Compte rendu in extenso des débats

Jeudi 6 avril 2017 - Strasbourg

1. Ouverture de la séance

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. ANTONIO TAJANI
Presidente

(La seduta è aperta alle 9.05)

2. Déclaration de la Présidence

  Presidente. – Prima di aprire, visto che dalla Cecenia attraverso la stampa arrivano notizie preoccupanti di torture e uccisioni di cittadini di quella Repubblica a causa dei loro orientamenti sessuali, volevo chiedere alle autorità cecene di fornire al più presto alla comunità internazionale notizie precise e dettagliate su ciò che sta accadendo, confermando che il Parlamento europeo condanna con forza ogni tipo di persecuzione e discriminazione nei confronti di persone a causa di orientamenti sessuali, razziali, religiosi e politici. Questo vale all'interno dell'Unione europea, ma noi difendiamo i nostri valori anche al di fuori dei confini della nostra Unione.

VORSITZ: EVELYNE GEBHARDT
Vizepräsidentin

  Die Präsidentin. – Meine Damen und Herren! Heute ist der Tag der Roma und eine besondere Gelegenheit, auch noch einmal daran zu erinnern, dass wir in der Europäischen Union eine Wertegemeinschaft sind, dass alles, was in der Welt geschieht, auch entsprechend angegangen werden muss und es uns nicht egal ist, was in der Welt geschieht mit Minderheiten, mit Andersdenkenden. Da müssen wir immer sehr klare Worte finden.

3. Journée internationale des Roms (débat)

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über

– die Anfrage zur mündlichen Beantwortung an den Rat zum Thema „Internationaler Roma-Tag“ von Roberta Metsola, Pál Csáky, Birgit Sippel, Soraya Post, Tanja Fajon, Sylvie Guillaume, Claude Moraes, Monika Flašíková Beňová, Ana Gomes, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Dietmar Köster, Marju Lauristin, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault D'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Elly Schlein, Cecilia Wikström, Nathalie Griesbeck, Benedek Jávor, Bodil Valero, Ulrike Lunacek, Barbara Lochbihler, Terry Reintke, Davor Škrlec, Bronis Ropė, Igor Šoltes, Eva Joly, Karima Delli, Ernest Urtasun, Rebecca Harms, Cornelia Ernst, Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Martina Anderson, Marina Albiol Guzmán, Merja Kyllönen, Dimitrios Papadimoulis, Eleonora Forenza im Namen der Fraktion der Europäischen Volkspartei (Christdemokraten), der Fraktion der Progressiven Allianz der Sozialdemokraten im Europäischen Parlament, der Fraktion der Allianz der Liberalen und Demokraten für Europa, der Fraktion der Grünen/Freie Europäische Allianz und der Konföderalen Fraktion der Vereinigten Europäischen Linken/Nordische Grüne Linke (O-000016/2017 - B8-0207/2017) - (2017/2614(RSP)) und

– die Anfrage zur mündlichen Beantwortung an die Kommission zum Thema „Internationaler Roma-Tag“ von Roberta Metsola, Pál Csáky, Birgit Sippel, Soraya Post, Tanja Fajon, Sylvie Guillaume, Claude Moraes, Monika Flašíková Beňová, Ana Gomes, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Dietmar Köster, Marju Lauristin, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault D'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Elly Schlein, Cecilia Wikström, Nathalie Griesbeck, Benedek Jávor, Bodil Valero, Ulrike Lunacek, Barbara Lochbihler, Terry Reintke, Davor Škrlec, Bronis Ropė, Igor Šoltes, Eva Joly, Karima Delli, Ernest Urtasun, Rebecca Harms, Cornelia Ernst, Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Martina Anderson, Marina Albiol Guzmán, Merja Kyllönen, Dimitrios Papadimoulis, Eleonora Forenza im Namen der Fraktion der Europäischen Volkspartei (Christdemokraten), der Fraktion der Progressiven Allianz der Sozialdemokraten im Europäischen Parlament, der Fraktion der Allianz der Liberalen und Demokraten für Europa, der Fraktion der Grünen/Freie Europäische Allianz und der Konföderalen Fraktion der Vereinigten Europäischen Linken/Nordische Grüne Linke (O-000017/2017 - B8-0208/2017) - (2017/2614(RSP)).

  Pál Csáky, szerző. – Elnök asszony, tisztelt Kollégák! Április 8-án ünnepeltük a nemzetközi roma napot, és ennek apropójaként – a frakciók zömének összefogásával – több kollégámmal együtt kérdést intéztünk a Bizottsághoz és a Tanácshoz. A 2011-ben elfogadott „Nemzeti romaintegrációs stratégiák uniós keretrendszere” nagyon időszerű volt, és azt hiszem, hogy sokak nevében beszélek, amikor azt mondom, hogy nagy reményeket fűztünk hozzá.

Számomra, mint a szlovákiai magyar kisebbséget képviselő politikus számára, ez a keretrendszer azért is fontos, mert reményt ad, hogy a közeljövőben mintául szolgálhat egy nemzeti kisebbségek védelmére létrehozandó univerzális keretrendszer kialakításához. Meggyőződésem ugyanis, hogy az európai értékek védelme – egy ilyen változó világban, amelyben élünk – fontos, és eme gondolatkör egyik hangsúlyos eleme kell, hogy legyen az őshonos kisebbségek védelme is.

Ennek része a roma társadalmakra való odafigyelés, és a problémáik megoldására tett lépések. Engedjék meg a tisztelt Európai Bizottság képviselői is, hogy két prioritásra hívjam fel a figyelmüket. Az első az úgynevezett romatelepek, roma settlement-ek léte, három olyan európai uniós országban is, ahol ez komoly problémát jelent. Az ország, ahonnan jövök, Szlovákia keleti részén több ilyen roma település van, ahol a romák európai emberhez nem méltó körülmények között élnek.

De léteznek ilyen telepek Romániában, illetőleg Bulgáriában is. Nyolc évig voltam Szlovákia miniszterelnök-helyettese, próbáltunk lépéseket tenni eme telepek fölszámolása érdekében, és úgy gondolom, hogy ezt folytatni kellene, talán egy Európai Roma Alap létrehozatalával is. A másik kiemelt prioritás pedig az oktatásügyi és nevelési programok támogatása kell, hogy legyen. Sok sikert kívánok a Bizottságnak ehhez, és azt hiszem, mindannyiunk támogatását tudom ígérni.

  Soraya Post, author. – Madam President, to make a tangible progress in our fight against anti-Gypsyism, which is at the root cause of the situation of the Roma today, we call for a project team on Roma issues to be set up, bringing together Commissioners Jourová, Thyssen, Crețu, Navracsics, Andriukaitis and Hahn, to create non-discriminatory and complementary EU funds and programmes.

We call for the continuation of the EU-Roma framework after 2020, building on the findings and recommendations of the Court of Auditors, the FRA, NGOs and watchdog organisations. We call on the Commission and the Member States to make sure that the projects financed by the EU are inclusive and fight segregation. Segregational practices must be clearly described and explicitly excluded from funding.

As we concede that most mainstream programmes systematically fail to reach out to young Roma, we call on the Court of Auditors to check the employment and education programmes of the EU. We call for anti-Gypsyism to be put in the focus on the national Roma strategies, and anti-discrimination indictors to be introduced in the relevant fields. We call on Member States to design their country strategies on the basis of consultations with Roma representatives and pro-Roma NGOs, and then involve them in the running, monitoring and evaluation of the projects.

We call on the Commission to set up a truth and reconciliation commission at EU level and in Member States, to set up such commissions at national level, to acknowledge this persecution, exclusion and disownment of the Roma throughout the centuries. To document this in an official white paper and to make their history become part of the curriculum in schools. We call on Member States to mark 2 August as Roma Holocaust Memorial Day. These steps are absolutely necessary to fight successfully against anti-Gypsyism.

  Cornelia Ernst, Verfasserin. – Frau Präsidentin! Der serbische Rom Rajko Đurić schrieb in einem seiner Bücher sinngemäß: Eines Tages beschloss Gott, den Menschen zu erschaffen. Er nahm Lehm, formte daraus eine Figur und tat sie in ein Gefäß, um sie zu Ton zu brennen. Dann ging er spazieren, und als er zurückkam, war der Mensch vollkommen schwarz. Er wurde der Urahn der Schwarzen. Gott versuchte erneut, einen Menschen zu erschaffen, und formte wieder eine Figur und tat sie in ein Gefäß, um sie zu Ton zu brennen. Dann öffnete er das Gefäß ein bisschen früh und dieser Mensch war ganz weiß und der Urahn der Weißen. Schließlich beschloss er, einen dritten Menschen zu schaffen, und dieser hatte die Farbe der beiden. Er wurde Urahn der Roma. Dieser Mythos, dass die Menschen zwar verschieden, aber letztlich doch von einem Gott sind, hat es nicht in die Wiegenlieder der Kinder Europas geschafft.

Irgendwie zwischen dem Großen und Ganzen, Schwarz und Weiß sind Roma und Sinti scheinbar verloren gegangen, als seien sie eine vernachlässigenswerte Nebensache. Sie sind verschwunden hinter Brexit und Flüchtlingsströmen, Haushaltszahlen und Prognosen, als wären sie überzählig. Es ist mancherorts vergessen worden, dass auch sie zu den Verschlungenen aller Rassismen gehören. Porajmos mit 500 000 Menschen aus ihrer Gemeinschaft, die das Jahr 1945 nicht überlebten. Wenn wir heute hier anlässlich des Roma—Tags sprechen, dann weil fast alle Versprechen gegenüber Roma und Sinti nicht eingelöst sind, weil wir es ihnen schuldig sind, mit ihnen gemeinsam endlich Gerechtigkeit herzustellen – Gerechtigkeit gegenüber einer der ältesten Minderheiten Europas. Freiheit und Gerechtigkeit, Freiheit, Gleichheit und Brüderlichkeit – die Schwesterlichkeit inbegriffen – muss auch für Roma und Sinti gelten. Nicht irgendwann, sondern jetzt, sofort, überall. Roma und Sinti sind keine Bittsteller. Sie haben sich für ihre Forderungen nicht zu rechtfertigen. Wir haben zu viele Generationen der Roma und Sinti im Stich gelassen. Fangen wir endlich an, unsere Schuld ihnen gegenüber abzuarbeiten.

  Benedek Jávor, szerző. – Elnök asszony, tisztelt Képviselőtársaim! Az április 8-i roma nap alkalmából idén második alkalommal rendeztük meg az Európai Parlamentben a roma hetet, amely számos, rendkívül színvonalas és érdekes programra adott lehetőséget, konferenciákra, eszmecserékre. A roma nap és a roma hét, a roma kultúra, a roma identitás ünnepe, a roma büszkeség megünneplésének a lehetősége.

Ugyanakkor arra is alkalom, hogy rámutassunk a problémákra, amelyekkel a roma közösség Európában és a tagállamokban a mai napig szembe kell, hogy nézzen. Arra, hogy ez európai romastratégia a tagállamokban és az Unió által végrehajtott programok sokasága, az elköltött pénzek ellenére, helyben, a terepen roma közösségek helyzete az elmúlt évtizedekben, az elmúlt években nem javul. Mindennapos tapasztalat továbbra is a szegregáció legkülönbözőbb formái, az oktatási, egészségügyi, lakhatási szegregáció, a munkaerőpiacra való jutásnak a lehetetlensége, az, hogy az uniós források sokszor nem segítik, jóllehet ezt célozzák, nem segítik a roma közösségek integrációját, hanem időnként éppen az ellenkező hatást érik el. Ez arra is rámutat, hogy nincsenek végrehajtva az uniós alapvető rendelkezések, értékek, jogok és szabályok. Ezért nem dőlhetünk hátra! Fel kell hívni a figyelmet arra, hogy továbbra is fel kell lépnünk a szegregáció, a romaellenesség, a rasszizmus minden formája ellen. Végre kell hajtanunk a meglevő jogszabályokat, és ki kell kényszerítenünk, hogy a tagállamok az uniós alapértékeket és az uniós alapjogokat tartsák be, minden esetben a roma kisebbségre, a roma közösségre vonatkozóan.

Tisztelt Képviselőtársaim, Európa sok problémával küzd, és sokat vitatkozunk arról, hogyan lehet ezt a közösséget sikeressé tenni. Abban azonban egyet kell értenünk, hogy a roma közösség integrációja, a roma közösség sikeressé tétele nélkül sem Európa, sem annak tagállamai soha nem lesznek képesek sikeressé válni.

  Neven Mimica, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, the Commission strongly condemns all forms and manifestations of racism and xenophobia, including anti-Gypsyism. It is indeed a root cause of Roma social exclusion and discrimination and it hampers the efficiency of policies which have been put in place.

The Commission is addressing the issue by a holistic approach through the enforcement of legal policy and financial instruments. We have stepped up our efforts to ensure the correct implementation of anti-discrimination legislation including the Racial Equality Directive, as well as the Framework Decision against Racism and Xenophobia.

We have launched infringement proceedings against three Member States on discrimination against Roma children in education. The Commission considers that education is a powerful tool to promote citizenship and the common values of freedom, tolerance and non-discrimination. In this context, the Commission will propose a Council recommendation on promoting social inclusion and common EU values through formal and non-formal learning before the end of this year.

The Commission will also launch a new pilot action with the Council of Europe to support the integration of Roma through enhancing inclusive education. In June 2016 the Commission launched the EU High-Level Group on combating racism, xenophobia and other forms of intolerance. It provides best practice guidance and strengthens the cooperation between the Commission, Member States, EU agencies, relevant international organisations and civil society. This high-level group is fostering discussions on the specificities of particular forms of intolerance, including anti-Gypsyism.

Following up on the high-level group’s discussion in December last year, the Commission has just published a document gathering key guiding principles on hate crime training for law enforcement and criminal justice authorities. The Commission also supports Member States and other relevant actors in their efforts to prevent and combat hate speech and hate crime.

In the framework of the high-level group, the Fundamental Rights Agency established a dedicated sub-group to support Member States in defining a methodology for data collection and recording of hate crime incidents.

The Commission has also taken initiatives to ensure that illegal hate speech is countered both in the offline and online worlds. On 31 May 2016 we agreed on a Code of Conduct on countering illegal hate speech online, with Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft and YouTube. We are now evaluating its implementation by these IT companies and we will present the result of this evaluation by the end of May.

The Commission is convinced that fighting discrimination and anti-Gypsyism must go hand-in-hand with fighting Roma social and economic exclusion. This is based on the assessment made by the Commission and confirmed in the Council conclusions of 8 December last year on accelerating the process of Roma integration. These conclusions urge Member States to acknowledge the discrimination affecting Roma, to recognise anti-Gypsyism as one of its underlying factors, and to fight it.

The conclusions are very concrete and comprehensive in this respect. Member States are urged to act through enforcing legislation, broad awareness, awareness raising, promoting a positive image of Roma and promoting Roma culture, language and history through school curricula, media or research.

The Council conclusions also urge Member States to recognise and commemorate the victims of Roma genocide. This is also why the Commission allocated EUR 6 million as specific funding to projects promoting tolerance and fighting stereotyping, hate speech and hate crime.

Another example is the two-year EU campaign ‘For Roma, with Roma’ aimed at combatting prejudices and discrimination, which ran from 2014-2016. Funding opportunities to fight discrimination are also available under the European Structural and Investment Fund where the Commission encourages Member States to involve the representatives of the Roma community in the programme’s monitoring and to promote Roma integration objectives.

Finally, the Commission considers that it is our moral duty to remember all those who suffered under the Nazi regime, including the Roma. The Commission welcomed and strongly supported the initiative of the European Parliament to designate 2 August as European Roma Holocaust Memorial Day. The Commission has already encouraged Member States to do the same. The Council conclusions on accelerating the process of Roma integration also urge Member States to recognise and commemorate the victims of the Roma genocide.

The Commission will continue to support the European Parliament in its action to bring the resolution to the Council for discussion.

  Monika Hohlmeier, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich habe in meinem eigenen Leben viele Erfahrungen machen dürfen in Bezug auf Integration von Roma, weil ich dafür früher mal als Ministerin zuständig war, und ich bin es, offen gestanden, ein Stück weit leid, dass wir die Debatte immer wieder führen müssen. Ich bedanke mich bei den Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die das Thema immer wieder auf die Tagesordnung holen.

Denn die Integration von Roma ist nach wie vor nicht gelungen. Wenn acht von zehn Roma nahe der Armutsgrenze sind, wenn ein Drittel der Studienteilnehmer nur bezahlte Arbeitsverhältnisse bekommen, dann zeigt das relativ deutlich auf, wo wir derzeit stehen. Wenn 50 % der Kinder gar nicht in die Schule gehen, dann ist die Integration der Roma nach wie vor nicht gelungen.

Ich halte es für wesentlich, sich nicht mit gegenseitigen Stereotypen aufzuhalten: „Die Roma verhalten sich wie folgt“. Man kann Roma integrieren, wenn man ihnen die Möglichkeit gibt, ordnungsgemäß zu wohnen, wenn man mit Sozialarbeitern gemeinsam dafür sorgt, dass die Kinder zur Schule gehen, wenn man dafür Sorge trägt, dass die Kinder auch eine Berufsausbildung machen – und zwar egal, ob Mädchen oder Bub, denn da gibt es auch noch unterschiedliche Handhabungsweisen und unterschiedliche Probleme –, wenn man dafür Sorge trägt, dass die Kinder auch nicht missbraucht werden, beispielsweise für Bettlerringe und Ähnliches. Da kann man sehr viel tun, wenn man dies tun möchte.

Und Herr Kommissar, ich hätte eine Bitte: Ich finde Statistiken wunderbar, aber die reale Hilfe ist eigentlich das Wesentliche, was wir voranbringen müssen. Das heißt, wir müssen vonseiten der Europäischen Kommission handeln – das wäre meine Bitte. Es reicht nicht, die Mitgliedstaaten hier letztendlich allein agieren zu lassen, denn ich habe in manchen Mitgliedstaaten den Eindruck, dass die Entwicklung für die Integration der Roma sehr, sehr langsam vorwärts geht und dass da vielleicht eine stärkere Unterstützung notwendig ist, manchmal auch ein bisschen mehr Druck. Denn wenn Menschen ohne Fenster, ohne Bäder, ohne überhaupt Schule in der Nähe, ohne überhaupt Lebensperspektive irgendeiner Art innerhalb der EU leben, dann ist das, glaube ich, eine sehr problematische Konstellation, die wir nicht nur mit einer Anfrage zur mündlichen Beantwortung jedes Jahr neu bedienen können, sondern wo wir uns konkret im Handeln verändern müssen.

  Tanja Fajon, v imenu skupine S&D. – Zaskrbljujoče in žalostno je dejstvo, da se Evropska unija na področju politike, ki bi izboljševala položaj Romov, ne more pohvaliti z napredkom, nasprotno.

Evropska komisija v svojem letnem poročilu priznava, da se v določenih državah situacija močno slabša. Eden med tremi romskimi otroki gre v posteljo vsaj enkrat na mesec lačen, 30 % romskih gospodinjstev nima dostopa do tekoče vode. In da se to dogaja v Evropi leta 2017, je sramota.

V luči strategije o integraciji Romov je ključno, da izboljšanje življenja na tisoče Romov-Evropejcev postavimo v osrčje dela politike Unije. Vrsta držav evropskega denarja še vedno ne uporablja za integracijo Romov.

In z vzponom skrajne desnice po vsem svetu je še bolj pomembno kot kdaj koli prej, da spoznamo tudi posledice holokavsta nad Romi: vsaj 500 tisoč Romov je bilo iztrebljenih med 2. svetovno vojno. V nekaterih državah je to predstavljalo okoli 80 % celotne romske skupnosti.

  Ivan Jakovčić, u ime kluba ALDE. – Gospođo predsjednice, poštovani gospodine povjereniče, i vi i ja smo svjesni da se, nažalost, uz Rome vežu termini segregacije, rasizma, netrpeljivosti, svi oni termini koji su direktno protiv vrijednosti Europske unije, onoga što svi zajedno ovdje, u ovoj sali, želimo promovirati, a to je upravo suprotno od navedenoga, to je tolerancija, uvažavanje naših različitosti. Među ostalim, činjenica je i da su Romi manjina koja je uz Židove najviše trpjela u Drugom svjetskom ratu.

Nažalost, moram reći da je uz nacističku Njemačku i ustaška Hrvatska bila jedna od onih država koja je pokazala što znači ubijanje ljudi, naprosto zato što su pripadnici jedne manjine koju su u onom trenutku svi mrzili. Ono što želim naglasiti je, međutim, nešto drugo. Želim naglasiti da postoje i dobri primjeri, neovisno o svim tragedijama kojih smo svjedoci, postoje odlični primjeri. Usudit ću se spomenuti i ono što sam ja činio dok sam bio istarski župan kada sam učinio sve što sam mogao kako bih pomogao Romima.

Mogu vam reći da, ako upotrijebimo neke metode – konkretno, sasvim konkretno – ako im pomognemo u obrazovanju, ako im organiziramo posebne vrtiće, ako stipendiramo školovanje romske djece, ako organiziramo njihove medijske nastupe kako bi pokazali svoju kulturu i ono što oni zaista znaju, ako im organiziramo posebna vijeća za nacionalne manjine, ako im pomognemo u mikropoduzetništvu, ako im legaliziramo njihove poslove na tržnicama, onda se može puno toga napraviti.

Želim naglasiti da europski programi, nacionalni programi neće nikada dokraja saživjeti ako se u to ozbiljno ne uključe lokalne i regionalne vlasti. Međimurje je jedan drugi, isto tako dobar primjer, jer imamo romska naselja ne samo u zemljama koje su navedene ranije, nego i u Hrvatskoj. Romska naselja u Međimurju imaju niz problema, ali imaju i dobrih primjera. Ja bih u tom kontekstu htio samo naglasiti da pozivam Komisiju da razmisli kako da europski novac direktno usmjeri prema lokalnim i regionalnim vlastima, jer je to sigurno jedan od načina na koji se romska zajednica može bolje integrirati u lokalnu ili regionalnu zajednicu.

(Govornik je pristao odgovoriti na pitanje postavljeno podizanjem plave kartice (članak 162. stavak 8. Poslovnika).

  Dubravka Šuica (PPE), pitanje koje je podizanjem plave kartice postavila. – Gospodine Jakovčiću, nismo u Hrvatskom saboru, ali slušala sam što ste govorili i svaka čast naporima koje ste Vi kao istarski župan poduzimali u Vašoj regiji i smatram da je potrebno da se novac usmjeri prema romskim zajednicama i stoga se pridružujem Vašem apelu. Smatrate li dobrim primjerom primjer Hrvatske, u kojoj imamo predstavnika romske zajednice u Hrvatskom saboru? Smatram da je to prilično solidan primjer i da se može nazvati europskom praksom.

  Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE), odgovor na pitanje postavljeno podizanjem plave kartice. – Poštovana kolegice, uvjeren sam da je Hrvatska definitivno napravila niz ozbiljnih, pozitivnih iskoraka prema svim manjinama, pa tako i prema romskoj. Činjenica da imamo zagarantirani mandat saborskog zastupnika pripadniku romske manjine nešto je za što nisam siguran da postoji u nekoj drugoj zemlji Europske unije. Ne poznajem do kraja to zakonodavstvo, ali ovo je sigurno odličan primjer i način da zastupnik koji pripada romskoj zajednici može promovirati interese te zajednice i pokazati način njezine integracije.

  Tania González Peñas, en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señora presidenta; «Gelem, gelem», que significa «anduve, anduve»: así comienza el himno gitano, unos versos que beben de la historia nómada del pueblo gitano y que están cargados de significado por estar inspirados en el recuerdo a los gitanos y las gitanas víctimas del nazismo del Holocausto.

En 1971, se declaró el 8 de abril Día Internacional del Pueblo Gitano, para reivindicar sus derechos, y hoy estamos aquí para conmemorar ese día —y es muy positivo que sea objeto de debate en este Parlamento Europeo— pero, sobre todo, para hacer de altavoces y denunciar el incremento de los delitos de odio contra la comunidad gitana y dejar patente todo el trabajo que queda por hacer en política sociolaboral en este sentido.

Está bien tener un día señalado en el calendario; eso da visibilidad y sensibiliza a la población, pero el pueblo gitano lleva décadas sufriendo discriminación, segregación y niveles de pobreza y exclusión social muy por encima de las medias europeas y nacionales, especialmente cuando hablamos de mujeres y niños.

Debemos trabajar con el conjunto de la sociedad para terminar con los estereotipos negativos hacia el pueblo gitano, y la mejor forma es promover la integración real y efectiva, la inserción sociolaboral y el acceso a una vivienda digna y eliminar las escuelas especiales, que en algunos países todavía segregan a las niñas y a los niños gitanos y ponen en riesgo el desarrollo individual y colectivo de los más jóvenes.

Y es fundamental, en este sentido, luchar contra el antigitanismo institucionalizado, del que tenemos casos en toda Europa, en todos los países de Europa. Señalo solamente dos para terminar: los campos de gitanos en Italia y los 2 582 romaníes desalojados por las fuerzas de seguridad en Francia.

Nos queda mucho trabajo por hacer también desde las instituciones.

  Terry Reintke, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, I would like to tell you a story: a story about two brothers, two Roma brothers. They are about my age and grew up in a city very close to my home town. Their family came from Kosovo. When they were in their mid-20s they were deported from Germany back to Kosovo – from their home back to a country they almost did not know. They were separated from their families, their friends and their lives. Their names are Kefaet and Selami. They are two brothers, two very talented musicians who have now found their way back home and have expressed their hardship in rap music.

They are two among many who have faced discrimination in the European Union, but they are also two among many Roma and this is what we very often forget when we speak about the Roma who have resisted, and who have found a way to deal with this hardship and to say that they want to fight against anti—Gypsyism in our societies. Not only that, they want to fight for a better life, for civil rights for all, for their families, for prospects and for equality in our societies. They should be an inspiration to all of us, not only on International Roma Day, but every day, because they will be amongst the people who will shape our societies in the future.

Do not be mistaken: the fight against anti-Gypsyism and against discrimination is not just something that the Roma communities have to take care of. It is something that all of us have to work for because this is not only about the livelihoods and the well-being of Roma communities; this is about our democracy. This is about whether we want to live in equal societies, so this is about our future as well. I urge you, Commissioner and all my colleagues, let us stand up against any form of anti-Gypsyism in our societies and fight side by side with the Roma people for a future of equality and democracy in the European Union.

  Tim Aker, on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Madam President, this debate is about Roma, but because of the EU’s four fundamentalisms – I will not call them freedoms – it is also about migration. Your cult-like adherence to complete open borders means it has to be. The EU signed its own political death warrant when it expanded to the east and brought into the EU vastly poorer former communist countries. Using EU rules, the great migration westwards began. For the first time in British recorded history, net migration to the UK soared to over a quarter of a million and as high as a third of a million recently.

One of the communities particularly hit was in Sheffield. According to reports, the Page Hall estate received an influx of 6 000 Roma and eastern European migrants in four years. Such had been the pace of migration into the UK that the then government’s integration adviser, Dame Louise Casey, was quoted to have said whole areas have changed beyond all recognition because of a failure by government to handle mass migration.

Now no one can deny anyone the ambition to get a better deal for themselves or their families, but as elected representatives we are answerable to our constituents first and foremost. My constituents watching this know that they are my boss. Like any good employer-employee relationship, if my employers do not think I am doing a good job they will remove me. This is perhaps why UKIP has won the Thurrock local elections for three years running.

What we have seen is the EU’s top-down agenda forcing change on communities that no one voted for. Let us look at the Page Hall estate again, a whole estate transformed without any one voting for it. In fact one Labour politician – yes, Labour – warned of riots due to the levels of Roma migration into Sheffield.

The knock-on effects of uncontrolled migration across the UK have seen school class sizes increase. Families struggle to get the right school place for their children; A&E waiting times are unbelievably high; the housing waiting list puts social housing beyond the reach of many of my constituents, and the pressures are always felt hardest in working class communities.

EU policies have turned a Europe of different nations and cultures into a free-for-all. It may suit the rich and wealthy to have easy access to cheap cleaners and au pairs, but working class communities have seen their neighbourhoods change and opportunities disappear without their consent. Brexit gives us a chance to change all this. If the Conservative government betray the millions of people who voted for proper border controls they will never be forgiven. We toppled one prime minister; we can do so again.

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

  Fredrick Federley (ALDE), blue-card question. – Madam President, I must say that I am very surprised that, in this important debate, where we talk about integration, opportunities for the Roma people and in remembrance of the Holocaust, the right honourable gentleman does not, with a single word, address that situation.

What he does is take on the majority position of society and blame the Roma population of Europe. You say, Mr Aker, that they are flooding your society and you are blaming poverty on the Roma people. The Roma people have been suffering all through European history but the situation has never been better. It seems like the honourable gentleman is harking back to a situation where we could address and oppress the Roma people of Europe nationally and it was hidden because we could not address it. Today, we have an opportunity to give prosperity to all of the people of Europe. Please address that in your reply and do not continue to attack the people that are moving across borders.

  Tim Aker (EFDD), blue-card answer. – I would like to thank the honourable Member for that speech. I do not know whether the translation was a bit skew-whiff, but I actually pointed out that the British Government had no integration plan whatsoever. Because of EU policies and because of complete free movement, there was no integration plan and, because of the levels of immigration into the UK, there could not have been an integration plan because the pace of change was far too quick.

That was the point I was making, so trying to paint a picture of everything being rosy in the European Union is precisely why people are fed-up with this place. Your failure to grasp this will mean that other nation states will vote to leave.

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

  Soraya Post (S&D), fråga (“blått kort”). – Du var väldigt tydlig med att romer inte passar i ert samhälle. Jag förstår inte hur du totalt utan sunt förnuft, totalt utan skamkänsla, kan komma in och föra den debatten i detta rum, i denna fråga, tyvärr.

Min fråga till dig är: Tyckte du att det passade sig när hela ert UK koloniserade mer än halva världen?

  Tim Aker (EFDD), blue-card answer. – Madam President, I am happy to e-mail the lady my speech where she can see that she was probably listening to a completely different speech. Trying to put words in my mouth, Madam, to make cheap political points actually debases this Parliament and this Chamber, which my constituents will see.

Two-thirds of the people in Essex and three-quarters in my constituency of Thurrock voted to leave this place and your ramblings there, Madam, are precisely why they were completely correct to do so.

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

  Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE), otázka položená zvednutím modré karty. – Pane Akere, já si myslím, že možná žijete na jiné planetě a že všichni tlumočníci nedokážou tlumočit Vaše pseudorasistické řeči. Vy tvrdíte to, že migranti, kteří přišli do Velké Británie, jsou všichni kriminálníci, všichni berou Britům práci, to se nám snažíte namlouvat. A co říkáte na případ Čecha, který byl umlácený řetězem před několika týdny, a britský soud dnes tohoto stejného Brita osvobodil a řekl, že to byla nutná obrana, přestože jsme na videu všichni viděli, jak byl doslova třemi Brity umlácen? Nestydíte se za to?

  Tim Aker (EFDD), blue-card answer. – I do not think there is anything to say to that level of rubbish. Another person trying to put words in my mouth – and you carry on doing this, carry on trying to paint everything in the European Union as rosy, keep demonising people who raise legitimate concerns.

In my speech, I mentioned the fact that the British Government had no integration plan, the fact that they had not put any plans in place to be able to manage migration when the European Union expanded. These are legitimate concerns, and are concerns that led 17 million people to vote to leave the European Union.

So, carry on, Sir, as you will; we will be out of this soon enough and you can keep talking to the echo chamber.

  Die Präsidentin. – Ich möchte daran erinnern, dass der erste Satz der Grundrechtecharta lautet: „Die Würde des Menschen ist unantastbar.“ Und zwar jedes Menschen. Das ist die Grundlage für unsere Zusammenarbeit und unser Zusammenleben hier in der Europäischen Union, und danach sollten wir auch handeln. Ich bitte auch die nachfolgenden Redner und Rednerinnen, sich daran zu halten.

  Mara Bizzotto, a nome del gruppo ENF. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ho grande rispetto per tutti i popoli che sono vittime di persecuzioni e violenze, soprattutto quelli che le hanno subite nella Seconda guerra mondiale. Oggi però, dietro la bugia dell'inclusione, l'Europa spende valanghe di soldi per i rom, milioni di euro che non servono a nulla, perché l'integrazione dei rom sta praticamente a zero, perché sono loro che non vogliono integrarsi. Questi soldi vanno dati ai nostri cittadini, ai nostri disoccupati, alle nostre famiglie in difficoltà.

Venite in Italia a vedere come i rom non si sono integrati. Chiedete alle forze dell'ordine, ai sindaci, ai cittadini che hanno la sfortuna di vivere vicino ai campi rom. Leggete i giornali, guardate le televisioni, e ogni giorno troverete valanghe di notizie sui problemi e sui disagi che i nostri cittadini sono costretti a subire a causa dei rom.

E non permettetevi di dire che siamo razzisti, perché noi non lo siamo. Stiamo dicendo soltanto cose reali che succedono ogni giorno. Altro che giornata internazionale per i rom. Piuttosto bisognerebbe fare una giornata per i nostri cittadini, italiani ed europei, che sono vittime dei soprusi e dei problemi causati dai rom.

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

  Soraya Post (S&D), fråga (“blått kort”). – Du visar ju ett stort mått av brist på intelligens, empati, mänsklig värdighet. Menar du att du på den här dagen står och talar om att romerna är orsaken till den situation som vi befinner oss i idag? Menar du att du då kan sitta i den här kammaren, som du absolut inte vill tillhöra? Har du svårt att integrera dig själv i EU:s värderingar? Är det så?

  Mara Bizzotto (ENF), Risposta a una domanda "cartellino blu". – Allora, io vivo in Italia e non vivo sulla luna. E in Italia, ogni giorno, le forze dell'ordine entrano nei campi rom, regolari o irregolari. E sì, trovano bambini senza scarpe, vestiti male e senza cibo. Ma trovano accanto dei macchinoni, delle Mercedes, delle Audi, delle macchine che evidentemente sono state comprate, non so come, spero non con i fondi europei. E questa è una vergogna, questa è una grande vergogna! Punto e basta.

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

  Maria Grapini (S&D), Întrebare adresată în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru”. – Stimată colegă, mă surprinde că n-ați ascultat apelul președintei noastre privind drepturile omului și prevederile din Carta ONU.

Dvs. spuneți că romii sunt de vină că sunt în această situație. Personal, ce ați făcut, sunteți europarlamentar, ce ați făcut pentru a integra romii în Italia, pentru educația lor, pentru a putea participa la școală? Ce copil n-ar vrea să mănânce, ce mamă n-ar vrea să aibă copilul bine îmbrăcat și educat? Și mamele rome sunt tot mame, doamnă!

  Mara Bizzotto (ENF), Risposta a una domanda "cartellino blu". – I fondi europei per l'integrazione dei rom in Italia o sono stati spesi male o non sono stati spesi. Perché, come ho già detto prima, i bambini rom in Italia non vogliono andare a scuola, perché le loro famiglie li costringono a chiedere l'elemosina o a rubare. Questo non lo dico io: se volete vi leggo i giornali, anche oggi nei giornali c'è scritto questo, anche oggi c'è scritto questo. O vengono tutti in Italia, i peggiori, i più cattivi, e i buoni vengono da voi... perché questa, purtroppo, è la semplice realtà. E sfido qualsiasi parlamentare italiano a dire il contrario.

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

  György Hölvényi (PPE), blue-card question. – I have a short question. What are you doing? That is the question. That was the lady’s question. We know this, we know the stories and we can explain it, but what are we doing to improve it? What are you doing in your capacity? It is not about the European forums. What are you doing? How are you trying to fulfil the European Union’s Roma strategy for 2012? That is the question. Please give a short answer.

  Mara Bizzotto (ENF), Risposta a una domanda "cartellino blu". – Io, appena arrivata nel 2009 qui al Parlamento europeo, ho chiesto quanti soldi sono stati spesi per i rom, perché non riuscivo a capire dove fossero stati spesi in Italia, perché purtroppo i soldi per i rom e l'integrazione non hanno funzionato. Ma perché non vogliono loro integrarsi con noi. Questo succede in Italia purtroppo, questo succede in Italia. Vi inviterei, quando volete, a venire con me nei campi rom, ovviamente accompagnati dalle forze dell'ordine, perché da soli è impossibile.

  Die Präsidentin. – Ich war jetzt großzügig mit den blauen Karten, weil es noch die Sprecherinnen und Sprecher der Fraktionen waren. Ich werde allerdings ab jetzt nur noch eine blaue Karte pro Redner und pro Rednerin zulassen, weil ich auch ein bisschen auf die Uhr schauen muss. Ich habe es allerdings jetzt laufen lassen, weil das eine sehr wichtige Debatte ist und auch sichtbar gemacht wird, wie die Positionen der Einzelnen sind.

  Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já si myslím, že tato debata ukazuje, jak je potřeba si tento Romský den prostě připomínat. Já, než jsem se stal poslancem EU a než jsem vlastně i začal pracovat, tak jsem čtyři roky pracoval jako streetworker a pracoval jsem s Romy. Je zajímavé vidět, jak se jejich kultura a jak se jejich soužití s tou majoritní skupinou v české společnosti výrazným způsobem mění.

Romové jsou jiní a o tom je tato debata. My si musíme připomínat tuto jinakost. Paní předřečnice tady říkala, jaké mají Romové problémy. Ano, můžeme říci, že Romové berou drogy. Možná dělají kriminalitu, ale proč ji dělají? To je ta základní otázka. A základní otázka je: Jak to můžeme změnit?

V Evropské unii žije několik milionů Romů, možná víc než některých národností, které mají zastoupení v Evropském parlamentu. Ale nemají svůj hlas. Kolik poslanců EP je tady romské národnosti? Kolik lidí z romské komunity se tady prosadilo? Kolik lidí z romské komunity má schopnost studovat? Můžeme tady nadávat a ukazovat příklady toho, že někdo má Mercedes a někdo prostě nechává děti běhat po ulici. Ale proč neukážeme příklady také těch Romů, kteří pracují jako policisté, právníci, lékaři, kteří chodí třeba v Itálii otírat zadky italským důchodcům v normální majoritní bílé společnosti. Proč tento příklad také nezmíníte? A to je moje otázka.

Slyšeli jsme tady od kolegy z Velké Británie, co Romové způsobili za problémy ve Velké Británii. Ale proč kolega z Velké Británie nehovoří o Romech, kteří jsou normálně zapojeni do pracovního procesu a kteří tvoří britskou společnost?

  Péter Niedermüller (S&D). – Elnök asszony! Szégyenkezve kell beismernünk: ma Európában nem jó romának lenni. Roma honfitársaink, akik ugyanolyan jogú polgárai az Európai Uniónak, mint bármelyikünk ebben a teremben, mindennapi életükben állandó és folyamatos diszkriminációval szembesülnek. Oktatási szegregáció, kényszer-kitelepítések, hátrányos megkülönböztetés a munkaerőpiacon és az egészségügyi ellátásban. Az európai keretstratégia számos nyilatkozat, állásfoglalás és konferencia ellenére a romák helyzete Európában, az utóbbi években lényegében semmit nem változott.

Éppen ezért nem további vitákra, hanem politikai szándékra és határozott cselekvésre van szükség Európában mindenütt. A cigánytelepek felszámolására, minőségi, esélyteremtő oktatásra, ösztöndíjakra, szociális gondozásra, munkahelyteremtésre, képzési programokra, és mindenek előtt világos és kemény fellépésre a rasszizmussal, a cigányellenességgel és a diszkriminációval szemben.

  Marina Albiol Guzmán (GUE/NGL). – Señora presidenta, el antigitanismo es un problema de primer orden en la Unión Europea. Las gitanas y los gitanos constituyen la minoría más grande del continente, y hay autoridades e instituciones que tienen unas políticas de discriminación sistemática hacia ella.

A día de hoy, hay Estados de la Unión como Hungría que, con un Gobierno del Partido Popular Europeo, segregan en escuelas diferenciadas al alumnado gitano. En la Unión Europea existen casos de discriminación y segregación en otros sectores, como la sanidad o el acceso a la vivienda.

Las medidas de austeridad se imponen a fuego sobre los pueblos de la Unión Europea. En cambio, el principio de igualdad que está recogido en todos los Tratados de la Unión es ignorado, y los Estados discriminan sin que la Unión Europea haga absolutamente nada.

Y es que se trata de una discriminación sistémica que hace que, en el Estado español, solo el 15 % de gitanas y gitanos finalicen la educación obligatoria, que tengan una tasa de paro casi diez puntos superior a la media, o que uno de cada diez habite en viviendas sin las condiciones mínimas de habitabilidad. Esto es consecuencia directa de la pobreza y del estigma asociado a una población constantemente ignorada e invisibilizada.

Lo que no se nombra no existe, y por eso es fundamental el reconocimiento integral de la identidad y la historia gitanas. Hemos trabajado para la creación de este día europeo de conmemoración del holocausto gitano. Pero, sin embargo, nos tememos que vuelva a ser solo una cuestión cosmética: cuando escuchamos a diputados y diputadas de los mismos partidos que segregan a niños y a niñas en Hungría o en Eslovaquia decir que apoyan estas iniciativas, la verdad es que quedan bastante vacías de reivindicación.

  Bodil Valero (Verts/ALE). – Fru talman! Vi är ju mitt uppe i årets romavecka, och det kan tyckas konstigt att vi behöver en sådan. Men för ett folk utan eget land, utan en stat, under sekler drabbat av diskriminering och förföljelser, är det tur att vi åtminstone kommit dithän att vi under en veckas tid uppmärksammar romer och den romska kulturen runt om i världen. I gröna gruppen har vi inför årets romavecka tagit fram en publikation, där vi ur olika perspektiv och från olika länder analyserar dagens situation och vad vi kan göra för att motverka antiziganismen i Europa. Den går att få av oss.

Vad är det som gör att romer fortfarande är så stigmatiserade, och hur kan det komma sig att våra majoritetssamhällen accepterar att en folkgrupp, som funnits i våra länder sedan många hundra år tillbaka, fortfarande särbehandlas och diskrimineras? För att förstå måste vi ta oss många hundra år tillbaka.

Vi vet att romer redan på 1300-talet i vissa länder i Europa förslavades och såldes eller byttes på auktioner. Slaveriet som sådant upplöstes inte förrän på 1860-talet, men levde i praktiken kvar i flera decennier till. De här vanföreställningarna, som vi har hört om här tidigare, är fortfarande djupt rotade i Europa, i så gott som varje land. Vi lär oss redan som barn att tro att romer själva väljer att stå utanför våra samhällen, att de inte vill delta, som vi hörde här nyss, i samhällets gemensamma aktiviteter. Samtidigt har våra beslutsfattande stiftat lag efter lag i land efter land mot romer. Det stiftades inte bara assimilationslagar som syftade till att bannlysa eller fängsla dem, utan även lagar som gav vem som helst rätten att ta livet av en rom genom hängning eller på andra sätt, främst män. Det är dags att vi i majoriteten tar ansvar för våra egna handlingar och ändrar våra attityder. Då kan vi komma vidare.

  Angelo Ciocca (ENF). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, stamattina mi sarei aspettato di vedere impegnata quest'Aula parlamentare – 751 parlamentari pagati dai cittadini europei, e non so quanti pagati dalle comunità rom – per lavorare su azioni concrete sui veri problemi dei nostri cittadini europei, sui veri fragili della nostra Europa. Mi sarei aspettato di parlare di anziani, mi sarei aspettato di parlare di disabili, mi sarei aspettato di parlare di disoccupati, di giovani o dei veri problemi di questa Europa, ad esempio la sicurezza: in Italia abbiamo un furto in abitazione ogni due minuti. Di questo mi sarei aspettato di parlare.

E invece siamo qui a parlare di finte vittime, di finti problemi, e così facendo non siamo sicuramente credibili e seri. Abbiamo una visione strabica: guardiamo qual è l'effetto ma non guardiamo qual è la causa. Non guardiamo quello che i cittadini italiani, ad esempio, si chiedono: che lavoro fanno i rom? Di cosa vivono i rom? Come pagano le nuove roulotte di nuova generazione, le auto? Dove finiscono i soldi pubblici per pagare l'acqua o la luce dei campi rom? Perché dobbiamo avere 124 campi rom abusivi in Italia su 167? Perché i bambini di queste comunità non hanno il diritto di andare a scuola? Perché, chi sta dietro all'accattonaggio e allo sfruttamento di questi minori?

Ecco, di questo avremmo voluto parlare, del problema che su 2 400 minori in Italia che percorrono una difficoltà giudiziaria, 1 500 sono minori rom. Di questo avremmo voluto parlare con voi.

  Die Präsidentin. – Erstens möchte ich Sie vielleicht daran erinnern – und das wissen Sie sehr gut –, dass parallel zu den Sitzungen des Plenums viele andere Sitzungen stattfinden, an denen unsere Kollegen und Kolleginnen teilnehmen. Das wissen Sie sehr gut, und das geschieht Ihnen auch immer wieder, dass Sie nicht den ganzen Tag im Plenum sitzen. Das geht schlicht und einfach nicht, wenn man seine Arbeit ordentlich macht.

Zweitens habe ich jetzt beschlossen, dass ich ab jetzt keine blaue Karte mehr zulasse, weil hier gerade etwas geschieht, was nicht gut ist für das Ansehen des Europäischen Parlaments. Wenn wir merken, wie hier Diskriminierung in den Äußerungen gang und gäbe wird, kann ich das nicht akzeptieren.

  Iratxe García Pérez (S&D). – Señora presidenta, las gitanas y los gitanos son ciudadanos de pleno derecho de la Unión Europea, poseen rasgos culturales propios y comparten una identidad común, lo cual no le resta nada a su ciudadanía, sino más bien al contrario: supone una riqueza para nuestra sociedad.

Y hemos conseguido avances en el ámbito de lo social, del acceso a la educación, al mercado laboral, pero todavía queda mucho por hacer y, hoy, intervenciones que hemos escuchado aquí nos dan claramente ese mensaje.

Hay que luchar contra los estereotipos, contra aquellos estereotipos que atribuyen a una parte de la población ciertos comportamientos. Es inaceptable, es vergonzoso escuchar a eurodiputados y a eurodiputadas decir que la población gitana es la que está robando, es la que está generando conflictos. Pregúntense y pregunten a la ciudadanía quiénes piensan que son los verdaderos ladrones de su país.

Creo que es inaceptable, que tenemos que luchar contra los estereotipos, que hay que avanzar juntos, trabajar juntos por la inclusión social y luchar contra mensajes de odio como los que hemos tenido que escuchar esta mañana en este Parlamento.

  Lynn Boylan (GUE/NGL). – Madam President, I welcome the opportunity, unlike my Italian colleague across the floor, to mark International Roma Day and to recognise the culture and tradition of Europe’s largest ethnic minority community.

Eight million Roma live within the European Union, and while the EU has developed a framework, we all know that the situation continues to be awful for the Roma community. For years the Roma community have been victims of forced assimilation. Their time-honoured culture and traditions were eroded and the cohesiveness of their communities were shattered.

We also must never forget that half a million Roma were killed by the Nazis during the Holocaust. We all must work together if we want to realise the aims of the framework and to break down the prejudices that do exist towards their community. We must work to build trust among the community for the institutions within the various Member States. Is it any wonder that children do not go to school when they are faced with attitudes like those we have heard today, on a day-to-day basis?

In Ireland, two children were taken from their parents by the police. Why? Because they were blond and they could not possibly belong to the Roma family. So is it any wonder that there is no trust within the Roma community for the institutions?

It is not okay that in 2017, members of the largest minority in the EU are still more likely to die early, to be illiterate and to live in squalor than the rest of the population.

  Silvia Costa (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, di fronte alla situazione evidente, che ci dimostrano anche le statistiche, con il 10 % dei bambini rom che non raggiungono le scuole superiori, con una concentrazione di discriminazioni e di povertà, nessuno di noi è in grado di dire che oggi siamo all'altezza della sfida di questa giornata. Non ho bisogno di qualche collega che con atteggiamenti assurdi e inaccettabili lo dica in questi termini, che non sono degni, secondo me, di questa discussione.

Però credo che sappiamo una cosa: c'è un impegno della Commissione, ci sono strategie nazionali che dobbiamo certamente verificare, anche nell'utilizzo dei fondi europei, e ci sono esperienze molto interessanti di inclusione, per esempio un progetto pilota che conosco che in Romania ha ottenuto un risultato molto interessante per quanto riguarda l'inclusione educativa.

Io ho fatto l'assessore regionale nella mia regione e ho capito alcune cose. Primo: l'azione dev'essere fatta sicuramente sul fronte dell'antidiscriminazione e sul piano giuridico, ma non si ha una desegregazione se non ci sono alcune misure. Primo: coinvolgere le famiglie (con borse di studio che vengono date ai ragazzi e che coinvolgono le famiglie nella responsabilità, si ottengono dei risultati incredibili); il coinvolgimento delle associazioni rom e delle associazioni laiche o religiose che si occupano in modo molto proattivo di loro; misure anche di sostegno nonché mediatori culturali e insegnanti che abbiano una capacità di didattica interculturale.

Certamente la strada è lunga. Non mi pare però che la Lega in Italia sia molto impegnata per questo.

  Julie Ward (S&D). – Madam President, in my north-west England constituency, there is a significant population of Roma in both rural and urban areas. For example, the annual Appleby Horse Fair in Cumbria has become one of the most celebrated Romany festivals in Europe, filmed, photographed and featuring in tourism guides. On the other hand, public perceptions of Roma are still based on disinformation.

Last year’s referendum campaign unleashed a new wave of increased hate towards ethnic minorities, with Roma communities being particularly targeted. A Roma community development worker in Manchester told me that on 24 June 2016 – the day after the referendum – a group of Roma children who used to play in a public park had disappeared from public view overnight, frightened by the rampant, unpleasant public mood towards people of different nationalities and ethnic backgrounds. Brexit has turned my country into a shameful, intolerant place and the Roma were sadly amongst the first victims. The Brexiteers, UKIP, the Conservative Government and the right-wing press must take responsibility for whipping up hatred on a scale not seen for decades. But on Roma Day, let us find ways of addressing the issue...

(The President cut off the speaker)

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D) – Vážená pani predsedajúca, od roku 2004, odkedy som poslankyňou Európskeho parlamentu, sa problematikou Rómov naša politická frakcia veľmi dôsledne zaujíma. Mali sme a máme vytvorené dokonca pracovné skupiny, ktoré pripravujú nielen misie do krajín, kde sa stretávame s rómskou komunitou, ale ktoré pripravujú aj konkrétne podnety a návrhy, ako by sme mohli pomôcť rómskej komunite.

Ja sama som ešte ako poslankyňa národného parlamentu bola vo veľmi úzkom kontakte s rómskou komunitou a musím povedať, že za celé tie roky sa podarilo urobiť aj kus dobrej práce – aby sme tu v deň, keď oslavujeme Deň Rómov, nehovorili len o tých slabších miestach. Pravdou však je, a to je úloha pre Komisiu, že bolo vynaložené množstvo peňazí nato, aby sa podarilo rómsku populáciu integrovať a aby sa podarilo vzdelávať rómske deti. A teda moja otázka pre vás, pán komisár, je: ako Komisia kontroluje, akým spôsobom boli tieto finančné prostriedky vynaložené, pretože v mnohých prípadoch sa preukázalo, že tie prostriedky boli nejako zdefraudované alebo neboli vynaložené na ten účel, na ktorý slúžiť mali.

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, Europa tiene mucho que recordar y reconocer para reconciliarse plenamente con su minoría perseguida más numerosa junto con la judía, víctima también la comunidad romaní del holocausto, pero sobre todo víctima de los discursos del odio, cargados de prejuicios, que hemos tenido que escuchar aquí, avergonzando a esta Cámara, por parte de eurodiputados de la extrema derecha populista.

Este Parlamento es el templo de la palabra y no puede ser ensuciado con esas palabras infames que intentan estigmatizar a toda una comunidad que es parte de la diversidad cultural y étnica que enriquece la fábrica de complejidad y de diversidad que es la Unión Europea.

Este Parlamento adoptó, el 15 de abril de 2015, una Resolución que compromete a la Comisión para que intente comprometer también a los Estados miembros en las buenas prácticas de integración de la comunidad romaní, que las hay en la Unión Europea, por ejemplo en mi país, España.

Pero lo que es fundamental es que de esas palabras se pase por fin a los hechos y que hagamos de la comunidad romaní un ejemplo no solamente de autocrítica, sino de aprendizaje permanente del compromiso de Europa con la promesa de la Unión Europea.

  Branislav Škripek (ECR) – Vážená pani predsedajúca, Rómovia patria k najpočetnejšej a stále nehomogénnej menšine žijúcej už dlhé stovky rokov v Európe. S nesmiernym zahanbením musím skonštatovať, že mnohí Rómovia ešte dnes v 21. storočí aj u nás na Slovensku žijú v enklávach bez dostupnej pitnej vody, elektriny či asfaltových ciest. Žijú v absolútnej chudobe bez možnosti akejkoľvek zmeny. Eurofondy, ktoré mali Rómom pomôcť, sa stávajú predmetom korupcie či neefektívneho využívania, čoho sme znovu svedkom u nás na Slovensku, a prispieva to len k väčšej segregácii. Je nutné si dnes pripomínať také historické fakty, akým je rómsky holokaust. Ale rovnako dôležité je dnes pomôcť Rómom, a to dvomi spôsobmi – aspoň tak to vidím: v prvom rade vybudovať predškolské zariadenia, kde si deti osvoja návyky a schopnosti, ktoré ich nenaučili ich rodičia. A tiež pomôcť Rómom sa rekvalifikovať na remeslá alebo pracovníkov v automobilovom priemysle, ktorých je nedostatok. Práca a spravodlivá mzda zabezpečia dôstojnejšie podmienky pre ich život a prinavrátia nádej, ktorú mnohí z nich už stratili.

Rovnako by som však chcel povedať, povedať to nahlas a poďakovať sa všetkým Rómom, ktorí dosiahli veľmi veľa a málo o tom vieme hovoriť: že sú to ľudia, ktorí sa pohybujú vo vedeckej oblasti, že sú to lekári, že sú to učitelia, že sú to univerzitní profesori. Na Slovensku máme prvého Róma v parlamente, ktorý pôsobil ako poslanec Národnej rady. Takže ďakujem všetkým, ktorí sa snažia a niečo dosiahli.

  Die Präsidentin. – Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben etwas Zeitverzug durch die doch recht lebendige Debatte, die wir hier gehabt haben. Deswegen werde ich beim nun folgenden Catch-the-eye-Verfahren nur denjenigen das Wort geben, die heute noch nicht die Gelegenheit hatten, sich zu äußern. Ich bitte die anderen darum, dafür Verständnis zu haben, denn sonst kommen wir bei den vielen vorliegenden Wortmeldungen nicht mehr zu Rande.

Catch-the-eye-Verfahren

  Csaba Sógor (PPE). – Elnök asszony! Örvendetesnek tartom, hogy az elmúlt években a romák helyzete az EU figyelmének központjába került és 2013-ban olyan tanácsi ajánlás került elfogadásra, amely nemzeti romaintegrációs stratégiák kidolgozására kötelezi a tagállamokat. Üdvözlendő, hogy a 2015-ös bizottsági felülvizsgálat egyértelmű javulást állapított meg a jelenlegi romaintegrációs stratégiák és az uniós eszközök összhangja között.

Számos országban azonban a meglevő keretek és intézkedések ellenére a romák továbbra is a hátrányos megkülönböztetés, marginalizáció és szegregáció elszenvedői. Romániában, ahol leginkább a korai iskolaelhagyók arányának csökkentése irányába történtek intézkedések, a legtöbb roma továbbra is halmozottan hátrányos helyzetben van, és igen nagy részük továbbra is kirekesztettségben és mélyszegénységben él. Éppen ezért további, következetes lépések megtételét látom szükségesnek a kitörési lehetőségek javítása, illetve a szegénység és kirekesztődés generációk közötti átadásának megszüntetése érdekében.

  Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la giornata internazionale dedicata al popolo rom e alla lotta contro l'antiziganismo è una data simbolica, come simbolica è la commemorazione del genocidio perpetrato ai danni dei rom durante la seconda guerra mondiale. Sono tuttavia simboli che servono a mantenere unita ed accogliente la società europea, dove l'emarginazione dei rom si manifesta in molti modi, dai fenomeni di ostracismo, quando non di aperta violenza, a un razzismo istituzionalizzato e pericoloso, incoraggiato da politici a caccia di voti.

La verità è che quella zigana è una cultura non facile da integrare, perché è fondata su uno stile di vita molto differente dal nostro, antico e a suo modo unico. È una cultura che ha molto da offrire all'Europa, una cultura che dà un grande valore ai legami familiari, al senso di appartenenza alla comunità e alla solidarietà. C'è ancora tanto da fare per una piena integrazione che vada oltre la celebrazione delle giornate commemorative. Occorre innanzitutto una vera presa di coscienza delle istituzioni.

  Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, με την ευκαιρία της 8ης Απριλίου, της Παγκόσμιας Ημέρας που είναι αφιερωμένη στους ανά τον κόσμο Ρομά, ξαναφέρνουμε στο μυαλό μας τους διωγμούς και τον κοινωνικό και φυλετικό ρατσισμό που υπέστησαν διαχρονικά οι Ρομά, καθώς τότε τους θεωρούσαν ως δήθεν κατώτερα όντα και παρείσακτους. Οι κρατήσεις και οι διώξεις των Ρομά, οι οποίες διήρκεσαν πολλούς αιώνες, κλιμακώθηκαν μετά το 1938. Κατά τον δεύτερο παγκόσμιο πόλεμο, οι Ρομά έγιναν στόχος εξόντωσης και γενοκτονίας από τους Γερμανούς Ναζί. Υπολογίζεται ότι οι θάνατοι των Ρομά κατά τη διάρκεια του ολοκαυτώματος προσέγγισαν το 70 % του συνολικού τους πληθυσμού στην Ευρώπη.

Ωστόσο, το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο αναγνώρισε τη γενοκτονία των Ρομά μόλις το 2011. Σε κάθε περίπτωση, η διασφάλιση πόρων προκειμένου να υπάρξει ομαλή ενσωμάτωση των Ρομά, ιδίως στην εκπαίδευση, την κατάρτιση και την απασχόληση, είναι κάτι το πολύ σημαντικό.

  Ivo Vajgl (ALDE). – Naš veliki pesnik Prešeren je enkrat napisal eno pesem, v kateri je rekel: Kaj učil boš cvesti veje, le ne uči pevcev peti!

Jaz mislim, da k tej današnji razpravi sodi tudi priznanje Romom za njihov neprecenljivi delež in prispevek k svetovni kulturni dediščini. Mislim, da jih moramo spoštovati zato, ker so tako ustvarjalni prišli na svet in živijo z nami.

In mogoče je današnji dan priložnost, da se jim tudi opravičimo za vse krivice, ki so jih doživeli zaradi svojega načina življenja.

  Milan Zver (PPE). – Kot bivši minister za izobraževanje se čutim dolžnega, da ob svetovnem dnevu Romov tudi sam spregovorim besedo, dve.

Najprej bi seveda rad čestital vsem pripadnikom romske etnične skupine, ki je dejansko, kot je povedal že kolega Vajgl, odigrala pomembno vlogo tudi v evropski zgodovini in ima svoje mesto v kulturni dediščini.

Ampak v tej razpravi danes bi bolj pričakoval, da bi si izmenjavali dobre prakse, kakšen tretma ima kakšna vlada do njih.

Moja vlada je imela do njih izjemno pozitiven tretma, veliko je bilo inovativnega, sprejeli smo, recimo, koncept „romski mentor”, ki je predpostavljal, da se izbere izmed Romov nekaj ljudi, ki skrbijo za to, da se otroci udeležujejo vzgojno-izobraževalnega procesa.

In ta inštitucija je bila izjemno uspešna, učinkovita in bi lahko bila primerna tudi za izmenjavo dobrih praks, kar se tiče romskih politik.

(Ende des Catch-the-eye-Verfahrens)

  György Hölvényi (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin! Ich sage das auf Ihrer Muttersprache jetzt, weil das absolut diskriminierend ist, was Sie gemacht haben. Ich habe mich gemeldet mit einer kurzen Frage zur „blauen Karte“, und alle, die später gekommen sind und sich von der linken Seite ganz spontan angemeldet haben, haben Sie angenommen, und mir haben Sie nicht erlaubt zu sprechen. Ich finde, das ist schrecklich. Schade, denn das ist absolut gegen diese Sache, die wir heute versuchen zu machen.

  Die Präsidentin. – Herr Hölvényi, das hat nicht nur Sie getroffen. Aber ich muss auf die Uhr schauen. Ich habe gesagt, dass nur noch diejenigen zu Wort kommen, die noch nicht gesprochen haben. Es haben sich auch andere gemeldet, die auch schon eine Zwischenfrage gestellt hatten, die nicht zu Wort gekommen sind. Deswegen ist es keine Diskriminierung Ihrer Person, sondern schlicht und einfach der Versuch, ein bisschen Ordnung in die Debatte hineinzubringen. Es tut mir Leid, wenn Sie sich so betroffen fühlen.

  Neven Mimica, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, the path ahead of us is still a long one until we see Roma treated like any other EU citizen. The change will not happen overnight, but we must not let them stop us. We have to keep steady on course with our fundamental values. The Commission will continue to work closely and to engage in dialogue with all the relevant stakeholders, including the representatives of the Roma people and pro-Roma civil society organisations. We need to ensure that all actors involved in the fight against anti-Gypsyism are supported, including by strengthening financial and policy support to civil society and national authorities. Thank you.

  Soraya Post (S&D). – En ordningsfråga. Jag skulle vilja börja med att tacka kollegor som har varit med i debatten, men jag söker också ert stöd för att vi skriver till talman Tajani och berättar om och kräver sanktioner mot det hattal och den diskriminerande debatt som fördes av vissa ledamöter idag. Det är oacceptabelt. Jag tackar ordföranden för det sätt ni hanterade det på. Jag tycker det var bra.

  Die Präsidentin. – Dankeschön, Frau Post. Ich hatte sowieso vor, das auch im Präsidium zur Sprache zu bringen, weil das wirklich weitreichende Äußerungen waren. Aber danke, dass Sie das hier noch einmal gesagt haben.

Ich bedanke mich für diese Debatte, die äußerst wichtig war. Und tatsächlich ist auch jeder Mensch für seine Äußerungen verantwortlich, kann aber auch, wenn es überzogen ist, zur Verantwortung gezogen werden. Das werden wir dann noch prüfen.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 162 GO)

  Maria Grapini (S&D), în scris. – Toți oamenii trebuie să se bucure de aceleași drepturi, libertăți și tratament. Romii sunt o minoritate ca oricare altă minoritate și nu ar trebui să se mai facă diferența nici între minorități, nici între acestea și majoritatea populației.

Personal, cred că avem nevoie de legi adecvate și de aplicare corectă. Romii au anumite vocații și trebuie ajutați. Cred că nu putem pune capăt segregării atât timp cât programele finanțate de la UE sau din bugetele naționale sunt formale și atât timp cât avem segregare prin lege.

De exemplu, sunt partide înființate pe criteriul etniei, ceea ce face să accentueze segregarea. Eu pledez pentru o lege care să nu permită înființarea unui partid pe criteriul etniei, oricare ar fi. Cetățenii unei țări pot fi membri ai unui partid și pot fi aleși.

Educația este deficitară. Etnia romă trebuie inclusă în forma de școlarizare comună cu majoritatea populației, nu separat. Eu am votat și am susținut cetățenii romi pentru parlamentul național și pentru cel european. România are cetățeni de etnie romă și în parlamentul național și în cel european.

  György Hölvényi (PPE), írásban. – Hölgyeim és Uraim, engedjék meg, hogy emlékeztessem Önöket, hogy Magyarország elsőként nézett szembe a romák társadalmi problémáival és dolgozott ki hosszú távú stratégiát. Ennek részeként, 2012-ben került be a nemzeti alaptantervbe a roma kultúra és történelem oktatása. A roma lányok iskolaelhagyásának megelőzésére létrehozott program két évvel ezelőtt. A roma nők foglalkoztatásának növelését szolgáló program során több mint 1100 roma nő szerzett szakképesítést, s emellett 12 %-kal nőtt a roma származású nők foglalkoztatottsága, illetve a kormány pályázatot hozott létre roma kulturálisesemények támogatására. Azt gondolom, hogy a magyar sikerek önmagukért beszélnek, s követendő példával járnak elől.

  Verónica Lope Fontagné (PPE), por escrito. – Todos los europeos hemos nacido con los mismos derechos y, por lo tanto, debemos luchar contra cualquier tipo de discriminación, incluidos los motivos de origen étnico.

La comunidad romaní sufre una tasa de exclusión del empleo superior al 75 %, lo que hace completamente necesaria la correcta implementación de la Directiva de igualdad de trato en materia de empleo, así como el refuerzo del papel de las ONG especializadas para fomentar su participación en el mercado laboral, facilitar información sobre sus derechos y mejorar la recogida de datos relativos a la discriminación, ya que en muchos casos la falta de confianza hace que no se presente denuncia alguna.

Sin embargo, en mi opinión, la prioridad tiene que ser la educación y la formación. Garantizar la escolarización infantil, en primer lugar, y evitar el abandono escolar, en segundo lugar, son requisitos básicos, ya que no solo mejoran las perspectivas laborales, sino que también contribuyen a una mayor participación en la sociedad, lo que reduce en última instancia la pobreza y la exclusión social.

Por último, y para conseguir una mayor integración de la comunidad romaní en la sociedad y contribuir así a acabar con la discriminación, tenemos que apoyar el acceso a una vivienda digna.

  Laurenţiu Rebega (ENF), în scris. – Salut Ziua internațională a romilor și urez acestui vechi popor să-și regăsească demnitatea și mândria printre popoarele europene. Salut, de asemenea, inițiativa colegilor europarlamentari de a adresa Comisiei și Consiliului trei întrebări referitoare la măsurile luate la nivel european privind incluziunea romilor și combaterea discriminării la adresa acestora.

Dar, când vorbim de integrare, trebuie să subliniem că e nevoie de efortul ambelor părți. Sunt convins că și majoritarii, și instituțiile statelor membre, și instituțiile europene pot și trebuie să facă mai mult pentru integrarea romilor și combaterea discriminării. Dar, chiar dacă majoritarii și instituțiile statelor ar deveni, peste noapte, ideale, condiția romilor nu va putea fi îmbunătățită fără un efort susținut de responsabilizare și autoeducare din partea acestora.

Aș vrea să existe organizații rome mai multe, mai active, mai responsabile, care să se implice în educația, în integrarea și în propășirea romilor. Aș vrea ca tot mai mulți dintre romi, și mai ales dintre liderii acestora, să urmeze îndemnul lui John Fitzgerald Kennedy: „Nu te gândi la ce poate face țara pentru tine, gândește-te la ce poți face tu pentru țară!”

Egalitatea sau nediscriminarea se afirmă prin legi, dar prestigiul și respectul se câștigă doar prin efortul propriu.

  Monika Smolková (S&D), písomne – Medzinárodný deň Rómov je vhodnou príležitosťou pre nás všetkých, aby sme si pripomenuli, že Rómovia sú neoddeliteľnou súčasťou európskych krajín už po stáročia. Som rada, že každý rok si 8. apríla pripomíname výročie prvého celosvetového stretnutia Rómov, ktoré sa konalo v Orpingtone pri Londýne v roku 1971. Aj keď ich odlišný spôsob života, zakorenené stereotypy a predsudky ešte stále vytvárajú medzi majoritnými populáciami a Rómami určité napätie, myslím si, že Deň Rómov by sme mali vnímať ako vhodnú príležitosť na zlepšovanie vzťahov medzi majoritou a rómskym obyvateľstvom. Ako človek pochádzajúci zo Slovenska z košického regiónu, kde žije najviac Rómov na Slovensku, chcem upriamiť vašu pozornosť na to, že napriek niektorým nezhodám, sa viacerí rómski predstavitelia v rómskych komunitách angažujú ako dobrovoľníci v cirkevných a neziskových organizáciách, pracujú ako terénni sociálni pracovníci, asistenti učiteľov a nemôžem opomenúť ani to, že niektorí Rómovia sú aj starostami obcí a poslancami obecných zastupiteľstiev. Napriek tomu, že rómska problematika je nesmierne ťažká a aj na Slovensku je dlhoročným problémom, musím povedať, že v košickom regióne máme úspešné materské školy, základné školy, komunitné centrá, obecné podniky, ktoré odvádzajú kvalitnú prácu s rómskymi komunitami. Chcem touto cestou poďakovať všetkým Rómom za doterajšiu spoluprácu a k ich sviatku im do ďalšieho obdobia popriať veľa úspechov.

4. Débats sur des cas de violation des droits de l'homme, de la démocratie et de l'État de droit (débat)

4.1. Russie, l'arrestation d'Alexeï Navalny et d'autres manifestants

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über sechs Entschließungsanträge zu Russland, der Festnahme von Alexei Nawalny und anderen Demonstranten (2017/2646(RSP)).

  Charles Tannock, author. – Madam President, our thoughts and condolences are with the victims and families of the atrocious terrorist attack in the St Petersburg metro this week. Nevertheless, we cannot allow this to silence our condemnation of President Putin, his leadership and foreign policy, particularly aggression regarding Ukraine and Syria. Following the revelations of corruption against Prime Minister Medvedev in a video published by Alexei Navalny last month, we saw a wave of protest against the government, largely from a new generation of Russians that wish for a better, and better governed, future for their country. The large number of arrests, including Navalny himself, reminds us all that presidential elections are looming next year.

I encourage the European Union to continue to press for the release of Navalny and to keep up the political pressure in the Council of Europe in response to the trumped-up convictions we have seen levelled against Navalny in Russia, largely aimed at preventing him from standing in the presidential elections next year. We are yet to see the exact response from the Kremlin following these protests and the attacks this week, but past experience suggests to me that political capital will be sought by President Putin from this.

  Soraya Post, author. – Madam President, Putin influenced the American election. He crushed opposition at home, silenced dissent. Putin had conquered Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine. His popularity sky-rocketed. Everyone thought he was untouchable. Then came March 2017, totally unexpected.

They used to call them the Putin Youth, young Russians who had grown up with him in power. They used to say that these youngsters only cared about their iPhones, then came March 2017. Beware, Mr Putin. You need to respect your Constitution. You need to release your political prisoners, or March 2017 will be another winter month which goes down in Russian history.

  Helmut Scholz, Verfasser. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In tiefer Anteilnahme verneigen wir uns vor den Opfern und Angehörigen des Terroranschlags von Sankt Petersburg. Es ist Grundkonsens im Europäischen Parlament, dass kein politisches Ziel und kein Recht die Tötung eines anderen Menschen legitimiert. Und in diesen schweren Stunden für das russische Volk schlage ich vor, die Abstimmung als Zeichen des Mitgefühls für heute auszusetzen.

Zwei Bemerkungen in der Sache: Erstens: Bei aller aus Sicht auch unserer Fraktion notwendigen Kritik an den gesellschaftlichen und Lebensverhältnissen in Russland, bei allen gegenwärtig laufenden Eskalationen – am Ende bleibt die Russische Föderation ein Nachbar, und nachhaltige Lösungen für internationale Probleme ohne und gegen Russland wird es nicht geben.

Das Parlament hat sich in Bezug auf Russland mit dem Rücken an die Wand gestellt, indem es unsere Kanäle der Kommunikation eingefroren hat. Der Entschließungsentwurf fordert in Artikel 13 vom Rat eine gemeinsame Stimme der EU gegenüber Russland. Ich schlage vor, bei uns damit anzufangen. Ohne Probleme kann die Konferenz der Präsidenten jetzt und heute die entsprechende Entscheidung wieder aufheben und die gegenwärtig eh stattfindenden zahlreichen „Privatreisen“ von Abgeordneten wieder zu einem parlamentarischen Dialog bündeln.

Zweitens: Menschenrechte sind überall unteilbar und gehören umgesetzt, gerade wenn man sich selbst dazu verpflichtet. Ich möchte aus keinem Land der Welt Bilder von Demonstrierenden sehen, die weggeschleppt werden, als bringe man Müll zum Recyclinghof. Auch diese Bilder aus Moskau erzählen uns etwas über die Achtung der Menschenwürde, über die Verhältnismäßigkeit des Einsatzes von Polizei und auch über die Länge noch bevorstehender Wege.

Ich meine: Jawohl, Korruption muss bekämpft werden, bei uns, in unserer Nachbarschaft und natürlich auch bei den Nachbarn unserer Nachbarn.

  Indrek Tarand, author. – Madam President, it seems to be another day on which we compete in this plenary Chamber on who articulates better phrases on Russian human rights, and as we hear there will be others who try to convince the House that the urgency must be adjourned. For me it is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. If something is urgent we cannot adjourn it.

It is about time to stop believing in delusions such as that Russia is a democracy. It has never been one, with the exception of six months exactly 100 years ago, after the February Revolution. After that the Bolsheviks took over, and under their enlightened leadership 50 million people were killed. Mr Putin’s educational background is Bolshevist, even worse he was a KGB officer, and it is pointless to believe or hope that he has even the slightest desire to develop democracy in his country.

Let me cite you one example to show that the Bolshevist manners have survived in this country, unfortunately. When I was 16 there was an anti-Soviet demonstration in Tallinn which was obviously declared illegal by the Soviets, and their militia was commanded to attack us. We were beaten up quite severely, but we survived, thanks to help from Western countries, the European Union, the American Government, etc. And later they sent commissars to school to explain that the youth had protested because they were promised US dollars. Mr Peshkov explained it 40 years later in the same way. Shame!

  Petras Auštrevičius, author. – Madam President, thousands of Russians joining the protest across the whole country in reaction to Alexei Navalny’s investigation of state corruption, and, sorry to say, typical behaviour from the EU – no action! A press release by the External Service and a resolution by this House – is that all we are up to? It is not enough!

A laundromat of Russian officials’ corrupt money: this is what Europe has become. A safe haven to turn dirty, stolen money into mansions, yachts and vineyards in London, Nice and Sardinia. Calling an investigation commission based on the Navalny report: this is what the EU action must be. This is what ordinary Russian people expect from the West, as it is the money illicitly taken from them. As long as we in the EU do not fight the Kremlin’s corruption, our policy vis-à-vis Russia is simply doomed. Silence and inaction will make us partners in crime, with no right to criticise.

PRZEWODNICTWO: RYSZARD CZARNECKI
Wiceprzewodniczący

  Tunne Kelam, author. – Mr President, freedom of assembly is a right, not a privilege, and this must be our message to the Russian authorities who have recently arrested more than 2 000 anti-corruption demonstrators through massive police operations, among them presidential candidate Alexei Navalny. But these are not occasional cases of state violence and injustice. We must understand the deepness of desperation that brought these tens of thousands to challenge the brutal force of the state apparatus. Russia has the largest gap between the richest and the poorest: 110 individuals around Mr Putin control 35% of state riches. We demand the immediate release of Alexei Navalny and other demonstrators, and postponing today’s vote would be a betrayal of these courageous citizens.

Our call is to the Commission and Member States to take systematic concentrated action against Russian money laundering and illegal assets inside the EU. It is also high time for the Council to adopt the Magnitsky sanctions, following the European Parliament’s resolutions to establish a common EU list of Russian officials who are responsible for the deaths and attacks against Russian whistle-blowers, but also of those who have illegally detained and sentenced human rights activists like Mr Navalny.

  Cristian Dan Preda, în numele grupului PPE. – Domnule președinte, după atentatul de la Sankt Petersburg suntem desigur solidari cu cetățenii ruși și mai ales cu familiile victimelor. Solidaritate resimțim și față de miile de oameni care au ieșit pe străzile mai multor orașe din Rusia la sfârșitul lui martie, la începutul lui aprilie, pentru a-și arăta dezacordul față de corupția care afectează mai mulți lideri de la Moscova, lideri care se bucură de o impunitate totală, asta pentru că justiția e sub controlul lui Putin. Cetățenii ruși nu sunt orbi, ei au decis să acționeze asumându-și toate riscurile, așa cum s-a spus, două mii de arestări.

Sigur că așa cum preciza Indrek Tarand mai devreme, ceea ce susține Putin, faptul că de pildă copiii sunt plătiți pentru a ieși la manifestație e ridicol. Din păcate, trebuie să vă spun că această retorică a fost folosită și de un guvern din Uniunea Europeană, de guvernul social-democrat din România, care a spus același lucru despre protestele recente din București și din alte orașe din țară. Iată ce înrudiri găsim între Rusia și una dintre țările membre ale Uniunii.

(Vorbitorul a acceptat să răspundă unei întrebări adresate în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru” (articolul 162 alineatul (8) din Regulamentul de procedură))

  Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D), Întrebare adresată în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru”. – Stimate coleg, vreau să vă întreb dacă nu credeți că Uniunea Europeană ar trebui să ia o poziție foarte puternică, întrebând Rusia dacă se mai consideră parte a comunității internaționale, deoarece Rusia nu respectă tratatele internaționale și acordurile internaționale la care este parte privind drepturile omului și drepturile cetățeanului, și în același timp nu credeți că Uniunea Europeană ar trebui să aibă o poziție puternică privind situația domnului Navalny, care sperăm că nu va avea aceeași soartă ca domnul Nemțov?

  Cristian Dan Preda (PPE), Răspuns la o întrebare adresată în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru”. – Credeam că domnul Frunzulică mă întreabă ce putem face cu guvernul socialist de la București. Întrebările dumnealui sunt întrebări retorice aproape.

Chestiunea mai gravă este aceea că iată, în Consiliul de Securitate, Rusia a blocat ieri o rezoluție introdusă de un stat membru al Uniunii, Franța, și de administrația americană, pentru că după atacul chimic din Siria există nevoia de a acționa imediat. Ne amintim de altfel că în 2013 s-a pus pentru prima dată problema de a interveni dacă un atac chimic se produce.

  Kati Piri, namens de S&D-Fractie. – In verschillende Russische steden gingen de afgelopen week tienduizenden mensen de straat op om zich aan te sluiten bij de zogeheten marsen tegen corruptie, de grootste anti-regeringsdemonstraties in jaren. De betogers eisten het ontslag van de Russische premier Medvedev, die in het nieuws kwam vanwege zijn exorbitante rijkdom als gevolg van grootschalige corruptie. In plaats van zijn ontslag had dit echter tot gevolg dat honderden onschuldige demonstranten werden opgepakt en vastgezet. Een van hen is Aleksej Navalny, de man die een van de bekendste oppositieleiders van Rusland is en door Wall Street Journal ooit werd omschreven als de persoon die door Vladimir Poetin het meest gevreesd wordt. Daarom moet hij kennelijk uit beeld.

De arrestaties vormen een schending van de vrijheid van meningsuiting, een van de grondrechten, die tevens is opgenomen in de Russische grondwet. Het is een kernwaarde in een open en vrije samenleving, net als de vrijheid van vergadering en vereniging, maar ook al staan deze rechten in de Russische grondwet, in de praktijk worden personen die in opstand komen tegen het huidige regime in Rusland monddood gemaakt, met inmiddels vele gevangenen en zelfs doden tot gevolg.

De EU riep er vorige week toe op om alle betogers van 26 maart en 2 april onmiddellijk vrij te laten, maar de Russische autoriteiten weigeren dit te doen. Rusland moet, net als ieder ander land, voldoen aan zijn internationale verplichtingen. Gebeurt dat niet, dan is het aan Federica Mogherini om de diplomatieke druk op te voeren, dit om te voorkomen dat Navalny het volgende slachtoffer onder de Kremlincritici wordt.

  Anna Elżbieta Fotyga, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, I pay tribute to Sergei Magnitsky, a brave Russian lawyer who exposed the biggest tax fraud in Russian history. For touching untouchables he was held in pre-trial detention, tortured, and died there. The dark revengeful face of the Russian judiciary system was shown in his being convicted after death, posthumously. I kindly ask the Chamber to recall his name in the resolution by accepting my amendment.

  Przewodniczący. – Niedawno w Parlamencie Europejskim była próba projekcji filmu, który atakował pana Magnickiego po śmierci. Na szczęście do tego nie doszło, ale warto o tym pamiętać.

  Ivo Vajgl, v imenu skupine ALDE. – Ko sled avtoritarnih, nasilnih posegov v javno dogajanje, v demokratične standarde postane preveč očitna, tedaj moramo reagirati.

Neomejena moč enega človeka in njegovega ozkega kroga sodelavcev ali sokrivcev vodi v diktaturo in naša preteklost in sedanjost nas opozarjata, kam pelje pot takšne države.

Aleksej Navalni je eden izmed redkih politikov v Rusiji po padcu berlinskega zidu, ki se je izpostavil, in režim je udaril po njem in tistih hrabrih ljudeh, ki ga podpirajo.

Rusije, kot jo je videl Gorbačov in vanjo verjel Jelcin, ni več! Putinu in vsem, ki njegov model vladanja v državah post komunizma posnemajo, je treba reči: Dovolj! Vaša sodišča vam ne bodo sodila, zato ste poskrbeli, zgodovina pa vam bo sodila!

  Jean-Luc Schaffhauser, au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, chez moi, en France – et donc pas en Russie –, le 24 mars 2013, lors d’une manifestation légale – et donc pas illégale, comme en Russie – nous sommes gazés, réprimés, arrêtés, emprisonnés, comme ce fut le cas de Nicolas Bernard.

Ici, en France, sous l’accusation de détournement de fonds – nous ne sommes pas en Russie –, les principaux chefs de l’opposition au gouvernement socialiste, M. Fillon et Mme Marine Le Pen, sont accusés sans aucune forme de procès, et on se sert de systèmes médiatiques et juridiques pour détruire des candidats. Nous ne sommes pas en Russie et il ne s’agit pas d’opposants minoritaires.

Monsieur Preda, pardonnez-moi, mais vous devez me laisser parler.

D’autre part, Monsieur le Président, je tenais juste à dire pour finir…

(Le Président retire la parole à l’orateur)

  Bruno Gollnisch (NI). – Monsieur le Président, je comprends très bien que vous coupiez la parole à un orateur qui a dépassé son temps de parole, sauf quand ce temps de parole est accaparé par un certain nombre d’intervenants vis-à-vis desquels vous avez le devoir d’imposer le silence.

À mon avis, les interruptions ne doivent pas compter dans le temps de parole d’un orateur. C’est tout à fait élémentaire.

  Przewodniczący. – Ja znam swoje uprawnienia i obowiązki, Pan Poseł przekroczył swój czas, podobnie jak niektórzy inni posłowie wcześniej. Wszystkich muszę traktować równą miarą. Nie chodzi mi o kwestie merytoryczne wystąpienia Pana Posła.

  Udo Voigt (NI). – Herr Präsident! Dieses Parlament wäre gut beraten, jegliche Einflussnahme auf innere Angelegenheiten Russlands zu unterlassen. Im Fall Alexei Nawalny sollten wir besser schweigen, denn hinsichtlich Gesinnungsjustiz und Verfolgung politisch Andersdenkender ist die EU selbst kein Unschuldslamm. So gibt es in meinem Land, der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, jährlich über 12 000 Ermittlungsverfahren wegen angeblicher Volksverhetzung oder Bildung einer kriminellen Vereinigung. Über 1 000 Patrioten werden jährlich ins Gefängnis gesteckt und verurteilt. Noch immer versucht der vermeintliche Westen, gemäß dem Muster der Farbrevolutionen in den Ländern des ehemaligen Ostblocks ihm genehme Systeme zu installieren. Wie wir übrigens bei der von außen gesteuerten Revolution auf dem Majdan sahen, tat dies der Korruption in der Ukraine keinerlei Abbruch. Dieses Parlament wäre gut beraten, jegliche Einflussnahme auf die inneren Angelegenheiten Russlands zu unterlassen.

  Jaromír Štětina (PPE). – Dámy a pánové, nedávno jsme přijali rezoluci na podporu Ildara Dadina. Byl v roce 2015 odsouzen na tři roky vězení za veřejný pokojný protest proti válce.

Dadin je představitelem nové ruské protestní generace, jejíž zbraní jsou sociální sítě a internet. Před 20 lety používala v Rusku internet jen asi 2 % populace. Dnes už používá internet asi 70 % Rusů. S pomocí internetu se podařilo Ildara osvobodit. Jeho žena Anastasia rozpoutala na sociálních sítích takovou kampaň, že byl nakonec propuštěn.

Internet se stal alternativou k mainstreamovým TV mediím i při letošních březnových protestech. Sloužil ke svolávání demonstrací. Proto většina z tisíce zadržených byli mladí lidé, včetně čtrnáctiletých dětí. Ildara opět zadrželi. Tentokrát jen na několik hodin. Včera jsem mu telefonoval. „Dnes to vypadá spíš na pokutu než na vězení,“ řekl. Jakoby kremelský režim slábl pod náporem svobodného internetu. Jakoby mladé Rusy zbavoval strachu.

(Řečník souhlasil s tím, že odpoví na otázku položenou zvednutím modré karty (čl. 162 odst. 8 jednacího řádu).)

  Janusz Korwin-Mikke (NI), blue-card question. – Only one short question: have you ever heard about the clan of Mr Igor Sechin, the President of Rosneft?

  Jaromír Štětina (PPE), odpověď na otázku položenou zvednutím modré karty. – Neslyšel.

  Monica Macovei (ECR). – Domnule președinte, regimul Putin spală bani dar spală și creiere printr-o propagandă kafkiană. Regimul Putin asasinează și închide oameni liberi și închide oponenții politici. „Laundromat-ul” rusesc a spălat 20 de miliarde de dolari numai în perioada 2010-2014, cu implicarea unui văr al lui Putin, cu implicarea unor companii și bani și persoane din Federația Rusă și de asemenea cu implicarea unor off-shore-uri și companii europene. Oamenii liberi care au manifestat împotriva corupției au fost reținuți, au fost supuși unor acte de violență. O universitate de top din Sankt Petersburg a rămas fără licență acum două săptămâni pentru că, nu-i așa?, educația creează oameni liberi și o dictatură nu se bazează pe oameni liberi.

De aceea mă întreb: atentatul de la Sankt Petersburg a fost real sau a fost regizat? Fiindcă moartea a paisprezece oameni pentru Putin nu înseamnă nimic ca să își mențină dictatura. Trebuie să fie foarte clar pentru noi toți, este o dictatură cu care nu avem cum vorbi altfel decât de la democrație la dictatură, nicio altfel de negociere nu va avea succes.

  Bruno Gollnisch (NI). – Monsieur le Président, il est très possible que l’arrestation de M. Navalny et l’interdiction de la manifestation qu’il dirigeait soient regrettables; nous n’avons pas le point de vue du gouvernement russe. Mais ce que je puis dire, c’est que dans mon pays, la France, à Lyon par exemple, le préfet Carenco ne se gênait pas pour interdire les manifestations de jeunes nationaux, dont beaucoup ont été arrêtés et même condamnés sans que cela émeuve personne.

En Allemagne, dont le Président nous vantait hier le respect des droits de l’homme, il y a près de 1 054 détenus d’opinion et de 12 000 personnes qui sont actuellement poursuivies. Alors, en un mot comme en cent, je préférerais que nous balayions devant notre porte. Je citais hier les cas d’un universitaire de 88 ans, d’un père de famille nombreuse et d’un polémiste bien connu qui ont été condamnés à de la prison ferme dans des conditions procédurales qui ne respectent pas les droits de la défense, mais cela n’émeut pas la majorité de cette assemblée.

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já chci podpořit návrh usnesení, který mně připadá jako velmi vyvážený a správný. Jasně odsuzujeme zásah Putinova režimu proti pokojným demonstrantům, kteří poukazovali na obrovskou korupci v ruské vládnoucí oligarchii.

Je zcela zjevné, že v tuto chvíli v Rusku neplatí základní ústavní lidské svobody – svoboda shromažďování, svoboda projevu – a je také zcela jasné, že tamní justice není nezávislá, ale jasně podléhá vlivu vládnoucího režimu a jasně slouží panu Putinovi. Co je ale důležité, co by zde nemělo zapadnout vedle odsouzení toho, jak se ruský režim chová, je to, že jde o praní špinavých peněz. Jde o obrovskou korupci ruských politiků.

Zde v usnesení je velmi důležitý bod, kdy vyzýváme Evropskou komisi a ostatní exekutivní orgány Evropské unie, aby udělaly vše pro to, aby ruští politici a úředníci nemohli prát špinavé peníze v rámci Evropské unie. To je velmi důležité, je třeba učinit vše pro to, aby evropské banky, evropské firmy nebyly využívány k legalizaci peněz lidí, kteří slouží Putinovu režimu.

(Řečník souhlasil s tím, že odpoví na otázku položenou zvednutím modré karty (čl. 162 odst. 8 jednacího řádu).)

  Maria Grapini (S&D), Întrebare adresată în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru”. – De fapt, voiam colegului de dinainte să-i pun o întrebare, dar profit că ați vorbit și vă susțin în propunerea dvs., dar credeți că în actuala formă, în actualele reglementări ale Comisiei, chiar putem să punem capăt abuzurilor din Rusia? Nu credeți că ar trebui spălarea de bani să fie tratată în relația cu orice altă țară, dar acum vorbind de Rusia, mult mai riguros și cu efecte concrete?

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE), odpověď na otázku položenou zvednutím modré karty. – Samozřejmě veřejná moc nemůže úplně odstranit takovouto formu trestné činnosti, ale můžeme hodně tuto nezákonnou formu trestné činnosti omezit.

Bylo by skvělé, kdyby Komise přišla s konkrétními návrhy a kdybychom zde na plénu konkrétně projednali možnosti, jak může evropská administrativa bojovat proti praní špinavých peněz nejen, řekněme, subjekty Evropské unie, občany Evropské unie, ale hlavně od politiků a řekněme úředníků, kteří slouží externím režimům, jako je třeba režim v Rusku. Takže bylo by dobré, kdybychom toto projednali v rámci samostatného návrhu, aby to nezapadlo. Dnes hovoříme o odsouzení ruského režimu, ale bavme se o konkrétních krocích, které přijmeme proti praní špinavých peněz.

Zgłoszenia z sali

  José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, caros Colegas, no início de março, Alexei Navalny - que dirige a Fundação de luta contra a corrupção - teve a coragem de, através de um vídeo, denunciar, uma vez mais, a corrupção da elite russa e dos empresários próximos do Kremlin. O seu filme deu origem aos maiores protestos desde que Putin regressou à presidência em 2012 e levou milhares de pessoas para as ruas de Moscovo e de mais outras oitenta cidades do país. Na sequência destas manifestações foram detidas cerca de 800 pessoas, só na capital, entre as quais o próprio Alexei Navalny.

Como a própria Vice-Presidente Mogherini declarou, estas detenções violam claramente os direitos à liberdade de expressão, de associação e de reunião pacífica, garantidos pela Constituição russa e, por isso, estes manifestantes detidos devem ser libertados imediata e incondicionalmente.

Gostaria de terminar referindo que estes protestos mostraram ao mundo que, apesar de Vladimir Putin governar a Rússia desde há dezassete anos, sem dar espaço a qualquer oposição digna desse nome, existe agora na linha da frente da contestação uma geração mais jovem que, nunca tendo conhecido outro líder na sua vida, sai do estado de apatia e está disposta a lutar por uma Rússia mais transparente e mais democrática.

  Pavel Telička (ALDE). – Mr President, the weaker the European Union is, the more silent it is, the more blind it is, the less responsive it is, the stronger the Kremlin will be, the more harassment we will see and witness, and I am afraid one day we might see again an opposition politician or maybe an anti-corruption activist shot somewhere by a bridge. That is a reality.

What was the reaction of the European Union to the recent harassment? What is the strategy of the European Union? I call upon us, after we pass this resolution, to have a serious debate here in the plenary in Parliament, to have a strategy vis-à-vis Russia. I am not targeting Russia, I am targeting the Kremlin, the practices, the abuse of human rights. At the same time, I can see opportunities vis-à-vis SMEs, civil society, and Russian citizens. There is something that we can do and also split the Kremlin from its citizens. That is the way to proceed.

  Bronis Ropė (Verts/ALE). – Susidorojimas su taikiais protestuotojais negali būti pateisinamas XXI a. Istorija rodo, jog yra du civilizacijos raidos keliai. Vienas, pagrįstas demokratija, pagarba politinėms ir pilietinėms laisvėms, veda į ilgalaikį stabilumą ir gerovę. Kito kelio paieškos paprastai baigiasi ekonomikos suirute, represijomis, o neretai ir ginkluota agresija prieš kaimynus. Atsakymas į klausimą, kuriuo keliu eina Rusija, manau, yra aiškus.

Pastarieji protestai rodo, jog Rusijoje yra ir laisvę mylinčių, ir už ją aukotis pasirengusių žmonių. Mūsų, europiečių, užduotis – skatinti demokratines jėgas, kartu baudžiant agresyvius autoritarinius lyderius.

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Pane předsedající, Evropský parlament opět zvedá hlas, abychom podpořili ty, kteří v Rusku riskují svůj život pro demokracii a svobodu.

Bohužel Putin vládne a využívá všech prostředků, aby potlačoval opozici. Ano, pane kolego Tarande, v Rusku není demokracie, ale sto let od bolševické revoluce už je načase, aby se Rusko probudilo a lidé si řekli o svobodu. V Rusku jsou lidé, kteří jsou ochotni riskovat a přinášet osobní oběti. Vážím si jich a jsem velmi ráda, že Evropský parlament se jich chce zastat.

Pan Navalný je skutečně opoziční politik, který evidentně ohrožuje Putina, a proto je pronásledován. Jaký kontrast s životem v Evropské unii, kde v našich členských státech žijí lidé svobodně a mohou vyjádřit svůj opoziční názor. To říkám tady kolegům z frakce Národní fronty. Mohou se svobodně vyjadřovat v tisku a v médiích, nejsou za to vězněni. Volat po propuštění pana Navalného je naší povinností.

  Csaba Sógor (PPE). – Mr President, thousands of people took to the streets of Russia over the past days. Alarmed, the government detained an estimated 1 400 people across Russia. It is especially remarkable that more than one-in-six of these protestors were aged under 21. We are seeing a new generation of protestors unfolding under Vladimir Putin’s rule. In its attempt to repress and discredit any kind of opposition, in the past few years the Russian regime has employed various means, most prominently the control of traditional media. Alexei Navalny, leader of the Anti-Corruption Foundation, for example, was excluded from any kind of traditional media. Instead, Navalny found his audience on the internet, among those who have few memories of their country before Putin. This new culture of information consumption is now the main challenge to the regime, representing an alternative to the propaganda. We should embrace this movement, as accessibility of information is a staple of any democracy.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)

  Neven Mimica, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, on Sunday, 26 March 2017, over 60 000 Russians gathered in over 80 cities across Russia to protest against corruption. It was the largest anti-governmental demonstration in the last five years. Russian citizens took to the streets despite, in many cases, not having received the requested authorisation for demonstrations. Still, the protests remained peaceful and non-violent. For this reason we consider the measures taken by the Russian authorities to be a disproportionate reaction.

The freedoms of expression, association, and peaceful assembly are fundamental rights guaranteed to the Russian citizens by the Russian Constitution. Peaceful protesters were detained and sentenced on a large scale.

These events raise strong doubts about the state of these fundamental rights in the Russian Federation. The response by the authorities to peaceful demonstrations was disproportionate and punitive. We were particularly alarmed by the indiscriminate actions of the authorities against young students and school pupils.

State authorities have a particular responsibility when dealing with young people and minors, a responsibility to always protect them against any physical and mental trauma. Journalists too were arrested while covering the events and subsequently released. Any actions against reporters who are simply doing their job represent a violation of freedom of the media, an incursion into the public’s right to know, and a clear breach of Russia’s international commitments. Overall, evidence shows that these kind of measures against journalists have a negative effect on free speech in the country.

Opposition leader and founder of the Anticorruption Foundation, Alexei Navalny, was also detained and sentenced to prison, alongside many other peaceful demonstrators. We believe that the Russian authorities have a responsibility to safeguard the fundamental rights of all their citizens, particularly in view of the presidential elections next year.

All political actors in the country have the right to play by the same rules on a level playing field. The European Union has made its position very clear with regard to these developments. We issued a statement on the events the same evening. The statement called on the Russian Federation to abide fully by the international commitments it has undertaken, including in the Council of Europe and the OSCE, to uphold the fundamental rights and to release immediately the detained peaceful demonstrators. We also expressed the same concerns during the OSCE Permanent Council on 30 March.

The European Union will continue to raise them, as necessary, with the Russian authorities.

  Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.

Głosowanie odbędzie się po debacie.

Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 162)

  Mark Demesmaeker (ECR), schriftelijk. – De vorige resolutie over de mensenrechtenschendingen in Rusland dateert van amper vier maanden geleden. Toen en ook nu heeft de N-VA-delegatie met overtuiging ‘voor’ gestemd. We steunen de politieke en gewetensgevangenen, vervolgde journalisten en mensenrechtenverdedigers in Rusland en de bezette gebieden zoals de Krim.

Officieel is vrije meningsuiting een grondwettelijk recht in Rusland. Van zodra je echter volgers krijgt en dus gevaarlijk wordt in de ogen van het regime, stopt het recht abrupt. Dan word je doelwit van intimidatie en vervolging. Aleksej Navalny, Boris Nemtsov, Denis Voronenkov, Nikolaj Gorochov, Vladimir Kara-Murza, Aleksandr Litvinenko... ze zijn de gekende slachtoffers van een regime dat hoe langer hoe minder vrije meningsuiting, persvrijheid of oppositie verdraagt. De massale arrestaties tijdens de manifestaties van 26 maart zijn verontrustend. De EU moet met één stem de boodschap naar het Kremlin blijven sturen dat respect voor mensenrechten en de internationale afspraken een voorwaarde is om opnieuw een betrouwbare partner te worden.

4.2. Biélorussie

  Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia jest debata nad sześcioma projektami rezolucji w sprawie Białorusi (2017/2647 (RSP)).

  Kosma Złotowski, autor. – Szanowni Państwo! Białoruś to dziwny kraj – tam Rosja już się skończyła, a Zachód jeszcze się nie zaczął. Ale i Zachód, i Rosja tam były. Aleksandr Łukaszenka to dziwny dyktator: raz chce budować wspólne państwo z Rosją, innym razem chce zbliżyć się do Unii Europejskiej. Dzisiaj Aleksandr Łukaszenka jest w fazie dalekiej od Unii Europejskiej, wprowadził bowiem idiotyczny podatek od bezrobocia i przeciwko temu podatkowi protestują Białorusini. Na Białorusi rodzi się społeczeństwo obywatelskie i my musimy je chronić, dlatego że lepiej, jeżeli na Białorusi jest Unia Europejska, jest zachód Europy niż Azja, niż Rosja, dlatego że lepiej dla nas jest mieć przyjazną Białoruś. Dlatego chrońmy tych demonstrantów, których teraz Łukaszenka wsadza do więzienia. Stąd projekt tej rezolucji.

Bardzo serdecznie dziękuję i zachęcam do jej poparcia.

  Soraya Post, author. – Mr President, for some time we saw a thaw in Lukashenko’s Belarus. Political prisoners were released, it was easier to protest, and the EU scrapped sanctions and started cooperation. This changed with the new so-called ‘social parasite tax’. Anyone who works less than 183 days a year is sentenced to forced labour or fined EUR 240. That is two-thirds of the average monthly salary. The law also applies to stay-at-home mothers with children in preschool. Protests were met with mass detentions. The authorities must immediately release all peaceful protesters and journalists. If not, the EU must sanction the responsible officials. Alexander Lukashenko: let Belarus thaw again. Let us continue on the good path of cooperation, instead of speaking the language of sanctions.

  Bronis Ropė, autorius. – Po pastarųjų savaičių įvykių Baltarusijoje mūsų, europiečių, pastangas kurti ir gerinti santykius su šia šalimi galima apibūdinti tik sena genialia vieno buvusio Rusijos premjero fraze: „norėjome kaip geriau, o išėjo kaip visada“. Panaikindami dalį sankcijų tikėjomės, kad Baltarusiją valdantis prezidento Lukašenkos režimas bent iš dalies gerbs žmogaus teises ir laisves.

Primenu, prezidento Lukašenkos režimas grasina ne tik Baltarusijos piliečių saugumui. Jau po dvejų metų Europai kils ne ką mažesnis pavojus, kylantis iš vos už 20 kilometrų nuo Europos Sąjungos išorinės sienos nesaugiai statomos potencialiai nesaugios atominės elektrinės. Negaliu suprasti, kodėl mūsų didžiosios frakcijos vengia šios temos. Kodėl kartu su Komisija vengiama pasiųsti aiškią žinią Baltarusijai, jog Rusijos ambicijos statyti potencialias atomines bombas Europos Sąjungos pasienyje mums yra nepriimtinos?

  Przewodniczący. – Chciałem Państwa poinformować, że niestety jesteśmy opóźnieni. W związku z tym jeszcze raz apeluję o przestrzeganie dyscypliny czasowej, a także informuję, że nie będę mógł niestety udzielać głosu w ramach procedury blue card.

  Marie-Christine Vergiat, auteure. – Monsieur le Président, oui, les droits de l’homme sont bafoués en Biélorussie. Oui, il y a répression, notamment contre ceux qui manifestent contre une mesure inique. Oui, c’est le seul pays d’Europe qui pratique la peine de mort. Oui, il faut soutenir le rapporteur spécial de l’ONU.

Mais d’autres droits y sont bafoués, notamment ceux des migrants. Ce sont principalement des Tchétchènes, des Tadjiks, des Géorgiens ou des ressortissants de pays où ce Parlement dénonce la situation. Ces migrants cherchent à rejoindre l’Union européenne pour y demander l’asile. Ils sont le plus souvent refoulés en Biélorussie, au risque d’être renvoyés dans leur pays, où l’on sait ce qu’ils risquent, compte tenu des bonnes relations de ce pays avec la Russie. Pire, l’Union négocie actuellement un partenariat de mobilité incluant, bien sûr, un accord de réadmission.

Je regrette donc que nos propositions dans ce domaine n’aient pas été retenues. Il n’est pas possible de ne retenir, dans les violations des droits de l’homme, que celles qui arrangent les uns et les autres et de fermer les yeux sur les risques que courent les opposants politiques des amis de M. Loukachenko.

Comment la Commission entend-elle faire respecter le droit d’asile dans ce pays? Les droits de l’homme ne sont pas à géométrie variable, on l’oublie trop souvent au sein des institutions européennes.

  Petras Auštrevičius, author. – Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, the one-year-old Council conclusions on lifting the EU sanctions was a decision taken on the basis of our goodwill and expectations. Have there been any positive steps by Lukashenko in reciprocity since then? I find none: elections in September were rigged, not a single political prisoner has been rehabilitated, the UN special rapporteur has been continuously ignored, the death penalty has never abolished, and they continue to execute people. The nuclear power plant in Ostrovets keeps growing, in violation of safety standards, nearly 50 kilometres away from an EU capital – Vilnius. As we speak, around 20 people remain in custody and may become new political prisoners. This is how dictators reciprocate. Colleagues, it is regrettable to see EU policy on Belarus looking like a self-repeating failure. This is so because some are attempting to curry favour with Lukashenko.

  Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski, autor. – Bez wątpienia sytuacja na Białorusi się pogarsza. Niestety. Ale musimy pamiętać, że Białoruś to nie Portugalia – leży tam, gdzie leży, i najważniejszym jej partnerem pozostaje Rosja. Mamy nadzieję, że ten wysiłek ostatnich dwóch lat nie zostanie zmarnowany. Przypomnę: Białoruś przestała być państwem, gdzie są więźniowie polityczni, podjęto wysiłki na rzecz kontroli fitosanitarnej, ochrony powietrza, systemu bolońskiego, jego wdrożenia.

Nie byłem zwolennikiem tej rezolucji, ale byłem zwolennikiem debaty. Musimy uwzględnić fakt, że pogarszająca się sytuacja na Białorusi jest efektem nie działań polityków, ale oddolnym sprzeciwem społeczeństwa na pogarszającą się sytuację ekonomiczną i gospodarczą, ale także polityczną. Niestety w obecnej sytuacji głównie politycy są odbiorcami negatywnych, nieadekwatnych reakcji samych władz. Lebiedźka, Rymaszewski, Statkiewicz są dotykani rozmaitymi represjami przede wszystkim za to, że są. I to niepokoi.

Dziś Parlament Europejski podejmuje rezolucję, w której nie skłania się jeszcze do nakładania czy powrotu do sankcji na Białoruś, ale ostrzega władze Białorusi, że ta droga, która została podjęta w marcu, i nieadekwatne represje wobec opozycji, wobec społeczeństwa mogą zakończyć się też rezolucją i powrotem do sankcji. Nikt na tej sali prawdopodobnie tego nie chce, ale ten głos Parlamentu Europejskiego dziś jest niezwykle ważny, bo jest ostrzeżeniem.

  Michaela Šojdrová, za skupinu PPE. – Pane předsedající, tak, jak řekl můj předřečník, situace v Bělorusku se velmi zhoršila. Stejně jako potlačování nezávislosti médií a opozice v posledních dnech narůstá, tak naopak klesá výkonnost ekonomiky. Pokles hrubého domácího produktu je o téměř čtyři procenta, velmi narůstá inflace a veřejné zadlužení roste každým dnem.

Tyto nepříznivé hospodářské podmínky vyhnaly koncem března tisíce občanů do ulic po celém Bělorusku a v rámci poklidných demonstrací tito lidé dali najevo nesouhlas a nespokojenost s děním v zemi. Bohužel režim zareagoval velkými represemi. Z těch stovek zatčených bych chtěla připomenout, že jsou mezi nimi členové opozičních křesťansko-demokratických a občanských stran. Jsou zatčeni za účast na pokojné demonstraci. Pavel Sevjaryněc byl zadržen na deset dnů a pokutován, Vitali Rymaševský byl zadržen a dostal velkou pokutu tisíc eur za účast na pokojné demonstraci, Anatol Ljabedzka byl zadržen a rovněž pokutován.

Myslím, že naším usnesením bychom měli dát jasně najevo, že budeme sledovat situaci a budeme vést běloruský režim k zodpovědnosti.

  Josef Weidenholzer, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Weißrussland ist ein geplagtes das Land. Es gibt wenige Gegenden in Europa, wo die Menschen Schrecklicheres erleiden mussten. Dennoch haben sie ihren Freiheitswillen und das Streben nach Gerechtigkeit nie aufgegeben. Deshalb dürfen wir gerade in diesen Tagen die Menschen nicht alleine lassen, und auch vermeintliche Stabilitätskriterien dürfen uns davon nicht abhalten.

Diese Entschließung des Parlaments ist ein Signal an die Menschen in Weißrussland, ein Zeichen der Solidarität und des Respekts für den Mut des weißrussischen Volks, und sie ist ein klarer Hinweis an die Regierung in Minsk, diesen riskanten Kurs der Einschüchterung und Freiheitsberaubung nicht fortzuführen und endlich Reformen zuzulassen. Stabilität lässt sich nur dann erreichen, wenn Rechtstaatlichkeit, Demokratie und Menschenrechte gelten.

  Marek Jurek, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Nasz główny cel na wschodzie Europy musi pozostawać niezmienny, to jest utrwalenie niepodległości państw, które powstały po rozpadzie Związku Sowieckiego. A więc musimy przede wszystkim wspierać na Białorusi rozwój tożsamości narodowej i prawa językowe, odrodzenie życia chrześcijańskiego i wolność Kościoła, rozwój opinii publicznej i aktywność obywatelską, otwarcie na Zachód i niezależność, choćby elementy niezależności białoruskiej polityki zagranicznej.

Dziś widzimy, że być może te wstrząsy, które obserwujemy, są znakiem, że Białoruś wchodzi w czas przyspieszonych politycznych zmian. W tych warunkach powinniśmy pamiętać o jednym, że pierwszą ze wszystkich swobód społecznych jest niepodległość ojczyzny i to powinno wyznaczać nasz stosunek do władzy i do środowisk opozycyjnych oraz społecznych.

  Pavel Telička, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, well, it looks like the honeymoon is over and the first signs of a possible Minsk Spring are also over. Well, sometimes less is more, so I will be very brief.

Conditionality has to apply. We have lifted sanctions, we have provided concessions, and we expected changes. Those did not arrive. There is a crackdown, so we must reintroduce sanctions, and this time they have to be harder. Once again, once we see concrete changes and reforms we can add, but at the moment there is no other action than to take a very hard and tough stand.

  Janusz Korwin-Mikke (NI). – Mr President, I absolutely agree with Mr Kosma Złotowski, and other authors, that the reason is the unfortunate bill condemning the so-called social parasites. Therefore, I am shocked that the draft resolution condemns the actions of police, which are quite normal. In every country, the police put protestors into jail sometimes. It is not our, or Mr Lukashenko’s, right to decide whether the police actions were exaggerated or not. Instead, the resolution should condemn the bill, and so I move the oral amendment that we should ask Mr Lukashenko to withdraw his bill. This pressure from the European Parliament would give him an excuse to withdraw this really unfortunate bill.

  Pavel Svoboda (PPE). – Pane předsedající, Evropská unie v posledních letech podnikla sérii vstřícných kroků vůči Bělorusku. Odpovědí režimu prezidenta Lukašenka byla nová represe, nová vlna represí, včetně zavedení daně z příživnictví, která se letos dotkla asi 470 tisíců běloruských občanů. V reakci na to vyšlo do ulic bezprecedentní množství lidí, mnozí z nich byli svévolně zatýkáni, pokutováni a zadržováni ve vazbě. K těmto osobám patří například Pavel Sevjaryněc, Vitali Rymaševský a Anatol Ljabedzka.

Vyzývám běloruskou vládu, aby osvobodila tyto demonstranty, novináře, občanské aktivisty a politické vězně. Ochota běloruského režimu přijmout koncept lidských práv a občanské společnosti zjevně neexistuje, a to si občané Běloruska nezaslouží.

  Andrejs Mamikins (S&D). – Mr President, Parliament’s Rules of Procedure give the possibility to react to urgent cases of violations of human rights, democracy and the rule of law. The initial idea was to express Parliament’s concern about the detention of some activists during and before the March demonstration in Belarus. However, we can see in the resolution that there are issues that cannot be termed very urgent. For example, the issue of the nuclear power plant in Astravets, the demand for the abolition of the death penalty, the recommendation to change tax legislation, the issue about studying in the EU and speeding up the visa and scholarship application process, electoral reform and other issues which cannot be described as urgent.

I would like to remind you that four months ago, a non-urgent resolution with the same title on the situation in Belarus, in which the same issues were mentioned, was adopted. I urge you in the future not to create a spam effect, but concentrate more on urgent topics and do not reduce the power of urgent resolutions.

  Agnieszka Kozłowska-Rajewicz (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Wszyscy jesteśmy rozczarowani informacjami, które spływają do nas z Białorusi. Forsowanie tej ustawy o darmojedach, sprzecznej ze zdrowym rozsądkiem, sprzecznej z prawami pracowniczymi, blokowanie mediów, blokowanie działania NGO-sów, partii politycznych, fałszowanie wyborów i pozorowanie działań w kierunku ich demokratyzacji, wreszcie brutalne tłumienie pokojowych protestów, które miały miejsce ostatnio, musi spotkać się ze sprzeciwem tej Izby.

To wszystko przecież wydarza się po tym, jak Unia Europejska – rękami Parlamentu, a więc także naszymi rękami – podżyrowała pożyczki dla Białorusi. Sama udzieliła wsparcia finansowego, zniosła sankcje polityczne i gospodarcze, bo chcieliśmy widzieć w Białorusi poważnego partnera, który dotrzymuje umów. Zaufanie i wzajemny szacunek są podstawą współpracy i jeżeli nasz partner mówi jedno, ale robi drugie, to trzeba skorygować plany i działania.

W tej sytuacji chciałabym zapytać Komisję Europejską, czy warunki udzielonych Białorusi pożyczek i gwarancji finansowych uwzględniają możliwość ich wstrzymania w sytuacji niewypełnienia zobowiązań w obszarze praw obywatelskich i rozwoju demokracji?

(Zgłoszenia z sali)

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, protecting human rights activists from reprisal is a priority for the EU and indeed my own country, Ireland. It is imperative that the Belarusian authorities release and drop all judicial charges against peaceful protesters, journalists, human rights defenders, civil society activists and opposition members who have been detained in connection with the current wave of demonstrations. I welcome the call for this in the resolution. We should not allow ourselves to be mollified by piecemeal concessions when gross human rights violations remain. The political will for liberalisation shown by the Belarusian Government is incompatible with their use of capital punishment and renders them undeserving of EU rapprochement. I welcome this resolution by the Parliament and hope the Belarusian Government will act immediately to address the concerns that have been outlined in this resolution, particularly the call for electoral reform, and for Belarus to join the moratorium on the death penalty.

  Julie Ward (S&D). – Mr President, the right to protest, to express dissent and disagreement with the status quo, is important for modern democratic societies. It is worrying, therefore, to witness the on-going crackdown on civil society in many countries including, sadly, some Member States such as Hungary. But beyond our borders, in Russia and Belarus, young people are even more fed up with corrupt, dysfunctional and undemocratic governments. It is very worrying to see brave young activists, poets, journalists and human rights defenders being arrested and harassed. We must always speak out for freedom of expression. In that respect, I am pleased to support the Belarus Free Theatre, which continues to expose both their own country and Russia’s abuse of human rights. Our resolution calls for more support for educational exchange programmes and scholarships. It is only through people to people contact and investing in young people and their opportunities, that a vibrant civil society can be built.

  Mark Demesmaeker (ECR). – Als ik het zo hoor, dan is president Loekasjenko een dictator noemen eigenlijk een compliment: hij is een despoot, hij is een tiran. Luister even naar wat deze stiefvader van de Wit-Russische natie zei over het werk van sommige journalisten. Ik citeer: “Als één van die journalisten of politici in mijn land zo zouden spreken, dan ruk ik eigenhandig zijn tong uit.”

Dit typeert deze tiran ten voeten uit. Jarenlang is hij alleen bezig geweest met zijn personencultus en zijn eigen macht. Hij heeft het politieke speelveld vernauwd, het middenveld gefnuikt en al wie een politiek alternatief kon bieden aan de kant geschoven. Een politicoloog vat het zo samen: “Je hoeft in Wit-Rusland niet te begrijpen wie schuldig of onschuldig is. Er zijn geen wetten en geen rechtbanken. Loekasjenko zelf is de wet en de rechtbank. Hij oordeelt, maar zijn beslissingen blijken onjuist. Uiteindelijk is er geen angst en geen geweten. Loekasjenko zelf is de verpersoonlijking van de angst en het gebrek aan geweten.”

Wij mogen niet onverschillig zijn. De EU moet de democratische krachten, de verdedigers van mensenrechten en van fundamentele vrijheden in Wit-Rusland – de laatste dictatuur van Europa – voluit blijven steunen.

  Carlos Iturgaiz (PPE). – Señor presidente, Bielorrusia sigue estando en las antípodas de los planteamientos fundamentales que rigen en la Unión Europea, como son, entre otros, la libertad de expresión de los ciudadanos, el respeto de los derechos humanos, la libertad de los medios de comunicación. Lukashenko preside Bielorrusia desde una postura pseudodictatorial, y no olvidemos que en ese país la pena de muerte está instaurada y en sus cárceles hay decenas de presos políticos.

Por todo ello, la Unión Europea debe ser firme y contundente; contundente ante este Gobierno bielorruso que es satélite del Gobierno ruso de Putin. Por eso, la Resolución va dirigida contra la represión que viven los ciudadanos bielorrusos y también a que se libere a los presos políticos, y va a tener todo el apoyo de mi Grupo —el Grupo Popular— en este Parlamento.

  Jean-Paul Denanot (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, ces deux dernières années, la Biélorussie avait effectivement fait un pas vers le respect des droits de l’homme et des libertés fondamentales. Ces efforts, d’ailleurs récompensés par l’Union européenne, doivent être maintenus et accentués. L’Union doit encourager les dirigeants à retrouver la bonne voie.

Les récents événements en Biélorussie ne sont pas acceptables. Les arrestations et la violence qui en ont découlé doivent être fermement condamnées; elles n’ont pas leur place dans une démocratie. Les demandes et prétentions de la population doivent être écoutées et entendues. Le Parlement doit condamner fermement tout acte contraire au principe du respect des libertés fondamentales. Nous devons appeler la Biélorussie à discuter avec sa population et à résoudre ces conflits de façon démocratique. Il faut souligner les efforts faits par la Biélorussie jusqu’à présent et la persuader de ne pas tout compromettre.

L’Union pourra soutenir la Biélorussie uniquement si celle-ci protège ses citoyens et leurs droits. M. Loukachenko doit nous entendre et, dans le cas contraire, il faudra que l’Union envisage des sanctions.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)

  Neven Mimica, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, the Belarus debate in the European Union continues to be driven by a policy of critical engagement. The most recent events in the lead-up to Freedom Day in Belarus on 25 March confirmed the need to maintain a critical approach in our bilateral relations. In reaction, we issued a statement pointing out that, despite the international community’s calls for restraint, the response by the security services, including preventive arrests beforehand and the detention of a large number of peaceful protesters on 25 March, itself were indiscriminate and inappropriate.

We further noted that such limitations to the freedom of expression and assembly are in contradiction with Belarus’ stated policy of democratisation, as well as its international commitments. We called for the immediate release of all recently detained peaceful citizens. Belarus has taken a number of positive steps in recent years. These include the pro-active participation of Belarus in the Eastern Partnership and in the interim phase on modernisation issues; the resumption of the EU-Belarus Human Rights Dialogue; the start of negotiations on visa facilitation, readmission agreements and a mobility partnership; the active pursuit of cooperation in the harmonisation of digital markets; and the signature of a cooperation agreement on an early warning mechanism in the energy sector.

Belarus has also played an increasingly constructive role in the region, notably with regard to the conflict in eastern Ukraine. After careful consideration, and with the support of Member States, including the local heads of mission in Minsk, and following the discussion in the political and security committee, it was decided to proceed with an EU-Belarus Coordination Group meeting on 3 and 4 April, understanding that this was an opportunity to pass strong and unambiguous messages to Belarussian interlocutors at an appropriate level.

A specific session of the meeting was dedicated to human rights and political freedoms. This is exactly what we mean by critical engagement. Formats, such as the Coordination Group and the Annual Human Rights Dialogue, allow us to reiterate our commitment to a stable, democratic and prosperous future for Belarus for the benefit of its people.

A range of subjects are of particularly importance to civil society were discussed at the meeting, including mobility, people-to-people contacts, trade, education and social security. The European Union also raised issues related to the registration of political parties, as well as the reinstatement of the civil and political rights of former political prisoners. In addition, separate meetings took place with Belarussian human rights defenders, civil society representatives and members of political opposition movements.

The European Union will also raise these issues at the next Human Rights Dialogue, which is scheduled to take place before summer. As stated in the Council conclusions of 15 February 2016, the European Union is open to the further development of EU-Belarus relations and to enhancing political relations and sectoral cooperation in the appropriate context. At the same time, tangible steps taken by Belarus to respect universal fundamental freedoms, the rule of law and human rights will remain key for the shaping of the EU’s future policy towards Belarus.

We take a note of today’s resolution on Belarus and share the concerns expressed. We will continue to closely observe Belarus’ response, with regard to freedom of speech, assembly and association, as we take our policy forward.

  Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.

Głosowanie odbędzie się po debacie.

Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 162)

  Csaba Sógor (PPE), írásban. – Bár a demokráciáról és annak jó működéséről alkotott fogalmaink különbözőek lehetnek, abban azt gondolom, hogy egyetértünk: a fehérorosz rezsim nem felel meg a legminimálisabb követelményeknek sem. Ezért szerintem nem kell meglepődnünk akkor, amikor egy talán enyhébb és a közeledésre lehetőséget teremtő időszak után újra megmutatta ez a rendszer az igazi arcát. Én azt gondolom, hogy a változásnak a választási rendszer reformja felől kell megindulnia, Fehéroroszország népének kell kimondania azt, hogy egy más alapokon nyugvó társadalomban akar élni. Ennek érdekében az országnak közeledni kell a valódi demokratikus működés felé, az Európai Unió pedig nem tehet mást, mint hogy az együttműködés feltételévé teszi a demokratikus választási játékszabályok tiszteletben tartását már a jövő évi választások előtt.

  José Inácio Faria (PPE), por escrito. – No dia 25 de março, em Minsk, as forças anti motim bielorrussas reprimiram violentamente a marcha que a oposição organiza anualmente, espancando pessoas, impedindo os jornalistas de fazerem o seu trabalho e detendo cerca de 700 manifestantes. A marcha visou protestar contra a “lei contra os parasitas sociais” que criou um imposto especial de 220 euros para aqueles que trabalham menos de seis meses durante o ano e contribuem menos para o financiamento do Estado. Os promotores desta marcha pacífica quiseram que coincidisse com o Dia da Liberdade, data não oficial de celebração da primeira República Popular da Bielorrússia em 1918. Mas “liberdade” não é uma palavra cara ao Presidente Lukashenko que desde 1994 governa com mão de ferro, possuindo um longo historial de repressão de manifestações pacíficas, prisões por motivos políticos e o vergonhoso título de ser ainda o único país na Europa a aplicar a pena de morte! Nesse mesmo dia, celebrámos os 60 anos do Tratado de Roma e reafirmámos o nosso compromisso com os valores dos pais fundadores. É em nome desses valores que precisamos rever os moldes da nossa relação com a Bielorrússia e condicioná-la ao respeito dos direitos humanos, das liberdades fundamentais e do Estado de direito.

  Kati Piri (S&D), schriftelijk. – Geen werk kunnen vinden, maar wel een boete opgelegd krijgen voor ‘te weinig werken’. Het is de huidige situatie in Wit-Rusland, waar inwoners die minder dan 183 dagen per jaar op hun werk doorbrengen een heffing van omgerekend 234,00 euro ontvangen. De zogeheten ‘belasting voor sociale parasieten’. Dit resulteerde de afgelopen weken in massale protesten in het land, waarbij honderden mensen zijn gearresteerd.

De maatregel en de arrestaties worden gezien als de druppel die de emmer doet overlopen. Wit-Rusland, ooit door Condoleezza Rice omschreven als de ‘laatste en enige dictatuur in Europa’, staat bekend om zijn gebrekkige democratie en de slechte omstandigheden met betrekking tot mensenrechten. Daarbij slaat president Aleksandr Loekasjenko iedere vorm van protest hard neer.

De heffing is een willekeurige, wrange en moreel betwistbare maatregel. In combinatie met het gewelddadige optreden van de politie plus het gebrek aan ‘vrijheid van vereniging’, schendt Wit-Rusland bovendien de internationale mensenrechten. Als Europees Parlement moeten we dergelijke acties scherp veroordelen en het land wijzen op zijn verplichtingen.

  Jarosław Wałęsa (PPE), na piśmie. – Od czasu uzyskania przez Republikę Białorusi niepodległości w 1991 roku obywatelom nie udało się zbudować w swoim kraju pełnej demokracji. Państwem od 1994 roku w sposób autorytarny rządzi Aleksandr Łukaszenka. Białorusini, podobnie jak pozostałe narody Europy, chcą pracować, rozwijać się i bogacić. Kraj ten mocno związany jest gospodarczo i politycznie z Rosją, przez co pośrednio stał się ofiarą ekonomicznych trudności, doświadczanych obecnie przez swojego wschodniego sąsiada.

Powodem protestów, które miały miejsce w wielu miastach Białorusi, jest zła sytuacja gospodarcza kraju i podatek nałożony na osoby bezrobotne. Protest jest formą dialogu i wyrażenia niezadowolenia społecznego, do którego prawo ma każdy naród. Alarmujące są informacje napływające z Białorusi o uczestnikach demonstracji zatrzymywanych przez policję i aresztowanych lub karanych grzywnami. Jak informuje pozarządowa organizacja praw człowieka „Viasna”, łączna liczba osób poddana różnym formom represji na skutek serii protestów w marcu 2017 roku przekracza 900.

Należy wspierać dążenia białoruskiej opozycji do zbudowania pełnej demokracji i europejskiego kierunku rozwoju. Jednocześnie nie wolno zapominać o niestabilnej sytuacji politycznej regionu wschodniego i wynikających z tego zagrożeniach. Należy wspierać Białoruś w dążeniu do niezależności politycznej i pokojowo budowanej demokracji. Demokracji budowanej w sposób niezagrażający białoruskiej państwowości i suwerenności.

4.3. Bangladesh, y compris le mariage des enfants

  Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia jest debata nad siedmioma rezolucji w sprawie Bangladeszu, w tym małżeństw dzieci (2017/2648(RSP)).

  Fabio Massimo Castaldo, autore. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, abbiamo un accordo di cooperazione e partenariato sullo sviluppo con il Bangladesh, e come Unione europea dobbiamo avere il coraggio di dire ai nostri partner quando ci sono dei problemi. E in Bangladesh, ahimè, di problemi ce ne sono molti.

Con la risoluzione di oggi vogliamo evidenziarne uno particolarmente grave. In Bangladesh il tasso di ragazze che si sposa entro i 18 anni è del 52 %; le spose bambine con meno di 15 anni sono il 18 % del totale. È evidente che nella maggior parte dei casi non si tratta di una scelta, e proprio per questo motivo le Nazioni Unite la ritengono una violazione dei diritti umani, perché apre la porta ad abusi legati alla dote, alle molestie sessuali, agli stupri e alla legittimazione della corruzione di minorenne.

Per questo, pur riconoscendo gli sforzi intrapresi dal Bangladesh negli ultimi anni per migliorare la situazione, vogliamo dire al governo che questo non basta e bisogna andare avanti in modo più deciso e convinto. La legge sulle limitazioni al matrimonio minorile del 2017 – e le scappatoie in essa contenute, che di fatto legalizzano queste eccezioni – deve essere cestinata e completamente riscritta.

Vogliamo ricordare al governo che il tesoro più prezioso di un paese è sempre rappresentato dalla sua gioventù. Sì, perché è di gioventù che stiamo parlando oggi, cari colleghi, di bambine. Ed è compito di un governo tutelare questo tesoro, permetterne un'educazione nel pieno rispetto dei loro diritti e garantire loro un futuro e la possibilità di poter scegliere liberamente e scevre da ogni vincolo la persona con cui vorranno passare la loro vita.

In questo caso noi non possiamo che fare il nostro dovere di Unione europea e dire al Bangladesh che è ora di porre in essere veri passi in avanti concreti. Questa legge non basta e non può bastare.

  Soraya Post, author. – Mr President, a 14-year-old girl was brought to the altar to be married to a man twice her age for a dowry, forever. Fifty-two percent of girls in Bangladesh are married when they are 18 years old, and 18% before their 15th birthday. The new law against child marriages allows for so many exceptions that it will most likely lead to more girls being raped or disfigured in acid attacks. In nearly all cases, these girls will not get an education and will live in isolation, poverty, economic dependence and servitude. These girls are children, not objects for sale in the adults’ marriage market. Today, we – as Parliament – have the chance to let these girls learn that not all adults in the world have abandoned them. We are concerned about these girls’ future. We, as a Parliament, have to act.

  Ulrike Lunacek, author. – Mr President, just imagine that you were 13, 14 or 15 years old and had been raped, and then your parents and the courts decided that it would be in your best interests to get married to the rapist. That is what the new provisions of this Child Marriage Restraint Bill in Bangladesh allow for. This is horrendous and we have to speak out. I am glad that we have a sense of urgency now, because even though Bangladesh pledged at the Girl Summit of July 2014 to reduce the number of girls marrying between the ages of 15 and 18 by 2021, this new law allows for so many exceptions that it is really a step backward and not forward. It could lead to an escalation of dowry abuse, sexual harassment, rape, acid violence, legitimisation of statutory rape and allow parents to force their daughters to marry their rapists. I am glad that we are speaking out very clearly against that.

Let me nevertheless also refer to something else where I think Bangladesh still needs to move ahead. It is almost four years since the Rana Plaza disaster in 2013, when a textile factory collapsed, killing more than 1 100 women and some men, with more than 2 500 people injured. Until now, the sustainability compact, which is supposed to improve the situation in the garment industry, labour rights and factory safety, has not been implemented as much as it should have been. So I ask the External Action Service and the Commission to follow up on that to make sure that human rights, children’s rights and girls’ rights are taken into account in Bangladesh.

  Charles Tannock, author. – Mr President, today’s resolution is very useful in highlighting the problems of forced child marriage and acts of sexual violence against women in Bangladesh, which we all rightly condemn. We must, however, distinguish such concerns from a wider condemnation of cultural norms and morals in Bangladesh, with very different social traditions and economic imperatives to those of our own here in the European Union. I am also mindful of the fact that in the United Kingdom and in Spain, the legal age of consent for marriage is 16, with the permission of parents.

On a separate point, I note in paragraph 13 the reference to the Foreign Donations Regulation Act, calling for its amendment. Of course, we wish to see a vibrant and free civil society operating in Bangladesh, and should be concerned by any legislation that prohibits such development. However, there have been problems with some NGOs and charities operating as vehicles for the funding of jihadi terrorism organisations and we must support the Bangladeshi Government’s right to crack down on these practices. Bangladesh is a secular country and enjoys a PCA with the European Union, and we should help it in its democratic progress and its prosperity.

  Lola Sánchez Caldentey, autora. – Señor presidente, Bangladés ha aprobado una reforma legal que permite el matrimonio de menores en «ciertas circunstancias», pero estas «ciertas circunstancias» dejan la puerta abierta para legalizar una práctica que ya es muy habitual.

Según la Unicef, Bangladés tiene la segunda tasa más alta del mundo de matrimonios infantiles y la más alta de Asia. Más de la mitad de las niñas —ya se ha dicho aquí— están casadas antes de los dieciocho años y el número es muy alto antes de los quince años.

Esta reforma legislativa es un retroceso en materia de derechos humanos, y especialmente en lo relativo al derecho de las mujeres y de las niñas. No olvidemos que el matrimonio infantil es muchas veces consecuencia de la pobreza y de la desigualdad, es decir, que se combate con políticas sociales efectivas, sobre todo en educación y en sanidad, incluyendo, por supuesto, el respeto a la salud y a los derechos sexuales y reproductivos de las niñas porque, muchas veces, los embarazos no deseados son los que llevan al matrimonio infantil.

No debemos olvidar tampoco la seria situación que vive este país en lo relativo a derechos de los trabajadores, libertades sociales, libertades de expresión y de opinión. Los datos de detenciones arbitrarias, extorsiones y torturas a sindicalistas, opositores y defensores de derechos humanos son muy habituales y muy alarmantes.

Por eso, la Comisión debería iniciar cuanto antes una investigación sobre el cumplimiento de los convenios internacionales sobre derechos humanos y laborales. No podemos seguir ofreciendo un sistema de preferencias generalizadas a un país en el que las violaciones de derechos humanos cada día son más graves, especialmente contra las mujeres.

  Dita Charanzová, author. – Mr President, child marriage is a violation of human rights. Children are simply not able to give their full consent, and there is enough evidence showing the serious psychological and physical impact of marrying as a child. Bangladesh knows this and has tried to reduce the number of child marriages, but taking away the minimum age and creating special conditions for children to marry is not a solution. There can be no special cases when it comes to violation of human rights.

Bangladesh already had one of the highest rates of child marriage in the world with the ban in place. The new law will simply encourage the practice to continue and even intensify the current situation. The Bangladeshi authorities must act now to ensure that this does not happen. The special circumstances that allow for child marriage must be clearly defined and very difficult to use. The penalties for breaking the law must be strong and upheld to deter child marriage from the outset. For cases where a girl becomes pregnant, other safe and legal alternatives to marriage must be available. The EU must be active and willing to support the Bangladeshi authorities to achieve this and, on a broader scale, to respect all of its human rights obligations.

  Tomáš Zdechovský, Autor. – Pane předsedající, jménem skupiny Evropské lidové strany bych chtěl říct, že v Bangladéši i přes dosažený pokrok v mnoha oblastech dochází stále k potlačování lidských práv v mnoha ohledech. Mám především na mysli svatby dětí, a to zejména dívek mladších osmnácti let, a dokonce mladších i patnácti let.

Velice mě zaráží fakt, že letos v únoru byl v Bangladéši schválen zákon, který de facto umožňuje pokračovat v těchto praktikách. A to i přesto, že bangladéšská vláda se nedávno zavázala podíl těchto dětských svateb postupně snižovat. Dochází také k pokračujícímu potlačování práv dětí, které s sebou přináší negativní dopady na jejich psychiku, vzdělání a jejich budoucí život. To přece nemůžeme tolerovat. Musíme apelovat na místní vládu, aby změnila tento zákon a aby zakázala veškeré svatby dětí, a to bez výjimky.

  Csaba Sógor, a PPE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Elnök Úr! Gyermekházasságok ellen nem csak azért emelünk szót, mert sérti a gyermekek jogait, mert a mai európai országokban már nem elfogadott társadalmi norma, bár egyes közösségekben még ma is élő gyakorlat. Egyrészt azért tartjuk elfogadhatatlannak, mert óriási egészségügyi kockázatnak teszik ki a leánygyermekeket, akiket sokszor akaratuk ellenére kényszerítenek bele házasságba. Ezek a gyermekek fizikailag és lelkileg sincsenek felkészülve a szüléssel és az anyasággal járó feladatokra, de a társadalmi szokásoknak eleget téve mégis erre kényszerülnek. Másrészt azért gondoljuk, hogy véget kellene vetni a gyermekházasságok gyakorlatának, mert azok tulajdonképpen konzerválják a szegénységet. A házasságot kötő gyermek tanulmányai félbeszakadnak, az oktatási rendszerből való kiesés pedig a társadalmi mobilizáció gátja. Ezért lenne fontos, hogy az épp fejlődő dél-ázsiai országokban is, ahol minden második nő 18 éves kora előtt megy férjhez, minden hatodik pedig 15 éves kora előtt, érzékelhető változás következzen be ezen a téren.

  Arne Lietz, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Das in Bangladesch verabschiedete Gesetz zur Beschränkung der Kinderehe beinhaltet leider weiterhin Ausnahmesituationen, die Kinderehen zulassen. Derzeit sind in Bangladesch 52 Prozent der Mädchen an ihrem 18. Geburtstag und bereits 18 Prozent der Mädchen an ihrem 15. Geburtstag verheiratet. Aus Sicht des Europäischen Parlaments könnte das Gesetz zur Folge haben, dass Gewalt im Zusammenhang mit der Mitgift, sexuelle Belästigung, Vergewaltigung sowie Säureangriffe zunehmen und die Vergewaltigung Minderjähriger legitimiert wird. Die Situation ist damit sogar gegeben, dass Mädchen gezwungen werden könnten, eventuelle Vergewaltiger sogar heiraten zu müssen. Deswegen unterstütze ich unseren Entschließungsantrag, der die Regierung auffordert, dieses Gesetz zu ändern. Die Rechtslücken müssen geschlossen werden, um sämtliche Kinderehen zu verbieten.

  Jana Žitňanská, za skupinu ECR – Vážený pán predsedajúci, každoročne až 15 miliónov dievčat mladších ako 18 rokov je nútených sa vydať za častokrát omnoho starších partnerov. Každú minútu to predstavuje 28 neplnoletých dievčat. Každé dve sekundy jedno dievča. Bangladéš patrí medzi krajiny, ktoré majú jeden z najvyšších podielov detských svadieb na svete a zároveň jej v Ázii patrí smutné prvenstvo. Viac ako polovica dievčat podstúpi nútený sobáš pred dovŕšením plnoletosti a takmer 20 % je dokonca mladších ako 15 rokov. V tomto kontexte je alarmujúce, že v Bangladéši nedávno prijali zákon, ktorý síce na jednej strane zakazuje svadby neplnoletých, dokonca u chlapcov stanovuje minimálny vek na 21 rokov, na druhej strane v tzv. opodstatnených prípadoch pripúšťa výnimky. V texte zákona sa však neuvádza spodná veková hranica pre tieto výnimky a taktiež je reálna obava, že výnimky sa budú zneužívať a tisíce dievčat budú prichádzať o svoje detstvo. Dnes sa teda zdá, že dievčatá v Bangladéši od nútených sobášov neochráni zákon, ale ich lepšie vzdelanie, pretože vzdelané dievčatá sa dokážu lepšie brániť a rozhodovať o vlastnom živote.

  Beatriz Becerra Basterrechea, en nombre del Grupo ALDE. – Señor presidente, solo oímos hablar de Bangladés cuando hay un accidente en una planta textil que trabaja para compañías occidentales y mueren decenas de trabajadores desprotegidos. Pero en Bangladés, uno de los países más pobres del mundo, hay más cosas que merecen nuestra atención, aunque no afecten a nuestros intereses empresariales.

En más de la mitad de los matrimonios en Bangladés, un país de 150 millones de habitantes, la novia es una niña, una menor. Hasta hace unos meses, la ley prohibía expresamente que una menor de dieciocho años pudiera casarse. Pero acaban de reformarla introduciendo una brecha de excepcionalidad a la norma. ¿Para qué? Para que las niñas que quedan embarazadas puedan casarse con el futuro padre, es decir con su abusador. Así me lo confirmó hace poco en las Naciones Unidas, la ministra de Asuntos de la Mujer y la Infancia, la señora Meher Afroz Chumki.

No puede existir ninguna excepción que permita el matrimonio infantil. Las niñas de Bangladés necesitan protección legal y educación completa en materia sexual y reproductiva.

La Unión Europea ha comprometido nuevas ayudas de casi 700 millones bajo su Programa Indicativo Plurianual para Bangladés. Señora Mogherini, señor Mimica, les pido que sean estrictos aquí. Congelen esos fondos de inmediato. No financiemos a un Gobierno que abre puertas traseras a los matrimonios con menores.

  Ignazio Corrao, a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il Bangladesh continua a far parlare di sé per quanto riguarda le violazioni dei diritti umani su diversi fronti: libertà di associazione, matrimoni precoci, arresti arbitrari e abusi da parte delle forze dell'ordine.

Sono passati ormai anni dalla tragedia del Rana Plaza, tragedia che ha attirato l'attenzione dell'opinione pubblica mondiale. Ma ciononostante nessun cambiamento è davvero avvenuto. Ci sembra chiaro che non c'è stata alcuna reale presa di coscienza da parte del governo sulla necessità di apportare le dovute riforme. Anzi, si è andati di male in peggio: il salario minimo non viene aumentato dal 2013, mentre il costo della vita è aumentato in modo significativo, costringendo lavoratori, sindacalisti e giornalisti a scioperare e denunciare le inaccettabili condizioni di vita a cui sono sottoposti. Per tutta risposta il governo ha deciso di procedere con arresti e repressioni e, come se non bastasse, ha praticamente legalizzato il child marriage.

Dobbiamo assolutamente esprimere il nostro dissenso. La Commissione europea deve avviare un'indagine che metta in luce le violazioni al sistema di preferenze generalizzate dell'Unione europea da parte del governo del Bangladesh e comportarsi di conseguenza.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, is rud uafásach, mhífhéaráilte, sean-nósach é an nós ‘pósadh leanaí’. Faraor, tá sé forleathan timpeall an domhain, agus measann an ghluaiseacht idirnáisiúnta ‘Cailíní, ní Brídeoga’ go mbíonn ar suas le 71% de chailíní faoi ocht mbliana déag d’aois pósadh.

Níl seo féaráilte. Is í an Bhanglaidéis ceann de na tíre is measa. Tá sé i gcoinne an dlí. Ach cén mhaitheas an dlí nuair a thugann an rialtas isteach leasú a cheadaíonn eisceacht i gcásanna speisialta? Cad is cás speisialta ann? D’fhéadfadh gach cás a bheith ina chás speisialta.

Dá bhrí sin, caithfimid brú a chur ar údarás na Banglaidéise an lúb ar lár seo a athrú agus freisin, ba chóir dúinn cabhrú leo chun oideachas a chur ar fáil agus chun cosc a chur ar an gcultúr a ligeann don sean-nós uafásach de phósadh leanaí tarlú agus é a stopadh go deo.

  Francisco Assis (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, o Governo do Bangladesh comprometeu-se com metas concretas de combate aos casamentos de crianças e raparigas menores de idade, um flagelo que deixa sequelas físicas emocionais terríveis, destrói o normal desenvolvimento da personalidade e acarreta um risco acrescido de pobreza, de analfabetismo e de violência sexual e física.

O Bangladesh registou alguns progressos neste capítulo, apesar de continuar a ser o país com a taxa mundial mais alta deste desrespeito pelos direitos humanos. No entanto, a lei de restrição do casamento infantil, recentemente aprovada, em vez de constituir um passo decisivo para combater este drama, revela-se uma lei perversa que introduz exceções em casos especiais ou no interesse do adolescente, sem elucidar sobre os critérios que presidem a essas classificações e sem estabelecer uma idade mínima para os casamentos em causa.

O Bangladesh é um país que beneficia do Programa Mundial do Fundo da ONU para a População e da UNICEF para acelerar o combate ao casamento infantil, programa esse que tem a União Europeia como um dos financiadores. A União Europeia deve, por isso mesmo, desenvolver esforços no sentido de pressionar as autoridades do Bangladesh a reverem a lei de restrição do casamento infantil sob pena de assistirmos a um retrocesso no combate a esta prática, que é causa de tanto sofrimento.

  Sajjad Karim (ECR). – Mr President, I am obliged to you. I take the floor today in my capacity as Chairman of the Standing Committee, within the International Trade Committee, for South Asian Trade, and with Bangladesh I have had the unique ability to see at first hand the tremendous amount of improvement that has taken place using trade mechanisms for women’s empowerment in Bangladesh and in particular female-headed households.

What we see here today is, however, a tremendous regression from the progress that has been made. At the very moment in time at which a young female needs the support of her society and country, it seems that other obligations may be placed in the way and her best interests not necessarily taken into account.

So I say simply this to the Government of Bangladesh: as a Union we have worked with you, we have stood with you, we have been very proud to see the tremendous improvements that you have made, but please, listen to what this House is conveying to you today. These sorts of developments do not take us forward. They challenge our relationship and we do not want to move away from encouraging you to keep moving forward on women’s empowerment issues.

  Krzysztof Hetman (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Ja także chciałbym zwrócić uwagę na dramatyczną sytuację dzieci w Bangladeszu. Bangladesz posiada jeden z najwyższych na świecie odsetków małżeństw zawieranych przez dzieci. Niestety pomimo wcześniejszych deklaracji, by walczyć z tym negatywnym zjawiskiem, pod koniec lutego Parlament Bangladeszu przyjął prawo, według którego małżeństwa osób niepełnoletnich będą mogły odbywać się w specjalnych przypadkach. Brak definicji tychże przypadków sprawia jednak, że de facto usankcjonowany został brak minimalnego wieku na zawarcie małżeństwa. Istnieją też uzasadnione obawy, że nowe prawo będzie wykorzystywane między innymi do zmuszania zgwałconych dziewcząt do ślubu ze swoim oprawcą w celu źle pojętego ratowania honoru, w efekcie jeszcze bardziej pogłębiając ich traumę. Tymczasem od rządu Bangladeszu oczekuję, aby skoncentrował się na ochronie praw i dobru dzieci oraz dopełnieniu wcześniejszych zobowiązań w tej tematyce.

Zgłoszenia z sali

  Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já bych chtěl samozřejmě také velmi odsoudit nucené dětské sňatky, k nimž dochází v Bangladéši. Myslím si, že je důležité nejen odsoudit tento faktický stav, ale i ten děravý zákon, jak zde byl popsán. Rovněž nedodržování mezinárodních závazků, které na sebe Bangladéš přijal. Myslím si, že to vše je odsouzeníhodné.

Ale myslím si, že bychom také neměli být pokrytci a zároveň bychom měli říci, co se stane, pokud do evropských zemí přijede obyvatel muslimských zemí a má s sebou manželku, která je například pod věkovou hranicí patnácti let, a budou v evropském prostoru konzumovat manželství. Já si myslím, že bychom měli i v této věci jasně říci, že takovéto jednání je v evropském prostoru nepřípustné a že bychom měli tímto způsobem odsoudit i to chování, ke kterému dochází, a o čemž víme, na území Evropy.

V tomto směru bychom měli vyslat jasný vzkaz do členských států Evropské unie.

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, conform datelor ONU, Bangladesh înregistrează în continuare cea mai ridicată rată de căsătorii între copii la nivel mondial. Raportul a arătat că 52 % din fetele din Bangladesh sunt căsătorite sub 15 ani. Din păcate, recenta lege din 2017 nu interzice decât în titlu căsătoriile și de fapt lasă loc căsătoriilor copiilor.

Apreciez rezoluția, dar nu este suficientă. Este nevoie de educația copiilor și a adolescenților și evident de schimbarea legislației. Domnule Comisar, eu cred că Comisia trebuie să utilizeze instrumente potrivite, împreună cu alte instituții internaționale, Unicef, ONU, pentru a schimba în practică actuala situație tragică, pentru că fetele vor rămâne toată viața cu amprentă după ce sunt obligate să se căsătorească cu agresorii.

  Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, υποστηρίζω το ψήφισμα το οποίο και υπέγραψα για μια χώρα, το Μπανγκλαντές, όπου η παιδική εκμετάλλευση στην εργασία σε εργοστάσια κυρίως ευρωπαϊκών και άλλων πολυεθνικών εταιρειών είναι στην ημερήσια διάταξη.

Ο ΟΗΕ θεωρεί τους γάμους των ανηλίκων ως παραβίαση των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων. Στο Μπανγκλαντές, αυτή τη στιγμή, το 18 % των κοριτσιών που παντρεύονται είναι κάτω των 15 ετών. Υποτίθεται ότι το Μπανγκλαντές αποφάσισε να λάβει μέτρα και να περιορίσει τους γάμους των ανηλίκων κάτω των 15 ετών μέχρι το 2021. Όμως, ο νόμος που εγκρίθηκε επιτρέπει επί της ουσίας αυτούς τους γάμους. Γι’ αυτό θεωρούμε ότι είναι απαράδεκτη αυτή η νομοθεσία· διότι ουσιαστικά θα επιτρέπει στους βιαστές να μπορούν να παντρεύονται τα βιασθέντα ανήλικα κορίτσια.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)

  Neven Mimica, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, the European Union has constantly and consistently called on the government of Bangladesh to guarantee respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law. This political outreach was a joint action with this Parliament. During two recent visits to Bangladesh, distinguished Members of the European Parliament called on the government to respect human rights, the rule of law, the democratic process, freedom of expression and fundamental labour rights. These visits received widespread local press coverage.

The European Union human rights strategy identifies the prevention of child marriage as a priority. The European Union regularly raises the issues of child marriage with the Bangladesh authorities, most recently during the EU-Bangladesh subgroup on good governance and human rights. In December last year in particular, the European Union raised concerns with regard to the Child Marriage Prevention Act, which keeps the marriageable age of girls at 18 but allows exceptions under specific circumstances.

Furthermore, the European Union has contributed EUR 6 million to the funding of the UNFPA-UNICEF and UNFPA global programme on child marriage, which also benefits the fight against child marriage in Bangladesh.

As regards the wider human rights situation in Bangladesh, at the EU-Bangladesh subgroup on good governance and human rights the EU raised concerns on extra-judicial killings and enforced disappearances, the death penalty, freedom of association and freedom of expression, the situation of minorities, violence against women, and fundamental labour rights.

At the EU-Bangladesh diplomatic consultation held in Brussels in February this year, while recognising progress made so far under the Sustainability Compact, the European Union underlined the need to address the shortcomings in compliance with freedom of association.

Human rights are also part of the partnership on development aid and cooperation set out in the Multiannual Indicative Programme for Bangladesh, which provides support to the sectors of nutrition, education and good governance for the period until 2020, for a total amount of EUR 690 million. Child marriages and other human rights issues will be further discussed at the EU-Bangladesh Joint Commission to be held in Brussels in the first half of this year.

The European Union stands ready to work together with the government of Bangladesh in addressing these issues.

  Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.

Głosowanie odbędzie się po debacie.

Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 162)

  Isabella Adinolfi (EFDD), per iscritto. – Da anni l'Unione europea sta tentando di cooperare con il Bangladesh per mettere fine ad una triste pratica, quella del matrimonio per i minori. Questi ultimi, vengono costretti dalle proprie famiglie a sposarsi e non c'è alcuna legge che lo vieti espressamente. I danni psico-fisici che ne derivano sono gravissimi e l'Ue non può rimanere a guardare mentre il futuro di milioni di bambini viene rubato. Il governo del Bangladesh deve rendere illegali i matrimoni per i minori.

  Kateřina Konečná (GUE/NGL), písemně. – Na plenárním zasedání ve Štrasburku 6. 4. jsme se věnovali společnému návrhu usnesení o Bangladéši, včetně dětských sňatků. Evropská unie má s Bangladéšem dlouhodobé vztahy, mezi něž patří i dohoda o spolupráci v oblasti partnerství a rozvoje. Podpora lidských práv a demokratických zásad patří mezi stěžejní zásady EU nejen v domácí, ale i v mezinárodní politice. V posledních měsících ovšem dochází podle nezávislých pozorovatelů k porušování lidských práv, násilným mizením obyvatel, represím vůči občanským společnostem, útokům na politické aktivisty a mučení. Navíc Bangladéš je stále zemí s nejvyšším počtem dětských sňatků na světě. Tímto návrhem usnesení vyzýváme bangladéšskou vládu, aby ukončila dětské sňatky, aby odsoudila pokračující odsouzeníhodné činy proti svobodě projevu a zajistila okamžité ukončení veškerých projevů násilí, obtěžování, zastrašování a cenzury směřujících proti novinářům, blogerům a občanské společnosti.

  Anthea McIntyre (ECR), in writing. – I believe we must demand that the government of Bangladesh respect its international obligations on human rights, and not only with respect to child marriage, important though that is. The Bangladesh authorities must condemn acts of violence towards innocent citizens. They must commission an independent investigation into extrajudicial killings and bring those responsible to justice. I listened to a recording (in translation) of a serving Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) officer exposing crimes he and fellow officers are instructed, by the authorities, to carry out. He describes how RAB officers select and kill people. These extra-judicial killings are known as ‘crossfire’. Officers place a discharged weapon beside the body to fabricate evidence against the dead individual, claiming they opened fire on RAB officers and were therefore killed in self-defence. He reveals that RAB officers are instructed to capture, kill and dispose of the body without it being traceable. He concludes that the victims are mainly from the country’s opposition parties. The government is using the RAB in its crackdown on the main opposition parties which continue to demand free, fair and participatory national elections in Bangladesh following the flawed elections in 2014.

  Marijana Petir (PPE), napisan. – Bangladeš je peta zemlja u svijetu po broju dječjih brakova. 52 % djevojčica stupa u brak prije navršene osamnaeste godine života, a 18 % prije navršene petnaeste godine života. U ruralnim područjima zemlje ovaj je omjer još veći te još više zastrašuje – 71 % djevojčica prisiljeno je udati se i odrasti prije osamnaeste godine života. Žalosna je spoznaja da roditelji, ugroženi teškim siromaštvom, nemaju drugog načina za osiguranje budućnosti, ponekad i života, vlastitih kćeri, nego udati ih u njihovom djetinjstvu i preranoj mladosti.

Svake minute diljem svijeta 28 djevojaka ostaju bez budućnosti zbog dječjih brakova što sa sobom donosi ogromne fizičke, psihičke i emocionalne posljedice. Vlada Narodne Republike Bangladeš obvezala se donijeti nacionalni plan koji će do 2041. u potpunosti iskorijeniti dječje brakove i prošle je godine donijela Zakon o ograničavanju dječjih brakova koji uvodi strože kazne za ljude koji žene djecu, no zakon je pun nedostataka i zapravo dječje brakove pravno dozvoljava, ne precizirajući „posebne uvjete” koje je potrebno zadovoljiti kako bi dječji brak bio pravno valjan.

Djeca imaju pravo na djetinjstvo, no kako bismo djeci osigurali djetinjstvo, moramo njihovim roditeljima omogućiti minimalne standarde za dostojanstven život kako ne bi posezali za ovako strašnim potezima. Iskorjenjivanje siromaštva je cilj kojega moramo ostvariti.

5. Dépôt de documents: voir procès-verbal

6. Pétitions: voir procès-verbal

IN THE CHAIR: PAVEL TELIČKA
Vice-President

7. Heure des votes

  President. – The next item is the vote.

7.1. Russie, l'arrestation d'Alexeï Navalny et d'autres manifestants (RC-B8-0245/2017, B8-0245/2017, B8-0246/2017, B8-0248/2017, B8-0249/2017, B8-0250/2017, B8-0251/2017) (vote)

– Before the vote:

  Helmut Scholz, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – Mr. President, as we are all witnesses of the terrorist attacks on the metro in St Petersburg, I would suggest that today we do not vote on the resolution but, as a symbolic act, hold the vote in the next plenary part-session. I think that, in this very worrying situation for the citizens of the Russian Federation, we should link it to the protest in Moscow and other cities over the last few weeks.

  Michael Gahler, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Die EVP—Fraktion ist dagegen. Die beiden Tatbestände haben nichts miteinander zu tun, und deswegen gibt es auch überhaupt keinen Anlass, die Abstimmung zu vertagen.

(The request was rejected)

– After the vote on Amendment 4:

  Ulrike Lunacek, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, I will ask – and I have announced this to the services beforehand –for withdrawal of this amendment now, for two reasons. One is that this morning, at the beginning of the session, President Tajani made a very good announcement that he condemned the atrocities against gay men in Chechnya, which happened just recently. The other reason is that, in agreement with some of the other Groups, I decided to ask for withdrawal, but we are also planning to table an oral question on these atrocities against gay men in the next plenary.

7.2. Biélorussie (RC-B8-0253/2017, B8-0253/2017, B8-0256/2017, B8-0258/2017, B8-0259/2017, B8-0261/2017, B8-0263/2017) (vote)

7.3. Bangladesh, y compris le mariage des enfants (RC-B8-0252/2017, B8-0252/2017, B8-0254/2017, B8-0255/2017, B8-0257/2017, B8-0260/2017, B8-0262/2017, B8-0264/2017) (vote)

7.4. Marchés de gros de l'itinérance (A8-0372/2016 - Miapetra Kumpula-Natri) (vote)

7.5. Pays tiers dont les ressortissants sont soumis à l'obligation de visa ou en sont exemptés: Ukraine (A8-0274/2016 - Mariya Gabriel) (vote)

– After the vote:

  Michael Gahler (PPE). – Mr President, as usual with the roll call vote, what was the distribution of votes? The spectrum was not shown.

  President. – I do apologise on behalf of the services. It was shown but only very briefly. We will show the figures.

7.6. Corps européen de solidarité (B8-0238/2017) (vote)

7.7. Adéquation de la protection offerte par le bouclier de protection des données UE-États-Unis (B8-0235/2017, B8-0244/2017) (vote)

  President. – That concludes the vote.

8. Explications de vote

8.1. Marchés de gros de l'itinérance (A8-0372/2016 - Miapetra Kumpula-Natri)

Oral explanations of vote

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já jsem s velkou radostí podpořil toto usnesení, protože boj proti roamingu je konkrétní, hmatatelná věc, na které občanům národních států můžeme ukazovat, že Evropská unie může být přínosem pro jejich život a něco dobrého pro ně udělat. A jsem také rád, že jsme nakonec přijali odvážnější řešení než to, které původně navrhovala Komise, a že jsme ještě dále snížili stropy velkoobchodních poplatků za roaming. Chci v této věci poděkovat zpravodajce, která výrazně přispěla k tomu, že se každý rok budou ty stropy za poplatky za roaming snižovat. Takže ten návrh je dobrý, je správný, a proto jsem jej s radostí podpořil.

  Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D). – Mr President, when the S&D Group called for an end to roaming charges almost six years ago, there was a lot of opposition from national governments, from the PPE Group in Parliament, and even from the Commission. Our perspective changed the situation and our longstanding priority will now finally become reality on 15 June.

Roaming charges are now a thing of the past. Europeans no longer face huge phone bills after travelling. They can use their phones abroad just like at home without paying extra. Instead of switching off their phone when crossing a border, people will now be able to call their friends at home, tweet from a conference, or check their emails at the airport. Under the leadership of our Group, Parliament defended the interest of citizens and small operators against big telecom companies, being able to push the data price cap down benefits consumers directly as the lower the cap, the more data they can use when travelling.

  Daniel Hannan (ECR). – Mr President, when this issue of roaming charges came before the Parliament, mine was one of the very few voices and very few votes against it. There is a competitive market, and there was no obvious need for state intervention. By privileging one particular type of tariff – in other words, that of the person who travels a lot – we end up effectively requiring a subsidy from kids on estates who don’t travel in order to subsidise people like us who do a lot of travel. But that is not my point today. I lost the argument and I lost that vote. My point is that the reduction in international roaming charges is happening anyway, is happening globally, and has nothing to do with this legislation. It is being done by individual operators.

We politicians are not as important as we think we are. There is this solipsistic fallacy where we assume that everything going on in the world is somehow the creation of laws and law-makers. A parting bit of advice as Britain comes towards the end of its time here, my friends: we are really not at the centre of affairs.

  Andrejs Mamikins (S&D). – Mr President, in the Middle Ages each feudal lord could block the road and start to take money from travellers for travelling on the road. We can see some feudal features in the mobile network market in the 21st century in the European Union. Important steps were taken by the Commission and Parliament to change the situation and abolish roaming charges in the EU, but the EU mobile network market remains fragmented. After the abolition of roaming charges, the next challenge could be that some big companies are tempted to take more money for a wholesale roaming charge. If we do not limit their wishes, this could lead to an increase in charges to consumers. The Commission and Parliament propose to establish the maximum level of wholesale roaming charges telecom operators can charge each other for calls, text messages and data from 15 June this year, and I am in favour of this decision.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr. President, I am very pleased that now we are finally there in our seven-year battle to introduce ‘Roam like at home’ for our citizens, and I would like to thank all MEPs who voted in favour today: 547 in favour, 27 against, 50 abstaining. Indeed, I would take issue with what my good friend Mr Hannan said from the United Kingdom. The European Parliament did play a huge part. If the markets had their way, the prices would be much higher because they would collaborate with one another. When the Commission made its proposals, the wholesale prices were much higher, and it was only the good work of those of us who were actually involved – and if Mr Hannan and his colleagues had got more involved they would know what was going on – that reduced, first of all, the roaming charges over a period of years, and now finally this piece in the jigsaw: the wholesale charges and we can have ‘Roam like at home’. Otherwise, the prices would be sky high, as Mr Hannan would like us to have.

8.2. Pays tiers dont les ressortissants sont soumis à l'obligation de visa ou en sont exemptés: Ukraine (A8-0274/2016 - Mariya Gabriel)

Oral explanations of vote

  Jasenko Selimovic (ALDE). – Mr President, after years of negotiations, after the informal agreement reached between the European Parliament and the Council in the last days of February this year, today we have all, together, demonstrated our strong commitment to visa-free travel to Ukrainian citizens. Very soon, Ukrainian citizens will be able to travel in the EU for 90 days without having a visa. The full importance of today’s vote cannot be underestimated. By granting Ukrainians the freedom to travel through the EU we have demonstrated that the unprecedented reforms undertaken by the Ukrainian Government are bearing tangible fruit, but above all, we are pointing out that we refuse to follow the path of closeness, nationalism, populism, that so many politicians are suggesting today. Today we have embraced openness and we should be proud of it. I now call for the EU Member States to implement today’s vote as soon as possible.

  Petras Auštrevičius (ALDE). – Tik treji metai praėjo nuo tos dienos, nuo Maidano įvykių, ir mes turime puikų pavyzdį, kai valstybė, kuri pasakė sau, kad ji keisis, kad ji nori matyti savo ateitį Europoje, pradėjo daryti pažangą. Taip, ji užtruko, nes darbų buvo daug – 72 kriterijai, kurių atžvilgiu Ukraina privalėjo padaryti pažangą. Mes dirbome kartu, mes ėjome kartu, pažanga pasiekta. Aš sveikinu Europos Sąjungą ir Ukrainą, kad mes kartu pasiekėme didžiulę pažangą. Tai dar kartą patvirtina, kad Europos Sąjunga išlieka atvira toms valstybėms, kurios eina pažangos keliu. Puiki žinia Ukrainos piliečiams: jie nebus diskriminuojami, jie galės važiuoti laisvai į Europos Sąjungą, kaip ir Europos piliečiai į Ukrainą. Aš tikiuosi, kad mes sužinosime vieni apie kitus dar daugiau, neliks mitų, neliks dezinformacijos ir kartu eisime į mūsų bendrą ateitį.

  Monica Macovei (ECR). – Domnule președinte, dialogul cu Ucraina pentru eliminarea vizelor a fost lansat încă din 2008. De atunci, Comisia a făcut numeroase rapoarte de progres, în principal după ce au început manifestațiile din noiembrie 2013 în Maidan și după alegerile din 2014.

A fost foarte greu pentru Ucraina în toată această perioadă și, trebuie să spunem adevărul, nu a existat un consens în Parlamentul European pentru condamnarea agresiunii rusești împotriva Ucrainei și, implicit, a Crimeei. El a venit ceva mai târziu și cu sancțiuni. Au murit oameni în timpul acesta; peste 9 000 de oameni au murit în perioada 2013-2014, numai în Donețk și Luhansk. Tocmai de aceea, este vital să-i ajutăm.

Susțin eliberarea vizelor, în paralel cu o monitorizare atentă a ceea ce se întâmplă în Ucraina. Să dai și să iei este un mod de lucru. De aceea, trebuie să monitorizăm ce se întâmplă cu banii pe care îi dăm Ucrainei, cu lupta anticorupție, cu statul de drept și cu eforturile Ucrainei și îi vom primi fericiți fără vize.

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). –Pane předsedající, já jsem velmi rád, že dneska prošlo usnesení, které jasně říká, že bude zaveden bezvízový styk mezi Evropskou unií a Ukrajinou. Je to vyvrcholení několikaletého procesu. Ukrajina již před dvěma lety splnila podmínky pro zavedení bezvízového styku.

Pro mě to není jenom o tom, že ukrajinští občané budou moci na devadesát dní cestovat po Evropské unii bez víza, ale toto dnešní rozhodnutí má obrovský symbolický význam. My jasně říkáme Ukrajincům, že s nimi počítáme, že to jsou naši partneři, a já doufám, že to dnešní rozhodnutí bude dále posilovat pocit většiny Ukrajinců, že chtějí být vůči Evropské unii hlavním partnerem a že hlavním partnerem je právě Evropská unie jako soubor demokratických států, a nikoliv Rusko, které – jak všichni dobře víme –, realizuje agresi na východě Ukrajiny.

Takže ta geopolitická rovina, to symbolické gesto, je možná ještě mnohem důležitější než to, že samotní Ukrajinci budou moci takto cestovat po Evropské unii. Já jsem rád, že tímto gestem posilujeme vazby mezi Evropskou unií a Ukrajinou.

8.3. Corps européen de solidarité (B8-0238/2017)

Oral explanations of vote

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, solidaritatea europeană trebuie să crească. Acest lucru se poate rezolva prin educație și implicare.

Mă bucur că am putut să votez un asemenea raport, această rezoluție referitoare la Corpul european de solidaritate, dar am atras atenția în dezbaterea avută că este nevoie să avem din partea Comisiei norme precise de aplicare, bugete, să avem noi bugete, nu trebuie să se ia din celelalte forme de sprijin al tinerilor.

Desigur, trebuie să se și monitorizeze, să se calculeze impactul și acest nou proiect să se coreleze cu celelalte proiecte de susținere a tinerilor pentru implicare nu numai la solidaritate, dar implicare și în munca de zi cu zi. Trebuie să le asigurăm locuri de muncă după voluntariat.

8.4. Adéquation de la protection offerte par le bouclier de protection des données UE-États-Unis (B8-0235/2017, B8-0244/2017)

Oral explanations of vote

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, along with other members of my group I voted against the committee’s report on the adequacy of protection afforded by the EU/US Privacy Shield in favour of supporting the alternative text tabled by the EPP and the ECR. The committee report contains very critical statements that I believe could potentially harm businesses that rely on the Privacy Shield to transfer data across the Atlantic securely and efficiently.

This criticism comes before the upcoming comprehensive annual review which is envisaged in the Privacy Shield framework, which ensures that the European Commission and data protection authorities can monitor the functioning of the system and keep it up to date, and so the claims in the report are therefore premature. The EPP/ECR text better acknowledges this upcoming inclusive review and is more balanced in its critique of the Safe Harbour system which has not changed in the time since the EPP resolution of May 2016, which welcomed the substantial improvements in the Privacy Shield compared with Safe Harbour. This allows the comprehensive review to take place and assess the findings afterwards.

  Lucy Anderson (S&D). – Mr President, in fact for many years the European Parliament has been at the forefront of efforts to protect citizens from the abuse of their personal data, so I was therefore very pleased to vote for this important resolution on improving the EU/US Privacy Shield, and I do not agree that it is a burden on business. This is not just a matter of human rights, it is also a matter of consumer confidence, and there are very real concerns about the scope of the protection within this agreement. It is better than the US Safe Harbour protections, but there are concerns about the use of data through automatic decision-making, and there are concerns about the remedies that will be available to EU citizens if there is a problem. So it is absolutely right that Parliament has taken a firm stand here. I also think that the Commission should have allowed Parliament to scrutinise this in a better way, because the use of the Implementing Act procedure in this particular instance has not worked out to our advantage. But overall I am extremely pleased with this resolution, and it enables us to take forward our work in this area.

  President. – That concludes the explanations of vote.

9. Corrections et intentions de vote : voir procès-verbal

(The sitting was suspended at 12.45 and resumed at 15.00)

VORSITZ: RAINER WIELAND
Vizepräsident

10. Approbation du procès-verbal de la séance précédente : voir procès-verbal

11. Grandes interpellations (article 130 ter du règlement)

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgen große Anfragen (O-000011/2017) nach Artikel 130b der Geschäftsordnung (2017/2583(RSP)) (B8-0209/2017).

  Piernicola Pedicini, autore. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor commissario, siamo qui per sottoporre oggi all'attenzione delle istituzioni europee – per la verità per l'ennesima volta – questo fenomeno, questo che è diventato un fenomeno, tristemente noto con il nome di "Terra dei fuochi", che in realtà è un'emergenza ambientale e sanitaria in cui sono costretti a vivere più di due milioni e mezzo di cittadini europei in un territorio compreso in 57 comuni nelle province di Napoli e Caserta, nel Sud Italia.

Da quelle parti sono stati individuati ad oggi più di 6 000 siti – in realtà questa cifra è una cifra ancora provvisoria, perché le ricerche sono ancora in corso – dove sono stati sversati oppure bruciati illegalmente rifiuti tossici, 10 milioni di tonnellate di rifiuti tossici e pericolosi, tra rifiuti sia urbani che industriali, trasformando quindi quella terra in una delle aree più inquinate dell'intera Unione europea.

Il quadro epidemiologico della popolazione residente da quelle parti presenta eccessi di mortalità e ospedalizzazione per tutte quante le patologie che possono essere riconducibili al rilascio oppure alla combustione di rifiuti tossici. La mortalità, purtroppo, per tutti quanti i tipi di tumore è superiore del 20 % rispetto alla media nazionale, in assoluta controtendenza rispetto ai trend perché, mentre in Italia questi trend sono discendenti, nella Terra dei fuochi c'è un incremento della mortalità per tutti i tipi di tumore. L'infertilità maschile è superiore del 17 % rispetto alla media nazionale. È davvero pauroso il quadro di salute dei bambini, perché c'è un eccesso di ricoveri per tutti quanti i tumori, soprattutto nel primo anno di età, e c'è un eccesso di tumori, specialmente del sistema nervoso centrale nella fascia di età che va tra gli zero e i 14 anni.

Nonostante ciò, continua l'ostracismo da parte di tutti coloro che fanno leva sulla difficoltà di stabilire una connessione scientifica fra questa esposizione ai veleni industriali e il cancro. C'è gente che addirittura arriva a negare questo nesso di causalità. Eppure non c'è famiglia che non abbia avuto un'esperienza tragica, un'esperienza drammatica di tumore, di uno o più tumori, tra i propri cari.

Negli ultimi venti giorni, per esempio, soltanto negli ultimi venti giorni, sono morti altri otto bambini per cancro. Adesso gli abitanti di quella zona hanno paura di bere l'acqua che sgorga dai propri rubinetti, hanno paura di mangiare la verdura, gli ortaggi che producono nei loro terreni. E, come se non bastasse, le economie locali, le produzioni agroalimentari hanno subito un effetto devastante dovuto alla pubblicità negativa che, naturalmente, ha indebolito le economie locali, che erano già deboli di per sé.

Abbiamo ricevuto tutti quanti il rapporto della rappresentanza permanente italiana, che dà il solito messaggio rassicurante, un messaggio rassicurante che illustra le azioni messe in campo tanto dal governo italiano, quanto dal governo regionale della Regione Campania, e che sembra finalmente indirizzato, questo programma, a risolvere definitivamente questa situazione. Il punto è che per anni, per oltre 20 anni, questa gente ha ascoltato messaggi rassicuranti e le cose non sono mai cambiate. Ad oggi ci sono ancora questi fuochi, questi fuochi sono ancora lì, e i rifiuti stanno per essere bruciati in questo momento.

Perciò noi oggi siamo qui per denunciare l'inutilità e l'inefficacia di tutte quante le soluzioni che sono state adottate dal governo italiano e dal governo regionale della Regione Campania, perché a nulla sono valse le denunce di decine nelle commissioni parlamentari, per esempio, oppure le decine di inchieste giornalistiche, gli esposti delle associazioni di cittadini e soprattutto la conta dei morti nei cimiteri di quelle terre avvelenate.

Commissario, questo è il più grande avvelenamento di massa in uno dei paesi della nostra Unione europea, e noi crediamo che le istituzioni europee abbiano il dovere di intervenire. Perciò vogliamo sapere se questa Unione ha intenzione di ridare speranza a questi cittadini, che sono pure loro cittadini europei, e se questa Unione ha intenzione di dare la giusta priorità al rispetto del diritto alla salute per i cittadini europei e quindi anche per i cittadini della Terra dei fuochi.

  Karmenu Vella, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, Mr Pedicini, let me start first of all by saying that the Commission has been very deeply concerned for many years about the environmental situation from which the region of Campania is suffering due to the illegal treatment and mismanagement of waste, and of course about the impact on public health. The latest public health report issued by the Istituto Superiore di Sanità, which links the abnormally high cancer rate in some parts of Campania with the illegal treatment of waste, has been brought to our attention.

Given the systematic shortcomings in waste management in Campania underpinned by organised crime, the Commission has made full use of its powers over the past decade to address the situation. Already in 2007 the Commission initiated infringement procedures against Italy for a lack of adequate disposal facilities for waste in Campania, and this led in 2010 to Italy being condemned by the European Court of Justice. Then again in 2015 the court condemned Italy to pay a heavy fine consisting of a lump sum of EUR 20 million plus EUR 120 000 every day due to insufficient follow-up measures.

One year earlier, in 2014, the Court of Justice had already imposed heavy fines on Italy for the existence of illegal disposal of waste, including hazardous waste, throughout practically all the Italian territory, including Campania. Also in 2014, the Commission suspended EU financial assistance corresponding to the financial period 2007-2013 in respect of waste management and disposal in Campania. We cannot grant EU money if there are no guarantees that it will be spent well. When we received adequate assurances, EU funding was again made available in the current programing period.

As regards enforcement by the Commission, there was nothing more that we could possibly do according to EU law. Now it is fair to say that the overall waste management situation in Campania has improved since the waste crisis of 2007 and following the government’s appointment of several waste emergency commissioners for the region. For instance, separate collection of waste in the region is steadily improving, as well as recycling. At the end of last year, Campania adopted a new regional waste management plan which is now being examined by the Commission services.

But challenges remain, and health problems caused by past practices are still making themselves felt. The health and the environmental issues in Campania have their roots in the existence of organised crime and an enforcement system which is not coping with it. Although the main responsibility for fighting organised crime rests with the Member States, the European Union has agreed to take action on a number of instruments in the field of enforcement of compliance.

To address the eco-mafia, in 2011 Europol created a platform for experts from law enforcement agencies, the EnviCrimeNet, dealing with environmental crime. Also to improve enforcement, the Commission will adopt later this year a communication setting out an action plan with practical actions for environmental compliance assurance. This will be aimed, amongst other issues, at helping Member States to combat waste crime and offences. In addition to the enforcement actions, the Commission has urged the Italian competent authorities to address land decontamination and rehabilitation as a matter of urgency. For the latter, EUR 72 million of EU structural funds have been made available under the current financial period, that is under the period 2014-2020.

Of course the specific health-related aspects are of huge concern and I know that the signatories of this major interpellation, including my colleague Pedicini, already met with my colleague Commissioner Andriukaitis here in Strasbourg few weeks ago. As you know, health policy is essentially a national competence but there may be scope for reinforcing dialogue with national authorities. I can assure you that my services will keep monitoring the situation in Campania. Solving the problems derived from the illegal treatment of waste in Campania is dependent on all relevant actors working effectively together.

  Jiří Pospíšil, za skupinu PPE. – Pane předsedající, já jsem velmi pozorně poslouchal odpověď pana komisaře na tuto závažnou otázku, která se týká Kampánie a obrovského znečištění tamní oblasti.

Jak jsem často kritický k tomu, jak zde vystupují zástupci Komise, tak teď musím říci, že já osobně s tou odpovědí souhlasím. Je třeba otevřeně říci, že byť se jedná o mimořádně závažnou skutečnost, a jak tady správně píší moji kolegové, jsou poškozovány životy a zdraví mnoha stovek i tisíců Evropanů, kteří v tom regionu žijí, tak primární odpovědnost za vzniklou situaci a i za řešení této situace musí mít Itálie jako taková. Protože pokud situace, která tam nastala, a je to zde jasně řečeno, je důsledkem protiprávního stavu, je důsledkem nelegálního zacházení s odpady, tak těžko asi Evropská unie primárně toto může vyřešit.

Ale já jsem velmi rád a to je zde důležité, že zde pan komisař řekl, že Evropská unie je připravena pomoci, je pro mě povzbudivé a pozitivní, že zde bylo řečeno, že jsou peníze ve strukturálních fondech, protože si myslím, jak znám situaci třeba z České republiky, kde jsme odstraňovali ekologické zátěže a stálo nás to stovky a stovky milionů korun, že bez podpory evropských peněz se těžko takto rozsáhlá ekologická zátěž dá odstranit.

Takže kdyby Evropská komise poskytla tamní regionální vládě peníze na to, aby došlo k sanaci takovýchto obrovských ekologických škod, tak já bych osobně za sebe jako poslance EP takovouto situaci vítal a podpořil bych ji. Ale musí platit ta původní teze, že primárně musí ze strany Itálie vzejít ochota, že do budoucna takové skládky nebudou vznikat, pachatelé budou postihováni, protože se jedná o závažnou trestnou činnost, a že sama italská vláda bude chtít vynaložit peníze na sanaci. Evropa k tomu může přidat.

(Řečník souhlasil s tím, že odpoví na otázku položenou zvednutím modré karty (čl. 162 odst. 8 jednacího řádu).)

  Piernicola Pedicini (EFDD), Domanda "cartellino blu". – Onorevole Pospíšil, anche il commissario, prima, ha ripetuto tutte le procedure d'infrazione che sono state comminate all'Italia rispetto a questo tema. Io le chiedo: secondo lei il metodo della procedura di infrazione in sé, che poi è una forma di tassa che viene pagata direttamente dagli stessi cittadini che sono già vessati dal punto di vista della salute e della mancanza di tutela ambientale, è un metodo che funziona, oppure no? Gli stessi cittadini che pagano in termini di salute poi pagano anche in termini di tasse.

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE), odpověď na otázku položenou zvednutím modré karty. – Pane kolego, já jsem právník. Pokud je zákonný důvod pro to, aby stát byl postižen rozhodnutím Evropského soudního dvora, pak zkrátka postižen bohužel být musí.

Jde o to, zda je porušeno, či není porušeno právo. Ale také zde jasně říkám, že Itálii má být poskytnuta pomoc ze strukturálních fondů k tomu, aby se ta ekologická zátěž vyřešila, protože z národních rozpočtů se rozsáhlé ekologické zátěže v zásadě nedají vyřešit.

  Nicola Caputo, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, dal lontano 2003, quando comparve per la prima volta in un rapporto di Legambiente sulle ecomafie, l'espressione "Terra dei fuochi" ha caratterizzato e marchiato un'intera area della Campania che abbraccia diversi comuni della provincia di Caserta e di Napoli. Io stesso provengo da quella ricca e feconda terra, che per secoli è stata chiamata "Terra di lavoro".

"Terra dei fuochi" sintetizza ed enfatizza ciò che a cavallo tra gli anni Novanta e l'inizio del nuovo secolo si è andato verificando in queste zone: un irresponsabile ed incontrollato sversamento di sostanze tossiche, scorie e rifiuti di ogni genere, cui spesso è seguito il loro incenerimento. Un'attività di inquinamento criminale e sistematico, che ha potuto contare su una catena di negligenze ed omissioni e sulla tragica impreparazione delle autorità competenti ad arginare il fenomeno. L'ho denunciato in quest'Aula nel corso del mio primo one-minute speech di questa legislatura.

L'impatto della Terra dei fuochi è stato devastante per la vita e per la salute di decine di migliaia di persone e per l'economia dell'intera Campania. Da novembre c'è una nuova emergenza in termini di mortalità, in particolare di bambini. I dati sono simili agli anni 2012 e 2013. I roghi tossici continuano 365 giorni all'anno, 24 ore al giorno. In 32 comuni della provincia di Napoli la mortalità supera la media regionale del 10 % per gli uomini e del 13 % per le donne, mentre in 23 comuni della provincia di Caserta le percentuali sono del 4 % e del 6 %. Con i suoi 500 000 ettari di superficie agricola, la Campania, con la Puglia e la Catalogna, rappresenta uno dei tre grandi poli agroalimentari europei. Un danno economico e d'immagine incalcolabile, nonostante i siti in cui si è sversato materiale tossico non superino l'1 % del totale delle aree rurali.

Devo però dire che dopo decenni di commissariamenti, durante i quali qualcuno di noi ha chiesto più volte, talvolta anche in maniera isolata, la mappatura delle aree a rischio, l'avvio di un processo di bonifica dei suoli inquinati e l'istituzione di un registro regionale dei tumori, si inizia a registrare un'inversione di tendenza. Fortunatamente è cambiato l'approccio al problema: c'è una maggiore consapevolezza e una forte determinazione a risolvere il problema alla radice.

Recentemente la Regione Campania si è dotata di una rigorosa procedura di certificazione della salubrità delle sue produzioni agroalimentari, così da risultare una delle regioni più controllate d'Europa, e ha messo in piedi un vero e proprio piano di monitoraggio dell'intero territorio campano, con l'obiettivo di svolgere indagini tecniche per la mappatura – anche mediante strumenti di telerilevamento – dei terreni della regione destinati all'agricoltura.

A febbraio il registro tumori infantili della Regione Campania è stato accreditato dall'Associazione italiana dei registri tumori ed è stato avviato uno specifico studio da parte dell'Istituto zooprofilattico e dell'Istituto tumori di Napoli su 4 200 soggetti provenienti da 168 comuni individuati sulla base di tre modelli differenti di rischio ambientale, al fine di escludere le interferenze date dalla poca esposizione o da fattori legati fisiologicamente all'età.

Inoltre, sono stati effettuati i primi interventi di bonifica delle aree inquinate. Si è dato avvio all'operazione di rimozione delle ecoballe, ma soprattutto la Campania si è dotata di un nuovo piano per i rifiuti, che dovrà traghettare la regione definitivamente oltre l'emergenza.

Certamente è necessario fare molto di più, continuare a tenere accesi i riflettori nazionali, e non solo nazionali, su questo enorme problema che continua a mietere vittime innocenti. Le istituzioni, a cui tocca dimostrare di avere capacità di intervento, devono fare la propria parte provvedendo a bonifiche in tempi celeri, ma anche l'Europa può e deve fare la sua parte, accompagnando la Campania in questo processo.

Pochi mesi fa, in un convegno che ha visto la presenza di medici e scienziati provenienti da ogni parte d'Europa, ho chiesto ad alcuni funzionari della Commissione – e ribadisco qui la mia richiesta – l'elaborazione di un manuale di buone pratiche, da quelle igienico-alimentari a quelle mediche e di prevenzione, per dare delle valide indicazioni ai cittadini che vivono in tutte le aree ad alto impatto ambientale d'Europa.

La Terra dei fuochi, assieme alle tante aree che soffrono un'emergenza ambientale, non deve essere considerata o avvertita come un problema esclusivamente italiano o campano: è un'emergenza europea. I problemi sono molteplici, complessi e collegati tra loro, e la sinergia tra le istituzioni europee e tra gli enti locali in questi anni è stata la vera chiave per arrivare a risultati tangibili.

Ringrazio il commissario Vella per la consueta disponibilità che dimostra ogni volta che parliamo di Terra dei fuochi e della Campania e per il coinvolgimento che ha dimostrato a più riprese. Grazie anche alle associazioni e alle istituzioni del territorio campano, alle migliaia di cittadini coinvolti in questo tentativo di salvare una terra meravigliosa. Ora si tratta solo di continuare a lavorare duramente e insieme, affinché la Terra di lavoro torni il prima possibile "Campania felix".

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

  Rosa D'Amato (EFDD), Domanda "cartellino blu". – Mi perdoni, on. Caputo, ma lei sa che il governo e la Regione Campania sono dello stesso colore del suo partito, vero? Vi parlate? Avete modo di comunicare, di operare quello che lei suggerisce in maniera pratica, visto che sono vent'anni che questa emergenza è purtroppo agli onori della cronaca? Poi, una domanda sulla sua proposta: lei propone un manuale igienico-alimentare. Che vuol dire? Che vogliamo porre rimedio alla causa delle malattie dei nostri cittadini insegnando loro a mangiare meglio, piuttosto che dire che la causa vera è l'inquinamento?

  Nicola Caputo (S&D), Risposta a una domanda "cartellino blu". – Come al solito voi del Movimento 5 Stelle vedete sempre il bicchiere mezzo vuoto. La questione è una. Innanzitutto la questione politica: è chiaro che il governo nazionale e il governo regionale sono del mio stesso partito, e ne sono orgoglioso, tant'è che gli unici fatti concreti che sono stati realizzati, sono stati realizzati soprattutto in questi ultimi anni ed i risultati sono tangibili. Anche il rapporto con la Commissione è migliorato, tant'è che ci stiamo avviando alla risoluzione anche del problema dell'infrazione.

La proposta che ho fatto, invece, al gruppo di scienziati e che non è stata essenzialmente una mia proposta – una proposta che è uscita da un tavolo, e che ho ribadito alla Commissione – è per affiancare a tutte le misure, anche di natura sanitaria, che vengono messe in campo, anche una misura di informazione. È importante superare anche l'approccio culturale che in alcune aree, purtroppo, è un po' deficitario.

  Der Präsident. – Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben zwar heute ein bisschen mehr Luft. Frau Grapini hat nachgefragt, warum ich ihr das Wort nicht für die blaue Karte gegeben habe. Bestimmte Grundsätze halte ich aufrecht. Es ist jedenfalls bei mir nicht üblich, dass man innerhalb der gleichen Fraktion Fragen stellt, weil wir hier schon Effekte gesehen haben, dass sich Kollegen die Bälle zuwerfen. Und das ist nicht die Art von Lebendigkeit der Debatte, die wir uns bei der Einführung der blauen Karte vorgestellt haben.

  Ivan Jakovčić, u ime kluba ALDE. – Gospodine predsjedniče, htio bih na početku solidarizirati sa talijanskim prijateljima koji su postavili ovo pitanje s onima koji su govorili, koji žive u Italiji, koji žive u Kampaniji, svjesni činjenice da živjeti u takvom okruženju nije jednostavno, odgovorno je politički, odgovorno je na svaki način pogotovo na ljudski način. Znajući da u samom našem pitanju danas, gospodine povjereniče, govorimo o tome da je la Terra dei Fuochi područje u Kampaniji u kojem se nalazi otprilike 2 000 iznimno onečišćenih lokacija koje utječu direktno na život 2 i pol milijuna stanovnika koji prema mnogim navodima umiru od raka ili su izloženi zaista toksičnim požarima. Zaista je ozbiljno pitanje na koji način mislimo sve to zajedno riješiti.

Područje obuhvaća čak 57 općina između Napulja i Caserte. Dodatni je problem da nitko ne zna gdje je taj toksični otpad uopće zakopan, je li na jednom mjestu, na drugom mjestu, godinama se to čini. Sve govori o tome da se radi o organiziranom kriminalu, ali ne samo o organiziranom kriminalu, nego i odlaganjima na zaista krajnje divlji način. Ono što naravno najviše zabrinjava je to da sve to zajedno utječe strašno na javno zdravlje. Zastrašujuće je čuti podatke koje smo slušali, a pogotovo je zastrašujuća informacija da javno zdravstvo ne može pomoći djeci, ne može pomoći onima kojima je najpotrebitije zdravlje u rastu.

Dakle mladi ljudi, djeca stradavaju zbog toga što imamo ovakve toksične požare. Ono što želim naglasiti je još nešto. Želim razgovarati o tome kako rješavati takve probleme. Moje iskustvo mi govori da se rješavanje ovakvih problema može učiniti europskim novcem. Imam konkretne primjere na kojima sam osobno radio u saniranju i identificiranju 46 divljih odlagališta koja su bila, ili jesu još uvijek djelomično, na granici između Hrvatske i Slovenije.

Zajedničkim sredstvima, europskim sredstvima, zajedničkim naporima uspjeli smo naći sva ta zajednička divlja odlagališta i početi ih sustavno rješavati da tako kažem jedan po jedan. U to treba uključiti nevladine udruge. U stvaranju katastra divljih odlagališta, osobno sam uključivao izviđače, planinare, sve one udruge koje su dobronamjerne prema okolišu i koje žele aktivno sudjelovati u svemu tome. Identificirali smo taj katastar na način da postoji GPS odredište svakoga divljeg odlagališta. I onda se može sustavno krenuti i u rješavanje takvih problema.

Naravno da ovdje želim istaknuti ne samo način prekogranične suradnje, jer u ovom konkretnom slučaju toga čak i nemamo, ali želim naglasiti potrebu suradnje s lokalnim vlastima. Bez aktivnog učešća lokalnih vlasti, niti nacionalne niti regionalne, a kamoli europske vlasti mogu nešto napraviti. Da, treba nam europski novac, jer bez europskog novca lokalne, pa ni nacionalne ni regionalne vlasti, neće lako izaći na kraj. Ali, trebaju nam dobri partneri u lokalnim vlastima, u nevladinim udrugama jer bez njih siguran sam da ćemo vrlo teško rješavati probleme.

Želim vas upozoriti i iskoristiti ovu priliku, gospodine povjereniče, i spomenuti vam mnoge crne točke kako ih mi nazivamo u Hrvatskoj koje postoje u okolišu. Postoje u okolišu ne samo u Hrvatskoj, nego i zemljama kandidatkinjama, postoji na mnogo mjesta mnogo divljih odlagališta, mnogo opasnih odlagališta. Vrijeme je da napravimo taj katastar najopasnijih odlagališta u Europskoj uniji i u našem prvom susjedstvu u zemljama koje će vrlo brzo jednog dana postati i članice Europske unije.

Dakle, želim vas upozoriti i na jedan veliki problem, a to je problem odlaganja vojnog materijala u Jadranskom moru. To je krajnje ozbiljan problem. O tome nigdje nitko ne govori i svi se nekako skrivamo i ne želimo o tome javno govoriti. Ali, to je ozbiljan ekološki problem. Dakle, mislim da su kolege koji su otvorili ovo pitanje na ovakav način pokazali svoju želju i solidarnost s građanima Kampanije. Ja želim to još jednom ovdje potvrditi, ali želim zamoliti Europsku komisiju da se ozbiljno uhvatimo posla i na primjeru Kampanije, neka to bude početak rješavanja ukupnog problema s takvim divljim odlagalištima opasnog otpada u Europskoj uniji.

Govornik je pristao odgovoriti na pitanje postavljeno podizanjem plave kartice (članak 162. stavak 8. Poslovnika).

  Maria Grapini (S&D), Întrebare adresată în conformitate cu procedura „cartonașului albastru”. – Stimate coleg, sunt de acord cu tot ce ați spus dumneavoastră. Până la urmă, întrebarea este legată de viața oamenilor și cred că cu toții suntem de acord că trebuie să facem tot ce se poate pentru a salva vieți.

Dar vă întreb: față de ceea ce ați prezentat dumneavoastră și domnul Caputo, nu credeți că ar mai exista o posibilitate de a ajuta acea zonă și nu numai, că în Europa avem multe zone, prin Fondul strategic de investiții? Fondul acesta a fost creat exact pentru proiecte greu finanțabile din piață prin bănci și eu cred că un asemenea proiect, așa cum ar avea nevoie „Țara focurilor” și nu numai, s-ar putea preta la finanțare prin Fondul strategic. Ce părere aveți?

  Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE), odgovor na pitanje postavljeno podizanjem plave kartice. – Poštovana gospođo Grapini, hvala na vašem pitanju. Mislim da postoji niz načina kako se može pomoći i jedan ste vi spomenuli, a to je pitanje korištenja fonda EFSU na način da se zaista pomogne u rješavanju divljih ili toksičnih odlagališta. Ali ako se taj fond ne želi upotrijebiti u te svrhe, sigurno se može upotrijebiti za jačanje konkurentnosti poljoprivrede u Kampaniji, koja je nažalost zbog ukupne situacije, zbog svog imidža došla u probleme konkurentnosti.

I u tom kontekstu, ako želimo koristiti novac za zaštitu okoliša i rješavati probleme divljeg odlagališta, možemo to tako učiniti. A „Junckerov” novac, novac Junckerovog fonda, koristiti za jačanje konkurentnosti turizma, poljoprivrede i drugoga u Kampaniji.

  Eleonora Forenza, a nome del gruppo GUE/NGL. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, voglio in primo luogo ringraziare i colleghi e le colleghe per aver presentato questa interpellanza. Credo che sia fondamentale che il Parlamento e la Commissione europea affrontino questa questione, che ormai non possiamo più certo chiamare una emergenza, dato l'ampio lasso di tempo da cui si protrae. E vorrei rispondere, a chi ha parlato di una competenza esclusiva degli Stati membri rispetto ai problemi di cui stiamo discutendo, che il diritto alla salute è un diritto fondamentale garantito nella Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell'Unione europea, così come il principio di precauzione dovrebbe essere un principio ordinatore dell'azione di Commissione, Parlamento e Consiglio.

Qui parliamo di una questione di giustizia ambientale negata, di fronte a cui non ci si può fare nessuno schermo, non si può addurre come alibi la competenza esclusiva dello Stato membro, sebbene siamo i primi a voler nominare quali siano le responsabilità del governo italiano e del governo locale.

Parliamo appunto, come veniva già detto negli interventi che mi hanno preceduto, di un'espressione, quella di "Terra dei fuochi", che comincia negli anni Duemila a diventare di uso comune, ma in realtà il problema di cui stiamo parlando, quello dello sversamento illegale di rifiuti speciali e tossici nella zona a cavallo fra le province di Napoli e Caserta, risale almeno a metà degli anni Settanta, e investigatori come Roberto Mancini avevano già messo in luce il problema.

Vorrei ricordare che un pezzo dello sviluppo delle piccole e medie industrie del Nord Italia si è costruito anche sullo sversamento esentasse di scarti di lavorazione nei terreni della Terra dei fuochi, con la mediazione della criminalità organizzata, che utilizzava ditte di movimento di terre, cave e trasporto di rifiuti per organizzare il traffico. Ritrovarsi quindi in una situazione di emergenza ancora oggi è un fatto politicamente e moralmente inaccettabile.

Personalmente sono in contatto, come altri colleghi qui in Aula, con i comitati che si occupano di difendere la giustizia ambientale nella Terra dei fuochi, e che sottolineano l'efficacia ad oggi delle misure di mappatura, monitoraggio e bonifica previste dalla legge italiana 6/2014e e implementate dal governo e dalla Regione Campania. Mancano progetti operativi di bonifica, manca un'analisi accurata dell'inquinamento delle falde acquifere, non sono coperte dai monitoraggi intere zone come quella comprendente il parco nazionale del Vesuvio. A cava dei Molti, ad esempio, nel comune di Maddaloni, si stima che siano presenti 200 000 metri cubi di rifiuti chimici già caratterizzati, ma la situazione è ferma e manca non solo un piano di bonifica operativo, ma anche la messa in sicurezza. Mancano inoltre piani di riqualificazione agricola dei terreni inquinati, con un grave danno economico per le popolazioni.

È necessario inoltre concentrare i test epidemiologici e tossicologici sulle persone che vivono all'interno del sito di interesse nazionale e non estenderli a tutta la regione, con il rischio di minimizzare la portata dei risultati. Le mamme del comitato "Vittime della Terra dei fuochi" hanno denunciato la morte per leucemia, nei soli ultimi quattro mesi, di ben 16 bambini, di cui l'80 % residente nella Terra dei fuochi. Troviamo da questo punto di vista vergognose le parole del ministro – anzi della ministra – della salute Lorenzin del 2015, che osò affermare che il tasso di mortalità più alto in Campania era dovuto a inquinamento da veicoli, a un cattivo sistema sanitario e a stili di vita e alimentazione errati. Siamo davvero senza parole, perché questo significa ignorare la pesantezza e la gravità del problema di cui stiamo parlando.

Ringrazio quindi ancora una volta i colleghi che hanno presentato questa interpellanza, un'interpellanza più che legittima, se consideriamo che la Commissione europea ha multato l'Italia per 22 milioni lo scorso febbraio e che, dopo la condanna della Corte europea del 2015 proprio per l'emergenza rifiuti in Campania e il non rispetto delle direttive 98/2008 e altre sul trattamento e riciclo dei rifiuti, dopo tutto questo ancora si stenta ad imporre una misura risolutiva a questo problema. Allora occorre anche sopperire a quanto lo Stato membro, il governo italiano, ancora stenta a fare, proprio perché in gioco c'è la salute dei cittadini e il diritto alla salute è un diritto fondamentale.

Voglio solo aggiungere che credo non basti – anzi, credo sia profondamente sbagliato – trasformare un problema di ordine economico-sociale, di giustizia ambientale di portata nazionale, in un problema di ordine pubblico, in un problema semplicemente di repressione e gestione dei flussi di rifiuti. La militarizzazione di molti di questi siti ha semplicemente troppo spesso impedito a comitati, a militanti, a esperti di poter presidiare in maniera adeguata i siti inquinati.

Penso che le soluzioni debbano essere di fondo, debbano essere soluzioni a lungo termine, ma debbano essere anche soluzioni immediate perché, appunto, parliamo di morti, parliamo di un danno economico, parliamo di un danno sociale che insiste su una zona in cui già la disoccupazione femminile e la disoccupazione giovanile è a livelli altissimi.

Sono appunto possibili anche misure immediatamente applicabili per ridurre la portata degli sversamenti e contenere il fenomeno dei roghi. Occorre attuare protocolli per fare prevenzione secondaria, ovvero disintossicare dagli agenti inquinanti assorbiti e soprattutto fare prevenzione primaria.

  Rosa D'Amato, a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la Terra dei fuochi è una delle situazioni più drammatiche del mio paese, ma anche dell'intera Europa. Parliamo di veri e propri avvelenamenti di massa a partecipazione pubblica. Sì, perché entrambi hanno una cosa in comune: lo Stato.

Sulla Terra dei fuochi dal 1991 al 2013 sono state 80 le inchieste per traffico illegale di rifiuti tossici, 2 000 le denunce, 500 le aziende coinvolte, 95 gli imputati a vario titolo, tra cui disastro ambientale e omicidio plurimo colposo. Ovviamente, prescrizione per tutti.

Tra Caserta e Napoli i decessi per tumori superano di gran lunga ogni media nazionale e straniera. Lo Stato conosce da anni la situazione: già a fine 2013, con un decreto per fronteggiare le emergenze ambientali e industriali, aveva stabilito la necessità di fare degli screening sanitari per essere certo della correlazione tra morti e Terra dei fuochi – come se ce ne fosse bisogno – screening però poi interrotti, perché le risorse sono state dimezzate. Ma il governo, nell'ambito della politica cosiddetta "svuota carceri", ha di fatto vanificato questo decreto e reso aleatoria la condanna per chi applica veri e propri roghi della morte.

Il governo dimostra così di avere ignorato che il diritto all'ambiente è un elemento costitutivo del diritto alla salute, che la Costituzione tutela in quanto diritto primario con il suo articolo 32, rendendosi così ripetutamente moroso rispetto all'adempimento sia degli obblighi comunitari che costituzionali, nonostante i numerosi moniti della Corte di giustizia europea. E i cittadini quindi pagano, e non solo con i 120 000 euro al giorno della multa europea, ma con quanto di più importante hanno: la loro vita e la vita dei loro figli. Il governo deve fornire una prospettiva diversa agli abitanti delle aree contaminate, trasformando la criticità in opportunità.

Ed ecco però la proposta: la Commissione europea si faccia promotrice – uno: della creazione di centri di ricerca internazionali, magari con sede nel Mezzogiorno d'Italia, che si occupino sia delle nuove tecnologie di bonifica che del processo decisionale per identificarle; centri guida per un settore che è in espansione. Due: poiché in Italia, e in Europa, molti siti rimangono abbandonati ed inquinati senza che il responsabile sia individuato e bonificato, chiediamo che sia istituito un fondo europeo finanziato dalle industrie inquinanti, come il superfund dell'EPA.

  Jean-Luc Schaffhauser, au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, je me devais d’être présent. D’abord, pour accompagner nos amis italiens; ensuite, comme député strasbourgeois, c’est aussi un devoir d’être là pour rendre réelle cette session du Parlement le jeudi après-midi, ce qui semble quand même difficile quand on compare par rapport à un jeudi après-midi à Bruxelles; enfin, parce que j’aime beaucoup la région de Naples pour y avoir beaucoup navigué, et parce que c’est une région absolument splendide.

J’aimerais qu’on élève un peu le débat sur la question du détournement de fonds européens vers la mafia et qu’on se pose la question des procédures qui ont permis cela. Certes – et j’y reviendrai –, il y a une responsabilité de l’Italie dans la délégation de gestion de ces fonds, mais il y a un problème plus global. Je constate – je me tourne vers la Commission – que soit nous sommes dans des procédures extrêmement compliquées où, craignant tout détournement de fonds, nous n’arrivons plus à dépenser les fonds. Pour illustrer mon propos, je citerai le G5 Sahel, pour lequel nous avons voté 15 milliards, qui sont absolument nécessaires pour la lutte en matière de sécurité et développement dans cette zone, mais les procédures mises en place sont telles qu’on ne dépense pas l’argent par peur d’un détournement des fonds. Il y a un problème. Soit nous sommes en face de protocoles, de chartes d’éthique, de codes de bonne conduite, de principes de transparence, de divulgations de conflits d’intérêt, et j’en passe, d’appels d’offres ouverts et, malgré tout, nous constatons ce détournement de fonds permanent.

Pourquoi en est-on arrivé là? Je pense que vous devez, à la Commission, vous poser des questions. Comment adapter des procédures au monde réel et à la situation réelle? Car il est très facile de faire des appels d’offres dans lesquels il y a détournement ou dévoiement des fonds. Cela aurait dû être anticipé, car il est quand même inacceptable qu’on arrive, par des fonds européens, à soutenir la criminalité organisée. Certes, ce que vous proposez est très bien. On sanctionne, on redonne de l’argent pour contribuer à remettre les choses en place, mais cet argent donné ne sera-t-il pas à nouveau détourné?

En Italie, nous faisons face à la même situation que celle que nous avons dans des pays très difficiles – et je pense particulièrement à la mafia albanaise, au Kosovo, en Bosnie—Herzégovine ou même en Serbie, dans tous ces pays de l’élargissement –, où des fonds communautaires – et vous le savez – sont détournés également pour soutenir des mouvements de la criminalité organisée.

Nous devons repenser ces procédures. Je voudrais revenir sur mon expérience: quand j’étais en 1980 auprès du maire de Strasbourg, les services étaient publics et nous avions la maîtrise de nos déchets, ce qui évitait tout détournement de la procédure puisque la ville était responsable et gérait elle-même, en régie propre, toute la gestion de ses déchets.

Les appels d’offres généralisés, la libéralisation selon laquelle il fallait mettre en concurrence ont particulièrement conduit à pareille situation de détournement de la procédure par des sociétés fictives, par des sociétés écrans au profit d’organismes et de la criminalité organisée ou, tout simplement, de sociétés qui font des profits absolument inacceptables. Tout cela fonctionnait très bien à Strasbourg, j’en donne l’exemple, quand nous le faisions en régie propre.

Deuxième chose: l’affaiblissement de l’État, la manière dont l’État a été empêché, le retrait de sa souveraineté, l’incapacité qu’il a véritablement de pouvoir utiliser les moyens, souvent de force, à l’égard de la criminalité organisée. Il n’y a pas que des éléments de droit, il y a aussi le monopole de la force, et nous sommes rentrés dans un circuit si compliqué que nous n’en sortons pas parce que nous avons affaibli les États.

Enfin, pour terminer, la Commission doit réfléchir à des procédures liées à la réalité.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, in the 1600s, when Naples was experiencing its golden age, it was known as the most fertile plain in the world. In the past 20 years, however, Naples and the Campania district have had new nicknames: ‘Land of Poison’, ‘Triangle of Death’, ‘Land of Fires’. The latter, of course, refers to the region of Campania where toxic wastes have been illegally burned and buried in a systematic fashion since the late 1980s. This is environmental sabotage on a grand scale.

From 1994 to 2008 the region of Campania in south-west Italy was under a formal state of emergency declared due to the saturation of regional waste treatment facilities. There is growing evidence, including from the World Health Organisation, that the accumulation of waste, illegal and legal, urban and industrial, has contaminated soil, water and the air with a range of toxic pollutants, including dioxins. It has even emerged that the United States Navy, whose European Command is based in Naples, conducted a USD 30 million study from 2008-2011 into local air, soil and water. They found unacceptable health risks and advised their personnel accordingly. Throughout all the research, a high correlation between incidence of cancer, respiratory illnesses and genetic malformations and the presence of industrial and toxic waste landfills has been found. Reported cases include women getting breast cancer unusually early, men developing lung cancer despite never having smoked, and children born with Down’s Syndrome to comparatively young mothers. All this is very, very worrying.

Many people say that the catalyst for this catastrophe is illegal trade and that hazardous waste is a by—product of tax dodging in a country with one of the highest levels of evasion in western Europe. Businesses massaging their income had to mask the scale of their activities and that meant hiding huge amounts of hazardous waste. Yet some people’s solution to this is to blame the European Union and, above all, the Commission. There is a phrase, ‘where there is a will, there is a way’, but you could also say, ‘where there is no political will, there is undue delay’. Commissioner Vella has pointed out the efforts they have made to help. The European Court of Justice fined Italy EUR 40 million, which they paid in 2015, and again another EUR 40 million in late 2015, again EUR 20 million, and, as has been mentioned, EUR 120 000 daily.

But all the fines in the world will not solve the problem unless there is a real, genuine effort and the political will to do so. The Commission is prepared to give EUR 172 million, but it can only act within the Treaties and the powers given to it. So I think there is need for fresh thinking and here and for cooperation so that the Land of Fires can once again become the most fertile plain in the world and a great place to live.

  Andrea Cozzolino (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, è molto importante la discussione che stiamo facendo oggi qui, e ringrazio i colleghi Pedicini ed altri, che hanno sollecitato questa riflessione. Però non sprechiamo questa occasione e proviamo a fare insieme al commissario Vella una riflessione che ci consenta di fare qualche passo in avanti rispetto a una vicenda di cui conosciamo tutti gli aspetti.

Non c'è cosa che non sappiamo di quello che è accaduto, negli ultimi 25, 30, 35 anni, in quella nostra terra. Conosciamo l'accumulazione originaria della criminalità organizzata, che ha fatto dello scambio con le imprese del Nord l'inizio, negli anni Settanta e negli anni Ottanta, di quella che poi è diventata la Terra dei fuochi. Conosciamo le responsabilità anche di tante forze produttive di quel territorio, che hanno continuato a utilizzare quelle aree per discariche abusive. Conosciamo le responsabilità dolorosissime della politica, a cominciare dalla mia parte politica.

Ma se noi continuiamo a farci solo del male, a polemizzare, e non proviamo a cogliere le occasioni che di volta in volta le istituzioni nazionali, regionali, locali ed europee ci consentono per riaprire questo dossier e fare, di queste occasioni, occasioni per fare un passo in avanti proprio per rispondere alle esigenze che abbiamo davanti, innanzitutto le esigenze di salute, di sanità che abbiamo su quel territorio, e di rilancio anche dell'immagine produttiva e civile di quell'area, allora sprechiamo il nostro tempo. Magari conquistiamo un po' di consenso personale, ma non facciamo passi in avanti.

Noi abbiamo una conoscenza della realtà come non mai. Sappiamo dove sono i siti inquinanti, o almeno la gran parte di essi: li abbiamo monitorati, finalmente abbiamo una mappa. Abbiamo un rapporto sulla salute. Poi si può discutere delle metodologie, e c'è anche un ulteriore aggiornamento, ma sappiamo che il problema c'è e che riguarda soprattutto i nostri bambini.

E abbiamo in corso un'azione di contrasto. Se io cito solo le cose che si sono fatte negli ultimi mesi del 2016 per contrastare quello che avviene adesso su quel territorio, dagli arresti, ai controlli, alle multe che sono state fatte, al tentativo di bloccare ancora uno sversamento abusivo su quelle aree, noi ci rendiamo conto che è in corso un'azione, un'iniziativa. Abbiamo finalmente un piano di raccolta e di smaltimento dei rifiuti – so che ne stanno discutendo con lei proprio in queste settimane. E abbiamo per la prima volta – lo dico alla mia collega D'Amato –ingenti risorse a disposizione. Non era mai accaduto tutto questo. Abbiamo risorse nazionali, abbiamo risorse europee.

E allora noi dobbiamo provare a costruire le condizioni perché stavolta, davvero, questa occasione non sia un'occasione persa. Non dobbiamo più ritornare in quest'Aula nei prossimi mesi per raccontarci una sconfitta, perché avendo la conoscenza, avendo gli strumenti e avendo anche le risorse a disposizione, poi ritorniamo a denunciare l'assenza di iniziative. Allora tutto quello che si può fare: innanzitutto una più forte concentrazione delle istituzioni, ma anche un accompagnamento.

Io qui vorrei proporre tre cose semplici. D'intesa con gli altri parlamentari, torniamo ogni sei mesi qui – magari utilizziamo la commissione per l'ambiente – e facciamo un punto sulla situazione, ogni sei mesi. Perché questa questione va affrontata, non può diventare oggetto di campagna politica ogni volta. Ogni sei mesi, per individuare responsabilità e cose che non si sono fatte.

Vorrei invitare il commissario Vella a venire in Campania a incontrare le autorità e a fare un punto sullo stato dell'avvio del programma delle bonifiche, sul piano sanitario. Fare un punto reale, dello stato reale delle cose. E vedere insieme che cosa fare, perché su questo sono d'accordo con tutti i colleghi che l'hanno detto: non possiamo avere solo una Europa che commina multe e poi basta.

E infine, io sono d'accordo con la proposta della collega D'Amato: lavoriamo per un centro di ricerca. Noi abbiamo tre poli importanti di bonifica nel Mezzogiorno d'Italia: Taranto, Crotone e Terra dei fuochi. È importante avere un investimento scientifico nel territorio del Mezzogiorno, perché può essere d'aiuto a questo programma enorme, che dobbiamo fare, di bonifica di questi nostri territori, e può essere anche una scelta vincente sul terreno anche di un rapporto più forte tra scienza, innovazione e sviluppo ecocompatibile.

Ecco, io credo che questo sia un modo per affrontare e per provare a dare una risposta positiva a una sfida enorme che sta davanti a noi, e sarebbe davvero drammatico se nei prossimi mesi tornassimo qui a discutere come se nulla fosse accaduto.

  Pina Picierno (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, voglio anch'io ringraziare il commissario e i colleghi: il collega Pedicini, i colleghi che con la loro interpellanza ci offrono quest'occasione importante di discutere anche qui, oggi, in merito a questa questione seria, annosa, grave che è la questione "Terra dei fuochi". È una questione ormai nota, colleghi, lo avete detto, ma non è per questo meno seria, non è per questo meno dolorosa.

Come avete già detto e come voglio ricordare, questa questione ha il volto delle centinaia e centinaia di persone, di donne, di bambini che in questi lunghi anni si sono ammalati a causa dello sversamento di rifiuti, che è stato operato in maniera illegale dai clan camorristici, certamente, ma anche da una certa economia sommersa, di cui dovremmo altresì discutere.

È una questione seria e dolorosa, come dicevo, perché esiste una correlazione evidente e riconosciuta tra lo sversamento illegale dei rifiuti e queste patologie tumorali: non citerò qui tutta la letteratura scientifica che ci ricorda questa correlazione – l'abbiamo sostenuto tutti, lo avete detto prima di me – e quindi mi limito soltanto a richiamarla. Dicevo, è una questione nota perché – colleghi, presidente, commissario – di questa questione noi discutiamo ormai da vent'anni.

L'operazione "Adelphi", che accertò per la prima volta il ruolo del clan Bidognetti attraverso Gaetano Cerci, attraverso la figura controversa, pericolosissima, di Cipriano Chianese, è del 1991. Nel 1995, durante il dibattimento del procedimento penale Avolio +19, fu ascoltato il pentito Schiavone, per la prima volta, che indicò, in quel dibattimento, i luoghi –lo ricorderete – dove dovevano essere interrati dei rifiuti che lui disse radioattivi. Ci fu poi un'azione, dopo quelle dichiarazioni, come conseguenza di quelle dichiarazioni, ci fu un'iniziativa della Criminalpol di Roma su delega della Procura napoletana, che avviò una serie di ispezioni, una serie di sopralluoghi nei siti indicati da Schiavone. Ma i rifiuti radioattivi non sono stati mai trovati, non sono stati mai identificati, come ha ribadito a più riprese Federico Cafiero De Raho, che al tempo, lo voglio ricordare, era il capo della DDA di Napoli.

Venti anni, dunque. In questi venti anni sono state dette tante cose, forse non tutte a proposito: abbiamo ascoltato molte cose approssimative, fino ad assistere a una specie di corto circuito pernicioso, a un certo punto – ho ricordato il caso dei rifiuti radioattivi mai identificati. Un corto circuito pernicioso, che a un certo punto sembrava inseguire più una richiesta di sensazionalismo a tutti i costi che non la ricostruzione reale, precisa, doverosa dei fatti. E in alcuni casi, colleghi, siamo arrivati addirittura al parossismo – io lo voglio ricordare – con camorristi pentiti che accusavano magistrati di dire bugie. Anche questo è accaduto.

E allora, colleghi, ci dobbiamo imporre, in questa discussione, perché sia veramente utile, perché sia costruttiva, intanto il rispetto dei fatti, la ricostruzione precisa, puntigliosa, doverosa della verità. E la verità ci impone di dire che la questione è molto seria e molto grave, la più grande mattanza di vittime innocenti che si sia mai verificata in quell'area del paese, certamente.

Ma non possiamo non dire che i passi in avanti sono tali e tanti, insomma dobbiamo riconoscere che finalmente, dopo anni di silenzi colpevoli, dopo anni di incapacità di azione, il governo italiano, le autorità locali, mi piace dire "lo Stato italiano" stanno lavorando bene, anche in collaborazione con la Commissione europea. Voglio ricordare le cose più importanti. La legge 68 del 2015, che ha introdotto nel codice penale un nuovo titolo dedicato ai delitti contro l'ambiente, sta funzionando, sta funzionando perché i dati elaborati dalla commissione ecomafie ci dicono che funziona. Così come possiamo riconoscere che il territorio è presidiato, che si sta lavorando in maniera seria alle bonifiche, a partire dalle zone più delicate.

Insomma, tanto si sta facendo e tanto bisogna continuare a fare, come stiamo facendo, lasciandoci alle spalle questi venti anni di incapacità e di silenzi e continuando sulla strada che abbiamo intrapreso e che io credo ci porterà finalmente alla risoluzione di questo problema serissimo per l'Italia e per l'Europa.

Catch-the-eye-Verfahren

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, nu vreau să mai reiau din dezbaterile colegilor mei. Sunt de acord că deșeurile afectează viața oamenilor și o afectează pe termen lung și pe generații. Vreau să ne gândim la soluții.

Eu am fost surprinsă când am văzut că, iată, Comisia, în directiva pentru deșeuri a lăsat o portiță pentru ca deșeurile periculoase să nu fie înregistrate. Transporturile mai mici de două tone de deșeuri periculoase și douăzeci de tone de deșeuri nepericuloase pot să treacă fără să fie înregistrate. Noi avem nevoie de o trasabilitate exactă, pentru că poate fi un transportator cu două tone de deșeu periculos, dar pot fi o mie de transportatori cu două tone pe an și atunci, gândiți-vă că mutăm focarele de infecție dintr-o țară în alta. Eu cred că aici trebuie să ne gândim la soluții pe termen imediat, cum putem să stopăm, dar mai ales pe termen lung.

Domnule comisar, poate vă gândiți să dedicați o sumă de cercetare țintită pe tehnologia pentru distrugerea deșeurilor, pentru că nu cred că avem acum o evidență foarte clară: ce tipuri de deșeuri avem și ce tehnologie avem pentru a le distruge și să nu afecteze viața oamenilor.

(Ende des Catch-the-eye-Verfahrens)

  Karmenu Vella, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I agree with my colleagues that this was a very good opportunity to discuss this great, huge, alarming, chronic problem – and I call it chronic because we act, we discuss, we act and discuss, and the problem goes on and on. The Commission is very much aware of the worrying situation caused by the sub-standard and illegal waste management in Campania over the years and has already acted consequently and comprehensively, for over more than 10 years now. The Commission has done its maximum within its legal powers and will continue to do its utmost to curb the situation. However, strict enforcement of relevant legislation by the Italian competent authorities is paramount to eradicate an environmental and health problem which is instigated by organised crime, and maybe some MEPs know more than others and accept and admit more than others what is actually going on.

I agree with those who said that the citizens are not only paying with their taxes, but more so, they are paying with their health. Mr Pedicini asked whether the infringement procedure works and I must say, yes, it does work. It works in other Member States. It also works in other sectors in Italy itself, so why should it not work in Italy for this sector? I have to say that even here, as I mentioned before, there was progress in this sector, there was improvement, as a colleague mentioned, that the Italian authorities in December presented a management plan which my services are assessing. I was also a bit surprised that, in this letter that we signed, we talk about waste, we talk about health, but very little about the root of the problem, the criminal activity for which the state and the citizens are paying and against which we all have to act.

We talked about funding. I do not think that we are addressing an issue of lack of funds here. Funding was available. I also mentioned that EUR 72 million was provided in the current financial framework, but funding alone will not do the job. We also need the political goodwill of all the authorities, of all the parties, to fight the root cause of these problems. We have only heard about what the EU should do when the EU has already done a lot, without naming and shaming the illegal activities. If we continue to discuss only the Commission and the EU without addressing and shaming what the real cause is, I think this will only encourage the illegal activities to go on.

And let us not underestimate the scale of this illegal activity because the waste problem in the Campania region has been characterised by illegality, inefficiency, irresponsibility and indecision. It is a much more complex phenomenon than it seems and unfortunately it has been inadequately addressed by policymakers.

As I said before, I can assure you that my services and all the Commission will keep monitoring the situation in Campania to verify that the Italian authorities are taking the necessary measures to ensure that the waste is managed without endangering human health and the environment in accordance with EU waste legislation. I need to stress again, however, that the solution to the acute health problems derived from the illegal treatment of waste in Campania is dependent on all relevant actors working effectively together. It is paramount that the Italian competent authorities take a firm hold of the situation and clamp down on organised crime in order to dissociate it from waste management. I think we can all be of service to our citizens not only by discussing the problem, but by actively working together to address again the root cause of it all. We know what the problem is, we know what we have to do so, let us do it. Let us act to solve the problem and not continue discussing it in aeternum.

  Der Präsident. – Damit ist die Aussprache geschlossen.

12. Décisions concernant certains documents: voir procès-verbal.

13. Transmission des textes adoptés au cours de la présente séance : voir procès-verbal

14. Calendrier des prochaines séances : voir procès-verbal

15. Interruption de la session

  Der Präsident. – Ich erkläre die Sitzungsperiode des Europäischen Parlaments für unterbrochen.

(Die Sitzung wird um 16.10 Uhr geschlossen.)