Koko teksti 
Menettely : 2014/0279(COD)
Elinkaari istunnossa
Asiakirjan elinkaari : A8-0021/2014

Käsiteltäväksi jätetyt tekstit :


Keskustelut :

PV 21/10/2014 - 18
CRE 21/10/2014 - 18

Äänestykset :

PV 23/10/2014 - 7.4
CRE 23/10/2014 - 7.4

Hyväksytyt tekstit :


Sanatarkat istuntoselostukset
Tiistai 21. lokakuuta 2014 - Strasbourg Lopullinen versio

18. Ukrainasta peräisin oleviin tavaroihin sovellettavat tullit (keskustelu)
Puheenvuorot videotiedostoina

  President. - The next item is the report by Gabrielius Landsbergis, on behalf of the Committee on International Trade, on customs duties on goods originating in Ukraine (COM(2014)0597 – C8-0165/2014 – 2014/0279(COD)) (A8-0021/2014).


  Gabrielius Landsbergis, rapporteur. - First of all, let me thank all of you who supported Ukraine during our meetings in the Committee on International Trade and here in plenary. I am pleased we have a broad and firm understanding that Europe has to stand by Ukraine by granting the unilateral extension of the autonomous trade measures (ATMs).

As we speak, Ukraine continues to struggle on all fronts at the same time. The ceasefire is not being respected; Ukraine is continuing to defend its territorial integrity against attacks from outside; it faces enormous economic and financial difficulties; and it has to undergo deep internal reforms. Europe has made a commitment to help Ukraine – and with today’s decision we will turn our words into deeds. This should help Ukraine to withstand the pressure from Russia, which is willing to obstruct the implementation of the Association Agreement between the EU and Ukraine and to interfere in our bilateral relations and sovereign decisions.

There was a time in history when Europe abandoned one eastern European country: 75 years ago Poland was left on its own against aggressors, despite previous statements offering great support. We all know what happened later. What could have been stopped at Poland’s borders finally engulfed the whole world. Ukraine is today’s front, and strong statements and words of support are simply not enough.

The extension of the Regulation is part of the EU commitment that was made at the same time as it was decided to postpone implementation of the deep and comprehensive free trade agreement (DCFTA) for 15 months – in the hope of peace.

The Ukrainian side favours the ATMs and says that they have helped to increase Ukraine’s exports to the EU and, indeed, to compensate for the fall in exports to countries in the Customs Union. The ATMs provide a much-needed opportunity for Ukrainian producers and businesses to divert their exports away from the increasingly restrictive Russian market, and also an incentive to bringing their operations and standards more into line with those of the EU.

I would note too that Member States have already supported the extension of the Regulation, so there is every chance of ensuring that it will remain in effect without any break. Taking into account the call from some colleagues for close monitoring of the implementation of the ATMs and for more reassurance on deadlines, I will urge the Commission to continue to monitor the effects closely.

These ATMs have been in place since April 2014, with Parliament’s approval, and we know exactly what they mean in terms of entitlements. All the relevant calculations have been done. Moreover, as Parliament ratified the Association Agreement last month it was expected to come into full force immediately, meaning that the tariff agreement would have been in place since last month.

Given the current situation, our timely decision will prove that the European Parliament can act swiftly and decisively. It will also be proof of our political will and recognition of our moral obligation: we are ready to help the Ukrainians and we are not leaving them alone. Colleagues, I count on your firm support for this decision.


  Martine Reicherts, Member of the Commission. - Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, at Parliament’s plenary session of 16 September, Commissioner De Gucht explained in detail the content and context of the outcome of the trilateral consultations between Ukraine, Russia and the EU on 12 September. The Commission agreed, as part of the outcome, to propose to the Council to delay the provisional application of the trade title of the EU Association Agreement with Ukraine until 31 December 2015, and this in the event that Ukraine ratified the Association Agreement.

The proposal by the Commission for such a delay was based on a clear request from Ukraine to take an initiative that would allow ratification of the Association Agreements to go ahead while leaving more time to discuss ways of addressing Russian concerns arising from the implementation of the DCFTA. This outcome must be seen in the bigger political context. It is part and parcel of a comprehensive peace process in Ukraine and secures a commitment from Russia to maintain its preferential trade regime with Ukraine.

Four days later, on 16 September, Ukraine went ahead with the ratification of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, which was endorsed simultaneously by the European Parliament here in Strasbourg giving its consent. Many of you, honourable Members, expressed satisfaction when the Association Agreement was ratified. It was truly historic, as it was the first time in the EU’s history that such a simultaneous vote had taken place. As part of the 12 September outcome, the Commission also agreed to submit a proposal to extend, until the end of 2015, the autonomous trade preferences currently granted to Ukraine, as they will otherwise cease to apply as of 1 November.

Let me recall the basic elements of these autonomous trade preferences. The unilateral market access granted to Ukraine corresponds to the first year of application of the schedule of concessions negotiated under the DCFTA. The current proposal simply extends the duration of those autonomous preferences by 15 additional months, thus maintaining the same preferences. Suspended duties would present an amount of up to nearly EUR 500 million. Preferences are granted to Ukraine subject to its effective cooperation in customs matters and require Ukraine not to change in any way its tariffs towards the EU. In addition, safeguard controls are in place to prevent market-distorting surges impacting adversely on European companies and industry, including the agriculture sector. EU phytosanitary rules remain fully applicable to Ukrainian products.

In order to address concerns expressed by Parliament, the extension of the autonomous trade preferences is subject to Ukraine’s respect for the essential elements of the Association Agreement. Most importantly from an economic point of view, the autonomous trade preferences have a very limited impact on the EU markets, and yet at the same time they represent a gesture of tangible economic and political support to Ukraine in a difficult situation, helping to address Ukraine’s difficult economic, political, security and territorial challenges.

I would like to thank Parliament for the efforts already made to pave the way for a swift conclusion of the legislative procedure for this file in order to ensure that trade flows are not disrupted. Parliament is therefore asked to endorse the Commission’s proposal so that these important preferences for Ukraine continue to apply after 1 November.


  Salvatore Cicu, a nome del gruppo PPE. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, credo che sia stato importante aver ottenuto la possibilità di un confronto in Parlamento su un tema di così notevole rilevanza. Noi capiamo perfettamente gli aspetti geopolitici che hanno determinato, anche sulla base di quanto ha argomentato il relatore, l'esponente della Commissione, la procedura accelerata, che noi condividiamo. Non facciamo nessuna questione rispetto a questa impostazione e siamo anche, come dire a sostegno del processo di pace, che naturalmente va oltre quegli elementi che sono racchiusi nella modifica regolamentare che qui ci troviamo a dibattere.

Abbiamo però sollevato, sia in commissione, e riproponiamo anche con la stessa formulazione in Aula, alcune richieste nei confronti soprattutto della Commissione. Il provvedimento noi riteniamo debba essere considerato un provvedimento eccezionale, il che significa non dovrà a nostro giudizio superare il termine dei 14 mesi che è stato concesso, quindi poter andare oltre il 31 dicembre del 2015.

Nello stesso tempo consideriamo fondamentale che fra sei mesi, fra otto mesi, venga verificato, approfondito quello che il rappresentante della Commissione oggi ci ha indicato come una certezza e cioè un monitoraggio che ci faccia capire qual è l'impatto che questo regolamento realizza rispetto al provvedimento.


  David Martin, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, when we agreed these temporary autonomous measures for Ukraine back in the spring, it was on the assumption that the deep and comprehensive free trade agreement would enter into force by next month. As the Commissioner has just reminded us, after the historic simultaneous signing by the European Parliament and the Ukrainian Parliament, this has been delayed until 2016.

The proposal today, therefore, is not for new measures but for an extension of existing measures, and that is why my Group has been able to support an accelerated procedure and why we will not support any amendments to this text. If we do not approve this on Thursday, there will be a gap in preferences when the current trade regime with Ukraine expires at the beginning of November. My Group will not accept a delay in the entry into force of this regulation. It would send the wrong signal to the people of Ukraine if we wilfully stood in the way of European solidarity and support as they struggle to re-establish democracy and economic stability.

When these trade measures were first proposed they did not include a human rights clause. However, this new proposal from the Commission has taken on board the demand from the Socialist and Democratic Group that it should include a human rights clause, and for that reason, and for the reason of urgency, we will support this regulation unamended on Thursday.


  Marietje Schaake, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Madam President, the exceptional provocations and aggression by Putin’s Russia in our eastern neighbourhood continue to be cause for great concern. At their root is the choice of the Ukrainians to seek stronger ties with the EU.

Choosing rules-based trade and a movement towards an open society will require difficult reforms. The deep and comprehensive trade agreement which is part of the Association Agreement is set to enter into force on 1 January 2016. Meanwhile, preferential trade measures were already adopted in April 2014 as part of the support package for Ukraine. Since their implementation, trade between the EU and Ukraine has increased drastically. Ukrainian exports to the EU increased by 25 % in May and June of this year compared to the same period last year and during the first six months of 2014 exports from Ukraine to Russia fell by 24 %.

These figures show the importance of the autonomous trade measures for the Ukrainian economy. Not extending them would not only seem a political statement but would have a very real economic impact on the country and its people. Given the economic asymmetry between the EU and Ukraine, the increase in exports from Ukraine is economically important for the country but it has relatively little effect on us in the EU. In principle, the autonomous trade measures do not allow illegal products onto the European market. All products must conform to EU standards, but the increase in trade may make it harder to control them. However this should not lead to products coming onto the European market which would otherwise be illegal and which could harm European producers.

The regulation before us prolongs the autonomous trade measures and amends the existing regulation to make access by Ukraine to the preferential conditions conditional upon respect for democratic principles, human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as respect for the rule of law. This is also mentioned in the Association Agreement. It is now important that these conditions are met and that the timeframe is kept. Exceptional circumstances call for exceptional measures but the goal remains to see a structural solution.


  Helmut Scholz, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Reicherts! Was die Kommission hier vorgelegt hat, ist aus Sicht der Bevölkerung der Ukraine eine Mogelpackung. Sie räumen für die ausgewählten Exportgüter für das gesamte Jahr 2015 die gleichen Mengen für die Ausfuhr in die EU ein, die von der Ukraine gerade nur in einem halben Jahr ausgeschöpft wurden. Zudem trägt die Verordnung mit dem 31. Dezember 2015 ein Verfallsdatum, das möglichen Investoren in der Ukraine keine Sicherheit geben kann.

Meine Fraktion fordert, ehrlicher vorzugehen und die Verordnung direkt mit dem erfolgreichen Abschluss der trilateralen Verhandlungen mit Russland zu verbinden. Wir sollten deutlich machen, wie auch diese konkrete wirtschaftspolitische Maßnahme mit realen Auswirkungen auf den Alltag der Bürgerinnen und Bürger sowohl in der Ukraine als auch in der EU-28 endlich einen Weg zu Frieden und wirtschaftlicher Perspektive eröffnen und fördern kann. Stattdessen setzt die Verordnung die Unterhändler weiter unter unnötigen Druck. Dabei hätten Sie die notwendigen Gespräche mit Russland von Anfang an suchen sollen, um für alle den besten Weg in eine gemeinsame Friedens- und Wirtschaftsordnung zu finden – nicht in der Konfrontation, sondern im bewussten Nutzen der Möglichkeiten der Ukraine als Brücke zwischen der EU und der Eurasischen Union.


  Bronis Ropė, Verts/ALE frakcijos vardu. Nors laikas ir vėlus, bet, manau, klausimas tiek Europai, tiek Ukrainai yra pakankamai svarbus. Savotiškai duodama ne žuvis, o meškerė, suteikiant Ukrainai galimybę gauti paramą iki 500 mln. eurų. Šiandien tenka tik apgailestauti, kad dėl Rusijos spaudimo Ukraina buvo priversta prašyti atidėti išsamios ir visapusiškos laisvosios prekybos sutarties taikymą. Dėl to manau, kad būtina priimti šią pristatytą rezoliuciją. Negalime jos atidėlioti. Mes turime ir toliau remti Ukrainos ekonomiką, padėti jai stiprėti iš vidaus ir užtikrinti jos stabilumą. Turime nusiųsti aiškų signalą Ukrainos žmonėms, taip pat ir verslui, kad remiame Ukrainos ekonomiką ir jos integraciją į Europos Sąjungos procesus.

Palaikę Komisijos pasiūlymą mes parodysime, jog Europos Sąjunga laikosi savo įsipareigojimų Rytų kaimynystės partneriams ir sugeba rasti tinkamą atsaką į iššūkius, kartu įrodydama, kad laikosi savo vertybių.


  Giulia Moi, a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, garantire preferenze tariffarie unilaterali all'Ucraina rappresenta indubbiamente un chiaro segnale politico nei confronti della Russia. Un segnale che però non deve contribuire a impoverire ulteriormente i nostri produttori e in particolar modo agricoltori. Queste preferenze graveranno per 487 milioni di euro sul bilancio comunitario, con conseguenze dirette sul settore agricolo, specie del mais e della farina, dove le esportazioni ucraine contano più del 60% e dove la riduzione dei dazi porterà perdite non facilmente recuperabili. È la seconda volta dopo l'embargo russo del 7 agosto che i nostri agricoltori subiscono le conseguenze politiche di questo accordo di associazione.

Chiediamo quindi alla Commissione di fare pressione affinché nei 14 mesi previsti si arrivi alla ratifica dell'accordo di associazione, con benefici anche per i nostri produttori, e che ci sia un controllo su quanto esportato non volendo ritrovarci farine OGM o prodotti non conformi agli standard europei in mancanza di appropriate riforme fitosanitarie.


  Udo Voigt (NI). - Frau Präsidentin! Frau Reicherts, ich erlaube mir die Frage, was hat die EU, was hat mein Land Deutschland von den Zollaussetzungen in diesen Stunden? Welche Waren können künftig überhaupt aus der Ukraine den europäischen Binnenmarkt bereichern? Ist diese Aktion nicht mehr oder weniger, erneut Öl ins Feuer zu gießen, und das falsche politische Signal, nachdem verschiedene Kriegsverbrechen noch nicht aufgeklärt sind, zum Beispiel die Morde in Odessa, die schrecklichen, tragischen Unfälle um den Flug MH 17? Wie wirken sich solche Maßnahmen auf Sanktionen und die Gegenreaktion von Russland aus? Wann wird die Eskalationsspirale beendet?

Wenn man hier Maßnahmen ergreifen sollte und den europäischen Binnenmarkt vergrößern will, dann sollte man das doch tun, indem man die Ukraine und Russland dazu nimmt und versucht, beide einzubeziehen, und stattdessen lieber das Freihandelsabkommen mit den USA aussetzt.


  Alessia Maria Mosca (S&D). - Signora Presidente, onorevoli deputati, troppo spesso l'Unione europea ha perso occasioni per far sentire la sua voce e il suo peso perché troppo lentamente si è mossa di fronte a situazioni di emergenza. In questa circostanza deve essere invece vista con positività la tempestività dell'iniziativa di evitare un vacuum normativo rispetto alla rimozione dei dazi doganali per le importazioni dall'Ucraina. Anzitutto perché crediamo che gli interessi di politica commerciale debbano essere coerenti a quelli di politica estera e che in questa fase sia necessario lanciare un segnale forte nei confronti di un popolo in difficoltà. Speriamo che in un futuro non troppo lontano la popolazione ucraina possa riconoscersi nei valori fondanti della nostra Unione.

Decisioni come queste dimostrano che si può e si deve avere il coraggio di anteporre interessi comuni a quelli di parte. È evidente la problematicità che comporta una procedura di emergenza e che questa possa effettivamente essere un elemento di preoccupazione, ma – nel bilanciamento con i danni che sarebbero intervenuti se non ci fosse stata la proroga – ha prevalso la valutazione di procedere comunque.

È il modo migliore a nostro avviso di offrire l'opportunità ai produttori ucraini di dirottare i loro scambi verso il mercato europeo, dando loro l'opportunità di sopravvivere e allo stesso tempo di incoraggiarli ad adattarsi agli standard comunitari. In più pensiamo sia positiva l'inclusione dell'articolo 2 che ribadisce l'obbligatorietà del rispetto delle libertà fondamentali, dell'inviolabilità dei confini e del contrasto alla proliferazione di armi di distruzione di massa.

È importante sottolineare che le misure commerciali autonome non sono un'indiscriminata apertura del mercato comunitario ai prodotti ucraini che fanno concorrenza alle produzioni comunitarie, in quanto nel settore agricolo e agroindustriale i livelli di protezione restano più alti che in altri settori, con quote e prezzi minimi che non falsano la competitività dei prodotti locali.

In sintesi speriamo che questa estensione possa essere percepita come un atto di buona volontà da parte dell'Unione europea e uno stimolo per arrivare alla conclusione della crisi quanto prima e non certo come un modo per perdere tempo né tantomeno una consuetudine e speriamo altresì che il vero e proprio trattato commerciale entri in vigore al più tardi il 1° gennaio del 2016.


  Kaja Kallas (ALDE). - Madam President, we all know that the Ukrainian conflict has resulted not only in more than 3 600 military and civilian casualties but also in major economic costs. That is why I strongly welcome this proposal today, as it aims to lower customs duties on goods from Ukraine until December 2015, when the Association Agreement will enter into force. This is needed for Ukraine’s economy, its businesses and its citizens.

It is, however, a shame that it should be needed today because of the delay in applying the free trade elements of the Association Agreement, due to pressure from Russia. Russia should not have a say in EU-Ukraine trade relations, and the Commission needs to ensure that we do not end up in the same situation in December 2015 when the Association Agreement enters into force.


  Jean-Luc Schaffhauser (NI). - Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, bien qu'il soit tard, je tiens à rappeler un certain nombre de choses, plus particulièrement à l'intention de la représentante de la Commission.

Rappelons les chiffres. Entre 2002 et 2012, les excédents de l'Union vers l'Ukraine ont été multipliés par cinq, passant de deux à dix milliards d'excédents. Ce n'est pas l'Union qui a aidé l'Ukraine mais l'Ukraine qui a aidé l'Union. Les droits de douane, déjà réduits, n'ont pas apporté la croissance et le développement économiques de l'Ukraine mais ont entraîné la destruction d'emplois, la récession et le chômage. L'accord n'apporte pas la stabilité économique mais l'instabilité économique en Ukraine ainsi qu'une concurrence déloyale, en particulier dans le domaine agricole. Chez nous, en France, où les agriculteurs souffrent de plus en plus, on dénombre plus d'un suicide par jour.

Dans quelques années, c'est la population de l'ouest après celle de l'est de l'Ukraine qui saura que l'Union et ses institutions européennes apportent l'instabilité politique et économique même s'il faut reconnaître que cet accord a, au moins, l'avantage de ne pas vouloir opposer l'Occident et l'Orient dans le développement de l'Ukraine.


  Johannes Cornelis van Baalen (ALDE). - Mevrouw de Voorzitter, ik steun net als mevrouw Schaake en mevrouw Kallas vanzelfsprekend dit arrangement. Dit is goed voor Oekraïne en wij moeten Oekraïne steunen.

Ik vind het echter onverteerbaar dat dit compromis tot stand gekomen is op basis van Russische chantage. Oekraïne is onder enorme druk gezet. Dat is mij duidelijk geworden in Brussel. Dat is mij duidelijk geworden in Moskou en in Kiev. En uiteindelijk mag over anderhalf jaar niet nog eens die Russische druk beloond worden. Dat kan niet gebeuren.

Ik ben het ook eens met diegenen die zeggen "onze landbouwsector mag niet de zure vruchten plukken". Dierenwelzijn, volksgezondheid, op dat soort zaken mag natuurlijk niets worden ingeleverd. Eventueel moet gekeken worden of de landbouwsector enige compensatie kan krijgen omdat zij ook zo lijdt onder een Russisch embargo.

Maar nogmaals, wij moeten Oekraïne helpen en daarom zijn wij volledig voor dit arrangement.


  Janusz Korwin-Mikke (NI). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Wolny handel jest zawsze zyskowny dla obu stron, dlatego nie ma najmniejszego powodu, żebyśmy ustalali, co wolno Ukrainie przywozić, a czego nie wolno. Jest to korzystne wyłącznie dla ludzi, którzy żyją z opracowywania takich sprawozdań. Ja to doskonale rozumiem i moim zdaniem jedynym sensem tego sprawozdania, które mam w ręku, jest to, że producenci cukru z buraków dali w łapę tym, którzy dopuszczają towary do obrotu, a producenci ziemniaków akurat nie. Każdy towar z Ukrainy i na Ukrainę powinien być dopuszczony na rynek Unii Europejskiej i odwrotnie.


Catch-the-eye procedure


  Adam Szejnfeld (PPE). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Temat, o którym rozmawiamy, ma dwa wymiary. Po pierwsze – pomoc i wsparcie dla Ukrainy, po drugie – godność i wiarygodność Unii Europejskiej. Słowo się rzekło, jeśli zatem Unia Europejska zgodziła się na wejście w życie umowy stowarzyszeniowej z Ukrainą dopiero za rok, to by być wiarygodną w stosunkach z Ukrainą i stanowczą w stosunkach z Rosją, Unia Europejska musi dochować słowa. Trzeba więc przesunąć autonomiczne środki handlowe do końca przyszłego roku. W przeciwnym razie nikt nas, a szczególnie Rosja, nigdy już nie będzie traktował poważnie. To my – Unia, a nie Rosja, powinniśmy decydować, kiedy wchodzą w życie nasze umowy handlowe z innymi krajami.


  Miguel Viegas (GUE/NGL). - Senhora Presidente, nós somos igualmente solidários com o povo ucraniano. É por isso que condenamos o golpe de Estado ilegal, apoiado pela União Europeia e pelos Estados Unidos. Esta ajuda que a União Europeia pretende dar ao povo ucraniano também a conhecemos em Portugal. A troco de ajuda financeira a União Europeia irá impor a liberalização da economia, irá desmantelar o aparelho produtivo daquele país, que não tem condições para competir com as grandes companhias europeias.

O que a União Europeia pretende não é ajudar, é apenas alargar o seu mercado a novos consumidores e ter acesso às matérias-primas da Ucrânia. Se a União Europeia quer ajudar, que exija do atual governo golpista da Ucrânia o respeito pelos direitos humanos, que cesse de apoiar as milícias fascistas que perseguem sindicalistas e outros ativistas sociais, que condene a tentativa de ilegalização do partido comunista da Ucrânia e que investigue todos os crimes cometidos, com especial destaque para o crime de Odessa. É esta ajuda que a União Europeia deveria dar.


  Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Oczywiste jest, że to, co staramy się zrobić w tej chwili, to próba wzmocnienia ekonomicznego krajów w potrzebie. Jest to jasny sygnał polityczny, że z jednej strony nie zgadzamy się na agresję, a z drugiej strony nie zostawiamy tych w potrzebie. Najprościej rzecz ujmując, stabilna Ukraina leży w naszym interesie. Wzmacnianie Ukrainy leży w naszym interesie, ale przede wszystkim Ukraina zbliżająca się do Unii Europejskiej leży w naszym interesie. Oczywiście musi to odbywać się w sposób jasny i przejrzysty. Musi to oznaczać głębokie strukturalne zmiany związane z reformą polityczną i ekonomiczną na Ukrainie, taki powinien być sygnał – jasny sygnał dla obywateli Unii Europejskiej i Ukrainy.


(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


  Martine Reicherts, Member of the Commission. - Madam President, the EU should definitely continue to support the comprehensive peace process in Ukraine, respecting the country’s territorial integrity and its right to decide on its destiny. We must stand shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine in the face of the extremely difficult political and territorial challenges it faces but also in its process of reforms and economic modernisation.

Parliament’s support in these efforts is vital. Delays in the extension of trade preferences should indeed be avoided as this could have an impact on economic operators’ decisions to import goods from Ukraine. Even retroactive application risks not fully repairing interferences with trade flows and would be cumbersome not only for the economic operators but also for our competent national customs authorities.

Therefore I urge Parliament to endorse the Commission’s proposal without amendments. The Council should then do its part so that the legislative act can be signed into law and enter into force as soon as possible.


  Gabrielius Landsbergis, rapporteur. - Madam President, I would like to thank all my colleagues who participated in the debate. It clearly sends a very strong message to our Ukrainian friends that all the main groups in Parliament support the decision.

I would like to make a few points. Regarding certain deadlines, I am sure that, in cooperation with the Commission, we can sort these things out. Regarding Russia, I have a huge question: why do we want to involve a third country in this type of decision? To me it is clear that the Euromaidan people made a decision when they protested against the regime. They made a decision to be part of Europe and we have to respond to that, without involving any third parties, whether Russia or any other country.

I strongly believe that on Thursday we will support this decision, and I call on all those Members who are still in doubt to support the decision without the amendments.


  President. - The debate is closed.

The vote will take place on Thursday, 23 October 2014.

Written statements (Rule 162)


  Antanas Guoga (ALDE), in writing. – I want to express my strong support for the reduction or elimination of customs duties through autonomous trade measures (ATMs) on goods originating in Ukraine. I believe that it is time to unite and to show our respect for the pro-European choice made by the Ukrainian people. I see the extension of ATMs as one of the ways to stabilise the countryʼs economy and politics. It would not only help Ukrainian businesses re-orientate from the Russian to the European market but would also help adapt their functioning and standards to EU ones, which will help in preparing for the full implementation of the DCFTA from January 2016. Ukrainian exports to the EU increased by 25 % in the first half of 2014 and will keep increasing if we open our market while Ukraine respects our sanitary and phytosanitary standards.


  Anja Hazekamp (GUE/NGL), schriftelijk. – Vandaag debatteren wij over het afschaffen van douanerechten op Oekraïense goederen. Of voor de volledigheid: het voorstel voor een verordening van het Europees Parlement en de Raad tot wijziging van Verordening (EU) nr. 374/2014 tot verlaging of afschaffing van douanerechten op goederen uit Oekraïne. We weten allemaal dat de intensivering van de handelsbetrekkingen met Oekraïne -en daarmee de vergroting van Europese invloed op Oekraïne- grote geopolitieke consequenties kan hebben. Daar zal ik nu dus niet verder op ingaan. Ik zie echter nog een probleem: in de EU zijn legbatterijen verboden en mogen legbatterij-eieren niet worden verkocht, terwijl Oekraïne dieronvriendelijke legbatterijen gewoon toestaat. En wat blijkt? Dit voorstel laat dierlijke producten uit Oekraïne gewoon toe, ongeacht de leefomstandigheden van de dieren. Hoe kan de EU met droge ogen verklaren dat ze een einde zal maken aan dieronvriendelijke productiemethoden als we deze producten via de achterdeur gewoon toelaten? Dankzij de Europese Commissie, die een grote Oekraïense eierproducent al toestemming gaf voor export naar Europa, liggen er binnenkort weer legbatterij-eieren in onze winkels. Ik vind dat onbegrijpelijk! Ik vind internationale veiligheid, mensenrechten, democratie én een respectvolle omgang met dieren belangrijker dan kortzichtige handelspolitiek. Daarom zal ik tegen dit verslag stemmen.

Oikeudellinen huomautus - Tietosuojakäytäntö