Az ülések szó szerinti jegyzőkönyve

2014. január 15., Szerda - Strasbourg

15. A szabad mozgással kapcsolatos alapvető jogok tiszteletben tartása az EU-ban (vita)

  El Presidente. − El punto siguiente en el orden del día es el debate a partir de las declaraciones del Consejo y de la Comisión sobre el respeto del derecho fundamental a la libre circulación en la UE (2013/2960(RSP)).

  Δημήτριος Κούρκουλας, Ασκών την Προεδρία του Συμβουλίου. − Κύριε Πρόεδρε, αξιότιμα μέλη, επιτρέψτε μου και εμένα με τη σειρά μου να καλωσορίσω την αντιπροσωπεία από την Κορέα, μία χώρα με την οποία μας ενώνουν κοινοί αγώνες για την ελευθερία και μία χώρα με την οποία η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση επιδιώκει περαιτέρω εμβάθυνση των σχέσεών της.

Θα ήθελα πρώτα απ' όλα να ευχαριστήσω το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο, που προσέθεσε αυτό το ιδιαίτερα σημαντικό θέμα στην ημερήσια διάταξη αυτής της συνεδρίασης. Πρόκειται για ένα ζήτημα μεγάλου ενδιαφέροντος, όχι μόνο για το Κοινοβούλιο, αλλά και για το Συμβούλιο, και θα έλεγα και για όλους τους ευρωπαίους πολίτες.

Είχαμε εντατικές συζητήσεις στο Συμβούλιο επί του θέματος της ελεύθερης κυκλοφορίας και θα επιθυμούσα να σας ενημερώσω για τα κύρια σημεία που ανέκυψαν από τις πρόσφατες συζητήσεις μας. Πρώτον, η συντριπτική πλειοψηφία των κρατών μελών υποστηρίζει πλήρως την ελεύθερη κυκλοφορία προσώπων και θεωρεί ότι το δικαίωμα αυτό θα πρέπει να διατηρηθεί και να προωθηθεί. Η ελεύθερη κυκλοφορία συνιστά μία εκ των τεσσάρων βασικών ελευθεριών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και βρίσκεται στην καρδιά της διαδικασίας της ευρωπαϊκής ενσωμάτωσης. Είναι, επίσης, μία από τις πτυχές που ωφελούν εμφανώς τους πολίτες μας.

Δεύτερον, η πλειονότητα των κρατών μελών δεν επιθυμεί οιαδήποτε σύγχυση των εννοιών "ελευθερία κυκλοφορίας", "κινητικότητα", "μετανάστευση" και "μετανάστες από άλλες χώρες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης". Βάσει του δικαίου της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, οι πολίτες της δεν πρέπει να εξισώνονται με τους μετανάστες τρίτων χωρών στο πλαίσιο της ελεύθερης κυκλοφορίας. Δεν μπορεί να υφίσταται αμφισημία, αναφορικά με τη νομική διάκριση, ως προς τις διαφορές στο καθεστώς και στην κλίμακα των δικαιωμάτων. Το δικαίωμα των πολιτών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης να κυκλοφορούν και να εγκαθίστανται εντός της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, είτε για οικονομικούς, είτε για άλλους σκοπούς, είναι θεμελιωδώς διαφορετικό από τις διαθέσιμες δυνατότητες των υπηκόων τρίτων κρατών οι οποίοι υπόκεινται στους κανόνες της μετανάστευσης.

Τρίτον, όλοι συμφωνούν ότι ενώ η ελευθερία κυκλοφορίας αποτελεί δικαίωμα, συνεπάγεται επίσης ορισμένα καθήκοντα και υποχρεώσεις. Στο πλαίσιο αυτό, το Συμβούλιο έχει εξετάσει ισχυρισμούς για κατάχρηση των δικαιωμάτων για ελεύθερη κυκλοφορία. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή με εξουσιοδότηση του Συμβουλίου διεξήγαγε έρευνα βάσει στοιχείων, η οποία περιλάμβανε τη συλλογή δεδομένων και από τα ίδια τα κράτη μέλη.

Τα αποτελέσματα ήταν ενδιαφέροντα και σημαντικά στο πλαίσιο της σημερινής συζήτησης. Οι πληροφορίες που συγκεντρώθηκαν και αξιολογήθηκαν από την Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή, υποδηλώνουν ότι οι πολίτες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης κυκλοφορούν πρωταρχικά με σκοπό να εργαστούν, και όχι για να αποκομίσουν κοινωνικά επιδόματα σε άλλα κράτη μέλη.

Στην πραγματικότητα, είναι λιγότερο πιθανό να είναι άνεργοι απ' ότι οι πολίτες της φιλοξενούσας χώρας, άρα συνεισφέρουν ενεργά στην οικονομική ανάπτυξη της χώρας υποδοχής.

Βεβαίως, κανείς δεν μπορεί να πει ότι δεν υπάρχουν και καταχρήσεις του συστήματος. Πάντα υπάρχουν μεμονωμένα περιστατικά κατάχρησης, είτε από τους ίδιους τους υπηκόους των κρατών μελών, είτε από τους υπηκόους άλλων κρατών μελών ή από υπηκόους τρίτων κρατών. Η κατάχρηση πρέπει, βεβαίως, πάντα να αντιμετωπίζεται. Υπάρχει νομικό πλαίσιο, υπάρχουν συγκεκριμένες δικλείδες ασφαλείας, που δίνουν τη δυνατότητα στα κράτη μέλη να λαμβάνουν τα απαραίτητα μέτρα για την αντιμετώπιση τέτοιων περιπτώσεων κατάχρησης.

Εντούτοις, η Συνθήκη δεν επιτρέπει επιπρόσθετα πανευρωπαϊκά μέτρα, ούτε περιορισμούς σε βάρος πολιτών ορισμένων κρατών μελών, ούτε προβλέπονται ποσοστώσεις υπηκόων Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, αυθαίρετες εκδιώξεις ή άλλα παρόμοια μέτρα διακριτικής μεταχείρισης.

Θα ήθελα να είμαι απολύτως σαφής στο σημείο αυτό. Ένας πολύ μεγάλος αριθμός κρατών μελών, μαζί με την Επιτροπή, συμφωνούν ότι το ζήτημα δεν είναι θέμα ευρωπαϊκού δικαίου ή θέμα ανάληψης δράσης σε ευρωπαϊκό επίπεδο, αλλά πρόκειται μάλλον για τον τρόπο με τον οποίο η ευρωπαϊκή νομοθεσία εφαρμόζεται σε τοπικό επίπεδο. Τούτο θα μπορούσε να περιλαμβάνει κάποια μέτρα αντιμετώπισης συγκεκριμένων καταστάσεων.

Η πρόσφατη ανακοίνωση της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής σχετικά με την ελευθερία κυκλοφορίας προσώπων, παρουσιάζει μία σειρά πιθανών δράσεων που μπορούν να εφαρμοστούν σε εθνικό επίπεδο.

Κύριε Πρόεδρε, αξιότιμα μέλη, παρακολουθούμε προσεκτικά τις επιθέσεις και την αρνητική δημοσιότητα που περιρρέει γύρω από την αρχή της ελεύθερης κυκλοφορίας. Πιστεύουμε ότι ιδίως σήμερα που βιώνουμε μια άνοδο του λαϊκισμού και της ξενοφοβίας, θα πρέπει οι δημόσιες τοποθετήσεις να βασίζονται σε πραγματικά στοιχεία και όχι σε επικίνδυνες γενικεύσεις ή στερεότυπα. Η ελεύθερη κυκλοφορία αποτελεί μία εκ των πλέον σημαντικών ωφελειών της ευρωπαϊκής διαδικασίας ενσωμάτωσης. Πρόκειται για ανεκτίμητο πλεονέκτημα το οποίο οφείλουμε να το διαφυλάξουμε τώρα καθώς και για τις επόμενες γενιές, και σας διαβεβαιώνω ότι η Προεδρία δεσμεύεται να εξασφαλίσει ότι αυτό θα γίνει.

  Viviane Reding, Vice-President of the Commission. − Mr President, honourable Members, today is a timely debate, because in recent weeks much has been said and written on this subject. That is why it is a debate in which institutions need to make their voices heard very clearly. The Commission believes that we must again and again state clearly that all EU citizens are entitled to free movement – without exception. They enjoy the right to free movement as a direct consequence of being European citizens and of their Member State being a Member of the European Union.

Free movement is one of those basic rights citizens enjoy. If you look at our Eurobarometer, it is also the right which they cherish most. I would like to make it very clear: it is a right which is not up for negotiation.

Free movement gives the citizens the right to live, work and study anywhere in the Union: an important right which over 14 million citizens utilise. They reside in another Member State on a stable basis. There is also a very strong economic case for free movement, because it not only benefits those who move, it also benefits the economies to which they move and the economies from which they have moved.

The GDP of the EU-15 is estimated to have increased by almost 1 % in the long term as a result of the free movement after the 2004 enlargement. The data – which is provided by the Member States – shows that the main motivation for EU citizens to move to another Member State is for work. Of all citizens residing in another EU country in 2012, more than three quarters – 78% – were of working age as compared to 66 % among nationals. The overall employment rate of mobile EU workers – 68 % – is higher than that of the non-mobile citizens – 65 %.

Also, and this is very important, mobile EU citizens tend to be net contributors to the costs of the public services they use in the host country. As a matter of fact, those who are not in employment represent a very limited share of the total number of mobile citizens. They are therefore unlikely to represent a real burden on the welfare systems of host countries.

Now, we have heard very clearly the concern which has been raised by some Member States, that free movement has been abused on their territories, causing difficult social situations in certain localities. The Commission has listened to those Member States and it has gathered data – provided by those Member States – to better grasp the dimension of the problem. To present its findings, the Commission adopted in November a communication on the free movement of citizens and their families which provides facts and figures, clarifies the rights and obligations and explains the conditions and limitations offered by the EU rules on free movement. To make it very clear: the current rules on free movement, including access to social benefits, contain sufficient safeguards to prevent EU citizens becoming an unreasonable burden on the host country.

Having said that, we would also like to say clearly that we stand ready to help the Member States in their efforts to fight fraud and abuse. While those seem to occur only on a small scale, they must nevertheless be taken very seriously, because abuse – or the feeling that there is abuse – destroys free movement. That is why the Commission, with a five-point action plan, proposed to give a helping hand to the Member States when implementing the right to free movement on their territories.

The Member States and the EU here share the responsibility to make these rules work and to uphold them for the benefit of the citizens, of growth and of employment. This also includes countering public perceptions which are not based on facts and economic realities. In exercising this responsibility, national authorities can count on the support of the Commission.

Please rest assured that the Commission is ready to uphold EU law. This is our duty as Guardian of the Treaties: we will ensure that any measure adopted in any Member State is fully compliant with EU law. I know from experience that I can count on the strong support of the European Parliament when it comes to these questions. Our citizens also know that they can count on us, and that is what we have to deliver.

(Applause)

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, the free movement of workers is one of the four fundamental freedoms of the European Union and the cornerstone of the EU single market. The free movement of workers benefits individual workers by giving them access to a greater range of job opportunities and experience, and it also benefits the economies and welfare systems of the host countries.

In order to ensure that EU workers are better able to exercise their right to free movement in practice, the EU treaty also includes rules to ensure that they do not face discrimination in terms of access to jobs or working conditions. These rules include the coordination of social security, as it is necessary to treat workers from other Member States and national workers equally in terms of other social benefits and tax advantages. The EU also offers help to people who are interested in working in another Member State through the European Employment Services (EURES) job search network, for example. We will make a proposal to upgrade this later this week.

The free movement of workers has been subject to transitional measures in five out of seven enlargements. On 1 January 2014, the transitional measures concerning the freedom of movement for Romanian and Bulgarian workers ended. Those nine Member States which were still applying restrictions in 2013 have now lifted them.

The Commission is monitoring this process to ensure that rights are not violated and that all questions receive an answer. Fairness – and the perception of fairness – is important. Concerns have nevertheless been expressed, even by some Members of this Parliament, about the risk that increased flows of people would put an excessive burden on the social security systems of some Member States. But the evidence shows that people actually go where they find jobs and not benefits. This is confirmed by a recent report published by the Commission, as well as by previous experience.

Because EU migrants are more likely to be economically active than nationals of the host Member States and less likely to claim social benefits, they are net contributors to the host country welfare system in the vast majority of the Member States.

In this context, let me express my satisfaction for the agreement reached at trialogue level concerning the proposal for a directive on measures facilitating the exercise of the right of free movement of workers. This directive is aimed at ensuring better national enforcement of the EU rules in the field of free movement of workers. It provides for the existence of at least one body in every Member State to provide assistance and information to EU workers and their family members on their EU rights. Thanks to amendments proposed by the Parliament, it will also be empowered to liaise and cooperate with similar bodies in other countries. I am confident that the adoption of the directive will lead to all-round better support concerning the rights of migrant EU workers.

Vice-President Reding recalled the Communication on free movement of EU citizens and their families which the Commission adopted last year. Amongst the five actions foreseen by the communication, one concerned the publication of a practical guide on the Habitual Residence Test. This guide was published on Monday, 13 January 2014 and will help Member States to apply EU rules on the coordination of social security and to safeguard against abuse. The guide was jointly drafted by representatives from Member States and the European Commission.

There are clear safeguards in EU law to prevent people from abusing the social welfare systems of other EU countries, and this guide will make it easier for national and local authorities to apply the Habitual Residence safeguards in practice, with the objective of facilitating the free movement of people throughout the European Union. It is also useful to recall that no Member State has provided any evidence of widespread or systematic abuse of social welfare by people from other EU countries.

  Marian-Jean Marinescu, în numele grupului PPE. – Domnule președinte, libertatea de circulație este un principiu fundamental al Uniunii Europene. Nu poate exista piață unică, fără libera circulație a forței de muncă. Lucrătorii sunt angajați pentru că antreprenorii au nevoie de ei. Cetățenii europeni au aceleași obligații, dar și aceleași drepturi.

Deficiențele administrațiilor naționale sau rezultatele economice nefavorabile nu se pot acoperi prin invocarea libertății de circulație. Această dezbatere este susținută de politicieni populiști și de alții, care cred că vor câștiga mai multe voturi, dacă devin populiști. Trebuie eliminată confuzia între libera circulație și accesarea sistemelor sociale. Nu cer să se limiteze un drept fundamental și nu blamez popoare, pentru că un număr foarte mic de beneficiari încalcă legea. Cine greșește, plătește.

Cred că este timpul ca dezbaterea ridicolă din Marea Britanie să înceteze, ca și din alte state membre, în care propriile statistici arată că în scurt timp rămân fără mână de lucru și că, fără migrație, economia intră în colaps. Guvernele ar trebui să se preocupe mai mult de crearea de locuri de muncă pentru proprii cetățeni.

Stimați colegi, dacă dorim mai multă ordine în sistemele sociale, atunci trebuie să acceptăm mai multă integrare. Trebuie să spunem lucruri adevărate, nu povești, și trebuie să continuăm să susținem principiile europene.

  Hannes Swoboda, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, there are 26.5 million people unemployed in Europe today. Nine per cent of all Europeans live in extreme poverty. One quarter of Europeans are at risk of poverty and social exclusion.

These are the problems facing Europe.

Freedom of movement in Europe, however, is not a problem. It is a right and a pillar of the European Union. People do not want just a single market for goods and services; they also want a joint and common labour market. Therefore I really deplore the fact that some people, especially those on the very extreme right – if they were here they could now debate the issue, but they are not here – fight against freedom of movement.

We progressives take the concerns of our citizens seriously. We understand that there is an on-going crisis in which millions of people have lost their jobs, their homes and their hope for a better future for themselves and their children, and that those people are looking for answers and for help. But national governments that allow people to be exploited and to be paid less than a decent income are the problem, and they should answer to their citizens and fight against social dumping.

It is much too easy to point to Brussels as being the one responsible for the disaster, but if we look at the figures which have been mentioned, only 2.7 % of EU citizens live in other EU countries, and that is a big problem. Poverty migration is a problem – but because poverty is the problem, not because migration is the problem.

There are single cases of abuse, as has been mentioned, but it is up to the Member States to fight against it. As I said this morning, it is very strange that Mr Cameron wanted to make a big fuss about it and wanted to show the figures in the coming weeks but then said ‘no, no, no, I have to go back and we will present the figures after the European election’.

Mr Cameron should join Mr Miliband, for example, in fighting against low-paid jobs, and the lack of qualifications and in fighting for a better Posting of Workers Directive.

Ironically, those countries or those politicians who are now engaged in a frantic debate about the dangers of abuse were the first to let us down when we wanted an improvement of the EU directive, especially the EU directive to prevent social dumping.

The debate we are witnessing is painful because it is reminiscent of a time before the European Union, a time where people, nations and minorities were singled out and attacked. Like many others, I am very happy that Romanians and Bulgarians are here, and I find it particularly disgraceful that now, with the labour market opening for Romania and Bulgaria, we are starting to think about fingerprinting and curtailing their rights.

Let us have a common Europe and a common labour market, because this is the only chance to have a social Europe for everybody, for Romanians and British people at the same time.

  Renate Weber, în numele grupului ALDE. – Domnule președinte, dragi colegi, mi-aș dori foarte mult ca aceasta să fie ultima oară când discutăm în acest Parlament despre libertatea de mișcare în interiorul Uniunii Europene. Nu pentru că nu ar fi un subiect foarte important, ci pentru că este inadmisibil ca acest drept fundamental să fie contestat.

Mi-aș dori ca toate evaluările și recomandările pe care noi, deputații europeni, le facem în rezoluții, să fie respectate de celelalte instituții europene, precum și de guvernele statelor membre.

Mi-aș dori ca politicienii europeni, de la premierul David Cameron, la ministrul de interne Manuel Valls și până la eurodeputatul Elmar Brok, să se comporte responsabil și să nu mai alimenteze, prin discursurile lor, intoleranța și xenofobia.

Mi-aș dori foarte mult ca, de pildă, concetățenii mei români, care trăiesc, studiază și muncesc în Marea Britanie, în Germania, Italia sau Olanda, să nu mai fie ținta campaniilor de presă sau a campaniilor politice nefondate și populiste, căci toate studiile arată că migrația forței de muncă a contribuit și contribuie la bunăstarea statului membru în care are loc.

Mi-aș dori foarte mult să nu mai fie nevoie să demonstrăm la infinit fapte evidente și să conviețuim normal unii cu alții, indiferent unde dorim să ne stabilim în interiorul Uniunii, așa cum a fost gândită și cum trebuie să rămână această construcție europeană.

Dar, cum vor exista tot timpul și politicieni extremiști, sau doar populiști și oportuniști, care vor dori să limiteze libertățile și drepturile fundamentale, va trebui să continuăm lupta noastră comună împotriva oricărei restricții privind libera circulație și pentru a ne asigura că toți cetățenii europeni, indiferent de țara de origine, sunt tratați în mod egal și au acces nediscriminatoriu pe piața muncii, oriunde în Uniune.

  Rebecca Harms, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! In Deutschland haben wir in den Jahren, in denen wir das Datum für die Freizügigkeit hinausgezögert haben, trotzdem weiterhin die Erfahrung gemacht: Wir haben viele Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer, die aus Osteuropa, aus ganz Osteuropa nach Deutschland kommen. Sie arbeiten zum Teil unter haarsträubenden Bedingungen auf Schlachthöfen, sie arbeiten in der häuslichen Pflege, sie arbeiten auf dem Bau. Illegal! Schwarz! Das macht es unheimlich einfach, sie auszunehmen. Das ist übrigens keine Entlastung der deutschen Sozialsysteme. Die Empörung über diese Zustände, über diese Rosinenpickerei in Deutschland, habe ich eigentlich immer nur punktuell gehört, aber nicht im Rahmen einer solchen nationalen Aufregung, wie das jetzt zum Zeitpunkt der Arbeitnehmerfreizügigkeit, der Freizügigkeit gegenüber Bulgarien und Rumänien passiert.

Ich finde, das ist wirklich eine bigotte und auch völlig falsch geführte Diskussion. Erst wenn wir diese legale Einwanderung in einen Arbeitsmarkt haben, dann können wir davon reden, dass auch unsere Sozialsysteme entlastet werden. Was wir anstreben, sind ja nicht nur gleiche Rechte; was wir anstreben, sind ja auch gleiche Pflichten für Menschen, die nebeneinander arbeiten. Gleiche Pflichten, gleiche Rechte – auch wenn die Europäer einen unterschiedlichen Pass mitbringen in die Arbeitsorte, an denen sie arbeiten.

Ich finde sehr gut, wie die Europäische Kommission auch die deutsche Diskussion versachlicht hat. Und ich finde, man sollte der deutschen Regierung auch noch mal sagen, was da eigentlich los gewesen ist. Man hatte diesen Zeitpunkt ja so weit wie möglich nach hinten verlagert. Warum war denn wieder nichts vorbereitet? Warum musste da, nachdem die Aufregung groß war, eine Ad-hoc-Arbeitsgruppe zur Lösung der Probleme eingerichtet werden? Dass wir Anforderungen an Hartz IV bekommen würden, dass wir Anforderungen auch ans Kindergeld bekommen würden, das war doch klar. Warum Verzögerung und dann keine Vorbereitung? Ich finde, dass Deutschland gerade als wohlhabendste Nation in dieser Auseinandersetzung nicht unbedingt das Land ist, an dem wir uns ein Beispiel nehmen sollten!

  Timothy Kirkhope, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, today is an opportunity – an opportunity to have a serious, moderate and sensible discussion on the future of freedom of movement in the EU.

Freedom of movement has brought economic growth and cultural diversity and has helped Europe meet the modern challenges of changing labour demands and global markets. The UK in particular has benefited through modern history from this form of two-way migration: through our Commonwealth, through the thousands of brave and hardworking Polish citizens who helped rebuild my country after the war, after fighting alongside us for freedom and democracy, through other European migration and also through the three million British citizens who benefit every day from living, working and retiring across the European Union.

But like any system which is nearly 30 years old, there needs to be a moment when we can look at how we need to adapt, reform and sometimes even strengthen it in order to ensure its future success and survival. But this should not translate into an attempt to destroy freedom of movement and discriminate against individual Member States. Hot tempers, blame, finger-pointing and the political point-scoring which has been taking place is not something that helps to restore confidence; it does not help us to find the best way forward.

I would like to say to Mr Swoboda: please get your facts right. When you refer to my Prime Minister, please also remember that the leader of the Labour Party in the UK has said exactly the same things in relation to these matters as my leader has. That tone, Mr Swoboda, is a disservice to this Parliament and to all the people of Europe.

I could fill my speech pointing blame at senior politicians from all countries, indeed in all political groups, but we need a more constructive debate. With such rhetoric we play into the hands of those individuals – and the media – who want to call this Parliament and the EU irrational and out of touch. The people of Europe look for leadership. Reform and clarification: yes. But the tone of today’s discussion must remain moderate, sensible and positive.

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

  Sarah Ludford (ALDE), blue-card question. – Does Mr Kirkhope agree with me in the light of his remarks that it is outrageous that Tory party leaders in the UK are suppressing a report on EU free movement because they do not like the positive evidence that it apparently contains? Will he join with me in calling for an honest debate, not one built on myths, and one that acknowledges that EU migrants in the UK pay one third more in tax than they receive in benefits and are much less likely to claim welfare than British people? By the way, I do agree with him that Labour Party leaders are also at fault in the UK, and I hope to blue-card Ms Willmott later.

  Timothy Kirkhope (ECR), blue-card answer. – Baroness Ludford has been around long enough in politics to know about me and my reluctance to see anything suppressed that adds a positive contribution to a debate of this kind. We need the positive approach and we need to be factual, calm and sensible, and no one could show more of that than Baroness Ludford herself.

  Cornelia Ernst, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Zunächst beglückwünsche ich meine bulgarischen und rumänischen Kolleginnen und Kollegen dazu, dass die Bürger ihrer Länder endlich auch die Freizügigkeit genießen können! Wir als Linke stehen für Gleichheit und Gleichberechtigung, und zwar aller in der EU lebenden Bürgerinnen und Bürger, und zwar ohne Wenn und Aber.

Gegen die – ich muss schon sagen chauvinistische und nationalistische – Hetze von Premier Cameron und dem Kleinfürsten Seehofer muss es Widerstand geben, weil ihre Hetze sich ja gegen alle Bürger und Bürgerinnen richtet, die außerhalb ihres Herkunftslandes arbeiten oder ihren Lebensmittelpunkt haben. Es geht also überhaupt nicht nur um Bulgarien und Rumänien, wie wir feststellen. Wie im Übrigen die Bulgaren und Rumänen in Deutschland zu der ausländischen Bevölkerungsgruppe gehören, die die wenigsten Sozialhilfeleistungen in Anspruch nimmt; einen Bruchteil, über den wir jetzt reden! Die Freizügigkeitsrichtlinie erlaubt keine Diskriminierung. Im Übrigen auch nicht aufgrund der sozialen Herkunft. Das hat auch etwas mit der Grundrechtecharta zu tun, in der das verankert ist.

Wir verlangen, dass die Mitgliedstaaten wie die Bundesrepublik Deutschland ihre Gesetze ändern, und zwar so ändern, dass das Prinzip der Freizügigkeit für alle gewährt wird. Deshalb unterstützen wir auch die Position der Kommission wärmstens. Gegen die restriktiven Regelungen der Bundesrepublik ist gerade ein Verfahren beim EuGH anhängig, und auch deutsche Gerichte haben sich gegen die restriktive Vergabe von Hartz IV, also dem Arbeitslosengeld II, ausgesprochen.

Erlauben Sie mir am Ende noch ein einziges Wort: Diejenigen, die jetzt von der Arbeitsmigration herumkrakeelen und sich gegen Einwanderer starkmachen, sind genau diejenigen gewesen, die für die Kürzung des Haushalts der EU gestimmt haben, auch bei den Kohäsionsfonds, die gegen Armut und Ausgrenzung da sein sollen. Da sage ich nur: Liebe Leute, schämt euch!

  Francesco Enrico Speroni, a nome del gruppo EFD. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, come hanno sottolineato il rappresentante del Consiglio e i rappresentanti della Commissione, esistono le regole, esistono gli abusi e le violazioni delle regole circa la libera circolazione. Io ricordo che, secondo queste regole, un cittadino europeo può, sì, andare in uno degli altri ventisette paesi ma non deve gravare sull'assistenza pubblica e deve avere un reddito minimo. Spesso queste condizioni non sono soddisfatte e nessuno reagisce, facendo applicare le norme in materia.

In Italia, paese in cui sono stato eletto, abbiamo già da tempo accettato, pur non avendo alcuna moratoria – molti cittadini, soprattutto rumeni, soprattutto di un particolare ceppo, i quali non sono iscritti alle liste del lavoro, quindi non cercano lavoro e vivono – per lo più – di assistenza sociale. Noi chiediamo che questi abusi cessino e che le regole europee vengano rispettate.

  Auke Zijlstra (NI). - Voorzitter, het vrije verkeer van personen is een fundamenteel recht, maar alle fundamentele rechten zijn op te schorten, zo heeft de Europese Commissie op vragen van mij aangegeven. Namelijk wanneer er sprake is van een noodsituatie. Zo is het vrije verkeer van kapitaal stopgezet op Cyprus. Als het omvallen van een bank op Cyprus al een noodsituatie is, waarom is de uit de hand gelopen situatie met de interne massamigratie dat niet?

Miljoenen mensen trekken van land tot land. Overal ontstaan problemen met huisvesting, met integratie, met scholing, en ook met het zogenaamde uitkeringstoerisme. Sociale stelsels zullen bezwijken onder Europese regels als die rechten toekennen waar geen plichten zijn.

Er zijn landen toegelaten tot de Europese Unie die er nog niet klaar voor waren en dat heeft geleid tot de huidige problemen.

Indachtig de opvatting van de Europese Commissie is het hoog tijd om deze situatie aan te pakken door het fundamenteel recht op vrij verkeer op te schorten. Maar de lidstaten moeten daartoe het initiatief nemen om hun eigen sociale stelsels en hun eigen bevolking te beschermen. En ze hebben, Voorzitter, alle recht daartoe.

  Моника Панайотова (PPE). - Г-н Председател, колеги, вече е 15 януари и всички видяхме, че миграционна вълна от българи и румънци няма, а спекулациите за мащабите ѝ са нереални. В контекста на предстоящите европейски избори трябва да направим следните основни изводи:

Първо, не бива да допускаме негативната кампания да доминира европейския дебат. Националните правителства и европейските формации не трябва да попадат в капана на пронационалистическите и антиевропейски партии, взаимствайки тяхната риторика с цел краткосрочни политически дивиденти. Подобни стратегии представляват „скриване“ от реалните проблеми и нужди на европейските граждани, чието решение изисква структурни реформи, повече образование за икономически растеж, повишаване на заетостта, особено сред младите.

Подобни кампании крият риска да се забрави вярата в хората и приносa на имигрантите към икономиката и обществото на приемащата страна. Личен пример дава българинът Пламен Петков, който загива трагично през 2012 г., спасявайки петгодишно момиче във Великобритания от удавяне и бива удостоен посмъртно с Кралския медал за доблест.

Незачитането на фундаменталното право за свободно движение е опасност за стабилността на Европейския съюз в дългосрочен план с оглед на мултикултурните общества, в които живеем.

Както спомена и заместник-председателят Рединг, според Евробарометър гражданите посочват това право като най-положителния ефект от интеграцията, а Европейската комисия отчита нарастване на брутния вътрешен продукт с минимум 1% в страните, приели работници от Източна Европа. Нека не поставяме под риск това постижение за конкурентоспособността на Европа чрез използване пълния потенциал на единния пазар.

  Sylvie Guillaume (S&D). - Monsieur le Président, Madame et Monsieur les Commissaires, chers collègues, la liberté de circulation des Européens est un droit fondamental auquel une très large majorité de nos concitoyens sont très attachés. Ce principe est au cœur de la réalisation de la citoyenneté européenne.

Dans ce débat, il faut d'abord et avant tout se concentrer sur les faits plutôt que sur des mythes véhiculés par certains élus conservateurs ou populistes au travers d'accusations infondées. Ce sont des amalgames douteux qui sont entretenus.

Quelques chiffres donc pour en revenir aux faits: seuls 2,8 % des citoyens européens vivent dans un autre pays que leur pays d'origine. La plupart d'entre eux sont des contribuables. En particulier, 79 % vivent dans un ménage dont au moins un des membres a un emploi. Les dépenses de santé pour les citoyens européens mobiles non actifs représentent 0,2 % du total des dépenses de santé.

Enfin, comme il était indiqué à l'instant sur le côté massif ou invasif de la mobilité, 24 Roumains semblent être arrivés au Royaume-Uni depuis le début de l'année et ce sont, pour les Pays-Bas, 21 Roumains et 15 Bulgares sur lesquels les entreprises se sont d'ailleurs précipitées.

Des règles, des obligations – si on le dit autrement – existent déjà au niveau européen pour encadrer les conditions de résidence et les droits aux prestations sociales des citoyens européens décidant d'aller travailler dans un autre pays que le leur. Elles doivent donc d'abord être mises en œuvre. Il faut cesser de pointer du doigt, sans preuve de surcroît, l'immigration des citoyens européens comme seule responsable des difficultés des finances publiques.

Il n'est donc pas acceptable que ces citoyens européens soient ainsi considérés a priori comme des boucs émissaires bien utiles pour masquer la responsabilité de certaines politiques. En effet, ce débat relève davantage de questions de politique interne à des fins purement électoralistes et aux relents nationalistes. C'est ce type de discours qui est entretenu par des élus qui mélangent allègrement, et quelquefois intentionnellement, les questions de levée des mesures transitoires et l'adhésion de la Roumanie et de la Bulgarie à Schengen. Ce sont les mêmes qui accusent les citoyens européens de tourisme aux prestations sociales mais pour qui le maintien de règles opaques sur le détachement des travailleurs n'est absolument pas un problème, et qui s'opposent par ailleurs farouchement au fait que tout sous-traitant direct soit tenu responsable pour le non versement du salaire à un travailleur détaché.

Ces travailleurs européens mobiles contribuent de façon importante à nos économies et nous devons le réaffirmer avec force. Les solutions sont ailleurs: dans la relance de nos économies, dans la défense des droits des travailleurs et la lutte contre la pauvreté. Nous refusons l'idée selon laquelle il y aurait des citoyens de première et de seconde classes, ce n'est clairement pas cette orientation que nous souhaitons à l'avenir pour l'Europe.

  Nadja Hirsch (ALDE). - Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Vertreter der Kommission! Freizügigkeit ist für mich als Liberale die Basis für Wohlstand und für Wachstum. Binnenmarkt und Freizügigkeit sollen Menschen Lebenschancen ermöglichen, sollen eine Perspektive entwickeln. Was ich allerdings im Moment erlebe – ich komme aus Deutschland, genauer gesagt aus Bayern –, ist genau das Gegenteil. Es ist reiner Populismus, was die CSU in Bayern in den letzten Wochen abgezogen hat. Sie hat Bulgaren und Rumänen wirklich diskriminiert und auf eine populistische Weise als Sozialbetrüger hingestellt. Ich wundere mich jetzt – ehrlich gesagt –, wo denn die Kolleginnen und Kollegen von der CSU sind. Hier könnten sie dieses Thema anbringen, hier sind sie aber leider heute nicht. Genau daran sieht man, dass das ganze Thema als reiner Wahlkampf missbraucht worden ist. Ich finde das als Europäerin sehr schlimm, weil eben – wie auch schon gesagt worden ist – die Fakten ein ganz anderes Bild zeigen. Wir brauchen die Menschen in Deutschland, in Europa. Wir wollen diese Menschen, die zu uns kommen und auch hier gerne arbeiten. Wir stehen zur Freizügigkeit und wollen eine Willkommenskultur, auch gerade in Deutschland und in Bayern.

Natürlich kennen wir die Probleme einzelner Kommunen in Verbindung mit der Armutswanderung. Das ist auch keine Frage. Aber daran arbeiten wir sachlich. Dafür gibt es auch den ESF, den man nutzen kann.

Ich muss aber zugleich sagen, und das ist jetzt an die Kommission gerichtet: Die Mitteilung letzte Woche, das Statement, das Interview von Ihnen, Herr Kommissar Andor, war nicht sehr hilfreich. Ihr Statement hat leider der CSU sehr stark in die Hände gespielt, nachdem Sie hier ein sehr missverständliches Interview gegeben haben. Es muss klar sein: Wenn jemand arbeitet und in die Sozialkassen eingezahlt hat, bekommt er ganz normal den Zugang zu den Sozialsystemen. Wenn er aber nicht gearbeitet hat, dann können wir auch nicht anfangen, riesige Einzelfallprüfungen einzuführen, denn das würde zusätzliche Bürokratie bedeuten. Das ist nicht sinnvoll.

  Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE). - Mr President, I am very pleased that we have been talking about many of the rules this afternoon, because I think that, for a number of us in our Member States, the way in which this debate is conducted is as if there are no rules and no regulations. People turn up, and from day one – hallelujah! – the money is showered upon you and you do not have to anything for it.

This is a total load of lies and an absolute misrepresentation, but of course it suits some to have a fact-free zone, because facts can be very uncomfortable.

Yes, there is evidence that there are problems. Looking at the citizenship reports from the European Union that the Commission has produced, we know that there is a lack of information for people when they move about how things work, what their entitlements are and how they actually fit into systems.

We know there is a lack of information about rights, such as rights at work. These are the sort of things that allow the exploitation of people. This is why we discussed labour inspection this week, partly as a direct response to some of the issues that have arisen through people moving within the European Union.

We should deal with those difficulties, and we should also deal with the gaps that there are in protection. But the principle is clear. If you move, there is equal treatment with the nationals of the state that you are in. This means that if you are contributing, you have entitlements. And I am really concerned about some of the actions calling into question the entitlements of people who have contributed to a system, so that they are actually going to get nothing for something – the opposite of what is often said.

  Ryszard Antoni Legutko (ECR). - Wolność poruszania się jest zasadą, której naruszać nie wolno, aczkolwiek w praktyce prowadzi ona często do konsekwencji trudnych do zaakceptowania. Wiąże się to ze zróżnicowanym poziomem zamożności w krajach Unii Europejskiej. Kraje bogatsze, społeczeństwa bogatsze bronią się przed nadmiernym napływem przybyszów ze społeczeństw biedniejszych.

Z mojego kraju w ciągu krótkiego czasu wyjechało szukać szczęścia ponad 2 miliony osób. Ta sytuacja z pewnością nie jest zdrowa. Wyjeżdżający stają się podwójnymi ofiarami: z jednej strony są ofiarą własnych rządów, które nie potrafią zadbać o wystarczające warunki egzystencji i pracy w kraju pochodzenia, z drugiej strony są oni szczególnie narażeni w kraju przyjmującym, gorzej traktowani i często padają ofiarą konfliktów partyjnych. Dlatego ostatnie wypowiedzi niektórych polityków brytyjskich, również w tej Izbie, przyjąłem z przykrością jako niesprawiedliwe wobec przybyszów z Polski. Podobnie przykre są informacje o tym, co przytrafia się moim rodakom w Niemczech, o czym często donoszą media. To jest także krzywdzące i niesprawiedliwe. Tak nie powinno być.

  Gerard Batten (EFD). - Mr President, this morning President Barroso restated the European Union’s commitment to open borders as a fundamental principle.

A sensible immigration policy in Britain would allow entry only to those people we might actually want: people with the skills to fill jobs that genuinely cannot be filled by our own unemployed; people who have a legitimate right to marry British citizens; people who are hardworking and law abiding. Instead, what has the EU given us? We also get criminals, drug addicts, alcoholics, beggars, vagrants and benefit-seekers.

Decent British people see their living standards being driven down, while benefits and social housing are given to people who have never paid a penny in tax in the UK. That is what the EU has delivered for us, and next May the voters of Britain will deliver their verdicts on you, fellow Members, when they vote for the UK Independence Party in massive numbers.

  Marine Le Pen (NI). - Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, la libre circulation dans l'Union européenne connaît aujourd'hui ses limites. L'immigration intra et extra-européenne de masse, le problème des Roms ou encore la directive sur le détachement des travailleurs, qui entraîne la concurrence effrénée et le dumping social entre travailleurs européens, ont réveillé légitimement la colère et l'euroscepticisme.

Le débat sur l'immigration intra-européenne s'amplifie en France, en Grande-Bretagne et en Allemagne avec l'ouverture du marché du travail aux Roumains et aux Bulgares depuis le 1er janvier. La réponse du Conseil européen? Un accroissement des contrôles par les inspections du travail afin d'éviter les fraudes et les abus, mais en aucun cas la suppression de la directive sur le détachement des travailleurs.

Concernant les Roms, les États membres doivent s'engager sur des stratégies nationales d'intégration par l'accès à l'emploi, à l'éducation, au logement et aux soins de santé, alors qu'avec la crise économique et les cures d'austérité de nombreux nationaux sont victimes de chômage et de pauvreté.

Il est grand temps que la souveraineté des États soit rétablie, le principe de libre circulation remis en cause et les frontières rétablies. Ce ne sont pas ceux qui ont défendu, contre toute logique et toute sagesse, le dogme de la libre circulation qui peuvent, aujourd'hui, apporter des solutions aux problèmes qu'ils ont eux-mêmes créés.

  Jacek Protasiewicz (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! W wystąpieniach pani komisarz Reding i pana komisarza Andora znalazły się w zasadzie wszystkie najważniejsze fakty i prawdziwe argumenty, czyli po pierwsze – liczby są jednoznaczne. Europejczycy, także Polacy, migrują do innych krajów, żeby pracować, a nie pobierać tam zasiłki. Według obliczeń mniej niż 0,5% korzysta z zasiłków nie pracując.

Po drugie, pracownicy z innych krajów poprzez podatki i płacone składki na ubezpieczenia społeczne i zdrowotne wpłacają do budżetów krajów, gdzie pracują, więcej, niż pobierają w formie różnych świadczeń. Mówiła o tym pani baroness Ludford powołując się na brytyjskie badania i obliczenia w tej sprawie.

Po trzecie wreszcie, nie ulega wątpliwości, że wkład tych pracowników, migrantów z krajów europejskich w rozwój gospodarczy krajów, gdzie pracują, jest oczywiście pozytywny, i to duży. Żaden, podkreślam, żaden rząd europejski nie dostarczył, mimo próśb Komisji Europejskiej, żadnych dowodów na to, że jest inaczej w tych trzech sprawach, o których wspomniałem.

W tym kontekście krzywdzące niestety były słowa premiera Camerona, które wypowiedział pod adresem Polaków, używając Polaków jako przykładu, ilustracji dla rzekomego nadużywania systemu zasiłków rodzinnych w Wielkiej Brytanii. One oburzyły moich rodaków, bo po pierwsze była to nieprawda, a po drugie było to obraźliwie wobec tych, którzy ciężko pracują i wpłacają do budżetu Wielkiej Brytanii więcej, niż z niego pobierają.

Spodziewałem się na tej sali ze strony brytyjskich posłów konserwatystów prostego słowa „przepraszam”. Niestety, to słowo nie padło. Apeluję więc do sojuszników konserwatystów brytyjskich, posłów z PiS-u, posłów z ugrupowania Polska Razem. Panowie, nie wystarczy mieć usta pełne frazesów o honorze Polski i godności Polaków, jeżeli nie byliście w stanie wyegzekwować od waszych sojuszników prostego, zwykłego słowa „przepraszam”, to znaczy jesteście nieskuteczni i wypowiedzcie to słowo w ich imieniu tu na tej sali. Tego oczekują nasi rodacy i wasi wyborcy.

(oklaski)

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). - Señor Presidente, Comisario, estamos hablando del respeto del derecho fundamental a la libre circulación de personas, pero es imposible hacerlo lo bastante en serio si no hablamos también de su contexto y de su trasfondo.

Y el contexto es el de una crisis como no ha padecido nunca otra la Unión Europea, una crisis en la que la demagogia, el populismo y la eurofobia rabiosa están galopando a lomos del sufrimiento de los más débiles, una crisis que afecta a todos los derechos y libertades, y afecta, desde luego, a la libre circulación de personas, que está sujeta a un ataque sin precedentes por parte de planteamientos irresponsables.

Usted ha hablado de los abusos del sistema social de prestaciones, pero también de la impresión de feeling of abuse, y hay que atacar también ese sentimiento, esa presunción de abuso que no tiene ninguna correspondencia con la realidad en numerosos casos, que está agitada por discursos irresponsables y oportunistas, además de por medios de comunicación que faltan a la verdad.

Porque no se trata de atacar la libre circulación, que es uno de los activos de la construcción europea más apreciados por los europeos, sino de atacar la explotación sin escrúpulos que algunos empleadores hacen de trabajadores, debilitados en sus derechos, para practicar un dumping social inaceptable e incompatible con el proyecto europeo.

Y hay que decir también que, en este contexto de crisis, se ha desatado la cultura del odio al diferente y al otro, la explotación de chivos expiatorios y una competencia cruel y darwinista por recursos sociales escasos, lo que ha llevado a muchos Gobiernos —entre ellos el de mi país— a recortar prestaciones sociales. Último episodio: la retirada de la tarjeta de cobertura sanitaria a quienes dejan por escasos meses —tres meses— el país y se trasladan a algún otro en busca de oportunidades de trabajo.

Por tanto, es una situación muy grave y tenemos una oportunidad de rescatar Europa, la mejor Europa: las elecciones de mayo de 2014. Seguramente, la última oportunidad de rescatar el sueño europeo para que no se convierta en una pesadilla y de restablecer el modelo social europeo, el edificio social europeo que está en más serio riesgo que nunca.

  Phil Bennion (ALDE). - Mr President, free movement is one of our most cherished achievements, but the recent debate has taken a serious turn for the worse, especially back home in the UK, where we see Conservative and Labour politicians dancing to the UKIP tune, using rhetoric which portrays EU migrants as scroungers. The Liberal Democrats must set the record straight and defend the benefits of free movement, which is a two-way street.

It allows Brits to retire to Spain and thousands of young people to seek jobs all across the European Union. Of course, this does not mean freedom to access benefits without responsibilities. The UK Government is already taking some legitimate action to prevent loopholes in this respect, but we need to separate spin from substance. We need a sensible, evidence-led debate on free movement. Evidence shows that EU migration has brought huge benefits, particularly to the UK Treasury and to the National Health Service, which is propped up by highly-skilled migrants.

We do need to listen to citizens’ concerns about pressure on public services and integration, but let us not pander to UKIP and the xenophobic right-wing press by fuelling inaccurate sterotypes. We owe it to the younger generation to defend the right of free movement and the countless opportunities it brings.

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

  Michael Cashman (S&D), blue-card question. – Would Mr Bennion agree with me that we should stop this defamation of hard-working migrants across Europe, and could he also give me the evidence and quote where the Labour Party has purportedly said that EU migrants who are hard-working and come to the United Kingdom are scroungers? I am a member of the Labour Party. I have never heard this, but perhaps somewhere he listens to voices outside his head that nobody else can hear.

  Phil Bennion (ALDE), blue-card answer. – In this respect I was talking about the rhetoric we are seeing from UK politicians in the Westminster Parliament, and I was grouping together politicians there, particularly when they are looking at extending the period which must elapse before people can claim benefits, in other words saying that they cannot claim them for two years. This rather insinuates that they are coming over to claim benefits. I certainly do not make any criticisms of Labour and Conservative politicians in this House, where I think we have had a rational debate.

  Elisabeth Schroedter (Verts/ALE). - Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen, werte Kommissare, werter Ratspräsident! Ich kann eigentlich nur wiederholen, was mein Vorredner schon deutlich gemacht hat: Die Freizügigkeit ist ein fundamentales Recht aller EU-Bürger und Bürgerinnen. Vor allen Dingen die reichen Mitgliedstaaten profitieren enorm davon. Sie können nämlich dadurch auf ausreichend qualifizierte Arbeitskräfte zurückgreifen. Zudem dürfen wir nicht vergessen, dass das Grundrecht der Freizügigkeit mit Rechten und Verpflichtungen verbunden ist für beide: für Bürger und Bürgerinnen und für die Mitgliedstaaten. Und aus meiner Sicht ist es schierer Populismus, wenn in Deutschland die CSU und die CDU propagieren, die Zuwanderer aus Rumänien und Bulgarien würden das deutsche Sozialsystem ausnutzen und nur aus dem Grunde nach Deutschland kommen. Das EU-Recht hat dazu eine klare Regel: Wenn ein Mitgliedstaat eine solche Störung feststellt, muss es der Kommission Zahlen vorlegen. Und diese Zahlen gibt es eben nicht für Deutschland!

Auf der anderen Seite hat diese Zuwanderung positive Effekte für unser Sozialsystem im überalterten Deutschland. Die von der CDU/CSU angestoßene Debatte ist aus meiner Sicht im Kern Ausdruck von Xenophobie und schürt klassische Ängste vor Fremden, die Deutschen etwas wegnehmen wollen. Sie droht zu einer rassistischen Debatte gegen Sinti und Roma zu werden!

Jede Einschränkung der Freizügigkeit rüttelt an den Festen der EU. Wir Grüne sind dagegen, dass eine Zwei-Klassen-Gesellschaft in der EU geschaffen wird und unterschiedliche Menschen aus unterschiedlichen Ländern unterschiedliche Rechte bekommen. Deswegen ist es für uns ganz wichtig, dass diese Entschließung hier heute debattiert und morgen erfolgreich darüber abgestimmt wird.

  Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR). - Wszyscy, którzy mówią, że prawo do przemieszczania się jest jednym z podstawowych praw człowieka w Unii Europejskiej, podstawowym prawem obywatela Unii Europejskiej, mają rację. To prawda. W dalszym ciągu widać jednak, że w umysłach wielu osób zachował się mur berliński. Istnieje podział na lepszych i gorszych. I my ten „mur berliński” musimy zburzyć, jeszcze raz obalić, ale tym razem w naszych umysłach. Również w umysłach osób, które siedzą na tej sali.

Nie mogę sobie odmówić gorzkiej satysfakcji zacytowania słów E. Broka, który siedzi na tej sali i który rok temu w wywiadzie dla magazynu Bild powiedział: „Imigranci, którzy przyjeżdżają do Niemiec tylko ze względu na zapomogi socjalne, zapomogi dla dzieci i opiekę zdrowotną, muszą być szybko odsyłani do swoich ojczyzn. Aby uniemożliwić im powtórne wjazdy do Niemiec, należałoby zastanowić się nad pobieraniem ich odcisków palców”. Mam pytanie do Jacka Protasiewicza: skoro chciał Pan, żebyśmy my, jako Polska Razem, przepraszali za słowa Davida Camerona, to czy ma Pan w tej chwili odwagę wstać i przeprosić za słowa E. Broka?

  Jacek Olgierd Kurski (EFD). - Mr President, never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.

Te słowa o bohaterskich polskich lotnikach, którzy ramię w ramię z Brytyjczykami uratowali Anglię przed Hitlerem, wypowiedział Winston Churchill, który musi się dzisiaj przewracać w grobie widząc jak obecny premier Wielkiej Brytanii rozumie wolność i równość. Pan Cameron dla niskich wyborczych kalkulacji zapowiedział zmiany w prawie zmierzające do pozbawienia Polaków – pracujących ciężko w Wielkiej Brytanii i płacących tam podatki – zasiłków dla ich dzieci pozostających w Polsce. Stanowi to jawną dyskryminację Polaków, którzy tworzą brytyjski dochód narodowy, i Polski, która stanowi rynek zbytu dla brytyjskiej gospodarki. Solidarna Polska wzywa pana Camerona do przeproszenia za te słowa i wycofania się z tej propozycji.

Mr Cameron, withdraw your proposals, which go against the European principles of the free movement of labour and people, and do not ever divide people in such a way.

  Elmar Brok (PPE). - Herr Präsident, verehrte Kommissare, verehrte Ratspräsidentschaft! Die Freizügigkeit ist ein grundsätzliches Recht der Europäischen Union, für das wir von Anbeginn gekämpft haben – ich persönlich auch –, und dieses muss verteidigt werden. Es ist völlig klar, dass eine Diskriminierung der Bürger irgendeines Landes nicht erlaubt sein darf. Das ist gegen europäisches Recht und gegen unsere Prinzipien. Deswegen sind beispielsweise die Vorstellungen von Herrn Cameron, im Falle von bestimmten Ländern die soziale Unterstützung zu halbieren gegenüber anderen, nicht erlaubt. Wer in einem Land arbeitet, hat dieselben sozialen Rechte, auch wenn er arbeitslos wird, wie jemand, der in diesem Lande Bürger ist. Das muss völlig klargestellt sein und darf in keiner anderen Weise geregelt sein.

Es muss klar sein, dass die Freizügigkeit ein kultureller Gewinn für unsere Bürger ist, aber auch ein ökonomischer Vorteil. Manchmal könnten wir Arbeitslosigkeit auch bekämpfen, wenn wir mehr Mobilität hätten. Auch hier ist, glaube ich, ein Punkt, der positiv gesehen werden muss.

Aber es muss auch klar sein, dass das EU-Recht die Möglichkeit gibt, nicht nur die Freizügigkeit herzustellen, sondern auch ihren Missbrauch zu verhindern. Deswegen bin ich dankbar, dass die Kommission jetzt Vorschläge gemacht hat, damit lokale Institutionen in der Lage sind, mit diesem Problem besser umzugehen. Und nichts anderes habe ich in der Vergangenheit gemeint! Es muss klar sein, dass Probleme in der nationalen Gesetzgebung bestehen und manche lokalen Administrationen mit diesem Problem der Öffnung für Freizügigkeit als auch deren Missbrauch nicht klarkommen, und daher müssen wir die entsprechenden Unterstützungen geben.

Ich meine, Europa schafft die Freizügigkeit, gibt aber auch die rechtlichen Möglichkeiten, den Missbrauch zu vermeiden. Ich glaube, es ist ein wichtiger Weg, das Recht einzuhalten, damit Populisten keine Chance haben, Missbrauch in einer falschen Richtung zu nutzen. Wir sollten mal sehen, dass europäische Programme genutzt …

(Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)

  Glenis Willmott (S&D). - Mr President, this is a really important, although emotive, debate. It is not helped by the constant scaremongering we hear from some of the other UK parties. We need to have a sensible discussion and to recognise the concerns that many people have, not just in the UK but also in many other countries, including Germany and France.

People on the doorstep constantly tell me that it is not the issue of migration itself that concerns them: it is more the fear that they will lose their job because someone from elsewhere will be willing to do it for less. They know that migration has brought huge economic benefits to our country, but this does nothing to allay their fears. You may or may not agree with their fears, but we cannot ignore them. What should we do?

Firstly, we should ensure that any domestic minimum wage legislation is properly enforced. Secondly, we need to strengthen the Agency Workers Directive, which is often used to undercut workers’ terms and conditions and to exploit migrant workers. Thirdly, once and for all, we must close the loophole in the Posting of Workers Directive.

I know that some rogue employers would not be happy with these changes because, quite frankly, they prefer to continue to hire cheap labour and treat workers as just another commodity. I have to tell them that this is not acceptable. We must stop, once and for all, this constant race to the bottom; instead we should be aiming for a race to the top. Freedom of movement is a fundamental principle of the EU. We need to ensure that another fundamental principle we work for is fairness for all.

  Cecilia Wikström (ALDE). - Herr talman! Att den debatt som hålls här idag överhuvudtaget äger rum är till lika delar sorgligt och skamligt. Mina föräldrars generation drömde om ett öppet Europa utan gränser, och det är min generation som har förverkligat detta. Om vi nu skulle börja införa begränsningar och undantag så beger vi oss ut på en resa på mycket, mycket hal is. Många medlemsländer är faktiskt beroende av arbetskraft från andra länder och ekonomierna skulle kollapsa. Dessvärre glömmer man bort detta.

Inför stundande val finns det bland oss vissa mörkermän som snedvrider debatten. De målar fram spöken som inte existerar, men som skrämmer människor, och det gör de för att plocka billiga politiska poäng genom att svartmåla EU-medborgare från vissa medlemsländer och göra dem till syndabockar. De uppviglar till rasism och xenofobi.

Låt oss nu hålla oss till fakta. Medlemsländerna runt om i EU har tjänat på den fria rörligheten, eftersom de som jobbar bidrar med stora summor till värdlandets socialförsäkringssystem. Den här debatten borde inte hållas, men när den nu ändå hålls så låt oss slå undan benen på dem som försöker ifrågasätta den fria rörligheten.

(Applåder)

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in Italia ci sono 3.300.000 disoccupati e un terzo della popolazione italiana è a rischio povertà. A chi, anche in questa sede, si ostina a ripetere che la libera circolazione dei lavoratori non può essere messa in discussione, consiglio di andare a incontrare i cittadini disoccupati, di andare a parlare con gli imprenditori che, a causa della crisi, chiudono le loro aziende. Allora capirebbe che in Italia non ci sono posti di lavoro per rumeni o bulgari perché non c'è lavoro neppure per i cittadini italiani.

Quindi, l'unica cosa da fare subito è bloccare per almeno due anni l'ingresso in Italia non solo degli extracomunitari ma anche, attraverso il meccanismo delle quote, dei cittadini che provengono dalla Romania e dalla Bulgaria, anche perché questi ospiti non invitati, una volta arrivati in Italia, pretendono da subito cure gratis e aiuti economici. Cure e aiuti economici che nemmeno i cittadini italiani hanno garantiti.

L'Unione europea deve affrontare questo problema prima che le tensioni sociali che già ci sono esplodano in maniera molto pericolosa.

(L'oratore accetta di rispondere a una domanda "cartellino blu")

  Karin Kadenbach (S&D), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Vielleicht habe ich Sie falsch verstanden, aber in einem Teil Ihrer Ausführungen haben Sie von Drittstaatenangehörigen gesprochen und dabei Rumänen und Bulgaren erwähnt. Das wäre die erste Frage.

Und das Zweite: Hielten Sie es nicht für notwendig, dass gerade jene Mitgliedstaaten, die jetzt diese Freiheit des Personenverkehrs in Frage stellen, mehr zur Kohäsionspolitik beitragen, sodass in jenen Regionen, wo diese Bewegungsströme sich begründen, mehr investiert würde, dort Arbeitsplätze geschaffen würden, damit dies dazu beitragen würde, dass Europa dort Lebensqualität findet, wo die Menschen sich zu Hause fühlen?

  Mara Bizzotto (EFD), Risposta a una domanda "cartellino blu". – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, io ho parlato di bulgari e di rumeni che sono ovviamente cittadini europei. Però ai cittadini italiani non importa niente: stanno cercando lavoro e non lo trovano e sapere che da lontano arrivano persone che occupano quel posto, non lo gradiscono.

Questo dico: ci sono troppi disoccupati; ci sono anziani che non hanno nemmeno i soldi per comprarsi le medicine e arrivano persone da altri paesi che le pretendono da subito. Questo dico, questa è la realtà e dobbiamo prenderne atto subito.

  Agustín Díaz de Mera García Consuegra (PPE). - Señor Presidente, el fin de las moratorias a la libre circulación para los trabajadores búlgaros y rumanos supone un paso más en la construcción del proyecto europeo y en la equiparación de todos los ciudadanos comunitarios. No podemos pedir reciprocidad e igualdad de trato a terceros Estados si nosotros no somos los primeros en hacerlo, y Bulgaria y Rumanía son, con todo derecho, europeos y comunitarios.

La libre circulación es, sin duda, uno de los grandes logros de la ciudadanía europea. Si circulan los capitales, los servicios, las mercancías, los bienes y, por supuesto, las ideas, ¿cómo podría explicarse que no circulen libremente las personas? No queremos que una libertad tan importante pueda verse vulnerada, y ello, señor Presidente, no es incompatible con su defensa. En absoluto es incompatible con esa defensa, ni con encontrar medidas ante posibles irregularidades o abusos.

Nos ha costado mucho construir lo que hoy somos y no podemos permitir que discursos extremistas y populistas tomen cuerpo y prendan fuego dentro de los debates nacionales. La crisis económica por la que atravesamos no puede ser un pretexto para limitar derechos, sino que debe ser un aliciente para reforzar nuestras economías y para hacer frente a los retos que debemos afrontar.

Lo cierto es que 14 millones de ciudadanos europeos contribuyen de una manera determinada a los ingresos de los presupuestos comunitarios de 28 Estados miembros, y esa es una verdad irrefutable.

  Kinga Göncz (S&D). - Az elmúlt napok híradásaiból kirajzolódik az ideális kelet-európai munkavállaló képe, akit szívesen fogadnak Nyugat-Európában. A jó kelet-európai munkavállaló dolgozik, amennyit bír, szigorúan minimálbérért, se többért, se kevesebbért, hogy se szociális dömpinget ne okozzon, se extra kiadást a munkaadójának. Minden munkát elvégez, amit a helyiek nem tudnak, vagy nem akarnak elvégezni, gondozza a nyugat-európai idős szülőket, neveli a gyerekeket, ápolja magukat, hogyha betegek. A jó kelet-európai munkavállaló a családját hátrahagyja, nem terheli meg velük a fogadó ország oktatási és egészségügyi ellátó rendszerét, a gyerekei után nem igényel családi pótlékot, és ha beteg, nem megy orvoshoz.

A fizetését sem utalja haza, hanem helyben elkölti az egészet, hadd nőjön a belső fogyasztás. Munkásszállón vagy elhagyott barakkban lakik, mert nem akarja bővíteni a keresletet, és ezzel fölverni a bérlakások amúgy is magas árát. Csendben tűri, ha segélyturistának, ingyenélőnek vagy olyan, nem kívánatos személynek titulálják, aki miatt romlik a bűnözési statisztika. Ha hazaküldik, akkor hazamegy, visszajön, hogyha hívják. Az ideális kelet-európai azonban nem is munkavállaló. Hanem milliárdos üzletember, az se baj, ha a vagyona eredete nem teljesen tiszta. Ő állampolgárságot és szabad mozgási lehetőséget kap. Ez azonban nem a szolidaritás, a közös értékek Európája. Mi, kelet-európaiak, nem ehhez csatlakoztunk.

  Nils Torvalds (ALDE). - Mr President, when some of us criticise free movement in Europe, we should remember that free movement in Europe was not something Europeans could take for granted in the 1940s, 1930s or 1950s and not even in the 1960s.

In July 1961, when I arrived in Berlin as a young man, 10 000 Germans – Europeans – came over to West Berlin.

On 13 August of the same year, that free movement was abandoned. So you will find no sympathy in my soul for those Members who are now speaking against free movement in Europe. It is something which is morally totally horrible.

  Gunnar Hökmark (PPE). - Herr talman! Den här debatten borde handla om det fantastiska att vi har uppnått en fri rörlighet i Europa. Att man kan ta jobb och att man kan verka över gränserna i alla delar av vår del av världen. Men debatten har istället en helt felaktig utgångspunkt och bygger på fördomar, främlingsfientlighet, rykten, skrämselpropaganda och kvällstidningsrubriker. Det är inte så man kan debattera en viktig fråga för Europas framtid.

2004 skrämdes man i Frankrike med att de polska rörmokarna skulle komma och ta jobben, men Frankrikes problem är varken polska rörmokare eller några andra rörmokare, utan problemet är den franska politiken. I Sverige skrämde socialdemokraterna med att det skulle bli en massiv social turism – det blev ingen social turism. 2009 skrämde man med att det skulle bli en omfattande svallvåg av utländska löntagare som dumpade lönerna – det blev inte så. I Storbritannien är det inte rumänerna eller bulgarerna som skapar problemen, utan dem skapade britterna själva.

Det är dags att vi står upp för den fria rörligheten men också bekämpar dem som försöker skapa en felaktig problembild – det hör inte till dagens Europa. Vi ska vara stolta över den fria rörligheten.

(Talaren godtog att besvara en fråga (”blått kort”) i enlighet med artikel 149.8 i arbetsordningen.)

  Marita Ulvskog (S&D), fråga ("blått kort"). – Herr talman! Jag vill fråga Gunnar Hökmark: Tycker du att det är anständigt att peka ut svensk socialdemokrati som att vi inte skulle stå för fri rörlighet? Det var vi som såg till att EU beslutade att öppna upp för så många länder från östra Europa som möjligt för att komma in i EU-samarbetet. Vi gjorde det före vårt första svenska ordförandeskap i EU, vi har gjort det efter, vi har gjort det hela tiden. Jag tycker att det är skandal att du kör med den typen av svartmålning.

  Gunnar Hökmark (PPE), svar ("blått kort"). – Herr talman! När den svenska socialdemokratin var i regeringsställning var man det enda partiet i Sveriges riksdag som ville införa en typ av undantag, och man förlorade. Jag tror inte att Marita Ulvskog kan säga emot mig på den punkten.

2009 drev Marita Ulvskog debatten om att vi skulle vara rädda för en flodvåg av inkommande löntagare från de nya medlemsstaterna som skulle dumpa lönerna. Vi hade den debatten – och jag bara säger detta för det är inte bara en fråga om de extrema partierna utan om det ansvar och det ledarskap som seriösa politiska partier måste ha. Den fria rörligheten har gynnat Europa och européerna.

  Ивайло Калфин (S&D). - Г-н Председател, аз много съжалявам, че на този дебат днес не присъстват най-големите опоненти на свободното движение, не виждам г-н Фараж, не виждам неговите поддръжници, интересно защо не идват на този дебат.

Защото днес се обсъжда и се говори с факти, а това, което липсва в техните аргументи, са фактите и аз специално искам да благодаря на Европейската Комисия и на заместник-председателя г-жа Рединг, на комисаря Андор, че защитиха европейските ценности и европейското право.

Но нека да погледнем и числата. Цялата тази истерия, която в някои страни, особено във Великобритания, се разви, водена от националистите, но за съжаление останалите партии се плъзгат, голяма част от тях, по тази линия, не почива на никакви факти.

Във Великобритания на 2000 души има един български гражданин, на град от 100 000 души има 50 български граждани. Това ли е натиск? Колко са безработните? На 600 – 1. Това са фактите.

Българските и румънските студенти внасят 30 млн. паунда годишно, за да живеят и учат във Великобритания, така че когато говорим за свободно движение, нека говорим с факти. Нека говорим защо г-н Камерън прибра доклада от секретаря по вътрешните работи, който трябваше да бъде публикуван и да докаже колко опасна е емиграцията. Оказа се, че фактите ги няма за това нещо.

Нека не спираме свободното движение на гражданите, страните членки печелят от него.

  Roger Helmer (EFD). - Mr President, I will address Mr Kalfin: you say that none of Mr Farage’s supporters are here. I am here. You say that we are not concerned with facts. Let me give you a fact. Last time we opened our borders to new Member States, our government promised us that the expected number would be 13 000. In fact we had half a million. We are desperately building new houses in my country, many of them in the countryside and on the greenbelt. Half of the new houses are going to immigrants. Those are the facts. We base our argument on facts. You should recognise that.

  Γεώργιος Παπανικολάου (PPE). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Υπουργέ, εύχομαι κατ' αρχάς η Ελληνική Προεδρία να είναι δημιουργική, να είναι παραγωγική, να είναι τελικά επιτυχημένη, η Ευρώπη αναμένει πολλά από την Ελληνική Προεδρία και είμαστε σίγουροι ότι θα επιτύχουμε.

Κυρίες και κύριοι, όλοι συμφωνούμε ότι το δικαίωμα στην ελεύθερη μετακίνηση είναι αναφαίρετο, είναι αδιαπραγμάτευτο, είναι ένα από τα κορυφαία κεκτημένα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Πρέπει - και σήμερα συζητούμε τα προβλήματα και τις προκαταλήψεις που ενδεχομένως δημιουργούνται - να πάμε και ένα βήμα παραπέρα. Πως το εφαρμόζουμε στο σύνολό του, πως αυτό λειτουργεί όπως πρέπει. Γιατί σχεδόν ένας στους δύο ευρωπαίους που ρωτήθηκαν, και αναφέρομαι και σ' εσάς κυρία Επίτροπε, απήντησαν ότι όταν απευθύνθηκαν στις τοπικές αρχές σε σχέση με την εφαρμογή του κοινοτικού κεκτημένου και της νομοθεσίας για την ελεύθερη διακίνηση, αντιμετώπισαν πολλές δυσκολίες.

Είναι πολύ σημαντικό ότι προχθές, η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή στην ανακοίνωσή της ανέφερε τη συνδρομή καθώς και τον καθοριστικό ρόλο των δήμων και των περιφερειών στο ζήτημα της ελεύθερης μετακίνησης, είναι όμως επίσης σημαντικό σήμερα, όπως προκύπτει από τη συζήτησή μας, το Συμβούλιο αλλά και η Επιτροπή, να απαντήσουν πως σκοπεύουν στη συνέχεια να συνδράμουν, ακόμη περισσότερο, τις τοπικές αρχές στην εφαρμογή της ελεύθερης μετακίνησης και, βεβαίως, στην άρση κάθε εμποδίου προς την κατεύθυνση αυτή.

  Cătălin Sorin Ivan (S&D). - Domnule președinte, am înțeles de la domnul Brok că s-ar putea să nu mai fie nevoie să ne amprentăm. Noi, delegația social-democrată din Parlamentul European, eram pregătiți să trecem pe la biroul domniei sale să ne lăsăm amprentele. Dacă e nevoie, știe unde să ne găsească.

Legat de declarațiile domnului Farage și ale celorlalți de la UKIP, sunt foarte multe studii, nu știu pe care să îl citez: studii făcute în Marea Britanie, în România, în Bulgaria, de Comisia Europeană, care arată contribuția celor care merg din România și Bulgaria și muncesc în Marea Britanie; faptul că sunt mai mulți bani pe care îi dau acolo decât iau din Marea Britanie; aportul pe care îl aduc la creșterea produsului intern brut în Marea Britanie (o spun chiar oamenii de afaceri din Marea Britanie). Prin urmare, delirului antieuropean al celor de la UKIP nu avem decât contraargumente logice cu care să îi răspundem, dar nu contează, pentru că în spatele acestui delir antieuropean se află incompetența și lipsa de responsabilitate a politicienilor din Marea Britanie, care nu reușesc să aducă soluții pentru concetățenii lor.

Vreau să spun că avem obligația în Parlamentul European, pentru că este singura instituție aleasă direct de cetățenii europeni, să luăm atitudine, când un singur cetățean european este jignit și umilit de la această tribună. Când milioane de cetățeni europeni, români, bulgari, polonezi, sunt jigniți și umiliți de la această tribună, avem cu atât mai mult obligația să luăm atitudine și să sancționăm astfel de declarații.

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

PRZEWODNICZY JACEK PROTASIEWICZ
Wiceprzewodniczący

  Franz Obermayr (NI), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Ich habe an den Kollegen Ivan als Mitglied der sozialdemokratischen Fraktion eine Frage, nachdem immer gesagt wird, die Diskussion in England wird von Nationalisten geschürt, und ich absolut gegen Nationalisten bin: Stimmt es, dass es vor allem Jack Straw, ehemaliger Labour-Minister, war, der sich im Nachhinein jetzt gegen die Öffnung ausgesprochen hat, dass es ein sozialdemokratischer Labour-Abgeordneter in England aus Sheffield, Blunkett, war, der Aufruhr befürchtet hat? Stimmt das alles, oder würden Sie sagen, Jack Straw ist ein Nationalist geworden?

  Cătălin Sorin Ivan (S&D), Răspuns la o întrebare adresată în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru”. – Traducerea a fost foarte proastă și nu am reușit să înțeleg foarte bine întrebarea. Legat de (ce am reușit să înțeleg eu) pericolul imigranților sau invaziilor, nu mi-a fost foarte clar.... Nu am înțeles întrebarea din cauza traducerii, îmi cer scuze. Ar trebui să fac presupuneri și pierdem timpul.

  Csaba Őry (PPE). - Elnök Úr! Ugye a vita vége felé nem szeretném ismételni az elhangzott érveket. Egy-két elemet azért kihangsúlyoznék, amelyek talán nem kellő súllyal hangzottak el. Az Európai Uniónak egyik legfontosabb sikere az európai közös belső piacnak a létrehozása és építése. Az európai közös belső piacot alapító alapjogok egy összefüggő rendszert képeznek. Ha valaki bármelyik elemét támadja, gyengíti, magát az európai közös piacot vonja kétségbe, az európai közös piacot támadja. Kettő: a szociális jogalkotás nemzeti hatáskörben van. Minden tagországnak megvan a lehetősége, hogy meghatározza a szociális jogosultságokat, a hozzáférésnek a szabályait, és szabályokat alkosson arra az esetre, hogyha valaki megsérti vagy visszaél ezekkel a jogokkal.

Hasznosnak tartom azt az útmutatót, amelyet a Bizottság kibocsátott. Talán jobban eltájékozódhatnak az egyes országok képviselői benne. És még egyszer – egyetlenegy mondat – az Európai Unió munkavállalóinak mindössze 3%-a az, aki migráns munkavállaló. Ennek a 3%-nak mindössze 1/5-e lehet az, aki Bulgáriából és Romániából jött, és szinte mérhetetlen, a töredéke az, aki esetleg visszaél. Azt gondolom, hogy ez a probléma meglehetősen fölfújt és realitásoktól mentes vitát eredményezett.

(A felszólaló hozzájárul egy „kékkártyás” kérdés megválaszolásához (az eljárási szabályzat 149. cikkének (8) bekezdése).)

  Paul Rübig (PPE), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Die Bewegung der Arbeitnehmer hat ja auch Vorteile für die Konsumenten. Europa besteht ja aus 100 % Konsumenten. Welche Vorteile sehen Sie hier in der Kaufkraft der Konsumenten?

  Csaba Őry (PPE), Kékkártyás válasz. – Köszönöm, én értem a kérdést. Én nem a fogyasztókról beszéltem, a belső piacról beszéltem, hogy a belső piac része, egy összefüggő rendszer része az alapjogoknak a rendszere, így a szabad mozgásnak a rendszere is. Egyébként a munkavállalóknak a nagy része, aki más országban dolgozik, az ott jövedelemmel rendelkezik és nyilván ilyen értelemben fogyasztó is. De nem a fogyasztókról szól, hanem a belső piac egységes rendszeréről szól a vita. A szabad mozgásnak a kétségbe vonása, újragondolása az egész európai piacot, az egész európai építménynek a jövőjét veszélyezteti.

  Wojciech Michał Olejniczak (S&D). - Szanowny Panie Przewodniczący! Swoboda przepływu osób nie niosłaby ze sobą takich kontrowersji, gdyby nie zróżnicowana sytuacja ekonomiczna w całej Unii Europejskiej. Prawdziwym wyzwaniem nie są populistyczne nawoływania do zamknięcia dostępu do konkretnych rynków, ale problem tworzenia miejsc pracy w całej Europie. Migracja zarobkowa spowodowana biedą i brakiem perspektyw przynosi przede wszystkim straty w tych państwach, z których pochodzą migrujący pracownicy. Migracja ta nawołuje o przeprowadzenie niezbędnych reform, zagwarantowanie godziwych warunków pracy dla wszystkich Europejczyków we wszystkich państwach członkowskich. Trzeba mocnej Unii Europejskiej z dużym budżetem. Czas uświadomić sobie, że walka z bezrobociem jest naszym podstawowym priorytetem.

W tym kontekście słowa premiera Camerona i innych polityków konserwatywnych są szczególnie dotkliwe. Ich próby przeciwstawienia Wielkiej Brytanii Europie, wraz z krytyką imigrantów z Polski i innych krajów Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, zasługują na szczególne potępienie i jasny odpór i cieszę się, że tego wyrazem jest dzisiejsza debata.

Nie pozwolimy na traktowanie Polaków jako Europejczyków drugiej kategorii. Polacy zbyt ciężko pracują na wspólny europejski dobrobyt, aby stać się przedmiotem politycznej wojny w wykonaniu nieudolnych przywódców, którzy dodatkowo nie potrafią liczyć. Dzisiejsza debata to zwycięstwo Europy otwartej, a porażka polityki Camerona, Kaczyńskiego i innych eurosceptyków i przeciwników. My, w Parlamencie Europejskim, Panie Przewodniczący, razem z Komisją i Radą, zrobiliśmy swoje. Teraz czas, aby wyborcy zagłosowali na socjalistów, na SLD, na Partię Pracy, a przeciwko Cameronowi i Kaczyńskiemu.

  Sergio Gaetano Cofferati (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, mettere oggi in discussione il principio di libera circolazione non è soltanto antistorico è anche insensato. La libera circolazione è un diritto moderno di cittadinanza ed è sorprendente che la sua messa in discussione venga da settori politici che sono da sempre teorici del liberismo più sfrenato e, però, quando parlano di mercato del lavoro addirittura prefigurano una condizione protetta se non addirittura autarchica dello stesso.

Dovete convincervi: la libertà di circolazione serve perché è una straordinaria leva economica: non c'è possibilità di competere nel mercato globale se non si hanno anche regole che vengono rispettate e da che mondo è mondo le persone che lavorano, e anche quando sono semplicemente cittadini, dalle loro comunità vengono protette perché questo garantisce coesione sociale, riduce il conflitto e aumenta il livello della partecipazione. Dunque meno male che c'è la libertà di circolazione.

Pytania z sali

  Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! Prowadzimy obecnie debatę, której w ogóle na tej sali być nie powinno. Swoboda przepływu osób jest jedną z podstawowych zasad funkcjonowania Unii. Wcześniej żaden z liderów państw członkowskich nie kwestionował tego prawa. Myślę, że premier Wielkiej Brytanii świadomie przesunął granicę, której dotychczas nie przekroczono, czyniąc Polaków odpowiedzialnymi za rzekome szkody, jakie Wielka Brytania poniosła w wyniku poprzednich akcesji. Nie tylko stygmatyzuje to Polaków, ale też burzy ideę zjednoczonej Europy. Dlatego Parlament powinien zdecydowanie zaprotestować przeciwko słowom premiera Camerona i dzieleniu przez niego obywateli Unii na tych, którzy mają więcej, i na tych, którzy mają mniej praw w Europie. Apeluję do premiera Camerona, aby skończył z populizmem i walką o poprawienie słupków poparcia kosztem Polaków. To nie Polacy są winni sytuacji na Wyspach, ale to, w jaki sposób ten kraj jest zarządzany przez obecny rząd.

(oklaski)

  George Sabin Cutaş (S&D). - Domnule președinte, doresc să îmi exprim regretul și revolta că românii și bulgarii sunt țintele unei campanii agresive de denigrare. Este clară miza electorală, în perspectiva alegerilor europarlamentare și, cum e în cazul Marii Britanii, a viitoarelor alegeri naționale.

Dincolo de discursul xenofob, doresc să remarc faptul că migrația românilor în țările membre confirmă faptul că libera circulație este un pilon al Uniunii Europene, atât ca drept esențial al cetățenilor, cât și ca realitate economică. Nouă din zece români care trăiesc în Germania lucrează legal și contribuie la sistemul social. În Marea Britanie, numai 1,4% din cei 120 000 de imigranți români primesc ajutoare sociale, spre deosebire de rata medie națională, 9,5% din populația britanică fiind beneficiară a ajutorului de stat.

De aceea, domnule președinte, cred că este datoria tuturor forțelor democratice și proeuropene să combată încercarea incorectă de transformare a românilor în vinovați de serviciu pentru incapacitatea unor guverne naționale de a oferi soluții anticriză viabile.

  Филиз Хакъева Хюсменова (ALDE). - Г-н Председател, припомням, че Директива № 78 на Съвета от 2000 г. за създаване на основна рамка за равно третиране в областта на заетостта и професиите е в действие.

По т. нар. рамкова директива страните членки имат задължение да представят доклади за транспонирането ѝ в националните си законодателства. Смятам, че ще е закъсняло Европейската комисия да чака и едва през 2015 г. да събере данни по нейното изпълнение и евентуално през 2016 г. да излезе с обобщителен доклад.

Страните членки се затрудниха с прилагането на рамковата директива. Тя се нуждае от точни дефиниции на основни понятия, които могат да бъдат почерпени от практиката на Съда на Европейския съюз.

Моят апел към Комисията е да започне процес на преразглеждане и допълване на директивата, който надявам се ще повлияе благоприятно евентуалните промени в националните законодателства да не се отдалечават от целите на Директивата.

  Marije Cornelissen (Verts/ALE). - Twee jaar geleden hadden we hier het eerste debat over kwalijke retoriek rond vrij verkeer. Het Europees Parlement pakte toen premier Rutte van Nederland hard aan omdat hij weigerde om het stigmatiserende Polen-meldpunt te veroordelen. Rutte beloofde toen om hierheen te komen om het debat met ons aan te gaan.

Sindsdien is het eigenlijk alleen maar erger geworden. Minister Asscher maakt mensen bang voor een vloedgolf aan Roemenen en Bulgaren, terwijl onderzoek aantoont dat die angst ongegrond is. Staatssecretaris Teeven maakt mensen bang voor misbruik van sociale zekerheid, terwijl onderzoek aantoont dat die angst ongegrond is.

Ik vind het al vervelend als oppositiepartijen een loopje nemen met de waarheid. Maar als regeringsvertegenwoordigers willens en wetens angst zaaien onder hun bevolking met onwaarheden, dan is dat ronduit afschuwelijk. Premier Rutte hebben we hier nog steeds niet gezien. Ik roep hem hierbij op om zijn beloften gestand te doen en eindelijk naar het Europees Parlement te komen, want tot mijn grote spijt is daar eerder meer dan minder reden toe gekomen.

  Paweł Robert Kowal (ECR). - Napisał do mnie, Panie Przewodniczący, i też do Pana, zwykły obywatel i pyta nas, czy nawet poza granicami kraju musimy sobie skakać do gardła. Wyjątkowo zwrócę się dzisiaj do kolegów z Polski i Europy Środkowej. Kochani! W każdej grupie – rozejrzyjcie się, począwszy od Jacka Kurskiego (czy chcesz, żeby cytować Farage'a?), a skończywszy na lewicy – znajdziecie ludzi, którzy z imigracji, z problemu nieszczęścia tych, którzy musieli wyjechać ze swojego kraju i pracować gdzie indziej, zbijają kapitał polityczny. My jako Polacy, my jako obywatele, my jako posłowie z Europy Środkowej jesteśmy tu dzisiaj nie po to, żeby z kimś walczyć – bo w każdej grupie kogoś znajdziecie – lecz jesteśmy po to, żeby wyraźnie powiedzieć, że nie zgadzamy się, wszyscy solidarnie, na to, żeby w jakikolwiek sposób ograniczyć prawo do swobodnego przemieszczania się i podejmowania pracy w innym kraju Europy. To jest nasze zadanie, to jest nasza pierwsza powinność i tego dzisiaj od was wymagamy. Tego oczekują dzisiaj Polacy, którzy ciężko pracują na Wyspach, tego oczekują obywatele innych krajów Europy Środkowej. Niech to wyraźnie zabrzmi.

  Przewodniczący. − Panie Pośle, nie mogę nadużywać tego miejsca, ale muszę odpowiedzieć na Pana pytanie. Tak, to prawda, ta rezolucja będzie dokładnie o tym, ale zdaje się, że Pana grupa nie przyłączyła się do wspólnego tekstu. To tylko tytułem wyjaśnienia, a teraz bardzo proszę o minutę dla pana posła Cymańskiego.

  Tadeusz Cymański, (EFD). - Panie Przewodniczący! Emigracja w Europie na masową skalę ma charakter przede wszystkim zarobkowy, nie zasiłkowy. Wielkie projekty wymagają wielkiej wyobraźni. Unia Europejska jest takim projektem. W tej chwili tej wyobraźni zabrakło. Uważam, że skala różnic na kontynencie i ogromne dysproporcje między państwami członkowskimi są naszą wspólną porażką i one są faktyczną przyczyną poszukiwania pracy dla siebie i źródła życia dla swoich rodzin w innych państwach. Fakty są oczywiste. Myślę, że Unia to również przestrzeganie elementarnych zasad i dotrzymywanie umów. Można te umowy zmieniać, każde państwo ma takie prawo, również Wielka Brytania, ale robi się to w określony sposób, nie poprzez atak i niszczenie elementarnych reguł, również reguł ważniejszych niż Unia Europejska. Są to reguły dobrego tonu, poszanowania innych i uczciwości w postępowaniu.

  Димитър Стоянов (NI). - Г-н Председател, когато националното богатство на една колонизирана държава бъде тотално източено от нейните колонизатори, населението на тази държава съвсем естествено започва да мигрира там, където са отишли нейните пари.

Т.е българите и румънците и всички останали източноевропейци, колкото и малко да са те всъщност реално след всичките данни, които бяха изнесени, които мигрират в посока запад, отиват там, където отидоха техните пари. Техните пари, които бяха откраднати, източени от вашите западни компании, които са в неравностойно положение, оставени в нашите крехки постсоциалистически икономики.

И ако искате да спрете този поток, това поточе, този мъничък поток, който тече към вашите страни, като ви дразни, тогава спрете да ограбвате нашите страни, освободете и позволете на нашите икономики да си стъпят на краката и тогава българите и румънците ще се върнат там, където са техните сърца, в своята родина.

(Ораторът прие да отговори на един въпрос „синя карта“ (член 149, параграф 8 от Правилника за дейността))

  Krisztina Morvai (NI), blue-card question. – If the free movement of people – one of the cornerstones of the European Union – is to be stopped, maybe it would be a good idea to stop the other one – the free movement of capital. Maybe those British friends of ours who want us East Europeans to be stopped from going to Britain should take their Tescos from our countries – then we would have more opportunities for work for our peasants, for our small shops, for our small businesses, and that would be a deal. Would you agree with that, Mr Stoyanov?

  Димитър Стоянов (NI), отговор на въпрос, зададен чрез вдигане на синя карта. – Г-жо Морваи, абсолютно съм съгласен, това е нещо допълнително, което искам да Ви кажа, че тези другите свободи на движение на стоки, капитали и услуги, те не Ви пречат, нали? Защото Вие сте наложили своя ботуш върху нашите пазари и ги изпомпвате оттам.

Единственото последно право, останало на нашите граждани в този Съюз, е да потърсят щастието си и бъдещето си там, където тези капитали бяха изнесени. Първо влизат като инвеститори и след това биват изнасяни в многократно по-големи количества и хората ги следват, това е естествено.

(Ораторът прие да отговори на един въпрос „синя карта“ (член 149, параграф 8 от Правилника за дейността))

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D). - Súhlasím v princípe s tým, že celá táto diskusia je veľmi nedôstojná smerom k obyvateľom tých členských štátov Európskej únie, ktoré pristúpili k Európskej únii po roku 2004, vrátane Rumunska a Bulharska. A napriek tomu, že sa nachádzame v rozdielnych politických skupinách, súhlasím s tým, že tí najväčší kritici z Francúzska, z Veľkej Británie, z Talianska, ich firmy sú u nás v našej krajine, ich firmy dávajú našim ľuďom v našich krajinách oveľa nižšiu mzdu, ako dávajú svojim zamestnancom vo svojich krajinách, a tu v diskusii... (predsedajúci zobral rečníčke slovo)

  Piotr Borys (PPE), pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowny Panie Pośle, czy nie sądzi Pan, że nie tylko kwestie różnic ekonomicznych są powodem wielkiej migracji wśród Polaków, Rumunów i Węgrów? Przecież w jednolitej Unii Europejskiej mamy równe prawa. Podstawowym prawem jest prawo do tego, aby być równie traktowanym, nawet jeżeli pracujemy i wyjeżdżamy i mieszkamy poza granicami. Czy nie sądzi Pan, że aby tę sytuację rozwiązać, to właśnie David Cameron powinien przeprosić za swoją niefortunną wypowiedź, która powoduje takie podziały także na tej sali?

  Димитър Стоянов (NI), отговор на въпрос, зададен чрез вдигане на синя карта. – Не мисля, че извиненията вършат работа, защото извиненията са като думите. Думите всеки може да ги говори, въпросът е какви са действията, които се предприемат зад думите.

И не мога да се съглася повече с Вас за това, че, и аз го казах преди малко, това е единственото останало право на българите, които вече и в собствената си държава биват третирани като втора ръка хора, защото хора от богати западни корпорации, развивали капитализъм векове наред, идват и им плащат по-малко и ги третират направо като роби.

И това е последното право - да отидем някъде, където можем да бъдем третирани нормално.

(Ораторът прие да отговори на един въпрос „синя карта“ (член 149, параграф 8 от Правилника за дейността))

  Andrew Henry William Brons (NI), blue-card question. – Mr Farage recently said that Bulgarians and Romanians were responsible for a lot of crime in London. Would you agree that in fact it is not ordinary Bulgarians and Romanians but a particular significant minority in both of those countries who were described by President Schulz in 2010 as a ‘difficult minority’?

  Димитър Стоянов (NI), отговор на въпрос, зададен чрез вдигане на синя карта. – За съжаление подобни изказвания пък предизвикаха в България вълна от снимки, на които са показани едни обикновени британци, които празнуват в Лондон събота и неделя и какви нарушения на обществения ред извършват те. Но не е правилно да се обвиняваме и да гледаме едни други кой какво прави.

А по отношение на Вашия въпрос, да, ние бяхме свидетели на подобна ситуация и във Франция, когато европейски граждани бяха върнати и депортирани в тяхната собствена държава. Това са тези, които Вие ни обвинявахте, че не можем да интегрираме. Заповядайте, интегрирайте ги Вие тогава, като знаете по-добре как става.

(Koniec pytań z sali)

  László Andor, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, honourable Members, for the Commission this has been a reassuring debate. I believe a great majority of this House is united in the rejection of xenophobia, scaremongering and manipulation. I believe we all want to respect the facts, our treaties and each other.

Several speakers emphasised the mutual benefits of the free movement of workers and also pointed to the fact that actual free movement – cross-border employment and job-seeking – is at a relatively modest level today in the European Union. If this is so – if the level of cross-border labour mobility is indeed relatively modest – the question is why some people should think that free movement is a nightmare.

Setting aside manipulation – and we know there is manipulation, especially when we see certain government officials withdrawing studies because of concern that they would help to clarify the picture for the public – I think this fear probably exists as a result of some unexpected recent developments and also of uncertainty about the future.

The unexpected developments include the scale of migration in certain specific cases and certain bad experiences that people in specific localities have had.

There has also been uncertainty about the future, but the experience of 1 January 2014, which was recalled by many speakers in this discussion, will hopefully lead to the elimination of that uncertainty, specifically in relation to the free movement of workers from Romania and Bulgaria.

The Commission has been working to reduce uncertainty by proposing and implementing concrete measures to ensure that the free movement of workers leads to better outcomes in the future, both economically and socially. We are working for the reinforcement of EURES, the European job mobility portal, which I have already mentioned, and I will bring forward the proposal on this very soon. We are also preparing a European Platform against Undeclared Work and, since Ms Cornelissen mentioned Minister Asscher, I would point out that he is one of the participants in this effort. Together we have looked into such cases and have considered the possibilities for reinforcing labour inspection in the Netherlands and using this experience to build the European Platform against Undeclared Work.

We have been working on better implementation of the Posting of Workers Directive, which many of the speakers mentioned. I am glad that a good compromise was established in the Council in December and I very much hope that in the coming weeks the Council and Parliament will agree on a good solution. The functioning of this directive will, I hope, lead to better and more services in the EU single market and also to better guarantees against social dumping.

We are also working for inclusive growth in source countries, because more opportunities and more jobs need to be created in the more peripheral regions of the Union, and we are working for more effective use of the EU financial instruments, especially the European Social Fund, for this purpose. That point should be highlighted now, at the start of the new seven-year financial period, when countries are still programming the ESF allocation.

While the discussion has been greatly overheated recently in some countries, it has been quite easy to misrepresent what the Commission has been up to in this context. Unfortunately this happened last week in the German press, as quoted by Ms Hirsch, and I would therefore like to point out that certain highly inaccurate statements were circulated in the German press without the Commission having said a word about the specific case in question. The first time I spoke about this so-called ‘Dano affair’, which is a matter for a court in Leipzig, was on Monday. I have already clarified the position but, since the report has been repeated, I have to say again that, contrary to what was stated in the German newspaper article, the Commission does not generally advocate facilitating the conditions of access to social benefits in the Member States, and no case against Germany is being taken up by the Commission. On the contrary, the Commission’s submissions in this context are based on the premise that Member States can refuse to grant social assistance allowances to inactive citizens. However, it derives from the case law of the Court of Justice that this refusal cannot be automatic. The competent national authorities must assess the individual situation of the applicant and, in particular, the period during which the benefit applied for is likely to be granted. If the grant of the requested benefit would place a disproportionate burden on that Member State’s social assistance system as a whole, the benefit can be refused.

I would like to see quality newspapers in particular paying closer attention to the facts, and if there is a question they should, of course, put it to the Commission directly.

What happened was disappointing, because I paid specific attention to the situation in German cities that I visited, from Munich to Hamburg. In many of these places I spoke with the mayors, and I will continue in the coming weeks, in North Rhine Westphalia, to work with the authorities of cities and regions to find solutions to specific local challenges there.

We do not need an escalation of this debate driven by gut feelings. We do not need the kind of bonfire of half-baked ideas which we have witnessed in recent weeks and months. We need more solidarity, more understanding and constructive cooperation to resolve the real problems that exist at municipal level and also at EU level.

  Viviane Reding, Vice-President of the Commission. − Mr President, an overwhelming majority in this House says that freedom of movement is an important positive right for all European citizens without exception. Freedom of movement is a right which is also precious to European citizens, because they tell us, in the Eurobarometer, that they consider this to be the most important right in the European Union.

But, like all rights, it comes with obligations. It is up to the Member States to take their responsibility and to put these obligations into practice. As my colleague has explained in detail, the Commission is ready to give Member States a helping hand so that this can be done.

The debate has also shown that the Commission and Parliament are in absolute agreement that freedom of movement is not a problem but an opportunity. It is an opportunity for our economy and for our society. We, as a Commission, will make sure it stays so. This House also agrees that free movement is a fundamental right and is not open to negotiation. I can tell you that the Commission will make sure that it remains so.

  Dimitrios Kourkoulas, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, honourable Members, as I said in my opening remarks, there is very strong and unconditional support in the Council for upholding and promoting the principle of free movement as one of the basic freedoms of the EU. I am pleased to take from this afternoon’s debate equally strong support among a very large majority of Members of this House.

Very many of you have called for free movement to be strongly defended. I very much agree, and I consider that both Parliament and the Council have an interest in working together – of course with the Commission – to this end. I also agree with those who have said that we need to have a rational and calm debate on this issue based on facts rather than scare stories.

Let me conclude by going back to the Maastricht Treaty of 1993. The Treaty of Maastricht established the notion of EU citizenship more than 20 years ago. Union law and the Treaties, as regards citizenship and the rights of citizens, have evolved since then, but one thing has remained the same. Free movement of persons is a fundamental right of all EU citizens and their family members, and it is our duty to do our utmost to uphold that fundamental right for the benefit of all our citizens.

  President. − I have received six motions for resolutions⁽¹⁾ tabled in accordance with Rule 110(2) of the Rules of Procedure.

The debate is closed.

The vote will take place on Thursday, 16 January 2014.

Written statements (Rule 149)

  Arkadiusz Tomasz Bratkowski (PPE), na piśmie. – Jako poseł do Parlamentu Europejskiego i członek Komisji ds. Wolności Obywatelskich, Sprawiedliwości i Spraw Wewnętrznych wyrażam stanowczy sprzeciw wobec dyskryminacyjnych działań podjętych przez premiera Camerona i jego ekipę rządzącą. Wkład polskich obywateli w rozwój gospodarczy Wielkiej Brytanii jest niepodważalny. O ujemnym wyniku finansowym z tytułu świadczeń socjalnych na rzecz wychowywania dziecka możemy mówić w przypadku obywateli brytyjskich, a nie polskich! Wielka Brytania jest członkiem Unii Europejskiej i ma obowiązek przestrzegać zasad, które legły u podstaw funkcjonowania zjednoczonej Europy, w tym również w odniesieniu do swobodnego przepływu osób! Prawa polskich obywateli, którzy zdecydowali się na migrację, są zagwarantowane prawem europejskim, na straży którego stoi Parlament Europejski!

Emigracja dla wielu Polaków, w tym z Zamojszczyzny, wiąże się z podjęciem wielu trudnych decyzji. W poszukiwaniu pracy i perspektyw zmuszeni jesteście Państwo do rozstania się z rodziną, przyjaciółmi, porzucacie wszystko, co jest Wam znane, próbując rozpocząć życie na nowo w obcym Wam państwie. Szefowie państw i rządów Unii Europejskiej składali Polsce i jej obywatelom wiele obietnic w okresie przedakcesyjnym, a ja w ramach pełnionego mandatu posła do Parlamentu Europejskiego ziemi lubelskiej nie dopuszczę do ich łamania.

  Minodora Cliveti (S&D), în scris. – Dezbaterea de astăzi este extrem de importantă pentru viitorul însuși al UE. Consider că declarațiile Comisiei Europene și ale Consiliului care fac obiectul acestei dezbateri analizează corect problematica mobilității cetățenilor europeni, pentru că asta înseamnă, practic, în cea mai mare parte, libera circulație în UE.

Mobilitatea produce plusvaloare, este un factor de creștere economică și este apreciată ca atare în majoritatea Europei. Recent, The Times a precizat că pe site-urile cu oferte de muncă destinate românilor există, numai pentru anul 2014, circa 5.000 de poziții, în timp ce în 2013 au fost oferite românilor în Marea Britanie circa 60.000 de posturi.

În același timp, însă, consider că este extrem de important a se face o netă distincție între mobilitate și migrație în UE, motiv pentru care apreciez răspunsul CE la întrebarea mea privind necesitatea acestei diferențieri. Aceasta nu este una formală, ci privește situații total diferite, de fond. Astăzi în plenul PE s-a vorbit despre imigranți, la modul general, despre imigrația legală și ilegală, care ar trebui combătută. Dar cetățenilor europeni nu li se pot aplica aceste reguli, de aceea este necesară clarificarea, inclusiv terminologică, a celor două noțiuni. Ambiguitatea cu privire la această diferență legală, între statutul de cetățean european și cel de imigrant și între seturi diferite de drepturi și tratamente poate duce la tensiuni suplimentare în spațiul european.

  Ioan Enciu (S&D), în scris. – Cetățenii români se confruntă cu o campanie sistematică și injustă de stigmatizare. Singura lor vină este că, de la 1 ianuarie, sunt cetățeni europeni cu drepturi depline, odată cu eliminarea restricțiilor pe piața muncii.

Din rațiuni populist-electorale, se vehiculează multe neadevăruri, ignorându-se evidențele. Imigranții nu sunt o povară, ci un ajutor economic pentru țările gazdă. Studiile de specialitate estimează, de altfel, că românii nu vor concura populația britanică și a altor state membre pentru obținerea locurilor de muncă. Din contră, se poate vorbi de complementaritate pe piața muncii, nu de substituție. Având în vedere media lor de vârstă și experiența de până acum, românii nu vor reprezenta o presiune suplimentară asupra sistemelor sociale – nici măcar a celui britanic, oricât de panicard ar fi agitată teza demagogică a „turismului social”. Emigranții români își părăsesc țara pentru a munci, nu pentru beneficii sociale care nu pot fi accesate decât în condiții restrictive, în special în Marea Britanie.

Nu în ultimul rând, aș vrea să atrag atenția asupra unei realități trecute incorect sub tăcere: statisticile britanice și germane indică o schimbare a axelor migrației, țările din flancul sudic al UE furnizând în ultimul an cu 50% mai mulți imigranți decât până acum.

  Tunne Kelam (PPE), in writing. – Freedom is the underlying principle of the EU represented by the main four freedoms – the free movement of people, goods, capital and services! We debate continuously on the need to accomplish the single market, which is fundamentally based on these four freedoms. So how can we even dream of a single market if the free movement of people is limited? Abuse of social services is a general problem and common to all EU countries and cannot be attributed to one particular group anywhere. And it has a simple solution – adopting good laws that minimise any abuse, and then implementing them. True, all EU Member States are free to set their obligations and benefits, and create a balance between those, but they cannot discriminate between EU citizens based on their nationality. Reforming the social systems to fit the reality and aid efficiently those in need whilst enabling others fully enjoy a free European labour market and by that reducing the poverty lines across Member States is what Europe needs today. Defamation of certain EU citizens and making them responsible for all misery, is irresponsible and in its essence anti-European. All EU citizens are equal and should be treated as such without concession.

  Krzysztof Lisek (PPE), na piśmie. – Panie Przewodniczący! Swoboda przepływu osób jest jedną z czterech podstawowych zasad traktatowych UE. Gwarantowana jest wszystkim obywatelom Unii. W wielu państwach członkowskich legalni pracownicy z innych państw członkowskich UE mają wkład netto do systemu opieki społecznej kraju przyjmującego na tym samym poziomie co wkład pracowników krajowych. Korzyści dla rozwoju kraju przyjmującego są widoczne m.in. w sektorach opieki zdrowotnej, rolnictwa i budownictwa. W zglobalizowanym świecie coraz więcej osób opuszcza swój kraj w celu podjęcia pracy.

Jestem zaskoczony i rozczarowany niedawnym wystąpieniem brytyjskiego premiera Davida Camerona, który przy pomocy populistycznych stwierdzeń podważa jedno z podstawowych praw obywateli UE – prawo do swobodnego przepływu osób. Warto tu nadmienić, że swobodny przepływ pracowników daje pozytywny przykład w aspekcie społeczno-gospodarczym tak na poziomie UE, jak i krajów członkowskich. To podstawa integracji, rozwoju gospodarczego i społecznego, a także pomoc w zwalczaniu kryzysu gospodarczego.

Liczę, że państwa członkowskie powstrzymają się od wszelkich działań mogących naruszać prawo do swobodnego przepływu pracowników, które jest oparte na podstawowym prawodawstwie UE. Pamiętajmy, że prawo unijne chroni wszystkich obywateli UE przed dyskryminacją na tle narodowościowym, jeżeli chodzi o warunki pracy i zatrudnienia, dostęp do szkolenia, świadczenia społeczne i ulgi podatkowe.

  Маруся Любчева (S&D), в писмена форма. – Всички страни – членки на ЕС са равнопоставени по отношение на всички негови политики и свободи, включително свободното движение на хора. Очакванията на някои страни, че след 1 януари българите веднага ще окупират летищата и ще се насочат към други страни, обаче не се оправдаха. Приемам с недоумение истерията, която се разви около датата 1 януари, и плашещите прогнози, които някои правителства направиха.

Несправедлив и унизителен е начинът, по който започна да се говори за българските емигранти като цяло. Идеята за снемане на пръстови отпечатъци е недопустима. Призовавам г-н Брок да се разграничи от тази идея. Преплитането на проблеми като миграция, ромска общност, малцинствени групи, Шенген, престъпност, социален туризъм и бежанци не дава ясна представа за проблемите, а само провокира негативно отношение към българските граждани.

Уважаеми колеги, европейското законодателство е еднакво за всички. Българите се ползват от всички права на европейски граждани и спазват своите задължения. Не замествайте с тях въпросите от своя собствен политически дневен ред. Всеки човешки труд е принос, независимо къде е организиран; трудът на емигрантите – също. Днес ЕС повече от всякога има нужда от по-голяма мобилност на работната сила, а не обратното.

  Светослав Христов Малинов (PPE), in writing. – Свободното движение на хора е основно право, гарантирано на гражданите на Европейския съюз чрез Договорите. Както Комисар Андор също спомена в своето изказване, в тази посока Комисията разработи допълнително мерки, които да насърчат гражданите на Съюза да упражняват правото си на свободно придвижване и пребиваване в държавите–членки.

Не мога да не изразя задоволството си от преобладаващия тон на дебата. В тази зала надделяха гласовете на здравия разум, надделя възгледът, че трябва да браним с всички средства ценностите и правото на Съюза. Същевременно едни от най-шумните оратори срещу пълното отварянето на трудовите пазари за български и румънски граждани днес, когато водещият аргумент в изказванията на повечето колеги бяха фактите, не бяха сред нас.

А какви са фактите? Емиграцията е обусловена от желанието за по-добри кариерни възможности и реализация, а не от перспективата за получаване на социални помощи. Правото за получаване на помощи от своя страна е свързано с приноса към осигурителните системи на съответните страни.

В условията на настоящата криза миграцията на работна ръка в рамките на Съюза не е само начин за намаляване на безработицата, но и средство за преодоляване на диспропорциите в търсенето и предлагането на пазара на труда - теми, които нееднократно сме обсъждали тук.

  Надежда Нейнски (PPE), в писмена форма. – През последните месеци станахме свидетели на ожесточен дебат, в който българи и румънци бяха набедени за всичко лошо, което ще се случи в шестте държави с отпаднали ограничения за работа от 1-ви януари.

Данните за икономическите ползи на миграцията, за желанието за работа на българи и румънци, за малкия брой хора, които реално ще напуснат родните си места, не можаха да убедят някои политици да не се поддават на популистка предизборна кампания. Така дебатът, от дебат за миграцията, се превърна в дебат за духа на Европейския съюз и равенството на държавите членки.

Ако в разгара на икономическата криза се говореше за Европа на две скорости – на финансово-дисциплинираните държави и на онези с лошите финанси, днес ставаме свидетели на ново разделение – между богатата Западна Европа с нарастващи националистически и протекционистки тенденции и бедната Източна Европа с нейните проблеми и емигранти.

Такова противопоставяне е не само тъжно, но и опасно. То ни връща години назад като манталитет и подлага под съмнение успехите на европейското обединение. Както по време на финансовата криза Европа прояви солидарност с държавите в затруднение, така и днес Европа трябва да защити България и Румъния, които настояват да бъдат уважавани трудът и способностите на техните граждани.

  Sandra Petrović Jakovina (S&D), napisan. – U tijeku ove rasprave, smatram neophodnim izjasniti zabrinutost obzirom na legitimnost uvođenja restrikcija od strane nekih država članica Europske unije kojima je hrvatskim državljanima od samog datuma punopravnog članstva onemogućeno ostvarivanje njihovog temeljnog prava slobode kretanja, prvenstveno u svrhu zapošljavanja. Mi se ovdje zapravo moramo zapitati da li doista mogu postojati izuzeća od pune primjene temeljnih načela, od kojih je jedno upravo i pravo slobode kretanja građana, koje ne samo da predstavlja temelje na kojima je Unija izgrađena, već je protekom vremena postavilo pravni temelj daljnjem razvoju legislative Unije, stvaranjem pravno obvezujućih normi. Zbog prethodno navedenog s razlogom preispitujemo legitimnu osnovu dopuštenja takvih ograničenja odnosno restrikcija budući da je njihov krajnji ishod kršenje prava Unije.

  Theodor Dumitru Stolojan (PPE), în scris. – Agitația declanșată în unele state membre ale Uniunii Europene cu privire la așa-zisa năvală a românilor și bulgarilor, începând cu 1 ianuarie 2014, s-a dovedit nefondată.

Indiscutabil politicienii populiști, extremiști au încercat să manipuleze oamenii fără a avea fapte, pe simple presupuneri. Din păcate, astfel de distorsiuni în lumea politică sunt destul de des întâlnite. Dar este inacceptabil ca guvernul unui stat membru, respectiv cel al Marii Britanii, să oprească publicarea unui raport guvernamental cu privire la imigrație, numai pentru faptul că realitatea nu justifică agitația generală declanșată în această țară, înainte de 1 ianuarie 2014.

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D), în scris. – Dreptul la libera circulație este unul dintre principiile fundamentale ale Uniunii Europene. Conform tratatului de aderare a României și Bulgariei, statele membre puteau introduce restricții privind libera circulație a lucrătorilor pentru o perioadă de maximum 7 ani de la momentul aderării celor două state. În perioada 2007-2013, unele state membre au introdus astfel de restricții pentru lucrătorii români și bulgari, în timp ce altele au decis, încă de la 1 ianuarie 2007, să nu aplice niciun fel de restricții sau au renunțat treptat la acestea. Astăzi, este unanim acceptat faptul că lucrătorii români au participat la creșterea economică și socială a statelor în care au rezidat și lucrat. Am militat încă de la 1 ianuarie 2007 pentru libera circulație a lucrătorilor români și bulgari. Consider că ridicarea acestor bariere asigură condiții egale de muncă și elimină dumpingul social, în acest fel protejându-i în egală măsură atât pe lucrătorii migranți, cât și pe lucrătorii autohtoni. De aceea, solicităm statelor membre să se abțină de la introducerea, din motive de populism, a oricăror măsuri discriminatorii aplicate lucrătorilor migranți. Uniunea Europeană se bazează pe principiul egalității de tratament față de toți cetățenii săi, principiu fundamental pentru contractul de încredere dintre Uniune și cetățenii săi.

  Boris Zala (S&D), písomne – Kolegovia, už tradične vyvolávajú niektoré krajiny hystériu okolo voľného pohybu osôb v rámci EÚ. Teraz je to Veľká Británia, v minulosti to bolo Nemecko či Rakúsko. Na tom nezáleží. Podstata problému je v niečom inom: práve tieto krajiny s radosťou lákajú kvalifikované pracovné sily a ponúkajú im rôzne výhody. Kvalifikované sily, ktoré vyštudovali na náklady inej krajiny a teraz majú svoje schopnosti odovzdávať v inej krajine. Dobre, dnes sme v EÚ, sme v podstate jedna krajina a sme občanmi toho istého „súštátia“. Potom to však musí platiť obojsmerne: tie krajiny, ktoré odlákavajú kvalifikovanú pracovnú silu z chudobnejších krajín, nemôžu odopierať prístup ľuďom s menšou kvalifikáciou alebo si vyberať, kto do krajiny môže a kto nemôže prísť. Proste brať si len smotanu. Musia mať rovnako podiel na podpore chudobných, na ich sociálnej podpore, ale aj akceptovať konkurenciu na pracovnom trhu. To je solidarita, ale nielen to: to je spravodlivosť, rovnaká pre každého občana EÚ bez ohľadu na to, z ktorej je krajiny. Nemožno len výhody brať a náklady odmietať. Bohatšie krajiny Európy si to musia uvedomiť a podľa toho konať.

  Zbigniew Ziobro (EFD), na piśmie. – Wolność to podstawowe prawo człowieka. Wolność daje nam siłę, która napędza rozwój. Wolność to nie tylko możliwość podejmowania indywidulanych decyzji, ale również możliwość nieskrępowanego przemieszczania się. Dziwię się, że rząd brytyjski dziś stara się tę wolność ograniczać. Wielokrotnie kontestowałem działalność i decyzje podejmowane przez UE. Uważam jednak, że fundamentalnym jej osiągnięciem było otwarcie granic i złamanie powojennego dyktatu zamknięcia Europy i jej podziału na dwie strefy. Premier Cameron na fali gospodarczego załamania oraz słabnącej politycznej pozycji stara się odbudować poparcie poprzez wprowadzanie nieprzemyślanych zmian.

Apeluję, Panie Premierze – w 1940 roku Anglicy przyjęli Polaków, ci pomogli pokonać im niemiecki Blitzkrieg nad Londynem. Mam nadzieję, że ta lekcja historii została zapamiętana. Wszelkie próby ograniczenia skazane są na klęskę. Unijne traktaty jej zabraniają. Panie Premierze Cameron, lepiej więc wycofać się teraz niż wycofywać się w kontekście porażki, pod dyktando i na warunkach Brukseli.

(1) See Minutes.