Cjeloviti tekst 
Postupak : 2014/0059(COD)
Faze dokumenta na plenarnoj sjednici
Odabrani dokument : A8-0141/2015

Podneseni tekstovi :


Rasprave :

PV 19/05/2015 - 3
CRE 19/05/2015 - 3
PV 15/03/2017 - 14
CRE 15/03/2017 - 14

Glasovanja :

PV 20/05/2015 - 10.7
CRE 20/05/2015 - 10.7
Objašnjenja glasovanja
PV 16/03/2017 - 6.5
Objašnjenja glasovanja

Doneseni tekstovi :


Doslovno izvješće
Utorak, 19. svibnja 2015. - Strasbourg Revidirano izdanje

3. Samocertificiranje uvoznika ruda i metala koji potječu iz sukobima pogođenih i visokorizičnih područja (rasprava)
Videozapis govora

  El Presidente. – El punto siguiente en el orden del día es el debate sobre el informe de Iuliu Winkler, en nombre de la Comisión de Comercio Internacional, sobre la propuesta de Reglamento del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo por el que se establece un sistema de la Unión para la autocertificación de la diligencia debida en la cadena de suministro de los importadores responsables de estaño, tantalio y wolframio, sus minerales y oro originarios de zonas de conflicto y de alto riesgo (COM(2014)0111 – C7-0092/2014 – 2014/0059(COD)) (A8—0141/2015)


  Iuliu Winkler, rapporteur. Mr President, the draft regulation that we will be debating today aims to break the link between mineral extraction and trade and the financing of armed conflict. It sets up an EU system of self—certification of importers of 3Ts and gold, modelled on the OECD due diligence guidelines for responsible supply chains of minerals from conflict-affected areas.

What the conflict-affected areas are, entrepreneurs will receive guidance to establish, but this regulation does not tell them. This is not country-specific: it is conflict-specific, if I may put it that way, so it does not deal with any specific country or region.

Let me emphasise that our aim here is to build a coalition of responsible stakeholders in the interests of the people and the local communities in conflict-affected areas. Responsible sourcing of minerals from those areas is a very complex challenge. The objective of the EU approach is to break the link between economic activity and transparently—managed industry and trade, and conflict financing and conflict fuelling.

Parliament has called on the Commission to take action on this issue. Therefore, last March the Commission came up with the draft regulation and the joint communication to accompany it.

Let me take this opportunity to thank Commissioner Cecilia Malmström, the coordinators in Parliament’s Committee on International Trade (INTA), Committee on Development and Committee on Foreign Affairs, the shadow rapporteurs, all colleagues and all the stakeholders involved in the debate in the past months, for the great amount of work invested in this.

My objective as rapporteur is to contribute and draw up an efficient regulation which has to be coherent with the integrated EU approach, an approach which is built on three pillars: a trade regulation which is setting up the supply chain due diligence self-certification mechanism; accompanying measures to assist European Union companies in their uptake of the self-certification system, firstly and with a special focus on European SMEs; and accompanying measures on the ground to be deployed through political, diplomatic and development cooperation specially designed to support capacity-building, better governance and, first of all, education of all the stakeholders involved.

In order to achieve these effects and Parliamentʼs intentions, trade regulation has to be efficient and workable. The compromise voted in INTA, which is on the table for the vote tomorrow, is a compromise that fulfils this objective. It provides the voluntary responsibility-based approach with mandatory due diligence obligations for EU smelters and refiners, and also importers of minerals. It takes on board existing experience and incorporates already—functioning self-certification mechanisms, so it takes on board a great deal of work which has already been done by industry initiatives by providing the possibility of recognition for already established and OECD-compatible schemes.

It introduces the European ʽresponsible importerʼ label for the importers under the regulation and it draws up a list of responsible European importers. It introduces voluntary labelling for companies operating in the downstream European certification of responsibility, which is introduced also under the regulation proposed. This proposal, voted in INTA, respects the principles of prudent and proportionate legislating. It does not unilaterally impose obligations on EU companies; it respects and ensures a consistent uptake of the minerals market towards responsible conflict-free certification.

This proposal also focuses specially on the large number of European SMEs involved. It protects these SMEs with the right incentives and assistance, and does this under the umbrella of the COSME programme. It includes a strong and clear review clause that provides for the possibility to assess the effects of the regulation on the ground. The review also provides the opportunity to accommodate evolutions in the OECD due diligence framework regarding additional minerals beyond 3TG as they are elaborated by the OECD.

The proposal also avoids the risk of trade diversion, disengagement from conflict areas, unwanted but de facto embargoes effects, and any surge in smuggling and illegal trade with a negative price effect on the market. It does all this because it provides a functional and workable implementing framework for the regulation.

I believe that the proposal voted in the INTA Committee and tabled in this plenary fulfils the objective of the integrated EU approach, so I ask Members to support this proposal in the vote tomorrow.


  Cecilia Malmström, Member of the Commission. Mr President, this is an important occasion to debate a very important issue, namely how to eliminate conflict minerals from our supply chains. By doing so, we will reduce the great hardship, endless wars and human rights abuses that have traditionally come with them. I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Winkler, the Committee on International Trade (INTA), the other committees and all the Members who have been active in working on this issue.

One of the challenges in trade policy is to harness the potential of our economies while creating effective systems to avoid negative consequences, like the one we are discussing today. This challenge is particularly acute in developing countries, and the issue of conflict minerals is one of the most glaring examples.

On the one hand, we do need a global market-based approach to raw materials that provides developing countries with a vital source of stable income through trade in natural resources. On the other hand, we need to break the link between minerals and conflict, the most obvious example of which is the conflict in the Great Lakes region in Africa. The situation there is horrific. Millions of people have been killed and millions more injured and traumatised since the outbreak of the first Congo war in the mid-1990s. While Congo is the most dramatic example of the phenomenon, it is not the only one.

Therefore, following calls for action by the United States, the G8 and this Parliament, based on the work of the OECD, the Commission developed, jointly with the High Representative, an integrated approach. The draft regulation we are discussing here today is only one of its components. I insist on this integrated approach because it is crucial to understand – and I know you all do – that there is no silver bullet to deal with this problem. It is by nature multidimensional and extremely complicated. So we must look at it from different angles – development, political, the trade perspective – all at the same time.

The size of Europe’s trade footprint is such that businesses here must play their part. The EU is amongst the world’s largest importers of tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold ores and concentrates, with a share of almost 35% of global trade. The EU is also a relatively large importer of tin, tantalum and tungsten and gold metals which presently represent almost 25% and 15% of global trade respectively.

But precisely because of our importance in trade, we can also make things worse if we do not approach it in the right way. If we impose a mandatory scheme without making sure that the conditions on the ground in the conflict regions are right in order to support the implementation of such a system, we do run a high risk of further disrupting global supply chains and driving them away from Africa altogether.

We also risk creating trade diversion, resulting in prejudice against individual countries, or even the whole continent, and that would lead to plummeting prices for minerals from certain origins. We can also risk continuing to have thriving underground markets in conflict and high-risk areas and a prosperous smuggling sector. We can also create a severe shortage in the EU for companies that are – most of the time – willing, but unable, to check their supply chains effectively, and we will have achieved nothing on the ground since we will have placed fragile mining areas and local communities under additional pressure from international markets.

If you do not believe me, you can have a look at the situation in the Great Lakes region since the US mandatory scheme in the Dodd-Frank Act came into effect. The difficulties there are described in United Nations reports year after year.

The Commission proposal has taken these key considerations into account, following an in-depth impact assessment exercise. Our plan is focused, proportionate and designed to complement the other components of the integrated approach.

Our proposal focuses on smelters and refiners. Until they know where they source their minerals from, we cannot reasonably ask the majority of downstream companies to know. Many of them might be tempted to lie. It will include responsible smelters and refiners in the EU and worldwide on a white list and consequently a ‘name and shame’ system for those that do not appear on it. There are no more than 40 smelters in the EU. How many of them do you think are able not to appear on that list? There will be a lot of pressure from you, from NGOs and from other business. I would argue not a single one.

Moreover, the Commission proposal sets up an enforcement structure to be deployed by Member States’ competent authorities to ensure that operators claiming to be responsible are truly so. It also includes a strong review clause to open the possibility for switching – in a staged manner – to a mandatory approach in the event that the current proposal does not deliver. It operates in parallel to the EUR 20 million package that the High Representative and the Commission have announced to further support capacity building in conflict regions.

So I think this voluntary, incentives-based approach, integrated for responsible sourcing, is the most appropriate one to achieve the common goal that we have here. I thank you for this possibility to debate it and am looking forward to the debate.


  Bogdan Brunon Wenta, autor projektu opinii Komisji Rozwoju. Panie Przewodniczący! Pani Komisarz! Jutrzejsze głosowanie w sprawie sprawozdania pana posła Winklera, którego byłem opiniodawcą z ramienia Komisji Rozwoju, daje szansę posłom do Parlamentu Europejskiego na wykonanie ważnego pierwszego kroku w stronę przerwania związku między wydobyciem minerałów i handlem nimi a finansowaniem zbrojnych grup, bojówek i wojen.

Stworzenie w krajach Unii rynku odpowiedzialnego handlu minerałami daje nadzieję na poprawę sytuacji mieszkańców w tych regionach, z których te minerały są pozyskiwane. Dlatego ważny jest przepływ informacji na poszczególnych etapach łańcucha dostaw: od wydobycia do finalnego produktu. W swojej opinii zaproponowałem zobowiązania dla górnej części łańcucha, szczególnie rafinerii, hut i importerów oraz należytą staranność dla dolnej części łańcucha zgodnie z wytycznymi OECD. Konieczne jest wzięcie pod uwagę sytuacji małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw, które często nie dysponują wystarczającymi środkami.

Z punktu widzenia Komisji Rozwoju bardzo ważne są środki towarzyszące, które pozwolą na kontynuację współpracy z krajami rozwijającymi się. Z zadowoleniem przyjmuję fakt, że Komisja przeznacza 20 mln na działania towarzyszące i mam nadzieję, że wkrótce przedstawi projekt tych działań.


  Daniel Caspary, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. Herr Präsident! Ich wünsche mir, dass wir bei all den Überlegungen, die wir in den kommenden Stunden und Tagen bis zur Abstimmung noch anstellen, die Menschen in den Konfliktregionen in unseren Fokus rücken. Wir brauchen eine Regulierung, die den Menschen vor Ort schnell hilft. Wir brauchen keine Regulierung, die nie in Kraft tritt, die vielleicht dem einen oder anderen politischen Aktivisten in Europa besser gefällt, aber dann am Ende bei den Menschen nicht ankommt. Wir brauchen etwas, was schnell durch Parlament und Rat durchgeht und vor Ort ankommt. Deswegen herzlichen Glückwunsch an die Kommission für den umfassenden Ansatz!

Ich glaube, es ist wichtig, dass Sie noch mal Wert darauf gelegt haben, Frau Kommissarin, dass es nicht nur um die Gesetzgebung alleine geht, sondern dass es auch auf die begleitenden Maßnahmen ankommt. Wir haben bei uns im Außenhandelsausschuss noch mal etwas nachgeschärft und bestimmte Bereiche auch verbindlich gemacht, z. B. für die Schmelzen. Aber ich denke, wir sollten doch auch aus den negativen Erfahrungen anderer Staaten lernen. Ich glaube, dass der Dodd-Frank-Act für die Menschen vor Ort nicht nur positiv war.

Der Berichterstatter und auch die Kommissarin sind darauf eingegangen: Es ist de facto ein Teilembargo gegen Kongo. Es hat doch in manchen Bereichen dazu geführt, dass heute kleine Minen geschlossen wurden, dass die Mitarbeiter dort kein Einkommen mehr haben, dass wir Familien in die Illegalität getrieben haben, dass der Schmuggel gestiegen ist, dass wir neue Abhängigkeiten haben. Und genau das wollen wir doch durch unsere europäische Gesetzgebung nicht. Wir sollten doch auch aus den Fehlern anderer lernen.

Deswegen wünsche ich mir, dass wir die Gesetzgebung etwas nachjustiert – wie wir es im Außenhandelsausschuss heute beschlossen haben – verabschieden. Ich wäre dankbar, wenn wir sie gemeinsam mittragen könnten. Ich rufe den Rat auf, das Dossier dann auch nicht einschlafen, sondern auch schnell passieren zu lassen. Und ich möchte ausdrücklich die Bereitschaft unserer Fraktion signalisieren: Sollte sich wider Erwarten in zwei oder drei Jahren vor Ort nichts zum Guten wenden, dann können wir gern über die nächsten Schritte sprechen. Aber wir sollten jetzt nicht das Kind mit dem Bade ausschütten und den Menschen vor Ort die Lebensgrundlage entziehen. Damit erreichen wir leider das Gegenteil.


  Gianni Pittella, a nome del gruppo S&D. Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ha ragione la Commissaria Malmström: questa è un'occasione importante e non possiamo sciuparla, non possiamo sciuparla con un bluff del Parlamento.

Lei sa perfettamente che esiste, come sanno i colleghi, un legame tra estrazione dei minerali e finanziamento delle milizie armate, e questo legame va rotto perché romperlo significherebbe tagliare i finanziamenti economici che alimentano la guerriglia. Rompere questo legame significherebbe anche contribuire a limitare l'odiosa violenza su donne e bambini che sono utilizzati dai signori della guerra come veri e propri schiavi per lavorare nelle miniere.

Per fare ciò, signora Commissaria e colleghi, abbiamo bisogno di una tracciabilità obbligatoria dei minerali nell'intera catena di produzione e commercio.

Noi socialisti non siamo disposti a sostenere una regolamentazione feticcia, un bluff, un buffettino sulle guance dei signori della morte e dei grandi interessi finanziari. In vista del voto di domani sul tavolo c'è già la possibile soluzione di compromesso che rappresenta un punto d'equilibrio tra le differenti posizioni dei gruppi politici e che tiene conto anche delle esigenze legittime delle piccole e medie imprese e delle microimprese.

Mi appello, dunque, a tutti i colleghi e le colleghe, al di là di ogni colore politico , perché ne va della credibilità dell'intero Parlamento. Siamo dinanzi ad una svolta importante nei confronti dell'Africa e di altre parti del mondo: non sciupiamo questa occasione.


  Emma McClarkin, on behalf of the ECR Group. Mr President, tomorrow we have big decisions to make in order to stop the fuelling of conflict through the extraction of, and trade in, minerals and metals in conflict areas around the world. While we cannot agree on the form of the EU’s approach and which direction it should take, at least we can agree that this is a problem that must be overcome.

Unfortunately, in my view, there is a real risk that by going in a certain direction we make matters worse for those on the ground. This is not what we want to do. While there are differences between the US Dodd-Frank Act and the mandatory measures being proposed by some groups, my concern is that the effects of a full mandatory approach will have similarly cumbersome requirements, particularly for the downstream supply chain. The response of many European companies, following the implementation of these requirements, will be to source elsewhere, creating de facto embargoes to the detriment of innocent miners and their families. Evidence from the Congo already points to this very problem.

So my alternative proposals are clear. We have established that there is a pinch point in the supply chain where there is a very realistic opportunity to determine the source of the minerals. A political compromise in the committee vote led to a mandatory approach being taken for this critical part of the supply chain, and I am happy to support it. Whether we like it or not, further down the supply chain it becomes more and more unfeasible for companies to prove where minerals used in finished products have come from.

This does not mean that attempts cannot in fact be made to find verification, and they are already being made through many industry schemes which we should recognise and also encourage. But as long as we adopt a strong review clause, which I believe we have done in our committee vote, it gives us the opportunity to assess the impact of our legislation and particularly to take into consideration the voluntary uptake for the scheme for downstream companies and the impact that it has really had on the ground. If changes need to be made at that point, then we will make them in full possession of the facts, rather than rushing into creating a top-down scheme that may do more harm than good. At this point we will see what works, what does not work, and what more needs to be done to eliminate the use of these minerals and metals to fund conflict worldwide.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8))


  William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFDD), blue-card question. I have one simple question: do you consider that the European Union, rather than, for example, the United Nations, is the best forum in which to deal with this matter?


  Emma McClarkin (ECR), blue-card answer. That is a very interesting question that you have posed to us. I am concerned that there are colleagues in this House that are more concerned about the Parliament’s credibility than they are about the livelihoods of these people and the condition of their lifestyle on the ground in conflict areas.

Some people may want to vote for a mandatory scheme. They will sleep well at night and they will have a nice press release – not considering the full impact of what it is going to have on the ground. This is what we need to focus on if we are really to be credible parliamentarians here in the big European Parliament.


  Marielle de Sarnez, au nom du groupe ALDE. Monsieur le Président, nous avons tous, dans cet hémicycle, un objectif commun: nous voulons briser le lien entre l'exploitation des mines et les conflits armés. Et nous avons un souhait: que notre Parlement se rassemble le plus largement possible autour d'une législation ambitieuse, qui pourra s'appliquer, entrer en vigueur et changer les choses concrètement dans les zones de conflit. Cette législation devra donc, à terme, être soutenue par la Commission et par le Conseil.

Pour le Parlement européen, la traçabilité doit être obligatoire pour tous les acteurs clés de la filière; c'est le sens de notre vote en commission INTA. Si nous continuons d'adopter cette approche demain, tout importateur de minerais, toute fonderie ou toute raffinerie européenne devront dès à présent certifier obligatoirement que leurs minerais importés sont propres, qu'ils ne proviennent pas d'une zone de conflit. Dans le même temps, les PME européennes bénéficieront d'une aide financière pour mettre en place une traçabilité de ces minerais et se voir alors octroyer un label "conflict-free".

Nous avons une clause de rendez-vous et, au bout de trois ans, nous pourrons faire le point sur ce règlement et évaluer très concrètement ce qui a ou n'a pas fonctionné. La Commission pourra dès lors – c'est le sens de l'amendement que je déposerai demain – accroître les obligations, y compris celle d'informer, et nous pourrons aussi accroître le nombre de minerais concernés par cette législation.

Cette législation européenne pourra alors servir de modèle afin de créer une dynamique positive dans d'autres régions du monde. Mes collègues l'ont dit: nous avons des enseignements à tirer de la loi Dodd-Frank. Nous savons que, de fait, un embargo a eu lieu sur les mines du sud du Congo, et que ceci ne va pas dans le bon sens. Je pense que notre législation et notre approche pourront servir de modèle et qu'au niveau international de l'ONU, il va falloir se mettre d'accord sur la question des ressources naturelles, qui appartiennent à la planète, aux habitants des pays et qui doivent en conséquent être prises en compte de façon durable.

Vous l'aurez compris, Madame la Commissaire, nous avons une approche ambitieuse et volontariste, mais je souhaite que cette approche se concrétise pour changer, réellement, les choses sur le terrain.


  Helmut Scholz, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Vergewissern wir uns nochmal, warum wir dieses Gesetz beschließen wollen: Menschen werden zu Opfern von Konflikten, die um Rohstoffe geführt oder zumindest durch den Verkauf von Rohstoffen finanziert werden.

Die Profitkette der Täter reicht bis in die Europäische Union. Diese Verordnung soll dazu beitragen, Transparenz in die Beschaffungswege der verarbeitenden Industrie zu bringen und dadurch das Geschäft mit Krieg, Vergewaltigungen, Kinderarbeit zu beenden oder zumindest zu erschweren. Dazu muss ein, dieses, Gesetz – Frau Malmström, Herr Caspary, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen – wirksam sein.

Hören wir auf Denis Mukwege, hören wir auf viele Fachleute aus den Konfliktregionen, auf Kirchenvertreter, selbst auf Kreise aus der Wirtschaft! Die sagen alle: Eine freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung von Unternehmen reicht nicht; dringend notwendig ist eine bindende Verordnung für die gesamte Lieferkette. Der knapp mehrheitlich angenommene Entwurf des INTA-Ausschusses würde jedoch lediglich 20 europäische Schmelzhütten zur Mitarbeit verpflichten. Oder anders gesagt: Für 80 % der Konfliktrohstoffe, die allein aus dem Kongo verkauft werden, hätte diese Verordnung keine Wirkung, denn die Verhüttung findet überwiegend in Asien statt.

Noch können wir diese Verordnung entsprechend für die gesamte Verarbeitungskette verbindlich machen. Anträge dazu liegen auch jetzt wiederum dem Plenum vor.

Es ist Zeit, endlich Konkretes für die Opfer der Grausamkeiten der Konflikte zu leisten. Und: Hier schließt sich der Ring um die Konfliktursachenbeseitigung, über die wir alle reden, angesichts der Flüchtlingsdramen im Mittelmeer und anderswo.

Ich zumindest – und das ist keine populistische Äußerung, sondern eine konkrete Verantwortung des Parlaments – will sagen können: Das EP arbeitet dafür, dass Menschen nicht gezwungen sind, ihre Heimat zu verlassen.


  Judith Sargentini, namens de Verts/ALE-Fractie. Oorlogen gaan vaak om grondstoffen. Zij beginnen er misschien niet om. Zij beginnen wellicht om een ideologisch verschil van mening, maar zij gaan vaak langer door vanwege grondstoffen. Overheden en rebellen financieren zichzelf en zo kom je tot de kip-of-eivraag: is de grondstof de oorzaak van de oorlog of is de oorlog veroorzaakt door de grondstof? Wat wel duidelijk is, is dat grondstoffen oorlogen financieren.

Als je dat weghaalt, en wij hebben dat eerder gedaan, dan haal je de financiering weg en dan stop je misschien de oorlog. Denk aan wat wij gedaan hebben met tuinmeubels. Hardhout is momenteel gecertificeerd, niet vrijwillig, maar verplicht. Denk aan wat wij gedaan hebben met de handel in diamanten. Dat is geen vrijwillige regeling. Dat is een verplichte regeling. Wij hebben in de laatste jaren gezien dat vrijwillige regels nooit nageleefd worden. Europese bedrijven kunnen zich al sinds 2011 houden aan de OESO-richtlijnen voor de certificering van producten met conflictmineralen. Zij doen het niet!

Het voorstel van de Commissie dat nu op tafel ligt, vrijwillige zelfcertificering, zal dus hetzelfde manco hebben als alle andere vrijwillige systemen. Het voorstel van de Commissie internationale handel beperkt het tot maar 20 Europese smelterijen en raffinaderijen en pakt niet de grote hoeveelheden. U heeft allemaal een telefoon. U heeft hem allemaal voor u liggen, u werkt er dagelijks mee. Er zijn geen telefoons die in Europa geproduceerd worden. Die worden allemaal in China geproduceerd. Dit soort apparaten zal niet onder Europese wetgeving vallen en dat betekent dat geen consument kan vragen: waar komen deze spullen vandaan? En de Chinese bedrijven zullen zich niet aan onze Europese regels hoeven te houden.

Dit gaat over oorlog in Congo, over vrouwen die verkracht worden, over kinderen die in mijnen werken. Dat kunnen wij tegengaan. Dit gaat niet over de Duitse automobielindustrie en hun problemen met bureaucratie!


  Tiziana Beghin, a nome del gruppo EFDD. Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, questo telefono è sporco di sangue, questo computer è sporco di sangue, tutta la tecnologia che noi utilizziamo è sporca di sangue e lo è perché i minerali che usiamo nella componentistica e nell'elettronica sono estratti in paesi di guerra dove, come abbiamo detto, finanziano abusi dei diritti umani, uccisioni e mutilazioni.

Noi abbiamo lavorato per creare un sistema obbligatorio, responsabile ed efficace che permetta di sapere esattamente quali prodotti sono sporchi di sangue e quali no. Questo è un sistema che non pesa sulle piccole e medie imprese ma obbliga le multinazionali dell'elettronica a fare i conti con le proprie responsabilità. Questo sistema non è un carico burocratico, è un sistema che obbliga tutti noi ad aprire gli occhi.

Colleghi, domani avremo una votazione importante: voteremo un regolamento e se avremo il coraggio di farlo nel modo giusto forse non salveremo il mondo ma, sicuramente, contribuiremo a renderlo un posto migliore.


  Steeve Briois (NI). Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, ce projet de règlement pose un principe louable, celui de ne pas encourager le financement de groupes armés qui participent à des actions de guérilla et de terrorisme. Cependant, il aboutira à sanctionner de manière unilatérale des entreprises européennes importatrices de minerais originaires de zones de conflit. En effet, cette nouvelle réglementation va alourdir considérablement leur coût de transformation. Et nous pouvons même anticiper un certain effet boomerang favorisant ainsi l'importation de biens transformés de pays tiers contenant des minerais litigieux issus de l'extraction dans les zones de conflit.

La course à l'approvisionnement des métaux rares est lancée. Il ne faut donc pas être naïf et espérer qu'une quelconque réglementation asséchera les circuits de financement des groupes armés. À part satisfaire notre bonne conscience, ce projet de règlement ne répondra à aucun enjeu en matière de maintien de la paix.

Enfin, avant de réglementer au nom de la morale, que l'Union européenne contrôle d'abord l'emploi de ses fonds dans certaines zones! Je pense notamment, au détournement par le Front Polisario – une milice indépendantiste – de fonds alloués à l'aide humanitaire destinée au camp de Tindouf dans le Sahara occidental.


  Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). Mr President, we need to break the link between minerals and conflict and thus we need a regulation that will be enforceable and adequate. We need mandatory certification for smelters and refiners and we also need to put pressure on smelters and refiners that are outside the EU. That is why in the Committee on Development we also included the importers in the mandatory certification.

However, going beyond that could be counterproductive, because it will be a burden not only for EU industries, but also for industries in the developing world. That is what we need to bear in mind here. We cannot actually restrict access to the EU market for them, which could be a consequence of such extensive regulation. So excessive regulation could really harm the economies of the developing world and could actually cost jobs there. That should not be the aim of EU regulation.

On the contrary, I think we need to focus on an enforceable and appropriate regulation that puts forward an obligatory certification for smelters and refiners and, as I said, also puts pressure on those who are the outside the EU – which is the majority – by including the importers in that obligatory system. In that way I think we will have an enforceable system that gives added value in the effort to break the link between minerals and conflict.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8))


  Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE), pitanje koje je podizanjem plave kartice postavio. Poštovani gospodine Stier, hvala što ste prihvatili plavu karticu. Govorili ste o potrebi označavanja proizvoda i govorili ste u suštini o potrebi sljedivosti proizvoda. Da li se slažete sa mnom da se zaista mogu prekinuti ovi ratovi i na način da se označavanjem i praćenjem sljedivosti proizvoda i svih ruda i minerala zna točno što se dešava na tom tržištu? Jer ako znamo sljedivost naranči i banana pa valjda možemo onda i ovih skupocjenih minerala.


  Davor Ivo Stier (PPE), odgovor na pitanje postavljeno podizanjem plave kartice. Poštovani kolega, doista mislim da je moguće doći do jednog kompromisa, na tome smo radili. Evo npr. u Odboru za razvoj smo postigli upravo takav jedan kompromis koji je naglasak stavio upravo na to da imamo sustav koji može tu sljedivost uspostaviti, da može jednostavno imati uključene čak i one uvoznike koji će na taj način isto tako morati certificirati svoje djelatnosti. Međutim, moj je argument bio da ukoliko idemo dalje od toga, npr. u Odboru za razvoj nije se išlo s obaveznim sustavom dalje od toga, moglo bi biti kontraproduktivno. Moramo imati dakle u vidu taj sustav, ali moramo doista razbiti tu poveznicu između minerala i konflikata.


  Maria Arena (S&D). Monsieur le Président, la question que nous devons nous poser aujourd'hui est la suivante: pourquoi l'immense majorité des populations vivant dans les régions riches en ressources naturelles continuent d'être privées de revenus nécessaires à leur développement mais, surtout, continuent d'être les victimes de crimes atroces, de massacres, de viols de femmes et d'enfants?

Il y a dix ans, dans le cadre du rapport Mapping sur la République démocratique du Congo, les Nations unies disaient déjà que l'abondance des ressources naturelles en République démocratique du Congo et surtout l'absence de réglementation et de responsabilité dans ce secteur avaient manifestement contribué directement aux violations généralisées et que des compagnies étatiques ou privées, nationales ou étrangères, pourraient porter une lourde responsabilité dans le cadre de ces crimes qui ont été commis dans le pays.

Cette situation ne concerne pas uniquement la République démocratique du Congo. Dans le monde entier, on parle en général de la malédiction des ressources qui enrichissent le Nord et qui appauvrissent le Sud.

C'est pour mettre fin à cette malédiction des ressources que nous réclamons une gestion transparente et responsable du commerce de celles-ci. En 2010, un pas a été franchi avec l'adoption de la loi Dodd-Frank aux États-Unis. Cette loi oblige les entreprises américaines à fournir des informations détaillées concernant leur approvisionnement sur les sites. Et, contrairement à ce que dit ma collègue, Mme de Sarnez, cette loi Dodd-Frank a apporté du changement dans les pays d'origine. Même si cela pris du temps, elle a entraîné des changements. Sous la pression, l'Europe s'empare de cette question. En 2010 et 2011, le Parlement européen se prononce en faveur de la transparence en matière de minerais des zones de conflit et ce, pour rompre le lien entre l'exploitation sauvage de ceux-ci et les conflits. En 2013, la Commission propose un règlement mais, contrairement à l'ambition du Parlement, ce règlement est timide, voire sans ambition, par son caractère volontaire.

Vingt ans déjà ont passé depuis le rapport des Nations unies, et nous en sommes encore aujourd'hui à débattre. Des millions de morts aujourd'hui sont en cause. Notre groupe demande un règlement ambitieux immédiatement, qui impose à toutes les entreprises utilisatrices des 3TG présentes sur toute la chaîne d'approvisionnement en Europe de se soumettre au devoir d'information.

Cette option contraignante pour toute la chaîne d'approvisionnement est, comme le dit le docteur Mukwege, le seul geste politique capable de placer le respect des droits humains au-dessus de l'intérêt économique de certains. Il en va de notre crédibilité européenne.


  Marietje Schaake (ALDE). Mr President, it is essential that trade policies are a key element in broader EU foreign policy goals, such as conflict resolution, human rights and development. That is why we need effective measures to break the link between the world’s most terrible conflicts and the role the trade in minerals plays in them; a link that currently leads from war to our living rooms.

We must make a clear distinction between legitimate mining and trading in blood-stained minerals globally. For our Group, the Commission proposals – which were mostly voluntary measures – did not go far enough. We put forward amendments with mandatory schemes for smelters and refiners, which are the key players in this market and cover most of the global market. We also called for support mechanisms for small and medium-sized enterprises in their efforts to ensure due diligence and compliance, because consumers deserve transparency. Through a review, we ensure that adequate enough mechanisms are in place to make sure that we accomplished in practice what we hope to accomplish now with this regulation.

There are important lessons to be learned from the past, such as from the Dodd-Frank Act which unintentionally led to Congo-free instead of conflict-free implications and hurt many people in their legitimate work and livelihoods. We should not hurt people with our good intentions. So meanwhile, while we focus on these important trade measures, let us look at the bigger picture too and keep an eye on all measures that are needed to end conflict all over the world, especially in the Great Lakes regions.


  Lola Sánchez Caldentey (GUE/NGL). Señor Presidente, el 80 % de las empresas no controlan sus suministros ni revelan si en sus productos hay minerales procedentes de zonas inestables, donde la extracción alimenta el conflicto y la violencia. Las violaciones de los derechos humanos, como el trabajo infantil, la violencia sexual y las desapariciones de personas, son tristemente habituales en la industria extractiva.

Por tanto, es necesario un reglamento contundente en esta materia, a la altura de esta Europa adalid de los derechos humanos. Es necesario un marco obligatorio para toda la cadena de suministro, que garantice la transparencia y la trazabilidad del producto en todo el proceso y no solo en la fase inicial.

Por tanto, este Parlamento debería abandonar la hipocresía y la falta de coherencia, porque, sin obligatoriedad para toda la cadena de suministro, esta iniciativa solo servirá para limpiar la conciencia de algunos de ustedes, pero no para atajar el problema de raíz. Debemos responsabilizarnos también de lo que hacen nuestras empresas en terceros países y, para ello, hace falta actuar con valentía y con voluntad política.

Espero que todos apoyemos las enmiendas que llaman a la trazabilidad, fundamentales para la transparencia y, además, para que los consumidores —la gente— puedan decidir y conocer lo que consumen.


  Ska Keller (Verts/ALE). Herr Präsident! Kommissarin Malmström und viele Kolleginnen und Kollegen haben darauf hingewiesen, welchen großen Schaden Konfliktmineralien in der Welt auslösen und wie stark Menschenrechte verletzt werden. Das Problem ist, dass der Gesetzesvorschlag, so wie er aus der Kommission kam und so wie er aus dem Handelsausschuss gekommen ist, einfach nicht zu diesem Problem, zu diesen schweren Menschenrechtsverletzungen passt.

Denn Selbstverpflichtungen helfen nicht. Freiwillige Zertifizierungen sind schon jetzt möglich, aber nur 12 % der Unternehmen nutzen diese Möglichkeit überhaupt. Und die, die es tun, nutzen sie nur, weil sie in den US-Markt exportieren wollen. Wir brauchen jetzt endlich verbindliche Regelungen für alle und für die gesamte Lieferkette. Denn nur verbindliche Regelungen für alle schaffen auch Wettbewerbsgleichheit. Wir machen uns lächerlich, wenn wir den Leuten vor Ort sagen: Ja, ihr habt es schwer in eurem Leben. Ja, es gibt die Menschenrechtsverletzungen. Und was wollen wir dagegen tun? Wir setzen auf die Freiwilligkeit von Unternehmen!

Ich denke, wir sind ein Parlament: Wir sollten Gesetze machen und keine Handlungsempfehlungen. Dafür liegen einige Änderungsanträge vor, und ich hoffe sehr, dass sich eine Mehrheit der Kolleginnen und Kollegen findet, die das unterstützen, damit sich wirklich vor Ort endlich etwas ändern kann und damit wir nicht darauf hoffen, dass irgendwann irgendwelche Unternehmen endlich mal Menschenrechte vor Profit stellen. Das hat bis jetzt noch nie funktioniert.


  William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFDD). Mr President, it is of course utterly reprehensible that in conflict zones armed groups force innocent people to extract minerals. But let us not forget the role that the EU has played in creating the poverty, particularly in Africa, that engenders armed groups and makes illegal trading in metals so attractive in the first place. The EU is fully complicit – and I wish people would realise this – and the EU should stop its protectionist and destructive trade policies that impoverish the African continent and thus create the context in which the trade in conflict metals flourishes. Further, and predictably, the EU is behind the pace in cracking down on conflict minerals. The United States has already acted, and indeed the Dodd-Frank Act was passed and enacted in July 2010, four years ago. It is this US law that has already reduced funds to groups that thrive on conflict minerals by almost two thirds.

I want to see an end to the exploitation and the use of conflict minerals, but the best way forward is a scheme, headed by the United Nations and working with individual African countries, not a scheme under EU control. The EU’s track record in Africa is wholly underwhelming.


  Λάμπρος Φουντούλης ( NI). Κύριε Πρόεδρε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, καλούμαστε σήμερα να συζητήσουμε και να αποφασίσουμε σχετικά με την πρόταση του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και του Συμβουλίου όσον αφορά τη θέσπιση ενωσιακού συστήματος αυτοπιστοποίησης της για την αλυσίδα εφοδιασμού των υπεύθυνων εισαγωγέων κασσιτέρου, τανταλίου και βολφραμίου, καθώς και χρυσού, που προέρχονται από περιοχές συγκρούσεων και υψηλού κινδύνου, όπου οι συγκρούσεις μεταξύ κρατικών, παρακρατικών, τρομοκρατικών και άλλων ομάδων είναι καθημερινές.

Ποια εταιρία, που σκοπός της είναι το κέρδος, θα παραδεχθεί ότι τα μεταλλεύματα που εισάγει έχουν εξορυχθεί σε πλαίσιο σεβασμού των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων των εργαζομένων, ότι δεν τα έχουν προμηθευτεί από οργανώσεις που τα πωλούν για την αγορά όπλων και ότι τα χρήματα που εισπράττουν οι χώρες αυτές προορίζονται για την ανάπτυξη και την ευημερία του πληθυσμού τους. Όλες θα αυτοπιστοποιούν ότι τα μεταλλεύματα που εισάγουν τηρούν τις προδιαγραφές που θέτει η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση.

Ξεχάσατε στην πρόταση να συμπεριλάβετε τα ματωμένα διαμάντια και το πετρέλαιο που πουλά το ισλαμικό χαλιφάτο σε χαμηλές τιμές ώστε να βρει πρόθυμους πελάτες και να χρησιμοποιεί τα κέρδη για τον εξοπλισμό των τρομοκρατών.

Είμαστε υποχρεωμένοι να καταψηφίσουμε την πρόταση γιατί κινείται σε λάθος κατεύθυνση.


  Salvatore Cicu (PPE). Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, è chiaro che dobbiamo riconoscere il grande carico emotivo che questa problematica pone e che in qualche modo condiziona il confronto. È evidente che siamo tutti, indistintamente, contro i gruppi armati, contro i mercati di morte, contro l'immissione di materiali o elementi che derivino da questa situazione e da questi conflitti. Ma, nello stesso tempo, abbiamo una grande responsabilità: dobbiamo porci il carico di valutare, di approfondire, di mediare rispetto a un sistema nuovo e rispetto agli effetti che questo sistema nuovo deve contemperare.

È evidente che dobbiamo ricercare la migliore soluzione. Forse, o meglio sicuramente, non basta individuare solo alla fonte fonderie e raffinerie; forse non basta, sicuramente non basta, il numero che è stato individuato. Dobbiamo andare oltre, dobbiamo imporre l'obbligatorietà che rispetto a coloro che debbono autocertificare nella filiera poi ci sia una riferibilità a quella autocertificazione, in modo che ci sia una legittimità, una trasparenza, una veridicità rispetto a quello che deve essere il sistema. Ma credo che il relatore Winkler abbia lavorato in questa direzione, che stia lavorando in questa direzione. Io sostengo fortemente l'azione che lui ha saputo portare avanti.

Credo che non dobbiamo smettere, in queste ore, in questi minuti, di dialogare perché abbiamo diversi obblighi: abbiamo soprattutto l'obbligo di non fare arrivare prodotti di morte ma abbiamo anche l'obbligo di sostenere un sistema, le nostre piccole e medie imprese, che sono già gravate, che sono oberate da tassazioni, che sono oberate da burocrazia, che sono oberate da un sistema che sicuramente non consentirebbe loro di realizzare la migliore condizione per poter partecipare a un mercato che riconosciamo molto spesso non avere regole molto chiare.

(L'oratore accetta di rispondere a una domanda "cartellino blu" (articolo 162, paragrafo 8, del regolamento)


  Maria Arena (S&D), question "carton bleu". Monsieur le Président, j'aimerais poser une question à M. Cicu: pensez-vous que les États-Unis ont moins d'attentions pour leurs entreprises que les Européens? Pensez-vous qu'une législation à caractère obligatoire aux États-Unis faisait préjudice aux entreprises américaines? Non. La législation que nous proposons aujourd'hui ne fait pas préjudice aux entreprises européennes.

Quels sont donc vos arguments par rapport à ce que les États-Unis ont fait et par rapport à ce que nous devons faire? Pourquoi l'Europe doit-elle mettre 20 ans pour prendre une disposition alors que les États-Unis mettent un an pour prendre cette disposition? Donnez-moi un argument, Monsieur Cicu.


  Salvatore Cicu (PPE), risposta a una domanda "cartellino blu". On. Arena, lei dovrebbe conoscere meglio e di più quello che è avvenuto negli Stati Uniti. Negli Stati Uniti, dopo aver imposto l'autocertificazione obbligatoria, c'è stato il crollo del sistema delle piccole e medie imprese. Negli Stati Uniti hanno dovuto ulteriormente riformare e rivedere questo sistema. Quindi è una problematica che comunque esiste e non possiamo fare a meno di prenderla in considerazione.

Noi siamo contro i mercanti di morte. Noi siamo contro una riferibilità che derivi da questi conflitti, ma siamo anche a favore della nostra piccola e media impresa, che ha bisogno di capire meglio e di più come procedere nel proprio sistema.

(L'oratore accetta di rispondere a una domanda "cartellino blu" (articolo 162, paragrafo 8, del regolamento))


  Tiziana Beghin (EFDD), domanda "cartellino blu". On. Cicu, lei ha fatto riferimento al Dodd-Frank: conviene con noi che il sistema che noi abbiamo proposto non è un Dodd-Frank europeo? Mi potrebbe spiegare in che modo (per una piccola e media impresa, visto che abbiamo stimato ed è stato stimato che con le linee guida dell'OCSE – niente che abbiamo inventato noi – il carico burocratico si ridurrebbe a circa 2 ore di lavoro all'anno rispetto a un sistema obbligatorio, che se le piccole e medie imprese volessero adottare comporterebbe un costo di circa 13 500 euro) in che modo con un sistema obbligatorio noi tuteliamo di più le piccole e medie imprese, secondo lei?


  Salvatore Cicu (PPE), risposta a una domanda "cartellino blu". Io sono d'accordo con lei, on. Beghin: credo che dobbiamo migliorare e dobbiamo contribuire a migliorare, però non mi sembra che con posizioni che siano, come dire, senza possibilità di mediazione e di confronto noi riusciremo a migliorare.

Allora la grande verità è che lei, come me, che vive la realtà italiana, sa che i nostri piccoli e medi imprenditori, che sono microimprenditori, devono fare lunghe file per pagarsi i bollettini postali delle tasse tutti i giorni, devono realizzare la condizione di non poter avere un commercialista che sostenga le loro procedure, devono realizzare il fallimento e la chiusura tutti i giorni della loro vita imprenditoriale.

Noi oggi vogliamo semplicemente cercare di capire quale può essere il miglior sistema per sostenere una mediazione. Non stiamo dicendo che non deve esistere una corretta protezione di quello che poi significa evitare conflitti armati e morti, ma nello stesso tempo chiediamo che ci sia un'autocertificazione .....

(Il Presidente interrompe l'oratore)


  David Martin (S&D). Mr President, I think what Africa wants is not more bleeding hearts but actually some serious action. What we are hearing from the centre and the right of this House is, frankly, just more bleeding hearts. As Maria Arena rightly said, while for countries like Australia, Canada and Norway resources have been a great boon and have helped their economies enormously, for Africa resources have been a curse.

Today, and tomorrow in the vote, we have a chance to turn that curse into a blessing. We can make an enormous contribution to stopping the exploitation of Africa’s miners and workers by local rebel groups on the one hand and, on the other hand to stopping their exploitation by unscrupulous European traders who do not know – or do not care – where the raw materials come from.

We need a mandatory due diligence scheme from the start to the end of the supply chain. In the world’s biggest market we have a duty to the people of Africa mining these minerals for our smart phones, and to our citizens in Europe who are asking for this change. Voluntary guidelines have been in place for years and 80% of European companies are ignoring these guidelines. Due diligence is not working. Anything short of a full mandatory scheme would be a failure and, frankly, a shame on this Parliament.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8))


  Daniel Caspary (PPE), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. Geschätzter Kollege Martin! Wenn ich Sie gerade zwischen den Zeilen richtig verstanden habe, dann unterstellen Sie unserer Seite im Haus, dass wir kein Interesse an den Menschen vor Ort hätten. Ich weise das zurück. Es geht uns genau um die Menschen!

Deswegen meine Frage an Sie: Teilen Sie die Erkenntnis, dass wir im Europäischen Parlament in der letzten Wahlperiode drei Verordnungen verabschiedet haben, bei denen wir im Europäischen Parlament sehr deutlich zum Ausdruck gebracht haben, was wir wollten, die aber dann im Rat steckengeblieben sind, weil wir vielleicht in einigen Details zu viel wollten, und dass wir vielleicht aus diesem Fehler lernen und nicht das wiederholen sollten, was bei der „Made-in“-Verordnung, was beim IPI, dem Instrument zur Marktöffnung im öffentlichen Beschaffungswesen, und was zum Dritten bei der Verordnung über die Revision der Handelsschutzinstrumente passiert ist?

Wir wollen doch den Menschen helfen und uns nicht hinter tollen Beschlüssen im Parlament verstecken, die nie wahr werden.


  David Martin (S&D), blue-card answer. Mr President, what we have heard from the other side is an attack on due diligence as if due diligence is something new that does not work and we have to look after our industry. But we have had due diligence in the food sector, we have had it in the financial sector, and we have had it in the timber sector. Due diligence does indeed work. What I find, what I pity, is that people on the other side of this House are trying to make excuses as to why due diligence would not work in this situation. I fear, even now, that they are more interested in looking after European interests than actually dealing with the problem in Africa.


  Louis Michel (ALDE). Monsieur le Président, le docteur Mukwege, notre Prix Sakharov, nous a exhortés à introduire un contrôle rigoureux sur l'exploitation des minerais qui financent les conflits. Je dois vous dire, Madame la Commissaire, Monsieur le rapporteur, que ce que vous proposez l'un ou l'autre ne correspond pas du tout à cette supplique.

Il nous a parlé en long et en large des effets collatéraux dramatiques que provoquent notre passivité et les faux arguments de faisabilité ou de bureaucratie que vous mobilisez pour ne rien faire. Limiter aux fonderies, raffineries et importateurs de minerais et de métaux l'obligation du respect du devoir de diligence sans le moindre devoir d'information pour les 879 000 entreprises en aval – c'est-à-dire 99 % des entreprises concernées – présente plus d'inconvénients que d'avantages pour les entreprises européennes.

Pourquoi? Parce qu'en n'ayant aucune obligation, les entreprises en aval auront toujours le choix d'acheter les minerais de conflits provenant d'autres opérateurs internationaux non couverts par le règlement, voire de s'approvisionner par le canal du trafic illégal. Il y a donc une raison économique majeure – que d'aucuns, manifestement, ne veulent pas comprendre – pour les entreprises européennes à imposer au minimum un devoir d'information à toutes les entreprises.

C'est le sens de l'amendement que j'ai déposé au projet. Il suffit que ces entreprises déclarent l'identité de leurs fournisseurs directs, on ne leur demande ni audit ni rapport. C'est donc une contrainte minimale, sans aucune surcharge bureaucratique, indolore pour les PME. En agissant de la sorte, on applique un traitement différencié qui prévoit des exigences beaucoup plus grandes pour les fonderies, les raffineries et les importateurs de minerais et de métaux, et un simple devoir d'information pour les autres. Soutenir cet amendement permettrait à une immense majorité du Parlement de faire avancer de manière substantielle...

(Le Président retire la parole à l'orateur)


  Patrick Le Hyaric (GUE/NGL). Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, il est urgent d'utiliser les armes du droit humain et environnemental à l'égard d'un commerce des plus opaques et des plus sales du monde, fondé sur la surexploitation des êtres humains et du sous-sol et sur le pillage des richesses de régions d'Afrique, comme celle des Grands Lacs, qui s'accompagnent d'exactions criminelles contre les populations que ces trafics encouragent et financent.

Laisser croire que ceux qui pillent ainsi le continent africain vont se conformer à un cadre de certification volontaire est au mieux de la naïveté, au pire de la complicité criminelle.

Il faut donc un mécanisme obligatoire et contraignant, avec des normes éthiques, sociales, morales et environnementales. Humaines, tout simplement. Sinon, c'est l'exploitation, une forme de domination coloniale, qui l'emportera.

Voilà pourquoi il nous faut renforcer encore le texte dans le sens d'une certification qui soit obligatoire pour tous les acteurs de la chaîne de production, d'approvisionnement et de transformation et qui s'applique à tous les minerais.


  Yannick Jadot (Verts/ALE). Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, nous étions tous là quand le docteur Mukwege racontait l'horreur de ce qui se passait dans son pays, l'horreur des conséquences des minerais de sang. Je crois que nous avons probablement tous eu une larme. Nous nous sommes tous indignés mais que sommes-nous devenus depuis? Nous avons une Commission européenne qui fait le minimum et nous avons un Parlement qui est en train de devenir cynique. Nous ne pouvons pas, au nom de l'instrumentalisation de mesures administratives, ne pas lutter contre l'horreur qui règne dans un certain nombre de régions.

Le système de diligence tel qu'il est construit est justement un système qui doit s'appliquer à l'ensemble de la chaîne d'approvisionnement, justement pour en réduire les coûts, et justement pour assurer la traçabilité. Le système de diligence est précisément un système qui fait porter sur les acteurs principaux les plus forts, les plus impliqués, la plus grosse partie de la responsabilité.

Alors cessons d'être cyniques, agissons et n'attendons pas qu'il y ait des reportages à la télévision pour nous scandaliser et enfin agir. Pour une fois que nous pouvons agir pour sauver des populations sans que les entreprises n'en supportent un coût élevé, faisons-le!


  Jarosław Wałęsa (PPE). Mr President, I have a few points to make. First of all, the scope of the regulation should stay untouched; we should not go beyond the fight for proposed minerals and metals. Secondly, I also support the proposed definitions of minerals and metals. As for the idea of certification, it must be ensured that the certification within each jurisdiction is recognised.

The lack of mutual recognition can lead to a double reporting obligation. I should emphasise that impositions on European companies covered by the regulation – excessive legal obligation – can lead to the loss of competitiveness in relation to businesses operating outside of the EU. Obviously, the main objective of the draft regulation is to reduce the financing of armed groups and to prevent the security forces from profiting from the exploitation of these minerals from high-risk areas. But the proposed measure to achieve this objective must support and further promote the responsible sourcing of these minerals, and we should exclude companies from financing the previously mentioned companies. This cannot, however, be done at the expense of the law-abiding European companies. We have to make sure that those who abide by the law are not affected in a negative sense.


  Bernd Lange (S&D). Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir leben in einer Zeit globalisierter Wertschöpfungsketten, und ich denke, aus einer wertbasierten Handelspolitik heraus müssen wir dafür sorgen, dass diese globalisierten Wertschöpfungsketten fair ablaufen. Das passiert nun mal nicht mit Freiwilligkeit, wie wir es gerade auch in der Textilproduktion gesehen haben. Wir brauchen verbindliche Anforderungen an Unternehmen, damit auch faire Bedingungen herrschen.

Wenn ich mir ansehe, dass wir nur von 20  Schmelzen und Raffinerien – und das ist übrigens ein richtiger Ansatz, weil das der Flaschenhals ist – Verbindlichkeit einfordern und von den restlichen 400 nicht, dann ist hier ein eklatantes Ungleichgewicht festzustellen. Wir brauchen eine klare Verbindlichkeit von der Produktion bis zu den Schmelzen, um sicher zu sein, dass die Produktion fair ist.

Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, lassen Sie uns doch auch ehrlich sein: Wir wissen, dass der Rat die Vorschläge des Parlaments in ihrer Gestaltungskraft immer reduziert. Deswegen: kein vorauseilender Gehorsam, sondern ein selbstbewusstes Parlament gegenüber dem Rat, damit wir auch etwas durchsetzen können!


  Malin Björk (GUE/NGL). Herr talman! Det finns en direkt koppling mellan de mineraler som används i våra mobiltelefoner och det extrema sexuella våldet i östra Kongo. Denis Mukwege, som nämndes tidigare här, fick parlamentets Sacharovpris för mänskliga rättigheter. Alla applåderade då hans kamp för att återställa kvinnors kroppar och deras värdighet. Men när man nu får möjlighet att ta ett konkret politiskt beslut som kan minska dessa konflikter och våldtäkterna, då struntar man i hans rekommendationer om en obligatorisk certifiering på mineraler.

En lag om obligatorisk certifiering skulle leda till att företag och konsumenter inte bidrar till att finansiera krig och våldtäkt när vi köper datorer och mobiltelefoner. Det tror jag att alla därute förväntar sig av detta parlament. Det är det vi vill ha.

EU säger sig vara ett fredsprojekt – ja, nu är det upp till bevis. Om man menar allvar, kan man inte rösta för det lagförslag som nu ligger på bordet. Ibland måste man välja: storföretagens intressen eller mänskliga rättigheter och kvinnors liv. Jag och min partigrupp väljer mänskliga rättigheter och kvinnors liv. Vi behöver en obligatorisk certifiering i alla led som gäller för alla mineraler.


  Heidi Hautala (Verts/ALE). Arvoisa puhemies, me todellakin tarvitsemme asetuksen, jossa koko toimitusketju on katettuna, ja sen on oltava pakollinen säännöstö, koska mehän tiedämme, mitä tapahtuu, kun vapaaehtoinen säännöstö on ollut jo käytössä EU:ssa vuodesta 2010. Tämä asetus ei siis kovinkaan paljon muuttaisi nykytilannetta. Usein on niin, että on hyvä lähteä liikkeelle vapaaehtoisuudesta ja edetä kohti sitovaa lainsäädäntöä. Me olemme juuri nyt siinä tilanteessa, että on hyvä ottaa käyttöön kaikkia toimijoita sitova lainsäädäntö.

Toisin kuin täällä on sanottu, itse asiassa tällainen koko tuotantoketjun kattava pakollinen järjestelmähän helpottaisi pienempien yritysten asemaa, koska silloin ne voisivat helpommin osoittaa, että niiden tuotteet täyttävät nämä eettiset kestävyysnormit, koska koko ketjun tiedot olisivat silloin helposti saatavilla. Tämä nimenomaan asettaisi eurooppalaiset toimijat samalle viivalle muiden kanssa.

Hyvät kollegat, miten tällaista voi vastustaa? Meidän kannattaa kuunnella edistyksellisimpiä yrityksiä, jotka puhuvat siitä, miten paljon liiketoimintamahdollisuuksia sisältyy eettisyyteen ja vastuullisuuteen.


  Anna Záborská (PPE). Nemôžem podporiť pozíciu výboru INTA. Ak porovnám vyššie administratívne zaťaženie tých európskych podnikov, ktoré spracovávajú minerály a kovy, s utrpením miliónov ľudí, nemám o čom rozmýšľať. Minulý piatok zomrelo v Nigérii 28 detí na otravu z vody znečistenej nelegálnou ťažbou zlata. Deti nemali ani päť rokov. Pred piatimi rokmi zomrelo v tej istej oblasti na následky otravy olovom viac ako 400 detí. Certifikácia by mala byť povinná a mala by zahŕňať celú dodávateľskú sieť od ťažobných spoločností až po konečného spracovateľa a mala by sa týkať všetkých surovín. Včera sme hovorili o financovaní rozvojovej pomoci. Zajtra budeme diskutovať o utečencoch na brehoch Európy, ktorí utekajú pred vojnami, násilím a chudobou. Ak nedokážeme prijať skutočne účinnú legislatívu, zbytočne sa budeme chváliť, že Európska únia je najväčším donorom rozvojovej politiky.


  Ignazio Corrao (EFDD), domanda "cartellino blu". On. Záborská, mi è piaciuto il suo discorso strappalacrime. Volevo chiederle che cosa voterà lei e che cosa voterà il suo gruppo, sia sul testo presentato sia sugli emendamenti che verranno presentati dai colleghi sull'obbligatorietà a tutti i livelli.


  Anna Záborská (PPE), odpoveď na otázku položenú zdvihnutím modrej karty. Určite budem pristupovať zodpovedne k tomu hlasovaniu. Rokovania ešte stále prebiehajú a svoje hlasovanie zvážim na základe výsledkov týchto rokovaní.


  Seb Dance (S&D). Mr President, we need to recognise the fact that we are massively behind the curve on this. Both in the US and China they have recognised the need for mandatory schemes, and I applaud the fact that many on other sides of this House have changed their mind and have a firm view on this. But we need to be clear that it would be utterly ludicrous to subject just 19 or 20 European companies to this scheme, not least because the SMEs that we are talking about would be excluded from the additional public trust and confidence that this scheme would bring.

The OECD due diligence guidelines are not onerous, and application throughout and across the supply chain would create a level playing field for all businesses and all companies. We do this for timber, we do this for diamonds. I do not believe that it is too much to ask us to do the same for these minerals.


  Lars Adaktusson (PPE). Herr talman! Europeiska unionen har nu möjlighet att ta ett viktigt steg för att bryta kopplingen mellan utvinning av mineraler och finansiering av väpnade grupper.

Doktor Denis Mukwege har påmint oss om det oerhörda som exporten av konfliktmineraler innebär för befolkningen i hans hemland.

Förslaget som vi nu diskuterar handlar bland annat om en tvingande lagstiftning för raffinaderier och importörer. Nära nog samtliga mineraler köps av företag i Europa och går genom just dessa kanaler. Att rikta in sig på de delarna av leverantörskedjan blir därför en träffsäker åtgärd som möjliggör för företagen att agera etiskt rätt, samtidigt som vi slår vakt om jobb och tillväxt.

Vi i parlamentet borde inta en tuffare hållning än kommissionen men samtidigt möjliggöra en konstruktiv förhandling med rådet, vilket i sin tur är en förutsättning för att den viktiga lagstiftningen om konfliktmineraler ska bli verklighet.


  Linda McAvan (S&D). Mr President, I want to make it absolutely clear that what the Committee on Development supported is not what is on the table now from the Committee on International Trade (INTA). What is on the table now has been rejected by many people. You all have a letter here from over 140 Catholic bishops; you have seen the letter from Dr Mukwege; you have seen the letter from the NGOs: they are saying that the INTA proposals are not good enough. They should be rejected and replaced by the amendments. So do not delude yourselves, on the other side of the House, into thinking that you are doing what the people want in the DRC, in the Great Lakes, in the conflict zones.

If you support the INTA Committee, you are doing what the business lobbyists want in this House. If we vote tomorrow along the lines of the INTA Committee, we will have a fig leaf of legislation which pretends to do something, but which actually achieves nothing at all. So I plead with you, do not listen to those who tell you that you are doing what the people in DRC want. They have been here, they have told us what they want: they want proper regulation throughout the supply chain. That is what we need to support.


  Nicola Danti (S&D). Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signora Commissario, domani il Parlamento rischia di approvare un testo ipocrita che non tutela chi subisce gravi violenze e sfruttamento per il commercio di minerali provenienti dalle zone di conflitto.

Purtroppo, signora, non è stato fatto quello che doveva essere fatto affinché questa proposta divenisse efficace e coerente. Non è stato fatto da chi ha blindato un testo farisaico e non è stato fatto nemmeno da chi, con le migliori intenzioni, ha mancato di proporre soluzioni che avrebbero favorito il raggiungimento dell'obiettivo finale.

Si doveva fare di più e meglio, prevedendo un regolamento obbligatorio con chiare procedure di certificazione e tracciabilità della catena di approvvigionamento per tutti quei soggetti che importano in Europa tali materie prime, limitando invece l'impatto sui soggetti a valle della catena ed evitando inutili oneri burocratici per le microimprese.

Avremmo bisogno di una cornice giuridica che contribuisca davvero a spezzare l'inaccettabile legame esistente tra commercio di tali risorse e finanziamento dei gruppi armati nel quadro più ampio di una coerente politica di cooperazione.

Siamo ancora in tempo per evitare di scrivere una pagina non degna della storia di questo Parlamento.


  Richard Howitt (S&D). Mr President, as this Parliament’s rapporteur on corporate social responsibility, I view this legislation on conflict minerals as a test of Europe’s claim to be a leader on responsible business. It was disappointing that the Commission proposal was weaker than the equivalent Dodd-Frank Act in the United States, and it is right that Europe should at least match it. Europe says we support the UN Guiding Principles on business and human rights, but voluntary self-certification is not enough. Our amendments seek to broaden the scope, to end the anomaly that the law would cover blood gold but not blood diamonds, to include not just raw materials but products made out of them, to recognise that Europe is responsible for a quarter of this trade worldwide, but that this proposal covers only one in 2 000 of our companies affected.

To the Christian Democrats, I would say that 70 bishops wrote a letter supporting our position, not yours, as does Christian Aid. You voted for a Sakharov Prize winner, and he asked you to vote for our position. Today, I hope you will use your conscience to vote with us. I have seen the victims of this evil trade in the Democratic Republic of Congo and in Colombia, and I am going to vote to end their suffering.


  Eric Andrieu (S&D). Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, notre Prix Sakharov, le docteur Mukwege, a déjà été cité dans ce débat. Que nous dit-il? Il nous dit la nécessité d'une réglementation ambitieuse pour rompre le lien entre les minerais et les conflits. C'était l'an dernier.

Le mois dernier, avec la résolution commémorant le dramatique effondrement du Rana Plaza au Bangladesh, nous réclamions des textes législatifs juridiquement contraignants sur le devoir de diligence, la traçabilité et la transparence de l'ensemble de la chaîne d'approvisionnement, pour améliorer les conditions de travail, de santé et de sécurité des travailleurs.

Demain, nous aurons l'occasion de mettre en cohérence nos paroles et nos actes en adoptant un texte qui garantira un approvisionnement du marché européen pleinement responsable, avec un impact réel et positif sur le terrain.

C'est pourquoi j'appelle tout particulièrement nos collègues libéraux et du PPE à être cohérents en votant les amendements que nous avons déposés, pour faire prendre à l'Union européenne le chemin vers plus de protection des droits et des êtres humains, en application de ses principes et de ses valeurs.


  Emmanuel Maurel (S&D). Monsieur le Président, depuis le début de ce débat, nous dénonçons tous le caractère profondément inhumain du commerce des minerais mais nous ne pouvons pas nous contenter de dénoncer. Ce qu'attendent de nous notamment nos amis africains, c'est que nous agissions, que nous agissions concrètement et responsabilisions les importateurs de minerais.

Or, le texte de la commission du commerce international est insuffisant. C'est la raison pour laquelle nous nous battons pour durcir ce texte. On ne peut pas se contenter d'un mécanisme volontaire et seulement volontaire. Il faut aller plus loin, d'où l'exigence de créer un devoir de diligence pour toutes les entreprises sur l'ensemble de la chaîne d'approvisionnement, de l'extraction jusqu'à la mise sur le marché. D'où aussi le débat pour ouvrir le champ du règlement à d'autres minerais parce que ces questions-là se poseront. D'où aussi, évidemment, la nécessité de ne pas se cantonner aux seuls fondeurs et aux seuls raffineurs mais d'aller plus loin.

Je pense que ce débat est plus que symbolique. Il faut que la réponse de l'Europe soit à la hauteur de l'enjeu. D'autres l'ont fait, à commencer par les États-Unis, cela a déjà été dit. Nous avons une responsabilité historique. Demain, lors du vote, sachons la saisir. Sachons être à la hauteur de l'idée de l'Union européenne que se font nos partenaires.


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


  Franc Bogovič (PPE). Govorimo o zelo perečem vprašanju, ker smo slišali, da se na eni strani pri samem pridobivanju rude izkoriščajo ljudje, ženske, mladi. Na drugi strani ogromno dobičkov iz te trgovine, pravzaprav edinega resursa, ki ga ima Afrika, zaide tudi v roke kriminalnim terorističnim organizacijam.

Zato podpiram prizadevanje, da se naredi na tem področju red, da tudi Evropa, ki je, kot smo slišali, velik porabnik teh surovin, da svoj prispevek in jasno pove, da želi na tem področju jasnost in transparentnost.

To transparentnost bomo zagotovili na takšen način, da bodo tudi prihodki od teh rud prihajali ljudem v Afriki.

Včeraj smo govorili o razvojni pomoči Afriki. In mislim, da če danes in jutri pri glasovanju uredimo to področje trgovine s surovinami, naredimo velik korak tudi v razvojni pomoči tistim, ki so razvojne pomoči najbolj potrebni.


  Patrizia Toia (S&D). Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, per una volta, noi qui abbiamo l'occasione di cambiare qualcosa di quel mondo ingiusto contro il quale abbiamo fatto mille inutili risoluzioni. Vi prego, non sprechiamola per ignavia o per una falsa paura di danneggiare l'economia.

La strada giusta, anche per le imprese, è quella del commercio responsabile, è quella dell'obbligatorietà non solo per le fonderie e le raffinerie, che abbiamo individuato qui come l'anello debole della catena. E se poi delocalizzano pazienza, ma lasciamo tutto il resto intatto.

Commissario Malmström, io la ricordo dieci anni fa in questo Parlamento come una collega sempre in prima linea, battagliera per i diritti umani, per la tutela delle donne e contro ogni violenza sui bambini. Ecco, a quella sua passione per i diritti umani io mi appello perché abbia più coraggio, più fantasia su questo dossier per cui lei ha una responsabilità diretta. Fatico a riconoscerla dietro a quelle parole dell'approccio integrato, della valutazione d'impatto, della clausola di revisione, le solite formule burocratiche che usiamo sempre per fare scudo rispetto alle non scelte e che spesso sono proprio inutili e vuote, soprattutto di fronte alla violenza e alla difficoltà di questa situazione. Non usiamo una soluzione che è acqua fresca rispetto ai problemi. Lei ha ragione, dipende dal cambiamento delle condizioni locali, ma quelle non cambieranno certo con la volontarietà.

Quindi, vi prego, facciamo qualcosa di più efficace. Lo dico al Parlamento, ai colleghi sensibili anche agli appelli delle ONG, dei vescovi, agli appelli della propria coscienza e lo dico anche a lei, Commissario, da lei mi aspetto di più.


  Νότης Μαριάς ( ECR). Κύριε Πρόεδρε, οι πολεμικές συγκρούσεις και οι εμφύλιοι πόλεμοι στον κόσμο και κυρίως στην Αφρική σε μεγάλο βαθμό γίνονται προκειμένου τα εμπόλεμα μέρη να βάλουν χέρι στις πλουτοπαραγωγικές πηγές και στις πρώτες ύλες της περιοχής. Γι' αυτό μιλάμε για ματωμένα διαμάντια, γι' αυτό μιλάμε για εμπόριο του θανάτου. Η νομοθετική πρόταση που συζητούμε δεν απαγορεύει τις αγορές μεταλλευμάτων από εμπόλεμες ζώνες.

Δεύτερον, προωθεί μέσω του συστήματος πιστοποίησης τις αγορές μεταλλευμάτων από εμπόλεμες ζώνες που θεωρεί δήθεν νόμιμες. Πρέπει να δράσουμε άμεσα και αποφασιστικά εδώ και τώρα. Πρέπει να επιβάλουμε ένα υποχρεωτικό σύστημα. Πρέπει να αφορά όλους τους φυσικούς πόρους και όχι τα τέσσερα μεταλλεύματα. Το ΙSIS κερδίζει τεράστια ποσά πουλώντας πετρέλαιο.

Τρίτον, πρέπει να αφορά όλες τις εταιρίες που εμπλέκονται.

Τέταρτον, πρέπει να αφορά όλη την αλυσίδα των εμπλεκομένων εταιριών.

Πέμπτον, πρέπει να αφορά και τους όρους εξόρυξης διότι εδώ γίνεται παραβίαση ανθρωπίνων και εργασιακών δικαιωμάτων στην εξόρυξη, δεν υπάρχουν συνθήκες ασφαλείας, γίνεται εκμετάλλευση παιδικής εργασίας.

Εδώ και τώρα αποφασιστική παρέμβαση του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου. Ευχαριστώ.


  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE). Señor Presidente, ha trabajado usted mucho, señora Comisaria, en esta propuesta, pero quiero insistir en que la trazabilidad de estos productos debe ser obligatoria. Esta debe ser una actitud a nivel global, y espero una actitud ética y coherente del Consejo y de las instituciones europeas para extender este movimiento en todo el mundo. Hay vidas en juego, niños que necesitan cambiar la pala con la que hurgan en la mina por lápices y cuadernos en la escuela. Porque las emociones que vivimos aquí con las denuncias del doctor Mukwege deben convertirse en hechos concretos y contundentes.

Y pido apoyo público, a nivel local, estatal y europeo, a las campañas que muchas organizaciones realizan para que la ciudadanía, para que los consumidores exijan saber, como se dice en euskera, «zure mugikorrak ezkutatzen duena» («lo que esconde tu móvil») para que podamos dejar al descubierto y excluir del mercado a quienes hacen negocio sobre la sangre y el dolor de seres humanos.

Comisaria, ha hablado de una cláusula de revisión si el sistema voluntario no funciona. ¿Por qué no nos anticipamos al fracaso del sistema voluntario aplicando esa obligatoriedad, dando así la imagen que la ciudadanía europea espera de nosotros? No perdamos esta oportunidad.


  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, nos últimos anos tornou-se visível a escassez persistente de matérias-primas a nível global. Importantes recursos minerais com distribuição restrita à escala planetária estão em défice de oferta. E não é por acaso que algumas das maiores reservas se situam em países devastados por conflitos internos, ingerências, permanentes violações da sua soberania e integridade territorial, quase sempre com a cumplicidade de organizações internacionais e potências estrangeiras interessadas em manter o controlo de recursos.

É o caso da região dos Grandes Lagos. Não deixa de ser, por conseguinte, pertinente discutir mecanismos de certificação de importadores de minerais provenientes de zonas de conflito e de alto risco, criando mecanismos de rastreabilidade que permitam identificar as matérias-primas originárias destas zonas.

Mas estes mecanismos têm limites evidentes que se tornam ainda mais claros quando olhamos para esta proposta de regulamento, proposta que apenas contempla uma parte dos minerais comercializados e que não vai além do primeiro elo da cadeia de valores, esquecendo deliberadamente a miríade de produtos finais e intermédios onde estas matérias—primas são incorporadas. É uma proposta perversa que nada resolverá, podendo, outrossim, criar novos problemas.


  Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE). Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Alle von Ihnen waren letztes Jahr beeindruckt, als Dr. Denis Mukwege, ein Arzt aus der Demokratischen Republik Kongo, den Sacharow-Preis bekam, den Preis dafür, dass er mit seinem Team Tausende von Frauen, die im brutalen Konflikt um Blutmineralien in seiner Heimat Opfer von Massenvergewaltigungen geworden sind, versucht zu heilen, physisch und psychisch. Er hat uns vor zehn Tagen am Europatag im Europäischen Parlament in Brüssel aufgefordert, hier tatsächlich ein umfassendes Gesetz zu verabschieden.

Da sind wir auch ihm und den Frauen aus der Demokratischen Republik Kongo verpflichtet. Wir brauchen eine obligatorische Sorgfaltspflicht für alle, nicht nur für die Rohstoffimporte, sondern auch für alle Produkte, für die gesamte Lieferkette. Geben Sie sich einen Ruck, alle jene, die dem Handelsausschuss nur zustimmen wollen! Sagen Sie Nein zu dem Feigenblatt von Gesetzgebung, das der Handelsausschuss vorschlägt! Sagen Sie Ja zu all diesen Anträgen, die wir eingebracht haben, damit es mit diesem Gesetz wirklich umfassend möglich sein wird, in Zukunft Frauen davor zu schützen, dass sie in diesen brutalen Kriegen um die Blutmineralien Vergewaltigungsopfer werden.


  Ignazio Corrao (EFDD). Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, quante volte ci siamo commossi vedendo le immagini in televisione delle guerre in Africa, quante volte abbiamo parlato di diamanti di sangue, quante volte abbiamo parlato di materie prime insanguinate!

Domani ci ritroveremo in questo Parlamento per votare su questo tema e lo faremo probabilmente in maniera ipocrita, per lo meno lo farà una parte di questo Parlamento, adducendo scuse assurde. Perché quando sento dire "oneri per le piccole e medie imprese", che sono degli oneri inesistenti, quando sento parlare di microimprese, che sono escluse dalle proposte che sono state fatte, significa che stiamo trovando delle scuse assurde, che vogliono continuare a giustificare sangue e morte.

Io credo che il voto di domani sia un voto storico, uno di quei voti che vengono registrati, per cui è una chiamata alla coscienza di ognuno di voi. Domani decidiamo se vogliamo voltare pagina e combattere seriamente un problema di cui si discute da una decina d'anni o se vogliamo continuare con questo atteggiamento ipocrita.

Ecco, io spero che domani prenderemo sul serio le parole del dottor Mukwege – a cui abbiamo dato il premio Sacharov – che è venuto a dire, la settimana scorsa al Parlamento europeo, che questa proposta è una proposta insufficiente e che quello che sta uscendo dalla commissione INTA non va bene per poter affrontare un problema di queste dimensioni.

Domani abbiamo questa possibilità, colleghi: cerchiamo di essere coerenti e non di commuoverci soltanto dinanzi alla televisione.




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


  Cecilia Malmström, Member of the Commission. Mr President, I would like to thank the House very much for this important debate. Parliament has today, as over the last year, contributed greatly to raising awareness of this very important issue. That awareness and that public pressure has also made many of the global mineral supply chains increasingly aware of the need to set due diligence standards as part of their corporate social responsibility.

This debate shows that we all share the same goals. We need to break the link between conflict trade minerals and the terrible violence that we have all witnessed, which affects so many children, women and men. We need to promote transparent, responsible mineral supply chains so that we can keep the money out of the hands of rebel groups; so that we can ensure that the revenue from this trade is available for good governance, for health, for schools and for other vital public services; and so that we can encourage economic growth that provides conflict-affected areas with hope for a better future.

In the Commission proposal we do address the upstream part of the supply chains, and with the accompanying measures we have set aside EUR 20 million: this money is to improve the conditions on the ground but also to help companies – especially small and medium-size companies – to be able to do the checks, the audits and the traceability because that is not easy today. We should not fool ourselves. It is not easy even for the best meaning company to be fully sure of where all its supplies come from. So this is to support them in doing this.

We also create an EU list of due diligence for the downstream companies with a possibility to name and shame, and I am quite confident – and this has strengthened in me after this debate – that most, if not all, companies will be on that list. If this is not effective there is a review clause to push further.

I think there has been a lot of work going on in this Parliament and I would like to pay tribute to the work in the Committee on International Trade and others to improve the Commission proposal, to make it even stronger, to make a proposal that we can be proud of here in the European Union and so that we can also achieve our goals while learning from some of the experiences in the past. The Commission will certainly look forward to working with Parliament on this in the future.


  Iuliu Winkler, rapporteur. Mr President, there is a very important consensus across this Chamber and it is that of supporting the best interests of the people and of the local communities in conflict areas. Their interest is in stopping mineral extraction from financing conflict, but their interest is also in the enforcement of law-abiding and transparent industry and trade to be the basis of sustainable local development.

The interests of people and communities caught in war and conflict cannot be served by an EU regulation alone; that is why we need an EU integrated approach. Whether something is right or wrong, good or bad, cannot be reduced to mere permissibility under a regulation. What we need is to develop a culture of responsibility and to educate all the stakeholders. We need individual responsibility when engaging stakeholders; we need to distinguish clearly between experts and activists.

While the taking—over of best practice is a good thing, to take over a failed practice, namely the mandatory Dodd-Frank Act, is a bad idea. Unilateral action provokes unilateral response, de facto embargoes produce de facto prohibitions, and prohibitions have never worked, as we know very well.

We have on the table the proposal from the Committee on International Trade (INTA). That is an effective and workable proposal; it has been carved out with responsibility. The INTA proposal is capable of being the strong fundament of the EU’s integrated approach to breaking the link between minerals and conflict, so please support this proposal tomorrow.


  Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà mercoledì 20 maggio 2015, alle 12.00

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 162)


  Isabella Adinolfi (EFDD), per iscritto. In quest'ultima sessione plenaria si è discusso e votato l'importante dossier riguardante la proposta di regolamento sull'istituzione di un sistema europeo di autocertificazione per gli importatori di alcuni minerali o metalli originari di zone di conflitto e ad alto rischio, i c.d. conflict minerals. La discussione ed il susseguente voto si sono incentrati soprattutto su un particolare punto che è risultato essere controverso: estendere gli obblighi di tracciabilità (autocertificazione) non solo a fonderie, raffinerie e importatori di determinati minerali, ma anche alle piccole e medie imprese (PMI) che fanno parte della filiera. Ciò è stato ritenuto da molti indispensabile per rendere efficaci gli obblighi di tracciabilità imposti ai principali attori della filiera, che altrimenti risulterebbero de facto facilmente eludibili. Un'impresa, infatti, avrebbe tutto l'interesse, e la concreta possibilità, di accedere al più vantaggioso mercato nero qualora dovesse agire su base volontaria nel dichiarare e garantire la provenienza dei minerali. Il dibattito è stato molto acceso ed emotivo e alcuni, trincerandosi dietro un fantomatico aggravio amministrativo per le PMI, si volevano opporre all'obbligo di tracciabilità anche per queste ultime. Fortunatamente, e grazie anche al lavoro del Movimento 5 stelle, il risultato del voto è stato positivo, scongiurando una tale assurdità.


  Guillaume Balas (S&D), par écrit. Le Parlement européen doit se prononcer sur un règlement visant à instaurer un mécanisme d'autocertification pour les sociétés importatrices de tantale, d'étain, de tungstène et d'or. On sait que le commerce de ces minerais est à l'origine de graves conflits pour le contrôle de leurs exploitations et provoque des dégâts environnementaux considérables.

Si l'intention est louable, le groupe socialiste souhaite que ce mécanisme d'autocertification soit obligatoire et concerne toutes les entreprises présentes sur l'ensemble de la chaîne d'approvisionnement. En l'état actuel de la position du Parlement adoptée en commission du Commerce international, à peine 5% des entreprises de ce secteur seraient soumises à ce mécanisme de vérification à savoir les raffineries et les fonderies. Les partis de droite et d'extrême droite se réfugient derrière des arguments fallacieux pour refuser d'élargir le champ d'application à l'ensemble des entreprises. La traçabilité ne saurait être efficace, tant du point de vue de l'information économique que de la transparence due aux citoyens. Si l'Europe souhaite tarir les sources de financements de groupes armés et venir en aide aux populations d'Afrique subsaharienne obligés de fuir leurs pays en guerre, le Parlement doit assurer la traçabilité des informations liées au commerce des minerais de conflits.


  Maria Grapini (S&D), în scris. Știm cu toții că a nu lua o decizie este cea mai proastă decizie. De aceea, sunt de părere că trebuie să votăm pentru regulamentul în cauză. Trebuie să avem grijă cum asigurăm siguranța utilizării minereurilor, în același timp trebuie să calculăm impactul asupra IMM-urilor. Pentru a face acest lucru trebuie să ținem cont de frecvența certificatelor, auditurilor și a verificării ex-post. Dacă se constată că poverile administrative și costurile vor fi foarte mari, trebuie să vedem cum venim în sprijinul IMM-urilor. Dacă se constată că impactul este foarte mare, cred că poate fi de ajuns și o declarație de conformitate pe propria răspundere în cazul în care importatorii din fiecare stat membru se vor aproviziona exclusiv din surse certificate obligatoriu. În același timp, nu putem compara pierderile IMM-urilor cu viața oamenilor. Sunt de acord cu înființarea autorității competente unice la nivelul UE pentru stabilirea unor proceduri unitare. Dacă însă se constată că este nevoie să extindem domeniul de aplicare pe tot lanțul, atunci putem cere revizuirea.


  Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE), in writing. Many constituents have been in touch, asking this Parliament to vote for a strong EU law to break the link between mineral extraction and the financing of armed groups in areas of conflict. Profits from so-called ‘conflict minerals’ are being used to fuel further violence and killing. The Commission proposal seeks to combat this outrage with a voluntary scheme, but this has been tried and failed in the past. I call upon colleagues to vote for a mandatory scheme, similar to that already adopted in the United States. To be effective, the law must ensure full coverage of the supply chain. This approach would give accountability and binding regulation on everything from mine to consumer – whether it be the process of extracting the minerals, or the manufacture of the smartphones or laptops that they end up in. It is essential that companies in the supply chain are covered, so that we can be sure that the goods we all use as consumers are included. I urge my fellow MEPs to vote for an effective law, and I hope that such an approach can be agreed on by the Member State government ministers, with the Parliament and Commission, so it can be put into practice.


  Alyn Smith (Verts/ALE), in writing. Conflict minerals are so-named because they are sourced in opaque or illegal practices in unstable areas of the world. For example, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold are sourced in conditions of extreme exploitation, violence and slavery.

According to the International Peace Information Service, armed groups are present at more than half of all mining sites in the DRC, where the local population is coerced into working in the mines and controlled by rape and violence. These minerals are present in our phones, our cars, even our food cupboards. We are complicit in modern—day slavery unless we take action now.

A voluntary scheme of self-certification will not work. The EU can be a powerful force in using soft power and trade to improve the lives of the most vulnerable, and we cannot pretend a voluntary system is enough. The upcoming vote can and should strengthen existing laws and I urge my fellow MEPs to be part of that force. Binding rules for firms involved in the production and trade of minerals are crucial for keeping conflict minerals out of Europe. This is our contribution to the fight against modern—day slavery.


  Valdemar Tomaševski (ECR), raštu. Pasiūlymas dėl Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamento apima itin svarbius saugumo bei taikos pasaulyje aspektus. Gamtos naudingųjų iškasenų gavyba, ypač konfliktų paveiktose vadinamojo trečiojo pasaulio šalyse, gali tapti nesutarimų priežastimi. Istorija rodo, kad retų iškasenų eksploatacija dažnai yra susijusi su konfliktais, įskaitant jėgos panaudojimą. Todėl šį reglamentą, kuriuo bandoma nutraukti ryšį tarp nelegalios mineralų eksploatacijos ir tarptautinių ginčų, verta išnagrinėtidar kartą. Pagrindinis mūsų teisės aktų tikslas šiuo klausimu turi būti taikos ir stabilumo puoselėjimas pasaulio didžiausios rizikos zonose. Šiame kontekste teigiamą reikšmę įgauna projektas, nustatantis ES sertifikavimo sistemą importuotojams, kurie nori vystyti atsakingą retų metalų importą į Europos Sąjungą. Tai reiškia reikalavimą tarptautiniuose santykiuose laikytis specifinių standartų, atitinkančių EBPO rekomendacijas. Tačiau rekomendacijose vienareikšmiškai nurodoma pareiga kruopščiai užtikrinti saugumą mineralų tiekimo grandinėje iš dėl konfliktų nukentėjusių vietovių, siekiant pašalinti bet kokią galimą žmogaus teisių pažeidimo riziką. Šiandien būtent tai matome. Kurdami naujus tarptautinės teisės aktus, EBPO nuorodas privalome pripažinti kaip vienas svarbiausių. Palaikymo nusipelno Komisijos pasiūlymas, vadinamasis principas „nepakenk“. Sąjunga privalo imtis lyderystės šioje srityje, kad galėtų efektyviau paveikti taikų konfliktų sprendimo būdą.

Pravna obavijest - Politika zaštite privatnosti