Rapporti verbatim tad-dibattiti

It-Tlieta, 7 ta' Ġunju 2011 - Strasburgu

1. Ftuħ tas-seduta

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. GIANNI PITTELLA
Vicepresidente

(La seduta è aperta alle 9.05)

2. Dokumenti mressqa: ara l-Minuti

3. Petizzjonijiet: ara l-Minuti

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

5. Dibattiti dwar każijiet ta' vjolazzjoni tad-drittijiet tal-bniedem, tad-demokrazija u l-istat tad-dritt (tħabbir ta' mozzjonijiet għal riżoluzzjonijiet imressqa): ara l-minuti

6. Tfaqqigħa tal-EHEC fl-Istati Membri tal-UE (dibattitu)

  Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca la dichiarazione della Commissione sull'epidemia di EHEC negli Stati membri dell'UE.

  John Dalli, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I should like to thank all of you for this opportunity to inform you about developments in relation to the outbreak of E coli.

I am very concerned about the heavy burden of death and disease that this food-borne epidemic has caused the European population and want to take the opportunity once again to express my condolences to those who are suffering as a result.

In this context I have to note that the situation is still evolving. There are now over 1 672 Shiga-toxin-producing E coli cases, and serious complications have developed in at least 661 people. According to the latest information, this outbreak is responsible for 21 deaths in Germany and 1 in Sweden. Sporadic cases are reported in 11 other Member States. Switzerland has also reported 15 cases and the United States 4. The epicentre of the disease is still the area around Hamburg in northern Germany. Most of the cases reported outside Germany concern either German nationals travelling or persons who visited this part of Germany. So what is the European Commission doing to tackle the outbreak?

First, we have immediately activated all our networks responsible for managing crises. The networks are in daily contact and allow for the timely exchange of information, laying the ground for rapid action. The Commission holds almost daily meetings with your public health authorities and food safety authorities to discuss the evolution of the outbreak, the health measures taken to prevent infection and the treatment of affected people. The Early Warning and Response System and the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed have provided a solid basis for exchanging information.

Second, we have asked the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) to do a scientific risk assessment, which is being updated regularly as the situation evolves. We now have an EU case definition which will allow Member States to share the same approach on the investigation of the outbreak. Patient questionnaires for outbreak investigations are being collected and compared by the ECDC. The ECDC has also developed, together with the European Food Safety Authority, advice on preventive measures addressed to the public. This advice is now available in all official languages on the Commission website.

We have asked the ECDC to urgently set up a platform to exchange best practice on treatment, involving both Member States and professional societies. Our food safety EU reference laboratory in Rome developed in record time a method which reduces the time needed to detect the E coli bacterium in food from about six days to 48 hours.

Finally, let me stress that public perception is extremely important. In this regard, the Commission draws up daily updates, shared with the Health Security Committee communicators’ network and food safety authorities. In addition, the Commission keeps its website dedicated to this outbreak up to date.

I would strongly urge Members of the European Parliament to support this science-based communication to the public, in order to reduce unnecessary fears and to reinforce our common efforts. I can assure you that the Commission, together with these agencies, is working very hard with national health and food safety ministries to support them in containing this outbreak.

To do that, we need to pursue intensively the investigation into the source of contamination; the work is taking place as I speak. During the Health Council yesterday I asked Germany to reinforce surveillance, outbreak controls and measures in order to identify the source of the outbreak and halt the spread of the infection. I also asked that the causes of the contamination should be swiftly dealt with. The German authorities accepted the Commission proposal to dispatch to Germany experts in epidemiology of food-borne diseases from the Commission, the ECDC and the EFSA.

On Sunday 5 June the experts started their mission to assist German authorities with the ongoing epidemiology, verify the results and contribute to the ongoing investigations to identify the source. As we all know, the initial suspicion raised by the German authorities that cucumbers from Spain were the cause has not been confirmed by any test results available.

On Sunday 5 June the German authorities notified the European Commission that, based on the epidemiological investigations, they believe bean sprouts are the possible source of the E coli outbreak affecting mainly the northern part of Germany. The information was transferred immediately to all Member States through the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed.

The Commission follows any new development closely, and will decide on the appropriate course of action the moment laboratory tests confirm any epidemiological finding. We do not have any results to date.

Here I should stress that it is crucial that national authorities do not rush to give information on any source of infection which is not proven by bacteriological analysis, as this spreads unjustified fears in the population all over Europe and creates problems for our food producers selling products in the EU and outside the EU.

While such intensive investigations are going on we must be careful not to jump to premature conclusions. In this respect I want to refer to the latest information coming from Germany regarding the suspicion that sprouts may be the source of contamination; it noted that laboratory tests have not been concluded and that consequently premature conclusions have to be avoided.

This illustrates that it is important for the Member States to introduce well sustained and scientifically based alerts into the RASFF and to trigger the RASFF when Member States are confident regarding the scientific evidence supporting the alert notification.

You have to act quickly and decisively in order to preserve the internal market. If we manage to do this, then we can learn from the lessons of this crisis and continually improve our systems. I have been repeating: our system works. We need to learn lessons as we go along. I believe that this is our responsibility: to be flexible and to be fast in adjusting our processes and procedures to respond to these types of incidents.

Coordination and clear lines of information and communication remain the core of our ability to be effective in such situations. We have to learn lessons on this front.

Before closing, I would like to raise briefly two more points. The first concerns references to bans on certain products. I would like to stress again that the outbreak is limited geographically to an area surrounding the city of Hamburg so there is no reason, as of today, to take such measures at European level. In the light of this and of the steps towards the identification of the source, we consider any ban on any product as disproportionate.

Finally, I am also very sensitive to the financial impact that this crisis is having on farmers, particularly vegetable producers. This is why I am working closely with my colleague Commissioner Cioloş to address the hardship faced by this group of our citizens that has also been hit by the outbreak. In fact Agriculture Ministers are holding an extraordinary Council meeting today to address E coli. As I finish talking to you, I will head back to Brussels to be with my colleague Commissioner Cioloş during this extraordinary Agriculture Ministers’ Council.

In addition, we are in constant contact with third countries, in particular Russia, to ask them to lift their ban, which is considered disproportionate. The Commission is working hand in hand with the Member States with one common goal: to bring this outbreak to an end as soon as possible. I am insisting to all concerned that, in situations like this, it is not a local problem, it is a European problem.

(Applause)

  Peter Liese, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich bedanke mich bei Kommissar Dalli, dass er zunächst den Blick auf die Patienten gerichtet hat. Das möchte ich auch tun. Es sind Hunderte von Menschen schwer krank. Das medizinische Personal im Norden Deutschlands kämpft wirklich am Limit. 22 Menschen sind schon gestorben. Im Rat hat gestern ein Vertreter eines anderen Mitgliedstaates, Luxemburg, gesagt, ökonomische Schäden sind wieder gutzumachen, Menschenleben nicht. Deswegen möchte ich zunächst einmal um Verständnis dafür werben, dass man warnt, auch wenn man keine hundertprozentige Gewissheit hat, wo die Quelle liegt, und nur einen Verdacht hat, dass man diese Informationen dann auch öffentlich macht.

Trotzdem müssen wir natürlich die Quelle finden. Ich sehe, dass viele Mitarbeiter in den Behörden auch mit Unterstützung der EFSA – vielen Dank an die Europäischen Institutionen, an Kommissar Dalli, dass auch die Europäische Union bei der Aufklärung hilft –, wirklich fieberhaft daran arbeiten. Trotzdem kann auch ich mich als deutscher Abgeordneter nicht hier hinstellen und sagen, dass alles gut läuft. Es gab im Krisenmanagement einige Probleme.

Beispielsweise hat die Gesundheitssenatorin von Hamburg die Öffentlichkeit informiert. Das war richtig, auch wenn bei den spanischen Gurken keine hundertprozentige Gewissheit bestand. Auf den spanischen Gurken war der EHEC-Erreger und der gehört da nicht hin. Das müssen auch die spanischen Kollegen wissen. Aber man hat zunächst die Öffentlichkeit informiert und erst sehr viel später, Stunden später, einen halben Tag später die Europäische Kommission und die spanischen Behörden. Das war nicht in Ordnung. Da müssen wir in Deutschland auch intern überlegen, wie wir das besser hinkriegen. Aber gemeinsam sollten wir uns wirklich darauf konzentrieren, dass der Feind nicht in Spanien oder in Deutschland sitzt, sondern das Problem der Erreger ist, den wir dingfest machen und bekämpfen müssen.

Ein letzter Satz. Wir haben in der letzten Plenarsitzung zum Thema Antibiotikaresistenz eine Entschließung angenommen. Auch wenn dieser Erreger nicht vorrangig mit Antibiotika behandelt werden sollte, haben wir das Problem, dass er gegenüber vielen üblichen Antibiotika resistent ist. Dieses Thema ist ein langfristiges Thema, das wir jetzt noch schneller angehen müssen. Denn es kann beim nächsten Mal sein, dass der Erreger mit Antibiotika behandelt werden muss, aber weil er resistent ist, nicht behandelt werden kann. Daran müssen wir arbeiten.

  Linda McAvan, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, you are right that this is a public health issue, a very serious one, and our focus should now be on caring for the sick and identifying the source, but then we have to look to the long term and find out how we stop it happening again.

A few weeks ago I met a representative of the US Food and Drug Administration. She was telling me about the problems of E coli in fruit and vegetables in the United States and we discussed how this was not common in the European Union. Now we have had this outbreak, so we have to ask ourselves some questions. Is it about our farming practices, as Peter Liese just mentioned? Is it about intensive farming, hot-housing fruit and vegetables? Is it about overuse of antibiotics in livestock? Is it about manure spreading? Would more accurate food labelling have helped us to identify more quickly the source of the contamination? I note that the Council is not here today, but the Council is resisting proper country of origin labelling on our foods. I hope they will listen to this debate in the future.

So, Commissioner, we need to investigate thoroughly for the longer term and we need to learn lessons and integrate them into our policies. Too often we hear from this Commission and from many in this House about over-regulation, but, as with the banks, I am starting to wonder whether we tend to put the needs of market and supply chains ahead of those of public protection and the consumer. ‘Business as usual’ is not going to be good enough. It is not normal that people in Europe go out for a salad and die as a consequence, and we need policy change to address this.

  Corinne Lepage, au nom du groupe ALDE. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, merci d'avoir d'abord parlé des victimes et des malades. C'est à eux que nos premières pensées doivent évidemment aller, ainsi qu'aux agriculteurs qui sont dans une grande difficulté que l'on peut parfaitement comprendre.

Trois points: premièrement, nous défendons le principe de précaution. Il a été appliqué ici, nous ne pouvons pas nous en plaindre, et il faut évidemment en assumer les conséquences. La priorité – Peter Liese l'a rappelé tout à l'heure – ce sont évidemment les êtres humains, avant les questions économiques, que l'on peut toujours traiter. La mort, malheureusement, est définitive.

Deuxièmement, je rejoins tout à fait ce que vient de dire Mme McAvan sur l'importance de la traçabilité. Nous discutons d'étiquetage aujourd'hui. Il est absolument fondamental que cet étiquetage soit complet, que la traçabilité puisse permettre de savoir d'où viennent les produits.

Troisièmement, sur la question absolument essentielle du fond du problème, il nous faut admettre que nous ne savons pas tout, admettre que nous sommes dans l'incertitude scientifique, admettre effectivement que, parfois, nous sommes dans l'ignorance. Nous ne pouvons pas tout savoir. On ne peut pas à la fois contester ceux qui ont pris des décisions et considérer qu'il faut attendre. Ici, le principe de précaution doit prévaloir.

  James Nicholson, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, first of all I would also like to express my sympathy to those who have been affected. Concerning those who have lost their lives: you cannot bring back a life. We can probably put the underlying situation right in the longer term, but it shows how wrong it is to jump to conclusions at a very early point. I can understand the anger – if there is anger and I am sure there is – from the Spanish side and from those who have lost their business. We can probably do something to recompense that, but you cannot give back a life.

We have got to learn from this and to ensure that in future we have a solid base for response, as the Commissioner has said. We have to find a resolution as quickly as possible to the present situation, and in the long term we have got to improve our response mechanisms to this type of situation.

I suppose it is very easy with hindsight to talk about what could or should have been done or what we did not do, but now, with the benefit of that hindsight, we could put mechanisms in place to ensure that this never happens again. The Commissioner is right. We must learn from the lessons of this. You must always learn from the lessons of your mistakes. If mistakes have been made, let us put them right and ensure that it never happens again.

  Rebecca Harms, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Herr Kommissar, Sie haben es richtig gesagt: Es sind zu viele Tote und zu viele Kranke, die wir durch diesen EHEC-Keim zu beklagen haben, und ich finde, dass die Situation, in die wir geraten sind, auch zeigt, dass weder Deutschland noch die Europäische Union vorbereitet sind auf eine EHEC-Ausbreitung, wie wir sie jetzt erleben.

Der schlichte Vergleich mit einigen anderen Ländern macht deutlich, dass wir besser sein könnten. Ich möchte nur das Beispiel der USA noch einmal aufgreifen. Seit den 80er Jahren gibt es da große Bemühungen in der Forschung, es gibt eine Meldepflicht, es gibt eine zentralisierte Seuchenbekämpfungsbehörde in Atlanta, die weitreichende Kompetenzen zum direkten Einschreiten hat, wenn eine solche Epidemie auftritt. Wir in Deutschland dagegen haben zwei Bundesministerien, die zuständig sind und sich offensichtlich nicht einigen konnten, wer die Verantwortung übernehmen will. Wir haben zusätzlich Länderministerien, die Verantwortung übernehmen wollen und müssen und offensichtlich überfordert sind. Wir haben Kommunikationsprobleme zwischen Laboren und Politikern. Wann die Wissenschaft interveniert, wann Seuchenbekämpfung angesagt ist und wann die Politik agiert, ist also völlig undurchsichtig.

Ich kann verstehen, dass eine Ministerin, wenn sie die Information bekommt, es seien die Gurken, dann entsprechend warnt, aber wo ist die Detailgenauigkeit in der Abstimmung? Wo ist die echte Entscheidungskompetenz? Meiner Meinung nach sieht es so aus, als wenn mit den Sprossen – ich sage das mit aller Vorsicht – genauso vorschnell gehandelt wurde wie mit den Gurken. Da besteht irgendwie eine Unstimmigkeit zwischen wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnis und politischem Handeln.

Zurück zu dem, was wir tun müssen: Eine Meldepflicht in ganz Europa organisieren, zentrale Labore definieren und eine zentrale Einrichtung in der Europäischen Union schaffen, die im Falle einer solchen Seuche dann auch die Entscheidungskompetenz hat. Das fände ich angemessen.

Ich bin Herrn Liese ausgesprochen dankbar, dass er die Antibiotikaproblematik angesprochen hat. Auch da sind wir mit Problemen konfrontiert, die wir eigentlich schon kennen. Doch weil wir uns vor der Auseinandersetzung mit dem Medizinsektor und der Pharmaindustrie und der Massentierhaltung scheuen – da gibt es eine Menge anzusprechen –, sind wir auch in der Auseinandersetzung um Antibiotikaresistenzen nicht so konsequent, wie wir sein müssten. EHEC und Antibiotikaresistenz – zwei große Probleme.

  Sabine Wils, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Die EHEC-Epidemie offenbart die Systemfehler der industriellen Lebensmittelproduktion im liberalisierten Binnenmarkt der EU. Wenn Profite Vorrang vor dem Gesundheitsschutz haben, geht das zu Lasten der Lebensmittelqualität und der Lebensmittelsicherheit. An den EHEC-Erregern sind bisher in Deutschland mindestens 22 Menschen gestorben, es gibt mehr als 1 500 Infektionsfälle. Bei über 600 Patienten wurde das gefährliche HUS-Syndrom diagnostiziert, das auch zu neurologischen Störungen führen kann.

Nach mehr als zwei Wochen ist die Infektionsquelle dieser lebensgefährlichen Epidemie immer noch unklar. Die Ermittlung der Infektionsquelle wäre bei einer regionalen Erzeugung der Lebensmittel einfacher und die Auswirkungen der Epidemie wären begrenzter. Wegen der langen Transportwege und der anonymen Produktionsbedingungen ist es sehr schwer, die Herkunft der Lebensmittel zurückzuverfolgen. Die Rückverfolgbarkeit der Herkunft der Lebensmittel ist aber für die Lebensmittelsicherheit unabdingbar. Verbraucher haben ein Recht darauf, zu erfahren, wie ihre Lebensmittel erzeugt wurden und woher sie kommen.

Die Bundesregierung in Deutschland hat bei der EHEC-Epidemie komplett versagt. Bei dem Durcheinander zwischen Länder- und Bundeskompetenzen blieb das Krisenmanagement auf der Strecke. Die Überwachungsbehörden waren auf diese Situation nicht eingestellt.

Wir brauchen ein radikales Umdenken in der Agrarpolitik. Lebensmittel müssen sicher sein. Aber auch die landwirtschaftlichen Erzeuger sollen vor unkalkulierbaren wirtschaftlichen Risiken geschützt werden. Die Politik zur Förderung der Agrarwirtschaft und der ländlichen Räume muss konsequent auf eine deutliche Dezentralisierung der Erzeugungs- und Vermarktungsstrukturen von Lebensmitteln ausgerichtet werden.

  Francisco Sosa Wagner (NI). - Señor Presidente, quisiera hacer tres anotaciones sobre la situación creada en torno a los pepinos.

Soy nieto de alemán y tengo gran cariño a ese país, pero es evidente que las autoridades alemanas han actuado, en este caso, con precipitación y con imprudencia.

De otro lado, si analizamos la actuación europea, advertimos que la desarrollada por la Autoridad de Seguridad Alimentaria y por la Comisión ha sido desvaída, muy apagada e imprecisa; no han sabido ni coordinar ni dirigir.

Tercero: los perjudicados tienen derecho a indemnizaciones económicas rápidamente. Pero, de momento, propongo a este Parlamento que nosotros organicemos en Bruselas o aquí, en Estrasburgo, una gran muestra de gastronomía europea basada, precisamente, en el pepino.

Hay que reivindicar el honor perdido —una expresión grata al escritor alemán Heinrich Böll— de los productores de pepinos. Europa es el escenario adecuado para ello.

  Esther Herranz García (PPE). - Señor Presidente, es obligado manifestar un sincero pesar por las veintitrés víctimas mortales: veintidós en Alemania y una en Suecia. Hay que decir que esta crisis es la prueba más fehaciente de que la Unión Europea debe mejorar, y mucho, su sistema de alerta alimentaria y su coordinación interna.

Los Estados miembros implicados han demostrado lentitud, ineficacia, inoperancia y, a estas alturas, todavía, después de veintitrés muertos, no sabemos de dónde viene el problema.

La Comisión Europea ha de reflexionar seriamente sobre los problemas que causa por sus acciones irresponsables o por inacción en momentos de crisis como el actual, ocasionando casos de ruina económica, de destrucción de puestos de trabajo que antes eran estables, de desempleo, de indefensión y, por supuesto, una crisis sanitaria con elevadísimos riesgos para la salud de la población, porque mientras ustedes, desde la Comisión, se hacían eco de irresponsables declaraciones de autoridades regionales alemanas —muy desinformadas y bastantes irresponsables—, con nombres y apellidos de explotaciones españolas, la población seguía expuesta, sin saberlo, a la bacteria: creyendo estar evitándola, los ciudadanos estaban más expuestos que nunca a comer algo que podía hacerles daño.

La Comisión Europea debería, hoy, en el Consejo de Agricultura, que se celebra en Luxemburgo a las dos de la tarde, proponer a los Ministros que se utilice parte de los 2 500 millones de euros que existen como remanentes de la Política Agrícola Común no utilizados. Esos 2 500 millones de euros deberían servir para reparar, en lo que se pueda, los daños ocasionados. Para ello, es necesario buscar una percha legal que permita hacerlo, una percha legal que ya se ha encontrado en otras ocasiones, como en los episodios de las «vacas locas» o las dioxinas, y que debería encontrarse ahora.

Por tanto, señores Comisarios, señores Ministros, hoy en Luxemburgo tienen que estar a la altura de su responsabilidad.

Las autoridades alemanas, además, dadas las irresponsables acusaciones vertidas, deberían apoyar esta solución económica, sin duda, y desde el principio, y sufragar también, con fondos propios, suyos, campañas de comunicación para restablecer la confianza de los consumidores en las producciones hortofrutícolas, ahora perdida.

  Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos (S&D). - Senhor Presidente, o surto infeccioso desencadeado na Alemanha coloca-nos perante um dos mais difíceis exercícios de gestão de crises de saúde pública de que há memória e com o qual a Comissão e sobretudo o Estado alemão não têm vindo a lidar da melhor maneira. Estamos perante uma enorme tragédia humana que inclui a perda de muitas vidas e que põe em perigo milhares de muitas outras e perante uma crise de confiança no consumo de alimentos básicos, com consequências económicas e sociais difíceis de prever.

A sociedade espera das autoridades nacionais e comunitárias uma resposta rápida e esclarecedora sobre as causas desta crise, bem como uma resposta eficaz. Mas também é necessário minimizar as nefastas consequências que estão a atingir outro universo de vítimas inocentes, os produtores hortofrutícolas – como já aqui hoje foi referido –, que têm sido responsabilizados de forma precipitada e injusta e que viram os seus rendimentos perdidos e o seu futuro seriamente ameaçado.

É também urgente agir de forma preventiva para evitar que situações análogas se repitam. Uma das vertentes da acção consiste no reforço da eficácia dos mecanismos de vigilância e de controlo sobre os antibióticos nos animais, como referi aqui no debate realizado há menos de um mês. Outra vertente de actuação importante é a configuração da nova PAC, que estamos a reformar. É fundamental que os estímulos e os incentivos sejam orientados no futuro para a qualidade assente em modos de produção sustentáveis, tal como o Grupo dos Socialistas e Democratas tem vindo insistentemente a reclamar.

  Frédérique Ries (ALDE). - Monsieur le Président, le bilan s'est encore alourdi: 23 victimes et plus de 2 200 malades en Europe, auxquels, bien entendu, vont toutes nos pensées ce matin. Les autorités allemandes n'ont toujours pas réussi finalement à identifier formellement l'origine de cette épidémie. En attendant, les légumes en Europe sont boudés et cette crise sanitaire s'est transformée en crise économique aussi, bien entendu, et en crise sociale. La filière maraîchère exige, à juste titre, des compensations et – le commissaire l'a dit – les ministres et les commissaires concernés vont se réunir à ce sujet cet après-midi à Luxembourg.

Au-delà de ce qui a été dit déjà sur le principe de précaution, sur la traçabilité essentielle – premier point –, il s'agira de savoir aussi comment cette alerte générale désignant le concombre espagnol comme coupable a pu être diffusée sans preuves ou presque. Comment, Monsieur le Commissaire, la Commission a-t-elle l'intention de tirer les conséquences impérieuses de cette crise grave pour que notre système d'alerte alimentaire soit plus que jamais basé sur la "sound and well sustained scientific evidence" –, je vous cite, Monsieur le Commissaire?

  Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR). - Przyłączam się do wyrazów żalu po ofiarach, życzę powrotu do zdrowia tym, którzy chorują. Wiele mamy do wyjaśnienia. Musimy ustalić źródło i przyczynę epidemii, ale także źródło i przyczynę rozpowszechniania w Europie i świecie fałszywych wiadomości o tej epidemii, fałszywych i szkodliwych, które wyrządziły tak wiele szkód. Trzeba dokładnie przyjrzeć się przyczynom tej epidemii i w szczególności przyjrzeć się trzeba hodowli wielkoprzemysłowej, gdzie na masową skalę stosuje się antybiotyki. Zgadzam się z przedmówcami, którzy o tym mówili. Jeżeli się na tak wielką skalę stosuje antybiotyki trudno się potem dziwić, że pojawiają się szczepy bakterii, które na antybiotyki nie reagują. Moim zdaniem ta zagęszczona hodowla ze stosowaniem antybiotyków powinna być w Unii Europejskiej bardzo ograniczona, a może nawet wyeliminowana. A szkody, które zostały wyrządzone, powinni ponieść ci, którzy je spowodowali.

  Martin Häusling (Verts/ALE). - Herr Präsident! EHEC ist kein neues Problem, aber man muss feststellen, dass Europa nach wie vor unzureichend auf so eine Krise vorbereitet ist. Es dauert zu lange, bis klare Richtlinien ausgegeben werden. Drei Wochen sind entschieden zuviel!

Verbraucherschutz, darüber sind wir uns einig, hat immer absolute Priorität vor wirtschaftlichen Interessen. Aber es muss schon klargestellt werden, wer wann warnt, wer nachher die Verantwortung für die Warnungen übernimmt und wann die Europäische Kommission auf den Plan tritt. In Deutschland sind 16 Bundesländer und 2 Ministerien zuständig, das ist zu kleinteilig für eine europäische Krise. Hier muss die europäische Ebene früher einbezogen werden. Ich glaube, wir haben nicht die richtigen Lehren aus den Krisen der 90er Jahre gezogen. Das müssen wir jetzt dringend nachholen.

Wir brauchen bei Nahrungsmitteln Transparenz und klare Nachvollziehbarkeit bei der Herstellung. Wir brauchen eine klare Herkunftskennzeichnung. Wir brauchen aber auch eine europäische Eingreiftruppe, die die wissenschaftliche und medizinische Arbeit koordiniert und Kontrollpläne aufstellt.

(Beifall)

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). - Senhor Presidente, perante o turbilhão de notícias contraditórias sobre a origem deste surto, importa tecer algumas considerações. A primeira para assinalar que, mais de 15 dias após os primeiros casos terem sido reportados e mais de 1 mês após as primeiras contaminações, os sistemas europeus de alerta rápido e resposta não foram ainda capazes de determinar a verdadeira fonte de contaminação, com todos os prejuízos que daí decorrem – já aqui mencionados. A segunda para lembrar que este é um caso grave, mas não isolado, de falta de segurança alimentar na União Europeia. Recordo o debate recente que aqui tivemos sobre o problema das dioxinas.

Estes casos são indissociáveis de uma PAC que promove modelos de produção intensiva de cariz exportador e que inviabiliza, em lugar de promover como seria necessário, a produção e o consumo locais, susceptíveis de garantir uma rastreabilidade muito mais efectiva e, logo, maior qualidade e segurança alimentar.

Por fim, impõe-se ressarcir os produtores europeus, e não apenas os da área geográfica do surto infeccioso, pelos prejuízos que estão a sofrer. Isto deverá ser feito com medidas comunitárias – porque é comum a política agrícola – e não apenas nacionais, dadas as óbvias desigualdades que tal iria gerar.

  Nick Griffin (NI). - Mr President, first it was cucumbers, yesterday it was bean sprouts. Today it is not bean sprouts. The truth is that the experts just do not know, but each time such allegations are made they destroy livelihoods in countries’ economies. What we do know is that there is something very strange about this outbreak. There is an unnatural combination of strains and DNA in the virus. It is affecting unusual groups of people in a way not normally associated with E coli outbreaks. It has already struck far more people and in far more places than a normal outbreak and, unlike in normal outbreaks, it has not been rapidly traced to one or two food suppliers.

Given all these inexplicable factors and the fact that various countries – including Britain, the USA, Iraq and Israel – have, in the past, been reported as experimenting with genetically manipulated E coli as a biological weapon, should there not be an urgent inquiry into the possibility that this outbreak is in fact an instance of, and perhaps a test run for, biological terrorism?

  Françoise Grossetête (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, la situation est grave, très grave même, car cette épidémie Eceh garde tout son mystère. J'imagine l'angoisse des malades atteints et nous ne pouvons que déplorer les décès survenus.

Tout ceci doit nous imposer beaucoup de rigueur dans l'approche des problèmes de santé publique européenne et nous fait comprendre qu'il est essentiel de travailler avec les chercheurs et l'industrie pharmaceutique pour répondre efficacement à une telle situation et aussi s'en donner les moyens.

La bactérie coûte donc des vies, trop de vies. Elle coûte aussi beaucoup d'argent à nos agriculteurs et elle entame dangereusement la confiance du consommateur dans des productions agricoles et une industrie agroalimentaire, qui sont pourtant certainement les plus contrôlées et les plus sûres au monde.

Après le concombre, la tomate, la salade, le soja, quelle sera la prochaine victime de cette psychose sanitaire? Les conséquences économiques sont graves pour les agriculteurs. Or, le système d'alerte a très bien fonctionné. Le problème est que la Commission européenne n'a pas les moyens ni la possibilité de contrôler la véracité des informations données par un État membre.

Aujourd'hui, les bactéries circulent plus rapidement que par le passé. Il faudra tirer les conséquences, en termes de communication, de la gestion d'une telle crise sanitaire. Un retour d'expérience est nécessaire. Il faudra sans doute envisager des contrôles supplémentaires avant de prendre pour argent comptant les conclusions d'une agence sanitaire nationale ou régionale.

Enfin, cette crise justifie totalement le renforcement nécessaire de la traçabilité des denrées alimentaires. L'obligation d'indication du pays d'origine ou du lieu de provenance n'est, malheureusement, prévue aujourd'hui que dans des cas limités. Il conviendrait d'étendre cette obligation à un plus grand nombre de denrées alimentaires. Cela permettrait d'identifier plus rapidement, en cas de crise sanitaire, les sources de contamination et de prévenir plus vite les consommateurs concernés.

  Jo Leinen (S&D). - Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Landwirte können entschädigt werden, aber Menschenleben können nicht zurückgeholt werden. In der Tat gilt unser Mitgefühl allen, die gestorben sind oder in Krankenhäusern liegen. Diese Situation ist dramatisch und auch inakzeptabel. Es ist inakzeptabel, dass wir drei Wochen nach Ausbruch dieser Krise immer noch nicht genau wissen, wo die Ursache ist. Das darf in Europa eigentlich nicht passieren.

Wir haben hier mehrere Lehren zu ziehen. Zum einen wird man die Quelle suchen und prüfen müssen, ob es nach wie vor in der Lebensmittelproduktion oder auch in der Lebensmittelkette unsachgemäße Praktiken gibt. Wir haben eine zwanzigjährige Gesetzgebung, und die Standards und auch die Normen in der Europäischen Union sind ziemlich streng, aber man kann feststellen, dass wir bei der Ernährung, bei den Nahrungsmitteln nach wie vor verwundbar sind. Es scheint da immer noch Lücken und Defizite zu geben, und da werden wir noch einmal Lehren ziehen müssen.

Ich bin auch der Ansicht, dass es hier ein Kommunikationschaos gibt. Die Kommunikation läuft nicht gut und nicht richtig. Wir brauchen eindeutig mehr Europa! Das ist hier von Kollegen gesagt worden. Wenn jede regionale oder nationale Behörde eine Warnung für ganz Europa ausgibt, dann muss das schiefgehen. Das ECDC hat meines Erachtens gute Arbeit geleistet, soweit ich das erkennen kann, aber wir brauchen ein modernes, ein besseres System der Meldepflicht zur Feststellung von Ursachen und auch ein besseres System zur Unterrichtung der Öffentlichkeit.

  Antonyia Parvanova (ALDE). - Mr President, the German and European authorities are still trying to identify the source of the E coli outbreak. Today we still have no concrete evidence about the reason for this spread and all scenarios should be considered, including potential negligence or unintentional entry of the bacteria into the food chain. How the bacteria were actually created is a different case; research and findings are needed urgently. However, I would also like to make a special point about the way current events have been communicated to the general public by German and European authorities, with the serious consequences we know for the fruit and vegetable sector, not only in Spain but in all our Union.

This is not the first time that we have had a problem relating to food safety in Germany. I propose that the Commission should help the German authorities to enhance the traceability and control of the German procedures, and similar measures should be taken concerning the procedures in other Member States.

Transparency is needed to maintain consumer confidence. All information should be available but this information should not be communicated in a way that means raising multiple alarms and triggering consumers’ fears when evidence has not yet been found. Let me also point out the responsibility of the media.

  Marina Yannakoudakis (ECR). - Mr President, hearsay can be dangerous. Did this outbreak start in Germany or some other Member State? Rumours can be destructive and can even help spread an outbreak. There are still many unanswered questions surrounding this outbreak. The only sure thing is that most Member States have reported cases of the bacteria. To date we have 22 deaths in the EU.

This outbreak demonstrates the importance of cross-border cooperation in the field of preventive health. It also brings into play the importance of having a European agency such as the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) to monitor, collaborate and inform the Member States. We are relatively lucky in the UK to have had only three reported cases, but that is today: tomorrow things could change, and we must be vigilant. In addition to finding the cause of the outbreak, we need to keep the public informed and therefore protected. ECDC is publishing daily updates.

Through cooperation we can control this outbreak. If our citizens are informed, they stand a better chance of avoiding infection. Above all, we need to be calm and measured in our response.

  Νικόλαος Χουντής (GUE/NGL). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, για δεύτερη φορά μέσα σε έξι μήνες η Ευρώπη αντιμετωπίζει μια διατροφική κρίση που έχει προκαλέσει σοβαρά προβλήματα υγείας σε πολλούς ανθρώπους αλλά έχει κοστίσει και τη ζωή συνανθρώπων μας. Εδώ κάτι δεν πάει καλά, κύριε Επίτροπε.

Τον Ιανουάριο είχαμε το πρόβλημα με τις διοξίνες στη Γερμανία· τώρα έχουμε το πρόβλημα με το βακτήριο πάλι στη Γερμανία. Η πρώτη περίπτωση καλύφθηκε ενώ ήταν γνωστή από μήνες· η δεύτερη περίπτωση εύκολα μετατοπίστηκε στα αγγούρια της Ισπανίας.

Πρόκειται περί προβλήματος αναγνωρισιμότητας, ιχνηλασιμότητας και ανεπαρκούς ελέγχου σε επίπεδο Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Στην πρώτη περίπτωση, τον Ιανουάριο, κ. Dalli, μας είχατε πει μιλώντας για τις διοξίνες ότι θα πάρετε όλα τα αναγκαία μέτρα προκειμένου να υπάρξει πιο αυστηρή νομοθεσία στο σύστημα ελέγχου των τροφίμων. Προχθές δηλώσατε ότι δεν πρόκειται περί προβλήματος αναγνωρισιμότητας, αλλά υπάρχει κάποιο άλλο πρόβλημα. Η στάση της Επιτροπής χαρακτηρίζεται από σύγχυση, κάλυψη, πανικό, με συνέπεια να θρηνούμε σήμερα ζωές, να θρηνούμε κρούσματα και να θρηνούμε συνέπειες στην αγροτική παραγωγή.

  Elisabetta Gardini (PPE). - Signor Presidente, stiamo discutendo di una situazione che è molto grave, continuando però – mi sembra in alcuni casi – a confondere piani molto diversi.

È evidente che non si possono mettere sullo stesso piano vite perdute con problemi economici; non è questo che stiamo facendo. Vorrei inoltre sottolineare che non è identificando le cause – che poi non sono tali – che si risolve il problema.

Se viene commesso un omicidio e si mette in galera un innocente, non per questo si porta sollievo e giustizia all'omicidio commesso. Ma stiamo facendo proprio questo: di fronte a una situazione gravissima con una crisi sanitaria, con una sicurezza alimentare messa in discussione, stiamo identificando colpevoli – che poi tali non risultano essere – provocando ulteriori vittime.

Sono già scesi in piazza i coltivatori spagnoli e oggi, fra una quarantina di minuti, anche in Italia i coltivatori diretti scenderanno a manifestare nelle piazze, a Milano e in provincia di Latina, per offrire ai consumatori cetrioli e ortofrutticoli freschi a dimostrazione che si tratta di alimenti sani, importanti per una dieta sana ed equilibrata. Non vorremmo aggiungere ai consumatori tedeschi il doppio danno di privarli di alimenti assolutamente indispensabili per la loro dieta e per la loro salute.

Vorrei anche ricordare alcuni dati, che dovrebbero far riflettere seriamente soprattutto le autorità competenti quando diramano talune informazioni che creano allarme, psicosi e panico. Si tratta di dati forniti da Eurobarometro ed elaborati dalla Coldiretti in Italia: il 43 percento degli italiani, ad esempio, di fronte a un'emergenza alimentare evita gli alimenti di cui ha sentito parlare per un certo periodo di tempo, mentre il 13 percento li esclude definitivamente dalla propria alimentazione. Cerchiamo quindi di renderci conto di cosa parliamo e di come andiamo a influenzare le abitudini alimentari delle persone.

Vorrei quindi sollecitare la Commissione se non pensa che sia il caso di far scattare la clausola di urgenza europea e di accelerare il discorso sulle compensazioni finanziarie.

  Dagmar Roth-Behrendt (S&D). - Herr Präsident! Herr Dalli, Sie und Ihre Kolleginnen und Kollegen in der Generaldirektion Gesundheit haben alles richtig gemacht! Das kann man von den deutschen Behörden nicht sagen. Das Mindeste, was wir sagen können, ist, dass es ein Kommunikationschaos gibt. Das ist vielleicht noch milde ausgedrückt. Dass der Gesundheitsminister Deutschlands es gestern nicht für nötig hielt, zu einer Gesundheitsministerratssitzung nach Luxemburg zu reisen, deren Hauptthema diese schwere Infektionskrise war, zeigt, dass er überhaupt keine Ahnung hat, worum es in Europa wirklich geht, dass er ignorant ist, die Probleme nicht erkennt oder immer noch mit innerparteipolitischen Krisen behaftet ist.

(Beifall)

Ferner muss ich feststellen – Herr Dalli hat es ja gesagt –, dass die deutschen Behörden offensichtlich der Ansicht waren, auf Experten der Europäischen Union verzichten zu können, und gönnerhaft und arrogant meinten, das bräuchten sie nicht. Auch dass diese Experten gerade erst seit drei Tagen in Deutschland sind, ist ein Skandal, und das müssen wir hier kritisieren. Aber gleichzeitig müssen wir auch sagen, es ist unsere Aufgabe in der Europäischen Union, die Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher zu warnen, wenn ein gefährliches Lebensmittel auf dem Markt ist.

Und ich sage Ihnen ganz eindeutig: Wenn auf einer Gurke oder einem Salat gefährliche Bakterien sind, die dann nicht zum Tod führen, dann ist das vielleicht schön, aber das führt für mich noch nicht zu einem Entschädigungsfall. Auf Gurken aus Spanien und aus anderen Ländern waren nun einmal EHEC-Bakterien drauf. Es waren zwar nicht diejenigen, die hinterher der Stamm waren, aber das dauert eine Zeit, um das herauszufinden.

Für mich ist das auch nicht der Hauptpunkt. Und diejenigen von Ihnen, die die Europäische Union verstehen und das Frühwarnsystem kennen, wissen auch, wie das Frühwarnsystem funktioniert. Sie wissen, dass im Frühwarnsystem das Produkt und auch der Name des Herstellers genannt werden müssen. Das können Sie aber auch in der Gesetzgebung leicht nachlesen. Für mich ist die wirkliche Frage: Was passiert denn in Zukunft? In Zukunft müssen wir uns überlegen: Kann es noch Gülle geben? Kann es noch Produktionsmethoden geben, die nicht akzeptabel sind? Wer kontrolliert eigentlich in der Europäischen Union was, wann und mit welchem Ergebnis, und wer hat welche Verpflichtungen, das zu dokumentieren?

(Beifall)

  George Lyon (ALDE). - Mr President, this is a real crisis. 23 people are dead, over 2 000 have been affected, the vegetable markets are in turmoil with prices on the floor, and it is estimated that producers are losing EUR 300 million a day. Relations between Germany and Spain are strained to say the least, and yet, three weeks into this crisis, we still have no idea of where the source of this contamination has come from.

Commissioner Dalli, I want assurance from you here today that absolutely every effort is being made to trace where the source of this E coli outbreak has come from, because until we trace the source we cannot start the process of rebuilding consumer confidence. Secondly, I want you to spell out what actions you intend to take once we get over this crisis to stabilise the market and rebuild consumer confidence.

Thirdly, we do have to hear from you what the Commission intends to do to try and compensate farmers who, through no fault of their own, have seen their markets destroyed and are unable to sell their produce. Fourthly, I want an assurance from the Commission that a transparent, independent investigation will be set up to establish the facts of what went wrong. It is only once we have the facts that we can take action to plug any gaps in food safety law.

  Elisabeth Köstinger (PPE). - Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar! Die gesundheitliche Dimension dieser durch das Auftreten des EHEC-Keims ausgelösten Krise ist absolut tragisch. Die Situation ist ernst. Es ist dringend notwendig, den Betroffenen Hilfe zukommen zu lassen und alle möglichen Maßnahmen zu ergreifen, um eine weitere Ausbreitung dieser Infektion zu verhindern. Den Forschungsinstituten und Krankenhäusern müssen alle dafür nötigen Ressourcen bereitgestellt werden.

Rasches Handeln war seit Auftreten des Erregers das Gebot der Stunde. Das europaweit einheitliche Krisenmanagement bis hin zur gemeinsamen Sprachregelung zeichnet sich aber nicht durch Professionalität aus. Die krankhafte Suche nach dem Ort der Kontamination führte zu voreiligen gegenseitigen Schuldzuweisungen. Die Folge dieser Auseinandersetzungen waren tagelange Negativschlagzeilen und die totale Verunsicherung der Konsumenten.

Für die betroffenen Produzenten führt dies zu dramatischen, existenzbedrohenden Einkommensverlusten. Selbst einwandfrei regional produzierte Produkte finden keinen Absatz mehr. Allein in Österreich ist der Absatz von Frischgemüse um 75 % eingebrochen. Die Gemüsebauern treffen diese Einkommenseinbußen mitten in der Haupterntesaison. Die unkoordinierte Information der Konsumenten im Zuge des Vorfalls wirft erneut die Forderung nach einer durchgängigen und branchenübergreifenden Herkunftskennzeichnung und einer effizienten Kontrolle nach dem Grundsatz „vom Ursprung weg gekennzeichnet und kontrolliert“ auf.

Der Konsument hat das Recht darauf, zu erfahren, woher die Produkte kommen. Dies gilt gleichermaßen für die Verkaufsregale wie auch für die Gastronomie und Großküchen.

Jetzt sind alle Behörden aufgefordert, die Vorurteile gegenüber Frischgemüse rasch zu beseitigen, den Absatz für Frischgemüse wieder anzukurbeln und den Handel mit Drittstaaten weiter zu beleben. Die heimischen Gemüsebauern sind durch die EHEC-Situation vollkommen überraschend und schuldlos in eine Existenzkrise gestürzt. Die Kommission muss die Möglichkeit einer Entschädigung vorsehen, sei es durch einen Europäischen Agrarfonds, den Europäischen Krisenfonds oder durch absatzstimulierende Maßnahmen.

Ich gebe Peter Liese absolut Recht: Menschenleben sind unwiederbringbar und jedes Todesopfer ist eines zu viel. Aber es ist auch unsere absolute Pflicht, unsere Produzenten nicht im Stich zu lassen, die schuldlos in diese existenzbedrohende Situation geraten sind.

  Iratxe García Pérez (S&D). - Señor Presidente, señor Comisario, todos deseamos que la crisis alimentaria alemana se cierre cuanto antes. Es obligado el recuerdo a las víctimas, y espero que, una vez reconducidos los errores iniciales, se logre identificar el foco de infección para tranquilidad de todos.

Pero, junto a la faceta sanitaria de esta crisis, no puedo dejar de hablar de su repercusión económica. En doscientos millones de euros semanales cuantifica el sector hortofrutícola español las pérdidas económicas causadas por los fatales errores de comunicación que hoy conocemos; un sector del que quiero destacar su actitud responsable y de colaboración total con las administraciones de mi país.

Señor Comisario, la trazabilidad hacia el origen funcionó, pero ¿cuánto tiempo se perdió desviando la atención hacia el origen, centrándola en la producción agrícola, mientras se descartaban otras formas de contaminación en destino, como la manipulación o la distribución? ¿Por qué la Comisión se hizo eco de informaciones apresuradas provenientes de Alemania?

Ha habido descoordinación, señor Comisario, y los cierres unilaterales de frontera a los productos españoles son prueba de los fallos de seguimiento de la crisis en el seno de la Unión Europea.

Pido a la Comisión que, con carácter inmediato, active todos los mecanismos para indemnizar al sector español y europeo, tanto a nivel económico como de imagen ante el consumidor. Más a largo plazo, habrá que ver qué otras medidas se adoptan en este sentido.

Acusaciones infundadas, improvisación, descoordinación, pérdidas millonarias, ataque al honor y a la credibilidad de un sector: ¿no es suficiente para exigir responsabilidades?

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE). - Mr President, I would like to thank Mr Dalli for his measured comments at the start of the debate. There have been some less measured comments in the Chamber because of the impact on human lives, and indeed the add-on impact on producers and consumer confidence. This is a most serious food crisis, and Mr Dalli has acknowledged that. We know it is regionalised in a certain part of the European Union but it is not a German-only problem, it is an EU problem.

The system exists to find the cause and deal with the consequences but I am afraid that not all parts of the system have been adequately put in place, and I have some questions in relation to timing. I understand that the rapid alert was given on 22 May 2011: I am concerned that the European experts went into Germany only on Sunday, 5 June. Why such an incredible time lapse? I think that this needs to be looked at.

We have, under Article 55 of Regulation 178/2002, the possibility of creating a crisis unit. Everyone who spoke said this is a crisis, and Mr Dalli acknowledges it is a crisis. It is one which is growing rather than declining, and I would suggest it is now time for the EU to invoke that regulation and put such a crisis unit in place.

The thing that has been most distressing has been the virtual ‘naming and shaming’ of vegetables and then declaring them not guilty. This has shattered consumer confidence not just in fresh fruit and vegetables but in our system of food safety and control. Commission Dalli, I know that you are nodding in agreement, and I welcome that, but I do believe that now is the time to set up the crisis unit, and I would like you to comment on that in your closing remarks.

  Ulrike Rodust (S&D). - Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar! Ich komme aus der Region in Europa, in der der EHEC-Erreger am schlimmsten wütet. Der aggressive Keim ist scheinbar nicht zu stoppen. Seit Mitte Mai haben sich bis gestern Mittag 1733 Menschen angesteckt, 23 Patienten sind qualvoll gestorben. Die Lage in den Kliniken ist äußerst angespannt. Die Intensivbetten werden knapp, dringend wird Blutplasma gebraucht. Ein Ende ist nicht in Sicht. Die Bürger bei mir zu Hause fürchten sich jeden Tag vor neuen Erkrankungen.

Für mich hat es etwas mit Verantwortungsbewusstsein und Mut zu tun, wenn vor allen nur möglichen Trägern dieses Keimes gewarnt wird. Analysiert wurden diverse Lebensmittel, doch gefunden wurde er bisher nicht. Mein Verständnis von hochwertigen Nahrungsmitteln ist, dass sie gesund sind und kontrolliert in den Handel gelangen. Hier sind vermutlich eklatante Fehler gemacht worden, und einmal wieder erleben wir, dass es Lücken gibt. In dieser Situation zu behaupten, man kenne den Verursacher, ohne fundierte Laboruntersuchungen auf dem Tisch zu haben, ist allerdings äußerst fahrlässig. Bei aller verständlichen Panik darf es auf keinen Fall zu einer Hexenjagd kommen, denn viele gut arbeitende Landwirte in ganz Europa werden dadurch in den Ruin getrieben. Für alle muss deshalb klar sein, dass wir als Europäische Union solidarisch miteinander umgehen müssen und uns in Notlagen gegenseitig helfend zur Seite stehen. Das heißt, auf medizinischer Ebene müssen alle Sachverständigen an einen Tisch und auf ökonomischer Ebene muss denen geholfen werden, die unschuldig in ein finanzielles Desaster geraten sind.

  Pilar Ayuso (PPE). - Señor Presidente, en primer lugar, quiero expresar mis condolencias a los familiares de los fallecidos por esta crisis.

Señor Comisario, la comunicación de los riesgos sanitarios a la opinión pública es una tarea difícil y delicada, y tiene que estar perfectamente documentada y constatada. No se trata de buscar culpables, pero en esta ocasión se han cometido fallos importantes, empezando por las imputaciones temerarias y precipitadas de una responsable política regional, recién llegada al cargo, que ha desencadenado una alarma social y una gravísima crisis económica irreparable.

Tampoco parece que la Comisión haya coordinado muy bien esta crisis. Yo me pregunto cuándo se produjo el primer caso y si se ha cumplido el artículo 3 del Reglamento sobre el Sistema de Alerta Rápida, que obliga a los Estados miembros a comunicar el riesgo sin demora en el plazo de 48 horas, y también si se ha cumplido el artículo 8 de dicho Reglamento, que obliga a la Comisión a verificar que la información es completa, veraz y legible y tiene la adecuada base jurídica.

Lo cierto es que se han puesto de manifiesto las graves carencias de este Reglamento y que hay que revisar el actual marco jurídico para, entre otras cosas, definir con precisión los procedimientos de gestión de crisis por parte de las autoridades competentes, asignar errores u omisiones al agente causante en la cadena alimentaria —y para eso está la trazabilidad—, evitar que la protección de la salud esconda barreras comerciales y arbitrar procedimientos compensatorios de daños al comercio y al lucro cesante.

Señor Comisario, la causa no son los pepinos ni la soja. La causa es el agente patógeno, como ha dicho el señor Liese. La causa es el serotipo O104:H4 de la bacteria Escherichia coli, que ya está descrita en toda la bibliografía científica y está asociada a productos cárnicos.

Pero, en cualquier caso, señor Comisario, hay que dejar trabajar a los científicos: que investiguen toda la trazabilidad, en toda la cadena alimentaria, incluida la manipulación y distribución de los alimentos.

  Andrés Perelló Rodríguez (S&D). - Señor Presidente, señor Comisario, nada de lo que hagamos aquí o en la Unión Europea va a devolver la vida a los muertos, y ojalá que lo que se está haciendo evite que haya más y pare la cadena de enfermos que están sufriendo sin haber hecho nada para estarlo.

No sabemos las causas, seguramente, pero sí sabemos algunas cosas que hemos de llamar por su nombre: ha habido negligencia en actuaciones políticas y ha habido negligencia en el Gobierno federal alemán; no puede actuar como si Hamburgo fuera una ciudad-Estado de otro continente.

Si la señora Merkel y su Ministra de Sanidad hubieran traducido en diligencia y eficacia para coordinarse la soberbia que tienen para dirigirse, con inusitada frecuencia, a otros Estados, algunas cosas de las que han pasado no habrían sucedido. Y esa negligencia ha tenido consecuencias criminales sobre un Estado, que ha sido el Estado español, y sobre su sector más importante, la agricultura: ha llevado a la ruina familiar a miles de personas y pequeños empresarios y ha desprestigiado para mucho tiempo la economía.

Le pido que vaya usted hoy al Consejo y pida indemnizaciones totales para esos afectados, ya que no podemos pedir la vida para los muertos. Y que se revisen los sistemas de control. Y que se exija responsabilidad a la señora Merkel. Y que se le pida menos arrogancia y más diligencia. Y que se la haga responsable de unos daños que ha causado. No puede ignorar que Hamburgo está en su Estado. No puede ignorar sus responsabilidades. No puede refugiarse bajo un Estado descentralizado y federal para causar los daños que ha causado.

Un poco más de humildad, un poco más de buena gestión y un poco menos de conservadurismo habrían ido muy bien para que esta crisis no se le escapara de las manos y España y otros agricultores del sur no tuviéramos que sufrir sus penosas consecuencias.

Revise usted los controles, revise usted los sistemas de alerta y pida responsabilidades, porque en España se lo estamos pidiendo, señor Comisario; a usted, al Consejo y al Estado alemán.

  Esther de Lange (PPE). - Voorzitter, ik wil de commissaris bedanken voor zijn aanwezigheid hier, maar ik had liever gehad dat hij ergens anders was. Op het vliegtuig naar Rusland bijvoorbeeld, om er op het hoogste niveau voor te pleiten dat het verbod dat Rusland nu heeft ingevoerd, wordt ingetrokken omdat het volledig overtrokken is. Ik dank de commissaris dat hij nu met ons wil communiceren, maar de communicatie, ook van de zijde van de Europese Commissie, heeft tot nu toe schandalig gefaald. Pas dagen nadat de crisis was uitgebroken kwam de commissaris met een persconferentie. Maar toen was de geest al lang uit de fles en circuleerden er in de media al de meest wilde verhalen. De commissaris sprak over een mogelijke bron op Nederlandse komkommers, terwijl dagen eerder al uit meer dan 200 tests was gebleken dat daar niets aan de hand was.

Ik ben het met u eens: de technische kant van het verhaal, die werkt. Rapid alert, tracking and tracing, dat functioneert allemaal. Maar er is ook nog de communicatiekant van deze hele kwestie en die is belabberd. Allereerst natuurlijk in Duitsland, waar zoveel verschillende instituten, overheden en zelfs meerdere ministers allemaal verschillende signalen afgeven. Een landbouwminister, die een onzinnige opmerking maakt over 'helemaal geen rauwkost meer eten', terwijl zij niet eens ter zake bevoegd is! Ik neem aan dat u Duitsland hierop aanspreekt, want er zal een grondig onderzoek moeten gebeuren naar hoe dit allemaal zo slordig is kunnen verlopen.

Verder hoop ik dat u straks bij de landbouwministers zult pleiten voor een noodfonds, te financieren via de marge die nog beschikbaar is in het landbouwbudget. Net zoals we dat gedaan hebben bij de zuivel, toen daar een diepe crisis uitbrak, moet ook nu die marge aangesproken worden. Alleen al in mijn land lijdt de sector 80 miljoen euro schade per week, terwijl de bron daar niet te vinden is en waardoor nu gezonde bedrijven op omvallen staan. Dat kan niet de bedoeling zijn in deze Europese Unie. Ik neem aan dat u dit sterke signaal vanuit dit Huis zal meenemen naar de vergadering van de landbouwministers.

  Anna Záborská (PPE) - Pán komisár, vítam túto debatu. Pozeráme sa na tento problém z rôznych uhlov pohľadu, pozeráme sa na zdroj nákazy, na identifikáciu patogénu, na možnosti liečby. Ja už len čakám teraz, ktorá farmaceutická firma príde s tým, že má liek na toto ochorenie a začne ďalšia panika.

Najväčšie rezervy, ktoré ja vidím, sú v informovaní občanov. Informovať občanov o tom, ktorú potravinu, v ten ktorý deň nemajú práve kupovať, lebo je podozrivá, si myslím, že je nedostatočné a nezodpovedné.

Treba informovať občanov a mala by tu byť jedna kampaň, ktorá bude na úrovni aj Európskej únie aj členských štátov, ako sa majú správať vo svojom každodennom živote. Občania ak dodržujú základné hygienické predpisy, ak dodržujú osobnú hygienu plus umývanie prípadne tepelné spracovanie potravín, je dostatočné na to, aby sa pred touto nákazou uchránili. Je to kampaň, ktorá nie je náročná, ale ja si myslím, že epidémie, rôzne ochorenia tu boli a aj budú v budúcnosti a to, čo občanov najmä uchránilo, bolo ich osobné správanie.

Presvedčená som o tom, že takáto kampaň by pomohla v prevencii ochorenia a pomohla by aj výrobcom zeleniny.

  Czesław Adam Siekierski (PPE). - To ważne, że dziś dyskutujemy na temat zagrożeń dla pacjentów, producentów i konsumentów żywności w wyniku pojawienia się groźnej bakterii, której źródła nie możemy jeszcze określić. Mówimy, że mamy dobry system monitoringu w zakresie jakości i wysokich standardów żywności. Pomimo to pojawiają się sytuacje trudne, jak obecnie. Dlatego konieczny jest przegląd naszego systemu nadzoru i kontroli i jego naprawa. Należy przygotować się do jeszcze groźniejszych sytuacji. Nie wolno informować o źródłach pochodzenia, jeśli nie ma pewności. To spowalnia proces dalszych poszukiwań i czyni ogromne krzywdy moralne i szkody gospodarcze.

Kierujemy słowa współczucia do rodzin ofiar, do tych, którzy chorują, ale pamiętajmy o odszkodowaniach dla rolników z różnych krajów, którzy ponieśli straty. Dyskutujemy nad przyszłością wspólnej polityki rolnej, nad sprawami bezpieczeństwa w zakresie dostępu oraz jakości żywności. Może ta trudna sytuacja uświadomi, jak ważny jest to obszar spraw i problemów, który dotyczy nie tylko wyżywienia, ale i zdrowia naszych obywateli.

  Josefa Andrés Barea (S&D). - Señor Presidente, estamos ante un problema de salud pública, ante una epidemia, como ha dicho el Comisario, y, ante esto, se han buscando culpables y no la causa.

El sistema no ha funcionado: tenemos veintidós muertos, 1 600 afectados y no conocemos la causa tres semanas después, y, apelando a un principio de precaución sin base científica —repito: sin base científica—, se culpabiliza a España.

Señores diputados, los pepinos españoles no estaban contaminados. ¡No estaban contaminados! Lo repito porque se han escuchado por aquí algunas versiones contrarias. Pero para que vean ustedes la importancia de lo que estas palabras han suscitado: 300 000 empleos se pueden ver afectados; una pérdida de confianza.

Una epidemia no conoce fronteras. Le doy la razón, señor Comisario: ¡no conoce fronteras!

Pedimos responsabilidad por lo que no se ha hecho, por lo que debemos hacer de inmediato, porque Alemania tiene un problema de riesgo en este momento —tiene el mayor número de afectados—, pero España no es culpable. Pedimos indemnizaciones.

  Isabelle Durant (Verts/ALE). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, vous l'avez dit, le problème n'est pas local, même s'il est localisé. Je vous invite à le dire plus haut et plus fort parce que nous avons très sérieusement besoin de plus d'outils et de coordination européenne sur ces questions.

Le message a été extrêmement confus et lourd de conséquences, y compris – on vient de l'expliquer à moult reprises – pour les producteurs espagnols mais également les autres, parce qu'ils ne sont pas les seuls à être affectés.

Entre communication précoce, d'un côté, et transparence de l'autre, l'équilibre est certes difficile. Mais la précaution ou le principe de précaution n'implique pas que nous communiquions à tort et à travers, beaucoup trop rapidement. Il faut donc mettre les choses au point, et ceux qui sont responsables d'une communication précoce doivent aussi soutenir l'indemnisation. C'est de cela que vous discuterez cet après-midi. C'est cela qui est important, même si évidemment, mes pensées vont d'abord, comme tout le monde, aux victimes. Néanmoins les agriculteurs sont, eux, en attente d'une indemnisation juste.

Pour le reste, les questions de la résistance aux antibiotiques et de la traçabilité restent des questions centrales sur lesquelles nous devrons encore travailler.

  Diane Dodds (NI). - Mr President, with 22 people dead in the EU and over 2 000 taken in for treatment as a result of the ongoing E coli outbreak across Europe, it is appropriate that this Parliament extends its sympathies to those who have lost loved ones and our good wishes for a recovery to others.

Consumers demand food that is of good quality, safe and traceable. The fact that the source of this outbreak is still unclear and that the search for answers has at times seemed haphazard means that consumer confidence is eroding fast. Economically, it is farmers who will suffer while this goes on – farmers whose food is perfectly safe.

We must also urge calm in such a situation. National governments have been quick to apportion blame. In the past we in the UK have suffered as a result of such scaremongering around our produce, and this speculative blame game must stop. Can I also say that this House constantly rushes to introduce regulation. Before it does so we must have a full and thorough investigation of the facts.

  Teresa Jiménez-Becerril Barrio (PPE). - Señor Presidente, lo más importante y lo que nos une hoy aquí son las víctimas, porque nadie debería sentirse tan desprotegido como hoy nos sentimos los consumidores europeos. Y por respeto a las víctimas necesitamos claridad y responsabilidad.

Es mi responsabilidad denunciar a las autoridades alemanas que acusaron injusta y precipitadamente a los pepinos españoles y, concretamente, a las cooperativas de Málaga y de Almería, que eran modelo de explotaciones y que no se recuperarán de esas acusaciones.

Miles de familias sin trabajo se preguntan por qué —necesitan una respuesta— y sobre todo cuál será su futuro, no solo en Andalucía, sino en toda la Europa agrícola.

Por tanto, y confiando en que los expertos encuentren rápidamente la solución, exijo a la Comisión que hoy, cuando vaya a hablar con el Consejo, pida medidas económicas inmediatas y morales para todos los productores que, desde Andalucía y desde toda Europa, miran hacia nosotros con indignación, pero con esperanza.

  Antonio Masip Hidalgo (S&D). - Señor Presidente, en lugar de primar la investigación y la colaboración europea, las autoridades alemanas han calumniado y perjudicado a los productores de pepino y a otros. Y todavía no ha dimitido nadie en Alemania, ni ofrecido reparaciones a la altura del daño causado. Es Alemania la que tiene un grave problema de credibilidad. Es intolerable el trato de la señora Merkel a los países del sur en materia de agricultura, y también financiera.

Alguien dijo que Merkel era discípula de Adenauer y Kohl. Nada de eso: carece de crédito moral.

  Bart Staes (Verts/ALE). - Voorzitter, commissaris, we moeten natuurlijk leren uit de fouten die gemaakt zijn. Er is het coördinatieprobleem, er is het coördinatieprobleem in Duitsland - dat is ook gezegd door verschillende Duitse collega's, zowel vanuit de meerderheid als de oppositie, - de twee Bondsministeries, de zestien Länder, het gebrek aan coördinatie.

Er moet een streng nationaal controlesysteem komen en er moet worden nagegaan hoe dat loopt, in Duitsland, maar vooral ook in de 26 andere lidstaten. Want nu wijzen we met de vinger naar Duitsland maar misschien mogen we straks naar onze eigen lidstaat wijzen. Dus die vraag moet worden gesteld: zijn de interne controlesystemen in alle nationale lidstaten voldoende sterk? De Europese systemen – mevrouw Roth-Behrendt heeft het terecht gezegd – die zijn er, die werken. Er is misschien een gebrek aan coördinatie. Er is in elk geval een gebrek geweest aan communicatie. Dus daar moeten we voor gaan.

Aan de commissaris wil ik ten eerste vragen of u ingaat op de vraag van onder meer meneer Leinen en mevrouw Roth-Behrendt om met een echt Europese oplossing te komen. En ten tweede, kunt u aangeven wat u op de landbouwtop wil doen en hoe u de landbouwers die schade hebben geleden, kunt vergoeden?

  Gabriel Mato Adrover (PPE). - Señor Presidente, es precisamente en las situaciones de crisis en donde se ve la eficacia y la confianza en las instituciones. En este caso, han dejado mucho que desear.

El Comisario ha dicho textualmente que las sospechas sobre los pepinos españoles no se han confirmado. No, señor Comisario: lo que se ha confirmado es que las sospechas eran infundadas, irresponsables y sin datos objetivos; lo que se ha confirmado es que hay veintitrés muertos y que se ha causado un daño enorme al sector hortofrutícola español.

Y lo que se ha confirmado es que la Comisión tiene que hacer lo que no ha hecho hasta ahora, actuar con contundencia en varios frentes: terminar con el brote; evitar que a las sospechas infundadas se les den visos de credibilidad afectando de forma gravísima a un Estado miembro —en este caso España— tomando las medidas que sean necesarias para ello; resarcir a los perjudicados sin demora; y restituir a la marca «España» su condición asociada de productos agroalimentarios seguros y de enorme calidad.

  Judith A. Merkies (S&D). - Voorzitter, commissaris, we zitten midden in een crisis en eerlijk gezegd hebben we zinniger zaken te doen op dit moment dan met de vinger gaan wijzen en schuld toewijzen. Als je midden in een crisis zit, zit er niets anders op dan op je kiezen te bijten en eerst de crisis op te lossen. Alle andere zaken kunnen we dan wel daarna bespreken. De eerste prioriteit is voor de patiënten een behandeling te vinden tegen deze antibioticaresistente bacterie en de bron op te sporen. Daarnaast moeten we vooral heel goed communiceren om de dunne lijn te lopen tussen de informatie aan de patiënten, aan de consumenten en aan de producenten en iedereen recht te doen.

De vraag daarnà is: hoe staat het eigenlijk met ons crisismanagement? Het is vast niet de laatste crisis. Wie heeft de regie? Teveel autoriteiten zijn hierbij betrokken en iemand moet de leiding nemen. Daar moet het gesprek vanmiddag met u, met de Raad over gaan. Hoe gaat het met de regie in de toekomst en wie gaat die in handen nemen? Het antibioticagebruik is inderdaad een doorn in het oog, met dieren en mensen. Er zijn te grote verschillen tussen landen. En last but not least, de schade moet worden vergoed. Duidelijkheid en daadkracht.

  Angelika Werthmann (NI). - Herr Präsident! EHEC ist das Wort der vergangenen Woche. Unser Mitgefühl gilt auf jeden Fall zunächst einmal den Opfern. Im Sinne der Gesundheit der Bevölkerung haben die Behörden die Pflicht, diese zu informieren. Das Wohl der Menschen steht über allem.

In den USA gibt es dazu ein Frühwarnsystem. Fakt ist, dass es über 2000 Infektionen gibt und mehr als 20 Menschen gestorben sind. Es ist die Pflicht, zu sagen, wo dieser Keim ist. Er war auf den spanischen Gurken, und da sollte er nun einmal ganz sicher nicht sein, denn ein Fäkalkeim hat auf einem Lebensmittel absolut nichts verloren.

Was die wirtschaftliche Entschädigung betrifft, hat der Verursacher zu zahlen und ganz sicher nicht die anderen. Abschließend möchte ich noch bemerken, dass der Rat während der gesamten Diskussion zu diesem Thema nicht anwesend war.

  Bogusław Sonik (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący, dziękuję bardzo, że zechciał Pan udzielić głosu w tak ważnej debacie. Obywatele Unii Europejskiej domagają się skuteczności działań instytucji europejskich również w zapobieganiu rozszerzania się wszelkich epidemii na cały teren Unii Europejskiej – i to jest zrozumiałe – ale przede wszystkim agencje prewencji w dziedzinie zdrowia i bezpieczeństwa żywności winny mieć wypracowane metody zapobiegania panice. Powinny być całkowicie niezależne od administracji krajów członkowskich, a nawet wyposażone w uprawnienia władcze w razie kryzysu.

Panice nie udało się zapobiec w tym przypadku. Skutkuje to milionowymi stratami, również i polskich rolników. Ceny warzyw na polskim rynku spadły o 2/3 zaledwie w ciągu jednego tygodnia. Producenci warzyw każdego dnia ponoszą straty w wysokości 2 mln złotych. Kilka miesięcy temu alarmowaliśmy w przypadku tzw. świńskiej grypy, instytucje europejskie nie zdały wówczas egzaminu w zapobieganiu szerzeniu się paniki w Unii Europejskiej. Teraz jest podobnie.

  Marc Tarabella (S&D). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, la solidarité doit jouer, c'est un principe fondateur de l'Union européenne, mais elle ne doit pas permettre une déresponsabilisation des différents acteurs.

Il n'est pas normal que les autorités allemandes n'aient pas, dès le départ, passé la main à l'Union européenne, dans un drame qui a dépassé leurs frontières, dès la fin de leur première conférence de presse qui a mis le concombre espagnol erronément en cause. Il n'est pas normal d'accuser sans preuves, de communiquer sans être sûr et de provoquer une telle confusion. Il n'est pas normal que tous les principes de la communication de crise soient ainsi bafoués. Nous sommes, à cause de cela, passés de la crise à la psychose. Ces rumeurs et ces chasses aux sorcières alimentées par les autorités mêmes ont fait un tort énorme, cela relève de l'irresponsabilité. La relation de confiance entre les consommateurs et les producteurs est à nouveau rompue.

Pour que ce drame ne soit pas en plus un terrible gâchis, tirons les leçons qu'il faut: déterminer les meilleurs moyens de mettre en place une traçabilité transfrontalière sans faille et mettre en place une cellule de communication européenne et une cellule de gestion de crise. Si on ne tire pas les leçons de cet échec rapidement, 23 personnes seront mortes pour rien.

  John Dalli, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I would like to thank you and also all the Members who contributed to this debate. I will not have time to react to every single interesting comment that was made, but I can assure you we have taken note of the feeling expressed in this House. Today, as I said, I will be attending the Council of Agriculture Ministers. Tomorrow I will be in Berlin to participate in a coordination meeting between the food safety sector and the health sector, together with the experts we have in place there.

My main preoccupation is to stop hospitalisations: that is my first and foremost objective. I am concentrating on mobilisation and on speeding up the identification of the cause of the outbreak. We set up the crisis unit on 30 May 2011 and, at Commission level, we were fully mobilised at that point. My public health department mobilised the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) and the ECDC has activated its crisis mode in order to make scientific assessments as rapidly as possible.

The Commission immediately asked the ECDC to carry out a scientific assessment. In daily meetings with Member State experts, the Commission has coordinated assessment measures: the establishment of common case definitions, case reporting, patient questionnaires, sharing perspectives on treatment, and hygiene advice to the public are some of the outputs we have achieved in a very short time span.

We have to be very careful and we have to keep everything in perspective. It is easy for all of us to sit in judgment with hindsight and to make statements, rather than being in the eye of the storm when a crisis is happening. We have to be careful in our statements and criticism because, while insisting – as I do – that decisions be made on the basis of well-sustained evidence, we should not terrify those who are called upon to take risky decisions, sometimes in very difficult situations, fearing that afterwards they will be put in the dock and everyone will pass judgment on their decisions. I think this aspect of situation management is very important.

The same goes for checking and controlling the information that is circulating. We have a system in Europe that allows for fast communication and, in order to have fast communication, we apply the subsidiarity principle – looking to the lowest possible level as the base from which communication should start. We have to be careful because, if we begin to add layer upon layer of controls and checks to verify the information circulating, then we will defeat the purpose of speed, and in circumstances where health is concerned, and where life and death is sometimes at stake, speed is of the utmost importance.

As regards information, we are supplying continuous information as we receive it. In this respect, we at the Commission agree that coordinated and rapid communication is an essential element of risk management. If you remember, in 2009-2010, as a result of our H1N1 experience, we set up a system to coordinate public health communication, and our EU Health Security Committee has a network of communicators. We will need to involve regional actors more effectively in this process, as well as the World Health Organization (WHO). As recently as yesterday, I was on the phone with Margaret Chan, the Director-General of the WHO, about this aspect of coordinating information and ensuring full coordination before any communication takes place.

We will study what happened, and undertake closer investigations and analyses. Once we are confident that the contamination has been stopped, we will concentrate on what happened in the information sector, with regard to investigation protocols and in terms of coordination across the board when the crisis occurred, and we will then reflect on whether we need more tools and closer European coordination. That may be part of the answer but, as you say, it is going to involve a lot of discussion both here in Parliament and also at Member State level.

On the issue of compensation, this will be discussed this afternoon in the AGRI Council, and I am sure that my colleague Commissioner Cioloş is doing his utmost to identify and develop ways and means of compensating our farmers who have been suffering as a result of this problem.

PRESIDE: ALEJO VIDAL-QUADRAS
Vicepresidente

  El Presidente. − Se cierra el debate.

Declaraciones por escrito (artículo 149)

  János Áder (PPE), írásban. – A legújabb németországi élelmiszer-biztonsági botrány ismét ráirányította a figyelmet a megfelelő hatósági ellenőrzés hiányosságaira. Újra megingott a fogyasztóknak az élelmiszert előállítók gondosságába és nem utolsósorban az ellenőrző hatóságok szakszerű működésébe vetett bizalma. Egy jól működő jogállamban a fogyasztó okkal bízik abban, hogy csak olyan élelmiszer kerülhet az asztalára, csak olyan ételt adhat a gyermekeinek, amely biztonsággal elfogyasztható. Sajnos nem ez az első alkalom, hogy ez a bizalom megrendül. Elég, ha csak a májusi, magyarországi mérgezett paradicsom botrányra gondolunk, de említhetnénk a januári németországi dioxinos sertéshúsbotrányt is. Mindezen szomorú események újra és újra felhívják a figyelmet arra, hogy az államnak erősítenie kell a hatósági ellenőrzéseket, és mindenféle hiányossággal vagy visszaéléssel szemben a lehető legszigorúbban kell fellépnie. Az semmiképpen sem várható el ugyanis az állampolgároktól, hogy ezt a munkát az állam helyett maguk végezzék el. Nem képezhetjük ki magunkat élelmiszer-vegyésznek és nem rendezhetünk be a lakásunkban az élelmiszerek megvizsgálására alkalmas laboratóriumokat. E helyett a helyes megoldás az, ha a legkeményebb szankciókkal sújtjuk a szabálytalankodókat, nem riadva vissza akár a kereskedelmi egységek bezárásától sem.

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. – Quero antes de mais deixar uma mensagem de solidariedade às famílias das vítimas. Os esforços da UE e dos Estados-Membros devem no imediato centrar-se na descoberta da origem da contaminação, para pôr fim ao surto e às mortes e restabelecer a confiança dos consumidores na cadeia alimentar, pois sem essa confiança não é possível pôr fim também ao desespero dos nossos agricultores. Para fazê-lo é necessário o trabalho conjunto entre as autoridades europeias de segurança alimentar e os ministérios da saúde dos Estados-Membros, o que tardou a acontecer devido à gestão desastrosa desta crise pela Alemanha. Nesta situação a UE não pode descurar os seus agricultores. Tem de criar um mecanismo para compensar com celeridade os enormes impactos negativos desta crise, que já está a colocar em causa a sobrevivência de muitas explorações. A protecção do consumidor tem prioridade absoluta, mas temos de corrigir os procedimentos. É fundamental definir quem lança o alerta, quando lança o alerta e como lança o alerta, para evitar o caos informativo a que temos vindo a assistir, com consequências desastrosas, sem que se tenha identificado sequer a origem do problema. Precisamos também de acções claras a partir de entidades que tenham um carácter pan-europeu.

  Ivo Belet (PPE), schriftlelijk. – Commissaris, collegae, onze bekommernis gaat eerst en vooral uit naar de slachtoffers van deze epidemie en hun nabestaanden. Deze rampzalige situatie mag zich niet herhalen; we moeten er snel lessen uit trekken om in de toekomst sneller te kunnen detecteren waar de oorzaak zit, en efficiënter en gecoördineerder communiceren. Want dat is toch wel jammerlijk mank gelopen, de communicatie en het gebrekkige overleg daarover tussen de lidstaten. Er is heel veel economische schade aangericht, die perfect vermeden had kunnen worden, als zorgvuldiger met crisiscommunicatie was omgesprongen. De getroffen ondernemers hebben recht op schadevergoeding. Daarom pleiten we voor de oprichting van een Europees noodfonds. Extra nationale steunmaatregelen zijn in dezen een doekje voor het bloeden, en getuigen bovendien niet van grote Europese solidariteit. Zoals Commissaris Dalli hier vanmorgen zei: 'Dit is geen nationaal, Duits probleem. Dit is een Europees probleem.' Laten we het daarom ook in Europees verband aanpakken. Deze crisis is ook een kans om aan de Europese burger duidelijk te maken dat Europa de slachtoffers van een dergelijke ramp inzake de volksgezondheid niet in de steek laat.

  Sergio Berlato (PPE), per iscritto. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la ricerca della fonte dell'epidemia di E. Coli si sta dimostrando complessa: anche gli ultimi esami sui campioni di germogli di soia, presumibili fonti dell'infezione e responsabili della morte di 20 persone in Europa e di oltre circa 300 casi gravi diagnosticati nella sola Germania, hanno dato esito negativo. La conseguenza immediata del manifestarsi dell'epidemia è stata un crollo sensibile del consumo di prodotti ortofrutticoli in tutta Europa. Sebbene, al momento, non siano ancora disponibili indicazioni precise sull'entità delle perdite nel settore europeo dell'ortofrutta in seguito alla crisi provocata dal batterio di E. Coli, è evidente che i danni economici per questo settore non saranno trascurabili. Premesso che su questa problematica ho già presentato un'interrogazione parlamentare, colgo l'occasione, in questa sede, per ribadire la necessità che l'Unione si impegni per sostenere, con strumenti appropriati alla gravità della crisi, i produttori europei del settore. Inoltre, sollecito l'attenzione della Commissione sull'opportunità di considerare l'introduzione di misure volte al miglioramento della conservazione dei prodotti ortofrutticoli e all'aumento dei controlli sui relativi imballaggi.

  Σπύρος Δανέλλης (S&D) in writing. – Όταν μέσα σε ένα εξάμηνο η διατροφική ασφάλεια της ΕΕ δέχεται ένα δεύτερο πλήγμα με τόσους νεκρούς μάλιστα, δε μιλάμε πια για ένα διατροφικό σκάνδαλο, αλλά για μια διατροφική κρίση. Όταν δύο εβδομάδες αργότερα δεν έχουμε βρει καν το αίτιο, αλλά έχουμε βιαστεί να υποδείξουμε τους φταίχτες, έχουμε δημιουργήσει πρόβλημα αξιοπιστίας.

Έχουμε κλονίσει παραγωγούς που, αν και έκαναν σωστά τη δουλειά τους, βρέθηκαν στη θέση του αποδιοπομπαίου τράγου κι εξακολουθούν σήμερα να πληρώνουν. Έχουμε κλονίσει την εμπιστοσύνη των καταναλωτών, ευρωπαίων και άλλων. Έχουμε δημιουργήσει ρήγμα στις εμπορικές μας συναλλαγές αλλά και στη συνοχή στο εσωτερικό. Αυτή η κρίση θέτει σε αμφισβήτηση το ίδιο το Ευρωπαϊκό γεωργικό μοντέλο και δοκιμάζει τη λειτουργία της εσωτερικής αγοράς. Δεν αρκεί πια να πούμε ποιος και σε τι έφταιξε. Η Επιτροπή οφείλει να προβεί σε σταθερές, διορθωτικές κινήσεις, μόνιμου χαρακτήρα, μία εκ των οποίων είναι και η ιχνηλασιμότητα, που αναδεικνύεται σε στόχο προτεραιότητας.

  Anne Delvaux (PPE), par écrit. – Chers collègues, dans l'affaire qui nous occupe, plusieurs points importants doivent être soulevés - et je relaye ici les préoccupations de mes concitoyens.

Premièrement, les consommateurs européens doivent pouvoir savoir ce qu'il y a dans leur assiette. C'est pourquoi il est primordial de garantir une traçabilité totale des produits agricoles au niveau européen.

Deuxièmement, il faut demander à l'Allemagne de tout mettre en œuvre pour trouver l'origine de la bactérie. À cet égard, je me réjouis de la décision de la Commission d'envoyer des experts en Allemagne. Mais, il faut aussi que l'exécutif européen fasse son travail à une plus grande échelle et vérifie si tous les systèmes de contrôles, d'analyse et de recherches ont bien été respectés car il faut améliorer et renforcer les mécanismes d'alerte alimentaire.

Troisièmement, il faut généraliser les audits à mener au niveau européen pour s'assurer de l'efficacité des systèmes de surveillance.

Enfin, quatrièmement, n'oublions pas les agriculteurs qui se sont retrouvés lésés sans avoir fait quoique ce soit mais qui ont été suspectés à tort! Et, ils seront encore nombreux à souffrir de la méfiance des consommateurs! À cet égard, il faut une solidarité européenne en faveur de mesures concrètes de compensation. Je vous remercie.

  Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (PPE), na piśmie. – Szanowni Państwo! W kontekście debaty na temat epidemii EHEC w państwach członkowskich Unii Europejskiej chciałabym zwrócić uwagę, że w wyniku decyzji krajów unijnych i pozaunijnych zamknięte zostały granice w celu ochrony rynku przed napływem warzyw z państw objętych przypuszczalnym źródłem zakażenia. Informacje otrzymywane od producentów warzyw są niepokojące. Odbiorcy stwierdzają zerowe zainteresowanie klientów zakupem ogórków, pomidorów czy innych warzyw. Ponoszą oni ogromne straty finansowe, gdyż cały towar zmuszani są wyrzucać lub oddawać znacznie poniżej ceny zakupu. Producenci kończą uprawy, co wiąże się ze zmianą produkcji, a co za tym idzie – ze zwolnieniami pracowników. Jeżeli prognozy dalej będą niepokojące i nie znajdziemy źródła zakażenia, to przedsiębiorcy będą zmuszeni zakończyć działalność z powodu braku płynności finansowej. Uważam, że Unia Europejska posiada instrumenty administracyjne, aby szybko reagować na podobne przypadki, dlatego powinniśmy zastanowić się, jak usprawnić system, aby był bardziej efektywny. Posiadając takie mechanizmy, powinniśmy jak najszybciej znaleźć źródło zakażenia, aby nie narażać na kolejne straty producentów warzyw. Dziękuję.

  Katarína Neveďalová (S&D), písomne – Spoločnosť si už pomaly musí zvyknúť, že každý rok sa vyskytne nejaká epidémia – raz je to vtáčia chrípka, potom prasacia, teraz je to baktéria v čerstvej zelenine.

Ani táto epidémia sa neobišla bez obetí a obrovských finančných škôd. Za hlavný rozdiel oproti predošlým epidémiám pokladám to, že stále sa nám nepodarilo s určitosťou zistiť, čo je zdrojom tejto nákazy – najprv to boli (španielske) uhorky, teraz sú to (nemecké) fazuľové klíčky.

Rovnako sa objavujú aj otázky ohľadom pochybení zo strany členských štátov. Tým narážam na pochybenie zo strany Nemecka, ktoré odmietlo pomoc od Komisie a snažilo sa túto krízu vyriešiť samo. Krivé obvinenia spôsobili španielskym poľnohospodárom obrovské finančné straty, nielen im, ale pravdepodobne aj celému poľnohospodárskemu sektoru.

Európska komisia včera navrhla odškodné 150 miliónov eur pre pestovateľov zeleniny poškodeným v dôsledku črevnej nákazy v Nemecku. Považujem za veľmi dôležité, aby v prípade pochybenia, ako v prípade Španielska, došlo k náprave. Podľa posledného vývoja to vyzerá, akoby jediná ujma, ku ktorej došlo, bola finančná strata európskych poľnohospodárov. Nesmieme však zabúdať, že najvyššia cena, ktorú sme zaplatili za túto epidémiu, sú desiatky obetí naprieč mnohými členskými štátmi Európskej únie! Je našou povinnosťou konať tak, aby k podobným pochybeniam a únikom nedochádzalo.

  Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE), în scris. – O primă precizare care se impune, pentru că a existat o remarcă în sală, este că în faţa unei astfel de crize, politica agricolă nu este problemă, ci mai degrabă soluţia. Consumatorii europeni s-au obişnuit să privească cu încredere alimentele pe care le găsesc pe rafturile magazinelor tocmai pentru că producătorii europeni sunt obligaţi să respecte cele mai înalte standarde din lume. Această criză a demonstrat însă că sistemul european nu este infailibil şi că suntem extrem de vulnerabili. Într-adevăr, trebuie să ne gândim acum în primul rând la victime. Ceea ce s-a întâmplat este o tragedie. În acelaşi timp trebuie să ne gândim şi la măsurile de sprijin care sunt necesare pentru a evita pierderea a mii de locuri de muncă în agricultură şi mai ales distrugerea unui sector întreg.

  Γεώργιος Τούσσας (GUE/NGL), in writing. – Το καινούργιο διατροφικό σκάνδαλο με την εμφάνιση νέου υπέρ - τοξικού βακτηρίου, που έχει προκαλέσει ήδη δεκάδες θανάτους και σοβαρές βλάβες στην υγεία χιλιάδων εργαζομένων, έρχεται να προστεθεί στον μακρύ, ατέλειωτο κατάλογο των διατροφικών σκανδάλων στην ΕΕ. Πρόκειται στην πραγματικότητα για εγκλήματα των διεθνικών επιχειρήσεων που λυμαίνονται τη διατροφική αλυσίδα, θυσιάζοντας την ανθρώπινη ζωή και τη λαϊκή υγεία για την αύξηση των κερδών τους. Η νέα διατροφική επιδημία αποδεικνύει ότι η ΕΕ ούτε θέλει, ούτε μπορεί να προστατεύσει την ανθρώπινη ζωή και τη δημόσια υγεία, γιατί σαν διακρατική ένωση των μονοπωλίων είναι ταγμένη να υπηρετεί και να προστατεύει τα κέρδη του κεφαλαίου και όχι τη ζωή των εργαζομένων. Οι αστήρικτες και χωρίς κανένα επιστημονικό υπόβαθρο κατηγορίες των Γερμανικών αρχών κατά των μικρομεσαίων αγροτοπαραγωγών των χωρών μελών του Νότου της ΕΕ, τις οποίες έσπευσε να υιοθετήσει η ΕΕ, προκαλώντας βαρύτατες ζημιές στους αγρότες των χωρών αυτών, μοναδικό στόχο είχαν να καλύψουν και να κρύψουν τον αντιλαϊκό - επικίνδυνο χαρακτήρα της ΚΑΠ, τις ευθύνες της ΕΕ, των αστικών κυβερνήσεων, των μονοπωλιακών ομίλων, που δεν διστάζουν να ταΐζουν τους εργαζόμενους με ό,τι πιο τοξικό κι επικίνδυνο για την υγεία τους αρκεί να μεγιστοποιεί τα κέρδη του κεφαλαίου.

  Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D), schriftelijk. – De manier waarop er gereageerd wordt op de uitbraak van EHEC-besmetting in het noorden van Duitsland, doet belangrijke vragen rijzen. Vooreerst moeten we ons bezinnen over de oorzaken van deze besmetting en de elementen die de bestrijding hinderen. Zitten er te veel antibiotica in het veevoer? Speelt een te intensieve landbouw ons parten? In welke mate hebben we betere etikettering en tracering nodig? Dit zijn belangrijke vragen, zeker nu de herziening van het gemeenschappelijk landbouwbeleid eraan komt.

Daarnaast is ook duidelijk geworden dat er nog substantiële pijnpunten zitten in het Europese crisismanagementsysteem voor voedselcrisissen. Zeker in een dergelijke situatie, waar er naast de federale overheid ook nog eens twee bevoegde ministeries per regio zijn, is er te veel versnippering en onduidelijkheid in de aanpak van en communicatie over de crisis. In dergelijke crisissen is het van cruciaal belang, zowel voor de consumenten als voor de voedselproducenten, dat er zo snel mogelijk een Europese coördinatiecel wordt opgericht die zowel voor de communicatie zorgt als de coördinatie van het wetenschappelijk onderzoek doet. Op die manier kan er veel sneller en efficiënter gezocht worden naar de oorzaken van de besmetting door ook de expertise van andere Europese onderzoekers en laboratoria ten volle te benutten.

7. Tassazzjoni fuq vetturi ta' tagħbija tqal (dibattitu)

  El Presidente. − El siguiente punto es la recomendación para la segunda lectura, de la Comisión de Transportes y Turismo, respecto de la Posición del Consejo en primera lectura con vistas a la adopción de la Directiva del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo por la que se modifica la Directiva 1999/62/CE relativa a la aplicación de gravámenes a los vehículos pesados de transporte de mercancías por la utilización de determinadas infraestructuras (15145/1/2010 - C7-0045/2011 - 2008/0147(COD)) (Ponente: Saïd El Khadraoui) (A7-0171/2011)

  Saïd El Khadraoui, Rapporteur. − Voorzitter, commissaris, als straks hopelijk de plenaire met een grote meerderheid het akkoord goedkeurt dat we onderhandeld hebben tussen de instellingen, dan zullen we een belangrijk moment meemaken voor de transportsector in Europa, een mijlpaal die richtinggevend kan zijn voor het beleid de komende tientallen jaren. De onmiddellijke concrete impact op het terrein zal natuurlijk afhangen van de politieke wil van de lidstaten om al dan niet gebruik te maken van de nieuwe mogelijkheden. Wij leggen niets op. We maken alleen dingen mogelijk en met name de toepassing van een principe waar we als Parlement al een aantal jaren voor pleiten, namelijk 'de vervuiler betaalt', de internalisering van de externe kosten.

Een aantal oud-strijders onder ons weten dat we daar al sinds 2006, toen collega Wortmann-Kool de vorige herziening leidde, hard voor gevochten hebben. In 2008 volgde een voorstel van de Commissie, waar we ondertussen drie jaar mee bezig zijn geweest. Degenen die het dossier van dichtbij gevolgd hebben, weten hoe moeizaam het allemaal verlopen is om dit resultaat te bereiken. Het is een compromis, een compromis tussen de instellingen, maar ook een compromis binnen de instellingen, dat bijvoorbeeld gesteund wordt door de kleinst mogelijke meerderheid in de Raad, maar dat ook hier in het Parlement tegenstanders heeft. De enen vinden dat het niet ambitieus genoeg is en anderen vinden dat het allemaal veel te ver gaat. Het is de verdienste van het onderhandelingsteam en met name van de schaduwrapporteurs die, samen met mezelf, mensen van de Raad en de Commissie, tot dit broos evenwicht zijn gekomen.

Ik vraag ieder van jullie om het pakket dat we bereikt hebben, te steunen als een stap in de goede richting. Het geeft de lidstaten voor het eerst de mogelijkheid om bovenop de reeds bestaande infrastructuurheffingen, die overigens niet overal op dit ogenblik consequent worden aangerekend, ook lawaai en luchtvervuiling aan te rekenen, en wel op zo'n manier dat bijvoorbeeld een vlootvernieuwing gestimuleerd wordt. Tegelijkertijd geeft het de lidstaten de mogelijkheid om meer variatie in de heffing te realiseren, afhankelijk van het tijdstip van de dag waarop de vrachtwagen gebruikmaakt van de weg. Op die manier krijgen de overheden sturingsmogelijkheden om de mobiliteit te verbeteren.

Tegelijkertijd is er ook een sterk engagement, het sterkst mogelijke engagement, van de lidstaten om de inkomsten te herinvesteren in het transportsysteem teneinde dit duurzamer te maken en minstens 15% van de inkomsten te herinvesteren in het trans-Europees transportnetwerk. Tegelijkertijd – en dat was een belangrijke vraag ook van het Europees Parlement – is er duidelijkheid over de transparantievereiste. Lidstaten moeten uitleggen hoe hoog de inkomsten zijn uit die heffingen, wat ze daarmee zullen doen om te komen tot een beter transportsysteem.

Het pakket zal ook toegepast worden op een groter deel van de vloot, met name alle voertuigen vanaf 3,5 ton. Dat is het principe, dat is de norm, dat zijn de afspraken. Het zal ook toegepast worden op het hele snelwegennet. We hebben sterk de nadruk gelegd op het belang van de interoperabiliteit van het systeem. Eén doosje per vrachtwagen om heel Europa te doorkruisen en niet 25 of 26. Dat is gebetonneerd in de wetgeving.

Ten slotte nog één punt, de concordantietabellen. We hebben daar nogal wat discussie over gehad. De oplossing die we gevonden hebben in de vorm van een aantal verklaringen van de drie instellingen, blijkt voldoende om geen precedentwaarde te kennen.

Tot slot, het Eurovignet is geen wonderoplossing. We gaan hiermee het mobiliteitsprobleem niet volledig oplossen, uiteraard niet. Het is wel een belangrijk onderdeel van een oplossing om te komen tot een meer duurzaam transportsysteem. Prijsprikkels zullen daar een belangrijk element van uitmaken maar we zullen nog veel meer moeten doen dan dat. Het is echter een stap in de goede richting en daarvoor vragen ik en de collega's uw steun.

  Enikő Győri, a Tanács soros elnöke. − Tisztelt elnök úr! Biztos úr! Raportőr úr! Képviselő hölgyek és urak! A magyar elnökség kezdetén arra tettünk ígéretet, hogy egy erős Európáért fogunk tevékenykedni, egy olyanért, melynek a középpontjában az ember áll. Nagyon örülök, hogy most egy olyan irányelv elfogadása előtt állunk, melynek köszönhetően egyértelműen javulni fog az európai polgárok életminősége. Így tehát szívből üdvözlöm azt, hogy sikerült elérnünk egy megállapodást az Európai Parlamenttel az Euromatrica-irányelvvel kapcsolatosan. A nehéz tehergépjárművekre egyes infrastruktúrák használatáért kivetett díjakról szóló javaslat célja a közlekedésben alkalmazott árak korrekt megállapítása, hogy azok pontosabban tükrözzék a nehéz tehergépjárművek használatából eredő levegőszennyezés és zajártalom, forgalmi torlódások és éghajlat-változási hatások tényleges költségeit.

Tény, hogy a kereskedelmi célú közúti fuvarozás a modern társadalmak egyik meghatározó gazdasági ágazata. Tény az is, hogy a közúti közlekedéshez köthető problémák, úgy mint a levegőszennyezés és zajártalom, valamint a forgalmi torlódások egyre súlyosabb méreteket öltenek. Egyre nagyobb a szerepük ezért az olyan innovatív, szakszerű szakpolitikai intézkedéseknek, mint például a környezetbarát járművek használatának ösztönzése vagy az útvonaltervezőknek a fejlesztése. A külső költségek internalizálását célzó intézkedések révén várhatóan nő a gazdasági hatékonyság és csökkennek a negatív környezeti hatások. Az Euromatrica-irányelvben javasolt igazságos útdíjrendszer hozzájárul majd ahhoz, hogy szűkös erőforrásainkat fenntarthatóbb módon igyekezzünk felhasználni. Ez az intézkedés nagy jelentőséggel bír a Bizottság által nemrég előterjesztett fehér könyvvel összefüggésben is, melynek címe „Útiterv az egységes európai közlekedési térség megvalósításához, úton egy versenyképes és erőforrás-hatékony közlekedési rendszer felé”.

Az intézkedés az első lépés azon az úton, amely az összes közlekedési mód külső költségeinek internalizálása felé vezet. A Tanács nézete szerint ez a javaslat az egyik legjelentősebb intézkedés a közlekedés területén. Tudjuk, hogy a Parlament egyetért velünk ebben. Közösen, keményen dolgoztuk a kompromisszum elérése érdekében. A magyar elnökség ezért külön szeretne köszönetet mondani Saïd El Khadraoui raportőr úrnak, amiért kész volt konstruktívan együttműködni a Tanáccsal és elkötelezetten törekedett a siker elérésére. A tárgyalások utolsó lezáratlan kérdése a megfelelési táblázatokhoz kapcsolódott. Az elnökség örömmel vette az ügyben talált megoldást, és fel kívánom olvasni a magyar elnökség idevágó nyilatkozatát, amelyet a soron következő lengyel, dán és ciprusi elnökségek is támogatnak.

In order to avoid any misinterpretation or misunderstanding, let me read it out in English: ‘It is hereby declared that the agreement reached between the Council and the European Parliament in the trialogue of 23 May 2011 concerning the directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 1999/62/EC on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures, Eurovignette, does not prejudge the outcome of interinstitutional negotiations on correlation tables.’

Tisztelt elnök úr! Képviselő hölgyek és urak! Ez egy rendkívül fontos ügy. Olyan, amely egyértelműen befolyásolni fogja polgáraink mindennapjait. Üdvözöljük tehát e két intézmény között elért megállapodást. Azt gondolom, hogy közlekedéspolitikai téren ez az egyik legfontosabb eredményünk a magyar elnökség alatt, és bizakodva állunk a holnapi szavazás elé, és abban bízunk, hogy a képviselők többsége támogatni fogja ezt az irányelvet. Még egyszer köszönet mindenkinek aki segítette ezen kompromisszum megszületését, a raportőrön túl a shadow-raportőröknek, a jogi szakértőinknek, hogy még a megfelelési táblák igen nehéz ügyére is volt megoldás ebben az ügyben.

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission. − Mr President, honourable Members, after three years’ negotiations, we are now close to the adoption of the amended directive on charging heavy goods vehicles, the so-called Eurovignette Directive.

This is part of a wider strategy to internalise the external costs of transport in all modes to get transport prices right. I would like to thank the Belgian Presidency for unblocking this file in the Council. The Hungarian Presidency skilfully negotiated with a very narrow majority in the Council.

Let me thank in particular the rapporteur, Mr El Khadraoui. Together with the shadow rapporteurs and members of the Committee on Transport and Tourism, he managed to significantly improve the text at second reading. I look forward to Parliament adopting this Directive for two main reasons.

Firstly, to achieve our goals of a more sustainable green transport system and thus implement the polluter-pays principle. The directive will authorise Member States to charge tolls on lorries not only for infrastructure costs, as is the case now, but also for noise and air pollution. It will also allow more efficient varying of tolls to ease congestion during peak hours.

Secondly, at a time of scarce public funding, the charging for external costs provided by the new directive will generate revenues and make new financial resources available for transport infrastructure. The Commission supports this agreement.

I have noted your declaration on the correlation table. I fully sympathise with you on this issue. On behalf of the Commission I will also make a formal statement:

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

‘The Commission regrets the lack of support for the provision included in the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 1999/62/EC on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures, which aimed at rendering the establishment of correlation tables obligatory.

‘The Commission, in a spirit of compromise and in order to ensure the immediate adoption of that proposal, can accept the substitution of the obligatory provision on correlation tables included in the text with the relevant recital encouraging Member States to follow this practice. It will inform Parliament within 12 months of the adoption of this agreement in plenary and produce a report at the end of the transposition period on practice in the Member States, in order to draw up for themselves – and in the interests of the Union – their own tables illustrating as far as possible the correlation between this directive and the transposition measures and to make them public.

However, the position followed by the Commission in this file shall not be considered as a precedent. The Commission will continue its efforts with a view to finding, together with Parliament and the Council, an appropriate solution to this horizontal institutional issue.’

  Corien Wortmann-Kool, namens de PPE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, de Eurovignetrichtlijn is belangrijk omdat ze de Europese spelregels vastlegt voor een kilometerheffing en daarmee ook het gelijke speelveld in de Europese Unie voor het wegvervoer zeker stelt. Ik wil echter niet verhullen dat onze fractie grote problemen had met het oorspronkelijke commissievoorstel en ook met het standpunt dat de rapporteur innam in eerste lezing. Gelukkig heeft de rapporteur forse stappen gezet in onze richting en het is zeker ook te danken aan de Raad en het Hongaars Voorzitterschap, die erin geslaagd zijn om uiteindelijk niet alleen een solide meerderheid in de Raad te realiseren, maar ook dit Parlement achter dit standpunt te krijgen.

De meerderheid van mijn fractie zal dit akkoord ook steunen, want hiermee zijn de eerste stappen gezet om het principe van 'de vervuiler betaalt' ook in te voeren, maar dan wel op een verstandige manier. Voorop staat dat er prikkels moeten komen om duurzaamheid te stimuleren, niet zomaar lasten verhogen. Extra heffing in de spitsuren, gecompenseerd tijdens de daluren, dat is nu veel beter uitgewerkt dan in het standpunt van de Raad. Daarmee zal de totale tolheffing gelijk blijven. Ook de uitzonderingen voor EURO V en EURO VI vormen een positief punt en tevens het feit dat de lidstaten zich opnieuw verbonden hebben om de interoperabiliteit van de tolsystemen te regelen, want het is ons een doorn in het oog dat dat nog steeds niet het geval is.

Belangrijk voor het Parlement is ook de oormerking. We hadden meer gewild. Maar het is zeker een belangrijke stap, niet alleen het percentage dat nu geoormerkt wordt, maar ook de rapportageverplichting voor de lidstaten. Hopelijk is dat een opmaat naar verdere oormerking van deze gelden.

  Ismail Ertug, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, sehr verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Nach einem langen Verhandlungsmarathon ist es meinem Kollegen Said El Khadraoui und den Vertretern von Rat und Kommission gelungen, ein verbessertes Maßnahmenpaket für die Maut schwerer Nutzfahrzeuge in Europa zu schnüren. Für das Erreichte bin ich den Beteiligten und insbesondere unserem Berichterstatter sehr dankbar.

Es ist uns gelungen, mit der Anerkennung des Prinzips der Internalisierung externer Kosten, mit der teilweisen Zweckbindung der Mittel für die Verkehrsinfrastruktur und mit den geschaffenen Anreizen zur Flottenerneuerung wichtige Ziele aus dem Weißbuch des Verkehrs zu verwirklichen. Nicht zu vergessen sind meines Erachtens auch die Transparenzverpflichtungen, die letztendlich von Seiten des Rates gelten müssen.

Die Tatsache, dass einzelne Mitgliedstaaten selbst nach Abschluss der Trilogverhandlungen versucht haben, über die sogenannten Korrelationstabellen im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes Sand ins Getriebe zu streuen, um diese Richtlinie zu blockieren, finde ich persönlich sehr bedauernswert. Nichtsdestotrotz möchte ich abschließend alle meine Kolleginnen und Kollegen dazu aufrufen, den gefundenen Kompromiss zu akzeptieren und die Ergebnisse der langen und mühseligen Verhandlungen nicht aufs Spiel zu setzen, denn hiermit wäre nur den Falschen geholfen. In diesem Sinne vielen Dank.

  Dirk Sterckx, namens de ALDE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, we gaan geen schoonheidsprijs winnen met wat nu op tafel ligt, ondanks de volgehouden en taaie inspanningen van de rapporteur, die ik daar trouwens voor gelukwens.

Het belangrijkste en het moeilijkste punt vond ik earmarking. Waarvoor gebruiken lidstaten de opbrengst van deze heffing? Zullen ze daarmee hun transporteconomie efficiënter maken? Verplichten wij hen daartoe om dat te doen? Dat is ons niet gelukt. We hebben dus niet wat we willen op dit punt. Het is een beetje pervers dat lidstaten de weg willen open houden om inkomsten te behouden, ook als de externe kosten behouden worden. Je moet eigenlijk met die heffing de externe kosten zoveel mogelijk beperken en liefst naar nul terugbrengen. Dus betere infrastructuur, research voor schonere vrachtwagens, enzovoort, dat is eigenlijk waarvoor het geld moet worden gebruikt.

Een punt dat nog altijd op mijn maag ligt is: als je een variabele heffing hebt tijdens spitsuren, hoe bestrijd je files als je niet alle veroorzakers van die files op dezelfde manier behandelt? Dit is een vraag die wij in eerste lezing op papier hadden staan, iets waar de Raad niet wilde van weten. De efficiëntie van sommige dingen die we doen, is dus niet echt 100%. Wat we wel hebben – en collega Ertug heeft er al naar verwezen – is meer openheid. Lidstaten moeten een rapport maken waarin ze zeggen hoeveel die heffingen opbrengen en wat ze gedaan hebben om het systeem te verbeteren. Dus ik hoop dat er een discussie ontstaat tussen de betaler, de vrachtwagensector, en de overheid over het gebruik van dit geld, over de efficiëntie.

Dat is een van de goede zaken. Ik ben niet enthousiast maar ik heb dit wel verdedigd in mijn fractie omdat we een belangrijk principe, namelijk internalisering van externe kosten, voor het eerst in Europese wetgeving schrijven. Dat betekent dat we aan het proces kunnen beginnen om voor alle transportmodi voor alle externe kosten de berekening te maken zodat uw economie verbetert, en ook uw duurzaamheid verbetert. In het kader van het Witboek heeft de commissaris een aantal maatregelen ingeschreven waarvoor deze stap noodzakelijk is. Als we dit niet goedkeuren, dan zitten we met het Witboek op een aantal punten ook vast. Het is toch wel raar dat het in de Raad – en mevrouw de voorzitter, ik verwijt het Hongaarse Voorzitterschap niets, u heeft uw best gedaan – telkens zo moeilijk is om een akkoord te bereiken. Dit is een belangrijke, een essentiële eerste stap in een lang proces.

  Roberts Zīle, ECR grupas vārdā. – Paldies, priekšsēdētāja kungs! Es gribētu arī pateikties vispirms Padomei un Komisijai par šī kompromisa atrašanu, bet it īpaši savam kolēģim Saïd El Khadraoui par šo ļoti labo veidu, kādā pabeigt šīs sarunas un nepazaudēt mērķi. ECR grupa atbalstīs kompromisa vienošanās, jo vairāki panāktie risinājumi īstenībā ir labi sasniegumi, Padomes pusē šis kompromiss bija ļoti trausls, un ir saprotams, ka vairāki jautājumi, kā direktīvas tvērums vai iezīmēto līdzekļu iekasēšana un novirzīšana dalībvalstīm, bija jutīgi līdz pat sarunu beigām. Domājams, ka tālākās samierināšanās sarunas novestu pie vēl sliktāka rezultāta vai paliktu vispār bez rezultāta. Un šeit svarīgākais ir virzīties uz priekšu, ieviešot ceļu nodevu iekasēšanas principu „piesārņotājs maksā”. Jo nodarītais kaitējums videi ir jākompensē un infrastruktūra ir jāuzlabo, un, kā jau kolēģis Dirk Sterckx minēja, šī ir pirmā likumdošana Eiropas līmenī, kur šis princips IR iestrādāts Eiropas līmenī. Šis princips un nodevas būtu jāievieš visās dalībvalstīs. Diemžēl vairākas valstis joprojām nav ieviesušas Eurovignette 1 infrastruktūras maksājumus, un visticamākais, ka šīs pašas valstis ļoti ilgi kavēsies arī ar šīs Eurovignette 2 ieviešanu. Tas kropļo tirgus situāciju kravu pārvadājumu plūsmās, un īstenībā ceļi tiek uzturēti no šo dalībvalstu un Eiropas Savienības nodokļu maksātāju naudas, un īstenībā to visu iegūst trešo valstu pārvadātāji, un infrastruktūra paliek neattīstīta, un ārējās izmaksas netiek kompensētas. Cerēsim uz dalībvalstu gribu. Paldies!

  Eva Lichtenberger, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Eurovignette und das Ergebnis der Verhandlungen ist ein Beispiel, wie der Rat derzeit versucht, alle Vorschläge des Parlaments, besonders wenn es um Verkehrspolitik geht, zu beschränken und auszuhöhlen. Die Verkehrspolitik der Verkehrsminister in den Mitgliedstaaten besteht darin, jeden Sonntag eine nachhaltige und zukunftsfähige Verkehrspolitik von der Europäischen Union zu verlangen und unter der Woche dann alles zu tun, um diese tatkräftig zu behindern.

Dabei ist eines klar: Lärm und Abgase sind eine Belastung für Mensch und Natur. Sie verursachen Kosten, und diese Kosten trägt derzeit der Steuerzahler, nicht der Verursacher. Der Vorschlag des EP war ohnehin schon ein sehr schwacher Vorschlag und ein schwieriger Kompromiss zwischen den Ländern im Zentrum Europas und an den Rändern, doch er wurde noch weiter ausgehöhlt.

So wurde zum Beispiel die Anrechnung der externen Kosten nicht verpflichtend, sondern freiwillig vorgesehen. Die Kostenanrechnung erfolgt nicht für alle Schadwirkungen, sondern nur für einige Faktoren. Letzten Endes macht das, was an Kostenanrechnung übrigbleibt, für eine ganze Transitverkehrstrecke mehr oder minder nur ein paar Würstchen und ein Bier aus. Das ist sehr wenig. Die Regelung gilt nur bedingt für Lkw über 3,5 Tonnen. Deutschland hat sich hier durchgesetzt mit dem 12 Tonnen-Vorschlag, und in Berggebieten werden nur jene Lkw der Besteuerung unterworfen, die es auf den Straßen dort ohnehin nicht mehr gibt, weil sie die großen Steigungen nicht bewältigen können.

Am Schluss wollte Italien das Ganze wegen eines bürokratischen Details noch zum Absturz bringen. Das ist also letzten Endes ein Musterbeispiel dafür, wie Verkehrspolitik leider noch immer nicht hinreichend ernst genommen wird. Wir Grüne werden trotzdem zustimmen, denn wir wollen Teil einer Mehrheit sein, die zumindest das Prinzip der Anlastung der externen Kosten rettet für eine Zukunft, in der es vernünftigere Verkehrsminister in den Mitgliedstaaten gibt.

  Jaromír Kohlíček, za skupinu GUE/NGL. – Pane předsedající, dovolte mi poděkovat zpravodajovi za dokončení velmi náročné práce.

„Euroviněty“ je jednou ze směrnic, která má umožnit postupné vyrovnání podmínek mezi silniční a železniční dopravou. Již řadu let je ve státech Evropské unie železniční doprava znevýhodněná tím, že uživatel dopravní cesty za toto použití platí. V případě silniční sítě jsou platby za použití infrastruktury zatím spíše symbolické.

Pokud se na věc podíváme čistě technicky s odhlédnutím od jakýchkoliv jiných souvislostí, zjistíme, že na provoz těžkých nákladních vozidel jsou nejlépe upraveny komunikace nejvyšší třídy, tj. dálnice, rychlostní silnice, silnice první třídy. Tak daleko, aby ve smyslu této výše naznačené logiky byly stanoveny nejvyšší poplatky u silnic nejnižších tříd, tj. místních komunikací, tato směrnice nejde. Naopak soustřeďuje se pouze na zpoplatnění za některé externí náklady, a to na základě zásady „znečišťovatel platí“, pouze u komunikací nejvyšších tříd, tj. dálnic, rychlostních silnic, silnic první třídy a silnic souběžných.

Platba by měla pokud možno maximálně omezit výjimky a má postihnout tzv. externí náklady silniční dopravy: jde o hluk a v první řadě o emise. Jsem upřímně zvědav, jak budou jednotlivé státy zdůvodňovat svojí neochotu zavést platby, alespoň podle tabulky č. 1, která je slabým odvarem toho, co si přejí skuteční ochránci životního prostředí.

Přes výše naznačené rozpory mezi logikou a zněním zde diskutovaného doporučení, skupina GUE/NGL toto stanovisko zpravodaje podporuje.

(Řečník souhlasil s tím, že podle č. 149 odst. 8 jednacího řádu odpoví na otázku, kterou mu zvednutím modré karty položil pan Leichtfried.)

  Jörg Leichtfried (S&D). - Herr Präsident! Herr Kohlíček, es könnte sein, dass ich Sie falsch verstanden habe. Ich wollte etwas klarstellen: Es ist ja relativ klar, dass dieser Kompromiss ein sehr schwacher Kompromiss ist, dass der Vorteil der Lkw auf den Straßen noch immer bestehen bleibt und dass die Maut insgesamt viel zu gering ist. Sie haben aber anfangs gesagt, dass durch diese Richtlinie jetzt unter Umständen ein Gleichstand zwischen Straße und Schiene hergestellt wird. Ich glaube nicht, dass dieser Gleichstand hergestellt wird. Es kann aber sein, dass ich Sie da falsch verstanden habe. Ich bitte Sie, das zu präzisieren.

  Jaromír Kohlíček (GUE/NGL). - Já si myslím, že je to pouze první krok k tomu, aby se vyrovnaly podmínky, protože jestliže na železnici platím za infrastrukturu výrazně ... (řečník pokračoval německy)

Es ist der erste Schritt zum Ausgleich der Bedingungen auf der Eisenbahn mit den Bedingungen auf der Straße. Denn bis jetzt zahlt man für die Eisenbahnstrecke, aber nur ganz wenig für die Straße. Also, das ist ein kleiner Schritt zur Angleichung der Bedingungen zwischen Eisenbahn und Straße.

  Juozas Imbrasas, EFD frakcijos vardu. – Pirmiausia norėčiau padėkoti pranešėjui už atliktą didelį ir labai svarbų darbą. Kaip žinia, transporto sektorius atlieka labai svarbų vaidmenį užtikrinant judumą ir socialinį bei ekonominį Europos vystymąsi ir norint išspręsti ekonomikos augimo ir tvarumo problemas, būtina tobulinti transporto sektoriaus infrastruktūrą. Visi nerimaujame dėl klimato kaitos padarinių, aplinkos išsaugojimo, įvairių su sveikata ir socialine gerove susijusių klausimų, kurie neatsiejami nuo racionalaus transporto naudojimo. Sutinku, kad principo „teršėjas moka” taikymas ir viešojo intereso gynimas skatina ir turi paskatinti priemones, kuriomis visų pirma būtų siekiama mažinti aplinkos taršą, triukšmą, kraštovaizdžio niokojimą, socialines sąnaudas, atsirandančias dėl sveikatai daromos žalos, nes visa tai skatina dideles ekonomines sąnaudas, kurių našta tenka visai bendruomenei, taigi ir visos Europos piliečiams. Gerai, kad kelių transporto srityje pagaliau siekiame taikyti principą „teršėjas moka”. Neabejoju, kad tai suteiks valstybėms narėms papildomų galimybių padaryti savo nacionalines kelių rinkliavų sistemas veiksmingesnes, t. y. bus galima sukurti veiksmingesnę transporto poreikių valdymo priemonę. Tačiau vis dėlto manau, kad priemonės, dėl kurių šiandien diskutuojama ir kurios bus priiminėjamos artimiausiu metu, nevisai adekvačios ir ekonomiškai naudingos tik centrinėms tranzitinėms Europos Sąjungos valstybėms narėms, jos ne visiškai arba daug mažiau palankios nemažai daliai Europos valstybių, esančių prie išorinių Europos Sąjungos sienų. Iš esmės pritardamas projektui manau, kad šį aspektą, kurį ką tik paminėjau, vertėtų visapusiškai dar kartą įvertinti, dar kartą pasverti ir tik tada priimti.

  Mike Nattrass (NI). - Mr President: So the EU seeks to raise EU revenue by taxation on trucks? Well, I ask UK voters what they think of the EU and the usual answer is ‘I do not think we should join’.

The UK has been politically taken over. UK law is made in Strasbourg, a monster red-tape factory is closing industry, and now we have tax but, because it is not football, the people are not informed. The UK media avoid EU reality, brains are fed with TV soaps and reporters say the EU does not affect local issues. The EU is not news.

This report seeks to raise tax from tolls on trucks, partly funding the trans-European TEN-T project, which includes linking high-speed EU trains. So, when the EU raises taxes in the UK, will the people respond by kicking the EU in the ballot box? No, because they are not informed. The final EU superstate takeover by stealth will be a taxpayers’ sleepwalk into Europe. The defences are down, the press do not care and the UK is asleep, so get those unfortunate truckers taxed.

  Mathieu Grosch (PPE). - Herr Präsident! Zuerst möchte ich dem Berichterstatter und auch den Kollegen für die Arbeit danken und gratulieren. Es war nicht leicht, hier einen Kompromiss zu finden. Das rührt auch daher, dass viele auch hier im Hause mit dem Resultat natürlich nicht hundertprozentig einverstanden sind. Die einen waren dafür, die anderen dagegen. Aber ich möchte schon einleitend vor der absurden Situation warnen, dass diejenigen, die mehr erwarten, sich mit denjenigen verbünden, die nichts erwarten, und damit das Ganze zum Scheitern bringen. Deshalb hoffe ich, dass diejenigen, die die Internalisierung der Kosten wollen und dies sogar als sehr kleinen Fortschritt betrachten, diesen Kompromiss hier unterstützen.

Das ist weitgehend die Haltung der EVP, wenn auch nicht aller Delegationen, denn wir sind für die Internalisierung der Kosten in allen Transportarten und wir sind auch dafür, dass man die Mittel für die Mobilität einsetzt. Das war für uns einer der wichtigsten Punkte. Es geht uns nicht darum, wie eben behauptet wurde, den Transport zu verteuern. Die Verteuerung macht ihn nicht effizienter. Es geht uns darum, dass wir einen korrekten Ausgleich haben, dass die Mittel, die im Rahmen der Mobilität teilweise eingenommen werden, auch in diesem Bereich investiert werden.

Ein weiterer für uns wichtiger Punkt ist die Interoperabilität. Wir wollen in Europa keine technisch unterschiedlichen Mautsysteme. 27 verschiedene Systeme in Zukunft sind unzumutbar. Ich komme aus einem Grenzgebiet, da werden sechs Mal Mautgebühren verlangt, wenn man eine halbe Stunde durch die Gegend fährt. Das ist nicht tragbar. Hier müsste der Rat noch etwas flexibler werden, als er in der Vergangenheit war. Wir legen auch Akzente auf umweltfreundliche Lkw. Das bedeutet, dass wir auch hier eine Richtung angeben, und wie bereits schon gesagt wurde, ist das, was hier eingeführt wird, nicht verpflichtend. Also sind diejenigen, die für die Internalisierung der Kosten sind, hier bestimmt nicht zufrieden. Ich persönlich hätte mir auch gewünscht, dass sie in allen Ländern Pflicht geworden wäre.

Diese Debatte hatten wir bereits so oft hier im Hause. Was wollen wir morgen? Siebenundzwanzig verschiedene Gebührensysteme, oder wollen wir, dass alle Länder nach gleichen Regeln arbeiten? Oder müssen wir wieder auf Krisen warten, damit wieder der Ruf nach Europa kommt? Denn auch bei der Eurovignette ist für mich eines klar: Nur Europa bringt die Lösung. Die verschiedenen Gebühren in den einzelnen Ländern bringen sie nicht.

(Beifall)

  Jörg Leichtfried (S&D). - Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, geschätzte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich glaube, es gibt in dieser Diskussion einen, der wirklich großen Erfolg gehabt hat, und das ist der Berichterstatter. Ich glaube wirklich, dass der Berichterstatter in diesem Dossier unglaublich viele Widerstände hat überwinden müssen und so das Möglichste aus dieser ganzen Frage herausgeholt wurde.

Tatsächlich ist es so, dass es in diesem Hause nicht wirklich eine Mehrheit für eine tatsächliche Ökologisierung des Verkehrs gibt. Dagegen muss man erst einmal ankommen. Es ist ganz klar, dass es derzeit im Rat eine Mehrheit von Verkehrsministerinnen und -ministern gibt, denen Umweltbelange kein Anliegen sind. Dass es eine Mehrheit im Rat gibt, denen Straßenanrainerinnen und Straßenanrainer vollkommen egal sind, und dass es eine Mehrheit im Rat gibt, die dafür ist, dass die Konsumentinnen und Konsumenten irgendeinen Ramsch, der weit transportiert wird, und nicht hochqualitative regionale Produkte kaufen. Aus dieser Situation heraus ist meines Erachtens noch das Beste herausgeholt worden.

Wir haben erstmals das Prinzip der externen Kosten. Das war ein großer Schritt, ein schwieriger Schritt gegen diese Widerstände. Wir haben erstmals die Möglichkeit, Abgase zu bemauten. Wir haben die Möglichkeit Lärm zu bemauten. Aber viel zu wenig natürlich und viel zu gering. Wenn man sich die Tabellen anschaut, ist das wirklich nur ein Tropfen auf dem heißen Stein. Es ist auch gelungen, die Korridore sozusagen zu erweitern. Es ist aber nicht gelungen, etwa CO2 zu bemauten. Das kann man niemandem erklären. Der Verkehr ist einer der größten Verursacher von CO2-Ausstoß in Europa, und er wird nicht bemautet. Das sind Dinge, die mich wirklich unzufrieden machen.

Aber ich schließe mich den Kolleginnen und Kollegen an, die meinen, man muss jetzt dafür stimmen, weil sonst alles den Bach hinunter geht. Ich stimme schweren Herzens dafür und denke, es ist gut, soweit gekommen zu sein, aber es muss in Zukunft noch viel besser werden.

  Gesine Meissner (ALDE). - Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren, Kommissar Kallas beschreibt in dem Weißbuch verschiedene Möglichkeiten, wie er sich die Zukunft des Verkehrs vorstellt. Er beschreibt zum einen, dass man Anreizsysteme braucht, um den Verkehr umweltfreundlicher zu gestalten, und zum anderen sagt er auch, dass man neue Finanzierungsquellen braucht, um zum Beispiel auch nach dem Verursacherprinzip vorgehen zu können. Die Eurovignette-Richtlinie, die wir heute besprechen, ist ein Weg, bei dem man beides wirklich schaffen kann.

Das war ein belgischer Kraftakt, so kann man es schon sagen, angefangen bei der belgischen Ratspräsidentschaft mit drei wichtigen handelnden Personen aus Belgien und vor allen Dingen aufgrund des Berichterstatters, dem es gelungen ist, eine Tür zu neuen Wegen aufzustoßen. Ich hätte allerdings diesem belgischen Kraftakt einen größeren Erfolg gewünscht als den, den wir jetzt haben.

Es ist tatsächlich ein kleiner weicher Kompromiss, den wir erreichen konnten. Wir haben zwar jetzt tatsächlich eine Zweckbindung in einem ganz geringem Maße: 15 % der Infrastrukturkosten, 15 % der externen Kosten müssen in TEN-T-Netze gehen. Das ist aber eigentlich viel zu wenig. Alle nationalen Verkehrspolitiker sagen, wir brauchen erhebliche Mittel, um unsere Infrastrukturnetze aufrechterhalten zu können. Natürlich sollte man die Mittel, die man dort einnimmt, auch wieder in diesen Bereich investieren können. Das ist ein Punkt, mit dem wir alle nicht zufrieden sein können. Tatsache ist, dass wir in diesem Zusammenhang dennoch einen Schritt in eine künftig ausbaubare Richtung gehen. Das ist auch der Grund dafür, dass wir diesem Kompromiss zustimmen wollen.

Es war also ein hartes Ringen. Es hätte durchaus sein können, dass wir gar nichts auf dem Tisch gehabt hätten, weil einige Mitgliedstaaten am liebsten gar nichts wollen. Deswegen ist es ein Erfolg, dem wir heute zustimmen können.

(Beifall)

  Oldřich Vlasák (ECR). - Pane předsedající, Komise v diskutované směrnici navrhla možnost zpoplatnění externích nákladů, jako je znečištění ovzduší, hluk, dopravní zácpy, přičemž vychází ze snahy o internalizaci externích nákladů dle principu „znečišťovatel platí“. Tento princip podporuji, protože jej považuji za důležitý z hlediska dopadu na životní prostředí a zdraví člověka jako i využívání více způsobů dopravy na celostátní, regionální i místní úrovni. To je ostatně i v zájmu municipalit, které jsou často negativními dopady, zejména tranzitní dopravy, poškozovány.

S ohledem na doznívající ekonomickou krizi a zvyšující se finanční zátěž dopravců jsem současně přesvědčen, že by měla být dána členským státům možnost zavádění externích nákladů rozložit časově a podle jednotlivých druhů. Nový systém by měl také umožnit obměnu zastaralého vozového parku pomocí nižších sazeb za externí náklady v případě investic do ekologických vozidel.

  Isabelle Durant (Verts/ALE). - Monsieur le Président, aujourd'hui, il n'y a pas de quoi se féliciter, on est loin d'un système de transport vert, comme cela a été dit. Qu'est-ce qu'il y a dans ce texte? Que dit-il? Il autorise simplement les États membres, sur une base volontaire, à utiliser un système pollueur-payeur. De plus, il est tellement corseté, tellement limité, qu'en définitive, il coûtera grosso modo trois à quatre cents de plus. Comment imagine-t-on qu'avec trois ou quatre cents de plus de majoration, on aura un réel effet sur le transfert de modes? Ce n'est donc pas un grand succès d'un point de vue écologique. Voilà ce qu'est devenu ce fameux principe d'internalisation des coûts externes, après la moulinette du Conseil – désolée Madame –, après tant de résistance, et malgré les efforts importants du rapporteur.

Malgré cela, nous voterons pour ce principe parce que c'est un principe important. C'est un principe comme d'autres – on a parlé auparavant du principe de précaution qui a gagné ses lettres de noblesse dans les directives européennes. Nous voterons pour ce principe. Ce n'est qu'un principe, toute la bataille reste à mener et nous continuerons de la mener pour avoir un véritable transfert de modes et un système de transport plus vert, meilleur pour la santé et pour la lutte contre le changement climatique.

  Laurence J.A.J. Stassen (NI). - Voorzitter, het huidige voorstel voor het eurovignet komt erop neer dat het efficiënte Europese wegvervoer inefficiënte spoorlijnen subsidieert. Het meest zorgwekkende is nog wel dat dit Parlement het huidige voorstel slechts beschouwt als een eerste stap. Deze eerste stap, let wel, in de verkeerde richting, betekent dat het huidig recht van de lidstaten om deze wetgeving te implementeren straks een verplichting wordt, dat de belasting per kilometer alleen maar zal stijgen en vooral ook dat de automobilist straks aan de beurt is.

Dit Parlement spreekt over één systeem tussen de lidstaten. Invoering van dit voorstel betekent echter dat transportbedrijven zich kunnen voorbereiden op een nieuw kastje in de cabine van hun truck, uiteraard met bijbehorende nieuwe belastingen. Het is duidelijk dat het Europees Parlement met dit voorstel het wegvervoer omwille van de klimaathysterie de nek omdraait. De transportsector heeft het al zwaar genoeg en zit niet te wachten op nog meer belastingen, opgedrongen door Europa.

  Antonio Cancian (PPE). - Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, signora Presidente del Consiglio, riconosco anzitutto e plaudo al lavoro che il relatore Saïd El Khadraoui ha fatto, impegnandosi con tutte le sue forze alla ricerca di una possibile mediazione.

Proprio per questo, ritengo si dovesse seguire la procedura rituale ma, a causa del mancato inserimento delle tabelle di correlazione nell'accordo finale, questo dossier avrebbe dovuto andare in conciliazione, cosa che avrebbe potuto costituire un'ottima occasione per il raggiungimento di un accordo complessivo. E questo purtroppo, com'è già stato detto, non è un dettaglio.

Il principio "chi inquina paga" è corretto, valido e condiviso e, affinché non vi siano dubbi, io sono favorevole all'ecologizzazione dei trasporti, però questo strumento – l'eurovignette – è purtroppo parziale e inefficace, oltre che iniquo. In un periodo di grande difficoltà economica, come quello che stiamo attraversando, la scelta di colpire una categoria economica portante del nostro mercato ha il mero scopo di fare cassa, anche se questa cassa non viene poi utilizzata, se non in minima parte, nelle infrastrutture dei trasporti.

A mio avviso, si introduce un meccanismo complicatissimo, anche nel calcolo applicativo. Quindi la mia posizione è critica nei confronti di questo dossier perché credo penalizzi in modo inaccettabile, nell'Europa della coesione economica e territoriale, gli Stati geograficamente più periferici.

L'efficacia del provvedimento non è dimostrata e la modulazione dei flussi di trasporto crea problemi ai progetti finanziari esistenti e a quelli futuri, perché si continua a spostare e a cambiare la tariffazione. A questo proposito, mi viene detto che gli Stati sono liberi di applicare o meno queste maggiorazioni ma, quando si tratta di trasporti transfrontalieri, dipendiamo anche dalle altrui decisioni e quindi bisogna trovare un accordo. Ecco, sono convinto che un accordo raggiunto a tutti i costi, a spese delle categorie dell'autotrasporto, non possa essere considerato un successo. Credo davvero che la strada da percorrere sia ancora molto lunga, soprattutto per quanto riguarda l'equità applicativa.

  Inés Ayala Sender (S&D). - Señor Presidente, quería agradecer, en primer lugar, la tenacidad del ponente, señor El Khadraoui, aunque he de decir también que, desde el principio, señalé la especial casuística de los países periféricos, con ausencia escandalosa de alternativas a la carretera —véanse los obstáculos continuos en los Pirineos, entre España y Francia, para establecer pasos regulares transfronterizos ferroviarios—. Incluso ahora —y aprovecho que está aquí el señor Kallas—, la Comisión pone en duda la futura travesía central del Pirineo en la próxima core network.

Es decir, que, teniendo esos problemas de alternativa ferroviaria, la verdad es que el acuerdo sobre la euroviñeta, que añade ahora mismo mayores gravámenes al transporte por carretera de productos que en los países periféricos, sobre todo tanto en el sur como en el este, son productos de poco o limitado valor añadido... Plantear ahora mismo, en este momento, como noticia, digamos, el problema de añadir aunque sea unos céntimos —entiendo a la señora Durant, cuatro céntimos le parece que no son nada—, pero ahora mismo acabamos de pasar o estamos todavía en plena crisis del pepino, y debido precisamente a esas irresponsables y falsas acusaciones sin pruebas, han asestado aun así un golpe brutal a miles de familias españolas; no solo a agricultores, también a transportistas, porque justamente esos pocos céntimos, en los miles de kilómetros y en productos como el pepino español, generan un problema grande para transportarlos al mercado central, que es de donde precisamente vienen esas acusaciones.

No, señor El Khadraoui, es que al principio, aparecieron unas primeras contabilidades, donde se veía claramente que, a través de los problemas del gravamen, se incrementaba, y luego desaparecieron, simplemente. Siempre he preguntado por qué desaparecieron aquellos estudios, pero la verdad es que era preocupante, y así nos lo han dicho una y otra vez.

Pero aun así yo estaría dispuesta, y ellos también, a hacer el sacrificio si se resolvieran los problemas, problemas importantes como la congestión. Pero, en el acuerdo actual, hemos de decir que en la congestión el vehículo particular no aparece incluido. Problemas importantes como el estado de las infraestructuras y la situación de mejora, también para reducir el ruido u otra contaminación; ahora mismo sabemos que no se va a poder, porque no tenemos ni siquiera alternativas para ello.

Por eso, la delegación española socialista se ve obligada a votar en contra de este acuerdo.

  Nathalie Griesbeck (ALDE). - Monsieur le Président, deux mots pour résumer la tonalité générale de nos travaux et de l'ambiance du Parlement: "enfin" et quand même "un peu dommage".

"Enfin" parce que, après de très longues négociations, nous parvenons à un compromis et que le principe du pollueur-payeur commence à prendre véritablement forme dans ce dossier.

"Un peu dommage" parce que, même si les choses sont compliquées dans les finances publiques des différents États membres, nous aurions dû tout faire pour réussir à réinvestir les recettes au bénéfice, par exemple, des projets prioritaires des réseaux transeuropéens de transport. M. Kallas, ce sera à la Commission d'exercer un contrôle étroit. "Dommage" aussi parce que, pour ma part, je regrette cet accord a minima en ce qui concerne la volonté de réduire la congestion, car si l'accord proposé conserve le concept des heures creuses, les modalités de sa mise en œuvre pour les États sont "molles". Là aussi, à la Commission de donner l'impulsion.

Troisièmement, alors que la directive actuelle prévoit d'impliquer les poids lourds de 3,5 tonnes à partir de 2012, nous prévoyons dans l'accord la possibilité de les exempter. C'est une concession dommageable. Là aussi, M. Kallas, à la Commission de jouer un rôle-clé. En somme, si c'est un petit compromis, c'est un petit pas, mais un pas tout de même. Nous le voterons donc!

  Ryszard Czarnecki (ECR). - Pani Lichtenberger mówiła, że są rozsądni ministrowie w państwach członkowskich Unii Europejskiej. Byłbym wdzięczny pani poseł, gdyby podała ich nazwiska, choć zdaję sobie sprawę, że byłaby to bardzo, bardzo krótka lista. Chciałem podziękować sprawozdawcy za bardzo rzetelną pracę, aczkolwiek warto dyskutować, bo jednak szereg rzeczy jest niesłychanie kontrowersyjnych. Więcej mają płacić ciężarówki, a więc właściciele firm transportowych. To jest problem dla firm w czasach kryzysu, nie ma co tego ukrywać. Pytanie, na co pójdą te pieniądze? Tutaj jest rzeczywiście dylemat, bo jeżeli one pójdą na kolejne głupie projekty jakiś marginesowych, marginalnych grup, to źle. One powinny pójść na branżę, na rozwój transportu, to wtedy można by to zrozumieć. Inaczej jest to taki swoisty haracz i to w majestacie Unii Europejskiej, z pieczątką Parlamentu Europejskiego. Uważam, że to rzecz naprawdę kontrowersyjna.

  Michael Cramer (Verts/ALE). - Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Der Verkehr in Europa ist zu billig. Nur der umweltfreundliche Verkehr ist zu teuer. All das ist politisch gewollt, und durch diese Richtlinie wird es auch nicht verändert. Wir haben einen unfairen Wettbewerb. Die Steuerprivilegien, die die Lkw bekommen, werden nicht gekürzt. Jeder Lkw verursacht 60 000 mal soviel Schäden wie ein Pkw, aber er wird natürlich nicht 60 000 mal zur Kasse gebeten.

Wir haben innerhalb der Europäischen Union seit Jahrzehnten eine verpflichtende Schienenmaut. Für jeden Streckenkilometer muss jede Lokomotive – egal ob sie Personen oder Güter befördert – eine Schienenmaut entrichten. Auf der Straße ist die Maut freiwillig. Sie ist gedeckelt. Sie gilt meist nur auf Autobahnen und sie gilt erst ab 12 Tonnen. Bei der Schiene ist sie unbegrenzt möglich. Das ist unfair und das behindert die umweltfreundliche Schiene und entlastet die umweltfeindliche Straße.

Wir wissen, dass eine Veränderung der Mobilität notwendig ist, um das Klima zu schützen. Wir Grüne wollen das Klima schützen und die Mobilität in Zukunft sichern. Deshalb brauchen wir einen fairen Wettbewerb. Diese Eurovignette ist nur ein klitzekleines Stück vorwärts zu diesem Ziel.

  John Bufton (EFD). - Mr President, HGV haulage is integral to the supply process essential to a good economy. If added charges are levied across Europe the extra cost is ultimately filtered to the consumer.

The UK Government is looking into HGV charges to bring us in line with Europe by 2015. We do not have a network of toll roads, nor do we lay additional charges on heavy goods vehicles after road tax. We face unfair competition from an increasing number of foreign trucks taking up more than their fair share of cross-border haulage. Foreign operators pay nothing to use our roads but UK diesel duty is as much as 23 pence a litre higher, giving competitors a 15% advantage. However, under EU law the UK cannot introduce a charge applicable only to foreign vehicles.

If this directive expands its capabilities, any move by the UK Government to introduce HGV charges will be overshadowed by an unwanted indirect tax which the Commission also reserves the right to make obligatory in 2013. As the proposals relate to taxation it should require unanimity at Council level, yet the legislation is being ushered in via the transport provision of Lisbon. It is an underhand way of introducing indirect taxation and should not be voted through by anybody with a democratic bone in their body.

  Christine De Veyrac (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, dans sa stratégie Europe 2020, l'Union européenne s'est fixé comme objectif de rendre notre économie plus verte et nos transports plus modernes. Toutes les institutions européennes ont largement soutenu cet objectif, y compris la quasi-totalité des États membres et de notre Parlement.

Dans ce contexte, il est donc regrettable que, depuis 2008, plusieurs États membres se soient employés à vider de son contenu la nouvelle proposition de directive "Eurovignette" et à bloquer ce dossier.

Aujourd'hui cependant, grâce à la ténacité de notre rapporteur – et je voudrais saluer ici Saïd El Khadraoui – et à celle des rapporteurs fictifs dans leurs négociations avec le Conseil, nous avons enfin un compromis devant nous. Certes, ce texte est beaucoup moins ambitieux que la proposition initiale mais il permettra pour la première fois de mettre en pratique le principe du pollueur-payeur et d'internaliser des coûts externes du transport tels que le bruit ou les émissions de CO2.

Pour que cette eurovignette ne soit pas une simple taxe mais contribue effectivement à l'amélioration des transports en Europe, les États membres sont aussi incités à réinvestir l'argent collecté dans la modernisation des modes de transport. Le Parlement a également réussi à obtenir des avancées concrètes en matière d'interopérabilité des systèmes de péage ainsi que de plus fortes incitations pour l'utilisation de poids lourds moins polluants.

Afin de rester cohérents avec les objectifs politiques que s'est fixés notre institution, j'espère sincèrement que nous pourrons adopter ce compromis qui nous est proposé en deuxième lecture et ouvrir ainsi la voie à une politique des transports plus durable.

  Gilles Pargneaux (S&D). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, une satisfaction enfin: le prix du péage du transport routier plafonné par cette nouvelle directive eurovignette pourra, à l'avenir, inclure les coûts des nuisances sonores et de la pollution atmosphérique.

Autre satisfaction: avec ce rapport El Khadraoui – et félicitations à Saïd El Khadraoui pour sa pugnacité –, nous exprimons clairement notre volonté de voir le principe du pollueur-payeur intégré dans les coûts du transport routier. Restons cependant vigilants: il importe de convaincre certains États membres, après trois ans de négociations interinstitutionnelles, que ce point d'équilibre trouvé dans ce trilogue permet une véritable politique protectrice en matière environnementale mais aussi une politique économique efficace en matière du développement du ferroviaire européen. Veillons également à ce qu'une partie des recettes soit bien affectée à l'infrastructure et aux projets de réseaux transeuropéens de transport comme c'est indiqué.

Permettez-moi aussi de faire part d'un regret face à ce compromis: que le caractère contraignant du principe pollueur-payeur n'ait pas été retenu. Encore une fois, au-delà de la pugnacité de notre rapporteur Saïd El Khadraoui que je saluais, Monsieur le Commissaire, la Commission européenne a encore perdu son bras de fer face à certains nationalismes et égoïsmes nationaux.

  Olle Schmidt (ALDE). - Herr talman! Ett stort tack till föredraganden för ett utmärkt arbete i en väldigt svår fråga. De nya reglerna som många har påmint om innehåller ju bara uppmaningar till medlemsstaterna om att använda inteckningar till att förbättra miljön och det är därför viktigt att vi, precis som Sterckx sa, här i Europaparlamentet återkommande påminner våra regeringar om vikten av att följa de här rekommendationerna.

Tanken är ju inte att våra förare/åkare ska betala för buller- och miljöpåverkan om vi inte samtidigt inför åtgärder som syftar till att lösa problemen såsom t.ex. vägbehandling och andra ljuddämpande åtgärder. Det är mycket viktigt att förhindra att dessa avgifter enbart blir en ny skatt på tunga vägtransporter som några av kollegorna här påminner om. Vi måste fortsätta arbetet med att förbättra miljön och sänka koldioxidhalten i Europa, och det är därför centralt att säkerställa att miljöavgifter verkligen används till att minska och eliminera de miljöproblem som uppkommer.

(Applåder)

  Peter van Dalen (ECR). - Voorzitter, met het besluit over het eurovignet zet Europa de juiste stap om het principe 'de gebruiker betaalt' in het wegvervoer te kunnen toepassen. Eindelijk hebben we nu het akkoord om de kosten voor het gebruik van infrastructuur, geluid en luchtvervuiling door te berekenen aan de vervoerder. Ik hoop dat veel Europese lidstaten dit systeem gaan toepassen, ook Nederland. Het kabinet Rutten doet er verstandig aan de plannen voor 'anders betalen voor mobiliteit' uit de kast te halen. Die plannen sluiten goed aan bij het huidige akkoord.

Ik hoop dat de Europese Commissie met voorstellen komt om die kosten gefaseerd ook bij andere vervoerwijzen door te berekenen. Uiteraard moet daarbij rekening worden gehouden met de specifieke eigenschappen per sector. Zo is de binnenvaart niet de enige gebruiker van het rivierwater; dat zien we dezer dagen bij die extreme droogte heel duidelijk. De landbouw immers heeft nu de sproeiers wijd open staan. Maar we hebben nu een belangrijke stap gezet en we moeten nu verder.

  Luis de Grandes Pascual (PPE). - Señor Presidente, no es casual que España, Italia, Grecia, Irlanda, Portugal y algún otro país coincidamos en nuestras reticencias a aceptar de buen grado la llamada Euroviñeta.

La coincidencia en la crítica trae causa de nuestra condición de países periféricos, que, al fin y a la postre, seremos los que paguemos este singular gravamen que recaudarán los Estados de la Unión Europea que tienen la centralidad geográfica.

La ratio que inspira a la Euroviñeta incurre en grandes contradicciones y el discurso de apoyo cada día resulta más endeble. Aunque se acepte como partida la racionalidad de la internalización de los costes externos, al final no se sostiene el que, para paliar la congestión, se penalice únicamente a los vehículos de gran tonelaje dejando los turismos fuera, en los mismos términos que el viejo lema de «quien contamina paga» se aplique con discriminación evidente.

De otro lado, Señorías, al final solo el 15 % de lo recaudado con la Euroviñeta, que fue imaginada como una fuente de financiación de infraestructuras, será destinado a la financiación de las redes transeuropeas y no de forma obligatoria, sino como simple recomendación, de modo y manera que el Ministro de Hacienda de turno destinará lo recaudado al fin que estime más conveniente a los intereses de su país, dentro del amplio capítulo de las infraestructuras. El resultado final no será otro que un varapalo más al transporte de mercancías por carretera, que, hoy por hoy, es el único modo que está permitiendo el mercado interior.

Esta es la realidad, Señorías, la realidad que es mucho más cruda en un cuadro de crisis económica. En este sentido, la competitividad de los productos europeos en los mercados mundiales no se puede permitir experimentos que puedan contribuir a deteriorar aún más la precaria situación de la economía europea con la imposición de nuevos costes añadidos.

Por último, la crisis alimentaria, que temerariamente se ha hecho recaer sobre los productos españoles, ha producido una penalización injusta y pérdidas ingentes a los mismos a quien penaliza la Euroviñeta: transportistas de mercancías y agricultores de cultivos de primor.

Estas son las razones, Señorías, por las que la delegación española de Partido Popular Europeo votará en contra de este proyecto de Directiva.

  Σπύρος Δανέλλης (S&D). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η γενική αρχή που εισάγει η οδηγία στη μεταφορά εμπορευμάτων, δηλαδή η εσωτερίκευση του εξωτερικού κόστους, είναι ιδιαίτερης ουσιαστικής και συμβολικής σημασίας. Πρόκειται για ένα σύγχρονο και ταυτόχρονα ευέλικτο πλαίσιο εφαρμογής της αρχής "ο ρυπαίνων πληρώνει", αλλά και ένα εργαλείο μετριασμού των προβλημάτων συμφόρησης μεγάλων εθνικών αρτηριών.

Γι’ αυτό ακριβώς θα πρέπει να καμφθούν τελικά οι ανησυχίες - κάποιες δικαιολογημένες - που έχουν εκφραστεί από πολλούς σχετικά με τις ανισομερείς επιπτώσεις της εφαρμογής στην περιφέρεια της Ένωσης και στον κλάδο των οδικών μεταφορών. Το συμβιβαστικό κείμενο, που σε μεγάλο βαθμό οφείλεται στο συνάδελφο El Khadraoui, σκοπεύει άλλωστε στη σταδιακή εφαρμογή των σχετικών τελών ώστε να συνοδευτεί παράλληλα από μια σταδιακή ανανέωση του ευρωπαϊκού στόλου.

Αυτό όμως που θα κάμψει τις αντιρρήσεις και θα αποτελέσει προϋπόθεση της αποδοχής αλλά και της αποτελεσματικότητας του πλαισίου της ευρωβινιέτας είναι αφενός μεν η πιστή, διαφανής και ταχεία εφαρμογή της οδηγίας στο σύνολο των χωρών μελών, αφετέρου δε η διοχέτευση του συνόλου των εσόδων ως ανταποδοτικών πόρων στις υποδομές μεταφορών και όχι η χρησιμοποίησή τους για να κλείσουν οι γνωστές μαύρες τρύπες.

  Hubert Pirker (PPE). - Herr Präsident! Diese Richtlinie ist, wie wir alle wissen, ein Kompromiss. Aber sie ist zweifelsohne ein guter Kompromiss, weil sie beiden Seiten Rechnung trägt, bis zu einem gewissen Grad zumindest, auf der einen Seite den Transporten und auf der anderen Seite den Bürgern, die unter Lärm und Abgasen leiden. Was sind die Vorteile dieser Richtlinie? Für mich sind es drei.

Zum einen ist es die Zweckbindung der Mauteinnahmen für Investitionen in eine verbesserte Verkehrsinfrastruktur, das ist volkswirtschaftlich interessant, das bringt mehr Sicherheit und bessere Verkehrswege. Das zweite ist eine Vereinheitlichung des Inkassos. Das reduziert die Kosten und vermeidet Staus. Das dritte und ganz wesentliche ist, dass es den Mitgliedstaaten die Möglichkeit und die Freiheit gibt, Kosten wie Lärm und Schadstoffemissionen künftig in die Maut einzurechnen. Das sind dann Lenkungsmechanismen.

Wer Stoßzeiten und Staus meidet, der zahlt weniger, wer saubere und leise Lkw fährt, der spart Kosten. Ich hoffe, dass diese Anreize dazu führen, dass in Zukunft Staus vermieden und Lkw-Flotten erneuert werden. Insgesamt wissen wir, dass in den Verhandlungen zweifelsohne nicht alle Wünsche erfüllt werden konnten, aber diese positiven Aspekte, die wir bei den Verhandlungen aufgrund der Stärke des Parlamentes durchsetzen konnten, sollten zu den gewünschten positiven Effekten führen.

Ich wünsche mir auch, dass es bei der Umsetzung nicht zuviel Bürokratie gibt, denn das würde dem Ganzen wieder schaden.

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D). - Includerea taxei bazate pe costurile externe în taxa de trecere permite statelor membre să introducă această taxă pentru utilizarea reţelei rutiere transeuropeană sau pe anumite sectoare ale acesteia şi în orice alte sectoare suplimentare ale propriilor reţele de autostrăzi, care nu fac parte din reţeaua rutieră transeuropeană.

Nu susţinem introducerea voluntară de bariere tarifare care vor creşte costurile operatorilor de transport din statele membre periferice şi implicit preţurile produselor transportate. Deşi directiva nu ar trebui să permită discriminări bazate pe naţionalitatea transportatorului, articolul 7k permite statelor membre care introduc un sistem de trecere şi/sau taxe de utilizare a infrastructurii să ofere o compensaţie adecvată pentru aceste taxe, ceea ce poate distorsiona concurenţa.

Consider că veniturile generate de taxa de utilizare a infrastructurii şi de taxa bazată pe costurile externe trebuie să fie utilizate pentru sprijinirea reţelei transeuropene de transport, îmbunătăţirea siguranţei rutiere şi punerea la dispoziţie a unor locuri de parcare sigure, absolut necesare pentru respectarea legislaţiei sociale aplicabile.

  Carlo Fidanza (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, tutti condividiamo la necessità di rendere più sostenibile il trasporto merci, ma questo risultato si ottiene principalmente attraverso investimenti infrastrutturali e un graduale ricambio del parco circolante.

Dietro lo spirito ambientalista di eurovignette e l'applicazione del principio "chi inquina paga", si nasconde in realtà un forte svantaggio competitivo per alcuni paesi rispetto ad altri, con ricadute pesanti non solo sul loro comparto dell'autotrasporto, in gran parte composto da piccole e medie imprese, ma sui rispettivi sistemi paese; il tutto senza una sufficiente e vincolante riallocazione delle risorse per il miglioramento delle infrastrutture, dell'efficienza e delle performance ambientali dei trasporti stessi – un elemento che sarebbe stato essenziale come bilanciamento di questa direttiva.

Il negoziato ha portato qualche piccolo risultato positivo – penso al tema dell'interoperabilità, del mini hire marketing nelle aree di montagna – ma complessivamente risulta insoddisfacente e ritengo che un'eventuale procedura di conciliazione sarebbe il modo migliore per smussare gli angoli che ancora rimangono non chiariti.

  Andrew Henry William Brons (NI). - Mr President, the proposed directive might be the last straw to break the back of the British road haulage industry. The industry has been declining steadily over the last decade. Drivers with operating licences have fallen by 8% in the last three years. Foreign lorries now control 80% of cross-Channel business. In the last decade 20% of domestic business has been lost to foreign hauliers. There is a large and growing resident population of foreign hauliers using foreign vehicles and paying only their own countries’ modest vehicle charges who are taking more and more domestic business.

It might appear that British hauliers are simply losing business as the result of competition, a favourite word in the EU lexicon. However, the competition is not fair competition. The British road fund licence is much greater and fuel tax exceeds that of other countries. Foreign hauliers work in the UK on fuel brought with them in 1 000-litre tanks. Whilst the proposed charges will apply to all vehicles, the burden on the British industry could be fatal. This directive must be resisted.

  Herbert Dorfmann (PPE). - Herr Präsident! Es steht außer Zweifel, dass der Binnenmarkt eine der großen Errungenschaften unserer Union ist und dass effiziente Transportstrukturen dazugehören. Aber ich selbst lebe an einer Strecke, über die 50 Millionen Tonnen Waren im Jahr transportiert werden, und ich denke, neben dem Recht der Menschen auf effizienten Transport gibt es auch ein Recht der Anrainer, vor den Lasten und Auswirkungen dieses Transports geschützt zu werden. Deswegen ist dieser Vorschlag sicher ein kleiner Schritt in die richtige Richtung, wenn er dazu genutzt wird, dass Investitionen getätigt werden, damit der Lärmschutz verbessert wird, damit es moderne Lkw gibt und damit vor allem moderne Schienennetze und modernes Rollmaterial geschaffen werden.

Es ist auch positiv, dass in Berggebieten ein höherer Aufschlag verlangt werden kann. Was ich für besonders bedenklich halte, ist, dass hier nach dem Prinzip der Freiwilligkeit vorgegangen wird, dass also nach wie vor Staaten, die diese Eurovignette nicht wollen, sie einfach nicht umsetzen müssen. Das führt nicht nur zu einer Diskriminierung in Europa, sondern das ist auch im Hinblick auf die Auswirkungen auf die Menschen äußerst bedenklich.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). - Mr President, the general trend of this proposal is positive because we are in an era where we have to tackle climate change, etc. in every possible area; all methods which lead to pollution have to be dealt with. Certainly the focus on the heavy goods vehicles makes sense regarding the use of tolls, etc.

The one point which we need to expand on in particular is that we should be able to develop technology that produces engines that require less and less fuel, in other words that travel more and more miles for fewer miles to the gallon. Certainly that is one area where much research needs to be done; many efficiencies could be made, not just for heavy goods vehicles, but also for all other vehicles. That is something which is not being mentioned and promoted and researched enough.

  Jacky Hénin (GUE/NGL). - Monsieur le Président, poser enfin la question de la taxation du transport routier de marchandises, de l'eurovignette, est en soi une bonne nouvelle pour tous les Européens. Ceci dit, nous sommes encore très loin de faire assumer par les transports routiers de marchandises une part raisonnable des coûts qu'ils représentent pour nos sociétés: usure des infrastructures, pollution, santé publique, accidents. Pour vivre dans une ville où transitent chaque année des millions de poids lourds, je peux vous affirmer que les souffrances des populations sont rarement prises en compte.

Et il y a la question que l'on ne veut pas aborder dans cette enceinte: les très bas salaires des chauffeurs, les terribles conditions de travail, les temps de conduite inacceptables pour la sécurité de tous. Il n'est pas exagéré de parler de forçats de la route.

Alors oui, il faut taxer au maximum pour encourager les circuits courts, le ferroutage, les transports maritimes, fluviaux, imposer un mieux-disant social à l'échelle de toute l'Union et de son voisinage. Mais il faut taxer de manière intelligente, pour que ce ne soient ni les PME/PMI du transport, ni les salariés de la route et encore moins les consommateurs qui paient, mais bien les gros chargeurs et les grands donneurs d'ordres comme la grande distribution.

  Siim Kallas, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I would like to thank honourable Members very much for their comments and I would like to make some remarks.

Firstly, Eurovignette is not a European tax. This must be made very clear. In that sense it is a bad name. On the contrary, it is a directive which limits and regulates national charges. We have 22 countries with different tolls and charges for different types of vehicles – heavy vehicles and private cars. All users from different countries pay these tolls if they appear on this network.

Secondly, please accept the compromise. This is much bigger and more complicated than it looks. There are two fundamental continuing fights behind this.

The first is a fight about principle – who should pay for the use of infrastructures and what specifically they should pay for. So it is going in the right direction. The ‘user pays’ and ‘polluter pays’ principle will inevitably continue. This is the direction that things are going.

The second fight is much more continuous and sharper. It is a conflict between the countries which have heavy transit traffic, which of course want more flexibility to address problems with their infrastructure, and clearly want to share the burden for the use of infrastructure between taxpayers and all users – I stress all users: there cannot be any discrimination.

Of course there is a group of countries who are fiercely against it. This was also very visible here during the debate. I must just remind you that on 15 October the Council agreed on the political compromise. It was just short of a blocking minority and the fight continues here now.

Mr El Khadraoui has done tremendous work to reach a good compromise and to have a good proposal for this compromise. I sincerely ask you to please support this compromise. It appears to have a lot of details that are not satisfactory in different parts and to different people but it is a really big step. This issue has been up in the air for years and years. Now we are taking a step forward.

  Enikő Győri, a Tanács soros elnöke. − Tisztelt képviselő hölgyek és urak! Először is szeretnék köszönetet mondani önöknek ezért az értékes vitáért. Nagyon sok érv és ellenérv hangzott el. Ez is mutatja, ahogy biztos úr is utalt rá, hogy egy kompromisszum született. Nagyon sok nehézség, gond és küzdelem árán, de meggyőződésem, hogy ez egy európai siker, ahogy egyébként Leichtfried képviselő úr is utalt erre. Köszönöm szépen szintén az elismerést, amellyel a magyar elnökséget illették.

Mint minden kompromisszum, ez is egy komoly egyensúlyozás, ami történt. Egyensúlyoznunk kellett a környezeti és a gazdasági fenntarthatóság között. Azt visszautasítom, hogy a Tanácsnak a környezetvédelem ne lett volna fontos. Ha nem lett volna fontos, nincs ez az irányelv. Szintúgy egyensúlyoznunk kellett - és ezt szeretném De Grandes Pascual úrnak is mondani – a centrum és periféria között. Valóban, a Tanácsban nagyon nagy viták voltak arról, hogy hogyan lehet a legjobban megfelelni annak, hogy a periféria országai ne érezzék magukat kiszorítva, és végül összeállt egy minősített többség a Tanácsban, és reményeim szerint – és azt gondolom, hogy a vita is ezt mutatta – a Parlamentben is.

Lehet azt mondani, hogy ez csak egy csepp a tengerben, de én azt gondolom, és örülök, hogy ezt többen a vita során elismerték, hogy egy rendkívül fontos első lépést tettünk meg a költségek internalizálása, illetve a bevételeknek az ágazatba való visszaforgatása terén. Akkor is – hogyha, mint minden kompromisszum – ez sem a legtökéletesebb, és biztos vagyok benne, hogy még fogunk tudni közösen a következő évek során majd még további lépéseket tenni.

Három konkrét ügyet említenék, amelyekre több kérdés is irányult. Az első a bevételek felhasználása, és Sterckx képviselő úrnak a megjegyzéseire térnék vissza. A megállapodás részletes ajánlást tartalmaz a tagállamok számára, pontosan a bevételeknek a felhasználását illetően, és kimondja többek között, hogy a keletkezett bevételeknek a legalább – és ezt Meissner asszonynak hangsúlyozom – 15%-át fordítsák transzeurópai közlekedési projekteknek a finanszírozására. Azt is szeretném hozzátenni, hogy ez egy megfelelő kompromisszum eredménye, és amint azt Dirk Sterckx is felvetette egy jó és megfelelő, ugyan lehet, hogy csak első lépés a megfelelő irányba.

A második konkrét kérdése szintén Sterckx úrnak volt a közlekedési dugók, torlódások költségének a megjelenítése. Nos, az Európai Parlamenttel elért megállapodás kiterjed erre a problematikára is, hiszen lehetővé teszi a tagállamok számára, hogy az úthasználati díjakat hely és idő függvényében differenciáltan állapítsák meg. Amint azt önök is tudják, a tagállamoknak lehetőségük nyílik arra, hogy a csúcsidőszakokban magasabb infrastruktúradíjakat szabjanak. Az infrastruktúradíjaknak ezzel a fokozottabb differenciálásával alternatív módon vehetjük fel a harcot a forgalmi torlódásokkal szemben, még ha csak a levegőszennyezést és zajártalmat veszik is figyelembe a külső költségdíjak kiszámítása során, az irányelvben bevezetett differenciálási mechanizmus akkor is hatékonyan járulhat hozzá az európai utakat jellemző dugók mérsékléséhez.

Végezetül a harmadik önök által felvetett kérdés, és itt Lichtenberger asszonynak a külső költségdíjra vonatkozó kérdésére szeretnék válaszolni. Ugye a Tanács még idén február 14-én fogadta el az első olvasat során kialakított álláspontját, és utána a Parlament kérésére illesztettünk be az irányelvbe egy ilyen rendelkezést, hogy a polgárok felé politikai jelzést adjunk a nehéz tehergépjárművek környezeti jellemzőit illetően, és így beépítettük azt a lehetőséget, hogy a hegyvidéki területeken alkalmazott felárhoz még külső költségdíj is járuljon az Euro 0,1,2 és 3-as járművek esetében. Mivel az Euro 3 járművek kevésbé szennyezőek, mint a többi legszennyezőbb Euro kibocsátási osztályba tartozó járművek, azokra csak egy későbbi időponttól vonatkozik a kettős díjfizetés rendszere, míg a többire már az irányelv hatálybalépésétől kezdődően. És ezen túlmenően az Európai Parlamenttel elért megállapodás a járműpark megújításának előmozdítása érdekében ösztönzőket irányoz elő a legkevésbé szennyező járművek, vagyis az Euro 5-ös és 6-os járművek tekintetében is.

Tisztelt képviselő hölgyek és urak, elnök úr! A mai vitából világosan kiderült, hogy az eurovignetta irányelvvel a közlekedési ágazat számára egy kiemelkedően fontos lépést tettünk. A nehéz tehergépjárművekre vonatkozó konkrét javaslat nemcsak önmagában fontos, szimbolikus jelentősége van. Először alkalmazza – és örülök, hogy ezt önök is visszaigazolták a felszólalásaikban – a szennyező fizet elvet, és elindít egy hosszú vita- és megvalósítási folyamatot, ami az összes közlekedési mód külső költségeinek internalizálásához vezet.

A magyar elnökségnek, elnök úr, nagy örömére szolgál, hogy sikerült elérni ezt a megállapodást az Európai Parlamenttel, és biztos vagyok benne, hogy a Parlament által elfogadandó, most megvitatott intézkedés révén nőhet a gazdasági hatékonyság és csökkenhetnek a közlekedési ágazatban a negatív környezeti hatások, és mindez által az Unió polgárai nyertesei lesznek ezen irányelv elfogadásának.

  Saïd El Khadraoui, Rapporteur. − Voorzitter, ik bedank iedereen voor de steunbetuigingen en de commentaren, ook de tegenstanders trouwens. De transportsector is belangrijk voor onze economie. Hij veroorzaakt echter ook kosten, kosten aan infrastructuur, maar ook andere kosten zoals fijn stof in de lucht, lawaai, files, enzovoort.

Met deze herziene richtlijn scheppen we eindelijk een Europees kader dat de lidstaten de mogelijkheid geeft om die kosten voor een stuk te laten terugbetalen door diegene die ze ook heeft veroorzaakt. Tegelijk kunnen de lidstaten hiermee ook middelen generen om te herinvesteren in het transportsysteem om het duurzamer te maken opdat die externe kosten ook daadwerkelijk verminderen. Zo kunnen ze de leefbaarheid van onze samenleving verbeteren, de efficiëntie in de sector vergroten en ook bijdragen tot een meer gelijk speelveld tussen de transportmodi, om op die manier ook spoor en binnenvaart extra kansen te geven.

Ik heb al benadrukt in mijn inleiding hoe moeilijk het was om dit te bereiken. De Commissie streeft trouwens in haar Witboek naar een verplichte internalisering van externe kosten tegen 2020. Dat belooft hevige discussies de komende jaren.

In afwachting daarvan hoop ik ten eerste dat er voldoende steun komt vanuit deze plenaire zodat we vooruit kunnen en we kunnen aantonen dat Europa ook beslissingen kan nemen die goed zijn voor onze burgers. Ten tweede hoop ik dat een aantal landen nu echt werk maken van de toepassing van de nieuwe mogelijkheden en met goede resultaten ook andere landen over de streep kunnen trekken. Op die manier kunnen we een breder draagvlak tot stand brengen om ook verder te gaan. De Europese Commissie heeft alvast in deze richtlijn heel veel huiswerk meegekregen om te onderzoeken. De komende jaren moet onderzocht worden of we niet andere externe kosten moeten internaliseren, of we het niet verplicht moeten maken, of niet andere soorten voertuigen moeten worden opgenomen. Dat is iets voor de komende jaren. Eerst deze eerste stap vooruit.

  El Presidente. − Se cierra el debate.

La votación tendrá lugar hoy a las 12.00 horas.

Declaraciones por escrito (artículo 149 del Reglamento)

  Bogdan Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz (PPE), na piśmie. – Uważam, że niezwykle istotne jest zakończenie już dzisiaj w ramach drugiego czytania prac nad dyrektywą poświęconą nakładaniu opłat na samochody ciężarowe, zwanej również dyrektywą o eurowinietach. Podstawową i najważniejszą kwestią jest zapis ustanawiający zasadę „zanieczyszczający płaci”, zgodnie z którą za użytkowanie infrastruktury drogowej przez pojazdy ciężarowe emitujące większe zanieczyszczenia oraz hałas aniżeli te wyposażone w silniki z normą Euro V i VI podlegać będą opłatom drogowym. Dodatkowo przewidziana została możliwość pewnego uzależnienia opłat od ruchu pojazdów (zatorów na drogach): w godzinach szczytu – niemniej jednak maksymalnie na 5 godzin dziennie. Uważam, że takie rozwiązanie trafnie zachęci do unikania korzystania z niektórych odcinków dróg w godzinach szczytu. Ponadto państwa członkowskie w ramach pobranych opłat będą mogły określać wykorzystanie uzyskanych środków z przychodów, ale co najmniej 15% wpływów powinno trafić na wsparcie finansowe dla projektów TEN-T w celu zwiększania zrównoważonego charakteru transportu.

  Vilja Savisaar-Toomast (ALDE), kirjalikult. – Lugupeetud juhataja, lugupeetud kolleegid. On hea meel tõdeda, et Eurovignette’i direktiiv on jõudnud teise lugemise lõpuni. Käesoleva raporti puhul tuuakse sisse põhimõte „saastaja maksab”, mis tähendab seda, et maanteetranspordi maksustamise reeglite muutmine lubab lisada veoautode õhu- ja mürasaaste reaalkulud raskeveokitelt kiirteede kasutamise eest kogutavatele maksudele ja tasudele. Lisaks näeb direktiiv ette, et selliselt kogutud vahendeid kasutatakse tõhusate ja keskkonnasõbralike transpordisüsteemide rahastamiseks. Samuti tuleb kogutud tasudest investeerida 15% üleeuroopalistesse transpordivõrkudesse ning seda mitte ainult maanteetransporti, vaid ka raudtee- ja laevaliiklusesse.

Kuigi direktiiv hakkab kehtima kõigile üle 3,5-tonniste veokitele, leian, et see säte läheb liiga kaugele, kuna sellised veokid tegutsevad peamiselt regionaalselt ning seda ei peaks üleeuroopaliselt reguleerima. Samas on liikmesriigil õigus kehtestada erand alla 12-tonnistele veokitele, mida loodetavasti ka Eesti teeb.

Eestist rääkides leian, et antud direktiiv teeb lõpu olukorrale, kus meie veoautod maksavad teistes maades, ent teiste riikide veokid meie teedel sõitmise eest ei maksa. Loodan, et valitsus lõpetab sellise ebavõrdse kohtlemise ning kehtestab kõigile võrdsed tingimused. Direktiiv näeb ette ka masinapargi uuendamise motiveerimise, ehk mida uuem ja vähem saastavam veok, seda vähem peab maksu maksma. See eeldab veofirmadelt suuri investeeringuid, mis tegelikult end suhteliselt kiiresti ära tasuvad - seda nii madalama teemaksu kui ka madalama kütusekulu osas. Aitäh!

  Dominique Vlasto (PPE ), par écrit. – La révision de la directive Eurovignette est indispensable pour mieux intégrer le coût des pollutions générées par le transport routier, ce qui sera dorénavant possible puisque les Etats membres pourront alors tenir compte des pollutions atmosphérique et sonore, et de la congestion de certains axes, pour fixer le tarif des péages des poids lourds.

Dans des régions comme la mienne, où les routes du massif alpin sont saturées en raison du transit de fret international, c'est une mesure qui est attendue.

Cette révision est également un premier pas vers le rétablissement d'une concurrence loyale entre transporteurs routiers européens, puisque certains Etats membres comme la France ou l'Allemagne appliquent déjà le principe du pollueur-payeur et souhaitent que l'UE le généralise.

Ce qui compte maintenant, c'est que les recettes de l'Eurovignette aillent effectivement vers des projets permettant d'améliorer les infrastructures, de réduire les pollutions et de protéger l'environnement.

Je salue donc les engagements des Etats de réaffecter en partie ces recettes au RTE-T, projet majeur pour garantir la cohésion du territoire européen et désenclaver des régions qui, comme celles des Alpes, ne bénéficient pas d'infrastructures suffisantes pour assurer un report modal de la route vers d'autres moyens de transport.

  Artur Zasada (PPE), na piśmie. – Jestem przekonany, że Unia Europejska potrzebuje jednolitych wytycznych umożliwiających państwom członkowskim pobieranie opłat z tytułu kosztów zewnętrznych wywoływanych przez sektor transportu drogowego. Niemniej musimy pamiętać o tym, że firm transportowych, zwłaszcza w czasie kryzysu, nie będzie stać na szybką wymianę swoich flot na pojazdy spełniające normy Euro V i VI. Nie można więc karać przewoźników za czynniki zewnętrzne, na które nie mają oni wpływu. W mojej opinii należy dążyć do maksymalnego wydłużenia okresu stosowania zachęt dla najczystszych ekologicznie pojazdów. Firmy transportowe inwestujące w technologie niskoemisyjne muszą mieć prawo do odpowiedniego okresu gwarancji inwestycyjnych, w którym płaciłyby najniższe stawki lub zostały z nich zwolnione.

I na zakończenie: Bardzo często podkreślamy na forum Parlamentu, że najważniejszy jest człowiek. Pamiętajmy więc, ze sektor transportu to w skali całej Wspólnoty nie tylko nadmierny hałas czy emisja CO2, ale przede wszystkim setki tysięcy miejsc pracy i ważna cześć PKB w wielu państwach członkowskich.

(Se suspende la sesión durante unos instantes)

PRZEWODNICZY: JERZY BUZEK
Przewodniczący

8. Ħin tal-votazzjonijiet

  Przewodniczący. − Kolejnym punktem porządku jest głosowanie.

(Wyniki i inne szczegóły głosowania: zobacz protokół)

8.1. Ħatra ta' membru tal-Qorti tal-Awdituri (H.G. WESSBERG - SV) (A7-0190/2011 - Inés Ayala Sender) (votazzjoni)

8.2. Talba għat-tneħħija tal-immunità parlamentari ta' Agnes Hankiss (A7-0196/2011 - Diana Wallis) (votazzjoni)

8.3. Il-prova tal-oriġini ta' ċerti prodotti tessili (A7-0156/2011 - Jan Zahradil) (votazzjoni)

- Przed rozpoczęciem głosowania:

  Jan Zahradil, rapporteur. − Mr President, just briefly, I was very honoured to be a rapporteur when we had the chance to repeal, instead of adopting, a piece of legislation. This is a redundant piece of legislation. I think it fits perfectly with our long-term goal, which is to legislate and to regulate better, so I can only recommend all of you to support this repeal. I would like to thank you for that in advance.

8.4. Il-parteċipazzjoni tal-Kroazja fix-xogħol taċ-Ċentru Ewropew ta’ Monitoraġġ tad-Droga u d-Dipendenza fuq id-Droga (A7-0186/2011 - Debora Serracchiani) (votazzjoni)

8.5. L-estensjoni tal-kamp ta' applikazzjoni tar-Regolament tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill dwar it-trasport transkonfinali professjonali tal-euro fi flus kontanti bit-triq bejn Stati Membri taż-żona tal-euro (A7-0077/2011 - Sophie Auconie) (votazzjoni)

- Przed rozpoczęciem głosowania:

  Sophie Auconie, rapporteure. − Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, en tant que rapporteure et au nom des groupes politiques qui sont d'accord, je demande le report du vote des deux rapports concernant le transport de fonds. Il s'agit du rapport dont nous parlons maintenant et du rapport A7-0076/2011, inscrit aux votes cinq points plus loin.

Ce report se justifie pour des raisons procédurales et vise à garantir la meilleure collaboration possible avec la Commission et le Conseil. Je vous invite donc tous à voter le report du présent rapport et de celui qui suit cinq points après.

  Przewodniczący. − Proszę teraz o dwie wypowiedzi. Proszę jedną osobę, która chce poprzeć tę propozycję, o wypowiedź. Bardzo proszę panią Bowles.

  Sharon Bowles (Chair of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs). - Mr President, I would like to clarify that the committee has asked for this to be deferred because we have been the subject of a procedural violation. A recital that was agreed in a written trialogue procedure – and about which there can therefore be no doubt – was removed in the Coreper (Committee of Permanent Representatives) text. We have also been told that the Commission Legal Services will not agree to a text that is not wholly in accord with the common understanding, even though the common understanding is not legally binding.

We cannot accept this unilateral change as a precedent in any way, and therefore we will not vote until the matter is resolved. We cannot allow the interinstitutional agreements, or common understandings or anything else, to restrict the power of this Parliament that has been conferred on us by the Treaty, and therefore this text cannot be allowed to proceed. Before we go ahead, we will also need to have a clear understanding that this cannot be repeated.

  Francesco Enrico Speroni (EFD). - Signor Presidente, non sono propriamente contro la proposta, però – visto che il lunedì pomeriggio procediamo all'approvazione del progetto di ordine del giorno per tutta la settimana – mi chiedo perché questa proposta di rinvio non sia stata fatta ieri, ma solo adesso, nell'immediatezza del voto.

(Parlament zatwierdził przesunięcie głosowania nad dwoma sprawozdaniami)

8.6. Applikazzjonijiet għat-trasport tas-Sistemi Globali ta' Navigazzjoni bis-Satellita (A7-0084/2011 - Silvia-Adriana Ţicău) (votazzjoni)

8.7. Ftehimiet Internazzjonali dwar l-Ajru skont it-Trattat ta' Lisbona (A7-0079/2011 - Brian Simpson) (votazzjoni)

8.8. Tassazzjoni fuq vetturi ta' tagħbija tqal (A7-0171/2011 - Saïd El Khadraoui) (votazzjoni)

8.9. Il-kontijiet ekonomiċi ambjentali Ewropej (A7-0330/2010 - Jo Leinen) (votazzjoni)

8.10. Is-seba' programm tal-UE għar-riċerka, l-iżvilupp teknoloġiku u d-dimostrazzjoni (A7-0160/2011 - Jean-Pierre Audy) (votazzjoni)

- Przed rozpoczęciem głosowania nad ustępem 47:

  Paweł Robert Kowal (ECR). - Panie Przewodniczący! Ja uprzedziłem sekretariat o tym, że chciałbym zgłosić ustną poprawkę polegającą na wykreśleniu art. 27, dlatego że ona zawiera niezgodne z prawdą informacje dotyczące ważnego projektu naukowego, który się nazywa Indect. Chciałbym poinformować Wysoką Izbę, że ten projekt posiada potwierdzenie ethical review. Przeszedł taki przegląd 15 marca 2011 r. w Brukseli z udziałem specjalistów z Austrii, Francji, Holandii, Niemiec i Wielkiej Brytanii. Audyt etyczny dotyczący działania tego projektu wypadł pozytywnie i to jest potwierdzone. Nie stwierdzono żadnych uchybień związanych z etycznymi aspektami tego projektu. Etyczne aspekty sprawozdania są ciągle monitorowane przez Komisję Europejską od samego początku. Chcę to podkreślić i poprosić Wysoką Izbę o rozwagę, by nie znalazły się w naszym sprawozdaniu informacje, które nie znajdują potwierdzenia w faktach. Jest to bardzo ważny naukowy, badawczy projekt prowadzony przez Akademię Górniczo-Hutniczą w Krakowie i szereg europejskich instytucji badawczych i uczelni.

(Poprawka ustna nie została przyjęta)

Głosowanie zostało przerwane o godz. 12.15 - ćwiczenia ewakuacyjne

ΠΡΟΕΔΡΙΑ: ΣΤΑΥΡΟΣ ΛΑΜΠΡΙΝΙΔΗΣ
Αντιπρόεδρος

9. Spjegazzjonijiet tal-vot

Γραπτές αιτιολογήσεις ψήφου

Έκθεση: Inés Ayala Sender (A7-0190/2011)

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − O candidato proposto tem, acima de tudo, experiência política, e também experiência de auditoria e financeira, apesar de esta última não ser porventura tão forte quanto desejável. Voto a favor deste candidato, mas penso que é necessária a continuação da reflexão sobre o tipo de qualificações que os membros do Tribunal de Contas devem possuir.

  Sophie Auconie (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai soutenu la nomination de Hans Gustaf Wessberg comme membre de la Cour des comptes car il possède une expérience professionnelle de plus de 30 ans dans la direction d'organismes publics et d'entreprises privées en Suède. La majorité de sa carrière a été consacrée à l'amélioration de la situation des entreprises privées en Suède en tant que cadre au sein d'organisations de représentation des intérêts des entreprises dans la vie publique. Il possède également une grande expérience du service public en tant que responsable politique et fonctionnaire de l'État. Il a été directeur général de l'Office suédois d'enregistrement des sociétés, organisme public indépendant, ainsi que secrétaire d'État à plusieurs reprises. C'est pourquoi je suis convaincue qu'il a les qualités requises pour ce poste.

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), per iscritto. − Il curriculum presentato da H.G. Wessberg per la nomina a membro della Corte dei conti traccia un profilo di competenze ed esperienze sicuramente in linea con gli standard tecnici e scientifici richiesti dalla carica. In particolare, l´impegno del sig. Wessberg a favore del tessuto imprenditoriale privato rende il candidato particolarmente idoneo ad assicurare il bilanciamento tra diritto comunitario e concrete esigenze tanto del mercato quanto dei cittadini europei. Mi sono pertanto espressa a favore di questa proposta di risoluzione parlamentare.

  Nessa Childers (S&D), in writing. − I voted for Sweden’s nomination of H.G. Wessberg to join the European Court of Auditors and replace Lars Heikensten. When the Budgetary Control Committee interviewed Mr Wessberg on 24 May 2011, MEPs praised his past performance in both the private and public sectors. Once appointed, H.G. Wessberg will serve until the end of Sweden’s mandate, that is until March 2012, and could then be re-elected for another mandate of six years. I wish him all the best in his new role.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − Na importante tarefa para a qual é indicado, desejo a H.G. Wessberg um mandato com todo o sucesso, estando convicto de que exercerá as funções para as quais é agora nomeado com toda a dedicação e competência.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − Podľa očakávaní nebolo vypočúvanie švédskeho kandidáta na post člena Dvora audítorov problematické. Ako sa neskôr ukázalo v hlasovaní, konečný výsledok bol mierne v prospech kandidáta. Má ministerskú skúsenosť, ako aj skúsenosť s prácou v súkromnom sektore. Tiež pracoval v rezorte obrany, zaoberal sa financiami a rozpočtami na vyššej úrovni a bol tiež zástancom členstva Švédska v EÚ.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I voted to support Sweden’s nomination of H.G. Wessberg to join the European Court. Mr Wessberg will replace Lars Heikensten, who left to become executive director of the Nobel Foundation. Mr Wessberg will take up his duties following his formal appointment by the Council of Ministers, scheduled for Friday, 10 June 2011.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − O Tribunal de Contas é uma instituição fiscalizadora, que verifica a legalidade e regularidade das receitas e despesas da União Europeia, bem como a boa gestão financeira, exercendo as suas funções com total independência. Dentro deste espírito, a nomeação das individualidades que o compõem tem de se reger por critérios de competência e independência. O Senhor H. G. Wessberg (SV) apresentou o seu Curriculum Vitae, respondeu a um questionário escrito e foi ouvido na Comissão do Controlo Orçamental, tendo apresentado argumentos suficientes para justificar a nomeação para o Tribunal de Contas para aí desempenhar as suas funções de forma competente e independente.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − The European Parliament,

having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0103/2011), having regard to the fact that at its meeting of 24 May 2011 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors, having regard to Rule 108 of its Rules of Procedure, having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0190/2011),

whereas H.G. Wessberg fulfils the conditions laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU,

delivers a favourable opinion on the nomination of H.G. Wessberg as a Member of the Court of Auditors; instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States.

I voted against because I think that it is possible to find more suitable person for the position offered, from the professional point of view.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente o relatório relativo à nomeação de H.G. Wessberg para o cargo de membro do Tribunal de Contas. Todos os dados apresentados para esta opção, incluindo as respostas ao Questionário destinado aos candidatos a membros do Tribunal de Contas, em anexo ao presente relatório, fundamentaram a minha decisão por indicarem o respeito dos critérios estabelecidos no n.º 1 do artigo 286.º do Tratado sobre o Funcionamento da União Europeia e a necessidade de plena independência dos membros do Tribunal de Contas, pelo que me congratulo com a nomeação de H.G. Wessberg.

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho votato a favore di questa relazione perché ritengo che la Corte dei conti possa giovarsi dell'esperienza di H.G. Wessberg nella gestione finanziaria delle istituzioni. Il candidato soddisfa le condizioni stabilite all'articolo 286, paragrafo 1, TFUE e il suo curriculum vitae conta una serie di cariche di rilievo nella gestione finanziaria e nel controllo del bilancio in istituzioni pubbliche ed imprese private. Le risposte al questionario mostrano la serietà e la motivazione del candidato.

  Catherine Stihler (S&D), in writing. − I was pleased to support the Swedish candidate for the Court of Auditors.

Έκθεση: Diana Wallis (A7-0196/2011)

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Tendo em conta que as acusações remontam a 2004, o que significa antes de a referida pessoa acusada de difamação entrar no Parlamento Europeu como deputada, voto a favor do levantamento da imunidade parlamentar de Ágnes Hankiss.

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), per iscritto. − Sono favorevole alla richiesta del relatore di revocare, per il caso in questione, l'immunità della onorevole collega. La pendenza giudiziaria che la vede imputata ha origine in un fatto che risale all’inizio del 2004, quando non era ancora membro del Parlamento europeo. Di tutta evidenza non si possono applicare quindi le disposizioni del regolamento che riguardano l'immunità e privilegi parlamentari, pertanto la revoca dell'immunità rispetta le disposizioni normative che regolano la vita istituzionale e giuridica della nostra Assemblea.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − Ústredný obvodný súd v Bude v Budapešti žiada Európsky parlament, aby zbavil jeho členku Ágnes Hankissovú imunity v súvislosti s obnovením trestného konania. Ágnes Hankissová bola obvinená súkromným žalobcom, že sa údajne dopustila trestného činu ohovárania na verejnosti a najmä trestného činu hanobenia pamiatky mŕtvej osoby, žalobcovho otca. Na základe uvedených skutočností a zároveň v súlade s rokovacím poriadkom Výboru pre právne veci sa domnievam, že je vhodné odporučiť, aby v tomto prípade došlo k zbaveniu imunity.

  Bruno Gollnisch (NI), par écrit. – Mme Wallis prétend que le Parlement européen applique des principes constants quant à la levée d'immunité de ses membres. C'est un mensonge cynique. Dans un cas me concernant, la Cour de Luxembourg a jugé en 2010 que le Parlement avait bafoué mes droits de parlementaire. Et il les a encore bafoués le mois dernier, exactement sur les mêmes fondements !

Car dire que l’immunité doit être levée parce que les propos reprochés au député ne l’ont pas été dans le cadre de son activité parlementaire est une sottise juridique absolue. Si tel avait été le cas, aucune poursuite n’eût été possible! C’est le cadre de l’actuel article 8. Par définition, l’article 9 s’applique aux activités autres que dans le cadre strict de ce parlement! Ici, désormais, le maintien ou la levée de l'immunité se fait à la tête du client: levée pour des opinions politiques dans un cas, maintien et fumus persecutionnis pour une présomption de fraude fiscale dans un autre. Pour ma part, plus fermement attaché à la liberté d'expression que les pseudo-démocrates de cet hémicycle, je refuserai systématiquement de lever l'immunité d'un de mes collègues, quelle que soit sa couleur politique, pour l'expression de ses opinions, aussi opposées aux miennes soient-elles.

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), raštu. − Atsakingas komitetas rekomenduoja atšaukti parlamentinį imunitetą (vienbalsiai), nes Budos centrinis apygardos teismas (Budapeštas) prašo Europos Parlamento panaikinti EP narės Ágnes Hankiss imunitetą dėl baudžiamosios bylos, kuri 2009 m. lapkričio 12 d. Vengrijos Respublikos Aukščiausiojo Teismo nutartimi buvo perduota nagrinėti iš naujo. Privati kaltintoja kaltina Ágnes Hankiss viešu garbės įžeidimu (Vengrijos baudžiamojo kodekso 179 straipsnis) ir ypač mirusiojo asmens, kaltintojos tėvo, atminimo paniekinimu (Vengrijos baudžiamojo kodekso 181 straipsnis) dėl 2004 m. sausio 23 d. laidoje „Péntek 8 mondatvadász“ padaryto pareiškimo. 2009 m. lapkričio 12 d. Aukščiausiasis Teismas nusprendė, kad iš tiesų buvo pažeistos materialinės baudžiamosios teisės normos ir perdavė bylą nagrinėti iš naujo Budos centriniame apygardos teisme. Pastarasis teismas turi iš naujo išnagrinėti bylą, atsižvelgdamas į Aukščiausiojo Teismo nutartyje patektus argumentus. Budos centrinis apygardos teismas pradėjo iš naujo nagrinėti bylą 2010 m. kovo 31 d. Tą pačią dieną procesas buvo sustabdytas, nes Ágnes Hankiss, kaip Europos Parlamento narė, turi parlamentinį imunitetą. Atitinkamą prašymą dėl imuniteto atšaukimo teismas pateikė 2010 m. liepos 6 d.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I voted to waive the parliamentary immunity of Ágnes Hankiss, accused of defamation. Ms Hankiss’s immunity was lifted because the events in question took place in 2004, before she was elected to the European Parliament (in July 2009), and because the case does not concern her political activities as an MEP.

  Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – L'immunité parlementaire ne sert pas à couvrir les délits de droit commun. Madame Ágnes Hankiss peut être jugée sans que son activité parlementaire soit mise en cause. Je vote pour la levée de son immunité.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − Since Ágnes Hankiss is accused of alleged defamation under Section 181 of the Hungarian Criminal Code, as a result of a statement made during the programme on 23 January 2004, I voted in favour.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − Na sessão de 6 de Setembro de 2010, o Presidente comunicou, nos termos do n.º 2 do artigo 6.º do Regimento, que recebera uma carta apresentada pelo Tribunal Distrital Central de Budapeste em 6 de Julho de 2010, requerendo o levantamento da imunidade parlamentar de Ágnes Hankiss, tendo enviado o pedido, nos termos do mesmo artigo, à Comissão dos Assuntos Jurídicos. O relatório da Comissão dos Assuntos Jurídicos, votado por unanimidade, concluiu que o caso em análise não é abrangido pelo âmbito das actividades políticas de Ágnes Hankiss enquanto membro do Parlamento. Dizendo respeito a uma declaração efectuada em 2004, muito antes de ter sido eleita deputada ao Parlamento. A relatora também não encontrou indícios de fumus persecutionis, ou seja, uma suspeita suficientemente grave e precisa de que o processo foi movido com a intenção de causar danos políticos à deputada. Por estes motivos acompanho a proposta da Comissão dos Assuntos Jurídicos e votei favoravelmente o levantamento da imunidade parlamentar de Ágnes Hankiss.

  Aldo Patriciello (PPE), per iscritto. − Il 6 luglio 2010 Il Tribunale distrettuale centrale di Buda ha trasmesso una richiesta per la revoca dell'immunità dell'on. Ágnes Hankiss, in relazione a un nuovo processo penale disposto con sentenza dalla Corte suprema della Repubblica di Ungheria nel 2009. Il 23 gennaio 2004, a seguito di una dichiarazione resa nel corso del programma: l'on. Ágnes Hankiss è accusata di un presunto reato di diffamazione dell'onore commesso in pubblico, in particolare, di diffamazione della memoria di una persona defunta.

Il Tribunale municipale di Budapest, in ultima istanza, il 25 marzo 2009 ha assolto Ágnes Hankiss dalle accuse, ma la Corte suprema ungherese il 12 novembre 2009 ha ordinato l'istituzione di un nuovo procedimento presso il Tribunale distrettuale centrale di Buda, avviato il 31 marzo 2010 e sospeso lo stesso giorno per l'immunità parlamentare dell'on. Ágnes Hankiss. Per questi motivi e poiché il caso non rientra nell'ambito di applicazione dell'attività politica dell'on. Ágnes Hankiss come membro del Parlamento europeo, in quanto riguarda una dichiarazione resa a lungo prima che fosse eletta deputata al Parlamento europeo, esprimo il mio voto favorevole affinché le sia la revoca dell'immunità parlamentare.

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. − In favour. The case relates to an alleged offence of defamation which does not come within the scope of Ms Hankiss’ political activities as an MEP, but relates instead to a statement made in 2004, before she was elected an MEP. The rapporteur has also found no evidence of fumus persecutionis.

Έκθεση: Jan Zahradil (A7-0156/2011)

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Voto a favor do presente relatório, uma vez que se compreendem os objectivos pretendidos pela Comissão de simplificação da legislação em vigor com vista a criar e a tornar melhor e mais clara a legislação para os empresários, principalmente no que respeita a formalidades alfandegárias levadas a cabo por importadores de têxteis.

  Roberta Angelilli (PPE), per iscritto. − Signor Presidente, i regolamenti (CE) n. 1541/98 e (CEE) n. 3030/93, emanati inizialmente con l'intento di applicare le misure di politica commerciale al settore tessile, sono diventati attualmente due testi obsoleti che apportano dei limiti al libero mercato e che mal si adattano all'evoluzione del nuovo contesto normativo.

Fino a poco tempo fa vigevano le restrizioni quantitative sulle importazioni provenienti da paesi membri dell'OMC e misure di salvaguardia speciali per quei prodotti tessili provenienti dalla RPC. Alla scadenza dell'Accordo dell'OMC nel 2005, queste restrizioni sono state soppresse, anche per la RPC nel 2008, pertanto l'unico strumento efficace per prevenire le distorsioni del mercato e continuare a controllare al tempo stesso le importazioni dei prodotti tessili rimane la subordinazione di questi alle procedure di verifica richiedenti l'indicazione del paese di origine. Indicazione peraltro contenuta nella proposta di regolamento sul Made In, votata in questa sede il 21 ottobre 2010, che introduce un meccanismo di controllo e punta a semplificare la legislazione in vigore, nella prospettiva di creare un contesto legislativo migliore e più chiaro per le imprese e per la tutela dei consumatori.

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau už šį dokumentą, kuriuo panaikinamas Tarybos reglamentas (EB) Nr. 1541/98 dėl tam tikrų tekstilės gaminių, klasifikuojamų Kombinuotosios nomenklatūros XI skyriuje ir išleidžiamų į laisvą apyvartą Bendrijoje, kilmės įrodymo ir dėl tokio įrodymo pripažinimo sąlygų ir kuriuo iš dalies keičiamas Tarybos reglamentas (EEB) Nr. 3030/93 dėl tam tikrų tekstilės gaminių importo iš trečiųjų šalių bendrųjų taisyklių .Pasaulio prekybos organizacijai 2005 m. panaikinus šalių narių kilmės importo apribojimus, Europos Sąjunga taip pat turi supaprastinti galiojančius teisės aktus siekiant sudaryti verslui palankesnę ir aiškesnę aplinką, visų pirma, supaprastinant muitų formalumus, kuriuos turi atlikti tam tikri tekstilės produktų importuotojai, kurių gaminiai išleidžiami į laisvą apyvartą Bendrijoje. Manau, kad minimi pakeitimai užtikrins importui taikomų taisyklių vienodumą ir suderins tekstilės importui taikomas taisykles su kitiems pramonės gaminiams taikomomis taisyklėmis, kas turėtų sustiprinti bendrą šios srities teisės aktų nuoseklumą.

  Слави Бинев (NI), в писмена форма. − Уважаеми колеги, подкрепих докладът на Zahradil, защото смятам, че Регламент (ЕО) № 1541/98 на Съвета относно доказателствата за произход на някои текстилни продукти е изпълнил предназначението си. Регламента на Съвета от 1998г. въведе инструменти за контрол на вноса на текстилни продукти, с които беше възможно изпълнението на Споразумението на СТО. С изтичането на Споразумението на СТО през 2005г. и на специалните предпазни мерки през 2008г, регламента на Съвета изпълни предназначението си, а приложените от него мерки за ограничение на вноса могат да се управляват с други инструменти.

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), per iscritto. − Abrogare questi regolamenti, benché potrebbe trattarsi dal punto di vista della semplificazione normativa di un'operazione positiva e condivisibile, significherebbe d'altra parte privare la nostra produzione industriale tessile di forme di difesa ancora valide contro la concorrenza sleale di paesi come la Cina.

Le argomentazioni del relatore, secondo cui la futura normativa sul made in e nuovi accordi in sede di Organizzazione mondiale del commercio costituiranno a breve una buona soluzione per difendere la nostra industria non sembrano reggere: sul made in siamo ancora in attesa di risposte dal Consiglio, che non pare avere intenzione di avallare una normativa che la nostra assemblea ha votato nell'autunno scorso a maggioranza schiacciante. Pare sicuramente più saggio attendere che sia definito un chiaro quadro normativo che regoli in futuro l'importazione di alcuni prodotti tessili dall'Oriente prima di procedere all'abrogazione delle vecchie normative. Il mio voto è pertanto contrario.

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau dėl šio pranešimo, nes jo pagrindinis tikslas yra panaikinti šiuo metu galiojantį ES reglamentą, nustatantį papildomus reikalavimus įrodant importuojamų į ES tekstilės produktų kilmę ir taip supaprastinti galiojančius teisės aktus ir sudaryti verslui palankesnę bei aiškesnę aplinką. Iki Pasaulio prekybos organizacijai (PPO) 2008 m. panaikinant suvaržymus tekstilės gaminių importui iš Kinijos, ES iš tiesų buvo reikalingas teisinis instrumentas, kuriuo remiantis būtų galima sureguliuoti prekybą su trečiosiomis šalimis ir taip apsaugoti ES vidaus rinką ir jos gamintojus. Tačiau šiuo metu tokios sudėtingos administracinės procedūros nebėra proporcingos, juolab, kad kitas ES reglamentas nustato pareigą muitinės dokumentuose nurodyti produkto kilmės šalį prieš paleidžiant jį laisvai cirkuliuoti ES rinkoje, o taip pat ES šiuo metu yra stiprinama vartotojų apsauga didinant jiems pateikiamos informacijos kiekį.

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), por escrito. − Aprovo a revogação do regulamento do Conselho relativo à prova de origem de determinados produtos têxteis, pois creio que, de forma a criar um enquadramento legislativo mais claro para as empresas, são necessários esforços que visem simplificar a legislação em vigor. Não obstante, devo acrescentar que considero importante a manutenção de mecanismos alternativos de controlo das importações de tais produtos para a UE, com vista a evitar que o aumento das mesmas cause perturbações no mercado.

  Mário David (PPE), por escrito. − Sou por natureza favorável a medidas de desburocratização e de simplificação administrativa. Quando se trata de resolver anacronismos, mais entusiasta fico! É este o caso. De facto, a existência de fardos administrativos desnecessários, como era o caso das provas de origem de certos produtos têxteis, nos casos em que não existem restrições quantitativas à importação desses produtos para o espaço europeu ou nos casos em que existe a necessidade de apresentação de uma autorização de importação, apenas adiciona areia à engrenagem da fluidez pretendida para o comércio internacional. Dito isto, e embora não directamente relacionado com esta medida, gostaria ainda de sublinhar a importância da manutenção do statu quo no que diz respeito às actuais regras da OMC, em especial no que diz respeito ao mercado mundial de Têxteis e Vestuário (T&V) e muito concretamente a alterações às regras para a importação de produtos de T&V para a União Europeia, numa altura de forte contracção económica em diversos Estados-Membros.

  Edite Estrela (S&D), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente este relatório por considerar que a proposta da Comissão Europeia contribui para a redução de sobrecargas administrativas e custos adicionais para as empresas através do reforço da uniformização das regras de importação de determinados produtos têxteis.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − A revogação do Regulamento n.º 1541/98 do Conselho pretende retirar aos importadores o ónus de apresentar a prova de origem de determinados produtos. Atendendo a que os produtos podem ser livremente importados, torna-se aparentemente desnecessária a comprovação da sua origem, mas subsistem dúvidas acerca da bondade desta medida facilitadora. Não posso deixar de frisar a necessidade de assegurar a qualidade dos produtos vendidos no espaço europeu e de garantir a segurança dos seus utilizadores. Mais do que saber qual a origem dos produtos têxteis provindos de fora da União, é essencial garantir os padrões europeus e não permitir que matérias-primas e produtos transformados entrem e sejam vendidos na União sem possuírem condições mínimas que o permitam. Julgo ainda que mais importante que o tipo de produtos empregados no fabrico dos produtos têxteis é aferir se os mesmos são produzidos no cumprimento das regras da concorrência e no respeito pela dignidade e direitos dos trabalhadores, porquanto se multiplicam os casos de violação de ambos, com consequências inadmissíveis para os próprios e para a viabilidade do sector têxtil europeu, nomeadamente do português, forçado a competir com quem incumpre sistematicamente tais regras e direitos.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − O presente relatório debruça-se sobre uma proposta de regulamento do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho que pretende revogar o Regulamento (CE) n.º 1541/98 do Conselho quanto à prova de origem de determinados produtos têxteis, assim como no que respeita aos termos de admissibilidade de prova, alterando o Regulamento (CEE) n.º 3030/93 do Conselho sobre o regime comum aplicável às importações de alguns produtos têxteis oriundos de países terceiros. As alterações agora introduzidas no enquadramento regulamentar permitem melhorar as medidas de política comercial, sobretudo após o aumento de importações com origem na República Popular da China, introduzindo instrumentos de controlo para as importações de produtos têxteis provenientes de países terceiros. Votei favoravelmente este relatório, pois, ao melhorar significativamente a informação aos consumidores, permitirá uma escolha consciente e responsável por parte de todos os cidadãos dos Estados-Membros e a opção de produtos made in UE.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − A proposta da Comissão, que o relatório aprova, propõe-se simplificar as formalidades seguidas pelos importadores de determinados produtos têxteis introduzidos em livre prática na Comunidade. Para o efeito propõe-se revogar as condições de aceitação das provas de origem relativas a determinados têxteis e respectivas obras com origem em países terceiros. O rol de produtos abrangidos é extenso: seda; lã, algodão; outras fibras têxteis vegetais; filamentos sintéticos ou artificiais; feltros e falsos tecidos; tapetes e outros revestimentos para pavimentos; tecidos especiais, rendas, tapeçarias, bordados; tecidos de malha ou croché; vestuário e seus acessórios; entre muitos outros. São bem conhecidas, em países como Portugal, as consequências da liberalização do comércio internacional no domínio do têxtil, com a eliminação das restrições quantitativas às importações e de disposições especiais de salvaguarda.

Esta proposta, em linha com as medidas anteriores, propõe-se facilitar ainda mais a vida aos grandes importadores europeus – os seus principais beneficiários, que assim acedem a matérias-primas e produtos finais de baixo custo, com sacrifício das indústrias nacionais e de milhares de postos de trabalho. Adiada fica uma reivindicação antiga do sector e dos consumidores, objecto já de resoluções deste Parlamento (a última, de 2010): a indicação do país de origem e a disponibilização de informação sobre a origem das várias mercadorias.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Este relatório aprova a proposta da Comissão Europeia que se propõe simplificar as formalidades seguidas pelos importadores de determinados produtos têxteis introduzidos em livre prática na União Europeia.

Assim, propõe-se revogar as condições de recolha das provas de origem relativas a determinados têxteis e respectivas obras com origem em países terceiros. O rol de produtos abrangidos é extenso, designadamente: seda; lã, algodão; outras fibras têxteis vegetais; filamentos sintéticos ou artificiais; feltros e falsos tecidos; tapetes e outros revestimentos para pavimentos; tecidos especiais, rendas, tapeçarias, bordados; tecidos de malha ou croché; vestuário e seus acessórios.

Ora, são bem conhecidas, em países como Portugal, as consequências da liberalização do comércio internacional no domínio do têxtil, com a eliminação das restrições quantitativas às importações e de disposições especiais de salvaguarda.

Esta proposta, em linha com as medidas anteriores, propõe-se facilitar ainda mais a vida aos grandes importadores europeus – os seus principais beneficiários – que acedem a matérias-primas e produtos finais de baixo custo, com sacrifício das indústrias nacionais e de milhares de postos de trabalho.

Adiada fica uma reivindicação antiga do sector e dos consumidores, objecto já de resoluções deste Parlamento (a última, de 2010): a indicação do país de origem e a disponibilização de informação sobre a origem das várias mercadorias, o que lamentamos.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − Komisia sa okrem iného zameriava aj na podporu jednotnosti pravidiel dovozu tým, že zosúlaďuje pravidlá dovozu textilu s pravidlami dovozu iných priemyselných výrobkov. Tým by sa v tejto oblasti mala zlepšiť celková súdržnosť legislatívneho prostredia. Právny nástroj, ktorý sa má zrušiť, sa týka podmienok prijímania dôkazov o pôvode niektorých textílií a textilných výrobkov, ktoré majú pôvod v tretích krajinách. Zastávam názor, že by malo byť cieľom vykonávať také opatrenia obchodnej politiky, ktoré by napomáhali predísť narúšaniu trhu spôsobenému prudkým nárastom dovozu z tretích krajín, ako je napr. Čínska ľudová republika.

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), raštu. − Pritariau šiam dokumentui, kadangi Komisijos pasiūlymas panaikinti Tarybos reglamentą (EB) Nr. 1541/98 ir iš dalies pakeisti Tarybos reglamentą (EEB) Nr. 3030/93 buvo parengtas vadovaujantis ES politiniu įsipareigojimu supaprastinti galiojančius teisės aktus siekiant sudaryti verslui palankesnę ir aiškesnę aplinką, visų pirma, supaprastinant muitų formalumus, kuriuos turi atlikti tam tikri tekstilės produktų importuotojai, kurių gaminiai, išleidžiami į laisvą apyvartą Bendrijoje ir klasifikuojami Kombinuotosios nomenklatūros XI skyriuje. Be to, Komisija siekia sustiprinti importui taikomų taisyklių vienodumą, suderinant tekstilės importui taikomas taisykles su kitiems pramonės gaminiams taikomomis taisyklėmis, kas turėtų sustiprinti bendrą šios srities teisės aktų nuoseklumą. Komisijos nuomone Sąjungos taikomas labai ribotos tekstilės sektoriaus prekybos politikos priemones galima valdyti netaikant nereikalingos naštos, kuri sukuriama reikalaujant visoms importuojamoms prekėms pateikti kilmės įrodymą. Taip pat padedama išvengti rinkos iškraipymo, kurį galėtų sukelti tokių tekstilės gaminių didelio masto importas į ES, jeigu nebūtų laikomasi leistinų kvotų.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I voted for this report which is driven by the European Union’s policy commitment to simplify the legislation in force with a view to creating a better and clearer legislative environment for businesses, mainly with respect to the simplification of customs formalities carried out by importers of certain textile products released for free circulation in the EU.

  Clemente Mastella (PPE), per iscritto. − Abbiamo fortemente sostenuto questa relazione in considerazione dell'impegno politico dell'UE volto alla semplificazione della legislazione in vigore: intendiamo creare un contesto normativo migliore e più chiaro per le imprese. Le misure europee di politica commerciale nel settore tessile possono essere gestite senza imporre l'eccessivo onere di presentare l'attestazione di origine per tutte le importazioni.Per continuare a controllare le importazioni di prodotti tessili soggette alle restrizioni quantitative ancora in vigore, e provenienti da Paesi che non sono ancora membri dell'OMC, l'UE si baserà sulle autorizzazioni d'importazione; mentre, per quanto concerne le categorie di prodotti che rientrano nella Sezione XI della Nomenclatura combinata, non soggetti a restrizioni quantitative all'importazione e immessi in libera pratica nell'UE, verrà applicato un sistema di sorveglianza statistica ex post per controllare il loro impatto sul mercato europeo. Ricordiamo che, dal 2010, per una migliore informazione dei consumatori sull'origine di diversi prodotti, in aggiunta ai succitati meccanismi di controllo delle importazioni è obbligatoria l’indicazione del paese d’origine di taluni prodotti di Paesi terzi. Ora dovremo occuparci di migliorare l'uniformità delle norme per l'importazione allineando quelle relative ai prodotti tessili a quelle di altri prodotti industriali, migliorando così la coerenza generale del contesto legislativo in questo settore.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − A votação expressa vem no sentido de que a designação fabricado em é essencial para a transparência dos mercados e para o devido esclarecimento dos consumidores sobre a origem dos produtos que consomem. É necessário fortalecer a economia comunitária, com a melhoria da competitividade da indústria da UE na economia mundial. Só conseguiremos ter uma concorrência justa se esta funcionar com regras claras para os produtores, para os exportadores e importadores, tendo também em atenção as premissas sociais e ambientais comuns. A codificação das regras já em vigor para as menções ou marcas que permitem identificar o lote ao qual pertence um género alimentício é o objectivo desta proposta. É, no entanto, de lamentar ainda não ser possível acompanhar o percurso do produto desde a sua origem.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − Since the report is on a Commission proposal that aims to simplify the legislation in force with a view to creating a better and clearer legislative environment for businesses, mainly with respect to the simplification of customs formalities carried out by importers of textile products, I voted in favour.

  Claudio Morganti (EFD), per iscritto. − Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ho espresso il mio voto negativo poiché questa relazione si basa su presupposti infondati e vaghe supposizioni future.

Da un lato si sostiene l'inutilità dell'attestazione d'origine, poiché si afferma che l'Unione europea possa tutelarsi basandosi su un sistema di sorveglianza statistica doganale ex-post: tuttavia non viene detto, ad esempio, che il "codice doganale comunitario aggiornato" è ben lontano da una piena operatività e che presenta ancora evidenti lacune, soprattutto nei termini di una completa e necessaria informatizzazione del sistema.

In contemporanea si indica espressamente come a sostegno della tutela del marchio d'origine sia prevista l'attuazione della relazione Muscardini sul made in, che peraltro noi abbiamo fortemente sostenuto; ebbene, sono contento delle certezze del relatore, ma al momento il regolamento sul made in non c'è ancora, né sappiamo bene se, quando e come verrà approvato.

In sostanza quindi questa relazione mi pare un pericoloso salto nel vuoto, con pesanti effetti come al solito sul settore tessile, che l'Unione europea continua a martoriare nella consapevole indifferenza generale.

  Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), per iscritto. − L'approvazione della proposta del collega Zahradil riapre la discussione sull'importanza di una denominazione di origine, per i prodotti provenienti dai paesi terzi, come misura in grado di attuare una politica commerciale capace di evitare turbative del mercato, dovute a un aumento delle importazioni estere, e risolvere la complicata situazione legislativa che oggi ostacola lo sviluppo delle piccole e medie imprese.

Sono quindi favorevole a un regolamento che uniformi le norme per le importazioni europee di tessili, attualmente in vigore, allineandole con quelle relative ad altri comparti industriali, ma ritengo che sia doveroso ricordare che nonostante si cerchi di valutare, attraverso meccanismi di controllo ex ante ed ex post, l'impatto sul mercato europeo di importazioni dai paesi terzi, l'Unione europea non è stata ancora in grado di dotarsi di un meccanismo di controllo basato su una informazione equa ed importante per i consumatori come quella della etichettatura di origine. Mi auguro che anche il Consiglio sia capace di valutare positivamente, e in tempi celeri, i decisi passi fatti da questo Parlamento verso la tracciabilità e l'informazione adeguata sui prodotti, misure in grado sia di garantire una conoscenza appropriate e sicura delle merci sul mercato, sia di valorizzare la specificità manifatturiera europea.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente o relatório sobre a proposta de regulamento do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho que revoga o Regulamento (CE) n.º 1541/98 do Conselho relativo à prova de origem de determinados produtos têxteis da secção XI da Nomenclatura Combinada, introduzidos em livre prática na Comunidade, bem como aos termos de admissibilidade da prova, e que altera o Regulamento (CEE) n.º 3030/93 do Conselho relativo ao regime comum aplicável às importações de certos produtos têxteis originários de países terceiros. Fi-lo com reservas, mas por globalmente ser positivo e por concordar com o compromisso estratégico da União Europeia de simplificar a legislação em vigor, tendo em vista a criação de um enquadramento legislativo melhor e mais claro para as empresas, sobretudo com o objectivo de simplificar as formalidades seguidas pelos importadores de determinados produtos têxteis introduzidos em livre prática na Comunidade e, igualmente, com o objectivo de reforçar a uniformidade das regras de importação através do alinhamento das regras relativas à importação de têxteis com as de outros bens industriais, o que também deve melhorar a coerência global do enquadramento legal neste domínio.

  Aldo Patriciello (PPE), per iscritto. − Con la proposta fatta dalla Commissione per l'abrogazione del regolamento n.1541/98(CE) del Consiglio riguardante le attestazioni d'origine di taluni prodotti tessili, e la modifica del regolamento n. 3030/93(CE) del Consiglio, relativo alle norme comuni per l'importazione di alcuni prodotti tessili originari dei paesi terzi, si vuole semplificare la legislazione in vigore, nella prospettiva di creare un contesto legislativo migliore e più chiaro per le imprese, specialmente per quanto riguarda la semplificazione delle formalità amministrative espletate dagli importatori di taluni prodotti tessili messi in libera pratica nella Comunità.

I requisiti per l'attestazione della prova d'origine dei prodotti tessili sono stati introdotti al fine di garantire la corretta applicazione delle misure di restrizione sull'importazione, per evitare distorsioni del mercato a causa delle importazioni provenienti dalla Repubblica popolare cinese. L'impatto e il numero delle misure applicate dall'UE per l'importazione di questi prodotti è gradualmente diminuito negli ultimi anni, infatti sono state create speciali disposizioni di salvaguardia per le importazioni di prodotti tessili e dell'abbigliamento originari della Repubblica popolare cinese e le restrizioni quantitative sulle importazioni originarie dei paesi che sono membri dell'OMC sono stati eliminate. Per i motivi esposti esprimo il mio voto favorevole.

  Phil Prendergast (S&D), in writing. − I have spoken on this issue before and I am voting for this report because I believe EU citizens have the right to know the make-up of the clothes they buy. This regulation will allow consumers to avoid buying products containing non-textile parts of animal origin, whether for health, ethical or other considerations. Under this regulation, for example, the trimmings on collars will be labelled clearly and separately from the rest of the garment, allowing consumers to make an informed choice about the clothes they buy. Allergy sufferers in particular stand to gain from this proposal, as fur is potentially hazardous to their health and without proper labelling they may buy a product containing these textiles without realising it.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), por escrito. − O Regulamento (CE) n.º 1541/98 tinha por objecto os requisitos de prova de origem de produtos têxteis com origem em países terceiros a que se aplicavam restrições quantitativas à importação. Por força das alterações entretanto ocorridas, nomeadamente por efeito do Acordo da OMC sobre Têxteis e Vestuário de 2005, parece justificar-se o afastamento daquela primeira prova de origem dos produtos, tendo, por isso, apoiado a revogação do referido regulamento. Visa-se, no conspecto geral, desagravar os encargos sobre os produtos à entrada no espaço europeu, sem sacrificar, no momento final, os interesses dos adquirentes, sendo, nessa medida, importante a manutenção de mecanismos alternativos de controlo das importações de tais produtos para a UE.

  Crescenzio Rivellini (PPE), per iscritto. − Mi congratulo per l'ottimo lavoro svolto dal collega Zahradil. Le misure di politica commerciale molto limitate applicate dall'UE nel settore tessile possono essere gestite senza imporre l'eccessivo onere di presentare l'attestazione di origine per tutte le importazioni. Tuttavia gli strumenti di controllo delle importazioni di prodotti tessili devono essere mantenuti. Infatti, per continuare a controllare le importazioni di prodotti tessili soggette alle restrizioni quantitative ancora in vigore e provenienti dalla Bielorussia e dalla Corea del Nord, che non sono ancora membri dell'OMC, l'UE si basa ora sulle autorizzazioni d'importazione. Ciò contribuisce a prevenire il problema delle distorsioni del mercato che sarebbero causate da un aumento delle importazioni di determinati prodotti tessili al mercato dell'UE, in caso di non rispetto delle quote consentite.

Inoltre, per quanto riguarda le categorie di prodotti non soggetti a restrizioni quantitative all'importazione e immessi in libera pratica nell'UE, viene applicato un sistema di sorveglianza statistica ex post per controllare il loro impatto sul mercato dell'UE. Desidero ricordare altresì che, il Parlamento europeo ha approvato nel 2010, in prima lettura, la relazione dell’on. Cristiana Muscardini sull’indicazione del paese d’origine di taluni prodotti importati da paesi terzi (Made in), che riguarda anche prodotti tessili e d’abbigliamento.

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. − In favour. In the ambit of the better-law-making approach, the Commission proposes to repeal a 1998 Council Regulation under which importers have to provide proof of origin of textiles and articles of apparel for EU customs procedures. The regulation had value as long as quantitative restrictions on textiles and articles of apparel existed through the WTO’s Multifibre Agreement. This agreement was terminated in 2005. By 2008, the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing between the EU and China and all other surveillance systems for imports of textiles and clothing from China had also ended. Textile and clothing imports from Belarus and North Korea, neither of which are members of the WTO, are still subject to quantitative restrictions. The system of import authorisations still remains in place for controls on these imports, which however do not pose problems with regard to the functioning of the EU market.

This system is deemed sufficient. All in all, Parliament is advocating a new ‘made-in’ labelling regime, which is currently a Sleeping Beauty after the conclusion of the first reading in 2010. Such a regime would provide much better control possibilities – and also consumer information – than the old Proof of Origin Regulations.

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho votato a favore di questa relazione perché mi trovo in sintonia con lo spirito di cui è portatrice: semplificare e uniformare la normativa UE sull'importazione dei prodotti tessili per facilitare i commerci con gli Stati terzi. Ritengo infatti che le limitate misure di politica commerciale applicate dall'UE al settore tessile siano pienamente gestibili anche senza imporre l'eccessivo onere di presentare attestazioni d'origine per tutte le importazioni. D'altronde, le autorizzazioni d'importazione, i sistemi di sorveglianza statistica ex post e i requisiti dei documenti amministrativi unici già garantiscono un controllo efficace delle importazioni nell'Unione. Per completare il quadro però, auspico la piena entrata in vigore della relazione Muscardini, che permetterà ai consumatori europei di essere meglio informati sull'origine dei prodotti anche tessili provenienti dai Paesi terzi.

  Oreste Rossi (EFD), per iscritto. − La normativa che in questo caso viene abrogata riguarda le condizioni di accettazione delle attestazioni di origine per taluni prodotti tesili originari di paesi terzi, che stabilivano i requisiti specifici applicando restrizioni quantitative. Il relatore condivide il punto di vista della Commissione secondo cui le misure di politica commerciale applicate dall'UE nel settore tessile possano essere gestite senza imporre l'eccessivo onere di presentare l'attestazione di origine per tutte le importazioni. Per quanto ci riguarda rientra nell'interesse sia dei consumatori sia delle imprese far sì che ogni onere caricato sugli importatori di merci provenienti dai paesi terzi sia utile al loro controllo e a una limitazione.

Oltretutto ci preoccupa il fatto che noi andiamo ad abrogare norme utili per i controlli alle dogane senza che al momento si stiano facendo passi avanti sul Made In bloccato in Commissione a causa dell'ostruzionismo del Consiglio. Voglio anche ricordare che sul provvedimento ad hoc sul tessile il Consiglio ha posto il veto sull'indicazione di origine e analogamente lo sta tentando di fare anche sull'obbligo di indicazioni in etichetta dei prodotti alimentari sul luogo di provenienza.

Il nostro voto è contrario.

  Catherine Stihler (S&D), in writing. − This Commission proposal simplifies the legislation in force on proving the origin of certain textile products.

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. − Em 1998, a União Europeia definiu a obrigatoriedade de as empresas importadoras efectuarem uma prova de origem dos produtos que constam da Secção XI da Nomenclatura Combinada, referidos no Anexo 1 ao Regulamento (CEE) n.º 3030/93 do Conselho, e que tenham sido produzidos em países terceiros. Importa salientar que, em 2005, foram eliminadas as restrições quantitativas às importações sobre produtos têxteis e vestuário de países membros da OMC, assim como, no final de 2008, também expiraram as disposições relativas ao mesmo tipo de produtos com proveniência da RP da China.

Sendo assim, voto favoravelmente o presente relatório por entender que é positivo definir um enquadramento legislativo mais claro e simplificado para as empresas europeias que importem produtos têxteis e de calçado com origem em países terceiros, continuando a existir restrições quantitativas, pois não são membros da OMC. Entendo ainda que as autorizações de importação contribuem efectivamente para monitorizar de forma eficiente a importação desta tipologia de produtos, salvaguardando de forma eficaz o seu impacto no tecido económico da UE e, consequentemente, de cada Estado-Membro.

  Angelika Werthmann (NI), schriftlich. − Ich habe dem Bericht über den Ursprungsnachweis bestimmter Textilwaren zugestimmt. Die Neufassung der Vorschriften in diesem Bereich zielt auf eine Vereinfachung und Vereinheitlichung des Legislativrahmens, inklusive der Verwaltungsformalitäten, gleichzeitig enthält sie aber auch angemessene Instrumente zur Handhabung der durch akuten Anstieg der Einfuhren aus Drittländern bedingten Marktstörungen. Schließlich trägt die neue Verordnung bisherigen Forderungen des Europäischen Parlaments bezüglich der vermehrten Aufklärung der Konsumenten Rechnung.

Σύσταση: Debora Serracchiani (A7-0186/2011)

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Voto a favor da participação da Croácia nos trabalhos do Observatório da Droga e da Toxicodependência, uma vez que o Observatório está aberto à participação de quaisquer países terceiros e especialmente tendo em atenção que a Croácia é uma rota de trânsito de drogas ilícitas que são contrabandeadas no caminho dos países de produção para os países consumidores, achando por isso essencial o seu envolvimento desde já.

  Sophie Auconie (PPE), par écrit. – En demandant à participer aux activités de l'Observatoire européen des drogues et des toxicomanies (OEDT), la République de Croatie a montré qu'elle partageait l’intérêt de l’Union et de ses États membres pour les objectifs et les réalisations de l’Observatoire, dont le but consiste à collecter des informations sur le phénomène des drogues et des toxicomanies afin d’élaborer et de diffuser des données objectives, fiables et comparables au niveau européen. C'est pourquoi j'ai soutenu le rapport de notre collègue Debora Serracchiani sur la conclusion de l'accord entre l'Union européenne et la République de Croatie concernant la participation de la République de Croatie aux activités de l'OEDT.

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau už šį dokumentą. Europos narkotikų ir narkomanijos stebėsenos centras atlieka svarbų vaidmenį renkant duomenis apie narkotikus ir narkomaniją bei ES lygmeniu rengiant objektyvią, patikimą ir palygintiną informaciją .Tai leidžia sudaryti narkotikų paklausos ir jos mažinimo būdų bei narkotikų rinkos analizės pagrindą. Kroatijos Respublika 2005 m. išreiškė norą dalyvauti Europos narkotikų ir narkomanijos stebėsenos centro veikloje. Kroatijos Respublika yra tranzitinė šalis, per kurią iš šalių gamintojų narkotikai neteisėtai gabenami į šalis vartotojas. Pastebimi ir plataus masto kokaino konfiskavimo atvejai Kroatijoje , kurie dažniausiai susiję su jūrų transportu. Palaikiau šį susitarimą ir Kroatijos Respublikos dalyvavimą Europos narkotikų ir narkomanijos stebėsenos centro veikloje, kas leis Europos mastu taip pat surinkti faktinę ir objektyvią informaciją iš Kroatijos apie narkotikus ir narkomaniją ir jų pasekmes , o tuo pačiu metu Kroatijos Respublika galės gauti informaciją apie geriausią patirtį, kad geriau suprastų narkotikų problemos pobūdį ir galėtų geriau ją spręsti.

  Regina Bastos (PPE), por escrito. − A droga é hoje um dos maiores flagelos que a nossa sociedade enfrenta. É uma problemática social e culturalmente complexa e dinâmica, que não pára de se modificar, apresentando novos contornos, a utilização de novas substâncias e novos grupos de consumidores. O Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência (OEDT), criado em 1993, tem como principais tarefas a recolha de dados sobre a droga e a toxicodependência, a elaboração e publicação de informações objectivas, fiáveis e comparáveis a nível europeu. Esta informação é muito importante porque proporciona uma base para analisar a procura de drogas e as formas de a reduzir, assim como, de um modo geral, os fenómenos associados ao mercado da droga.

A Croácia é uma rota de trânsito de drogas ilícitas, que são contrabandeadas no caminho dos países de produção para os países consumidores. É por isso muito importante para a Europa que a Croácia faculte informação objectiva sobre drogas, toxicodependência e respectivas consequências, ao mesmo tempo podendo obter informação sobre as melhores práticas. Daí o meu apoio à presente recomendação.

  Слави Бинев (NI), в писмена форма. − Уважаеми колеги, подкрепям доклада относно проекторешението на Съвета за сключване на Споразумението между Европейския съюз и Република Хърватия за участието на Република Хърватия в работата на Европейския център за мониторинг на наркотиците и наркоманиите, тъй като броят на смъртните случаи намалява за всички наркотици без хероина в сравнение с предходната година и като цяло има напредък в борбата с употребата на наркотици. Република Хърватия ще може да получава информация относно най-добри практики, за да постигне разбиране на естеството на своите проблеми по отношение на наркотиците и за да реагира по-добре спрямо тези проблеми.

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), per iscritto. − Ho espresso un voto favorevole alla relazione della collega Serracchiani sul progetto di decisione del Consiglio relativa alla conclusione dell'accordo tra l'Unione europea e la Repubblica di Croazia sulla partecipazione della Repubblica di Croazia ai lavori dell'Osservatorio europeo delle droghe e delle tossicodipendenza poiché ritengo che rappresenterebbe uno scambio reciproco molto proficuo per entrambe le parti. Infatti, da un lato, essendo la Croazia una delle principali vie di transito per l'introduzione di droghe in UE, la sua partecipazione all'Osservatorio fornirebbe informazioni concrete e decisive a sostegno dell'impegno per combattere questo traffico illegale; dall'altro, la Croazia potrebbe avvalersi delle migliori pratiche europee per affrontare e contrastare questo fenomeno.

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau dėl šio pranešimo, nes pritariu, jog Kroatijos dalyvavimas Europos narkotikų ir narkomanijos stebėsenos centre yra labai svarbus norint ne tik efektyviau kovoti su neteisėtu narkotikų vartojimu bei prekyba pačioje Kroatijoje, bet ir visoje ES. Kroatija, būdama pakrantės valstybe prie išorinių ES sienų, yra naudojama kaip tranzitinė šalis tarptautiniam narkotikų platinimui, todėl itin svarbu kad ES teiktų visą reikalingą pagalbą šios šalies nacionalinėms institucijoms kovoje su šiuo itin pavojingu sveikatai ir socialiniam stabilumui reiškiniu. Pagal sudaromą susitarimą Kroatija dalyvaus Centro darbo programoje, vykdys susijusiuose ES teisės aktuose nustatytus įsipareigojimus bei dalysis duomenimis su Europos narkotikų ir narkomanijos stebėsenos centru, laikydamasi Sąjungos duomenų apsaugos reikalavimų.

  Sebastian Valentin Bodu (PPE), în scris. − Republica Croația reprezintă o importantă rută de tranzit prin care drogurile ilegale din țările producătoare sunt introduse în țările consumatoare. Dovadă stau confiscările unor cantități semnificative de cocaină din Croația care sunt legate, în cea mai mare parte, de transportul maritim. Potrivit Observatorului European pentru Droguri și Toxicomanie, în Croația nu s-a realizat niciun sondaj privind folosirea drogurilor ilegale de către populație în general. Însă cele mai recente date privind decesele cauzate de droguri, din 2008, arată că s-au înregistrat 87 de cazuri. Cantităţile de droguri capturate au crescut în mod constant. Formarea ofițerilor de poliție și furnizarea echipamentului necesar au fost continuate. Cu toate acestea, rezultatele investigațiilor și ale urmăririi infracțiunilor legate de droguri trebuie consolidate în mod semnificativ.

Croația rămâne una dintre principalele rute pentru traficul de droguri către UE. Participarea Republicii Croația la activitățile derulate de Observatorul European pentru Droguri și Toxicomanie devine, în aceste condiţii, un fapt pozitiv pentru întreaga Uniune. Astfel, participarea Croaţiei la programul de lucru al Observatorului presupune conectarea la rețeaua europeană de informații privind drogurile și toxicomania și schimbul de date cu OEDT.

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), por escrito. − Desejo desde já felicitar o Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência pelo relevante trabalho que tem vindo a desenvolver no sentido de reduzir a quantidade de drogas e dos fenómenos a estas associados no espaço europeu. Confirmo a minha concordância com a participação da Croácia nas actividades do Observatório, pois, tendo em conta a integração deste país numa rota de trânsito de drogas ilícitas devido à sua posição geográfica estratégica, creio que a adopção do programa europeu conduzirá à melhoria da saúde e da paz social, não só a nível europeu, mas também mundial.

  Carlos Coelho (PPE), por escrito. − O OEDT desempenha um papel fundamental na recolha de dados sobre a droga e a toxicodependência, contribuindo para a existência de informações objectivas, fiáveis e comparáveis ao nível europeu que servem de base para a análise do nível de procura de drogas, das formas para a reduzir, bem como, de um modo geral, dos fenómenos associados ao mercado da droga. Os países terceiros que partilhem dos interesses da União e dos Estados-Membros pelos objectivos e trabalhos do OEDT poderão participar nesses trabalhos. A Croácia fez o seu pedido em 2005, tendo as negociações sido concluídas, em 2009, com êxito. É importante a aprovação deste Acordo, pois a Croácia é uma das principais rotas de tráfico de drogas ilícitas para a UE, pelo que é essencial que este país seja associado aos trabalhos do OEDT o mais rápido possível, especialmente tendo em conta que a adesão da Croácia à UE está prevista para o final de 2012 ou início de 2013. A Croácia deverá ter uma ligação à Rede Europeia – REITOX – e partilhar dados com o OEDT, com o pleno respeito das regras em matéria de protecção de dados previstas no direito da União, bem como na legislação nacional.

  Mário David (PPE), por escrito. − O fenómeno da toxicodependência e em especial dos mercados da droga é uma ameaça global e um obstáculo terrível, difícil de combater devido à sua constante deslocação e mutação. A natureza do trabalho desenvolvido pelo OEDT é bastante relevante neste domínio, visto permitir, a partir de diferentes Estados, a criação de uma base de conhecimento e informação internacional. Informação esta crucial à análise e criação de estratégias para reduzir e combater a existência dos mercados da droga e da toxicodependência. A vontade da Croácia em se associar à UE nesta importante contenda tem vindo a enunciar-se desde 2005 e urge agora que se concretize, através da sua integração nos trabalhos do OEDT, com sede em Lisboa. A proposta apresentada no relatório, no que diz respeito ao cumprimento das obrigações pela Croácia perante o OEDT e a UE, é muito positiva. Voto positivamente este relatório, pois acredito que esta ligação entre a Croácia e a UE contribuirá não só para um mais eficaz combate ao fenómeno da droga e da toxicodependência, mas também para a construção de uma maior solidariedade entre a UE a Croácia, país candidato à adesão e membro de pleno direito a curto prazo... pelo menos assim espero!

  Anne Delvaux (PPE), par écrit. – La mission principale de l'Observatoire européen des drogues et des toxicomanies (OEDT) est de collecter des informations sur les drogues et les toxicomanies pour élaborer et diffuser des données objectives, fiables et comparables au niveau européen. L'OEDT est, dans les faits, ouvert à tout pays tiers qui partage les intérêts de l'UE. La Croatie en était demandeuse depuis 2005. Elle fera désormais aussi partie du Réseau européen d'information sur les drogues et les toxicomanies.

Pour moi, ce rapport s'inscrit également dans la nécessité de mieux échanger les données entre États membres et agences européennes et surtout préparer une éventuelle adhésion de manière plus posée que le "grand" élargissement aux pays d'Europe centrale et orientale (PECO) qui s'est opéré en 2004 et en 2007.

  Edite Estrela (S&D), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente o relatório sobre a "participação da Croácia nos trabalhos do Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência", porque me parece positiva, tendo em conta a adesão da República da Croácia à União Europeia prevista para breve, mas, sobretudo, porque o consumo e o tráfico de drogas ilícitas são fenómenos globais com gravíssimas repercussões socio-económicas e sanitárias.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − O Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência (OEDT) tem por objectivo recolher dados sobre o consumo de drogas e a toxicodependência, de modo a analisar a evolução do consumo de drogas entre a população, bem como estudar a promoção de políticas e acções tendentes à redução do consumo. Sabendo que o OEDT está aberto à participação de Estados não membros da UE e que, em 2005, a República da Croácia solicitou a participação; e considerando que a Croácia está na rota de trânsito de drogas ilícitas, entre os países produtores e os países consumidores, e que importantes apreensões, sobretudo de cocaína, são feitas neste Estado, considero um passo importante a participação da República da Croácia no OEDT. Por isso voto favoravelmente a decisão relativa à assinatura, em nome da União, de um acordo entre a União Europeia e a República da Croácia com esta finalidade.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − A presente recomendação, elaborada por Debora Serracchiani e tendo por base a proposta de decisão do Conselho sobre a assinatura de um Acordo entre a União Europeia (UE) e a República da Croácia, versa sobre o interesse manifestado pela República da Croácia em integrar o Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência. Considerando que a Croácia é uma das principais rotas de tráfico de droga para a UE e onde têm sido feitas apreensões significativas de produtos alucinogéneos ilícitos (canábis, heroína, cocaína, ecstasy e anfetaminas); considerando a adopção de um Programa Nacional de Prevenção do Consumo da Droga entre os Jovens por parte do Governo croata; considerando que a República da Croácia solicitou a adesão à UE, cuja integração se prevê em 2013, apoio a assinatura do Acordo entre a União Europeia e a República da Croácia para que esta possa integrar o Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência, sediado na cidade de Lisboa.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − A evolução da situação mundial relativamente à produção, tráfico e consumo de drogas ilícitas é preocupante. O relatório de 2009 do Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência confirma desenvolvimentos de sentido negativo, em relação a drogas como a cocaína, a heroína e novas drogas sintéticas, em que se regista a persistência de consumos elevados e mesmo a tendência do seu agravamento. Nesta evolução pesarão inúmeros factores, não lhe sendo alheio o aprofundamento da crise do capitalismo e dos seus efeitos sociais em inúmeros países. Neste relatório propõe-se o apoio ao Acordo entre a União Europeia e a República da Croácia sobre a sua participação nos trabalhos do Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência.

Independentemente do processo de adesão deste país à UE, dos seus desenvolvimentos e desenlace, é proposta a sua participação no referido Observatório, tendo em conta que está a fazer esforços em termos de investigação e repressão dos crimes relacionados com droga. Sugere-se contudo que estes esforços devem ser consideravelmente melhorados, dado que a Croácia continua a ser uma das principais rotas do tráfico de droga da UE. Seria importante que esta adesão da Croácia ao Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência, que apoiamos, pudesse contribuir para melhorar o combate ao tráfico de droga.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Com a aprovação deste relatório o Parlamento Europeu deu o seu apoio ao Acordo entre a União Europeia e a República da Croácia sobre a sua participação nos trabalhos do Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência.

Embora, como refere a relatora, esteja prevista a entrada da Croácia na União Europeia no segundo semestre de 2012 ou no início de 2013, pode aceitar-se a sua participação no referido Observatório, dado que esse país está a fazer esforços em termos de investigação e repressão dos crimes relacionados com droga. Mas os esforços têm de ser consideravelmente melhorados, dado que a Croácia continua a ser uma das principais rotas do tráfico de droga da UE.

Sabemos que o desenvolvimento da situação mundial em relação à produção, tráfico e consumo de drogas ilícitas é preocupante. Segundo dados do relatório, de 2009, do Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência, evidenciam-se desenvolvimentos de sentido negativo, com incidência na cocaína, heroína e novas drogas sintéticas, em que se regista a persistência de consumos elevados e mesmo a tendência do seu agravamento.

Esperemos que esta decisão contribua para melhorar o combate ao tráfico de droga.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − Chorvátska republika je na tranzitnej trase, po ktorej sa nelegálne pašujú drogy z krajín, kde sa produkujú, do krajín, kde sa spotrebúvajú. Významné a veľkoobjemové zhabania kokaínu v Chorvátsku sa poväčšine spájajú s námornou dopravou. Užívanie nelegálnych drog a ich pašovanie sú celosvetovými javmi, ktoré ohrozujú zdravie a sociálnu stabilitu. A preto, najmä za účelom osvety v danej problematike a prevencie v užívaní drog a iných omamných látok, vítam účasť Chorvátskej republiky na činnostiach Európskeho monitorovacieho centra pre drogy a drogovú závislosť.

  Lorenzo Fontana (EFD), per iscritto. − Signor presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Considerando che la Croazia sarà un partner importante per il futuro dell'Unione Europea nei rapporti con i Paesi dell'Ex Jugoslavia, e che quel territorio é un territorio chiave per il passaggio di sostanze stupefacenti, si apprezza l'entrata del Paese candidato nell'Osservatorio europeo delle droghe e delle tossicodipendenze. E' per noi fondamentale poter conoscere e lavorare assieme agli esperti croati del settore per combattere questo triste fenomeno, per questo sono favorevole alla proposta.

  Nathalie Griesbeck (ALDE), par écrit. – En qualité de rapporteure fictive sur ce dossier, j'ai résolument voté en faveur de cette résolution et de cet accord par lequel la Croatie pourra participer aux activités de l'Observatoire Européen des Drogues et des toxicomanies, et aussi au réseau européen d'information sur les drogues et les toxicomanies (REITOX). Je soutiens ainsi pleinement la participation de la Croatie pour qu'elle puisse prendre part activement à la lutte contre ce phénomène dont l'importance et les effets dévastateurs s'accroissent dangereusement en Europe. D'après les statistiques de l'Observatoire, 75 millions d'Européens ont déjà consommé du cannabis et 14 millions d'Européens ont déjà consommé au moins une fois de la cocaïne. Il faut également rappeler que la Croatie demeure l'un des principaux lieux de passage pour les trafics de drogues à destination de l'Union européenne. Cet accord permettra ainsi d'obtenir des informations factuelles et objectives de la part de la Croatie sur les drogues et les toxicomanies, ainsi que sur leurs répercussions, mais permettra également à la Croatie, par ces échanges d'informations et de bonnes pratiques, de mieux faire face et appréhender ce phénomène.

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), raštu. − Pritariau šiam pranešimui, nes, kaip kad žinome, pagrindinis Europos narkotikų ir narkomanijos stebėsenos centro uždavinys yra rinkti duomenis apie narkotikus ir narkomaniją siekiant Europos lygmeniu parengti ir paskelbti objektyvią, patikimą ir palygintiną informaciją. Informacija turėtų sudaryti narkotikų paklausos ir jos mažinimo būdų ir apskritai reiškinių, susijusių su narkotikų rinka, analizės pagrindą. Yra numatyta, kad Europos narkotikų ir narkomanijos stebėsenos centro veikloje gali dalyvauti ir trečiosios šalys, kurias su Sąjunga ir jos valstybėmis narėmis sieja bendri interesai siekiant Centro tikslų ir atliekant jo darbą. 2005 m. Kroatijos Respublika išreiškė norą dalyvauti šio centro veikloje. Kroatijos Respublika dalyvaus Centro darbo programoje, vykdys Reglamente nustatytus įpareigojimus, bus įtraukta į Europos narkotikų ir narkomanijos informacinį tinklą (REITOX) ir dalysis duomenimis su EMCDDA, laikydamasi Sąjungos duomenų apsaugos reikalavimų ir nacionalinės teisės aktų. Kroatijos Respublika taip pat mokės finansinius įnašus Sąjungai, kad padengtų savo dalyvavimo išlaidas, dalyvaus Centro valdybos veikloje be balsavimo teisės, kol taps ES nare. Savo ruožtu EMCDDA Kroatijos Respublikai taikys tokias pačias įtraukimo į Europos narkotikų ir narkomanijos informacinį tinklą (REITOX) ir aprūpinimo personalu sąlygas kaip ir dabartinėms valstybėms narėms.

  Jarosław Kalinowski (PPE), na piśmie. − Narkomania to problem społeczny, zarówno krajów rozwiniętych, jak i tych słabo rozwiniętych. Chorwaci, tak jak inne kraje, borykają się z narkomanią i posiadają bardzo surowe prawo w tej kwestii. Profilaktyka odbywa się zwłaszcza w szkołach, gdyż ta grupa społeczna jest najbardziej podatna na uzależnienie od narkotyków. Chorwacja, jako kraj kandydujący do UE, ma obowiązek dostosowywania swego systemu prawnego do systemu obowiązującego w krajach Wspólnoty. Uważam, że udział Chorwacji w pracach Europejskiego Centrum Monitorowania Narkotyków i Narkomanii jest niezwykle ważny zwłaszcza, że kraj ten jest krajem tranzytowym. Przez Chorwację przewozi się nielegalne substancje z krajów produkujących je do krajów będących konsumentami. Udział w Europejskim Centrum Monitorowania Narkotyków i Narkomanii przybliży Chorwacji niezwykle ważną politykę antynarkotykową Unii Europejskiej.

  Giovanni La Via (PPE), per iscritto. − Egregio Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, con il voto odierno ho sostenuto la raccomandazione sulla partecipazione della Repubblica di Croazia ai lavori dell'Osservatorio europeo delle droghe e delle tossicodipendenze. La Repubblica di Croazia parteciperà, infatti, al programma di lavoro europeo delle droghe e delle tossicodipendenze dell’Osservatorio, il cui compito principale consiste nel raccogliere dati sul fenomeno delle droghe e delle tossicodipendenze per elaborare e diffondere a livello europeo informazioni obiettive, affidabili e comparabili. Il tema è chiaramente molto importante, sia per i suoi notevoli effetti sul campo della tutela del diritto alla salute, che per la lotta ai fenomeni criminosi associati al mercato della droga. La Croazia rappresenta, infatti, una delle vie di transito via mare comunemente utilizzate dalla criminalità organizzata per introdurre droghe illecite passando dai paesi di produzione a quelli di consumo. E questo dato è per noi ancora più preoccupante, se consideriamo che la Croazia è il prossimo Paese candidato a divenire Stato membro dell'UE. Auspico, pertanto, che la partecipazione della Croazia al programma di lavoro possa rivelarsi di massima utilità.

  Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE), în scris. − Această propunere de decizie a Consiliului privind încheierea unui acord între Uniunea Europeană şi Republica Croaţia privind participarea Republicii Croaţia la activităţile Observatorului European pentru Droguri şi Toxicomanie (OEDT) este importantă, deoarece Croaţia este una dintre porțile de intrare principale a drogurilor în Europa.

În vederea combaterii eficiente a traficului de droguri, care nu este o amenințare doar pentru Croaţia, dar şi pentru Uniunea Europeană, este important ca şi Croaţia să fie conectată la reţeaua europeană de informaţii privind drogurile şi toxicomania (REITOX) şi să fie implicată activ şi direct în schimbul de date cu OEDT. Acest schimb de date ajută la crearea unei baze de analiză a cererii de droguri şi a fenomenelor auxiliare ale traficul de droguri, care este esenţială pentru publicarea de informaţii obiective, reale şi comparabile la nivel european.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I welcome this agreement and the participation of the Republic of Croatia in the activities of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. Illicit drug use and trafficking are worldwide phenomena that threaten health and social stability. Statistics show that around one in three young Europeans has tried an illicit drug and at least one of our citizens dies every hour from a drug overdose. At a European level, it is also important to have factual and objective information from Croatia concerning drugs and drug addiction and their consequences, and, at the same time, the Republic of Croatia can get information on best practices to understand the nature of its drug problems and better respond to them.

  Jiří Maštálka (GUE/NGL), písemně. − Oblast samotné drogové problematiky, o které nyní hovoříme, je současnou a zároveň i značně historickou problematikou. Nelegální drogový obchod přesahuje a vždy přesahoval hranice jedné země. Domnívám se, že nastavení kvalitní mezinárodní spolupráce v oblasti boje proti nelegálnímu obchodování s drogami, a to nejen na evropské úrovni, ale zejména na celosvětové úrovni, by mohlo být jednou cestou ke zlepšení efektivity boje proti tomuto druhu obchodu.

Jako lékař také uvádím, že zneužívání drog může mít ty nejzávažnější a nezvratitelné následky pro lidské zdraví. Podporuji proto efektivní mezinárodní spolupráci v oblasti boje proti nelegálnímu obchodu s drogami či jejich prekurzory a zároveň připomínám nutnost prevence.

  Clemente Mastella (PPE), per iscritto. − L’uso ed il traffico illegale di droga sono fenomeni di portata mondiale che minacciano la salute e la stabilità sociale. La Repubblica di Croazia rappresenta una via di transito attraverso la quale vengono introdotte clandestinamente droghe illecite passando dai paesi di produzione a quelli di consumo. Inoltre, si è registrato, negli ultimi 10 anni, un progressivo aumento dei decessi per droga. Nonostante la continua formazione dei funzionari di polizia e la fornitura delle apparecchiature necessarie, i risultati delle indagini e dei procedimenti relativi ai reati legati agli stupefacenti necessitano ulteriori miglioramenti. La Croazia, infatti, continua a trovarsi su una delle principali rotte del traffico di droga verso l’Unione Europea. Siamo certo favorevoli all'adozione di un programma nazionale per la prevenzione del consumo di droga fra i giovani, inteso ad aggiornare i programmi esistenti; approviamo, dunque, la partecipazione della Repubblica di Croazia ai lavori dell’Osservatorio europeo delle droghe e delle tossicodipendenze. A maggior ragione, visto che si tratta di un Paese candidato e anzi ormai prossimo all'adesione all'UE, risulta fondamentale che possa fornire agli Stati Membri informazioni esaurienti ed obiettive in merito ai traffici di droghe, alla tossicodipendenza e alle relative conseguenze economiche e sociali.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − O flagelo da droga continua a preocupar toda a UE. Quanto mais países contribuírem para o seu combate, maiores possibilidades de sucesso teremos. Daí que a participação da Croácia nos trabalhos do Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência seja bem-vinda. É, no entanto, necessário que a Croácia intensifique o combate ao tráfico de droga no seu país, pois este continua a ser uma das principais rotas de tráfico da Europa.

  Louis Michel (ALDE), par écrit. – L'Observatoire européen des drogues et des toxicomanies (OEDT) a comme objectif premier de collecter des données sur les drogues et les toxicomanies afin de préparer et de publier des informations objectives, fiables et comparables, au niveau européen.

La République de Croatie participera ainsi au programme de travail de l'Observatoire, sera liée au réseau européen d'information sur les drogues et les toxicomanies (REITOX) et partagera des données avec l'OEDT. La République de Croatie est une zone de transit pour des drogues en provenance des pays producteurs et demeure l'un des principaux lieux de passage pour les trafics de drogues à destination de l'Union européenne.

Elle a toutefois adopté en 2010 un programme de mise en œuvre d'un plan d'action de lutte contre la toxicomanie ainsi qu'un programme national de prévention à l'intention des jeunes. Par ailleurs, la formation d'agents de police et la mise à disposition des équipements nécessaires se sont poursuivies.

La participation de la Croatie à l'OEDT lui permettra ainsi d'appréhender cette problématique par un échange d'informations et de mieux y faire face. Cette participation est également un signal encourageant pour l'adhésion prochaine de la Croatie à l'Union européenne.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − As is known, the Centre is working basically with policy-makers at the level of the Community and the Member States, which thus help to develop a strategy for combating drugs and providing information to the general public. At the present time attention is mainly paid to implementation of the EU Action Plan for 2009-2012, which is aimed at strengthening European cooperation in the struggle against the unacceptable consequences of drug addiction. I would like to see the Centre working not only on the consequences but also on the causes of drug addiction, thus solving the problem at an early stage. I voted in favour.

  Rolandas Paksas (EFD), raštu. − Manau, kad ne tik Europos Sąjungoje, bet ir už jos ribų, turime imtis priemonių, kad narkotikų vartojimas ir jų paklausa būtų sumažinta griežtomis prevencinėmis priemonėmis kovojant su reiškiniais, susijusiais su narkotikų rinka. Atsižvelgiant į tai, labai svarbu gauti tikslius duomenis bei informaciją apie narkotikus ir narkomaniją, kadangi tai yra pasaulinio masto reiškiniai, keliantys grėsmę mūsų visų sveikatai, saugumui, socialinei gerovei. Pritariu Kroatijos dalyvavimui Europos narkotikų ir narkomanijos stebėsenos centro veikloje. Kroatija siekia tapti pilnateise Europos Sąjungos nare. Pažymėtina, kad Kroatija yra tranzitinė šalis, per kurią dideliais kiekiais gabenami narkotikai į kitas šalis. Džiugu, kad Kroatija deda dideles pastangas, siekdama kovoti su nelegaliu narkotinių medžiagų gabenimu, vartojimu ir prekyba. Tačiau Kroatija ir toliau yra vienas iš pagrindinių neteisėto narkotikų gabenimo į ES maršrutų. Atsižvelgiant į tai, labai svarbu operatyviai gauti faktinės ir objektyvios informacijos apie narkotikus ir narkomaniją ir jų pasekmes. Be to, bus sudarytos palankios sąlygos Kroatijai gauti informacijos apie kitų ES šalių geriausiąją patirtį sprendžiant problemas, susijusias su narkotikais ir narkomanija.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − Congratulo-me com a participação da República da Croácia no Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência (OEDT). A principal tarefa do OEDT consiste em recolher dados sobre a droga e a toxicodependência, para elaborar e publicar informações objectivas, fiáveis e comparáveis a nível europeu. A informação destina-se a proporcionar uma base para analisar a procura de drogas e as formas de a reduzir, bem como, de um modo geral, os fenómenos associados ao mercado da droga. De facto, a Croácia, à semelhança de alguns outros países europeus, é uma rota de trânsito de drogas ilícitas, que são contrabandeadas no caminho dos países de produção para os países consumidores. As apreensões importantes e em grande escala de cocaína na Croácia estão, na sua maioria, relacionadas com os transportes marítimos. Com a aprovação deste relatório, a República da Croácia passará a participar no programa de trabalho do Observatório e a partilhar dados com o OEDT, no respeito das exigências em matéria de protecção de dados previstas no Direito da União e na legislação nacional. O acordo assegura a contribuição financeira para a União, a fim de cobrir os custos da sua participação.

  Aldo Patriciello (PPE), per iscritto. − L'OEDT è l'Osservatorio europeo delle droghe e delle tossicodipendenze, istituito nel 1993 con il compito principale di raccogliere dati sulle droghe e sulle tossicodipendenze, al fine di elaborare e diffondere dati oggettivi affidabili e compatibili a livello europeo. Le informazioni fornite dall'Osservatorio servono per poter analizzare i quantitativi di droga immessi nell'UE e per tutti quei fenomeni associati al mercato della droga, per poter analizzare al meglio i metodi per contrastare questi fenomeni. L'Osservatorio è aperto alla partecipazione dei paesi terzi che condividono l'interesse dell'Unione e dei suoi Stati membri per gli obiettivi e le realizzazioni dell'Osservatorio. Nel 2005 la Croazia ha chiesto di partecipare ai lavori dell'Osservatorio e nel 2006 il Consiglio ha autorizzato la Commissione ad avviare negoziati con la Repubblica di Croazia, negoziati che si sono positivamente conclusi nel luglio 2009 con la sigla dell’accordo.

L'accordo è stato successivamente rivisto nel dicembre 2009 alla luce del trattato di Lisbona. Bisogna ricordare che la Croazia risulta già inserita nella Reitox, la rete europea di informazione sulle droghe e le tossicodipendenze. Per le motivazioni suesposte e affinché si possa avere sempre una miglior collaborazione con i paesi extraeuropei esprimo il mio voto favorevole.

  Fiorello Provera (EFD), per iscritto. − La Croazia ha chiesto di aderire all'Osservatorio delle droghe e delle tossicodipendenze nel 2005. Poiché questo Paese è una delle principali rotte del traffico di droga verso l'UE, ritengo sia importante poter disporre di informazioni concrete e obiettive da parte della Croazia in merito a questi fenomeni. È, pertanto, interamente condivisibile la posizione del relatore e sostengo questo provvedimento.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), por escrito. − A República da Croácia requereu a sua participação nas actividades do Observatório Europeu da Droga e da Toxicodependência (OEDT), criado em 1993 e com sede em Lisboa. Na verdade, é este um Estado particularmente interessado no combate ao tráfico de droga: além dos problemas de política interna que conhece, apresenta-se como uma rota de entrada destes produtos no espaço comunitário. Pugnando contra a toxicodependência e o tráfico de droga, a República da Croácia já desenvolveu medidas neste sentido no plano interno, quer ao nível de prevenção do consumo, quer no apoio à investigação de crimes relacionados com o tráfico. Há, assim, interesse mútuo na adesão da República da Croácia ao OEDT. Todavia, na medida em que ainda não se trata de um Estado-Membro, torna-se necessário definir o seu estatuto (os seus direitos de participação e os deveres que sobre si devem impender) no contexto do Observatório.

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. − We supported the mandate of EMCDDA in 2006. As regards the specific situation in Croatia, it is a transit route through which illicit drugs are smuggled on their way from the producer countries to consumer countries. Significant and large-scale cocaine seizures in Croatia are mostly connected with sea transport. In the last 10 years, the number of deaths has gradually increased in Croatia. A majority (77.1 %) of the cases of deaths were associated with opiates. In 2008, the total number of reported drug related offences was 7 168. In 2009, a total of 7 934 persons were treated by the national drug addiction institutes. The number of seizures decreased for all drugs except heroin when compared to the previous year and, in general, progress has been made in combating drug abuse. Generally Croatia’s anti-drug legislation is similar to that of the EU Member States.

However, the rapporteur’s position points out that, from 2010 on, every therapeutic community has to provide the Office for Drugs with data on treated patients. It would be good to obtain more information on the scope of this obligation. Nevertheless, this is an issue for domestic legislation, not the Agreement.

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho votato a favore di questa raccomandazione perché ritengo che la protezione della salute e della stabilità sociale dei cittadini europei sia un obiettivo prioritario, da tenere presente nella lotta all'uso e al traffico illegale di droga. La Croazia si trova su una delle principali rotte del traffico di droga verso l'Unione europea. La sua partecipazione al programma di lavoro dell'Osservatorio europeo delle droghe e delle tossicodipendenze permetterà all'Unione Europea di disporre di informazioni concrete in merito al traffico e al consumo di droga in Croazia e alla Croazia di comprendere la portata dei suoi problemi di droga e di adottare le migliori pratiche per affrontarli. Inoltre, tale partecipazione trova una solida base giuridica nell'articolo 21 del regolamento (CE) n. 1920/2006 istitutivo dell'Osservatorio, che apre le porte dell'OEDT anche ai paesi terzi che ne condividono obiettivi e interessi.

  Catherine Stihler (S&D), in writing. − I welcome this report, which integrates Croatia into the fight against drugs in the EU.

  Michèle Striffler (PPE), par écrit. – L'objectif de l'Observatoire européen des drogues et des toxicomanies est de récolter des informations sur le phénomène des drogues (commerce, marché, utilisation) et de les diffuser aux États membres afin d'analyser et de mieux combattre ce phénomène. J'encourage ainsi pleinement la participation de la Croatie à cet observatoire afin qu'elle prenne part activement à la lutte contre ce phénomène dont l'importance et les effets dévastateurs s'accroissent dangereusement en Europe.

  Angelika Werthmann (NI), schriftlich. − Das Abkommen zwischen der Europäischen Union und der Republik Kroatien stellt für EU und Kroatien aufgrund des Daten- und Erfahrungsaustauschs rund um das Thema Drogen und Drogenmissbrauch und der Tatsache, dass stündlich ein EU-Bürger an einer Überdosis stirbt, ein effizientes Mittel dar, um den Handel mit Drogen sowie den Konsum, zu reduzieren bzw. zu verhindern. Zu berücksichtigen ist der Umstand, dass Kroatien 2012 bzw. 2013 Mitglied der EU wird und aufgrund seiner geographischen Position für Drogendealer einen guten Umschlagsplatz bietet.

Έκθεση: Sophie Auconie (A7-0077/2011)

  Elena Băsescu (PPE), în scris. − Am votat pentru raportul doamnei Auconie. Salut prezenta propunere de extindere a domeniului de aplicare în transportul rutier transfrontalier de numerar în euro. Teritoriul statelor membre care sunt pe cale de a introduce moneda unică trebuie să fie inclus în sistemul transportului de numerar. În cadrul zonei euro, ar trebui să se poată încheia un contract cu societatea de transport de fonduri care oferă cel mai bun preţ, chiar dacă aceasta este situată în alt stat membru. Aceasta va permite accesarea circuitelor celor mai eficiente de colectare și livrare de numerar și de servicii de numerar. În viitor, vor fi necesare tot mai multe transporturi de numerar în euro în perioada care precedă trecerea la această monedă. În plus, un număr mare de state membre din zona euro au încheiat sau pot dori să încheie acorduri pentru producerea bancnotelor și monedelor în străinătate.

  Слави Бинев (NI), в писмена форма. − Уважаеми колеги, подкрепям доклада относно проекта за регламент на Съвета за разширяване на обхвата на този Регламент на Европейския парламент и на Съвета относно специализираното трансгранично транспортиране на евро в брой по шосе между държавите-членки в еврозоната, тъй като в обхвата на предложението за регламент относно трансграничното транспортиране на евро в брой по шосе между държавите-членки в еврозоната, е добре да се включи и територията на държавите-членки, на които предстои въвеждане на еврото, тъй като по време на подготовката на прехода обикновено нараства нуждата от транспортиране на евро в брой.

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), por escrito. − Concordo com o alargamento do âmbito de aplicação da proposta de regulamento sobre o transporte rodoviário profissional transfronteiriço de notas e moedas de euro entre os Estados-Membros da área do euro ao território dos Estados-Membros que estão em vias de aderir à zona euro.

  Anne Delvaux (PPE), par écrit. – L'objectif de la présente proposition consiste à étendre le champ d'application de la proposition de règlement sur le transport transfrontalier d'euros en espèces par la route entre États membres dans la zone euro (proposition principale) au territoire des États membres qui sont sur le point d'introduire l'euro. La période précédant le passage à cette monnaie conduit en effet à un besoin accru de transport d'euros en espèces. J'accueille favorablement cette extension du champ d'application (notons toutefois que la base juridique est ici celle de l'article 352 TFUE, ce qui signifie que le Parlement européen ne dispose que d'un pouvoir d'approbation).

  Edite Estrela (S&D), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente esta recomendação por considerar necessário que o âmbito de aplicação deste Regulamento seja extensível ao território de um Estado-membro que esteja prestes a adoptar o euro. Esta decisão vai contribuir para uma transição mais harmoniosa para o euro, dando resposta adequada à necessidade acrescida de transporte transfronteiriço de notas e moedas durante o período que antecede a mudança de moeda em circulação.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − Acompanho a relatora, no seguimento do seu relatório inicial, em que o regulamento relativo ao transporte profissional de notas e moedas de euro seja alargado ao território dos Estados-Membros que estão em vias de aderir à zona euro.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − Cieľom tohto nariadenia je zjednodušiť regulačné obmedzenia tak, aby eurobankovky a euromince mohli jednoduchšie obiehať medzi členskými štátmi a aby bola zároveň v rámci eurozóny zabezpečená vysoká úroveň profesionality a bezpečnosti. Je vhodné rozšíriť rozsah pôsobnosti tohto nariadenia, keďže v období, ktoré predchádza zavedeniu euromeny v členských štátoch eurozóny, dochádza k zvýšenej potrebe prepravy eurovej hotovosti.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I voted for this report, the purpose of which is to extend the scope of the proposal for a regulation on the cross-border transportation of euro cash by road between euro-area Member States (the main proposal) to the territory of Member States that are about to introduce the euro, since there is normally an increased need for euro cash transportation in the run-up to the changeover.

  Rolandas Paksas (EFD), raštu. − Manau, kad tikslinga išplėsti reglamento dėl tarpvalstybinio grynųjų eurų vežimo kelių transportu iš vienos euro zonos valstybės narės į kitą taikymo sritį, ir jo nuostatas taikyti valstybių narių, kurios rengiasi įsivesti eurą, teritorijoje. Atkreiptinas dėmesys, kad valstybėse, kurios rengiasi pakeisti valiutą, atsiranda didelis grynųjų eurų vežimo paslaugų poreikis. Dėl to reikia gerinti vežimo paslaugų kokybę, vežėjams nustatant palankias sąlygas tinkamai, greitai ir efektyviai teikti paslaugas. Be to, atsižvelgiant į gabenamų krovinių pobūdį ir jų vertę, labai svarbu, kad grynieji pinigai saugiai pasiektų galutinį gavėją.

  Aldo Patriciello (PPE), per iscritto. − Le banconote e le monete metalliche in euro, sono dei veri e propri mezzi di pagamento paneuropei, l'area dell'euro consta attualmente di 16 Stati membri. Per le incompatibilità fra le legislazioni nazionali, nella maggior parte dei casi è molto difficile per le aziende che si occupano del trasporto di contante a livello professionale trasferire il contante in euro fra gli Stati membri dell'area dell'euro, per cui questo trasporto risulta attualmente molto limitato. Di conseguenza, l'esigenza di trasporto transfrontaliero su strada del contante in euro è notevolmente aumentata.

Con questa nuova proposta di regolamento si vuole estendere il campo d'applicazione della normativa sul trasporto transfrontaliero su strada del contante in euro tra gli Stati membri dell'area dell'euro al territorio degli Stati membri che sono in procinto di introdurre l'euro. La proposta principale è quella di estendere il campo d'applicazione della normativa sul trasporto transfrontaliero tra gli Stati membri dell'area euro, senza dimenticare che il periodo che precede il passaggio all'euro come moneta nazionale per i nuovi Stati comporta una maggiore esigenza di trasporto di contante in euro. Per questi motivi e affinché ci sia una regolamentazione chiara su questo argomento esprimo il mio voto favorevole al regolamento in esame.

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho votato a favore di questa raccomandazione perché ritengo che il regolamento sul trasporto transfrontaliero su strada del contante in euro tra gli Stati membri vada esteso nel suo campo di applicazione anche al territorio dei paesi in procinto di introdurre la moneta unica. Tali Stati infatti, nel periodo che precede l'introduzione della moneta unica nel loro territorio, necessitano di una maggiore quantità di contante per inserirsi completamente e rapidamente negli scambi commerciali dell'Unione europea, entrandone quindi a far parte a pieno regime.

  Catherine Stihler (S&D), in writing. − I welcome this report, which has provisions to allow a greater volume of euro cash to travel to countries which are due to adopt the euro to cope with demand. I supported this report because it improves the safety and training of professionals who transport euro cash.

  Νίκη Τζαβέλα (EFD), γραπτώς. – Ψήφισα θετικά το σχέδιο κανονισμού του Συμβουλίου για την επέκταση του πεδίου εφαρμογής του κανονισμού του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και του Συμβουλίου για την επαγγελματική διασυνοριακή οδική μεταφορά μετρητών ευρώ μεταξύ κρατών μελών της ζώνης του ευρώ. Την υπερψήφισα γιατί θεωρώ πως η επέκταση του πεδίου εφαρμογής του κανονισμού είναι απαραίτητη και θα λύσει προβλήματα αναφορικά με την ασφάλεια του προσωπικού που είναι υπεύθυνο για την μεταφορά.

Έκθεση: Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (A7-0084/2011)

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Voto a favor do relatório em apreço, tendo em conta que os sistemas de navegação por satélite devem assegurar a interoperacionalidade entre os diferentes sistemas. Por seu turno, a Comissão deve assegurar os níveis correctos de financiamento. Devo notar ainda que, das 15 acções incluídas no Plano de Acção da Comissão, 9 devem ter aplicação imediata.

  Sophie Auconie (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai voté en faveur du rapport de notre collègue Silvia-Adriana Ţicău sur les applications dans le transport des systèmes de navigation globale par satellite. En effet, je soutiens l’application des fonctions du GNSS aux différents modes de transport ainsi que la mise en œuvre adéquate de la recherche et des financements dans ce domaine.

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau už šį pranešimą. 2010 m. birželio 14 d. Komisija paskelbė savo „Pasaulinės navigacijos palydovų sistemos (GNSS) taikymo veiksmų planą“ ir jame pateikė 24 konkrečių veiksmų rekomendacijas. Veiksmų planas parengtas atsižvelgiant į platesnį bendrą pasaulinių navigacijos palydovų sistemų naudojimo kontekstą ir ypač į EGNOS (Europos geostacionarinės navigacinės tinklo sistemos) kūrimą ir naudojimą. ES pradėjo vykdyti EGNOS projektą (ir Galileo projektą) siekdama, kad būtų teikiami signalai civilinėms reikmėms ir Europos pramonei užtikrinamos visapusiškos galimybės konkuruoti šioje besiplečiančioje strateginėje rinkoje. Šiuo metu Europos užimama rinkos dalis (25 proc.) yra nepakankama. EGNOS suteiks daugiau galimybių (EGNOS yra dešimt kartų tikslesnė nei GPS), kai 2013 m. pradės veikti Galileo sistema. Komisija yra tinkamiausia institucija galinti geriausiai koordinuoti veiksmų plano įgyvendinimą norint išvengti veiksmų dubliavimo valstybių narių lygmeniu ir užtikrinti bendrą pažangą įvairiose su GNSS programomis susijusiose ES politikos srityse. Atsižvelgiant į didelę ekonominę naudą, kurią EGNOS – jei ji bus sukurta ir jei bus panaudojamos visos jos teikiamos galimybės – duos visos Europos ekonomikai, Komisija turėtų nustatyti aiškius prioritetus šioje srityje, įskaitant EGNOS veikimą visoje ES teritorijoje bei užtikrinant tinkamas investicijas į tolimesnius šios srities mokslinius tyrimus ir technologijų plėtrą.

  Adam Bielan (ECR), na piśmie. − Panie Przewodniczący, Dynamiczny rozwój systemów nawigacji satelitarnej w ostatnich latach jest wynikiem zarówno technologicznego postępu jak i zapotrzebowań rynku. Powszechne jest dziś wykorzystywanie ich w każdym rodzaju transportu. Stała ekspansja tej branży powoduje, że prognozowana wartość europejskich systemów może osiągnąć pułap 230 miliardów euro do roku 2025. Unijne projekty EGNOS i Galileo mogą wpłynąć na konkurencyjność na każdym poziomie tego sektora usług. Są bowiem zdecydowanie lepsze i bardziej precyzyjne niż system GPS, pozostając jednocześnie z nim kompatybilne. Niestety kraje wschodniej i południowej Unii wciąż nie są objęte systemem EGNOS. Rozszerzenie zasięgu wydaje się więc niezbędne w kontekście jego dalszego rozwoju. Niesprecyzowane pozostają również sposoby finansowania kosztów utrzymania systemu Galileo, które szacuje się na ok. 800 milionów euro rocznie. W oparciu o powyższe wstrzymuję się od głosu w sprawie raportu.

  Слави Бинев (NI), в писмена форма. − Уважаеми колеги, подкрепям доклада относно приложения в транспорта на глобалните навигационни спътникови системи — политика на ЕС в краткосрочен и средносрочен план, тъй като пазарът за навигационни системи е огромен. С предложението ще се избегне дублиране на равнище държави-членки и ще се гарантира цялостният напредък в многообразието от сфери на политиките на ЕС в този сектор. Като цяло европейската навигационна система (десет пъти по-точна от GPS) ще допринесе значително за целите, свързани със сигурността и околната среда в пътния транспорт, и ще облекчи движението по пътищата чрез възможността за събиране на пътни такси.

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), per iscritto. − Abbracciando un atteggiamento prudenziale, ho inteso astenermi dal votare sulla relazione della collega Ţicău in quanto, sebbene possa essere ritenuto strategico un piano d´azione sui sistemi globali di navigazione via satellite, per fornire segnali destinati all´uso civile e assicurare all´industria europea l´opportunità di competere all´interno di quote di mercato in costante crescita, esistono numerosi punti di criticità che non sono stati affrontati. Tra questi, i possibili rischi in materia di protezione dei dati, ma soprattutto l´incertezza sulle fonti per il finanziamento del costo annuale di manutenzione di Galileo, stimato intorno agli 800 milioni di euro. La mancanza di chiarezza sull´aspetto della sostenibilità finanziaria di un progetto così importante per l´economia europea, ma anche ambizioso, richiedono un atteggiamento cauto e concreto.

  Philippe Boulland (PPE), par écrit. – La résolution du Parlement européen du 7 juin 2011 a pour objectif d'encourager la Commission européenne dans la poursuite d'actions ciblées pour favoriser l'émergence de systèmes globaux de navigation par satellite. Les projets européens GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) et Galiléo sont des concurrents directs du GPS américain. Notre vie quotidienne en est désormais facilitée. Ils représentent une valeur ajoutée pour l'industrie mais aussi pour les transports en Europe. Voilà pourquoi je soutiens totalement ces projets dont les retombées vont être multiples. Pour l'aviation civile, la gestion du trafic aérien sera plus sûre. Pour le trafic routier, ce système facilitera la perception des redevances, améliorera la sécurité par le biais d'appels d'urgence géolocalisables, de suivi des transports routiers. Tous ces domaines seront améliorés par la création de ce service européen. J'ai voté pour cette résolution afin de faire pression sur les autorités européennes et nationales et éviter d'accumuler un retard qui fait perdre chaque jour à l'Europe d'infinies potentialités.

  Jan Březina (PPE), písemně. − Akční plán pro aplikace globálního družicového navigačního systému (GNSS) načrtává kroky, které jsou nezbytné k tomu, aby GNSS překonal kritický bod zaručující úspěch projektu. Je důležité, aby plán neuvízl v přemíře iniciativ a neustrnul na pouhých konzultacích a byl do roku 2013 skutečně proveden. Systém EGNOS (Evropská služba geostacionárního navigačního pokrytí) musí pokrývat celou Evropskou unii a měl by být rozšířen na severní, východní a jihovýchodní Evropu. Aby byl plně efektivní pro dopravní účely, musí zahrnovat nejen celou Unii, ale i naše nejbližší sousedy. V oblasti civilního letectví by měl být podporován jeho vývoj a používání aplikace EGNOS pro přistávací manévry. Jedná se o strategickou podmínku pro skutečné vytvoření jednotného evropského nebe. Značný potenciál pro využití EGNOS a GNSS představuje také oblast bezpečnosti, životního prostředí a plynulejšího provozu v silniční dopravě, protože je lze využívat pro vybírání mýtného.

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), por escrito. − Concordo com a política respeitante à aplicação nos transportes de sistemas globais de navegação por satélite, que creio contribuir para uma gestão mais eficaz dos transportes e da logística, bem como dos sistemas de vigilância. Tendo em conta o elevado valor do mercado global deste sector, que continuará a crescer nos próximos anos, sublinho ainda a importância de criar as condições para que a indústria europeia possa competir.

  Christine De Veyrac (PPE), par écrit. – Les bénéfices attendus des systèmes de navigation globale par satellite actuellement pour l'économie européenne sont évalués entre 55 et 63 milliards d'euros sur les 20 prochaines années. Environ 6 % du PIB total de l'UE dépendent de ces applications, qui sont pour l'instant principalement basées sur le système américain GPS.

Dans ce contexte, j'ai voté en faveur du rapport d'initiative de Madame Ticau, qui demande à la Commission de fournir un soutien financier adéquat pour le développement des applications basées sur le système de navigation globale par satellite européen, EGNOS et Galileo. L'accès des PME à ces financements doit être particulièrement encouragé afin de stimuler l'innovation basée sur ces systèmes européens.

  Edite Estrela (S&D), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente este relatório por considerar que a aplicação do Plano de Acção proposto para o sistema global de navegação por satélite (GNSS) contribuirá para o estabelecimento de uma rede de transportes mais eficiente, através de meios de transporte mais seguros, mais ecológicos e mais económicos.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − Os sistemas globais de navegação fazem parte do dia-a-dia do sector dos transportes e terão crescente importância num mundo que funciona cada vez mais em rede e que tem nas trocas e na rapidez das comunicações parte da sua essência. É evidente a vantagem e o valor comercial de tais sistemas, e é compreensível o interesse europeu de possuir o máximo deste tipo de soluções e que estas operem sem depender de terceiros. O Plano de Acção apresentado pela Comissão apresenta propostas válidas para o futuro da abordagem comunitária a estas questões e permite relançar o tema de modo mais sólido e consequente. O modo como estes sistemas serão financiados requer particular rigor de modo a evitar desperdícios bem como imaginação de forma a angariar apoios e parceiros. Faço votos que a União ainda possa dotar-se de sistemas globais de navegação autónomos e que explore todas as suas potencialidades de modo a promover o reforço da sua economia, o aumento dos postos de trabalho, a segurança dos transportes.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − O presente relatório, elaborado por Sílvia-Adriana Ţicău, debruça-se sobre a aplicação de sistemas de navegação por satélite nos transportes da União Europeia (UE), na sequência da publicação, em 14 de Junho de 2010, por parte da Comissão, do Plano de Acção sobre as aplicações do sistema global de navegação por satélite (GNSS). Desde 2000, data da disponibilização do serviço GPS, que este sector tem apresentado um crescimento exponencial (124 mil milhões de euros em 2008), prevendo-se que, em 2025, tenha um valor global de mercado na casa dos 230 mil milhões de euros. Como a UE não podia ficar para trás nesta tecnologia de ponta da navegação por satélite, desenvolveu um sistema europeu de navegação geoestacionária denominado EGNOS (European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service), precursor do sistema GALILEO, que deverá estar operacional em 2013 com um nível de exactidão dez vezes superior ao do GPS. Prevê-se, num futuro próximo, um grau de exactidão até 45 centímetros. Saúdo a relatora e congratulo-me com a aprovação deste relatório, que votei favoravelmente, o qual vai permitir à UE aumentar a sua quota de mercado e fornecer à indústria condições de competitividade num mercado estratégico e em franco crescimento.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Os sistemas globais de navegação por satélite (GNSS) podem ter aplicações importantes e muito úteis na actividade de todos os tipos de transportes, podendo, entre outros aspectos, torná-los mais seguros, mais ecológicos e mais económicos. O GNSS pode também desempenhar um papel vital no apoio e na promoção da utilização dos chamados sistemas de transporte inteligentes. A relatora aborda alguns destes aspectos. Mas, como as demais tecnologias, os resultados práticos das aplicações do GNSS são indissociáveis do contexto económico e social em que se produzem, das finalidades e objectivos que servem. Em geral e também neste sector em particular. Nessa medida, não é de estranhar que se proponha que este sistema sirva de apoio igualmente, por exemplo, à constituição do céu único europeu – aspecto do relatório de que nos distanciamos. Concordamos com um sistema global de navegação por satélite que possa apoiar o desenvolvimento, a modernização e a diversificação de serviços públicos – designadamente no domínio dos transportes. O GNSS não pode todavia deixar de ser analisado em toda a multiplicidade de dimensões em que poderá ter aplicação. Nessa medida, questionamos os limites das potenciais utilizações destes programas num quadro de competição assumida entre a UE e os EUA, no que respeita às funcionalidades e eficiências destes sistemas.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Os sistemas globais de navegação por satélite podem ter aplicações importantes e muito úteis na actividade de todos os tipos de transportes, podendo, entre outros aspectos, torná-los mais seguros, mais ecológicos e mais económicos. Estes sistemas podem também desempenhar um papel vital no apoio e na promoção da utilização dos chamados sistemas de transporte inteligentes. Mas, tal como as demais tecnologias, os resultados práticos das aplicações são indissociáveis do contexto económico e social em que se produzem, das finalidades e objectivos que servem. Nessa medida, não é de estranhar que se proponha que este sistema sirva de apoio, igualmente, por exemplo, à constituição do céu único europeu – aspecto do relatório de que nos distanciamos.

Concordamos com um sistema global de navegação por satélite que possa apoiar o desenvolvimento, a modernização e a diversificação de serviços públicos, designadamente no domínio dos transportes.

Mas o sistema não pode, todavia, deixar de ser analisado em toda a multiplicidade de dimensões em que poderá ter aplicação. Nessa medida, questionamos os limites das potenciais utilizações destes programas num quadro de competição assumida entre a UE e os EUA, no que respeita às funcionalidades e eficiências destes sistemas.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − V júni 2010 Komisia zverejnila Akčný plán pre aplikácie globálneho navigačného satelitného systému (GNSS), ktorý zahŕňal 24 konkrétnych odporúčaní. Tento akčný plán sa vypracoval v období, keď sa zavádzali globálne navigačné satelitné systémy, konkrétne systém EGNOS (Európska geostacionárna navigačná prekrývacia služba). Satelitné navigačné systémy by mali zabezpečiť súčinnosť medzi rôznymi systémami a tiež by mali byť použiteľné v osobnej a nákladnej doprave. Domnievam sa, že Komisia by mala podniknúť kroky potrebné na koordináciu vykonávania Akčného plánu a na zabezpečenie pokroku v tých oblastiach politiky EÚ, ktorých sa aplikácie GNSS týkajú.

  Lorenzo Fontana (EFD), per iscritto. − Signor presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la proposta della collega seppur condivisibile in alcuni punti ci lascia perplessi in molti altri. L''individuazione di come sarà assicurato il finanziamento del costo annuale di manutenzione di Galileo, stimato a 800 milioni di EUR, una volta che questo sarà operativo. I possibili rischi in materia di protezione dei dati legati all'utilizzo delle applicazioni e dei servizi GNSS e la necessità pressante di prevedere fondi aggiuntivi per un rapido successo delle operazioni legate a EGNOS e Galileo. Per questo la proposta non é da scartare ma non può trovare il mio pieno appoggio.

  Nathalie Griesbeck (ALDE), par écrit. – L'adoption de ce rapport est une avancée importante car celui-ci pose les bases du déploiement général de systèmes mondiaux de navigation satellitaire, et plus précisément du développement d'EGNOS, qui doit favoriser la mise en place du système Galileo. J'y ai également apporté mon vote car cela va permettre la mise en place de mesures concrètes qui faciliteront le développement des transports en Europe et qui auront un impact important en matière de sûreté et d'environnement ainsi que pour l'amélioration de la fluidité du trafic pour le transport routier.

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), raštu. − Pritariau šiam dokumentui, kadangi 2010 m. birželio 14 d. Komisija paskelbė savo „Pasaulinės navigacijos palydovų sistemos (GNSS) taikymo veiksmų planą“ ir jame pateikė 24 konkrečių veiksmų rekomendacijas. Veiksmų planas parengtas atsižvelgiant į platesnį bendrą pasaulinių navigacijos palydovų sistemų naudojimo kontekstą ir ypač į EGNOS (Europos geostacionarinės navigacinės tinklo sistemos) kūrimą ir naudojimą. EGNOS yra Galileo sistemos pirmtakas. GNSS svarbus plėtojant intelektines transporto sistemas (ITS), nes naudojant intelektines transporto sistemas galima rasti efektyvesnius, švaresnius ir saugesnius sprendimus transporto srityje, o norint tinkamai įgyvendinti daugelį ITS paslaugų būtina gerai veikianti GNSS. EGNOS ir Galileo gali labai padėti tvarkant kelių eismą, todėl būtina šiame sektoriuje vykdyti informavimo kampaniją norint geriau išnaudoti jos teikiamas galimybes, susijusias su mokesčių rinkimu, e. signalu, saugių stovėjimo vietų sunkvežimiams rezervavimu prisijungus prie tinklo ir stebėjimu realiuoju laiku, ir padidinti kelių transporto saugumą ir jo tinkamumą aplinkai.

  Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE), în scris. − Această propunere de rezoluție a Parlamentului European este importantă, deoarece SGNS (Sistemul Global de Navigație prin Satelit) are aplicabilitate în toate tipurile de transport (terestru, maritim, aerian), eficientizând traficul, ajutând creșterea economică şi diminuând poluarea. Totodată, SGNS face parte din obiectivele centrale ale Strategiei UE 2020 în materie de inovare. Pentru ca acest sistem global de navigație să fie implementat corespunzător şi uniform în toate statelor membre UE, este nevoie de alocarea unor fonduri anuale mai mari decât cele curente.

Această propunere de rezoluție sugerează, printre altele, alocarea de fonduri pentru cercetarea şi dezvoltarea unor noi aplicații SGNS care pot avea aplicabilitate în domenii ca: schimbările climaterice, agricultură, apărare civilă, sisteme de alertare în cazul dezastrelor naturale etc. Nu în ultimul rând, dezvoltarea unui sistem SGNS la nivelul UE garantează independenţa UE faţă de sistemele de navigație similare din străinătate.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I welcome the Action Plan on Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) Applications (COM(2010)308), which aims to promote the development of downstream applications through certification, standardisation and coordination with the industry and other countries as well as by disseminating information, raising awareness, implementing regulatory measures and increasing funding.

  Clemente Mastella (PPE), per iscritto. − Con la pubblicazione del piano d'azione sui sistemi globali di navigazione via satellite (GNSS) e lo sviluppo e la diffusione di EGNOS (Servizio europeo di copertura per la navigazione geostazionaria), l'Unione Europea ha voluto indicare le modalità di utilizzo civile ed assicurare che tutta l'industria europea abbia l'opportunità di competere all'interno di questo mercato strategico in forte crescita. Concordiamo con il piano d'azione mirato formulato dalla Commissione che comprende 15 interventi settoriali, 9 dei quali di immediata e importante applicazione nei trasporti soprattutto per quanto concerne la promozione di EGNOS nei paesi terzi. Infatti, per rendere questo sistema realmente efficace dal punto di vista dei trasporti, occorre far sì che la sua copertura vada oltre i confini europei, fino a raggiungere i paesi confinanti. Pertanto risulta fondamentale estenderlo alle regioni del nord, dell'est e del sud est europeo. Inoltre, nell'ambito dell'aviazione civile, chiediamo agli Stati membri di dare priorità a procedure e servizi basati su EGNOS, allo scopo di creare uno spazio aereo unico europeo. È altresì evidente che sia EGNOS che GNSS costituiscano un importante contributo per la sicurezza e la tutela dell'ambiente. Per raggiungere questi obiettivi è necessario un investimento adeguato nel settore di ricerca e sviluppo europei.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − Este é o momento para a Comissão coordenar a execução do Plano de Acção de modo a evitar duplicação a nível dos Estados-Membros, e assegurar o progresso geral na multiplicidade de domínios de actuação da União Europeia abrangidos pelas aplicações GNSS. O sistema EGNOS deve cobrir a totalidade da União Europeia e, com carácter prioritário, deve ser alargado às regiões Sul, Este e Sudeste da Europa. Para que o EGNOS seja totalmente eficaz do ponto de vista dos transportes, o seu alcance tem de corresponder a todo o território da União, chegando mesmo mais além, até aos nossos vizinhos mais próximos. No domínio da aviação civil, os Estados-Membros devem promover o desenvolvimento e a utilização de procedimentos de aterragem baseados no EGNOS; por conseguinte, reveste-se de carácter prioritário a certificação para a aviação civil dos serviços e procedimentos baseados no EGNOS. Trata-se de um requisito estratégico para a criação de um verdadeiro céu único europeu. É igualmente evidente que os sistemas EGNOS e GNSS podem, de uma maneira geral, dar um importante contributo para os objectivos ambientais e de segurança, bem como para um melhor fluxo do tráfego no sector dos transportes rodoviários, através da sua disponibilização em sistemas de portagens rodoviárias. Temos de encontrar formas de financiamento deste sistema.

  Louis Michel (ALDE), par écrit. – Les applications des systèmes globaux de navigation par satellite (GNSS) constituent une composante centrale et indispensable de l'activité dans tous les domaines liés aux transports et leur bon fonctionnement rend le transport plus sûr, plus respectueux de l'environnement et plus économique.

L'Union européenne ne peut pas rester dépendante de systèmes conçus initialement à d'autres fins par d'autres pays. Étant donné la grande valeur ajoutée qu'apportent les projets GNSS et Galileo à la politique industrielle européenne, il est essentiel d'assurer leur succès. Un plan d'action ciblé constitue la meilleure option pour insuffler un nouveau dynamisme et contribuer significativement à des objectifs en matière de sûreté et d'environnement ainsi que d'amélioration de la fluidité du trafic pour le transport routier.

Par ailleurs, les systèmes de navigation par satellite doivent assurer l'interopérabilité entre différents systèmes, y compris les systèmes conventionnels. L'extension de la couverture du système EGNOS doit être une priorité. Elle doit être étendue ensuite à l'ensemble du continent européen mais également aux pays du partenariat euro-méditerranéen, ainsi qu'au Moyen-Orient et à l'Afrique. Enfin, la Commission devrait proposer des mesures afin de garantir un niveau de financement suffisant sans porter atteinte aux autres fonds alloués à la politique des transports.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − Satellite navigation systems should ensure interoperability between different systems and should also allow intermodal use in passenger and freight transport services. Therefore I voted in favour.

  Rolandas Paksas (EFD), raštu. − Balsavau už šią rezoliuciją dėl ES politikos priemonių trumpuoju ir vidutiniu laikotarpiu, skirtų pasaulinės navigacijos palydovų sistemos taikymo transporto programoms, visų pirma dėl to, kad visos Europos mastu didelis dėmesys turi būti skiriamas GNSS ir Galileo projektams transporto sektoriuje. Ypatingas vaidmuo šioje srityje tenka Komisijai, kuri turi sukurti tokį reguliavimo mechanizmą, kuris pašalintų įvairias biurokratines ir kitas kliūtis bei sudarytų palankias sąlygas sklandžiam ir efektyviam šių projektų įgyvendinimui. Be to, labai svarbu, jog būtų užtikrintas tinkamas ir pakankamas šių projektų finansavimas remiantis skaidrumo ir proporcingumo kriterijais, ypatingą dėmesį skiriant MVĮ. Turime skatinti, kad GNSS ir Galileo programos būtų naudojamos civilinėje aviacijoje ir tokiu būdu prisidėtų prie bendros Europos dangaus oro eismo valdymo mokslinių tyrimų programos sukūrimo ir sudarytų palankias sąlygas jos įgyvendinimui. Labai svarbu, kad Europos palydovinės navigacijos programos būtų pritaikytos įvairių rūšių transporto paslaugoms ir taikomos visoje Europoje, o ne tik tam tikrose šalyse, nes minėtų programų efektyvus įgyvendinimas padidintų krovinių transporto efektyvumą ir padėtų išspręsti daugelį transporto saugumo bei aplinkosaugos problemų.

  Alfredo Pallone (PPE), per iscritto. − Cari colleghi, ho votato a favore della relazione della onorevole Ţicău perché ritengo giusto che nuove tecnologie, come i sistemi di navigazione satellitare, sempre più diffusi e utili per la collettività, vengano applicate al settore dei trasporti. Nel sistema globale in cui viviamo, l'UE deve adattare le sue politiche alle esigenze dei vari settori e prevedere un sistema globale di navigazione satellitare che si integri perfettamente col ben noto sistema GPS tanto da fornire indicazioni istantanee e senza margini d'errore. Con un mercato in ampia crescita e cifre stimate oltre i 200 miliardi di euro nei prossimi 10 anni la navigazione satellitare ha bisogno di opportunità di finanziamento adeguate che ne favoriscano uno sviluppo concreto.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − Em 14 de Junho de 2010, a Comissão publicou o seu Plano de Acção sobre aplicações do sistema global de navegação por satélite, contendo 24 recomendações específicas de acções a desenvolver. Este sector, na sua globalidade, tem experimentado uma enorme expansão desde a primeira disponibilização de serviços GPS a partir das instalações de satélite americanas em 2000. De facto, o valor do mercado global estimado era de 124 mil milhões de euros em 2008, projectando-se que atinja os 230 até 2025. Deste valor, 20 % provêm de Sistemas de Transporte Inteligentes e 5 % de aplicações de segurança, incluindo aplicações de segurança dos transportes. Este projecto tem o intuito de fornecer sinais garantidos para utilização civil e assegurar à indústria europeia, a todos os níveis, a possibilidade de competir neste mercado estratégico em crescimento. A quota de mercado actual da Europa, de 25 %, está aquém das expectativas. O EGNOS é compatível com o sistema GPS, mas oferecerá mais possibilidades quando o Galileo ficar operacional em 2013, tendo agora um nível de exactidão dez vezes superior ao do GPS. Estes factos, associados às implicações imediatas e importantes no sector dos transportes, que incluiu, designadamente, sistemas avançados de assistência ao condutor, motivam o meu voto favorável.

  Aldo Patriciello (PPE), per iscritto. − Il settore dei sistemi globali di navigazione via satellite ha vissuto una forte espansione dalla sua prima utilizzazione nel 2000 in America. Si calcola che nel 2025 il valore globale del suo mercato sarà di 230 miliardi, di cui il 20% è rappresentato dai sistemi di trasporto intelligenti e il 5% da applicazioni di sicurezza.

Nel giugno 2010 la Commissione ha pubblicato il piano d'azione sui sistemi globali di navigazione europei via satellite (GNSS) e in particolare per il sistema europeo EGNOS: questo piano comprende anche di 24 raccomandazioni d'intervento specifiche. Per avere un maggiore sviluppo del sistema EGNOS, si devono privilegiare le misure proposte nel piano d'azione e occorrono assolutamente investimenti e finanziamenti adeguati nelle attività di ricerca e sviluppo. Infatti una carenza di finanziamenti comunitari per le piccole e medie imprese, per la partecipazione a questo progetto di ricerca tramite il 7°/8° PQ, lo renderebbe meno attraente per gli operatori commerciali. Per un maggiore sviluppo del sistema EGNOS e affinché questo sistema non soffra di una mancanza di finanziamenti comunitari, il mio voto a questa proposta è favorevole.

  Phil Prendergast (S&D), in writing. − The Commission’s Action Plan on Global Navigation Satellite Systems shows there is huge demand in a market projected to be worth EUR 230 billion by 2025. However, Europe is failing to compete globally in this field and our current market share of 25% is below what is expected. We must ensure we take the necessary steps to ensure this industry achieves its full potential. The European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service (EGNOS) is ten times more accurate than GPS and it is predicted that accuracy to 45 centimetres can be achieved in the near future. This system has obvious uses in the fields of air and sea transport and can also be used in road transport. However, we must be mindful of encroaching too much on European citizens as there are obvious personal privacy issues with such technology. Overall I welcome ENGOS and GNSS as they can make an important contribution to safety and environmental objectives and I believe adequate investment in the related research and development will be essential. But the funding gap must be closed in order to reap the benefits of these projects.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), por escrito. − Na sequência do Plano de Acção sobre aplicações do sistema global de navegação por satélite (GNSS), publicado pela Comissão a 14 de Junho de 2010, com vista a incrementar o sistema europeu complementar de navegação geoestacionária EGNOS, devem envidar-se esforços para estender o sistema de navegação a todo o espaço europeu. Na verdade, trata-se de um sistema cuja expansão pode oferecer grandes vantagens a nível económico e de segurança. Para o efeito, é necessário, porém, um maior investimento em inovação e desenvolvimento. Só assim, por um lado, o sistema atingirá o seu escopo último e, por outro, chegará a um grau de maturação que permita o derradeiro retorno do ponto de vista económico. Trata-se de uma área, de resto, que tem conhecido um enorme desenvolvimento. Estima-se, por exemplo, que a breve prazo seja possível alcançar um grau de precisão da localização geográfica até 45 centímetros. Por estas razões, votei favoravelmente o presente relatório.

  Crescenzio Rivellini (PPE), per iscritto. − Si è votato, oggi, durante la sessione plenaria al Parlamento europeo di Strasburgo la relazione "Applicazioni per i trasporti del sistema globale di navigazione satellitare". Nel 2010 la Commissione ha pubblicato il piano d'azione sui sistemi globali di navigazione via satellite (GNSS). Il piano di azione delinea i rimedi necessari per far in modo che venga garantito il successo della navigazione satellitare. Il piano di azione si inserisce nel contesto dell´ampia diffusione dei sistemi globali di navigazione via satellite e, nello specifico, lo sviluppo e la diffusione di EGNOS (Servizio europeo di copertura per la navigazione geostazionaria).

EGNOS è il precursore del sistema Galileo. L'UE ha avviato i progetti EGNOS e Galileo per fornire segnali destinati all'uso civile, e assicurare che tutta l'industria europea abbia un'opportunità di competere all'interno di questo mercato strategico in crescita. Io credo sia necessario, cosi come evidenziato dal collega on. Ticau, che venga predisposto un finanziamento aggiuntivo al programma Galileo e quindi la possibilità di prevedere un fondo di riserva Galileo all´interno del bilancio comunitario per coprire i costi addizionali, evitando di danneggiare gli altri programmi.

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. − I voted in favour of this report. On 14 June 2010 the Commission published its Action Plan on Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS), which included 24 specific recommendations for action. The background to the Action Plan is the general deployment of global satellite navigation systems and specifically the development and deployment of EGNOS (European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service), the forerunner of the Galileo system. The sector as a whole has experienced enormous expansion since the first provision of GPS services from American satellite facilities in 2000. The estimated global market value in 2008 was EUR 124 billion, and it is projected to reach EUR 230 billion by 2025. Of this, 20% is represented by Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) and 5% by safety applications, including transport safety applications.

The EU launched the EGNOS project (and Galileo) to provide signals guaranteed for civilian use and to ensure that European industry at all levels has an opportunity to compete in this growing strategic market. Europe’s current market share of 25% is below expectations. EGNOS is GPS compatible but it will offer more possibilities when Galileo becomes operational in 2013. EGNOS is 10 times more accurate than GPS.

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), per iscritto. − Approvo, assieme al relatore, il piano d'azione della Commissione per lo sviluppo di EGNOS e Galileo, basato su nove misure orizzontali di immediata applicazione nel settore dei trasporti. Una diffusione capillare di EGNOS su tutto il territorio europeo fino ai paesi terzi confinanti, avrà un forte impatto positivo sull'intera economia dell'Unione e sugli obiettivi di sicurezza e ambiente, oltre a favorire un flusso di traffico su strada più scorrevole. Per raggiungere tali obiettivi però, è necessario un investimento adeguato nel settore di ricerca e sviluppo, finora insufficiente. L'Unione europea infatti è l'unico blocco commerciale che non finanzia direttamente il proprio programma sul GNSS.

  Vilja Savisaar-Toomast (ALDE), kirjalikult. − Lugupeetud juhataja, lugupeetud kolleegid! Globaalsete navigatsioonisatelliitide süsteemide transpordirakenduste raport toetab ning rõhutab antud valdkonna komisjoni aastate 2010-2013 tegevuskava rolli ja olulisust ning selle mõju transpordile. Tegevuskava üheksa meedet on vahetult ja olulisel määral seotud transpordiga. Globaalsete navigatsioonisatelliitide süsteemide kasutamine ja arendamine nähakse ette kõigis transpordiliikides. Äärmiselt suurt rolli mängib see muidugi maantee- ja lennutranspordis. Meetmetest tasub kindlasti välja tuua ühtse Euroopa taeva loomise hõlbustamine ja intelligentsete transpordisüsteemide rakenduste loomine.

Lisaks annab satelliitide kasutamine võimaluse väga paljude erinevate rakenduste välja töötamiseks ning kasutamiseks. Loodan siiralt, et käesolevas raportis märgitud süsteemide, rakenduste ja lahenduste väljatöötamine ja töösse rakendamine läheb planeeritult ning juba lähiaastatel leiavad rakendust erinevad lahendused, mis lihtsustavad meie ettevõtete ja kodanike elu ning suurendavad liiklusohutust nii merel, õhus kui ka maanteel. Aitäh!

  Catherine Stihler (S&D), in writing. − I welcome this report, which deals with developing and deploying European systems to exploit Galileo and other satellite systems and their applications in the transport domain.

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. − O GNSS tem actualmente implicações em todas as políticas da UE, e o seu desenvolvimento e aplicação terão um efeito catalisador na concretização da UE 2020 e na criação de uma indústria europeia estratégica e competitiva. No que diz respeito aos transportes, as aplicações do GNSS representam 20 % da totalidade das aplicações em termos de volume, e 44 % em termos de valor. Uma indústria que representa um mercado mundial em crescimento, no qual a Europa deve tomar a dianteira e alcançar a sua autonomia. As aplicações e serviços do GNSS no domínio dos transportes têm implicações variadas na segurança, na eficácia, nos custos económicos e ambientais de todos os modos de transportes. Outro elemento que considero importante realçar é que, para que haja um desenvolvimento equitativo, a cobertura do EGNOS deve abranger todos os Estados-Membros e possibilitar a interoperabilidade e compatibilidade com os países terceiros, de forma a tornar este mercado concorrencial e dinâmico. Por último, reforço a ideia do relator de que o novo QFP deve assegurar níveis adequados de financiamento, tanto para a investigação e o desenvolvimento como para a aplicação do GNSS, e devem ser criados mecanismos de facilidade de acesso ao mesmo por parte das PME, para o desenvolvimento e a comercialização das aplicações do GNSS.

  Angelika Werthmann (NI), schriftlich. − Ich habe dem Bericht zugestimmt. Nachdem der europäische Marktanteil auf dem wachsenden Markt der Satellitennavigationssysteme hinter den Erwartungen zurückgeblieben ist, legte die Kommission im Juni letzten Jahres einen Aktionsplan für die Anwendungen des GNSS vor. Die Kommission hat sich sinnvollerweise für einen zielgerichteten Aktionsplan entschieden, dessen Empfehlungen beinhalten nicht nur die Verwirklichung des "Einheitlichen Europäischen Luftraums", bereits eine mehrfach bestätigte Priorität der EU, sondern auch im Bereich des Straßenverkehrs werden GNSS einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Verwirklichung von Sicherheits- und Umweltschutzzielen leisten. Insgesamt soll der Aktionsplan sicherstellen, dass auch der europäische Markt in dieser Branche, dessen weltweiter Marktwert Prognosen zufolge bis 2025 weiter auf 230 Milliarden Euro wachsen soll, konkurrieren kann.

  Artur Zasada (PPE), na piśmie. − Jestem przekonany, że podjęcie działań na rzecz wykorzystania EGNOS i GALILEO w lotnictwie cywilnym jest kluczowe dla utworzenia jednolitego europejskiego systemu zarządzania ruchem lotniczym. Niestety, tak jak podkreśliła poseł sprawozdawczyni w swoim dokumencie, wprowadzenie systemu Galileo napotyka coraz to nowe problemy. Zgadzam się z wezwaniem Komisji do szybkiej certyfikacji EGNOS dla lotnictwa cywilnego. Wielokrotnie już podkreślałem, że jestem entuzjastą koncepcji Single European Sky i jednolitego systemu zarządzania ruchem lotniczym SESAR.

Szybkie i pełne urzeczywistnienie europejskiej przestrzeni powietrznej jest bardzo ważnym strategicznie krokiem w kierunku rzeczywistej integracji Wspólnoty i wzmocnienia wspólnego rynku. Bez systemu GALILEO nie będzie systemu SESAR, a bez niego nie będzie Single European Sky 2. Pamiętajmy, że zwłaszcza w tym obszarze mamy do czynienia z systemem naczyń połączonych. Słabość jednego elementu będzie miała fatalny wpływ na pozostałe.

Έκθεση: Brian Simpson (A7-0079/2011)

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Aprovo o relatório em causa, sendo necessário um quadro para avaliar os acordos aéreos individuais, embora os parlamentares necessitem de seguir as negociações em vez de serem deixados para trás, ficando sujeitos à escolha de aceitarem ou rejeitarem o texto final.

  Sophie Auconie (PPE), par écrit. – Le traité de Lisbonne, qui est entré en vigueur le 1er décembre 2009, a élargi les circonstances dans lesquelles l'approbation du Parlement est requise avant de conclure un accord international. Les accords sur le transport aérien font désormais partie de cette catégorie. C'est pourquoi je soutiens le rapport de mon collègue Brian Simpson, sur la mise en place d’une série de critères visant à évaluer leur contenu. Aussi, je pense qu'il faut promouvoir un accès équilibré aux marchés et des possibilités d’investissement, ainsi qu’une concurrence loyale, notamment en matière de subventions publiques et de normes sociales et environnementales.

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. − Įsigaliojus Lisabonos sutarčiai, susitarimams, priskiriamiems sričiai, kuriai taikoma įprasta teisėkūros procedūra, reikia Parlamento pritarimo. Balsavau už šį pranešimą, kuriuo siekiama nustatyti bendruosius principus, kaip turėtų būti vertinami oro susisiekimo susitarimai atsižvelgiant ir į jų turinį, ir į procedūras, kurias Europos Parlamento transporto ir turizmo komitetas gali priimti, siekdamas užtikrinti, kad vykstant deryboms dėl susitarimų būtų tinkamai informuojamas ir turėtų galimybių pateikti savo prioritetus gerokai prieš tai, kai jam bus pateiktas prašymas ir reikės rinktis duoti pritarimą arba jo neduoti. Išsamūs oro susisiekimo susitarimai su kaimyninėmis šalimis arba reikšmingais pasauliniais partneriais galėtų būti labai naudingi keleiviams, krovinių vežimo operatoriams ir oro linijoms kaip galimybės naudotis rinkomis ir teisės aktų derinimo priemonės, kuriomis siekiama skatinti sąžiningą konkurenciją, įskaitant klausimus, susijusius su valstybės subsidijomis, socialiniais ir aplinkosaugos standartais. Pritariu pranešėjui, jog Parlamentas turėtų stebėti procesą nuo pat pradžios ir aktyviai dalyvauti aptariant svarstomas temas bei siekiant žinoti esamą derybų dėl oro susisiekimo susitarimų padėtį. Taip pat Komisija turėtų žinoti kriterijus, kuriuos Parlamentas taikys vertindamas susitarimą ir jo elementus.

  Sergio Berlato (PPE), per iscritto. − Con l'entrata in vigore del trattato di Lisbona si è ampliato il numero dei casi in cui è richiesta l'approvazione del Parlamento europeo per la conclusione di un accordo internazionale. Gli accordi aerei rientrano ora in questa categoria. Le nuove competenze parlamentari stabilite dal trattato implicano nuove responsabilità per garantire che il Parlamento e la commissione competente siano adeguatamente informati circa la preparazione degli accordi sui quali tale istituzione sarà invitata a dare la propria approvazione. Alla luce di tale cambiamento, accolgo con favore la corrispondente nuova responsabilità del Parlamento di controllare più da vicino la conduzione dei negoziati. Colgo l'occasione per sottolineare in questa sede che, al fine di potersi trovare nelle migliori condizioni per valutare se concedere o meno l'approvazione al termine dei negoziati, è fondamentale che il Parlamento segua il processo fin dalla sua fase iniziale, anziché dopo la conclusione dei negoziati stessi.

Da ultimo, rinnovo l'invito rivolto alla Commissione di alimentare uno scambio costante di informazioni con il Parlamento europeo presentando regolarmente delle relazioni in cui si analizzino i punti di forza e di debolezza degli accordi esistenti. Ritengo, infatti, che questo strumento consenta al Parlamento di valutare in modo più efficace gli accordi futuri.

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), per iscritto. − La presente mozione per una risoluzione del Parlamento sulla stipulazione di accordi aerei internazionali riconosce molti dei principi chiave sostenuti dalla Lega Nord. Tra questi, compare la necessità di garantire pari diritti di accesso al mercato alle compagnie aeree di tutti gli Stati membri, evitando manovre di dumping occulto finanziato direttamente dalle politiche nazionali, contrarie alle norme comunitarie sugli aiuti di Stato. La mozione esprime inoltre preoccupazione per la sicurezza dei cittadini, riconoscendo l'importanza fondamentale della elaborazione di un quadro di riferimento in materia di sicurezza. Un ulteriore principio difeso dalla Lega Nord e accolto nella presente mozione riguarda la trasparenza tra l'operato delle istituzioni europee e i cittadini dell'Unione, i cui interessi sono direttamente rappresentati nel Parlamento. A tale fine, la mozione sottolinea infatti la necessità che la Commissione non venga meno alla propria responsabilità di tenere costantemente informato il Parlamento sul corso delle sue negoziazioni con attori terzi. Per le ragioni fin qui elencate, ho deciso di esprimermi a favore di questa mozione.

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau dėl šio pranešimo, nes pritariu, jog išsamūs ES oro susisiekimo susitarimai su trečiosiomis šalimis tik pasitarnautų keleiviams, krovinių vežimo operatoriams ir oro linijoms daugeliu aspektų: saugumo, aplinkos apsaugos standartų palaikymo bei palankios verslo aplinkos skatinimo. Šio pranešimo tikslas − supaprastinti bei padaryti aiškesnį oro susisiekimo susitarimų sudarymą bei sprendimų dėl tokių susitarimų priėmimą, Europos Parlamentui iš anksto informuojant Komisiją, kokiais kriterijais jis remsis pritardamas ar nepritardamas vieno ar kito susitarimo ES vardu sudarymui. Pranešime Parlamentas taip pat atkreipia Komisijos bei Tarybos dėmesį į susitarimus, kurių sudarymas galėtų pasitarnauti ES bei jos piliečiams, tačiau kurių ES dar nėra sudariusi dėl vienokių ar kitokių priežasčių su tokiomis šalimis kaip, pavyzdžiui, Rusija, Kinija, Japonija bei Indija.

  Sebastian Valentin Bodu (PPE), în scris. − Tratatul de la Lisabona, care a intrat în vigoare la 1 decembrie 2009, a mărit numărul situațiilor în care este necesară o aprobare din partea Parlamentului în vederea încheierii unui acord internațional. Astfel, demersul Comisiei pentru transport și turism de a elabora un raport din proprie inițiativă cu scopul de a stabili anumite principii generale referitoare la modul în care acordurile privind transportul aerian ar trebui să fie evaluate vine ca unul firesc. Acordurile globale cu țările vecine sau parteneri importanți la nivel mondial pot furniza beneficii substanțiale, oferind pasagerilor și operatorilor de transport de marfă servicii îmbunătățite – atât în ceea ce privește diversitatea, cât și costurile – permițând în același timp noi oportunități și un avantaj competitiv companiilor aeriene.

Iar convergența reglementărilor poate aduce un aport însemnat la promovarea concurenței loiale, în special în ceea ce privește subvențiile de stat și standardele sociale și de mediu. Este regretabil faptul că Consiliul încă nu a acordat Comisiei un mandat pentru a negocia un acord global privind transportul aerian cu parteneri comerciali importanți, cum ar fi Republica Populară Chineză și India, în ciuda propunerii din 2005. Dezvoltarea economică din această regiune sporește valoarea unor astfel de acorduri.

  Vito Bonsignore (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho espresso voto favorevole su tale relazione d'iniziativa perché la crescente importanza del contributo del settore dell'aviazione comporta molti benefici all'economia europea, ma anche diversi svantaggi. Per consentire all'istituzione di cui faccio parte di conoscere nei minimi dettagli quale tipo di accordo merita l'approvazione o meno, ritengo sia opportuno conferire al Parlamento maggiori poteri di controllo. Il voto che ci appresteremmo a dare sarebbe il risultato di un'attenta verifica sul frutto dei negoziati che dovranno promuovere il rispetto delle leggi internazionali di settore in materia di diritti sociali, il pieno riconoscimento delle pratiche e procedure di certificazione, lo scambio dei dati sulla sicurezza e delle ispezioni comuni. Solo approvando accordi ambiziosi e che rispecchino i principi ai quali fa riferimento l'Unione europea potremmo dare un valido contributo all'attività e al miglioramento dell'UE.

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), por escrito. − Creio que a convergência regulamentar suscitada por certos acordos aéreos internacionais se vai concretizar na criação de condições de concorrência equitativas, o que não só é benéfico para a indústria dos países envolvidos, mas constitui também uma oportunidade para uniformizar e reforçar as normas sociais e ambientais. Também os serviços prestados a passageiros e a operadores de transporte de mercadorias sofrerão notáveis melhorias, que, de outro modo, como através de acordos bilaterais, não serão tão visíveis.

  Carlos Coelho (PPE), por escrito. − A celebração de acordos globais sobre transportes aéreos com países vizinhos ou importantes parceiros mundiais reveste-se de uma especial importância em termos de acesso ao mercado e de convergência regulamentar, promovendo condições de concorrência equitativas, o mesmo nível de normas sociais e ambientais, etc., o que traz benefícios para todas as partes: passageiros, operadores de transporte de mercadorias e companhias aéreas. Também ao nível dos acordos horizontais é importante harmonizar os acordos bilaterais existentes com a legislação comunitária, de forma a proporcionar uma maior segurança jurídica, aumentar a transparência e criar benefícios adicionais em termos de simplificação, ao mesmo tempo que se garante que todas as companhias aéreas da UE possam usufruir dos mesmos direitos. Com a entrada em vigor do Tratado de Lisboa, o Parlamento Europeu passou a ter um papel de maior relevância nesta área, passando a ser obrigatória a aprovação do PE para a celebração destes acordos internacionais. Apoio, assim, este relatório que pretende definir alguns princípios gerais e um conjunto de normas coerente para a avaliação destes acordos, ressalvando a importância de o PE ser mantido informado e poder acompanhar o processo desde o seu início, sendo-lhe dada a oportunidade de expressar as suas preocupações e prioridades.

  Rachida Dati (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai voté en faveur de ce rapport pour deux raisons principales. Premièrement, le rapport préconise de donner une place plus importante au Parlement européen, dans le contexte des nouveaux pouvoirs que lui confère le Traité de Lisbonne en matière de conclusion des accords internationaux avec les pays tiers. Il souligne, à ce titre, la nécessité d'un renforcement du dialogue avec la Commission européenne aux différents stades de la négociation et dans le suivi des accords en vigueur. Deuxièmement, le rapport insiste sur la nécessité de conclure des accords sur la sécurité aérienne avec les pays tiers dans lesquels existe un important secteur de construction aéronautique; c'est une nécessité au regard de l'exigence légitime de garantie d'une sécurité aérienne sans cesse accrue.

  Christine De Veyrac (PPE), par écrit. – Depuis l'entrée en vigueur du traité de Lisbonne, le Parlement européen a davantage de pouvoirs pour intervenir dans la conclusion d'accords internationaux entre l'Union européenne et les pays tiers. Le rapport de Brian Simpson adopté aujourd'hui va ainsi permettre de mieux définir le rôle du Parlement dans les négociations internationales en matière d'aviation.

Je me félicite que le Parlement insiste particulièrement pour que les accords conclus par l'Union européenne prévoient une reconnaissance mutuelle des normes de sécurité et de sûreté aérienne, ainsi que des garanties pour une meilleure protection des droits des passagers.

  Edite Estrela (S&D), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente o relatório relativo aos "acordos aéreos internacionais no âmbito do Tratado de Lisboa", porque sublinha a importância de o Parlamento ser "imediata e plenamente informado em todas as fases" do processo de negociação de acordos entre a União e países terceiros ou organizações internacionais.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − O Tratado de Lisboa conferiu novas competências ao Parlamento Europeu no tocante à aprovação de acordos internacionais. De entre esses, os acordos aéreos internacionais revestem-se de particular importância, considerando as múltiplas necessidades de segurança e de coordenação que envolvem. A avaliação da sua bondade requer critérios rigorosos de escrutínio e um acompanhamento dos termos da negociação. Espero que a Comissão e o Parlamento cooperem activamente de modo a melhorar continuamente a qualidade e rigor deste tipo de acordos.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − O presente relatório, da autoria de Brian Simpson, versa sobre os acordos aéreos internacionais no âmbito do Tratado sobre o Funcionamento da União Europeia (TFUE). A partir de 1 de Dezembro de 2009, com a entrada em vigor do TFUE, o Parlamento Europeu (PE) viu os seus poderes reforçados, assumindo responsabilidades de co-decisão em muitas matérias, entre as quais os serviços aéreos. Neste sentido, a Comissão dos Transportes e do Turismo apresentou este relatório, que se afigura extremamente positivo e oportuno, definindo alguns princípios gerais com os quais concordo plenamente. O PE tem, assim, a possibilidade de acompanhar todo o processo desde o início através das informações que lhe são prestadas pela Comissão, particularmente através da Direcção-Geral da Mobilidade e dos Transportes, e de apreciar, conscientemente, os acordos que vier a ser chamado a votar, sejam acordos horizontais, globais ou de segurança.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Os acordos aéreos internacionais previstos pelo Tratado de Lisboa são acordos supranacionais, que visam sobrepor-se aos acordos bilaterais existentes, realizados pelos Estados-Membros. A nossa posição contrária a este princípio tem vindo a ser reiterada nos sucessivos acordos sobre os quais o Parlamento se tem vindo a pronunciar, e devidamente acompanhada da crítica ao sentido global destes acordos – que apontam, sem excepção, para a liberalização e privatização do sector. O relator (significativamente, oriundo da social-democracia) refere que os acordos sobre transportes aéreos com países vizinhos ou importantes parceiros mundiais podem proporcionar benefícios substanciais aos passageiros, aos operadores de transporte de mercadorias e às companhias aéreas.

Todavia, a realidade – neste como noutros sectores em que a liberalização avançou (veja-se o caso do transporte ferroviário) – desmente estas promessas de benefícios. Se há de facto quem ganhe com os processos de concentração monopolista no sector do transporte aéreo – que inevitavelmente se segue à liberalização e à livre concorrência – não são nem os passageiros, nem os trabalhadores, nem muitas das companhias aéreas ditas de bandeira, mas sim os grandes grupos europeus do sector. São razões para o nosso voto contra.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Este relatório refere-se aos acordos aéreos internacionais previstos no Tratado de Lisboa. São acordos supranacionais com o objectivo de harmonização e sobreposição aos acordos bilaterais existentes, realizados pelos Estados-Membros.

O relator refere que os acordos sobre transportes aéreos com países vizinhos ou importantes parceiros mundiais podem proporcionar benefícios substanciais aos passageiros, aos operadores de transporte de mercadorias e às companhias aéreas, através do acesso ao mercado.

No entanto, a verdade é que a prática destes acordos, ao nível da UE, já nos demonstrou que tais promessas de benefícios não passam de uma falsidade quer para os trabalhadores quer para os passageiros.

A maioria destes acordos tem como objectivo implícito a abertura do mercado e a liberalização do sector, tendo por argumentação a livre concorrência ou evitar as suas distorções, os benefícios que as companhias mais poderosas daí podem retirar e a falsa solução ambiental para a redução das emissões de carbono, de inclusão da aviação no regime de comércio de licenças de emissão.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − Po tom, ako 1. decembra 2009 vstúpila do platnosti Lisabonská zmluva, sa rozšírili podmienky, za ktorých sa požaduje súhlas Parlamentu na uzatvorenie medzinárodnej dohody. Dohody o leteckej doprave v súčasnosti patria práve do tejto kategórie. Predtým sa o takýchto dohodách s Parlamentom len konzultovalo. Nové právomoci Parlamentu stanovené Lisabonskou zmluvou však prinášajú i nové povinnosti.

Zastávam názor, že Parlament musí byť schopný sledovať priebeh rokovaní predtým, než bude konfrontovaný s možnosťou prijať alebo odmietnuť konečné znenie jednotlivých medzinárodných dohôd. Navyše, relevantné kritériá pre letecké dohody s tretími krajinami by mali zahŕňať možnosť vyváženého prístupu na trhy a k investičným príležitostiam, rovnako ako spravodlivú hospodársku súťaž v oblasti štátnych dotácií a environmentálnych a sociálnych štandardov.

  Lorenzo Fontana (EFD), per iscritto. − Signor presidente, onorevoli colleghi, le nuove competenze derivanti dal Trattato di Lisbona ci permettono anche di poter incidere per quanto riguarda lo spazio aereo nei suoi accordi. La relazione pone l'accento sulla concorrenza leale, monitorando pertanto anche i finanziamenti statali, un occhio di riguardo alla questione ambientale e uno standard elevato per i diritti dei passeggeri. Tutto questo ci trova favorevoli e per questo la relazione ha il mio appoggio.

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), raštu. − Pritariau šiam dokumentui, kadangi 2009 m. gruodžio 1 d. įsigaliojusi Lisabonos sutartis išplėtė sąlygas, kurioms esant ir siekiant sudaryti tarptautinį susitarimą reikia Parlamento pritarimo. Šiuo metu aviacijos susitarimai patenka į šią kategoriją, nes jie priskiriami sričiai, kuriai taikoma įprasta teisėkūros procedūra. Atsižvelgdamas į šį pasikeitimą Transporto ir turizmo komitetas nusprendė savo iniciatyva parengti pranešimą, kuriuo siekiama nustatyti kai kuriuos bendruosius principus, susijusius su tuo, kaip turėtų būti vertinami oro susisiekimo susitarimai turint mintyje ir jų turinį, ir procedūras, kurias Komitetas gali priimti siekdamas užtikrinti, kad vykstant deryboms bus tinkamai informuojamas ir turės galimybių pateikti savo prioritetus gerokai prieš tai, kai jam bus pateiktas prašymas ir reikės rinktis duoti pritarimą arba jo neduoti.

  Giovanni La Via (PPE), per iscritto. − Egregio Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, nella seduta odierna ho espresso il mio voto a favore della relazione del collega Simpson sugli accordi aerei internazionali a norma del Trattato di Lisbona. Infatti, a seguito dell'entrata in vigore del trattato, avvenuta il primo dicembre 2009, il Parlamento europeo ha acquisito il diritto a concedere la propria approvazione in relazione agli accordi che riguardano settori ai quali si applica la procedura legislativa ordinaria. Si tratta di un notevole passo in avanti, soprattutto con riferimento al c.d. deficit democratico dell'UE, se pensiamo che in precedenza il Parlamento, organo democraticamente eletto dai cittadini europei, veniva solo consultato in merito alla conclusione di simili accordi. Ci aspettiamo quindi che la Commissione esecutiva faccia proprio il nostro invito a mantenere il flusso delle informazioni e a fornire alla commissione competente tutte le notizie relative all'intenzione di proporre negoziati con l'obiettivo di concludere e modificare accordi aerei internazionali, in modo tale da consentire all'intero Parlamento di esprimere con piena cognizione il suo parere.

  Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE), în scris. − Tratatul de la Lisabona instituie noi competenţe parlamentare, dând, astfel, o putere de decizie mai mare Parlamentului European şi totodată responsabilitatea garantării bunului mers al lucrurilor, a informării şi a siguranţei cetăţenilor. Convergenţa reglementărilor comisiilor competente din cadrul Parlamentului European, precum şi recunoaşterea reciprocă a normelor de siguranţă şi securitate şi asigurarea celui mai înalt standard posibil referitor la acordurile internaţionale privind transportul aerian aduc beneficii atât pentru pasageri şi pentru operatorii de marfă, din punct de vedere logistic şi economic, cât şi pentru companiile aeriene.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I voted for this Report which considers that comprehensive air agreements with neighbouring countries or significant global partners can deliver substantial benefits to passengers, freight operators and airlines, by means both of market access and of regulatory convergence to promote fair competition, including with regard to state subsidies and social and environmental standards providing certain standards and conditions are met.

  Clemente Mastella (PPE), per iscritto. − Con il Trattato di Lisbona, gli accordi aerei richiedono l'approvazione del Parlamento Europeo, poiché riguardano un settore al quale si applica la procedura legislativa ordinaria. Concordiamo con l'idea della Commissione per i trasporti e il turismo di stabilire alcuni principi generali in merito alle modalità di valutazione degli accordi aerei da un punto di vista sostanziale. Inoltre, è necessario che essa sia adeguatamente informata nel corso dei negoziati, per poter rendere note le proprie priorità ben prima che venga richiesto di esprimere un parere favorevole o contrario all'approvazione; pertanto è necessario che il Parlamento segua il procedimento normativo dall'inizio. Gli accordi generali con i Paesi vicini o con importanti partner globali possono fornire sostanziali benefici ai passeggeri ed agli operatori del trasporto europei grazie al miglioramento dei servizi, sia in termini sia di varietà che di costo, offrendo al tempo stesso alle compagnie aeree nuove opportunità di profitto. Una convergenza normativa potrà essere molto importante per promuovere una concorrenza leale. Sosteniamo infine, la rilevanza dell'avvio di negoziati con importanti partner commerciali dell'Asia, quali la Repubblica popolare cinese e l'India, poiché la crescita economica dell'intera regione rende tali accordi sempre più rilevanti per lo sviluppo del commercio mondiale.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − A aprovação do Tratado de Lisboa aumentou os casos em que a aprovação do Parlamento é necessária para a conclusão de acordos internacionais. Os acordos sobre serviços aéreos pertencem agora a esta categoria porque abrangem uma área à qual é aplicável o processo legislativo ordinário. Assim, a Comissão dos Transportes e do Turismo resolveu propor este relatório de iniciativa com o objectivo de definir alguns princípios gerais sobre o modo como os acordos sobre transportes aéreos devem ser avaliados em termos de substância e dos procedimentos que a comissão pode adoptar para se manter devidamente informada ao longo das negociações e para ter a oportunidade de expressar as suas prioridades muito antes de ser confrontada com a decisão final de aprovação ou rejeição. Os novos poderes parlamentares previstos no Tratado de Lisboa criam uma nova responsabilidade de assegurar que o Parlamento e a sua comissão competente estejam devidamente informados sobre a preparação dos acordos que mais tarde serão chamados a aprovar. A esta obrigação corresponde uma responsabilidade de controlo mais próximo da condução das negociações. É assim necessário ter estes pressupostos em conta aquando das futuras negociações de acordos internacionais.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − The report covers the framework to evaluate individual air agreements, taking into account the changes under the Lisbon Treaty, to be used for all future negotiations, conclusions and parliamentary approval thereof (via consent). Relevant criteria for air agreements with third countries include balanced access to markets and investment opportunities, as well as fair competition in terms of state subsidies, environmental and social standards. I voted in favour.

  Rolandas Paksas (EFD), raštu. − Išsamūs oro susisiekimo susitarimai su kaimyninėmis šalimis arba reikšmingais pasauliniais partneriais yra naudingi ne tik krovinių vežimo operatoriams ir oro linijoms, bet ir keleiviams. Visų pirma, dėl tokių susitarimų visoms Sąjungos oro linijoms bus užtikrinamos vienodos teisės. Be to, bus taikomi aukšti skrydžių saugos ir saugumo standartai, kurie yra gyvybiškai svarbūs keleiviams, įgulai ir apskritai visam aviacijos sektoriui. Atsižvelgiant į minėtų susitarimų naudą, manau, kad tikslinga nustatyti bendruosius principus, kurie būtų naudojami vertinant oro susisiekimo susitarimus. Svarbu, kad kiekviename susitarime būtų sušvelninami ar panaikinami naudojimosi rinka ir investavimo galimybių apribojimai, išlaikyti ir sugriežtinti socialiniai ir aplinkosaugos standartai, užtikrinta tinkama duomenų ir privatumo apsauga, nustatytas abipusis saugumo standartų pripažinimas ir išlaikytas aukštas keleivių teisių lygis. Atkreiptinas dėmesys į tai, kad Komisija turi imtis neatidėliotinų veiksmų, kad būtų išspręstas skrydžių virš Sibiro teritorijos klausimas ir pradėtos derybos dėl tarptautinių oro susisiekimo susitarimų su Japonija ir Rusija.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − O Tratado de Lisboa, em vigor depois de 1 de Dezembro de 2009, aumentou os casos em que a aprovação do Parlamento é necessária para a conclusão de acordos internacionais. Os acordos sobre serviços aéreos pertencem agora a esta categoria porque abrangem uma área à qual é aplicável o processo legislativo ordinário. Anteriormente, apenas era necessário consultar o Parlamento sobre esses acordos. Face a esta alteração, a Comissão dos Transportes e do Turismo decidiu elaborar um relatório de iniciativa que tem por objectivo definir alguns princípios gerais sobre o modo como os acordos sobre transportes aéreos devem ser avaliados pelo Parlamento Europeu em termos de substância, antes de ser confrontado com a decisão final e de poder apenas aprovar ou rejeitar. Os novos poderes parlamentares previstos no Tratado de Lisboa criam a nova responsabilidade de assegurar que o Parlamento e a sua comissão competente estejam devidamente informados sobre a preparação dos acordos que mais tarde serão chamados a aprovar. A esta obrigação corresponde uma responsabilidade de controlo mais próximo da condução das negociações. As possibilidades identificadas no presente relatório, que voto favoravelmente, podem ser entendidas como uma lista de elementos a adoptar de acordo com as circunstâncias particulares de cada acordo.

  Aldo Patriciello (PPE), per iscritto. − Dall'entrata in vigore del trattato di Lisbona, il Parlamento ha rafforzato il suo ruolo nella conclusione di accordi aerei internazionali. La commissione TRAN ha deciso di elaborare una relazione d'iniziativa con l'obiettivo di stabilire alcuni principi generali, in merito alle regole di valutazione degli accordi aerei, da un punto di vista sostanziale, nonché in merito alle procedure che la commissione può adottare per assicurarsi di essere adeguatamente informata nel corso dei negoziati e per poter rendere note le proprie priorità ben prima che venga ad essa richiesto di esprimere un parere per l'approvazione.

Questi accordi si possono dividere in tre tipologie: accordi orizzontali, che allineano i precedenti accordi bilaterali; accordi generali, che mirano a garantire una legale concorrenza e infine accordi di sicurezza, affinché sia garantita un elevato livello di sicurezza dell'aviazione civile. Inoltre si raccomanda una serie di criteri per valutare il loro contenuto, compreso l'accesso equilibrato ai mercati e alle opportunità di investimento, nonché la concorrenza leale, in termini di sovvenzioni statali, ambientali e sociali. Al fine di mantenere il flusso continuo di informazioni, per una miglior analisi dei punti di forza e punti deboli di questi accordi esprimo il mio voto favorevole.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), por escrito. − Tendo o Tratado de Lisboa aumentado o leque de competências do Parlamento Europeu em matéria de conclusão de acordos internacionais, revela-se necessário, no processo de redefinição do seu estatuto, oferecer novas formas de enquadramento jurídico da sua actuação. É neste sentido que surge o presente relatório. Passando o Parlamento Europeu a (também) ter competência relativa a Acordos sobre Serviços Aéreos, é importante garantir que lhe sejam disponibilizados meios de informação ao longo do processo de negociação. Na verdade, a sua intervenção não pode limitar-se ao momento final do processo, em que a sua actuação se reduz apenas a assentir ou discordar da solução final, sem encontrar ao seu dispor um leque de indicadores relevantes para tomar uma posição ponderada. Estando assente a necessidade de fazer intervir o Parlamento Europeu ao longo do processo, é ainda necessário chamar a atenção, ainda que em traços gerais, para aspectos como os termos em que a informação é prestada ou os momentos em que deve ser disponibilizada.

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. − I voted in favour. The Treaty of Lisbon, which entered into force on 1 December 2009, extended the circumstances in which Parliament’s consent was required for the conclusion of an international agreement. Air agreements now fall within this category because they cover a field to which the ordinary legislative procedure applies. Previously Parliament had only been consulted on such agreements. In view of this change, the Committee on Transport and Tourism decided to draw up an own-initiative report with the aim of setting out some general principles on how air agreements should be evaluated, covering both their substance and the procedures the Committee might adopt to ensure it is well informed throughout the course of negotiations and has an opportunity to express its priorities well before being confronted with the yes/no choice of consent.

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), per iscritto. − La relazione elabora delle linee generali per un'adeguata comunicazione tra Parlamento e Commissione durante l'adozione di accordi aerei internazionali e per la definizione di modalità comuni di valutazione degli accordi stessi. Grazie al trattato di Lisbona, il Parlamento ha ottenuto ulteriori competenze e corrispondenti responsabilità, dovendo ora controllare più da vicino la negoziazione e la conclusione degli accordi aerei. Considerata l'importanza di tali accordi, soprattutto nel garantire migliori servizi ai passeggeri e nuove opportunità agli operatori, è auspicabile che il Parlamento metta al corrente la Commissione delle sue preoccupazioni e dei suoi criteri di valutazione in fase iniziale, senza attendere la conclusione dei negoziati.

  Vilja Savisaar-Toomast (ALDE), kirjalikult. − Lugupeetud juhataja, lugupeetud kolleegid! Lissaboni lepinguga anti parlamendile suuremad õigused ning üks neist on see, et rahvusvaheliste lepingute sõlmimiseks on tarvis parlamendi nõusolekut. Transpordi- ja turismikomisjon peab suhteliselt tihti hindama ja menetlema erinevaid lennunduslepinguid. Leian, et käesolev raport aitab ja lihtsustab transpordi- ja turismikomisjoni tööd märkimisväärselt, kuna selles tuuakse välja üldised põhimõtted, kuidas lennunduslepinguid tuleks nii sisu kui ka meetmete osas hinnata.

Täpsemalt aitab käesolev raport selgitada ning lihtsamalt menetleda erinevaid lennunduslepinguid ning osutab, millistele kriteeriumidele tähelepanu juhtida ning milliseid aspekte jälgida. Lisaks aitab käesolev raport käsitleda protsessi, kuidas neid lennunduslepinguid menetleda ning millised etapid on erinevate institutsioonide vahel vajalikud. Leian, et käesolev raport on vajalik ning seetõttu ka toetasin selle raporti vastuvõtmist. Aitäh!

  Brian Simpson (S&D), in writing. − This report provides for a framework to be established in order that Parliament can undertake its obligations under the Lisbon Treaty in regard to international air agreements. The Committee on Transport and Tourism were keen to ensure that in dealing with individual agreements with individual sovereign countries, Parliament used the same procedures and guidelines for rapporteurs to work with in order to give us a consistent approach and to give us the opportunity to consider important aspects, including relevant safety and social conditions. I shall be voting in favour and would hope that Parliament can support my report so that the proposed framework can be put into operation

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. − A entrada em vigor do Tratado de Lisboa institucionalizou novas áreas onde a aprovação do Parlamento Europeu é necessária para a conclusão de acordos internacionais. Os acordos sobre transportes aéreos encontram-se nesta categoria, uma vez que fazem parte do processo legislativo ordinário. Este facto impõe que o PE seja informado regularmente, para uma avaliação concertada de todo o processo de negociação, e possa, simultaneamente, expressar as suas opiniões e prioridades.

O presente relatório contém directrizes sobre como os acordos aéreos devem ser analisados, em termos de conteúdos e de procedimentos a adoptar. São apresentados três tipos de acordos que compreendem objectivos diferenciados, nomeadamente os acordos horizontais, os acordos globais e os acordos de segurança.

Voto favoravelmente este acordo por considerar essencial que a posição assumida pela Comissão Europeia, e sublinhada neste relatório, expresse que o PE deve acompanhar regularmente todo o processo, através de uma partilha de informações, e que, no mínimo de 3 em 3 anos, a Comissão deve apresentar uma análise das vantagens e desvantagens dos acordos já em vigor. A aprovação dos acordos deve ser realizada através de uma relação interinstitucional profícua, que permita às instituições europeias participarem activamente na mesma.

  Νίκη Τζαβέλα (EFD), γραπτώς. – Υπερψήφισα την έκθεση του συναδέλφου Brian Simpson με θέμα τις "Διεθνείς συμφωνίες για τις αεροπορικές μεταφορές στο πλαίσιο της Συνθήκης της Λισσαβώνας," λαμβάνοντας υπόψη πως το Κοινοβούλιο πλέον έχει μεγαλύτερο μερίδιο ευθύνης, όσον αφορά τις διαπραγματεύσεις σε διεθνείς συμφωνίες. Επιπρόσθετα, οι συμφωνίες για τις αεροπορικές μεταφορές με τρίτες χώρες βοηθούν στην ανάπτυξη των διεθνών αερομεταφορών και διασφαλίζουν μια ασφάλεια δικαίου.

  Angelika Werthmann (NI), schriftlich. − Aufgrund der durch den Vertrag von Lissabon neu begründeten Kompetenzen werden dem Europäischen Parlament künftig öfter internationale Luftverkehrsabkommen zur Beurteilung und Genehmigung vorgelegt werden. Der Berichterstatter schlägt daher vor, allgemeine Grundsätze zu erarbeiten, um diese Bewertung zu vereinfachen - aber auch zu verbessern. Obwohl er die Vorzüge derartiger Abkommen grundsätzlich anerkennt, verzichtet der Berichterstatter nicht auf eine differenzierte Herangehensweise und fordert mehrfach einen konstruktiven Dialog zwischen Kommission und Parlament.

  Artur Zasada (PPE), na piśmie. − Z zadowoleniem przyjąłem wyniki dzisiejszego głosowania, zwłaszcza z uwagi na fakt, że byłem posłem sprawozdawcą do dokumentu dotyczącego porozumienia lotniczego pomiędzy Unią Europejską a Stanami Zjednoczonymi. Był to dokument o szczególnej wadze. Rynki lotnicze Unii Europejskiej i Stanów Zjednoczonych ujęte łącznie odpowiedzialne są za około 60% światowego ruchu lotniczego. Przyszłe otwarcie rynku dla przedsiębiorstw lotniczych UE i USA w oparciu o niedyskryminacyjne podstawy zaoferuje pasażerom i przewoźnikom w transporcie lotniczym lepsze usługi, przyniesie znaczące korzyści gospodarcze oraz stworzy miejsca pracy. Niestety, Parlament Europejski nie był włączony w negocjacje porozumienia pomiędzy Wspólnotą a USA i ostatecznie nie miał wpływu na treść tego dokumentu. Jest to sytuacja nie do przyjęcia. Zgadzam się z zatem z główną tezą przyjętego dziś sprawozdania pana Simpsona w sprawie międzynarodowych umów o ruchu lotniczym: Parlament Europejski powinien od samego początku być włączony do negocjacji lub co najmniej powinien być informowany o ich postępach.

Σύσταση για τη δεύτερη ανάγνωση: Saïd El Khadraoui (A7-0171/2011)

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Aprovo o presente relatório, tendo em consideração os novos elementos que foram introduzidos pelo Conselho, nomeadamente no que se refere a earmarking, mais transparência e iniciativas para renovação das frotas, a capacidade do veículo e as possibilidades de uma mais eficiente variação de infra-estrutura. A Eurovinheta III irá permitir aos Estados-Membros – se optarem por tal – taxar os usuários rodoviários pelos custos externos (poluição, ar, barulho) de modo a que os poluidores-pagadores sejam introduzidos nos transportes rodoviários. Em antecipação ao Livro Branco, a legislação agora prevista obriga os Estados-Membros e a Comissão a tomarem os próximos passos para um sistema de transporte mais sustentável e interoperacional, um sistema de taxação harmonizado e mais internalização de custos externos.

  Sophie Auconie (PPE), par écrit. – Avec le projet de directive relative à la taxation des poids lourds pour l'utilisation de certaines infrastructures ("Eurovignette"), les États membres auront désormais la possibilité de taxer la pollution atmosphérique et sonore du transport routier. Cette mesure, appliquant le principe de « pollueur-payeur », vise à inciter au renouvellement progressif des camions qui circulent sur nos routes. Elle pourra représenter également une nouvelle source de financement pour les transports plus propres comme le ferroviaire et le fluvial. J'ai donc soutenu le rapport de Saïd El Khadraoui. Toutefois j'appelle les Etats membres à faire preuve de mesure lorsqu'ils mettront en place l'eurovignette : celle-ci ne doit pas mettre en péril la bonne santé commerciale et financière des entreprises de transport ou des entreprises qui ont recours au transport.

  Liam Aylward (ALDE), i scríbhinn. − Is é an líonra bóithre a úsáidtear le formhór na n-earraí Éireannacha a dhíoltar ar mhargadh an AE a iompar agus, dá bhrí sin, vótáil mé i gcoinne na mbeart a moladh sa tuarascáil seo, toisc go gcuirfidís costas ró-throm ar iompróirí, ar onnmhaireoirí agus ar tháirgeoirí Éireannacha. Tá táillí i gceist le Treoir an Eurovignette cheana féin, ach níl iallach ar na Ballstáit na táillí seo a ghearradh. Tá an Eurovignette i bhfeidhm faoi láthair ar 15 000 km de mhótarbhealaí Eorpacha, leath de mhótarbhealaí an AE a bhfuil dola orthu san áireamh. Cé go bhfuilim i bhfabhar aghaidh a thabhairt ar thruailliú aeir agus fuaime agus daoine a spreagadh chun feithiclí níos glaine a úsáid, dá leathnófaí an Treoir seo agus dolaí don truailliú fuaime agus aeir a chur san áireamh, bheadh iompróirí Éireannacha a thógann onnmhairí Éireannacha chun na hEorpa thíos go mór leis.

Déantar onnmhairiú idirnáisiúnta ar mhéid mór earraí Éireannacha agus d’fhéadfadh na costais bhreise a mholtar sa tuarascáil dochar as cuimse a dhéanamh do chuideachtaí onnmhairithe agus iompair na hÉireann, agus d’fhéadfadh gur bhuille marfach a bheadh ann do na gnóthais bheaga sin nach bhfuil ach corrlach brabúis beag á dhéanamh acu faoi láthair.

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau už šią per antrąjį svarstymą pateiktą Tarybos ir Parlamento bendrąją poziciją dėl „Eurovinjetės“ direktyvos. Pagrindiniai direktyvos tikslai − sudaryti sąlygas valstybėms narėms taikyti kelių naudotojams mokesčius už tam tikras išorines sąnaudas, t. y. taikyti principą „teršėjas moka“, taip pat suteikti valstybėms narėms papildomų galimybių padaryti savo nacionalines kelių rinkliavų sistemas efektyvesnes. Pritariu aplinkos taršos mažinimo tikslams ir „teršėjas moka“ principo įgyvendinimui kelių transporto srityje. Taip pat palaikiau siūlymą, kad iš „eurovinjetės“ mokesčio gautos pajamos būtų skiriamos investicijoms į kelių infrastruktūrą bei naudojamos siekiant didinti transporto tvarumą. Tvaraus transporto skatinimas yra esminis bendrosios transporto politikos elementas. Tuo tikslu turėtų būti mažinama transporto įtaka klimato kaitai ir jo neigiamas poveikis, ypač grūstys, kliudančios judumui, bei oro ir akustinė tarša, daranti žalą sveikatai bei aplinkai.

  Jean-Luc Bennahmias (ALDE), par écrit. – Si je salue l'accord qui a été trouvé sur la directive Eurovignette, je suis néanmoins loin d'être pleinement satisfait. En entérinant le compromis trouvé entre le Parlement et le Conseil, nous mettons fin à de longues années de négociations. Certes il s'agit d'un pas dans la bonne direction mais c'est un accord a minima qui manque de contraintes ! En effet, les Etats auront seulement la possibilité mais aucunement l'obligation de faire payer les poids lourds pour les couts externes qu'ils engendrent. Il n'en reste pas moins que l'idée est lancée et c'est là le vrai point positif qui me permet de voter pour le compromis. En instaurant le principe du pollueur-payeur pour les poids lourds, la directive ouvre la voie à la reconnaissance dans nos politiques publiques de l'internalisation des coûts externes engendrés par les transports. Le principe de la transparence des recettes et des investissements est également acté ce qui, espérons le, sera un précédent dans l'évaluation des politiques publiques: les Etats devront en effet faire rapport à la Commission régulièrement. On regrettera tout de même le faible seuil d'affectation des recettes aux RTE (15%). Et il nous faudra veiller à l'application de l'engagement qu'ont pris les Etats d'investir les recettes dans les projets durables.

  Sergio Berlato (PPE), per iscritto. − La relazione oggi in discussione è di particolare importanza perché prevede la modifica della direttiva 1999/62/CE relativa alla tassazione di autoveicoli pesanti adibiti al trasporto di merci su strada. Ritengo che l’impostazione della proposta di nuova direttiva, frutto del compromesso fra Presidenza ungherese, Commissione e Parlamento, sia fortemente dannosa per l'economia italiana, che trasporta circa un terzo – ovvero circa 200 miliardi di euro l’anno – di tutto l’interscambio commerciale sulle strade europee.

A seguito dell'attuazione della direttiva nei paesi europei di transito, le merci importate ed esportate dall'Italia sarebbero le più esposte ad essere gravate da ulteriori oneri. Condivido la posizione fortemente critica del governo italiano secondo cui, in un periodo di grande difficoltà economica come quello attuale, la scelta politica di colpire una categoria economica portante del nostro mercato non è certamente lungimirante. A mio avviso le piccole aperture attenute in sede di compromesso non incidono in modo decisivo su un impianto fortemente negativo sia per il sistema Italia sia per il comparto dell'autotrasporto. Inoltre, l'efficacia del provvedimento non è dimostrata: il trasporto su strada, e i suoi costi in termini di produzione di inquinamento, continueranno a crescere fino a quando non verrà costituita una rete infrastrutturale intermodale.

  John Bufton (EFD), in writing. − I voted against this amendment as it is imperative that the Commission is not permitted to establish revenue-raising capabilities, even via an indirect charge, particularly without the unanimous assent of the Council. In the UK we do not currently subscribe to the Eurovignette scheme. However, the Westminster Government is looking into rolling out HGV charges in accordance with European law by 2015. The Commission, however, has reserved the right to make the carbon charge obligatory by 2013. I do not wish to see UK citizens in any way contributing to any form of EU tax.

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), por escrito. − A imposição de uma taxa aos veículos pesados é uma medida que penaliza os países periféricos da União Europeia, como a Grécia, a Itália, a Espanha e Portugal, que por sua vez são em grande parte os mais afectados pelo contexto de crise financeira (que se transformou nestes países numa crise orçamental e económica). Atendendo ao acima exposto, voto contra o documento apresentado, pois considero injusta a desigual incidência de tais taxas, uma vez que seria nos países periféricos que obteria a maior parte das receitas, em benefício dos países da Europa Central.

  George Sabin Cutaş (S&D), în scris. − Am votat împotriva raportului El Khadraoui privind taxarea vehiculelor grele de marfă deoarece propunerea permite introducerea de bariere tarifare care vor crește costurile operatorilor de transport din statele membre periferice. Directiva va îngădui, de asemenea, statelor membre să ofere compensații în schimbul acestor taxe, ceea ce ar putea duce la distorsionarea competiției dintre operatorii europeni proveniți din state membre diferite.

  Marielle De Sarnez (ALDE), par écrit. – Le Parlement vient de donner son accord aux nouvelles règles de taxation du transport par route permettant ainsi de garantir le développement et le financement d'une politique des transports plus adaptée aux exigences environnementales en termes de pollution et de bruit. Si les transporteurs routiers devront désormais payer pour la pollution atmosphérique et sonore que les camions génèrent, les Etats membres, en contrepartie, auront l'obligation de réinvestir les recettes obtenues par cette redevance dans les réseaux de transports transeuropéens et, surtout, dans des systèmes de transport plus performants, et moins polluants. Cette taxation est un pas en avant mais n'est pas suffisante. Il est temps que les Etats membres s'engagent à mener une véritable politique de développement du fret et ainsi utiliser de façon cohérente l'ensemble des infrastructures du transport ferroviaire et routier.

  Anne Delvaux (PPE), par écrit. – Le Parlement européen a approuvé aujourd'hui à une large majorité la révision de la directive Eurovignette. Le texte prévoit que les poids lourds paieront pour la pollution atmosphérique et les nuisances sonores. L'accord entériné ce jour autorise en effet les États membres à facturer aux transporteurs routiers le coût de la pollution atmosphérique et sonore, en plus du prix de l'utilisation des infrastructures autoroutières.

Si cette révision est importante, elle ne représente pourtant qu'un petit pas dans la bonne direction. Car la réglementation est non-contraignante! J'attends donc encore de nouvelles propositions qui rendent obligatoires ces nouvelles mesures en y incluant le coût de tous les dommages causés à l'environnement et qui étendent le principe de pollueur-payeur à tous les modes de transport.

Le texte insiste également pour que les revenus de prélèvement de péage soient effectivement utilisés. Sur ce point, le Parlement a obligé les États membres à investir une partie des rendements du prélèvement de péage dans l'amélioration de l'infrastructure de circulation et de la mobilité. Il faudrait également pouvoir étendre ces prélèvements à des projets comme la réduction de la pollution de l'air voir la nuisance sonore.

  Edite Estrela (S&D), por escrito. − Votei contra o relatório sobre "imposições aos veículos pesados de mercadorias" porque considero que a aplicação de taxas de utilização de infra-estruturas poderá ter repercussões negativas para a economia europeia, em particular nos países periféricos. Tendo em conta que, no sector dos transportes rodoviários, são já aplicados vários impostos e taxas, nomeadamente os impostos especiais de consumo sobre os combustíveis, e considerando a actual conjuntura económica, penso que a internalização dos custos do sector deveria ser ponderada, de modo a poder merecer um consenso mais alargado entre os diversos agentes abrangidos por estas medidas.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − A revisão da Directiva Eurovinheta obriga a que os veículos pesados de mercadorias que circulam nas auto-estradas europeias fiquem sujeitos ao princípio do poluidor-pagador, permitindo que os Estados-Membros possam incluir os custos da poluição sonora e atmosférica nas portagens nacionais. O custo adicional médio deverá situar-se entre os três e os quatro cêntimos por veículo/quilómetro. Este princípio, num momento em que a economia europeia está fragilizada e em que a competitividade é mais necessária do que nunca, pode servir para tornar ainda mais caro o transporte de mercadorias, sobretudo para os países periféricos, para os quais ao preço do bem se somam os custos de transporte, que não apenas já são forçados a internalizar os custos com combustíveis como agora terão que fazer o mesmo com os custos adicionais nas portagens, perdendo, assim, competitividade. Sem pretender menorizar a questão ambiental, este não me parece, porém, o momento de onerar as empresas europeias com mais uma taxa.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − A imposição de uma taxa aos veículos pesados é uma medida que penaliza os países periféricos da União Europeia e constitui, simultaneamente, uma receita adicional nos países da Europa Central. O texto resultante do trílogo é menos negativo para Portugal do que a proposta saída da Comissão dos Transportes e do Turismo (TRAN), pois reduz a taxa de variação para 175 % e o pico horário de taxação para cinco horas, prolongando a isenção dos veículos menos poluentes por mais 1 ano (passa a ser por 4 anos). Porém, a imposição desta taxa continuará a ser uma realidade e trará um acréscimo dos custos existentes para os países periféricos da União Europeia. Estas novas disposições da Directiva Eurovinheta, permitirão que os Estados-Membros incorporem nas portagens cobradas aos veículos pesados de mercadorias, para além do custo da utilização da infra-estrutura, um montante correspondente ao custo da poluição sonora e atmosférica originada pelo tráfego. Este custo adicional médio deverá ser de três a quatro cêntimos por veículo/quilómetro. Os veículos menos poluentes ficarão isentos. Pelo facto de considerar que os Estados-Membros periféricos são prejudicados, votei contra a proposta deste relatório.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − A enorme dependência do modo de transporte rodoviário é um problema real (em Portugal, a dependência deste tipo de transporte é ainda superior à média da UE). Seja por razões de ordem ambiental e de saúde pública, devido aos elevados níveis de poluição que lhe estão associados, seja também por razões de natureza energética, que se prendem com a escassez progressiva do petróleo e com a dificuldade acrescida de acesso a esta matéria-prima. É essencial por isso promover uma diversificação dos modos de transporte de mercadorias, particularmente com uma aposta forte no transporte ferroviário. Lamentavelmente, esta aposta não só não tem sido feita, como em alguns países – como é o caso de Portugal – aquilo a que temos assistido é ao desinvestimento neste tipo de transporte. Desinvestimento que se tende a acentuar na sequência de processos de liberalização e de privatização. O relatório em causa, abordando algumas destas questões, mais não faz do que procurar impor uma nova tributação sobre os veículos pesados de mercadorias (a somar às actualmente existentes – algumas recentemente aumentadas em Portugal), de eficácia duvidosa quanto à efectiva prossecução dos objectivos enunciados, e representando um encargo adicional, cujos efeitos, em face da actual crise económica e social, poderão gerar situações liquidatárias para muitas empresas.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Sabemos que a enorme dependência do modo de transporte rodoviário é um problema real (em Portugal, a dependência deste tipo de transporte é ainda superior à média da UE). É preciso alterar esta situação, seja por razões de ordem ambiental e de saúde pública, devido aos elevados níveis de poluição que lhe estão associados, seja também por razões de natureza energética, que se prendem com a escassez progressiva do petróleo e com a dificuldade acrescida de acesso a esta matéria-prima.

É essencial, por isso, promover uma diversificação dos modos de transporte de mercadorias, particularmente com uma aposta forte no transporte ferroviário. No entanto, esta aposta não só não tem sido feita, como, em alguns países – como é o caso de Portugal – aquilo a que temos assistido é ao desinvestimento neste tipo de transporte, o que se tende a acentuar na sequência de processos de liberalização e de privatização.

Este relatório aborda algumas destas questões, mas, depois, limita-se a procurar impor uma nova tributação sobre os veículos pesados de mercadorias (a somar às actualmente existentes – algumas recentemente aumentadas em Portugal, como as portagens nas SCUT), de eficácia duvidosa quanto à efectiva prossecução dos objectivos enunciados, e representando um encargo adicional, cujos efeitos, em face da actual crise económica e social, poderão gerar situações liquidatárias para muitas empresas.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − Od prijatia stanoviska Európskeho parlamentu k smernici Eurovignette III v prvom čítaní uplynul istý čas. Smernica by mala umožniť členským štátom – ak si to želajú - vyberať od užívateľov ciest poplatky za niektoré (obmedzené) externé náklady, a to tak, aby sa v odvetví cestnej dopravy konečne zaviedla tzv. zásada „znečisťovateľ platí“.

Poskytne tiež členským štátom dodatočné možnosti na zvýšenie účinnosti vnútroštátnych systémov vyberania cestných poplatkov, čo predstavuje lepší nástroj riadenia dopytu v odvetví dopravy. Tieto ciele potvrdilo stanovisko Rady a teraz je žiaduce zo strany Komisie podniknúť také kroky, ktoré by viedli k trvalo udržateľnému rozvoju dopravy, súčinnosti, harmonizovanému systému poplatkov a ďalšej internalizácii externých nákladov.

  Pat the Cope Gallagher (ALDE), in writing. − The reality is that this proposal will have a disproportionate impact upon the peripheral Member States in the European Union, such as Ireland, as centrally located Member States have the option of switching to rail. It is estimated by the Irish Exporters Association that a truck travelling from Ireland to mainland Europe via Holyhead and Dover will incur a road use charge of EUR 120 and an external cost of EUR 30. Therefore, a roundtrip will incur a fee of EUR 300 as a result of this legislation. The main export sectors that will be affected include pharmaceuticals, ICT, medical devices, dairy and other food products. Moreover, the road haulage sector employs over 30 000 people in Ireland. The bottom line is that these new charges will increase the cost of transporting Irish exports into European markets. I voted against this report as the EU should be seeking ways to improve our competitiveness in line with the Europe 2020 strategy instead of introducing legislation which threatens our competiveness.

  Roberto Gualtieri (S&D), per iscritto. − Il voto favorevole dell'Aula alla direttiva sui pedaggi al trasporto su strada rappresenta un passo in avanti per la tutela della salute dei cittadini europei, e un impegno a ridurre gli effetti nocivi dell'inquinamento del trasporto merci su strada. Introducendo il principio del "chi inquina paga", per la prima volta in questo settore, si vuole così incoraggiare un trasporto più sostenibile e sicuro, favorendo quindi alternative come il trasporto su rotaia. Sulla base del compromesso raggiunto, bisogna tuttavia tenere anche in considerazione la tutela dell'autotrasporto, senza penalizzare eccessivamente questo settore. E' quindi necessario che gli Stati membri si impegnino ad utilizzare in maniera efficace gli introiti derivanti dall'Eurovignetta, ad esempio investendo per migliorare la rete infrastrutturale e incentivando l'impiego di veicoli per il trasporto su strada meno inquinanti, per far sì che i benefici della direttiva vadano a vantaggio di tutti i settori coinvolti.

  Sylvie Guillaume (S&D), par écrit. – J’ai voté en faveur du rapport de mon collègue Saïd El Khadraoui sur la révision de la législation européenne de l’Eurovignette, qui permettra la taxation des poids lourds. Pour la première fois, le principe « pollueur-payeur » va s’appliquer aux transports routiers et les poids lourds pourront être taxés pour les nuisances sonores et la pollution de l’air lorsqu’ils emprunteront les autoroutes de l’Union Européenne. Une initiative innovante que je salue, puisqu’elle permet de prendre en compte le coût environnemental et social, et ne se limite pas uniquement au coût des infrastructures. On peut regretter néanmoins que l’ambition du Parlement européen sur des exigences environnementales fortes ait été freinée par le Conseil des ministres, sous prétexte de coûts additionnels trop importants. Malgré tout, ce rapport est un véritable pas en avant en matière d’environnement.

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), raštu. − Pritariau šiam dokumentui, kadangi šio dokumento tikslas yra apmokestinti sunkiasvores transporto priemones priklausomai nuo to, kuriuo paros metu jos važiuoja, piko valandomis ar ne, taip pat priklausomai nuo skleidžiamo garso ir variklio tūrio. Mažiausiai 15 proc. iš mokesčių surinktų pinigų investuojami į kitus projektus, susijusius su CO2 mažinimu. Gerai, kad mes esame pasiryžę šiandien mažinti klimato kaitą, kad kelių transporto srityje pagaliau siekiame taikyti principą „teršėjas moka“. Neabejoju, kad tai suteiks valstybėms narėms papildomų galimybių padaryti savo nacionalines kelių rinkliavų sistemas veiksmingesnes, t. y. bus galima sukurti veiksmingesnę transporto poreikių valdymo priemonę. Tačiau, vis dėlto manau, kad šios priemonės yra ekonomiškai naudingos bei palankios tik kelioms centrinėms, tranzitinėms Europos Sąjungos valstybėms narėms, užtat visiškai nepalankios arba daug mažiau palankios nemažai daliai Europos Sąjungos valstybių narių, esančių prie išorinių Europos Sąjungos sienų tiek rytuose, tiek pietuose, tiek vakaruose, tiek šiaurėje. Todėl manau, kad mums šį aspektą vertėtų visapusiškai įvertinti, dar kartą pasverti ir tik tada priiminėti.

  Jarosław Kalinowski (PPE), na piśmie. − Chciałbym wyrazić swoje pełne poparcie dla dyrektywy dotyczącej pobierania opłat od pojazdów ciężarowych. Szczególnie chciałbym wesprzeć zapis bardzo istotny dla europejskiego środowiska. Mam nadzieję, że niższe opłaty dla samochodów mniej zanieczyszczających powietrze zmotywują pozostałych właścicieli firm transportowych do unowocześnienia swojej floty. Także uprawy znajdujące się w obszarze dróg często uczęszczanych byłyby znacznie mniej narażone na zanieczyszczenie spalinami. Za pozytywny aspekt uważam również podwyższenie opłat za przejazd w godzinach szczytu. Dzięki tym ograniczeniom uzyskamy większe bezpieczeństwo na drodze oraz komfort jazdy dla wszystkich użytkowników dróg. Z powodu tego ograniczenia polepszy się również stan infrastruktury, która ulega największej destrukcji właśnie w godzinach największego natężenia ruchu.

  Giovanni La Via (PPE), per iscritto. − Signor Presidente, ho votato contro il testo di compromesso proposto che risulta essere conforme alla posizione del governo italiano, che già nel Consiglio dell'UE aveva avuto modo di esprimersi in maniera contraria a tale ipotesi. Imporre un ulteriore sistema di tassazione per gli autotrasportatori significa infliggere un colpo molto pesante ad un settore che in Italia rappresenta una colonna portante del nostro sistema commerciale. Aggravare i costi per tali categorie significa aumentare gli oneri per la collettività e penalizzare le nostre merci che risultano, pertanto, meno appetibili sul fronte della domanda. Non ritengo che tale compromesso sia la giusta soluzione in special modo per un territorio, quale ad esempio quello italiano, area di partenza di flussi di trasporto che sono fonte di ricchezza per il nostro sistema paese e che bisogna salvaguardare individuando adeguati strumenti per combattere l'inquinamento atmosferico e acustico, ma che tengano in necessaria considerazione le sue peculiarità strutturali e logistiche.

  Agnès Le Brun (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai voté pour la résolution sur la taxation des poids lourds car elle entérine un accord difficile sur la révision de la "Directive eurovignette". Cette directive de 1999, révisée en 2006, vise à harmoniser la taxation des poids lourds. La révision adoptée constitue un premier pas en matière d'internalisation des coûts externes dans le transport routier et donc vers une application concrète du principe « pollueur-payeur ». La pollution atmosphérique et sonore due au trafic sera ainsi taxée, de manière électronique, à raison de 3 à 4 cents par kilomètre en fonction de la classe Euro du véhicule, du lieu et du taux d'encombrement. Cette révision permet désormais de mieux gérer le trafic grâce à l'augmentation des redevances en période de pointe (maximum 175% sur 5h) mais prévoit également de les diminuer d'autant en période creuse afin de ne pas pénaliser financièrement les entreprises de transport routier. Enfin la résolution incite les États membres à utiliser l'argent récolté de manière à financer certains types de projets de transport durable.

  Bogdan Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz (PPE), na piśmie. − Szanowny Panie Przewodniczący! Głosowałem za eurowinietami, ponieważ uważam, że rozwiązania tego typu są w stanie zapewnić pełne zharmonizowanie europejskiego systemu nakładania opłat na pojazdy ciężarowe, ułatwiając tym samym sprawny przejazd przez państwa członkowskie, unikając zbędnych opóźnień. Moim zdaniem wpisanie zasady „zanieczyszczający płaci” zapewni ograniczenie zanieczyszczenia oraz hałasu wywołanego przez pojazdy ciężarowe niewyposażone w silniki zgodne z normą Euro V i VI, które nie podlegają opłatom drogowym. Dodatkowo ustanowiona zasada, że w ramach pobranych opłat państwa członkowskie będą mogły określać wykorzystanie uzyskanych środków z przychodów, ale co najmniej 15% wpływów powinno trafić na wsparcie finansowe dla projektów TEN-T, zapewni zwiększanie zrównoważonego charakteru transportu.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I voted for this report revising ‘Eurovignette’ road haulage tax rules, which will make it possible for Member States to charge hauliers for air and noise pollution costs, in addition to motorway tolls. This directive will ensure that revenue from these charges is used to improve the performance of transport systems and cut pollution.

  Clemente Mastella (PPE), per iscritto. − La direttiva 1999/62/CE relativa alla tassazione di autoveicoli pesanti adibiti al trasporto di merci su strada per l'uso di talune infrastrutture, consente agli Stati membri, se lo desiderano, di addebitare agli utenti della strada anche alcuni costi esterni avendo in questo modo ulteriori possibilità di incrementare l'efficienza dei propri sistemi di pedaggio nazionali e disponendo così di un miglior strumento di gestione della domanda di trasporto. Siamo dell'idea che in un periodo di grande difficoltà economica, la scelta di colpire una categoria economica portante del nostro mercato al mero scopo di fare cassa non rappresenta una scelta politica particolarmente lungimirante. Inoltre, lo strumento così individuato, penalizza in modo inaccettabile gli Stati geograficamente più periferici, paesi d'origine, di partenza o di arrivo delle merci, a tutto vantaggio dei paesi "centrali" e di transito. Infine, nell'elaborazione del principio non si tiene conto dell'impatto di questo provvedimento sui flussi di traffico e quindi sulle concessioni già in essere, con il conseguente rischio di spostare altrove tali traffici. L'efficacia del provvedimento non è dimostrata: il trasporto su strada ed i suoi costi in termini di inquinamento continueranno a crescere: questo è il motivo della nostra posizione contraria, come Delegazione Italiana del PPE.

  Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Esta directiva prevê que os Estados-Membros incorporem nas portagens cobradas aos veículos pesados de mercadorias, para além do custo da utilização da infra-estrutura, um montante correspondente ao custo da poluição sonora e atmosférica originada pelo tráfego. Considero que o princípio poluidor-pagador não é uma solução que se limita a entregar ao mercado a decisão. Autorizar e legitimar a poluição caso seja economicamente viável para a empresa não é um caminho para a sustentabilidade. Considero que a prioridade da União Europeia deve ser impor medidas mais restritas a nível da poluição dos transportes rodoviários pesados e apostar decisivamente no transporte ferroviário de mercadorias. Esta directiva, sem resolver o problema da poluição, agrava a desigualdade entre Estados-Membros, ao colocar um maior ónus sobre os países periféricos como Portugal, que são exportadores, mas não são países de atravessamento. Por estes motivos votei contra.

  Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – Ce rapport a le mérite de réclamer des comptes aux États membres. Sur les cadeaux qu'ils font aux constructeurs automobiles de petits camions d'abord. C'est une bonne chose car ces pratiques irresponsables doivent cesser. Sur l'affectation des recettes de l'eurovignette ensuite. Là aussi, l'opacité ne peut être la règle! Ces recettes devraient être exclusivement vouées à des politiques écologiques. Il est cependant regrettable que le texte s'arrête en si bon chemin. Il n'y a presque rien sur le cadeau fait aux constructeurs de véhicules Euro VI. Pire: l'inclusion de l'eurovignette dans le marché carbone est promue. Je vote pour ce texte pour encourager les efforts et valider l'idée d'eurovignette tout en regrettant ces deux graves manquements.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − As preocupações de ordem ambiental nunca podem ser postas em causa. No entanto, não podem ser desenquadradas das questões económicas, ainda para mais no momento de crise que ainda atravessamos e que continua a fustigar os países do Sul da Europa, nomeadamente o meu país, Portugal. Assim sendo, não posso estar de acordo com a aprovação do princípio do poluidor-pagador, pois esta situação vai prejudicar enormemente os industriais do sector do transporte de mercadorias dos países periféricos, nomeadamente de Portugal, em detrimento dos países mais ricos da Europa Central e do Norte.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − Eurovignette III will allow Member States – if they so wish – to charge road users for external costs (air, noise, pollution), so that finally the ‘polluter pays’ principle is introduced in road transport. Taking into account that the tax system is opaque and irrational I voted against.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. − In Zeiten zunehmender Globalisierung, in der auch das Verkehrsaufkommen massiv steigt, ist es gerade Mitgliedstaaten, die über sensible Regionen wie etwa im Bereich des Alpentransits verfügen, ein Anliegen, bestimmte externe Kosten Straßennutzern nach dem Verursacherprinzip in Rechnung zu stellen. Gleichzeitig soll damit auch ein Instrument zur besseren Steuerung der Verkehrsnachfrage entstehen. Im vorliegenden Bericht wird ein pragmatischer Ansatz verfolgt, um die vielen verschiedenartigen Wünsche unter einen Hut bringen zu können. In diesem Zusammenhang dürfen jedoch auch die diversen Initiativen für freie Fahrt von sogenannten Giga- oder Megalinern nicht übersehen werden, die mit hohen Infrastrukturkosten einhergehen. Ebenso gilt es, das bis dato eher reine Lippenbekenntnis zur Verlagerung des Güterverkehrs von der Straße auf die Schiene zu beachten. Diese Faktoren sollte man auch bei der im Vorschlag angeführten Zweckbindung der Einnahmen aus den Infrastrukturgebühren nicht vergessen. Hinsichtlich der Anreize für die Flottenerneuerung gilt es auch zu bedenken, dass wir nicht einerseits unsere heimischen Frachter und Flottenbesitzer einseitig mit strengen Umwelt- und Sicherheitsvorschriften belegen dürfen und die Billig-Konkurrenz dann mit stinkenden Schrott-Fahrzeugen über die Grenze kommt. Da der Bericht hier aber durchaus vernünftig argumentiert, habe ich dafür gestimmt.

  Claudio Morganti (EFD), per iscritto. − Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ho voluto esprimere il mio voto negativo su questa proposta poiché andrebbe ad avere un impatto fortemente negativo soprattutto sulle imprese più piccole di autotrasporti. È sicuramente giusto combattere l'inquinamento e cercare di decongestionare il traffico, ma l'introduzione di un ulteriore aggravio fiscale non mi pare certo la soluzione migliore; con l'applicazione di questo "eurobollo" è molto probabile che riescano a sopravvivere solamente le imprese più grandi di autotrasporto, ovvero quelle che hanno maggiori risorse a disposizione.

Numerose piccole imprese, soprattutto in Italia, rischiano di dover uscire dal mercato poiché gli oneri da sostenere diventerebbero eccessivi, e questo avrebbe sicuramente un pesante impatto anche dal punto di vista occupazionale. L'augurio che mi faccio quindi è quello che altri paesi europei seguano la linea del governo italiano, che ha già confermato che non applicherà questa misura: la crisi ha fortemente danneggiato il settore dell'autotrasporto e questa nuova tassa non credo certo sia di grande aiuto per una sua ripresa.

  Rolandas Paksas (EFD), raštu. − Nepritariu pasiūlymui apmokestinti sunkiasvorių krovinių transporto priemones pagal skleidžiamą triukšmą bei taršą. Manau, kad netikslinga sukurti dar vieną papildomą mokestinę naštą vežėjams, kurie labai stipriai nukentėjo nuo finansų krizės. Nustatant mokestį bus atsižvelgiama ne tik į kelių infrastruktūros kaštus, automobilio taršos kategoriją bei važiavimo trukmę, bet ir į užterštumo, triukšmo lygį bei transporto kamščius. Be to, mokestis bus taikomas ne tik transeuropiniams tinklams priklausančiuose greitkeliuose, bet ir kituose greitkeliuose bei svarbiuose keliuose. Atkreiptinas dėmesys į tai, kad toks reguliavimas turės neigiamos įtakos Europos kelių vežėjų pajamoms, didins krovinių pristatymo terminus. Dėl minėtų priežasčių didės vežimo kaštai ir krovinių vežimo kaina. Be to, nustatyta rinkliava gali žymiai sumažinti kelių transporto paklausą.

  Alfredo Pallone (PPE), per iscritto. − La nuova direttiva Eurovignette, con l'obiettivo di incentivare l'attuazione di sistemi di tariffazione armonizzati tra gli Stati membri per un miglioramento dell'efficienza e della performance ambientale del trasporto di merci su strada, finisce per penalizzare alcuni Stati periferici, come l'Italia, che sono destinazioni di partenza o di arrivo delle merci; per questo ho votato contro la relazione che modifica la direttiva del 1999. Invece di aumentare la concorrenza e stabilire regole comuni per il mercato interno, la nuova direttiva falsa il gioco della concorrenza a vantaggio di alcuni Stati, che sono posti al centro del traffico autotrasportato in Europa. Con il pretesto della riduzione delle emissioni di CO2 si pone in essere una tassazione che dovrebbe scoraggiare il trasporto su strada a vantaggio di quello ferroviario e dell'intermodalità. La direttiva, così come concepita, rappresenta un forte danno per tutto il sistema dell'autotrasporto, in un momento di stagnazione economica in cui sarebbe necessario attuare misure volte al rilancio del settore

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − O presente relatório apresenta uma abordagem pragmática para não perder mais tempo com a aprovação da denominada Directiva Eurovinheta III, relativa à aplicação de imposições aos veículos pesados de mercadorias pela utilização de certas infra-estruturas. Pretende-se alcançar o melhor compromisso possível no seio do Parlamento e com o Conselho. As alterações propostas são o resultado de consultas com os grupos políticos. Nestes termos, votei favoravelmente o presente relatório, que permitirá aos Estados-Membros – se assim o entenderem – cobrar também aos utilizadores das estradas alguns custos externos (limitados), a fim de introduzir o princípio do poluidor-pagador nos transportes rodoviários. Também dará aos Estados-Membros possibilidades adicionais para tornarem mais eficientes os respectivos sistemas de tarifas rodoviárias nacionais, o que significa um melhor instrumento de gestão da procura nos transportes. Estes objectivos foram confirmados pela posição do Conselho. De salientar a proposta de reserva das receitas de custos externos e infra-estruturas para serem usadas, em particular, nos transportes sustentáveis e nas redes transeuropeias. Uma reserva eficaz das receitas (que aumente a responsabilização e a transparência) não só irá aumentar a aceitação pública como também assegurar a redução dos custos externos dos transportes rodoviários.

  Aldo Patriciello (PPE), per iscritto. − Signor Presidente, con la modifica della direttiva 1999/62/CE gli Stati membri, potranno addebitare agli utenti della strada anche alcuni costi esterni (contenuti) così da introdurre in maniera definitiva il principio "chi inquina, paga" nel trasporto stradale; questi Stati avranno ulteriori possibilità di incrementare l'efficienza dei propri sistemi di pedaggio nazionali, disponendo così di un miglior strumento di gestione della domanda di trasporto. Per questo i prezzi strada a pedaggio per il settore dei trasporti rifletteranno il costo dell'inquinamento acustico e atmosferico, nonché i costi di infrastruttura.

Questi costi terranno sempre conto di alcune eccezioni, purché lo Stato che le richiede disponga di una buona giustificazione. Ci saranno incentivi per promuovere il rinnovo della flotta dei mezzi pesanti, deroghe per i mezzi pesanti con motori che inquinano di meno e infine il prezzo del pedaggio potrà variare a seconda dell'orario di transito. Questo per far si che i mezzi pesanti possano evitare alcuni tratti stradali nelle ore di punta. Il denaro ricavato da quest'aumento del pedaggio dovrà essere reinvestito in infrastrutture di trasporto con almeno il 15% inizialmente essere destinato a progetti di trasporto transeuropei. Per questi motivi e per una migliore viabilità europea esprimo il mio voto favorevole.

  Miguel Portas (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Esta directiva prevê que os Estados-Membros incorporem nas portagens cobradas aos veículos pesados de mercadorias, para além do custo da utilização da infra-estrutura, um montante correspondente ao custo da poluição sonora e atmosférica originada pelo tráfego. Considero que o princípio poluidor-pagador não é uma solução que se limita a entregar ao mercado a decisão. Autorizar e legitimar a poluição caso seja economicamente viável para a empresa não é um caminho para a sustentabilidade. Considero que a prioridade da União Europeia deve ser impor medidas mais restritas a nível da poluição dos transportes rodoviários pesados e apostar decisivamente no transporte ferroviário de mercadorias. Esta directiva, sem resolver o problema da poluição, agrava a desigualdade entre Estados-Membros, ao colocar um maior ónus sobre os países periféricos como Portugal, que são exportadores, mas não são países de atravessamento. Por estes motivos votei contra.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), por escrito. − A proposta de revisão da Directiva Eurovinheta aqui em causa visa introduzir o princípio do poluidor-pagador nos transportes rodoviários, permitindo que os Estados-Membros possam incluir os custos da poluição sonora e atmosférica nas portagens nacionais, o que se traduz na imposição de mais uma taxa aos veículos pesados. Trata-se de uma medida penalizadora dos países periféricos da União Europeia, que se afigura particularmente gravosa no actual contexto de crise financeira que atravessamos. Por estas razões, votei contra o presente relatório.

  Frédérique Ries (ALDE), par écrit. – J'ai voté en faveur de ce compromis sur la révision de la directive "eurovignette", dont l'objectif est d'introduire le principe du "pollueur-payeur" pour les poids lourds circulant sur autoroutes.

Les États membres pourront enfin inclure dans leurs taxes ou péages les coûts réels induits par la pollution atmosphérique et sonore du transport routier, alors que seuls les coûts liés aux infrastructures pouvaient être pris en compte jusqu'ici. Le compromis se situe en deçà des ambitions du Parlement européen et ne permettra pas à lui seul de révolutionner le transport routier, dont le secteur et les États membres ne sont visiblement pas encore prêts à endosser le coût réel de l'empreinte écologique.

Le coût moyen supplémentaire ne devrait finalement pas dépasser 4 centimes par véhicule et par kilomètre, et les camions aux moteurs les plus propres et roulant aux heures creuses en seraient exemptés. Mais cette réforme était aux oubliettes avant que la Présidence belge ne la remette sur la table du Conseil. Et c'est une avancée dont je me réjouis, un premier pas positif vers un transport routier plus durable.

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), por escrito. − Por esto hemos votado a favor, porque no nos valen los falsos argumentos del PSOE y del PP sobre la competitividad del sector; ganar competitividad pasa también por generar incentivos a la inversión de más eficientes medios de transporte, pasa por reglas de competitividad justas y pasa por la internalización de los costes sociales y ambientales de las actividades económicas en general. Desde los Verdes-ALE siempre hemos trabajado a favor de la internalización de costes, para conseguir un precio social y medioambientalmente justo de todas las mercaderías.

Sabemos que la propuesta de mínimos queda muy lejos de nuestras aspiraciones, pero es también un voto de confianza en que el proceso no se detendrá aquí y que el reconocimiento de la necesidad de internalizar costes del transporte es un paso importante. No dejamos de recordar a los Estados Miembros que deben ir más allá y legislar sistemas de gravámenes más justos y eficientes que incluyan todos los costes externos nombrados y exigimos a la Comisión que continúe trabajando para una futura propuesta más ambiciosa sobre este hecho.

  Licia Ronzulli (PPE), per iscritto. − La raccomandazione è l'ultimo passo dell'iter procedurale di modifica della direttiva 1999/62/CE relativa alla tassazione dei mezzi pesanti per l'utilizzo di certe infrastrutture (Eurovignette). Essa è il frutto di lunghe consultazioni e compromessi anche con i vari gruppi politici. Addebitare agli utenti alcuni relativi costi esterni permette agli Stati membri di incrementare l'efficienza dei propri sistemi di pedaggio nazionali, migliorando così la loro capacità di gestione della domanda di trasporto. Il principio "Chi inquina, paga" poi, contribuisce a responsabilizzare gli utenti del settore. Infine, un'assegnazione trasparente ed efficace degli introiti provenienti da infrastrutture e costi esterni suscita maggiore consenso da parte del pubblico, oltre a velocizzare la diminuzione dei costi esterni del trasporto stradale.

  Vilja Savisaar-Toomast (ALDE), kirjalikult. − Lugupeetud juhataja, lugupeetud kolleegid! Täna vahetult enne hääletusi arutelul olnud raskete kaubaveokite maksustamine on järjekordne näide sellest, kuidas algselt väga hea mõte jääb lõpuks suhteliselt nõrgaks ning kaotab suure osa mõjust. Leian, et veel suuremal määral oleks pidanud kogutavad maksud minema transpordi infrastruktuuride arendamisse, ent kahjuks, nagu tihtipeale juhtub, ei ole nõukogu heade mõtetega päri.

Paljud riigid näevad selles hoopis lisamaksutulu teenimise võimalust, mida saab paljudel muudel otstarvetel kasutada. Äärmiselt positiivne on see, et käesoleva direktiivi vastuvõtmisega peab Eestis lõppema olukord, kus teiste riikide veokid meil maksu ei maksa, aga meie veokid teistes riikides maksavad. Olenemata sellest, et paljuski on käesolev raport menetluse käigus nõrgemaks muutunud ning mitmetes sätetes on parlament pidanud järgi andma, on see siiski suur samm edasi ning pean vajalikuks seda kindlasti toetada. Aitäh.

  Olga Sehnalová (S&D), písemně. − Zprávu jsem podpořila. Jde o kompromis založený na principu „znečišťovatel platí“, tzn. zásadě umožňující zpoplatnit některé externí náklady dopravy, například v podobě znečišťování životního prostředí, hluku a dopravních zácp. Zreálnění externích nákladů dopravy je krok správným směrem.

  Catherine Stihler (S&D), in writing. − El Khadraoui has done a great job on this report. The only way that we can make progress in fighting climate change is responsible reports such as this one which hold those accountable who cause the most pollution and which is why I was able to support it.

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. − A imposição de uma taxa aos veículos pesados de mercadorias pela utilização de certas infra-estruturas, nos termos do documento do Parlamento Europeu levado hoje a votação em plenário, constitui um acréscimo de custos relacionados com a circulação deste tipo de transporte. A Eurovinheta é uma medida que penaliza os países periféricos da União Europeia e constitui, simultaneamente, uma receita adicional nos países da Europa Central, num período em que aqueles países passam por um período de dificuldades económicas e financeiras.

A revisão da directiva em conformidade com a posição do Parlamento Europeu trará efeitos consideravelmente negativos em termos de competitividade e de desenvolvimento da economia de vários Estados-Membros, como é o caso de Portugal. Embora reconheça que o texto final aprovado hoje em Estrasburgo seja menos negativo do que o texto anterior acordado em comissão parlamentar, a imposição desta taxa continuará a ser uma realidade e trará um acréscimo dos custos existentes para os países periféricos da União Europeia.

Pelas razões expostas, em nome do interesse nacional e enquanto membro da Comissão dos Transportes no Parlamento Europeu, votei contra o documento apresentado em plenário.

  Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), in writing. − I abstained on the Eurovignette vote today. I abstained because, in the case of Catalonia, what is proposed would penalise a lot of small and medium enterprises that do not have the option of putting goods and products on trains – in particular because of the difference of gauge, which constitutes a physical barrier to completion of the internal market – and would damage their business greatly.

  Viktor Uspaskich (ALDE), raštu. − Gerbiami kolegos, bet kokios naujos ES taisyklės dėl sunkiasvorių krovinių transporto priemonių apmokestinimo turi išlaikyti balansą tarp naujų valstybių narių aplinkosaugos poreikių ir ekonominių interesų. Lietuva – vertinga tranzito šalis Europai. Mūsų krovininis transportas ir sunkiai dirbantys sunkvežimių vairuotojai tapo mūsų šalies vizitine kortele. Remiantis Lietuvos automobilinių kelių direkcijos duomenimis, per pastaruosius dešimt metų sunkiasvorių transporto priemonių skaičius pagrindiniuose keliuose išaugo trigubai – jos padeda formuoti mūsų ekonomikos stuburą. Lietuvai, kuri ir taip jau yra labai išvarginta finansų krizės, kelių transporto kainų pakėlimas būtų vienas sunkiai pakeliamų smūgių. Aš sutinku su pranešėju, kad valstybėms narėms turėtų būti suteikta galimybė padaryti savo nacionalinių kelių apmokestinimo sistemas efektyvesnes.

Aš esu susipažinęs su šiame pranešime paminėtais užterštumo klausimais ir aš žiūriu į juos labai rimtai, tačiau papildomi mokesčiai už oro taršą ir triukšmą netaps išganymu. Problema yra daug didesnė nei pateikta šiame pranešime. Daugumos ES valstybių narių kelių infrastruktūroms būtina tolimesnė plėtra. Tuo pačiu metu Lietuvoje kelių tvarkymui ir plėtrai skirtas finansavimas sumažėjo daugiau nei 20 % per keletą pastarųjų metų.

  Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE), na piśmie. Głosowałem za przyjęciem dyrektywy. Uważam, że decyzja dotycząca rozszerzenia zakresu finansowania eurowiniety o koszty zewnętrzne, czyli koszty zanieczyszczenia środowiska i hałasu, jest korzystniejsza od poprzedniej, ograniczającej się jedynie do pokrycia kosztów infrastruktury drogowej. Dyrektywa ta jest przychylna państwom tranzytowym, więc polskim posłom do Parlamentu Europejskiego powinno na niej szczególnie zależeć.

Warto również uwypuklić fakt, że opłaty mają być niższe, im wyższa jest kategoria ekologiczna pojazdu ciężarowego. Na szczęście z opłat będą zwolnione pojazdy o ładowności 3,5-12 ton oraz użytkownicy samochodów osobowych. Ceny za przejazd będą skonstruowane w zależności od pory dnia, co moim zdaniem przyczyni się do zniechęcenia używania odcinków zagrożonych korkami w godzinach szczytu.

Ważną zasadą dyrektywy jest także zapis odnośnie wydatkowania wpływów pochodzących z myta. Mają one być ponownie inwestowane w infrastrukturę transportową, bez zastrzeżenia dotyczącego rodzaju, natomiast minimum 15% dochodów ma być przeznaczone na projekty TEN-Tu (Trans European Transport Networks). Uważam, że potrzebujemy także długofalowych działań prowadzących do zbieżności metod wyliczania kosztów zewnętrznych we wszystkich państwach członkowskich. Mogłoby to zagwarantować przejrzystość komunikatów dla branży europejskich przewoźników drogowych.

  Angelika Werthmann (NI), schriftlich. − Aufgrund der positiven Erfahrungen der Schweiz seit Einführung der leistungsabhängigen Schwerverkehrsabgabe im Jahr 2001 gibt es keine Einwände gegen die neue Richtlinie. In der Schweiz gibt es seit 2001 10 Prozent weniger Fahrten, gleichzeitig aber ist die transportierte Gütermenge um 60 Prozent gewachsen, die Emmissionsquote konnte gesenkt werden – eine Win-win-Situation. Die Zweckbindung der Einnahmen soll Öffentlichkeitsakzeptanz fördern und die externen Straßenverkehrskosten verringern.

  Iva Zanicchi (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho espresso un voto negativo nei confronti del testo presentato dal relatore on. Saïd El Khadraoui che consente di far pagare una sovrattassa per l'inquinamento atmosferico e acustico generato dagli autoveicoli pesanti. Pur ritenendo condivisibile il principio del cosiddetto "chi inquina paga", è piuttosto discutibile, in una situazione di crisi economica, porre ulteriori tassazioni sui pedaggi autostradali dei TIR, in particolar modo senza l'obbligo di destinarne gli introiti a investimenti che vadano a migliorare le infrastrutture. Il testo approvato non agevola tra l'altro quegli Stati membri, tra cui l'Italia, che soffrono di barriere geografiche tali da render più costosi gli spostamenti delle merci destinate all'import/export.

Έκθεση: Jo Leinen (A7-0330/2010)

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Aprova-se o relatório em apreço, tendo em conta que, com as necessárias negociações, o relator teve a oportunidade de assegurar a inclusão de uma cláusula de revisão para o regulamento referido para possível introdução, após um relatório de implementação pela Comissão, de novos modelos que cobrem uma variedade de bens ambientais. Esta revisão deve ter lugar antes do ano de 2013. Para além disso, foi introduzida a possibilidade de estimativas, o que permite colmatar as falhas no caso de os Estados-Membros não entregarem os dados a tempo.

  Elena Oana Antonescu (PPE), în scris. − Pentru dezvoltarea economică durabilă a Uniunii Europene, este esențială o abordare cu un fundament științific solid a insuficienței resurselor și a ecosistemului. Conturile economice pentru mediu constituie o bază de date importantă pentru deciziile politice în domeniul mediului. Necesitatea acestor conturi este rezultatul funcțiilor cruciale ale mediului în ceea ce privește performanța economică și generarea bunăstării pentru cetățenii Uniunii Europene. Aceste funcții includ furnizarea de resurse naturale pentru activitățile de producție și consum, absorbția deșeurilor de către mediile ecologice și serviciile de mediu care susțin viața. Este foarte important ca aceste conturi economice și de mediu europene să fie utilizate în mod activ în toate procesele decizionale europene relevante ca element-cheie pentru evaluările de impact, planurile de acțiune, propunerile legislative și alte produse importante ale procesului decizional.

Am votat în favoarea acestui raport. Conturile de mediu descriu interacțiunile dintre mediul de afaceri, gospodării și mediu. Prin urmare, acestea trebuie să aducă o contribuție la evaluarea politicilor, în special în furnizarea de date cu privire la efectele pe care le au asupra mediului activităților economice.

  Sophie Auconie (PPE), par écrit. – La politique c'est trouver les meilleures solutions possibles aux problèmes qui se posent... Mais comment y parvenir si l'on ne connait pas parfaitement les problèmes et les solutions possibles ? Voici une question fondamentale notamment, mais pas uniquement, pour la politique environnementale... Ainsi, il est indispensable que les décideurs politiques disposent d'informations fiables et les plus exhaustives possibles sur le monde actuel et sur la situation de l'environnement... C'est le constat auquel le Conseil européen est arrivé en juin 2006 lorsqu'il a demandé à l'Union européenne et à ses États membres d'élargir les comptes nationaux aux principaux aspects du développement durable. Je me félicite de cette initiative et de la proposition de la Commission européenne car elle permettra d'en savoir plus sur les émissions atmosphériques, les taxes environnementales, etc.

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau už šį pranešimą. Europos aplinkos apsaugos politika gali būti deramai įvertinta tik tuomet, jei turima patikimų duomenų. Iki šiol svarbiausios ES masto su aplinkos sąskaitomis susijusios politinės iniciatyvos yra Šeštoji aplinkosaugos veiksmų programa, ES tvaraus vystymosi strategija ir į vairios su Kardifo procesu susijusios sektorių politikos iniciatyvos, apimančios tokias sritis , kaip klimato kaita, darnusis transportas, gamta ir biologinė įvairovė, sveikata ir aplinka, gamtos išteklių naudojimas, atliekų tvarkymas ir tarptautinis tvaraus vystymosi mastas. 2006 m. birželio mėn. išvadose Europos Vadovų Taryba paragino Europos Sąjungą ir valstybes nares į nacionalines sąskaitas įtraukti pagrindinius tvaraus vystymosi aspektus. Todėl nacionalinių sąskaitų sistema turi būti papildyta integruota aplinkos ir ekonomikos apskaita, kurios duomenys būtų visiškai nuoseklūs.Šiam tikslui pasiekti būtina, kad kiekviena valstybė narė rinktų vienodus ir išsamius duomenis ir kad sistema būtų visapusiškai suderinta ES lygmeniu.

  Sebastian Valentin Bodu (PPE), în scris. − Evaluarea politicii de mediu europene este posibilă numai dacă sunt disponibile date fiabile. Prin urmare, obligativitatea colectării acestor date de către statele membre constituie un pas esențial. Datele de mediu disponibile în prezent la nivel european ar trebui îmbogățite pe termen mediu prin adăugarea de informații pentru a îmbunătăți posibilitățile de evaluare a politicilor. Reciclarea și prevenirea generării de deșeuri, emisiile atmosferice și schimbările climatice, precum și consumul și producția durabilă ar fi mult mai ușor de monitorizat dacă ar fi disponibile date de o înaltă calitate referitoare la interacțiunea dintre mediu și economie. Aceste date pot fi colectate în cadrul conturilor pentru mediu, însă cu condiția ca toate statele membre să coopereze, iar armonizarea datelor să fie pe deplin asigurată la nivelul Uniunii.

Obiectivele urmărite ar trebui, deci, să fie precizate într-un mod mai coerent și ar trebui stabilite perspective clare în ceea ce privește dezvoltarea conturilor economice pentru mediu. Conturile economice pentru mediu ar trebui să aducă o contribuție la evaluarea politicilor, în special prin furnizarea de date cu privire la efectele pe care le au asupra mediului activitățile economice. Informațiile corespunzătoare ar putea constitui un fundament extrem de valoros pentru adoptarea deciziilor în cadrul politicii de mediu.

  Vito Bonsignore (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho visto con favore la proposta del collega cui ho espresso un voto a favore. La politica ambientale europea diventa sempre più fondamentale alla luce della crisi economica e della strategia UE 2020 e solamente attraverso dati attendibili è possibile controllare in maniera approfondita la politica ambientale europea. I dati ambientali sono l’unico strumento di valutazione della politica ambientale e tali dati dovrebbero essere arricchiti nel medio termine con ulteriori informazioni attendibili.

Inoltre i dati potrebbero essere monitorati più facilmente se fossero disponibili indicazioni affidabili sulle interazioni tra i fattori ambientali ed economici: i conti economici ambientali potrebbero contribuire alla valutazione delle politiche, fornendo dati sull’impatto ambientale delle politiche economiche, e saranno determinanti ai fini della presa di decisioni in materia economico-ambientale. Gli Stati membri dovranno disporre di metodologie, classificazioni e regole comuni da compilare nell'ambito di un quadro vincolante per gli stessi Stati e a tal riguardo si auspica caldamente che queste nuove misure non comportino costi aggiuntivi o maggiore burocrazia. Come ritiene il relatore la proposta di regolamento in esame rappresenta un primo passo per la stesura di una contabilità ambientale di maggiore portata.

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), por escrito. − Em prol do desenvolvimento sustentável, é essencial tomar as decisões acertadas, e para isso baseadas em dados fiáveis, em matéria de política ambiental. Deste modo, apoio e felicito a proposta de regulamento do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho relativo às contas económicas do ambiente da União Europeia, pois creio que irá contribuir para avaliar as políticas, disponibilizando, em particular, dados sobre o impacto ambiental das actividades económicas.

  Lara Comi (PPE), per iscritto. − Misurare la qualità dell'aria delle nostre città e fare un'analisi approfondita di tale misurazione sarebbe un passo avanti verso una maggiore trasparenza dell'attività politica. Tale indicatore, infatti, benché riferibile a grandezze chimico-fisiche non immediatamente spendibili nella comunicazione tra eletti ed elettori, è il risultato di molteplici decisioni economiche: esso indica, tra l'altro, la concentrazione di attività economiche inquinanti, la composizione del mix energetico utilizzato per le attività produttive e per il riscaldamento di case e uffici, l'uso degli autoveicoli e la gestione delle infrastrutture viarie e del traffico, l'isolamento degli edifici e la qualità dei materiali utilizzati, la presenza o meno di aree verdi, solo per fare qualche esempio. Dall'altro lato, la qualità dell'aria ha delle conseguenze importanti sulla spesa sanitaria, in particolare per i reparti di pneumologia e oncologia. Emerge dunque con forza come un indicatore ambientale si possa trasformare in indicatore economico e politico. Inoltre, può indicare nuovi meccanismi per disincentivare comportamenti viziosi e finanziare progetti virtuosi. Questi collegamenti aiutano la politica a prendere decisioni migliori, nell'interesse dei cittadini. Stabilire le metodologie corrette è il primo passo ed è bene che si compia.

  Anne Delvaux (PPE), par écrit. – Cette proposition de règlement date d’une décision du Conseil européen de juin 2006. À l’époque, l'UE avait décidé d’étendre les comptes nationaux existants et les données statistiques à recueillir aux principaux aspects du développement durable. Pour compléter les comptes nationaux et les données, la Commission a proposé un règlement visant à établir des comptes économiques européens de l’environnement.

Conformément à la proposition de la Commission, les États membres devraient dès lors se voir transmettre une méthode et des normes, définitions, classifications et règles comptables communes, qui devraient être rassemblées dans un cadre contraignant pour chacun d’entre eux. Bien que j'estime qu'une priorité devrait d'abord être accordée aux données déjà disponibles (c’est-à-dire collectées au niveau régional, national et européen), je suis d'avis que si la nécessité de ces modules supplémentaires se révèle avérée, ne génère pas de bureaucratie inutile et de frais supplémentaires, dans ce cas, Eurostat devrait être autorisé à rassembler les données des États membres en vue de la création des comptes économiques environnementaux au niveau européen.

C'est pourquoi j'ai également salué la mise en place de ces nouveaux comptes économiques européens de l’environnement et ai proposé d’en étendre la portée à d’autres modules.

  Edite Estrela (S&D), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente o relatório sobre as contas económicas do ambiente da União Europeia, por considerar necessária a existência de indicadores relativos ao desenvolvimento sustentável e ao bem-estar dos cidadãos, para além do PIB, que permitam fazer igualmente a avaliação das políticas ambientais europeias.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − Nas palavras do relator, as contas económicas do ambiente devem contribuir para a avaliação das políticas, disponibilizando, em particular, dados sobre o impacto ambiental das actividades económicas. Esta ideia é importante e é, de facto, a única forma de obter dados concretos sobre o real impacto das políticas ambientais. Se, por um lado, o crescimento económico não pode esquecer o ambiente, é também verdade que as políticas ambientais não podem esquecer (ou virar costas) às actividades económicas e à competitividade das empresas e indústrias europeias. É sempre por este prisma que vejo o problema do desenvolvimento sustentável, que implica, necessariamente, crescimento económico com respeito pelo ambiente, duas faces de uma mesma moeda que a Europa, sobretudo no actual momento, não pode (nem deve) esquecer.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − Em 28 de Setembro de 2009, a Comissão apresentou uma Comunicação denominada O PIB e mais além: Medir o progresso num Mundo em mudança, propondo medidas em ordem à criação de uma base de dados sobre as contas relativas ao ambiente da União Europeia, tendo em vista um melhor debate público e uma tomada de decisão mais bem sustentada. A Comissão, até finais de 2013, deve apresentar um relatório que responda a questões tais como: qual a situação das nossas florestas? Até que ponto é que os nossos recursos haliêuticos se encontram exauridos? Para esse efeito, necessitamos de uma base estatística credível e actualizada, a criar com este regulamento. O quadro jurídico criado com esta proposta permitirá à UE avaliar as contas do ambiente tendo em conta o desenvolvimento sustentável. Nunca foi tão importante dar atenção à bipolarização ambiente/economia. Votei favoravelmente este relatório, pois, além de permitir a tomada de decisões políticas mais abrangentes e fundamentadas, vai ao encontro da máxima de que nós não somos donos deste Mundo, tomámo-lo de herança aos nossos netos. É fundamental deixarmos um ambiente saudável às gerações futuras.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − A definição e a disponibilização de indicadores e de estatísticas descritivas que permitam monitorizar a evolução de factores económicos e ambientais e, bem assim, possíveis interacções entre ambos, constitui indiscutivelmente uma ferramenta útil de apoio ao planeamento estratégico, à definição de políticas públicas e ao delinear de vias de desenvolvimento sustentáveis. Ademais, como refere o relator, os dados a obter podem e devem contribuir para a avaliação de políticas, permitindo uma aferição do impacto ambiental das actividades económicas. As informações obtidas podem constituir um fundamento importante para as decisões em matéria de política ambiental. A proposta de regulamento apenas prevê a recolha e a compilação de dados no âmbito das emissões para a atmosfera, dos impostos ambientais por actividade económica e das contas de fluxos de materiais para a economia. Outros dados poderiam ser adquiridos noutras áreas. O relator pronuncia-se também nesse sentido, sugerindo a realização de estudos-piloto para averiguar a sua aplicabilidade prática. Deverá, todavia, ser tida em conta a necessária adaptação dos sistemas estatísticos nacionais e os seus custos. A Comissão parece ter este facto em conta na sua proposta, ainda que apenas parcialmente, ao prever derrogações aos Estados-Membros quando for necessário efectuar adaptações de grande envergadura.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Esta proposta de regulamento aqui analisada apenas prevê a recolha e a compilação de dados no âmbito das emissões para a atmosfera, dos impostos ambientais por actividade económica e das contas de fluxos de materiais para a economia. Outros dados poderiam ser adquiridos noutras áreas. O relator pronuncia-se também nesse sentido, sugerindo a realização de estudos-piloto para averiguar a sua aplicabilidade prática.

Mas a definição e a disponibilização de indicadores e de estatísticas descritivas que permitam monitorizar a evolução de factores económicos e ambientais – e, bem assim, possíveis interacções entre ambos – constitui indiscutivelmente uma ferramenta útil de apoio ao planeamento estratégico, à definição de políticas públicas e ao delinear de vias de desenvolvimento sustentáveis.

Os dados a obter podem e devem contribuir para a avaliação de políticas, permitindo uma aferição do impacto ambiental das actividades económicas. As informações obtidas podem constituir um fundamento importante para as decisões em matéria de política ambiental.

Deverá, todavia, ser tida em conta a necessária adaptação dos sistemas estatísticos nacionais e os seus custos. A Comissão parece ter este facto em conta na sua proposta, ainda que apenas parcialmente, ao prever derrogações aos Estados-Membros quando for necessário efectuar adaptações de grande envergadura.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − Environmentálne ekonomické účty by mali prispievať k hodnoteniu politiky tým, že by poskytovali najmä údaje o účinkoch hospodárskych aktivít na životné prostredie. Takéto informácie môžu byť veľmi dôležité pre rozhodnutia v oblasti politiky životného prostredia. Recyklácia a predchádzanie vzniku odpadov, znečisťovanie ovzdušia a klimatické zmeny, či trvalo udržateľná spotreba a výroba by sa dali monitorovať oveľa efektívnejšie, keby boli k dispozícií vysokokvalitné dáta, čo sa týka interakcie medzi environmentálnymi a ekonomickými faktormi.

Domnievam sa, že zber relevantných dát, ktorý bol do dneška dobrovoľným, by sa mal stať povinným. Navyše v prípade, že by bol do tejto oblasti zavedený spoločný rámec na zhromažďovanie, spracovávanie, odovzdávanie a vyhodnocovanie európskych environmentálnych ekonomických účtov, uľahčila by sa situácia ohľadom politického hodnotenia európskej politiky životného prostredia.

  Elisabetta Gardini (PPE), per iscritto. − Il trattato di Amsterdam ha posto una grande attenzione sull'interrelazione tra la politica economica e quella ambientale. Ecco perché fattori come i trasporti sostenibili e le risorse energetiche sono diventati punti chiave anche nelle politiche di altri settori. Di fatto, già nel 2006, il Consiglio europeo aveva invitato gli Stati membri a estendere i conti nazionali agli aspetti fondamentali dello sviluppo sostenibile, per fornire dati pienamente coerenti. Voto a favore di questa proposta di regolamento perché ritengo che possa agevolare l’attività degli istituti nazionali di statistica, permettendo l’elaborazione di dati armonizzati e tempestivi in materia di contabilità ambientale. A tal proposito, l’adozione di una base giuridica europea per la rilevazione di dati sui conti economici ambientali potrà fornire stime a livello europeo sulla esistente interazione tra economia e ambiente. Auspico, infine, che questo strumento possa essere visto come un ulteriore conferma del ruolo guida svolto a livello mondiale dall’Unione Europea in materia di conti ambientali.

  Robert Goebbels (S&D), par écrit. – J'ai voté contre le rapport Leinen qui, sous couvert de statistiques dites environnementales, met en branle une avalanche de renseignements nécessitant une charge bureaucratique énorme, et tout cela au nom de l'évangélisme verdâtre.

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), raštu. − Aplinkos ekonominės sąskaitos turėtų padėti atlikti politikos vertinimą, visų pirma, kai jose pateikiami duomenys apie ekonominės veiklos poveikį aplinkai. Atitinkama informacija gali būti svarbus pagrindas priimant su aplinkos apsaugos politika susijusius sprendimus. 2006 m. birželio mėn. išvadose Europos Vadovų Taryba ragina ES ir valstybes nares į nacionalines sąskaitas įtraukti pagrindinius tvaraus vystymosi aspektus. Svarbus indėlis plėtojant šią politinę koncepciją yra ir Komisijos pasiūlymas dėl Europos aplinkos ekonominių sąskaitų. Europos aplinkos apsaugos politika gali būti deramai įvertinta tik tuomet, jei turima patikimų duomenų. Todėl valstybės narės turi įsipareigoti rinkti minėtuosius duomenis. Siekiant pagerinti politikos vertinimo galimybes, Europos lygmeniu turimi duomenys apie aplinką gana greitai turėtų būti išplėsti įtraukiant papildomą informaciją. Turint geros kokybės aplinką ir ekonomiką susiejančių duomenų būtų galima geriau stebėti atliekų perdirbimą ir atliekų atsiradimo prevenciją, išlakų kiekį ir klimato kaitą, tausų vartojimą ir gamybą. Susilaikiau balsuodamas už šį dokumentą, kadangi nemanau, kad šie duomenys gali būti renkami taikant vien tik aplinkos sąskaitų sistemą, būtina, kad tai darytų kiekviena šalis ir kad sistema būtų visapusiškai suderinta ES lygmeniu.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I voted for this Report. Environmental economic accounts should contribute to policy evaluation, particularly by making data available on the environmental impact of economic activities. Such information could be extremely valuable for the purposes of environmental policy-making.

  Clemente Mastella (PPE), per iscritto. − È possibile valutare in maniera approfondita la politica ambientale europea soltanto in presenza di dati attendibili, ragion per cui la rilevazione dei dati da parte degli Stati membri deve essere obbligatoria. Facciamo particolare riferimento ai dati sulle emissioni atmosferiche, sulle tasse ambientali per diverse attività economiche e sulla contabilità dei flussi di materia a livello macroeconomico. A nostro parere, i conti economici ambientali dovrebbero contribuire alla valutazione delle politiche, fornendo in particolare i dati sull'impatto ambientale delle attività economiche, dati che potrebbero rivelarsi particolarmente utili ai fini della presa di decisioni in materia economico-ambientale. Sosteniamo la necessità di prevedere una clausola di revisione e la presentazione da parte della Commissione europea di relazioni periodiche sull'attuazione pratica del regolamento. Riteniamo sia importante verificare l'attendibilità e la comparabilità dei dati per poter apportare alcuni miglioramenti e garantire un elevato livello di qualità della contabilità economico-ambientale. È altresì opportuno tenere debitamente conto dello sviluppo di nuovi moduli e delle esperienze maturate nel corso degli studi pilota. La relazione di verifica dovrebbe fornire l'occasione di adeguare il regolamento in base agli ultimi sviluppi constatati e alle esperienze maturate.

  Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Considero necessário um melhor leque de estatísticas sobre as consequências ambientais das políticas dos Estados-Membros e da UE, bem como sobre a contabilização de certos impostos que sustentam as políticas ambientais. É lamentável que as estatísticas e os impostos sejam indiscriminadamente incluídos numa contabilidade ambiental. O objectivo dessa assimilação é a implementação do mercado do clima e dos seus direitos bolsistas de poluição. A delegação de poderes para a Comissão também vai nessa direcção. Votei favoravelmente, uma vez que defendo a ideia de instrumentos estatísticos necessários, mesmo recusando as políticas que eles servem.

  Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – Il est nécessaire de s'accorder sur l'élaboration de statistiques exemplaires sur les conséquences environnementales des politiques des États membres et de l'UE ainsi que sur la comptabilité des taxes qui soutiennent certaines politiques environnementales. C'est une évidence.

Il est par contre regrettable que statistiques et taxes soient englobées indistinctement dans une "comptabilité environnementale". L'objectif d'une telle assimilation est la mise en œuvre du paquet climat et de sa bourse des droits à polluer. La délégation de pouvoirs à la Commission va elle aussi dans ce sens.

Je vote pour cependant. Je veux valider l'idée d'instruments statistiques nécessaires même si je refuse les politiques qu'on veut leur faire servir.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − É muito importante que as contas económicas do ambiente contribuam para a avaliação das políticas, disponibilizando dados sobre o impacto ambiental das actividades económicas. Essas informações podem constituir um fundamento importante para as decisões em matéria de política ambiental. Temos que saber definir o objecto, a finalidade, bem como o contributo do proposto no presente regulamento para a estratégia global de O PIB e mais além. Este regulamento prevê apenas a recolha e a compilação de dados no âmbito das emissões para a atmosfera, dos impostos ambientais por actividade económica e das contas de fluxos de materiais para a economia. É um primeiro passo com vista à elaboração de contas económicas do ambiente mais completas, já que, actualmente, segundo informações dos serviços estatísticos europeus e nacionais competentes, apenas se dispõe, para esses âmbitos, de dados à escala europeia. É pois necessário continuar a avançar para que os dados estatísticos na área do ambiente sejam cada vez mais fiáveis e frequentes.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − Recycling and prevention of waste, air emissions and climatic change and sustainable consumption and production could be monitored much more effectively if high-quality data were available regarding the interaction between environmental and economic factors. The relevant data collection, which until today was made on a voluntary basis at EU level, should become therefore mandatory. Moreover environmental data currently available should be expanded in the medium term to facilitate the necessary policy assessment of the European environmental policy. I agree with the rapporteur’s position and I voted in favour.

  Rolandas Paksas (EFD), raštu. − Europos aplinkos apsaugos politika gali būti tinkamai ir deramai įvertinta tik tuomet, jei turima patikimų duomenų. Atliekų perdirbimas, išlakų kiekis, klimato kaita, tausus vartojimas ir gamyba turi būti nuolat stebimi, kad būtų daroma pažanga šiose srityse visos Europos mastu. Aplinkos ekonominių sąskaitų rengimo sistema yra viena iš priemonių, kuri padėtų rinkti ir kaupti duomenis išlakų, mokesčių pagal ekonominės veiklos rūšis ir šalies ūkio medžiagų srautų sąskaitų srityse. Tačiau privalomas šios sistemos pobūdis sukuria papildomą administracinę naštą, todėl diegiant tokią sistemą reikia tinkamai įvertinti jos taikymo poveikį, išdėstyti tikslus ir nurodyti aiškias tolesnio aplinkos ekonominių sąskaitų plėtojimo gaires. Atkreiptinas dėmesys į tai, kad pagrindinės kontrolės ir atsakomybės funkcijos šiose srityse bus suteikiamos Eurostatui. Minėtųjų funkcijų įgyvendinimui būtina numatyti pakankamai darbuotojų ir finansinių išteklių. Tačiau reikia atsižvelgti į tai, ar Europos Sąjungos biudžetas yra pakankamas, kad būtų skiriama papildomų finansinių resursų biurokratinio aparato didinimui ir jo išlaikymui.

  Alfredo Pallone (PPE), per iscritto. − Cari colleghi, la proposta di regolamento sui conti economici ambientali europei intende fornire strumenti utili al conseguimento di alcuni obiettivi importanti come una strategia europea di contabilità ambientale ed un approfondimento dei lavori degli istituti di statistica che offrono i dati in materia agli organi amministrativi. Ho votato a favore del testo perché ritengo importante per uno sviluppo sostenibile l'inserimento delle tematiche ambientali nelle politiche dell'Unione ed avere dei conti nazionali e un programma europeo con una contabilità economica e ambientale integrata in materia di trasporti, riciclaggio e prevenzione dei rifiuti, emissioni atmosferiche, cambiamenti climatici, produzione e consumi sostenibili.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − Em 2006, o Conselho Europeu convidou a UE e os seus Estados-Membros a alargar as contas nacionais aos principais aspectos do desenvolvimento sustentável, propondo medidas a tomar, a curto e a médio prazo, para desenvolver indicadores globais que proporcionassem um debate público de maior qualidade e ajudassem a tomadas de decisão baseadas nos impactos económicos das medidas ambientais a implementar. Votei favoravelmente o presente relatório por concordar com este primeiro passo com vista à elaboração de contas económicas do ambiente mais completas, já que, actualmente, segundo informações dos serviços estatísticos europeus e nacionais competentes, apenas se dispõe de dados à escala europeia. Importa identificar, num plano de trabalho, outros módulos prioritários em que já se trabalha e em relação aos quais, provavelmente em breve, também poderão ser apresentados os dados correspondentes, designadamente dados sobre o impacto ambiental das actividades económicas. A reciclagem e a prevenção dos resíduos, as emissões para a atmosfera e as alterações climáticas, a par do consumo e da produção sustentáveis, seriam passíveis de uma melhor supervisão se se dispusesse de dados de qualidade que combinassem o ambiente com a economia. Esses dados podem proporcionar uma importante ajuda para a tomada de decisões quanto às medidas ambientais.

  Aldo Patriciello (PPE), per iscritto. − Il Consiglio europeo nel 2006 ha invitato l'Unione europea e i suoi Stati membri ad estendere i dati statistici per uno sviluppo sostenibile e a quelli già esistenti di contabilità nazionale. La stessa Commissione nel 2009 nella comunicazione "Non solo PIL: misurare il progresso in un mondo in cambiamento" ha proposto diverse misure, da adottare nel breve e medio termine, sulla definizione di indicatori generali che creino una base cognitiva più affidabile per un migliore dibattito pubblico e un'azione politica più adeguata. Ma in particolare sono stati toccati anche gli aspetti concernenti i conti economici ambientali europei.

La valutazione dei conti economici ambientali europei in maniera approfondita può essere fatta solo alla presenza di dati attendibili, per questo gli Stati membri dovrebbero essere equipaggiati con la metodologia e standard comuni, definizioni, classificazioni e regole contabili che devono essere elaborati in un quadro vincolante per tutti gli Stati. Per precisare gli obiettivi perseguiti e i futuri orientamenti per quanto riguarda i conti economici ambientali e affinché questi possano costituire un elemento indispensabile per le decisioni in materia economico-ambientale esprimo il mio voto favorevole alla proposta in oggetto.

  Phil Prendergast (S&D), in writing. − In order to ensure sustainable development and appropriate environmental policies at EU level, it is essential that policy makers are provided with reliable data on the environmental impact of economic activities. I support this resolution as it lays out a number of effective measures for the collection of more comprehensive data. If the EU is serious about increasing recycling, reducing waste and limiting air emissions and climate change then it must take action. The most effective way to achieve European goals in relation to sustainable development and environmental policies is through full cooperation across all Member States. Therefore mandatory data collection on the impact of economic activities by Member States is necessary. The more accurate and reliable the information provided is, then the better our environmental policies will be.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), por escrito. − Uma política de desenvolvimento sustentável supõe, para surtir os efeitos pretendidos, que nos processos de tomada de decisão haja informação que permita adoptar soluções ponderadas. Torna-se assim necessário que os Estados-Membros reúnam um vasto conjunto de indicadores que facultem, em termos agregados, uma imagem global do espaço comunitário em termos ambientais. É este o objecto da proposta da Comissão ao Parlamento Europeu e ao Conselho sujeita à apreciação do Parlamento Europeu. Por estas razões, votei favoravelmente o presente relatório.

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. − We voted in favour. The proposal creates environmental economic accounts as satellite accounts to ESA 95 by providing methodology, common standards, definitions, classifications and accounting rules, intended to be used for compiling environmental economic accounts. At the initial stage, the environmental accounts to be compiled within the common framework shall be grouped in the following modules: a module for air emissions accounts; a module for environmentally related taxes by economic activities; a module for economy-wide material flow accounts. On the basis of our amendments adopted in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, the compromise negotiated with the Council contains, in addition to the accounts initially proposed, a requirement for the Commission to report by the end of 2013 and examine extension of the accounts to cover material stocks (and not only flows) as well as eco-system services. Agreement on this requirement for Member States to provide data with harmonised methodology on environmental economy is actually a positive concrete step in the ‘beyond GDP’ process.

  Angelika Werthmann (NI), schriftlich. − Volkswirtschaftliche Gesamtrechnungen stellen Umweltbezüge aufgrund von Wirtschaftsleistungen und Wohlstandsschaffung her, sie sollen laut Kommissionsvorschlag eine Datenerhebung bei Luftemissionen und umweltbezogenen Steuern vorsehen. Durch die Umweltgesamtrechnung sollen nur die Wechselwirkungen aufgezeigt werden. Nachhaltige Entwicklung in der EU erfordert einen angemessenen Umgang hinsichtlich des Ökosystems und der wachsenden Ressourcenverknappung. Die Bürger müssen über Umweltauswirkungen, welche durch wirtschaftliche Tätigkeiten bedingt sind, informiert werden.

  Iva Zanicchi (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho espresso un voto favorevole al testo del collega Jo Leinen. Negli ultimi anni infatti la politica ambientale e la politica di sostenibilità hanno acquisito una notevole rilevanza, facendo crescere l'attenzione sull'integrazione tra la politica economica e quella ambientale. I cambiamenti climatici, i trasporti sostenibili, la natura, le biodiversità, l'utilizzo e lo sfruttamento delle materie prime e delle risorse naturali, la gestione dei rifiuti hanno visto aumentare in modo esponenziale la loro importanza all'interno delle politiche degli Stati membri. Per questo le valutazioni sulla politica ambientale europea e sulle strategie tematiche adottate in ambito UE possono essere effettuate in modo serio e rigoroso solo se vengono forniti dati attendibili.

10. Korrezzjonijiet u intenzjonijiet għall-vot: ara l-Minuti

(Η συνεδρίαση διακόπτεται στις 13.15 και επαναλαμβάνεται στις 15.00.)

PRZEWODNICZY: JERZY BUZEK
Przewodniczący

11. Komunikazzjoni tal-Presidenza

  Przewodniczący. − Proszę Państwa, mam do podania następujący komunikat: w związku z próbną ewakuacją przeprowadzoną w czasie dzisiejszych głosowań wszystkie wyjaśnienia dotyczące stanowiska zajętego w dzisiejszych głosowaniach będą przyjmowane w dniu jutrzejszym, a więc stanowiska będą wyjaśniane razem w jutrzejszym głosowaniu. Jutro także dokończymy głosowania, które nie odbyły się dzisiaj. Chodzi o przerwane głosowanie nad jednym ze sprawozdań, które podejmiemy dokładnie w tym samym miejscu, w którym je przerwaliśmy, aby wszystko miało pełną ciągłość.

12. Approvazzjoni tal-Minuti tas-seduta ta’ qabel: ara l-Minuti

13. Ħin għall-Mistoqsijiet mal-President tal-Kummissjoni

  Przewodniczący. − Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest tura pytań z udziałem przewodniczącego Komisji.

  Manfred Weber, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Zunächst darf ich mit einem Schmunzeln sagen, dass ich uns beglückwünsche, dass wir den Feueralarm alle gut überstanden haben und wieder gesund im Plenarsaal zurück sind.

Als EVP-Vertreter möchte ich eine Frage an den Kommissionspräsidenten stellen, die sich mit den Bildern beschäftigt, die wir in den letzten Wochen aus dem Mittelmeerraum erhalten haben, wo viele Menschen auf der Flucht vor den Verhältnissen in Afrika in Europa gelandet sind bzw. teilweise auch nicht angekommen sind. Wir haben Bilder von gestrandeten und von toten Menschen in den Nachrichten sehen müssen.

Wir wissen alle, dass es unsere gemeinsame europäische Herausforderung ist, eine Antwort zu finden auf dieses Drama und dieses Flüchtlingselend. Ich möchte im Namen der EVP-Fraktion den Kommissionspräsidenten bitten, uns eine Einschätzung zu geben, ob die Kommission – vor allem FRONTEX – genug Ressourcen hat, ob wir als Europäische Union genug Möglichkeiten haben, vor Ort zu reagieren, und ob wir genug gesetzliche Grundlagen haben, damit Europa im Mittelmeerraum gemeinsam handeln kann.

Außerdem würde mich interessieren, wie sich die Gespräche mit den Herkunftsländern – z. B. mit Tunesien, mit Ägypten – darstellen und ob wir als Europäer in diesem Bereich gut vorankommen.

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − Mr Weber, we all regret recent events that have caused the loss of many lives. I agree with you on the need to take more decisive action in this field.

There was an immediate response to assist the countries in North Africa – more than EUR 1 million for humanitarian assistance – and this assistance will continue. Through the Hermes joint operation, the Frontex border agency is coordinating a response to the strong migratory pressure. However, it is very important that Member States in the Mediterranean region, together with third countries, continue to cooperate and coordinate their efforts. More needs to be done.

So my very direct answer to you is that, yes, we need more resources for Frontex. The proposals to reinforce Frontex need to be adopted as a matter of urgency. We also need Member States to show political will and, above all, solidarity among themselves by offering the requisite technical and human resources. As you know, the European Union as such does not have all those resources, so we need the cooperation of the Member States in making them available.

  Manfred Weber, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, danke für diese Einschätzungen. Wenn Sie ausführen, dass wir für FRONTEX im Moment mehr Ressourcen brauchen, würde mich noch interessieren, ob Sie nicht auch der Ansicht sind, dass die Staaten bisher zu wenig bereit waren, Ressourcen bereitzustellen, um FRONTEX stark zu machen. Wir hatten ja bisher die Toolbox. War bisher von Seiten der Mitgliedstaaten zu wenig Bereitschaft vorhanden, FRONTEX entsprechend zu unterstützen?

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − There is an ongoing debate about this, in fact it is one of the topics for the European Council this month, on 23 and 24 June. Not only should the Member States adopt the proposal already put forward to reinforce Frontex, but it is also important to step up the logistical response: more planes and more ships are indispensable and we cannot currently provide them from our budget at European level.

I think there is a political will to do this but it needs to be done in a coordinated manner and this is where an effort has been initiated by the Commission: Commissioner Malmström is working on the matter with the Member States, and I hope the European Council later this month will confirm our thinking.

At the same time, of course, we also need the cooperation of third countries. I myself was in Tunisia, where I spoke with the Prime Minister, and they have promised us cooperation. In fact, they are cooperating and we are now trying to reach some form of pragmatic logistical agreements between the Tunisian authorities and our own agencies.

  President. − Not all MEPs are back in the Chamber after the fire drill.

  Guy Verhofstadt, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Yes, I noticed that some of my colleagues are still on the fire drill.

Yesterday Commissioner Olli Rehn announced a number of important steps in the Commission. First of all, he asked for a number of changes to a rescue mechanism. He said it is necessary for this mechanism to be able to provide countries with flexible credit lines. He said that this mechanism has to be able to go to the secondary market and, most importantly, he said that this can be done by discounted swaps with its own AAA rated bonds. This is very important because it means that you can swap bad bonds from countries in difficulties with the rescue mechanism’s AAA bonds.

Secondly, he also said that the Commission should start to examine the possibility of Eurobonds – finally, I may say.

My question to you, Mr Barroso, is can you confirm that this is also the position of the Commission? Secondly, as time is pressing, will you propose these changes to the rescue mechanism at the next European Council meeting in two weeks’ time?

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − I want to confirm that all the ideas put forward by Commissioner Rehn have my full support and endorsement, so I will not repeat what he said.

Regarding the ESM, we are now in the process of establishing it. As you know, I hope the governments will very soon agree on that and so I hope that there will be a political decision in the European Council confirming the decisions regarding the European Stability Mechanism and, of course, you know what our position is.

Regarding eurobonds, this is not a new idea. The Commission has for many years – including one of my predecessors – put forward the idea of eurobonds. The reality is that so far Member States have not accepted the idea; namely when we had the crisis with Greece, the Commission proposed some idea of mutualisation of the debt, which was rejected by most of the Member States in the euro area. I think that there is now some progress in terms of accepting the idea of considering several options, and the Commission will of course present several options. We have always thought that the idea of eurobonds was an attractive one provided the Member States could support it, but we are not yet there, to be honest. We are not yet there and I think what we have to do now is focus on the ESM.

  Guy Verhofstadt, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – I do not think that the crisis concerning Greece and the euro is over. It is not over. So we have to find additional instruments. One of the additional instruments is, in fact, what Olli Rehn is proposing – a swap of bad bonds from some countries for a smaller package of AAA rated eurobonds. That is the way forward. These eurobonds can be issued by the EFSF, by the ESM or by a new European agency in the future. That does not matter. It is the mechanism that is important and it is important that, for the first time, I think, Olli Rehn and the Commission recognise that it is the way forward.

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − Mr Verhofstadt, the Commission acts as a collegiate body. I think you find it easier to agree with what Olli Rehn says than with what I say, but in fact we are saying exactly the same thing.

In the annual growth survey the Commission was defending and proposing collectively more intervention of this kind in the markets; that was unfortunately not agreed to by the Member States. So what I can confirm is that we are working along that line; we are trying to have increased flexibility for intervention in the markets but, honestly, I think we should now focus on the ESM and consider, of course, options for the future of the eurobonds if the Member States are ready to take that additional step.

  Jan Zahradil, za skupinu ECR. – Pane předsedo, jak víte, moje skupina je složená převážně z nečlenů eurozóny, ale jak už jsem tady několikrát řekl, rozhodně si nepřejeme neúspěch eura. Na to jsou naše ekonomiky příliš propojené, a proto musím říci, že naše pocity z toho, co se děje, jsou smíšené.

My tady dostáváme nejednoznačné signály. Něco jiného říká Evropská rada, něco jiného říká Evropská centrální banka, něco jiného říká Mezinárodní měnový fond. A hlavně mám pocit, že tady pořád ještě vítězí politická stanoviska nad těmi ekonomickými. Jako by bylo možné ošálit trhy nějakými přísliby a vyhnout se skutečnému řešení situace.

Já se chci zeptat, pokud jde o otázku restrukturalizace státního dluhu, jaká je vlastně pozice Evropské komise? Skutečně stále preferujete nalévání dalších a dalších peněz a poskytování dalších a dalších nekonečných půjček do ekonomik, které jsou ve vážných potížích a na samém okraji kolapsu, nebo už se tady začíná projevovat zdravý rozum a uvažuje se vážně i o možnosti restrukturalizace jejich státních dluhů, protože podle mého názoru se tomu v dlouhodobém horizontu stejně nevyhneme.

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − Mr Zahradil, first of all, unfortunately the economic problems that we have in Europe are not only in the euro area. Some Member States outside the euro area are also involved in balance of payment support programmes through the Commission and the IMF.

Regarding the euro area, as you say, there are discussions ongoing between the Member States, the Council, the Commission and the European Central Bank on achieving the best possible comprehensive response. As you know, there is not always expert agreement on the best way to obtain that response. This is still ongoing work.

It is fair to recognise that these issues are extremely difficult and complex. The magnitude of the challenge is unprecedented and it requires some work of convergence. That is why the Commission has been extremely prudent in the way it communicates on that matter because some of these issues are market sensitive. One thing is clear: as we have said, restructuring is not an alternative to the painful fiscal consolidation efforts that all the Member States have to make if they want to correct their imbalances in terms of deficit and debt.

  Daniel Cohn-Bendit, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur Barroso, il est vrai qu'on ne comprend pas toujours la position de l'Union européenne, mais vous venez de répondre sur ce point. Je voudrais dire trois choses.

D'abord, sur la restructuration, arrêtons. Nous savons tous qu'il y aura, à un moment donné, une restructuration de la dette, en Grèce par exemple, pour la simple raison qu'il faut donner au gouvernement grec la possibilité de reprendre confiance et qu'il faut restructurer la société grecque. Parce qu'aujourd'hui, en Grèce, personne n'a confiance en personne, ni dans le gouvernement. Et tant que le gouvernement n'arrivera pas à donner une perspective d'avenir à son peuple, autre que l'austérité, il n'arrivera pas à relancer l'économie.

Il faudrait donc replacer, au cœur des réflexions de la Commission, et des parties concernées, la nécessité de redonner confiance à la population grecque, c'est la condition sine qua non pour l'adoption d'éventuelles mesures. Or, aujourd'hui, l'austérité ne donne pas à cette société le temps de la réflexion. C'est la raison de ce refus, qui peut être très dangereux.

Une dernière question, l'évasion fiscale. L'Europe ne pourrait-elle pas aussi aider la Grèce dans ce domaine? Il y a des comptes grecs dans des banques en Autriche, au Luxembourg, à Chypre et en Suisse. Pourquoi ne pas geler ces comptes ou, au moins, remettre en question le secret bancaire pour que le gouvernement grec sache d'où vient l'évasion fiscale. On lui demande de faire cesser l'évasion fiscale et, dans le même temps, on ne l'aide pas et ce sont nos banques, des banques européennes, qui, en fait, cachent l'évasion fiscale.

  José Manuel Barroso, président de la Commission. − Monsieur Cohn-Bendit, il est vrai qu'il y a un problème d'évasion fiscale en Grèce même si, selon moi, ce n'est pas la cause du problème structurel grec.

Actuellement, nous sommes en train de travailler sur la lutte contre le secret bancaire. Comme vous le savez, tous les États membres ainsi que la Suisse se sont engagés depuis mars 2009 à appliquer la norme de l'OCDE qui prévoit qu'un État ne peut refuser de fournir une information à la demande d'un autre État, au motif que cette information serait détenue par une banque ou un autre établissement financier. Ce principe a été inclus par nous, Commission, dans la directive en matière de coopération administrative dans le domaine de la fiscalité, qui est entrée en vigueur le 11 mars 2011 et qui n'entrera malheureusement en application que le 1er janvier 2013.

Dès lors, la question du secret bancaire est résolue sur le plan juridique au niveau européen et ne peut faire obstacle à un échange complet de renseignements sur demande entre administrations fiscales. Je crois que toutes les raisons sont réunies pour qu'aujourd'hui déjà, sur la base de la coopération administrative, les États membres de l'Union européenne donnent toutes les informations à la Grèce concernant une éventuelle fraude ou évasion fiscale.

  Lothar Bisky, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Herr Barroso, ich habe nur eine kurze Frage. Ich freue mich, dass auf dem G8-Gipfel und auf dem vorangegangenen eG8-Forum das Internet behandelt wurde. Man macht sich auch Sorgen, warum sich die Mächtigen mit dem Internet beschäftigen. Wir wissen, wie sensibel dieser Bereich ist. Können Sie etwas mehr darüber sagen? Ist das eine einmalige Sache, oder geht das länger? Werden Sie das wieder auf die Tagesordnung setzen?

  José Manuel Barroso, président de la Commission. − Le Président Sarkozy a eu, à mon avis, une excellente idée parce que l'internet est un phénomène global. Nous voulons tous un internet ouvert. Nous pensons que c'est une grande contribution pour la connaissance et pour la liberté. En même temps, il y a parfois des abus de l'internet: certaines exploitations, d'enfants par exemple, des crimes commis en profitant de certaines libertés offertes par l'internet.

Nous avons donc eu une discussion très intéressante avec quelques-uns des grands créateurs d'initiatives dans le cadre de l'internet, du leader de Google à M. Zuckerberg, leader de Facebook, et d'autres. Nous avons discuté de ce que pourrait être la régulation adéquate de l'internet, tout en préservant bien sûr toute la liberté et tout le potentiel d'innovation qu'offre l'internet. Il y a donc eu débat et confirmation, à l'issue du débat, que, ce point, internet, figurera à l'avenir à l'ordre du jour du G8.

  Lothar Bisky, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Ich bleibe dennoch etwas aufmerksam in dieser Frage und möchte an Sie die Frage richten, ob Sie bereit wären, uns in groben Zügen über die weiteren Verhandlungen zum Internet zu informieren, denn das ist eine wichtige, einschneidende Maßnahme für die Zukunft.

  José Manuel Barroso, président de la Commission. − Il n'y a pas vraiment eu de négociation. C'était un échange de vues très général, une sorte de brainstorming. Il y a eu auparavant une conférence qui s'appelait précisément e-G8, à laquelle ont participé de grands acteurs du secteur de l'internet et les autorités. Ce n'était pas du tout une négociation; je ne l'ai pas vu comme cela. Nous avons demandé à ces responsables de grandes entreprises de l'internet de dire comment ils voient l'avenir de ce secteur et, d'un autre côté, avec les différents membres du G8, nous avons fait part de nos préoccupations, de nos intérêts et comment nous percevons Internet. Mais il n'y a pas vraiment eu de négociation en termes de résultats concrets.

  Nigel Farage, on behalf of the EFD Group. – Mr Barroso, we have enjoyed a series of pantomime exchanges on the euro. Every time I have predicted that a country would need a bail-out you have come back and said, oh no, they don’t, everything is fine. And now we face the fourth bail-out – the second Greek bail-out – unless, of course, today you are going to tell us that is not necessary either. But the question I want to ask you today is perhaps far more serious than anything that has happened in Greece or Ireland or Portugal to date. It is about the real sovereign debt crisis which we may face within the next few weeks, and which concerns the integrity of the European Central Bank itself.

Month after month I have warned that you cannot go on buying up vast quantities of your own bad debt. Mr Barroso, do you accept that the finances of the European Central Bank and its integrity are now in a serious and parlous state?

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − No, I do not accept that. I think the European Central Bank is a very credible institution that has been managed with great wisdom and intelligence. The independence of the ECB is respected by all the Member States of the euro area. Of course we know that there are some difficulties in the euro area. As I have already said, they are difficulties which, to be fair, concern not only the euro area.

Unfortunately your criticism of the euro area is always ideological. The debt problems are not exclusive. On average, the debt in the euro area is lower than the debt in the UK, to give an example. But in fact we have different problems because this is the first time we have had this type of monetary union without some more integrated institutional setting. That is precisely why we are now trying to have a comprehensive response, and the ECB is part of the effort we are making to give financial stability to the euro area.

  Nigel Farage, on behalf of the EFD Group. – Backing up some of my rhetoric, just yesterday the respected think-tank Open Europe came out with some figures on this. It said that a staggering EUR 190 billion of the ECB’s exposure is exposure to the Greek state and Greek banks. Should the ECB see the value of its assets fall by just 4.25%, its entire capital base will be wiped out. Do you accept the findings of Open Europe, or do you go along with Mr Juncker’s assertion a couple of weeks ago that, with the situation in the euro being as serious as it is, you actually have to lie in public?

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − First of all I do not lie and the Commission has always been very consistent in the information it has given about all the situations. The situation is difficult; we have said it honestly from the beginning and we do not pretend the situation is a rosy one.

Having said this, the European Central Bank’s credibility relies on the absolute determination of the euro area governments to do whatever it takes to ensure the financial stability of the euro area, so I have no doubts about the system’s ability, of the efforts in the euro area and the credibility of the European Central Bank. I have no doubts about the capacity of the European Central Bank to defend European interests, nor about the commitment of the Member States of the euro area to provide all the guarantees the European Central Bank needs to fulfil its independent role as our central bank.

In terms of exposure of central banks, there are other central banks in Europe and outside Europe which are in a much more difficult and vulnerable situation than the European Central Bank, which is a credible, internationally much respected body of the European Union.

  Nicole Sinclaire (NI). - The EU is becoming even wider and, with the advent of pan-European political parties, seemingly ever deeper, with this inability to achieve consensus being proved repeatedly. The contrary position of Germany over Libya and Italian and French disagreement over the recognition of Schengen visas proved this.

Could you explain to me and to my electorate how it is possible to instigate common policy in important areas, such as international relations and security, without consensus, unless we dispense with the democratic rights of Member States to project their own aspirations unilaterally?

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − Frankly, I do not understand the concern that is behind your question. In fact, we are a Union of 27 democratic states and we have agreed that in common foreign and security policies decisions should be taken unanimously. If the Member States do not agree unanimously, it is not possible for us to impose a decision on those Member States, and thus we are fully respecting the democratic nature not only of our Union, but also of our Member States.

I believe that it is in our interest as Europeans, European citizens, that the Member States act together in external matters. It is obvious that today in Europe even the biggest Member States do not have the necessary influence or leverage to talk on an equal basis with the United States or China and other powers, but together the European Union can make a difference. So I hope that the process will lead to increased convergence in terms also of foreign policy matters between our Member States.

  Nicole Sinclaire (NI). - The first thing I mentioned was pan-European parties. Could you explain to me why taxpayers should fund political parties at any level? Maybe you could explain to me how useful they are for the EU’s aims.

One other question I have is about Cathy Ashton. I note her attendance at Commission meetings is very low. Is the UK being correctly represented at the Commission?

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − There are two questions here. First of all, the European parties are, as you know, recognised as important entities by the Treaty that was ratified unanimously by our Member States. So there is a reason to support the European parties because they are, in fact, European entities, recognised as such by our Treaty.

Secondly, regarding Cathy Ashton, she is not only Vice-President of the Commission, but also High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. She has a very challenging job in which she has to represent the European Union, so of course she has more travel assignments than most of the members of the Commission. She makes a great personal effort to be present at almost all the Commission meetings. She cannot be at all of them.

However, I wish to point out that members of the Commission are not there to represent countries. They are nominated by countries but they are there to represent the European Union. All of us take an oath, when we assume our duties, saying that we are not there to represent countries, and in fact the credibility of the institution comes exactly from that fact – that we try to be independent and to serve the general European interest. I can tell you that the Member States, including the UK, are very well represented in the European Council by their Prime Ministers and in the Council by the various ministers.

  Martin Schulz, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Ich bitte, meine Verspätung zu entschuldigen. Ich habe deshalb auch bis zum Ende gewartet.

Herr Barroso, ich möchte Sie angesichts der ernsten Situation, in der wir in der Europäischen Union sind, Folgendes fragen: Das Jahr 2008 war das Jahr einer tiefen Bankenkrise. Diese Bankenkrise hat im Jahr 2009 zu einer tiefen Wirtschaftskrise der Realwirtschaft geführt. Die Kostenübernahme von Bankendefiziten durch öffentliche Haushalte hat schließlich im Jahr 2010 zu einer tiefen Krise der öffentlichen Haushalte geführt. Diese tiefe Krise öffentlicher Haushalte wird begleitet durch eine Kürzungsorgie, die unter anderem auch durch Maßnahmen, die die Europäische Union verlangt, in einigen Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Union zu dramatischen Situationen führt. Es besteht die Gefahr, dass die Jahre 2011 und 2012 nach der Bankenkrise, der Wirtschaftskrise und der Krise der öffentlichen Haushalte zur sozialen Krise in Europa führen.

Ich frage Sie deshalb: Ist die Kommission bereit, mit uns gemeinsam darüber zu diskutieren, wie wir die Unterfinanzierung der sozialen Abfederung von Menschen, der sozialen Sicherungssysteme in den Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Union, insbesondere in den Staaten, die am stärksten von der Haushaltskrise betroffen sind, verbessern können?

Zweitens: Sind Sie bereit, mit uns definitiv über Eurobonds zu diskutieren, um die Gelder zu bekommen, die wir brauchen, um in die Wirtschaft zu investieren, um Wachstum und Jobs in den am stärksten betroffenen Staaten zu ermöglichen?

  José Manuel Barroso, président de la Commission. − Aujourd'hui même, Monsieur Schulz, la Commission a adopté la recommandation pour chacun des vingtsept pays et il y a aussi une communication chapeau où nous présentons précisément cette préoccupation que vous venez d'évoquer et qui est vraiment très importante pour nous. Nous savons très bien que l'austérité, qui est nécessaire aujourd'hui à cause de la nécessité de réduire le déficit et la dette, est vraiment très difficile.

En même temps, nous croyons que chaque euro qui est maintenant dépensé en intérêts de la dette est un euro en moins pour les hôpitaux, pour les services publics de santé, pour l'enseignement public, pour la sécurité sociale. Donc, c'est cela la véritable austérité. C'est pourquoi nous devons faire un effort de consultation budgétaire très sérieux pour rétablir la confiance et, en même temps, réaliser les réformes structurelles pour assurer la compétitivité mais en protégeant les plus vulnérables.

Je crois que vous allez aimer notre document que nous avons adopté aujourd'hui. Il se préoccupe de tout ce qui touche au marché du travail: comment attirer plus de gens sur le marché du travail, comment avoir cette dimension sociale dans l'ensemble de nos politiques?

Maintenant, il s'agit de voir dans chaque pays quelle est la marge dont on dispose pour garantir ces objectifs. Mais je crois que les objectifs, nous les partageons.

  Marco Scurria (PPE). - Signor Presidente, in realtà non intendevo intervenire sul discorso del G8, ma piuttosto porre al Presidente Barroso una domanda riguardante la cultura.

Nell'Unione europea esistono molti programmi che incoraggiano i giovani – ma non solo – a incontrarsi, facendo sì che questa diventi una vera Unione. Programmi come Comenius, Lifelong learning, Youth in action, ecc., hanno rappresentato per molti giovani e professionisti il vero incontro dell'Unione europea, ispirando un vero sentimento europeista.

(Il Presidente interrompe l'oratore spiegando che il dibattito è su un altro argomento, ma poi lo invita a continuare...).

Desidererei quindi sapere qual è il destino di questi programmi, almeno nelle previsioni della Commissione, visto che sono prossimi a scadere e che avremmo già dovuto affrontare la questione in seno alla commissione CULT. Come intende sviluppare la Commissione la prossima programmazione dal 2014 in poi? Ritengo sia questo sia un tema cui sono particolarmente interessati molti attori dell'Unione europea e molti giovani dei nostri paesi.

  José Manuel Barroso, président de la Commission. − La Commission manifeste un grand intérêt pour tout ce qui relève de la promotion de cette dimension culturelle en Europe et de tous les échanges. J'y suis moi-même très attaché et j'ai déjà d'ailleurs rencontré quelques-uns des acteurs principaux dans ce domaine.

Nous allons présenter des propositions à la fin de ce mois pour les perspectives financières pour tous les secteurs, y compris la culture. Nous allons bien sûr faire des propositions importantes dans ce domaine. Nous pensons rationaliser les instruments tout en garantissant l'ambition des programmes comme ceux que vous avez mentionnés, qui sont des programmes emblématiques et de la plus grande importance pour une Europe des citoyens et une Europe qui reconnaît la valeur de la culture.

  Sarah Ludford (ALDE). - I will stick to the topic. The Commission yesterday adopted a strong package of reports and measures on fighting the corruption that is costing the EU EUR 120 billion per annum – roughly equivalent to the total EU budget – but eight Member States score less than five out of ten on the Transparency International index. The Commission says implementation of anti-corruption instruments is unsatisfactory.

So would it not have been a good idea for corruption to be raised at the G8 Summit? The only reference that I can find, and it was an oblique one, was about developing countries. There was no reference at all to how rich countries need to show the political will to tackle the problem of our own backyard and show leadership on this. Was not this an opportunity missed to talk about corruption and bribery at the G8, especially as one of the members, Russia, is 154th out of 178 and many of our own Member States show poorly on the Transparency International index?

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − The issue of corruption was dealt with when we had this outreach meeting with African leaders, but I can tell you that anti-corruption issues are going to be high on the agenda of the G20 meeting in November. Having said that, I think it was a useful discussion because, when there is corruption, someone is corrupted but there is also someone doing the corrupting, so in a way the G8 members were also scrutinised when we discussed the issue of Africa.

By the way, I gave them very good news because I announced that the Commission is going to put forward initiatives relating to transparency for raw materials – good or bad news depending on perspective: less transparency makes it easier for some regimes to use revenues from their national resources and raw materials in a non-transparent way, sometimes with the complicity, we have to say, of the so-called developed world. That was the angle taken on the issue at the last G8 meeting.

  Peter van Dalen (ECR). - Meneer Barosso, u sprak zojuist over de Europese Centrale Bank en u zei dat de Europese Centrale Bank onafhankelijk is. Het punt is, de ECB is niet onafhankelijk in de Griekse crisis. De ECB heeft partij gekozen. De ECB heeft als een commerciële bank voor tientallen miljarden aan zwakke obligaties opgekocht en nu houdt de ECB de noodzakelijke herstructurering van de Griekse schulden tegen.

Mijn vraag is concreet: wat doet u eraan om te voorkomen dat de ECB met haar twee petten op, de harde maar noodzakelijke maatregelen voor de herstructurering van de Griekse economie tegenhoudt?

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − The European Central Bank (ECB) is certainly independent, and not only is its independence recognised by the Treaty – so it is therefore legal and Treaty-based independence – but I can also tell you that I have had some seven years’ experience in this position, dealing very frequently with the ECB and being present on many occasions when the ECB has shown it does not need our support to affirm its independence. I want to reassure you on that point.

Regarding the issue of restructuring, various options are, as you know, under analysis. We are considering the whole debate, but the position of the Commission has already been clearly stated: we believe that the restructuring is not an alternative to the efforts that Member States have to make in terms of fiscal consolidation and structural reform. That has been our consistent position and we will maintain it.

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL). - Senhor Presidente, ainda em relação à reunião do G8, eu gostava de saber, Sr. Presidente da Comissão, se ainda foi adiada mais uma vez toda a questão da regulamentação dos mercados financeiros, designadamente com a aplicação de uma taxa sobre os movimentos de capitais, as mais-valias, sobre o fim dos paraísos fiscais, o fim dos produtos derivados e das agências de notação, tendo em conta a sua total descredibilidade neste momento e toda a falta de transparência e, por último, a questão ligada a estes problemas que estão aqui na União Europeia, com a Grécia, com Portugal, com a Irlanda, em que se está a impor um processo que visa sobretudo impor aos trabalhadores e aos países instrumentos e processos de agravamento de exploração e de agravamento do seu decréscimo económico, o que, a curto prazo ou a médio prazo, vai contribuir para maior pobreza, mais desemprego, mais desigualdades.

Não acha que isto está em contradição com todos os princípios que têm sido enunciados, incluindo pelo próprio Tratado?

  José Manuel Barroso, Presidente da Comissão. − Senhora Deputada Ilda Figueiredo, em primeiro lugar, em relação às questões da regulamentação financeira global, como sabe, desde que o G20 se estabeleceu como o primeiro fórum económico para a governação global nas áreas financeiras, é o G20 que tem dado primazia a essas questões.

De qualquer maneira, alguns desses pontos foram abordados. Eu próprio... tenho ocasião de lhe dizer... fui eu próprio que lancei no G8 a discussão sobre uma taxa sobre a actividade financeira, precisamente quando falávamos também do problema da ajuda ao desenvolvimento, e a minha posição é claramente a favor dessa taxa, desse imposto. Estamos a trabalhar nisso na Comissão e apresentaremos algumas ideias muito em breve.

Em relação à questão global que coloca, também foi discutida a situação na Zona Euro. Aí temos talvez pontos de vista completamente diferentes. Nós entendemos que, sem uma consolidação orçamental e sem reformas estruturais, não haverá hipótese de promover os nossos objectivos: uma economia social de mercado.

  Jacek Saryusz-Wolski (PPE). - Mr Barroso, at the G8 summit the participants debated their commitments to the neighbourhood policy in the Mediterranean. You yourself, on behalf of the European Union, have committed EUR 1.24 billion saying it is for the neighbourhood, which might have been understood as being just for the south.

We know from the interim versions of the Commission’s document that in an initial phase, within the EUR 1.24 billion, EUR 150 million was for the east and all the rest was for the south. That contradicts the principle of symmetry and equal attention being paid to both neighbourhoods. How would you explain this? What did you really and factually commit to the southern Mediterranean neighbourhood policy within the context of the only amount of money that has been mentioned by you?

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − Mr Saryusz-Wolski, my friend, let me tell you very frankly that I understand the concerns that you have with the Eastern Neighbourhood, but I think that the most important issue is not to place East and South in competition with one another: we need both. What is important now is to help those who want us to help them, and to do that in an effective way.

In fact the approach we have put forward in the revision of the Neighbourhood Policy is clear. We are not allocating resources on an East-South cleavage but based on conditionality according to each partner’s progress towards reform, or, if you like, more for more. Those who do more, those who show that they deserve more, will receive more. So we do not have a previously prepared envelope – this is for country A or for country B – the country has to show that it deserves to be supported.

I think this is the right approach, and in that case we will, of course, fulfil our commitments both to our Eastern European partnership – that is extremely important – but also to our neighbours in the Mediterranean.

  Marielle De Sarnez (ALDE). - Monsieur le Président, ma question a en fait un lien avec la question précédente et votre réponse.

Vous venez de parler de l'aide que vous aviez accordée, notamment aux démocraties arabes émergentes, lors du G8 de Deauville: quarante milliards de dollars, pour la plupart sous forme de prêts du FMI, de la BERD, de la BEI, et quinze milliards d'euros environ, somme provenant de l'Union européenne et des États membres.

Vous venez de parler de conditionnalité. Ma question porte sur ce sujet. Cette aide est effectivement conditionnée à un certain nombre de critères: élections libres et régulières, liberté d'association, de la presse, liberté d'expression, lutte contre la corruption, indépendance de la justice, réforme de l'armée et de la police – critères que vous connaissez très bien.

J'aimerais savoir qui appréciera au fond le respect de ces critères, notamment en ce qui concerne toutes ces démocraties arabes émergentes? Notre Parlement sera-t-il pleinement associé à l'évaluation du respect de la conditionnalité mise en place ou s'agira-t-il d'un pouvoir discrétionnaire du Conseil?

  José Manuel Barroso, président de la Commission. − Notre idée – et j'espère que vous serez d'accord – c'est que ce doit être la Commission qui pilote l'exercice. Effectivement, je suis très fier que ce soit la Commission, avec la haute représentante, qui ait tout de suite présenté le blueprint de notre réponse, le partenariat pour la démocratie en Afrique du nord, en Méditerranée du sud, et aussi le partenariat pour la prospérité partagée. Aujourd'hui, le Conseil reconnaît quand même qu'il serait bon que la Commission pilote l'exercice. Et la Commission, bien sûr, doit rendre compte devant le Parlement. Donc, je ne peux que saluer tout l'intérêt, tous les efforts du Parlement pour être étroitement associé.

D'ailleurs, ce qui est en train de se passer dans certains pays arabes est vraiment stratégique, non seulement pour ces pays, mais pour la démocratie dans le monde, pour l'évolution du monde musulman, et pour nous, en Europe. Donc, tout ce qu'on peut faire pour mobiliser non seulement les institutions européennes mais nos sociétés en faveur de ce défi de la transition démocratique chez nos voisins est très important et je ne peux que saluer l'intérêt du Parlement européen.

  Νικόλαος Σαλαβράκος (EFD). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, επ’ ευκαιρία της Συνόδου των G8 διάβασα οικονομικά στοιχεία του 2009 σύμφωνα με τα οποία το παγκόσμιο ΑΕΠ ήταν 58 τρισεκατομμύρια δολάρια, ενώ το χρηματοοικονομικό χρήμα ανερχόταν στα 615 τρισεκατομμύρια δολάρια. Παράλληλα, στο θέμα "νομισματική πολιτική" που σας απασχόλησε, επιβεβαιώθηκε ότι οι ΗΠΑ εκδίδουν νέο χρήμα, νέα δολάρια, ενώ η Ένωσή μας δεν εκδίδει νέο νόμισμα.

Οι οικονομολόγοι διαφωνούμε σε πολλά πράγματα· όμως δύο πράγματα μας έχει διδάξει η ιστορία: πρώτον, ότι τον πτωχευμένο δεν τον σώζεις δίνοντάς του ακριβά δάνεια και, δεύτερον, ότι τη βαριά λιτότητα δεν μπορεί ποτέ να τη μειώσει το έλλειμμα μιας μακροοικονομίας που βρίσκεται σε ύφεση και η οποία δεν μπορεί να υποτιμήσει το νόμισμά της. Το ευρωομόλογο, κύριε Πρόεδρε, καθίσταται επιτακτικό. Το βλέπετε ως μέσον αντισταθμίσεως της ραγδαίας εκδόσεως νέου νομίσματος από τις ΗΠΑ;

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − In fact this question should be in the first part of our debate but I can respond to the distinguished Member by saying that, over the years, the Commission’s position has been very open, and in fact sympathetic, to the idea of eurobonds. One of my predecessors was the first to put forward the idea of eurobonds.

The reality is that there was no agreement between the Member States. What the Member States have agreed now was the creation of a European stability mechanism. When it is created it will become the number one international financial institution in the world – the most important in the world in terms of financial strength. I think that is where we should now concentrate our efforts.

At the same time we are open to discussing with the Member States – and with the Parliament of course – several options regarding the possibility of eurobonds, provided the Member States are willing to consider that possibility. That is of course a very important and decisive one.

  Andrew Henry William Brons (NI). - The recent G8 summit wanted it to be known that it was providing USD 40 billion to Egypt and Tunisia for overthrowing dictatorships and embracing democracy. However, the G8 statement said that it would support countries in the region that move towards not just democracy, but also a market economy. It wants these countries to ‘reap the benefits of globalisation’ and to engage in ‘investment integration’, which means making it easier for G8 countries to make money in these countries and then take the money out again.

I would not object to recipients of aid being expected to implement and retain democratic institutions and procedures. That would be quite right. However, is it not sinister that recipients should be told which economic policies they should choose and which they should discard? Surely donors have no right to instruct these new democracies as to which democratic choices they should make?

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − I agree with the perspective which was adopted by the G8. I think it is in our common interest to have not only open societies but open economies. These countries are our neighbours, and I think the best way to help them is through trade.

We will never be able to provide the amount of money they need if they stay closed. For instance, in the Maghreb countries – as you probably know – the reality is that trade among themselves is almost insignificant. They are asking us to open up our markets, but they do not trade among themselves. I think it is important that we say: yes we are ready to support you, but you should also open up your economy and integrate into the global economy.

In fact we see that a country’s progress is very clearly linked to its capacity to integrate in a global economy. Just look at Asia with countries that are not yet democracies; it is because they were able to open up that they could participate in the global economy and reap some benefits for their peoples.

  Gabriele Albertini (PPE). - Signor Presidente, signor Presidente Barroso, la dichiarazione finale del vertice del G8 per quanto riguarda il Medio Oriente afferma: "I negoziati sono l'unica via verso una soluzione globale e duratura al conflitto. Israele e Autorità palestinese dovrebbero rispettare gli attuali accordi di cooperazione e astenersi da misure unilaterali che potrebbero ostacolare il progresso e le riforme".

L'Unione europea – che è importante interlocutore del G8 – sostiene questa affermazione? Se sì, lo avete comunicato alla parte palestinese, che sta progettando un passo unilaterale a settembre, durante l'Assemblea delle Nazioni Unite?

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − Regarding the Middle East peace process, I do not remember a single international meeting in the last 30 years where this issue was not mentioned. We have restated our urgent call for resuming the peace process and we have urged both parties to re-engage in substantive talks to bring the Middle East peace process to an effective conclusion.

We all commended the new US vision on reaching a framework agreement as groundbreaking and forward-looking. However, there were different reactions to the details of this new vision. To be honest with you, there are different approaches among the G8 partners to the Hamas-PLO cooperation and to the issue of the 1967 borders.

There were also some concerns around the table about the risks entailed in a potential Palestinian endeavour to unilaterally seek recognition at a United Nations General Assembly. I can tell you that we are also discussing this with the Member States and that I hope that we in Europe will have a common position on the matter.

  Malika Benarab-Attou (Verts/ALE). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur Barroso, les pays du G8 ont décidé de l'octroi d'une somme de quarante milliards de dollars pour la Tunisie et l'Égypte, comme il a déjà été dit. Cependant, l'Union européenne doit plaider pour plus de transparence, de visibilité et de traçabilité, en somme pour une meilleure gouvernance de ces aides.

Il convient de mettre l'accent sur quatre points essentiels: premièrement, garantir le caractère démocratique et la transparence absolue dans la coopération au développement. Deuxièmement, s'assurer dudit respect des droits de l'homme, mais aussi accroître le rôle et les capacités des organisations de la société civile et organiser une réforme du système de gouvernance de l'aide avec une implication plus forte du Parlement européen.

Monsieur Barroso, l'UE doit se porter garante de la bonne réception par les populations cibles de ces aides. Quelles sont les mesures concrètes envisagées par l'Union européenne dans ce sens?

  José Manuel Barroso, président de la Commission. − Madame la députée, vous avez dit exactement ce que je pense. Je suis on ne peut plus d'accord avec vous. Nous allons maintenant le faire à l'aide de plusieurs instruments pour vérifier effectivement que les engagements pris par les pays partenaires sont tenus et appliqués avec détermination. Je peux vous dire que non seulement les services de la Commission, mais aussi la haute représentante, qui va d'ailleurs nommer un représentant spécial pour cette région, vont assurer le suivi de tous ces programmes. Nous pensons effectivement que c'est dans ce genre de dialogue que nous pouvons aider ces pays, notamment en renforçant la participation de la société civile.

J'étais récemment en Tunisie, où j'ai rencontré non seulement le gouvernement et le président de la République, mais également les représentants de la société civile, des organisations de femmes, des syndicats. J'ai vu à quel point ils considèrent important notre engagement, non seulement par le biais des gouvernements mais aussi par le biais de la société civile. Encore une fois, comme je l'ai dit à Mme de Sarnez, l'engagement du Parlement européen serait très important à cet égard aussi, dans le cadre de relations avec les parlements et les partis politiques naissants dans ces jeunes ou nouvelles démocraties.

  Γεώργιος Κουμουτσάκος (PPE). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, στην πρόσφατη συνάντηση των G8 συζητήσατε για την παγκόσμια οικονομία και συμφωνήσατε ότι οι προσπάθειες επικεντρώνονται στους στόχους της βιωσιμότητας των δημοσίων οικονομικών, της ανάρρωσης των οικονομιών, της αντιμετώπισης της ανεργίας. Και όλα αυτά γίνονται προς όφελος της κοινωνίας και των πολιτών.

Όμως, κύριε Πρόεδρε, αν δούμε το παράδειγμα της Ελλάδας, πρόσφατα δεκάδες και εκατοντάδες χιλιάδες πολίτες βγαίνουν στις πλατείες και στους δρόμους γύρω-γύρω από την Ελληνική Βουλή αυθόρμητα χωρίς καθοδήγηση, αλλά με αγανάκτηση, αναζητώντας αξιοπρέπεια και προοπτική. Και πρέπει, κύριε Πρόεδρε, να συμφωνήσετε ότι καμία πολιτική δεν μπορεί να είναι αποτελεσματική εάν δεν έχει τη στήριξη ή έστω την ανοχή της κοινωνίας. Αυτή η πολιτική στην Ελλάδα ουσιαστικά περιορίζεται σε ένα δίλημμα μεταξύ εξαντλητικής λιτότητας ή χρεοκοπίας.

Σας ανησυχούν αυτές οι κοινωνικές εξελίξεις; Είναι ένα μείζον πολιτικό θέμα. Τι μήνυμα έχετε να στείλετε σε αυτούς τους ανθρώπους που με μεγάλη αξιοπρέπεια, με ειρηνικό τρόπο, διεκδικούν μια προοπτική και ένα καλύτερο μέλλον για τους ίδιους, τις οικογένειές τους και τα παιδιά τους;

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − First of all I would like to express my solidarity with the Greek people. I understand how difficult these times are for Greece. But I also believe that the responsibility of political leaders at European or national level, whether they are in government or in opposition, is to show what countries have to do. In fact, without fiscal consolidation, without structural reform, Greece will not come out of this crisis.

The reality is that some painful measures are unavoidable in Greece and anyone who claims otherwise is lying to the Greek people. My appeal to the Greek leaders is to explain in honest terms to the population of Greece the difficult choices that the country has to make. We will all support it.

In the European Council, it was I who proposed a reduction in interest rates on loans granted to Greece. But, at the same time, let us be honest. Greece has to make some of the effort itself because one country cannot live forever with such high levels of debt.

This is the honest message that we should convey to the government and the opposition in Greece, and that we in Europe must accept if we really want to help that country.

  John Bufton (EFD). - Mr President, I am glad that you raised at the G8 Summit the issues of the problems of the euro zone. It is a crisis, and we all know it is a crisis. As the previous speaker mentioned, many Member States are concerned. We had issues in Madrid recently when people were protesting on the streets. There were protests in Lisbon, of all places, and we have also seen what has happened in Greece.

Isn’t it time, Mr Barroso, that you stood up – you mentioned telling lies a few moments ago – and told the truth and said that there is an option: that these countries should be allowed to leave the euro zone? That is the only way out of it.

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − I have great respect for all our democratic states so it is not up to me to tell them what they should do in this matter. But we know that Greece has no intention of leaving the euro zone. I am in constant contact with both the Greek authorities and the main opposition party and I know very well that they do not want to leave the euro zone.

Probably some of you, distinguished Members, would like the country to leave the euro zone, or perhaps your country is not in the euro zone and we respect that, but Greece is very committed to the European project. Greece has difficulties, and we are trying to support it, but please do not attack the euro on ideological grounds.

The reality is that there are countries outside the euro zone that have at least comparable problems. Iceland is not a member of the euro zone and Iceland went bankrupt. Let us put it frankly: Iceland was one of the richest countries in the world in per capita terms before the financial crisis.

In the European Union we also have countries that are facing the same kind of difficulties because of very high levels of expenditure. So the reality is that the euro is not the problem, the problem is a very high level of debt or a very high level of deficits in the economies.

  Przewodniczący. − Tura pytań do przewodniczącego Komisji została zamknięta.

PRÉSIDENCE DE MME ISABELLE DURANT
Vice-présidente

14. Is-Sudan u s-Sudan t'Isfel (dibattitu)

  La Présidente. - L'ordre du jour appelle la déclaration de la vice-présidente de la Commission/haute représentante de l'Union pour les affaires étrangères et la politique de sécurité sur le Soudan et le Sud Soudan (2011/2717(RSP)).

Je crois savoir que c'est M. Piebalgs qui la remplace et je l'en remercie. Je vous donne donc la parole, Monsieur le Commissaire, en son nom et au nom de la Commission.

  Andris Piebalgs, Member of the Commission, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission and EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. − Madam President, the six-year transition period of the Sudanese Comprehensive Peace Agreement will come to an end in about a month’s time. This is a historic moment for Sudan, and indeed for the whole African continent. The people of Southern Sudan have waited a long time for this moment, when their country’s independence will be declared on 9 July. The European Union will be represented at the Independence Day ceremony by the High Representative and Vice-President of the Commission.

Following a credible referendum at the beginning of this year, we commended Sudanese parties on the remarkable job they did in organising the referendum. We welcomed that President Bashir had publicly said that North Sudan would be the first to recognise an independent South Sudan. But the positive momentum of the immediate post-referendum period has vanished. There are worrying tendencies towards increased tensions and conflict. The recent violent clashes in and around Abyei could well lead to another military confrontation between North and South Sudan.

We discussed Sudan in the Foreign Affairs Council, both in January and in May, and will revert to it at the 20 June Foreign Affairs Council. At the Council, the High Representative intends to present a comprehensive EU strategic approach for Sudan, mainly focusing on an independent South Sudan, but also including elements for constructive engagement with North Sudan, including the Transitional Areas, Darfur and the East. In fact, we will be witnessing the birth of not one new state but two.

The comprehensive approach will be a political strategy document, setting out all the key strands of our policy towards Sudan. The EU’s main objectives are to support peace between the two states and democratisation and prosperity within both of them. We want to see two viable states coexisting as good neighbours sharing an open border, allowing for cross-border exchanges of people, goods, capital and ideas.

South Sudan will need all our attention in terms of stabilisation, state-, institution- and capacity-building and long-term development. Our utmost concern would be to avoid state failure.

As part of a possible response strategy we will be looking at a number of important elements: stepping up the EU presence in Juba by establishing an EU delegation; initiating comprehensive political dialogue; stabilising South Sudan and the joint border through specific measures and instruments – including the Common Security and Defence Policy and the Instrument for Stability – and increasing development assistance.

With regard to the latter, the EU has just made additional funds totalling EUR 200 million available for South Sudan, making our envelope today roughly EUR 300 million. We are working together with the Member States in a joint EU programming exercise to maximise the impact on the ground. At the same time, we will continue humanitarian assistance and we will work to ensure that trade is part of the comprehensive approach.

North Sudan, on the other hand, will suffer some losses. We need to support reform-minded elements in the North, promote an inclusive political dialogue and enhance our efforts to promote human rights. We are trying to step up our political dialogue with the government in Khartoum. My recent visit was intended to signal EU re-engagement following Khartoum’s positive response to the outcome of the referendum.

We are, however, extremely concerned about the recent violence and, as I said, the military occupation of the city of Abyei, which constitutes a clear violation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). We urge the parties to abstain from any further provocation and to negotiate the conditions for the long-term peaceful co-existence of local communities living in and around Abyei.

We also continue to have concerns about the detention of human rights defenders, journalists, opposition politicians and peaceful student protestors. One of the basic principles of the CPA was the establishment of democratic governments based on respect for diversity and basic freedoms. We want to see respect for fundamental freedoms and genuinely inclusive democratic governments in both North and South Sudan.

I must also mention Darfur. The European Union remains deeply concerned about the continued violence in Darfur, leading to displacements, and the severe impact this is having on humanitarian operations.

There is positive news. The three European citizens who were held hostage in Darfur for several months have been released but, at the same time, we know the situation in Darfur is as it has been previously. We will need to continue to support efforts to achieve a comprehensive and just peace in Darfur, trying to secure a positive outcome from the peace negotiation process and create enabling conditions on the ground for a Darfur-based political process. We welcome the outcome of the recent All Stakeholders Conference in Doha and hope it will provide for such important developments towards lasting peace in Darfur.

Lastly, I must mention justice. A lasting peace in Darfur cannot be achieved without justice and reconciliation. There has to be an end to impunity. The Council has repeatedly recalled the obligation of the Government of Sudan to cooperate fully with the International Criminal Court, pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1593. The Darfur people deserve to achieve what they have been longing for for so long – lasting peace and justice.

  Mariya Nedelcheva, au nom du groupe PPE. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, lors du référendum d'autodétermination du Sud-Soudan, ce qui m'a marquée avant tout, c'était l'enthousiasme, la joie, l'exultation même des populations. Les gens étaient heureux parce que, pour une fois, ils avaient voix au chapitre. Pour une fois, après plus de vingt ans de guerre, ils avaient le sentiment que ce qu'ils avaient à dire serait entendu.

Six millions de Sud-Soudanais, il ne faut pas les décevoir mais il ne faut pas non plus oublier les habitants du Nord. Il est important que, dans l'élan démocratique déterminé par les résultats du référendum, les négociations soient les plus transparentes possibles pour assurer une base solide au futur développement, d'une part de chacun des deux nouveaux États, d'autre part des relations entre eux et, enfin, des relations de la communauté internationale avec les deux. La viabilité et la stabilité du Nord et du Sud sont primordiales. Il est crucial que les questions irrésolues jusqu'alors trouvent enfin une solution. Je parle ici du problème de la citoyenneté, du partage de la dette et des revenus du pétrole ou encore de la difficile question des frontières non délimitées.

D'autre part, les référendums dans les régions d'Abyei, du Sud Kordofan et du Nil bleu doivent avoir lieu et ce dans le cadre de l'accord de paix global. La situation à Abyei s'aggrave de jour en jour. Elle est très préoccupante. Abyei ne doit pas atteindre un point de non-retour qui viendrait faire capoter plus de six années de négociations. Les tensions se transformant en conflit ouvert risquent d'occulter l'indépendance du Sud-Soudan et de replonger la région dans le chaos.

Mais Abyei ne doit pas faire oublier ce qui se passe au Darfour. À ce titre, il est nécessaire de prendre en compte les conclusions de la conférence de Doha, comme vous venez de le dire, Monsieur le Commissaire, et de ne pas perdre de vue la nécessité permanente d'assurer l'acheminement de l'aide humanitaire et la sécurité du personnel. Des négociations transparentes sont le gage de deux États viables.

De même, l'arrêt des violences et la bonne coopération entre les deux États, voilà le cadre – je le rappelle – déjà dessiné par le déroulement du référendum. Il est important que cela continue pour que la volonté politique des deux États et de la communauté internationale puisse réellement se transformer en réels projets de développement pour les citoyens des deux pays. C'est eux et leur bien-être qui sont l'enjeu central de la démocratisation, du pluralisme politique, du respect des droits de l'homme et de la diversité religieuse, culturelle et ethnique au Sud et au Nord Soudan.

  Véronique De Keyser, au nom du groupe S&D. – Madame la Présidente, le 9 juillet, le Sud du Soudan célébrera son indépendance et sa dignité retrouvées. En effet, c'est en termes de dignité et d'émotion que le peuple soudanais parle de cet événement.

M. Piebalgs, j'avais préparé une intervention de trois minutes. Quand je vous ai écouté, je me suis demandé si je devais parler. Je voudrais vous faire un compliment: je pense que nous pouvons être fiers, ici dans ce Parlement, de l'action de toute l'Union européenne, de la manière dont cette affaire soudanaise a été menée et je croise vraiment les doigts, avec le peuple soudanais, pour que l'on parvienne à mener cela jusqu'à l'indépendance et après.

Vous avez évoqué les principales questions, c'est-à-dire la question d'Abyei qui n'est toujours pas résolue, les décisions politiques qui devaient être prises – nous l'avons dit – sur la citoyenneté, la dette, la monnaie, etc., mais surtout vous avez parlé de ce que vous voulez faire en termes de développement et en termes humanitaires, du fait que la justice doit être rendue et que nous n'allons pas brader la Cour pénale internationale. En fait, vous avez dit l'essentiel.

Je vais juste rajouter quelques points. S'agissant du problème du développement et de l'humanitaire, il est vrai que tout reste à faire au Sud du Soudan, qu'il faut continuer à développer le Nord et surtout ne pas l'isoler. Tout reste à faire parce que le pays n'a vécu que de pétrole. Il n'a pas développé d'économie diversifiée, il n'y a pas d'éducation, pas de routes, pas d'hôpitaux, etc. Les besoins et les attentes de la population sont immenses et, si nous ne voulons pas que cette population soit déçue par l'indépendance, le développement et l'humanitaire devront rester longtemps encore. Mettons-nous bien cela en tête.

Concernant la question des droits de l'homme, celle des droits de la femme et celle du pluralisme politique, même dans le Sud, la polygamie existe. On achète des femmes avec des vaches, il y a quatre-vingts pour cent de femmes illettrées, les droits des enfants restent à instaurer, le pluralisme politique est à inventer, il n'y a pas de culture du pluralisme politique – on l'a vu – lors des élections et lors du référendum. C'est en même temps quelque chose de passionnant et de merveilleux.

J'ai rencontré la commission électorale du Sud du Soudan, du Nord du Soudan, mais surtout du Sud. Ils veulent faire des lois, ils veulent une bonne constitution, bâtir leur pays et nous disent: "on aura de l'argent, ne vous en faites pas, mais aidez-nous, soyez là.". Je pense que sur ce plan vous avez su répondre à cette demande. Votre passage, celui de Mme Georgieva dans le passé et la venue probable de Mme Ashton pour l'indépendance, sont des événements majeurs.

Le fait que vous vouliez présenter un plan stratégique pour le Sud du Soudan est ce que nous demandons après chaque élection, surtout pas de one shot, un follow-up, un avenir pour les pays vers lesquels on va. Pour tout cela, Monsieur Piebalgs, aujourd'hui – j'ai complètement changé mon texte – je voudrais vous remercier, parce que comme je le dis, c'est bien de pouvoir être fière de l'Union européenne, surtout en cette période difficile.

  Ivo Vajgl, v imenu skupine ALDE. – Spoštovana predsedujoča, spoštovani gospod komisar, ko bo 9. julija proglašena neodvisnost še ene afriške države, Južnega Sudana, bo na tem kontinentu zaprto še eno poglavje kolonialnega nasledstva. Želimo verjeti, da bo po demokratični odločitvi na referendumu Južni Sudan na miroljuben način, s pogajanji rešil še odprta vprašanja z državo na severu, da se bo regija izognila nevarnosti, da bi izbruhnili spori in spopadi zaradi meja, demografskih in migracijskih gibanj zaradi nafte in drugih naravnih bogastev, ki jih imata obe državi veliko, pa četudi sta statistično revni.

Opozarjam na nujnost kontinuiranega sodelovanja mednarodne skupnosti, OZN, Afriške unije in Evropske unije, pri konsolidaciji obeh držav, pri zagotavljanju miru in graditvi institucij demokratične in pluralne države na jugu. Kako aktualen izziv, spoštovani kolegi, v času, ko celotna širša regija doživlja preporod in se odpira zahtevam in standardom modernega časa.

Sudan je spet enkrat pred pomembno zgodovinsko prelomnico. Vsi dogovori, ki so bili sprejeti ob koncu krvave državljanske vojne, še niso uresničeni. Položaj v pokrajini Abjej je bližje krizi kot miru, v Darfurju vlada nasilje, Sudan potrebuje naše zanimanje in nesebično pomoč.

Pomembno je tudi, da je varnostni svet podaljšal mandat misije UNMIS v Sudanu in da bo napotil dodatne mirovne sile v Sudan. Vladama v Kartumu in Jubi sporočamo, naj mirovnike Združenih narodov sprejmeta kot prijatelje in jim zagotovita varnost.

  Nirj Deva, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, Commissioner Piebalgs is right. We also have one of the greatest challenges facing the European Union in front of us. As rapporteur for the European Parliament report on nation building, I have to say that this is an extraordinary opportunity for us to partner South Sudan, one of the poorest and newest ‘countries-to-be’ on 9 July, and make nation building – that we keep talking about in this Chamber – a reality on the ground.

This is a country rich in natural resources, but it is also a country with the most awful social indicators. A child born in South Sudan today has a higher chance of dying in infancy than attending primary school. What a statistic that is. Food products provided by aid agencies and intended for distribution to the poor for free are now being sold on the market. We need to build capacity from the bottom up. They do not have a civil service. They do not have trained administrators. They do not have the infrastructure that is required for a modern ‘state-to-be’. They need the rule of law, they need good governance, they need transparency, they need our expertise as partners. They need to invite us and we need to provide our partnership of know-how.

  Judith Sargentini, namens de Verts/ALE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, je zou de vlag willen uitsteken en er een glas champagne op willen drinken, want als een bevolking kan kiezen voor zijn eigen onafhankelijkheid, dan hoort dat en dan mag dat. Het vervelende hier is dat Zuid-Soedan eigenlijk met een erfenis uit het verleden zit en dat het uitsteken van de vlag of het drinken van dat glas champagne wellicht wat misstaat, gezien de situatie waarin ze zich bevinden. Nu Noord-Soedan Abyei is binnengevallen, valt het te prijzen dat Zuid-Soedan heeft gezegd: wij laten ons niet provoceren. Maar de vraag is natuurlijk hoelang dat zo blijft.

Dat wij als internationale samenleving hebben toegekeken hoe bij het referendum de zaak Abyei onbesloten bleef, is eigenlijk zeer onverantwoord en het is een recept voor hernieuwde oorlog. Dat er opnieuw VN-troepen naar toe moeten om de rust te herstellen, kunnen we dan ook gerust aannemen. Wat ik extra ingewikkeld vind is: wat benoemen we en wat benoemen we niet? Kijken we naar het feit dat Soedan probeert het toekomstig referendum in Abyei te beïnvloeden door te zeggen: 'tel de herders die zich daar deels wel en deels niet ophouden, mee'? Is het gerechtigd van Zuid-Soedan om te zeggen: 'nee, want zij wonen hier niet vast'? Als je dat zegt, ontken je dan niet het bestaansrecht van de herders? Het lijkt een Catch-22 waar je niet zomaar een oplossing voor hebt.

En dan nog twee andere aspecten. Wil Zuid-Soedan een eerlijke start hebben, dan hebben ze eigenlijk wel recht op schuldenkwijtschelding. Schulden die gemaakt zijn door het regime in Khartoum, waarvan je niet kunt zeggen dat die de mensen in het zuiden goed gediend hebben.

Het andere aspect is: hoe gaan wij om met de rijkdommen die in Zuid-Soedan in de grond zitten? Is Zuid-Soedan ondertussen betrokken bij EITI, het Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, waarbij wordt nagegaan of er geen corruptie is en waarbij olietegoeden ten goede komen aan de bevolking? En als dat niet zo is, hoe kunnen wij dan in Europa daarbij helpen? Het enige wat immers echt helpt, als het gaat om Europese hulp aan Zuid-Soedan en eigenlijk ook aan het Noorden, is eerlijke handel en eerlijke investeringen te initiëren. We kijken allemaal met vrees naar hoe de situatie zich ontwikkelt en ik hoop dat we nog een keer met die vlag en dat glas champagne kunnen proosten op de vrijheid van Zuid-Soedan.

  Gabriele Zimmer, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Wir schauen alle mit großer Sorge in diese Region der Welt und wissen genau, dass die Gefahr eines Bürgerkriegs noch längst nicht gebannt ist. Wie fragil der Friedensprozess, der in Gang gesetzt wurde, letztendlich noch ist, zeigen gerade die Ereignisse in Abyei.

Der aufgebrochene Konflikt ist dramatisch, die nordsudanesische Armee hat Abyei besetzt und 15 000 Menschen sind auf der Flucht. Ich denke, dass wir als Europäische Union nach wie vor sehr konkret helfen müssen und dass es darum gehen muss, die Nahrungsmittelhilfe und die humanitäre Hilfe für die Flüchtlinge schnellstens in Gang zu setzen und die humanitäre Nothilfe für die Flüchtlinge bereitzustellen.

Bereits ohne diese Eskalation des Konflikts sind im Südsudan über 40 % der Bevölkerung von Nahrungsmittelhilfe abhängig. Der Südsudan wird zu einem der ärmsten Länder der Welt gehören, und wenn wir wollen, dass die MDG auch hier greifen, dann ist es dringend notwendig, dass die vom Rat bereitgestellten Mittel – 200 Millionen EUR – tatsächlich für die Nahrungssicherheit, die Bildung und die Gesundheit in diesem Teil der Welt ausgegeben werden.

Wir fordern als Fraktion auch den sofortigen Rückzug der bewaffneten Einheiten des Nordens und des Südens aus Abyei, die Einhaltung des umfassenden Friedensabkommens und die Anerkennung der entmilitarisierten Zone. Mit Blick auf die diskutierte Verlängerung des UN-Mandats fordern wir, dass auch die Gefahren und Probleme, wie sie beispielsweise bei der MONUC-Mission in der Demokratischen Republik Kongo sichtbar wurden, dabei mit berücksichtigt und ausgewertet werden.

Enttäuscht sind wir darüber, dass keine wirklich starke Forderung nach einem Schuldenstopp und einer Überprüfung der Auslandsschulden Eingang in die vorliegende Entschließung gefunden hat. Das finde ich bedauerlich.

  Bastiaan Belder, namens de EFD-Fractie. –Voorzitter, twee zaken wil ik graag aan de hoge vertegenwoordiger of haar vervanger voorleggen inzake de actuele situatie in Sudan. Ten eerste: ik roep de hoge vertegenwoordiger dringend op zich bij de Sudanese autoriteiten in te zetten voor de vrijlating van de christin Hawa Abdalla Muhammad Saleh, die op 25 mei in een vluchtelingenkamp in Darfur is gearresteerd door de veiligheidsdienst op religieuze gronden. Naar verluidt is Saleh na haar arrestatie gemarteld en naar een onbekende locatie in Khartoem overgebracht, een persoonlijke tragedie die Europese inzet vergt.

Twee: van een kenner van de Sudanese situatie en internationaal waarnemer in de zo veelvuldig geteisterde conflictregio Abyei, las ik het scherpe verwijt – en dat trof mij sterk als lid van het Europees Parlement – dat de diplomatieke druk vanuit Europa op het moorddadige en oorlogszuchtige regime van president al-Bashir "nihil en slecht gecoördineerd is". Dat is een verpletterend verwijt eigenlijk.

Geeft de internationale gemeenschap, inclusief Europa, president al-Bashir ook nu weer, na de bezetting van Abyei, een gevoel van onschendbaarheid? En dit nota bene op het ogenblik dat al-Bashir binnenlands zo zwak staat en internationale druk op zijn regime meer dan opportuun is! Ik hoop dan ook op Europese druk op al-Bashir.

  Mario Mauro (PPE). - Signora Presidente, signor Commissario, facendo tesoro dell'impostazione pragmatica da lei tenuta in occasione del suo intervento, mi accingo a farle due raccomandazioni, attraverso le quali intendo anche valorizzare il lavoro di monitoraggio dell'esperienza del referendum profuso in questi ultimi tempi dalla collega De Keyser che, dal mio punto di vista, è stata quanto mai preziosa per le nostre istituzioni.

Mi riferisco a una questione molto particolare: personalmente non sono rimasto molto stupito che al referendum e all'esito di questo sia seguito un momento di ulteriore accanimento – quasi – da parte delle istituzioni e delle autorità sudanesi, soprattutto nella regione di Abyei. È tipico della politica di Khartoum, fatta continuamente di stop and go, di lasciar vedere una soluzione e poi di cancellarla con un comportamento repentino, uno stile che ha prodotto quel disastro che è il Sudan.

Mi permetto di suggerire: abbiamo creato all'interno del Servizio di azione esterna una struttura che si occupa esplicitamente di crisi umanitarie, quella struttura va allertata adesso su Abyei e non quando avremo di fronte un grande disastro. Va messa in moto perché è una struttura credibile, che ha dato buona prova di sé, ad esempio, nella circostanza della crisi libica. Credo che quella struttura debba essere messa oggi in condizione di predisporre un piano, di presentarlo anche in commissione AFET, spiegando come intende muoversi, per farci capire quanto valore possa avere la politica estera dell'Unione europea quando ci adoperiamo tutti congiuntamente per il fine migliore.

Un'ultima raccomandazione riguarda i nostri rapporti con la Cina: ovunque si sente affermare che la Cina ha un grande ruolo in Sudan, evocando la cosa come uno spettro che si deve solo temere. Personalmente sostengo invece, in questo particolare momento, la necessità di relazioni molto accurate e privilegiate con la Cina onde poter appurare se, al di là degli interessi economici, anch'essa intende affrontare sino in fondo il tema dei diritti umani.

  Ana Gomes (S&D). - Madam President, the EU must keep up pressure on the Government of Sudan to withdraw troops from the border town of Abyei. A solution to the Abyei problem is needed urgently to prevent the escalation of armed conflict between Sudan and South Sudan. This conflict is jeopardising the peace process that should have followed the referendum of January 2011.

The firing of shots by militia men at a UN helicopter at the end of May was an outrageous and cowardly act; as outrageous as the call by the Khartoum Government for UN Peacekeepers to withdraw after 9 July. The UN presence is more necessary than ever to help observe the parties and stabilise the region, thus preventing the conflict from expanding.

Ensuring a peaceful transition to independence in South Sudan also requires that the fight against impunity remains at the top of the EU agenda for both countries and for their unhelpfully meddling neighbours. The EU should not be tempted to make any potentially ‘convenient deals’ with President al-Bashir in exchange for forgetting that he and his henchmen must be brought before the International Criminal Court (ICC) to answer for the war crimes and the crimes against humanity committed against the Sudanese people in Darfur.

  Charles Goerens (ALDE). - Madame la Présidente, le récent référendum sur l'indépendance du Sud-Soudan inaugure une ère nouvelle dans le traitement de la politique du nouvel État. Ce qui était naguère encore considéré comme une affaire intérieure au Soudan devient, avec la création du nouvel État indépendant, une affaire internationale. Toute relation avec Khartoum – et notamment dans le domaine de la sécurité – devient désormais une affaire internationale et relève en toute logique de l'application du droit international.

Nous saluons donc la manière dont divers acteurs s'acquittent de leurs tâches. Il y a lieu de mentionner de ce point de vue les plus grands défis immédiats que va rencontrer l'État nouvellement créé. Et parmi ceux-là, premièrement la médiation menée par Thabo Mbeki, président de l'Afrique du Sud et de l'Union africaine, et aussi celle – et je crois qu'il faut le souligner – de Mme Rosalind Marsden, notre représentante spéciale au Soudan.

Deuxièmement: l'adhésion du nouvel État aux accords de Cotonou ouvre des perspectives de coopération nouvelles pour le développement de ses relations avec l'Union européenne. Je crois que c'est une nécessité et nous devrons tout faire pour mener à bien une ratification rapide.

Troisièmement: la nécessité de développer une capacité de gestion des problèmes gigantesques auxquels est confronté le nouvel État, encore très fragile. Là aussi, la communauté internationale est interpellée.

Quatrièmement: la nécessité de contribuer également au développement du Nord, qu'il ne faut pas oublier, et qui s'apprête à rédiger une nouvelle constitution.

Enfin, il y a la situation sécuritaire dramatique au Darfour et la volonté unilatérale du gouvernement d'organiser un référendum sur son statut, le 1er juillet 2011.

Je salue bien entendu l'implication personnelle de notre commissaire au développement, avec son équipe, dans cette phase cruciale. Il a bien compris que cette période décisive pour l'avenir du Sud-Soudan constitue aussi un test de résistance pour l'Union européenne, et pas seulement pour l'Union européenne.

  Peter van Dalen (ECR). - Voorzitter, de glorieuze dag van 9 juli nadert. Zuid-Sudan zal officieel onafhankelijk worden, een natie die openlijk uitkomt voor de grote waarden van het christelijk geloof. Maar een natie die ook zeer wordt beproefd, want de oude vos Omar al-Bashir is dan bijna al zijn haren verloren, maar zijn streken zeker niet. In de regio Abyei is hij begonnen burgers uit te moorden. De etnische zuivering van het zuidelijke Ngok Dinka-volk lijkt te zijn begonnen. Medewerkers van de Verenigde Naties zijn hun leven er niet zeker.

Mevrouw Ashton kent onze steun voor haar mensenrechtenbeleid. En ten aanzien van de opstandelingen in Bengasi heeft ze – en terecht – duidelijke keuzes gemaakt. Doe dat nu ook, tegen Omar al-Bashir, want het volk van Zuid-Sudan verdient onze krachtige steun.

  Sabine Lösing (GUE/NGL). - Frau Präsidentin! Im Februar waren viele Menschen, auch in diesem Hause, voller Hoffnung, aber auch voller Sorge über die Zukunft des Sudan. Die weiter bestehende Gefahr gewalttätiger Konflikte wurde unterschiedlich bewertet. Klar war, dass die Menschen im Sudan vor großen Problemen stehen und Unterstützung brauchen. Nun sorgt die Situation dort wieder für Schlagzeilen. Ursache für die jüngsten Ereignisse sind die ungelösten Probleme, die mit der kommenden Unabhängigkeit des Südens verbunden sind. Und diese Probleme kann man nicht mit Waffengewalt lösen. Deshalb begrüße ich die kürzlich durch die Vermittlung der Afrikanischen Union erzielte Einigung zwischen Nord- und Südsudan über eine demilitarisierte Zone entlang der zukünftigen Staatsgrenze. Auch eine 7 000 Mann starke UN-Truppe nach dem MONUC-Vorbild kann mehr schaden als nützen. Und schauen wir in den Kongo, so sehen wir, was MONUC-Truppen mit anrichten können.

Hilfen für den Sudan dürfen nicht parteilich sein und nicht interessengeleitet. Sie müssen die Interessen der Menschen im Süden und im Norden in den Mittelpunkt stellen. Das gilt für materielle und auch für diplomatische Hilfen. Damit der Konflikt nicht weiter angeheizt wird, müssen alle Waffenlieferungen gestoppt werden. Wir fordern die Beendigung der zivil-militärischen Zusammenarbeit und der militärischen Ausbildungsmission.

  Michèle Striffler (PPE). - Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, nous ne pouvons bien sûr que nous féliciter de la conduite pacifique et crédible du référendum de janvier sur l'autodétermination du Sud-Soudan. Le Sud-Soudan proclamera – cela a déjà été dit – son indépendance le 9 juillet. Les défis sont immenses tant concernant l'organisation interne de ce nouvel État que dans ses relations avec le Soudan, à leurs frontières communes et dans la région d'Abyei, riche en pétrole.

Le Soudan et le Sud-Soudan sont confrontés à des besoins humanitaires énormes. Les principaux défis sont la sécurité, l'accès aux populations en détresse et le respect des principes humanitaires. La crise est loin d'être finie. La communauté internationale doit absolument maintenir sa présence et une capacité humanitaire très importante. Nous devons rester très attentifs à l'évolution de la situation, déjà dramatique, mais qui pourrait empirer et constituer une menace pour la stabilité de la région.

De plus, il est essentiel que l'aide au développement qui sera mise en place au Sud-Soudan soit coordonnée et complémentaire avec l'aide humanitaire. Le lien entre urgence et développement prend toute son importance dans ce contexte où les structures étatiques sont très faibles et où la crise humanitaire va perdurer. L'aide au développement doit ainsi appuyer les structures étatiques et augmenter l'accès de la population aux services de base, actuellement assurés par les ONG et organisations internationales.

Enfin, les événements au Sud-Soudan et dans la région d'Abyei ne doivent pas faire oublier la situation au Darfour, considérée comme la pire crise humanitaire au monde. La vie de millions de gens dépend toujours de l'aide extérieure.

Et permettez-moi – puisqu'il me reste quelques secondes – de saluer le travail de M. Piebalgs, que je trouve remarquable.

  Richard Howitt (S&D). - Madam President, I want this afternoon to strongly emphasise the need for the EU to work with South Sudan in democratisation and institution-building. Yes, this will be a country with one of the highest infant mortality rates and lowest educational indicators in the world, necessitating fast-track accession to the Cotonou Agreement, with access to the European Development Fund and fair debt alleviation. But just as the EU should be proud that we have contributed to a largely peaceful and credible referendum process – and I pay tribute to my colleague, Veronique de Kayser, for her personal leadership – the EU must give priority to helping South Sudan with its constitutional review process, entrenching a multi-party system and preventing corruption from taking any root from the start.

Madam President, for South Sudan the 9 July date goes before everything else; for North Sudan, although the comprehensive peace agreement may be coming to an end, its obligations do not. The threat of violence remains, not just in South Sudan itself, but in the neighbouring Blue Nile and South Kordofan provinces of North Sudan, and still in Darfur. Indeed, I want to ask Mr Piebalgs in his reply to explain what the EU is doing to combat continuing and deteriorating human rights violations, in particular concerning human rights defenders such as Hawa Abdulla from the AU-UN peace-keeping mission, who has been subject to arbitrary detention and beaten.

I was privileged to be present in East Timor at the birth of the world’s first new state of this millennium. I hope that South Sudan can achieve its independence while averting the tragic transition suffered by the people of East Timor and providing peace and prosperity for the Sudanese people, who have suffered too much during the longest-running civil war in Africa.

  Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE). - Signora Presidente, difficile accompagnare gli ultimi passi della formazione di un nuovo Stato attraverso un percorso pacifico. Occorre salvaguardare l'obiettivo di fondo – la pace – ma non perdere pezzi significativi dell'accordo globale.

L'azione militare di Khartoum ad Abyei pare pregiudicare il buon esito globale di questo percorso, anche se non la costituzione del cinquantaquattresimo Stato africano il prossimo 9 luglio.

Al Sud spetta di non reagire alle provocazioni e di non perdere di vista l'obiettivo di fondo, che non è solo tanto l'indipendenza, ma anche la costituzione di istituzioni credibili e lo sviluppo di una popolazione al 90 percento al di sotto la soglia di povertà, che non dovrà beneficiare di investimenti stranieri, che già si annunciano trasparenti e non di rapina.

Credo che questo – il problema degli investimenti stranieri nel sud del Sudan – sarà presto un nuovo fronte sul quale l'Unione europea dovrà vigilare e far valere la sua credibilità acquisita in questi anni nella regione.

  Charles Tannock (ECR). - Madam President, on 9 July South Sudan will declare independence as an English-speaking new African state. The EU has rightly supported the CPAP’s process and referendum in South Sudan. However, the next few months will remain critical. South Sudan must be enabled to establish itself as a viable sovereign state. Even without a hostile neighbour to the north, South Sudan faces enormous developmental challenges. Infrastructure is largely non-existent. There is widespread intercommunal hostility. Healthcare indicators are amongst the worst in the world and the economy is almost completely dependent on oil exports.

It is therefore essential to increase EU developmental and humanitarian aid to South Sudan. However, South Sudan also needs the EU’s unequivocal support politically. The recent seizure of the disputed border region of Abyei by the Khartoum Government suggests that President Bashir is still not fully reconciled to his country’s partition. Lastly, I am also hopeful that South Sudan will live up to its promise and be the first African Union country to re-recognise the stable and democratic Republic of Somaliland as an independent country also.

  Χαράλαμπος Αγγουράκης (GUE/NGL). - Κυρία Πρόεδρε, οι πρόσφατες συγκρούσεις στο Αμπιέι δείχνουν πόσο αβάσιμοι ήταν οι πανηγυρισμοί των ΗΠΑ και της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης μετά το δημοψήφισμα. Αποδείχθηκε για άλλη μια φορά ότι η ιμπεριαλιστική ειρήνη είναι εξίσου αιματηρή με τον ιμπεριαλιστικό πόλεμο. Είναι προφανές ότι Βορράς και Νότος, στην τροχιά των ιμπεριαλιστών, θύματα του ανταγωνισμού και της πολιτικής του "διαίρει και βασίλευε", δύσκολα θα μπορέσουν να αποφύγουν μια ευθεία σύγκρουση.

Το πετρέλαιο, τα κοιτάσματα χρυσού, χαλκού, ουράνιου που διαθέτει το Αμπιέι είναι αυτό που εδώ και 20 χρόνια επιχειρούν να εκμεταλλευθούν ποικίλες ιμπεριαλιστικές δυνάμεις. Αυτός ο ανταγωνισμός ευθύνεται για τον κίνδυνο ενός νέου, ακόμα πιο αιματηρού πολέμου, αφού τώρα θα υπάρχει άμεση εμπλοκή του ΝΑΤΟ, των ΗΠΑ και της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, όπως φαίνεται να επιδιώκουν οι ευρωενωσιακές δυνάμεις μετά και τον πόλεμο στη Λιβύη.

Είναι επιτακτική ανάγκη να τεθεί τέρμα σε κάθε ιμπεριαλιστική επέμβαση στο Σουδάν, σε κάθε πράξη εχθρότητας και αντιπαράθεσης μεταξύ του Βορρά και του Νότου. Εμείς πιστεύουμε ότι ο λαός του Σουδάν στο Βορρά και στο Νότο πρέπει να πάρει την τύχη στα χέρια του. Μόνο έτσι μπορεί να αποφύγει τον πόλεμο και μόνο έτσι μπορεί να γίνει κυρίαρχος του πλούτου της χώρας του για να προχωρήσει σε μια άλλη ανάπτυξη.

  Joachim Zeller (PPE). - Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich hatte die Möglichkeit, als Wahlbeobachter des Parlaments das Referendum zur Unabhängigkeit des Südsudan zu erleben, und ich war beeindruckt von der großen Zustimmung der Südsudanesen, künftig das Schicksal ihres Landes selbst bestimmen zu wollen.

Ich sah auch die große Erwartungshaltung bei den Menschen, die die Unabhängigkeit ihres Landes als Befreiung von der Sklaverei auffassten. Tausende, vielleicht Zehntausende von sogenannten internal displaced persons, die die jahrzehntelangen Kämpfe im Süden in die Flüchtlingslager des Nordens trieben, machten sich auf den Weg in ihre frühere südsudanesische Heimat.

Natürlich wollen die Menschen im Südsudan neben der Unabhängigkeit des Landes vor allem in Frieden lebend einen Weg in eine glücklichere Zukunft gehen, nach all den Jahrzehnten kriegerischer Auseinandersetzungen, bei denen Millionen von Südsudanesen ihr Leben lassen mussten.

Am 9. Juli soll nun der neue Staat Südsudan offiziell unabhängig werden und die Staatenfamilie unserer Welt erweitern. Die Startbedingungen sind denkbar schlecht, darüber ist hier ja schon viel gesagt worden. 70 % der Menschen leben als nomadisierende Viehzüchter, 80 % sind Analphabeten, der Konflikt um Abyei weitet sich in einen militärischen Konflikt aus. Dort gab es bereits Tote und Verwundete. Als wäre das nicht genug, nehmen auch die Rivalitäten zwischen den Stämmen und bewaffneten Gruppen im Südsudan zu, und nach Schätzung von Beobachtern sollen bereits mehr als Tausend Menschen seit Januar ihr Leben verloren haben. Die Verwundeten und Geschändeten sind kaum gezählt.

Der Sudan gehörte zu den gescheiterten Staaten. Es droht die Gefahr, dass der Staat Südsudan bereits als gescheiterter Staat beginnt. Ich bin der festen Überzeugung, dass es angesichts der kolonialen Vergangenheit der dortigen Länder eine große Verpflichtung Europas für diese Region gibt. Gemeinsam mit der UNO und der Afrikanischen Union ist hier die gemeinsame europäische Außenpolitik gefordert, und sie kann sich auch hier beweisen. Dabei geht es nicht nur um Geld, sondern auch darum, die zarte, sich herausbildende Zivilgesellschaft zu unterstützen. Wir müssen mit denen hart verhandeln, in deren Händen das Schicksal des Landes liegt, nämlich den Stammesführern, Anführern der militärischen Gruppen, dass sie die Hoffnung der Menschen in ihrem Lande nicht enttäuschen.

  Corina Creţu (S&D). - Peste mai puţin de o lună va fi proclamată independenţa Sudanului de Sud aprobată masiv la referendumul din ianuarie. Din păcate, în acest timp nu s-au clarificat controversele legate de delimitarea frontierei şi împărţirea veniturilor din extracţia petrolului. Deci noul stat se naşte sub spectrul conflictului şi de aceea cred că se impune intensificarea eforturilor diplomatice, inclusiv ale Uniunii Europene.

Apreciem prezenţa dumneavoastră în Sudan, ca şi a colegilor noştri, inclusiv activitatea doamnei De Keyser, dar, după ştiţi, în ultima perioadă, situaţia s-a înrăutăţit dramatic. Peste 80 000 de persoane şi-au părăsit locuinţele, semn că apare riscul unei crize umanitare. Întrebarea mea pentru domnul comisar se referă la oportunitatea prezenţei unei forţe de menţinere a păcii în zonă, având în vedere declaraţia ONU de ieri, care a recunoscut eşecul forţelor sale, care au rămas pasive în faţa tensiunilor din ultima perioadă.

  Marielle De Sarnez (ALDE). - Madame la Présidente, il y a quelques heures, le gouvernement soudanais a informé l'ONU que les conditions nécessaires au retour de milliers de résidents ayant fui la région disputée d'Abyei, à la frontière entre le Nord et le Sud du Soudan, allaient être mises en place.

Nous le savons, si le départ est toujours très rapide, les retours de personnes déplacées prennent du temps et sont trop souvent sources de troubles humanitaires et sociaux considérables. C'est pourquoi je vous propose que l'Union européenne mette en place, dans les plus brefs délais, une mission de surveillance sur le modèle de ce que nous avons fait dans les Balkans. Cette mission pourrait évidemment se déployer avec le concours de l'Union africaine et, pourquoi pas, de certains pays tiers.

Un mot enfin sur les rumeurs qui circulent sur un possible "nettoyage ethnique" dans la région. Si les faits sont avérés, il faudra évidemment que, poussée par l'Union européenne, la communauté internationale agisse rapidement car le drame de l'ex-Yougoslavie ne doit en aucun cas se reproduire.

  Cristian Dan Preda (PPE). - Nu puţini au fost cei care au salutat rezultatul referendumului referitor la independenţa Sudanului de Sud. Asta ar însemna crearea unui al 54-lea stat pe continentul african.

Ceea ce se întâmplă acum, însă, e un fel de duş rece. Trebuie să fim foarte realişti şi să admitem că în acest moment împărţirea pe cale paşnică a Sudanului este în pericol. Ocuparea regiunii contestate Abiey de către forţele guvernamentale sudaneze pe 21 mai, violenţele care continuau şi ieri la Kadugli ne arată că războiul civil dintre nord şi sud poate reizbucni oricând. Sigur că acest lucru trebuie evitat cu orice preţ şi mesajul nostru trebuie să fie foarte clar.

Operaţiunile militare ale guvernului sudanez şi ale miliţiilor din Abiey constituie o încălcare gravă a Acordului de pace global. Trebuie evitată, suntem convinşi cu toţii cred de lucru la aceasta, orice escaladare a violenţei care ar putea conduce la pierderi suplimentare de vieţi omeneşti. Situaţia securităţii trebuie rezolvată în conformitate cu acordurile de la Kadugli si Abiey de la începutul anului, inclusiv, cred eu, prin intervenţia unei forţe de securitate mixtă mandatată de Naţiunile Unite.

Dacă aceste obstacole sunt surmontate, rămân numeroase semne de întrebare privind viabilitatea celor două state care ar trebui să coexiste pe teritoriul fostului Sudan. E nevoie de voinţă politică şi disponibilitate pentru dialog pentru că există o serie întreagă de chestiuni în suspans: frontierele comune, cetăţenia, obligaţii internaţionale, desigur resursele petroliere.

Pe de altă parte, vreau să subliniez deteriorarea situaţiei drepturilor omului şi a statului de drept în Sudan, unde am asistat recent la o multiplicare a arestărilor arbitrare. Nu pot să nu amintesc faptul că Omar al-Bashir este în continuare sub mandat de arestare internaţional, fără ca autorităţile din această ţară să ţină seama de acest lucru.

Închei cu un punct pozitiv: vreau să salut eliberarea celor trei ostatici bulgari care lucrau pentru serviciul umanitar aerian al Naţiunilor Unite, care au fost răpiţi în luna ianuarie în Darfur.

  Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE) - Krvavá občianska vojna, ktorá trvala v Sudáne viac ako dve desaťročia, zdevastovala krajinu a zničila alebo inak tragicky poznačila milióny jej obyvateľov. Ohavnosti spáchané počas občianskej vojny boli konečne zastavené podpísaním mierovej dohody, ktorej neoddeliteľnou súčasťou bolo uskutočnenie úspešného referenda.

Prevencia je najlepším liekom a preto som presvedčený, že prostriedky Európskej únie určené Sudánu by mali byť alokované nielen na humanitárnu a rozvojovú pomoc, ale aj na podporu demokratického zriadenia a právneho štátu, ktoré sú základnou podmienkou pre uplatnenie základných ľudských práv vojnou poznačených Sudáncov.

Výsledky spomínaného referenda jasne ukazujú túžbu prevažne kresťanského južného Sudánu o nezávislosť. Ak sa tak stane, verím, že to už je tak, južný Sudán ako najmladší štát sveta bude potrebovať asistenciu a podporu.

  Katarína Neveďalová (S&D) - Plne súhlasím s vyjadrením a vyhlásením pani Madam Ashton, ale zároveň zdieľam obavy o nasledujúci vývoj v tejto krajine.

Región Abyei v Sudáne je už dlhé roky miestom, ktoré je zmietané konfliktami. Iba pred necelými 6 rokmi sa skončila viac ako 20 rokov trvajúca občianska vojna. Práve táto oblasť bola kľúčom v konflikte a podľa vyhlásení medzinárodnej krízovej skupiny sa práve vývoj v tejto časti krajiny odrazí na osude celého Sudánu. Udrží krajina mier alebo znova upadne do nejakej vojny?

V prípade, že by sa mala južná časť osamostatniť je potrebné podporovať čo najmierovejšiu tranzíciu. Preto by som chcela vyjadriť podporu Komisii, ktorá tvrdo odsudzuje použitie sily voči nevinným civilistom, voči ktorým zasiahla a naďalej zasahuje sudánska armáda a okupuje tento región.

Európska únia má príležitosť byť mierotvorcom a napomôcť stabilite v regióne a posilniť svoju pozíciu nielen ako najväčší donor na svete, ale aj svoju politickú pozíciu a hlavne pomôcť obyvateľom tejto krajiny.

  Janusz Władysław Zemke (S&D). - Chciałbym zwrócić uwagę na, moim zdaniem, bardzo istotny czynnik. My na tej sali cieszymy się wszyscy, że w wyniku referendum powstanie wkrótce nowe państwo – Sudan Południowy. Ale podkreślić należy, że jest to tylko szansa, gdyż państwo to dzisiaj nie ma podstawowych atrybutów, jakie powinno posiadać każde państwo. Nie posiada ono struktury, kompetentnych urzędników ani też wymiaru sprawiedliwości. Inaczej mówiąc, otwiera się także pole do działania różnych sił, które tam na miejscu mogłyby podważyć spokój i bezpieczeństwo. W tym kontekście uważam, że oprócz bardzo ważnej pomocy humanitarnej trzeba dbać także o bezpieczeństwo i że potrzebne są tam dalej obecne siły ONZ.

  Elena Băsescu (PPE). - Aş dori să salut şi eu declaraţia vicepreşedintelui Comisiei în contextul intensificării conflictului dintre cele două părţi. Consider că liderii politici trebuie să respecte voinţa poporului exprimată prin referendumul de independenţă. Sudanul are o lungă istorie de tulburări interne violente, iar ultimele evoluţii indică o întoarcere la acest trecut. Subliniez situaţia deosebit de dificilă în care se află populaţia din zonele de conflict. Există riscul producerii unei catastrofe umanitare, dacă membri comunităţii internaţionale nu vor interveni.

Mai mult, se înregistrează atacuri în zonele apărate de trupele ONU, ceea ce pune în pericol viaţa militarilor şi întoarcerea refugiaţilor. Atrag atenţia supra importanţei dezarmării treptate a grupărilor care împiedică punerea în aplicare a rezultatelor referendumului. Traficul de arme din zonă încurajează şi mai mult mişcările rebele şi compromite procesul de stabilire a independenţei.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). - Madam President, today’s discussion on Sudan and South Sudan is encouraging and positive in a world where there is more bad news than good news.

The European Union has both an opportunity and a responsibility to nurture the new state along and to ensure that democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights are established in Sudan and South Sudan. Particularly, I think the record of the European Union – because of the founding principles of Schuman based on peace and prosperity – puts us in a position in which large states worldwide could not be, because they might be seen to be using Sudan to exploit it for their own internal and external policies.

We can do a great deal, working with the UN, to establish these new states, particularly South Sudan, and to ensure that they do not have civil wars, as often happens when new states occur.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D) - Po osamostatnení, ktoré ma nastať presne o mesiac, bude južný Sudán musieť čeliť hneď niekoľkým humanitárnym a sociálno-ekonomickým problémom. Vzhľadom na tieto okolnosti bude vonkajšia pomoc na podporu južnému Sudánu v boji proti extrémnej chudobe, na posilnenie miestnych spoločenstiev a na urýchlenie prínosu výhod mieru pre obyvateľstvo dlhý čas ešte dôležitejšia ako doteraz.

Hoci sa od južného Sudánu očakáva, že požiada o pristúpenie k dohode z Cotonou, 10. Európsky rozvojový fond bude k dispozícii až po určitom čase od pristúpenia k dohode. Preto vzniká riziko, že v období bezprostredne po referende sa vytvorí medzera vo financovaní, kedy bude južný Sudán veľmi zraniteľný a do veľkej miery ohrozený štátnym kolapsom. Tomu treba jednoznačne zabrániť kvôli hrozbe humanitárnej katastrofy, a preto by sme mali spraviť všetko, čo je v našich silách, aby sme pomohli Sudáncom preklenúť toto kritické obdobie a aby sme zabránili opakovaniu krvavých konfliktov.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI). - Frau Präsidentin! Da werden von der Armee des Nordens in der Stadt 15 000 Menschen, die für den Südsudan plädierten, vertrieben, und dann will man auf einmal zweifellos im Eilverfahren ein Referendum in Abyei im Schatten einer Armee abhalten, bei dem man sich zuvor mit dem Süden über den Kreis der Wahlberechtigten nicht einmal einigen konnte. Ein wahrlich groteskes Unterfangen.

Es sind nicht nur die unterschiedlichen Auffassungen über Eigentum und Zugehörigkeit, die Abyei zum Zankapfel eines jahrzehntelangen Bürgerkriegs machten, es sind auch unterschiedliche Religionen, also der moslemische Norden gegen den von Christen und Anhängern von Naturreligionen bewohnten Süden, die durch willkürliche Grenzziehung ehemaliger Kolonialmächte zusammengezwungen wurden. Das darf hinsichtlich der jüngsten Eskalationen nicht vergessen werden.

Man hätte das Referendum nie durchpeitschen dürfen, solange der Status der Abyei-Wahlberechtigten nicht fixiert war. Ebenso wenig darf man die genauso umstrittenen Regionen Blue Nile und Südkordofan mit den Nuba-Bergen vergessen. Das wäre meines Erachtens grob fahrlässig und sollte nicht geschehen.

  Boris Zala (S&D) - Kolegovia, nikdy som nedôveroval prezidentovi Bašírovi a nedôverujem mu ani teraz. Z toho celkom jasne vyplýva, že som pesimista, že by sa v Sudáne už nič neudialo. Som presvedčený, že tento prezident sa pokúsi vojenskou silou zasiahnuť voči juhu, či už obsadením niektorých častí území či niektorých významných miest alebo zdrojov surovín.

Z tohto pohľadu by bolo veľmi zaujímavé, aké preventívne akcie alebo preventívne kroky má pripravený Úrad vysokej komisárky, aby sa tak nestalo, povedzme v spolupráci s OSN alebo s Africkou úniou, to na jednej strane, a potom samozrejme by bolo veľmi zaujímavé, akým spôsobom alebo akými krokmi by chcel postupovať úrad, ak sa tak stane, v prípade teda, že severný Sudán nedodrží mierovú zmluvu, ktorá bola podpísaná, o čom som v podstate presvedčený.

  Jaroslav Paška (EFD) - Južný Sudán je krajina, ktorá si odhlasovala nezávislosť a bude najnovším členom Organizácie spojených národov. Je to krajina, ktorá si síce nezávislosť odhlasovala, ale je závislá prakticky od všetkého. Je závislá od svojho severného suseda a je závislá od pomoci, či už Európy ale aj okolitých krajín Afriky. Je to krajina v ktorej chlapi nie sú naučení pracovať. Chlapi čakajú na pokyn, kedy sa začne nejaká vojna, aby zobrali zbrane a začali sa medzi sebou biť. Je to krajina, kde pracujú iba ženy a deti, deti nechodia do škôl, a preto nie sú vzdelané. Je to krajina, ktorá nemá robotníkov, nemá učiteľov, nemá lekárov. Je to krajina, kde treba všetko budovať od základov, a preto bude veľmi ťažké a veľmi náročné vybudovať tu riadny politický systém a postaviť túto krajinu na nohy. Je to ťažká úloha nielen pre Európu, ale aj pre Organizáciu spojených národov.

  Andris Piebalgs, Member of the Commission, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission and EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. − Madam President, first of all I am very grateful for your broad support for the strategy that was presented to you. I will just run through a couple of elements that were raised in the debate.

The people of North and South Sudan are undoubtedly the masters of their countries. We are supporting the process, but the referendum definitely represents a watershed: it is a completely new qualitative situation. It is not the same situation as before. Yes there is violence, there are difficulties, but the situation is different. Now we see a light at the end of the tunnel. So that is why I would say that it is a great victory for us because we supported the process politically, both through our own actions and in financial terms. So that is a completely new situation.

We never compromised on human rights or International Criminal Court issues. Our position is very clear with regard to both the ICC and human rights. Whenever there is a violation of human rights, the High Representative makes very strong and clear statements and puts pressure on the authorities. It has been said that there is no immediate response, but changes are being made. It is not an easy process and we will continue to deal with it.

On Abyei, the situation is difficult, but again the European Union position will be very a clear and strong condemnation of the occupation calling for the situation to be resolved immediately. It is basically up to the United Nations Security Council to decide on the situation. It will decide if there is to be another mission and if there is a United Nations Security Council resolution, we will be its greatest supporters.

But what we need to bear in mind is our strong political stance and declaration and our support for civilian operations. I believe, as I said to South Sudan, that we should not expect all the issues to be resolved by 9 July. Independence will be declared, there will be ongoing discussions and the important element is that the African Union Panel, chaired by Thabo Mbeki, has support from both sides, North and South. We are very firmly behind the Mbeki panel. So we have every reason to believe that all the difficult questions will be answered.

With regard to the debt issue, work is under way as part of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative. This takes time and the Abyei issue certainly did not help. But that issue has not been forgotten.

China, in as much as we can involve it, is a fully-fledged member of the Security Council and it would be a great help in finding solutions in the country. At this stage I cannot claim that there has been a lot of activity with the Chinese. They are in oil, they are in the North of Sudan, but it is definitely a great help when the broader international community tries to find a solution to the issues.

Last but not least, I am very grateful for your interest in Sudan. On the one hand it is rather far from us, but on the other it is very close. If things go wrong, if people are dying in Africa, the European Union cannot stay on the outside saying ‘well it is too far’. Your broad interest in the issues definitely encourages both the High Representative and myself to put together efforts to help people build peaceful lives.

  La Présidente. - Le débat est clos.

Le vote aura lieu jeudi, le 9 juin 2011, à 12 heures.

Déclarations écrites (article 149)

  Fiorello Provera (EFD), per iscritto. – Il Sudan, il più grande dei Paesi dell’Africa Sub-sahariana, è crocevia fra mondo arabo ed africano, oltre che mosaico di numerose ed eterogenee etnie. Esso ha registrato numerosi conflitti sin dalla sua indipendenza dal Regno Unito nel 1956. Con la firma degli “Accordi di Naivasha” e del Comprehensive Peace Agreement (2005) ha avuto formalmente fine il ventennale conflitto Nord-Sud. Come previsto dal CPA, nel gennaio 2011 si è svolto il referendum che ha segnato l’ultima tappa del percorso verso l’indipendenza del Sud dal Nord Sudan. In questa fase di transizione estremamente delicata, sarà necessario mantenere un approccio bilanciato tra il Nord e il Sud del Paese, con particolare attenzione ai bisogni del Sud in termini di istitution building e di governance. L’aiuto dell’UE al Sud Sudan dovrebbe peraltro essere calibrato sulle effettive capacità di assorbimento della nuova entità statale. Occorrerà infatti evitare che i futuri flussi finanziari destinati a Juba finiscano con il non essere correttamente impiegati o, peggio, con l'alimentare l'esistente forte corruzione. L'Europa dovrebbe inoltre impegnarsi maggiormente per tutelare le minoranze cristiane nel Nord del paese, nei confronti delle quali sono in aumento i fenomeni di persecuzione e discriminazione.

15. L-applikazzjoni tal-acquis ta' Schengen fil-Bulgarija u r-Rumanija (dibattitu)

  La Présidente. - L'ordre du jour appelle le rapport de Carlos Coelho, au nom de la commission des libertés civiles, de la justice et des affaires intérieures, sur le projet de décision du Conseil sur l'application de la totalité des dispositions de l'acquis de Schengen en Bulgarie et en Roumanie (14142/2010 - C7-0369/2010 – 2010/0820(NLE)) (A7-0185/2011)

  Carlos Coelho, relator. − Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, Senhor Presidente do Conselho, Caras e Caros colegas, seis notas breves. A primeira: reforçar Schengen. A livre circulação das pessoas constitui um dos maiores sucessos e conquistas da União Europeia. Schengen é um dos grandes pilares da União. Por isso, fazemos parte dos que acham que ele não deve ser enfraquecido, pelo contrário, deve ser preservado e reforçado. Apoio as considerações que a Comissária Malmström fez neste sentido ainda há pouco.

Os cinco Estados-Membros fundadores deram lugar aos actuais 25: 22 Estados da União e três fora da União. A livre circulação é garantida, assim, num território com quase 43.000 quilómetros de fronteiras marítimas externas, mais de 7.700 quilómetros de fronteiras terrestres, abrangendo 25 países, como disse, e 400 milhões de cidadãos.

Segunda nota: confiança mútua. A supressão dos controlos das fronteiras internas exige um elevado nível de confiança mútua entre os Estados-Membros. É necessário um rápido e adequado intercâmbio de informações através do Sistema de Informação de Schengen, uma boa cooperação policial e a existência de controlos eficazes nas fronteiras externas. A segurança do Espaço Schengen depende do rigor e da eficiência com que cada Estado-Membro efectua os seus controlos nas suas fronteiras externas. Quando isso assim não acontece fragiliza-se o espaço Schengen, mina-se a credibilidade da União e destrói-se a confiança mútua.

Terceira nota: regras iguais. A confiança tem de existir também nos procedimentos que têm de ser claros e justos. Os países candidatos têm de conseguir implementar e aplicar de forma eficaz e correcta todos os critérios de Schengen, os mesmos critérios que foram exigidos a todos os anteriores candidatos à adesão, nem mais nem menos.

Quarta nota: a transparência. Em nome da liberdade, mas também da segurança, há que assegurara maior transparência. Lamento que, mais uma vez, o Conselho não se tenha portado da melhor maneira em relação ao Parlamento Europeu, recusando o acesso aos membros do Parlamento aos relatórios de avaliação. O problema pôde apenas ser ultrapassado graças à diligência dos embaixadores da Roménia e da Bulgária que solicitaram a desclassificação desses relatórios e o respectivo envio para o Parlamento Europeu, permitindo assim que os membros desta Casa tivessem acesso ao conteúdo das avaliações, recomendações e conclusões finais. O Conselho, lamentavelmente uma vez mais, não respeitou este Parlamento. A mesma transparência é exigível aos problemas pendentes assinalados que, embora não constituam um obstáculo à plena adesão dos dois países a Schengen, devem ser alvo de um acompanhamento por parte do Comité de Avaliação, de forma a verificar o seguimento que foi dado a essas recomendações, bem como a eventuais mudanças que ainda se encontrem em curso. O Parlamento Europeu reclama acesso a essas informações.

Quinto lugar: cidadania europeia. Quantas vezes invocamos em discurso o valor da cidadania europeia? Desde a sua adesão à União, em 2007, que quer a Bulgária, quer a Roménia tinham a expectativa legítima dos seus cidadãos se tornarem cidadãos comunitários de pleno direito e poderem usufruir dos mesmos direitos dos outros cidadãos comunitários, onde se inclui a liberdade de circulação no interior do Espaço Schengen. É pois, a cidadania europeia que reforçamos ao alargar o Espaço Schengen.

Sexta e última nota: trabalharam bem. É evidente que ambos os países estão de parabéns pelo esforço que realizaram para cumprir todos os requisitos de Schengen. Isso é claro nos relatórios de avaliação e nos posteriores acompanhamentos das missões de peritos que fizeram a avaliação e é claro na missão que fizemos na Bulgária e na Roménia, para a qual agradeço a colaboração dos colegas romenos Marian-Jean Marinescu, Ioan Enciu, Renate Weber e os colegas búlgaros Andrey Kovatchev e Mariya Nedelcheva. Estamos, assim, em condições de receber a Bulgária e a Roménia no Espaço Schengen e espero que o Conselho adopte a mesma posição logo que receber o nosso parecer positivo.

ΠΡΟΕΔΡΙΑ: ΣΤΑΥΡΟΣ ΛΑΜΠΡΙΝΙΔΗΣ
Αντιπρόεδρος

  Enikő Győri, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, I am particularly glad of the opportunity to participate on behalf of the Council in the debate on the extension of the Schengen Area to Bulgaria and Romania.

This has been a consistently high priority for the Hungarian Presidency. I am therefore especially pleased that by now both Bulgaria and Romania have received positive evaluation of their technical preparedness to apply the entirety of the Schengen acquis. We welcome the fact that the assessment by this Parliament has also led to similar conclusions. I particularly commend the work of the rapporteur, Carlos Coelho, for his professional and personal dedication.

For a moment, allow me to deviate from the protocol for the sake of a historic reference. When the accession of Hungary and other new Member States from Central Europe to Schengen was hampered by a technical difficulty related to the development of the Schengen Information System, the SIS II, it was the then Portuguese Presidency that helped us with a generous and inventive solution.

I would also like to thank the Chair, Mr López Aguilar, and all the members of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs for their commitment to this issue. The Hungarian Presidency has made considerable efforts to take this dossier forward. The Presidency became aware early on that there was a need to address persistent reservations on the part of a number of Member States vis-à-vis the process.

The Presidency therefore put the state of play of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to Schengen on the agenda of the JHA Council meeting on 24 and 25 February. On that occasion the Council endorsed the Presidency’s conclusions on the progress made and the need to continue to work in close cooperation with all Member States towards a solution acceptable to all parties involved.

Both Bulgaria and Romania have taken very significant steps to bring their countries’ policy and practice up to the Schengen standards. These include areas such as data protection, police cooperation, the control of external air, sea and land borders, the issuing of visas and the appropriate implementation of the SIS and SIRENE functions. In the meantime the Schengen evaluation of Romania and Bulgaria on all chapters was completed in March with a positive outcome. Following the adoption of the relevant reports by the relevant Council working party, the Presidency submitted draft conclusions on the completion of the evaluation process to the JHA Council scheduled for 9 June.

I know that this will be good news for most in this House, not least those Members from Bulgaria and Romania. It will mark an important step on their way towards full participation in Schengen. The Council will continue to monitor further progress in all areas since proper follow-up is an ongoing exercise in all Schengen countries. In this respect, I can assure the honourable Members that both Bulgaria and Romania will continue to report regularly on the steps taken to remedy the remaining shortcomings. They will, in particular, be looking to reinforce further the controls at their borders and to improve cross-border police cooperation as well as their systems for the issuing of visas.

When Parliament adopts the report prepared by Mr Coelho and the Council adopts the conclusions drafted by the Presidency, only the very last step – adopting the decision of the Council which, as we all know, requires unanimity – will be left. In this respect, I would like to underline that the Council may return to this issue very soon to reflect on how it can further the process, possibly in September this year.

The report prepared by the rapporteur touches upon the subject of access to classified documents – as was also mentioned by the rapporteur in his introductory remarks – which was an important question in dealing with this dossier. Parliament’s access to classified documents is one of the outstanding interinstitutional issues between the Council and Parliament that the Hungarian Presidency is aiming to resolve. While we have managed to agree on the way forward with Parliament’s delegations, the implementation of the solution found still requires some time.

However, the Hungarian Presidency looked, right at the beginning of its term, for an immediate solution in order not to delay the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Schengen Area. In that context, it was at the proposal of the Hungarian Presidency that the Council gave its assent so that Parliament could have access to documents pertinent to the accession of the two Member States to the Schengen Area.

All in all, the Hungarian Presidency is convinced that the enlargement of the Schengen Area to include Bulgaria and Romania, now that they meet all the technical and legal criteria, would be beneficial for the entire Schengen cooperation and for Europe as a whole, where one could travel from the Black Sea to the Atlantic without being stopped to show a passport or identity card. We all know that this free movement is one of the fundamentals of our European Union – something which is really tangible for our citizens and something of value which we all have to safeguard.

  Cecilia Malmström, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, Schengen is indeed a fantastic achievement. It is one of the most tangible gifts that the European institutions have given to Europe’s citizens – the fact that, as the Presidency said, you can actually drive from Finland to Portugal without stopping at any border control. We must safeguard Schengen and the latest debate on reintroducing borders must be stopped. We have already discussed on many occasions how we should strengthen Schengen, and not weaken it. We need more Europe on this, and not less Europe. We need better evaluation, better tools and better guidelines and recommendations on how to interpret the Schengen acquis. This will be discussed with Member States in the Council this week, but also later at the European Council at the end of June.

I would like to congratulate Romania and Bulgaria on the considerable efforts they have made. I have seen with my own eyes that they have done a lot of hard work. One of the advantages of being late is that you can benefit from the latest technology. I have been impressed by the technology and the work that has been put in place by Romania and Bulgaria and I would like to congratulate them on these investments. The result is that they both now meet the technical criteria of Schengen and they are committed and deserve the trust of the European Union. The Commission welcomes this report on the work by Romania and Bulgaria and I would like also to thank Mr Coelho and the shadow rapporteurs for this report and this approach.

The Commission has always taken the line that there is no formal link between the CVM mechanism and Schengen accession. But of course we all know that access to Schengen is also based on trust, and trust, or lack of trust, has been very much debated in the last weeks. The decision to lift internal border controls with Romania and Bulgaria must not only be based on the technical evaluation but also on this trust, and unfortunately that trust is not there today. That is why it was so important, as the Presidency outlined, to work with Member States to find a swift solution to this so that borders could be lifted as soon as possible.

This must remain a priority. The Council, which has the say on this, must define a clear framework with clear timetables related to border control so that Romania and Bulgaria can see a way forward. They have demonstrated that they are ready to join, that they have made the necessary progress, and hopefully there will very soon be a possibility to achieve a way forward and a decision by the Council.

  Agustín Díaz de Mera García Consuegra, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señor Presidente, felicito al señor Coelho, y lo hago porque el rigor es su línea habitual. Añado, a continuación, que hay que ayudar a Bulgaria y a Rumanía. Yo confío en Bulgaria y en Rumanía. Han trabajado bien y tienen que recibir lo que, en justicia, les corresponde; no se trata de ningún regalo.

Se ha dicho, por parte de la Presidencia en ejercicio del Consejo y también por parte de la Comisaria, la señora Malmström, que cumplen técnica y jurídicamente, y yo uno mi voz a la de ellas. Creo que no tenemos que tomar en consideración otros criterios que no sean los exclusivamente técnicos y también jurídicos.

Esos criterios se resumen en cinco. Se trata de que cumplen: cumplen el nivel de protección de datos, cumplen el Sistema de Información de Schengen, cumplen la cooperación policial, cumplen la emisión de visados y cumplen el control de fronteras exteriores aéreas, marítimas y terrestres. En puridad, cumplen también con el SIS y con SIRENE.

Por todo ello, este Parlamento debe mandar un mensaje inequívocamente potente al Consejo y, singularmente, a las representaciones permanentes de cinco países que no voy a citar ahora, pero que están en la mente de todos nosotros.

Creo, Señorías, que incluyendo a Rumanía y a Bulgaria en el espacio Schengen, que comporta a más de cuatrocientos millones de seres humanos, hacemos suma y no resta, construimos más Europa. Y no debemos utilizar los dobles raseros. Y no debemos exigir a Rumanía y a Bulgaria condiciones que no exigimos al resto de los Estados miembros para estar en ese espacio de libertad.

Así es que, para concluir mi intervención, deseo inequívocamente la señal poderosa, potente y mayoritaria de este Parlamento, dirigida al Consejo.

Felicidades, de nuevo, señor Coelho, y felicidades a Rumanía y a Bulgaria.

  Ioan Enciu, în numele grupului S&D. – Mulţumesc dlui Coelho pentru munca, angajamentul şi expertiza deosebită depusă la acest raport. Mulţumesc, de asemenea, preşedinţiei ungare şi dnei comisar Malström pentru susţinerea acordată acestui raport.

Dezbaterea privind aderarea României şi Bulgariei la spaţiul Schengen a fost atât de mult deturnată în scopuri politicianiste, încât aproape s-a uitat ce dezbatem în realitate. Vreau să reamintesc tuturor că, în realitate, vorbim despre criterii extrem de clare şi concrete pe care orice stat candidat trebuie să le îndeplinească pentru a deveni membru al spaţiului Schengen.

Nu există niciun fel de argument moral sau juridic care să ne facă să schimbăm regulile de aderare acum la final. Regulile pot fi îmbunătăţite cu ocazia aprobării noului mecanism de evaluare Schengen aplicabile tuturor statelor membre, nu cu standarde duble.

Este momentul să fim oneşti şi să recunoaştem că România şi Bulgaria sunt socotite vinovate pentru tot ceea ce merge prost la nivelul Uniunii şi la nivelul intern al unor al unor state membre. Acest lucru este total inacceptabil. Nu România şi Bulgaria sunt vinovate pentru că Uniunea Europeană şi anumite state membre nu sunt capabile să gestioneze imigraţia şi frontierele şi nici pentru derivele extremiste şi populiste ale câtorva guverne care pun în practică politici antiimigraţie şi consideră ca fiind o crimă mobilitatea cetăţenilor europeni, în special a celor de etnie romă.

Nu în ultimul rând, cetăţenii români şi bulgari trebuie să sufere de pe urma proastelor relaţii personale ale autorităţilor naţionale cu anumiţi lideri influenţi europeni. Instituţiile europene trebuie să fie vocea raţiunii, să contracareze această diversiune pe care unii încearcă să o creeze. Parlamentul European şi Consiliul trebuie să respecte legislaţia europeană, iar Comisia să vegheze la acest lucru în calitate de gardian al tratatelor.

  Renate Weber, în numele grupului ALDE. – Discutăm astăzi un dosar care a pus pe agenda noastră din ultimele luni mai multe chestiuni de principiu. Doresc să-i mulţumesc raportorului, domnului Carlos Coelho, pentru felul foarte profesionist în care a condus activitatea în Comisia pentru libertăţi civile, justiţie şi afaceri interne, în aşa fel încât aceste principii să fie respectate. A fost o plăcere să colaborez cu domnul Coelho, al cărui spirit constructiv şi-a pus amprenta asupra întregului dosar.

Pe de o parte, avem o chestiune de principiu atunci când analizăm dacă două state membre ale Uniunii care îndeplinesc criteriile de aderare la spaţiul Schengen trebuie să fie admise în acest spaţiu. Regula spune: da. Ambele ţări au fost evaluate privind pregătirea tehnică pentru această aderare şi concluziile sunt, categoric, pozitive. Raportorul nostru a mers chiar mai departe şi a organizat el însuşi vizite de lucru, însoţit fiind şi de raportorii alternativi, pentru a vedea felul în care se prezintă tehnic atât centrele de comandă, cât şi unele puncte de frontieră.

Pe de altă parte, tot o chestiune de principiu a fost cea a relaţiilor instituţionale dintre Parlamentul European şi Consiliu atunci când a fost vorba de accesul deputaţilor europeni la documentele pe baza cărora trebuiau să voteze. Punctul de vedere al Consiliului, că numai unii deputaţi ar putea avea acces şi vota în cunoştinţă de cauză, în vreme ce alţii ar trebui să ridice mâna în mod mimetic, a fost aspru criticat de Comisia LIBE şi sunt bucuroasă că punctul nostru de vedere a avut câştig de cauză.

Colaborarea instituţională trebuie să fie corectă, raţională şi democratică. Sper ca votul de mâine să trimită un mesaj clar şi pozitiv al deputaţilor europeni privind aderarea României şi Bulgariei la spaţiul Schengen.

  Timothy Kirkhope, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, I would like to say to the Commissioner that European citizens are losing confidence and trust in more and more European programmes. It is important that we do not push further forward at a speed and rate we are not fully prepared for. This is a feeling felt by many Member States with regard to the Schengen Area and we should not rush with further expansion before all involved are fully and sufficiently ready and prepared.

Of course I must stress that this debate should not be used as an excuse to criticise either Bulgaria or Romania, who we know have been working very hard to meet the technical criteria that the Commission has set. Although there may well be disagreement between us as to whether those criteria have been met, much has been done. But this is an opportunity to talk about renewing faith in the Schengen system and the integrity of the European Union itself, and an opportunity to improve a completely outdated and ineffective evaluation mechanism.

We are currently dealing with a system which is not able to deal with the current or future challenges Europe faces or the political views of its Member States. Now is the time to set criteria which not only deal with the technical aspects of the Schengen system but assess the impact of organised crime and corruption, also within the assessment of existing Schengen Member States, and I would like to see Europol and Eurojust involved in those assessments. Perhaps such a new evaluation mechanism would help prevent some of the differences of opinion and lack of confidence in the current system which we are hearing not only in this Chamber but right across Europe at the present time.

  Tatjana Ždanoka, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, the issue at stake is whether we grant assess to the Schengen Area for Bulgaria and Romania. I myself come from a new Member State and I remember how it wanted to join the area. I therefore very much welcome the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to that area.

There were some shortcomings on the road to Schengen, but now the problems are resolved. Bulgaria and Romania are fully prepared to join the area of free travel in 2011. I understand the concerns about corruption and organised crime. That is why cooperation within the framework of the mechanism for cooperation and verification should be continued. However, we cannot invent new criteria for joining the Schengen Area and we cannot undermine the certainty that a state is part of that area as soon as current criteria are met.

The debates in Parliament have revealed a clear need to avoid double standards when evaluating the implementation of the Schengen acquis in existing and acceding Schengen Member States. The file on that evaluation is thus crucial. We find it unacceptable that several Member States have suggested, in the Council, changing the legal bases for the proposal so as to exclude Parliament from the decision-making process.

I hope very much that our rapporteur, Mr Coelho, will defend Parliament’s prerogatives, as he always does very successfully, with our full support. I would like to thank him for his work and hope for further good cooperation in the future.

  Cornelia Ernst, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Es wird Zeit, dass Bulgarien und Rumänien in die vollständige Anwendung des Schengen-Besitzstands einbezogen werden. Denken Sie daran: Die Abschaffung der Kontrollen an den Binnengrenzen und die Herstellung von Freizügigkeit gehören zu den wichtigsten Errungenschaften und Werten der Europäischen Union. Deswegen kann ich auch die Blockaden einer Reihe von Mitgliedstaaten – unter anderem auch Deutschland, wo ich herkomme, – überhaupt nicht nachvollziehen. Es wurde mit der Angst vor unkontrollierbaren Flüchtlingsströmen argumentiert und damit, dass Korruption bekämpft werden müsse. Nach den vorliegenden Stellungnahmen kann ich diese Argumente nicht verstehen.

Es ist ein gefährliches Spiel, das hier mit Bulgarien und Rumänien getrieben wird. Deshalb haben wir auch den Berichterstatter, Herrn Coelho, von Anfang an unterstützt, dass es für alle Mitgliedstaaten die gleichen Standards geben muss, auch im Umgang mit Schengen.

Wir waren zutiefst befremdet darüber, genau wie die anderen Kollegen im Ausschuss auch, dass der Rat derart unmöglich mit dem Parlament umgegangen ist und uns anfangs sogar verweigert hat, die Dokumente einzusehen. Insgesamt liegt eine positive Stellungnahme vor. Wir erwarten, dass der Schengen-Beitritt realisiert wird und dass nicht noch bis zum September gewartet wird.

Ich möchte zum Schluss die Bukarester Journalistin Sabina Fati zitieren: „Die Rumänen sind euphorische Bürger. Sie schauen auf Westeuropa wie auf einen Ort, dessen Maßstäbe sie unbedingt erreichen möchten. Wenn man ihnen jetzt den Rücken kehrt, können viele EU-skeptisch werden.“ Das wollen wir weder in Bezug auf Rumänien noch auf Bulgarien.

  Mario Borghezio, a nome del gruppo EFD. – Signor Presidente, l'articolo 4, paragrafo 2, dell'atto di adesione a Schengen stabilisce che la verifica mediante procedura di valutazione del rispetto delle condizioni necessarie all'applicazione dell'acquis di Schengen da parte dei nuovi Stati membri è un requisito essenziale affinché il Consiglio decida di abolire il controllo alle frontiere interne con gli Stati.

Ora noi riteniamo che sarebbero necessari e urgenti proprio quei presupposti – che valutiamo oggi inesistenti – di carattere normativo e operativo, che impediscono l'infiltrazione da Bulgaria e Romania di soggetti non desiderabili che possono minare la sicurezza dei paesi membri.

Le relazioni agli atti del Parlamento non sono tranquillizzanti per le gravi carenze che sussistono nelle frontiere aeree, di terra e marittime, a cominciare dall'esecuzione dei controlli. Non a caso, le nostre polizie si trovano quotidianamente di fronte a numerosi casi di clandestini provenienti da questi due paesi.

Suggerisco la necessità di una sospensione della procedura di entrata di Bulgaria e Romania nel sistema di Schengen sulla base del principio di precauzione, anche in vista della prevedibile enorme pressione dalle frontiere esterne verso questi due paesi che diventano i buchi di groviera del sistema dell'Unione europea rispetto all'entrata dei clandestini.

  Daniël van der Stoep (NI). - Voorzitter, ik val met de deur in huis. Bulgarije en Roemenië, onze Oost-Europese corrupte boevennesten, voldoen totaal niet aan de voorwaarden voor toetreding tot Schengen. Ik herhaal: totaal niet. Ondertussen kan commissaris Malmström dan wel idealistisch mijmeren hoe heilig het Schengenacquis is, en ondertussen kan de meerderheid van het Parlement dan wel doodleuk vinden hoe prachtig het zou zijn als Bulgarije en Roemenië bij Schengen zouden komen, maar realistisch is het niet.

Het is naïef, het is eigenlijk kinderlijk naïef. De feiten liegen er niet om. Bulgarije en Roemenië hebben zelf al lang en breed aangetoond momenteel Schengen onwaardig te zijn. Volgens de corruptie-index van Transparency International is corruptie in beide landen aan de orde van de dag. Wat betrouwbaarheid betreft, scoort Bulgarije op de schaal van 1 tot 10 slechts een 3,6 en Roemenië een 3,7. Op een schoolrapport zouden deze cijfers betekenen: gefaald, ronduit gefaald. En deze landen zouden bij Schengen moeten komen? Natuurlijk niet, nooit niet.

De feiten liegen er verder ook niet om. In januari van dit jaar zijn enkele tientallen Bulgaarse douanebeambten opgepakt voor corruptie. In februari van dit jaar zijn bijna 200 Roemeense douaniers gearresteerd, ook wegens corruptie. Beide landen scoren ook zorgwekkend hoog als het gaat om mensenhandel. Alleen al in Nederland zijn afgelopen jaar tientallen slachtoffers van Bulgaarse en Roemeense mensenhandel aangetroffen. En deze landen zouden bij Schengen moeten komen? Het zou een schande zijn en volstrekt onverantwoordelijk.

Men kan wel willen, men kan zoveel willen. Maar zie de realiteit. Doe de oogkleppen af. Bulgarije en Roemenië zijn totaal niet aan Schengen toe. Nu niet, nooit niet.

  Андрей Ковачев (PPE). - Благодаря на г-н Coelho за обективната и справедлива оценка на направеното от България и Румъния. Благодаря и на Председателството, и на Комисията за тяхната подкрепа по този доклад.

Процесът на оценка и присъединяване на тези страни трябва да завърши по същите критерии, по които е започнал. Още през 2007 г. е залегнало, че след изпълнение на техническите критерии България и Румъния ще се присъединят към Шенген през 2011 година. Това вече е факт. Оценката на експертите на Съвета е еднозначна: България и Румъния изпълняват критериите за членство.

Всички резерви, които напоследък чуваме, са в сферата на вътрешнополитическия дебат на някои страни-членки. Вместо краткосрочни сметки, ние трябва да се мобилизираме за по-доброто опазване на нашите външни граници, за подписване и спазване на реадмисионни споразумения с нашите съседи на юг и изток и солидарност с тези страни-членки, които са подложени на най-силен имиграционен натиск в Южна Европа.

Това е особено важно в сегашния момент на външни заплахи и страхове сред нашите граждани от нелегална имиграция, която може да застраши сигурността и социалните придобивки в Европа. Нужни са ни ефективни и работещи планове при кризи, каквито имахме в Италия и Малта. Не може да допускаме двоен стандарт. Ако ще обсъждаме и приемаме нови правила, то те трябва важат за всички страни - и старите, и новите.

Уважаеми колеги, България и Румъния са си свършили работата и сега надграждат техните системи за сигурност в координация с партньорите по Шенген. Те са положили и полагат много усилия в борбата с корупцията и организираната престъпност. В настоящия момент ще съм по-спокоен, ако средиземноморската граница на Шенген се охранява така добре, както България и Румъния охраняват техните черноморски граници. Докладчикът, както и други колеги бяха там и те знаят за какво говоря.

Ето защо, за да се засили сигурността в Шенген, то е необходимо Съветът да вземе решение за приемане на България и Румъния в Шенген още тази година през септември. Колеги, призовавам ви да подкрепим доклада на г-н Coelho, с което ще изразим ясен и силен политически сигнал към Съвета, че за по-сигурни външни граници и за по-спокойни наши граждани мястото на България и Румъния е в Шенген още през настоящата година.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D) - Sloboda pohybu je jednou zo základných slobôd a výdobytkov občanov členských štátov Európskej únie a ja by som chcela za našu frakciu, za frakciu Socialistov a demokratov v Európskom parlamente, podporiť vstup Rumunska a Bulharska do Schengenského priestoru.

Musím povedať, že či už kontrolná správa ale aj stanovisko samotného spravodajcu sú pozitívne a že im za to treba poďakovať, ale zároveň vyjadriť aj také roztrpčenie. Roztrpčenie nad tým, ako sa dnes niektorí kolegovia z krajín, ktoré samé majú problémy s nelegálnou imigráciou, ktoré samé majú problémy s korupciou, pozerajú na Rumunsko a Bulharsko. Bulharsko a Rumunsko sú plnohodnotnými členskými štátmi Európskej únie a náš prístup k nim musí byť rovnaký ako k ostatným členským štátom Európskej únie.

Takže ak budete posudzovať pristúpenie Bulharska a Rumunska, ak budeme o tom zajtra hlasovať, bola by som veľmi rada, keby ste sa na to pozerali tak, ako by ste sa pozerali na svoje vlastné krajiny.

  Станимир Илчев (ALDE). - На тази сесия ние финализираме своята оценка за готовността на България и Румъния да се присъединят към Шенгенското пространство и ще го направим успешно, защото е успешен докладът на г-н Coelho. Доминиращо е очакването оценката на Парламента да съвпадне с положителната позиция на комисията LIBE и гражданите на двете страни (България и Румъния) да чуят, че техните институции са направили необходимото и светофарът пред булевард "Шенген" вече светва в зелено.

Дискусиите бяха дълги, но добрата новина е, че ние не допуснахме експеримента критериите за членство за Шенген да се променят ad hoc. Трудните дни, разбира се, не са отминали и правителствата на двете държави трябва да изяснят сега всички мотиви на онези, които са скептични и които пред очите ни се превърнаха от някогашни съюзници на българското и румънското интегриране в автори на тезата за изчакване.

Какво е ядрото на тези мотиви - обективни опасения или предразсъдък, ситуационна предпазливост или разочарование. Надявам се министрите на вътрешните работи и министрите на правосъдието да бъдат поне толкова откровени помежду си, колкото откровени бяхме ние по време на процеса на доклада Coelho.

  Paweł Robert Kowal (ECR). - Mam wrażenie, że w ostatnich dyskusjach w Parlamencie Europejskim coraz częściej myślimy w kategoriach obrony limesu – czasami jest to na granicy Unii Europejskiej, a czasami chcemy stawiać granice i bronić ich wewnątrz Unii Europejskiej.

Chcę twardo i zdecydowanie stwierdzić: nie ma żadnych merytorycznych przesłanek do tego, aby dzisiaj przeciągać wejście Bułgarii i Rumunii do strefy Szengen. Powinniśmy się przeciwstawić wszelkim próbom ograniczania kontaktów między obywatelami, powinniśmy się przeciwstawić wszelkim próbom ograniczania wolności w podróżowaniu, w działaniu na terenie Unii Europejskiej. Dyskusja, której się przysłuchuję, pokazuje, jak bardzo rozdarta jest dzisiaj Unia Europejska. Ci, którzy dzisiaj podnoszą sztuczne argumenty przeciwko wejściu Bułgarii i Rumunii do strefy Szengen, będą ponosili w swoich sumieniach odpowiedzialność za niszczenie projektu politycznego, jakim jest Unia Europejska. I tej odpowiedzialności już nigdy nie unikną.

  Gerard Batten (EFD). - Mr President, it is odd, is it not, that as the Schengen area comes apart in its core countries, there are plans to extend it to include Bulgaria and Romania. There are over 900 000 gypsies in Romania and Bulgaria, many of whom would like to migrate. Once they can travel freely within the Schengen area, many of them will inevitably find their way to Britain in order to take advantage of our generous benefits and public housing system, like so many before them.

Perhaps some enterprising British citizens might like to meet the Roma as they disembark at Calais and Heathrow and give them the addresses and location maps so that they can find their way to the homes of our Prime Minister, his cabinet colleagues and all the MPs in favour of EU membership. Only when the Roma pitch their caravans on the front lawns of our out-of-touch political class might they change their views on the benefits of EU membership.

  Philip Claeys (NI). - Voorzitter, ik vrees dat het Europees Parlement zich weer eens van zijn meest wereldvreemde kant zou laten zien als het zijn goedkeuring zou geven aan de toetreding van Bulgarije en Roemenië tot de Schengenzone. Het staat in elk geval vast dat er verschillende lidstaten zijn die zich daartegen zullen verzetten. En ze hebben daar goede redenen voor.

Zo is er het recente verslag van Europol over de georganiseerde misdaad waarin gesteld wordt dat misdaadgroepen uit Albanië, Turkije en de vroegere Sovjet-Unie de kansen en mogelijkheden zullen benutten, die de toetreding van Roemenië en Bulgarije zal bieden. Er wordt in dat verslag ook gewezen op de visumvrijstelling voor Balkanlanden, die ook al zo'n lichtzinnige maatregel was.

Er is het probleem van de illegale immigratie via Turkije, die nog massaler zal vloeien wanneer Bulgarije in de Schengenzone komt. Welke garanties geeft de Commissie dat dit probleem op een effectieve manier zal worden aangepakt? Geen enkele. In welke maatregelen is voorzien om te beletten dat er nog meer problemen komen met Roma-zigeuners die voor overlast en criminaliteit zorgen? Ook geen enkele.

Hoe zit het met de gerechtelijke hervormingen en de anti-corruptiemaatregelen die nog nodig zijn? De Roemeense en Bulgaarse burgers die met goede bedoelingen naar Schengenlanden reizen, zullen in elk geval – ik ben ervan overtuigd – begrijpen dat het ongemak van grenscontroles niet opweegt tegen de noodzaak om alle andere Europeanen te beschermen tegen georganiseerde criminaliteit en massale illegale immigratie.

  Marian-Jean Marinescu (PPE). - Aderarea României la spaţiul Schengen este un proiect care a implicat eforturi majore din punct de vedere financiar, instituţional şi uman şi reprezintă unul dintre cele mai importante obiective politice pentru România. România a investit peste un miliard de euro şi rezultatele au fost clar pozitive în toate rapoartele de evaluare. Au fost îndeplinite toate condiţiile impuse prin acquis-ul Schengen.

România administrează una dintre cele mai lungi frontiere externe din Uniune şi, în consecinţă, a dezvoltat cel mai modern sistem integrat de securizare la standardele impuse de acquis-ul Schengen. România şi agenţia FRONTEX şi-au intensificat relaţiile de parteneriat. În operaţiunile FRONTEX desfăşurate în Grecia, România este, după Germania, al doilea contribuitor cu echipamente şi resurse umane. În cazul unui aflux masiv de imigranţi la frontieră s-au implementat, în parteneriat cu instituţii similare din alte state membre, Germania şi Olanda, mecanisme specializate în domeniul imigraţiei şi azilului. În activitatea de combatere a traficului ilegal se folosesc toate metodele moderne de investigare şi culegere de informaţii. A fost dezvoltată o aplicaţie unică în Europa, care permite prelucrarea datelor atât în SIS I, cât şi în SIS II. Sistemul de supraveghere a frontierelor maritime a fost dat ca exemplu de bună practică. În paralel, autorităţile au acordat o atenţie deosebită luptei împotriva corupţiei. Colaborarea permanentă în cadrul mecanismului special instituit de Comisia Europeană a condus la rezultate care dovedesc că România are capacitatea instituţională necesară şi voinţă politică pentru a atinge obiectivele din domeniul justiţiei.

Consider că aderarea la spaţiul Schengen nu este un cadou oferit României, ci o recunoaştere a meritelor şi eforturilor sale şi va aduce un plus evident la securitatea frontierelor externe ale Uniunii. Domnule Coelho, vă mulţumesc şi vă felicit pentru modul în care aţi gestionat acest dosar.

  Tanja Fajon (S&D). - Bolgarija in Romunija sta izpolnili postavljene pogoje in v schengenski prostor vstopata na podlagi svojih zaslug. Ne smemo dovoliti, da bi politični argumenti širitev odložili. Močno me skrbi populistična in skrajno desna nacionalistična retorika, ki Unijo zelo nevarno vodi v nestrpnost, rasizem, diskriminacijo in brezbrižno zapiranje vrat.

Z vsako schengensko širitvijo širimo prostor svobode, pravice in varnosti in prepričana sem, da bo čas, tako kot v preteklosti, pokazal možnosti gospodarskega in drugega razvoja. Nedopustno je, da danes nekatere članice Unije pozivajo k ponovni vzpostavitvi notranjih meja. Mobilnost Evropejk in Evropejcev znotraj Unije, svoboda potovanja je ena od osrednjih evropskih svoboščin in vsakršno omejevanje bi ogrozilo eno najbolj otipljivih koristi, ki jih imajo državljani od tesnejšega evropskega povezovanja.

S širitvijo schengenskega prostora na Bolgarijo in Romunijo bomo dokazali, da je ideja povezovanja še kako živa, da gre Evropa naprej in da imajo v njej jasno prihodnost tudi države, ki trkajo na vrata, med njimi zahodnega Balkana.

  David Campbell Bannerman (ECR). - Mr President, I may have changed my seat here to the ECR Group this week, but I have not changed my perspective on the European Union. When it comes to Schengen it has been the ECR view that this is generally a matter for Schengen Area members to decide, including Switzerland, of course, which is in Schengen, but not in the European Union. But the closure of the border by France to Italian trains, and Danish demands to mend Schengen shows it is in crisis.

Pragmatism dictates that the implications of Bulgaria and Romania joining are profound for those way beyond the Schengen Area. A leaky border will mean that many illegal entrants destined for the UK can reach Calais without hindrance, for example, and Bulgaria has not complied with its obligations on organised crime. In summary, this proposal is simply a border too far.

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD). - Signor Presidente, mentre l'Europa fa finta di niente, il rapporto 2011 di Europol sul crimine organizzato sostiene che, con l'entrata di Romania e Bulgaria in Schengen, le potenti organizzazioni criminali turche, russe e albanesi potranno espandere la loro attività in tutt'Europa.

Ancora, cito testualmente: "L'immigrazione illegale dalla Turchia si allargherà alle coste della Bulgaria, aumenteranno i traffici di droga e di esseri umani in mano alla criminalità turca e albanese". Inoltre, sul traffico di esseri umani, "L'entrata in Schengen di Romania e Bulgaria potrebbe dare alla criminalità bulgara e alle comunità rom nuove opportunità per aumentare i loro traffici, già consistenti, verso il resto dell'Europa". In definitiva, aumento dell'immigrazione illegale dalla Turchia e dei traffici di droga e di esseri umani, meno sicurezza per i cittadini europei.

L'Europa vuole fare un grande favore al crimine organizzato. Il partito della Lega Nord è e sarà sempre contrario a questo genere di scelte scellerate. Chi domani voterà a favore di questa relazione avrà la responsabilità di un voto che aprirà alla criminalità organizzata un'autostrada che porta dritto al cuore dell'Europa.

  Kinga Gál (PPE). - Tisztelt államtitkár asszony, biztos asszony, képviselőtársaim! Örömmel tölt el, ha a Coelho-jelentés holnapi megszavazásával az Európai Parlament egyértelmű jelét adja: elismeri Románia és Bulgária felkészültségét és támogatja a két ország csatlakozását a közösségi vívmányaink egyik legfontosabbikához, a schengeni övezethez. Ahhoz, amely a kelet- és közép-európai országok számára történelmi okokból is olyan sokat jelent: a szabad és akadálymentes utazás lehetőségét.

A mai vitánk legfontosabb üzenete a tagállamok számára az kell legyen, hogy Románia és Bulgária teljesíti ugyanazokat a csatlakozási feltételeket, amelyet az Unió az eddig csatlakozott országoktól is elvárt.

Hangsúlyozni kell, hogy nem lehet több követelményt támasztani Románia és Bulgária irányába, mint az előző schengeni csatlakozás esetében támasztottunk. A tagállamok ne alkalmazzák a kettős mérce intézményét, mert az pontosan azt az alapot kezdi ki, amire a schengeni vívmány épül: a kölcsönös bizalom intézményét. Pontosan az elmúlt hónapok eseményei bizonyítják, hogy Európa legfontosabb vívmánya védelemre és mellette való kiállásra szorul. Hangsúlyoznám továbbá azt is, hogy még véletlenül sem szabad árukapcsolásként végezni ebben a kérdésben, tehát összekötni a két tagország schengeni csatlakozását és a schengeni értékelési mechanizmus felülvizsgálatának az ügyét. Ez utóbbira igen nagy szükség van, de ez nem kapcsolható most így össze.

Végül hadd gratuláljak Coelho jelentéstevőnek, akinek konstruktív és következetes munkája kiemelkedő fontosságú volt a jelen ügyben is, továbbá köszönjem meg a magyar elnökség a két tagállam mielőbbi schengeni csatlakozásának irányába tett konkrét lépéseit és elkötelezettségét.

  Anna Hedh (S&D). - Herr talman! Imorgon kommer vi att rösta om Bulgarien och Rumänien ska få ansluta sig till Schengensamarbetet. För mig som socialdemokrat är det en självklarhet att alla länder i EU som uppfyller alla de högt ställda kraven för samarbete ska få delta. Det är naturligtvis viktigt att vi ställer tuffa krav för att få ansluta sig till Schengen, men det måste vara samma objektiva kriterier för alla. Allt annat är politiskt hyckleri.

När alla experter nu bedömer att Rumänien och Bulgarien uppfyller kraven tycker jag att det är självklart att de ska få ansluta sig. Ikväll har det framförts invändningar med hänvisning till korruptionen i de båda länderna, men det är ju inget som kan bekämpas via Schengensystemet. Kommissionsledamot Cecilia Malmström presenterade i dagarna ett paket för att bekämpa korruptionen som vi kan jobba vidare utifrån. Det är en fråga för hela unionen, inte bara för Rumänien och Bulgarien. På samma sätt kräver kampen mot den organiserade brottsligheten mer samarbete, inte fler stängda dörrar.

(Applåder)

  Salvatore Iacolino (PPE). - Signor Presidente, signora Commissario, Schengen è sicuramente un patrimonio di civiltà di grandissimo valore.

Oggi dobbiamo salutare con favore un risultato importante, cioè l'aver contemplato, fra i cittadini di paesi che possono beneficiare di questo strumento fondamentale, anche quelli della Bulgaria e della Romania. L'area Schengen va quindi consolidata e ulteriormente rafforzata: se c'è una testimonianza concreta di civiltà europea è proprio questa: il diritto di cittadinanza europea trova una misura concreta proprio negli spazi di Schengen.

L'acquis di Schengen è quindi uno strumento fondamentale per l'economia legale e sono convinto che il 24 giugno di quest'anno il Consiglio trarrà spunti di riflessione importanti da questo che vuole essere un rafforzamento dei sentimenti di fiducia e di collaborazione fra gli Stati membri.

Certo, i meccanismi di valutazione devono passare dai sistemi intergovernativi a quelli comunitari, come già annunciato dalla signora Malmström nei giorni scorsi, così com'è vero che la governance di Schengen determina certamente una maggiore cooperazione, un rafforzamento dinamico, ma anche un aggiornamento, trasparenza e dialogo sicuramente.

I requisiti sono stati soddisfatti da Bulgaria e Romania, e mi congratulo con l'onorevole Coelho per aver saputo coniugare libertà di movimento e sicurezza dei cittadini con un testo equilibrato, condiviso in sede di commissione LIBE.

  Илияна Малинова Йотова (S&D). - Групата „ШЕВАЛ” определи хиляда и триста-километровата българска граница за сигурна външна граница на Европейския съюз, за което работиха няколко български правителства. Комисията LIBE препоръчва на Съвета да одобри присъединяването на двете страни в Шенгенското пространство и аз искам да благодаря на всички колеги за професионалната работа.

Някои държави-членки поставят нови политически критерии, които ще отложат Шенгенския процес. Присъединяването бе определено дори като хазарт за сигурността на европейските граждани заради престъпността и корупцията.

Очевидно е, че резултатите тук не са убедителни, но затова си има вътрешнополитически критерии и евентуални оставки на български министри. Тези проблеми са предмет на други оценки: например механизмът на Европейската комисия за проверка и сътрудничество. Искам да приветствам и комисар Malmström за предложения вчера от нея нов пакет от мерки за борба с корупцията.

Днес обаче България и Румъния не могат да бъдат боксова круша за нерешените проблеми, свързани със сигурността в Европа: бежанската вълна от Африка, наближаващите избори в някои страни-членки, популистка риторика, разочарованието от финансовата и икономическа криза. Никой днес няма интерес от Европа на две писти и затова ви призовавам да подкрепите доклада Coelho и да призовете Съвета да вземе положително решение.

  Véronique Mathieu (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, je souhaite tout d'abord féliciter mon collègue, Carlos Coelho, qui a fait sur ce rapport du travail d'orfèvre, et Dieu sait que c'était très compliqué.

La Bulgarie et la Roumanie ont fait des efforts considérables pour renforcer le contrôle de leurs frontières et elles y sont parvenues. Qu'il s'agisse de la coopération policière et judiciaire, de la protection des données, de la politique des visas et du contrôle des frontières aériennes, maritimes ou terrestres, les dernières évaluations sont très claires. Tous les critères techniques sont remplis. Nous ne pouvons que constater cet état de fait. La Bulgarie et la Roumanie sont à présent en mesure de mettre en œuvre cet acquis Schengen en termes techniques et en termes de personnel.

Par ailleurs, si aucun obstacle aujourd'hui n'empêche cet élargissement de l'Espace Schengen, nous notons qu'un certain nombre de recommandations ont été adressées à ces deux pays. J'espère que ces recommandations feront l'objet d'un suivi strict au regard notamment des frontières entre la Bulgarie, la Grèce et la Turquie car, comme vous le savez, la confiance mutuelle entre les États Schengen repose sur le plein respect, par ces États, de leurs obligations réciproques. Si l'une des parties ne respecte pas ses obligations, elle crée des appels d'air, c'est tout le système qui devient défaillant.

J'espère vivement qu'un accord sera obtenu au Conseil afin d'accueillir ces deux pays dans le cercle privilégié que forment les États Schengen. Et nous mesurons tous, dans cet hémicycle, la portée de ce type de décision pour les citoyens concernés. Encore bravo à M. Coelho pour son rapport.

  Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (S&D). - Consider că statele care şi-au exprimat rezerve privind aderarea României şi Bulgariei la spaţiul Schengen nu trebuie să uite că acest proces este o obligaţie juridică prevăzută prin Tratatul de aderare a României şi Bulgariei la Uniunea Europeană şi pe care toate aceste ţări şi-au asumat-o prin semnarea tratatului.

Ţările Uniunii Europene trebuie totodată să conştientizeze şi faptul că este în interesul lor ca România şi Bulgaria să adere la Schengen, pentru că ele îşi vor aduce propria contribuţie la securitatea tuturor statelor membre, extinderea spaţiului Schengen urmând să consolideze procesul de integrare în interiorul Uniunii Europene şi spaţiul comun de libertate, securitate şi justiţie.

Recunoaşterea de către misiunile de evaluare ale Uniunii Europene a bunei funcţionări, a conectării României şi Bulgariei la Sistemul de Informaţii Schengen, care funcţionează la cele mai înalte standarde de siguranţă, este un argument forte în acest sens. Prin această conexiune, toate ţările Uniunii vor avea acces la datele informatizate privind clandestinii care încearcă să ajungă în Europa şi va exista un control mai eficient al frontierelor externe ale Uniunii Europene.

  Hubert Pirker (PPE). - Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, Frau Ratsvorsitzende! Wir alle wissen, dass beide Länder – Rumänien und Bulgarien – sehr viel in die Sicherung der neuen Außengrenzen der Europäischen Union investiert haben. Sie erfüllen die Schengen-Standards. Objektive Überprüfungen sind alle zum selben Ergebnis gekommen: Die Voraussetzungen für einen Beitritt zum Schengen-Raum sind erfüllt. Unser Berichterstatter hat auch selbst vor Ort eine Überprüfung vorgenommen. Er hat objektiv bewertet und ist zum selben Schluss gekommen. Daher werden wir nicht nur dem Bericht zustimmen, sondern auch zustimmen, dass diese beiden Länder in den Schengen-Raum aufgenommen werden.

Der Schengen-Raum ist aber auch ein Vertrauensraum. Das heißt, es ist nicht mit einer einmaligen Aktion getan, sondern das Vertrauen muss auf Dauer erhalten werden, eine Investition in die Sicherheit muss auf Dauer gewährleistet sein. Das gilt übrigens für alle Staaten und nicht nur für diese beiden Staaten. Ich hoffe, dass dieses Vertrauen auf Dauer gesichert bleibt, damit wir die Reisefreiheit, die Freizügigkeit innerhalb der Europäischen Union als ganz großes Gut auch auf Dauer werden aufrechterhalten können.

Sorge bereitet mir allerdings eine Information, die mir heute zugegangen ist, die ich allerdings nicht verifizieren kann, wonach in Rumänien das Einkommen der Polizei um ein Drittel gekürzt werden soll. Wir alle wissen, dass eine Voraussetzung für Unbestechlichkeit, für seriöses Arbeiten bei der Polizei eine gut bezahlte Polizei ist. Ich hoffe daher, dass diese Information falsch ist und dass die Polizisten, die einen Dienst im Interesse dieser Länder und im Interesse der Sicherheit der gesamten Europäischen Union tun, auch in Zukunft gut bezahlt werden, so dass sie nicht anfällig für Bestechung sind.

  Αντιγόνη Παπαδοπούλου (S&D). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, σύμφωνα με την έκθεση Coelho, η Ρουμανία και η Βουλγαρία είναι, βάσει των αξιολογήσεων των εμπειρογνωμόνων, επαρκώς προετοιμασμένες για να εφαρμόσουν τις διατάξεις του κεκτημένου του Σένγκεν στα χερσαία, θαλάσσια και εναέρια σύνορά τους. Τηρούν τις βασικές προϋποθέσεις και τα ίδια κριτήρια με άλλα κράτη μέλη για πλήρη ένταξη στο χώρο Σένγκεν. Στηρίζοντας την πλήρη ένταξη των χωρών αυτών επιδεικνύουμε την κοινοτική μας αλληλεγγύη και στηρίζουμε την ευρωπαϊκή ιδέα και το θεμελιώδες δικαίωμα ελεύθερης μετακίνησης των πολιτών εντός της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης δημιουργώντας μια ισχυρότερη Ευρώπη.

Όσον αφορά τους προβληματισμούς που τίθενται στην έκθεση για τις αυξανόμενες μεταναστευτικές πιέσεις στην ευαίσθητη περιοχή Βουλγαρίας, Τουρκίας και Ελλάδας, αυτοί αποτελούν σύγχρονες προκλήσεις για την ίδια την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση και τα κράτη μέλη για να εξεύρουν ολιστικές πανευρωπαϊκές προσεγγίσεις ώστε να ενισχύσουν αποτελεσματικά τα εξωτερικά τους σύνορα, να ενισχύσουν την FRONTEX, να επιδείξουν τη δέουσα κοινοτική αλληλεγγύη και να στηρίξουν τα κράτη μέλη της Νότιας Ευρώπης που δέχονται τις ανάλογες μεταναστευτικές ροές. Ο επίκαιρος διάλογος για εκσυγχρονισμό της Συνθήκης Σένγκεν πρέπει να λάβει υπόψη τις πιο πάνω προκλήσεις.

  Ивайло Калфин (S&D). - Г-жо Комисар, участието в Шенгенското пространство означава поемане на отговорност. България и Румъния трябва да бъдат приети, за да поемат своята част от отговорността, заедно с останалите страни-членки за опазването на европейските граници.

Зная, че в много страни-членки днес темата за Шенген е чувствителна и предизвиква много обществени дебати. Тя получи ново значение през последните месеци с прилива на емигранти от Северна Африка. Факт е, че дори стари и големи страни-членки бяха затруднени да се справят с емигрантския поток.

Тези проблеми обаче няма да се решат, като не се допускат България и Румъния. Точно обратното - правилната реакция би трябвало да бъде укрепването на принципа на солидарността по отношение на емиграционната политика и ангажиране на всички страни-членки с нейното провеждане. Ние трябва не само да дадем възможност, но и да изискаме от България и Румъния да поемат своите отговорности и да изпълняват задълженията си на външните граници на Европейския съюз.

Комисар Malmström спомена за доверието. Това е точно така: правителствата на двете страни трябва да получат възможността да отговорят на предизвикателството и да докажат, че могат успешно да пазят европейските граници.

  Rovana Plumb (S&D). - Mr President, dear colleagues, one month ago I came to Brussels by car and at the Hungarian border I saw a huge queue of trucks. I recall counting 87. They were from Germany, Italy, Denmark and Hungary, loaded with goods which people were waiting for. They were delayed by a procedure which no longer applies in the rest of the European Union.

I would like to underline the importance of the accession of Romania and Bulgaria to this important space. It is important for the interests of the whole of Europe, because we have to rebuild the trust of our European citizens in the European Union and its institutions. You said, Madam Commissioner, that Schengen is an important gift for all European citizens, but it is also an important tool for not ‘less’ but for ‘more’ Europe.

I strongly believe that the European Parliament will adopt this report tomorrow and that the Council will act accordingly as soon as possible.

(Applause)

  Csaba Sógor (PPE). - A Coelho-jelentés megállapítja: mind Románia, mind Bulgária bizonyította, hogy kellően felkészült a schengeni vívmányok rendelkezéseinek megfelelő módon történő alkalmazására. A két ország schengeni övezethez történő csatlakozásának időpontja azonban még mindig bizonytalan, mivel egyes tagállamok úgy ítélik meg, hogy a különböző uniós intézmények ismételt megállapításai ellenére a csatlakozás zavarokat okozna a schengeni rendszerben. Elismerve a romániai igazságszolgáltatás hiányosságait, arra szeretném felhívni kollégáim és a Tanács figyelmét, hogy egy olyan kérdésben hivatottak dönteni, amely közvetlenül befolyásolja 30 millió uniós polgár mindennapi életét. A belső határellenőrzés megszüntetése az európai integráció óriási sikere. Román és bolgár állampolgárok jogosan várják el, hogy ők is teljes jogú uniós polgárként élvezhessék a schengeni vívmányok előnyeit. Határozott álláspontom, hogy egész Európa erősebb lenne, ha Bulgária és Románia még az idén csatlakozhatna a schengeni övezethez.

  Katarína Neveďalová (S&D) - Ja tu dnes stojím preto, aby som jednoznačne podporila vstup Rumunska a Bulharska do Schengenského priestoru.

Myslím si, že správa pána Coelha veľmi dokazuje tento názor, že tieto dve krajiny sú plne pripravené a splnili všetky podmienky. Bulharsko a Rumunsko sú členskými krajinami Európskej únie 4 roky, pre niektorých mojich kolegov, ak si to náhodou nevšimli, a niektoré ich otázky a ich rasistické poznámky ohľadne týchto krajín ma naozaj ako občana Európskej únie veľmi mrzia, pretože ak hovoríme o nezákonných prisťahovalcoch z týchto krajín, ktorí náhodou môžu nejakým spôsobom narušiť naše územia, tak hovoríme vlastne o členoch a občanoch Európskej únie, takže tam žiadni nezákonní prisťahovalci určite nie sú.

Myslím si, že kto splní podmienky, mal by dostať možnosť stať sa členom Schengenského priestoru a toto je základný princíp rovnosti, na ktorom stojí Európska únia, a kto ho spochybňuje, spochybňuje základné princípy Európskej únie.

  Филиз Хакъева Хюсменова (ALDE). - Г-жо Комисар, колеги, след приемането на България в Европейския съюз, влизането в Шенгенското пространство е следващото събитие, натоварено с очакване. То е очакване за справедливост.

След като България и Румъния се потрудиха и се справиха добре с техническите критерии за Шенген, забавянето на двете страни би било в разрез с правилата, утвърдени в Европейския съюз. Условията в Съюза са еднакви за всички. За нашите страни трябва да се прилагат същите критерии, които са действали и към другите държави-членки. Противното е дискриминация.

Проблеми с корупцията има в много държави-членки и цяла Европа трябва да се бори с нея, защото четирима от всеки пет европейски граждани считат корупцията за основен проблем в страната си. Европа има проблеми с увеличаването на емигрантите. По тези теми трябва да намерим общи решения, но придържайки се към ценностите ни и устоявайки принципите ни.

  Lena Kolarska-Bobińska (PPE). - Mówi się w Unii Europejskiej o kryzysie. Dotychczas mówiliśmy głównie o kryzysie ekonomicznym. Teraz to, co się dzieje wokół strefy Schengen, powoduje, że ludzie mówią, że nie tylko gospodarka, ale również kwestia podstawowych praw obywateli jest zagrożona. Dlatego po wydarzeniach wokół strefy Schengen we Włoszech, we Francji i potem w Danii uważam, że musimy wysłać bardzo klarowny sygnał, że nie, strefa Schengen nie jest zagrożona, nie chcemy jej zawieszenia, chcemy jej umocnienia i rozszerzania, że bardzo nam zależy na Europie otwartej.

Musimy pokazać, że umiemy przezwyciężać kryzysy. Bardzo dziękuję pani komisarz, że kiedy Dania chciała zacząć kontrole na granicach, tak szybko został wypuszczony komunikat dotyczący wspólnej polityki azylowej i imigracyjnej. Ale teraz musi być kolejny krok. Nie chodzi o to, żeby przegłosować tylko wejście Rumunii i Bułgarii do strefy Schengen. Chodzi o to, żeby to zrobić jak najszybciej.

  Ioan Mircea Paşcu (S&D). - Mr President, today the Schengen arrangements are coming under strong pressure. On the one hand, given the current wave of immigrants from North Africa, where the EU is encouraging democratic change, some states have asked for, and obtained, a temporary suspension of those arrangements. On the other hand, other states have decided, for reasons which would seem to reflect their own narrow interests towards the applicants, to exploit the fact that Romania and Bulgaria are not yet part of the area and to try to keep them out, once again.

Consequently, the rules of the game have been modified during the match, to the disadvantage of the two players. I personally support the positive conclusions of the report and praise the author for them but, although I can understand the political reasons for amending the recommendation – the basis of politics is after all compromise – I cannot ignore the fact that the new conditionality suggested might facilitate a subjective interpretation of it. I pray to God that I am wrong.

  Cristian Silviu Buşoi (ALDE). - Raportul pe care îl avem astăzi în faţă este unul obiectiv şi echitabil, subliniind faptul că România şi Bulgaria sunt pe deplin pregătite din punct de vedere tehnic să adere la spaţiul Schengen. Mai mult decât atât, aşa cum se arată în documentele de evaluare, în ceea ce priveşte anumite aspecte, România poate fi un exemplu de bune practici.

Am convingerea fermă că aderarea României şi Bulgariei la acest spaţiu nu va afecta negativ siguranţa frontierelor ci, dimpotrivă, va creşte încrederea europenilor în spaţiul Schengen. Se vorbeşte adesea de încredere reciprocă, s-a vorbit şi în această dezbatere. Cum putem vorbi însă de încredere reciprocă în momentul în care unele state membre schimbă regulile jocului din mers, introducând noi criterii pentru aderarea la Schengen?

Argumentele invocate astăzi împotriva aderării României şi Bulgariei nu au fost luate în considerare în cazul niciunui alt stat care a aderat la Schengen în trecut. Singurul lucru pe care îl aşteaptă românii şi bulgarii este un tratament egal faţă de celelalte state şi o evaluare obiectivă conform aceloraşi criterii. Parlamentul trebuie să transmită Consiliului un mesaj clar în acest sens şi să insiste asupra unei date concrete de aderare.

  Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE). - Mulţumesc dlui raportor care, iată, a elaborat un raport extrem de important, dar şi extrem de dificil în acelaşi timp, datorită faptului că avem poziţii controversate în acest sens, în ceea ce priveşte aderarea României şi Bulgariei la spaţiul Schengen.

Dragi colegi, vreau să mulţumesc şi tuturor celor care au înţeles că Uniunea Europeană se extinde pe baza valorilor şi, nu în ultimul rând, aderarea Bulgariei şi României la spaţiul Schengen face parte din asumarea răspunderii în 2004 de către cele două state pentru îndeplinirea condiţiilor, care s-au dovedit ulterior a fi îndeplinite prin rapoartele de evaluare ale Comisiei Europene.

Astăzi întrebam un coleg, deputat în Parlamentului European dintr-o ţară care are o poziţie controversată în ceea ce priveşte aderarea noastră la spaţiul Schengen, care ar fi motivul pentru care ei s-ar opune. Se pare că condiţiile tehnice sunt îndeplinite, însă politica controversată la nivel naţional ar fi motivul. Acest lucru nu poate fi acceptat.

  Νικόλαος Σαλαβράκος (EFD). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, θεωρώ ότι η αξιοπιστία της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης συνίσταται στην ενιαία εφαρμογή των κανόνων. Θεωρώ προφανές ότι η είσοδος της Ρουμανίας και της Βουλγαρίας στη Συνθήκη του Σένγκεν πρέπει να είναι αποδεκτή με την τήρηση των ιδίων κανόνων που ετηρήθησαν για την εισαγωγή και άλλων κρατών στη Συνθήκη αυτή.

Χαιρετίζω την έκθεση του κ. Coelho και την πρότασή του για την ανάγκη λήψης πρόσθετων μέτρων από τη Βουλγαρία για να προωθηθεί ένα ειδικό σχέδιο δράσης με την Ελλάδα και την Τουρκία λόγω του προβλήματος της παράνομης μετανάστευσης στα ελληνοβουλγαρικά σύνορα. Επαναλαμβάνω, κύριε Πρόεδρε, την πάγια θέση μου ότι πρέπει να αναθεωρηθεί η Συνθήκη Δουβλίνο ΙΙ και να λειτουργήσει το υπηρεσιακό γραφείο του FRONTEX στην Ελλάδα σε μόνιμη βάση.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI). - Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin! Das Schengener Abkommen, das wissen wir, darf nicht Massenzuwanderungen in die Sozialsysteme begünstigen, und die Reisefreiheit darf nicht zu einem Anstieg von Kriminalität und illegaler Zuwanderung führen. Der Kampf gegen das organisierte Verbrechen und die Verbesserung des Grenzschutzes müssen in der EU endlich einen höheren Stellenwert erhalten.

Wenn Italien mit seinem grenzpolizeilichen Sicherungssystem angeblich weit hinter dem üblichen Schengen-Standard zurückbleibt, steht zu befürchten, dass Neulinge wie Rumänien und Bulgarien auch bald in ihren Bemühungen nachlassen könnten.

Ein überhasteter Schengen-Beitritt ist also abzulehnen, da davon in erster Linie die organisierte Kriminalität aus Osteuropa oder sogar aus dem Kaukasusraum profitieren könnte. Bei der Bekämpfung von Asylmissständen hat sich meines Erachtens Dänemark als Vorreiter für EU-weite Regelungen erwiesen. Wohl deshalb hat die Kommission derart scharf auf die Ankündigung stärkerer Grenzkontrollen zur Bekämpfung steigender Kriminalität reagiert. Wir sollten uns klarmachen, dass Schengen zwar offene Binnengrenzen fordert, doch nur, wenn die Außengrenzen wirklich sicher sind.

  Wim van de Camp (PPE). - Voorzitter, iedereen die het dossier gevolgd heeft, weet dat de Schengentoetreding van Bulgarije en Roemenië in Nederland een buitengewoon moeilijk dossier is. Maar we hebben ook een Europese verantwoordelijkheid. In dat opzicht heb ik één vraag aan de commissaris: hoe past de handhaving van de Schengencriteria in de algemene bestrijding van het corruptiebeleid? Onlangs nog hoorden we over de grensbewaking tussen Bulgarije en Oekraïne dat er toch grensbewakers van Bulgarije waren omgekocht die aan de buitengrenzen mensen toelieten die niet in de Europese Unie thuishoren.

Tweede vraag, ook al door mijn collega Pirker aangekondigd: wat betekenen de grootscheepse politiebezuinigingen in Roemenië voor de handhaving van de Schengencriteria? Er is daar geen overleg met de vakbonden. Wat is de stand van zaken?

  Monika Smolková (S&D) - Bulharská republika a Rumunsko za 3 roky urobili všetky potrebné opatrenia, aby mohli byť súčasťou Schengenského priestoru. Kritéria a opatrenia pre zabezpečenie vonkajších hraníc nie sú jednoduché. Obidva štáty to zvládli a oprávnene majú byť členmi spoločného Schengenského priestoru, a to bez ohľadu na to, že v súčasnosti Európa čelí prívalu migrantov z Afriky.

Dôležité je, že hodnotiaci výbor, ktorého členovia osobne navštívili obidva štáty, konštatovali, že Rumunsko aj Bulharsko spĺňajú Schengenské požiadavky.

Som presvedčená, že poslanci Európskeho parlamentu predmetnú správu schvália a následne bude aj Radou jednoznačne prijatá. Prajem občanom Rumunska a Bulharskej republiky, aby zažili to nadšenie, aké som zažila aj ja osobne pri pílení hraničnej závory 22. 12. 2007, keď Slovensko sa stalo súčasťou Schengenu.

  Anneli Jäätteenmäki (ALDE). - Arvoisa puhemies, Schengen-alueen laajentumisessa on kysymys standardien täyttämisestä mutta myös luottamuksesta. Bulgarian ja Romanian hakemus on mielenkiintoiseen aikaan esillä, kun EU:ssa on alettu kyseenalaistaa vapaan liikkuvuuden periaatetta.

Aikaisemminkin sisärajatarkastuksia on toki tehty, mutta perusteena ovat silloin olleet tapahtumat, urheilutapahtumat, jalkapallon eurocup, maailmanmestaruuskisat tai jotkut huippukokoukset. Tälläkin hetkellä monet Schengen-maat tekevät kansallisen lainsäädäntönsä puitteissa poliisitarkastuksia muun muassa Schengenin alueen sisäisillä lennoilla.

Nyt keskustelu on kuitenkin erilaista. Nyt tarkastuksia ei tehtäisi enää tapahtumien vuoksi vaan ilmiön vuoksi. Asia on herkkä, koska siinä kyseenalaistetaan vapaa liikkuvuus ja... (puhemies keskeytti puhujan)

  Мария Неделчева (PPE). - Приветствам г-н Coelho за добре балансирания и безпристрастен доклад. Текстът е отражение на констатациите на докладчика на място при посещенията му в България и Румъния, но и израз на волята на Европейския парламент да остане верен на европейския дух. А именно: готовността за членство в Шенген се базира само и единствено на изпълнени технически критерии. Това е факт.

Техническата готовност, вследствие на добре свършената работа на България и Румъния, е положителната констатация, която днес и ние правим. Сега е важно чрез убедително мнозинство утре по време на вота да изпратим двоен сигнал.

Най-напред - послание към Съвета на министрите. Чрез достъп до информацията, чрез конструктивен диалог и зачитане мнението на Парламента, Съветът ще покаже не само добрата си воля за сътрудничество с нас, но и ще изпрати силен сигнал за една от институциите-пазители на европейски ценности и прозрачно сътрудничество и партньорство.

Силен сигнал и към българските и румънските граждани. На тях Европейският съюз казва: "Да" на равното третиране на всички страни-членки, "Да" на еднакви правила и "Да" на еднакво зачитане на постигнати резултати. Сигурна съм, че Съветът знае да се вслуша в положителните опити.

  Надежда Нейнски (PPE). - Първо искам да благодаря от своя страна на г-н Coelho за задълбочения доклад. Вземам думата, защото съм провокирана от очевидните опити през казуса за България и Румъния да бъдат решавани вътрешни проблеми, както и да се дава отговор на вътрешни страхове.

Премахването на визите за България и Румъния преди повече от десет години беше посрещнато със същите страхове. Но тогавашните европейски лидери проявиха кураж и далновидност и то в период, когато България и Румъния не бяха членки на Европейския съюз. И не сбъркаха.

Затова днес трябва да си спомним, че днешният дебат е дебат за правилата, които трябва да бъдат еднакви за всички, за равнопоставеността между държавите-членки, заложена в Европейския договор, и не на последно място за прокламираната толкова много европейска солидарност.

Сигурно Европа днес е по-различна от Европа преди двадесет години. Това никого не бива да го изненадва. Но ако има криза в Шенгенското пространство, то това е предмет на друг дебат. И ако той доведе до промяна на условията, те трябва да се променят за всички. Защото нека припомним, че огромни групи нелегални емигранти преминават ….

(Председателят прекъсна оратора)

  Метин Казак (ALDE). - Аз искам да поздравя докладчика г-н Coelho за изключително балансирания и положителен доклад. Той е резултат от общото настроение и общата визия, която има мнозинството от тук присъстващите колеги за това, че България и Румъния заслужават и трябва да бъдат част от Шенгенското пространство.

Разбира се, не бива да се прехвърлят проблеми от болната глава на здравата. Корупция и престъпност има във всички държави от Европейския съюз. Но борбата срещу тези явления би могла да се постигне, само когато се обединят усилията на всички 27 страни. И не бива да се прехвърлят отговорности, не бива да се прехвърлят тежести само върху една част от европейските страни.

България и Румъния доказаха, че могат да работят за обединена Европа. Аз мисля, че те ще бъдат достойни членове и на Шенгенското пространство.

  Traian Ungureanu (PPE). - Mr President, Bulgaria and Romania proved that they can guarantee the safety of the EU borders and this is fully – I repeat, fully – documented. By the way, the officers arrested in Romania and Bulgaria were arrested for corruption. Can anyone in this House claim that, for instance, a Dutch officer, a corrupt Dutch officer, would not be arrested for corruption in the Netherlands?

Secondly, Romania and Bulgaria did not compete to win the top prize of Transparency International. They entered the judicial contract and fulfilled all its criteria. Now if somebody is trying to change the rules of the game during the game, I think this might be illegal according to EU law and is, anyway, unfair according to common sense.

  Cecilia Malmström, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, thank you for this very useful debate. There is indeed a clear need to strengthen the trust and faith in Schengen by strengthening governance and by strengthening the evaluation mechanism – as the Commission proposed long before Christmas – with more involvement of independent experts and the Commission, and also increased transparency involving Parliament in all the steps that are taken there. We also need to become much better in immediately assisting Member States which are in difficulties for one or other reason, and we need to clarify under what circumstances border controls might be reintroduced.

All this needs to be done. We also need to fight against corruption and to increase the fight. Yes, there is corruption in Bulgaria and Romania, but there is corruption in every Member State, and the Commission proposed only yesterday a report on how we want to enforce the struggle against corruption. Some of you were kind enough to refer to this.

But in the meantime we must recognise the enormous efforts that have been made by Bulgaria and Romania in order to comply with the technical requirements of Schengen. They are very clear, they are very transparent. That is why these countries must be given a clear perspective, a clear framework on what is expected of them, so that Member States will feel ready to welcome them into the Schengen community.

  Enikő Győri, a Tanács soros elnöke. − Elnök úr! Biztos asszony! Tisztelt képviselő hölgyek és urak! Először is szeretném megköszönni azoknak az elismerést, akik itt pozitívan szóltak a magyar elnökség erőfeszítéseiről. Nagyon fontos volt számunkra, hogy végig az elmúlt öt hónap során éreztük az Önök támogatását. A mai vita is jól bemutatta, hogy egy erős többség van az Európai Parlamentben amellett, hogy Románia és Bulgária csatlakozhasson a schengeni övezethez. Azért, mert a házi feladatukat elvégezték.

Mi az elmúlt öt hónap során és a maradék előttünk álló időben is azért fogunk küzdeni, hogy ezt kimondjuk, a Tanács megállapítsa, hogy technikai standardok szempontjából Románia és Bulgária készen áll a schengeni övezethez történő csatlakozásra. Nagyon komoly munkát végzett mindkét ország. Maximális elismerést érdemelnek ezért a tevékenységükért. Elhangzott a vita során többek részéről, mind azok részéről, akik a csatlakozás mellett, mind azok részéről, akik az ellen, vagy annak halasztása mellett érveltek, hogy a kölcsönös bizalom a kulcsszó ebben a kérdésben. Ezzel magam is rendkívüli módon egyetértek, és a magyar elnökség végig a bizalomépítésre törekedett.

Milyen úton-módon próbáltuk ezt elérni? Egyrészt folyamatos párbeszédben álltunk mindkét érintett országgal. Figyeltük az erőfeszítéseiket, igyekeztük segíteni őket abban, hogy hogyan tudják jobban elismertetni ezeket az erőfeszítéseiket. Másrészt folyamatos kapcsolatban álltunk azokkal az országokkal, amelyek kételyeket fogalmaztak meg Románia és Bulgária csatlakozásával kapcsolatosan. És utána igyekeztünk azt is elérni, hogy ezek az országok a jelölt országokkal is fölvegyék a kapcsolatot és így, azt tudom mondani Önöknek, hogy egy állandó párbeszéd zajlott a színfalak mögött is annak érdekében, hogy a felek jobban értsék egymást és legyen kölcsönös bizalom. Ez a kölcsönös bizalom az, amire az Európai Unióban a politikáink legnagyobb része épül, e nélkül ezt az egyhangúságot igénylő politikai döntést a tagállamok nem tudják meghozni. Ez egy időigényes folyamat.

Nekünk hat hónap adatott meg erre. Ezalatt a hat hónap alatt, abban bízom, hogy eljutunk odáig, pontosan kettő nap múlva, hogy a tagállamok kimondják, igen, a házi feladat elvégeztetett. Mi segíthet a kölcsönös bizalom megteremtésében? Egyrészt ez a konzultációsorozat, amit említettem. Másrészt, hogy a két jelölt ország folytassa az erőfeszítéseit és folyamatosan bizonyítsa, hogy képes az Unió külső határainak a megvédésére. Az a magatartás, az az óriási fejlődés, amelyet a két ország bemutatott, ezt az ütemet, ezt a ritmust kell folytatni a közeljövőben is.

Másrész meggyőződésem, hogy segíthet, még ha hivatalosan nem is része a schengeni csatlakozás feltételeinek az az együttműködési és ellenőrzési mechanizmus, amelyről, erről a híres CVM-ről ugye, a Bizottságtól júliusban jön ki majd a jelentés, ami pontosan azokkal a kérdésekkel foglalkozik, amelyek ebben a vitában is elhangzottak. Szervezett bűnözés, korrupció elleni harc. Ezekről a Bizottság kiállít majd egy bizonyítványt. Mi végég harcoltunk azért, hogy ez ne legyen feltétel, de igenis a kölcsönös bizalomépítést mindenképpen segíteni fogja. Tehát egy pozitív CVM, meggyőződésem, hogy a pozitív politikai döntést a schengeni bővítésről is elő fogja segíteni.

Ha azt kérdezik tőlem, hogy úgy egyébként az Európai Unióban milyen a hangulat mindenféle befogadáshoz, akkor mindannyian tudjuk, hogy nehéz erre azt mondani, hogy az Európai Unió jelenleg igen befogadó hangulatát éli. Itt a vitában több olyan megjegyzés is elhangzott, amely pontosan ezt demonstrálja. Például volt, aki azt mondja, hogy a román-bolgár schengeni csatlakozással majd elindulnak a romák ebből a két országból. Szeretnék nagyon világos lenni, hogy a szabad mozgás egy uniós alapelv, hatályos, érvényes, erre épülnek politikáink, ezt a jogot most is élvezik a romániai, bulgáriai romák, és bárki más az egész Európai Unió összes sarkában. Bárki szabadon mehet, nincs vízumkötelezettség, aki szeretne, most is elindulhatna.

De én arra nagyon büszke vagyok, hogy magyar elnökség alatt megszületett az a romastratégia, amely egyértelműen meghatározza minden tagállamnak a kötelezettségét ezzel a nehéz sorsú közösséggel szemben. A problémát a gyökereinél kell kezelni, és ezáltal, hogyha jobb foglalkoztatási, oktatási lehetőséget biztosítunk számukra, ez a belső migrációs nyomás is csökkenni fog az Unión belül. És engedjenek meg még egy megjegyzést. Hogy ha bárki valamelyik alapvető szabadságjogunkat a leggyengébbektől tagadná meg, akkor azok mindannyiunk számára veszélybe kerülnének.

Végezetül, mivel sok szó esett arról is, hogy ugye folyik a schengeni rendszernek a felülvizsgálata, a magyar elnökség első perctől nagyon világosan kimondta, és valljuk ezt folyamatosan. Világosan el kell választani a schengeni bővítés ügyét attól, hogy egyébként a schengeni rendszert milyen felülvizsgálat alá vonjuk. Ne keverjük össze a kettőt. Meg kell őriznünk a szabad mozgás vívmányát, jobban kell használnunk a meglévő eszközöket, például a külső határok közös jobb ellenőrzésére. Ezért dolgozunk a Frontex-rendeleten, ezért dolgozunk azon, hogy az észak-afrikai migrációs nyomást csökkentsük a helyben kezeléssel, ezért van új szomszédságpolitika, ezért dolgozunk az Európai Beruházási Bank hitelezési kapacitásának a megnövelésén. Az utolsó pillanatban vagyunk. Már csak egy jogi probléma akadályozza az Önökkel való megállapodást a szokásos „delegated act” problematika, és csak ezután jön az, hogy vizsgáljuk fölül a schengeni rendszert, és nézzük meg, hogy hol kell azon pontosítani, javítani, mert látjuk, hogy igenis vannak vele problémák, de tartsuk be ezt a sorrendiséget.

Elnök úr! Tisztelt képviselő hölgyek és urak! Én abban bízom, hogy a schengeni problematika mind a bővítési, mind pedig a felülvizsgálati részében a Bel- és Igazságügyi Tanács két nap múlva esedékes ülése fontos döntéseket fog meghozni, de úgy, hogy garantáljuk polgáraink szabad mozgását.

  Carlos Coelho, relator. − Durante o debate um colega nosso disse que deixar entrar a Roménia e a Bulgária seria uma decisão infantil. Não estou nada de acordo. Acho que quando nós chegamos à idade adulta apreciamos os argumentos racionais e, se formos adultos bem formados, apreciamos os julgamentos racionais que são justos. E, para ser justos, não podemos contemporizar com double standards.

Aquilo que temos de perguntar é se a Bulgária e a Roménia cumprem ou não as condições para entrarem em Schengen. E, se cumprem, devem entrar. É legítimo que os seus cidadãos possam ser considerados cidadãos europeus de corpo inteiro. E os cidadãos da Bulgária e da Roménia não devem ser reféns de discursos populistas.

Relativamente a Schengen, nós sabemos que nem tudo está bem. Por isso, estamos a defender um novo sistema de avaliação de Schengen, para poder identificar os problemas, para poder responder com consequência e para poder tomar decisões se os problemas permanecerem. Mas a discussão sobre o novo sistema de avaliação de Schengen também não pode fazer dos cidadãos da Bulgária e da Roménia reféns desse processo legislativo. São processos diferentes, cada um com o seu ritmo.

Finalmente, Senhora Ministra Gyõri, muito obrigado pela referência simpática a Portugal e ao SIS One For All que facilitou a entrada de vários países e também do seu no espaço Schengen. Agradeço-lhe muito essa referência simpática e essa recordação. Queria que levasse ao Conselho o retrato deste debate e, sobretudo, como espero, o retrato da votação que faremos amanhã, que acredito vai ser muito expressiva, que o Conselho perceba que quando a assembleia que representa os cidadãos da Europa por uma tão grande maioria, como espero, diz sim à Bulgária e à Roménia, espero que o Conselho o faça no mais curto espaço possível de tempo.

  President. − Dear colleagues, I believe that on the basis of the overwhelming majority of positive comments and evaluations in this Chamber today by Members of Parliament, as well as the evaluations of the Commission and of Council, warm congratulations are due to Bulgaria and Romania.

The debate is closed.

The vote will take place on the 8th of June 2011.

Written statements (Rule 149)

  Elena Oana Antonescu (PPE), în scris. – România şi Bulgaria au dovedit încă o dată, dacă mai era nevoie, că sunt capabile să ia toate măsurile necesare astfel încât să garanteze un nivel substanţial de securitate pe graniţa de est a Uniunii Europene. Având în vedere efortul financiar, la nivel tehnic, instituţional şi administrativ depus de România pentru a face parte din Spaţiul Schengen, consider că evaluarea pozitivă din acest dosar trebuie să se regăsească, în perioada următoare în stabilirea unui termen clar de aderare la această zonă.

Schimbarea regulilor în timpul jocului, escaladarea retoricii eurosceptice şi apariţia temei separate legate de nevoia de a controla imigraţia ilegală nu trebuie amestecate. La nivel tehnic, România este mai pregătită ca niciodată pentru a fi jandarmul Uniunii Europene pe graniţa de est.

Iar dubla măsură în evaluarea unor parametri nu este o caracteristică demnă şi reprezentativă proiectului Europei unite. Sunt convinsă că, odată integrată în spaţiul Schengen, România va dovedi tuturor statelor membre seriozitate şi rigurozitate în garantarea siguranţei frontierei de est şi, mai mult decât atât, va convinge întreaga Europă, prin rezultatele obţinute, că a reuşit să crească securitatea întregului spaţiu comunitar.

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D), raštu. – Visiems Europos Sąjungos piliečiams viena iš svarbiausių ES vertybių yra judėjimo laisvė, o Šengeno erdvė ir išsiskiria tuo, kad panaikinama jai priklausančių šalių bendrų sienų kontrolė ir joje įgyvendinama asmenų judėjimo laisvė. Taigi, mes turime gerbti visų be išimties Europos Sąjungos piliečių teisę laisvai judėti. Jei Bulgarijai ir Rumunijai dėl prisijungimo prie Šengeno erdvės bus taikomi papildomi kriterijai nei kitoms ES valstybėms narėms, tai bus kuriami dvigubi standartai. Mes turime išvengti „dvigubais standartais“ grindžiamos sistemos, kuri būtų labai griežta šalims kandidatėms ir labai švelni šalims, kurios jau priklauso Šengeno erdvei. Šengeno teisyno taisyklės turi būti tokios pačios visoms šalims ir vertinimo sistema turi būti grindžiama nuostata, jog taisyklių turi būti laikomasi visą laiką, o ne tik įstojimo metu. Prie Šengeno erdvės prisijungusios šalys ir toliau turi laikytis visų saugumo reikalavimų, nes iš tikrųjų šios erdvės saugumas priklauso nuo valstybių narių griežtai ir veiksmingai vykdomos savo išorės sienų kontrolės ir nuo greito ir kokybiško keitimosi informacija naudojantis Šengeno informacine sistema. Taigi, siekiant panaikinti vidaus sienų kontrolę, būtina, kad valstybės narės kuo labiau bendradarbiautų ir imtųsi būtinų veiksmų, ypač didėjant migracijos srautams, nes Šengeno erdvės saugumas priklauso nuo kiekvienos valstybės narės vykdomos savo išorės sienų kontrolės griežtumo ir veiksmingumo.

  Kinga Göncz (S&D), írásban. – Az Európai Bizottság értékelése szerint Románia és Bulgária felkészült a schengeni csatlakozásra, így a Tanácsnak haladéktalanul meg kell hoznia a döntést a két tagállam felvételéről. Nem alkalmazhatunk kettős mércét, mert ez aláásná az Európai Unió hitelességét, és nem vezethetünk be újabb feltételeket sem. A schengeni csatlakozás, a határok lebontása az a lépés, amelyet az állampolgárok a legtöbbre értékelnek az Európai Unió vívmányai közül, az euró mellett ez az Európai Unió szimbóluma is. A mozgás szabadsága az egyik kulcsa a közös piac sikerességének is. Valóban szükség van az Unió külső határainak a biztonságos védelmére, azonban ennek a célnak az elérését nem a felkészült belépők kívül tartása, hanem a folyamatos, transzparens schengeni értékelési rendszer bevezetése jelenti, amely az egységes európai migrációs politikával és a belső szolidaritáson alapuló menekültpolitikával együtt jelent megoldást sok nyitott kérdésre. Ezert kérem, hogy a Tanács mielőbb lépjen előre ezeken a területeken.

  Iosif Matula (PPE), în scris. – România este pregătită pentru ridicarea controalelor interne la frontierele terestre, aeriene și maritime. În urma vizitelor efectuate pe teren și a evaluărilor tehnice, raportorul desemnat de Parlamentul European, dar și grupul de experți, au concluzionat că România îndeplinește toate criteriile pentru aderarea la spațiul Schengen, prevederi asumate prin tratatul de aderare din anul 2005. Au fost remediate toate deficiențele semnalate în trecut și, mai mult, la unele capitole, țara mea este dată ca exemplu de bune practici. În legătură cu obiecțiile ridicate de unii deputați, vreau să atrag atenția asupra faptului că acestea se referă la teme ce nu țin în mod direct de acquis-ul Schengen, neputând fi invocate drept rațiuni pentru blocarea accesului României la acest spațiu. Înțeleg preocupările anumitor colegi privind securizarea frontierelor externe ale UE, cu atât mai mult cu cât unele state pot fi considerate destinații preferate ale fluxurilor de emigranți. Reamintesc însă faptul că regulile europene trebuie să fie aceleași pentru toate statele membre, neputând fi schimbate în timpul jocului, deoarece aceasta ar însemna o discriminare a cetățenilor români. Având în vedere evaluarea tehnică pozitivă, Consiliul pentru Justiție și Afaceri Interne trebuie să dea undă verde integrării României în Schengen începând cu toamna acestui an.

  Franz Obermayr (NI), schriftlich. – Glaubt man dem vorliegenden Bericht, dann ist alles in bester Ordnung und Rumänien und Bulgarien haben bewiesen, dass sie ausreichend vorbereitet sind, alle Schengen-Bestimmungen anzuwenden. Kennt man allerdings den Europol Bericht OCTA 2011 zum Thema organisiertes Verbrechen, dann fragt man sich, ob der Ausschuss für bürgerliche Freiheiten blind und taub ist, und weshalb wir uns Europol überhaupt leisten, wenn wir seine Warnungen völlig ignorieren. Europol berichtet über Rumänien und Bulgarien als Transitrouten für Drogen-Schmuggel, Waffenschiebereien und Menschenhandel. Organisierte kriminelle Banden, zunehmend multiethnisch, agieren mit extremer Gewalt. Viele haben einen paramilitärischen Hintergrund. Diese Gruppen, und ich zitiere wörtlich aus dem Europol-Bericht „wollen ihren Einfluss in der EU erweitern und sehen ihre Chance im Schengen-Beitritt Bulgariens und Rumäniens“. Europol Direktor Rob Wainwright erklärt in einem Interview: „Der mögliche Schengen Beitritt Rumäniens und Bulgariens und die Visaliberalisierung für die Ukraine – all dies kann man als neue Chance für das organisierte Verbrechen betrachten.“ Wir haben die Pflicht gegenüber unseren Bürgern, die Warnungen von Europol ernst zu nehmen. Das Schengener Abkommen öffnet bereits jetzt dem organisierten Verbrechen und der illegalen Zuwanderung alle Türen nach Europa. Daher bedarf es erst einer dringenden Reparatur, bevor es ausgeweitet wird!

  Debora Serracchiani (S&D), per iscritto. – Ringrazio il relatore Coelho per questa ottima relazione che si inserisce all'interno del recente dibattito sull'applicazione del trattato di Schengen. L'esistenza di controlli efficaci alle frontiere esterne deve essere un fattore importante in quanto la sicurezza dell'area Schengen dipende dall'efficienza con cui ogni Stato membro effettua i controlli alle sue frontiere esterne e – benché alcuni problemi restino ancora rimasti irrisolti – la Romania e la Bulgaria hanno dimostrato di essere sufficientemente preparate ad applicare tutte le disposizioni dell'acquis di Schengen. Si è discusso molto dell'effettiva efficienza degli apparati statali di questi due paesi nonché sul loro livello di corruzione, tuttavia ritengo che l'applicazione di Schengen dovrebbe prescindere da questo, dato che – come è avvenuto già per gli altri Stati membri – è sufficiente basarsi solo sull'efficienza dei controlli alle frontiere e sulla preparazione dei corpi di polizia. L'aggiunta di altri requisiti creerebbe un precedente discriminatorio che non si è avuto neppure dopo il grande allargamento del 2007.

  Adrian Severin (NI), in writing. – The real question is whether all EU citizens, irrespective of their national origin, are to be treated equally and granted equal access to EU fundamental rights. Against the background of the global economic crisis, the EU is experiencing a crisis of democracy and solidarity. We are seeing the renationalisation of Europe. In this context, the debate on Romania’s and Bulgaria’s accession to the Schengen Area has provoked stark reactions motivated by pseudo-arguments and double standards.

This is not about technical aspects, nor about the security of the EU’s external borders, nor yet about migration or efficiency of the judiciary. It is a European political problem of a strategic character. It is about EU cohesion. To speak about a lack of preparation at our eastern borders when seeing the permeability of our southern borders is simply hilarious. To promote national political agendas at the expense of the aspirations of EU citizens of Bulgarian and Romanian origin is outrageous. Indeed, we need better defended borders, a better migration policy, better administrative capacity and honest public servants. But this requires more and not less Europe. One right step in this direction is the immediate enlargement of the Schengen Area to include Romania and Bulgaria.

  Кристиан Вигенин (S&D), in writing. – Можем категорично да кажем, че сама по себе си България, или по-конкретно българските граждани не представляват заплаха - нито пряка, нито потенциална - за безопасността, реда и спокойствието в рамките на Шенген. Страната ни, макар и със закъснение, е изпълнила всички технически изисквания, свързани с контрола по външните граници.

Налице е обаче висока степен на недоверие, че в практическото прилагане на мерките за контрол могат да възникнат сериозни пробойни. Това недоверие личи в докладите на Европейската комисия относно механизма за сътрудничество и проверка, в докладите на Европол, в поредицата изявления на висши представители на различни страни членки. При този невиждан ръст на контрабандата и на сивата икономика, при наличието на корупция, при несправянето с организираната престъпност няма защо да се сърдим, че пред нашето членство възникват допълнителни пречки.

Европейският парламент трябва да заеме принципна позиция, а тя е, че не може правилата на играта да се променят в движение. Според формалните изисквания България и Румъния са готови за членството в Шенгенското пространство и Европейският съвет трябва да вземе възможно най-скоро положително решение. Разчитам докладът на г-н Coelho да бъде одобрен с голямо мнозинство, с което да даде ясен политически сигнал към страните членки.

(The sitting was suspended for a few moments)

IN THE CHAIR: EDWARD McMILLAN-SCOTT
Vice-President

16. Ħin tal-mistoqsijiet (mistoqsijiet lill-Kummissjoni)

  President. − The next item is Question Time (B7-0407/2011).

The following questions are addressed to the Commission.

Part one

Question 6 by Mairead McGuinness, which has been taken over by Jim Higgins (H-000206/11)

Subject: Quality food schemes

In February 2011 the Commission registered its 1000th quality food name. It is clear; however, that the number of applications to register under the protected geographical indication (PGI), protected designation of origin (PDO) and traditional specialities guaranteed (TSG) quality food schemes varies considerably from one Member State to another. Why does the Commission think there are such disparities between Member States? Can the Commission comment on the views expressed by some food producers that the registration process is long and bureaucratic and therefore discourages applicants? How can the registration process be made more user-friendly?

Can the Commission provide information on consumer awareness of the quality food schemes? How can recognition of the PDO, PGI and TSG labels be improved and made more relevant to consumers, in particular in Member States that have few registered products?

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, when the European system of protected designations of origin (PDOs), protected geographical indications (PGIs) and traditional specialities guaranteed (TSGs) was set up, equivalent systems already existed in some Member States.

The concept of geographical indications was thus familiar and names had already been registered at national level. This explains why there are many registered names in certain Member States. Nevertheless, growing interest in the system has been observed in many Member States.

The procedure for registering a name generally takes several years. This is because the applicant group has to draw up specifications and have them approved at national level and then by the Commission. The single document summary of the specifications for geographical indications or the specifications themselves for traditional specialties are then published in the Official Journal of the European Union in order to allow objections to be made.

The objection period lasts six months. If there are no objections, the name may be registered. If an objection is lodged, the interested parties have six months to reach agreement. If no agreement is reached, the Commission issues a decision that is voted on by the Standing Committee. This procedure explains the time required for registration to take place. On the other hand, once a name has been registered, it enjoys strong protection and international recognition and benefits from communication tools, particularly use of the logo.

The Commission is aware of the need to speed up the registration procedures. Proposals to this end have been made in the context of the Quality Package, including reducing the time for the Commission to scrutinise applications received to six months and reducing the objection period to two months.

Awareness of the system varies greatly from country to country, often depending on the number of registered names in a country. The Commission makes funds for promoting quality products available to operators in order to raise consumer awareness of the system.

  Jim Higgins (PPE), deputising for the author. – Mr President, I want to thank the Commission for its reply. I think the labelling of food produce is something that is to be commended. But the Commissioner has put his finger on it in relation to a number of issues: first of all the fact that there are some diverse standards; secondly, the long time that it takes from the time of application to actual registration. If ever there was an example of bureaucracy at European level, this surely is it.

In my country, it takes the Department of Agriculture five years from the time that you actually make an application until you are registered. Given the crisis in Germany, we need more food labelling, we need more standards; we need more quality control. So I would urge the Commission that we should have a much tighter time frame.

  Barbara Matera (PPE). - Signor Presidente, mi aggancio al discorso del quality food.

L'Italia, nelle ultime due settimane, ha subito un danno economico pari a 20 milioni di euro per la mancata vendita di ortaggi – in particolar modo cetrioli – a causa del batterio EHEC. Si parla di 4,4 milioni di euro solo a seguito della sospensione delle importazioni dalla Russia.

Tutto l'intero settore ortofrutticolo è in ginocchio. Chiedo quindi alla Commissione quali misure intende prendere a difesa del mercato ortofrutticolo e quali inoltre per evitare che si diffondano notizie incerte sulle origini del batterio EHEC, che sta colpendo tutto il settore ortofrutticolo, gettando nel panico intere popolazioni. Si parla di quality food!

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − My response to the first question is that the Commission is aware of the need to speed up the legislation procedures. Proposals to this end have been made in the context of the Quality Package, which I referred to in my first answer.

The Commission’s proposals include reducing the time for scrutinising the application it receives to six months and also reducing the objection period to two months. If Parliament and the Council decide to adopt the Commission’s proposals, almost one year – or ten months at least – will be saved for the majority of applications.

As for the other question, there was a Health Council yesterday which dealt with the issue. We shall follow up on it at a later stage while taking the today’s extraordinary Agriculture Council into account. I am not in a position at this moment to give further details but we will definitely follow up on it.

  Marian Harkin (ALDE). - Mr President, I will be very brief. I apologise that I did not get here in time for the Commissioner’s answer at the beginning. I suppose my question refers to the fact that there is a low level of awareness among producers in many countries, and in some countries it is very low. Is the Commission taking any steps to try and increase that level of awareness, not just amongst consumers but amongst producers?

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, awareness of the system varies greatly from country to country, and the number of registered names in a given country also varies. European funds for promotion are available to operators to promote quality products, with more than EUR 19 million being allocated to fifteen promotion programmes between 2006 and 2010.

Moreover, the Commission wishes to re-examine the policy for promoting agricultural products and a Green Paper is planned for this summer. This will be an opportunity to discuss the objectives of this policy once again, and to examine expectations with regard to promotion and quality of products and dissemination of information in this context.

  President. − Question 7 by Jim Higgins (H-000199/11)

Subject: Youth unemployment

The economic crisis has devastated employment levels among young graduates. In November last year, unemployment among young people reached 21% across the EU.

Youth unemployment stands at less than 10% in only three countries — Germany, the Netherlands and Austria. Elsewhere it is dramatic: in the Baltic States, Ireland, Greece and Slovakia, unemployment among young people stands at 30% or above. And in Spain, it is more than 40%.

What steps does the Commissioner intend to take to prevent an exodus of young people from Europe?

How does the Commissioner intend to emulate the best practices of Germany, the Netherlands and Austria on an EU-wide scale?

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − High unemployment among young people is one of the Commission’s top priorities and is one of my foremost personal concerns. Lack of jobs could conceivably generate an exodus of young people from Europe, but the vast majority of young people who change countries to find work will probably choose to move to another Member State. That is why it is so important to promote freedom of movement for workers within the Union.

It offers a solution in regions where unemployment among young people is high, given the labour shortages in certain sectors in some Member States that are evident from the Commission’s new quarterly vacancy monitor. Promoting mobility among young people within the EU is one of the aims of the Europe 2020 flagship initiative: Youth on the Move. It outlines a wide range of measures to reduce the current high youth unemployment.

Let me give you a few examples. Youth labour mobility will be promoted in particular through a new EU job mobility scheme, Your First EURES Job, which was launched with the support of this House and the Council. Its aim is to help young people find a job on the European labour market and assist employers in recruiting young European mobile workers.

Your First EURES Job will provide advisory, job search, recruitment and financial support amounting on average to EUR 1 000 for more than 2 000 young job seekers and companies willing to recruit young EU workers.

The Commission also encourages the Member States to introduce a youth guarantee to ensure that all young people are in further education, training or work within four months of finishing their general education. In Germany, Austria and the Netherlands, as the Honourable Member rightly points out, youth unemployment rates are relatively low. This is due at least in part to the comprehensive vocational education and training systems in those Member States, which facilitate young people’s labour market integration.

The Bruges Communiqué of December 2010 on enhanced European Cooperation in Vocational Education and Training for the period 2011–2020 is an important European achievement in this area. It outlines objectives and identifies the action needed to improve the quality of vocational training and make it more accessible and relevant to the needs of the labour market.

I would also, as another element to my reply, like to highlight the Youth at Work campaign. Launched in Budapest on 29 April, Youth at Work will bring together small and medium-sized enterprises and young job seekers and will provide information and support to inspire young people to set up their own businesses. Over 30 events are planned between now and the end of 2012 when this campaign will end.

Honourable Members, I hope that the avenues and initiatives I have indicated will be followed up with effective action within the Member States.

  Jim Higgins (PPE). - The figures are frightening: the Baltic States, Ireland, Greece and Slovakia, 30%; Spain, 40%; in your own country, Mr President, one million people under 25 with no prospects of a job. In Italy, 76% of youngsters say they are going to emigrate. I would love to think that youth mobility within Europe is the answer, but most of the countries in Europe, barring the three you mentioned, have unemployment problems.

What we really need is to focus on the fact that Europe has an ageing population. We cannot afford this brain drain. These are highly educated, highly motivated young people and what we need is to hold them, to keep them, to introduce the kind of imaginative schemes that you have already mentioned in the three Member States, Germany, the Netherlands and Austria. I welcome the fact that the Commission is recommending initiatives to the Member States. I think that in some of the Member States, however, we need some financial assistance in terms of training people and keeping them at home, because I think that, rather than feeding the jobs market within the EU, they will be feeding the job markets of Australia and other countries further afield.

  Janusz Władysław Zemke (S&D). Moje pytanie do komisarza jest nieco innego typu. Komisarz mówił o różnych działaniach, które mają powodować, że bezrobocie będzie się zmniejszało, ale nie powiedział on ani jednego słowa o tym, że jedną z ważnych i bardziej skutecznych ścieżek mogłoby być to, żeby poszczególne państwa wzajemnie brały pod uwagę kwalifikacje zdobyte w innych państwach. Dzisiaj młody człowiek często szuka pracy za granicą i musi tam zdawać ponownie te same egzaminy. Co się z tym będzie działo?

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D). - Rata ridicată a şomajului înseamnă că investiţiile statelor membre efectuate pentru educaţia tinerilor se pierd în momentul în care aceştia sunt obligaţi să emigreze dintr-un stat membru în afara Uniunii Europene. Vreau să vă întreb, domnule comisar, având în vedere că rata abandonului şcolar a ajuns la 16%, chiar la 40% în Portugalia, cum va arăta rata şomajului în rândul tinerilor în 15-20 de ani şi ce măsuri luaţi pentru a nu se întâmpla acest lucru?

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − In my answer I highlighted the measures that have already been outlined in Europe 2020 and already they are making their way towards practice in various Member States through effective Commission programmes.

It is also true that this is more of a horizontal issue for the Commission, and there are in other EU initiatives very relevant proposals including, for example, the country-specific recommendations which we just published today, very important references to the need to reform education policies and improve the performance of education and training systems in various Member States in order to better connect the substance of education and training with the needs of the labour market.

This can qualitatively improve the employment opportunities of young people in a number of Member States, including Spain and others where the situation is the most difficult and where the reform of the education system was either delayed or ignored in the recent period.

It is also important to highlight the Single Market Act which, among other initiatives, aims at promoting the recognition of qualifications and diplomas, thus making the European labour market more transparent and more efficient, highlighting and raising more opportunities than in the past.

It is also important to stress that many actions are supported by the financial instruments of the EU, especially in this context, the European Social Fund, but I should also mention the new Microfinance Facility that provides programmes, and in the latter case, entrepreneurship and self-employment opportunities, and I think these dimensions have to be reflected in the forthcoming MFF proposal as well. I trust that the Parliament will be supportive in this area within the MFF.

  President. − Question 8 by Georgios Papanikolaou (H-000194/11)

Subject: Migration and the Schengen Area

The principle of freedom of movement in the Schengen Area is in danger of being compromised by the North African crisis, as reflected in talks between Italy and France concerning the relocation of migrants coming chiefly from Tunisia and the reintroduction of border controls. This is also confirmed by statements issued by French officials on the need to re-examine certain provisions of the Schengen Agreement.

What action does the Commission intend to take to prevent freedom of movement in the Schengen Area, a cornerstone of European unification, being compromised?

Given that the introduction of the Schengen Area has shifted responsibility for EU external border controls onto a limited number of Member States, how will the Commission persuade Member States as a whole to show greater and more effective solidarity in the face of a mass influx of migrants and overcome their manifest reluctance to assume their responsibilities in this respect, so as to ensure that the burden is fairly shared?

  Cecilia Malmström, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, the question that has been raised by Mr Papanikolaou addresses – as do later questions – the different angles and perspectives of Schengen, the migratory crisis and the pressure put on Schengen. So let me first answer Mr Papanikolaou.

Earlier, we discussed Mr Coelho’s report and the need to safeguard Schengen as one of the most beautiful achievements of the European Union. The right to move freely is indeed a very important embodiment of the European project. More than 1.25 billion cross-border journeys are made by tourists within the EU each year. Free movement is also a great boost and a benefit for the internal market, so safeguarding this achievement is key to the Commission and an absolute priority for me personally.

Let me emphasise once again that the Commission’s approach is to reinforce Schengen, to improve the evaluation – as we already proposed before Christmas – to clarify the rules, to identify the tools, to assist Member States in need and, possibly, to introduce a mechanism which would bring a coordinated Community-based response to exceptional situations, for instance when a Member State fails to control its internal borders.

The Commission’s main objective is to have a preventive approach. The proposed changes to strengthen the monitoring mechanism, which is designed to maintain mutual trust between the Member States and their capacity to apply effectively and efficiently the accompanying measures, will make it possible to maintain an area without borders.

This will be done through more on-the-spot visits to check the application of the Schengen acquis to Member States. These controls could lead to recommendations to the Member States for immediate actions and deadlines for implementing them. Increased trust among Member States will also reduce the recourse by Member States to unilateral initiatives to temporarily reintroduce internal borders or to intensify police checks at internal border zones.

The spirit of Schengen is a spirit of trust and solidarity. It is important that the EU show concrete solidarity to the Member States most affected by large-scale inflows of migrants and persons in need of international protection. This solidarity can take different forms by assisting, for instance, where the external border is under pressure. Frontex plays a key role here and we have shown in the recent RABIT intervention at the Greek-Turkish border, and in the joint naval operation Hermes, that Member States are ready to assist other Member States.

We must also foster daily cooperation between national authorities in the field of border surveillance. This is the purpose of the European border surveillance system (EUROSUR), which has been progressively developed since 2008 and for which the Commission will present a legislative proposal during this year.

We can also show solidarity by showing financial solidarity. There is a framework programme this year that takes into consideration the management of migration flows. We have a financial mechanism to improve the management of these flows at the European level and to strengthen the solidarity between Member States. Of course, we now have a large consultation process and we are under budgetary restraints, but you can count on me to ensure that there will still be money under this fund for the future as well.

Those Member States most exposed to migratory pressures and located at the external borders of the EU must receive adequate financial compensation for the tasks they are carrying out in the interests of the Schengen area as a whole – this by fair burden-sharing in order to support those Member States affected by large inflows of persons in need of international protection.

It must be clear that any decision on the relocation of irregular migrants and beneficiaries of international protection depends on the Council and on the willingness of the Member States. The Member States have not yet expressed any support for such an approach on a general basis with, however, one notable exception – the pilot project on relocation to other Member States for persons who have received international protection on Malta. In order to give a timely follow-up to this, I organised a pledging conference a month ago. I am pleased to say that over 300 places were made available from Member States and associated countries. Others will hopefully be offered in the future as well. This is a sign of concrete solidarity. I want to thank those countries and I hope that they can also contribute in the future.

  Γεώργιος Παπανικολάου (PPE). - Κυρία Επίτροπε, σας ευχαριστώ πολύ. Συμφωνώ απολύτως μαζί σας, όπως νομίζω ότι συμφωνεί και το Κοινοβούλιό μας. Αυτό φάνηκε άλλωστε και προηγουμένως στη συζήτηση για την ένταξη της Βουλγαρίας και της Ρουμανίας. Την ίδια στιγμή όμως - το γνωρίζετε καλά - στο Συμβούλιο υπάρχει ζήτημα ομοφωνίας για το θέμα της Βουλγαρίας και της Ρουμανίας.

Μιλήσατε για εμπιστοσύνη. Ναι, θέλουμε να οικοδομούμε συνεχώς την εμπιστοσύνη. Η Δανία, όμως, με την επιλογή που έχει κάνει, αποδέχεται τη δήλωσή σας αυτή;

Τοποθετηθήκατε επίσης και στο θέμα του νέου μηχανισμού. Ενόψει και της Συνόδου Κορυφής η συζήτηση αυτή για το μηχανισμό ενισχύει την αντίληψη για την εμπιστοσύνη - θυμίζω ότι ούτως ή άλλως στο άρθρο 23 του Κώδικα Σένγκεν προβλέπεται μηχανισμός για εξαιρετικές περιστάσεις - ·ή μήπως τελικά προκαλεί νέα ανησυχία στα κράτη μέλη και σε όσα κράτη βρίσκονται στο χώρο Σένγκεν;

  Giovanni La Via (PPE). - Signora Commissario, la Commissione europea formulerà, entro il prossimo mese, la proposta del nuovo quadro finanziario pluriennale relativo al periodo 2014-2020.

Quali azioni – oltre a FRONTEX, che ha già citato – la Commissione europea intende finanziare per supportare gli Stati membri maggiormente colpiti dalle richieste di asilo e soprattutto per prevenire in futuro l'accentuarsi di flussi migratori di tipo economico? In altri termini, quali azioni intende finanziare, attraverso le politiche di vicinato mediterranee, per far sì che si prevengano flussi migratori consistenti nei prossimi mesi e anni?

  Cecilia Malmström, Member of the Commission. − Trust can never be commanded, it has to be deserved and earned. We can only try to improve the trust between Member States by having a more vigorous governance over Schengen; to make sure that we evaluate, not by the peer-review system we have today but through an independent mechanism on a European communitarian basis with the involvement of the European Union in order to identify problems or weaknesses in the Schengen system very early on and also make sure that we have tools at our disposal to immediately assist Member States that are in difficulty. Hopefully that should allow us to increase the trust.

In answer to the other honourable Member, we are now negotiating the framework, so I am not in a position to give you any figures. However, as we do today, we are seeking to increase the independence and the resources of Frontex. We are also seeking to facilitate Member States’ access to the various funds under migration by simplifying and by making it easier, when it comes to borders, asylum, integration, etc.

Of course we need to distinguish between irregular migrants and migrants in need of international protection. As you know, the Council and Parliament are now negotiating to have the resettlement programme in place, and this is also an area where the European Commission could look at possibilities for financing quite a lot of it. In relation to our immediate neighbourhood across the Mediterranean, in the mobility partnerships: we are looking to include all aspects of irregular, legal and international protection asylum under migration.

All this demands a lot of political will and some extra resources, and I will do my best to fight to make sure that there are resources under my responsibility.

Part two

  President. − Question 9 by Bernd Posselt (H-000196/11)

Subject: Visa scheme for Kosovo

What is the Commission’s assessment of the current state of progress towards visa liberalisation for Kosovo (visa facilitation scheme), and what is the timetable for action on this urgent matter?

  Cecilia Malmström, Member of the Commission. − The Commission is currently constantly monitoring all the steps taken by the Kosovo authorities to fulfil the conditions for the launching of the visa liberalisation dialogue. We have said all the time that there are two key issues remaining in order to engage in such a dialogue: sound readmission, and reintegration policies in line with the EU standards.

Implementation of the law on readmission and of the bilateral readmission agreements with the EU Member States needs to continue in a good manner. There have been two assessment missions in Kosovo – in June last year and in December last year – to assess the state of play in Kosovo regarding the integration process. These have shown that there is a lot of progress, but there are still some things to be done, and we are in dialogue with the Kosovo Government in order to help and assist them to do these last things. There must also be progress at the municipal level.

We receive regular updates from Kosovo, and I also meet with the responsible ministers, and once all these elements are in place we are ready to launch a new mission to go there and see what steps can be taken in order to open the visa liberalisation dialogue. We are not there yet, but there is a lot of progress in Kosovo and we are working very closely with the government in order to support them and help them make progress.

  Bernd Posselt (PPE). - Frau Kommissarin, vielen Dank für die sehr gute Antwort. Ich möchte nur noch fragen, ob Sie es für möglich halten, dass diese Mission noch dieses Jahr nach Kosovo geht, oder können Sie das überhaupt nicht abschätzen? Wäre es nicht wichtig, dass ein so kleines Land, das wir mit großem Aufwand unterstützen, auch seinen jungen Menschen die Möglichkeit gibt, Europa wirklich kennenzulernen? Es ist doch völlig kontraproduktiv, die Menschen dort einzusperren. Ich weiß, dass Sie damit sympathisieren, dass wir die Grenzen öffnen. Aber sehen Sie es als realistisch an, dass diese Mission vielleicht noch unter der polnischen Präsidentschaft stattfindet?

  Cecilia Malmström, Member of the Commission. − Mr Posselt, I fully share your ambition to do everything to prevent Kosovo from becoming an isolated little island in this region, in which we are trying remove visa barriers one by one. We are certainly not going to abandon Kosovo. The timing is very much in the hands of Kosovo’s Government. We are working with the Kosovans, and as soon as they inform us that they have done everything we asked them to do, they can come to us and we will send that mission. It is very much in their hands, but we have no time limits, we can come whenever they call and whenever reasonable progress has been made.

  President. − Question 10 by Gay Mitchell (H-000205/11)

Subject: Countering the use of the internet by criminals

The rapid growth of technology, and in particular the internet, is making criminal organisations more and more difficult to penetrate. Criminals are now communicating with one another via the internet, rather than by mobile phone, which had been the method of choice until recently.

How does the Commission propose to combat the use of the internet by criminal gangs across Europe?

  Cecilia Malmström, Member of the Commission. − Cybercrime is indeed a growing menace. It is going increasingly mobile, and recent threat analysis suggests that organised crime is getting increasingly involved in criminal activities in cyberspace. So the Commission is pursuing various activities in the field to improve overall cybersecurity and to prevent and to tackle cybercrime.

At the policy level, specific objectives and roadmaps have been set in recent policy documents. We have the European digital agenda and the European internal security strategy. In that strategy cybercrime is clearly identified as one of the priorities for us to work on for the future.

Last year, we also tabled two legislative proposals: one in March, a directive on child online exploitation, was adopted by the Commission and I know it is now being negotiated, and also a proposal for directives on attacks against information cybersystems. That was last September; it is also being negotiated between you and the Council, and I know that a lot of progress has been made.

This, of course, strives to adopt European legislation in the face of recent threats in cyberspace. We have in particular included provisions to penalise the use of tools such as malicious code that are used to create so-called botnets, which have been used by criminals.

International cooperation is also key to fighting cybercrime and that is why we are engaging with international partners on these issues. We have the working group between the EU and the United States, created last November, where we have had a series of different expert meetings. We will report on progress for the next EU-US summit in November this year. We also plan to set up a cybercentre where we could coordinate at European level the efforts that are being made in the different Member States.

Cybercrime is directly influenced by rapid technological advances, quickly emerging in new business models, but also by the ability of law enforcement and wider society to come to terms with such fluid environments as cyberspace. Cybercrime is becoming a volume crime. It is for this reason that we need jointly to get our systems in order and share intelligence in order to attack this issue. If there is reason to believe that organised crime groups are behind more and more crimes on the internet, the same investigative measures applied in the detection and prosecution of offline organised crime should be applied, coupled of course with an improved coordination mechanism.

Finally, ten years ago the Council of Europe Convention – the Budapest Convention – on Cybercrime was adopted. Ten years later, not all the Member States have signed and ratified that convention. We are pushing, by all means, for ratification by the end of the year, the tenth anniversary, because it would prove an important commitment by all Member States to fighting these crimes.

  Gay Mitchell (PPE). - Thank you for your reply, Commissioner. I understand that there are people bragging and conducting so-called criminal business on the internet, and that gang business includes drug trafficking, human trafficking, prostitution, weapons trafficking, smuggling illegal immigrants across borders, even murder, theft, fraud, armed robbery and much more. This is all being done on Facebook, using the system, and it is being bragged about. Surely it is possible for Europol and the service providers – perhaps even coordinated by the Commission – to identify some of these people. The more they feel that they are immune, the more their numbers will grow.

I would ask the Commissioner to consider taking some special steps to coordinate a response to what some of these people are doing on the internet.

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D). - Numărul, amploarea şi gravitatea atacurilor informatice au crescut în ultimii ani. Victimele sunt simplii cetăţeni, companii sau chiar instituţii publice, locale, naţionale sau europene. Uniunea trebuie să-şi întărească strategia privind lupta împotriva criminalităţii informatice. Aş dori să vă întreb, în afara cadrului legislativ şi a extinderii mandatului ENISA, ce măsuri are în vedere Comisia pentru a-şi întări un rol de lider în asigurarea securităţii informatice?

  Cecilia Malmström, Member of the Commission. − Yes indeed, ordinary crime is also now being carried out on the internet because it is a useful tool, but there are also new kinds of crime that are facilitated by the internet, such as identity fraud or the plundering of bank accounts or suchlike.

You can be assured that we follow this very closely. Just recently, Europol made some quite remarkable attacks on some of these gangs, identifying cross-border European gangs involved in child pornography, for instance, but also in trafficking and drugs, so there are a lot of experts at Europol dealing with this.

Of course we need to do more. We need to connect all the alert centres in the European Union, to share statistics, to share information and also to work more together with private companies in order to identify the solutions to this to a certain extent. We are also planning – and conducting a feasibility study right now – to set up a European cybercentre by 2013 to coordinate this work, to work as an alert centre and to support the different national cybercentres that already exist. We are following this very closely, and Europol, together with the national authorities, is doing its utmost to try to combat this increasing crime.

  President. − Question 11 by Sarah Ludford (H-000215/11)

Subject: Schengen evaluations and the possible suspension mechanism

There is a danger that Commission proposals for governance of the Schengen zone are seen to be prioritising European procedure over European substance. The Commission is suggesting a dominant lead for itself in a revised Schengen evaluation process, and Parliament proposes to modify that in order to allow a balance between the role of European and national experts. In relation to Schengen suspension, the Commission is proposing an EU mechanism instead of Member State decision, but this has been widely (mis)interpreted to mean that the reintroduction of internal borders will actually be easier in practice. Since it may well prove politically too difficult to implement a Community method for both evaluations and suspension, however worthwhile, would it not be better to make European substance the priority by launching infringement proceedings when necessary against Member States in breach of Schengen rules?

Question 12 by Maria Eleni Koppa (H-000216/11)

Subject: Implementation of the Schengen Agreement

Freedom of movement for European citizens unimpeded by internal borders following the creation of the Schengen Area is one of the basic principles of the EU and the cornerstone of European integration. The reintroduction of border controls within the EU does not provide a solution to migration and will on the contrary make life more difficult for European citizens and lead to a nationalistic outlook.

In view of this and the statement by the EP President to the effect that freedom of movement is perhaps the aspect of the EU most appreciated by Europeans, what position does the Commission intend to adopt with regard to Denmark following its recent decision to reintroduce border controls? Is it willing to take measures further to strengthen external EU borders? Will it review the principle that the Member State of entry bears sole responsibility for illegal immigrants?

  Cecilia Malmström, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I will take both questions at the same time because they are almost identical. They address the challenge of maintaining and further developing Schengen in view of the migration crisis. I did briefly touch on this in my reply to Mr Papanikolaou’s question, but these elements should of course be kept in mind in this context as well.

In the question, Ms Ludford expressed concerns that the negotiations on the new Schengen evaluation and suspension rules might be lengthy and difficult to agree upon and asked the Commission to prioritise launching infringement procedures against Member States in breach of Schengen rules instead. Let me be very clear on this: infringement of Schengen rules cannot be tolerated, but one element does not exclude the other. We are also planning to follow a parallel approach.

We are the guardians of EU law. The Commission will continue to make sure that the Schengen rules are correctly applied and respected by everybody. The basis of our work needs to be the existing legislation. I am convinced that the current legislation can cater for a vast majority of the situations. Where there are any differences in interpretation or implementation, the Commission should consult the Member States in question and clarify the rules. This can be done by issuing guidelines or recommendations.

The Commission is ready to use all available means to ensure the correct application of EU law, including launching infringement procedures whenever such action is necessary. At the same time we will work on the preventive measures which should help us to avoid infringement procedures. In this context we now have ongoing negotiations between the Commission, Parliament and the Council with a view to establishing a more efficient evaluation system for Schengen. We are currently considering whether and how to complement this evaluation mechanism in order to create mutual trust and ensure a coherent application of the rules.

Regarding the Danish Government’s plan regarding controls on the Danish internal borders, which Ms Koppa referred to, you will of course be aware that the President of the Commission wrote to the Danish Prime Minister immediately, pointing out that the first analysis by the Commission raised major doubts about whether the proposed measures would be in line with Denmark’s obligations under European and international law. President Barroso emphasised that Member States may not carry out systematic intra-EU border controls of goods or people and urged Denmark to refrain from taking unilateral steps. We are now analysing the information provided by Denmark and will then decide on further action.

Ms Koppa also asked whether the Commission will propose a revision of the principle of exclusive responsibility of the state of first illegal entry. I would like to underline that this is a principle according to which a person found irregularly on the territory of a Member State is returned to the state of first entry into the EU. It is a specific rule under the Dublin Regulation, which establishes that the Member States have to assess which Member State is responsible for examining an asylum application lodged on their territory. It is therefore not an instrument designed to respond to the challenges related to irregular migration.

In the Commission proposal for a recast of the Dublin Regulation, this principle remains untouched. The Member States that play the biggest role in the applicant’s entry into the EU should be responsible for examining his or her application for asylum. The European Parliament expressed overwhelming support for this in its vote on the proposal in May 2009. This support was confirmed by the vote in the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs in November last year.

  Sarah Ludford (ALDE). - Commissioner, I am, of course, very glad to hear you stress again the importance that you attach to the maintenance of the Schengen Area. I know you are very sincere on that, but my worry is that, despite that, people seem to have got the wrong end of the stick and the impression has got abroad – for instance, last week an article in the Financial Times said that ‘Schengen as well as the euro zone was disintegrating’ – that somehow the Commission is fairly relaxed about the reintroduction of internal border controls.

I fear that the emphasis the Commission puts, as it were, on its own institutional rights is not being tracked through to its determination in practice, its zeal in practice, to take infringement proceedings if necessary. I have not heard of Rome and Paris receiving a letter of the kind that the President sent to Copenhagen.

  Μαρία-Ελένη Κοππά (S&D). - Ευχαριστώ, κύριε Επίτροπε, για την καθαρή απάντησή σας σχετικά με το θέμα του Σένγκεν καθώς και την αναφορά που κάνατε σε προηγούμενη ερώτηση για το μέτρο ανακατανομής μεταναστών στα κράτη μέλη ανάλογα με πληθυσμιακά, οικονομικά, γεωγραφικά κριτήρια.

Σε κάθε περίπτωση, στο θέμα του Κανονισμού "Δουβλίνο ΙΙ", θέλω να επισημάνω ότι σήμερα για ορισμένες χώρες, όπως είναι η χώρα μου η Ελλάδα, που αποτελούν τα εξωτερικά σύνορα της Ένωσης και που πραγματικά δέχονται περίπου το 90% των μεταναστών που μπαίνουν στην Ευρώπη, ο Κανονισμός "Δουβλίνο ΙΙ" δεν είναι ανεκτός, δεν είναι κάτι που μπορούν να το αντέξουν οι πληθυσμοί, δεν είναι κάτι που μπορούν να το αντέξουν οι χώρες. Επομένως, από τη δική μας πλευρά, είναι ένα πάγιο αίτημα η αναθεώρηση τουλάχιστον υπό το φως των νέων εξελίξεων.

  Γεώργιος Παπανικολάου (PPE). - Κυρία Επίτροπε, αναφέρατε και προηγουμένως την έμφαση που αποδίδεται στην έννοια της αλληλεγγύης, στη δίκαιη κατανομή των βαρών. Kαι πολύ σωστά μας υπενθυμίσατε ότι επίκεινται οι διαπραγματεύσεις για την επανεγκατάσταση προσφύγων από τρίτες χώρες. Είχατε ανακοινώσει και πέρσι ότι αναμένουμε και το νέο πρόγραμμα για την εσωτερική επανεγκατάσταση. Θα ήθελα να μας πείτε εάν πρόκειται να το ανακοινώσει η Επιτροπή σύντομα.

Δεύτερον, σε ό,τι αφορά το Δουβλίνο ΙΙ, θα ήθελα να επισημάνω τα εξής συμπληρώνοντας αυτά που είπε η συνάδελφος η κ. Κοππά. Η Γαλλία ανέστειλε τις επιστροφές στην Ελλάδα· η Γερμανία επίσης· το Ευρωπαϊκό Δικαστήριο Ανθρωπίνων Δικαιωμάτων μας καταδίκασε για συγκεκριμένους λόγους, και για το Δουβλίνο ΙΙ και τη λειτουργικότητα αυτού. Τι άλλο πρέπει να συμβεί για να καταλάβουμε όλοι ότι πρέπει αμέσως να αλλάξει το Δουβλίνο ΙΙ, όπως ζητά το Κοινοβούλιό μας;

  Cecilia Malmström, Member of the Commission. − I am sorry if there is a false impression about the Commission’s views on Schengen. I do not think I have spoken about anything other than Schengen for the last month! I have emphasised how important Schengen is, what a gift it is to the European Union and that we must strengthen it and not weaken it.

We look very seriously upon all reports of the suspension of Schengen. We are engaged in dialogue with Italy, France and Denmark in order to clarify exactly what has been done, what is being proposed and whether it is in compliance with Schengen rules. We are also looking at how we can strengthen the evaluation of Schengen in order to make sure, beforehand, that the current peer review system, which is not very good, is exchanged for something that is done at a European level, with an increased role for the European Parliament.

We need to have more tools at our disposal to assist Member States. We need to be better at issuing guidelines. We also need to clarify under what exceptional circumstances suspension can be carried out in order to avoid unilateral action that jeopardises the whole system. So you can rest assured that we will do our utmost to strengthen Schengen and that we need more European engagement there, not less.

Dublin is of course related to this, but it is a parallel process. This is part of the negotiations on the asylum package that are currently taking place between Parliament and the Council. The Commission has proposed keeping the responsibility of the first country of asylum in the Dublin Regulation, but also reintroducing an emergency mechanism in order to suspend that mechanism under special circumstances. This is very controversial in the Member States; very few support such an emergency mechanism. It is one of the most difficult areas of the negotiations on the asylum package.

So that is not the solution to the Greek problem. In parallel with putting the asylum system in place for the whole of Europe, which would also lead to greater burden-sharing – because if all Member States have a system that works, all Member States could receive asylum seekers – the solution for Greece is to continue with the reform plans that are being implemented under the action plan in Greece. The Commission and the Member States are supporting Greece with a huge amount of money, expertise, interpreters and administrators. We are assisting Greece in the important work it is doing to build up a system that is in line with European law. A lot has been done, but there is a lot still to do. This has to be done in parallel with the negotiations on the asylum system.

  President. − Question 13 by Frédéric Daerden (H-000197/11)

Subject: Future of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF)

A number of votes and declarations have proven that there is consensus within the EU on various aspects of this fund.

First of all, it differs from the European Social Fund in both its methodology and its objectives. The two instruments cannot therefore be confused, either formally or in practice.

Secondly, despite a slow start, changes to the implementing regulation in 2009 enabled the EGF to be used more effectively. Indeed, a clear increase in applications to mobilise this tool that brings the Union closer to its workers has been noted. There is therefore no doubt that it needs to be made sustainable.

Lastly, this specific aspect of the EGF calls for it to be regarded as a permanent fund in its own right, with sufficient payment appropriations to ensure that no transfers have to be made in order to mobilise it.

What does the Commission think about establishing a genuine fund that is on a par with the others, to meet all the needs of the EGF without restricting the role of the European Parliament which has been so involved in this issue?

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − I am grateful for the interest you have shown in the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund. This year will be crucial for the Fund’s future, because the Commission intends to make a proposal on the rules governing the fund and the way will function in the next programming period.

Over the past few months, the Commission has carried out consultations on this matter with the Fund’s most important stakeholders. In particular, we have closely examined Parliament’s own excellent report on the EGF, which was drawn up by Mr Portas a few months ago. On the basis of experience gained with the Fund in its present form and suggestions made during consultations, we have great hopes that our proposal will significantly improve the fund after 2013 and will in particular solve two problems with the current mechanism for financing.

The first issue is the time it takes for a contribution to be granted once a Member State has submitted an application. A large part of that time is taken up by assessing the application. The Commission is looking at ways of clarifying or simplifying the information that the Member States will have to provide to demonstrate that applications are eligible. A lot of time is also taken up with the need to request and obtain approval for each application from both arms of the budgetary authority. This also holds up payment of contributions from the Fund, to the detriment of the workers, because some Member States are reluctant to advance payments for training, job-search assistance and other measures.

In addition, the number of applications submitted to the Fund, and thus the overall amount applied for, has increased significantly over the last two years. This has made it increasingly difficult to identify sufficient margins from which to draw contributions. That is a problem. Commission approval of applications to the Fund in 2011 had to be postponed for the first time because sufficient payment appropriations could not be found quickly. I am sure you will agree that this is not helpful to workers who have been made redundant and need assistance quickly. We need to find solutions for these problems and bring the mechanism for financing the fund more closely into line with these objectives.

At present, there are several options on the table. For instance, the Fund could be part of the European Social Fund. It could have its own budget. The Commission has taken no decision yet on the best way of addressing these issues, but it intends to table a proposal in autumn on the Globalisation Adjustment Fund of the future, bearing European workers’ best interests in mind. I look forward to hearing your views.

  Pervenche Berès (S&D), suppléant l'auteur. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, au nom de M. Daerden, permettez-moi de vous remercier de cette réponse. Nous soutiendrons évidemment toutes les initiatives qui permettront d'accélérer les procédures lorsqu'elles viennent en aide aux travailleurs victimes de licenciements dans le cadre ou de la mondialisation ou de la crise.

Simplement, nous voudrions attirer votre attention sur deux difficultés. La première, c'est que le caractère de soutien aux travailleurs doit rester la priorité. Ce qui signifie que, à travers la révision des procédures, nous nous opposerons à l'idée que le Fonds d'ajustement à la mondialisation devienne un outil parmi d'autres, par exemple d'une politique de cohésion, car alors tout l'argent communautaire, en-dehors de celui de la politique étrangère ou de la recherche et du développement, deviendra de la politique de cohésion. Nous avons des objectifs particuliers à poursuivre et il faut avoir ces outils. Le Fonds d'ajustement à la mondialisation en fait partie.

Nous vous demandons également d'articuler la gestion du fonds, en collaboration avec vos collègues commissaires, avec les autres politiques qui ont un impact dans ce domaine, que ce soit le domaine de la concurrence ou le domaine de la politique industrielle.

  Νικόλαος Χουντής (GUE/NGL). - Στις αρχές του χρόνου, στην ερώτηση εάν η Ελλάδα έχει καταθέσει αίτηση για να ενεργοποιηθεί το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Προσαρμογής στην Παγκοσμιοποίηση είχατε απαντήσει όχι. Αυτή η απάντηση έκανε αίσθηση στην ελληνική πραγματικότητα λόγω της οικονομικής και κοινωνικής κατάστασης που βρίσκεται η χώρα.

Η ερώτηση που σας κάνω είναι απλή: μετά έξι μήνες, έχει καταθέσει η χώρα μου αίτηση για ενεργοποίηση του Ταμείου Προσαρμογής στην Παγκοσμιοποίηση για στήριξη των εργαζομένων που πλήττονται από τη χρηματοοικονομική κρίση; Εάν ναι, εάν έχετε αυτήν την πληροφορία, σας παρακαλώ πείτε μου εάν έχει εγκριθεί. Εάν όχι, μπορείτε να εξηγήσετε γιατί δεν κατατίθεται από την Ελλάδα τέτοια αίτηση;

  Marian Harkin (ALDE). - I did have a question for the Commissioner further on, which we will not get to tonight, and which did indeed ask for his view on the merging of the ESF and the EGF, on which you have spoken but did not give us an opinion. So if you are in a position to do that I would appreciate hearing it, and also, if there were to be a merger would you see an increase in budgetary appropriations for the Social Fund?

Finally, my other question relates to the timing, and you spoke about the difficulty with the Commission and the budgetary authority. What about also encouraging Member States, as soon as they have applied for the EGF, to start putting in place themselves the measures that they have applied for under the EGF, because that at least would ensure that workers would not be waiting for the application of the Fund?

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − I am glad to hear in the discussion confirmation of the Commission’s objectives in this exercise to bring the EGF into the next financial perspective as a stronger and more effective instrument to support workers who have been made redundant. This case is also supported by the fact that, in the near future, fiscal consolidation will remain on the agenda in most of the Member States, and they will find it extremely helpful if there is a strong, quick and effective EU-level instrument to support workers who suddenly find themselves out of a job.

As I pointed out, some questions remain open, such as the relationship between the EGF and the ESF. As you know, the ESF is implemented through shared management, and I believe that the management system of the current ESF is not compatible with the objectives of the EGF. No matter what eventual format we find, I think this question of management will be very important in influencing the final arrangements. I am not speaking about names, but about the need for a separate fund and the need to pay attention to speed in particular.

Of course even now, and probably also in the future, various Member States will find it possible to fund programmes either from the EGF or the ESF and have some kind of room for manoeuvre, but it is very important just to keep the EGF available for all Member States in case there is a need to respond to sudden employment crises.

The second question pointed to the problem of defining eligibility in the current regulation. This is also an issue we are looking at in order to have a greater level of clarity, but at the moment we are simply working on extending the temporary regulation until the end of this financial perspective. I am speaking here about the rules which have been introduced in response to the crisis and to make the EGF more effective in tackling the impact of the crisis on workers.

  Liam Aylward (ALDE). - Mr President, can you indicate how many more questions you might be prepared to take in this section?

  President. − Mr Aylward, I did say before you came in that we had 20 minutes per Commissioner, which would mean that we could possibly get to Question 15 by Mrs Blinkevičiūtė, but I am afraid I do not think we are going to make it to yours. Perhaps you could put a supplementary to another question?

Question 14 by Nikolaos Chountis (H-000200/11)

Subject: Collective labour agreements

Having had recourse to the bailout mechanism, Greece, Spain and Portugal have come under heavy pressure from the Commission and the IMF to make major changes to industrial relations and collective bargaining procedures under the terms of the respective ‘Memorandums’, thereby overturning national guarantees for workers.

For example, in the case of Greece, the Memorandum stipulates the following: ‘The government shall ensure that company-level agreements take precedence over sectoral agreements, which in turn take precedence over occupational agreements. The government shall remove the provision that allows the Ministry of Labour to extend all sectoral agreements to those not represented in negotiations’.

Furthermore, under Article 156 TFEU, matters relating to collective bargaining are governed by the principle of subsidiarity.In view of this: Is the Commission aware that this approach not only is creating a vicious circle of pay cuts and erosion of workers’ rights but also runs counter to the Treaties, which the Commission is required to respect?

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − The Commission acknowledges that the Greek crisis has a high social cost for sections of the population in Greece, but that cost is mainly the result of financial imbalances, diminishing competitiveness and financial difficulties: the very difficulties the Memorandum seeks to resolve and not exacerbate.

Some claim that, because these are in the Memorandum, it does not observe the principle of subsidiarity provided for in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. I do not believe that is true. The measures in the Memorandum were drawn up in close cooperation with the Greek Government and endorsed by the Greek Parliament. That shows that they respect the principle of subsidiarity.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union backs up my opinion. Article 28 of the Charter stipulates that, in line with EU and national laws and practices, workers or their organisations have the right to negotiate and conclude collective agreements at the appropriate levels, and, in cases of conflicts of interest, to take collective action to defend their interests, including strike action. However, Article 51 of the Charter states that its provisions are addressed to the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the EU, with due regard for the principle of subsidiarity, and to the Member States only when they are implementing EU law.

There is no specific EU legislation regulating which collective agreements take precedence when they are concluded at different levels. Nor is there any specific EU legislation regulating the possibility of extending collective agreements concluded at branch level by way of state intervention. These issues therefore fall exclusively within the remit of national law, with due regard for the relevant international obligations of Greece, including the relevant conventions of the International Labour Organisation.

I trust that I have answered the questions satisfactorily. I also trust that I have convinced you that the fiscal, financial and structural measures in the Memorandum are vital if Greece is to come out of the crisis. I hope I have allayed the fears some of you may have about the failure to observe the principle of subsidiarity.

  Νικόλαος Χουντής (GUE/NGL). - Κύριε Επίτροπε, λυπάμαι διότι για άλλη μια φορά η απάντησή σας δεν ήταν σαφής. Την ίδια περίπου απάντηση μου δίνετε και σε γραπτές ερωτήσεις. Εάν πράγματι η Επιτροπή σέβεται ότι το καθεστώς των συλλογικών συμβάσεων είναι θέμα εθνικής νομοθεσίας, τότε παραβιάζετε ή όχι το ρόλο σας με βάση τις Συνθήκες όταν ζητάτε να καταργηθεί ουσιαστικά το καθεστώς των συλλογικών συμβάσεων; Την ερμηνεία που δίνετε δεν την υιοθετούν και τα ευρωπαϊκά συνδικάτα που σας έχουν καταγγείλει για παραβίαση των Συνθηκών.

Και η ερώτησή μου είναι: ποιος ζητά να καταργηθούν οι συλλογικές συμβάσεις: εσείς, το Διεθνές Νομισματικό Ταμείο, οι δανειστές της Ελλάδας, της Πορτογαλίας της Ιρλανδίας; Σας παρακαλώ να δώσετε πιο σαφή απάντηση.

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − (microphone switched off until middle of first sentence) ... much of the institutional arrangements including the wage setting arrangements in various Member States. These emergency situations have been handled through policies that were jointly developed by the EU, the IMF, the ECB and the governments of the Member States concerned.

Indeed there are still some open questions, and also some raised by the so-called Euro-Plus Pact. We recently held a number of discussions about the connection between social dialogue and economic governance with the social partners, including the ETUC. This is an ongoing discussion. I am not saying that all the questions have been answered and that is exactly why I took the initiative of organising a conference on wages and wage setting in the EU. This conference will take place with the involvement of the social partners and other stakeholders in September. We will continue this discussion and hopefully find the right answers.

  President. − Question 15 by Vilija Blinkeviciute (H-000203/11)

Subject: Review of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community

The reference framework for the free movement of workers is laid down in Council Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community and has been revised several times.

Parliament is currently drafting a report on promoting professional mobility in the EU. The Commission representative who attended the meeting of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs stated on 19 April 2011 that the Commission was preparing to revise and improve the Regulation.

When in the Commission’s view is that process likely to begin?

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − The free movement of workers is a fundamental principle of the EU. Together with the free movement of goods, services, and capital, it is a pillar of the single market and has contributed to European integration over the last 50 years.

It also has a significant social dimension, insofar as it fosters the social, economic and cultural integration of EU migrant workers and members of their families into the host Member State. The body of EU law on free movement of workers gives EU citizens the right to move freely within the Union for work purposes and protects the social rights of workers and their family members.

As you know, 1 May 2011 was an important date for the EU. It marked the end of restrictions on the right to work of citizens from the eight Member States which joined in 2004, who can now work freely in any Member State.

The Commission hopes that the Member States which still apply transitional measures to workers from Romania and Bulgaria will liberalise their labour markets when the second phase expires on 31 December 2011.

The end of transitional arrangements means that more EU citizens can take advantage of one of the EU’s fundamental freedoms and work freely in another Member State. That opens great opportunities for the individual, who can move where there are jobs, and also for the economy.

I know that mobility and freedom of movement for workers are also important to this House. The Commission is pleased with the own-initiative report on promoting worker mobility within the European Union and is following the debate in the parliamentary committees with great interest.

But we are also aware that, despite the large body of EU legislation in the area of freedom of movement for workers, most EU citizens still feel there are too many obstacles to working in another Member State. The situation has been highlighted on several occasions recently. The Monti Report of 9 May 2010 – ‘A New Strategy for the Single Market’ – points out that, while freedom of movement for workers is a success overall from a legal viewpoint, it is the least-used of our four single market freedoms.

Tackling these problems calls for a broad approach, combined with effective implementation of the principle of free movement. The enforceability of the right of free movement conferred by EU law is particularly relevant in cases of discrimination on the basis of nationality, as the individuals concerned need to have suitable mechanisms to ensure such rights are properly protected.

The Commission services are currently evaluating EU legislation on the free movement of workers, and in particular Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68, and are exploring the options for improving the enforcement of EU law on freedom of movement, including, where necessary, by presenting an initiative in 2012.

Parliament’s report on worker mobility therefore comes at the right time, and will certainly contribute to the debate on enforcement of EU law on free movement of workers and the choice of any further action on this issue.

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D). - Ačiū labai, komisare, už jūsų atsakymą. Iš tikrųjų lauksime ateinančiais metais Komisijos pateikto pataisyto reglamento, tačiau aš noriu dar išgirsti jūsų nuomonę, ar Komisijai nereikėtų vertinti ne tik teigiamų laisvo darbuotojų judėjimo pasekmių, bet ir neigiamų laisvo darbuotojų judėjimo pasekmių. Pavyzdžiui, iš kai kurių Europos Sąjungos šalių išvyko labai daug darbuotojų, kvalifikuotų, gerai parengtų, į kuriuos valstybės narės daug investavo. Jie išvyko į kitas Europos Sąjungos šalis. Ar nemanote, kad reikėtų įsteigti tam tikrą fondą, iš kurio galėtume solidariai kompensuoti tuos praradimus toms valstybėms narėms, iš kurių išvyko parengti kvalifikuoti darbuotojai.

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − This is a very topical question. We have recently had a number of discussions in the context of 1 May. I took up this issue with the employment ministers of the Visegrád countries, and of the Baltic states. We have been looking at where free movement might lead to a certain amount of tension, especially when it affects certain professions where free movement is not leading to a circular phenomenon, but more of a one-way street.

If such tendencies are observed, it is primarily up to the Member State governments to draw up the right strategies regarding training, remuneration and career opportunities to improve development for those in the medical profession, for example, which has been a particular focus of these discussions.

We will continue to monitor this problem and continue to discuss it with the governments of the relevant Member States, as I have already been doing.

  President. − Question 19 by Hans-Peter Martin (H-000208/11)

Subject: Reallocation of financial resources in the regional and cohesion funds

Is the Commission prepared to reallocate at least 10% of the EUR 51 billion currently available each year in the regional and cohesion funds to fast-start funding for new electricity networks for renewable energy?

  Johannes Hahn, Mitglied der Kommission. − Herr Abgeordneter! Vielen Dank für Ihre Frage. Es ist wichtig festzuhalten, dass aus dem Titel der Strukturfonds für die laufende Finanzperiode 2007-2013 im Rahmen der mehr als 400 operativen Programme die Mittel bereits zugeteilt sind bzw. mit den Regionen und den Mitgliedstaaten vereinbart worden sind.

Teil des gesamten Prozesses am Beginn einer Finanzperiode ist, mit Mitgliedstaaten und Regionen die Programme für die laufende Periode festzulegen sowie zu bestimmen, was für die einzelnen Programme an finanziellen Mitteln zur Verfügung steht. Entsprechend dem Konzept der geteilten Aufgabenverwaltung bzw. des geteilten Managements sind es die Mitgliedstaaten und/oder die Regionen, die für die Umsetzung der Programme vor Ort verantwortlich sind. Sie sind auch zuständig und verantwortlich für die Auswahl und die Durchführung der Projekte und letztlich für die Kontrolle – zumindest auf der ersten Ebene.

Schon zu Beginn dieser Periode war das Thema Energieeffizienz und Förderung erneuerbarer Energieformen ein wichtiger Punkt. Dies ist eine der Prioritäten der Regionalpolitik, die auch in verschiedenen der von mir angeschnittenen rund 400 Programme in Form von maßgeschneiderten Angeboten umgesetzt wird.

In der laufenden Periode ist aufgrund dieser Vereinbarung mit den Regionen und mit den Mitgliedstaaten ein Budget von insgesamt 9,2 Milliarden EUR für eine nachhaltige Energiepolitik, mit den Schwerpunkten erneuerbare Energie und Verbesserung der Energieeffizienz, vorgesehen. Durch einen Beschluss des Parlaments und des Rates von 2009 haben wir zusätzlich die Möglichkeit geschaffen, dass bis zu 4 % der Mittel aus dem Fonds für regionale Entwicklung für Maßnahmen zur Verbesserung der Energieeffizienz bei Wohnbauten genutzt werden können. Das wird in der Zwischenzeit von rund der Hälfte der Mitgliedstaaten in Anspruch genommen, wobei Frankreich in der Nutzung und Umsetzung dieser Möglichkeit besonders vorbildlich ist.

  Hans-Peter Martin (NI). - Herr Kommissar, nicht böse sein, aber let’s get serious. Ich lese Ihnen gerne meine Frage vor. Sie lautet: Ist die Kommission bereit, mindestens 10 % der derzeit jährlich 51 Milliarden Euro als Anschubfinanzierung für neue Stromnetze im Bereich erneuerbarer Energien einzurichten?

Sie haben jetzt viel erzählt. Alles richtig. Nur darum geht es doch nicht. Es geht doch darum, jetzt ein Signal zu setzen und zu sagen: Ja, wir haben verstanden. Ja, wir ziehen die Konsequenzen aus Fukushima. Ja, wir meinen 2020 wirklich ernst. Um eine Energiewende voranzubringen, müssen wir den Strom aus Norddeutschland nach Österreich bringen. Mein Vater war Chef der Vorarlberger Kraftwerke. Sie haben sicherlich auch Erfahrung in diesem Bereich. Da braucht man Leitungen.

Also nochmals meine Frage: Sind Sie persönlich bereit, genau diese Anschubfinanzierung, von der alle sagen, dass wir sie dringend brauchen, wirklich auf den Weg zu bringen und nicht einfach das umzusetzen, was unter Ihren Vorvorgängern beschlossen worden ist?

  Johannes Hahn, Mitglied der Kommission. − Herr Abgeordneter, ich habe Ihre Frage sehr genau gelesen. Deswegen habe ich Ihnen auch eine sehr genaue Antwort gegeben auf Basis der Regeln, die wir im Bereich der Regionalpolitik haben. Das Wesen dieser Regeln besteht darin, dass es mit den Mitgliedsländern Vereinbarungen gibt. Diese Vereinbarungen können weder einseitig von der Kommission noch einseitig von den Regionen abgeändert werden.

Ich persönlich würde mir wünschen und mich freuen, wenn die heute schon verfügbaren Mittel genutzt werden. Ich gehe hier sozusagen wie eine lebende tibetanische Gebetsmühle von Konferenz zu Konferenz, von Mitgliedsland zu Mitgliedsland und werbe dafür, dass diese Mittel, die heute schon zur Verfügung stehen, genutzt werden. Da der Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien ja einer der Schwerpunkte der Europa 2020-Strategie ist, gehe ich davon aus, dass es in der nächsten Periode definitiv ein höheres Budget für diesen Bereich geben wird, auch aus dem Titel der Regionalpolitik. Außerdem wird es sicherlich auch im Zusammenwirken mit dem Kollegen Oettinger hier Investitionen im Infrastrukturbereich, was die transeuropäischen Netze im Bereich der Energieversorgung anbelangt, geben. Wenn heute Regionen zusätzlich zu den schon verfügbaren Mitteln Mittel umwidmen wollen, dann sind wir sicherlich gerade in diesem Bereich sehr offen, diese Möglichkeit zu eröffnen bzw. jedenfalls hier ernsthafte Gespräche zu führen. Aber nochmals, wir können als Kommission nicht einseitig diese Vereinbarungen abändern.

  President. − Question 20 by Anne E. Jensen (H-000212/11)

Subject: Fulfilment of the objectives of structural funds payments

At the end of June 2011, the Commission will present its proposal for the next 7-year budgetary framework (2014-2020). In the case of EU regional policy, there have been substantial problems with absorption capacity under the individual programmes. Several programmes have also failed to achieve their objectives.

How does the Commission intend to include the absorption capacity of each Member State as a criterion for the allocation of structural fund appropriations in the coming budgetary period?

Does the Commission agree that payments should be reviewed if a region has been receiving structural funding for years without this resulting in it meeting the targets set?

Will the Commission consider a ‘sunset mechanism’ that sets a closing date on the allocation of structural fund appropriations to individual recipient regions? Does the Commission agree that such a mechanism would help create a more results-oriented cohesion policy?

The Court of Auditors Annual Report for 2009 found the highest error rate to be in payments under the EU’s cohesion policy. This was the same finding as in previous years. How does the Commission intend to remedy this situation?

  Johannes Hahn, Mitglied der Kommission. − Frau Abgeordnete, vielen herzlichen Dank für die Frage. Hinsichtlich der Absorptionsrate und ihrer Berücksichtigung bei der Zuweisung von Mitteln in der kommenden Periode verweise ich schon jetzt auf die bestehende Regel hinsichtlich der Obergrenze der Mittelzuweisung – Stichwort capping. Es gibt eine Regel, die besagt, dass im Hinblick auf eine gewisse Staffelung pro Mitgliedsland nur ein bestimmter Betrag gemessen am Gesamt-BIP eines Landes für Strukturpolitik zur Verfügung steht. Die jährliche Dotierung darf diese Obergrenze nicht übersteigen.

Wir werden für die nächste Periode sicherlich überlegen, ob die Höhe der bestehenden Obergrenze gerechtfertigt ist, ob hier Adaptierungen notwendig sind, um die Aufnahmefähigkeit besser zu gestalten bzw. zu gewährleisten.

Was die Zielerreichung der Programme betrifft, darf ich an den fünften Kohäsionsbericht und an den budget review erinnern, in dem deutlich gemacht wurde, dass wir die performance der Programme stärker in den Blick nehmen müssen. Und für die nächste Periode ist diesbezüglich ein Set an Überprüfungen und Anreizsystemen vorgesehen, das die Kommission im Legislativberichtpaket für die Kohäsionspolitik nach 2014 vorschlagen wird.

Beim Thema Fehlerquote habe ich schon mehrmals auch hier im Haus auf die methodologischen Probleme bei der Überprüfung mehrjähriger Programme hingewiesen. Rund die Hälfte des EU-Haushalts setzt sich sicherlich aus Mitteln zusammen, die für mehrjährige Aktivitäten ausgegeben werden. Die Überprüfung des Rechnungshofes im Hinblick auf den Haushaltsvollzug betrachtet immer nur das laufende Jahr, und daraus ergeben sich methodologische Herausforderungen, weil es im Rahmen der Regionalpolitik etwa 3 Auditlevel gibt, die jährliche Überprüfung durch den Rechnungshof aber schon nach dem ersten Auditlevel einsetzt und daher hier immer eine höhere Fehlerquote anfallen wird als am Ende eines Programmzyklus, wie wir das schon nachweisen konnten.

Jedenfalls hat meine Vorgängerin Danuta Hübner auch hier zusammen mit dem Parlament einen Aktionsplan aufgesetzt, dessen Wirksamkeit schon sichtbar ist, der seine Wirkung entfaltet hat. Aber eine dieser Maßnahmen war auch die Möglichkeit, dass eine Generaldirektion in begründeten Fällen Zahlungsunterbrechungen bis maximal sechs Monate verfügen konnte. Dieses Instrument wurde beispielsweise im Vorjahr über fünfzig Mal angewendet. Alle diese Zahlungsunterbrechungen konnten vor Zeitablauf wieder aufgehoben werden, weil die beanstandeten Punkte gelöst wurden.

Ich bitte Sie aber auch bei der Fehlerquote immer zu berücksichtigen, dass die Regionalpolitik hier, wenn Sie so wollen, eine Art Schneepflugfunktion hat, dass wir bei gewissen Dingen, die legistisch entwickelt werden, überprüfen, wie sie in der täglichen Praxis umgesetzt werden, wie es um ihre Wirksamkeit bestellt ist und welche Probleme sich ergeben. Das Thema öffentliche Auftragsvergabe ist z. B. immer wieder Gegenstand von Diskussionen mit Mitgliedstaaten, Regionen und final beneficiaries. Rund 70 % der Fehlerquote entfallen auf diesen Bereich. Wenn es uns gelingt – wir haben gemeinsam mit dem Kollegen Barnier eine entsprechende Initiative gesetzt –, dieses System zu vereinfachen, dann reduzieren wir auch hier die praktische Fehleranfälligkeit. Wir versuchen, in diesem Bereich unsere Hausaufgaben zu machen und uns entsprechend weiterzuentwickeln.

  Anne E. Jensen (ALDE). - Hr. formand! Jeg vil gerne takke kommissær Hahn for et godt svar, som viser, at man tager disse problemstillinger alvorligt. Problemstillingerne er jo ikke blevet mindre af den økonomiske krise, som gør, at mange lande har svært ved at finde medfinansiering. Gør Kommissionen sig nogen særlige overvejelser om, hvad det kan betyde for den næste programmeringsperiode? Fører strukturfondsstøtten virkelig til en udvikling af disse regioner? Får man resultater? Gør Kommissionen sig yderligere tanker om, hvad der kan gøres for at stramme op på opfølgningen af de egentlige målsætninger – overordnede målsætninger – omkring udvikling, så der ikke alene leveres projekter men også udvikling?

  Johannes Hahn, Mitglied der Kommission. − Frau Abgeordnete, es ist unser erklärtes Ziel, in der nächsten Programmperiode die Strukturpolitik, soweit das irgendwie geht, an die Strategie Europa 2020 thematisch anzubinden. Hier gibt es also zentrale Zielsetzungen und Prioritäten, die im Rahmen einer maßgeschneiderten Adaptierung in den Regionen umgesetzt werden sollen. Die Aufgabe der Regionen wird darin bestehen, sich wie aus einem Menü, aus einer Speisekarte einige wenige Prioritäten auszuwählen, insbesondere wenn es sich um Wettbewerbsregionen handelt.

Die Regionen werden dann mit uns als Kommission in einem Partnerschafts- und Investitionsvertrag sehr realistische, aber ambitiöse quantifizierbare Ziele setzen und vereinbaren, sodass wir am Ende der Periode eindeutig sehen können, ob die gemeinsam vereinbarten Zielsetzungen erreicht oder vielleicht sogar übererfüllt wurden. Wenn sie nicht erreicht wurden, haben wir dann die Möglichkeit, uns gemeinsam anzuschauen, was die Gründe für die Nichterreichung waren und ob das auf hausgemachte oder externe Faktoren zurückzuführen ist. Darauf aufbauend können wir dann Rückschlüsse für die weitere Programmplanung und die finanzielle Allokation in der darauffolgenden Periode ziehen. Das ist eine sehr wesentliche, sehr qualitative Weiterentwicklung der Regionalpolitik in der nächsten Finanzperiode.

  President. − Questions which have not been answered for lack of time will receive written answers (see Annex).

That concludes Question Time.

17. L-aġenda tas-seduta li jmiss: ara l-Minuti

18. Għeluq tas-seduta

(The sitting closed at 20.00)