Indekss 
 Iepriekšējais 
 Nākošais 
 Pilns teksts 
Debašu stenogramma
Trešdiena, 2013. gada 11. septembris - Strasbūra Pārskatītā redakcija

4. Savienības stāvoklis (debates)
Visu runu video
PV
MPphoto
 

  Der Präsident. − Als erster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärung des Präsidenten der Kommission zur Lage der Union (2013/2623(RSP)).

Sehr geehrter Herr Kommissionspräsident Barroso, ich heiße Sie herzlich willkommen, ich heiße Herrn Außenminister Linkevičius ebenso herzlich willkommen. Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich freue mich sehr, Sie zur letzten State-of-the-Union-Erklärung des Kommissionspräsidenten in dieser Legislaturperiode begrüßen zu dürfen. Die State-of-the-Union-Debatte zwischen Kommission und Parlament ist sicher ein Schlüsselmoment im politischen Leben der Europäischen Union.

Heute findet ein Gipfeltreffen hier in Straßburg statt, ein Gipfeltreffen der Gemeinschaftsinstitutionen. Wir beraten einmal im Jahr, sicher wie immer auch dieses Mal in heftiger Auseinandersetzung, den Fahrplan für die Europäische Union. Wir, die Gemeinschaftsinstitutionen – Parlament und Kommission –, beraten transparent und öffentlich. Im Gegensatz zu anderen Organen, die zu Gipfeltreffen nach Brüssel reisen, sich manchmal selbst zur europäischen Exekutive erklären, oft hinter verschlossenen Türen tagen, tagen wir öffentlich.

Ich glaube, es ist gut, dass die Debatten über die europäischen Angelegenheiten transparent bei offenen Türen und für alle Bürgerinnen und Bürger erkennbar ausgetragen werden.

(Beifall)

Die Menschen in Europa wollen wissen, wer entscheidet wo auf welcher Grundlage warum und mit welchen Argumenten. Für unsere heutige Debatte muss eines gelten – der Vertrauensverlust von Menschen in die europäischen Institutionen ist gewaltig. Und deshalb gilt der Grundsatz: Transparenz schafft Vertrauen. Und diese Debatte ist eine transparente Debatte, von der ich hoffe, dass sie Vertrauen in die Funktionsweise und in die Funktionalität der europäischen Demokratie zurückbringt.

Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, die Kommission und das Parlament haben eine gemeinsame Leitlinie: Mit überwältigender Mehrheit in diesem Hause und sicher einstimmig in der Kommission ist die Gemeinschaftsmethode die Leitlinie des Handelns in der Europäischen Union.

Die Gemeinschaftsmethode, das bedeutet, Konflikte durch Dialog und Konsens zu lösen, an Stelle des Rechts des Stärkeren die Solidarität und die Demokratie zu setzen, den Interessenausgleich zwischen kleinen und großen Staaten, zwischen Nord und Süd, Ost und West. Gemeinschaftsmethode, das bedeutet, das Wohl aller über die einzelnen Partikularinteressen zu stellen.

Die Partikularinteressen, die Einzelinteressen, übrigens auch, dass Nationen und einzelne Staaten gegeneinander konkurrieren, ist das Gegenteil der Gemeinschaftsmethode und es ist gefährlich. Deshalb, meine Damen und Herren, appelliere ich an die Mitglieder und die Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Union und die Mitglieder des Europäischen Rates, insbesondere was die Umsetzung großer gemeinsamer Projekte angeht: Im Parlament wird mit Mehrheit entschieden, wir haben eine lange Liste von Aufgaben, die deshalb nicht gelöst werden, weil im Rat Partikularinteressen herrschen und die Gesetzgebung blockieren.

(Beifall)

Das gilt insbesondere für die Umsetzung der von uns gemeinschaftlich und mit breiter Mehrheit hier beschlossenen Finanziellen Vorausschau. Deren Umsetzung in konkretes Recht ist extrem schwierig.

Meine Damen und Herren, dieser Sommer war der erste Sommer in fünf Krisenjahren, der relativ ruhig verlaufen ist. Darüber haben wir uns alle gefreut. Es war nicht so, dass jede Woche eine andere Katastrophennachricht über die Ticker lief oder apokalyptische Beschwörungen einer Euro-Dämmerung uns alle verunsichert haben. Und es ist Ruhe an den Finanzmärkten eingekehrt – das ist sicher eine gute Nachricht.

Doch diese Ruhe darf uns nicht täuschen, auch in der heutigen Debatte nicht. Noch immer leiden Millionen Menschen unter den Folgen der Krise. Die Arbeitslosenzahlen sind nach wie vor horrend hoch, die Armut ist dramatisch, die Wirtschaftsentwicklung schleppend, die Kreditklemme nach wie vor nicht behoben. Wir hier nehmen die Sorgen der Menschen sicher ernst. Wir müssen bis zu den Europawahlen die nicht gelösten Probleme auch engagiert und mutig anpacken.

Ich werde Ihnen morgen früh – ich glaube, das ist eine gute Nachricht – hier vor der Abstimmung vortragen können, dass zwischen uns und der Europäischen Zentralbank nach meinem Dafürhalten zur Bankenunion eine gute Lösung gefunden worden ist. Die Aufsicht und die parlamentarische Kontrolle über die Aufsichtstätigkeit der Zentralbank im Rahmen der Bankenunion ist auch ein Stück Transparenz, von dem ich eben geredet habe. Die Bürger und Bürgerinnen wollen wissen, was eine Zentralbank, wenn sie Aufsichtsorgan ist, an Rechenschaft gegenüber dem Parlament abzulegen hat.

Die Jugendgarantie muss umgesetzt werden. Das Schlimmste, was es in Europa gibt, ist die Jugendarbeitslosigkeit. Wenn wir jungen Menschen in Europa keine Perspektive geben, wie wollen wir erwarten, dass sie Vertrauen in die Europäische Union haben?

Ich habe über die Schwierigkeiten mit dem mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen gesprochen. Ich erwarte von allen Organen, von der Kommission und vom Europäischen Rat, dass wir die Finanzielle Vorausschau nutzen, um Wachstum in Europa zu schaffen, denn die Finanzielle Vorausschau ist ein gezieltes Investitionsprogramm.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. − Mr President, in eight months’ time, voters across Europe will judge what we have achieved together in the last five years. In these five years, Europe has been more present in the lives of citizens than ever before. Europe has been discussed in the coffee houses and popular talk shows all over our continent. Today, I want to look at what we have done together, at what we have yet to do. I want to present what I believe are the main ideas for a truly European political debate ahead of next year’s elections.

As we speak, exactly five years ago the United States Government took over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, bailed out AIG, and Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy protection. These events triggered the global financial crisis. It evolved into an unprecedented economic crisis. And it became a social crisis with dramatic consequences for many of our citizens. These events have aggravated the debt problem that still distresses our governments. They have led to an alarming increase in unemployment, especially amongst young people. And they are still holding back our households and our companies.

But Europe has fought back. In those five years, we have given a determined response. We suffered the crisis together. We realised we had to fight it together. And we did. And we are doing it.

If we look back and think about what we have done together throughout the crisis, I think it is fair to say that we would never have thought all of this possible five years ago. We are fundamentally reforming the financial sector so that people’s savings are safe. We have improved the way governments work together, how they return to sound public finances and modernise their economies. We have mobilised over EUR 700 billion to pull crisis-struck countries back from the brink, the biggest effort ever in stabilisation between countries.

I still vividly remember my meeting last year with chief economists of many of our leading banks. Most of them were expecting Greece to leave the euro. All of them feared the disintegration of the euro area. Now, we can give a clear reply to those fears: no one has left or has been forced to leave the euro. This year, the European Union enlarged from 27 to 28 Member States and next year the euro area will grow from 17 to 18 Member States. What matters now is what we make of this progress. Do we talk it up, or talk it down? Do we draw confidence from it to pursue what we have started, or do we belittle the results of our efforts?

I just came back from the G20 meeting in St Petersburg. I can tell you: this year, contrary to recent years, we Europeans did not receive any lessons from other parts of the world on how to address the crisis. We received appreciation and encouragement. Not because the crisis is over (because it is not over), but the resilience of our Union has been tested and will continue to be tested. But what we are doing creates the confidence that we are overcoming the crisis – provided we are not complacent.

We are tackling our challenges together and we have to tackle them together, because in our world of geo-economic and geopolitical tectonic changes, I believe that only together, as the European Union, can we give our citizens what they aspire to: that our values, our interests, our prosperity are protected and promoted in the age of globalisation.

So now is the time to rise above purely national issues and parochial interests and to have real progress for Europe. To bring a truly European perspective to the debate with national constituencies. Now is the time for all those who care about Europe, whatever their political or ideological position, wherever they come from, to speak up for Europe. If we ourselves do not do it, we cannot expect others to do it either.

We have come a long way since the start of the crisis. In last year’s State of the Union speech, I stated that ‘despite all our efforts, our responses have not yet convinced citizens, markets or our international partners’. One year on, the facts tell us that our efforts have started to convince. Overall spreads are coming down. The most vulnerable countries are paying less to borrow. Industrial output is increasing. Market trust is returning. Stock markets are performing well. The business outlook is steadily improving. Consumer confidence is rising sharply.

We see that the countries which are most vulnerable to the crisis and are now doing most to reform their economies are starting to note positive results. In Spain, as a signal of the very important reforms and increased competitiveness, exports of goods and services now make up 33% of GDP, more than ever since the introduction of the euro.

Ireland has been able to draw money from capital markets since the summer of 2012, the economy is expected to grow for a third consecutive year in 2013 and Irish manufacturing companies are rehiring staff. In Portugal, the external current account, which was structurally negative, is now expected to be broadly balanced, and growth is picking up after many quarters in the red.

Greece has completed, in just three years, a truly remarkable fiscal adjustment, is regaining competitiveness and is nearing for the first time in decades a primary surplus. And Cyprus, which started the programme later, is also implementing that programme as scheduled, which is a precondition for a return to growth.

My point is this: for Europe, recovery is within sight. Let us be realistic in analysis, let us not overestimate the positive results but let us not also underestimate what has been done.

Of course, we need to be vigilant. ‘One swallow does not make a summer, nor one fine day’. Even one fine quarter does not mean we are out of the economic heavy weather. But it does prove we are on the right track. On the basis of the figures and evolutions as we now see them, we have good reason to be confident.

This should push us to keep up our efforts. We owe it to those for whom the recovery is not yet within reach, to those who do not yet profit from positive developments. We owe it to our 26 million unemployed, especially to the young people who are unemployed and who are looking to us. They want to have reasons to feel hope about Europe and about their own countries. So hope and confidence are also part of the economic equation.

If we are where we are today, it is because we have shown the resolve to adapt both our politics and our policies to the lessons drawn from the crisis. And when I say ‘we’, I really mean ‘we’: it has really been a joint effort. At each and every step, you, the European Parliament, have played a decisive role through one of the most impressive records of legislative work ever. I personally believe this is not sufficiently known by the citizens of Europe and you deserve more credit and recognition for this. So let us continue to work together to reform our economies, for growth and jobs, and to adapt our institutional architecture. Only if we do so, will we leave this phase of the crisis behind us as well.

There is a lot we can still deliver together, in this Parliament’s and this Commission’s mandate. What we can and must do, first and foremost – let us be concrete – is to deliver the banking union. It is the first and most urgent phase on the way to deepening our economic and monetary union, as mapped out in the Commission’s Blueprint presented last autumn. The legislative process on the Single Supervisory Mechanism is almost completed. The next step is the ECB’s independent valuation of banks’ assets, before it takes up its supervisory role.

Our attention now must urgently turn to the Single Resolution Mechanism. The Commission’s proposal has been on the table since July and, together, we must do what is necessary to have it adopted during this term. It is the way to ensure that taxpayers are no longer the ones in the front line for paying the price of bank failure. It is the way to make progress in decoupling banks from sovereign risk. It is the way to remedy one of the most alarming and unacceptable results of the crisis: increased fragmentation of Europe’s financial sector and credit markets – even an implicit renationalisation. And it is also the way to help restore normal lending to the economy, notably to SMEs. Because in spite of the accommodating monetary policy, credit is not yet sufficiently flowing to the economy across the euro area. This needs to be addressed resolutely.

Ultimately, this is about one thing – growth – which is necessary to remedy today’s most pressing problem – unemployment. The current level of unemployment is economically unsustainable, politically untenable and socially unacceptable. So all of us here in the Commission – and I am happy to have all my colleagues in the Commission here with me today – all of us, not just one or two Commissioners, this is a collective effort – all of us want to work with you, intensively, to deliver as much of our growth agenda, our sustainable growth agenda, as we possibly can.

We are mobilising all the instruments we have at European level but of course we have to be honest, not all instruments are at European level: some of them are at national level. And I want to focus on the implementation of the decisions that are most crucial now: youth employment and financing the real economy for SMEs. We need to avoid a jobless recovery too.

Europe must, therefore, speed up the pace of structural reforms. Our Country Specific Recommendations set out what the Member States must do in this respect. And at European level – because there is what can be done at national level and what can be done at European level – the focus should also be on what matters most for the real economy: exploiting the full potential of the single market comes first.

We have a well-functioning single market for goods, and we see the economic benefits of that. We need to extend the same formula to other areas: mobility, communications, energy, finance and e-commerce, to name but a few. We have to remove the obstacles that hold back dynamic companies and people. We have to finish connecting Europe.

I would like to announce that, today, we will formally adopt a proposal that gives a push towards a single market for telecoms. Citizens know that Europe has dramatically brought down their costs for roaming. Our proposal will strengthen guarantees and lower prices for consumers, and present new opportunities for companies.

We know that in the future trade will be more and more digital. Is it not a paradox that we have an internal market for goods but when it comes to the digital market, we have 28 national markets. How can we grab all the opportunities of the future that are opened up by the digital economy if we do not conclude this internal market?

(Applause)

The same logic applies to the broader digital agenda: it solves real problems and improves daily life for citizens. The strength of Europe’s future industrial base depends on how well people and businesses are interconnected. And by properly combining the digital agenda with data protection and the defence of privacy, our European model strengthens the trust of citizens. Both with respect to internal and external developments, adopting the proposed legislation on data protection is of utmost importance to the Commission.

The single market is a key lever for competitiveness and employment. Adopting all remaining proposals under the Single Market Act I and II, and implementing the Connecting Europe Facility in the next few months, we will lay the foundations for prosperity in the years to come.

We are also adapting to a dynamic transformation on a global scale, so we must encourage this innovative dynamism on a European scale. That is why we must also invest more in innovation, in technology and in the role of science. I have great faith in science, in the capacity of the human mind and the capacity of a creative society to solve its problems. The world is changing dramatically and I believe many of the solutions are going to come, in Europe and outside Europe, from new science discoveries, from new technologies, and I would like Europe to be leading that effort globally.

This is why we – Parliament and the Commission – have made Horizon 2020 such a priority in the discussions on the European Union budget. That is why we use the European Union budget to invest in skills, education and vocational training, dynamising and supporting talent. That is why we have pushed for Erasmus Plus. And that is why, later this autumn, we will make further proposals for an industrial policy fit for the 21st century. Why we mobilise support for SMEs. Because we believe a strong dynamic industrial base is indispensable for a strong European economy.

(Applause)

And whilst fighting climate change, our 20-20-20 goals have set our economy on the path to green growth and resource efficiency, reducing costs and creating jobs.

By the end of this year, we will come out with concrete proposals for our energy and climate framework up to 2030. And we will continue to shape the international agenda by fleshing out a comprehensive, legally binding global climate agreement by 2015, with our partners. Frankly, we need the others on board too. Europe cannot fight climate change alone. We need a level playing field globally and we should lead that effort. At the same time, we will pursue our work on the impact of energy prices on competitiveness and also on social cohesion.

All these drivers for growth are part of our ‘Europe 2020’ agenda, and fully and swiftly implementing it is more urgent than ever. In some cases we even have to go beyond the Europe 2020 agenda. This means we must also pursue our active and assertive trade agenda. This is about linking us closer to growing third markets and guaranteeing our place in the global supply chain.

Contrary to perception, while most of our citizens think that we have been losing in global trade, we have in fact been increasing our surplus with the rest of the world. We have a significant and increased trade surplus of more than EUR 300 billion a year in goods, services and agriculture. We need to build on that. This too will demand our full attention in the months to come, notably with the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the US and the negotiations with Canada and Japan.

Last but not least, we need to step up our game in implementing the Multiannual Financial Framework, the European budget. The EU budget is the most concrete lever we have at hand to boost investments. In some of our regions, European investment is the only means they have to get some public investment because they cannot now have resources at national level.

Both Parliament and the Commission wanted more resources – we have been in that fight together – but even so, let us be honest, one single year’s EU budget represents more money – at today’s prices – than the whole Marshall Plan did in its time! Let us now make sure that the programmes can start on 1 January 2014; that the results are felt on the ground, in our regions or across Europe, and that we use the possibilities of innovative financing: from instruments that have already started, to European Investment Bank money and to project bonds.

We have to make good on the commitment we made in July. From the Commission’s side, we will deliver. We will, for example, present the second amending budget for 2014 this month. There is no time to waste, so I warn against holding it up. In particular, I urge Member States not to delay.

I cannot emphasise this enough: citizens will not be convinced by rhetoric and promises only, but by a concrete set of common achievements. We have to show the many areas where Europe has solved problems for citizens. Europe does not cause problems: Europe is part of the solution.

I address what we have to do still more extensively in today’s letter to the President of the European Parliament, which you will also have received, so I will not go into detail now regarding our programme for next year. But my point today is clear: together, there is a lot still to achieve before the elections. It is not time to throw in the towel, it is time to roll up our sleeves and work hard.

Of course none of this is easy. I think that everybody recognises that we have been living in extremely challenging times, a real stress test for the European Union. We know too that the path of permanent and profound reform is as demanding as it is unavoidable. Let us make no mistake: there is no way back to business as usual. Some people believe that after this everything will go back to the way it was before. They are wrong. This crisis is different. This is not a cyclical crisis, but a structural crisis. We will not go back to the old ‘normal’. We have to shape a new ‘normal’. We are in a transforming period of history and we have to understand that, and not just say it but draw all the due conclusions, including in our state of mind and how we react to the problems. We can see from the first results that it is possible to win that battle, and we all know that it is not only possible but it is necessary.

At this point in time, with a fragile recovery, the biggest downside risk I see is – you know what – political. This is the biggest downside risk we have: lack of stability or lack of determination and perseverance. Over the last years we have seen that anything that casts doubt on governments’ commitment to reform is instantly punished. On the positive side, strong and convincing decisions have an important and immediate impact. In this phase of the crisis, governments’ job is to provide the certainty and predictability that markets still lack.

I am sure you all know Justus Lipsius. Justus Lipsius is the name of the Council building in Brussels. Justus Lipsius was the very influential 16th century humanist scholar who wrote a very important book called De Constantia. He wrote: ‘Constancy is a right and immovable strength of the mind, neither lifted up nor pressed down with external or casual accidents.’. Only a ‘strength of the mind’, he argued, based on ‘judgment and sound reason’, can help you through confusing and alarming times. I hope that in these difficult times, all of us, including the government representatives that meet at the Justus Lipsius Building, show that determination and that perseverance when it comes to the implementation of decisions taken, because one of the issues we have is to be coherent and not just take decisions but afterwards be able to implement them on the ground.

It is only natural that, over the last few years, our efforts to overcome the economic crisis have overshadowed everything else. But our idea of Europe needs to go far beyond economics. We are much more than a market. The European ideal touches the very foundations of European society. It is about values – and I underline the word ‘values’. It is based on a firm belief in political, social and economic standards, grounded in our social market economy.

In today’s world, the European Union level is indispensable to protecting these values and standards and promoting citizens’ rights: from consumer protection to labour rights, from women’s rights to respect for minorities, from environmental standards to data protection and privacy.

Whether defending our interests in international trade, securing our energy provision, or restoring people’s sense of fairness by fighting tax fraud and tax evasion, it is only by acting as a Union that we pull our weight on the world stage. Whether seeking impact for the development and humanitarian aid we give to developing countries, managing our common external borders or promoting Europe as a strong security and defence policy, it is only by integrating more that we can really reach our objectives.

There is no doubt about it. Our internal coherence and international relevance are inextricably linked. Our economic attraction and political traction are fundamentally entwined. Does anyone seriously believe that, if the euro had collapsed, we or our Member States would still have any credibility left internationally? Does everyone still realise how enlargement has been a success in terms of healing history’s deep scars, in establishing democracies where some years ago no one had thought it possible? How neighbourhood policy was and still is the best way to provide security and prosperity in regions of vital importance for Europe? Where would we be without all of this?

Today, countries like Ukraine are more than ever seeking closer ties with the European Union, attracted by our economic and social model. We cannot turn our back on them. We cannot accept any attempts to limit these countries’ own sovereign choices. Free will and free consent need to be respected. These are also the principles that lie at the basis of our Eastern Partnership, which we want to take forward at our summit in Vilnius.

And does everyone still remember just how much Europe has suffered from its wars during the last century, and how European integration was the valid answer? Next year, it will be one century since the start of the First World War. A war that tore Europe apart, from Sarajevo to the Somme. We must never take peace for granted. We need to recall that it is because of Europe that former enemies now sit around the same table and work together. It is only because they were offered a European perspective that even Serbia and Kosovo have now come to an agreement, under the mediation of the EU.

Last year’s Nobel Peace Prize reminded us of that historic achievement: that Europe is a project of peace. We should be more aware of it ourselves. Sometimes I think we should not be ashamed to be proud. Arrogance is one thing: we do not want to be arrogant. But we should be proud of Europe and of what we have achieved. We should look towards the future, but with a wisdom we gained from the past.

(Applause)

Let me say this to all those who rejoice in Europe’s difficulties and who want to roll back our integration and go back to isolation: the pre-integrated Europe of the divisions, the war, the trenches, is not what people desire and deserve. The European continent has never in its history known such a long period of peace as it has had since the creation of the European Communities. It is our duty to preserve it and to deepen it.

It is precisely with these values that we address the unbearable situation in Syria, which has tested, over the last months, the world’s conscience so severely. The European Union has led the international aid response by mobilising close to EUR 1.5 billion, of which EUR 850 million comes directly from the European Union budget. The Commission will do its utmost to help the Syrian people and refugees in neighbouring countries.

We have recently witnessed events we thought had long been eradicated. The use of chemical weapons is a horrendous act that deserves a clear condemnation and a strong answer. The international community, with the United Nations at its centre, carries a collective responsibility to sanction these acts and to put an end to this conflict. The proposal to put Syria’s chemical weapons beyond use is potentially a positive development. The Syrian regime must now demonstrate that it will implement this without any delay. In Europe, we believe that, ultimately, only a political solution stands a chance of delivering the lasting peace that the Syrian people deserve.

There are those who claim that a weaker Europe would make their country stronger, that Europe is a burden and they would be better off without it. My reply is clear: we all need a Europe that is united, strong and open. In the debate that is ongoing all across Europe, the bottom-line question is: do we want to improve Europe, or give it up? My answer is clear: let us engage! If you do not like Europe as it is: improve it! Find ways to make it stronger, internally and internationally, and you will have in me the firmest of supporters. Find ways that allow for diversity without creating discrimination, and I will be with you all the way. But do not turn away from it.

I recognise that, as in any human endeavour, the European Union is not perfect. For example, controversies about the division of labour between the national and European levels will never be conclusively ended. I value subsidiarity highly. For me subsidiarity is not a technical concept, it is a fundamental democratic principle. An ever closer union among the citizens of Europe demands that decisions are taken as openly and as transparently as possible and as close to the people as possible.

Not everything needs a solution at European level. Europe must focus on where it can add most value. Where this is not the case, it should not meddle. The European Union needs to be big on big things and smaller on smaller things – something we may occasionally have neglected in the past. The European Union needs to show it has the capacity to set both positive and negative priorities. As all governments, we need to take extra care of the quality and quantity of our regulation knowing that, as Montesquieu said, ‘les lois inutiles affaiblissent les lois nécessaires’ – useless laws weaken the necessary ones.

But there are areas of major importance where Europe must have more integration, more unity, where only a strong Europe can deliver results. I believe a political union needs to be our political horizon, as I stressed in last year’s State of the Union speech. This is not just the demand of a passionate European. This is the indispensable way forward to consolidate our progress and ensure the future. Ultimately, the solidity of our policies, namely of the economic and monetary union, depends on the credibility of the political and institutional construct that supports it.

So we have mapped out, in the Commission Blueprint for a deep and genuine Economic and Monetary Union, not only the economic and monetary features, but also the necessities, possibilities and limits in deepening our institutional set-up in the medium and long term. The Commission will continue to work for the implementation of its Blueprint, step by step, one phase after the other. And I confirm, as announced last year, the intention to present, before the European elections, further ideas on the future of our Union and how best to consolidate and deepen the Community method and the Community approach in the longer term. That way, these ideas can be subject to a real European debate. They will set out the principles and orientations that are necessary for a true, political union.

We can only meet the challenges of our time if we strengthen the consensus on our fundamental objectives. Politically, we must not be divided by differences between the euro area and those outside it, between the centre and the periphery, between north and south, between east and west. The European Union must remain a project for all members, a community of equals.

Economically, Europe has always been a way to close gaps between countries, regions and people. And that must remain so. We cannot do Member States’ work for them, the responsibility remains theirs, but we can and must complement it with European responsibility and European solidarity.

For that reason, strengthening the social dimension is a priority for the months to come, together with our social partners. The Commission will come with its communication on the social dimension of the economic and monetary union on 2 October. Solidarity is a key element of what being part of Europe is all about, and something to take pride in.

Safeguarding its values, such as the rule of law, is what the European Union was made to do, from its inception to the latest chapters in enlargement. In last year’s State of the Union speech, at a moment of challenges to the rule of law in our own Member States, I addressed the need to make a bridge between political persuasion and targeted infringement procedures, on the one hand, and what I call the nuclear option of Article 7 of the Treaty, namely suspension of a Member State’s rights.

Experience has confirmed the usefulness of the Commission role as an independent and objective referee. We should consolidate this experience through a more general framework. It should be based on the principle of equality between Member States, activated only in situations where there is a serious, systemic risk to the rule of law, and triggered by predefined benchmarks. The Commission will come forward with a communication on this. I believe it is a debate key to our idea of Europe.

This does not mean that national sovereignty or democracy are constrained, but we do need a robust European mechanism to influence the equation when basic common principles are at stake. There are certain non-negotiable values that the EU and its Member States must and shall always defend.

The polarisation that resulted from the crisis poses a risk to us all, to the European project. We, the legitimate representatives of the European Union, can turn the tide. You, the direct democratic representatives of Europe, directly elected, will be at the forefront of the political debate. The question I want to put to you is the following: which picture of Europe will voters be presented with? The candid version, or the cartoon version? The myths or the facts? The honest reasonable version or the extremist populist version? It is an important choice to make.

I know some people out there will say Europe is to blame for the crisis and the hardship. But we can remind people that the European Union was not at the origin of this crisis. It resulted from mismanagement of public finances from the national governments and the irresponsible behaviour in the financial markets.

We can explain how Europe has worked to fix the crisis, what we would have lost if we had not succeeded in upholding the single market. Because the single market was under threat and upholding the common currency, because some time ago some people were predicting the end of the common currency. If we had not coordinated recovery efforts and employment initiatives, how would we be now?

Some people will say that it is Europe that is forcing governments to cut spending, but we can remind voters that government debt got way out of hand even before the crisis. Not because of, but despite, Europe. We can add that the most vulnerable in our societies, and our children, will end up paying the price if we do not persevere now and the truth is that countries, inside the euro or outside the euro, in Europe or outside Europe, are making efforts to curb their very burdened public finances.

Some will campaign saying that we have given too much money to vulnerable countries. Others will say we have given too little money to the most vulnerable countries, but every one of us can explain what we did and why: there is a direct link between one country’s loans and another country’s banks, between one country’s investments and another country’s businesses, between one country’s workers and another country’s companies. This kind of interdependence means only European solutions can work. What I tell people is: when you are in the same boat, one cannot say: ‘your end of the boat is sinking’. We were in the same boat when things went well, and we are in it together when things are difficult.

Some people might campaign saying: Europe has grabbed too much power. Others will claim Europe always does too little, too late. The interesting thing is that sometimes we have the same: saying Europe is not doing enough and at the same time not giving more instruments for Europe to do what Europe has to do. But we can explain that Member States have entrusted Europe with tasks and competences. The European Union is not a foreign power. The European Union is a result of democratic decisions by the institutions and the Member States.

At the same time, we must acknowledge that, in some areas, Europe still lacks the power to do what is asked of it, a fact that is all too easily forgotten by those – and we know there are many out there – that are always ready to nationalise success and to Europeanise failure. Ultimately, what we have, and what we do not have, is the result of democratic decision-making and I think we should remind people of that.

I hope Parliament will take up this challenge with all the idealism it holds, with as much realism and determination as the times demand of us. The arguments are there. The facts are there. The agenda has been set out. In eight months’ time, voters will decide. Now, it is up to us to make the case for Europe. We can do so by using the next eight months to conclude as much as we can. We have a lot to do still: namely, adopting and implementing the European budget, the MFF. This is critical for investment in our regions all over Europe. This is indispensable for the first priority we have: the fight against unemployment, notably youth unemployment.

Another priority is to advance and implement the banking union. This is critical in order to address the problem of financing for businesses and SMEs. These are our clear priorities: employment and growth. Our job is not finished. It is in its decisive phase. Because the elections will not only be about the European Parliament, nor will they be about the European Commission or about the Council, about this or that personality. The elections will be about Europe. We will be judged together. So let us work together – for Europe. With passion and with determination.

Let us not forget that 100 years ago Europe was sleepwalking into the catastrophe of the war of 1914. Next year, in 2014, I hope Europe will be walking out of a crisis, more united, stronger and open.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Der Präsident. − Herr Kommissionspräsident! Sie haben auf Justus Lipsius Bezug genommen und die Namensgebung für das Ratsgebäude – das fand ich gut! Ich möchte Sie aber auch darauf aufmerksam machen, dass der Philosoph Justus Lipsius der Erfinder des Gottesgnadentums war – ich hoffe nicht, dass das der Grund für die Namensgebung für das Ratsgebäude war.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Joseph Daul, au nom du groupe PPE. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président de la Commission, Monsieur le Président du Conseil, chers collègues, ce débat sur l'état de l'Union, à quelques mois de la fin de la législature, a une résonance particulière.

Je voudrais, Monsieur le Président, saluer votre travail et celui de la Commission européenne. Avec la crise, certains auraient pu prétendre aux solutions démagogiques. Vous n'avez pas emprunté cette voie: vous avez travaillé à des mesures concrètes. L'année écoulée, pour la première fois, vous avez analysé les orientations budgétaires des États membres, les réformes engagées, et ce avec recul. Je rappelle qu'il ne peut et qu'il ne doit pas y avoir deux poids, deux mesures. Tous les États doivent être traités de la même façon. C'est une question de confiance vis-à-vis de nos concitoyens. Il faut tenir le cap!

C'est d'autant plus important que les mesures qui ont été prises commencent à porter leurs fruits. Je crois qu'il faut aussi le dire. La Lettonie est sortie de la crise. L'Irlande est sur la bonne voie. Au Portugal, le chômage baisse pour la première fois depuis des mois. En Espagne, de grands investissements sont en cours. En Grèce, le tourisme a bien repris cet été. Ce trimestre, la zone euro renoue elle aussi avec la croissance.

Mais cela ne veut pas dire que nous pouvons ralentir et nous arrêter. Il faut poursuivre les réformes. La Commission, en tant qu'arbitre, a, de ce point de vue, une responsabilité. Nous devons attaquer la deuxième partie du match. L'achèvement du marché unique en fait partie – vous l'avez dit ce matin et je le répète. Un marché unique plus abouti, c'est au bas mot près de 1 % de croissance en plus et cela ne coûte pas un euro d'investissement en plus.

Nous avons obtenu un accord sur la reconnaissance plus large des qualifications professionnelles, une victoire pour les Européens. À cela s'ajoute le travail que nous faisons dans le secteur financier, notamment avec l'union bancaire. Il y a bien sûr les réformes du budget et le EFP et ce que vous nous avez dit, Monsieur le Président, il faut surtout le dire au Conseil. Nous avons donné notre accord; c'est au Conseil que ça bloque pour le moment. Je crois, là aussi, que vous avez encore des choses à faire et que vous devez encore convaincre, et je vous fais confiance. Nous avons avancé, avant l'été, et j'attends du Conseil qu'il remplisse ses engagements pour que nous puissions le mettre en œuvre, ce nouveau budget.

Chers collègues, il faut des impulsions au niveau européen pour stimuler la croissance, grâce à des législations et à des investissements ciblés qui mettent l'accent sur la création d'emplois. Il faut assainir encore nos finances publiques. Certains chefs de gouvernement ont pris avec courage des décisions indispensables pour le bien de leur pays et de l'Union européenne, mais la sagesse budgétaire n'est pas une fin en soi. Il faut évaluer l'efficacité de nos décisions. L'économie n'est pas une science exacte et toutes les politiques ne sont pas efficaces. Je crois qu'il faut aussi le reconnaître.

Laissez-moi vous donner un exemple: nous pensions tellement aux services que nous avons oublié l'industrie. Or, où sont les services aujourd'hui? Pour la plupart, pas en Europe! Nous avons le devoir d'investir à nouveau dans l'industrie pour garder nos emplois. Il ne faut pas avoir peur de le dire. C'est aussi cela le rôle de l'Europe.

Chers collègues, la crise économique n'a pas seulement affecté nos institutions financières, elle a aussi entamé la confiance des citoyens dans leurs gouvernements. Vous l'avez dit: la crise financière n'est pas due à l'Europe. C'est trop facile de dire que c'est à cause de l'Europe! Non! C'est grâce à l'Europe et à l'euro que nous avons sauvé les livrets d'épargne de nos concitoyens! Je crois que c'est important. Nos concitoyens se détournent, avec ces discours, des partis politiques traditionnels. Leur foi en l'Europe s'effrite. Les populismes de tous bords diffusent des schémas faciles et réducteurs. Or, ce n'est pas la solution. Nous ne pouvons pas succomber au repli sur soi, qui conduirait notre continent définitivement sur la pente du déclin.

Dans huit mois, lors des élections européennes, le débat ne se limitera pas à une confrontation droite-gauche. La question portera avant tout sur l'Europe que nous voulons.

L'histoire a démontré que l'Europe est le meilleur rempart pour protéger les Européens. Nous le voyons bien: pour que notre continent puisse exister, il nous faut une diplomatie européenne, une défense européenne commune, non pas pour faire la guerre mais pour assurer la paix et aider les plus pauvres de ce monde.

Moins il y a d'Europe, plus il y a d'échecs! Notre débat, aujourd'hui, a ce mérite: il nous permet de faire le point, de voir où nous en sommes. L'Europe est sur la bonne voie!

Pour assurer notre avenir, il faut des bases solides, il faut respecter les valeurs que nous défendons et qui sont les nôtres. Notre Parlement est et restera un partenaire de la Commission pour construire cet avenir commun!

(Applaudissements)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Hannes Swoboda, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, as in all his previous speeches, President Barroso has described a half-full glass as totally full. I will demonstrate that the glass is still half empty. President Barroso, you spoke about figures and, yes, there are some good figures, and we are happy about that, but I want to speak about people: about women, about the younger generation and about children, who are still suffering under the austerity policy.

You spoke about increasing investment confidence. But why, Mr Barroso, is there a lack of confidence on the part of Europe’s citizens? This is another question that the Commission and the Commission President need to answer. Recently, Prime Minister Samaras, of the future Greek Presidency of the Council, spoke about a Greek recovery. With 60% of young people still unemployed and with efforts to find a new package for Greece, it is astonishing that some people should talk about a recovery.

Turning to Spain, you probably read the recent article about the young generation there: the children who have to go to school to be fed because they cannot get enough meals at home. And do you know, Mr Barroso, how many jobs have been created in Spain in the last few months? The answer is 31. Thirty-one new jobs: this is the recovery in Spain! It is a scandal.

As for Portugal, your own country, Mr Barroso, I do not know whether you have spoken, as I did recently when I was in Setúbal, with Caritas, who can show you children being taken out of kindergarten because people are ashamed to send their children to kindergarten with poor clothes. That is also the reality of Europe: so show that the glass is not simply half full; it is also half empty. We still have much to do, and we need to change the policies of the Commission.

(Loud applause)

Because austerity is increasing the rift between rich and poor and between north and south, and is aggravating racism and xenophobia. Blaming the others – the foreigners, the migrant workers, the welfare tourists from Bulgaria and Romania – is very popular, for example among the Conservatives in Great Britain, and even more so UKIP and others. This is happening all over Europe today: austerity is undermining solidarity between states and also between citizens.

Yes, I agree we need a strong Europe – a much stronger Europe. How can we support Baroness Ashton’s important work if we do not have a stronger Europe? And that means, of course, more investment because public and private investment is lacking. I have seen many young entrepreneurs who would like to go for new start-ups if they could get credit and investment.

I was recently at Porsche and at BASF, one of the leading companies in Germany, and I saw the high quality of work there. But you know, Mr Barroso, even in rich Germany there is a lack of investment and infrastructure. They have to close bridges and highways because they cannot be repaired; and people say that their Internet speed is sometimes slower in rich Germany than in some of our poor countries. We have to fight together, in all our countries, for more investment.

Mr Barroso, you also mentioned the civil liberties situation. Yes, you are right, but I would take an even stronger stance. How can it be that a black minister in Italy is attacked again daily, even by some of the Members of this Parliament? It is a shame. We should be proud to have a black minister in one of our European governments.

(Applause)

Journalists and friends of journalists are being intimidated in some other countries; laws against media freedom have been passed in certain countries; and Roma are being attacked again, even more so than before. These are things that we need to combat very strongly. Therefore I demand from the Commission more policies for economic recovery, more policies on social cohesion and solidarity, and more capacity to defend the rule of the law in Europe.

You also mentioned, Mr Barroso, some of the proposals due to come forward: for example, on the social dimension of economic and monetary union. But I would ask you: things have been in place since the spring, so why does it require nearly half a year to bring forward this proposal? Are you afraid that some governments are against it? Perhaps you mentioned it and I missed it.

We passed a legislative proposal on the restructuring of industries because we want restructured industries. We are not conservatives who say that once an industry is there, it has to stay as it is. It must be subject to social conditions. Why do you not have the courage to come forward with a legislative proposal on the restructuring of industries? Is it because some countries are against it?

You are the President of the Commission, and the Commission must have the strength to fight not only with this Parliament but also with the Council. So I hope, at least, that you come forward with some proposals on these issues because we need them.

(Applause)

I also want to raise the issue of health and safety regulations because I mentioned the health situation earlier. You need only look briefly at the book The body economic: why austerity kills. It kills in the true sense. Under austerity, among other things, the rate of suicide is increasing, so we also need health and safety regulations from the Commission.

However, let me also address the Council. We had an agreement on the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). Why is the Council breaking this agreement? We had an agreement, together with the Commission, on frontloading against youth unemployment. But the Council is not frontloading: it is reducing the money for youth unemployment, and this is not acceptable.

(Applause)

How can you present a budget for 2014 which is not up to standard, and not up to the agreement? How can the Council violate the law and the Treaty by not negotiating with Parliament about things which have to be negotiated? We must stick to the laws and the rules, and demand that the Council comes forward with a reasonable budget under the MFF for 2014. My group will not vote in favour of a budget that is not up to standard to fight against youth unemployment in Europe, for that is the biggest task. Talk alone is not enough; we want action from the Council.

(Applause)

We also expect progress on the financial transaction tax (FTT), which is currently taking a lot of flak. We expect of the Council, with the help of the Commission of course, that the promise made to our citizens – that the financial sector will contribute through the FTT – will finally be kept. It is not acceptable that so many citizens should suffer and that banks and financial institutions should not contribute to resolving the crisis.

Lastly, there is to be an election campaign, to which the President referred. The centre-left has approaches to many issues very different from those of the centre-right, especially on social issues. But I hope that the centre in this Parliament will defend the future of Europe. If some governments are now calling for the words ‘ever closer Union’ to be deleted from the Treaty, we say ‘No’. We want an ever closer union in the fields of both economic and foreign affairs. That is the only way to go forward, and I therefore believe in the vision of a United States of Europe. However, just as the United States of America, it is not a unitary state, Europe will never be one. It will have its diversity but will get rid of this nationalism and xenophobia.

With all our differences between right and left, let us fight for a common Europe: a Europe strong enough to defend itself; a Europe strong enough to say and do whatever we have to say and do, on issues from Syria and Egypt to competition with China, and all the others. We cannot defend the interests of our citizens if we go back to nationalism and xenophobia. We have to go forward towards a common united Europe.

(Loud applause)

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

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jaime Mayor Oreja (PPE), pregunta de «tarjeta azul». – Señor Presidente, sí, señor Swoboda, usted, al referirse a España —no sé si ha sido un problema de interpretación simultánea—, ha hablado de escándalo, cuando en este último mes hay 31 puestos de trabajo nuevos, que se suman a otros puestos de trabajo nuevos.

La pregunta es: ¿cuál es su concepto de escándalo? ¿Cuándo se crean puestos de trabajo, o cuando en la etapa de gobiernos socialistas se destruyeron millones de puestos de trabajo en España? ¿Cuál es su concepto de escándalo en ese sentido, señor Swoboda?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Hannes Swoboda (S&D), blue-card answer. – When we talk about recovery we think of thousands of new jobs, not merely 28 or 31. It is scandalous in this precarious situation – although you are proud of what your government has done and it is not only about politics – that there are just 31 jobs.

Do you know what has also happened? You know perfectly well that if you push people out of the queue for jobs – and the people who cannot find a job despair, and have no hope of getting a job – then you will have a good record. But recovery, for me, is about getting more people into jobs and not about having fewer people looking for work because they despair of finding it.

Many people in Spain – and not only in Spain but in many other countries too – are emigrating. You know perfectly well how many people have left the country to go to Argentina and other countries in Latin America and to Germany. We cannot solve the issue of unemployment by telling young people to leave the country and find a job elsewhere. That is not our policy in any way.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Guy Verhofstadt, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, this was Mr Barroso’s last State of the Union address before the elections, and he has also spoken about these elections. But let me be very frank: there is absolutely no room today for complacency, because in my opinion a number of important things – maybe the most important things – are still to be done to tackle this crisis. I am not alone in saying this. In last week’s issue of The Economist they wrote, and I quote: ‘our sleepwalking leaders must start now to agree if we want to avoid disaster’. The Economist was not talking about the President of the Commission – I think that the sleepwalking leaders that they meant were more to be found in the Council than in the Commission – but that is a fair analysis of what is happening.

We have to be clear here. This crisis is not over. It is true you have given a whole range of early signs of recovery, but we have to make a realistic assessment, a realistic analysis of the situation. These first signs of recovery are more the proof of the fact that we have hit the bottom of the recession, and that means that we are entering what I call a second phase of this crisis. It is far too easy only to see the negative points, as has been done a few minutes ago – but it is also not fair only to see the positive signs and say, OK, it is over now, we are going up again. That is not true. What we are in fact seeing is a second phase in this crisis: a long period of economic stagnation that we are about to enter – what I call a Japanese winter.

You know in Japan in the 1990s they also had a real-estate bubble. They entered an unresolved banking problem and for two decades they had low growth figures, high unemployment figures, growth between 0% and 2%, and that is what we are falling into now at this moment. So my problem with the State of the Union address, Mr Barroso, is that it fails to show a consistent vision for that problem: how to avoid a Japanese winter, how to avoid two lost decades of economic stagnation in the next twenty years. What do we do to avoid that? What is our common vision so we do not fall into that trap?

Personally I think that three things are necessary. Three big reforms towards a new Europe. The first thing – you have spoken about this and I want to come back to it – is a real banking union that is more than the Single Supervisory Mechanism that we have today.

Secondly – and there was not enough of this in your vision of the future – we need a more integrated eurozone, with a real government in the eurozone and in the European Union, with a common treasury, with common financial instruments so that we can finance our investments at a lower interest rate. We are on average paying 2% more interest in Europe to finance our investments than for example in Japan and America. So how can we recover?

Thirdly, I think we also have to open the issue of whether is it perhaps necessary to have a broader task for our Central Bank, as the Bank of Japan has, as the Federal Reserve Board in the United States has. In other words, next to inflation targeting, you should have gross domestic product targeting.

In fact, what I want to do today, in this debate on the State of the Union, is to make a proposal to our Parliament now to do something in these last eight months. Let us be honest, we can carry on in this last eight months in the same way as we are doing now, with big fights between the different political parties and the Council, and then we will end up with nothing at all because we will have reached the election campaign. Or we can use this time, these seven or eight months, to pick up a number of files where we are saying that they represent an added value for our people and for our citizens. Let us deal with a number of crucial files in the next months so that we can have something concrete to show for the remaining seven, eight months of this legislative period.

My proposals are two: firstly, there is a proposal now on the table from the Commission on the resolution fund to complete the banking union. Why not adopt this Commission proposal on a fast track? I think that everybody here – all the groups – can agree on the proposal that Mr Barnier has put on the table on the banking union and the resolution fund. Let us do a fast-track and let us immediately start negotiations with the Council on this. If we start with the whole business of a report and making our own mandate then we shall lose months and months and we shall not reach the discussion with the Council.

My second proposal tends in the same direction. You now have a package on the digital agenda to complete the single market with open Internet, with lower roaming tariffs. Either we discuss this, losing months in Parliament; or, together we say: yes, OK, this is a good proposal by Ms Kroes and the Commission, let us go forward and let us use a fast track. Let us immediately start the negotiations. Why waste months and months on defining a mandate on this and have nothing to show for it when the elections are here? No lower roaming tariffs and no open Internet?

My proposal to all the groups is that in the next weeks and months we make a deal on that, and the same applies to the MFF. I am sorry – and I am saying that to the Council, I am repeating what Mr Swoboda has said – there should be no agreement with Parliament if, as it appears, what you are offering on the MFF is in fact breaching your word. That is what you are doing. You are putting on the table a budget for 2014 that has lower figures for the MFF which we have to approve. How can that be possible?

Finally, I think the next elections should not be a big fight between the Left and the Right. I do not mind that, though certainly when you are in the Centre you have all the problems landing on your head. But I think it should be more between Eurosceptics, who think that you can put the world outside your borders, and pro-European forces, and I hope that all the pro-European forces can be united to beat the Eurosceptics.

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

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Miloslav Ransdorf (GUE/NGL), blue-card question. – Firstly, I agree with Mr Verhofstadt that the crisis is not over. We are facing the second stage of the crisis. What we need to overcome the crisis is a pioneering spirit and I agree with Mr Verhofstadt that we cannot see any pioneering spirit in the framework of the Commission. Instead we only see routine, the old ways of solving the problem, but in this case the Commission is not the solution to the problem but part of the problem.

In the Czech Republic we will soon be having elections. In 2004, 74% of the population were in favour of involvement in the European Union but now, in the most recent poll the same number, 74%, were against involvement in the European Union. Please could you speak about this problem of the lack of confidence...

(The President cut off the speaker)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Guy Verhofstadt (ALDE), blue-card answer. – Mr President, I do not know what the question was.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Rebecca Harms, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissionspräsident, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich finde eigentlich ganz gut, dass Herr Barroso uns daran erinnert hat, dass im nächsten Jahr 2014 ist und wir ein Hundert Jahre nach 1914 in der Europäischen Union leben.

Ich finde, die Rückbesinnung auf solche Daten, die macht noch einmal deutlicher, was für eine beneidenswerte Politikergeneration wir eigentlich heute sind, und in was für einem beneidenswerten Teil der Welt wir diejenigen sind, die politische Verantwortung für dieses wunderbare Projekt „Europäische Union” übernommen haben. Ich finde, das muss auch immer wieder gesagt werden.

Das was erreicht worden ist, ist wunderbar und es ist eher an uns allen die Fragen zu stellen, warum wir in den letzten Jahren so wenig in der Lage gewesen sind, dieses Wunder „Europäische Union” besser zu verteidigen. Denn tatsächlich haben wir ja insbesondere nach den letzten fünf Jahren, damit zu kämpfen, dass mehr und mehr Bürger in der Europäischen Union die Europäische Union nicht als Teil der Lösung, sondern als wachsendes Problem betrachten.

Von den Vorrednern, von Herrn Swoboda und auch von Herr Verhofstadt, ist gesagt worden, was ich nur unterstreichen kann: Die Krisenpolitik hat eben nicht uns alle sicher aus der Krise herausgeführt, sondern die Krise hat in weiten Teilen der Europäischen Union, so wie wir darauf reagiert haben, Elend und Perspektivlosigkeit geschaffen. Wie wir damit umgehen, wie wir aus der Rezession herauskommen und wie wir aufhören, uns immer nur mit der öffentlichen Verschuldung zu beschäftigen und die großen Risiken, die finanziell im Banken- und im Finanzsektor angetürmt sind, nicht bearbeiten, das ist eine ganz zentrale Frage. Die Bankenunion – da kann ich nur unterstützen, was Herr Kollege Verhofstadt gesagt hat – muss kommen, sonst werden wir die Ursachen der Krise nicht bekämpfen.

Ich möchte als „Grüne” Dinge ansprechen, die hier bisher überhaupt nicht erwähnt worden sind. Arbeitslosigkeit, Herr Kollege Verhofstadt, haben Sie angesprochen. Sie haben auch über die Notwendigkeit, die Rezession zu bekämpfen, geredet, aber wie machen wir das? In welche Richtung wollen wir industrielle und wirtschaftliche Erholung?

Ich finde es unerträglich, Herr Barroso, dass in Ihrer Amtszeit in den letzten fünf Jahren konsequent Klimaschutz nach hinten gerückt wurde. Ich finde es unerträglich, dass zur Zeit die Europäische Union, in der immer wieder behauptet wird, dass Energieeffizienz und Ressourceneffizienz und erneuerbare Energien die Zukunft sind, dass diese Europäische Union dank der Kommission im Moment dazu übergehen will, neue Subventionen für Atomkraft, für Kohle zu schaffen, und die neuen Technologien und die Effizienztechnologien benachteiligen will. Das ist nicht im Sinne der Bürgerinnen und Bürger, deren Vertrauen sie gewinnen will.

Ich finde auch nicht in Ordnung, dass Frau Merkel – toleriert von der Kommission – beim Kollegen Kenny in Irland oder beim Regierungschef in Portugal anruft und sagt: „Ich vertrete die Interessen von BMW und Mercedes. Wenn ihr Klimaschutz für die Autoindustrie macht, basierend auf einem abgeschlossenen Trilog, dann sorge ich als deutsche Regierungschefin dafür, dass Unternehmen von BMW und Mercedes aus diesen Ländern verschwinden.”

Meine Damen und Herren, wo sind wir eigentlich gelandet, warum widerspricht denn niemand aus der Kommission öffentlich, wenn ein solcher politischer Skandal passiert?

(Beifall)

Meine Damen und Herren, die Agrarreform – ökologisch hat das nichts gebracht! Es ist ungerecht, was Sie beschlossen haben. Das Handelsabkommen, das Sie mit den USA jetzt anfangen zu verhandeln, wird in Europa Zehntausende von Arbeitsplätzen überall in der Landwirtschaft kosten. Wollen Sie das wirklich, Herr Barroso?

Demokratie – in Italien hat das angefangen –, Pressefreiheit, Meinungsfreiheit: Sie haben das mit Ihren Kollegen akzeptiert, was da passiert ist. Heute können wir in Ungarn und in Rumänien nur noch beklagen, was da passiert. Sie verteidigen nicht die Grundrechte der Europäischen Union. Und dass der whistleblower Edward Snowden unfreiwillig im Asyl bei Putin hängt, was bedeutet das eigentlich für die demokratischen Werte und die Grundrechteorientierung in Europa?

(Beifall)

Herr Barroso, die Tabakrichtlinie: Tür und Tor weit auf für die mächtigste Lobby der Welt! Dass die Abstimmung vertagt worden ist, das ist wirklich der negative Schlusspunkt einer peinlichen Diskussion, die in der Kommission, aber auch in diesem Parlamentgeführt wird.

(Beifall)

Frau Sommer, ich würde gerne einmal mit Ihnen darüber reden.

Meine Damen und Herren, lassen Sie mich zum Schluss noch Folgendes sagen: Wir werden heute Nachmittag über Syrien in Ruhe reden. Ich bin total erleichtert, dass die Diplomatie sich noch einmal Raum geschaffen hat. Aber die Flüchtlingskatastrophe, die wir verantworten, mitverantworten – seit Monaten, seit Jahren –, die durch Syrien verschärft wird, das ist eine Schande! Sie können Europa besser machen! Herr Barroso, Sie hätten Europa besser machen können. Sie können das Vertrauen der Bürger mit einer anderen Politik zurückgewinnen.

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

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Daniel Caspary (PPE), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Geschätzte Kollegin Harms! Sie haben gerade in Ihrem Wortbeitrag aus vermeintlichen Telefonaten der deutschen Bundeskanzlerin zitiert. Da ich davon ausgehe, dass Sie die nicht persönlich abgehört haben: Kann es sein, dass vielleicht diese Situation auch ein Beispiel für Ihren gespaltenen Umgang mit dem Datenschutz ist? Die Grünen setzen sich ja auf der einen Seite immer wieder für Datenschutz ein, überdramatisieren jetzt diese Spionageaffäre und ziehen sie weiter hoch, und auf der anderen Seite möchte der grüne Verkehrsminister in Baden-Württemberg über Wochen hinweg Bewegungsprofile der Autofahrer abspeichern, um dann eine Maut abkassieren zu können.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Rebecca Harms (Verts/ALE), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Herr Caspary! Ich würde mich freuen, wenn das, was Sie sagen wollten, auch in die Richtung ginge, dass die Intervention von Frau Merkel, über die in Brüssel überall geredet wurde, direkt in Lissabon anzurufen und in Irland in Dublin anzurufen, nachdem das Parlament sich unter der Führung eines Berichterstatters aus Ihrer Fraktion im Trilog auf unverbindliche, aber richtungsgebende Grenzwerte für Pkw zur CO2-Reduzierung geeinigt hatte, dass Frau Merkel sich mit diesen Anrufen nicht nur gegen diesen Trilog gestellt hat, sondern auch deutlich gemacht hat, unterstützt von vielen Kräften aus Deutschland in Brüssel, dass mit dieser Politik Standorte deutscher Automobilindustrie in Südeuropa gefährdet werden. Das halte ich für einen politischen Skandal, für den Sie sich entschuldigen sollten, Herr Caspary!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Martin Callanan, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, Europe needs a new direction and that direction cannot be based on old ideas. Europe needs new thinking.

Now these are not my words, Mr Barroso: they are yours from the equivalent speech last year. The problem, of course, is that yet again you have not delivered on any of the big promises you have made or on any of your grand rhetoric year after year. Your chance to deliver that new direction has passed.

The question we have to address now is whether your successor will be able to deliver any of the change that the EU so desperately needs. Next year the Commission will have a fresh leader, although personally I am not optimistic that he or she will come up with any fresh ideas. Indeed, many of the applicants for your job are here today.

It is like a giant hustings meeting. Commissioner Reding, who I think has moved to the front bench now, is clearly running as the federalist candidate, producing more eye-catching babble every day that goes past. Commissioner Rehn could be delivering the speech next year, although I suspect that if he did we would all have a bit of a late lunch. And if Commissioner Rehn gets the Liberal nomination, what about poor Mr Verhofstadt? What is he going to do? Perhaps he could challenge Mr Schulz for the Socialist nomination. I am sure he would feel more at home in that group.

In fact I think I am one of the few people here who do not actually want to do your job. I am perfectly happy with the one that I have got.

The problem of course is that none of these potential candidates on show today represents any new ideas. They represent the vested interests of the past: the people of the European district in Brussels, rather than the people of Europe. And next May the choice will not be about anonymous candidates from political groupings that nobody has ever heard of. It will be about whether you want merely to shuffle the deck of cards or to throw the deck out completely and start afresh.

The essential flaw of the EU is that it simply does not trust the capacity of people and markets to overcome problems. Problems, we are told repeatedly here, can be solved only by ‘more Europe’. If somebody falls off a ladder somewhere in Europe, we need a new directive to solve it. People are not allowed to be trusted to decide their own working hours. They are not even to be allowed to take up e-cigarettes, to cite another topical example.

And when EU lawyers say, as they did yesterday, that the financial transaction tax, so beloved of so many of you, is actually illegal, that does not matter because nothing – not even the law – should stand in the way of further European integration.

We need a new Euro-realist direction with different ideas: one that says that patriotism is healthy; to be proudly German or French or Polish is not necessarily anti-European. The concepts are not mutually antagonistic, and to want a new direction for Europe is not anti-European. The real anti-Europeans are those whose idea of change in the EU only means moving further in the old, failed direction. The real nationalists are those who force us to accept a European nation, which, as reality shows, nobody in Europe actually wants.

And you know what? We have tried the old interventionist, centralising, socialist-type approach. It may have been appropriate for the 1950s; today it is well past its sell-by date. So, let us try something different. Let us try a new approach. Perhaps we could rediscover the principle of freedom that many in Europe fashioned for the world, of opening our markets, of embracing enterprise, of eliminating the many vested interests in the Union.

Next year’s elections will offer us an opportunity, not to advance European political parties and their candidates, beloved of many of us although nobody in the real world has heard of them, but to give people a true choice – not a choice about who you want steering the tanker, but actually about whether you want the tanker to go in a different direction.

Many of us want change. All the polls indicate that the people of Europe want change. Next May, they will have a chance to make a stand. They can say that they do not simply want a new president for the EU; they want a new direction for it.

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

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Graham Watson (ALDE), blue-card question. – In his group Mr Callanan has three Members who represent Gibraltar and yet he has said nothing about the frustration over the summer of the right to free movement of the people of Gibraltar or the harassment they have been suffering. Does this suggest that he does not think this is important? And would Mr Callanan welcome the fact that Prime Minister Cameron picked up the telephone to President Barroso and asked President Barroso to help him on this issue?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Martin Callanan (ECR), blue-card answer. – I commend Mr Watson’s opportunism in raising the subject of Gibraltar – he raised it again yesterday, so perhaps there is an election coming up – but the Conservative Members in my Group do an excellent job of representing the people of Gibraltar. He knows that I agree with them that the actions of the Spanish Government have been disgraceful.

Actually the people who they are hurting are the people of Spain – in the poorer parts of Spain – who actually want to cross the border into a free and prosperous Gibraltar and actually make a living and earn some money for their families.

So I am sure this is designed to distract attention from the many domestic problems that Mr García Magallo is suffering with his Prime Minister in Spain. I hope that the problems are resolved soon.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Τάκης Χατζηγεωργίου, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας GUE/NGL. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, εγώ προσωπικά έχω θαυμάσει το κουράγιο του κυρίου Barroso και την πίστη του ότι τα πράγματα βαίνουν καλώς στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Αγωνίστηκα να καταλάβω πόθεν προέρχεται αυτό το κουράγιο και νομίζω ότι προέρχεται από το γεγονός ότι ζει σε άλλη Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση από αυτή στην οποία ζω εγώ. Θα σας δώσω μερικές επιπρόσθετες εικόνες από αυτές που έχει δώσει ο κύριος Swoboda. Μόλις εκατό μέτρα έξω από το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο στις Βρυξέλλες συναντάτε κάθε εκατό μέτρα μερικούς ζητιάνους. Δεν τους έχετε δει; Και εδώ στο Στρασβούργο στα πεζοδρόμια κοιμούνται άστεγοι, στην καρδιά της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης! Και στην Κύπρο χιλιάδες παιδιά καταφέρνουν να πάνε στο σχολείο, σήμερα το 2013, επειδή φιλανθρωπικές οργανώσεις μπορούν να τους πάρουν ένα σάντουιτς και ένα ποτήρι γάλα, χιλιάδες νέοι... Για αυτό λέω ότι μάλλον ζούμε σε διαφορετική Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση από αυτή στην οποία ζει ο κύριος Barroso.

Although we are still in the midst of an economic crisis, all the austerity policies and measures that are being promoted are not only aggravating the problems that the economy is facing, but are also leading to a deepening of the crisis. The result is increased poverty and unemployment, more cuts and privatisations.

The harsh realities of the economic crisis cannot be afforded any more by the people. In saying this, we are not only referring to the European citizens of the south, we are also referring to all those people who lose their jobs in Germany, in France, in Slovenia, in Cyprus.

In my country, where the decisions taken by the Troika destroyed the economy, unfortunately the EU is associated nowadays with the economic crisis. It has lost the battle on technology and it also lacks coherence.

And now some words about Syria. We condemn any external intervention in the internal affairs of the country. We have already the example of Iraq where, during Blair’s and Bush’s orchestrated witch-hunt to discover one bottle of chemicals, more than one million people perished. They are still trying to find that bottle of chemicals. As long as the European Union continues to be dragged in the wake of others, it will never be able to play a substantial role towards peace.

Concerning chemical weapons, we believe that the Russian proposal could potentially be a solution. Nonetheless we cannot avoid asking the question who produces them? And who sells them? It is high time to start being more serious about disarmament. We have a duty as Europeans to play an important role towards this end. This is the cornerstone for achieving global peace. For as long as Europe accepts and continues to take part in the global arms trade industry, then wars will continue unabated.

Mr Barroso, there is a lack of democracy in Europe. We have to accept that. If we really want to see European citizens supporting the European Union project, the European Union can only fully materialise for its people when a Cypriot or a Maltese feels equal with a German or a French or a British citizen. Democracy means respect for minorities. There is no proportional respect today for smaller countries and I dare to say there is no respect even in the working of our Parliament as far as the minority opinion is concerned. As Baroness Ashton said lately to Mr Morsi, democracy is not only elections: democracy is the life that lies in between two elections.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Nigel Farage, on behalf of the EFD Group. – Mr President, the problem is not just Mr Barroso but the entire unelected government of Europe – and perhaps there is a chance for our citizens to reflect on where the real power lies in this Union.

I have listened to Mr Barroso for nearly 10 years and I give him full marks for consistency. He is a man who likes fixed ideology. He probably picked it up when he was a Communist or a Maoist, or whatever he was, and for the last 10 years he has pursued Euro-federalism combined with an increasing green obsession.

And yes, it has been good! For bureaucrats, big businessmen and landowners it has not been a bad decade, but it has been a disaster for poor people, unemployed people and those on low wages. The euro, which you, Mr Barroso, believed would give us monetary stability, has done the very opposite. It was a misconstruction from the start and it is pretty clear that youth unemployment, at nearly 50% across the Mediterranean, is probably nearly double what it would have been, as a direct result of the misconstruction that is the euro. The countries in question are in the wrong currency, but I know that you will never admit to that. I think the euro will die a slow and painful death, but you are all in denial about that.

However, it is the green agenda that I really find more interesting. You keep telling us, Mr Barroso, that climate change is an absolute top priority and you have been greeted with near-hysteria in this place over the last 10 years. Those of us who have been sceptical have been mocked, derided and called deniers. We argued from the start that the science was not settled, and we have argued very strongly that the measures we are taking to combat what may or not be a problem are damaging our citizens. We have been proved to be right. Tens of millions have been forced into fuel poverty; manufacturing industry is being driven away because our competitors in China and America are going for cheap fossil alternatives; and wind turbines are blighting the landscapes and seascapes of Europe. Yet still today you go on about green growth. Well, the consensus is breaking down behind you.

Commissioner Tajani said the other day that we face a systematic industrial massacre. It is time to stop this stupidity. To help you, there is the NASA photograph taken last August of the northern ice caps and there is the NASA photograph of the ice caps taken this year. The ice has increased by 60% in one year. Leading American scientists are now saying that we are going into a period of between 15 and 30 years of global cooling. We may have made one of the biggest and most stupid collective mistakes in history by getting so worried about global warming.

You can reverse this in the next seven or eight months. You can bring down people’s taxes. If you do not do so, they will vote on it in the European elections of next year.

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

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jörg Leichtfried (S&D), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Herr Präsident! Herr Farage! Sie sind ja manchmal recht witzig, aber immer seltener! Sie sitzen erste Reihe fußfrei und erzählen uns jetzt allen, was wir besser machen sollen, was Herr Barroso besser machen soll, was alle anderen besser machen sollen. Aber was haben Sie in dieser Zeit gemacht, seit Sie im Europäischen Parlament sind? Sie haben keinen einzigen Bericht eingebracht. Sie waren nie Schattenberichterstatter. Sie haben nie eine Stellungnahme gemacht. Das Einzige, was Sie gemacht haben, ist herumzuquatschen! Und Sie werfen den anderen vor, dass nichts geschieht! Wie kommen Sie dazu, Herr Farage? Wie können Sie das vor Ihren Wählern und Wählerinnen rechtfertigen, hier noch nie gearbeitet zu haben?

(Beifall)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Nigel Farage (EFD), blue-card answer. – Oh no, I’m sorry, old son, I haven’t accused you of not working – far from that. I have accused you of doing far too much and actually, collectively in this House, forming a consensus, and I am going to come back to this green agenda. You all formed the view that carbon dioxide emissions were leading to rapid global warming and that it was the greatest crisis that has ever faced mankind, and therefore we had to start taxing carbon.

There has been no global warming, Sir, for twenty years. The ice caps have grown significantly over the last twelve months, and I am making a positive proposal that would put back into work tens of thousands of people, and I am saying: let us scrap these climate levies and let us see where the science goes over the course of the next few years. I cannot think of a more positive thing that has been said in this House this morning.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Nicole Sinclaire (NI). - Mr President, I am amazed that we have had this State of the Union address today. I am surprised that Mrs Merkel has not asked us to postpone it until after the German general election.

Well, Mr Barroso, this was your fourth and last State of the Union address and you have brought along the rest of your appointed Commission – for support. Never before has a tier of this Parliament been filled with such incompetence and failure.

A question, why is it that it is the President of the unelected arm of the EU that gives this address? Why is it not President Schulz?

One Member of your Commission is here today, despite only having an attendance record of 52%, almost as low as a UKIP MEP. Your flagship policy, when you became President, was the much-vaunted Lisbon Strategy which seeks to make the EU the most dynamic economy in the world. That sank without trace. In fact the EU has gone into reverse. Unemployment, especially among youth, is rocketing and little Miss Red Tape sitting next to you is not helping.

Mr Barroso, your own Commission’s poll shows there is no trust in the EU. The people of the biggest five countries feel the EU is not working. Two-thirds of people across the EU think their views are not being heard. No wonder – but when they do express an opinion, for example in a rare referendum, they are treated with contempt and told that somehow they do not understand. The arrogance is palpable. The people must be listened to. Let the people decide.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Linas Antanas Linkevičius, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, President of the Commission, Commissioners, honourable Members, on behalf of the Council let me thank President Barroso for his clear and perceptive analysis of the current state of the European Union.

The President has set out many of the challenges we all face, not least in the area of economic and financial policies. The development of the economic and monetary union, banking union and the single resolution mechanism, as part of the overall objective of ensuring effective European decision-making in the banking sector: these are the priority areas for the Lithuanian Presidency.

President Barroso has rightly underlined the importance of continuing to make progress on the establishment of banking union, and effective delivery is essential here for all of us. Equally importantly to this end, we need to finalise the various proposals under the single market focusing on the digital agenda – something that was raised here in this House yesterday when a very important discussion took place – as well as moving forward with the internal energy market. I can assure the Commission of the Lithuanian Presidency’s support on these and other key issues.

We look forward to rapid progress in the trade and investment negotiations with the US, which, as was mentioned in this address, can give us a powerful tool for delivering greater prosperity and creating jobs.

The European economy also stands to benefit from the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), which will release much-needed funds to help stimulate growth and create jobs, particularly – and I agree with you here – for young people. The agreement we reached in June constitutes a good deal for our citizens and is very welcome. We therefore look forward to its adoption in the near future. I strongly agree that getting the economy financed is of crucial importance. We must work together here to adopt the MFF speedily. I can assure you that everything will be done according to agreed procedures and within an agreed legal framework.

‘Unity’ is a key word which was sounded today many times, and the united stance on Syria is of crucial importance. Our strong, united position, as reflected in the High Representative’s statement in Vilnius, has undoubtedly already contributed to the search for a diplomatic solution. It is already a contribution to this process. Mention was also made of united support for the countries of the Eastern Partnership, to help them withstand external pressure. This is another of our tasks, and we are addressing it.

I do not intend to run through all the issues raised by President Barroso in his address. Many of them, as I have said, already constitute priorities for the Lithuanian Presidency. I want to assure both the Commission and this House of the Presidency’s support in tackling the heavy agenda which lies before us. Our Irish colleagues set a formidable example with the results they were able to achieve, and we hope to prove equally productive. I know that our Greek colleagues, as the other member of the trio group, share the same ambition. Together we have a great deal of work to do before this parliamentary term comes to an end next year.

 
  
  

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. GIANNI PITTELLA
Vicepresidente

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Herbert Reul (PPE). - Herren Präsidenten! Natürlich ist Europa noch in einer Krise, und es kommt darauf an, sie zu lösen und die Menschen bei dieser Lösung mitzunehmen – das stimmt.

Aber ich bin mir nicht sicher – Frau Harms, Herr Swoboda, Herr Verhofstadt – ob man Menschen bei der Bewältigung einer schwierigen Frage mitnimmt, indem man nur von morgens bis abends erklärt, wie dramatisch die Lage ist, wie elendig das ist, wie die blanke Not herrscht, wie alle nur in Not darben. Das stimmt doch nicht. Die Situation ist doch viel komplexer.

Und zur realistischen Beschreibung: – Da bin ich dem Herrn Präsidenten Barroso heute wirklich dankbar – er hat eine realistische Beschreibung abgegeben. Er hat keine Schönrednerei betrieben. Er hat beschrieben, welche Maßnahmen welche Erfolge haben und welche Maßnahmen wir weiter betreiben müssen. Und im Gegensatz zu vielen aus der linken Ecke dieses Hauses ist er eben der Meinung, dass man diesen Weg konsequent weitergehen muss, das ist auch richtig so!

An Strukturen, an Sparreformen geht kein Weg vorbei, aber es ist nicht alles. Aber es ist zentral, und es war erfolgreich! Und wenn Sie gestern einmal die Süddeutsche Zeitung gelesen haben: US-Anleger kaufen derzeit mehr europäische Aktien als je zuvor in den vergangenen 36 Jahren, auch das Vertrauen in Staatsanleihen steigt. Also Leute, es geht doch voran. Jetzt lasst uns doch mal bitte die Lage realistisch beschreiben. Die Maßnahmen waren richtig, sie waren vernünftig. Es braucht Zeit, manchmal muss man auch Situationen über eine längere Zeit durchhalten.

Und es gibt auch noch ein paar Fragen zu lösen. Na klar gibt es die, und sie sind ja auch hier beschrieben worden. Sie sind auch richtig beschrieben worden. Und sie richten sich an die Kommission, aber sie richten sich auch manchmal an uns. Wisst Ihr, immer dieses Gequatsche von Wirtschaft- und Industrieförderung, und dann gleichzeitig heute Mittag eine UVP beschließen, mit der die Maßnahmen für Industrieansiedlungen weiter verschärft werden, das ist ja nicht nur verlogen, das ist ja lächerlich. Das passiert doch hier.

(Beifall)

Hier wird Schönrednerei betrieben, wenn gesagt wird, wir müssen uns um die Industrie kümmern. Da meint man aber irgendwie nur die „schöne grüne neue Welt”. Und wenn es konkret wird, Frau Harms, da machen Sie mit, noch neue Auflagen reinzupacken. Was heute ansteht bei der Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfung, was ansteht bei vielen Vorschlägen, die Sie hier machen – Verbote, neue Genehmigungen, neue Auflagen – das macht Wachstum kaputt, und dafür sind Sie verantwortlich. Das ärgert mich maßlos!

(Beifall)

(Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte” gemäß Artikel 149 Absatz 8 zu beantworten.)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ana Gomes (S&D), Pergunta segundo o procedimento "cartão azul". – O Sr. Reul e o Presidente Barroso esqueceram-se de medir o estado da União pelo crescimento da desigualdade entre países ricos e pobres e entre cidadãos ricos e pobres em cada Estado-Membro. O que é que o Sr. Reul tem a dizer aos cidadãos alemães que vão votar este mês, muito preocupados com o que estão a gastar com os países resgatados, enquanto a Alemanha está a ganhar com os empréstimos e até já poupou 41 mil milhões de euros com os juros baixos ou negativos, enquanto os países resgatados se financiam a juros exorbitantes e a sua dívida pública não para de crescer? O que é que acham que pensam os cidadãos gregos, portugueses, irlandeses e espanhóis desta gritante negação do que deviam ser o euro e a União?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Herbert Reul (PPE), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Ich habe in meinem politischen Leben in den letzten Jahrzehnten in der europäischen Politik gelernt, dass Staaten, die sorgfältig mit Geld umgehen, Staaten, die sich um Strukturreform bemühen, einen mühsamen Weg gehen. Auch Deutschland hat das ja gemacht. Da gab es einmal einen SPD-Kanzler, der ist diesen Weg gegangen. Und damit haben wir uns die Kraft geschaffen, neues Wachstum zu erarbeiten und für die armen Menschen auch Arbeitsplätze zu schaffen. Ich kenne keine Alternative zu diesem Weg. Auf jeden Fall reicht Geld ausgeben und Geld reinschmeißen alleine nicht aus. Es muss ein bisschen intelligenter sein, Frau Kollegin!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Tonino Picula (S&D). - Gospodine Predsjedniče, u svom obraćanju danas, kao niti u pošlogodišnjem izvještaju o stanju Unije nijednom niste spomenuli proširenje Unije, kao ni Hrvatsku koja je prošle godine već završila pregovore, a od prvog srpnja je 28. članica. A trebali ste, jer je Hrvatska prva zemlja koja je ušla u Uniju nakon stupanja na snagu Lisabonskog sporazuma, što je zajednički uspjeh same Hrvatske, institucija Europske unije i, svakako, Vaše Komisije. Kao najnovija članica dokazat ćemo kako proširenje Unije na Hrvatsku olakšava traženje europskog rješenja i za regionalne napetosti budući da situacija na jugoistoku našeg kontinenta ostaje i dalje složena. Kada govorimo o utjecaju ulaska Hrvatske u Europsku uniju na regiju, volio bih da do iduće godine, kada će svijet obilježiti stogodišnjicu početka tragedije zvane Prvi svjetski rat, države na jugoistoku Europske unije budu još uvijek jasnije na putu članstva u Uniju jer se jedino tako mogu zaista otkloniti posljedice sukoba koji su tijekom prošlog stoljeća toliko koštali, ne samo taj prostor, nego cijelu Europu. Često ste spominjali globalizaciju. U vremenu kada su se snažno globalizirala tržišta, globalizirale su se i raznovrsne prijetnje, od financijskih i gospodarskih kriza do ratova, ali solidarnost se nažalost nije globalizirala u jednakoj mjeri. To potvrđuju razmjeri duboke krize u kojoj se Europa još uvijek nalazi. Gospodine Predsjedniče, što je s Vašim lanjskim prijedlogom „Decisive deal for Europe”? U travnju ove godine retorički ste se odrekli drastične politike odricanja, ali imam dojam da je europska politika ostala jednostrana, da se nastavlja naglašavati tržište i monetrana dimenzija, a zapostavlja socijalna politika i politika zapošljavanja. Visoka nezaposlenost mladih, žena i starijih radnika potpuno je izmijenila strukturu zaposlenosti u velikom dijelu Unije. Statistički podaci pokazuju da će svaka nova europska generacija biti manje zastupljena u trajnom zapošljavanju od generacije prije nje. Dakle, u Europskoj godini građana građani ostaju suočeni s ozbiljnim europskim socijalnim i gospodarskim neizvjesnostima. To je opomena svima nama, ali Vi ste među najodgovrnijima. Hvala.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Alexander Graf Lambsdorff (ALDE). - Herr Präsident, Herr Barroso! Das war eine sehr gute State-of-the-Union-Rede, eine realistische Beschreibung der Situation. Erste Anzeichen von Besserung sind zu sehen: Die Wirtschaft wächst wieder, wenn auch auf niedrigem Niveau, die Arbeitslosigkeit sinkt, die Exporte steigen, die Spreads werden geringer. Dies zeigt, dass der eingeschlagene Weg richtig ist. Ich bin sehr dankbar, dass Sie das heute so deutlichgemacht haben. Das war wichtig, und es war ein sehr klares Signal! Der eingeschlagene Weg ist die Konsolidierung der öffentlichen Finanzen, dazu hat Kollege Reul eben schon etwas gesagt, aber es sind eben auch Strukturreformen in den betroffenen Ländern: Liberalisierung der Gütermärkte, der Dienstleistungsmärkte und der Arbeitsmärkte – all die schmerzhaften Prozesse, die einige Länder bereits hinter sich haben.

Ich will hier ein paar Worte zur Jugendarbeitslosigkeit sagen: Ja, es ist richtig, sie ist viel zu hoch, sie ist dramatisch und muss bekämpft werden. Aber wo waren eigentlich unsere Freunde von den Sozialisten und den Grünen, als die Jugendarbeitslosigkeit in einigen der betroffenen Länder bereits vor der Krise bei 20, 25 % lag? Da haben wir die Liberalisierung der Arbeitsmärkte vorgeschlagen, da haben wir Strukturreformen vorgeschlagen, das wurde immer abgelehnt. Es ist ja nicht so, dass die Arbeitslosigkeit erst durch die Krise nach oben gegangen ist. Sind wir am Ziel? Nein, sicher nicht, aber wir sind sicher auf dem richtigen Weg!

Und lassen Sie mich eine Sache ganz zum Schluss noch sagen: Sehr dankbar bin ich Ihnen dafür, dass Sie eine Rechtsstaatsinitiative aufnehmen, dass Sie die Diskussion um Ungarn jetzt zum Anlass nehmen – liebe Kollegin Reding, Sie haben das ja auch vorangebracht –, um etwas zu tun, damit wir Europäer unsere Werte verteidigen. Wenn wir unsere Werte vergessen, vergessen wir uns selbst! Das dürfen wir nicht zulassen! Viel Glück dabei!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jill Evans (Verts/ALE). - Mr President, President Barroso asked us what would make Europe stronger. Well, today is Catalonia’s National Day and thousands of people will form a human chain across the country to demand independence in the form of the Catalan Way, which is based on the Baltic Way of 1989 which led to the independence of the Baltic countries and transformed the European Union.

Next year there will be a legally-agreed referendum on Scottish Independence. I represent Wales, which is a nation with its own government. However, in the Council of Ministers our vote is passed by the UK and not in the Welsh national interest, even when funding and jobs are at stake. We want the ability to play a full part in rebuilding the economy, reclaiming Europe for all its nations and regions. That is what will make Europe stronger. Also, you mentioned the centenary of the First World War, so can I ask that you today pledge your support for the peace process in the Basque country?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jan Zahradil (ECR). - Pane předsedající, pane přesedo Barroso, já jsem vás volil v roce 2004, protože vás předcházela pověst reformátora. V roce 2009 už jsem sice nevěřil, že jste reformátor, ale volil jsem vás stejně, abych dokázal, že naše skupina ECR se umí chovat konstruktivně. Věřte, že kdybyste kandidoval potřetí, což už kandidovat nebudete, tak bych vás už nevolil. A váš dnešní projev je toho jenom důkazem, ten mi to jenom potvrdil. Já vás nebudu trápit, pane předsedo, myslím, že to byl suverénně nejslabší projev, který jste kdy v této sněmovně, v tomto sále pronesl. Ale daleko zajímavější bylo to, co přišlo potom, daleko zajímavější byly ty reakce z jednotlivých skupin, od lidovců, od socialistů, od liberálů, od zelených. Ta bezradnost a to zoufalství, které z toho čišelo.

Ono by to bylo skoro směšné, kdyby to zároveň nebylo tragické, jak ani jedna z těchto skupin neví, jak má reagovat na to, co je všechno dnes v Evropské unii špatně. Prostě vy jste si všichni tady vystavěli vzdušný zámek, takovou skleněnou věž, teď se tam začínají objevovat praskliny a nikdo z vás neví, co s tím vlastně dělat, a všichni jenom dokolečka dokola opakujete: „více Evropy, více Evropy“, a strašíte tady euroskepticismem.

Já tedy nevím, co to přesně je, ten euroskepticismus, ale vím, že počet lidí v Evropě, kteří se dívají kriticky na současný stav Evropské unie, pořád narůstá. A být kritický k některým aspektům Evropské unie neznamená být euroskeptik. Neznamená to chtít tu konstrukci zničit, ale znamená to chtít ji vylepšit.

To se ovšem nemůže stát, dokud tady budou sedět lidé jako vy. Dámy a pánové, já vám říkám, bohužel, jste všichni úplně mimo, úplně mimo. A naštěstí ty volby příští rok dopadnou tak, že lidí jako vy tady bude stále méně, lidí jako my tady bude stále více, a to bude pokračovat, dokud se nám nepodaří paradigma evropské integrace změnit nějakým rozumnějším směrem. Já se na to velice těším, dámy a pánové.

(Řečník souhlasil s tím, že odpoví na otázku položenou zvednutím modré karty (čl. 149 odst. 8 jednacího řádu)).

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Michael Theurer (ALDE), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Kollege Zahradil! Sind Sie bereit, anzuerkennen, dass nicht die EU Probleme hat, sondern dass die Nationalstaaten ihre Hausaufgaben nicht gemacht haben? Nehmen wir doch einmal die Jugendarbeitslosigkeit: Da hat doch die EU überhaupt keine Kompetenzen! Da wird jetzt behauptet, die EU hätte Probleme. Sie stellen sich hier hin und sprechen von EU-Problemen. Tatsache ist doch, dass die Nationalstaaten – also das Konzept, das Sie vertreten – die Probleme geschaffen haben. Da müssten Sie die Nationalstaaten einmal auffordern, vor ihrer eigenen Tür zu kehren. Präsident Barroso hat doch völlig Recht, wenn er sagt, die Probleme werden europäisiert und die Erfolge nationalisiert! Das ist doch der falsche Weg!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jan Zahradil (ECR), odpověď na otázku Michaela Theurera položenou zvednutím modré karty. – Pane Theurere, já s vámi klidně budu souhlasit v tom, že jsou evropské vlády, které se chovají nezodpovědně, které žily na dluh, které utrácely víc, než mohly, a které zruinovaly vlastní rozpočty a zruinovaly vlastní ekonomiku. Ale já nevěřím, že je možné vymyslet takové evropské řešení, které – shora, od zeleného stolu – se uvalí na tyto země jako nějaká násilná nepřirozená věc.

Podívejte se, k čemu to vede, podívejte se, jaké nálady vznikají např. v Řecku. A podívejte se naproti tomu, jaké nálady vznikají v Německu. To jsou nálady, které jsou vyprokovány nepřirozenými umělými celoevropskými řešeními, které občané ani jedné z těchto zemí nejsou schopni akceptovat.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Lorenzo Fontana (EFD). - Signor Presidente, dal mio punto di vista, il problema è che quest'Europa è stata costruita al contrario, nel senso che uno Stato federale doveva mettere in primo piano soprattutto la realizzazione di un'unione politica, estera e di difesa, mentre noi siamo partiti dall'unione monetaria. Se è vero che l'attuale crisi economica non è imputabile all'Europa, è anche vero che le politiche europee e la moneta unica, purtroppo, non hanno favorito la ripresa, anzi, forse l'hanno resa molto più difficile e lenta.

Signor Presidente, ci chiediamo come mai ci siano tanti cittadini contrari all'Europa. Personalmente, le devo dire che mi stupirei del contrario. Ovviamente, questo non significa che i cittadini sono contrari all'Europa tout court, perché ci sono delle contraddizioni da risolvere. Ad esempio, dov'è l'unità europea quando – com'è successo quest'estate – Malta rifiuta di accogliere un barcone di immigrati e rifugiati, i quali devono essere dirottati verso le coste italiane? Dove erano finite nella fattispecie la solidarietà e l'unità europee? Dov'è l'Europa unita quando si tratta di difendere il settore manifatturiero dalla concorrenza sleale cinese? Anche sotto questo aspetto si fa molto poco.

Cosa dovrei raccontare a quei giovani che per trovare un lavoro sono costretti ad emigrare – come avevano fatto i loro nonni – che l'Europa si preoccupa per l'appunto di finanziare rifugiati politici, Stati in preadesione come la Turchia e talune minoranze come i rom? Cosa dovrei dire, che l'Europa non si occupa dei giovani?

Signor Presidente, se risolveremo questi problemi probabilmente ci sarà un po' più di europeismo.

(L'oratore accetta di rispondere a una domanda "cartellino blu" 'articolo 149, paragrafo 8, del regolamento))

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Liisa Jaakonsaari (S&D), sinisen kortin kysymys. – Arvoisa puhemies, komission puheenjohtaja Barroso sanoi puheessaan viisaasti, että Euroopan unionin pitää olla suuri suurissa asioissa ja pieni pienissä asioissa. Mutta kun kuuntelen teidän ryhmänne edustajia ja nyt teitä, puheenjohtajaa, niin en löydä yhtä ainoaa asiaa, en suurta enkä pientä, jossa te näkisitte Euroopan unionilla olevan tärkeän roolin. Äsken puhuitte puolustuspolitiikasta. Onko todellakin niin, että ajattelette puolustuspolitiikkaa ainoana alueena, jossa Euroopan pitäisi toimia yhdessä?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Lorenzo Fontana (EFD), Risposta a una domanda "cartellino blu". – Non solo in tema di politica di difesa., mi sembra di essere stato abbastanza chiaro. Ad esempio, in materia di politica commerciale ed economica nei riguardi di paesi che fanno concorrenza sleale, quando stipuliamo trattati con la Cina che magari impiega gli schiavi nei laogai, ecco l'Europa potrebbe davvero fare molto di più. Questo è un ambito nel quale l'Europa potrebbe difendere i cittadini europei, ma purtroppo ritengo si faccia ancora abbastanza poco.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Philip Claeys (NI). - Mijnheer Barroso, de goednieuwsshow die u daarjuist heeft gegeven was bijna een oefening in zelfparodie, een oefening in politieke satire. Het kwam erop neer dat u op de G20 in St. Petersburg felicitaties in ontvangst heeft kunnen nemen voor de aanpak van de problemen van de EU.

Welnu, ik nodig u uit om even met beide voeten op de grond te gaan staan. Binnen enkele dagen zullen de Duitse kiezers naar de stembus trekken, en onmiddellijk daarna zal de grote ontnuchtering volgen en zullen zij te horen krijgen hoeveel geld er opnieuw naar Griekenland moet gaan en naar alle andere landen. De problemen worden onder de mat geveegd in de hoop dat de kiezers niet in opstand zullen komen.

Wij weten allemaal dat de burgers in Europa zich massaal afkeren van de bemoeizuchtige en geldverslindende EU en zij hebben daar alle reden toe. De euro is voor de noordelijke landen een bodemloze put geworden en voor de zuidelijke landen een economische gevangenis.De Schengenruimte leidt tot nog meer ongecontroleerde immigratie, terwijl er nu al meer dan 26 miljoen werklozen in de EU zijn en dat is waar de Europese kiezers in mei volgend jaar mee zullen afrekenen.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE). - Mr President, allow me to thank Mr Barroso for an honest and reasonable speech. You used those words yourself when you spoke.

Let us not disrespect our citizens: they are much more sophisticated than many Members, and particularly the previous speaker, realise. Allow me to cite the Eurobarometer survey that this Parliament itself conducted: our citizens realise that peace and freedom of movement are two of the European Union’s most positive achievements. A large majority say that membership of the European Union is a good thing. Ireland despite our difficulties – and many have spoken about them – is particularly positive: 66% say EU membership is a good thing.

Seven Europeans in ten – and this is important – think that what brings us together is much more significant than what separates us. However, one particular finding should give great heart to those of us who know that Europe has a future: a clear majority believe that, by 2025, EU citizens will be more involved in European affairs than they currently are. So there is a future and we have to build it. That means we have to solve the problems which, we know, exist today. Rather than moaning about them and getting up here all the time to say how bad things are, let us get on and cure the problems.

Member States are doing this with difficulty themselves. The European Union has to assist them. So let us continue the work, and let us do it not because there is an election coming but because we are elected to do it and to serve our citizens.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). - Señor Presidente, señor Presidente de la Comisión, estoy de acuerdo en que el debate de hoy no puede limitarse a los últimos meses ni circunscribirse a datos y magnitudes que puedan ofrecer una foto distorsionada del estado de la Unión.

Estamos en la recta final de la legislatura, con unas elecciones europeas próximas –mayo de 2014–; nos estamos jugando el futuro de la Unión y es el momento de hacer balance y rendir cuentas.

Y la Unión sigue padeciendo los efectos de la gran recesión, que ha sido la peor hora de su historia, y no es aceptable intentar una narrativa edulcorada que pretenda hacer pasar por recuperación o luz al final del túnel lo que no es sino un punto de inflexión de un ciclo negativo que dura demasiado, en el que el manejo de la crisis ha sido pésimo, con errores de diagnóstico, de estrategia y de dirección política.

Incluso si se deja atrás la recesión, la crisis no ha terminado. El proyecto político basado en la confianza mutua está muy deteriorado, y el euroescepticismo, el populismo y el extremismo son sus consecuencias.

De manera que dejar atrás la recesión puede ser un efecto estadístico: después de una prolongada caída, un punto de inflexión hacia arriba; pero nada permite anunciar ningún tiempo nuevo, ni legitima la estrategia de austeridad aplicada implacablemente, ni el sentimiento de culpa y penitencia que se ha impuesto a los países con mayores dificultades, quebrando el espíritu europeo de solidaridad.

De manera que el triunfalismo económico está injustificado. Pero no es inocente, convalida la política aplicada: ni cambia, ni camufla, ni tapa el daño social, ni la creciente desigualdad, ni la injusticia provocada por los ajustes de la crisis, ni las esperanzas rotas, ni las vidas truncadas de muchos europeos, y no solo entre la gente joven.

Pero sigue habiendo 26 millones de parados, muchos sin cobertura y sin esperanza de volver a encontrar empleo, como sucede en España, donde el derrumbamiento de la población activa y el desánimo de quienes ya no tienen incentivos para inscribirse en las listas del paro no equivalen ni a crecimiento del empleo ni a reducción del paro.

El déficit público está muy por encima de lo que en su momento se anunció como tope de imposible cumplimiento, luego revisado al servicio de la misma estrategia fallida. Y la deuda pública está en unos niveles sin precedentes. Por cierto, los mismos que la doctrina que se ha usado de cobertura –dice que son incompatibles con el crecimiento–, pero lo cierto es que estamos ante un crecimiento raquítico, sin empleo y sin esperanza para los jóvenes, que es la negación del impulso europeo y del modelo social europeo.

De manera que el estado de la Unión no es bueno, no es aceptable; seguimos necesitando inversión, crecimiento, empleo, financiado con recursos y un presupuesto robusto, y, en definitiva, una respuesta europeísta, que muchos echan de menos desde hace ya unos cuantos años.

(El orador acepta responder a una pregunta formulada con arreglo al procedimiento de la «tarjeta azul» (artículo 149, apartado 8, del Reglamento))

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Krisztina Morvai (NI), blue-card question. – You mentioned extremism as a problem. What do you think about the mass surveillance of European citizens?

This is a question which I wanted to ask Mr Barroso, but due to a lack of full democracy there is no opportunity to ask him spontaneous questions. What do you think about his adviser, Mr György Konrád? Mr Konrád is a Hungarian who is an adviser of the Commission on the future of Europe, and he, as a liberal person, thinks that there is nothing wrong with mass surveillance.

Is it part of the future of Europe that it will be OK and accepted that we shall be surveyed by Big Brother?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D), respuesta de «tarjeta azul». – Sí, el extremismo, claro que sí, es un desafío. Está bien el recordatorio de que el año que viene se cumplirán cien años del desencadenamiento de la conflagración que fue en su momento la más devastadora de la historia de Europa, hasta que 30 años después vino la Segunda Guerra Mundial, aún peor, causada por un incremento, por un redoble, de mayor nacionalismo y de mayor extremismo. No es la respuesta adecuada, no. Soy un europeísta convencido, pero también convencido de que hay que cambiar el rumbo, de que hace falta otra política europea, con otros contenidos y otra dirección, y de que hay una Unión Europea que demasiados europeos echan de menos durante demasiado tiempo.

Pero ha mencionado también el espionaje masivo sobre los europeos, y es una ocasión en la que la Unión Europea tiene que mostrar que se preocupa por los derechos fundamentales de los ciudadanos y los hace valer. Y este Parlamento lo está haciendo. La comisión que presido —la Comisión de Libertades Civiles, Justicia y Asuntos de Interior— conduce precisamente una investigación que quiere deducir las consecuencias de esas prácticas inaceptables, llevarlas al plano político en la relación bilateral con los Estados Unidos, si es necesario, pero, sobre todo, reforzar el régimen de protección de la privacidad de los derechos fundamentales de los europeos, cumpliendo el trabajo de finalización del procedimiento legislativo de protección de datos que está en marcha en la Comisión.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Andrew Duff (ALDE). - Mr President, Mr Barroso has tantalised us with the promise of principles and orientations for political union. In plain language that means of course Treaty change. And the Commission contribution to this is vital because the central purpose of the next round of Treaty reform is to transform the Commission to be a democratic, federal government of a fiscal union.

We have to put the Council of Ministers in order and adjust the role of the European Council. And, if we are to start the Convention, as we expect to be able to do in the spring of 2015, it is this Commission and this Parliament which have got to prepare the ground thoroughly.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Laurence J.A.J. Stassen (NI). - Mijnheer Barroso lijkt van mening dat hij best goed werk heeft geleverd, maar durft hij dat ook hardop te verkondigen op straat? Op welke planeet woont u eigenlijk, mijnheer Barroso? Europa is een sociaal en economisch slagveld, de Europese Unie kan zich niet verschuilen achter de globale crisis. De wereldeconomie groeit, terwijl Europa krimpt, alléén Europa.

De Europese Unie is de oorzaak van deze crisis, niet de oplossing. Gelukkig is er nog een sprankje hoop en dat zijn de Europese verkiezingen van volgend jaar. Dan zal de kiezer een streep in het zand trekken en zeggen: genoeg is genoeg! De burger heeft er genoeg van om als proefkonijn te moeten opdraaien voor dit absurde experiment. Men heeft genoeg van dit ondemocratisch monster en men heeft genoeg van de partijen die ons hebben verkocht aan de EU. Wij staan aan de vooravond van een electorale aardverschuiving. De winter is voorbij, de lente komt, de Europese lente is nabij!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Giovanni La Via (PPE). - Signor Presidente, signor Presidente Barroso, oggi abbiamo ascoltato un quadro complessivo dell'Unione, e ovviamente la ringraziamo per la completezza della sua esposizione.

Come avrà probabilmente compreso dalla reazione abbastanza fredda dell'Aula in alcuni passaggi, forse questo Parlamento si aspettava qualcosa di più, più coraggio, un quadro più ampio di proposte in grado di dare risposte alle criticità che l'Europa sta vivendo. Abbiamo sempre incentrato la nostra attenzione su crescita e sviluppo, ma molto spesso ci siamo confrontati esclusivamente con austerità e rigore.

Abbiamo bisogno di nuovi strumenti per sostenere investimenti e occupazione. Abbiamo bisogno di forzare la nostra attenzione su crescita e sviluppo, perché se non avremo crescita, se il nostro PIL non crescerà, sicuramente non avremo nemmeno occupazione. Abbiamo invece riscontrato da parte del Consiglio, soprattutto col bilancio del 2014 rispetto alle conclusioni del Consiglio dei capi di Stato e di governo, una scarsa attenzione alle linee di bilancio su crescita e occupazione – la rubrica 1A. Abbiamo bisogno di invertire la tendenza!

Per sganciarci sicuramente dai vincoli che gli Stati membri ci pongono, abbiamo bisogno di fare un discorso nuovo sulle risorse proprie. Il bilancio europeo non può rimanere ancorato al finanziamento degli Stati membri che condizionano l'utilizzazione delle risorse. Per avere più Europa dobbiamo avere più autonomia. Dall'altro lato, abbiamo bisogno anche di finanza innovativa. Per uscire dalla crisi, abbiamo bisogno di finanziare gli investimenti, e su questo ci attendiamo delle proposte da parte della Commissione.

Quanto poi alla politica estera e alla politica mediterranea, assistendo a quanto avviene sulla sua sponda meridionale, e settentrionale dell'Africa, ritengo si debba fare di più perché concediamo molte risorse ma contiamo poco. In altri termini, signor Presidente, per uscire dalla crisi serve più Europa, ma dobbiamo anche utilizzare meglio quanto di cui già disponiamo.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Patrizia Toia (S&D). - Signor Presidente, i cinque anni della nostra legislatura hanno racchiuso esattamente il tempo della crisi peggiore dal dopoguerra. La crisi ha messo alla prova la capacità dell'Europa di reagire, la validità del progetto europeo, e noi dobbiamo essere onesti e dire la verità, cioè che l'Europa non ha saputo rispondere in modo sufficiente, altrimenti la realtà economica e sociale che ci circonda non sarebbe quella che vediamo.

Ritengo soprattutto che l'errore di una politica unilaterale di miope austerità, di cui qualcuno porterà la responsabilità politica, rischia oggi, a giudizio dei cittadini, di far bocciare l'Europa stessa, e il prossimo Parlamento potrebbe essere il riflesso di questo sentimento di rifiuto. Certo, delle misure sono state prese, ci mancherebbe che fossimo stati con le mani in mano a guardare! Ma gli indicatori rivelano un'Europa stremata, di giovani senza indipendenza perché senza lavoro, di un tessuto sociale debole e di imprese ancora in grande affanno.

Se nel nostro dibattito mettiamo il dito sulla piaga sociale, non vorrei passassimo per i soliti socialdemocratici un po' ossessionati dal walfare. Non è così! Noi pensiamo che la questione sociale sia quella da cui partire perché facciamo politica per i cittadini, non per altro, e perché siamo lungimiranti e sappiamo che il futuro, anche economico, richiede coesione del tessuto sociale e preparazione.

Facciamo politica sulla base di valori, il primo dei quali è la qualità di una vita decente e dignitosa per tutti i cittadini europei. Riteniamo poi che lo sviluppo, anche il più smart, debba fondarsi sull'equità – parola sparita dal vocabolario europeo e spesso sostituita da quella dell'esclusione sociale. Il rischio che corriamo oggi, è anche politico e democratico, è di non comprendere che a fallire o a mancare l'obiettivo è stata quest'Europa incompleta, divisa ed egoista, con un preciso credo politico, mentre invece un'Europa diversa è possibile, necessaria e va costruita.

Signor Presidente, ciò che occorre non è solo un lungo elenco di cose da fare, ma un cambiamento profondo, un'alternativa da cui far discendere anche le cose da fare. Vogliamo un'Europa unita, sociale, un'Europa prospera. È troppo, troppo ambizioso? Io credo di no perché senza ambizione l'Europa non solo non sarebbe nata ma non sarebbe neanche stata concepita da coloro che l'hanno concepita e poi realizzata.

(L'oratore accetta di rispondere a una domanda "cartellino blu", articolo 149, paragrafo 8, del regolamento))

 
  
  

PRESIDE: MIGUEL ÁNGEL MARTÍNEZ MARTÍNEZ
Vicepresidente

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Karin Kadenbach (S&D), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Frau Toia, wenn ich Sie richtig verstanden habe, treten auch Sie für eine Politik der Solidarität, des Zusammenhalts ein, so wie wir sie in Österreich unter sozialdemokratischer Führung vorleben – nämlich eine Politik, die in Jugend investiert, die eine Jugendbeschäftigungsgarantie gibt, die Vorbild für Europa sein könnte, die keine tiefen Einschnitte im Sozialbereich verfolgt, sondern ganz im Gegenteil weiß, dass Investitionen in den Pflegebereich in den Sozialbereich, in die Krankenpflege und in den Bildungsbereich zu Beschäftigung führen.

Österreich hat im Moment die höchste Beschäftigungsrate in Europa und die beste Rate bei der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit. Sind Sie auch der Meinung, dass der Weg, den der Herr Barroso und die Konservativen beschreiben – die Kaputt-Spar-Politik –, der falsche Weg für ein solidarisches und soziales Europa ist?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Patrizia Toia (S&D), Risposta a una domanda "cartellino blu". – Non solo l'ho detto, ma lo credo profondamente. Credo proprio che l'obiettivo della politica sociale – quella che tu hai richiamato, l'occupazione, la sanità, una vita decente e di qualità – non sia solo un grande obiettivo sociale ed etico, ma anche un buon punto di partenza per la crescita economica e lo sviluppo che vogliamo perseguire.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jean-Pierre Audy (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président de la Commission européenne, Mesdames et Messieurs les commissaires, Monsieur le Ministre, chers collègues, l'Union traverse un moment difficile. Elle est en grand danger. Pourquoi?

Parce qu'elle est confrontée à la pire des crises: celle de la confiance de ses citoyens. Pourtant, les commissaires et vous-même, Monsieur le Président, avez tenu la barre. Au nom de ma délégation, nous saluons l'action de certains d'entre eux, dont Michel Barnier, tout particulièrement en ce qui concerne la régulation et la supervision des activités économiques et financières.

Avec les gouvernements des États membres, soutenus par les parlements nationaux et dans le cadre de la colégislation, nous avons évité un effondrement du continent, même si des maladresses ont été commises. Les chefs d'État ou de gouvernement, au sein du Conseil européen, ont travaillé dans une logique d'union sacrée et ont assuré la cohésion d'ensemble. Je salue l'action de son président, M. Van Rompuy, même si je regrette qu'il n'ait pas entretenu suffisamment de relations politiques avec notre Parlement. Malgré tout, la confiance se perd.

Que faire dès lors pour retrouver la confiance des citoyens? Il faut leur dire la vérité, à savoir que les États membres ont vécu au-dessus de leurs moyens en s'endettant de manière démesurée. Que nous devons travailler dur – comme partout dans le monde – pour préserver notre ambition sociale et notre influence internationale. Que nous devons, Monsieur le Président, cesser d'être naïfs. Nous devons avoir des frontières extérieures sûres, une douane efficace et défendre nos intérêts commerciaux dans le monde sans concessions.

Dans les négociations commerciales bilatérales, prenez bien en considération la réciprocité des normes sociales, sanitaires et environnementales. Ne prenez pas l'agriculture comme variable d'ajustement, sinon vous vous verrez adresser un jour un refus de ratification par notre Parlement, ainsi que le traité de Lisbonne nous en donne le pouvoir.

La vérité, c'est qu'aujourd'hui, dans les dix pays les plus puissants du monde, il y a quatre pays européens et que, tous les dix ans, un État européen sort de la liste, de telle sorte qu'en 2050, il n'y en aura plus aucun. Oui, de la vérité jaillira la lumière! De cette lumière renaîtra l'espérance des peuples européens, appelés à jouer un grand rôle dans le monde nouveau qui s'ouvre devant nous.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Glenis Willmott (S&D). - Mr President, though I usually welcome an optimistic outlook and while it is always good to hear from you, President Barroso, that the bad times are almost over, I am afraid that for many, this message really just does not fit the reality and, while you may be thinking about popping open the champagne, I would air some caution as the real work is yet to begin.

The financial markets may be recovering and the experts may be more optimistic about the EU economy, but if you step outside the bubble, you will see the true consequences of austerity: living, social and working standards dropping; ordinary people feeling the pain; exploitation by predatory employers using zero-hour contracts; a massive rise in food banks and the need for aid across the EU, while energy prices rise and unemployment remains cripplingly high.

Now is not the time to congratulate ourselves. Now is the time to get to work and stop the erosion of living and working conditions caused by austerity across the EU.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marian-Jean Marinescu (PPE). - Europa a traversat o perioadă dificilă. Criza financiară a generat o criză economică şi a creat mari probleme în majoritatea statelor membre. Comisia a reacţionat şi a propus legislaţia necesară pentru a preveni situaţii similare şi a creea posibilitatea de redresare. Parlamentul European a sprijinit aceste propuneri, de cele mai multe ori împotriva poziţiei Consiliului şi, în consecinţă, avem acum o legislaţie solidă, care trebuie implementată.

Guvernele, sub presiunea internă, au utilizat deseori măsuri populiste. Dezbaterea austeritate – dezvoltare – locuri de muncă a determinat creşterea populismului. Comisia are acum la dispoziţie două mecanisme care pot determina statele membre să adopte măsurile necesare pentru dezvoltare şi locuri de muncă: Semestrul european şi Acordul de parteneriat.

Semestrul european poate direcţiona bugetele naţionale către o politică de cheltuieli înţelepte şi investiţii pentru dezvoltare şi locuri de muncă. Acordul de parteneriat trebuie să creeze sinergia între bugetele naţionale şi fondurile europene. Statele membre trebuie să elaboreze strategii clare privind direcţiile şi priorităţile de dezvoltare pentru a utiliza la maximum această sinergie.

Cred că, în perioada următoare, Comisia are un rol extrem de important şi nu trebuie să ezite să ia toate deciziile necesare, indiferent de statul membru afectat, pentru a aplica aceste mecanisme care pot redresa contextul actual şi pot genera creştere economică şi stabilitate la nivelul întregii Uniuni.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jacek Protasiewicz (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Przewodniczący Komisji Europejskiej! Spieramy się dzisiaj nawet ostro o stan Unii Europejskiej w piątym i, miejmy nadzieję, ostatnim roku kryzysu, który – to prawda – nie zaczął się w Europie, ale boleśnie dotknął także i nasz kontynent. W odróżnieniu od wielu mówców, zarówno z lewej, jak i z radykalnie prawej strony tej sali, uważam, że instytucje unijne potrafiły udzielać prawidłowej odpowiedzi na wyzwania stawiane przez kryzys. Ostatnim tego przejawem był bardzo mądry kompromis w sprawie wieloletniego budżetu unijnego, który dla wielu regionów Europy, a zwłaszcza tych pogrążonych w poważnym kryzysie, będzie źródłem jedynych funduszy na inwestycje publiczne, a zatem na rozwój i nowe miejsca pracy.

Panie Przewodniczący Barroso, czas kryzysu to także wzrost nastrojów ksenofobicznych skutkujących wezwaniami do ograniczania kluczowej swobody unijnej, jaką jest wolność przepływu osób na wspólnym europejskim rynku z prawem do wyboru miejsca zamieszkania i legalnej pracy. Liczę i oczekuję, Panie Przewodniczący Barroso, że Komisja Europejska nadal będzie bronić tego fundamentalnego prawa przed populistycznymi pomysłami pojawiającymi się tu i ówdzie nie tylko w debacie publicznej, nie tylko w debacie parlamentarnej, ale również w wypowiedziach – co bardzo niepokojące – wielu członków rządów państw członkowskich.

Trzecią sprawą, na którą chciałbym zwrócić uwagę jest nasze wschodnie sąsiedztwo. Mimo wewnętrznych kłopotów gospodarczych, mimo politycznego zmęczenia związanego z rozszerzaniem Unii Europejskiej, nie możemy odwrócić się do naszych wschodnich sąsiadów plecami. Zwłaszcza teraz, gdy kraje te poddane są ogromnej presji politycznej ze strony Rosji. Apeluję więc zarówno do Pana, Panie Przewodniczący Barroso, ale też do litewskiej prezydencji reprezentowanej tutaj przez ministra spraw zagranicznych: nie zmarnujmy szansy, jaką jest szczyt Partnerstwa Wschodniego w Wilnie, na podpisanie i natychmiastowe, nawet prowizoryczne, wdrożenie umowy stowarzyszeniowej z Ukrainą i rozpoczęcie podobnego procesu z innymi krajami Partnerstwa Wschodniego. To szansa na historyczny zwrot w naszym nowym wschodnim sąsiedztwie, którego nie wolno nam zaprzepaścić.

 
  
  

VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ
Präsident

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Gunnar Hökmark (PPE). - Mr President, I would like to thank the President of the Commission for his presentation of the State of the Union. I think we have two challenges. One is to deal with the consequences of the problems of the crisis which, as he underlined, we still have to fight. At the same time we also need to meet the challenges we have seen emerging, because the global economy in 2013 is not the same as before we entered the crisis in 2008.

We face new and rapidly emerging competition in all areas and it is not enough to deal with the problems of the crisis. We must also accelerate the reforms needed to keep up with and to take up the global competition. I think one way of describing the change is that this year there will be more mobile-phone connections than human beings, which is a sign of the level of prosperity. It is also the sign of a totally new global economy.

It is not enough to be as good as we were in 2008. We must be much better and that requires reforms in all areas. I would like the Commission, as well as the Presidency of the Council, to see the challenges that we have in the global economy. That underlines for me that we must now take action to make reforms to the European economy for the internal market and ensure that we have full freedom of movement in all areas, not least the service sector. Regarding the telecoms sector, we must be insistent and decisive in achieving a European telecoms market, which is one of the most important things in order to enable the whole of the European economy. I said yesterday, and I say now, that we need to ensure that we in Europe can achieve the new Googles, the new Yahoos and the new Apples. We must also ensure that in the future Nokias will buy Microsofts and not the other way round. I would like us to make the reforms that will turn Europe into the leading economy. That requires difficult decisions and we are all responsible for taking them.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Dubravka Šuica (PPE). - gospodine Predsjedniče, slažem se s vama da nije dovoljno donijeti odluke nego treba imati snagu za njihovu implementaciju. Građane nećemo moći uvjeriti retorikom nego konkretnim akcijama. ovo su izazovna vremena za EU i nužnost reformi je neizbježna i ovo je posebna kriza kao što se sami rekli trebamo stvoriti novi model. Mi trebamo jaku Europu, potrebno je više jedinstva, i slažem se da trebamo više solidarnosti i odgovornosti i da moramo osigurati vrijednosti EU. Pitali ste koju ćemo sliku Evrope prikazati našim biračima; populističku ili iskrenu verziju, onu koju građani osjećaju. Moj odgovor je onu u koju građani vjeruju a to je ideal da će građani i u mojoj Hrvatskoj i na primjer u Njemačkoj imati približno isti standard tu mislim i na materijalni status građana i na stupanj razvoja infrastrukture ali i na ideal Evrope, dakle na vrijednosti poput vladavine prava. Činjenica je da je i posredstvom Komisije došlo do toga da i oni koji su nekoć bili neprijatelji danas sjede zajedno. Tu mislim na naše susjedstvo i zato pozdravljam nastavak proširenja. Isto tako ne smijemo zanemariti činjenicu da 7 od 10 Europljana kaže da trebamo biti zajedno i onda to ne smijemo ignorirati. Ali nikako ne smijemo podijeliti Europu na one koji su u eurozoni i oni koji su izvan nje, na bogate i siromašne, na sjever i jug. Dakle podržavam sve najvažnije prioritete koje ste spominjali, a kad razgovaramo o tome da je nezaposlenost ....

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Othmar Karas (PPE). - Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissionspräsident, meine Damen und Herren! Robert Schuman hat 1950 gesagt, die Europäische Union entsteht nicht mit einem Schlag, nicht durch eine einfache Zusammenfassung, sondern es wird Ereignisse geben, die eine neue Tat der Solidarität schaffen. Zu nicht mehr und nicht weniger hat uns heute der Kommissionspräsident aufgerufen: nicht satt zu sein, nicht stehenzubleiben, sondern den Weg der Taten, der Solidarität fortzusetzen!

Wir haben Armut und Jugendarbeitslosigkeit zu bekämpfen, die Datensicherheit sicherzustellen, die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit zu erhöhen, eine Antwort auf die Globalisierung zu geben und die Umwelt- und Klimaveränderungen zu bewältigen. All das ist nur möglich, wenn wir neue Taten der Solidarität, mehr Zusammenhalt, mehr Gemeinschaftskompetenzen, mehr Zusammenarbeit zwischen Parlament und Kommission wollen!

Und wenn jemand sagt, das Glas ist halbleer, dann meint er, wir sind gescheitert. Wenn jemand sagt, das Glas ist halbvoll, dann meint er, wir sind am richtigen Weg, wir dürfen aber nicht satt sein, sondern müssen den Weg fortsetzen – gemeinsam. Und wir haben ja auch einen Fahrplan dafür: Bankenunion, Fiskalunion, Wirtschafts- und Sozialunion, Gemeinsame Außen- und Verteidigungspolitik und die Politische Union. Da ist viel zu tun! Aber das, was wir getan haben, bietet uns die Grundlage dafür, diese Ziele zu erreichen – mit einem Konvent und mit der öffentlichen Debatte, die zu Recht eingemahnt wurde. Und daher hat das Europäische Parlament mit dieser Rede zur Lage der Union die Informationsoffensive „ACT.REACT.IMPACT“ für die nächsten zwölf Monate gestartet!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Paulo Rangel (PPE). - Senhor Presidente, Senhor Presidente da Comissão, queria também saudar a Presidência lituana, uma vez que é a primeira oportunidade que tenho de estar em contacto com a Presidência do Conselho lituana.

Sr. Presidente, eu queria dizer neste momento, que é o momento anterior às eleições para o Parlamento Europeu, em que há um discurso do estado da União, que, como português e como membro do PPE, tenho orgulho no trabalho que a Comissão fez e, em particular, na presidência que o Dr. Durão Barroso teve aqui ao longo destes dez anos, e em particular também nestes cinco anos. Um orgulho não arrogante, exatamente como aquele que aqui definiu que nós, europeus, devemos ter.

Queria deixar só dois pontos. O primeiro: o que acho que é fundamental que esta Comissão deixe como legado é a ideia que tem de haver mais solidariedade e mais coesão. Eu acho que neste momento os países que estão em crise económica e financeira, designadamente países periféricos e países do sul da Europa, têm dado um exemplo de grande determinação na feitura das reformas estruturais e precisam de sinais de coesão por parte da União Europeia e dos países mais fortes da União Europeia. E, portanto, é fundamental que esta linha seja prosseguida.

E um segundo ponto que queria trazer aqui, que para mim é um grande motivo de esperança e que devia ser para nós uma grande meta do futuro: é a aposta séria na parceria com os Estados Unidos. Eu julgo que o exemplo que o caso sírio nos dá é o exemplo também do reforço dos valores ocidentais. Quando a solução que nós temos para escolher é entre a ditadura e o terrorismo, os valores ocidentais saem reforçados, e por isso uma parceria séria, económica, de abertura de mercados com os Estados Unidos, relançando a centralidade do Atlântico, penso que é o projeto que pode relançar também a solidariedade europeia.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  José Manuel Barroso, Comissão. − Senhor Presidente, começo por responder diretamente ao Sr. Deputado Paulo Rangel, para lhe agradecer as suas palavras e para dizer que realmente os países que têm estado sob programa têm feito um esforço notável, com imensos sacrifícios. Por isso mesmo é que aqui os reconheci publicamente e por isso mesmo é que também continuo a fazer um apelo a maior solidariedade no conjunto da União Europeia. Este valor, solidariedade, com a correspondente responsabilidade, é essencial numa União verdadeiramente digna desse nome.

J'aimerais aussi répondre à plusieurs questions qui ont été posées par d'autres parlementaires.

Joseph Daul a parlé d'un principe auquel la Commission et moi-même tenons absolument: le principe de l'égalité des États devant les traités. En fait, nous sommes face à un grand défi. Comment garantir, dans une Union à vingt-huit États membres – certains étant dans la zone euro, certains n'y étant pas encore, certains ne voulant pas y être –, la flexibilité nécessaire sans créer de la stratification, sans créer de hiérarchies? Sentons-nous que nous faisons partie de la même Union?

La Commission, gardienne des traités, a l'obligation de défendre l'unité de notre projet et elle continuera de le faire. Par conséquent, il s'agit d'une grande entreprise politique qui demandera beaucoup d'intelligence, beaucoup de sagesse, celles de garantir l'unité tout en permettant la diversité. Je suis d'accord avec M. Verhofstadt – même si, parfois, j'ai l'impression que, même lorsque nous sommes d'accord, M. Verhofstadt aime dire qu'il n'est pas d'accord avec moi – quand il affirme que nous devons avoir une plus grande intégration dans la zone euro. C'est pourquoi nous avons présenté le projet pour une véritable Union économique et monétaire. Finalement, ce que vous avez proposé, Monsieur Verhofstadt, ce sont les pistes que nous avons aussi proposées dans ce projet dont je suis particulièrement fier.

L'autre jour, un des plus grands philosophes européens, M. Jürgen Habermas, a déclaré que, jusqu'à présent, le document que la Commission a présenté était le projet politique le plus complet sur l'avenir de l'Europe. Nous continuerons à le développer progressivement, fidèles à cette vision qui nous guide. J'ai été ravi de constater qu'aujourd'hui, presque tous les groupes, malgré leurs différences considèrent les propositions qui sont sur la table au sujet de l'union bancaire, notamment le mécanisme de résolution unique, comme une priorité législative de la construction européenne. Mais nous devons également nous projeter au-delà de l'union bancaire, sur le plan du budget, de la gestion de la zone euro, voire de l'union politique.

And I think for me the most interesting point during this debate was this one. Many of you focus on the problems. Others focus on the solutions. I prefer to be on the side of the solutions. This is the question.

I think my assessment was realistic. I have recognised that there are still difficulties. I have not said that we are out of the crisis. I have explicitly said that we are still in the crisis and that we should avoid any kind of complacency. But regarding the situation, we have two possibilities: we have the possibility of insisting on the negative side, of continuing this self-deprecation and this Euro-pessimism that is so destructive, that is sometimes intellectually glamorous but will not bring hope and confidence to our citizens, or, as European leaders – and you are a European leader, as I am – we can give people hope and we can say to them, look, there are indeed some signals – because there are some signals – that things are changing for the better. And this is the point. And this is the political question that I put to all of you at the beginning of my intervention today.

Then I want to speak more directly to the pro-European forces, some from the centre-left, some from the centre-right, some from the centre, but who basically share, as Mr Swoboda rightly said, the same values. What is going to be your story to the electors? Are you going to say, like the populists or the extremists, that everything is wrong in Europe? If you go that way you will only reinforce those who do not believe, as we do, in European values.

Mr Callanan, you said, making a joke about possible competitors for the Commission election, that you are not interested in that job, that you are very happy with yours. Let me tell you very frankly that even if you were interested you could not have a chance to be elected President of the Commission and do you know why? I am not saying that happily, because I think increasingly your party and your Group is looking like UKIP, a Eurosceptic, anti-European group. And I am starting to have some doubts that you are going to be elected yourself in Britain, or if it is not UKIP that is going to be the first force in the British elections. Because when it comes to being against Europe, the people, between the original and the copy, prefer the original. That is probably why they are going to vote more for Mr Farage than for Mr Callanan.

And this I do not say with any kind of satisfaction, because, even if we have some differences, we have worked in many areas very constructively with the Conservatives, the British Conservatives and the Conservative Group. We have worked together for the internal market, for reform, we have worked together against some kinds of regulation, we have worked together in many areas including free trade. But this is an important point, because if those forces that are pro-European, or even those that are not really pro-European but constructive, have the same discourse, the same political attitude as the anti-Europeans, the Eurosceptics, the populists, in that case the latter will win the next election.

So my appeal to you is to make the case for Europe, because you are part of Europe. As I have said, much of the legislation that has been made would not have been possible without the very strong cooperation between the Commission and the European Parliament. Take the MFF. We were not happy with the result, but, frankly, without the complicity between the Commission and the European Parliament the result would be much worse. President Schulz knows that well because we were together during those negotiations. And I could give you many more examples.

Ms Harms, when you say that Europe has done nothing or that on climate change there is zero change, come on! Let us be real! Europe is leading the world in terms of the objective for climate change. On low-CO2 cars, the proposals were put forward by the Commission. If you are not satisfied with the solution now, put the question to the Member States, not to the Commission. We are keeping a very strong commitment to climate change.

Mr Farage shows that populists are sometimes obscurantists. Ninety-nine per cent of scientists, Mr Farage, believe that climate change exists as a result of human activity: 99% of scientists. Of course there are always people who are paid to say the opposite. To pretend, as you pretend, against all well-established science, that the problem of climate change is just an invention of the Greens or of the Left, is complete nonsense.

Of course we have to find a way, of course we have to find a sensible way to fight climate change. And we have to look at the same time at competitiveness in Europe. We have to make this part of our agenda for growth and I believe that the green economy brings many possibilities. It would be a mistake to base the case on climate change solely on environmental matters. They are of course decisive. It is an existential matter for our planet, the conservation of our planet. But we have to make the case also in terms of the economy, in terms of what it can bring in terms of our health, because in fact we have seen increasing numbers of natural disasters that most scientists attribute to climate change.

So this is important, and I think that it is almost incredible that the leader of one European Parliament group says that something which has been established clearly by science is an invention of some political forces.

As I have said before, I believe in science and I believe part of the solution for our problems is through more science, more innovation, more research, more technology and this is the way for Europe to address these problems.

Regarding the social aspect, Mr Swoboda, you know very well that Europe – or at least European institutions – have been fighting a lot for these matters. You know very well that the Commission was pushing hard for a more generous Social Fund, for the Globalisation Adjustment Fund, for the financial transaction tax that now some Member States do not want to implement. You know very well, so let us not create artificial divisions here.

Now, what happens in fact is that we are aware of the difficulties in Europe. You are right, you and some others, when you outline difficulties that many of our citizens, particularly unemployed people, are still experiencing.

And to one of the distinguished Members of Parliament who said to me that I have never seen that reality, that I have never seen people begging near the Parliament, let me tell you, I have not only seen people near Parliament but, together with Joseph Daul, I went to a food bank in the region of Strasbourg/Bas-Rhin, and I know well how many people are poor in Europe and suffer.

Coming from my country, Portugal, I know well the difficulties of poverty in many of our sectors. But not only do I know, I am fighting to solve that problem. It was the Commission which upheld the aspiration for a fund for the most deprived people and had to fight hard against some capitals that were seeking to remove it our priorities. So not only do we know the reality in Europe, but we are trying to do our best with the instruments we have to remedy those situations.

And this is the point I want to make as well, because, as some of you said, where are the instruments? Many of these instruments and responsibilities are at national level. Let us be honest: employment is mainly a national policy. We can influence, we can create some funds. We can create the Youth Employment Initiative, we took the initiative of the Youth Guarantee. But in the end it depends on what Member States do or do not do. This is the point.

And that is why we have to be clear about this because if not – and you are going to see that during the elections – many of our citizens are going to put the blame on Europe for what was in fact the action or inaction of some of our governments and Member States. That is the tendency to Europeanise failure and to nationalise success. And I believe that you, as Members of Parliament and we, as the European Commission, have a duty to explain to our citizens what is the national responsibility, what is the European responsibility: of course making an honest and reasonable assessment; of course recognising also that not everything we have been doing is perfect; of course recognising that these slow decisions of the Member States and the European Union architecture are sometimes frustrating; but giving hope to our citizens.

I think that, as political leaders, we have the duty of confidence, we have a duty to provide hope to our citizens. And that is my appeal to you, particularly to the pro-European forces who I believe, in spite of some ideological differences, share the same values. The same values that are in the Treaty of Lisbon, that have been there since the Treaty of Rome, the values of the dignity of human beings, of peace, of freedom and justice.

And that is why I was also happy to receive the words of many of you congratulating the Commission for what we are doing in terms of the rule of law. Because if you want to speak about the rule of law internationally, we have to be sure that here in Europe we also respect all those principles, because our conception of Europe is not just about the economy or about the market, it is a conception based on values. And I believe that in spite of the natural differences, we basically share these values.

And I have a great confidence in Europe. I think that it was Ms McGuinness who gave some figures about the extraordinary support that still exists in Europe for the European ideal. Do you not find it really extraordinary that in spite of all the difficulties that Greek citizens have been experiencing, a huge majority of Greek citizens support the euro? Do you not find it extraordinary that in Spain, even if there are five million non-Spanish unemployed, there is not a xenophobic or anti-foreigner party? I believe that in Europe we have a great resilience. I believe that this crisis has tested us and is testing us to the limit and I believe that in Europe, if you keep the objectives, we will come out of this crisis stronger because our resilience was tested.

It is a complete caricature to present European policy just as fiscal consolidation. At least since 2010 I have been saying that fiscal consolidation alone is not sufficient, that there are some limits to the policy of fiscal consolidation. Our policy is a complex mix of fiscal consolidation, structural reform and investment – targeted investment in the sectors of the future, to have a more innovative, a more modern Europe.

And even in fiscal consolidation, we have been adapting to the different difficult economic cycle. The Commission has been putting much more emphasis on the structural deficit than on the nominal deficit, as you know, and it was our proposal in several cases to give the Member States more time to adjust their deficits. So trying to find the right balance and the right calibration for a policy that of course in the medium term, in the short term, has naturally a recessionary effect.

But to put the question once again: who is responsible for the difficulties in Europe. Was it policy or was it the mistakes made in the past? One of you said Greece is the victim of the policies of Europe. False! Completely! Greece is the victim of the irresponsible behaviour of the governments of Greece. This is the reality, and it was because of this that the European Union was asked to come and give support. Without European Union support, Greece would now be completely insolvent. The situation would be much more difficult. So we have to have the courage to ask who created the problem.

Without the European Union, the countries that are now in a difficult situation would be in a much worse situation. Without Europe they would be suffering much more. And so it is important to put the record straight, because, if not, our electors, your electors, will think that Europe is to blame when in fact, as I said, Europe, even if it is not perfect, did not create the problem, Europe is a victim of the problem and Europe is certainly part of the solution.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Luis de Grandes Pascual (PPE). - Señor Presidente, es una cuestión muy breve y de orden.

Ayer, señor Presidente, el señor Watson utilizó de forma fraudulenta el Reglamento para referirse a un tema de fondo sensible como es Gibraltar. Hoy, él mismo —el señor Watson— y el representante de los conservadores han montado una pantomima para abordar un tema de fondo que ha producido indefensión, y yo no he podido contestar, ni siquiera con la tarjeta azul.

Yo apelo a su autoridad y a su equidad probada para decir sencillamente que es verdad que existe un problema en Gibraltar, que no es menos cierto que existe un diálogo entre el Primer Ministro británico y el Presidente del Gobierno de España y que no es menos cierto que traen causa estos problemas de que el Gobierno de España está intentando adoptar medidas para evitar el contrabando de tabaco, la evasión fiscal y el blanqueo de capitales.

Eso es lo que hay que hacer: dialogar. Sobran intervenciones nostálgicas, electoralistas, en defensa de una colonia que no tiene sentido en Europa.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Nicole Sinclaire (NI). - Mr President, I was extremely disappointed that Mr Barroso did not answer my main question: why it should be he, the unelected representative of an EU institution, giving the State of the Union address rather than the elected representative, Mr Schulz. Maybe you could help me on this point, Mr Barroso?

We do not agree on much, and I do not agree with your vision of a united Europe, but I do agree with you, Mr Barroso, that if the club is going to prosper, if it is going to work, you need all the members inside working towards that. I need to ask you then: why do you not challenge the UK to put up or shut up? Why do you go along with the UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, pretending that he can renegotiate to recover powers from the European Union? Are you saying that he can renegotiate certain items from the Treaty of Rome? Can you just make it clear, once and for all, that renegotiation of significant powers such as the Social Chapter is not possible?

Is it not damaging to the European Union to have the UK in its current predicament until 2017? Is it not time for the UK and its people to decide, sooner rather than later, whether they want the country to remain a member of the European Union?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Nigel Farage (EFD). - Mr President, next year’s European election will not be contested on the old division lines of left and right and several group leaders have agreed with that today. Frankly, that is all irrelevant. It will be contested between those of us that believe in national democracy within the nation state and those that believe that the 28 countries that are part of the EU are better governed by these institutions. That in a sense is what this comes down to.

But, Mr Barroso, those of us that believe in national democracy do not want to take us back to the Western Front or 1914. Those of us that believe in national democracy will say to you it is a healthy assertion of identity, but it also shows a deeper understanding of why the problems of Europe were caused in the past. It is democratic nation states in Europe, that are stable, that will not go to war with each other, which are a force for good and I would remind people that, without the vote in the House of Commons two weeks ago, we would now be at war in Syria. What better proof can there be that nation state democracy can be a force for good?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Τάκης Χατζηγεωργίου (GUE/NGL). - Κύριε Barroso, είπατε ότι οι Έλληνες πολίτες υποστηρίζουν στην πλειοψηφία τους το ευρώ. Στην πραγματικότητα όλοι οι πολίτες, όχι μόνον στην Ελλάδα, που υποστηρίζουν κατά την δική σας άποψη το ευρώ, στην πραγματικότητα φοβούνται να φύγουν από το ευρώ. Είναι τελείως διαφορετικό πράγμα να στηρίζετε τα επιχειρήματά σας πάνω στον φόβο των πολιτών να μετακινηθούν σε κάτι καινούργιο. Αυτή είναι η πραγματικότητα και αφήσατε πίσω το γεγονός ότι το χρέος της Ελλάδας είναι σήμερα μεγαλύτερο από ό,τι ήταν με την έναρξη της κρίσης.

Είπατε ότι αυτή η κρίση δεν έχει καμιά σχέση με καμιά από τις προηγούμενες και για αυτό πρέπει να σκεφθούμε διαφορετικά. Το ‘διαφορετικά’ όμως δεν μας το περιγράψατε. Φοβάστε να χρησιμοποιήσετε τη λέξη ‘κοινωνική δικαιοσύνη’. Χρησιμοποιούμε τη λέξη ‘συνοχή’. Έχει αλλάξει το λεξιλόγιο. Η ‘κοινωνική δικαιοσύνη’ είναι μια λέξη η οποία δεν πρέπει να χρησιμοποιείται σε αυτό το Κοινοβούλιο.

Μιλάτε για κινητικότητα. Κύριε Barroso, εγώ προέρχομαι από ένα χωριό της Ευρώπης που ένα πρωί οι μισοί του κάτοικοι εξαφανίστηκαν άλλοι στη Νότιο Αφρική και άλλοι στην Αυστραλία. Ξέρουμε από κινητικότητα. Είναι όμως άλλο πράγμα η κινητικότητα βασισμένη πάνω στη γνώση μου, και άλλο πράγμα η επιβολή να σηκωθώ να φύγω από το κράτος μου, για να πάω σε άλλο κράτος της Ευρώπης για να παίρνω 600 ευρώ μισθό. Ξέρουμε, λοιπόν, τι εστί κινητικότητα.

Τονίσατε ότι εκατομμύρια άνθρωποι υποφέρουν. Εγώ θα προσθέσω ότι εκατομμύρια χρήματα έχουν φύγει από τις τσέπες των πολλών και έχουν πάει στις τσέπες των ολίγων. Η Ευρώπη θα βρει τον δρόμο της εάν γίνει μοχλός για την παγκόσμια ειρήνη και εάν φέρει ισονομία, ισοπολιτεία και κοινωνική δικαιοσύνη μέσα στους πολίτες της.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Martin Callanan (ECR). - Mr President, can I first of all thank Mr Barroso for the unsolicited electoral advice for my party. It is a bit rich coming from the unelected head of the European Commission to give us electoral advice on how to prepare for elections, but I suppose that is typical of him.

He has spoken for what I totted up to be a total of 55 minutes this morning and of course he played his usual trick of having something for everyone. There was a little bit on a commitment to subsidiarity, which I welcome; I would like to see it in action but nevertheless I welcome it; and of course all the usual guff about more integration being required, more Europe being the solution to our problems, accompanied also by the usual scaremongering that somehow the alternative to ever-closer integration is the trenches of the First World War. Come on, Mr Barroso, nobody seriously believes that any more.

As usual, your speeches this morning were long on rhetoric but your time in office has been very short on action. I really believe that those of us who believe in less Europe and less integration are actually starting to win the arguments in Europe now. Even Mr Schulz, in his interview with Reuters yesterday – I was amazed – said, if they quoted you correctly, Mr President, that the EU cannot do everything and what you can do locally you should do locally. Well, of course we welcome the sinner that half-repenteth but, never mind, we should appreciate from where this comes.

Mr Barroso, concerning your grand rhetoric, the journalists in the Press Room have a terrible habit of playing buzzword bingo with your phrases to see whether you come out with your favourite phrases. I have to say my favourite from this morning which I wrote down is that you said ‘we have to shape a new “normal”’. I hope that makes sense in Portuguese because I really do not know what it means in English.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Rebecca Harms (Verts/ALE). - Herr Präsident! Meiner Meinung nach gewinnt man Vertrauen und Zustimmung nicht zurück, wenn man versucht, den Menschen an Stellen ein schönes Bild zu zeigen, an denen die sie wissen, dass ihre Unsicherheit zu Recht besteht.

Und ein ganz wichtiger Punkt ist zur Zeit in Europa, dass die Lasten der Krise ungerecht verteilt sind und dass wir zunehmend wegen dieser Ungerechtigkeit Verunsicherung erleben, was die Zukunftsperspektiven angeht. Und ich finde, da sollten Sie das nicht schönreden.

Ihr ganzes Engagement für die Klimapolitik – Sie sind ja da dankenswerter Weise gegen die großen Klimaskeptiker in diesem Haus, also Herrn Reul, Herrn Farage und andere noch einmal in die „Bütt“ gegangen – Ihr verbales Bekenntnis ist gut und schön. Ich erinnere mich an eine sehr erfolgreiche Klimapolitik mit Stavros Dimas, mit dem ehemaligen Energiekommissar Piebalgs. Ich sehe eben heute, dass Sie mit Ihrer umweltpolitischen Unvernunft immer wieder Günther Oettinger und Herrn Tajani stützen und dass vernünftige Leute wie Frau Hedegaard oder Herr Potočnik in dieser Auseinandersetzung einfach nichts mehr zu sagen haben. Das finde ich bedauerlich!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Guy Verhofstadt (ALDE). - Mr President, I think that it would be a big mistake to make it a fight between Eurosceptics and those who are defending the present state of affairs in Europe. Then we would lose this election, Mr Barroso.

There is a third way, a third choice to be made. That is to defend Europe, but a different Europe. In a way the Eurosceptics are right in their criticism that this crisis has been badly managed. They are right. That is not a criticism of you but is mainly directed at the Heads of State and Government, who acted far too late and did far too little in a number of their reforms.

What we have to defend is a pro-European line, but a line that is in favour of a different Europe from that of today – a more integrated Europe than we have today. I am sure that this message could be very popular if we want it to be. Who can believe Mr Callanan who, together with Mr Farage, is telling everybody that we shall beat the Chinese and the Indians and that we shall beat the Americans economically by retreating behind our national borders, by going to negotiations as single nation states in this economic struggle of today. Nobody can believe that, Mr Callanan. A new vision on Europe does not mean going back to the past. It means looking to the future and not to the past.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Hannes Swoboda (S&D). - Mr President, if I had 40 minutes speaking time like President Barroso I would have talked about the many good things about the European Union and defended the European Union, but with less time I have to point to those elements which he did not point out.

Mr Barroso, you said you want to be on the side of the solutions. Yes. What I want is for you to be more active, for example, concerning the Member States you criticise here. Honestly, after our criticism here today, you have been much more dynamic, much more social even, so you cannot expect more criticism in the future calling for a more social and more dynamic Mr Barroso.

Let me make one last point, because this really shows the difference in how we think. In the south of Spain – I am sorry to use another example from Spain, it is not against Spain, not at all – there is a mayor who is now running a lottery at the swimming pool in his city, and the prize is a transitional temporary job. This is not what we want. People have a right to have a job. We want a policy for jobs. We do not want lotteries to win a temporary job: we want a European employment policy to get permanent jobs, sustainable jobs. That is what we are fighting for and I hope we have you on our side.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Joseph Daul (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, j'ai bien écouté tout le monde, j'étais là du début à la fin. Je sais que nous sommes en campagne électorale. Il y a, actuellement, des campagnes dans les différents pays; il y aura une campagne européenne. Heureusement que les citoyens ne nous ont pas écoutés parce que nous avons quand même pris des mesures depuis la crise, que nous avons votées ensemble dans les partis démocratiques et qui vont dans le bon sens. C'est le premier point. Je vous remercie d'avoir voté cela; après nous partirons tous en campagne. Je ne renierai pas mes valeurs ni ma foi en faisant de la démagogie. Nous n'avons pas le droit de faire cela, nous avons le devoir de dire la vérité à nos concitoyens.

Chers amis, je suis pour une politique sociale et fiscale. J'ai mené une bagarre pour qu'il y ait une politique agricole et nous avons aujourd'hui la même politique dans toute l'Europe. Si nous avions fait la même chose au niveau social et fiscal, nous ne serions pas dans cette situation.

Voilà ce que nous devons dire à nos électeurs. Voilà ce nous devons défendre pour sauver l'Europe.

(Applaudissements)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Der Präsident. − Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

 
  
  

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. ROBERTA ANGELILLI
Vicepresidente

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Struan Stevenson (ECR). - Madam President, on 1 September, 52 innocent, unarmed civilians were massacred in Camp Ashraf in Iraq and seven hostages were taken. I understand this morning that these seven hostages, including six women, were secretly flown by helicopter last night to the Iranian border where they are about to be handed back to the Iranians and will face certain torture and execution. Why has Baroness Ashton not intervened? Why are we not insisting that they be released immediately? I ask for your absolute immediate intervention on this issue, Madam President.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL). - Señora Presidenta, se cumplen hoy 40 años del golpe de Estado en Chile, y quería rendir homenaje, hoy aquí, al Presidente Salvador Allende y a los miles de chilenos y chilenas asesinados, torturados y desaparecidos. Honor al Presidente Salvador Allende, que supo inmolarse para defender la Constitución de Chile.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Hannes Swoboda (S&D). - Frau Präsidentin! Ich möchte noch erwähnen, dass unsere Fraktion auch heute Abend dazu eine Veranstaltung hat.

Was ich aber auch noch erwähnen möchte: Heute ist der Gedenktag zur Erinnerung an den tragischen Tod von Anna Lindh, der ehemaligen schwedischen Außenministerin. Und wir sollten auch ihrer gedenken. Das war ein brutaler Anschlag mitten in Europa, und sie war eine junge, dynamische zukünftige Ministerin. Das ist auch sehr traurig, und ich wollte nur darauf hinweisen.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Petri Sarvamaa (PPE). - Madam President, since we seem to be commemorating 11 September I would just like to add one more to this list, especially today when it is exactly 12 years since the towers fell, and we are witnessing the inaction of the international community in times which will affect the future, though none of us in this House can predict how. We will know in about 10 years, 20 years, or maybe in 50 years our children will know, but I hope for the best for all of us in this time of crisis.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Presidente. − La discussione è chiusa.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 149)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Claudette Abela Baldacchino (S&D), in writing. – In face of the State of the Union, we also need to stress the insufficiencies of European policies. I want to draw attention to the phenomenon of precarious work, which knows no limits. It is urgent to address the hardship that this places upon our citizens. Precarious work brings with it social problems, such as poverty and social exclusion, and it is detrimental to working conditions and rights of workers. I remind Parliament and the Commission of a 2010 resolution on precarious work and female workers, and a follow-up on the actions that have been taken since. The time is also ripe for a plan that addresses precarious work amongst youth. The EU needs to recognise that precarious work is eroding the very heart of our society. It leads individuals to live at the risk of poverty. Member States have an obligation to find efficient solutions. In this context, I cannot but praise the current initiatives by the Maltese Government to tackle precarious work; its example should be followed by both the Commission and other Member States. Such concrete measures would send a strong message of hope.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ivo Belet (PPE), schriftelijk. – We zijn begonnen aan het laatste politieke seizoen van deze legislatuur en we gaan ervan uit dat dit een aansporing voor ons allen is om cruciale dossiers rond te krijgen. Het Europese toezicht op de banken is essentieel om het vertrouwen diepgaand te herstellen en zo de bescheiden economische groei een forse duw in de rug te geven. Het is een unieke kans om de burgers te tonen dat we uit het dal gekropen zijn, de zaken onder controle hebben en de welvaart van de Europeanen veilig zullen kunnen stellen.

We hebben zeer turbulente jaren achter ons liggen, maar gelukkig hebben we hieruit lessen getrokken en structurele ingrepen gedaan om te vermijden dat manke toestanden zich kunnen herhalen. We moeten daarnaast ook knopen doorhakken over de biobrandstoffen en over een strengere regulering voor rookwaren. Ook hier moeten we aantonen dat we durven beslissingen te nemen die in het algemeen belang zijn en die tegen de haren instrijken van heel wat belanghebbenden. Kortom, we staan voor een politiek jaar waarin we de Europeanen kunnen tonen en bewijzen dat we meer dan ooit gebaat zijn met een sterkere Europese samenwerking.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  John Bufton (EFD), in writing. – I must laud the Commission Presidentʼs attempt to put a positive spin on the current State of the Union, however, I quite simply fail to buy into his over optimistic and ideological view. And I am sure I am not the only one. Europe is, in reality, nowhere near an economic recovery – fragile or otherwise. And this incessant pursuit of forming a Europe-wide banking union is unlikely to aid recovery. It is, if anything, more likely to lead Europe into an even deeper financial mess. Similarly, his suggestion that we continue to work in the same way to alleviate unemployment levels in the EU is simply absurd. One look at the figures tells us that the schemes and systems implemented to date have been ineffective – and yet he insists on forcing the Member States to continue down this road to ruin. To end on a positive note, although it is unusual for the Commission President to express opinions about the internal political situation in a Member State, I welcome his acknowledgement that UKIP is fast becoming a real fighting force in UK politics. The real brand of euro-scepticism that our party offers is finally receiving the recognition it deserves.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nessa Childers (S&D), in writing. – Statistics are showing minute economic growth and a slight decrease in unemployment; although they could act as signs that we are coming out of recession, these are, however, just statistics. To ordinary citizens we are in just the same situation as we were when we entered the recession. With unemployment stabilising and statistics showing minor economic growth, there are some signs of recovery in the EU. But it is an incredibly feeble recovery. This recovery is a numerical one and the struggling people in Europe have not yet seen improvements. Many of our citizens have no jobs or opportunities, there have been cuts in social protection, and public services such as pensions, education and health. The austerity agenda is not working and is making recovery worse. However, there is a viable alternative. It involves making the multinationals, the banks and the rich pay their fair share in solving the economic crisis they caused, whilst stimulating economic growth through targeted investment and maintaining the living standards of people on low incomes so that economic growth happens. That is how we will start to see real recovery.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Corina Creţu (S&D), în scris. – Dezbaterea privind starea Uniunii este, din păcate, bilanţul unui cincinal pierdut pentru cetăţeni şi pentru proiectul european. Austeritatea impusă de populari a sporit şomajul, sărăcia şi euroscepticismul. Totodată, nu s-a făcut pasul spre ceea ce numim "mai multă Europă". Comisia Barroso nu a avut viziunea şi curajul necesare pentru a împinge construcţia europeană înainte. Există iniţiative, precum „uniunea bancară“, şi „garanţia pentru tineret“ blocate într-un proces birocratic care trebuie accelerat. Sunt, în acest sens, eforturi semnificative din partea Parlamentului pentru a stimula cooperarea şi transparenţa decizională, precum acordul dintre Parlamentul European şi Banca Centrală Europeană privind mecanismul unic de supraveghere bancară şi acordul interparlamentar privind bugetul UE pentru exercițiul financiar 2014-2020.

Din păcate, Consiliul încearcă să minimalizeze în continuare atribuţia de legiferare a Parlamentului şi importanța pe care acesta o acordă creșterii economice și ocupării forței de muncă. Deși austeritatea a dispărut din vocabularul popularilor europeni, ea este o realitate la nivelul Uniunii, reflectată și în percepţia Consiliului privind bugetul european pentru viitorii şapte ani. E inadmisibilă reducerea, în ultimul moment, cu un miliard de euro, a bugetelor alocate creării locurilor de muncă pentru tineri şi inovării.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Σπύρος Δανέλλης (S&D), in writing. – Είναι εξαιρετικά θετική η πρόταση για τους όρους οι οποίοι προσδιορίζουν την προτιμησιακή καταγωγή των προϊόντων, βάσει της οποίας θεσπίζονται τα προτιμησιακά δασμολογικά μέτρα. Αυτή ορίζει ότι για να εξασφαλισθεί προτιμησιακή εισαγωγή ενός προϊόντος στην ΕΕ θα πρέπει αυτό είτε να έχει παραχθεί εξ ολοκλήρου στη συγκεκριμένη χώρα καταγωγής είτε να έχει υποστεί σημαντική μεταποίηση ή επεξεργασία που έχει καταλήξει στην κατασκευή ενός νέου προϊόντος. Επίσης, εντάσσει ρητά στη βασική νομοθετική πράξη τα κριτήρια προσδιορισμού ενός προϊόντος ως έχοντος προτιμησιακή καταγωγή. Με την πρόταση αυτή γίνεται ένα σημαντικό βήμα για την άρση αθέμιτου ανταγωνισμού -μεταξύ άλλων- από νωπά γεωργικά προϊόντα τρίτων χωρών στα αντίστοιχα προϊόντα της Ε.Ε. Σας υπενθυμίζω ότι νωπά γεωργικά προϊόντα από τρίτες χώρες, με χαμηλό κόστος παραγωγής, εισάγονταν στην ΕΕ και μετά από υποτυπώδη επεξεργασία που δεν μετέβαλλε τα χαρακτηριστικά ή την ειδική υφή του προϊόντος, διετίθεντο στην ευρωπαϊκή αγορά ως προϊόντα της ΕΕ.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ismail Ertug (S&D), schriftlich. – In den letzten Jahren durchlebte die EU-Politik eine Legitimitätskrise, da die europäische Bevölkerung vor allem durch die Sparpolitik der Eurozone immer stärker verunsichert wurde. Viele Menschen stehen nicht nur dieser Politik, sondern auch dem europäischen Einigungsprozess mittlerweile kritisch gegenüber. Deshalb müssen wir versuchen, die Bevölkerung für unsere Politik und unser Handeln zurückzugewinnen.

Wir müssen als Politiker Visionen schaffen, welche den einzelnen EU-Bürger selbst betreffen, sodass er sich damit identifizieren und auseinandersetzen kann.

Präsident Barroso, bei Ihrem Vortrag erhielt man den Eindruck, als sei die Krise bereits passé. Ein leichter Wirtschaftsaufschwung allein reicht jedoch nicht, den vielen Arbeitslosen wieder einen Zugang zum Arbeitsmarkt zu bieten. Wir können die Vertrauenskrise in der EU aber auch die Wirtschaftskrise nur dann überwinden, wenn die Krisenpolitik der EU endlich auch zur Verbesserung der Situation von Arbeitslosen und Arbeitnehmern in prekären Beschäftigungsverhältnissen beiträgt.

Darüber hinaus müssen alle Länder an einem Strang ziehen. Das bedeutet, dass man mit einer gemeinsamen Währung nur erfolgreich agieren kann, wenn man gemeinsame wirtschaftliche und soziale Ziele verfolgt. Das Spardiktat von Kanzlerin Merkel & Co. war ein Paradebeispiel dafür, wie man europäische Politik nicht gestalten sollte.

Ein weiterer zentraler Punkt, mit dem wir uns dringend auf EU-Ebene stärker auseinandersetzen müssen, ist der Steuerbetrug. Alleine in Deutschland entstehen durch die Steuersünder jährlich Schäden in Höhe von 30 Milliarden Euro. Das ist Geld, welches in Bildung, Infrastruktur oder Schuldenabbau besser investiert werden könnte.

Mit den so gewonnen Mitteln lässt sich wiederum eine ausgewogenere Haushaltspolitik finanzieren, die nicht nur auf Sparen ausgerichtet ist, sondern auch durch gezielte Investitionen in Bildung, Forschung, Wachstumsbranchen und Beschäftigung einen Mehrwert für die Bevölkerung mit sich bringt.

Lasst uns gemeinsam eine neue, mutigere und sozialere Politik wagen, welche unsere Bevölkerung überzeugt und unsere Union dauerhaft stärkt!

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D), písomne. – Pretrvávajúca hospodárska a sociálna kríza sa tvrdo dotýka najzraniteľnejších skupín obyvateľov EÚ. Obrovská úroveň nezamestnanosti, krachujúce podniky a nezmyselné škrty vo verejnom sektore vedú k zvyšovaniu fenoménu chudoby a k situácii, keď našim občanom nevieme zabezpečiť ani len základné sociálne služby a práva, ako je právo na dôstojný život, právo na vzdelanie, právo na prácu, na lekársku starostlivosť, právo na pomoc v núdzi atď. Zlá ekonomická a sociálna situácia našich obyvateľov spôsobuje nedôveru v zmysel európskeho projektu a v Európsku úniu ako takú. Súčasné problémy Únie ľudia cítia na vlastnej koži. Nemôžeme sa čudovať, že sú čím ďalej tým viac skeptickí. Obyvatelia jednotlivých členských štátov totiž necítia reálne výsledky našej snahy. Protikrízové opatrenia nie sú dostatočne účinné. Treba prijať konkrétne opatrenia na podporu trvalého a inteligentného rastu, vytvárať nové pracovné miesta, prijímať opatrenia, ktoré mladým ľuďom zaručia, že po skončení štúdia sa môžu začať realizovať na pracovnom trhu, a nie mrhať svojim talentom na úradoch práce. Treba prijať potrebné opatrenia zamerané na podporu konkurencieschopnosti EÚ. Treba prijať opatrenia na oživenie nášho jednotného trhu a na podporu malých a stredných podnikateľov, ktorí sú v kontexte oživenia hospodárstva nenahraditeľní. Únia potrebuje hlbšiu mieru integrácie a väčšiu mieru vzájomnej solidarity.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  András Gyürk (PPE), irasban. – Az Európai Bizottság számos kísérletet tett a gazdasági válság felszámolására, azonban egyelőre úgy tűnik, az európai polgárok kételkednek az eredményekben.

Nemrégiben készült egy 28 tagállamra kiterjedő felmérés, amely szerint 2014-ben az európai választásokon az Európai Parlament frakcióinak visszaszorulása, és a szélsőséges erők előretörése várható. Vajon a szkepticizmus terjedése és a polgárok elfordulása a hagyományos európai elittől nem annak az eredménye, hogy az uniós intézmények a valóban fontos kérdések helyett túlzottan sokat foglalkoztak egyes tagállamok belügyeivel?

Magyarország, amelyet az elmúlt két évben méltatlanul ültettek szégyenpadra, mára bebizonyította, hogy önálló és innovatív gazdaságpolitikát folytatva képes jelentős eredményeket elérni az állam pénzügyeinek konszolidálása és a polgárok életkörülményeinek javítása terén. A magyarok erőfeszítéseinek köszönhetően nyolc év után idén végre lezárult a Magyarország ellen folyó túlzottdeficit-eljárás, és egyedüliként az IMF-hitelhez folyamodó államok közül, Magyarország előtörlesztette a Valutaalaptól 2008-ban felvett kölcsönt.

Emellett Magyarország azon kevés ország közé tartozik, amelyekben idén növekedett a bérek vásárlóértéke, emelkedett a nyugdíj, és csökkentek a közszolgáltatási díjak.

Meggyőződésem, hogy az Európai Unió hitelessége csak úgy szerezhető vissza, ha az intézmények az embereket érintő legfontosabb kérdésekkel foglalkoznak, és teret engednek a nemzeti megoldásoknak. A magyar polgárok eredményei a közösséget erősítik, ezért méltók Európa elismerésére. Európa tanulhat a magyar modellből.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Danuta Jazłowiecka (PPE), na piśmie. – Dane napływające z europejskiej gospodarki pokazują, że najgorszy okres kryzysu mamy już za sobą. Jednak ożywienie gospodarcze jest bardzo słabe i nie przekłada się na poprawę sytuacji na rynku pracy. Większość analityków jest zgodna co do tego, że niewielki wzrost gospodarczy, jaki nas czeka w najbliższych latach, nie spowoduje przyrostu ilości miejsc pracy. Nie możemy również zapominać, że te, które powstają, mają najczęściej charakter tymczasowy i są niskopłatne. UE potrzebuje więc nowej polityki przemysłowej. Działania sanacyjne ostatnich lat skoncentrowane były przede wszystkim na redukowaniu wydatków publicznych. Sytuacja na rynku pracy bardzo wyraźnie pokazuje, że działania te były może nie błędne, ale z pewnością zbyt jednostronne. Niezbędne staje się uzupełnienie ich inicjatywami wspierającymi tworzenie miejsc pracy, te zaś powinny zmierzać do ściągnięcia do Europy inwestycji przemysłowych. Nie możemy się oszukiwać, że nowe czy zielone technologie nie stworzą miejsc pracy dla wszystkich Europejczyków.

Powinniśmy wzorować się na Stanach Zjednoczonych, które coraz skuteczniej potrafią przekonać przedsiębiorców do inwestowania w Ameryce. Oczywiście miało na to wpływ obniżenie kosztów pracy i spadek cen surowców energetycznych, ale wsparte to było również aktywną postawą tamtejszych władz wszystkich szczebli. Wydaje się, że Europa powinna pójść w tym samym kierunku, aby poprawić sytuację na rynku pracy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), na piśmie. – W Parlamencie Europejskim istnieje szeroka zgoda, że podstawowym problemem dzisiejszej Unii Europejskiej jest bezrobocie, a w szczególności bezrobocie wśród młodzieży. Dobrze, że UE próbuje zmniejszyć skalę bezrobocia. Nie zapominajmy jednak, że to ani państwo, ani organizacje międzynarodowe – generalnie – nie tworzą miejsc pracy. Powinniśmy zatem koncentrować się na tworzeniu warunków dla tych, którzy dzięki temu stworzą z kolei trwałe miejsca pracy. Możemy pomagać przedsiębiorcom w kreowaniu dobrobytu, ale nie próbujmy ich zastępować. Uważamy europejski model społeczno-ekonomiczny za najlepszy na świecie. Tak pewnie jest w rzeczywistości, choć musimy jednocześnie pamiętać, że model ten nie jest bytem idealnym. Trzeba go nieustannie doskonalić, poprawiać, a przede wszystkim dbać o gospodarkę, która jest prawdziwym i niezastępowalnym paliwem dla realizacji europejskiego modelu. Bez zdrowej gospodarki europejski model nie może i nie będzie funkcjonować prawidłowo.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Sandra Kalniete (PPE), rakstiski. – Es piekrītu Eiropas Komisijas prezidenta Žozē Manuela Barrozu teiktajam, ka dalībvalstis nedrīkst apstāties pie veiktajām reformām. Ir jāturpina iesāktais darbs, jo ekonomiskā izaugsme joprojām eiro zonā ir nepiedodami vāja. Ja dalībvalstis neturpinās reformas, tad šo patiešām varēs dēvēt par zudušo desmitgadi. Ir jāsaprot, ka pasaule mainās un Eiropas Savienībai ir jāspēj mainīties līdzi. Mēs redzam, ka šobrīd spēcīgākā ekonomiskā izaugsme ir tieši Ziemeļeiropas valstīs, kuras stingri ievēro fiskālo disciplīnu un veic nepieciešamās reformas, lai izdevumi būtu saskaņoti ar ieņēmumiem. Protams, ka daudziem var nepatikt Baltijas valstu un īpaši Latvijas minēšana kā piemērs, kuras valdība un cilvēki pašaizliedzīgi ir paveikuši milzīgu darbu, lai atjaunotu stabilu un ilgtspējīgu ekonomisko izaugsmi. Tomēr arī Dienvideiropas valstīm ir jāsaprot skarbā realitāte, ka nāksies pieņemt vēl virkni nepatīkamu lēmumu, lai nākotnē varētu saglabāt augsto dzīves līmeni. Esmu gandarīta, ka eiro zonā mēs redzam ekonomisko izaugsmi, un ceru, ka pēc gada mēs jau runāsim par daudz labākiem ekonomiskās izaugsmes un nodarbinātības rādītājiem.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Mitro Repo (S&D) ), kirjallinen. – Tosiasioiden tunnustaminen on viisauden alku. On anteeksiantamatonta antaa Eurooppa-projektin valua tuhkana tuuleen. Meidän on hyväksyttävä, että keskiverto eurooppalaisella on oikeus tuntea itsensä turhautuneeksi ja jopa petetyksi, mitä tulee viimeaikaiseen talouskriisin hoitoon eri vaiheissa ja eri instansseissa. Politiikka, joka antaa vastuuttomasti liian suuria lupauksia edes yrittämättä lunastaa niitä, ei voi johtaa kuin vararikkoon. Kymmenien huippukokouksien pitäminen, joitten jälkeen kansalaisille uudestaan ja uudestaan kerrotaan tehdyn historiallisia päätöksiä kriisin ratkaisuksi, ei voi olla uuvuttamatta rehellisimpääkin eurooppalaista. Ensikevään EP-vaalit, jotka ajoittuvat Kreikan puheenjohtajuuskaudelle, jolle joudutaan vielä antamaan kolmas avustuspaketti, tulevat olemaan kyllä kohtalokkaat. Vastakkain ei enää ole perinteinen oikeisto- ja vasemmistoleiri, vastakkain tulee olemaan euroskeptikot ja Eurooppa-myönteiset. Pelkään pahoin, että edelliset on paljon helpompi mobilisoida liikkeelle. Eurooppapolitiikkaa pitäisi tehdä niin, että kulloisiinkin vaaleihin valmistauduttaisiin koko vaalikauden ajan niin että jo toteutetulla politiikalla haetaan uudelleen vahvistusta alkuperäiselle visiolle. Uskon, että eurooppalaiset ovat poliittisesti kypsiä hahmottamaan myös suurempia strategiakokonaisuuksia. Se vaistoaa erittäin herkästi, jos siltä kätketään tosiasiat ja jos totuutta vääristellään. Tämä tarkoittaa sitä, että EU ansaitsee sellaiset johtajat, joilla on rohkeus tunnustaa virheensä ja puutteensa ja samalla kertoa selvästi, ymmärrettävästi ja rohkeasti oman visionsa Euroopasta ja sen toteutumisen mukana tuomat seuraukset ja riskit.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Czesław Adam Siekierski (PPE), na piśmie. – Odnosząc się do orędzia przewodniczącego Barroso należy podkreślić, że stan UE jest obecnie trudny do jednoznacznego określenia, co wynika z dużego uzależnienia Europy od sytuacji globalnej. Nadal brakuje jednoznacznie ukształtowanych unijnych instytucji w dziedzinie nadzoru bankowego. Bez wątpienia głównym atutem Unii jest wspólny rynek, ale nadal nie jest on w pełni ukończony, m.in. brak jest ciągle wspólnotowego rynku usług, a unia bankowa jest tworzona zbyt wolno. Zarządzanie gospodarcze w Europie często sprowadza się do „ręcznego sterowania”, a brakuje rozwiązań systemowych. Zadowalające jest bezpieczeństwo żywnościowe naszego kontynentu, ale rolnicy europejscy mają zbyt małe dochody; mamy coraz mniej młodych ludzi skłonnych przejmować gospodarstwa, przegrywamy konkurencję z importem żywności. Nasza działalność na zewnątrz jest ciągle zbyt mała i nieuporządkowana.

Przewodniczący nie odniósł się do wyników utworzonej niedawno Europejskiej Służby Działań Zewnętrznych. Można jednak zakładać, że wiele pozostaje do zrobienia w tym obszarze. Zabrakło również szerszego odniesienia do kwestii ograniczenia wieloletnich ram finansowych UE na lata 2014-2020, które po raz pierwszy w historii będą miały okrojony budżet. Jak te cięcia budżetowe mają się do faktu przyjęcia Chorwacji, strategii „Europa 2020” stawiającej przed nami ambitne plany? Jak chcemy likwidować wielkie różnice w rozwoju między krajami członkowskimi, regionami, czy po prostu między poziomem życia obywateli UE?

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Nuno Teixeira (PPE), por escrito. – A crise económica e financeira que tem assolado o mundo colocou as instituições europeias no centro da solução para crise. A partir desta, a integração económica passou a ser um pilar da Estratégia UE2020 e os Estados-Membros estão agora mais próximos nas políticas económicas, monetárias e financeiras. Apesar de alguns progressos no crescimento económico, visíveis nos países europeus, estamos a enfrentar uma enorme crise social com 26 milhões de desempregados, na sua grande maioria jovens qualificados. Não podemos pedir mais sem criar um quadro de crescimento futuro. É, por isso, urgente aprovar o próximo quadro financeiro plurianual 2014-2020, pois será este a fonte de investimento de muitas regiões europeias. Temos que apoiar e facilitar o acesso ao financiamento europeu das PME, a base do mercado europeu. É preciso finalizar a união bancária, de forma a termos medidas preventivas e corretivas para uma crise futura semelhante à que vivemos hoje. Queremos mais Europa onde houver valor acrescentado. Queremos mais solidariedade quando as situações são negativas para uns Estados-membros e positivas para outros. Uma união política que permita que o processo decisório e institucional seja mais célere e eficaz.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D), în scris. – Starea Uniunii trebuie analizată prin percepția şi încrederea celor 500 de milioane de cetățeni europeni în propriul viitor. Rata ocupării forței de muncă este de numai 68,4%, cheltuielile pentru cercetare şi dezvoltare sunt doar de 2,02% din produsul intern brut (PIB), 12,8% din populația cu vârsta între 18-24 ani a părăsit timpuriu școala și 119,8 milioane cetățeni europeni se află în pragul sărăciei sau a excluziunii sociale. Starea Uniunii nu se poate îmbunătăți dacă nu se investește în educație și în sănătate, în asigurarea de locuri de muncă decente şi în garantarea unei pensii decente. UE trebuie să își dezvolte o politică industrială capabilă să refacă industria europeană, într-o manieră eco-eficientă. Dezvoltarea industrială a UE trebuie acompaniată de măsuri de finanțare a economiei europene, astfel încât să se asigure atât locuri de muncă pe teritoriul UE, cât şi competitivitatea UE pe plan mondial. Este inadmisibil ca astăzi să existe încă bariere privind libera circulație a lucrătorilor, iar statele membre să se confrunte cu un regres față de modelul social pe baza căruia Uniunea a fost construită. Uniunea trebuie să apere modelul social european, să crească competitivitatea industriei în toate statele membre și să asigure locuri de muncă pe teritoriul Uniunii.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Γεώργιος Τούσσας (GUE/NGL), in writing. – Η σημερινή ομιλία του προέδρου της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής, δηλώνει την αποφασιστικότητα των μονοπωλίων και του πολιτικού τους προσωπικού να συνεχίσουν με την ίδια σφοδρότητα την αντιλαϊκή επίθεσή τους ενάντια στους εργαζόμενους, σε όλα τα κράτη μέλη της ΕΕ. Είναι αλήθεια αυτό που δήλωσε ο πρόεδρος της Επιτροπής, ότι τα τελευταία χρόνια η ΕΕ, μαζί με το Ευρωκοινοβούλιο και τις αστικές κυβερνήσεις των κρατών μελών, πέτυχαν πολλά. Πράγματι. Στήριξαν και διασφάλισαν την κερδοφορία του κεφαλαίου, μειώνοντας δραστικά την τιμή της εργατικής δύναμης σε όλα τα κράτη μέλη της ΕΕ. Σ' αυτές τις "επιτυχίες" για το κεφάλαιο αναφέρεται ο πρόεδρος της Επιτροπής, όταν συγχαίρει την συγκυβέρνηση του κεφαλαίου ΝΔ-ΠΑΣΟΚ (όπως και τις προηγούμενες) για τις "εντυπωσιακές μεταρρυθμίσεις" που πραγματοποίησαν στην Ελλάδα "τα τελευταία τρία χρόνια". Πίσω από τις προπαγανδιστικές ενέσεις αισιοδοξίας, ενόψει των ευρωεκλογών, κρύβεται η ανησυχία του πολιτικού προσωπικού των μονοπωλίων για την χρεοκοπία της αντιλαϊκής πολιτικής της ΕΕ στις λαϊκές συνειδήσεις. Οι λαοί πρέπει να απορρίψουν το τραγικό παρόν και το εφιαλτικό μέλλον που τους επιφυλάσσει η ένωση των μονοπωλίων. Η δική τους ελπίδα βρίσκεται στην διάλυση της ΕΕ, την αποδέσμευση από τα δεσμά της λυκοσυμμαχίας, την οικοδόμηση της κοινωνικής συμμαχίας, για να περάσει η εξουσία από τα μονοπώλια στα χέρια της εργατικής τάξης."

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Dominique Vlasto (PPE), par écrit. – Je me réjouis, Monsieur le Président, du ton de votre discours sur l'état de l'Union, qui tranche avec ceux de certains gouvernements qui clament depuis plusieurs mois que la crise est derrière nous! Effectivement, les signes de reprise sont là, poussent à l'optimisme, mais ne relâchons pas nos efforts! Le PPE soutient un mot d'ordre: la réponse, c'est plus d'Europe! Durant cette crise, l'Union a été un rempart, car qui sait dans quel état seraient nos économies si l'Europe n'avait pas réagi. Alors on peut regretter que la réaction ait parfois été faible, que les décisions pas toujours prises dans les temps ou que l'absence de coordination entre les politiques nationales ait gaspillé beaucoup d'énergie, mais les résultats sont là et les réformes en matière de supervision, d'assainissement des finances publiques et de convergence commencent à porter leurs fruits. Dans la plupart des pays membres, le chômage baisse et l'activité industrielle repart. Rien ne sera jamais plus comme avant, du moins faut-il l'espérer. Si l'Europe s'est dotée d'outils pour se prémunir contre toute rechute, il s'agit désormais de convaincre les Etats qui laissent filer la dette publique de faire des choix courageux.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), por escrito. – O Presidente da Comissão Europeia tentou mitificar o projeto da União Europeia, em tom de ode pouco triunfal, proclamando o projeto e os valores da União, a forma heroica como resistiu às adversidades e a necessidade de ser defendida. Mas porque temos que a defender? Porque a UE é um veículo para garantir às pessoas os seus direitos e uma vida digna? Não, pelo contrário. Temos que a defender porque é a União Europeia. Um projeto comum na retórica de Barroso, um projeto de criação de desigualdade, na realidade quotidiana dos trabalhadores. O discurso de Barroso foi, assim, vazio de conteúdo concreto e forte em mistificações abstratas que estão longe, bem longe, do mundo real. Barroso apostou também no argumento de que a mudança está aí, os sinais da retoma económica estão finalmente a aparecer depois dos nossos esforços. Portugal serviu de exemplo - o crescimento regressou ao país após uma série de trimestres negativos. A economia portuguesa, bem sabemos, não cresceu, o que aconteceu foi que o ritmo da recessão abrandou ligeiramente e circunstancialmente. Os portugueses vivem um drama social real, com perspetivas de se agravar através das medidas já anunciadas de despedimentos e cortes nas pensões. Mas a demagogia retórica de Barroso ignora o concreto.

 
Juridisks paziņojums - Privātuma politika