Πληρη πρακτικα των συζητησεων

Τρίτη 2 Ιουλίου 2013 - Στρασβούργο

1. Έναρξη της συνεδρίασης

VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ
Präsident

(Die Sitzung wird um 9.05 Uhr eröffnet.)

2. Κατάθεση εγγράφων: βλ. Συνοπτικά Πρακτικά

3. Μεταφορές πιστώσεων: βλ. Συνοπτικά Πρακτικά

4. Συζήτηση για περιπτώσεις παραβίασης των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων, της δημοκρατίας και του κράτους δικαίου (ανακοίνωση των προτάσεων ψηφίσματος που έχουν κατατεθεί): βλ. Συνοπτικά Πρακτικά

5. Συμπεράσματα του Ευρωπαϊκού Συμβουλίου (27-28 Ιουνίου 2013) (συζήτηση)

  Der Präsident. − Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärungen des Europäischen Rates und der Kommission zu den Schlussfolgerungen der Tagung des Europäischen Rates (27.-28. Juni 2013) (2012/2808(RSP)).

  Herman Van Rompuy, President of the European Council. − Mr President, honourable Members, after the March European Council meeting I reported to you on the broad agreement among all leaders on our strategy to bring the European Union to recovery: first, restoring and maintaining financial stability; second, making our economies more resilient and competitive, with structurally sound public finances (using the flexibilities in our common rules) and long-term reforms; third, fighting, directly and indirectly, unemployment, and I added explicitly, especially for the young; and the fourth element of our strategy was working towards a genuine Economic and Monetary Union – preparing for the future.

Looking back at the decisions taken at or just before the June European Council – because sometimes the pressure created by having a European Council meeting can concentrate minds – it is striking to see that on each and every one of the four strands of this strategy we are moving forward, we are making progress – gradually, but decisively.

As is now the tradition every June, we discussed and endorsed the country-specific recommendations, thus closing this year’s European Semester, which is the cornerstone of our new economic governance. Though only three years old, it is already the most advanced surveillance and policy coordination mechanism in the world.

We welcomed the agreement reached by Finance Ministers the night before the European Council on the directive on recovery and resolution. This is a crucial matter, which can now be taken forward with Parliament in the legislative process before the end of this parliamentary term. Together with the Single Supervisory Mechanism and the directive on capital requirements (where Parliament’s efforts to finalise the legislative work have been of vital importance), this directive on resolution and recovery is essential for the completion of the Banking Union, which is a key element of the work on a genuine Economic and Monetary Union.

The Banking Union remains an immediate priority – and the European Council stressed this again forcefully – as it will help ensure financial stability, reduce financial fragmentation and restore normal lending to the economy. On the latter point – restoring normal lending to the economy – European leaders also took action and we agreed on an Investment Plan for Europe, based on a joint report by the Commission and the European Investment Bank.

The aim is to address the credit crunch that is holding back the very companies that should be driving the recovery: local SMEs, and the start-ups of today which will perhaps be the success stories of tomorrow. We need to bring oxygen deep into the system, across the whole Union, and especially in the most vulnerable countries.

We also agreed on concrete measures with an immediate impact to fight youth unemployment, which is a most urgent concern for our societies – and a concern we also discussed in the presence of the European social partners in a prime example of social dialogue at work at EU level.

We decided to scale up and speed up the Youth Employment Initiative, so that the money starts flowing as of 1 January 2014. Most of the money will now be spent in 2014-2015, the years when it is most needed; moreover, the flexibility offered by the MFF means, in effect, that there will be substantially more available for the Youth Employment Initiative than the EUR 6 billion we had initially foreseen for it; according to projections at least EUR 8 billion in total.

We made a clear link between this Youth Employment Initiative and the Youth Guarantee – to ensure that within four months of leaving school or becoming unemployed, every young person gets a good offer for a job, education or training. We also called for other important actions – for instance promoting cross-border mobility through the EURES and Erasmus+ programmes, including vocational training, as well as high-quality apprenticeships.

These measures will undoubtedly boost the efforts taken by national governments, with which the bulk of the responsibility lies. During the European Council it was clear that leaders are eager to exchange experiences and best practices, just as they will again at tomorrow’s meeting in Berlin.

The decisions that the European Council took just a couple of days ago on the financing of the economy and the fight against youth unemployment would not have been possible without the agreement reached on the Multiannual Financial Framework by the Presidents of the Parliament, the Council and the Commission just a couple of hours before the start of the European Council.

Last Thursday, the European Council unanimously and firmly gave its political backing to the MFF agreement. Based on that, Member State representatives have, in the meantime, formally approved it. I hope that you will equally approve the MFF later this week. It will be a catalyst for investment and growth and jobs across Europe – which is particularly urgent and necessary at a time of crisis, a time of high unemployment and of doubts about the European project.

Indeed, the best way to restore confidence and prove these doubts wrong is by showing that Europe is delivering, that we are leaving a difficult situation behind and can jointly cope with the challenges of the future.

Of course, there is still a lot of work ahead of us, on many fronts – for instance on the deepening of Economic and Monetary Union, on which I gave heads of government a detailed state of play last Friday. But this should not prevent us from reaffirming loud and clear that, even if the road is still long, we are on the right track and that when our institutions work together for the common European good – and the MFF is an example – Europe is capable of producing concrete, tangible results. As I have just said, we are producing results, and last week proved it.

The June European Council also proved that our European project remains attractive for those who are not yet part of it. On Friday morning, we agreed to move forward towards opening accession talks with Serbia, and to take an important step in our relations with Kosovo. We welcomed Croatia as a member of the European Union and Latvia as a member of the eurozone. So, we are welcoming new members, and not – as some had predicted – losing them!

To sum up, the June European Council reached some important agreements. I should add one more of special interest to Parliament – namely the formal adoption of the decision establishing the future composition of Parliament, on the basis of the consent it had given.

And at the same time we prepared the way for other decisions still to come. This may not, perhaps, be to the taste of those who want either spectacular revolutions or confrontations but nonetheless it was an important and useful meeting, taking our common strategy forward together gradually but decisively and in good cooperation with all other institutions of our European Union.

Allow me to mention another matter which I know is of great concern here, as elsewhere, and on which my spokesperson released a statement on my behalf yesterday. I am very concerned by the press reports with allegations of US surveillance of EU premises abroad and in Brussels. The European Union, via its External Action Service, is examining the allegations and is in contact with US authorities.

The European Union has demanded and expects full and urgent clarification by the US regarding the allegations. I take note of the remarks today by US President Barack Obama and his commitment to provide all the information that US allies want and what exactly the facts have been. At this stage, I cannot provide any further comments. I will continue to follow this matter with the attention it deserves.

  José Manuel Barroso, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, let me start by welcoming the new Members of this Parliament from Croatia. On behalf of the European Commission and in front of this House, I want to wholeheartedly welcome Croatia as the 28th Member of the European Union.

Before entering into the subject of today’s debate, there is an issue of political importance that I would like to raise immediately, as this is the first opportunity that I have had to do so in front of this House. It concerns the recent reports on American activities in the European Union and Member States.

If the reports prove to be true, it would be very disturbing and raise serious and very important concerns. This is why as soon as the media reports were released we asked the US for full and immediate clarification on the matter.

The Vice-President/High Representative Catherine Ashton, who has competence in such matters has raised the issue, together with her services, with the United States and discussed it personally with Secretary of State Kerry. Yesterday the Executive Secretary General of the European External Action Service, Pierre Vimont, asked the United States Ambassador to the European Union to meet with him at EEAS headquarters.

The Commission will also address this issue in the context of the working group of experts that is being set up by Vice-President Reding and Commissioner Malmström together with the Council Presidency – on the European Union side – and with US Attorney General Holder – on the US side – to exchange information on intelligence collection of information and get clarity notably on the PRISM programme. The Commission expects clarity and transparency from our partners and allies, and this is what we expect from our United States partners.

Over recent months and years, the European Union has made an impressive and unprecedented effort to stabilise the euro and adapt our structures and policies to meet the challenges posed by the crisis. We still have a lot of work to do, however, before we can leave the crisis behind.

As I said to the European Council last week: the crisis is not over. We should not let up in our efforts for stability and growth by completing the EMU, correcting our public finances, structural reforms for competitiveness and targeted investments for growth.

The June European Council was precisely about everyone taking up their responsibilities. It has delivered some very important results: by endorsing the country-specific recommendations for structural reforms as proposed by the Commission, by stepping up the fight against youth unemployment, and by taking decisions aimed at restoring normal lending to the real economy, notably to SMEs.

I have to mention first one result that was achieved a few hours before this summit actually started, and which turned out to be a precondition for its success. I am talking about the political agreement on the multiannual financial framework reached in the morning of Thursday 27 June between the Irish Taoiseach, the President of the European Parliament and myself.

I was delighted that both President Schulz and Taoiseach Kenny, holding the Presidency of the Council, were able to accept my invitation and strike this political deal, without prejudice to the final decision of this House and the formal decision of the Council. The deal reached was based on very extensive negotiations conducted by the Council, Parliament and Commission and their respective teams – I want to congratulate all of them – and I hope it will be formally endorsed both by you and by the Council.

The extremely challenging dynamics of the negotiation process – unanimity in the Council, consent by absolute majority at Parliament – mean that nobody was able to reach all of their objectives. This is why – even though the Commission has always supported a more ambitious European budget – I consider this agreement a crucial step for the European Union in demonstrating its capacity to act and to take difficult decisions. The EU budget is an almost one trillion euro investment fund for growth and jobs. Without it, everything we are trying to do for growth, for investment, for the regions, for young people, for employment and for research would be put at risk.

In terms of the structural reforms needed to get our socio-economic framework in line with the demands of today’s global economy, the agenda was set out clearly in the Annual Growth Survey and, in particular, in the country-specific recommendations presented by the Commission five weeks ago. With the endorsement of these recommendations by the European Council, a new step was taken in the European Semester process. Economic governance in the European Union has reached a new stage of maturity and common ownership.

Everyone can now see that this is not a top-down process with the Commission telling Members what to do. But governments now should accept that reform, or lack of reform, in one country seriously impacts on neighbours and economic partners across Europe, and sometimes across the world. We are all in this together, so we have to cooperate, coordinate, debate and decide together as well. This is what economic union means. This is economic governance at work. And it is working.

Now, we have to make our common efforts to work to tackle some of the social and economic challenges we are facing together – youth unemployment especially. Most of the groundwork to turn this economically untenable and socially unacceptable situation around must be done at national level.

Therefore, the Commission has proposed specific recommendations on youth unemployment for 19 countries: from reforming labour markets to reinforcing public employment services, from shifting taxation away from labour to improving education for the low-skilled, or supporting programmes for training and apprenticeships. There is a lot that national governments can and must do.

I welcome the fact that the European Council has clearly underlined that message. Now governments must honour their commitments. The European institutions are there to guide and support this effort, in particular through the structural funds: we will speed up the youth employment initiative and front-load the funds so that the initial EUR 6 billion is invested in the following two years, and not spread thinly over the full seven years of the MFF period.

If we want this money to really make a difference, we need to focus it on regions with youth unemployment rates of over 25%, and do so quickly. This is only possible if Member States prepare specific youth unemployment initiative programmes and submit their plans this year. This will enable us to hit the ground running early in 2014. And as this House rightly stressed in the MFF discussions, we need to guarantee funds for the years afterwards as well.

So now – thanks to the increased flexibility that the European Commission has always supported and that was finally agreed by the Member States – the total amount spent on youth unemployment over the seven years can be estimated at above EUR 8 billion.

We also need to re-launch and expand the Youth Employment Action Teams. Since we set them up early in 2012, these teams have helped eight Member States reallocate around EUR 16 billion in structural funds to the most pressing needs, to the benefit of about one million young people and 55 000 SMEs. The new teams will be sent to help countries prepare their Youth Employment Initiative projects and implement the Youth Guarantee scheme.

On top of this, we will boost the mobility of young workers – one of the unfulfilled promises of the internal market so far – by reforming EURES, which already gives access to over 1.4 million vacancies in Europe and nearly 31 000 registered employers across the European Union.

Later today, in the margins of the WorldSkills competition in Leipzig, the European Commission will launch another important initiative, following the Grand Coalition for Digital Jobs we set up earlier. We will launch today the European Alliance for Apprenticeships, because not everything can be done by governments or other public institutions. We should also mobilise the social partners. Business can do more to help create more and better quality apprenticeships.

Before the European Council we met with the European social partners, and I was happy to see that all of them, trade unions and business organisations, were very committed to a stronger response from Europe. And tomorrow, together with some twenty heads of state and government and labour ministers, we are also meeting with the President of the European Parliament, in Berlin, to add to the momentum of the fight against youth unemployment.

All taken together, I would say: finally youth employment as a top priority seems an idea whose time has come. But ideas are not enough. Our young people need actions, they need decisions, and they need jobs. So let us do it.

The June European Council also made measures to support financing to small and medium-sized enterprises a priority. I welcome that, on the basis of the recommendations in the joint report by the Commission and the EIB, the European Council has supported much-needed action in this field. Following the increase of its capital – that we were the first to advocate – the extra EIB activities are expected to increase its lending activity in the EU by at least 40% between 2013 and 2015, with a particular focus on innovation and skills, SME financing, resource efficiency and strategic infrastructure.

In our joint report with the EIB, the European Commission has outlined a number of options for launching ambitious joint risk-sharing financial instruments to leverage private-sector and capital-market investments in SMEs in the very near future. Our proposals aim at fully exploiting the joint potential of the structural funds, together with loans from the EIB. The European Council committed Member States to do their part of the further preparatory work in order for these instruments to be fully operational by January 2014.

It was also agreed to accelerate the implementation of the project bonds pilot phase, with nine projects in six countries in the pipeline already, of which the Commission will present its assessment later this year.

With our communication on the ‘Top Ten’ consultation of SMEs, we urge all parties involved to take a long hard look at themselves to see if their role in legislation is a burden or a help to SMEs. We should always try to lighten the load of regulation, where possible, without lowering our standards or losing sight of the agreed common European goals.

I believe these are the key issues that determine, in the short term, both the effectiveness and the legitimacy of our reform efforts. With the Compact for Jobs and Growth we wanted to pool and reinforce the broader agenda of measures to support growth as a priority. One year on, on the basis of the comprehensive implementation report I presented to the European Council – it is now publicly available – we can only conclude that follow-up to the Compact for Growth has been a mixed success.

There have been some real breakthroughs, such as the recent agreement on professional qualifications and public procurement, but in other areas progress has been uneven or simply too slow. We must speed up work on the Single Market Act proposals, on the digital single market, the internal energy market and the European research area.

Time is running out, so I hope to be able to count on your persistent and powerful support to push through as much of our growth and jobs agenda as possible by the end of the term of this Parliament. But decisions at European level are not the same as implementation at national level, so my message to the European Council was also clear: Europe’s economic recovery must begin at home.

The last point I would like to make concerns the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union. One of the main reasons why we have been able to overcome the existential threat to the euro is that the European institutions and Member States have signalled their determination to learn the lessons of the crisis, to complete the EMU, and to make it irreversible. We cannot backtrack on that promise. The only way is forward, as set out in our blueprint towards a deep and genuine EMU. But sometimes we receive conflicting signals on the political will to move further.

Last week we saw an important breakthrough with the Council’s agreement on a common approach to dealing with failing banks without relying on taxpayers’ money. The Commission is now looking forward to working closely with Parliament with a view to finalising this by the end of the year at the latest.

The next step is a single resolution mechanism, on which the Commission will present its proposal in the next two weeks, and I hope that we can make swift progress on that. This will ensure effective European decision-making on problematic banks within the Single Supervisory Mechanism.

The forthcoming implementation of the two-pack takes us one step closer to a fiscal union. Today I would like to announce that, following our commitment towards the European Parliament as part of the overall agreement on the two-pack, the Commission is now setting up an expert group to look into all merits and risks, the legal requirements and the financial consequences of initiatives of joint issuance of debt in the form of a redemption fund and Eurobills

The members of this, group chaired by Gertrude Tumpel-Gugerell, a former member of the Executive Board of the ECB, combine impressive expertise with a varied background. I trust it will make a very good contribution for further work by the Commission and by this Parliament.

Last week in the European Council we also discussed the other building blocks of the EMU, based on the Commission’s ideas on ex-ante policy coordination and the competitiveness and convergence instrument. We will soon present a report on the social dimension of the EMU, which is an essential complement to fiscal and political integration.

To leave the crisis behind and to address the economic and social priority of fighting unemployment, we need to focus on small and medium-sized enterprises, because they form the heart of the European economy. These enterprises need to address the issues that matter for European competitiveness.

To continue on the path of structural reforms, the younger generations need to see a future for themselves. To recover the confidence of investors and citizens alike, we need to maintain the momentum of our efforts to reform the institutional set-up of the EMU. This European Council certainly represented progress, and we should be in no doubt about what the next steps towards growth and jobs will be.

Let us now focus on delivery.

  Joseph Daul, au nom du groupe PPE. – Monsieur le Président du Parlement, cher Martin Schulz, Monsieur le Président du Conseil, cher Herman Van Rompuy, Monsieur le Président de la Commission, cher José Manuel Barroso, chers collègues, avant de commenter les conclusions du Conseil de la semaine dernière, je voudrais d'abord saluer la Présidence irlandaise qui s'achève, et remercier le Premier ministre Enda Kenny et son équipe pour le travail qu'ils ont fourni. Mais je voudrais aussi saluer le travail, l'écoute et la présence de Lucinda Creighton, qui, pendant les six mois, n'a pas manqué une seule réunion du Parlement. Je crois qu'il faut le souligner. C'est probablement parce que c'est une femme, qu'elle est fidèle et qu'elle a été fidèle au poste et, surtout, au niveau de l'écoute. Il faut quand même le dire, Dany, parce que vous savez, les bancs sont souvent vides, que ce soit ici, ce matin, ou que ce soit de l'autre côté. Je crois qu'il faut le relever.

Au cours des six derniers mois, 80 engagements législatifs ont été menés à bien. Il y a bien sûr l'achèvement de gros dossiers, comme celui de la politique agricole commune. Nous sommes aussi parvenus à un accord sur le paquet Horizon 2020 pour l'innovation, la recherche et le développement. C'est un élément clé pour aider nos entreprises à se développer. Et, surtout, nous sommes parvenus à un accord sur le cadre financier pluriannuel. Le travail intense des négociateurs, de part et d'autre, a permis cet accord et je voudrais, ici, encore les féliciter. Ce travail était capital.

Nous, Parlement, en tant que colégislateur, étions attachés à notre responsabilité. Nous avons posé des conditions de bon sens nécessaires à tout accord. Nous ne pouvions pas accepter d'entraîner l'Union européenne sur la pente glissante de la dette. D'où notre exigence de trouver une solution aux crédits 2013 manquants. Et, avant de voter définitivement au mois de septembre, Monsieur le Président, il faut que le projet de 2013 et les millions manquants soient bien assurés.

Nous ne pouvions pas nous résigner à un budget restreint sans trouver une solution pour optimiser nos investissements. Il fallait un budget plus souple permettant d'affecter chaque euro non dépensé aux politiques qui en ont le plus besoin, d'où la flexibilité pour utiliser les marges non utilisées.

Nous ne pouvions pas nous satisfaire d'un budget d'austérité pendant sept ans. L'Europe doit pouvoir agir rapidement aux changements auxquels notre continent est confronté. D'où la clause de révision pour qu'en 2016, le prochain Parlement ait voix au chapitre.

Enfin, il n'était plus possible de laisser place à un tel marchandage tous les sept ans pour satisfaire les égoïsmes de certains. L'Europe, ce n'est pas une somme de rabais. L'Europe vaut plus que cela.

C'est pourquoi je demande au Conseil, à la nouvelle Commission et au prochain Parlement de travailler tout de suite, au début de l'année prochaine, après l'élection, sur un vrai budget doté de vraies ressources propres et je demande que soient définis les domaines dans lesquels l'Europe est plus efficace que les États membres, et vice versa. Nous devons prendre cette question à cœur tout de suite.

Nous en avons marre de ces marchandages. Nous avons maintenant soixante années d'Europe; je crois que nous avons le devoir de remettre tout sur la table, mais vraiment tout, et de redéfinir ce que fait l'Europe et ce que font les différents États membres.

La semaine dernière, lors du Conseil européen, nous avons mis l'accent sur le chômage des jeunes. Or, sans nos politiques communes financées par un CFP crédible, nous en serions encore à parler de ce fléau plutôt que d'agir. Je sais qu'il n'y en a que pour quelques années, mais j'espère que, si ces quelques années marchent, la sagesse nous permettra de continuer cet effort.

Le chômage en Europe, en particulier celui des jeunes, nous préoccupe tous. Un jeune sur quatre est sans travail et, dans certains pays, ce niveau atteint 50, voire 70 % de la population active. Grâce à nos fonds et aux fonds consacrés aux politiques structurelles, donc grâce aux investissements dans nos régions, nous soutenons la croissance et l'emploi. Avec le milliard d'euros supplémentaire, ajouté à la dernière minute au Fonds d'aide aux plus démunis, l'Europe montre qu'elle a aussi un cœur pour ceux qui souffrent le plus.

Avec les crédits supplémentaires pour Erasmus, les PME et les projets de recherche, nous donnons plus de moyens à la lutte contre le chômage. Certes, les politiques de l'emploi relèvent de la compétence nationale mais quand, dans toute l'Europe, il y a plus de deux millions de postes vacants, nous ne pouvons pas interdire de penser Europe. Et pour offrir plus de formations, plus de compétences, un meilleur apprentissage des langues, pour plus de mobilité, grâce aux dix milliards d'euros supplémentaires accordés à la BEI, l'Europe contribue aussi à financer les petites et moyennes entreprises. Elles sont le creuset d'innovation mais n'ont pas toujours l'argent nécessaire pour se financer, et surtout sont confrontées à des taux prohibés dans les pays qui sont le plus en crise.

Dix milliards d'euros qui peuvent générer cinq fois plus, c'est presque notre budget annuel, rien que pour les petites et moyennes entreprises, mais c'est un investissement de bon sens puisque les petites et moyennes entreprises ne se délocalisent pas.

Sans ce Conseil, et avec un accord sur le CFP, ces décisions n'auraient pas eu de sens. Il fallait faire preuve, tous ensemble, de responsabilité, celle de nous donner les moyens d'agir.

Je tiens, à nouveau, à remercier celles et ceux qui ont eu cette vision européenne, et je tiens pour cela à redire merci aussi à la Présidence irlandaise.

  Hannes Swoboda, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, I will be very brief as my colleagues are still coming in.

We finally got an agreement on youth unemployment, but, Mr Van Rompuy, it was this Parliament who pressed for the Youth Guarantee. It was this Parliament who pressed for the front-loading and it was this Parliament who said front-loading needs to be complemented by back-loading.

Finally we got something! Let me be honest: if we have six, eight or ten billion euros it makes a difference but we have to stop the austerity policy as it is now. We have to move into a growth policy. Even Foreign Affairs, which is not a left-wing paper, wrote recently, ‘the results of the experiment are now in and they are consistent: austerity doesn’t work’.

A small step you did take was to emphasise investment. This is something we have emphasised during many debates here. Another serious paper, Die Zeit, wrote ‘Deutschland geht kaputt’ because of the lack of investment in infrastructure. That is true not only for a rich country like Germany; it is true for many others too. I do not want to read in some years’ time: Europa geht kaputt. It is important of course that this does not happen either physically or mentally.

Therefore we need investment: public investment and private investment. I hope at least that everything from the budget will be spent on this investment because that is very important. As regards private investment, we did something via the banking resolution. Fine, thank you, but nevertheless we are far from having a real European banking union. It is important for private banks to give credit to private industry because without this investment, without this credit, it is not possible to go forward in our growth policy.

As regards the social criteria, again some progress has been made. I wish to emphasise that. However, we will fight really hard for a strong, social dimension in the EMU. It is not acceptable for our citizens that we take account of the debt rate and the deficit rate but that we do not take account of the poverty rate, for example. It is important that we fight against poverty and that we monitor all the governments on what they do on poverty, for example, or what they do to close the gap between the rich and the poor.

Finally, as regards the surveillance of EU premises: you said some words, I agree, but we need strong words. Dear colleagues, in this Parliament we need a data protection package before we come to any agreement with the US. We have to ask the US to respect what this Parliament and what Europe decides on data protection; that is very important. There should be no agreement without that kind of recognition from the US, and I hope you will take a strong stance towards the US because what they are doing is unacceptable.

I am very much in favour of good relations with the US but with these kinds of activities they are destroying the possibility of good relations between the EU and the US.

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

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), Pergunta segundo o procedimento "cartão azul". – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Swoboda, o senhor veio aqui verberar a austeridade, e está muito certo, mas a social-democracia europeia e os partidos socialistas europeus andaram a vender aos povos da Europa o tratado da austeridade, o tratado orçamental. Diziam que era a disciplina necessária, que queriam contrabalançar com a solidariedade, com o reforço da solidariedade necessária. Reparei que, na sua intervenção, evitou o acordo sobre o Quadro Financeiro Plurianual, um acordo que nos dá a dimensão da verdadeira solidariedade europeia. Pela primeira vez na história, reduz-se o orçamento em termos absolutos. Numa altura em que se agravam as desigualdades e a divergência, reduzem-se as verbas para a coesão, é esta a verdadeira face da solidariedade europeia. Com que cara, Senhor Swoboda, vão agora os partidos socialistas defender este acordo junto dos povos?

  Hannes Swoboda (S&D), blue-card answer. – Concerning the MFF, I would speak with the Irish Presidency about that, because it was something from the Irish Presidency and came about on that occasion. We were fighting to the bitter end to get more money. It was the Council which, unfortunately, was very resistant. Unfortunately, we know also whose position is dominant, from the conservative side, but life is a compromise too.

Let me tell you one thing. We have been fighting for many years for two things: first of all for budgetary discipline, which is necessary, but also against austerity, which is an extreme form of cutting salaries, cutting wages and cutting pensions. That is a policy we cannot accept, and we have always said that. When Portugal’s Finance Minister resigned recently it was a clear sign that austerity does not work, because this policy no longer has any support in Portugal. This was made very clear.

  Guy Verhofstadt, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, I would like to tackle three topics in this debate: the agreement on the MFF – which Joseph Daul has also mentioned – the non-agreement on the banking union – let us be honest: there was an agreement in Ecofin on the Resolution Directive, but not on the main issue of the resolution fund – and the new revelations on NSA spying in the European Union.

Firstly, on the agreement on the MFF, we have taken the right decision to refuse the initial Council proposal as it was presented to us a few months ago. Because, as you will remember, the initial proposal offered no flexibility at all. In this agreement we now have close to full flexibility on the amounts. This means that we can now be very sure that the EUR 908 billion in payments will be fully available. This was not the case in the MFF for an amount of EUR 55 billion.

But we must not be naive in this debate. The fight is not over yet. There are a number of important outstanding issues. For example, we said that there should be no deficit; Joseph Daul said just that a few minutes ago. We need an agreement on the final EUR 3.9 billion, and that has to be decided by the Council.

Before we give our consent to this deal we must review it thoroughly, to be sure that the wording used by the Council really is compulsory and binding. We also talked about new own resources. I hope also that the high-level group that the Council has proposed can also start its work before we give our consent to this MFF, to save us from having to start this work in a few years’ time. Finally, we need a modern and innovative budget. We need to ensure that there is more money available for research, innovation and the digital agenda.

My second point concerns the outcome of the European Council. I deplore the fact that there are no paragraphs on the banking union in the conclusions. All the paragraphs on the banking union have been deleted from the conclusions. This means that we currently have no agreement about the banking union between the Member States. We have general ideas and general principles, but no agreement on the resolution mechanism. That it this very important because it is the lack of a banking union that is the main problem today.

Mr Van Rompuy said that we need more oxygen in our economy. That is true, but the way to put oxygen in our economy is to restore the transfer of money from the banks to the real economy – small and medium-sized businesses – and that is not happening today. You can make plans for whatever money you like in the European Investment Bank and in the European budget, but if there is no transfer of real money from the banks to the small and medium economy, we will never emerge from the current economic stagnation.

So my request to the Commission is – as Mr Barroso has just said – is for this proposal of a resolution fund to be put on the table at the Council as quickly as possible. Let us stop this discussion for the moment. The Council should take the initiative, and then we can start our legislative work on this resolution fund.

I say the same thing for Economic and Monetary Union. I was at the meetings with the Member States with Mr Brok and Mr Gualtieri. No progress is being made. They cannot agree on the future architecture of the Economic and Monetary Union. Everything has been delayed until the end of the year. So I ask the Council to put that proposal, based on the blueprint, on the table as well.

Finally my third point concerns the American spy scandal. We need to react firmly. It is now up to the European Parliament to do that, because the statements by Baroness Ashton and Mr Van Rompuy were worded too weakly. The only thing I heard from you is ‘we are concerned’. We are not concerned, we are angry. We are outraged about what is happening at the moment and what is being discovered.

Friends do not do that: spying in the EU Embassy in Washington, spying in the EU delegation in New York, spying in the Council building in Brussels, and probably also spying on our mailboxes and accounts. I am pretty sure that the Americans already knew about the offshore tax haven that Mr Farage has created for himself on the Isle of Man before we did. I am pretty sure that they knew about it and did not tell us about it. Yes, Mr Farage, you can laugh but you do not look very happy today.

So we need full clarification. Can we really continue with negotiations on data retention protection and data transfer? I am not talking about the FDA. That would be an idiotic idea because we have an enormous interest in the FDA.

But why not put the other negotiations on hold? We also have to start a special inquiry in this Parliament – a committee of inquiry or a special inquiry group in the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs as soon as possible.

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

  Liisa Jaakonsaari (S&D), sinisen kortin kysymys. – Arvoisa puhemies, olen täsmälleen samaa mieltä puheenjohtaja Verhofstadtin kanssa tästä vakoiluskandaalista. Mitä mieltä olette ajatuksesta, jos parlamentti vaatisi anteeksipyyntöä Yhdysvalloilta? Nopeaa anteeksipyyntöä. Koska nyt tämä näyttää aika selvältä tämä asia, niin miksi he eivät pyydä anteeksi? Jos me vaadimme anteeksipyyntöä, niin siellä voitaisiin reagoida. Mitä mieltä olette tästä?

  Guy Verhofstadt (ALDE), blue-card answer. – I think an apology is the minimum we can ask from the American side. More has to be done. For example, the Commission is currently negotiating on data protection, data transfer and on a number of files. Why should we continue negotiations?

First of all we need clarification on this, but I want to go further than only apologies. And I would like to see a special inquiry committee. We should set up a committee of inquiry or a special inquiry group in the European Parliament in the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs.

But what we also need is a genuine European Parliament position before the end of the year on this and on the measures we are going to take, not just apologies. Apologies are not enough.

  Rebecca Harms, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr Ratspräsident! Herr Kollege Verhofstadt, wer einen großen Mund hat, der muss dann auch mal springen. Und wenn Sie sagen, das ist alles so schlimm mit den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika und den Spionageattacken – und ich teile diese Verärgerung –, dann muss man an dieser Stelle entscheiden: De Gucht eröffnet die Verhandlungen nicht!

(Beifall)

Und an dieser Stelle Komplimente an die starke Frau in der Europäischen Kommission, nämlich an Viviane Reding, die das als Erste ausgesprochen hat! In diesen Verhandlungen wird es ganz stark darum gehen, dass europäische Normen, zum Beispiel zum Datenschutz, in Frage gestellt werden. Deswegen dürfen die Verhandlungen nicht eröffnet werden, bevor wir nicht untersucht haben, wie groß das Problem eigentlich ist! Wenn es noch einer Klärung bedurfte, dann kam die gestern von Außenminister Kerry, der sich in der internationalen Öffentlichkeit hinstellte und erklärte, das sei doch alles ganz normal. Also Reding hat Recht: Stoppt De Gucht und zwar sofort!

(Beifall)

Zum Thema „große Klappe und nichts dahinter“: Der Haushalt, den wir verabschieden, ist vielleicht für die Duchessa von Alba sehr gut. Wenn man sich anschaut, was Großgrundbesitzer in der Europäischen Union an Direktzahlungen aus dem Agrarhaushalt bekommen werden, und das in Vergleich stellt mit dem, was wir gegen die Jugendarbeitslosigkeit aufwenden: Ich schäme mich dafür! Denn das ist genau das strukturelle Problem dieses Haushalts. Wir setzen nach wie vor die alten vormodernen Prioritäten! Wir haben mehr Geld für die Agrarindustrie als für die arbeitslosen Jugendlichen. 10 Euro pro Kopf bedeutet das, was in der Jugendgarantie steckt! 10 Euro pro Kopf – das ist wirklich der Hammer!

Martin Schulz, du weißt, dass ich sehr enttäuscht gewesen bin über die eilige Zustimmung zu diesem Haushalt. Es hat genau mit dieser armseligen Entscheidung zur Jugendgarantie zu tun. Wir wissen in Deutschland, was das Problem Jugendarbeitslosigkeit bedeutet. Wir haben zum Beispiel mit dem Aufbau Ost versucht, strukturelle Probleme zu überwinden. Was wir heute brauchen, ist ein Aufbau Europa, zumindest ein Aufbau Südeuropa! Die Rezession in Südeuropa ist das große Problem. Junge Menschen werden in großer Zahl täglich zusätzlich arbeitslos. Und solange die Europäer das nicht entscheiden, können sie sich diese Jugendgarantie an den Hut stecken!

(Beifall)

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

  William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFD), blue-card question. – Ms Harms, is the termination or temporary cessation of the EU-US discussions designed to end in a trade agreement formal Greens policy, or is that just your personal opinion?

  Rebecca Harms (Verts/ALE), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Meine Haltung dazu ist, dass ich im Moment dank der Enthüllungen des Whistleblowers Snowden den Beleg dafür bekomme, dass in den USA eine vollständig andere Idee in Bezug auf den Schutz der Bürgerrechte und den Datenschutz besteht. Wir sollten prioritär über ein internationales Datenschutzabkommen verhandeln, bevor wir einem Freihandelsabkommen zustimmen, weil ansonsten die europäischen Normen am Ende wieder abgeschwächt werden. Meine Erfahrung mit SWIFT, meine Erfahrung auch mit dem Abkommen über den Schutz von Passagierdaten belegen eigentlich die Skepsis, die die Europäer da haben müssen.

  Martin Callanan, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, we keep debating unemployment and poor growth here, but what steps are we actually taking to solve this particular crisis?

We are of course taking some, but it is not nearly enough. We ask ourselves: why is that? It is because too often vested interests are obstructing the reforms that we desperately need in Europe. We fail to see that more laws, more initiatives, more red tape are actually harming businesses and stopping people from working. We need to understand that sometimes in Europe ‘less is more’.

Let me give you an example. This is from someone who works in a temporary work agency and actually deals with the agency workers directive. They said, and I quote: ‘In many cases drivers who are employed on a pay-as-you-earn basis are actually being stopped from working after their eleventh week as this is the point at which the EU regulations kick in’. People are actually being stopped from working because of the laws that we pass here in Europe.

The Commission’s own European vacancy monitor showed that after the Agency Workers Directive came into force, vacancies at Randstad, which is France’s leading temporary agency, fell by 20% in two months. This of course is legislation brought in to protect workers, but actually it persecutes them.

If we are serious about solving this problem then there are two good places to start. First of all we should scrap the laws that punish productivity, that damage entrepreneurship; secondly, we should open up markets so that enterprise is rewarded and not penalised. The best way to create more employment in Europe would be to create some unemployment in the European Commission – fewer officials dreaming up new rules and regulations; fewer pet projects; fewer vested interests standing in the way of the structural reform that we need.

The saying ‘less is more’ should of course apply to the EU, and that is why I fully support the Dutch Government’s recent efforts to draw a line in the sand to say that there are competences that we believe are better exercised closer to the people, that ever-closer union is not the answer to our problems in Europe. I am sure that Mr Verhofstadt will want to show his support for the position put forward by one of his own Liberal governments.

The problem is that we in this Parliament and officials in the Commission are dominated by those same vested interests. This Parliament seeks to extend its powers at every opportunity; Commission officials move their careers forward by formulating new ways to interfere in our lives here in Europe.

Ever-closer union has become synonymous with ever-more meddling regardless of whether it is the right thing to do, either for our economy or for our people. We will soon be perfectly harmonised, we will be perfectly equal in Europe. Unfortunately we will have harmonised unemployment and we will have equalised poverty across the Union.

There is an alternative, and that is to cut the red tape that binds us; to redirect our efforts and open up markets across Europe; to reward hard work. To do so of course will not be easy. There will be protests from many lobby groups, from trade unions and from others often funded by the EU itself, but by taking on those vested interests we will open to door to the economic reforms that we have to make.

That is why I would like to see President Barroso use the last few months of his term to take on those on the left and the Socialists who are actually preventing these reforms. In fact I have to admit that I am actually at a bit of a loss today because normally I like to stand here and reprimand President Barroso for stuff the Commission has done, or alternatively I like to denigrate the French Socialist government, but it seems to me that they are doing such a good job of slagging off each other that I am not sure I am actually required to interfere in this happy feast any more.

Frankly, some of the comments made by French Ministers in recent weeks have undermined their own credibility and demonstrated the desperate situation in which they find themselves. So they hit out at anybody and anything rather than take responsibility for their own poor decisions in France.

We now know that it is possible to overcome some vested interests. The long-term MFF budget has shown that change, even a little bit of change, is slightly possible in Europe.

The siren voices continue to argue that reducing the EU budget will somehow damage the economy in Europe. We all know that is not true. It will of course harm those that are dependent on EU handouts, such as the trade unions and the NGOs that the Commission funds. But does anybody outside the bubble really believe that we cannot reduce the budget in Europe and yet increase its value?

If we want to solve the EU’s economic crisis then we need to overcome those vested interests that stand in our way, that stop us from delivering a better Europe by constantly forcing us to deliver more Europe. We can do more to help Europe’s economy by doing less here in the Commission and in this Chamber.

  Gabriele Zimmer, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Wir wollen ein Europa haben, das letztendlich allen Menschen auch eine Zukunft bieten kann, und wir wissen ganz genau, dass Verträge, Abkommen, Entscheidungen, die zwischen den Institutionen getroffen werden, die Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten der EU entweder einschränken oder sie erweitern.

Das, was uns in der vergangenen Woche als Kompromiss präsentiert worden ist, ist aus meiner Sicht ein schlechter Deal, bei dem es vor allem einen Verlierer gibt: Das sind diejenigen, die auf die Stärkung von Programmen, von Projekten angewiesen sind, damit sich ihre sozialen und ökologischen Lebensbedingungen verbessern. Dem ist vorige Woche ein Riegel vorgeschoben worden. Es gibt einen weiteren Verlierer, das ist die Demokratie, insbesondere die Beteiligung des Parlaments an diesem sogenannten Kompromiss und seine entsprechenden Rechte. Ich halte es für fatal, dass ja offensichtlich die Amerikaner eher informiert sind über das, was ausgehandelt wird, als wir im Europäischen Parlament in der Breite aller Fraktionen. Eher sitzen andere mit am Tisch als wir.

Ich war immer stolz darauf, dass sich das Parlament in den letzten Wochen gegen das, was im Februar im Rat ausgehandelt worden ist, in einer breiten Front zur Wehr gesetzt hat. Und jetzt brechen wir selber diese Front auf! Wir brauchen vielleicht morgen bei der Abstimmung über die Entschließung keine qualifizierte Mehrheit, da reicht eine einfache Mehrheit, da kann man sich vielleicht auf zwei Fraktionen stützen. Was ist aber im September, wenn die Verordnung kommt? Da brauchen Sie eine qualifizierte Mehrheit, und da werden Sie die Fragen beantworten müssen zu dem, was jetzt alles fehlt und was offen ist und was nicht behandelt wurde. Wie soll denn das bis September noch reinverhandelt werden, wenn wir jetzt schon die Positionen aufgegeben haben?

Was ist die Flexibilität wert, wenn ein Großteil der Defizite dieses Jahres in den nächsten Haushaltsrahmen verschoben wird? Was ist das wert? Es wird von einem Jahr ins andere verschoben. Letztendlich lassen wir Schlupflöcher zu, so dass die Mitgliedstaaten ihre Zahlungen nicht leisten, wie sie vereinbart worden sind! Was ist es wert, wenn eine neue Kommission kommt, die sich nicht an das gebunden fühlt, was dort vage formuliert worden ist? Was ist mit der Revision 2016? Wie verbindlich ist die denn? Was ist mit dem front-loading für die Jugendarbeitslosigkeit? Sechs Milliarden! Ja bitteschön, noch nicht einmal bei den sechs Milliarden können Sie doch konkret benennen, wo die herkommen! Wo stehen sie denn? Können Sie denn konkret benennen, wo diese sechs Milliarden für die ersten zwei Jahre sind, acht Milliarden für die sieben Jahre? Was heißt denn das dann, wir setzen etwas auf, was nicht fortgesetzt werden kann? Wir sagen den jungen Menschen: „Das ist nicht euer Ding, was hier abläuft“.

Rebecca Harms hat völlig Recht. Wir haben hier eine Struktur, die mit den Realitäten in der Europäischen Union nicht mehr Schritt hält, und wir tun nichts, um das endgültig zu beenden und zu sagen: Wir müssen das umkrempeln, weil die Leute uns sonst nicht mehr vertrauen, weil sie uns wegrennen. Welches Signal wollen wir denn noch aussenden? Wir rennen letztendlich dem schlechten Deal hinterher und werden morgen noch eine Begrüßungsentschließung annehmen. Ich fasse es nicht! Ich fasse es einfach nicht mehr! Dafür geben wir uns her? Ich kann meine Kolleginnen und Kollegen wirklich nur bitten, dass wir hier ganz klar sagen: Dieser Deal ist nicht das, was notwendig ist. Und Politik muss sich an dem messen, was notwendig ist, und nicht daran, wo man vielleicht gerade irgendwo eine Einigung zu einem ganz bestimmten Punkt erzielen kann, weil Bundestagswahlen anstehen, weil die Europawahlen anstehen, und nicht, weil es dringende soziale und ökologische Probleme zu lösen gilt. Das kann nicht sein!

Ein Wort noch zu dem Ausspähprogramm der Amerikaner. Eine Entschuldigung reicht überhaupt nicht aus! Bevor überhaupt an ein Freihandelsabkommen gedacht werden kann, muss erst einmal geklärt werden, ob die USA und die EU auf Augenhöhe stehen und ob wir uns gegenseitig respektieren mit all unseren Rechten, mit all unseren Errungenschaften und auch Standards, die wir uns erarbeitet haben.

  Nigel Farage, on behalf of the EFD Group. –Mr President, for the first time this year not just Mr Barroso but also President Van Rompuy have come to the Chamber, and yet look around you. What have we got? Five percent turnout amongst Members? They have not missed much. Just the usual drivel about the fight against youth unemployment.

With 62% youth unemployment in Greece, and with Spain not far behind, it is perhaps about time we were honest and admitted we are causing it ourselves. We are doing it through the misconstruction of the euro, through the obsession with global warming and the over-regulated business model.

Yet your recipe is more bureaucracy: a youth guarantee scheme, another six billion for the youth employment initiative, the setting-up of the European alliance for apprenticeships, backed up by the quality framework for traineeships, and the list goes on, and on: yet more highly-paid civil servants setting up organisations that will achieve nothing.

Until the euro is broken up, until you reverse the social market model you will not help youth unemployment. However I must concede you have had one great victory.

A couple of years ago Mr Barroso said that the European Union was an empire, and your empire has just expanded. Indeed David Cameron appears to be the biggest cheerleader for the EU extending all the way to the Urals.

No, you have got Croatia. You have planted your flag on Croatian soil. Not that there was much public support for this: only 22% of Croatians turned out to vote in the European Parliament elections. But there was plenty of support from the Croatian political class.

Oh yes, the Prime Minister who negotiated entry, Mr Sanader, who was jailed for ten years last year for selling national assets, has been backed up by the whole of Croatia. They have sold out their country for personal gain and to be on a bigger stage. A country that fought for 800 years to be independent has given it away after twenty years to these guys in front of us today.

Well you may be getting away with it for the moment, but it is not going to last very long. There is a gathering electoral storm. It is coming on the left, in the centre and on the right.

You can hardly fail to notice what has happened in big countries like France or Italy, what is happening in Finland, the Netherlands, and even in Britain. The European elections next year present the opportunity for us to show you, Mr Barroso, that the European project is reversible, and it needs to be reversed for the betterment of the peoples of Europe.

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

  Joseph Daul (PPE), question "carton bleu". – Monsieur Farage, simplement une question. Pour la Croatie, le peuple croate a choisi par référendum. Il a donc choisi librement d'adhérer. Je crois qu'il faut aussi respecter la démocratie et les référendums.

La deuxième question, simplement. Vous avez quel statut en tant que député? Vous êtes payé par l'argent européen ou par l'argent britannique?

(Interjection hors micro de Guy Verhofstadt)

  Nigel Farage (EFD), blue-card answer. – Well there was a referendum in theory. You will notice that less than 50% of people turned out to vote; you will notice that millions of euros from the European institutions were poured for many years into Croatia; and you will notice that there was something called pre-accession aid – we can call it bribery if you like – that was poured into Croatia, and there was a prize.

We, in turn, offered a prize for the first Eurosceptic article that appeared in a Croatian newspaper. In the three years leading up to the referendum we did not have to give away any money. That is the point: it is a one-sided political debate and it is all about the power of Brussels and the greed and vanity of politicians in Member States.

I am paid by the European Parliament and what I am doing – just as the Scottish National Party do, and just as the Irish Nationalists in the 19th century did – is using that money to expose the waste, the fraud and the extent to which our countries are now governed by these Chambers. The sooner I get the opportunity, Sir, to be the turkey that votes for Christmas, I will do so!

  Philip Claeys (NI). - Voorzitter, op de Top van vorige week werd bevestigd dat de onderhandelingen over de toetreding van Turkije een nieuwe impuls zullen krijgen. Het ongelofelijke wordt dus werkelijkheid: het blinde politiegeweld en de grootschalige schendingen van de mensenrechten door het islamistische Erdogan-regime worden door de Europese Unie niet bestraft, maar beloond.

In 2004 heeft men de kiezers beloofd dat de onderhandelingen zouden worden stilgelegd, als Turkije zich op flagrante manier niet aan de spelregels zou houden. Het is nu wel overduidelijk dat men de kiezers belogen heeft. Turkije móet en zál lid worden van de Europese Unie, wat er ook gebeurt.

Welnu, de EU bewijst daarmee dat ze het contact met de realiteit van de échte wereld volledig heeft verloren. De grote meerderheid van de kiezers is tegen de toetreding van Turkije, van een islamitisch en niet-Europees land als Turkije. Maar de EU houdt geen rekening met de wil van de kiezers. En ik kan u beloven, collega's, dat dit een thema wordt bij de volgende Europese verkiezingen en dat er met deze houding zal worden afgerekend.

  Gay Mitchell (PPE). - Mr President, first of all can I say at the outset that my country fought for its independence for 700 years and eventually got it and gained sovereignty the day we joined the European Union. Up until then the British Chancellor of the Exchequer set our interest rate and set the value of our currency and we got ten minutes’ notice. It has been a great experience for a small country like ours to get out from under that dictatorship and to be able to share sovereignty with other Member States.

Secondly, I would like to raise the question that George Soros has raised about Eurobonds. He says that, if Eurobonds are introduced, the danger of default would disappear, balance sheets and banks would receive an immediate boost and so would the budgets of heavily indebted countries. Could we please hear what is the position of the President of the Council and the President of the Commission on this? Is this a runner or is not a runner? We really need to do something to put this to bed or to put it on the agenda.

Can I say in relation to this crisis we are in that I believe it is time now for a solidarity charter and that is not just a question of the Germans showing solidarity to us; it is a question of us – particularly small states – showing solidarity as well. Let us put solidarity centre stage. What do we need to give in order to receive? I think that is the sort of thing we need to say.

Lastly, I would like to say that I believe the German Federal President yesterday quoting Benjamin Franklin was correct when he said: ‘whoever gives up freedom to gain security will, in the end, lose both’. We should have an explanation from the US Ambassador to the EU as to what is going on and he should then make himself available to a committee of inquiry in this House so we can determine exactly what has been happening in relation to these spying allegations.

PRESIDE: MIGUEL ANGEL MARTÍNEZ MARTÍNEZ
Vicepresidente

  Pervenche Berès (S&D). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président Herman Van Rompuy, je comprends que, lorsque le Conseil européen, avec le soutien de certains gouvernements, écoute le Parlement européen, les choses avancent.

Cela a été le cas, s'agissant de la priorité en faveur de l'emploi des jeunes, et notamment la question de savoir comment l'on pouvait utiliser de manière anticipée les 6 milliards et les reconstruire après 2015. Cela a été aussi le cas lorsque vous avez rehaussé le niveau du Fonds européen d'aide aux plus démunis, pour le porter à 3,5 milliards.

Mais pour le reste, Monsieur le Président, si le Conseil européen est cohérent, s'il veut vraiment faire de l'emploi des jeunes une question prioritaire, alors il faut traiter d'autres questions. Et lorsque je vois la façon dont vous renvoyez toujours aux réformes structurelles, sans remettre en cause l'impact des mesures d'austérité et le résultat qu'on a pu observer dans les pays où elles ont été, de manière disciplinée, mises en œuvre, il y a là une impasse que vous refusez de voir.

Il y a aussi, Monsieur le Président, cette conviction que le retour à l'emploi ne se fera pas dans les pays de la périphérie si vous ne résolvez pas la question de l'union bancaire, Or, ici, dès décembre 2012, vous aviez un accord de principe pour l'union bancaire, et nous ne voyons pas beaucoup de progrès.

Quant à vous, Monsieur le Président Barroso, qu'avez-vous fait du pacte de croissance, depuis un an? Pourquoi est-ce que, un an plus tard, on nous redit qu'il y a un accord sur un pacte de croissance? Où sont les résultats de mise en œuvre qui sont de votre responsabilité pour mobiliser ces milliards au service de la croissance et de l'emploi?

  Peter van Dalen (ECR). - Voorzitter, in Raadsconclusie nr. 11 lees ik dat de Europese Top verheugd is over de opening van de onderhandelingen over een vrijhandelsakkoord tussen de Verenigde Staten en Europa. Ik vind dat woord "verheugd" echt een misser, want toen afgelopen vrijdag die conclusies werden opgeschreven, was al bekend dat de Amerikaanse inlichtingendiensten Europese overheden op grote schaal bespioneren. Een goed werkend vrijhandelsakkoord tussen Europa en de Verenigde Staten moet gebaseerd zijn op vertrouwen en integriteit, maar de onderlinge relatie heeft door het afluisterschandaal een enorme deuk opgelopen.

Het is daarom van belang, Voorzitter, dat Europa samen met de Obama-administratie een top houdt waarbij Obama openheid van zaken geeft. Alleen op die manier kan er sprake zijn van een goede relatie tussen Europa en de Verenigde Staten. Pas dan, Voorzitter, zijn we écht verheugd.

  Lorenzo Fontana (EFD). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, devo dire, intanto, che sono abbastanza incuriosito dal fatto che qualcuno si sia sorpreso che gli Stati Uniti ci spiassero – come se fosse una novità – ma devo anche dirvi – non so se lo sapete – che in una delle regioni italiane del nord, la Lombardia, si fanno più intercettazioni che in tutti gli Stati Uniti, quindi dovremmo guardare anche ai problemi di libertà e di privacy che ci sono all'interno degli Stati membri prima di andare a guardare quelli di oltre Atlantico.

Devo dirvi un'altra cosa, io ho visto che sono stati erogati più fondi, adesso, per la disoccupazione giovanile, ma mi chiedo una cosa: è stata chiesta l'austerità da parte dell'Europa e l'austerità ha portato a più tasse; più tasse hanno fatto sì che ci fosse maggiore disoccupazione e quindi adesso l'Europa, che è quella che ha creato la disoccupazione dà dei soldi – pochi, a dir la verità, perché sembra quasi un'aspirina che cerca di curare un malato terminale – per la disoccupazione giovanile.

Non è il caso che magari togliamo un po' d'Europa e facciamo respirare un po' di più i paesi e gli Stati membri, facciamo in modo che ci sia un po' meno tassazione, per fare in modo che le aziende riprendano la loro capacità produttiva e così si riprenda anche l'occupazione?

  Mario Borghezio (NI). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, è stato molto pubblicizzato quello che si è inteso fare in questo Consiglio europeo, si dice, per tutelare i piccoli risparmiatori con la clausola dei 100 mila euro.

Mi sembra però invece più che evidente il grandissimo favore finanziario che le scelte del Consiglio hanno inteso fare alle banche dei paesi a economia più forte. Se infatti nella graduatoria delle azioni creditrici nei casi di default bancari si dà precedenza negativa ai grandi gruppi, questo è come dare un bell'annuncio ai gruppi con sede nei paesi europei a economia più debole di trasmigrare il più presto possibile verso le più sicure banche dei paesi forti, con tanti saluti alla strategia spesso strombazzata di riavvicinamento fra le economie del nord e del sud Europa.

Sono tutti provvedimenti, quelli che sono stati divulgati che lasciano – a parte questo – il tempo che trovano, non parliamo nemmeno, per carità, di patria europea, di quelli sul lavoro giovanile: quattro ciliegie. C'è una sola cosa che si deve fare, abrogare i derivati che sono la causa del default bancario, della truffa internazionale bancaria voluta e protetta dai superpoteri occulti tipo Trilateral e Bilderberg Club che attualmente governa il mio paese.

  Giuseppe Gargani (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, qualche giorno fa il G8 si è chiuso auspicando un lavoro per i giovani, ma è stato detto nel comunicato finale che l'economia globale è debole e che l'Europa, signor Presidente del Consiglio, è un buco nero.

È un buco nero perché gli errori della politica europea – rigore senza nessuna progettazione per lo sviluppo, senza strategia politica – hanno portato alla situazione di difficoltà nella quale ci troviamo. Persino la Germania – l'on. Swoboda ce l'ha spiegato stamattina, l'ha ricordato – è in difficoltà, si era illusa di poter probabilmente esportare anche fuori dall'Europa e non si è resa conto che se l'Europa era debole finiva per essere debole essa stessa.

Il vertice ha avuto un risultato molto parziale, ha rinviato le scelte vere, ha indicato somme anche superiori a quelle che erano previste di 6-8 miliardi per concretizzare un programma di occupazione giovanile, ma non si sa come vengano spese, quale sarà la concreta ed effettiva possibilità di poter addirittura nel 2014 e nel 2015 avere la concretizzazione e la spesa di questa somma.

Il ruolo della BEI – che è la cosa più importante – il ruolo cioè della Banca europea per gli investimenti, non viene assolutamente individuato e, come è stato detto, essa non è neppure citata nel comunicato finale. Le scelte politiche non ci sono e la divisione tra i paesi del nord e i paesi del sud è acuita e quindi se l'ammontare del bilancio dell'UE dell'1% rispetto al PIL e gli Stati impongono il pareggio di bilancio, io credo che non ci sia la possibilità di poter programmare a oggi, con questa politica, uno sviluppo per l'Europa.

  Alejandro Cercas (S&D). - Señor Presidente, señores Presidentes del Consejo y de la Comisión Europea, permítanme que, con el mayor respeto, pero también con la mayor sinceridad, les exprese mi indignación, porque es tal —no solo mi desilusión—, con los resultados del último Consejo.

Señor Van Rompuy, no conozco a un solo europeísta español ni a un solo europeísta belga ni de ninguna otra nacionalidad que pueda afirmar hoy, como usted, que estamos por el buen camino; al contrario, hay división de opiniones. Unos piensan que el Consejo ha sido totalmente indiferente; otros, que ha sido totalmente negativo con relación a la recuperación económica, la creación de empleo, la construcción de una Europa más democrática.

Hay una unanimidad total en la opinión de que estamos equivocados. Aún más en cuanto a la unión económica y monetaria, ya que no solo no existe una verdadera unión económica y monetaria, sino que ni siquiera se han cumplido las promesas que ustedes hicieron en el Consejo de julio del año pasado. No nos ha traído el pilar social. Ni está ni se le espera.

Por tanto, señores, la desilusión es profunda. No entre gente que busca la confrontación o la revolución, sino entre los que creen que Europa es algo más que una libre zona de comercio. Una indignación por lo que han hecho en sus recomendaciones a los Estados miembros (más austeridad y nada nuevo con respecto al crecimiento) y también por lo que no han hecho. No han hecho nada por incrementar el contenido democrático del proyecto europeo, no han hecho nada por devolvernos la Europa ilusionada, la Europa de la cohesión, de la justicia social, la Europa de una comunidad de valores.

Están ustedes, señores, muy equivocados y lo peor es que están conduciendo a Europa a un callejón sin salida.

  Bastiaan Belder (EFD). - Voorzitter, de Top van eind vorige week stond goeddeels in het teken van de schrikbarend hoge jeugdwerkloosheid en Europese financiering om de groei te bevorderen. Van dat laatste verwacht ik eerlijk gezegd niet veel. De maatregelen moeten immers uit de lidstaten zelf komen.

Daarom ben ik ook blij met de oproep dat de lidstaten met hoge werkloosheid de arbeidsmarkt moeten hervormen. Dit laat onverlet dat de weerbarstige eurocrisis het echte probleem vormt. De bankenunie geeft daarop niet het juiste antwoord. Een wisselkoersmechanisme biedt perspectief op verbetering van de concurrentiekracht waar we zo om verlegen zitten in Europa. Meer Europa en centralisatie doen dat echt niet. Daarom sta ik afwijzend tegenover een Europese economische regering en verwacht ik weinig heil van de vergezichten van de heer Van Rompuy.

Tevens is er afgelopen week een akkoord gesloten over het meerjarig financieel kader 2014-2020. Onwenselijk zijn de stappen op weg naar eigen middelen voor de Europese Unie. De EU staat ten dienste van de lidstaten en dat moet blijken in de financiering door middel van lidstaatbijdragen.

  Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président du Conseil, Monsieur le Président de la Commission, le Conseil européen de février nous avait fortement déçus, et il a bien fallu que le Parlement pèse de tout son poids pour rectifier un peu le tir. Merci à Alain Lamassoure de ce qu'il a fait en ce sens.

Mais je vous mets en garde. Vous n'êtes pas encore au rendez-vous de l'Europe sociale. Avec l'initiative pour l'emploi des jeunes, vous envoyez un signal de mobilisation aux chefs d'État et de gouvernement. Mais vous savez combien ce phénomène du chômage des jeunes est en pleine accélération. Aujourd'hui, il y a 10 % de chômeurs en Europe, mais 23,5 % des jeunes sont des chômeurs. Nous désespérons les jeunes. Ensuite, depuis 2008, ce chômage des jeunes est en pleine accélération et a été multiplié par 2.

Il y a un point à propos duquel je voudrais vous suggérer de revoir votre vision des choses. Cette initiative pour l'emploi des jeunes cible les jeunes de 15 à 25 ans. Mais pensez qu'aujourd'hui, avec la crise, les jeunes allongent leurs études. Nous avons de plus en plus de jeunes diplômés entre 25 et 30 ans qui sont des chômeurs. Si nous passons de 15 à 30 ans, nous doublons le nombre de jeunes chômeurs. Vous ne pouvez pas désespérer cette génération des 25-30 ans. Vous ne pouvez pas les abandonner.

Il y a un deuxième point sur lequel je vous demande de revoir votre copie. Il s'agit des régions qui comptent 25 % de jeunes chômeurs. Vous devez introduire une vision dynamique de l'évolution de ce chômage des jeunes. Vous devez introduire une vision des départs des jeunes vers d'autres régions. Vous ne garantirez l'efficacité de cette politique que si vous avez cette vision dynamique. Vous courez toujours après la réalité. Nous vous demandons de tomber dans la réalité, vraiment!

  Véronique De Keyser (S&D). - Monsieur le Président, je me joins aux voix de ceux qui, tout en reconnaissant qu'il y a eu un compromis et que mieux vaut un compromis que rien du tout, se disent que ce compromis, en tout cas, ne répond en rien aux besoins immenses des populations aujourd'hui et de celles qui voudraient encore croire en l'Europe.

On a parlé des jeunes. On a dit "bon, il y a la garantie jeunesse, il y a des choses qui vont être faites pour eux", mais – celle qui m'a précédée l'a dit aussi – le problème est tellement important que ceci est une goutte d'eau dans la mer. Les plans d'austérité, aujourd'hui, empêchent les pays de pourvoir à leurs obligations.

Mais l'Europe n'est pas le relais suffisant. Je voudrais revenir sur un point qui n'a pas été évoqué aujourd'hui. On parle des plus vulnérables. On n'a pas dit un mot sur le fait que, dans ces accords aujourd'hui, la coopération au développement et l'aide humanitaire ont été complètement sapées. Nous savons aujourd'hui qu'en tant que partenaire mondial, l'Union européenne a des engagements envers le tiers-monde, qu'il y a des engagements dans des crises qui sont prévisibles. Ce n'est pas l'instrument de flexibilité qui doit jouer, il ne s'agit pas de flexibilité. Nous savons que la Syrie, aujourd'hui, est un désastre, nous savons que le Sahel est un désastre et nous coupons allègrement là-dedans.

Alors, si nous ne faisons rien pour nos jeunes, si nous faisons trop peu pour les plus démunis et si, en plus, nous n'en faisons pas assez par rapport aux crises du monde, c'est l'image même de l'Europe aujourd'hui qui va en prendre un coup. Et je voudrais bien que, puisque nous n'en sommes pas encore exactement au vote du cadre pluriannuel, ces considérations-là soient prises en compte.

  Jacek Protasiewicz (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! Moje poprzedniczki bardzo krytycznie wypowiadały się o ustaleniach szczytu, ale ja mam wrażenie, że właśnie o ile nie zawsze mamy do czynienia ze szczytami, które przynoszą wymierne rezultaty i konkretne pozytywne decyzje, to właśnie zeszłotygodniowa Rada Europejska należy do tych, o których można powiedzieć, że przywódcy Unii Europejskiej potrafią właściwie odczytywać problemy, reagować na wyzwania i próbować zaradzać największym plagom, jakie spotykają zwłaszcza młodzież europejską.

Mam tutaj rzeczywiście na myśli dwie decyzje, które były z mojej perspektywy kluczowe. Pierwsza dotyczy porozumienia w sprawie wieloletnich ram finansowych – to jest tego budżetu Unii, na który ludzie, przedsiębiorcy, samorządowcy, działacze organizacji pozarządowych, ale też zwykli obywatele, w wielu regionach Europy naprawdę czekali. To są czasami jedyne pieniądze, które uruchomione od przyszłego roku mogą procentować konkretnymi inwestycjami, dlatego że rządów narodowych czy władz regionalnych nie stać na prowadzenie inwestycji publicznych bez użycia funduszy europejskich. Chciałbym za tę decyzję serdecznie podziękować i pogratulować zarówno przewodniczącemu Parlamentu jak i przewodniczącemu Komisji i Rady – wiele milionów Europejczyków na nią czekało.

Druga decyzja, może mało ambitna z pewnej perspektywy, ale jednak również zasługująca na uznanie, to zwiększenie o 30% wydatków (minimum 30% jak słyszeliśmy z ust pana przewodniczącego Van Rompuya) na walkę z tą plagą jaką jest bezrobocie młodzieży.

Mam nadzieje, że te fundusze na wsparcie programów narodowych przyniosą wymierne rezultaty, nie tylko w liczbie nowych miejsc pracy, nie tylko w zmniejszeniu liczby młodzieży, która jest bezczynna, nie ma możliwości podjęcia pracy, albo kontynuowania zatrudnienia, ale również, co ważne, że wśród tych młodych ludzi, którzy dzisiaj są rozczarowani, sfrustrowani, przywróci ona wiarę w sens projektu europejskiego, w sens Unii Europejskiej jako tej instytucji, która rozumie potrzeby zwykłych obywateli, a nie tylko polityków i bankierów.

  Jaime Mayor Oreja (PPE). - Señor Presidente, señor Van Rompuy, señor Barroso, simplemente quiero decir que, para nosotros, el Consejo Europeo constituye la confirmación de que se está gestando una nueva agenda de prioridades que sin duda caminan en la buena dirección y por eso, sin duda, les felicito. Porque la Unión Europea debe afrontar a corto plazo dos problemas especialmente dramáticos: en primer lugar, el desempleo —y especialmente el juvenil— y, en segundo lugar, la fragmentación de los mercados financieros.

Por eso, en la medida de sus competencias, esta Cumbre va marcando una preocupación por el desempleo juvenil que no se había producido hasta la fecha y al que se han destinado 8 000 millones de euros; y, claro que no es la panacea, pero va en la buena dirección. Como también va en la buena dirección que hoy en España, en el mes de junio, haya más de 125 000 parados menos. Va en la buena dirección, es un paso más en la buena dirección.

Y también acogemos con satisfacción las medidas que se están produciendo para evitar la fragmentación de los mercados financieros y eso será bueno para las pequeñas y medianas empresas y también para la Unión Europea, porque no se puede castigar a determinadas empresas en función de su localización geográfica.

En definitiva, claro que hace falta avanzar en muchas cosas en la Unión Europea: en la unión bancaria, en el sistema de arquitectura institucional de la Unión Europea, en la supervisión, en la recapitalización directa de los bancos, en el mecanismo de resolución única, en el fondo de resolución común. Pero ustedes están acertando en que van por la agenda de la buena dirección en los problemas que preocupan realmente a los europeos.

  Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz (PPE). - Először is szeretném azzal kezdeni a hozzászólásomat, hogy gratulálok a tanácsi ülésnek a következtetéseihez. Nagyon fontos kérdésekben született végmegállapodás, és ezek jó része előremutató. Itt szeretnék gratulálni Horvátország csatlakozásához, a megkezdendő további csatlakozási tárgyalásokhoz, és elsőként ki szeretném emelni, hogy üdvözlöm, hogy a Tanács következtetéseiben a válságkezelésre talán most először egy komplex megközelítést javasolt, komplex megközelítést, rájött arra, hogy nincs pénzügyi válság külön, nincs gazdasági válság külön, nincs munkaerő-piaci vagy éppen szociális válság külön.

Annak is örülök, hogyha lépés születik olyan irányban, hogy a tanácsi ülésen elfogadják a tagállami megoldásokat, és rájönnek végre, hogy más feltételrendszerek között az egyes tagállamok nem alkalmazhatnak ugyanolyan válságkezelési módokat.

Örülök annak is, hogy hazám, Magyarország ezen az úton indult el, és ennek eredményeképpen elmondhatom, hogy a foglalkoztatottság nőtt, a munkanélküliség csökkent, az államadósság csökkent, a költségvetési hiány tartósan csökkent, és ennek eredményeképpen több mint 9 év után végre kikerültünk a túlzottdeficit-eljárás alól is.

Annak is örülök, hogy a bankunió témájában előrelépés született, mégpedig oly módon, hogy a szolidaritást is figyelemmel kísérve és figyelemmel tartva tekintettel vannak arra, hogy azon országok, amelyek nem tagjai a zónának legalább olyan beleszólást kapjanak a későbbi esetekben is.

Öröm az is, hogy a kkv-témakörben is határozott ajánlás születik a hiteláramlások növelésére, mert mégiscsak ez az egyedüli potenciális növekedési lehetőség a gazdasági növekedés beindítására. Amit zárásként szeretnék hangsúlyozni: nagy öröm számomra, hogy az Európai Tanács ülése kiemelten foglalkozott az Európát sújtó árvizekkel, és egy olyan megállapítással zárta a következtetéseit, amely iránymutató lehet a Bizottság számára, és segítheti a mi munkánkat is a délutáni vitában, amely ugyanezzel a kérdéssel foglalkozik.

  El Presidente. − Comprenderán todos ustedes que, entre otras cosas por el sentido de la Historia que tengo y que comparto con el señor Pöttering, me sienta muy feliz y muy emocionado por poder dar la palabra al primer colega croata en la historia del Parlamento Europeo que va a intervenir en el Pleno. Con mucha emoción le doy la palabra al amigo Andrej Plenković para que tome la palabra, también en nombre de su pueblo.

(Aplausos)

  Andrej Plenković (PPE). - Hvala lijepa, gospodine potpredsjedniče, hvala Vam što ste bili u Zagrebu prije dva dana s nama na proslavi članstva Hrvatske u Europskoj uniji. Zahvaljujem i predsjedniku Europskog vijeća, g. Van Rompuyu, i predsjedniku Europske komisije na toploj dobrodošlici, kao i svim kolegama koji su zaista učinili ova prva dva dana izuzetnim za sve nove izravno izabrane hrvatske zastupnike.

Drago mi je da je Europsko vijeće prije nekoliko dana donijelo nekoliko bitnih, važnih odluka koje se reflektiraju i na prioritete i očekivanja Republike Hrvatske od članstva u Europskoj uniji. Prije svega, drago mi je da je uoči Europskog vijeća postignut dogovor i o proračunu, o takozvanoj Dab1 reviziji za 2013., tako da Hrvatska od ovog tjedna kad izglasamo taj proračun može normalno funkcionirati u proračunskom smislu kao država članica. Isto tako, cijenim napore kolega u Parlamentu koji su u pregovorima s Vijećem došli do kompromisa o višegodišnjem financijskom okviru (MFF) na tih pet bitnih elemenata: i o jedinstvu proračuna, i o reviziji MFF-a, i o vlastitim prihodima te transparentnosti i fleksibilnosti. Za Hrvatsku su posebno bitni oni aspekti zaključaka koji se odnose na zapošljavanje mladih, to je problem koji je jednako prisutan i u Hrvatskoj kao i u mnogim članicama Unije te od njega očekujemo da nam upravo s ovim unaprijed koncentriranim sredstvima između 2014. i 2016. olakša rješavanje ovog bitnog društvenog problema.

Također, veselimo se i novim investicijama u malo i srednje poduzetništvo jer je upravo ono kičma europskoga gospodarstva, a važno je i za gospodarski oporavak Hrvatske. Također smatram da je za Hrvatsku ova prigoda koja se ukazuje sada važna zato što ćemo dogovorom o MFF-u imati mogućnost brzo donijeti i dinamične odluke za sve ostale odredbe koje će omogućiti naše financiranje.

A samo na kraju, g. Farageu poručujem da smo imali debate uoči našeg referenduma. Nije nikada bio u Hrvatskoj prije 2011., a pokušao nam je patronizirati raspravu i strateški cilj od 20 godina. Savjetujem mu da se drži svog Isle of Man.

Intervenciones con arreglo al procedimiento de solicitud incidental de uso de la palabra («catch the eye»)

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE). - Mr President, I have moved from the back benches to the front rows in recent times and – Mr Farage will be disappointed when I say this – the new mood in this House is much calmer than it has been for some time.

That is a reflection of the solid, calm work of the Commission, Council and Parliament in taking step-by-step, measured responses to the crisis. They are not headline-grabbers, Mr Farage – something you always try to do – but they are important for our citizens. The day we stop taking a measured step-by-step approach to the problems will be the day that Europe will fail.

So I would say to all of us in this House who have families, children, parents and who have responsibilities: do not to be led by the noises of the extremists.

  Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D). - Egyetértek azzal, hogy az európai állam- és kormányfők 8 milliárdra megnövelték az európai ifjúsági garanciára elkülönített forrásokat, bár meg kell, hogy jegyezzem: ez az összeg messze elmarad a Nemzetközi Munkaügyi Szervezet, az ILO által becsült 21 milliárd eurós minimális összegtől. Ahhoz, hogy az Európai Unió eljusson Ausztria vagy Finnország jelenlegi szintjére, ahhoz évi 30 milliárd euróra lenne szükség. Örömteli, hogy az Unió egyik legsikeresebb kezdeményezését az Erasmus programot is sikerült megmenteni. Ami pedig a kohéziós politikát illeti nagyon fontos, hogy annak a felhasználási szabályaiból kerüljön ki a makroökonómiai feltételrendszer, amely a kistérségeket, a vállalkozásokat bünteti a rossz politika miatt. Végezetül magyarként nagy öröm volt hallani déli szomszédunk...

(az elnök elveszi a szót)

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE). - Señor Presidente, coincido con el señor Van Rompuy en que, sin sobresaltos, vamos dando pasos para poder consolidar una verdadera unión económica y monetaria.

La crisis ha sido definitiva para conseguir estos avances, pero sus urgencias nos exigen más velocidad y decisión en asuntos como la lucha contra la pobreza, la recuperación del crédito o los programas de reactivación y creación de empleo, especialmente en el ámbito juvenil, más políticas de crecimiento, adaptar la consolidación fiscal a las condiciones económicas, contemplar los bonos-proyecto a emitir por el BEI, así como otro tipo de bonos para poner en marcha los programas destinados a microempresas, trabajadores y familias, y también para impulsar proyectos de I+D+I ha sido la aportación de mi partido a la posición común con la que España se presentó en esta Cumbre.

Les pido, además, que no olviden que —como ha dicho el señor Barroso— la recuperación empieza y requiere un esfuerzo coordinado de los Estados miembros. Animo por ello a la Comisión a que impida...

(El Presidente interrumpe a la oradora)

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). - Senhor Presidente, as conclusões do Conselho Europeu, embrulhadas em novas doses de propaganda, não iludem a dura e crua realidade dos factos. Olhemos para as medidas sobre desemprego jovem: proposta de 6 mil milhões de euros que não sabemos de onde vêm nem para onde vão, mas sabemos que a OIT admitiu serem necessários, pelo menos, 21 mil milhões para que um programa de promoção do emprego possa ter algum impacto. Outras propostas: subvenções salariais e promoção da mobilidade laboral transfronteiras, ou seja, o orçamento comunitário a financiar diretamente a precariedade laboral e a fuga de cérebros da periferia para o centro. Outra proposta: redução dos custos não salariais do trabalho, ou seja, descapitalizar ainda mais os sistemas públicos de segurança social e aumentar os lucros do patronato, sem nenhum efeito prático na criação de emprego, que só crescerá com o aumento da procura, o que só acontecerá com a melhoria dos salários que estão a ser esmagados. Em suma, nada de novo, tudo velho, tudo muito velho.

  El Presidente. − Gracias João y felicidades a los intérpretes por su trabajo.

  Andrzej Grzyb (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! To, co mnie szczególnie interesuje, to ważne decyzje, które zostały podjęte. Po pierwsze, zaakceptowanie porozumienia budżetowego na lata 2014–2020. Nie było wcale oczywiste, że to porozumienie dojdzie do skutku. Po drugie, są nowe środki – choć niewystarczające – na bezrobocie młodzieży, ale ten problem staramy się rozwiązać. Powinniśmy zrobić więcej! Po trzecie, podjęta została próba rozwiązania kryzysu kredytowego. Małe i średnie przedsiębiorstwa potrzebują kapitału. Małe i średnie przedsiębiorstwa to są te podmioty, w których można utworzyć nowe miejsca pracy. Podobnie jest również z tworzeniem nowych przedsiębiorstw.

Chcę podziękować prezydencji Irlandii i powitać nową prezydencję, prezydencję litewską, która przejmie szereg zadań. Irlandia dokończyła jednak ważne dzieła. Chciałbym także z zadowoleniem stwierdzić, że Chorwacja jest nowym członkiem, że pan poseł Plenković – pierwszy raz jako poseł Chorwacji będącej już pełnym członkiem – zabrał tutaj głos. I z zadowoleniem witam...

(Przewodniczący odebrał mówcy głos.)

  Phil Prendergast (S&D). - Mr President, having rejected the Council’s initial proposal for the MFF, we pushed as far as we could for more funding to address a mounting unemployment crisis, particularly amongst our youth, for investment in training, regional development and infrastructure and for more flexibility in the use of funds in order to address our priorities at a time of recession.

In the face of conservative austerity-bent majorities across the EU institutions, we find ourselves forced to settle for a minimum. At the same time, the Council continues to drag its feet on a resolution mechanism for broken banks, to release the public purse from the vice-grip of toxic banking debt, which was – let us not forget – the foremost cause of the economic crisis we face.

The austerity experiment goes on, ignoring the fact that the root of the problem – public expenditure on public goods, social services and welfare support – did not bring us to the brink. We have to acknowledge reality and stop suffocating our economies – for growth’s sake.

  Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL). - Senhor Presidente, as conclusões e o acordo a que se chegou em relação ao Quadro Financeiro Plurianual para 2014-2020 vão condenar esta Europa à austeridade eterna e é de lamentar que o grupo dos socialistas, que esteve em oposição a este quadro em fevereiro, agora esteja de acordo com as conclusões e que tenha sido uma parte integrante importante e a muleta do PPE neste acordo.

Este acordo não só não traz nada de novo como mascara a realidade. Os 6 mil milhões de euros para o emprego jovem não são dinheiro novo, metade desse dinheiro vai ser retirado do Fundo Social Europeu. É um insulto, não consegue de maneira nenhuma reverter o desemprego na Europa. A ajuda aos mais desfavorecidos é apenas uma migalha de que este Parlamento deveria ter vergonha.

Gostava agora de perguntar ao Senhor Presidente da Comissão ...

(O Presidente retira a palavra à oradora)

  Daniel Cohn-Bendit (Verts/ALE). - Monsieur le Président, vous devriez changer l'énoncé, ce n'est pas catch the eye, c'est catch the list.

  Le Président. - Non, vous vous trompez, Monsieur Cohn-Bendit, ce n'est pas catch the list, c'est catch the eye.

Mais vous avez une liste.

  Le Président. - Non, je n'ai pas de liste. Enfin, j'ai une liste, mais j'ai un catch the eye. Ce qu'on ne peut pas faire, c'est s'interrompre à chaque fois que quelqu'un souhaite intervenir au milieu du débat parce qu'alors, on n'en finirait jamais. Je vous remercie, Monsieur Cohn-Bendit. De toute façon, je prends note de votre remarque.

  Andrew Henry William Brons (NI). - Mr President, increased mobility is not so much a cure for youth unemployment as it is a cause, at least in the West. Unemployment in the South is caused directly by a euro that is over-valued for those countries, but the European Council is determined to keep on expanding the zone. The European Council wants to improve growth and competitiveness, but the EU’s energy policy pushes up energy costs, making industry less competitive. It even provides incentives for manufacturers like Corus near Middlesbrough to move production to India. Immigration – two thirds of it from outside the EU in the case of the UK – is giving our jobs to people from outside. Increasing globalism will make industry in the EU try unsuccessfully to compete with emergent economies. The European Council does not so much have a cure for the recession, it is part of the problem.

  Juan Andrés Naranjo Escobar (PPE). - Señor Presidente, como de costumbre a lo largo de estos años de crisis, el Consejo Europeo reacciona a trompicones, como lo demuestran las decisiones en el ámbito de la unión bancaria, que avanza con lentitud exasperante.

En lo que se refiere al presupuesto para los próximos siete años, partimos de una realidad dura, un importe de gasto que se sitúa a niveles de 2008, pero que es explicable por dos razones insoslayables: la crisis fiscal de casi todos los Estados miembros y la lógica de los ingresos de la Unión, que obedece más a los intereses nacionales que a un bien general comunitario.

Detrás de esta cuestión late, en el fondo, la necesidad de una reforma profunda que nos lleve a la unión fiscal, sin la que no pueden funcionar correctamente las políticas económicas y presupuestarias de la Unión y de los Estados en un área de moneda única.

Pero también tenemos noticias buenas para el presupuesto: revisión de cifras, flexibilidad para pagos y compromisos, ayuda al empleo juvenil y, por fin, la posibilidad de reformar los recursos propios.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D) - Hlavnou témou samitu bola otázka nezamestnanosti mladých a hoci témy, ako je zvýšenie konkurencieschopnosti, rastu a zamestnanosti, sa preberajú stále dookola, akosi sa nám stále nedarí dopracovať sa ku konkrétnym výsledkom.

Považujem za veľmi dôležité pripomenúť, že miera nezamestnanosti mladých ľudí v rámci Európskej únie vzrástla už na 21 percent, čo zodpovedá 5,5 miliónu mladých ľudí. Za ostatné roky navyše počet mladých ľudí bez práce dramaticky narastá.

Boj proti nezamestnanosti mladých si vyžaduje komplexný prístup a správne cielené investície a je našou povinnosťou zmobilizovať všetky dostupné nástroje. Máme predsa štrukturálne fondy, máme Európsky sociálny fond, ktorý je jedným z hlavných finančných nástrojov na úrovni Európskej únie. Uvedomme si konečne, že sociálne investície, to nie sú len výdavky, sú to investície, ktoré v budúcnosti prinesú reálne zlepšenie.

  Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE). - Senhor Presidente, Senhor Barroso, estamos a falar hoje de políticas centradas no emprego, de políticas para combater a crise, de políticas para combater o desemprego juvenil. No dia 17 de abril, o Colégio de Comissários vai tomar uma decisão estratégica sobre o setor naval, na Galiza, no País Basco e nas Astúrias. Uma decisão estratégica que também está no Quadro Financeiro Plurianual porque são políticas industriais, de luta contra o desemprego e nós, neste Parlamento, pedimos-lhe, e esta será a oportunidade antes dessa reunião do Colégio de Comissários, que tenha em conta o setor naval e essa possível multa pelo sistema de tax lease que vai deixar sem emprego mais de 30 mil famílias.

  El Presidente. − Gracias, señora Miranda. Seguro que el señor Barroso la ha comprendido a usted perfectamente en su versión del portugués.

  Jan Kozłowski (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! Z zadowoleniem przyjąłem konkluzje z zeszłotygodniowego posiedzenia Rady, zarówno te dotyczące uzgodnienia wieloletnich ram finansowych, na które czekały wszystkie regiony i wszystkie środowiska, jak i decyzje dotyczące bezrobocia młodzieży. Dramatyczna sytuacja młodzieży na rynku pracy wymaga zdecydowanych i szybkich działań, dlatego za słuszną uważam decyzję o koncentracji większości środków na walkę z bezrobociem młodych w pierwszych dwóch latach nowej perspektywy finansowej. Unia Europejska dysponuje instrumentami, które dobrze wykorzystane dają możliwość wsparcia. Szczególny potencjał posiada Europejski Fundusz Społeczny, ale poza tzw. gwarancjami dla młodzieży, które są głównym środkiem polityki społecznej, należy skupić się przede wszystkim na działaniach, które będą pomagały tworzyć nowe miejsca pracy i pobudzały przedsiębiorczość.

(Fin de las intervenciones con arreglo al procedimiento de solicitud incidental de uso de la palabra («catch the eye»))

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − Mr President, regarding the European Council issues, the question that was directed to me was about what the European Union has been doing regarding the implementation of the growth compact.

Before the European Council I sent to all Heads of State and Government, and also to the European Parliament through its President, a very clear and transparent report on the implementation of the Growth Compact, where I signalled, in very clear terms, what has been done, what has not been done and what is in the process of being completed.

I invite all of you – those who have not yet seen that report – to look at it attentively because I think it is a very important exercise in transparency as regards the real implementation of the Compact for Growth and Jobs.

As I said in my introductory remarks, the ‘bilan’ is rather mixed. There are, it is fair to say, important points of progress, but there are still matters where we need to do more, namely in terms of implementation. Most of the bottlenecks, if you look at this report, are mainly in terms of national implementation. This is the fair, objective assessment we can give to you.

The Commission, apart from many initiatives that it has taken – from the initial proposal to the increase of the EIB lending capacity, to the project bonds, to the Youth Guarantee scheme and many other initiatives – has committed to redirect and redeploy the structural funds for growth.

I would like now to report to you more concretely. I am pleased to confirm that the EUR 55 billion representing the last tranche of the European Union budget to complete current programmes – the 2013 tranche – has now been allocated to all programmes. In other words, the full budget of cohesion policy for the period 2007-2013 – EUR 346 billion – has been made available to Member States.

The Commission is now working with Member States to ensure that these resources are mobilised rapidly and efficiently to support growth in investment and jobs. Several Member States – Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Sweden – have reported on frontloading their programmes and have already allocated all the 2013 funds or will do so soon. Other Member States have indicated that selection processes are well underway – for instance Germany, France, Poland and the UK. I urge those Member States who have not yet done so to accelerate selection processes for prompt implementation.

Concerning structural fund reprogramming to date, I would like to remind Members of this House that, since 2009, more than EUR 39 billion has been reprogrammed to support the most pressing needs and reinforce effective measures – with the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and Cohesion Fund accounting for EUR 32.7 billion and the European Social Fund (ESF) accounting for EUR 6.5 billion.

These measures have been accompanied by exceptional increases in the European Union cofinancing rate for nine Member States, reducing national financing by EUR 19 billion by May 2013 and adding a further cofinancing top-up for the programme countries, namely paying EUR 1.7 billion.

These measures have reduced national cofinancing requirements by EUR 20.7 billion. This takes pressure away from national budgets in the most vulnerable countries at a time of crisis. I could go on at length explaining some of the measures, namely the action teams for tackling youth unemployment and many other concrete measures. I invite you to look at this report on the Compact for Growth and Jobs where you will see afterwards, in a very graphic way as well, all the measures that were announced by the European Council and the Council where we have shown the different levels of implementation in green, yellow and red.

I believe that when we speak about transparency and accountability this should not be only words, but we should really put them into practice. I think this is clearly important.

If I may now make a more general political remark, I hope that Members of the European Parliament, namely those coming from the pro-European families, resist the temptation that is unfortunately very common among some national politicians when there is a problem in the economy to put the blame on Brussels or on the European Union, instead of doing their own homework and instead of doing what they should do at home to reform their economies, to promote investment and in fact to make our economies more competitive.

I think this point is very important bearing in mind the European Parliament elections we are going to have next year. Because if the main political forces, those with the great tradition of supporting the European project, start criticising the European Union, if they think they will gain or make points with that, they are completely wrong. Because in the business of attacking the European Union there are others that are much better than the mainstream political forces and at the end they are going to be the ones who will benefit from these kinds of populist attacks.

That is why I want to conclude, and since I cannot mention all the statements, by praising one statement that I particularly liked during today’s meeting. It was Ms McGuinness’s remark. It was brief but she touched on a very important point. We have to deal with these matters with a great sense of responsibility. We should not ask the European level what the European level cannot deliver now. I can assure you that at European level, together with the European Parliament, we are using to the full all the instruments we have to promote growth and stability in Europe.

However, we have to do it in a spirit of responsibility on a step-by-step approach; highlighting what has been achieved and also being honest about what has not yet been achieved.

It is true that there are many matters where we need to do more and in a more determined and quicker manner. But I think this is the language of truth. This is the only way to reconnect Europe to citizens; to talk with them responsibly; to tell them the truth and not to create illusions that we are not able to fulfil and to avoid the narrow vision of some nationalism or some chauvinism that can only do harm to our European Union – a European Union that, despite all the difficulties, is indeed showing its resilience and its very strong power of attraction. Not only has Croatia now joined the European Union, but also the Union is giving the green light for Latvia to become the next member of the euro family.

My dear friends of the European Parliament, I remember that more or less one year ago people were speaking about the implosion of the euro and now I see new members for the euro, new members for the European Union. In spite of all the difficulties I see this Europe has a great future if we do it in a responsible constructive way.

  Herman Van Rompuy, Conseil européen. − Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, je remercie d'abord tous les intervenants. Je remercie tout particulièrement ceux qui sont intervenus d'une façon positive par rapport aux conclusions du Conseil européen. C'est tellement rare que je chéris ces moments et que je les retiens.

Certains d'entre vous ont parlé de la faillite de la politique menée – ce qu'on appelle la politique d'austérité. Eh bien, la politique que l'on mène, c'est beaucoup plus qu'une politique d'austérité. Je l'ai expliqué tout au début de mon introduction. C'est une politique, une stratégie en quatre points: assurer la stabilité financière, favoriser le rétablissement de finances publiques saines, restaurer – dans la mesure du possible – la compétitivité, travailler sur l'union économique et monétaire et prendre des mesures directes visant l'emploi et, surtout, l'emploi des jeunes.

Sur cette stratégie, il y a depuis longtemps un consensus au Conseil européen, et ce sont des gouvernements de centre-gauche, des gouvernements de centre-droite, des coalitions autres que celles que je viens de citer, qui l'approuvent dans la continuité des dernières années. Ce n'est donc pas une stratégie imposée par quelques institutions, par quelques gens têtus. Non, c'est une stratégie partagée par les gouvernements, appuyée par leurs parlements nationaux. Je tiens à le redire.

Concernant la politique d'assainissement budgétaire: bien sûr, c'est une politique qu'on continue à mener. La direction, c'est toujours la direction qui a été établie il y a quelques années. Elle se concrétise au travers des plans de stabilité, mais vu la situation économique, et vu aussi les résultats qui ont été obtenus – c'est-à-dire qu'on a diminué de 50 % en moyenne les déficits budgétaires –, on a pu assouplir le rythme, on a donné des délais à certains pays pour atteindre les objectifs budgétaires. Dans le cas de six ou sept pays, on a gardé la direction, mais on a changé le rythme, pour précisément tenir compte des résultats obtenus et de la récession qui les frappent. Mais donc, garder le cap est extrêmement important, afin également de maintenir la crédibilité.

Cette politique est donc beaucoup plus consensuelle qu'on ne le croit à travers l'Europe – l'Europe des gouvernements nationaux, appuyée par des parlements nationaux. Mais on sait très bien que cela prend du temps et qu'on ne peut pas attendre, disons, le retour d'une croissance forte sans travailler sur l'emploi, et surtout sur l'emploi des jeunes.

C'est pour cela qu'on a besoin, outre une politique générale – et personne, je l'espère, n'est partisan d'une politique d'augmentation des déficits budgétaire –, d'une politique directe, d'une politique spécifique. Et je constate que les pays qui ont les plus faibles taux de chômage des jeunes dans notre Union européenne sont précisément ceux qui ont cette politique spécifique, axée sur la formation, sur une bonne éducation et sur une coopération entre le monde des entreprises et les écoles de tout niveau. Et ce sont ces pays qui ont davantage de succès, même dans une période – également pour eux – de récession ou de quasi-stagnation. Il faut tirer toutes les conséquences des politiques menées dans certains pays. Il faut apprendre ce que certains pays ont pu réaliser. Et c'est l'exercice que l'on mène, c'est le travail que l'on continuera aussi, d'ici quelques jours à Berlin.

Alors, en ce qui concerne l'union économique et monétaire, est-ce que le rythme est trop lent? Chers collègues, on s'est prononcé, en juin de l'année passée, en faveur d'une supervision unique, d'une surveillance unique, de toutes les banques. Six mois plus tard, on a le cadre législatif, tout au moins au niveau du Conseil. Six mois, c'est peu pour une réforme qui est en fait, dans ce monde financier, une réforme quasi révolutionnaire! Je l'avais déjà dit, il y a un an, dans ce Parlement. Bien sûr, il faut maintenant réaliser cela sur le terrain. Il faut engager des gens. Il faut une infrastructure, une logistique. Cela prend du temps. On a travaillé à une cadence très élevée, et on continue à travailler à une cadence très élevée.

On s'est mis d'accord, il y a quelques jours, sur une harmonisation des résolutions de crise dans les différents pays, avec un critère concernant la manière de procéder. Ce sera très utile d'ailleurs, lorsque la Commission présentera sa proposition relative à un mécanisme de résolution de crise unique pour toute l'Union européenne. C'est là aussi un pas extrêmement important parce que les deux composantes centrales d'une union bancaire sont la surveillance et la résolution de crise. Pour ce qui est de la surveillance, on en est au stade de la mise en œuvre et, en ce qui concerne la résolution de crise, on a déjà une harmonisation. On attend la proposition de la Commission et on travaillera au cours du deuxième semestre au Conseil et au Parlement, de sorte que toute cette procédure soit terminée avant les élections européennes.

Mais, bien sûr, cela prend du temps, je l'ai dit, parce que l'on doit combattre la fragmentation financière au sein de la zone euro, et qu'on ne peut pas attendre d'avoir une union bancaire totale et complète. On doit avoir, ici aussi, des mesures ponctuelles, et c'est pour cela qu'on a demandé à la Commission européenne et à la Banque européenne d'investissement de travailler, d'avoir un partage de risques, de manière à pouvoir aider le plus possible les petites et moyennes entreprises afin qu'elles aient accès au crédit.

Donc, comme pour le chômage des jeunes, il faut mettre en place des politiques spécifiques en attendant que les réformes structurelles portent leurs fruits, et j'aimerais que vous compreniez cette démarche, qui est effectivement une démarche graduelle, une démarche pas-à-pas, mais qui suppose de garder le cap, de garder la direction.

On a dit qu'il n'y avait pas de solidarité dans l'Union européenne. Dans le budget européen que, j'espère, on approuvera, il y a beaucoup de solidarité européenne. Le mécanisme de sauvetage financier, le MES, est un mécanisme de solidarité. On a parlé aussi, à un moment donné, de l'aide au développement. On n'a pas coupé dans l'aide au développement. On a mentionné la Syrie. Qui est le plus grand donateur d'aide humanitaire à la Syrie? C'est l'Union européenne et ses États membres, avec une somme totale d'un milliard d'euros. On bat tous les autres joueurs mondiaux, et de loin. L'Union européenne reste, d'une manière générale, le plus grand donateur d'aide au développement dans le monde, avec plus de 50 %.

Je ne suis pas masochiste. Je ne fais pas dans l'euphorie non plus. Mais il faut dire les choses telles qu'elles sont. Et donc je ne demande pas de la compréhension, mais j'insiste pour que l'on voie toujours la vérité dans tous ces aspects.

Sur les récents incidents et révélations, dont plusieurs d'entre vous ont parlé, on doit d'abord avoir une clarification complète, avoir toutes les informations avant de se lancer dans des accusations. Si ces accusations, bien sûr, se révèlent exactes, alors le moment sera venu d'agir et j'emploierai, à ce moment-là, d'autres mots que ceux que j'emploie aujourd'hui. Mais on a demandé aux autorités américaines davantage de clarification sur ces suspicions et sur ces accusations.

Voilà, c'est un Conseil européen qui, sur différents plans, a pris des mesures concrètes conformément à la philosophie que j'ai exposée, une philosophie basée sur une stratégie en quatre points, sans que l'on s'attende à ce que cette stratégie donne tous les résultats escomptés dans les domaines du chômage des jeunes et de l'accès au crédit. C'est pour cela qu'on prend, entre-temps, des mesures directes, spécifiques, pour s'attaquer aux problèmes dans la mesure du possible, tout en sachant que, par exemple, quand on parle de l'emploi, la plupart des compétences sont des compétences nationales. Il est trop facile d'accuser l'Europe pour les problèmes non résolus au niveau national. On doit en finir avec ce proverbe qui dit que "s'il pleut, c'est la faute de l'Europe!". Non, il faut voir où se trouvent les responsabilités, particulièrement quand on parle de la politique de l'emploi.

  El Presidente. − Se cierra el debate.

Declaraciones por escrito (artículo 149 del Reglamento)

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. – Norėčiau pasveikinti Airiją sėkmingai užbaigus pirmininkavimą Europos Sąjungai bei pasiekus susitarimą dėl 2014–2020 m. daugiametės finansinės perspektyvos. Savo pirmininkavimo programoje Airija siekė priimti realius ir apčiuopiamus sprendimus, kurie tiesiogiai įtakotų darbo vietų kūrimą bei ekonomikos atsigavimą ir augimą. Manau, kad pavyko pasiekti nemažai. Vien tik sprendžiant bedarbystės problemas Airijos pirmininkavimo metu buvo rastas kompromisas ir priimta 80 teisės aktų, kuriuose įtvirtinamos trumpojo ir ilgojo laikotarpio priemonės kovojant su nedarbu. Taip pat labai svarbūs sprendimai buvo priimti ekonominės valdysenos bei bankų priežiūros stiprinimo srityse, šiais sprendimais siekiama stabilizuoti valstybių narių ekonomikas bei sukurti saugesnę, stipresnę ir geriau reguliuojamą bankinę sistemą. Airijos pirmininkavimo metu buvo susitarta dėl vieningo bankų priežiūros mechanizmo, kapitalo reikalavimų direktyvos, dviejų paketų ekonominės valdysenos stiprinimo rinkinio bei užtikrintas veiksmingas Europos semestras. Šie sprendimai jau netolimoje ateityje leis kurti stipresnę, stabilesnę ir patikimesnę ES.

  Elena Băsescu (PPE), în scris. – La reuniunea Consiliului European au fost aprobate recomandările specifice de ţară, în contextul Semestrului European. În cazul României, pe lângă recomandări referitoare la continuarea consolidării fiscale, combaterea şomajului în rândul tinerilor, reforma învăţământului, se mai cere continuarea măsurilor de reformare a sistemului sanitar. Astfel, se cere ca România să sporească eficienţa, calitatea şi accesibilitatea sistemului de sănătate, în special pentru persoanele defavorizate şi pentru comunităţile îndepărtate şi izolate, dar şi să reducă recurgerea la spitalizarea excesivă a pacienţilor, inclusiv prin îmbunătăţirea serviciilor de tratament ambulatoriu. Reforma sănătăţii este imperativă. Din păcate, până în prezent, aceasta s-a făcut doar la nivel declarativ. Lipsa personalului medical, salarizarea necorespunzătoare şi condiţiile din spitalele româneşti reprezintă probleme care trebuie abordate de urgenţă de Guvernul României. De asemenea, accesul la servicii sanitare pentru persoanele defavorizate, precum romii, este o altă problemă care va trebui rezolvată. E nevoie de un plan pe termen mediu şi lung, care să remedieze deficienţele şi să pună în aplicare recomandările Uniunii Europene.

  Carlos Coelho (PPE), por escrito. – Só conseguiremos ultrapassar a atual crise económica e financeira com medidas fortes e de grande alcance que permitam restabelecer a confiança e colocar a Europa na via do crescimento forte, inteligente, sustentável e inclusivo. Entre as várias medidas acordadas, gostaria de realçar as decisões tomadas para combater o desemprego jovem, que atingiu proporções dramáticas, com cerca de 5 milhões de jovens desempregados na Europa, e na sequência do qual corremos o grave risco de ver toda uma geração crescer sem quaisquer perspetivas reais de futuro. Aplaudo o reforço financeiro previsto no âmbito da Iniciativa para o Emprego Jovem. Receio que a escassez orçamental que resulta da miopia do Conselho e da imposição britânica não esteja à altura dos desafios que temos que encarar. Os Estados-Membros deverão desenvolver esforços para adaptar a formação dos jovens às reais necessidades do mercado de trabalho, com a introdução, por exemplo, de novos estágios e formação que permitam aos jovens saírem mais bem preparados para o mercado de trabalho. Em paralelo, deverão incentivar uma maior dinâmica e competitividade no mercado de trabalho, por exemplo, através da adoção de incentivos fiscais à contratação de jovens. Foram igualmente aprovadas medidas de apoio ao empreendedorismo e de reforço dos Programas Europeus Erasmus + e Erasmus Primeiro Emprego.

  George Sabin Cutaş (S&D), în scris. – Acordul din cadrul Consiliului European de săptămâna trecută reprezintă un succes al forului nostru legislativ, în urma acceptării de către Consiliu a unor amendamente esenţiale aduse variantei iniţiale a Cadrului financiar multianual pentru perioada 2014-2020. Chiar dacă suma totală a bugetului rămâne la nivelul stabilit la reuniunea din februarie a Consiliului: 960 de miliarde, acest lucru este compensat de flexibilitatea în utilizarea fondurilor, în special prin posibilitatea reportării lor de la un an la altul, precum şi de la un capitol bugetar la altul. Astfel, finanţările sectoriale vor putea fi suplimentate faţă de forma iniţială. Măsurile decise în plan social, în special majorarea fondurilor pentru combaterea şomajului în rândul tinerilor şi cele referitoare la cercetare sunt menite să contribuie la atenuarea efectelor crizei prin stimularea creării de locuri de muncă şi creştere economică bazată pe inovaţie. Varianta de compromis a bugetului UE pentru perioada 2014-2020 oferă premisele depăşirii impasului politic actual. Sper ca acesta să conducă, în acelaşi timp, la relansarea economică mult aşteptată.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. – Wenn nun Milliarden nicht mehr in die Rettung ob waghalsiger Spekulationen angeschlagener Banken investiert werden, sondern in Jugendliche, muss eines klar sein: Alleine wird die EU-Jugendgarantie keine Wunder leisten können. Nur allzu groß ist die Verlockung, Jugendliche in Arbeitsbeschaffungsmaßnahmen zu „parken“, damit sie aus den offiziellen Arbeitslosenstatistiken verschwinden. Eine Jugendgarantie ist also nur sinnvoll, wenn wirkliche Perspektiven geschaffen werden. Und dazu gehört auch, dass sich die EU der Problematik der Flexibilisierung auf dem Arbeitsmarkt annimmt. Denn welche Perspektive sollen die Aneinanderreihung von Dauerpraktika, Mini- und Teilzeitjobs sowie befristeten Verträgen schon bringen? Nicht zuletzt ist es keine Lösung, wenn gut ausgebildete junge Menschen aus den betroffenen Ländern in Massen in den Norden ziehen. Die Qualifizierten werden in ihren Heimatländern gebraucht, um die Krise zu bewältigen. Kommt es hingegen zu einem Massenexodus, so würde dies die tiefgreifenden Probleme der südlichen EU-Staaten nur noch weiter verschlimmern. In Erinnerung rufen sollten wir uns auch, dass die Jugendarbeitslosigkeit schon vor der Krise in den Ländern mit strukturellen Problemen hoch war. Im Süden mangelt es an guten Ausbildungssystemen und diese gilt es entsprechend aufzubauen, damit die Jugendgarantie langfristig wirken kann.

  Моника Панайотова (PPE), в писмена форма. – Уважаеми колеги, Приветствам постигнатото споразумение по МФР за периода 2014-2020 г., чрез което европейските институции показват, че трябва да работят заедно и да не превръщат бюджета на ЕС в междуинституционален заложник. Постигането на компромис е от ключово значение, за да се осигури стабилна и предсказуема среда за инвеститорите, както и за страните членки при програмирането на техните бюджети и подготовката на големи дългосрочни инвестиционни проекти. Според мен, основният недостатък при планирането на рамката бе не обемът на заложените средства, а липсата на фундаментално преструктуриране на неговата логика с цел превръщането му в дългосрочно инвестиционно средство - тоест да отпаднат неефективни бюджетни линии, а не просто схематично да се добавят нови приоритети. Предизвикателствата днес изискват средствата от МФР да се разходват разумно, с оглед на ефекта и "добавената стойност" за нашите граждани и ЕС като цяло. Европейският бюджет не трябва да е единственото средство за реализиране на „Европа 2020”, но има основната роля на двигател и гарант за реализирането на общите цели. В тази връзка, приветствам осигуряването на по-голяма гъвкавост на бюджетната рамка, което ще позволи средствата да бъдат насочвани към приоритетни сфери, като насърчаване на младежката заетост, образованието и увеличаване конкурентоспособността на европейската икономика чрез инвестиции в научно-развойна дейност. Благодаря!

  Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), na piśmie. – Porozumienie polityczne dotyczące wieloletnich ram finansowych Unii Europejskiej jest bardzo dobrą wiadomością dla wszystkich, którym zależy na rozwoju wspólnej, zjednoczonej Europy.

Niezmiernie ważne jest, że szukając kompromisu finansowego, nie zapomnieliśmy o istotnych społecznie potrzebach. Mam na myśli te postanowienia wieloletniego budżetu, które dzięki konsolidacji środków, już w pierwszych latach jego obowiązywania, poprawią sytuację młodych ludzi na rynku pracy. Bardzo się cieszę, że od początku przyszłego roku, za sprawą unijnych funduszy, istnieje realna szansa skutecznego przeciwdziałania bezrobociu wśród młodych ludzi.

Wielkim sukcesem jest to, że korzystając z budżetowych środków, instytucje Unii Europejskiej, w porozumieniu z rządami państw członkowskich, będą mogły tworzyć programy skutecznie zwalczające bezrobocie wśród młodych oraz pozwalające im zdobywać nowe umiejętności i zawodowe kwalifikacje. Plan zagwarantowania młodym Europejczykom możliwości podjęcia pracy lub dalszej edukacji w okresie czterech miesięcy od zakończenia szkoły, ma szansę zdecydowanie poprawić sytuację młodych ludzi na rynku pracy. Dlatego bardzo ważne jest, by Komisja, nadzorując wykorzystanie środków na walkę z bezrobociem wśród młodych ludzi, jednocześnie inicjowała i koordynowała programy na rzecz zatrudnienia ludzi młodych, funkcjonujące w poszczególnych państwach członkowskich.

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. – Nos dias 27 e 28 de junho, os Chefes de Estado e de Governo dos 27 países europeus chegaram a acordo sobre diversas medidas de promoção do emprego jovem, a adesão da Letónia à zona euro e União Económica e Monetária. Gostaria de enfatizar os resultados alcançados na área do emprego jovem, devido ao facto de finalmente as instituições europeias terem adotado uma resolução com medidas concretas que poderão ser aplicadas na generalidade dos Estados-Membros. Num momento em que a taxa média de desemprego jovem na Europa já supera os 23 % e já é superior a 60 % em alguns países, considero urgente a implementação de novas medidas de promoção do emprego jovem que passem por promover uma crescente mobilidade à escala europeia, reduzir o desfasamento entre o ensino superior e as necessidades do mercado de trabalho ou ainda apoiar empresas de capital de risco, business angels ou a criação de incubadoras de empresas que permitam dinamizar o empreendedorismo jovem. Por fim, apelo ainda aos Estados-Membros que reduzam os impostos coletivos das empresas quando estas contratem um número significativo de jovens, reduzindo a taxa de desemprego, os custos sociais que lhe são inerentes e aumentando a capacidade de inovação e liderança tecnológica.

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D), în scris. – Consiliul European din 27-28 iunie 2013 a avut ca principale teme: ocuparea forţei de muncă în rândul tinerilor; creştere, competitivitate şi ocuparea forţei de muncă; finalizarea Uniunii Economice şi Monetare; mobilizarea resurselor financiare pentru a sprijini reconstrucţia şi acţiunile de prevenire în regiunile şi statele membre afectate de inundaţii. Salut alocarea a 6 miliarde EUR Iniţiativei privind ocuparea forţei de muncă în rândul tinerilor, iniţiativă care ar trebui să fie funcţională până în ianuarie 2014. De asemenea, reamintesc importanţa programului Erasmus, care promovează formarea profesională transfrontalieră, dar şi a unor măsuri de la nivelul statelor membre, destinate modernizării învăţământului profesional şi tehnic, consolidării cooperării dintre educaţie şi întreprinderi sau reducerea contribuţiilor sociale. În ceea ce priveşte implementarea Pactului pentru creştere economică şi locuri de muncă, subliniez importanţa reconstruirii bazei industriale europene. Conform statisticilor Eurostat, patru dintre cele 27 de state membre — Germania(27,29%), Italia(12,44%), Marea Britanie(11,93%) și Franța(11,65%) — au realizat peste 60% din producția industrială a UE în 2010, iar 10 state membre au realizat împreună sub 4% din aceasta. Solicităm Consiliului European să se asigure că de dezvoltarea industrială a UE vor beneficia toate statele membre ale UE. În final, salut deschiderea negocierilor de aderare cu Serbia.

(La sesión, suspendida a las 10.45 horas, se reanuda a las 10.50 horas)

VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ
Präsident

6. Ανασκόπηση της Ιρλανδικής Προεδρίας, συμπεριλαμβανομένης της συμφωνίας για το ΠΔΠ (συζήτηση)

  Der Präsident. − Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zu der Bilanz des irischen Ratsvorsitzes, einschließlich der Einigung über den MFR (2012/2799(RSP)).

  Enda Kenny, Uachtarán-in-oifig sa Chomhairle. − A Uachtaráin, cuireann sé áthas ormsa a bheith libh an mhaidin seo chun cuntas a thabhairt do Pharlaimint na hEorpa ar Uachtaránacht na hEorpa a bhí ag Éirinn le sé mhí anuas.

of the European Parliament, President of the European Commission, distinguished leaders of the political groups and members of the European Parliament, as Taoiseach, I am very pleased to speak here at the European Parliament this morning in this review of the Irish Presidency and the MFF.

Ireland’s seventh Presidency of the Council concluded on Sunday. It was a hectic final week, ending an extraordinarily busy and productive six months. Through the support and partnership of the European Parliament, Ireland’s Presidency did achieve very significant results. I want to thank you, the Members of the Parliament, for your confidence and your commitment as we discharged our Presidential duties.

When I last addressed this Parliament it was to mark a new Presidency in a new year. I spoke of what we intended to do and of the urgent need to get results. Today I am proud to say in this Parliament that we have achieved those.

Six months ago, I set out on behalf of our Presidency our objectives based on the three pillars of stability, of jobs and of growth. We set out to make good on our commitments, in particular those made at the highest level of the European Council. We could do no less since at this difficult juncture it was imperative that our citizens and the markets would see clear evidence that our Union could and would follow through on commitments made and entered into.

Such follow-through has been the hallmark of the Irish Presidency. I believe that what we have achieved in that regard has bolstered the credibility of the European Union, its role and its work in the eyes of our people and of our citizens. Since we assumed the Presidency after a particularly torrid period, achieving and sustaining stability was an obvious and a key objective and goal.

Banking union was of critical importance. We needed to repair, to restructure and to renovate our banks to do two vital things. Firstly to generate sustainable economic growth and secondly to prove to our citizens they could depend on us to do what we said we would do at the meeting of Heads of State and Government and that was to sever the link between banks and sovereigns.

The follow-through achieved in the Irish Presidency was seen in three further developments. Firstly, the new single supervisor; secondly, stronger capital rules for banks; and, thirdly, just last week, in agreeing new rules for the winding-down of banks. These new bank resolution rules will protect taxpayers from having to bail out banks again in the future.

Equally in our Presidency, we also worked to put in place positive drivers for growth and job creation right across Europe and, when it comes to those all-important jobs and sustaining our families and our communities, trade is absolutely crucial and fundamental.

Therefore we concentrated on securing agreement on the mandate for negotiations for the EU-US trade talks. Such agreement is essential to what should be a game-changing transatlantic partnership – one based on an equal and open relationship, and in the current circumstances I hope that that can be proven to apply. This will allow us to turn the enormous potential for jobs and growth into reality.

You know that small and medium enterprises are the lifeblood of job creation, so we made Europe’s small businesses a priority every step of the way. For example, we managed to achieve the political agreement that will make it easier for our small and medium enterprises to access the two trillion euro public procurement market of the European Union through a simpler and cheaper bid process and with this everybody wins: more bids, governments get better value for money; our small businesses can really compete and expand and that means jobs in your countries for your citizens.

Research and development is something that this Parliament holds very dear. The EUR 70 billion Horizon 2020 programme agreed in principle last week is crucial in terms of research and development. The proportion of such funds taken up by small and medium enterprises should go up by one third.

But we could have done little or none of this without the close cooperation of the institutions. Securing agreement with the European Parliament on the EU’s common agricultural policy for the next seven years has been one of the more important achievements of this Presidency. It will greatly enhance our efforts to transform our agriculture and fisheries industries into sustainable, green sectors for growth and jobs in the future.

I welcome the Parliament’s strong support for the EUR 16 billion Erasmus+ programme. Like many here, I have read and understand the theories of Umberto Eco. We believe that it is indeed our culture and not war that cements our amazing 70-year peace.

I am especially happy with work done on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund. This will provide real support for an important sector of our society, namely our redundant workers. Can any politician here be happy with a situation where 26 million people are unemployed across the European Union? I know you are not happy with that; nobody can be and this is a small but important help in that direction. We, as politicians, can never underestimate the layers or the depth of trauma and despair and disappointment of a hard worker being made redundant in any of your countries.

Throughout our Presidency we retained and maintained a strong focus on all those important high-potential sectors, like the digital sector. Equally, we made major progress on data protection and on e-identification legislation. Both of which I know are central to your own parliamentary agenda here.

We made headway too on issues like the European Protection Order, on access to lawyers in criminal proceedings and on insolvency. We concluded, successfully, the historic negotiations that will allow this Union to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights, extending the same standards of protection to our citizens in their dealings with the European Union institutions as when dealing with their own governments.

We have also shown significant leadership in the area of CSDP (capability development, maritime surveillance and cyber security) and in addition we have laid the initial groundwork for the thematic discussion on defence at the December European Council.

But there has been one signal issue of Ireland’s Presidency, and that was our absolute commitment to ending, insofar as is possible, the blight of youth unemployment. It is an abomination against our young men and our young women, too many of whom have reached working age and have yet to know what it feels like to get up and have a job to go to every day; who have yet to realise the sense of purpose and pride and dignity of a job well done and being well done. Our Union has to be 100% sure that we will not allow unemployment to lock our young men and women out of their futures, out of the happy and successful lives that they could and should have with this initiative and that they could now be living.

I am heartened then that in just the second month of our Presidency we managed to secure the commitment of all the Member States to the Youth Guarantee. When implemented effectively, this will give young people under the age of 25 the opportunity and the chance of training or a new job within four months of their becoming unemployed.

It is clear to all of us that to tackle the scourge of unemployment among young people we must press ahead with adapting our education and training systems to 21st century norms, including partnerships with employers. To boost employment and employability we have taken important decisions on cross-border mobility, including a stronger EURES job-search facility. Presidency agreements on the expanded Erasmus+ programme and on professional qualifications recognition will make an important contribution to this area, as indeed will agreement with Parliament on the proposal on portability of pension rights.

In all of this, and in particular in front-loading for the Youth Guarantee, we worked with you, Mr President, and your Parliament.

Everybody knows there was one other fundamental issue here and that was the MFF – the multiannual financial framework – and the budget. Our work on the MFF has underpinned so much of our Presidency endeavours and achievements.

It was just last Thursday in Brussels that President Schulz and the Presidency, along with President Barroso of the Commission, reached a long and eagerly-awaited agreement on the multiannual financial framework. As a parliament you vote on this agreement and resolution tomorrow. You cast your vote on a complex series of texts dealing with important technical and financial matters that affect every citizen in our Union. You know that the negotiations to this point were long, were difficult, were highly sensitive for both the Council and Parliament and indeed the Commission.

The results identified the best way to ensure that the almost EUR 1 trillion for the MFF is released as soon as possible into the real economy. I might say, Mr President, that from the outset you made it clear – you made it very clear – that the priorities for this Parliament were the arrangements for flexibility, for review, for revision, for own resources and for the unity of the budget. In many ways, those priorities shaped the agenda for subsequent negotiation.

The Parliament’s insistence on greater flexibility in how we manage our resources was a very significant step forward and I welcome that. This will help to ensure that we get the maximum out of a budget at a time when every single euro counts. But there were times when the Council and Parliament differed sharply: times when it was very difficult to make any progress on the negotiations; times when there was frustration, deep frustration, and deep disappointment on both sides.

We refused to be daunted or to remain divided on the issues and we built on the sense of trust which is very important for this Parliament and in political negotiations; we built on that sense of trust between the Commission, the Parliament and the Presidency and on those relationships that we had developed. We did not give up on this. We kept at it and because we did, we got there with you and now the detail of what we did agree is before the Members of the European Parliament.

I want to say here that we did listen to this Parliament. We did listen to the membership of the Parliament and, by listening actively, I believe we did manage to address the main issues of concern which were identified by you, the Members, in the resolution of 13 March.

As in all good negotiations, the outcome struck a balance. Not everyone in the Council was happy; let me assure you of that. Let me assure you that it is something of an under-statement to say so. But indeed not everyone in Parliament is 100% satisfied either.

I am happy to say today here that it was Parliament that championed many of the important measures. Not least of which was jumpstarting the research and innovation resources earlier than planned; the flexibility you introduced allows us to advance more money for youth unemployment; you worked to ensure that aid for the most deprived people stays at current levels and is not reduced – which we support. No one institution has a monopoly of wisdom and the Parliament has made the MFF a better instrument.

The signal that we now send to our struggling peoples, our struggling businesses and especially to our young men and young women, is that, yes, Europe is capable of rising to meet the challenge; that Europe is and has proven to be competent and it is a Union that is worthy of their trust and it is a Union that is deserving of their confidence because it can, it does and it will make its decisions when it focuses with a sense of conviction and belief and trust among leaders.

Today, 500 million members of the European family face what are, for all of us, unprecedented challenges in our economies and in our society. The MFF is the single, biggest investment tool we have at our disposal and we need to come together and use it forthwith and immediately.

At the New Year, I described the Parliament as our partner on our six-month Presidency journey and at the height of this summer we can look back and say ‘what a journey we have had’. We have invested considerable time and effort in growing and tending to that relationship. From the outset, we worked closely and intensively with you – in fact, since long before our Presidency started – the long hours of negotiations at all levels and across the full spectrum of the Union’s work was in our sights.

I believe, Mr President, that we have respected the role of this Parliament, your Parliament and of its mandate. That respect has been a characteristic of the Irish Presidency. As we say in Ireland: give respect, get respect. Equally we have done our best to represent and to always faithfully fulfil the role and the mandate of the Council. We have come to know each other better and to be more familiar with each other and to value each other’s perspectives.

I want to pay tribute to my Deputy Leader, an Tánaiste, and particularly our Minister for European Affairs here, Minister Creighton – now well known to you all in this Parliament; she has been a regular attender here in this Chamber representing the Council and listening to the many diverse views of your Members. I want to thank you, Minister, for your invaluable contribution in bringing the MFF to a conclusion.

(Applause)

Yes, for all of us – the Presidency, the Parliament and the Council – the work has been challenging, the work has been daunting but, individually and especially as a team, we have been equal to that challenge because we are strengthened and we are uplifted in what is our common cause: our proud people and their proud and prosperous and peaceful future.

As you know, managing a Presidency places very considerable demands on any administration and this is particularly so in the case of smaller countries like Ireland. As my government first came to office over two years ago we began to plan for this Presidency. We believed a country making a journey in difficult waters to recovery would be well placed to lead a Union committed to that same destination and I believe that we were right.

Our Presidency has been good for our country; good for Ireland and I hope it has been good for the Union, and very good for our urgent agenda of stability, of jobs and of growth.

Today I am proud to say to this Parliament that I am, as the saying goes, very deeply European. I believe in the idea of Europe as our home and because I do I believe, as Europeans, we do ourselves an injustice by failing to marvel at what we have made – and above all what we have made together – from the wreckage of war and of atrocity and of chaos.

Lithuania, a new and an old European, has now assumed the Presidency. I am drawn indeed to the words of the man who called himself the last citizen of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the Nobel laureate who was perhaps best known as a Polish writer. I refer, of course, to Czesław Miłosz, so beloved of our own Nobel laureate in Ireland, Seamus Heaney.

Miłosz wrote: ‘Undoubtedly, I would call Europe my home. But it was a home that refused to acknowledge itself as a whole. Instead, as if on the strength of some self-imposed taboo, it classified its population into two categories members of the family (quarrelsome but respectable) and poor relations.’

Today we Europeans are what we must strive to be, very much a whole and very much a one family. Our shared identity exists beyond the realms of mere economics or currency or money. It is in our literature, in our music, in our culture and above all in our people, for we are the early generations lucky enough to be, not merely Europeans, but European.

In Ireland we have an old saying that a wound heals from the margins in. I hope that what we have achieved at the Western margins will bring a new healing with it and a new hope and a new prosperity to our European people, to our European home. Indeed, one where there is always room for God’s goodness, for human kindness, for dignity and for joy.

(Loud applause)

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission. − Mr President, let me first thank the Taoiseach, Enda Kenny, for his excellent cooperation during this Council Presidency and very sincerely congratulate him on the impressive work and results. Let me add a special thanks to the Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore and the Europe Minister Lucinda Creighton and to all their political colleagues and civil servants for their dedication and their competence, which made this a focused and very successful Council Presidency.

The core priorities over the last months were clearly set out at the start of the Irish Presidency and carefully maintained thereafter: stability, growth and jobs. We have made further progress in updating the European Union’s architecture to the pressures of the 21st century economy, showing that we are learning lessons from the crisis.

Some of the main deliverables of the past months were in the field of financial services, where political agreements were found between co-legislators on two cornerstones of the banking union: the single supervisory mechanism and the Capital Requirements Directive and Regulation.

A general approach was also agreed in Council on bank resolution and recovery, on the directive and regulation on markets and financial instruments and on packaged retail investment products. A political agreement at second reading on deposit-guarantee schemes still needs to be found. Indeed there has been a standstill for one and a half years.

On the economic governance front, the two-pack has entered into force. The European Semester method is gaining strength and we have started a debate on ex-ante coordination of major economic reforms and on the convergence and competitiveness instrument, which is the way forward to guaranteeing the responsibility of and solidarity between Member States in the future.

Let me especially thank the Irish Presidency for the support given to the consolidation of the European Semester. As I said in the previous debate and I will not repeat myself, now we have a much more structured and credible exercise of collective economic governance in the European Union.

We also made clear in the previous debate that we have made progress on measures which can help create more growth and jobs directly. Today we can say that youth employment is at the top of the priorities for European Union action and of course the Irish Presidency made certainly a very important contribution towards this.

Following the Commission initiative, the recommendation on the European youth guarantee was adopted earlier this year. This is one of the main elements in breaking the cycle of youth unemployment. With the preparations during the past months and the decisions taken just last week we are ensuring that we will meet that challenge together.

Now the key is implementation. Let us be under no illusions about what European-level action can do. Much has to be done at national level but we have now the political momentum to make this a reality: the success of the fight against youth unemployment.

During the Irish Presidency we also launched negotiations on a free-trade agreement with Japan, and we now have a mandate to start negotiations on the transatlantic trade and investment partnership with the United States. Both negotiations will be difficult and sensitive, but the potential benefits of ambitious deals would be unprecedented. Ireland clearly understands the importance of the boost these deals can bring, and I thank you for your support and leadership in the Council.

On taxation – one of the priorities of the May European Council, and which is so important for the legitimacy of every other effort we make in terms of public finances – we now have a mandate for negotiating savings and taxation agreements with non-European Union third countries, as well as the Council decision authorising enhanced cooperation for a directive on the financial transaction tax. In the area of enlargement, the historic decision to open negotiations with Serbia was confirmed and the Council agreed to open negotiations on a stabilisation and association agreement with Kosovo.

So it was an eventful six months, but no deal was more important than the political deal reached on the multiannual financial framework last week. Last week’s agreement represents a good compromise between the interests of the Member States and the objectives of the European Parliament.

As you know, this is the result of the longest and hardest-fought budget negotiations ever. I believe the final result sends out an important signal that the institutions of the European Union are able to work together and agree on a budget that will help the European Union emerge from the crisis.

The Commission has played its role fully, and I am happy that President Schulz and the Taoiseach were able to meet with me, first to unblock the negotiations and then to build on that to come to an agreement at political level on the MFF. We hope this will be formally endorsed by all.

The dynamics of the negotiation process, unanimity in the Council and consent by absolute majority in Parliament, require that all sides move towards a consensus. I want to praise all those that have worked for this objective, namely Parliament’s negotiating teams – without their commitment this could not have been possible – and those from the Irish Presidency and the Commission.

For the Commission, the objective has been to ensure that the future budget is workable and manageable. As you know, our initial proposal was more ambitious, but the final outcome respects those principles, maintains a necessary balance and keeps the basic structure of the initial proposal intact. From the beginning, the Commission called for as much flexibility as possible, and we have strongly supported Parliament in this demand. I am satisfied that this was finally achieved.

The role of the Parliament throughout the negotiations has been very significant and successful. In addition to the flexibility of payments and commitments, Parliament was able to secure a number of important breakthroughs. Let me just mention some of them: on the midterm review of the MFF, on support for measures against youth unemployment, education, research and SMEs, on the consolidation of the programme of aid to the most deprived and the clear commitments regarding the amending budget for 2013, which need to be fully honoured. I would also like to remind you of the decisions concerning the follow-up on the issue of own resources.

Taken together, they show how Parliament was able to use its consent power responsibly and effectively. For this reason, after Member States in the Council have already given the MFF their full backing, I hope this House, in its political resolution, will also support it tomorrow. We need this budget, not for the European Union institutions but for our citizens and our regions, particularly those that are in a more difficult situation where investment from the European Union makes up by far the lion’s share of public investment.

In the context of the MFF, I also need to refer to the very important achievements on some of the sectoral MFF programmes during the Irish Presidency. Let me name just a few of them as examples. An important agreement was reached on the reform of the common agricultural policy after 2013 – which was another of the Irish priorities – strengthening the position of farmers within the food production chain, making direct payments fairer and greener and making the CAP more effective and more transparent. An agreement on the reform of the common fisheries policy was also reached. There is now a political deal for other sectoral MFF proposals, some of them very innovative and a source of special pride at the Commission, such as COSME for SMEs, the Connecting Europe Facility, Creative Europe, Erasmus+ and Horizon 2020.

To conclude, the Irish Presidency had all the elements of a successful one: a clear set of priorities, genuine political commitment, technical knowledge and drive, and a safe pair of hands to manage it all, as well as the capacity – as the Taoiseach underlined – to build on and reinforce the relationship of trust and respect between the Presidency of the Council and the European institutions such as the European Parliament and the European Commission.

Thank you for your hard work and close cooperation. We will all benefit from that in the next six months which, under the Lithuanian Presidency – the first ever Lithuanian Presidency – promise to be just as important for Europe’s economic and political future.

  Der Präsident. − Herr Barroso, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte Sie darauf hinweisen, wenn wir jetzt mit der Aussprache beginnen, dass ich die Abstimmungen jetzt bereits auf 12.15 Uhr angesetzt habe, weil ich sonst die Rednerliste hier nicht abarbeiten kann. Aber wir sollten die Aussprache zu Ende bringen.

  Gay Mitchell, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, firstly congratulations to the Irish Presidency on a very successful and active six months. In view of something that was said in the House earlier this morning, can I say to our Croatian colleagues: welcome. In 1916, we had a rising in my country to secure our independence and I believe that, if the people who led that rising could have looked forward to today, to the seventh successful completion of Ireland’s Presidency of the European Union, they would have been very proud of our achievements and of the sovereignty that we have achieved. I say this to Croatia: do not listen to the kinds of comments that were made here this morning. This membership of the European Union is what will bring strength and a greater say and sovereignty to Croatia, as it has to Ireland.

I would like to commend our government for its professional and smooth chairmanship of the Council of the European Union and make particular mention of some of our Ministers who have been back and forth between Brussels and Strasbourg, and indeed beyond, for the last six months. To the Taoiseach Enda Kenny, for his energy and commitment, I say a particular word of appreciation; to Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore for his conduct at the MFF in particular, I think we should show appreciation; and to the Minister for European Affairs, Lucinda Creighton, for keeping us well briefed and for her energy and her work here with us, I would say thank you very much indeed. This is the first Irish Presidency under the new European Council arrangements, including the new arrangements for the agreement of the MFF, and I believe it was a great success.

I have one last comment. I believe that, given the momentum that has been made in Ireland and the achievements that have been made in recent years, and given the fact that we have had the Celtic tiger years, our brightest days are still ahead. I wish the government well with that.

  Hannes Swoboda, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, I would like to thank the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste and of course Minister Creighton for their work. It was a heavy workload and in the end we also got agreement on the budget. Let us hope that the Council and Parliament agree.

I think it is important to talk about the implementation now because there is not much time. We could have had an agreement earlier if, for example, the Council secretariat had not prevented the Council or the Presidency from coming to a conclusion.

I think we have to spend money on aid for the most deprived and for fighting youth unemployment as well as for developing excellence in innovation, which I saw in Dublin some days ago when I visited the Biomedical Sciences Institute at Trinity College, because all of this is important for the budget and for our future.

Budget spending has to go to all levels, from the poorest through to excellence in our work, and therefore we need the flexibility we were fighting for so that all of the budget is spent and none of the money goes back to the Ministry of Finance because, in any case, the budget is very low.

I would like to raise an issue with the Taoiseach which is not only an Irish one – although it perhaps first came to public attention in Ireland – but also affects the whole of Europe. When we see the communication or the dialogue between some of the managers of the Anglo Irish Bank – and again I would say that it is not only an Irish issue but a European issue – we have to confess that we have in Europe a complacent, arrogant and sometimes indecent banking sector and bank managers. That is not acceptable.

I would ask the Taoiseach and my other colleagues whether they can remember, when we were fighting in this Parliament against extravagant bonuses, that these were the people who demanded bonuses and many of our ministers supported them, although we in Parliament did not. We had to fight hard. Can you remember the Libor scandal for example? Now I see that Brussels has recently charged 13 banks in relation to credit default swaps (CDS).

This is the banking sector we still have in Europe today. They are making fun of us. We should instead be making real regulations and rules for decent banking activity, which is something we need, and we should be giving money to the small and medium-sized enterprises who need it in Ireland and in many other countries.

Therefore I hope that we can have your commitment, even after the Presidency and based on your experience with the Anglo Irish bankers and with many other bankers, so that we can have real rules for the banking sector and a real union for a European banking union. It is important to make it very clear that those bankers, whether they are in the minority or majority, who want to work decently for Europe can work. However, we have to say no to that category of arrogant and complacent bankers who are destroying the credibility of the banking sector in the European Union.

  Anne E. Jensen, for ALDE-Gruppen. – Hr. formand! Flere har nævnt her i dag, at det irske formandskab havde en tung arbejdsbyrde. Jeg vil sige, at det havde en umulig arbejdsbyrde. Det var simpelthen enormt, hvad man skulle nå, både den flerårige budgetramme, hvor hvert enkelt land havde vetoret, og så alle de underliggende lovtekster, over 50 forskellige dele, der skulle falde sammen, og derfor er det utroligt, at man har fået det hele til at lande. Jeg kan forstå, hvis det irske formandskab i dag føler stor lettelse og glæde over, at man kom i hus. Det er en flot indsats.

ALDE-Gruppen satte jo ikke spørgsmålstegn ved den budgetramme, som statscheferne vedtog i februar. Vi mener godt, at EU kan leve med et mindre budget i en periode, hvor mange lande kæmper med at rette op på de offentlige finanser, men vi var ikke enige i den måde, man havde fordelt budgetrammen. Vi var kede af, at man havde for lidt fokus på forskning og udvikling af infrastruktur og for meget fokus på direkte støtte til landbruget. Derfor er jeg glad for, at vi fik mere fleksibilitet, vi fik en aftale om revision, så det nyvalgte parlament i 2016 får mulighed for at få indflydelse på budgetrammen. Det er mit håb, at det kan gavne initiativet til bekæmpelse af ungdomsledighed, men også sikre, at vi får flere penge til forskning og infrastruktur, herunder flere penge til den digitale agenda.

Og så skal vi have arbejdsgruppen om nye egne indtægter i gang. Jo før, desto bedre! Vi er nødt til at få et nyt system, der er mere gennemskueligt og forståeligt. Det er nødvendigt for at få en bedre debat om budgettet i fremtiden.

  Daniel Cohn-Bendit, im Namen der Verts/ALE fraktion. – Herr Präsidenten, liebe Kollegen, selten habe ich mich so in der Minderheit gefunden wie heute.

Je dois avouer que je ne vous comprends pas. Je ne comprends pas cette autosatisfaction. Je dois vivre sur une autre planète quand j'entends le Président Kenny nous déclarer: "Les citoyens vont nous dire merci". Mais les citoyens ne nous comprennent plus; ils ne comprennent pas l'Europe. Ils ne comprennent pas ce que nous faisons et vous dites que nous avons un budget à la hauteur du défi de la crise.

Eh bien, non! Nous n'avons pas de budget à la hauteur du défi de la crise. Nous n'avons pas de budget qui soit vraiment un budget pour le développement du sud de l'Europe. Non, non, non! Nous avons, aujourd'hui, un accord qui est au rabais: nous apportons 9 milliards pour les jeunes alors que, pendant la campagne électorale, le même jour où le Président du Parlement, social-démocrate, M. Martin Schulz, concluait un accord de 9 milliards pour les jeunes, le candidat social-démocrate Steinbrück, au Bundestag, disait qu'il en fallait 20, au moins, pour arriver à lutter contre le chômage des jeunes. Je voudrais savoir si, dans la mathématique européenne, 9 milliards et 20 milliards c'est le même chiffre. Personnellement, j'ai appris à l'école que ce n'était pas la même chose. De qui se moque-t-on ici?

Vous avez trouvé un accord et nous, Parlement, avons raté et ratons ici un moment historique de remettre la démocratie européenne sur les pieds. Nous avons raté et ratons le moment de montrer au Conseil européen que ce n'est pas comme cela que nous allons construire l'Europe; ce n'est pas en continuant l'égoïsme national mené par un certain M. Cameron, un égoïsme national que de plus en plus de gouvernements sont en train de développer. Nous n'avons pas su, en tant que Parlement européen, résister à cet égoïsme national. Et en raison de cet égoïsme national, quand nous demandons un budget européen doté de ressources propres, on nous dit non!

M. Verhofstadt déclare: "Vous allez voir ce que vous allez voir. Après la révision, nous allons avoir des ressources propres." Nenni, nenni! Vous n'aurez rien, rien, rien! Car le Conseil, les chefs de gouvernement, à l'unanimité, veulent le pouvoir sur l'Europe. Ils ne veulent pas un pouvoir démocratique contrôlé par un Parlement, ils veulent le pouvoir qui est au-delà d'une certaine démocratie. C'est pour cela que vous n'aurez rien à la révision!

C'est pour cela que nous aurions dû dire non! Car le seul langage que comprennent les politiques, c'est le rapport de force. Le seul langage que comprennent les politiques, c'est quand nous savons leur dire non! Quand M. Cameron déclare: "Je vais mettre mon veto", tout le monde se met à genoux. Si seulement ce Parlement avait dit: "Nous mettons notre veto tant que nous n'aurons pas un budget qui va vers l'avenir."

Les Fonds structurels, nous les avons toujours eus. Nous n'avons pas de plan pour soutenir le Sud. Nous n'avons pas de plan en faveur des jeunes.

C'est pour cela que je vous dis franchement que j'ai le blues! J'ai le blues. Je ne vous comprends pas. M. Habermas a raison. Quand je vous regarde, ici, c'est la technocratie froide qui a le pouvoir, mais ce n'était pas l'émotion pour les citoyens européens en crise.

Je vous remercie de m'avoir écouté gentiment.

(Applaudissements)

  Richard Ashworth, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, I would like to congratulate the Presidents of Parliament, the Commission and the Council on achieving an MFF deal, but especially can I thank the Irish Presidency, the Taoiseach and Ministers Creighton and Gilmore. This MFF deal represents a major success of a highly effective Presidency.

Taoiseach, you and your team earned our thanks and respect for handling a very tough negotiation, and for delivering a successful outcome on time. That was not easy. It was a thoroughly good job done. This deal is a sensible pragmatic agreement. It reflects the efforts to contain and control costs of government within the Member States. The key now is implementation.

There are two points which I would like to make, and the first is on flexibility. Flexibility is important. It is going to help us manage the budget, and it will enable us to address changing priorities. However, I want to stress firstly that it is no substitute for discipline, and secondly that it underlines the need to shorten the budgetary period – a five-year budget for a five-year parliament. Moreover, I remain concerned that not enough has been done to address the ongoing budget deficit, which will leave us with our ongoing RALS problems.

Finally, I congratulate you, Taoiseach, on your determination to address funding for youth unemployment and SMEs. Frankly, this catastrophe should have been addressed long ago. You have demonstrated the will to provide the funds. We now have to demonstrate the capacity to absorb the funds and to deliver benefit to the European citizens.

  Paul Murphy, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – Mr President, I would like to say to the Taoiseach: given that the proclaimed stability, jobs and growth have clearly not materialised, could I perhaps suggest an alternative slogan for the Presidency: ‘Never let the facts get in the way of a good story’.

Six months ago, the good story was a recovery country leading recovery in Europe. The unfortunate fact is Ireland’s return to recession, leading a deepening recession in Europe. Today, the good story is what is presented as a European budget stimulus. The stubborn fact is that this is the first austerity budget in the history of the European Union. It involves cuts of tens of billions of euros – not to bloated salaries, not to bloated expenses, but to funding for workers losing their jobs, to Erasmus, to development programmes and to cohesion funding. It will further worsen the crisis.

The other good story today, according to the Taoiseach, is the opening of free trade talks with the US, but the uncomfortable facts suggest that the so-called special relationship is built on extensive spying on European governments and millions of citizens. Would the Taoiseach agree that these talks, at the very least, should be suspended, pending a full investigation? Would he also agree that Edward Snowden should be commended for his actions and should be granted asylum in Ireland or another European country?

  Diane Dodds (NI). - Mr President, firstly let me commend the Irish Republic on the manner in which it has conducted its time in office during the Presidency. Political agreements have been reached on a number of difficult issues – the common agricultural policy, the common fisheries policy and the MFF – and whilst I am still anxious to see the legal text, I recognise that this is no mean feat. I am, however, disappointed that there has been little or no focus on the resolution of the institutional dispute between the Council, Parliament and Commission, with these matters now being settled in court.

The report on North Sea cod, on which I worked as the rapporteur, is caught up in this dispute. Reports passed by this House and which create flexibility for the cod plan are now in jeopardy. Fishermen from the United Kingdom, the Republic of Ireland and other European nations look at this political wrangling with frustration and anger, but not disbelief – they have become all too accustomed to the failure of Brussels to act on their behalf.

  Alain Lamassoure (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président du Conseil, Monsieur le Commissaire, je tiens d'abord à remercier la Présidence irlandaise. Elle a su aller au-delà d'un mandat de négociation qui était terriblement contraint par l'exigence de l'unanimité. Je veux aussi rendre hommage à toute l'équipe des rapporteurs pour un travail collectif remarquable, et remercier la Commission.

Le Parlement a fait preuve de réalisme. Le budget européen est financé par les budgets nationaux, les budgets nationaux sont ruinés. Il n'était pas possible d'obtenir des chiffres supérieurs.

Avec de tels chiffres, est-ce que l'Union pourra financer l'objectif qu'elle se fixe à elle-même? Non! Et Daniel Cohn-Bendit avait raison de le dire. Alors que faire?

D'abord, rouvrir l'ensemble du dossier très vite. La nouvelle Commission, le nouveau Parlement, le Conseil pourront y travailler dès 2016. Ensuite, jeter les bases d'un financement autonome du budget de l'Union. Une procédure inédite s'engagera dès l'automne. Les parlements nationaux seront associés dans une sorte de mini-convention européenne. Enfin, utiliser mieux et plus vite des ressources plus rares, au profit de l'emploi des jeunes, des investissements d'avenir, de l'aide aux plus démunis.

Non, ce compromis ne sauve pas l'Europe, mais il finance le plus urgent et il lance une méthode et un calendrier pour sortir durablement de l'impasse budgétaire actuelle. Je recommande au Parlement de l'accepter. Conformément à cet accord politique, nous procéderons au vote juridique à la rentrée, lorsque le Conseil aura adopté les crédits de paiement nécessaires pour 2013.

  Emer Costello (S&D). - Mr President, first of all I want to congratulate the Taoiseach and Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore on a successful Irish Presidency.

As has been outlined, the main priority of the seventh Irish Presidency was stability, growth and jobs, with a particular emphasis on youth employment. We cannot underestimate the corrosive impact of youth unemployment across Europe, which is poisoning young minds which would otherwise be full of idealism and hope. So I welcome last week’s initial agreement on the one-trillion-euro MFF, and in particular the decision to front-load up to EUR 6 billion into tackling youth unemployment. I particularly welcome that Council conceded to Parliament’s demand on flexibility, so that unspent EU funds will continue to fund youth employment initiatives from 2016.

As rapporteur for Parliament on the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived, I welcome the decision to allocate an extra EUR 1 billion to bring the fund back to EUR 3.5 billion, and I hope that this dossier can now be agreed with the Lithuanian Presidency.

The Irish Presidency has made progress in many areas. One – banking union – has proved to be painfully slow, but it should be acknowledged nevertheless that significant progress has been made towards better supervision and resolution, on capping bankers’ bonuses and, crucially, on breaking the link between banking and sovereign debt. But there is still much work to be done and we need the proposal on banking resolution, as President Barroso referred to it today, and I welcome the fact that he is going to bring this proposal forward shortly.

Our citizens need reassurance that never again will taxpayers be burdened with the bill for the reckless, irresponsible and even criminal behaviour of bankers. I believe it is important for us to develop the social dimension to Economic and Monetary Union. Social union is what will inspire solidarity among the citizens of the EU and restore our faith in the vision of our founding fathers: peace and prosperity through solidarity and cohesion. I would like to pay tribute to the hard work done by the Irish Ministers and officials, and indeed EU officials, over the last six months.

  Pat the Cope Gallagher (ALDE). - A Uachtaráin, ar an gcéad dul síos ba mhaith liom comhghairdeas a dhéanamh leis an Taoiseach, an Tánaiste, an Aire Creighton, na hairí go léir agus na hoifigigh go léir a rinne sár-obair le linn tréimhse na hUachtaránachta.

I am pleased that the Parliament concluded an agreement with the Presidency in relation to the common fisheries policy. While disappointed that my key recommendation in relation to the hake quota preference was not accepted, I am pleased that it is strengthened within the report.

The budget represents a good deal for Ireland over the next seven years and, to be nationalistic about it, I am of course delighted that the Taoiseach has included EUR 100 million extra for the BMW region and EUR 150 for that important PEACE programme that has done so much to bring peace to Northern Ireland, and indeed the whole of Ireland.

The EUR 1.5 million for the CAP is all-important to us. The new unemployment initiative is to be welcomed and requires cofinancing, as does the Leader Programme.

Finally, Mr President, in the presence of the Taoiseach, I would like to thank you in particular.

Ba mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a chur in iúl duitse as ucht an cuidiú a thug tú domsa suíomh idirlín i nGaeilge a chur ar fáil sa Pharlaimint.

  Helga Trüpel (Verts/ALE). - Herr Präsident, Herr Ratspräsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir Grüne werden gegen diesen mehrjährigen Haushaltsplan der EU stimmen, und vor allem gegen diesen schlechten Kompromiss, der jetzt ausgehandelt worden ist. Es ist eine verpasste Chance, was wir jetzt auf dem Tisch haben. Der ganze Haushalt ist nämlich nicht zukunftsgerichtet, sondern rückwärtsgerichtet. Wir geben nach wie vor zu viel Geld für die falschen Schwerpunkte aus: für die Direktzahlung an Bauern, für den Kernfusionsreaktor ITER. Aber wo wir jetzt in der Krise wirklich investieren müssten, was wir doch wissen, in wirkliche Wachstumsimpulse, in eine CO2-arme Wirtschaft, in grüne Jobs, in viel mehr Möglichkeiten für unsere jungen Menschen, das tun wir zu wenig. Es gibt nach wie vor zu wenig Geld für Forschung und Entwicklung, für Bildung und für kleine und mittlere Unternehmen. Da kommt aber die wirkliche Wachstumsdynamik her.

Und jetzt behaupten Sie immer, wir hätten volle Flexibilität durchgesetzt. Das stimmt doch nicht! Es gibt nach wie vor eine Kappung bei der Flexibilität. Das war aber der Hauptverhandlungspunkt des Parlaments! Verkaufen Sie hier nicht Sachen für Gold, die kein Gold sind. Die Verhandler reden das Ergebnis schön. Ich sage, der Rat hat sich vor allem – und das ist zutiefst zu bedauern – mit nationalen Egoismen durchgesetzt. Mit dieser Entscheidung mit der Mehrheit, die sich hier jetzt abzeichnet, und Ihrem Verhalten werden Sie das Europäische Parlament zu einem politischen Zwerg machen. Das ist falsch in der Machtauseinandersetzung mit dem Rat. Wir müssten das Gegenteil tun!

  Martina Anderson (GUE/NGL). - Mr President, the Irish Presidency has not been a success despite what has been said here earlier. However, I do commend its leadership on the issue of the Tobacco Products Directive as it announced plans to become the first EU member to bring in 100% standardised packaging. Maith thú! – well done. I also welcome the extension to PEACE funding.

Unfortunately, this is in contrast to its lack of leadership in other areas. The Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore’s tactics in the MFF negotiation was an embarrassment. The substance of the proposed MFF agreement is equally disappointing. It represents continued austerity: its immediate impact will be a 6% cut to the EU budget in 2014. It is the first time the EU budget has been cut in 56 years and it was cut under the Irish Presidency. I find that shameful.

Austerity is not working in Ireland, and it will not work for the rest of Europe. Furthermore, the Irish Presidency failed to extend the Syrian arms embargo and failed to put domestic violence on the agenda.

  Marine Le Pen (NI). - Monsieur le Président, au risque de froisser, une fois de plus, cette noble Assemblée, et même si ni l'Irlande, ni la Lituanie n'ont de responsabilité dans le scandale qui secoue depuis quelques jours l'Europe, cette Présidence finissante et cette Présidence débutante se grandiraient à annoncer publiquement que la découverte de PRISM, vaste opération de flicage des États et des citoyens, notamment européens, n'est une surprise que pour les peuples, et non pas pour les élites des États membres qui composent l'Union européenne.

Elles auraient intérêt à admettre que l'Union européenne porte une lourde responsabilité puisqu'elle est dans l'incapacité de protéger les libertés individuelles des citoyens des États de l'Union, que la mollesse de ses réactions concrètes n'a d'égal que les vibratos de ses pitoyables gémissements d'indignations artificiels, que la protection réelle des millions de particuliers et d'internautes, dont les communications ont été épiées, écoutées, traquées, ne pourra pas passer par l'Union européenne – une instance supranationale, technocratique, antidémocratique, résolument soumise aux États-Unis et qui, par l'intermédiaire d'ACTA, cherchait, elle-même, secrètement à surveiller les citoyens des États membres de l'Union; que la meilleure preuve de cette complicité entre l'Union européenne et les États-Unis se révélera dans l'accélération de ce terrible accord de libre-échange avec les États-Unis, mortel pour notre économie, notre agriculture, notre défense et, aujourd'hui, pour nos libertés.

  Jean-Luc Dehaene (PPE). - Voorzitter, dat uit onderhandelingen met de Raad uiteindelijk een aanvaardbaar compromis uit de bus is gekomen, mag ons niet doen vergeten dat het basisvoorstel dat de Europese Raad in februari heeft goedgekeurd een gemiste kans is. Door een MFK voor te stellen dat lager ligt dan de vorige heeft de Europese Raad immers nagelaten de nodige middelen beschikbaar te stellen voor de doelstellingen die hij zelf heeft vooropgezet, zoals Europa 2020, het groeipact voor jobs en de nieuwe bevoegdheden. En daarna zal men zeggen dat Europa zijn doelstellingen niet haalt.

Oorzaak is dat de financiering van de Europese begroting vanuit de nationale begrotingen gebeurt. Om te voldoen aan de begrotingseisen van de Europese Unie moeten de lidstaten besparen en dat willen ze ook op de Europese bijdrage. Deze is immers in hun begroting opgenomen als een uitgave. De enige manier om uit deze schizofrene situatie te geraken is terugkeren naar de Verdragen die bepalen dat de Europese begroting moet worden gefinancierd met eigen middelen. Nieuwe eigen middelen voor de EU gaan gepaard met een vermindering van de BNI-bijdrage, hetgeen een verlichting zal betekenen voor de nationale begrotingen.

Een tussenstap hierbij zou kunnen zijn om de EU-bijdragen buiten de nationale begroting te plaatsen en niet te laten meetellen voor het nationale deficit. Deze bijdrage zal dan meteen definitief verworven zijn voor de Europese Unie. De BNI-bijdrage zal dan als een eigen inkomst van de Unie kunnen worden beschouwd. Dat zal meteen de volle flexibiliteit op Europees niveau garanderen en een einde maken aan een moeilijke discussie over de betalingskredieten.

Ten slotte moeten we ook af van de unanimiteit, want op die manier is het onmogelijk om te onderhandelen.

  Göran Färm (S&D). - Herr talman! Kolleger! Uppgörelsen om långtidsbudgeten är ingen bra överenskommelse, men det är den bästa möjliga i detta läge.

Vi har fått mycket kritik, inte minst av den svenska regeringen, för att inte omedelbart ha sagt ja till rådets kohandel i februari. Det var dock faktiskt viktigt att vi stod på oss, trots att vi utsattes för den här tuffa pressen.

Vad är det då vi har åstadkommit genom att fortsätta förhandla? Jo, vi har för de närmast kommande åren flerdubblat den gemensamma satsningen för att komma till rätta med ungdomsarbetslösheten. Vi har dessutom hittat en lösning för att kunna fylla på budgeten även åren därefter. Vi har fått en tidigareläggning av satsningarna på bland annat forskning och småföretag, som annars, tvärtemot rådets löften, skulle ha fått kraftiga nedskärningar de första åren. Vi har fått igenom den ändringsbudget som gör att EU nu kan ta sig ur sin betalningskris. Vi har fått igenom en betydligt mer flexibel budget och inte minst en obligatorisk halvtidsöversyn för att kunna utveckla denna långtidsbudget i mer offensiv riktning när krisen förhoppningsvis är över.

Tyvärr har denna konfliktfyllda process, inte minst internt i rådet, avslöjat en rad brister i EU:s sätt att fungera. I ekonomiska kristider försvagas solidariteten. Medlemsländerna slår främst vakt om sina egna, kortsiktiga nationella intressen, till exempel den egna avgiften. Men om inte medlemsstaterna samtidigt orkar stå upp för det gemensamma kommer EU att försvagas – och ett svagt EU är det sista vi behöver. Inte minst är det oroväckande att medlemsstaterna på alla sätt har försökt reducera Europaparlamentets inflytande till förmån för uppgörelser i slutna rum. Det måste vi stå emot, eftersom det är ett allvarligt hot mot öppenhet och demokrati i EU.

  Marian-Jean Marinescu (PPE). - Având în vedere perioada de criză pe care o traversăm, problemele bugetare ale statelor membre, disciplina financiară impusă de noile regulamente europene, acordul privind CFM poate fi considerat un succes. Dacă luăm în considerare situaţia politică şi socială din Uniune, creşterea populismului şi scăderea încrederii în Uniune, putem, de asemenea, să spunem că s-a realizat un acord în condiţii dificile şi că poate fi considerat un sprijin pentru stabilitatea europeană. Un buget multianual este de preferat unui buget anual, contribuie la menţinerea unităţii Uniunii. Dacă ne gândim, însă, că s-a aplicat pentru prima dată procedura bugetară din Tratatul de la Lisabona, putem spune că Parlamentul European nu a utilizat avantajele oferite de această procedură, şi anume codecizia pentru politicile orizontale. Bugetul Uniunii a fost decis în Consiliul European şi datorită condiţiei de unanimitate a fost decis de un număr restrâns de state membre. Există însă un acord şi trebuie să-l salutăm şi respectăm. Flexibilitatea şi rectificarea sunt îmbunătăţiri importante obţinute de Parlament. Nu trebuie să uităm, însă, că sunt încă necesare decizii importante ale Consiliului referitoare la actualul exerciţiu financiar: două rectificări bugetare pentru anul 2013, în valoare de 13,2 miliarde, absolut necesare pentru a respecta angajamentele Comisiei, în special pentru politica de coeziune. Aş adăuga aici şi punerea în practică a Acordului din Consiliul European din februarie 2013, privind aplicarea regulii M+3 pentru România şi Slovacia.

Vreau să mulţumesc Preşedinţiei irlandeze atât pentru CFM, cât şi pentru acordurile pe celelalte politici orizontale.

  Ивайло Калфин (S&D). - Г-н Председател, г-н министър-председател, уважаеми комисари, постигнатият компромис по многогодишната финансова рамка беше много труден, включително защото Парламентът имаше нови функции, и бих искал да се обърна към Европейския съвет да свиква с новите функции на Парламента.

Процедурите, които се налагат, изискват по голяма част от въпросите съвместно вземане на решения и затова Европейският парламент не прие и няма да приеме предпоставени решения, които се взeмат само от едната страна, от Съвета, без Европейският парламент да има участие в тях.

По отношение на съдържанието на постигнатия компромис, ние няма как да сме доволни от равнищата на бюджета, които бяха предвидени. Не сме доволни, защото продължаваме да смятаме, че те няма да могат да финансират политическите цели, които същите министър-председатели, правителствени и държавни глави са поставили пред Европейския съюз.

В същото време ние сме доволни, че някои от основните ни приоритети, свързани с младежката безработица, свързани с конкурентоспособността, свързани с Фонда за подпомагане на най-бедните, бяха включени в последния компромис, който беше направен.

По отношение на реформата на бюджета смятам, че също бяха направени важни крачки напред. Особено искам да подчертая споразуменията за повече гъвкавост и Парламентът ще настоява всяко едно евро, което е включено в съответните тавани на бюджета, да бъде използвано за европейски политики.

Освен това, ревизията на бюджета в средата на периода и собствените ресурси също са важни теми, по които Парламентът ще настоява за получаване на конкретни резултати.

Най-накрая искам да подчертая, че все още има няколко условия, за да довършим преговорите.

Първото условие е да бъдат довършени преговорите по правните основания и искам да се обърна към Съвета да отвори тези теми, които все още не е отворил – в областта на селскостопанската политика и в областта на кохезионното развитие, които бяха решени от февруарския Съвет, но по които Парламентът има право на съвместно вземане на решения.

И на второ място, ние ще очакваме окончателното решение по актуализацията на бюджета и изплащането на всички плащания, които трябва да се направят тази година.

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE). - Mr President, I would say to the Taoiseach that words matter and the words that have not been quoted from his speech I will now quote. I think they reflect his standing and his government’s approach to the Presidency of the European Union: ‘We have discharged our presidential duty’. I think many in this House should listen to those words and reflect on them. I congratulate the Taoiseach and those on his team who have worked hard for the European Union and discharged their duties to very good effect.

Because words matter, I think also we must reflect on the words of Ms Anderson. She may be wearing the green today, but it is only on the outside. I regard her comments with the contempt they deserve, and I go back to congratulate our Presidency: Minister Creighton, Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore, Minister Coveney. I was one of the few negotiators from this Parliament on the common agricultural policy, on which full respect was given to this Parliament’s new codecision powers and where we got a political agreement.

In relation to the other policies, the Presidency worked meticulously to deliver for the European Union, so it should be proud of its work, but to those who are coming afterwards, to the Lithuanian Presidency, I would say do not worry – there is still a great deal of work to be done! That is exactly what the European Union is about: constant ongoing work for citizens. Do not mind the headline-grabbers like Cohn-Bendit, who did not even sit through the debate, or Ms Anderson, who was so negative; the Irish Presidency has done great work.

  Eider Gardiazábal Rubial (S&D). - Señor Presidente, cuando me preguntan por qué elegí la Comisión de Presupuestos, siempre digo que es la comisión más política, que es donde se ve el dinero que se destina a los proyectos que tenemos en marcha, donde se ven las prioridades políticas, en este caso, del Parlamento Europeo.

Y prioridades, aquí tenemos muchas: desempleo, PYME, solidaridad, crecimiento. Pero cuando vamos a ver el presupuesto y el acuerdo sobre el marco financiero que se nos presentan, esas prioridades no están reflejadas. Estamos en medio de la mayor crisis de la Unión Europea. Veintisiete millones de parados, de los que seis de ellos son jóvenes. ¿Y cuál es nuestra respuesta a ello? Un recorte sin precedentes en el presupuesto para los próximos siete años. Porque esto no es un recorte coyuntural, es un recorte para los próximos siete años.

Decía el señor Barroso que nuestra prioridad es el desempleo juvenil. Efectivamente, pero desde luego, con seis mil millones de euros, en un principio para siete años y ahora concentrados en dos, no vamos a solucionar, ni mucho menos, el problema del desempleo juvenil. ¿Y qué vamos a hacer en 2016? No nos va a quedar dinero ni para luchar contra el desempleo juvenil ni para afrontar los retos que tenemos.

No me resigno a creer que este es el mejor acuerdo posible. No me vale que me digan que el Parlamento tiene que ser responsable y votar un acuerdo realista. ¡No! La responsabilidad es estar a la altura de las circunstancias y este acuerdo no lo está.

Europa no puede seguir construyéndose en base a egoísmos nacionales y a acuerdos de mínimos, por lo menos, no la Europa que yo defiendo.

Catch-the-eye-Verfahren

  Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz (PPE). - Stabilitás, munkahelyek és növekedés. Ez a hármas határozta meg az ír elnökség programját. Mint ahogy miniszterelnök úr említette rendkívül rögös úton indultunk el együttesen. Azonban ez az út sokfelé vezethetett volna. Ez az út a gazdasági fellendülés, a versenyképesség növelése és a pénzügyi stabilitás elérése érdekében mozgott. Nagyon szép eredményei voltak ennek az elnökségnek úgy a bankunió tekintetében, amikor arról beszélhetünk, hogy úgy beszélünk a bankfelügyeletről, hogy közben a bankoknak a stabilizálása is megtörténik a feltőkésítés révén, a mérleg főösszegének az ellenőrzése révén. Nagyon örülök, hogy sikert értünk el a kkv-k finanszírozása területén. Szintén csak kiemelkedően jól és elismerően tudok beszélni arról, amit az ifjúsági munkanélküliség területén az ír elnökség mutatott. Azt gondolom, hogy kiváló eredmény, gratulálok hozzá...

(az elnök elveszi a szót)

  Mojca Kleva Kekuš (S&D). - V tej dvorani stalno ponavljajo, da je večletni finančni okvir instrument za pogon rasti, zaposlovanja in investicij v Evropski uniji.

Jaz se žal z zmanjšanim proračunom ne morem strinjati in ga ne podpiram. Vendar verjamem, da je v teh časih to tudi največ, kar smo lahko dosegli. Računam namreč na velik multiplikacijski efekt, ki ga imajo v bistvu evropska sredstva pri vseh projektih, ki so financirani iz evropskega denarja. Povečanje prožnosti in prenosa sredstev med leti in med programskimi postavkami nam bo v prihodnje po mojem dovolilo učinkovitejšo izrabo evropskih sredstev.

Bi pa res želela vso svojo podporo dati ustanovljenemu skladu za brezposelnost mladih, predvsem z enega vidika: ker verjamem, da smo končno ugotovili, da je brezposelnost mladih ne samo problem posameznih držav članic, ampak evropski problem, kjer potrebujemo evropska sredstva, evropski denar.

  Claudio Morganti (EFD). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, al di là di numeri e cifre che si possono interpretare a piacere, la cosa che dovrebbe far riflettere è stata la fatica con cui si è giunti a questa intesa. Un'intesa che è al ribasso, è inutile negarlo.

La Commissione europea dovrebbe interrogarsi sul perché gli Stati membri non sembrano più voler credere all'Europa, tanto da limitarne drasticamente le risorse. Qui il discorso si fa ben più ampio e dobbiamo considerare quelli che sono i costi e i benefici di questa Unione. Negli ultimi anni è parso chiaro a tutti che questa Europa ormai non funziona più ed è un notevole costo soprattutto per l'Italia, che negli ultimi sette anni ha lasciato a Bruxelles – tra entrate e uscite – oltre 30 miliardi di euro.

I benefici direi che sono stati alquanto modesti se non nulli. Gran parte dei fondi europei finisce al Mezzogiorno che non li spende o li spende male, agli altri restano le briciole, comunque difficili da ottenere. L'Europa è passata da essere speranza a essere timore. Bisogna riflettere su questo e trarne le doverose conclusioni.

  Franz Obermayr (NI). - Herr Präsident! Ich muss einen der Bereiche herausgreifen, in dem die Bilanz der irischen Präsidentschaft leider enttäuschend ausfällt, nämlich den Datenschutz. Denn beim Aufweichen der Datenschutzverordnung hatten Lobbyisten vornehmlich aus den USA – IT-Konzerne wie Google und Facebook – einen wichtigen strategischen Verbündeten, nämlich die irische Regierung. Schließlich hat sie aufgrund der Ansässigkeit von Facebook ein vitales wirtschaftliches Eigeninteresse daran, ein einheitliches und strenges Datenschutzrecht zu verhindern. Bereits am Beginn der Präsidentschaft stellte Dublin klar, dass der Vorschlag der Kommission zu weit geht, und statt Strafen es bloß Rügen geben soll und auch mildernde Umstände zu akzeptieren sind. Im Endeffekt setzte Irland die Herabsetzung des Strafrahmens für Unternehmen durch. Geringe Strafen heißt natürlich auch geringer Abschreckungseffekt.

Also bleibt zu hoffen, dass die Enthüllungen von Herrn Snowden den öffentlichen Druck erhöhen, damit doch noch ein effektiver Datenschutz für Europa geschaffen wird.

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. GIANNI PITTELLA
Vicepresidente

  Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the Commission. − Mr President, this debate has very clearly demonstrated how successful the Irish Presidency was. There was clear progress on banking union; there was the completion of the third European Semester; there was achievement of CAP and fisheries reform; there was a political agreement on the Youth Guarantee Programme; there was an agreement on the mandate for EU-US free trade talks and, of course, also historic steps for Croatia, Serbia and Kosovo being undertaken under the Irish Presidency.

At the same time, Taoiseach, you managed to get your country on the path towards recovery. For all this I would really like to thank you and congratulate you, but I think the most important achievement of your Presidency was clearly the agreement on the multiannual financial framework and on the draft amending budget for 2013 and other complex issues linked to it.

As this debate has clearly shown, the negotiations have been very difficult, but we in the Commission are convinced that this was the best deal under very difficult circumstances. The deal was, from February, clearly improved, thanks to the very skilful negotiations of the European Parliament’s negotiating team and the personal involvement of the President of the European Parliament. Of course, this would not have been possible without the great work of the Irish Presidency, the Tánaiste and his close collaboration with Commissioner Lewandowski.

I also would like to pay tribute to Minister Lucinda Creighton, who was already referred to in the previous debate as the minister who had always been there when the difficult debates were taking place and who really promoted the cooperation between the Presidency and this Parliament to new heights. As you know, Mr President, the success of a Presidency always depends on political vision, strong commitment and hard work. You brought all these qualities to your Presidency. Many Council meetings ran over time and several of them had to be repeated because you wanted them to have a clear reflection of typical Irish qualities: strong pro-European dedication, hard work, resilience and the refusal to give up, and on top of that, to do it all in a good atmosphere with your special, excellent Irish humour!

Strong leadership needs strong support and you had it from your very efficient administration in Dublin and also your excellent team in Brussels at your Permanent Representations. Many trialogues were concluded thanks to the enormous effort of your Ambassador, Rory Montgomery, and his team.

Dear Taoiseach, thank you very much for a job well done and for an excellent Presidency.

(Loud applause)

  Enda Kenny, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, I have listened carefully to what the honourable Members have had to say here and I want to thank those who uttered kind words about the Presidency.

Let me say that I am well aware of the difficulties that everybody had in regard to the MFF. Indeed, from a national perspective Ireland supported a higher level of resources, but as the Presidency we were required to work within the remit and the responsibility given to us. From the first exchanges with Parliament, the Presidency recognised that this would hinge around the question of balance: on the one hand, the overall amounts, and on the other hand, the flexibility and the review necessary to make this budget work.

You also sought to reflect the politics of a parliament which is coming towards the end of its mandate by seeking an opportunity for the next parliament to review and possibly revise in the light of changing economic circumstances and unforeseen events. Parliament was not willing to bind the hands of the Chamber that will be elected next year in 2014, and the Presidency appreciated that concern indeed.

I could outline for you all the changes that were made to meet the concerns of the parliamentary negotiators, and they could list a whole range of issues which they feel were not addressed. However, what makes for a good outcome is that there is a balance at the end of the negotiations.

The proposal before you, the elected Members of the European Parliament, stands or falls on its merits. The vote tomorrow is a matter for the Members here in this Chamber. The Treaties make this very clear. An MFF regulation can only be adopted by the Council with the consent and the authorisation and the approval of the European Parliament. There have been substantive and detailed negotiations and you have the outcome from last Thursday agreed and recommended by both President Schulz and myself.

Ireland no longer holds the Council Presidency, so it is not for me to represent Council positions now in a formal sense, but of course Ireland’s membership and its interest in this Union have not changed. It is from that perspective that I would suggest that we need to stand back from the negotiations and from the forgeing of proposal and counter proposal and look at what we need to do now for our 500 million citizens.

The Union needs to get on with the job now of planning for the deployment of the investment plan, for the investment of EUR 960 billion – EUR 960 billion – to be released into the real economy. The MFF on the table is the most valuable instrument that we have at our disposal to make an impact and make a difference. We have no more time to lose and for that reason I would urge the Members of Parliament to vote tomorrow for the proposal.

Let me just refer to a number of issues that were raised here. Mr Swoboda said that the implementation of the MFF is urgent and is critical. I agree with that 100%. If we are to make an impact in the countries of the Union, it is into the real economy that the implementation and the investment of the EUR 960 billion has got to be made.

Mr Cohn-Bendit, I am glad to see you back, I do not like to see politicians leave the field of battle, as it were. You made a very impassioned plea and I understand the frustration that you feel, but we have a very significant element of money in here and it is up to you and everybody else to see that it is implemented effectively. I thank you for your contribution in that regard.

By the way, I did not ask the citizens of Europe to thank us, but merely pointed out that it is now our continued responsibility to deal with their problems and this MFF budget is part of that. It might not be enough in many people’s eyes, but it is the best instrument that we have got.

In respect of MEP Murphy, who described this as an austerity budget: by any stretch of the imagination – by anybody’s imagination, even MEP Murphy’s – EUR 960 billion is a not insignificant amount of money to inject into the real economy of the European Union. For that reason this is about real jobs for real people and it beats any alternative that I have heard proposed from Mr Murphy’s quarter.

I might also say that the trade talks between the European Union and the US have not yet commenced. They are not due to commence until July, as was agreed at the G8 summit in County Fermanagh in Ireland. I do hope that, under the current circumstances, the facts that are needed to be exposed here and presented are dealt with and that we can move on and focus on what needs to be done here in bringing to a conclusion, in the next two years, trade talks that could result in very significant growth in economies and very significant growth in job numbers both throughout Europe and throughout the United States.

I would like to thank MEP Gallagher for his comments about the peace dividend funds for Northern Ireland. I might point out that – with his interest in fishing – we also adopted the Atlantic Strategy with Commissioner Geoghegan-Quinn between Canada, the US, Portugal, Spain, France, Britain and Ireland as a model to be implemented for others.

In respect of the comments made by Ms Trüpel and Ms Anderson, people will always say that we never have enough money, but the political reality is that we have to ask European taxpayers to fund the budget and the leaders of 27 different countries and 27 different governments agreed on a budget of EUR 960 billion. I think it now makes best sense to get on with implementing that in the interests of the people, particularly the 26 million who are unemployed throughout Europe.

I reject Ms Anderson’s assertion that Ireland’s negotiations of these elements of the budget were an embarrassment. I congratulated Tánaiste Gilmore and Minister Creighton for their work. It is beneath Ms Anderson actually to say that this was an embarrassment for our own country and she also makes the point that we did not reach agreement in respect of domestic violence. I would remind Ms Anderson that we did reach agreement on the European Protection Order which recognises domestic violence protection across borders and that is an issue that we were very happy to be associated with. I might say that we also had a facility for personnel from Northern Ireland to serve here in the Permanent Representation in Brussels to be fully acquainted with all of the issues that were being discussed by the politicians as we moved towards the successful conclusion of these matters.

Of course, I want to formally express my government’s welcome to Croatia as it joins the Union. We are stronger and better for Croatia’s presence making us now a Union of 28 Members. I also want to make it clear that I am pleased that under the Irish Presidency we were in a position to agree the opening of accession negotiations with Serbia and of talks with Kosovo on a stabilisation agreement as well as opening a new chapter in the negotiations with Turkey.

This was Ireland’s first Council Presidency under the revised post-Lisbon arrangements with a greatly enhanced role for this Parliament, and as the Presidency we had to adapt to this and we had to learn some new ways of working and negotiating with our colleagues. If one thing was clear to all of the Irish Presidency Ministers and officials it was the centrality of Parliament’s role in the European Union business and for all other presidencies following ours; let that be a central lesson in their negotiations and their understanding. Our Presidency programme had to be delivered with and through Parliament and it was a better Presidency because of that fact.

I am deeply grateful to Parliament, to its President and to its leadership. We owe a great deal of gratitude to the committee chairs, to the rapporteurs and the Members in the way in which you constructively engaged with the Irish Presidency since last January. Of course, as we step back from the limelight of the Presidency, the responsibility does not go away; the work does not diminish. Ensuring stability and growth and jobs for our citizens will continue to remain the key challenge for us.

Tomorrow you will have a presentation on the priorities of the Lithuanian Presidency, from President Dalia Grybauskaitė, and I wish Lithuania the very best of success as they take over the mantle from Ireland. There is so much to do and we look forward to supporting them as Presidency and working with our colleagues here.

Can I conclude by saying that intensive engagement by the Irish Government with the European Union will now build on the reinforced set of relationships and capacity that has been born during our Presidency. I remain committed to continuing to develop our engagement with the European Union institutions and the Member States so that our country, Ireland, remains where it belongs firmly at the heart of Europe.

Next year, 2014, brings the European elections. Some of you politicians will not stand, some of you politicians will stand, some of you will be elected, some of you will not and some new Members will be elected to this great Parliament here. But your duty is to contribute to implementing what has now been decided in the interests of the citizens of the countries that we represent and get on with that job through cooperation and implementation, and let that be your hallmark. That is your duty; that is your responsibility; that will be your responsibility. Our citizens – your citizens – will not thank us if we fail in that duty and Europe, our home, will not prosper if we shirk our responsibilities.

(Loud applause)

VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ
Präsident

  Der Präsident. − Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet am Mittwoch, 3. Juli 2013, statt.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 149 GO)

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D), raštu. – Džiaugiuosi, kad Airija, prieš baigdama savo pirmininkavimą Europos Tarybai, sugebėjo Europos Parlamentui pasiūlyti esminių kompromisų, kurių dėka didžiausios politinės jėgos Parlamente pagaliau gali pritarti 2014–2020 metų finansavimo programai. Viena iš labiausiai mūsų Europos Parlamente diskutuotų ir nerimą kėlusių sričių buvo, kaip žinote, ES finansavimas neseniai sukurtai Europos jaunimo garantijų iniciatyvai, kuri taps vienu iš pagrindinių instrumentų kovojant su vis dar rekordus kai kuriose šalyse mušančiu jaunimo nedarbu. Baiminomės, kad šiuo metu numatytų lėšų Jaunimo garantijų iniciatyvai pakaks tik ateinantiems dvejiems metams, ir, kad vėliau, prireikus, ES finansavimas bus sunkiai įmanomas. Džiaugiuosi, kad dabar bus numatyta galimybė finansavimą šiai svarbiai priemonei pratęsti ir po 2016 metų. Būsimasis daugiametis ES biudžetas taip pat taps veiksmingesnis, skaidresnis bei nuoseklesnis, taip pat jame nuo šiol bus nustatyti griežtesni reikalavimai ES finansinių įsipareigojimų vykdymui. Tačiau svarbiausia, kad dabar turėsime didesnį ir nuoseklesnį finansavimą švietimo, mokslinių tyrimų bei paramos labiausiai skurstantiems žmonėms sritims. Tai ne tik įgalins investicijas šiose ES konkurencingumą lemiančiose bei užimtumą skatinančiose srityse, bet ir leis Europos Sąjungai pasirūpinti savo labiausiai nuo krizės nukentėjusiais piliečiais.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. – A Presidência irlandesa chega ao fim com a celebração do acordo entre os presidentes das três instituições – Parlamento, Conselho e Comissão – sobre a proposta de Quadro Financeiro Plurianual 2014-2020. Como era esperado e como avisáramos, depois da devida teatralização, com juras de que jamais aprovariam a proposta de QFP do Conselho, direita e social-democracia do Parlamento entendem-se na celebração de um acordo que representa uma cedência, em toda a linha, às grandes potências que comandam o processo de integração. Depois de se entenderem na aprovação do Tratado Orçamental, que eterniza as políticas ditas de austeridade, veio a social-democracia dizer que o reforço da disciplina teria como contrapartida o reforço da solidariedade, expresso num reforço do orçamento da UE. Isto mesmo fez e disse o Partido Socialista em Portugal, juntando-se, como habitualmente, à direita. Está mais uma vez bem à vista qual o significado da tão propalada solidariedade europeia. Pela primeira vez, reduz-se o orçamento comunitário em termos absolutos, mesmo no contexto de um novo alargamento. Numa altura em que aumentam as desigualdades e a divergência entre países, corta-se nas verbas da coesão. Portugal perderá cerca de 10 % de financiamento da UE em comparação com o atual Quadro Financeiro. E perderá mais ainda com o aprofundamento desta integração capitalista.

  Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), in writing. – Ireland obtained the Presidency of the EU Council in a crucial moment, where expectations were high and time for achieving results was short. Regardless of the obstacles, the Irish EU Presidency was able to meet commitments on 80 legislative dossiers in areas that affect EU citizens daily. Through 374 trilogue meetings and 54 Council sessions, chaired by Irish Ministers, the Irish EU Presidency was able to concluded negotiations on the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM), the Unified Patent Court agreement (UPC) and the Erasmus+ project for supporting education and training. In the last days of the Presidency Ireland led a compromise on the CAP and CFP reform, as well as the Horizon 2020 programme for research and innovation. Perhaps the Presidency’s greatest accomplishment was its ability to reconcile various interests and reach a political agreement on the next MFF 2014-2020 at the levels of the Presidents of the three institutions. The MFF deal includes many of the issues the Parliament has been insisting on: more flexibility in payments and commitments, arrangements for revision and stronger emphasis on fighting youth unemployment. We therefore thank Ireland for a successful Presidency which accomplished important results in the areas of stability, job creation and growth.

  Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE), in writing. – The highly successful six-month EU Presidency by Ireland has been an excellent example for all to follow in future. The Irish Presidency has, against considerable odds, succeeded in brokering a deal on reform of the common fisheries policy, and worked extremely hard to deliver similar results on EU agriculture policy. The Presidency has even succeeded in winning agreement on the even more complex and controversial matter of the EU budget for future years. The fact that this immensely difficult and politically contentious series of talks has been led so outstandingly well by Ireland demonstrates very clearly that there is absolutely no reason why an independent Scotland could not also succeed and prosper as a normal independent Member State of the EU. It is clearly not the size of a Member State which determines its political and diplomatic effectiveness. This week heralded the official start of Croatia’s membership of the European Union. Croatia, like Ireland, is smaller than Scotland, and commences its EU membership with a Commissioner nominated by its government, a top-table seat in the Council of Ministers, and twice as many MEPs as Scotland currently has. With independence, Scotland too will join the mainstream in Europe.

  Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), na piśmie. – Wieloletnie Ramy Finansowe były niewątpliwie najważniejszym zadaniem irlandzkiej prezydencji w Radzie. Nie było to zadanie łatwe. Dlatego tym większe uznanie należy się władzom irlandzkim, którym udało się doprowadzić do politycznego porozumienia między instytucjami UE. To ważne osiągnięcie, bo wieloletni budżet będzie miał olbrzymi wpływ na przyszłość UE. Będąc polskim posłem do Parlamentu Europejskiego, mam dodatkowy powód do satysfakcji. WRF są bowiem bardzo korzystne dla Polski. Ramy potwierdzają też, że wartości, które leżały u źródła narodzin europejskiej integracji nadal są aktualne. Solidarność, wzmacnianie pokoju i dobrobytu, wspieranie słabszych, troska o dobro wspólne – to wszystko nadal działa. Polska jest świetnym przykładem tego, jak efektywnie może być wykorzystane europejskie wsparcie. To po prostu jest dobra inwestycja. Dla wszystkich. Dziękuję bardzo.

  Peter Šťastný (PPE), písomne. – V prvom rade by som chcel Írsku zablahoželať k úspešnej organizácii predsedníctva, ktoré zanechalo pozitívny odkaz do budúcnosti. Írske predsedníctvo malo od začiatku jasnú víziu a medzi hlavné priority patrili podpora hospodárskeho rastu a tvorba pracovných miest. Práve v týchto oblastiach sa podarilo dosiahnuť niekoľko hmatateľných úspechov. Príkladom je schválenie programu Horizont 2020 orientovaného na podporu výskumu a inovácií, ktoré sú hlavnými predpokladmi dlhodobo udržateľného rozvoja. Veľkým problémom súčasnosti je aj vysoká miera nezamestnanosti mladých ľudí. Jedným zo spôsobov, ako s ňou aktívne bojovať, je program Erasmus+ schválený počas írskeho predsedníctva, ktorý umožní štyrom miliónom mladých ľudí čerpať granty na podporu mobility a vzdelávania do roku 2020. Najťažším a zároveň najdôležitejším krokom predsedníctva bolo prijatie rozpočtu. Kompromis, ktorý sa Írsku podarilo vyrokovať, zabezpečuje rozpočet na nasledujúcich 7 rokov a umožní tak financovanie programov zameraných na podporu zamestnanosti.

  Γεώργιος Σταυρακάκης (S&D), γραπτώς. – Η συμφωνία για τον μακροπρόθεσμο προϋπολογισμό της ΕΕ για τη περίοδο 2014-2020 δεν είναι η ιδανικότερη. Ωστόσο, οι σημαντικές βελτιώσεις που επέφερε το Κοινοβούλιο στην πρόταση της συνόδου κορυφής του Φεβρουαρίου καθιστά την συμφωνία αποδεκτή. Τα κύρια αιτήματα του Κοινοβουλίου για εστίαση στην ανάπτυξη και την δημιουργία θέσεων απασχόλησης, την καταπολέμηση της ανεργίας των νέων, την ενίσχυση των προγραμμάτων έρευνας και καινοτομίας και την υποστήριξη των μικρομεσαίων επιχειρήσεων ικανοποιήθηκαν σε μεγάλο βαθμό. Επίσης, λάβαμε εγγυήσεις ότι το συνολικό ποσό του προϋπολογισμού θα χρησιμοποιηθεί στο έπακρο, θα υπάρχει μεγαλύτερη ευελιξία στις πληρωμές και τις δεσμεύεις καθώς και η δυνατότητα επανεξέτασης και αναθεώρησης του προϋπολογισμού σε ενδιάμεσο χρόνο. Ακόμα λάβαμε την δέσμευση των κυβερνήσεων ότι θα υπάρξει άμεση συμφωνία για την εκταμίευση 7,3 δις ευρώ για την κάλυψη μέρους των απλήρωτων λογαριασμών για το 2013. Αυτό που προέχει πλέον είναι η έγκαιρη προετοιμασία των νέων προγραμμάτων ώστε από τη 1 Ιανουαρίου να μπορέσουν να τρέξουν όσο το δυνατόν ομαλότερα και να συνεισφέρουν στις προσπάθειες να ξεπεραστεί η κρίση. Ας μη ξεχνάμε ότι ο προϋπολογισμός της ΕΕ αποτελεί το κύριο επενδυτικό κοινοτικό μέσο, λειτουργώντας ως καταλύτης για την οικονομική ανάπτυξη, τη δημιουργία θέσεων εργασίας και την επίτευξη της κοινωνικής, οικονομικής και εδαφικής συνοχής.

  Marc Tarabella (S&D), par écrit. – Nous pouvons être heureux d'avoir pu conclure la nouvelle législation sur les marchés publics durant la Présidence irlandaise. Augmenter la qualité et l'efficacité des services aux citoyens, faciliter l'accès des marchés aux PME, garantir le respect de bonnes conditions de travail et des critères environnementaux: ce texte représente une nette avancée pour tous les acteurs de notre société.

De nombreux points positifs peuvent être mis en avant: coopération public-public renforcée; respect des règles incluant les conventions collectives entre partenaires économiques et sociaux; lutte contre les offres anormalement basses; abandon de l'offre la plus basse à tout prix; transparence et responsabilité dans la chaîne de sous-traitance; encouragement et amélioration des procédures électroniques.

Le citoyen attend que chaque euro de l'argent public soit dépensé de manière utile, efficace et responsable. Cette réforme des marchés publics était indispensable et ponctuera le quotidien de tous les acteurs de notre société.

  Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D), schriftelijk. – Het akkoord over de volgende meerjarenbegroting is maar een mager beestje. Het mag dan misschien wel het maximaal haalbare zijn dat op dit moment van de lidstaten verwacht kan worden, maar dat neemt niet weg dat de uitkomst ver verwijderd blijft van de minimumeisen die het Parlement in zijn vorige resoluties heeft gesteld.

De EU krijgt met dit akkoord de volgende 7 jaar een begroting die gericht is op het verleden, terwijl we meer dan ooit een beleid nodig hebben dat ons een toekomst biedt. Daarvoor zijn investeringsmiddelen en middelen om de strijd tegen de jeugdwerkloosheid te voeren absoluut noodzakelijk. Om die reden ben ik helemaal niet gelukkig met dit resultaat en kan ik dit akkoord niet steunen.

Het bereikte akkoord verdedigt onvoldoende het algemene Europese belang. Zelfs de toegevingen die het Parlement heeft kunnen afdwingen, zoals de 'frontloading' van middelen voor de strijd tegen jeugdwerkloosheid dreigen een vergiftigd geschenk te worden. Het concentreren van deze middelen in het begin van de begrotingsperiode gaat immers niet gepaard met het optrekken van het jaarlijkse uitgavenplafond. Voor elke euro die eerder wordt uitgegeven, moeten er investeringen worden uitgesteld. Dit ondergraaft natuurlijk nog meer de mogelijkheid van het EU-budget als investeringsbudget.

7. Ώρα των ψηφοφοριών

  Der Präsident. − Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Abstimmungsstunde.

7.1. Εκλογή του Διαμεσολαβητή (ψηφοφορία)

(Der Präsident erläutert technische Einzelheiten der elektronischen Abstimmung, gefolgt von einer Testabstimmung gemäß Artikel 204 Absatz 6 der Geschäftsordnung.)

  Bogusław Sonik (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! Myślę, że nietaktem jest umieszczanie na tej liście próbnej, którą otrzymaliśmy, nieżyjącego artysty Luciano Pavarottiego.

Nach der Abstimmung :

  Der Präsident. − Da niemand im ersten Wahlgang die erforderliche Mehrheit erreicht hat, findet der zweite Wahlgang morgen, 3. Juli 2013, statt.

7.2. Κανονισμός υπηρεσιακής κατάστασης των υπαλλήλων και καθεστώς που εφαρμόζεται στο λοιπό προσωπικό της ΕΕ (A7-0156/2012 - Dagmar Roth-Behrendt) (ψηφοφορία)

– Nach der Abstimmung:

  Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the Commission. − Mr President, I would like to take this occasion to personally thank you and Parliament for your strong support in these very difficult negotiations. I know that without your personal involvement and very skilful negotiations on the overall MFF package, this result would not be possible.

I would also like to thank wholeheartedly the rapporteur, Ms Dagmar Roth-Behrendt, and her shadow rapporteurs Mr Baldassarre, Ms Lichtenberger, Ms Wikström, Mr Karim, Mr Maštálka and Mr Speroni. We have been working very hard on this file under an intense time pressure and in the end I think we managed to get a very honourable and good deal.

I am very pleased about today’s vote because through these approved Staff Regulations and approved administrative reform we have clearly proven that the European civil service is in tune with the European citizens. It shares the efforts of many public administrations for more savings and further modernisation, but it is also a good decision for the institutions and staff. We will still be able to recruit the highly-qualified staff we need and, at the same time, today’s vote makes it clear that to work for the European institutions means not only showing strong European commitment and dedication, but also possessing the great ability and skill required to pass a most demanding selection procedure and to be prepared to work longer working hours and retire later than most colleagues in the national civil services.

I would like to conclude by saying that I believe that through this modernisation the European civil service will be fully equipped to deal with the current crisis and with European and global challenges and to work on Europe, which will, I believe, emerge stronger from the crisis than it was before.

(Die Abstimmung wird unterbrochen.)

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. GIANNI PITTELLA
Vicepresidente

8. Σύνθεση των επιτροπών: βλ. Συνοπτικά Πρακτικά

9. Ώρα των ψηφοφοριών (συνέχεια)

9.1. Σύμβαση της Βιέννης σχετικά με την αστική ευθύνη ως προς τις πυρηνικές ζημίες (A7-0198/2013 - Alajos Mészáros) (ψηφοφορία)

- Prima della votazione:

  Alajos Mészáros, rapporteur. − Mr President, I will be very brief, since this report on the authorisation to accede to the 1997 Protocol of the Vienna Convention has not been debated in the plenary, and I would like to give you some brief information about the subject matter and the aim of this report.

The proposal enables the contracting parties of the Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage to ratify the Protocol or to accede to it. The Council’s decision is addressed to the EU Member States that are contracting parties to the Vienna Convention but who have not ratified or concluded its 1997 Protocols so far. These countries are Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland and Slovakia. The amendment to the Vienna Convention is an update of the rules to strengthen the right to fair compensation for damage in the event of nuclear accidents.

Accession to the 1997 Protocol is therefore beneficial for improving victim compensation across the European Union. The Council decision proposes to authorise the conclusion or ratification of the 1997 Protocol for the Council Member States. In accordance with the Treaties of the EU, the Council decision requires the consent of the Parliament. As your rapporteur, I do recommend that Parliament gives it consent to the Council decision in order to allow the contracting parties to conclude the 1997 Protocol.

9.2. Εφαρμογή του άρθρου 93 της Συνθήκης ΕΚ (A7-0180/2013 - Sirpa Pietikäinen) (ψηφοφορία)

9.3. Εξωτερική πολιτική αερομεταφορών της ΕΕ (A7-0172/2013 - Marian-Jean Marinescu) (ψηφοφορία)

9.4. Δραστηριότητες των οργανισμών εξαγωγικών πιστώσεων των κρατών μελών (A7-0193/2013 - Yannick Jadot) (ψηφοφορία)

9.5. Αίτηση άρσης της βουλευτικής ασυλίας της Marine Le Pen (A7-0236/2013 - Cecilia Wikström) (ψηφοφορία)

- Prima della votazione:

  Bruno Gollnisch (NI). - Monsieur le Président, je voudrais, très brièvement, faire observer, avant le vote sur le rapport de Mme Wikström sur l'immunité parlementaire de Marine Le Pen, que l'intéressée n'a pas pu obtenir que cette question soit débattue en plénière, qu'elle n'a pas la possibilité de s'exprimer à cet égard devant l'ensemble de nos collègues et qu'il n'a même pas été possible d'obtenir un vote nominal sur ce sujet, pour que chacun prenne ses responsabilités.

En d'autres termes, cette procédure s'apparente plus à celle du Soviet suprême de l'ex-Union soviétique qu'à celle d'un parlement respectueux des droits de ses membres.

(Mouvements divers)

  Presidente. − Onorevole Gollnisch, la procedura prevede che la discussione si faccia nell'ambito della commissione giuridica e così è stato fatto, quindi non c'è nessuna particolarità nei confronti dell'onorevole Le Pen.

9.6. Καθεστώς του Ευρωπαϊκού Ιδρύματος (A7-0223/2013 - Evelyn Regner) (ψηφοφορία)

9.7. Έλεγχος από το κράτος λιμένα (A7-0394/2012 - Brian Simpson) (ψηφοφορία)

9.8. Έγγραφα κυκλοφορίας οχημάτων (A7-0199/2013 - Vilja Savisaar-Toomast) (ψηφοφορία)

- Prima della votazione finale:

  Brian Simpson (S&D). - Mr President, for this report, and indeed for the reports by Ms Sehnalová and Mr Kuhn – we will have to do them separately – could I please ask, under the rules, that we postpone the vote on the legislative resolution and refer the matter back to the Committee on Transport and Tourism, with a view to reaching a first reading agreement with the Council?

(Il Parlamento approva la richiesta di rinvio in commissione)

9.9. Οδικός τεχνικός έλεγχος των οχημάτων επαγγελματικής χρήσεως που κυκλοφορούν στην Ένωση (A7-0207/2013 - Olga Sehnalová) (ψηφοφορία)

- Prima della votazione finale:

  Brian Simpson (S&D). - Mr President, I have the same request as for the previous report, which is that this report go back to the Committee on Transport and Tourism, with a view to reaching a first reading agreement with the Council, and so to postpone the legislative vote.

(Il Parlamento approva la richiesta di rinvio in commissione)

9.10. Περιοδικός τεχνικός έλεγχος των μηχανοκίνητων οχημάτων και των ρυμουλκουμένων τους (A7-0210/2013 - Werner Kuhn) (ψηφοφορία)

- Prima della votazione finale:

  Brian Simpson (S&D). - Mr President, for the third and last time, can I ask Parliament to postpone the vote on the legislative resolution, sending this back to committee for an opportunity for negotiations with the Presidency for a first reading deal?

(Il Parlamento approva la richiesta di rinvio in commissione)

9.11. Ουσίες προτεραιότητας στον τομέα της πολιτικής των υδάτων (A7-0397/2012 - Richard Seeber) (ψηφοφορία)

9.12. Oρισμένες κατηγορίες οριζόντιων κρατικών ενισχύσεων - δημόσιες επιβατικές σιδηροδρομικές και οδικές μεταφορές (A7-0179/2013 - Herbert Dorfmann) (ψηφοφορία)

9.13. Γαλάζια ανάπτυξη - Προώθηση της βιώσιμης ανάπτυξης στους τομείς των θαλάσσιων μεταφορών και του τουρισμού (A7-0209/2013 - Spyros Danellis) (ψηφοφορία)

9.14. Συμβολή των συνεταιρισμών στην αντιμετώπιση της κρίσης (A7-0222/2013 - Patrizia Toia) (ψηφοφορία)

9.15. Μια βιοοικονομία για την Ευρώπη (A7-0201/2013 - Paolo Bartolozzi) (ψηφοφορία)

(Applausi)

10. Αιτιολογήσεις ψήφου

  Presidente. − Comunico di aver ricevuto molte dichiarazioni di voto.

La seduta proseguirà al massimo fino alle 14.45 per consentire ai servizi di preparare la ripresa della seduta alle 15.00.

Le altre dichiarazioni di voto saranno esaminate domani dopo le votazioni.

11. Εκλογή του Διαμεσολαβητή

Dichiarazioni di voto scritte

  Marc Tarabella (S&D), par écrit. – Je tiens à féliciter la nouvelle médiatrice pour son nouveau poste. Qui plus est, c'est la première fois qu'une femme occupe ce poste, et nous nous en félicitons.

  Elisabetta Gardini (PPE), per iscritto. − Al di là del nome, è necessario che questa funzione venga esercitata con grande senso di responsabilità e coerenza.

L'augurio che faccio al nuovo Mediatore europeo è proprio quello di lavorare con serenità e con la consapevolezza dell'importanza del ruolo ricoperto. Spero vivamente che non sia necessario un suo intervento, ma è importante vigilare affinché tutte le denunce per cattiva amministrazione delle istituzioni e degli organi dell'Unione europea vengano vagliate e analizzate. Un'attenta analisi permetterà di individuare i problemi e risolverli.

11.1. Κανονισμός υπηρεσιακής κατάστασης των υπαλλήλων και καθεστώς που εφαρμόζεται στο λοιπό προσωπικό της ΕΕ (A7-0156/2012 - Dagmar Roth-Behrendt)

Dichiarazioni di voto scritte

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Aprovo o presente relatório, tendo em conta que o ambiente económico atual oferece uma boa oportunidade para modernizar o Estatuto dos Funcionários da União Europeia, de modo a que este reflita melhor a realidade demográfica e económica da Europa. No entanto, penso ser essencial que os princípios subjacentes a uma política de pessoal saudável e moderna nas instituições europeias se baseiem, em particular, na necessidade de premiar o desempenho e a qualidade de serviço e de ter em conta o equilíbrio geográfico. O relator considera e eu concordo que estes princípios devem ser o cerne da nova reforma e que qualquer alteração deve também assegurar a equidade do sistema da União Europeia, refletir os esforços de consolidação das administrações nacionais e as condições oferecidas por outras organizações internacionais.

  Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), per iscritto. − Dopo quasi due anni di difficili negoziati, siamo finalmente arrivati a un accordo che consente di ottenere un risparmio di 2,7 miliardi di euro entro il 2020 e di modernizzare la funzione pubblica europea.

I risparmi sono possibili grazie a modifiche e tagli sostanziali come la riduzione del 5% delle assunzioni fino al 2017, il congelamento dei salari per due anni, l'innalzamento dell'età pensionabile e la riduzione di svariate indennità. Ma il nuovo statuto consentirà anche il passaggio verso una funzione pubblica moderna, competente ed efficiente. A tal fine, la struttura delle carriere sarà organizzata in modo da creare un legame diretto tra la responsabilità assunta e il grado mantenuto.

Inoltre, con l'obiettivo di premiare chi merita e di punire chi non raggiunge risultati positivi, lo scatto all'interno dello stesso grado e le misure disciplinari dipenderanno dal rapporto di valutazione annuale delle prestazioni lavorative.

  Elena Băsescu (PPE), în scris. − Am votat pentru acest raport şi aş vrea să îi felicit pe această cale pe toţi cei implicaţi în negocieri pentru rezultatul obţinut. Actualul context economic trebuie să fie înfruntat cu o atitudine solidară, iar în unele state membre au existat deja modificări similare. În lumina noilor reglementări, personalul european, vital pentru funcţionarea eficientă şi corectă a UE, este pregătit să facă faţă problemelor financiare cu care ne confruntăm. Mai mult, consider că s-a transmis un mesaj pozitiv cetăţenilor, care, în această perioadă caracterizată de măsuri de austeritate, trebuie sensibilizaţi şi asiguraţi de faptul că funcţionarii UE nu sunt o categorie privilegiată. În final, consider esenţial faptul că s-a ajuns la un echilibru între realizarea de economii şi asigurarea unei funcţionări optime a instituţiilor.

  Philippe Boulland (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai voté en faveur de la modification du statut des fonctionnaires européens, dans l'optique de faire des économies et de moderniser le service public européen. À l'heure où des efforts importants sont demandés à nos concitoyens, il était important d'en tenir compte et d'appliquer ces mêmes efforts aux fonctionnaires de l'Union. Ainsi, nous avons validé le gel des salaires pendant deux ans, le passage de l'âge de la retraite de 63 à 66 ans pour les nouveaux fonctionnaires, et à 65 ans pour ceux déjà en poste. Ces nouvelles contraintes ont été calculées selon la moyenne de l'Union, afin que les efforts demandés aux fonctionnaires nationaux soient aussi appliqués aux fonctionnaires européens.

  Philip Claeys (NI), schriftelijk. − Ik heb mij onthouden van stemming over de regels m.b.t. EU-ambtenaren. Het is goed dat het aantal personeelsleden wordt verminderd, dat de solidariteitsheffing wordt verhoogd, dat de werktijd wordt verlengd en dat de pensioenleeftijd wordt verhoogd. Het is echter slechts een zeer kleine stap vooruit. De wijzigingen zijn te beperkt in omvang. Er wordt in het verslag niet gesproken over de te hoge lonen, noch over de overbodige instellingen die beter afgeschaft kunnen worden. Het valt aan de burgers bijvoorbeeld niet uit te leggen dat (volgens Die Welt) meer dan 4 300 EU-ambtenaren meer verdienen dan de Duitse bondskanselier. Ook de lonen en vergoedingen van de europarlementsleden kunnen en moeten omlaag.

  Lara Comi (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho votato a favore delle modifiche allo statuto dei funzionari europei. Le modifiche riguardano prevalentemente misure generali, sull'avanzamento di carriera, le condizioni di lavoro, le pensioni e le indennità. È bene far sapere ai cittadini europei che abbiamo votato per la riduzione del 5% delle assunzioni fino al 2017, il congelamento dei salari nel 2013 e 2014, l'avanzamento ai gradi superiori solo per concorso interno e per funzioni manageriali, la retrocessione di grado automatica a seguito di 3 valutazioni insufficienti e l'avvio della procedura di licenziamento dopo 5 rapporti negativi, l'aumento delle ore lavorative senza compensazione da 37,5 a 40, l'età pensionabile da 63 a 66 (e in casi eccezionali a 70), l'abolizione del prepensionamento senza perdite dei diritti e la riduzione dei giorni di congedo e del rimborso forfettario. Si tratta di misure che consentiranno un risparmio di 2,7 miliardi di euro entro il 2020, oltre un ulteriore miliardo e mezzo legato a riduzione dei giorni di congedo e all'aumento delle ore lavorative. Si abbattono così i costi della macchina burocratica europea e si migliora l'efficienza dell'amministrazione.

  Rachida Dati (PPE), par écrit. – Nous devons garantir que l'argent des Européens est utilisé de façon efficace, et c'est pourquoi je soutiens les mesures de réduction des dépenses comprises dans cette proposition. Les citoyens sont particulièrement attentifs à ces questions, et sauront reconnaître les améliorations que contient ce texte. Ce statut suscite des interrogations, notamment en ce qui concerne les dispositions sur le temps de travail. Ce texte va donc dans le bon sens, celui d'une plus grande efficacité de la fonction publique européenne.

  Philippe de Villiers (EFD), par écrit. – Le statut des fonctionnaires européens fait souvent parler de lui. Il est indéniable que ce statut est avantageux en comparaison de la pratique (rémunérations, conditions de travail, imposition, etc.) d'une majorité des États européens. Loin des quelques centaines de fonctionnaires de l'origine, il concerne aujourd'hui presque 50 000 personnes et doit impérativement être réformé.

Le rapport présenté ne va pas assez loin, mais au moins dans la bonne direction.

Mais le problème profond n'est pas là: la pléthorique fonction publique européenne n'est pas en elle-même responsable du naufrage de l'UE. Elle exécute et met en œuvre les toujours plus nombreuses compétences que les gouvernements nationaux ont transférées à Bruxelles. Aujourd'hui, il est surtout temps de reprendre le pouvoir.

  Jill Evans (Verts/ALE), in writing. − I voted against the Roth-Behrendt report on Staff Regulations because of the failure to distribute the burden amongst higher-grade officials progressively and fairly. This is also evident in the case of the privileges and allowances that the report does not even mention. Wales has to deal with cuts like everywhere else and it is important that we make the system as fair and as open as possible for all.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − O relatório em análise, da responsabilidade da colega Dagmar Roth-Behrendt, debruça-se sobre a proposta de regulamento do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho que altera o Estatuto dos Funcionários e o Regime aplicável aos outros agentes da União Europeia. A crise económica e financeira exige uma consolidação orçamental pública dos Estados-Membros. Assim, este momento deve ser uma oportunidade, não só para estes procederem à redução dos seus gastos com o setor público, mas também para tornar a administração pública muito mais eficiente. As instituições europeias devem ser uma referência em termos de gestão de recursos humanos, ao contratarem pessoal independente e altamente qualificado. Por isso, saúdo esta iniciativa de emagrecimento das rubricas orçamentais relativas ao pessoal e a reorientação dos recursos financeiros para investimentos produtivos que promovam o crescimento económico e a criação de emprego. Porque se trata de uma resolução que visa dotar as instituições europeias de uma política de pessoal saudável e moderna que, além de ter em conta o equilíbrio geográfico, se baseie nos critérios da competência e da qualidade, votei favoravelmente.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − As instituições e agências da UE empregam, no seu conjunto, cerca de 55 mil funcionários e outros agentes. A filosofia deste relatório é manifestamente legitimadora da visão/mito de que a crise económica decorre direta ou indiretamente de um excesso de direitos dos trabalhadores e, bem assim, legitimadora também da prática política subsidiária desta visão, que consiste em atacar os trabalhadores nos seus direitos e salários. Este facto condiciona e determina, por si só, a nossa posição contrária ao relatório. Esta reforma – contestada pelos trabalhadores, que empreenderam diversas medidas de luta, incluindo greves – permitirá, dizem, à custa dos salários e pensões dos trabalhadores, poupanças num montante total de 8 mil milhões de euros. A Comissão propõe reduzir o pessoal de cada instituição e agência em 5 %. A relatora reconhece (e aceita) que, mantendo-se os objetivos e o volume de trabalho, este corte implica que cada trabalhador assuma uma parte do volume de trabalho adicional. Outras medidas de poupança propostas são, entre outras, o aumento do horário de trabalho, sem compensação em termos de remuneração, o aumento da idade de aposentação de 63 para 65 anos, a eliminação do subsídio de expatriação. Votámos contra.

  Robert Goebbels (S&D), par écrit. – Je me suis abstenu sur la nouvelle règlementation de la fonction publique européenne. Certaines réformes étaient nécessaires. Mais la réforme introduit également un rabotement sur des acquis sociaux et charge inutilement les moins gradés.

Beaucoup de nos concitoyens pensent que les fonctionnaires européens sont des privilégiés. Ce n'est plus le cas, excepté pour la haute fonction publique européenne. Or, celle-ci doit certes payer à l'avenir un prélèvement de solidarité de 7 %, contre 6 % pour les grades inférieurs. Mais les salaires des humbles secrétaires seront réduits de 13 % en début de carrière et de 40 % en fin de carrière. Les emplois à durée déterminée seront multipliés. L'austérité devient la marque de fabrique européenne. Pour ceux qui pensent que les fonctionnaires européens ne paient pas d'impôt, il faut signaler que l'impôt européen est progressif jusqu'à une dernière tranche de 45%.

  Jacky Hénin (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – J'ai voté contre la réforme du statut des fonctionnaires européens, qui prévoit une augmentation de l'âge de départ à la retraite. Pas un mot sur les salariés précaires, nombreux dans les institutions européennes, rien non plus sur les écarts de salaires pourtant conséquents: un professeur de langue, bien sûr externalisé, peut toucher jusqu'à 10 fois moins que son élève. La mesure phare de ce rapport est un gel de salaires des fonctionnaires pendant deux ans. Quel but? Prétendre que l'austérité est plus juste puisque partagée par ceux qui la mettent en œuvre.

Mais rien ne peut justifier que des mesures austéritaires soient imposées par une institution non élue. D'autant moins que ce rapport ne remet pas en cause les rémunérations de certains fonctionnaires européens grassement payés pour être les contremaîtres de l'austérité et justifier, de manière prétendument scientifique, les assainissements budgétaires qui saignent les peuples à blanc. Avant toute chose, il faut modifier leur imposition. Pour les fonctionnaires français, par exemple, la différence entre l'impôt communautaire et l'impôt qui aurait dû être payé en France devrait être versé à l'État français. C'est la taxation différentielle proposée par le Front de Gauche pour tous les ressortissants français lors de la campagne présidentielle.

  Jim Higgins (PPE), in writing. − I voted in favour of the reform of the proposal which produces substantial savings. Savings are necessary at a time of financial crisis in Europe. However it is vital to strike a balance between savings and the need to ensure that the institutions can perform their tasks and duties in accordance with their obligations and powers under the Treaties.

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), raštu. − Susilaikiau balsuodamas už šį pasiūlymą. Pasiūlymo pateikimo priežastis ir jo esmė – numatyti naują darbo užmokesčių ir pensijų tikslinimo metodą, įskaitant išlygos taikymą metodui, ir specialųjį mokestį. Šis pasiūlymas buvo pateiktas vykstant finansų krizei Europoje. Noriu pažymėti, kad pernelyg griežtos taupymo priemonės ne visada sukuria teigiamą rezultatą. Nepritarčiau nuomonei, kad būtina sumažinti darbuotojų skaičių 5 proc. Teigiama tai, kad darbuotojų skaičius privalo būti sumažintas iki 2018 m. Manau, kad Komisija klysta teigdama, kad tai turėtų būti taikoma automatiškai visoms institucijoms ir esu įsitikinęs, kad reikia labiau atitinkamai situacijai pritaikytų sprendimų. Nerimą kelia ir tai, kad kalbama apie pensinio amžiaus pailginimą, kuris Komisijos nuomone atspindi dabartines demografines tendencijas visoje ES. Kitas aspektas tai, kad bandoma riboti ATS darbuotojų karjeros galimybes. Manau, kad svarstomos priemonės turi būti labiau pasvertos ir išdiskutuotos bei pritaikytos realiai esamai situacijai.

  Philippe Juvin (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai soutenu le rapport de ma collègue Dagmar Roth-Behrendt. Ce rapport portait sur la modification du statut des fonctionnaires et du régime applicable aux autres agents de l'UE. Il soulignait notamment, avec justesse, que malgré le contexte actuel de crise, la réduction des effectifs au sein des institutions et des agences de l'Union comportait des risques et pourrait aboutir à entraver celles-ci dans l'exécution de leurs missions et devoirs. Je me réjouis de cette prise de position par le Parlement européen.

  Jarosław Kalinowski (PPE), na piśmie. − Obecne tempo postępu zachodzącego w świecie jest ogromne. Idzie za tym wykorzystanie surowców mineralnych, zmiany demograficzne, a także dewastacja środowiska naturalnego. Aby przyszłe pokolenia mogły nadal cieszyć się doskonałościami natury, należy podjąć działania, by zrównoważyć procesy rozwojowe i ekologiczne. Niezbędne jest podjęcie działań mających na celu wsparcie innowacyjnych posunięć obejmujących sfery związane z biogospodarką. Aby osiągnąć pełną harmonizację konieczne jest ustalenie przejrzystych i elastycznych ram prawnych oraz koordynacja i spójne międzysektorowe działania w obszarze tworzenia nowych technologii, a także podejmowanie innowacyjnych badań oraz wprowadzanie nowoczesnych rozwiązań w życiu zwykłych obywateli. Dlatego też – jako świadomi przyszłości przedstawiciele społeczeństwa europejskiego – powinniśmy podjąć dobrą decyzję już teraz.

  Michał Tomasz Kamiński (ECR), in writing. − The proposed reforms for the staff of the European institutions are missing key issues that have to be addressed. One point is that there is a lack of any type of connection between merit and promotion. This results in a lack of quality among the employees, which manifests a lack of efficiency. The other point is that the solutions to the method and crisis clauses are very complicated and could lead to a number of political problems. I believe that this report is incomplete and I cannot support it. I voted against this report.

  Agnès Le Brun (PPE), par écrit. – La crise économique et financière a contraint les Etats à prendre des décisions difficiles mais nécessaires pour parvenir à retrouver le chemin de la stabilité budgétaire. L'Union européenne les félicite de ces efforts et continue de les inciter à poursuivre les réformes entreprises. Alors, à l'heure où se pose la question du statut des fonctionnaires, il me semble normal de procéder à une réforme du service public européen. C'est pourquoi j'ai décidé de me positionner en faveur de ce texte car il vise à faire des économies et à moderniser ce service. Le passage de l'âge de départ à la retraite de 63 à 66 ans ainsi que la mise en place d'un nouveau prélèvement de solidarité me semblent notamment justifiés.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I agree with the proposal to base the method on nominal salary changes (instead of real salary changes) in all the Member States, instead of in only some of them, and hope that the Commission will be able to find a practical solution to the problem of obtaining relevant data from 27 Member States on time.

  Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Votei contra o relatório, apesar de reconhecer que a proposta apresentada ao plenário do PE contém melhorias muito substanciais face à proposta inicial da Comissão Europeia, o que se deve à pressão das organizações sindicais. Contudo, não posso votar favoravelmente um relatório que ignora a situação dos (as) trabalhadores (as) precários (as), tão numerosos nas instituições europeias, e que passa a idade da reforma dos 63 para os 65 anos.

  Arlene McCarthy (S&D), in writing. − Whilst the agreement between Parliament and the Council could have gone further, the deal on the table makes substantially more savings than those proposed by the Commission. Rejection of this deal would lead to budgetary uncertainty with the current pay freeze left open to legal challenges. As a Parliament we need to take our responsibilities for reform seriously and not simply say no to a reform that will reduce costs. This is the first step towards a further and deeper reform and we want to work constructively to achieve that. Therefore the EPLP is voting in favour of the cuts and savings made to the EU’s administrative budget.

  Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – Ce rapport critique à juste titre la volonté de la Commission européenne d'effectuer des économies drastiques sur le dos des personnels, notamment les moins payés. La Commission prend ainsi prétexte d'une révision partielle du statut des fonctionnaires européens nécessitée par l'arrivée à échéance de certaines dispositions transitoires, pour proposer une refonte très large du statut motivée uniquement par des considérations comptables. Tout en exprimant cette juste critique et en réclamant que la Commission modifie substantiellement sa proposition, ce rapport valide néanmoins des idées aussi fausses et rétrogrades que le relèvement de l'âge de la retraite qui serait rendu nécessaire par l'évolution démographique. Cela conduit la Commission à proposer le relèvement de 63 à 65 ans de l'âge minimal de la retraite des fonctionnaires européens et à les inciter à travailler jusqu'à 67 voire 70 ans. Je vote contre ce rapport qui, malgré des velléités de critique de l'aveuglement comptable de la Commission, porte un rude coup au droit à la retraite.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − As instituições e agências localizadas nos diferentes locais de afetação da UE e respetivas delegações em países terceiros empregam, no seu conjunto, cerca de 55 mil funcionários e outros agentes. A reforma introduzida, em 2004, no Estatuto dos Funcionários e na função pública europeia permitiu a sua modernização e a melhoria da relação de eficácia de custos. Esta reforma resultará em poupanças num montante total de 8 mil milhões de euros até ao final de 2020. A presente proposta em apreço tem por principal objetivo introduzir um novo método de adaptação dos salários e das pensões, incluindo a aplicação da cláusula de exceção e da contribuição especial. Nesta altura de crise, todos temos de contribuir para a combater, daí o meu voto favorável.

  Alajos Mészáros (PPE), írásban. − A népességnövekedés, az élelmezési és energiaszükségleti igények nagyarányú megemelkedése és a természeti erőforrások szűkössége új kihívásokat jelent az Uniónak. A termelés és a fogyasztás egyensúlyát hatékonyan és fenntartható módon kell kezelni. A biogazdaság jó lehetőséget nyújt e kihívásoknak való megfelelésre. Hozzájárul a vidékfejlesztés támogatásához, az üvegházhatású gázok kibocsátásának csökkentéséhez, és a termelési ciklus jobb fenntarthatóságához is. Az európai biogazdaságról szóló bizottsági közlemény, valamint a biogazdaságra vonatkozó stratégia életbeléptetésére irányuló, a közleményben vázolt cselekvési terv három összetevő elemet tartalmaz: a kutatás és az innováció előmozdítását, a különböző politikák közötti nagyobb szinergiák megteremtését és a piacok és a piaci verseny erősítését. Egységes kutatási és innovációs programokat kell kifejleszteni és támogatni, gondoskodni kell az ipari beruházások finanszírozásáról, pénzügyi eszközöket kell rendelkezésre bocsátani. Ösztönözni kell a bioiparnak szentelt köz- és magánszféra közötti partnerségek létrehozását, új projektek támogatását, új termékek kifejlesztését és forgalmazását. A biogazdasági stratégiáknak elő kell segíteniük a háztartási és kommunális hulladék hatékonyabb felhasználását is. Foglalkozni kell a mezőgazdaságból és az erdészetből származó melléktermékek és maradékanyagok hasznosításával. Az utóbbiak hatékony felhasználásához nélkülözhetetlen a jobb jogi szabályozás elfogadása, ezért támogattam szavazatommal a jelentést.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. − Der Bericht über das neue Statut der EU-Beamten enthält wichtige Änderungen, die die Dienstzeiten an jene der Beamten in den Mitgliedstaaten anpassen. Das war höchste Zeit. Die Erhöhung der Wochenarbeitszeit auf 40 Stunden bzw. des Pensionsalters auf 65 sind absolut zu befürworten. Leider hat man weiteres Einsparungspotenzial ungenutzt gelassen. So hätte man die Zahl der EU-Beamten weiter reduzieren können. Viele Agenturen sind unnötig, verschlingen viel Geld und haben keinen wirklichen Nutzen. Die EU-Mitarbeiter, die vielfach fern der Heimat gute Arbeit für die Union leisten, sollten aber auch nicht schlechter gestellt werden als ihre Kollegen in den Botschaften oder Vertretungen der Mitgliedstaaten. Dies hat der Bericht sichergestellt. Ein paar Privilegien, insbesondere für hohe Beamte, hätte man dennoch streichen können. In Summe ist der Bericht ein Kompromiss, der den Status quo verbessert, aber noch Potenzial hätte. Daher habe ich mich der Stimme enthalten.

  Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), par écrit. – J’ai voté en faveur du rapport de ma collègue Dagmar Roth-Behrendt parce qu’il s’agit d’un rapport de compromis après d’âpres et longues négociations. Il permet de résoudre la double équation de la réduction du nombre de personnel et le gel de leur salaire exigés par le Conseil européen tout en préservant une fonction publique européenne capable de fonctionner correctement. Ce rapport émanant d’un an et demi de négociation permet en outre de conserver les principes essentiels à sauvegarder pour garantir le bon fonctionnement de nos institutions européennes.

  Tiziano Motti (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho sostenuto la proposta di regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio che modifica lo statuto dei funzionari e degli altri agenti dell'Unione europea in quanto è necessario garantire l'assunzione e il mantenimento di personale altamente qualificato e multilingue equamente distribuito per Paese di provenienza e per genere, in linea con gli elevati standard di deontologia professionale richiesti dalla funzione pubblica europea.

  Rolandas Paksas (EFD), raštu. − ES pareigūnų tarnybos nuostatai ir kitų tarnautojų įdarbinimo sąlygos turi užtikrinti, kad visos ES institucijos ir jų darbuotojai dirbtų našiai ir taupiai. Labai svarbu, kad naujasis teisinis reguliavimas išsaugotų pusiausvyrą tarp didesnio našumo, taupymo ir institucijų gebėjimo vykdyti savo politiką. Nepritariu pasiūlymui dėl pensinio amžiaus ilginimo. Mechaniškas pensinio amžiaus ilginimas sukels itin neigiamus ir skaudžius padarinius. Tai neužtikrins geresnės gyvenimo kokybė, o tik sumažins garantijas dėl užimtumo, ypač jaunimo atžvilgiu. Pažymėtina, kad ekonomika nebus išgelbėta žmogaus gyvenimo kokybės sąskaita. Priversti žmones ilgiau dirbti nėra geriausias būdas taupyti ar spręsti socialines problemas.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − A proposta da Comissão que serve de base ao presente relatório tem como principal objetivo introduzir um novo método de adaptação dos salários e das pensões, incluindo a aplicação da cláusula de exceção e da contribuição especial. Trata-se de uma intervenção imposta pela expiração, no final de 2012, das disposições aplicáveis do Estatuto dos Funcionários, bem como pela necessidade de responder de forma adequada a um acórdão do Tribunal de Justiça (processo C-40/10). Embora as alterações requeridas pela data de expiração atrás mencionada pudessem cingir-se ao âmbito das atuais propostas de alteração do Estatuto, a Comissão decidiu ir mais além. Votei favoravelmente o presente relatório e concordo com a relatora que crê oportuno intervir exclusivamente nos pontos que carecem de alteração. Com efeito, a grande reforma do Estatuto, que propiciou a realização de economias substanciais, teve lugar há alguns anos e ainda está a produzir os seus efeitos que devem ser devidamente analisados.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), por escrito. − Tendo em conta, por um lado, a expiração, no final de 2012, das disposições aplicáveis do Estatuto dos Funcionários e, por outro, a necessidade de responder ao acórdão do Tribunal de Justiça proferido no âmbito do Processo C-40/10, a Comissão apresentou atempadamente a proposta que visa introduzir um novo método de adaptação dos salários e das pensões, incluindo a aplicação da cláusula de exceção e da contribuição especial. A proposta é apresentada num contexto de crise financeira na Europa e integra as medidas de poupança contidas em todas as rubricas do orçamento gizado no quadro financeiro plurianual. De quanto precede, a relatora concluiu que as alterações contribuem para o equilíbrio entre a realização de poupanças e a necessidade de garantir que as instituições executem as missões que lhes foram confiadas nos termos das obrigações e competências previstas nos Tratados. Considerando a apreciação da relatora, votei favoravelmente o relatório relativo ao Estatuto dos Funcionários da UE.

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), in writing. − Against. Our group has decided to vote against the Staff Regulations on the grounds of the failure to burden officials in higher grades progressively and fairly. This is evident not just in the allocation of the sacrifices demanded but also in the privileges and allowances that this reform does not touch.

  Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho espresso parere favorevole alla relazione sulla proposta di regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio che modifica lo statuto dei funzionari e il regime applicabile agli altri agenti dell'Unione europea, perché reputo essenziale un processo di modernizzazione a riguardo. L'evoluzione demografica ed economica che interessa l'Europa richiede che le istituzioni lavorino in modo efficiente, garantendo un buon rendimento e una buona qualità del servizio offerto. Il recente allargamento dell'Unione alla Croazia, i compiti derivanti dal trattato di Lisbona e la crisi economica che ha coinvolto l'Europa formano un contesto che va tenuto in debita considerazione. Dunque, se è vero che occorre procedere ad una riduzione dei costi, è vero anche che gli obblighi attribuiti dai trattati alle istituzioni e agli organi dell'Unione devono in ogni caso adempiuti. Per questo motivo, bisogna ponderare per esempio l'eventuale decisione di ridurre automaticamente il personale del 5% in ogni istituzione ed agenzia: sarebbe, difatti, opportuno adeguare tale scelta alle esigenze di ogni singolo ramo operativo. Condivisibile sarebbe la proposta di introdurre una nuova categoria del personale di assistenza (AST), volta a garantire l'efficienza dello stesso affinché si mostri sempre rinnovato, preparato e competente.

  Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − Votei contra o relatório, apesar de reconhecer que a proposta apresentada ao plenário do PE contém melhorias muito substanciais face à proposta inicial da Comissão Europeia, o que se deve à pressão das organizações sindicais. Contudo, não posso votar favoravelmente um relatório que ignora a situação dos (as) trabalhadores (as) precários (as), tão numerosos nas instituições europeias, e que passa a idade da reforma de 63 para 65 anos.

  Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), in writing. − The Green Group decided to vote against the Staff Regulations for the failure to burden officials in higher grades progressively and fairly. This is evident not just in the allocation of the sacrifices demanded (the rate of the solidarity levy for example: 6% for all grades with the exclusion of grades AST 1 to AST 3 step 1 – no change from the old system – in addition to income tax, and only 7% for the two highest grades), but also in the privileges and allowances that this reform does not touch (i.e. expatriation allowance).

  Marc Tarabella (S&D), par écrit. – La réforme en cours ne devrait concerner que ce qui devait être modifié. Mon argument est que la grande réforme du statut, qui a permis de réaliser des économies substantielles, a été opérée il y a quelques années et produit encore ses effets et qu'il convient de s'en tenir strictement au calendrier prévu pour l'adoption des changements proposés actuellement.

Il ne faut pas oublier qu'il est d'une importance vitale de respecter l'échéance de la fin de l'année 2012 comme date limite pour l'obtention d'un accord entre le Parlement européen et le Conseil. Sinon, à l'expiration de la méthode et du prélèvement spécial, non seulement aucune économie n'aura été réalisée, mais de nouvelles dépenses devront être honorées, à charge du budget de l'Union.

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. − O Parlamento Europeu considerou que nenhum acordo político sobre a redução de pessoal das instituições e órgãos da União deve prejudicar os seus poderes orçamentais no âmbito de outros processos, tais como o processo orçamental anual ou as próximas negociações sobre o quadro financeiro plurianual 2014 -2020, pelo que se opõe firmemente a qualquer tentativa de antecipar o resultado dessas negociações. Além disso, de acordo com o texto aprovado em plenário, o Parlamento pretendeu, no contexto da realização das economias, salvaguardar um princípio de justiça social, para que estas não sejam feitas em detrimento do pessoal dos graus inferiores. Neste contexto, votei a favor do documento que visa a alterar o Estatuto dos Funcionários e o regime aplicável a outros agentes e que entrará em vigor em 2014.

  Inese Vaidere (PPE), rakstiski. − Šobrīd vairākas Eiropas Savienības dalībvalstis ir ekonomisko prioritāšu izvēles priekšā — mēģināt saglabāt ierastās, bet dārgās sociālās garantijas vai pārkārtot valsts ekonomiku, lai ilgtermiņā celtu konkurētspēju, tādējādi nodrošinot darbavietas un ekonomisko izaugsmi.

Saskaroties ar finanšu un ekonomisko krīzi, Latvijas valdība uz situāciju reaģēja būtiski samazinot budžeta izdevumus, tai skaitā — valsts pārvaldes izdevumus. Līdzīga rīcība ir nepieciešama arī ES līmenī, īpaši ņemot vērā to, ka ES budžets nākamajam plānošanas periodam ir mazāks nekā sākotnēji plānotais.

Uzskatu, ka arī ES institūcijās nodarbināto ierēdņu algām un sociālajām garantijām ir jābūt atbilstošām ekonomiskajām tendencēm Eiropā, kas nozīmē arī to, ka nedrīkstam no dalībvalstīm pieprasīt taupības pasākumus, tos neieviešot arī ES pārvaldē.

Balsojumā neatbalstīju EP Juridiskās komitejas piedāvātās izmaiņas, kuras padarīja ziņojumu piekāpīgāku, jo, lai arī tas satur tādas nepieciešamas izmaiņas kā darba nedēļas pagarināšana līdz 40 darba stundām nedēļā, tomēr tajā nav iekļautas vairākas svarīgas reformas no Eiropas Komisijas sākotnējā piedāvājuma. Tas attiecas gan uz dažādu veidu piemaksām pie pamatalgas, gan pensijām, kuras Juridiskās komitejas ziņojumā diemžēl paredzēts saglabāt esošajās robežās.

Tāpat uzskatu, ka ierēdņu algu samazinājuma priekšlikums, ko saturēja Komisijas piedāvājums, bija adekvāts, īpaši, salīdzinot ar ierēdņu algām trūcīgākajās ES dalībvalstīs.

  Marie-Christine Vergiat (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – J'ai fait le choix de voter contre le rapport sur la proposition de règlement du Parlement européen et du Conseil modifiant le statut des fonctionnaires et le régime applicable aux autres agents de l'Union européenne. Sous la pression des organisations syndicales, des avancées ont bien eu lieu par rapport aux propositions initiales de la Commission. Ceci explique que la proposition présentée au Parlement européen avait justement le soutien de ces organisations. Mais je ne peux pas soutenir un texte qui ne tient pas compte de la situation des agents précaires, ceux qui reçoivent les plus bas, et même de très bas salaires, nombreux dans les institutions européennes, contrairement à l'image donnée habituellement à l'extérieur. De plus pour une question de cohérence, comment soutenir un texte qui reporte de 63 à 65 ans l'âge de la retraite?

  Marina Yannakoudakis (ECR), in writing. − I voted against this report because it does nothing to address the real problems of pay levels for EU officials. It has failed to reform the expat, household and travel allowances offered to officials and, frankly, it does not address the questions being raised by concerned citizens. The public is rightly annoyed at the amount the EU institutions spend on salaries. And I agree with them when the link between merit and pay remains weak. By not ensuring that taxpayers are getting value for money from EU officials, the European institutions are failing to address the persistent perception that the EU is little more than a gravy train. The proposed 7.2 % increase in staff pensions is unacceptable, especially at a time of economic hardship across Europe. Overall the report lacks ambition. MEPs had a real chance to radically reform the way in which EU staff are paid and to address the concerns of Member States and the public. The reforms fail to address profligate allowances, fail to encourage efficiency and fail to identify with the many who struggle on a daily basis to make a living.

  Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − As instituições e agências localizadas nos diferentes locais de afetação da UE e respetivas delegações em países terceiros empregam, no seu conjunto, cerca de 55 mil funcionários e outros agentes. O Estatuto dos Funcionários e a função pública europeia estão a ser objeto de uma reforma aprofundada com o objetivo de poupar 8 mil milhões de euros até ao final de 2020. Votámos contra porque os cortes financeiros a efetuar serão feitos à custa da perda de direitos adquiridos dos trabalhadores e mesmo de despedimentos. Pretende-se, por exemplo, reduzir o pessoal de cada instituição e agência em 5 %, o aumento do horário de trabalho através da instauração de um número mínimo de horas de trabalho (40) sem compensação em termos de remuneração, a redução da licença anual paras as deslocações ao seu local de origem a 3 dias, o aumento da idade da reforma de 63 para 65 anos, entre outras medidas. Não podemos estar de acordo.

11.2. Σύμβαση της Βιέννης σχετικά με την αστική ευθύνη ως προς τις πυρηνικές ζημίες (A7-0198/2013 - Alajos Mészáros)

Dichiarazioni di voto scritte

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Aprovo o presente relatório, tendo em conta que a responsabilidade civil internacional em matéria nuclear rege-se por dois instrumentos: a Convenção de Viena e a Convenção de Paris sobre a responsabilidade civil de terceiros no domínio da energia nuclear de 1960. Ambas as convenções partilham princípios semelhantes quanto à substância. A Convenção de Viena foi adotada para proporcionar uma compensação adequada e justa às vítimas de danos causados por acidentes nucleares, criando um sistema especial de responsabilidade civil no domínio da energia nuclear. A União tem, por conseguinte, competência exclusiva quanto a essas disposições que constam do Protocolo e os Estados-Membros não se podem tornar Partes Contratantes do Protocolo no que respeita a essas disposições. A fim de dar resposta à falta de uniformidade remanescente entre os Estados-Membros, no que respeita às regras que regem o procedimento de reconhecimento e execução de decisões judiciais no domínio dos danos nucleares, acolho favoravelmente a decisão da Comissão de se comprometer a considerar a extensão, numa futura proposta, da solução de dar precedência às regras da União aos Estados-Membros que tenham ratificado o Protocolo de 1997 anteriormente à sua adesão à União Europeia, ou seja, a Letónia e a Roménia, e aos Estados-Membros que sejam Partes Contratantes na Convenção de Paris.

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau už pritarimą Tarybos sprendimo projektui ir už tai, kad būtų sudaryta galimybė Vienos konvencijos susitariančiosioms šalims prisijungti prie 1997 m. protokolo. Tarptautinė branduolinė atsakomybė reglamentuojama dviem priemonėmis: Vienos konvencija ir 1960 m. Paryžiaus konvencija dėl atsakomybės prieš trečią šalį atominės energijos srityje. Abiejose konvencijose nustatyti panašūs pagrindiniai principai. Vienos konvencija buvo priimta siekiant tinkamai ir teisingai atlyginti žalą branduolinių avarijų aukoms, joje nustatyta speciali civilinės atsakomybės sistema branduolinės energetikos srityje. Siekdama pašalinti išlikusius valstybių narių skirtumus, susijusius su taisyklėmis dėl teismų sprendimų branduolinės žalos padarymo srityje pripažinimo ir vykdymo procedūrų, Komisija įsipareigojo apsvarstyti, kaip būsimame pasiūlyme būtų galima išspręsti klausimą dėl pirmenybės Sąjungos taisyklėms suteikimo tose valstybėse narėse, kurios 1997 m. protokolą ratifikavo iki įstodamos į Europos Sąjungą, t. y. Latvijoje ir Rumunijoje, ir valstybėse narėse, kurios yra Paryžiaus konvencijos šalys narės. Todėl Taryba siūlo įgalioti valstybes nares, kurios yra Vienos konvencijos susitariančiosios šalys, t. y. Bulgariją, Čekiją, Estiją, Lietuvą, Lenkiją, Slovakiją ir Vengriją ratifikuoti 1997 m. protokolą arba prie jo prisijungti. Panašus sprendimas buvo pasiūlytas 2004 m. protokolo, kuriuo keičiama Paryžiaus konvencija, atžvilgiu.

  Elena Băsescu (PPE), în scris. − Am votat în favoarea recomandării şi susţin această propunere deoarece consider că este foarte actuală. Împreună cu imperativul condiţiilor de securitate maximale pentru proiectarea, construcţia şi funcţionarea centralelor nucleare, propunerea se înscrie în logica actuală de reducere a dependenţei energetice a Uniunii. Este deci necesar să luăm în considerare eventuale consecinţe asupra indivizilor şi să fie oferită victimelor o despăgubire corectă în cazul unor daune provocate de accidente nucleare. Salut decizia de a pune capăt lipsei de uniformitate între statele membre cu privire la normele de reglementare a procedurii de recunoaştere şi executare a hotărârilor în domeniul daunelor nucleare. În final, aştept angajamentul Comisiei Europene în legătură cu eventualitatea extinderii soluţiei de a acorda prioritate normelor Uniunii la statele membre care au ratificat protocolul anterior aderării la Uniune. Acesta este şi cazul ţării mele, care a ratificat acest protocol în 1998.

  Nora Berra (PPE), par écrit. – Le régime international de la responsabilité nucléaire est régi par la Convention de Vienne - adoptée afin d'indemniser de manière adéquate et équitable les victimes de dommages causés par des accidents nucléaires - et la Convention de Paris. La Convention de Vienne ayant été modifié par le protocole de 1997 ainsi que la Convention de Paris par le protocole de 2004, la Commission a proposé que le Conseil autorise la Bulgarie, l'Estonie, la Hongrie, la Lituanie, la Pologne, la République Tchèque, la Roumanie, la Slovaquie, parties contractantes à la Convention de Vienne, à ratifier ou conclure les protocoles de 1997 et 2004. L'adhésion au protocole est facultative pour ces cinq Etats.

  Fabrizio Bertot (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho votato a favore del progetto di decisione del Consiglio che prevede l'adozione di prescrizioni tecniche uniformi applicabili ai veicoli a motore, ai loro accessori e parti che possono essere installate.

L'obiettivo del progetto, infatti, è semplificare e accelerare le procedure di voto dei regolamenti UNECE da parte della Commissione a nome dell'Unione, riducendo così i ritardi nell'adozione di tali atti. Ciò dovrebbe contribuire a sviluppare ed armonizzare i regolamenti tecnici relativi ai veicoli e, quindi, ad agevolare il commercio internazionale. Uno strumento dei più efficaci per agevolare gli scambi commerciali e quindi per favorire le nostre aziende produttrici.

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), per iscritto. − Per consentire alle parti contraenti la convenzione di Vienna di concludere il protocollo del 1997 è necessario il consenso del Parlamento, per questo motivo ho inteso votare a favore di questo testo.

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau dėl šio pranešimo, kadangi yra būtina nustatyti civilinės atsakomybės sistemą branduolinės energetikos srityje ir numatyti žalos atlyginimą branduolinių avarijų aukoms. Svarbu pažymėti, jog 1997 m. rugsėjo 12 d. Tarptautinėje atominės energijos agentūroje priimtame Protokole numatytos nuostatos dėl jurisdikcijos ir teismo sprendimų pripažinimo ir vykdymo daro poveikį ES teisės, visų pirma Reglamento „Briuselis I“, nuostatoms. Europos Sąjunga šio protokolo nuostatoms turi išimtinę kompetenciją ir valstybės narės šių nuostatų atžvilgiu negali tapti protokolo susitariančiosiomis šalimis. Norint pašalinti išlikusius valstybių narių skirtumus, Europos Komisija įsipareigojo apsvarstyti, kaip būsimame pasiūlyme būtų galima išspręsti klausimą dėl pirmenybės ES taisyklėms suteikimo tose valstybėse narėse, kurios 1997 m. protokolą ratifikavo iki įstodamos į Europos Sąjungą, t. y. Latvijoje ir Rumunijoje, ir valstybėse narėse, kurios yra Paryžiaus konvencijos šalys narės. Taigi, Taryba siūlo įgalioti valstybes nares, kurios yra Vienos konvencijos susitariančiosios šalys, t. y. Bulgariją, Čekiją, Estiją, Lietuvą, Lenkiją, Slovakiją ir Vengriją ratifikuoti 1997 m. protokolą arba prie jo prisijungti. Panašus sprendimas buvo pasiūlytas 2004 m. protokolo, kuriuo keičiama Paryžiaus konvencija, atžvilgiu.

  Philippe Boulland (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai voté en faveur de la ratification du protocole d'amendements à la Convention de Vienne – convention qui établit un système d'indemnisation pour les victimes de dommages causés par des accidents nucléaires et un régime spécial de responsabilité civile en matière d'énergie. Le problème réside dans le fait que certains États membres ne sont pas membres de cette convention; certains sont membres de la Convention de Paris sur le même sujet.

Il existe donc une réelle hétérogénéité parmi les États européens en matière de dommages nucléaires. L'objectif de ce rapport était donc d'articuler les différents régimes entre eux. Pour mettre fin à ces incompréhensions, la Commission proposera d'ailleurs bientôt une proposition visant à établir la primauté du droit européen sur le droit conventionnel international, ce qui obligera tous les États européens à respecter les règles européennes, primant sur les différentes conventions internationales.

  John Bufton (EFD), in writing. − My party holds the view that it is not the Council’s place to give independent sovereign states permission to act in one way or another – it is up to the individual Member States to make their own decisions and act of their own accord. For this reason, I voted against this report.

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), por escrito. − Concordo com a proposta de alteração da Convenção de Viena para proporcionar uma compensação adequada e justa às vítimas de danos causados por acidentes nucleares.

  Lara Comi (PPE), per iscritto. − La presente Convenzione comporta l'impegno ad applicare i principi fondamentali di sicurezza per gli impianti nucleari e definire norme dettagliate che vengono aggiornate periodicamente al fine di tutelare al meglio la salute umana e l'ambiente in cui viviamo. Ritengo opportuno far prevalere le norme dell'Unione Europea agli Stati Membri che hanno ratificato il protocollo del 1997 prima di aderire all'UE e agli Stati che sono parti contraenti della Convenzione di Parigi: così facendo si arriverebbe all'uniformità delle procedure e delle decisioni in materia di danni nucleari. Voto favorevolmente su questa risoluzione perché concordo con questi obiettivi.

  Rachida Dati (PPE), par écrit. – Grâce à ce texte, nous faisons en sorte que les victimes d'un dommage nucléaire puissent obtenir réparation de la même façon, quel que soit leur Etat d'origine. Cette harmonisation de nos règles permettra plus de lisibilité pour les victimes, et surtout plus de justice pour tous.

  Christine De Veyrac (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai voté en faveur de ce texte qui propose une réforme essentielle pour une plus grande coordination entre les Etats membres sur la question nucléaire. En effet, le texte permet l'adoption par certains pays d'Europe centrale et orientale du protocole de 1997 modifiant la Convention de Vienne. Ainsi, le texte permet d'harmoniser le régime européen de la responsabilité nucléaire, menant par là même à une plus grande cohérence de l'Union européenne.

  Edite Estrela (S&D), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente o relatório sobre a Convenção de Viena relativa à Responsabilidade Civil em Matéria de Danos Nucleares, uma vez que vai permitir às Partes Contratantes na Convenção de Viena concluírem o Protocolo de 1997, até que a Comissão apresente uma proposta que possibilite uma maior uniformidade entre os Estados-Membros no domínio da compensação adequada e justa às vítimas de danos causados por acidentes nucleares.

  Jill Evans (Verts/ALE), in writing. − I voted in favour of this amendment to the Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage. It is necessary to address the lack of uniformity among Member States on the recognition and enforcement of judgments in the field of nuclear damage. For Wales with one nuclear power plant and another in the process of being decommissioned, it is imperative that proper rules are laid down to ensure that in the event of a nuclear accident, those responsible are made liable for the damage.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − A Convenção de Viena cria a o normativo necessário para assegurar a compensação adequada e justa as vítimas de danos causados por acidentes nucleares, criando um sistema especial de responsabilidade civil no domínio da energia nuclear. Relativamente aos Estados-Membros da UE, a União tem competência exclusiva quanto às disposições que constam do Protocolo de 1997 e os Estados-Membros não se podem tornar Partes Contratantes. No entanto, o Conselho propõe autorizar a Bulgária, a República Checa, a Estónia, a Hungria, a Lituânia, a Polónia e a Eslováquia a ratificarem ou a celebrarem o Protocolo de 1997, na medida em que a sua adesão à UE é posterior à ratificação do Protocolo pela União. Atenta a importância das matérias objeto do Protocolo, acompanho o relator na sua recomendação de aprovação do presente relatório.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − O relatório em apreciação, elaborado pelo colega Alajos Mészáros, diz respeito a uma recomendação para que o Parlamento Europeu aprove o projeto de decisão do Conselho que autoriza determinados Estados-Membros a ratificarem ou a aderirem, no interesse da União Europeia, ao Protocolo adotado em 12 de setembro de 1997, que altera a Convenção de Viena, de 21 de maio de 1963, relativa à Responsabilidade Civil em Matéria de Danos Nucleares, e faça uma declaração sobre a aplicação das regras relevantes da legislação da UE. Considerando que todos os Estados-Membros gozam dos mesmos direitos e deveres, é fundamental que haja uniformidade em todas as matérias, nomeadamente no que respeita às regras que regem o procedimento de reconhecimento e execução de decisões judiciais no domínio dos danos nucleares. Todas as vítimas de acidentes nucleares devem ter um tratamento justo e ser devidamente indemnizadas. Votei favoravelmente esta recomendação porque entendo que os Estados-Membros que adotaram a Convenção de Viena (Bulgária, a República Checa, a Estónia, a Hungria, a Lituânia, a Polónia e a Eslováquia) devem ratificar ou celebrar o Protocolo à Convenção de Viena de 1997, a fim de poderem beneficiar das compensações devidas às vítimas de acidentes nucleares.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − O regime internacional de responsabilidade nuclear é regido principalmente por dois instrumentos: as convenções de Viena e de Paris. A Convenção de Viena foi adotada em 1963, com o objetivo de assegurar uma indemnização adequada e justa às vítimas de danos causados por acidentes nucleares no domínio dessa energia. Foi alterada pelo Protocolo de 1997, que contém uma nova definição de dano nuclear, integrando o conceito de dano ambiental e de medidas de prevenção, alarga o âmbito de aplicação geográfica, alarga o período durante o qual podem ser apresentados pedidos de indemnização, aumenta os montantes mínimos das indemnizações. Este protocolo que altera a Convenção de Viena, aprovado sob os auspícios da Agência Internacional de Energia Atómica, inclui disposições relativas à competência e sobre o reconhecimento e a execução das decisões, que afetam disposições contidas na legislação da UE. A UE tem, portanto, competência sobre as disposições do Protocolo e os Estados-Membros não podem tornar-se partes contratantes no protocolo, na medida em que essas disposições estão em causa. O Conselho propõe autorizar os Estados-Membros que são partes contratantes da Convenção de Viena, ou seja, Bulgária, República Checa, Estónia, Hungria, Lituânia, Polónia e Eslováquia, a ratificar ou celebrar o Protocolo de 1997. Neste contexto, consideramos que se justifica esta proposta de decisão.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − Medzinárodná jadrová zodpovednosť je riadená dvoma nástrojmi: Viedenským dohovorom a Parížskym dohovorom o zodpovednosti tretej strany v oblasti jadrovej energie. Javí sa ako opodstatnené uprednostniť právne predpisy Únie pred predpismi členských štátov, ktoré ratifikovali protokol z roku 1997 už pred vstupom do Európskej únie, t. j. Lotyšska a Rumunska, a členských štátov, ktoré sú zmluvnými stranami Parížskeho dohovoru. Je odporúčané zmluvným stranám Viedenského protokolu, t. j. Bulharsku, Českej republike, Estónsku, Maďarsku, Litve, Poľsku a Slovensku, ratifikovať alebo uzavrieť protokol z roku 1997.

  Elisabetta Gardini (PPE), per iscritto. − Le modifiche della convenzione di Vienna comportano aspetti favorevoli per le potenziali vittime di un incidente nucleare, vale a dire un aumento degli importi della responsabilità e una definizione più ampia di danno nucleare.

Pertanto, dopo aver consultato i soggetti interessati, viene riconosciuto che qualsiasi iniziativa in questo settore non deve ostacolare l'adesione degli Stati membri alle convenzioni internazionali che migliorano la situazione delle vittime potenziali nell'Unione europea. In questo senso l'adesione al protocollo del 1997 può dimostrarsi utile.

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), raštu. − Balsavau už šį dokumentą. Tarptautinė branduolinė atsakomybė reglamentuojama dviem priemonėmis: Vienos konvencija ir 1960 m. Paryžiaus konvencija dėl atsakomybės prieš trečią šalį atominės energijos srityje. Abi konvencijas sieja panašūs pagrindiniai principai: pirmoji buvo priimta siekiant atlyginti žalą branduolinių avarijų aukoms, tokiu būdu numatant specialią civilinę atsakomybę. Siekdama pašalinti išlikusius valstybių narių skirtumus susijusius su taisyklėmis dėl teismų sprendimų branduolinės žalos padarymo srityje pripažinimo ir vykdymo procedūrų, Komisija įsipareigojo apsvarstyti ir pateikti pasiūlymus dėl ES teisės aktų viršenybės įforminimo atskirose valstybėse narėse. Taryba siūlo įgalioti valstybes nares, kurios yra Vienos konvencijos susitariančiosios šalys, t. y. Bulgariją, Čekiją, Estiją, Lietuvą, Lenkiją, Slovakiją ir Vengriją ratifikuoti 1997 m. protokolą arba prie jo prisijungti. Pasiūlyme dėl Tarybos sprendimo numatyta, kad Jungtinė Karalystė ir Airija pagal 21 protokolą, pridėtą prie Sutarties dėl Europos Sąjungos veikimo, dalyvaus priimant šį sprendimą ir jis joms bus taikomas, o Danija nedalyvaus ir jai nebus privalomos ar taikomos šio sprendimo nuostatos. Todėl pritariau pranešėjo rekomendacijai pritarti Tarybos sprendimui.

  Philippe Juvin (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai soutenu le rapport de mon collègue Alajos Mészáros. Ce rapport portait sur la proposition de la Commission d'autoriser les Etats membres qui sont parties contractantes à la convention de Vienne, convention relative à la responsabilité civile en matière de dommages nucléaires, à ratifier ou à conclure le protocole de 1997 la modifiant. Cette proposition va dans le bon sens et concernait particulièrement des pays de l'Europe de l'Est. Je n'avais donc aucune raison de m'y opposer.

  Giovanni La Via (PPE), per iscritto. − Il regime internazionale della responsabilità nucleare è regolato sia dalla convenzione di Vienna che dalla convenzione di Parigi. Gli Stati membri, per quanto riguarda le norme sulla procedura per il riconoscimento e l'esecuzione delle decisioni in materia di danni nucleari, non hanno procedure uniformi; è per questo motivo che la Commissione prende in considerazione sin da adesso la definizione di alcune misure volte a garantire la prevalenza delle norme UE anche in caso di ratifica precedente al momento di adesione all'Unione europea.

  Constance Le Grip (PPE), par écrit. – Je me suis prononcée en faveur du projet législatif sur la Convention de Vienne relative à la responsabilité civile en matière de dommages nucléaires. Cette Convention, adoptée en 1960, établit un régime international pour les règles d'indemnisation vis-à-vis des victimes civiles d'accidents nucléaires. En 1997, un nouveau protocole a modifié la compétence judiciaire et l'exécution des décisions. Par conséquent, c'est l'Union européenne qui a obtenu la compétence dans ce domaine. Ainsi, pour accroître l'application des règles européennes, le Parlement souhaite autoriser les États membres parties à la Convention de Vienne et dont l'intégration à l'UE n'est intervenue qu'après 1997, à ratifier le protocole de 1997. Cela concerne la Bulgarie, la République tchèque, l'Estonie, la Hongrie, la Lituanie, la Pologne et la Slovaquie. Par conséquent, le cadre européen s'appliquera plus largement, en assurant une meilleure protection des victimes de dommages nucléaires.

  Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), în scris. − Am votat în favoarea propunerii. Aderarea la Protocolul din 1997 de modificare a Convenţiei de la Viena din 1963 trebuie să fie obligaţia oricărui stat pentru protecţia drepturilor omului. Scopul acestui Protocol este să ofere o mai mare protecţie victimelor care suferă de pe urma dezastrelor nucleare şi să asigure despăgubiri proporţionale cu gravitatea prejudiciilor suferite. Atrag atenţia asupra necesităţii respectării prevederilor Convenţiei de la Viena şi a Protocolului din 1997. Accidentul de la Fukushima a arătat prejudiciile cauzate de dezastrele nucleare, printre altele, probleme grave de sănătate pe termen lung, ca de exemplu anomalii la nivelul glandei tiroide şi risc mărit de cancer, dar şi probleme grave legate de mediu, care afectează şi sănătatea oamenilor. Cer statelor membre ale Uniunii Europene, în special celor care folosesc energia nucleara, să adere, să semneze şi să ratifice Convenţia de la Viena şi Protocolul din 1997 privind răspunderea civilă pentru daune nucleare.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I welcome this Report. International nuclear liability is governed by two instruments: the Vienna Convention and the Paris Convention on third party liability in the field of nuclear energy of 1960. Both conventions share similar principles on substance. The Vienna Convention was adopted to provide adequate and fair compensation to victims of damage caused by nuclear accident, by setting up a special system of civil liability in the field of nuclear energy.

  Clemente Mastella (PPE), per iscritto. − La responsabilità in materia nucleare è disciplinata a livello internazionale da due strumenti: la Convenzione di Vienna e la Convenzione di Parigi del 1960.

Data la mancanza di uniformità ancora esistente fra gli Stati membri per quanto riguarda le norme concernenti la procedura per il riconoscimento e l'esecuzione delle decisioni in materia di danni nucleari, riteniamo di dover estendere la prevalenza alle normative comunitarie anche agli Stati membri che hanno ratificato il Protocollo del 1997 prima di aderire all'Unione europea, ossia Lettonia e Romania.

Inoltre, accogliamo la proposta del Consiglio di autorizzare gli Stati membri che sono parti contraenti della Convenzione di Vienna, quindi Bulgaria, Repubblica Cieca, Estonia, Ungheria, Lituania, Polonia e Slovacchia, a ratificare o concludere il Protocollo del 1997.

  Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – L’intention d’améliorer l’indemnisation des victimes dans le cas tragique où surviendrait un incident nucléaire est louable. Elle avoue le danger existant. Deux éléments posent problème : d’abord, même si la convention de Vienne et la convention de Paris sont des textes très proches, la Commission ne résout pas, par le présent texte, le problème de la distorsion législative dans la responsabilité civile en matière de dommages nucléaires. La méthode qui consiste à inciter au niveau européen un Etat à ratifier une convention internationale me semble proche de l’ingérence. Elle ne correspond d'ailleurs pas à une procédure prévue par les Traités. Je n’accepterais pas que cette méthode soit employée pour la France ; je ne peux accepter qu’elle le soit pour un autre Etat. Par cette abstention, j'approuve l’amélioration de l’indemnisation des victimes et je désapprouve la méthode adoptée par la Commission.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − A responsabilidade civil internacional em matéria nuclear rege-se por dois instrumentos: a Convenção de Viena e a Convenção de Paris. A Convenção de Viena foi adotada para proporcionar uma compensação adequada e justa às vítimas de danos causados por acidentes nucleares, criando um sistema especial de responsabilidade civil no domínio da energia nuclear. Com a aprovação deste regulamento, os Estados-Membros que sejam Partes Contratantes na Convenção de Viena, isto é, a Bulgária, a República Checa, a Estónia, a Hungria, a Lituânia, a Polónia e a Eslováquia, ficam autorizados a ratificar ou a celebrar o Protocolo de 1997.

  Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − He votado a favor de este informe debido a que da su aprobación a la decisión del Consejo para permitir que las partes puedan aprobar el protocolo de la Convención de Viena de 1997. Esta Convención estipula las indemnizaciones y las responsabilidades que los ciudadanos de un Estado firmante tienen derecho a recibir por los daños causados en un accidente nuclear. Existe una cierta falta de homogeneidad entre los Estados miembros de la UE donde hay partes que aún no han suscrito dicho protocolo, esto podría desembocar en múltiples problemas legales, en especial ante accidentes o sucesos con una dimensión transfronteriza dentro de la UE. El informe solo pretende aprobar las propuestas y trámites necesarios para que los Estados miembros hagan más homogéneas sus normativas sobre el tratamiento de las víctimas de los daños producidos por tecnología nuclear. Es por esto por lo que he votado a favor de este informe.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − On 12 September 2007 a Protocol was adopted under the auspices of International Atomic Energy Agency was adopted. This Protocol included regulations on jurisdiction, acknowledgement and enforcement of judicial decisions and influences EU legislature. In order to solve the problem of lack of unity among EU countries regarding rules regulating the procedure of acknowledgment and enforcement of judicial decisions, the Commission committed itself to considering, in the very near future a decision which would give preference to EU rules for EU Member States that ratified the 1997 Protocol before accession to the EU, such as Latvia and Romania, and for EU countries which are Contracting Parties to the Paris Convention. Therefore I voted in favour.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. − Derzeit legen ja die EU-Mitgliedstaaten selbst die Haftungshöhe für Atomkraftwerke fest. Demzufolge sind AKWs in der Regel für den Pannenfall nur minimal versichert. Wie es ja bereits in der Vergangenheit der Fall war, müssen also nach wie vor die Steuerzahler den Großteil der Schäden aus einem Atomunfall tragen. Umgekehrt hingegen müssen Wasser- und Wärmekraftwerke oftmals für etwaige Schäden, die sie verursachen, haften. Da dies eine eklatante Wettbewerbsverzerrung darstellt, wurde vor einigen Wochen Beschwerde bei der Kommission eingereicht. Zudem wurden auch bei Atomkraftwerken auf EU-Gebiet einige Punkte hinsichtlich der Sicherheit aus vergangenen Abkommen nach wie vor nicht umgesetzt. Da die vorgeschlagenen Maßnahmen nicht ausreichen, um die Missstände zu beseitigen, indes jedoch einige gute Ansatzpunkte enthalten, habe ich mich der Stimme enthalten.

  Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), par écrit. – La Convention de Vienne fixe les différentes obligations des Etats en matière de responsabilité suite aux dommages nucléaires. Il me semble important et nécessaire que les États membres de l’Union Européen aient la même position quant à la ratification d’une telle convention. Il faut rendre obligatoire la ratification de cette convention, tout comme celle de Paris, qui accorde une compensation juste aux victimes d’accidents nucléaires. Je suis donc en faveur d’une telle proposition et donne en conséquence mon vote à ce rapport de M. Mészáros.

  Rolandas Paksas (EFD), raštu. − Pritariu pateiktam Tarybos sprendimo projektui. Visoje ES turi būti taikomos vienodos branduolinės atsakomybės taisyklės. Branduolinių avarijų aukoms turi būti tinkamai ir teisingai atlyginama žala. Atkreiptinas dėmesys į tai, kad visoje ES turi būti taikomos vienodos teismų sprendimų branduolinės žalos padarymo srityje pripažinimo ir vykdymo procedūros. Siekiant pagerinti aukų apsaugą įvykus branduoliniams incidentams, reikia nustatyti ir harmonizuoti visoje ES taikomas civilinės atsakomybės už branduolinę žalą užtikrinimo priemones. Todėl svarbu, kad visos ES valstybės narės būtų prisijungusios prie šio protokolo. Be to, civilinės atsakomybės už branduolinę žalą sąlygos yra svarbios pasirenkant ir derantis su strateginiu investuotoju. Tik bendrų pastangų dėka mes pasieksime užsibrėžto tikslo ir užtikrinsime tinkamą galimos branduolinės žalos atlyginimą.

  Justas Vincas Paleckis (S&D), in writing. − Operators of nuclear power plants are responsible for any damage caused by them, regardless of fault. Nuclear damage is not an event that affects only one country, which creates difficulties when attempting to figure out how to manage the process of handling the damage caused. Therefore, regulations governing international nuclear liability are necessary and have been created. The two main forms of this regulation are the Vienna Convention and the Paris Convention on third party liability. These conventions provide adequate and fair compensation to victims of damage caused by nuclear accidents. However, although the EU is part of these conventions, some Member States ratified the 1997 Protocol prior to their accession. This has resulted in a lack of uniformity among Member States and means that there are differences in how some Member States would handle the procedure for recognition and enforcement of judgments in cases of nuclear damage. I voted in favour of this report because it is important for there to be uniform accountability in all Member States so that victims can be compensated correctly.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − A Convenção de Viena foi adotada para proporcionar compensação adequada e justa às vítimas de danos causados por acidentes nucleares, criando um sistema especial de responsabilidade civil no domínio da energia nuclear. Votei favoravelmente o presente relatório, que pretende dar resposta à falta de uniformidade remanescente entre os Estados-Membros no que respeita às regras que regem o procedimento de reconhecimento e execução de decisões judiciais no domínio dos danos nucleares.

  Aldo Patriciello (PPE), per iscritto. − Onorevoli colleghi, la convenzione di Vienna è stata adottata allo scopo di assicurare un adeguato ed equo risarcimento alle vittime di danni causati da incidenti nucleari, istituendo un regime speciale di responsabilità civile nel settore dell'energia nucleare.

Concordo con il relatore sul fatto che il Parlamento debba dare la sua approvazione al progetto di decisione del Consiglio riguardo alla convenzione di Vienna, pertanto ho espresso il mio voto a favore della proposta.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), por escrito. − O projeto de decisão do Conselho propõe a autorização de certos Estados-Membros a ratificarem ou celebrarem o Protocolo à Convenção de Viena, adotado em 12 de setembro de 1997, sob os auspícios da Agência Internacional da Energia Atómica. Este Protocolo inclui disposições sobre a competência e o reconhecimento e execução das decisões que afetam disposições que constam do direito da UE. Não podendo os Estados-Membros tornar-se Partes Contratantes do Protocolo sem a autorização do Parlamento decorrente do projeto de decisão do Conselho, o relator recomenda que o Parlamento dê a sua aprovação ao projeto de decisão do Conselho, a fim de permitir a conclusão do acordo que diz respeito ao reconhecimento mútuo de decisões judiciais no domínio dos danos nucleares.

  Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE), per iscritto. − La Commissione europea propone che il Consiglio autorizzi gli Stati Membri, parti contraenti della convenzione di Vienna sulla responsabilità civile in materia di danni nucleari, a concludere o ratificare il protocollo del 1997 sulla modifica della stessa. Tenendo conto che in Europa non esiste ancora una legislazione specifica e soprattutto uniforme che disciplini la responsabilità civile nucleare (difatti, ci sono il regolamento (CE) n. 864/2007 sulla legge applicabile alle obbligazioni extracontrattuali che esclude la responsabilità nucleare dal suo campo di applicazione e il regolamento (UE) n. 1215/2012 sulla competenza giurisdizionale, il riconoscimento e l´esecuzione delle decisioni in materia civile e commerciale), l´adesione al protocollo del 1997 si rivelerebbe utile. Modifiche alla convenzione di Vienna comporterebbero aspetti favorevoli alle potenziali vittime di un incidente nucleare, in quanto determinerebbero un aumento degli importi della responsabilità e amplierebbero la definizione di danno nucleare. Peraltro, gli Stati membri non sarebbero ostacolati da nessuna iniziativa presa in questo settore, nella loro adesione alle convenzioni internazionali che migliorano la situazione delle potenziali vittime nell´Unione europea. A fronte delle considerazioni elaborate, ho espresso parere favorevole alla proposta.

  József Szájer (PPE), írásban. − A Bécsi Egyezmény 1963-ban került aláírásra azzal a céllal, hogy a nukleáris balesetek áldozatai megfelelő és tisztességes kártalanítást kapjanak. 1997-ben egy jegyzőkönyvet csatoltak az Egyezményhez, melynek rendelkezései felett az Európai Unió kizárólagos hatáskörrel rendelkezik, tehát a tagállamok külön-külön nem csatlakozhatnak ahhoz. Szavazatommal támogatom a tanácsi határozattervezetet annak érdekében, hogy immár Magyarország is jogosult legyen ratifikálni az 1997-es jegyzőkönyvet.

  Marc Tarabella (S&D), par écrit. – Afin de remédier au manque d'homogénéité qui persiste entre les États membres en ce qui concerne les règles régissant la procédure de reconnaissance et d'exécution des décisions dans le domaine des dommages nucléaires, la Commission s'est engagée à étendre, dans une future proposition, la solution consistant à donner la priorité aux règles de l'Union pour les États membres qui ont ratifié le protocole de 1997 avant leur adhésion à l'Union européenne, comme la Lettonie et la Roumanie, et pour les États membres qui sont parties à la convention de Paris.

Le Conseil propose donc d'autoriser les États membres qui sont parties contractantes à la convention de Vienne, c'est-à-dire la Bulgarie, la République tchèque, l'Estonie, la Hongrie, la Lituanie, la Pologne et la Slovaquie, à ratifier ou conclure le protocole de 1997. Une solution similaire a été suggérée en ce qui concerne le protocole modifiant la convention de Paris en 2004. Je rejoins cet avis.

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. − A Convenção de Viena, relativa à responsabilidade civil em matéria de danos nucleares, diz respeito à compensação justa e adequada às vítimas de danos provocados por acidentes nucleares, através da criação de um sistema de responsabilidade civil. Esta recomendação, puramente técnica, permite que os Estados-Membros se tornem Partes Contratantes do Protocolo à Convenção de Viena adotado em 1997, uma vez que a União tem competência exclusiva nesta matéria.

  Angelika Werthmann (ALDE), schriftlich. − Mit diesem Bericht wird darauf abgezielt, gegen das Fehlen einheitlicher Verfahren in den Mitgliedstaaten vorzugehen. So sollen die Vertragsparteien des Wiener Übereinkommens das Protokoll von 1997 ratifizieren oder abschließen, was in Bezug auf die Inhalte, nämlich besondere Regelungen zur zivilrechtlichen Haftung im Bereich der Kernenergie, einem deutlichen Schritt nach vorne entspricht.

  Iva Zanicchi (PPE), per iscritto. − La responsabilità in materia nucleare è disciplinata a livello internazionale da due strumenti: la convenzione di Vienna e la convenzione di Parigi del 1960 sulla responsabilità civile nel settore dell'energia nucleare.

Entrambe le convenzioni sono fondate, nella sostanza, su principi analoghi. La convenzione di Vienna è stata adottata allo scopo di assicurare un adeguato ed equo risarcimento alle vittime di danni causati da incidenti nucleari istituendo un regime speciale di responsabilità civile nel settore dell'energia nucleare.

Al fine di ovviare alla mancanza di uniformità ancora esistente fra gli Stati membri per quanto riguarda le norme concernenti la procedura per il riconoscimento e l'esecuzione delle decisioni in materia di danni nucleari, la Commissione si è impegnata a prendere in considerazione l'opportunità di estendere, in una futura proposta, la soluzione di dare la prevalenza alle norme UE anche agli Stati membri che hanno ratificato il protocollo del 1997 prima di aderire all'Unione europea, vale a dire Lettonia e Romania, e agli Stati membri che sono parti contraenti della convenzione di Parigi.

Si propone perciò di autorizzare gli Stati membri che sono parti contraenti della convenzione di Vienna (Bulgaria, Repubblica Ceca, Estonia, Ungheria, Lituania, Polonia e Slovacchia) a ratificare o concludere il protocollo del 1997.

  Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − A presente iniciativa diz respeito à proposta de decisão do Conselho que autoriza os Estados-Membros, que são Partes Contratantes na Convenção de Viena de 21 de maio de 1963 relativa à responsabilidade civil em matéria de danos nucleares (Convenção de Viena), a ratificarem o Protocolo que altera a referida Convenção ou a aderirem ao mesmo. A Convenção de Viena foi adotada, em 21 de maio de 1963, com o objetivo de assegurar uma indemnização adequada e justa às vítimas de danos causados por acidentes no domínio da energia nuclear. A Convenção de Viena foi alterada pelo Protocolo de 1997 e contém uma nova definição de dano nuclear. O Conselho propõe, portanto, autorizar os Estados-Membros que são partes contratantes da Convenção de Viena, ou seja, a Bulgária, República Checa, Estónia, Hungria, Lituânia, Polónia e Eslováquia, a ratificar ou a celebrar o Protocolo de 1997. O relatório recomenda que o Parlamento dê o seu consentimento ao projeto de decisão do Conselho. Votámos favoravelmente.

11.3. Εφαρμογή του άρθρου 93 της Συνθήκης ΕΚ (A7-0180/2013 - Sirpa Pietikäinen)

Dichiarazioni di voto scritte

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Aprovo o presente relatório, tendo em conta que, no contexto de uma profunda modernização das regras em matéria de auxílios estatais, a fim de contribuir tanto para a execução da Estratégia Europa 2020, como para a consolidação orçamental e o crescimento, o artigo 107.º do Tratado deve ser aplicado em toda a União de forma eficaz e uniforme. O Regulamento (CE) n.º 659/1999 do Conselho, de 22 de março de 1999, codificou e reforçou a prática anterior da Comissão de aumentar a segurança jurídica e de apoiar o desenvolvimento da política em matéria de auxílios estatais num ambiente transparente. No entanto, à luz da experiência adquirida com a sua aplicação em situações recentes, como o alargamento e a crise económica e financeira, determinados aspetos desse regulamento devem ser alterados, a fim de dotar a Comissão de instrumentos de controlo e execução dos auxílios estatais simplificados e mais eficazes. Deste modo, penso ser imperioso que a Comissão se dote de instrumentos mais eficazes, de modo a trazer mais transparência, tal como prevê o artigo em discussão.

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau už šią rezoliuciją. SESV 107 ir 108 straipsniuose apibrėžtos ES valstybės pagalbos taisyklės: 107 straipsnyje pateikta valstybės pagalbos apibrėžtis ir priežastys, dėl kurių pagalba gali būti laikoma suderinama su vidaus rinka, o 108 straipsnyje išdėstyti pagrindiniai procedūriniai principai, kuriais grindžiami Komisijos veiksmai užtikrinant, kad valstybės narės laikytųsi nustatytų taisyklių. Išsamesnės šių straipsnių taikymo procedūrinės taisyklės nustatytos Reglamente (EB) Nr. 659/1999. Šis vadinamasis Procedūrų reglamentas nuo jo priėmimo 1999 m. nebuvo iš esmės keičiamas. Dabartinis pasiūlymas iš dalies pakeisti Reglamentą (EB) Nr. 659/1999 yra išsamesnės valstybės pagalbos sistemos reformos pagal Komisijos komunikatą „ES valstybės pagalbos modernizavimas“ dalis. Bendras valstybės pagalbos taisyklių reformos tikslas – užtikrinti, kad valstybės pagalba būtų tinkamiau prisidedama įgyvendinant strategijos „Europa 2020“ darbotvarkę ir konsoliduojant biudžetą. Šis pasiūlymas labiausiai padės padidinti valstybės pagalbos kontrolės veiksmingumą.

  Elena Băsescu (PPE), în scris. − Am votat în favoarea raportului deoarece introducerea mecanismelor de evaluare a compatibilităţii ajutoarelor şi investigaţiilor asigură îmbunătăţirea respectării de către statele membre a normelor privind ajutoarele de stat. Astfel, vor fi realizate obiectivele unei mai bune implementări a Agendei Europa 2020 şi a consolidării bugetare. Chiar dacă situaţia economică s-a îmbunătățit faţă de începutul crizei, este esenţial să continuăm eforturile în acordarea de ajutoare de stat. Salut propunerile de îmbunătăţire a gestionării plângerilor în ceea ce priveşte ajutoarele de stat, deoarece astfel s-ar spori rapiditatea, dar şi eficacitatea procedurii de acordare a ajutoarelor. Totodată, este esenţială sporirea supravegherii de către Comisie a statelor membre în acordarea de ajutoare, pentru o funcţionare corectă a pieţei interne şi a concurenţei în Uniune. Între 2009-2011, guvernul de dreapta din România a acordat ajutoare de stat în valoare de 450 milioane de dolari, pentru realizarea de investiţii de peste 2,5 miliarde de euro.

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), per iscritto. − Ho votato a favore della relazione Pietikäinen.

Condivido la richiesta avanzata nel testo di fornire alla Commissione meccanismi più efficienti e semplici per valutare gli aiuti di Stato, ma soprattutto la necessità della stessa di astenersi dall'intervenire nelle misure messe in campo dagli Stati membri, con l'obiettivo di realizzare misure sociali che non causino distorsioni sul mercato. Ritengo sia fondamentale ottenere una semplificazione della procedura di concessione degli aiuti di stato.

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau dėl šio pranešimo, kadangi yra svarbu užtikrinti, jog valstybės narės laikytųsi nustatytų taisyklių ir taip pat siekti padidinti valstybės pagalbos kontrolės veiksmingumą. Svarbu pažymėti, jog dabartinis pasiūlymas iš dalies pakeisti Reglamentą (EB) Nr. 659/1999 yra išsamesnės valstybės pagalbos sistemos reformos pagal Komisijos komunikatą „ES valstybės pagalbos modernizavimas“ dalis. Bendras valstybės pagalbos taisyklių reformos tikslas yra užtikrinti, kad valstybės pagalba prisidėtų prie Strategijos „Europa 2020“ įgyvendinimo tikslų. Viena iš pastebimų problemų yra ta, jog valstybės narės neturi bendros pagalbos taisyklių sistemos ir dažnai nukenčia dėl šios neapibrėžtos padėties. Siekdama užtikrinti, kad taisyklės būtų taikomos nuosekliai nacionaliniu lygmeniu, pritarčiau Komisijos siūlymui sukurti patogesnes priemones, padedančias nacionaliniams teismams priimti sprendimus. Ši nauja nuostata būtina, siekiant valstybės pagalbos sistemos reformos tikslų, nes ji padės užtikrinti galimybę Komisijai tiksliau ir greičiau atlikti tyrimus. Be to, yra siūlymų už taisyklių pažeidimus numatyti baudas, tačiau nustatant baudų lygį turėtų būti daromas skirtumas tarp suinteresuotųjų šalių ir trečiųjų šalių.

  Philippe Boulland (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai voté en faveur de la réforme du régime des aides d'État, afin que ces aides contribuent davantage à la mise en œuvre de la stratégie Europe 2020 et s'inscrivent véritablement dans une démarche d'assainissement des finances publiques. Les principaux points concernent l'augmentation des contrôles par les autorités compétentes et un meilleur traitement des plaintes. Les aides d'État sont un instrument primordial des États, surtout dans la période de crise que nous traversons, mais elles doivent être utilisées de façon à ne pas représenter une entrave disproportionnée à la concurrence.

  Arkadiusz Tomasz Bratkowski (PPE), na piśmie. − Poparłem sprawozdanie pani Sirpy Pietikäinen dotyczące poprawy i ponownej weryfikacji w sposób szczegółowy unijnych zasad pomocniczości państwa. Rozporządzenie Rady (WE) nr 659/1999 ma na celu usprawnienie sposobu rozpatrywania skarg oraz bardziej efektywnepozyskiwanie informacji z rynku, a także zwiększenie przejrzystości całej procedury. Należy zwrócić uwagę, iż w wyniku wdrożenia omawianych postanowień, skarżący będzie zobowiązany do przekazania informacji poświadczających słuszność przeprowadzenia kontroli oraz do wykazania, że jest zainteresowaną stroną. Tylko po spełnieniu powyższych kryteriów wniosek zostanie uznany za skargę. Rozwiązania zaproponowane w dokumencie uskutecznią egzekwowanie prawa oraz pomogą uniknąć sytuacji, kiedy to niesłusznie przyznana pomoc państwa ogranicza konkurencję we Wspólnocie.

  John Bufton (EFD), in writing. − I voted against this report as I do not believe that the Commission should be granted the power to launch this kind of investigation.

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), por escrito. − Os artigos 107.º e 108.º do TFUE definem as regras comunitárias em termos de auxílios estatais. O Regulamento (CE) n.º 659/1999, que clarifica as regras processuais para a execução destes artigos, é agora alvo de uma proposta de alteração, no sentido de fazer com que os auxílios estatais contribuam melhor para a execução da Agenda 2020 e para a prosperidade económica dos Estados-Membros. Com esta proposta, a Comissão pretende tornar o processo de denúncia mas eficaz e transparente e ter uma recolha e tratamento de informação mais eficiente. Assim, no caso de denúncias que não respeitem os requisitos de informação necessários ou que sejam infundadas, a Comissão não terá de adotar uma decisão formal e o Parlamento propõe o mesmo procedimento para as situações em que não sejam detetadas irregularidades. Quanto à recolha de informação, a Comissão poderá alargar o leque de fontes de informação e sancionar agentes que forneçam informação enganosa ou omissa. O PE deverá solicitar à Comissão a investigação de casos concretos em certos setores e ter um papel mais relevante nesta matéria. Apoio o presente relatório que, contribuindo para expurgar situações de distorção de concorrência no mercado interno, é positivo para os cidadãos europeus.

  Lara Comi (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho votato a favore di questa importante posizione del Parlamento. Si tratta di modifiche al regolamento (CE) n. 659/99 su norme procedurali in materia di aiuti di Stato. Se fino a oggi la Commissione era tenuta a svolgere indagini su ogni presunta violazione, indipendentemente dalla fonte dell'informazione, ora i denuncianti devono presentare un certo numero di informazioni obbligatorie ed essere portatori di interessi. In mancanza, la Commissione non sarà più tenuta ad adottare una decisione formale. Ciò consentirà di concentrarsi sulle denunce più fondate, con enorme semplificazione del lavoro. Inoltre, con il testo che abbiamo adottato, come già avviene in materia antitrust, la Commissione potrà svolgere le indagini in modo più tempestivo e preciso e comminare anche sanzioni. I cambiamenti adottati vanno, a mio avviso, nella direzione giusta, cioè di migliorare il trattamento delle denunce e di garantire una raccolta di informazioni di mercato efficace e affidabile. In questo modo, gli aiuti di Stato possono contribuire maggiormente alla realizzazione della strategia 2020 e al risanamento dei bilanci nazionali. Inoltre, queste modifiche aiuteranno la concessione degli aiuti di Stato da parte degli Stati in maniera conforme alle regole concordate e il mercato unico potrà funzionare meglio perché si limitano molto gli aiuti illegali e distorsivi.

  George Sabin Cutaş (S&D), în scris. − Am votat pentru acest raport deoarece consider că este nevoie de o modernizare a procedurilor pentru acordarea ajutoarelor de stat. Parlamentul European sprijină propunerea Comisiei Europene pentru o mai buna gestionare a plângerilor primite. De asemenea, în calitate de shadow raportor din partea grupului meu politic, am susţinut ideea ca executivul european să poată să ceară informaţii despre ajutoarele de stat direct de la participanţii pe piaţă, în cazul în care statele membre nu oferă informaţii complete. În opinia mea, acest lucru nu ar face decât să mărească transparenţa.

  Rachida Dati (PPE), par écrit. – Si nous voulons que l'argent public soit utilisé au mieux, pour créer de la croissance et de l'emploi de la manière la plus juste possible, cela passe par des aides d'Etats plus efficientes. C'est pourquoi je soutiens la réforme de ce règlement qui, dans le cadre plus général de la réforme des aides d'Etats, permettra d'améliorer l'efficacité et la transparence des procédures.

  Christine De Veyrac (PPE), par écrit. – La réforme des procédures en matière d'aides d'État doit avant tout améliorer l'efficacité du contrôle de ces aides. C'est ce que présente le texte en se positionnant pour une amélioration du traitement des plaintes et pour une collecte d'informations auprès des acteurs du marché plus efficace. J'ai voté en faveur de ce texte car il représente une réforme nécessaire en matière d'aides d'Etat.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − Inserida na reforma global sobre a Modernização da política da UE no domínio dos auxílios estatais, esta proposta de alteração visa criar as necessárias condições para que os auxílios estatais possam contribuir, da melhor forma, para a prossecução dos objetivos da Agenda UE 2020. Existem duas importantes alterações que merecem ser salientadas: a melhoria do tratamento de denúncias e da recolha de informações relativas ao mercado. Deste modo, será possível aumentar a rapidez, eficácia e transparência destes processos, bem como ajudar a Comissão a se centrar nas questões verdadeiramente fundamentais.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − A colega Sirpa Pietikäinen apresentou-nos um relatório sobre uma proposta de regulamento do Conselho que altera o Regulamento (CE) n.º 659/1999, que estabelece as regras de execução do artigo 93.º do Tratado CE (auxílios estatais). Os auxílios estatais encontram-se regulamentados nos artigos 107.º e 108.º do Tratado sobre o Funcionamento da União Europeia. Tendo em conta a Comunicação da Comissão, torna-se necessário proceder à modernização da política da União no que se refere a esta matéria. Para tal, é fundamental uma melhoria no tratamento das denúncias, para que os processos sejam mais céleres, eficazes e transparentes, contribuindo, assim, para desincentivarem a prática de fraudes. Os auxílios estatais devem visar o desenvolvimento integrado do mercado único e não prejudicar o correto funcionamento da União Europeia. Votei favoravelmente a presente proposta uma vez que o objetivo é fazer com que os auxílios estatais contribuam para melhorar a execução da Agenda 2020 e promovam o crescimento económico e a prosperidade dos Estados-Membros.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − É evidente a abordagem neoliberal plasmada neste relatório. Defende-se que a Comissão deve examinar os casos que lhe sejam submetidos e ter muito cuidado em não isentar demasiadas atividades do controlo dos auxílios estatais, não vá algum Estado soberano decidir imiscuir-se no funcionamento do sacrossanto livre mercado. Por outro lado, reforça-se o federalismo, pretendendo-se dotar a Comissão de instrumentos simplificados e mais eficazes de controlo e execução dos auxílios estatais, ou seja, apoiando a recolha direta de informação junto dos intervenientes no mercado por parte da Comissão, substituindo o que até agora era uma competência de soberania de cada Estado-Membro e das suas instituições. Outra questão de fundo continua por resolver: os Estados-Membros que têm dinheiro no respetivo orçamento - os maiores beneficiados com a integração da UE - podem ajudar as suas empresas, as suas associações ou instituições. Os Estados-Membros que não têm ficam em clara desvantagem. Esta é uma desigualdade que nenhuma legislação resolve. Limitar a intervenção do estado na economia é o objetivo da UE e de legislação como esta. Mas nada se diz sobre os milhares de milhões de euros despejados no setor financeiro, com o beneplácito da UE.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − Toto tzv. procesné nariadenie sa podstatne nezmenilo od svojho prijatia v roku 1999 a je súčasťou iniciatívy Komisie o modernizáciu. Bolo navrhnuté spolu so správou o uplatňovaní článkov 92 a 93 Zmluvy o fungovaní EÚ. Je opodstatnené vysloviť podporu všeobecnému cieľu návrhu Komisie, snažiac sa udržiavať dobré fungovanie jednotného trhu. Zároveň je potrebné a dôležité zabezpečiť, aby politika hospodárskej súťaže zostávala spravodlivou a zohľadňovala ciele stratégie EÚ 2020.

  Philippe Juvin (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai soutenu le rapport de ma collègue Sirpa Pietikäinen. Ce rapport portait sur l'amélioration du traitement des plaintes et l'instauration d'une collecte efficace et fiable d'informations auprès des acteurs du marché. Il s'inscrit dans une volonté générale de modernisation de la politique de l'Union européenne en matière d'aides d'Etat. Je me réjouis donc de son adoption par une large majorité de députés: 651 voix pour, 26 voix contre et 33 absentions.

  Béla Kovács (NI), írásban. − Kezdhetném azzal, hogy hazámnak ilyen feltételek mellett nem lett volna szabad belépnie az Európai Unióba, ami ráadásul azóta már alig hasonlít arra, amibe beléptünk. Legnagyobb problémánk éppen a virtuális EU-s támogatás, ami mögött valójában hatalmas elvonás van. Ehhez képest az állami támogatási szabályok megsértésének vizsgálata csak csepp a tengerben, de valóban nem adottak a Bizottság számára a megfelelő vizsgálati eljárás feltételei. Ezért el kell fogadni a Bizottság javaslatait munkafeltételeinek javítása érdekében. A korábbiakhoz képest nemzeti hatáskört nem von el, sőt még támogatja is a nemzeti bíróságok jobb működését. A hazai támogatási gyakorlat anomáliái pedig a jelen kormányzat túlhatalmának és a demokrácia félreértelmezésének következményei. Ez az anyag is a jobb híján elfogadandók táborát gyarapítja.

  Constance Le Grip (PPE), par écrit. – Mardi, j'ai voté en faveur du rapport concernant l'application de l'article 93 du traité CE, afin de moderniser la politique de l'UE en matière d'aides d'Etat. Dans la théorie, les subventions publiques accordées par un gouvernement national pour soutenir des activités domestiques sont contraires au droit de l'UE et au principe de libre concurrence. Toutefois, l'Union autorise et encadre juridiquement quelques exceptions, lorsque l'action est d'intérêt public. L'objectif de ce rapport est de réorienter les aides pour qu'elles servent la stratégie Europe 2020 et l'assainissement des finances publiques. D'autre part, nous souhaitons réformer la procédure de plainte destinée à sanctionner les États qui ne respectent pas les conditions de l'Union, grâce à un traitement plus rapide et plus efficace des affaires qui portent le plus atteinte au marché unique.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I welcome this Report. Currently, the Commission has to investigate every alleged violation of the state aid rules, no matter what the source is; there are no specific formal requirements attached to the lodging of a complaint. This has led to a high number of complaints lodged at the Commission, many of which are either not motivated by genuine competition concerns or not sufficiently substantiated, leading to a situation where resources are tied up and often diverted from pursuing genuine competition issues, and procedures are prolonged. To address this, the Commission proposes that complainants are in the future required to submit a certain amount of compulsory information, while also demonstrating that they are interested parties in the alleged misuse of state aid. In cases where the information does not pass these admissibility criteria, it will not be classified as a complaint, meaning the Commission will no longer be under an obligation to adopt formal decisions

  Clemente Mastella (PPE), per iscritto. − Oggi, in seduta plenaria, abbiamo accolto la proposta di modifica di un regolamento che fa parte di una riforma più generale degli aiuti di Stato dell'Unione europea.

Siamo certi che l'approvazione di tale proposta contribuirà, da un lato, a migliorare il trattamento delle denunce e, dall'altro, a garantire una raccolta efficace ed affidabile di informazioni di mercato. Riteniamo, infatti, che la priorità sia di porre rimedio ai problemi rilevati nella procedura di denuncia, aumentandone la rapidità, l'efficacia e la trasparenza anche per poter permettere alla Commissione di occuparsi dei casi più importanti per il corretto funzionamento del mercato unico.

È nostro dovere, dunque, garantire che la Commissione disponga di strumenti efficaci per verificare che gli Stati membri concedano gli aiuti di Stato conformemente alle regole concordate e non ostacolino la concorrenza all'interno dell'Unione europea, scoraggiando gli aiuti di stato illegali.

Inoltre, crediamo sia assolutamente necessario risolvere il problema delle divergenze nell'interpretazione delle norme sugli aiuti di Stato in alcuni Stati membri; insistiamo affinché si chiariscano queste situazioni, valutando, attraverso indagini di mercato, quale tipo di domanda esiste per determinati servizi.

  Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – Ce rapport soutient la réforme du contrôle des aides d'État proposée par la Commission européenne. Au nom de la concurrence libre et non faussée, cette chasse aux aides d'État est déjà responsable de l'interdiction absurde du financement public de certaines activités productives d'intérêt général ou du démantèlement de certaines entreprises publiques. Avec la réforme proposée les pouvoirs d'investigation et de contrôle de la Commission sur les États seraient encore renforcés, sous couvert d'une concentration des contrôles sur les plus grosses aides d'État. Je vote contre ces nouvelles armes données à la Commission européenne contre les aides publiques.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − As regras comunitárias em matéria de auxílios estatais estão atualmente consignadas no Tratado sobre o Funcionamento da União Europeia (designado «TFUE» ou «Tratado»). Treze anos após a sua entrada em vigor, é necessária uma modernização do regulamento processual, a fim de adaptar o procedimento em matéria de auxílios estatais a uma União Europeia com 27 Estados-Membros, 500 milhões de habitantes e 23 línguas oficiais. A presente crise económica e financeira pôs em risco a integridade do mercado interno e demonstrou a importância de um controlo e de uma execução racional e eficientes dos auxílios estatais. É necessário dispormos de melhores instrumentos, de modo a intervir dentro dos prazos que correspondam às necessidades das empresas e a promover uma utilização correta dos recursos públicos em políticas orientadas para o crescimento. Daí o meu voto favorável.

  Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − No he podido votar a favor de este informe porque se basa en la mejora de los principios de mercado. El presente informe trata de mejorar y uniformar los criterios sobre las quejas de competencia, debido a su elevado número, alrededor de unas 300, que se presentan en este ámbito cada año. El informe también recoge la posibilidad de que la Comisión recabe información por su propia cuenta de los operadores del mercado, liberando a los Estados miembros de la responsabilidad y la posibilidad de ser sancionados por no aportar la información requerida por la Comisión. Se trata de un informe de poco contenido político que pretende agilizar y mejorar la eficacia del trabajo de la Comisión en el ámbito de la competencia, de mejorar su funcionamiento y liberar a los Estados miembros de una carga de trabajo no necesaria. Pero no he votado a favor debido a que solo busca mejorar la competencia del mercado único y desarticular las ayudas estatales de los Estados miembros.

  Louis Michel (ALDE), par écrit. – Je salue ce rapport qui survient dans le cadre de la modernisation de la politique de l'UE en matière d'aides d'Etat afin que ces aides contribuent à la fois à la mise en œuvre de la stratégie Europe 2020 et à l'assainissement des finances publiques. Les mesures envisagées dans ce rapport permettront d'améliorer le traitement des plaintes et de garantir une collecte efficace et fiable d'informations auprès des acteurs du marché dans le but ultime de garantir le bon fonctionnement du marché unique. Par ailleurs, le dépôt des plaintes sera soumis à une conditionnalité ce qui permettra d'accroître la rapidité et l'efficacité de la procédure et ainsi la Commission européenne pourra se concentrer sur les affaires les plus importantes pour garantir le bon fonctionnement du marché unique.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − The general aim of the reform of the rules is to have State aid which better contributes to the implementation of the Europe 2020 agenda and to budget consolidation. I am confident that this proposal will contribute mainly to an improvement in the effectiveness of State-aid control. The improvements proposed by the Commission are two-sided: on the one hand they are seeking to improve the resolution of complaints and, on the other, ensure effective and reliable gathering of information from the market. Both seek to address the perceived problems of the complaints procedure and to increase the speed, efficiency and transparency of the procedure, as well as to help the Commission truly concentrate on the most important cases in ensuring the proper functioning of the single market. I am in favour.

  Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), par écrit. – L’Union européenne doit se doter dans le cadre de l’unification de son développement, de procédures modernes de contrôle des aides d’États. Il faut simplifier les recours possibles et les dépôts de plaintes pour les mesures qui faussent la concurrence au sein du marché intérieur. Il faut cependant que les nouvelles règles applicables laissent dans certains domaines la libre décision aux États membres, ce qui est le cas dans ce rapport. C’est pour cela que j’ai répondu favorablement lors du vote.

  Tiziano Motti (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho sostenuto la modifica del regolamento (CE) n. 659/1999 sulle modalità di applicazione dell'articolo 93 del trattato CE in materia di aiuti di Stato, affinché un miglior funzionamento delle procedure di denuncia trattate dalla Commissione e la garanzia per tale organo di disporre di procedure rapide, efficaci e trasparenti garantiscano il corretto funzionamento del mercato unico e impediscano i potenziali effetti distorsivi della concorrenza sul mercato interno provenienti dall'erogazione di aiuti di stato non conformi alle disposizioni degli articoli 108 e 109 del TFUE.

  Rolandas Paksas (EFD), raštu. − Balsavau už šią rezoliuciją. Siekiant skatinti tvarų, pažangų ir integracinį ekonomikos augimą, valstybės pagalba turėtų būti suderinta su vidaus rinka. Labai svarbu užtikrinti, kad valstybės narės tinkamai laikytųsi nustatytų taisyklių ir užtikrintų, kad teikiama pagalba neiškraipytų konkurencijos ir prekybos. Siekiant užtikrinti tinkamą vidaus rinkos veikimą turi būti nustatytas veiksmingas kontrolės mechanizmas bei padidintas skaidrumas. Didesnį dėmesį reikėtų skirti skundų nagrinėjimo procedūroms. Jos turi būti greitesnės, veiksmingesnės ir skaidresnės. Pažymėtina, kad veiksminga ir patikima rinkos informacija užtikrina greitą ir veiksmingą pagalbos suderinamumą. Todėl siekiant tiksliau ir greičiau atlikti būtinus tyrimus, Komisijai turi būti suteikta teisė taikyti atgrasomąsias priemones už klaidingai pateiktą informaciją.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − Em 1999, o Conselho adotou o Regulamento (CE) n.º 659/19991 que define mais em pormenor as regras processuais que regem a aplicação dos artigos 107.º e 108.º do TFUE e que foram aplicadas até hoje sem alterações significativas. Mais de 13 anos após a sua entrada em vigor, é necessária uma modernização do regulamento processual, a fim de adaptar o procedimento em matéria de auxílios estatais a uma União Europeia com 27 Estados-Membros, 500 milhões de habitantes e 23 línguas oficiais. Votei favoravelmente o presente relatório do Parlamento Europeu que acolhe os objetivos da Comissão e propõe alterações limitadas ao projecto de regulamento que visa garantir que a Comissão tem à sua disposição ferramentas eficazes para garantir aos Estados-Membros a concessão de auxílios estatais, de acordo com as regras acordadas.

  Aldo Patriciello (PPE), per iscritto. − Onorevoli colleghi, ritengo che l'obiettivo generale della riforma delle norme sia di fare in modo che gli aiuti di Stato contribuiscano maggiormente alla realizzazione della strategia Europa 2020 e al risanamento dei bilanci e reputo che la proposta contribuisca principalmente ad aumentare l'efficacia del controllo degli aiuti di Stato.

Concordo inoltre con il relatore sul fatto che questa nuova disposizione sia essenziale ai fini della realizzazione degli obiettivi della riforma degli aiuti di Stato, poiché consentirà alla Commissione di svolgere le indagini in modo più tempestivo e preciso. Pertanto ho espresso il mio voto a favore della proposta.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), por escrito. − Os artigos 107.º e 108.º do TFUE definem as regras comunitárias em termos de auxílios estatais. O Regulamento (CE) n.º 659/1999, que clarifica as regras processuais para a execução destes artigos, é agora alvo de uma proposta de alteração, no sentido de assegurar que os auxílios estatais contribuem de forma mais efetiva para a execução da Agenda 2020 e para a prosperidade económica dos Estados-Membros. Com esta proposta, a Comissão pretende tornar o processo de denúncia mais eficaz e transparente e ter uma recolha e tratamento de informação mais eficiente. Assim, no caso de denúncias que não respeitem os requisitos de informação necessários ou que sejam infundadas, a Comissão não terá de adotar uma decisão formal e o Parlamento propõe o mesmo procedimento para as situações em que não sejam detetadas irregularidades. Quanto à recolha de informação, a Comissão poderá alargar o leque de fontes de informação e sancionar agentes que forneçam informação enganosa ou omissa. O PE deverá solicitar à Comissão a investigação de casos concretos em certos setores e ter um papel mais relevante nesta matéria. Por considerar que as propostas em causa contribuem para expurgar situações de distorção de concorrência no mercado interno, votei favoravelmente o presente relatório.

  Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE), per iscritto. − Gli aiuti di Stato rappresentano un contributo importante per il buon funzionamento del mercato unico, in quanto concorrono a una migliore allocazione delle risorse pubbliche e ad una parità di trattamento delle imprese, siano esse pubbliche o private, favorendone la libera concorrenza. Dal momento che l'Unione europea si è spesso trovata a svolgere indagini relative ad aiuti di Stato versati irregolarmente nelle casse di imprese che operano sul mercato unico, un aumento dell'efficacia del controllo degli stessi sarebbe più che opportuno. Difatti, esprimo parere favorevole alla proposta di modifica del regolamento (CE) n. 659/ 1999 recante modalità di applicazione dell'articolo 93 del trattato CE, in materia di aiuti di Stato. Ritengo che i miglioramenti proposti dalla Commissione costituiscano il reale punto di partenza per agire in tale direzione. Migliorare il trattamento delle denunce e garantire una raccolta di informazioni di mercato efficace e affidabile fornirebbe alla Commissione strumenti concreti di verifica sulla concessione degli aiuti, permettendo di conseguenza al sistema comunitario di assistere da vicino le giurisdizioni nazionali al fine di conformare il mercato unico ai principi consacrati dai trattati.

  Marc Tarabella (S&D), par écrit. – Les améliorations proposées par la Commission sont doubles: il s'agit, d'une part, d'améliorer le traitement des plaintes et, d'autre part, de garantir une collecte efficace et fiable d'informations auprès des acteurs du marché. Ces deux aspects visent à remédier aux problèmes liés à la procédure de plainte et à accroître la rapidité, l'efficacité et la transparence de la procédure, ainsi qu'à permettre à la Commission de se concentrer sur les "grosses" affaires, plus importantes pour garantir le bon fonctionnement du marché unique.

Dans l'ensemble, je soutiens tout à fait la proposition de la Commission et ses objectifs, et je me suis contenté de proposer quelques modifications mineures au projet de règlement. Il est primordial, pour garantir le bon fonctionnement de notre marché unique et faire en sorte que des aides d'État illégales n'entravent pas la concurrence au sein de l'Union européenne, de doter la Commission d'instruments efficaces permettant de vérifier que les États membres octroient des aides d'État conformément aux règles convenues.

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. − As regras comunitárias em matéria de auxílios estatais foram introduzidas pela primeira vez, em 1952, no Tratado que institui a Comunidade Europeia do Carvão e do Aço e em 1957, no Tratado que institui a Comunidade Económica Europeia. Atualmente, estão consignadas no Tratado sobre o Funcionamento da União Europeia. Subscrevo o presente relatório, pois a proposta de reforma do regulamento processual incide em dois domínios considerados fundamentais, nomeadamente a melhoria do tratamento das denúncias e a garantia de uma maior eficiência e fiabilidade do processo de recolha de informações de mercado. Por fim, gostaria de enfatizar o facto de a Comissão dever centrar a sua atenção nos casos de auxílios estatais com potencial para distorcer a concorrência no mercado interno, salvaguardando os constrangimentos económicos e sociais das regiões ultraperiféricas que devem possuir derrogações favoráveis dos auxílios de estado.

  Angelika Werthmann (ALDE), schriftlich. − Die Berichterstatterin zielt auf Effizienz und Konsequenz im Zusammenhang mit der Erlangung von Marktinformationen und der Durchsetzung von Vorschriften ab. Ziele dieser Art, die das System und die Werte der Union vorantreiben, sind sehr zu begrüßen.

  Iva Zanicchi (PPE), per iscritto. − La proposta in esame fa parte di una riforma generale relativa agli aiuti di Stato, in linea con la comunicazione della Commissione europea "Modernizzazione degli aiuti di stato dell'UE", e permetterà di aumentare l'efficacia dei controlli relativi a questa delicata materia.

Obiettivo principale di tale riforma è fare in modo che gli aiuti di stato contribuiscano in modo concreto alla realizzazione della strategia Europa 2020 e al risanamento dei bilanci.

  Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − As preocupações neoliberais estão presentes e são transversais a todo o relatório. A maioria do PE defende que a Comissão deve examinar os casos que lhe tenham sido submetidos e ter muito cuidado em não isentar demasiadas atividades do controlo dos auxílios estatais, não vá algum Estado-Membro decidir imiscuir-se no funcionamento do sacrossanto mercado livre. Por outro lado, reforça-se o federalismo, defendendo-se que a Comissão seja dotada de instrumentos simplificados e mais eficazes de controlo e execução dos auxílios estatais, ou seja, apoiando a recolha direta de informação junto dos intervenientes no mercado por parte da Comissão, substituindo o que até agora era uma competência de soberania de cada Estado-Membro e das suas instituições. A questão de fundo, essa, continua por resolver: os Estados-Membros que têm dinheiro no respetivo orçamento - os maiores beneficiados com a integração da UE - podem ajudar as suas PME, as suas associações ou instituições, os Estados-Membros que não têm, ficam em clara desvantagem. Esta é uma desigualdade muito grande que nenhuma legislação resolve. Existe uma grande dose de hipocrisia quando se estão a abordar temas como o das ajudas estatais e, ao mesmo tempo, a falar de consolidação orçamental.

11.4. Εξωτερική πολιτική αερομεταφορών της ΕΕ (A7-0172/2013 - Marian-Jean Marinescu)

Dichiarazioni di voto orali

  Adam Bielan (ECR). - Panie Przewodniczący! Silna unijna polityka w dziedzinie lotnictwa jest gwarantem postępu zarówno w zakresie jednolitego otwartego rynku, jak i współpracy gospodarczej z najważniejszymi zagranicznymi partnerami handlowymi. Obecnie lotnictwo stanowi potężny dział gospodarki, generując ponad pięć milionów miejsc pracy w krajach członkowskich. Nadal jednak wymaga szerokiego zaangażowania celem podnoszenia jego potencjału i konkurencyjności.

Niezwykle istotne są działania ukierunkowane na stałe poszerzanie przepustowości, w tym na maksymalne wykorzystywanie możliwości istniejących portów lotniczych oraz na ich rozbudowę. Ogromną rolę dla komplementarności ruchu wewnętrznego odgrywają tani przewoźnicy. Ich działalność musi jednak uwzględniać wszelkie standardy wynikające z ochrony praw konsumenckich.

We współpracy z krajami partnerskimi korzystnym rozwiązaniem są umowy o ruchu lotniczym. Niepokojącym zjawiskiem jest natomiast nieprzestrzeganie przez Rosję porozumienia dotyczącego wycofania opłat za przeloty nad Syberią, do czego zobowiązuję Moskwę członkostwo w WTO. Należy zwrócić uwagę na ten problem we wzajemnych relacjach.

  Phil Bennion (ALDE). - Mr President, I of course voted in favour of this report given its importance, and particularly because we need a strong external aviation policy in a world where aviation is part of global trade. Much more still needs to be done on the single European sky. We still have a ridiculously fragmented situation. Much more also needs to be done in order for the EU to be stronger in its negotiations with third countries. If we fail to do that, we will fail to get a level playing field for European airlines in the global economy.

I am, of course, referring in particular to the emissions trade mechanism, where we need a global agreement, and we need to be speaking with one voice with the International Civil Aviation Organization to get it.

Finally, on airport capacity and the increasing number of congested airports around Europe, we cannot keep building new runways at hub airports and solve the issue of noise with bans on night flights. We need a long term strategy and to look at developing specialised hubs through our regional airports and to stop focusing only on existing hub airports.

  Giommaria Uggias (ALDE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il settore europeo dell'aviazione impiega attualmente oltre 5 milioni di persone e offre un contributo annuo di PIL pari a 365 miliardi di euro, un miliardo di euro al giorno, contribuendo in misura fondamentale alla crescita economica e alla coesione territoriale e sociale dell'intero continente.

Si tratta quindi di un settore fondamentale che deve essere messo in condizioni di far fronte alle nuove sfide che provengono da altre regioni del mondo che, beneficiando di legislazioni più permissive in termini di costruzione di nuove capacità aeroportuali, rafforzano la loro posizione sul mercato globale dell'aviazione a scapito dei vettori europei.

Occorre quindi salvaguardare competitività delle compagnie aeree e delle imprese dell'Unione e tale obiettivo può essere raggiunto innanzitutto migliorando la carente capacità di molti aeroporti, sia attraverso lo stanziamento di risorse per la nuova costruzione di nuove opere, sia tramite un utilizzo più efficiente delle infrastrutture esistenti anche e soprattutto grazie a una migliore assegnazione degli slot aeroportuali.

Credo, e finisco Presidente, che vada in questo contesto migliorato anche il fondamentale ruolo che svolgono gli aeroporti regionali in tutta Europa.

  Jim Higgins (PPE). - Mr President, I voted in favour of this report because it contributes EUR 365 billion to European GDP and supports 5.1 million jobs.

However, seven years after the communication from the Commission on developing the agenda for the Community’s external aviation policy, we still have not reached the goals that were set out. We have to make rapid progress on European aviation. Ireland, as an island nation, depends largely on aviation. New economic challenges are arising from regions of the world where much more permissive legislation is allowing companies to build huge new airports that divert a lot of travellers from European hubs.

The European Union urgently needs increased airport capacity in order to avoid the risk of losing competitiveness relative to the regions that are experiencing rapid, exponential growth. We must continue to be focused on the Asia-Pacific region, the Middle East and the South American region. Investment in airport infrastructure must be taken seriously, even if the demand does not exceed supply. We have to build for the future.

  Monika Smolková (S&D) - Podporila som správu, lebo sa domnievam, že je to dobrá správa, ktorá nielen analyzuje a hodnotí súčasný stav vonkajšej politiky EÚ v oblasti letectva, ale poukazuje na problémy a nedostatky, ktoré môžu ohroziť konkurencieschopné odvetvie letectva v rámci celosvetovej siete.

Za dôležité považujem, že sa zdôrazňuje význam potreby dlhodobých investícií do letiskovej infraštruktúry s cieľom zvýšiť kapacitu a účinnejšie využívať existujúcu infraštruktúru vrátane regionálnych letísk na východných hraniciach EÚ.

Týka sa to aj letiska v mojom meste v Košiciach na Slovensku, ktoré je vstupnou bránou do schengenského priestoru na východe Európy a je od ukrajinskej hranice vzdialené 100 km. Rozvoj nášho regiónu bude závisieť aj od možnosti využívania väčšej kapacity letiska a investícií do letiskovej infraštruktúry.

Pre budúcnosť regionálnych letísk bude dôležité, aby členské štáty pristúpili k zriaďovaniu, resp. udržiavaniu regionálnych letísk a zabezpečeniu investícií do ich infraštruktúry.

  Charles Tannock (ECR). - Mr President, international aviation by definition crosses borders. Therefore, while I am always cautious in the battle of competing EU and Member State competences, aviation policy is one area where, clearly, a coordinated policy can add value and make logistical sense, and an EU common aviation policy brings tangible economic benefits for all Member States. A common rigorous and strong external aviation policy would help to extend that, particularly by opening up new opportunities for EU airlines internationally.

Given that Heathrow, which is probably the world’s busiest airport globally, lies inside my London constituency, I fully support all initiatives to boost international aviation and to make it more efficient, less noise and air-pollutant and more cost-effective. To this extent I welcome the report’s call to examine the lack of a level playing field across international airports. It is in all our interests for aviation to work better both for businesses, for job creation and for consumers, so I am delighted to support it.

Dichiarazioni di voto scritte

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Aprovo o presente relatório, tendo em conta que a aviação é atualmente um setor-chave da economia europeia. Contribui com 365 mil milhões de euros para o PIB europeu e é responsável por 5,1 milhões de empregos, mas, sete anos após a Comunicação da Comissão Desenvolver a agenda da política externa comunitária no setor da aviação, a UE ainda não atingiu os seus objetivos. É tempo de progredir rapidamente no setor da aviação europeia. Novos desafios económicos surgem de regiões no mundo, onde uma legislação muito mais permissiva autoriza as empresas a construir novos aeroportos enormes que desviam muitos dos viajantes dos aeroportos centrais europeus. A União Europeia necessita, com urgência, de uma maior capacidade aeroportuária, a fim de evitar o risco de perder competitividade face a regiões que vivem um crescimento rápido exponencial (a preocupação centra-se nas regiões da Ásia-Pacífico, Médio Oriente e América do Sul).

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau už šį pranešimą. Aviacija yra itin svarbus ES ekonomikos sektorius, kuris sukuria per 365 mlrd. eurų ES BVP bei užtikrina apie 5,1 mln. darbo vietų. Prieš septynerius metus Komisija paskelbė komunikatą dėl Bendrijos išorės politikos aviacijos srityje darbotvarkės rengimo, tačiau joje užsibrėžti tikslai iki šiol nėra pasiekti. Pasaulinės tendencijos aviacijos srityje kelia grėsmę šio sektoriaus gyvybingumui ir konkurencingumui ES. Pasaulyje taikomi lankstūs modeliai, kurie įgalina įmones statyti didelius oro uostus, kurie ir stengsis perimti tam tikrą dalį ES keleivių. Todėl ES turi didinti savo oro uostų pajėgumus, kad galėtų išsilaikyti itin konkurencingoje pasaulinėje aviacijos rinkoje. Nuo 2005 m. suderėta nemažai susitarimų su svarbiausiomis šalimis partnerėmis. Vis dėlto su svarbiausiomis partnerėmis, įskaitant ir Australiją ir Naująja Zelandiją, turi būti sudaryti itin svarbūs susitarimai. Taip pat svarbu įgyventi esamas ES priemones kaip SESAR, kuri yra ES oro erdvės kontrolės infrastruktūros modernizavimo priemonė, GNNS, kuri yra globali satelitinė navigacijos programa ir kt. Šių priemonių įgyvendinimas sustiprintų ES pramonės padėtį bei suteiktų jai didesnes galimybes konkurencingoje pasaulinėje aviacijos rinkoje.

  Erik Bánki (PPE), írásban. − A légi közlekedés napjainkban az európai gazdaság kulcsfontosságú ágazata. 365 milliárd euróval járul hozzá az Unió GDP-jéhez, és 5,1 millió munkahely működését támogatja, azonban céljaink még mindig teljesítésre várnak. Az Európai Uniónak sürgősen növelnie kell repülőtéri kapacitását annak érdekében, hogy elkerülhesse versenyképességének csökkenését azon térségek javára, amelyek gyors, exponenciális növekedést tapasztalnak. Stratégiai szempontból az Európai Uniónak meg kell őriznie a légi közlekedési ágazat versenyképességét. Fontos azonban, hogy ezt úgy tegye, hogy egyúttal különös figyelmet fordít a munkaügyi és környezetvédelmi előírásokra, az utasok jogaira és az európai rendeletek tiszteletben tartására. A jelentést ennek érdekében szavazatommal támogattam.

  Elena Băsescu (PPE), în scris. − Am votat în favoarea raportului deoarece politica în domeniul aviaţiei poate contribui la consolidarea industriei, mai ales că mulţi operatori aerieni au fost afectaţi de criză. Însă, pentru a fi coerenţi pe plan extern, trebuie să avem o abordare comună la nivelul Uniunii Europene, deoarece rezultatele ar fi o mai mare competitivitate a companiilor europene. De asemenea, preţurile pentru consumatorii finali ar putea scădea, iar securitatea zborurilor ar fi consolidată. Reformarea sistemului de management al traficului aerian va fi esenţială. Mai ales că el reprezintă cel de-al treilea cost ca mărime pentru companiile aeriene, după combustibil şi taxele de aeroport. Totodată, susţin şi eu că în relaţiile cu ţările terţe Uniunea trebuie să aplice principiul reciprocităţii. Acest lucru este cu atât mai important cu cât, deseori, operatorii aerieni din Uniune sunt afectaţi de concurenţa neloială.

  Regina Bastos (PPE), por escrito. − A aviação é atualmente um setor-chave da economia europeia que contribui com 365 mil milhões de euros para o PIB europeu e é responsável por 5,1 milhões de empregos. Novos desafios económicos surgem de regiões do mundo, onde uma legislação muito mais permissiva autoriza empresas a construir novos aeroportos que desviam muitos passageiros dos aeroportos europeus. A UE necessita, pois, de maior capacidade aeroportuária, a fim de evitar o risco de perder competitividade face a regiões que vivem um crescimento rápido exponencial. A UE necessita de manter um setor de aviação competitivo. Nesse sentido, desde 2005 que foi negociado um número significativo de acordos com países parceiros fundamentais. No entanto, ainda devem ser alcançados outros acordos decisivos, entre os quais, a Austrália e Nova Zelândia. Apesar da necessidade de liberalização, a UE precisa de continuar a defender os interesses e as normas europeias. Deve pois, prestar atenção especial às normas laborais e ambientais, aos direitos dos passageiros e ao respeito pela regulamentação europeia. Pelo exposto, apoiei o presente relatório.

  Sergio Berlato (PPE), per iscritto. − L'aviazione svolge un ruolo fondamentale nell'economia europea: contribuisce per oltre 300 miliardi di euro al PIL europeo e da essa dipendono 5,1 milioni di posti di lavoro.

Tuttavia, a ben sette anni di distanza dalla comunicazione della Commissione sullo sviluppo dell'agenda per la politica estera comunitaria in materia di aviazione, gli obiettivi non sono stati ancora raggiunti. Stanno emergendo nuove sfide economiche in regioni del mondo in cui legislazioni molto più permissive consentono alle imprese di costruire aeroporti nuovi che attirano numerosi viaggiatori dagli hub europei. Diviene necessario, pertanto, compiere rapidi progressi nel settore dell'aviazione europea.

A mio avviso, l'Unione europea dovrebbe aumentare senza indugio le proprie capacità aeroportuali per evitare di perdere competitività rispetto a regioni che stanno registrando una crescita esponenziale nel settore e, al contempo, sfruttare appieno le capacità degli aeroporti esistenti.

Concordo con il relatore nel ritenere che il crescente numero di vettori aerei low-cost nel mercato interno europeo potrebbe essere considerato come nuovo modello di rafforzamento del mercato piuttosto che una minaccia competitiva. I vettori aerei "classici" e low-cost potrebbero trovare un modo per armonizzare il mercato europeo e integrarsi a vicenda, in modo da rispondere con una maggiore stabilità alle sfide dei mercati esterni.

  Nora Berra (PPE), par écrit. – Dans l'Union européenne, l'aviation représente 365 milliards d'euros et 5,1 millions d'emplois. Face aux enjeux que l'aviation représente, la Commission a publié une communication, dont découle ce rapport d'initiative, sur les défis qui se posaient à l'Union Européenne : certains régions du monde proposent des législations plus avantageuses pour la construction d'aéroport moderne, ce qui doit amener l'Union européenne à se pencher sur ses capacités aéroportuaire au risque de voir les voyageurs européens se diriger vers ces nouvelles infrastructures plus compétitives. L'Union européenne doit réfléchir aux investissements nécessaires pour modifier ses infrastructures aéroportuaires. Des initiatives - initiatives qui doivent permettre un meilleur service et une amélioration de la sécurité des passagers européens ainsi que soutenir les compagnies aériennes européennes afin qu'elles restent compétitives sur le marché mondial - ont déjà été menées pour répondre à ses défis : le système de nouvelle génération pour la gestion du trafic aérien (SESAR), l'initiative Clean Sky, ou encore l'Agence Européenne de la Sécurité Aérienne (AESA). Au regard de ces éléments, j'ai voté pour le rapport.

  Fabrizio Bertot (PPE), per iscritto. − Esprimo un voto a favore, in quanto l'aviazione svolge un ruolo fondamentale nell'economia europea, contribuendo per 365 miliardi di euro al PIL europeo e con 5,1 milioni di posti di lavoro.

L'UE deve urgentemente aumentare le proprie capacità aeroportuali per evitare di perdere competitività rispetto a regioni che stanno conoscendo una rapida crescita esponenziale. Il crescente numero di vettori aerei low cost nel nostro mercato interno potrebbe essere utilizzato come nuovo modello di rafforzamento, piuttosto che essere considerato una minaccia competitiva. L'UE deve salvaguardare un'industria dell'aviazione competitiva, i mercati dell'aviazione più importanti sono al di fuori dell'Europa e le industrie dell'UE devono pertanto crescere in questi mercati.

A sostegno del futuro sviluppo, sottolineo l'importanza della creazione e attuazione di meccanismi UE quali SES, SESAR, EASA e GNSS, creati per sostenere il mercato interno, che aiuteranno l'UE anche nella politica estera in materia di aviazione. Occorre necessariamente istituire alcune procedure come i blocchi funzionali dello spazio aereo, essenziali per l'attuazione del cielo unico europeo. Nonostante la necessità di liberalizzazione, l'UE deve continuare a difendere gli interessi e le norme europei.

Attenzione particolare deve essere rivolta alle norme concernenti il lavoro e l'ambiente, i diritti dei passeggeri e il rispetto dei regolamenti europei.

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), per iscritto. − Ho sostenuto col mio voto la relazione Marinescu che affronta quelli che sono effettivamente i problemi alla base della crisi dell'industria aerea, sottolineando in particolare come la ripresa di questo settore dipenda in modo determinante dall'adozione di misure contro la concorrenza sleale dei paesi terzi.

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau dėl šio pranešimo, kadangi aviacijai tenka svarbus vaidmuo suteikiant žmonėms ir įmonėms susisiekimo Europos Sąjungoje ir visame pasaulyje, ypač su besivystančiomis rinkomis, galimybę. Svarbu pažymėti aviacijos vaidmenį ES ekonomikoje, pirmiausia ekonomikos augimo ir darbo vietų kūrimo atžvilgiu, nes šioje pramonės srityje sukuriama daugiau kaip 5 mln. darbo vietų Europoje ir 2.4 proc. Sąjungos BVP, taip pat ši pramonės sritis prisideda prie Sąjungos susisiekimo su likusiu pasauliu. Didėjanti bendroji aviacijos erdvė vystoma drauge su kaimyninėmis šalimis. Verta pabrėžti, jog pigius skrydžius siūlančios bendrovės lemia didelę konkurenciją tarp oro transporto bendrovių, o pigių skrydžių segmentas sudaro 40 proc. visos ES oro transporto rinkos. Visos oro transporto bendrovės privalo laikytis bendrų reikalavimų ir užtikrinti pagrindines teises pagal Tarptautinės darbo organizacijos konvencijas. Šių ir kitų sąlygų nesilaikymas sudaro kliūtis aviacijos augimui ir užimtumui. Manau, jog dabar kaip niekad metas daryti sparčią pažangą Europos aviacijos srityje. Nauji ekonominiai iššūkiai siejami su pasaulio regionais, kur remdamosi gerokai liberalesniais teisės aktais įmonės gali statyti didžiulius naujus oro uostus, perviliojančius nemažai keleivių iš Europos oro susisiekimo mazgų. Europos Sąjunga turi skubiai didinti savo oro uostų pajėgumą, kad išvengtų konkurencingumo praradimo, ypač Azijos ir Ramiojo vandenyno, Artimųjų Rytų ir Pietų Amerikos regionų atžvilgiu.

  Philippe Boulland (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai voté en faveur de la modification de la politique européenne d'aviation, qui vise à lutter contre les distorsions de la concurrence du fait des pratiques de certaines compagnies étrangères au détriment des compagnies européennes. En Europe, les aides d'États sont accordées à certaines compagnies aériennes locales pour l'ouverture de lignes régionales au détriment d'autres compagnies, créant de facto une distorsion de la concurrence.

Il a donc été proposé de réviser les lignes directrices communautaires sur les versements d'aides d'État et d'aides au démarrage. Il est important de réguler efficacement le domaine de l'aviation, puisqu'il représente un secteur clef d'avenir (prévisions de 5% de croissance / an jusqu'en 2030, majoritairement hors-Union européenne).

  Arkadiusz Tomasz Bratkowski (PPE), na piśmie. − Lotnictwo jest bardzo szybko rozwijającą się gałęzią gospodarki Unii Europejskiej, która zatrudnia aż 5 mln obywateli. W celu zachowania odpowiedniego poziomu konkurencyjności tego sektora na arenie światowej konieczne jest odpowiednio szybkie wdrożenie we wszystkich państwach członkowskich pakietu przepisów o jednolitej europejskiej przestrzeni powietrznej (SES) oraz modernizacja europejskich systemów zarządzania ruchem lotniczym (program SESAR). Niestety, obserwujemy znaczne opóźnienia przy wprowadzaniu powyższych projektów, co generuje dodatkowe koszty dla linii lotniczych i skutkuje utrudnieniami dla pasażerów. W związku z powyższym Komisja Europejska powinna zastosować politykę karną w stosunku do państw, które nie stosują się do zaleceń funkcjonowania bloków przestrzeni powietrznej. Ponadto sektory lotnictwa w państwach rozwijających się (w regionach Azji, Pacyfiku, Bliskiego Wschodu i Ameryki Południowej) stanowią coraz większą konkurencję dla lotnictwa UE. Dlatego musimy dokonać szybkiego postępu w tej dziedzinie, m.in. poprzez zwiększenie przepustowości w portach lotniczych, zachęcanie do inwestowania w infrastrukturę lotniczą, a także pełne wdrożenie mechanizmów takich jak SES czy SESAR.

  Alain Cadec (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai vote en faveur du rapport Marinescu, qui dresse un état des lieux très juste de la situation des aéroports et du secteur de l'aviation dans l'Union européenne. Je partage son constat d'améliorer la compétitivité de ce secteur pour que les aéroports de l'UE relèvent du meilleur standard international car c'est aussi un atout pour son rayonnement et son attractivité. Comme le rapporteur, je pense qu'il convient d'accélérer le décloisonnement du marché unique dans le domaine de la régulation du ciel unique. Placer les principes de réciprocité et de concurrence loyale au coeur de la stratégie extérieure de l'Union pour l'aviation me semble également vital, sans quoi les entreprises du secteur se verront probablement refuser l'accès à de nouveaux marchés. Enfin, dans le cadre des accords bilatéraux régissant les coopérations en matière d'aviation avec des pays tiers, il est aussi important de fixer des seuils minimaux de normes à respecter pour ne pas aller vers un moins-disant réglementaire préjudiciable aux droits des passagers.

  Antonio Cancian (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho votato a favore della relazione presentata dal collega Marinescu perché condivido la presa di posizione in merito alla politica estera europea in materia di aviazione. Condivido l’opinione per cui questo settore rappresenta un obiettivo strategico all’interno delle politiche di sviluppo dell’Unione europea. Meccanismi come SESAR, GNSS ed altri sono strumenti indispensabili per il completamento del mercato unico. Lo sviluppo ed il completamento di queste tecnologie fungerà inoltre come stimolo per il nostro tessuto industriale, in particolare per i poli di eccellenza che se ne occupano in modo specifico.

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), por escrito. − Devida à máxima importância que o setor aéreo representa na economia europeia, e devido aos fracos avanços a que assistimos na implementação do SES e do SESAR, concordo com a posição do relator no sentido de tomar medidas punitivas contra os Estados-Membros que não tenham cumprido o prazo final previsto para dezembro de 2012 e não tenham conseguido fazer quaisquer progressos em relação aos blocos funcionais de espaço aéreo (FAB).

  Carlos Coelho (PPE), por escrito. − O setor da aviação é uma área da economia em rápido crescimento no seio da UE, mas não com a mesma rapidez que no seu exterior, sobretudo em regiões como a Ásia e o Médio Oriente, o que reflete a sua conjuntura de crescimento económico. A crise económica e financeira tem tido mais repercussão em determinadas regiões, quando comparado com outras, o que obrigou as companhias aéreas da União a enfrentar enormes desafios em termos de concorrência, levando-as a ter de suprimir, desde 2012, mais de 20 mil postos de trabalho. Só poderemos combater esta tendência através da adoção de uma abordagem mais coordenada e mais ambiciosa, criando uma política externa sólida e abrangente no setor da aviação, contribuindo para criar uma posição europeia forte no mercado mundial e incentivando uma concorrência leal e aberta, o que deverá beneficiar não só as empresas, mas também os consumidores. Por outro lado, no interior da União, as transportadoras aéreas enfrentam uma forte concorrência por parte das transportadoras de baixo custo, que representam 40 % da oferta aérea na União, pelo que é necessário encontrar as melhores formas de completar mutuamente estes dois modelos empresariais perante os desafios do mercado externo.

  Lara Comi (PPE), per iscritto. − L´aviazione ha un ruolo importante nell'economia europea, ed è quindi necessario puntare su questo campo apportando progressi al fine di non perdere competitività rispetto ad aree che stanno crescendo rapidamente. Ritengo di rilevante importanza quindi investire nel campo delle infrastrutture aeroportuali e concordo con la creazione e l'attuazione di meccanismi UE quali SES, SESAR, EASA e GNSS al fine di aiutare l`UE nella politica estera in materia di aviazione. E' importante avere una concorrenza equa e aperta in tutte le attività collegate ai servizi aerei e cercare come nel caso di vettori aerei classici e low cost un modo per integrarsi a vicenda in modo da rispondere con maggiore stabilità alla sfida dei mercati esteri. Voto a favore di questa relazione poiché appoggio il relatore nei punti che ha espresso.

  Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (S&D), în scris. − Libera circulaţie a persoanelor în Europa a determinat, în ultimii ani, o creștere semnificativă a numărului operatorilor de transport aerian la preț redus, lucru care nu poate fi decât benefic pentru cetăţenii europeni. Pe de altă parte, această creştere constantă poate reprezenta un model nou de consolidare a competitivității şi ea trebuie să fie corelată cu investițiile în infrastructura aeroporturilor, chiar dacă, pentru moment, cererea nu depășește încă oferta.

  Rachida Dati (PPE), par écrit. – L'Europe, c'est le premier marché touristique du monde: le secteur de l'aviation européen a tout à gagner de cette réussite, et doit absolument se saisir rapidement des opportunités que cette situation lui offre, pour devenir à son tour un véritable tremplin vers la croissance et l'emploi. Grâce à ce texte, nous mettons en place des mesures pour soutenir ce secteur et l'aider à combattre certaines pratiques déloyales de ses compétiteurs. Je me félicite notamment de l'accent mis sur le rôle de GNSS: le système européen de navigation par satellite sera un outil clef pour mieux répondre en temps réel aux besoins des passagers, grâce à l'amélioration de nos outils de surveillance et de navigation.

  Marielle de Sarnez (ALDE), par écrit. – Le secteur de l'aviation joue un rôle majeur pour l'économie européenne. Il représente 2,4 % du PIB européen et permet à notre continent d'être relié au reste du monde à travers un réseau aéroportuaire très dense. Bien que l'aviation européenne soit performante, elle doit faire face à une très forte concurrence, notamment des pays du Golfe qui subventionnent leurs compagnies. L'Union européenne doit donc développer une politique de l'aviation visant à garantir des conditions de concurrence justes avec les compagnies des pays partenaires mais aussi augmenter ses investissements dans le secteur pour devenir plus compétitive. Airbus constitue par exemple une des plus belles réussites de coopération économique européenne. Enfin, l'Europe doit œuvrer au sein de l'Organisation de l'Aviation Civile Internationale pour qu'un système mondial d'échange d'émissions de CO2 voie le jour.

  Christine De Veyrac (PPE), par écrit. – Alors que la concurrence fait rage sur le marché aéronautique mondial et européen, il était important de rappeler que les règles du jeu doivent être équitables pour opérer sur un marché ouvert et non faussé. L'Union européenne doit réagir au plus vite et accompagner la filière aéronautique dans sa mutation en adoptant des outils de soutien et de lutte contre toute forme de distorsion du marché. Protéger l'aéronautique, c'est protéger la compétitivité et l'attractivité des 5,1 millions d'emplois dans nos territoires, mais aussi protéger notre réseau de dessertes régionales si important pour nos concitoyens ! Nos constructeurs sont confrontés à l'apparition de nouveaux acteurs, notamment d'Asie, profitant de législations permissives. Mais la bataille se joue aussi entre aéroports ; si l'Union n'investit pas rapidement dans ses infrastructures aéroportuaires, les plateformes de correspondance mondiales se délocaliseront vers ces mêmes régions où de lourds investissements d'infrastructures portent aujourd'hui leurs fruits. Et sans parler de nos compagnies aériennes qui bataillent aujourd'hui contre l'émergence de compagnies asiatiques bénéficiant de financements conséquents, mais aussi contre l'essor incroyable des compagnies à bas coût. Je me félicite de cette prise de position du Parlement européen. Une Europe forte est une Europe ouverte et concurrentielle, mais aussi une Europe qui protège et agit dans un intérêt citoyen.

  Anne Delvaux (PPE), par écrit. – Je me réjouis de l'adoption de ces mesures prises au sujet de l'aviation. Ce secteur est très important, non seulement au niveau des emplois, où l'on parle de plus de 5 millions de personnes actives dans le domaine, mais également au niveau du chiffre économique que représente le secteur. Ces mesures sont nécessaires afin de rester compétitif par rapport aux pays émergents, mais aussi afin de maximiser l'utilisation que nous faisons des infrastructures disponibles actuellement, et ainsi d'en garantir l'efficience.

  Ioan Enciu (S&D), în scris. − Am votat în favoarea acestui raport întrucât cred că aviaţia este un sector important al economiei europene care creează peste 5 milioane de locuri de muncă şi reprezintă aproximativ 365 de miliarde din PIB-ul european. Prin urmare, trebuie urmărită modernizarea şi mărirea competitivităţii acestei industrii, în special prin promovarea investiţiilor în infrastructura aeroportuară, dar şi prin eficientizarea fluxurilor de călătorii, spre exemplu prin folosirea de soluţii automatizate şi semiautomatizate. În acelaşi timp, este necesară ameliorarea cooperării la nivel internaţional şi încheierea de parteneriate cu ţări şi regiuni terţe. Nu în ultimul rând, Uniunea Europeană trebuie să vorbească pe o singură voce atunci când vine vorba de reprezentarea intereselor industriei aviaţiei la nivel internaţional, în special în cadrul Organizaţiei Aviaţiei Civile Internaţionale.

  Edite Estrela (S&D), por escrito. − Votei favoravelmente este relatório por defender um mercado único no setor da aviação que funcione em articulação com a política externa da UE. O setor da aviação desempenha um papel muito importante para União, em particular em termos de crescimento e de emprego, pelo que é necessário manter um setor da aviação da União forte e competitivo.

  Jill Evans (Verts/ALE), in writing. − I voted in favour of this report. The proposals outlined will help increase competitiveness amongst EU airlines and airports. The Welsh Government has just purchased Cardiff Airport which is of key importance to our economy and I want EU legislation to enable us to develop the airport to the best European standards.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − Para avaliarmos a importância do setor da aviação na vida contemporânea, basta-nos imaginar por um momento um mundo no qual ainda não dispuséssemos da capacidade de nos deslocarmos por via aérea. Certamente que as comunicações, o transporte e o comércio operariam com dificuldade acrescida e significativamente mais devagar. Ao fazer uma retrospetiva, podemos constatar enormes progressos desde os primeiros tempos da aviação experimental quer em termos de autonomia de voo, quer em progresso técnico e tecnológico, quer quanto à capacidade de carga dos aviões. A União Europeia dispõe de diversas e importantes empresas de aviação, das frotas mais modernas, dos melhores aeroportos e de um mercado único e aberto que possibilita aos seus cidadãos terem acesso a diversas rotas e serviços com elevados graus de profissionalismo e segurança. Não obstante, tal como outras indústrias, também a aviação europeia sofre o impacto da presente crise económico-financeira. Compete aos decisores europeus procurarem contribuir para inverter este estado de coisas, dotar o setor da aviação de competitividade a nível global e dar novo ânimo a este mercado.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − O setor da aviação, não obstante estar a passar por uma crise complicada, é muito importante na economia europeia, uma vez que representa mais de cinco milhões de postos de trabalho e movimenta 365 mil milhões de euros. A dimensão deste setor exige uma análise multifacetada. Em primeiro lugar, é fundamental potenciar o seu crescimento de modo a criar mais emprego. Para tal, é preciso aumentar o movimento através de uma aposta forte e consistente nos mercados emergentes, ao mesmo tempo que se promove o crescimento de aeroportos regionais tendo em vista o descongestionamento dos aeroportos principais. Outras questões que devem ser tidas em conta dizem respeito à defesa dos direitos dos consumidores, nomeadamente quanto à segurança dos passageiros e seus bens. Também a livre transparência, evitando os subsídios que distorcem a concorrência e o acesso aos mercados, os problemas ambientais, sobretudo os decorrentes do ruído, devem merecer atenção por parte das autoridades responsáveis. Também não é despiciente a questão relativa ao espaço aéreo da Sibéria, fundamental nas ligações aéreas entre a UE e o Canadá, sendo de exigir condições de reciprocidade. Votei favoravelmente o relatório elaborado pela colega Marian-Jean Marinescu porque é necessário reorientar a política externa da UE no setor da aviação, de modo a torná-la uma indústria mais forte e mais competitiva.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − O relatório destaca os progressos realizados na criação de um mercado regional único e aberto na UE e defende uma abordagem comum da UE em relação à sua política externa no setor da aviação. O objetivo, o de sempre: potenciar o mercado único. Considera-se que a convergência regulamentar europeia é fundamental para uma posição europeia forte no mercado mundial. Ou seja, este relatório desfia o cardápio dos interesses das multinacionais europeias do setor da aviação e aponta o caminho para o reforço da concentração monopolista em curso no setor à escala europeia, propiciando melhores condições a esses monopólios na disputa com companhias de outras regiões do globo. O relator salienta a importância de criar e aplicar mecanismos como o SES, o SESAR, a EASA e o GNSS. Afirma que estes instrumentos, criados para apoiar o mercado interno, ajudarão, por conseguinte, a UE na sua política externa no setor da aviação. Refere-se que a finalização destes instrumentos consolidará a posição do setor europeu, tornando-o mais forte. Afirma-se ainda que é necessário reforçar alguns procedimentos obrigatórios. Por exemplo, os blocos de espaço aéreo funcionais, essenciais para aplicar o Céu Único Europeu, devem ser completados o mais depressa possível. Obviamente, votámos contra.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − Letectvo je v súčasnosti kľúčovým sektorom európskeho hospodárstva. K európskemu HDP prispieva 365 miliardami EUR a poskytuje 5,1 milióna pracovných miest. Dosiaľ sa však nepodarilo naplniť všetky ciele, ktoré si letectvo stanovilo. Je opodstatnené vynakladať spoločné úsilie na harmonizovanie letectva v rámci členských štátov Európskej únie, i v snahe vedieť tak pružnejšie reagovať na výzvy vonkajšieho trhu. Malo by byť našou snahou dospieť k dosiahnutiu rozsiahlej dohody v rámci problematiky leteckej dopravy s niektorými susednými krajinami a kľúčovými hospodárskymi partnermi. Spoločné kroky by mali mať zároveň taktiež na zreteli úsilie o udržanie konkurencieschopnosti leteckého odvetvia.

  Jacqueline Foster (ECR), in writing. − I voted in favour of this report. Aviation is an important sector across Europe where it accounts for more than five million jobs, especially in the UK – home to the world’s busiest international airport at Heathrow and many high-skilled aviation engineers. There are a number of key areas of focus which I believe are of high importance as we look forward. Firstly, it is vital that we push forward with the Single European Sky. All Member States committed to this project over 10 years ago and we must not now let it be hampered by the vested interests of some countries. It is also important that we lay the foundations for a policy focused on the most significant growth markets in the long-haul sector, creating economic opportunities for European airlines, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region. I want UK airlines and the entire aviation supply chain to be competitive in the global market, to be able to grow and expand, create jobs and foster economic growth without the often pointless and burdensome legislation bought forward by the regulation obsessed Commission.

  Elisabetta Gardini (PPE), per iscritto. − Sono convinta che la politica estera in materia di aviazione debba basarsi sul principio di reciprocità.

È necessario avviare un confronto che metta al centro del dibattito l'accesso al mercato, l'apertura e la concorrenza leale per garantire, in ultima analisi, condizioni eque a tutti i soggetti interessati. Concordo nel fissare come obiettivi principali la possibilità di creare benefici per i consumatori e le imprese e, allo stesso tempo, sostenere le compagnie aeree e gli scali aeroportuali dell'Unione nello sforzo di salvaguardare la loro posizione di leader mondiali.

  Mathieu Grosch (PPE), schriftlich. − Die EU ist an der Aufrechterhaltung eines starken und wettbewerbsfähigen EU-Luftverkehrs interessiert, zumal er über 5 Millionen Arbeitsplätze umfasst und 2,4 % des EU-BIP ausmacht.

Dieser Sektor hat einen starken internationalen Charakter, und das macht es unabdingbar, in der Luftfahrt vorrangig nach internationalen statt europäischen Lösungen zu suchen. Die Flüssigkeitsregelung an Flughäfen oder das Emissionshandelssystem sind gute Beispiele dafür. Nur durch internationale Regelungen können Wettbewerbsverzerrungen zwischen europäischen und internationalen Fluggesellschaften verhindert werden.

Vor allem bei Fragen der Sicherheit, des Umweltschutzes, aber auch der sozialen Regelungen kommt es darauf an, dass die EU auf internationaler Ebene einen ernstzunehmenden Verhandlungspartner darstellt. Dies drückt sich vor allem in den bilateralen Luftverkehrsabkommen aus. Hier muss die EU verstärkt auf Augenhöhe mit den Partnern verhandeln und dabei europäische Standards in Bezug auf Umwelt, Beschäftigung und Sicherheit als Vorreiter einbringen, denn nur so wird die europäische Luftfahrt sich trotz des erhöhten Wettbewerbs weiterhin durchsetzen können.

Voraussetzung dafür ist jedoch, dass die Mitgliedstaaten mit einer Stimme sprechen, erster wichtiger Schritt dahin ist, die Umsetzung des Einheitlichen Europäischen Luftraums. Denn wenn die Mitgliedstaaten dazu bereit sind, ihre nationalen Prärogative gegen einen europäischen Ansatz auszutauschen, dann werden sie auch auf internationaler Ebene als Einheit ernst genommen.

  Jim Higgins (PPE), in writing. − I voted yes to this report because of the fact that the aviation sector is key to the European economy. It contributes EUR 365 billion to European GDP and supports 5.1 million jobs. I believe that it is important to invest now in order to protect our competitiveness and prominence against aviation sectors in other parts of the world, even if demand has not yet reached supply.

  Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE), in writing. − I supported this report and in particular welcome the reference to passenger rights. This is one area of consumer law where the EU has done good work in strengthening the rights of our citizens. Any efforts the Union can make to encourage airlines and nations outwith Europe to adopt similar policies are to be welcomed.

  Philippe Juvin (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai soutenu le rapport d'initiative de mon collègue Marian-Jean Marinescu. Ce rapport portait sur l'aviation, secteur-clé de l'économie européenne. De nouveaux défis sont lancés depuis des régions du monde où il existe une législation beaucoup plus permissive. Ce rapport souligne avec justesse les points sur lesquels il faut avancer afin d'y faire face. Il propose notamment d'agrandir la capacité des aéroports de l'Union européenne afin de ne pas risquer de devenir moins compétitifs. Le rapporteur soulignait en outre le préoccupant retard pris dans la mise en œuvre du ciel unique européen et du système SESAR. Ce rapport a été voté à une très large majorité: 650 voix pour, 54 contre et 5 abstentions.

  Michał Tomasz Kamiński (ECR), in writing. − Currently, the most important aviation markets are located outside of Europe, for which reason we need to reform the aviation industry within the EU. Reforms in policies ensure that our aviation industries stay competitive and up to date. They create important changes to the key sector in the European economy. Aviation alone contributes EUR 365 billion to European GDP and provides 5.1 million jobs. It is an industry that has to maintain a high level of efficiency to excel among its competition. I voted in favour of this report.

  Béla Kovács (NI), írásban. − Repülni pedig muszáj gondoljuk mindaddig, míg egy vulkán kettőt nem pöffent. De a trend persze a fejlesztés irányába mutat mind a járatszámok, mind az útvonalak vonatkozásában. Ahol pedig kereslet van, ott a piaci szereplők azt ki is használják, és ebben az üzleti szegmensben Európának van is mit keresnie, leginkább a hosszú távú utak vonatkozásában. Stratégiai szempont, hogy az Európai Unió megőrizze a légi közlekedési ágazat versenyképességét. A belső piac támogatására létrehozott uniós mechanizmusok segítséget nyújtanak a légi közlekedéssel kapcsolatos közösségi politika megvalósításában. Egyúttal nagyobb figyelmet kell fordítani a munkaügyi és környezetvédelmi előírásokra és az utasok jogaira. Minden esetben ellenzem a nemzetállami függetlenséget korlátozó lépéseket, a repülés kapcsán azonban a biztonság mindenek felett való, így az EU és a Nemzetközi Polgári Repülési Szervezet közötti nagyobb fokú koordinációt is támogatni kell. Bár az ajánlás piacgazdasági és fogyasztói társadalmat ösztönző kitételei számomra aggályosak, de jobb hiányában és a biztonságra fókuszálva el kellett fogadnom az anyagot.

  Giovanni La Via (PPE), per iscritto. − Il ruolo svolto dal settore dell’aviazione in Europa è significativo. Essa, infatti, contribuisce per 365 miliardi di euro al PIL europeo e dà occupazione a circa 5 milioni di lavoratori. Pur tenendo fermo questo quadro, a sette anni dall’introduzione dell’agenda per la politica estera comunitaria in materia di aviazione, non sono stati raggiunti gli obiettivi preposti. Ho espresso voto favorevole alla presente relazione perché ritengo che ponga in essere le necessarie proposte correttive al fine di implementare e rafforzare la politica estera in materia di aviazione, puntando forte sull’aumento delle proprie capacità aeroportuali ed armonizzando le legislazioni nazionali in un’ottica comunitaria, così da consentire una crescita esponenziale tale da sostenere le sfide economiche di un’economia globale.

  Constance Le Grip (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai soutenu le vote du Parlement en faveur de la politique extérieure de l'UE dans le domaine de l'aviation. Dans l'économie européenne, l'aviation est un secteur clé qui emploie 5.1 millions de personnes et pèse plus de 365 milliards d'euros dans le PIB de l'UE. Toutefois, la concurrence des puissances émergentes, notamment d'Asie-Pacifique, du Moyen-Orient et d'Amérique du Sud, menace le secteur aérien européen. En effet, des aéroports géants sont construits ou en projet dans ces zones géographiques, et risques de détourner une partie de l'activité aéroportuaire hors du continent européen. Par conséquent, il est indispensable que l'Union se dote d'une politique extérieure forte et d'une stratégie de développement de long terme afin de rester compétitive dans le secteur aérien. Nous devons soutenir l'industrie européenne dans ce domaine et anticiper l'élargissement et la modernisation de nos infrastructures aéroportuaires. Par ailleurs, la coopération au niveau de l'UE, tels que le programme du ciel unique européen, doit être intensifiée.

  Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (PPE), na piśmie. − Sektor lotniczy w Unii Europejskiej zatrudnia aż 5 mln osób oraz wytwarza 2,4% jej PKB. Udział ten mógłby być jeszcze wyższy za sprawą lepszego wykorzystania istniejących lotnisk regionalnych. Jak słusznie zauważył sprawozdawca, lotniska regionalne, które znajdują się przy wschodnich granicach UE, w tym np. Rzeszów-Jasionka w moim regionie Podkarpaciu, są szansą na zwiększenie przepustowości oraz dalszy rozwój tego sektora. Doceniam także wezwanie skierowane do Komisji Europejskiej, aby zakończyła trwające negocjacje z państwami sąsiednimi, w tym np. Ukrainą. Zmniejszenie zatłoczenia głównych węzłów europejskich oraz zwiększenie konkurencyjności całej UE uzależnione jest od rozwoju istniejących lotnisk regionalnych oraz zawarcia nowych porozumień międzynarodowych. Dlatego też zagłosuję za tym sprawozdaniem. Dziękuję.

  Bogdan Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz (PPE), na piśmie. − Panie Przewodniczący! W trakcie głosowania odniosłem się pozytywnie, do sprawozdania w sprawie unijnej polityki w zakresie zewnętrznych stosunków w dziedzinie lotnictwa – jak sprostać przyszłym wyzwaniom – i zaakceptowałem je. Uważam, że ze względu na szybki rozwój technologiczny oraz zapotrzebowanie zarówno w zakresie przewozów pasażerskich, jak i towarowych, musimy doprowadzić do szybkiego postępu w lotnictwie europejskim. Przede wszystkich potrzebujemy nowych, większych portów lotniczych ze zwiększoną przepustowością, ponieważ w niedalekiej przyszłości możemy stracić konkurencyjność na rzecz innych rozwijających się w błyskawicznym tempie regionów świata. Ponadto nowe rozwiązania technologiczne wspierające zarówno bezpieczeństwo lotów, jak i ich efektywność, wymagają natychmiastowego wdrożenia, np. SES, SESAR, EASA czy GNSS. W tym celu powinniśmy między innymi skupić się na przyjęciu szerszego podejścia zarówno w negocjacjach z państwami trzecimi, jak i z Międzynarodową Agencją Lotnictwa Cywilnego, co podkreślono w sprawozdaniu. Dodatkowo. Ponadto nie możemy pozwolić sobie już dłużej na opóźnienia związane z wprowadzeniem jednolitej europejskiej przestrzeni powietrznej.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − Aviation is today a key sector in the European economy. It contributes EUR 365 billion to European GDP and supports 5.1 million jobs but, seven years after the Communication from the Commission on ‘Developing the agenda for the Community’s external aviation policy’, we have still to reach our goals. It is, now more than ever, time to make rapid progress in European aviation. New economic challenges are arising from regions of the world where much more permissive legislation is allowing companies to build huge new airports that divert a lot of travellers from European hubs. The European Union urgently needs increased airport capacity to avoid the risk of losing competitiveness relative to regions that are experiencing rapid exponential growth (our concerns are focused on the Asia-Pacific, Middle East and South American regions). Investment in airport infrastructure must be taken seriously, even if demand does not yet exceed supply. Meanwhile, the existing capacity needs to be used to its maximum efficiency (including by means of better management of slots and use of non-hub airports to reduce congestion).

  Clemente Mastella (PPE), per iscritto. − Siamo consapevoli del ruolo fondamentale che l'aviazione ricopre nell'economia europea e per questo, ora più che mai, è necessario compiere rapidi progressi nel settore.

Di questo abbiamo discusso oggi, in seduta plenaria, basandoci sulla relazione dell'onorevole Marinescu, che ha insistito sulla necessità di salvaguardare un'industria dell'aviazione che sia sempre più competitiva. Siamo certi, infatti, che l'Unione europea debba urgentemente aumentare le proprie capacità aeroportuali per evitare di perdere competitività rispetto a regioni che, invece, stanno conoscendo una rapida crescita, quali il Medio Oriente, il Sudamerica e l'Asia.

Riteniamo, inoltre, che gli investimenti nelle strutture aeroportuali debbano essere seriamente valutati, anche se, attualmente, la domanda non supera l'offerta. Siamo convinti che sia indispensabile sfruttare appieno le capacità esistenti, anche quelle considerate una minaccia competitiva, come il crescente numero dei vettori aerei low-cost nel mercato interno dell'Unione europea che, invece, potrebbe essere preso come nuovo modello di rafforzamento.

Infine, nonostante la necessità di liberalizzazione, crediamo fermamente che l'UE debba continuare a difendere gli interessi e le norme europei, in primo luogo quelli concernenti il lavoro e l'ambiente, i diritti dei passeggeri e il rispetto dei regolamenti europei.

  Véronique Mathieu Houillon (PPE), par écrit. – Le secteur de l’aviation est un secteur en pleine mutation. L’enjeu du marché mondial est important pour l’aviation européenne et difficile au vue de la concurrence internationale. Une meilleure coopération est nécessaire au niveau européen. Nous devrions miser sur des accords aériens au niveau de l’UE plutôt qu’un niveau national comme c’est le cas. Afin de rester compétitif, les transporteurs aériens historiques et les nouvelles compagnies à bas prix devraient dialoguer pour se répartir le marché. Par ailleurs, les aides d’Etat ne doivent pas être un frein à une concurrence loyale.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − A aviação é atualmente um setor-chave da economia europeia. Contribui com 365 mil milhões de euros para o PIB europeu e é responsável por 5,1 milhões de empregos. Há, no entanto, uma grande margem de progressão nesta indústria, como demonstram os enormes crescimentos registados nas regiões da Ásia-Pacífico, Médio Oriente e América do Sul. O investimento em infra-estruturas aeroportuárias deve ser encarado com seriedade, ainda que, no momento, a procura não exceda a oferta. Entretanto, é necessário que a atual capacidade seja usada com a máxima eficiência, através de uma melhor gestão das faixas horárias e da utilização de aeroportos que não sejam centrais para a redução dos congestionamentos. Falando em termos estratégicos, a União Europeia precisa de manter um setor de aviação competitivo. Atualmente, os mercados de aviação mais importantes situam-se fora da Europa e, por isso, as empresas europeias necessitam também de serem desenvolvidas nesses mercados.

  Louis Michel (ALDE), par écrit. – L'aviation est par définition transfrontalière et nécessite une politique commune dans l'UE. Une politique d'aviation forte au niveau européen permettra de progresser sur le marché intérieur et apportera des avantages à tous les Etats membres tout en ouvrant de nouvelles opportunités pour les compagnies aériennes de l'UE.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − The report calls for the EU to adopt a more united approach, both in negotiations with third countries and at the International Civil Aviation Organisation. It expresses its concern about subsidies received by European carriers’ competitors and criticises delays in completing the Single European Sky. I voted in favour.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. − Die Luftfahrt steht vor neuen wirtschaftlichen Herausforderungen. Auf der einen Seite werden höhere Flughafenkapazitäten gefordert, um die Gefahr eines Verlustes von Wettbewerbsfähigkeit im Vergleich zu Regionen mit raschem, exponenziellem Wachstum abzuwenden. Andererseits übersteigt derzeit die Nachfrage das Angebot nicht. Klar ist, dass die EU eine wettbewerbsfähige Luftverkehrsbranche benötigt. Es wurden jede Menge Maßnahmen auf EU-Ebene gesetzt, etwa hinsichtlich besserer Nutzung der Zeitfenster, sog. Slots. In der Vergangenheit wurde in diesem Zusammenhang eine Reihe von Übereinkommen mit Drittländern geschlossen. Im Hinblick auf die Internationale Zivilluftfahrt-Organisation (ICAO) mag eine bessere EU-interne Koordination sinnvoll sein, deren Ausgestaltung muss indes den Mitgliedstaaten selbst überlassen bleiben. In diesem Sinne kann ich dem Bericht nicht zustimmen.

  Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), par écrit. – Je suis favorable à ce rapport porté par mon collègue M-J Marinescu parce qu’il émet des propositions pour que des progrès rapides soient possibles notamment dans l’accueil et la sécurité des voyageurs aériens. Pour que l’Union européenne conserve son rôle central en tant que nœud de mobilité internationale, nous devons augmenter rapidement la capacité de nos aéroports européens pour conserver notre compétitivité et notre expertise dans ce domaine. Il faut que nous soyons dans une démarche d’unification de notre ciel européen par une gestion unique du trafic aérien pour renforcer son efficacité et sa sécurité.

  Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė (PPE), raštu. − ES išorės politika aviacijos srityje ir šioje srityje daromi susitarimai labai svarbūs atviros oro erdvės kūrimui, taigi – ir tiesesniems maršrutams bei trumpesniems skrydžiams. Tai labai svarbu aplinkos požiūriu. Tačiau, siekiant didesnio aplinkos kokybės gerinimo, būtina siekti, jog aukšti aplinkos apsaugos standartai būtų diegiami ir trečiosiose valstybėse, todėl šie klausimai taip pat turėtų būti įtraukiami į ES išorės politikos aviacijos srityje turinį.

  Tiziano Motti (PPE), per iscritto. − Ho sostenuto la proposta di risoluzione del Parlamento europeo inerente alla politica estera dell'Unione in materia di aviazione. Tale settore nonostante i rapidi progressi e il ruolo fondamentale che svolge nell'economia europea non ha ancora raggiunto gli obiettivi stabiliti nell'agenda redatta nel 2005 dalla Commissione. È pertanto necessario sostenere l'industria dell'aviazione europea sul mercato mondiale attraverso meccanismi che implementino una politica estera consolidata e rafforzata.

  Rolandas Paksas (EFD), raštu. − Manau, kad reikalinga ambicingesnė ES išorės politika aviacijos srityje. Aviacija atlieka esminį vaidmenį ekonomikos ir pramonės sektoriuose. Atsižvelgiant į naujus ekonominius iššūkius bei į krizės sukeltus neigiamus padarinius, būtina persvarstyti esamą aviacijos politiką, kad šis sektorius būtų pajėgus konkuruoti pasaulinėje rinkoje bei galėtų tinkamai atlaikyti naujus iššūkius. Pažymėtina, kad Europos vežėjus ekonomikos nuosmukis palietė ypač smarkiai. Jie nėra tinkamai apsaugoti nuo nesąžiningos konkurencijos. Visų pirma, būtina nuosekli bendros išorės politikos aviacijos srityje vystymo strategija, kuri sukurtų Europos vartotojams ir ES pramonei pridėtinę vertę. Mes turime ryžtingiau įgyvendinti reformas, kad išlaikytume stiprią ir konkurencingą aviacijos pramonę.

  Pier Antonio Panzeri (S&D), per iscritto. − Esprimo voto favorevole riguardo la proposta di risoluzione del Parlamento europeo sulla politica estera dell'UE in materia di aviazione. L'aviazione svolge un ruolo fondamentale nell'economia europea, contribuendo per 365 miliardi di euro al PIL europeo. Essendo l'aviazione un settore in rapida crescita dell'economia, sia all'interno sia al di fuori dell'Unione, soprattutto in Asia e Medio Oriente, è ora più che mai necessario compiere rapidi progressi in questo settore. L'Unione europea deve urgentemente aumentare le proprie capacità aeroportuali per evitare di perdere competitività rispetto a regioni che stanno conoscendo una rapida crescita esponenziale, considerando che l'aviazione svolge un ruolo importante nel favorire i collegamenti tra le persone e le imprese sia in Europa sia a livello globale. Per questo gli investimenti nelle infrastrutture aeroportuali devono essere considerati seriamente e, strategicamente parlando, l'Unione europea deve salvaguardare un'industria dell'aviazione competitiva: essendo oggi i mercati dell'aviazione più importanti al di fuori dell'Europa, le industrie dell'UE devono crescere in questi mercati.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − A aviação é atualmente um setor chave da economia europeia. Contribui com 365 mil milhões de euros para o PIB europeu e é responsável por 5,1 milhões de empregos, mas, sete anos após a Comunicação da Comissão Desenvolver a agenda da política externa comunitária no setor da aviação, a UE ainda não atingiu os seus objetivos. É tempo de progredir rapidamente no setor da aviação europeia. Nestes termos, votei favoravelmente o presente relatório que apela a uma abordagem da União mais coordenada e mais ambiciosa, a fim de criar uma concorrência leal e aberta, uma vez que, apesar do trabalho realizado nos últimos sete anos, ainda não foi adotada uma política externa abrangente no setor da aviação. Concordo igualmente com a proposta de convergência regulamentar europeia como elemento fundamental para uma posição europeia forte no mercado mundial, determinante para as relações com os países terceiros.

  Aldo Patriciello (PPE), per iscritto. − Onorevoli colleghi, le fondazioni rivestono un ruolo di primo piano nell'Unione europea, poiché svolgono un ruolo cruciale nel'istruzione, nella ricerca, nei servizi sociali, la sanità, la protezione ambientale, la promozione dei talenti, i giovani e lo sport, l'arte e la cultura.

Concordo con il relatore sull'importanza della durata e della sostenibilità della fondazione europea, pertanto ho espresso il mio voto in favore alla proposta.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), por escrito. − Considerando que o setor da aviação representa 2,4 % do PIB da União, garantindo emprego a mais de 5 milhões de trabalhadores, e considerando ainda que a política externa contribui determinantemente para a competitividade das transportadoras da União, a Comissão é chamada a promover um enquadramento jurídico internacional que impulsione a vitalidade económica do setor, criando oportunidades e eliminando obstáculos às companhias aéreas. Isto, claro, sem prejuízo das normas laborais e ambientais, dos direitos dos passageiros e do respeito pela regulamentação europeia. As relações no domínio da aviação dos diferentes Estados-Membros da União com os demais países devem ser gizadas de modo a proteger os interesses comunitários, ajudando a consolidar a posição da indústria da União no competitivo mercado mundial. Por conseguinte, o relator concluiu que o crescimento contínuo do setor da aviação, assim como a necessidade de gerir os efeitos deste crescimento, dependem da política externa comum aos Estados-Membros que é delineada no presente relatório e que contou com o meu apoio.

  Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE), per iscritto. − Approvo la proposta di risoluzione del Parlamento Europeo in materia di aviazione. Dal momento che l'aviazione costituisce una risorsa importante per il mercato europeo, è bene incentivarne lo sviluppo. Se la priorità è di rendere il settore maggiormente competitivo, occorre innanzitutto creare il giusto equilibrio tra la tendenza del mercato unico alla liberalizzazione degli scambi e la necessità di preservare la legislazione comunitaria. Concordo con l'idea che i vettori aerei low-cost debbano essere utilizzati come un modello di rafforzamento, invece che come una minaccia competitiva: un numero sempre crescente di consumatori, difatti, sceglie questa opzione per effettuare spostamenti all'interno e al di fuori dello spazio comunitario. Supportare le compagnie aeree nelle iniziative low-cost a fianco di quelle che promuovono solo voli, per così dire, "classici" significa rispondere alla domanda degli utenti e al contempo arricchire e consolidare il mercato. Quanto alla responsabilità comune degli Stati membri e della Commissione affinché ottengano una rappresentanza coordinata in seno alla Organizzazione internazionale per l'aviazione civile (ICAO), ritengo sia un buon punto di partenza per lanciare il settore dell'aviazione su scala internazionale assicurando allo stesso una protezione economica e giuridica.

  Marc Tarabella (S&D), par écrit. – L'aviation est devenue un secteur-clé de l'économie européenne. Elle pèse 365 milliards d'euros dans le PIB de l'Union et emploie 5,1 millions de personnes. Toutefois, sept ans après la publication de la communication de la Commission sur le développement de l'agenda de la politique extérieure de l'aviation de la Communauté, beaucoup de chemin reste à parcourir. Le moment est venu d'accomplir des progrès rapides dans le domaine de l'aviation européenne. De nouveaux défis économiques sont lancés depuis des régions du monde où une législation beaucoup plus permissive autorise la construction d'énormes aéroports modernes, qui détournent une bonne partie des voyageurs des plateformes aéroportuaires européennes.

L'Union européenne a besoin de toute urgence d'accroître la capacité de ses aéroports afin de ne pas risquer de devenir moins compétitive que d'autres régions qui connaissent une croissance exponentielle fulgurante (nous pensons notamment à la région Asie-Pacifique, au Moyen-Orient et à l'Amérique du Sud). Il convient de considérer sérieusement des investissements dans les infrastructures aéroportuaires, même si la demande n'excède pas encore l'offre. Par ailleurs, les capacités actuelles doivent être exploitées de manière optimale (il faut notamment améliorer la gestion des créneaux horaires et recourir davantage aux aéroports régionaux pour limiter les encombrements).

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. − A política externa no setor da aviação reveste-se da maior importância para a União Europeia, contribuindo com 365 mil milhões de euros para o PIB europeu e representando 5,1 milhões de emprego. Contudo, este setor enfrenta enormes desafios, nomeadamente o aparecimento de aeroportos centrais estratégicos fora do espaço europeu, o desinvestimento nas infraestruturas aeroportuárias e a perda de competitividade da indústria aérea. Por isso, é necessário avançar, a nível interno, com o Céu Único Europeu, em particular com os blocos de espaço aéreo funcionais e a aplicação do SES, SESAR e o GNSS. A nível externo, é preciso avançar com acordos aéreos com regiões como o Médio Oriente, a Ásia e a América Latina, sem deixar para trás as normas europeias nas questões ambientais, laborais e regulamentares, bem como os direitos dos passageiros. A política externa no setor da aviação é, sem dúvida, uma mais-valia para as empresas e os cidadãos europeus.

  Marie-Christine Vergiat (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – J'ai fait le choix de voter contre la résolution sur la politique extérieure de l'Union européenne dans le domaine de l'aviation. Cette résolution met en évidence l'importance du secteur de l'aviation dans l'économie européenne. En effet, ce secteur emploie plus de 5.1 millions de personnes. Ce secteur a effectivement fait l'objet de nombreux changements depuis 2005. Mais, derrière les «progrès» soulignés par le rapport, la triste réalité est la mise en place d’une concurrence toujours plus sauvage qui se développe au niveau mondial mais aussi entre acteurs européens. L'aviation européenne fait effectivement face à nombre de nouveaux concurrents situés des régions de l’Asie-Pacifique, du Moyen-Orient et de l'Amérique du Sud mais elle se heurte à de plus en plus d’acteurs "low cost" aux pratiques sociales et commerciales honteuses qui, grâce à cela, gagnent toujours plus de terrain. Les résultats sont inquiétants: des conditions de travail dégradées, une prise en compte de la sécurité des passagers et du personnel navigant qui s'étiole... En résumé, aucun garde-fou face à la libéralisation de plus en plus débridée du secteur, c’est donc un vote contre sans états d’âme

  Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE), in writing. − I lent my support to ‘the EU’s External Aviation Policy – Addressing future challenges (2012/2299(INI))’. As my colleagues so accurately stated in the report, this is not an easy undertaking but it will provide for the establishment of a brighter future for EU aviation. The importance of this industry to the EU cannot be understated as the present statistics show that aviation ‘contributes EUR 365 billion to European GDP and supports 5.1 million jobs’. That being said, it is vital that we make the necessary expansions and changes to accommodate the needs of not only the EU economy but also of passengers that travel worldwide. To do so I support the recommendation made by the rapporteur who stressed the importance of ‘developing and implementing EU mechanisms such as SES, SESAR, EASA and GNSS. These tools, created to support the internal market, will by consequence help the EU in its external aviation policy. The completion of these mechanisms will consolidate the position of the European industry, leaving it stronger to face the new competitive challenges’.

  Angelika Werthmann (ALDE), schriftlich. − Dieser Bericht behandelt die EU-Luftfahrtaußenpolitik. Die Luftfahrt ist eine wichtige Branche und bietet 5,1 Millionen Arbeitsplätze. Investitionen in Flughafeninfrastruktur müssen ernst genommen werden und Kapazität muss effizient genutzt werden. „Klassische“ Luftfahrtunternehmen und Billigfluglinien könnten sich ergänzen und so Herausforderungen gemeinsam meistern. Die Schaffung und Umsetzung von EU-Mechanismen wie dem einheitlichen Luftraum sind von großer Bedeutung. Die EU muss die europäischen Interessen und Standards bei Arbeits- und Umweltnormen, Fluggastrechten und der Einhaltung europäischer Vorschriften verteidigen. Eine engere Koordinierung innerhalb der EU durch Stärkung europäischer Luftfahrtgesellschaften und europäischer Drehkreuze und auf internationaler Ebene ist notwendig.

  Iva Zanicchi (PPE), per iscritto. − L'aviazione svolge un ruolo fondamentale nell'economia europea contribuendo per 365 miliardi di euro al PIL europeo: purtroppo, però, a sette anni di distanza dalla comunicazione della Commissione sullo sviluppo dell'agenda per la politica estera comunitaria in materia di aviazione, gli obiettivi non sono ancora stati raggiunti.

È dunque necessario compiere rapidi progressi nel settore dell'aviazione: l'Unione europea deve urgentemente aumentare le proprie capacità aeroportuali per evitare di perdere competitività rispetto a regioni che stanno conoscendo una rapida crescita economica.

Per queste ragioni ho espresso il mio supporto alla relazione dell'onorevole Marinescu, che accoglie con favore la creazione e l'attuazione di meccanismi volti a consolidare la posizione dell'aviazione europea, rendendola più forte e competitiva di fronte alle nuove sfide.

  Roberts Zīle (ECR), rakstiski. − Parlamenta rezolūcija par ES ārējo aviācijas politiku ir atbalstāma, jo ieskicē galvenos izaicinājumus, ar ko saskaras ES aviācijas nozare. Savienības aviokompānijas pasaules aviācijas tirgū saskaras ar ārkārtīgi lielu konkurenci, tāpēc ir svarīgi veidot vienotu un spēcīgu ES ārējo aviācijas politiku. Pievienojos rezolūcijā paustajai pozīcijai, ka ārējā aviācijas politikā attiecībā uz trešajām valstīm būtu pilnībā jāievēro savstarpīguma, tostarp attiecībā uz tirgus pieejamību, atvērtuma un godīgas konkurences principi, nodrošinot vienlīdzīgus konkurences nosacījumus, kas dotu labumu gan patērētājiem (t. i. pasažieriem), gan avikompānijām. Īpaši vēlos uzsvērt rezolūcijā pausto par situāciju, ka Krievija atsakās ievērot vienošanos par Sibīrijas pārlidojuma nodevu piemērošanas pakāpenisku izbeigšanu, un tāpēc — tā kā šīs nelikumīgās tranzīta nodevas piemērošana Savienības pārvadātājiem ilgtermiņā rada diskriminējošus nosacījumus — ES būtu jāveic atbildes pasākumi, aizliedzot vai ierobežojot tranzītu tās gaisa telpā vai veicot jebkādus pasākumus saistībā ar Krievijas aviokompāniju ES gaisa telpas izmantošanu, lai motivētu Krieviju atcelt minētās nodevas, kas ir nelikumīgas, jo ir pretrunā starptautiskajiem nolīgumiem. Rezolūcija aicina Komisiju un Padomi izvērtēt iespējamos pasākumus Krievijas un ES savstarpīguma nodrošināšanai saistībā ar gaisa telpas izmantošanu. Šis savstarpīguma princips attiecībā uz Krievijas tirgu Latvijai un pārējām Baltijas valstīm ir svarīgs arī citās transporta nozarēs, jo īpaši dzelzceļa jomā.

  Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − O relatório destaca os progressos realizados na criação de um mercado regional único e aberto na UE e defende uma abordagem comum da UE em relação à sua política externa no setor da aviação. O objetivo, o de sempre: potenciar o mercado único. Ou seja, este relatório desfia o cardápio dos interesses das multinacionais europeias do setor da aviação e aponta o caminho para o reforço da concentração monopolista em curso no setor à escala europeia, propiciando melhores condições a esses monopólios na disputa com companhias de outras regiões do globo. Votámos contra.

11.5. Δραστηριότητες των οργανισμών εξαγωγικών πιστώσεων των κρατών μελών (A7-0193/2013 - Yannick Jadot)

Dichiarazioni di voto orali

  Adam Bielan (ECR). - Panie Przewodniczący! Kredyty eksportowe są jednym z istotnych mechanizmów wspomagania wymiany handlowej, szczególnie w okresie kryzysu. Banki, udzielając kredytu zagranicznemu nabywcy, przekazują fundusze rodzimym eksporterom, wspierając w ten sposób gospodarkę własnego kraju. To ważne, by coroczne sprawozdanie uwzględniało ocenę zgodności projektów wspieranych przez agencje z międzynarodowymi regulacjami w zakresie takich kredytów oraz zasadami działań zewnętrznych Unii. Ciekawie wygląda wobec powyższego kierowana do Rady i Komisji propozycja wypracowania wspólnie z europejską dyplomacją metodologii składania wnikliwych sprawozdań, których jakość jest obecnie zdecydowanie zbyt niska. Powinno to prowadzić do wzrostu przejrzystości udzielania kredytów. Na wsparcie zasługuje także postulat przyjęcia przez kraje OECD nowych zasad dotyczących kredytów eksportowych oraz wysokich standardów zapewniających jednakowe warunki uczciwej konkurencji działalności agencji kredytowych.

  Charles Tannock (ECR). - Mr President, in 2012-13 British businesses received GBP 4.3 billion worth of support from the UK Government through UK export finance. I am therefore a strong believer that Member States’ export credit agencies are vital in fostering the domestic export industry and I am wholly supportive of the Commission’s efforts in establishing a framework for the annual reporting of EU Member States on the activities of their ECAs. Furthermore, these efforts are fundamental to increased transparency and comparability across all the Member States.

ECAs are a hugely important instrument for enhancing trade across Europe and internationally. Therefore I commend the report’s desire for increased monitoring of these agencies so as to evaluate, maximise and learn from ongoing ECA projects and exchange experiences. Increasing exports from Britain are a key driver of economic growth and job creation and this is an area which the EU should be focused on and which can bring real, true added value to the table.

  Daniel Hannan (ECR). - Mr President, one of the things that we are often told is that we need to be in the European Union in order to have a seat at the table. Something that struck me in the years that I have been doing this job is how many of these EU directives and regulations are there to give effect to guidelines or rules that come from an even higher, more international level, this one being a very good example. This report is about implementing an OECD agreement. It could have equally have been an International Labour Organization agreement or a UN convention. What happens in practice is that the European Union has one seat at the table and then Norway and Switzerland and the other independent countries have their own seats so in fact, far from getting a seat at the table, the Member States are surrendering their seat at the table where the law is actually made in exchange for a voice over how to implement it when it has come down.

Since we did not get an explanation of the vote I would like to use my last five seconds to say something about the Roth-Behrendt report. It is extraordinary when we are raising taxes and cutting civil service pay around Europe that our own employees are exempt from both of those things, that their salaries keep rising and that they pay no tax. We are in a pre-revolutionary, pre-1789 situation where decision-makers are immune from the consequences of their own decisions.

Dichiarazioni di voto scritte

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Aprovo o presente relatório, tendo em conta que o relatório da Comissão indica claramente a escala e importância das atividades de crédito à exportação. A exposição declarada decorrente das atividades das agências de crédito à exportação dos Estados-Membros durante 2011 ascendeu a mais de 250 mil milhões de euros, incluindo 260 transações com implicações ambientais elevadas notificadas. Tal como já declarou aquando do processo legislativo do Regulamento n.º 1233/2011, o relator valoriza o facto de os Estados-Membros disporem de um instrumento assim, que contribui para o comércio e as oportunidades de negócios para empresas europeias. Por outro lado, os relatórios anuais dos Estados-Membros, assim como a sua avaliação por parte da Comissão, estão longe de satisfazer a intenção do Parlamento de conseguir fazer essa avaliação. Tal é o caso, em especial, no que diz respeito à informação sobre os elementos não financeiros do anexo I, como o tratamento dos riscos ambientais no cálculo dos prémios das agências de crédito à exportação e a compatibilidade com os objetivos da política externa da União.

  Elena Oana Antonescu (PPE), în scris. − Raportul Comisiei Europene cu privire la activităţile agenţiilor de credit la export ale statelor membre reprezintă un instrument util pentru instituţiile europene, statele membre şi actorii economici înşişi, în egală măsură. Mai mult, el poate contribui la dezvoltarea economică a Uniunii Europene într-un context în care depăşirea efectelor recesiunii economice prelungite este imperativă. În acelaşi timp însă, datele extrem de importante cuprinse în acest document ridică o altă problemă pentru Uniunea Europeană. Atât dezvoltarea economică, precum şi conturarea Uniunii ca actor politic global reclamă o coordonare mai intensă a activităţilor comerciale cu politica externă. Realizarea unei cooperări mai eficiente a grupului de lucru al Consiliului în sectorul creditelor la export, a Comisiei şi a Serviciului European de Acţiune Externă este benefică pentru toţi actorii implicaţi.

  Zigmantas Balčytis (S&D), raštu. − Pritariau šiai rezoliucijai. 2011 m. Parlamentas ir Taryba susitarė į ES teisę perkelti 2005 m. Ekonominio bendradarbiavimo ir plėtros organizacijos (EBPO) susitarimą dėl veiklos eksporto kreditų srityje. Valstybės narės, rengdamos, vystydamos ir įgyvendindamos savo nacionalines eksporto kreditų sistemas ir prižiūrėdamos, kaip vykdoma veikla oficialiai remiamų eksporto kreditų srityje, turėtų vadovautis Sąjungos bendrosiomis išorės veiksmų nuostatomis, pvz., susijusiomis su demokratijos įtvirtinimu, pagarba žmogaus teisėms ir nuoseklia vystymosi politika, taip pat kova su klimato kaita. Buvo sutarta, kad, mainais į didesnį valstybių narių eksporto kreditų srityje vykdomos veiklos skaidrumą ES lygmeniu, Komisija gali priimti deleguotąjį aktą, kad būtų įgyvendinami būsimi EBPO susitarimai. Vienas iš svarbiausių reikalavimų didesnio skaidrumo užtikrinimui yra įpareigojimas valstybėms narėms teikti Komisijai metines ataskaitas. Ataskaitose turi būti teikiam informacija apie turtą ir įsipareigojimus, sumokėtas išmokas ir kompensacijas, naujus įsipareigojimus, pozicijas ir priemokas, taip pat apie neapibrėžtus įsipareigojimus, kurie atsirastų vykdant veiklą, susijusią su oficialiai remiamais eksporto kreditais. Valstybėms narėms pateiktus ataskaitas, o Komisijai jas įvertinus ir pateiktus vertinimo ataskaitą matyti, kad beveik neįmanoma įvertinti pateiktų duomenų. Pritariu Europos Parlamento raginimui užtikrinti tinkamą veiklos ataskaitų teikimo ir Komisijos atliekamo šių ataskaitų vertinimo kokybę.

  Elena Băsescu (PPE), în scris. − Am votat în favoarea raportului deoarece garantarea şi asigurarea exporturilor reprezintă un instrument foarte util în contextul dificultăţilor cu care se confruntă foarte multe companii europene. Criza a diminuat exporturile în foarte multe state europene, iar, în aceeaşi măsură, statele importatoare s-au confruntat cu dificultăţi în plata la timp a produselor care intrau în ţară. După cum se ştie, agenţiile pentru garantarea exporturilor deţin o parte importantă a datoriei statelor în curs de dezvoltare. De aceea, consider că rolul lor a devenit tot mai semnificativ la nivel european. Însă costurile pentru garantarea sau asigurarea produselor exportate trebuie să menţină competitivitatea lor, iar transparenţa sectorului trebuie să crească în continuare. De aceea, avem nevoie de o raportare cât mai exactă din partea statelor membre în ceea ce priveşte activitatea agenţiilor.

  Regina Bastos (PPE), por escrito. − Em 2011, o Parlamento e o Conselho decidiram, de comum acordo, transpor para o direito comunitário o convénio da OCDE de 2005 sobre atividades de crédito à exportação. O acordo estabelecido previu que as futuras versões das disposições da OCDE seriam transpostas pela Comissão através de atos delegados, devendo em contrapartida ser assegurada a transparência redobrada das atividades de crédito à exportação dos Estados-Membros a nível da União Europeia. O regulamento n.º 1233/2001, que resulta deste processo, prevê um dever de informação, por parte da Comissão, ao Parlamento sobre as negociações empreendidas, a fim de estabelecer normas globais no domínio dos créditos à exportação que beneficiem de apoio oficial. Solicita-se à Comissão que faculte orientações aos Estados-Membros, para que, nos próximos relatórios anuais, a Comissão seja realmente capaz de fornecer ao Parlamento uma avaliação em que consiga declarar se as atividades de crédito à exportação dos Estados-Membros são compatíveis com os objetivos da ação externa da UE. Pelo exposto, apoiei o presente relatório.

  Nora Berra (PPE), par écrit. – L'objectif des crédits à l'exportation est de soutenir le commerce et les investissements des entreprises européennes dans le domaine du commerce international. Le Parlement, en 2010, dans le cadre de la mise à jour dans la législation de l’UE des dispositions de l’OCDE relatives aux crédits à l’exportation, a négocié que les obligations de déclaration soient plus strictes. Ces dernières ont été mises en œuvre pour la première fois en 2011. Dans ce rapport d’initiative, la commission INTA, dont je suis membre, se réjouit des efforts mis en œuvre pour améliorer et garantir la transparence. Il est également à souligner l’action de certains Etats membres qui tendent à rendre compte de manière claire et transparente de leur respect de certains objectifs de l’action extérieure de l’Union européenne. A la lumière des éléments disponibles, je me suis prononcée en faveur de ce rapport d’initiative.

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), per iscritto. − Ho sostenuto col mio voto la relazione dell'onorevole Jadot sulle agenzie di credito all'esportazione. Il testo molto equilibrato descrive in modo molto chiaro e dettagliato la situazione delle agenzie nazionali di credito all'esportazione, così come previsto dal regolamento (UE) n. 1233/2011.

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D), raštu. − Balsavau dėl šio pranešimo, kadangi yra būtina užtikrinti motorinių transporto priemonių techninę apžiūrą ir užtikrinti jos taikymą, siekiant pagerinti kelių eismo saugą ir aplinkos apsaugą. Reikėtų pažymėti, kad norint, jog transporto priemonę būtų leista pateikti rinkai, ji turi atitikti taikomus tipo arba individualaus patvirtinimo reikalavimus, kuriais garantuojamas optimalus saugos ir aplinkosaugos standartų lygis. Ši registracija yra oficialus leidimas naudoti transporto priemonę viešuosiuose keliuose ir ja užtikrinama, kad būtų laikomasi reikalavimų, kurių taikymo įvairioms transporto priemonėms pradžios terminai yra skirtingi. Transporto priemonės registracijos procedūros nuostatos turėtų būti pradedamos taikyti panašiai visose valstybėse narėse, siekiant užtikrinti, kad tiesioginį pavojų eismo saugai keliančios transporto priemonės nebūtų naudojamos keliuose. Todėl pritarčiau Komisijos pasiūlymui sumažinti registracijos liudijimų matmenis ir juose padaryti įrašus apie techninę apžiūrą, kad vairuotojams reikėtų su savimi vežiotis mažiau dokumentų. Taip pat manau, jog transporto priemonės savininkai turėtų turėti galimybę patys panaikinti transporto priemonės registraciją, kad jiems nebūtų taikoma atsakomybė.

  Philippe Boulland (PPE), par écrit. – Les crédits à l'exportation permettent de soutenir le commerce et les investissements des entreprises européennes dans le domaine du commerce international. Les règles en termes de déclarations ont été renforcées en 2011; la Commission nous a donc présenté les conclusions de ses observations pour 2012. J'ai voté en faveur de ce rapport afin de saluer les efforts de la Commission pour accroître la transparence au niveau de l'UE et pour sa coopération avec les autres organes (groupe de travail du Conseil et SEAE) dans la mise en place d'une méthode d'information sérieuse selon les principes directeurs de l'OCDE.

  Maria Da Graça Carvalho (PPE), por escrito. − Os créditos à exportação são um instrumento importante para apoiar o comércio e os investimentos das empresas europeias no domínio do comércio internacional. Concordo com os elementos sugeridos a constar nos relatórios anuais das agências nacionais.

  Lara Comi (PPE), per iscritto. − Di questi tempi, l'apertura ai mercati internazionali è una necessità per moltissime imprese, nonché un'auspicabile atteggiamento anche per quelle che guardano principalmente al mercato interno. Oltre al mercato potenziale più ampio, c'è una concorrenza più formativa con un effetto di maggiore efficienza su tutto il processo produttivo. Tuttavia, il commercio internazionale è ormai competenza esclusiva dell'Unione Europea, mentre le agenzie per il credito all'esportazione continuano ad essere strumenti nazionali di promozione commerciale. Ho votato a favore di questa relazione per premiare innanzitutto lo spirito di armonizzazione che essa sottintende. Ben venga la facilitazione della diffusione delle migliori pratiche, purché nel quadro delle regole stabilite.

  Rachida Dati (PPE), par écrit. – Le crédit à l'exportation, c'est un outil clef pour permettre à nos entreprises de se développer à l'international. Il est important de signaler cependant que nous ne disposons pas de l'ensemble des informations pertinentes sur cette question, ce qui est regrettable: un tel levier de croissance et de rayonnement pour nos entreprises ne doit pas rester dans l'obscurité, il faut pouvoir l'évaluer pour en tirer tous les bénéfices.

  Christine De Veyrac (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai voté en faveur de ce texte car il soutient les crédits à l'exportation, pierre angulaire du commerce et des investissements européens, tout en assurant un plus grand contrôle de ceux-ci. Le texte insiste sur la nécessité de la transparence quant à ces crédits à l'exportation, ce qui permettra de mieux contrôler ces flux financiers. Le texte permet une clarification des pratiques et une plus grande coopération économique entre les Etats-membres.

  Diogo Feio (PPE), por escrito. − Face à retração das economias europeias, é cada vez mais evidente a necessidade de as empresas europeias diversificarem os seus mercados e não se aterem às fronteiras da União. Para que tal se verifique, mostra-se muitas vezes necessária a concessão de crédito às mesmas para que adquiram ou reforcem a sua capacidade exportadora. Não obstante, há que atentar na necessidade de esta facilitação respeitar a legislação europeia e de não ser utilizada para fins que ponham em causa direitos e liberdades de populações de Estados terceiros. Faço votos para que as empresas dêem bom uso ao crédito recebido e que esta ajuda reforce a capacidade exportadora europeia promovendo, desta forma, a criação de emprego e o robustecimento das relações comerciais com outras partes do mundo.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − A crise económica que atravessamos exige cada vez mais apoios financeiros às pequenas e médias empresas, visto constituírem a espinha dorsal da economia da União Europeia. Numa situação em que as economias nacionais estagnam – para não dizermos regridem – o caminho da exportação é uma das poucas saídas que temos para conseguir o tão almejado crescimento económico e a criação de emprego. É, pois, essencial criar linhas de financiamento e de apoio às empresas exportadoras que garantam a máxima transparência no seu funcionamento. Votei favoravelmente o relatório elaborado pelo colega Yannick Jadot sobre o primeiro relatório anual da Comissão ao Parlamento Europeu relativamente às atividades das agências de crédito à exportação dos Estados-Membros, porque é fundamental que o Parlamento tenha conhecimento do modo como os dinheiros públicos são aplicados, sobretudo após a entrada em vigor do Tratado de Lisboa. Saúdo, por isso, o empenho da Comissão em levar a cabo políticas externas sobre transações financeiras de acordo com as recomendações contidas neste relatório e que vão de encontro às orientações da Organização para a Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Económico (OCDE).

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − O Regulamento n.º 1233/2011 tem como objetivo melhorar a transparência das agências de crédito à exportação (ACE), requerendo que os Estados-Membros apresentem relatórios anuais das ACE com os seguintes elementos: informações sobre os ativos e passivos, pedidos de pagamento liquidados e recuperações, novos compromissos, exposições e prémios cobrados, bem como sobre os passivos contingentes susceptíveis de decorrer dos créditos à exportação que beneficiam de apoio oficial; informações sobre a forma como os riscos ambientais, que podem acarretar outros riscos relevantes, são tidos em conta nos créditos à exportação que beneficiam de apoio oficial; informações sobre uma avaliação no que diz respeito à compatibilidade das agências de crédito à exportação com os objetivos e obrigações da UE. O relator assinala alguma falta de transparência nos relatórios que têm sido conhecidos e reclama melhorias a esse nível, incrementando o conteúdo das informações prestadas sobre as ACE, de forma a poder avaliar mais facilmente o seu impacto em diversas áreas. São, no essencial, preocupações que se justificam.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − V roku 2011 Parlament a Rada dospeli k dohode vo veci transpozícií dohody OECD z roku 2005 o činnostiach v oblasti vývozných úverov do právnych predpisov EÚ. Bola prijatá dohoda, že Komisii sa udelí právomoc prijímať delegované akty týkajúce sa transpozície budúcich verzií dohôd OECD výmenou za zvýšenú transparentnosť činností členských štátov v oblasti vývozných úverov na úrovni EÚ. Predkladaná správa zahŕňa sadu odporúčaní pre budúce podávanie správ. Súčasne je dôležité snažiť sa o dosiahnutie súladu činností členských štátov v oblasti vývozných úverov s cieľmi EÚ v oblasti vonkajšej činnosti.

  Elisabetta Gardini (PPE), per iscritto. − È evidente l’impegno di alcuni Stati membri (Italia, Belgio, Paesi Bassi e Danimarca) su questo complesso argomento.

Tuttavia, dobbiamo riconoscere che non esiste ancora alcuna metodologia consolidata per elaborare relazioni su questioni di carattere non finanziario, e gli Stati membri, nonché le istituzioni europee come la Banca europea per gli investimenti, devono ancora rispettare gli obblighi del trattato di Lisbona per dimostrare la loro conformità con gli obiettivi dell'azione esterna dell'Unione.

Pertanto, per favorire relazioni migliori, è auspicabile un ulteriore sforzo in maniera tale da soddisfare meglio le nostre aspettative per monitorare il lavoro delle ACE.

  Elisabetta Gardini (PPE), per iscritto. − E’ evidente l’impegno di alcuni Stati membri (Italia, Belgio, Paesi Bassi e Danimarca) su questo complesso argomento. Tuttavia, dobbiamo riconoscere che non esiste ancora alcuna metodologia consolidata per elaborare relazioni su questioni di carattere non finanziario, e gli Stati membri, nonché le istituzioni europee come la Banca europea per gli investimenti, devono ancora rispettare gli obblighi del trattato di Lisbona per dimostrare la loro conformità con gli obiettivi dell'azione esterna dell'Unione. Pertanto, per favorire relazioni migliori, è auspicabile un’ulteriore iniziativa in maniera, tale da soddisfare meglio le nostre aspettative per monitorare il lavoro delle ACE.

  Jim Higgins (PPE), in writing. − I welcome the Commission’s efforts to establish a framework for annual reporting by Member States on their export credit activities in order to step up transparency at EU level. The main objective of reporting on the activities of Member States’ export credit agencies (ECAs) is to monitor the compliance of these ECAs with the international disciplines applicable to export credits and with obligations laid down in the Treaty on the European Union (TEU), and in particular its Articles 3 and 21 which define the principles governing the Union’s relations with the rest of the world, as well as the guiding principles of the Union’s action on the international stage.

  Juozas Imbrasas (EFD), raštu. − 2011 m. Parlamentas ir Taryba susitarė į ES teisę perkelti 2005 m. Ekonominio bendradarbiavimo ir plėtros organizacijos (EBPO) susitarimą dėl veiklos eksporto kreditų srityje. Reglamento (ES) Nr. 1233/2011 I priede, kuriame EK įpareigojama teikti EP metines vykdytų derybų, siekiant nustatyti visuotinius standartus oficialiai remiamų eksporto kreditų srityje, ataskaitas. Pirmasis ataskaitinis laikotarpis apima 2011 m., kurio ataskaitoje buvo įvertintos 20 (iš 27) valstybių narių veikla minėtoje srityje. Šis dokumentas perduotas jį priskiriant riboto naudojimo dokumentų kategorijai ir nėra prieinamas visuomenės atstovams. Taip pat ir 2011–2012 metų ataskaita. Pranešėjas ginčija galiojantį apribojimą remdamasis neįgyvendintu skaidrumu eksporto kreditų srityje. Valstybių narių metinės ataskaitos ir Komisijos atliktas šių ataskaitų vertimas beveik neatitinka Parlamento užmojo gebėti įvertinti šią atitiktį, nes kol kas nėra susitarta dėl metodikos vertinant, ypač apie nefinansinius klausimus, tokius kaip poveikis aplinkai ir pan. Todėl, norint padėti gerinti ataskaitų teikimo kokybę, valstybėms narėms ir Komisijai pateikiamos rekomendacijos, kaip parengti kitą metinę ataskaitą, kuri geriau atitiktų mūsų lūkesčius stebėti eksporto kreditų agentūrų veiklą. Balsavau už šį pasiūlymą, nes yra būtina parengti valstybėms narėms skirtas gaires, kad kitose metinėse ataskaitose Komisija Parlamentui iš tiesų galėtų pateikti vertinimą ar valstybių narių veikla eksporto kreditų srityje atitinka ES išorės veiksmų tikslus.

  Philippe Juvin (PPE), par écrit. – J'ai soutenu le rapport d'initiative de mon collègue Yannick Jadot. Ce rapport portait sur la mise en œuvre des nouvelles obligations de déclaration concernant les crédits à l'exportation (instrument qui permet de soutenir le commerce et les investissements des entreprises européennes dans le domaine du commerce international). Il rappelait notamment que l'objectif principal de l'obligation de faire rapport sur les activités des organismes de crédit à l'exportation est de vérifier qu'ils respectent les règles applicables aux crédits à l'exportation et les obligations imposées par le Traité sur l'Union européenne. Il soulignait en outre l'effort déployé pour accroitre la transparence au niveau de l'UE. Il s'agissait d'un vote unique et ce rapport a été adopté par 670 voix pour, 27 contre et 15 abstentions. Je m'en félicite.

  Giovanni La Via (PPE), per iscritto. − La relazione della Commissione ha indicato in maniera chiara il ruolo e l’importanza delle Agenzie per il Credito all’Esportazione (ACE). Tuttavia, l’esposizione delle attività delle ACE dei singoli Stati membri durante il 2011 ammontava a circa 250 miliardi di euro, comprensivi delle 260 segnalazioni di operazioni con elevate ricadute ambientali. Il sistema delle ACE si conferma positivo e utile come strumento per migliorare le opportunità commerciali e imprenditoriali delle imprese europee e, in questa direzione, va ulteriormente rafforzato e integrato con gli altri strumenti adottati nello stesso ambito dall’UE.

  Constance Le Grip (PPE), par écrit. – Je me suis prononcée en faveur du rapport concernant les organismes de crédit à l'exportation des États membres. La mission de ces organismes nationaux consiste à évaluer la conformité des crédits à l'exportation par rapport aux règles européennes. Chaque année, ils publient un rapport pour rendre compte des activités des États aux institutions de l'Union. Or, le Parlement constate que ces rapports ne permettent pas de déterminer si les actions des États sont conformes ou non au droit européen. Par conséquent, une méthode commune doit être établie pour encadrer la procédure et le contenu des bilans annuels. De plus, l'évaluation des risques écologiques liés aux exportations des États membres doit faire l'objet d'une attention particulière, en vue d'établir une stratégie globale, pour réduire l'empreinte carbone de nos activités économiques.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I welcome this report which “Underlines the importance – in the context of the scale of Member States’ export credit activities – of Recital 4 of Regulation 1233/2011, calling for compliance with the Union’s general provisions on external action, such as consolidating democracy, respect for human rights and policy coherence for development, and the fight against climate change; recalls, in this sense, the importance of the specific reporting requirements formulated in Annex I of the regulation to ensure that the Commission and Parliament are able to make an assessment of this compliance”.

  Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – Ce rapport se félicite du bilan effectué par la Commission européenne sur l'activité des organismes nationaux de crédit à l'exportation et leur respect des objectifs de l'Union européenne. Il souligne l'importance de ces soutiens publics à l'exportation pour l'économie européenne. Mais il n'aborde pas l'impasse écologique que constitue la priorité donnée aux exportations qui démultiplient l'empreinte écologique des productions. Il reste ainsi silencieux sur l'objectif de relocalisation des activités productives. Pour cela les soutiens publics aux secteurs exportateurs d'intérêt général devraient être combinés avec des mécanismes de protectionnisme solidaire permettant à chaque État ne pas voir son économie détruite par le libre-échange. Ce rapport salue enfin les efforts de l'UE pour mettre la politique commerciale au service des droits de l'homme et de la lutte contre le changement climatique. Il est pourtant silencieux sur la négociation actuelle d'un accord de libre-échange avec les États-Unis qui met justement en péril ces objectifs. Au-delà des bonnes intentions, je ne peux donc voter pour un rapport qui passe à côté d'enjeux aussi importants pour l'écologie et les libertés.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − Em 2011, foi transposto para o direito comunitário o Convénio da OCDE de 2005 sobre atividades de crédito à exportação. O acordo estabelecido no quadro deste processo previu que as futuras versões das disposições da OCDE seriam transpostas pela Comissão através de atos delegados, devendo em contrapartida ser assegurada uma transparência redobrada das atividades de crédito à exportação dos Estados-Membros a nível da UE. É importante que a Comissão estabeleça um quadro de informação anual sobre as atividades de crédito à exportação dos Estados-Membros nos termos do Regulamento n.º 1233/2011, de forma a favorecer a transparência a nível da UE e assim podermos controlar a observância das disciplinas internacionais aplicáveis aos créditos à exportação e das obrigações decorrentes do Tratado UE por parte das agências de crédito à exportação dos Estados-Membros.

  Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − He votado a favor de este informe debido a que es una buena evaluación de la aplicación del primer año del Reglamento (UE) nº 1233/2011 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo sobre las agencias de crédito a la exportación. Según este Reglamento las agencias deben incrementar su trasparencia y rendir cuentas ante la CE, entre otras cosas sobre su cumplimiento del derecho medioambiental, derechos humanos, préstamos sostenibles y normas anti-corrupción de la UE. Casi todos los Estados miembros tienen su propia Agencia de Créditos a la Exportación, que da créditos, garantías o seguros avalados por el gobierno a empresas privadas del país que hacen negocio en el extranjero. Algunas de estas agencias son totalmente públicas, otras son de propiedad privada o mixta, pero siempre patrocinadas por los gobiernos. Tras un año de la aplicación del Reglamento antes mencionado, era de esperar que los Estados miembros hubieran incrementado la transparencia de estas agencias, pero no ha sido así. Esta crítica se refleja en el informe y por ello he votado a favor.

  Louis Michel (ALDE), par écrit. – La crise mondiale a montré l'importance d'un financement adéquat pour les échanges commerciaux mondiaux. Les agences de crédit jouent un rôle vital pour soutenir les intérêts des exportateurs européens, mais il est vital de s'assurer que les organismes de crédit à l'exportation fonctionnent de manière transparente. La transparence et la divulgation de données au niveau européen sont cruciales afin de rendre plus cohérente l'action de l'UE en matière de droits de l'homme et de démocratie. Je soutiens donc l'idée contenue dans ce rapport, à savoir demander aux Etats membres d'inclure dans leur rapport d'activité annuel un bilan sur le respect des règlements internationaux et le respect des règles régissant les exportations de l'UE.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − This is a reaction to the first official reporting exercise by the Member States for the year 2011. It contains a set of recommendations for future reporting, in particular with regard to compliance with the EU’s external action objectives. I am in favour since illiterate and bad reporting may present the EU with a few more Greeces.

  Tiziano Motti (PPE), per iscritto. − Sono d'accordo con la relazione annuale della Commissione al Parlamento Europeo sulle attività delle agenzie degli Stati membri riguardo al credito all'esportazione. Il credito all'esportazione è un importante strumento a disposizione degli Stati Membri per migliorare le opportunità commerciali e imprenditoriali delle imprese europee; è pertanto necessario regolare tale strumento in modo coerente ai nuovi accordi OCSE ma anche in conformità con i principi che guidano l'azione esterna dell'UE, tra tutti il trattamento dei rischi ambientali e la lotta al cambiamento climatico, questioni che sembrano incidere particolarmente sui crediti all'esportazione.

  Siiri Oviir (ALDE), kirjalikult. − Tunnustan komisjoni jõupingutusi liikmesriikide ekspordikrediidiga seotud tegevuse iga-aastase aruandluse raamistiku kehtestamiseks. Aruandes tuuakse selgelt esile, et ekspordikrediiditoimingud on ulatuslikud ja olulised – nende kogu riskipositsioon oli üle 250 miljardi euro ehk peaaegu kaks korda enam kui ELi aastaeelarve, hõlmates muu hulgas 260 suure keskkonnamõjuga tehingut. Arvestades tehingute suurt ulatust ja mõju, on ELi põhiväärtuste ja välistegevuse üldiste normide, nagu demokraatia edendamine, inimõiguste kaitse ja keskkonnakaitse, arvestamine äärmiselt oluline. EL peab käituma igas valdkonnas, nii sõnades kui ka tegudes kooskõlas oma põhiväärtustega ning siin ei tohiks teha kellelegi allahindlust. Toetasin raportit, kus pööratakse tähelepanu eespool nimetatule ning samuti mitmele vajakajäämisele, nagu aruannete ebapiisav kvaliteet, mis ei võimalda anda veel piisavat hinnangut näiteks keskkonnaohtude käsitlemisele ja pidada kinni liidu välispoliitika eesmärkidest. Kuna tegemist on esimese aruandega, loodan, et liikmesriigid ja komisjon teevad puudujääkidest oma järeldused ning arvestades raportis tehtud ettepanekuid, likvideerivad need.

  Rolandas Paksas (EFD), raštu. − Balsavau už šią rezoliuciją. Valstybių narių eksporto agentūros atlieka labai svarbų vaidmenį kuriant darbo vietas bei švelninant dabartinės ekonominės ir finansų krizės padarinius ne tik ES, bet ir už jos ribų. Tai yra svarbi priemonė siekiant išsaugoti Europos įmonių veiklą ir investicijas. Todėl labai svarbu, kad eksporto kreditų agentūros tinkamai atsižvelgtų į Sąjungos tikslus bei politiką. ES turi būti taikomi aukšti skaidrumo ir ataskaitų standartai, siekiant sumažinti rinkos iškraipymus ir nustatyti vienodas konkurencijos sąlygas. Labai svarbu užtikrinti agentūrų finansinių operacijų patikimumą, kadangi jų teikiama parama turi atnešti maksimalią naudą. Būtina užkirsti kelią kyšininkavimui ir korupcijai. Mažoms ir vidutinėms įmonėms turėtų būti sudarytos galimybės naudotis rinka bei skatinama laisva ir sąžininga prekyba.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − Em 2011, o Parlamento e o Conselho decidiram de comum acordo transpor para o direito comunitário o Convénio da OCDE, de 2005, sobre atividades de crédito à exportação. Prevê-se que os relatórios anuais dos Estados-Membros deem conta dessa atividade. Os relatórios enviados pelos Estados-Membros à Comissão e a avaliação que a Comissão faz estão longe de satisfazer a intenção do Parlamento de conseguir fazer a avaliação da compatibilidade das atividades de crédito à exportação com a política externa da União. Isto verifica-se, em especial, no caso da informação sobre os elementos não financeiros, como o tratamento dos riscos ambientais. Neste sentido, acompanho o relator no pedido que faz à Comissão para que esta faculte orientações aos Estados-Membros, para que, nos próximos relatórios anuais, a Comissão seja realmente capaz de fornecer ao Parlamento uma avaliação em que consiga declarar se, em sua opinião, as atividades de crédito à exportação dos Estados-Membros são compatíveis com os objetivos da ação externa da UE.

  Franck Proust (PPE), par écrit. – Les crédits à l’exportation sont un instrument qui a pour but de soutenir le commerce et les investissements des entreprises européennes en ce qui concerne le commerce international. Ils sont très importants pour le développement international de nos entreprises car ils leur permettent de grandes possibilités de commerce et d’échanges. En 2011 ont été mises en place de nouvelles obligations de déclaration aux États membres pour plus de transparence dans le système des organismes de crédits. Il est important que les États continuent leur efforts de communication pour permettre une harmonisation de ces crédits, et que l’on puisse développer de nouvelles règles favorisant le bon fonctionnement de ce système. De plus, les OCE doivent respecter un certains nombre de règles, ils doivent être en adéquation avec les objectifs de l’UE, et ces communications par les États membres permettent un contrôle plus efficace et donc de plus grands effets des crédits. Ce n’est qu’en assurant une cohérence politique européenne que l’UE pourra devenir un acteur fiable et influent au niveau mondial. Ce rapport prouve l’efficacité de la communication, pour que les organismes de crédit à l’exportation soit plus efficace et plus égalitaire entre les États.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE), por escrito. − Os créditos à exportação são um importante instrumento de apoio ao comércio e investimento das empresas europeias no domínio do comércio internacional. As atividades de crédito à exportação dos Estados-Membros durante 2011, que ascenderam aos 250 biliões de euros, traduzem-se em comércio e oportunidades de negócio significativas para as empresas europeias. Em 2010, o Parlamento negociou obrigações de prestação de requisitos de informação mais rigorosas para os Estados-Membros e para a Comissão em relação ao crédito à exportação. As novas exigências de relatórios, aplicadas pela primeira vez em 2011, visam reforçar a transparência e garantir a monitorização do cumprimento das normas internacionais aplicáveis aos créditos à exportação e da conformidade com as obrigações dos Tratados da UE. Contudo, os relatórios anuais dos Estados-Membros estão longe de satisfazer a os objetivos do Parlamento. Por conseguinte, a fim de contribuir para melhorar a informação apresentada, o relator formulou recomendações para a elaboração do próximo relatório.

  Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE), per iscritto. − La proposta di risoluzione del Parlamento europeo sulla prima relazione annuale della Commissione al Parlamento europeo, sulle attività delle agenzie degli Stati membri per il credito all'esportazione, rimarca l'importanza del criterio di trasparenza cui gli Stati membri e la Commissione sono tenuti a rispondere nella elaborazione delle relazioni sulle attività di credito all'esportazione svolte. Considerando la portata sempre maggiore che vanno assumendo le attività delle ACE, ritengo che le considerazioni formulate nella proposta siano pertinenti e, dunque, esprimo la mia approvazione a riguardo. Se da un alto si delinea l'utilità dell'obiettivo del regolamento delegato che appunto aggiornerebbe il regolamento di base (UE) n.1233/2011 con i nuovi accordi OCSE, dall'altro lato si pone la necessità di adempiere gli obblighi di trasparenza circa le modalità di redazione delle relazioni. E' chiaro che presentare una relazione annuale di rendiconto sulle attività di credito all'esportazione sotto la forma di "documenti riservati" non giova al compimento di tale principio. In tale senso la Commissione è chiamata a rivestire un ruolo preminente, perché orienti gli Stati membri in vista della realizzazione degli obiettivi dell'azione esterna dell'UE.

  Monika Smolková (S&D), písomne − Správne zacielené vývozné úvery poskytované exportno-úverovými agentúrami majú veľký vplyv na každodenný život ľudí vrátane malých a stredných podnikov, preto ich vnímam ako dôležitý nástroj v európskych spoločnostiach pri vytváraní vhodných príležitostí na obchod a podnikanie. Aj napriek tomu, že v správe Komisie sa hovorí o zlej kvalite vypracovaných správ za jednotlivé členské štáty za rok 2011, ako aj zlé hodnotenie týchto správ zo strany Komisie, podporila som túto správu, pretože si myslím, že to môžeme považovať za prvý krok, ktorý môže viesť k zlepšeniu podávania ďalších správ a odstráneniu zistených nedostatkov. Keďže na základe predložených výročných správ členských štátov nie je možné zatiaľ posúdiť, či sú činnosti v oblasti vývozných úverov v súlade s cieľmi zahraničnej politiky Únie, očakávam, že Komisia pri predkladaní ďalšej výročnej správy už bude schopná dostatočne posúdiť aj tieto skutočnosti. Myslím si, že v záujme kvalitnejšieho vypracovania ďalších výročných správ a ich objektívnejšieho posúdenia musia byť v budúcnosti jasne zadefinované postupy a odporúčania pre členské štáty a Komisiu, ktoré jednoznačnejšie dokážu posúdiť súlad členských štátov s cieľmi Únie.

  Marc Tarabella (S&D), par écrit. – Les rapports annuels des États membres ainsi que l'évaluation par la Commission de ces rapports ne répondent guère à l'intention du Parlement de pouvoir procéder à cette évaluation. Cela vaut plus particulièrement en ce qui concerne la déclaration des éléments non financiers de l'annexe I, comme le traitement des risques environnementaux dans le calcul des primes des OCE et la conformité aux objectifs de politique étrangère de l'Union. Cette carence n'est, dans une certaine mesure, pas étonnante. Certains États membres font des efforts louables pour rendre compte de ces questions difficiles, comme l'Allemagne, l'Italie, la Belgique, les Pays-Bas et le Danemark.

Nous devons toutefois reconnaître qu'il n'existe encore aucune méthodologie établie pour rendre compte des éléments non financiers, et les États membres, de même que les institutions européennes, comme la Banque européenne d'investissement, doivent encore se conformer aux exigences du traité de Lisbonne en matière de conformité avérée aux objectifs de l'Union concernant son action extérieure.

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. − Segundo o artigo 207.º do Tratado sobre o Funcionamento da União Europeia (TFUE), a política comercial comum é conduzida de acordo com os princípios e objetivos da ação externa da União. As atividades de crédito possuem uma grande importância para os Estados­Membros durante o ano 2011, devido ao facto de terem uma exposição total de mais de 250 mil milhões de euros, incluindo 260 transações com importantes implicações ambientais notificadas, que se traduzem em comércio e oportunidades de negócios significativas para as empresas europeias. Sou favorável ao presente relatório devido ao facto de permitir alcançar uma maior verificação da compatibilidade das agências de crédito à exportação com os objetivos da ação externa da União e de ser disponibilizada a necessária informação sobre o tratamento dos riscos ambientais no cálculo dos prémios das agências de crédito à exportação.

  Marie-Christine Vergiat (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – J'ai voté pour cette résolution abordant la question de la régulation des organismes de crédits à l'exportation (OCE). Ces organismes garantis par les États proposent des crédits, des assurances et des garanties aux entreprises privées européennes qui exercent leurs activités à l'étranger, en particulier dans les pays en développement, dans des conditions financières et politiques qui peuvent certes être risquées. Mais ces crédits financent surtout des projets peu transparents, ayant des conséquences environnementales et sociales dramatiques que l'on connaît bien.

On estime qu'en 2011 les actions des OCE des États membres s'élevaient à 250 milliards d'euros - à titre de comparaison, cela représente près du double du budget annuel de l'Union. Certes, cette résolution aurait pu aller plus loin, par exemple en enjoignant les États-membres à inclure des représentants d'ONG et de syndicats dans la surveillance des activités de ces organismes. J'ai quand même voté en faveur de ce rapport, qui va dans le sens d'une plus grande transparence des activités en ce domaine.

  Angelika Werthmann (ALDE), schriftlich. − Der Berichterstatter zeigt hier deutlich auf, wie wichtig und unerlässlich die Bewertung der Tätigkeiten der Exportkreditagenturen auch durch das Europäische Parlament ist. Allein das Jahresvolumen der durchgeführten Geschäfte ist ein Argument für eine sorgfältige Prüfung und Abwicklung. Der Berichterstatter arbeitet die Probleme des bestehenden Systems sorgfältig heraus und bezieht sich dabei sowohl auf inhaltliche als auch auf strukturelle beziehungsweise bürokratische Problemfelder. Gefordert wird mehr Transparenz und übersichtlich nachvollziehbare Berichterstattung.

  Iva Zanicchi (PPE), per iscritto. − I crediti all'esportazione sono un importante strumento per il sostegno del commercio e degli investimenti delle imprese europee nel commercio internazionale.

In seguito alla presentazione della relazione annuale in merito all'aderenza delle politiche degli Stati membri alle norme internazionali applicabili ai crediti all'esportazione ed ai trattati internazionali, la relazione dell'onorevole Jadot raccomanda la complementarità dell'azione svolta dalle agenzie di credito nazionali con le finalità e gli obiettivi dell'azione esterna dell'Unione europea.

  Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − O Regulamento n.º 1233/2011 tem como objetivo expresso melhorar a transparência das agências de crédito à exportação (ACE), requerendo que os Estados-Membros apresentem relatórios anuais das ACE com elementos sobre ativos e passivos, pedidos de pagamento liquidados e recuperações, novos compromissos, exposições e prémios cobrados, bem como sobre os passivos contingentes susceptíveis de decorrer dos créditos à exportação que beneficiam de apoio oficial; sobre a forma como os riscos ambientais, que podem acarretar outros riscos relevantes, são tidos em conta nos créditos à exportação que beneficiam de apoio oficial; sobre uma avaliação no que diz respeito à compatibilidade das agências de crédito à exportação com os objetivos e obrigações da UE. O relator assinala alguma falta de transparência nos relatórios que têm sido conhecidos e reclama melhorias a esse nível, incrementando o conteúdo das informações prestadas sobre as ACE, de forma a mais facilmente poder avaliar o seu impacto em diversas áreas. São, no essencial, preocupações que se justificam.

11.6. Αίτηση άρσης της βουλευτικής ασυλίας της Marine Le Pen (A7-0236/2013 - Cecilia Wikström)

Dichiarazioni di voto scritte

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), por escrito. − Aprovo o presente relatório, uma vez que o Gabinete do Procurador Principal do Tribunal da Relação de Lyon solicitou o levantamento da imunidade parlamentar de um membro do Parlamento Europeu, Marine Le Pen, a propósito de uma eventual ação judicial relativa a um alegado crime de incitamento ao ódio, discriminação ou violência contra um grupo de pessoas com fundamento na sua filiação religiosa. A atual investigação judicial foi aberta pelo Procurador de Lyon em 13 de janeiro de 2012, em resposta a uma queixa com pedido de compensação por danos, em que o processo criminal datado de 1 de dezembro de 2011 é apresentado pela Association de défense des droits de l’homme. A queixa foi introduzida em resposta à decisão do Procurador de Lyon de não prosseguir a investigação preliminar que efetuara em resposta a queixas comuns que lhe haviam sido apresentadas em conexão com o mesmo assunto. Foi dada a Marine Le Pen a oportunidade de ser ouvida em conformidade com o artigo 7.º, n.º 3, do Regimento do Parlamento e, segundo o mesmo artigo, um seu representante, Bruno Gollnisch, falou em seu nome e, com base nas explicações dadas, não existem razões para suspeitar da existência de fumus persecutionis.

  Ivo Belet (PPE), schriftelijk. − De Hongaarse regering heeft al heel wat omstreden hervormingen bijgestuurd. De enige correcte weg is dat de Europese Commissie dit proces verder monitort en garandeert dat Hongarije, net als alle andere lidstaten, de fundamentele waarden van de EU respecteert.

We hebben geen nood aan een nieuw politiek forum, dat – dit staat in de sterren geschreven – zal uitmonden in politieke afrekeningen. EU-commissaris Reding heeft in het verleden bewezen dat ze inbreuken op de EU-wetgeving efficiënt en moedig weet aan te pakken. Ik ga ervan uit dat ze dat in dit geval ook zal doen.

  John Bufton (EFD), in writing. − This decision is a frightening example of the lack of freedom of speech and/or expression that exists within Parliament. It essentially aims to stop Eurosceptics from (rightfully) criticising failing policies.

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE), por escrito. − Na sequência das afirmações de que as orações muçulmanas feitas nas ruas de França eram uma espécie de ocupação pelas forças nazis, o Gabinete do Procurador Principal do Tribunal da Relação de Lyon acusa Marine Le Pen de incitamento ao ódio, discriminação ou violência contra um grupo de pessoas com fundamento na sua filiação religiosa e pede o levantamento da imunidade parlamentar para que possa ser julgada. As afirmações de Marine Le Pen foram proferidas num contexto de campanha eleitoral para líder do partido Frente Nacional, não tendo, por conseguinte, nenhuma conexão com as atividades enquanto membro do Parlamento Europeu. Considerando a recomendação da Comissão dos Assuntos Jurídicos, e embora todo o arguido seja considerado inocente até a sentença ter transitado em julgado, votei favoravelmente esta proposta de levantamento da imunidade parlamentar a Marine Le Pen.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. − O presente relatório baseia-se no pedido do Procurador Principal do Tribunal da Relação de Lyon de levantamento da imunidade parlamentar de uma deputada deste Parlamento, Marine Le Pen, associado a uma ação judicial relativa a um alegado delito. A deputada Marine Le Pen é acusada de incitamento ao ódio, discriminação ou violência contra um grupo de pessoas com fundamento na sua filiação religiosa, acusações que, a serem comprovadas, violam elementares direitos humanos. Lembremos hoje e aqui um dos considerandos do Preâmbulo da Carta Internacional dos Direitos Humanos: Considerando que o desconhecimento e o desprezo dos direitos do homem conduziram a atos de barbárie que revoltam a consciência da Humanidade e que o advento de um mundo em que os seres humanos sejam livres de falar e de crer, libertos do terror e da miséria, foi proclamado como a mais alta inspiração do homem. Confrontado com uma crise de colossal profundidade e extensão à escala planetária, o capitalismo não deixará de, como no passado, procurar subjugar os povos por todos os meios e lançando mão de todas as armas – se necessário for, de novo a barbárie e o fascismo. Votámos a favor do levantamento da imunidade parlamentar de Marine Le Pen.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne − Na parlamentnom zasadnutí v decembri 2012 predseda oznámil, že dostal žiadosť z Úradu hlavného prokurátora pri Odvolacom súde v Lyone o zbavenie poslaneckej imunity Marine Le Penovú. Následne bola žiadosť postúpená Výboru pre právne veci. Marine Le Penová je obvinená z podnecovania nenávisti, diskriminácie či násilia proti skupine osôb na základe ich náboženského vyznania. Malo sa tak udiať v decembri 2010 v Lyone v rámci prejavu odvysielaného v rozhlase a publikovaného v tlači. Vychádzajúc z dostupných skutočností a po zvážení dôvodov za a proti vo veci zbavenia imunity poslanca bolo odporúčané, aby Európsky parlament zbavil Marine Le Penovú parlamentnej imunity.

  Elisabetta Gardini (PPE), per iscritto. − Considerare le conseguenze delle proprie parole; è evidente che Marine Le Pen con i suoi paragoni storici improbabili e banalmente odiosi non lo abbia fatto.

La richiesta avanzata dalla procura di Lione è legittima e l'istigazione all'odio razziale è un'accusa grave, soprattutto in un momento in cui in Europa assistiamo alla recrudescenza di movimenti estremisti che ci riportano alla memoria il periodo più bui della storia europea.

  Bruno Gollnisch (NI), par écrit. – Le Parlement européen s'est toujours montré clément vis-à-vis de ses députés. Vous avez, par exemple, protégé l'immunité parlementaire de M. Pannela et de Mme Bonino, qui contribuaient à la pratique d'avortements illégaux en Italie, au nom du fait que leurs actions rentraient "dans le cadre de [leur] lutte politique". Vous avez toléré les insultes de M. Voggenhuber, qui qualifiait M. Haider et le FPÖ de fascistes, au nom de "l'évolution des mœurs" dans la politique et de la possibilité aujourd'hui de proférer des "paroles dures", "plus acérées, plus offensantes" qu'auparavant. Vous avez défendu M. Valenzi, suspecté de dilapidation de fonds publics, ou encore M. Cohn-Bendit, accusé d'entrave à l'action de la justice dans le but d'aider un terroriste. Vous avez refusé de laisser la justice belge entendre M. Öger dans une affaire d'enlèvement et de séquestration. Enfin, vous avez soutenu M. Brok alors qu'il était poursuivi pour fraude fiscale.

Ce Parlement en vient maintenant à toujours protéger les députés appartenant aux courants dominants, même coupables de crimes de droit commun, et à toujours avaliser les persécutions contre la liberté d'expression de la minorité. Ce "deux poids – deux mesures" n'est pas seulement inéquitable. Il vous déshonore.

  Sylvie Guillaume (S&D), par écrit. – J'ai voté pour la levée de l'immunité de Mme le Pen. Le Parlement européen est régulièrement sollicité pour lever l'immunité de certains de ses membres lorsque des procédures judiciaires civiles ou pénales sont ouvertes contre eux. Dans ce cas, comme pour les précédents, il est important que la Justice puisse enquêter librement et, pour cela, que l'immunité parlementaire soit levée. Le Parquet de Lyon va pouvoir instruire sereinement pour déterminer si oui ou non, Mme le Pen s'est rendue coupable d'incitation à la haine raciale.

  Jacky Hénin (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – Le Parlement européen a voté le 2 juillet pour la levée de l'immunité parlementaire de Marine Le Pen. Je me félicite de cette décision. Si un député ne doit pas pouvoir être inquiété des prises de position qu'il tient dans l'exercice de ses fonctions au Parlement européen, il ne doit pas non plus être au-dessus des lois. En affirmant, lors d'un meeting à Lyon, que la pratique de la religion musulmane était assimilable à l'occupation nazie lors de la seconde guerre mondiale, Marine Le Pen savait très bien qu'elle pouvait être inculpée d'incitation à la haine, à la discrimination ou à la violence contre une catégorie de personnes en raison de leur appartenance religieuse. Elle doit être responsable de ses actes.

Je précise qu'elle n'a même pas pris la peine d'être présente lors de l'examen de la levée de son immunité en commission des affaires juridique au Parlement européen pour donner sa position sur cette affaire, ce qui montre bien le peu de cas qu'elle fait du respect de la loi française. Cette affaire révèle une fois de plus que le Front national, avant d'être un parti protestataire, est surtout un parti qui incite à la haine de l'autre, sans jamais proposer de solution pour les peuples.

  Jan Kozłowski (PPE), na piśmie. − Glosowałem za przyjęciem sprawozdania posłanki Sousa, gdyż uważam, że to dobry dokument. Biorąc pod uwagę fakt, że wciąż napływają kolejne wnioski o wsparcie EFG, a także to, że w bieżącym roku przypada najważniejsza, końcowa faza oceny ex-post funkcjonowania EFG w latach 2007–2013, kwota 750 tysięcy euro przeznaczona na pomoc techniczną wydaje mi się uzasadniona.

Podobnie jak sprawozdawczyni pragnę wyrazić nadzieję, że działania Komisji w zakresie wprowadzenia elektronicznego formularza aplikacyjnego i standaryzacji procedur przyczynią się do wprowadzenia znaczących uproszczeń i większej dostępności potrzebnych informacji. Liczę też, że planowane spotkania grup ekspertów i seminarium dla praktyków wpłyną na wzrost efektywności projektów wspieranych z EFG. Mam nadzieję, że ocena ex-post, której planuje dokonać Komisja, przyczyni się do tego, aby w przyszłości EFG był efektywniej wykorzystywany i aby wsparcie z tego funduszu stanowiło wartość dodaną, było dobrze skoordynowane z działaniami podejmowanymi na poziomie krajowym i przyczyniało się do rzeczywistej poprawy sytuacji zwalnianych pracowników i znalezienia przez nich miejsca na rynku pracy.

  David Martin (S&D), in writing. − I voted to waive the immunity of Marine Le Pen. Ms Le Pen is accused of incitement to hatred, discrimination or violence against a group of persons on grounds of their religious affiliation.

  Jean-Luc Mélenchon (GUE/NGL), par écrit. – Ce rapport préconise la levée de l'immunité parlementaire que Marine Le Pen a invoquée pour ne pas être poursuivie pour incitation à la haine ou à la discrimination suite à ses propos comparant certaines prières de rue avec l'occupation nazie pendant la seconde guerre mondiale. Ces propos ne visant que les prières de rue des fidèles d'une religion et pas les autres, ils ne visaient en réalité qu'à stigmatiser les personnes concernées sur un prétexte religieux. Dans la loi française, le racisme ainsi exprimé contre des personnes n'est pas une opinion mais un délit. Ces expressions n'ont aucun rapport avec le mandat de Mme Le Pen au Parlement européen et leur poursuite par la justice ne vise pas à compromettre l'exercice de ce mandat mais à lutter contre le racisme. Il n'y a donc pas lieu d'invoquer ici l'immunité parlementaire et je vote donc pour la levée de l'immunité de Mme Le Pen pour que justice puisse être rendue.

  Nuno Melo (PPE), por escrito. − A defesa da independência do mandato do Deputado Europeu é da competência do Parlamento Europeu e essa independência não pode ser posta em causa. De acordo com o artigo 8.º do Protocolo relativo aos Privilégios e Imunidades da União Europeia, os membros do Parlamento Europeu não podem ser procurados, detidos ou perseguidos pelas opiniões ou votos emitidos no exercício das suas funções. O Procurador Principal do Tribunal da Relação de Lyon solicitou o levantamento da imunidade parlamentar de uma deputada ao Parlamento Europeu, Marine Le Pen, em conexão com uma ação judicial relativa a um alegado delito. Marine Le Pen é acusada de incitamento ao ódio, discriminação ou violência contra um grupo de pessoas com fundamento na sua filiação religiosa, um delito previsto no direito francês. Considerando que a acusação não tem qualquer relação com a posição de Marine Le Pen enquanto deputada ao Parlamento Europeu, sou favorável ao levantamento da imunidade.

  Alexander Mirsky (S&D), in writing. − Ms Le Pen is accused of incitement to hatred, discrimination or violence against a group of persons on grounds of their religious affiliation. I am against since Parliament should not impede MEPs from working.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. − Ich habe gegen die Aufhebung der Immunität von Marine Le Pen gestimmt, da aus meiner Sicht die Voraussetzungen dafür nicht gegeben waren. Zum einen halte ich ihre Aussage, wonach sie die Massengebete von Muslimen in einigen Teilen Frankreichs, bei denen öffentliche Plätze und Straßen blockiert werden, als eine Art von Besetzung oder Besatzung empfindet, für eine, die im Rahmen der freien Meinungsäußerung möglich sein muss. Zum anderen ist es wieder einmal unglaublich sehen zu müssen, wie die „Vereinigte Linke“ in diesem Haus bzw. das Establishment zwei Kategorien von Abgeordneten kreiert. Während man bei Leuten wie Cohn-Bendit alle möglichen und unmöglichen Gründe erfindet, um eine Aufhebung der Immunität abzulehnen, werden die EU-kritischen und rechten Abgeordneten möglichst rasch ausgeliefert. Als Demokrat muss man solch ein unverhältnismäßiges Vorgehen strikt ablehnen!

  Claudio Morganti (EFD), per iscritto. − Non sono uno strenuo difensore dell'immunità parlamentare, poiché a mio avviso i politici sono cittadini uguali agli altri, anche se con responsabilità diverse.

Tuttavia nella decisione di revocare l'immunità parlamentare all'onorevole Marine Le Pen vedo piuttosto una precisa volontà politica di colpire una persona che rappresenta idee e sentimenti che magari qualcuno può anche non condividere, ma che vanno comunque rispettati.

Voglio riportare il testo del discorso per cui è stata chiesta un'azione giudiziaria nei confronti dell'on. Le Pen: "Quindici anni fa c'è stato il velo e poi si sono visti sempre più veli. Dopo c'è stato il burqa: e poi sempre più burqa. Quindi le preghiere sulla via pubblica (...) e adesso ci sono 10 o 15 posti in cui regolarmente la gente affluisce per accaparrarsi il territorio (...). Mi dispiace, ma per quelli che amano tanto parlare di Seconda guerra mondiale e di occupazione, ecco qui si può parlare di occupazione, perché questa è un'occupazione del territorio (...). Certo, non ci sono mezzi blindati né soldati, ma è pur sempre un'occupazione, e pesa sugli abitanti." Ora, ditemi voi se queste affermazioni possono essere oggetto di una così seria e dura presa di posizione.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), por escrito. − Foi solicitado ao Parlamento Europeu o levantamento da imunidade parlamentar da eurodeputada Marine Le Pen, no âmbito de uma ação crime de incitamen