli zostały poparte ogromnymi transferami kapitału do branż najbardziej zagrożonych kryzysem. Nasze gospodarki są ze sobą połączone, a kryzys ma charakter globalny, dlatego proponowane środki naprawcze muszą być także odpowiedzią o globalnym charakterze i o takim samym zasięgu. Muszą także uwzględniać podstawową zasadę UE, czyli zasadę solidarności. Tylko ona pozwoli na zachowanie spójności terytorialnej i społecznej wewnątrz Unii. Uważam, że w czasie kryzysu zasada solidarności zyskuje także nowy polityczny wymiar.

Popieram również wyrażoną w sprawozdaniu troskę o uwikłanego w kryzysie przeciętnego człowieka. Musimy ponownie uruchomić kredyty dla rodzin i firm, a zwłaszcza - dla MŚP, które przecież stanowią podstawę europejskiej gospodarki. Tylko taki cel, wraz z ochroną oszczędności obywateli, uzasadnia wykorzystanie publicznych funduszy na plany ratunkowe. A jeżeli w ramach europejskiego planu ratunkowego udałoby się nam zlikwidować tzw. „raje podatkowe”, to walka z kryzysem byłaby na pewno łatwiejsza i skuteczniejsza.

  Louis Grech (PSE), in writing. – As the financial crisis is deepening with no end in sight, I think that more funds will be necessary in order to stabilize the European economy and stop the downward spiral. Other bottelneck which are the spiralling rate of unemployment and enormous insecurity in the labour market. Non availibility of credit together with the increase in the public deficit is still a major problem and is a key factor if we really want to successfully and effectively tackle economic recession. It is very important that adequate credit supply is re-established and that money should be used as an economic stimulus i.e. to flow to families and companies. It is necessary to create incentives to attract capital investment. Unfortunately at the moment there is no European mechanism or institution capable of coordinating an integrated continental recovery and therefore we are reapplying patchwork solutions that may fail as a whole, since member states' economies are highly interdependent. The European recovery efforts must go hand in hand with regulatory changes to avoid repeating the mistakes that brought us into the crisis. Lack of regulation and poor supervision have been at the root of the porblem and we need to re-establish effective regulations.

  Pedro Guerreiro (GUE/NGL), por escrito. – Só será possível compreender a grave situação socio-económica que caracteriza os países da UE, incluindo Portugal, se estivermos conscientes dos objectivos deste "processo de integração" e de como as suas políticas estão no cerne das causas da actual crise capitalista, de que a UE é um dos epicentros.

Durante os últimos 23 anos a CEE/UE promoveu a circulação de capitais e a financeirização da economia, liberalizou e impulsionou as privatizações, concentrou e instalou sobre-produção, deslocalizou e destruiu capacidade produtiva, promoveu o domínio económico de uns à custa da dependência de outros, fomentou a exploração dos trabalhadores e a transferência crescente dos ganhos de produtividade do trabalho para o capital, centralizou a riqueza criada, aumentou as desigualdades sociais e as assimetrias regionais, tudo sob a batuta das grandes potências e dos grandes grupos financeiros e económicos - eis a origem da insanável crise capitalista.

Não é a "crise", mas as políticas inerentes ao capitalismo que estão na origem do desemprego, da precariedade, dos baixos salários, da degradação das condições de vida, da pobreza, da doença, da fome, das crescentes dificuldades com que se confrontam os trabalhadores e as populações.

Por isso, saudamos a grande manifestação da CGTP-IN, a grande central dos trabalhadores portugueses, do próximo dia 13 de Março, para mudar de rumo, por mais emprego, salários e direitos!

  Gábor Harangozó (PSE), in writing. – The Union needs to maximise its efforts to implement a consistent framework to tackle the global financial crisis. If we want to restore public confidence and a sound financial system, we ought to act rapidly to sustain employment and economic activity. To alleviate the negative effects of recession, maintaining social standards and employment levels, some adjustments should be made to simplify access to available resources while ensuring more transparency and better management. The last EIT Council conclusions called for 'rapid additional action by the ESF to support employment, especially for the most vulnerable groups in the population, paying particular attention to the smallest undertakings by reducing non-wage labour costs'. I would like therefore to ask the next Council Summit to seriously consider the creation and retention of jobs through co-financing measures related to reducing non-wage labour cost, on a temporary basis, in countries seriously affected by financial or economic downturn. The utmost attention should indeed be given to the most vulnerable groups in the population, those who suffer the most from the consequences of the economic and social downturn, to avoid further asymmetric impact of the crisis that jeopardizes the balanced development of all territories within the Union.

  Tunne Kelam (PPE-DE), in writing. – Solidarity is one of the most precious values for Europe today. Yet in the current economic crisis there are signs that European solidarity is being undermined.

More than ever we have to avoid divisions between Member States – to avoid categorisation of old and new, big and small. The division which exists between euro and non euro zone Member States must not give the euro zone states a privileged position from which to dictate the common future. All Member States need to be involved equally in decision-making. All Member States have to be guaranteed the right to communicate their problems and concerns in order to find possible European solutions.

Europe needs a driving force to overcome the economic crisis with the least amount of damage. Protectionism cannot be the answer to the economic crisis. On the contrary, openness and the spirit of competition need to remain the basis of our activities. Therefore, to take advantage of the current depression, more money should be invested in innovation, research and development.

In other words, the crisis should be seen as an incentive to implement the Lisbon strategy. Only by using fully this strategy based on solidarity can we ensure jobs and the sustainability of the European economy.

  Magda Kósáné Kovács (PSE), írásban. – A sérelmeket rangsorolni nem érdemes. A közösen átérzett fájdalom azonban erőforrásokat és szándékokat mozgósít. Sokan idézik az 1929-es válságot, pedig annak hatásaként jött II. világháború már két különböző útra vezette Európát. A volt keleti blokk országait ráadásul traumaként érte a rendszerváltás is, de itt és most mindannyiunkat egyformán fenyeget a jeleit korábban mutató, mégis váratlan globális pénzügyi-gazdasági válság.

A válság pillanatától kezdve Európa útja nem lehet többet elágazó, de még több párhuzamos út rendszere sem, nincs két sebesség. A spekulatív tőkét leszámítva mindenki vesztésre áll, legfeljebb a mérték különbözik. A közös piac paradigmája ebben a helyzetben csak akkor maradhat életképes és versenyképes, ha együttesen koordinált közös válaszokat adunk. A protekcionizmus kísértete nem ad jó tanácsokat!

A tagállamok feladata, hogy saját pénzügyi terveiket egymással együttműködve dolgozzák ki, melyet az Uniónak úgy kell kiegészítenie, hogy kinek, kinek az erejéhez mérten adjon támogatást, ugyanakkor abból azok a tagállamok és polgárok is pozitív egyenleggel jöjjenek, akik a sorban hátrébb állnak. A közép-kelet-európai térség részben történelmi okok, részben annak következményeként, hogy az euró hiánya a bizalmatlanságot és a spekulatív tőkét ellenünk fordította ebben a sorban hátrébb szorult. És noha az egyes uniós tagországok közé nem tehető egyenlőségjel, határozottan állítom, hogy Európai szinten van szükség olyan támogatási rendszer kidolgozására, amely lehetővé teszi a szolidaritás jegyében a tagországonkénti megfelelő segítségnyújtást.

  Marian-Jean Marinescu (PPE-DE), în scris. – Toate principiile Planului de redresare economică trebuie să se regăsească în planurile de redresare economică naţionale.

Fondurile europene puse la dispoziţie trebuie utilizate pentru proiecte de maximă prioritate şi distribuite echitabil între statele membre, ţinându-se însă cont de eventualele situaţii speciale.

Trebuie să folosim eficient toate oportunităţile pe care le avem la dispoziţie, de aceea devansarea posibilităţilor de utilizare a fondurilor europene este de maximă importanţă, pentru că accelerează şi asigură o fluctuaţie a implementării acestui plan.

Proiectele trebuie să se deruleze rapid şi eficient pentru a capta forţa de muncă aflată în dificultate; de aceea procedurile birocratice, şi mai ales termenele de aplicare a procedurilor trebuie diminuate drastic pentru a asigura eficienţa imediată a acestui proces.

De asemenea, printre măsurile care trebuie adoptate, este necesar să se insiste pe cele privind adoptarea unui cadru legislativ european care să lupte eficient împotriva aşa-numitelor paradisuri fiscale.

Este evident că ajutorul de stat trebuie utilizat cu precauţie pentru a evita crearea problemelor de concurenţă, dar, concomitent, este necesară o analiză atentă a efectelor benefice pe care un asemenea ajutor le poate avea în ceea ce priveşte utilizarea forţei de muncă, avându-se în vedere situaţiile în care acest ajutor este mai mult decât necesar.

  Iosif Matula (PPE-DE), în scris. – Comisia Europeană alocă sume importante pentru realizarea de investiţii în eficienţa energetică, în producerea de energie regenerabilă, precum şi în construcţia de reţele transeuropene de transport şi energie. Numai prin implementarea unei bune politici în domeniu ne putem asigura că situaţii de criză a gazelor şi energiei în unele zone ale Uniunii nu se vor mai produce în viitor.

Prin conectarea tuturor reţelelor europene de gaz şi energie se asigură realizarea principiului solidarităţii: un stat membru va putea importa - dar şi exporta - resurse naturale, în condiţii normale, dar şi de criză.

În acest context, statele membre trebuie sa utilizeze oportunităţile de finanţare oferite prin Fondurile structurale pentru a-şi dezvolta proiecte în domeniul infrastructurii, energiei şi mediului.

Pentru îmbunătăţirea calităţii acestor proiecte şi eficienţa punerii lor în aplicare, ţările Uniunii trebuie să valorifice la maximum asistenţa tehnică pe care o poate acorda Comisia Europeană.

  Alexandru Nazare (PPE-DE), în scris. – Salut rapiditatea de care au dat dovadă instituţiile UE în identificarea unor soluţii la actuala criza economică. Doresc însă să subliniez câteva aspecte care trebuie abordate cu o atenţie sporită.

În primul rând, finanţarea pentru proiectele de infrastructură energetică. Consider fundamental greşită abordarea de a împărţi aceiaşi bani la cât mai multe proiecte, cu riscul de a nu acoperi bugetul necesar pentru finalizarea lor. În ultima vreme, urmărind discuţiile despre Nabucco, am impresia ca ne jucăm cu focul. Nu se poate să anunţăm 250 milioane euro pentru Nabucco, apoi să spunem că reducem finanţarea cu 50 milioane, pentru ca, în final, să concluzionăm că, de fapt, ar trebui sa fie o investiţie eminamente privată. Utilitatea proiectului Nabucco este indiscutabilă şi nu ne putem permite tergiversarea lui din motive politice şi economice.

În al doilea rând, cred că nu trebuie să cădem pradă tendinţelor protecţioniste care ar afecta funcţionarea pieţei interne. Chiar dacă impactul crizei este asimetric pe teritoriul Uniunii, răspunsul trebuie să fie unul în concordanţă cu obiectivele politicii de coeziune şi principiile pieţei interne. Consider absolut necesară o evaluare a impactului acestor modificări pentru a spori eficienţa măsurilor în noul cadru financiar 2014-2020.

  Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE-DE), în scris. – Reprezentând 1/3 din bugetul UE, fără să fie un instrument de management al crizei, politica de coeziune reprezintă totuşi cea mai importantă sursă de investiţii în economia reală şi o imensă oportunitate, în special pentru regiunile cu dezavantaje permanente. Doresc, în consecinţă, să atrag atenţia asupra necesitaţii găsirii de soluţii pentru o mai bună implicare pe verticală a regiunilor la nivel european.

În condiţiile create de situaţia economică extraordinară, doresc să subliniez importanţa sporirii flexibilităţii accesării fondurilor structurale şi să salut totodată extinderea posibilităţii de sprijinire a investiţiilor în eficienţa energetică şi în energiile regenerabile din sectorul locuinţelor şi al tehnologiilor curate.

  Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE-DE), kirjallinen. – Arvoisa puhemies, arvoisa esittelijä, hyvät kollegat, viime viikolla komissio luovutti neuvostolle talouskriisiä käsittelevän tiedonantonsa tämän kuun lopun neuvoston kokousta varten. Tämän lisäksi komissio esitti ensimmäisen arvionsa Euroopan talouden elvytyspaketin tuloksista. Komissio pitää alustavia tuloksia hyvinä ja arvioi, että kansalliset ja Euroopan tason elvytystoimet yhteen laskien elvytyksen kokonaisarvo tulee vastaamaan noin 3,3 prosenttia BKT:stä vuosina 2009–2010.

Onnittelen esittelijää erittäin ansiokkaan mietinnön laatimisesta. Pidän erityisen tärkeänä hänen painottamaansa tarvetta jäsenvaltioiden toimien koordinoimisesta. Protektionististen tendenssien herääminen on erittäin huolestuttavaa. Vaikka puheiden tasolla kaikki jäsenvaltiot vakuuttavat puhaltavansa yhteen hiileen, on toimien tasolla luettavissa jotain aivan muuta. On äärimmäisen tärkeää, että EU-johtajat tekevät päätöksensä nyt puheidensa pohjalta, eivätkä anna periksi protektionistisille paineille, jotka useassa maassa ovat kiistatta kovia.

EU:n tulee ottaa uusi, kunnianhimoinen askel Lissabonin strategian jatkoksi. EU tarvitsee elvytyspaketin, joka tukee uusia aloja kilpailukyvyn ja kasvun perustana. Mm. ekomodernisaatiolla, uusiutuviin energianlähteisiin ja tietotekniikkaan satsaamalla, on mahdollista saada aikaan myönteinen toimialamuutos.

Kriisi on myös mahdollisuus. Se on mahdollisuus järjestää uudelleen koko Euroopan-laajuinen ja globaali finanssiarkkitehtuuri. Kriisi on myös mahdollisuus sysätä talouskasvu aivan uudelle, uusiutuviin energialähteisiin ja energiatehokkuuteen perustuvalle tielle. Niin kutsuttu uusi vihreä diili tulee olla elvytyksen ja uuden kasvun perustana. Näin samalla, kun luomme työpaikkoja ja innovaatioita, vastaamme myös ilmastonmuutoksen mukanaan tuomiin haasteisiin.

  Zita Pleštinská (PPE-DE), písomne. – Európske hospodárstvo trpí dôsledkami globálnej finančnej krízy a najrozsiahlejším a najvážnejším poklesom za posledných 60 rokov. Táto kríza je obrovským testom pre Európu. Dotkla sa podnikov a rovnako občanov a ich rodín. Mnohí z nich žijú v obavách hlavne zo straty zamestnania a očakávajú, ako sa Únia zachová

Európa nesmie byť len súčtom 27 národných záujmov, ale musí byť založená na solidarite a ochote členských štátov a regiónov čo najrýchlejšie realizovať svoje programové ciele.

Malo by nám byť jasné, že v čase hospodárskej krízy by sme sa mali sústrediť na lisabonské ciele hlavne v oblasti zamestnanosti. Práve kohézna politika má finančné nástroje, ktoré sa musia uplatňovať intenzívnejšie a flexibilnejšie v čase krízy. Finančné prostriedky kohéznej politiky EÚ v období 2007 – 2013 môžu významne pomôcť pri napĺňaní cieľov obnovenej lisabonskej stratégie Únie pre rast a zamestnanosť, ktorými sú občania, podniky, infraštruktúra, energetika a výskum a inovácie. Potrebujeme lepšiu koordináciu, zbaviť sa protekcionizmu a akejkoľvek demagógie. Musíme obnoviť kapitálové toky a transfer kapitálu.

Som presvedčená, že investície do inovácií, nových technológií, ekoinovácií prinášajú nový potenciál, ktorý je nevyhnutný na zabezpečenie efektívnej reakcie na súčasnú finančnú krízu. Musíme odstrániť všetky bariéry a vytvoriť skutočný vnútorný trh s obnoviteľnými energiami.

  Katrin Saks (PSE), kirjalikult. – Tänan raportöör Ferreirat asja- ja ajakohase raporti eest. Tänase kriisi tingimustes on äärmiselt oluline olemasolevate vahendite ärakasutamine. Kahetsusväärne, et suurem osas liikmesriike, kellel on võimalus saada tuge struktuuri- ja ühtekuuluvuse fondidest uues finantsperspektiivis, ei ole suutnud seda raha kasutusse võtta. Nii ka minu kodumaal Eestis. Sellel on mitu põhjust: esimeseks võtmeprobleemiks on liikmesriikide omapoolne administratiivne suutlikkus, kus liikmesmaad saavad ise palju ära teha ja halduslikku toimimist parendada. Teisalt on küsimus euroliidupoolne. On oluline, et EL muudaks tingimusi paindlikumaks. Probleem on näiteks nende programmidega, kus kulutused tuleb teha eelnevalt, mida finantseeritakse tagantjärele. Raske on saada täna laene, et neid kulutusi teha. On väga oluline, mida Euroopa Komisjon kavatseb ettemaksude osas teha. Järgmine oluline punkt on omafinantseerimise määr praegustes tingimustes ja ka siin tuleks mõelda suuremale paindlikkusele. Kolmas oluline punkt puudutab järelvalvemehhanismi, aga praegune bürokraatia on selgelt ebamõistlik.

Tänan raporti eest.

  Theodor Dumitru Stolojan (PPE-DE), în scris. – În cazul unor state membre, printre care şi ţările baltice, România sau Ungaria, criza financiară şi recesiunea globală au pus în evidenţă dezechilibre structurale acumulate în perioadele de creştere economică, bazate pe intrări de investiţii străine directe şi îndatorare externă în ritmuri rapide.

Orice plan al UE de redresare economică trebuie să ţină seama de faptul că aceste ţări au nevoie de o finanţare externă substanţială, pentru acoperirea deficitului din comerţul cu bunuri şi servicii. În lipsa acestei finanţări externe, ţările respective sunt condamnate la ajustări bruşte şi masive, care vor elimina câştigurile de bunăstare obţinute în anii precedenţi, vor slăbi coeziunea UE şi pot pune în pericol chiar stabilitatea în zonă.

Consiliul şi Comisia Europeană au o răspundere precisă în găsirea de soluţii pentru finanţarea externă necesară. Statele membre în cauză au responsabilitatea, câştigând timp prin finanţarea externă obţinută, de a efectua reformele structurale prin care să corecteze dezechilibrele acumulate.

  Margie Sudre (PPE-DE), par écrit. – La politique régionale est la première source d'investissements européens dans l'économie réelle. Accélérer et simplifier son financement peut contribuer à la relance économique, grâce à un afflux de liquidités dans des secteurs ciblés.

Les paiements plus rapides et plus souples, forfaitaires et en un seul versement, que propose la Commission permettront la mise en œuvre sans délai de projets dans les domaines de l'infrastructure, de l'énergie ou encore de l'environnement.

Les autorités nationales et régionales doivent exploiter ces opportunités et faire un usage intensif des fonds structurels pour promouvoir l'emploi, les PME, l'esprit d'entreprise et la formation professionnelle tout en garantissant leur contribution, comme l'exigent les règles du cofinancement, afin que les fonds alloués puissent être pleinement consommés.

J'appelle les conseils régionaux et les préfectures des départements d'outre-mer (DOM), autorités de gestion des fonds structurels, à anticiper ces adaptations pour que leurs programmes régionaux se concentrent immédiatement sur les projets présentant le potentiel de croissance et d'emplois le plus important.

Face au malaise actuel des DOM, alors que le mouvement social touche dorénavant la Réunion, nous devons explorer de nouvelles pistes de développement endogène et actionner tous les leviers à notre disposition, y compris ceux que l'Union européenne nous apporte.

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (PSE), în scris. – Comunicarea CE privind Planul european de redresare economică din decembrie 2008 enumera domeniile în care UE va investi în următorii ani, pentru a asigura creştere economică şi păstrarea locurilor de muncă şi anume: sprijinirea întreprinderilor mici şi mijlocii – estimare financiară de 30 miliarde euro, prin BEI; accelerarea investiţiilor în proiecte de infrastructură pentru interconexiuni energetice transeuropene şi de bandă largă - estimare financiară de 5 miliarde euro pentru îmbunătăţirea eficienţei energetice a clădirilor; cercetare şi inovare.

Aceste măsuri trebuie sprijinite prin propuneri legislative care să asigure şi alocările financiare. Propunerea de regulament din ianuarie 2009 pentru finanţarea proiectelor de energie în cadrul Planului European de Redresare Economică nu are alocări financiare pentru eficienţa energetică a clădirilor. Consider ca UE greşeşte dacă, în această perioadă de criză economică, nu îşi susţine financiar priorităţile.Domeniul eficienţei energetice a clădirilor poate genera aproximativ 500 000 de locuri de muncă în UE, poate îmbunătăţi calitatea vieţii cetăţenilor şi poate contribui la dezvoltarea economică sustenabilă prin promovarea energiilor regenerabile. Personal, consider că ar fi un eşec al actualei Comisii Europene dacă nu va susţine eficientizarea energetică a clădirilor prin măsuri şi instrumente financiare, prin măsuri fiscale adecvate şi printr-un semnal politic ferm, la nivel european.

  Andrzej Tomasz Zapałowski (UEN), na piśmie. – Panie Przewodniczący! Dzisiaj debatujemy nad planem ożywienia gospodarki w odniesieniu do priorytetów strategii lizbońskiej. Pomimo kilku lat od ogłoszenia tej strategii, widzimy, iż nie jest ona realizowana, czyli produkujemy dokumenty, których następnie nie wdrażamy. Potwierdza to tylko pewien zwyczaj, który stał się normą w tym parlamencie, czyli zarzucanie obywateli regulacjami utrudniającymi im w wielu wypadkach życie, a niewpływającymi istotnie na ich poziom życia.

Także postępujący kryzys finansowy pokazuje, że Komisja Europejska i Rada całkowicie oderwały się od codziennych problemów społeczeństwa. Przecież Komisja nie ma żadnego realnego programu działań w odniesieniu do postępującego kryzysu. Każdy widzi, iż poszczególne kraje samodzielnie podejmują działania ratunkowe, a pięciusetmilionowy rynek kierowany centralnie nie jest w stanie realnie wpływać na skalę kryzysu.

Przez ostatnie lata wmawiano krajom Europy Wschodniej, iż powinny sprywatyzować swoje banki, czyli podporządkować je bankom zachodnioeuropejskim. I tak naiwnie zrobiono, a dziś te właśnie banki spekulują i dobijają gospodarki nowych członków UE.

PRÉSIDENCE DE MME MARTINE ROURE
Vice-présidente

(1) βλ. Συνοπτικά Πρακτικά.

4. Aġenda

  La Présidente. - En ce qui concerne la proposition de résolution de la commission des affaires étrangères sur la situation humanitaire au Sri Lanka, j'ai reçu de M. Robert Evans et quarante autres signataires une opposition par écrit à l'inscription de ladite proposition de résolution.

Conformément aux dispositions de l'article 90, paragraphe 4, du règlement, la proposition de résolution est inscrite pour débat et vote à l'ordre du jour de la présente session.

Je vous propose donc d'inscrire le débat ce soir comme dernier point, et le vote aura lieu demain à midi. Le délai de dépôt des amendements est fixé à cet après-midi à 15 heures.

  Robert Evans (PSE). - Madam President, on Monday evening the Committee on Foreign Affairs adopted a motion regarding the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Sri Lanka, pursuant to Rule 91.

The situation in Sri Lanka is clearly very serious, but exactly what is happening regarding the humanitarian situation is far from clear. I am conscious that there are many differing views across this House. So I suggest that the most sensible course of action would be to timetable a proper debate, which cannot seriously be fitted in in this part-session but could be in our next part-session, which is just 10 days away. I am grateful to Mr Daul of the PPE-DE Group for indicating his group’s support for this course of action. As we are a serious Chamber, I suggest and ask colleagues to support a debate with resolution and full participation at the next part-session, to do justice to the gravity of the situation in Sri Lanka.

  Daniel Cohn-Bendit (Verts/ALE). - Madame la Présidente, quand quelqu'un propose quelque chose, quelqu'un peut toujours parler contre, avant le vote.

Donc, je veux simplement dire que la situation au Sri Lanka est extrêmement dramatique. Il y a 150 000 personnes enfermées, qui ne peuvent pas sortir. C'est exactement le même cas qu'en Birmanie. C'est pour cela qu'il faut laisser le Sri Lanka, aujourd'hui, à l'ordre du jour, pour montrer notre détermination d'être solidaires avec ceux qui sont enfermés.

(Le Parlement rejette la demande de report du débat)

5. Ħin tal-votazzjonijiet

  La Présidente. - L'ordre du jour appelle l'Heure des votes.

(Pour les résultats des votes et autres détails les concernant: voir procès-verbal)

5.1. L-eżenzjoni mit-taxxa fuq il-valur miżjud fuq l-importazzjoni finali ta’ ċerti oġġetti (verżjoni kodifikata) (A6-0060/2009, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg) (votazzjoni)

5.2. Aġġustament tas-salarji bażiċi u l-allowances għall-persunal tal-Europol (A6-0078/2009, Agustín Díaz de Mera García Consuegra) (votazzjoni)

5.3. Mobilizzazzjoni tal-Fond ta' Solidarjetà tal-UE (A6-0106/2009, Reimer Böge) (votazzjoni)

5.4. Baġit ta' emenda nru 1/2009: Għargħar fir-Rumanija (A6-0113/2009, Jutta Haug) (votazzjoni)

5.5. Regoli u standards komuni għall-organizzazzjonijiet tal-ispezzjoni u tal-perizji tal-vapuri u għall-attivitajiet rilevanti tal-amministrazzjonijiet marittimi (Verżjoni mfassla mill-ġdid) (A6-0097/2009, Luis de Grandes Pascual) (votazzjoni)

5.6. Regoli u standards komuni għall-organizzazzjonijiet tal-ispezzjoni u tal-perizji tal-vapuri (verżjoni mfassla mill-ġdid) (A6-0098/2009, Luis de Grandes Pascual) (votazzjoni)

5.7. Kontroll tal-Istat tal-Port (verżjoni mfassla mill-ġdid) (A6-0099/2009, Dominique Vlasto) (votazzjoni)

5.8. Sistema komunitarja ta' monitoraġġ ta' bastimenti u ta' informazzjoni (A6-0100/2009, Dirk Sterckx) (votazzjoni)

5.9. Investigazzjoni ta' inċidenti fis-settur tat-trasport marittimu (A6-0101/2009, Jaromír Kohlíček) (votazzjoni)

5.10. Responsabbiltà ta' trasportaturi ta' passiġġieri bil-baħar fil-każ ta' aċċidenti (A6-0102/2009, Paolo Costa) (votazzjoni)

5.11. Assigurazzjoni tas-sidien ta' vapuri għal pretensjonijiet marittimi (A6-0072/2009, Gilles Savary) (votazzjoni)

5.12. Konformità mar-rekwiżiti tal-Istat tal-bandiera (A6-0069/2009, Emanuel Jardim Fernandes) (votazzjoni)

5.13. Tassazzjoni fuq vetturi ta' merkanzija tqila għall-użu ta' ċerti infrastrutturi (A6-0066/2009, Saïd El Khadraoui) (votazzjoni)

5.14. Aċċess tal-pubbliku għad-dokumenti tal-Parlament Ewropew, tal-Kunsill u tal-Kummissjoni (A6-0077/2009, Michael Cashman) (votazzjoni)

– Avant le vote final

  Michael Cashman, rapporteur. − Madam President, under Rule 53, I would like to ask the Commission to respond and tell us whether it intends to adopt all of Parliament’s amendments as adopted today.

  Günter Verheugen, Vice-President of the Commission. − Madam President, I have the honour of giving the following declaration on behalf of the Commission.

The Commission takes note of the amendments voted by Parliament that it will study in detail. The Commission confirms its willingness to seek a compromise with Parliament and Council. The Commission will only consider its proposal after the two branches of the budgetary authority have adopted their positions. The Commission intends to continue to pursue a constructive dialogue, in the mean time, with both institutions.

  Michael Cashman, rapporteur. − Madam President, I do not know where the Commissioner has been, but we adopted a position this morning.

I would therefore like to request that the plenary vote to refer the report back to committee, which would give the committee the flexibility to enter into negotiations with both the Council and the Commission.

I therefore ask for the House’s support for a referral back to committee.

(Le Parlement approuve la demande de report du vote final)

  Michael Cashman, rapporteur. − Madam President, my thanks to the House for its patience on this, my final intervention. Can I now ask you, Madam President, to write a formal invitation to the Czech Presidency, as well as the incoming Swedish Presidency, to open a formal dialogue with the European Parliament as soon as possible?

Equally, as announced in the voting list and for the sake of clarity and coherence of the text that we have now adopted, I kindly ask that you request the plenary services to proceed, without any substantive change, to do the following: to group the articles according to their content under specific thematic titles, to re-order recitals and definitions accordingly and to produce and publish Parliament’s position as a consolidated text as soon as possible.

Finally, may I pay due thanks to the enormous and supportive work which I have been given not only by the secretariats, but by the tabling services.

(Applause)

  La Présidente. - Je transmettrai donc cette demande, Monsieur Cashman, et les suites seront données.

5.15. Linji gwida għal politika dwar l-impjiegi tal-Istati Membri (A6-0052/2009, Jan Andersson) (votazzjoni)

5.16. Estensjoni tal-applikabilità tal-Artikolu 139 tar-Regoli ta' Proċedura tal-Parlament sal-aħħar tas-seba' leġislatura (B6-0094/2009) (votazzjoni)

5.17. Is-sitwazzjoni soċjali tar-Roma u l-aċċess imtejjeb tagħhom għas-suq tax-xogħol fl-UE (A6-0038/2009, Magda Kósáné Kovács) (votazzjoni)

5.18. Naffaċċjaw l-isfidi marbuta mal-provvista taż-żejt (A6-0035/2009, Herbert Reul) (votazzjoni)

5.19. Trasport Aktar Ekoloġiku u l-Internalizzazzjoni tal-Ispejjeż Esterni (A6-0055/2009, Georg Jarzembowski) (votazzjoni)

5.20. L-Istrateġija ta' Liżbona (votazzjoni)

– Avant le vote sur l'amendement 28 (concerne le vote sur l'amendement 27)

  Pervenche Berès (PSE). - Madame la Présidente, peut-être me suis-je trompée, mais il me semble que vous avez fait voter l'amendement 27 qui, en réalité, était un amendement technique, qui demandait simplement à déplacer le paragraphe 47. En revanche, sur le texte original, il y a une demande de vote séparé par appel nominal.

Donc, je pense que nous avons accepté de déplacer le paragraphe 47, et il faut maintenant voter par appel nominal en deux parties sur le paragraphe 47 lui-même.

  La Présidente. - Nous allons éclaircir les choses: il n'y avait pas d'objection sur le fait que le paragraphe 47 soit inséré après le paragraphe 49. Or, nous avons ensuite voté l'amendement 27, qui a été approuvé. Nous ne pouvions donc pas voter sur le paragraphe 47 puisque nous avons voté sur l'amendement 27. Il n'y a donc pas de problème.

5.21. Il-ġlieda kontra l-bidla fil-klima (votazzjoni)

– Avant le vote sur le paragraphe 20

  Avril Doyle (PPE-DE). - Madam President, a very brief amendment to the original text. Paragraph 20, line 3 should read: ‘reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation’. At the moment it reads ‘reducing emissions for deforestation and degradation’. I want to change the word ‘for’ to ‘from’. In the English version it is wrong. This is not contentious.

(L'amendement oral est retenu)

5.22. Linji gwida għall-politika tal-impjiegi (votazzjoni)

– Avant le vote sur le paragraphe 13

  Elizabeth Lynne (ALDE). - Madam President, this is a very simple amendment, just to change ‘the disabled’ to either ‘people with disabilities’ or ‘disabled people’. We never use the words ‘the disabled’ in English.

(L'amendement oral est retenu)

– Avant le vote sur l'amendement 1

  Philip Bushill-Matthews (PPE-DE). - Madam President, this, again, is a fairly standard amendment with reference to the role of these consultations of the social partners. It just adds, at the end, the phrase: ‘in accordance with national custom and practice’. This is normally built into an amendment, but for some reason it got left out. The Socialists are supportive of this amendment, and hopefully the other groups will be too; they usually are.

(L'amendement oral est retenu)

5.23. Pjan Ewropew ta' rkupru ekonomiku (A6-0063/2009, Elisa Ferreira) (votazzjoni)

– Avant le vote

  Gunnar Hökmark (PPE-DE). - Madam President, I would like to inform our group that there is a mistake in our voting lists regarding Amendment 113: there should be a plus in the voting list, and not a minus.

– Avant le vote sur l'amendement 93

  Elisa Ferreira, rapporteur. − Madam President, it is just to change the wording in Paragraph 93 concerning sound state finance to ‘as soon as possible’, instead of ‘when economic conditions allow’, as agreed with the shadow rapporteurs.

(L'amendement oral est retenu)

– Avant le vote sur l'amendement 71

  Alain Lipietz (Verts/ALE). - Madame la Présidente, il s'agit d'un amendement purement technique. Il y a une faute dans l'édition de notre amendement. Il y a un "indent" qui était rédigé ainsi: "intensify the elimination of barriers" et nous avons remplacé par "remove injustified barriers", mais malheureusement, l'ancien paragraphe, l'ancien indent est resté dans le texte de l'amendement. C'est donc bien le troisième indent que nous avons légèrement modifié et il n'y a pas lieu de maintenir l'ancienne version.

(L'amendement oral est retenu)

– Avant le vote sur la proposition de résolution

  Martin Schulz (PSE). - Frau Präsidentin! Sie sehen an der großen Freude der EVP-ED-Fraktion über meine Wortmeldung, wie schön das jetzt bei unserer Abstimmung war.

Ich will mich bei unserer Kollegin Elisa Ferreira bedanken, die eine ungeheure Arbeit geleistet hat, um dieses Ergebnis zustande zu bringen. Ich schließe in diesen Dank ausdrücklich auch den Kollegen Hökmark ein, und ich schließe ausdrücklich auch die Kollegen Frau Herzog, Herrn Bullmann und Kollege Lehne ein, die bei der gleichgearteten Lissabon-Entschließung – wie ich finde – Enormes geleistet haben.

Aber Sie sehen an der Reaktion der Europäischen Volkspartei, dass doch einige Aufregung herrscht. Wir danken dafür, dass Sie bei der Schließung der Steueroasen und der Solidarität mit den Mitgliedstaaten mit uns gestimmt haben. Bis vor wenigen Minuten sah das anders aus. Es ehrt Sie, dass Sie der Sozialdemokratisierung weiter Zuspruch geben, und es ist gut für das Europäische Parlament, das nach links geschoben wurde.

(Beifall von links und Proteste von rechts)

  Daniel Cohn-Bendit (Verts/ALE). - Madame la Présidente, je voulais simplement rappeler, et au PSE et au PPE, qu'il y a d'autres groupes dans ce Parlement que les deux grands groupes!

  Hartmut Nassauer (PPE-DE). - Frau Präsidentin! Ein Punkt zur Tagesordnung. Vielleicht könnten Sie dem Hause mitteilen, aufgrund welches Geschäftsordnungsartikels der Kollege Schulz eben das Wort ergriffen hat.

  La Présidente. - Chers collègues, je vais bien sûr répondre à M. Nassauer qu'il a tout à fait raison, mais que parfois, pour la démocratie, il faut savoir un petit peu dépasser les lignes.

Je voulais dire, chers collègues, que j'ai donné la parole à M. Schulz en vertu de l'article 141 du règlement. Il avait parfaitement le droit de le faire.

  Joseph Daul (PPE-DE). - Madame la Présidente, est-ce que c'est au nom de la Commission qu'il est intervenu? Parce qu'il veut devenir commissaire? Ou est-ce qu'il est intervenu en tant que président du groupe?

– Après le vote final

  Vittorio Prodi (ALDE). - Signora Presidente, chiedo di verificare. Non mi consta che sia stato fatto il voto finale nella relazione Reul, può verificare?

  La Présidente. - Monsieur le député, nous avons adopté l'amendement 3, qui remplace donc toute la résolution.

5.24. Politika ta' Koeżjoni: investiment fl-ekonomija reali (A6-0075/2009, Evgeni Kirilov) (votazzjoni)

6. Spegazzjonijiet tal-vot

Explications de vote orales

- Rapport: Elisa Ferreira (A6-0063/2009)

  Richard Corbett (PSE). - Madam President, I welcome the fact that this report looks at what can be done at European level to stimulate the economies, whilst I recognise that most of the instruments to do so remain at national level: 99% of public expenditure is national, not European; most regulation is national, not European. But if we look at what we can do at European level, the plan proposed by the Commission for a EUR 30 billion contribution, including advance payments from Structural Funds and new loans from the European Investment Bank, can and will make a real contribution to coming out of this crisis.

We must also make sure that we avoid protectionism in Europe. A beggar-your-neighbour approach by different countries would weaken our common market and seriously damage the prospects of job creation and economic growth in the long term. On the contrary, freedom of movement for workers and initiatives to help businesses’ exports to the single market will help provide the stimulus needed for our economic recovery.

- Rapport: Paolo Costa (A6-0102/2009)

  Carlo Fatuzzo (PPE-DE). - Signora Presidente, ho votato a favore del progetto comune per aumentare la sicurezza di chi sceglie il mare per viaggiare. Credo che sia molto importante aggiungere che si dovrebbe spendere di più per la professionalità di tutti i marittimi che sono responsabili della navigazione – dal comandante, al capo macchinista, al nostromo, al capitano d'armi, al timoniere e a tutti i marittimi – perché da loro dipende la vita e la sicurezza degli uomini in mare. Quindi più professionalità e più retribuzione per chi ha nelle proprie mani la nostra vita di passeggeri del mare.

- Rapport: Saïd El Khadraoui (A6-0066/2009)

  Simon Busuttil (PPE-DE). - Dwar dan ir-rapport nixtieq ngħid li minkejja l-inizjattiva favur l-ambjent, l-effetti negattivi u żbilanċjati ta' din l-inizjattiva fuq ir-reġjuni u l-pajjiżi li qedgħin fil-periferija tal-Unjoni Ewropea pereżempju bħal Malta, ma kinux ikkunsidrati biżżejjed. Din l-inizjattiva kapaċi ġġib żieda sostanzjali fil-prezz tat-trasport tal-merkanzija meta jkun hemm trasport lejn u minn dawn ir-reġjuni fil-periferija, liema żieda tista' tissarraf fi prezzijiet iktar għolja tal-prodotti li jidħlu u joħorġu minn dawn ir-reġjuni jew minn dawn il-pajjiżi. Għaldaqstant, jiena vvutajt kontra dan ir-rapport.

  Leopold Józef Rutowicz (UEN). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Pobieranie opłat dodatkowych od pojazdów ciężarowych jest zwiększeniem podatków. Transport ciężarowy świadczy usługi dla całej gospodarki, dla obywateli. Jego koszty mają wpływ na cenę wszystkich produktów, których jesteśmy konsumentami. Obciążenie transportu dodatkowymi kosztami oprócz już płaconych podatków, akcyzą od paliw i winiet teraz, gdy mamy problem kryzysu, który nie wiemy kiedy się zakończy jest społeczną nieodpowiedzialnością.

Zanieczyszczenie powietrza, efekt cieplarniany, wypadki w dużym stopniu są zależne od konstrukcji pojazdów i rozwiązań komunikacyjnych. W tym zakresie w ostatnich dziesięciu latach nastąpił znaczny postęp korzystny dla nas wszystkich. W obecnej formie nie popieram dyrektywy, która wymaga radykalnego przeredagowania.

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

  Hannu Takkula (ALDE). - Arvoisa puhemies, haluan ensinnäkin todeta, että kannatan tätä Cashmanin mietintöä, kiitoksia hänelle siitä. Se parantui paljon täällä parlamentin käsittelyssä, kun ottaa huomioon, mikä oli komission alkuperäinen esitys.

Lähtökohtana pitää olla se, että päätöksenteko on avointa. Ihmisillä pitää olla mahdollisuus saada asiakirjoja, koska vain sitä kautta syntyy luottamus, ja tässä on erittäin tärkeää, että voimme koko Euroopan tasolla päästä siihen, että ihmiset näkevät, miten lainsäädäntöprosessi etenee, ja avoimuutta noudatetaan kaikissa hallinnon portaissa asiakirjojen osalta.

Kaikki luonnollisesti ymmärtävät, että on joitakin kohtia, kuten yksityisen henkilön terveyteen liittyvät asiat ja niin edelleen, missä pitää toimia suljetusti, mutta lähtökohtaisesti lainsäädäntöprosessissa kaiken pitää olla avointa, ja tässä suhteessa olen tyytyväinen tähän ja katson, että rehellinen ja avoin päätöksenteko on se seikka, jonka kautta voimme saada kansalaisten luottamuksen.

  Martin Callanan (PPE-DE). - Madam President, a recent report by the UK-based NGO the TaxPayers’ Alliance said that EU membership costs every man, woman and child in the United Kingdom GBP 2 000 each every year.

I have to say that many of my constituents in the North East of England think they get very bad value for such a large sum of money. Therefore, ensuring public access to the documents of the European institutions is the very least that those constituents could expect in return for handing over such large sums to the EU every year. In the eyes of many people the EU remains a very obscure and monolithic entity. Anything that we can do to improve access, to give more information to the public on some of the things that perhaps some of our Commissioners and others would rather keep confidential, is very welcome.

Already we see whistleblowers and others that have been vilified and hounded out of their jobs for exposing confidential information. If all that information had been available in the first place, then perhaps many of those over-the-top reactions would have been unnecessary.

  Syed Kamall (PPE-DE). - Madam President, I am grateful for this opportunity to explain how I voted on this very important report. We all know that, when different parties are involved in sensitive political negotiations, sometimes there is a need for secrecy in order to avoid a deal being scuppered. However, this is not really what we are talking about in this case.

Recently there have been negotiations on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement and some of the issues that have been debated include a massive erosion of individual civil liberties. There have been proposals, for example, to search people’s iPods and laptops when entering countries to check for copyright and non-copyright material. Were we able to debate these in an open and transparent manner? No, because these documents have been kept secret – perhaps for justifiable reasons, but reasons that we do not really understand. Therefore, what we really need is more openness and more transparency in order for us to really get to the heart of the issue.

I completely agree with my colleague, Mr Callanan, when he says that the fact that they were not transparent does not bode well for the EU.

- Rapport: Jan Andersson (A6-0052/2009)

  Carlo Fatuzzo (PPE-DE). - Ringrazio i fans che mi continuano a seguire da lungo tempo e non si stancano. Signora Presidente, sono uno dei 74 parlamentari che oggi hanno votato contro la relazione Jan Andersson, non perché io sia contro l'occupazione, ma perché in questi orientamenti per le politiche dell'Unione europea, degli Stati dell'Unione europea, non è assolutamente specificato che una delle possibilità per favorire l'occupazione è quella di lasciare che i lavoratori che lo desiderano, che lo richiedono, possano andare in pensione. Questa politica di rinviare l'età di pensione obbligatoriamente, dovunque, comunque, non fa altro che far perdere posti di lavoro ai giovani che volentieri sostituirebbero gli anziani che desiderano lasciare il proprio posto a loro, ai giovani.

  Martin Callanan (PPE-DE). - Madam President, this report starts from a false assumption: the assumption that the EU knows best when it comes to employment policy. Many of my constituents would profoundly disagree; they would rather that the EU were kept well away from anything to do with employment policy. I believe that my country should withdraw from the EU’s Social Chapter.

It is more than a little ironic that the EU seeks to pass on its wisdom on employment policy to the Member States whilst at the same time it is responsible for huge amounts of red tape and regulation that have constricted so many businesses in my region and across Europe and caused an awful lot of the unemployment that it now seeks to cure.

The European social model is outdated, it is destructive, it prevents job creation and it acts against entrepreneurship. The best thing would be for the EU to keep its nose out of the Member States’ employment policy and produce less red tape and less regulation. That is the best thing that we could do to create more jobs in the economy.

- Proposition de décision sur l'article 139 du règlement (B6-0094/2009)

  Jim Allister (NI). - Madam President, I voted for this proposal because it postpones the folly of an utterly unnecessary waste of even more money on translation services in this House in respect of Irish.

I would have preferred the entire folly of that waste to have been overturned. However, at least this saves our taxpayers some of the unnecessary waste.

The minimal use of Irish in this Chamber is self-evident, although Miss de Brún, as part of her aggressive Republican agenda, may regale us in that dead tongue, with the only relief being that hardly anyone who tunes into Parliament on line can understand a word she says. I can assure them they are missing very little.

Her Sinn Féin colleague, Miss McDonald, has not got past uttering a little stammering, stuttering, pidgin Irish, but even then we are wasting money on translation.

- Rapport: Magda Kósáné Kovács (A6-0038/2009)

  Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE-DE). - Madam President, I thank Ms Kovács for the informative and helpful report on the situation of the Roma.

As you all know, the population of the Roma is ever-expanding and consistently becoming a huge and influential force throughout Europe. This group of 10-12 million people is amongst the poorest on the continent, yet has immeasurable potential.

As Europeans and Members of the European Parliament, which was founded on the pillar of equality, we must react to this problem as quickly as possible. The continual oppression of one of Europe’s largest minorities is shameful and inefficient. With better regulation and a higher degree of cooperation, nations may be able to provide work for this huge block of potential labourers. With the looming economic crisis, the Roma may be able to help solve some of Europe’s deepest problems. In addition, the prejudice against and degradation of these people has gone on long enough. Equal rights and opportunities must be provided to all citizens of Europe, including the Roma.

Just at the beginning of this month in Hungary two Roma people were shot like animals when they were trying to escape from their burning house. How is it possible that in a united Europe there are cases like this?

  Philip Claeys (NI). - Voorzitter, ik heb tegen het verslag-Kovács gestemd, omdat dit hele verslag doordrongen is van het slachtofferdenken en omdat ik van oordeel ben dat een minderheidsgroep, zoals de Roma-zigeuners, eigenlijk veel meer baat zou hebben bij een strategie van responsabilisering.

Ook ik ben natuurlijk van oordeel dat de Roma correct behandeld moeten worden, zoals iedereen trouwens, maar de meerderheid van de problemen die in dit verslag vermeld worden, hebben te maken met een levensstijl, met een manier van leven waar die mensen zélf voor gekozen hebben. En dan kunnen we nog zoveel verslagen en resoluties aannemen en zoveel geld geven als we willen, op het terrein zal dat helemaal niets aan de situatie veranderen.

  Frank Vanhecke (NI). - Voorzitter, ik heb in dit Parlement, in al de jaren dat ik hier ben, al heel veel politiek correcte onzin zien passeren, die meestal werd goedgekeurd met zeer grote meerderheden, maar dit verslag slaat in mijn ogen toch werkelijk alles. Indien dit Parlement zich per se wil bemoeien met de sociale situatie van de Roma en met hun toegang tot de arbeidsmarkt, is het dan echt teveel gevraagd om een minimum aan objectiviteit na te streven?

De waarheid is dat de problemen van de zigeunerbevolking voor het grootste deel het simpele gevolg zijn van hun eigen weigering om zich aan te passen aan de maatschappij waar zij wonen, zeker wat onderwijs betreft, zeker wat beroepsopleidingen betreft. Al decennia lang pompen wij miljoenen euro's in allerhande programma's vol idyllische, maar vooral onrealistische onzin in de sfeer van dit verslag. Zonder enig resultaat. Wordt het dan geen tijd om te stoppen met pamperen, en eens naar de echte oorzaken van de problemen te zoeken vooraleer wij oplossingen voorstellen?

- Rapport: Herbert Reul (A6-0035/2009)

  Avril Doyle (PPE-DE). - Madam President, while the amended version was an improvement, it was still with a heavy heart that I supported this own-initiative report, since it was not consistent with the climate and energy package carried by a huge majority in this House on 17 December 2008.

Just to remind us, my own EU-ETS report, which was the cornerstone of this package, was carried by 610 votes for, 60 abstentions, and 29 against. Needless to say, Mr Reul was not among the 610 Members out of 699 who supported my report.

I have reservations about any reference to drilling in the Arctic or exploration for alternative sources of oil, such as tar sands. Past months have shown that the importance of energy security has never been as acute. The cooperation that is necessary across the EU, and the need to take advantage of the stimulus packages currently launched by almost all Member States and the Commission, underscore the need for investment in renewables to increase our energy security, to decrease our carbon emissions and to wean us off our high dependence on fossil fuel, albeit over an agreed timeline.

  Martin Callanan (PPE-DE). - Madam President, I was the shadow rapporteur on the Sacconi report into CO2 emissions from passenger vehicles, and I can see from the work that I did on that that we do need to reduce our dependence on oil.

We need to reduce that dependence because most oil supplies are, of course, in very unstable and unsavoury parts of the world. For far too long, our thirst for oil has sustained regimes that are deeply inimical to everything that we stand for, to our own interests and to our own values, especially with regard to human rights and good governance.

Particularly, of course, we need to reduce our dependence on Russian oil supplies. Russia has shown in the past that it will not hesitate to use its control of much of our energy supply to achieve political and economic goals, and we need to do all we can to reduce their ability to do so, and to do that we of course need to reduce our dependence on oil.

- Rapport: Georg Jarzembowski (A6-0055/2009)

  Neena Gill (PSE). - Madam President, I abstained on this report because I believe it simply does not go far enough. We have previously made commitments in this House to the reduction of emissions. Transport has a key role to play in the fight against climate change and should be assisted in meeting its responsibility, but this report will do little to help.

This is unfortunate because there are some good proposals. The noise charges for trains take into account the broader environmental impact of transport and fit well with the proposals currently going through the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy on reducing noise in car tyres.

But much more could have been done for the aviation sector. It is odd that the report mentions rail, sea and inland waterway transport yet neglects this sector, one of the principal contributors of carbon emissions. It is because it lacks teeth in this area and so many others that I abstained on this report.

- Proposition de résolution B6-0107/2009 (Stratégie de Lisbonne)

  Hannu Takkula (ALDE). - Arvoisa puhemies, Lissabonin strategia on kannatettava asia, mutta sen kohdalta täytyy todeta, että tämä ajatus, että Eurooppa olisi maailman johtavin tietoon perustuva talousalue 2010, ei ole toteutumassa. Me elämme nyt vuotta 2009, ja sen vuoksi jos haluamme saada jotakin aikaan, meidän pitää löytää oikeanlaista sitoutumista Euroopan laajuisesti hyvin nopeasti. Silloin me voimme saavuttaa tämän tavoitteen ehkä vuoteen 2020 tai 2030 mennessä.

Tämä tarkoittaa erityisesti sitä, että koulutukseen ja tutkimukseen pitää sitoutua Euroopan laajuisesti hyvin nopeasti. Meillä on tällä hetkellä käsillä taloudellinen taantuma ja tämän taloudellisen taantuman keskellä pitää muistaa, että jotta me voimme saada riittävän hyviä inhimillisiä resursseja, työvoimaa meidän työmarkkinoillemme, silloin tarvitaan erityistä satsausta koulutukseen ja opettajankoulutukseen, ja tässä on painopistealue, jos haluamme todellakin saavuttaa Lissabonin strategian tavoitteet.

  Philip Claeys (NI). - Voorzitter, ik heb mij onthouden van stemming over de resolutie over de Lissabon-strategie, hoewel de resolutie in feite globaal genomen een zeer evenwichtige resolutie is die een goede diagnose maakt van de situatie en ook tal van voorstellen bevat waar ik mij volledig achter kan scharen. Maar ik heb mij van stemming onthouden, omdat hier opnieuw gewag wordt gemaakt van die fameuze blue cards van de economische immigratie en deze ook uitdrukkelijk wordt gesteund, juist op een moment waarop wij in de Europese Unie met meer dan 20 miljoen werklozen zitten en de werkloosheid door de economische crisis nog verder zal toenemen.

Juist op zo'n moment moeten wij ophouden met terug te grijpen naar gemakkelijker kortetermijnrecepten zoals nog maar eens economische immigranten massaal naar hier halen, en moeten we integendeel investeren in opleiding en herscholing van de bestaande werklozen, in plaats van deze mensen zomaar te laten vallen ten voordele van een massale nieuwe immigratie.

  Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE). - Madam President, I cannot remember how I voted on the Lisbon Strategy. I think it is a completely worthless thing, because Europe was meant to be the leading knowledge-based society by 2010. Over the 10 years I have sat in this Chamber, I did wonder how we were going to get there when we were passing regulation after regulation that was stifling business and opportunity and, indeed, encouraging business to move away from the continent of Europe.

I am always reticent when it comes to these sorts of reports. Having sat in the Chamber for a couple of hours today voting about imposing more and more regulation on businesses and on people, I feel we are going in exactly the wrong direction from this Chamber and we need a huge about-face immediately.

  Martin Callanan (PPE-DE). - Madam President, I agree with many of the comments made by my colleague, Mr Heaton-Harris. As he correctly said, the Lisbon Strategy commits the EU to becoming, slightly ironically, the most competitive economy in the world by 2010. With just one year to go before that self-imposed deadline, I cannot be the only person in this House who wonders, and becomes more than a little sceptical, about whether we will ever get there.

We constantly pass resolutions and the Commission constantly produces strategy documents telling us how we are going to get there. It is just that we never seem to arrive.

The content of the Lisbon Strategy was always far in excess of the EU’s capacity to deliver it, and was in many ways contrary to the whole ethos of the EU over the past 50 years because, as Mr Heaton-Harris reminded us, much of the EU’s employment and economic regulation actually causes more difficulty in achieving the goals of the Lisbon Strategy than anything else. We are constantly piling on more and more burdens and regulations that force industry out of Europe, and we have no chance whatsoever of meeting any of the goals of the Lisbon Strategy. It is about time we were honest with ourselves and admitted that.

  Syed Kamall (PPE-DE). - Madam President, the initial goals of the Lisbon Strategy committed the EU to creating a knowledge economy, an innovative economy, a digital economy by the year 2010. Well, I have news for us all here in this packed Chamber: we are running out of time. You may not have noticed, but we have made very little progress so far.

Before I became a politician I used to work with a lot of innovators and help lots of start-up companies. It was a real contrast, coming to the world of European politics, to see how we dealt with innovation. When we deal with innovation here, we have committees, we have strategy documents, we have votes, we have everything but innovation, unless you consider more paper creation to be innovation.

When you talk to the innovators out there, the people who are going to create wealth in the European Union and across the globe, what they want is for governments to keep out of the way. It is time the looters of government stopped draining the life-blood of companies.

  Neena Gill (PSE). - Madam President, it is with heavy heart that I stand up to speak once again on Lisbon. I do not normally speak here just for the sake of being negative. I believe that the European Union talks the talk when it comes to the Lisbon Strategy. However, today, almost 10 years since the summit, it is a long way from walking the walk.

We hear many warm words about the need for the skilled workforce that will be able to adapt to economic upheavals, such as the one we face today. However, across Europe we still face a chronic skills crisis. In my region, the West Midlands, the skilling of the workforce has had a particularly painful and protracted birth. Regrettably, we have the highest proportion of skill-shortage vacancies of any British region. I would, therefore, call on the Commission not to lose sight of the structural reforms needed to reinvigorate the Lisbon Strategy during a period which is beset with economic disorder, higher oil and commodity prices and ongoing turbulence on the financial markets.

- Proposition de résolution B6-0134/2009 (Changement climatique)

  Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE). - Madam President, the reason I want to give an explanation of vote on this particular report is because I cannot believe the hypocrisy of this House in talking as it always does about climate change.

Why is this House hypocritical? Well, look around you. We are in our second Chamber. We have a perfectly good Chamber back in Brussels. We are here for only three or four days per month. I admit that we are going to get an extra part-session this particular month, but only to average out for the one in 12 sessions that we need to do.

We have hundreds of people displaced from their normal places of work to come here. They travel and cause carbon emission while they are getting here. We are possibly the least green parliament that there is. When I entered this place it was meant to be a paperless parliament yet, if you look around, all our desks are covered in paper. We are the worst hypocrites when it comes to this than any Chamber I know.

  Syed Kamall (PPE-DE). - Madam President, I entirely agree with the sentiments expressed by the previous speaker. We should consider the fact that the European Parliament has two Chambers – in Strasbourg and Brussels – and we also have three sites, including the one in Luxembourg, which people do not talk about very often. Not only are we building a new block in Luxembourg, leading to more carbon emissions that could well contribute to climate change – or not, depending on what one believes on the issue – but also it is simply hypocritical for us to carry on debating climate change while we continue to operate out of three places of work.

Even if we were eventually to operate only out of one – Brussels – when you walk around the streets of Brussels at night and look up from Place du Luxembourg towards the European Parliament building you see this great lit-up beacon to hypocrisy. If we are going to tackle climate change, it is about time we put our own house in order.

- Proposition de résolution B6-0133/2009 (Politiques de l'emploi)

  Frank Vanhecke (NI). - Voorzitter, ook deze resolutie staat eigenlijk bol van de goede bedoelingen, maar een mens moet zich toch een keer afvragen of met dat soort resoluties ook maar één morzel grond aan de dijk wordt gezet.

Voor mij is het bijvoorbeeld onbegrijpelijk dat een resolutie over werkgelegenheid, voorzover dat al een Europese bevoegdheid is - en ik vind dat dat geen Europese bevoegdheid is - voorbijgaat aan zeer essentiële vragen zoals: hoeveel werklozen zijn er op dit ogenblik in de Europese Unie? 20 miljoen nog? Of zijn we al op weg - meer waarschijnlijk - naar de 25 miljoen?

Vraag: Houdt de Commissie nog altijd vast aan haar waanzinnige optie om meer dan 20 miljoen nieuwe vreemdelingen aan te trekken naar de Europese Unie? Vraag: Gaat de Commissie eindelijk afzien van haar rekruteringscentra in landen als Mali of Senegal om nog meer werkloosheid te importeren? Dat soort vragen hadden we in de resolutie verwacht in plaats van de nietszeggende catalogus van goede voornemens die het nu jammer genoeg is geworden.

  Syed Kamall (PPE-DE). - Madam President, once again we are talking about something that we are doing very little about, and that is employment policy. Once a colleague said to me that when the European Parliament talks about employment, it is actually creating far more unemployment than one would expect. We have got to recognise that, if we are going to create jobs, we have to set the wealth creators free. We have to enable them to continue their spirit of free enterprise, to create wealth, to create jobs.

But what do we do here? By regulation and debate, what we seek to do is to choke off the very spirit of innovation, the very spirit of entrepreneurship, and we have continued to do that today. Only today Mr Schulz – who is a man I often disagree with, but not today – talked about the social-democratisation of the EPP. Now that that day has come, we know that we are doomed when it comes to creating jobs in Europe.

  Daniel Hannan (NI). - Madam President, have you noticed that the harmonisation of policy always happens in the same direction? More integration invariably means more intervention.

Or let us put that the other way around: pluralism guarantees competitiveness. If you have competing states with different tax levels, then you can only raise your tax to a certain level before your money starts going abroad. If you have competing states with different employment policies and different social policies, you can regulate your employment market only to a certain degree before the jobs start crossing your borders.

Now, during the good years the European Union was able to disregard these verities and was able to construct behind its walls a highly regulated and centralised market. But those good years have come to an end. We now risk cutting ourselves off from more dynamic economies and becoming more penurious and more irrelevant and ultimately, like Tolkien’s Eldar, going into the west and fading.

- Rapport: Luis de Grandes Pascual (A6-0097/2009)

  Richard Corbett (PSE). - Madam President, I notice that at least some of those who have been denigrating all European legislation, whatever it is, nonetheless voted in favour of the third Maritime Package, a package that I welcome because it increases the health and safety of people on ships; it will ultimately cut costs because it will save lives downstream and it makes safety systems of different Member States compatible with each other, thus making them more efficient, more effective, less costly, while at the same time improving health and safety. I welcome the adoption of this package, which will make a difference to the safety of hundreds of constituents of mine in Yorkshire and Humber.

- Rapport: Elisa Ferreira (A6-0063/2009)

  Neena Gill (PSE). - Madam President, I voted in favour of this report as I was pleasantly surprised that our proposals against tax havens were adopted by the House. I was also in support of the wide-ranging remit given in this report to address the current crisis.

The one aspect that I really want to focus on is the recovery plan so far. We need to make certain that we still have secure jobs and sustainable careers for people when the economy begins to perform better and support key sectors such as the car industry. The automotive sector is a model of how traditional industries should adapt in the years to come. I recently visited the Jaguar Land Rover plant in my constituency, where I saw how the company has turned itself into a world leader in green automobile technology, and where the new type-approval guidelines we have been adopting in this House have been welcomed wholeheartedly.

  Daniel Hannan (NI). - Madam President, once again we are indulging the fantasy that you can spend your way out of debt and legislate against recessions. At best, we are engaging in self-deceit; at worst, we are deliberately perpetrating a deceit against our electorate.

The truth is that nothing can stop this correction: interest rates were held too low for too long and now that the air has been pumped into the balloon, it is going to come out again. We could try to rescue some of the victims but, instead, we engage in this pretence that we can stop the thing happening. The debt will be paid by our children yet unborn and unbegot, and nowhere more than in my country, where every child is now born with a debt of GBP 30 000 because of the incompetence and incontinence of its government.

As our national poet says: ‘This land of such dear souls, this dear dear land, ... Is now leased out – I die pronouncing it – like to a tenement or pelting farm.’

And now, on top of that national debt, we are expected to contribute to these European recovery programmes. I close again with the words of our national poet: ‘Prevent it, resist it, let it not be so, Lest child, child’s children, cry against you, “Woe!”’

  Jean-Claude Martinez (NI). - Madame la Présidente, on peut citer comme exemples de grande criminalité financière internationale l'affaire Madoff, évidemment, mais aussi la spéculation sur les matières premières agricoles en 2007.

C'est la raison pour laquelle toute une série de juristes, notamment le cabinet de Carlos Sotelo en Espagne, et des réseaux de grands cabinets ont proposé l'institution d'un tribunal financier international.

On pourrait d'ailleurs tout simplement élargir la compétence de la Cour pénale internationale à la grande criminalité financière parce que, en 2007, des millions d'enfants sont morts de la spéculation sur les produits agricoles. Il y a eu un Darfour financier.

Ce tribunal financier international aurait pour compétence d'enquêter sur la spéculation et les spéculateurs, de contrôler les paradis fiscaux, de réguler et de sanctionner.

C'est le test de sincérité pour Obama, pour le Président Sarkozy et pour les dirigeants. C'est le message politique à envoyer aux opinions publiques, et ce serait la première étape d'une organisation planétaire, d'un phénomène planétaire et d'un traitement planétaire d'une crise économique planétaire.

- Rapport: Evgeni Kirilov (A6-0075/2009)

  Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE). - Madam President, it is very nice to speak after Mr Corbett in such debates because Mr Corbett is never wrong in this place; often confused, as he was today, giving the wrong explanation of vote at the wrong time, but obviously never wrong! I do wonder, though, whether in this House we know what the real economy is. Is the real economy a bunch of paper-pushers and bureaucrats, with us writing laws that other people have to implement, such as the Civil Service in the UK, where we have been growing the public sector way faster than the private sector has been growing over the last 10 years? Or is the real economy actually people doing jobs of work and innovating and starting their own businesses? I just wonder if this report is actually heading in the right direction. Having read it, I am pretty sure that it is not.

  Daniel Hannan (NI). - Madam President, we in this House know, perhaps better than some outside, the extent to which the European Union has now become a mechanism for the massive redistribution of wealth.

For a long time, that system worked very well because there were only a very small number of people paying into the pot. The only two net contributors to the budget for most of the European Union’s history were the United Kingdom and, outstandingly, Germany.

However, things have changed now, and the money is running out. We saw that vividly illustrated at the summit two weeks ago when the Hungarian prime minister demanded a EUR 190 billion bail-out for Central and Eastern Europe, and was told in no uncertain terms by the German Chancellor that the money was not there and would not be forthcoming.

German taxpayers (and this is rarely acknowledged) have always propped up the whole system. Integration rests on their sufferance, and they have now seen through this. They are not responding any more to the unspoken appeal to historical responsibility. They are a sensible, level-headed people and can recognise a self-serving argument and spot a racket when they see one. If you think I am wrong about this, then let them have a referendum; let everyone have a referendum: put the Treaty of Lisbon to a vote. Pactio Olisipiensis censenda est!

Explications de vote écrites

- Rapport: Geringer de Oedenberg (A6-0060/2009)

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Dichiaro il mio voto favorevole alla relazione dell'onorevole Geringer de Oedenberg sulla versione codificata dell'esenzione dell'imposta sul valore aggiunto di alcune importazioni di beni a carattere definitivo. Trattandosi di una mera codificazione di un testo legislativo precedentemente esistente e non comportando alcuna modifica sostanziale del testo stesso, credo che si debba sostenere la proposta della Commissione e le raccomandazioni dei servizi giuridici del Parlamento, del Consiglio e della Commissione stessa.

- Rapport: Díaz de Mera Garcí Consuegra (A6-0106/2009)

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Mi astengo dalla votazione della relazione dell'onorevole Diaz de Mera Garcia Consuegra sull'adeguamento degli stipendi base applicabili al personale dell'Europol. Concordo solo in parte con l'opinione del relatore in merito e non ritengo dunque opportuno schierarmi in proposito.

- Rapport: Reimer Böge (A6-0106/2009)

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

Ritengo che la catastrofe ambientale che ha colpito la Romania non possa passare inosservata. La Romania è uscita provata dall'alluvione, non solo dal punto di vista economico e ambientale, ma anche sotto il profilo sociale.

Strazianti sono state le cronache che hanno riportato le vicende personali della popolazione: nuclei famigliari hanno perso i loro affetti e i loro beni, molti dei quali conquistati con il sudore di una vita.

Molte associazioni sono già attive sul territorio ma è giunto il momento che anche le istituzioni, ed in prima persona i membri di quest'aula, diano un contributo concreto a questa causa.

Accolgo quindi positivamente il parere della commissione per i bilanci ed auspico che quanto prima gli 11.785.377 euro del Fondo di solidarietà siano messi a disposizione della Romania, a fine di risollevare la popolazione sia dal punto di vista economico, ambientale e sociale.

  Genowefa Grabowska (PSE), na piśmie. − Zasada solidarności jest w Unii Europejskiej zasadą podstawową i niekwestionowaną. To właśnie ta zasada, istniejąca przecież nie tylko na papierze, odróżnia Unię od innych organizacji międzynarodowych. Jej praktycznym wyrazem jest bez wątpienia Fundusz Solidarności, uruchomiony na mocy porozumienia międzyinstytucjonalnego z 2006 roku dla niwelowania negatywnych konsekwencji „poważnych klęsk żywiołowych”. Dobrze, iż Fundusz działa, że w ubiegłym roku skorzystało z niego pięć państw. Jest to dowodem na to, że żadne państwo UE w obliczu tragedii nie pozostanie osamotnione. Powódź, która w lipcu 2008 r. nawiedziła pięć okręgów w północno-wschodniej części Rumunii, spowodowała poważne straty materialne (0,6% DNB) oraz zdezorganizowała życie ponad 2 milionów mieszkańców z 214 gmin.

W tej sytuacji wniosek Rumunii o pomoc, nawet jeśli nie spełnia on kryteriów ilościowych określonych w art. 2 ust. 1 rozporządzenia 2012/2002 ustanawiającego Fundusz Solidarności UE, uważam za zasadny. Nie mam także wątpliwości, iż w tym przypadku należy zastosować kryterium „nadzwyczajnej klęski żywiołowej” także przewidziane w ww. rozporządzeniu i pozwalające na uruchomienie Funduszu na rzecz Rumunii. Jako polski poseł z regionu, który latem 2008 roku także został dotknięty klęską żywiołową (trąba powietrzna w województwie śląskim), na szczęście nie o tak ogromnej sile niszczenia oraz skali, rozumiem i w pełni popieram ten namacalny dowód europejskiej solidarności.

  Maria Petre (PPE-DE), în scris. − Am votat în favoarea acestui raport deoarece contribuie la mobilizarea mult mai rapidă a Fondului de Solidaritate. În 2006, plata efectuată de Uniunea Europeană prin intermediul Fondului de Solidaritate pentru ajutorul României după inundaţiile din aprilie şi august a întârziat un an. Remarc cu satisfacţie că procedurile s-au îmbunătăţit şi permit o intervenţie promptă a Uniunii în ţările care s-au confruntat cu o catastrofă naturală majoră sau o catastrofă ieşită din comun.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Esprimo il mio voto favorevole alla relazione del collega Böge concernente la mobilitazione del Fondo di solidarietà europea. Concordo sul fatto che le condizioni di ammissibilità alla mobilitazione del suddetto fondo siano soddisfatte nel caso della domanda inoltrata dalla Romania a seguito delle alluvioni abbattutesi sul paese nello scorso luglio. Le alluvioni hanno infatti causato gravi danni al paesaggio e alla popolazione residente nell'area delle 5 regioni colpite. Pertanto mi sembra più che opportuno che il fondo venga mobilizzato, anche perché la somma in questione rientra nel massimale annuo previsto dall'accordo interistituzionale del mese di maggio 2006.

- Rapport: Jutta Haug (A6-0113/2009)

  Călin Cătălin Chiriţă (PPE-DE), în scris. − Am votat în favoarea Raportului elaborat de doamna eurodeputat Jutta Haug (Germania), deoarece solicită mobilizarea sumei de 11,8 milioane EUR din Fondul de Solidaritate al UE (FSUE) pentru a ajuta victimele inundaţiilor care au afectat România în iulie 2008.

Acest gest reprezintă răspunsul UE la solicitarea de asistenţă din partea României. Cererea se referă la cinci judeţe (Maramureş, Suceava, Botoşani, Iaşi şi Neamţ). 241 de localităţi româneşti, cu o populaţie totală de 1,6 milioane de locuitori, au suferit în mod direct în urma catastrofei care a distrus parţial sau total locuinţele şi culturile agricole.

Am votat cu gândul la oamenii care şi-au pierdut în inundaţii casele, bunurile, animalele şi chiar membri ai familiilor lor. Preşedintele Consiliului Judeţean Suceava, domnul Gheorghe Flutur, a pledat pentru cauza lor la Bruxelles, în Parlamentul European.

Consider că România are nevoie de o sumă mai mare pentru remedierea distrugerilor cauzate de inundaţii, iar asistenţa europeană este necesară şi binevenită.

  Pedro Guerreiro (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − O primeiro orçamento rectificativo para 2009 refere-se à mobilização do Fundo de Solidariedade da UE a favor da Roménia na sequência das inundações que assolaram este país, em Julho de 2008.

Face a um prejuízo directo calculado em cerca de 471,4 milhões de euros, é (só agora!) proposta a mobilização de apenas 11,8 milhões de euros no quadro deste fundo, o que, mais uma vez, demonstra a necessidade urgente da sua revisão.

O objectivo deste fundo é permitir uma resposta rápida, com eficácia e flexibilidade a "situações de emergência" nos vários Estados-Membros, pelo que apoiamos, apesar de todas as insuficiências, a sua mobilização a favor da Roménia.

Todavia, os 11,8 milhões de euros serão orçamentados à custa da diminuição das verbas destinadas ao Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional - objectivo convergência. Isto é, a "solidariedade" prestada à Roménia é financiada através das verbas destinadas aos países e regiões economicamente menos desenvolvidas, onde se inclui a própria Roménia! Eis o que se pode designar como a solidariedade entre os “pobres”, ou seja entre os chamados “países da coesão”/regiões de convergência...

Discordamos que sejam utilizadas verbas da “coesão” - tanto mais que num quadro de agudização da crise socio-económica -, quando existem outras verbas, como as destinadas à militarização da UE.

  Iosif Matula (PPE-DE), în scris. − Am votat în favoarea raportului privind mobilizarea Fondului de Solidaritate al Uniunii Europene pentru România întrucât consider că ajutorul financiar acordat ţării noastre reprezintă un sprijin important şi necesar pentru localităţile lovite de viituri în luna iulie a anului trecut. Regiunea de Nord-Est a României a fost grav afectată: 214 localităţi şi mai mult de 1,6 milioane de oameni au suferit în mod direct din cauza dezastrului. Aportul financiar al Comisiei Europene de 11,8 milioane euro vine în sprijinul investiţiilor în reabilitarea infrastructurii de transport şi canalizare, consolidarea albiei râurilor şi lucrări de îndiguiri, pentru prevenirea unor astfel de catastrofe naturale în viitor.

Consider că depistarea timpurie a cauzelor care duc la producerea de dezastre naturale de această amploare sau chiar mai grave reprezintă cel mai important pas pentru protejarea cetăţenilor Europei.

Având în vedere schimbările climatice cu care ne confruntăm, susţin instituirea de instrumente de monitorizare a factorilor de mediu din fiecare regiune în parte, precum şi alocarea unui buget adecvat pentru acestea. Zonele de convergenţă sunt cele mai expuse pericolului de a fi afectate de catastrofe naturale, iar pentru realizarea politicii de coeziune economică, socială şi teritorială, o atenţie deosebită trebuie îndreptată înspre acestea.

  Rovana Plumb (PSE), în scris. − Domeniile sensibile la efectele schimbărilor climatice sunt, în principal: resursele de apă, agricultura, energia, silvicultura şi biodiversitatea şi, nu în ultimul rând, sănătatea populaţiei.

Fenomenele meteo extreme din ultimii ani înregistrate in România au avut ca rezultat inundaţii şi secetă şi conduc la necesitatea abordării cu maximă seriozitate, competenţă şi responsabilitate problematica schimbărilor climatice.

Ca social-democrată am votat acest raport deoarece suma alocată de 11,8 milioane EURO prin rectificarea bugetară sprijină România în efortul de adaptare la schimbările climatice pentru înlăturarea efectelor inundaţiilor prin realizarea de lucrări de protecţie cu caracter local (protecţia aşezărilor umane, amenajarea bazinelor prin lucrări de ameliorare a torentelor şi creşterea suprafeţei împădurite ) şi nu în ultimul rând implicarea şi educarea populaţiei în vederea unui comportament adecvat înainte, în timpul şi după trecerea inundaţiilor.

  Nicolae Vlad Popa (PPE-DE), în scris. − Am votat în favoarea raportului privind proiectul de buget rectificativ nr. 1/2009 al Uniunii Europene pentru exerciţiul financiar 2009. Raportul vizează mobilizarea unei sume de 11,8 milioane EUR în credite de angajament şi de plată din Fondul de solidaritate al UE, în urma efectelor inundaţiilor care au afectat România în iulie 2008.

Susţin iniţiativa Comisiei Europene prin care UE îşi arăta solidaritatea faţă de judeţele Suceava, Iaşi, Neamţ, Botoşani şi Maramureş, care au suferit în urma inundaţiilor din iulie 2008.

Prin votul de azi, plenul Parlamentului European validează decizia Comisiei pentru bugete din 24 februarie 2009. În şedinţa respectivă, Preşedintele Consiliului Judeţean Suceava, Gheorghe Flutur, a prezentat situaţia regiunii afectate de inundaţii, susţinând solicitarea de fonduri cu imagini şi cu o situaţie statistică a distrugerilor în urma calamităţilor naturale care au afectat zona.

El a precizat că au fost trimise avertizări şi a menţionat că, împreună cu autorităţile din regiunea ucraineană Cernăuţi, s-a convenit înfiinţarea unui sistem de alertă rapidă în cazul unor calamităţi, în continuarea acestui proiect urmând să fie realizate alte programe de cooperare transfrontalieră pentru situaţii de urgenţă.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Mi dichiaro in favore della relazione dell'onorevole Haug a proposito del bilancio rettificativo per l'anno 2009, la quale tiene in considerazione i gravi danni provocati dalle alluvioni abbattutesi sulla Romania nel luglio 2008. Ho già espresso il mio parere favorevole alla relazione dell'onorevole Böge sulla mobilitazione del fondo di solidarietà dell'UE nel caso specifico e qui ribadisco il mio sostegno alla misura, purché essa miri, come previsto dall'accordo interistituzionale del 2006, al ripristino rapido ed efficace di condizioni di vita dignitose nelle regioni colpite dalla catastrofe naturale e non al risarcimento dei danni subiti dai privati.

  Flaviu Călin Rus (PPE-DE), în scris. − Am votat Propunerea de rezoluţie a Parlamentului European privind proiectul de buget rectificativ nr. 1/2009 al Uniunii Europene pentru exerciţiul financiar 2009 (6952/2009 – C6 0075/2009 – 2009/2008(BUD) deoarece aceasta a vizat mobilizarea unei sume de 11,8 milioane EUR în credite de angajament şi de plată din Fondul de solidaritate al UE, în urma efectelor inundaţiilor care au afectat România în iulie 2008.

- Rapport: Luis de Grandes Pascual (A6-0097/2009)

  John Attard-Montalto (PSE), in writing. − Malta is one of the main EU states with a substantial tonnage on its register books. On the other hand, it discharges its obligations as a flag state, in accordance with international conventions.

The thee main obligations are to: (a) apply the provisions of the Flag State Code; (b) take the necessary measures for an independent auditing of their administration at least once every five years, in accordance with the rules of the IMO; (c) take the necessary measures with regard to the inspection and survey of ships and the issue of statutory certificates and exemption certificates as provided for by the international conventions.

A new requirement is that, prior to allowing the operation of a ship which has been granted the right to fly its flag, the Member State concerned shall take the appropriate measures to ensure that the ship in question complies with the applicable international rules and regulations and, in particular, the safety records of the ship.

  David Martin (PSE), in writing. − This legislation will reinforce existing EU safety legislation and transpose major international instruments into Community law. I support this legislation because it recognises the need to closely supervise classification societies, which perform vital tasks in maintaining safety at sea, because of the major concentration of power they hold.

- Rapport: Luis de Grandes Pascual (A6-0098/2009)

  Carl Lang et Fernand Le Rachinel (NI), par écrit. – Huit textes législatifs faisant partie d'un paquet maritime viennent d'être adoptés au Parlement européen. Nous nous en félicitons, car ce paquet couvre non seulement l'indemnisation des passagers, mais aussi les inspections, le contrôle de l'État du port, les enquêtes sur les accidents de transport et le choix de l'autorité décidant du lieu de refuge des navires en détresse.

La balle est désormais dans le camp des États membres, car il ne suffit pas de légiférer, encore faut-il qu'il y ait transposition dans leurs législations nationales.

Le premier test sera celui du contrôle des pavillons de complaisance des pays européens. Ces pavillons sont utilisés pour détourner les règlementations syndicales, fiscales, de recrutement, de sécurité ou environnementales du pays de propriété réelle.

Chypre et Malte figurent encore aujourd'hui dans les cinq premiers pavillons de complaisance en nombre de bateaux perdus.

Il est malheureusement notable que malgré les efforts faits depuis les naufrages des pétroliers Prestige et Erika, la situation ne s'améliore guère. Les navires sous-normes, sous pavillon de complaisance, cassent les prix du transport. Les pays dits riches, en réponse, bâtissent eux-mêmes leur propre pavillon (bis) dans le but de lutter contre la perte de fret.

En réalité, pour éliminer réellement ces épaves flottantes, c'est à l'ultralibéralisme que l'Union européenne doit s'attaquer.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Esprimo il mio voto favorevole alla relazione del collega De Grandes Pascual concernente le disposizioni e norme comuni per gli organismi che effettuano le ispezioni e le visite di controllo delle navi. Ho già avuto modo di esprimere le ragioni che mi spingono a sostenere il lavoro condotto dall'onorevole relatore a proposito del terzo pacchetto marittimo e i vantaggi che le misure previste potrebbero apportare in termini di sicurezza del trasporto marittimo e di miglioramento della regolamentazione esistente. In tal caso ribadisco il carattere favorevole del mio voto.

- Rapport: Dominique Vlasto (A6-0099/2009)

  Bogusław Liberadzki (PSE), na piśmie. − Głosuję za przyjęciem sprawozdania w sprawie zatwierdzonego przez komitet pojednawczy wspólnego tekstu dotyczącego dyrektywy Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady w sprawie kontroli państwa portu (przekształcenie). Zgadzam się z celami wyznaczonymi w trzecim pakiecie morskim.

Siedem wniosków wchodzących w skład pakietu ma za zadanie zapobiegać wypadkom (poprawa jakości bander europejskich, przegląd prawodawstwa związanego z kontrolą państwa portu i monitorowaniem ruchu statków oraz poprawa przepisów dotyczących towarzystw klasyfikacyjnych) oraz zapewniać skuteczne reagowanie w razie wypadków (rozwój zharmonizowanych ram regulujących dochodzenia powypadkowe, wprowadzenie przepisów dotyczących odszkodowań przysługujących pasażerom w razie wypadku i wprowadzenie przepisów dotyczących odpowiedzialności właścicieli statków w połączeniu z systemem ubezpieczeń obowiązkowych).

Pragnę wyrazić swoje poparcie dla wypracowanego porozumienia, a szczególnie dla punktów: rozszerzenie zakresu celem objęcia nim również statków zawijających do kotwicowisk, przeprowadzanie inspekcji statków z większą częstotliwością, trwałe objęcie statków zakazem na pewnych warunkach.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Dichiaro il mio voto favorevole alla relazione dell'onorevole Vlasto relativa al controllo da parte dello Stato di approdo che si colloca nel quadro del terzo pacchetto marittimo. Concordo con la parte dell'accordo raggiunto a proposito dell'estensione del campo di applicazione della direttiva alle navi che fanno scalo negli ancoraggi e quella riguardante l'aumento dei tassi di controllo e di ispezione per le navi con il più alto profilo di rischio. Mi ricollego, a tal proposito, alla necessità che le valutazioni di tale rischio siano il più possibile puntuali e indipendenti. Mi associo anche nel ritenere che in specifiche condizioni, il rifiuto di accesso delle navi debba essere permanente, al fine di garantire livelli di sicurezza adeguati per gli operatori e per i passeggeri.

- Rapport: Dirk Sterckx (A6-0100/2009)

  Bairbre de Brún and Mary Lou McDonald (GUE/NGL), in writing. − We welcome the shift in emphasis in this resolution, and some of the positive proposals in relation to regulation of the financial sector, innovation, energy efficiency and investment, as well as acknowledgement of the need to protect employment, create jobs, combat poverty and focus on the most vulnerable groups in society.

However, the logic of the Lisbon Strategy is flawed and needs to be fundamentally revised, particularly in light of the new economic situation.

In addition, three are a number of specific proposals contained in the resolution which are short-sighted and counter-productive, such as the insistence on deregulation and on flexible employment practices leading to a weakening of workers rights.

For these reasons we abstained in the final vote on this report.

  Bogusław Liberadzki (PSE), na piśmie. − Głosuję za przyjęciem sprawozdania w sprawie zatwierdzonego przez komitet pojednawczy wspólnego tekstu dotyczącego dyrektywy Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady zmieniającej dyrektywę 2002/59/WE ustanawiającą wspólnotowy system monitorowania i informacji o ruchu statków.

Zgadzam się z celami wyznaczonymi w trzecim pakiecie morskim.

Siedem wniosków wchodzących w skład pakietu ma za zadanie zapobiegać wypadkom (poprawa jakości bander europejskich, przegląd prawodawstwa związanego z kontrolą państwa portu i monitorowaniem ruchu statków oraz poprawa przepisów dotyczących towarzystw klasyfikacyjnych) oraz zapewniać skuteczne reagowanie w razie wypadków (rozwój zharmonizowanych ram regulujących dochodzenia powypadkowe, wprowadzenie przepisów dotyczących odszkodowań przysługujących pasażerom w razie wypadku i wprowadzenie przepisów dotyczących odpowiedzialności właścicieli statków w połączeniu z systemem ubezpieczeń obowiązkowych).

Jako kontrsprawozdawca sprawozdania pana Sterckxa pragnę wyrazić swoje pełne poparcie dla głosowanego dokumentu.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Ritengo che il pacchetto marittimo sia da considerare in maniera unitaria ed integrata, come da sempre fatto dal Parlamento nel momento della trattazione dei singoli fascicoli. Pertanto, dichiaro il mio voto favorevole alla relazione dell'onorevole Sterckx riguardante l'istituzione di un sistema comunitario di monitoraggio del traffico navale e dell'informazione poiché tale sistema si inserisce in un contesto più ampio mirante al miglioramento della sicurezza del traffico marittimo e alla facilitazione della sua gestione, per il quale ho già più volte espresso il mio parere favorevole. Nel caso specifico, l'applicazione della tecnologia ai fini del monitoraggio delle navi sarebbe funzionale alla più facile attribuzione delle responsabilità in caso di incidenti e al miglioramento delle procedure di accoglienza delle navi in cosiddetti "luoghi di rifugio". Per questo mi sento di sostenerla con il mio voto favorevole.

- Rapport: Jaromir Kohlicek (A6-0101/2009)

  Guy Bono (PSE), par écrit. – J'ai voté en faveur de ce rapport, présenté par le député tchèque de la gauche unitaire Jaromír Kohlíček, concernant les enquêtes sur les accidents dans le secteur des transports maritimes.

Ce texte met l'accent sur la nécessité de définir, à l'échelle européenne, des orientations claires et contraignantes afin d'assurer un suivi efficace des accidents en mer. Il répond aux inquiétudes qui ont suivi le naufrage du pétrolier Erika au large des côtes françaises. C'est pour éviter que des cas de mauvaise gestion comme celui-là ne se répètent que l'Union européenne a décidé d'imposer un cadre strict, qui traite de tous les aspects techniques et de toutes les démarches à suivre en cas d'accident: méthodologie des enquêtes, base de donnée européenne sur les accidents de mer, consignes de sécurité, etc.

Je partage l'idée qu'il est indispensable de faire de l'espace maritime européen l'un des plus exemplaires et sécurisés du monde. C'est ce à quoi concourt le paquet maritime, aussi appelé "Erika III", dans lequel s'intègre le présent rapport. C'est un véritable bond en avant pour le secteur maritime, et aussi pour l'environnement, souvent victime collatérale des conduites peu respectueuses en mer.

  Bogusław Liberadzki (PSE), na piśmie. − Głosuję za przyjęciem sprawozdania w sprawie zatwierdzonego przez komitet pojednawczy wspólnego tekstu dotyczącego dyrektywy Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady ustanawiającej podstawowe zasady regulujące postępowanie dochodzeniowe w sprawie wypadków w sektorze transportu morskiego i zmieniającej dyrektywy 1999/35/WE i 2002/59/WE. Zgadzam się z celami wyznaczonymi w trzecim pakiecie morskim.

Siedem wniosków wchodzących w skład pakietu ma za zadanie zapobiegać wypadkom (poprawa jakości bander europejskich, przegląd prawodawstwa związanego z kontrolą państwa portu i monitorowaniem ruchu statków oraz poprawa przepisów dotyczących towarzystw klasyfikacyjnych) oraz zapewniać skuteczne reagowanie w razie wypadków (rozwój zharmonizowanych ram regulujących dochodzenia powypadkowe, wprowadzenie przepisów dotyczących odszkodowań przysługujących pasażerom w razie wypadku i wprowadzenie przepisów dotyczących odpowiedzialności właścicieli statków w połączeniu z systemem ubezpieczeń obowiązkowych).

Pragnę wyrazić swoje poparcie dla wypracowanego porozumienia, a szczególnie dla punktów: metodologia dochodzeń w sprawie wypadków, decyzja w sprawie dochodzenia, sprawiedliwe traktowanie marynarzy, ochrona świadków/poufność dokumentacji.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Mi esprimo favorevolmente in merito alla relazione dell'onorevole Kohlicek riguardante le inchieste sugli incidenti nel settore del trasporto marittimo. Troppo spesso l'attribuzione delle responsabilità in caso di incidenti più o meno gravi in mare è di difficile effettuazione. Penso al caso delle indagini successive alla vera e propria catastrofe naturale causata dall'incidente della petroliera Prestige e a molti altri che purtroppo non cessano di verificarsi. Il trasporto marittimo merita un'attenzione particolare perché, oltre ad essere il più conveniente in termini relativi, è uno tra i più rischiosi in termini di conseguenze ambientali di un incidente. Credo sia dunque necessario stabilire delle linee guida precise e vincolanti sulle modalità di svolgimento delle indagini tecniche a seguito di incidenti di navigazione e garantire che siano fornite indicazioni chiare al fine di prevenirli. Ecco la ragione del mio parere favorevole al rapporto.

- Rapport: Paolo Costa (A6-0102/2009)

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Mi esprimo a favore della relazione dell'onorevole Costa concernente la responsabilità dei vettori che trasportano passeggeri via mare e per vie navigabili interne in caso di incidente. Mi associo al collega nel ritenere che sia quanto mai opportuno che le disposizioni della convenzione di Atene del 1974 relativa al trasporto via mare dei passeggeri e del loro bagaglio vengano incorporate nel diritto comunitario, poiché le differenze nazionali tuttora vigenti non permettono di garantire un livello adeguato di responsabilità e di assicurazione obbligatoria nel caso di incidenti in cui siano coinvolti i passeggeri. Se ciò non accade per altri mezzi di trasporto, credo sia necessario che, anche nel caso del trasporto marittimo, la legislazione debba essere adeguata.

- Rapport: Gilles Savary (A6-0072/2009)

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Intendo sostenere la relazione del collega Savary riguardante l'assicurazione degli armatori per i crediti marittimi poiché condivido le raccomandazioni effettuate dall'onorevole relatore circa la necessità di garantire che l'obbligo di assicurazione venga rispettato da parte degli armatori che entrino in acque poste sotto la giurisdizione di qualsiasi Stato membro, anche tramite lo strumento sanzionatorio in caso di assenza del certificato a bordo della nave, qualora tale caso si verifichi. Concordo con il fatto che l'importo dell'assicurazione sia fissato ai massimali previsti dalla Convenzione LLMM 1996, la quale garantisce un risarcimento adeguato alle vittime di incidenti in mare. Mi associo pertanto alla raccomandazione del relatore relativa all'approvazione del progetto di raccomandazione concordato con il Consiglio.

- Rapport: Jardim Fernandes (A6-0069/2009)

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Mi dichiaro in favore della relazione dell'onorevole Jardim Fernandes circa il rispetto degli obblighi degli Stati di bandiera, che dimostra la determinazione del Parlamento a mantenere il III pacchetto marittimo unito di fronte ai momenti di arresto dei lavori in sede di Consiglio su certi aspetti, come l'oggetto della presente raccomandazione. Per questo mi compiaccio del lavoro svolto dal collega e dai colleghi parlamentari della commissione trasporti. Ritengo che il valore aggiunto dell'accordo politico raggiunto sia da considerare importante, soprattutto in quanto chiama gli Stati membri a introdurre un sistema di gestione della qualità per le loro amministrazioni marittime e ad adeguarsi alle norme internazionali in materia, prime tra tutte quelle scaturite dalle convenzioni con l'Organizzazione Marittima Internazionale. Oltre a vantaggi in termini di qualità delle bandiere europee e di sicurezza, la proposta permetterà di migliorare le condizioni concorrenziali sul territorio comunitario ed è pertanto, a mio parere, da sostenere.

- Rapport: Saïd El Khadraoui (A6-0066/2009)

  Brian Crowley (UEN), i scríbhinn. − Caithfidh tíortha na hEorpa oibriú le chéile chun aidhmeanna comhshaoil an Aontais a bhaint amach. Ach chun a chinntiú go mbíonn beartas comhshaoil an AE inbhuanaithe, ní foláir prionsabail an AE agus tréithe agus riachtanais éagsúla gach Ballstáit a chur san áireamh.

Tagann an Tuarascáil Eurovignette salach ar na haidhmeanna sin i gcás na mBallstát atá imeallach san Aontas Eorpach.

Chuirfeadh moltaí an Eurovignette pionós ar thíortha imeallacha agus dhéanfadh na tíortha atá i lár na hEorpa an-mhaith as. Measaim féin go bhfuil moltaí an Eurovignette ag teacht salach ar phrionsabail an Mhargaidh Aonair agus creideann mise gur leatrom ar bhunús tíreolaíoch é sin ar thíortha áirithe. Is oileán í Éire atá suite ar imeall na hEorpa. Ní bheidh leoraithe ó thíortha eile ag teacht trí Éirinn ach beidh ar na leoraithe tromualaigh seo againne táille a íoc in an-chuid tíortha ar fud na hEorpa. Níl aon dul as: caithfimid gnó a dhéanamh, caithfimid ár n-earraí a onnmhairiú agus a allmhairiú. Faoi thogra an Eurovignette beidh buntáistí iomaíochta ann do thíortha atá suite i lár na hEorpa, nach mbeidh orthu na táillí céanna a íoc. Níl sé ceart nó cóir idirdhealú den saghas seo a dhéanamh bunaithe ar suíomh tireolaíoch tíre ar bith.

  Avril Doyle (PPE-DE), in writing. − The Eurovignette Directive was created to harmonise levy systems on European roads - including vehicle taxes, tolls and charges relating to the use of road infrastructure and establish fair mechanisms for charging infrastructure costs to hauliers. The recent revision of the directive from the Commission proposes additional amendments to the Directive; such as cost assessment for the environmental impact of HGVs (Heavy Goods Vehicles) in terms of noise pollution, congestion and air pollution.

Countries with large amounts of transit traffic hold considerably different opinions to more peripheral countries, like my own, which depend on large volumes of traffic for importation and exportation of goods. While in principle these are fair, it should be implemented in a gradual and equitable manner. These are issues that we cannot afford to ignore. HGVs are frequently subject to time constraints and external timetables, like those of ferry operators. The construction of a port tunnel in Dublin city has done much to reduce the need for HGVs to be in the city centre, and has increased the quality of air and reduced noise pollution. This was a worthwhile investment.

I am not convinced of the need to create a European independent authority to fix toll levels, and would argue that this falls under the domain of subsidiarity.

  Françoise Grossetête (PPE-DE), par écrit. – J’ai voté en faveur du rapport El Khadraoui relatif à la taxation des poids lourds pour l'utilisation de certaines infrastructures.

Il est important de donner la possibilité aux États membres d'appliquer des taxes "plus intelligentes" au secteur des transports par route pour couvrir les coûts externes et encourager ainsi un comportement plus écologique.

Si la pollution atmosphérique et sonore doit être prise en compte, il n'en va pas de même pour les encombrements qui ne sont pas seulement dus aux transports routiers; pareille redevance serait discriminatoire puisque les voitures particulières sont aussi responsables de la congestion.

En outre, ce secteur paie les conséquences de la crise économique à travers le prix du pétrole et les coûts résultant de la livraison des marchandises. Les PME de transport routier ne seront pas en mesure de supporter ces charges supplémentaires dans ce contexte de crise économique.

Il convient d'adapter davantage les infrastructures routières à l'augmentation du trafic mais surtout de s'engager dans la voie du transport durable en privilégiant les modes de transport faiblement émetteurs de carbone.

En tant qu'élue rhônalpine, je peux témoigner de l'inadaptation de nombreux secteurs routiers de la vallée du Rhône.

  Małgorzata Handzlik (PPE-DE), na piśmie. − Podczas dzisiejszego głosowania Parlament Europejski przyjął projekt dyrektywy w sprawie tak zwanych eurowiniet, która umożliwia państwom członkowskim pobieranie opłat za używanie infrastruktury drogowej przez pojazdy ciężarowe.

W głosowaniu końcowym opowiedziałam się przeciw przyjęciu tej dyrektywy. Sądzę, iż wprowadzanie przepisów tej dyrektywy przyczyni się do wzrostu kosztów dla przedsiębiorstw świadczących usługi transportowe. Koszty takie mogą być w szczególności dotkliwe dla małych i średnich firm, które nie dysponują wystarczającymi środkami finansowymi, które pozwoliłyby na wymianę floty pojazdów. Co więcej przepisy takie mogą być dotkliwe dla firm w momencie obecnego kryzysu finansowego, kiedy wiele firm boryka się z utrudnionym dostępem do kredytu.

Z pewnością powinniśmy szukać sposobów, które pozwolą na bardziej ekologiczne pojazdy na naszych drogach, nie powinniśmy jednak wykorzystywać środków, które są w rzeczywistości kolejną formą opodatkowania przedsiębiorstw.

  Jim Higgins (PPE-DE), in writing. − On behalf of my Fine Gael colleagues in the Parliament I would like to clarify that we did not vote in support of the El Khadraoui report on the charging of HGVs, due to concerns over the legal basis for the proposal, concerns regarding the compulsory use of electronic tolling and the provision for earmarking of revenue. We fully support the principles behind the proposal, but believe the report’s application of the principle is flawed.

  Stanisław Jałowiecki (PPE-DE), in writing. − Not only did I vote against this report, but I also consider it dangerous to the European common market. This is mainly because of its unfair character and the fact it acts like a concealed tax. Moreover, it will not contribute to environmental protection. During this time of financial crisis it is kind of absurd. This type of regulation shows that the EU is turning its head away from its citizens.

  Jörg Leichtfried (PSE), schriftlich. − Ich stimme für den vertretbaren Kompromiss zur neuen Eurovignette. Ich habe mit der Sozialdemokratischen Fraktion im Europäischen Parlament seit Jahren – gegen den massiven Widerstand von Teilen der konservativen EVP-Fraktion – dafür gekämpft, dass die externen Kosten (Lärm, Stau, Umweltverschmutzung) in die Mautberechnung mit einfließen sollen, damit die finanzielle Last weg vom Steuerzahler hin zum Verursacher, nämlich zum Schwerlastverkehr, verlagert wird.

Dem voraussichtlichen Ergebnis des Kompromisses zu den Staukosten stehe ich ablehnend gegenüber, da deren Anerkennung als externe Kosten aufgrund der Mehrheitsverhältnisse nur unter der Bedingung durchsetzbar war, dass es nicht nur den Schwerlastverkehr sondern alle Stauverursacher, also auch Pkws, betrifft.

Voraussichtlich wird auch die Einberechnung von CO2 gegen den unverständlichen Widerstand der EVP nicht durchgesetzt werden. Mein im Ausschuss gestellter Antrag, in dem ich Mindestmauten für alle Strecken des TEN-Verkehrsnetzes gefordert habe, fand keine Mehrheit. Ich werde diesen Vorschlag bei der weiteren Diskussion in jedem Fall erneut einbringen.

Besonders positiv für Österreich sehe ich, dass es wahrscheinlich keine Gegenrechnung von externen Kosten und dem sogenannten Alpenzuschlag (höhere Maut in Alpenregionen) geben wird. Das bedeutet, dass Österreich eine höhere Maut in sensiblen Alpenregionen erheben darf, und unabhängig davon können noch die externen Kosten angelastet werden. Das bedeutet, eine höhere Brennermaut wird möglich.

  David Martin (PSE), in writing. − I support this report which should encourage the shift of freight from the road onto rail. The report is part of a package of initiatives aimed at making transport more sustainable, and ensuring that users will only have to pay the transport costs directly related to their use of that particular mode of transport. Tolls will be charged for local noise pollution, local air pollution as well as infrastructure damage/costs. This will create a fairer system of the “polluter pays” principle, with safeguards built in to ensure market transparency and avoid discrimination.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. − Spätestens seit der Osterweiterung ist der Lkw-Verkehr in Europa gestiegen, und manche Mitgliedstaaten wie Österreich bekommen dies eben besonders deutlich zu spüren. Wir haben heute das Problem, dass es Bereiche gibt, die hohe externe Kosten verursachen, für welche die Allgemeinheit aufkommen muss. Der Lkw-Transport kreuz und quer durch Europa ist einer davon, ein anderer wichtiger Bereich sind AKWs.

Wenn nur die Lkw-Maut angehoben wird, die Bahn aber nicht gleichzeitig ausgebaut und grenzüberschreitende Hindernisse im Bahnverkehr endgültig beseitigt werden, dann haben wir heute nur eine Verteuerung der Waren beschlossen, die erhoffte Erleichterung für die Gesundheit der Menschen und die Reduktion der Umweltbelastung werden dann ausbleiben.

Jemanden, der im Stau steht, dafür auch noch zu bestrafen, halte ich für kontraproduktiv und würde wohl zu einer Verlagerung des Verkehrs zurück in kleine Dörfer und Ortschaften führen, und das wollen wir keineswegs. Langfristig bleiben nur die Möglichkeiten des Infrastrukturausbaus, und da werden wir endlich den öffentlichen Nahverkehr attraktiv gestalten müssen. Die heute anstehende Eurovignette scheint einen annehmbaren Kompromiss darzustellen, weshalb ich auch dafür gestimmt habe.

  Cristiana Muscardini (UEN), per iscritto. − Signor Presidente, la salvaguardia dell'ambiente e la sicurezza stradale, all'origine della proposta di direttiva in oggetto, costituiscono due finalità che l'Unione europea deve perseguire con tenacia per una politica dei trasporti più attenta alle aspettative ed ai diritti dei suoi cittadini. Ben vengano quindi alcune modifiche alla direttiva CE del 1999 che prevedono la tassazione per quegli autoveicoli pesanti che utilizzano alcune infrastrutture stradali. Tali passi in avanti devono essere ragionevoli e graduali per evitare in un periodo di grave crisi economica, qual è quello attuale, il collasso di un comparto economico importante, quasi esclusivamente fondato sulle piccole e medie imprese.

Inoltre non si è ancora creato in Europa un sistema intermodale completo ed efficace, tale da garantire un travaso significativo del trasporto merci verso comparti meno inquinanti ed in queste circostanze il trasporto su strada rappresenta, per le sue caratteristiche e per la sua efficienza, il sistema di più larga diffusione ed utilizzo per il mondo produttivo.

Con il mio voto di oggi ho voluto quindi sottolineare l'importanza di compiere passi graduali ma indicativi e non solo simbolici per un trasporto stradale più sicuro e rispettoso dell'ambiente, senza penalizzazioni illogiche e controproducenti per il settore in questione.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Concordo con il lavoro svolto dal collega Saïd El Khadraoui, inerente alla tassazione a carico di autoveicoli pesanti adibiti al trasporto di merci su strada per l'uso di talune infrastrutture, e pertanto voto favorevolmente la relazione. Sebbene non sia d'accordo su alcuni punti come quello relativo all'inclusione o meno di alcuni costi esterni nella tassa, sono d'accordo sul principio secondo il quale "chi inquina paga". L'ottimo lavoro svolto dal collega sottolinea l'esigenza di assegnare i proventi derivanti dalla tassa, nella loro totalità, al settore dei trasporti. Infine, penso che i proventi derivanti dagli oneri per i costi esterni non devono diventare un'ulteriore forma di tassazione.

  Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), schriftelijk. − Het voorstel waarover we vandaag stemden is een herziening en uitbreiding van de vorige Eurovignet-richtlijn en gaat over de regels voor tolheffing op de Europese wegen. Lidstaten kunnen volgens de aangenomen voorstellen voortaan de kosten van luchtvervuiling, lawaai en files doorrekenen aan vrachtwagens. Dit is goed nieuws voor de belastingbetaler. Nu betalen we nog met z'n allen voor de schade als gevolg van luchtvervuiling. Straks is het de vervuiler die betaalt. Bovendien stimuleren we transportbedrijven op deze manier om in schonere vrachtwagens te investeren.

Ik heb dus voor dit voorstel gestemd, te meer daar ook de fileheffing als bijkomende externe kosten voor bergregio's werd opgenomen. Files dragen sterk bij aan luchtvervuiling, geluidsoverlast en brandstofverspilling. Indien we de opbrengst van deze heffing kunnen gebruiken om te investeren in transport per spoor of over water, dan verhelpen we zowel het fileprobleem als de klimaatverandering. Bovendien zorgen de vertragingen als gevolg van files voor flinke economische schade in de transportsector.

Jammer genoeg werden klimaatkosten als gevolg van het vele vrachtverkeer niet opgenomen, dit terwijl de transportsector een grote verantwoordelijkheid heeft in het uitstoten van emissies.

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

  Alessandro Battilocchio (PSE), per iscritto. − Signor Presidente, voto favorevolmente. La trasparenza non è solo un attributo, ma un principio su cui dovrebbero basarsi tutte le procedure delle istituzioni. È necessario assicurare ai cittadini e agli organi elettivi il più ampio accesso possibile ai documenti detenuti dalle istituzioni europee, per permettere loro di partecipare in modo efficace al processo politico e chiedere alle autorità pubbliche di rendere conto del proprio operato. Per questo in passato ho sostenuto con forza ed appoggiato la pubblicazione delle presenze dei deputati in Aula.

Nonostante i progressi compiuti dalle istituzioni europee sul fronte dell'apertura e della trasparenza, la situazione non si può affatto considerare perfetta e l'attuale rifusione del regolamento (CEE) n. 1049/2001, relativo all'accesso del pubblico ai documenti in possesso delle istituzioni europee, va considerata un ulteriore passo verso la realizzazione di un ambiente amministrativo in cui la disponibilità delle informazioni e la semplicità di accesso alle medesime costituiscano la norma e non l'eccezione. In conclusione vorrei ricordare il grande traguardo raggiunto nell'ultimo periodo: oggi al Parlamento europeo sono utilizzate non meno di 23 lingue ufficiali. Anche i documenti della Comunità Europea sono disponibili in 23 lingue e ciò rappresenta una garanzia di funzionamento democratico.

  Charlotte Cederschiöld (PPE-DE), skriftlig. − Vi moderater har idag röstat ja till Cashmans betänkande A6-0077/2009 om revideringen av öppenhetsförordning EG nr 1049/2001, för att verka för en ökad öppenhet inom de europeiska institutionerna. Vad gäller ändringsförslag 61 och 103 till artikel 5 anser vi att förlikningsdokument från tredje behandlingen bör vara öppna omedelbart efter avslutat sista förlikningssammanträde, till skillnad från de dokument som testas i själva förhandlingen. Dokument från trepartsmöten i första och andra behandlingen bör vara helt öppna under hela förfarandet.

  Chris Davies (ALDE), in writing. − I very much regret that into procedures intended to develop the principle that the public has a right to see EU documents the Parliament has inserted emphasis that such rules shall not apply to MEPs. It is argued that this just restates rules already enshrined in the Members' Statute, but to many people this will just look like another case of 'one rule for them and another for us', and I am glad that the Liberal Democrat group did not support the amendments tabled by Mr Nassauer.

It is particularly important that details of all payments of expenses made to MEPs by the Parliament be made publicly available. Our own auditors have revealed that some of the Parliament's Members are very definitely not 'honourable', in fact some of them are cheats and rogues. The principle of full transparency is one that needs to be established at the earliest possible date if Europe's citizens are to have confidence in this institution.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Voto favorevolmente la relazione presentata dal collega Cashman sull'accesso del pubblico ai documenti del Parlamento europeo, del Consiglio e della Commissione. Condivido la lodevole iniziativa del collega, che è volta a colmare la lacuna delle norme comuni riguardo alle "informazioni riservate" (i cosiddetti documenti sensibili citati nell'attuale regolamento n. 1049/2001) mantenendo a livello normativo alcuni buoni principi tratti dalle norme di sicurezza interne del Consiglio e della Commissione, nella misura in cui tali principi possano essere anche applicabili a un organo parlamentare. Infine, condivido l'obiettivo generale del collega Cashman, che vuole modificare questo regolamento nell'intento di rafforzare la trasparenza, senza rendere questo strumento troppo specifico e difficile da attuare.

  Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), schriftelijk. − De verordening van 2001 zorgde zeer zeker voor een grotere openheid naar de bevolking toe door het publiek toegang te verlenen tot documenten van de Europese instellingen. Het is goed dat we na zeven jaar praktijkervaring deze verordening opnieuw bekijken. Wat is de stand van zaken? Reeds in 2006 stelde het EP heel wat voorstellen tot aanpassing van de verordening voor. Doel? De transparantie nog verbeteren. Maar de Commissie hield daar niet erg rekening mee.

Meer zelfs, het voorstel van de Commissie ter herziening van de verordening uit 2001 dat nu op tafel ligt, betekent een verstrenging, dus minder transparantie. Zo worden documenten over handelsonderhandelingen als vertrouwelijk beschouwd. Uiteindelijk is het kiezen tussen pest en cholera. Ik stem dus voor het verslag-Cashman, omdat het, alhoewel onvolledig, al met al een verbetering is ten opzichte van het voorliggende Commissievoorstel. Een meer radicale aanpak met een totale verwerping van de Commissievoorstellen ware echter nog beter geweest, want dan zou de Commissie gedwongen zijn met een nieuw en beter voorstel op de proppen komen. Dat zou de transparantie van de Europese instellingen enkel maar ten goede komen en de befaamde kloof tussen de EU-instellingen en de burger echt dichten.

- Rapport: Jan Andersson (A6-0052/2009)

  Alessandro Battilocchio (PSE), per iscritto. − Signor Presidente. Non è una novità: l'attuale crisi economica e finanziaria sta colpendo l'Europa. Sono molto preoccupato per il mio paese, l'Italia. La crisi fa perdere posti di lavoro e le famiglie, che hanno sempre meno soldi, spendono sempre meno. C'è quindi bisogno di un forte intervento. Questa crisi sembra particolarmente grave ma la sua profondità e la sua estensione nel tempo dipendono dai nostri comportamenti. Dobbiamo unire le nostre forze: è indispensabile un approccio europeo coordinato. Oggi più che mai si manifesta l'impellente necessità di attuare le riforme in modo rigoroso, al fine di creare posti di lavoro di qualità e benessere per i cittadini europei. Dobbiamo invertire la tendenza verso una radicale ristrutturazione, evitare la perdita di posti di lavoro e impedire un’ulteriore pressione al ribasso sui salari e sulle prestazioni di sicurezza sociale.

Dobbiamo fronteggiare efficacemente le sfide connesse all’aumento della disoccupazione e dell’esclusione sociale. Inoltre, occorre migliorare il coordinamento degli sforzi sia da parte dell’UE che degli Stati membri, ma è altrettanto necessario che le misure adottate nell’ambito del piano di ripresa economica per affrontare le crisi a breve termine risultino coerenti con gli obiettivi comunitari a lungo termine delineati dalla strategia di Lisbona. Per questo il mio voto è favorevole.

  Carl Lang (NI), par écrit. – Il est remarquable que ce rapport admette plusieurs échecs de l'Union européenne en matière sociale. Il y a d'abord l'aveu que les objectifs de la stratégie de Lisbonne ne seront pas atteints en 2010. Ensuite, on y trouve des chiffres intéressants s'agissant de la progression du taux de chômage qui passe de 7 % en 2008 à 8,7 % en 2009, plus précisément de 7,5 % à 9,2 % dans la zone euro, soit une perte prévue de 3,5 millions d'emplois.

Ce constat affligeant devrait faire réfléchir les européistes quant aux réformes radicales qui doivent être prises au niveau des États membres afin de limiter au mieux les effets désastreux de la crise économique et financière, crise qui trouve sa source dans l'ultralibéralisme et la mondialisation pourtant si chers à Bruxelles.

Pour cela, il n'est pas sérieux de poursuivre une telle politique de maintien des lignes directrices pour les politiques de l'emploi des États membres. Il faut au contraire remettre en question cette logique dirigiste pour redonner aux États la maîtrise de leurs moyens économiques et financiers tout en instaurant la préférence et la protection nationale et communautaire qui permettront la reconquête du marché intérieur et le retour à la croissance.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. − Mittlerweile hat die von den USA ausgehende Finanzkrise die Realwirtschaft voll getroffen. Wie man in dieser Krise am besten reagieren soll und womit die Wirtschaft optimal angekurbelt werden kann, um so auch den Anstieg der Arbeitslosenzahlen in Schach zu halten, darin sind sich die Experten nicht einig.

Aber bereits vor der Finanzkrise war die Lage am Arbeitsmarkt alles andere als rosig: Immer mehr Arbeitskräfte wurden in Teilzeitarbeit, in Mini- und Midi-Jobs gedrängt, und sozial gesicherte Arbeit wurde stetig abgebaut. Seit langem sind immer mehr Menschen trotz Erwerbstätigkeit von Armut betroffen. Es ist angesichts der düsteren Konjunktur-Prognosen absehbar, dass die Zahl der Vollzeitbeschäftigten weiter sinken wird, und irgendwann werden wohl auch die Kurzarbeiter zu Arbeitslosen werden. Wir müssen uns bestmöglich rüsten, um ein Arbeitslosenheer zu vermeiden. Ob die im vorliegenden Bericht angeführten Maßnahmen dafür geeignet bzw. ausreichend sind, darf bezweifelt werden. Aus diesem Grund habe ich ihn abgelehnt.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Voto negativamente la relazione presentata dalla collega Andersson. Sebbene, infatti, io ritenga che si debbano unire le nostre forze per invertire la tendenza verso una radicale ristrutturazione, evitare la perdita di posti di lavoro e impedire un'ulteriore pressione al ribasso sui salari e sulle prestazioni di sicurezza sociale, penso d'altro canto che le misure poste in essere dalla Commissione siano largamente insufficienti per garantire un adeguata copertura e protezione del tessuto sociale e lavorativo dell'Unione europea.

  Flaviu Călin Rus (PPE-DE), în scris. − Criza economică actuală are şi va avea şi în viitorul apropiat repercusiuni asupra pieţei de ocupare a forţei de muncă.

Am votat Propunerea de rezoluţie legislativă a Parlamentului European referitoare la „Liniile directoare ale politicilor de ocupare a forţei de muncă ale statelor membre” deoarece, alături de raportor, sprijin poziţia Comisiei, care a propus (conform anexei la Decizia 2008/618/CE a Consiliului din 15 iulie 2008) ca politicile de ocupare a forţei de muncă să fie menţinute şi pe parcursul anului 2009. Conform Comisiei, această abordare va crea un cadru solid în măsură să combată criza economică şi financiară şi să continue reformele structurale.

  José Albino Silva Peneda (PPE-DE), por escrito. − A crise que vivemos, mais do que uma crise económica e financeira, é sobretudo uma crise de confiança, e o seu sinal mais dramático é o elevado nível de desemprego. Mas o desemprego não implica apenas perda de rendimento, porque leva também à perda de confiança em nós próprio e nos outros.

Para que volte a haver confiança, há que definir uma estratégia muito clara de médio prazo.

Para isso, o papel dos responsáveis políticos é decisivo, pelos sinais e mensagens que transmitem. Prudência, segurança, falar verdade, resistir à propaganda fácil de metas inexequíveis e ao auto-elogio são algumas das boas práticas que podem ajudar a restaurar a confiança.

Por outro lado, há que criar emprego e, para isso, têm que existir condições para o investimento por parte das empresas.

Há que actuar rapidamente, porque, se nada for feito a este nível, a dificuldade de financiamento enfrentada pelos países mais deficitários da zona euro vai conduzir ao aprofundamento da recessão, ao contínuo aumento do desemprego, à perda de rendimentos das empresas e das famílias.

Desta forma, apoiei o relatório do colega Andersson que propôs a manutenção das orientações para as políticas de emprego em 2009.

- Proposition de décision sur l'article 139 de règlement (B6-0094/2009)

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Não é compreensível nem aceitável mais uma prorrogação, ou seja, mais um adiamento do direito consagrado de todos os deputados se poderem dirigir ao Parlamento Europeu na sua própria língua e de todos os documentos produzidos serem redigidos nas línguas oficiais. Já se passaram vários anos desde a adesão de alguns dos países cuja limitação ao uso da língua persiste, nomeadamente a Irlanda e a República Checa, sem que tenham sido encontrados os linguistas necessários. As justificações avançadas são vagas e inconsistentes, mas as prioridades financeiras não têm passado pela sua formação, o que nos leva a desconfiar dos seus objectivos. Não aceitamos que seja posto em causa o direito inalienável à diversidade cultural e linguística na UE, o que afectaria igualmente o Português. Não podemos aceitar esta discriminação.

Mais uma vez, manifestamos a nossa intransigência na salvaguarda da identidade cultural de cada Estado-Membro e de todas as línguas nacionais como línguas de trabalho e, neste sentido, o nosso voto só pôde ser contra esta decisão. É, afinal, a transposição para o plano cultural e linguístico daquilo que são as políticas orçamentais da UE, as quais dão prioridade ao investimento em armamento em vez da valorização da cultura e da salvaguarda do emprego.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Esprimo il mio voto a favore della proposta di decisione presentata dall'Ufficio di presidenza riguardante la proroga dell'applicabilità dell'art.139 del regolamento del Parlamento fino al termine della settima legislatura.

- Rapport: Magda Kósáné Kovács (A6-0038/2009)

  Alessandro Battilocchio (PSE), per iscritto. − Signor Presidente, voto favorevolmente. Sono molto preoccupato per i recenti incidenti accaduti in Italia. Si sta determinando un clima da "caccia alle streghe" nei confronti dei cittadini rumeni e Rom, con tanto di spedizioni punitive. Da parte del governo italiano è in atto un'ossessiva campagna sulla sicurezza. Ma l'adozione di eccessive misure nei confronti delle comunità Rom potrebbe peggiorare la già drammatica situazione di queste minoranze e compromettere le opportunità d'integrazione e l'inclusione sociale. Non bisogna dimenticare che lo Stato di diritto impone che la responsabilità penale è individuale e non la si può attribuire a categorie collettive. Deviare da questo principio sarebbe un precedente pericoloso che porterebbe alla criminalizzazione d'interi gruppi etnici o di particolari nazionalità di migranti.

Certamente l'immigrazione è una materia che necessita un coordinamento europeo, per rafforzare quegli strumenti giudiziari e di polizia in grado di colpire la criminalità organizzata. Ma non solo. Risulta importante adottare chiare politiche di occupazione per le categorie svantaggiate, fra cui la popolazione Rom attiva, che prevedano misure di sostegno volte a favorire la loro progressiva integrazione nel mercato del lavoro ed una maggiore attenzione verso le politiche educative rivolte ai giovani.

  Hélène Goudin och Nils Lundgren (IND/DEM), skriftlig. − EU är en värderingsunion och har därför ansvar för att upprätthålla respekten för mänskliga rättigheter inom sina gränser. Därför har EU också en roll, via sina medlemsländer, för att uppmärksamma romernas utsatta situation och för att underlätta deras integrering i samhället. Vi har därför röstat ja till detta betänkande.

  Anna Ibrisagic (PPE-DE), skriftlig. − Vi har idag röstat för initiativbetänkandet om romernas sociala situation och bättre tillgång för romer till EU:s arbetsmarknad av Kósáné Kovács (A6-0038/2009). Rapporten tar upp ett mycket allvarligt problem och pekar tydligt ut behovet av åtgärder för att komma tillrätta med det utbredda utanförskapet som drabbar många romer idag. Att samarbete mellan medlemsstaterna sker för att komma tillrätta med dessa stora problem välkomnar vi.

Vi vill dock tydliggöra att vi inte ser olika former av särlösningar som en väg framåt för att minska utanförskapet. Särskilda skattenivåer för arbetsgivare som anställer romska kvinnor och andra dylika åtgärder riskerar snarast att cementera utanförskapet och motverka integrering i det övriga samhället.

  Marian-Jean Marinescu (PPE-DE), în scris. − Raportul Comisiei pentru ocuparea forţei de muncă şi afaceri sociale este binevenit, evidenţiind o nouă dimensiune a strategiei de incluziune a romilor, dezvoltată începând cu 2005 de-a lungul unei serii de rezoluţii a Parlamentului European. Situaţia actuală a romilor demonstrează că nu s-au înregistrat suficiente progrese în ceea ce priveşte integrarea romilor, după ce Comisia a lansat în 2005 primul său apel în această direcţie.

Raportul propune linii de acţiune importante în domeniul politicii pentru promovarea educaţiei romilor şi a încurajării discriminării pozitive pe piaţa muncii. Sprijinirea integrării romilor pe piaţa muncii prin măsuri de finanţare a formării şi reformării, măsuri de promovare a activităţilor independente în rândul romilor, acordarea de credite de concesiune sau subvenţii publice, precum şi conceperea unor forme inovatoare de muncă în agricultură, reprezintă obiective pe care UE are datoria de a le coordona. Crearea unui grup de experţi la nivelul Uniunii Europene, care să includă reprezentanţi ai romilor, ar putea contribui, de asemenea, la coordonarea strategiei pentru romi a statelor membre şi a utilizării fondurilor structurale şi de coeziune.

Aştept ca aceste sugestii să motiveze Comisia Europeană îndeajuns ca să vină cu propuneri legislative în vederea obţinerii unor rezultate vizibile în acest domeniu.

  David Martin (PSE), in writing. − Roma people represent the biggest minority in the European Union and their integration into European society is one of the biggest challenges the EU will face in the coming decade. The Roma, comprising approximately 10-12 million people, have no chance of escaping from poverty and exclusion. Such a degree of social disadvantage hampers the attainment of a basic level of human dignity and equal opportunities for the Roma. I welcome this report which highlights the need to improve conditions for all Europeans, regardless of race.

  Alexandru Nazare (PPE-DE), în scris. − Asigurarea egalităţii de şanse a minorităţii rome în UE constituie abordarea justă pentru a preveni combaterea excluderii sociale şi respectarea drepturilor acestei comunităţi. De aceea am votat în favoarea raportului doamnei Kovács, pe care îl consider foarte util.

Doresc, însă, să fac câteva precizări pentru a nuanţa poziţia mea în această privinţă.

Dată fiind natura inerent transnaţională a acestei minorităţi, o abordare eficientă privind drepturile romilor nu poate fi gestionată decât la nivel european. De aceea am propus crearea unei Agenţii Europene pentru Romi, cu rolul de a asigura coordonarea, la nivel european, a politicilor care vizează această minoritate.

În al doilea rând, sprijinirea integrării minorităţii rome nu se poate face prin măsuri fiscale cu caracter redistributiv, întrucât acestea nu pot rezolva problemele structurale care afectează comunităţile de romi. Modalitatea optimă de a sprijini această minoritate trebuie să se axeze pe programe educaţionale, care să aibă rolul de a ajuta aceste comunităţi să dobândească competenţele necesare pentru accesul pe piaţa muncii.

Pe de altă parte, o politică europeană privind minoritatea romă trebuie să vizeze promovarea toleranţei şi acceptării diferenţelor culturale, punând accent pe convieţuirea paşnică în limitele impuse de legile statului în cauză şi de normele la nivel european.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Esprimo il mio voto negativo riguardo alla relazione sulla situazione sociale dei rom e sul miglior accesso al mercato del lavoro nell'Unione europea, presentata dalla collega Kósáné Kovács. Ritengo fermamente che, in questo modo, si crei un'ulteriore discriminazione di fondo verso il popolo dei rom. È necessario, invece, trattare i rom come tutti gli altri cittadini, senza che questi godano di eccessivi vantaggi e agevolazioni che vadano a discapito degli altri cittadini europei, che hanno gli stessi diritti (e doveri soprattutto) di questo popolo.

  Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), schriftelijk. − De Roma-gemeenschap is de grootste en meest benadeelde minderheidsgroep binnen Europa. Wie de situatie op de voet volgt, weet dat er noodzaak is aan een gecoördineerde aanpak om hun werk- en leefomstandigheden te verbeteren. Ik ben blij dat het voorliggende verslag ervoor pleit aangepaste opleidingen aan te bieden om de kansen van Roma op de arbeidsmarkt te vergroten. Daarnaast moet het menselijke en sociale kapitaal versterkt worden door vanaf het begin te werken aan hun integratie in de Europese samenleving.

Het is goed dat er een Europese expertgroep, met vertegenwoordigers uit de Roma-gemeenschap, wordt opgericht. Ook het voorstel om partnerschappen uit te werken en voldoende financiële middelen in te zetten en dit alles via een database te volgen, zijn bijzonder goede voorstellen. Ik steun dit verslag omdat het aangeeft hoe we een verbetering van de situatie van Roma-gemeenschap kunnen bewerkstelligen. De alternatieve resolutie die de PSE-Fractie voorstelt, valt jammer genoeg te zwak uit. Ik zal deze dus niet ondersteunen.

- Rapport: Herbert Reul (A6-0035/2009)

  Šarūnas Birutis (ALDE), raštu. − Naftos paklausos valdymas neturi apsiriboti tik ES. Pasaulyje ES suvartojamos naftos kiekio procentinė išraiška ir artimiausiais metais laipsniškai mažės. Tai lemia vien jau didelis paklausos augimas už ES ribų. Todėl ES energijos tiekimo saugumo atžvilgiu bus labai svarbu mažinti paklausos augimą ir pasaulio lygiu, tačiau nekeliant pavojaus trečiųjų šalių ar pačios ES plėtros tikslams. Labai svarbus yra ir rinkos ekonomikos kainodaros mechanizmų trečiosiose šalyse skatinimas – pavyzdžiui, panaikinus valstybės subsidijas kurui.

Visoms šioms priemonėms reikalingos investicijos. Investuoti galima tik tuomet, kai yra pakankamas kapitalas ir galima tikėtis pelno. Todėl būtina kuo greičiau įveikti dabartinę finansų krizę, kuri gali virsti ekonomine krize. Per pastarąjį dešimtmetį padidėjo būsimam ES naftos tiekimo saugumui kylantys sunkumai. Tačiau jie gali būti įveikti darant tikslingą poveikį tiek pasiūlai, tiek paklausai, jei pavyks paskatinti politinę valią ir tarptautinį koordinavimą, bendradarbiavimą ir inovacijų kūrimą.

  Avril Doyle (PPE-DE), in writing. − On balance, I can support this own initiative report from my colleague, MEP Reul. As the past months have shown, the importance of energy security has never been as acute. The cooperation that is necessary from all Member States (MS) and the need to take advantage of the stimulus packages currently launched by almost all MS and the Commission underscore the need for investment in renewable technology to increase our energy security and decrease our CO2 emissions. Our years of dependence on fossil fuels have left us with two stark conclusions:

1. We need to be independent from global geopolitical forces, as the Russian/ Ukraine impasse this winter showed and the ravages of OPEC's pricing policy.

2. Our need to meet ever pressing CO2 reduction deadlines continues and should be maintained as a matter of utmost priority.

We can not shy away from the challenges both economic and environmental with which we are currently faced.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Voto negativamente la relazione presentata dal collega Reul sulle sfide connesse all'approvvigionamento di petrolio. Sono in disaccordo con il relatore, infatti, quando si afferma che, secondo varie stime, sarà possibile estrarre petrolio in quantità sufficienti per soddisfare la domanda anche in futuro, ma solo a prezzi più elevati per i consumatori e tramite il miglioramento delle condizioni di investimento. Sebbene sostenga le iniziative della Commissione per evitare che i prezzi petroliferi si impennino nei prossimi anni, non penso che la situazione sia stata analizzata correttamente in tutto il suo insieme.

- Rapport: Georg Jarzembowski (A6-0055/2009)

  Avril Doyle (PPE-DE), in writing. − The report that MEP Jarzembowski has presented makes the 'greening' of transport a priority and is an important first step towards a more comprehensive approach making transport more environmentally friendly. An essential part of the response to climate change is an alteration in our means and methods of transportation, be it in the adoption of advanced hybrid vehicles, in increased green public transportation or the increased efficiency of other methods of transportation.

The Rapporteur has advanced the options of charging Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) for the pollution they cause and including noise pollution caused by rail transport under the provisions of the report. It is important that we consider the needs of peripheral European countries who encounter several geographic barriers that depend on a strong transport network to supply their countries, and for their economic growth. We must ensure that these measures are applied in an equitable manner. With these reservations, I am pleased to support the report.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Voto favorevolmente la relazione presentata dal collega Jarzembowski sulla resa più ecologica dei trasporti e l'internalizzazione dei costi esterni. La mia opinione, che coincide con quella del relatore, autore di un eccellente lavoro, sottolinea la grande utilità della mobilità per la qualità di vita dei cittadini, la crescita e l'occupazione nell'Unione europea, la coesione socioeconomica e territoriale e il commercio con i paesi terzi, nonché per le imprese e i lavoratori che operano direttamente e indirettamente nel settore dei trasporti e della logistica. In quest'ottica, mi compiaccio del fatto che la Commissione, nella sua comunicazione, abbia redatto un "inventario" delle misure sinora adottate dall'Unione europea per una politica dei trasporti sostenibile. È un piccolo passo verso un grande obiettivo.

  Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), schriftelijk. − De Commissie publiceerde een pakket van mededelingen over het "vergroenen van transport", een "strategie voor het internaliseren van externe kosten" en "maatregelen die het geluid reduceren van goederenmaterieel". Ik vind het heel positief dat er gewerkt wordt aan groene maatregelen op het gebied van transport en moedig dit ook aan.

Met het verslag-Jarzembowski zouden de voorstellen van de Commissie echter worden afgezwakt. Daarom legden de Groenen positieve amendementen op tafel, zoals de vraag om meer medefinanciering tussen de EU en de lidstaten, een kerosinetaks voor vluchttransporten en het loskoppelen van toename in transport van economische groei. Onze amendementen werden evenwel niet aanvaard, waardoor dit verslag geen toegevoegde waarde heeft voor de voorstellen van de Commissie; ik heb dan ook tegen dit verslag gestemd.

  Catherine Stihler (PSE), in writing. − I support measures towards a greening of transport. This will help us in our fight against climate change. However, specific measures need to be strengthened and I had to abstain.

- Proposition de résolution B6-0107/2009 (Stratégie de Lisbonne)

  John Attard-Montalto (PSE), in writing. − I fully concur that among the impacts of the economic crisis, the rise of poverty in the EU is the greatest concern. It is essential to halt the current rise in unemployment in the EU. I believe that the most efficient way of reducing and preventing poverty is through a strategy based on the goals of full employment, high quality jobs, social inclusion, measures to encourage entrepreneurship and activities to boost the role of SMEs and investments. In a nutshell, this is the most important part of the preamble to the resolution.

If we fail to stem the rise of poverty in the EU as a result of the existing exceptional circumstances, then the EU will have failed to address the most important issue stemming from this economic and financial calamity.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Na União Europeia (UE) temos vindo a assistir a um aumento dos níveis de pobreza, do trabalho precário e das desigualdades, situação que poderá agravar-se no contexto da actual crise económica e financeira, uma vez que as previsões apontam para uma tendência de recessão e para um aumento do número de desempregados.

Para isso têm contribuído as políticas consagradas na Estratégia de Lisboa e na Estratégia Europeia de Emprego, que promovem a desregulamentação financeira, a liberalização dos mercados e a precariedade dos vínculos laborais. Assim, o que se impunha era uma ruptura com estas políticas, Mas, face ao agravamento das condições sociais e económicas, a resposta (ou não resposta) da UE reflecte as suas opções de classe, insistindo na continuação das políticas que promovem a acumulação de lucros colossais por parte dos grandes grupos económicos e financeiros, em detrimento das condições de vida dos trabalhadores e das populações.

Ora, o que se impõe é a inversão das actuais políticas macro-económicas e a defesa do emprego e dos direitos dos trabalhadores. É necessária uma política alternativa que garanta uma repartição equitativa dos recursos, estimule a actividade económica, crie empregos, reforce o papel do Estado na economia, dinamize a procura, incentive o crescimento de micro e de pequenas e médias empresas e reforce o investimento, tendo em linha de conta as necessidades e especificidades de cada Estado-Membro.

  Glyn Ford (PSE), in writing. − I voted for this report despite my disappointment at Amendment 10 by the Greens calling for the introduction of an EU-wide financial transaction tax. As President of the Globalisation Intergroup in this Parliament, I strongly support the introduction of a Tobin-type tax to both control financial speculation and raise billions of euros to help alleviate deep poverty in the world amongst the billion plus living on less than a euro a day. Who can be against such a simple and effective measure?

  Luís Queiró (PPE-DE), por escrito. − A Estratégia de Lisboa foi pensada num contexto e para um contexto económico claramente diferente daquele em que nos encontramos presentemente. Esta circunstância, no entanto, não implica uma revisão de todos os conceitos que lhe estão subjacentes. A distinção entre a excepcionalidade das actuais circunstâncias e aquilo que devem ser as políticas levadas a cabo para a promoção do desenvolvimento e da competitividade europeias a longo prazo deve ser feita. Mas importa não retirar dessa distinção a ideia de que a situação de crise impõe medidas contrárias às boas políticas. Pelo contrário. A resposta à actual situação, ainda que exija medidas excepcionais, deve ser orientada pelas ideias de boas políticas, de opção pelo investimento na inovação e na capacidade competitiva da Europa, sob pena de, simultaneamente, não ajudarem a responder à crise nem ajudarem a preparar os Estados-Membros da União Europeia para a fase seguinte da economia mundial.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Dopo un'attenta valutazione della proposta di risoluzione sulla strategia di Lisbona, alla fine ho deciso di astenermi e quindi di non votare, né positivamente né negativamente, la proposta.

  Eoin Ryan (UEN), in writing. − The financial and resultant economic crisis have dwelt a huge blow to European growth and the stability of the job market. In these difficult times, our primary aim must be, as this joint resolution says, to protect EU citizens, whether workers, entrepreneurs, householders, from the effects of the crisis. While the current crisis is undoubtedly devastating, it also offers opportunity: opportunity to change our way of thinking; opportunity to build a strengthening framework for sustainable growth that can withstand potential shocks; and opportunity to build a sound economic and social base for the future.

Among the elements of this resolution that particularly appeal are the recognition of the crucial role of small- and medium-sized enterprises and the support that needs to be given to them. Not only do SMEs provide valuable employment, accounting for 80% of new jobs in the EU in recent years, but they also play a key social role in stimulating local economies, diversifying employment and encouraging entrepreneurship. Similarly, the emphasis on innovation – especially in the environmental sector – is very welcome and an illustration that the twin goals of energy efficiency and economic stability need by no means be mutually exclusive.

  Peter Skinner (PSE), in writing. − The EPLP believes that the Lisbon Strategy remains an important platform for growth and job creation across the EU. This is still an objective which is achievable, even if the current economic climate damages the true potential. However, the EPLP does not agree that an EU-wide transaction tax is a necessary vehicle to achieve some of the Lisbon Strategy objectives and did not support this measure.

The EPLP could support the main thrust of the approved text and therefore voted in favour of the report.

  Catherine Stihler (PSE), in writing. − According to the Allianz Group report which was published on Monday, the recession is slowing the EU this year in reaching its goal of becoming the world’s leading knowledge-based economic area. In order for us to reach the Lisbon targets we must do all we can, even in these tough times, to meet these goals. By meeting these goals we will be able to see our way through the recession, making the EU stronger placed in the future. We must also keep to the Barcelona targets on childcare.

  Γεώργιος Τούσσας (GUE/NGL), γραπτώς. – Tα ψηφίσματα των πολιτικών δυνάμεων του κεφαλαίου, αποκρύπτουν τα αίτια και τον χαρακτήρα της καπιταλιστικής κρίσης. Φορτώνουν τα βάρη της κρίσης στους εργαζόμενους που πλήρωσαν τα υπερκέρδη του κεφαλαίου και τώρα καλούνται να πληρώσουν την κρίση για να διασωθούν και να αυξηθούν τα καπιταλιστικά κέρδη. Τα ψηφίσματα καλούν την ΕΕ να εμβαθύνει την αντεργατική Στρατηγική της Λισσαβόνας να εφαρμόσει το Σύμφωνο Σταθερότητας και το Σχέδιο Oικονομικής Aνάκαμψης, να προχωρήσει στην πλήρη απελευθέρωση της εσωτερικής αγοράς. Προτείνουν μέτρα στήριξης των μονοπωλιακών ομίλων, με την παροχή άφθονου ρευστού χρήματος από την τσέπη των εργαζομένων, μείωση της φορολογίας του κεφαλαίου, και αύξηση της χρηματοδότησης των μεγάλων μονοπωλιακών επιχειρήσεων. Προωθούν την επιτάχυνση των καπιταλιστικών αναδιαρθρώσεων με επίκεντρο τη στρατηγική της "ευελφάλειας" και την οδηγία για την οργάνωση του χρόνου εργασίας, δηλαδή αύξηση του εργάσιμου χρόνου μέχρι 13 ώρες την ημέρα και 78 την εβδομάδα, τον διαχωρισμό του εργάσιμου χρόνου σε ενεργό και απλήρωτο ανενεργό.

H ανάπτυξη της "πράσινης οικονομίας", η απελευθέρωση της έρευνας και της ενέργειας και η καινοτομία, ανοίγουν νέους δρόμους για κερδοφόρες επενδύσεις του κεφαλαίου σε βάρος των εργαζομένων και των λαϊκών στρωμάτων.

H άτυπη Σύνοδος Κορυφής της 1ης του Mάρτη επιβεβαίωσε την όξυνση των ενδοιμπεριαλιστικών αντιθέσεων αλλά και το ενιαίο μέτωπο των μονοπωλίων απέναντι στους λαούς.

- Proposition de résolution B6-0134/2009 (Changement climatique)

  John Attard-Montalto (PSE), in writing. − I agree that the EU maintains a leading role in international climate policy. However, unless it speaks with one voice, this will result in loss of credibility. The EU as a whole appears to be on track regarding targets for climate change, but all countries including Malta have to be careful not to lag behind, as this will affect the credibility of the Union.

Limiting global average temperature increases is necessary not only in the developed world, but also in the countries which are developing. Needless to say, such actions will strain financial resources. The EU has to provide a plan which will address relevant areas and sources of financing.

  Edite Estrela (PSE), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente a resolução do Parlamento Europeu sobre a luta contra as alterações climáticas. A União Europeia deve manter a sua posição de liderança relativamente à política internacional sobre o clima e envidar todos os esforços para alcançar, em Copenhaga, um acordo que permita uma redução das emissões de dióxido de carbono para a atmosfera e possibilite limitar o aumento global da temperatura a menos de 2ºC, acima dos níveis pré-industriais.

No contexto da actual crise financeira e económica, alcançar um novo acordo para o combate às alterações climáticas, em Copenhaga, é fundamental. A crise económica e a crise climática podem ser combinadas com oportunidades económicas importantes para desenvolver novas tecnologias e criar emprego.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Há aspectos positivos, que valorizamos, nesta resolução. Destacamos os pontos em que se exorta a União Europeia a procurar activamente em Copenhaga um acordo que tenha em conta os relatórios científicos mais recentes sobre alterações climáticas, se empenhe para estabilizar os níveis e as temperaturas alvo que ofereçam fortes probabilidades de evitar alterações climáticas perigosas e preveja revisões regulares para assegurar que os objectivos estão de acordo com os dados mais recentes da ciência. De igual modo, é positiva a chamada de atenção que é feita para a necessidade de aumentar significativamente os recursos financeiros, de modo a permitir as iniciativas de atenuação necessárias nos países em desenvolvimento.

Mas discordamos que, embora apenas em considerandos, insista no regime de comercialização de direitos de emissão da UE, admitindo mesmo que possa servir como modelo para o desenvolvimento do comércio de emissões noutros países e regiões desenvolvidas. Aliás, discordamos da óptica economicista que nitidamente influencia vários pontos da resolução.

  Glyn Ford (PSE), in writing. − I voted in favour of this resolution by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety. Despite the depth and breadth of the current financial crisis, a product of deregulation, cowardly regulators and greedy bankers, we cannot take our eyes off the need to continue to act to halt climate change. We need to see the current crisis as an opportunity to spend resources to achieve a step change in our lifestyles and promote a green new deal across the continent and the world. We cannot achieve our goals unless we work in partnership with the US and Japan, China and India.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Sono d'accordo su alcuni punti della risoluzione relativa alla lotta contro il cambiamento climatico. D'altro canto, non posso condividere diversi paragrafi del rapporto. Quindi, decido di astenermi e non esprimermi sull'argomento.

  Catherine Stihler (PSE), in writing. − We must use the green economy to create jobs throughout the EU. This must be a priority during the financial crisis.

- Proposition de résolution B6-0133/2009 (Politiques de l'emploi)

  Hélène Goudin och Nils Lundgren (IND/DEM), skriftlig. − Resolutionen innehåller många behjärtansvärda uppmaningar. Men det mesta som behandlas i resolutionen ligger på de nationella parlamentens politiska ansvar att åtgärda.

Resolutionens förslag leder också till att större resurser krävs till EU:s fond för justering av globaliseringseffekter. Det innebär att medlemsstaternas avgifter till EU måste höjas. Detta samtidigt som medlemsländerna behöver behålla sina minskade ekonomiska resurser till sin egen social- och sysselsättningspolitik. Vi tror inte att EU:s globaliseringsfond är det mest effektiva sättet att stödja arbetstagare som förlorat sina arbeten. Medlemsländerna är bättre på att bedriva en effektiv politik på detta område. Dessutom spenderar medlemsländerna var och en summor på stimulanspaket i samma storleksordningar som deras bidrag till EU:s budget i dess helhet.

Vi har på grund av främst skrivningarna om EU:s fond för justering av globaliseringseffekter röstat nej till denna resolution.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Comunico il mio voto negativo riguardo alla proposta di risoluzione sugli orientamenti per le politiche a favore dell'occupazione. Infatti, considerando che la crisi finanziaria ed economica globale richiede che l'UE reagisca in modo risoluto e coordinato al fine di evitare perdite di posti di lavoro, sostenere un reddito adeguato per i cittadini ed evitare la recessione e trasformare le attuali sfide sul piano economico ed occupazionale in opportunità, penso che le azioni poste in essere dalla governance degli eurocrati sia decisamente insufficiente a reggere il peso della crisi che stiamo attraversando anche in un settore delicato come quello dell'occupazione.

- Rapport: Elisa Ferreira (A6-0063/2009)

  John Attard-Montalto (PSE), in writing. − The initiative to launch the Recovery Plan is a reaction to the serious ongoing economic downturn. The top priority of the Recovery Plan must be to stimulate the economy and competitiveness of the EU, and to avoid increased unemployment. Members insist that all financial aid must be timely, targeted and temporary. The present exceptional circumstances have to be seen within the wider context of a firm commitment to bringing normal budget discipline back on track as soon as the economy recovers.

In addition, the Recovery Plan must also serve the purpose of delivering a fair international agreement to give poorer countries the opportunity to escape poverty without fuelling global warming, by helping to finance massive investment.

Finally, coordinated action between Member States must be directed at reducing uncertainty in the credit markets and facilitating the functioning of those markets.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Apesar de terem passado algumas propostas pontuais positivas, que votámos favoravelmente, designadamente a que se refere aos paraísos fiscais, infelizmente a generalidade das propostas do nosso Grupo foram rejeitadas e a linha dominante do relatório é a continuação das políticas neoliberais com uma ou outra pincelada rosa para cidadão eleitor ver em vésperas de campanha eleitoral.

Das nossas propostas rejeitadas destaco as que visavam solicitar o aumento significativo dos recursos financeiros e uma aplicação mais célere dos meios destinados a apoiar o emprego, uma reorientação dos programas de apoio aos grupos mais vulneráveis, incluindo programas de garantia de condições de vida decentes e de acesso a serviços públicos de alta qualidade para todos. Lamento, igualmente, que tenham rejeitado propostas como as que consideravam insuficiente o montante do Plano de Relançamento (1,5% do PIB da UE) para enfrentar com êxito a crise actual, fazendo notar que a UE ficará muito atrás de países como os EUA e a China. De igual modo, lamento que tenha sido rejeitada a critica à Comissão por vincular o plano de relançamento ao aprofundamento de “reformas estruturais” neo-liberais e à estrita observância do Pacto de Estabilidade e Crescimento, quando o que se impunha era eliminá-los e mudar de políticas.

  Glyn Ford (PSE), in writing. − I can only congratulate my colleague Elisa Ferreira on her report on the European Economic Recovery Plan. I would endorse the sentiments of Poul Rasmussen that we have not yet done enough. The bail out of the banks was a necessary but not sufficient step. We must also take steps to deal with the problems of the labour market. Work-sharing must be encouraged and when short time is demanded we should encourage maintaining hours at the workplace by utilising the time for training to improve skills.

The real crisis is not in the subprime mortgage market but rather in the ten times larger casino economy of the increasingly esoteric and fantasy world of the derivatives market, which needs to be brought under control. I therefore welcome moves to control tax havens and to introduce an EU-wide financial transaction tax to overcome the worst consequences of the crisis, mitigate speculation and raise finance to help us stay on track to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.

  Małgorzata Handzlik (PPE-DE), na piśmie. − Przyjęte w dniu dzisiejszym sprawozdanie dotyczące europejskiego planu naprawy gospodarczej wspiera zaproponowane przez Komisję Europejską działania, które mają przyczynić się do ożywienia europejskiej gospodarki.

Dane z ostatnich tygodni nie napawają optymizmem. Szacuje się, iż wzrost gospodarczy w Europie w 2009 r. pozostaje na poziomie poniżej zera. Na całym obszarze UE rośnie także bezrobocie. Jest to najpoważniejsza recesja, jaka dotknęła Wspólnotę Europejską i pierwsza od czasu wprowadzenia wspólnej waluty.

Dlatego potrzebne są zdecydowane działania, które doprowadzą do tworzenia nowych miejsc pracy i realnej poprawy sytuacji gospodarczej. Kwestią kluczową jest oczywiście „uzdrowienie” systemu finansowego, aby przedsiębiorstwa (w szczególności małe i średnie, które stanowią przecież podstawę europejskiej gospodarki) i obywatele mieli dostęp do kredytów. Dlatego też skuteczne i szybkie przywrócenie kredytowania musi zostać pilnie zapewnione. Pomoc przeznaczona na walkę z kryzysem nie może być tylko skierowana na ratowanie wybranych sektorów. Pomoc taka jest nieunikniona, ale powinna ona także uwzględniać trwałe podejście do konkurencyjności europejskiego przemysłu. Kryzys nie może także być okazją do wprowadzania nowych, nadmiernie obciążających regulacji.

Liczę, iż europejski plan naprawy gospodarczej przyniesie w najbliższym czasie efekty w postaci pierwszych sygnałów ożywienia gospodarczego.

  Astrid Lulling (PPE-DE), par écrit. – À situation exceptionnelle, moyens exceptionnels.

La conjoncture est à ce point détériorée qu'elle justifie l'action concertée des États pour tenter de relancer l'activité économique. Plusieurs constats s'imposent néanmoins. La situation exceptionnelle que nous connaissons ne remet pas en cause les règles élémentaires de l'économie. Les emprunts d'aujourd'hui constitueront les dettes de demain, que les États seront bien obligés de rembourser dans le futur. Les déficits sont peut-être nécessaires, mais leur coût à payer sera lourd. Il faut en être conscient. L'on évoque déjà les hausses d'impôts qui s'imposeront dans un futur proche pour remettre à flot les finances publiques.

Deuxièmement, toutes les dépenses engagées dans les plans de relance sont loin de se valoir. Les dépenses d'investissement dans la modernisation de l'appareil productif ou dans la recherche pèsent d'un poids très différent des dépenses de fonctionnement. Il conviendra donc que les États se dotent des outils appropriés pour effectuer les choix les plus adaptés.

Enfin, puisque les mots ont leur sens, précisons que le plan de relance n'est pas à proprement parler un plan européen, mais qu'il s'agit tout au plus d'une coordination des mesures nationales prises par les différents États membres. Faut-il aller plus loin? La question mérite d'être posée, mais la mise sur pied d'un plan de relance commun à l'Union européenne présupposerait des révisions fondamentales des politiques et des moyens européens.

  Adrian Manole (PPE-DE), în scris. − Planul de relansare a economiei europene este în special important prin cele două elemente centrale ale sale: în primul rând, măsuri de stimulare fiscală pe termen scurt pentru impulsionarea cererii, protejarea locurilor de muncă şi redarea încrederii consumatorilor, iar în al doilea rând, investiţii inteligente pentru impulsionarea creşterii economice.

Prioritatea numărul unu a Uniunii Europene o constituie protejarea cetăţenilor de efectele negative ale crizei financiare. Pentru economia României, măsurile îşi vor dovedi eficacitatea, în special în ceea ce priveşte IMM-urile, prin simplificarea şi accelerarea procedurilor, punerea la dispoziţie anticipată a fondurilor structurale şi de coeziune, precum şi a fondurilor pentru dezvoltare rurală.

Votul pozitiv acordat acestui raport implică şi faptul că Fondul Social European va trebui să finanţeze măsuri de promovare a ocupării forţei de muncă, în special în favoarea grupurilor celor mai vulnerabile de populaţie şi, de asemenea, vor trebui create condiţiile-cadru care să atenueze efectele asupra sectorului antreprenorial, deoarece acestui sector îi revine un rol-cheie pentru redresarea economiei, el contribuind decisiv şi la crearea de locuri de muncă şi, astfel, la generarea de cerere pe piaţa internă.

  Rovana Plumb (PSE), în scris. − Am votat favorabil raportul colegei Ferreira, cu convingerea că acesta va ajuta la depăşirea perioadei economice dificile pe care o traversează Europa, ca urmare a politicilor neo-liberaliste din ultimii 10 ani.

Statele bogate europene trebuie să-şi arate solidaritatea pentru estul Europei, iar mărirea fondului de ajutorare acordat acestora este necesară. În viziunea noastră, a socialiştilor europeni, trebuie să acţionăm pentru eliminarea diferenţelor între statele mai dezvoltate şi cele în curs de dezvoltare, cu atât mai mult cu cât economia celor din urmă este strans legată de instituţiile bancare din vest. De aceea ne trebuie un plan de coordonare a economiilor tuturor statelor membre.

Susţinem introducerea unor măsuri împotriva activităţilor financiare offshore, prin intermediul cărora cei care câştigă foarte mult îşi mută afacerile în aceste paradisuri fiscale, neplatind impozite, în timp ce cei mai mulţi cetăţeni UE plătesc impozite şi îşi pierd locurile de muncă. Cifrele sunt alarmante, până la sfârşitul anului 2009 preconizându-se un număr de 25 milioane de şomeri în întreaga Europă (în România 500.000). Eliminarea "paradisurilor fiscale" va duce la eliminarea şomajului.

Avem nevoie de promovarea şi sprijinirea solidarităţii europene între vechile şi noile state membre, iar votarea amendamentului referitor la această problemă reprezintă un test pentru PE.

  John Purvis (PPE-DE), in writing. − The economic situation in Europe and further afield is as grave as any of us can remember, and it is absolutely right that the European Union and the Member States do everything that they can to ensure that a recession does not turn into a slump and that where government action really can kick-start economic activity it should be allowed to do so.

This report is not perfect and we cannot agree with everything in it, but it reiterates the key points that the downturn is not an excuse for protectionism, excessive debt or the removal of competition rules. We have resisted efforts from the left, whose amendments have aimed to turn a reasonable report into an unaffordable shopping list or an attack on capitalism and the financial system in general.

It is now important for all of us to roll up our sleeves and get our economies working again. This report recognises that the free market and the individuals and businesses of Europe are vital to the reconstruction process, and it is on that basis that the British Conservatives support it.

  Luís Queiró (PPE-DE), por escrito. − O relatório Elisa Ferreira sobre o Plano Europeu de Relançamento Económico, apesar de conter elementos positivos, sofre do mesmo mal que o plano em si: um retrato da situação sem que a compreensão integral das causas geradoras da actual crise esteja definitivamente estabelecida, um somatório de iniciativas que se deseja que restaurem a confiança dos agentes económicos sem que, no entanto, até ao momento se identifiquem sinais desse efeito e uma fraca capacidade de mobilização europeia. Aliás, sobre este ponto acrescente-se que se este relatório, em termos concretos, pouco resolve, é porque o Parlamento Europeu pouca capacidade tem para o fazer. O mesmo se passa com a Comissão Europeia.

Do orçamento do referido plano, apenas 15% serão verbas a gerir a nível comunitário. A resposta terá, pois, de ser encontrada a nível europeu, sim, mas em primeiro lugar através da vontade política dos Estados-Membros em coordenar as suas respostas com a actual situação económica. O impulso tem de vir dos Estados-Membros. Se vier. Porque actualmente os sinais de falta de vontade política europeia são preocupantes. Veja-se, por exemplo, as posições contraditórias que os sociais-democratas alemães ou austríacos tomam no PE ou quando representam os governos dos seus países.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Concordo con alcuni punti della relazione presentata dalla collega Ferreira sul piano europeo di ripresa economica, ma non la approvo totalmente. Per questo motivo, decido di astenermi e non votare la relazione della collega.

  José Albino Silva Peneda (PPE-DE), por escrito. − A grande questão que esta crise arrasta é o aumento do desemprego, situação que só pode ser invertida através do aumento do investimento.

Para haver mais investimento, é necessário que o crédito seja acessível e barato, mas tudo aponta que, para os próximos tempos, ele seja escasso e muito mais caro para países mais vulneráveis, como é o caso de Portugal.

Estes países enfrentam dificuldades acrescidas de financiamento, pelo que apoio claramente a possibilidade de passar a haver, a nível da zona euro, um único emitente central de dívida pública europeia, que é, aliás, o cenário mais compatível com a sustentabilidade do euro a longo prazo.

Nas actuais circunstâncias, é imperioso reactivar o mercado de crédito europeu com atribuição de empréstimos responsáveis a empresas viáveis e às famílias.

Também as ajudas financeiras a bancos e empresas devem ser bem direccionadas, temporárias, transparentes, avaliadas em termos de custo-benefício e controladas rigorosamente.

A solidez e solidariedade do projecto europeu podem estar em causa e, por isso, é fundamental agir de forma coordenada e respeitar as regras do mercado interno sem dar lugar a proteccionismos.

Apoio o relatório sobre o Plano de Relançamento da Economia Europeia da minha colega Elisa Ferreira por estar em conformidade com estas linhas gerais de orientação.

  Peter Skinner (PSE), in writing. − This report accompanies the recovery plan of the European Commission, which attempts to reinvigorate the EU economy. The EPLP can support the main thrust of the rapporteur’s ideas and believes that many of the issues outlined are critical for a real recovery.

The Commission response during the economic crisis has been muted and Parliament believes that more effective tools are required to produce recovery. In fact, an environmental approach could lead to greater innovation and spark renewed productivity whilst also having a positive effect on our environment. However, care has to be taken not to injure specific industrial sectors or reduce our overall economic possibilities, and therefore consideration of a targeted approach is very necessary. Similarly, a new approach to financial supervision denoted by the de Larosière wise men’s report is also vital to ensuring against systemic risks.

  Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), schriftelijk. − Als Groenen zijn we van oordeel dat wat we nu meemaken een samenkomst van drie met elkaar verbonden crises is: een economische, een ecologische en een sociale. De Verts/ALE-Fractie verzet zich daarom tegen het promoten van een ‘Europees herstelplan’, in het licht van de aanstaande Europese Voorjaarstop, dat enkel bestaat in het weer op gang brengen van het oude laissez-faire model.

Het pompen van enorme sommen in dat model brengt een serieus risico met zich voor het verdiepen van de ecologische en sociale crises. Het is contraproductief om domweg de vraag aan te jagen om zo de productie weer op peil te brengen. Dit is juist wel wat het verslag-Ferreira voorstelt en daarom stemde ik tegen.

Het economisch herstelplan moet nieuwe financiële financieringsinstrumenten mogelijk maken en tegelijkertijd het systeem, via regulering, snel weer stabiel en betrouwbaar maken. De prikkel om via bepaalde bonussen voor kortetermijnwinst te gaan moet worden weggenomen en regels voor zogenaamde hefboomfondsen en private equityfondsen zijn noodzakelijk. Transparantie, open boekhouding en supervisie moeten belastingparadijzen onmogelijk maken. Aan de hand van een precieze taakomschrijving kunnen banken opnieuw dienaars van de reële economie worden, waarbij de Europese Centrale Bank als waakhond kan dienen.

  Catherine Stihler (PSE), in writing. − The financial crisis is the first test of globalisation. A crisis fuelled by greed and now consumed by fear should make us question our fundamental values and what kind of society we would like to live within. This is not a time for narrow nationalism, but a time where a strong Europe has never been so important. The need for a coordinated approach, not just across the EU, but across the world, makes the G20 in London so important.

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (PSE), în scris. − Am votat pentru raportul Fereira ce solicită Comisiei Europene să vină cu orientări clare şi puternice în scopul unei mai bune abordări coordonate între toate statele membre pentru gestionarea acestei puternice crize economice în vederea protecţiei unui număr cât mai mare de locuri de muncă. Solicit Comisiei să înceapă procedurile cât mai repede posibil.

Prin acest raport, Parlamentul European invită Consiliul European de primăvară să dea un impuls politic puternic şi să stabilească o foaie de parcurs pentru toate iniţiativele legale, pentru a garanta împreună cu Parlamentul că acestea vor fi adoptate în timp util.

Raportul subliniază consecinţele economice şi sociale extrem de negative ale crizei în multe dintre noile state membre, care constituie un risc substanţial de destabilizare şi de creştere a sărăciei. Se aşteaptă ca efecte colaterale să afecteze euro şi economiile din zona euro. Solicităm o abordare coordonată la nivelul Comunităţii având în vedere solidaritatea comunitară şi asumarea unei responsabilităţi colective în această privinţă şi invităm Comisia să revizuiască şi să consolideze toate instrumentele destinate stabilizării statelor membre afectate, inclusiv stabilizării ratelor de schimb, astfel încât să se poată pune în aplicare prevederi de siguranţă şi pachete de răspuns rapide şi eficiente.

  Marianne Thyssen (PPE-DE), schriftelijk. − Ik heb goed geluisterd naar de tussenkomsten van de rapporteurs en de fractievoorzitters, waaronder ook de uithaal van de fractievoorzitter van de PSE-Fractie tegen het stemgedrag van de PPE-DE-Fractie ten aanzien van amendement 92. Wij zijn het inderdaad niet eens met de draagwijdte van dat amendement en samen met mijn fractiecollega's heb ik met overtuiging tegengestemd. Het kan toch niet de bedoeling zijn dat wij kortetermijnmaatregelen nemen die de langetermijndoelstellingen ondermijnen?

Derhalve is het niet verantwoord om aan de lidstaten een budgettaire inspanning op te leggen ongeacht hun schuldgraad, die een belangrijke factor is om uit te maken tot waar "deficiet-spending" verantwoord kan zijn. Mijn fractie is terecht op de lijn van de Commissie gebleven, die ervan uitgaat dat we ook aan de toekomstige generaties moeten denken. Daarom is het verantwoord de budgettaire stimulansen te moduleren naar gelang van de schuldgraad van de lidstaten. Een uniforme inspanning vragen van 1,5% van het BBP is om die reden niet haalbaar en onverantwoord.

  Γεώργιος Τούσσας (GUE/NGL), γραπτώς. – Το σχέδιο ανάκαμψης της ευρωπαϊκής οικονομίας ρίχνει τα βάρη της καπιταλιστικής κρίσης στις πλάτες των εργαζομένων, προωθεί τις γενικότερες επιδιώξεις της ΕΕ, προστατεύει τα κέρδη, τα συλλογικά συμφέροντα της πλουτοκρατίας.

H ολομέτωπη επίθεση στα ασφαλιστικά και εργασιακά δικαιώματα, στο εισόδημα της λαϊκής οικογένειας και το βιοτικό της επίπεδο έχει στόχο να διασφαλίσει η ΕΕ στα ευρωενωσιακά μονοπώλια ότι θα βρίσκονται σε «πλεονεκτική θέση όταν ανακάμψει η οικονομία» απέναντι στο διεθνή ανταγωνισμό.

H ΕΕ και οι κυβερνήσεις προσπαθούν να αποσπάσουν τη λαϊκή συναίνεση, χρησιμοποιώντας τη μέθοδο "του καρότου και του μαστίγιου", προκειμένου να επιβληθούν με τις λιγότερες αντιστάσεις οι καπιταλιστικές αναδιαρθρώσεις, όπως καθορίζονται από τη στρατηγική της Λισαβόνας: απασχόληση και ανεργία εκ περιτροπής, αύξηση ορίων συνταξιοδότησης, δραστική μείωση μισθών, συνάξεων και κοινωνικών παροχών.

Άλλωστε οι αποφάσεις των Συνόδων Kορυφής και η χρηματοδότηση των μέτρων, αποκλειστικά από τα ίδια τα κράτη μέλη, κάνουν εμφανή την όξυνση των ενδοϊμπεριαλιστικών ανταγωνισμών, που οδηγούν στην πολιτική του "ο σώζων εαυτόν σωθήτω".

Μία είναι η επιλογή για τους εργαζόμενους: Αντίσταση - ανυπακοή - αντεπίθεση με το KKΕ, καταδίκη της πολιτικής του ευρωμονόδρομου και των δυνάμεων που τον στηρίζουν! Ανασύνταξη του λαϊκού κινήματος και πάλη για τη λαϊκή εξουσία και τη λαϊκή οικονομία!

- Rapport: Evgeni Kirilov (A6-0075/2009)

  Alessandro Battilocchio (PSE), per iscritto. − Signor Presidente, voto favorevolmente. La trasparenza non è solo un attributo ma un principio su cui dovrebbero basarsi tutte le procedure delle istituzioni. È necessario assicurare ai cittadini e agli organi elettivi il più ampio accesso possibile ai documenti detenuti dalle istituzioni europee, per permettere loro di partecipare in modo efficace al processo politico e chiedere alle autorità pubbliche di rendere conto del proprio operato. Per questo in passato ho sostenuto con forza ed appoggiato la pubblicazione delle presenze dei deputati in Aula.

Nonostante i progressi compiuti dalle istituzioni europee sul fronte dell'apertura e della trasparenza, la situazione non si può affatto considerare perfetta e l'attuale rifusione del regolamento (CEE) n. 1049/2001, relativo all'accesso del pubblico ai documenti in possesso delle istituzioni europee, va considerata un ulteriore passo verso la realizzazione di un ambiente amministrativo in cui la disponibilità delle informazioni e la semplicità di accesso alle medesime costituiscano la norma e non l'eccezione.

In conclusione vorrei ricordare il grande traguardo raggiunto nell'ultimo periodo: oggi al Parlamento europeo sono utilizzate non meno di 23 lingue ufficiali. Anche i documenti della Comunità europea sono disponibili in 23 lingue e ciò rappresenta una garanzia di funzionamento democratico.

  Jean Marie Beaupuy (ALDE), par écrit. – Ce rapport d'initiative est à mettre en perspective avec le débat législatif en cours visant à modifier les règlements pour les Fonds structurels, et notamment le règlement FEDER (Rapport ANGELAKAS) et le règlement FSE (Rapport JÖNS).

Afin d'obtenir un accord en première lecture permettant de donner une réponse rapide à cette crise qui touche directement les citoyens européens, l'ADLE a choisi de ne pas amender les propositions législatives. Dans un souci de cohérence, cette même approche a été appliquée pour ce vote.

Mes collègues du MoDem et moi-même partageons les mêmes préoccupations pour la lutte contre le changement climatique; cela devra être confirmé comme une priorité de la politique de cohésion après 2013.

  Pedro Guerreiro (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Não contem connosco para enaltecer o oco “plano de relançamento da economia europeia” que, na sua maior parte, será auto-financiado por cada um dos Estados-Membros (a “solidariedade europeia” no seu melhor...), e que não coloca em causa as políticas neoliberais, que estão na origem do agravamento das condições de trabalho e de vida da esmagadora maioria da população.

Por isso, não surpreendentemente, a maioria do PE rejeitou as nossas propostas que:

- Denunciavam que, no momento em que se verifica o agravamento da crise socioeconómica da UE, o orçamento comunitário para 2009 é “o mais baixo de sempre”;

- Insistiam no reforço dos Fundos Estruturais e do Fundo de Coesão;

- Sublinhavam que os “adiantamentos suplementares” destes fundos, implicarão uma redução do financiamento comunitário para os próximos anos;

- Criticavam a sub-execução destes fundos, particularmente no contexto do agravamento das condições socioeconómicas na UE;

- Exigiam que estes fundos sejam considerados como objectivo de despesa e propunham o aumento da taxa de co-financiamento comunitário e a anulação da regra N+2 e N+3 em relação a estes fundos;

- Insistiam em que estes fundos sejam efectivamente utilizados para promover a convergência real, abandonando, assim, a sua contínua subordinação aos objectivos neoliberais da "Estratégia de Lisboa";

- Insistiam no combate às deslocalizações de empresas.

  David Martin (PSE), in writing. − I support this report which recommends faster, more flexible payments for structural funding. This report will ensure wide use of structural funds to secure jobs, and to create more jobs. I welcome this report which calls for funding to be provided to projects earlier and reduce the need for bank loans.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI), per iscritto. − Esprimo il mio voto contrario in merito alla relazione del collega Kirilov sulla politica di coesione riguardante gli investimenti nell'economia reale. È indispensabile, infatti, comprendere che la politica di coesione dell'UE contribuisce in misura rilevante al piano europeo di ripresa economica e rappresenta la prima fonte di investimenti comunitari nell'economia reale, che apporta un'assistenza mirata per affrontare le esigenze prioritarie e i settori che presentano un potenziale di crescita, sia nel settore pubblico sia in quello privato. Questo, però, deve far pensare rispetto agli errori che sono stati compiuti in passato e hanno condotto a questa grave congiuntura economica. È necessaria una regolamentazione ferrea anche in questo settore, se no si rischia di ripetere ciclicamente gli stessi sbagli.

7. Korrezzjonijiet u intenzjonijiet għall-vot: ara l-Minuti

(La séance, suspendue à 13 h 55, est reprise à 15 heures)

VORSITZ: HANS-GERT PÖTTERING
Präsident

8. Dikjarazzjoni tal-President

  Der Präsident. − Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich darf Sie zunächst um Verständnis und auch um Entschuldigung bitten, dass die Sitzung so spät beginnt, aber ich bin selber erst vor zwei Minuten informiert worden, dass ich gebeten werde, eine Erklärung abzugeben zu einem sehr traurigen Ereignis, und diese Erklärung möchte ich gerne mit Ihrer Zustimmung abgeben.

Mit großer Traurigkeit und Empörung haben wir heute von dem Ereignis in Winnenden in Baden-Württemberg in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland erfahren, wo fünfzehn Menschen auf tragischste Weise in der Albertville-Realschule ums Leben gekommen sind. Der Attentäter, ein siebzehnjähriger ehemaliger Schüler dieser Schule, hat sich nachher selbst das Leben genommen. Bei einer Schießerei in einem dortigen Supermarkt bei der Verfolgung des Amokläufers sind zudem zwei Polizisten verletzt worden.

Im Namen des Europäischen Parlaments möchte ich mein tief empfundenes Beileid und meine Solidarität mit den Familien und allen Verwandten der Opfer aussprechen. Die Opfer sind schuldlose junge Schülerinnen und Schüler sowie drei Lehrer aus der Schule.

Diese Tragödie findet erst sechs Monate nach einem ähnlich schrecklichen Amoklauf in einer Schule in Kauhajoki in Finnland statt. Es ist unsere Aufgabe als verantwortungsvolle Politiker in der Europäischen Union und in allen Mitgliedstaaten, unser Möglichstes zu tun, damit solche Taten rechtzeitig vorhergesehen und verhindert werden können – wenn wir denn Einfluss darauf haben.

Geschockt sind wir auch über ein anderes tragisches Ereignis in Alabama in den Vereinigten Staaten, wo ein Amokläufer mindestens zehn Menschen erschossen hat, bevor er seine Waffe gegen sich selbst richtete.

Ich darf noch einmal in Ihrer aller Namen unser tiefstes Mitgefühl und unsere Solidarität mit den Opfern und ihren Familien zum Ausdruck bringen. Ich wäre Ihnen dankbar, wenn Sie der Ermordeten gedenken würden.

(Das Parlament erhebt sich zu einer Schweigeminute.)

PRÉSIDENCE DE M. GÉRARD ONESTA
Vice-président

9. Approvazzjoni tal-Minuti tas-seduta ta' qabel: ara l-Minuti

10. Kompożizzjoni tal-Parlament: ara l-Minuti

11. Progress tal-Proġett SIS II (dibattitu)

  Le Président. - L'ordre du jour appelle la discussion commune sur:

- la question orale au Conseil sur l'état d'avancement du projet SIS II de Carlos Coehlo, au nom du groupe PPE-DE, Martine Roure, au nom du groupe PSE, et Henrik Lax, au nom du groupe ALDE (O-0005/2009 - B6-0010/2009), et

- la question orale à la Commission sur l'état d'avancement du projet SIS II de Carlos Coehlo, au nom du groupe PPE-DE, Martine Roure, au nom du groupe PSE, et Henrik Lax, au nom du groupe ALDE (O-0006/2009 - B6-0011/2009).

  Carlos Coelho, Autor. − Senhor Presidente, Senhor Presidente em exercício do Conselho, Senhor Vice-Presidente da Comissão e caras e caros Colegas, no Parlamento Europeu somos claramente defensores da rápida entrada em funções do SIS II, que deveria ter ocorrido já em 2007. A segunda geração do SIS representa uma abordagem comunitária da necessidade de reforçar a segurança nas fronteiras externas e comporta inovações importantes como os dados biométricos e a interligação dos alertas. Concordámos que essa entrada em funções só poderá ocorrer quando tivermos um sistema robusto e a funcionar plenamente 24 horas por dia. Chegou, creio, o momento de apurar responsabilidades, proceder a uma avaliação profunda da situação e encontrar as soluções que permitam dar a viabilidade técnica a este projecto e restaurar a sua credibilidade já fragilizada.

Sabemos que vários testes foram feitos o ano passado, cujo resultado final foi negativo, nomeadamente o “operational system test”. O Conselho e a Comissão decidiram estabelecer um prazo de quatro meses na tentativa de resolver os problemas existentes embora sem grande sucesso, como se pode constatar nos resultados obtidos em Dezembro de 2008 com a repetição dos testes. Apesar de algumas melhorias terem sido feitas, permaneceram, tanto quanto sabemos, grandes problemas ao nível da performance e robustez do sistema, do extravio de mensagens, da qualidade dos dados e do processo de sincronização entre as cópias nacionais e o sistema central. Ora, o SIS

II nunca poderá iniciar operações sem que estes problemas estejam resolvidos. Expresso as minhas dúvidas sobre a capacidade da empresa contratada num período tão reduzido de tempo resolver todos estes problemas que não conseguiu resolver antes com mais tempo. Espero que seja lançada uma auditoria independente ao projecto para apurar responsabilidades. Não tenho objecções ao cenário técnico alternativo da evolução do “SIS I for all” para o SIS II, com a condição de ser plenamente respeitado o quadro legal aprovado para o SIS II. No final de Março, deverá ser apresentado um relatório de avaliação e de comparação dos dois cenários. O Parlamento quer ter acesso a este estudo bem como ser informado sobre a nova direcção a dar ao projecto quer ao nível de confiança existente ao nível técnico, bem como as implicações ao nível jurídico, o novo calendário e o impacto orçamental. Gostaria de recordar ao Conselho e à Comissão, sobretudo neste momento, que a maior transparência em todo este processo é largamente recomendável.

  Martine Roure, auteure. − Monsieur le Président, le SIS II, nous le savons, est un outil très important pour assurer la sécurité de l'espace Schengen, notamment après l'élargissement aux dix nouveaux pays.

Et depuis l'adoption des bases juridiques en 2007, nous n'avons jamais pu recevoir de compte rendu détaillé des développements ou des problèmes d'ordre technique ou politique qui entravaient la mise en route du système.

C'est par la presse que nous avons pu apprendre que tous les tests nécessaires au démarrage du système central en toute sécurité avaient échoué en décembre 2008.

Nous savons que la Commission a essayé d'élaborer un plan de remédiation pour résoudre les problèmes principaux, et nous savons que plusieurs États membres, au sein du Conseil, pensent déjà à une alternative qui consisterait en une simple mise à niveau du système SIS actuellement en fonction.

Le problème n'est donc pas de nature technique, il est de nature politique. Ce Parlement a été appelé à définir en codécision l'architecture du SIS II qui, à lui seul, aurait assuré la sécurité nécessaire à l'espace de liberté, de sécurité et de justice. Nous y avons travaillé sans perdre de vue la sécurité et la protection des droits fondamentaux de nos citoyens.

Ici, c'est la responsabilité politique des institutions européennes qui est en jeu, notamment celle du Conseil et de la Commission, car nous estimons que le Parlement a bien rempli sa tâche vis-à-vis des citoyens.

Nous attendons aujourd'hui, et dans le futur, des explications politiques en ce qui concerne ce changement radical de route. Cela pourra bien sûr avoir des conséquences très lourdes au niveau du budget destiné jusqu'à présent à ce projet, à partir de la mise en réserve, si nécessaire, des ressources disponibles, et ce jusqu'à ce que l'avenir du projet et sa base légale aient été dûment définis.

  Henrik Lax, författare. − Herr talman, rådsordförande, kommissionär! Vi här i Europaparlamentet måste få veta om rådet och kommissionen fortfarande tror på att SIS II kommer att förverkligas. Kommer kommissionen att framhärda och försöka att hitta en teknisk lösning på de problem som nu finns? Vilken är vägen framåt? Som det har kommit fram i de två föregående inläggen så vill vi i Europaparlamentet kontinuerligt bli underrättade om problemen, och det har vi inte blivit nu.

Om SIS II i sin nuvarande form inte kan förverkligas, finns det en plan B – kommer det att presenteras en sådan? Som Roure egentligen var inne på är frågan om SIS II ytterst en fråga om unionens trovärdighet när det gäller att garantera den inre säkerheten i unionen. Men vi ska också komma ihåg att samma infrastruktur ska användas för visuminformationssystemet VIS. I förlängningen står därför trovärdigheten i unionens visumpolitik också på spel, dvs. förmågan att sköta relationerna med omvärlden på ett människovärdigt sätt.

Och till sist: Har kommissionen fortfarande medlemsländernas fulla stöd för det här projektet? Är de villiga att stå för kostnaderna för ett projekt som aldrig tycks bli verklighet?

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, before I address the subject of our debate today, let me start by expressing my deep condolences to relatives of the victims in the tragic incident in Baden-Württemberg today.

Now let me turn to the subject of our debate today. Firstly, we are grateful for the opportunity to have this debate. This is an important issue, as you all know well. A number of operational difficulties have led to specific problems in getting SIS II up and running.

The Presidency wishes, as you request, to be completely transparent with you about the history of and the background on this issue. Because of the negative results of the original tests on the system, further tests were conducted in November and December 2008. The final results of these operational system tests were only known in the second half of January 2009.

At their informal meeting of 15 January 2009 in Prague, Justice and Home Affairs Ministers were informed by the Commission that the outcome of these tests had been less than satisfactory. The ministers agreed immediately on the need to implement a new global SIS II management approach, involving Member States working together with the Commission. The new management approach will provide for closer monitoring of the project, thereby allowing for early warning of any potential difficulties. It was also agreed that measures would be taken at a subsequent JHA Council, which took place on 26 and 27 February 2009. At that meeting, the Council agreed in its conclusion to invite the Commission to keep Parliament and the Presidency of the Council fully informed about problems related to SIS II and the way forward.

This Parliament has asked whether the problems identified to date will require the system to be rebuilt. According to the information received by the Council on the status of the SIS II project, a number of problems persist. However, we understand that the view of the Commission is that all outstanding issues can be resolved without a major redesign of the SIS II application.

At its February meeting, the Council endorsed the implementation of the SIS II analysis and repair plan, which will allow for the identification of all issues and their immediate solution, as well as the evaluation of the technical architecture so as to ensure a stable and flawless SIS II system. Nevertheless, the Council also agreed that the contingency plan should be followed in case serious problems emerge which could not be resolved. As far as an alternative to SIS II is concerned, the JHA Council in February welcomed the completion of the feasibility study serving as a basis for creating a workable, alternative technical scenario for developing SIS II based on SIS I+ evolution as a part of the contingency plan.

The Council also requested that as soon as possible, and by May 2009 at the latest, a report containing an in-depth assessment and comparison of both scenarios should be submitted to the Council by the Presidency and the Commission. The Council will assess, on the basis of this report, the progress made on SIS II development and, as far as the alternative scenario is concerned, will examine the prospect of achieving the objective of SIS II as set out in the legal framework governing the establishment, operation and use of SIS II, on the technical basis of SIS I+ evolution. This examination will be carried out as soon as possible and at the latest by the Council meeting on 4 and 5 June 2009.

As to the details requested by Parliament on the resolution of the outstanding problems and in particular the financial aspects, the Council invited the Commission not only to inform the European Parliament about the problems related to SIS II, but also to inform both Parliament and the Council fully and on a regular basis about the expenditure figures related to the central SIS II project and to measures taken to ensure complete financial transparency.

On the basis of the report requested from the Presidency and Commission, the Council will, at the latest by its meeting in June 2009, discuss the calendar for entry into operation of SIS II. This will take into account the provisions on time schedules set out in Parliament’s resolution of 24 September 2008 on the draft Council regulation on immigration from the Schengen Information System – SIS I+ – to the second-generation Schengen Information System – SIS II. This was incorporated into Article 19 of the Council Regulation of 24 October.

I am sure that the Commission will be able to provide some additional information in response to the questions raised. I would simply like to assure you, the Members of this Parliament, that the Presidency will follow this issue closely and ensure that the way forward agreed last month by JHA ministers is strictly respected.

  Jacques Barrot, vice-président de la Commission. − Monsieur le Président, je tiens à confirmer les propos de M. le ministre Vondra. Je dois d'ailleurs dire que, avec M. Langer, le président du Conseil des ministres de l'intérieur, nous avons fait de ce problème du SIS II une priorité absolue.

Je vais essayer, à mon tour, de vous donner quelques précisions. Le contractant principal de la Commission pour le développement du SIS II a exécuté une campagne de tests opérationnels sur le système central en interaction avec un certain nombre de systèmes nationaux. Entre novembre et décembre 2008, les résultats de ces tests nous ont conduits à conclure que le système central n'avait pas atteint le niveau contractuellement requis.

Dès la mi-novembre, la Commission a initié un exercice d'analyse approfondie de la solution SIS II, actuellement en développement par Hewlett-Packard/Steria, en collaboration avec les experts des États membres et avec l'aide et l'assistance de deux cabinets de consultants informatiques renommés.

Suite à l'échec des tests opérationnels, nous avons donc mis en œuvre un plan d'analyse et de réparation d'une durée estimée à quatre mois. L'objectif de ce plan est d'amener l'application, la mise en œuvre de SIS II à un niveau de stabilité et de performance satisfaisant.

Le plan vise, premièrement, la réparation des bogues connus liés au système central – un certain nombre de bogues ont déjà été réparés – et, deuxièmement, la vérification que l'application, la mise en œuvre de SIS II n'est pas viciée par des faiblesses structurelles insurmontables.

Des tests ciblés sont exécutés dans un certain nombre de domaines prioritaires afin de lever les incertitudes planant sur l'architecture de la solution actuelle, cette activité allant de pair avec la finalisation de l'analyse technique des problèmes fondamentaux.

D'autre part, la Commission a mis en place une approche globale de la gestion du projet pour mieux intégrer les composantes centrales et nationales du SIS II, dans le respect des compétences légalement établies par la Commission et les États membres.

Concrètement, la Commission coordonne une structure de gestion commune du projet. Cette structure de gestion commune réunit les gestionnaires des projets nationaux, les gestionnaires du projet central ainsi que les contractants de la Commission. Cette structure va accompagner le projet tout au long de la période d'analyse et de réparation puis, durant les tests de qualification, puis durant la phase de migration, jusqu'au démarrage de SIS II.

Au terme de la période d'analyse et de réparation, nous aurons une idée précise des moyens qu'il reste encore à mettre en œuvre pour le démarrage de SIS II et du calendrier correspondant, comme vient de le dire M. le vice-premier ministre Vondra. Évidemment, l'objectif de mise en service du SIS II en septembre 2009 devra incontestablement connaître des retards.

Les difficultés actuelles du projet du SIS II ont été discutées lors de la réunion informelle des ministres du 15 janvier et lors du Conseil "Justice et affaires intérieures" des 26 et 27 février. Les grandes lignes de la démarche préconisée par la Commission pour la continuation du projet SIS II ont été acceptées.

Tout d'abord, la nécessité de poursuivre l'analyse de la faisabilité d'une solution technique alternative fondée sur l'actuel SIS I+ a reçu un soutien de la part du Conseil. Nous sommes donc en mesure de poursuivre cette analyse de faisabilité concernant une solution alternative.

Mais toute solution technique alternative devra évidemment s'inscrire dans le respect du cadre juridique du SIS II tel que vous l'avez adopté et tel que le Conseil l'a adopté. Évidemment, il faudra faire très attention à la réutilisation maximale des investissements ainsi qu'à la situation des États membres et pays associés qui comptent intégrer l'espace Schengen dans les prochaines années.

Les ministres se sont fixé une clause de rendez-vous, comme cela vient d'être dit, au mois de juin au plus tard – début juin – afin de faire le point sur les progrès réalisés et de définir, le cas échéant, de nouvelles orientations et, éventuellement, le basculement vers une option alternative. Dans cette perspective, le Conseil a demandé que, dès que possible mais au plus tard pour mai 2009, la Présidence et la Commission, en coopération étroite avec la Task force SIS II et en consultation avec les instances appropriées, présentent au Conseil un rapport contenant une évaluation et une comparaison détaillées des deux scénarios.

À cet effet, des critères communs de comparaison ont été agréés pour évaluer les mérites et les désavantages respectifs de chaque solution. En clair, cela veut dire que nous aurons, en effet, une décision du Conseil début juin, à la lumière de tous les tests qui auront été réalisés, et cela permettra, nous le pensons, de poursuivre SIS II ou, éventuellement, d'aller vers une solution alternative mais qui restera, bien entendu, en conformité avec les objectifs que vous avez définis.

J'ai bien entendu été très sensible à ce qu'ont dit M. Coelho et Mme Roure, à savoir la nécessité d'une grande transparence. Je voudrais dire que nous enverrons – et nous continuerons à envoyer – des comptes rendus du comité SIS II de manière très régulière. Je dois dire aussi que j'ai adressé un courrier à M. Gérard Deprez, président de la commission des libertés civiles, avec copie à Carlos Coelho, pour l'informer de manière détaillée de la situation du SIS II.

Je veux dire aussi à M. Lax que les problèmes du SIS II n'affectent pas le VIS. Les problèmes du SIS II ne concernent pas l'infrastructure partagée avec le VIS. Le VIS suit très bien, on peut le dire, la planification convenue avec les États membres.

Ce que je veux vous dire, c'est que nous avons vraiment organisé, à la fois avec cette Task force et au sein de la Commission, des rendez-vous extrêmement réguliers avec le cocontractant et les deux cocontractants, mais surtout Steria, et que nous pouvons vraiment espérer, Monsieur le Président, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, que ce dossier connaîtra un aboutissement dans les mois qui viennent, avec cette décision d'une date ultime, qui sera début juin, et au cours de laquelle le Conseil devra, en effet, prendre une décision.

Je puis prendre ici l'engagement que le Parlement sera tenu au courant de tous ces développements.

  Marian-Jean Marinescu, în numele grupului PPE-DE. – Problema operabilităţii sistemului de informaţii Schengen II a fost din nou dezbătută în cadrul reuniunii Consiliului din februarie 2009 şi s-a subliniat încă o dată necesitatea găsirii unei soluţii imediate la impasul în care se află SIS II în acest moment.

Cu toate acestea, am impresia că, în loc de răspunsuri, apar tot mai multe întrebări în urma dezbaterilor pe marginea SIS II. Consiliul susţine punerea în aplicare a unui plan de analiză şi reparaţii care să permită identificarea problemelor din arhitectura tehnică a lui SIS II, cu scopul de a asigura stabilitatea şi fiabilitatea acestuia. Pe de altă parte, Consiliul nu exclude decizia de a adopta o alternativă tehnică care să poată realiza obiectivele pe care şi le-a propus SIS II.

Oricare dintre variante va fi aplicată, ea nu trebuie să aibă repercusiuni asupra calendarului de aderare a ţărilor care nu sunt încă incluse în spaţiul Schengen. Aş dori să ştiu ce măsuri va lua Comisia pentru a evita o posibilă întârziere şi cum se vor acoperi costurile suplimentare datorate acestor schimbări. Exemplul României este concludent: România are 2 000 km de frontieră externă, integrarea în Schengen prevăzută pentru martie 2011 este o prioritate şi toate aceste ezitări pot avea consecinţe asupra respectării acestui termen.

Aş dori să mai menţionez un lucru. În contextul în care Comisia se pregăteşte să elaboreze o nouă propunere legislativă referitoare la următoarele etape ale gestionării frontierelor, cer Comisiei să evalueze mai întâi eficacitatea sistemelor actuale de gestionare a frontierelor, cu scopul de a obţine o sinergie optimă între acestea şi apoi să analizeze oportunitatea investiţiilor în logistica de frontieră.

Pentru realizarea obiectivelor strategice ale Uniunii, Comisia nu ar trebui să lanseze crearea de la zero a noi instrumente până când cele existente, precum SIS II sau VIS, nu devin operaţionale şi fiabile.

  Genowefa Grabowska, w imieniu grupy PSE. – Panie Przewodniczący! Sytuacja, o której dyskutujemy jest wymownym przykładem pokazującym, że niekiedy łatwiej jest osiągnąć konsensus i uzyskać zgodę polityczną na otwarcie granic, niż pokonać problemy techniczne.

Wejście nowych państw członkowskich do Schengen w dniu 23 grudnia 2007 roku było dla obywateli tych państw świętem i wydarzeniem. Wiem to, bo jestem z Polski – państwa, które skorzystało z tego dobrodziejstwa i które bardzo sobie ceni otwarcie granic, jako że zniknęła ostatnia z dyskryminacyjnych okoliczności, które dzieliły nas od państw członkowskich starej Unii Europejskiej.

Także w moim kraju jest agencja Frontex. Wiem, że pan komisarz Barrot był w Polsce, prowadził rozmowy we Frontexie i także wizytował granicę zewnętrzną Unii, za której szczelność Polska odpowiada. Wiem, że w praktyce nie ma większych problemów ze strzeżeniem i szczelnością tej granicy. Za to mamy problem z kwestiami technicznymi, których rozwiązanie urasta do problemu politycznego, jak powiedziała moja koleżanka Martine Roure, i z czym się w pełni zgadzam.

Zatem jeżeli są problemy techniczne, jeżeli są kłopoty, to chyba każda instytucja Unii Europejskiej jest odpowiedzialna za to, aby zwrócić się do tego organu, który prowadził tak długo pracę nad wdrożeniem systemu SIS II. Szkoda, że tego nie zrobiono i że transparentność w tej materii została niejako wymuszona.

Uważam, że Parlament Europejski nie może się zgodzić, aby jakiekolwiek działania były poza nim czynione, aby był pomijany tam, gdzie chodzi o rozwiązanie problemów ważnych dla obywateli, zwłaszcza jeśli chodzi o bezpieczeństwo.

Ostatnia, lekka zupełnie uwaga. Gdyby były kłopoty, gdyby Hewlett-Packard nie bardzo sobie radził z rozwiązaniem problemów technicznych, to mamy w Polsce znakomitych specjalistów, młodych ludzi, którzy są wspaniałymi, znanymi w świecie informatykami. Myślę, że mogliby się przydać i zrobić to znacznie taniej, szybciej i lepiej.

  Hubert Pirker (PPE-DE). - Herr Kommissar, Herr Ratspräsident! Schengen steht und stand immer als ein Synonym für die Verbindung von Sicherheit auf der einen Seite und Freiheit/Freizügigkeit auf der anderen Seite. Die Bürger – und wir alle – haben darin einen Mehrwert der Europäischen Union gesehen. Es hat immer ausgezeichnet funktioniert, und es ist „one for all“ interimistisch optimal genutzt worden.

Das was jetzt passiert ist, ist ärgerlich. Ärgerlich ist aber auch, dass dem Parlament – das immer sehr kooperativ war – die notwendige Information nicht übermittelt wurde. Wir haben die Bevölkerung immer informiert. Das Schengener Informationssystem II wird wie geplant zeitgerecht optimal funktionieren, und jetzt mussten wir hören, dass solche Probleme entstanden sind und ein Ende des Dilemmas nicht wirklich in Sicht zu sein scheint.

Mich würde interessieren: Stimmen die in den Medien kolportierten Zahlen, wonach bisher etwa 100 Millionen Euro in den Aufbau des Schengener Informationssystems II geflossen sind? Gibt es Konsequenzen gegenüber der Firma? Oder warum hat die Kommission, der Rat oder wer auch immer nicht eine zeitgerechte begleitende Kontrolle eingeleitet?

  Mihael Brejc (PPE-DE). - Pravzaprav je čudno, da se pri tako velikih in težkih vprašanjih, tehničnih namreč, postavljajo vedno znova vprašanja, kako zagotoviti, da bo sistem deloval. Danes je obdelovanje podatkov vendarle že preseženo, ko govorimo o tehničnih vprašanjih, zato javnost upravičeno sprašuje, kako to, da na ravni Evropske unije nimamo strokovnih inštitucij, ki bi bile dovolj kompetentne, da bi tehnične probleme, ki se pojavljajo pri izjemno velikih, obsežnih podatkovnih bazah, da bi torej te inštitucije zmogle to delo.

Ves čas sodelujem pri teh razpravah, tudi s poročevalcem Coelhom, in seznanjen sem tudi bil s tem, da obstajajo določene tehnične težave pa tudi pomanjkljivosti, v znanju najbrž. Torej, moj občutek je, in ni samo moj občutek, je občutek javnosti, da je potrebna resna tehnična in tudi finančna revizija sistema in postaviti je treba tudi vprašanje odgovornosti tistih, ki so ta projekt vodili.

  Bernd Posselt (PPE-DE). - Herr Präsident! Herr Kommissar, ich schätze Sie persönlich sehr, aber es ist ein unerträglicher Pfusch, der hier stattfindet, Verschwendung und Inkompetenz in einem unerträglichen Ausmaß. Deshalb appelliere ich nicht nur an die Kommission, sondern auch an den Ausschuss für bürgerliche Freiheiten, Justiz und Inneres und den Haushaltskontrollausschuss, sich sehr intensiv mit dieser Frage zu befassen.

Ich bin glücklich, dass die tschechische Ratspräsidentschaft hier ist. Denn Bayern und die Tschechische Republik haben exakt dasselbe Sicherheitsinteresse, und wir haben erlebt, dass sich trotz aller Ängste bei der Grenzöffnung die Sicherheitslage seit der Grenzöffnung durch perfekte polizeiliche Zusammenarbeit nachdrücklich und grundlegend verbessert hat. Das kann ein Modell für andere Teile Europas sein – dafür möchte ich der Tschechischen Republik aus bayerischer Sicht ausdrücklich danken. Wir erwarten, dass das Schengen-Informationssystem endlich auch flächendeckend funktioniert und dass es nicht auf einzelne vorbildliche bilaterale Beispiele beschränkt bleibt.

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, I would like to thank you for this debate. I think it shows that there is a problem which needs to be fixed. The Council, under our leadership, did what it could in January. It took seriously this initiative to build the contingency or alternative plan and to push for a solution by setting the deadlines.

That is what we can do. As regards the financial issues, I shall leave the floor to the Commission to respond. We now have excellent cooperation between Minister Langer and Commissioner Barrot, so we believe that we will be able to deal with that.

Concerning the question of whether this is a political or a technical problem, we believe that this is just a technical problem. It is not a smokescreen, as has been suggested, to cover some political problems. No – the system must be operational as soon as possible.

Regarding the comments by Mrs Grabowska: yes, we remember what it means to be in the waiting room; we were discussing this a year ago. All the countries that are interested in seeing some progress here are suddenly sharing experiences similar to ours. We are committed to setting out a technical solution which will allow participation by industries of additional countries, in accordance with the particular calendar.

I shall limit myself to these few concluding remarks. I said a lot at the beginning; now we will move on.

  Jacques Barrot, Vice-président de la Commission. − Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le vice-premier ministre Vondra, merci pour l'engagement de la présidence tchèque sur ce dossier qui nous apporte, en effet, un appui tout à fait apprécié.

Je voudrais répondre d'abord à M. Marinescu pour lui dire qu'il n'y a pas de problème particulier, étant entendu que les États membres qui ne sont pas encore entrés dans Schengen pourront, eux aussi, intégrer SIS II. Nous aurons plusieurs "slots", plusieurs périodes où les nouveaux États membres non membres de Schengen pourront entrer dans SIS II et, normalement, il ne devrait pas y avoir de difficultés particulières.

Madame Grabowska, je vous remercie, d'autre part, pour tout ce que fait la République de Pologne pour garder les frontières extérieures. J'ai pu constater, en effet, la qualité du travail accompli par Frontex avec les équipes polonaises sur la frontière ukrainienne.

Je voudrais simplement dire, d'ailleurs, en réponse à Mmes Roure et Grabowska, que c'est essentiellement un problème technique. Ce n'est pas, comme l'a dit M. Vondra, un problème politique. Simplement, ce qui est vrai, c'est que les États membres – certains États membres – ont eu des exigences toujours plus fortes. SIS II s'est donc retrouvé, il faut bien le dire, avec des objectifs de plus en plus sophistiqués. De ce fait, le système est devenu plus complexe et, malgré les hommages que vous avez rendus à l'informatique, il y a une mise en place qui s'avère plus difficile que prévu. Mais c'est vrai que le problème demeure essentiellement un problème technique et qu'il doit par conséquent pouvoir être résolu.

Je voudrais dire à M. Pirker que le Parlement sera bien informé – et j'en prends ici l'engagement. J'ai moi-même pris en cours de route ce projet et je crois pouvoir dire que je le considère vraiment comme une priorité absolue. Je veux également rassurer M. Brejc sur le fait que nous avons clairement défini les responsables. Nous avons fait, avec les services de la Commission, cette Task force qui associe étroitement les États membres. Je crois que nous avons un pilotage qui est maintenant sûr, mais il faut en effet que notre cocontractant soit à la mesure des exigences que nous lui avons posées.

Je voudrais aussi répondre à la question financière qu'ont notamment posée MM. Pirker et Posselt à l'instant. Le montant total des engagements budgétaires de la Commission sur le projet SIS II s'élève à environ 68 millions d'euros. Les contrats correspondants englobent les études de faisabilité, le développement du système central proprement dit, le support et l'assurance qualité, le réseau s-Testa, la préparation pour la gestion opérationnelle à Strasbourg, la sécurité, les préparatifs en matière de biométrie et la communication. Voilà donc pour les engagements: 68 millions d'euros.

En ce qui concerne les paiements, 27 millions d'euros ont été effectivement déboursés à ce jour pour le développement technique: développement du système, 20 millions d'euros; mise à la disposition d'un réseau à la pointe du progrès technique, 7 millions d'euros; assurance qualité, 4 500 000 euros.

Ce qu'il faut dire, c'est que, au cas où le Conseil déciderait, après avoir obtenu une vision précise de la fiabilité du SIS II ou de son manque de fiabilité, de passer à une formule SIS I+R, on pourrait penser qu'à ce moment-là, on pourrait réutiliser le réseau de communication mis en place pour le SIS II, ce qui préserverait pour une très grande partie les investissements correspondants.

Notre vrai problème, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, c'est de doter Schengen, l'espace de liberté de Schengen, d'un outil vraiment efficace. C'est vrai que si nous réussissons Schengen II, ce sera le système le plus performant au monde étant donné les performances qu'il nous permettra d'atteindre. Encore faut-il, en effet, que l'informatique soit au rendez-vous.

Ce que je voudrais en tout cas vous dire, après la présidence tchèque, – et je remercie encore une fois M. Vondra pour l'engagement de la République tchèque dans ce dossier difficile – c'est que je crois vraiment que nous avons mis en oeuvre, en relation avec la présidence actuelle, tous les moyens possibles pour ne plus prendre aucun retard et pour permettre réellement à notre cocontractant de répondre à nos attentes. En tout cas, nous aurons un rendez-vous fixe qui permettra au Conseil de prendre les décisions nécessaires, et je prends encore une fois l'engagement de tenir votre Parlement au courant, comme il se doit.

  Le Président. - Le débat est clos.

Déclarations écrites (article 142)

  Alin Lucian Antochi (PSE), în scris. – Consider că proiectul vizând perfecţionarea mecanismului de gestionare a frontierelor externe ale Uniunii Europene nu ar trebui privit ca o tentativă de stopare a migraţiei ca proces. Scopul real al măsurilor de securizare a frontierelor UE nu constă neapărat în stăvilirea fluxurilor imigratorii, ci în controlarea strictă a acestora. Gestionarea corectă a migraţiei constituie un factor benefic pentru societăţile şi economiile statelor Uniunii Europene.

Ţin să subliniez că Uniunea Europeană ar trebui să atragă mai multă atenţie gestionării frontierelor sale periferice unde există zone de conflict. Merită înalt apreciată activitatea desfăşurată până acum de către Misiunea Uniunii Europene de Asistenţă la frontiera dintre Republica Moldova şi Ucraina (EUBAM), caracterizată prin stabilirea unui regim unic vamal la frontieră, crearea barierelor pentru contrabandă şi reducerea activităţii grupurilor criminale.

Pe de alta parte, nesoluţionarea până în prezent a conflictului transnistrean face destul de dificilă posibilitatea gestionării de către autorităţile moldoveneşti a acestui segment de frontieră, unde continuă să mai persiste un flux mare de migraţie ilegală.

Vreau să-mi exprim convingerea că Uniunea Europeană deţine suficiente pârghii de ordin politic, economic şi de securitate pentru a curma acţiunile ilegale menţionate mai sus, inclusiv pentru a se implica mai activ în soluţionarea conflictelor îngheţate de la periferiile sale estice.

12. Rapport ta' segwitu 2008 dwar il-Kroazja - Rapport ta' segwitu 2008 dwar it-Turkija - Negozjati dwar l-adeżjoni tal-ex Repubblika Jugoslava tal-Maċedonja fl-2008 (dibattitu)

  Le Président. - L'ordre du jour appelle les déclarations du Conseil et de la Commission sur:

- le rapport de suivi 2008 sur la Croatie,

- le rapport de suivi 2008 sur la Turquie, et

- le rapport de suivi 2008 sur l'ancienne République yougoslave de Macédoine.

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, let me introduce the debate on the progress reports on the three countries Croatia, Turkey and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

Let me begin with Croatia. Your report rightly states that Croatia made good progress over the past year. Since the start of the negotiations, 22 chapters – out of 35 – have been opened, of which seven have been provisionally closed. The Presidency will continue to take forward the negotiations. Two accession conferences in particular are planned: at deputy level in the coming weeks, and at ministerial level in June.

Your report rightly highlights the importance of reaching a settlement to the outstanding border dispute with Slovenia. I would like to assure this Parliament that the Presidency will continue to make every effort to help resolve this issue and, in this context, we fully support the ongoing efforts of the Commissioner, Olli Rehn, to find a solution to allow us to continue with the accession negotiations. We had a lunch just before the sitting to discuss this in depth. Concerning the last development, we welcome Croatia’s decision announced on Monday that it accepts the mediation proposed by the group of experts proposed by Olli Rehn. We are encouraging both Slovenia and Croatia to work constructively in order to find a permanent and mutually acceptable solution as a matter of urgency, because it should not be just a prescription for more delays.

Apart from this important issue, further progress in the wider negotiations depends, above all, on Croatia itself. The necessary political, economic, legislative and administrative reforms have to be completed, and it has to meet its obligations under the Stabilisation and Association Agreement. The implementation of the revised Accession Partnership is also important in preparing for further integration within the European Union. The Council considers that the indicative and conditional road map drawn up by the Commission in its 2008 Progress Report is a useful tool. It will assist Croatia in taking the necessary steps to reach the final stage of the negotiations. That said, despite good progress, much remains to be done.

Let me pick out some of the key areas where further progress is needed, beginning with judicial reform. The EU has made it very clear that the establishment of an independent, impartial, reliable, transparent and efficient judicial system is essential. It is a condition for strengthening the rule of law and the proper implementation of the acquis. A professional, accountable, transparent and independent public administration is also key. Significant legislative reforms have been achieved in these two areas, but we need to see how they will work in practice.

The same is true of the fight against corruption and organised crime, as outlined in your report. The powers and resources of the Office for the Prevention of Corruption and Organised Crime have been strengthened. This is also the case with the criminal courts investigating cases in this area. The main issue now is to make sure that the expected results are delivered. The full implementation of the anti-corruption programme and action plan is key to addressing this serious problem.

The Union has also underlined that full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), including access to documents, is essential. We are following very closely developments in this area and we invite the Croatian authorities to ensure that full cooperation with ICTY is maintained. We welcome the recent agreement concerning the missing documents and urge Croatia to deliver on it.

On refugee return, we note that the implementation of the convalidation decision for validating pension rights has begun and information on the changes to the rules has been made available to the returnee community.

On housing care, the 2007 cases have been resolved, but the 2008 benchmark has not yet been met. Work on ensuring the sustainability of refugee return must continue. This also goes for legislation to improve the rights of minorities.

You have rightly highlighted the issue of regional cooperation in your report. Efforts to improve good neighbourly relations must continue.

Let me now turn to the issue of Turkey. Negotiations with Turkey continued during 2008, and a total of four chapters – as is almost a tradition – were opened during the course of the year.

Despite the EU’s encouragement to Turkey to step up its reform efforts, 2008 did not deliver the expected level of reform. Further work on the political criteria remains key. Significant efforts will be needed in a number of areas, as highlighted by the Council in its conclusions of 8 December 2008 and in the Commission’s 2008 progress report. This is an issue to which you have also drawn attention in your report.

At the same time the Presidency welcomes the recent positive steps undertaken by Turkey, including the recently adopted national programme for the adoption of the acquis and the appointment of the new chief negotiator. It is important that these commitments are now translated into real and tangible actions.

We would like to take this opportunity to stress the strategic importance of Turkey. The Presidency shares the opinion of Parliament that Turkey needs to be commended for the progress achieved in the field of energy. We continue to assess ways forward in this crucial area, particularly in terms of full support to the Nabucco pipeline project.

As far as Turkey’s progress to accession is concerned, we would like to highlight that progress in the area of freedom of expression is essential for overall progress in the negotiations. Besides the welcome amendments to Article 301 of the Criminal Code, which have had a positive effect, there are still a number of legal provisions that remain in place which could lead to restrictions in this area. Website bans, often disproportionate in scope and duration, remain a cause for concern. Adequate legal solutions are also required to ensure that religious pluralism is brought in line with European standards.

A comprehensive anti-corruption strategy needs to be developed. We are concerned also at the increased number of reported cases of torture and ill-treatment, in particular outside official places of detention. The law on the duties and legal powers of the police, amended in 2007, must be monitored closely in order to prevent violations of human rights. The ratification of the Protocol to the Convention against Torture is vital.

As far as the south-east is concerned, we welcome the announcement of the guidelines and general content of the South-East Anatolia Project. We now await concrete steps leading to the economic, social and cultural development of the region. This must include addressing longstanding issues such as the return of internally displaced persons or the question of village guards.

As far as EU-Turkey relations are concerned, it is clear that Turkey needs to fulfil its obligation of full, non-discriminatory implementation of the Additional Protocol. This is an important issue, as highlighted in your report, and should be addressed as soon as possible, as it clearly affects the pace of the accession negotiations. Issues covered by the declaration of 21 September 2005 will continue to be followed up, and progress is urgently awaited.

Furthermore, Turkey also needs to commit itself unequivocally to good neighbourly relations and to the peaceful settlement of disputes.

Despite all these difficulties, progress continues in a range of areas. Work is currently under way on Chapter 16 on taxation and Chapter 19 on social policy and employment. Despite the fact that negotiations are becoming more complex as they advance, the Czech Presidency is committed to making progress on those chapters where progress is really possible. Moreover, the Presidency puts emphasis on reaching progress in Chapter 15 on energy, in compliance with energy issues, because it is one of our priorities.

Finally, let me turn to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. It is a dynamic country with considerable potential. At the same time, it faces a number of significant challenges. Both these points are brought out admirably in your report. There is indeed much in the report with which the Council is in agreement.

Your report places considerable emphasis on the question of a date for the opening of accession negotiations. You also rightly highlight the wish of all sides to find an early and mutually acceptable solution to the issue of the name.

As far as recent developments are concerned, the early elections in June 2008 were held in several stages following significant problems both during the run-up, and on the original election day on 1 June. OSCE/ODIHR/Council of Europe noted that there was a ‘failure to prevent violent acts’ in the run-up to the elections, and that the elections did not live up to a number of key international standards.

As a result, we underlined to the Government and all political players the importance of addressing these core points in the run-up to the presidential and local elections due in a few days time. It is our impression that this message has been heard and that significant efforts are being taken to prevent any disruption. We shall see whether these efforts bear fruit.

The Commission’s 2008 Progress Report is helpful. We have taken note of the blueprint drawn up by the Government of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. It is a detailed text which represents a serious effort to take on board the Commission’s recommendations. Against the background of the region as a whole, the document and the work that has gone into it should be viewed positively.

The internal cohesion of this multiethnic state is, of course, key to its future development. I would, therefore, like to endorse the importance which this Parliament attaches to the Ohrid Framework Agreement This has been pivotal in drawing the country back from conflict and in assisting in its path towards greater European integration.

On visa liberalisation, we are currently at an evaluation stage, and I would not wish to prejudge the outcome. On a personal basis, I would simply say that I have much sympathy for the hopes and aspirations of ordinary citizens of the former Yugoslavia who would like to be able to travel freely again. But the essential precondition remains the preparedness of the country to fulfil the specific criteria set out in the visa liberalisation road map. Personally, I hope that positive developments can be achieved soon.

This brings me to one of the key points in your report and resolution. The Czech Presidency is fully committed to the European perspective for the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Further progress in this direction is achievable. But the key objectives of the Association Partnership have to be fulfilled and we need evidence of well-conducted elections, in contrast to what happened in 2008. These points will be evaluated by the Commission in its next progress report. We look forward to this report, and to further developments in Skopje.

PRESIDE: MIGUEL ANGEL MARTÍNEZ MARTÍNEZ
Vicepresidente

  Olli Rehn, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, today’s debate provides a very good opportunity to review the accession process in the three candidate countries.

Let me start with Croatia. Mr Swoboda’s draft resolution addresses the main challenges which face Croatia today. I fully agree with Deputy Prime Minster Vondra that the accession negotiations with Croatia have generally been going well since they started in October 2005, and that is why in November 2008 the Commission proposed an indicative road map for reaching the final stage of accession negotiations by the end of 2009, provided Croatia fulfils the necessary conditions.

On this too I share the analysis of your rapporteur and Mr Vondra as regards the future challenges such as judicial reform, the fight against organised crime and corruption, and reform of the ship-building sector and bringing it into line with our state aid regime and competition policy.

Unfortunately, the accession negotiations with Croatia are currently stalled because of the border issue. We have worked with the Czech Presidency on this matter, and I very much appreciate the support of the Presidency in our efforts to find a viable way forward.

Although this is a bilateral issue, it has become a European problem, and the Commission therefore took the initiative to offer European facilitation to solve the border issue and allow Croatia’s accession negotiations to continue, assuming that both sides found such facilitation useful.

That was the message I took to both Ljubljana and Zagreb in January. I have since then been discussing the terms of such facilitation with both foreign ministers – most recently in a trilateral meeting yesterday evening – following the decisions of both governments on our initiative.

I welcome the endorsement in principle from both countries on such European facilitation, which would be provided by a senior expert group chaired by President Martti Ahtisaari. During our talks yesterday we explored the possibilities for agreeing on the specific terms of facilitation. We agreed to continue the talks in the near future. This is thus still work in progress.

Let me point out that, in its efforts, the Commission has relied on the negotiating framework, which is the very foundation of the EU accession process for Croatia, agreed by Croatia and all the EU Member States, including Slovenia.

By adopting and agreeing the negotiating framework, both Croatia and Slovenia agreed to resolve any border dispute in line with the principle of peaceful settlement of disputes in accordance with the United Nations Charter. The UN Charter states, and I quote, because this is of particular importance: ‘The parties to any dispute [...] shall [...] seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice’.

There are two equally important conclusions to this statement in the UN Charter. First, the parties can choose any one of the methods outlined in the UN Charter. The Commission’s initiative is without doubt among these methods.

Second, whatever method in the UN Charter they agree to choose, they have to agree between the two of them. I sincerely hope that this will happen sooner, rather than later. The Commission’s initiative provides a very solid basis for this, and a viable way forward.

To sum up, the Commission’s objective is indeed to solve the border issue and in parallel to unblock the EU accession negotiations of Croatia so that Croatia is able to meet its target timeline of concluding the technical negotiations by the end of 2009.

I welcome Ms Oomen-Ruijten’s carefully balanced resolution on Turkey, and support the Presidency’s efforts to open chapters which are technically ready to be opened. We have unfortunately witnessed a certain slow-down of political reforms in Turkey in recent years. However – and I agree with your rapporteur on this – since the end of last year and the beginning of this year there have been certain positive developments, such as the launch of a new television channel broadcasting in Kurdish and the establishment of a parliamentary committee on gender equality. Moreover, the new ‘National Programme for the Adoption of the Acquis’ and the appointment of a new full-time chief negotiator are also steps forward.

I am also encouraged by the fact that Prime Minister Erdogan and the leader of the main opposition party, Deniz Baykal, signalled their commitment to Turkey’s EU accession process during their recent visits to Brussels. I hope these developments will result in a strong political and societal consensus to pursue EU reforms with renewed vigour and energy.

This is connected with freedom of expression, which is a core European value. An open and transparent relation between the press and public authorities is indeed elementary to the quality of the democratic debate in any country. This is particularly true for a country like Turkey which is going through a difficult process of transformation and reform. The Commission is therefore very closely following the ensured existence of press freedom in Turkey. It should be genuinely respected, as it is the very foundation of any open society, and thus of the continued democratic transformation of Turkey.

I shall say a few words on Cyprus. There is a unique chance this year to reunite the island and bring to an end this long-standing conflict on European soil. It is essential that Turkey proactively support the ongoing settlement talks between the leaders of the two communities in Cyprus.

Concerning the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, I thank Mr Meijer and the shadow rapporteurs for a well-balanced resolution. I share their regret that, three years after the country achieved candidate status, accession negotiations have not yet started.

The key outstanding condition is the ability to meet international standards for the conduct of free and fair elections. This is a core requirement for compliance with the Copenhagen political criteria, and the presidential and municipal elections in March and April will therefore be a moment of truth.

I share the positive assessment in your draft resolution on the progress made by Skopje in implementing the road map towards visa liberalisation. The Commission remains committed to making a proposal to the Council on visa-free travel in 2009, once the conditions have been met by each country in the region. I know how important this is for the ordinary citizens of the Western Balkans.

I shall summarise by saying that, for the sake of stability and peace, liberty and democracy, we shall continue our work for a gradual, managed accession of the three candidate countries, despite the very challenging economic times. I trust that Parliament will also continue to support this very valuable common goal.

  Hannes Swoboda, Verfasser. − Herr Präsident, Herr Ratspräsident, Herr Kommissar! Ich möchte zuerst und hauptsächlich über Kroatien sprechen. Kroatien hat eine ganze Reihe von Fortschritten gemacht. Ich bin sehr dankbar für die Bemühungen in Kroatien selbst, insbesondere was die Justizreform betrifft. Da waren notwendige Schritte zu tun. Durch zwei neue Minister sind einige Dinge in Gang gesetzt worden. Ich weiß, Minister können nicht alles erreichen. Aber wesentliche Dinge in Fragen der Korruptionsbekämpfung und der Bekämpfung der grenzüberschreitenden Kriminalität sind passiert.

Zweitens: Was die Frage der Zusammenarbeit mit dem Internationalen Strafgerichtshof betrifft, möchte ich klar zum Ausdruck bringen, dass ich mir von Kroatien natürlich alle notwendigen Schritte erwarte. Es gab Dispute über verschiedene Befehlsketten und entsprechende Dokumente. Ich hoffe, dass diese Dinge in den nächsten Tagen aufgeklärt werden können, so dass von dieser Seite keine Unterbrechung oder Verzögerung der Verhandlungen erfolgt.

Drittens: Was die Wirtschaftsreformen betrifft, so hat Kroatien ebenfalls einiges eingeleitet. Ich bin sehr froh über die Pläne, auch was die Schifffahrtsindustrie betrifft. Das ist nicht leicht, aber hier sind doch die wesentlichen Grundsteine gelegt worden. Ich bin ferner froh, dass auch mit den Arbeitnehmern in der Schifffahrtindustrie entsprechende Vereinbarungen getroffen werden können. Diese Reformen werden schmerzlich sein, aber sie sind notwendig, und sie können in einer vernünftigen Form gemacht werden.

Ich komme jetzt schon zu der großen Frage, die hier immer wieder kontrovers ist, und das ist die Frage des Grenzkonfliktes. Herr Kommissar, ich muss Ihnen leider sagen, dass ich schon etwas darüber enttäuscht bin, dass Sie die Sache ohne entsprechenden Kontakt mit dem Parlament angegangen sind. Ich habe Ihnen die Unterlagen geschickt, Sie haben substanziell nichts geantwortet. Wir wären vermutlich schon weiter, wenn Sie diese Fragen mit mehr Sensibilität behandelt hätten. Damit kein Missverständnis entsteht: Ich unterstütze durchaus Ihren Vorschlag zur Mediation. Aber man hätte schon weiter sein können, hätte man vor allem in der Frage des Stellenwertes des internationalen Rechts hier von vornherein eine klare Aussage getroffen und nicht erst nachher.

Wir sind in einer schwierigen Situation. Beide Seiten müssen sich bewegen, das ist klar. Ihr ursprünglicher Vorschlag war zumindest in seiner Formulierung nicht optimal. Ich hätte mir auch gewünscht, dass Sie gerade mit dem Parlament und auch mit dem Berichterstatter einen engeren Kontakt halten. Dann hätten wir nämlich gemeinsam vielleicht auch schon mehr erreichen können. Das ist leider nicht geschehen, aber das ist jetzt trotzdem nicht der Kern der Debatte. Der Kern der Debatte ist, wie wir weiterkommen.

Wir kommen weiter. Das wird wahrscheinlich die Formulierung sein, die ich dem Parlament morgen vorschlage. Wir werden sagen, dass diese Mediation, die Sie vorgeschlagen haben – okay, das ist nun einmal so, und das will ich durchaus unterstützen –, auf der Basis des internationalen Rechts und, um es auf Englisch zu formulieren, on international law inclusive on the principles of equity basieren sollte. Die beiden Seiten müssen sich in dieser Richtung einigen. Beide Seiten, Kroatien und Slowenien, müssen anerkennen, dass das internationales Recht ist, aber dass natürlich auch the principles of equity, die Fairness, eine gerechte Lösung – wenn man so will, eine politische Lösung – notwendig sind. Das ist von beiden Seiten anzuerkennen, und eigentlich ist es ein bisschen traurig, dass wir in dieser Situation nicht weiterkommen. Wir haben andere Probleme auf dieser Welt und insbesondere auch in Europa, so dass diese Probleme im Einvernehmen gelöst werden sollten. Trotz aller Kritik wünsche ich Ihnen natürlich viel Erfolg bei der Überzeugung beider Partner. Leider ist das gestrige Gespräch nicht so positiv ausgegangen, wie es ausgehen sollte, aber ich hoffe, dass das bald der Fall ist.

Lassen Sie mich noch eine generelle Bemerkung machen, weil das auch Mazedonien betrifft: Bilaterale Probleme bestehen, aber sie sollen die Erweiterungsverhandlungen nicht blockieren. Was unseren Antrag betrifft – der manchmal missverstanden wird: Natürlich sollten bilaterale Probleme nicht im negotiation framework enthalten sein! Das ist etwas, was außerhalb steht. Es geht um die Verhandlungen zwischen der Europäischen Union und den einzelnen Ländern. Parallel dazu sollten die bilateralen Probleme gelöst werden, wenn beide Seiten – in diesem Fall Mazedonien und Griechenland – bereit sind, die Dinge zu behandeln. Wir müssen von diesem Parlament aus ein klares Signal geben: In all diesen Konflikten müssen sich beide Seiten bewegen. Es kann nicht sein, dass sich nur eine Seite bewegt und die andere stehen bleibt. In all diesen Fällen muss klar sein: Die bilateralen Probleme dürfen die Beitrittsverhandlungen nicht blockieren, sondern man kann parallel dazu arbeiten, und auch dieses Parlament wird helfen, dass in den beiden Konflikten, um die es hier geht, sich auch beide Seiten bewegen werden. Ich hoffe, dass wir dann zu einem guten Ergebnis kommen.

  Ria Oomen-Ruijten, Auteur. − Voorzitter, laat mij beginnen met iedereen die bijgedragen heeft aan dit verslag van harte te bedanken. Ik heb hier een kritische, maar wel eerlijke evaluatie neergelegd van de voortgang die Turkije in 2008 heeft geboekt. Het is een verslag dat vele punten bevat, Turkije een spiegel voorhoudt, en slechts één heldere boodschap heeft, en wel dat er voor het derde opeenvolgende jaar te weinig is gebeurd qua politieke hervormingen.

Politieke hervormingen, het voldoen aan de criteria van Kopenhagen, dat is een absolute prioriteit. Het gaat niet om het openen van hoofdstukken. Het gaat om datgene wat de Europese burgers verenigt, de rechtsstaat, een onafhankelijke en onpartijdige justitie, de vrijheid van meningsuiting, een optimaal functionerende pers, een individueel burgerrecht voor elke burger. Voorzitter, op die punten moet er meer worden gedaan en als dat allemaal gebeurd is, dan worden er ook politieke hoofdstukken geopend.

Voorzitter, die politieke criteria invullen moet Turkije niet voor óns doen; de Turkse regering heeft haar eigen burgers bij haar aantreden gezegd dat het nodig is Turkije te moderniseren. Daarvoor zijn hervormingen van de politieke criteria nodig, want voor de opbouw van een sociaal georiënteerde markteconomie dienen mensen de mogelijkheid krijgen om hun creativiteit te beleven, dienen alle burgers dezelfde rechten te hebben. Daarom staan de politieke criteria nu centraal in ons verslag.

We zijn met de Commissie buitenlandse zaken, met de GPC, met iedereen daar geweest; ik heb toen het gevoel gekregen en óók een sprankje hoop gekregen dat er iets aan het veranderen is. Commissaris Rehn, u hebt dat ook al gezegd. Tien jaar geleden had ik me niet kunnen voorstellen dat er tv-uitzendingen in het Koerdisch zouden zijn. Ook dat is in het verslag neergelegd. De positieve rol van Turkije op de Kaukasus heb ik eveneens zeer gewaardeerd. Ik heb mijn waardering uitgesproken voor de eerste stappen in de richting van het openen van de grenzen met de Armeniërs, want ook de Armeniërs moeten worden verlost uit het isolement waarin ze nu zitten.

Voorzitter, er is een nationaal programma goedgekeurd om die hervormingen door te voeren; dit zijn allemaal positieve elementen en ik hoop van ganser harte dat Turkije nu zelf met grote voortvarendheid met de nieuwe onderhandelaar die hervormingen oppakt. Een modern en welvarend Turkije is van het allergrootste belang voor de Turkse bevolking, maar - en dat zeg ik in elke lidstaat in Europa - zeer zeker ook van groot belang voor ons allen in de Europese Unie.

Voorzitter, ik heb nog wat extra opmerkingen. We krijgen nogal eens berichten dat de mediavrijheid, de persvrijheid te wensen overlaat en dat de pers, wanneer zij van haar vrijheden gebruikmaaktuitoefent, achteraf fiscale aanslagen zijn of andersoortige maatregelen krijgt opgelegd. Dit moet veranderen.

Tot slot nog één punt, namelijk de amendementen die zijn ingediend. Ik zou de Socialistische Fractie willen vragen please don't do it, accepteer het verslag zoals het hier ligt. Wanneer er verbeteringen aangebracht moeten worden, akkoord, maar er moeten geen extra dingen worden gevraagd. Dat is nergens voor nodig en leidt alleen maar tot polarisatie hier in dit Huis.

  Erik Meijer, Auteur. − Voorzitter, uitbreiding van de Europese Unie is op dit ogenblik veel minder een prioriteit dan in de jaren die voorafgingen aan de grote uitbreidingen van 2004 en 2007. De publieke opinie in de bestaande lidstaten is daarover nu veel minder positief. Dat heeft veel te maken met verschillen in welvaart en in het niveau van salarissen, verschillen die kunnen leiden tot meer arbeidsmigratie vanuit armere lidstaten naar rijkere lidstaten.

Ook het probleem van de in de landen van voormalig Joegoslavië gehate visaverplichtingen heeft veel te maken met die vrees. Het leidt ertoe dat veel inwoners van deze landen, die tot 1992 gemakkelijk toegang kregen tot de huidige lidstaten van de Europese Unie, onze landen nu moeilijk kunnen bezoeken. Dat moet veranderen.

Als kandidaat-lidstaten hun best doen om zo snel mogelijk volwaardig lid te worden van de Europese Unie, kunnen ze daarbij fouten maken. Ter wille van dat doel heeft Macedonië in 2008 nieuwe wetgeving doorgevoerd in een ongewoon snel tempo, dat slecht past bij onze gangbare opvattingen over een zorgvuldige democratische besluitvorming.

De oppositie, verschillende niet-gouvernementele organisaties en individuele burgers klagen in verschillende gevallen over onzorgvuldig bestuur. Zij vinden dat de grootste regeringspartij meer vrijheid neemt dan past in een pluriforme samenleving, waarin de democratie meer betekent dan alleen het houden van verkiezingen. Er is kritiek op het niet registreren van klachten van burgers door de politie. Er bestaat verontwaardiging over het demonstratief arresteren van de burgemeester van de stad Strumitsa en van andere politici.

Ik stel voor om die kritiekpunten in de morgen aan te nemen resolutie niet te verzwijgen. Er is alle reden om hier openlijk uit te spreken dat nog lang niet alles goed gaat. Toch moeten we erkennen dat het in Macedonië niet slechter gaat dan in andere staten tijdens hun toetredingsonderhandelingen en soms zelfs na hun toetreding. Als de toetredingsonderhandelingen met Macedonië nu starten, duurt het nog minstens tot 2017, voordat dit land lid kan zijn.

Een jaar geleden stemde het Parlement voor mijn voorstel om die onderhandelingen zo spoedig mogelijk te laten beginnen. Daarna is de verstoring van de parlementsverkiezingen een argument geworden om eerst te wachten op de verkiezingen die binnenkort plaatsvinden voor de president en de gemeentebesturen. Verder uitstel heeft twee grote nadelen: de brede steun binnen Macedonië voor het EU-lidmaatschap zal afbrokkelen, de status van kandidaat-lid verliest in de toekomst zo elke betekenis.

Iedereen weet dat de naam Macedonië zonder toevoeging stuit op onoverkomelijke bezwaren van Griekenland. Voor Griekenland is deze buurstaat Noord-Macedonië, Hoog-Macedonië, Vardar-Macedonië of Skopje-Macedonië. Dat is een aanmerkelijk positievere opstelling dan die van vóór 2006, waarin Griekenland elk gebruik van de naam Macedonië voor de noorderburen wilde vermijden.

Juist Griekenland heeft er, veel meer dan andere lidstaten, belang bij dat dit noordelijke buurland zo snel mogelijk toetreedt tot de Europese Unie. Daarvoor moet zo snel mogelijk door beide staten een oplossing worden overeengekomen. Het alternatief is dat beide staten blijven wachten tot de andere staat als eerste een grote concessie doet, maar die andere staat kan niet als enige dwars tegen de binnenlandse publieke opinie ingaan.

We moeten niet naar een toestand waarin volksreferenda gaan uitspreken dat men geen compromis met het buurland wil sluiten. Zo lang geen compromis wordt gevonden, zullen mijn opvolgers als rapporteur nog decennia lang jaarlijks moeten blijven melden dat vooruitgang niet mogelijk is.

Tot slot, Voorzitter, ook het andere bilaterale meningsverschil tussen Slovenië en Kroatië moet snel worden opgelost. In 2011 moet Kroatië een volwaardige lidstaat kunnen zijn. Staatssteun voor de scheepsbouw mag geen belemmering zijn als het andere lidstaten is toegestaan om staatssteun te geven aan hun banken of hun auto-industrië. De werkgelegenheid in Pula, Rijeka en Split moet behouden kunnen blijven.

  Bernd Posselt, im Namen der PPE-DE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! In dieser Erweiterungsdebatte müssen wir drei entscheidende Unrichtigkeiten geraderücken. Erstens: Die Türkei ist kein europäisches Land, sondern liegt in Kleinasien. Sie ist, wie der Ratspräsident mit Recht gesagt hat, ein strategisch wichtiger Partner, und daher brauchen wir eine strategische Partnerschaft und keinen Beitritt zur EU.

Zweitens: Die Probleme, die Mazedonien betreffen, haben nichts damit zu tun, dass dort angeblich die Demokratie nicht funktioniert, Herr Kommissar – ich war bei den Wahlen, sie waren vorbildlich, Probleme gab es da nur bei einer winzigen Minderheit innerhalb der Minderheit –, sondern sie haben mit dieser unsäglichen Namensfrage zu tun, die zur bilateralen Erpressung missbraucht wird.

Drittens! Kroatien ist längst reif, der Europäischen Union beizutreten. Wir könnten die Verhandlungen ohne weiteres dieses Jahr abschließen, wie es das Europäische Parlament mehrfach gefordert hat und vermutlich auch morgen wieder fordern wird. Dass es noch nicht so weit ist, liegt ausschließlich an einer Blockade durch Slowenien im Rat. Herr Ratspräsident und Herr Kommissar, ich appelliere an Sie, durch eine vernünftige Lösung dafür zu sorgen, dass diese Blockade endlich aufhört. Die Grenzfrage ist exakt dieselbe, die schon bestanden hat, als wir Slowenien aufgenommen haben. Wir können nicht ein Land trotz der offenen Frage aufnehmen und das andere nicht.

Deshalb appelliere ich, Slowenen und Kroaten bei einer vernünftigen Lösung der Grenzfrage zu unterstützen, aber gleichzeitig alle Verhandlungskapitel zu öffnen. Das eine hat mit dem anderen nichts zu tun, und die Öffnung der Verhandlungskapitel ist die Voraussetzung dafür, dass wir mit einem hervorragenden und vorbildlichen Beitrittskandidaten dieses Jahr noch zu einem vernünftigen Ergebnis kommen.

Was die Lösung der bilateralen Frage betrifft, wo wir unsere guten Dienste anbieten, so bitte ich Sie, Herr Kommissar, auf eine objektive Arbitrage hinzuarbeiten. Ihre Sprecherin hat am Montag selbst gesagt, das könnte auf der Basis von international law and jurisprudence stattfinden. Ich möchte Sie fragen, ob Sie diese Formulierung für geeignet halten, um hier zu einem Kompromiss zwischen beiden Seiten zu kommen.

Ich würde jedenfalls gerne diese Formulierung …

(Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)

  Jan Marinus Wiersma, namens de PSE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, ik wil graag een aantal opmerkingen maken over het heel goede verslag van mijn collega Ria Oomen-Ruijten over Turkije. Mijn fractie onderschrijft de belangrijkste conclusie in het verslag, namelijk dat er de afgelopen tijd te weinig vooruitgang is geboekt.

Weliswaar was 2008 een turbulent jaar voor de Turkse politiek en die turbulentie zal er wel toe geleid hebben dat een aantal hervormingen niet zijn doorgegaan, dat het proces als zodanig voor een deel stil is komen te liggen. Nu die problemen in Turkije voor een deel zijn opgelost, hopen we dat de regering aan de hand van de plannen die ze op tafel heeft gelegd, vaart zal maken met datgene wat nodig is om het onderhandelingsproces met de Europese Unie geloofwaardig te houden. Ik wijs met name op het nationaal programma voor hervormingen, dat door de huidige regering is vastgesteld.

Onze fractie blijft de onderhandelingen met Turkije natuurlijk steunen en de onderhandelingen gaan wat ons betreft over lidmaatschap van de Europese Unie, ook al moeten we geen illusies hebben over de complexiteit van dat proces en de mogelijke duur ervan. Maar het kan niet zo zijn dat de impuls alleen maar van Turkije komt. Wij moeten ook als EU een betrouwbare partner blijven in dat proces.

Turkije is van strategisch belang voor de Europese Unie, met name vanwege onze energievoorziening en alles wat daarmee samenhangt, en we zijn als PSE-Fractie voor het openen van het energiehoofdstuk in het onderhandelingsproces. Maar uiteindelijk zal Turkije toch zelf de bulk van het werk moeten doen, en er zijn ook in het verslag van Ria Oomen-Ruijten heel veel punten waar wij kritisch naar gekeken hebben en waar we ook kritisch naar moeten blijven kijken.

Ik wil een paar punten uit dat uitstekende verslag lichten. De vrijheid van meningsuiting moet worden gegarandeerd. We zijn nog steeds niet tevreden over wat daar gebeurt. Recentelijk is er een internetactie geweest rond Armenië en de genocide; de manier waarop daar door de autoriteiten op wordt gereageerd, is toch een aantasting van die vrijheid.

Iets wat heel erg van belang is, wat we ook steeds willen herhalen en waarover wij als Europees Parlement geen enkele twijfel moeten laten bestaan, is dat wij een islamisering van Turkije nooit zullen accepteren, dat we het land uiteindelijk alleen maar zullen kunnen opnemen, op basis van het seculiere karakter zoals dat nu in de grondwet is vastgelegd.

Tot slot wil ik nog één opmerking maken. Er is door commissaris Rehn enigszins optimistisch gesproken over de onderhandelingen op Cyprus. Ik vind dat wij niets moeten doen, maar ook niets moeten nalaten om het succes van die gesprekken mede mogelijk te maken en we zullen ook een oproep moeten doen aan Turkije om niets te doen wat die processen, die gesprekken in de wielen kan rijden, want de partijen moeten daar in vrijheid kunnen onderhandelen over hoe ze hun gezamenlijke toekomst vorm willen geven. Ik kan alleen maar zeggen dat ik hoop dat het optimisme van commissaris Rehn gerechtvaardigd is.

  István Szent-Iványi, a ALDE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Tavaly év végén két fontos fejlemény következett be a horvátországi csatlakozási folyamatban. Egyfelől a horvát kormány érdemi lépéseket tett az igazságügyi reform területén, határozottan fellépett a szervezett bűnözés ellen, és eredményeket mutatott fel a korrupció elleni küzdelemben. Ugyanakkor a csatlakozási tárgyalások leálltak, a kétoldalú határvita miatt. Itt nem egyszerűen Horvátországról van szó – tisztelt hölgyeim és uraim – hanem sokkal inkább a bővítési folyamat hiteléről. Ezt veszélyezteti ez a magatartás, ezért nagyon fontos, hogy minél hamarabb föloldják a blokkolást. Azt a nagyon veszélyes üzenetet hordozza a tárgyalások blokkolása, hogy a csatlakozás nem a feltételek teljesítésén múlik, hanem a kétoldalú viták rendezésén, ahol az egyik fél az erő pozíciójából kívánja rákényszeríteni az akaratát a másikra.

Üdvözöljük Olli Rehn biztos úr közvetítési javaslatát, nagyon örvendetes, hogy pozitívan reagált rá Szlovénia és Horvátország is, és reméljük, hogy ezek után már nincs semmiféle indok arra, hogy a csatlakozási tárgyalásokat a továbbiakban blokkolják. Továbbra is hiszünk abban, hogy a tárgyalások az év végéig – az eredeti menetrend szerint – lezárhatók. Ehhez azonban további erőfeszítésekre van szükség. Elvárjuk, hogy Horvátország oszlasson el minden aggályt a hágai nemzetközi törvényszékkel történő együttműködés terén, és szolgáltassa ki az összes dokumentumot, amit követelnek tőle. Ez nagyon fontos. Fontosnak tartjuk továbbá a menekültek visszatérésének elősegítését, a roma kisebbség integrációját és a deszegregációs program befejezését, valamint az uniós támogatások hatékony felhasználását is, hiszen itt is komoly lemaradás tapasztalható. Még mindig megvan az esély arra, hogy az eredeti menetrendet tartani tudjuk. Ez közös felelősségünk! Horvátországtól is konstruktivitást várunk, de az Európai Uniótól is, mert itt most nem csak a közös vállalásunkról van szó, hanem az egész bővítési folyamat hiteléről.

  Konrad Szymański, w imieniu grupy UEN. – Panie Przewodniczący! Przede wszystkim gratuluję pani poseł Oomen-Ruijten oraz panom Swobodzie i Meijerowi bardzo rzetelnie przygotowanych rezolucji.

Jeśli chodzi o Turcję, to obraz naszych relacji zarysowany w tym dokumencie nie jest optymistyczny, ale jest z całą pewnością prawdziwy. Bardzo się cieszę, że w rezolucji podtrzymano nasze oczekiwania w zakresie swobód religijnych dla wspólnot chrześcijańskich w Turcji, w zakresie prawa do nauczania, kształcenia duchownych, w końcu w zakresie ochrony własności tych wspólnot. Podobnie jak w innych sferach mamy tu do czynienia z ciągłymi, coraz bardziej irytującymi, opóźnieniami ze strony Turcji.

Turcja bez względu na proces akcesyjny jest bardzo obiecującym, ważnym partnerem Europy w zakresie bezpieczeństwa i energii. Wysiłki rządu premiera Erdogana i prezydenta Gula na rzecz poprawy relacji z sąsiadami są najważniejszym wątkiem polityki tureckiej w ostatnim czasie. Szkoda, że zostały podważone awanturniczymi działaniami wobec Izraela. Niepokojące są również próby wiązania rozwoju współpracy strategicznej między Unią a Turcją, która jest sprawą na dziś, z procesem negocjacji, których dynamika spada z powodów obiektywnych. Tak odbieram tureckie oświadczenia w sprawie Nabukko. Potrzebujemy tutaj bardziej pragmatycznego podejścia. Pokusa szantażu jest złym doradcą.

Jeśli chodzi o Chorwację, powinniśmy zrobić wszystko, aby tempo procesu akcesji przewidujące wejście Chorwacji do Unii w 2009 r. było utrzymane. Stabilizacja tego regionu jest wciąż krucha. Ani spory graniczne ani własnościowe nie mogą stać się dodatkowymi warunkami rozszerzania bałkańskiego. W imię ustabilizowania regionu procesem integracji powinniśmy jak najszybciej objąć Chorwację, a następnie Serbię, Macedonię, Czarnogórę, być może Kosowo i Albanię.

  Joost Lagendijk, namens de Verts/ALE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, collega's, over het verslag van collega Oomen-Ruijten kan ik kort zijn. Het is in hoofdlijnen een prima verslag dat de resterende problemen prima opsomt en als er sprake van vooruitgang is, dat ook zegt. Wat dat betreft alle lof voor de rapporteur.

Ik wil eerlijk gezegd van deze gelegenheid gebruikmaken om terug te blikken op vijf jaar relaties EU/Turkije in deze Parlementsperiode. Het jaar 2004, vijf jaar geleden, was terugkijkend eigenlijk het gouden jaar van de hervormingen die Turkije echt dichter bij de EU brachten. Het merkwaardige, en eerlijk gezegd ook wel een beetje treurige is dat sinds 2004 het tempo van de hervormingen te laag is, dat eigenlijk de bereidheid in de Europese Unie om Turkije een eerlijke kans te geven, is afgenomen en dat in Turkije het animo voor het lidmaatschap is teruggelopen.

In alle Parlementsverslagen over al die jaren is duidelijk wat de prioriteiten van het Parlement zijn als het gaat om cruciale hervormingen. Ten eerste de vrijheid van meningsuiting. Ja, het bekende artikel 301 is veranderd, maar de situatie is nog steeds onbevredigend. Het is zeer te betreuren dat websites, zoals YouTube, nog steeds niet toegankelijk zijn in Turkije, en er is een ontoelaatbare druk van de regering op een deel van de media.

Ten tweede de Koerdische problematiek. Er was in 2007 grote hoop dat er na de toetreding van de Koerdisch-nationalistische partij DTP een oplossing gevonden zou worden tussen de DTP en de AKP. Dat is helaas niet gebeurd.

Ten derde religieuze minderheden. Ja, er is de wet op de stichtingen, die voor een deel van de minderheden een oplossing biedt, maar voor een grote moslimminderheid, de Alevieten, is er helaas nog steeds geen oplossing. Óndanks al die ontoereikende vooruitgang is er in dit Parlement nog steeds een meerderheid die vóór toetreding is.

Ik denk dat de boodschap van dit debat en van de debatten in de afgelopen vijf jaar aan de Turkse regering zou moeten zijn dat die steun, ondanks de ontoereikende hervormingen, alléén zal blijven bestaan als er werkelijk snel op alle drie de terreinen nieuwe hervormingsvoorstellen worden gedaan.

Wat dat betreft, deel ik voor een deel het optimisme van de commissaris over de Koerdische tv, over de openingen die er zijn gemaakt tussen Turkije en Armenië; de wil tot hervorming van 2004 zal moeten terugkeren. Als dat gebeurt, ben ik er ook van overtuigd dat het optimisme in onze debatten en in de debatten in Turkije zal terugkeren.

  Αδάμος Αδάμου, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας GUE/NGL. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, η έκθεση προόδου της Τουρκίας και η αξιολόγησή της το Δεκέμβριο αφορούν το αν συμμορφώνεται η εν λόγω χώρα ή όχι με όλα τα κριτήρια της Κοπεγχάγης και τις υποχρεώσεις που προκύπτουν από τη συμφωνία σύνδεσης και το πρόσθετο Πρωτόκολλο της Άγκυρας.

Ο στόχος της πλήρους ένταξης, σημαντικός για την Τουρκία και την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, παραμένει κινητήριος δύναμη για μια σειρά μεταρρυθμίσεων και αλλαγών στις πολιτικές της Τουρκίας προς διασφάλιση των δικαιωμάτων όλων των μειονοτήτων, της πολιτικής λύσης στο Κουρδικό, της αναγνώρισης της γενοκτονίας των Αρμενίων και της άρσης του συνοριακού εμπάργκο με την Αρμενία.

Η Τουρκία οφείλει να συμμορφωθεί με όλες τις συμβατικές της υποχρεώσεις έναντι της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, όπως συνέβη και με όλες τις προηγούμενες υπό ένταξη χώρες. Αντ’ αυτού η Τουρκία δεν συμμορφώνεται με τις ειλημμένες συμβατικές της υποχρεώσεις έναντι της Ένωσης που αφορούν την Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία ως κράτος μέλος. Αρνείται το άνοιγμα των λιμανιών και αεροδρομίων της σε πλοία και αεροπλάνα της Δημοκρατίας και την άρση του βέτο για συμμετοχή της Κύπρου σε διεθνείς οργανισμούς. Και ενώ επιδιώκει ρόλο ρυθμιστικού παράγοντα στην περιοχή, συνεχίζει να παραβιάζει το διεθνές δίκαιο κατέχοντας την Κύπρο.

Σήμερα βρισκόμαστε στη μέση διαπραγματεύσεων για τη λύση του Κυπριακού επί τη βάσει διζωνικής δικοινοτικής ομοσπονδίας με πολιτική ισότητα, όπως διατυπώνεται στα ψηφίσματα του ΟΗΕ, στο πλαίσιο του διεθνούς και του ευρωπαϊκού δικαίου. Πρέπει λοιπόν η Ένωση να εμμείνει στις θέσεις αρχής και να εντείνει τις πιέσεις της, ώστε η Τουρκία να επιτρέψει την ουσιαστική πρόοδο στις διαπραγματεύσεις, να τερματίσει την κατοχή και να προβεί στις δέουσες ενέργειες για τη διαλεύκανση της τύχης των αγνοουμένων. Επαναφέρουμε το θέμα αυτό με τροπολογία, παρότι υπάρχει και άλλο ψήφισμα για τους αγνοούμενους, με αφορμή τις πρόσφατες δηλώσεις του Τούρκου στρατιώτη Ολγκάτς για εκτέλεση, το 1974, 10 αιχμαλώτων Ελληνοκυπρίων, οι οποίοι εξακολουθούν να είναι αγνοούμενοι. Το θέμα είναι καθαρά ανθρωπιστικό και δεν χάνει την αξία του όσες φορές και να το επαναλάβουμε.

Αναφορικά με το κεφάλαιο της ενέργειας, αυτό δεν μπορεί να ανοίξει, αν η Τουρκία δεν πάψει να παρεμποδίζει την Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία από το να ασκεί τα κυριαρχικά της δικαιώματα στην αποκλειστική οικονομική της ζώνη. Και διαβάζω σε συγκεκριμένη δική σας αναφορά, κύριε Επίτροπε, ότι η Επιτροπή ανησυχεί για τις παρενοχλήσεις τουρκικών πολεμικών πλοίων κατά σκαφών που πραγματοποιούν έρευνες για υδρογονάνθρακες στην αποκλειστική οικονομική ζώνη της Κύπρου. Και ακόμη ότι, στα συμπεράσματά του στις 8 Δεκεμβρίου του 2008, το Συμβούλιο αποθαρρύνει τυχόν απειλές, προστριβές ή πράξεις οι οποίες θα μπορούσαν να επηρεάσουν αρνητικά τις σχέσεις καλής γειτονίας και την ειρηνική διευθέτηση των διαφωνιών.

Θα είναι καλό, κύριε Επίτροπε, να πιέσετε την Τουρκία προς τη σωστή κατεύθυνση, που είναι αυτή ακριβώς των δικών σας δηλώσεων. Και γι’ αυτό το θέμα έχουμε καταθέσει τροπολογία το περιεχόμενο της οποίας συμφωνεί πλήρως με τις δηλώσεις σας, κύριε Επίτροπε, που είναι άρα και δηλώσεις της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής.

  Bastiaan Belder, namens de IND/DEM-Fractie. – Voorzitter, rapporteur mevrouw Oomen-Ruijten richt zich in paragraaf 17 tot de hele Turkse samenleving om vrijheid van godsdienst volop in praktijk te brengen. Ik sluit mij bij deze oproep volmondig aan, want het raakt hier een essentieel toetredingscriterium voor Turkije én de Europese Unie.

Intussen wedijveren met name het Turkse onderwijs en de Turkse mediawereld in de verspreiding van de stereotype karikatuur van inheemse christenen, van Turkse christenen, als vijanden van de eigen natie, als handlangers van westerse machten, die het vaderland opnieuw wensen te koloniseren en onderling wensen te verdelen. Commissaris, spreekt u de passieve Turkse overheid, de verantwoordelijke Turkse overheid ook aan op dit toetredingsobstakel?

En dan, commissaris, nog een tweede vraag. Alle Turkse identiteitspapieren vermelden de religie van staatsburgers. Dé oorzaak tegelijk van veelvormige maatschappelijke discriminatie van Turkse christenen. Ampel reden, commissaris, om bij uw Turkse gesprekspartner op onmiddellijke schrapping van deze rubriek in officiële documenten aan te dringen.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, se il progresso della Croazia appare soddisfacente quanto ad adozione dei testi legislativi per la lotta alle discriminazioni, ritengo che prima di apprezzare quanto la risoluzione enuncia, si debba riscontrare l'attuazione delle leggi. Ad esempio, circa l'accesso alla proprietà immobiliare, in particolare per quanto riguarda proprio le opportunità di investimento italiano, a me non risultano particolari progressi de facto. Non approvo la risoluzione perché, nonostante palesi l'insufficienza dei progressi compiuti e l'incoerenza all'acquis comunitario, si compiace di un'adesione che vuole si realizzi, a mio avviso, troppo presto. Restituiscano intanto quello che hanno fregato ai nostri profughi istriano-dalmati dal '47 in poi e poi, solo poi, ne parliamo della loro adesione.

  Anna Ibrisagic (PPE-DE). - Herr talman! Resolutionen om f.d. jugoslaviska republiken Makedonien är i min mening en välbalanserad text och jag vill tacka Meijer för att han i sitt arbete koncentrerat sig både på de reformer och mål som har uppnåtts och på de frågor som man ännu måste anstränga sig mer kring. Jag är särskilt glad att resolutionen sänder en stark signal om att den nuvarande situationen efter tre års väntan på att starta förhandlingarna är mycket oroande och oacceptabel. Det är helt klart och tydligt att f.d. jugoslaviska republiken Makedonien är en europeisk stat vars plats är i den europeiska unionen.

När vi diskuterar denna fråga i parlamentet brukar jag undvika att ta upp den namnkonflikt som finns mellan Grekland och f.d. jugoslaviska republiken Makedonien. Jag anser att det finns många andra frågor som borde diskuteras mer ingående och som vi aldrig diskuterar eftersom namnkonflikten tar oproportionerligt mycket tid. Men idag, efter att jag har läst en del av ändringsförslagen, känner jag behov att starkt understryka att det inte är acceptabelt att utnyttja några som helst bilaterala konflikter för att försvåra för ett land att röra sig snabbare mot den europeiska integrationen eller för att stoppa ett lands deltagande i de internationella institutionerna.

Det finns många länder som har haft och som har bilaterala konflikter, och vi vill alla att dessa konflikter löser sig så fort som möjligt på ett sätt som är acceptabelt för båda sidor, men under tiden bör man enligt min uppfattning inte blockera varandra i den europeiska integrationsprocessen, i synnerhet när det gäller länder som befinner sig i ett känsligt läge både geografiskt och politiskt.

  Józef Pinior (PSE). - Panie Przewodniczący! Trzeci rok z rzędu jestem sprawozdawcą umownym grupy socjalistycznej sprawozdania oceniającego przygotowania Byłej Jugosłowiańskiej Republiki Macedonii. Muszę powiedzieć, że sytuacja z Macedonią przypomina sytuację z greckiej antycznej tragedii. Właściwie dobra wola wszystkich stron jest powszechnie deklarowana, natomiast nic z tego nie wynika. Byłem pewien trzy lata temu, że pod koniec kadencji tego Parlamentu będziemy mogli mówić o sukcesie w negocjacjach Macedonii na drodze do Unii Europejskiej. Tak się nie stało. Głównym problemem jest kwestia nazwy, która niezależnie od tego, że jest kwestią bilateralną niezależną od kryteriów kopenhaskich oddziaływuje na sytuację polityczną na drodze negocjacji Macedonii do Unii Europejskiej. Mamy wolę Grecji, mamy wolę samej Macedonii, jednak nie można było przez te kilka lat uzyskać porozumienia w tej sprawie. Mogę jedynie wyrazić nadzieję jako sprawozdawca umowny tego sprawozdania grupy socjalistycznej, że ta kwestia zostanie rozwiązana w perspektywie interesu Unii Europejskiej, Macedonii i Grecji.

Istnieje problem stabilizacji instytucji politycznych w Macedonii. Dostrzegamy go bardzo wyraźnie. Dostrzegamy także bardzo wyraźnie wolę polityczną społeczeństwa, władz, grup politycznych tego kraju, który rozwija się w kierunku Unii Europejskiej. Rada powinna zdecydować o rozpoczęciu negocjacji akcesyjnych przed końcem 2009 roku w zależności od pełnej realizacji najważniejszych priorytetów porozumień. Bardzo ważne są w tym aspekcie najbliższe wybory, które odbędą się w Macedonii – wybory prezydenckie i wybory lokalne. Będziemy je ze strony Parlamentu Europejskiego bardzo ściśle monitorować.

  Charles Tannock (PPE-DE). - Mr President, thank you for clarifying that. Greece joined the European Union in 1981 and membership has brought many benefits to that country, of which I am extremely fond. But almost 30 years later Macedonia naturally wants to join the European Union and share those same benefits. It is therefore only right that Greece, as a neighbouring Balkan state, expresses its firm solidarity and works to help a small country like Macedonia to achieve its aspirations.

But because of its own province named Macedonia, Greece objects to the use of the name ‘Republic of Macedonia’ on its own, insisting instead on ‘former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia’, or FYROM. For the sake of consistency, why does Greece not therefore also insist on calling Estonia the ‘Former Soviet Republic of Estonia’ as a formal title?

I therefore regret that Greece is now considering applying its veto to Macedonia’s membership over this issue. I fear that Greece risks bringing itself into ridicule and I urge the Government in Athens to soften its line. I am known in this House and in my constituency as a strong philhellene and a friend of Greek and Cypriot MEPs alike, but I am also a member of the newly formed EP Friends of Macedonia. Let us resolve this outstanding issue promptly and sensibly. Also I call on the Parliament to send a delegation of MEPs to observe Macedonia’s forthcoming presidential election and help legitimise the outcome.

As regards Croatia’s imminent EU accession, it is regrettable that border disputes with Slovenia remain outstanding. As in the case of Greece and Macedonia, these difficulties must be solved bilaterally rather than being dragged into the EU accession process.

Slovenia joined the European Union while it still had outstanding issues with Italy, which did not stand in its way and try and block its accession, so I see no reason why Croatia should be held back in turn. In a similar vein and in future, I would never countenance Croatia vetoing Serbia’s admission because of territorial disputes.

Of more immediate concern to my electors who are suffering from enlargement fatigue is the scale of organised crime and corruption in Croatia, which the Government must truly make it a national priority to eradicate.

PRÉSIDENCE DE MME MARTINE ROURE
Vice-présidente

  Alexander Graf Lambsdorff (ALDE). - Frau Präsidentin! Ich stelle zunächst fest, dass ich im Namen meiner Fraktion zum Thema Türkei spreche und nicht im eigenen Namen. Für Liberale und Demokraten ist die Entwicklung in der Türkei besorgniserregend. Drei Jahre nicht nur zu wenig Fortschritte beim Reformtempo, sondern teilweise sogar Rückschritte. Wie Kommissar Rehn hier richtig festgestellt hat, ist die Pressefreiheit ein Kernwert der Europäischen Union. In einem Land, das der EU beitreten will, muss die Achtung der Pressefreiheit über jeden Zweifel erhaben sein.

Das was wir sehen, ist allerdings etwas anderes. Kritische Journalisten haben Schwierigkeiten bei der Akkreditierung. Der neue Eigentümer von ATV hat noch viele Fragen zu beantworten, es gibt Aufrufe von höchsten Stellen zum Boykott bestimmter Medien, die Dohan-Gruppe wird mit einer willkürlichen Steuerstrafe in Höhe von 400 Millionen Euro überzogen. Das ist eine willkürliche Maßnahme, die uns zur Frage der Rechtsstaatlichkeit bringt, für Liberale genauso wichtig wie die Pressefreiheit. Auch die Rechtsstaatlichkeit muss gewährleistet sein. Die Berichte über zunehmende Fälle von Folter und Misshandlung in Polizeigewahrsam beunruhigen uns zutiefst, insbesondere dann, wenn sie außerhalb von offiziellen Gefängnissen oder Polizeiwachen stattfinden. Aber auch wenn sie dort stattfänden, würden sie uns selbstverständlich beunruhigen.

Symbolische oder rein pragmatische Maßnahmen wie die Annahme eines neuen Programms oder die Ernennung eines neuen Chefunterhändlers sind erfreulich, wenn man das rein praktisch betrachtet. Sie reichen allein aber nicht aus, um das Reformtempo erneut zu beleben. Nach Auffassung der Liberalen und Demokraten muss die Türkei unabhängig von der Beitrittsperspektive Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, Politik und Verfassung reformieren, und zwar im eigenen Interesse, im Interesse der Menschen.

Lassen Sie mich noch ein Wort zu dieser Debatte sagen: Mir kommt diese Debatte vor wie ein Kinderkarussell, auf dem manchmal ein türkisches, manchmal ein kroatisches, manchmal ein mazedonisches Pferdchen vorbeifährt. Ich denke, wir sollten diese Debatte demnächst anders strukturieren. Im Übrigen wäre ich dankbar, wenn wir sie in Brüssel hätten und nicht in Straßburg.

  Mario Borghezio (UEN). - Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la questione "Croazia", beh è un dovere da parte di chi parla a nome del popolo italiano che lo ha eletto, ricordare la giusta rivendicazione: più di 60 anni sono passati da quella rapina storica dei beni dei nostri istriano-dalmati. La Croazia ha il dovere morale e il Presidente della Commissione Barroso ha un dossier su questa questione così delicata e dannosa, che va sottolineata. È una questione morale, prima che ancora politica, la restituzione dei beni a chi ne ha diritto: Sono 1.411 beni liberi.

Turchia: ma come si può pensare di fare aderire in tutta tranquillità un Paese che oggi pone il veto islamico, persino in ambito NATO, alla nomina di un Segretario generale solo perché rappresenta un Paese, la Danimarca, nel quale c'è stata la questione delle vignette. C'è l'altolà islamico della Turchia, Paese islamico, alla nomina di Segretario generale dell'Alleanza atlantica di un Primo Ministro, solo perché Primo ministro di un Paese che ha avuto la vicenda delle vignette islamiche – un Paese liberale nel quale ovviamente, a differenza della Turchia, si possono pubblicare delle vignette ironiche anche su Maometto. In Turchia c'è una legge – e il Commissario dovrebbe conoscerla – che proibisce l'edificazione di qualunque tempio non musulmano in una via in cui ci sia una moschea: cioè se c'è la moschea in quella via, non può esserci nessun altro edificio religioso. La nostra relatrice, che mi pare portasse un bellissimo paio di pantaloni, con quel vestito, con i pantaloni, non potrebbe entrare ancora oggi nel parlamento turco. Questo dimostra che siamo ancora molto indietro. La Turchia è Asia, non è Europa.

  Angelika Beer (Verts/ALE). - Herr Präsident, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Als erstes möchte ich im Namen meiner Fraktion der Grünen und der Europäischen Freien Allianz den heute anwesenden stellvertretenden Ministerpräsidenten Mazedoniens begrüßen.

Als zweitens gilt mein Dank der tschechischen Ratspräsidentschaft und insbesondere der Aussage von Herrn Premierminister Topolánek, der gestern erstens darauf hingewiesen hat, dass der Namensstreit zwischen Mazedonien und Griechenland eine bilaterale Sache ist und keine Auswirkungen haben darf, und sich zweitens für den schnellstmöglichen NATO-Beitritt Mazedoniens und damit für die Aufforderung an Griechenland, das Veto zurückzuziehen, ausgesprochen hat – zwei sehr wichtige Punkte.

Es ist vielleicht manchmal etwas arrogant, wenn wir über Beitrittskandidaten reden. Deswegen möchte ich auch die eigene Verantwortung zur Sprache bringen. Denn wir reden hier über die Perspektiven und die Mängel der Beitrittskandidaten, haben aber auf der anderen Seite ganz wesentliche politische Kräfte wie die Konservativen in Deutschland, die durchsetzen wollen, dass nur noch Kroatien aufgenommen wird und keine weiteren Staaten folgen.

Wenn das in der nächsten Legislaturperiode in der Europäischen Union die Mehrheitsmeinung werden sollte, dann zerstören wir den Friedensaufbau Europas, den wir nach den Kriegen im Balkan mit viel Kraft finanziert haben. Wir werden unglaubwürdig und würden die europäische Glaubwürdigkeit hintenanstellen. Ich bitte alle, dem zu widerstehen.

Bei Kroatien und Slowenien gehen wir davon aus, dass es gut ohne doppelte Standards und ohne Veto geht, dass die Grenzstreitigkeiten beiseite gelegt werden können, und wir wünschen uns eine schnellstmögliche Verhandlungsaufnahme mit Mazedonien.

  Gerard Batten (IND/DEM). - Madam President, if Turkey joins the European Union it will be the poorest and most economically backward Member State, with a population of over 72 million people. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people will migrate to countries like Britain.

The European Union will border countries such as Syria, Iraq and Iran, with enormous potential for future conflict and confrontation.

However, the people who should really be worried about Turkish entry are Greek Cypriots: if Turkey joins the EU, the Turks will have the right to go anywhere in the EU. Thousands of Turks will be able to legally go to Southern Cyprus and effectively occupy it, quite legitimately, if they so wish.

In the European elections on 4 June, voters of Greek origin in London should remember that the Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green Parties all enthusiastically support Turkish entry. The only British party in the European Parliament that opposes Turkish entry is the UK Independence Party.

  Philip Claeys (NI). - Voorzitter, als de onderhandelingen met Turkije één positief gevolg hebben, dan is het wel de perfectionering van de kunst van het eufemisme bij de Commissie en de Raad. De manier waarop de problemen in Turkije worden geminimaliseerd, begint indrukwekkend te worden. Het gaat zelfs zó ver dat men daar in Turkije af en toe zelfs de spot mee gaat drijven.

De waslijst met problemen is zo lang, dat het onbegrijpelijk is dat de onderhandelingen nog altijd doorgaan. Nochtans had de Commissie beloofd dat het onderhandelingsproces gelijke tred zou houden met het hervormingsproces in Turkije. Van die belofte is niets overgebleven, want men blijft maar nieuwe hoofdstukken openen.

De balans van meer dan drie jaar onderhandelingen is zonder meer bedroevend. Laten we er dus de stekker eruit trekken. Turkije is geen Europees land en hoort dus niet in de Europese Unie, maar laat ons daarentegen een relatie van bevoorrecht partnerschap met Turkije uitwerken.

  Doris Pack (PPE-DE). - Frau Präsidentin, Herr Ratspräsident, Herr Kommissar! Kroatien ist das erste Land, für dessen Beitritt zur Europäischen Union nach den Erfahrungen mit den letzten beiden Erweiterungen um Rumänien und Bulgarien die Messlatte richtigerweise sehr hoch gelegt wurde. Daher sind die erzielten benchmarks und Fortschritte durch die kroatische Seite auch besonders zu würdigen. Die noch ausstehenden Reformen im Justizbereich – sie wurden erwähnt – werden angepackt. Die angemahnte vollständige Zusammenarbeit mit dem Haager Kriegsverbrechertribunal bezüglich der Aushändigung noch fehlender Dokumente ist auf einem guten Weg.

Bei Slowenien geht es um bilateraler Grenzstreitigkeiten – lieber Herr Kommissar, Sie haben plötzlich gesagt: europäische Grenzstreitigkeiten! Vor dem Jahr 2004 waren das keine europäischen Grenzstreitigkeiten, da waren das Grenzstreitigkeiten, die man nicht zur Kenntnis genommen hat: Damals hat man sich auch nicht auf die UNO bezogen, um diesen Streit beizulegen, jetzt tut man es. Wenn also Slowenien wegen dieser bilateralen Grenzstreitigkeiten, die auch bei seinem Beitritt zur Europäischen Union kein Hindernis waren, die Öffnung der notwendigen Verhandlungskapitel nicht weiter behindert, könnten die Beitrittverhandlungen zwischen Kroatien und der EU Ende dieses Jahres abgeschlossen werden.

Auch das Kandidatenland Mazedonien hat große Fortschritte gemacht. Wenn die Ende März anstehenden Wahlen internationalen Standards entsprechen, müsste die EU endlich ein Datum für die Eröffnung der Beitrittsverhandlung nennen. Der leidige bilaterale Namensstreit zwischen Mazedonien und Griechenland sollte Letzteres nicht verführen, ein Veto einzulegen.

Es bleibt also zu hoffen, dass die beiden EU-Mitgliedstaaten Griechenland und Slowenien sich an ihre eigene Situation vor ihrer Aufnahme in die EU erinnern und daraus schlussfolgern, sich gegenüber den Nachbarstaaten europäisch und fair zu verhalten.

Sollten Kroatien und Mazedonien die von mir beschriebenen Ziele in diesem Jahr – auch dank ihrer Nachbarn – erreichen, würde das ein positives Signal an die restlichen Westbalkanstaaten senden, dass die EU es nämlich mit der in Thessaloniki gegebenen Zusage für einen Beitritt aller Westbalkanstaaten ernst meint, zu dem auch die CDU steht, liebe Frau Beer.

  Libor Rouček (PSE). - Několik poznámek: za prvé je dobře, že se tato debata o rozšíření Evropské unie koná, protože je důležité, že ani v době velké hospodářské krize Evropa nezapomíná na jednu ze svých priorit, připomínám úspěšných priorit, a tou je další rozšíření. A tuto prioritu bychom neměli pustit ze zřetele. Za druhé pokud jde o Chorvatsko, jsem přesvědčen, že přístupová jednání je možno uzavřít již v tomto roce. Proto bych chtěl vyzvat Radu, aby již nyní vytvořila technickou pracovní skupinu, která bude pověřena vypracováním smlouvy o přistoupení. Pokud jde o Bývalou jugoslávskou republiku Makedonii, je politováníhodné a demoralizující pro Makedonce, že ve Skopje dosud nebyla zahájena přístupová jednání, ačkoli Makedonie získala statut kandidátské země již před třemi lety. Proto bych chtěl i zde vyzvat Radu, aby urychlila tento proces. A pokud jde o Turecko, ano souhlasím, že k otevření tzv. politických kapitol je nutno urychlit politické reformy. Nechápu však, proč není možno s Tureckem jednat např. o kapitole „Energetika“, která je životně důležitá jak pro Evropskou unii, tak pro Turecko.

  Jelko Kacin (ALDE). - V ALDE podpiramo poročilo Meijer. Makedonija (FYROM) si zasluži priložnost in boljšo prihodnost. Potrebuje pa tudi minimalno mero mednarodnega spoštovanja, vključno s pravico do lastne identitete in s priznanjem lastnega jezika in lastne kulture.

Vprašanje imena države se vleče predolgo in vzdušje v državi že dolgo slabša. Vse več je populizma in nacionalizma, preveč je političnega vkopavanja in verbalnih napadov na sosede. Imenovanje objektov infrastrukture po zgodovinskih imenih iz časa grške zgodovine, še pred prihodom Slovanov v te kraje, ni korak v smeri dobrih odnosov s sosedi. Več deset metrov visoki spomeniki so nepotrebni.

Državi, politikom in ljudem je potrebno pomagati iz blokade, če nočemo nestabilnosti. Ukinitev viz pa ni dovolj. Potrebujejo datum in začetek pogajanj. Zaslužijo si priložnost, da pokažejo svoje sposobnosti v pristopnem procesu. Pomagati jim moramo zdaj in jim izkazati potrebno zaupanje. S tem bomo prispevali k stabilnosti v regiji in omogočili pozitiven razvoj. Pozitiven odziv potrebujejo zdaj, kajti čas je zelo, je zelo pomemben. Čas je pravzaprav zlato.

In še nekaj o Hrvaški. Gospod komisar, v preteklosti sta predsednika obeh vlad, Drnovšek in Račan, že dosegla velik dosežek, sporazum o meji. Žal sta danes oba že pokojna. Ampak bila sta tako pogumna, da sta šla naprej, da sta vlagala v prihodnost, in nekaj sta dosegla. Mislim, da je prav, da vzpodbujate obe vladi, da gresta po njihovih stopinjah in da ponovno in hitro dosežeta sporazum o meji. To bo dobro za Slovenijo, Hrvaško, Evropsko unijo in za zahodni Balkan.

  Bogusław Rogalski (UEN). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Negocjacje z Turcją w sprawie przystąpienia do Unii ciągle trwają, choć powinny być już dawno zakończone. Rząd turecki nie przedstawił spójnego i wszechstronnego programu reform politycznych. Turcja nie wznowiła prac nad nową świecką konstytucją, której ważnym elementem miała być ochrona praw człowieka i podstawowych wolności, jakie rząd turecki miał zagwarantować.

Ciągle trwa dyskryminacja mniejszości etnicznych i religijnych. Turcja nie podjęła też kroków w celu wzmocnienia bezstronności instytucji sądowniczych. Wolność słowa i prasy w dalszym ciągu nie jest w Turcji chroniona, a wręcz łamana. Przemoc domowa oraz przymusowe małżeństwa są cały czas nagminne.

Sprzeciw Turcji wobec strategicznej współpracy między Unią a NATO jest jawnym działaniem na szkodę Wspólnoty. Turcja nie uznaje ponadto niepodległości jednego z członków Unii Europejskiej, jakim jest Cypr - i to jest skandal. Turcja to kraj antydemokratyczny, łamiący prawa człowieka, kierujący się obcym dla nas światem wartości. Dla dobra Europy lepiej będzie jeśli Turcja nie stanie się członkiem Unii.

  Sepp Kusstatscher (Verts/ALE). - Danke, Frau Präsidentin! In dieser sehr umfangreichen Diskussion hier und heute will ich nur ein Problem herausgreifen, und zwar das Thema der Mehrsprachigkeit in Mazedonien.

Kürzlich hat es an Schulen in Struga Konflikte zwischen albanisch- und mazedonisch-sprachigen Eltern gegeben. Auf Druck dieser nationalistisch gesinnten Eltern reagierten die Verantwortlichen und trennten den Unterricht nach ethnischen Gruppen. Das ist eine falsche Entwicklung. Das Erlernen von Sprachen wird nicht durch das Auseinanderhalten von Sprachgruppen gefördert, sondern durch zwangloses Zusammenführen von Menschen verschiedener Sprachen in Schule, Beruf und Freizeit. Der Unterricht des Englischen, nun schon ab der ersten Klasse uneingeschränkt verpflichtend, ist zwar durchaus zu begrüßen, darf aber nicht zu einer Ausrede für einen Mazedonier werden, nicht Albanisch zu lernen, und auch nicht für einen Albaner, nicht Mazedonisch zu lernen. Die Schule in einer mehrsprachigen Region hat eine ganz besondere Aufgabe: Sie muss im Unterricht neben der Muttersprache der Kinder auch die Sprachen der Nachbarn vermitteln.

In Vielfalt geeint, so lautet das Motto der EU. Das soll auch für Mazedonien gelten!

  Hanne Dahl (IND/DEM). - Fru formand! Jeg mener, at Tyrkiet skal være medlem af EU. Kritikken af Tyrkiet er berettiget på mange punkter, men lurpasseriet og undskyldningerne må stoppe, og der bør laves en seriøs plan for at få Tyrkiet med i EU. Det vil tage tid, men landet skal med, og det bør vi sige klart og forpligtende. I stedet for en pseudodebat om demokratiet i Tyrkiet, er der brug for en reel og åben debat om, hvilken plads religionen kan og skal spille i samfundsdebatten. Vi er nødt til at skabe et europæisk samarbejde, der er i stand til at tage den udfordring op, som et Europa, der er sammensat af forskellige religioner, er. Dette vel at mærke, uden at vi mister de centrale værdier og menneskets ukrænkelighed, der udspringer af de europæiske værdier, der skabes i smeltediglen af jødisk, kristen og hellenistisk kultur i århundrederne før og efter Kristi fødsel.

  Carl Lang (NI). - Madame la Présidente, une minute pour vous dire que, malgré l'acharnement et l'aveuglement des institutions européennes, une évidence devrait s'imposer à tous: le temps est venu de mettre fin au processus d'adhésion de la Turquie à l'Union européenne.

La situation d'enlisement des négociations, d'incompréhension mutuelle et d'ambiguïté permanente est préjudiciable à tous, à l'Union européenne comme à la Turquie. Il nous faut sortir de l'hypocrisie et en finir avec les faux-semblants.

Il faut aussi rappeler une évidence. La Turquie est un pays d'Asie mineure. La Turquie n'est pas une nation européenne, ni géographiquement ni culturellement. La Turquie occupe militairement une partie d'un État membre de l'Union européenne puisque nous n'avons, à ce jour, que dix chapitres de négociations sur trente-cinq et qu'un seul chapitre a été conclu. Il est temps que chacun retrouve sa liberté, son indépendance, sa souveraineté, à commencer par Chypre.

Les peuples d'Europe ne veulent pas de la Turquie en Europe. Respectons nos peuples et respectons l'Europe!

  Pál Schmitt (PPE-DE). - Az Európai Unió-Horvátország közös parlamenti bizottság elnökeként szeretném felhívni a figyelmet arra a nagyjelentőségű fejleményre, hogy hétfőn a horvát miniszterelnök – és nem csak a miniszterelnök, hanem a köztársaság elnöke is, valamint a parlament minden ellenzéki pártja is – hozzájárult ahhoz, hogy az Unió közvetítsen a Horvátország és Szlovénia közti kétoldali határvita megoldásában a nemzetközi jog alapján. Én magam is az Unió történetében példátlannak tartom, hogy egy tagország bénítja az Unió bővítését és megakadályozza ebben a pillanatban 12 tárgyalási fejezet megnyitását, és teszi mindezt úgy, hogy annak idején 2001-ben, saját csatlakozási tárgyalásai során kijelentette, hogy nincsenek határvitái szomszédjaival.

A csatlakozási tárgyalások megkezdése, 2005. óta számottevő eredményt értek el az igazságügyi rendszer és a közigazgatás átalakításában, a korrupcióelleni fellépésben, a kisebbség jogai biztosításában, a menekültek visszatérítésében, illetve a regionális együttműködés terén. Horvátország esetében első ízben alkalmazott ún. referenciaértékek – angolul benchmark-ok – teljesítését is. Hozzávetőlegesen 100 ilyen volt, sikerrel hajtották végre. A rendkívüli erőfeszítések kapcsán a horvát lakosság végre pozitív üzenteket várna az Uniótól. Az érzékeny és öntudatos lakosság csalódással fogadta, amikor egy szomszédos, baráti ország egymaga megakadályozta a csatlakozási tárgyalások folytatását. A balkáni régió hosszútávú és megnyugtató stabilizálása egyedül az európai integráció útján lehetséges. Hibát követ el az Unió, ha megengedi Szlovéniának, hogy kétoldali vitájával hátráltassa a horvát tárgyalásokat, amely eddig is mindent megtett az európai alapértékek védelme és a közösségi jogszabályok átvétele érdekében. Megjegyzem, Elnök Asszony, hogy nem szerencsés – talán akik minket hallgatnak, azok számára sem – hogy három fontos, óriási történelemmel rendelkező ország sorsát így összemosva, egy kalap alatt tárgyaljuk. Talán jobb lett volna külön-külön tárgyalni a három országot.

  Emine Bozkurt (PSE). - Voorzitter, ik wil doorgaan op het punt waarover mevrouw Oomen-Ruijten het ook had: de politieke criteria. In het onderhandelingsproces met Turkije zijn de burgerrechten zeer duidelijk op de agenda gezet. Dat zien we ook terug in dit verslag.

Een aantal dingen is duidelijk verbeterd: Koerdischtalige televisie, maar ook de installatie van een vrouwencommissie in het Turks parlement, waar ik als rapporteur vrouwenrechten in Turkije, me de afgelopen jaren keihard voor heb ingezet. Belangrijke hervormingen.

Ook het vermeerderen van het aantal opvanghuizen voor vrouwen die mishandeld zijn, is een duidelijke verbetering. Maar wat gebeurt er met die vrouwen als ze de opvanghuizen verlaten? Hoe wordt voor hun en voor de kinderen gezorgd? Daar moet Turkije aandacht aan besteden. Met de gemeenteraadsverkiezingen op komst: er moeten meer vrouwen komen in de gemeenteraad. Eind deze maand zijn de verkiezingen.

Ik wil nog de aandacht vestigen op fraudebestrijding. Turkije moet beter samenwerken met de Europese Unie bij fraudebestrijding alsook bij de bestrijding van vrouwenhandel, want veel te veel mensen worden bijvoorbeeld slachtoffer van fraude met de groene fondsen of van fraude met liefdadigheidsinstellingen.

  Jim Allister (NI). - Madam President, I have never supported the admission of non-European Turkey into the EU, but the current economic downturn makes me more convinced than ever of that view.

As a huge net contributor, the United Kingdom carries a disproportionate burden in funding the EU so, when it comes to the massive additional cost of enlargement to include Turkey, we would be burdened beyond what we could bear. With a reduced tax base, falling income and increased welfare outlay, and a crippling debt legacy in the future decades arising from the mismanagement of the Labour Government, we cannot go on taking out our diminishing cheque book to pay for Turkish enlargement.

Call that narrow, mercenary national interest if you will, but to me it is inescapable common and fiscal sense.

  Αντώνιος Τρακατέλλης (PPE-DE). - Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η Ελλάδα, ως το παλαιότερο μέλος της περιοχής, τόσο στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση όσο και στο ΝΑΤΟ, υπήρξε και συνεχίζει να είναι πρωτοπόρος στις προσπάθειες για ένταξη όλων των χωρών των Βαλκανίων στις ευρωατλαντικές δομές, αφού πιστεύει ακράδαντα ότι η ανάπτυξη των χωρών της περιοχής είναι προς όφελος όλων.

Η Ελλάδα έχει επενδύσει πάνω από ένα δισ. δολάρια στην Πρώην Γιουγκοσλαβική Δημοκρατία της Μακεδονίας και έχει δημιουργήσει 20.000 θέσεις εργασίας, μεγέθη χωρίς προηγούμενο στις ξένες επενδύσεις για την τοπική οικονομία. Για τη χώρα μας, το θέμα της ονομασίας δεν αποτελεί απλώς πρόβλημα με ιστορικές, ψυχολογικές ή συναισθηματικές διαστάσεις. Συνθέτει ένα υπαρκτό πολιτικό θέμα ουσίας, που αφορά το σύνολο των Ελλήνων πολιτών αλλά και των ευρωπαϊκών αξιών της καλής γειτονίας και περιφερειακής συνεργασίας.

Υπενθυμίζω ότι η χώρα μου συνήνεσε στην απόδοση στην Πρώην Γιουγκοσλαβική Δημοκρατία της Μακεδονίας καθεστώτος υποψήφιας προς ένταξη χώρας στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση με το COM(2007) 0663 με τη ρητή δέσμευση για την εύρεση μιας κοινώς αποδεκτής λύσης μέσω διαπραγματεύσεων στο θέμα του ονόματος υπό την αιγίδα του ΟΗΕ, η οποία θα συνεισφέρει στην περιφερειακή συνεργασία και στις σχέσεις καλής γειτονίας, διότι χωρίς λύση δεν υπάρχει φιλία και χωρίς φιλία δεν νοούνται συμμαχίες και εταιρικές σχέσεις.

Η αντιπροσωπεία μας δεν είναι αντίθετη σε όλες εκείνες τις εκφράσεις της έκθεσης οι οποίες στηρίζουν ισχυρά την επίλυση του θέματος υπό την αιγίδα του ΟΗΕ. Δυστυχώς όμως, πέραν της ξεκάθαρης αυτής θέσης, υπάρχουν στις παραγράφους 12 και 13 επιπλέον διατυπώσεις που αποδυναμώνουν τις προσπάθειες λύσης του προβλήματος και ενθαρρύνουν την αδιαλλαξία και γι’ αυτό είναι απολύτως απαράδεκτες, ενώ οι τροπολογίες 1 και 2 επαναφέρουν τις παραγράφους 12 και 13 στη σωστή διατύπωση.

Κατά τα λοιπά, η έκθεση έχει πολλά στοιχεία τα οποία θα βοηθήσουν την Πρώην Γιουγκοσλαβική Δημοκρατία της Μακεδονίας να εξακολουθήσει την προσπάθεια στον ευρωπαϊκό δρόμο.

  Μαρία-Ελένη Κοππά (PSE). - Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η πολιτική της διεύρυνσης είναι η πιο πετυχημένη έκφραση της εξωτερικής πολιτικής της Ένωσης. Στην περίπτωση της Τουρκίας, το μήνυμα πρέπει να είναι σαφές: Στόχος είναι η ένταξη που περνά όμως μέσα από την εκπλήρωση των υποχρεώσεών της, μέσα από την εδραίωση της δημοκρατίας, το σεβασμό των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων και τη διατήρηση σχέσεων καλής γειτονίας.

Η Τουρκία βρίσκεται σε μια κρίσιμη περίοδο, τόσο εσωτερικά όσο και στον επαναπροσδιορισμό του γεωστρατηγικού της ρόλου. Στο πλαίσιο αυτό, η συνέχιση των μεταρρυθμίσεων και ο σταθερός ευρωπαϊκός προσανατολισμός είναι απολύτως αναγκαία. Να σημειώσω όμως ότι το κλίμα έντασης που η Τουρκία καλλιέργησε το τελευταίο διάστημα στο Αιγαίο δημιουργεί νέα προβλήματα.

Στην περίπτωση της Πρώην Γιουγκοσλαβικής Δημοκρατίας της Μακεδονίας η Επιτροπή τόνισε σαφώς ότι η χώρα δεν πληροί τις βασικές προϋποθέσεις για έναρξη διαπραγματεύσεων, καθώς έχει σημαντικά ελλείμματα στον τομέα της δημοκρατίας. Σε ό,τι αφορά τη διαφορά για το όνομα, παρ’ ό,τι η Ελλάδα έδειξε πνεύμα συνεργασίας και ρεαλισμό, η κυβέρνηση των Σκοπίων δεν ανταποκρίθηκε.

Δυστυχώς όμως, στην έκθεση του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου που εξετάζουμε σήμερα, η χώρα μου παρουσιάζεται ως μόνη υπαίτια για την καθυστέρηση έναρξης διαπραγματεύσεων. Αυτό αδικεί την Ελλάδα και δεν διευκολύνει την εξεύρεση λύσης σε ένα πρόβλημα που ταλαιπωρεί τις δύο χώρες για πάνω από 15 χρόνια.

  Alojz Peterle (PPE-DE). - Doslej sem podprl vsa poročila Evropskega parlamenta o napredku Hrvaške na poti do polnopravnega članstva v Evropski zvezi in tudi to pot pozdravljam njene številne nove dosežke. Z veseljem bom podprl tudi to pomembno poročilo, ki ga je z izjemnim trudom pripravil kolega Swoboda, s predpostavko, da bodo kompromisna dopolnila odražala uravnotežen in realističen pristop. Samo tak pristop lahko vodi v odpravo razlogov za zadržke in za pospešitev pristopnega procesa.

V celoti se strinjam s predsednikom Vondro, da potrebujemo konstruktiven in dinamičen pristop. V tem smislu se mi zdi zelo pomembno, da je po dosedanjih neuspešnih dvostranskih poskusih Evropska komisija z iniciativo za mediacijo ponudila možnost novega in kredibilnega poskusa dokončne rešitve mejnega problema med Slovenijo in Hrvaško in v tem kontekstu hiter napredek pri vstopnih pogajanjih Hrvaške.

Vesel sem, da sta obe državi pobudo sprejeli in da so se začeli pogovori na visoki ravni. Upam, da smo s to pobudo veliko bližje trojni zmagi: zmagi Hrvaške, Slovenije in Evropske zveze. Ne more zmagati samo eden ali eno stališče, zmagamo lahko samo s skupnimi cilji in s skupno voljo.

Prav tako se strinjam s poročevalcem Swobodo, da je treba upoštevati pri tem tudi načelo pravičnosti, ki je del mednarodnega prava. In popolnoma se strinjam s komisarjem Rehnom, da je primerno izhodišče za ureditev mejnega spora listina OZN in da je pobuda Komisije v duhu te listine.

Čas je, da začne delovati zelena miza. Brez retorike in pritiskov, ki bi prizadevali dostojanstva ene ali druge udeležene strani ali njen status v pristopnem procesu. Potrebujemo pozitivno atmosfero. Prepričan sem, da obstaja samo ena dobra rešitev, to je tista, za katero se bosta ob mediaciji tretjega, se pravi Evropske komisije, sporazumeli Slovenija in Hrvaška. Želim si, da se to zgodi čimprej.

  Γιώργος Δημητρακόπουλος (PPE-DE). - Κυρία Πρόεδρε, συμφωνώ και αναγνωρίζω την ευρωπαϊκή προοπτική της Τουρκίας, όμως, για να έχει αυτή η προοπτική αίσιο τέλος, η Τουρκία θα πρέπει:

πρώτον, να σεβαστεί έμπρακτα τα δικαιώματα των μειονοτήτων και να αποφεύγει πολιτικές σαν αυτές που εφαρμόζει, π.χ. στην Ίμβρο και την Τένεδο·

δεύτερον, να βελτιώσει τις σχέσεις της με την Ελλάδα, κράτος μέλος που στηρίζει την ευρωπαϊκή της προοπτική, αίροντας, για παράδειγμα, το casus belli και τερματίζοντας μια για πάντα τις παραβιάσεις στο Αιγαίο·

τρίτον, να σημειώσει πρόοδο στο Kυπριακό. Η πρόοδος αυτή σηματοδοτείται αφενός με την αποχώρηση των τουρκικών στρατευμάτων κατοχής αφετέρου με μια πιο εποικοδομητική στάση σε όλες τις πτυχές για την επίλυση του ζητήματος. Θέλω να θυμίσω εδώ ότι εγώ ανήκω στη γενιά που ανατράφηκε με το σύνθημα «Τα σύνορά μας είναι στην Κερύνεια».

  Joel Hasse Ferreira (PSE). - O processo conducente à adesão da Turquia à União Europeia avança em ritmo lento. Neste momento não é o ritmo moderado com que as reformas são levadas a cabo na Turquia que trava o processo, mas a lentidão do Conselho e da Comissão Europeia. A discussão do impacto económico, social e político desta futura adesão foi feita aprofundadamente, em Dezembro último, na cidade polaca de Sopot, numa conferência em que tive o gosto e honra de ser orador.

Quanto às prioridades do Governo turco, é bom pensarmos no pequeno-almoço que existiu com o Primeiro-Ministro Erdogan, em Janeiro último, em Bruxelas, o qual trouxe uma oportuna clarificação, complementada pelos contactos que têm sido desenvolvidos por alguns de nós com a posição republicana e por um variado conjunto de personalidades e organizações da República turca, para além do trabalho persistente que temos feito na comissão parlamentar conjunta Turquia-União Europeia.

A terminar, diria, Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário e caros Colegas, que este é um processo decisivo para uma Europa bem alargada, forte e aberta ao mundo, laica e democrática, na qual a República de Chipre democraticamente unificada tem o lugar que bem merece.

  Метин Казак (ALDE). - Благодаря, г-жо Президент. Турция играе ключова роля за геостратегическата и енергийната сигурност на Европа, и тя ще продължи да бъде стабилизиращ фактор и по време на кризата. Вярно е, че събития като процесът за закриването на АКП, случаят "Ергенекон" и местните избори забавиха реформите в страната, но с назначаването на нов главен преговарящ се създава прекрасна възможност за турското правителство да ускори процеса за хармонизиране на законодателството с европейските стандарти и да отбележи напредък в политическите критерии в преговорните глави.

Смятам, че Турция следва да постигне три приоритета, ако иска да напредне сериозно по пътя за членство. Първо, да продължи да работи конструктивно за успеха на разговорите по кипърския въпрос, но този ангажимент трябва да бъде споделен от всички страни в процеса и да не бъде използван като претекст за блокирането на преговорите. Второ, да зачита свободата на словото и на мисълта. И трето, да осигури защитата на малцинствените общности, особено на техните културни и образователни права. Все по-модернизираща се Турция трябва да спечели отново проевропейските си поддръжници. Благодаря.

  Bart Staes (Verts/ALE). - Voorzitter, ik was een van de parlementsleden die vóór de opening van de onderhandelingen met Turkije stemde, en ik geloof dat die onderhandelingen al met al een oefening in conflictpreventie zijn. Ik ben ervan overtuigd dat de onderhandelingen een goede invloed hebben op tal van beleidsterreinen. Ze zorgen voor een beter sociaal klimaat in Turkije zelf, voor betere milieu- en gezondheidswetgeving en betere arbeidswetgeving voor Turkse mensen.

De onderhandelingen zorgen op den duur ook voor betere levensomstandigheden voor tal van bevolkingsgroepen: vrouwen, religieuze minderheidsgroepen, Koerden en Alevieten. Maar het gaat te traag. Er is al vier jaar stilstand, en de pijnpunten die een oplossing verdienen, zijn allerlei. De discriminatie van partijen zoals de Koerdische DTP is niet aanvaardbaar. Er is een gebrek aan burgerlijk en politiek toezicht op de werking van het leger, en dat kan gewoonweg niet.

De vrijheid van meningsuiting en de persvrijheid zijn essentieel en foltering en mishandeling in gevangenissen kan niet gedoogd worden. En ook een politieke oplossing voor het Koerdische vraagstuk is een absolute noodzaak. Ik denk dat we onder die omstandigheden de onderhandelingen zonder enige twijfel moeten voortzetten.

  Kyriacos Triantaphyllides (GUE/NGL). - Madam President, I would like to congratulate Commissioner Rehn on his position on the Oomen-Ruijten report, which was that it is essential for Turkey to proactively support the ongoing talks between the leaders of the two communities in Cyprus. That is why we are in full agreement with the rapporteur when, in paragraph 40 of her report, she calls on Turkey ‘to facilitate a suitable climate for negotiations by withdrawing Turkish forces and allowing the two leaders to negotiate freely their country’s future’.

I would suggest that, at this moment of direct talks, it might not be advisable for the European Parliament to include in its report any proposal for derogations from the acquis.

To complement the rapporteur’s position, we also call on Turkey to comply with its obligations regarding investigations into the fate of missing persons and to stop interfering in the Republic of Cyprus’ exclusive economic zone. In so doing, Turkey will itself facilitate its way towards accession.

  Marie Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou (PPE-DE). - Madame la Présidente, hier, j'ai déposé une question orale à la Commission et j'ai reçu une note de service du Secrétariat du Parlement me disant que M. le commissaire allait répondre à ma question cet après-midi.

Je déclare que je m'appelle Panayotopoulos et que j'ai déposé une question sur le paragraphe 6 du cadre des négociations avec la Turquie.

  La Présidente. - Madame, je pense que le commissaire vous a entendue.

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − Madam President, we have had a very long but important debate here today. This is a crucial year in the accession process for Croatia and for the whole of the Western Balkan region and we certainly attach importance to and welcome Parliament’s continued support in bringing Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and the Western Balkans closer to the EU.

Much has been said about the lack of progress in Turkey regarding its reform effort. We therefore welcome the reaffirmed commitment of Turkey towards its EU path, as Mr Erdogan said, and invite her to take the opportunity in 2009 to prove this commitment and make further progress in its path towards the EU.

Turkey has to deliver on long-awaited reforms. The continuing support of the European Parliament throughout the process is significant, in particular given the challenges ahead. I will have the opportunity of meeting the Turkish negotiator tomorrow in Prague.

At the same time, we should not take lightly the strategic importance of Turkey, in particular in the current turbulent times, and nor should we forget our previous commitments. As far as I know, President Obama, during his visit to Europe, may visit Turkey as a kind of model Muslim country. I think that this is not the time for Europeans to give up in our engagement with Turkey. I think that Joost Lagendijk, rightly, said this.

Concerning the border dispute between Croatia and Slovenia, I was listening carefully to what Hannes Swoboda, István Szent-Iványi and many others said, so let me just repeat that we as the Presidency welcome the fact that both Slovenia and Croatia have now agreed to pursue their work on Commissioner Rehn’s initiative concerning this dispute. We fully support this initiative and we are concerned that it has not generated any fruitful outcome yet, regarding the specific terms of facilitation. We note that time is running out, and the Presidency is keen to ensure concrete progress in the negotiations based on the work already done. We are therefore considering the possibilities for enhancing our support for the Commissioner’s initiative in the near future. We were just discussing this over lunch.

Concerning the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Bernd Posselt among others said that we should support the effort of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and I think he is right. I shall just mention that the Czech Prime Minister Topolánek visited Skopje yesterday and reaffirmed our commitment to the European aspiration of this country.

  Olli Rehn, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, I want to thank Members for a very constructive, substantive and responsible debate, and I would like to make just a few points concerning your speeches.

First, it is clear that all policy-making in Europe and in the world is overshadowed by the very challenging context of today, because of the financial crisis and the economic recession that our citizens are feeling and, of course, this is dominating the minds of our leaders in the European Union.

Still, it is absolutely essential that we as the European Union maintain our commitment to the EU perspective on south-eastern Europe, and this has been the expressed political will here today in the European Parliament, which I welcome and appreciate.

Secondly, concerning Cyprus, my friend, Mr Wiersma, said that I must be an optimist. I think something was lost in translation, even though I thought I was speaking English – maybe with a somewhat ethnic accent from eastern Finland! However, I do not consider myself either an optimist or a pessimist, but rather I am usually a realist as regards the analysis of things and determined as regards those issues that I can really influence. Here, I think that it is absolutely essential that we support the talks of the two leaders and of the two communities that are going on at the moment, so that we can seize the opportunity in 2009 to achieve a comprehensive settlement and, of course, we expect Turkey will contribute to a favourable political climate to achieve such a settlement.

From the point of view of the European Union, it is important to ensure that any solution is in line with the Union’s founding principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the rule of law. In other words, the EU can support any such solution that creates a united Cyprus respecting the principles on which the EU was founded and able to carry the obligations of EU membership. This clearly implies a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation with political equality, as defined by the relevant resolutions of the UN Security Council.

Finally, concerning Croatia, I thank the speakers for their support for the Commission’s initiative on mediation – an initiative that is based on international law, and here I refer to both the UN Charter and the negotiating framework between the EU and Croatia. I can only underline that, whatever method is chosen, it will need to be a bilateral agreement between the two countries, Slovenia and Croatia. We are working on that in order to facilitate such an agreement.

I sincerely wish that you can support the Commission’s initiative in your resolution so as not to create a situation where we would have to return to square one, because this is the only realistic and viable way forward.

Let me conclude by saying that I sincerely believe that it is still possible for Croatia to reach the ambitious target of concluding the accession negotiations by the end of 2009, provided that the negotiations can proceed soon. That is why I encourage both countries to agree rapidly so as to solve the border issue and without delay unblock Croatia’s EU accession negotiations. I should like to thank you for your support for this initiative.

  La Présidente. - J'ai reçu, conformément à l'article 103, paragraphe 2, du règlement trois propositions de résolution⁽¹⁾.

Le débat est clos.

Le vote aura lieu demain, 12 mars 2009.

  Bernd Posselt (PPE-DE). - Frau Präsidentin! Ich habe eine konkrete Frage an den Kommissar, nämlich ob er damit einverstanden ist oder auch vorschlägt, dass man das principle of equity, wie in der Kommissionserklärung vorgesehen, durch international law and jurisprudence ersetzt.

(Unterbrechung durch die Präsidentin)

  La Présidente. - Monsieur Posselt, le débat est clos.

Déclarations écrites (article 142)

  Călin Cătălin Chiriţă (PPE-DE), în scris. – O felicit pe doamna Ria Oomen-Ruijten pentru acest raport excelent elaborat.

Doresc să accentuez 2 idei:

1) În primul rând, consider că UE trebuie să încurajeze dezvoltarea în continuare în Turcia a elitelor pro-europene, moderne, laice, dar şi difuzarea valorilor europene şi a informaţiilor de calitate privind integrarea europeană. În acest scop, UE trebuie să susţină mai activ reforma învăţământului din Turcia, garantarea autonomiei universitare, dezvoltarea studiilor de integrare europeană şi Programul Erasmus. Studenţii, cercetătorii şi profesorii care doresc să studieze aprofundat instituţiile şi politicile UE trebuie să fie încurajaţi şi susţinuţi.

2) În al doilea rând, în paralel cu susţinerea drepturilor persoanelor aparţinând minorităţilor naţionale, UE trebuie să condamne cu hotărâre acţiunile separatiste etnice. Mă refer la separatismul kurd din Turcia şi la separatismul turc din Cipru, dar mai sunt şi alte exemple. UE trebuie să susţină aplicarea fermă a principiilor integrităţii teritoriale şi bunei vecinătăţi în ceea ce priveşte Turcia, Irakul, Ciprul şi celelalte ţări din regiune.

  Richard Corbett (PSE), in writing. – I am encouraged that the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Commission are confident that negotiations for Croatia’s accession to the EU can be concluded this year. Croatia has made good progress in adopting the Community acquis, the anti-corruption body USKOK has intensified its work and legislation has been introduced to reform the Croatian judiciary.

However, this is tempered by the knowledge that cases remain where the ICTY has been unable to access certain documents relating to alleged war crimes, and further attention must be given to minority rights such as the status of the Krajina Serbs and refugee return.

Enlargement is one of the great successes of the modern European Union. Having integrated many European nations ravaged by the Cold War, we must now do the same for the Western Balkans. Croatian accession is the first crucial step.

  Alexandra Dobolyi (PSE), írásban. – A török kérdést mindig is kételyek és bizalmatlanság vette körül. Mindig akadt olyan probléma, ami lényegesen továbbment a szigorú csatlakozási kritériumok teljesítésnek szükségességén.

Ezzel kapcsolatban elég, ha csak megnézzük, milyen szomszédsági kapcsolatot is ápol Törökország olyan európai uniós tagállamokkal, mint Görögország, Ciprus, vagy olyan unión kívüli országgal, mint Örményország. Továbbá, ha figyelembe vesszük, hogy Törökország az egyetlen olyan állam, amely számára az unió csak 26 tagállamból áll, minden realitást, nemzetközi egyezményt és jogot figyelmen kívül hagyva, akkor érdekes, hogy Törökországa maga is ehhez a közösséghez szeretne csatlakozni, tartozni a jövőben.

Azon az állásponton vagyok, mindaddig, amíg az ország magatartása nem változik érdemben alapvető fontosságú kérdésekben, akkor az ország Európai Unióhoz való csatlakozási folyamata a jövőbe vész. Amikor az Európai Unió elhatározta, hogy megkezdi a csatlakozási tárgyalásokat, azt abban a reményben és meggyőződésben tette, hogy Törökországnak igen is van helye az európai családban. Felteszem a kérdést, biztos, hogy a mai Törökország is ezt gondolja?

Ha Törökország egyértelmű elkötelezettséget mutat jószomszédi kapcsolatainak alakításában, a fennálló viták békés rendezésében az ENSZ Alapokmányával és egyéb Európai Uniós dokumentummal összhangban, akkor van remény.

Ha e kritériumukat maradéktalanul teljesíti Törökország, akkor, esélye van arra, hogy elnyerje mindannyiunk támogatását, és talán visszaszerezheti Európa állampolgárainak szimpátiáját is.

  Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (PSE), na piśmie. – W przeciągu ostatniego roku widać znaczący postęp oraz wzmożone wysiłki Chorwacji w negocjacjach akcesyjnych. Negocjacje o członkostwo w UE są na dobrej drodze, tym niemniej kraj musi skoncentrować się na dalszych reformach w takich dziedzinach, jak administracja, wymiar sprawiedliwości, gospodarka, walka z korupcją i zorganizowaną przestępczością, respektowanie i ochrona mniejszości, ściganie zbrodni wojennych.

Niezbędne są dalsze wysiłki w celu pełnej transpozycji acquis communautaire oraz jego skutecznego wdrożenia. Ponadto niezwykle istotne jest doprowadzenie do polepszenia stosunków sąsiedzkich Chorwacji, w szczególności ze Słowenią, oraz znalezienie ostatecznego rozwiązania w kwestii granic z innymi państwami sąsiadującymi.

Chorwacja powinna także uwzględnić w swojej polityce rozwoju cele, jakie stawia sobie obecnie Unia Europejska w dziedzinie pakietu klimatycznego i odnawialnych źródeł energii.

Dalsze postępy Chorwacji w negocjacjach akcesyjnych zależą w szczególności od dokonania niezbędnych reform politycznych, gospodarczych, legislacyjnych oraz administracyjnych. W tym kontekście należy przypomnieć, że mapa drogowa wskazana przez Komisję jest bardzo przydatnym i pomocnym narzędziem, które wspiera kraj w finalizowaniu negocjacji w poszczególnych rozdziałach. Mam nadzieję, iż uda się osiągnąć ich fazę końcową, nawet jeszcze w tym roku.

  András Gyürk (PPE-DE), írásban. – Az energiaügyi együttműködés az EU-török kapcsolatok egyik leghangsúlyosabb kérdésévé lépett elő. Ennek elsődleges oka, hogy Törökország tranzitállamként nagymértékben hozzájárulhat ahhoz, hogy az EU mérsékelje energiaforrásoktól való függőségét és több lábon álljon ellátását tekintve. A Törökországgal való együttműködés elmélyítése egyúttal fontos lépés lehet az energia belső piacának kiterjesztése felé.

Meggyőződésem, hogy Törökország és az Európai Unió alapvető céljai egy irányba mutatnak. Lehetőleg minél több forrásból szeretnének eleget tenni a növekvő energiafogyasztási igényeknek. A több lábon állás elősegítése mindenekelőtt a gázellátás terén sürgető feladat. Ezen törekvés kulcsfontosságú eszköze a Nabucco vezeték megépítése. A januári gázválság minden korábbinál erőteljesebben mutatott rá az említett beruházás szükségességére. Ezért is üdvözlendő fejlemény, hogy az Európai Gazdaságélénkítési Terv forrásokat különítene el a gázvezeték megépítésére.

A Nabucco ügyében tett első kapavágások előtt kétoldalú kormányközi megállapodásokra van szükség, mindenekelőtt Törökország bevonásával. Sajnálatosnak tartom azokat a nyilatkozatokat, amelyek közvetlenül összekötik Ankara Nabucco-hoz való viszonyulását az ország uniós csatlakozásával. Meggyőződésem, hogy az energiapolitikai együttműködés kérdése nem válhat külpolitikai fegyverré. A fentiek miatt intenzívebb energetikai párbeszédre van szükség az Európai Unió és Törökország között. Ennek egyik lehetséges állomása az energetikai csatlakozási fejezet megnyitása lehet.

  Nicolae Vlad Popa (PPE-DE), în scris. – Raportul anual al Comisiei privind progresele înregistrate de Turcia ca stat candidat în 2008 este echilibrat. Deşi procesul de reformă ar trebui impulsionat şi opt capitole de negociere rămân blocate, Comisia a apreciat în mod deosebit recenta activitate diplomatică a Turciei şi rolul său în promovarea stabilităţii regionale. Evenimentele verii 2008 au subliniat rolul strategic al Turciei, inclusiv în ceea ce priveşte domeniul energetic.

În domeniul cooperării regionale, este remarcat rolul constructiv pe care Turcia l-a avut în relaţiile sale de vecinătate şi în Orientul Mijlociu, printr-o diplomaţie activă. Evoluţiile din Caucaz au relevat importanţa strategică a Turciei pentru securitatea energetică a UE, în special prin diversificarea rutelor de transport. Documentul subliniază importanţa unei cooperări strânse în domeniul energiei între UE şi Turcia, un element cheie în acest sens fiind proiectul Nabucco. În urma lansării negocierilor dintre liderii ciprioţi grec şi turc pentru realizarea unei înţelegeri privind problema cipriotă, este crucial ca Ankara să continue să sprijine găsirea unei soluţii şi eforturile pe care le face ONU in acest scop.

Extinderea UE şi continuarea integrării europene a statelor din Balcanii de Vest sunt dosare prioritare pentru România. România sprijină progresul substanţial al negocierilor cu Turcia, proces a cărui dinamică este de natură să stimuleze reformele interne.

  Toomas Savi (ALDE), in writing. – During the past five years, the New Member states have witnessed numerous positive effects of the membership of the European Union. That experience is not to be monopolized, and I therefore support fiercely the EU’s continued enlargement. However, as much as I would like to see Turkey joining the EU in the near future, the progress report unfortunately indicates something quite the opposite.

I have addressed this issue several times in this Chamber, pointing to the Armenian genocide, concerns over the Kurds and the occupation of Cyprus.

In addition to that, when examining the progress that Turkey has made towards the completion of negotiations on 35 acquis communautaire chapters since October 2005, one can see that only twelve chapters have been opened and until now just one – the chapter on science and research – has been closed.

I would like to ask the Council and the Commission how they propose to accelerate the course of the negotiations and solve the dispute on Cyprus.

  Csaba Sógor (PPE-DE), írásban. – Az uniós tagországoknak több szolidaritást és toleranciát kellene mutatniuk a csatlakozó országok irányában. Országom, Románia nem volt felkészülve a csatlakozásra, a kisebbségi jogok területén mai napig is hiányosságok vannak Magyarország mégsem akadályozta meg Románia csatlakozását, mert számára a legfontosabb az Európai szolidaritás és tolerancia volt. A csatlakozó országoknak természetesen nagyobb lépésekben kell haladniuk az emberi- és kisebbségi jogok szavatolásának terén, de a már uniós tagországoknak is jó példát kellene mutatniuk. Ezért tartom fontosnak, hogy elsősorban az uniós tagországokat szólítsuk fel:

- írják alá és ratifikálják a kisebbségi és regionális nyelvek kartáját,

- szűntessék meg az egyik EU tagállamban hatályban lévő, kollektív bűnösség fogalmát bevezető törvényt,

- Koszovó példájából tanulva, a már csatlakozott uniós országok területén szavatolják a hagyományos nemzeti kisebbségek kulturális és területi autonómiáját.

  Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (PSE), írásban. – A Nyugat-Balkán stabilizálása és európai kötődésének erősítése fontos feladatunk, mivel a térség geostratégiai jelentőséggel bír Európa számára, miközben számos szempontból, például gazdasági és energetikai téren igen sérülékeny és kiszolgáltatott.

Horvátországot reményeink szerint már 2011-ben, a magyar elnökség idején az uniós tagállamok között üdvözölhetjük, de ennek feltétele, hogy sikerrel záruljanak a Szlovéniával most megindított, nemzetközi közvetítéssel zajló kétoldalú tárgyalások a Piráni-öböl megosztásáról. További követelmény, hogy Horvátország a háborús bűnösök felkutatása és kiadatása terén teljes mértékben működjön együtt a hágai Nemzetközi Törvényszékkel. Ezen túl pozitív üzeneteket kell küldenünk a régió azon országainak is, ahol ma még a felvétel ideje - számos külső és belső tényező miatt - bizonytalan. Mihamarabb ratifikáljuk a Stabilitási és Társulási Megállapodást Szerbiával és Bosznia-Hercegovinával, adjuk meg a hivatalos tagjelölti státuszt a régió összes országának, valamint határozzunk meg pontos menetrendet a vízummentesség mielőbbi biztosítására. A pénzügyi válság nagy erővel sújtott le a Balkánon, az uniós tagállamoknak szükség esetén részt kell vállalniuk a térség stabilizálásában, segítséget kell nyújtaniuk a bajba jutott országoknak. Az Uniónak figyelemmel kell követnie az etnikumközi viszonyokat is a térségben, különös tekintettel az érzékeny macedóniai belső helyzetre, amely pillanatnyilag a régió legveszélyesebb konfliktusát rejti magában.

(1) Voir Procès-verbal

13. Mandat tal-Qorti Kriminali Internazzjonali għall-ex-Jugożlavja (dibattitu)

  La Présidente. - L'ordre du jour appelle le débat sur le rapport d'Annemie Neyts-Uyttebroeck, au nom de la commission des affaires étrangères, sur une proposition de recommandation du Parlement européen à l'intention du Conseil sur le mandat du Tribunal pénal international pour l'ex-Yougoslavie (2008/2290(INI)) (A6-0112/2009).

  Annemie Neyts-Uyttebroeck, rapporteure. − Voorzitter, commissaris, Raadsvoorzitter, collegae, sinds zijn oprichting in 1993 heeft het Internationaal Straftribunaal voor voormalig Joegoslavië 161 personen in staat van beschuldiging gesteld, heeft het de strafprocedure tegen 116 beschuldigden afgerond, terwijl voor een aantal andere beschuldigden de strafprocedure nog lopende is.

Slechts in twee gevallen moet het strafproces nog beginnen, terwijl twee hoofdbeschuldigden, de heren Mladic en Hadzic nog voortvluchtig zijn. De VN-Veiligheidsraad heeft het Tribunaal aangezet om zijn werkzaamheden uiterlijk tegen eind 2010 af te ronden, maar heeft van deze datum geen absolute deadline gemaakt.

Na een begrijpelijke moeizame start - alles was immers nieuw en moest als het ware ter plekke worden uitgevonden - heeft het Tribunaal zich ontpopt tot een uiterst gedegen, ernstige en bekwame rechtsinstantie die haar werkzaamheden geenszins beperkt tot het spreken van recht. Rechtspreken doet het Tribunaal overigens met de allergrootste zorgvuldigheid, wat haar legitimiteit heeft versterkt. Tevens heeft het Tribunaal heuse out-reach-programma's opgezet om bij te dragen tot het verwerkings- en verzoeningsproces in de landen ontstaan uit het uiteenvallen van het voormalig Joegoslavië.

Ook werkt het Tribunaal mee aan de vorming van nationale juridische instanties, die immers de hoofdmoot van de dossiers betreffende oorlogsmisdaden en misdaden tegen de menselijkheid moeten behandelen. Het is namelijk nooit de bedoeling geweest dat het Tribunaal overal in voormalig Joegoslavië en voor altijd in de plaats zal treden van nationale jurisdicties.

Integendeel, het zijn de betrokken landen zelf die ervoor moeten zorgen dat oorlogsmisdaden en misdaden tegen de menselijkheid worden vervolgd en berecht. Met het oog daarop heeft het Tribunaal een aantal dossiers doorgezonden naar nationale jurisdicties en heeft het zich geconcentreerd op de belangrijkste gevallen.

Ook heeft het Tribunaal een heuse completion strategy in drie fasen opgesteld om aan de wensen van de Veiligheidsraad tegemoet te komen. Dat plan voorziet in een volledige afwikkeling van alle rechtszaken tegen eind 2011 met misschien een kleine uitloper in 2012. Om in alle eventualiteiten te voorzien, maar bovenal om ervoor te zorgen dat Mladic en Hadzic in elk geval dezelfde procesgang zullen ondergaan, moet worden voorzien in een efficiënt, hooggekwalificeerd en voldoende uitgerust mechanisme dat alle resttaken kan uitvoeren, ook nadat het mandaat van het Tribunaal is afgelopen.

Om al die redenen verzoeken we de Raad om er bij de Verenigde Naties, en vooral bij de Veiligheidsraad, op aan te dringen dat het mandaat van het Tribunaal met minstens twee jaar wordt verlengd, dat er na afloop daarvan in een opvangmechanisme wordt voorzien en dat ervoor wordt gezorgd dat het archief van het Tribunaal wordt bewaard en toegankelijk gemaakt.

In eenzelfde, maar iets ruimere context vragen we dat goede samenwerking met het Tribunaal en de uitbouw van een efficiënte rechterlijke macht, die ook misdaden tegen de menselijkheid behandelt, beoordelingscriteria blijven voor onze betrekkingen met de landen in de westelijke Balkan. We dringen er bij de betrokken landen op aan dat ze volop blijven meewerken met het Tribunaal, en voor afdoende antwoorden aan de hoofdaanklager zorgen.

Tenslotte roepen we de Commissie op om aandacht te blijven schenken aan vormingsprogramma's en andere initiatieven die gericht zijn op onderlinge dialoog, op het gezamenlijk zoeken naar waarheid en op verzoening. Want, collega's, voorzitters, rechtspraak alleen - hoe goed ook - leidt nog niet tot verzoening, en die is broodnodig opdat de mannen en vrouwen van de westelijke Balkan uiteindelijk aan hun toekomst kunnen bouwen.

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − Madam President, I think this debate is a timely one and that Mrs Neyts-Uyttebroeck’s report includes a number of important recommendations. It gives me the opportunity to raise an issue which is central to our policy towards the Western Balkans.

The work of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) is an essential element in rendering justice, coming to terms with the past and moving forward. It is also key to strengthening the rule of law in the region. This can be a slow, and at times difficult, process, but the ICTY has made important progress. So far it has completed proceedings against 116 accused with very different verdicts. Only two of 161 indictees remain at large.

When the ICTY was set up in 1993 the domestic judicial systems in the former Yugoslavia were unprepared for dealing with crimes of this scale. Yet it was clear that they had to be addressed. No contract, no agreement, no society can be sustainable without justice. Our strategy towards the region is to assist in stabilising the countries of the Western Balkans and helping them realise their EU perspective. A central element of that policy is cooperation with the ICTY. We support its mandate in several ways.

Firstly, the countries of the Western Balkans are part of the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP). This process depends on respect for democratic principles, the rule of law, human rights and the rights of persons belonging to minorities, fundamental freedoms and the principles of international law and regional cooperation. It also depends on full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. SAP conditionality is monitored through the annual progress reports prepared by the Commission. The next progress reports will be published in October 2009.

In addition, human rights and rule-of-law issues, including strengthening the functioning, impartiality and responsibility of the judiciary system, and the fight against corruption and organised crime are key priorities of the EU’s European Partnership with the countries of the Western Balkans. These are updated on a regular basis.

Furthermore, the Council has adopted two common positions aimed at supporting the implementation of the mandate of the ICTY by imposing an assets freeze on indicted fugitives and a travel ban on persons assisting ICTY indictees to evade justice. These common positions are regularly extended and updated.

The European Union will support the work of the ICTY until it has been completed. I entirely agree that in the longer term the legacy of the ICTY must be preserved. Whenever this happens – and it is not a matter for the EU to decide – the domestic judicial systems will need to be ready to take over the ICTY’s files. This is one of the reasons why the emphasis we have placed on judicial reform and good governance in the SAP is so important.

The work of NGOs and individuals, such as the Humanitarian Law Centre in Belgrade and the Research and Documentation Centre in Sarajevo, who are seeking after the truth, also deserves our full support.

Let me close by thanking this Parliament for your support in this area and in particular for this helpful and constructive report.

IN THE CHAIR: Diana WALLIS
Vice-President

  Olli Rehn, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, I welcome the initiative and report by Mrs Neyts-Uyttebroeck. This initiative and report send a very welcome signal about the commitment of the European Parliament to support the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY).

For the Commission it is clear that the international community must maintain its full support for the ICTY to complete its remaining tasks. There can be no impunity for war crimes and, as you well know, full cooperation with ICTY is a condition for making progress in European integration. This necessary condition affects the EU accession process of Serbia today and it has affected Croatia. I hope it will not affect Croatia again, on condition that Croatia maintains full cooperation with ICTY.

This principle also includes the handling of war crime cases that are referred back to domestic jurisdiction by the ICTY. We have provided financial support and we are intensifying our support and efforts at capacity-building in this important field, especially in Bosnia and Herzegovina which has by far the largest caseload.

The Commission has recently approved funding for a project initiated by Chief Prosecutor Serge Brammertz on internships in his office to train visiting war crime prosecutors and young professionals from south-east Europe.

We are also working with Chief Prosecutor Brammertz on other projects including a regional conference for war crime prosecutors from the Western Balkans. That will take place in Brussels in early April, next month.

All in all, the Commission remains fully committed to ICTY and continues to support Mr Brammertz and his dedicated colleagues in efforts to bring to justice those who are responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law and thus we want to support this important work contributing towards reconciliation and the maintenance of peace in the Western Balkans.

I look forward to continuing to work together with Parliament in this regard.

  Ria Oomen-Ruijten, namens de PPE-DE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, hartelijk dank aan mevrouw Neyts voor de volledigheid van haar verslag. Wij moeten als Parlement inderdaad, zoals ze stelt, onze prioriteiten heel helder stellen. Er mag geen straffeloosheid zijn voor oorlogsmisdadigers. Er moet volledige medewerking zijn van alle landen in de regio en er moet ook een zorgvuldige afronding van het werk van het Internationaal Strafhof komen.

Voorzitter, het is duidelijk dat het Hof in Den Haag met 116 afgeronde zaken en veel werk in de regio, een heel mooie balans kan voorleggen. Niemand kan meer zeggen dat schuldigen onbestraft blijven. Ik ben ook blij met de nadruk die er gelegd is op de volledige medewerking die aan het Hof moet worden verleend. Dat geldt voor alle landen waaruit verdachten afkomstig zijn. Ook de mensen die nu nog gezocht worden, moeten voor het Hof gebracht worden en alle landen in de regio hebben zich daartoe ten opzichte van de Europese Unie verplicht. Wij zouden niet geloofwaardig zijn, als we daar niet aan vasthouden. Ik zal overigens morgen, met goedkeuring van de rapporteur, een mondeling amendement daarop indienen.

Voorzitter, de waarde van het Hof is groot, omdat er nog zoveel te doen is in het justitiële apparaat in de Balkan. Daarom is het ook goed dat in dit verslag de nadruk op het goede functioneren van een onafhankelijke en onpartijdige justitie wordt gelegd. Want dat is een van de criteria van Kopenhagen.

Voorzitter, twee specifieke opmerkingen: de termijn. Ik vind dat je niet zo strikt zou moeten vasthouden aan 2010, 2011; het is namelijk veel belangrijker dat het Hof ook na die termijn, als de zaken nog niet zijn afgehandeld, verder kan functioneren.

Het tweede punt is de afwikkeling. Zelfs met de arrestatie en het proces van Mladic en Hadzic eindigt het werk van het Hof niet. Het residual mechanism en het Internationaal Strafhof kunnen taken afhandelen, maar goede en minder goede ervaringen mogen naar mijn gevoel nooit en te nimmer verloren gaan.

  Richard Howitt, on behalf of the PSE Group. – Madam President, since its establishment in 1993, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has fundamentally reshaped the role of international humanitarian law and has provided the victims of the tragic Balkan conflicts, who would otherwise have gone unheard, with an opportunity to voice the horrors that they and their families experienced and to seek justice.

The ICTY has shown that no one, whatever their position or status at the time of the conflict, is immune from justice – a precedent that now sees the International Criminal Court promote respect for human rights across our world.

Today we reiterate that, for the former Yugoslavia, there can be no impunity for those indictees who are still being sought. Ratko Mladić and Goran Hadžić are still renegades from justice and must be handed in.

We should also give our full support to Chief Prosecutor Brammertz’s call for the necessary documentation, vital to the case against the former General Ante Gotovina and others, to be made available to the Tribunal – an issue that our Croatian friends amongst others know is pertinent to the EU accession process.

The Socialist Group has proposed two amendments to plenary. Firstly, that it should be made clear that any proposals for a possible mandate extension should not divert attention from the key task of completing trials and moving towards the earliest possible closure. Secondly, we appeal for free access to the ICTY’s archives by prosecutors, defence counsel and, eventually, historians and researchers.

I thank the rapporteur, and I commend these amendments to the House.

  Sarah Ludford, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Madam President, we need to support, to its conclusion, the impressive work of the Hague Tribunal in bringing perpetrators of terrible crimes to justice and not impose an artificial cut-off, because time pressures would prejudice fair trials while shortcuts would harm the safety of witnesses. While many lower-level cases have been successfully transferred to national courts, some of them may be unable or unwilling to conduct criminal proceedings in accordance with international standards, which means that transfers are sometimes being resisted by victims and witnesses.

In order to permit the continuation of the ICTY’s mandate, we urge the Council to encourage the Security Council to provide sufficient resources from its general budget, not least to be able to retain key specialists and highly qualified staff. The Tribunal must leave a sound legacy, both as a model for other potential ad hoc tribunals and in order to contribute to the strengthening of justice in the Balkan countries.

There is a need for increased EU support for domestic war crimes investigations and trials and for the Copenhagen criteria to include even more support for a well-trained and high-performing judiciary, but the legacy of that the Tribunal must also contribute to reconciliation and inter-ethnic understanding, and the work of NGOs deserves more resources.

Commissioner Rehn reminds us that full cooperation with the ICTY is a condition of EU accession but the truth is, as Commissioner Orban candidly told me last night in the absence of Commissioner Rehn, that there is no unanimity in the Council as to what that means. That has led to confusion and a consistent postponement of deadlines. Much as we all want Serbia and Croatia to join, the Council, Commission and Parliament must be united and firm in saying that indictees like Mladić and Hadžić must be delivered and, in the case of Croatia, evidence and witnesses facilitated. We cannot afford to relax these conditions.

  Jan Marinus Wiersma (PSE). - Voorzitter, ik wil een paar punten noemen in dit korte debat. Het werk van het Joegoslavië-Tribunaal is van eminent belang, niet alleen om te garanderen dat zij die verantwoordelijk zijn voor misdaden tijdens de oorlogen op de Balkan hun straf niet ontlopen, maar ook om het rechtsgevoel van de mensen te bedienen. Het Tribunaal speelt ook een belangrijke rol in het Europees beleid ten aanzien van de westelijke Balkan. Dat wordt in het verslag van mevrouw Neyts ook goed benadrukt.

Nu het einde van het mandaat van het Tribunaal in zicht komt, moeten we nadenken over de afronding van het werk. Bij ons staat daarbij voorop dat de capaciteit behouden blijft om de zaken die nu al lopen af te ronden en om de laatste twee verdachten die nog op vrije voeten zijn, Mladic en Hadzic, voor het Tribunaal te brengen.

Op geen enkel moment mag namelijk de indruk worden gewekt dat door de lengte van het mandaat en het aflopen daarvan die mensen op vrije voeten zouden blijven. Of dat gebeurt via een verlenging van het mandaat of het optuigen van een residual mechanism is voor ons geen principiële kwestie, en wat ons betreft kunnen we misschien ook een vorm vinden om de rechters, de raadsheren en het secretariaat op een vorm van standby te zetten.

  Véronique De Keyser (PSE). - Madame la Présidente, l'Union européenne applique à tous les pays des Balkans le principe de l'égalité de traitement.

Si, d'un côté, nous insistons pour que Belgrade livre Mladic avant de pouvoir mettre en œuvre l'accord intérimaire sur le commerce dans le cadre de l'accord d'association et de stabilisation, il est clair que nous demandons aussi une pleine coopération de la Croatie avec le Tribunal.

Or, cette coopération, c'est le moins qu'on puisse dire, laisse encore à désirer. Lors de la dernière visite du procureur Brammertz à Zagreb, en février, où il s'était rendu pour réclamer les documents manquants sur l'utilisation de l'artillerie dans l'opération "Tempête" qui, pour mémoire, a eu pour conséquence l'exode de 200 000 Serbes et la mort de 350 civils, le procureur avait exigé une pleine coopération de la Croatie, et si la Commission européenne vient de donner son feu vert à l'ouverture du chapitre 23 sur le judiciaire et les droits fondamentaux, certains gouvernements européens ne l'entendent pas de cette oreille, et le Parlement européen non plus.

Il n'y aura pas, en fait, d'adhésion pour nous dans les Balkans sans garantie de paix, et la meilleure des garanties, c'est la vérité et la justice sur les crimes du passé.

Je voudrais féliciter Mme Neyts-Uyttebroeck pour son rapport, qui a obtenu l'unanimité en affaires étrangères.

  Alexandru Nazare (PPE-DE). - Felicit raportoarea, doamna Neyts şi salut Raportul privind mandatul Tribunalului Penal Internaţional pentru fosta Iugoslavie, un raport la care am contribuit şi eu cu câteva amendamente şi care ridică o serie de probleme reale pe care avem datoria să le luăm în considerare.

Trebuie să ne asigurăm că rezultatele obţinute până acum de acest tribunal în pedepsirea crimelor de război şi promovarea reconcilierii în Balcanii de Vest sunt fructificate. Munca tribunalului trebuie dusă la bun sfârşit. De asemenea, este necesară evaluarea rezultatelor de până acum, şi mai ales a obiectivelor care nu au fost încă atinse. În funcţie de această evaluare, Consiliul ar trebui să ia în considerare o prelungire de mandat pentru atât timp cât va fi nevoie.

Desigur, activitatea acestui tribunal nu va putea continua la nesfârşit; de aceea trebuie să ne asigurăm că va exista un mecanism care să asigure în continuare funcţiile reziduale care sunt în prezent îndeplinite, atât timp cât va fi nevoie. Consider binevenită în acest sens formularea acelei propuneri către Consiliul de securitate al Naţiunilor Unite, în vederea fondării unei instituţii în acest sens.

O altă măsură pe care o consider crucială pentru dezvoltarea unor capabilităţi instituţionale durabile în Balcanii de Vest ţine de crearea unui set de norme şi criterii de evaluare pentru sistemele judiciare din aceste ţări, pentru a susţine tribunalele naţionale.

  Bogusław Rogalski (UEN). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Międzynarodowy Trybunał Karny dla byłej Jugosławii wniósł znaczny wkład w proces pojednania na Bałkanach Zachodnich przyczyniając się do przywrócenia i utrzymania pokoju w regionie. Przyczynił się także do stworzenia podstaw nowej ogólnoświatowej normy rozstrzygania konfliktów po zakończeniu wojny. Trzeba jednak podkreślić, iż sprawą zasadniczą musi być wspieranie rozwoju potencjału krajowego sądownictwa na Bałkanach, tak aby lokalne sądy mogły kontynuować dzieło, które rozpoczął Trybunał. Poprawa współpracy między sądami a prokuraturą na Bałkanach Zachodnich jest kolejnym ważnym wyzwaniem, szczególnie w przypadkach obejmujących ekstradycję i wzajemną pomoc prawną. Istnieje również oczywista potrzeba wprowadzenia mechanizmów, które zapewnią, że funkcje Trybunału po jego likwidacji oraz spuścizna Trybunału umocnią zasady państwa prawa.

Na koniec pragnę zaapelować do państw Bałkanów Zachodnich, do państw Unii, aby wspierały pracę organizacji pozarządowych, jak i innych instytucji, które pomagają ofiarom, propagują dialog i porozumienie między grupami etnicznymi oraz wspierają dążenie do pojednania na Bałkanach.

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − Madam President, in conclusion, I would like briefly to reiterate our full support for the ongoing work of the ICTY as an important part of the healing and reconciliation process in the Western Balkans, now and in the future.

Let me just mention that we will be having meetings with the Chief Prosecutor, Serge Brammertz, in Prague tomorrow. I agree that the Tribunal should be in a position to carry out its mandate, complete the ongoing trials and open new ones against the two indictees still at large. I also agree that the legacy of the Tribunal has to be preserved by strengthening the local capacity to deal with the outstanding cases. After all, these are the cases which concern the Western Balkan countries and for which they themselves eventually need to take responsibility.

  Olli Rehn, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, I wish to thank you for a very concise but important debate and congratulate Mrs Neyts-Uyttebroeck on her report and initiative.

The ICTY is indeed an expression of European values of justice and the rule of law, and therefore this debate is so important. It is also an essential element of our enlargement policy in the Western Balkans.

On dates, I can only agree with the ICTY itself – that the dates in the tribunal’s completion strategy are target dates only and not absolute deadlines, as correctly stated in Mrs Neyts-Uyttebroeck’s report.

For the Commission, the crucial issue is retaining the support of the international community for the completion of the Tribunal’s existing mandate so as to ensure that there will be no impunity for war crimes in the future.

  Annemie Neyts-Uyttebroeck, rapporteure. − Madam President, I wish to thank everybody who contributed to this debate.

I also wanted to say that I have found with everybody who works or has worked at the ICTY a degree of dedication and commitment which I have seldom seen elsewhere. That has been a great pleasure.

That was all the more reason to come forward with these proposals.

  President. − The debate is closed.

The vote will take place tomorrow, Thursday, 12 March 2009.

Written statements (Rule 142)

  Marek Aleksander Czarnecki (ALDE), na piśmie. – Panie Przewodniczący! Prace Trybunału w Hadze zasługują na stałe wsparcie Unii Europejskiej, głównie ze względu na stworzenie podstaw nowej normy rozstrzygania konfliktów, a także znaczny wkład w proces pojednania w rejonie Bałkanów Zachodnich.

W świetle rezolucji ONZ wzywających do zakończenia prac MTK, zgadzam się z Panią sprawozdawczynią, iż należy zbadać możliwość przedłużenia mandatu tej instytucji. Istnieje potrzeba dalszych prac Trybunału, choćby ze względu na fakt, iż wielu zbrodniarzy dalej znajduje się na wolności, a znaczna liczba spraw wymaga jeszcze rzetelnego rozpatrzenia.

W moim przekonaniu kluczowe jest także stworzenie jasnego mechanizmu działania wymiaru sprawiedliwości na Bałkanach, który przejmie pierwotne funkcje Trybunału po jego ewentualnej likwidacji. Apeluję także do państw członkowskich o wspieranie prac organizacji pozarządowych i innych instytucji, które pomagają ofiarom, promują dialog i porozumienie pomiędzy grupami etnicznymi oraz wspierają dążenie do pojednania.

  Αθανάσιος Παφίλης (GUE/NGL), γραπτώς. – 10 χρόνια από το βρόμικο πόλεμο που εξαπέλυσαν HΠA-NATO-ΕΕ κατά της Γιουγκοσλαβίας οι ένοχοι για τα εγκλήματα κατά των λαών της ασελγούν πάνω στους χιλιάδες δολοφονημένους, μεταξύ των οποίων γυναίκες και παιδιά, πάνω στις τεράστιες καταστροφές, που προκάλεσαν στα Bαλκάνια. H σχετική Έκθεση εξυμνεί το Δικαστήριο της Xάγης που έστησαν, για να δικάσουν τα θύματά τους και να αθωώσουν τα εγκλήματα των Aμερικανοευρωπαίων ιμπεριαλιστών. Ένα Δικαστήριο με κατασκευασμένα κατηγορητήρια, με παρωδίες δικών, που οδήγησαν στη δολοφονία του πρώην Προέδρου της Γιουγκοσλαβίας Σλόμπονταν Mιλόσεβιτς. Mε απίστευτο θράσος ζητούν την παράταση της λειτουργίας του για να κατασκευάσουν νέους ενόχους και να ασκήσουν τρομοκρατικές πιέσεις στους λαούς της Γιουγκοσλαβίας, ζητώντας τους να υπογράψουν δήλωση μετανοίας για την υπεράσπιση της πατρίδας τους και να υποδουλωθούν στους Ευρωπαίους δολοφόνους τους.

H απλή καταψήφιση της κατάπτυστης αυτής έκθεσης δεν είναι αρκετή. Tο KKΕ δεν συμμετέχει στην ψηφοφορία. Aρνείται έστω και με την παρουσία του να συμμετάσχει στη νομιμοποίηση των ιμπεριαλιστικών εγκλημάτων από το Ευρωκοινοβούλιο. Aποδίδει και με αυτόν τον τρόπο έναν ελάχιστο φόρο τιμής σε όσους πλήρωσαν με το αίμα τους την ιμπεριαλιστική βαρβαρότητα HΠA-NATO-ΕΕ.

Tα πραγματικά Δικαστήρια των λαών θα στηθούν και οι πραγματικοί ένοχοι και δολοφόνοι των HΠA-NATO και ΕΕ, οι κεντροδεξιές και κεντροαριστερές κυβερνήσεις, θα δικαστούν και θα καταδικαστούν για τα εγκλήματά τους.

14. Ħin tal-mistoqsijiet (mistoqsijiet lill-Kunsill)

  President. − The next item is Question Time (B6-0009/2009) to the Council.

Question No 1 by Marian Harkin (H-0040/09)

Subject: Improvement of quality, availability and financing of long-term care

Given the challenges that Europe is facing as a result of an ageing population, leading to an increasing number of people in need of care, combined with changes in size and composition of families, labour market changes and increased mobility which will all impact on the availability of carers, the Commission's Demography Report (SEC(2008)2911) recognised that such challenges would require a variety of policy responses including the strengthening of solidarity between the generations in terms of long term care, greater recognition for professional carers and most importantly greater support for family carers.

The Presidency has already indicated its priority with regard to paying greater attention to the improvement of quality, availability and financing of long-term care. What steps does the Council propose to take during its Presidency to support informal carers throughout the EU, many of whom already provide long-term care and indeed save our health services millions of euros in health care provision?

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − Let me react to Mrs Harkin’s question.

The Presidency is fully aware of the importance of long-term care in the context of an ageing population. According to Eurostat, the population of over-65s in the EU will double between 1995 and 2050. In its conclusion of 16 December 2008 on public health strategies to combat neuro-degenerative diseases associated with ageing, the Council welcomed the work already carried out by associations that defend and support patients and their carers and called on the Member States and Commission to reflect together on support for carers and to consider ways of developing it further.

In addition, the Council also invited the Member States to establish, in cooperation with the stakeholders concerned, a national strategy action plan or any other measures aimed at improving the quality of life of patients and their carers, as well as to improve the distribution of useful information to patients, their families and their carers, in order to make them aware of the care principle and best practices that have been identified.

The Council also recommended that Member States should evaluate the complexity or redundancy of administrative procedures which confront patients and their carers and consider measures for simplifying them.

Moreover, in the 2008 Joint Report on Social Protection and Social Inclusion, transmitted by the Council to the European Council, Member States committed themselves to increasing access to quality services. To this purpose they reaffirmed that the right balance needs to be struck between public and private responsibilities and formal and informal care and that provision in a residential or community setting is to be preferred to an institutional setting.

The Council also called on the Social Protection Committee to continue to promote the sharing of experiences and exchange of best practice regarding the quality of long-term care, assistance to carers, the organisation of long-term care and the importance of integrated care.

The Presidency will carry on the objective of the 18-month programme of the Council in the field of public health and focus efforts at EU level on enhancing the exchange of experiences relating to health care and solidarity with carers, taking into account the health challenges created by our ageing societies.

The Czech Presidency will pay special attention to issues of community long-term care, informal family care, and the dignity and rights of older persons. The Presidency will organise a European conference on dignity and hazards for the elderly, which will take place in Prague on 25 May 2009.

The Conference will focus on the reform of social and health services to respond better to the needs and preferences of older persons and families and will deal, inter alia, with such issues as community long-term care, family care, geriatric frailty, prevention of abuse and neglect of the elderly, and the role of municipalities.

The Presidency will also organise the European Conference called ‘Social Services – a tool for mobilising the work force and strengthening social cohesion’, which will take place in Prague on 22 and 23 April. The conference will pay special attention to growing employment opportunities in social services in the context of population ageing, support for informal carers and the role of social services in active social inclusion and reconciliation of care and employment.

Priority attention will be paid also to independent living in the community. The conference should contribute to exchange of best practices.

Let me conclude with the recent development in the area of taxation. The Ecofin Council reached an agreement just yesterday in Brussels that all Member States should have the option to apply reduced VAT rates on a permanent basis to domestic care services such as home help and care of the young, elderly, sick or disabled.

  Kathy Sinnott (IND/DEM). - I have been very encouraged by the Czech Presidency, particularly in the emphasis it has placed on the family. The Commission’s report on demography, which shows that we have an ageing European population, is subtitled ‘solidarity between the generations’, but it is really within the family that we learn solidarity and that this is based on love and care.

I am also very glad that the Czech Presidency has identified respect for human dignity, because that principle is at the heart of care. I would like you to comment on that because, as far as I can see, in order for care to be delivered to those who are dependent on care in a way that respects human dignity, we have to keep that principle in mind.

  Hubert Pirker (PPE-DE). - Frau Präsidentin! Ich halte es für sehr positiv, dass man sich bemüht, Familienangehörige zu unterstützen, damit sie die Langzeitpflege übernehmen. Realität ist nur leider, dass dafür nicht genügend Familienangehörige da sind. Wir brauchen dagegen zunehmend hochprofessionell ausgebildetes Personal. Daher meine Frage: Welche Initiativen will die Ratspräsident ergreifen, damit wir genügend professionell ausgebildetes Pflegepersonal zur Verfügung haben? Denkt man auch an eine Form der harmonisierten Ausbildung, weil das neue Initiativen sind?

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − Madam President, I thank Members for their comments regarding the Presidency’s efforts to improve living conditions for the elderly. The problem of ageing is one which we all share; and we should approach this with some dignity.

It is, of course, true that many of those challenges remain in the national competencies of the Member States but, at the start of the debate, I mentioned the two conferences. I think Member States could provide training and counselling opportunities to family carers. The development of high-quality education is a key factor for improving the quality of care, as are temporary replacement care and special leave for employees who look after family members. Here flexible working time, part-time jobs and other care-friendly employment arrangements are important.

Finally, social protection for family carers is also important. The care provided by both informal and professional carers must be appreciated and organised by society. Economic security, therefore, is a prerequisite for ensuring the quality of care.

  President. − Question No 2 by Brian Crowley (H-0044/09)

Subject: Unemployment in Europe

What initiatives is the European Council pursuing at present to combat youth and long-term unemployment in Europe?

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − I should like to thank Brian Crowley for raising the question. I think you are certainly aware that the Member States are, in the first instance, responsible for designing and implementing their employment policies. However, the Council has a number of responsibilities in the field of employment, including the annual adoption of the employment guidelines in accordance with Article 128 of the Treaty. Especially now that Europe is facing a financial and economic crisis, the Council is paying special attention to the employment policies of the Member States.

You specifically asked in your question about the current initiatives by the European Council to help combat youth and long-term unemployment in Europe. In December 2008, the European Council agreed on a European Economic Recovery Plan to provide a coherent framework for action to be taken at the level of the Union, as well as for measures adopted by each Member State, taking account of their individual circumstances. The European Council’s conclusion stressed, in particular, rapid additional action by the European Social Fund to support employment, especially for the benefit of the most vulnerable groups in the population. The European Council undertook to evaluate the implementation of the plan at its upcoming March spring Council, indicating that additions or amendments to it could be made if necessary.

During the first half of 2009, the Czech Presidency is paying particular attention to employment measures also, within the context of the spring European Council. The spring European Council will consider the employment situation in the Community and adopt conclusions thereon on the basis of the Joint Employment Report adopted by the Council and the Commission.

The opinion of the European Parliament on the matter will be welcomed in view of the European Council in March. Based on the assessment of the European Council, the Council will adopt the guidelines on the Member States’ employment policies. The present employment guidelines adopted last year, as well as previous versions, have consistently stressed the importance of tackling youth and long-term unemployment in the Member States.

Since the autumn of 2008, when the effects of the present crisis on employment started to be evident, the Employment Committee, which was established by the Council in accordance with Article 130 of the Treaty, has undertaken the new task of continuous monitoring of the Member States’ employment situation. The committee’s findings are being passed on to the Council.

Moreover, the Presidency has decided to organise the Employment Summit so as to maintain a platform for the debate and eventual decisions, and that will be held on 7 May. Topics for discussion will be confirmed after the spring European Council – so we are planning to have the orientation debate on this next week. It should also be mentioned in this context that during this year the European Parliament and the Council, as the co-legislators, are evaluating and considering amendments to the European Globalisation Fund, an instrument aimed at the elimination of negative globalisation impacts, where job losses certainly belong, as well as decreasing the risk that redundant employees will become long-term unemployed. The aim is to avoid long-term unemployment by timely assistance to the employees affected through activation programmes, such as training, which would enable improved qualifications.

On the whole, promoting employment, including fighting long-term unemployment and youth unemployment, has always featured high on the agendas of the Council and of the European Council. The Presidency supports the implementation of the flexicurity principles. Their implementation to national policies, together with continuing structural reform, will help improve the situation of vulnerable groups in the labour market, which include the young, the elderly, the long-term unemployed and people with low qualifications.

The honourable Member can be assured here that during spring 2009, amidst the global financial and economic crisis and rising unemployment, this continues to be the case.

  Brian Crowley (UEN). - I would like to thank the President-in-Office for his response. I think it is a tribute to the Presidency that they had planned an employment conference before we recognised or realised ourselves the seriousness of the unemployment arising from the economic crisis.

But in light of that employment summit that will be taking place, there are three key issues which have to be focused on and dealt with: firstly, not just using the European Social Fund merely for training but also to ensure that that training leads to actual jobs and is not just training for training's sake; secondly, ensuring that the Globalisation Fund is made more active immediately because the job losses are occurring now; and thirdly, and most importantly, encouraging our colleagues in the Council not to engage in national protectionism of jobs in their own countries to the detriment of jobs in other countries, since if we coordinate and cooperate we have a better chance of success.

  Gay Mitchell (PPE-DE). - Would the President-in-Office agree with me that the situation we are in is not akin to the 1930s, but more akin to the situation at the end of the Second World War, and that what we really need is something more akin to a Marshall Plan-type new input for recovery in Europe?

Would he agree, therefore, that there is potential for the European Investment Bank to get an investor, such as China, to lend money to the EIB to invest in Europe, which could then be refunded through the extra trade tariffs and VAT collected by the Union to whoever lent that money to the EIB? Would he agree that while the Employment Conference is welcome, we need some new thinking and something as dramatic as what happened at the end of the Second World War?

  Hubert Pirker (PPE-DE). - Frau Präsidentin! Mitverantwortlich für die Jugendarbeitslosigkeit sind zweifelsohne auch die noch bestehenden Mobilitätsbarrieren. Wir haben exzellente grenzüberschreitende Ausbildungsprogramme, auch für Lehrlinge. Aber die Barrieren im Bereich der sozialen Rechte und der Krankenversicherung führen dazu, dass all diese Möglichkeiten der Mobilität und der zusätzlichen Ausbildung über Grenzen hinweg nicht genutzt werden können. Was wird vonseiten der Ratspräsidentschaft dagegen unternommen?

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − Madam President, I think there are two separate points, one from Mr Crowley and one from Mr Mitchell. I think we need to avoid the various protectionist temptations here which could even lead to growing unemployment in various Member States. The national solution should not be to the detriment of the neighbours and the price for it should not be paid by future generations.

We need to have measures and to react to the current situation, and we are trying to do this. I agree with Mr Mitchell that we need a plan, yes, and we have some plans. We have the European Economic Recovery Plan and we need to implement it. Of course we are in discussion with and working with the European Investment Bank. Its President Maystadt held a conference two days ago at which he demonstrated how much the EIB had spent since the crisis started – about EUR 10 billion more than in the previous year. There is another initiative by the EIB, together with the EBRD and the World Bank, to allocate resources amounting to more than EUR 24 billion to cover the needs of the various SMEs, for example. That is important in maintaining employment.

Regarding the revision of the regulations on the European Social Fund and the European Globalisation Fund, an agreement on the proposal for a revision of the regulation on the European Social Fund, simplifying the recording of the expenditure and increasing payments on account to the Member States, has been reached in the Council. Currently the Parliament’s position is awaited and the revised regulation could enter into force in May 2009.

  President. − Question No 3 by Mairead McGuinness (H-0046/09)

Subject: Disparity in global production standards

Europe imposes high standards, which we all applaud, on food production and manufacturing inside its borders but does not require these standards to be met by imports. European standards, particularly for food production and the manufacture of clothes and toys, are the best in the world; but these high standards add costs and make production inside EU borders more expensive. Imported products, which are not subject to the same high environmental and other standards, are placed on our shelves, often at much cheaper prices.

What is the Council doing at the WTO and other global fora to raise awareness and encourage higher production standards around the world, giving better protection for workers and consumers?

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − I appreciate another question again from the Irish MEPs – it looks like the Irish are most active during Question Time here.

So, concerning the initiative at the WTO to raise awareness and encourage higher production standards around the world, let me first of all remind the honourable Member that the Commission is the main trade negotiator of the European Community at the WTO, acting on the basis of the mandate given by the Council. Therefore, we would need Commissioner Ashton here.

Regarding production standards, Article 20 of the GATT allows governments to act regarding trade in order to protect human, animal or plant life or health, provided they do not discriminate or use this as disguised protectionism.

In addition, there are two specific WTO arrangements dealing with these issues: the sanitary and phyto-sanitary (SPS) measures and technical barriers to trade (TBT) agreements.

The SPS is a separate agreement containing basic rules on food safety and animal and plant health standards. It allows countries to set their own standards, provided that these are based on science. The TBT agreements oblige the WTO members to ensure that technical regulations, voluntary standards and conformity assessment procedures do not create unnecessary obstacles to trade.

Members of the WTO are therefore encouraged to use international standards, guidelines and recommendations where these exist. They may take measures which result in higher standards only if there is a scientific justification for doing so.

The European Community imposes high-level standards through which we protect our consumers. However, we must ensure that the required standards are not in conflict with the agreements mentioned above.

We all know that there are different viewpoints on these issues and that the European Community has been many times on the defensive side of a dispute over such measures.

In the Community’s view, good regulatory practice can, among other things, help to avoid unnecessary obstacles to international trade and make sure that legislation is not more trade-restrictive than necessary. At the same time, it can defend the right to set public policy objectives, for instance in relation to human, animal and plant life and environments at levels it considers appropriate, provided these are not applied in a manner which would constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination.

In the current context of the financial turmoil and economic meltdown, the importance of full compliance and effective implementation of all WTO rules and agreements cannot be over-emphasised.

The European Community has been working towards strengthening the international standards within the relevant WTO committees, in particular the TBT, SPS, TRIPS, trade and environmental committees. A recent case which may be mentioned is the hard stance of the European Community in the SPS committee at the end of February on the issue of some members’ non-compliance with the standard of the World Organisation for Animal Health.

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE-DE). - I would like to thank the President-in-Office for the detailed and technical response, but let me give you a practical example which may focus your mind. In a few years the European Union will ban the production of eggs from caged systems. However, the system will still be used outside of our borders and we will import liquid egg or powdered egg from those cages that are banned in the European Union, and producers wonder at the logic of all of that.

I ask you, as a man who is quite logical and detailed in your responses, how do you argue the case for that type of system unless we say that you cannot import the liquid egg or the powdered product coming from a caged system? It is ridiculous to ban it internally.

  Jim Allister (NI). - Minister, I think the key focus of the question was that of competitiveness and how we retain competitiveness for EU producers. Given that EU producers, particularly of food, have the extra costs of meeting EU standards and at the same time compete with imports from countries that do not, in those circumstances could I ask you whether you are persuaded that the CAP should be used to fund maintaining the competitiveness of EU producers? Without that funding we are going to suffer exactly the fate that Mrs McGuinness has referred to.

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − I am not among the greatest defenders of the CAP. I am generally in favour of continuing reform of the CAP, but I hope that we will not be in a situation of importing liquid or dried egg. Also, I believe that most of the EC’s standards regarding placement on the market are based not just on what we have agreed here in Europe but on the internationally agreed Codex Alimentarius standards and the UN Economic Commission for Europe standards. It is important that everybody follow certain standards, and that we do not create the conditions which would seriously undermine this.

TBT agreements oblige the WTO and its members to ensure that technical regulations, voluntary standards and conformity assessment producers do not create unnecessary obstacles to trade.

  President. − Question No 4 by Claude Moraes (H-0047/09)

Subject: Climate change

What preparations is the Council making in the run up to the G8 summit in July and the climate change conference in Copenhagen later this year in order to move international negotiations forward on climate change? In particular, can the Council report on any improved cooperation between the EU and the new US Administration in this area?

In addition, what further action in the fight against climate change is the Council planning in order to consolidate the package of measures agreed upon in December?

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − In December 2008, the Poznań Conference agreed on a work programme for 2009, which clearly identified steps towards the Copenhagen Climate Conference to be held in December 2009. Poznań has also sent the message that the current financial crisis is not to be seen as an obstacle to further action on climate change, but instead as yet another opportunity for transforming profoundly our economic system and moving toward a low-carbon economy.

That being said, we have to be aware that we will not have an easy time in doing so. The economic downturn will affect the willingness of the stakeholders involved to absorb additional costs related to the reduction commitments, as well as mitigation and adaptation measures.

The Czech Presidency intends to pursue efforts at international level towards a successful agreement in Copenhagen in December. As you know, as a follow-up to the Commission communication called ‘Towards a Comprehensive Climate Change Agreement in Copenhagen’ and on the basis of the input of the Temporary Committee on Climate Change set up by the European Parliament, the Council adopted conclusions on this issue last week, thereby further developing the EU position on a comprehensive post-2012 agreement.

The forthcoming European Council is also expected to agree key political messages. In addition to the shared vision of the long-term action on mitigation and adaptation as well as technology, the identification of appropriate means for financing effective and long-term climate policies is key in the EU’s position and will determine, to a large extent, the success of the Copenhagen Conference.

The EU has already started to engage in active outreach not only with key negotiating partners and the main emerging economies but also with the new US Administration, which has already signalled its readiness to engage again in a meaningful way.

The Presidency has had its first meeting with the new US Administration and plans to have further exchanges as soon as possible. Climate change will be one of the topics discussed during the informal EU-US Summit in Prague on 5 April. The first signals coming from Washington are, in any case, encouraging so it will be crucial to ensure good cooperation between the EU and the US in order for our positions to be as ambitious as possible and to ensure that, consequently, the major emerging economies will follow suit.

For the EU’s efforts to fight climate change to deliver, it is absolutely crucial that we bring other major world CO2-producing economies on board. It is for this reason that several of these countries have also been invited to the G8 meeting – South Africa, Egypt, China, India, Australia, Mexico, Brazil, Indonesia and South Korea.

As far as the climate and energy package is concerned, by reaching agreement on this package in December 2008, the EU sent a very strong political signal to all its negotiating partners in the world. Now we will start its implementation, which involves a lot of technical work.

Aware of the need to determine in further detail the criteria which the European Union would wish to apply in deciding to move from a 20% to a 30% reduction, the Council is currently considering the issues of complementarity of effort and of the adequacy of possible developing country actions on the basis of the Commission communication. The relevant text is included in the Environment Council conclusions of 2 March 2009.

  Claude Moraes (PSE). - What would Question Time be without our Irish colleagues and their effective and articulate contributions? I am speaking first now, but really to make a point to the Presidency.

The point behind my question is that we should be aware that our younger constituents in particular – and I am sure I am not the only one in this situation – want to urge both this Presidency in its mid-term, and also the Swedish Presidency, to look carefully at what the Americans are trying to do in ensuring that there is no conflict – and Mr Vondra did mention this – between tackling the urgent priority of the economic crisis, unemployment and so on, and encouraging action on climate change, promoting the climate change package and encouraging industries to be involved in the low-carbon economy.

I am not asking the world, but I should like to say: please, always be aware that they are not mutually exclusive objectives. Many of our younger constituents across the EU are telling our presidencies this very thing.

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (PSE). - Având în vedere efectele schimbărilor climatice, precum perioade lungi de secetă, diminuarea resurselor de apă potabilă şi deşertificarea unor importante suprafeţe de teritoriu european, aş dori să întreb Consiliul dacă are în vedere dezvoltarea unui sistem european pentru irigaţii.

Consider că investiţiile în agricultură trebuie să fie o prioritate în această perioadă de criză economică. De asemenea, pentru balanţa comercială a Uniunii Europene, agricultura reprezintă un domeniu extrem de important şi trebuie să asigurăm o alimentaţie sănătoasă, suficientă şi accesibilă pentru cetăţenii europeni.

  Avril Doyle (PPE-DE). - I would like to recall for the Presidency-in-Office that at the Summit meeting last December all heads of state or government agreed to a declaration which said inter alia that, in the context of an international agreement on climate change in Copenhagen in 2009, for those who wished to do so, part of the auction revenues would be used to enable and finance actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change in developing countries which have ratified the agreement, in particular the least developed countries.

My question is very simple. Because Summit declarations do not appear in any Official Journal or on the record, before the end of your Presidency, Minister, could you put the full content of that declaration at last December’s summit on the record here in the House? It is most important that we have a record of such important declarations.

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − I think it is in the conclusions of the Environment Council in early March. I do not have the papers with me so I will look carefully again. My feeling is that I have read this. We are ahead of the European Spring Council meeting and I would expect confirmation of all those ambitious goals.

I do not know – and this raises some other questions – whether we will come up with an appropriate amount of money to put on the table for funds to help the developing countries with mitigation and adaptation, because we are just at the beginning of our talks with the US and other partners and it would not make sense to show our cards right now.

The debate with the Americans is ongoing. The Deputy Minister of the environment met Carol Browner early this month and Martin Bursík, who is the Czech Minister for the Environment, is going to meet his partners in Washington – I think later this week or early next month – so there is already a dialogue.

Yes of course we need to find common ground. There is the economic crisis; there are those ambitious environmental goals. You are right that we can find a lot of synergies and there is no need to fight. If you read the European economic recovery plans there are a lot of programmes which have a green cover or a green colour. At the same time a lot of public explanation lies ahead. The conditions in the Member States of the EU are not necessarily always the same so I expect a lot of public work and public diplomacy lies ahead of us in this area.

  President. − Question No 5 by Liam Aylward (H-0050/09)

Subject: Road safety

According to the priorities of the Czech Presidency, the high number of people killed on European roads requires an enhancement of Europe-wide effort to improve road safety.

What plans does the Presidency have to tackle this issue?

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − As the honourable Member has pointed out, improvement of road safety and reducing the high number of fatal accidents on Community roads are among the priorities of the Czech Presidency for the transport sector. This is not surprising, as we are the country located right at the centre of the continent. Traffic intensity and the related dangers are a top priority for us.

Sharing the same concerns as you and with a view to improving the current situation in the short term, the Presidency intended to hold a ministerial debate at a Council meeting in spring 2009 on future development in the area of road safety in the context of the preparation of a new action plan on road safety. However, in view of the fact that the Commission has indicated to the Presidency its intention to postpone the date of the adoption of this new action plan, the Czech Presidency considers this debate to be premature.

One example of concrete action under our Presidency in the field of road safety is a final negotiation between the Council and the Parliament on a proposal for a regulation concerning type-approval requirements for the general safety of motor vehicles. As you know, the Presidency and Parliament’s representatives managed to reach an agreement concerning this proposal and the European Parliament adopted the regulation yesterday. The general safety regulation requires the mandatory fitting of electronic stability control systems on all vehicles, and an advanced emergency braking system and a lane-departure warning system on heavy duty vehicles. These new technologies can significantly improve vehicle safety and it is clear that road safety will benefit when they are introduced as the standard system on new vehicles.

Agreement at first reading will allow the obligatory introduction of electronic stability systems in new vehicles from 2011, one year earlier than foreseen in the original Commission proposal. Furthermore, the Council has just started the examination of the Commission’s action plan for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) in Europe and the associated proposal for a directive laying down the framework for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport and for interfaces with other modes of transport. Both items have as one of their goals the improvement of road safety through the application of information and communication technologies to the road transport sector.

The Presidency intends to invite the Ministers to adopt the Council conclusions on the action plan at the Council meeting in March 2009 and a general approach or a political agreement on the abovementioned proposal at the Council meeting in June 2009. The role of the ITS in the area of road safety will also be discussed during the informal meeting of transport ministers to take place in late April in Litoměřice in my country.

Intelligent Transport Systems and applications such as emergency call and driver hyper-vigilance systems, speed alerts and alcohol locks could make a considerable contribution to enhancing our road safety. Electronic stability systems and eCall alone could save up to 6 500 lives a year in Europe if they are fully deployed. Given the importance the Presidency attaches to road safety, it will examine any other proposals on these issues that the Commission may present shortly, provided the limited time available until the end of June allows it.

  Seán Ó Neachtain (UEN). - Tá ceist eile ann as Éirinn ach inár dteanga fhéin an t-am seo. Céard iad, a cheapann tú, na cúiseanna is mó atá leis an uimhir ard de bhásanna ar na bóithre? Bhfuil sé i gceist ag Uachtaránacht na Seice aon chomhordú nua a dhéanamh idir na caighdeáin éagsúla atá i bhfeidhm sna tíortha éagsúla Eorpacha maidir leis na gluaisteáin a bheith i gcóir mhaith. Chomh maith leis sin, an gceapann tú gur chóir go mbeadh níos mó ná teicneolaíocht i gceist maidir le laghdú a chur ar bhásanna ar na bóithre?

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (PSE). - Uniunea nu a făcut suficient pentru reducerea accidentelor rutiere. Siguranţa rutieră poate fi îmbunătăţită prin investiţii în infrastructură, prin îmbunătăţirea comportamentului participanţilor la trafic şi prin respectarea legislaţiei rutiere.

Comisia Europeană a venit cu o propunere de directivă privind urmărirea transfrontalieră a amenzilor date pentru încălcarea regulilor de circulaţie. Parlamentul European a votat. Care este stadiul şi care sunt perspectivele de aprobare a acestui dosar în Consiliul Uniunii Europene?

  Jim Higgins (PPE-DE). - Firstly, I would like to ask the Council if it accepts that what we need are specific targets for each Member State in relation to reducing the numbers of deaths and fatalities on our roads.

Secondly, would the Council accept that we need the enforcement of a system whereby, if an offence is committed in one jurisdiction, the offender can be prosecuted by the courts in that jurisdiction, even though the offender has returned to his or her native homeland?

Last, but by no means least, I welcome the Council’s information in relation to the eCall system, but when will it be mandatory in all Member Sates? It is vital from the point of view of accidents, and particularly one-vehicle accidents.

  Alexandr Vondra, President-in-Office of the Council. − First of all, I understand how these issues are very important during the election campaign because everybody cares about this road safety problem. I think we have to be aware of one thing, that the governments and the European Council in particular cannot be responsible for every single life on our roads. It is also and primarily the responsibility of the drivers behind the wheel.

But of course we need to focus on this issue and, again, for us it is among the priorities, so we need to move this discussion ahead. That is why we have selected this as one of the key items on the agenda of the informal Transport Ministers’ meeting at the end of April and certainly I will tell my colleague in my government, our Minister of Transport, how important this issue is for you, too.

The main topic of this informal meeting is the deployment of the Intelligent Transport System (ITS), in the EU. Road safety and security are certainly one of the six priority action areas which were identified by the Commission in this ITS action plan. We want to move the debate forward.

  President. − Questions which have not been answered for lack of time will be answered in writing (see Annex).

That concludes Question Time.

(The sitting was suspended at 19.10 and resumed at 21.00.)

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. LUISA MORGANTINI
Vicepresidente

15. Green Paper dwar il-Ħaddiema tas-Saħħa fl-Ewropa (dibattitu)

  Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca in discussione il Libro verde sul personale sanitario in Europa.

  Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, I am very pleased to have been invited to make a statement to Parliament on the Green Paper on the EU Workforce for Health, adopted by the Commission on 10 December 2008.

That invitation comes at an opportune moment, as we are now approaching the end of the consultation phase, which will be closed at the end of this month.

It is clear that there are growing pressures on all EU health systems arising from an ageing population, health threats as well as the rising cost of new technologies and patients’ increased expectations – and all this against the background of a difficult economic situation.

Without a well-trained and motivated health workforce throughout the EU, the financial sustainability of European health systems will be threatened and health inequalities will increase.

As the European population gets older, so does its health workforce, and there are insufficient new recruits coming through to replace those who leave. We need to reflect on the reasons why young people are not motivated to become health workers.

This, coupled with the mobility of health professionals within and between Member States is creating common health workforce problems for most European health systems.

I expect a large number of responses to the Green Paper from the many stakeholder organisations in the field of health that have expressed concerns about this important issue.

I also look forward to receiving contributions from the members of this Parliament. Those will really facilitate our work and serve our common objective.

The analysis of the answers we receive will guide us in developing strategies at EU level to support the Member States in tackling these challenges.

The health workforce debate is distinct from the issues covered by the draft directive on patients’ rights in cross-border health care.

Indeed, that proposal focuses on the rules and arrangements needed to provide access, in equitable conditions, to safe and high quality health care for patients moving across Europe.

The primary aim of the draft legislation is to enforce, in a fair and consistent manner, patients’ rights as recognised by the European Court of Justice. It does not seek to regulate cross-border provision of health services, freedom of establishment or the mobility of health professionals.

However, that does not mean that the draft directive ignores safety and quality of care for patients seeking health care abroad – which is intrinsically related to the context in which health care is provided by health professionals.

In this respect, the draft directive sets out very clearly an essential rule, which is that, as regards cross-border health care, the rules of the country of treatment apply.

Let me also briefly mention other provisions, such as those in Article 5 of the proposal: Member States would commit to defining national quality and safety standards, to implementing them effectively and to making them public; health-care providers would provide all the relevant information to enable patients to make an informed choice – including details of their insurance cover or other means of personal or collective protection with regard to professional liability, which must be in place in all Member States, patients would have a means of making complaints and of receiving remedies and compensation when they suffer harm arising from the health care they receive.

With this set of principles and rules, I believe that the draft directive defines a clear relationship between the patient and the provider to ensure sound information as well as safe and quality care for European citizens who decide to travel to another Member State for treatment.

Let me also recall that, under the primary responsibility of my colleague Commissioner McCreevy, there is another important piece of EU legislation which regulates mutual recognition of qualifications for doctors, nurses, dentists, midwives and pharmacists. I refer to Directive 2005/36/EC, which is now in force. That Directive also provides for specific obligations for Member States as regards the exchange of information in the case of movement of health professionals. Those flows of data are facilitated by the use of the internal market information (IMI) system, which already allows for the electronic exchange of information on the five main health professions. Furthermore, an extension of IMI to all regulated professions is envisaged.

To conclude, tackling the challenges of the EU health workforce whilst ensuring financial sustainability of health systems will be one of the major tasks over the next decade for Europe. This requires a comprehensive policy approach, as no Member State can realistically find its own solution in isolation. The solution cannot simply be to attract health workers from developing countries, where the shortage is even greater.

To that effect, the Green Paper will allow for discussion and further definition of the issues at stake, leading to the design of common actions, where appropriate. I know that your expectations are high, and I count on your help in building solutions to support the invaluable contribution that health professionals make to the lives of each and every one of us.

  Presidente. − Cara Commissaria non ho dubbi che i parlamentari risponderanno proficuamente alla sua richiesta di contribuire al Libro verde sul personale sanitario.

  John Bowis, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. – Madam President, I would like to thank the Commissioner, both for giving up her evening to come and join us in this packed House, but also for bringing the message that she has brought. It is an important Green Paper and it should start a major discussion within this Parliament and beyond.

She raised one or two questions during her submission just now, including her question about why more nurses and doctors are not coming forward. If I may say so, I think that is half the question. The other half is why so many are leaving. The key to this will be to find ways of recruiting and retaining health-care professionals. That goes particularly, perhaps, for nurses, but also for doctors and for other therapists and so on. I think we have to look at the career structures that we provide. We have to see how promotion is seen as a potential. We have to cut down some of the barriers within and between the professions. We have to ensure that the work environment is pleasant. It is going to be tough but it can be comfortable as well. We have to make sure that research facilities are available in Europe so we do not lose people abroad. Perhaps, above all, we have to listen to the sharp-end professionals. Too often – I know from when I have been in government and you know as a Commissioner – we listen to the top people and we do not go down to the beds and listen to the nurses and the doctors who are actually dealing on the ground. If we did more of that, then perhaps we would get more of our policy right.

I of course want to refer – as the Commissioner has referred – to my report, the Parliament’s consideration of cross-border health. We said right from the beginning that important with that were the two measures that were not coming at the same time. One of them, of course, was patient safety and we do have a measure that has sped its way on the fast track to join us. This one is somewhat behind. It concerns the health professionals. We do need to have the health professionals providing that service – that back-up – to cross-border health to enable patients to move safely and with confidence. Indeed, standing here in Strasbourg, we think of the Strasbourg, Liège, Luxembourg example of where the reference network concept may be of great value in terms both of patients and training and research.

The Commissioner has referred to the movement of health professionals, and we need to look at ways of making that a reality without endangering patient safety. I think that certainly includes the issue of language tests, which are not an obstacle but must be a protective measure for patients. She has referred to the recognition of qualifications. That clearly is important, whether you are treated at home by an incoming doctor, or you are going abroad to meet a local doctor there. There are some professions – and chiropractic is one – where you have recognition in some countries and not in others. We need to look at ways of bringing those ancillary health professionals into the centre of our planning.

We also, of course, need to be sure we have patient safety in terms of doctors who are disciplined or struck off – doctors, nurses, any health professionals – and in my report I call for this to be facilitated by the Commission. I think that is something we need to look at more.

The Commissioner rightly referred to the brain drain. It is tragic that we are not providing enough health professionals but go and grab them from the countries that can least afford it. If you look at the figures, we see, on average, 1 in 4 doctors and 1 nurse in 20 has trained in Africa and is working in OECD countries. It is partly that we as countries pinch them and it is partly our NGOs who also use them and recruit them in the country concerned, pay them more than they would be paid in their own services. Therefore they do not go back to work there.

All those things are important, Commissioner. We need to look at the safety of health professionals. We need to put needle-stick injuries and hospital acquired infections on our agenda, as well as assaults on staff. We know from talking to midwives recently about the difficulty of getting professional indemnity insurance. Those are some of the issues that I hope will be to the forefront in our discussions on this very welcome Green Paper.

  Jules Maaten, namens de ALDE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, ik wil me graag aansluiten bij veel van de woorden die John Bowis zojuist heeft gesproken. Het Groenboek dat wij van u hebben ontvangen, commissaris, is een voortreffelijk stuk. Het is natuurlijk bij een groenboek altijd zo dat we nieuwsgierig zijn naar alle reacties die erop komen. Deze zijn natuurlijk ten dele voorspelbaar, maar het is in ieder geval goed om die te ontvangen, zodat die bij mogelijke toekomstige wetgeving kunnen worden betrokken.

Een belangrijk Groenboek, omdat het een zaak is die toch geregeld moet worden. Het Groenboek komt voort uit de controverse die indertijd is ontstaan over de voorstellen van Frits Bolkestein en het is goed dat de Commissie het op deze manier aanpakt, voorzichtig, met een groenboek, en veel discussie daarover. Want ik denk vooral dat er veel angst is over dit onderwerp. Ik wil daarom ook mijn bijdrage niet beperken tot alleen maar het thema van de gezondheidswerkers, want ik denk dat we ook op andere terreinen dezelfde angst voor het onbekende van de Europese dimensie in de gezondheidszorg steeds weer terugvinden.

Er is veel bereikt de afgelopen jaren in de Europese Unie op het gebied van volksgezondheid, zowel onder uw voorgangers, als met u als commissaris; ik wil dan ook van de gelegenheid gebruikmaken om u te complimenteren, commissaris, met het stempel dat u in een relatief korte tijd op dit beleid hebt weten te drukken. Ik had niet gedacht dat dat mogelijk zou zijn in zo'n korte tijd en ik denk dat wij er met zijn allen trots op kunnen zijn hoe u dat hebt gedaan.

Er is de afgelopen jaren heel wat bereikt, bijvoorbeeld op het gebied van de geneesmiddelen voor pediatrisch gebruik, een zaak waarvan de burgers niet eens weten dat er een probleem is, maar waar nu juist bij uitstek een Europese oplossing van belang is, omdat lidstaten dit niet alleen kunnen oplossen. Juist de schaalgrootte is hierbij van nut. Ik ben van mening dat een en ander ook voor andere terreinen geldt.

Bijvoorbeeld voor het beleid op het gebied van tabak en ontmoediging van roken, waar de Europese Unie ook een voortrekkersrol speelt. Niet alleen in de Unie zelf, maar ook daarbuiten. Ook daar geldt weer dat het juist de schaalgrootte is die maakt dat we op zo'n punt effectief kunnen zijn. We zijn ook heel druk bezig met de grensoverschrijdende zorg en het beschermen van patiëntenrechten in Europa, evenzo onder leiding van rapporteur John Bowis, en ik hoop en verwacht ook dat we op dat punt tot een positief resultaat kunnen komen.

Toch zie je telkens weer, bij ieder onderwerp dat naar voren komt, dat niet alleen ministers, maar ook collega-parlementariërs in de nationale parlementen, huiverig zijn voor een verdere verdieping van Europese samenwerking op het gebied van volksgezondheid. Met 27 verschillende systemen in de Europese Unie denken we allemaal zelf het beste model te hebben. Met wie je ook spreekt, ieder systeem is het beste systeem. Dat kan natuurlijk niet. Je kunt niet 27 verschillende systemen en tegelijkertijd 27 beste systemen hebben.

Natuurlijk is er in elk land goed nagedacht over zo'n systeem. Er zijn allemaal mensen en allemaal goedbedoelde belangen bij betrokken. Dan is een moeilijk evenwicht gevonden en dan komt daar opeens de Europese Unie doorheen razen met een idee waarvan wij nu weer vinden dat dat het beste is. Ik begrijp goed dat dat op weerstand stuit.

Maar ik meen toch dat op een aantal terreinen nu juist die schaalgrootte - zoals bijvoorbeeld bij zeldzame ziekten - in het belang kan zijn van zowel patiënten als van systemen. Genoeg redenen voor meer Europese betrokkenheid op het gebied van volksgezondheid. Bijna 40.000 patiënten wachten in Europa op een orgaan, en iedere dag sterven er bijna tien mensen die op die wachtlijsten staan.

Alcoholmisbruik kost 195.000 levens en schaadt de Europese economie voor 125 miljard euro per jaar. Een zaak die waarschijnlijk niet eens nationaal, maar lokaal het best kan worden aangepakt. Maar je ziet ook Europese trends, bijvoorbeeld bij alcoholmisbruik onder jongeren. Dan moet je nagaan of het misschien toch niet zinvol is om dat Europees aan te pakken. We lopen echter op tegen het uiterste van ons kunnen op basis van de huidige Verdragsteksten om die problemen aan te pakken.

Toch moeten we meer bereiken. Bijvoorbeeld - en daar is dit Groenboek zo belangrijk voor - een daadwerkelijk vrij verkeer van gezondheidsdiensten. Ik ben ervan overtuigd dat als we alle problemen, want er zijn natuurlijk problemen, goed onder ogen zien en met oplossingen daarvoor komen, bijvoorbeeld om beunhazerij tegen te gaan, om de rechtszekerheid van patiënten, maar ook van de gezondheidswerkers te versterken, dat uiteindelijk iedereen er beter van wordt, als dat vrij verkeer op een verantwoordelijke manier georganiseerd wordt, maar wel mogelijk wordt.

Betere samenwerking op het gebied van orgaandonatie en effectieve samenwerking bij bescherming van pandemieën - een zaak waar ik altijd maar weer bij terugkom. Als je dat niet Europees aanpakt, ben ik ervan overtuigd dat we heel grote problemen gaan krijgen als er eens een keer die griep uit Thailand komt aanwaaien. Eigenlijk moet de Commissie op dat moment binnen 24 uur crisismaatregelen kunnen nemen.

Tot slot, artikel 152 is denk ik uiteindelijk toch ontoereikend om verder effectief Europees optreden te organiseren. Als we in de verre toekomst toch weer eens aan een Verdragswijziging durven te denken, zou je wat mij betreft moeten denken aan een uitbreiding van de wettelijke basis voor volksgezondheid in een nieuw Verdrag.

  Bart Staes, namens de Verts/ALE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, net als John Bowis en Jules Maaten, wil ik de commissaris complimenteren met haar Groenboek. Ik denk dat dat Groenboek geen dag, geen uur te vroeg komt. De commissaris zei zelf dat de toenemende vergrijzing inderdaad de druk op de gezondheidsstelsels, maar vooral ook op de werknemers zal doen toenemen. En wie inderdaad zijn of haar oor te luisteren legt bij mensen die in de sector werken, die weet dat de algemene werkvoorwaarden er zeer lastig zijn: fysiek en ook vaak psychisch.

Werken in die sector vraagt heel veel van de werknemers en wordt vaak al te karig betaald. Het hoeft dan ook niemand te verbazen dat het werkverloop er zeer hoog is. Vast staat ook dat het al te vaak gaat om zeer precaire contracten, met als gevolg dat velen de sector voortijdig verlaten. Naar mijn oordeel zal de Unie dan ook in haar beleid verschillende zaken moeten nastreven: duurzame werkgelegenheid, een goed arbeidsmilieu, veilig werk, geen braindrain, en, zoals het in het Engels zo mooi wordt gezegd: decent work.

De commissaris heeft terecht gewezen op de richtlijn waar John Bowis mee bezig is, de richtlijn over de grensoverschrijdende gezondheidszorg. Maar in mijn contacten met mensen in de sector werd me ook de band toegelicht tussen het werken als gezondheidswerker en de arbeidstijdenrichtlijn. In de arbeidstijdenrichtlijn wordt nu gewerkt per contract, maar niet per persoon, om de duur te bepalen.

Mij is ter ore gekomen dat er Poolse artsen zijn die gedurende de week de hele week werken op een gewoon contract in een Pools ziekenhuis en tijdens het weekend naar het Verenigd Koninkrijk vliegen om daar een 48-uursshift te gaan draaien. Dit is natuurlijk ongehoord. Dit is iets waar rekening mee zou moeten worden gehouden, ook in de arbeidstijdenrichtlijn. Ik hoop dan ook dat dit onderwerp ook aan bod zal komen bij de discussie over het Groenboek.

  Kωvσταντίνος Δρούτσας, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας GUE/NGL. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η Πράσινη Βίβλος για το ευρωπαϊκό υγειονομικό δυναμικό αποκαλύπτει τα σχέδια του κεφαλαίου και της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης στην κατεύθυνση της ιδιωτικοποίησης και εμπορευματοποίησης της υγείας-πρόνοιας με οδυνηρές συνέπειες σε βάρος των εργατικών λαϊκών οικογενειών και στους εργαζόμενους στο χώρο της υγείας.

Οι αλλαγές αυτές είναι μέρος των γενικότερων αντιλαϊκών ανατροπών στην κοινωνική ασφάλιση και στις κοινωνικές υπηρεσίες, που προωθούνται σε όλες τις χώρες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης με την ενεργή στήριξη και τη συνενοχή των κεντροδεξιών και κεντροαριστερών δυνάμεων, οι οποίες αντιμετωπίζουν την υγεία σαν εμπόρευμα, πηγή κερδοφορίας του κεφαλαίου, και τους ασθενείς και τις οικογένειές τους σαν πελάτες.

Κεντρικός στόχος είναι η επέκταση της επιχειρηματικής δραστηριότητας του κεφαλαίου και η οικοδόμηση ενός συστήματος όπου οι δημόσιες υπηρεσίες υγείας θα λειτουργούν με ιδιωτικά κριτήρια σε ανταγωνισμό με τον ιδιωτικό τομέα.

Τα πρώτα θύματα αυτού του εμπορευματοποιημένου συστήματος υγείας είναι οι ίδιοι οι εργαζόμενοι στον τομέα αυτό. Το 10% του εργατικού δυναμικού της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, οι εργαζόμενοι αυτοί, εργάζονται συχνά κάτω από απαράδεκτες και επικίνδυνες για τους ασθενείς συνθήκες. Η διαρκής παραβίαση των χρονικών ορίων εργασίας αποτελεί μάλλον τον κανόνα παρά την εξαίρεση. Οι αμοιβές τους, στον δημόσιο τουλάχιστον τομέα, περιορίζονται, όπως και η αποτελεσματικότητά τους, λόγω των επιλογών των ιδιωτικών ασφαλιστικών εταιριών. Το κεντρικό ζήτημα της Πράσινης Βίβλου είναι η κινητικότητα των εργαζομένων, η εφαρμογή των κανόνων της οδηγίας Bolkestein στο χώρο της υγείας.

Η υγεία είναι κοινωνικό αγαθό και όχι εμπόρευμα. Οι εργαζόμενοι σ’ αυτήν προσφέρουν κοινωνική υπηρεσία και, όχι, δεν είναι μέσα παραγωγής κερδών! Μόνο ο αγώνας των εργαζομένων μπορεί να εξασφαλίσει αποκλειστικά δημόσιες, δωρεάν και υψηλής ποιότητας υπηρεσίες υγείας, μακριά από κάθε ιδιωτική επιχειρηματική δραστηριότητα.

  Kathy Sinnott, on behalf of the IND/DEM Group. – Madam President, more people work in health than any other area. The groups of health workers we instantly think of are doctors, nurses, pharmacists and dentists, who are supported by radiologists, lab technicians, researchers, therapists, biochemists and an army of administrators and staff who keep health services functioning.

There is also a second group of professionals: the herbal physicians, chiropractors, osteopaths, homeopaths and nutritionists who focus on a more natural approach to health.

Lastly there are the family carers. The largest single group of health workers who labour day and night without pay in the health sphere.

Going back to the first group, in this report the Commission is concerned that the number of professionals working in mainstream health care is not sufficient to meet the needs of the growing demand. The Commission further stresses the need to attract young people to choose these professions. However, in some countries this is not the problem.

In Ireland last month 3 500 young people took an exam in the hope of securing one of a few hundred medical school places. Similarly, there will be far more young people applying for nursing, therapies, etc., than our universities are willing to train.

Commissioner, it is not a question of attracting young people. It is a question of allowing them to train. Our secondary students in Ireland are working towards a career in medicine, but it is, unfortunately, made unattainable by a rationing system that is out of touch with demand, which leaves us with severe shortages of qualified professionals.

I know that similar disconnects between training and demand exist in other European countries. I would suggest that, in working to attract young people to this profession, you will only frustrate them until we provide them with the opportunity to gain these skills.

Having not allowed these students to train and thereby creating an artificial shortage, we then, of necessity, bring in medical personnel from third countries – even the poorest countries – leaving their own people without medical help and creating a brain drain.

The second group of health professionals I mentioned, like herbal physicians, were unfortunately completely left out of this report. To leave them out fails to acknowledge the valuable contribution they make in keeping Europeans healthy and is out of touch with the wishes of many Europeans who seek their help.

This sector is very important. The Commission’s apparent attempts to suppress it with directives, like the Vitamin and Mineral Supplements Directive, further compound this growing gulf between EU policy and people’s everyday health choices.

Finally, I would like to make reference to the third and largest single group of health workers: the family carer. These are the people who care for dependant older people and those with disabilities. We need them more every year, not less. As Europe ages and the number of people with disabilities increases, we cannot take them for granted. The only way we are going to keep these essential carers is if we support them in their work.

Finally, our health force is more important than ever. The Commission is right to say that there are new and re-emerging threats to health, such as communicable diseases. Yet the Commission should also take careful note that every chronic disorder related to the immune system dysfunction is on the increase, for example asthma, allergy, multiple sclerosis, autism, diabetes, epilepsy, fibromyalgia and many more.

I would advise the Commission to look at every one of these diseases that is on the rise and try to understand what is triggering these epidemics because, allowing them to increase unchecked and to affect more and more people, is both cruel and unsustainable.

  Nicodim Bulzesc (PPE-DE). - Madam President, I welcome the Commission Green Paper and its objective of increasing the visibility of the issues around the EU health workforce and identifying challenges and action that can be taken.

But I wish to take the opportunity to emphasise one aspect of the Green Paper, namely the training of the health workforce. I initiated Written Declaration 0095/2008 on this issue, which is ongoing. I strongly support the idea that it is absolutely essential to develop training communication courses for the health workforce in order to provide clearer and more complete information to patients. Patients’ ability to understand health and medical issues and directions is closely related to the clarity of the communication. Despite various initiatives to improve the quality and the availability of health information, studies indicate that patients want more information than they currently receive and that health professionals tend to overestimate the amount of information that is supplied.

  Ewa Tomaszewska (UEN). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Niedobór pracowników służby zdrowia jest zjawiskiem globalnym. Jednak najdotkliwiej się go odczuwa na własnym podwórku. Brak wyspecjalizowanej pomocy medycznej, brak doświadczeń klinicznych w określonych specjalnościach i konkretnych świadczeń medycznych prowadzi do poszukiwania pomocy lekarskiej w innych krajach.

Dlatego tak ważne jest uregulowanie zasad transgranicznej opieki medycznej. Pacjent ma prawo wiedzieć, jaki standard usług oferują konkretne placówki, jaki będzie sposób finansowania, ile za leczenie czy rehabilitację zapłaci system ochrony zdrowia z kraju pacjenta, a ile sam pacjent. Dyrektywa w tej sprawie jest konieczna.

Kolejną kwestią jest podnoszenie kwalifikacji personelu medycznego, w czym powinna pomóc mobilność powiązana z kursami językowymi. Za korzystną uważam propozycję stworzenia obserwatorium ds. personelu służby zdrowia. Pani Komisarz, dziękuję za Zieloną księgę.

  Colm Burke (PPE-DE). - Madam President, the promotion of a sustainable workforce for health across in Europe is crucial in continuing our improvement in health-care services and facilities across the 27 Member States.

Europe faces a number of challenges in sustaining and improving our health-care services. The demography of the Member States poses a major issue for health workers as Europe’s population ages and life expectancy increases by 2.5 years every decade. Increased pressures apply to the workforce because, as the population ages, so too do the workers. The key to maintaining an adequate workforce in the face of this imminent retirement is to ensure that there are sufficient younger recruits available to replace those who retire.

The importance of improved health-care research and data across Europe cannot be stressed enough. At present there is a lack of up-to-date, comparable data and information among the Member States on a number of key health-care issues including training and employment of workers, age, gender and international flow of health professionals. The availability of Europe-wide information is immensely important for the planning and providing of future health workers and for all health authorities.

  Czesław Adam Siekierski (PPE-DE). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Bardzo zależy nam na tym, aby to właśnie system opieki zdrowotnej był tym najsprawniej funkcjonującym. Należy więc, zgodnie z założeniami Zielonej księgi, podnosić kwalifikacje personelu medycznego oraz zadbać o komfort i godziwe warunki pracy służby medycznej. Nie możemy pozwolić na to, aby lekarze dyżurowali zbyt długo.

Chciałbym również zwrócić uwagę na kwestię promocji zdrowia. Promowanie zdrowego trybu życia to jedna z metod przyczyniających się do profilaktyki. Może doprowadzić do zapobiegania różnego rodzaju chorób i schorzeń. Dlatego też, w myśl zasady, iż lepiej jest zapobiegać niż leczyć, powinno się wspomagać wszelkiego rodzaju akcje i kampanie promujące zdrowie. Pamiętajmy, że inwestycje we wszelkiego rodzaju innowacyjne metody leczenia, sprzęty kliniczne czy nowe technologie są inwestycjami w nas samych.

  Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, I wish to thank all the speakers for their valuable contributions. This shows that your contributions can be very helpful, because already some very important points have been made.

These include, for example, the question of how we can create the right work environment for workers in order to keep them in their home countries and, also, how we address the very serious problem of the brain drain.

I was in Liberia last week and was shocked to hear that for a population of 3 million they have only 150 doctors. The rest of their doctors are all in the United States of America. This is a very big problem – not only for Third World countries, but also within the European Union, as there is a very serious brain drain from the east to the west. We have to see how we might possibly encourage health workers and health professionals to stay in their home countries. In order to do that, we have to create better work conditions for them.

Formal care cannot be addressed without taking into account the need for, and the capacity for, informal care, which we indeed reconcile in the Green Paper.

Mrs Sinnott raised the very important question of how to train more people and offer people more opportunities to train. That is the other side of the coin. On the one hand we want more health workers, but on the other hand we do not have the capacity to train them. All these are very important questions which we shall be able to answer and give solutions to once we collect all the important comments that you and other stakeholders make on the Green Paper. At the end of the process we hope we will arrive at some solutions to the problem before it becomes truly insurmountable.

  Presidente. − La discussione è chiusa.

16. Il-Ħames Forum Dinji dwar l-Ilma, Istanbul, 16-22 ta' Marzu 2003 (dibattitu)

  Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca la discussione sull'interrogazione orale alla Commissione sul 5° Forum mondiale dell'acqua a Istanbul (dal 16 al 22 marzo 2009), di Josep Borrell Fontelles, a nome della commissione per lo sviluppo (O-0026/2009 - B6-0015/2009).

  Pierre Schapira, auteur. − Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, dans quelques jours, une délégation de notre Parlement se rendra à Istanbul pour participer au cinquième forum mondial de l'eau, un événement qui réunira tous les acteurs mondiaux de l'eau: agences onusiennes, banques de développement, États, organisations professionnelles, ONG et autorités locales.

Au moment où l'eau devient un bien de plus en plus rare et où l'accélération du changement climatique laisse présager la multiplication des conflits liés à l'accès à l'eau, j'ai souhaité préparer cette rencontre en proposant un texte fort au vote de notre institution afin de définir les bases de l'action européenne dans ce domaine.

La situation est grave, vous le savez, la pénurie en eau se généralise au-delà des régions traditionnellement sèches. L'accès à l'eau, dont la qualité est d'ailleurs en constante dégradation, est désormais une préoccupation pour tous. Les chiffres donnés par l'ONU parlent d'eux-mêmes. Un milliard de personnes n'a pas accès à l'eau potable. Deux milliards cinq cents millions n'ont pas accès à l'assainissement. Cinq mille enfants de moins de six ans meurent chaque jour de maladies dues à l'absence d'eau potable ou de services hygiéniques, ou à leur mauvaise qualité.

Le scandale est que les premières victimes sont toujours les plus pauvres. L'accès à l'eau, qui sera l'un des principaux enjeux des années à venir, risque de retarder encore plus la réalisation des objectifs du millénaire pour le développement. Le prochain forum mondial de l'eau doit être l'occasion de préparer ensemble des solutions pour répondre à cet immense défi.

Ma priorité était d'abord de rappeler que l'eau est un bien commun de l'humanité qui doit être un droit universel. C'est le premier paragraphe de la résolution proposée et il est essentiel car les politiques que nous mettons en œuvre en dépendent. Rappeler ce principe de base, c'est dire non à la marchandisation de l'eau, dont nous connaissons malheureusement trop bien les conséquences désastreuses.

En effet, le rapport du PNUD de 2006 révèle une injustice flagrante. La privation des systèmes de distribution s'est souvent traduite par un manque d'eau potable pour les populations les plus défavorisées. Dès lors, des millions de personnes doivent se diriger vers le secteur informel qui, compte tenu des intermédiaires, propose des prix cinq à dix fois plus chers.

Par ailleurs, nous défendons l'accès à l'eau potable et à l'assainissement pour tous. Cela implique que l'eau doit rester sous contrôle public, seul à même de faire prévaloir l'intérêt général. C'est ce principe qui devrait guider nos politiques et je suis heureux que la résolution y fasse référence.

L'intervention publique peut en effet permettre de résoudre le problème de cet accès. Une tarification juste et durable pour tous serait à la fois moins coûteuse pour les populations pauvres que le recours au secteur informel et permettrait d'investir dans les infrastructures nécessaires.

Cet objectif ne peut être atteint que par la contribution de tous. Aussi, l'aide publique au développement doit être utilisée en association avec les ressources des collectivités locales, les prêts bancaires, les capitaux privés et des partenariats novateurs.

Je souhaiterais notamment insister sur l'importance du financement solidaire, tel que le permet, notamment en France, la loi Houdin. Celle-ci donne la possibilité aux collectivités locales de prélever un centime par mètre cube sur les factures d'eau des usagers pour financer des actions de coopération internationale uniquement dédiées à l'eau.

La Commission est-elle prête, Madame, à encourager le développement de ce genre d'instrument? Cela doit se faire dans le respect de la notion de bien public et c'est pourquoi je me félicite que le texte de la résolution rappelle que les partenariats public-privé doivent être strictement définis et encadrés réglementairement.

Depuis le dernier forum mondial, le rôle des collectivités locales a été reconnu par toutes les parties prenantes, parlementaires et ministres compris. Le prochain forum – celui d'Istanbul – sera marqué par deux avancées majeures: la signature d'un consensus des autorités locales sur l'eau et l'organisation de deux journées entièrement consacrées au rôle des collectivités.

Êtes-vous prête, Madame la Commissaire, à utiliser le formidable réservoir d'expertise et de ressources humaines et financières des collectivités locales pour favoriser le partenariat Nord-Sud? Forts de leurs expériences réussies et de leurs compétences techniques, les villes du Nord sont désireuses d'apporter leur aide à leurs homologues en développement.

Pour terminer, l'ONU a publié aujourd'hui un rapport sur l'eau qui dresse des projections alarmantes pour l'avenir. Sous la double pression de la croissance démographique et du changement climatique, la crise de l'eau est aggravée par la faiblesse de la réaction politique. Alors que l'eau est la priorité de toute politique de développement, seuls 6 % de l'aide internationale lui sont consacrés.

Voilà pourquoi je souhaite que l'Europe, notre Parlement et la Commission adressent un message fort aux populations du Sud, car cet accès inéquitable à l'eau ne peut durer.

  Presidente. − Mi permetto una piccola nota personale: mi auguro davvero che l'acqua non venga sottratta dall'essere un bene comune e sia un diritto per tutte e tutti.

  Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, first of all I would like to convey the apologies of my colleague, Louis Michel, for not being able to be here in person, as he is in the Congo. However, it is with great pleasure that I will take up the points, because they are so important.

The Commission fully agrees that water and sanitation service provision is naturally addressed at the local level, through local government, municipalities and communities. We have to recognise, however, that weaknesses exist between those different levels, most notably in weaker countries where the provision of basic services is not a strong priority.

Last year, the European Development Days here in Strasbourg focused on the role of local authorities, who are at the heart of access to essential services, as well as on the importance of local governance and the participation of citizens. This is obviously a central issue for the water sector and the Commission, through its different instruments, is working to increase support to local authorities and reinforce partnerships between local actors from the North and the South.

At EU level, European water policy is also based on the principle of good governance, encouraging the involvement and participation of citizens, local communities, NGOs and stakeholders. This is reflected not only in the Water Framework Directive but also in initiatives such as the EU Water Initiative launched at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, which contains the reinforcement of the role of local actors among its objectives.

In Africa, where the Millennium Development Goals linked to water and sanitation are still not on track, investments need to increase, and the Commission has demonstrated its political commitment by creating a financial mechanism.

The Water Facility of half a billion euros has enabled mobilisation of double that amount through cofinancing of a large number of programmes to improve the water, sanitation and hygiene situation of millions of people. It has also improved water governance and management in ACP countries. The focus on the involvement of local actors has been one of the added values of this facility.

The EU will be represented at the Ministerial Segment of the World Water Forum by the current Czech Presidency. The statement that is being prepared includes references to the need for good governance through capacity development and institutional reform at all levels.

The Commission’s policy, approved in 2002, promotes integrated water resources management in developing countries. It is in this framework that the different uses of water – such as drinking water, sanitation, irrigation etc. – have to be addressed, in order to reach an optimal allocation of benefits among all users.

Moreover, the best practices of different experiences of green belts around cities, particularly in Africa, are currently being analysed in the context of the ‘Great Green Wall for the Sahara and the Sahel’ initiative as part of a feasibility study supported by the European Commission. Further support to this initiative will be considered in the framework of the Africa-EU Partnership on Climate Change.

I am pleased to announce that the Water Facility will continue under the 10th European Development Fund and that EUR 200 million has been set aside for that purpose. Member States are invited to participate with additional funding.

The Commission’s strategy is based on an integrated framework for collaboration with partner governments, EU Member States and all the stakeholders concerned.

The Water Facility complements the national programmes with its capacity to work with decentralised actors and develop innovative solutions. The ongoing preparation of the 10th EDF Water Facility identifies in particular the potential offered by public water operators, who provide over 90% of water and sanitation services globally.

Therefore, public-public partnerships potentially constitute a very cost-effective approach in terms of promoting the relevant ‘good governance’ principle in the ACP water sector, with potentially long-term and sustainable impacts on institutional and organisational change. Such ‘twinning’ partnerships – for instance through training and technical assistance – can be efficient ways to promote the principles of good governance in the water sector in ACP countries.

Finally, let me confirm that aid effectiveness and the division of labour are discussed with relevant partners within the mechanisms of the EU Water Initiative. A mapping of EU Development Assistance in the water sector has been carried out to improve that ongoing dialogue. The question of donor orphans is an important one in the water sector and the Commission intends to take this into account in the conception of the new Water Facility under the 10th EDF.

  José Ribeiro e Castro, em nome do Grupo PPE-DE. – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, retomo as palavras já aqui proferidas há anos atrás pela Colega Eija-Riitta Korhola, em 13 de Março de 2006. Ela descreveu-nos assim a situação no tocante ao acesso da água potável: “os números são alarmantes, morrem 3900 crianças todos os dias devido à falta de água potável, um quinto da população mundial, ou seja, cerca de 1100 mil milhões de pessoas sofre de falta de água potável. Mais de 40% da população mundial não tem acesso à água corrente e esgotos”.

Passaram três anos sobre estas constatações e o que se passa? O que se passa é que o cenário global se mantém preocupantemente idêntico, o que não pode deixar de nos preocupar. Deparamo-nos hoje com uma séria crise de saneamento básico que a todos convoca. Recordo que este problema afecta sobretudo as regiões mais pobres e subdesenvolvidas do globo, em particular a África Subsariana. Esta continua a ser a zona mais atingida pela falta de qualidade da água, em particular nas zonas rurais e nos bairros de lata que circundam as grandes cidades. Mas o problema é vastíssimo. Tenho aqui, comigo, uma brochura da UNICEF que data já de 2001, mas no essencial as suas verificações mantêm-se e são impressionantes. O que é que nos diz? Diz-nos que estes 1000 milhões se repartem um pouco por todo o mundo. Estes 1000 milhões de pessoas sem água potável: 4% no Médio Oriente e Norte de África, 4% na Europa Central e Oriental, 19% na Ásia do Sul, 25% na África Subsariana, 42% na África Oriental e Pacífico. E, se virmos os indicadores no interior de cada um destes espaços, são as regiões da África Oriental e Pacífico e da África Subsariana que nos apresentam números de alarme com, respectivamente, 24% e 43% das respectivas populações que, em 2000, no início da década, ainda não dispunham de acesso à água potável e segura.

É ocioso lembrar as complicações para a saúde, algumas delas fatais, que derivam destas carências, e como elas se repercutem no desenvolvimento e progresso das populações privadas em qualidade e abundância deste bem essencial, bem como as tensões fronteiriças que o acesso à água provoca e como estas arriscam a agudizar-se se nada for feito para as prevenir.

A União Europeia, actor global, não pode, enquanto contribuinte por excelência do esforço mundial para fazer face a este problema, eximir-se de participar nos principais debates sobre esta temática. Saúdo as relações que aqui nos fez a Senhora Comissária. Saúdo, por isso, também a realização e a participação europeia neste Quinto Fórum Mundial da Água. Este constituirá mais uma oportunidade para todos os principais actores debaterem a questão de modo objectivo e prepararem uma abordagem clara a este problema. Não posso senão apoiar este esforço também partilhado por toda a Comissão do Desenvolvimento no sentido da promoção da subsidiariedade, bem como, uma vez que aqui há muitas responsabilidades a nível local, solidarizar-me com as restantes preocupações da nossa comissão. A água, caros Colegas, é um bem essencial à vida, à vida de cada um de nós, à vida da humanidade.

  Inés Ayala Sender, en nombre del Grupo PSE. – Señora Presidenta, me congratulo esencialmente de la celebración de este V Foro Mundial del Agua en Estambul, y, sobre todo, también, de la participación de la Unión Europea, con una representación de la Comisión, pero también con una delegación del Parlamento Europeo. Y entiendo además, y apoyo, la necesidad de apoyar a las autoridades públicas locales para llegar a sistemas democráticos y participativos y mejores o innovadores de la gestión del agua, y de apoyar también los procesos de descentralización.

Todo ello con el objetivo primario y primordial de defender el derecho fundamental al agua y a los servicios sanitarios, pero, evidentemente, dentro de un marco riguroso de respeto al desarrollo sostenible que en la Unión Europea se materializa en la Directiva marco sobre el agua como referente, y con los Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio como fondo en el ámbito del desarrollo.

He de decir que todo ello –y así lo expondré mañana en una enmienda que espero que esta Cámara acepte– fue objeto de discusión este verano en la Expo Internacional de Zaragoza 2008, en la que por primera vez, además, participó el Parlamento Europeo junto con la Comisión en situación de igualdad. En ella más de 2000 expertos, en la Tribuna del Agua, y ONG, en el foro llamado El Faro, además de las delegaciones de la Comisión y del Parlamento, discutieron y generaron un enorme acervo de discusión y de propuestas muy interesantes y creativas sobre la gestión del agua.

Esto se perpetuó en una «Carta de Zaragoza 2008», adoptada el 14 de septiembre de 2008, con 17 puntos, algunos de los cuales querría destacar. En ella se dice:

– «que el acceso al agua potable y al saneamiento es un derecho humano que debe ser garantizado por los poderes públicos»;

– «que el acceso al agua es un potente vector de desarrollo»;

– «que las predicciones indican que el cambio climático es capaz de modificar la disponibilidad y las necesidades de agua en todo el planeta»;

– «que la sostenibilidad de la producción de alimentos está directamente ligada al uso eficiente del agua».

– «que la unidad de cuenca hidrográfica es el ámbito territorial más eficiente para aprovechar el agua y el que mejor permite resolver los conflictos entre países, regiones o usuarios»; y, finalmente,

– «que la intervención pública debe tomar la iniciativa para promover la legislación y la estructuración adecuadas de los derechos del agua».

Solicito a la Comisaria que tenga en cuenta las conclusiones de esta «Carta de Zaragoza» en cuya elaboración participamos tanto expertos como ONG, asociaciones y también la Comisión y el Parlamento, y que realmente sirvió como foro de debate previo a este V Foro Mundial del Agua en Estambul.

Creo que merece la pena integrar las conclusiones de esta Carta y también de la Tribuna del Agua en el acervo de discusión y debate europeo que presentamos como Unión Europea en el pabellón en esta exposición internacional.

  Roberto Musacchio, a nome del gruppo GUE/NGL. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, già due anni fa svolgemmo un dibattito d'Aula e approvammo un'impegnativa risoluzione sui temi dell'acqua, in occasione del IV Forum mondiale allora a Città del Messico. Scrivemmo allora che l'acqua dev'essere un diritto dell'umanità e che vanno costruite politiche attive di realizzazione di questo diritto attraverso forme di cooperazione pubblico-pubblico, che guardino in particolare alle comunità territoriali.

Purtroppo quella risoluzione non fu sostenuta dalla Commissione europea presente a Città del Messico – lo ricordo alla Commissaria adesso – nonostante fosse stata assai apprezzata da molti Paesi, in particolare dall'America latina. Ha pesato, purtroppo, la natura stessa di questo tipo di forum, che è comunque una struttura privatistica. Ora avremo l'occasione di essere presenti a Istanbul anche come delegazione parlamentare e sarebbe bene che la nostra presenza fosse supportata da una risoluzione altrettanto adeguata a quella del 2006: ancora non ci siamo pienamente e dunque mi avvio a presentare su questo degli emendamenti.

Noi abbiamo bisogno di una svolta decisa sul problema dell'acqua. Le cifre della sofferenza per l'acqua sono note e drammatiche, destinate a peggiorare anche a conseguenza dei cambi climatici. Proprio in rapporto con il cambio climatico è il nuovo campo di intervento che va aperto. Il cambio climatico peggiora l'accesso all'acqua e il cattivo accesso all'acqua peggiora il cambio climatico. Dunque, al tema del diritto, a quello della collaborazione pubblico-pubblico, si aggiunge quello di un rapporto forte da stabilire con il protocollo di Kyoto. Proprio l'ONU va coinvolta a fondo della questione acqua. È a una struttura apposita dell'ONU che si può vedere affidata la governance mondiale sull'acqua, sottraendola alle logiche privatistiche che ancora sono presenti nell'attuale forum. E ciò favorirebbe anche la connessione con le grandi convenzioni, quella per il clima e quella contro la desertificazione, che vivono proprio in ambito ONU.

Occorrono poi, naturalmente, finanziamenti adeguati, che possono venire dalla fiscalità generale e da prelievi, ad esempio, sulle acque minerali, di cui – voglio dire ai colleghi – abusiamo anche in questo Parlamento. La privatizzazione dell'acqua va contrastata: essa renderebbe l'accesso ad un bene vitale non più un diritto ma un mercato. E io penso che tutta la nostra storia europea insegna che è il pubblico ad aver garantito il diritto all'acqua nelle nostre case, ciò che non avviene in altri continenti sempre più affidati alla penetrazione del privato.

Sono temi concreti, ma anche di grandissimo valore morale. Non a caso per il diritto all'acqua sono in campo grandi movimenti, grandi personalità, laiche ma anche religiose. Ancora di recente, e più volte negli ultimi anni, l'Aula del Parlamento europeo è stata messa a disposizione – giustamente, ne ringrazio i Presidenti – di riunioni importanti di organismi di movimento a livello mondiale. Da ultimo, nell'ultimo appuntamento, è stata avanzata l'idea di un vero e proprio protocollo per il diritto all'acqua, che sono convinto dovremo tutti sostenere.

  Filip Kaczmarek (PPE-DE). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Dla większości z nas swobodny dostęp do wody jest czymś oczywistym. Codziennie zużywamy wielkie ilości wody. Warto jednak pamiętać, że według szacunków Światowej Organizacji Zdrowia jedna szósta mieszkańców Ziemi, tj. ponad miliard ludzi nie ma dostępu do wody spełniającej podstawowe, minimalne normy czystości. Oznacza to, że w cywilizacji XXI wieku miliony ludzi cierpi z powodu pragnienia i umiera na skutek chorób wywołanych spożywaniem zanieczyszczonej wody. Byłem niedawno w największym mieście Afryki, w Lagos, gdzie zaledwie 1% mieszkańców posiada dostęp do bieżącej wody.

Dane tego typu są przerażające, ale mimo to problem wody nie zajmuje miejsca na pierwszy stronach gazet, nie wywołuje powszechnego zainteresowania mediów czy nie jest przedmiotem dyskusji i sporów, jak na przykład kwestie AIDS, walka z malarią czy globalne ocieplenie. Wynika to zapewne z faktu, iż problem ten dotyka tylko w 2% Europejczyków, ale już mieszkańców Afryki w 27%. Szacuje się, że w samej Afryce wskutek chorób wywołanych spożywaniem brudnej wody umiera rocznie więcej osób niż wskutek AIDS i malarii razem wziętych.

Można zatem powiedzieć, że brak dostępu do wody pitnej nie uśmierca w sposób medialny, widowiskowy i nie wywołuje takiego szerokiego zainteresowania jak klęski typu trzęsienia ziemi, tsunami czy powodzie albo konflikty zbrojne. Ale fakty są takie - jak mówił już pan Ribeiro e Castro - średnio każdego dnia umiera 6000 dzieci z powodu chorób wywołanych brakiem wody. Oznacza to, że co 15 sekund umiera dziecko. Wyobrażają sobie Państwo reakcję świata, oddźwięk, stopień mobilizacji i determinacji, gdyby to się działo w Europie, a nie w Afryce Subsaharyjskiej czy w Azji?

Dlatego problem dostępu do wody nie jest tylko problemem krajów rozwijających się, ale jest również problemem krajów rozwiniętych. Powszechny dostęp do wody pitnej jest niezbędnym warunkiem dla rozwoju krajów i skutecznej walki z ubóstwem. Bez zaspokojenia tej potrzeby nie ma mowy o polepszeniu opieki zdrowotnej czy rozwoju edukacji. Bez zapewnienia wody na potrzeby rolnictwa czy prostego przemysłu całe społeczeństwa są skazane na walkę o codzienną egzystencję, a rezultatem tej walki są konflikty zbrojne, migracja, destabilizacja, czyli blokady rozwoju i zwiększanie różnic rozwojowych.

W Forum, o którym mówimy będą również brali udział politycy i będą dyskutowali o aktualnych sprawach. Jedną z tych aktualnych spraw jest sytuacja w Darfurze, skąd prezydent Baszir wyrzuca organizacje, które między innymi dbają o to, aby mieszkańcy Darfuru mieli dostęp do wody. Będzie to więc okazja, aby skłonić między innymi prezydenta Baszira, aby pozwolił organizacjom międzynarodowym na dostarczanie wody mieszkańcom Darfuru.

  Giulietto Chiesa (PSE). - Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, vorrei ricordare anch'io, come ha fatto l'onorevole Musacchio, che questo Parlamento ha promosso a febbraio, insieme al World Political Forum di Michail Gorbačëv, un'assemblea dal titolo significativo: "Fare la pace con l'acqua", assemblea che ha prodotto un memorandum per un protocollo mondiale dell'acqua che merita la massima attenzione e che è stato, del resto, condiviso da tutti i principali gruppi politici di questo Parlamento, ma che sembra essere stato ignorato dalla commissione sviluppo, che ha fatto questo documento.

Non credo sia un caso: il documento qui in discussione appare infatti debole e a mezz'aria su tutte le questioni cruciali che saranno sul tappeto a Istanbul. Per esempio l'acqua come diritto umano fondamentale. Se lo è – ed è un'assurdità negarlo – allora non può essere anche una merce. Non si compra un diritto e non lo si vende in una società di liberi. Un diritto si compra solo in una società di schiavi. Ma sappiamo bene che colossali interessi privati vogliono impadronirsi di questo diritto. Allora, che cosa va a dire l'Europa a Istanbul? Chi, com'è scritto per esempio nel considerando J, bisogna accrescere la priorità finanziaria dell'acqua? Ecco una formulazione ambigua per eccellenza. Inoltre lo Stato, la proprietà pubblica, è il responsabile unico della politica idrica oppure no? Oppure, come si dice al paragrafo 12 della risoluzione, è il "responsabile maggiore"? Ma cosa significa questa frase? Cosa del resto contraddittoria con il paragrafo 2 dello stesso documento, dove si dichiara, giustamente, che l'acqua è un "bene pubblico" da tenere "sotto controllo pubblico".

Insomma, siamo nel pieno di una crisi generale del modello di sviluppo della nostra società ma ancora ci attardiamo su un'idea del mercato che si appropria della stessa natura a fini privati. Infine, un altro punto molto debole: l'assenza di una proposta organizzativa nel documento per la gestione mondiale dell'acqua. Proposta di un'agenzia mondiale formulata invece nel memorandum citato, che è contenuta in uno degli emendamenti che io appoggerò in sede di votazione.

  Czesław Adam Siekierski (PPE-DE). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Piąte Światowe Forum Wody to wydarzenie, które powinno stać się okazją do prac nad systemami publicznego zarządzania wodą, które byłyby skuteczne, przejrzyste, podlegające regulacji i zgodne z celami zrównoważonego rozwoju w celu zaspokojenia potrzeb społeczeństwa. Specjalna rola i zadania spoczywają tu na samorządach lokalnych. Ponadto kryzys żywnościowy ujawnił potrzebę rozwijania nowych technik, takich jak nawadnianie obszarów rolnych. Równolegle w rolnictwie zadbajmy o to, aby stosowane były naturalne nawozy lub takie, które szybko rozłożą się w glebie i nie przenikną do wód podziemnych.

Wreszcie, jak Komisja zamierza zrealizować wolę Parlamentu Europejskiego wyrażoną w jego rezolucji z dnia 15 marca w sprawie czwartego Światowego Forum Wodnego, dotyczącą popierania i sposobów solidarnego finansowania gospodarki wodnej? Problem wody to najważniejsze wyzwanie, przed jakim stoi świat i Europa.

  Alessandro Battilocchio (PSE). - Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, hanno ragione i colleghi, i numeri sono allarmanti e ci impongono una riflessione profonda. Tante, troppe persone nel mondo sono ancora private del diritto fondamentale all'acqua. In questi anni la regolamentazione sulla materia si è particolarmente estesa. Vorrei però che venisse sottolineata ad Istanbul la necessità, non più rinviabile, di una razionalizzazione dei tanti organismi internazionali che dovrebbero avere un ruolo di governance, indirizzo e controllo delle dinamiche mondiali legate all'acqua e che spesso oggi sovrappongono azioni e competenze.

Mi auguro inoltre che in occasione del V Forum mondiale emerga e venga condiviso il concetto dell'acqua come bene pubblico globale, con conseguenti politiche appropriate legate alla tutela, alla proprietà pubblica e alle modalità di utilizzo e distribuzione.

  Marie Anne Isler Béguin (Verts/ALE). - Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, je crois que, ensemble, au sein de cet hémicycle, nous répétons toujours les mêmes choses depuis des années.

Je crois que tout a déjà été dit sur l'eau, sur ce bien commun de l'humanité, et malheureusement il faut le redire encore parce que la situation est loin de s'améliorer, bien au contraire. Avec le nouveau rapport de l'ONU, on voit que la situation tendrait plutôt à se dégrader. Et là, je pense que, malgré les propositions qui sont faites et les politiques qui sont menées par l'Union européenne, qui sont un premier pas en avant, il faut vraiment aller au-delà parce que sans eau, il n'y a pas de vie. Il faut également être conscients que de nombreuses populations, notamment les pays avec lesquels nous commerçons et nous dialoguons, sont en rupture d'eau potable ou n'ont toujours pas accès à l'eau potable.

C'est absolument inadmissible et inacceptable. À mon sens, il faut vraiment soutenir – et je crois que l'Union européenne doit soutenir au niveau international et à Istanbul – le statut de l'eau comme bien commun de l'humanité. Ce n'est pas une marchandise qu'on peut vendre ou qu'on pourrait vendre avec nos entreprises multinationales. C'est vraiment cela que nous devons défendre à Istanbul, et je pense que nos collègues vont le défendre.

  John Bowis (PPE-DE). - Madam President, I have listened to my colleagues quite rightly highlighting the shortage of water, lack of access to water, the diseases that come from that. All that is fundamentally important for this water forum.

I just wanted to raise the other side of that coin because those of us who were recently in Guyana with the ACP regional conference were made very aware of those countries which have too much water because of climate change. Mr Musacchio was talking about the climate change impact on water; how it can contaminate, how it can dry it up, lose the access, but here we have too much and we have to bear in mind what that does in terms of polluting water supplies and causing damage to crops and all the rest of it.

So we have, I believe, to add to this list for the water forum the issue of forestation/deforestation, because, unless we get that right, we will go on having floods as well as droughts.

  Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, nobody can underestimate the importance of water and the need to manage our water sources well. But, as I said in my introductory remarks, we also need to assist the poorer parts of the world in gaining access to clean drinking water. The Commission will continue to assist these countries.

Water is a primary human need, as was recognised and reaffirmed during the Fourth Water Forum in Mexico in 2006. Of course, as I said before, the EU will be represented and will put forward a strong case on all the points I have made at the forthcoming Forum in Istanbul.

Mr Bowis referred to another very important question – and I agree with him – namely that, because of climate change, we see other parts of the world being flooded with water. We really have to take action about that. As he said very clearly, forestation is one of the solutions to the problem.

  Presidente. − Comunico di aver ricevuto una proposta di risoluzione⁽¹⁾ conformemente all'articolo 108, paragrafo 5 del regolamento.

La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà giovedì 12 marzo 2009.

(1) Vedasi processo verbale

17. Rapport Nru 10/2008 tal-Qorti tal-Awdituri dwar l-Għajnuna tal-KE għall-Iżvilupp fir-rigward tas-Servizzi tas-Saħħa fl-Afrika tas-Sub-Saħara (dibattitu)

  Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca la discussione sull'interrogazione orale alla Commissione sulla relazione speciale della Corte dei conti n. 10/2008 sull'aiuto allo sviluppo fornito dalla CE ai servizi sanitari nell'Africa subsahariana, di Josep Borrell Fontelles, a nome della commissione per lo sviluppo (O-0030/2009 - B6-0016/2009).

  Anne Van Lancker, Auteur. − Voorzitter, commissaris, beste collega's, Afrika is het enige continent dat geen noemenswaardige vooruitgang boekt inzake de millenniumdoelstellingen, vooral op gezondheidsgebied, en met name moeder- en kindersterfte, de strijd tegen hiv/aids, tbc en malaria. Dat heeft alles te maken met hun zwakke gezondheidssystemen en met de human resources-crisis die in die sector heerst. Het is dan ook duidelijk dat investeren in gezondheidssystemen essentieel is in de strijd tegen armoede.

Dat is trouwens ook de mening van de Commissie, maar volgens het verslag van de Rekenkamer kan de Commissie dat al wel jarenlang beweren, in de praktijk komt daar bitter weinig van terecht. De Commissie doet inspanningen, vooral via verticale fondsen in de strijd tegen aids, en dit is volgens ons misschien wel noodzakelijk, maar het mag niet ten koste gaan van het globale pakket aan investeringen in de basisgezondheidszorg.

Mevrouw de commissaris, het budget voor basisgezondheidszorg is sedert 2000 proportioneel niet eens toegenomen in het kader van het ganse pakket officiële ontwikkelingshulp. Reden genoeg dus voor dit Parlement om op basis van het verslag van de Rekenkamer een aantal vragen te stellen en een aantal aanbevelingen te formuleren aan de Commissie. Ik heb vier punten.

Ten eerste. Verhoging van het budget voor de gezondheidszorg. Hier is duidelijk een gezamenlijk initiatief nodig van de EU met de partnerlanden. De ontwikkelingslanden hebben zich geëngageerd 15% van hun begroting te investeren in het kader van de Abuja-verklaring. Maar dat kan onmogelijk lukken, mevrouw de commissaris, als de Commissie en Europa maar 5,5% van het Europees Ontwikkelingsfonds hieraan spenderen. Ik zou dan ook graag van u willen weten op welke manier de Commissie ervoor wil zorgen dat in het kader van het 10e EOF de investeringen in gezondheid worden verhoogd.

Ten tweede. Beter en efficiënt gebruik van begrotingssteun. Dat is een paradepaardje van de Commissie, maar krijgt weinig goede punten in het verslag van de Rekenkamer. Begrotingssteun bevat nochtans een groot potentieel om tegemoet te komen aan de tekortkomingen in de zuiderse gezondheidszorgen. Sectoriële begrotingssteun kan echt gefocussed mikken op gezondheidssystemen, maar wordt amper gebruikt in Afrika bezuiden de Sahara.

Algemene begrotingssteun kan ook helpen, maar dan moet de Commissie de partners wel engageren en enthousiasmeren om gezondheidszorg als een focale sector te selecteren, en we roepen de Commissie daar dan ook toe op. Mijn vraag aan de Commissie: op welke manier gaat u ervoor zorgen dat zowel via sectorsteun als algemene begrotingssteun veel betere en meer resultaatgerichte actie wordt ondernomen.

MDG-contracten is een van de beloftevolle instrumenten van de Commissie. Ik ben er 100% voor, maar eerlijk gezegd is dit een beetje te weinig, te kort door de bocht, want deze zijn alleen bestemd voor de goede leerlingen, en dus zijn alternatieven absoluut wenselijk voor de anderen.

Ten derde: verhoging van de expertise. Volgens het verslag beschikt de Commissie ook over onvoldoende expertise om haar beleidsvoorstellen in de gezondheidszorg waar te maken. Daarom vragen we aan de Commissie om die expertise te garanderen door meer gezondheidsexperten op te nemen en ook beter samen te werken met de WHO en met de lidstaten.

Ten vierde: betere coördinatie binnen de gezondheidszorg. Commissaris, het is absoluut noodzakelijk dat er echt werk gemaakt wordt van de Europese gedragscode over de verdeling van het werk en ervoor te zorgen dat de investeringen en de programma's inzake gezondheidszorg tussen de verschillende landen van de Europese Unie echt beter gecoördineerd worden. En dat ervoor gezorgd wordt dat de zogenaamde wezen onder de hulpbehoevende landen ook een gezondheidshulp kunnen garanderen.

Tot slot, beste collega's, zou ik nog een woord van dank willen richten aan mijn collega Bart Staes die namens de Commissiebegrotingscontrole onze bezorgdheid vanuit de Commissie ontwikkelingssamenwerking ondersteunt en de Commissie vraagt haar plannen met het oog op de kwijtingsprocedure te verduidelijken, en wel liefst vóór eind 2009.

Het is duidelijk, commissaris, beste collega's, dit Parlement dringt er bij de Commissie op aan om haar beleidsprioriteiten met meer overtuiging en met betere instrumenten eindelijk ook in realiteit om te zetten. Dat is meer dan noodzakelijk, willen we tegen 2015 ook nog een kans maken om de millenniumdoelstellingen te halen, want, commissaris, basisgezondheidszorg verdient duurzame investeringen op lange termijn.

  Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, the Commission really welcomes the European Court of Auditors’ special report on EC support to health services in Africa. The debate on this oral question gives us an opportunity to discuss our health support to Africa with you, the European Parliament.

I am not going to repeat here the formal reaction the Commission has already made regarding the Court of Auditors’ special report, which has already been published on the Internet.

Unfortunately this report has not received wide coverage in the press and, when it was mentioned, things were sometimes oversimplified by saying that ‘Europe has not kept its promises in Africa’. Let me therefore just clarify a few essential points before we enter into the debate.

The Commission remains fully committed to supporting the Millennium Development Goals, the health-related Goals 4, 5 and 6 being an integral part of these goals: reduction of child mortality by two thirds, reduction of maternal mortality by three quarters, and halting and reversing the spread of HIV/AIDS. This is what our development cooperation stands for, but our commitment must not be measured by budgetary allocations to the health sector alone.

Doubtless, child mortality will be reduced by effective health service interventions, vaccinations in particular. Therefore we monitor vaccination coverage not only in our health programmes, but also in many of our general budget support operations. However, child mortality also depends on other factors such as nutrition, housing, access to safe water, sanitation and education. Therefore our contribution can and will frequently be outside the health-care sector itself.

When deciding on sectoral allocations and modalities of our development assistance, we agreed in Paris and Accra to increasingly respect basic principles of aid effectiveness. Here are just two examples. The first is leadership by partner governments. This means, after an in-depth discussion with the partner country, accepting the sectors proposed for support. It might not be the health sector but education or water and sanitation.

Second: alignment on national systems. This means channelling our aid, preferably as budget support (provided that the basic criteria are fulfilled). If the country has a sufficiently well formulated poverty strategy, our support may preferably be channelled as general budget support.

Although this support will then not be earmarked as health sector support, it is linked to targets for health, such as vaccination coverage rates or proportions of births assisted by skilled health personnel. Such targets are usually part of the poverty strategy and are monitored, and budget support disbursement is often linked to progress on them.

In addition to the global commitments on aid effectiveness made in Accra and Paris, we, the European Union, have collectively agreed on a code of conduct that foresees, for example, a reduction in the number of sectors in which each and every donor is active, in order to reduce the administrative and managerial burden on our partner countries through the multiplicity of donors. This is the meaning of the division of labour approach that EU Member States and the European Commission have agreed upon. We know that it will not always be easy to agree on this at the country level, particularly as health scores high in public opinion, and all donors and donor countries want to be present and to be seen. We will at times have to resist such a tendency and leave it to the other donors to do the job.

I therefore hope that our debate today will contribute to further clarifying these issues and to helping ensure that Europe fulfils its promises to Africa.

  John Bowis, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. – Madam President, I thank the Commissioner for that response. I am sure you are right, Commissioner, that figures can mean many things and we need to look very carefully at them. But of course today we are looking at the Court of Auditors, so we have to look at the figures. I sometimes wish we would look at people rather than figures, but we agree ‘no wealth without health’. That is not just a slogan but a reality in so many low-income countries.

We agree that the Court of Auditors says only 5.5% of EDF funding is going to health, whereas the European Union’s policy – and Parliament’s policy – is that 35% should be spent on health and education. There is a wrong figure there, and it may well not be as bad as that figure suggests. Nevertheless, it shows we have got to do a lot better, and that involves cooperation – if I can use that term – with the 15% pledge enshrined in the Abuja Declaration by the countries themselves.

But, Commissioner, I want to come back to the people. Go to Mali and see the diabetes out of control and look at the cost to families: over 30% of their family income spent on insulin, if they have to buy it – and they do have to buy it. Go to Chad and ask about the mental health services, and they will tell you that they used to have them before the civil war. Go anywhere in Africa and see the inhumane treatment of people with epilepsy, whereas for a few cents we could make most of them seizure-free. Go anywhere in Africa and see the AIDS orphans and see and meet the grandparents trying to raise the grandchildren because the parents are dead.

The statistics are there. We know that in the Americas 14% of the world’s population has 10% of the global burden of disease and 42% of the health workers. Sub-Saharan Africa has 11% of the world’s population, 25% of the global burden of disease and 3% of the health workers. It reflects the debate that we had earlier. But we have to look at those things because you cannot have health without health services, without health workers and without health education.

We also have to look at some of the projects that we are embarking on. It is not just TB, AIDS and malaria, but all the other diseases. It is the neglected diseases, for which the Commission stands proud with its cooperation with the pharmaceutical companies on that initiative to bring help to people in need of those medicines. We have to look at the causes of ill health, and the debates this evening have centred round those.

Only if we pull all these things together will the statistics add up – and that means the people will add up. What we do better will help people to be better, and then their economies could be better too.

  Bart Staes, namens de Verts/ALE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, collega's, het verslag van de Rekenkamer wordt eigenlijk pas volgende week officieel gepresenteerd in de Commissie begrotingscontrole. Mijn complimenten dus aan de Commissie ontwikkelingssamenwerking en zeer zeker ook aan mevrouw Anne Van Lancker, die ervoor hebben gezorgd dat dit debat hier vandaag plaatsvindt, en dat we morgen een resolutie zullen aannemen waarin heel nauwgezet wordt uiteengezet wat er fout is.

Laat ons goed luisteren naar het betoog van mevrouw Van Lancker, naar de aanbevelingen die zij in haar lange speech heeft gedaan. Laat ons goed luisteren, mevrouw de commissaris, naar het betoog van John Bowis, die op een zeer treffende wijze heeft uitgelegd wat er schort.

Wie het verslag van de Rekenkamer erop naleest, kan niet zomaar over de zaak heengaan. De cijfers zijn er, en mevrouw Van Lancker heeft het terecht gezegd, de millenniumdoelstellingen inzake deze sector zullen niet worden gehaald, of in elk geval zeer moeilijk. Kijk maar eens naar de cijfers die de Rekenkamer land per land vermeldt, en dan wordt u met de beide voeten op de grond geplaatst.

Aids-prevalentie, 34% van de bevolking is getroffen in Swaziland, 23% in Lesotho, 14% in Malawi. De kindersterfte in Swaziland was 78 op 1000 in 1997, nu 86 op 1000. In Lesotho was de levensverwachting medio jaren '90 nog 60 jaar, nu nog 41 jaar. In Kenia sterft meer dan 1 op de 10 kinderen vóór ze vijf jaar oud zijn. De aanbeveling, de analyse van de Rekenkamer over de efficiëntie van het EU-beleid in de voorbije jaren is pijnlijk verontrustend.

Ik hoop dan ook, commissaris, dat u er als Commissie in zult slagen om de vragen die ik als rapporteur van de Commissie begrotingscontrole in deze resolutie heb kunnen laten opnemen, inderdaad vóór 10 april zult beantwoorden, zodat we die antwoorden kunnen meenemen in de kwijtingsprocedure die eind april wordt afgerond.

  José Ribeiro e Castro (PPE-DE). - Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, quem visita a África Subsariana reconhece facilmente, na generalidade dos países, a enorme debilidade dos seus sistemas de saúde e o impacto extremamente negativo que esta debilidade tem na vida e na saúde das populações que aqueles serviços deveriam servir.

Os indicadores continuamente divulgados a nível internacional não cessam de o confirmar. E, nessa medida, é absolutamente perturbadora a noção de que gestos simples e práticos até não muito elaborados, nem sequer particularmente dispendiosos, poderiam ser suficientes para salvar muitas vidas. O apoio financeiro europeu pode ser crucial neste tocante e não podemos deixar de ter sempre presente como a cooperação na área da saúde é verdadeiramente estratégica e atravessa directamente não só um dos Objectivos do Milénio mas muitos dos Objectivos do Milénio. Ora, o Tribunal de Contas considerou que, cito, “o financiamento comunitário a favor do sector da saúde não aumentou desde o ano 2000 na proporção da sua ajuda total ao desenvolvimento, apesar dos compromissos assumidos pela Comissão relativamente aos objectivos do Milénio e da crise sanitária na África Subsariana”. Fim de citação. E reconheceu, cito de novo, “a Comissão contribuiu de forma significativa através dos seus financiamentos para constituir o fundo mundial de luta contra a Sida, a tuberculose e a malária, mas não concedeu a mesma atenção ao reforço dos sistemas de saúde que se previa ser uma das suas prioridades”. Fim de citação.

Segundo o Tribunal, isso terá acontecido, cito de novo, "porque a Comissão não tinha experiência suficiente em matéria de saúde para garantir que o financiamento da ajuda por ela concedida a este sector era utilizado da melhor forma”. Fim de citação.

Este é, portanto, um forte desafio que o Tribunal de Contas lança directamente à Comissão Europeia e que eu acompanho. Pelo nosso lado, quero reiterar esse mesmo desafio sustentado agora na objectividade destes dados e desta avaliação. Os serviços de saúde já fazem parte, mas devem fazer cada vez mais parte das nossas prioridades de ajuda ao desenvolvimento, sendo merecedores de um acréscimo no seu financiamento. Optimizar a forma como a ajuda é prestada tendo presente as necessidades aparentemente antagónicas de coordenação na sua gestão e de proximidade com as populações beneficiárias é prestar um serviço que pode salvar muitas vidas.

A Comissão Europeia não pode deixar de responder positivamente a este repto e é nesse sentido que a exorto. O colega Bowis, ainda há pouco, fez-nos aqui uma intervenção tocante e foi capaz de pôr rostos, rostos humanos na frieza seca destes números do Tribunal de Contas. O desafio para nós, Senhora Comissária, é o de a nossa cooperação ser capaz de pôr nestes mesmos rostos um olhar de alegria e de esperança. E para isso, Senhora Comissária, é indispensável que sejam outros os números na área da saúde na nossa cooperação.

  Marie Anne Isler Béguin (Verts/ALE). - Madame la Présidente, je ne voulais pas vraiment intervenir sur le rapport, mais ajouter un point qui me tient particulièrement à cœur et que j'ai soulevé à plusieurs reprises lors des réunions des ACP; c'est la question de la situation sanitaire des populations touareg au Niger. Dans ce contexte, Madame la Commissaire, je voudrais vraiment poser le problème de sociétés européennes qui vont exploiter des ressources naturelles dans des pays africains, et notamment la société Areva pour la France, qui va exploiter l'uranium au Niger, sans donner aucune information aux populations locales, si bien que les populations présentes là-bas se servent, par exemple, de matériels ou de ferraille radioactifs pour en faire des ustensiles de cuisine.

Aujourd'hui, les autorités nigérianes ne permettent pas de faire des études sérieuses sur la situation radioactive de ces populations, mais nous savons qu'elles sont dans une situation alarmante.

Nous avions demandé, lors d'une réunion ACP, qu'une étude épidémiologique soit menée sur ces populations. Je réitère aujourd'hui cette demande à la Commission.

PRESIDÊNCIA: Manuel António dos Santos
Vice-Presidente

  Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, not only have I listened carefully to what has been said tonight, and not only have I paid attention to what was said in the report by the Court of Auditors, but also, as I said before, I have just come back from a visit to Côte d’Ivoire and Liberia and have seen with my own eyes what the needs of these countries are in the field of health. They have needs in terms of infrastructure, needs in terms of the trained health providers we have already talked about, and needs in terms of medication.

Those needs are immense, and I cannot but agree with you that we have to intensify our efforts in offering our help, in the field of health, in the poor countries of Africa.

I can assure you that I will convey your comments to my colleague, Louis Michel, and I am sure he too will consider all your suggestions and comments with great attention, just as I have done.

  Presidente. − Comunico que recebi uma proposta de resolução⁽¹⁾ apresentada em conformidade com o nº 5 do artigo 108º do Regimento.

O debate está encerrado.

A votação terá lugar na quinta-feira, 12 de Março de 2009.

(1) Ver acta

18. L-implimentazzjoni taż-Żona Unika ta' Pagamenti bl-Euro (SEPA) (dibattitu)

  Presidente. − Segue-se a pergunta oral à Comissão sobre a realização do Espaço Único de Pagamentos em Euros (SEPA), apresentada por Pervenche Berès, em nome da Comissão dos Assuntos Económicos e Monetários (O-0018/2009).

  Pervenche Berès, auteure. − Monsieur le Président, j'interviens au titre de la commission économique et monétaire. Madame la Commissaire, ce Parlement européen, sous l'autorité de notre rapporteur, Jean-Paul Gauzès, s'est beaucoup engagé pour que les moyens législatifs de la mise en œuvre du projet SEPA – Single Euro Payments Area – puissent voir le jour.

Lorsque nous avons défini le dispositif législatif d'accompagnement – la directive sur les services de paiement –, nous nous posions un certain nombre de questions. Aujourd'hui, nous nous rendons compte que ces questions étaient sans doute légitimes.

Au moment où ce projet doit être lancé, nous éprouvons un certain nombre d'inquiétudes car nous n'avons pas l'impression que le niveau de mobilisation qui, me semble-t-il, n'a rien à voir avec les enjeux de la crise, n'est pas tout à fait au rendez-vous de ce qu'il devrait être.

Or, ce projet, qui a beaucoup mobilisé les acteurs du secteur, qui a beaucoup mobilisé le législateur, mais qui, surtout, doit représenter un outil de paiement moderne et adapté à la réalité de ce qu'est notre monnaie unique, l'euro, risque au fond de ne pas obtenir la masse critique qui devrait être la sienne pour pouvoir donner pleinement ses effets.

Nous nous inquiétons notamment que le lancement de l'instrument de prélèvement automatique du projet SEPA, qui est sans doute un des aspects les plus originaux de ce projet, rencontre quelques difficultés.

Il nous semble que, du point de vue de la responsabilité de la Commission, deux questions se posent. La première est de savoir comment la Commission a l'intention de promouvoir et de soutenir la migration vers les instruments de paiement du SEPA. Un calendrier a été fixé et on voit bien qu'il ne tient pas compte de tous les éléments de la réalité. La seconde est de savoir si la Commission est d'avis qu'une masse critique de paiements ayant migré vers les instruments SEPA devrait être atteinte d'ici 2010, et, sinon, ce qu'il faut faire pour qu'il en soit ainsi.

Lorsque nous avons arrêté le dispositif législatif, nous n'avons pas arrêté de date butoir claire et contraignante pour la migration vers les instruments du SEPA. Nous pensons qu'il est sans doute temps de le faire. Nous comprenons qu'il y a des questions qui sont encore ouvertes sur la compatibilité des systèmes nationaux et du système SEPA, sur ce que signifie la migration définitive, mais nous pensons qu'il est de la responsabilité de la Commission d'accompagner l'industrie pour répondre aux interrogations qui sont encore les siennes.

Il y a ensuite la question des commissions d'interchange qui, manifestement, a été ignorée ou négligée alors qu'elle est, pour beaucoup d'acteurs, au cœur des conditions de succès du projet SEPA. De ce point de vue-là, on a parfois l'impression qu'au sein des différents responsables, que ce soit le secteur professionnel de la banque, que ce soit la Direction du marché intérieur ou la Direction de la concurrence, on se renvoie un peu la balle.

Peut-être est-il de la responsabilité du législateur d'interpeller ces acteurs et de les appeler à un certain sens de la responsabilité. Il nous semble que, à ce stade, on ne peut pas mettre en cause un dispositif qui a une cohérence sans accompagner les acteurs du marché dans leur définition d'un système alternatif. C'est exactement la difficulté que nous avons dans ce dossier des commissions d'interchange.

La Direction de la concurrence, dans un certain nombre de cas, a indiqué qu'elle considérait que ce dispositif était contraire aux règles de la concurrence, mais elle estime ensuite que c'est à l'industrie de trouver la réponse alternative. Or, les réponses alternatives qui existent à l'échelle des États membres n'ont pas, elles, été testées par la Direction de la concurrence. Rien n'indique donc que la Direction de la concurrence pourrait les soutenir et rien n'indique non plus que certaines des solutions soient des solutions adaptées aux problèmes qui sont devant nous.

À titre d'exemple, imaginer que le financement d'un système d'interchange puisse reposer sur la pénalité du dispositif, c'est-à-dire sur les fautes qui seraient commises, donc en réalité très souvent sur les plus vulnérables, ne me paraît pas être raisonnable ni juste socialement.

J'interpelle donc la Commission sur deux points forts: définir une date butoir pour la migration et aider à la définition d'un système alternatif ou d'un système acceptable du point de vue des règles du traité en matière d'interchange.

  Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, first of all may I convey the regrets of Commissioner McCreevy for not being able to attend.

Well, this is indeed a long question but I believe both the question and the draft resolution on SEPA implementation correctly identify the key issues we need to resolve to make a success of SEPA.

The first question asks how the Commission intends to promote and foster migration to SEPA instruments.

SEPA is primarily a market-driven project, but given the substantial benefits to the wider economy, the Commission has sought to encourage SEPA migration, for example by acting as a catalyst to raise the political profile of SEPA through our SEPA Progress Report and by encouraging early migration by public authorities. And, also, by striving itself to be an early adopter of SEPA. And finally, as announced in last week’s Commission ‘Driving European Recovery’ by coming forward with proposals to ensure that the full benefits of SEPA are realised.

The second question asks if a critical mass of payments will have migrated by end 2010. Clearly we favour rapid migration to keep extra costs during migration to a minimum. Although the SEPA Credit Transfer (SCT) has been successfully launched, less than 2% of payments have migrated. Furthermore, the Sepa Direct Debit will only be launched later this year. So the current pace of migration is too slow to attain critical mass migration by 2010.

The third question was on the necessity of a clear and binding end date. We see the strong merits of fixing an end date and of course 2012 does not seem unreasonable. However, for many Member States this remains a very sensitive question. We therefore favour establishing a clear process to examine this question, by collecting information on the impact of an end date on different stakeholders and launching a meaningful debate with them.

This could pave the way for some political endorsement and, if needed, a possible legislative proposal, for example, at the end of the year.

Your fourth question asks how to enhance legal certainty for the SEPA Direct Debit in relation to the MIF and existing mandates.

We need a temporary solution to the business model problem to provide legal clarity and get the SEPA Direct Debit successfully launched. That is why the Commission fully supports the efforts of Parliament and the Council to find a temporary solution within the context of the revision of the Regulation on cross-border payments.

The Commission also supports the continued legal validity of existing national direct debit mandates under SEPA migration. However, this is a legal matter for national authorities to solve, for example by using the opportunity provided by the Payment Services Directive’s implementation.

The fifth question related to how the Commission is tackling the MIF issue for card payments.

This work is progressing primarily through the Commission’s assessment under the competition rules of the two major international card schemes, namely MasterCard and Visa.

On 19 December 2007, the Commission decided that the MasterCard MIFs for cross-border card payments with MasterCard and Maestro branded consumer credit and debit cards were not compatible with the competition rules. MasterCard is appealing the Commission’s decision.

In March 2008 the Commission opened proceedings to establish whether Visa Europe’s MIF constitutes an infringement of Article 81. Discussions with Visa are ongoing as well.

The Commission seeks to maintain a level playing field for MasterCard and Visa Europe as well as for the other payment card schemes which might emerge in the future.

Your penultimate question asks if the Commission should propose a concrete solution to the MIF issue. In a market economy it is incumbent upon industry to propose an appropriate business model. In relation to cards, as I have said, discussions are ongoing with Mastercard and Visa. In relation to SEPA direct debit, the Commission is willing to assist industry by providing urgent guidance within the framework of a sustained dialogue with the banking industry and on the basis of contributions by the relevant market actors. This guidance should be provided by November 2009 at the latest.

And your final question asks what specific measures the Commission intends to propose to make sure that SEPA migration does not lead to a more expensive payment system.

In the Commission’s opinion this should not happen. Firstly, SEPA should foster competition and increase operational efficiency through economies of scale – both producing downward price-pressure.

Secondly, SEPA should also increase transparency, which will limit cross-subsidisation and hidden pricing, although optically some users may perceive the switch from high hidden pricing to low visible pricing as a price increase. Here clear communication by banks will be important.

Third, the Commission is carefully monitoring the impact of SEPA on customers by launching studies.

Finally, we agree that there is concern that efficient national debit card schemes may be replaced by more expensive alternatives. However, there are initiatives that could develop into a new pan-European debit card scheme and an overall backstop is provided by the existing powers of EU and national competition authorities.

Therefore in conclusion SEPA should result in a more efficient payment system and adequate safeguards under EU and national competition policy exist.

I therefore very much welcome this Resolution and Parliament’s strong support for SEPA.

  Jean-Paul Gauzès, au nom du groupe PPE-DE. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, mes chers collègues, beaucoup vient d'être dit sur ce qu'il est advenu de cette directive sur les services de paiement pour laquelle j'étais rapporteur du Parlement et qui a été adoptée en première lecture en 2007.

Cette directive a notamment pour effet de donner aux différents acteurs bancaires, regroupés au sein de l'EPC, les instruments juridiques nécessaires à la mise en place du SEPA. Une réglementation européenne a été ainsi adoptée pour les cartes bancaires, les virements et les débits d'office.

Le SEPA est un marché intégré des services de paiement en euros où il n'existera aucune différence entre les paiements transfrontaliers et les paiements nationaux. Cette situation aura des avantages à la fois pour le secteur bancaire et pour les consommateurs.

Vous l'avez dit, la Commission s'est engagée à veiller à ce que la migration vers les instruments SEPA n'entraîne pas, pour les citoyens de l'Union européenne, un renchérissement du système de paiement.

Depuis l'adoption de ce rapport, la migration vers le SEPA progresse très lentement, beaucoup trop lentement. Au 1er octobre 2008, seul 1,7 % des transactions était effectué selon le format de virement SEPA.

C'est pourquoi nous approuvons aujourd'hui la résolution du Parlement européen qui demande à la Commission de fixer une date limite pour la migration vers les produits SEPA. Cette date ne doit pas être postérieure au 31 décembre 2012, date à compter de laquelle tous les paiements en euros devraient normalement être effectués selon les normes SEPA.

Mais avant que cette migration ne puisse être effective, il convient de régler le délicat problème, la délicate question des commissions interbancaires multilatérales. Il convient de ne pas supprimer ces commissions. Le service de paiement est une activité commerciale, la couverture des coûts et une marge pour les intervenants sont légitimes.

Il convient en revanche d'éviter l'opacité ou l'arbitraire. Il est donc opportun que la Commission fixe des lignes directrices quant à l'application de ces commissions d'interchange.

Pour plus de sécurité juridique, ces lignes directrices doivent être connues avant le lancement du système SEPA pour les prélèvements. Sans cette sécurité juridique, les banques de nombreux pays risqueraient de ne pas lancer le débit direct et il pourrait même y avoir la paralysie de la mise en œuvre du SEPA.

Le parti populaire européen et le PSE ont d'ailleurs déposé des amendements très semblables dans ce sens pour le vote de demain. Bien évidemment, nous souhaitons qu'ils soient pris en considération.

  Margarita Starkevičiūtė (ALDE). - Šiuo sudėtingu laiku yra labai svarbu ekonomikoje surasti galimus augimo šaltinius. Mūsų Europos finansų rinkos plėtra kaip tik ir yra toks galimo Europos ekonomikos augimo šaltinis. Šiuo atveju mes kalbame apie mokėjimų rinką ir tenka apgailestauti, kad mūsų priimti sprendimai pakankamai lėtai įgyvendinami. Pagrindinė priežastis paprastai nurodoma – bankų techninės galimybės, nes tai daugiausiai techniniai sprendimai, tačiau aš norėčiau pasakyti, kad bankų techninis atnaujinimas yra bankinio sektoriaus, pačių bankų interesas ir tokiu būdu jie gali modernizuoti savo rinką, atsiskaitymus su klientais ir uždirbti daugiau pinigų. Todėl būtų labai svarbu, kad valstybės narės ryžtingiau įgyvendintų vieningos mokėjimų srities įgyvendinimo planą.

  Paul Rübig (PPE-DE). - Herr Präsident, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Wir wissen, dass die einheitliche europäische Zahlungszone gerade für die kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen eine echte Herausforderung darstellt. Letztlich arbeiten sie ganz intensiv mit den Kreditkartensystemen zusammen, und die Preise und die Kosten, die aus diesen Systemen resultieren, sind sehr unterschiedlich. Ich glaube, dass auch hier die Transparenz nicht im notwendigen Ausmaß gegeben ist.

Gerade in einer Krise brauchen wir für die Betriebe eine dementsprechende Unterstützung. Es muss möglich sein, durch eine Senkung von Kosten die Bonität der Betriebe zu erhöhen, weil sie damit natürlich auch wieder an Kredite kommen. Ich glaube, dass SEPA hier ein gutes Instrument wäre. Es sollte so schnell wie möglich eingesetzt werden, um zu erreichen, dass nicht nur die kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen kostengünstig und effizient arbeiten können, sondern dass dies auch für die Beziehungen zwischen den Kleinen und den Großen gilt.

  Androulla Vassiliou, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I would like to thank the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and its Chair, Mrs Berès, for this debate. The Commission welcomes Parliament’s support for SEPA, which is not only a self-regulatory initiative, but also a major public policy initiative reinforcing economic and monetary union as well as the Lisbon agenda. Parliament and the Commission clearly share the same vision and the same goal for SEPA.

Let me, however, recall three important points. Firstly, as mentioned earlier, the Commission has been very active in helping to drive forward the SEPA migration process, in particular by putting pressure on public authorities to be early adopters. We will relentlessly continue our efforts as a SEPA catalyst.

Secondly, although we share Parliament’s interest for an end date for SEPA, we do not believe that the time is right to carve an end date in stone. We have put a process in motion and are convinced that a lot of ground work is needed before such a commitment can be envisaged.

Thirdly, I can confirm that the Commission will provide guidance on the compatibility of multilateral, interbank remuneration with competition rules. We know there is little time left before the entry into force of the SEPA direct debit, and that our guidance should therefore be available before November 2009. However, let me insist on one point: that guidance can only be provided subject to the industry supplying us first with concrete ideas for possible business models.

  Presidente. − Comunico que recebi uma proposta de resolução⁽¹⁾ apresentada em conformidade com o n.º 5 do artigo 108.º do Regimento.

O debate está encerrado.

A votação terá lugar quinta-feira, 12 de Março de 2009.

(1) Ver acta

19. Id-deterjazzjoni tas-sitwazzjoni umanitarja fix-Sri Lanka (dibattitu)

  Presidente. − Segue-se o debate sobre a proposta de resolução apresentada pela Comissão dos Assuntos Externos sobre a deterioração da situação humanitária no Sri Lanka (B6-0140/2009).

  Marie Anne Isler Béguin (Verts/ALE). - Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, je voudrais remercier tout d'abord le président de la commission des affaires étrangères, qui a bien voulu accepter la procédure prévue à l'article 91 et mettre à l'ordre du jour de lundi dernier cette résolution d'urgence, puisque lors de notre dernière plénière ici, à Strasbourg, nous avions déjà une résolution d'urgence sur cette question du Sri Lanka. Je voudrais aussi remercier le Parlement d'avoir accepté qu'il y ait ce débat, ce soir, et vous remercier, Madame la Commissaire, d'être venue pour ce débat car je sais que c'est une heure qui est difficile pour vous.

Nous avons voulu cette résolution parce que nous devons présenter un signal politique fort envers le gouvernement et les représentants tamouls du Sri Lanka, puisque la situation se dégrade de jour en jour. Nous en avons des témoignages directs de la part de familles et de populations tamoules qui se trouvent en Europe et qui nous envoient en permanence des messages et des témoignages de ce qui leur arrive et de ce qui arrive à leurs familles, prises au piège des conflits entre les Tigres tamouls et l'armée sri-lankaise. Ce sont vraiment des horreurs qu'endurent ces populations.

Nous ne savons pas combien de personnes sont concernées, mais nous estimons qu'entre 150 et 200 000 personnes demanderaient d'être évacuées. Or, évacuer, qu'est-ce que cela signifie? Les ONG nous demandent qu'elles soient évacuées par voie maritime, mais là encore, je tiens à poser la question: pour aller où? Où vont aller ces populations?

Cet après-midi, j'ai rencontré une gamine qui est née dans un camp de réfugiés sri-lankais et qui est aujourd'hui en Europe. Si c'est pour que ces populations tamoules doivent quitter leur territoire pour aller vivre dans des camps de réfugiés, ce n'est pas la solution non plus.

Nous demandons donc dans cette résolution qu'il y ait un vrai cessez-le-feu. Il y aura bien sûr débat avec le PPE pour un cessez-le-feu immédiat ou temporaire. Nous demandons vraiment aux autorités un cessez-le-feu immédiat pour que les populations puissent être mises hors de danger, parce que nous savons qu'il y a des populations qui sont tuées. Nous en avons encore eu un exemple aujourd'hui par ces témoignages. Nous demandons bien sûr, dans cette résolution, que le gouvernement sri-lankais coopère avec les ONG et avec les pays qui sont de bonne volonté pour aider à la résolution de ce conflit. Nous demandons aussi que l'Union européenne puisse aider à acheminer la nourriture et les médicaments qui manquent cruellement.

Enfin, si vous le permettez, je voudrais dire au nom de mon groupe – puisque c'est à l'initiative du groupe des Verts que nous avons déposé cette résolution d'urgence lundi à la commission AFET – que nous demandons que cette question soit vraiment prise au sérieux par un certain nombre de nos collègues qui ont des intérêts divers dans ce pays. Je vous rappellerai que cela fait longtemps que certains des groupes politiques demandent à pouvoir parler de cette question du Sri Lanka et que pour des raisons internes de certains pays, on n'a pas pu débattre de cette question sur les Tamouls et leur situation, qui s'est dégradée depuis les années 1980.

Madame la Commissaire, puisque vous êtes présente parmi nous, je crois qu'on peut aussi se poser une autre question. L'Union européenne apparaît comme une possibilité dans la résolution des conflits. Le moment est peut-être donc venu de se poser la question de la mise en place éventuelle d'une cellule de résolution des conflits au sein de l'Union européenne.

Nous voyons dans le Caucase, nous voyons partout ailleurs dans le monde, que l'Union européenne est prise au sérieux par les propositions qu'elle émet. Dans la résolution des conflits, on ne doit plus être aujourd'hui un acteur qui accompagne, mais un véritable promoteur de la résolution des conflits. Si, aujourd'hui, on pouvait poser les premières pierres de la résolution de ce conflit avec une présence forte de l'Union européenne et un message fort envers les autorités, je crois que nous aurions aussi grandi au niveau de l'union politique.

  Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, as one of the Tokyo Co-Chairs of the Sri Lanka peace process, the European Commission and I personally have been following the developments in Sri Lanka very closely. We are deeply concerned about the current situation and the tragic humanitarian consequences of the conflict, as expressed in the GAERC Council conclusions of 23 February and the Co-Chairs’ statement, issued locally on 3 February.

We are particularly preoccupied about the plight of thousands of internally displaced persons – you are right – trapped by fighting in Northern Sri Lanka. We are no longer facing a crisis but what I think is already a humanitarian catastrophe. This was confirmed to us by a wide range of independent sources, including the UN and the ICRC. The Government’s recent announcement about opening two evacuation roads at the north and at the south of the safe zone is a positive step but we want to know how this will work in practice.

We have called on the parties – the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and the Sri Lankan authorities – to protect the civilian population as required under international humanitarian law and to allow the safe and voluntary movement of people away from the combat zone. Both the LTTE and the Sri Lankan army are responsible for the dramatic increase in civilian casualties during the past months. There is an immediate and urgent need to act to save lives in Sri Lanka, as was also confirmed by the UN Under-Secretary, Sir John Holmes, who drew attention to the high casualty rate, and also the ICRC.

The Commission is convinced that the outcome of this crisis will have lasting consequences for peace, for reconciliation and for the unity of Sri Lanka, and in this context strongly supports the call issued by Sir John Holmes to the Government of Sri Lanka to interrupt hostilities to allow time for the civilian population to get out safely and to the LTTE to let the civilians go and agree on a peaceful end to the fighting.

The Co-Chairs have also appealed to the LTTE to lay down their arms but unfortunately this call has been rejected, even ignored. We feel that the Government of Sri Lanka has an obligation to protect all its own citizens and agree to a humanitarian ceasefire – this was also said in the Council conclusions last time – to allow sick and wounded people to leave Vanni and to arrange for food and medicine to be let in. This is also what India suggested last weekend.

We continue to be alarmed about the human rights situation in Sri Lanka, against the background of reports of extrajudicial killings, abductions and serious intimidation of the media. It is very important that the Government follows up the most prominent high-profile cases. There cannot be any impunity for such crimes.

At the end of the day the European Commission continues to be convinced, as I myself would say, that there is no military solution to Sri Lanka’s ethnic conflict. An inclusive dialogue is required, leading to a political settlement. Lasting peace and reconciliation can only be achieved by addressing the concerns which led to the insurgency in the first place and by providing adequate space for all the communities. As a Co-Chair, I have always said there can only be a political solution by means of some sort of devolution package, which has been on the table, has been taken off the table and now has to come back on the table.

  Charles Tannock, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. – Madam Commissioner, Sri Lanka’s brutal civil conflict is finally nearing its end. Of course it is too early to say whether this will mean the end of terrorist activity by the Tamil Tigers.

We certainly should not support a permanent ceasefire at this stage in case it allows the Tigers to regroup. In my view, their only option now is to lay down their arms or be defeated militarily with more casualties. A long-term ceasefire would be a disaster because – as a suicide attack in Sri Lanka earlier this week demonstrates – the LTTE is ruthless, bloodthirsty and rightly identified as a terrorist organisation by the European Union and the United States.

We should be resolute in our support for President Rajapaksa in his efforts to end an insurgency that has only brought untold human misery to Sri Lanka and severely retarded the economic development on that beautiful island. However, thousands of innocent civilian IDPs still remained trapped on a narrow coastal strip. These civilians must be allowed to leave so that the army can conclude its offensive. It is reprehensible, but entirely to be expected of the Tigers, that they are exploiting these civilians as human shields. The Tigers have been deaf to appeals from the international community to surrender and establish a temporary humanitarian corridor.

Nevertheless, allowing the UN and other organisations to arrange safe passage from the conflict zone for these civilians is essential to avoid further bloodbaths. Sri Lanka appreciates its own responsibility in this regard and wants to avoid civilian casualties but, understandably, the army’s patience is limited and fears that the Tigers will seek to escape by a sea evacuation procedure, mixing in with the civilians.

Therefore we on this side of the House endorse the establishment of a humanitarian corridor and a temporary and immediate ceasefire or cessation of hostilities, but we also want to see the comprehensive defeat of the LTTE and a peaceful, just and multi-ethnic Sri Lanka established in its place, where there is maximum autonomy to the Tamil majority areas and an equitable sharing of resources and power within a unitary Sri Lankan state.

  Robert Evans, on behalf of the PSE Group. – Mr President, I very much welcome this debate in the presence of the Commissioner, whom I thank very much for her serious, her strong and her profound statement. It is clearly a very important subject, although it is regrettable that we are discussing it at 11 o’clock at night with so few people here. But the attendance does not, I think, reflect the interest in this topic, nor the seriousness with which many Members view it. We are, to use the Commissioner’s words, deeply concerned about the situation. Tonight’s debate recognises also that the situation has moved on and, as Mrs Isler Béguin said at the beginning, that we need to send a strong signal about the deteriorating situation that is worsening day by day.

I support the original resolution tabled, with the exception of the one word ‘temporary’. I deplore the language that Mr Tannock has just used, when he said that a long-term ceasefire would be a disaster. Surely – I appeal to you – we are not interested in just a temporary ceasefire. In every case of conflict around the world, this Parliament, composed of compassionate people, has argued for a permanent ceasefire that can pave the way for diplomatic rebuilding, so that dialogue can begin – and, yes – so that we can get that peaceful, just and multi-ethnic society that Mr Tannock spoke about and with which I agree.

So I applaud the Greens for their first amendment, Amendment 1, and I am sure that all decent people here, concerned about the civilians in Sri Lanka, will too. A temporary ceasefire by its very nature implies a return to war later on, which nobody wants. A return to war will mean more deaths, more suffering, more humanitarian tragedy and I cannot believe that anybody on either side of the House really wants that.

Likewise, Amendment 2: I support this amendment too because it condemns all acts of violence by whoever is perpetrating them, on whatever side of the conflict. We cannot condone any violence, including the recent suicide attack which has been referred to.

Then I turn my attention to Amendments 3, 4 and 5. I would like to read a short piece that I received from a Sri Lankan Member of Parliament in the Jaffna district, Mr Selvarajah Kajendren, dated 10 March. He says ‘I wish to bring to your urgent attention the civilian deaths in Sri Lanka. The Army fired artillery shells fitted with cluster munitions from 2 a.m. till 10 a.m. on Tuesday 10 March 2009’ – this week. ‘The Sri Lankan Government forces indiscriminately attacked all parts of the “safe zone” using every kind of lethal shells, some of them banned in many countries. In this indiscriminate cluster shelling more than 130 civilians were killed, including children, and more than 200 were severely injured.’

I doubt that anyone would suggest that this is fabricated. More, I would suggest that we all want to do everything we can to help bring an end to that sort of violence. He also refers to his colleague, Mr S. Kanakaratnam, who is living right in the middle of the ‘safe zone’. He says that from 1 January to 6 March this year 2 544 civilians have been killed in these ‘safe zones’ by bombing campaigns and well over 5 828 civilians have been gravely injured. Yet the Sri Lankan army, he says, have been bombing by air and artillery fire, killing on average 30 to 40 civilians on a daily basis.

I do not believe that he would be fabricating. From what the Commissioner has said, from all the evidence given by all the NGOs that have got anywhere near there, that seems to be reflective of what is happening.

Amendment 6: I here refer to the report by Sir John Holmes, which was sent to me by His Excellency the Ambassador of Sri Lanka in Brussels. In the report he says there is serious overcrowding in some of the transit sites. His words are reflected in my amendment and it is right that we should be concerned about these camps. I have some pictures of the camps. Anybody is welcome to look at these pictures that have been sent to me. Again I suggest they are genuine and not fabricated. I know that the Commissioner’s office in Colombo is following this very closely and has close contacts within the real danger zone.

Amendments 7 and 8 strengthen the original reference to the war zone so that civilian needs can be fully attended to. We ask for unhindered access not only to the combat zone but also to the refugee camps so that humanitarian agencies, which everybody in this House supports, are granted full access. Everybody round the Chamber would support the work of the humanitarian organisations.

Finally, Amendment 9 suggests we send this resolution to the Secretary-General of the United Nations because I believe that this is an international humanitarian crisis, as reflected in the title, and that we should do everything we can. That is why I thank the Greens for putting this down and I ask all colleagues to support the amendments tabled by all political groups.

  Marie Anne Isler Béguin, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, je voudrais remercier Mme Ferrero-Waldner pour son intervention et pour sa réponse à l'appel des ONG et des populations qui sont prises au piège.

Nous craignons en effet de nous retrouver un peu dans une situation similaire à la Birmanie après le tsunami de 2006, où la junte avait bloqué l'accès de l'aide humanitaire. Aujourd'hui, donc, nous devons tout faire pour que l'aide humanitaire et notre aide puissent arriver jusqu'aux populations qui en ont besoin.

Mais je voudrais aussi m'adresser à mes collègues du PPE et du parti socialiste, parce que je crois, chers collègues, qu'il faut en appeler à la sagesse. En effet, si nous avons déposé cette proposition de résolution d'urgence, c'est pour que le Parlement s'exprime et ait une position demain.

Ce que je ne voudrais en aucun cas, c'est que, pour des raisons de divergences sur le cessez-le-feu immédiat ou le cessez-le-feu temporaire – que nous comprenons puisque le débat a déjà eu lieu –, cette résolution ne soit pas votée par l'un ou l'autre des camps. S'il vous plaît, je vous appelle donc vraiment à la sagesse.

Par contre, je voudrais quand même dire, notamment à M. Tannock que, en reprenant les paroles de Mme la commissaire, aucun conflit armé ne résout jamais aucun problème. Nous le savons. La guerre ne résout jamais rien.

À mon sens, demander un cessez-le-feu temporaire n'est pas responsable par rapport aux populations concernées. Cela veut en effet dire qu'on va les relancer dans un combat dans un futur – et dans quel futur –, une fois que les populations seront évacuées. Est-ce que nous pouvons nous permettre de laisser les populations être évacuées? Les populations tamoules sont des populations qui sont propriétaires de terrains. Elles souhaitent donc revenir sur leur territoire. Elles sont sri-lankaises.

Je pense donc qu'il faut être très attentifs à cette question-là mais je suis prête à faire des concessions et à retirer des amendements à condition que, ensemble, nous ayons une position commune pour donner ce signal politique fort au monde entier.

  Geoffrey Van Orden (PPE-DE). - Mr President, we should be under no illusions about the terrible impact of war on innocent civilians and our moral duty to do all that we can to reduce their vulnerability and to help in the provision of humanitarian assistance. That is why Parliament passed its urgent resolution on Sri Lanka less than three weeks ago.

For decades now, Sri Lanka has been afflicted by a terrorist campaign conducted by the internationally proscribed LTTE. There is no equivalence between terrorists and the legitimate forces of a democratic government. Let us remember that it was the LTTE that perfected suicide bombing as a tactic, that it pioneered the use of women in suicide attacks, and that it makes undisguised use of child soldiers and of human shields. Over the last 26 years, it has systematically carried out thousands of deliberate murders across Sri Lanka and, just two days ago, 14 people were murdered in a suicide attack during an Islamic festival in the Matara district.

The LTTE is now in a desperate end-game and, typically in such situations, is turning to international apologists to get it off the hook. A tiny minority of Members of this House were unhappy with the resolution passed by the majority in this Parliament and, disgracefully and improperly, they wanted to focus condemnation on the Sri Lankan Government. We cannot support amendments based on unattributable – and often nonsensical – allegations, as we have heard from Mr Evans, or selective quotation from one NGO report. We have no good reason to dispute the Government’s firm assertion that its troops have not fired on no-fire zones and will not do so.

Six days ago the Secretary-General of the United Nations called on the LTTE to remove its weapons and fighters from areas of civilian concentration and to cooperate in all humanitarian efforts calculated to relieve the suffering of civilians. The European Union has condemned the action of the LTTE in preventing civilians from leaving the conflict area.

The greatest service all in this House can do is call on the LTTE to lay down its arms and to release the civil population from its grip. Then, much-needed humanitarian aid can be delivered, people can begin to look forward to better lives and all Sri Lanka can get back on the path of democratic politics and to building a fair and more prosperous society for all its citizens, free from terrorist oppression.

  Jo Leinen (PSE). - Herr Präsident! Frau Kommissarin, ich stimme Ihnen vollkommen zu, dass wir eine politische Lösung und keine militärische Lösung in Sri Lanka brauchen. Ich war mehrfach als Mitglied der Südasiendelegation in dem Land. Ich weiß, wie sehr die Menschen nach 25 Jahren Gewalt den Frieden herbeisehnen.

Ich muss allerdings auch sagen, dass in so einem Krieg die LTTE einen Schritt machen müsste, den sie leider nicht macht. Sie haben das auch erwähnt, und die Außenminister haben am 23. Februar diese Organisation noch einmal eindringlich aufgefordert, die Waffen niederzulegen und den Terror zu beenden. Man stelle sich irgendein Mitgliedsland der EU vor, wo seit 25 Jahren Terror herrscht. Dass dort natürlich viel Chaos und Unordnung ist, ist leicht auszumalen. Ich bin sehr für die Sache der Tamilen, aber ich lehne die Methoden der LTTE genauso entschieden ab. Über Wochen hören wir schon, dass in diesem kleinen Landstrich mehr als 100.000 Menschen einfach gefangen genommen werden, Reuters hat gestern noch gemeldet, dass nach Augenzeugenberichten Leute erschossen werden, wenn sie diese Zone verlassen wollen. Hier ist also eine Aufforderung an die LTTE und die Kräfte hinter der LTTE vonnöten, diese Praktiken zu beenden. Das Spiel ist aus, das kann so nicht weitergehen.

Natürlich sind die Zivilisten in dieser Kriegszone dem Sperrfeuer von beiden Seiten ausgesetzt. Man muss auch an die Regierung appellieren, das Völkerrecht zu respektieren und humanitäre Aktionen zuzulassen. Es ist der Fundamentalismus von beiden Seiten, der sehr viele Opfer fordert. Ich meine, wir sollten uns auch auf die Nachkriegsordnung vorbereiten. Sie haben es gesagt: Das 13. Amendment in der srilankischen Verfassung muss umgesetzt werden, das eine Dezentralisierung im Sinne einer Verwaltung der Gebiete durch die Bevölkerung, die dort wohnt, vorsieht, und die EU kann dort wertvolle Hilfe leisten. Ich bin sicher, Sie in der Kommission und wir in der EU sind dazu bereit.

  Paul Rübig (PPE-DE). - Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin Ferrero-Waldner, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Ich glaube, was die Frau Kommissarin gesagt hat, nämlich dass keine militärische Lösung möglich ist, sollte eigentlich auf den Titelseiten in Sri Lanka stehen. Dass nämlich im Hinblick auf die Spannungen, die es im Land gibt, die Probleme, die sich hier in vielen Jahren angehäuft haben, in Wahrheit von der Regierung immer wieder versucht wird, ein Angebot zu machen. Es scheitert ganz einfach an der Kommunikationsstrategie.

Man muss natürlich auch sehen, dass die strategische Lage von Sri Lanka auch externen Raum gibt, in Kraft setzt, die im Land alleine nur sehr schwer zu steuern sind. Deshalb sollte man auch darauf achten, dass sich die wirtschaftliche Situation bessert, dass die Infrastruktur in diesen Gebieten verbessert wird, so dass auch die notwendige Kommunikation zwischen den streitenden Parteien ermöglicht wird. Vielleicht ist es möglich, den einen oder anderen Mediator hier einzusetzen.

  Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL). - Voorzitter, wat er nu in Sri Lanka gebeurt, was reeds enkele jaren volkomen voorspelbaar. Het gaat niet alleen om een humanitair probleem, maar vooral om een ernstig politiek falen. Na een jarenlange gewelddadige strijd voor afscheiding van het noordoosten van het land, heeft een vorige regering van Noorwegen bemiddeling aangeboden tussen de door Singalezen beheerste regering en de opstandige beweging van de Tamils. De Noorse onderhandelaar, die langdurig heeft gewerkt aan het zoeken naar vreedzame oplossingen, is nu zelf minister in de nieuwe regering. Helaas is die mogelijkheid voor een vreedzame oplossing daarna verlaten.

De regering van Sri Lanka heeft in de zomer van 2006 een eind gemaakt aan de vredespogingen en opnieuw gekozen voor het eenzijdig opleggen van een militaire oplossing. Die regering denkt nu waarschijnlijk dat zij een groot succes heeft geboekt. In werkelijkheid is een vreedzaam, harmonieus en als gelijkwaardige partners samenleven van de twee volkeren voor de toekomst nog veel moeilijker geworden. Zonder compromis over een vreedzame oplossing zal ook het verdere verloop gruwelijk gewelddadig zijn. We moeten terug naar de vredesbemiddeling zonder winnaars en verliezers.

  Michael Gahler (PPE-DE). - Herr Präsident! Vielen Dank, Frau Kommissarin, für Ihre klaren Worte. Ich denke, unser Hauptaugenmerk muss jetzt auf das Schicksal der Zivilbevölkerung gerichtet sein, und da kann eigentlich nur das, was der Ministerrat am 23. Februar gesagt hat, gelten: Wir brauchen einen unmittelbaren Waffenstillstand. The EU calls for an immediate cease fire. Ich bin dagegen, dass wir um das Wort „temporary“ ergänzen. Sonst wird die humanitäre Katastrophe, die Sie angesprochen haben, weitergehen.

Ich denke auch, in dieser Situation, in der die Menschen dort in dieser Zone eingesperrt sind, müssen wir uns gegen alle Gewaltakte wenden, die die Menschen daran hindern, die Kampfzone zu verlassen. In dieser Situation ist es mir dann egal, ob die Gewalt von der LTTE oder von Regierungssoldaten ausgeübt wird. Unser Augenmerk muss auf die Menschen selbst gerichtet sein.

Vielleicht darf ich noch eine Bemerkung an die Kollegen aus der ehemaligen Kolonialmacht richten, die sich auf den Weg machen, unsere Fraktion zu verlassen. Ich hoffe, mein Eindruck, der sich mir ein bisschen aufgedrängt hat, dass es auch eine bestimmte innenpolitische Motivation gibt, so ganz einseitig nur auf die LTTE einzuschlagen, ist falsch. Ich hoffe, man hat da nicht auch ein bestimmtes Segment der Wählerschaft im Auge.

  Robert Evans (PSE). - Mr President, this is not a point of order. I was indicating to your colleague that I wanted to ‘catch the eye’ to speak, which I am allowed to do and which I thought I had done.

I want to thank Mr Meijer for his remarks. He also referred to the valiant work of Mr Erik Soldheim, from Norway, whom I met 10 days ago in Oslo.

I very much agree with Mr Gahler, who spoke a great deal of sense: it is the fate of the civilians that concerns us. I suggest that of all the amendments, the most important is Amendment 1, which calls for an immediate and total ceasefire, and which must be in the interests of all the people of Sri Lanka.

There is much evidence. It is not circumstantial. Some of it is from the office of the regional director of the health services of the Sri Lankan Government, which talks about a humanitarian catastrophe and the substandard conditions in which people are living. This is echoed by the European Commission, the ICRC, the UN, the International Crisis Group and Refugee Care Netherlands. The title of the debate this evening is the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Sri Lanka, and we have a duty to do everything we possibly can to prevent that, which I think we can, if we find the right way forward.

  Presidente. − Senhores Deputados, eu apliquei rigorosamente o Regimento. Como podia dar a palavra a cinco oradores e só três é que intervieram efectivamente, resolvi dar ainda a palavra ao Deputado Evans.

  Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I would like to thank the honourable Members for what has been a very important debate, even if it was short and took place late in the evening.

Since the beginning of this Commission’s term of office, as a Co-Chair, I have been very much preoccupied by Sri Lanka. There were moments when we had some hope – rather more at the beginning – but hope has now faded away. I wanted to take part in the Geneva Process, but it seems that was difficult for the Government of Sri Lanka. In any case, this process unfortunately broke down. I was also ready to go up to the north to start mediation, like my predecessor, Chris Patten. But the north was not ready – officially Mr Prabhakaran had measles or chicken pox. In any case, I am in complete agreement with Mr Gahler, who said – and this is also my own concern – that we should put people and humanitarian concerns first.

As is so often the case, we have been the largest humanitarian donors in Sri Lanka. In 2008-2009 we allocated EUR 19 million for humanitarian assistance, which was then channelled through partners like the ICRC, the United Nations and also some international non-governmental organisations. These organisations are ready to help the affected populations, but they have real problems – which they tell us about – in gaining access to the conflict area. Since September 2008, the ICRC has been the only agency allowed to operate in the LTTE controlled areas in Vanni. The World Food Programme has been allowed to send some food convoys, but this has only been sufficient for around 50% of needs. Since 2008 we have provided another EUR 7 million in humanitarian assistance to the two organisations. We have also been pushing consistently, in both Colombo and Brussels, for better access to these populations by humanitarian organisations.

Therefore I can only say – together with the other Co-Chairs and also particularly with Norway – that we have used every opportunity to press the parties in conflict to implement the 2002 ceasefire agreement and to solve the conflict using peaceful means, but nothing has worked. Numerous calls for a return to negotiations have always been totally ignored and unfortunately the military route has prevailed. The scope for intervention by the international community has narrowed more and more over the last three years, but not one of the Co-Chairs has abandoned the mission. We have all remained committed to contributing to a peaceful solution to the conflict, as can be seen from the last Co-Chairs’ press statement released on 3 February, of which I am sure you will all be aware.

Therefore what we must do now is again press for humanitarian access, get the humanitarian and civilian population out, and then try, when the time is right, to start to foster a political dialogue with the parties in conflict and try to persuade them that a political solution is the only way out. Otherwise there will be a guerrilla war, which will not solve anything for this beautiful island. It was once a paradise and could become a paradise again.

  Presidente. − O debate está encerrado.

A votação terá lugar quinta-feira, 12 de Março de 2009.

20. L-aġenda tas-seduta li jmiss: ara l-Minuti

21. Għeluq tas-seduta

(A sessão é encerrada às 23h35.)