Verbatim report of proceedings

Monday, 9 December 2013 - Strasbourg

1. Resumption of the session

VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ
Präsident

(Die Sitzung wird um 17.05 Uhr eröffnet.)

  Der Präsident. − Ich erkläre die am Donnerstag, dem 21. November 2013, unterbrochene Sitzungsperiode für wiederaufgenommen.

2. Statements by the President

  Der Präsident. − Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Ich darf Sie bitten, sich von Ihren Plätzen zu erheben.

(Das Parlament erhebt sich.)

Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Nelson Mandela ist in der vergangenen Woche verstorben. Wir trauern um einen Freiheitshelden, einen weisen Revolutionär, einen großen Versöhner. Die Südafrikaner sagen: „Wir haben unseren Vater verloren.“ Ganz sicher hat die Welt eine Jahrhundertpersönlichkeit verloren.

27 Jahre saß Nelson Mandela in Haft, doch nie trachtete er nach Vergeltung. Ihm ist die gewaltfreie Transformation Südafrikas von einem rassistischen Unterdrückerregime zu einer Demokratie zu verdanken. Er hat Worten wie Freiheit, Gleichberechtigung und Aussöhnung ganz sicher eine neue Bedeutung verliehen. Die Menschen, die das Privileg hatten, ihn zu treffen, hat er durch sein Charisma, sicher auch durch seine Bescheidenheit und seine Großmut für sich gewonnen.

In Anerkennung seines Kampfes gegen die Unterdrückung hat das Europäische Parlament Nelson Mandela 1988 den ersten Sacharow-Preis verliehen.

Im Namen des Europäischen Parlaments spreche ich seiner Familie, der Regierung und den Menschen in Südafrika unser Beileid aus. Nelson Mandela ist am vergangenen Donnerstag gestorben. Aber ich bin sicher, sein Erbe lebt in den Herzen von Millionen Menschen weiter.

Eine andere traurige Nachricht, meine Damen und Herren, hat unsere Mitbürgerinnen und Mitbürger in Lettland getroffen. Am 21. November starben insgesamt 54 Menschen, als das Dach eines Supermarktes in Riga auf sie niederstürzte.

Der Einsturz dieses Gebäudes ist das schwerste Unglück, das das Land seit seiner Unabhängigkeit getroffen hat. Diese Tragödie hat nicht nur die Menschen in Lettland, sondern uns alle tief schockiert. Ich habe bereits unmittelbar nach dem Unglück das getan, was ich hier wiederhole; den Menschen im Lande unser Beileid auszusprechen, aber auch unsere Solidarität zu übermitteln.

Den Opfern in Riga und insbesondere Nelson Mandela gilt in dieser Minute unser Gedenken. Ich darf Sie um eine Minute des Schweigens bitten.

(Das Parlament legt eine Schweigeminute ein.)

Meine Damen und Herren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In diesen Minuten gehen uns besorgniserregende Hinweise zu, die von einer Mobilisierung von Polizei und anderen Kräften rund um den Majdan-Platz in Kiew berichten. Ich nutze die Gelegenheit, um die ukrainischen Behörden aufzurufen, Zurückhaltung zu üben und unter allen Umständen von Gewalt auf dem Majdan-Platz abzusehen. Wir hier im Europäischen Parlament stehen für die Ausübung der Redefreiheit und der Versammlungsfreiheit, und wir unterstützen die legitimen europäischen Hoffnungen des ukrainischen Volkes. Ich rufe die Regierung auf, ja ich rufe alle auf, so schnell wie möglich einen Dialog zu suchen und zu finden, vor allen Dingen aber jede Art von Gewalt zu vermeiden. Ich gehe davon aus, dass ich das auch in Ihrem Namen tue.

(Beifall)

3. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting : see Minutes

4. Composition of Parliament: see Minutes

5. Verification of credentials : see Minutes

6. Interpretation of the Rules of Procedure : see Minutes

7. Composition of committees and delegations: see Minutes

8. Delegated acts (Rule 87a): see Minutes

9. Corrigenda (Rule 216): see Minutes

10. Signature of acts adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure (Rule 74): see Minutes

11. Announcement by the President (deadlines for questions for written answer (Rule 117) and written declarations (Rule 123)): see Minutes

12. Questions for oral answer (submission): see Minutes

13. Texts of agreements forwarded by the Council: see Minutes

14. Action taken on Parliament’s positions and resolutions: see Minutes

15. Petitions: see Minutes

16. Documents received: see Minutes

17. Order of business

  Der Präsident. − Der endgültige Entwurf der Tagesordnung dieser Tagung, wie er in der Konferenz der Präsidenten in ihrer Sitzung vom Donnerstag, dem 5. Dezember 2013 gemäß Artikel 137 der Geschäftsordnung festgelegt wurde, ist verteilt worden. Es wurde keine Änderung beantragt.

Der Arbeitsplan ist somit festgelegt.

******

  Ewald Stadler (NI). - Herr Präsident! Gemäß Artikel 195 der Geschäftsordnung hat jedes Mitglied dieses Hauses das Recht, Änderungsanträge zu stellen, damit diese im zuständigen Ausschuss geprüft werden können.

Am 22. Oktober hat das hiesige Parlament den Estrela-Bericht an den Ausschuss für die Rechte der Frau und die Gleichstellung der Geschlechter zurücküberwiesen. Dieser Bericht wurde dort behandelt, und das was morgen zur Abstimmung gelangt, ist ein neuer Bericht. Aber den Mitgliedern des Parlamentes wurde vom Ausschuss die Möglichkeit verwehrt, Änderungsanträge zu stellen. Dagegen wurde Protest erhoben. Dieser Protest wurde bis heute nicht beantwortet, obwohl der Juristische Dienst im Ausschuss selber erklärt hat, dass Änderungsanträge zulässig sein müssen.

Es wurde darüber hinaus von mehreren Mitgliedern des Parlaments darum ersucht, dass der Juristische Dienst und der AFCO-Ausschuss eine Stellungnahme zu dem Verfahren abgeben sollen. Auch das wurde nicht zugelassen.

Es wurden darüber hinaus Änderungsanträge eingebracht, und die werden vom Tisch gewischt. Dieses Verfahren zum Estrela-Bericht ist absolut geschäftsordnungswidrig! Meine Meinung deckt sich mit der Meinung des Juristischen Dienstes, wie sie im Ausschuss referiert wurde, und ich betone meinen ausdrücklichen Protest gegen diese Vorgangsweise, zumal das eine sensible Materie ist, zumal hunderte Bürger vor diesem Haus gegen diesen Bericht demonstrieren und zumal das Haus zum Ausdruck gebracht hat, dass es sich hier um eine Angelegenheit handelt, mit der man versucht, eine Bürgerinitiative, eine der erfolgreichsten Bürgerinitiativen mit mehr als einer Million Unterstützungsunterschriften, die Bürgerinitiative One of us, zu unterlaufen.

Ich möchte meinen absoluten und heftigen Protest gegen diese gesetzwidrige und geschäftsordnungswidrige Vorgangsweise des Ausschusses zum Ausdruck bringen.

18. Common Fisheries Policy - Common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products (debate)

  Der Präsident. − Als nächster Punkt der Tageordnung folgt die gemeinsame Aussprache über

- die Empfehlung für die zweite Lesung des Fischereiausschusses betreffend den Standpunkt des Rates in erster Lesung im Hinblick auf den Erlass der Verordnung des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates über die Gemeinsame Fischereipolitik und zur Änderung der Verordnungen (EG) Nr. 1954/2003 und (EG) Nr. 1224/2009 des Rates und zur Aufhebung der Verordnungen (EG) Nr. 2371/2002 und (EG) Nr. 639/2004 des Rates und des Beschlusses 2004/585/EG des Rates (12007/3/2013 - C7-0375/2013 - 2011/0195(COD)) (Berichterstatterin: Ulrike Rodust) (A7-0409/2013) und

- die Empfehlung für die zweite Lesung des Fischereiausschusses betreffend den Standpunkt des Rates in erster Lesung im Hinblick auf den Erlass einer Verordnung des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates über die gemeinsame Marktorganisation für Erzeugnisse der Fischereiund der Aquakultur, zur Änderung der Verordnungen (EG) Nr. 1184/2006 und (EG) Nr. 1224/2009 des Rates und zur Aufhebung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 104/2000 des Rates (12005/2/2013 - C7-0376/2013- 2011/0194(COD)) (Berichterstatter: Struan Stevenson) (A7-0413/2013).

  Ulrike Rodust, Berichterstatterin. − Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Morgen stimmen wir in zweiter Lesung über die neue Grundverordnung ab, das Herzstück der reformierten Fischereipolitik.

Wir haben uns lange gestritten. Aber nach langen und harten Verhandlungen haben wir einen Text gefunden, dem alle relevanten Fraktionen im Parlament und alle Mitgliedstaaten im Rat zustimmen können. Das ist ein großer Erfolg, auf den wir alle gemeinsam stolz sein können.

Was haben wir erreicht? Das größte Problem der Gemeinsamen Fischereipolitik, nämlich die anhaltende Überfischung, wird mit dieser Reform endlich angegangen. Der Rat der Europäischen Union wird verpflichtet, bei seinen jährlichen Entscheidungen über Fangmengen nachhaltig zu handeln. Die Überfischung muss grundsätzlich bis 2015 gestoppt werden, sodass sich die Fischbestände zu erholen beginnen. Es wird klargestellt, dass eine Verschiebung auf ein späteres Datum – spätestens 2020 – nur erlaubt ist, wenn die wirtschaftliche und soziale Nachhaltigkeit der beteiligten Flotten ernstlich gefährdet ist.

Das Parlament konnte in diesem Zusammenhang durchsetzen, dass eines klar ist: Das Ziel aller Maßnahmen ist ein Anwachsen der Bestände, und zwar noch über ein nachhaltiges Niveau hinaus. An die Adresse der Fischereiminister kann ich nur sagen: Wir schauen Ihnen auf die Finger und sorgen dafür, dass diese Regeln auch eingehalten werden.

Auch bei der geplanten Verpflichtung zur Anlandung aller Fänge konnte eine Einigung erzielt werden. Der Text sieht, wie vom Parlament in erster Lesung gefordert, eine verbindliche Einführung eines Rückwurfverbots innerhalb eines klar definierten Zeitrahmens – schrittweise von 2015 bis 2019 – vor. Es dürfen zwar Ausnahmen vom Rückwurfverbot beschlossen werden; diese gelten jedoch nicht unmittelbar, sondern nur durch einen gesonderten Beschluss, im Normalfall in einem Mehrjahresplan.

Hier werden wir darauf achten müssen, dass wir dort, wo es nötig ist, Ausnahmen erlassen. Gleichzeitig dürfen wir das Ziel nicht aus den Augen verlieren: Das Rückwurfverbot soll einen Anreiz schaffen, umweltverträglicher, behutsamer und selektiver zu fischen. Die Reform ist breit angelegt. Wir haben wirklich versucht, die Fischereipolitik in ihrer ganzen Breite zu reparieren.

Ich kann jetzt nicht jeden Punkt in der ihm gebührenden Ausführlichkeit darstellen. Deshalb hier nur ein paar Stichworte: Wir haben die Regionalisierung beschlossen, Detailentscheidungen müssen in Zukunft nicht mehr in Brüssel getroffen werden. Zur globalen Dimension unserer Politik: Wir machen Schluss mit dem Export der Überfischung in Entwicklungsländer, und Fischereiabkommen müssen in Zukunft eine Menschenrechtsklausel enthalten. Wir entwickeln die Aquakultur in Europa koordiniert und nachhaltig. Es gibt eine faire Quotenverteilung. Wer nachhaltig fischt, soll in Zukunft durch zusätzliche Quoten belohnt werden.

Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, diese Reform ist nicht das Ende der Fischereipolitik. Wir werden weiter hart arbeiten müssen, um unsere Meeresumwelt zu erhalten und gleichzeitig eine Zukunft für die europäische Fischerei sicherzustellen. Aber mit der Reform haben wir ein gutes Fundament geschaffen, eine gute Grundlage, auf der wir aufbauen können.

Wir haben immer noch nicht die interinstitutionellen Probleme zu den Mehrjahresplänen gelöst. Aber seit ein paar Wochen verhandeln wir in sehr konstruktiver Atmosphäre darüber. Ich bin hoffnungsfroh, dass wir dieses leidige Thema bald lösen können und uns dann mit voller Kraft den dringend benötigten Mehrjahresplänen zuwenden können.

Zum Abschluss ein paar Worte des Dankes. Vielen Dank, Kommissarin Damanaki, für Ihren unermüdlichen Einsatz für eine nachhaltige Fischerei. Vielen Dank an die litauische Präsidentschaft, stellvertretend für den ganzen Ministerrat. Vielen Dank, liebe Kollegen aus dem Parlament, für die intensive und gute Zusammenarbeit. Und natürlich ganz, ganz herzlichen Dank an alle Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter, die uns geholfen haben, diesen wichtigen Schritt gemeinsam zu gehen.

VORSITZ: OTHMAR KARAS
Vizepräsident

  Maria Damanaki, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, with today’s two reports by Ms Rodust and Mr Stevenson we are this week finalising a very intensive process to reform the common fisheries policy. If these reports are adopted, I think that Parliament will have enabled the ambitious reform that the Commission was seeking with this proposal.

This is a very important step forward because we have done this together with the Council. Parliament has clearly shown that codecision works as effectively in fisheries as it does in other areas, something that has at times been questioned. Now we have proved that Parliament can cooperate productively with the Council to produce good results in fisheries policy.

I would like to thank Ms Rodust, the rapporteur. She has done an excellent job, as have all Members of the Committee on Fisheries. I would also like to thank Mr Stevenson for his contribution.

Let me underline that the only missing element of the new fisheries policy puzzle is now the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund. So I urge Parliament and the Lithuanian Presidency – I am sorry that they are not here – to do everything possible to complete the work by the end of the year. This is important because, if we complete the work on our fisheries fund by the end of the year, we will then have the budget to carry out essential work. If we do not have a budget, we cannot send our inspectors out to conduct fisheries controls, we cannot receive scientific advice and we cannot support valuable projects in the Regional Fisheries Management Organisations, to name just a few of the consequences. I would like to urge Parliament and the Lithuanian Presidency to work on this. The Commission is ready to facilitate and will put forward creative solutions, but we need to make a decision about the funding before the end of the year.

On the basic regulation, I am happy with the result because, as Ms Rodust has already mentioned, it fully supports the Commission’s approach and we are now in a position to fulfil all the sustainability principles. We are going to bring our stocks to maximum sustainable yield level – or even above this level – and next week we will be discussing next year’s fishing opportunities in the Council and we will fight for good decisions.

Furthermore, we will have a gradual landing obligation starting from 1 January 2015, which we are preparing. We will also have regionalisation with more responsibilities for the regions and better legal standards for our external policy. I think that this was a good outcome after all.

Turning now to the Common Market Organisation Regulation, this will, of course, make a substantial contribution to the overall objective of ensuring sustainable fishing and aquaculture activities.

As you know, the Commission would have preferred more ambitious labelling rules in the interests of consumers. Therefore, the Commission was not in a position to support the final compromise between Parliament and Council on this point.

Here, as well, our priority must be implementation. The Commission is doing all it can to have the related implementing regulations in place from 1 January 2014. This will help the Member States and the professional organisations to implement the new rules properly.

Over a year ago, on the occasion of the vote in first reading, I appealed strongly to you to make use of the historic opportunity to reform the European fisheries policy. You have grasped this opportunity and now, with the final work to formalise the agreement, we are turning this into a historic moment indeed.

  Carmen Fraga Estévez, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señor Presidente, para el Grupo del Partido Popular Europeo el proceso negociador tras la primera lectura ha permitido incorporar a la futura PPC aspectos que para nosotros eran esenciales y que, sin restarle ambición, le añaden realismo y la flexibilidad que estaban ausentes tanto de la propuesta inicial de la Comisión como del informe de la ponente.

Puesto que la postura del Consejo estaba más cerca de los planteamientos de nuestro Grupo, el resultado tras los diálogos tripartitos nos resulta mucho más satisfactorio, en particular, en temas claves como los modelos de explotación, los descartes, el contenido de los planes plurianuales, la gestión de la capacidad de la flota o la atención a la situación de las pesquerías mixtas, pasadas por alto pese a que constituyen la mayor parte de las pesquerías de la Unión.

Particularmente importante han sido los avances en el concepto de gestión a través del RMS, que deberá alcanzarse con carácter general en 2015, siempre que sea posible, o de forma progresiva hasta 2020 para todas las especies, y el hecho de que el parámetro clave sea, como también solicitábamos, la mortalidad por pesca en lugar de la biomasa.

En otro de los temas más complejos, la prohibición de los descartes, se ha logrado –como propuso el PPE– un calendario más realista que tiene en cuenta las pesquerías mixtas. Se arbitran también soluciones y períodos transitorios para los casos en que el aumento de la selectividad resulte extremadamente difícil o los costes del desembarque resulten desproporcionados, al igual que se ha tratado de encontrar una salida para las flotas que no disponen de cuotas de determinadas especies, o esas sean demasiado bajas como para poder aunar la política de descartes con el mantenimiento de la actividad.

  Antolín Sánchez Presedo, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señor Presidente, es la primera vez, desde que se aprobó el primer Reglamento de base, hace tres décadas, que el Parlamento actúa como colegislador. Aprecio el esfuerzo de la ponente, la señora Rodust, para asegurar la sostenibilidad pesquera en todas sus dimensiones.

Situar las poblaciones por encima del rendimiento máximo sostenible en 2015, cuando sea posible, o 2020, lo más tarde; eliminar los descartes entre 2015 y 2019; desarrollar planes multianuales; usar criterios objetivos y transparentes para la distribución de oportunidades de pesca; regionalizar las medidas técnicas; orientar la gestión al equilibrio de las capacidades de las flotas y las oportunidades de pesca; aumentar la participación y evaluar el cumplimiento son pasos en la buena dirección. La referencia a las tareas de protección, a áreas de protección de la pesca y a la pesca costera serán bien acogidas en Galicia.

Por eso, pese al mantenimiento del principio de estabilidad relativa, a las restricciones al mercado interior y a que sería de desear una mayor información al consumidor en la OMC, considero que la reforma es un avance que merece apoyo y la clave será ahora su ejecución.

  Pat the Cope Gallagher, thar ceann an Ghrúpa ALDE. – A Uachtaráin, ba mhaith liom Uachtaránacht na hÉireann agus mo chomhghleacaithe Ulrike Rodust agus Struan Stevenson, an bheirt rapóirtéirí ar an tuarascáil, a mholadh as ucht an dá rialachán thábhachtacha seo.

Throughout the negotiations I endeavoured to enshrine the Hague Preference into the common fisheries policy. I was pleased to secure the support of Parliament. However, despite the refusal of the Council to properly consider that important proposal, I am pleased to have negotiated a strengthened recital whereby Member States must take full account of the Hague Preferences when deciding on annual quotas.

Tá neart de na leasuithe tábhachtacha a mhol mé den chéad uair le linn na gcainteanna i bParlaimint na hEorpa clúdaithe anois ag an gComhbheartas Iascaigh nua. Ina measc sin tá aitheantas ar leith d’oileáin bheaga chósta a bhíonn ag brath ar chúrsaí iascaigh agus aitheantas freisin go mba cheart leanúint leis na limistéir atá íogair ó thaobh na bitheolaíochta de, ina mbeadh an Bosca Éireannach san áireamh.

And despite legal constraints the new CFP includes greater regionalisation and bottom-up decision-making, particularly for technical and conservation measures. The attention will now quickly turn to the implementation of the policy, especially in relation to the discard ban. So the introduction of the discard ban will only work in practice if principles of avoidance and minimisation through more selective gear are followed. The conclusion that is also critical is that we should fully support the producer organisations, which I believe are the cornerstone of the new policy.

  Isabella Lövin, för Verts/ALE-gruppen. – Herr talman! Från och med nästa år kommer EU att ha en helt ny fiskeripolitik. Den kommer att innebära ett stopp mot överfiske, ett stopp för dumpning av fisk och mycket striktare villkor för EU-flottorna när de ska fiska utanför Europas gränser i utvecklingsländer.

Detta är en smått revolutionerande förändring av en omtalad destruktiv fiskeripolitik som har gett EU dåligt rykte världen över, och jag är väldigt stolt över att kunna säga att det är EU-parlamentet, miljörörelsen, och även vi i den gröna gruppen som har varit pådrivande i denna reform.

Det visar att förändring är möjlig även på andra områden om politiker tar sin uppgift på allvar och väljarna tydligt visar vad de förväntar sig av sina folkvalda representanter.

Men kampen är inte över. Nu ska den goda lagtexten översättas i handling. Varje nytt beslut på fiskets område måste följa de nya hållbarhetsprinciperna. Därför tycker jag att parlamentet i morgon ska rösta nej till fiskeriavtalet med Marocko, som inte innehåller de tydliga klausuler för respekt av mänskliga rättigheter som vi kommit överens om. Så vill jag tacka alla kollegor som har arbetat, speciell fru Rodust och kommissionsledamot Damanaki, för ett mycket gott arbete.

  Marek Józef Gróbarczyk, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Dotychczasowa wspólna polityka rybacka spotkała się z generalną krytyką płynącą ze wszystkich środowisk związanych z rybołówstwem oraz szeregu organizacji ekologicznych. Skutki jej obowiązywania najbardziej odczuli rybacy, a wiązały się one z nadmiernymi ograniczeniami. Nowa polityka rybołówstwa musi dać szansę na rozwój całej branży połowowej. Nie jest ona doskonała, niemniej jednak usuwa dotychczasowe obostrzenia, które niejednokrotnie miały charakter głęboko nieracjonalny i rozmijały się z istotą działalności branży połowowej. Zasadniczą kwestią, jaką wprowadza nowa polityka, jest promowanie zawodu rybaka. Jest to wartość fundamentalna dla przyszłości i rozwoju branży. Drugi element stanowi wsparcie dla rozwoju drobnego rybołówstwa będącego podstawą przyszłego kształtu działalności połowowej w Europie. Przyjmowane sprawozdanie jest również wezwaniem kierowanym do rybaków, aby nie porzucali zawodu rybaka.

  João Ferreira, em nome do Grupo GUE/NGL. – É uma evidência o fracasso das últimas três décadas de Política Comum das Pescas. Uma gestão centralizada, distante da realidade, desconhecedora da profunda diversidade que caracteriza as pescas na Europa e que teve resultados desastrosos nos planos económico, social e ambiental. Apesar disso, o Tratado de Lisboa veio atribuir à União Europeia competência exclusiva, e não partilhada, na gestão dos recursos vivos marinhos, assim agravando todo o problema.

Foi visível ao longo de todo o processo de discussão da reforma o constrangimento que este enquadramento institucional representa para a implementação de uma gestão de proximidade, a que melhor serve os objetivos de sustentabilidade. A alteração deste enquadramento institucional é uma necessidade que persiste e à qual teremos, mais tarde ou mais cedo, que dar resposta.

É significativo como aquele que foi apresentado como um dos pilares desta reforma e um esteio da proclamada regionalização - os planos plurianuais - persistam enredados num conflito institucional sem via à vista, o que prefigura, também aqui, a confirmação da velha máxima de que é preciso que algo mude para que tudo continue na mesma.

  John Stuart Agnew, on behalf of the EFD Group. – Mr President, UKIP have forced a vote on the second reading by virtue of tabling the only amendment. We are concerned at the intimidation of Gibraltarians by the Spanish Government and wish to remind all parties that Gibraltar never opted into the common fisheries policy, making it permanently free from EU interference.

Leave Gibraltar Alone is the polite title of our amendment. At first reading we were astonished to witness the Conservatives voting against the repatriation of our UK fishing waters when given this golden opportunity. They have been banging on about repatriation of fishing waters for years; so what is going on here?

At the other end of the Mediterranean we have Greece – and I am not insulting anybody, I am only looking at the fact that Greece is due to take over the rotating Presidency next month. In a recent study on the profitability of the EU fishing fleet all Member States were invited to submit data. Some submitted more than others, but Greece submitted nothing whatsoever, despite the fact that the Greek Commissioner actually holds the fisheries portfolio.

The study did receive enough data, however, to declare that Slovenia, Germany, Ireland and Finland are running their fisheries at a net loss despite the subsidies received. Greece may or may not be in a similar position; without the data we just do not know. If we add the acknowledged environmental damage created by the overzealous search for fish we have to ask: what is the point of the CFP?

  Andrew Henry William Brons (NI). - Mr President, the long-term prospects for British fishermen depend on withdrawal from the EU, but of course fishermen want solutions to current and immediate problems. We are told that the discard policy involving fish that cannot survive will of course be discontinued, but the survivability rate is said to be higher with some species. There must be research-led distinctions between treatment of different species.

Avoidance of by-catch waste is a welcome theme of the Stevenson report, with adult commercial fish to be allowed onto the open market and the remaining by-catch being used for some other commercial purpose: fish meal, pet food, etc. In the end, by-catches must be reduced, possibly with gear that distinguishes between different sizes for selective catch and release, such as the pot-trap developed by my constituent Mr Jeff Stockdale in 2009.

Information to consumers is always to be welcomed but the original requirements for gear type, fish stock and flag state might have been excessively costly. That the supply of this information will be voluntary is to be welcomed.

  Alain Cadec (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, nous validerons demain la réforme de la politique commune de la pêche, sur laquelle nous avons travaillé pendant plus de trois ans.

Ces deux textes sont le fruit de longues négociations pour trouver un équilibre entre la préservation de la ressource et la préservation de l'emploi dans les secteurs de la pêche et de l'aquaculture. Nous avons mis en place des mécanismes importants pour la conservation. L'un des principaux objectifs de cette politique est l'atteinte de niveaux de biomasse au-delà de ceux permettant de produire le rendement maximum durable d'ici 2015.

Nous avons également validé l'obligation de débarquement de toutes les captures. Sur ce point, je persiste à dire que cela sera compliqué pour les pêcheurs, dont les navires ne sont pas toujours équipés pour tout débarquer. Le seuil de minimis de 5 % permettra malgré tout aux pêcheurs de s'adapter grâce à un calendrier réaliste pour l'interdiction des rejets.

Nous voulons trier sur le pont et non sur le fond. C'est pourquoi je me réjouis que la nouvelle politique de la pêche permette le financement des engins plus sélectifs. Le Parlement demande également un financement pour la collecte des données et les contrôles. Nous souhaitons des mesures pour une pêche qui soit durable du point de vue environnemental, économique et social. La généralisation des plans de gestion pluriannuels permettra aussi une vision à long terme de la ressource.

Je voudrais aussi rappeler que les États membres sont libres de gérer les quotas de manière collective s'ils le souhaitent.

C'est une longue bataille que le Parlement a menée pour donner cette liberté de choix sur la gestion des droits de pêche. Nous avons réussi à éviter l'obligation des concessions de pêche transférables, c'est-à-dire la marchandisation et la libéralisation d'un marché des droits à pêcher.

Grâce à l'organisation commune du marché, les organisations de producteurs ont un rôle accru. Elles gèrent la mise sur le marché des produits de la pêche et de l'aquaculture et doivent s'organiser pour répondre à la demande toujours plus forte. Par ailleurs, la création d'un écolabel européen unique participera également à l'information du consommateur, qui est renforcée grâce à cette réforme.

  Göran Färm (S&D). - Herr talman! Under de mer än tjugo år som jag har varit ute och talat om Europafrågor bland allmänheten har fiskeripolitiken tillhört de absolut mest kritiserade områdena. Det kommer upp på skolor, det kommer upp på arbetsplatser, det kommer upp på torgmöten.

Men nu går vi äntligen mot fullbordandet av en grundlig reform av EU:s fiskeripolitik, och för det tror jag att vi framför allt ska tacka kommissionsledamoten fru Damanaki och vår huvudföredragande Ulrike Rodust.

Vi har en del beslut kvar att fatta, bl.a. om djuphavsfisket, där jag hoppas att vi kan hålla fast vid den grundläggande hållbarhetsprincipen och slå fast ett förbud mot den mest skadliga djuphavstrålningen.

Lyckas vi få de sista pusselbitarna på plats tror jag att vi med stolthet kan hävda att vi har format en mycket mer hållbar fiskeripolitik för framtiden, miljömässigt och ekonomiskt. På sikt kommer det att vara gynnsamt även för fiskerinäringen.

  Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE). - Mr President, ten years ago or so in this place I voted against the then package of CFP so-called reform, and here we are, ten more years of over-centralised failure later. I voted against then because it did not include steps towards zonal management.

Today we are at least looking at a foundation, as Ms Rodust called it, for the future. Now Member States at least have an opportunity to build on the text that is in this reform package, to determinedly push for more decision-making to be made on a regional basis.

I hope that they will, and I hope that the Commission will let it go through. And that for me should include the detailed decision-making about discard elimination, a very complex problem partly caused by CFP regulation. We need time to adjust and to have those regulations that are causing discards changed. We need time to develop even more selectivity to avoid unwanted catches in the first place.

  James Nicholson (ECR). - Mr President, we all want healthy fish stocks, a prosperous fishing industry and a healthy marine environment, and I believe this reform will go some way towards achieving that. The new regionalised approach to decision-making is particularly welcome. It is clear that a Brussels-centred one-size-fits-all approach was not working, and it is imperative that we put fishermen at the core of developing technical and conservation measures in order to secure a sustainable fishing industry.

Nevertheless, there are still major questions looming over this reform, particularly in regard to the ban on discarding of fish. Realistically, catch quotas have to be effectively imposed by Member States. The devil is in the detail, as we have seen through the reform of the CAP. We must ensure that both the delegated and implementing acts implement effectively the spirit of the political agreement. I thank both rapporteurs for their work and I wish the Commissioner well next week in Brussels when all the fishermen arrive to see what their fate is for 2014.

  Νικόλαος Σαλαβράκος (EFD). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, συγχαίρω την κ. Rodust και τον κ. Stevenson για τη σημαντική δουλειά που έκαναν και αναγνωρίζω την εξαιρετική συνδρομή της Επιτρόπου Δαμανάκη. Είναι η πρώτη φορά που ψηφίζεται η μεταρρύθμιση της αλιευτικής πολιτικής μέσω της διαδικασίας της συναπόφασης, και αυτό αποτελεί μία νίκη για το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο και τα ευρωπαϊκά όργανα. Στόχος της μεταρρύθμισης είναι η άμεση αποκατάσταση της βιωσιμότητας των αλιευμάτων, η καταπολέμηση της υπεραλίευσης και των ανεπίτρεπτων πρακτικών όπως η απόρριψη των αλιευμάτων. Όλα αυτά πλέον προστατεύονται και επιβάλλονται μέσα από ένα κανονιστικό πλαίσιο.

Η όλη αυτή διαδικασία, αποτέλεσμα πολλών και πολύωρων συνεδριάσεων και διαπραγματεύσεων, δεν θα έχει όμως καμία ουσία, εάν τα κράτη δεν συμμορφωθούν προς τους κανόνες που ψηφίζουμε και εάν δεν υπάρξει ένα ικανό και αξιόπιστο σύστημα επιτήρησης και ελέγχου. Η έκθεση για την οργάνωση της αγοράς για τις ιχθυοκαλλιέργειες κρίνεται πολύ σημαντική και κρίσιμη σε μία περίοδο που η ευρωπαϊκή βιομηχανία καλείται να ανταγωνιστεί αυτές τρίτων χωρών.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE). - A reforma da PCP, alcançada após um longo processo de análise, propostas e negociações, é razoavelmente equilibrada, sobretudo se atendermos à proposta original da Comissão que negligenciava o equilíbrio, agora mais próximo, entre os três pilares fundamentais da PCP: ambiental, social e económico.

Aliás, é precisamente o do desequilíbrio entre os três pilares e da subvalorização das diferenças entre a pesca industrial e a artesanal, entre as pescarias monoespecíficas do norte e as pescarias multiespecíficas do sul, que os problemas maiores surgem. Refiro-me ao objetivo de atingir o rendimento máximo sustentável sempre que possível até 2015 e o mais tardar até 2020, exequível para pescarias limpas, muito difícil para as multiespecíficas. O mesmo se verifica com o calendário para o cumprimento da obrigatoriedade do desembarque da totalidade das capturas, muito exigente para as pescarias mistas do sul, que capturam uma grande diversidade de espécies e exemplares de tamanhos variados, para além de requerer adaptações nas condições logísticas das embarcações e infraestruturas portuárias. Neste contexto lamento que a regionalização da PCP tenha sido sempre mais um ideal do que uma realidade.

Em todo o caso, a nova PCP traz aspetos bastante positivos, tais como a fundamentação científica da decisão política, o estabelecimento de planos de gestão plurianuais, a criação de zonas de recuperação de unidades populacionais, a proteção acrescida das zonas biogeograficamente sensíveis, o reforço das competências dos conselhos consultivos... Apoiemos o setor para o ajudar, nesta transição, a tirar partido dos novos instrumentos estabelecidos.

  Isabelle Thomas (S&D). - Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, nous y voilà, plus de deux ans de travaux arrivent à leur terme. Nous avons âprement débattu de la ressource, du RMD, des rejets, c'est-à-dire des aspects écologiques, et nous avons fini par obtenir – je le crois – de bons résultats. Cependant, il faudra sans doute, à l'avenir, avoir une vision globale de la pêche.

La réalité de la pêche ne démarre pas à la capture mais, surtout, elle ne s'arrête pas au moment où le poisson est débarqué. L'activité s'inscrit dans un contexte mondial, avec, aujourd'hui, malheureusement, plus de 65 % des produits de la mer consommés en Europe qui sont importés et vendus à moindre coût dans les grandes surfaces.

L'OCM a répondu en partie à ces questions en incitant à la création d'un écolabel européen et en imposant des normes de commercialisation identiques aux pêcheurs européens et à l'importation, mais il reste encore beaucoup de questions, notamment le contrôle de la pêche mondiale et les règles sociales et environnementales pratiquées par les navires hors Union.

Si nous n'imposons pas un minimum de règles à l'importation, nous mettons en grand danger la compétitivité européenne. Il faut de manière urgente, Madame la Commissaire, que nous ouvrions ce dossier par l'instauration d'un registre mondial des flottes en négociant au sein des organisations régionales de gestion des pêches.

  Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! Jesteśmy na ostatnim etapie procedury legislacyjnej, której efektem końcowym będzie zreformowana wspólna polityka rybołówstwa. Cieszę się z wypracowanych rozwiązań, ponieważ pokazują, że Unia Europejska stoi na straży zrównoważonego rozwoju, dbałości o środowisko, a także potrzeb społeczeństwa.

Udało się nam wypracować rozwiązania gwarantujące odnowienie zasobów rybnych już od 2015 r. Osiągnęliśmy także kompromis w sprawie odrzutów i wprowadziliśmy mechanizm regionalizacji, który pozwoli na przyśpieszenie adaptacji realiów do zapisów rozporządzenia. Udało nam się wprowadzić przepisy o utrzymaniu zdolności połowowych floty w poszczególnych państwach członkowskich oraz odpowiednio uregulować problematykę połowów na terytorium państw trzecich i wpływu przestrzegania praw człowieka na trwałość umów. Kompromis dotyczy także kryteriów dostępu, czyli zasad kierujących rozprowadzaniem uprawnień do połowów. W moim przekonaniu wypracowane rozwiązania są optymalne i zasługują na aprobatę i głosowanie za projektem rozporządzenia.

Catch-the-eye-Verfahren

  Gabriel Mato Adrover (PPE). - Señor Presidente, hemos llegado al final del proceso de reforma de la Política Pesquera Común por lo que se refiere a su Reglamento de base y también al del mercado. Con la votación de mañana adoptaremos la nueva PPC.

Ha sido un período largo, y complicado en muchos momentos, que ha cubierto toda esta legislatura, y que empezó en 2009 con el Libro Verde sobre la reforma de la Política Pesquera Común. El gran impulso dado por la Presidencia irlandesa, unido a la buena colaboración interinstitucional, han sido fundamentales para llegar adonde estamos hoy. Y creo que el objetivo político se ha logrado.

Vamos a tener una política pesquera que asegure la sostenibilidad ecológica, social y económica, basada en los mejores datos científicos disponibles y en la que los descartes ya no van a estar permitidos.

Asimismo, los Estados miembros, a través de la regionalización, podrán proponer medidas de conservación y llegar a un acuerdo sobre las mismas con otros Estados miembros ribereños.

Este es el final del proceso y marca el inicio de una nueva manera de pescar y de gestionar. Los Estados miembros tienen mucho trabajo por delante si quieren ser partícipes de una verdadera regionalización.

  Tonino Picula (S&D). - Gospodine predsjedniče, podržavajući odredbe o izbjegavanju i smanjenju neželjenog ulova na minimum, naglašavam da je u provedbi ovih mjera potrebno posebno osnažiti specifičnost ribolova na Jadranu i Mediteranu. Ovdje je riječ o ribolovu koji iskorištava velik broj vrsta bez jedinstvenog ciljanog ribljeg fonda te je zato teže selektivno loviti. Vezano uz zajedničku organizaciju tržišta, podržavam predloženo osnaživanje prava proizvođačkih organizacija, ali još jednom želim da se uzme u obzir činjenica da proizvođačke organizacije nisu čest oblik na Mediteranu. Iako ih nalazimo u Italiji i Grčkoj, njihova funkcija nije jednaka onima u sjevernim zemljama.

U Hrvatskoj su ribarske zadruge tipičan oblik organizacije proizvođača, osnovane s ciljem poboljšanja uvjeta rada članova. Budući da organizacije proizvođača predstavljaju glavni kanal za provođenje mjera zajedničke organizacije tržišta, vidljivo je da zadruge na primjer u Hrvatskoj nemaju na raspolaganju jednake instrumente. Kako bi se ostvario puni potencijal korisnih mjera predloženih u oba izvješća, potrebno je uzeti u obzir i razlike među članicama pa vjerujem da će se spomenute odredbe prilagoditi navedenim primjerima.

  Chris Davies (ALDE). - Mr President, it has taken us two and a half years to get here, but it was worth the wait. We have a policy which has been much criticised over the years and now it is one which I will be able to defend with pleasure –because at the heart of it is the determination to rebuild our fish stocks, as the Commissioner said, above maximum sustainable yield.

Of course it is a work in progress: there will be loopholes which will have to be closed; there will enforcement action that will be needed. But progress has already been made on the discards issue, which the Commissioner pushed very hard personally.

At one time fishermen were saying it could not be done and now, on a daily basis, we hear of new techniques being developed to reduce by-catch. I think the Commissioner and our rapporteur deserve our thanks. Between them they have given a better future for the fish in Europeʼs seas and for our fishing industry.

  Peter van Dalen (ECR). - Voorzitter, voor mij is het eindresultaat niet acceptabel en ik denk daarbij concreet aan twee punten. In de eerste plaats de "discard ban", de aanlandplicht. Voor de gemengde visserij in de Noordzee zal het echt onmogelijk zijn om een en ander uit te voeren. Niemand weet eigenlijk hoe dat moet. Wel weet iedereen dat de gemengde visserij bijvangst oplevert.

En dan kom ik meteen aan mijn tweede punt. Er bestaat namelijk een techniek om die bijvangst enorm te reduceren, de zogenaamde pulskorvisserij. Met een paar volt wordt de vis geprikkeld om in het zwevende net te zwemmen. Gevolg: de zeebodem wordt niet aangetast, brandstof wordt bespaard, er wordt heel effectief gevist zonder bijvangst. Maar uitgerekend die techniek, Voorzitter, wordt nergens toegelaten. Ik vind het echt onbegrijpelijk dat deze innovatieve methode geen kansen worden geboden.

Daarom, Voorzitter, gezien zowel deze moeilijke aanlandplicht als het pulsverbod kan ik niet stemmen voor de aanbeveling voor de tweede lezing.

  Bastiaan Belder (EFD). - Meneer de Voorzitter, mevrouw de commissaris, collega's, bij het nieuwe visserijbeleid is niet goed geluisterd naar de sector. Vanachter bureaus zijn onhaalbare deadlines op papier gezet. In de Noordzee is een volledige aanlandplicht niet uitvoerbaar.

Hoe moet dit onuitvoerbare beleid dan geïmplementeerd worden? De Commissie weet het niet en legt het op het bordje van de visserijsector. Dat vind ik niet fair.

Onze vissers zijn ambitieus en vakkundig, maar ze kunnen niet het onmogelijke doen. Ik verzoek de commissaris dan ook met klem om écht naar de vissers te luisteren. Dat betekent concreet dat onhaalbare deadlines voor de aanlandplicht alsnog bijgesteld moeten worden tijdens het proces, bijvoorbeeld via de meerjarenplannen. Is de commissaris daartoe bereid?

Ik roep de commissaris op de menselijke maat in het oog te houden, want alleen dan is beleid ecologisch, economisch en sociaal duurzaam.

  Dubravka Šuica (PPE). - Gospodine predsjedniče, za razliku od kolege, želim pozdraviti ovu ribarstvenu politiku jer smatram da je ovo jedini način kako sačuvati more i kako učiniti da budemo održivi. Dakle, ova ribarstvena politika je i socijalna i gospodarska i najviše govori o ekološkoj održivosti. Ono što posebno želim pozdraviti, to je regionalizacija. Dakle, odluke se neće donositi u Bruxellesu nego u zemljama članicama, što smatram da je vrlo važno. Isto tako smatram da su zemlje članice odgovorne za određivanje kvota.

Također, ovdje vidimo da će biti veća informiranost potrošača, što je vrlo važno, a budući da dolazim s Mediterana, s Jadrana, iz Hrvatske, smatram da je vrlo važno da se priznaje zanimanje ribar, a posebno da se zaštićuju mali ribari i to vidim kao veliku razliku i to želim posebno pozdraviti i naravno pozdravljam zaustavljanje prekomjernog izlova i naravno da ću glasovati za ovaj prijedlog.

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D). - A reforma da PCP apresenta agora a oportunidade de melhorar a gestão de proximidade, promover a sustentabilidade e a valorização dos recursos e a viabilidade das comunidades costeiras dependente das pescas a partir de uma visão mais específica das nossas regiões. Neste particular foi muito importante a rejeição das quotas transferíveis. A PCP, com os seus instrumentos financeiros, deve também assegurar a concessão dos apoios necessários não só aos profissionais das pescas, como à comunidade científica, para que os objetivos possam ser atingidos.

É fundamental que as zonas identificadas como biogeograficamente sensíveis sejam agora também protegidas da subexploração das frotas externas, como é o caso dos Açores. Também a aprovação de um CCR para as regiões ultraperiféricas vem dar um contributo indispensável à promoção desta abordagem ecossistémica que tem em conta o caráter sensível e as nossas especificidades. Devemos, por último, garantir agora, no comércio internacional, a igualdade de tratamento com os operadores externos.

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE). - Señor Presidente, espero que esta reforma de la Política Pesquera Común sirva para hacer más sostenible esta actividad y mejorar la objetividad y la transparencia de las decisiones que se adoptan. A ello contribuirán la regionalización, la obligación de compartir datos científicos homogéneos, de manera sistemática, sobre la situación de las especies en la mar y la verdadera capacidad de las flotas. Además, se mejora la participación de los consejos regionales de pesca. La política sobre los descartes es más realista que en la propuesta original y también ha mejorado el enfoque de la dimensión exterior y los acuerdos con los países terceros, en cuyas negociaciones creo necesaria más implicación del sector.

Finalmente, me parece de sumo interés que los fondos pesqueros vayan a tener un impacto más positivo sobre el desarrollo y el empleo en las zonas costeras y en el sector, y que primen la sostenibilidad. Eso beneficiará a la pesca artesanal y a pequeña escala, que necesita aún una definición más ajustada a la diversidad que la caracteriza y una regulación sobre el etiquetado que hable del origen del pescado y valorice su actividad.

  Ruža Tomašić (ECR). - Gospodine predsjedniče, grago mi je da se posljednjih godina dogodio zaokret u ribarstvenoj politici Unije i da smo danas svi svjesni koliko je za budućnost naših ribara i očuvanje morskog ekosustava važna održivost pri ribarenju.

Sretna sam što prijedlog prepoznaje potrebu za obnovom ribljeg fonda i predviđa zaustavljanje prekomjernog izlova do 2015. No, produženje ovog roka ne mogu podržati, pogotovo ne zbog razloga koje navode izvjestitelj i Vijeće.

Osjećam potrebu istaknuti kako su nas upravo velike i neodržive flote, čiji je nekontrolirani rast dobrim dijelom temeljen na prekomjernom izlovu, dovele u situaciju u kojoj se nalazimo dok panično pokušavamo spasiti riblji fond. Stoga ne vidim zašto bi prema njihovoj socijalnoj i ekonomskoj održivosti bili posebno obazrivi.

Neplanskim ribarenjem lišenim svake odgovornosti prema moru i susjedima s kojima ga dijele sve su nas dovele u nezavidnu situaciju i danas njihove greške plaćamo svi. Dokle?! Do 2020.?! S tim se jednostavno ne mogu složiti.

  Andrej Plenković (PPE). - Gospodine predsjedavajući, prije svega, čestitam izvjestiteljima na ovom konačnom pravnom aktu prije nego što stupi na snagu nova zajednička ribarstvena politika koja ide paralelno sa članstvom Hrvatske u Europskoj uniji. Smatram da ova nova reforma mora dovesti do prestanka pretjeranog, naravno, izlova i mora dovesti do održivosti ribljega fonda, a pritom ne smijemo smetnuti s uma niti zaboraviti socijalnu osjetljivost samog sektora.

Smatram da se mora štititi mali tradicionalni ribolov jer upravo je on u svojoj srži najodrživiji i dolazi do konkretnog interesa svakog pojedinog ribara. Pitanje zabrane odbacivanja ulova dolazi sa sjevernih mora, sa Sjevera Europe, na Mediteranu, Jadranu možda još ne postoji dovoljno jasna infrastruktura da bi se tako nešto provelo, prema tome o tome moramo voditi posebnog računa.

A kada je riječ o uređenju tržišta, proizvodima ribarstva i akvakulture, smatram da organizacije proizvođača kao novi mehanizam mogu pomoći i u pogledu postizanja najbolje cijene za proizvođača, a trebaju ga zemlje koje to nemaju dobro prihvatiti i pružiti.

  Guido Milana (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Commissario, Lei deve ringraziare il Parlamento perché se fosse stato per il Consiglio probabilmente questa riforma non sarebbe stata così sostenibile come l'abbiamo aiutata noi a farla realizzare.

È sostenibile dal punto di vista ambientale, è sostenibile dal punto di vista economico e io ritengo che sia sostenibile anche grazie al ruolo del Parlamento dal punto di vista sociale. Le cose buone però hanno necessità di essere applicate nella maniera più puntuale possibile. Vede, noi siamo passati dalla centralità nella pesca dell'armatore e della barca a una centralità del mare e del pescatore. Vorrei che fosse interpretata così la fase di implementazione da parte della Commissione di questa nuova riforma, cioè porre al centro il mare e il pescatore. Il pescatore perché è la compatibilità sociale dell'intervento, il mare in quanto è il contenitore che potrà garantire forse che potremo pescare in futuro un po' di più rispetto ai sacrifici che facciamo oggi.

  Oleg Valjalo (S&D). - Predsjedavajući, pitanje usuglašavanja zajedničke ribarstvene politike Europske unije od velike je važnosti i za Republiku Hrvatsku kao novu zemlju članicu Europske unije. U tom sam kontekstu već u svojim prijašnjim obraćanjima ovom parlamentu naglašavao važnost učinka zajedničke politike koju donosimo na sve zemlje članice, kako ukupno, tako i pojedinačno. Premda je zajednička ribarstvena politika neosporno važna, nužno je da uvijek budemo oprezni u njezinom definiranju jer će sve ove mjere sasvim sigurno značajno utjecati na funkcioniranje ribarskog sektora u svim državama članicama.

Volio bih posebno ukazati na činjenicu koju nam opetovano napominju stručnjaci iz ovog područja, a naravno naglasili su je i izvjestitelji u svojim izvješćima, a to je nedostatak i neujednačenost podataka o stanju ribarskih flota i općenito indikatora o ribarskoj politici zemalja članica. Taj nedostatak trebamo što prije ukloniti. Trenutna situacija ukazuje također na neujednačenost iskorištavanja ribljih fondova u zemljama članicama zbog različite razvijenosti i opremljenosti tehnologijom. Nedvojbeno je da još veće napore trebamo usmjeriti na ujednačavanje potencijalnih članica i zbog toga ću svakako podržati ovo izvješće.

(Ende des Catch-the-eye-Verfahrens)

  Maria Damanaki, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I would like to thank all the Members of Parliament for their comments. I would also like to thank Parliament for its good cooperation, because we have done this together: the Council, Parliament and the Commission. We at the Commission needed your thoughts and interventions throughout the whole procedure in order to achieve this result.

This is a good result because it is a step towards sustainability, regionalisation, and a better external aspect of the policy. As we have already mentioned, one way or another we are going to give more attention not only to our fishermen and our industry, but also to our seas and oceans. So I think this is a good reform after all. It is also an important moment for the three institutions, as it is the first time since the Lisbon Treaty that Parliament has proved that it can work as a co-legislator with us at the Commission and with the Council in order to achieve a good compromise, a good product.

So I would like to thank you all. For the future, I recognise and acknowledge what almost all of you have already said, namely that we have a lot of work to do: we have the principles but now it is time for implementation, which will be much more difficult. I am already working with the Commission’s services in order to come forward with new decisions about the details – as we have already said, details are very important. I also hope that we will have some good results in our discussions. We have made progress with regard to the long-term management plans, which I know are of great interest to this body. I think that we have to focus on implementation next year and I hope that, until the end of my mandate, we will be in a good position to be able to implement the new fisheries policy, as requested by this body.

  Ulrike Rodust, Berichterstatterin. − Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Vielen Dank für diese sachliche Debatte.

Ab Januar 2014 werden wir nun ein Gesetz haben, das sich für alle als Win-win-Situation bewahrheiten wird – für die Fischer, für die Umwelt, für die Fische und für die Verbraucher.

Ich hatte vor drei Jahren einen Traum. In absehbarer Zeit werden wir in unseren Gewässern wieder so viele Fische haben, dass sich unsere Kinder, Enkelkinder und weitere Generationen ohne schlechtes Gewissen auf viele leckere Fischgerichte freuen dürfen.

Junge Menschen werden mit Begeisterung Fischer werden und so viel Geld verdienen, dass sich dieser schwere Beruf wieder lohnt. Ich habe großes Vertrauen in die Fischer. Wer allerdings dieses Vertrauen missbraucht, muss zukünftig mit erheblichen Strafen rechnen. Die Meeresumwelt wird wieder gesunden, und wir werden von einer Überfischung nur noch in den Geschichtsbüchern lesen.

Heute bin ich überzeugt: Der Traum wird sich bewahrheiten. Dafür vielen, vielen Dank an alle! Und ich bin auch davon überzeugt: Wir werden morgen eine historische Entscheidung fällen.

  Der Präsident. − Die gemeinsame Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet am Dienstag, 10. Dezember, um 11.30 Uhr statt.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 149 GO)

  Jarosław Kalinowski (PPE), na piśmie. – Sektor rybołówstwa czekał bardzo długo na tę reformę. Do tej pory zmagał się z niegospodarnością, nielegalnymi połowami i samowolą. Było to zabójcze dla środowiska naturalnego oraz zasobów rybnych w Europie i na świecie. Teraz ta gałąź gospodarki ma cieszyć się nowymi regulacjami, zakładającymi przywrócenie zrównoważonego rybołówstwa oraz położenie kresu niegospodarnym praktykom. To również szansa na stworzenie wielu nowych miejsc pracy w obszarach nadbrzeżnych i dalszy ich rozwój.

Jednak najważniejszym problemem, który zostanie rozwiązany, jest przełowienie na europejskich wodach. Nowe założenia wprowadzają odnowienie zasobów rybnych dzięki funkcjonowaniu tzw. „kwot połowowych”. Równie istotnym aspektem będzie wyeliminowanie tzw. odrzucania połowów, a wszystkie złowione ryby będą wliczane do wspomnianej kwoty połowowej. To bardzo ważne, mając na uwadze wiele zagrożonych wyginięciem gatunków ryb i zubożenie różnorodności ekosystemu wodnego. Pozytywnym faktem jest elastyczność tej polityki, dzięki której możliwe będzie dopasowanie wielu szczegółowych kwestii ściśle związanych ze specyfiką danego regionu do ogólnych jej założeń. Cieszy również to, że nowy dokument ma zostać wdrożony już od początku nadchodzącego roku.

  Béla Glattfelder (PPE) , írásban. – A világ tengereinek 30 %-a túlhalászott, a tengeri halállományok fennmaradása veszélybe kerülhet. Ezért folyamatosan és jelentősen csökken a kihalászott tengeri halmennyiség. Az új közös halászati politikának jóval nagyobb figyelmet kell fordítania a fenntartható haltenyésztésre, vagyis az akvakultúrára, kiemelten pedig az édesvízi haltenyésztésre. Magyarország kiváló adottságokkal rendelkezik az édesvízi haltenyésztés terén. Ez nemcsak az élelmezésbiztonsághoz járul hozzá, hanem jelentős számú új munkahelyet teremt. Továbbá növeli a biológiai sokféleséget, hiszen a halastavak számtalan madár- és egyéb állatfaj számára biztosítanak életteret. Nem véletlen, hogy nagy részük védettség alatt áll. Az új közös halászati politikában az akvakultúra jelentősége növekszik, ezt az irányvonalat a jövőben tovább kell folytatni. A 2014–2020 közötti költségvetési időszakban a jelenleginél nagyobb pénzügyi támogatást kell nyújtani az édesvízi akvakultúra-ágazatnak az EU költségvetéséből.

  Czesław Adam Siekierski (PPE), na piśmie. – Porozumienie w sprawie wspólnej polityki rybołówstwa zakłada rozwiązanie bardzo ważnych kwestii. Do 2015 roku przeławianie musi zostać całkowicie wyeliminowane, aby zasoby rybne mogły się odnowić. Celem powinno być osiągnięcie takiego wzrostu poziomu stad, który będzie gwarantował ich przetrwanie. Dobrym krokiem w tej kwestii jest również porozumienie w sprawie zakazu zbyt dużych odrzutów ryb. Należy wyeliminować nadmierną ilość marnotrawionych ryb. Aby w przyszłości uniknąć problemu nadmiernej zdolności połowowej floty, państwa członkowskie powinny być zobligowane do przeprowadzania corocznej analizy zdolności połowowych swoich flot według kryteriów wyznaczonych przez Komisję Europejską.

Bardzo ważnym punktem w porozumieniu jest również sprawa decentralizacji decyzji. Niektóre sporne kwestie dotyczące zasad technicznych w poszczególnych regionach morskich powinny być rozwiązywane przez zainteresowane strony zamiast centralnie w Brukseli. Pozwoli to na szybszą realizację tych elementów unijnych dyrektyw w sprawie środowiska, które są związane z rybołówstwem. Państwa członkowskie będą musiały w sposób obiektywny dokonać rozdziału uprawnień do połowów między rybakami. Kryteria rozdziału uprawnień powinny obejmować kryteria środowiskowe, społeczne i gospodarcze. Przyczyni się to do zwiększenia ilości miejsc pracy i redukcji degradacji środowiska naturalnego. Mam nadzieję, że nowa wspólna polityka rybołówstwa przyczyni się do stabilizacji tego sektora.

19. North-East Atlantic: deep-sea stocks and fishing in international waters - Status of the North-East Atlantic mackerel fishery (debate)

  Der Präsident. − Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die gemeinsame Aussprache über

– den Bericht von Kriton Arsenis im Namen des Fischereiausschusses über den Vorschlag für eine Verordnung des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates mit besonderen Auflagen für die Befischung von Tiefseebeständen im Nordostatlantik und Vorschriften für den Fischfang in internationalen Gewässern des Nordostatlantiks und zur Aufhebung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 2347/2002 (COM(2012)0371 - C7-0196/2012 - 2012/0179(COD)) (A7-0395/2013) und

– die Anfrage zur mündlichen Beantwortung an die Kommission über den Stand der Dinge bei der Makrelenfischerei im Nordostatlantik von Pat the Cope Gallagher, Alain Cadec und Gabriel Mato Adrover im Namen des Fischereiausschusses (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=OQ&reference=O-2013-000113&language=DE" \t "_blank"  - B7-0526/2013) (2013/2890(RSP)).

  Kriton Arsenis, rapporteur. − Mr President, we are here to discuss a very thorny issue in Parliament: the proposal for the North-East Atlantic fisheries and deep-sea fisheries. What happened was that our fishermen were fishing in the coastal Atlantic waters. Once fish stocks were depleted there, they moved further inside the great depths of the Atlantic, fishing deeper and deeper into the sea, reaching more and more seabeds. This led to the discovery of new fisheries, fish that were argued over at the beginning, fish that had never been targeted before.

But what we soon found was that the fish that live at such great depths are very vulnerable. Sometimes they are only able to reproduce once they reach 35; sometimes they live for over 100 years, or even 150. This means that if you catch the big ones their stocks are quickly depleted – and this is what happened. We have cases where fish stocks were depleted in just two years and, 20 years later, they have still to recover. In 2002 we had the first access regime that brought forth some improvements but fish stocks did not return to sustainable levels and the Commission has now come up with another proposal to phase out bottom trawling over a two-year period.

The debate started in Parliament soon after the Commission released its proposal but there were severe delays. It was the first case I know of where the procedure was postponed so many times. We had two hearings – not one, but two hearings – on the issue and it was on the verge of not being voted or negotiated, for practical time reasons or simply because of big blocking majorities. Members worked very intensely to find common ground within the Committee on Fisheries and I would like to thank Carmen Fraga Estévez and Pat the Cope Gallagher and all the shadows who helped to bridge the huge gaps. One side wanted very limited things while the other side wanted the Commission proposal and even more.

The compromise that was reached is a compromise without the Commission’s basic proposal – the bottom trawling ban. There was an underlying agreement, however, that this compromise would be supported by the Member States in the Council. All this month I have tried to talk with the Member States involved. I failed to get any commitment that this compromise can be the final outcome of negotiations. The Socialist Group, just one hour ago, decided to vote in favour of the introduction of the bottom trawling ban.

  Pat the Cope Gallagher, author. − Mr President, in this contribution I will deal with the mackerel situation and I am extremely concerned – as indeed are many other Members – about the actions of the Commissioner and her determination to cut a deal with Iceland and the Faroes at any cost.

The Commissioner informed the Committee on Fisheries last week that any deal with Iceland and the Faroe Islands would be better than no deal. I refer to last week’s meeting. Normally I would not do so because it was in committee, but immediately after the meeting the Commissioner issued her prepared script even though the meeting was in committee, so I feel I am quite free to speak about it.

I want to remind you, Commissioner, that you have a particular responsibility towards the European pelagic fleet and the coastal communities that depend so much on this important industry for employment. The bottom line is that no deal is better than a bad deal. A bad deal would tie the hands of this sector in Europe for many, many years when you and I and many others are gone.

I would like to remind the Commissioner that both Iceland and the Faroe Islands have increased their overall share of the catch from 5% in 2005 to 52% in 2013, and the Commissioner wants to reward countries that are prepared to do that. They have set their own bilateral quotas outside the remit of the Coastal States, which include the EU, Norway, Iceland, the Faroe Islands and Greenland. It is very hard to understand how a Commissioner can be prepared to reward the unsustainable actions of Iceland and the Faroe Islands by fishing over what she describes as double-digit quotas and, in addition to these huge unilateral mackerel quotas that both parties have set for 2013, the Faroe Islands have this year withdrawn from the Coastal States Agreement on Anglo-Scandia herring.

We know mackerel is a straddling stock in the territorial waters of the Coastal States and, due to the large increase in mackerel stock, it has now expanded both within Iceland and Faroese waters. I accept this and I will deal with it, but ICES, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, has confirmed that the corresponding area for mackerel is off the southern and north-western coasts of my country, Ireland. Since 2010, the Coastal States have met on at least 14 occasions in various parts of the world but to no avail. The most recent meeting took place in Clonakilty, Ireland.

It is also important to note that in 2010 the EU and Norway concluded a long-term agreement on mackerel management for the North-East Atlantic and I also took the opportunity to discuss the ongoing situation when I met with the Norwegian European Affairs Minister. I compliment Norway on the stance which they have taken because, as it stands, we are relying on the Norwegian authorities – on the Norwegian Minister – to defend the rights of the EU pelagic fleet. It is sad that I have to make that statement but it is a matter of fact.

Furthermore, and in direct response to the over-fishing of mackerel by Iceland and the Faroe Islands, this Parliament and the Council fast-tracked a very weak document which came from the Commission in relation to sanctions and I as rapporteur strengthened those trade sanctions. Ninety-nine percent of the Members of this House voted in favour of that over a year ago and the Commissioner has said that it is important to have good relations between Parliament and the Council. But the Commission has ignored the views of 99% of us – almost every Member of this House. I have to say, Commissioner, I welcome your initiative to implement the trade sanctions against the Faroe Islands in respect of Anglo-Scandia herring, but you cannot do the same in relation to mackerel.

I would appreciate it if you could provide this information. I asked you a question last week and have not received an answer about the impact of this. You said the consequences were positive, but let us know what they are. Will you say whether you will once again consider trade measures should the current negotiations fail to reach a satisfactory agreement?

We all agree with the results of the latest scientific data: an increase in the stock of 64%, and of course we will have more details of this in March next year. Commissioner, can you confirm that these offers of 12% or 11.9% have been made and that they do not have – despite what you say – the support of the entire Council? Indeed, when I met Council members yesterday, they told me very clearly that they do not favour what you are doing. Did you discuss this with Norway prior to entering into this so-called offer?

In conclusion, Commissioner, you must think of the two-tier approach: when the fish are in Norwegian, Icelandic and Faroese waters, they are entitled to it, and when they move out, they are not entitled to it. The two-tier approach is the answer and I believe we can resolve the problem if we adopt that approach.

  Maria Damanaki, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, let me start with the proposal on deep-sea fishing. This is a very important issue as the rapporteur, Mr Stevenson, has already emphasised.

I would like to come back to the Commissionʼs proposal. I would like to repeat that the heart of the Commissionʼs proposal is the phase-out of bottom trawling and bottom gillnetting for deep-sea species. As you may know, parts of our fisheries industry are against this proposal. They were against it and they are still against it.

So in order to answer their concerns, we provided an assessment of the potential socio-economic impact of this particular measure. We came to the conclusion that the large majority, namely 83%, of the vessels that are now catching deep-sea species would not be affected at all.

So this is my answer to the concerns of our fishermen: 83% will not be affected at all.

Under our proposal, only 17% of deep-sea vessels will be affected and let me say clearly what affected means, so we can have this in mind. Affected does not mean that these vessels have to stop fishing. Not at all. It only means that they have to change their fishing technique to more sustainable gears, as is already practised in some regions of the European Union.

Let me underline that. In some regions of the European Union our fishermen have already changed their gears. They are using better gears. For example, in the Azores and Madeira fishermen have already been doing this for many years. And their vessels are profitable.

So if this works for vessels from these regions, then surely it must work for vessels from Boulogne and Galicia as well. This is what our impact assessment, our study, proves.

I regret that the Committee on Fisheries decided not to support this phase-out. I welcome the amendment tabled by several groups for the plenary that would reintroduce a phase-out. I think that this can be a step towards protection of our deep-sea environment and also towards protecting the sustainability of our fisheries.

So let me assure you that the Commission is ready to engage in constructive three-party discussions on this proposal. Having said that, I have to say here very openly that now that Parliament is expressing its views on the proposal, since you are going to vote tomorrow, I expect – I hope, but also I expect and I am going to ask – the Council Presidency to finally start their work on this regulation.

The Council has not even started to work on this regulation even though our proposal was tabled a long time ago. So I would like to ask the Presidency again, since Parliament is going to conclude tomorrow, to start – at least to start – their work on this file.

Now I would like to turn to mackerel and Mr Gallagherʼs question. You know of course, because we have discussed this issue here in the plenary over and over again and also in the Committee on Fisheries, that the Commission has been working for more than three years to find a solution for the mackerel fisheries in the North Atlantic, with the objective of protecting the best interests of our fishermen, in particular those in the pelagic sector. This is our aim and this is what we are trying to do and what we intend to do.

For a number of years now, the mackerel stock has migrated into new territories and the stock now spreads as far as Iceland and even Greenland.

I do not want to praise here the bad behaviour of Iceland and the Faroe Islands since they have imposed unilateral quotas. I agree that this is something that is not acceptable, but at the same time I think that I have to stress that we need an agreement, and in order to reach an agreement we have to understand and we have to recognise that the stock is not only spreading, it is moving up to Icelandic and Greenland waters.

So we have to have this in mind if we really want an agreement. Simply saying you have no right to fish and we are going to keep all the fish for ourselves is not a good basis for an agreement. This, at least, is my opinion.

So what is happening now? We have some good scientific advice for this year, although it is not yet fixed, and I can say that what I see is an opportunity to reach an agreement with Iceland and the Faroe Islands. An opportunity, a window of opportunity.

Of course our industry and the Norwegian industry – we are discussing this with Norway too – will be the main beneficiaries of the increase in the availability and the catch stocks for mackerel in 2014 following the latest ICES advice.

But I would very much like to reach an agreement now that the stock is in good shape. If the stock is in good shape then it gives us the opportunity, a better window of opportunity, to reach an agreement. If the stock is not in good shape, then everybody will want to fish more and this is not the best way to act.

So I have been discussing again and again with the Icelandic Government and I am going – myself – the day after tomorrow to the Faroe Islands to meet the Prime Minister and the Minister for Fisheries and try to persuade them to come to a deal with us.

It will not be easy and of course we are working on this together with our Norwegian allies. We also have to discuss it with you and we have to discuss it with the Council of Ministers.

So it will not be a decision taken by a Commissioner. It will be a decision taken by the full College, of course. It will be a decision that will be taken by the Council of Ministers, and this is something I would welcome because I think that our fishermen really need the best protection for their interests.

It will not be an agreement at any cost. It will be an agreement on a realistic basis that understands that the stocks are not only ours. So having Norway and the European Union once again fishing 90% of the stock, as we did last year, is not an option for me. I would like to state that very clearly.

Why? Because if we try to do this again it will not be a good basis for persuading anybody, especially the Court if we are going for trade measures, that we ourselves are fishing sustainably.

So we have to recognise that we have to move towards a deal. If the deal is possible, it will be OK. If the deal is not possible, then we have to take decisions for sustainability.

Let me add something else. Mr Gallagher repeated here that we have to go for a two-tier approach. I agree with him. This is also in our mind. That is why I can inform Parliament that in any case no deal will give Icelanders and Faroese access to our waters.

This is our translation of this principle. They are not going to have access to our waters. This means that if the stocks are not in good shape, then they are not going to fish their share. They are going to fish only in their waters. So this is something we have to bear in mind.

I do not know if there will be an agreement. I am going to try hard to get one. I will of course discuss it with the Council and the Council has been supportive for the moment. They will also discuss the final outcome of our agreement, of our negotiation.

What I would like to say very openly is that we have to remember that if we end up with no deal this year, then it is highly likely that there will be an Olympic fishery there. Why? Because no deal means that Iceland and the Faroese will put their unilateral quotas in place. Then the Member States will push in the Council to have their share too, so we may end up with an Olympic fishery approach and we may end up with a situation that will not be good for the sustainability of the stocks.

But then at least I will be able to come here and say I have tried, so it will not be the Commissionʼs responsibility if the stock collapses.

  Anna Rosbach, ordfører for udtalelse fra Udvalget om Miljø, Folkesundhed og Fødevaresikkerhed. − Hr. formand! Fru kommissær! Som parlamentarikere har vi påtaget os det juridiske og moralske ansvar for at bevare og beskytte vore naturværdier. Hver dag ødelægger trawling godt 40.000 km2 havbund og efterlader områder, som mest af alt ligner undervandsørkener! Trawling ødelægger alt, hvad det kommer i nærheden af, uagtet om det er 1.000 år gamle koraller eller skrøbelige dybhavsarter, hvoraf mange er uspiselige. Denne afstemning vedrører et lille antal både, der fisker på så stor dybde, og de hverken bidrager til de offentlige finanser i Europa, private arbejdspladser eller økonomien i stor stil som helhed. Til gengæld modtager de enorme summer af EU-støtte. Fortsætter vi med dybhavstrawling, skader vi ikke kun havmiljøet, vi skader denne forsamlings legitimitet og renommé! Nogle beslutninger burde egentlig ikke være så svære at træffe, og dette er i mine øjne en af dem! Jeg vil derfor stemme for kollega Arsenis' betænkning.

  Carmen Fraga Estévez, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señor Presidente, yo venía aquí con un discurso preparado, pero al llegar a este Pleno me acabo de enterar de que un compromiso que ha llevado muchos meses trabajarlo y hacer que sea un compromiso serio, ahora resulta que es boicoteado por el ponente y por el Grupo Socialista, basándose en no se qué justificaciones del Consejo. Me parece muy poco serio. Y además me parece muy poco leal hacia el trabajo que hemos estado haciendo aquí seriamente muchos diputados.

Dicho esto, señora Comisaria, usted sabe muy bien que su propuesta es una propuesta cuyo punto de partida es absolutamente radical, injustificado y discriminatorio. Y espero que este Parlamento pueda bloquearlo y, si no, que el Consejo, en su saber y entender, lo bloquee en un futuro.

La prohibición que usted propone de ciertas artes de pesca, como el arrastre de fondo y el enmalle, no la defiende nadie, salvo, con mucho interés, las ONG medioambientales y, por lo que veo aquí, también algunos diputados.

Usted ha puesto ahora mismo el ejemplo de Azores. Ese es un enfoque que nada tiene que ver con su propuesta. Ese es un enfoque como los que defendemos algunos como yo: el enfoque de ecosistema marino vulnerable, en el que también se protege el ecosistema y donde no se puede pescar. Pero una cosa es eso y otra la prohibición radical, que es la que usted propone. E insisto, ni en la NEAF, ni en la NAFO, ni en las Naciones Unidas, nadie, nadie propone esa prohibición.

Por tanto, yo considero que su propuesta es muy radical y espero –como digo– que aquí se bloquee, porque además es discriminatoria. Porque en esas mismas aguas que usted quiere prohibir a los nuestros, estarán pescando mañana Islandia, las Islas Feroe, etc., y encima exportarán a la Unión Europea lo que a nosotros usted nos prohíbe pescar.

  Guido Milana, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, neanch'io leggerò quello che avevo preparato, anche perché non vorrei che il Parlamento adesso tradisse la discussione che abbiamo fatto mezz'ora fa sulla riforma della pesca.

Perché, mezz'ora fa, abbiamo detto che bisognava avere una politica sostenibile e che bisognava aiutare il mare a produrre di più. Oggi siamo pronti a tradire quest'aspetto: questo è il vero tradimento, non il cambio di un'opinione mentre si costruisce una posizione del Parlamento.

Nessuno si è preoccupato quando, per esempio – non nelle Azzorre, ma nel Mediterraneo – c'è stato un divieto di pesca a strascico nel fondo a mille metri di profondità. Anche lì il comportamento era generalizzato. Non si può essere assenti quando si parla di una parte e presenti dall'altra. Tra l'altro, la cosa gravissima è che il Consiglio è totalmente assente. Tre Presidenze: quella irlandese, quella cipriota e quella lituana non hanno messo all'ordine del giorno questo punto e questo è di una gravità inaudita! Non credo che sia stata soltanto inerzia di queste Presidenze, ma una vera e propria azione di lobby di chi ha interesse a lasciare le cose come stanno nel nord Atlantico!

  Pat the Cope Gallagher, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, I would like to thank Mr Kriton Arsenis, the rapporteur, for delivering the compromise package. But having listened to his contribution, I would have to ask the question: do we enter into negotiations for a compromise in all good faith? I am quite sure that Mr Arsenis himself will vote in favour of his compromises – otherwise he would have to withdraw his name from the report. We will have to wait and see, but it certainly undermines my confidence in negotiating in the event of a loss of faith.

The Commission’s decision – the Commission has to take some responsibility – to publish the proposal even before the Deepfishman project was finalised, resulted in a flawed recommendation. The Committee on Fisheries had two public meetings, numerous shadow meetings and bilaterals with the rapporteur.

From my point of view, I was interested in the possible impact on Ireland. They said that there were no implications whatsoever for Ireland – until we had the presentation and we soon saw the effect that it would have. Thankfully, looking after the interests of my own country, we have removed tusk, conger eel and ling from the list of species, which is of course a welcome development.

Look at Article 6. We can all focus on the deep sea, but look at Article 6, which outlines specific rules on the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems and that is, of course, vitally important. But let the Commissioner and others be very honest with us and tell us about these great fishery longlines, about the implications for sharks, which are the endangered species. And nobody is talking about the most endangered species of all, namely the fishermen of the future.

  Jean-Paul Besset, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, il y a quelques mois, au mois de février, ce Parlement a voté à une très large majorité une nouvelle politique commune de la pêche réorientée vers la protection des ressources et la sélectivité des techniques de pêche. J'espère que, demain, le Parlement va confirmer ce vote, qui était intervenu en février.

La première application, l'application directe de cette nouvelle politique commune de la pêche est dans le règlement que propose la Commission pour la pêche en eaux profondes. C'est une excellente proposition de la Commission que, hélas, la commission de la pêche a refusée, dans son cœur de cible, à savoir l'interdiction du chalutage en eaux profondes, qui est une technique particulièrement destructrice comme toute la communauté scientifique l'a démontré.

Nous voulons donc que le Parlement revienne dans sa logique et dans sa cohérence et, demain, réintroduise la proposition de la Commission interdisant le chalutage en eaux profondes au-delà de six cents mètres.

  Marek Józef Gróbarczyk, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Słowa pana Arsenisa zaskoczyły nas jako grupę, ponieważ do tej pory przygotowywaliśmy wspólnie rozwiązania i – jak sam wspomniał – przygotowanych zostało kilka wysłuchań publicznych mających na celu znalezienie wspólnego rozwiązania. Dzisiaj jesteśmy całkowicie zaskoczeni tymi słowami i można powiedzieć, że tak jak prowadziliśmy negocjacje w zakresie wspólnej polityki rybołówstwa, tak teraz brakuje tych samych porozumień i takiego samego toku. W związku z czym stajemy na stanowisku, że nie możemy się zgodzić z tą propozycją i będziemy dalej forsować rozwiązania, które były przyjęte przez naszą grupę.

  Martina Anderson, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – Mr President, we are still waiting for the Commission to propose a viable and sustainable solution to the question of fishing quotas in the North-East Atlantic, one that reflects the increase in stock number, and those Member States which abused their previous allocation should be sanctioned, not rewarded. I call on the Commission to act to protect and to promote the interests of EU Member States, such as Ireland, which have acted responsibly and which have relied on these fishing resources for decades.

Overfishing by one country can have devastating effects on others and it is up to the Commission to prevent this. I sincerely hope to see a fast and fair deal to prevent any further disruption in this fragile area and to the livelihoods of those who rely on it. I certainly hope that this Chamber, the MEPs, can have confidence in the negotiations that are taking place, but I know from what we have heard this evening that there is a lot of concern.

  Gabriel Mato Adrover (PPE). - Señor Presidente, para algunos, en política parece que vale todo. Y los compromisos no valen nada. ¡Qué pena!

Lamentablemente, en esta Cámara hay quienes quieren erigirse en únicos centinelas de los recursos pesqueros, ignorando que los verdaderos centinelas de los recursos pesqueros son precisamente los pescadores. Esos mismos pescadores a los que la propuesta de la Comisión aboca a una situación irreversible. Si, tal y como pretende, se prohíbe el arrastre y enmalle de fondo para la pesca de especies de profundidad, las consecuencias serán económica y socialmente catastróficas para muchas comunidades dependientes de la pesca, que no podrán soportarlo.

Cuatro ejemplos: el Reino Unido estima que cerca de cuatrocientos barcos ingleses se verían afectados por la propuesta; en Francia, solo teniendo en cuenta cuatro puertos, se perderían, aproximadamente, quinientos empleos directos relacionados con los treinta y dos barcos con licencia para pescar especies de fondo; también Portugal se vería notablemente perjudicado por una prohibición como la propuesta; y, si nos referimos a España, es evidente que imposibilitaría operar a los censos de arrastre en aguas internacionales de la NAFO, la NEAFC y Noruega y el arrastre en aguas de la Unión para la «flota de los 300», así como a los censos de volanta y rasco en el Cantábrico noroccidental.

Pero lo que es más grave es que esta propuesta de prohibición del arrastre se ha presentado en contra de la opinión de los Estados miembros, de los CCR, de los comités científicos de la NAFO y de la NEAFC. El arrastre no se ha prohibido en ningún país del mundo, ni siquiera en Nueva Zelanda, ejemplo para el mundo de explotación pesquera sostenible y que está muy cerca de la barrera de coral. Tampoco ha sido prohibido por ninguna organización regional de pesca ni por la propia Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas.

Reflexionen. Es compatible proteger y pescar. Proteger y pescar. Hagámoslo así.

  Isabelle Thomas (S&D). - Monsieur le Président, nous avions trois défis, trois enjeux majeurs à traiter par le biais du rapport sur les grands fonds. Premièrement, protéger les fonds vulnérables, deuxièmement, garantir que toutes les espèces des grands fonds puissent se régénérer durablement, troisièmement, préserver les emplois du secteur de la pêche.

Grâce à l'adoption du compromis conclu en commission de la pêche, ces trois objectifs peuvent tous être atteints. Pour ma part, je ne trahirai pas la parole donnée. Grâce à l'interdiction partielle du chalut et à la sanctuarisation d'une empreinte écologique dans 90 % des eaux internationales de l'Atlantique Nord-Est, grâce à une fixation de quotas étendue à toutes les espèces, donc plus exigeante que la PCP, grâce à une cartographie des fonds vulnérables d'ici deux ans, nous nous sommes donnés les moyens d'atteindre les objectifs environnementaux que nous nous sommes fixés. Mais il est tout aussi important de dire que, grâce aux compromis, nous réalisons notre troisième défi, celui de maintenir une activité elle aussi vulnérable dans les 10 % de zones maintenues pour la pêche des grands fonds. Ce sont au minimum 758 navires, Madame la Commissaire – selon la propre étude d'impact de la Commission –, et donc des milliers de marins pêcheurs qui pourraient maintenir leur activité.

En ces temps de chômage, la perte de ces emplois entraînerait certaines de nos régions en Écosse, en Irlande, en France, en Espagne et au Portugal vers le précipice.

  Chris Davies (ALDE). - Mr President, I think there are some here who care more about the niceties of a procedure than they do about the state of our seas and the threat to our marine ecosystems. Amendments have been tabled, which we will vote on tomorrow, calling for deep sea trawling below 600 metres to be banned. That reflects the position that the Commission has put forward. It makes clear that this activity is deeply harmful. There is growing support across this House for these proposals because we all realise that at these depths it takes an enormously long time for the marine ecosystem to recover once it is damaged.

Three hundred marine scientists have written to us saying that we should stop this activity because of the damage. That is more scientists saying we should stop it than there are fishermen on a regular basis actually doing it! For heaven’s sake, let us listen to the science. Remember we can always go back to start trawling if there is a seabed to trawl. We cannot stop it if we have destroyed the seabed, because if we do that it is gone for our lifetimes.

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

  Struan Stevenson (ECR), blue-card question. – Mr President, I missed my speaking time in the first debate because no one has yet discovered a way of getting to Strasbourg from Scotland by 5 p.m. However, I want to refer to what Chris Davies has just said. He talks about people being more concerned about the niceties of procedure. We spent months debating this with the sector, with the scientists, with the NGOs, and we in the Committee on Fisheries arrived at a compromise proposal that met the agreement of all the political groups; and now we see these political groups putting down amendments for debate and voting tomorrow which is a betrayal of the parliamentary process.

How can we have any confidence in future negotiations if this is the way people are going to react, simply because elections are due, and some people are courting publicity and being opportunistic in trying to win votes? This is not a way to be dealing with the sensible sustainable fisheries of the future.

  Chris Davies (ALDE), blue-card answer. – Mr President, although primarily this affects French boats, because they are the majority of boats fishing on a regular basis – and it is interesting that more and more French MEPs are coming out opposing this – there is a Scottish element to this. In Scotland the universities specialise in marine biology. That is where many of the marine scientists are coming from. Why is Mr Stevenson not listening to the advice of his own Scottish scientists?

  Struan Stevenson (ECR). - Mr President, if Mr Davies would like to come up to Kinlochbervie, he will find a small community whose only business is provided by deep-water trawlers. They fish on the continental slope for whitefish, megrim, saithe and monkfish at 900 metres. That whole community is going to be destroyed by Chris Davies. I hope he comes up and speaks to the fishermen and the families who are going to lose their livelihoods because of this ridiculous, over-the-top reaction by him and his supporters.

  Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! Połowy głębinowe, a więc powyżej 400 m, mogą być bez wątpienia zagrożeniem dla środowiska. Zdajemy sobie sprawę z ilości gatunków, które żyją w głębinach, a także widzimy, jak ograniczona jest nasza wiedza o dnach mórz i oceanów. Dlatego też doceniam starania prowadzące do tego, by przedstawiony projekt był kompromisem pomiędzy obrońcami środowiska a rybakami. Projekt zawiera postanowienia gwarantujące, że przyznawanie pozwoleń na połowy będzie oparte o analizy naukowe, i jednocześnie nakłada na rybaków obowiązek rejestrowania i raportowania o połowach gatunków głębinowych. Obowiązkiem państw członkowskich będzie ocena oddziaływania połowów na stan ekosystemu morskiego jeszcze przed odnowieniem pozwolenia na dalsze połowy. To wszystko gwarantuje, że zasada zrównoważonego rozwoju będzie realizowana.

Chciałbym dodać, że cieszy mnie fakt, iż nie został zamrożony rynek uprawnień połowowych. Możliwość wymiany uprawnień będzie dla wielu rybaków szansą na bardziej efektywne wykorzystywanie kutrów i możliwości załogi. Na koniec chciałbym podziękować panu sprawozdawcy za współpracę i uwzględnienie polskich postulatów dotyczących dokonywania wymiany uprawnień do połowów pomiędzy państwami członkowskimi.

Catch-the-eye-Verfahren

  Romana Jordan (PPE). - Tudi jaz sem dobila številna opozorila znanstvenikov in sama jih jemljem zelo resno. Govorijo namreč o živalskih vrstah, govorim seveda o globokomorskem ribolovu z vlečnimi mrežami in znanstveniki opozarjajo na vrste, ki so dolgo živeče, ki počasi rastejo in imajo zaradi tega seveda tudi daljše regeneracijske cikle. Zaradi tega tak ribolov povzroča veliko škodo in sama sem zaskrbljena, da lahko okrevanje takih ekosistemov traja tudi stoletja.

Menim, da to, da ni dovolj podatkov o ribjem staležu, in da pravzaprav ne vemo, kakšen točno naj bi bil vzdržen ribolov tam, ni argument za to, da ne ukrepamo, še zlasti, ker imamo dobre prakse, kot so recimo na Norveškem.

Menim, da sedanja generacija ne sme iztrebiti in opustošiti ekosistemov, ki so vir hrane in preživetja. Naslednja generacija ljudi bo še številčnejša in do njih imamo odgovornost trajnostnega razvoja.

  Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D). - Señor Presidente, quiero decir que, efectivamente, la Unión Europea tiene el compromiso de asegurar que en el año 2020 sus ecosistemas marinos estarán en buenas condiciones y se mantendrán así en el futuro. La Directiva marco sobre la estrategia marina establece esta obligación para los Estados miembros.

Todos sabemos que las aguas profundas son especialmente sensibles porque tienen hábitats con una biodiversidad que se ha formado a lo largo de períodos prolongados de tiempo y porque hay especies vulnerables que, en caso de pérdidas, se recuperan en larguísimos períodos de tiempo.

Por eso, después de diez años durante los que no han funcionado las medidas adoptadas, hemos dado la bienvenida a la posición de la Comisión, que incluía medidas drásticas. Nosotros pensamos que no es necesario utilizar, en este caso, el serrucho. Hay que hacer una operación de cirugía, y por eso hemos llegado a un compromiso en la comisión, definiendo la política de pesca de aguas profundas, estableciendo una lista de especies vulnerables, estableciendo condiciones y límites para las autorizaciones, estableciendo una lista de áreas de ecosistemas sensibles y estableciendo una evaluación.

Pensamos que sería positivo que en el Parlamento tuviera un amplio apoyo para conseguir que el Consejo llegue a un acuerdo y evitar medidas que dividan nuestra posición.

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE). - Señor Presidente, la elaboración del informe ha sido complicada y voy a poner en valor el compromiso alcanzado, porque creo que ese es el camino.

El País Vasco tiene cuatro buques que pescan por debajo de los seiscientos metros, pero esto no significa que sea una pesca dirigida a especies profundas. No pescan tiburones, solo rape. Lo hacen durante el día y solo durante dos o tres meses al año, con un carácter más artesanal que el resto y apenas tienen descartes, tal y como consta en un informe del instituto AZTI realizado a petición del propio sector. Por ello, deberían quedar exentos de la aplicación de este Reglamento y ser utilizados, señora Comisaria, como un ejemplo de buena práctica que debe aplicarse a nivel europeo.

Las enmiendas presentadas a última hora pueden acabar con un sector que es y debería ser un ejemplo. Tengan claro que el más interesado en mantener la sostenibilidad es el propio sector, y esto debemos hacerlo en colaboración con los institutos científicos y con datos objetivos para hacer de nuestro sector un sector rentable y sostenible.

  Sandrine Bélier (Verts/ALE). - Monsieur le Président, je voudrais, ce soir, me faire la porte-parole de la faune et des poissons d'eaux profondes pour demander à cette assemblée de mettre fin à une pratique inique et particulièrement destructrice, le chalutage en eaux profondes, le chalutage à plus de six cents mètres.

Les communautés végétales et animales marines en eaux profondes sont très variées et riches, mais elles sont surtout fragiles et vulnérables. Tout est plus lent en eaux profondes: déplacements, reproduction, évolution. La reconstitution d'une population d'espèces détruites peut prendre des décennies, voire des centaines d'années.

Aussi, en moins de dix ans, la pêche en eaux profondes a-t-elle épuisé plus de 80 % de la ressource halieutique d'eaux profondes dans l'Atlantique Nord-Est. Ce n'est pas rendre service aux pêcheurs, ni aux citoyens de cette planète, que d'autoriser cette pratique de pêche sur-subventionnée, non sélective et dévastatrice de nos fonds marins. Pour deux à cinq espèces commercialisables, ce sont des centaines d'autres qui sont sacrifiées, détruites inutilement.

Je vous appelle donc, chers collègues, à voter l'amendement déposé pour mettre fin à la pêche au chalut en eaux profondes et l'interdire, afin de participer à la cohérence d'une réforme ambitieuse de notre politique commune de la pêche.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). - A situação da pesca da sarda no Atlântico Nordeste exige uma discussão que vai além dos níveis de pesca da Islândia e das Ilhas Faroé. É a própria repartição de quotas entre Estados-Membros que merece uma discussão séria na base de informação atualizada sobre o estado do recurso e do respetivo stock populacional. A evolução do stock tem levado, por exemplo em Portugal, a uma maior abundância relativa da espécie nas águas nacionais nos últimos anos, pelo que a quota portuguesa atual se encontra desadequada face à situação real do recurso, como o demonstra, de resto, o fecho da quota em regra muito mais cedo do que noutros países e numa situação de comprovada abundância do recurso.

As chaves de alocação de recursos entre Estados-Membros devem acompanhar a evolução do stock e a abundância relativa dos recursos em cada zona. Só assim se evita que, em nome de uma estabilidade relativa, se imponha, de facto, uma estabilidade absoluta injusta e desadequada da realidade.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI). - Herr Präsident! Wir Österreicher sind zwar bekanntlich keine Nation von Hochseefischern, die ökologische Situation der Weltmeere geht uns aber auch etwas an. Darum erlauben Sie mir einige Bemerkungen dazu.

Die Tiefseefischerei mit Grundschleppnetzen zerstört bekanntlich durch ihre Vorrichtungen empfindliche Lebensräume mitsamt der dort angesiedelten Arten. Ein jüngst von der Europäischen Kommission veröffentlichter Bericht hebt aber hervor, dass Tiefseearten auch mit alternativen Fangmethoden befischt werden könnten. Diese verursachen nur geringe Schäden an den Ökosystemen der Tiefsee.

Die Schäden durch die Grundschleppnetzfischerei sind ja unverhältnismäßig zum Ertrag. Im Nordostatlantik werden nur circa 0,75 % der europäischen Fangerträge auf diese Art eingefahren. Außerdem zählt die Schleppnetzfischerei zu den Fischfangmethoden, die im Verhältnis zur Menge an gefangenem Fisch die geringste Anzahl an Arbeitsplätzen sichern.

Alternative Methoden wie die Langleinenfischerei schaffen sechs Mal so viele Arbeitsplätze. Der Ausstieg aus der Subventionierung der Tiefseefischerei mit Grundschleppnetzen ist daher aus wirtschaftlichen, sozialen und ökologischen Gründen richtig und auch notwendig.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE). - Este relatório é um bom exemplo do trabalho desejável que pode ser feito no Parlamento entre os vários grupos políticos. E também entre interesses divergentes, como por vezes acontece entre o setor pesqueiro e os ambientalistas.

Partiu-se de uma proposta radical da Comissão e chegou-se a um relatório consensual, que preserva princípios fundamentais da defesa de habitats sensíveis e de manutenção de condições razoáveis de operacionalidade para a frota. Prevaleceu uma proposta realista e pragmática que aposta na investigação dos habitats das profundezas marinhas e na avaliação do impacto das artes de pesca dirigidas às espécies de profundidade, contemplando medidas destinadas à proteção dos ecossistemas marinhos vulneráveis cuja localização deverá ser identificada pelos Estados-Membros e comunicada à Comissão.

Eu penso que este acordo, tão difícil de alcançar e verdadeiro exemplo de trabalho parlamentar, não pode e não deve ser rompido amanhã.

  Gesine Meissner (ALDE). - Herr Präsident! Ist es nicht so, dass wir noch gar nicht genau wissen, was in der Tiefsee eigentlich alles los ist?

Man sagt immer wieder, das Meer ist erst zu etwa 10 % erforscht. Und gerade mit modernen Technologien wie Fächerecholot und Tauchroboter ist es seit Ende des letzten Jahrhunderts möglich, die Ökosysteme in der Tiefsee zu erforschen. Man hat jetzt festgestellt, dass es von Nordnorwegen bis nach Mauretanien Kaltwasserkorallenriffe gibt. Gerade in diesen Kaltwasserkorallen, die sehr empfindlich sind und leicht zerstört werden können – und dann nicht ohne Weiteres so schnell wieder wachsen –, gibt es viele – auch wertvolle – Speisefische.

Und ich denke, es ist nicht einsehbar, warum wir dort noch Tiefseeschleppnetzfischerei zulassen sollen. Denn es ist tatsächlich auch so, dass weniger als 10 % – ich glaube es sind nur 5 % – der gesamten Nordostatlantikfischerei aus der Tiefsee ist. Wenn man dadurch riskiert, ein Ökosystem zu zerstören, das gerade gut ist, um die Fische wachsen zu lassen, dann schneiden wir uns selbst ins Fleisch.

Wir haben gerade die Fischereireform beschlossen. Wir sollten tatsächlich konsequenterweise das verbieten, dass das passiert.

ΠΡΟΕΔΡΙΑ: ΑΝΝΥ ΠΟΔΗΜΑΤΑ
Αντιπρόεδρος

  Alain Cadec (PPE). - Madame la Présidente, je suis de ceux qui pensent que, dans le compromis de M. Arsenis, on se donne les moyens de préserver l'environnement mais aussi l'activité économique et donc les emplois.

Le gel de l'empreinte, par exemple, permet la préservation des écosystèmes, qu'on le veuille ou non, et la sanctuarisation de toutes les autres zones. Par ailleurs, la présence d'observateurs sur tous les bateaux va permettre de vérifier et de garantir l'équité de tout ce qui se passe. Par ailleurs, nous nous donnons aussi quatre ans pour décider de la poursuite ou non de cette pêche. Je pense donc, très sincèrement, que ce compromis est un bon compromis et j'espère que, demain, le bon sens l'emportera et que le Parlement le votera.

  Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE). - Mr President, we heard lots of self-congratulation earlier on this evening about CFP reform and the fact that we are ending 30 years of failure through over-centralised, one-size-fits-all decision-making, which has completely failed to recognise the very specific nature of the individual fisheries that we have around our coasts. The hard-won compromise led by Mr Arsenis would require Member States to identify and protect vulnerable ecosystems using a science-led approach and an appropriate approach to these particular fisheries. For that reason, I cannot support amendments which now seek to reintroduce a one-size-fits-all policy: an arbitrary level above which all trawling everywhere will be banned.

At one of the hearings referred to by Mr Arsenis we heard an expert who warned us of the unintended consequences of that – and it would be considerable and nothing to do with deep-sea species or the protection thereof – so we cannot credibly expect to be ending the one-size-fits-all approach in welcoming that on the one hand, and then, half an hour later, supporting the exact opposite. I shall therefore be supporting the compromise, hard won. Give it a chance and tailor it to what we need to do to conserve stocks in relation to the exact needs of those stocks and ecosystems.

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE). - Señora Presidenta, vamos a centrar el debate. Los científicos nos advierten –y esto es algo que hemos conocido todas y todos nosotros estos días– de que las especies y los hábitats vulnerables de aguas profundas son objeto de algunas de las prácticas pesqueras más destructivas por parte de algunas de las flotas de la Unión Europea. Y no solamente esto, sino que, encima, lo estamos haciendo con fondos de la Unión Europea.

El arrastre de fondo de aguas profundas causa un daño medioambiental considerable y no ofrece ningún rendimiento económico positivo. Este tipo de actividades, además subvencionadas, son con las que pretendemos terminar precisamente mediante la enmienda que hemos presentado para el Pleno de mañana.

Creo que tenemos una gran oportunidad, como lo hemos hecho en el pasado, al aprobar la reforma de la política pesquera. Lo hicimos en su momento cuando aprobamos un Reglamento mucho más estricto para proteger a los tiburones. Lo hemos hecho también en algunas ocasiones de una forma muy clara, cuando hemos mandado un mensaje a favor de una política de gestión mucho más responsable, de no alimentar la sobrepesca. Y mañana tenemos una nueva ocasión para demostrar que este Parlamento está del lado: 1) del sentido común, y por tanto de los análisis científicos; y 2) de las generaciones futuras y de su derecho a poder seguir disfrutando de ese mar, de esos océanos, que, no lo olvidemos, son un bien común.

(Τέλος παρεμβάσεων με τη διαδικασία "catch the eye")

  Maria Damanaki, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, I would like to thank all the Members of Parliament for their contributions. It seems that there are different opinions on this issue and it also seems that there are a lot of concerns about the future of the sector. I would repeat that the Commission intends to defend its own proposal. This proposal was well balanced, with a transitional, phasing-out period.

In any case, we are going to respect the vote of Parliament tomorrow and I would like to underline that we are going to facilitate a dialogue between Parliament, the Council and the Commission in order to find the best solution forward.

I would also like to underline that the Commission is going to exhaust all opportunities at the margins to facilitate the transitional period in order to help our fishermen and to avoid the situations already mentioned about jobs lost and so forth. We will await for your vote tomorrow and then I am going to work with you and the Council in order to find the best solution.

  Kriton Arsenis, rapporteur. − Madam President, tomorrow this plenary might decide to kill the report; it is a risk that we consciously take. Can I explain why? As Mr Milana said, for 18 months, for three whole presidencies, the Council has not even presented this issue, opened, or even started discussing this issue.

When we reached this huge compromise we actually gave the industry what it wanted: to avoid the threat of banning deep sea trawling. In exchange we got the protection of the vulnerable marine ecosystems. Colleagues, how many of you came to me and told me that this is a compromise which can fly in the Council, that this is a compromise which can be endorsed by the Council?

And yet, one month after we adopted our compromise, the Council did not put it on the agenda, did not even present it. I used this time to talk to the Member States and the presidencies. The best we could get as a commitment from their side was: ‘Vote and we will see’ or ‘We prefer your compromise to the Commission proposal, but let us come together for negotiations’.

If this compromise is further watered down it will become meaningless. Our choice tomorrow is to go for a strong mandate with a ban and go for negotiations, or go for negotiations using our mandate as a starting point and end up with something meaningless. That is why in the Socialist Group we took this decision to support the reintroduction of the ban.

  Πρόεδρος. - Η συζήτησε έληξε.

Η ψηφοφορία θα διεξαχθεί αύριο Τρίτη 10 Δεκεμβρίου 2013 στις 11.30.

Γραπτές δηλώσεις (άρθρο 149)

  Nessa Childers (NI), in writing. – Deep-sea bottom trawling involves dragging heavy metal equipment along the seabed at high speed. This practice destroys fragile eco-systems such as cold water corals and it takes many years for species to reproduce and recover. Deep-sea fish have been over-exploited and deep-sea habitats have already been degraded by 30+ years of trawling. If passed, the ban would be the first of its kind, although it would build on existing prohibitions on trawling in shallower water. It could give the seas some breathing space and fish stocks a chance to recover. This is an archaic practice we need to stop and more needs to be done to protect the vulnerable habitats and species in our seas. Parliament has been active in establishing a positive legacy for the oceans, given our recent votes regarding the fisheries sector, and we should not stop now. This vote is an opportunity to reverse much of the damage done to fisheries and deep-water trawling should be a practice of the past.

  Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE), in writing. – I voted against this report, which contains many good proposals, as Amendment 62 on Article 9 was narrowly defeated. This concerned the banning of trawling and gillnets below a depth of 600 metres, thus protecting deep-sea species. Deep-sea environments are increasingly ecologically fragile: things happen slowly there due to the cold and lack of light, yet they are ecologically diverse. Disruption of that environment means it takes a long time to recover – just as high-mountain environments take a long time to recover when they are damaged. Deep-sea trawling trashes the environment necessary for ecological diversity, creating long-term damage for a short-term return. This House has missed a valuable opportunity to further help the marine environment (which is increasingly under threat from climate change) by deferring a decision to stop deep-sea trawling. Hence my decision to vote against this report.

  Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE), kirjallinen. – Meren pohjalla elävät lajit ovat erityisen herkkiä ylikalastukselle. Ne saavuttavat lisääntymiskypsyyden hitaasti eivätkä sen saavutettuaankaan lisäänny riittävän nopeasti kantojen ylläpitämiseksi. Erityisesti meren pohjalla elävät pienet hailajit ovat vaarassa hävitä, ja siksi tänään pöydällä oli troolauksen lisäksi myös ehdotus näiden lajien lisäämisestä haavoittuvien lajien listaan. Kalojen lisäksi myös monet korallilajit kärsivät pohjatroolauksesta. Komission esitys ja tieteellinen näyttö puhuvat pohjatroolauksen kieltämisen puolesta. Parlamentissa kuitenkin monet surevat kiellon mahdollista vaikutusta kalastajien elinkeinon jatkumiseen. Tähän argumenttiin kiteytyy hyvin koko EU:n kalastuspolitiikan pitkä linjakiista siitä, miten tasapainoillaan kalastajien edun ja kestävien kalakantojen välillä: ajaako tämän päivän kalastajien elinkeinoa tulevaisuuden kalakantojen ja kalastajien toimeentulon kustannuksella? Taloudellisten menetysten argumentti ei pohjatroolauksen tapauksessa ole kovinkaan uskottava, etenkin kun EU-alueelle nostettavista kalasaaliista vain prosentti tulee syvemmistä vesistä. Vaihtoehto troolaukselle on lukuisilla koukuilla suoritettava kalastus, ja esimerkiksi Norja kalastaa syvällä merellä ainoastaan tällä menetelmällä.

  Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu (S&D), în scris. – În zonele de mare adâncime găsim specii și habitate unice, vulnerabile, precum corali și ecosisteme de bureți, care sunt puse în pericol prin utilizarea de metode de pescuit cu impact agresiv, precum traule sau setci de fund. Este foarte important să eliminăm acele unelte de pescuit distructive pentru mediul acvatic și să promovăm pescuitul sustenabil. În acest sens, susțin propunerea de compromis a raportorului privind eliminarea practicilor de pescuit dăunătoare în acele zone cu ecosisteme vulnerabile.

În același timp, sprijin și utilizarea practicilor alternative de pescuit, precum utilizarea de paragate, întrucât acestea nu numai că sunt mai puțin dăunătoare ecosistemelor marine, dar au și capacitatea de a susține de șase ori mai multe locuri de muncă decât alte unelte de pescuit la mare adâncime.

  Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D), schriftelijk. – Meer dan 75 procent van de visbestanden in de wereld wordt overbevist en industriële vistechnieken tasten ook ander leven onder water aan. Het Europees Parlement stemt morgen over een aantal teksten dat de Europese visserij alvast een stuk duurzamer kan maken. Eén van de voorliggende dossiers, het verslag-Arsenis, heeft betrekking op de regels die van toepassing zijn op visvangst op grote diepte. Bij het vissen op grote diepte met bodemnetten wordt behoorlijk wat schade aangericht aan de zeebodem, aan koralen en aan andere bestanden van zeedieren dan die soorten waarop eigenlijk gevist wordt. Een amendement om diepzeevisserij met bodemnetten te verbieden op een grotere diepte dan 600 meter zorgt voor ophef. Nochtans is het uiterst belangrijk dat dit voorstel morgen alle steun krijgt. Het verbod op vangst op grote diepte treft in de praktijk slechts een tiental visserijbedrijven die deze techniek toepassen. De zeebodem wordt daarbij afgeschraapt met sleepnetten, wat een ecologische ravage aanricht. Er bestaan echter minder agressieve alternatieven. De Belgische sociaaldemocraten steunen een verbod op het gebruik van sleepnetten op grote diepte.

20. EU-Morocco Fisheries Partnership Agreement: protocol setting out fishing opportunities and financial contributions (debate)

  Πρόεδρος. - Το επόμενο σημείο στην ημερήσια διάταξη είναι η συζήτηση επί της σύστασης της κ. Carmen Fraga Estévez, εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής Αλιείας σχετικά με το σχέδιο απόφασης του Συμβουλίου για τη σύναψη, εξ ονόματος της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, του πρωτοκόλλου μεταξύ της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και του Βασιλείου του Μαρόκου σχετικά με τον καθορισμό των αλιευτικών δυνατοτήτων και της χρηματικής αντιπαροχής που προβλέπονται στη συμφωνία αλιευτικής σύμπραξης μεταξύ της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και του Βασιλείου του Μαρόκου [14165/2013 - C7-0415/2013 - 2013/0315(NLE)] (Α7-0417/2013).

  Carmen Fraga Estévez, Ponente. − Señora Presidenta, en diciembre de 2011 este Parlamento aprobó una Resolución en la que solicitaba la negociación de un nuevo Protocolo de pesca con Marruecos que corrigiese los problemas detectados en el anterior. Por su parte, el mandato del Consejo otorgado a la Comisión para la apertura de negociaciones incluía demandas similares a las de este Parlamento.

De lo que se trataba básicamente era de mejorar la eficiencia económica del Protocolo de forma que lo pagado por el acceso a los recursos tuviera un adecuado retorno para la Unión Europea, favoreciendo la plena utilización de las posibilidades de pesca obtenidas. Además, se incluían criterios relativos al compromiso con un desarrollo sostenible, negociando solo sobre los excedentes de pesca; la incorporación de una cláusula sobre derechos humanos y la inclusión de garantías de que el Protocolo cumple con el Derecho internacional y, especialmente, con los compromisos contraídos por Marruecos en el seno de las Naciones Unidas.

La Comisión ha negociado un Protocolo que, en opinión de la Comisión de Pesca, cumple todas estas demandas, y que ha sido, asimismo, aprobado por la Comisión de Presupuestos y la Comisión de Desarrollo. Cuenta, igualmente, con el respaldo tanto del sector pesquero de la Unión como del marroquí, y de los sindicatos europeos.

Me gustaría destacar ahora algunos de los avances que mejor demuestran la consonancia de las peticiones del Parlamento Europeo:

– se han negociado posibilidades de pesca para 126 barcos con bandera de 11 Estados miembros, que darán empleo a 1 500 tripulantes, de los que aproximadamente 500 serán locales;

– se ha adecuado la contrapartida financiera a las posibilidades de pesca reales, que se incrementan en un 33 %, mientras que el coste del presupuesto de la Unión se reduce en un 17 %;

– se han corregido los aspectos que impedían el total aprovechamiento de las posibilidades de pesca, adaptando las medidas técnicas, modificando las zonas de pesca según las distintas flotas y modificando algunas zonas de pesca, como en el caso de las categorías 1 y 2, por ejemplo, para incluir puertos mejor equipados, como el de Mohamedia, que además de aumentar la seguridad de la flota, ahora sí permitirán cumplir las obligaciones de desembarque;

– para los cálculos de los excedentes se han utilizado los mejores datos científicos disponibles, cruzando la información aportada por Marruecos con los datos de los investigadores de la Unión; se garantiza, además, un seguimiento científico permanente durante toda la duración del Protocolo;

– se mejora, asimismo, el control a través de un sistema de intercambio de datos electrónicos;

– en cuanto a la política sectorial, por vez primera en un Protocolo de pesca, los proyectos presentados por Marruecos deberán incluir las repercusiones que los fondos europeos tendrán en la población en términos sociales, económicos y laborales, y utilizar criterios geográficos; deben ser aprobados por la comisión mixta, y para garantizar que el Parlamento Europeo pueda, también, realizar un control adecuado, la Comisión de Pesca ha aprobado una enmienda para que los diputados al PE, en calidad de observadores, puedan asistir a estas comisiones;

– y, finalmente, la cláusula de derechos humanos, según la cual el incumplimiento conducirá a la suspensión del Protocolo y de la contrapartida financiera.

Por otra parte, respecto a las cuestiones de legalidad planteadas, me gustaría subrayar de nuevo que, tanto los servicios jurídicos de la Comisión como los del Parlamento, han vuelto a establecer que el Protocolo es legal, conforme al Derecho internacional, y específicamente a la doctrina de las Naciones Unidas, según la cual la explotación de recursos es perfectamente legal, siempre que beneficie a la población. Por tanto, será durante la ejecución del Protocolo cuando se podrá comprobar este extremo, que –como he dicho– de incumplirse podrá conducir a la suspensión del Protocolo.

Creo, por tanto, que estamos ante el Protocolo que mejor responde a las preocupaciones expresadas en esta Cámara, con nuevos mecanismos de control, tanto financiero como de sostenibilidad, por lo que, como ponente, solo puedo pedir el apoyo a la aprobación del mismo, negociado sobre las nuevas bases que nosotros mismos habíamos reclamado.

  Maria Damanaki, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, first of all I would like to thank the rapporteur, Ms Fraga, and the Committee on Fisheries for their work on this proposal. But I would also like to thank the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Development who have given support to this proposal. So it is not only the Fisheries Committee but also the Budgets and Development Committees that are supporting this proposal.

I would like to remind you that two years ago this House rejected our proposal referring to a possible agreement with Morocco on fisheries. But this House also asked me to negotiate a new agreement. You asked the Commission to negotiate a new agreement, and of course you put conditions on these new negotiations: economic profitability, environmental sustainability and compliance with international law. So I can say to you that the agreement we have reached with the Moroccan authorities is in full accordance with these conditions you have already set.

I took Parliament’s message on board and I negotiated. It took me 18 difficult months to reach this agreement. And let me be clear: I think that this is the best possible agreement we can have, and no other agreement will be possible if Parliament decides to reject it. Of course it is up to you to decide, but I would like you to know that if you decide to reject it there will be no other agreement in place. But I really think that this agreement fulfils your demands and concerns. Let me explain why.

This agreement is economically profitable. This is also understood and underlined by Parliament’s Committee on Budgets. Fishing possibilities increase by 33%, EU taxpayers’ payments decrease by 30% and the EU fleet is expected to benefit by up to EUR 100 million per year. We have to think about the social consequences of this agreement and that is why the social partners – both sides, the ship-owners and the workers – strongly support this agreement. The trade union ETF, the European Transport Federation, has come to me strongly supporting this agreement.

This agreement is also environmentally sustainable: the protocol contains clear legal obligations for sustainable exploitation, based on scientific assessment, providing certainty that only the surplus will be fished. So this is what we asked for: only the surplus will be fished.

Finally, the protocol is compliant with international law. Let me explain this a little bit further.

First I would like to make one point very clear: no legal authority until now – including the United Nations, the European Court of Justice or the Legal Service of any of the EU institutions (Commission, Council, and Parliament) – has ever said that an agreement with Morocco covering Western Sahara is illegal. Nobody. What they do say – and rightly so – is that such an agreement must fulfil certain conditions; in particular, referring to this fisheries agreement, that fishing activities must benefit the local population.

These are the conditions we have to meet, and may I also say that, if we had legal advice saying that any agreement with Morocco would be illegal, then no agreement referring to the Western Sahara could be adopted by this Parliament.

I would like to remind you that we already have an agreement with Morocco, including the Western Sahara territory. You have voted for trade and other agreements referring to this territory. And I think that this is the only way to keep working with Morocco, unless you think that we have to end our relations with this country. Of course it is up to you to decide. I would also like to underline that there is a human rights clause within the protocol.

I would also like to underline that this agreement is better, absolutely better, than the agreements you have voted for before. Why? Because we have introduced a very detailed reporting obligation on Morocco. Morocco must report on the economic and social benefits, for example on employment and investments. But they also have to report on the geographical distribution of all sectoral support projects. So we can see whether the local population can benefit from our taxpayers’ money. I may also say to you that, if we have any doubts, we can also ask our delegation in Morocco to carry out fact-finding missions. So there are a lot of safety clauses referring to all your concerns.

I have listened to your concerns, the concerns of Parliament and I have done my part. Of course I can understand that your concerns perhaps go further than fisheries and this agreement, but I would like to underline that realistically this is the best agreement we have. I think that the best way for the European Union to go in the interests of all the Moroccan population, including all territories’ populations, is to keep in contact with Morocco and come to an agreement.

  Cristian Dan Preda, rapporteur pour avis de la commission du développement. − Madame la Présidente, je voudrais d'abord féliciter ma collègue Carmen Fraga Estévez pour son rapport. L'avis que j'ai rédigé dans la commission du développement va dans le même sens: il ne s'agit pas d'une simple reprise du texte antérieur, mais d'un accord substantiellement nouveau, qui répond en fait aux critiques formulées par notre Parlement en décembre 2011, il y a deux ans.

Nous avons déjà parlé du fait que le rapport coûts/bénéfices s'est sensiblement amélioré. Je voudrais faire remarquer en plus que la moitié de la contribution financière de l'Union est destinée à développer le secteur marocain de la pêche, ce qui va, bien sûr, dans le sens du développement. Ensuite, il y a la question du principe de durabilité qui devient une condition essentielle pour l'activité envisagée. En troisième lieu, les retombées économiques et sociales du protocole pour les populations locales pourront être évaluées.

En conclusion, c'est un bon protocole, d'autant plus que la dimension des droits de l'homme est bien présente et que le protocole peut être suspendu en cas de violation. Je suis donc en faveur de l'adoption de ce nouveau texte.

  Gabriel Mato Adrover, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señora Presidenta, el Protocolo negociado cumple con el mandato del Consejo, cumple a rajatabla con la Resolución del Parlamento Europeo de 2011 y satisface al sector pesquero europeo al permitir una pesca sostenible, duradera y rentable que es beneficiosa para ambas partes.

En este Protocolo se otorgan ciento veintiséis licencias de pesca, a repartir entre once países de la Unión Europea, de las que un centenar correspondería a España. Desde el punto de vista laboral, con este Protocolo se daría trabajo a mil quinientos tripulantes —entre los que se encuentran quinientos marroquíes— y a otros tres mil trabajadores más en actividades afines. Y, si hablamos de España, daría sustento a más de ochocientas familias, principalmente andaluzas y canarias.

En cuanto a la relación coste-beneficio, está muchísimo mejor ajustada. Es un acuerdo mucho mejor para los pescadores y más barato para la Unión. Y para quienes tienen dudas al margen de lo estrictamente pesquero, quiero decirles que este Acuerdo, que, además, es totalmente conforme con el Derecho internacional —lo dicen los servicios jurídicos—, es también plenamente conforme con los mandatos. Contempla la obligación de respetar los derechos humanos y los principios democráticos y posibilita, además, que la Unión Europea suspenda su vigencia en caso de vulneración de cualquiera de estos derechos o principios.

Por tanto, se puede hacer mucha política a costa de este Protocolo, cosa que no se hizo con el protocolo agrario, por ejemplo. Pero, desde luego, lo que no se puede es cuestionar algunas cuestiones que se están cuestionando. No hay ni un solo argumento jurídico, ni de intereses pesqueros, que pueda ser puesto en duda.

Es un buen protocolo y merece nuestra aprobación. Y además, merece nuestro reconocimiento la señora Fraga, por su magnífico informe.

  Luís Manuel Capoulas Santos, em nome do Grupo S&D. – A proposta de acordo que temos aqui hoje em discussão responde às principais preocupações do Parlamento constantes da nossa resolução de 14 de dezembro de 2011, que aprovámos na sequência da rejeição do acordo anterior. Agradeço à Senhora Comissária que tenha tido em conta as nossas posições na proposta que nos apresentou e que negociou com o Reino de Marrocos.

Do ponto de vista económico, é positiva a redução dos custos a cargo do orçamento comunitário e o aumento da contrapartida dos armadores. Do ponto de vista social, é igualmente positiva a expectativa de emprego com padrões laborais elevados que se coloca a europeus e marroquinos. Do ponto de vista ambiental, merece destaque a exclusão da exploração de recursos ameaçados, como é o caso dos mariscos e cefalópodes e a fixação de capturas de espécies pelágicas dentro de limites sustentáveis, assim como a consagração do reforço da cooperação científica para garantir o cumprimento dos objetivos de sustentabilidade.

Do ponto de vista da sensível questão do Sara Ocidental, fica pela primeira vez inscrito no acordo a obrigatoriedade de os meios financeiros para o desenvolvimento do setor serem justa e proporcionalmente aplicados em todo o território marroquino e no território do Sara Ocidental ocupado por este país em benefício das respetivas populações e com acompanhamento da comissão mista.

De referir ainda a cláusula referente aos direitos humanos, segundo a qual, como já aqui hoje foi dito, qualquer incumprimento conduzirá à suspensão do acordo. Por todas estas razões apelo ao plenário, enquanto relator-sombra do meu grupo político, S&D, para que vote favoravelmente o presente acordo de pescas.

(O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta "cartão azul" (n.º 8 do artigo 149.º)).

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), Pergunta segundo o procedimento "cartão azul". – Eu queria perguntar ao Senhor Capoulas Santos qual foi a sua posição quando, há uns anos, a Indonésia, que ocupava ilegalmente Timor-Leste, fez um acordo com países terceiros para a exploração do petróleo no mar de Timor.

Pergunto-lhe hoje, qual foi então a sua posição, se considerou esse acordo justo e aceitável?

  Luís Manuel Capoulas Santos (S&D), Resposta segundo o procedimento "cartão azul". – Senhor Deputado, à luz do direito internacional, é considerado legal um acordo que garanta que a potência ocupante utiliza os recursos explorados em benefício das populações. Isso está garantido no acordo de Marrocos, não estava garantido no acordo de exploração do petróleo então levado a cabo pela Indonésia no território de Timor-Leste.

  Nils Torvalds, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Madam President, two years ago Parliament reacted to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement with Morocco. I am sorry to say that the Commission did not take note of the very key points behind Parliament’s reaction. While the new agreement constitutes an improvement from an economic point of view, there are only cosmetic changes when it comes to human rights and the right to self-determination of the Sahrawi people. Under international law, Western Sahara is occupied. That is a fact. Civilised policies therefore exclude Western Sahara when concluding agreements with Morocco, since any other action would constitute a breach of international law. We should do the same.

The Commission says that the new agreement will address our concerns regarding human rights, but without the right to self-determination no human rights are respected. The EU must be consistent when we speak of our core values. There cannot be a ‘but’ after human rights and international law – ‘we are for human rights “but”’ – therefore I have asked my group to vote against the agreement. And I am sorry, Commissioner Damanaki, but you might still experience the shameful day when the European Court of Justice declares this agreement null and void.

  Raül Romeva i Rueda, en nombre del Grupo Verts/ALE. – Señora Presidenta, en la línea del señor Torvalds, yo también he recomendado que nuestro Grupo vote en contra, en coherencia con lo que hemos estado defendiendo estos últimos años.

Cuando, en 2011, ya planteamos votar en contra de la antigua versión, lo hicimos porque los recursos estaban en muy mal estado y porque, económicamente, no era viable. Pero, además, porque era ilegal. Y esta situación sigue siendo exactamente la misma hoy. Siento discrepar de la Comisaria y de algunos diputados, pero no se puede argumentar que esta situación es legal. Marruecos está negociando con unos recursos que no le pertenecen. Y, en ese sentido, no son solamente los beneficios lo que hay que tener en cuenta, son los deseos del pueblo saharaui, al que nadie ha preguntado en toda la negociación y que, explícitamente, ha dicho que está en contra de este Acuerdo.

Por lo tanto, desde el punto de vista del Derecho internacional, es un acuerdo ilegal. Y por esta razón —no solamente porque es inmoral desde el punto de vista del respeto de los derechos humanos, sino porque es, también, ilegal—, nuestro Grupo va a votar mañana en contra de este Acuerdo.

  Marek Józef Gróbarczyk, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Umowa Unii Europejskiej z Królestwem Maroka po wielu latach negocjacji ma szansę zostać przyjęta. Nabiera to szczególnego znaczenia w kontekście zwiększenia obszarów połowowych przy zastosowaniu wzajemnych korzyści oraz zrównoważonej eksploatacji zasobów naturalnych. Umowa ta jest niezwykle ważna, tak dla Unii Europejskiej, jak i dla Maroka, jako efekt wzajemnej współpracy. Dzięki wieloletniemu okresowi negocjacji prowadzonych przez Komisję Europejską umowa ta gwarantuje respektowanie praw człowieka oraz zabezpieczenie korzyści ekonomicznych w sposób właściwy dla wszystkich grup etnicznych Maroka. Podstawowym celem Unii Europejskiej przy zachowaniu powyższych warunków powinno być poszanowanie integralności Maroka w wymiarze terytorialnym, ekonomicznym i społecznym, a także koncentracja na sprawach gospodarczych w odniesieniu do sfery rybołówstwa. To niezwykle ważna i konieczna umowa, której poparcie jednoznacznie deklaruję.

  João Ferreira, em nome do Grupo GUE/NGL. – Já o dissemos por diversas vezes e aqui o reafirmamos: nada temos contra um acordo de pescas com Marrocos, um acordo que seja justo, que observe os princípios de sustentabilidade e que seja mutuamente vantajoso. Mas um acordo que, para além das águas marroquinas, inclui recursos sobre os quais Marrocos não tem soberania à luz do direito internacional, é um acordo ilegal, que não podemos aceitar.

A inclusão das águas do Sara Ocidental neste acordo, em que a Comissão Europeia lamentavelmente insiste, afronta a decisão do Tribunal Internacional de Justiça e várias resoluções das Nações Unidas. É uma afronta ao direito internacional. Além do mais, atendendo à situação no território, esta é uma demonstração de quanto valem afinal as hipócritas cláusulas de direitos humanos que a União Europeia põe nos seus acordos. É bom lembrar que até os Estados Unidos excluíram explicitamente os produtos oriundos do Sara Ocidental do acordo comercial que mantêm com Marrocos. Enquanto isso, a Comissão Europeia insiste na ilegalidade. Esperemos que este Parlamento não lhe siga os passos.

  Lucas Hartong (NI). - Voorzitter, commissaris, vandaag debatteren we opnieuw over een visserijverdrag met Marokko. Opnieuw zal de PVV tegen stemmen. Het voorgestelde verdrag is geen haar beter dan het eerdere voorstel dat dit Parlement terecht afwees. De kosten-batenverhouding is compleet zoek. De actuele situatie van de visbestanden is niet te meten, omdat er geen goede wetenschappelijke gegevens zijn. De mensenrechten van bewoners in de Westelijke Sahara worden niet geëerbiedigd en we gaan, als het aan de Commissie ligt, betalen voor het vissen in open internationale wateren. Als klap op de vuurpijl hebben Britse, Poolse en Nederlandse vissers al aangegeven niet te gaan vissen onder het nieuwe verdrag, omdat de kosten niet tegen de baten opwegen. Het lijkt al met al op een pure lobby voor behoud van met name Spaanse visrechten.

Bijna de helft van de EU-bijdrage gaat naar ontwikkeling van de visserijsector in Marokko. Dat is verkapte ontwikkelingshulp en dat hoort sowieso niet thuis in een visserijverdrag. De Nederlandse belastingbetaler betaalt bovendien weer eens voor iets waarover hij niets te zeggen heeft. Dit is dus ook nog eens het slechtste verdrag ooit na het Verdrag van Lissabon. Laten we hopen dat dit Parlement morgen opnieuw het voorgestelde verdrag naar de prullenbak verwijst. Als het aan de PVV ligt, komt er overigens nooit meer een nieuw verdrag op tafel en laten we Marokko in zijn ruime vissop gaar koken.

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE). - Desde dezembro de 2011, quando o Parlamento rejeitou o Acordo de Pesca União Europeia-Marrocos, que a frota europeia teve de abandonar as águas marroquinas, com um elevado prejuízo que se vai acumulando até hoje.

Aqui, como em outras águas de países terceiros em que a União deixa de pescar, a sua posição é ocupada por outros interesses que, ao contrário do que acontece entre nós, ignoram os direitos humanos e negligenciam quer a justa recompensação das populações autóctones, quer uma gestão sustentável das pescarias.

Atendendo às razões que ditaram o voto negativo do Parlamento em 2011 e as orientações da resolução aprovada no mesmo dia, o acordo que hoje aqui se apresenta responde às objeções do passado seguindo as recomendações de então. Eis o que é objetivamente inquestionável. Este protocolo é compatível com o direito internacional, ambientalmente mais sustentável, economicamente mais rentável do que o anterior. Ele contempla um aumento das possibilidades de pesca, baseado em pareceres científicos na ordem dos 33%, uma melhoria da relação custo-benefício entre a contrapartida financeira e as possibilidades de pesca, uma alteração das zonas de pesca e das condições operacionais da frota e é ainda o acompanhamento pela União Europeia da utilização do apoio setorial e das suas repercussões socioeconómicas numa base geográfica, assegurando que parte da compensação financeira é realmente aplicada no Sara Ocidental.

Votar contra o acordo prejudicaria a frota europeia, e também o povo sarauí, pelo rompimento das boas relações entre Marrocos e a União Europeia, a única potência pesqueira da região que respeita os direitos humanos.

(O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta "cartão azul" (n.º 8 do artigo 149.º)).

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), Pergunta segundo o procedimento "cartão azul". – Queria perguntar à Senhora Deputada Patrão Neves se, por hipótese, o seu país fosse ocupado por uma potência estrangeira e se essa potência celebrasse com outros países um acordo para a exploração dos recursos pesqueiros do seu país, se consideraria isso justo e aceitável? E se ficaria descansada com a declaração da potência ocupante do seu país que utilizaria os proveitos gerados pelo acordo de exploração do peixe do seu país em benefício da população local?

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (PPE), Resposta segundo o procedimento "cartão azul". – Essa é uma reedição da mesma questão que já colocou ao Colega Capoulas Santos que também, à semelhança do que acontece comigo, defende este mesmo acordo. A resposta já foi dada, de facto este acordo obedece ao direito internacional e por isso a sua questão é uma questão hipotética, que não se aplica neste caso.

  Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D). - Señora Presidenta, el nuevo Protocolo es coherente con el acuerdo agrícola y comercial aprobado en febrero del año pasado y se enmarca en una relación de asociación avanzada entre la Unión Europea y Marruecos. Responde además a las preocupaciones del Parlamento de rentabilidad, sostenibilidad y legalidad.

De rentabilidad, porque decrece la aportación de los contribuyentes de la Unión y aumentan las posibilidades de pesca del Acuerdo.

De sostenibilidad, porque va a permitir el retorno de ciento veintiséis buques europeos, en su inmensa mayoría artesanales y españoles, que no pueden faenar desde hace dos años, y que lo harán con criterios de sostenibilidad, porque va a favorecer la cooperación científica y va a facilitar el intercambio de información electrónica.

Todos los informes jurídicos dicen que el Protocolo es coherente con la legalidad internacional y que cumple los compromisos de la Unión Europea respecto del Sáhara, no predetermina la soberanía y establece mecanismos de transparencia y control para que se beneficie a la población saharaui. Además, la experiencia demuestra que el rechazo del anterior Protocolo no contribuyó a la solución del conflicto, mientras que este nuevo Protocolo puede crear vías de cooperación que permitan lo que nosotros pretendemos: una solución justa y duradera, en el marco de las Naciones Unidas.

  Alain Cadec (PPE). - Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, l'accord de pêche entre l'Union européenne et le Maroc, tant attendu par les deux parties, est enfin mis aux voix au Parlement européen.

Le nouveau protocole à l'accord, paraphé le 24 juillet, permet à 126 navires de l'Union européenne de pêcher le surplus dans les eaux marocaines grâce à la contrepartie financière de cet accord, qui s'élève à 30 millions d'euros. La moitié de cette contrepartie financière finance l'accès aux eaux et l'autre partie finance le développement du secteur de la pêche marocain. Le Royaume du Maroc est tenu de présenter régulièrement des rapports détaillés sur l'utilisation de la contrepartie financière pour le développement du secteur de la pêche.

Je veux rappeler ici que cet accord est excellent car il est mutuellement bénéfique. Toutes les recommandations de la résolution du Parlement européen du 14 décembre 2011 ont été prises en compte. Cet accord est durable, les zones de pêche ont été modifiées pour respecter les exigences du Maroc et les avis des scientifiques de l'institut de recherche marocain ont été pris en compte. Les quotas pour la pêche pélagique n'ont pas été augmentés.

Cet accord contient également une clause d'exclusivité, qui permet d'éviter les licences privées sur lesquelles l'Union européenne n'a aucune visibilité. Il contient également une véritable clause de respect des droits de l'homme. Les obligations d'embarquement de marins marocains à bord sont en hausse par rapport au protocole précédent. La contrepartie financière est répartie sur tout le territoire; toute la population locale va donc en bénéficier.

Je compte donc sur la sagesse de cette institution, demain, pour donner un avis favorable à la conclusion de cet accord.

  Jens Nilsson (S&D). - Fru talman! Till kommissionsledamot Maria måste jag säga att hon är min hjältinna. När det gäller att få en ny fiskereform på plats måste jag säga att denna gång håller jag inte med.

Jag anser att detta inte stämmer. Det här avtalet stämmer inte med folkrätten. De resurser i form av fisk som finns utanför Västsaharas kust tillhör Västsaharas folk, och om villkoret är uppfyllt eller inte måste man fråga dem om, och de har inte varit tillfrågade.

Jag hävdar att det är en otroligt farlig väg vi är inne på. Om vi överprövar den bedömning som Förenta Nationerna har gjort – Förenta Nationerna som i en resolution talat om att Västsahara är ockuperat och deras rättstjänst som vid ett tidigare tillfälle sagt att avtalet inte är förenligt – hur ska vi då våga kritisera Ryssland eller USA eller Israel eller någon annan nästa gång som de säger att FN har gjort fel bedömning? Jag säger att vi ska säga nej till detta.

  Guido Milana (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, faccio una semplice riflessione: due anni fa abbiamo bocciato un accordo di pesca con il Marocco. In questi due anni non c'è stato quest'accordo e non c'è stato nessun dialogo tra i saharawi e il Marocco.

Non capisco perché, se lo ribocciamo, questo dovrebbe essere l'avvio di una fase virtuosa. Due anni fa abbiamo dato indicazioni precise alla Commissione, non dicendole che l'accordo era illegale, ma dicendo che questo accordo, così com'era, non andava bene, occorreva cambiarlo. La Commissione arriva dopo due anni e ci porta un accordo cambiato. Qual è la ragione per cui dovremmo bocciarlo, se quell'accordo è esattamente corrispondente a quello che ci è stato detto due anni fa?

Piuttosto, io penso che il Parlamento, la Commissione, il Consiglio, l'Europa stiano perdendo una grande occasione in quel quadrante, che è quella di dare seguito anche alla risoluzione che abbiamo fatto due anni fa e più volte in questo Parlamento, dove non muoviamo un dito politicamente come Europa per aprire un tavolo di confronto in quell'area e continuiamo a nasconderci dietro il velo pietoso dell'ONU!

Credo che questa debba essere la responsabilità del Parlamento. Facciamo ancora in tempo, domani, a votare l'accordo di pesca e, contemporaneamente, a dare un'indicazione precisa per costruire le condizioni affinché la politica estera europea si occupi di questa questione, altrimenti facciamo la guerra con i pesciolini e con i pesciolini non risolveremo né il problema dei saharawi né tantomeno del Marocco.

Διαδικασία "catch-the-eye"

  Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Zdaję sobie sprawę, że kwestia nowego protokołu budzi kontrowersje. Słyszałem wiele opinii, które przedstawiają powyższą sprawę jako wybór pomiędzy interesem europejskiego rybołówstwa a walką o wolność ludności Sahary Zachodniej. W moim przekonaniu takie czarno-białe przedstawienie tak delikatnej problematyki jest zbyt daleko idące. Uważam, że przygotowany przez Komisję Rybołówstwa projekt jest rozsądny. Bierze pod uwagę korzyści i skutki dla ludności Sahary Zachodniej, a jednocześnie uwzględnia umiarkowane ramy prawne. Dzięki temu udało nam się wypracować kompromis łączący wspomniane interesy rybołówstwa i praworządność, której wymagamy od Maroka. Umowa ta przyniesie korzyści ekonomiczne, zachowując przy tym odpowiednie standardy połowów i dbałość o środowisko naturalne.

Chciałbym na zakończenie powiedzieć, że spotkałem się z opiniami, według których umowa z Marokiem narusza prawo międzynarodowe, ale wydaje mi się, że jeżeli ta kwestia nie zostanie rozstrzygnięta przez ONZ, to porozumienie powinno być zawarte w obecnym kształcie.

  Sergio Gaetano Cofferati (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signora Commissario, sentire ripetutamente da parte dei sostenitori di quest'accordo fare riferimento alle categorie della legalità e del rispetto del diritto internazionale mi sembra sinceramente un grave atto di debolezza.

Il problema non può essere considerato di carattere giuridico, è un problema politico: siamo di fronte ad un accordo che migliora senza dubbio quello precedente, per quanto riguarda alcuni aspetti economici, ma che non risolve per nulla il tema delicatissimo dei diritti di un popolo. Qui siamo di fronte ad un accordo che interviene su un territorio occupato, utilizzando delle risorse di quel territorio senza che sia chiesta in alcun modo un'opinione agli interessati. È una violazione, questa sì, di diritti.

Come si può risolvere politicamente? Ci sono altri paesi, come gli Stati Uniti, che si inibiscono nei loro accordi commerciali con il Marocco di intervenire sui saharawi, noi dobbiamo fare esattamente la stessa cosa, per una ragione politica che aiuta un processo di democratizzazione che è lontano dall'essere realizzato.

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE). - Señora Presidenta, agradezco el esfuerzo realizado por la ponente para responder a la resolución de este Parlamento y del Consejo, pero parte de las aguas del Sáhara Occidental, que incorpora el Acuerdo, no son titularidad de Marruecos.

La legislación internacional es clara al respecto y, además, hemos incumplido todos los plazos para cerrar el proceso de autodeterminación del Sáhara y cumplir con las resoluciones internacionales.

Mi partido, el Partido Nacionalista Vasco, y Coalición Canaria concurrimos juntos a las elecciones al Parlamento Europeo y hemos defendido y seguiremos defendiendo la causa del pueblo saharaui, el derecho a su autodeterminación. Pero esta causa está unida al grito de las flotas pesqueras canaria y andaluza, que nos demandan una salida a su dramática situación mediante el Acuerdo que debatimos.

Los motivos expuestos harán que mañana en la votación tenga que abstenerme.

  Gilles Pargneaux (S&D). - Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, deux ans de négociations mises en œuvre par vous, Madame la Commissaire, deux ans qui, finalement, ont abouti à une proposition d'accord, qui va effectivement permettre, aux pêcheurs européens, espagnols notamment, et à l'ensemble des pêcheurs marocains et sahraouis de travailler et de vivre correctement de leur activité de pêche.

Que faut-il dire aujourd'hui – et j'en appelle à mes collègues du Parlement et de mon groupe? Que la totalité des réclamations des parlementaires européens ont reçu une réponse positive. Deuxièmement, que la durabilité est assurée puisque uniquement les surplus de poissons seront pêchés. Troisièmement, que l'équité de l'accord est assurée. Le Maroc fournira un rapport annuel détaillant les retombées économiques de l'accord, notamment pour les Sahraouis. Quatrièmement, enfin, que le droit international est respecté. D'ailleurs, l'avis juridique du Parlement européen a conclu à sa légalité avec la mise en place d'une clause relative aux droits de l'homme.

J'appelle donc à voter pour et je suis très satisfait que mon groupe socialiste et démocrate, par la voix de notre collègue Capoulas Santos, appelle, très majoritairement, à voter demain pour cet accord de pêche entre l'Union européenne et le Royaume du Maroc.

  Isabella Lövin (Verts/ALE). - Madam President, tomorrow – 10 December – is actually Human Rights Day, which was proclaimed by the UN General Assembly in 1950. This is quite ironical.

I would like to remind colleagues that last week the Pan-African Parliament and the African Union urged this Parliament to vote ‘no’ to this agreement because it violates human rights and the self-determination of Western Sahara.

The 18 difficult months that the Commissioner was talking about: why were they so difficult? Because Morocco did not want to have a human rights clause in this protocol. So the wording of the human rights clause in this protocol differs from any other fisheries agreement that we have ever seen in the Committee on Fisheries. They did not even want to mention ‘Western Sahara’; the words ‘Western Saharaʼ are not there.

So how are we going to check how this protocol is going to be executed when Morocco does not even allow Members of this Parliament to come into the country to meet with Sahrawi people and meet the human rights activists in the area? I very much urge colleagues to stand up for human rights tomorrow on Human Rights Day and vote ‘no’ to this shameful agreement.

  Anna Rosbach (ECR). - Fru formand! Det er fint nok, at EU indgår en aftale med Marokko – men kun med Marokko! Jeg kan kun støtte nogle af mine forrige taleres udsagn. Eftersom ingen anerkender Marokkos krav på Vestsahara, så kan man naturligvis heller ikke anerkende, at Marokko har en ret til at forhandle på Vestsaharas vegne. De oprindelige folk i Vestsahara har ifølge FN ret til selvbestemmelse, og så længe deres interesser ikke har været inddraget i forhandlingerne, så kan denne aftale selvsagt ikke være gyldig! En vedtagelse af aftalen vil konkret betyde, at EU betaler Marokko for at få lov til at fiske i et fremmed, internationalt farvand. USA har en frihandelsaftale med Marokko, som ikke inkluderer Vestsahara, men kun vedrører marokkansk territorium. Jeg håber meget, at EU når frem til samme model, så hvis USA kan overholde folkeretten, så er jeg sikker på, at EU også kan!

  Pino Arlacchi (S&D). - Madam President, Morocco invaded and militarily occupied the territory of Western Sahara and has no legal title to dispose of Western Sahara’s natural resources. The EU should not be an accomplice to a colonial robbery.

If Morocco and the Commission had intended to take into account the reason behind Parliament’s rejection of the fisheries agreement, they would have included in it the need for Morocco to give to the Sahrawi people the revenues coming from the exploitation of their waters. Otherwise they could have excluded from the agreement the waters of Western Sahara, following the example of the US Congress and US Government, which do not include Western Sahara in any economic agreement with Morocco.

None of that has happened. The text of the agreement contains only a generic and hypocritical reporting obligation for the Kingdom of Morocco on respect for human rights in international law. Morocco does not have the slightest credibility in this regard as it continues to practice torture, arbitrary arrest and detention, along with targeted assassination and political persecution in the occupied territories. I reiterate therefore my earlier invitation to vote against this shameful agreement.

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

  Luís Manuel Capoulas Santos (S&D), Pergunta segundo o procedimento "cartão azul". – Eu gostaria apenas de perguntar se o Senhor Arlacchi tem consciência de quem foi a potência que mais inspirou Marrocos para ocupar o território do Sara Ocidental. Causa-me uma enorme admiração quando vejo agora aqui invocar os Estados Unidos como alguém que pratica boas práticas relativamente ao Sara, quando todos sabemos que os Estados Unidos deram luz verde para que Marrocos ocupasse o território.

  Pino Arlacchi (S&D), blue-card answer. – The question has nothing to do with the core subject of this discussion. Even the USA can do something good; what they do is not necessarily wrong. The USA has been a colony of a European power, they rebelled against it, and internationally on this kind of issue they often take exactly this position. They do not endorse colonial occupation and robberies.

  Gesine Meissner (ALDE). - Frau Präsidentin! Es ist vieles gesagt worden, was vollkommen richtig ist. Zum einen ist es richtig, dass dieses Abkommen wirtschaftlich besser ist als das vorherige, das stimmt. Es ist auch so, dass es Arbeitsplätze geben würde in der EU und in Marokko selber, auch in der Westsahara, das stimmt auch. Es gibt im Moment einige Arbeitsplätze für Frauen, zum Beispiel aus der Westsahara, in der Fischerei. Das ist alles richtig.

Ich habe den Minister für Landwirtschaft und Fischerei von Marokko getroffen. Er hat mir versichert, dass die Gelder auch in die Westsahara gehen, dass er dort Fischhallen baut und Ähnliches mehr. Das schien auch glaubhaft. Nur ist doch das Problem dabei, dass tatsächlich das, weswegen wir das damals abgelehnt haben – es ist bereits gesagt worden –, nämlich der völkerrechtliche Status und die Menschenrechte, nach wie vor nicht gelöst ist.

Mir ist vor allen Dingen wirklich angst und bange um den völkerrechtlichen Status. Wenn die USA sagen, sie schließen bei Abkommen mit Marokko immer die Westsahara aus – auch viele andere Länder wie etwa Norwegen –, wie können wir dann sagen, wir tun das nicht? Auch wenn ehemalige Richter der VN, die zuständig sind für das Gebiet, sagen, dieses Abkommen ist nicht in Ordnung, wie können wir, wenn der Juristische Dienst des Parlaments sagt, das ist nicht in Ordnung, dann dafür sein? Es gibt so viele Fragezeichen dabei.

Darum habe ich den Eindruck, wir müssen wirklich sehen, dass das normal verhandelt wird – auch wenn ich weiß, es hat so lange gedauert – mit der Beteiligung der westsaharauischen Bevölkerung. Sonst können wir dem so nicht zustimmen. Es geht einfach gesetzlich nicht.

(Τέλος παρεμβάσεων με τη διαδικασία "catch the eye")

  Maria Damanaki, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, honourable Members, it is obvious that there has been a heated debate and it is obvious that a lot of you have a lot of concerns not about the agreement itself but about the human rights of the Sahrawi people and the people of the Western Sahara in general.

Let me be absolutely blunt about this. This is an agreement which is better than the previous one. I would like to remind you that Parliament did not just reject the previous protocol. Parliament approached the Commission and asked us to negotiate a new protocol. I think that the new protocol covers the concerns of Parliament. Of course it does not answer the concerns of some Members of Parliament about the self-determination of the Western Sahara.

A lot of you have asked me to resolve a political problem. Let me be completely clear here. Our legal service – the Commission’s legal service, Parliament’s legal service, the UN legal service – nobody says that a protocol with Morocco is illegal a priori. Nobody. So I do not understand why you are referring to all of this with such certainty.

I am not a lawyer. I imagine that most of you are not legal specialists either, so we have to see what our legal services say. This is what is said there and I would like to urge you to remember that if this is the path that we are taking, no agreement with Morocco should therefore be supported by Parliament. If you want to solve political problems through a possible agreement, what you are saying is that we should stop the agreements; stop any agreement with Morocco.

All the agreements with Morocco from now on will be somehow related to this issue. So what are we going to do? Perhaps you think that it is better to vote against any agreement. I do not agree with this approach and I have to be completely honest with you. Of course we have to have concerns about human rights but in the meantime we have to consider these concerns in a way which allows us to be very productive and bring about specific results.

In my opinion, this is the best agreement we can have on fisheries – I emphasise fisheries – and I think that all the other concerns can be addressed on other occasions and in other forums.

  Carmen Fraga Estévez, Ponente. − Señora Presidenta, yo vuelvo a insistir en lo que ha dicho la señora Damanaki, lo que ha dicho el señor Milana y lo que han dicho muchos.

En primer lugar, aquí se pidieron y solicitaron unas cosas por parte de este Parlamento que fueron coincidentes —como digo— con el mandato del Consejo. Y esto es lo que la Comisión ha negociado. Desde el punto de vista técnico-pesquero el Acuerdo es impecable, y esta vez este Acuerdo tiene visos, obviamente, de una utilización del cien por cien y con una rentabilidad máxima.

En segundo lugar, el tema de los derechos humanos. Sí, efectivamente ―como han dicho aquí algunos―, la hipocresía de los derechos humanos. A mí me parece muy bien que aquí seamos muy exigentes, pero antes hemos hablado de Mauritania y de otros acuerdos en los que nadie se plantea los derechos humanos.

Yo solamente quiero decir una cosa. La doctrina Corell, que es la doctrina de las Naciones Unidas —porque aquí se ha planteado también el tema de las Naciones Unidas—, que es la que recogen prácticamente tanto los servicios jurídicos de la Comisión como del Parlamento Europeo, dice claramente, en un caso similar, que es la explotación de recursos petrolíferos en aguas del Sáhara Occidental, que Marruecos, como administrador de facto, puede administrar este territorio no autónomo y sus recursos siempre y cuando beneficie a la población. Y, por primera vez en un protocolo de pesca, la Comisión Europea ha negociado los mecanismos y los instrumentos que van a permitir controlar que ese beneficio se produzca en ese territorio. Y es la primera vez ―insisto― que esto se hace.

Más no se puede hacer con un protocolo. Y nosotros, como Parlamento, hemos pedido también poder estar en esas comisiones mixtas donde se tienen que aprobar conjuntamente todos esos proyectos para decir si sí o si no.

A priori, este Protocolo es absolutamente legal. Y con su implementación podremos ver si es beneficioso o no. Los mecanismos existen y el control puede existir. Y, además, existe la cláusula de suspensión del Acuerdo y de la contrapartida financiera si esto no se cumple.

Por tanto, quiero rebatir todo lo que se ha dicho aquí a este respecto. Y digo, una vez más, que este Protocolo, desde el punto de vista técnico-pesquero y desde el punto de vista de los derechos humanos, es impecable. Por tanto ―insisto―, vuelvo a pedir su apoyo.

  Πρόεδρος. - Η συζήτηση έληξε.

Η ψηφοφορία θα διεξαχθεί αύριο Τρίτη 10 Δεκεμβρίου 2013 στις 11.30 το πρωί.

21. Gender aspects of the European framework of national Roma inclusion strategies - Progress made in the implementation of national Roma integration strategies (debate)

  Πρόεδρος. - Το επόμενο σημείο στην ημερήσια διάταξη είναι η κοινή συζήτηση επί:

- της εκθέσεως της κ. Lívia Járóka εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής Δικαιωμάτων των Γυναικών και Ισότητας των Φύλων, σχετικά με τη διάσταση του φύλου στο ευρωπαϊκό πλαίσιο εθνικών στρατηγικών ένταξης των Ρομά [2013/2066(INI)] (Α7-0349/2013).

- της προφορικής ερώτησης του κ. Juan Fernando López Aguilar εκ μέρους της Επιτροπής Πολιτικών Ελευθεριών, Δικαιοσύνης και Εσωτερικών Υποθέσεων, σχετικά με την πρόοδο που σημειώθηκε κατά την υλοποίηση της στρατηγικής των κρατών μελών για την ενσωμάτωση των Ρομά (O-000117/2013 - B7-0528/2013).

  Lívia Járóka, rapporteur. − Madam President, the poverty and social exclusion that directly affects 80 million Europeans is threatening the full range of human rights – not only economic but also social and cultural rights, including the right to an adequate standard of living, the rights to health, housing, food and education, and also civil and political rights.

In addition, over the past five years we have been struggling with a long, drawn-out economic crisis with varying degrees of success. The crisis is having a disproportionate impact on the rights of specific groups of people, particularly those who are increasingly vulnerable because they already suffer from discrimination and social exclusion. Fear and anxiety caused by the economic downturn have generated a spreading wave of racism and xenophobia which is further weakening the protection of the most vulnerable.

First and foremost, it affects the ten million Roma in Europe who are practically detested in national economies and who sink deeper into poverty. After decades of scrambling from one attempt at economic crisis management to the next under successive governments, it became clear that success called for a solution that we embraced throughout the entire continent and across the political divide. Realising that the situation was neither acceptable nor sustainable, the European Parliament was a pioneer in demanding an EU-level response to the situation of Roma which then became a reality under the Hungarian Presidency of the EU in the form of an EU framework for national Roma inclusion strategies.

But the first phase of the framework implementation has already revealed some significant flaws which I address in both my report for the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality and in the resolution for the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. I believe that policy-makers should act in five ways to rule out the major risks which we already see: first, national strategies must be brought closer to reality. This would mean that we would have to draw – the Commission has to draw – a flowchart of the EU Roma inclusion process in order to clarify the state of play as regards implementation and the next steps to be taken as well as to clarify specifically the division of tasks and responsibilities among the stakeholders. At this moment we do not yet know who is responsible for the failure or the success of the Roma strategy.

It would further imply developing a dashboard of EU Roma inclusion indicators adding outcome indicators, baselines, and numerical headline targets to national strategies. This also requires that Member States allocate enough financial access to fulfil their policy commitments. In many national action plans this is missing; as is a reflection of the national Roma inclusion strategies in their national budgetary policies.

You need to know that we found that over the last twenty years, according to studies in several Member States, only 10% of the money spent on Roma projects has actually reached the Roma.

Second, national strategies must be brought closer to the Roma themselves. It means that Roma organisations must be strengthened and there needs to be a proper framework consultation, not just platform-based peer learning and the sharing of experiences among policy-makers and Roma organisations. Also, Roma NGOs must be strengthened because we need authentic, independent and highly educated Roma leaders who actively lead the public discourse on Roma and who put community building and social acceptance at the forefront and above the interests of their sponsors.

Third, national strategies must better target the Roma. This means taking into account the multi-dimensional and territorial aspects of poverty and launching integrated, multi-sector development programmes for the most deprived micro-regions by mobilising all available CSF funds and other EU instruments because we have learned that the Member States have not been using them over the past few years.

Fourth, national strategies must protect Roma; they must go hand-in-hand with the anti-discrimination measures that the Commission has already introduced and they have to be much better used.

Fifth, we also have to bring the Balkans into this strategy. From the outset we said that we would like to see the accession countries included in this dossier from the very beginning. What we see is that the successful social and economic inclusion of the Roma can only be achieved if we make sure that this risk of failure does arise.

  Kinga Göncz, szerző. − Fontosnak tartjuk ezt a vitát és azt, hogy még a parlamenti ciklus lezárása előtt megszülessen egy határozat a romaintegrációval kapcsolatban. Üdvözöljük a tanácsi javaslatokat is, amelyek sok ponton ugyanazt hangsúlyozzák, amit a mi tervezetünk is. Ennek a ciklusnak fontos eredménye az európai keretstratégia és az, hogy minden tagállam elkészítette a saját nemzeti stratégiáját, de ezzel többé-kevésbé véget is ért a pozitív dolgok felsorolása.

A nemzeti stratégiák nagyrészt papíron maradtak. Nem fogalmaznak meg akciótervet, nem rendelnek hozzá költségvetési forrásokat, sőt pont azokban a tagállamokban késik az uniós források felhasználása, amelyekben a legnagyobb szükség lenne rájuk a romaintegrációhoz. Változatlan a települési és iskolai szegregáció, sőt sok helyen romlik a helyzet. Nemcsak a nemzeti, hanem a helyi szinteken is hiányzik a politikai akarat az integrációt segítő programokhoz.

Európa szégyene, hogy az emberi jogokra épülő térség közepén több millió ember él harmadik világbeli körülmények között.

Ha a romák elhagyják a hazájukat, azt nem csak a szegénység miatt teszik, hanem elsősorban a fokozódó cigányellenesség, a diszkrimináció, a gyűlöletbeszéd és gyűlölet-bűncselekmények miatt. A régi tagországokban sem jobb a helyzetük. A kirekesztés, jogellenes kitoloncolás, kilakoltatás napi gyakorlat. A romákat európai állampolgárokként ugyanúgy megilleti a szabad mozgás joga, mint bárki mást. Ha eredményeket akarunk elérni, egyszerre kell kezelnünk – komplex programok formájában – a  diszkriminációt, az oktatási és munkaerő-piaci hátrányokat és megteremtenünk a megfelelő lakhatási körülményeket, az egészségügyi szolgáltatásokhoz való hozzáférést. A demokratikus politikai pártoknak egyértelműen el kell határolódniuk a szélsőjobb kirekesztő, gyűlöletkeltő megnyilvánulásaitól.

A Bizottságnak is egyértelmű lépéseket kell tennie: követnie kell, hogy a tagállamok valóban átültették-e és alkalmazzák-e a faji egyenlőségi irányelvet, tekintettel vannak-e a szabad mozgás és letelepedés jogára, a diszkrimináció-mentesség jogára. Ha nem, kötelezettségszegési eljárást kell indítania.

A tagállamoknak érdemi párbeszédre kell törekedniük a romák képviselőivel, és el kell fogadtatniuk a nem roma lakossággal a romaintegráció fontosságát. A nemzeti kapcsolattartó pontokat valódi befolyással rendelkező intézményekké kell tenniük. Ügyelniük kell arra, hogy szakpolitikai döntések ne ássák alá a romastratégiában foglaltakat, és az EU források felhasználására kiírt operatív programok támogassák ezeket a célokat. Tagállami felelősség az intézményi diszkrimináció megszüntetése is.

Azt tudjuk, hogy rossz a helyzet, de pontos adatokra van szükségünk ahhoz, hogy lássuk, hol van a legnagyobb szükség a beavatkozásra. Az adatgyűjtést, monitoringot nem lehet teljes egészében a tagállamokra bízni. Szükség van civil monitoringra, ezért javasoltuk a következő évi költségvetésbe kísérleti projektként a romaszervezetek kapacitásépítését.

Ahhoz, hogy az EU értőbb módon tudjon lépni a romaintegráció területén, szüksége van jól képzett fiatal roma értelmiségiekre és speciális programokkal kell támogatnia a képzésüket. Elengedhetetlen, hogy a Bizottság főigazgatóságain legyenek roma munkatársak. Ennek előkészítéseként kell lennie a Bizottságban is egy roma gyakornoki programnak. Ezen a területen az S&D frakció példát mutat a saját roma gyakornoki programjával. Fontosnak tartjuk, hogy az Erasmus Plus és a Kreatív Európa program is kiemelt figyelmet szentel annak, hogy romák is legyenek a kedvezményezettek között. Az ESZA pedig prioritásként kezeli a szegénység csökkentést, a romaintegrációt. Csak mindezeket figyelembe véve, összehangolt erőfeszítésekkel, egyértelmű tagállami és helyi politikai akarat mellett tudunk majd eredményeket elérni néhány éven belül.

  Maria Damanaki, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, I would like to thank Parliament for debating Roma inclusion strategies today.

Also, on behalf of my colleague Commissioner Reding, I am very proud to announce that the Council adopted today, with unanimity, the first European legal text on Roma inclusion – the recommendation on effective Roma integration measures in the Member States. This is a big achievement. It means that the need to act in a coordinated way has finally been widely recognised by all Member States.

So this is a success for the Commission, which put this proposal on the table, but it is also a success for the European Parliament, which has always been very supportive of an EU approach to Roma inclusion. It is also a signal of hope for the Roma population everywhere in Europe. The European Parliament now needs to give its consent to the text and I am sure that it will do that swiftly.

This Council recommendation is the first legal instrument within the European framework for national Roma integration strategies. It strengthens the European framework by providing guidance to Member States in the four key areas of education, employment, housing and health. It also calls on Member States to take effective measures to combat anti-Roma rhetoric and to better inform the Roma about their rights and civic duties.

Member States are also encouraged to better support local and regional authorities, to facilitate transnational cooperation at all levels and to pay particular attention to the protection of children and women.

In this context, I would like to thank Ms Járóka for taking up gender aspects in the national Roma integration strategies. The Commission considers gender equality to be a principle to be applied in all policy fields. The Commission is well aware that Roma women are particularly vulnerable. Very often they are denied a fair chance on the labour market, equal access to education, healthcare and decent housing. Some are victims of violence and exploitation, even within their own communities. This is why the situation of Roma women is flagged up as being one of the cross-cutting issues in the Council recommendation.

The European Commission has tried hard to ensure that European structural funds will be mobilised to boost national efforts to improve the social and economic situation of vulnerable groups, but Member States are unfortunately not yet making the best possible use of them. Negotiations on the partnership agreements and operational programmes on the use of European structural and investment funds for the period 2014 until 2020 are still ongoing.

In this context, the Commission is particularly vigilant and recommends that Member States include Roma integration as a priority. The Commission has also set up a network of national Roma contact points in all EU Member States. This network is proving to be very useful for the exchange of best practices and peer review of the implementation of the national strategies.

In addition, the Commission is in permanent contact with the Member States, Roma civil society and all the stakeholders involved in the process of Roma integration. National reform programmes under the Europe 2020 Strategy are also being scrutinised for coherence with national Roma integration strategies. Where appropriate, reference to Roma integration is made in the country-specific recommendations. Hence, in 2013, the Commission issued country-specific recommendations on the Roma to five Member States.

Finally, the Commission’s enlargement strategy highlights the precarious situation of many Roma in the Western Balkans. The Commission is helping the enlargement countries to support integration of Roma through the instrument of pre-accession assistance. The Commission is currently implementing or planning projects with a total value of more than EUR 50 million that could benefit the Roma communities. The Commission will continue to monitor the progress and implementation of the national strategies and report on its findings.

On 4 April 2014 we will hold a European Roma Summit in Brussels. Roma integration must remain a European priority. It is one of the great challenges of our time. It puts our spiritual strength and Europe’s cohesion to the test, so we have to do our very best to ensure good results.

  Edit Bauer, A Foglalkoztatási és Szociális Bizottság véleményének előadója. − Kedves Biztos Asszony! A roma nők helyzetével kapcsolatban szeretném kiemelni a Foglalkoztatási és Szociális Bizottság véleményéből azt a megállapítást, hogy a roma nők jelenléte a munkaerőpiacon rendkívül alacsony. Véleményünk szerint a szegénység csapdájából a munkából származó jövedelem nélkül pedig csaknem lehetetlen kitörni. A diszkrimináción és az általánosan magas munkanélküliségen túl fokozott figyelmet kell fordítanunk a foglalkoztathatóság kérdésére. A roma nők csupán 68%-a írástudó, 36%-a pedig iskolába se járt, ebből kifolyólag az alulképzettség súlyos és behozhatatlan hátrányt jelent számukra a munkaerőpiacon. A helyzet kulcsát az oktatásügyben kell tehát keresni. A roma fiatalok, a roma lányok munkanélküliségén ugyanis még a „Youth Guarantee” sem tud segíteni. Sem az élethosszig tartó tanulás, sem az átképzés nem hoz eredményt, ha nincs hozzá megfelelő alap. A tagállamok felelőssége ezen a területen vitathatatlan, és bármennyire nagyszerűek is lehetnek az épp elfogadott tanácsi ajánlások, nem helyettesíthetik a tagállamok aktivitását és tennivalóját a romastratégia megvalósításában. Ez pedig sürgős tennivaló.

  Csaba Sógor, a PPE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Mindannyian tudjuk, hogy a nemzeti romaintegrációs stratégiák végrehajtása terén komoly hiányosságok vannak az Unió tagállamaiban. A kérdés itt és most az, hogy komolyan veszik-e a tagállamok a romák helyzetének javítására irányuló erőfeszítéseket, ennek érdekében pedig készek-e egy hosszú folyamat kezdeti lépéseinek megtételére. Pozitív változás rövid távon nagyon nehezen remélhető, ám a későbbi sikerek alapjait most kellene lefektetni. A problémák hatékony kezeléséhez a pénz csak az egyik fontos tényező: nagyon sokszor azt látjuk, hogy a rendelkezésre álló pénzalapok nem jutnak el a kedvezményezettekhez, továbbá a programok monitoringja során komoly rendellenességeket tapasztalunk. Fontos szempont az is, hogy az egyes tagállamok földrajzilag kiegyensúlyozottan kezeljék a kérdést: nem lehet csupán a nagyvárosok peremkerületeiben koncentrálódó közösségekre összpontosítani, a vidéki környezetben élő romák problémáira is megoldásokat kell keresni. Egészen konkrétan olyan elképesztő meglátásokkal is találkozhat az ember, miszerint Romániában az ország nyugati és központi területeire ebből a szempontból nem szükséges figyelni, hiszen az igazi problémák délen és keleten vannak. Határozottan ki kell mondanunk, hogy ez nem így van. Románia esetében az ország egész területén élnek roma közösségek és sajnos hasonlóan nehéz szociális körülmények között. A Bizottságra fontos szerep hárul a stratégiák életbe ültetése során, hiszen a roma közösségek helyzetének javítása közös felelősségünk, európai ügy, amelyet nem lehet csupán néhány tagállam feladataként felfogni.

  Minodora Cliveti, în numele grupului S&D. – Doamnă președintă, strategia europeană de integrare a romilor a fost elaborată în 2011, urmată de rapoartele naționale în 2012 și de un prim raport al Comisiei Europene și al Consiliului din 2013. Aceste demersuri creează o bază solidă în procesul de soluționare a problemelor romilor. Constat, însă, insuficiența abordării de gen, ceea ce înseamnă că este nevoie de accentuarea analizei în această direcție, ceea ce își propune practic raportul pe care urmează să îl votăm mâine.

Este știut că femeile rome trăiesc într-o societate profund patriarhală, tradiționalistă, în care dependența economică, violența în familie, accesul redus la educație, căsătoriile și sarcinile timpurii au consecințe asupra sănătății, realizării personale și statutului lor social. Strategia europeană de integrare a romilor trebuie să trateze separat problema integrării femeilor rome, ceea ce poate diminua discriminarea generală a acestora, ca și pe aceea din propria lor comunitate.

În viziunea mea, strategia trebuie să pună accentul pe colaborare între statele membre, pentru evitarea tensiunilor, schimburi de bune practici și soluții transfrontaliere, dată fiind tradiționala mobilitate a acestor etnici și să prevadă, de asemenea, măsuri concrete de implicare a organizațiilor non-guvernamentale, dar și a etnicilor înșiși în rezolvarea acestei complexe probleme europene care este integrarea europeană a romilor.

(Vorbitorul a acceptat să răspundă unei întrebări adresate în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru” [articolul 149 alineatul (8) din Regulamentul de procedură])

  Димитър Стоянов (NI), въпрос, зададен чрез вдигане на синя карта. – Г-жо Председател, г-жо Кливети, във връзка с това, което казахте за патриархалността на циганското общество и че една от основните причини младите момичета да не посещават или да бъдат спирани от училище, е упражнявано физическо или психическо насилие основно от страна на техните родители или принудителното им вкарване в брак, смятате ли, че една подходяща специална мярка, както казахте Вие, би била, например, ускорена процедура за отнемане на родителски права, когато родителите не допускат деца до училище, и то говоря универсално, не само за циганския случай?

  Minodora Cliveti (S&D), Răspuns la o întrebare adresată în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru”. – Este o problemă delicată. De altfel, în România au existat nenumărate măsuri concrete prin care asemenea căsătorii timpurii practic nu sunt legale. Se vorbește despre logodnă, se vorbește despre alte asemenea măsuri, dar este foarte adevărat că, având în vedere interesul superior al copilului, în țara mea asemenea căsătorii nu sunt permise. Asta înseamnă că legislația, practic, corespunde celei europene.

Problema este că trebuie să cunoaștem foarte bine aceste tradiții, pentru că ele există. Trebuie să încercăm, prin educație, așa cum s-a mai spus aici, mai ales, să determinăm schimbări în cadrul comunității, ceea ce, practic, duce la ideea aceasta de comunicare, de discuție cu acești etnici.

  Cecilia Wikström, för ALDE-gruppen. – Fru talman! Fortfarande tvingas vi konstatera att den romska minoriteten lever i en hårdare och svårare verklighet än alla vi andra EU-medborgare.

De är idag Europas mest utsatta minoritet och övergreppen tycks aldrig avta. Nyligen blev detta tydligt också i mitt hemland Sverige när man avslöjade att polisen haft omfattande registrering över romer. Registren innehöll ostraffade människor, även avlidna och barn under två års ålder. Oanständigt är bara förnamnet!

De nationella strategier som har antagits ger inte tillräckliga resultat och de pengar som har anslagits har inte kommit romerna till del som de skulle. Därför uppmanar jag kommissionen att upprätta en övervakningsmekanism i alla medlemsländer när det gäller att säkerställa romers fundamentala rättigheter.

I dag kom Eurobarometern som redovisar medborgarnas prioriteringar. Man har gjort undersökningen i alla medlemsländer, och det man prioriterar främst som den primära uppgiften för EU och EU:s institutioner är säkerställandet av de mänskliga rättigheterna. Därefter kommer solidaritet och lika rättigheter.

Nu är det dags att alla EU:s institutioner levererar detta som medborgarna prioriterar och ber om. I dagens EU ska alla ha samma möjligheter till skolgång, ekonomiska och sociala rättigheter, fri rörlighet och tillgång till sjukvård. Nu måste vi intensifiera samarbetet och visa en politisk vilja att komma tillrätta med dessa problem. Och det är nu!

  Hélène Flautre, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Madame la Présidente, d'autres collègues ont dit à quel point nous avions, pendant cette législature, travaillé sur l'enjeu, important pour l'Europe et son avenir ainsi que pour sa crédibilité, de l'inclusion des Roms.

J'ai compté pas moins de 75 résolutions, dont 3 spécifiques sur les Roms, adoptées durant cette législature. Puis, surtout il y a ce cadre européen stratégique et les plans d'action nationaux. Alors que faire de plus? Que faire d'autre?

La banalisation des discours populistes, discriminatoires et racistes n'est pas enrayée et on assiste encore trop souvent, comme dans mon État membre par exemple, à des évacuations sans que des solutions de relogement dignes et durables ne soient proposées, ce qui crée des situations humanitaires, voire sanitaires, qui deviennent absolument catastrophiques.

Il y a la question des Fonds structurels qui sont attribués mais qui sont mal dépensés, voire pas dépensés du tout, et que les pouvoirs locaux ne s'approprient pas. Il faut obtenir, et notre résolution le demande, que le Conseil adopte les recommandations proposées par la Commission depuis juin dernier. Mais il y a aussi, à mon sens, pour la Commission européenne la nécessité de montrer sa détermination à activer les procédures d'infraction dès que les directives en matière de non-discrimination ou celles en matière de liberté de circulation ne sont pas mises en œuvre, voire sont directement violées dans les États membres. Il y a la carotte des Fonds structurels, il faut le bâton des procédures d'infraction.

Puis, il faut aussi valoriser toutes les initiatives de terrain qui fonctionnent, parce qu'il y en a et il y en a beaucoup. Il faut les valoriser et voir quels sont les ingrédients. Dans ces ingrédients, bien sûr, il y aura une volonté politique locale, mais il y aura, aussi et toujours, la participation des populations à la recherche des solutions.

C'est là une voie que nous pourrions encore améliorer au cours de la prochaine législature.

  Cornelia Ernst, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, meine Damen und Herren! Das Europäische Roma-Informationsbüro ERIO veröffentlichte eine Publikation, die Diskriminierung von Roma aus nur drei Monaten 2013 dokumentiert.

Darin zeigt sich, dass vor allem lokale und nationale Behörden – ja sogar Minister – unmittelbar selbst Diskriminierung von Roma vornehmen bzw. diese tolerieren. Wie in Tschechien, wo in Budweis für die Rechte anständiger Bürger – tschechischer Bürger natürlich – und mit Hitler-Gruß unter dem Schutz der Polizei gegen Roma demonstriert wurde.

Wie in Frankreich, wo der Bürgermeister der Stadt Cholet öffentlich verkündete, dass Hitler nicht genug Roma getötet habe, und der französische Innenminister davon spricht, das Roma-Problem müsse man mit Abschiebung lösen. Oder im ungarischen Ózd, wo den Roma das Wasser abgedreht wurde, weil sie sowieso nur Missbrauch damit trieben.

Das Gleiche tat man im italienischen Torino. In den Niederlanden haben Behörden Roma-Familien in Container ausgesourct, damit man sie aus der Stadt Amsterdam loswird. In Rumänien wurden in Baia Mare 15 Roma auf die Straße gesetzt und die Sonderbeschulung von Roma-Kindern eisern durch die Regierung verteidigt.

In der Kulturhauptstadt Košice wurde eine Mauer – im Übrigen die 14. – zur Abtrennung von Roma gebaut. Ich will nur sagen: Es ist fünf Minuten vor zwölf, und wir sollten nicht reden, sondern handeln, und da erwarte ich, dass es Vertragsverletzungsverfahren gegen diese Mitgliedstaaten gibt. Uns nützen keine Mitteilungen – da können wir noch so viele beschließen – wenn man den Rassismus nicht aktiv bekämpft.

  Claudio Morganti, a nome del gruppo EFD. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, proprio oggi la Corte d'appello di Milano ha quasi dimezzato la condanna prevista per un giovane rom che, ancora minorenne, nel gennaio 2012 a bordo di un SUV aveva travolto e ucciso un agente di polizia locale a Milano, trascinando il corpo del povero vigile per oltre duecento metri.

Al ragazzo sono state concesse dai giudici le attenuanti sulla base del contesto di vita familiare nel quale è cresciuto, caratterizzato dalla commissione di illeciti da parte degli adulti di riferimento e dalla totale assenza di scolarizzazione. E così, tra meno di tre anni, questo assassino potrebbe essere di nuovo in libertà.

Tutto ciò accade perché in Italia – anche qui in Europa – esiste un sistema che tutela in maniera scandalosa i rom, con finto buonismo, per cui diventa impossibile criticare queste persone e anzi bisogna difenderle e tutelarle sempre di più. La gente è stanca di questa discriminazione al contrario ed è ora di finirla di essere compiacenti con i rom, perché poi si ottiene l'effetto contrario, aumentando cioè l'odio reciproco e il razzismo.

In questa relazione si parla di agevolazione nell'istruzione e nel lavoro. Vorrei dire che in Italia la scuola è pubblica e aperta a tutti e se i bambini rom non ci vanno è perché le loro famiglie preferiscono utilizzarli per furti e accattonaggio, attività sicuramente più redditizie. In teoria i rom sono individui come tutti gli altri, sebbene con delle predisposizioni particolari a delinquere, che noi tutti conosciamo. Non vedo quindi perché debbano essere così sostenuti e tutelati in maniera particolare e sicuramente vergognosa.

PŘEDSEDNICTVÍ: PAN OLDŘICH VLASÁK
místopředseda

  Димитър Стоянов (NI). - Г-н Председател, обърнете внимание на параграф 65 от доклада, защото преди седем години аз написах на докладчика Ярока едно отворено писмо, което предизвика доста остра и критична реакция. Много интересно е, че това, което Вие тогава нарекохте расизъм, сега г-жа Ярока е написала, или поне неговата квинтесенция, в своя доклад. Благодаря Ви, г-жо докладчик, че сте ме цитирали в този доклад.

Как може да е различно? Нима, когато едно човешко същество преминава от зависимост от един човек в зависимост от друг човек срещу пари, това не се нарича „робство“? Нима робството може да бъде толерирано и може да бъде наричано „малцинствена традиция“? Нима, когато има съвкупление с малолетен, това не се нарича „педофилия“? Може ли педофилията да бъде толерирана и наричана малцинствена традиция?

Не, не може и аз се радвам, че г-жа Ярока е написала все пак в нейния доклад, сред многото други неверни неща в него, че това не може да е така.

Решението на проблема е само едно – точно както всички други народи, които са страдали от подобни варварски традиции в миналото, сами са се освободили от тях, единствено и само циганската общност може сама да загърби това свое варварско настояще в бъдещето.

  Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, on entend des choses étonnantes dans cet hémicycle.

Le problème de l'intégration des Roms en Europe ne relève pas simplement – je crois que cela a été dit – du montant des fonds européens disponibles. Outre le FSE, le Parlement a autorisé, depuis 2009, le financement de logements pour les communautés marginalisées au titre du FEDER. Or, cette possibilité – cela a été dit aussi – n'a presque pas été utilisée.

La Commission européenne le dit dans ses recommandations au Conseil de juin dernier: la solution nécessite, je cite, un "changement de mentalité dans la population majoritaire comme chez les membres des communautés roms". Ainsi, nous devons travailler sur deux tableaux: réduire les discriminations dont font l'objet les Roms, mais également changer les mentalités de ces communautés en les responsabilisant.

Le rapport de Lívia Járóka donne un exemple: les femmes roms sont soumises à des traditions patriarcales et machistes qui les empêchent d'exercer leur libre choix, ce qui freine leur intégration. Nous devons être conscients que la mobilité des roms est économique et non culturelle. C'est parce que leur intégration est très difficile dans leur pays d'origine que les Roms cherchent un meilleur avenir dans d'autres pays européens.

Nous devons agir. Les priorités sont connues: accès à l'éducation, à l'emploi, à la santé et au logement, lutte contre les discriminations, responsabilisation des individus, ainsi que protection des femmes et des enfants. Mme la commissaire a parlé d'efficacité. Nous verrons! Maintenant, reste à savoir si les États membres, derrière leurs discours, ont la volonté politique de mettre en place de véritables stratégies d'intégration grâce, notamment, aux fonds européens.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D) - Neviem už ani koľký krát za desať rokov hovoríme o riešení problematiky Rómov, o rómskej stratégii. Najprv kritika smerovala k štátom ako bolo Maďarsko, Slovensko, neskôr k Rumunsku a Bulharsku, a dnes, po desiatich rokoch, keď sa situácia zmenila v tom, že tí takzvaní neprispôsobiví Rómovia začínajú využívať voľný pohyb osôb, prichádza k novému poňatiu tejto situácie aj v takých krajinách ako je Taliansko, Francúzsko či Veľká Británia.

Smeruje to k tomu, že vo Francúzsku sa búrajú chatrče a deportujú sa Rómovia z Rumunska a z Bulharska, a my sa tu vždy zídeme dvakrát do roka, ešte prípadne usporiadame nejakú konferenciu a tam diskutujeme o tom, čo robiť s tým, aby sa situácia Rómov zlepšila.

Ja som v Európskom parlamente od roku 2010 a o tomto sa bavíme desať rokov. Je viac ako evidentné, že sme sa nikam za týchto desať rokov neposunuli. Peniaze zo štrukturálnych fondov sú vykrádané alebo veľká časť z nich je vykrádaná. A práve na to vykrádanie týchto peňazí sú využívaní tí najchudobnejší Rómovia v osadách.

Sú vymýšľané projekty, na ktoré tie peniaze nikdy nejdú. Tým Rómom to nijako nepomôže. Títo Rómovia potom aj na základe úžery a takéhoto konania páchajú trestnú činnosť a nielen oni, ale aj ich deti.

Ak chceme naozaj riešiť problém Rómov v Európe, tak si tu začnime hovoriť pravdu a prestaňme sa tváriť, že to vyrieši konferencia v Bruseli alebo v nejakom päťhviezdičkovom hoteli. Poďme do tých osád, kde boli realizované úspešné projekty, ale nediskutujme o tom stále len v inštitúciách Únie.

  Hélène Flautre (Verts/ALE). - Monsieur le Président, ce n'est pas une carte bleue, c'est un point à l'ordre du jour.

Nous venons d'entendre, au cours de ce débat des propos ostensiblement haineux et racistes, notamment du groupe EFD. Ce n'est pas la première fois que cela arrive. Lors de notre débat en octobre dernier, la commissaire, Mme Reding, avait déploré et avait dit sa honte d'avoir à écouter certains propos au sein de cet hémicycle.

Je crois qu'il est absolument nécessaire que cette question soit transmise à la Conférence des présidents et que le Président du Parlement européen nous propose des suites à donner à ces propos qui sont tenus dans notre hémicycle.

  President. − We will refer the matter to the relevant authority.

Catch-the-eye procedure

  Anna Záborská (PPE) - V boji proti chudobe hrajú ženy kľúčovú úlohu. To platí o Rómoch rovnako ako o ostatných národoch Európy.

Len žena sa môže stať matkou a dať nový život. Aj preto sú ženy najviac vystavené riziku extrémnej chudoby. Podporujem preto všetky snahy o odstránenie diskriminácie žien. Každý človek, žena aj muž musí mať rovnakú možnosť rozhodovať o svojom živote. Táto sloboda však nezahŕňa právo ukončiť ľudský život. Navyše kompetencie v oblasti interrupcií majú len členské štáty, nie Európsky parlament.

Skutočne neviem, prečo sa táto problematika musí dostať do každej správy. Problémom rómskeho etnika nie sú počaté deti, ale desaťročia štátnej intervencie. Tá vždy vedie k strate zodpovednosti. Návrat k schopnosti postarať sa o seba a vlastnú rodinu nevedie cez reprodukčné práva, ale cez solidaritu, vzdelanie a ponuku príležitostí.

  Sandra Petrović Jakovina (S&D). - Gospodine predsjedniče, u okviru razmatranja ovog pitanja ne možemo zaobići temu ograničenja slobode kretanja građana unutar Europske unije. Pravo na slobodno kretanje je temeljno pravo koje proizlazi iz pripadnosti Europskoj uniji.

Otvaranje tržišta rada tiče se socijalnih integracija. U mnogim zemljama postoje problemi s integracijom Roma koji su nomadskog duha i kulture i putuju iz jedne zemlje u drugu. Njima se mora omogućiti da zadrže svoju slobodu koja proizlazi i njihove mobilnosti.

Također, Romi ne napuštaju vlastitu zemlju zbog siromaštva, već zbog diskriminacije i govora mržnje, te je iz tog razloga potrebna snažna politička volja na europskoj i nacionalnoj razini, veći angažman lokalnih vlasti i veća socijalna uključivost svih građana.

Europska unija opet ima vrlo visoku nezaposlenost i teško je integrirati mlade ljude na tržište rada, pa ne čudi da je teško integrirati i Rome. Pritom je obrazovanje Romske djece ključno za njihovu integraciju. Dopustite mi spomenuti jedan pozitivni primjer uključenosti: Mlade žene Romkinje moje zemlje, Nure Ismailovski, koja je sa liste socijaldemokrata 2009. bila izabrana u Gradsku skupštinu grada Zagreba, predstavničko tijelo glavnog hrvatskog grada, i svojim izuzetnim doprinosom i zalaganjem ostavila duboki trag (Predsjednik je prekinuo govornika).

  Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL). - Mr President, let me start by quoting Malcolm X: ‘I believe in human beings, and that all human beings should be respected as such, regardless of their colour’. That is not one of Malcolm X’s most radical quotes. However, despite the rhetoric of the establishment, it is clear that they – and some people in this Chamber – struggle with that idea, especially when it comes to Roma people.

This crisis has seen an increase in racism and xenophobia against Roma and other minorities as politicians attempt to scapegoat them to deflect attention away from their own austerity policies.

Last month a young Roma girl in Dublin was taken away from her parents by the police. Why? Because she was presumed to have been the victim of abduction simply on the basis of the colour of her hair. This racial profiling and state racism cannot be accepted. An independent inquiry is needed immediately. In France, when a Roma child was taken from a school bus by police and deported, school students all over France marched in protest. They knew instinctively how to respond to blatant discrimination. We need more than resolutions. We need a struggle to root out a system that has racism at its core.

  Franz Obermayr (NI). - Herr Präsident! Man muss das Thema aus der Sicht der Betroffenen sehen – nämlich aus der Sicht der Roma auf der einen Seite, aber andererseits aus der Sicht der betroffenen Bewohner von westeuropäischen Kommunen, die wegen der Zuwanderung am Rande der Verzweiflung sind. Mit Sprüchen, die ich heute höre, von Fremdenfeindlichkeit und Rassismus, wenn jemand eine Kritik wagt, kann man keine sachliche Diskussion führen.

Es ist eine Tatsache, dass es eine starke Binnenzuwanderung in unsere Sozialsysteme gibt in einer Form, die bisher in der EU nicht bekannt war. Englische, deutsche, österreichische Kommunen leiden sicherlich in jeder Hinsicht unter dieser Last. Man muss auch heute festhalten: Es gibt auf der eine Seite bei den Roma bittere Armut, aber auf der anderen Seite gibt es dort protzige Clanchefs, die in Schlössern in Rumänien und Bulgarien wie Könige leben.

Wenn wir helfen wollen, dann wird Geld alleine nicht ausreichen. Wir müssen daher vor allem die Roma-Clans in die Pflicht nehmen. Wir müssen deren Bereitschaft zur Kooperation einfordern. Sonst kommen wieder vor allem nur die Frauen und Kinder, die Betroffenen, aus diesem Teufelskreis aus sozialer Armut und Kriminalität nicht heraus.

(Der Redner ist bereit, eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ gemäß Artikel 149 Absatz 8 der Geschäftsordnung zu beantworten.)

  William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFD), blue-card question. – Would Mr Obermayr agree that the free movement of people in Article 6 is becoming unworkable, if indeed it is not unworkable already?

  Franz Obermayr (NI), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Ich danke für diese Frage. Ich glaube, das kann man nicht so einfach und undifferenziert sehen. Natürlich ist die freie Mobilität eine wesentliche Errungenschaft. Aber die freie Mobilität hat sicherlich auch dann da und dort Grenzen, wo sie zu einer Belastung der angestammten Bevölkerung wird. Hier muss man einen Ausgleich finden. Der Ausgleich wird eben nicht durch Gerede, nicht durch Vorhalt von Rassismus und Fremdenfeindlichkeitsvorwürfe erledigt, sondern durch kluge Strukturen, wo man eben, wie ich bereits gesagt habe, vor allem die Verantwortlichen, die Hinterleute, die Clanchefs in die Verantwortung nimmt.

  Alajos Mészáros (PPE). - Először is szeretném megköszönni Járóka Lívia képviselő asszonynak a romastratégiában kifejtett eddigi munkáját, amellyel véleményem szerint elévülhetetlen érdemeket szerzett.

A romákkal kapcsolatos kérdésekben országspecifikus stratégiákat kell alkalmazni. A gazdasági válság Szlovákiában is hátrányosan befolyásolta a nők, ezen belül a roma nők helyzetét, ami a foglalkoztatás területén nyilvánul meg leginkább. A roma nők közül kerül ki a legtöbb korai iskolaelhagyó. Sokan serdülőkorukban szülnek gyereket, így kevés az esély arra, hogy továbbtanuljanak. A képzéshiány az egyik fő oka annak, hogy kirekesztődnek a munkaerőpiacról, és gyakran munkakeresés helyett a szociális támogatásoktól remélik a megélhetést. Ez egy ördögi kör. Az ő gyermekiket erőteljesen sújtja a gyermekszegénység. Olyan gyermekgondozási stratégiákat kell kialakítani, amelyek biztosítják a roma gyermekek számára a megfelelő törődést. A roma gyerekek hatékony oktatásának kulcsa a szülői partnerségen alapuló oktatás. A cselekvési tervekben elsősorban a gyermeknevelésre és az oktatásban való részvételre kell hangsúlyt fektetni. Felvilágosító tanfolyamokkal biztosíthatják, hogy a roma nők közösségeik előmozdítói legyenek.

  María Irigoyen Pérez (S&D). - Señor Presidente, la integración de la ciudadanía romaní en los Estados de la Unión requiere, además de voluntad, políticas continuadas e inversión dirigidas a luchar contra la exclusión.

En mi país llevamos muchos años aplicando políticas activas de integración. España es hasta la fecha el país de la Unión que más fondos comunitarios viene destinando a programas orientados en exclusiva a la integración de los gitanos: del Fondo Social Europeo se destinan en el actual período 47 millones de euros.

Frenar el abandono escolar temprano y el absentismo escolar y facilitar el acceso laboral son las prioridades de los retos para los próximos años. Políticas sociales inclusivas, como viviendas sociales o protección por desempleo, han tenido un impacto positivo en la integración.

Tenemos buenos programas y buenos resultados. Aprendamos de ellos, reforcemos el Fondo Social Europeo como el mejor instrumento para reforzar la integración.

  Sari Essayah (PPE). - Arvoisa puhemies, kiitän Lívia Járókaa erinomaisesta mietinnöstä, joka nostaa esille romaniväestön aseman ja erityisesti naisten ja tyttöjen tilanteen. Naisia ja tyttöjä kohtaa helposti niin sanottu kaksoissyrjintä, koska he ovat syrjittyjä paitsi etnisen taustansa myös sukupuolensa takia.

Mietinnössä nostetaan erinomaisesti esille koulutuksen ja terveydenhuollon tärkeys sekä myös sosiaaliset asuntoprojektit, joista esimerkiksi omassa kotimaassani Suomessa saatiin erinomaisia tuloksia 60–70-luvuilla, jolloin niillä pystyttiin integroimaan romaniväestö hyvin kantaväestöön.

Lähtökohtana on kuitenkin se, että henkilöt saavat ehdottomasti itselleen henkilöpaperit, jotta he eivät altistu ihmiskaupalle ja erilaisille mafiajohtoisille kerjäämisorganisaatioille. Tiedän, että on edelleenkin EU-maita, jotka eivät myönnä papereita kaikille romaneille. On myös tärkeätä, että romanit pääsevät itse päättämään omasta, heitä koskevasta politiikastaan eli heidät tulee osallistaa romanipolitiikan tekemiseen.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)

  Maria Damanaki, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, a lot of Members of Parliament have underlined the crucial importance of Member State involvement in the implementation of their national strategies. This is absolutely our number one priority. That is clear. Social inclusion is the responsibility of the Member States. The fact that today the Council adopted by unanimity the first European legal instrument for Roma inclusion is a very strong sign that the willingness is there, so there has been a change. I would like to underline that a lot of you perhaps could not even imagine such a fact four years ago when we started working on a European framework on Roma inclusion. The Commission is there to guide Member States in implementing their national strategies. They need to go local, they need to make full use of European funds, they need to include Roma NGOs and implement all the other good proposals we have already mentioned.

Every year the Commission produces a report to measure progress in each and every Member State. This is our monitoring mechanism. We do more than this. We give recommendations in the country-specific recommendations to the Member States most concerned. All of us would like to see fast progress, so I will work with you and the Commission will work with you. I hope that we will have the time to see this progress throughout next year.

I would also like to refer to the comments I have heard from some of you. Many of you have referred to anti-gypsy demonstrations and we have heard intolerable words in this House again this evening. The Commission would like to once again underline that it strongly condemns all manifestations of racism, xenophobia and intolerance. We are following the situation very closely in all Member States and we have mobilised all the tools available to make it better – expertise and financial and legal instruments. Equal access to education is a known problem in some Member States. Discrimination is prohibited in the European Union. All Member States have transposed into national law the Racial Equality Directive and they have to ensure that this is properly applied. The Commission will report on the application of the directive before the end of the year.

One last comment. I would like to underline that free movement is a pillar of European rights and the Commission, as a guardian of the Treaty, is going to monitor in the best way how Article 6 of the Treaty is implemented. European citizens can move freely and of course we have to respect the right limits that are there. Effective implementation of the Free Movement Directive is necessary. This is the job of the Commission and this is also the job of the Member States. The Commission will give Member States a helping hand. Last week we adopted a five-point action plan to help Member States and in particular local authorities to respond to the challenges that free movement may pose in future in order for Member States to respect their authorities but, at the same time, implement the Treaty and its approaches.

  Lívia Járóka, rapporteur. − Mr President, I would like at this stage to thank all those colleagues who have supported my work in Parliament in the last nine years; we wanted to manage a complete paradigm shift by making Europe understand that inclusion of the Roma is very important for Europe itself. We wanted to show, through the economic and human rights argument that we presented, that the successful social and economic inclusion of Roma, so their figures could approach the regional average, would respond to the demographic challenge of the increasing elderly and decreasing working-age population. This could also trigger substantial economic growth in countries with significant Roma populations.

I turn to the questions that many people raised – usually those people who like to talk in these debates, to get some votes maybe. Those colleagues who have been working on this dossier for a long time however do not just talk about it; they already know that including Roma populations in European societies and economies would make sure that this would, in the meantime, mitigate the influx of their migration driven by material interest.

So, I would like to highlight once again – also thanking the Commission and Parliament, and the Hungarian Presidency as they were the only ones to take this dossier over to the Council – that the only answer to many of the questions talked about today is effective inclusion. Not inclusion only as window-dressing, not inclusion only on paper, but real effective economic inclusion is the only win-win scenario for Europeans and for European citizens who are of Roma origin.

  President. − I have received one motion for a resolution⁽¹⁾ tabled in accordance with Rule 115(1) of the Rules of Procedure.

The joint debate is closed.

The vote on the report by Lívia Járóka will take place on Tuesday, 10 December 2013 and the vote on the motion for a resolution will take place on Thursday, 12 December 2013.

Written statements (Rule 149)

  Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), in writing. – The situation of Roma women is far worse compared to that of men. This is partially due to patriarchal and sexist traditions that prevent women from exercising their freedom of choice on issues concerning their lives. As a result, most Roma women live in greater poverty then men. They face severe exclusion in the field of employment and are hampered by limited education opportunities, inadequate housing, poor healthcare, general marginalisation and discrimination by majority communities. While national reports on implementing the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies (NIRS) still fail to take account of the situation of Roma women, the current report offers important recommendations to remedy these issues. The report stresses the need for Member States to allocate adequate funds to NIRS and further develop plans to provide Roma women with the means to facilitate their access to education, employment, housing, and healthcare. The report further calls on Member States and the Commission to strengthen gender mainstreaming, conduct gender impact assessments, and involve Roma and womenʼs NGOs in the process. Adopting this report is an important step towards helping to improve the social inclusion and integration of the Roma, in particular of Roma girls and women.

  Marian-Jean Marinescu (PPE), în scris. – Ca urmare a slabelor progrese înregistrate de statele membre în implementarea strategiilor naționale de integrare a romilor, rezoluția Parlamentului European din 12 decembrie invită statele membre și Comisia Europeană să creeze un mecanism eficient la nivelul Uniunii Europene, de implementare și evaluare a strategiilor naționale de integrare a romilor.

De asemenea, rezoluția solicită implicarea activă și responsabilizarea persoanelor de etnie romă în cadrul dezvoltării și gestionării strategiilor și politicilor de incluziune a romilor, Comisia având rolul de a institui un mecanism de monitorizare și adoptare a unor măsuri ferme în cazul încălcării drepturilor fundamentale ale romilor.

În procesul de integrare a romilor un rol important îl are educația, astfel încât rezoluția invită statele să faciliteze accesul copiilor de etnie roma la servicii de educație și să asigure infrastructura necesară formării cadrelor didactice cu scopul prevenirii abandonului școlar. Implicarea ONG-urilor în procesul educativ poate asigura accesul persoanelor de etnie romă la programe de mentorat și stagii de pregătire profesională care să permită accesul pe piața muncii. O abordare integrată a utilizării fondurilor europene și naționale, cât și o implicare a societății civile, a autorităților locale și regionale ar asigura succesul strategiilor naționale de integrare a romilor din comunitățile urbane și rurale.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. – Naturgemäß haben sich durch die anhaltende Wirtschaftskrise soziale Spannungen verstärkt. Weitestgehend wird bessere Bildung als Schlüssel für bessere Eingliederung der Roma angesehen. In der Realität allerdings ist die Schulsituation von Roma-Kindern trotz kaum vorhandener Sprachbarrieren oft problematischer als die anderer Schüler mit Migrationshintergrund. Vielfach sind es die typischen Traditionen dieser Gruppen, die einer Besserung der Lebensumstände im Wege stehen. In typischer Gutmenschenmanier wurden über Jahre hinweg Sozialisierungsversuche gestartet, und sie alle scheitern, weil sie vom Gros dieses Nomadenvolkes nicht angenommen werden. Das hat zur Verfestigung von Verhaltensweisen geführt, die sich als oppositionell zur kulturellen Identität der Kultur der dominanten Gruppen verstehen. Die EU hat nach wie vor kein Patentrezept für die ungelösten Fragen rund um die Niederlassung und den Besitz von Personaldokumenten etc. Einmal mehr muss in diesem Zusammenhang klargestellt werden, dass es kein Recht auf Zuzug in die Sozialsysteme gibt. Die EU darf Hilferufe von Gemeinden und Städten, deren Sozialbudgets durch einen wahren Ansturm an Roma bis hin zum finanziellen Kollaps überlastet sind, keinesfalls länger ignorieren.

  Tiziano Motti (PPE), per iscritto. – Non è un caso se questa risoluzione, che ho sostenuto, è iniziativa di una collega del mio stesso Gruppo, il PPE. Ci si aspetterebbe, nell’immaginario collettivo, che i diritti sociali, previdenziali, occupazionali e di genere delle donne Rom, unitamente ad una politica di integrazione più coraggiosa, fossero prerogativa esclusiva di una parte politica di questo Parlamento. Noi del centro destra siamo uniti in questo ambito con i colleghi del centrosinistra, ed oggi ho sostenuto questa risoluzione che vuole integrare, favorire e proteggere il ruolo delle donne Rom. Perché l'integrazione passa attraverso l'ottica del riconoscimento dei diritti promossi dalla UE a tutti i cittadini europei. Garantire anche al ROM accesso al lavoro, alla casa e ad una reale integrazione, significa anche ridurre il fastidioso fenomeno della delinquenza e soprattutto piccola delinquenza troppo spesso associata ad un'etnia, quella Rom, che conta circa 9 milioni di cittadini, Europei a tutti gli effetti e quindi soggetti di diritto e di doveri.

  Josef Weidenholzer (S&D), schriftlich. – Insgesamt gibt es in Europa rund 12 Millionen Roma. Fast 20 Prozent davon geben an, schon körperlichen Übergriffen ausgesetzt gewesen zu sein. Die politischen Entscheidungsträger in den EU-Mitgliedstaaten müssen daher entschlossener gegen weitverbreitete Vorurteile vorgehen. Es ist dringend notwendig, Maßnahmen zu setzen, um diese Bevölkerungsgruppe zu integrieren. Sonntagsreden reichen nicht aus. Es braucht Information, Aufklärung und aktive Handlungen. In Zusammenarbeit mit den Mitgliedstaaten hat die europäische Ebene die Verantwortung dafür, einen effektiven Integrationsprozess umzusetzen. Im Juni 2011 hat die Kommission einen bereits 2008 vom Europäischen Parlament geforderten „EU-Rahmen für nationale Strategien zur Integration der Roma bis 2020“ verabschiedet, der die Mitgliedstaaten auffordert, nationale Integrationsziele in den Bereichen Bildung, Beschäftigung, Gesundheitsfürsorge und Wohnraum für Roma festzulegen. Die EU-Förderung für Roma beträgt für die Periode 2007 bis 2013 rund 350 Mrd. EUR. Viele Mitgliedstaaten nützen diese Förderungen aber nicht aus. Es fehlt an politischem Willen, die gesellschaftliche Inklusion von Roma wirklich voranzutreiben. Die nationalen Eigenbeiträge für solche Projekte werden oft aus innenpolitischen Motiven nicht aufgebracht. Auch die Europäische Kommission versagt oft, wenn es darum geht, Diskriminierung von Roma klar und eindeutig zu verurteilen.

(1) See Minutes.

22. One-minute speeches (Rule 150)

  President. − The next item is the one-minute speeches on matters of political importance (Rule 150).

  Elena Băsescu (PPE). - Domnule președinte, în contextul în care astăzi este ziua internațională anticorupție, atrag atenția că guvernul socialist din România continuă să pună piedici justiției și luptei împotriva corupției. Bugetul pe 2014 aduce scăderi semnificative pentru principalele instituții din domeniul justiției. ANI va pierde 10,3 milioane de lei față de anul acesta, mai exact 34,2%, contrar recomandărilor Comisiei din MCV. Bugetul Ministerului Justiției scade cu 94 de milioane de lei față de anul trecut, iar cel al Ministerului Public scade cu 41 de milioane de lei față de 2013. În plus, guvernul Ponta are un ministru trimis în judecată de DNA și mai mulți deputați și senatori sunt protejați de Parlament prin decizii ale majorității USL.

  Tonino Picula (S&D). - Poštovani gospodine predsjedniče, nedavno sam imao zadovoljstvo ugostiti učenike s hrvatskih otoka Iža, Prvića i Silbe te njihove učitelje. Želio sam najmlađim generacijama približiti rad Europskog parlamenta, ali i ukazati na specifične probleme sredina iz kojih dolaze. Druženjem s uvijek iskrenim i inspirativnim osnovnoškolcima saznao sam još više o problemima koji muče moje male goste i njihove roditelje.

Zato ovim putem skrećem pozornost na neizvjesnosti s kojima se suočavaju zbog depopulacije i mogućih ukidanja područnih škola na otocima, kao i riskantnog prijevoza preko mora, što je svakodnevica neke od ove djece. Utoliko ohrabruje najava resornog ministarstva da će korištenjem suvremenih medija nastojati djeci na otocima omogućiti što kvalitetniji odgoj i obrazovanje, a pri izradi nove mreže osnovnih škola voditi računa o prometnoj povezanosti kako bi se svakom djetetu omogućilo pravo na njihovo pohađanje.

Kao zastupnik u Europskom parlamentu, rođen na otoku i odrastao uz more, svjestan sam vrijednosti ali i težine života na otocima. Depopulacija hrvatskih otoka stvaran je problem kojim se treba ozbiljno posvetiti slijedeći najbolje europske prakse i mogućnosti u ovom području.

  Jelko Kacin (ALDE). - Razmere v Ukrajini in potek dogodkov po odpovedi podpisa sporazuma, množičen odziv državljanov, ki svojo prihodnost vidijo na zahodu, bližje Evropski uniji, je jasno sporočilo, da načela in vrednote zahodne Evrope in EU tam uživajo visoko javno podporo.

Če pogledamo na te procese s strani držav, ki pristopajo, pa moramo izreči občudovanje državljanom, ki dokazujejo, da so aktivni, motivirani, ambiciozni, ko zahtevajo reforme doma in spoštovanje demokracije. Vse to nas opogumlja, zato moramo biti kot celota Evropska unija bolj aktivni in bolj odzivni.

Moramo posredovati jasna in odločna sporočila podpore, zlasti tistim državam Zahodnega Balkana, ki so najbolj aktivne in uspešne v reformah. Odprtje poglavij 23 in 24 v primeru Črne Gore in medvladna konferenca v primeru Srbije so potrebni sedaj,  takoj, decembra, tudi kot potreben, enoznačen in predvsem jasen odziv na razmere v Ukrajini

  Iñaki Irazabalbeitia Fernández (Verts/ALE). - Señor Presidente, señora Comisaria, mañana celebraremos el Día Internacional de los Derechos Humanos.

La defensa de los derechos humanos es uno de los fundamentos de la Unión Europea. El derecho de los ciudadanos a utilizar su propia lengua y a no ser discriminados por ello es parte constituyente de esos derechos, y así está reconocido tanto en la Carta Internacional de Derechos Humanos como en la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea.

Empero, esos derechos lingüísticos no están garantizados en todos los Estados de la Unión.

Pasado mañana se cumplirán tres meses desde que este Parlamento aprobó el informe sobre las lenguas europeas amenazadas de desaparición y la diversidad lingüística en la Unión Europea.

Pedimos a la Comisión y a las otras instituciones de la Unión que hagan suyas las recomendaciones de dicho informe y que desarrollen y hagan desarrollar políticas valientes para garantizar los derechos lingüísticos a la ciudadanía de la Unión. Especialmente, pedimos a la Comisión que recomiende a los Estados miembros que no hayan ratificado la Carta Europea de las Lenguas que la ratifiquen.

La ratificación de la Carta es un mínimo para garantizar la defensa real de los derechos lingüísticos de la ciudadanía.

  Nikola Vuljanić (GUE/NGL). - Gospodine predsjedniče, ekonomska kriza u Europi uporna je i ne da se. Sjeverne zemlje naizgled se oporavljaju, ali i taj oporavak je gotovo pa nezamjetan. Na jugu ni toga nema.

Krizu je, to više nitko ne dvoji, proizveo ovakav kapitalizam kojeg zovemo liberalnim. Kako države članice reagiraju? Tako da pojačavaju instrumente baš tog i takvog kapitalizma, restrikcije svega osim prava na enormnu zaradu.

Liberalizira se tako tržište rada, sva radnička prava, čak i ono prastaro, osam sati rada, osam odmora, osam obrazovanja i slobodnog vremena brišu se u ime konkurentnosti i apstrakcija poput BDP-a, porasta ovog i onog i smanjenja nečeg drugog. Radnike se otpušta po američkom sistemu „you are fired“. Otpuštaju se trudnice, bolesni i slično i to se zove liberalizacijom.

Republika Hrvatska je upravo u postupku donošenja baš takvog zakona. Hoćemo li imati Europu siromašnih ako ovdje to odšutimo?

  Andrew Henry William Brons (NI). - Mr President, some in my country would say that Britain in the EU is not British enough, and they would be right. But I would say that the European Union is not European enough. The immigration policies of Western Member States and the embryonic EU policy have brought third world populations to Europe and have turned parts of Europe into the third world.

Identities are the product of ancestry and history, not of culture or legal contrivance. The EU does not have a European economic protectionist policy. It has a globalist policy designed to move by gradual degrees to a world economy with a common wage level and standard of living.

There are genuine Europhiles, but the Eurocrats are not among them. They are cosmopolitans. Ironically, the main media-created, pretend Eurosceptic party in the UK is in favour of a quarter of a million immigrants each year and embraces globalism and global free trade.

We have all heard of sad instances where children have been injured and sometimes strangled as a result of playing with toys, because of their tendency to put everything in their mouths and to wrap things around themselves. This has led to action at European level, and thankfully that has been quite successful.

The European Union Toy Safety Directive has been very effective. This year 434 products were removed from the market as a result of the Directive and RAPEX, through which the directive is enforced. That is an increase of 26% from last year. We would ask where the toys come from which are defective – and unfortunately about 58% of them come from China. There are moves afoot to try to deal with that bilaterally.

Finally, however, I would like to say that toys from that mass producer from the North Pole who has a beard longer and whiter than mine are fully compliant with the European Toy Directive.

  Traian Ungureanu (PPE). - Mr President, on 1 January 2014, after seven long years, the transitional barriers will be lifted on the labour markets in all Member States. In Britain, a vicious media campaign has created the false expectation of an allied Romanian and Bulgarian invasion. British officials have even hinted that new restrictions could be introduced by Britain. This is simply false and dangerous as it encourages public disapproval of the rights enshrined in the European Treaties. The so-called debate in Britain would be hilarious if it were not shameful, and I regret that this House did not find worthy of debate the implications of the British attitude to the completion of the single market.

  María Irigoyen Pérez (S&D). - Señor Presidente, señora Comisaria, utilizo mi voz para dar la palabra a miles de ciudadanos españoles a los que tratan de silenciar con el proyecto de Ley de seguridad ciudadana del Gobierno del señor Rajoy. Es, sin duda, una deriva autoritaria: la mayoría en las urnas no les faculta para imponer una ley a su antojo. Esta proposición, rechazada por los ciudadanos, jueces, asociaciones de policía y guardia civil, es una ley mordaza que trata de acallar la expresión y la voluntad de la ciudadanía con elevadas multas.

Nada de lo que dijeron que iban a hacer han hecho. Y lo que no dijeron lo han hecho. El uso del miedo es una táctica peligrosa que nos retrotrae a tiempos oscuros de la historia de mi país. El Consejo de Europa ha dado la voz de alarma; la sociedad española, también. Y la Comisaria Malmström, contra el uso de cuchillas en la valla de Melilla. Nunca hasta ahora la joven democracia ha sufrido tan duros y profundos ataques como los actuales.

  Oleg Valjalo (S&D). - Poštovani gospodine predsjedniče, premda je trajni zadatak svih nas u Parlamentu štititi prava svih građanki i građana Europske unije, dobro vam je poznato da naši jednominutni govori daju i priliku i pravo da u određenim trenucima skrenemo pažnju isključivo na našu vlastitu zemlju i osvrnemo se na neku situaciju u njoj, posebice ako želimo upozoriti na određenu političku opasnost ili neku drugu pogubnu prijetnju.

U vezi s tim želio bih, u svijetlu referenduma koji se 1. prosinca ove godine održao u mojoj zemlji, izraziti svoju duboku zabrinutost zbog sve većeg jačanja krajnje radikalnog konzervativizma koji za cilj ima ograničavanje prava određenih društvenih skupina, u konkretnom slučaju, seksualnih manjina. Dijelom je ovo zasigurno posljedica i teške ekonomske krize, ali ipak me silno brinu trendovi koji ukazuju na sve veću nesnošljivost prema nacionalnim manjinama te se sve više i snažnije usmjeravaju prema ograničavanju ustavnih prava spomenutih manjina. Ksenofobiji, antisemitizmu i mržnji bilo koje vrste nije mjesto u civiliziranoj Europi i to se s ovoga mjesta nikada ne smijemo umoriti ponavljajući.

  Marian Harkin (ALDE). - Mr President, I speak this evening in support of my independent colleagues in Dáil Éireann and in support of Irish citizens, with a special mention to ʻBallyhea says NO!ʼ

Tonight I ask the European Central Bank to allow the Irish Central Bank to destroy right now 28 billion in sovereign bonds that were issued in lieu of the promissory note, and all interest payments on those bonds. The promissory note was an IOU given by the Irish people to bail out two insolvent banks in order to prevent contagion in the EU banking system. Ireland put its finger in that particular dyke.

Last February the promissory note transferred back to the Irish Central Bank and we in Ireland are now paying capital and interest to our own Central Bank, and when it is all paid our Central Bank will simply burn that money. It will evaporate. The crisis has cost us 25% of our GDP and four and a half million people have borne 42% of the cost of the banking crisis. We need a deal.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). - Sob os auspícios da União Europeia e do FMI prossegue o programa de destruição e de saque dos recursos nacionais em curso em Portugal. Prossegue a privatização de empresas públicas estratégicas e rentáveis. Depois da EDP, da REN e da ANA chegou agora a vez dos CTT, os Correios de Portugal.

De um dia para o outro uma empresa pública que levou centenas de anos a construir foi alienada em 70%, mais de 40% ao capital estrangeiro. O Estado vê-se assim privado de instrumentos estratégicos para a promoção do desenvolvimento económico e da justiça social, para além de lucros e dividendos futuros a troco de uma receita que não ultrapassa os 2% do montante global da dívida pública, uma dívida que não cessa de aumentar. Mas este roubo ao país e ao seu povo rende muito a alguns, poucos.

Num país empurrado para o empobrecimento coletivo, as 25 maiores empresas, as 25 maiores fortunas, digo, aumentaram 16% num ano e já valem 10% do produto interno bruto. É este o resultado de uma política que semeia a pobreza, destrói a riqueza, mas cria ricos. É a este caminho que temos que pôr fim o quanto antes.

  Corneliu Vadim Tudor (NI). - „Fac apel la Parlamentul European să se implice în instituirea unui control sever al pieței sondajelor de opinie la nivel continental, cu pedepse exemplare pentru infractori. Nu putem vorbi despre democrație și alegeri libere dacă acestea sunt viciate de niște fraude nerușinate.”

Doamnelor și domnilor, am rostit cele două fraze în această aulă la 12 martie 2012. Dar eu am vorbit, eu am auzit. De atunci și până acum au avut loc alegeri parlamentare în țara mea, România, care au fost și ele furate. La 25 mai 2014 se vor desfășura alegeri și pentru Parlamentul European. Nu am nicio îndoială că și acestea vor fi furate. Mecanismul e simplu, ca într-un film cu proști. Serviciile secrete dirijează totul, cu acordul stăpânilor yankei ai coloniei penitenciare numite România, iar ofițerii acoperiți ai acestei noi Securități și-au făcut institute de sondaje mincinoase și posturi de televiziune.

Unii oficiali europeni închid ochii. Ce rost mai au alegerile? Ce eficiență mai are Parlamentul European?

  Gabriel Mato Adrover (PPE). - Señor Presidente, señora Comisaria, es curioso que, con la triste experiencia que acumulan, algún socialista se plantee hoy cuestionar leyes del actual Gobierno de España. Pero yo no voy a hablar de eso.

Yo iba a hablar de que, en la última sesión plenaria, aprobamos el programa Horizonte 2020, en el que se consignan setenta mil doscientos millones de euros para el periodo 2014-2020. Nunca la Unión Europea había destinado tantos recursos a la investigación, al desarrollo y a la innovación, factores clave para el desarrollo de nuestras industrias, el cumplimiento de la agenda digital, la política energética, la reducción de las emisiones y una utilización más eficaz de los recursos.

Mientras esto sucede, en Canarias el Gobierno pretende desmantelar el Instituto Tecnológico de Canarias, un centro de referencia internacional en muchos ámbitos, con más de veinte años de experiencia, que ha contribuido notablemente a las políticas de innovación, con una actividad digna de destacar y que tiene magníficos trabajadores, de una calidad contrastada, que han sido capaces de captar y gestionar fondos europeos, fundamentalmente de la Estrategia Europea de Especialización Inteligente y que hoy, desgraciadamente, ven peligrar sus puestos de trabajo.

  Edit Bauer (PPE). - Elnök Úr, Biztos Asszony! November végén Szlovákiában regionális választások zajlottak, melyek eredményeképp az egyik régió élére egy szélsőséges, xenofób, rasszista, a túlnyomó többség véleménye szerint fasiszta elveket valló elnök került. Ennek a sokkoló ténynek az árnyékában kevés figyelmet kapott az a tény, hogy az ország szocialista miniszterelnöke ahelyett, hogy a szélsőség térnyerése ellen lépett volna fel, a választókat egy másik megyében úgy buzdította, hogy a szlovák szavazók azért menjenek el szavazni, nehogy egy szlovák városban magyar megyefőnök legyen. Az ilyen a kisebbségek elleni diszkriminációra való buzdítás rendkívül veszélyes. Szlovákiában ennek nyomán a magyar kisebbség ellen sorozatos elnyomó intézkedéseket tesz a kormány. A legnagyobb kisebbséget – a magyart – gyakorlatilag kiszorítják a tényleges döntéshozatalból. A kisiskolák megszüntetésére vonatkozó intézkedés a magyarul oktató kisiskolák felének bezárásához vezet. Nagyon kérem biztos asszonyt, hogy figyeljen erre a folyamatra.

  Sergio Gaetano Cofferati (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, qualche giorno fa in un quartiere della città di Prato, nella civilissima Toscana, sette cittadini cinesi sono rimasti uccisi in un incendio e altri due sono rimasti gravemente feriti.

Lavoravano in un'azienda tessile e dormivano nella stessa azienda, lavoravano e vivevano in condizioni disumane: sono lo specchio di un livello alto di rischio e di pericolo che è proprio di tutto il lavoro clandestino. Ovviamente, far fronte a questi fenomeni compete in primo luogo alle autorità locali, poi a quelle nazionali.

Credo che occorra avere consapevolezza che il lavoro clandestino e i pericoli che trascina con sé siano un grande tema europeo sul quale bisogna intervenire anche con normative sovranazionali, attraverso controlli e con sanzioni, tutte le volte che si riscontra la mancanza di una certezza e di un controllo che garantiscano queste persone.

  Kinga Gál (PPE). - Elnök Úr, Biztos Asszony! 24 évvel ezelőtt ezekben a napokban egy fiatal magyar pap nem félt kiállni a véleménynyilvánítás szabadsága mellett, így kiváltotta azokat az eseményeket Temesváron, Romániában, amelyek aztán megbuktatták a diktatúrát. Akkori kiállásáért ez a pap, Tőkés László, ma képviselő kollégánk, Románia csillaga kitüntetést kapott. Most ezt a kitüntetést akarják visszavonni kollégánktól Bukarestben, mert ismételten megkérdőjelezik az egyén, így Tőkés elidegeníthetetlen jogát a szabad szóláshoz és véleménynyilvánításhoz. Személye szimbolikus, ezért kitüntetésének visszavétele azt jelezné, hogy a jogállam, jogbiztonság gyengébb ma Romániában, mint a múlt szellemeinek újraélesztői. Megkérem Basescu államfőt, fontolja meg alaposan, visszavonja-e Tőkés kitüntetését csupán azért, mert él szólásszabadságának jogával. Megkérem az alapjogi biztos asszonyt, hogy ne engedje ma Romániában a szólásszabadság ilyen meghurcolását, az egyházi és közösségi ingatlanok visszaállamosítását, vagy az igazságszolgáltatás révén történő jogfosztásokat, a jogbiztonság csorbítását.

  Jacky Hénin (GUE/NGL). - Monsieur le Président, la directive sur le détachement des travailleurs est un danger majeur pour l'avenir de la démocratie sociale dans l'Union européenne. Loin de favoriser une prétendue concurrence libre et non faussée, elle instaure, au contraire, une concurrence déloyale entre les peuples et les systèmes sociaux.

Près de chez moi, à Dunkerque, dans le cadre d'un chantier de terminal méthanier, un appel d'offres estimé à seize millions d'euros devrait être attribué à une société italienne, 25 % moins chère, différence qui se fait sur le montant des cotisations sociales. 75 % des salariés qui pourraient travailler sur le chantier devraient être des salariés détachés dans une région où le taux de chômage oscille entre 15 et 18 %. Cette concurrence ne profite qu'aux affairistes et aux esclavagistes du 21e siècle que sont les trafiquants de main-d'œuvre.

Si nous voulons qu'à nouveau les peuples puissent envisager l'Europe autrement que comme une pieuvre qui les asphyxie chaque jour un peu plus, il faut abroger d'urgence cette directive de dumping social et garantir à chaque résident de l'Union un socle de droits sociaux.

  Rosa Estaràs Ferragut (PPE). - Señor Presidente, utilizo este turno de palabra para instar al Parlamento y al mundo a que se ayude a preservar las vidas de Bernard Ntaganda, en Ruanda, y de otros prisioneros políticos que son sometidos a múltiples vejaciones por el Gobierno de Paul Kagame.

Bernard Ntaganda y sus colegas fundaron el partido político PS Imberakuri el 18 de enero de 2009. Desde esta fecha hasta el día de hoy, Bernard Ntaganda ha sido encarcelado, condenado por perturbación de la paz nacional, porque encabezaba el primer partido opositor registrado en Ruanda, y, en la cárcel, ha sufrido todo tipo de vejaciones, hasta el punto de que tuvo que hacer una huelga de hambre y se le dificultaba la asistencia médica, y todo por defender la democracia en mayúsculas. Por lo tanto, pido que se haga este llamamiento a nivel internacional.

  Dubravka Šuica (PPE). - Poštovani gospodine predsjedniče, želim govoriti o jednom europskom projektu koji Komisija nije klasificirala kao prioritetni europski, nego nacionalni, hrvatski. Ovdje se radi o povezivanju jednog dijela Europske unije koji nije otok, a koji nije povezan s matičnom zemljom, a niti s Unijom. Radi se o Dubrovniku i izgradnji mosta za koji željno iščekujemo rezultate predstudije izvodljivosti koja će sutra biti objavljena.

Ne čini li vam se paradoksalnom situacija da morate dva puta pokazati putovnicu da biste došli iz jednog dijela Europske unije u drugi dio, a istovremeno se zalažemo za mobilnost i jedinstveno tržište koje se temelji na slobodi kretanja ljudi, robe, usluga i kapitala. Koristim ovaj trenutak kako bih sve vas kolege iz svih krajeva Unije upoznala s problemom prometne izoliranosti Dubrovnika i samim time diskontinuiteta Europske unije jer koliko god želim da Bosna i Hercegovina što prije ispuni kriterije za pridruživanje, toliko to nije realno uskoro očekivati.

Uvjerena sam da će nam Komisija omogućiti sredstva iz Regionalnog fonda i fonda „Schengen Facility” te da ćemo zajedničkim naporima ovaj davno započeti Pelješki most izgraditi i da će s punim pravom nositi naziv „europski most”.

  Claudette Abela Baldacchino (S&D). - Ma setax jonqos li dan il-Parlament jingħaqad mal-poplu tal-Afrika, kif ukoll mad-dinja kollha biex nagħtu tislima xierqa lil Nelson Mandela.

Nixtieq infakkar x'kien qal Nelson Mandela fil-ġuri tiegħu u propju fl-20 ta' April 1964. Kien qal: Ħaddant l-ideal ta' soċjetà demokratika u ħielsa li fiha kull persuna tista' tgħix f'armonija u b'opportunitajiet indaqs. Dan huwa ideal li nittama li nara li jseħħ f'ħajti, iżda li jekk meħtieġ, huwa ideal li lest li mmut għalih.

Huwa kliem li jimlina b'kuraġġ biex naffrontaw l-isfidi soċjali li għandna quddiemna.

Anke fl-Ewropa għad għandna miljuni ta' ċittadini li għadhom jittamaw li l-ideal ta' Mandela jsir realtà għalihom ukoll. Fosthom għandna mal-ħamsa u għoxrin miljun tifel u tifla li qegħdin jgħixu f'riskju ta' faqar u esklużjoni soċjali.

Grazzi għal Mandela l-Afrika t'Isfel għandha kostituzzjoni li hija fost l-aktar progressivi fid-dinja.

F'mument ta' niket, għalhekk, nappella lil dan il-Parlament biex nimpenjaw ruħna biex ix-xewqa ta' Mandela ssir realtà u jkollna opportunitajiet indaqs.

  Andrej Plenković (PPE). - Gospodine predsjedniče, nedavno sam kao član Odbora za proračune organizirao panel o ekonomskim i financijskim učincima članstva Hrvatske u Europskoj uniji gdje je zaključeno da Hrvatska i dalje ne bilježi gospodarski rast, nedovoljno koristi europska sredstva, da treba intenzivirati trgovinsku razmjenu, a osobito izvoz u članice Europske unije, te da mora privući strana ulaganja. Istodobno je Europska komisija za Hrvatsku na temelju podataka o proračunskom deficitu u 2012. od 5% BDP-a najavila pokretanje procedure prekomjernog deficita, obuhvaćanje postupkom prekomjernih makroekonomskih neravnoteža, te dubinsku analizu ekonomije u okviru Europskog semestra.

Razvidno je da proračun za 2014. ne daje zadovoljavajuće odgovore na stabiliziranje javnih financija, niti sagledava jedinstvenog nacionalnog i europskog ekonomskog i fiskalnog konteksta. S obzirom na iskustva u drugim članicama zanima me koje će mjere Komisija predložiti Hrvatskoj kako bi pomogla da dođe do oporavka gospodarstva i sustavnog provođenja strukturnih reformi koje će ići korak dalje od fiskalne konsolidacije koju provodi aktualna Vlada?

  Моника Панайотова (PPE). - Г-н Председател, призовавам да спре дискриминационното отношение и спекулациите за мигрантска вълна от българи и румънци, особено след изявлението на британския премиер Камерън, че свободното движение на хора в Европейския съюз трябва да бъде „по-малко свободно“.

Този подход създава негативни стереотипи спрямо вече законно пребиваващите българи и румънци и показва политическа немощ за позициониране във вътрешен план не чрез постижения, на принципа на страха и негативната кампания срещу европейски граждани. Свободата на движение е фундаментално право. Великобритания не може да нарушава Договорите на Европейския съюз и същевременно да се ползва от достиженията на европейския пазар.

Данните показват, че вътрешната мобилност в Европейския съюз има положителен ефект върху икономиките в страните членки, огромна част от мигрантите са икономически активни, т.е. мигрират с цел работа и влиянието им върху социалната система е незначимо, под 1 %.

Българите и румънците, които не са в топ 20 на националностите, емигриращи във Великобритания, са най-често интелигентни млади хора – „икономически бонус“, който внася повече данъци в бюджета ѝ, отколкото страната плаща под формата на социални помощи.

  Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL). - O Governo português decidiu desmantelar os estaleiros navais de Viana do Castelo, ou seja, decidiu aplicar a uma das poucas empresas públicas que restam em Portugal a mesma receita que está a aplicar ao país. O Ministro da Tutela desculpou-se com uma suposta exigência de Bruxelas de devolução de 180 milhões de euros, mas Senhora Comissária, a verdade é que ainda não tivemos uma única palavra da Direção Geral de Concorrência da Comissão Europeia e era importante termos para percebermos se o que o Ministro disse é verdade ou se está a usar Bruxelas como desculpa.

Para além disto não conhecemos sequer as regras ou as intenções deste negócio, mas há claras evidências de que a gestão que está a ser feita é uma gestão danosa. Em vez de encontrarmos os verdadeiros culpados, o que se está a fazer é castigar-se os trabalhadores e as suas famílias e está a entregar-se, mais uma vez, ao desbarato o património que é de todos nós. Por tudo isto a população mobilizou-se e continua a lutar porque sabe que a construção naval não pode morrer em Portugal e, mais uma vez, o Governo está a lutar contra os interesses do país.

  Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein (PPE). - W tej chwili, kiedy jesteśmy na tej sali, w Kijowie milicja szturmuje Majdan, oczyszcza ulice z demonstrantów. I to dziś, kiedy przewodniczący Parlamentu Europejskiego Martin Schulz mówił o tym, aby dialogować, aby używać dialogu, a nie siły. I za te słowa wspierające od Parlamentu Europejskiego byłam proszona, szczególnie przez studentów ukraińskich w Krakowie, aby przynieść gorące słowa podziękowania. W Krakowie odbywają się demonstracje wspierające Ukrainę przeciw decyzji Janukowycza i za kursem europejskim, przeciw użyciu siły i za dialogiem. Apel o dalszą solidarność i o przedłużenie wiz studentom ukraińskim, którzy studiują w Unii Europejskiej. Odbywają się demonstracje w różnych miastach europejskich. Pamiętajmy o tym, że Ukraina jest bardzo blisko, że Ukraina jest krajem europejskim, a jej obywatele to są Europejczycy i oni dzisiaj potrzebują naszej solidarności, naszego wsparcia o demokrację i walce o kurs na Europę. Nie wolno nam szczędzić dzisiaj żadnych wysiłków, aby wspierać te dążenia Ukrainy.

  President. − That concludes the item.

23. Negotiations for an EU-Canada strategic partnership agreement (short presentation)

  President. − The next item is the report by Elisabeth Jeggle, on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, containing the European Parliament’s recommendation to the Council, the Commission and the European External Action Service on the negotiations for an EU-Canada Strategic Partnership Agreement (2013/2133(INI)) (A7-0407/2013).

  Elisabeth Jeggle, Berichterstatterin. − Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der vorliegende Bericht enthält die Empfehlung des Europäischen Parlaments an den Rat, die Kommission und den Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienst zu den laufenden Verhandlungen über ein strategisches Partnerschaftsabkommen zwischen der EU und Kanada.

Ich möchte meinen Kolleginnen und Kollegen für das konstruktive Arbeiten an diesem Bericht danken. Mein Dank gilt auch unserem Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienst. Ziel des strategischen Partnerschaftsabkommens, das seit 2011 verhandelt wird, ist es, die politischen, kulturellen und wirtschaftlichen Beziehungen zwischen der EU und Kanada zu vertiefen und ihnen einen aktuellen Rechtsrahmen zu geben, was mit dem alten Rahmenabkommen aus dem Jahr 1976 nicht mehr gegeben ist.

Das strategische Rahmenabkommen ergänzt das Wirtschafts- und Handelsabkommen, das sogenannte CETA, für das im Oktober eine politische Einigung gefunden wurde. Das strategische Partnerschaftsabkommen soll so gestaltet werden, dass die europäischen Werte und Grundsätze geachtet werden.

Kanada ist ein demokratischer Staat, wir teilen mit den Kanadiern unsere Vorstellungen in Bezug auf Menschenrechte, Grundrechte und demokratische Institutionen, und wir haben in vielen Bereichen sehr ähnliche Standards. In zahlreichen Entschließungen des Europäischen Parlaments haben wir einen gemeinsamen Ansatz, den sogenannten common approach, bei EU-Abkommen mit Drittstaaten gefordert.

Entsprechend diesem Ansatz ist es wichtig, dass die entsprechenden politischen Klauseln im strategischen Partnerschaftsabkommen mit Kanada fixiert werden. Ziel ist, dass dieses ganz besondere Abkommen zwischen der Europäischen Union und Kanada eine positive Signalwirkung hat und eine gute Vorlage für weitere EU-Abkommen mit Drittstaaten ist.

Ich möchte die Fraktionen eindringlich bitten, dass wir den Bericht morgen mit großer Mehrheit annehmen und ein starkes Signal Richtung in Rat, Kommission, Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienst und vor allem auch in Richtung Kanada senden. Ich hoffe sehr, dass die kanadische Regierung und das kanadische Parlament – sobald die Verhandlungen zum strategischen Partnerschaftsabkommen abgeschlossen sind – zeitnah zustimmen.

Nur auf diese Weise kann auch das EU-Kanada-Handelsabkommen, das CETA, das sich sehr positiv auf die Wirtschaft beider Seiten auswirken wird, unmittelbar in Kraft treten. Als ständige Berichterstatterin im Ausschuss für auswärtige Angelegenheiten und erste stellvertretende Vorsitzende der Kanada-Delegation im Europäischen Parlament setze ich mich entschieden für eine Fortführung und Vertiefung unserer hervorragenden und umfassenden Beziehungen ein.

Beide Abkommen zusammen sind ein starkes Signal für die Welt, wie durch ehrliche Zusammenarbeit Handel und Achtung der Grundrechte in gutem Sinne vereint werden können.

Catch-the-eye procedure

  Ruža Tomašić (ECR). - Gospodine predsjedniče, kao kanadska državljanka i članica Izaslanstva za odnose s Kanadom zadovoljna sam što upravo u toj zemlji imamo stabilnog partnera koji razumije važnost transatlantskog povezivanja u svim sferama - od gospodarske do sigurnosne.

Posebno bih naglasila važnost trgovinskog povezivanja jer su obostrani gospodarski interesi uvijek najkonkretniji temelj za izgradnju stabilnih partnerskih odnosa.

Moramo stoga ustrajati na finalizaciji sveobuhvatnog sporazuma o gospodarstvu i trgovini te u dobroj vjeri nastaviti graditi naše odnose, bez da ih ograničavamo nepotrebnim klauzulama, poput one o demokraciji i ljudskim pravima, kojima a priori dajemo do znanja svom partneru kako ga smatramo lošijim od sebe.

Tako se posao ne sklapa, a sve oko ovog sporazuma je upravo to - posao, i to dobar posao za obje strane. Poštujmo tu činjenicu i poštujmo Kanadu, zemlju u kojoj su i demokracija i ljudska prava na višem nivou nego u Europskoj uniji, jer jedino tako možemo graditi buduće partnerske odnose.

  Jaroslav Paška (EFD) - Kanada je nám civilizačne blízkou krajinou. Európska únia však rokuje už od roku 2009 s Kanadou aj o podmienkach obchodnej dohody.

Kanada je významným obchodným partnerom členských štátov Únie a úspešné odstránenie colných a administratívnych bariér môže prispieť k zvýšeniu obchodnej výmeny zhruba o 23 %. Národohospodárski experti odhadujú, že takéto zlepšenie obchodného obratu prispeje k zvýšeniu hrubého domáceho produktu Únie zhruba o 12 miliárd eur.

Aj keď málokto pochybuje o vzájomnej výhodnosti tejto dohody, jej ratifikácia podlieha tak na kanadskej strane, ako aj na strane Únie interným pravidlám. A vízová politika našich kanadských partnerov voči niektorým členským štátom Únie môže byť istou prekážkou ratifikačného procesu. Preto, myslím si, by bolo dobré po vyriešení technických otázok dohôd vytvoriť čo najlepšie podmienky aj pre hladkú ratifikáciu týchto dohôd.

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. ROBERTA ANGELILLI
Vicepresidente

  Seán Kelly (PPE). - A Uachtaráin, ba mhaith liom rud amháin a rá. Tá amhras ar thioscail áirithe go gcailleoidh siad de bharr an chomhréitigh seo, go háirithe tionscal talmhaíochta agus dá bhrí sin, b’fhiú féachaint air tar éis cúpla bliain i dtaobh an bhfuil ag éirí leis de réir mar a cheapaimid agus mura bhfuil is féidir linn leasú a dhéanamh. Is é sin an pointe is tábhachtaí. Tá seans iontach anseo don Aontas agus do Cheanada maidir le jabanna agus fás agus mar sin de agus go háirithe trádáil eadrainn.

(Fine della procedura "catch-the-eye")

  Viviane Reding, Vice-President of the Commission. − Madam President, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mrs Jeggle, for this recommendation on the negotiation of the Canada-EU strategic partnership agreement.

This is a timely and excellent initiative because we are finalising the negotiations on trade and on strategic partnership with Canada. You know that the EU and Canada are natural partners with historic ties, shared values and common interests. Our wide-ranging cooperation goes from regional stability and the environment to energy security and higher education. It started out in purely economic terms in the 1950s and has grown into a real and strong strategic partnership.

Our economic ties, as you know, are very strong but the trade agreement set out will further boost these trade and investment flows.

The strategic partnership, SPA, enshrines the joint values and aims to take relations to another level. It promotes a deepening of the ties in all fields of cooperation beyond trade and economics. The announcement of a political agreement on CETA also creates the right conditions for a swift conclusion of the negotiation of the SPA, which is important as it provides an overall framework for EU-Canada relations and is therefore a natural companion to CETA. The European Parliament's support in concluding this partnership is key to its success.

  Presidente. − La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà martedì 10 dicembre 2013.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 149)

  Tokia Saïfi (PPE), par écrit. – L'UE a choisi de négocier un accord commercial complet et approfondi avec le Canada, qu'elle va compléter par une refonte de l'accord d'association qui la lie avec ce pays depuis le milieu des années 70. C'est sur ce projet de refonte que nous nous sommes prononcés en plénière. Pour ma part, je considère que ce projet reste dans la droite ligne des orientations de la Commission européenne concernant nos relations transatlantiques. En effet, tant la Commission que nous-même au Parlement souhaitons organiser davantage nos relations de coopération avec le Canada. Mais tout comme dans le cadre de l'accord commercial, il faut prendre en compte et valoriser nos différences culturelles, juridiques et normatives, plutôt que de chercher à tout prix à les égaliser.

24. Development and 'state building' in South Sudan (short presentation)

  Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca la breve presentazione della relazione di Véronique De Keyser sugli sforzi della comunità internazionale in materia di sviluppo e costruzione dello Stato del Sudan del Sud [2013/2090(INI)] (A7-0380/2013).

  Véronique De Keyser, rapporteure. − Madame la Présidente, je voudrais d'abord associer à ces remerciements ceux des collègues qui ont travaillé avec moi – les rapporteurs fictifs de ce rapport –, mais aussi les collègues des autres commissions qui nous ont donné des avis très judicieux, et notamment ceux de la commission des affaires étrangères.

Le Soudan du Sud est le dernier État d'Afrique à avoir conquis son indépendance. Il y aura trois ans, en janvier qu'il l'a manifestée lors d'un référendum. Le 9 juillet 2011, il proclamait son indépendance et, cinq jours plus tard, l'Assemblée générale des Nations unies l'acceptait comme membre.

La rapidité de cette adhésion comme membre n'est pas un hasard. En réalité, cette accession à l'indépendance a été soutenue par toute la communauté internationale à la suite d'un traité de paix de 2005, le Comprehensive peace agreement, qui mettait fin à une guerre civile interminable au Soudan, qui avait enflammé toute la région.

Voilà où nous en sommes. Nous avons un nouveau pays qui menace, évidemment, d'être un État fragile, qui a une ressource pétrolière qui représente 88 % de son économie, mais qui n'a rien d'autre, qui a un voisin – le Soudan – avec lequel, bien évidemment, il ne s'entend pas très bien puisqu'il s'en est séparé.

Depuis deux à trois ans maintenant, nous assistons entre Soudan et Soudan du Sud à des tensions, à des arrêts de la circulation du pétrole qui pénalisent soit l'un, soit l'autre pays. Cela a amené la communauté internationale, les Nations unies, les États-Unis, la troïka – c'est-à-dire les États-Unis, la Grande-Bretagne et la Norvège – à créer des forums, comme à Washington en 2013, pour tenter d'aider ce Soudan du Sud à ne pas tomber déjà en banqueroute et à résoudre ses difficultés.

C'est un État qui ne va pas très bien. 50 % de la population est en dessous du seuil de pauvreté. La dépendance vis-à-vis du pétrole, comme je l'ai dit, est absolue; il n'y a pas de diversification de l'économie. Les accords de Cotonou n'ont pas encore été signés, il est donc difficile pour l'Union européenne de l'aider. Il y a une corruption qui s'installe – nous n'avons pas les chiffres exacts – qui s'avère absolument endémique. Il n'y a pas de filet de sécurité sociale, le taux de mortalité infantile et maternelle est le plus élevé au monde. 48 % des jeunes filles sont mariées contre leur gré entre 15 et 19 ans, voire plus jeunes. Moins de 30 % des filles vont à l'école primaire. L'armée n'est pas intégrée, il y a des milices. Il y a des exécutions extrajudiciaires, de la torture, des viols de populations, du harcèlement des journalistes et des défenseurs des droits de l'homme. De plus, il y a un vrai problème de langue puisqu'il y a 60 langues et idiomes différents et que l'anglais est la langue officielle, alors que le peuple ne le comprend pas.

Ce rapport est un rapport de recommandation parce que, si ce pays saute, c'est toute la corne de l'Afrique qui, à nouveau, est déstabilisée et rentre en guerre. Il y a deux paragraphes qui synthétisent les recommandations de ce rapport en faveur d'une bonne gouvernance, d'une lutte en faveur des droits de l'homme, etc., ce sont les paragraphes 9 et 11. Je souhaite qu'on s'y réfère parce que c'est vraiment très compliqué.

Je voudrais dire que, aujourd'hui, l'Union européenne a investi 830 millions au Soudan du Sud, ce qui est énorme. 830 millions, c'est presque 1 milliard et nous n'en parlons pas dans cette enceinte. Voilà un pays qui doit aller vers une transition démocratique. Nous devons continuer à l'aider mais nous devons aller vers plus d'éducation, plus d'infrastructures et de la bonne gouvernance, ainsi qu'être les amis du Soudan du Sud, mais aussi le guider plus fermement dans la voie d'une gouvernance qui serait exempte de la corruption qui règne actuellement.

Procedura "catch-the eye"

  Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). - Gospođo predsjednice, želio bih pozdraviti rad izvjestiteljice u ovom izvješću o razvoju Južnoga Sudana.

Kao član vanjskopolitičkog odbora želio bih, iz jedne vanjskopolitičke perspektive, spomenuti važnost uloge vanjske službe europske diplomacije, pogotovo u izgradnji boljih odnosa između Južnog Sudan i sjevera, upravo iz razloga što preko 80% ekonomije Južnog Sudana ovisi o nafti, a znamo da se ona može isključivo izvoziti preko naftovoda koji ide prema sjeveru. Vidjeli smo kako je taj naftovod bio blokiran 15 mjeseci, sve do travnja ove godine, upravo zbog loših odnosa između sjevera i juga.

Tu je naravno uloga europske diplomacije da pomogne u rješavanju takvih situacija, jer tek se tada ekonomija kroz izvoz nafte može razviti i onda naravno dolaze i do izražaja svi ovi drugi elementi koje je izvjestiteljica spomenula i koje i ja još jednom pozdravljam. Mislim da su na jedan vrlo balansiran, učinkovit način predstavljeni u ovom izvješću.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). - Madam President, not very long ago we discussed South Sudan in the urgency debate one Thursday afternoon. We are discussing it again here tonight, which is indicative of the European Union’s commitment – and the commitment of the European Parliament in particular – to progress in matters in this fragile new state. That is the way it should be because we have a reputation – and rightly so – for being the biggest donor of humanitarian development aid in the world.

Obviously this is a country that needs a lot of help. It has a lot of potential but it does not have the wherewithal or the experience to develop its potential as of now, particularly in relation to its natural resources – oil, etc. It is fairly rich in those but it needs a proper infrastructure to be developed. It is important that our aid will go towards ensuring this is done because that will eventually lead them to be more independent and more viable. Education is also very important for everybody in order to eliminate some of the bad customs they have had there, particularly in relation to their attitudes to women over many years.

(Fine della procedura "catch-the-eye")

  Viviane Reding, Vice-President of the Commission. − Madam President, I would like to praise Ms De Keyser for not only an excellent report but also for the consultative process which has been building up to this report. We have been given a very detailed overview of the many opportunities but also of the magnitude of the challenges faced by South Sudan to achieve peace, stability and prosperity. The Commission agrees with the many recommendations in the report and considers it an important road map for continued EU action in South Sudan and the wider region.

The current political, social and economic situation cannot be understood in isolation from the country’s history, but if you look at the country’s history you see that in just eight years the country has built institutional structures of governance, significantly improved access to education and health facilities and created opportunities for better livelihoods. The progress made is impressive.

As the rapporteur has justly said, the European Union has greatly supported these state- and nation-building efforts with very high levels of investment. We have established a solid partnership with the South Sudanese Government and with civil society. With key international partners, we are now spearheading efforts to forge a new partnership with the government through a New Deal Compact based on mutual accountability. In this process we will continue to advocate the importance of joining the Cotonou Agreement in order to establish a predictable and long-term partnership with the EU.

Let me finish by expressing the European Commission’s full adherence to the importance of the role of women and girls in the healing process and dealing with the past. The most important lessons development actors have learned is that the systemic exclusion of women and girls from economic, political and social life is the greatest barrier to development and this is a lesson that is at the centre of our action in South Sudan.

  Presidente. − La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà martedì 10 dicembre 2013.

25. Recovery and resolution framework for non-bank institutions (short presentation)

  Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca la breve presentazione della relazione di Kay Swinburne sul quadro di risanamento e risoluzione delle crisi per le istituzioni finanziarie diverse dalle banche [2013/2047(INI)] (A7-0343/2013).

  Kay Swinburne, rapporteur. − Madam President, this report on recovery and resolution of non-bank financial institutions was written to look at both the systemic weaknesses that the recent financial crisis has highlighted in our market infrastructure and to assess the possible unintended consequences of the regulatory changes that have been implemented post the crisis.

While the work on the recovery and resolution of banks has undergone a lot of international work, less has been done to improve the stability of our critical market infrastructure. Yet the level of interconnectedness of our entire financial system has long been identified as a future weakness in the financial markets as a whole. We have seen what happens when one bank goes down. We have not yet seen what happens when a piece of critical market infrastructure collapses and I hope we do not see this anytime soon.

This report focuses on that scenario, looking in particular at the possible failure of central clearing houses and settlement systems – so-called CSDs – and calling for further study of infrastructure risk in other sectoral areas, such as insurance and asset management. EMIR and the global derivatives reform agenda, once implemented, will mean more transactions essentially cleared at a regulated clearing house. While these institutions performed well during the 2008 crisis, they did not at that time deal with the volume of transactions that they necessarily will in the future.

CCPs have already been identified by the Financial Stability Board and CPSS-IOSCO as a possible new source of systemic risk. The macroprudential tools for supervision that are provided for in EMIR should, however, provide the necessary safeguards to ensure that CCPs really do bring stability and greater transparency to the financial markets. However, in the event of a failure, we need to have in place a legally sound framework for CCPs: should they themselves have recovery plans, and what powers do supervisory authorities need to have to intervene in their operations?

This report emphasises that day-to-day operations should continue to create the right incentive structures for good governance of CCPs so that banks, as clearing members, are still highly incentivised to participate in auctions, so that CCPs themselves are not encouraged to clear products for which they cannot appropriately manage the risk, and indeed that end users of these clearing members – the clients and investors – are not exposed to more risk than they can understand or absorb.

It is clear that should a counterparty fail or some operational failure cause the CCP to run out of margin, it should have the default waterfall to protect its members and the system users. The CCP default waterfall needs to be clearly defined and communicated. In debating the line between recovery and resolution, Parliament reached a strong consensus around the view that if a CCP was able to agree measures amongst the clearing members to further refill this default waterfall, then that was recovery, albeit under the supervision of the resolution authority.

However, if client assets were to be involved, by variation haircut margin or any other tool to disseminate losses more broadly, this could only be done under the auspices of resolution authorities. So indeed we need to make sure that we have systems in place such that if a CCP exhausts its default waterfall it cannot raid pension funds or asset managers’ resources because of its governance failures. If a CCP’s management has the option of using client assets before exhausting its own capital and utilising its own shareholder money, then there is no incentive for good governance to balance out their profit incentive. Indeed, client assets should not be involved in recovery, only in resolution.

My concerns with CSDs are slightly different but again emerge from regulatory concerns. There are issues here. We have a CSDR legislation in place, coming through negotiations trialogue at the moment. This report calls upon the Commission to deliver a legislative response for recovery resolution as soon as possible.

  Viviane Reding, Vice-President of the Commission. − Madam President, I would like to thank Ms Swinburne for an excellent report. It is true that the regulatory framework in this area is in line with the international commitments undertaken at G20 level to improve the functioning of financial markets and to avoid taxpayers having to bear the cost of the failure of a financial institution.

We welcome the contribution this report makes to this important debate. So, based on our own consultations and the international work underway under the aegis of the Financial Stability Board, we agree that the priority in this area should be to develop appropriate tools for the recovery and resolution of central counterparties. These institutions, already systemic by their nature, are set to grow further in importance as the G20 commitment to bring over-the-counter derivatives into CCP clearing houses is implemented.

Regarding the other institutions mentioned in the report, we agree likewise on the need to focus efforts on implementing the stronger prudential requirements currently being finalised at EU level – the Solvency II Regulation on central security depositories – and to roll out appropriate proposals in due course for their recovery and resolution, taking account of the findings of the ongoing international work.

We appreciate the consideration the report gives to some of the key questions which a regulatory framework for CCP recovery and resolution will need to address: for example, mechanisms to allocate potential losses which exceed existing requirements or contractual arrangements should be transparent and effective. In view of their central role, the continuity of the services provided by CCPs should be safeguarded but this should not be done in a way which distorts incentives for the users of CCPs or gives rise to moral hazards.

The Commission takes note of these and other issues raised in the report and will carefully consider them when preparing its policy response in this area.

  Presidente. − La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà martedì 10 dicembre 2013.

26. EU space industrial policy (short presentation)

  Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca la breve presentazione della relazione di Angelika Niebler sulla politica industriale dell'UE in materia di spazio - Liberare il potenziale di crescita economica nel settore spaziale [COM(2013)0108 - 2013/2092(INI)] (A7-0338/2013).

  Angelika Niebler, Berichterstatterin. − Frau Präsidentin, verehrte Frau Vizepräsidentin der Europäischen Kommission, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Heute war es in vielen deutschen Zeitungen zu lesen: Der Luft- und Raumfahrtkonzern EADS will in seiner bisherigen Verteidigungssparte Cassidian zahlreiche Stellen streichen. Mich als oberbayerische Abgeordnete macht es besonders betroffen, dass der oberbayerische Standort Unterschleißheim bei München voraussichtlich vollständig geschlossen wird. Mehr als 8 000 Arbeitsplätze sind in Gefahr.

Allein in Bayern sind mehr als 400 Unternehmen der Luft- und Raumfahrtindustrie ansässig, rund ein Drittel aller Beschäftigten dieser Industriesparte arbeiten in Bayern. Hinzu kommen mehr als 150 Unternehmen, die der Satellitennavigationsanwenderindustrie zugeordnet werden können. Doch seit Jahren stagnieren Budgets, der Branche fehlt es an Perspektive.

Das hat auch für den zivilen Bereich drastische Folgen. Viele Unternehmen der Nicht-Raumfahrtindustrie profitieren von unzähligen Produkten als Ergebnis der Weltraumforschung. Gleichzeitig sind unzählige Dienste, auf welche unsere Bürgerinnen und Bürger und auch wir selber im täglichen Leben zurückgreifen, von der Raumfahrt direkt oder indirekt abhängig, z. B. das Fernsehen, Hochgeschwindigkeits-Internet, Navigationssysteme, das europaweit automatische Notrufsystem eCall, und auch die Landwirtschaft greift gerne auf Geodaten zur Landverbesserung zurück.

Es ist daher an der Zeit, eines der größten Probleme der Weltraumbranche anzugehen, nämlich die Finanzierung. Bei der Raumfahrtindustrie handelt es sich um eine investitionsintensive Industrie mit ungewöhnlich langen Entwicklungszyklen. Planungssicherheit ist daher für die Unternehmen von höchster Priorität. Unternehmen scheuen sich, viel Geld für Innovationen in die Hand zu nehmen, wenn am Ende unsicher ist, ob sie einen Abnehmer dafür finden. Ich persönlich bin daher davon überzeugt, dass wir eine Art Anschubfinanzierung brauchen, um Geld für Innovationen zur Verfügung zu stellen, mit denen dann wiederum Wirtschaftswachstum generiert und Arbeitsplätze geschaffen werden können.

Wir brauchen darüber hinaus eine engere Kooperation der drei Handlungsträger der europäischen Raumfahrtpolitik – EU, ESA und den Mitgliedstaaten –, um unter anderem einen Forschungsfahrplan für den Zeitraum bis zum Jahr 2020 zu entwickeln. Dieser sollte den Unternehmen als Leitplanke für Investitionen dienen.

Das Europäische Parlament hat sich stets für eine ehrgeizige europäische Weltraumpolitik stark gemacht. Daran sollten wir festhalten. Galileo gilt es für seine volle Einsatzfähigkeit schnellstmöglich fertigzustellen. Weitere Nutzen und Vorteile, beispielsweise der Satellitenkommunikation, müssen analysiert werden. Nur so können wir es schaffen, die Abhängigkeit von anderen Weltraumnationen zu senken.

Lediglich mit einer echten europäischen Weltraumpolitik versetzen wir unsere heimische Raumfahrtindustrie in die Lage, wettbewerbsfähig zu werden und auch wettbewerbsfähig zu bleiben.

Procedura "catch-the-eye"

  Seán Kelly (PPE). - Madam President, space is, I suppose, a topic which fascinates many people but it does not lead them to pursue that fascination by being involved in the industry in any way, and indeed the industry is limited enough across Europe. I think there are about 30 000 workers but at the same time it represents 6.5 billion for the economy. I think, as Angelika Niebler was pointing out, what a huge potential.

But that potential particularly needs a lot of research and development and that takes financing. While we do have good programmes for many years now like Copernicus and Galileo I think that to realise the potential we need to invest more in it, particularly with the likes of India and China now powering ahead as well as, of course, the USA. The European Union needs to be well ahead in that regard and well committed; particularly, we need an internal market for the whole space area and I think that is something we should be working very strongly to develop.

There is a whole pile of industries which can come from the whole space sector. In my own constituency a company was founded a few years ago which is taking off rapidly. It is called Treemetrics and uses satellite imagery to track and monitor forestry around the world in the greatest possible detail, right down to the last tree, which helps of course not only in just tracking the trees but with the size of the trees, their removal and if anyone interferes with them.

I think investing in the space sector and particularly in industrial policy will pay huge dividends for us in the future and we have to go that way, as Angelika Niebler pointed out.

  Richard Howitt (S&D). - Madam President, in my own East of England constituency technology has been developed which has allowed communication beyond our solar system to map the Milky Way, to test Einstein’s theory of relativity from space and, of course, to establish Europe’s own Global Positioning System. e2v and BAE systems in Chelmsford and Astrium in Stevenage tell me how important the EU support we are debating tonight is if we are to win the new space race for jobs and for technology.

Like our main rapporteur, Ms Niebler, however, I express concern about today’s announcement by EADS in relation to their space and defence business, but I welcome the fact that I have received a commitment from Astrium in Stevenage that their plant and Britain will remain part of the core business of the company. I welcome the fact that the job losses that have been announced may not take place for three years, and that there is every intention by the company to achieve them through natural wastage rather than redundancy. I urge the strongest possible consultation with the workforce and appropriate trade unions to achieve that aim.

  António Fernando Correia de Campos (S&D). - Senhor Presidente, quero cumprimentar a relatora e dizer-lhe que é necessária uma política de indústria espacial estável e integrada, que possa competir com os outros grandes atores globais, com a Agência Espacial Europeia, com a União e entre a União e os Estados-Membros. Programas como o Galileo, o Copérnico ou o Egnos são prioritários, devem abranger toda a União e constituem bons exemplos de uma política industrial espacial coerente e competitiva com um enfoque nas pequenas e médias empresas e uma forte componente de investigação e desenvolvimento.

A Estratégia Europa 2020 reconhece o papel da indústria espacial como veículo de inovação, competitividade, emprego e crescimento. É um setor relevante na proteção e segurança dos cidadãos, na resposta a cenários de crise, na política comum de segurança e defesa, na vida quotidiana das telecomunicações, transportes e TIC. É um setor que necessita de um impulso mais forte.

(Fine della procedura "catch-the-eye")

  Viviane Reding, Vice-President of the Commission. − Madam President, let me first thank the rapporteur, Ms Niebler, for a very important report on a very important industry because space is a key enabling sector for Europe’s economy, and space activities require and generate innovation and scientific, technological and organisational excellence. It is for that reason that EUR 11 billion has been committed in the next multiannual financial framework to the EU’s space programmes, be it Galileo, Copernicus or space research.

A considerable amount of this money will be devoted to space activities. It is therefore essential to ensure the most efficient possible use of such investment. Good coordination among our stakeholders is essential: Member States, the Commission, the Space Agency and others. It is also essential that we ensure coherence in the programmes and avoid duplication in spending and structures.

A reflection along these lines is already underway following the recent Commission communication on establishing appropriate relations between the EU and the European Space Agency.

Ms Nieblerʼs report is also right in stressing the need for Europe to seek technological non-dependence and develop the critical technology to pursue its space ambition and maintain a competitive position in the world. It is at this global level where we need also to be very careful. The Commission is doing that, not only in the context of the ongoing EU-US transatlantic trade partnership negotiations but also for the long term by way of a study which will be issued in the second half of next year.

Finally, the rapporteur advances the role of the private commercial market for the European space industry and the importance of the satellite communications sector. The Commission has proposed a number of measures which could help develop the space market, including services. We will take action in areas including research, procurement and spectrum availability and, where necessary, regulatory action.

  Presidente. − La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà martedì 10 dicembre 2013.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 149)

  Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), per iscritto. – Al giorno d'oggi, innumerevoli servizi dipendono direttamente o indirettamente dalle tecnologie spaziali, e molti settori non connessi allo spazio traggono benefici dalle conquiste tecniche dell'industria spaziale. L'economia europea ha sempre avuto una posizione leader, che oggi viene minacciata dall'affacciarsi di nuove potenze, come India e Cina. In tale contesto il Parlamento europeo ha mostrato come sia necessario potenziare la nostra azione, aumentando le sinergie tra il settore civile e quello della difesa e rafforzare il coordinamento tra le attività spaziali dell'UE, dell'ESA e degli Stati membri, per raggiungere l'indipendenza tecnologica e un accesso europeo allo spazio. Importante dunque dare nuovo slancio ai programmi Galileo, Copernico (GMES) e alla comunicazione satellitare in generale, per una politica spaziale europea ambiziosa basata su un vero mercato interno dell'industria, con un quadro giuridico coerente. Questo lo spirito dell'iniziativa parlamentare, alla quale ho dato il mio voto.

27. CARS 2020: towards a strong, competitive and sustainable European car industry (short presentation)

  Presidente. − L'ordine del giorno reca la breve presentazione della relazione di Franck Proust su CARS 2020: verso un'industria automobilistica europea forte, competitiva e sostenibile [COM(2012)0636 - 2013/2062(INI)] (A7-0391/2013).

  Franck Proust, rapporteur. − Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, si je vous dis que l'industrie automobile traverse une crise sans précédent, cela résonne sans doute comme quelque chose d'assez familier. Pourtant, c'est une réalité bien prégnante.

Ce secteur a enregistré en 2012 à peine douze millions d'unité vendues contre environ dix-sept millions en 2007, juste avant la crise, soit un recul ramenant aux chiffres des années 1990.

Pourtant, l'automobile est un pilier de notre économie, à plusieurs titres d'ailleurs: un pilier de notre croissance, car elle représente près de 4 % du PIB; un pilier de l'économie régionale, car c'est la première activité économique de dizaines de régions en Europe; un pilier social, ensuite, avec douze millions d'emplois directs et indirects; mais, surtout, un pilier technologique, car 80 % de l'investissement privé en recherche passe par l'automobile.

Tout cela nous permet d'affirmer une chose: l'industrie automobile, par sa place au cœur de l'industrie, constitue un indicateur indéniable de l'état de notre économie. Aujourd'hui, les peuples européens s'interrogent sur l'avenir de cette production. Par conséquent, il était inconcevable que les députés européens, seuls représentants directs des peuples, n'interviennent pas dans le débat.

Nous nous sommes saisis de cette problématique et nous avons bien fait. Avec ce rapport, nous avons examiné le plan d'action CARS 2020, que la Commission a lancé en novembre 2012. Ce plan d'action, je tiens à le dire, était un excellent point de départ, et je tiens à remercier le vice-président Tajani pour tout le travail effectué en amont. Je tiens notamment à saluer le processus CARS 21, long mais fructueux travail de concertation avec l'industrie. Néanmoins, le plan d'action pèche parfois par excès de synthèse. C'est pourquoi nous devions y ajouter une véritable valeur ajoutée pour être entendus.

Le rapport que je vous présente aujourd'hui n'a qu'une seule ambition: proposer des solutions novatrices pour renouer avec la croissance du secteur automobile, novatrices car nous avons deux défis à relever. À très court terme, c'est l'urgence qui doit prévaloir, l'urgence de sortir ce secteur du cercle infernal de la crise et, à moyen terme, nous devons avoir l'ambition de rapprocher nos politiques en matière d'industrie automobile pour agir unis plutôt que divisés.

Au final, nous devons nous battre pour une Europe qui agit, mais, surtout, une Europe qui protège. Ce rapport insiste sur un certain nombre de points. D'abord, améliorer profondément l'approche de la Commission en identifiant plus précisément la surcapacité de production et les restructurations comme les points majeurs de la crise du secteur, trop peu présents dans le plan d'action.

Ensuite, le rapport demandera d'imposer progressivement une réglementation plus claire et plus prévisible pour l'industrie. Cela favorisera les investissements. Nous devons d'abord laisser l'industrie sortir la tête de l'eau avant de lui imposer de nouvelles normes qui viendraient un peu plus la fragiliser.

De même, ce rapport rappelle que l'avancée et le savoir-faire technologique sont les seuls avantages compétitifs de l'Europe sur le reste du monde. Nous devons donc nous focaliser sur ce que nous savons faire de mieux pour asseoir durablement notre compétitivité. Nous saluons et encourageons la flexibilité du travail basée sur le dialogue social et la réorientation ainsi que l'amélioration du savoir-faire des employés au vu des évolutions du marché.

Enfin, nous demandons un renforcement de notre arsenal légal et de nos pratiques pour lutter contre la concurrence déloyale au sein de l'Europe comme sur les marchés extérieurs.

Chers collègues, voilà les grandes lignes du rapport. Il reflète un bon compromis, qui a récolté l'aval d'une très large majorité des voix en commission de l'industrie. Aussi, demain, en votant en faveur de ce rapport, vous démontrerez que ce n'est pas parce qu'un combat est difficile qu'il ne peut être gagné.

Procedura "catch-the-eye"

  Seán Kelly (PPE). - A Uachtaráin, is maith go bhfuilimid ag díospóireacht an ábhair seo anocht mar i gcomparáid leis an ábhar a rabhthas ag caint faoi ó chianaibh, an tionscal spáis a bhfuil 35 000 duine fostaithe ann, tá 12 000 000 fostaithe – go díreach nó go hindíreach – sa tionscal gluaisteán san Eoraip.

Tugann sé 4% de OTI ach tá sé i bpráinn le blianta beaga anuas go háirithe de bharr an chúlaithe eacnamaíochta. Anuraidh, díoladh 12 000 000 gluaisteán ach cúig bliana ó shin díoladh 17 000 000 gluaisteán. Is laghdú 5 000 000 é sin agus dá bhrí is fiú go mbeadh plean gníomhartha againn agus fáiltím roimh an bplean seo agus tá súil agam go n-éireoidh leis.

Just one or two points: I welcome particularly our renewed emphasis on a manufacturing base for Europe as opposed to services. And particularly where cars are concerned: energy-efficient and safe cars will give us an advantage if we concentrate on that as opposed to the rest of the world.

  Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE) - Automobilový priemysel hrá významnú úlohu pri rozvoji mnohých regiónov EÚ, a tak prispieva k udržaniu zamestnanosti. Svetová konkurencia nám však ukazuje, že ak si má automobilový priemysel v Európe udržať svoje medzinárodné postavenie, musí sa skutočne zmobilizovať a okrem iného aj viac zamerať na výskum a inovácie.

Predovšetkým v oblasti ekologických inovácií sa nachádza veľa priestoru na zdokonaľovanie. Reštrukturalizácia, o ktorej sa v súčasnosti hovorí, si zasluhuje osobitnú pozornosť členských štátov v koordinácii s Európskou úniou, aby sa zamedzilo negatívnemu dopadu, predovšetkým na zamestnancov.

Rád by som ešte pripomenul, že členské štáty majú možnosť využiť pri konvergencii aj fondy Európskej únie, ktoré sú na tento účel v novom programovacom období práve vyčlenené. Verím však, že automobilový priemysel sa stane konkurencieschopnejším a bude aj v budúcnosti zdrojom rastu a hlavne zamestnanosti.

  Josefa Andrés Barea (S&D). - Señora Presidenta, señora Comisaria, señor ponente, CARS 2020 es un plan de acción europeo para una industria del automóvil fuerte, competitiva y sostenible. Hoy estamos ante una lenta recuperación, entre el uno y el dos por cien, pero arrastramos una caída importante, pérdida de empleos y una escasa financiación para las empresas, y con diferencias entre Estados por las ayudas de Estado que cada uno recibe, siendo los Estados del Sur los que más sufren.

El automóvil europeo tiene que mirar más allá de la crisis si quiere subsistir. Y se plantean cuatro pilares: la inversión en I+D+i, las mejoras de las condiciones de mercado interior, la comercialización hacia el exterior y la inversión en capital humano.

Hay que recalcular la situación en lo que este plan plantea y adaptarse a las nuevas demandas: modelos más utilitarios, apuesta por los vehículos verdes y valorización del reciclaje. Y, sobre todo, hay una pauta que la empresa automovilística ha sabido establecer para subsistir, que es el diálogo social. Hay que establecer el diálogo social como palanca de mantenimiento.

  Phil Bennion (ALDE). - Madam President, from the UK’s perspective, the CARS 2020 action plan for the car industry has the potential to turbocharge latest UK Government plans to help manufacturers, such as Jaguar Land Rover, to compete globally. It has the potential to improve the business environment and boost research and development. It needs to define and shape a car industry which remains strong and competitive globally and which also plays a full part in decarbonising energy for sustainable road transport. It also needs to be about how to focus support for research and development to help Europe’s car industry meet the challenge of becoming greener but more competitive at the same time.

I am very happy that much of this programme – this CARS 2020 action plan – fits closely with Vince Cable’s strategy, at the UK Government level, which is called Driving Success. This is also based on boosting research and improving the conditions business operates in. It is crucial that national and European levels work together and take action to help car manufacturers be competitive at a global level.

(Fine della procedura "catch-the-eye")

  Viviane Reding, Vice-President of the Commission. − Madam President, the report Mr Proust has put on the table in this House is of great value because it shows us how important the car industry is to the European Parliament. The European Commission thinks the same and, through its action plan, it shows its willingness to place the automotive industry back at the very heart of growth.

As far as the implementation of the CARS action plan for the automotive industry is concerned, I am convinced that this is an inspiring example. It shows how a well-coordinated process can lead to structural changes. This pro-action plan has significantly improved coordination between the Commission services and stakeholders.

Smart regulation for instance. The Commission made sure that no additional unnecessary burdens would be created for industry. We propose legislation only where more predictability was needed for the sector. The European Commission also attached great importance to the overhaul of the type-approval procedures in order to align them to international rules for the purpose of making them more effective and to reduce unnecessary burdens and cost to industry. In this respect the work on the review of the framework directive for motor vehicles is ongoing.

Clean vehicles. The commercial impact that light vehicles can have vis-à-vis tomorrow’s energy challenges is very significant. That is why we adopted the Clean Power for Transport package. In particular, the communication on a European alternative fuel strategy and the directive on alternative fuels infrastructures at Member State level aim at facilitating the development of the single market for alternative fuels for transport in the whole European Union.

Concerning R&D and access to finance, the European Commission presented in 2013 a proposal for a European green vehicles initiative to co-finance research in the area of energy efficiency and alternative fuels. We are also working on improving access to finance for SMEs. COSME has a budget of EUR 2.3 billion for the period 2014-2020 and the EIB will represent the main source of financing for SMEs at European level.

Let me conclude by informing you that we have started to reflect on how to take CARS 2020 beyond 2014. EU-level instruments can hardly be considered adequate without effective parallel structures at national and regional levels and, to this end, we are working together with industry.

  Presidente. − La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione di svolgerà martedì 10 dicembre 2013.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 149)

  Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), per iscritto. – Con il suo irrinunciabile contributo in termini di occupazione ed innovazione, l'industria automobilistica rappresenta un elemento centrale per l'economia europea ed un traino per il suo processo di crescita. Questo testo riconosce tale ruolo e, nel prendere atto delle difficoltà crescenti che il settore automobilistico sta attraversando - causa l'attuale contesto di crisi e la conseguente contrazione del mercato europeo - definisce una strategia di azione fatta di politiche coerenti ed interventi mirati agli aspetti nevralgici di questo settore. Tra questi, si propone il finanziamento dell'innovazione e del capitale umano tramite una serie di iniziative normative a sostegno di ricerca e innovazione; il miglioramento delle condizioni di mercato attraverso l'abbattimento della burocrazia e l'applicazione di una regolamentazione più snella ed efficacie; il rafforzamento della competitività sui mercati extraeuropei, attraverso una politica commerciale armonizzata a livello internazionale; una maggiore e migliore collaborazione tra i vari livelli di governo e i vari attori coinvolti nel comparto, che sia ispirata ai principi di equità e trasparenza. L'approvazione di questo piano d'azione sarà quindi un passo fondamentale nella fissazione di obiettivi di lungo termine rivolti a mantenere solida la competitività di un settore industriale di estrema rilevanza per l'economia e l'occupazione europea.

  Преслав Борисов (PPE), в писмена форма. – Уважаема г-жо Председател,

Автомобилната промишленост е най-голямата индустрия на Европа и в своята цялост е от стратегическо значение за европейската икономика, осигурявайки близо 12 млн. преки и косвени работни места.

Имайки предвид, че в момента този сектор е изправен пред сериозни проблеми, свързани със стагнация на търсенето на нашите пазари и увеличаваща се конкуренция от външни страни с бързо развиваща се икономика, ние трябва да определим политическата насока за нейното устойчиво развитие.

И още повече, имайки предвид фактори като постепенната промяна в използването на енергийни източници и преминаването към дигитализация на компонентите и функциите, необходимо е цялостно преосмисляне на нашия подход към мобилността през 21-ви век.

Считам, че резолюцията, която ще гласуваме, отразява реалистични цели, изпълнението на които ще доведе до добавена стойност за европейската автомобилна индустрия. В текста са заложени насоки като повишаване на конкурентоспособността, инвестиране в научни изследвания и нови технологии, квалификация на човешките ресурси и други.

Радвам се, че резолюцията е достатъчно широкообхватна и търси решения на проблеми от разнородно естество като преструктурирането, свръх капацитета, по-лесен достъп на малки и средни предприятия до капиталови пазари.

Колеги, ето защо напълно подкрепям резолюцията и Ви призовавам да гласувате в нейна полза.

  Mark Demesmaeker (Verts/ALE), schriftelijk. – Het strategische belang van de automobielsector voor de Europese economie en welvaart is ontegensprekelijk. De mondiale crisis bracht de sector echter in het oog van de storm. Met Cars 2020 lanceert de Europese Commissie haar visie terzake. Het Europees Parlement verwelkomt het initiatief van de Commissie, maar spoort haar tegelijk aan dringend over te gaan tot concrete politieke actie! Cars 2020 bevat immers nog al te veel lacunes en blijft op vele punten te vrijblijvend. In het bijzonder vraagt het Parlement een oplossing voor het overcapaciteitsprobleem, een coherente aanpak van herstructureringen en specifieke maatregelen voor kmo's. Daarnaast wijst het Parlement op het belang van Onderzoek & Ontwikkeling en van slimme regelgeving. Ook in mijn regio zijn dergelijke inspanningen nodig. Met de sluitingen van Ford en Opel werd Vlaanderen zeer hard getroffen. Wij blijven echter geloven dat een concurrerende maakindustrie cruciaal is voor de innovatiekracht en de welvaart van Vlaanderen. Zoals de SALK-strategie (actieplan voor Limburg) van de Vlaamse Regering aangeeft, is het essentieel dat de maakindustrie verder evolueert naar een slimme, innovatieve en duurzame maakindustrie met hogere toegevoegde waarde om concurrerend te blijven. Inspelen op dit Europese verhaal is dan ook belangrijk.

28. Agenda for next sitting: see Minutes

29. Closure of the sitting

(La seduta è tolta alle 22.25)