Rapporti verbatim tad-dibattiti

It-Tnejn, 17 ta' Jannar 2011 - Strasburgu

1. Tkomplija tas-sessjoni

PRZEWODNICZY: JERZY BUZEK
Przewodniczący

  Przewodniczący. − Ogłaszam wznowienie sesji Parlamentu Europejskiego przerwanej w czwartek, 16. grudnia 2010 r.

(Posiedzenie zostało otwarte o godz. 17.00)

2. Approvazzjoni tal-Minuti tas-seduta ta' qabel: ara l-Minuti

3. Dikjarazzjoni tal-President

  Przewodniczący. − Mam kilka uwag wstępnych. Jest to 5 krótkich punktów.

Dnia 27 stycznia mija 66. rocznica wyzwolenia niemieckiego nazistowskiego obozu koncentracyjnego i zagłady Auschwitz-Birkenau. Każdego roku w tym dniu czcimy pamięć ponad miliona zamordowanych tam ludzi. Daje nam to siłę do wspólnego budowania pokojowej przyszłości zjednoczonej Europy, która nie będzie znała w przyszłości takich koszmarów.

Druga informacja: dnia 13 stycznia naród litewski obchodził 20. rocznicę krwawej niedzieli, kiedy to armia sowiecka dokonała próby obalenia demokratycznie wybranego rządu niepodległej Litwy. Litwini obronili swoją wolność i są dziś równoprawnymi członkami wspólnoty euroatlantyckiej. Wspominając tę ważną dla Europy rocznicę, solidaryzujemy się dzisiaj z Białorusinami, także naszymi sąsiadami, którzy oczekują jeszcze, by wolność i demokracja zagościły w ich kraju.

Kolejna informacja: dnia 23 grudnia 2010 roku Unia Europejska przystąpiła do Konwencji Praw Osób Niepełnosprawnych Organizacji Narodów Zjednoczonych. Konwencja ta, wraz ze strategią w sprawie niepełnosprawności przygotowaną przez Komisję Europejską, pozwoli do 2020 roku zapewnić równość praw obywatelskich, politycznych i gospodarczych blisko 80 milionom obywateli Unii, którzy mają różnego rodzaju niepełnosprawności.

Informacja czwarta: chciałbym także przypomnieć, że jesteśmy poważnie zaniepokojeni zniknięciem chińskiego adwokata pana Gao Zhishenga. Według najnowszych informacji jest on źle traktowany i poddawany torturom. Parlament Europejski kilkakrotnie już zajmował się sprawą pana Zhishenga. Dziś pragnę wezwać władze chińskie do ujawnienia miejsca jego pobytu i stanu zdrowia.

Ostatnia informacja: od czasu naszego ostatniego spotkania przed świętami zakończyła się prezydencja belgijska, a przewodnictwo w Radzie Unii Europejskiej przejęły Węgry. Będziemy na temat obydwu prezydencji rozmawiali na tej sesji Parlamentu. W tym czasie mieliśmy też do czynienia z ważnymi wydarzeniami politycznymi: wybory na Białorusi, ostatnie wypadki w Tunezji. Obydwa te punkty są w porządku obrad naszej sesji plenarnej. Pragnę też przypomnieć, że w ostatnich tygodniach świat dotknęło kilka poważnych klęsk żywiołowych. Łączymy się w bólu z rodzinami ich ofiar i przekazujemy im, a także rządom tych krajów, nasze kondolencje.

4. Kompożizzjoni tal-kumitati u tad-delegazzjonijiet : ara l-Minuti

5. Testi ta' ftehim imressqa mill-Kunsill: ara l-Minuti

6. Petizzjonijiet: ara l-Minuti

7. Azzjonijiet meħuda skond il-petizzjonjiet u r-riżoluzzjonijiet tal-Parlament: Ara l-Minuti

8. Mistoqsijiet bi tweġiba orali u dikjarazzjonijiet bil-miktub (tressiq): ara l-Minuti

9. Ordni tas-seduta

  Przewodniczący. − Rozdany został końcowy projekt porządku dziennego sporządzony zgodnie z art. 137 Regulaminu przez Konferencję Przewodniczących na posiedzeniu w czwartek, 13 stycznia 2011 r. Zaproponowano następujące zmiany.

  Potito Salatto (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, colgo l'occasione dell'ordine dei lavori per chiederle formalmente che l'Alto Rappresentante Catherine Ashton venga in Aula nel Parlamento a riferire sugli atti compiuti o che compirà per ciò che avviene per i cristiani nel mondo. Vorremmo che venisse qui con una sua relazione in modo che il Parlamento possa essere informato in maniera dettagliata su tutto.

  Przewodniczący. − Przepraszam Pana bardzo, Kolego. Mamy na ten temat oficjalną debatę w środę o godz. 15.00.

  Νικόλαος Χουντής (GUE/NGL). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, επικαλούμαι το άρθρο 173 περί εφαρμογής του Κανονισμού, για να επισημάνω ότι παραβιάζεται το άρθρο 116, διότι είναι η τρίτη συνεχής συνεδρίαση της Ολομέλειας του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου που στην ημερήσια διάταξη δεν περιλαμβάνεται το θέμα «Ερωτήσεις προς το Συμβούλιο», όπως προβλέπει το άρθρο 116. Σας παρακαλώ να μου εξηγήσετε γιατί γίνεται αυτό, πού οφείλεται και, σε κάθε περίπτωση, σας παρακαλώ να υπερασπισθείτε το δικαίωμα του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και των βουλευτών να ασκούν κοινοβουλευτικό έλεγχο και στο Συμβούλιο.

  Przewodniczący. − Decyzję w tej sprawie podejmiemy w najbliższym czasie. Sprawa dotyczy traktatu lizbońskiego i nowych relacji pomiędzy Parlamentem Europejskim a Radą. Jesteśmy teraz dwuizbowym parlamentem w Unii Europejskiej. Na równej stopie Parlament Europejski i Rada stanowią prawo. Zmieniły się relacje w Unii, ale ja bym proponował, żeby nie ciągnąć tej dyskusji, bo sprawa będzie w najbliższym czasie wyjaśniona. Bardzo dziękuję Panu za zwrócenie uwagi. Sprawa będzie wyjaśniona w najbliższym czasie.

  Bernd Posselt (PPE). - Herr Präsident, was ich fraglich finde, ist, dass man im Hinblick auf mögliche künftige Änderungen einfach ohne jede Grundlage ein parlamentarisches Recht – nämlich die Fragestunde – streicht. Die Entscheidung ist – wie Sie selbst sagen – noch nicht gefallen. Und da sie noch nicht gefallen ist, müsste man die Fragestunde so lange durchführen, bis eine Entscheidung gefallen ist, und nicht in vorauseilendem Gehorsam schon eine Entscheidung exekutieren, die noch gar nicht gefallen ist. Ich sage Ihnen ganz ehrlich: Ich halte es für falsch, denn in den Fragen der Außenpolitik und der Erweiterungspolitik ist der Rat keine andere Kammer, sondern ein Organ, das wir natürlich parlamentarisch kontrollieren müssen!

(Beifall)

  Przewodniczący. − Dziękuję kolegom za uwagi w tej sprawie. Chciałbym Państwa zapewnić, że na najbliższej Konferencji Przewodniczących, gdzie jak Państwo wiecie, ustalane są porządki obrad, a więc w najbliższy czwartek, poruszę tę sprawę – żebyśmy ustalili, jak to będzie wyglądało w przyszłości. Konferencja Przewodniczących jest odpowiedzialna za porządek obrad i w najbliższy czwartek będziemy o tym rozmawiać. Dziękuję bardzo.

Przechodzimy do porządku obrad.

Poniedziałek

Grupa Zielonych/Wolne Przymierze Europejskie wniosła, aby debata na temat sytuacji w Tunezji zakończona została rezolucją, czego nie planowaliśmy. A zatem jest propozycja, aby była w tej sprawie rezolucja. Rozumiem, że kolega Cohn-Bendit chce się wypowiedzieć na temat tego wniosku.

  Daniel Cohn-Bendit, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, vous êtes au courant que les événements en Tunisie se sont précipités et d'ailleurs nous pouvons nous féliciter que M. Ben Ali ait quitté le pays. La situation de ces prochaines semaines va donc être très tendue en Tunisie. Je trouve que ce Parlement doit, dans une courte résolution, demander des choses très précises au Conseil et à la Commission. Vous savez qu'il y aura peut-être des élections d'ici six à huit semaines, nous n'avons donc pas le temps d'attendre février.

Il faut que l'Union européenne agisse, il faut que nous agissions maintenant, et la base de notre action doit être une résolution que nous devrions voter jeudi à midi. Je comprends que, vu la situation, c'est avec grand enthousiasme que cette assemblée va enfin pouvoir voter une résolution sur la Tunisie.

  Francesco Enrico Speroni, a nome del gruppo EFD. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, non credo che la risoluzione muterà la situazione in Tunisia, ed è per questo che sono contro.

(Parlament odrzucił wniosek)

Czwartek

  Przewodniczący. − W sprawie debat - na podstawie art. 122 Regulaminu Konfederacyjna Grupa Zjednoczonej Lewicy Europejskiej/Nordycka Zielona Lewica złożyła wniosek o usunięcie z porządku obrad debaty w sprawie Brazylii: ekstradycja Cesare'a Battistiego. Pan Tavares chciałby przedstawić ten wniosek. Bardzo proszę.

  Rui Tavares, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – Mr President, some colleagues took the initiative of putting an urgency resolution on the agenda on Brazil’s refusal to extradite Cesare Battisti to Italy. I understand their motives, but as I shall demonstrate, this is not at present a human rights case. It is not an urgent case and it is not even a ‘breach of the Rule of Law’ case. Furthermore, it comes at a terrible moment when Brazil is facing the worst natural disaster in its history.

Cesare Battisti is in prison. He is awaiting the decision of the Brazilian Supreme Court and the Supreme Court is currently not in session during the southern hemisphere’s summer holiday. There is no reason to believe that there will not be an independent decision. I expressed my solidarity with the families of the victims in this case, and rest assured I have no sympathy with political violence either from the right or the left, but we should use the urgencies to debate Southern Sudan, the case of Buchtar Tabuni in Indonesia, or the Palestinian man shot dead in his bed.

Is the Parliament going to allocate to President Dilma Rousseff, just after her groundbreaking election and for no sound formal reason, the kind of debate that we usually reserve for people like Mugabe? I would ask you to remove Brazil from the urgencies on the agenda.

  Mario Mauro, a nome del gruppo PPE. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, intanto intendo – a nome del mio gruppo e credo di tutto il Parlamento – sottolineare con forza la vicinanza che abbiamo nei confronti del popolo e del governo brasiliano per il lutto gravissimo collegato alle alluvioni di questi giorni: centinaia di persone che hanno perso la vita e a cui facciamo sentire la nostra vicinanza.

Allo stesso tempo ribadisco a nome dei proponenti – e, mi auguro, di tutto il Parlamento – la nostra ferma intenzione di dibattere questo tema, perché l'istanza di giustizia non si è ancora compiuta, perché la vicenda di Cesare Battisti merita di essere ulteriormente giudicata dal Parlamento europeo che deve far sentire la sua voce in sede internazionale.

  Judith Sargentini (Verts/ALE). - Voorzitter, ik wil het verzoek van de heer Tavares ondersteunen, omdat dit geen urgente zaak is – de heer Battisti zit in de gevangenis en er is geen reden om aan te nemen dat hij daar op korte termijn vrijkomt; mijns inziens zouden wij ons niet moeten mengen in individuele zaken van mensen die nog voor het gerecht staan.

(Parlament odrzucił wniosek)

(Ustalony został porządek prac)⁽¹⁾

(1) Inne zmiany wprowadzone do porzadku prac: patrz Protokół

10. Dokumenti mressqa: ara l-Minuti

11. Dikjarazzjoni mill-President tal-Parlament Ewropew dwar is-sitwazzjoni fit-Tuneżija

  Jerzy Buzek, President. − Szanowne Koleżanki i Koledzy! Z wielkimi obawami, ale i nadziejami obserwowaliśmy w ostatnich tygodniach wydarzenia, które mają miejsce w Tunezji. Pokojowe demonstracje w obronie słusznych postulatów zmieniły się w krwawe starcia - nad czym ubolewamy - gdy tunezyjskie władze zwróciły się przeciw swoim obywatelom. Dziś chylimy głowy przed ofiarami tych wydarzeń. Nasze głębokie współczucie kierujemy do tych wszystkich, którzy stracili swoich najbliższych. Szczególnie wspominamy pierwszą ofiarę starć – młodego Mohammeda Bouazizi. Ten tragiczny gest na trwałe zapisał się jako symbol fali demokratycznego odruchu tunezyjskiego społeczeństwa. Uczcijmy minutą ciszy pamięć tunezyjskich przyjaciół. Proszę o powstanie z miejsc.

(minuta ciszy)

Dziękuję bardzo. Drogie Koleżanki i Koledzy! „Jaśminowa rewolucja” trwa. Pod wieloma względami jest to prawdziwie historyczny czas. Chcę wyrazić głębokie uznanie dla odwagi i determinacji obywateli Tunezji. To oni są źródłem tych zmian. Jest to jednak dopiero początek długiej drogi. Jako Europejczycy dzielimy aspiracje Tunezyjczyków, chcemy im towarzyszyć w drodze ku ich pełnej realizacji. Europejczycy są szczególnie wyczuleni na sprawiedliwość społeczną, równość szans, wolność słowa, demokracji i prawdziwy pluralizm, kształtowanie własnej politycznej przyszłości. Dlatego nie pozostajemy dziś obojętni. Wzywamy, by zmiany te miały równocześnie pokojowy charakter. Muszą prowadzić do sprawiedliwości i rządów prawa. Mamy także fundamentalne postulaty. Po pierwsze, uwolnienie wszystkich arbitralnie aresztowanych. Po drugie, przeprowadzenie niezależnych śledztw wobec poważnych zarzutów korupcji, a także przypadków śmierci, nadużycia siły. Po trzecie, przejrzyste, prawdziwie demokratyczne wybory prezydenckie i parlamentarne, monitorowane przez lokalnych i zagranicznych obserwatorów i po czwarte, wspieramy starania stworzenia rządu jedności narodowej, który reprezentowałby wszystkich Tunezyjczyków.

Unię Europejską i Tunezję łączy długoletnie partnerstwo, to są nasi sąsiedzi zza Morza Śródziemnego. To partnerstwo musi służyć przede wszystkim naszym obywatelom, Tunezyjczykom i Europejczykom. Nasze partnerstwo, jeśli ma pozostać wiarygodnym i znaczącym, musi wspierać Tunezyjczyków w ich drodze ku głębokim przemianom. Musimy pomóc Tunezji odnieść sukces. Drogie Koleżanki i Koledzy! Bądźmy po stronie Tunezyjczyków.

  Štefan Füle, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, the recent popular uprising in Tunisia is unprecedented in the modern history of the country. On 17 December 2010, a young university graduate set himself on fire out of sheer desperation after police seized the fruit and vegetables that he was selling for a living. Less than a month later, nationwide protests have brought about the definitive departure of President Ben Ali.

The European Union has condemned the violence of the repression during the last days of the regime. As I speak, the security situation remains precarious. Looting and violence are still being reported. Tunisia remains in a very delicate phase, although the first news about the formation of a national unity government is just coming in.

Despite some uncertainty, the message of the Tunisian people is loud and clear: Tunisia wants to be a stable democracy that fully respects fundamental rights and freedoms. It wants free and fair, inclusive elections. The people want to write a new page in their history and we want to support them in that endeavour. Respect for the Constitution and the steps being taken, as we speak, to bring together a national solidarity government are moves in the right direction.

Of course, this is only a start. The European Union has never ceased to remind Tunisia of its international obligations in the field of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Ever since the start of my term of office – since my hearing before this House in fact – I have repeated that enhanced status clearly means enhanced commitments in all areas of our relationship, including fundamental freedoms and human rights.

I have stressed in all meetings with the Tunisian authorities, on behalf of the European Commission, that they had to deliver on their democratic and human rights commitments. At the very first session of negotiations on the action plan for statut avancé, I insisted personally, in an unprecedented and extremely clear way, that any use of the new Article 61a of the Penal Code would be seen by us as incompatible with statut avancé and with our shared values.

And, by the way, if there were still sceptics on both sides who thought that these values were shared only in theory, they should listen again and again to the voice of the Tunisian street over the last days and weeks. What was this if not a solemn demand for democracy and for more economic justice?

As Catherine Ashton and I stated this morning, the European Union stands ready to support a truly inclusive electoral process with appropriate guarantees. We hope its modalities can be announced as soon as possible, once the government of national unity has been shaped and starts its work. We are ready to provide immediate assistance in preparing and organising the electoral process, as well as lasting support for a genuine democratic transition.

We are also working on a broader package to assist – as soon as the situation stabilises – with, inter alia, economic development, close attention to the social problems faced by Tunisia’s youth, and consolidating the rule of law and the judiciary.

We will, of course, continue consulting closely with this House and with the Member States on this process.

The European Neighbourhood Policy is based on essential values shared by the European Union and its partners: democracy, human rights and an open market economy, with a view to building together a shared area of democracy, stability and prosperity. The Commission has always stressed that these values were an essential component of our neighbourhood policy, towards both our southern and our eastern neighbours.

With its strong middle class, high level of education, closeness to Europe and overall moderation, Tunisia is well placed to take the leap towards democracy that people have now asked for with such force and courage, and I think everyone should agree that the European Union also has a strong interest in a democratic, prosperous and stable Tunisia. We have a long-standing and robust relationship with Tunisia and close links between our peoples and our business communities. It is my ambition, and that of the Vice-President of the Commission/ High Representative of the Union for Foreign and Security Policy, that we should now strengthen our bilateral relations on the basis of new commitments by our partners on governance, respect for the rule of law and for fundamental freedoms, and economic and social reforms.

We will do our utmost to help the Tunisian people to turn their aspirations into reality.

  José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señor Presidente, los recientes acontecimientos de Túnez deberían invitarnos a reflexionar con sentido de la responsabilidad sobre, al menos, dos aspectos. En primer lugar, sobre el hecho de si las políticas de apoyo al statu quo en países ayunos de libertades democráticas contribuye realmente a la estabilidad, en este caso, en nuestro entorno más próximo.

Y en segundo lugar, señor Presidente, sobre el hecho relativo a si la desaparición de la escena política del señor Ben Ali es una condición suficiente para garantizar el alumbramiento de una verdadera transición democrática.

Desde mi punto de vista, señor Presidente, la respuesta a estas dos preguntas es negativa. Por eso, señor Füle, se impone una profunda reflexión acerca de por qué la política de vecindad, en el espíritu del Proceso de Barcelona, no ha producido los efectos de democratización que estaban previstos y cómo podríamos o deberíamos corregir el tiro.

En segundo lugar, la experiencia nos demuestra ―y hay muchos casos― que, cuando se produce un vacío de poder, los partidos más radicalizados, más extremistas, sustituyen el proceso, lo secuestran y quieren dar al traste con él.

Señor Presidente, solamente en defensa de la libertad, el extremismo no es un vicio; solamente en defensa de la justicia, la moderación no es una virtud. Por ese imperativo ético, la Unión Europea tiene que movilizar todos sus esfuerzos para contribuir a que este proceso no descarrile.

Celebro la declaración del señor Füle en el sentido de prestar asistencia electoral a Túnez, pero creo que es más importante todavía dar un paso más y acompañarlo con una misión de observación electoral de la Unión Europea. Y no solamente por este imperativo ético que está inscrito en el código genético de la Unión Europea, sino también, señor Presidente, por nuestro propio interés: porque de nada sirve viajar en primera clase si en clase turista hay un pasajero que viaja con una bomba en el maletín.

  Pier Antonio Panzeri, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, condividiamo le preoccupazioni per quanto sta avvenendo in Tunisia ed esprimiamo il nostro cordoglio per le tante persone che hanno perso la vita durante le manifestazioni.

La fase nuova e confusa che si è aperta dopo la fuga dell'ex presidente Ben Ali ora deve portare all'obiettivo che da più parti è stato sollecitato: l'avvio di riforme economiche e sociali in grado di rispondere alle aspettative di larghissima parte della popolazione e l'allargamento degli spazi di democrazia, perché siano sempre più coinvolte la società civile e le diverse forze di opposizione nell'azione pubblica e nel governo.

È evidente che ogni paese ha il diritto a scegliersi la propria strada, ma noi siamo interessati al fatto che queste riforme si realizzino e che i cambiamenti siano effettivi e non un semplice maquillage. Ma ciò che sta avvenendo in Tunisia in questi giorni interroga tutti noi, interroga l'Europa con i suoi ritardi e i suoi errori.

Nel 1995, a Barcellona, l'Unione europea lanciò il programma di partenariato con il Mediterraneo, che doveva comprendere una cooperazione economica, politica, militare, persino sociale e umana, ma nemmeno nei due obiettivi chiave si è realizzato. Per l'economia, c'è stato un drastico ridimensionamento dei progetti regionali e infrastrutturali perché i finanziamenti degli Stati europei non sono arrivati, quelli della Commissione restano in standby. La promessa di zona di libero scambio non esiste, ma il fallimento più evidente è sul piano politico, del quale occorre piena consapevolezza, Commissario.

L'Unione per il Mediterraneo lanciata nel 2008 è rimasta una cosa di facciata. Il vertice che doveva tenersi nel novembre 2010 è stato rinviato sine die. Il problema è che i diversi governi europei non hanno e non vedono l'interesse per una vera cooperazione, preferiscono mantenere i rapporti con regimi discutibili, arroccati nella difesa delle ricchezze nazionali che controllano senza democrazia, mentre milioni di giovani vivono senza prospettive, se non quelle di un'emigrazione sempre più difficile.

Non c'è da meravigliarsi, quindi, se sotto la spinta della crisi economica e sociale le manifestazioni in Tunisia si sono trasformate in uno tsunami capace di abbattersi pesantemente sulla struttura di potere esistente. Non regge più il realismo politico dell'Europa per paura del fondamentalismo islamico, così come forse è l'ora di mandare definitivamente in archivio una concezione tardo-coloniale che tende a riemergere ogni tanto nei rapporti con i paesi nordafricani.

Ecco, proprio partendo da Barcellona serve una nuova visione europea verso il proprio Sud, verso il Mediterraneo, con maggiore credibilità rispetto al passato. Ciò significa – e glielo chiedo, Commissario, con forza – una profonda revisione delle politiche di partenariato e di vicinato sin qui seguite: non possiamo nascondere che sia la Commissione, sia il Consiglio erano persino pronti a discutere con la Tunisia l'accordo per lo statuto avanzato. Sulla base di quali criteri si riteneva possibile tutto questo ancora deve essere spiegato.

Serve un cambio di linea, un cambio di passo e ciò può essere fatto – lo diciamo a Commissione e Consiglio – associando con maggiore convinzione questo Parlamento all'elaborazione e all'applicazione di una nuova idea di partenariato verso i paesi della sponda mediterranea. Tutto ciò non è solo nell'interesse di questi paesi, ma è soprattutto nell'interesse dell'Europa.

Molti dei problemi che l'Europa mostra di avere possono essere affrontati e risolti solo attraverso un rapporto produttivo e virtuoso con tutti i paesi del Maghreb. La strada è stretta, ma è l'unica da percorrere, quella di sostenere riforme economiche e democratiche e, nello stesso tempo, mettere in campo tutti gli antidoti necessari contro il fondamentalismo e il terrorismo.

C'è da augurarsi che questa drammatica e amara lezione che proviene dalla Tunisia possa servire a tutti noi per avere maggiore consapevolezza di ciò che è utile fare, di ciò che è utile cambiare nell'azione europea.

  Marietje Schaake, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, I would like to congratulate the Tunisian people for their bravery, courage and persistence in speaking up for opportunities and freedom, and I hope all can refrain from using violence and that there will be free and fair elections soon.

Citizens spoke out against an oppressive regime which has used bullets and killed its youth. Only weak governments go to such lengths to preserve their artificially obtained corrupt power and wealth. Regimes derive their legitimacy from providing for the well-being of their citizens, not from closing universities and access to information and free communications.

With regard to access to information, the Tunisian opposition used the internet, and the internet is becoming more and more important for peaceful opposition across the world. I learned about the uprising by the citizens’ movement in Tunisia through the internet and eyewitness accounts that were posted there, but it took about a month of the struggle before mainstream media and political leaders woke up to the realities of the street.

In the same week – last week – the French Minister for Foreign Affairs offered help to the Tunisian Government in the form of riot police and assistance in policing. What is the Commission’s reaction to that offer, and where was the help for citizens in support of their rights?

(Applause)

The confrontation between the Tunisian Government and its people took place on the virtual highways of the internet as much as on the streets. The Tunisian Government was known for being among the most advanced in the use of filtering and censoring software, and over the past month it spared no efforts to repress people through these technologies. Repressive regimes across the world continue to use technologies to silence free speech.

Today is Martin Luther King Day and it was Martin Luther King who said that a time comes when silence becomes betrayal. Commissioner Füle, that time has arrived. The United States has lost significantly in terms of credibility in its fight for leadership in internet freedom.

The EU has a struggle ahead, about which we will speak tonight in relation to the upcoming Hungarian laws. But the young, freedom-loving generation across the world is looking to the symbolic example that Tunisia has given and is looking to the EU for support, and there is no reason why we should not lead in defending people’s freedoms, including on the internet.

  Daniel Cohn-Bendit, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, j'avoue que j'aurais aimé que ce Parlement soit à la hauteur de la fierté des Tunisiens qui ont su abattre le dictateur Ben Ali.

Chers collègues, le dictateur est tombé, mais la dictature, la structure de la dictature existe toujours en Tunisie. Et aujourd'hui, il faut faire très attention. Des gouvernements européens, la majorité de ce Parlement ont, pendant des années, soutenu la structure de la dictature, et le dictateur tunisien. Encore la semaine dernière, la majorité des groupes refusait un débat sur la Tunisie et refusait une condamnation de Ben Ali.

Ce qu'a fait la ministre des affaires étrangères française n'est que le dernier exemple de la complicité de l'Occident. Et pourquoi ? Pour la peur, parce qu'on avait peur de l'islamisme. On a raison d'avoir peur de la dictature de l'islamisme, mais qu'ont-ils à voir avec cela ces jeunes, ces Tunisiens qui n'avaient rien d'islamistes, qui se battaient pour la liberté? Et M. Bouazizi qui s'est immolé, c'est le Jan Palach de la Tunisie et quand Jan Palach s'est immolé, tout ce Parlement était derrière lui. Nous ne sommes même pas capables d'être derrière M. Bouazizi, voilà la vérité de ce Parlement.

Maintenant il s'agit que la Commission agisse. Il s'agit simplement de dire une chose, de dire aux Tunisiens qu'une élection démocratique dans un pays qui vient de sortir de la dictature ne se fait pas en deux mois. Il n'y a pas une base de démocratie. La liberté d'expression, les médias, les radios, la télévision n'existent pas. Il n'existe qu'une imprimerie d'état.

C'est pour cela que je demande à la Commission qu'elle prenne l'argent de l'accord d'association et qu'elle mette cet argent au service de la liberté d'expression en Tunisie et non pas au service d'organisations gouvernementales tunisiennes.

Deuxièmement, le gouvernement de transition n'est pas un gouvernement d'unité nationale. Pourquoi? Parce que la majorité de ceux qui se sont battus ou de ceux qui sont en exil ne sont pas encore rentrés, ne sont pas reconnus, donc il faudra du temps pour que des forces démocratiques – non pas des forces qui avaient été "reconnues" par Ben Ali –, mais des forces réellement démocratiques, puissent se développer.

L'Union européenne doit démonter que, pour nous, ce qui se passe en Tunisie, c'est la clé de la compréhension et de l'espoir pour tous les pays arabes. Démocratie et Islam veulent aller de pair et si nous sommes capables de soutenir la démocratie tunisienne en train de naître, nous verrons qu'en Égypte, en Jordanie, en Syrie, et partout, le peuple et les peuples vont s'élever contre leurs dictateurs.

Nous avons une responsabilité, nous tous ici, parce qu'enfin des Tunisiens, donc une partie du monde arabe, nous montrent que l'espoir de liberté qu'on a vu en 89 dans les pays de l'Est, ce même espoir est aujourd'hui en train de naître dans un pays comme la Tunisie, demain en Algérie, après-demain en Égypte et en Jordanie.

Donc c'est pour cela qu'il est inimaginable que ce Parlement reste assis et dise: "Ah oui, peut-être, on ne sait pas". On ne savait pas en 89 ce qu'allait devenir la Pologne. On ne savait pas avec Gorbatchev ce qu'allait devenir la Russie. Si à chaque fois que les peuples demandent la liberté, on leur demande une assurance, qu'ils nous disent que c'est sûr que ça ira dans une direction, on ne soutiendra jamais la liberté et c'est pour cela que je demande à la Commission: "bougez, donnez, montrez aux Tunisiens que maintenant la realpolitik, c'est la politique de soutien à la démocratie et non plus à la structure de la dictature".

(Applaudissements)

  Charles Tannock, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, the upheaval in Tunisia is undoubtedly a reflection of people’s frustration at the country’s political stagnation and its relative economic stagnation. The flagrant corruption and wealth of the ruling family elite contrasted sharply with the high levels of poverty and unemployment among ordinary people.

Former President Ben Ali paid the supreme price for failing to meet the expectations and aspirations of his people, but I do not agree with some assessments, particularly in the Green Group, that his government was one of the most repressive in the Arab world. Tunisia has been an example, in some ways, of a modern, secular and progressive Arab country. For example, polygamy and veils were banned and foreign direct investment and tourism were encouraged.

Tunisia has managed to resist the efforts of violent Jihadis to undermine the integrity of its secular society. It is therefore essential that Tunisia’s political leaders – the new leaders that will now emerge – protect that legacy, because Salafist extremists will undoubtedly try to take advantage of the chaos and turmoil that will advance their dangerous agenda, which obviously also threatens European political objectives, including foreign policy objectives.

Tunisia’s new political leadership also needs to understand that poor governance and gross inequality offer a fertile breeding ground for violent radicalism. I am encouraged that the interim leadership has promised substantial reforms because embarking on such a path will greatly strengthen Tunisia’s relationship with the European Union. In the meantime, my group calls for maximum restraint by the security forces and for the arrest and trial of the ancien regime’s presidential guard leadership responsible for the shooting, in the last few days, of innocent bystanders, in a futile attempt to destabilise the country. I congratulate the army on its professionalism in protecting the Republic’s institutions.

We in the EU must give the new Tunisian government of unity every assistance and also afford every assistance to EU citizens, including British citizens, who are stranded, having been in Tunisia on a holiday.

  Marie-Christine Vergiat, au nom du groupe GUE/NGL. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, c'est avec une certaine fierté et beaucoup d'émotion que j'interviens aujourd'hui dans cet hémicycle au nom de mon groupe, la Gauche unitaire européenne/Gauche verte nordique.

En effet, nous avons été très peu nombreux – peu nombreuses même, dirais-je – sur ces bancs à dénoncer les dérives du régime tunisien et ce qu'il faisait subir à ceux et celles qui osaient, envers et contre tout, le critiquer et dénoncer ses pratiques et notamment la torture des défenseurs des droits de l'homme.

Il a fallu qu'un jeune homme de 26 ans s'immole par le feu pour que le peuple tunisien se lève, pour qu'il n'ait plus peur, car il se sentait bien seul. L'espoir de liberté y est né. Il a fallu plus de cinquante morts pour que l'Union européenne ose un timide communiqué dans lequel elle appelait à la retenue dans l'usage de la force sans mettre en cause en quoi que ce soit le sacro-saint partenariat de l'Union européenne avec la Tunisie, sans condamner les violences, Monsieur Füle, jusqu'à samedi. Et le moins que l'on puisse dire, c'est que le régime tunisien ne vous a guère entendu depuis votre nomination.

Ces mots de "retenue dans l'usage de la force" me sont restés en travers de la gorge. Le Parlement européen a été muet, hormis un timide communiqué de la délégation Maghreb. Ce n'est que samedi que vous vous êtes exprimé, Monsieur le Président, et aujourd'hui la majorité du Parlement européen a refusé une résolution écrite. Les instances européennes savent pourtant être plus véhémentes envers d'autres régimes. La Française que je suis sait quelles sont les responsabilités du gouvernement français et je ne reviendrai pas sur les propos de notre ministre des affaires étrangères. Visiblement, pour certains, le temps des colonies n'est pas encore révolu mais espérons que tout ceci fait partie du passé.

Grâce au courage du peuple tunisien, en quelques jours le miracle tunisien, si cher à certains ici, s'est effondré et a montré son vrai visage. Aujourd'hui, la responsabilité de l'Union européenne est effectivement grande pour accompagner sans ingérence le peuple tunisien dans sa transition démocratique. L'Union européenne doit suivre le processus électoral, veiller à ce qu'une commission d'enquête indépendante fasse toute la lumière sur ce qui s'est passé, sur les violences et la corruption. Le peuple tunisien ne doit plus être spolié, les biens et les avoirs des familles Ben Ali et Trabelsi doivent non seulement être surveillés, mais gelés.

L'Union européenne a failli. Un long chemin devra être parcouru pour que les Tunisiens reprennent confiance. Aujourd'hui, certes, les choses sont encore difficiles et il peut y avoir valeur d'exemple pour le Maghreb dans ce qui se passe là-bas. Nous savons que des soulèvements identiques peuvent avoir lieu dans tous ces pays où les Occidentaux font toujours passer leurs propres intérêts avant ceux des peuples concernés. Des hommes se sont déjà immolés en Algérie, en Égypte et en Mauritanie. Il est temps de passer des discours aux actes en matière de démocratie et de droits de l'homme. Il est temps de refonder les partenariats de l'Union européenne avec les pays du Sud et de construire enfin ceux-ci sur l'exigence démocratique, le respect des droits de l'homme et l'égalité, sinon l'Union européenne fera effectivement le lit des intégristes.

  Gerard Batten, on behalf of the EFD Group. – Mr President, you made some remarks at the beginning of the debate about free and fair elections and good representative government and you asked us to support the people of Tunisia.

No democrat could disagree. People will tolerate a lot from incompetent, corrupt governments, but push them too far and they will rebel. It is a doctrine of internal security services that any population is only three days away from riots and civil unrest when the food supplies run out.

Are there any parallels to be drawn between what is happening in Tunisia and the European Union? The EU gives undemocratic and incompetent government. It has a political class that is increasingly detached from the wishes of its people. There is high youth unemployment in many countries in Europe as a direct result of EU policies. There are already riots and civil unrest in Greece due to its purely ideological commitment to the European single currency. Countries like Spain, Portugal and Ireland may soon follow Greece as their economies become untenable in the straitjacket of the euro.

Do not think that it cannot happen in European countries. When governments become the enemies of their own people then the people will eventually rebel.

I agree with what you said in your introduction but let us see those principles applied in Europe as well as in other countries of the world.

  Przewodniczący. − Tym samym zamykamy punkt porządku obrad.

12. Kundizzjonijiet armonizzati għall-kummerċjalizzazzjoni tal-prodotti għall-kostruzzjoni (dibattitu)

  Przewodniczący. − Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest zalecenie do drugiego czytania sporządzone w imieniu Komisji Rynku Wewnętrznego i Ochrony Konsumentów w sprawie stanowiska Rady w pierwszym czytaniu w sprawie przyjęcia rozporządzenia Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady ustanawiającego zharmonizowane warunki wprowadzania do obrotu wyrobów budowlanych i uchylającego dyrektywę Rady 89/106/EWG (10753/3/2010 - C7-0267/2010 - 2008/0098(COD)) (sprawozdawczyni: Catherine Stihler) (A7-0343/2010)

  Catherine Stihler, rapporteur. − Mr President, it is a good way to start the New Year with this debate and tomorrow’s vote on the deal concluded under the Belgian Presidency on this important report on construction products.

I would like to start by thanking all colleagues who made this possible for their hard work, their thoughtfulness and commitment to making this proposal a reality. I would also like to put on record my thanks to the IMCO Secretariat and to the Belgian Presidency, in particular to Mr Vertessen and Mr Haerynck for all their dedicated work.

As I said in my report quoting the poet Robert Frost - ‘Good fences make good neighbours’ (with an implied question mark). It is important that we maintain the momentum to complete the internal market and break down barriers to trade. As Mario Monti in his report on the Single Market acknowledges, ‘Europe is still in a phase of “market construction” that requires breaking down barriers to cross border activity, cutting dead wood of national administrative and technical barriers and overcoming corporate resistance’.

With this proposal we have attempted to make the single market work more effectively, we have attempted to have clearer and more transparent systems in place so that products placed on the market are of the highest standards and that the construction industry has a fairer market place to trade within.

Currently the construction industry is facing the economic challenges caused by the global financial meltdown of 2008 and exacerbated by the slow economic recovery we face across the EU. We should never forget what an important sector the construction industry is – 12 million EU citizens are directly employed in the sector and 26 million EU citizens are dependent on it – that is 38 million people reliant on the sector. For economic growth construction is essential for jobs and employment.

It is also one of the most dangerous sectors to work within. Taking Germany, whose safety record is second to none, one construction worker in 5000 will suffer a fatal accident during their lifetime. The health and safety of those who work at the coalface of construction should always be remembered and it is important to have acknowledgement of this in the report.

It was with this in mind that we successfully managed on both sides to come to some agreement on the issue of labelling hazardous substances, so that the report was in line with REACH but also helps those who work with products which in the past have led to chronic conditions and death – conditions such as asbestos-related mesotheliomia and, to an extent, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease caused by working conditions and by inhaling dust.

The proper labelling of hazardous substances can help those with these lung conditions and illustrates how interlinked our work here is. I am proud of the fact that this report was conducted and concluded under the European Year of the Lung. Lung health is so often neglected and I was delighted that in this Parliament we recognised its importance.

I would also like to briefly comment on SMEs. In Parliament we are urged to ‘think small first’ and this should carry throughout our work. This is why we have managed to create a second stream for smaller corporations to place their products on the internal market and the system should make it cheaper and more practical for SMEs to reach a larger market place which can only increase their trading potential.

On the separate issue over transparency concerning who serves on technical bodies and how they work, I think that we have moved the bodies which approve products further than was originally foreseen. The transparency over processes and the approval of products can only help break down the walls and barriers which exist in the European Union today. This should help companies in the EU, and in particular the special conditions set for micro-enterprises are also helpful in these tough economic conditions.

In the European Union we should always strive for better regulation. Along with my shadow rapporteurs, I have modified the sections of the report which are no longer relevant or which were so unclear that no one was able to follow them or ensure their application. For an industry such as the construction sector it is imperative that the rules are clear and I look forward to seeing the difference these particular changes will make.

The scale is huge and the challenges many, but today these new rules which will come into force through Member States in the next 24 months will help the construction sector as we attempt to create economic growth and, through this, jobs.

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione. − Signor Presidente, onorevoli deputati, innanzitutto desidero ringraziare il Presidente che ci fa l'onore di presiedere un dibattito su un argomento così importante per la politica industriale e del mercato interno e desidero altresì ringraziare l'on. Stihler, relatore, che ha lavorato in modo approfondito su questa proposta e ci ha, grazie al suo impegno, permesso di raggiungere un accordo in seconda lettura.

Voglio inoltre ringraziare vivamente tutti i relatori ombra e il presidente della commissione per il mercato interno, l'on. Harbour. I vostri sforzi collettivi sono stati determinanti per giungere ad una svolta durante i negoziati tra le Istituzioni in merito a questo dossier estremamente tecnico.

La Commissione accoglie con favore il compromesso in seconda lettura da parte del Parlamento e del Consiglio; a prescindere dagli aspetti di natura tecnica, si tratta di un dossier di grande importanza. L'adozione del regolamento sui prodotti da costruzione rappresenta un passo di inestimabile rilievo per l'intero settore europeo della costruzione. I prodotti della costruzione rappresentano il 3% del PIL a livello europeo e in termini di occupazione le attività legate al settore della costruzione ricoprono il 6,5% del PIL a livello europeo e il 7,5% in termini occupazionali: nell'insieme questo porta il settore della costruzione a rivestire un peso del 10% nell'ambito dell'economia europea, come ha ricordato nel corso del suo intervento la relatrice.

Inoltre, l'adozione del regolamento sui prodotti da costruzione costituisce un passo in avanti importante nell'ambito della semplificazione e di una migliore legislazione e consolida nello stesso tempo il mercato interno per i prodotti di costruzione. Questo è stato anche il primo caso di applicazione pratica dei principi sanciti nell'ambito dello "Small business act". In effetti, alle imprese europee, specialmente alle più piccole, finalmente la normativa comunitaria offrirà strumenti abilitanti anziché l'esatto contrario, ossia moduli da compilare, trafile burocratiche e obblighi aggiuntivi.

Non posso che essere soddisfatto di questo risultato, in modo particolare per le soluzioni apportate alle tre questioni considerate in precedenza più complicate: in primo luogo, per quanto riguarda la questione inerente le sostanze pericolose, la Commissione preparerà un rapporto su questo punto importante, informando il Parlamento e presentando, se del caso, le eventuali proposte legislative successive.

In secondo luogo, il trattamento speciale riservato alle microimprese, da sempre ritenute fondamentali al fine di salvaguardare i principi dello "Small business act". Il risultato conseguito soddisfa questo criterio, mantenendo la possibilità di procedure semplificate per le microimprese.

Infine, in varie parti del testo si riconosce la necessità di ridurre gli obblighi amministrativi delle imprese e quelli legati ai testi, non solo introducendo procedure semplificate per quel che riguarda la marcatura CE, ma anche mantenendo facoltativo l'uso delle valutazioni tecniche europee.

Tuttavia, come indicato nella dichiarazione della Commissione allegata alla posizione del Consiglio in prima lettura, occorrerà verificare che le soluzioni scelte siano veramente le migliori per affrontare le necessità reali. In particolare, dovremo evitare di sottoporre le imprese, soprattutto le più piccole, ad obblighi amministrativi ingiustificati o comunque non necessari. È nostra intenzione monitorare attentamente questo aspetto e inserire le nostre conclusioni nella relazione al Parlamento europeo e al Consiglio da elaborare dopo cinque anni dall'entrata in vigore del presente regolamento.

Desidero inoltre puntualizzare che la Commissione intende collaborare da vicino con il Parlamento europeo e, naturalmente, con il Consiglio, in merito all'attuazione di questo regolamento. A tale proposito ho chiesto ai miei servizi – che ringrazio per il contributo che danno sempre all'attività legislativa della Commissione – di preparare una road map sull'implementazione, che ho intenzione di inviarvi non appena sarà possibile. Ciò riguarda in particolar modo i cosiddetti aspetti di comitatologia. Il Parlamento è un partner chiave della Commissione, e posso assicurarvi che intendo continuare a collaborare da vicino anche per quel che riguarda la fase successiva dell'adozione. D'altronde, 14 anni passati in quest'Aula non sono trascorsi in vano.

Infine, la Commissione ha ritenuto necessario presentare una dichiarazione riguardante la deroga all'accordo comune tra le istituzioni, relativa al termine per presentare obiezione nei confronti degli atti delegati. La Commissione tiene a sottolineare che il principio stabilito nel progetto di intesa comune prevede un termine per la presentazione delle obiezioni di due mesi, prorogabile per altri due.

Nel caso in questione, la Commissione ritiene che non sussistano circostanze particolari che possano giustificare una deroga a tale principio. La Commissione si rammarica del fatto che il principio concordato nel progetto di intesa comune non sia stato rispettato e nella sua dichiarazione sottolinea che il caso dei prodotti di costruzione non può costituire un precedente.

Ringrazio il Parlamento – anche attraverso il suo Presidente, che ringrazio ancora per aver partecipato a questo dibattito – dell'interesse con il quale ha esaminato questa proposta di semplificazione. Per concludere, vorrei mettere in risalto i vantaggi che ci aspettiamo da questa nuova normativa, nonché quelli risultanti per i produttori e gli utilizzatori dei prodotti da costruzione, come pure per le amministrazioni nazionali.

Confermiamo anche la disponibilità della Commissione ad adempiere agli obblighi previsti dal testo del regolamento, in particolare ad elaborare le relazioni che le sono state richieste.

Grazie ancora Signor Presidente, grazie agli onorevoli parlamentari per l'impegno e per la cooperazione dimostrata.

  Andreas Schwab, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Herr Vizepräsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Auch von meiner Seite möchte ich zunächst ein herzliches Dankeschön an all diejenigen richten, die am Zustandekommen dieser Verordnung in zweiter Lesung aktiv mitgewirkt haben. Denn diese Verordnung – wie der Name es schon sagt – bringt eine Verbesserung im Verhältnis zur bestehenden Richtlinie. Das Baupolizeirecht ist ja in der Vergangenheit ein Stück weit Kernbereich nationaler Eigenständigkeit gewesen. Dass es uns gelungen ist, hier mit einer Verordnung den europäischen Binnenmarkt nach vorne zu bringen, ist sehr positiv.

Zweitens enthält die Verordnung gerade für die mittelständische Wirtschaft, für kleine und mittlere Unternehmen, eine Reihe von wichtigen Erleichterungen, die ihnen das Wirtschaften und den Umgang im europäischen Binnenmarkt erleichtern werden. Und letztlich sind natürlich auch die Verbraucher Nutznießer dieser Verordnung, weil die Sicherheit und Zuverlässigkeit von Bauprodukten durch diese Verordnung erheblich verbessert wird.

Ich darf auch für unseren Schattenberichterstatter, Herrn Professor Mayer, sprechen, der heute leider wegen Wahlkreisterminen noch in seinem Wahlkreis ist. Er hat mich gebeten, darauf hinzuweisen, dass es sich bei dieser Verordnung am Ende in zweiter Lesung um einen Kompromiss handelt, um einen guten Kompromiss, aus seiner Sicht aber doch noch einige Punkte zur Nacharbeit notwendig sind. Ich bin sehr dankbar, dass Herr Vizepräsident Tajani darauf hingewiesen hat, dass das Parlament auch bei diesen im Nachgang noch fälligen Arbeiten eingebunden sein wird. Für ihn als Schattenberichterstatter reicht es nicht aus, dass das Verhalten der Hersteller von Bauprodukten und der Vertrieb ihrer Produkte allein geregelt werden, sondern die hier vorliegende Verordnung muss durch ein Regelwerk ergänzt werden, das die Grundsätze und die praktischen Regeln für die Verwendung und den Einbau von Bauprodukten ebenfalls festlegt. In diesem Zusammenhang sollte nach seiner Meinung die Kommission erwägen, der europäischen Normungsinstitution CEN ein Mandat zur Vorlage eines vereinheitlichten europäischen Regelwerks zu geben.

Des Weiteren möchte er darauf hinweisen, dass die Kommission beobachten soll, ob die neue Bauprodukteverordnung zu einer ausreichenden Harmonisierung in allen Bereichen und nicht zu weiteren Sicherheitsproblemen und zu unfairem Wettbewerb führen wird. Aber nach den Ausführungen von Kommissar Tajani bin ich sicher, dass wir dies auch gemeinsam erreichen werden.

ΠΡΟΕΔΡΙΑ: ΡΟΔΗ ΚΡΑΤΣΑ-ΤΣΑΓΚΑΡΟΠΟΥΛΟΥ
Αντιπρόεδρος

  Evelyne Gebhardt, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte meinen ganz herzlichen Dank der Berichterstatterin Catherine Stihler aussprechen, die in diesem hochtechnischen Bereich eine sehr wichtige Arbeit geleistet hat.

Denn es ist nicht nur ein technischer Bericht, es ist auch ein hochpolitischer Bericht, der uns vorliegt, ein Bericht, in dem auch hohe politische Standards respektiert werden mussten. Es ging darum, die Belange der Wirtschaft, der Sicherheit und des Arbeitsschutzes miteinander in Einklang zu bringen. Und das ist der Berichterstatterin aus Sicht des Europäischen Parlaments und der Sozialdemokratinnen und Sozialdemokraten hervorragend gelungen.

Die Belange der Wirtschaft zu respektieren und zu sehen, wo ihre Probleme in diesem Bereich der Bauprodukte sind, war eine wesentliche Sache. Es ging auch darum, die Balance zwischen den großen Unternehmen und den kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen zu finden. Wir fanden es richtig, dass die Kommission vorgeschlagen hat, dass kleine Unternehmen weniger Regeln brauchen. Aber das bedeutet nicht – und darauf bezieht sich die Verbesserung, die gegenüber dem Vorschlag der Kommission gemacht wurde –, dass es weniger Sicherheit geben darf. Und die Standards müssen auch wirklich auf hohem Niveau sein. Und es ist uns gelungen, das in diesem Bereich umzusetzen.

Es ist natürlich auch wichtig, die Sicherheit in den Vordergrund zu stellen, die für die Verbraucher und die Verbraucherinnen von ganz besonders großer Wichtigkeit ist. Denn wo ein Bauprodukt hergestellt und eingebaut wird, muss dafür gesorgt werden, dass die Benutzer dieses Produktes am Ende genau so sicher sind wie diejenigen, die vorher damit gearbeitet haben.

Der dritte Punkt, der für uns Sozialdemokratinnen und Sozialdemokraten ganz besonders wichtig war, ist die Verbesserung des Arbeitsschutzes und dass dieser expressis verbis auch noch einmal hineingeschrieben wurde. Darauf hat Frau Stihler in ihren Ausführungen auch großen Wert gelegt. Denn es geht auch darum, dass bei diesen Bauprodukten häufig mit gefährlichen Substanzen und Stoffen gearbeitet wird. Dass in diesem Bereich dafür gesorgt wird, dass der höchstmögliche Schutz wirklich erreicht wird, ist von außerordentlicher Wichtigkeit. An diesen Schutz muss dann auch später – und daran müssen wir wohl noch arbeiten, Herr Tajani – bei der Entsorgung solcher Produkte, wenn sie nicht mehr gebraucht werden, gedacht werden.

Ich bedanke mich noch einmal ganz herzlich bei der Berichterstatterin, die wirklich hervorragende Arbeit geleistet hat.

  Heide Rühle, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, auch mein Dank gilt Frau Stihler und allen Schattenberichterstattern. Ich glaube, wir haben in dieser zweiten Lesung einen guten Kompromiss hinbekommen, auch wenn – wie immer bei Kompromissen – natürlich nicht alle Seiten zufrieden sind.

Ich möchte ausdrücklich die Anmerkungen von Herrn Prof. Meyer aufgreifen, die Herr Schwab zum Ausdruck gebracht hat. Ich glaube, bei der Kennzeichnung müssen wir noch nacharbeiten. Wir haben jetzt eine gute Harmonisierung der Bauprodukte, d.h. der Erstellung der Bauprodukte. Aber wo wir nacharbeiten müssen, ist beim Einbau, bei der Verwendung der Bauprodukte. Eine Möglichkeit ist es, dass die Kommission hier im Bereich der Eurocodes weiterarbeitet und es dann hier auch ein Mandat im Bereich der Eurocodes gibt, um zu einer Weiterentwicklung zu kommen.

Die andere Möglichkeit ist, dass wir zu einer Harmonisierung des Verwendungsbereichs und des Anwendungsbereichs kommen, damit wir hier nicht wieder zurückfallen auf die nationale Ebene und eine Europäisierung nur im Bereich der Produkte selbst haben, aber nicht im Verwendungsbereich. Hier müssen wir nacharbeiten, und da hat die Kommission auch unsere volle Unterstützung, wenn sie zu weiteren Maßnahmen kommt.

Ich möchte noch einen weiteren Punkt erwähnen, der wichtig war bei der Auseinandersetzung, ob wir zustimmen oder nicht. Es gab in den Verhandlungen leider einen Fehler der belgischen Ratspräsidentschaft. Die belgische Ratspräsidentschaft hat in der zweiten Lesung nach der ersten Lesung neue Bereiche eingeführt – Artikel 8.3 und Artikel 8.6 – ohne dass das Parlament seine volle Zustimmung gegeben hat. Nun hat die ungarische Ratspräsidentschaft dies in einem Brief aufgegriffen. Allerdings glaube ich nicht, dass die ungarische Ratspräsidentschaft den Konflikt wirklich verstanden hat. Ich möchte noch einmal darauf hinweisen, dass ich erwarte, dass der Rat künftig, wenn er in der zweiten Lesung neue Punkte einbringt, wirklich auf das Parlament zugeht und versucht, mit dem Parlament einen guten Kompromiss zu erzielen.

Dennoch sind wir angesichts des Ergebnisses der Meinung, dass es keinen Sinn hat, wegen eines solchen Formfehlers diesen Kompromiss abzulehnen. Wir stimmen diesem Kompromiss zu, weil wir glauben, dass das ein wichtiger Schritt zu einer weiteren Harmonisierung des Sektors ist, und der Sektor hat eine große wirtschaftliche Bedeutung. Deshalb also unsere Zustimmung zu dieser zweiten Lesung.

  Emma McClarkin, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, I would like to thank Mrs Stihler for her hard work. It has been a very long road.

In Europe today, the construction sector directly employs 12 million EU citizens. In addition, approximately 92% of the manufacturers of construction materials are small and medium-sized enterprises – this amounts to over 65 000 individual businesses. Clearly, the construction sector is vital for the European economy, and we have a responsibility to the industry to help support it, especially after the economic crisis.

There are many aspects of this report which produced something of a stalemate between many of us, such as the nature of EU legislation. It is not perfect, it is a compromise. Key issues included the declaration of performance or CE marking, where a successful agreement was made to ensure micro-enterprises do not face the same burdens as larger companies. On tackling and identifying hazardous substances in construction products, we managed to broker a compromise ensuring no conflict with existing REACH regulations.

I hope that this second-reading agreement will have real results and will encourage the free movement of construction products, improve standards across the EU and promote the recycling of construction products in future whilst, most importantly, not increasing bureaucratic burdens on businesses or confusing consumers.

  Lara Comi (PPE). - Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, accolgo con favore il compromesso raggiunto in relazione ad alcuni punti specifici che giudico di vitale importanza, in vista di un'efficace realizzazione degli obiettivi che con tale proposta legislativa ci proponiamo di raggiungere.

Mi riferisco alla conservazione delle norme sulle procedure semplificate, volte sicuramente ad alleggerire gli oneri e a ridurre i costi sostenuti dalle imprese, specie per quanto riguarda le piccole e medie imprese. Ritengo infatti indispensabile, nel quadro di una congiuntura economica negativa come quella attuale, riconoscere l'importanza del ruolo rivestito dalle piccole e medie imprese, che costituiscono uno dei pilastri fondamentali su cui poggia la nostra economia.

Inoltre, attraverso l'introduzione di meccanismi procedurali semplificati e in particolar modo con la riduzione dei tempi per l'immissione di nuovi prodotti sul mercato, la nuova regolamentazione favorisce sicuramente l'innovazione. Al tempo stesso, tutela i consumatori, ponendoli in condizione di beneficiare più tempestivamente di prodotti dal carattere innovativo senza perciò rinunciare alle garanzie di qualità e sicurezza che devono essere assicurate dal marchio CE.

A mio avviso, quindi, l'accordo raggiunto rappresenta un ottimo compromesso capace di realizzare il giusto bilanciamento tra le esigenze dei produttori e quelle dei consumatori e di garantire così il corretto funzionamento del mercato in un settore che è veramente il traino della nostra economia europea.

  Συλβάνα Ράπτη (S&D). - Κυρία Πρόεδρε, ευχαριστώ πάρα πολύ την κυρία Stihler για την εξαιρετική δουλειά που έκανε. Μιλήσαμε όλοι για ένα τεχνικό θέμα. Και ευτυχώς η κυρία Gebhardt, εκ μέρους της Σοσιαλιστικής Ομάδας, υπογράμμισε ότι το θέμα δεν είναι μόνο τεχνικό, αλλά είναι και άκρως πολιτικό και οικονομικό. Γνωρίζουμε όλοι ότι η οικοδομή είναι βασικός πυλώνας της οικονομίας. Γνωρίζουμε όλοι ότι οι μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις είναι η σπονδυλική στήλη της οικονομίας μας, μιας οικονομίας στο πλαίσιο της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης που βρίσκεται σε εξαιρετικά δύσκολη κατάσταση. Άρα λοιπόν, η έκθεση της κυρίας Stihler είχε μία έντονη πολιτική σημασία. Και τα κατάφερε περίφημα!

Καταφέραμε και πετύχαμε ένα συμβιβασμό, ένα καλό συμβιβασμό για όλους. Καταφέραμε να βρούμε την ισορροπία εκείνη που θα μας δώσει απλές διαδικασίες, τις οποίες θα μπορούν να εφαρμόσουν χωρίς εκπτώσεις στην ποιότητα οι μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις, και, ταυτοχρόνως, το μέγιστο δυνατό καλό αποτέλεσμα.

Καταφέραμε να χτυπήσουμε την υπόθεση των επικίνδυνων ουσιών. Όλοι θυμόμαστε - και οι παλαιότεροι εμού εδώ θυμούνται πάρα πολύ καλά - την υπόθεση της μόλυνσης με αμίαντο του κτηρίου Berlaymont, που είχε κλείσει για πέντε ή έξι χρόνια. Για φανταστείτε τι θα γινόταν σε ολόκληρες πολιτείες μέσα στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση εάν δεν θα μπορούσαμε να χειριστούμε το θέμα των επικίνδυνων ουσιών.

Έχουμε, τέλος, μπροστά μας ακόμη το θέμα της ασφάλειας και της διαφάνειας. Και εδώ νομίζω ότι τα κατάφερε περίφημα η κυρία Stihler στην έκθεσή της και στο συμβιβασμό που επιτεύχθηκε.

Κλείνοντας, κυρία Πρόεδρε, θα ήθελα να ευχηθώ, όσο καλά τα καταφέραμε στην οικοδομή, άλλο τόσο καλά να μπορέσουμε να τα καταφέρουμε στην οικοδόμηση της ευρωπαϊκής Πολιτείας.

  Malcolm Harbour (ECR). - Madam President, as chair of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, I want to associate myself very much with many of the remarks – in fact all the remarks, I think – that people have made on the work that Catherine Stihler has done. I think that taking over a complex dossier for a second reading and coming into our committee to do that has been a tough task which she has done extremely well.

I would remark that it shows the importance of the second-reading procedure in this House, because we have been able to make significant improvements to the text of the position that we received from the Council. As Mrs Rühle in particular pointed out, we had some disagreements with them. We have a letter from the Hungarian Presidency on some of the detailed issues which will be published with the Minutes.

I just want to make two concluding remarks in endorsing this agreement. The first is to say to you, Commissioner, in thanking you for your work with us, that we need to work very closely with you on the implementation of this proposal. As you pointed out, there are important aspects of comitology here and my committee is absolutely behind the need to follow up these proposals very seriously.

Secondly, I think that this is an absolutely crucial sector and we do need to keep it under review, as many colleagues have said, to make sure that there are in effect no market barriers put in place that are going to stop it contributing vitally to the European economy.

  Zuzana Roithová (PPE). - Já jsem velice spokojená s textem stavební směrnice, který dojednali zpravodajové se vstřícnými komisaři Tajanim a Barnierem, pro dnešní druhé čtení. Díky tomu by se trh se stavebními výrobky měl zjednodušit. Sjednotí se nadšení, zjednoduší dokumentace a zruší různé zbytečné byrokratické praktiky. Zvláště vítám, že konečně zvítězil i názor, že budování staveb je poskytování stavebních služeb, a nikoli uvádění výrobků na trh, a že stavební činnost zahrnuje i případné nesériově vyrobené komponenty zabudované do staveb. Také firmy v České republice tuto malou reformu opravdu ocení, protože stará směrnice jim zvyšovala náklady, aniž by to mělo vliv na lepší kvalitu. Můj výbor IMCO se sjednotil a text přijal jednoznačně, a to i pokud jde o zjednodušení pro mikropodniky. A já věřím, že zítra tak učiní celý Parlament. Bude to další důkaz o zlepšování právního prostřední v Evropské unii směrem, který podporuje jednotný trh.

  Anja Weisgerber (PPE). - Frau Präsidentin! Die Einigung hat mich nicht in allen Punkten überzeugt, aber ich weiß, dass die neue Verordnung im Vergleich zur derzeitigen Rechtslage eine deutliche Verbesserung darstellt. Denn erstmals bekommen wir eine einheitlich europäische technische Sprache für Leistungen von Bauprodukten und gestraffte und vereinfachte Verfahren. Wir haben den europäischen Binnenmarkt vorangebracht und damit den Firmen, aber durch einheitliche Sicherheitsanforderungen auch den Verbrauchern genutzt. Grundsätzlich halte ich Erleichterungen für Kleinstunternehmen von bürokratischen Vorschriften für wichtig und sinnvoll. Aber man muss auch berücksichtigen, dass aufseiten der Anwender auch Kleinstunternehmen tätig sind, die Bauprodukte verarbeiten, und diese müssen ebenso geschützt werden.

Daher freue ich mich, dass mein Vorschlag in der Einigung angenommen wurde. Danach gelten für Kleinstunternehmen bei der Bewertung von Leistungsmerkmalen der Bauprodukte vereinfachte Verfahren. Wenden sie allerdings solch ein Verfahren an, so müssen sie die Gleichwertigkeit der angewandten Verfahren mit dem eigentlich europaweit vorgesehenen Verfahren nachweisen. Nur so gewährleisten wir, dass die Angaben zu Leistungsmerkmalen auch exakt und zuverlässig sind und dass auch die Sicherheit von Gebäuden in ganz Europa gewährleistet ist.

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione. − Signor Presidente, onorevoli deputati, condivido le parole del presidente Harbour quando sottolinea l'importanza del testo che stiamo discutendo e che sarà approvato grazie a questo accordo dall'Assemblea, perché si tratta di una nuova normativa che darà importanti segnali al mercato ma, nello stesso tempo, fisserà delle buone regole, permettendo alle piccole e medie imprese di potersi sviluppare, soprattutto in questa fase finale della crisi, dove noi dobbiamo fare di tutto perché le piccole e medie imprese possano creare nuova occupazione e possano svilupparsi. Questo è l'obiettivo della Commissione europea, condiviso dall'impegno forte del Parlamento europeo, proprio grazie anche all'implementazione e allo sviluppo dello "Small business act".

Semplificazione per le piccole e medie imprese, quindi riduzione degli impegni burocratici, ma, nel disegnare queste regole per la liberalizzazione del mercato e per lo sviluppo del mercato – come ha sostenuto nel corso del suo intervento anche l'on. Gebhardt – c'è un forte segnale che riguarda anche la sicurezza, sicurezza che riveste grande importanza per i lavoratori che operano nel settore delle costruzioni, ma anche per i consumatori.

Mi pare che questo testo vada nella giusta direzione, fermo restando che è intenzione della Commissione non concludere con l'approvazione della norma frutto dell'accordo e del compromesso tra Consiglio e Parlamento: vogliamo continuare a lavorare nei prossimi anni e confermo questo impegno anche al presidente Harbour – che ha sottolineato la necessità di andare avanti – di dar vita ad una road map sull'implementazione che vi invierò appena possibile.

Molti parlamentari nel corso di questo dibattito sono intervenuti sul tema dell'armonizzazione nel settore delle costruzioni, in modo particolare per quanto riguarda la sicurezza. Sono assolutamente cosciente e consapevole del problema e sono lieto di avere elaborato con il CEN gli Eurocodici, che sono norme armonizzate che riguardano proprio la sicurezza delle costruzioni. La Commissione, come sapete, sta preparando in questo momento una comunicazione sul tema della standardizzazione, che sarà presentata nel giro di poche settimane all'attenzione del Parlamento e del Consiglio, quindi signor Presidente, onorevoli deputati, credo che oggi e domani si compia un importante passo in avanti.

Ripeto, non si tratta soltanto – e voglio ringraziare la relatrice per la pazienza avuta nell'operare su norme tecniche che però rappresentano la fotografia di un forte impegno politico – di norme tecniche, ma dietro ai tecnicismi si nasconde una scelta economica importante a favore delle piccole e medie imprese, che sono quelle che potranno creare nuovi posti di lavoro nei prossimi anni, e a favore di mezzo miliardo di cittadini europei.

  Catherine Stihler, rapporteur. − Madam President, thank you to all colleagues who have taken the time to speak this afternoon and evening.

I think Commissioner Tajani’s comments about partnership working, the road map and the issue of Eurocodes, which Mrs Rühle and (I think) Mr Schwab also mentioned, are important and that we take forward the good cooperation that we have had. It is a compromise that we have reached and there are some things colleagues might have liked in this compromise that we did not manage to get in, but Parliament managed to secure 75% of the amendments that we thought were important within this text, and that is no mean feat.

There is something that struck me throughout this debate. The construction sector is so vitally important to our economies for future growth, for jobs, that I would like to ask the President whether we can make sure there is an annual debate in this House on the construction sector, to take forward the cooperation that the Commissioner has offered to us and to make sure that we always place the importance on the construction sector that this House should do, given that 38 million people rely on the construction sector for their jobs.

So, thank you, Madam President, thank you, Commissioner, and I look forward to the weeks, months and years ahead because the construction debate will continue in the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and I for one will certainly be following it.

  Πρόεδρος. - Η συζήτηση έληξε.

Η ψηφοφορία θα διεξαχθεί την Τρίτη 18 Ιανουαρίου 2011.

Γραπτές δηλώσεις (άρθρο 149)

  George Becali (NI), în scris. – Vreau să o felicit pe doamna raportor pentru conţinutul raportului său. Construcţiile reprezintă un domeniu în egală măsură sensibil şi important al economiei europene şi avem nevoie de armonizare. Spun sensibil nu doar din perspectiva modului în care acest sector a reacţionat la criză, ci mai ales din cea a numărului mare de lucrători, 12 milioane, şi de IMM-ri, circa 65 000. Susţin puternic ideea că trebuie să recunoaştem pentru construcţii necesitatea unui nivel ridicat de siguranţă şi de sănătate a muncii. Mă refer în mod egal şi clar la accidentele de muncă, destul de frecvente, dar şi la substanţele periculoase utilizate în proces. În încheiere, adaug un singur lucru: piaţa unică în domeniul construcţiilor are nevoie de sprijin potrivit importanţei şi specificităţii sale, dar şi pentru aspectele sensibile de care vorbeam la începutul intervenţiei mele.

13. Il-konsegwenzi fl-UE tal-każ tal-għalf ikkontaminat bid-diossina fil-Ġermanja (dibattitu)

  Πρόεδρος. - Το επόμενο σημείο είναι η δήλωση της Επιτροπής σχετικά με τις συνέπειες στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση από τον εντοπισμό διοξίνης σε ζωοτροφές.

  John Dalli, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, as you are well aware, the New Year started with a serious incident of dioxin contamination of animal feed in Germany. The Commission services have been monitoring developments closely and in full cooperation with the competent German authorities.

I have already started considering possible measures which will ensure that our high-level food and feed safety system will become even more efficient. But let me start with the facts of the incident first: the incident came to light when a compound feed manufacturer notified the German competent authorities on 22 December 2010 after having received the analytical result from a laboratory that a sample was found to be non-compliant with EU legislation after self-controlled tests.

Between the middle of November and middle of December of last year a biodiesel manufacturer delivered seven consignments of fatty acids intended for technical purposes to a feed fat manufacturer who also produces fats for technical use. This latter company was at the same time a registered feed fat manufacturer; apparently blending of feed grade fat and technical fat took place. Four of these consignments delivered in the second half of November were later found to be contaminated with dioxins. The other three delivered to feed mills in the first half of December 2010 were not contaminated.

However, until this was verified and for purely precautionary reasons, all consignments were regarded and treated as potentially contaminated. A total of almost 2 300 tonnes of potentially contaminated feed fat was delivered to 25 feed manufacturers in Germany. No deliveries of feed fat were made outside of Germany.

Between 100 000 and 200 000 tonnes of feed containing 2% to 10% of the potentially contaminated fat were delivered to about 4 800 farms in Germany. As a strictly precautionary measure all farms were blocked; their commercial activities suspended; there were laying hen, fattening poultry, goose, pig, dairy cattle, bovine and rabbit farms. Some deliveries of potentially contaminated feed for breeding hens were also made to France and Denmark.

No food of animal origin from the blocked farms can be placed on the market until the farms are unblocked. This can only happen after it is ensured through analytical results and investigations that the farms are not contaminated at levels above those provided by the EU law. Currently, of these 4 800 farms that were originally blocked, 939 farms – mostly poultry and pig establishments – remain blocked. It appears that no contaminated food was traded or exported from Germany since the incident was notified, with a few exceptions.

In the end, analytical results showed that the products were compliant with EU legislation. This is an example of the effectiveness of the EU’s traceability system and we will continue to be vigilant in this respect.

The fortunate element of this incident is that the observed levels of dioxin in food where EU limits were exceeded have not been very high, which means that no immediate health risk for the consumer is expected as a result of the consumption, if any, of the contaminated products during a short period of time.

What has the Commission done to help manage the incident? My services have been in constant contact with the German authorities and they immediately disseminated all information to Member States through the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed. They have also been in touch with the competent authorities in third countries, providing a clear picture of the incident to our trade partners. Moreover, Commission officials met with stakeholders in the fats and oils industries to explore ways of further strengthening the monitoring of dioxin in feed.

I personally contacted the German Federal Minister for Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection, Ilse Aigner, on 6 January, and we exchanged views on what needs to be done to avoid similar contamination and incidents in the future. Today, I again contacted the German Minister, as I was concerned by the recent news from last weekend that a feed manufacturer did not provide a full list of farms which received potentially contaminated feed, and provided incorrect information as regards the use of contaminated feed fat in compound feed, resulting in an additional blocking of several hundred farms.

This concerns a very serious infringement of EU food safety provisions. Let me say it clearly: the German authorities are fully engaged in dealing with this contamination and are doing their best to deal with it urgently and decisively.

I am informed that they are making available additional capacity for testing so that this is done and finished in the shortest possible time. However, it is important that the wider implications for the approach towards the safety of animal feed at EU level are also urgently addressed. For this reason, a team from the Food and Veterinary Office will visit Germany next week to assist the German authorities and to inform our overall knowledge and understanding of how this contamination happened and how it can be avoided in the future. The German authorities are informed and have agreed to this visit. I know that we can count on the full cooperation of our German colleagues.

This incident will also be discussed during the Agricultural Council which will take place in Brussels next Monday 24 January. As I have already mentioned, we are reflecting on measures including legislative ones.

The incident has highlighted the necessity to ensure the effectiveness of national control systems which underpin the confidence of all EU Member States and third countries in our food and feed safety measures. In order to address this issue, I am exploring the possibility of establishing a strict segregation of the production of fats and oils intended for feed and food purposes from the production of fats and oils for technical uses, and I am considering the possibility of legal requirements on reinforced controls on dioxins at different stages of the feed chains.

I am confident that these measures when endorsed and adopted will bring the necessary improvements to our already solid food and feed safety systems.

  Albert Deß, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar! Vielen Dank, Herr Kommissar, für die sachliche Darstellung dieses Dioxin-Skandals in Deutschland. Mich macht es wütend, auch als Landwirt, dass wir uns immer wieder mit solchen Skandalen befassen müssen, bei denen die Ursache anscheinend in Schlamperei, aber auch in krimineller Energie liegt. Wir können noch so viele Gesetze und Verordnungen auf den Weg bringen – wir haben in Europa mit die strengsten Gesetze zur Produktion von Lebens- und Nahrungsmitteln, wir haben die niedrigsten Grenzwerte bei Inhaltsstoffen, die die Gesundheit unserer Verbraucher gefährden könnten –, und trotzdem sind wir vor solchen Gefahren nicht gefeit.

Deshalb muss es auch eine Forderung sein – und dafür sind auch die Mitgliedstaaten zuständig –, dass dann, wenn die Staatsanwaltschaft feststellt, dass kriminelle Energie im Spiel ist, das Strafmaß massiv erhöht werden muss. Solche Leute dürfen nicht mit Geldstrafen davonkommen, hier sind Haftstrafen nwk1. Sie müssen weggesperrt werden, damit sie solches Unheil nicht mehr anrichten können.

Ich bin sehr froh, Herr Kommissar, dass Sie den deutschen Behörden bescheinigt haben – das war auch mein Eindruck in Deutschland –, dass hier die entsprechenden Maßnahmen nacheinander ergriffen worden sind. Es wird in Deutschland zum Teil ein politisches Theater veranstaltet, das der Sache nicht gerecht wird. Wir müssen uns alle zusammensetzen und die strengen Bestimmungen, die wir haben, dort noch ergänzen, wo es notwendig ist.

Sie haben eine Sache angesprochen, bei der Sie unsere vollste Unterstützung haben. Auch ich bin dafür – und ich spreche auch im Namen meiner Fraktion –, dass wir bei der Produktion von Lebensmitteln und anderen Produkten eine strenge Trennung einführen, damit solche Vermischungen nicht erfolgen können. Unsere Unterstützung haben Sie, Herr Kommissar, wenn es darum geht, unsere Vorschriften und unsere Verordnungen noch zu verbessern, damit solche Skandale in Zukunft noch besser verhindert werden können.

  Ulrike Rodust, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Herr Kommissar, ich bin etwas erstaunt über Ihre Ausführungen. Ich nehme die Presse – zumindest in Deutschland – etwas anders wahr. Auch mich macht es unglaublich wütend, dass es immer wieder Skandale im Bereich der Lebensmittelsicherheit gibt. Wir dürfen das nicht zulassen. Mir ist bewusst, dass Verordnungen und Gesetze allein nicht verhindern können, dass es kriminelle Machenschaften in diesem Bereich gibt. Aber wir müssen alles daransetzen, damit es den Verantwortlichen so schwer wie möglich gemacht wird. Die Kommission muss die Mitgliedstaaten auffordern, ihr Strafmaß in diesem Bereich dringend zu überprüfen. Ein mutwilliger und fahrlässiger Umgang mit Lebensmitteln und Futtermitteln darf nicht mit banalen Strafen vergolten werden. Oft ist es doch nur so, dass Geldstrafen im Vergleich zu dem Gewinn so niedrig sind, dass sie aus der Portokasse bezahlt werden.

Ganz wichtig ist es außerdem, die Anzahl der staatlichen Kontrolleure zu erhöhen. Das aktuelle Beispiel in Deutschland zeigt sehr gut, dass das Prinzip der Eigenkontrolle große Mängel hat. Ich weise darauf hin, dass es notwendig ist, dass das Verursacherprinzip in der gesamten Kette konsequent greift – vom Futtertrog bis zum Teller. Denn im Futtertrog fängt die Sicherheit unserer Lebensmittel bereits an.

Es dürfen nicht Unschuldige das kriminelle Verhalten anderer ausbaden. Bis jetzt ist nicht geklärt, wer für die Verluste der Landwirte aufgrund des Dioxin-Skandals aufkommen wird. Die in die Insolvenz gegangenen Verursacher bestimmt nicht, denn da ist gar kein Geld zu holen. Das kann nicht sein! Hier sollte über einen europäischen Topf nachgedacht werden, in den die Futtermittelhersteller alle einzahlen müssen. Die immer wieder auftretenden Probleme bei der Lebensmittelsicherheit machen eines immer wieder deutlich: Wir müssen für die ganze Prozesskette, sowohl Lebens- als auch Futtermittel, die komplette Rückverfolgbarkeit sicherstellen. Hier sind die EU-Verordnung und die nationalen Gesetze nachzubessern.

  Corinne Lepage, au nom du groupe ALDE. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, nous avons connu quatre incidents de ce type en dix ans en Europe.

S'il faut se féliciter que notre système d'alerte ait convenablement fonctionné, la survenance de ce type d'incident est absolument inacceptable. La santé des consommateurs européens ne peut pas être la variable d'ajustement d'un système qui privilégie la réduction des coûts et qui, effectivement, est un encouragement indirect lorsque les sanctions sont aussi faibles qu'elles le sont.

Et pourtant, Monsieur le Commissaire, nous avons besoin, et vous le savez mieux que quiconque, d'avoir la confiance de nos concitoyens. Dès lors, quelles actions envisagez-vous? Vous avez parlé, et je m'en réjouis, il y a un instant, d'obliger à séparer l'usage de la préparation des graisses industrielles et des graisses destinées à l'alimentation. Cela doit être une obligation, Monsieur le Commissaire, et non pas une simple faculté dans le processus de fabrication, pour que nous ayons beaucoup plus de certitudes.

Deuxièmement, il est tout à fait anormal que l'insolvabilité puisse être ainsi organisée. Quelles actions peut-on mettre en place, Monsieur le Commissaire, pour garantir que de tels actes ne restent pas impunis car la responsabilité est encore le meilleur gardien de la sécurité?

Et, enfin, en dernier lieu, quelles actions envisagez-vous de mettre en place pour améliorer la surveillance établie par les États? Il s'est quand même passé près de trois semaines entre le moment où ont été livrées ces graisses et le moment où l'alerte a été donnée. Ce n'est bien entendu pas du tout la faute de la Commission, mais, simplement, cela pose problème aux consommateurs dans l'intervalle. Pensez-vous que nous pouvons améliorer la situation sur ce point, Monsieur le Commissaire?

  Martin Häusling, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Man muss feststellen, dass das Vertrauen der Verbraucher wieder einmal ganz erheblich gestört ist und die Verbraucher sich natürlich fragen: Was machen die nationalen Behörden und was macht die EU, um diesen Giftmischern das Handwerk zu legen? Im Gegensatz zum Herrn Kommissar glaube ich, dass es nicht etwa ein Zwischenfall oder ein dummer Zufall war. Ich glaube, dass mittlerweile ein System dahintersteckt, dass bestimmte Unternehmen mit dem Verschnitt von Stoffen, die eigentlich nicht in die Futtermittel gehören, Millionensummen verdienen und sich letztendlich aus der Haftung stehlen und Bauern und Verbraucher die Betroffenen sind.

Ich glaube, an diesem Punkt müssen wir ansetzen, und man muss sich natürlich auch fragen: Setzt die Kontrolle an der falschen Stelle an? Es gibt in Deutschland ein Handvoll Unternehmen, die im Futtermittelbereich mit Fett arbeiten. Warum setzt man da nicht gezielt in der Kontrolle an? Warum verlässt man sich auf Eigenkontrollen und bekommt eher zufällig Werte geliefert, denen man dann vonseiten der staatlichen Kontrolle hinterherlaufen muss? Das heißt, wir brauchen europaweit eine risikobasierte Überwachung, und da geht die Frage an Sie, Herr Kommissar: Was macht die EFSA an dieser Stelle? Ist dies ein deutscher Fall, oder gibt es in Europa weitere Fälle, die vielleicht nur nicht entdeckt sind?

Wir brauchen – ich glaube, darüber herrscht Einvernehmen – eine Positivliste, was eigentlich in die Futtermittel hineingehört? Wir brauchen strenge Zulassungsregeln für die Betriebe, und wir brauchen eine Haftungspflicht und eine Trennung der Warenströme. Aber ich glaube, wir brauchen auch – und das muss man an dieser Stelle wieder sagen – ein grundsätzliches Umsteuern in vielen Bereichen der Politik. Denn schlussendlich sollte das Futter der Tiere vom Acker kommen und nicht aus Industriebetrieben. Die Bauern müssen wissen, womit sie ihre Tiere füttern, und die Verbraucher müssen auch wissen, woher das Futter kommt. Das müssen wir gewährleisten. Da können und müssen wir bei der Agrarreform ansetzen, dass wir hier wieder etwas zurückdrehen. Denn letztendlich trägt die ganze Landwirtschaft den Schaden, den einige kriminelle Panscher hier anrichten, und das müssen wir grundsätzlich verhindern!

  James Nicholson, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, I sympathise totally with the position that many German farmers find themselves in at the present time.

I had this experience about two years ago in Northern Ireland when we went through a very similar exercise. The people who really suffered in this were the farmers who were not actually involved in any way at all. I think the word ‘criminal’ has been mentioned here and there are those with criminal intent who have been involved in this. We have to ask why they do it, and whether they are doing it to make a lot of extra money, as Mr Häusling says. If they are, they should be prosecuted for it.

But we should make it very clear that it is not those who are producing food that are responsible. It is the providers of the feed to those who are producing the food that are responsible. We must take action against these people to make sure that it does not happen and to restore consumer confidence. I can well understand why consumer confidence should be shaken at this moment. As someone said, this has happened before and it should not be allowed to happen again. Let us not simply go wholesale and bring in new legislation. Let us implement what we have.

  Sabine Wils, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Mahlen, mischen, mogeln – das sind die drei goldenen „M“ der Futtermittelindustrie in Deutschland. Seit 1999 gab es allein in Deutschland fünf Dioxin-Skandale. Futtermittelhersteller und Lebensmittelkonzerne scheren sich dort offensichtlich nicht um EU-Richtlinien und nationale Gesetze, wenn es darum geht, mit billigen Lebensmitteln große Gewinne zu machen. Der Wettbewerb um Niedrigstpreise im Lebensmittelmarkt ist hart in Deutschland. Das Futter für die Massentierhaltung soll daher möglichst billig sein. Staatliche Kontrollen finden bei den Futter- und Lebensmittelproduzenten kaum statt. Der Staat hat zunehmend auf die Eigenkontrolle der Hersteller gesetzt und qualifiziertes Personal eingespart. Unter diesen Bedingungen konnten jetzt mit Dioxin kontaminierte technische Fettabfälle aus der Biodieselherstellung in die Futter- und Lebensmittelkette gelangen.

Der aktuelle Dioxin-Skandal hätte verhindert werden können, wenn das Fett auf Dioxine untersucht worden wäre, bevor es in das Futter gemischt wurde. Dann wäre die Belastung rechtzeitig aufgefallen. Jetzt werden wieder unzählige Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher zusätzlich mit Dioxinen belastet. 80 % des Dioxins, das wir aufnehmen, kommt über tierische Lebensmittel – also über Fleisch, Milch und Eier – in unseren Körper. Foodwatch fordert zu Recht, dass Futtermittelhersteller verpflichtet werden müssen, jede Charge einer Futtermittelzutat auf Dioxine und PCB zu testen, bevor sie das Futter mischen. Es darf keine einzige Zutat in das Futter gelangen, die nicht die Grenzwerte einhält. Hochbelastete Chargen müssen nachweisbar vernichtet werden. Nur so können weitere Panschereien und Verdünnungen von Schadstoffen verhindert werden.

Auch die Labore müssen verpflichtet werden, Grenzwertüberschreitungen bei den staatlichen Aufsichtsbehörden zu melden. Für Fleisch muss eine Kennzeichnungspflicht zur Rückverfolgbarkeit eingeführt werden. Die aktuellen und die bisherigen Lebensmittelskandale in Deutschland haben gezeigt, dass staatliche Routinekontrollen bei den Futtermittelherstellern und den Tierproduzenten unabdingbar sind. Wie wollen Sie das durchsetzen, Herr Kommissar?

  Peter Liese (PPE). - Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Verbraucher und Landwirte müssen vor verantwortungslosen Futtermittel- und Futterfett-Panschern besser geschützt werden. Ihnen muss europaweit das Handwerk gelegt werden. Eine Kollegin sprach gerade nur über Deutschland, aber wir hatten leider Dioxin-Skandale und ähnliche Skandale in der Vergangenheit auch in anderen Mitgliedstaaten.

Zunächst hat der Staatsanwalt das Wort, denn hier geht es um kriminelle Handlungen. Ich hoffe, dass die deutschen Staatsanwälte und die vielleicht noch involvierten Organisationen aus anderen Ländern – es wird ja auch von den Niederlanden als einem Teil der Kette gesprochen – schneller arbeiten als die Staatsanwälte in Irland. Dort sind nämlich erst jetzt die Verantwortlichen für einen Skandal im Jahr 2008 verurteilt worden. Da müssen wir insgesamt schneller werden.

Ich bitte darum, diesen Skandal – es ist ein Skandal – ins richtige Verhältnis zu setzen. Die Werte waren maximal vierfach erhöht. Das ist schlimm, und wir haben aus guten Gründen einen Vorsorgewert, der nicht überschritten werden darf. Aber der Vorsorgewert ist bewusst so gewählt, dass wir erst bei hundertfacher Überschreitung in die Bereiche kommen, wo im Tierversuch langfristig Schäden festgestellt wurden. Es geht also nicht um akute Gefahren, es geht um Vorsorge.

Bei dem Skandal in Belgien 1999 waren die Werte 700-mal so hoch wie der jetzige EU-Grenzwert. Außerdem haben wir die Dioxinbelastung in der Umwelt seit 1990 durch Maßnahmen der EU – z.B. die Chemikaliengesetzgebung, verbesserte Standards bei Müllverbrennungsanlagen usw. – auf ein Zehntel reduziert. Trotzdem brauchen wir in der Nahrungsmittelkette Maßnahmen, die europaweit ergriffen werden müssen. Wir brauchen Dioxin-Monitoring, wir brauchen eine Trennung der Fette, ich meine, wir brauchen ein EU-weites Reinheitsgebot für Futtermittel, und wir brauchen eine bessere Absicherung der Landwirte, die nichts dafür können, dass es in der Futtermittelkette immer wieder zu solchen Schlampereien und kriminellen Machenschaften kommt.

  Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos (S&D). - Senhora Presidente, nunca é demais repetir que a Europa dispõe de normas mais exigentes do que as que existem em qualquer outra parte do Mundo no que diz respeito à qualidade dos produtos alimentares e esta imagem não pode ser posta em causa. Exigem-no os nossos consumidores, os mercados para onde exportamos e os nossos produtores, que fazem um grande esforço em trabalho e investimento para as respeitar.

Se a contaminação, recentemente ocorrida na Alemanha, tivesse acontecido em muitas outras partes do mundo, nunca sequer provavelmente teríamos tido conhecimento dela. Mas não. Aconteceu na União Europeia. E o que se passou na Alemanha é inaceitável e deve ser, não só cabalmente esclarecido, assim como rapidamente responsabilizados os autores daquilo que parece tratar-se de um crime e não de um acidente.

Não parece estar ainda totalmente esclarecida a origem da contaminação e isto causa-me grande estranheza. Não está claramente definida qual a responsabilidade das autoridades alemãs sobre eventuais falhas no controlo. Parece que o conhecimento se deveu a uma comunicação da empresa e não a um controlo das autoridades.

Não estão apurados os responsáveis e a gravidade desta situação exige um esclarecimento objectivo por parte da Comissão.

  Britta Reimers (ALDE). - Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Bei dem jetzigen Dioxin-Vorfall geht es um mehr als nur um einen Skandal. Hier wird den Menschen Europas ihr Spiegelbild offenbart. Wie lange schon beklagen wir, dass in der Landwirtschaft ein extremer Preis- und Überlebenskampf tobt, angeheizt durch das unersättliche Verlangen nach immer billigeren Lebensmitteln.

Dieser Kampf ist längst kein einfaches Kräftemessen mehr, sondern es ist mehr. Und dabei greifen Einzelne zunehmend häufiger zu immer kriminelleren Mitteln und Methoden. Hierbei jedoch werden wir alle nur verlieren. Wir können noch mehr Gesetze und Richtlinien erlassen, wir können noch mehr Kontrollen mit noch mehr Kosten durchführen, wir können noch härtere Strafen verhängen – nichts davon wird gegen die kriminelle Energie eines solch harten Existenzkampfs ankommen.

Wir müssen endlich die Ursache dieses Übels angehen. Das Immer-mehr- und Immer-billiger-Wollen, muss endlich sein Ende finden. Als Landwirtin habe ich die Ohnmacht gegenüber solchen kriminellen Machenschaften Einzelner – wie in diesem Fall – nun direkt vor der Haustür erlebt. Ich habe mit meinen Berufskollegen gezittert, wer denn nun als nächstes an der Reihe ist und unschuldig in diesen Sog gezogen wird.

Deswegen frage ich die Kommission: Was wollen Sie und ihre Kollegen tun, damit Lebensmittel wieder mehr Wert erhalten? Ich begrüße Ihre Vorschläge, aber Sie werden das Hauptproblem nicht lösen.

  Bart Staes (Verts/ALE). - Voorzitter, collega's, mijnheer de commissaris, dit schandaal geeft me een echt een déjà-vu-gevoel, want de crisis verloopt inderdaad bijna identiek als twaalf jaar geleden in België. Al te veel incidenten toonden de afgelopen tien jaar aan dat er in de sector van de oliën en de vetten in de diervoedersector nogal wat actoren rondlopen die vanuit een gewetenloze hebzucht en op criminele wijze bereid zijn fraude te plegen, fraude ten nadele van het inkomen van boeren en boerinnen, fraude ten nadele van de gezondheid van consumenten. Dat is onaanvaardbaar. Vandaar dat er dus inderdaad nood is aan een soort stresstest voor de bestaande wetgeving. Ik hoop dat de landbouwraad daarop zal ingaan.

Maar er is ook nood aan controle en toezicht. Binnen de sector is er nogal wat autocontrole. Welnu, op iedere vorm van autocontrole moeten strengere extra controles door de nationale overheden worden uitgevoerd. Dat moet gebeuren in een goede ratio. Ten tweede vind ik ook dat er meer controle moet komen van het Food & Veterinary Office in Ierland. Er moet meer controle op de controle komen. Ik heb gelezen dat er in de afgelopen tien jaar maar drie missies hebben plaatsgevonden door het FVO. Dat is te weinig, dat aantal moet omhoog. Commissaris, wilt u het FVO instructies geven om het aantal missies ter zake van dioxineproblemen op te voeren.

  Jaroslav Paška, za skupinu EFD. – Európska únia si za dlhé roky svojho pôsobenia vytvorila nesmierne bohatú štruktúru rozličných nariadení a predpisov, ktoré majú u verejnosti vzbudiť dojem, že Únia dbá o čistotu a kvalitu našich potravín. Na posilnenie tohto dojmu zamestnala množstvo všelijakých odborníkov, kontrolórov, veterinárov a úradníkov a vybudovala bohaté inštitucionálne zázemie garantujúce akúsi európsku kvalitu potravín.

No vážení, dnes vidíme, ako to funguje. Európa je zaplavená ťažko kontaminovanými potravinami a naša byrokratická mašinéria zjavne nevie, čo s tým. Pre pochopenie vážnosti situácie si najskôr pripomeňme, čo nám to kšeftári s potravinami naservírovali.

Vedecká komunita považuje dioxín za najjedovatejšie chemikálie, ktoré kedy človek vyprodukoval. Sú karcinogénom najvyššieho stupňa, ale spôsobujú aj zníženie bunkovej a hormonálnej imunity, zvýšenú náchylnosť na infekcie, zníženú plodnosť, zvýšenú potratovosť, dysfunkciu vaječníkov, poruchy pôrodu, zvýšenú úmrtnosť plodov, poruchy vývoja centrálnej nervovej sústavy, patologické zmeny steroidných hormónov a receptorov atď.

Nerozkladajú sa. Hromadia sa v tkanivách živých organizmov a Svetová zdravotnícka organizácia uvádza, že ak sa do priameho obehu dostane dioxín s veľkosťou jedného zrnka ryže, zodpovedá to množstvu ročného limitu pre milión ľudí.

Dnes sa dodatočne dozvedáme, že nemecká spoločnosť Harles and Jentzsch obohacovala dioxínmi krmivá pre zvieratá a od marca 2010 dodala na trh až tri tisíc ton dioxínmi znečisteného tuku. Podľa súčasných zistení putovali kontaminované vajcia do Holandska, Veľkej Británie, mäso do Francúzska a Dánska.

Pýtam sa preto, pán komisár, ako je možné, že podnik, ktorý dodáva kŕmne zmesi tisícom farmárov, nie je evidovaný v predpísanom systéme kontroly? Aká je súčinnosť štátnych inštitúcií v Nemecku, keď sa podniku umožní vyrábať kŕmne zmesi bez toho, aby bol súčasne zaevidovaný do systému kontroly? Ako prebiehali veterinárne kontroly na farmách, keď veterinárni kontrolóri od marca 2010 do decembra minulého roku nezistili kontamináciu krmiva? A vážení, ako to je s likvidáciou týchto potravín? Hovoríme o likvidovaných vajciach a likvidovanom mäse a čo...

(Rečník bol prerušený predsedajúcou)

VORSITZ: SILVANA KOCH-MEHRIN
Vizepräsidentin

  Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Mamy do czynienia ze skandalem, ale skandal to za mało powiedziane. To jest wielkie zagrożenie życia i zdrowia dla tysięcy ludzi. Liczę na to, że winni zostaną ustaleni i właściwie ukarani, ale ta sprawa niech będzie też powodem do refleksji nad modelem rolnictwa, jaki nam się wytworzył w Unii Europejskiej. Rolnictwo stało się przemysłem. Już nie mamy hodowli zwierząt, tylko produkcję mięsa, mamy wielkie fermy, mamy przemysł paszowy i zwierzęta karmione paszami, i to z dioksynami, paszami genetycznie modyfikowanymi, niezbadanymi do końca, i ten model rolnictwa się nie sprawdza. To jest model, który nie gwarantuje bezpieczeństwa żywnościowego.

Wyjściem jest większy szacunek i respekt do takich gospodarstw, jakie mamy jeszcze w Europie, w Polsce i w innych krajach – opartych na własnej produkcji pasz. Powinniśmy to popierać.

  Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL). - Commissie, al in maart 2010 wist het verantwoordelijk bedrijf dat het producten verkocht met gevaarlijk hoge dioxineconcentraties. Hoe kan het dat dat bij geen enkele overheidscontrole is gebleken, zodat er toen al maatregelen hadden kunnen worden genomen? Zijn de huidige mechanismen voor controle op onze voedselveiligheid eigenlijk wel voldoende? Blijkbaar niet, want dan had deze dioxinecrisis kunnen worden voorkomen.

Voedselschandalen volgen elkaar op. Niet alleen dioxinecrises, maar denk ook aan de kloonproducten die vorig jaar ongezien in onze winkels terechtkwamen. Regels zijn er genoeg, maar de controle op voedselveiligheid moet beter en frequenter worden uitgevoerd en bovendien moeten de uitkomsten van deze controles openbaar worden. Het gaat hier om de veiligheid van ons voedsel en om de gezondheid van onze burgers.

Bovendien roep ik de Commissie op om de gedupeerde boeren die zonder het te weten hun eigen vee vergiftigden, te steunen bij schadeclaims tegen de verantwoordelijke bedrijven.

  John Stuart Agnew (EFD). - Madam President, I would like to declare an interest: I am a British egg producer.

The dioxin contamination appears to be a consequence of the failure to adhere to the more rigorous processing standards needed for animal feed, as opposed to the less demanding process used to convert rapeseed to biofuel. The EU’s enthusiasm for biofuels can therefore have unintended consequences. In my view, however, this is not a matter for the EU. It will not be solved by – and certainly does not need – extra regulation. The Germans have identified a problem, they have told us about it and they are taking the necessary steps.

In the UK we have a comprehensive assurance scheme called the Lion Code. It covers both animal feed production in the mill and egg production on the farm, thus ensuring that incidents like this are highly unlikely. So, if any of you are insistent on top quality eggs, ‘ask for the Lion’ and British producers will be delighted to supply you.

  Michel Dantin (PPE). - Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, je crois qu'il faut d'abord nous réjouir, car si nous parlons aujourd'hui d'une crise, c'est parce que notre système a quand même fonctionné.

Nous possédons le système de protection du consommateur qui se situe au niveau le plus élevé au monde. Il faut que les consommateurs aient cela à l'esprit actuellement. Mais le système n'a pas fonctionné correctement et, avant d'en inventer un autre, je crois qu'il faut effectivement examiner avec attention complètement les raisons qui ont conduit à un tel retard dans la découverte du problème et nous interroger sur les causes de ce retard.

Mais il faut aussi – me semble-t-il – que nous nous interrogions sur le pourquoi, au-delà de la dénonciation de l'acte criminel. Je crois que nous avons engagé le monde agricole et agroalimentaire dans une course aux bas coûts, dans une course aux prix les plus bas en matière de fourniture et nous ne sommes plus à l'abri de ce genre de déviation avec des comportements qui ne sont pas qualifiables.

Alors, Monsieur le Commissaire, envisagez-vous un renforcement des pénalités pour de tels actes? Ma deuxième question concerne la façon dont nous apporterons un soutien immédiat – je dis bien immédiat – aux éleveurs concernés. Car les marges sont tellement faibles que, si certains n'obtiennent pas des soutiens très vite, voire des avances sur des sommes qui leur seront dues un jour, ces éleveurs auront disparu le jour où la procédure aura abouti suivant une vitesse que je qualifierais "de normale".

  Franz Obermayr (NI). - Frau Präsidentin! Darf ich die Frage an meinen Vorredner richten? Er hat gesagt, dass das System grundsätzlich funktioniert. Mich würde interessieren, ob er weiß, dass nicht das System aufgedeckt hat, sondern es Verbraucher waren, die hier zum Aufdecken beigetragen haben.

Zum Zweiten möchte ich meinen Vorredner hinsichtlich seines Informationsstandes fragen, ob er auch weiß, dass es Studien gibt, wonach die Bürger sehr wohl gerne bereit sind, etwas mehr zu zahlen, wenn sie die Gewissheit hätten, dass die Produkte aus artgerechter Haltung kommen und qualitativ hochwertig sind.

  Michel Dantin (PPE). - Madame la Présidente, je pense que le collègue qui a posé une question avait plus un commentaire à faire sur une situation qu'une question à me poser. Évidemment, nous savons que le système a dérapé. Mais je voudrais souligner, vis-à-vis du consommateur européen, la sévérité de notre système de protection. Nous ne pouvons pas laisser dire sans arrêt que rien n'est fait, alors que nous avons le standard le plus haut au monde.

  Paolo De Castro (S&D). - Signor Presidente, Signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, ringrazio anch'io innanzitutto il Commissario John Dalli per essere venuto oggi in Aula a riferire su questo caso che allarma i consumatori europei.

La prossima settimana anche la commissione agricoltura, che mi onoro di presiedere, approfondirà ulteriormente il dibattito sulle conseguenze di questo grave episodio. Nonostante l'Europa sia molto impegnata sul fronte della sicurezza alimentare, sono necessari ulteriori sforzi in tema di trasparenza e controlli per evitare altri casi di contaminazione alimentare.

Ricordo che nell'ultimo anno il Parlamento ha approvato una relazione di iniziativa sulla qualità dei prodotti agricoli e soprattutto quest'Aula ha approvato in prima lettura il regolamento sulle informazioni alimentari ai consumatori, che ha introdotto l'indicazione obbligatoria in etichetta del luogo di provenienza per i prodotti agricoli. Un'importante novità che purtroppo, però, ha avuto una battuta d'arresto l'8 dicembre in Consiglio Salute. Noi in seconda lettura tenteremo di reintrodurla, perché si tratta di un importante traguardo di tutela e trasparenza per i consumatori europei.

Il Parlamento quindi si muove nella giusta direzione, dimostrando di stare dalla parte dei consumatori. Auspichiamo anche da parte del Consiglio e della Commissione un atteggiamento analogo.

  Marit Paulsen (ALDE). - Fru talman, herr kommissionsledamot! Jag måste hålla med det som flera av kollegerna redan påpekat, nämligen att den nuvarande lagstiftningen till stor del fungerar. Det är inte där problemet ligger. Problemet ligger istället i efterlevnad, kontroll och sanktionssystem. Sanktionssystemen har vi på EU-nivå inte rätt att lägga oss i, och vi måste komma ihåg att om vi skriver lagar utan att det samtidigt finns sanktionssystem så skriver vi väldigt många lagar rent ut sagt i vatten, knappast ens på papper. Det fungerar inte.

Men kommissionsledamoten tog upp någonting som är oerhört viktigt. Jag var föredragande för den förordning som ligger till grund för foderkontrollerna. Kommissionsledamoten tog upp frågan om den strikta åtskillnaden av råvaror för foderindustrin och för tekniska ändamål, i detta fall fett.

Mitt förslag för tio år sedan var att alla produkter av tveksamt ursprung skulle färgas. För ärligt talat jag tycker väldigt, väldigt synd om de bönder som gång på gång ska drabbas av gift i fodret utan att de kan göra något.

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ho voluto essere uno dei firmatari di questa interrogazione perché ritengo sia fondamentale, dopo l'incidente avvenuto nelle scorse settimane, aprire un dibattito sulla sicurezza alimentare.

Quanto sono veramente sani e nutrienti i prodotti che ogni giorno milioni di cittadini europei consumano? Siamo realmente certi che i prodotti presenti sulle nostre tavole sono sicuri? La qualità delle materie prime è fondamentale per garantire la genuinità del prodotto finale; un controllo costante, dal campo alla tavola, è l'unico mezzo per evitare la contaminazione dei prodotti alimentari e per individuare immediatamente i potenziali rischi.

Il nuovo incidente tedesco conferma la necessità di rendere obbligatoria in tutti i prodotti, anche quelli trasformati, l'indicazione di origine in etichetta, come ha già sottolineato il collega De Castro. Dobbiamo tutelare il diritto del consumatore a conoscere la provenienza di ogni prodotto che sta acquistando e la sicurezza alimentare dei nostri prodotti può essere garantita soltanto con una condivisione di responsabilità di tutti gli operatori.

È vero, già oggi la legislazione europea prevede controlli e procedure per garantire che il cibo che arriva sulla nostra tavola sia idoneo al consumo e i rischi di contaminazione siano ridotti al minimo, ma il nostro obiettivo deve ora essere quello di contribuire quotidianamente al miglioramento della qualità degli stessi.

Sottolineo con orgoglio che domani il parlamento italiano approverà una legge che estende l'indicazione del marchio di origine obbligatorio a tutti i prodotti alimentari oggi privi dello stesso. Finalmente sapremo la provenienza di prodotti quali carni suine, anche il latte a lunga conservazione, la frutta, la verdura e alcune bibite come l'aranciata.

Spero che l'Europa prenda spunto da questa legge, io mi impegnerò attivamente per garantire una più ampia trasparenza, informazione e tutela dei diritti del consumatore, strumenti che ritengo fondamentali per favorire un'alimentazione sana e genuina.

  Marita Ulvskog (S&D). - Fru talman! Den viktiga frågan nu den är hur vi undviker nya skandaler, nya risksituationer. Det är bra att kommissionsledamoten åker till Tyskland och det är självklart att jordbruksrådet måste diskutera saken. Det hade varit en skandal i sig om de inte hade gjort det. Det behöver fortfarande göras saker på det här området. Ja, vi behöver kraftfulla sanktioner som medlemsländerna förstår att de måste besluta om.

Framförallt behöver vi ett slut på självkontrollen. För andra branscher och företag är det fullkomligt självklart att det är oberoende myndigheter som ska övervaka att regelverken efterlevs. Men det gäller alltså inte i den bransch som handlar om att producera födoämnen som vi människor lever på.

Att skylla på stordrift, lågpriskonkurrens och annat går helt inte. Som konsumenter vill vi inte äta giftig mat. Vi måste se till att konsumenterna får veta när de faktiskt gör det och att de får reda på att de inte ska behöva göra det.

  Antonyia Parvanova (ALDE). - Madam President, the December contamination in Germany which we are discussing today and the blatant breach observed in our food safety chain not only seriously put at risk the health of thousands of consumers, but also revealed remaining weaknesses in our food traceability system. It is indeed more than worrying that the German authorities, and the Commission itself, were not able to guarantee that none of the contaminated raw products, such as eggs, entered the food chain by being included as ingredients in processed food.

Traceability is quite often seen as a burden for the food industry, but it appears crucial when it comes to an emergency situation such as the one discussed today and should be considered as a prerequisite in protecting consumers’ health and safety. I would therefore like to put two questions to the Commission.

Firstly, can it now be certain and confirm that none of the contaminated eggs or any single product affected entered the food chain via their utilisation in processed foods?

Secondly, does it intend to reinforce traceability and information measures in order to guarantee an optimal protection of consumers in future food crises with health implications?

  Elisabeth Köstinger (PPE). - Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar! Die europäischen Konsumentinnen und Konsumenten sind durch den deutschen Dioxin-Skandal verunsichert und fordern zu Recht höchste Sicherheit und lückenlose Nachvollziehbarkeit in der Lebensmittelerzeugung. Letztendlich wurde durch fahrlässiges Verhalten von Futtermittelkonzernen das internationale Ansehen der Landwirtschaft beschädigt. Die Kommission ist dringlichst aufgefordert, das Vertrauen in die europäische Qualitätsproduktion in der Landwirtschaft, die höchste Standards erfüllt, wiederherzustellen.

Die lückenlose Ermittlung der Verantwortlichen und die Schadensbegrenzung im deutschen Dioxin-Skandal sind nur der Anfang. Es müssen rasche und umfassende Maßnahmen getroffen werden, um solche Praktiken der Futtermittelhersteller zukünftig zu verhindern. Die Futtermittelkette ist keine Müllentsorgungsstelle und Industrieabfallprodukte haben im Tierfutter nichts verloren. Ich plädiere für schärfere und EU-weit einheitliche Regeln, vor allem beim Transport. Bereits eine Verunreinigung von Futtermitteln ist nicht zu akzeptieren. Unabdingbar ist aber vor allem die lückenlose und umfassende Kontrolle solcher Konzerne. Kein Landwirt, der mehrmals jährlich überprüft wird, kann die derzeit vorherrschende Kontrollpraxis von Futtermittelkonzernen verstehen. Trotzdem ist anzumerken, dass der gerade diskutierte Fall durch eine Eigenanzeige ins Rollen gebracht wurde und die zuständigen Behörden richtig reagiert haben.

Vor allem gilt es aber, das Augenmerk auf die zu Unrecht geschädigten Bauern zu richten. Diese brauchen dringend Unterstützung, denn der entstandene Schaden darf auf keinen Fall auf sie abgewälzt werden. Tausende Existenzen sind derzeit bedroht. Am vergangenen Freitag brach der Erzeugerpreis im Schweinemastbereich um 23 Cent je Kilogramm ein. Bereits zum Jahreswechsel hatten die Mäster einen Rückgang von 13 Cent zu verkraften. Verschärft wird die Lage dadurch, dass in den vergangenen Wochen die Futterkosten stark gestiegen sind. Hier sind rasche Lösungen gefordert. Das Vertrauen der Konsumenten in landwirtschaftliche Produkte darf auf keinen Fall aufgrund von Profitgier und Fahrlässigkeit verspielt werden.

  Catherine Stihler (S&D). - Madam President, as we have heard, dioxin is a dangerous chemical which is known to cause cancer, and in this instance it entered the food chain when chemicals meant for use in biofuels were accidentally used in animal feed.

Some test results from the Agriculture Ministry in Schleswig-Holstein have shown that the fat in the feed contained 77 times the approved amount of dioxin. The Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed is designed to protect European consumers from exactly these types of contamination. By the time the alarm was raised, contaminated products were all over Germany and other parts of the EU, even in UK quiches, which were removed from supermarket shelves as a precautionary measure.

This is not the first dioxin scare. We have had problems with mozzarella from Italy, pork products in Ireland and cattle products in Northern Ireland. What we want to know from the Commission is why this rapid alert system has again failed to protect consumers, and what the Commission is going to do to put it right.

  Σπύρος Δανέλλης (S&D). - Κύριε Επίτροπε, δώδεκα χρόνια μετά το σκάνδαλο διοξινών στις βελγικές ζωοτροφές, εντοπίστηκαν τώρα διοξίνες σε ζωοτροφές στη Γερμανία, χώρα με παράδοση στην πειθαρχία και τους αξιόπιστους θεσμούς. Αυτό σημαίνει ότι το σύστημα ελέγχων δεν είναι επαρκώς αυστηρό, στοχευμένο, διαφανές και αντικειμενικό και δεν συνοδεύεται από επαρκή αντικίνητρα και κυρώσεις. Τα κενά αυτά πρέπει να καλυφθούν με σοβαρότητα και ευθύνη έναντι του καταναλωτή, ιδιαίτερα, σε μία εποχή που η οικονομική κρίση ευνοεί την εξεύρεση αθέμιτων λύσεων για μείωση του κόστους παραγωγής. Δεν είναι δυνατόν να περιμένουμε ότι, ιδιαίτερα σε αντίξοες οικονομικές συνθήκες, τα προβλήματα θα αυτορρυθμίζονται στη βάση ενός συστήματος ηθικών αξιών. Και βέβαια, οι καταναλωτές πρέπει να έχουν άμεση και πλήρη πληροφόρηση για τον κίνδυνο στον οποίο εκτίθενται.

Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση υπερηφανεύεται ότι έχει θεσπίσει αυστηρούς όρους για τη διασφάλιση της δημόσιας υγείας, της προστασίας του περιβάλλοντος, της ευζωίας των ζώων. Θα πρέπει όμως και να διασφαλίσει την απαρέγκλιτη εφαρμογή τους εάν δεν θέλει η πολιτική της να περιορισθεί απλώς σε...

(Η Πρόεδρος αφαιρεί το λόγο από τον ομιλητή.)

  Franz Obermayr (NI). - Frau Präsidentin! Vorab: Für mich ist es keine Fahrlässigkeit, sondern vorsätzlich kriminell. Was brauchen wir? Wir brauchen ein paar wichtige Punkte: eine zwingende EU-weite Kennzeichnungspflicht. Aber nicht nur der Schlachtungsort, sondern auch der Herkunftsort muss vermerkt sein. Die Verbraucher werden gegenwärtig bewusst getäuscht. Die Studien zeigen ganz klar, dass die Leute gerne Geld ausgeben würden. Nur wollen sie die Kette, woher das Produkt kommt und woher es auch wirklich stammt, lückenlos nachvollziehen.

Zweitens: Wir brauchen strengere Kontrollen. Schließlich waren es eben doch keine Lebensmittelkontrolleure und auch keine EU-Agentur für Lebensmittelsicherheit, die die Feststellung getroffen haben, sondern das Unternehmen selbst.

Drittens brauchen wir eine klare Trennung von Nahrungsmittelfetten und einer Fettherstellung für technische Zwecke. Ich halte es da sehr mit Pythagoras, der es wieder einmal sehr treffend formuliert hat: „Denn alles, was der Mensch den Tieren antut, kommt letztlich wieder auf den Menschen zurück.“

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE). - Madam President, in Ireland two years ago, in December 2008, we had a problem. I wonder what the Commission has done in the two years to avoid this current crisis.

I have a specific question: Member State authorities are crying out for guidelines from the Directorate-General for Health and Consumers. On the feed hygiene regulations, they want guidance and a workshop. Will you please make a commitment tonight to give them what they are requesting?

I have three other points to make. We need very clearly to identify the high-risk products, the high-risk processors and the location and names of the high-risk producers, and at the very least we need total segregation of products that are destined for the animal feed chain and thus for the food chain. It is not rocket science.

We also need, as others have said, controls along the way so that we detect those who continue to try and break the rules to make money. Cutting costs is about cutting corners. The problem is that it costs Europe billions; it takes away consumer confidence and ......

(The President cut the speaker off)

  Karin Kadenbach (S&D). - Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar! Ich bin keine Agrar-Romantikerin, d.h. ich glaube nicht an die Werbesprüche von den glücklichen Hühnern und den glücklichen Schweinen, weil ich tagtäglich etwas anderes erlebe.

Aber ich glaube trotzdem, dass die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher in Europa ein Anrecht darauf haben, Lebensmittel vorzufinden, die sicher sind. Daher die erste große Forderung: Wir brauchen strenge Kontrollen, und wir brauchen strenge Strafen. Wir brauchen aber auch – ich glaube, das hat die heutige Diskussion klar gezeigt – eine andere Agrarstruktur in Europa. Heute sitzt Kommissar Dalli vor uns, der für die Gesundheit zuständig ist, und ein bisschen ist er heute derjenige, der zum Handkuss kommt. Wir müssen auch in Richtung Agrarreform gerade aus diesem Skandal heraus lernen und in Europa für eine Struktur in der Agrarwirtschaft sorgen, die auf der einen Seite die Bedürfnisse der Landwirtschaft und der Landwirte erfüllt, auf der anderen Seite aber auch die Sicherheit der Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher gewährleistet.

Ich würde darum ersuchen, dass wir aus diesem Skandal wirklich lernen.

  Richard Ashworth (ECR). - Madam President, we have had a number of incidents like this over the years. I would have thought that by now the importance of traceability and quality assurance would be well understood and that the structures and regulations ought to be in place to prevent incidents like this.

This raises a number of very serious concerns. Firstly, it is extremely damaging to consumer confidence in the food industry and, secondly, it is always the farmers who are the innocent parties. It is always the farmers who suffer a disproportionate effect when compared to the consequences for the food-processing industry.

I am reasonably satisfied that the German authorities, and the Commissioner and his team, took reasonable, appropriate and swift action when they were aware that there was a problem. Nevertheless, a number of very serious questions arise – questions about the behaviour of some sectors of the processing industry where, clearly, more needs to be done by way of prevention, more needs to be done by way of punitive powers where the consequence of this action …

(The President cut the speaker off)

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). - Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, a descoberta de produtos contaminados com dioxinas e a sua disseminação por diversos circuitos de comercialização constitui um facto da maior gravidade.

Sem prejuízo de se apurarem cabalmente as responsabilidades e as consequências deste facto e de se rastrear o destino dos produtos contaminados, este incidente convoca-nos a uma reflexão mais profunda sobre o falhanço de todo o quadro regulamentar existente.

Aqui está um exemplo das consequências de uma política agrícola comum orientada para o mercado, que promove modelos de produção intensiva de cariz exportador, que favorece a grande agro-indústria e que aniquila a pequena e média agricultura e a agricultura familiar. Que inviabiliza em vez de promover, como seria necessário, a produção e o consumo locais susceptíveis de garantir uma muito maior rastreabilidade.

Aqui está mais um exemplo de como também por razões de saúde pública e de segurança e qualidade alimentar se impõe uma profunda modificação da actual Política Agrícola Comum.

  Marc Tarabella (S&D). - Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, on peut faire état d'un certain ras-le-bol par rapport à ces crises à répétition, dont une en Belgique en 1999, très similaire à la crise actuelle et qui fut une crise à grand échelle.

Très clairement, nous avons les mesures les plus strictes au monde. Je ne crois pas qu'il convienne de les alourdir. Il faut simplement les faire mieux fonctionner. Et, probablement, l'une des premières mesures à adopter serait le renforcement des sanctions infligées à ces criminels, car il ne s'agit évidemment pas de la maladresse d'un lampiste, mais plutôt d'un crime organisé par des criminels en col blanc, qui veulent maximiser leur profit.

Deuxièmement, une autre priorité pourrait, semble-t-il, être de renforcer et de mieux cibler les contrôles en fonction des risques. Troisièmement, comme Catherine Stihler l'a dit, le système Rapex, rapid exchange, qui est normalement de nature à fonctionner pour que tous les États membres soient avertis d'un risque potentiel, a probablement manifesté certaines faiblesses à cet égard.

J'aurais voulu votre opinion à ce sujet, Monsieur le Commissaire.

  Peter Jahr (PPE). - Frau Präsidentin! Die deutsche Futtermittelindustrie hat ein gutes System der Selbstkontrolle. Dieses System funktioniert allerdings nicht bei krimineller Energie und bei kriminellen Machenschaften. Wer vorsätzlich oder illegal verbotene Mittel in Futtermittel beimischt, entzieht sich auch vorsätzlich dieser Selbstkontrolle.

Für mich gibt es da in Ergänzung zu meinen Kollegen noch drei wichtige Hauptschlussfolgerungen: Erstens brauchen wir mehr staatliche Kontrolle. Zweitens brauchen wir eine lückenlose Meldepflicht von Futtermitteltestergebnissen, die auch bei entsprechenden Kontrollen vorgehalten werden müssen. Drittens brauchen wir für die, die kriminell werden, härtere Strafen. Das ist kein Kavaliersdelikt, das ist mit Vorsatz gemacht worden.

Zum Schluss müsste ich noch einmal daran erinnern, dass in diesem Futtermittelskandal die Landwirte die Hauptleidtragenden sind, die zurzeit ihre Produkte überhaupt nicht bzw. nur mit großem Wertverlust verkaufen können.

  John Dalli, Membru tal-Kummissjoni. − Jiena meta nisma' dawn il-kummenti, illi għalihom nirringrazzja lil dawk kollha li ħadu sehem f'dan id-dibattitu, ma jistax ikun ma nirriflettix fuq il-kritika li jkollna, mhux fuq hekk biss, imma fuq kważi kull ħaġa li nagħmlu bħala Ewropa, dwar il-burokrazija żejda illi aħna nimponu fuq kulħadd meta nagħmlu regolamenti u meta aħna nesiġu ċerti kontrolli. Ikollna konsumaturi, ikollna imprendituri, ikollna negozjanti, kulħadd igerger illi qegħdin nimponu ħafna xkiel biex l-affarijiet jimxu sewwa.

Però meta jinqalgħu każi bħal dan tad-diossina, naraw, kif qed nisimgħu llum, kemm fil-fatt hemm bżonn illi jkollna ċerti kontrolli kif għandna in place bħalissa, kemm huma importanti u kemm jeħtieġ illi nkunu assidwi fil-mod kif nistgħu aħna nimplimentawhom. Bħala konsumatur niddejjaq ħafna illi niġi ffaċċjat b'sitwazzjoni bħal din, illi, bħalkom il-konsumaturi u bħall-konsumaturi kollha li għandna fl-Ewropa, jheddu l-konfidenza li għandna fis-safety tal-prodotti Ewropej. U nirrabja meta nagħraf li dan ikun qed jiġri minħabba nies li jkunu kisru l-liġi għax iridu jiksru l-liġi, u mhux xi żball ordinarju.

Fil-fatt, kif għadu kemm qal l-aħħar kelliem li tkellem illum, ebda sistema ma taħdem fejn hemm il-kriminalità. Fejn ikollok nies li jridu jiksru l-liġi, ma tistax ikollok sistema perfetta illi se tiggarantixxi li kollox se jmur ħarir, li kollox se jmur tajjeb. U għalhekk l-importanti hu illi nagħmlu minn kollox biex nassiguraw illi għandna x-xibka minsuġa tajjeb, b'toqob mill-aktar irqaq illi minnhom dawn il-kriminali ma jistgħux jgħaddu.

Jiena, l-esperjenza tiegħi, ilni nagħmel leġiżlazzjoni f'pajjiżi mill-1987, ili mat-23 sena nagħmel leġiżlazzjonijiet u, kulmeta nagħmel liġi, dejjem nara li l-problema kbira mhux il-klawżoli li se tagħmel fil-liġi, però biex tipprova taħseb kif dik il-liġi se tiġi miksura u għalhekk x'tista' tagħmel biex tikkontrolla biex ma tinkisirx. U jiena naħseb issa li aħna qegħdin fil-fatt f'din il-fażi tar-realtà. Aħna ma rridux illi jerġgħu jiġru dawn l-affarijiet u rridu nagħmlu minn kollox biex naraw li s-sistema tagħna hija waħda li almenu min se jipprova jiskappa, min se jipprova ma jaħdimx skont ir-regoli li għandna u li aħna nagħmlu bejnietna lkoll, naqbduh u naqbduh mill-aktar fis.

Nistgħu naġixxu meta aħna nkunu nafu b'dak li qed jiġri, ma tistax taġixxi fl-injoranza ta' dak li qed jiġri. U għalhekk kumment, pereżempju fuq ir-Rapid Alert System, jiena ma ngħidx li r-Rapid Alert System ma ħadmitx - ir-Rapid Alert System ħadmet tajjeb għax is-sekonda li konna nafu bl-affarijiet, kulħadd kien informat b'dak li qed jiġri. Dik hija r-Rapid Alert System, u b'dak il-mod ħadmet ħafna.

U rridu naraw ukoll li nsaħħu kemm jista' jkun ir-regolamenti u r-regolamentazzjoni li għandna. Jien naqbel, pereżempju, ukoll ma' Ms McGuinness li qalet dwar l-importanza li nagħtu lill-guidelines u li nesiġu li dawk l-elementi fil-katina tal-ikel fejn hemm ir-riskju, nagħmlu l-akbar kontrolli fuq dawn ir-riskji. U għal dan il-għan, pereżempju, waħda mill-affarijiet li qegħdin nipprovaw, jew li ser nissuġġerixxu hija li ma nibqgħux biss f'ċerti elementi ta' riskju, naċċettaw sempliċi reġistrazzjoni ta' kumpaniji, bħal pereżempju l-feed mills, imma li jkun hemm approvazzjoni wara li jkunu saru ċerta due diligence exercises fuq l-applikant kif ikun.

Irridu wkoll nassiguraw li dak li ġara fil-fatt qiegħed taħt kontroll. Jiena mal-awtoritajiet kompetenti fil-Ġermanja qiegħed f'kuntatt kontinwu u jiena sodisfatt li qegħdin jagħmlu dak kollu li hu possibbli biex, mhux biss jikkontjenu s-sitwazzjoni kollha malajr kemm jista' jkun, biex inkunu nafu l-informazzjoni kollha u sħiħa tas-sitwazzjoni kemm jista' jkun malajr, però li jieħdu wkoll azzjoni.

U jiena infurmat pereżempju li dak il-prodottur ta' feed mill li ta informazzjoni qarrieqa, għaliex kien qal li ssupplixxa biss għaxar farms meta fil-fatt kien issupplixxa disa' mija, dan diġà qiegħed taħt proċeduri li ttieħdu mill-prosekuzzjoni ġewwa l-Ġermanja, għaliex din kienet informazzjoni ħażina li setgħet ġabet ħafna konsegwenzi. Aħna wkoll nistgħu nassiguraw li l-prodotti li marru barra mill-Ġermanja, bħal, pereżempju, bajd, li kien intiż biex ikun jista' jiġi użat ukoll għall-manifattura tal-ikel, ġie użat fil-manifattura tal-ikel, però billi kien ukoll imħallat imbagħad ma' prodotti oħrajn li ma kinux Ġermaniżi, meta ġew ittestjati dawn il-prodotti, instab li l-livell tad-diossina kien baxx ħafna.

U rrid nagħmel hawnhekk l-aħħar kumment, għax il-ħin għadda: fil-fatt naqbel ukoll jien li kemm jista' jkun ikollna sanzjonijiet mill-aktar ħorox kontra min jabbuża. Wieħed irid jifhem però li dan it-tip ta' miżuri mhumiex xi ħaġa li nistgħu nagħmluhom aħna bħala Kummissjoni, jew nistgħu nimponuhom aħna bħala Kummissjoni, imma huma affarijiet li l-Istati Membri jridu kemm jista' jkun jinfurzawhom fil-pajjiż tagħhom.

  Die Präsidentin. − Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 149)

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. – A CE deve exortar a Alemanha e todos os países envolvidos nesta matéria a tomar as medidas adequadas para colmatar esta situação, impor sanções e garantir que todos os envolvidos nesta crise da dioxina assumam a total responsabilidade dos vastos prejuízos causados aos sectores da agro-pecuária, da transformação e aos consumidores. O facto de alguns produtores de alimentos para animais estarem conscientes desta contaminação com dioxina desde Março de 2010 sem a denunciar às autoridades públicas é totalmente inaceitável. Urge por isso informar com grande transparência todos os Estados-Membros e países terceiros acerca de todos os detalhes sobre os alimentos potencialmente contaminados. Todos os alimentos que não se encontrem em conformidade com a legislação da UE têm de ser identificados e retirados do mercado. É necessário garantir que todas as medidas são tomadas para proteger a saúde pública, dispor de informações rápidas e circunstanciadas sobre a evolução da situação, relatando-a com a maior proximidade e transparência, para retomarmos o mais rapidamente possível a normalidade e a fundamental confiança dos consumidores na cadeia alimentar.

14. Ftehim UE-Kamerun dwar il-liġi tal-foresti - Ftehim UE-Repubblika tal-Kongo dwar ir-regolamenti tal-foresti - Ftehimiet ta' Sħubija Volontarja FLEGT (dibattitu)

  Die Präsidentin. − Als nächster Punkt folgt die Gemeinsame Aussprache – Forstrecht (Kamerun, Republik Kongo)

– Abkommen EU/Kamerun über das Recht im Forstsektor

Empfehlung von Yannick Jadot im Namen des Ausschusses für internationalen Handel (A7-0371/2010)

Empfehlung zu dem Vorschlag für einen Beschluss des Rates über den Abschluss eines freiwilligen Partnerschaftsabkommens zwischen der Europäischen Union und der Republik Kamerun über Rechtsdurchsetzung, Politikgestaltung und Handel im Forstsektor sowie über die Einfuhr von Holzprodukten in die Europäische Union (FLEGT)

[12796/2010 - C7-0339/2010 - 2010/0217(NLE)]

– Abkommen EU/Republik Kongo über das Recht im Forstsektor

Empfehlung von Yannick Jadot im Namen des Ausschusses für internationalen Handel (A7-0370/2010)

Empfehlung zu dem Vorschlag für einen Beschluss des Rates über den Abschluss eines freiwilligen Partnerschaftsabkommens zwischen der Europäischen Union und der Republik Kongo über Rechtsdurchsetzung, Politikgestaltung und Handel im Forstsektor sowie über die Einfuhr von Holzprodukten in die Europäische Union (FLEGT)

[10028/2010 - C7-0170/2010 - 2010/0062(NLE)]

– Anfrage zur mündlichen Beantwortung [2010/3015(RSP)] an die Kommission über FLEGT - Freiwillige Partnerschaftsabkommen mit Kongo und Kamerun und weitere geplante freiwillige Partnerschaftsabkommen von Yannick Jadot, Catherine Bearder, David Martin, Joe Higgins, Daniel Caspary (O-0202/2010 - B7-0802/2010) im Namen der

Fraktion der Grünen / Freie Europäische Allianz

Fraktion der Allianz der Liberalen und Demokraten für Europa

Fraktion der Progressiven Allianz der Sozialisten und Demokraten im Europäischen Parlament

Konföderale Fraktion der Vereinigten Europäischen Linken/Nordische Grüne Linke

Fraktion der Europäischen Volkspartei (Christdemokraten)

  Yannick Jadot, rapporteur. − Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, je voudrais déjà exprimer à tous mes collègues mes remerciements pour le travail que nous avons mené en commun sur cette question, qui a permis que l'ensemble des groupes politiques de ce Parlement ait une position commune et soit amené à poser une question orale et à rédiger une résolution qui accompagne les accords de partenariat volontaire.

Le sujet est d'importance. Vous le savez tous, la forêt recule. Toutes les deux secondes dans le monde, c'est l'équivalent d'un terrain de football qui est détruit, c'est en un an l'équivalent du territoire de la Grèce qui est déforesté et c'est évidemment dramatique. C'est dramatique du point de vue de la diversité: ce sont quelques milliers d'espèces végétales et animales qui sont mises en danger alors que les forêts les plus touchées – les forêts tropicales – comprennent la moitié de la biodiversité terrestre. C'est évidemment dramatique aussi du point de vue des changements climatiques: la déforestation contribue à hauteur de 20 % à l'effet de serre. Enfin, la déforestation met en danger quelques centaines de millions de personnes qui, soit vivent dans les forêts, soit vivent de la forêt.

L'exploitation et l'industrie forestières figurent parmi les principales causes de la déforestation, en particulier, dans la zone qui nous intéresse aujourd'hui: le bassin du Congo. On estime que 20 à 40 % du bois coupé et échangé dans le monde est du bois illégal. La question que nous évoquons aujourd'hui est donc évidemment essentielle.

Ces accords de partenariat volontaire ont été approuvés dans le cadre de la procédure d'approbation au sein de la commission du commerce international. Cette procédure permet, grâce au traité de Lisbonne, au Parlement européen de s'exprimer mais, en même temps, il peut uniquement dire oui ou non. C'est donc pour cela que ce débat est extrêmement important, parce qu'il nous permet de rentrer davantage dans le détail et qu'il vous permet, Monsieur le Commissaire, en tant que représentant la Commission, de répondre aux questions que vous adresse le Parlement.

Ces accords sont importants, ils permettent d'assurer la traçabilité du bois. Ils mettent aussi en place des procédures de vérification indépendantes, et accompagnent les politiques et la gouvernance forestières dans les pays concernés. Aujourd'hui, nous parlons du Congo Brazzaville et du Cameroun.

Mais déjà un premier point avant de rentrer dans ces accords et dans les questions du Parlement: il faut bien faire la différence entre le bois légal et le bois durable. Évidemment, nous traitons ici de la légalité du bois mais qui dit légalité du bois ne dit pas durabilité de l'exploitation forestière.

Donc, la première question générale que je poserais à la Commission est: comment la Commission s'engage-t-elle à assurer la cohérence globale autour de la question des forêts – l'année 2011 est l'année internationale des forêts – en prenant en compte ce qui a été dit à Nagoya, en prenant en compte ce qui a aussi été décidé à Cancun, notamment sur le mécanisme REDD-plus et en tenant compte également des accords commerciaux négociés qui parfois, en libéralisant le commerce du bois, participent à la déforestation?

Ensuite, nous attendons toujours une réponse de la Commission européenne sur la question des agrocarburants et des changements indirects d'affectation des sols. Vous savez que le Parlement vous a demandé d'intégrer ces enjeux dans les critères d'évaluation de durabilité des agrocarburants.

Concernant plus spécifiquement les accords de partenariat volontaire, il y a beaucoup d'éléments positifs: nous avons fortement apprécié le travail de négociation et, notamment, d'association des acteurs de la société civile au Cameroun et en République du Congo; on sait que ce n'est pas facile et de ce point de vue là, il apparaît que ces accords de partenariat volontaire sont un succès.

Mais, comme je le disais tout à l'heure, un certain nombre de questions et de demandes demeurent: Monsieur le Commissaire, êtes-vous prêt à venir, par exemple, tous les six mois ou six mois après la signature d'un accord, nous rendre compte de la mise en œuvre de l'accord? Parce qu'il est évident que, entre la qualité de la négociation et la mise en œuvre, il peut y avoir une grande différence. Nous souhaiterions donc que vous veniez nous dire si les acteurs, notamment les acteurs de la société civile, continuent à être associés à la mise en œuvre. Dans des pays où il n'est pas toujours facile de se plaindre, notamment quand il y a de la corruption, est-ce qu'il est prévu des mécanismes de plaintes – notamment indépendants – qui permettraient à ces acteurs de la société civile de dénoncer une mauvaise mise en œuvre, de dire que leur parole n'est plus écoutée? De la même façon, nous souhaiterions que vous fassiez régulièrement rapport sur les impacts de la mise en œuvre de ces accords, pour que vous nous disiez où nous en sommes, à la fois en termes de cohérence globale de l'action de la Commission sur les forêts, et en termes de mise en œuvre spécifique sur la question de la légalité du bois.

Enfin un dernier élément: vous prétendez que, dans ces accords, il n'y a pas de budget. Or, il va évidemment falloir des budgets pour accompagner ces politiques, donc pouvez-vous clarifier la question budgétaire autour de ces accords de partenariat volontaire?

  Catherine Bearder, author. − Madam President, the tropical rainforests in Cameroon and the Congo are precious and we must welcome this voluntary agreement to address the sustainability of the harvesting of the timber that they contain.

The forests belong not only to the people of these countries but they are part of the ecosystem of the planet, they are key to the life-sustaining systems and they contain billions of tons of carbon.

Halting deforestation is one of the ways that we should be tackling climate change, and governments around the globe have been trying to do this for years. These two countries should be congratulated for their courage and foresight in signing up to these voluntary agreements with the EU.

However, regulating and enforcing these agreements will prove a challenge. Heaven knows, building in sustainable management of our own continent’s resources is hard enough. But the will is there and for that we should be very pleased. Careful management can bring down illegal and unsustainably imported timber.

At the moment the amount of timber that is illegally harvested and imported into the EU constitutes almost one fifth of the timber products on our markets, despite Parliament and others trying to tackle this. Enforcement will be made easier with the involvement of local people and civil society in these countries, and we must ensure that their right to be heard and involved is maintained and listened to. After all, they have the most to lose if their forests are removed.

The widespread removal of tropical timber is driven by an insatiable appetite for products to grace our homes. We should value this resource better and take greater care of the resource that not only sustains a whole host of plant and animal species but is slow-growing and takes many years to reach maturity.

We must take care not to undermine our own efforts to fight deforestation and climate change by simultaneously providing the largest market for illegal timber products in the world.

The result of these agreements may mean that tropical timber reaches a higher price, and that is something that we should not object to. It is not only a limited resource, but it is the only thing that local people have to sell. They know the true value of their resource and with this agreement, so will we.

These people are our eyes and ears in the forest and we need their help to enforce the agreements. They need us to support their ability to voice any concerns. These agreements are a two-way process and we look to you, Commissioner, to be able to enforce it.

The VPAs (Voluntary Partnership Agreements) are good for the planet, good for our partner countries and good for the EU. We must ensure that the agreements work and that any breaches are monitored and addressed. Then we must look to other countries in Africa, Asia and South America to sign up to similar agreements as soon as possible and I look forward to working with you and the Commission to achieve this.

  David Martin, author. − Madam President, let me begin by thanking Yannick Jadot for his exemplary cooperation with his shadows. We all worked extremely well on this report and I am delighted – as he has said – that we managed to reach a broad consensus.

The agreements with Congo and Cameroon, taken together with Ghana, means that some of Africa’s most vulnerable forests are now covered by Voluntary Partnership Agreements. The existence of these agreements, as the two previous speakers have said, is to be warmly welcomed. They provide a mechanism for tackling the massive illegal trade in timber. They provide an opportunity for the better management of a vital natural resource and, hopefully, they will bring greater transparency and help us tackle corruption in the forest sector, which unfortunately in Africa is endemic at the moment.

But, while welcoming these agreements, I nevertheless share with the rapporteur a number of concerns. I would just like to express three this evening.

First and foremost, the danger – it is not the intention, but there is a danger – of agreeing such a framework is that it is seen as providing a framework for large-scale exploitation of our forests, leading to the opposite of the purpose of the agreement, namely further degradation and further deforestation, thus contributing to the very destruction of the global environment we are trying to avoid. What we want is an agreement that contributes to the conservation and sustainable management of our biodiversity resources. I agree with the rapporteur that this means that the Commission has to constantly monitor the situation and report back regularly on how the agreement is progressing.

Secondly, indigenous people, who are so often the victims of environmental exploitation, should benefit from this agreement. The promise in the Voluntary Partnership Agreement by the Congolese Government to promote a law ensuring that the rights of indigenous people are promoted and respected must be delivered upon. Again I urge the Commission, in their contact with the Government, to continually press for the delivery of this promise until it is there on the statute book in the Congo.

Thirdly, we must ensure – and I agree with Catherine Bearder who mentioned this – that appropriate funds are available to properly implement this Agreement. No matter how good an agreement is on paper, without the resources to carry it out, it is a meaningless piece of paper. As has been indicated, there are no financial packages attached to the Agreement itself. It is up to us – both the Commission to propose, and Parliament and Council to put into the budget appropriate budgetary facilities – to make this Agreement work. That means we need to have money to verify the legality of timber coming into the European Union, we need money to train, equip and give the technical expertise to those operating in the African countries we have VPAs with, and we also need resources to carry out the monitoring that I have already mentioned.

So we need to make sure, in the coming months, that we deliver the financial framework to make a success of these agreements. I repeat that these are good agreements but, like all agreements, they will depend on the goodwill and vigilance of individuals – the non-government organisations, the Member States, the Congolese and Cameroon Governments – to deliver on their promises to make sure these agreements work in practice. They should lead to better management of our forests and better management of vital global resources but, if wrongly handled, they could take us in the opposite direction. We look to the Commission to keep a beady eye on the progress that is being made.

  Joe Higgins, author. − Madam President, we agree with the general approach of Yannick Jadot to this issue. I welcome any agreement that guarantees protection of the rainforests of our planet, if such agreements also advance the protection of the indigenous people of the forest and give a better life to the majority of the people in the countries concerned.

It must be said at the start that both the Republic of Congo and Cameroon have highly repressive governments. Cameroon is very high in the Corruption Index kept by Transparency International, and in the Republic of Congo there has been horrific exploitation of some sections of the population, notably the pygmy people, although a new law has just been passed and people will wait to see what this does to protect indigenous people.

The logging industry in these countries is implicated in corruption and in the exploitation of workers and the deforestation involved is a huge threat to the livelihoods of the indigenous people. It is for this reason that the original resolution of the European United Left Group calls for the logging industry to be in public ownership and under democratic control, crucially involving workers in the industry and the indigenous communities in the forests affected by logging.

The Left’s resolution also points out that illegal logging is related to poverty levels in the countries concerned. It can provide an income for individuals and their families who would otherwise go hungry, and therefore ending illegal logging is also linked to ending the poverty and deprivation of many communities in the relevant countries.

This will not be done by the corrupt local elites, nor by European multinational corporations whose key motivation is private profit, but by the forestry workers and the indigenous peoples themselves taking democratic ownership of their resources. In this sense, the people of sub-Saharan Africa can take inspiration from their brothers and sisters in Tunisia in their heroic struggle against a corrupt dictatorship over the past weeks.

  Daniel Caspary, Verfasser. − Frau Präsidentin! Meine geschätzten Kollegen mehrerer Exportländer von tropischem Hartholz haben begonnen, freiwillige Partnerschaftsabkommen mit der EU im Rahmen des FLEGT-Aktionsplans zu unterzeichnen. Die Europäische Union wird die Reformen für eine verantwortungsvolle Forstverwaltung und für einen Kapazitätsausbau unterstützen, insbesondere die Einführung von Herkunftssicherungs- und Legalitätsnachweissystemen für Holzprodukte.

Was mir besonders wichtig ist: Wenn es der Verbesserung der Transparenz und der Verhinderung von Umweltschäden bei forstwirtschaftlichen Tätigkeiten hilft, dann ist es gut, dass die Partner die Verpflichtung eingehen, geltende Rechtsvorschriften zu ändern und zu verbessern. Ausdrücklich begrüße ich auch, dass sich die Europäische Union verpflichtet hat, beim Aufbau von Kapazitäten in den holzerzeugenden Ländern Unterstützung zu leisten, vor allem bei der Einführung von Herkunftssicherungs- und Legalitätsnachweissystemen für Holz und Holzprodukte.

Zwei weitere Punkte möchte ich nennen: Die freiwilligen Partnerschaftsabkommen werden von der Idee getragen, dem Handel mit illegal geschlagenem Holz und daraus hergestellten Erzeugnissen gemeinsam ein Ende zu setzen und einen Beitrag dazu zu leisten, der Entwaldung, der Waldschädigung und deren Folgen in Gestalt von CO2-Emissionen sowie dem Verlust der biologischen Vielfalt weltweit Einhalt zu gebieten.

Eine weitere großflächige Ausbeutung der tropischen und anderer besonders artenreicher Wälder mit hoher Kohlenstoffspeicherkapazität ist nicht zu verantworten und kann zu einer weiteren Entwaldung und Waldschädigung führen und somit weltweit verheerende Folgen für die Umwelt haben.

Deshalb sind diese Abkommen ein kleiner, aber ein guter Schritt in die richtige Richtung. Ich teile ausdrücklich die angesprochenen Punkte meiner Vorredner, danke dem Berichterstatter für die gute Zusammenarbeit und würde mich freuen, wenn wir mit diesen Abkommen wirklich vorankommen könnten, um unsere Welt ein Stück besser zu machen.

  Andris Piebalgs, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, I would like to start by thanking the rapporteur, Mr Jadot, for his support for the Voluntary Partnership Agreements on Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade with Congo and Cameroon. I hope this House will follow the recommendations for consent to conclude these two agreements. This would also encourage the parliaments in both Cameroon and Congo to complete their consideration.

It is important that both the European Union and our partner countries endorse the VPAs, since illegal logging is a problem for all. I know that illegal logging is just the visible tip of the iceberg. Basically we are talking about starting to work together for sustainable management of forestry resources. And, to answer one of the rapporteur’s suggestions immediately, I could say that, yes, I am ready to come here every six months, as Parliament calls me, to monitor the implementation of these agreements.

It is true that this is a commitment. There are risks but this is the only way, in my opinion, to achieve really sustainable management of this resource, because if we do not do this, we will not manage to be successful through declarations alone.

For our partner countries there is a lot of commitment, but I believe that one important factor is the loss that results from illegal logging. Each year, USD 10-15 billion is lost in revenue. Illegal logging also has extremely negative consequences for indigenous peoples, for biodiversity and in terms of climate change.

At the same time, it is also important to emphasise that the EU is one of the biggest markets for tropical wood. This means that our approach is extremely important in how the whole issue is being addressed. Of the tropical wood arriving in the EU, 20% comes from illegal sources, so we have an obligation to ensure that we source only legal wood.

The climate change issue is another concern for everyone, and the protection of forests needs to start somewhere. It is very simple to say that we need to pay to protect forests: it is a simple formula, but applying it requires a lot of commitment from both sides.

I shall try to answer a couple of questions that have been put to me. On enforcement and implementation, the VPA establishes a joint committee to monitor implementation of the agreement. It will also establish an independent audit to analyse the legality assurance system and its effectiveness and efficiency. There is also an annual reporting mechanism, and the annual report will be made public and will definitely be available to the European Parliament.

Moreover, in preparation for the VPAs, we have involved civil society and indigenous peoples. Until now they had been completely left out of the process, so we have agreed, under the new agreements, to set up multi-stakeholder committees to monitor, or guide, the implementation process where indigenous people are involved.

In addition, the VPAs include a complaints mechanism, and the independent auditor will have access to, and will rely on, information from a wide array of sources, including civil society and communities.

There is a definite cost in terms of resources. Between 2002 and 2008, the EU contributed EUR 544 million to forestry in general in the developing world, some of it directed to FLEGT work in individual countries. The Commission has so far spent a further EUR 35 million to support FLEGT more generally, and we will spend EUR 35 million more between 2011 and 2013. I would emphasis, too, that Member States also make fiscal contributions.

We have also dedicated human resources to the implementation of FLEGT. I have seven civil servants dealing with this, and they are working closely with the European Forest Institute and national forest authorities.

An additional effort has been made in the form of the Illegal Timber Regulation, adopted in 2010 as a key element of the FLEGT action plan, and this will complement the VPA approach. It will discourage unregulated, unsustainable exploitation of forests.

The recent agreement in Cancún on action to reduce emissions due to deforestation and forest degradation (known as ‘REDD’) will facilitate further Commission support for developing countries. Our future work on forest governance through VPAs will be helped by the fact that REDD makes provision for governance and for observance of the rights of indigenous peoples and members of local communities.

I take note of the human rights situation in partner countries. I agree with the draft motion for a resolution that the Commission should continue to focus on these issues. I can assure you that we keep human rights issues at the centre of our political dialogue with the partner countries, and I can assure you that the fight against corruption is one of the issues we address when dealing with the partner countries.

But I would emphasise one particular point that represents encouragement for the whole process: the fact that partner countries feel engaged. Without real engagement from our partner countries, given all the weaknesses at administrative level, we cannot protect forests more effectively.

I know that this is the start of the process, but it is a start being made by both sides, and I am always ready to come to Parliament to report on how the implementation is going. However, with FLEGT we are definitely not taking a wrong step. It is a step in the right direction: we are not increasing the risk. Perhaps we are not providing entirely sufficient solutions, but at least it is a decent step that we can be proud of.

IN THE CHAIR: Diana WALLIS
Vice-President

15. Kompożizzjoni tal-Parlament: ara l-Minuti

16. Ftehim UE-Kamerun dwar il-liġi tal-foresti - Ftehim UE-Repubblika tal-Kongo dwar ir-regolamenti tal-foresti - Ftehimiet ta' Sħubija Volontarja FLEGT (tkomplija tad-dibattitu)

  President. − We now return to the debate.

  Eva Joly, rapporteure pour avis de la commission du développement. − Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, ces accords de partenariat entre l'Union européenne, le Cameroun et le Congo devraient être en principe une bonne nouvelle pour ces populations, une bonne nouvelle pour la biodiversité. Mais ce n'est qu'une étape d'un long processus que le Parlement européen suivra avec vigilance.

Si nous voulons que cet accord permette la mise en place d'un commerce du bois réglementé, transparent, respectueux de l'environnement, au bénéfice des populations locales et non plus de quelques groupes plus ou moins légaux, l'Union européenne doit faire en sorte que les droits des populations locales et indigènes soient pleinement respectés et que leur participation aux consultations soit effective. Elle doit aider au renforcement des capacités des acteurs, à la lutte contre la corruption, à la mise en place d'une véritable gouvernance forestière.

Les accords ne doivent pas être un prétexte pour perpétuer le pillage des ressources naturelles des pays en développement, mais bien permettre un rééquilibrage des relations entre l'Union européenne et ces pays.

  Christofer Fjellner, för PPE-gruppen. – Fru talman! Dessa s.k. Flegt-avtal som vi ska rösta om i morgon rörande Kongo och Kamerun är viktiga europeiska verktyg, eller vapen, i kampen mot illegal skogsavverkning. Därför välkomnar jag dem.

Den illegala skogsavverkningen är ett väldigt stort problem, så väl miljömässigt som ekonomiskt och socialt. Det är samtidigt viktigt att komma ihåg att det sällan är själva sjukdomen, i detta fall den illegala avverkningen, som skapar förutsättningar för handeln med illegalt timmer. Den är snarare ett symptom och en följd av många andra sjukdomar som i många fall är ännu allvarligare – fattigdom, avsaknad av äganderätt, korruption och i vissa fall krig.

Problemen är som störst i några av världens allra fattigaste länder. Därför är jag väldigt glad över att kommissionen tagit fasta på det när man utformat och förhandlat fram avtalen. Man har så att säga bytt frihandel i utbyte mot att de berörda länderna gör reformer för att stärka äganderätten, bekämpar korruption och se till att införa en vettig skogslagstiftning.

Att man skjuter in sig på grundorsakerna snarare än symptomen är det som talar mest för att det vi gör imorgon är ett steg i rätt riktning. Samtidigt är det viktigt att komma ihåg, framför allt inför kommande förhandlingar med andra länder, att när vi bekämpar handeln med illegalt avverkat timmer så får vi inte hindra fattiga länder från att exportera en av sina mest värdefulla råvaror. Vi får inte göra det svårare för dem att använda det här fantastiska naturmaterialet som trä är. Det goda inte blir det bästas fiende.

Jag vill påminna om att mitt land Sverige en gång i tiden blev rikt just genom att exportera timmer. Den möjligheten får vi inte förhindra för dagens fattiga länder. När ni nu går vidare och förhandlar fram avtal hoppas jag att ni fortsätter kampen mot just illegalt avverkat timmer och inte mot handeln med trä.

  George Sabin Cutaş, în numele grupului S&D. – Comisia Europeană a început procesul încheierii unor acorduri de parteneriat voluntare cu ţări care exportă lemn în Uniunea Europeană. În acest context, consider că este importantă elaborarea unei structuri de participare activă a comunităţilor locale, atât pentru monitorizarea punerii în aplicare a acordului, cât şi pentru ameliorarea cadrului de guvernanţă din sectorul forestier şi, nu în ultimul rând, cu scopul de a evita, pe cât posibil, corupţia.

Implicarea societăţii civile în procesul de elaborare a acordului cu Camerun reprezintă un semnal pozitiv în acest sens. Totodată, măsuri concrete sunt necesare pentru continuarea acestui tip de dialog în toate ţările semnatare. Trebuie urmărită, de asemenea, clădirea unei industrii a lemnului durabile din punct de vedere social şi de mediu, inclusiv prin reducerea despăduririi şi a degradării forestiere în aceste ţări. Acordurile trebuie să respecte angajamentele internaţionale ale Uniunii Europene în ceea ce priveşte mediul şi dezvoltarea durabilă.

  Chris Davies, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Madam President, we are debating Voluntary Partnership Agreements. These are lovely words, they are good words: they represent a European Union that is not trying to impose its will upon developing nations but is trying to lend a helping hand to achieve common goals. Yet the practicalities of an agreement with a state the size of Congo create all sorts of daunting problems.

The size of the state alone is something akin to that of Europe; the governance for much of that state is non-existent; corruption levels are quite extraordinary – Transparency International puts the Republic of Congo almost bottom of its league table.

Then there is the number of staff we have working to ensure that this agreement delivers on its goals – just a handful of people; the profits of illegal logging are absolutely vast and perhaps greater than anything we can offer by way of compensation; and the markets for illegal wood are in countries like China, which may not be paying anything like the attention that we pay, and the respect that should be paid, to maintaining forests.

All these problems suggest that voluntary partnerships, however good our intentions, will have difficulty delivering the goals. So what assurances can the Commission give us that every possible step will be taken to ensure that our high ambitions here will truly be realised, and that we can all have confidence that these voluntary partnership agreements, as we make them in future, will deliver on the goals we have set?

  Anna Rosbach, for EFD-Gruppen. – Fru formand! Jordens skove er verdens lunger, og vi skal gøre alt, hvad vi kan, for at beskytte dem. I en tid med en hurtigt voksende verdensbefolkning og dermed et generelt voksende behov for ressourcer, udflyttende arbejdspladser til fjerne verdensdele og en økonomisk krise ser jeg hellere, at vi i EU bruger mere europæisk træ, end at vi importerer eksotisk træ fra lande, hvor det er svært at kontrollere ulovlig skovhugst, og hvor vi tilligemed ikke kan styre korruptionen.

Når vi fjerner tropiske skove, forringer vi biodiversiteten i områderne og er med til at udrydde en lang række truede dyrearter og ændre klimaet. Og det er helt unødvendigt! Især når der eksisterer glimrende alternativer. For hvis vi igen lærer at rejse mere skov i Europa og bruger mere europæisk træ, vil disse problemer forsvinde. Hvorfor skal vore haveborde være af regnskovstræ, eller hvorfor er eksotiske parketgulve smartere end gulve af EU-træ?

Men når det er sagt, og da jeg ikke kan stoppe EU-borgernes brug af eksotisk og tropisk træ, er det vigtigt, at de her foreliggende aftaler bliver vedtaget. Det er vigtigt, at vi er med til at sikre en bedre kontrol med de træprodukter og det træ, vi importerer. Vi skal forsøge at sikre os mod korruption, hvilket er ekstremt svært, hvad aftalerne da også bærer præg af. Derfor har jeg heller ingen illusion om, at vi hermed får udryddet al illegal skovhugst i hverken Cameroun eller Congo - desværre! Jeg havde hellere set bindende aftaler i stedet for frivillige. Men det er klart, at det er bedre med frivillige aftaler end slet ingen aftaler, og derfor støtter jeg dem.

Generelt håber jeg dog at se flere initiativer til beskyttelse af verdens skove, især når det gælder EU's aftaler med lande fra problematiske dele af verden.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI). - Frau Präsidentin! Das Partnerschaftsabkommen mit Kamerun im Forstsektor ist meines Erachtens zwar löblich und kommt im Internationalen Jahr der Wälder der EU auch aus Imagegründen sehr gelegen. Aber ob das Abkommen das Papier wert ist, auf dem es unterschrieben wird, muss leider bezweifelt werden.

Immerhin steht Korruption in Kamerun auf der Tagesordnung. Umweltorganisationen werfen dem Staat vor, dass der Regierung Umweltverbrechen der Forstindustrie sehr wohl bewusst sind, Korruption aber die Kontrolle und die Strafverfolgung verhindert. Immerhin sollen ausländische Firmen mehr als 60 % der Holzgewinnung und Holzverarbeitung und drei Viertel des Holzexports kontrollieren. Nur wenn sichergestellt ist, dass sich ausländische Firmen nicht länger an einheimischen Firmen, denen das Forst- und Umwelt-Know-how völlig fehlt, abputzen, und wenn Kamerun die Korruption in den Griff bekommt, hat ein solches Abkommen Sinn. Bei aller Sorge über die Vernichtung der Regenwälder darf diese nicht als Vorwand dienen, in Europa den Waldbesitzern die Nutzung der Wälder zu versagen, denn die meisten EU-Länder weisen eine vorbildhafte Waldbewirtschaftung auf.

  Filip Kaczmarek (PPE). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Miesiąc temu wraz z delegacją Komisji Rozwoju byłem w Republice Konga, gdzie rozmawialiśmy również o inicjatywie FLEGT z przedstawicielami władz, ekspertami i organizacjami pozarządowymi.

Przemysł drzewny jest branżą bardzo ważną dla tego kraju. Jest drugim źródłem dochodów eksportowych po ropie naftowej. Warto przypomnieć, że to, co się dzieje z dochodami z ropy naftowej i z ich wykorzystaniem nie jest dla nas do końca przejrzyste i jasne, albo przynajmniej informacje są przekazywane z dużym opóźnieniem. Jednocześnie rząd Republiki Konga wyraża troskę o przyszłość obszarów leśnych i planuje dużą akcję zalesiania. Oczywiście nie wiemy jeszcze, czy ten program zalesiania się powiedzie, ale na pewno warto życzyć rządowi Konga, aby tak się stało. Dlatego też takie ważne jest, aby wzmocnić legalny obrót drewnem. Równie istotne jest to, aby FLEGT funkcjonował w krajach sąsiednich, dlatego że inaczej, np. wskutek przemytu, porozumienie może się okazać w praktyce nieskuteczne.

Nie wiemy też jeszcze, czy standardy, które promujemy w zakresie legalnego handlu drewnem staną się obowiązujące i funkcjonujące globalnie – niektórzy mówcy zwracali już na ten problem uwagę. Tak czy inaczej musimy się starać, aby ten system okazał się skuteczny. Musimy też pomóc w wywieraniu presji na innych importerów (spoza Europy), aby stopniowo eliminować nielegalny handel drewnem.

Inicjatywa FLEGT ma znaczenie zarówno dla ograniczenia ubóstwa, jak i dla ochrony środowiska, powstrzymywania zjawisk wylesiania oraz rozwoju zróżnicowanej gospodarki w wielu krajach. W przypadku Republiki Konga idzie to w parze z inną potrzebą, a mianowicie z potrzebą rozwoju rolnictwa i zmniejszenia importu żywności. Dzięki FLEGT światowy handel drewnem może stać się bardziej sprawiedliwy, bardziej zrównoważony i bardziej przyjazny środowisku. Mamy nadzieję, że tak się stanie.

  Κρίτων Αρσένης (S&D). - Κύριε Επίτροπε, τα συγχαρητήρια μου για την ουσιαστική ολοκλήρωση των διαπραγματεύσεων για τις δύο αυτές συμφωνίες. Θα ήθελα όμως να εκφράσω την ανησυχία μου γιατί έχουν παγώσει οι διαπραγματεύσεις FLEGT με την Ινδονησία και τη Μαλαισία.

Κύριε Επίτροπε, έχετε στα χέρια σας, ως Επιτροπή, ένα σημαντικό εργαλείο: τον κανονισμό για την ξυλεία. Αυτός ο κανονισμός εξαιρεί τις χώρες με τις οποίες έχει συναφθεί συμφωνία FLEGT από τις διαδικασίες που προβλέπει ο κανονισμός. Είναι ένα σημαντικό εργαλείο για να δώσουμε νέα δυναμική στις διαπραγματεύσεις. Χρειάζεται πράγματι να ολοκληρώσουμε τις συμφωνίες FLEGT με όλες τις χώρες που έχουν σημαντικά τροπικά δάση είτε στην Ασία είτε στη Λατινική Αμερική, αλλά και με τους μεγάλους μεταπράτες της ξυλείας, όπως το Βιετνάμ, η Καμπότζη, το Λάος, η Κίνα και τόσες άλλες χώρες.

Αυτές οι χώρες ακολουθούν τη δική τους πορεία· θεσπίζουν τις δικές τους διαδικασίες για να εκσυγχρονιστούν και να μπορούν να παρακολουθούν τη νόμιμη υλοτόμηση. Το ερώτημα είναι: εμείς κάνουμε ό,τι χρειάζεται; Τα 27 κράτη μέλη παίρνουν τις κανονιστικές αποφάσεις για την εισαγωγή ξυλείας από χώρες FLEGT;

Τέλος, για τον κανονισμό της ξυλείας απαιτείται μία σειρά κατ’ εξουσιοδότηση πράξεων. Έχουμε δύο χρόνια μέχρι την πλήρη εφαρμογή του κανονισμού. Η Επιτροπή πρέπει να επισπεύσει τις διαδικασίες, να προχωρήσει στις κατ’ εξουσιοδότηση πράξεις για να γνωρίζουν οι χώρες τις λεπτομέρειες στις οποίες πρέπει να προσαρμοσθούν.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). - A Uachtaráin, gan dabht ar bith is ceist i bhfad níos tábhachtaí é seo ná an phoiblíocht a gheobhaidh sé.

One of the great scandals of the 20th century was the continuous and systematic chopping down of forests, especially in the Third World, done not by individuals who knew no better and cannot be faulted, but by big greedy businesses and corrupt governments. That is why this agreement is to be welcomed wholeheartedly and I hope it will be implemented, because if it is not, it will not be worth the paper it is written on.

On the broader front, we also have to ensure that other policies of the European Union do not contribute to continued deforestation. I am referring to the proposed agreement on Mercosur which many people feel will encourage farmers to chop down the forests in those countries so that they can export agricultural products into Europe.

So we have to be vigilant.

Go raibh maith agat.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). - Senhora Presidente, a exploração de madeira ilegal em países da África Central, como os Camarões e o Congo, constitui uma ameaça à integridade de recursos de que depende a existência e o modo de vida das comunidades locais e das populações indígenas. Uma ameaça a um ecossistema repositório de uma enorme biodiversidade e com uma importância muito grande na regulação dos ciclos biogeoquímicos.

Perante o avanço da destruição da floresta tropical nesta região – alimentado, é bom não o esquecermos, pela procura de operadores e importadores dos países industrializados, particularmente da União Europeia – a solução não pode ser legalizar o que hoje é ilegal, ou seja, a exploração insustentável da floresta, legitimando de alguma forma a usurpação da terra às comunidades locais e a ocupação de extensas áreas de floresta por empresas madeireiras, como vem sucedendo.

A política de cooperação e de ajuda ao desenvolvimento da União Europeia tem aqui um papel muito importante, apoiando uma diversificação da economia destes países e invertendo um modelo assente na dependência elevada da exploração e exportação de um número reduzido de matérias-primas para os países industrializados.

  Paul Rübig (PPE). - Frau Präsidentin! Ich glaube, dass das Thema Holz uns in Zukunft noch weit intensiver beschäftigen wird. Deshalb ist es für das Abkommen wichtig, dass man dem Bereich Forschung eine dementsprechende Unterstützung gibt und vor allem auch im Bereich der Aus- und Weiterbildung schaut, dass die kleinen und mittleren Betriebe in Kamerun und im Kongo die Möglichkeit bekommen, sich ökologisch in diesem Bereich entsprechend weiterzuentwickeln. Deshalb freut es mich, dass diese Diskussion stattfindet. Es ist für uns alle wichtig, dass der Bedarf an Holz auch in Zukunft sichergestellt ist.

  Franz Obermayr (NI). - Frau Präsidentin! 40 % der Fläche Kameruns sind von Wald bedeckt. Noch, müssen wir sagen, denn Kamerun ist zwar der größte Tropenholzexporteur Afrikas, aber in keinem anderen Land werden die Wälder so massiv abgeholzt.

Experten schätzen, dass in 10 bis 15 Jahren die ökologisch wertvollen Baumarten aus dem Kongo-Becken verschwunden sein werden, wenn die Abholzung so weiter geht. Was ist zu tun? Wesentlich für den Schutz der Tropenwälder Kameruns ist vor allem die Bekämpfung der Korruption, sowohl auf Beamtenebene, aber auch bei den privaten Pächtern, weiterhin eine wirksame Strafverfolgung und natürlich eine nachhaltige Fortwirtschaft. Wo viel gefällt wird, muss auch etwas nachwachsen. Und ganz wesentlich ist eine bessere Ausbildung der Holzarbeit, um frühe Schäden beim Abholzen zu vermeiden.

Vor allem sind die europäischen Unternehmen in die Pflicht zu nehmen, denn rund 80 % des Ertrags werden nach Europa verschifft. Hier muss die EU auch entsprechend ansetzen, um direkt durchzugreifen. Freiwilligkeit ist gut, doch in diesem Zusammenhang kommen wir mit ihr auf keinen guten Grund und auf keinen grünen Zweig. Wir müssen die Unternehmen in die Pflicht nehmen!

  Andris Piebalgs, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, the debate definitely went beyond the scope of this Voluntary Partnership Agreement. It is not only trade that affects forests: the forest is an energy resource for these countries, and population growth also has an impact on the forest.

So I would like to emphasise again that this is a first step in addressing just one of the areas of concern. I know that it is not a solution, but you have to start somewhere in addressing the issues.

Also, I would not like to discourage you with regard to the level of commitment of the countries concerned. I know that dealing with these countries is sometimes not simple, but they are countries with a difficult history. They got their independence 50 years ago, and not exactly in the same circumstances as some of our countries got independence, so things take time. It takes time to establish state institutions capable of fighting corruption or establishing the management of resources, and they are on the right track. In Africa, in particular, they have economic growth even in times of crisis, and this means they are getting stronger and getting better.

I realise this is just one indicator, but overall there has been encouraging news, and the only way we can improve the process is by working together. That is where we come in with sustainable forest management: we are talking about Congo-Brazzaville (the Republic of the Congo) and Cameroon today, but we are also working with the Democratic Republic of the Congo and with Indonesia. We are still negotiating but we have high hopes of a positive conclusion.

So I would say that the risks here are minimal. Commitment is the starting point and I look on this process as a very positive one.

We should also consider the global commitment to fight climate change. Cancún gave some assurances that other parts of the world also take things seriously in that regard. We are not the only ones who would like the world to be fair and sustainable, and other parts of the world will learn from us.

Let us take, for example, energy efficiency drives. We made a start, and other parts of the world have followed. The same applies to resource efficiency. If we can use less timber, then other parts of the world will definitely learn from our example. I believe there are a lot of ways in which we can lead.

Last but not least, I would like, once again, to guarantee that the Commission will conduct monitoring, not only by my own staff but also through the EU delegations and the Member State delegations that we have. This is one of the processes in which we share our efforts with the Member States. The Commission does not simply work alone and, in many respects, Member States’ experience has been particularly crucial in concluding this voluntary partnership agreement.

I would ask this House really very much to deal with this consent process because I believe it is a healthy process, it goes in the right direction and at the same time does not provide the answers on all the issues that you have raised today.

  Yannick Jadot, rapporteur. − Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, une nouvelle fois merci aux collègues qui sont intervenus. Je crois que nous sommes à peu près tous intervenus dans le même sens: rappeler ce point essentiel à travers l'APV, qui est le lien entre le développement, l'environnement et le renforcement de la société civile.

Je crois qu'aujourd'hui, s'il y a un levier sur lequel on peut construire un développement durable dans ces pays, notamment les pays africains, c'est évidemment le renforcement de la société civile. Tant que, dans ces pays-là, le seul ou le principal élément de démocratie, ce sera le vote pour le président, on le voit bien – l'histoire de la Côte d'Ivoire nous le rappelle malheureusement – on n'avancera pas suffisamment.

Donc, le renforcement de la société civile, le fait qu'elle soit partie prenante permanente dans la mise en œuvre de ces accords, dans le suivi de l'exploitation forestière, dans la discussion sur les conditions de cette exploitation forestière et sur le partage des revenus liés à cette exploitation forestière, est essentiel.

C'est à travers ce renforcement de la société civile aussi qu'on répond le mieux à l'argument qui nous est présenté souvent sur la question de la Chine. Pourquoi faudrait-il répondre aux critères d'une coopération forte avec l'Europe, des critères sociaux, démocratiques, environnementaux, alors que la Chine nous offre un boulevard en matière de corruption ou de pillage? Eh bien le renforcement, justement, de cette société civile, est le meilleur rempart à ce système que tente notamment d'imposer la Chine dans les pays du Sud.

Et puis, vous l'avez dit, Monsieur le Commissaire, l'Europe est un grand marché pour les bois tropicaux, mais c'est aussi – et c'est essentiel pour tous les exploitants, pour toute l'industrie – un marché stable et rémunérateur et cela, c'est très important aussi comme levier dans ces pays.

Merci de votre souhait de travailler avec le Parlement européen. Nous sommes très heureux de cette collaboration à venir.

  President. − The debate is closed.

The vote will take place on Wednesday (19 January 2011).

Written statements (Rule 149)

  Gaston Franco (PPE), par écrit. – Je me félicite qu'après cinq ans de négociations, les accords de partenariat volontaire (APV) dans le cadre du plan d'action relatif à l'application des réglementations forestières, gouvernance et échanges commerciaux (FLEGT), voient le jour l'un avec le Cameroun, l'autre avec la République du Congo.

Ces accords vont permettre de garantir une bonne gouvernance forestière en accordant une licence FLEGT aux produits forestiers de ces pays et en assurant ainsi une exploitation et une gestion durables des forêts.

Il est plus que nécessaire d'avoir un système qui permette la surveillance des mouvements du bois et de ses produits depuis la récolte jusqu'à l'exportation. 20% à 30% de la production industrielle mondiale de bois sont d'origine frauduleuse et 60% de l'exploitation des forêts en Afrique a été illégale durant les dix dernières années.

Ces APV permettront ainsi de préserver les forêts de ces pays en luttant contre l'exploitation illégale du bois qui est responsable de dommages environnementaux, économiques et sociaux conséquents.

Le grand avantage de ces APV est qu'ils vont s'appliquer envers toutes les exportations entre l'UE et ces pays ainsi qu'avec tous les autres pays importateurs de bois.

Je souhaite que ce système d'APV se développe rapidement à d'autres pays forestiers.

  Daciana Octavia Sârbu (S&D), in writing. – FLEGT voluntary partnership agreements were a good basis on which to build international cooperation to tackle the problem of deforestation. And they continue to show their relevance today, especially in the context of last year’s illegal timber regulation. Countries which adhere to such voluntary schemes are able to give certain guarantees about the legality and environmental sustainability of their timber sources. There are clear benefits in terms of environmental protection, although we should be mindful of the fact that trade in legally harvested timber is not necessarily sensitive to needs of indigenous people. It is important that, as more VPAs are agreed, their effects are closely monitored and that their terms take full account of the needs and human rights of people who are dependent on forests, but who often do not have a voice in the management of those forests.

17. Ftehim Interim ta' Sħubija bejn il-KE u l-Istati tal-Paċifiku - Ftehim ta' Sħubija Interim bejn il-KE u l-Istati tal-Paċifiku (dibattitu)

  President. − The next item is the joint debate on

– the report by David Martin, on behalf of the Committee on International Trade, on the recommendation on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Interim Partnership Agreement between the European Community, of the one part, and the Pacific States, of the other part (05078/2010 – C7-0036/2010 – 2008/0250(NLE)) (A7-0365/2010),

– the oral question to the Commission on Interim Partnership Agreement between the European Community, of the one part, and the Pacific States, of the other part, by Vital Moreira, David Martin, on behalf of the Committee on International Trade (O-0212/2010 - B7-0807/2010).

  David Martin, rapporteur. − Mr President, firstly I would like to say that I know that, for good reasons, Commissioner De Gucht cannot be with us this evening. I would like to thank him for taking the trouble to call me last week and explain why he is unable to be here, and I would like to thank him and his team at DG Trade for their cooperation, and in particular Martin Dihm for all his assistance.

I have tried, in my role as rapporteur, to follow on from the good work of the previous rapporteur, my former colleague Glyn Ford. I am fortunate that the adoption of Glyn’s resolution in 2009 meant that Parliament already had a clear position on the EC-Pacific Interim Economic Partnership Agreement. Parliament’s formal position then is the one that I have tried to follow in my report and question today.

I would like to thank Donatella Pribaz, who was the committee administrator responsible. This turned out to be her last report for the committee before her promotion, so I would like to wish her well in her new job and thank her for making my task here easier. Finally, in terms of acknowledgements, I would also like to welcome the presence here of the Ambassador for Papua New Guinea and to thank him and his staff for their close collaboration. The insights they provided allowed me to make specific input to the report.

Firstly, I would like to make a few general remarks on the agreement and the regional context. Secondly, I plan to discuss three specific aspects of the EPA which I believe it is important to highlight: namely Aid for Trade, the Fijian political situation and fisheries. Thirdly, I will comment on the future of EC-Pacific trading relations.

In terms of the background and regional integration, this interim – or goods only – EPA has been negotiated with two Pacific states – Papua New Guinea and Fiji. These are the two Pacific island states that have the highest levels of trade with the EU and have key exports destined for the EU market: tuna and sugar respectively.

The EPA gives Papua New Guinea and Fiji duty-free and quota-free access to the EU market in return for the gradual liberalisation of their markets over a 15-year period. Papua New Guinea has committed to liberalising 88% of EU imports on the date of application of this agreement, and Fiji will liberalise 87% over a 15-year period.

The remaining 12 Pacific states either enjoy duty-free and quota-free access through the Everything But Arms scheme or, because of their low level of trade with the EU, have very little interest in an interim EPA. Nevertheless, I believe it is important that, as we move towards a full EPA, we should pursue our objective of regional integration and continue to press for a full EPA involving all the Pacific states.

In terms of the content of the resolution, Parliament has to consent to this agreement before it can be ratified. We will vote on Wednesday – as you have indicated, Madam President – on two different reports, firstly on consent, which I am recommending that we give, and secondly on the accompanying motion for a resolution. There are other issues in the motion for a resolution but, as I have said, I want to comment particularly on three.

First, regarding Aid for Trade, funding for implementation is crucial to achieving the agreement’s objectives of economic diversification and poverty alleviation. It is important that a fair and equitable share of the EUR 2 billion set aside in the 2007 Aid for Trade Strategy is directed towards the Pacific region. It is also important to highlight that this interim EPA was conceived as a short-term measure to safeguard the Pacific’s trade preferences following the World Trade Organisation (WTO) ruling.

Bearing that in mind, it should not be seen as a sign of EU acceptance of the political regime in Fiji. I would urge the Fijian Government to make moves towards democracy. I hope that the necessary reforms can take place to allow financial support for the Fijian sugar industry to be allocated.

On fishing, the fisheries sector plays a key role in Papua New Guinea’s economy and – importantly – provides employment and income to its citizens. In the three tuna processing plants which export to the EU there are 5700 employees, the majority of whom are women. This is a country where it is sometimes difficult to find good employment for women.

I support the purpose of the flexible rules of origin in this agreement, namely to develop the processing industry, but it is essential that the industry develops in a sustainable manner. Environmental considerations are paramount and I have asked, in my report, for the Commission to monitor this aspect and to report back regularly to Parliament on compliance with the regulation on illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing.

I appreciate that there are some concerns in this House – and specifically in the Committee on Fisheries – about the potential impact of Papua New Guinea’s tuna imports on the EU industry. However, when we look at the latest figures, we can see that during the period 2003-2009, imports made up around only 2% of total preserved and prepared fish imports and around only 3% of preserved and prepared tuna imports. I do not believe that this low level of imports will threaten the domestic EU industry, especially if we take into account the limited capacity of the Pacific states’ fishing fleets and the limited on-land processing capacity.

Nevertheless, it is of course right that we should continue to monitor the situation and that, if there are any unexpected increases in fishing products coming from Papua New Guinea, the Commission should take appropriate action. As I mentioned earlier, I hope that the Pacific states can agree a comprehensive regional EPA.

In my report I have recommended the inclusion of several points of substance in future negotiations, which I hope the Commission will take into account. These include intellectual property. Too often we talk about intellectual property from one side only, but I hope that we will look at intellectual property in terms of including traditional knowledge. I also hope we will add transparency in government procurement as well as provision for issuing working visas of up to 24 months.

As we move towards a full EPA, I hope the Commission will involve all the Pacific states but, in the meantime, let us press ahead and get the interim EPA with PNG and Fiji on the books and working as a demonstration of what we can achieve in the future.

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. GIANNI PITTELLA
Vicepresidente

  Andris Piebalgs, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I would like to thank the rapporteur for his report and particularly for his positive attitude on consent to the interim Economic Partnership Agreement with the Pacific states of Papua New Guinea and Fiji. I hope that this House will follow his advice.

Consent by the European Parliament – for the first time on a trade agreement under the Lisbon Treaty – has important political significance because this is a trade agreement with a long-term development focus and because of the momentum it will provide to ongoing negotiations on the comprehensive EPA with the Pacific region.

Back in 2007, the immediate purpose of the interim agreement was to secure continued access to the EU market for those countries in the Pacific region which most depend on it, given the impending expiry of the Cotonou trade regime. The Commission’s commitment to concluding negotiations on a comprehensive EPA with the Pacific region as a whole remains unchanged and we are currently engaged in negotiations with our Pacific partners.

We can go forward only if we accept the special nature of the Pacific region and tailor the EPA accordingly. We are talking about small and remote island states which differ greatly in their economic situation, development needs and relations with the EU. Some countries have ‘least developed country’ status and are therefore covered by the EU’s Everything But Arms trade regime; some have little, if any, trade with the Union. We are therefore open to entering into the trade relationships that best suit the Pacific region as a whole, and the ongoing negotiations will inform the ultimate choices.

Whatever approach we opt for, it is absolutely crucial to ensure that any agreement will indeed contribute to the development of the countries concerned. That is why there is also financial assistance to enhance trade capacity. That is why we will allow partner countries in the developing world to exclude more sensitive products from the trade agreements: something that we would not allow other countries to do. In this context, I have duly taken note of the concerns expressed about the derogation in the interim EPA from the standard rules of origin for fisheries products.

It is precisely for development reasons that we granted this derogation and we did so on the basis of our informed judgment that Papua New Guinea’s small market share makes it unlikely that its tuna exports could damage the interests of the EU industry. The European Union and Papua New Guinea have applied these rules provisionally since 2008 and, whereas export figures have fluctuated, no upward trend has been detected. Let me also reassure you that the Commission does not intend to offer similar arrangements to any other region.

The Commission will, in any event, closely monitor the implementation of the derogation and will report to Parliament on the basis of a study which will be prepared before the end of 2011.

Some of you were also present in September last year when the current elected Prime Minister addressed the INTA Committee. He expressed the readiness of his government to grant EU vessels and investors access to Papua New Guinea’s waters. We take this oral declaration very seriously and we will continue to engage with our partners till it comes to fruition.

Parliament’s consent will allow us to launch the implementation mechanisms provided for the agreement; one of these is the Trade Committee, which could be convened this spring and which provides a platform for raising all the issues relating to mutual obligations under the interim EPA. Your vote is therefore crucial to helping us move forward on this and other important issues.

With regard to Fiji, the country did sign the interim EPA but it does not apply it provisionally. This makes Papua New Guinea currently the only country provisionally applying the EU-Pacific interim EPA. Fiji continues, for the time being, to have access to the EU market under the Market Access Regulation, since the Council has not adopted trade sanctions. As you are aware, the EU decided to suspend development aid to Fiji because of the political situation in the country. Resumption of aid would presuppose progress in governance in Fiji and, in particular, a return to democratic principles of government, but at the moment there is no tangible progress in Fiji in this regard.

The EPA we have discussed today is only an interim arrangement to ensure that access to the EU market is not lost. The Commission is fully committed to continue negotiations on a comprehensive EPA with the Pacific region.

  Carmen Fraga Estévez, ponente de opinión de la Comisión de Pesca. − Señor Presidente, señor Comisario, la exención a las normas de origen parte de un gravísimo error de cálculo que ha hecho la Comisión sobre su impacto, no solo en el sector atunero comunitario, que es muy serio, sino en la propia zona del Pacífico ―a la que se pretende ayudar―, cuando los beneficiarios reales son casi exclusivamente las voraces flotas de China y el Sudeste Asiático y su industria de transformación.

La DG Comercio ha establecido esta exención basándose en que Papúa Nueva Guinea no tiene capacidad pesquera para explotar sus recursos. Sin embargo, según los datos más recientes de la Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, hay 41 cerqueros con pabellón de Papúa Nueva Guinea operando en la zona, con un total de capturas que en el año 2009 se elevó a casi medio millón de toneladas y, de ellas, más de 75 000 (entre semitransformados y transformados) acabaron en la Unión Europea, lo que sitúa a Papúa Nueva Guinea entre los seis principales exportadores a la Unión Europea. No es cierto, por tanto, como dicen ustedes, que para desarrollar el sector pesquero de Papúa Nueva Guinea fuera necesario dar entrada libre a otras flotas.

En ningún caso la Unión Europea puede falsear sus compromisos con el desarrollo sostenible. No obstante, estamos viendo como, al amparo de esta exención y a fin de dar entrada a los inversores asiáticos, Papúa Nueva guinea ha enmendado su legislación para que no sea posible presentar denuncias por daños medioambientales y ha puesto en marcha una normativa de inversiones que permite contratar a trabajadores locales y a mano de obra barata procedente de Asia con las peores garantías laborales que quepa imaginar.

Si a ello añadimos que Papúa Nueva Guinea lidera ―en la organización regional de pesca que he citado antes― una negativa rotunda a cualquier norma internacional de gestión y control de la pesca el resultado es que, mientra que la DG Asuntos Marítimos y Pesca pone toda la carne en el asador para luchar contra la pesca ilegal, otros le abren las puertas. Yo, señor Comisario, vengo ahora mismo de la Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission y sé muy bien la posición que ha mantenido Papúa Nueva Guinea. Por eso, me mantengo en la posición de la Comisión de Pesca de pedir que se suspenda la exención en la revisión del acuerdo del que estamos hablando.

  Laima Liucija Andrikienė, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, as shadow rapporteur for the PPE Group, I would like to start by saying that we welcome the increasing role of the EU as a trading power in every region of the world, including the Pacific region.

The agreement, as it is now, is not a perfect one, not least because it is not a comprehensive EPA, but only an interim one. We hope that the Commission will be in a position to negotiate, in due time, a comprehensive EPA including a larger number of countries in the region.

Secondly, the current agreement concerns only a small part of EU trade, since the share of EU trade accounted for by the whole of the Pacific region is just 0.06%, and yet some areas have caused us concern, most notably on the issue of the derogation from the rules of origin for fishery products.

In our resolution we raise our concern that a number of countries, such as the Philippines, Thailand, China, the United States, Australia and others, will be able to take advantage of this derogation and potentially export large quantities of processed fisheries products to the EU, potentially harming the interests of the EU fish processing and canning industry.

We therefore encourage the Commission to act on Parliament’s request for it to conduct an impact assessment study and, in the event that the assessment demonstrates a destabilising effect on the EU’s fish processing and canning industry, for it to initiate the procedure leading to suspension of the exceptional arrangements in this agreement regarding rules of origin.

  George Sabin Cutaş, în numele grupului S&D. – Actualul acord interimar de parteneriat încheiat în noiembrie 2007 de Comisia Europeană şi statele Papua-Noua Guinee şi Fiji a fost aspru criticat de către societatea civilă şi de către politicienii din regiunea Pacificului. Aceştia au subliniat consecinţele negative pe care acordul le-a avut asupra nivelului de solidaritate interregională şi a dorinţei politice de integrare economică în regiune.

Aceasta din urmă a fost divizată în grupuri care au negociat în mod individual şi sub presiuni obţinerea unui acord intermediar cu Comisia Europeană. Totodată, se crede că acordarea statutului de produs originar, derogare de la plata taxelor vamale în Uniune pentru produsele piscicole de provenienţă din Papua Noua Guinee şi Fiji a condus la crearea unui centru de procesare a acestor produse, inclusiv a unor produse neoriginare, de către firme din statele vecine, cu scopul de a profita de avantajele derogării.

Acest proces ar avea efecte nefaste asupra industriei, lucrătorilor şi veniturilor locale, ţinând cont de faptul că industria piscicolă este una dintre cele mai importante generatoare de locuri de muncă în aceste ţări. De asemenea, el ar reprezenta o concurenţă neloială pentru produsele europene. Prin urmare, este posibil ca acordul să fi avut efecte contrare celor dorite.

Astfel, Comisia Europeană trebuie să se asigure că viitorul acord de parteneriat va contribui atât la dezvoltarea unei industrii piscicole locale sustenabile, creatoare de locuri de muncă, cât şi la o integrare regională mai strânsă, spre exemplu, prin negocierea viitorului acord cu regiunea Pacificului în întregimea sa.

  Isabella Lövin, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, one of the objectives of the EPAs is to promote regional integration. What we have seen so far is that this is not happening. On the contrary, in the case of the Pacific, the EU is undermining unity by offering interim agreements to some ACP countries, with special conditions attached.

The derogation from the rules of origin for fish processed in Papua New Guinea and Fiji is an example of this. I believe that this derogation is potentially hazardous and that it must be thoroughly evaluated in 2011, as already agreed.

I say this because it is important to have facts when discussing this matter. What are the effects on global fish stocks, on employment and on the environment in Papua New Guinea? What are the social conditions of the workers? All this must be fully and transparently assessed, and then the derogation may or may not be abolished on that basis, and not on the basis of complaints from the Spanish fishing industry which, itself, fishes in Papua New Guinea but never lands fish there – and, by the way, does not pay customs duty when it sells the fish as European on the European market.

  Elie Hoarau, au nom du groupe GUE/NGL. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, je pense qu'il est quelque peu abusif de dénommer les accords de partenariat économique intérimaires "accords Pacifique", puisque, sur les quinze États ACP de la zone, seuls deux d'entre eux sont signataires.

À l'évidence, ces accords prennent davantage la forme d'accords bilatéraux que de véritables accords régionaux, accords bilatéraux qui s'écartent des objectifs affichés des APE, à savoir l'intégration régionale. Comment ne pas voir là l'illustration de ce que dénoncent, dans le Pacifique comme en Afrique, les acteurs de la société civile, à savoir qu'un certain nombre de pays ACP ont été contraints de signer des accords individuels parce que la Commission n'a pas su faire des APE un véritable instrument de partenariat de développement?

Ces fortes pressions exercées par les négociateurs européens sur les États ACP ont été dénoncées par les pays ACP eux-mêmes à l'occasion de la 92e session du Conseil des ministres d'Afrique, des Caraïbes et du Pacifique, qui s'est tenue à Bruxelles du 8 au 12 novembre 2010. La réalité tragique des APE, accords négociés par la Commission européenne, est telle qu'ils sont un échec avant même leur entrée en vigueur. Un échec tel que nombre de pays ACP demandent aux États membres de l'Union européenne d'examiner la possibilité de réviser le mandat de négociation donné à la Commission européenne en juin 2002.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI). - Herr Präsident! Im Zusammenwirken mit der derzeitigen Marktsituation führt die Reform der EU-Zuckermarktordnung dazu, dass der EU-Zuckerpreis unter dem internationalen Preis liegt.

Die langjährigen Abnahmeverträge mit den Zuckerrohproduzenten in Afrika, der Karibik oder dem Pazifik werden bei dieser Preissituation wohl nur sehr schwer haltbar sein. Dass die Bauern in den AKP-Staaten ihre Ware lieber zu höheren Preisen auf dem Weltmarkt verkaufen, statt sie günstig in der EU zu vertreiben, mag bei den Schwierigkeiten rund um die neuen AKP-Abkommen eine Rolle gespielt haben. Wenn nun dieser Anreiz wegfällt und gleichzeitig eine Meistbegünstigungsklausel in Kauf genommen werden muss und zudem noch die Staatseinnahmen mit dem Wegfall der Zolleinnahmen sinken, ist es ja kein Wunder, dass die AKP-Staaten so zögerlich waren.

In diesem Zusammenhang wird sicherlich ein Augenmerk auf die Fischerei gelegt werden müssen, und zwar nicht nur, ob Papua-Neuguinea und Fidschi anderen Handelspartnern Zugang zu ihren Fischereigewässern gewährt haben. Vielleicht sollte man auch aufklären, ob die Vorwürfe stimmen, dass sich etwa die spanische Fischereiflotte aufgrund der EU-Einschränkungen und der Fangquoten in den Pazifik verlagert hat und dort unter fremder Flagge fischt.

  Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). - Señor Presidente, yo también quiero expresar mi preocupación por el impacto de este acuerdo en el sector pesquero del atún en conserva, muy importante en España y en especial en Galicia, mi circunscripción.

Este impacto negativo obedece, como se ha dicho, a una concesión sin precedentes y mal fundamentada: la exención de las normas de origen en los productos transformados de la pesca, cuando así se solicite, por no disponer de materia prima autóctona suficiente.

Pues bien, es lo primero que ha hecho Papúa Nueva Guinea, y la exención ya se está aplicando. Papúa Nueva Guinea se convierte así en una gran plataforma de transformación y exportación de atún proveniente de los grandes competidores de la industria europea, es decir, Filipinas, Tailandia, China y los Estados Unidos. Realmente, ellos son los grandes beneficiarios del acuerdo.

Se estima que la producción de atún se elevará finalmente a cuatrocientas mil toneladas al año, dirigidas al mercado europeo, que consume actualmente un total de unas setecientas diez mil. El impacto será muy grave, ya que los precios del atún procedente de Papúa Nueva Guinea son un tercio más baratos que los europeos, por los bajos salarios y los inexistentes estándares medioambientales.

En mi tierra, en Galicia, se considera una competencia imbatible, que tendrá graves consecuencias en el empleo. Deseo que el estudio de impacto que anuncia la Comisión Europea tenga el mayor rigor posible y tenga en cuenta las consecuencias, a corto y medio plazo, de esa exención de las normas de origen.

Espero que ponga fin, cuanto antes, a la aplicación de esta exención. Es una medida excepcional y transitoria. Sin embargo, parece que en Papúa Nueva Guinea la consideran permanente. De lo contrario, no se harían esas inversiones. Espero, además, que esta exención no vuelva a recogerse en otros acuerdos, y tampoco en el acuerdo definitivo. Pero, en la actualidad, ya hay un problema con el acuerdo provisional y debe subsanarse.

  Josefa Andrés Barea (S&D). - Señor Presidente, el Acuerdo de Asociación con Papúa Nueva Guinea y Fiyi conlleva, como se está diciendo aquí, una exención a las normas de origen. Afecta, sobre todo, al atún, como ha dicho el ponente. ¿Qué queremos con este acuerdo? Queremos el desarrollo del sector pesquero y la superación de la pobreza en estos archipiélagos, esto es, la ayuda al desarrollo.

¿Pero qué efectos negativos tiene que terceros países se beneficien de este trato preferencial?

Estamos escuchando aquí las denuncias que se están produciendo. Queremos una situación equilibrada. La Comisión nos acaba de decir que hay análisis claros. Sin embargo, la opinión que aquí se expresa es que no es así. En 2008 se dijo que no existía ningún tipo de distorsión y se nos anunció un informe de impacto.

Queremos una situación equilibrada. Queremos una revisión, consulta y controles. Queremos saber si este acuerdo sirve para la ayuda al desarrollo de este archipiélago. Y también queremos saber si se cumplen las medidas sanitarias ―algo muy importante para los productos que se importan―, la gestión sostenible de la pesca, la lucha contra la pesca ilegal ―elemento fundamental― y un elemento también muy importante que nos mostraría la forma de trabajar de estos terceros países que pueden estar radicados en Papúa Nueva Guinea, como es el cumplimiento de las normas internacionales de trabajo.

Queremos dar sostenimiento a este acuerdo, queremos ayudar al cumplimiento de este acuerdo, pero también queremos que este acuerdo sirva para el desarrollo de Papúa Nueva Guinea y de Fiyi y que no perjudique a la industria española.

  Alain Cadec (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, je tiens à attirer votre attention sur la dérogation aux règles d'origine accordée à la Papouasie-Nouvelle-Guinée, concernant les produits de la pêche transformés, notamment les conserves de thon, qui me semble extrêmement dangereuse.

Ce pays ACP bénéficie d'un accès préférentiel au marché européen, c'est-à-dire d'une exonération totale des droits de douane sur les conserves de thon qu'il exporte sur notre marché. Je ne mets pas en doute la politique de développement que l'accord met en œuvre. En revanche, la dérogation aux règles d'origine sur les conserves de thon est totalement inacceptable.

Cette dérogation permet aux opérateurs extérieurs de s'implanter en Papouasie-Nouvelle-Guinée et elle ne profite donc que très peu à l'emploi et à la population locale. Il faut permettre l'aide au développement, mais une aide juste et efficace, qui profite aux régions concernées.

Les importations communautaires de thon sont passées de 9 200 à 16 200 tonnes de 2008 à 2009. Elles ont doublé en un an seulement. Ce phénomène ne peut que s'aggraver si cette dérogation est maintenue. De plus, ces produits ne respectent pas les mêmes normes sociales, sanitaires et de préservation de la ressource que les normes imposées aux produits européens. Il est notamment impossible de vérifier l'origine des captures.

Chers collègues, la Commission européenne n'a-t-elle pas pris le temps de lire mon rapport sur l'origine des importations des produits de la pêche et de l'aquaculture dans l'Union européenne?

En tous les cas, si c'est le cas, c'est à désespérer. Nous ne pouvons pas de la sorte sacrifier les emplois européens et la qualité des produits vendus sur le marché européen. Je ne veux pas qu'une situation destructrice pour l'industrie de la transformation européenne se mette en place durablement.

  Ulrike Rodust (S&D). - Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Für mich als Koordinatorin des Fischereiausschusses ist in diesem Übergangsabkommen besonders der Aspekt der Fischerei interessant. Hier gab es im Vorfeld einige Kontroversen hinsichtlich der Lockerung der Ursprungsregelung für Papua-Neuguinea. Ich unterstütze die Auffassung der Kommission, durch diese Lockerung die Wirtschaft eines der ärmsten Länder unserer Erde anzukurbeln. Das darf auch – davon bin ich fest überzeugt – uns Fischereipolitikern nicht egal sein. Ich verstehe gleichzeitig die Sorgen der europäischen Industrie, kann mir aber, ehrlich gesagt, nicht vorstellen, dass die gewährten Erleichterungen dazu führen, dass Papua-Neuguinea eine ernstzunehmende Konkurrenz für unsere Konservenindustrie wird.

Aber wir müssen wachsam sein, denn es ist natürlich niemandem geholfen, wenn wir unsere halbe Konservenindustrie in den Pazifikraum verlagern. Ich muss aber dazu sagen, dass uns in der Diskussion über dieses Abkommen sehr widersprüchliche Informationen hinsichtlich der Frage vorlagen, in welchem Umfang in Papua-Neuguinea investiert wird und welche Staaten indirekt von der Lockerung der Ursprungsregelung profitieren. Ich bitte deshalb die Kommission dringend, die Anwendung dieser Ausnahmeregelung genau zu überwachen und dem Parlament rechtzeitig über die Auswirkungen auf die Entwicklung in Papua-Neuguinea und die Auswirkungen auf die europäische Konservenindustrie Bericht zu erstatten. Wenn diese Regelung nicht die gewünschten Ergebnisse vor Ort erzielt und nicht vertretbaren Schaden für europäische Firmen bedeutet, müssen wir bei der Verhandlung des endgültigen Abkommens neu entscheiden. Halten Sie uns bitte auf dem Laufenden!

  Pablo Zalba Bidegain (PPE). - Señor Presidente, en primer lugar, me gustaría aclarar que estoy a favor de estrechar vínculos comerciales entre la Unión Europea y Papúa Nueva Guinea que favorezcan el desarrollo de esta región, pero que favorezcan un desarrollo sostenible.

Creo sinceramente que este acuerdo, tal y como lo hemos planteado actualmente, no es un buen acuerdo. Estoy absolutamente en contra de una cláusula del mismo que considero injusta: la exención a las normas de origen, porque no solo pone en peligro el desarrollo sostenible de Papúa Nueva Guinea sino que, como bien hemos escuchado aquí, pone en peligro toda una industria europea, la industria conservera. Esta concesión debería ser absolutamente excepcional, y no debería haberse aplicado en el caso de Papúa Nueva Guinea. Además, no olvidemos el serio precedente que esta medida está sentando, y sentará, en futuras negociaciones de la Unión Europea.

En mi opinión, hubiese sido necesaria una resolución mucho más clara y contundente al respecto que indicase categóricamente que, en la próxima revisión del Acuerdo de Asociación Interino, se suspenda definitivamente la exención a las normas de origen. Por tanto, quiero pedir a la Comisión que tenga en cuenta las dramáticas consecuencias que esta concesión va a tener, primero, en la industria conservera europea y, segundo, en la sostenibilidad del medio ambiente y en los recursos naturales de Papúa Nueva Guinea, y el precedente tan negativo que sienta para futuras negociaciones. Por mucho que la Comisión haya reconocido que no será un precedente, la presión estará ahí. Por tanto, pido a la Comisión que decida poner fin, cuanto antes, a la exención a las normas de origen.

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE). - Mr President, I actually came down to participate in the next debate but I have been watching this debate from my office and I am concerned, like others who have spoken in the debate here, about the idea of flexibility on rules of origin.

In the last seven days there was a programme on British television, part of a whole Channel Four series about the fishing industry, in which, I am afraid, the European Union’s fisheries policy came in for severe criticism, and we are getting lots of e-mails from concerned citizens.

This specific issue did not arise, but I would just like to stand up and support those colleagues who have expressed huge concern about a proposal that is supposed to be positive as a development tool, but in fact could be quite negative, not just from a European perspective, but also for the very countries we are trying to assist.

  Andris Piebalgs, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, this was an extremely interesting debate. There is poverty in the world. We need to deal with it. One way would be the transfer of financial resources, but it is much better to give the people the opportunity to make a decent living from the work they do. The three tuna processing facilities in Papua New Guinea which are authorised to export tuna to the EU employ around 5 700 people, most of whom are women. Jobs are at stake in Papua New Guinea, which is one of the most poverty-stricken countries.

When it proposes derogations, the Commission takes due account of the risks involved and looks to create safeguards. The Commission takes the view that it is highly unlikely that Papua New Guinea’s exports will cause any serious disruption to the EU’s fishing and canning industry given the low volume of trade between Papua New Guinea and the EU, and Papua New Guinea’s low market-share in the EU tuna market of around 3% in recent years. Provisional application dates from 2008, and we have some experience with figures. It will not cause any disruption to Europe’s fishing or canning industries. The development of trade flows will be further analysed in a study on the effect of the implementation of the special rules of origin for fishery products which will be prepared in 2011.

In addition, the Commission will monitor trade with PNG and will not hesitate to take appropriate measures if a serious disturbance of the EU market becomes evident. The Interim Agreement explicitly allows for the application of such measures in its Chapter 2 on trade defence instruments. There is no indication at this stage of any negative impact of Papua New Guinea’s exports of fishery products on the canning industry in other ACP or GSP+ countries. This aspect will also be looked at in the study I have just mentioned.

I should like to add that, independently of any special rules of origin or preferential trade agreements, countries and companies exporting fish or fishery products to the EU will always have to comply with the regulation on illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and with the EU’s health and food safety requirements. I believe that the Commission has considered the matter very carefully before bringing this measure forward.

I shall now turn to a broader issue: the EPA in general. Trade is far from simple. As I have said, the only way to eradicate poverty is to allow growth in the developing world. It is true that regional cooperation is rather difficult at the start. It is not just trade agreements that make regional development happen. That is why we have earmarked EUR 45 million for aid for trade in the Oceania region. This is three times more than was provided for under the ninth EDF. It is only by facilitating trade flows that you can expect regional trade to take place. If we look at all developing countries, basically all trade is based on monoculture – one particular export item with a high fluctuation rate. This has a highly disruptive effect in the countries concerned.

When we talk about migratory flows, security, safety and justice in the world, we cannot just say that we do not care about it. We should care about it, and our departments have carried out an extensive study. We are proposing very decent measures which are completely in line with all the European Union’s objectives.

I believe that the measure is right and that the necessary safeguards are in place in case anything goes wrong. I believe we have judged this correctly and I therefore lend my support to this agreement.

  David Martin, author. − Mr President, I will be brief. I find myself almost, indeed entirely, in agreement with the Commissioner on this subject.

Firstly, to repeat, it is important that we sign the interim EPA because, if we do not, existing trade preferences for Papua New Guinea and Fiji will disappear, under the WTO ruling. The interim EPA is precisely that: it is an interim arrangement, and I agree with all the colleagues who say that our objective in the long run should be a full, comprehensive EPA with all the Pacific countries, encouraging regional integration in the Pacific. But we have to take this step at the moment to ensure the continuation of preferences for the two largest countries in the Pacific region.

On fishing, the Commission has made it very clear that what we have here is an exception. This will be the only derogation. There are no other parts of the world to which we intend giving such a derogation. Why are we giving a derogation to Papua New Guinea? I will tell you: it is because Papua New Guinea is literally on the other side of the world, and the likelihood of EU fishing fleets exploiting that area extensively is limited, although they are free to do so. There is nothing to stop EU fishing fleets fishing in Papua New Guinea waters and landing their catch and getting their catch canned in Papua New Guinea – and, as has been said earlier, that would be very good for development, and indeed we should encourage it.

But the situation at present is that Chinese boats, Thai boats and boats of other Asian nationalities are fishing in Papua New Guinea’s waters and landing their fish back in their own country, giving no opportunity for development in Papua New Guinea.

There is a development opportunity here in terms of providing jobs, particularly for women. We often complain that we do not do enough in our development policy to encourage downstream activity. Here we are actually doing something positive for downstream activity. As the Commissioner has said, in order to qualify the fish still needs to meet all the standards under the regulation on illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. It has to meet all our sanitary and phytosanitary conditions. That is absolutely essential. The three factories in Papua New Guinea meet these standards at the moment and are providing useful jobs. If we have a sudden increase in the number of factories, and a sudden surge in imports from Papua New Guinea, then of course we will have to revisit the situation and potentially take action.

At the moment, however, the statistics speak for themselves. This agreement has been in place since 2008. There has been no surge. There is no threat to the European tuna industry. I have met, as rapporteur, with the leaders of the Spanish tuna industry and they themselves have said to me that there is no current threat. What they are worried about is the future. They accept that at the moment there is no serious threat to the EU industry. So let us not exaggerate the situation. Let us not make a poor developing country pay for our preoccupation with our own self-interest.

  Presidente. − Comunico di aver ricevuto una proposta di risoluzione conformemente all'articolo 115, paragrafo 5, del regolamento.

La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà mercoledì 19 gennaio 2011.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 149)

  Helmut Scholz (GUE/NGL), schriftlich. – Das Interims-Partnerschaftsabkommen zwischen der Europäischen Gemeinschaft und Fidschi und Papua-Neuguinea greift in den komplizierten und komplexen Integrationsprozess in der pazifischen Region ein. Es leistet leider kaum erkennbare entwicklungspolitische Förderung für die beiden Staaten. Ich möchte daran erinnern, dass der Militärputsch in Fidschi 2006 vom Europäischen Parlament, vom Rat und auch von der Kommission einhellig verurteilt wurden. Die bis heute andauernde Diktatur wird nun mit dem Abschluss dieses Handelsabkommens quasi als Vertragspartner anerkannt. Das Bemühen unserer Partner in Australien, Neuseeland und anderen Ländern der Region um eine Rückkehr zur Demokratie in Fidschi wird durch diesen Vertrag unterwandert. Als ich in unserer Sitzung im Handelsausschuss die Unterdrückung der Demokratie durch die Militärs in Fidschi kritisierte, war die Antwort von deren Vertretern: „But we are in control!“ Was ich für blanken Zynismus hielt, scheint nun den Ansprüchen der Kommission an die Legitimität ihrer Vertragspartner zu genügen. Meine Fraktion wird gegen dieses Abkommen stimmen. Ich werde mich dafür einsetzen, das Abkommen so lange auszusetzen, bis die Demokratie in Fidschi wiederhergestellt ist.

18. L-adozzjoni internazzjonali fl-Unjoni Ewropea (dibattitu)

  Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca la discussione sull'interrogazione orale alla Commissione sull'adozione internazionale nell'Unione europea, di Roberta Angelilli (O-0193/2010 - B7-0670/2010).

  Roberta Angelilli, Autore. − Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, molti colleghi, insieme a me, sono stati sensibilizzati nel corso degli anni sul problema dei minori abbandonati, orfani o bambini di strada. Tra le associazioni che mi hanno contattato c'è quella degli Amici dell'adozione.

Di questi bambini abbandonati ce ne sono tanti e non solo nel terzo mondo, ma anche in Europa. Sono bambini che diventano invisibili e finiscono nel circuito vizioso della povertà e dell'esclusione sociale o, peggio ancora, vengono sfruttati dalla criminalità organizzata per l'accattonaggio, il lavoro nero, la prostituzione, il traffico di organi o di adozioni illegali; sono bambini che spesso passano la loro infanzia tra assistenti sociali ed orfanotrofi.

A questi bambini noi dobbiamo garantire il diritto ad essere adottati, il diritto ad avere una famiglia. Un bambino deve rimanere il meno possibile in un istituto. L'obiettivo, ovviamente, è l'interesse superiore del minore, quindi l'adottabilità deve essere concessa certamente con accortezza, sotto la scrupolosa vigilanza delle competenti autorità nazionali, ma se ci sono le condizioni, i bambini hanno il diritto di essere adottati, innanzitutto a livello nazionale, ma anche a livello internazionale, all'interno dell'Unione europea.

So che la Commissione è sensibile, seppur si tratta di una competenza squisitamente nazionale, ma sarebbe appunto auspicabile una sorta di coordinamento tra Commissione e Stati membri per buone prassi e strategie capaci di garantire la massima trasparenza, per evitare adozioni illegali e adozioni facili, ma anche per ottenere da tutti gli Stati membri la massima collaborazione nel garantire il diritto all'adozione e per evitare che i bambini siano abbandonati a se stessi o, come dicevo prima, abbandonati all'interno di un istituto.

  Kristalina Georgieva, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, thank you for bringing forward this important question. The protection and promotion of children’s rights is a priority for the Commission, especially since the launch of the communication entitled ‘Towards an EU strategy on the rights of the child’ in 2006. The strategy on the rights of the child focuses on the fundamental rights of children, including the protection of the best interests of the child as enshrined in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights.

The Commission is determined to ensure that all fundamental rights encompassed in the Charter are duly respected by all EU actions, both legislative and non-legislative. This practice will be upheld and further developed in the forthcoming communication on the rights of the child that the Commission will be publishing this year. As of this year, 2011, the Commission will also be reporting annually on progress made on the application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.

We have to remember that the provisions of the Charter are addressed to the institutions and bodies of the Union, with due regard for the principle of subsidiarity, and to the Member States only when they are implementing Union law. We therefore have to remember that, currently, no European Union legislation on international adoption exists. The subject is regulated by the Hague Convention of 29 May 1993 on protection of children and cooperation in respect of inter-country adoption, as well as by national laws. All the Member States are party to that Convention, but the EU is not. Its aim is to implement Article 21 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child by establishing safeguards to ensure that inter-country adoptions take place in the best interests of the child and that the child’s fundamental rights are respected.

Internationally, the Commission supports the accession of third countries to the 1993 Hague Convention on inter-country adoption and its correct implementation by participating in relevant meetings of the contracting parties. The Commission does not consider specific European rules on intra-EU adoptions to be necessary, as all 27 EU Member States are parties to the Hague Convention. That being said, the Commission is closely following the issue of international adoption within the European Union, given the link between adoption and children’s rights. The Commission has taken steps to see how countries are implementing the convention on adoption, and, in November 2009, provided a forum for an exchange of views on the issue.

The Commission’s Green Paper on the free circulation of public documents, published on 14 December 2010, addresses the lack of mutual recognition of adoption decisions as civil status acts between Member States and its impact on the freedom of movement of EU citizens. This is a specific step which addresses the question raised today.

  Salvatore Iacolino, a nome del gruppo PPE. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Signora Commissario, non v'è dubbio che il tema dell'adozione internazionale sia un tema di particolare rilevanza e bene ha fatto la collega Angelilli a sottoporlo al Parlamento europeo in questa sessione.

Procedure più snelle e semplificate, costi che in atto sono particolarmente rilevanti, dai 20 ai 30 000 euro per adozione, difficoltà a dare una risposta concreta a un'esigenza, quella della famiglia, quella dei genitori di diventare appunto tali. Ragazzi vulnerabili e spesso abbandonati che si pongono talvolta in condizione di invisibilità, mi riferisco in particolare ai flussi di emigranti clandestini e ai tanti ragazzi che sono sottoposti, dopo essere stati collocati nei centri di identificazione ed espulsione, a quella tratta vergognosa di schiavitù nella quale molto spesso gli stessi vengono coinvolti.

Ci vogliono contributi nei confronti della famiglia; il modello italiano, il modello di altre realtà, può essere seguito: detrazione per le spese legate al costo dell'adozione internazionale, crediti agevolati alle banche, procedure, dicevamo, snelle e semplificate, con meccanismi reali di monitoraggio su ciò che accade nei vari Stati membri, prevenzione reale sul traffico degli esseri umani – recentemente il Parlamento è intervenuto con un dossier specifico – contrasto reale alle adozioni illegali e trasparenza.

E, perché no, se vogliamo restituire centralità alla famiglia, come spesso riferiamo in questo consesso, dobbiamo fare in modo che le associazioni, quelle associazioni che molto spesso sono il veicolo fondamentale di queste adozioni siano caratterizzate da standard di garanzia particolarmente elevati.

Se c'è un suggerimento – e concludo – alla Signora Commissario, è: perché non prevedere una modalità di accreditamento europeo nei confronti di queste associazioni, fare in modo che queste associazioni si muovano con trasparenza, chiarezza e concretezza, ma con una linea elevata di garanzia che tuteli veramente i diritti inviolabili e intangibili dei minori?

  Monika Flašíková Beňová, za skupinu S&D. – Hovoríme tu v tejto večernej hodine o veľmi citlivej téme, pretože hovoríme o tých najmenších, o tých, ktorí potrebujú našu lásku a potrebujú našu opateru.

Problém opustených detí v Európe sa stáva čoraz závažnejším. Vzniknutá situácia je v dnešných dňoch v oveľa väčšej miere vecou zodpovednosti práve bezprostredného okolia. Aj prostredníctvom práva osvojiť si dieťa na medzinárodnej úrovni je možné predísť tomu, aby boli mnohé deti nútené žiť v detských domovoch, kde napriek veľkej starostlivosti, ktorú dostávajú, nikdy nepocítia takú tú skutočnú materskú lásku alebo otcovské pohladenie.

Je preto potrebné zefektívniť systém adopcií tak, aby si opustené deti v čo najskoršom veku mohli nájsť náhradnú rodinu. Treba napríklad zúžiť práva biologických rodičov, ak o dieťa neprejavujú skutočný záujem po určitý čas. Skrátilo by sa tým obdobie, ktoré dieťa trávi v detskom domove, lebo nie je tzv. právne voľné. Takto by tiež bolo možné do určitej miery eliminovať zbytočné časové prieťahy v celom adopčnom procese.

Množstvo dohovorov o ochrane maloletých legislatívne upravuje snahu kompetentných konať v prospech a v záujme týchto detí. Ochrana práv dieťaťa je rovnako jedným z hlavných cieľov Európskej únie. Vhodnými krokmi je preto potrebné aj naďalej postupovať tak, aby bol za každých okolností chránený najmä najlepší záujem dieťaťa.

  Cecilia Wikström, för ALDE-gruppen. – Herr talman! Jag vill inleda med att tacka Roberta Angelilli för initiativet och tacka för svaret till kommissionsledamot Georgieva. Det här är en viktig debatt.

Ett hem att kalla sitt eget, en familj som skyddar en, som värmer och värnar ett skört litet barn är något som väldigt många barn runtom i Europa idag saknar. Det är en dröm för de barn som växer upp på institutioner.

Vi måste alla nu göra vårt yttersta för att föräldralösa eller övergivna barn inte ska behöva växa upp på barnhem och andra institutioner utan i familjer där de får den ömhet som kan bära dem ända in i vuxenlivet, så att de blir hela vuxna och inte trasiga.

I våra medlemsstater har vi olika uppfattningar om vilka individer som kan utgöra en familj. Jag tror ändå att vi kan vara överens om att en familj kan se olika ut men att det är som är viktigast är att man möter barnet med kärlek och omsorg.

Jag hoppas att vi också kan enas kring hur viktigt samarbetet kring politiska strategier och instrument för internationella adoptioner är. Jag utgår från att kommissionen tar täten i det här arbetet. Jag ser också fram emot att tillsammans med kollegorna arbeta fram en gemensam resolution i den här frågan. I den mån vi kan bidra till att föra samman ett övergivet föräldralöst barn med en familj som längtar efter barn har vi bidragit med något mycket stort.

Låt oss också komma ihåg hur viktigt det är hur möter dessa våra minsta bröder och systrar. Om vi möter dem med kärlek ökar vi gryningsljuset på jorden. Det tror jag är en livsuppgift för alla, oaktat vilken roll vi har i samhället.

  Marina Yannakoudakis, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, adoption is a positive way of providing a new family for children who cannot be brought up by their birth parents, or children who lose their parents. To adopt a child in the UK, checks and vetting procedures are robust, and prospective parents need to be accepted by an adoption agency. The welfare of the child is and should be at the heart of the adoption process.

The issue of inter-country adoptions is more complex than national adoption, but I am very grateful to the PPE Group for bringing this issue forward. Whilst it is to be commended that we try and move forward in it, I have concerns that international adoption does bring risks – risks that have already been mentioned, such as child abuse and malpractice, that undermine the welfare of the child.

That is why I believe that all Member States need to ensure that their adoption laws are regulated in a way that promotes the interests of the child. Member States must work together to ensure that the legal process of adoption between the providing and receiving countries is transparent, robust and holds the child’s welfare as its priority.

  Слави Бинев (NI). - уважаема г-жо комисар Георгиева, скъпи колеги, ще дам пример с България, където проблемът с изоставените деца става все по-сериозен и са необходими спешни мерки, за да се овладее ситуацията. Системи, подобни на българската, в които огромен процент деца се дават за международно осиновяване, са вредни.

От друга страна, докато системите за грижи за децата са такива, международното осиновяване може да се окаже единствената възможност за семейство и нормален живот за мнозина от децата в домовете. Когато подобряваме цялостната система, трябва да внимаваме да не им отнемаме този шанс. Необходими са мерки, които да улеснят процедурата за международно осиновяване, но и да гарантират интересите на децата ни. Да гарантират, че така наречените "осиновители" не гонят само европейско гражданство, нещо, което в момента им се позволява.

Не трябва аз да питам дали го правят от чисто сърце или користни цели. Това е работа на тези, които ще проведат интервюто за осиновяване и ще внимават за интересите на нашите деца. Принципите на Конвенцията на ООН за правата на детето и съпътстващата ги философия трябва да са в основата на правото на международното осиновяване в рамките на Европейския съюз.

  Elena Băsescu (PPE). - Apreciez interesul colegilor mei din delegaţia italiană pentru situaţia copiilor abandonaţi, interes pe care îl împărtăşim cu toţii, de altfel, însă această problematică ţine doar de competenţa naţională. Am insistat să iau parte la această dezbatere, deoarece provin dintr-o ţară asupra căreia se fac presiuni pentru reluarea adopţiilor internaţionale şi pentru modificarea legislaţiei aflate în vigoare. Însă, în România, există mai multe familii doritoare să adopte, decât copii adoptabili, iar legislaţia noastră, la care au participat şi numeroşi experţi internaţionali, este în perfectă coordonare cu cea europeană.

Referindu-mă acum la această rezoluţie, menţionez că sintagma „dreptul copilului de a fi adoptat internaţional”, cum prevede punctul d, nu este recunoscută de convenţia ONU şi de cea de la Haga. Adopţia internaţională reprezintă doar o opţiune. Aceşti copii ajung în sistem datorită situaţiei precare a familiilor din care provin, care, conform legislaţiei şi convenţiilor internaţionale, nu trebuie să reprezinte un motiv pentru adopţie. De aici, numărul mare de copii aflaţi în centrele de plasament. 22 966 copii au, totuşi, un părinte. Legislaţia din România nu prevede decăderea din drepturile părinteşti decât în cazul unui abuz. Deci, aceşti copii nu sunt în situaţia de a fi adoptaţi. La fel şi cei 22 285 de copii aflaţi în asistenţă maternală. Raţionamentul rezoluţiei trebuie axat pe interesul superior al copilului, aşa cum au spus şi colegii mei înainte şi nu al celui care adoptă. Fiecare stat şi nu altcineva are obligaţia de a alege soluţiile cele mai potrivite pentru copiii săi.

În final, recomand tuturor o mai bună cunoaştere a legislaţiilor naţionale. Mă refer aici la faptul că, de exemplu, mai multe tribunale de minori din Italia au emis în 2009 şapte hotărâri de adopţie pentru copii din România, fără să ţină cont de legislaţia noastră.

  Victor Boştinaru (S&D). - Salut această dezbatere în plenul Parlamentului European, pornind de la premiza că protecţia drepturilor copilului este şi trebuie să fie o prioritate a fiecărui stat membru al Uniunii noastre. Scopul final pentru toţi cei prezenţi aici este promovarea interesului copiilor.

Bineînţeles, criterii comune şi stricte, pe care statele membre să le implementeze, sunt necesare pentru ameliorarea condiţiilor de îngrijire şi trai ale copiilor instituţionalizaţi şi abandonaţi şi pentru protecţia lor atunci când aceştia sunt adoptaţi şi, mai ales, acum, în condiţiile în care austeritatea bugetară pare să fie singura idee a guvernelor de dreapta din Uniunea Europeană. În consecinţă, primul pas este asigurarea unei îngrijiri corespunzătoare pentru aceşti copii; în al doilea rând, lupta împotriva traficului de copii şi a prostituţiei infantile; în al treilea rând, să nu uităm că, în interesul copiilor, trebuie dată întâietate adopţiilor de către un membru al familiei şi adopţiilor naţionale; în al patrulea rând, abia, adopţiile internaţionale.

Pentru că aici putem trage doar concluziile din trecut, deschiderea porţilor pentru adopţiile intenţionale în România a însemnat crearea unor reţele de trafic de copii fără precedent, cazuri de răpire a copiilor şi vânzarea lor spre Occident, în colaborare cu organizaţii europene şi internaţionale. Între 1997-2000, doamnă Comisar, România „a exportat” 9 150 copii, iar ţara mea nu va mai accepta niciodată o asemenea monstruozitate.

Aş dori, în final, să vă rog, prin intermediul dumneavoastră, ca doamna Comisar Reding să clarifice alegaţiile apărute în mass-media românească şi internaţională privitoare la Agenţia Europeană de Supraveghere a Adopţiilor Internaţionale, propunere care apare şi în studiul comandat de Comisia Europeană. Un coleg europarlamentar aşteaptă, încă, răspunsul doamnei Comisar Reding la o întrebare.

  Alexandra Thein (ALDE). - Herr Präsident! Erst vor kurzem haben wir im großen Plenarsaal unseres Parlaments in Brüssel einen internationalen Workshop zur elterlichen Verantwortung und zum Schutz von Kindern veranstaltet, den zu leiten ich die Ehre hatte. In Europa gibt es immer mehr ausgesetzte und aufgegebene Kinder, die nicht auf Dauer in Waisenhäusern leben sollen. Es ist deshalb unsere Pflicht als Gesetzgeber, das Recht auf internationale Adoption innerhalb der EU zu stärken, damit diesen Kindern geholfen werden kann. Dies verlangt auch Artikel 24 unserer Grundrechtecharta, in der es heißt: „Kinder haben Anspruch auf den Schutz und die Fürsorge, die für ihr Wohlergehen notwendig sind.“

Wir haben zwar das Haager Adoptionsübereinkommen und ein Übereinkommen des Europarats, diese sind jedoch nicht ausreichend. Bei internationalen Adoptionen bestehen noch große rechtliche Probleme in der Praxis. Hier helfen nur internationale Regelungen, die die immer noch bestehenden unterschiedlichen nationalen Regelungen beseitigen und durch klare und einfache Prinzipien ersetzen. Dabei darf bei allem gesetzgeberischen Eifer nicht aus dem Blickfeld geraten, dass die EU mit der Haager Konferenz für internationales Privatrecht kooperieren muss, um ein abgestimmtes Vorgehen zu gewährleisten. Die EU sollte also auf diesem Gebiet nicht das Rad neu erfinden. Ich begrüße die entsprechenden Erklärungen der Kommissarin.

  Ryszard Czarnecki (ECR). - Panie Przewodniczący! To bardzo ważny, ale też drażliwy temat. Przypomnę, że w Parlamencie Europejskim zeszłej kadencji mieliśmy problem adopcji rumuńskich dzieci przez rodziców w Izraelu i budziło to poważne perturbacje, także natury politycznej. Teraz kolejna inicjatywa, która – jak sądzę – ma dobre intencje, ale jak widać budzi emocje. Myślę, że tutaj trzeba bardzo uważać, aby nie wylać dziecka z kąpielą, aby troszcząc się o dobre przyszłe życie dla dzieci, nie spowodować sytuacji, w której pójdziemy na skróty, w której otworzymy furtkę dla pospiesznych adopcji i tak naprawdę pozwolimy na odbieranie dzieci rodzicom. Przed tym bardzo mocno bym przestrzegał.

  Csanád Szegedi (NI). - Tisztelt elnök úr, tisztelt képviselőtársaim! Örülök, hogy a nemzetközi örökbefogadás témaköre, az elhagyott gyermekek ügye napirendre került az Európai Parlamentben. Rendkívül fontosnak tartom, hogy úgy en bloc a gyermekek védelme mind az Európai Parlamentben, mind pedig az Európai Unióban kiemelt prioritás legyen. Az elhagyott, elhagyatott gyermekek védelmében mindannyiunknak példát kell mutatni. Nekik is joguk van ahhoz, hogy egészséges, mind testileg, mind lelkileg egészséges felnőtté váljanak. Ehhez pedig elengedhetetlen, hogy ezek az elhagyott, elhagyatott, árva gyermekek családban, egészséges környezetben nőjenek fel. Mindent meg kell tennünk annak érdekében, hogy minél kevesebb gyermek kerüljön árvaházakba. Különös megvilágítást kap az elhagyott gyermekek témaköre, hogyha az elöregedő Európára gondolunk, ahol minden gyermek a saját jövőnk záloga is egyben.

  Edit Bauer (PPE). - Elnök úr! Kedves biztos asszony! Szeretném megköszönni az Ön alapos válaszát. Azzal együtt, hogy tudjuk, hogy a Hágai Szerződés gyakorlatilag szabályozza a nemzetközi örökbefogadást, azt is tudjuk, hogy a 27 tagországból 26 részese ennek a szerződésnek, és abban is igaza van Önnek, hogy ez a szubszidiaritás kérdése, hogy hogy alkalmazzák ezt a nemzetközi egyezményt. Ezzel együtt én úgy érzem, hogy nem lehet közömbös, az élet kikényszeríti, hogy ne csak akkor foglalkozzunk a gyerekek problémájával, amikor botrányok vannak, amikor kiderül, hogy több száz gyereket adtak el ide, több száz gyereket, vagy több mint ezer gyereket adtak el amoda. Ennek a másik oldala az, hogy azokat a gyerekeket, akikről tudjuk, hogy léteznek az Európai Unióban ezerszámra, örökbe lehessen adni. A téma megkerülhetetlen, mert az Európai Unió felelős a gyerekek jogainak betartásáért, miközben azt is látjuk, hogy az örökbefogadás körül, bizony annak következtében, hogy egyes jogokat túldimenzionál a nemzeti jogszabály és a nemzeti gyakorlat, így örökbefogadhatatlanná válnak a gyerekek és így csorbulnak a más jogaik. Biztos asszony! Én nagyon szeretném Önt arra kérni, hogy azt, amit elmondott a bevezetőjében, hogy nincs olyan nemzetközi jogszabály, ami az Európai Unióban már lehetne, hogy az örökbefogadásról szóló dokumentumokat a tagországban elismerjék, hogy ebben a kérdésben szükséges gyorsan előre lépnünk.

  Zita Gurmai (S&D). - Elnök úr, biztos asszony, kedves kollégák! A nemzetközi örökbefogadás legalább olyan súlyú kérdés, mint a határokon átnyúló válások ügye, és legalább olyan figyelmet is igényel, már csak azért is, mert legtöbbször a felnőttek döntéseinek érzelmileg, anyagilag és minden lehetséges értelemben kiszolgáltatott gyermekekről van szó, akiket a legmagasabb szintű közösségi védelem illet meg.

A nemzetközi örökbefogadás kapcsán szóbeli kérdést benyújtók érdeklődése elsősorban a jogi környezetre vonatkozott. A gyakorlat áttekintése legalább olyan fontos, mint a jogszabályalkotás. Új vagy egyáltalán jó szakpolitikai döntés, új jogszabályi környezet ugyanis csak megbízható adatok, statisztikák illetve a tényleges gyakorlat ismeretében alakítható ki. Csak pontos adatokból állapítható meg, hogy egyáltalán szükséges-e hozzányúlni a szabályozáshoz, ezért tartom a kollégák által feltett kérdést kiemelt jelentőségűnek. Mivel azonban szerintem ezt az egész kérdéskört nagyon átfogóan kell kezelni, szeretnék egy lépéssel hátrébb lépni, mint a kérdésfeltevők tették.

A következő kérdéseket szeretném feltenni a Bizottságnak: vannak-e pontos statisztikai adataink az Unión belüli, illetve a harmadik országok közreműködésével létrejövő nemzetközi örökbefogadási esetekről? Egészen pontosan milyen adatokat gyűjtünk ebben a témában? Milyen módszerekkel? Ki gyűjti az adatokat, és ha a tagállamok gyűjtik, akkor egységes-e ez a módszertan? Ha nemzetközi örökbefogadásra kerül sor akár az Unión belül, akár a harmadik fél közreműködésével, akkor a szülők és a gyerekek kiválasztása, illetve előzetes felkészítése hogyan néz ki? A felkészítést hogyan ellenőrizzük? Vannak-e erre közös szabályaink? Milyen különbségek vannak a tagállamok gyakorlatai között? Van-e életkori limit akár az örökbefogadóra, akár a gyermekre nézve? Kapnak-e az örökbefogadó szülök folyamatos szakmai támogatást? Van-e megbízható, rendszeres utókövetés? Lehet-e tudni, hogy az örökbefogadó szülők milyen gyakorisággal ütköznek problémákba, és hogy ezek a problémák milyen jellegűek? Milyen segítséget nyújtanak a tagállamok problémás esetekben? Köszönöm szépen a figyelmet, és köszönöm biztos asszony kiváló munkáját!

  Sonia Alfano (ALDE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, da alcuni anni in Italia numerose famiglie e altrettanti bambini rumeni subiscono le conseguenze del blocco delle adozioni internazionali da parte della Romania.

La Convenzione dell'Aia rappresenta il quadro di riferimento da attuare in maniera uniforme in tutti i paesi dell'Unione europea e in questo bisogna che la Romania faccia uno sforzo per adeguarsi. Se la Romania ritiene che il blocco delle adozioni internazionali sia funzionale a tutelare i bambini, ad esempio per il rischio che si sviluppi un traffico illegale degli stessi, affronti anche con l'aiuto dell'Unione europea questa problematica, inasprendo i controlli e con normative severe; è necessario però un impegno affinché tante famiglie per bene possano accogliere bambini che meritano una seconda opportunità di avere un'infanzia felice.

Chiedo quindi alla Commissione in che maniera intende supportare un eventuale impegno della Romania a cancellare la moratoria sulle adozioni internazionali e, inoltre, vorrei conoscere la posizione della Commissione riguardo alla possibilità di creare un'Agenzia europea per le adozioni, anche alla luce degli studi effettuati.

  Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR). - Panie Przewodniczący! Adopcja może być i często jest dobrodziejstwem dla dziecka, ale procedury z nią związane mogą być też powodem nadużyć, takich jak handel dzieci czy wyrywanie dzieci do adopcji z rodzin, które wcale nie porzuciły swoich dzieci, tylko często z powodu biedy nie są w stanie zapewnić im właściwych warunków. Ta wielka liczba dzieci w sierocińcach, o której wspominamy w dzisiejszej debacie, to często nie są dzieci porzucone, ale właśnie dzieci rodziców biednych, którzy nie radzą sobie z trudną sytuacją życiową. Takim rodzinom trzeba pomóc. Państwa za dużo mniejsze kwoty mogłyby pomóc tym rodzinom, wcale nie zabierając dzieci do sierocińca, a w konsekwencji dalej do adopcji. Powinniśmy przyjąć jednoznaczną zasadę – w Unii Europejskiej powinno być to obowiązujące – nigdy nie zabierać dzieci z rodzin z powodu biedy, pomagać, nie zabierać dzieci. Bieda nie może być przyczyną zabierania dziecku jego naturalnej rodziny.

  Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Signora Commissario, oggi ci troviamo a discutere di quello che rappresenta un terribile controsenso per un'Unione che vuole assicurare la piena libertà di movimento dei propri cittadini ed essere funzionale alle esigenze degli stessi; un controsenso che rivela un concreto bisogno di aiuto da parte di taluni e l'impossibilità da parte di altri di poter offrire l'aiuto sollecitato.

Quello delle difficoltà e degli ostacoli che si frappongono all'adozione internazionale è un paradosso che si traduce in un dramma per migliaia di bambini e famiglie all'interno dell'Unione europea. Le numerose convenzioni internazionali hanno dato prova di poter affrontare i problemi legati alle adozioni solo in maniera parziale: ciò è dovuto, da un lato, alla specificità di ogni convenzione e alla natura esclusiva delle stesse; dall'altro, però, il limite degli sforzi sinora profusi è nel carattere intergovernativo delle strutture e dei processi decisionali esistenti.

Il trattato di Lisbona e la Carta dei diritti fondamentali offrono oggi i capisaldi giuridici e l'approccio politico, naturalmente, cambia. La protezione e il benessere dei bambini rientra ufficialmente tra i pilastri dei diritti salvaguardati dell'Unione. È questa la base del dibattito odierno e dell'interrogazione orale presentata, una base sulla quale poggia una discussione più ampia che dovrebbe essere a cuore di questo Parlamento, che dovrebbe essere puntuale e attenta in questo Parlamento e perseguita con la tenacia di cui la collega Angelilli ha dato prova.

Permettetemi di ricordare Saint-Exupéry, il quale diceva: "Tutti i grandi sono stati bambini una volta, ma pochi di essi se ne ricordano".

  Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE). - Întrebarea orală de la care a pornit Rezoluţia privind adopţiile internaţionale aduce pe agenda Parlamentului European un subiect de o importanţă majoră.

Adopţia internaţională poate fi considerată numai ca un mijloc alternativ, după ce au fost epuizate măsurile de adopţie la nivel naţional. De asemenea, adopţia internaţională prezintă o serie de particularităţi şi dificultăţi care ţin, în mare măsură, de interacţiunea limitată dintre copil şi adoptori, în perioada anterioară adopţiei, precum şi de probleme de adaptare lingvistică şi culturală întâmpinate de acesta ulterior adopţiei. Principiul interesului superior al copilului şi nu al adoptorului, după cum rezultă din Convenţia ONU şi din cea de la Haga, trebuie să stea la baza rezoluţiei Parlamentului European, axându-se pe dezvoltarea acestuia într-un mediu familiar, ce asigură continuitate în creşterea copilului şi luând în considerare backgroundul etnic, religios, cultural şi lingvistic al acestuia.

Esenţial în analizarea temei privind adopţiile şi elaborarea rezoluţiei este principiul reintegrării copilului din sistemul de protecţie în familia biologică sau extinsă. Aş dori să atrag atenţia asupra unei confuzii ce se face adesea între numărul copiilor separaţi de părinţii lor, dar aflaţi în sistemul de protecţie şi numărul copiilor adoptabili. Copiii separaţi de părinţii lor beneficiază de protecţie din partea statului pentru o perioadă limitată şi nu sunt adoptabili. Consider că nu avem nevoie de mecanisme de control şi că principiile existente la nivel internaţional, legate de acestea, sunt suficiente.

  Marco Scurria (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, noi stiamo affrontando stasera questo dibattito, frutto anche dell'intervento di tante associazioni che in tutto il continente, in tutta l'Unione europea si sono rivolte a noi per, appunto, affrontare questo tema così delicato che abbiamo trasformato, a cominciare da Roberta Angelilli, in questa interrogazione.

Ci hanno sottoposto un problema molto semplice, almeno sembra, da un punto di vista dialettico: ci sono tanti bambini negli istituti europei e ci sono tante famiglie che vogliono adottare bambini, ma spesso questo incrocio non avviene e i bambini continuano a rimanere negli istituti e le famiglie continuano a rimanere senza bambini.

Bambini che, chiaramente, hanno la nostra priorità, la nostra attenzione, e quindi hanno bisogno di tutte le accortezze del caso, ma bambini che, quando rimangono per troppi anni negli istituti, spesso in questi istituti diventano oggetto dei mercanti di prostituzione e di traffici di organi per i nuovi mercanti di schiavi.

Tutto questo avviene mentre appunto molte famiglie vorrebbero aprire le loro case a questi bambini e allora sono molto contento di aver ascoltato il Commissario per le misure che intende adottare, a cui dovremmo aggiungere, però, la possibilità di una maggiore cooperazione tra gli Stati in materia di collaborazione, di adozione internazionale, insieme ovviamente ad una vigilanza sulla tutela del minore adottato.

Chiediamo quindi procedure più snelle nell'interesse delle famiglie e dei bambini, perché tra qualche anno questi ex bambini e ragazzi diventati uomini e donne non debbano chiedersi perché un'Europa piena di potenziali famiglie accoglienti li ha lasciati nella loro condizione.

  Anna Záborská (PPE). - Dovoľte mi trochu iný pohľad na adopcie. Deti si zaslúžia to najlepšie. To v prvom rade znamená, že si zaslúžia rodinu. Vlastnú alebo náhradnú, s milujúcou matkou a otcom. V ceste k takejto rodine nesmú stáť hranice ani Európska únia. A hoci hlavné slovo v otázke adopcií majú členské štáty, našou povinnosťou je túto cestu uľahčiť.

Nezabúdajme však na to, že na prvom mieste musí zostať snaha o dobro dieťaťa. Snaha pomôcť jeho rodičom, ak sa ocitnú v ťažkostiach. Sociálna situácia rodičov nesmie byť dôvodom na rozhodnutie o adopcii ich dieťaťa. Zobrať dieťa chudobným rodičom je jednoduché, ale zároveň to najhoršie, čo môžeme dieťaťu urobiť. A to platí dvojnásobne o medzinárodných adopciách.

Ako jedna z tých, ktorí sú podpísaní pod otázkou o medzinárodných adopciách, ktorú sme predložili Komisii, som veľmi rada, že táto téma oslovila veľa mojich kolegov. Alebo bola by som ešte radšej, keby sme s rovnakou energiou a nástojčivosťou zohľadňovali dobro rodiny a jej potreby pri všetkých európskych politikách.

  Agustín Díaz de Mera García Consuegra (PPE). - Señor Presidente, la adopción internacional inspirada en los principios de prevalencia del interés superior del niño y del respeto de sus derechos fundamentales resulta un medio apropiado para procurar una familia a los que no se les puede encontrar una familia en sus países de origen.

El tráfico de seres humanos, la explotación sexual y la esclavitud laboral constituyen una terrible realidad que afecta a cientos de millones de menores. Veamos algunos datos: hay más de ciento cuarenta y cinco millones de niños abandonados en el mundo; solo en Rusia, más de seiscientos mil viven en la calle; desde 1980, más de dos millones de niños han muerto en los conflictos armados; más de seiscientos millones de niños viven en situación de extrema pobreza; más de cinco millones mueren cada año; más de ciento treinta millones de niños en países desarrollados crecen sin tener acceso a la educación básica, por causa de su pobreza, y, de ellos, el 60 % son niñas; siete millones de niños están sometidos a esclavitud sexual en el mundo.

Por todo ello, debemos impulsar mecanismos que favorezcan un instrumento de adopción internacional inspirado en la protección del menor, armonizando para ello los diferentes requisitos y procedimientos previstos en las legislaciones de los Estados miembros, aplicando singularmente el artículo 21 de la Carta de los Derechos del Niño y tomando en consideración el artículo 24 de nuestra Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales.

  Erminia Mazzoni (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Signor Commissario, ho sottoscritto questa interrogazione proposta dalla collega Angelilli perché ritengo che ancor di più all'indomani di Lisbona l'Unione europea non possa non porre tra le proprie priorità la tutela dei minori.

Le procedure di adozione sono, a mio avviso, solo la cartina di tornasole di una deriva sociale della quale abbiamo il dovere di farci carico ponendo degli argini. I minori, nel migliore dei casi, diventano oggetto di scambi commerciali che sono sicuramente non dignitosi per ciascuno di noi, ma purtroppo sono spesso anche vittime di sfruttamento e di violenza.

Al di là del fenomeno dei cosiddetti fantasmi, cioè di quei nati in condizione di clandestinità e di abbandono che non vengono censiti dal sistema, si conta un numero incerto di bambini in stato di adottabilità, cui corrisponde un numero di coppie che richiedono l'adozione, che non si incontrano per questioni di interpretazione legislativa e di burocrazia ingombrante.

L'Unicef ha di recente pubblicato uno studio dal quale emergono dati allarmanti anche in molti paesi europei. Come presidente della commissione per le petizioni mi sono imbattuta più volte in casi di conflitti normativi tra paesi dell'Unione dai quali derivano conseguenze negative, a volte drammatiche, solo per i minori.

Le complesse procedure previste in molti ordinamenti nazionali non sempre si rivelano proficue per l'interesse del minore, i tempi lunghi contrastano con l'esigenza di promuovere il passaggio del minore entro il primo anno di vita per ridurre il trauma dello sradicamento e di evitare una lunga permanenza negli orfanotrofi, anche perché consideriamo che, superato un certo limite di età, purtroppo, vengono richiesti meno dal mercato.

Alla luce di questi dati, credo che sia opportuno dar corso alla necessità avvertita da tempo di un coordinamento a livello europeo delle normative nazionali che consenta, da un canto, la semplificazione delle procedure delle adozioni intraeuropee e che, dall'altro, garantisca il rispetto dei principi fondamentali nelle adozioni da paesi extraeuropei.

  Carlos Coelho (PPE). - Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, caras e caros Colegas, felicito a colega Angelilli pela oportunidade desta pergunta oral. Sou dos que consideram que temos de desenvolver políticas mais eficazes de protecção das crianças que visem prevenir situações de pobreza, de abuso e de abandono das crianças e, paralelamente, de alternativas ao seu internamento em instituições, onde a adopção deverá desempenhar um papel crucial.

A UNICEF reconhece que não se reduziu o número de crianças em instituições e que o aumento de adopções ficou muito aquém do crescimento do número de crianças institucionalizadas, pelo que temos que fazer um exame dentro de nós. É importante proceder a uma avaliação geral do direito e da prática administrativa e judiciária relativamente aos processos de adopção existentes nos vários Estados-Membros de forma a podermos identificar os eventuais obstáculos ao seu bom funcionamento.

E, relativamente aos países terceiros, temos de vigiar o problema das adopções irregulares ou ilegais que incide principalmente sobre as regiões mais pobres. É por exemplo o caso da Guiné-Bissau, em que mais de 50 % das crianças não foram registadas, o que facilita o desenvolvimento da acção criminosa de redes de tráfico de crianças.

Creio, assim, ser necessária uma estratégia europeia de protecção dos interesses das crianças no âmbito dos procedimentos de adopção internacional, de forma a evitar e prevenir o rapto, a venda ou o tráfico de seres humanos.

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE). - Mr President, in Ireland the motto of the International Adoption Association is that families are made in many ways. The debate tonight reflects the interest that there is in adoption. There are over 1 200 members of that Association: many have adopted and some wish to adopt.

Our attitudes to adoption have changed utterly. In Ireland we come from a past where mothers – particularly single mothers – had their babies taken from them and given away to others to be adopted. That is not a good history, but it is certainly one that has now conditioned how we think of adoption: the child must be at the centre of it. Certainly, the birth families are very important in all of this.

Equally, we have a duty and a responsibility to give the very best possible home to all our children. Each Member State – and that is the level on which this should operate – needs to protect children within its own borders. Europe should provide a coordinating role.

I hope that in Ireland we will have a referendum on the rights of the child. We talk about it a lot, but we are not so effective in actually dealing with it. I am hopeful that the referendum will happen. The situation will certainly improve then. This has been a really useful debate and I thank colleagues for it.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). - Mr President, the greatest gift that we can give to any child is that of a happy home. Most children find that in their own home with their natural parents. Many though, get this with their adoptive parents.

Either is preferable to an institutional life, provided of course that there is no corruption or exploitation involved.

To find the balance is very difficult, but I think that we need – while taking into consideration the Hague Convention etc. – where there are prospective adoptive parents who are bona fide and beyond reproach, to facilitate them more in giving the gift of a happy home to a child who has not otherwise got one, and not encumbering them with lengthy, expensive, drawn-out processes.

We need to get the balance right because, as a teacher, I came across many adopted children and the vast majority were in very good homes.

  Mario Pirillo (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, onorevole Angelilli, Signora Commissario, la protezione e la cura del benessere dei minori sono divenuti, con l'entrata in vigore del trattato di Lisbona, uno dei diritti fondamentali che l'Europa tutela in maniera vincolante. Ciononostante, si registrano ancora in Europa troppi episodi di abbandono di minori, che finiscono nel migliore dei casi in orfanotrofio. Una situazione drammatica, che per le nostre democrazie non può essere tollerata.

Occorre per questo mettere in campo tutte le energie necessarie per impedire che questa situazione diventi ingestibile, adottando una strategia per innalzare il livello di attenzione e favorendo al massimo il diritto di adottare i minori a livello internazionale.

Per fare ciò, innanzitutto, serve una precisa fotografia della situazione in tutti i paesi membri, con un monitoraggio costante da effettuare magari attraverso l'istituzione di un osservatorio permanente sui diritti dei minori. Inoltre, è necessario avere un quadro complessivo delle misure in essere prese dall'Unione europea e di quelle che potrebbero essere intraprese per tutelare al massimo i minori che devono essere adottati dai cittadini europei.

  Catherine Bearder (ALDE). - Mr President, the wide range of instruments which currently govern international adoptions has led to confusion over whose role it is to safeguard the rights of children subject to international adoptions. The Commission needs to focus further on the competent authorities, and ensure that those regulating the adopters’ and the adopted children’s rights are making sure that basic minimum standards are adhered to, and that, in the longer term, the child is able to maintain a link to its birth country and its culture.

Specifically, urgent measures must be taken to react to the abuse and trafficking of children, which, as a report in my own country today shows, is alarmingly on the rise both within and across European borders. Child trafficking and child laundering – the stealing of children who are subsequently sold to adoptive parents as legitimate orphans – is a phenomenon which does not receive adequate attention at an international level.

I would call on the Commission to play a more active role in the field of international adoption, to take concrete steps to improve the convoluted and confused legislative framework which currently governs international adoption in the EU, and to protect those most vulnerable young people.

  Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE). - V tejto chvíli hovoríme o medzinárodných adopciách preto, lebo v každom štáte existujú deti, ktoré akosi nemožno alebo nie je možné z rôznych dôvodov umiestniť vo fungujúcich rodinách alebo v náhradných rodinách v tom-ktorom štáte samotnom.

Je neprípustné, aby sa opakovali také situácie, ako sme v nedávnej minulosti boli svedkami toho, že jedna bohatšia krajina, napríklad Taliansko, mala možnosť vo väčšej miere adoptovať deti z chudobnejšieho Rumunska. Určite, tak ako aj niektorí kolegovia už v tejto večernej hodine povedali, chudoba nemôže byť dostatočným dôvodom na to, aby sme zobrali dieťa z rodiny a umožnili medzinárodnú adopciu.

A chcem veľmi zdôrazniť, aby sme v tejto situácii dávali veľký pozor, aby boli zachovávané nielen národné zákony, ale aj medzinárodné. Aby sa zabránilo riziku zneužívania, obchodovania a únosov detí.

  George Sabin Cutaş (S&D). - Doresc să fac, de asemenea, referire la Convenţia ONU prin care se spune că adopţiile internaţionale nu pot fi decât o alternativă de ajutorare a copilului, atunci când acestuia nu îi poate fi găsită o familie adoptivă sau când nu poate fi îngrijit corespunzător în ţara sa de origine.

Riscurile unei liberalizări a adopţiilor internaţionale sunt multiple. Pe de o parte, creşte posibilitatea traficului de copii şi a abuzurilor survenite ca urmare a intereselor de ordin financiar şi a dificultăţilor de monitorizare a situaţiei post adopţie. Pe de altă parte, separarea copilului de părinţii săi biologici, de locul său de origine, poate avea consecinţe nefaste de ordin psihologic, social şi educaţional. Atunci când vorbim despre adopţii trebuie să avem, în primul rând, în vedere asigurarea bunăstării copilului şi, prin urmare, nu trebuie exercitate presiuni asupra statelor membre ale Uniunii, cu tradiţii şi proceduri legale diverse în domeniul adopţiilor, pentru liberalizarea adopţiilor internaţionale.

  Antonyia Parvanova (ALDE). - Mr President, I would again like to draw your attention to the practice of illegal adoption. There is an organised crime network in Europe – and especially in south-eastern Europe – which deals in this. Hundreds of children are being illegally adopted or put up for trade.

After everything that we have succeeded in doing here in Parliament, we should not have just one small recital on this issue in the Human Trafficking Directive. I call on the Commission to take special measures to prevent this horrible crime, and also to punish the perpetrators. We could not cope, country by country, at national level, with this very vicious practice. It constitutes organised crime, and I therefore insist that it should be dealt with at EU level.

  Marian-Jean Marinescu (PPE). - Rezoluţia referitoare la adopţia internaţională în Uniune trebuie să menţioneze clar următoarele aspecte: familiile care intenţionează să recurgă la adopţia internaţională trebuie să aibă avizul instituţiei naţionale competente din ţara din care provin; adopţia internaţională trebuie să se realizeze numai sub responsabilitatea autorităţilor competente din cele două state membre, a familiei şi a copilului.

De asemenea, monitorizarea copiilor adoptaţi prin procedura de adopţie internaţională trebuie să fie efectuată de către instituţia naţională cu atribuţii în acest domeniu. Nu în ultimul rând, este necesar ca autorităţile naţionale competente să raporteze periodic statului membru din care provine copilul adoptat, prin procedura de adopţie internaţională, cu privire la procesul de dezvoltare a acestuia.

  Catherine Stihler (S&D). - Mr President, I just wanted to add something about kinship care, and support to kinship carers.

Most kinship carers are grandparents and find themselves being the main caregivers for their grandchildren, normally because the parent either has a drug addiction or has died through that drug addiction.

The issue I wanted to bring to this House’s attention is the good work that Mentor UK has been doing on the rights of kinship carers. Some kinship carers adopt their grandchildren. Others do not, but are in a caring relationship with that child and provide a stable and safe home for them. However, the rights of kinship children are often actually less than those of children who are in proper care. This is something which I felt people had touched upon in this debate, but I would urge you, if you are interested in the issue of kinship carers, to look at the work of Mentor UK and the help that is given to kinship carers in different countries.

  Kristalina Georgieva, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, let me first echo the sentiments of those who expressed thanks to Ms Angelilli for initiating a very rich debate this evening. I have five points to make in summing up the debate.

First, the Commission fully agrees with the views that have been expressed on the importance of protecting and promoting the rights of children in inter-country adoptions. This is and will remain the main objective of the Commission as we participate in discussions on this topic, both in the context of the Hague Convention and in our work on the rights of children in Europe.

On this issue, I would point out that in the forthcoming communication on children’s rights, we will present actions to promote the rights of the child for the period between 2011 and 2014. These will include actions aimed at improving the support the Commission provides to Member States in the implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. As I mentioned with reference to the Green Paper, we are also taking steps that will facilitate the circulation of civil status acts as adoption decisions – in other words, the mutual recognition of national adoption decisions within the EU.

With regard to MEPs’ concerns that the issue is sensitive and should be seen in the context of national needs and national legislation, the Commission would like to underline that the Romanian law on international adoptions is the sole responsibility of the Romanian Government. The measure that has been taken must be seen in connection with the abusive practices in inter-country adoption in Romania in the past. The Commission is closely following developments in Romanian legislation, but I would like to stress again that it is Romania’s sole responsibility to further develop this law.

On monitoring, it is our strong belief that the appropriate institution is the Special Commission of the Hague Convention on the Protection of Children and Cooperation in respect of Inter-Country Adoption. The Commission participates in that monitoring body. We will take many of the points that have been made this evening into account when we think about how we participate in the work of this body.

The Commission considers accreditation to be a matter of national authority. It relates to family laws that Member States have and develop, and therefore it is appropriate that it should be addressed at that level.

Finally, I will convey to Vice-President Reding the points that have been made here this evening, including the question raised by one Member in relation to which an answer is expected.

As the godmother of an adopted boy, I have seen how emotional and difficult the issue of adoption can be, and how many factors are involved in a decision to adopt. I have listened to the debate this evening not only with great interest, but also with a sense that it is a matter not just of legislation, but also of hearts and minds. Therefore let us pray that hearts and minds are brought into play in a way that best protects the interests of children, both our children and children in other countries.

  Presidente. − Comunico di aver ricevuto cinque proposte di risoluzione conformemente all'articolo 115, paragrafo 5, del regolamento.

La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà mercoledì 19 gennaio 2011.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 149)

  John Attard-Montalto (S&D), in writing. – The resolution being discussed is basically stating the fundamental principles of the rights of children to be adopted and safeguards for their welfare. It is deficient in putting forward concrete proposals to make the adoption procedures more efficient, less bureaucratic without compromising on the safeguards. There are thousands of orphaned or abandoned children who live in substandard conditions. There are thousands of childless couples who could give a future to these children. It is not enough to call on EU institutions to play an active role at the Hague conference to exert pressure to improve, streamline and facilitate international adoption procedures. It would be more meaningful if concrete proposals are made on how to streamline and facilitate international adoption procedures. It may be admirable if the issue of international adoptions is seen within the wider context of adoption itself. National governments need to legislate so as to give a fresh impetus to the relevant laws and enable the adoption of children who have been abandoned by their parents. In many legislations the assent of the biological parents is still necessary, even if these have completely abandoned their children.

  Franz Obermayr (NI), schriftlich. – Kinder gehören zu den schutzbedürftigsten Mitgliedern unserer Gesellschaft, gerade wenn es sich um verwaiste, ausgesetzte oder misshandelte Kinder handelt. Bei internationalen Adoptionen tragen Kinder, die aus ihrem gewohnten Umfeld herausgerissen werden, oft massive Schäden davon. Stets muss daher das Kindswohl im Vordergrund stehen. Das muss auch die UNO beachten: Letztes Jahr wurde in Mexikocity eine Kampagne auf U-Bahntickets (!) lanciert, die auf das Adoptionsrecht von homosexuellen Paaren abzielte. Medienberichten zu Folge wurde diese Kampagne von der UNO unterstützt! Das, obwohl Psychologen die zentrale Bedeutung für die Kindesentwicklung bestätigen, mit Vater UND Mutter als Identifikationsfiguren aufzuwachsen! Gerade bei adoptierten Kindern, die bereits als solche oft keine optimalen Startchancen haben, sind stabile Familienverhältnisse besonders wichtig. Es kann in jeder Partnerschaft zu schwierigen Konstellationen kommen, man sollte aber im Sinne des Kindeswohles Probleme nicht schon vorprogrammieren!

  Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), na piśmie. – Panie Przewodniczący, Koleżanki i Koledzy! Bardzo się cieszę, że dziś Parlament Europejski zajmuje się kwestią adopcji w ramach Unii, bo jest to kwestia mi wyjątkowo bliska. Szczególne uwzględnienie dzieci w Karcie praw podstawowych oraz w art. 3 Traktatu o Unii Europejskiej daje nam możliwości, ale również zobowiązuje do zajęcia się tym. Adopcja międzynarodowa może stać się szansą na normalne życie i szczęście rodzinne dla wielu porzuconych dzieci, które przez swój wiek lub uwarunkowania zdrowotne nie mają szansy na adopcje w swoich krajach. W Europie mamy dziś do czynienia z sytuacją, w której w państwach o szeroko rozpropagowanej i łatwo dostępnej aborcji jest mało dzieci do adopcji. W innych zaś krajach jest ich wiele i poza najmłodszymi nie mają szansy na własne rodziny. Dodatkowo wzrasta ilość par, które mają problemy z poczęciem swoich dzieci albo cierpią na nieuleczalną bezpłodność. Dlatego z dużym entuzjazmem przyjmuję prace Komisji Europejskiej w tym zakresie. Kraje członkowskie powinny dojść do porozumienia w kwestii uproszczenia procedur, które nie będą zbyt skomplikowane i długotrwałe. Nie możemy jednak zapomnieć o wprowadzeniu mechanizmów ochronnych i kontrolnych, aby nie dopuścić do procederu handlu dziećmi.

19. Diskorsi ta' minuta (Artikolu 150 tar-Regoli ta' Proċedura)

  Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca gli interventi di un minuto su questioni di rilevanza politica.

  Zuzana Roithová (PPE). - Je to již 19 měsíců, kdy Kanada náhle a jednostranně zavedla vízovou povinnost pro občany České republiky, která jako člen Unie nesmí zavést reciproční víza pro všechny Kanaďany. Předseda Barroso ihned řekl, že to je unijní, nikoli bilaterální problém, ale bohužel komisařka Malmströmová to neřeší jako prioritu, jen pasivně monitoruje bilaterální pracovní jednání. Rada na mou interpelaci řekla, že o reciprocitě Unie nejedná, neboť dosud ani nedostala žádné návrhy od komisařky. Čeští občané tak jsou de facto evropskými občany druhé kategorie, pokud jde o jejich práva, a diví se, že Kanaďané do České republiky jezdí dál bez víz.

Upozorňuji, že liknavost Komise zvyšuje také riziko, že český parlament odloží ratifikace smluv mezi Unií a Kanadou. Nemá totiž jinou možnost, jak bránit práva občanů, když EU selhává a netlačí na Kanadu. Proto žádám spolu s vámi, aby paní komisařka neprodleně jednala s Kanadou a také se postavila za Rumuny a Bulhary. Anebo společná vízová politika a princip solidarity už nejsou evropskými hodnotami? Je si paní komisařka vědoma, co vše je dnes ve hře?

  Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE). - Consumul de substanţe psihotrope şi psihoactive ce se situează, de regulă, în zona gri a legislaţiei are efecte mult mai nocive decât drogurile cunoscute până acum. Aceste substanţe sunt întâlnite în mod frecvent în Europa, în magazinele de vise şi sunt cunoscute sub numele de etnobotanice, un termen inventat pentru a da un aspect nevinovat traficului şi consumului de droguri.

Ţări precum Polonia, Israel, Suedia, Danemarca, Anglia, Germania au interzis deja un număr semnificativ de substanţe identificate ca fiind psihotrope şi psihoactive. Substanţele comercializate, deşi nu fac parte din lista substanţelor interzise, sunt foarte greu de supus controlului, punând corpul medical în imposibilitatea de a oferi ajutor, deoarece combinaţiile chimice folosite au reacţii necunoscute. Singura măsură ce se poate lua este aceea de a interzice funcţionarea acestor magazine, după care trebuie să ne concentrăm eforturile asupra eliminării comercializării prin intermediul internetului.

  Άννυ Ποδηματά (S&D). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η συνεχιζόμενη κρίση στην ευρωζώνη θέτει όλους – ευρωπαϊκά θεσμικά όργανα, κράτη μέλη, πολιτικές ηγεσίες – ενώπιον των ευθυνών μας. Πρέπει να πάρουμε την πρωτοβουλία των κινήσεων από τις αγορές, να δώσουμε μια ολοκληρωμένη και πειστική απάντηση στην κρίση συμπληρώνοντας - και όχι υποκαθιστώντας ή παραβλέποντας - τις ευθύνες που έχουν αναλάβει τα κράτη μέλη να εκπληρώσουν τις υποχρεώσεις τους. Σ’ αυτό το πλαίσιο, ευρωπαϊκές προσωπικότητες, πολιτικά κόμματα, κινήσεις πολιτών, ευρωπαϊκά συνδικάτα υποστηρίζουν ότι τα ευρωομόλογα μπορούν να παίξουν ένα ρόλο κλειδί για την υπέρβαση της κρίσης χρέους και τη διασφάλιση της σταθερότητας του ευρώ.

Θέλω λοιπόν να τονίσω ότι το Συμβούλιο πρέπει να ανταποκριθεί άμεσα στο αίτημα που διατύπωσε το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο με το ψήφισμά του στις 16 Δεκεμβρίου 2010 και να δώσει ένα ξεκάθαρο σήμα στην Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή ώστε να προχωρήσει σε ενδελεχή μελέτη του θέματος και σε υποβολή συγκεκριμένων προτάσεων.

  Graham Watson (ALDE). - Mr President, I rise to make a statement about the plight of hundreds of thousands of airline passengers in Europe in the 10 days before Christmas and the chaos in the arrangements for transporting them and their baggage to their intended destinations. The failure of our airlines and our airports to deal with a few centimetres of snow in a few Member States caused devastating delay, disruption and despair for travellers.

I call on Parliament’s Committee on Transport and Tourism, the Union’s Transport Commissioner and transport ministers in the Council to conduct an inquiry into the disruption, to make provisions to prevent its recurrence, to ensure that those affected are properly compensated, and to study a sharing of the burden of compensation in future between the airline companies and others involved, such as airport operators.

Unusual snowfalls and uncommonly low temperatures, as predicted in 2009 by the Potsdam Institute, arise from the melting of the Arctic ice cap. They will become more frequent. We cannot prevent them, however much we must try to limit them, but we can – and we must – be prepared for them.

  Ryszard Czarnecki (ECR). - W Moskwie ogłoszono wyniki raportu specjalnej komisji badającej przyczyny katastrofy polskiego samolotu pod rosyjskim miastem Smoleńsk 10 kwietnia zeszłego roku. W tej katastrofie zginął prezydent Polski i 96 innych pasażerów, w tym szereg najważniejszych osób w państwie. Ten raport jest absolutnie skandaliczny. Zawiera szereg kłamstw i ewidentnie spycha odpowiedzialność za tę katastrofę na stronę polską, całkowicie pomijając poważne błędy po stronie rosyjskiej, np. złe naprowadzanie tego samolotu przez kontrolerów wieży lotniczej w Smoleńsku. Strona rosyjska nie uwzględniła bardzo wielu uwag Polski do tego raportu, 20 stron uwag zostało po prostu zlekceważonych. To sprawa bardzo przykra, tym powinna się zająć Unia Europejska.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). - Senhor Presidente, terminou 2010, declarado o Ano Europeu de Combate à Pobreza e à Exclusão Social, ano em que a União Europeia, com inauditos cinismo e hipocrisia, pôs em marcha políticas e orientações que tiveram e têm como consequência o significativo aumento da pobreza e da exclusão social.

Em Portugal, o orçamento de Estado para 2011, concebido e aprovado sob a pressão e o aplauso da União Europeia, conduzirá o país à recessão económica e à regressão no plano social, com subida do desemprego, já hoje em níveis históricos, e alastramento da pobreza e da exclusão social.

Somam-se a tudo isto as inaceitáveis pressões e chantagens que se abateram sobre o país nas últimas semanas e que aqui queremos vivamente denunciar, o crescente tom de ameaça do capital financeiro e das instituições ao seu serviço para que o país e o seu povo se submetam e aceitem a injustiça e o esbulho, para que aceitem a drenagem de recursos do país para os bolsos do capital financeiro.

Uma coisa é certa: espera-nos um ano de muitas lutas, se persistirem por este caminho.

  Angelika Werthmann (NI). - Mr President, with regard to Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and to Article 10 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, I was informed that, on Christmas Day, a massive abuse of religious freedom took place in the Church of St Synesios in the occupied town of Rizokarpaso.

The so-called authorities, supported by Turkey, had stopped the Saturday service on the pretext that no application had been made to hold the mass that day, although according to the Church of Cyprus, such permission was requested at the beginning of December, as has been the case for the last 36 years.

Mr President, I strongly encourage you to take the appropriate steps to guarantee religious freedom on the soil of a European Union Member State.

  Ioannis Kasoulides (PPE). - Mr President, on Christmas Day, the Turkish Security forces in Rizokarpaso, in the occupied part of Cyprus, interrupted by force the Christmas mass being celebrated by the few remaining – elderly – Christians there, evicted the priests from the church and ordered the congregation to leave. The excuse was that they had been given written permission for Sunday mass, but that Christmas was on a Saturday.

Demanding written permission for mass is a restriction of the freedom of religion in itself, let alone to interrupt a Christmas Day mass on the grounds of a petty bureaucratic excuse – all this in a Member State of the Union, by ordinance of a country aspiring to join it.

Under the Vienna Agreement, 12 000 Greek Cypriots enclaved in the Karpass Peninsula were allowed to live there after the Turkish invasion. Today there are 300. Now you understand why.

  Alf Svensson (PPE). - Herr talman! Jag tror det vore av mycket stort värde att EU från högsta nivå startade en interreligiös dialog. Jag skulle gärna se att EU försökte få Turkiet att stå värd för en sådan dialog. Vi vet alla hur kristna har behandlats runtom i världen, på olika håll i Mellanöstern, kopterna i Egypten, kristna irakier i Irak etc., etc. Vi kan inte, enligt min bestämda uppfattning, bara referera, åhöra och åse detta, utan vi måste göra någonting konkret.

Det första vi måste göra, enligt mitt sätt att se, är att skapa en dialog. Det vore värdefullt om Turkiet, med den brobyggaranda som trots allt tror jag finns där, fick stå värd för den typen av dialog. Det handlar om judar, om kristna, om muslimer. Låt oss få till stånd en bred interreligiös dialog i EU:s regi.

  Philippe Juvin (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, en Iraq, en Égypte, les chrétiens disent: "Notre calvaire est lourd". Bientôt, chers collègues, il n'y aura plus de chrétiens sur les terres qui ont vu naître le christianisme. En Turquie – on en parlait il y a quelques instants –, pays musulman laïc, pays qui frappe à notre porte, 20 % de la population était chrétienne il y a cent ans, ils sont moins de 1 % aujourd'hui.

Le mouvement auquel nous assistons est en réalité un mouvement de fond. Le monde arabo-musulman persécute ses chrétiens, les condamne, empêche leur conversion, les punit, les tue. On voit très bien que la religion, l'islam, devient une religion d'État. Le résultat est là, la religion chrétienne est la plus persécutée au monde.

Or, chers collègues, défendre les chrétiens d'Orient, c'est augmenter les chances de faire contrepoids à la montée de l'extrémisme de l'islam. La présence des chrétiens partout est un facteur d'équilibre. Il faut donc absolument la défendre.

Et vraiment, je me demande, chers collègues, où sont passés les défenseurs des droits de l'homme, qui se félicitent, comme nous, que l'Occident soit laïc et pluraliste et qui baissent honteusement les yeux devant un Orient qui devient peu à peu réservé à une seule religion.

  Frédéric Daerden (S&D). - Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, le gouvernement hongrois a décidé, fin de l'année 2010, de ne plus subventionner l'Institut de la petite enfance créé par Emmi Pikler à Budapest.

Cette scientifique hongroise a créé ce centre pour qu'il développe des méthodes pédagogiques à destination des tout petits sur des bases scientifiques. L'efficacité de ces méthodes pour le développement psychomoteur des enfants a été reconnue internationalement. Des institutions de la petite enfance calquée sur ce modèle se sont multipliées en Europe, jusque dans ma propre ville belge.

Il est dommage qu'à la sortie de l'année européenne de lutte contre la pauvreté, notamment la pauvreté infantile, un tel signal soit donné par la Hongrie. Cette décision est surprenante, vu le rayonnement international de cet Institut Pikler et les autorités administratives hongroises ayant annoncé leur volonté de continuité dans les fonctions de celle-ci. Je m'interroge donc, mais sans aucun préjugé, sur les motifs qui ont présidé à cette décision du gouvernement hongrois.

  Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE). - Mr President, I would like to express concerns over the Agreement between the EU and Morocco. The future of the agriculture sectors in the Euro-Mediterranean countries will be seriously affected if this Agreement remains as it is now.

We have to open our borders and reach an agreement with the European agricultural sectors, and not one behind their backs. The Commission has carried out studies that clearly show that the Euro-Mediterranean countries will be the most negatively affected by the EU-Morocco Agreement.

I would not ratify this Agreement without the inclusion of some clauses concerning the labour market, the social dimension and the environment in Morocco. If we do nothing, it is our farming activity and food chain industry that will risk losing out, especially in the Euro-Mediterranean countries. These are the concerns I wanted to share with you tonight.

  Constance Le Grip (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, je voulais à mon tour, à l'instar de plusieurs de nos collègues, aborder la question de la persécution des chrétiens partout dans le monde, notamment des chrétiens d'Orient.

Nul n'est besoin de rappeler les actes horribles récemment perpétrés. Je voudrais rappeler tout à fait solennellement que défendre les chrétiens en Orient comme partout dans le monde, plaider pour la liberté religieuse, la diversité des croyances, c'est plaider pour la liberté, la démocratie et les droits de l'homme, qui sont des valeurs au cœur du projet européen et qui sont, bien sûr, en tout cas nous en sommes tous convaincus ici, des valeurs universelles.

Il est vraiment temps maintenant, par-delà l'indignation, l'émotion, les condamnations solennelles, de passer des paroles aux actes. J'appelle donc instamment les autorités de l'Union européenne, la haute représentante pour les affaires étrangères et la politique de sécurité mais également tous nos gouvernants, les ministres des affaires étrangères à engager des mesures précises, à mettre en place un plan d'action précis, concret pour faire du respect de la diversité religieuse et de la lutte contre toutes les formes de persécution religieuse une priorité.

  Tamás Deutsch (PPE). - Tisztelt elnök úr, kedves képviselőtársaim! Magyarországon tavaly májusig nyolc esztendőn keresztül a szocialisták és a liberálisok koalíciója volt hatalmon. Magyarországon nyolc esztendőn keresztül folyamatosan gyengült a demokrácia, tömegessé vált az emberi jogok sérelme. Magyarországon gyengült nyolc esztendőn keresztül a sajtószabadság. Ezzel kapcsolatban az európai szocialistáknak és az európai liberálisoknak szava sem volt. Tavaly májusban a magyar polgárok elsöprő többsége leváltotta ezt a szocialista-liberális kormányt és Európában példa nélküli többséggel a Fidesz-Kereszténydemokrata kormányt jutatta hatalomhoz. Ez a kormány tavaly év végén egy új médiatörvényt fogadott el, amelyik garanciáját adja a sajtószabadságnak. Ilyen körülmények között éri éles támadást Magyarországot és az Unió soros elnöki tisztségét betöltő magyar kormányt. Nem egyeztethető össze az európai értékekkel ez a kettős mérce. Ez ellen fel kell emelnünk a szavunkat.

  Sergej Kozlík (ALDE). - Pred tromi rokmi došlo k rozšíreniu schengenského priestoru o nové členské krajiny. Avšak na hraniciach medzi starými a novými členskými krajinami stále existujú obmedzujúce opatrenia.

Napríklad na hraničnom prechode Rusovce – Kittsee, je to diaľničný prechod medzi Slovenskom a Rakúskom, rakúska strana uplatňuje výrazné obmedzenie rýchlosti na 30 km/h. Pritom prejazd je ešte výrazne zúžený betónovou zábranou.

Nie je ničím výnimočným, že na tejto hranici sa pravidelne vykonáva kontrola rýchlosti prechádzajúcich vozidiel a dosť často aj policajné kontroly dokladov a obsahu kufrov áut.

Členstvo v Schengene predsa znamená voľný pohyb ľudí a tovarov. Na to, že občan prekračuje hranicu členského štátu Únie, by ho mala upozorniť len obyčajná informačná tabuľa. Uvedené správanie, a to nielen v prípade Rakúska, je porušovaním pravidiel Schengenu a Európska komisia by mala na to dať principiálnu odpoveď.

  Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR). - Panie Przewodniczący! Moi poprzednicy mówili o dyskryminacji chrześcijan. Ja też chciałbym powiedzieć o pewnej formie dezawuowania części państw europejskich. W ciągu ostatnich paru tygodni na początku prezydencji Węgier padło bardzo wiele krytycznych słów pod adresem Węgrów i bardzo często te słowa były nieuzasadnione i nieusprawiedliwione. Niestety oprócz słów ministra spraw zagranicznych Luksemburga również bardzo niesprawiedliwe słowa, chyba obrażające Węgrów, padły z ust polityków tej Izby, między innymi pana Martina Schulza. Myślę, że to jest przejaw pewnej wiary, że państwa w Unii Europejskiej dzielą się na lepsze i gorsze. Lepsze są te, które są tutaj już od dłuższego czasu, a gorsze są te, które są tutaj dopiero od 2004 roku.

Myślę, że ten typ dyskryminacji powinien się zakończyć, wszyscy powinni się przyzwyczaić do tego, że nowe państwa są pełnoprawnymi członkami Unii Europejskiej, zwłaszcza na tej sali. Dlatego proszę o to, żeby osoby na tej sali, które pozwalają sobie na tego typu dyskryminację, dyscyplinować i karać.

  Alajos Mészáros (PPE). - Sokakkal együtt én is üdvözlöm a magyar EU-elnökséget. Büszke vagyok arra, hogy ez a közép-európai tagállam a 2004-ben csatlakozottak közül harmadikként láthatja el ezt a megtisztelő és felelősségteljes küldetést. Nem fér hozzá kétség, hogy Magyarország mindig is a demokrácia élharcosai közé tartozott. Ki kérdőjelezné meg 1956-ot, 1989-et vagy 2006 őszét. Ezért nagyon megdöbbent az a negatív kampány, amelyet bizonyos politikai erők a soros EU-elnök ellen indítottak, többek között a magyar médiatörvény ürügyén. Egészen nyilvánvaló, hogy nem jogi kérdésről van itt szó, hanem a politikai vesztesek támadásáról. Ők próbálják kikezdeni az egységes európai eszmét. A kultúrtörténeti szőnyegen ábrázolt Magyarország térképéhez pedig ennyit: aki nem képes szembenézni a történelemmel, az a jövőt sem látja tisztán. Úgy, ahogy egy francia, egy német vagy lengyel beszélhet nemzete múltjáról, megteheti ugyanezt egy magyar is. Nagyon felelőtlennek és veszélyesnek tartom az elnöklő országunk ilyen jellegű lejáratását éppen akkor, amikor a legnagyobb összefogásra lenne szükségünk.

  Γεώργιος Παπανικολάου (PPE). - Κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, η Ελλάδα αποτελεί τη βασική πύλη εισόδου παρανόμων μεταναστών προς όλη την Ευρώπη. Σύμφωνα με την FRONTEX, το 90% των λαθρομεταναστών που καταφεύγουν στην Ευρώπη μπαίνουν από την Ελλάδα.

Αντιμετωπίζουμε στην Ελλάδα, λοιπόν, μια μεγάλη κρίση σε ό,τι αφορά το ζήτημα αυτό. Το τελευταίο διάστημα η ελληνική κυβέρνηση ανακοίνωσε την πρόθεσή της να δημιουργήσει ένα φράχτη στα χερσαία σύνορά μας με την Τουρκία. Διερωτάται κανείς αν μία τέτοια λύση μπορεί στρατηγικά να βοηθήσει στην επίλυση του προβλήματος, αν αρκεί αυτό. Φυσικά και όχι. Όσους φράχτες και να φτιάξουμε, όσες προσπάθειες και να κάνουμε, χρειάζεται συνολική στρατηγική και αλληλεγγύη μεταξύ των ευρωπαϊκών κρατών. Και για να ξεκινήσουμε σωστά, το πρώτο που πρέπει να κάνουμε είναι να εδραιώσουμε μια καλή συνεργασία για τα θέματα αυτά με τη βασική χώρα προέλευσης, την Τουρκία.

Εκκρεμεί η υπογραφή σύμβασης Ευρώπης-Τουρκίας. Γνωρίζουμε πολύ καλά ότι, για να καταλήξουμε σε μία συμφωνία και να προχωρήσουμε στην εφαρμογή της, χρειάζονται ενάμιση με δύο χρόνια· μέχρι τότε, λοιπόν, ας εφαρμόσουμε τη διμερή συμφωνία που υπάρχει με την Ελλάδα από το 2002, όπως έκαναν και άλλες χώρες του Νότου και ρύθμισαν το πρόβλημα.

  Catherine Stihler (S&D). - Mr President, next week all across the world people will be celebrating the life of Scotland’s national poet, Robert Burns. As many of you know, a central part of a Burns supper is a haggis.

Currently there is a ban in the USA on importing Scottish haggis, yet one in three Americans claim Scottish ancestry and would like to try some authentic Scottish haggis. What action can the Commission and the Council take in their transatlantic dialogues to put Scottish haggis back, not just on the agenda, but also on the menu when it comes to American traditional Scottish Burns suppers?

  Sonia Alfano (ALDE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il 13 e il 14 gennaio si è svolto nello stabilimento FIAT di Mirafiori un referendum con il quale gli operai e gli impiegati sono stati chiamati a votare a favore o contro il piano di rilancio dello stabilimento torinese.

Il piano di rilancio è basato su un nuovo contratto collettivo che intacca diritti fondamentali dei lavoratori, quali quello alla malattia, allo sciopero, addirittura quello alla pausa intermedia durante otto ore ad una catena di montaggio. Il referendum è illegittimo, perché l'amministratore delegato Sergio Marchionne ha minacciato gli operai che, in caso di vittoria dei "no" all'accordo, l'azienda avrebbe abbandonato la produzione italiana, trasferendo tutto altrove.

Questa strategia della paura, di un capitalismo al ribasso senza regole e senza diritti, ha avuto il sostegno del governo e addirittura di gran parte del Partito Democratico, partito di opposizione con radici nel Partito Comunista Italiano. Gli unici sindacati a opporsi sono stati la FIOM e la CGIL e sono state estromesse dalla rappresentanza sindacale.

Ciononostante, il "sì" ha vinto con solo il 54% dei voti. Con questo accordo, l'Italia dei diritti torna indietro di parecchi decenni. È giusto che l'Europa sappia e ne tenga conto.

  Ρόδη Κράτσα-Τσαγκαροπούλου (PPE). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, θα ήθελα να αναφερθώ στην ανησυχητική κατάσταση σε χώρες εταίρους της Μεσογείου και τις επιπτώσεις που μπορεί να έχει η κατάσταση αυτή στις σχέσεις μας, στην ασφάλεια, στην ευημερία στην περιοχή.

Μιλήσαμε σήμερα το απόγευμα για τις ραγδαίες ανατροπές στην Τυνησία· κοινωνικές ταραχές υπάρχουν σε χώρες του Μαγκρέμπ και του Μασρέκ· νέα πολιτική αστάθεια στο Λίβανο, ενώ αδιέξοδα συνεχίζουν να υπάρχουν στην ειρηνευτική διαδικασία. Πρέπει να μας απασχολήσει σοβαρά η κατάσταση αυτή, διότι οι χώρες της Μεσογείου είναι χώρες εταίροι και όχι μόνο χώρες γείτονες.

Θα σας θυμίσω ότι στην Τυνησία από το 1995 μέχρι σήμερα έχουν διατεθεί ποσά άμεσης βοήθειας που υπερβαίνουν το 1 δισεκατομμύριο ευρώ, πέρα από τα χαμηλότοκα δάνεια της Ευρωπαϊκής Τράπεζας Επενδύσεων, και μέχρι το 2013 έχουμε προγραμματίσει σημαντικά ποσά άμεσης βοήθειας.

Θα ήθελα λοιπόν να κάνω μια έκκληση, κύριε Πρόεδρε. Να κάνουμε μία σοβαρή πολυμερή συζήτηση με απολογισμό των σχέσεών μας, να δούμε τις προοπτικές και τις διαδικασίες που πρέπει να ακολουθήσουμε, και η Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος να μας παρουσιάσει ένα ολοκληρωμένο σχέδιο γειτονίας μέσα στο πλαίσιο της Ένωσης για τη Μεσόγειο για να αντιμετωπίσουμε τις κρίσεις αυτές από κοινού με τις χώρες εταίρους.

  Joe Higgins (GUE/NGL). − Mr President, in December Commission President Barroso told me by letter that his meeting with President Nazarbayev last October would help advance respect for human rights in Kazakhstan. The same was said about granting Kazakhstan the chair of the OSCE in 2010 and holding a major OSCE summit in Astana in December. However, world leaders had scarcely left that summit when it was announced that a referendum was to be held in March to cancel the presidential election in 2012, thus keeping Nazarbayev in power until 2020.

Harassment of the opposition press and of human rights defenders is being stepped up. Activists from the left-wing movement ‘Kazakhstan 2012’ are being harassed and jailed.

I demand that the EU stop boosting the Nazarbayev dictatorship. The independent trade union and social movements in Kazakhstan must be fully supported so that they can lead mobilisation to end this dictatorship – just as people power in Tunisia ended the Ben Ali dictatorship – and put in place structures to bring the wealth of Kazakhstan into the democratic ownership of the majority.

  Krisztina Morvai (NI). - (a képviselő mikrofonja nem volt bekapcsolva, így a mondat eleje nem hallható)...a Bizottságnak a rendkívüli ülése. Mi más is lett volna a téma, mint a magyar médiatörvény? Nem akartam hinni a fülemnek, amikor befolyásos szocialista és liberális képviselőtársaink azt követelték, hogy az Európai Unió indítson úgynevezett súlyos jogsértési eljárást Magyarországgal, a jelenlegi soros elnökkel szemben. Ez a rendelkezésre álló legsúlyosabb szankció. Ilyen szankciót, sem pedig semmilyen szankciót nem alkalmaztak akkor, amikor 2002 és 2010 között a szocialista és liberális kormány Magyarországon minden egyes tüntetést szétveretett, emberek százait börtönözte be önkényesen, szemeket lövetett ki és súlyos sérüléseket okozott. Ha ezek után az Európai Unió súlyos jogsértési eljárást fog a jelenlegi magyar kormány és állam ellen indítani, akkor végre kinyitja azoknak a szemét, akiknek bármiféle illúziójuk volt az Európai Unió Magyarországhoz való hozzáállásával kapcsolatban, és azt gondolom, hogy a magyar nemzet követelni fogja az Európai Unióból való kilépésünket, és lesznek, akik követnek bennünket.

  Antigoni Papadopoulou (S&D). - Mr President, I also want to raise the issue of respect for religious freedom for all, without discrimination, because this is a basic human right.

That human right was violated in my country for the few Christians attending Christmas mass at the church of Agios Synesios in the occupied village of Rizokarpaso.

The so-called police of the Turkish occupying regime entered the church and forced the priest to terminate the Christmas Day service and then forced the enclaved Greek Cypriots attending the mass to evacuate the church.

The European Parliament must strongly condemn such actions, which reveal the ugly and oppressive face of the Turkish occupation of the northern part of Cyprus, in violation of European law and human rights and the Third Vienna agreement of 1975.

The EU must stop Turkey and its subordinate local administration in the occupied part of Cyprus from committing further violations, and from continuing the ethnic cleansing of the remaining 300 Christian Greek Cypriots.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). - Mr President, the Food Supplements Directive was adopted in 2002 but, almost nine years later, it has still not been fully implemented. The Commission has yet to produce a proposal to harmonise the maximum amounts of vitamins and minerals that can be included in food supplements as required by the directive. This failure means that companies have to produce multiple product formulations to comply with different national laws. This is unfair and expensive, especially as a scientific model for setting maximum amounts is available. The Commission itself cited this in a paper in 2006.

It begs the question of why the proposal has not been produced? Perhaps, to paraphrase Robbie Burns, whom somebody mentioned a minute ago, ‘The best laid plans of mice and men and the Commission gang aft agley’. It needs to happen very soon, because EU legislation is intended to make it easier for companies to compete in the internal market by standardising requirements. The sooner it happens, the better. I urge the Commission to get a move on.

  Илиaна Ивaнова (PPE). - уважаеми колеги, напоследък обществеността в България е свидетел на поредица от публикации за предполагаемо използване на специални разузнавателни средства за подслушване на висши управляващи. Източникът на тази информация е неясен, с неясен произход и автентичност, остава анонимен и никой не поема отговорността за разпространението й.

Ясно изразената воля за реформи и борба с организираната престъпност от правителството, недопускането на влияние от страна на бившата Държавна сигурност, както и фактът, че тази година в България предстоят президентски и местни избори, дадоха старт на тази кампания, създаваща напрежение и насаждаща недоверие в управлението. Интерес от това състояние имат кръговете на влияние, които покровителстваха и се облагодетелстваха от срастването на престъпността с държавата. Днес те търсят реванш за засегнатите си интереси.

Искам да ви уверя, че България е правова държава, в която такива средства се прилагат от органите само в рамките на закона и че управлението ще продължи реформите по пътя, който е поело, недопускайки нелегитимни интереси да пречат на борбата с престъпността.

  Станимир Илчев (ALDE). - през последните месеци в България наистина расте тревогата сред обществото от ескалацията в използването на специални разузнавателни средства. Но към този проблем има и друга гледна точка. Подслушванията се превръщат като че ли във фетиш за някои политици и ръководители на съвременните специални служби.

Ефективността в борбата с престъпността не се е повишила. Още по-неприемлива е назряващата страхова психоза от тези подслушвания. Наистина не са ясни авторите на тази вакханалия: дали това са хора от сектора за сигурност, дали са техни бивши колеги или нелегитимни структури, които имат дестабилизиращи намерения. Съдържанието на подслушваните разговори мистериозно циркулира из медиите. В такъв разговор участва и министър-председателят на България. Съдържанието е дискредитиращо, но той твърди, че записът е манипулиран.

Отвъд тази неприятна фактология е усещането на българските граждани, че институциите не работят добре, че брутално се нарушават човешки права. И затова като новоприета страна член на Европейския съюз България се нуждае от съдействие, за да преструктурира своите специални служби.

  Presidente. − L'esame del punto è chiuso.

20. L-implimentazzjoni tal-Konsensus Ewropew dwar l-għajnuna umanitarja: l-analiżi ta' nofs it-term tal-Pjan ta' Azzjoni tagħha u t-triq 'il quddiem (preżentazzjoni qasira)

  Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca la relazione di Michèle Striffler, a nome della commissione per lo sviluppo, sull'attuazione del consenso europeo sull'aiuto umanitario: bilancio di metà percorso del suo piano d'azione e prospettive future [2010/2101(INI)].

  Michèle Striffler, rapporteure. − Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, le contexte humanitaire global s'est aggravé, les défis et besoins humanitaires sont immenses et il y a une multiplication des terrains d'intervention.

Le consensus européen pour l'aide humanitaire est un instrument fondamental qui garde toute sa pertinence dans ce contexte humanitaire en pleine mutation. Les défis humanitaires peuvent trouver leur réponse dans une application rigoureuse du consensus et de son plan d'action. Cependant, le consensus reste encore trop méconnu au-delà des partenaires humanitaires. Un effort est donc à effectuer afin de renforcer sa visibilité et de mieux le faire connaître auprès des États membres et des acteurs impliqués. Il faut plaider pour que ce consensus soit diffusé, compris et appliqué au sein du service européen d'action extérieure et par les acteurs militaires.

En 2009 a été mis sur pied le groupe de travail sur l'aide humanitaire et l'aide alimentaire au sein du Conseil, qui est devenu un forum pertinent, mais dont le rôle devrait être renforcé en termes de coordination entre États membres et de suivi de la mise en œuvre du consensus et de plaidoyer pour l'aide humanitaire vis-à-vis des autres groupes de travail du Conseil du COPS.

La révision à mi-parcours du plan d'action est une occasion unique de renforcer l'action dans des domaines méritant plus d'attention tels que, premièrement, la promotion des principes humanitaires et du droit international humanitaire, car l'aide humanitaire n'est pas un instrument de gestion de crise et il convient de regretter la politisation croissante de l'aide humanitaire et de ses conséquences sur le respect de l'espace humanitaire. Un deuxième domaine concerne les questions liées à la qualité, à la coordination et à la cohérence dans le cadre de la fourniture de l'aide humanitaire de l'Union européenne, et un troisième élément est la clarification de l'utilisation des moyens et capacités militaires et de protection civile en conformité avec le consensus humanitaire et les directives des Nations unies.

La distinction entre les mandats des acteurs militaires et humanitaires doit rester bien claire et un dialogue entre acteurs militaires et humanitaires est nécessaire afin de favoriser une compréhension mutuelle.

De plus, j'invite dans mon rapport la Commission européenne à présenter des propositions législatives très ambitieuses afin de créer une force européenne de protection et je me félicite de la récente communication de la Commission sur le renforcement des capacités de réponse de l'Union européenne en cas de catastrophe.

Enfin, il faut renforcer la dimension "réduction des risques de catastrophe" et le lien entre l'aide d'urgence, la réhabilitation et le développement.

Le traité de Lisbonne a introduit le service européen d'action extérieure. Nous nous sommes donc attachés, au cours des négociations, à défendre l'indépendance de la DG ECO et à éviter toute instrumentalisation possible de l'aide humanitaire à des fins de politiques étrangères. Des règles strictes et transparentes doivent être mises en place pour la coopération et la coordination entre le service européen d'action extérieure et la Commission pour la gestion d'une crise de grande ampleur.

Pour finir, j'aimerais attirer votre attention sur la multiplication des violences sexuelles – Je pense en particulier à l'Est de la République du Congo dans le Kivu – et sur l'importance d'intégrer systématiquement le genre et la santé reproductive dans la réponse humanitaire dans les services de santé de première urgence.

  Anna Záborská (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, je félicite Mme Striffler pour son rapport. Il omet cependant de mentionner les acteurs qui fondent leur engagement sur la religion, notamment chrétienne. Le texte du consensus européen mentionne bien la Croix-Rouge mais ignore d'autres acteurs disposant du même statut en droit international mais qui se fondent sur la religion chrétienne comme par exemple l'Ordre de Malte.

Ainsi, ce rapport apporte une nouvelle preuve de la négligence avec laquelle les institutions européennes accueillent l'engagement des acteurs chrétiens dans l'intervention humanitaire. Les religions n'ont pas seulement l'obligation, mais aussi la compétence nécessaire pour intervenir rapidement dans les situations de crise et de catastrophe naturelle.

J'invite le rapporteur à proposer un amendement oral pour reconnaître l'utilité et l'efficacité des acteurs qui fondent leur travail sur la foi chrétienne.

  Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE). - Európska únia spolu s členskými štátmi sú najvýznamnejším svetovým darcom humanitárnej pomoci. A je to naša morálna povinnosť.

Európsky konsenzus o humanitárnej pomoci sa stal významným medzníkom, čo dosvedčuje aj analýza akčného plánu realizácie humanitárnej pomoci. Správa však poukazuje aj na konkrétne slabiny systému a iné prekážky, ktoré bránia efektívnemu a rýchlemu prísunu humanitárneho tovaru a služieb pre najzraniteľnejšie obyvateľstvo v krízových oblastiach.

Verím, že Lisabonská zmluva prinášajúca celý rad inovácií v oblasti humanitárnej pomoci Európskej únie, ktorá je odteraz aj samostatnou politikou, bude vhodne a promptne využitá na zlepšenie dosahovania hmatateľných výsledkov v súlade s rešpektovaním ľudskej dôstojnosti, humanitárnych hodnôt a dodržiavaním ľudských práv, ako sú zakotvené v medzinárodnom práve, napríklad aj pri rýchlej pomoci pri katastrofách.

  Zuzana Roithová (PPE). - Trvalé zvyšování počtu a rozsahu humanitárních katastrof ve třetích zemích, které je mimo jiné i důsledkem klimatických změn, vyžaduje kvantitativní, ale i kvalitativní zlepšení humanitární pomoci. A proto plně podporuji opatření zmíněná ve zprávě, včetně transformace civilní ochrany členských států, aby mohla sloužit i jako akceschopná koordinovaná pomoc Evropské unie. Za naléhavé ovšem považuji také zlepšit bezpečnost humanitárních pracovníků. Myslím, že by Komise měla vyčlenit kapacity také na šíření osvěty zejména na Haiti, aby postižení obyvatelé chápali příčiny a následné okolnosti jejich katastrofy a pomáhali chránit bezpečnost humanitárních pracovníků, a nikoli naopak. Jinak je nutné – a nikoli nežádoucí – využívat ochrany armádních sil.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). - Mr President, I should briefly like to ask some questions. Regarding the European Union, I know that we are wonderful for donating aid to where it is needed, but it often goes through NGOs. Are there any NGOs that have not been up to scratch, or that have been the subject of complaints in the countries in which they operate, or that the European Union itself might have reservations about? In other words, do we just give the aid and the supplements – let us put it that way – to the NGOs annually? Where is the accountability?

In the light of some programmes I have seen recently, I was rather concerned about allegations being made as to what some of the NGOs were doing and their lack of accountability. Having said that, I know that the vast majority are doing good work and are properly motivated.

  Peter Jahr (PPE). - Herr Präsident! Vielen Dank an die Berichterstatterin, dass wir diese Problematik heute in diesem Haus diskutieren können. Ich habe noch zwei Anmerkungen bzw. Fragen, die mich immer bei der humanitären Hilfe umtreiben: Erstens ist es unstrittig und wichtig, dass man natürlich hilft, wenn Menschen in Not sind, aber – das hat mein Vorredner schon gesagt – man sollte auch immer wieder die Frage stellen: Werden diese Mittel auch angemessen und ordentlich verwendet?

Zweitens dürfen wir auch nicht vernachlässigen: Humanitäre Hilfe, Menschen geraten in Not, das ist richtig. Das können Naturkatastrophen sein, aber es sind auch zunehmend von Menschen selbst verursachte Katastrophen. Dazu zählen insbesondere politische oder auch kriegerische Auseinandersetzungen. Wir müssen bedenken, dass humanitäre Hilfe Soforthilfe ist, wir aber gleichzeitig auch die Ursachen, nämlich die politischen Gewalttaten, beseitigen müssen.

  Kristalina Georgieva, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I very much welcome Mrs Striffler’s report, as well as Parliament’s involvement in and continued strong advocacy for effective European humanitarian action.

The consensus was adopted in 2007. It provides an essential common policy framework for the EU – a common vision accompanied by an action plan. Both the Member States and the Commission have a shared responsibility to make sure that the consensus is well implemented.

I want to stress that what comes very clearly out of the report is the message that humanitarian principles, international humanitarian law and protection of the humanitarian space have to be at the centre of our action on the consensus. Four-fifths of our humanitarian aid goes to people in need in conflict-related, man-made emergencies. For us to be able to reach these people it is critical that our aid is independent and neutral and that it is perceived in this way.

I would like to give you one example of this. I have just come back from Yemen where, together with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Antonio Gutierrez, we engaged on the humanitarian access issue with high-level government officials and representatives of the al-Houthi rebel movement. For the first time we obtained commitment on their part to facilitate humanitarian access and respect delivery of aid to all Yemeni people in need, in line with the humanitarian principles of neutrality and independence. Having spent a number of hours with men with Kalashnikovs, I would like to observe that we in Europe do bring this value of neutrality that is a bridge to people in need. In the Yemeni case, there are 300 000 internally displaced people and many more hundred thousands affected by six wars in six years in the north of Yemen.

Of course, for a long-lasting impact, humanitarian aid is not the right instrument. It is development that can lay the foundation for lasting peace. We in the Commission have completed a year-long review process of the European consensus action plan, in close liaison with our Member State and humanitarian partners. On 8 December, the Commission adopted a Communication on this. The review shows that over the past three years we have made significant contributions to strengthening the humanitarian response in terms of advocacy and humanitarian action, as well as by bringing humanitarian aid and civil protection together.

We also concluded that there is scope for further improvement in three areas.

Firstly we need to promote the quality and effectiveness of aid by good assessment, a well-coordinated response and investment in disaster risk reduction and local capacity. At a time when needs are growing and budgets are constrained, this is critical.

Let me just respond here to the question of accountability. Obviously we need to stretch every euro to the full and deliver it with the highest possible quality and in the most effective way. In order to ensure that our partners – UN agencies and NGOs – are accountable, we review one-third of all partners and one-third of all projects every year. We have our own humanitarian aid offices in all the hotspot areas of the planet to be the ears and the eyes of our taxpayers, including in Yemen, because of increasing humanitarian needs. I recently cut the ribbon of our humanitarian aid office there.

The second issue concerning which we can see room for improvement is the strengthening of the European voice. We are the largest donor and have to make sure that we speak very clearly with one voice. We must also reach out to other donors so that we play our leadership role, vis-à-vis traditional donors, but also by engaging new donors.

Thirdly we need to ensure coherence which means working, together with the External Action Service, with military actors to make sure that a principled humanitarian approach is safeguarded and is also promoted in Europe.

Let me finish by once again thanking Mrs Striffler for her work on this issue and calling upon Parliament to continue the discussion on this topic. The world has changed. Unfortunately there will be more and more natural and man-made disasters. Whatever action we take will determine not only the lives of the people affected, but also the moral standing and the capacity of the EU to lead in the world.

  Presidente. − La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà martedì 18 gennaio 2011.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 149)

  Artur Zasada (PPE), na piśmie. – Pomoc humanitarna stanowi przejaw powszechnej solidarności międzyludzkiej, jest naszym obowiązkiem moralnym. Współcześnie obserwujemy systematyczny wzrost zapotrzebowania na pomoc humanitarną ze względu na wzrastającą liczbę odnotowanych klęsk żywiołowych. Przyczyniają się do tego nie tylko zmiany klimatyczne, ale także rozwój technik wykrywania katastrof i komunikacji w celu powiadamiania o ich zajściu. Ważnymi kryteriami świadczenia pomocy humanitarnej powinny być szybkość, odpowiedzialność i możliwie niskie koszty administracyjne. Rozwój transportu jest czynnikiem usprawniającym niesienie pomocy. Dzięki temu można szybciej dotrzeć do poszkodowanych i udzielić pomocy większej liczbie ofiar. Dlatego tak ważne staje się włączanie firm – korporacji, koncernów, ale także małych przedsiębiorstw, (nie tylko transportowych i logistycznych), w budowanie sieci podmiotów współpracujących ze sobą na danym terenie, aby skutecznie nieść pomoc i doskonalić system szybkiego reagowania na zagrożenia. Na zasadzie partnerstwa międzysektorowego (biznes - organizacja/ instytucja) mogą być tworzone bazy, oddziały, biura dysponujące funduszami, powierzchniami magazynowymi, wolontariuszami, żywnością, niezbędnymi materiałami i sprzętem oraz środkami transportu. Taka współpraca może przynieść wymierne korzyści w obliczu ludzkich dramatów, szczególnie gdy trzeba szybko zareagować, a nie najpierw zająć się zbieraniem funduszy.

21. L-agrikoltura bħala settur strateġiku fil-kuntest tas-sigurtà tal-ikel (preżentazzjoni qasira)

  Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca la relazione di Daciana Octavia Sârbu, a nome della commissione per l'agricoltura e lo sviluppo rurale, sul riconoscimento dell'agricoltura come settore strategico per la sicurezza dell'approvvigionamento alimentare [2010/2112(INI)].

  Daciana Octavia Sârbu, Raportoare. − Sunt onorată să vă prezint raportul meu, care vorbeşte despre importanţa strategică a agriculturii în asigurarea securităţii alimentare a Uniunii Europene. Agricultura este neglijată în discuţiile privind strategia şi viitorul Uniunii Europene, iar raportul vine să arate că Europa nu se află într-o situaţie de securitate alimentară, că fermierii şi întregi zone rurale sunt în pericol de dispariţie şi că noile provocări, cum sunt schimbările climatice, tind să destabilizeze rezervele alimentare, deja în scădere, nu doar în Europa, ci şi în lume.

În contextul în care producţia de alimente trecuie să crească până în anul 2050, cu cel puţin 70%, pentru a satisface nevoia de hrană a populaţiei la nivel global, este nevoie ca securitatea alimentară să se afle în centrul dezbaterilor atât la nivel mondial, cât şi european. Uniunea Europeană trebuie să răspundă ferm acestor provocări, iar prin acest Raport încercăm să propunem astăzi câteva căi concrete de acţiune.

În primul rând, avem nevoie de o politică agricolă comună puternică, menită să garanteze securitatea alimentară atât a cetăţenilor săi, cât şi să contribuie la asigurarea securităţii alimentare la nivel mondial, în contextul resurselor limitate şi al efectelor schimbărilor climatice. Nu putem vorbi despre securitatea alimentară dacă nu abordăm două probleme esenţiale şi anume: volatilitatea pieţelor şi a preţurilor şi rezervele de hrană în scădere la nivel mondial.

În ceea ce priveşte volatilitatea preţurilor, am solicitat Comisiei ca, în cadrul noii PAC, să consolideze rolul instrumentelor de intervenţie pe piaţă şi să ia măsuri mai consistente pentru limitarea speculaţiilor pe pieţele agricole. În zilele noastre, rezervele de alimente la nivel global sunt mult mai limitate decât în trecut, conform estimărilor, acestea putând acoperi nevoia de hrană de la nivel mondial doar o lună şi jumătate. De aceea, am considerat că ar fi benefic să se creeze un sistem global de rezerve alimentare, atât rezerve de urgenţă, pentru a reduce foametea, cât şi rezerve care să fie folosite pentru reglementarea preţurilor pe pieţele agricole, care să se afle sub egida internaţională şi să se prijine pe expertiza instituţiilor deja existente, precum ONU sau FAO. Cred că Uniunea Europeană trebuie să fie iniţiatorul acestui demers, de aceea am cerut Comisiei să îşi asume acest rol.

O altă chestiune importantă abordată în acest Raport este situaţia tinerilor agricultori. Dacă ne gândim la viitorul agriculturii europene, atunci trebuie să acordăm mai multă atenţie tinerilor agricultori. La nivel european, doar 7% din agricultori sunt sub 35 ani. De aceea, am cerut Comisiei să se prevadă măsuri de încurajare a acestora.

Pe de altă parte, am subliniat necesitatea păstrării diversităţii agriculturii europene. În acest sens, am menţionat faptul că practicile agricole tradiţionale, exploataţiile familiale, fermele mici, dar şi agricultura ecologică pot aduce o contribuţie valoroasă la asigurarea securităţii alimentare şi am solicitat crearea de programe la nivel european, care să sprijine aceste tipuri de agricultură. Să nu uităm însă că şi pe teritoriul Uniunii încă există sărăcie şi foamete şi că milioane de europeni au apelat în această iarnă la ajutoare alimentare europene. De aceea, în contextul crizei economice, este de o importanţă majoră menţinerea programului european „Ajutoare alimentare pentru persoanele cele mai defavorizate”, cu finanţare europeană.

În încheiere, aş dori să mulţumesc raportorilor din umbră şi celorlalţi colegi din Comisia pentru agricultură pentru buna colaborare şi pentru contribuţiile aduse în redactarea acestui raport, cât şi secretariatului Comisiei pentru agricultură şi sper ca, împreună, să adoptăm mâine un raport care să răspundă aşteptărilor cetăţenilor europeni.

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE). - Mr President, I would like to thank Mrs Sârbu, our rapporteur, for the excellent work she has done on this report and for her cooperation with all the shadows. This follows work which I carried out in the previous mandate on the role of the common agricultural policy and global food security.

I regret that we are debating this report just before midnight. Perhaps it will be at a minute to midnight that Europe and the world wake up to the realities of how insecure we are when it comes to food production.

This report is extremely welcome in our overall debate on this issue and in the context of our debate on reform of the common agricultural policy.

I had some concerns, but I think they are reflected in the final text. The idea that one form of production system is better than another – that organic, small, local is better – is not a good argument. We need all production systems to contribute to our food security. We do need to address market volatility and speculation and I do not think we have all the answers yet.

The single key problem with agriculture is low incomes for farmers. Young farmers will not work for nothing, and we have to address the low income problem if we want security of food supply.

  Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE). - V dôsledku neustáleho rastu populácie sme nútení čoraz intenzívnejšie sa zaoberať otázkou potravinovej bezpečnosti, prístupu k primeranej, zdravotne neškodnej a výživnej strave.

S cieľom zaistiť potravinovú bezpečnosť je preto nevyhnutné zvýšiť transparentnosť a spravodlivosť v samotnom potravinovom reťazci. Zabezpečiť spravodlivú návratnosť pre poľnohospodárov, zisky a tvorbu cien, ako aj životaschopné poľnohospodárstvo.

Osobne považujem za vysoko dôležité uplatňovanie ráznej politiky rozvoja vidieka, prostredníctvom ktorej zachováme životaschopnosť vidieckej Európy a zvýšime konkurencieschopnosť poľnohospodárstva, podporíme inovácie a v konečnom dôsledku aj samotnú zamestnanosť.

Poľnohospodárstvo má veľký význam predovšetkým v znevýhodnených oblastiach a aj preto treba prijímať stimuly, ktoré podporia poľnohospodárstvo vidieka, prilákajú do poľnohospodárstva viac mladých ľudí a napomôžu znížiť regionálne rozdiely a zabezpečia trvalo udržateľný rozvoj.

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D). - Quero dar os meus parabéns sinceros à colega Sârbu pela excelência do relatório produzido, aconselhando vivamente a que a Comissão o tenha em conta, sobretudo naqueles aspectos em que a dimensão complexa das questões agrícolas – que em muito ultrapassam a dimensão estrita da agricultura – exigem o envolvimento de outras áreas como a da concorrência do mercado interno e da regulação financeira, bem como também exigem o seu tratamento noutros palcos extracomunitários como o G-20 ou a OMC.

As questões absolutamente determinantes para a agricultura, para os agricultores e para a disponibilização em quantidade e qualidade suficiente de alimentos às populações da Europa e do mundo só poderão de facto ser enfrentadas se o forem em todas estas suas dimensões, e os objectivos ambiciosos da reforma da PAC só poderão ser alcançados se a reforma ultrapassar as fronteiras estritas da agricultura e os seus objectivos forem igualmente tidos em conta nas necessárias intervenções nas outras áreas de políticas e nos outros organismos de carácter global.

Este relatório deixou-o bem claro e eu saúdo-o por isso.

  Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR). - Panie Przewodniczący! Też przyłączam się do gratulacji dla pani Sârbu za znakomite sprawozdanie, które uważam za jedno z najważniejszych w tej kadencji.

Ludzi na świecie jest coraz więcej, ziemi pod uprawę coraz mniej. Żywność staje się produktem strategicznym w coraz większym stopniu. O ile ropę naftową można zastąpić energią słoneczną czy atomową, o tyle żywności pochodzącej z ziemi nie da się zastąpić niczym. W Unii Europejskiej zachowujemy się niekiedy tak, jakbyśmy ciągle borykali się z problemem nadprodukcji żywności. Cała polityka rolna Unii Europejskiej w ostatnich latach nastawiona była na to jak ograniczać produkcję rolną, jak ją zmniejszać. Dzisiaj na horyzoncie są już czasy, kiedy żywności będzie brakować. Bardzo dobrze, że z Parlamentu, dzięki sprawozdaniu pani Sârbu, wychodzi ten sygnał, że sytuacja się zmieniła i polityka rolna Unii Europejskiej też musi się zmienić. Musimy szanować rolnictwo – gwarancję naszego bezpieczeństwa żywnościowego.

  Peter Jahr (PPE). - Herr Präsident! Es ist nun einmal in der Politik so wie im täglichen Leben: Das, was man hat, das schätzt man am wenigsten. Und so scheint es ja auch offenbar so, dass wir in der Europäischen Union einen Überfluss an Nahrungsmitteln haben, und es gibt ja immer noch genügend zu kaufen. Wenn man die Futtermittelexporte gegenrechnet, haben wir in der Europäischen Union einen Selbstversorgungsgrad von 88 %. Das heißt, auch wir in der Europäischen Union müssen aufpassen, dass der Selbstversorgungsgrad an landwirtschaftlichen Produkten und Nahrungsmitteln gewährleistet ist.

Deshalb bin ich der Berichterstatterin, Frau Sârbu sehr dankbar, dass sie dieses Problem wieder in den Mittelpunkt gerückt hat. Auch wir brauchen in der Europäischen Union eine gemeinsame Agrarpolitik, die die Menschen in unserer Union ausreichend mit Lebensmitteln versorgt. Angesichts einer wachsenden Weltbevölkerung oder der Auswirkungen des Klimawandels und steigender Energiepreise wird deutlich, dass die Landwirte in Europa dies zukünftig nicht alleine bewältigen können. Wir brauchen dazu auch eine strategische Abstimmung in der Welt.

  Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D). - Az Unió biztonságos élelmiszer-ellátása a következő évtizedek egyik legnagyobb biztonságpolitikai kihívása lesz. A Sârbu-jelentésnek ez a legnagyobb értéke, ami rámutat arra, hogy egy-két évtized múlva az élelmiszer és az édesvíz olyan stratégiai termék lesz, mint most a kőolaj és a földgáz. Azért is jó az időzítése a jelentésnek, mivel most folynak a közös agrárpolitika jövőjéről szóló viták, most folyik a 2014 utáni költségvetés tervezése, és sokan fenik a fogukat a közös agrárpolitika költségvetésének megcsorbítására. Nagyon fontos, hogy ez a közös agrárpolitika a jövőben megfelelő forrásokkal rendelkezzen. Ehhez meg kell győzni a pénzügyminisztereket, a döntéshozókat, hogy az élelmiszer-gazdaság az Európai Unióban nem csak élelmiszert termel, hanem olyan közjavakat, környezetvédelmi szociális közjavakat is, amelyeket a mezőgazdaság nélkül semmi módon nem tudnánk szavatolni és megtermelni.

  Krisztina Morvai (NI). - Az élelmiszer–biztonságról szólva zavaró számomra, hogy az Európai Unió országait egységes egészként kezeli a jelentés. Az új tagállamokban egészen más a helyzet, mint a régiekben. Magyarországgal kapcsolatban például hadd tegyek fel két kérdést. Hogyan lehetséges, hogy egy csodálatos mezőgazdasági adottságokkal rendelkező országban gyermekéhezésről beszélhetünk? Az Európai Unió közepén gyerekek és felnőttek is éheznek. A másik kérdésem: hogyan lehetséges, hogy olyan egészségtelen irányban változott a mezőgazdaságunk, hogy hatalmas területeken ipari jelleggel nyersanyagot állítunk elő, elsősorban valamiféle –elnézést a kifejezésért, de – gyarmati jelleggel, és ugye a feldolgozása ennek az élelmiszernek külföldön folyik, ott termelik meg azt a profitot, amit aztán – megint csak visszahozva Magyarországra a feldolgozott élelmiszert – realizálnak magas áron. Valami alapvető probléma van mindezzel.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). - A Uachtaráin, cosúil le cainteoirí eile ba mhaith liom comhghairdeas a ghabháil leis an rapóirtéir Bean Uí Sârbu as an dea-obair san ábhar seo.

In four minutes, Mrs Sârbu covered a multitude of issues. I am not going to go over all the things she mentioned, but I would like to reiterate two points. First, there is a need for a well-funded CAP. I hope this Parliament will play a key role in ensuring that the CAP is not demeaned or diminished in any way. Second, we need to ensure that young people are encouraged to go into farming as a livelihood.

Furthermore, we have a policy of encouraging the growth of energy crops on good agricultural land. In view of the fact that we may be facing a food shortage worldwide, with a population increasing at a rate of 80 million per year, should we reassess that policy? Are we robbing Peter to pay Paul, or perhaps robbing Paul and Peter and finishing up with nothing? That is the question I would like to ask.

  Csanád Szegedi (NI). - Tisztelt elnök úr, tisztelt képviselőtársaim! A jelentésből egyértelműen kitűnik, hogy a mezőgazdaság területén sem mehet minden úgy, ahogy eddig ment. Nem mehet az tovább, hogy a világ egyik végéből a másik végére szállítunk, illetve a nagyvállalatok szállítanak mezőgazdasági termékeket. Ugye, ez működhet természetellenes módon. Európába hoznak be, köztük Magyarországra is almát, paprikát, paradicsomot, és nem is Spanyolországból vagy Hollandiából nagyrészt, hanem Kínából, Brazíliából, hát hústermékeket. Mehet ez így, csak hát azokat a termékeket fel kell tenni a szállítóeszközre, mondjuk hajóra, heteken-hónapokon át utaznak. Ezeket különböző tartósítószerekkel tartósítani kell, amik az emberek számára nagy fogyasztás esetén mérgezőek. Namost az emberek a nagy kereskedelmi láncokban ehhez a termékekhez jutnak hozzá, és aztán csodálkoznak, mi ez a sok betegség, daganatos, rákos megbetegedés. Hát nyilvánvaló, hogy az ételszínezékek és a mesterséges adalékanyagok ezeknek a kiváltói. Hozzá kell tennem, hogy a kisgazdákat kell támogatni, hogy egy kialakulóban lévő élelmiszerválságban Európa mentőövei lehessenek, ezért a multicégek helyett a kisgazdákat kell támogatni.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). - Senhor Presidente, o reconhecimento da agricultura como um sector estratégico no contexto da segurança alimentar de que nos fala este relatório é indissociável do reconhecimento e promoção do conceito da soberania alimentar. Quanto maior a dependência alimentar de um país, maior a sua insegurança alimentar, maior a dificuldade em assegurar o abastecimento de alimentos à sua população em quantidade e qualidade suficientes.

A soberania alimentar é o melhor seguro contra a volatilidade dos preços dos bens alimentares, assunto que volta dramaticamente a estar na ordem do dia. Esta volatilidade tem tido origem fundamentalmente na especulação financeira exercida sobre os produtos alimentares, área em que os especuladores, fundos de investimento, hedge funds, fundos de pensões, grandes bancos, se foram concentrando à medida que outras bolhas especulativas foram secando ou rebentando.

A única maneira de impedir esta especulação é acabar com os instrumentos que a viabilizam, nomeadamente com alguns produtos financeiros como os derivados OTC.

Infelizmente, as medidas que a União Europeia adoptou neste domínio estão muito longe de poder travar esta sinistra engrenagem da especulação e as suas desumanas consequências – como vem, aliás, reconhecer um relatório recente das Nações Unidas da autoria do relator especial para o direito à alimentação.

  Lívia Járóka (PPE). - Mr President, we are discussing the poorest of the poor – the European Roma – and, together with the new Hungarian Presidency, we are all addressing the European Roma strategy.

Among inter-sectoral issues that concern the poorest of the poor, agriculture is very rarely addressed, notably because no land is owned by the poorest of the poor in Europe. So we are talking not just about food security but about having food on the table. As one of my colleagues has already said, this is an essential question for the EU today. I believe that the agricultural sector – and the Commission’s work on these documents – has to be in line with all the EU micro-regional development projects which are concerned with fighting poverty and securing food on the table for future generations.

  Kristalina Georgieva, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, the Commission very much welcomes this timely report, as food prices are rising sharply, mainly due to erratic weather conditions and natural disasters, but also to increases in energy prices that impact on the cost of food.

Therefore I want to thank the rapporteur, Mrs Sârbu, and the members of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development for their efforts.

Food security is fundamental for the almost one billion people around the world that still suffer from hunger, but it is also important for vulnerable populations across Europe. For them, the common agricultural policy makes a real difference. The – sometimes criticised – CAP has managed to provide EU citizens with food at affordable prices and has ensured food security in Europe. This must continue. Food security is identified as a central issue in the communication on the common agricultural policy towards 2020 that was adopted on 18 November by the Commission.

The report that Mrs Sârbu has put in front of us underlines the issue of excessive price volatility, which is closely linked to food security because of the impact it has both on farmers and on consumers.

The Commission fully agrees that there is a need to tackle excessive price volatility. We must collectively look for better regulation, supervision and transparency to address market issues, and this requires not only better financial regulations but also substantially improved transparency on the market.

The report recommends the creation of a global food system. Not an easy subject. We have had experiences in the past of commodity boards. They have proved not to be successful and therefore this topic undoubtedly requires more detailed debate. It also requires analysis of the experience we have gained, for example from the EUR 1 billion Food Facility adopted by the Commission in 2008, and also from the work that the Commission undertakes closely with the FAO and the World Food Programme to ensure that bumper stocks are pre-positioned in order to soften the blow of rising food prices.

All these efforts can be developed when the G20 looks closely into the food stocks issue, and you can be assured that the European Commission will be an active participant in the related deliberations in the coming weeks.

The report has made a call, echoed by many of you here this evening, for a strong agricultural and rural development policy in Europe, capable of ensuring food security for all, with the support of research and innovation to face the challenges of producing more with the fewer resources we have and will have.

The Commission fully agrees with this. There is no more relevant instrument to fulfil these objectives than a strong common agricultural policy able to guarantee the economic and environmental competitiveness of agriculture and – as some of you said – able to bring young people into the agricultural sector of Europe.

  Presidente. − La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà martedì 18 gennaio 2011.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 149)

  Sergio Berlato (PPE), per iscritto. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la sicurezza alimentare rappresenta una priorità politica sia a livello comunitario sia mondiale. Il processo di globalizzazione della catena alimentare fa emergere costantemente nuove sfide e, talvolta, anche rischi per la salute e per gli interessi dei consumatori.

Una delle principali sfide che l’Unione europea dovrà affrontare è rappresentata dall’elaborazione di riforme agricole e alimentari volte a soddisfare le esigenze della popolazione mondiale. Secondo dati recenti, quest’ultima è in continua crescita e si prevede che aumenterà del 40% circa entro il 2050, determinando un aumento della domanda di alimenti che si stima raddoppi rispetto agli attuali fabbisogni.

Per far fronte al crescente aumento della domanda mondiale di prodotti agricoli e alimentari, gli Stati membri e l’Unione saranno chiamati a garantire la sicurezza dell’approvvigionamento alimentare. Per realizzare tale obiettivo, l'UE dovrà garantire la sicurezza dei prodotti alimentari tenendo conto delle loro specificità e assicurando, allo stesso tempo, il corretto funzionamento del mercato interno.

Da ultimo, sollecito l'attenzione della Commissione su tutte le possibili misure volte a migliorare la formazione dei giovani sul lavoro ed a creare opportunità di lavoro per i laureati nel campo della sicurezza alimentare, con il principale obiettivo di contribuire all'occupazione nel settore agricolo.

  Zuzana Brzobohatá (S&D), písemně. – Je zcela správné podtrhnout význam potravinového zajištění obyvatelstva EU, které je jejich základním lidským právem. Evropská unie proto musí usilovat o zajištění zdravotně nezávadných a výživných potravin, které budou ekonomicky a fyzicky dostupné pro všechny občany EU a umožní jim tak vést aktivní a zdravý život. Je třeba striktně dbát na dodržování nejvyšších standardů potravinové a zemědělské produkce, na bezpečnost a kvalitu potravin stejně jako na jejich ekologickou udržitelnost. Nicméně v této souvislosti je třeba upozornit také na striktní vyžadování stejných kvalitativních a bezpečnostních standardů, pokud jde o potraviny dovážené z třetích zemí, tak aby byla chráněna konkurenceschopnost evropských zemědělců. Ráda bych také podpořila opatření, která budou zemědělce motivovat k vyšší energetické účinnosti, neboť energetické náklady jsou klíčový faktor pro míru ziskovosti zemědělské činnosti. Jako nejdůležitější v celé zprávě vidím důrazný apel na Komisi, aby ve veřejném zájmu zajistila ve spolupráci s členskými státy přístup veřejnosti k informacím o výsledcích kontrol zajišťování potravin, zejména rychlým sdílením těchto informací mezi členskými státy. Nesmí se prostě opakovat stejné selhání jako prodej masa obsahujícího stopy dioxinu, jako tomu je nyní v Německu, kdy ostatní členské státy byly nedostatečně a pozdě informovány o nastalé situaci.

  Nessa Childers (S&D), in writing. – As we begin to consider what the final make-up will be of the CAP post-2013, the themes of food security, food shortages and sustainability are coming ever more to the fore. This is something that almost everyone in this House, and everyone who will be involved in drawing up the bill, will recognise. The biofuel boom several years ago, coupled with the global food crisis in 2009, has shown us how scarce a resource food is beginning to become. As such, our vision must be narrowed: the sustainability of food and the needs of those who do not have automatic access to food must be put first; farming practices and innovations should be geared towards more food, and the correct crops; and, as we draft the new CAP bill, we should finally ensure that the new CAP will work towards a carbon-free Europe, and one which does not exacerbate the current carbon problem.

  Robert Dušek (S&D), písemně. – Zabezpečení dodávek potravin považujeme za jedno ze základních lidských práv. Již dnes je ve světě 900 milionů lidí, kteří kvůli chudobě trpí neustálým hladem. Do roku 2050 má světová populace překročit počet 9 miliard lidí a světová produkce potravin se bude muset zvýšit až o 70 %. Zemědělství má na jedné straně zvyšovat produkci a na druhé straně se potýká s vysokými cenami energií, stále se zmenšující neznečištěnou půdní plochou a s následky klimatických změn. Musíme řešit nestabilitu a kolísání cen způsobené spekulacemi na komoditních trzích i ubývání zásob potravin. Budoucí zajištění dodávek základních potravin vyžaduje silnou společnou zemědělskou politiku. SZP by měla zlepšit zabezpečení dodávek potravin zvýšením produktivity a podporovat ekologicky udržitelnou produkci potravin i tradiční zemědělství, drobné zemědělce, ekologické farmy, místní a regionální distribuci potravin. Tyto modely zemědělství přispívají k zajišťování dodávek potravin, neboť využívají po generace vyzkoušené metody a postupy v jednotlivých oblastech EU. Zemědělství je nejstrategičtější politikou EU, jeho úspěšnost pomůže zajistit přežití evropské populace v době potravinové krize. Aby mohla společná zemědělská politika bojovat s následky klimatických změn, s udržením cen potravin na akceptovatelné úrovni a zvyšovat dodávky nezávadných základních potravin, je nezbytné, aby její rozpočet zůstal zachován na minimálně stávající úrovni.

  Sandra Kalniete (PPE), rakstiski. – Eiropas lauksaimniecība ir viena no Savienības stratēģiski svarīgākajām nozarēm, jo tā nodrošina ar pārtiku vairāk nekā 500 miljonus iedzīvotāju. Lai Eiropas lauksaimniecības politika varētu sasniegt savu galveno uzdevumu, proti, nodrošināt Eiropas iedzīvotājus ar veselīgu un kvalitatīvu pārtiku par samērīgām cenām, vienlaikus saglabājot pienācīgus ienākumus lauksaimniekiem, tai ir jābūt konkurētspējīgai globālajā tirgū un jānodrošina godīga konkurence Eiropas iekšējā tirgū. Tāpēc mūsu uzdevums KLP reformas ietvaros ir nodrošināt vienlīdzīgas konkurences iespējas visiem Eiropas lauksaimniekiem. ES valstis nav saskārušās ar pārtikas nodrošinātības problēmām, tomēr šādi riski pastāv nākotnē, un mums ir jāspēj attiecīgi reaģēt, pirms tas ir noticis. Jāņem vērā, ka lauksaimnieki jau šobrīd strādā ar minimāliem ienākumiem vai pat zaudējumiem, kas nelabvēlīgi ietekmē viņu spēju uzturēt ražošanu. Arī dabas kataklizmas ietekmē pārtikas cenas veikalos un līdz ar to arī pārtikas pieejamību cilvēkiem. Mums ir jāapzinās lauksaimniecības stratēģiskā nozīme Eiropas Savienībā un jādara viss, lai nākotnē Eiropas cilvēkiem nenāktos pieredzēt situācijas, kad iestājas pārtikas nepietiekamība, jo ES politiķi un valdības nebūs laikus saskatījuši riskus un tos novērsuši. Lauksaimniecības atzīšana par stratēģiski svarīgu nozari pārtikas nodrošinātībā ir svarīgs solis, lai mēs nākotnē izvairītos no pārtikas nodrošinājuma problēmām.

  Elisabeth Köstinger (PPE), schriftlich. – In dem Initiativbericht wird anerkannt, dass die Landwirtschaft von strategischer Bedeutung für die weltweite Ernährungssicherheit ist. Ein Blick in die Zukunft zeigt, wie dringend der Handlungsbedarf ist: Bis 2050 rechnen Experten mit einer Verdopplung der weltweiten Nachfrage an Nahrungsmitteln. Die Landwirtschaft muss vorbereitet sein, um den enormen Bedarf der wachsenden Bevölkerung an unbedenklichen und ausreichenden Nahrungsmitteln decken zu können. Gleichzeitig muss den Hindernissen begegnet werden, die durch die Begrenzung der natürlichen Ressourcen, durch hohe Energiepreise und durch den Klimawandel entstehen. Ich unterstützte den Bericht, der klar aufzeigt, dass Ernährungssicherheit auch in der Europäischen Union ein zentrales Anliegen ist und die Forderung einer Abstimmung der einzelnen Politikfelder untereinander. Nur wenn Agrarpolitik, Entwicklungs-, Handels-, Finanz- und Energiepolitik sowie die Forschung zusammenarbeiten, können Verbesserungen erzielt werden. Die Sicherung der Einkommen der Landwirte und die Versorgung mit ausreichend Qualitätslebensmitteln müssen deshalb Kernziele der gemeinsamen europäischen Agrarpolitik sein. Die stark schwankenden Marktpreise im Agrarsektor werden durch Ernteausfälle und Spekulationen und eine Konzentration im Handel bedingt und sind wesentliche Unsicherheitsfaktoren. Interventionen und Lagerhaltungen sind die Krisenmechanismen, die Marktmissbrauch und Spekulationstransaktionen einen Riegel vorschieben. Es ist bedeutend, dass diese Marktinterventionsmechanismen in der künftigen GAP eine zentrale Rolle spielen. Ein weiterer wichtiger Punkt ist die Empfehlung eines weltweiten Aufbaus von Nahrungsmittelvorräten und Notreserven.

  Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (PPE), na piśmie. – Drogie Koleżanki i Koledzy! Europa potrzebuje Wspólnej Polityki Rolnej, która zapewni rozwój, a nie stagnację europejskiego rolnictwa. Polityka rolna musi odpowiadać na wyzwania europejskie i globalne, zwłaszcza gdy weźmiemy pod uwagę fakt, że według Światowej Organizacji ds. Wyżywienia i Rolnictwa produkcja żywności musi wzrosnąć co najmniej o 70%, aby zaspokoić populację światową, która do 2050 roku ma przekroczyć 9 mld. Widać zatem, że Wspólna Polityka Rolna powinna zwiększać bezpieczeństwo żywnościowe poprzez zwiększenie wydajności przy jednoczesnym promowaniu zrównoważonej środowiskowo polityki żywności. Chciałabym zwrócić uwagę, że uregulowania w tym zakresie powinny być przejrzyste. Cenię sobie inicjatywy, które zalecają promocję różnorodności rolnictwa, uwzględnienie rolnictwa tradycyjnego i ekologicznego. Dodatkowo ważnym aspektem jest zagwarantowanie młodym rolnikom dostępu do ziemi i kredytów, aby realizować cele WPR takie jak innowacyjność, modernizacja, wzmocnienie konkurencyjności, a przede wszystkim nowoczesne rolnictwo.

  Véronique Mathieu (PPE), par écrit. – Le lien entre la Politique agricole commune européenne et la sécurité alimentaire mondiale est une thématique importante à intégrer dans le processus d'élaboration de la PAC post-2013. En effet, les priorités de la PAC sont à mettre en perspective, non seulement avec les aspirations de notre société actuelle, mais aussi avec les contraintes que l'avenir nous imposera à l'échelle mondiale. D'après l'organisation des Nations unies pour l'alimentation et l'agriculture, la production alimentaire doit augmenter d'au moins 70% pour pouvoir répondre à l'accroissement des besoins de la population mondiale. La production européenne doit tenir compte de la sécurité alimentaire mondiale et renforcer la production européenne en vue de limiter les importations. De même, je soutiens la proposition de révision de la législation financière pour lutter contre la volatilité des prix, en grande partie provoquée par la spéculation. Pour être efficace, il faut pourtant que cette réflexion soit menée en parallèle à l'échelle internationale. Je me félicite que la présidence française du G20 compte à ce titre parmi ses priorités la lutte contre la volatilité des matières premières et des produits agricoles.

  Iosif Matula (PPE), în scris. – Creşterea cererii de alimente la nivel global, ca efect al creşterii populaţiei planetei, se reflectă în mod evident asupra resurselor naturale de hrană şi implică noi reglementări şi precauţii în domeniul securităţii alimentare. UE are misiunea prioritară de a garanta statelor membre dreptul la securitate alimentară şi de a susţine ţările în curs de dezvoltare să atingă un nivel adecvat de siguranţă alimentară. Consider importantă promovarea producţiei şi comercializării alimentelor tradiţionale locale. Produsele alimentare cu referinţă regională prezintă multiple beneficii prin: costurile reduse de transport şi reducerea riscului de perisabilitate. Există multe regiuni cu un pronunţat potenţial agricol neexploatat din cauza unor dezechilibre în plan social sau economic, pe fondul accentuării îmbătrânirii populaţiei rurale sau industrializării. Astfel, importante suprafeţe agricole nu sunt utilizate eficient. Un rol cheie în asigurarea securităţii alimentare îl pot avea autorităţile regionale prin sprijinirea capacităţii agricole a regiunilor ce deţin acest potenţial. UE este unul dintre liderii mondiali în domeniul cercetării şi inovării, inclusiv în agricultură. Cu o majoritate a populaţiei urbane în continuă creştere, apare o nouă provocare: cât de prioritară este dezvoltarea agriculturii urbane în vederea asigurării securităţii alimentare, prin diverse modele cum ar fi agricultura urbana pe verticală?

  Tiziano Motti (PPE), per iscritto. – Presidente, condivido l'approccio promosso dalla risoluzione approvata oggi in quest'Aula: la sicurezza alimentare sia un diritto umano fondamentale, che si realizza quando tutti dispongono, in qualsiasi momento, di un accesso fisico ed economico a un'alimentazione adeguata, sana e nutriente. Nell'Unione europea circa 80 milioni di persone infatti vivono ancora al di sotto della soglia di povertà e molte di loro sono aiutate attraverso programmi di aiuti alimentari. Un'alimentazione corretta deve essere un fattore chiave della nostra salute, e sugli OGM sono ancora troppi i dubbi sollevati da una parte della comunità scientifica. Per questo motivo mi sono opposto alle aperture, presenti nel testo, verso gli OGM, in particolare laddove si prevede di estendere il processo di approvazione per l'importazione di cibi geneticamente modificati provenienti da Paesi terzi all'interno dell'Unione europea. Per coerenza, ritengo che non si possa privare i nostri agricoltori dell'applicazione di una tecnica che poi si tollera nella produzione di importati. Accolgo invece con favore misure volte ad incentivare i giovani agricoltori, che oggi rappresentano solo il 7%, con premi di installazione, tassi d'interesse agevolati sui prestiti e altri incentivi degli Stati membri attraverso i bilanci di sviluppo rurale, sicuro che la produzione agricola europea possa rimanere agli attuali alti livelli di qualità e sicurezza.

  Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE), în scris. – Salut raportul referitor la recunoaşterea agriculturii ca sector strategic în contextul securităţii alimentare dar, în acelaşi timp, îmi exprim regretul pentru faptul că Parlamentul a decis să aloce atât de puţin timp pentru dezbaterea acestuia. Tema este cu atât mai actuală în această perioadă, în care am devenit conştienţi de modul în care criza alimentară poate afecta stabilitatea statelor. Revolta din Tunisia a avut printre motivaţii scumpirea alimentelor. Algeria, India, Bangladesh sunt state în care scumpirea alimentelor a provocat tensiuni serioase. Sporirea culturilor de biodiesel, speculaţiile financiare, reorientarea extrem de rapidă a producătorilor către culturi agricole mai rentabile, nu în ultimul rând, schimbarea obiceiurilor alimentare ale cetăţenilor multor state sunt, de asemenea, teme noi, legate strâns de subiectul raportului de astăzi.

Un comentariu final: într-un top al vulnerabilităţii la creşterea preţului alimentelor, realizat de o bancă japoneză, dintre 40 de ţări cele mai vulnerabile, patru sunt membre ale Uniunii Europene, un alt stat va deveni curând membru al UE, iar 3 state sunt vecini imediaţi ai Uniunii. Un top interesant care trebuie să ne dea de gândit.

  Pavel Poc (S&D), písemně. – Chápeme-li zemědělství jako strategické odvětví, pak nezbytnou podmínkou zajištění bezpečnosti dodávek potravin je soběstačnost EU minimálně na úrovni produkce základních potravin a krmiv. Závislost EU na dovozu zemědělských produktů způsobuje růst cen potravin a poškozuje jejich přímé producenty v obchodním řetězci. Podle Organizace OSN pro výživu a zemědělství (FAO) by se do roku 2050 mohla poptávka po potravinách a krmivech zvýšit o 70 %. Bude proto třeba uplatnit všechny formy zemědělství, které jsou k dispozici, a významně podpořit finanční investice do vědy a výzkumu v této oblasti. Účinné využívání tradičních zemědělských odrůd, které jsou pro určité regiony charakteristické, také vyžaduje větší podporu a zájem veřejnosti. Například posouzení environmentálního dopadu produkce potravin a přepravních vzdáleností je pro spotřebitele snadno srozumitelné. Současné až 50% plýtvání v rámci celého řetězce výroby nebo neúměrný růst nákladní dopravy nejsou faktory slučitelné se zajištěním bezpečnosti potravinových dodávek. Nelze předstírat snahu o zajištění bezpečnosti dodávek potravin ani ochranu životního prostředí a současně tolerovat závislost na dovozu produktů vypěstovaných na jiném kontinentě a dovážených tisíce kilometrů. Taková praxe vytváří obrovskou ekologickou stopu a současně nutí rozvojové země dovážet téměř veškeré potřebné potraviny, činí je závislými, ničí jejich hospodářství, zbídačuje jejich obyvatelstvo a ničí jejich životní prostředí.

22. L-aġenda tas-seduta li jmiss: ara l-Minuti

23. Għeluq tas-seduta

(La seduta è tolta alle 23.30)