Verbatim report of proceedings

Thursday, 16 November 2017 - Strasbourg

1. Opening of the sitting

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. DAVID-MARIA SASSOLI
Vicepresidente

(La seduta è aperta alle 9.05)

2. Petitions: see Minutes

3. EU-New Zealand Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation (Consent) - EU-New Zealand Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation (Resolution) (debate)

  Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca, in discussione congiunta,

- la raccomandazione di Charles Tannock, a nome della commissione per gli affari esteri, sul progetto di decisione del Consiglio sulla conclusione a nome dell'Unione dell'accordo di partenariato sulle relazioni e la cooperazione tra l'Unione europea e i suoi Stati membri, da una parte, e la Nuova Zelanda, dall'altra (15470/2016 - C8-0027/2017 - 2016/0366(NLE)) (A8-0327/2017), e

- la relazione di Charles Tannock, a nome della commissione per gli affari esteri, recante una proposta di risoluzione non legislativa sul progetto di decisione del Consiglio sulla conclusione a nome dell'Unione dell'accordo di partenariato sulle relazioni e la cooperazione tra l'Unione europea e i suoi Stati membri, da una parte, e la Nuova Zelanda, dall'altra (2017/2050(INI) (A8-0333/2017).

  Charles Tannock, rapporteur. – Mr President, the Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation, otherwise known as PARC, between the European Union and New Zealand is a much welcomed initiative. New Zealand is one of the EU’s closest partners, a country with which we share common values and interests. PARC builds on the existing joint declaration signed in 2007 developing and cementing those links, allowing for closer cooperation and more regular ministerial dialogue. I am pleased as rapporteur that we have been able to include a resolution alongside our consent motion, which allows us the opportunity to reaffirm our support for the agreement and to express our strong solidarity with New Zealand as a country.

PARC covers many of the areas that we would expect to see, and is similar in scope to the recently signed Strategic Partnership Agreement with Canada, for which I am pleased to say I was also the rapporteur. These areas include fighting terrorism and organised crime, aiding global development, working together at the multilateral level, and combating climate change and supporting sustainable development. New Zealand is a leader in the renewable energy sector and has set itself ambitious targets for renewable energy production. This emphasis on combating climate change, supporting sustainable development and protecting biodiversity is very clear throughout the PARC, and I strongly support this.

Article 15 for instance, which focuses on working together to further the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures, gives a sense of the level of commitment by all parties pledged to the specific regard here. We also see PARC reaffirming the terms of the Framework Participation Agreement (FPA) signed in 2012 which allows for New Zealand to contribute militarily towards European Union Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions. New Zealand, as our resolution notes, plays an important role in contributing towards peace and international security, a role that is all the more impressive when considering its relatively small size and geographical location. Its contribution, following the FPA, to the EU’s highly successful EU NAVFOR Atlanta, which was commanded from my own constituency in London, has been well received and we look forward to setting and seeing more cooperation of this kind in future.

I should also mention again, highlighted in the resolution, the role that New Zealand has played in the European Union’s policing mission in Afghanistan. Indeed, it was at the sidelines of a Brussels meeting concerning Afghanistan that the PARC agreement was signed back in October of last year 2016. Looking at the resolution itself, I believe that I am speaking for the majority of this House, when I say that the positive tone taken reflects the extremely good will towards New Zealand felt by this Parliament and the belief that the relationship between the European Union, its Member States and New Zealand is a force for good in the world.

To conclude, I believe that the signing of PARC is not only a positive development in ties between the New Zealand authorities and Government, and the European Union, but it is part of a wider development and success story of the EU itself, where we see it working effectively to secure agreements with third countries, both in terms of political cooperation, but also for trade. Having seen the passing of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and the Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA) with Canada, this agreement with New Zealand marks the start of an increased engagement with the Pacific region, as the European Union is set to start trade negotiations with New Zealand shortly. It is also doing so with Australia and Japan in the next year or so.

I believe that this will send a strong signal to all of those that doubt and seek to undermine the achievements and benefits of European Union membership. This morning’s debate is a chance for this Parliament to demonstrate the strong support for New Zealand that exists across the entire political spectrum, as was illustrated only too clearly by the overwhelming vote in favour of these motions in the Committee on Foreign Affairs. Therefore, I look forward to hearing the rest of the debate.

  Phil Hogan, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, thank you for the opportunity of this debate on the European Union-New Zealand Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation. In the first place, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Tannock, for his excellent report and for his engagement throughout the process in Parliament. I believe this report gives an excellent overview of the relationships and relations between the European Union and New Zealand, and is a very good background to inform today’s vote in this Parliament on consent to the conclusion of the agreement.

As a general remark, let me say that the agreement is the outcome of our efforts to provide a modern framework for relations with one of the European Union’s closest partners in the Asia-Pacific region. European Union relations with New Zealand are excellent and I sincerely believe they will continue to develop under the new Government of Prime Minister Ardern.

President Tusk has just had a first, very positive exchange of views with the Prime Minister at the East-Asia Summit. The European Union and New Zealand are like-minded partners, and consequently we coordinate closely on a number of international issues. We also have very good development cooperation, especially in the Pacific, which focuses mostly on clean energy and climate-change-related projects. In parallel, political dialogue with New Zealand has been intensifying and there has been an ever-increasing number of political contacts over the past years. In 2016, the European Union upgraded its diplomatic representation in New Zealand from chargé d’affaires to ambassador level.

We highly appreciate our cooperation in crisis management. In the past, New Zealand participated in the European Union operations in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Afghanistan and the Horn of Africa. In 2012, the European Union and New Zealand signed a framework participation agreement, the first one of the Asia-Pacific region, which reinforced the EU-New Zealand broader partnership and opened new avenues for cooperation. Since 2014, a regular strategic security dialogue has been taking place at senior official level.

Our partnership and cooperation agreement with New Zealand upgrades our relationship to make it fit for the 21st century. We share the same views on many global issues, and approach these issues in a similar way. We support democracy, the rule of law and human rights, and are active players in multilateral organisations such as the United Nations and the World Trade Organization. We also have shared interests in tackling key global challenges such as climate change, sustainable development and preserving the environment, in addition to humanitarian aid and the fight against terrorism, to name just these.

As regards the economy, we have a shared interest in launching our free-trade agreement (FTA) and these negotiations should be launched as soon as possible. We already have dynamic economic relationships and we look forward to expanding our trade links further.

Our successful preparatory work demonstrates that we see eye to eye on many issues, but let me assure the honourable Members that we have had the utmost regard to agricultural sensitivities. In November 2016 the Commission released a study on the cumulative impact of future trade agreements in the agricultural sector. The ruminant meat and dairy sectors were identified as more sensitive ones in a possible free-trade agreement with New Zealand.

These sensitivities are fully reflected in the European Union’s trade negotiation strategy for the free-trade agreement. The draft directives for negotiating the FTA were published by the Commission in September this year and the discussions in the Council are ongoing. Parliament has fed into these discussions with a dedicated report which was adopted at the end of October.

I trust that the Council will adopt the negotiating directives soon, which will enable the Commission to launch the FTA negotiations at the beginning of 2018. The Commission looks forward to continuing cooperation with Parliament on this matter.

  Traian Ungureanu, în numele grupului PPE. – Domnule președinte, într-o lume plină de confuzii și contradicții putem conta pe puține certitudini. Noua Zeelandă este una dintre ele.

Vorbim pe drept cuvânt despre Noua Zeelandă ca despre un prieten cu care împărțim aceleași valori, chiar dacă geografic vorbind, ne desparte o lume. E normal ca toate aceste lucruri să se concretizeze într-un parteneriat politic, economic și tehnologic.

De altfel, această convergență s-a reflectat direct în colaborarea excelentă a grupurilor politice pe parcursul dezbaterilor asupra acestui raport. Și țin să-l felicit în mod special pe raportor, domnul Charles Tannock, pentru tactul și suplețea cu care a condus elaborarea acestui raport.

Acordul de parteneriat privind relațiile și cooperarea UE-Noua Zeelandă, pe care-l vom vota astăzi, și rezoluția ce-l acompaniază, pot și trebuie să deschidă calea spre negocierea unui acord de liber schimb UE-Noua Zeelandă.

Potrivit intențiilor Comisiei aceste negocieri vor demara înainte de sfârșitul anului. E adevărat că, mai nou, popularitatea acordurilor de liber schimb nu e foarte mare, dar plusurile și șansele pe care acordurile de liber schimb le deschid nu pot fi negate nici statistic nici rațional.

  Andi Cristea, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, on behalf of the S&D Group, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Charles Tannock, and our colleagues in the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET), for the very strong and comprehensive text submitted before this House today. Parliament values very much the partnership with New Zealand, and we look forward to an even more ambitious cooperation. This is the spirit of the report and our contribution. The EU and New Zealand are like-minded partners, with common values and interests. The Partnership Agreement will foster an even more effective bilateral engagement by strengthening political dialogue and improving cooperation in a wide range of areas.

New Zealand is one of the EU’s closest friends and valued allies. At a time of high international volatility, where mistrust and populists risk undermining multilateralism and the interest of the international community at large, the EU is proud to forge and foster even closer alliances with like-minded nations and long-standing partners like New Zealand. The Partnership Agreement will provide a forward-looking political framework within which EU-New Zealand relations and cooperation on sustainable development and a comprehensive range of issues will be developed even further for years to come, in order to match new ambitions and aspirations.

I am confident that today’s vote will confirm with a large consensus a strong and substantive text and will reiterate and underline once again the energy and ambition of this longstanding relationship, of which the Partnership Agreement will now be the most eloquent pillar. Many thanks to the rapporteur and colleagues, once again, for their cooperation and support.

  David Campbell Bannerman, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, while recently in New Zealand for my work on the parallel EU-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, I was reminded of the importance of the deep and special relationship with our Kiwi friends. The EU is New Zealand’s third-largest trading partner, after Australia and China, whilst the UK remains New Zealand’s top EU export destination. EU Member States and New Zealand enjoy a strong partnership, sharing many common goals, with strong political, economic and cultural ties, including in multilateral organisations such as the United Nations and the World Trade Organisation.

The recently signed EU-New Zealand Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation (called PARC for short) is an important tool in modernising these historic links. This is a parallel, but separate, agreement covering non-trade aspects, very similar to Canada’s Strategic Partnership Agreement and Australia’s Framework Agreement. It aims to facilitate more effective bilateral engagement by strengthening political dialogue on a wide range of issues, from customs to innovation, education and culture, to migration, judicial affairs and the fight against global terrorism and cybercrime.

I expect a similar strategic agreement between the EU and the UK post-Brexit. I give credit to my friend and colleague Charles Tannock for his work in steering the PARC report through the European Parliament, and not leaving it parked.

  Norica Nicolai, în numele grupului ALDE. – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, deși îndepărtată geografic Noua Zeelandă este foarte apropiată din punct de vedere al partajării valorilor democratice și al standardelor civilizaționale înalte cu Uniunea Europeană. Asta explică faptul că pentru noi dar, cu siguranță, și pentru Noua Zeelandă acest acord va constitui un pas înainte spre o colaborare consolidată.

Avem o lungă tradiție de colaborare economică. Sigur, suntem al treilea partener în relațiile comerciale, primul fiind Marea Britanie, și, sper că în viitor, după ce vom avea un acord de liber schimb, Europa continentală va fi un partener mult mai influent și mult mai pregnant în această relație. Avem o lungă colaborare în materie securitară, nu numai Bosnia-Herțegovina, ci și alte misiuni de menținere a păcii ne-au găsit împreună. Avem un parteneriat consolidat și eficient în combaterea terorismului și nu numai.

Schimbările climatice care ne preocupă pe toți constituie, de asemenea, un palier de cooperare între Uniunea Europeană și Australia. De aceea acest acord, în opinia noastră, va fi semnificativ și va marca o nouă viziune cu privire la vocația de jucător global a Uniunii Europene.

Vreau să-i mulțumesc domnului Tannock pentru colaborare. Cred că puține rapoarte au avut parte de o cooperare atât de consolidată între grupurile politice și asta nu numai pentru că raportul reflectă opțiunea noastră în materie de acorduri de cooperare, ci pentru că Noua Zeelandă este unul dintre partenerii care merită privilegiați în relațiile noastre externe în toate domeniile de activitate.

  Jaromír Kohlíček, za skupinu GUE/NGL. – Pane předsedající, Nový Zéland je v očích mnoha lidí v Evropě tak trochu pohádkovou zemí na druhém konci světa. Poměrně řídké osídlení, velké plochy krásné přírody spolu s polohou jedné z posledních výsep na cestě k Antarktidě a do jižního Tichomoří činí z této země potenciální ráj pro turisty a výzkumníky.

Je zajímavé, že v lednu 2017, bezprostředně po zahájení jednání o brexitu ministerský předseda vlády této země svou první zahraniční cestu směroval do Evropského parlamentu, Londýna a Berlína. Tím jasně naznačil, že vedle tradičních vztahů s Londýnem má země zájem o zvláštní vztahy s Evropskou unií. Dlužno podotknout, že autor zprávy mylně směšuje Evropskou unii a Evropu. Což u britského poslance Tannocka tolik nepřekvapuje.

Při jednání s Novým Zélandem o dohodě o volném obchodu bude jistě delikátní a citlivá otázka zejména zemědělských produktů. Pro země EU bude zajímavé využít zkušeností Nového Zélandu s ochranou životního prostředí a stabilizací dodávek elektřiny v podmínkách, kdy více než 80 % výroby pochází z obnovitelných zdrojů. To zatím v Evropské unii neznáme.

Zajímavá je angažovanost této země v Mezinárodním fondu pro Irsko. Tento fond podporuje hospodářský a sociální rozvoj zeleného ostrova a přispívá k dialogu a usmíření komunit. Mimochodem, právě otázka Irska je jedním z prvních bodů jednání komisaře Barniera se zástupci britské vlády.

  Jordi Solé, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, we support closer relations between the European Union and New Zealand and therefore we welcome the conclusion of the Partnership Agreement with a country that, although far away from us geographically speaking, is very close and like-minded when it comes to standards of democracy, human rights, fundamental freedoms, international law, and so on.

A country with one of the highest Human Development Index rankings, there are many things from New Zealand to praise, for instance the functioning of its institutions of government, the way minorities are nowadays respected and promoted, its relevant commitment to sustainable development and to peacekeeping operations, and its valuable efforts in the fight against climate change, with more than 80% of its electricity coming from renewable energy sources. It also seems to me remarkable that, since some weeks ago, New Zealand, the first country in the world in which all women had the right to vote, has now the world’s youngest female head of government, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.

We believe that this Partnership Agreement can provide for a framework that promotes and further develops the relationship with a country with which we can work together for a better advanced and future-oriented governance. We also hope that this instrument can bring about more people-to-people ties, the ties that make countries and regions really come closer, and that it will also be useful to deepen relations between the EU and the Asia-Pacific region.

When it comes to negotiations for a new Free Trade Agreement, our position is much less enthusiastic, first and foremost because we favour a multilateral trade agenda and multilateral negotiations to regulate world trade, where respect for human rights, the environment and social rights prevail. Secondly, we want clear limits for negotiations, especially with regard to agriculturally-sensitive issues, animal welfare, a phasing out of extensive agricultural production methods, or the possibility of sustainable development chapters. Thirdly, we call for a bigger democratic oversight for all trade negotiations.

Thus, we would have preferred that the resolution simply took note of, instead of openly supporting, the launch of the Free Trade Agreement negotiations. Notwithstanding our position on the FTA, we welcome this PARC, insofar as it will allow us to have stronger ties with New Zealand, and we thank the rapporteur, Mr Tannock, for his work.

  Patrick O’Flynn, on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Mr President, it seems to me that the prospect of Brexit is spurring EU interest in warming up relations, and indeed trading ties, with many of the countries eager to reach trade deals with the United Kingdom after its departure.

It is widely regarded as a source of shame in Britain that in the 1970s our country threw up tariff barriers against our historic Commonwealth friends such as Australia and New Zealand. That is a wrong which is soon to be righted, as the United Kingdom broadens its economic and diplomatic relationships across the world, raising the priority we give to Commonwealth nations, as well as seeking to sustain links with Member States of the European Union.

New Zealand is a magnificent country, a bedrock of democratic values in its region and a key part of the Anglosphere, so it is good to see the EU strengthening political relationships with New Zealand as well.

As regards the agricultural sector, New Zealand farmers are renowned the world over for their enterprising attitudes and ability to get by without any subsidies, let alone expensive and extensive networks such as those contained in the EU common agricultural policy. It is good also to hear Mr Hogan talking specifically about free-trade agreements with New Zealand – not before time, many will think – albeit not as part of the arrangements under the Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation.

I believe that the United Kingdom’s International Trade Secretary, Liam Fox, may be a few steps ahead of the EU in this regard. If, indeed, the prospect of Brexit is serving as a catalyst for the EU to reduce its tariff walls against the ‘sunrise’ parts of the global economy, then that is yet another benefit of the United Kingdom’s magnificent decision to rejoin the global family of independent sovereign nations.

  Jean-Luc Schaffhauser, au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, je n’ai rien contre la Nouvelle-Zélande. Ce qui me frappe dans ce texte, le texte de son rapporteur, c’est le rapport religieux avec le libre-échange.

Ni l’échec de l’ALENA, ni le retrait américain du TAFTA, ni l’opposition de nos opinions publiques à l’AECG ne vous dissuadent de continuer dans cette voie.

Les menaces pesant sur notre agriculture, et surtout sur les filières d’élevage, livrées à l’agrobusiness intensif néozélandais, sont volontairement passées sous silence.

Par l’extension illimitée et inconditionnelle du libre-échange, vous empêchez nos États et nos parlements de protéger la sécurité alimentaire et l’indépendance des peuples européens, ainsi que d’assurer la survie de nos économies.

La marche de l’Union européenne vers le sans-frontiérisme détruit la raison même de l’Europe, car elle montre votre recherche d’un gouvernement mondial.

Il faut quitter ces institutions européennes mortifères, si on veut sauver le projet européen.

  Γεώργιος Επιτήδειος (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η εταιρική σχέση της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης με τη Νέα Ζηλανδία περιλαμβάνει ένα ευρύ φάσμα δραστηριοτήτων, μέσα στο οποίο είναι και το εμπόριο. Η Νέα Ζηλανδία έχει ως δεύτερο εξαγωγικό προορισμό την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, από την οποία εισάγει κυρίως βιομηχανικά προϊόντα, αυτοκίνητα, μηχανήματα, τηλεοπτικό εξοπλισμό αλλά και ενδύματα και υλικά κλωστοϋφαντουργίας.

Επειδή από τη Νέα Ζηλανδία εισάγονται στην Ευρώπη κυρίως πρόβειο κρέας, μαλλί, φρούτα, κρασί και γαλακτοκομικά προϊόντα, που παράγονται και στις χώρες του ευρωπαϊκού Νότου, πρέπει οι εμπορικές συναλλαγές γι’ αυτά τα προϊόντα να γίνονται με ιδιαίτερη προσοχή. Εάν, μάλιστα, ληφθεί υπόψη ότι η εταιρική σχέση προβλέπει τη συνεργασία των τελωνείων και την άρση κάποιων τεχνικών εμποδίων, μεταξύ των οποίων είναι και οι δασμοί, πρέπει οπωσδήποτε να ενεργοποιηθεί η εμπορική άμυνα, διότι υπάρχει κίνδυνος τα προϊόντα που θα έρχονται από τη Νέα Ζηλανδία να δημιουργήσουν συνθήκες αθέμιτου ανταγωνισμού με τα αντίστοιχα προϊόντα του ευρωπαϊκού Νότου, κάτι το οποίο είναι απαράδεκτο και δεν πρέπει να συμβεί.

  Adam Szejnfeld (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! W przyszłym roku będziemy obchodzili stulecie zakończenia I wojny światowej. Przy okazji dzisiejszej debaty warto podkreślić, że Nowa Zelandia – ten mały kraj, wtedy niespełna milionowy –postawiła 100 tysięcy swoich żołnierzy po stronie aliantów, pomagając nam w zwycięstwie. Nie gorzej było podczas II wojny światowej. Dwieście tysięcy Nowozelandczyków walczyło po dobrej stronie mocy. Nie dziwi więc, że łączą nas także stosunki formalne, jak wspólna deklaracja o stosunkach i współpracy z 2007 r. czy umowa o partnerstwie na rzecz stosunków i współpracy z 5 października 2016 r. Można by wręcz się dziwić, że dopiero tak późno podpisaliśmy tak ważne nas wiążące umowy. Bo co nas łączy? Więzi kulturalne, więzi polityczne, więzi gospodarcze, poszanowanie praw człowieka i praworządności, współpraca w zakresie środowiska i bezpieczeństwa, w tym walka z terroryzmem. Cieszę się więc, że skutkiem tego wszystkiego będzie – mam nadzieję jak najszybciej – także zawiązanie między nami umowy o wolnym handlu. Warto bowiem przypomnieć, że Unia Europejska jest trzecim partnerem handlowym dla Nowej Zelandii, a wartość naszej wspólnej wymiany gospodarczej to jest około 20 miliardów dolarów nowozelandzkich. Unia Europejska jest także drugim inwestorem w Nowej Zelandii. Co ważne Nowa Zelandia to demokratyczne państwo szanujące praworządność, ochronę środowiska, prawa mniejszości. Nic nas nie dzieli oprócz odległości, w związku z czym nadal budujmy tę współpracę między nami.

  Luigi Morgano (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ringrazio il relatore. Non poteva che essere positiva la raccomandazione del Parlamento europeo a concludere un accordo di partenariato con la Nuova Zelanda. La Nuova Zelanda, è stato ricordato, è infatti uno dei paesi a noi più vicini, poiché condivide gli stessi valori e principi democratici, il rispetto dei diritti umani, questioni fondamentali come pace, sicurezza e ambiente.

Una comune cultura, quindi, e sensibilità che ha permesso di instaurare uno stretto partenariato con l'Unione europea e con gli Stati membri, che si è concretizzata in comuni scelte politiche. Mi riferisco al contribuito neozelandese alle operazioni ONU di mantenimento della pace in Bosnia, Kosovo, Sierra Leone e Afghanistan, alla formazione delle forze di sicurezza irachene che combattono Daesh, al ruolo di copatrocinatore delle risoluzioni del Consiglio di sicurezza ONU in Siria e processo di pace in Medio Oriente.

Ancora, il suo ruolo importante di contributore e fornitore di assistenza allo sviluppo sostenibile e alla riduzione della povertà nei paesi in via di sviluppo, al concreto impegno in materia di clima nell'ambito della Convenzione quadro ONU sui cambiamenti climatici, e all'attuazione dell'accordo di Parigi, nell'ambito di COP21.

È bene, quindi, essere arrivati alla conclusione di questo accordo, che comprende anche la lotta al terrorismo, in particolare impegni in materia di scambio di informazioni su reti e gruppi terroristici, sui metodi per prevenire, contrastare e combattere terrorismo, radicalizzazione e criminalità informatica, ma anche intese per una cooperazione scientifica, accademica e tecnologica.

Una scelta coerente con l'avvio dei negoziati sull'accordo di libero scambio tra UE e Nuova Zelanda, che devono svolgersi in uno spirito di reciprocità e mutuo beneficio, tenendo conto della sensibilità di alcuni prodotti agricoli e di altro tipo.

Un accordo importante, un quadro politico coerente orientato al futuro, all'interno del quale le relazioni e la cooperazione su un'ampia gamma di questioni saranno ulteriormente sviluppate negli anni, nell'interesse dei cittadini dell'Unione e della Nuova Zelanda.

  Richard Sulík (ECR). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, ako člen skupiny Austrália-Nový Zéland dohodu o voľnom obchode s Novým Zélandom jednoznačne vítam. Je to práve bezbariérový obchod, ktorý je najlepšou cestou prehlbovania vzťahov medzi jednotlivými krajinami sveta, najmä s takými, s ktorými máme silné politické, historické aj kultúrne väzby, a Nový Zéland takouto krajinou je.

Ako člen parlamentnej skupiny Austrália-Nový Zéland som sa stretol s množstvom relevantných hráčov a môžem povedať, že táto dohoda už mala byť dávno uzavretá. Podľa mojich informácií jej bránili najmä obavy západoeurópskych farmárov z novozélandského hovädzieho mäsa. Toto považujem za vtip, keďže novozélandský farmári nedostávajú vôbec žiadne dotácie a navyše musia svoje produkty dopraviť cez pol sveta do Európy. Mať strach pred takouto konkurenciou je veľmi slabá vizitka západoeurópskych farmárov.

Chcem preto vyjadriť nádej, že po dnešnom chválení dohody o spolupráci PARC bude čoskoro uzavretá aj dohoda o voľnom obchode.

  Anne-Marie Mineur (GUE/NGL). – Er is natuurlijk helemaal niets mis met goede betrekkingen met Nieuw-Zeeland. Het is een prachtig land, met prachtige mensen en prachtige ideeën. Maar ik zou graag met Nieuw-Zeeland samenwerken op een manier die echt ten dienste staat van duurzaamheid, klimaat en werknemersrechten. Deze partnerschapsoverkomst is een eerste stap op weg naar weer een nieuw vrijhandelsverdrag. Dat betekent dus meer handel, meer transport, meer brandstofkosten en meer uitstoot. Dat dient het klimaat helemaal niet. De klimaatconferentie in Bonn leert ons dat we nog niet eens in de buurt komen van de doelen die we ons in Parijs hebben gesteld.

Ook het voornemen om in deze verdragen met Australië en Nieuw-Zeeland verder te gaan dan al de bedoeling was in de overeenkomst betreffende de handel in diensten (TiSA), vormt een bedreiging voor de arbeidsrechten en werkzekerheid van Europese werknemers. En wat betekenen al deze gecombineerde vrijhandelsverdragen voor de agrarische sector? Kan de commissaris daar duidelijkheid over geven?

De handelsverdragen die de Europese Unie afsluit, zijn gestoeld op een convergentie van de regelgeving. Dat betekent dat wij zeggenschap kwijtraken over onze regels. Dat gebeurt door expliciete afspraken daarover, maar ook door een veel onzichtbaarder werkwijze, namelijk door het samenwerkingsorgaan op het gebied van regelgeving. Daarmee wordt het voor een volksvertegenwoordiger onzichtbaar en oncontroleerbaar hoe onze regels precies convergeren. Het feit dat Nieuw-Zeeland net heeft ingestemd met het Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), maakt het er niet beter op.

Er zijn grote verschillen tussen de regels over de hele wereld en de landen van Europa staan daarin vrij eenzaam aan de top. Als wij gaan convergeren met de hele wereld, weten we vrij zeker dat we onze standaarden kwijtraken. Ik heb niets tegen Nieuw-Zeeland, wel tegen dit soort handelsverdragen. Juist met je vrienden moet je dit soort afspraken niet maken. Dank u wel.

  Bronis Ropė (Verts/ALE). – Puiku, kad sėkmingai plėtojasi santykiai su Naująja Zelandija. Mes pripažįstame tas pačias vertybes ir glaudesni ekonominiai santykiai tikrai prisidės prie tarptautinės vertybinės bendruomenės stiprėjimo.

Kita vertus, viskas nėra taip paprasta, kaip atrodo iš pirmo žvilgsnio. Visų pirma, neturime pamiršti, kad kurdami dvišales specialias prekybines sutartis mes kartu griauname tarptautines struktūras. Sunkiai kurta Pasaulio prekybos organizacija lieka nuošalyje. Trečiosios šalys irgi mato žinią, kad galima mėginti gauti trumpalaikės naudos. Ar susimąstome apie ilgalaikes tokios veiklos perspektyvas?

Negalime ignoruoti ir ekologinio poveikio. Nekartosiu statistikos, kokį poveikį klimato kaitai daro vien Naujosios Zelandijos galvijininkystės sektorius. Ar tikrai mes norime jį dar labiau skatinti, tuo pat metu spartindami klimato kaitą?

  Bogusław Liberadzki (S&D). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Około sześciu tygodni temu miałem przyjemność przyjmować w imieniu przewodniczącego Tajaniego grupę posłów parlamentu Nowej Zelandii z przewodniczącym Carterem na czele. Była to okazja do takiego dokonania krótkiego przeglądu i porównania jednocześnie intencji, woli, podobieństw, różnic.

Otóż pierwsza generalna konstatacja: historycznie jesteśmy sobie bliscy, to znaczy Europa jest bliska Nowej Zelandii. Druga rzecz bardzo ważna: nasze gospodarki nie są konkurencyjne, nasze gospodarki są w dużej mierze komplementarne. Trzecia konstatacja: rozmiar Unii Europejskiej pod każdym względem i rozmiar Nowej Zelandii to są dwa zupełnie inne rozmiary.

I wreszcie to, co ich bardzo interesuje, to jest rzetelna współpraca i pytanie: w jaki sposób podzielimy, zwłaszcza obrót artykułami pochodzenia rolnego, po brexicie. Drugie – współpraca w dziedzinie terroryzmu i zwalczania terroryzmu. I konstatacja ogólna – gratuluję, że rozważamy to sprawozdanie. Bardzo gorąco rekomenduję poparcie.

  James Nicholson (ECR). – Mr President, I welcome the Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation between the European Union and New Zealand and I want to congratulate Mr Tannock on a very good report.

We already enjoy strong relations and share many common goals on international issues. There are many deep historical ties between Northern Ireland, which I represent, and New Zealand. William Massey, the 19th Prime Minister of New Zealand, grew up in Limavady, in County Londonderry, so there is a great tie between my region and New Zealand. It is vital that we build on these ties with New Zealand and other Commonwealth countries, while we are in the European Union and also once we leave.

It is clear that there is political will from both the Commission and New Zealand to get the ball rolling on a free-trade agreement. As rapporteur, for the Agriculture Committee, on trade with New Zealand, I firmly believe that this has the potential to provide opportunities for our producers if a fair and balanced trade deal can be achieved. And that is the bottom line here.

Commissioner, you will be going off to Buenos Aires very shortly, for the World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference, and it will be linked to that as well. We in Europe have got to be positive on trade, because if we are negative it will work against us.

I heard comments earlier in this debate about Europe trying to outdo the UK. I have a feeling that, while Europe has left the starting post on this issue, Dr Fox is still in the paddock and has not even got on his horse yet. From my point of view, I think we are in a very interesting position, where Europe will go ahead, and the UK will have good trade. So we will have good relations with this brilliant – lovely – country and I wish it well, with every success in the future.

  Neena Gill (S&D). – Mr President, I welcome the conclusion of this partnership agreement with New Zealand and my congratulations too to Charles Tannock. In these times of increasing isolation and nationalism, I think it is of paramount importance that we join forces with partners who share our values and our world vision to advance an open rules-based global order that works for the people. As an MEP in the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats Group (S&D), I welcome that the recent elections in New Zealand resulted in a Labour-led government, championing an agenda of sustainable development.

Clearly, the EU and New Zealand are already finding an important common cause and we are making progress on trade negotiations on which this House adopted recommendations last month. Aside from trade, I hope this partnership will help us to focus our attention on a region of important mutual strategic benefit – the Asia-Pacific region. Whether it concerns the stability in the South China Sea that harbours vital shipping routes, combating climate change or addressing terrorist threats, this region is of key strategic importance to the European Union and I call upon the High Representative, the Council and the Commission to ensure that this agreement is a stepping stone to advancing our partnerships in the Asia-Pacific region, where New Zealand is an important actor.

  Tonino Picula (S&D). – Gospodine predsjedniče, podržavam Sporazum o partnerstvu o odnosima i suradnji između Europske unije i Novog Zelanda jer je riječ o našem bliskom partneru kada se radi o obrani demokratskih načela i ljudskih prava. Prvi stalni veleposlanik Europske unije u Novom Zelandu stupio je na dužnost prošle godine, čime je otvoreno i autonomno izaslanstvo Europske unije na Novom Zelandu.

Novi Zeland predano sudjeluje u operacijama Europske unije za upravljanje krizama: Atalanta EUNAVFOR-a oko Afričkoga roga, misiji EUPOL-a u Afganistanu i misiji EUFOR-a (Althea) u Bosni i Hercegovini.

Naglašavam važnost pojačane brige o okolišu i morima radi zaštite prirodnih resursa, zajedničke ciljeve u borbi protiv klimatskih promjena te partnerstvo na području opće dostupnosti održive energije u skladu s istoimenom inicijativom Ujedinjenih naroda.

Vjerujem u partnerstvo Europske unije i Novog Zelanda jer dijelimo iste vrijednosti i interese. Naše partnerstvo treba nadograditi gospodarskom dimenzijom sklapanjem sporazuma o slobodnoj trgovini. Nadam se da ćemo prevladati razlike u pogledu priznavanja zemljopisnih indikacija proizvoda.

  Francisco Assis (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, começo por saudar o relator pelo excelente trabalho levado a cabo e salientar a importância deste acordo de parceria com a Nova Zelândia. A Nova Zelândia é um dos países do mundo com quem temos mais proximidade, é um Estado de Direito democrático que tem uma interpretação das questões internacionais muito próxima daquela que prevalece no âmbito da União Europeia e, por isso, temos todas as razões para procurar reforçar as ligações de natureza política com a Nova Zelândia. Nesse sentido, este acordo de parceria pode inaugurar uma nova fase nesse âmbito.

Mas também quero dizer que espero que, para além deste acordo de parceria no âmbito político, e com o que isso comporta em várias dimensões que já aqui foram referidas, isto também seja um passo importante para que se avance plenamente para a concretização de um acordo de livre comércio com a Austrália.

Entendo que a União Europeia não se pode fechar sobre si mesma, a União Europeia tem que se abrir também do ponto de vista das relações comerciais com outras zonas do mundo e a Nova Zelândia é naturalmente, pela sua proximidade política cultural e no domínio dos valores, um parceiro comercial a recomendar para a União Europeia.

Procedura "catch-the-eye"

  Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señor presidente, yo también quiero empezar felicitando al señor Tannock por su excelente informe. Creo que es muy conveniente que el Parlamento Europeo apruebe el Acuerdo de Asociación con Nueva Zelanda, país lejano geográficamente, pero, como ya se ha dicho, muy cercano a la Unión Europea en valores, principios e intereses. Y también está claramente comprometido con la cooperación y la gobernanza internacionales.

Con la firma el pasado agosto del Acuerdo Marco con Australia, la Unión Europea dio otro paso más a la hora de potenciar su presencia en Asia-Pacífico. Yo creo que la Unión es un actor global y tiene que seguir siéndolo, también, cuando seamos una Europa de veintisiete Estados. Para ello tenemos que reforzar nuestra proyección en una región tan amplia pero también tan dinámica como la de Asia-Pacífico, y los acuerdos de Nueva Zelanda, y también el de Australia, nos servirán mucho.

  Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la Nuova Zelanda è legata all'Unione europea e ai suoi Stati membri da un partenariato stretto e di lunga data, ed ha già concluso accordi bilaterali di libero scambio con paesi importanti quali l'Australia, la Thailandia e la Cina. La Nuova Zelanda è un paese con standard di civiltà elevati che promuove metodi di produzione sostenibili, in particolare nel settore alimentare, e ha promosso accordi globali a livello mondiale in materia di clima e mitigazione delle emissioni.

Non dobbiamo però commettere errori già commessi in passato, perché ogni accordo di libero scambio comporta qualche rischio, specie per le nostre produzioni agroalimentari. Va dunque chiarita prioritariamente la tutela che si intende riservare ai prodotti agroalimentari europei, che sono prodotti sensibili e che per esempio sono stati già messi a rischio da accordi come il CETA.

La Nuova Zelanda è un partner importante. L'accordo di libero scambio potrà portare benefici ad entrambi i paesi, ma l'Europa dovrà essere in grado di tutelare con la massima attenzione i propri asset e le proprie specificità.

  Maria Heubuch (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident! Niemand bezweifelt hier, dass wir die Werte, die uns zugrunde liegen, gemeinsam wirklich respektieren, und auch ich will das an dieser Stelle tun. Aber sind wir wirklich ergänzende Volkswirtschaften, wie vorher gesagt wurde? Ich sehe das im Bereich Landwirtschaft nicht bei jedem Produkt so. Und hier tut sich insgesamt ein Problem auf. Wir machen sehr viele Handelsabkommen – es wurde gerade das CETA genannt –, wir gehen zum Mercosur, wir gehen nach Australien, nach Neuseeland, jetzt kommt Japan. Aber wer schaut wirklich darauf, was das letzten Endes für die Landwirtschaft und für die Lebensmittelproduktion heißt? Wer evaluiert wirklich, was insgesamt auf uns zukommt? Wir schauen jedes Abkommen einzeln an, aber das summiert sich ja auf.

Hierin sehe ich ein ganz großes Problem. Wir müssen hier genau evaluieren, was es insgesamt heißt. Lebensmittel sind keine normale Ware, das ist nicht ein Auto, das wir beliebig herstellen können. Lebensmittelproduktion hat sehr viel mit den Regionen vor Ort zu tun, mit den Menschen, die darin arbeiten, und das hat auch damit zu tun, wie wir dann mit der Umwelt umgehen. Ich denke, das sollten wir hier besser evaluieren und hier mehr Schutz aufbauen.

  Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, οι καλές πολιτικές σχέσεις της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης με τη Νέα Ζηλανδία χρησιμοποιούνται ως ένα πολιτικό επιφαινόμενο, ως ένα επιχείρημα, απλώς, για να προχωρήσουμε σε μια συμφωνία ελευθέρων συναλλαγών, όπως έγινε και με τη CETA.

Αυτοί οι οποίοι υποστηρίζουν τις ελεύθερες συναλλαγές είναι συνήθως από τις χώρες του ευρωπαϊκού Βορρά, που παράγουν βιομηχανικά προϊόντα τα οποία εξάγουν στη Νέα Ζηλανδία. Αλλά υπάρχει ένα σοβαρό πρόβλημα, κ. HOGAN, που έχει σχέση με τη γεωργία: θα χτυπηθεί η αγροτική παραγωγή στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση και θα υπάρξουν πάρα πολλά προβλήματα για την κτηνοτροφία, με τα γαλακτοκομικά προϊόντα της Νέας Ζηλανδίας και τη βιομηχανία τροφίμων.

Δεν πρέπει να ξαναπάμε σε μια ιστορία, όπως με τη CΕΤΑ. Πρέπει να υπάρξει προστασία των προϊόντων ονομασίας προέλευσης, προστασία των γεωγραφικών προσδιορισμών, προστασία της φέτας και των άλλων προϊόντων που είναι παραδοσιακά για την Ελλάδα. Μην ξαναφτάσουμε να συζητούμε ό,τι έγινε με την υπόθεση της CΕΤΑ και τον Καναδά.

  Czesław Adam Siekierski (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! W Komisji Rolnictwa przyjęliśmy opinię dotyczącą rolnictwa w negocjacjach umowy handlowej z Nową Zelandią. Autorem był przemawiający wcześniej pan poseł Nicholson, świetny specjalista tych relacji i tego sektora rolnego. Chcę powiedzieć, że Nowa Zelandia ma konkurencyjny sektor rolny, silnie ukierunkowany na eksport z dominacją sektora mleczarskiego, hodowli owiec, kóz, produkcji wołowiny, a także sektora owoców. Handel artykułami rolnymi ma duży udział w całości handlu Nowej Zelandii. Nowa Zelandia jest eksporterem głównie produktów rolnych, natomiast Unia – produktów przetworzonych do Nowej Zelandii. Mamy problemy w różnicy standardów czy oznaczeniach geograficznych. Wiemy, że Nowa Zelandia jest zwolennikiem pełnej liberalizacji handlu. Prawdą jest, że Nowa Zelandia jest konkurencyjna w stosunku do rolnictwa europejskiego, ale to nie oznacza, że mamy nie rozwijać handlu. Mamy wynegocjować odpowiednie warunki, partnerskie warunki, bo po prostu handel to podstawowy czynnik rozwoju i wzrostu i globalizacja na rynku światowym po prostu w tym kierunku idzie. Należy także oczekiwać, że Nowa Zelandia, która była częścią TPP, Partnerstwa Transpacyficznego, zapewne wróci – będzie powód – do tych rozmów i Partnerstwo Transpacyficzne zyska nowe wymiary.

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

  Phil Hogan, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I would like to thank everybody for the very constructive exchanges in relation to this agreement, and to thank all who spoke on the subject. I greatly appreciate the discussion and your interest in the European Union-New Zealand Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation.

The debate has shown very strong support for the strengthening of the European Union and New Zealand relationship through this agreement and, although we are geographically far from one another, dialogue and cooperation between the EU and New Zealand have never been as close as they are today. This new agreement gives us the opportunity to consolidate our achievements and advance onto a range of issues relevant to the challenges of our time.

Many Members have clearly expressed some concerns about the future negotiations in relation to a free-trade agreement. I can say that the Commission and the negotiating mandate in relation to these issues are fully transparent. The two negotiating directives and the mandate in relation to these negotiations are on our website, and the sensitivities in relation to agriculture will be included. The Commission has made it absolutely clear to our New Zealand counterparts that agricultural sensitivities must be taken into account and that no full liberalisation can be contemplated for some sectors.

The Commission has proposed in the draft negotiating directives, which have already highlighted the agricultural sensitivities, to ensure that any future agreement will not cause major disruption in the European Union, including in the outermost regions. The important thing is that our sensitivities on market access and geographical indications are acknowledged, and these are well known to New Zealand and are being acknowledged by it in the scoping process.

In relation to specific issues of trade and agriculture, and trade generally, the broader geopolitical considerations are important for a like-minded partner in the Oceania-Pacific region. New Zealand, together with Australia, is among the fastest-growing developed economies. There will be gains for the cars and car parts, machinery, chemicals and services sectors. The agricultural sector, as well, will benefit from improved market access for processed products, for cheeses and alcoholic beverages – particularly important for the agricultural sector with the acknowledgment of our geographical indications (GI) scheme and the recognition of our GI products such as wines, spirits and agri-food products. New Zealand has recognised this at ministerial level and the scoping paper reflects the high level of ambition that we can pursue on geographical indications, which is providing a good starting point for the actual negotiations.

Can I also say to Ms Heubuch that we will include, as we do in every free-trade negotiating mandate, issues around environment, issues around animal welfare, animal health, and indeed plant health. All of these issues will be very important in terms of pursuing an ambitious outcome, which will ultimately have to be approved by this House, in relation to whether we have achieved enough or not.

Lastly, I would say to Mr O’Flynn that I look forward to meeting Secretary of State Fox in the marketplace, and he will see that size matters when it comes to trade in the European Union where we have 450 million customers, while he will have about 70 million customers. I hope that we will be able to continue the high standards for food that we have become accustomed to in free-trade agreements in the European Union, and we will not lower our standards to what has been advocated in the marketplace in the context of any free-trade agreement by Secretary Fox.

  Charles Tannock, rapporteur. – Mr President, as we wind up the debate I would first like to thank the Commissioner and the shadow rapporteurs across Parliament who have all been very supportive throughout the process. The report’s passage through the committee stage and the Parliament has also been very smooth, and whilst this is largely due to the widespread support that exists for greater cooperation with New Zealand in everything from fighting terrorism to mitigating climate change, clearly it shows that New Zealand really is close to us in many ways.

As I set out in my earlier speech and has been echoed throughout the House, this agreement is welcome and therefore something we can be proud of. As a Brit, however, I have to admit that this is a bittersweet moment, given my country’s impending exit from the European Union. There are those in Britain, and in this House, sadly, that still believe in a British Empire Mk. II, and that the United Kingdom has been held back in freely trading and cooperating with its old Commonwealth partners such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

The truth is that Britain will now have to renegotiate from scratch, on a bilateral basis, political agreements such as this and future FTAs which, by the time of Brexit in 2019, will have already been concluded for the EU. This is a great pity for my country, and certainly can illustrate the increasing success that the European Union is achieving now in negotiating and signing ambitious political and free trade agreements with democratic countries and economic blocs in the Asia-Pacific region and in the wider globe.

As I conclude, my only final wish is to welcome this initiative and the eventual FTA and to hope that later today we will be able to celebrate its successful adoption by Parliament.

  Presidente. – La discussione congiunta è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà giovedì 16 novembre 2017.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 162)

  Urmas Paet (ALDE), kirjalikult. – EL ja Uus-Meremaa on samameelsed ning globaalsetes küsimustes sarnaseid seisukohti omavad riigid, kellel on mitmeid ühiseid eesmärke. Ühiste eesmärkide paremaks saavutamiseks on mõistlik suurendada omavahelist koostööd ja dialoogi. ELi ja Uus-Meremaa suhteid ja koostööd käsitleva partnerluslepingu sõlmimise eesmärk ongi tugevdada omavahelist partnerlust, suurendada koostööd erinevates valdkondades ning tõhustada suhtlust. Seda näiteks välis- ja julgeoleku valdkonnas, nagu massihävitusrelvad, terrorismivastane võitlus ning rahu ja julgeoleku edendamine maailmas. Samuti nähakse lepinguga ette koostöö suurendamine majandus- ja kaubandusvaldkonnas ning teadusvaldkondades.

  Dubravka Šuica (PPE), napisan. – Novi Zeland je već dugi niz godina partner s Europskom unijom i njezinim članicama s kojima dijeli zajedničke vrijednosti, ljudska prava, temeljne slobode, vladavinu prava, mir i sigurnost. Novi Zeland je zajedno s SAD-om, Kanadom i Australijom član zajednice „Five Eyes” koja usko surađuje sa zajednicom „Fourteen Eyes” u čijem radu sudjeluju i članice EU-a: Francuska, Njemačka, Italija, Nizozemska, Belgija, Švedska, Danska i Španjolska. Također, Novi Zeland je dugogodišnji član OECD-a, MMF-a, ADB-a i novoosnovanog AIIB-a.

Europska unija Novi Zeland smatra 3. najvećim trgovačkim partnerom koji već ima dobru suradnju s najbližim partnerima Europske unije poput SAD-a (sporazum potpisan 2010. Wellingtonskom deklaracijom) i Australijom (sporazum iz 1983.) Također, Novi Zeland je sklopio bilateralne sporazume o slobodnoj trgovini s Australijom, Singapurom, Tajlandom, Kinom, Hong Kongom, Tajvanom, Malezijom i Južnom Korejom, kao i multilateralne trgovinske sporazume u okviru Sporazuma o transpacifičkom strateškom gospodarskom partnerstvu sa Singapurom, Čileom i Brunejem.

Jako je bitno za Europsku uniju unaprijediti odnose s Novim Zelandom zbog dijeljenja zajedničkih interesa. Buduća suradnja bi doprinijela razvoju i Novom Zelandu i članicama Europske unije.

  Jarosław Wałęsa (PPE), na piśmie. – Współpraca między UE a Nową Zelandią ma ogromny wpływ na dalszy rozwój tych dwóch gospodarek i ich wzajemnych stosunków. Tematem debaty był projekt rezolucji nieustawodawczej w sprawie decyzji Rady dotyczący zawarcia, w imieniu Unii, umowy o partnerstwie w zakresie stosunków i współpracy między Unią Europejską a Nową Zelandią. 5 października 2016 roku Nowa Zelandia i UE podpisały umowę o partnerstwie w stosunkach i współpracy (PARC). Umowa ta świadczy o ostatnio widocznej bliskiej relacji między tymi dwoma stronami. Nie tylko należy zauważyć wysoki poziom wzajemnych stosunków, lecz podkreślić gotowość do dalszej współpracy w najbliższym czasie.

Umowa stwarza długotrwałe kulturalne, polityczne i ekonomiczne więzi między UE a Nową Zelandią, wzmacnia wspólne wartości dla praw człowieka oraz rządów prawa, dodatkowo zakłada dalszą współpracę w takich dziedzinach jak technologie innowacyjne, ochrona środowiska czy bezpieczeństwo. PARC zapewnia pełną współpracę między państwami Wspólnoty a Nową Zelandią dla wspólnego dobra. Ponadto nie tylko utrwala dialog polityczny i współpracę ekonomiczną, lecz korzystnie wpływa na rozwój nauki, edukacji i kultury.

Należy dodać, że takie partnerstwo przyczyni się do skuteczniejszego zwalczania problemu migracji, terroryzmu, zorganizowanej przestępczości, jak również cyberprzestępczości. Obie strony jak najbardziej popierają umowę, są chętne do wspólnego rozwoju. Dlatego bardzo ważne jest poparcie projektu rezolucji w sprawie stosunków i współpracy między członkami UE a Nową Zelandią.

4. Debates on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law (debate)

4.1. Freedom of expression in Sudan, notably the case of Mohamed Zine El Abidine

  Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la discussione su sette proposte di risoluzione sulla libertà di espressione in Sudan, in particolare il caso di Mohamed Zine al-Abidine (2017/2961(RSP)).

  Charles Tannock, author. – Mr President, a free press is one of the essentials for ensuring that a meaningful democratic system can function operating under the rule of law. Without such an underpinning, other efforts and programmes aimed at improving good governance and development are always undermined.

I am pleased that we are therefore taking the opportunity today to shine a spotlight on the terrible state of press freedom in Sudan, particularly illustrated by the case of journalist Mohamed Zine al-Abidine and his editor-in-chief Osman Mirgani. Al-Abidine, in a clear case of political persecution and selective justice, has been sentenced to a suspended sentence of five years, ostensibly for writing a piece alleging corruption associated with the ruling family of President Omar al-Bashir. Whilst this is a most egregious example, it is sadly not an isolated case. In 2016, there were 44 occurrences of confiscated publications affecting 12 different newspapers, which gives you an idea of the widespread nature of such repressive practices in Sudan.

All of this is in clear contradiction of the Cotonou Agreement. I hope that today’s debate will serve as a call on the Commission to remind the Sudanese authorities of their obligations under international law.

  Ignazio Corrao, author. – Mr President, it is sad that today we are again discussing Sudan. Not only because nothing has changed but especially because the situation is getting even worse, mainly in regard to freedom of expression. Reporters Without Borders ranks Sudan among the least free countries, at 174 out of 180 in the 2017 World Press Freedom Index, due to the harassment of the media and confiscation of newspapers issue.

In addition to this, a new concern arises in regard to the proposed Press and Printing Act of 2017, which includes further controversial restrictions to online publication and provisions for the lengthier suspension of newspapers and journalists. It is true that today the spotlights are on Mohamed Zine al-Abidine who is paying very dearly for the choice to have respected the fundamental right of freedom of expression. But let us not forget about all of those, also in Europe, who lost even their lives simply because they shed some light on unacceptable situations.

Parliament just yesterday dedicated a room within these premises in honour of Daphne Caruana Galizia, the Maltese journalist brutally assassinated for speaking out the truth. Parliament and all its Members have to make a strong contribution so as to prevent such situations. This is why we will support this resolution by which we urge the Sudanese Government to stop its heinous practices against journalists and editors, in order to start to build a democratic environment where both the rule of law and human rights are respected. Unfortunately, this is just one aspect of a more complex picture that includes several violations of human rights, ranging from the well-known situation in Darfur to international criminal law concerns.

I conclude by saying that, with great honour, I will take part next month in the Sub—committee on Human Rights’ mission to Sudan, so as hopefully to provide support, not only to Mr Mohamed Zine al-Abidine, but to all journalists who are victims of harassment, intimidation and attacks, and advocate freedom of online and offline expression.

  Barbara Lochbihler, Verfasserin. – Herr Präsident! Ich begrüße es, dass wir an die sudanesische Regierung appellieren, Freiheitsrechte zu respektieren.

Immer wieder werden durch den allmächtigen Geheimdienst und die Polizei Zeitungen beschlagnahmt, Nichtregierungsorganisationen verboten, Versammlungen aufgelöst und Menschenrechtler verhaftet. Die Strafverfolgung des regierungskritischen Journalisten Mohamed Zine al-Abidine ist ein aktuelles Beispiel dafür. Ich erwarte aber auch, dass wir in einer Entschließung wie dieser die Politik der EU im Sudan selbstkritisch hinterfragen.

Daher haben wir Grüne Änderungsanträge eingebracht. Wir problematisieren die EU-Kooperation mit dem Sudan zu Migrationsfragen. Außerdem fordern wir, dass ohne wesentliche Verbesserungen der Menschenrechtslage die EU und die Mitgliedstaaten ihre diplomatischen Beziehungen einschränken. Im Frühjahr habe ich selbst in Khartum mit Menschenrechtsaktivisten gesprochen, die alle befürchten, dass der starke Fokus der EU auf Grenzschutz und Sicherheit zu Zurückhaltung in menschenrechtlichen Fragen führt. Diese Sorge teile ich. Für den Sudan wäre es fatal, wenn die EU auch hier zugunsten kurzfristiger Interessen den Blick von der katastrophalen humanitären und menschenrechtlichen Lage auch nur teilweise abwenden würde.

Der Sudan ist derzeit das einzige Land, dessen amtierendes Staatsoberhaupt vom Internationalen Strafgerichtshof wegen Kriegsverbrechen und Völkermord per Haftbefehl gesucht wird. Diese Woche hat sich der sudanesische Präsident Al-Baschir in Uganda aufgehalten. Leider hat Uganda nichts unternommen, um ihn an den Internationalen Strafgerichtshof zu überstellen.

Die Hohe Vertreterin hat das öffentlich kritisiert. Ich unterstütze dies ausdrücklich. Die EU muss weiterhin konsequent die Zusammenarbeit mit dem Internationalen Strafgerichtshof einfordern.

  Marie-Christine Vergiat, auteure. – Monsieur le Président, le groupe GUE/NGL ne s’est pas associé à cette résolution, non pas que le cas de M. Zine al-Abidine ne soit pas symbolique des violations de la liberté de la presse au Soudan, une presse qui subit sans cesse censure directe ou indirecte, via notamment la confiscation régulière de journaux, mais parce qu’elle n’est pas à la hauteur des violations des droits de l’homme perpétrées dans ce pays.

Les ONG continuent de nous dire que la situation y reste inchangée, notamment au Darfour. Les bombardements se poursuivent et il y a même été fait état de l’utilisation d’armes chimiques. De plus, il n’y aucune sécurité pour la population en dehors des camps.

Or, M. le président Al-Bachir, toujours sous le coup d’un mandat d’arrêt de la Cour pénale internationale, veut démanteler ces camps au moment même où l’ONU diminue de façon drastique, à savoir de moins 44 %, la présence de la Minuad.

Je crains que la situation des droits de l’homme au Soudan ne soit sacrifiée sur l’autel des politiques migratoires européennes et des amis saoudiens, compte tenu du poids des troupes soudanaises au Yémen. Cela risque même de rendre encore plus difficile notre mission «droits» en décembre. Je le regrette sincèrement.

  Soraya Post, författare. – Herr talman! År 2016 riktades världens blickar mot Donald Trumps hetsiga kampanjtal om fake news. Samma år fängslades nio journalister i mer auktoritära länder på grund av anklagelser om just fake news. År 2015 rörde det sig om två rapporterade fall.

Vi har inga siffror för 2017 ännu, men trenden är väldigt tydlig. Hur vi som demokratier agerar kan betyda skillnader mellan ett liv i frihet och ett liv i fängelse för journalister. Sudan är ett gott exempel på detta.

I år satsar EU 1,7 miljoner euro för att finansiera projekt som främjar demokratiska principer i Sudan, med ett särskilt fokus på bland annat media.

Med USA:s dalande stjärna måste EU på allvar ta upp kampen för mänskliga rättigheter. I avtal och partnerskap med tredje länder måste vi sätta klausulerna om mänskliga rättigheter i centrum, och när de inte uppfylls ska det åtföljas av kännbara konsekvenser.

Jag vill också passa på att tipsa om Forbidden Stories, ett projekt som Reportrar utan gränser och Freedom Voices Network lanserar nu i november för att säkra material från hotade journalister och göra det möjligt att fortsätta deras arbete om de grips eller dödas.

  Javier Nart, autor. – Señor presidente, la definición de Sudán es un régimen presidido por un delincuente, por un prófugo de la justicia y por un régimen y un presidente que han sido responsables de los genocidios en Yebel Marra, en Yebel Nuba y en la zona del Darfur, y de la represión de su propio pueblo desde hace muchísimos años.

La situación en Sudán significa sencillamente que estamos ante un régimen donde los yanyauid en la zona del Darfur y la Agencia de Seguridad Nacional son los que mandan, son los todopoderosos y, en consecuencia, los pilares del régimen. Las libertades no existen y la libertad de prensa es un mito, aunque hayan firmado todas las declaraciones internacionales o algunas de ellas. En cualquier caso, el caso de Mohamed Zin al-Abidín no es más que un exponente de una situación general, de un país sometido a una bárbara represión, a una bárbara explotación.

Esta es la situación en Sudán. Mohamed Zin al-Abidín es simplemente una anécdota en una espantosa categoría.

  Tunne Kelam, author. – Mr President, the situation of human, civil and political rights in Sudan continues to be worrying. Especially alarming is the state of freedom of expression. There are numerous reports about security services intervening in the activities of journalists, intimidating and censoring them. Mohamed Zine al-Abidine is just one of them. He has been taken to court for criticising the alleged corruption of President al-Bashir’s family. The editor of the newspaper al-Tayar was fined for publishing his article. Last year there were at least 44 cases of confiscated publications and the publication of three newspapers was suspended.

We urge the Sudanese authorities to end all forms of harassment and intimidation of journalists, and immediately review charges against Mohamed Zine al-Abidine. More importantly, the Sudanese Government is called upon to implement in a good spirit fundamental human rights, including freedom of expression. I thank Commissioner Stylianides for raising the issue of fundamental rights in Sudan during his recent visit to this country, but more needs to be done. The European Union should be mainstreaming human rights in our relations with third countries at all times.

  Lars Adaktusson, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, again we observe the heinous measures which dictatorships are willing to use in order to silence even the slightest criticism – legitimate criticism. Yet we act surprised. By this time we ought to know to what lengths authoritarian regimes are ready to go in order to silence any perceived threats. As a former journalist I realise the indispensable role of a free press in any state grounded in the rule of law. External scrutiny is a fundamental aspect of holding political representatives accountable to the people.

The European Union must condemn the unjust sentencing of Mohamed Zine al-Abidine and Osman Mirgani, and increase the pressure on the Sudanese regime. The President and his companions must cease their actions. The people of Sudan too deserve to live in freedom, in security and democracy.

  Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, le dittature non amano giornalisti critici. Per questo motivo dobbiamo continuare a denunciare le violazioni dei diritti dell'uomo che compiono. Questo è il nostro dovere anche di fronte al popolo sudanese oppresso. Con questa risoluzione noi denunciamo la ripetuta violazione della libertà di espressione e di stampa e il maltrattamento del giornalista Mohamed Zine al-Abidine e del suo editore Osman Mirghani. Questi casi sono l'indice dell'arretramento dei diritti umani nel Sudan. Il regime autocratico di Omar al-Bashir si dimostra liberticida ed impiega le forze dell'ordine in spedizione punitive nei confronti di coloro che denunciano la corruzione.

Il Sudan ha la necessità di sentirci vicini nel sostenere le iniziative di denuncia che provengono dal popolo stesso sudanese. Le autorità sudanesi si impegnano a rispettare i diritti umani e le libertà fondamentali sanciti dal diritto internazionale, compresa la libertà di espressione.

  Marietje Schaake, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, Mohamed Zine al-Abidine wrote an article about alleged corruption by the President of Sudan, Mr al-Bashir, who of course is accused of many worse crimes including the gravest ones – crimes against humanity, genocide and war crimes – but he is avoiding facing trial. Al-Abidine did what a journalist is supposed to do – shed light on those in power – but is now being sentenced to five years as one of many critics that are silenced.

We call on the Sudanese authorities to review these outrageous charges and to respect all people’s rights. The government should at least adhere to its own commitments under the Cotonou Agreement, but also to the Declaration on Media Freedom in the Arab World. We in the EU should step up our efforts to make sure that people’s rights are respected in Sudan, including the freedom of expression online and offline.

I would suggest that by only focusing on managing migration we are not doing that, we are not prioritising respect for human rights. In fact we may well give people a good excuse to repress and to keep people down. I think that is the wrong development also from our side.

  Pavel Svoboda (PPE). – Pane předsedající, pane komisaři, dle světového indexu svobody tisku Reportérů bez hranic je Súdán na 174. místě ze 180 hodnocených států. Vládní úřady v Súdánu běžně zadržují a obviňují novináře a zabavují vydání různých periodik.

V roce 2016 došlo celkem k 44 takovým případům, které se týkaly dvanácti různých novin. Muhammad Zajn al-Ábidín kritizoval údajnou korupci v rodině súdánského prezidenta al-Bašíra, jak už zde bylo několikrát konstatováno. Byl podmíněně odsouzen na 5 let a vůči rozsudku se odvolal. Jeho případ je jen jedním z mnoha případů porušování základních práv a svobod v Súdánu.

Víme, že svoboda tisku a svoboda vyjadřování je základním předpokladem vzniku a rozvoje svobodné společnosti. Perzekuci novinářů bychom tak měli jako Evropská unie důrazně odsoudit a tvrdě sankcionovat její iniciátory. Naopak všem těm, kteří v Súdánu bojují za přežití nezávislého tisku, musíme poskytovat veškerou možnou podporu. V případě Muhammada Zajna al-Ábidína musíme žádat spravedlivý proces.

  Julie Ward (S&D). – Mr President, in a country where widespread violations of human rights have been extensively reported by international organisations such as Waging Peace, the case of Mohamed Zine al-Abidine is extremely worrying. His arrest and imprisonment follows repeated acts of intimidation and harassment, conducted by the authorities against journalists.

It is clear that the Sudanese Government seeks to silence critical voices by means of judicial harassment, censorship and confiscation of newspapers. These unacceptable actions have been taking place in the context of total disregard by Mr Omar al—Bashir, a total disregard for human rights and international law. He still has not been brought to justice regarding the grave accusations of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity that were filed against him several years ago.

The EU must use all diplomatic channels at its disposal to urge the Sudanese authorities to release Mohamed Zine al—Abidine and all the human rights defenders, journalists and political opponents behind bars in Sudan. High Representative Federica Mogherini must also put all her efforts into presenting Mr al—Bashir to the International Criminal Court.

  Neena Gill (S&D). – Mr President, Sudan ranks 174th out of 180 in terms of press freedom. This gives you a clear idea of the context in which journalist Mohamed Zine al-Abidine and his editor-in-chief are facing charges for criticising alleged corruption in the family of the Sudanese President al-Bashir, a president who has escaped justice for organising war crimes and crimes against humanity. These journalists are not alone in facing repression. The Sudanese intelligence agency has been waging an actual war on freedom of information and expression for years. There is no hope for democracy if these basic values continue to be threatened.

My main concern is that the EU gives EUR 100 million in aid to Sudan on migration. We need to ensure that not a euro is diverted to fund surveillance and IT systems that could assist in repression of journalists and media. I think that the High Representative, the Commission and Member States need to step up support to civil society that can help and reform press and printing legislation.

Procedura "catch-the-eye"

  Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, πρέπει καταρχάς να σημειώσουμε ότι το Σουδάν δεν έχει κυρώσει την αναθεωρημένη εκδοχή της συμφωνίας του Κοτονού του 2005. Ο πρόεδρός του, al-Bashir, κατηγορείται για γενοκτονία και διαφεύγει αυτή τη στιγμή την παραπομπή στο Διεθνές Ποινικό Δικαστήριο.

Είναι προφανές ότι το πρόβλημα της ελευθερίας του Τύπου είναι ένα από τα προβλήματα καταστρατήγησης των θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων και ελευθεριών στο Σουδάν. Επικρατεί λογοκρισία και όποια εφημερίδα τολμήσει να ασκήσει κριτική στο καθεστώς κλείνει. Έχουμε επανειλημμένα κατασχέσεις εφημερίδων οι οποίες έχουν ασκήσει έντονη κριτική στο καθεστώς και, φυσικά, η τελευταία περίπτωση των δημοσιογράφων, κυρίως του al-Abidine, ο οποίος έκανε κριτική μέσα από την εφημερίδα του για διαφθορά στο καθεστώς.

Πρέπει η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση να λάβει συγκεκριμένα μέτρα απέναντι στο καθεστώς του Σουδάν και να διασφαλίσει, φυσικά, ότι όποια ευρωπαϊκή βοήθεια δίνεται πρέπει να πηγαίνει απευθείας στους πολίτες και όχι στο καθεστώς.

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Pane předsedající, Evropský parlament má povinnost se zastat nespravedlivě stíhaných, máme povinnost podporovat svobodu médií. Nemusíme chodit ani tak daleko. Vlády, které mají nějaký svůj problém a bojí se svobody slova, první zasahují proti svobodě tisku a novinářům. Podívejme se na Maltu, Turecko, Rusko.

A Súdán má ekonomické, ale také politické problémy, a tak vláda perzekuuje názorové oponenty i obyvatele, kteří bojují za svobodný Súdán.

Nedávno Parlament podpořil Petra Jaška a jeho spolupracovníky, kteří jako humanitární pracovníci podporovali nespravedlivě stíhané. A pojďme tedy také nyní podpořit Muhammada Zajna al-Ábidína a další novináře, kteří v Súdánu pomáhají hledat pravdu. Minimálně tato jejich statečnost si zaslouží naši velkou podporu.

  Carlos Iturgaiz (PPE). – Señor presidente, quiero apoyar esta Resolución en favor de la liberación de Mohamed Zin al-Abidín. Sudán es uno de los países donde hay una falta de libertad y una falta evidente de derechos humanos. El régimen de Sudán tiene sometido e intimidado a su pueblo, y el caso de Mohamed Zin al-Abidín es una muestra de cómo se reprime por la dictadura autoritaria sudanesa la libertad de la prensa por informar de la corrupción del presidente de Sudán y de su familia.

Desde la Unión Europea, señorías, debemos condenar lo que está ocurriendo en Sudán. No solo en el caso que hoy nos concierne, sino en todas las violaciones de la libertad de expresión y de los derechos que se producen en ese país africano. Como saben ustedes, Sudán recibe ayudas económicas por parte de las instituciones europeas. Y esas ayudas deben también estar circunscritas a que Sudán cumpla los requisitos democráticos de respeto de la libertad de expresión y el respeto de los derechos humanos.

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

  Phil Hogan, Member of the Commission, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, as you know, I am taking this item on behalf of Commission Vice-President Mogherini. The European Union continues to express serious concerns about the human rights situation in Sudan, which is marked by human rights violations and abuses, including restrictions on peaceful protests, media censorship, harassment and arbitrary detention of human rights defenders, the crackdown on civil society organisations and restrictions on freedom of religion. In particular, freedom of expression and press and media freedoms are also under serious threat. The security authorities continue to seize print runs, to suspend independent newspapers indefinitely, and arbitrarily to arrest and detain journalists for the critical content of their writing.

Such concerns were highlighted in a statement issued by the European Union, with like-minded partners, in December 2016. Despite some progress that Sudan has recently shown on humanitarian access and establishing a cessation of hostilities in conflict areas, changes in the domestic setting remain limited. Civil society organisations are largely inhibited from operating at full capacity, with crackdowns on protesters, human rights defenders, journalists, members of the opposition and religious minorities. The case of Mohamed Zine al-Abidine is emblematic of the problems that affect the whole country. In 2012, this journalist was detained for two weeks because of an opinion article denouncing the abuse of power by the highest circles of Sudanese leadership, which was published by the newspaper al-Tayar. As a consequence, the newspaper was immediately suspended for two years.

On 23 October the Sudanese court sentenced Zine al-Abidine to a three-year suspended sentence and the editor-in-chief, Osman Mirgani, to six months in jail for criminal conspiracy and disruption of the public order. Mirgani was released the following day after a fine for his release was paid.

The European Union has closely monitored the aforementioned prosecution and other similar cases through which the Sudanese Government tries to maintain control over the information landscape in the country. The Union will continue to call on the Government to respect freedom of expression and enable space for civil society. The Union also remains committed to supporting human rights defenders and civil society at large through various means at our disposal. The Union is, for example, supporting several projects on press freedom, as well as civic and human-rights education in Sudan through the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights.

The European Union strongly encourages the Government of Sudan to show full commitment to peace and reconciliation in Sudan. This includes the strengthening of the democratisation process, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as the adoption of genuine political and economic reforms addressing the root causes of conflict. The EU is ready to engage with the Government of Sudan on these issues.

PRÉSIDENCE DE MME Sylvie GUILLAUME
Vice-présidente

  La Présidente. – Le débat est clos.

Le vote aura lieu aujourd’hui à partir de 12 heures.

4.2. Terrorist attacks in Somalia

  La Présidente. – L’ordre du jour appelle le débat sur cinq propositions de résolution concernant les attentats terroristes en Somalie (2017/2962(RSP)).

  Charles Tannock, author. – Madam President, a lorry in Mogadishu, loaded with explosives, tragically resulted in the deaths of 385 people, with many others injured and more than 100 buried without identification, due to the severity of their injuries. Their loved ones will never know who they are.

Somalia is a land plagued with intractable problems: terrorism, drought, famine, refugee camps, crippling debt, child soldiers and the worst corruption in the world for the tenth year running. Add to this the allegations of sexual violence by troops from the UN-backed African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), the force mobilised to protect the Somalian people from extremist groups, and it is clear that this is still a very fragile nation, teetering on the edge.

The election of President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed was a milestone in this country’s recent history and there are some positive signs that President Mohamed is committed now to continuing the fight against al-Shabaab. By appointing representatives from different clans to ministerial office, he is also building unity across a very fractured society. The EU, too, must now do what it can by encouraging dialogue between the social sectors and ensuring that allegations against AMISOM troops are thoroughly investigated and that those responsible are rapidly brought to justice.

  Lola Sánchez Caldentey, autora. – Señora presidenta, hoy me gustaría hablar de una verdad incómoda. No podemos hablar de terrorismo en Somalia sin antes señalar al elefante sentado en la habitación: un Estado, Arabia Saudí; una cifra, el 25 % de su comercio es con la Unión Europea. Somos su primer socio comercial. La verdad incómoda: Arabia Saudí es el Estado fundador y el mayor promotor del wahabismo, y es socio preferencial de la Unión Europea. Sí, de esta Unión Europea de la coherencia política.

Al terrorismo se le combate con desarrollo sostenible, con integración y cohesión social, con redistribución de la riqueza, no con militarización. La estabilización de Somalia requiere que pongamos fin a la hipocresía de nuestra acción exterior. La ayuda al desarrollo no debe condicionarse a la cooperación en política migratoria, sino que debe centrarse en alcanzar los ODS.

Pero, tristemente, el mayor gasto con diferencia de la comunidad internacional en Somalia es el militar. No objetaríamos si los drones repartieran inclusión social y derechos humanos, pero sabemos que —producto de nuestra coherencia política— esto dista muchísimo de ser así.

  Soraya Post, author. – Madam President, in October this year hundreds of people senselessly lost their lives in Somalia. Some are still missing. This is the latest in a long line of acts of violence, extremism and terror – attacks for the most part attributed to al-Shabaab.

These terrible acts have occurred in the wider context of internal conflict and instability including acute food insecurity and the fact that more than two million people have been forced to leave their homes, as internally displaced persons or refugees, in the region.

We must take a strong stand in condemning these acts of violence as well as addressing the situation that Somalia is facing when it comes to nationwide security, stability and justice – a situation which will continue to worsen without strong action in defence of civil society, human rights, democracy and rule of law.

  Hilde Vautmans, Auteur. – Vorige maand werd Somalië getroffen door twee gruwelijke bomaanslagen, met als gevolg 400 doden, honderden gewonden en tientallen vermisten. Ik ben dan ook blij dat we daar deze ochtend aandacht aan besteden. Al te vaak blijven terroristische aanslagen in Afrika immers een kleine voetnoot. Laten we vandaag dus ons medeleven betuigen aan de slachtoffers en hun familie.

Somalië is een land dat het sowieso al erg moeilijk heeft. Het lijdt onder droogte, ondervoeding en conflicten. Meer dan een miljoen mensen zijn er ontheemd. Wat me vooral zorgen baart, is het toenemende geweld en extremisme, ook onder kinderen. Daar moeten we dringend wat aan doen. We moeten stappen zetten in de strijd tegen straffeloosheid zodat daders worden bestraft. We moeten ook inzetten op de rehabilitatie van kindsoldaten. Kinderen horen te spelen, niet te vechten. We moeten voorkomen dat kindsoldaten worden geronseld door criminelen. We moeten kijken of de ontheemden kunnen terugkeren, want meer dan een miljoen mensen in Somalië zijn ontheemd. Laten we daarop inzetten. Ten slotte moeten we als Europa onze humanitaire beloften nakomen. Laten we er samen voor ijveren dat Somalië weer een land wordt waar kinderen kunnen spelen, gezond kunnen opgroeien en voeding hebben. Dank u wel.

  Joachim Zeller, Verfasser. – Frau Präsidentin! Nach der Wahl von Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed im Februar dieses Jahres zum Präsidenten von Somalia gab es die leise Hoffnung, dass sich die Lage im Land Somalia stabilisieren könnte und auch der Terrorismus im Land energischer bekämpft werden kann. Nach den feigen Bombenanschlägen im Zentrum der Hauptstadt Somalias, in Mogadischu, im Februar dieses Jahres scheint sich diese Hoffnung zu zerschlagen. Hunderte tote, verwundete und vermisste Menschen sind zu beklagen. Ihr Schicksal darf uns nicht gleichgültig sein, ihren Angehörigen gehört unser Mitgefühl.

Dabei stellt sich die Frage, wie handlungsfähig die Regierung und die Sicherheitsbehörden Somalias sind, um ihre Bürgerinnen und Bürger zu schützen. Und auch die Somalia-Mission der Afrikanischen Union, Amison, scheint nicht in der Lage zu sein, die Aktionen von Terrororganisationen wie Al-Shabaab wirksam zu unterdrücken – im Gegenteil: Es wird berichtet, dass zum Beispiel 5 000 burundische Soldaten ihre Stellungen kampflos aufgegeben haben und die ihnen schutzbefohlene Zivilbevölkerung der Al-Shabaab-Miliz ausgeliefert haben. Amison wurde und wird über die afrikanische Friedensfazilität maßgeblich von der EU finanziert. Wir sollten dringend die Wirksamkeit dieser Hilfen überprüfen, nachdem auch ein Rechnungshofbericht erhebliche Zweifel an Effektivität und Effizienz dieser Fazilität aufwirft.

Die internationale Gemeinschaft ist gefordert, damit Somalia nicht weiter destabilisiert wird und Terrororganisationen wie Al-Shabaab nicht zu einer Gefahr für die ganze Region werden, wenn wir beispielsweise an die politisch unklare Lage in Kenia denken, wo es Hunderttausende von Flüchtlingen aus Somalia gibt.

Angesprochen wurde von den Kollegen, dass die geopolitische Lage natürlich auch eine Rolle spielt. Nördlich des Golfs von Aden haben wir den Bürgerkrieg in Jemen, jetzt eine weitere Destabilisierung der Lage in Somalia. Das kann zu einem Flächenbrand werden, der uns nicht gleichgültig sein kann. Bevor weitere Menschenleben zu beklagen sind, ist Handlung gefordert, auch von der Europäischen Union.

  Seán Kelly, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, now we are speaking about Somalia which is a very tragic situation because in Somalia, first of all, they have a famine as a result of four rainy seasons having failed, leading to 800 000 refugees and between one and a half to two million displaced persons. On top of that, it is unfortunately a very corrupt country, with Transparency International rating it for the tenth year running as the most corrupt in the world, and of course the worst of all is al-Shabaab, the terrorist organisation which caused major devastation in October.

But there is great hope for Somalia. Number one, they have a newly elected President who seems to be a good man and, as pointed out by Charles Tannock, is trying to incorporate as many groups as possible in government. Secondly, many females and young people have been elected to government. Thirdly, the people had the courage to protest publicly against al-Shabaab.

The European Union has done a lot of work here, giving EUR 3.4 billion in aid between 2015 and 2020, 60% of what Somalia has got from the world community. I think we need to work with the President and others: firstly, to establish their own security forces – as Mr Zeller said, the African Union Mission in Somali (AMISOM) is not working – and secondly, to try and fight that terrible terrorist group al-Shabaab and keep young people away from them and then we can make progress.

There is a great opportunity here. Let’s grasp it.

  Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, dopo anni di conflitto che ha causato danni immensi alla popolazione e all'economia della Somalia, il paese stava iniziando ad intravedere spiragli di pace, un ritorno alla vita e alla speranza. Poi, il terrorismo islamista con al-Shabab ha colpito con una ferocia estrema, con degli attentati vili che hanno provocato migliaia di vittime, che questa risoluzione intende fortemente condannare, ribadendo la vicinanza dell'Europa a questo processo di pace.

Invece di cedere alla paura, il popolo somalo ha reagito, mostrando la sua forza e la capacità di rimanere unito. Sta a noi ora rimanere al loro fianco, sostenere questa popolazione stremata da decenni di conflitto in un percorso autonomo di pace, coinvolgendo gli attori internazionali e regionali. Perché la pace in Somalia, signora Presidente, signor Commissario, significa pace e benessere anche per tutti i paesi del Corno d'Africa.

  Anna Elżbieta Fotyga, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, I convey deepest sympathy to the families of all the casualties and the Somalian people condemning this appalling terrorist act. Taking into account all the difficulties mentioned by the author Mr Charles Tannock, the decade-long combating of al-Shabaab’s terrorist activity is a very difficult task. There is some hope after the inauguration of President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed and his pledge to get rid of this terrorist organisation’s acts in Somalia.

The truck bomb attack was first of all probably a reaction to this. We have to build the resilience of Somalian society and assist the government which is willing to combat it.

  Marietje Schaake, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Madam President, the attacks in Mogadishu on 14 and 28 October resulted in unprecedented numbers of innocent people killed. I wish to convey my condolences to the victims’ families and loved ones, and actually, to all Somalis.

I am glad the EU offered emergency response quickly and hope that there will be more efforts by the international community to continue to build resilience and address structural problems. This should include meeting the needs of the 400 000 children who are suffering from malnutrition. Access to aid organisations should be granted. It is important to see the connection between the different elements that can lead to the recruitment of people to terrorist organisations.

We must also acknowledge that terrorism is a global problem and needs to be addressed in unity. I think it is a shared responsibility of the international community and I hope it will be met by all.

  Javier Couso Permuy, en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señora presidenta, nuestra condena más absoluta al terrorismo que asola Somalia y al atentado que causó la muerte a más de trescientas cincuenta personas. Pero estamos perdiendo la batalla al perder los valores. No solo sirve la óptica militar. Y más cuando es un calco de esa guerra contra el terror que promovió la Administración Bush, que siguió Obama, y que ha seguido el presidente Trump. Los vemos, sus resultados, no solo en Somalia sino en Afganistán y otros lugares.

El asesinato extrajudicial y extraterritorial por medio de drones no es solo una afrenta al Derecho, sino que causa inaceptables víctimas inocentes que, además, son caldo de cultivo para el terrorismo. Tampoco iniciativas como el proceso de Jartum para externalizar el control fronterizo son la solución.

Nadie emigra por gusto y la militarización de ese control fronterizo no es la solución, sino invertir todos los medios en desarrollo sostenible de igual a igual, atacar la financiación del terrorismo, señalar claramente a los culpables, como los saudíes y el wahabismo, actuar con los actores regionales para estabilizar y combatir el terrorismo.

  Jean-Luc Schaffhauser, au nom du groupe ENF. – Madame la Présidente, la Somalie est l’une des plus grandes tragédies africaines. Déchirée depuis la fin de la Guerre froide, le pays est confronté à toutes les plaies du continent africain: islamisme, divisions ethniques, pillages des ressources et ingérences occidentales et africaines.

Nous échouons souvent dans le développement en Afrique, car il nous manque une approche complète et consciente du terrain.

Nous oublions trop souvent que développement et sécurité doivent aller de pair.

Je tiens à souligner tout de même le courage des services extérieurs, de nos services extérieurs, notamment de la Commission, qui ont voulu s’implanter là-bas, sur place.

Cela va dans le bon sens d’une approche de terrain. Nous devons cependant éviter une approche trop souvent libérale, car nous pensons que le développement peut se faire sans État et sans protectionnisme. En cela, les accords de Lomé sont bien plus avancés que ceux actuels de Cotonou.

Je suis sûr qu’un travail parlementaire conjoint aboutira de manière positive à cette approche du codéveloppement.

  Λάμπρος Φουντούλης (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, αρχικά, δεν νομίζω να υπάρχει κανείς σώφρων άνθρωπος που να μην καταδικάζει απερίφραστα τις τρομοκρατικές επιθέσεις των φανατικών ισλαμιστών. Υπάρχουν 300 νεκροί και 300 τραυματίες από την πρόσφατη βομβιστική επίθεση στην πρωτεύουσα της Σομαλίας, Mogadishu, και οι αρχές θεωρούν βέβαιο ότι πρόκειται για ενέργεια της al-Shabaab.

Η Σομαλία είναι μια χώρα που εδώ και δεκαετίες πλήττεται από αστάθεια, ένοπλες συγκρούσεις, εμφυλίους, προβλήματα σίτισης του πληθυσμού, επιδημίες -όπως η χολέρα- και, φυσικά, έχει ένα τεράστιο πρόβλημα διαφθοράς. Οι επεμβάσεις της Δύσης, κατά καιρούς, δεν κατάφεραν να λύσουν τα προβλήματα και απλά αντικαθιστούσαν τη μία διεφθαρμένη ολιγαρχία με άλλη. Ακόμα και ο στρατός, υποστηριζόμενος από τις κυβερνήσεις της Δύσης, συνεχίζει μέχρι και σήμερα να στρατολογεί ανηλίκους.

Εκ θέσεως είμαστε αντίθετοι σε επεμβάσεις στα εσωτερικά ζητήματα τρίτων χωρών, θα πρέπει όμως να εντοπίσουμε τις πηγές χρηματοδότησης όλων αυτών στη Σομαλία και να απαγορεύσουμε αυστηρά σε κάθε εταιρεία που δραστηριοποιείται στην Ένωση να έχει οποιαδήποτε οικονομική συναλλαγή που, όπως αποδεικνύεται τελικά, είναι το βασικότερο κίνητρο όλων αυτών των συγκρούσεων.

Θα ήθελα να αναφέρω στο Σώμα ότι αυτές τις μέρες στην Ελλάδα υπάρχει μία φονική πλημμύρα στην οποία έχουν χάσει τη ζωή τους 16 άτομα, 26 έχουν τραυματιστεί και 6 αγνοούνται. Ελπίζω η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση να βοηθήσει την κατάσταση.

  Pavel Svoboda (PPE). – Paní předsedající, pane komisaři, 358 obětí hrůzného teroristického útoku spáchaného 14. října tohoto roku v Mogadišu uctíme nejlépe tím, že budeme pokračovat ve snaze obnovit fungující somálský stát.

Komise zaslouží poděkování za rychlou reakci a pomoc při zajištění lékařské péče obětem tohoto atentátu. Dle Transparency International je Somálsko nejzkorumpovanější zemí na světě. Následky této korupce jsou jasné. V Somálsku trpí 400 000 dětí podvýživou. Tři miliony Somálců žijí na hranici hladomoru. Hrozbu celonárodního hladomoru dosud nemůžeme vyloučit.

Teroristé z takto rozvrácené společnosti samozřejmě těží. Boj proti terorismu v Somálsku začíná zajištěním základních životních potřeb obyvatelům Somálska. V této humanitární pomoci musí Evropská unie pokračovat. Měla by zároveň mobilizovat celé mezinárodní společenství, především sousední a další státy regionu, aby každý podle svých možností přispěl ke konci Somálska na území, které kontrolují více teroristé než vláda Somálska.

  Josef Weidenholzer (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin! Der grässliche Anschlag vom 21. Oktober in Mogadischu hat das leidgeprüfte Somalia für kurze Zeit wieder einmal in den Mittelpunkt des Weltinteresses gerückt. Seit einem Vierteljahrhundert herrscht hier Rechtlosigkeit, weil die Staatlichkeit nur in Ansätzen existiert. Das ist auch einer der Gründe für die zunehmende Destabilisierung der gesamten Region. Das Horn von Afrika ist eine der instabilsten Zonen dieser Welt.

Die tragischen Ereignisse sollten unsere Aufmerksamkeit auf die Region lenken und Anlass zu neuen politischen Anstrengungen geben. Europa sollte neben diplomatischen Bemühungen vor allem auch die somalische Diaspora unterstützen. Diese ist der einzige Hoffnungsträger für ein neues Somalia. Vor allem müssen wir die Mittel für die humanitäre Hilfe erhöhen und unsere Zusagen einhalten. Wir sollten auch auf Saudi-Arabien einwirken, seine Unterstützung für die wahhabitischen Extremisten einzustellen.

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-жо Председател, уважаеми г-н Комисар, уважаеми колеги, нарастващото присъствие на групировката „Ислямска държава“ в Сомалия може да стане значителна заплаха, ако тя успее да привлече джихадистките бойци, които ще избягат от рухващите бастиони в Сирия и в Ирак. Според доклада на ООН бойците на „Ислямска държава“ в Сомалия са нараснали многократно. Както всички знаем, от над десет години в Сомалия съществува ислямистката и много опасна групировка „Аш Шабаб“ – терористична организация, която се стреми да установи пълен контрол над мюсюлманите в трите разкъсани региона в страната и да наложи шериатското право.

Наскоро президентът Мохамед Абдулахи Мохамед изрази позицията, че е обявил състояние на война срещу групировката „Аш Шабаб“. Смятаме, че ние като общност трябва да подкрепим Сомалия по пътя на стабилизацията, защото видяхме какво се случи в Северна Африка, когато бяха разпаднати държавите там и се отвори кутията на Пандора, която заля Европа с вълна от мигранти и насилие. Трябва да спомогнем за това тероризмът да бъде спрян в зародиш, за да не изпаднем отново в ситуацията Европа да бъде спасителен пояс и да подлагаме държавите и гражданите си на риск.

  Ilhan Kyuchyuk (ALDE). – Madam President, in recent years, the EU has shown its strong and longstanding commitment to supporting Somalia and its people. The EU’s engagement in the country has intensified over the years, with the Union remaining the largest donor in terms of both political engagement and financial and technical support and expertise. Unfortunately, the ongoing conflicts and power struggles within Somalia have destabilised the country’s political and security environment, leading to the rise of terrorism and large refugee movements both within the country and beyond its borders.

In less than a year the terrorist group al-Shabaab, the local branch of al-Qa’ida, has conducted more than 20 attacks in Mogadishu, leaving hundreds of people dead and more than a thousand injured. Terrorist attacks weaken and reverse the gains made today. Therefore, I call on the EU to use active diplomacy to encourage the international community to remain strongly engaged, through a process of state-building and security in Somalia. The EU and the international community should improve political and security stability in the country, because terrorism is a common threat that must be tackled on the basis of full cooperation.

  Kateřina Konečná (GUE/NGL). – Paní předsedající, situace v Somálsku je dlouhodobě složitá a bezútěšná. Vnitřně rozdělená země se stala obětí vzestupu náboženského extremismu a s ním spojeného násilí. Teroristické útoky v oblasti jsou bohužel velmi časté a souvisí i s aktem pomsty. Stejně tak tomu bylo minulý měsíc, kdy somálský voják odpálil v hlavním městě kamion naplněný hned několika stovkami kilogramů výbušnin a zabil přes 350 osob. Tento zbabělý čin byl reakcí na jiný, stejně zbabělý čin, ke kterému došlo v srpnu. 7 dospělých neozbrojeným farmářů a tři děti byli zabiti vládními a americkými jednotkami na jihu země. Chci proto apelovat na to, aby se naše odsouzení hanebných činů neřídilo podle toho, pod jakou vlajkou k nim došlo. V otázkách obrany nevinných nesmíme hledět na to, koho považujeme za spojence, ale měřit všem stejným metrem.

  Angelo Ciocca (ENF). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, un pensiero va alle famiglie e alle vittime dei vigliacchi e vili attentati terroristici di matrice islamista, ovviamente. Però ora l'Europa deve agire, l'Europa deve reagire. L'Europa come può reagire? Fermando i canali di finanziamento del terrorismo islamista, in primis la tratta dei clandestini. L'Europa, per sconfiggere il terrorismo, deve difendere i confini e non può continuare invece a pagare quella che è un'accoglienza folle e criminale.

Se dovessimo riflettere per qualche secondo assieme sui moventi del recente attentato islamista in Somalia, che ha visto coinvolti ben 358 morti, individueremo almeno due moventi. Il primo movente è l'obiettivo di instaurare la Sharia in Somalia, ma il secondo obiettivo, più profondo e di business e di profitto, è creare spavento, creare destabilizzazione del popolo somalo per spingerlo nel percorso criminale delle partenze clandestine verso l'Europa.

Ben 200 000 somali hanno raggiunto l'Italia negli ultimi cinque anni. Allora, un'Europa che difende i confini è un'Europa che vuole chiudere definitivamente i rubinetti ai finanziamenti del terroristi, un'Europa che difende i confini è un'Europa che vuole dire basta e sconfiggere il terrorismo, un'Europa che difende i confini è un'Europa che vuole debellare realmente il problema del terrorismo nel nostro paese.

  Wajid Khan (S&D). – Madam President, the bombing in central Mogadishu on 14 October was one of the most lethal terrorist attacks in recent years. It killed over 350 people, left more than 200 injured, and many are still missing. Al-Shabaab, the organisation responsible for such barbarity, had not itself foreseen the scale of its own operation. They did not even claim public responsibility for the loss of so many lives, for fear of angering the citizens and losing support for their insurgency.

The population did not even have time to mourn for these victims before yet another brutal attack took place on 28 October. Somalia is under attack, and it needs our support to continue. I therefore appeal to the African Union and the United Nations: this is not the time to withdraw troops from the country. We cannot abandon Somalia in their time of need. Only with a joint effort can we hope to defeat the terrorists and soon restore peace in Somalia.

  Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, καταδικάζουμε απερίφραστα την τρομοκρατική επίθεση που έγινε στις 14 Οκτωβρίου στο Mogadishu και είχε πάρα πολλά θύματα· 358 νεκρούς και 228 τραυματίες. Μια τρομοκρατική ενέργεια της al-Shabaab, της γνωστής ισλαμιστικής τρομοκρατικής οργάνωσης, η οποία βεβαίως στρατολογεί συνεχώς παιδιά, αλλά και άλλους πολίτες στη Σομαλία, ακριβώς επειδή υπάρχει φτώχεια. Το 75% του πληθυσμού ζει κάτω από το όριο της φτώχειας, ο υποσιτισμός έχει πλήξει 400.000 παιδιά και υπάρχουν και πάρα πολλοί πρόσφυγες. Αποτελεί, λοιπόν, λίπασμα για την τρομοκρατία η άσχημη οικονομική κατάσταση που επικρατεί στη Σομαλία· 420.000 πρόσφυγες βρίσκονται μόνο στην Κένυα.

Αντιλαμβάνεστε, λοιπόν, ότι χρειάζεται μία δραστική παρέμβαση προκειμένου να σταθεροποιηθεί η κατάσταση και, κυρίως, να υπάρξει οικονομική ανάπτυξη στη Σομαλία, για να μην έχουμε ούτε παράνομους μετανάστες στην Ευρώπη και κυρίως για να μπορέσουν οι άνθρωποι αυτοί να στηρίξουν την πατρίδα τους.

Interventions à la demande

  Krzysztof Hetman (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Somalia od dłuższego już czasu regularnie jest ofiarą przerażających i jednocześnie tchórzliwych ataków terrorystycznych, włączając w to październikowy atak bombowy w Mogadiszu będący jednym z najkrwawszych zamachów na świecie. Prawie wszystkie te ataki mają jeden wspólny mianownik: Asz-Szabab. Nie ulega więc wątpliwości, że niezbędne są kompleksowe działania mające na celu likwidację tej organizacji terrorystycznej. Sądzę, że rezultat lutowych wyborów prezydenckich i dojście do władzy prezydenta Abdullahi Mohameda dają szansę na pozytywne zmiany w tym kierunku. Trzeba jednak pamiętać, że obok wzmocnienia sił bezpieczeństwa równie ważne są działania dodatkowe, takie jak ograniczenie źródeł finansowania Asz-Szabab poprzez kontrolę pochodzenia zasobów naturalnych czy też zmniejszenie ryzyka rekrutacji przez Asz-Szabab osób młodych, na przykład poprzez zwiększenie liczby miejsc pracy.

(Fin des interventions à la demande)

  Phil Hogan, Member of the Commission, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, on behalf of Vice-President Mogherini I want to indicate to the House the view of the Commission in relation to the matter that has been raised arising from the terrorist attacks in Somalia. On 14 October, Somalia suffered one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in recent history, when a truck filled with explosives detonated in a busy area of Mogadishu. Some 350 civilians died and many more were injured. Only two weeks later, on 28 October, another deadly terror attack hit Mogadishu.

The High Representative and Vice-President Federica Mogherini spoke to President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed (Farmajo) to express condolences at both occasions and reaffirm the European Union’s long-term commitment to Somalia and its people. I am sure everybody in this House will join with me in expressing our sincerest condolences to the victims and their families.

Terrorist attacks are not uncommon in Somalia and the terrorist organisation al-Shabaab unfortunately remains a continuous threat to the building of a peaceful and democratic society benefiting the Somali people. In the last few years, thanks to the collective work of the Somalis themselves, coupled with the support of the international community, Somalia – following decades of civil war, clan feuds and disarray – has seen positive political developments. Slowly a federal state with institutions is being established.

AMISOM, the African Union’s peace-keeping operation, has been essential in providing a security space for political progress to happen. The European Union, including its Member States, is by far the largest supporter of Somalia, with a collective contribution of EUR 3.5 billion in 2015 to 2020. The important and positive progress cannot be reversed. It is essential for Somalia’s advancement and security, and it is important for stability in the region and beyond. The Federal Government of Somalia now has to show leadership and determination. Only political inclusivity, joint commitment and unity between the federal and regional levels will move Somalia out of this constant crisis mode.

We therefore welcome the recent meetings convened by President Farmajo and by Prime Minister Hassan Ali Khayre between the federal government and the federal member states. The security situation has to be tackled up-front, and the concrete building of a Somali-owned security architecture in line with the agreed stability pact has to move forward. Equally, the federal project must move forward, fundamentally in finalising the constitutional review to resolve the outstanding issues of power and resource sharing between the federal government and the federal member states.

All of these reforms should allow Somalia to take ownership of its own security and its own economic potential. In turn, it will create the conditions for AMISOM’s gradual draw-down.

  La Présidente. – Le débat est clos.

Le vote aura lieu aujourd’hui à 12 heures.

Déclarations écrites (article 162)

  Mark Demesmaeker (ECR), schriftelijk. – Onze delegatie betreurt de zware tol die de aanslag van 14 oktober in Mogadishu heeft geëist. Somalië wordt al jaren gewurgd door geweld uit extremistische hoek. Aanslagen, executies en ontvoeringen domineren er het dagelijkse leven. Met deze laatste aanslag bereikte de brutaliteit echter een absoluut dieptepunt: 358 onschuldige burgers lieten het leven en vele honderden geraakten gewond. We mogen terreur nooit gewoon worden. Ook niet in Somalië. Daarom roepen wij de internationale gemeenschap op om het land te helpen in zijn strijd tegen terreur en zo het pad vrij te maken naar vrede en stabiliteit.

  Monica Macovei (ECR), in writing. – We are all too familiar with the horrific effects of terror in Europe in these recent years, yet we must also focus on Africa, where terrorism is devastating Somalia. The country has suffered another terrorist attack in the form of a truck bomb, which struck Mogadishu. In this particular strike, more than 300 people were killed and 500 were injured. This attack is unfortunately another chapter in the story of terrorism in Somalia. Mogadishu has seen four separate bombings in the year 2017 alone. Hundreds have been killed as a result.

This issue is a crisis for both Somalia and Africa. The EU and Africa have had a prosperous and beneficial relationship for many years, however that relationship is being jeopardised as a result of these repeated terrorist attacks. In order to ensure a better future for both Africa and the EU, we must deliver technical and financial support to the Somali Government to help them fight terrorism.

  Bogdan Brunon Wenta (PPE). – Zdecydowanie potępiam krwawy atak terrorystyczny przeprowadzony 14 października tego roku w Mogadiszu, w wyniku którego życie straciło przynajmniej 358 osób, a pozostałe 228 odniosły rany. Zamachy terrorystyczne, strzelaniny w miejscach publicznych, egzekucje i porwania w Mogadiszu uległy nasileniu szczególnie w ostatnich miesiącach. Mając na uwadze ograniczoną zdolność Somalii do ochrony swoich obywateli przed przemocą oraz ryzyko powrotu kraju do stanu anarchii, Unia Afrykańska powinna poważnie rozważyć możliwość przedłużenia Misji Unii Afrykańskiej w Somalii (AMISOM) poza rok 2018. Ponadto apeluję do Komisji Europejskiej o przeznaczenie większej puli środków w ramach Instrumentu na rzecz Pokoju w Afryce na przeciwdziałanie terroryzmowi i radykalizacji. Zwracam się też do Rady Unii Europejskiej o rozważenie możliwości poszerzenia mandatu Szkoleniowej Misji Wojskowej w Somalii (EUTM Somalia) o działania antyterrorystyczne, przy jednoczesnym zwiększeniu stanu osobowego misji. Chroniczna destabilizacja tego państwa przyczynia się do masowej ucieczki Somalijczyków z ich kraju i poszukiwania lepszych warunków życia w Europie. Kryzys migracyjny ostatnich lat pokazał, że nasze możliwości pomocy w tej kwestii są ograniczone, dlatego też zwracam się o wsparcie Unii Europejskiej dla działań ukierunkowanych na rozwiązanie problemu migracji u źródeł jego powstawania.

4.3. Madagascar

  La Présidente. – L’ordre du jour appelle le débat sur six propositions de résolution concernant Madagascar (2017/2963(RSP)).

  Νότης Μαριάς, Συντάκτης. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η Μαδαγασκάρη είναι το τέταρτο σε έκταση νησί στην υφήλιο. Πρόκειται για μια περιοχή πλούσια σε πλουτοπαραγωγικές πηγές, της οποίας όμως ο λαός είναι ιδιαίτερα φτωχός, καθώς το 92% του πληθυσμού ζει με λιγότερα από δύο δολάρια των ΗΠΑ ημερησίως.

Το 1980, η Μαδαγασκάρη έπεσε στα νύχια του Διεθνούς Νομισματικού Ταμείου, που εφάρμοσε τα γνωστά του προγράμματα, με αποτέλεσμα να έχουμε φτώχεια, ανεργία και αρπαγή του δημόσιου πλούτου. Τώρα βρίσκεται υπό την επιρροή της Κίνας, η οποία την έχει εντάξει στον δρόμο του μεταξιού, με έργα υποδομών και με κινεζοποίηση της οικονομίας, η οποία έχει γεμίσει με φθηνά κινεζικά προϊόντα και έχει διαλυθεί, με αποτέλεσμα να υπάρχουν απεργίες και αντιστάσεις.

Σε αυτή, λοιπόν, την κατάσταση βρίσκεται η χώρα, με πολιτική κρίση και με σύγκρουση της κυβέρνησης με τη Δικαιοσύνη, λόγω της υπόθεσης Claudine, που έχει σχέση με δωροδοκίες. Είναι προφανές ότι χρειάζεται μία παρέμβαση της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης για την αποκατάσταση της ομαλότητας και για διευκόλυνση αυτού του λαού, προκειμένου ο ίδιος να μπορεί να εκμεταλλευτεί τις πλουτοπαραγωγικές του πηγές και την οικονομία του και να βρεθεί σε πολιτική ομαλότητα, ιδίως καθώς βαδίζει προς τις εκλογές.

  Jordi Solé, auteur. – Madame la Présidente, Madagascar est confronté à une exploitation hautement problématique de ses ressources naturelles. 36 000 hectares de sa forêt tropicale disparaissent chaque année, souvent au profit d’entreprises détenues par des oligarques locaux.

De nombreux permis d’exploitation des mines ont été accordés par l’ancien gouvernement de transition dans des procédures non transparentes, sans consulter la population locale et sans tenir compte des impacts environnementaux.

Rares sont les crimes environnementaux à faire l’objet de poursuites. Il en va tout autrement pour les activistes environnementaux qui s’opposent au pillage de leur pays et qui se retrouvent régulièrement en prison ou devant des juges, c’est le cas de Clovis Razafimalala.

Cet activiste a dénoncé le trafic et l’exploitation illégale du bois de rose. Il a pour cela été détenu pendant plus de neuf mois, sur la base d’accusations fabriquées de toutes pièces, pour rébellion, destruction de documents publics et de marchandises, et incendies criminels. Il a finalement été condamné à une peine de prison de cinq ans avec sursis.

Le rapporteur spécial de l’ONU sur les droits de l’homme et l’environnement, John Knox, évoque un problème de corruption de la justice pour expliquer de tels faits.

Madagascar est également en train de revoir son code des mines. Il est très important que cette révision aboutisse à un texte garantissant des principes élémentaires, comme le recours obligatoire à des études d’impact, la consultation préalable des habitants affectés par les activités minières, les possibilités de recours et l’octroi de permis conditionnés à la limitation stricte de la transformation du site pendant les activités d’extraction, à la reconstitution du site au terme de ces activités et à la compensation des impacts environnementaux.

Le gouvernement devrait aussi saisir cette occasion pour revoir les permis d’exploitation hautement douteux accordés par l’ancien gouvernement.

Je me réjouis que la résolution conjointe évoque, entre autres, toutes ces questions brûlantes.

  Miguel Urbán Crespo, autor. – Señora presidenta, desde 2009 hemos visto en Madagascar un aumento de la economía extractivista de recursos mineros, forestales y agroalimentarios por parte de las multinacionales que ha ido directamente aparejado de una alarmante persecución de periodistas, ecologistas y defensores de los derechos humanos, que denuncian la corrupción del Gobierno y este modelo económico depredador de derechos y de recursos medioambientales.

Es fundamental señalar la relación del aumento de la violencia sexual hacia las mujeres con las zonas de explotación minera, en un país —Madagascar— donde las mujeres siguen sin tener derecho al aborto legal.

Debemos exigir al Gobierno de Madagascar el cumplimiento escrupuloso de los derechos humanos, así como el cumplimiento de los derechos sexuales y reproductivos de las mujeres.

Pero nuestra exigencia también es para las multinacionales depredadoras de recursos y, muchas veces, vulneradoras de derechos. Por todo ello, también le exigimos a la Unión Europea que apoye el tratado vinculante que se está debatiendo en las Naciones Unidas, de respeto a los derechos humanos por parte de las multinacionales.

Depende de nosotros también, señorías, tomar parte y ponernos justamente del lado de la gente y de los derechos humanos, impidiendo el expolio de las multinacionales.

  Soraya Post, author. – Madam President, the human rights situation in Madagascar right now is extremely serious. The everyday reality of human rights defenders is intimidation, threats, lack of freedom of association and expression, and judicial harassment – in clear contravention of international human rights norms. We need to send a clear message to the Malagasy authorities that the harassment of human rights defenders and journalists must stop. They must be allowed to carry out their work in safety.

The court sentences that have been handed down to human rights defenders and journalists to force them to stop their work, such as in the case of Raleva, must be quashed.

The EU and its Member States must invest in providing support and protection to human rights defenders; it is our obligation.

  Louis Michel, auteur. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, à un an de l’élection présidentielle et des élections législatives, tous les ferments d’une crise pré- et post-électorale sont réunis: accaparement de tous les leviers du pouvoir, suppression des libertés pour les partis non gouvernementaux, manque de bonne gouvernance avec un niveau très élevé de corruption et de détournement de fonds publics, emprisonnements arbitraires, harcèlement de journalistes, y compris les journalistes d’investigation, et des défenseurs des droits humains et environnementaux, non-respect du principe de la séparation des pouvoirs, ingérence de l’État dans les affaires judiciaires, exécutions extrajudiciaires, justice populaire face à l’impunité de certains officiers de la force publique.

Le collègue Jordi Solé a déjà évoqué le cas de Clovis Razafimalala, je n’y reviendrai pas.

Il y a un autre cas, celui de M. Ravela, qui a été condamné à deux ans de prison avec sursis juste pour avoir osé demander la preuve qu’une société minière chinoise s’était vu accorder les permis miniers et environnementaux nécessaires pour poursuivre ses activités.

Cette résolution vient véritablement à son heure. Elle ne pourrait être assez dure.

  Tomáš Zdechovský, Autor. – Paní předsedající, mnozí v roce 2013 jásali, že Madagaskar nakročil správným směrem, ale že je stále potřeba co zlepšovat. Neměli však pravdu. Ukázalo se, že toto zlepšení je pouze dočasné. Současná vláda by měla ctít základy právního státu a nechat justiční orgány svobodně rozhodnout o případech korupce či lidských práv. Je nutné, aby byly dodrženy fundamentální svobody včetně té nejdůležitější, svobody svobodného vyjadřování. Doufám, že nadcházející volby v příštím roce proběhnou demokraticky a transparentně a Evropská unie se bude na dodržování všech práv podílet.

Toto ale není pouze problém Madagaskaru, je to obecně problém většiny afrických států. Situace na Madagaskaru je pouze pomyslná špička ledovce. Porušování lidských práv probíhá napříč celou Afrikou. Opětovně to prokazují výzkumy organizací jako Human Right Watch či Amnesty International, že je běžnou praxí omezování svobody projevu politické opozice, genderová a rasová diskriminace, dětská práce, nucená manželství, náboženská nesvoboda, korupce či dokonce otroctví. Mnohdy situace dojde tak daleko, že jsou lidé zcela nelegitimně zatýkáni, tyranizováni nebo dokonce zabíjeni a často kvůli mizerným penězům nebo přírodním surovinám, jako je to na Madagaskaru.

Nadto se v Africe rozmáhá radikální islám, který stále více nabourává smýšlení tamních obyvatel. V otázce lidských práv v Africe je obrovský prostor pro zlepšení, nicméně tomu musíme napomoci podobně, jako na Madagaskaru se snaží Evropská unie. Evropská unie je garant a ochránce demokratických hodnot a základních lidských práv a svobod, ale musí aktivně participovat na stabilizaci situace a přispívat skrze své diplomaty k nastolení právního státu a dodržování lidských práv.

Partnerství Afriky a Evropské unie v oblasti ekonomické spolupráce je důležité, nicméně by se nemělo zapomínat na to, že naší prioritou je předcházet konfliktům a přispívat k jejich řešení, aby se situace dále nevyhrocovala. Je nutno vést dialog o lidských právech s africkými zeměmi z mandátu Evropské unie a prosazovat pevný závazek ochrany lidských práv, demokracie a právního státu v celém světě.

  Bogdan Brunon Wenta, w imieniu grupy PPE. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Jak już wielu przedmówców wspominało, wydawało się, że wybory przed czterema laty doprowadzą do stabilizacji, poprawy i stworzenia rządów prawa. Ale jak widzimy, dzisiejsze standardy demokratyczne nie są przestrzegane w tym kraju. Wszyscy już mówiliśmy o prześladowaniu dziennikarzy, obrońców praw człowieka, środowiska, o nieskutecznych akcjach funkcjonariuszy państwowych, o bezpodstawnych zatrzymaniach, a jednocześnie aktach samosądu.

Sądzę, że w tym przypadku, jeżeli chodzi o Madagaskar, bardzo ważne jest powstrzymanie przede wszystkim nadmiernej i nielegalnej eksploatacji dóbr naturalnych. Są to dobra nie tylko Madagaskaru, ale i światowe, a ich nadmierna eksploatacja doprowadza do degradacji ekologicznej i przede wszystkim odbiera szansę przyszłym pokoleniom ludności, obywateli w tym kraju na rozwój społeczno-ekonomiczny, a jednocześnie, jak widzimy, prowadzi to do zdecydowanej korupcji na wszelkich szczeblach aktualnej władzy.

Na pewno istotne jest przestrzeganie praw człowieka, a także to, aby nie nastąpiły zmiany konstytucyjne w tym kraju. Sądzę, że szansą na to będą wybory prezydenckie w przyszłym roku i one mogą pozwolić przy pełnej współpracy i kontroli, aby ten kraj dalej pozostawał na poziomie kraju demokratycznego i mam nadzieję, że to się wszystko uda nam wspólnie zrobić.

  Boris Zala, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, the priority must now be on the upcoming presidential elections, to ensure that they are free and fair and that the results are accepted by all political players as legitimate. Madagascar cannot afford another slide into chaos. This is the responsibility of the current President. That is the key message of the urgency resolution.

But the signs are not encouraging. The current government violates human rights on a daily basis. Madagascar is one of the poorest and worst—governed countries in Africa. The people of Madagascar are in desperate need of governance. Neither poverty nor plague can be contained without a legitimate government in place. International donors cannot operate in a state of perpetual instability. That is why the conduct of the upcoming elections is so critical to the country’s future. The EU must put maximum pressure on the government to deliver them.

  Dita Charanzová, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Madam President, it is unfortunate that we are having to discuss Madagascar today. After the last elections we were all hopeful that the situation would improve, but this is not happening. Madagascar is truly in a dire state. While the outbreak of the plague has recently been dominating the headlines, there are many other serious issues threatening the well—being of its citizens and undermining their human rights.

The reports of the government arbitrarily detaining human rights defenders, journalists and activists, and the cases of extrajudicial killing, are alarming and disturbing. This needs to end.

As Madagascar enters a new election year, the EU should be more actively engaging in helping the country to strengthen democracy and the rule of law and should provide as much technical assistance as necessary to this end.

  Younous Omarjee, au nom du groupe GUE/NGL. – Madame la Présidente, je me pose la question de la valeur des recommandations en matière de liberté de la presse à Madagascar, quand, en Europe, les lanceurs d’alerte sont traduits en justice.

Quelle est aussi la force morale des recommandations en matière de respect des droits fondamentaux, quand les entreprises européennes violent dans le monde entier les droits de millions de travailleurs?

Quelle est aussi la valeur des recommandations pour la réforme du code minier dans la grande île, quand on omet de dénoncer la spoliation des terres et l’exploitation des ressources minières par les compagnies européennes? Car on aurait mieux fait d’adresser ces recommandations à l’entreprise allemande Tantalus, qui s’est accaparé 300 kilomètres de terres sur le dos des paysans malgaches.

En fait, comme toujours, sous couvert des droits de l’homme, c’est toujours par l’ingérence économique, par l’ingérence politique que l’on poursuit ce qui nous obsède ici, c’est-à-dire les intérêts de l’Union européenne, des pays européens et des multinationales européennes.

  Dominique Bilde, au nom du groupe ENF. – Madame la Présidente, en écoutant certaines personnes, je constate qu’elles sont un peu déconnectées de ce qui se passe exactement à Madagascar.

Les insuffisances de Madagascar en matière de démocratie ne justifient pas d’acculer sa population à la pauvreté. Mes collègues ont ainsi souligné, à juste titre, les conséquences dramatiques du gel des financements européens de 2009 à 2014, puisque ce pays dépend à 50 % de l’aide internationale.

Madagascar n’est pas plus épargnée que l’Europe par l’infiltration islamiste et le risque terroriste y est désormais tangible. À cet égard, les Européens, comme l’ensemble de la communauté internationale, doivent se garder de toute ingérence quant à la question de la minorité musulmane des Khojas.

Madagascar est en effet, avant tout, aux prises avec une situation économique inextricable, puisque l’aggravation des inégalités depuis 2005 et les infrastructures défaillantes compromettent tout espoir de reprise.

Un effort considérable sera nécessaire pour améliorer les conditions d’existence des 92 % de Malgaches qui survivent avec moins de deux euros par jour. Un développement, par exemple, de l’élevage des crevettes locales – les meilleures au monde – serait une avancée. Les ravages de la peste, qui a causé la mort de 127 personnes durant les mois d’août et octobre, sont le dernier symptôme tragique de ce dénuement extrême.

L’intervention européenne est cruciale tant les autorités malgaches peinent à faire face à cette crise sanitaire qui, selon l’Organisation mondiale de la santé, devrait se poursuivre jusqu’en avril de l’année prochaine.

Notre mobilisation est donc urgente pour sortir Madagascar de l’ornière de l’instabilité chronique de la famine et de la maladie.

  Cristian Dan Preda (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, le Parlement européen a été l’un des supporters constants de Madagascar sur la voie de la consolidation de la démocratie et de la stabilisation.

En décembre 2013, nous avons envoyé une mission d’observation électorale à Madagascar, afin d’accompagner le processus de sortie d’une crise politique qui avait duré cinq ans et de soutenir ainsi le peuple malgache. J’ai moi-même participé à cette mission et je me souviens très bien combien notre présence était importante lors de cette étape délicate de sortie de crise.

Pour moi, il est essentiel que le pays continue d’avancer sur la bonne voie et que le prochain processus électoral, qui devrait se tenir fin 2018, se déroule dans de bonnes conditions. Pour cela, la stabilité politique doit être préservée et le dialogue et la recherche du consensus doivent être privilégiés par les acteurs politiques. C’est la seule recette possible pour l’organisation d’élections crédibles en temps et en heure. Je me souviens d’ailleurs que nous avions reçu le président malgache à Bruxelles et mené ce dialogue extrêmement utile à cet égard.

Si les prochaines élections se déroulent bien, je suis convaincu que l’Union européenne continuera à soutenir le pays.

Dans l’immédiat, il revient à l’Union – il nous revient – d’utiliser tous les instruments à notre disposition pour soutenir un dialogue politique inclusif et d’insister sur le respect des droits de l’homme dans la perspective du prochain processus électoral.

  Cécile Kashetu Kyenge (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, nous parlons de Madagascar et, du coup, nous voyons pointer à l’horizon les pires tares de démocratie approximative. Le schéma est désormais classique.

Le climat sociopolitique malgache frôle la catastrophe. Réduit à la misère, le peuple assiste impuissant à la généralisation de la corruption. Amnesty International s’en est fait l’écho, en juillet dernier, en pointant du doigt les malversations qui gangrènent la grande île du plus bas au plus haut niveau.

L’élection présidentielle était prévue en 2018, mais voilà qu’une révision constitutionnelle surgit de nulle part. C’est le sésame pour dilater le temps et repousser les élections. Ceux qui le disent n’ont pas tort.

L’agenda politique affiche un tableau sombre: musellement de l’opposition, ingérence gouvernementale dans les procédures judiciaires, conditionnement des travaux de la CENI, répression excessive des activistes, intimidation des journalistes et expédition punitive des forces de l’ordre.

Notre résolution exprime notre aversion vis-à-vis de ces violations et, en même temps, notre ferme soutien pour le peuple malgache.

  Pavel Svoboda (PPE). – Paní předsedající, 92 % obyvatel Madagaskaru žije s méně než 2 dolary denně. Madagaskar je tak nejchudší zemí světa, v níž ale naštěstí neprobíhá ozbrojený konflikt. Je také bohužel příkladem země, jejíž nepříliš stabilní politická situace zhoršuje životní podmínky obyvatelstva a ty dále zhoršují politickou stabilitu. Slabá vláda práva nebo omezování svobody slova umožňuje organizovanému zločinu nelegální těžbu a poškozování jedinečné přírody Madagaskaru. Ničení přírody ztěžuje nastolit udržitelný rozvoj v místním společenství a vede i k takovým následkům, jako je probíhající morová epidemie s již 127 mrtvými. Světová zdravotnická organizace vidí jasnou souvislost mezi celkově špatnou společenskou i politickou situací a zhoršením zdravotnických služeb, které dosud vedlo k 1 800 případům moru.

Apelujme tedy na vládu Madagaskaru, aby zaručila dodržování základních práv a svobod, zajistila konání demokratických voleb v roce 2018 a vytvořila tak prostor pro řešení prostřednictvím dialogu a spolupráce. Pokud to Madagaskar učiní, může počítat s pomocí Evropské unie.

  Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D). – Madam President, Madagascar is facing a very difficult situation, having been hit hard by economic and political instability, by the negative growth of GDP and by the failure to meet the election deadlines. The failure of Madagascar to respect the election timeline has caused Western nations to withdraw financial aid and brought further political instability, worsening the country’s situation from the socio—economic, humanitarian and human rights perspectives. Therefore, in welcoming the call to devote attention to the preparations of the forthcoming presidential elections, I strongly believe that supervision from the international community’s side is required in order to ensure that democratic standards are met, and that elections take place in a free, open and transparent manner.

Moreover, I conclude by expressing my full support for the call on the Malagasy authorities to fulfil their international commitments, to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms and, last but not least, to guarantee respect for the rule of law, which comes as a response to increasing concerns about human rights violations, arbitrary arrests and detentions, and about limited freedom of expression and unfair trials.

Interventions à la demande

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Madam President, it is interesting that at my own party’s national convention last week in Ireland prominence was given to the question of Africa and it was mentioned that the European Union as a whole, they felt, needed to engage more with Africa. I pointed out the lot of engagement we have already in terms of development and humanitarian aid, etc., but at the same time, it is a point worth making. Also worth making is the point made by my colleague behind me here, Cristian Dan Preda, that the delegations that went there were well—received and beneficial, and I think we need more direct dialogue – with Members of the European Parliament, with Commissioners, like Commissioner Hogan, etc. They can bring a lot of expertise and direction to countries like Madagascar and also help us better understand their problems and help them deal with issues like human rights violations and illegal logging, etc., and to ensure that their elections are properly conducted and fair. I think direct dialogue is something we need to encourage a bit more.

  Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il Madagascar vive una profonda crisi economica e politica che accentua antichi problemi mai risolti, primo tra tutti la situazione dei diritti umani, che è in drastico peggioramento. Un paese tra i più spettacolari del pianeta dal punto di vista ambientale che non riesce a sfruttare le sue risorse a causa dei continui conflitti interni.

A questa instabilità si è aggiunta negli ultimi mesi l'esplosione di una preoccupante epidemia di peste che ha fatto già registrare 127 morti. Una situazione drammatica, considerato che il 70 % della popolazione vive ancora al di sotto della soglia di povertà e che il sistema sanitario ha una media di soli 3 posti letto ogni 10 000 persone. Il Madagascar resta una delle nazioni più povere del mondo e le sue richieste di aiuto vengono spesso ignorate dai paesi occidentali, poco interessati al futuro di questa grande isola nell'Oceano Indiano.

L'Unione europea deve dare sostegno ai difensori dei diritti umani nel paese e lavorare affinché le prossime elezioni democratiche si svolgano in un clima di serenità e nel rispetto dell'ordine costituzionale.

(Fin des interventions à la demande)

  Phil Hogan, Member of the Commission, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, I am taking this point on behalf of Vice-President Mogherini. She welcomes, of course, the interest of the House in the situation in Madagascar, which is entering a critical period in its history. It is important that we assess the political climate as we approach the presidential election, which is due a year from now.

Ensuring credible, inclusive and transparent elections has been mentioned by many Members in this House, and is a means of addressing a number of systemic issues, and doing so well before the electoral campaign itself has begun. Successful elections can only take place if citizens feel safe and secure, if candidates are free to run, if human rights and fundamental freedoms are demonstrably protected, and if the rule of law is maintained.

It is also important that the legislative framework for the elections should be prepared in an inclusive manner, both before and during passage through the parliamentary system. We are naturally concerned in the Commission about reports of violence and intimidation in Madagascar. These must be transparently investigated. Detention and harassment of journalists and civil society activists also cannot be ignored and is being followed up by our EU delegation in Antananarivo.

I want to assure Ms Kyenge that we continue to believe that Madagascar can enjoy a positive future if it can break the cycle of political crisis which has held back the development of resilient institutions and viable long-term reforms, which the country needs and which the EU is highly committed to supporting. There is urgent work to be done, as 90% of the population live on less than USD 2 per day and almost one in two children suffer from malnutrition. There is widespread social exclusion, and women and children are suffering in particular from exploitation. Health care and the environment are also critical priorities.

The challenges that are faced by human rights defenders and advocates of reform in Madagascar are complex and substantial. They stem from a culture of impunity which has allowed corruption to persist, but are exacerbated by specific issues such as disputes over land ownership and a lack of confidence in decentralised administration across this enormous and complex country. For ordinary people, difficulty in accessing information and in confronting a dysfunctional public administration leads to a sense of helplessness and encourages vigilante justice and other unacceptable means of conflict resolution.

Even when the European Union’s relations with Madagascar were constrained under Article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement, we continued to maintain a strong partnership with civil society. Since the holding of democratic elections in 2013 and the restoration of constitutional order, we have fully resumed our cooperation, but we must recognise that the challenges faced by Madagascar can only be comprehensively addressed with stronger institutions and more accountability.

For Madagascar this is a critical period but also a period of opportunity. The Union will continue to encourage the progress which is needed in democratic consolidation. We recall the African Union Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance, which sets out a clear democratic vision, including key elements for a successful election, such as strengthening of independent and impartial national electoral bodies, the maintenance of national mechanisms that redress election-related disputes, and ensuring fair and equitable access to state-controlled media during elections.

In relation to the action the European Union is taking on a regular basis, I would remind the House that our High Representative Ms Mogherini regularly raises these issues in relation to human rights, including Madagascar, and has raised them as recently as the Our Ocean Conference in Malta, or the last Donors Conference in Paris. These are where the concerns about human rights are raised by the EU’s highest level, as Mr Preda has acknowledged and has indicated. The EU is focusing all development and humanitarian aid on poverty reduction and is linking our budget support to human rights criteria.

Ms Charanzová and Mr Kelly have mentioned the importance of having free and fair elections. The European Union is focusing on financial support and technical support to the National Electoral Commission and to civil society, to assist in the organisation of these particular elections. Can I also say to Mr Kelly and to other Members that the support we are giving to Madagascar to have free and fair elections, in addition to the technical support, is a priority for the European Union in relation to electoral observation in 2018.

Next week we will have a very important occasion when the African Union and the European Union will be launching the External Investment Fund which has been proposed by Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission. I have regular contacts with the African Union Commissioner for Agriculture and we are working on developing technology transfer and vocational training and other development projects around how we can improve the position of women in agriculture – in particular in Africa and indeed in Madagascar – in order to get the benefits of the great cooperation of the EU and the African Union, but also to improve the lot of ordinary people through agriculture and food on the African continent, including Madagascar.

  La Présidente. – Le débat est clos.

Le vote aura lieu aujourd’hui.

Déclarations écrites (article 162)

  Isabella Adinolfi (EFDD), per iscritto. – Nonostante le elezioni del 2013 in Madagascar si siano svolte in un clima positivo, con un esito democratico e credibile, la situazione politica, sociale ed economica del paese è ancora instabile. Giornalisti e difensori dei diritti umani godono di pochissima libertà e sono spesso vittime di intimidazioni da parte delle autorità nazionali. Credo che l'Unione europea debba sostenere il Madagascar perché investa nell'offerta e sostegno dei difensori dei diritti umani e per far sì che si arrivi alle elezioni del 2018 in un clima di dialogo e credibilità che possa garantire un processo elettorale equo e libero.

  Rolandas Paksas (EFDD), raštu. – Kiekviena valstybė turi pareigą sudaryti sąlygas visapusiškam gyventojų vystymuisi, užtikrinti pagrindinių žmogaus teisių standartų laikymąsi. Madagaskaro valdžios institucijos privalo puoselėti ir ginti savo piliečių teises. Svarbu kurti tvarų viešosios valdžios aparatą, imtis efektyvių veiksmų politinės padėties, socialinio ir ekonominio lygio stabilizavimo tikslais. Turi būti imtasi efektyvių veiksmų nusikalstamumo, žodžio laisvės pažeidimų, terorizmo ir smurto prevencijos veiksmų. Šalyje turi būti išsaugota konstitucinė tvarka ir politinis stabilumas. Privalo būti užtikrintas taikus konfliktų sprendimas, aprūpinant nukentėjusiuosius būtinomis medicinos, higienos priemonėmis ir maisto atsargomis, sudarant sąlygas visapusiškam humanitarinės pagalbos tiekimui. Madagaskaro valdžios institucijos turi sistemingai atlikti nešališkus neteisminių egzekucijų tyrimus, patraukti kaltininkus baudžiamojon atsakomybėn ir užtikrinti, kad aukų šeimos gautų tinkamą kompensaciją.

(La séance est suspendue à 11 h 36)

VORSITZ: EVELYNE GEBHARDT
Vizepräsidentin

5. Resumption of the sitting

(Die Sitzung wird um 12.00 Uhr wieder aufgenommen)

  Die Präsidentin. – Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Sitzung ist wieder aufgenommen.

Herr Dartmouth, Sie haben sich zur Geschäftsordnung gemeldet. Bitte sagen Sie auch, auf welchen Artikel Sie sich beziehen.

  William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFDD). – Madam President, I am rising under Rule 11(3). It is clear from the intervention of Ms Jacqueline Foster yesterday that Mr Corbett has misrepresented the role of Mr Verhofstadt in relation to the committee of Westminster MPs that visited Brussels re Brexit. It is a most serious matter to misrepresent...

(The President cut off the speaker)

  Die Präsidentin. – Lieber Kollege! Wir können die Diskussion von gestern nicht noch einmal anfangen.

Ich habe einen weiteren Geschäftsordnungsantrag. Herr Woolfe, bitte schön, Sie haben das Wort!

  Steven Woolfe (NI). – Madam President, I am grateful for permission to make this intervention. I rise in relation to two rules: Rule 184a and Rule 198. In relation to Rule 198, I seek that you, as the President, look to the House to form a committee that looks at the appalling and abysmal behaviour of Saudi Arabia towards the people of Yemen, and the funding of any projects of the European Union with Saudi Arabia.

As you are fully aware, the cholera crisis in Yemen is now reaching 1 million people. There are children dying daily in their hundreds and Saudi Arabia has decided to block the ports, the airports and any travel in, also not permitting people to treat those children. The European Union has a responsibility to deal with the suffering of those people in Yemen and I ask you under Rule 198 that this Parliament seeks to censure Saudi Arabia.

  Die Präsidentin. – Darf ich Sie bitten, zu Ihrem Geschäftsordnungsantrag zu kommen?

Das ist nicht der Fall. Okay.

  Δημήτριος Παπαδημούλης (GUE/NGL). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, χθες μία φονική πλημμύρα στη χώρα μου, την Ελλάδα, στα προάστια δυτικά της Αθήνας, προκάλεσε μια τεράστια φυσική καταστροφή και ήδη θρηνούμε 15 νεκρούς.

Θεωρώντας δεδομένη την έκφραση της αλληλεγγύης του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και όλης της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης προς τον ελληνικό λαό που πλήττεται από αυτή την καταστροφή, και ως έκφραση συλλυπητηρίων στις οικογένειες των νεκρών, προτείνω, κυρία πρόεδρε, να τηρήσουμε ενός λεπτού σιγή.

  Die Präsidentin. – Danke schön. Wir können heute leider keine solche Schweigeminute machen, aber eines ist ganz klar: Wir sind alle bei den Opfern von Katastrophen, die für uns wirklich immer sehr große Katastrophen menschlicher Art sind.

Ich bedanke mich bei Ihnen, Herr Papadimoulis, und auch bei Ihnen, dass Sie an die Opfer denken. Ich bedanke mich dafür, dass wir uns auch immer für Minderheiten einsetzen und dafür sorgen, dass sie geschützt werden. Das ist für uns als Europäisches Parlament eine sehr wichtige Frage. Danke schön, dass Sie uns noch einmal darüber informiert haben.

Aber wenn Sie erlauben, würde ich jetzt gerne zu unserer Geschäftsordnung übergehen.

  Werner Langen (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin! Ich wollte das Plenum darüber informieren, dass am Dienstagnachmittag während der Debatte über die Rechtsstaatlichkeit in Malta die Livestream-Übertragung in Malta nach dem Beitrag des Kollegen Giegold gestört und nach dem Beitrag des Kollegen Casa abgeschaltet wurde. Insgesamt 28 Kollegen, die danach geredet haben, kamen nicht mehr zu Wort. Ich halte das für einen ungeheuren Skandal und bitte das Präsidium, die Ursache zu ermitteln.

(Beifall)

  Die Präsidentin. – Danke schön für die Information.

Ich sehe jetzt allerdings keine weiteren Geschäftsordnungsanträge. Deswegen kommen wir zu unseren Arbeiten.

6. Composition of committees : see Minutes

7. Voting time

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt folgt die Abstimmungsstunde.

(Abstimmungsergebnisse und sonstige Einzelheiten der Abstimmung: siehe Protokoll.)

7.1. Freedom of expression in Sudan, notably the case of Mohamed Zine El Abidine (RC-B8-0634/2017, B8-0634/2017, B8-0636/2017, B8-0637/2017, B8-0638/2017, B8-0639/2017, B8-0640/2017, B8-0642/2017) (vote)

7.2. Terrorist attacks in Somalia (RC-B8-0600/2017, B8-0600/2017, B8-0631/2017, B8-0632/2017, B8-0633/2017, B8-0635/2017) (vote)

7.3. Madagascar (RC-B8-0641/2017, B8-0641/2017, B8-0643/2017, B8-0644/2017, B8-0645/2017, B8-0646/2017, B8-0647/2017) (vote)

7.4. Establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast) (A8-0345/2017 - Cecilia Wikström) (vote)

  João Pimenta Lopes (GUE/NGL). – Um ponto de ordem, Senhora Presidente, para apresentar um protesto. É meio-dia e dez, o documento que vamos agora votar, ainda que sendo só uma expressão do seu consentimento, está disponível apenas numa língua desta casa, quando o documento data do dia 6 de novembro.

Trata-se de uma violação do princípio do multilinguismo que limita a capacidade dos deputados desta casa de avaliarem na sua própria língua o documento em questão e que deveria impedir a votação de qualquer documento, este ou outro, nestas condições. Será, naturalmente, o resultado daquilo que são os cortes orçamentais no que diz respeito à tradução e temos que apresentar este protesto.

  Die Präsidentin. – Danke schön, Herr Pimenta Lopes! Wir stimmen heute nicht über den Bericht als solchen ab, sondern nur über den Beschluss des LIBE-Ausschusses, Verhandlungen aufzunehmen. Für die Aufnahme von Verhandlungen ist nach unserer Geschäftsordnung keine Übersetzung des Berichts in alle Amtssprachen erforderlich. Der Bericht liegt seit vergangener Woche auf Englisch vor. Dies ist die Trilog-übliche Vorgehensweise. Die Übersetzung wird nachgereicht.

Wir kommen nun zur Abstimmung über den Beschluss des LIBE-Ausschusses auf Grundlage des Berichts von Frau Wikström.

  Cecilia Wikström, rapporteur. – Madam President, the European Parliament has managed to do something quite unusual: we have united the EPP, the Socialist Group, the ALDE Group, the Greens and the GUE Group to build a solid reform of the Dublin Regulation, based on solidarity. It is a complicated, delicate file, but according to the Eurobarometer of this year 70% of citizens of Europe expect the European Union to deliver on this, to deliver on the collapsed system that we have today.

It is high time today that we deliver. United we are strong. The alternative is that we stand, as of today, with no policy on a very topical and very difficult area, namely migration. If we cannot manage to unite, the European Parliament makes itself completely irrelevant. If we are united we can also ask the Council to come up with a position where they can unite. We have united, more than 200 political parties of Europe, on this, and a big majority of the Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) Committee.

Now the Council does not even have a position. We have a position that will change the reality out there, so, colleagues, today I stand before you asking for your confidence to start negotiations based on solidarity, based on European policy, creating an asylum system that is going to change the chaos of today and turn it into order. The alternative we know very well. It is your choice. Ask me, together with my team, to enter into negotiations, or defend the failed policy as of today in front of your citizens, if you can.

  Die Präsidentin. – Entschuldigung. Danke schön Frau Wikström. Herr Pimenta hat die Gegenrede bereits gehalten.

Deswegen können wir jetzt zur Abstimmung übergehen.

Der Beschluss des Ausschusses wurde vom Parlament gebilligt. Die Verhandlungen können jederzeit aufgenommen werden.

7.5. EU-New Zealand Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation (Consent) (A8-0327/2017 - Charles Tannock) (vote)

7.6. EU-New Zealand Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation (Resolution) (A8-0333/2017 - Charles Tannock) (vote)

7.7. The EU-Africa Strategy: a boost for development (A8-0334/2017 - Maurice Ponga) (vote)

7.8. Activities of the European Ombudsman in 2016 (A8-0328/2017 - Marlene Mizzi) (vote)

7.9. Environmental Implementation Review (EIR) (B8-0590/2017) (vote)

7.10. Combating inequalities as a lever to boost job creation and growth (A8-0340/2017 - Javi López) (vote)

  Die Präsidentin. – Damit ist die Abstimmungsstunde geschlossen.

8. Explanations of vote

8.1. EU-New Zealand Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation (Consent) (A8-0327/2017 - Charles Tannock)

Mündliche Erklärungen zur Abstimmung

  Jan Zahradil (ECR). – Paní předsedající, samozřejmě jsem tuto zprávu podpořil a mohu jenom vyjádřit svoji radost nad tím, že se Evropský parlament po určité pauze věnuje rozvoji vztahů s pacifickým regionem, nejenom s Novým Zélandem, ale i s Austrálií. Konec konců minule jsme tady dali mandát k vyjednávání o smlouvě o volném obchodu jak s Austrálií, tak s Novým Zélandem, a to dnešní hlasování o dohodě o partnerství a spolupráci a vztazích s Novým Zélandem je k tomu velmi vhodný předstupeň, takže je dobře, že si Evropská unie otevírá partnerské okénko obchodní cesty do tohoto regionu, a myslím, že tady existoval a bude existovat velice široký konsensus nad tím, že to je dobrá věc, že je to ku prospěchu našich národních ekonomik a že bychom v tom měli pokračovat. Určitě to podporujme.

  Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já také podporuji dohodu o partnerství a vztazích mezi Evropskou unií a Novým Zélandem. Jedná se o perspektivní krok v získání důležitého obchodního i strategického partnera a spojence v asijsko-tichomořském regionu. Od prohloubení vztahů s Novým Zélandem si osobně slibuji podporu udržitelných investic a růstu, vznik nových pracovních míst na obou stranách a také nové obchodní příležitosti pro soukromé subjekty. A mimo jiné také spolupráci v mnoha oblastech: od inovací, vědy po migraci, terorismus, boj proti organizovanému zločinu, kybernetické kriminalitě nebo soudní spolupráci. Podle mého názoru je Nový Zéland důležitým aktérem obchodní strategie Evropské unie v této oblasti a hlubší a vyvážená efektivní spolupráce napomůže oboustranné spokojenosti a stabilní demokracii.

  Daniel Hannan (ECR). – Madam President, what an amazing country New Zealand is: 4 million people, as remote geographically as any territory in the world, totally dependent on international trade, and yet it has gone a quarter of a century without a single quarter of negative economic growth. How? By international global commerce.

Yet, here is the amazing thing: no one in New Zealand is suggesting that in order to succeed they need to join a customs union with Malaysia or join a political union with Nauru, or even join a single currency with Australia. They have managed to succeed by living under their own laws, while remaining interested and engaged in the affairs of every country on every continent. It is a natural healthy thing to be independent and to trade. Commerce does not require political union.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Madam President, I was very pleased to vote in favour of this report, and very much welcome the signing of the partnership agreement with New Zealand. It is testament to the ongoing cooperation that the EU has fostered with New Zealand. The agreement has reinforced cooperation on a wide variety of important areas, and also facilitates further progress in trade with the launching of negotiations for the free trade agreement between the EU and New Zealand.

Speaking as an Irish person, we have a long-standing, friendly relationship with New Zealand. Indeed, one in six New Zealanders claim Irish heritage, and the Irish Government was very pleased to witness the opening of the New Zealand embassy in Dublin earlier this year. There have always been strong personal and cultural links between the two countries. This is also the case for other Member States, and certainly now for the European Union at large. The PARC Agreement has built on political, economic and cultural ties that look forward to future developments between the EU and New Zealand in these areas and of course, as the world gets smaller, New Zealand comes nearer to us.

8.2. EU-New Zealand Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation (Resolution) (A8-0333/2017 - Charles Tannock)

Mündliche Erklärungen zur Abstimmung

  Jasenko Selimovic (ALDE). – Madam President, I voted in favour of this agreement because I firmly believe that this cooperation will be fruitful, allowing both partners to swiftly move towards a modern, comprehensive and fair free trade agreement. I recognise the importance of New Zealand for my country, Sweden. It is actually the eighth most important trade partner for my country, and I believe it can be so with the EU as well. I believe that this agreement is especially important in this protectionist time as a fight against protectionism, and that is why I supported it.

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-жо Председател, уважаеми колеги, гласувах за доклада, защото Европейският съюз и неговите държави членки и Нова Зеландия имат здрави и добри взаимоотношения, като същевременно споделят и много общи цели по повечето глобални въпроси, като демокрацията, върховенството на закона и правата на човека, борбата срещу климатичния тероризъм. Те също така са активни поддръжници и участници в многостранни организации, като Организацията на обединените нации и Световната търговска организация.

Връзките между двете страни партньори бяха укрепени през октомври 2016 г. с подписването на споразумението за партньорство между Европейския съюз и Нова Зеландия, което ще представи всеобхватна и модерна правна основа за отношенията между двете преговарящи страни. Целта е да се улесни по-ефективното двустранно ангажиране от страна на Съюза и неговите държави членки с Нова Зеландия чрез засилване на политическия диалог, подобряване на сътрудничеството по икономически и търговски въпроси и много други области от иновацията, образованието, културата и миграцията.

Ето защо подкрепих резолюцията и сключването на споразумението за партньорство.

8.3. The EU-Africa Strategy: a boost for development (A8-0334/2017 - Maurice Ponga)

Mündliche Erklärungen zur Abstimmung

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Paní předsedající, pokud chceme pomoci Evropě, musíme pomoci Africe. To musí být naše strategie do budoucích měsíců a let. Proto jsem podpořila zprávu, která obsahuje řadu konkrétních doporučení pro nadcházející summit EU-Afrika. Za posledních 30 let se populace Afriky zdvojnásobila z 600 milionů na 1,2 miliardy a dále bude růst. Samozřejmě s růstem obyvatel bude sílit i migrační tlak.

Evropská unie je největším poskytovatelem rozvojové pomoci. S ekonomickou pomocí musíme ale také spojovat hodnoty, především ochranu lidských práv, důstojnosti života a právního státu. Kromě ozbrojených konfliktů, politického útlaku a špatné ekonomické situace jsou důvodem migrace i klimatické změny. Potřebujeme, aby se podmínky v Africe zlepšily a lidé měli důstojné podmínky i motivaci k růstu.

Na závěr mi dovolte připomenout slova papeže Františka. Za všemi čísly musíme vidět lidi, konkrétního člověka, a to musí být naše lidská strategie.

  Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE). – Paní předsedající, partnerství s Afrikou musí odrážet nové priority, které kopírují politický a hospodářský vývoj obou kontinentů. Partnerství má několik prioritních oblastí: od hospodářské spolupráce, přes migraci a životní prostředí. Já bych zdůraznil dvě – z mého pohledu – nejdůležitější oblasti strategie.

Zaprvé je to dodržování lidských práv, která jsou na africkém kontinentu velmi porušována, a bezpečnost na celém kontinentu. V souvislosti s nedávnými událostmi na Madagaskaru a v dalších afrických zemích chci apelovat na aktivní participaci Evropské unie při dodržování lidských práv napříč Afrikou. Proto jsem to podpořil.

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-жо Председател, уважаеми колеги, подкрепих доклада на колегата Понга по ред причини. Най-напред Африка е сред основните икономически партньори на Европа в икономически и търговски план, и не само затова, но и що се отнася до развитието на хуманитарната помощ. Засилването на политическия диалог между Европейския съюз и Африка представлява предварителното условие за обновяването на стратегическото партньорство, за да се осигурят ползи в различните области на икономическото развитие, растежа, създаването на работни места, миграцията и сигурността.

За тази цел развитието на регионалното измерение на сътрудничеството между африканския континент и Европейския съюз би било от съществено значение. Освен това докладът изтъква и призовава за създаване на стратегия по най-важния въпрос – мобилност и миграция, която да допринесе за развитието както на Африка, така и на Съюза. Това е изключително важен елемент с оглед на неспиращия миграционен поток от Северна и Централна Африка. Безспорно такава стратегия е необходима, а Европа трябва да насочи усилието си за стабилизиране на тези държави, за да предотврати задълбочаването на миграционната криза.

  Andrejs Mamikins (S&D). – Madam President, support for the African continent is not a gift or charity. Investment in Africa’s development will help not only the African people, but also us Europeans. A stable and developing African continent will give us more security. It will prevent forced migration, because people will be able to receive decent work and social protection in their states and native lands. It will give us more possibilities for our businesses to find partners and of course new markets.

In my view, there are a lot of empty words from the leaders of our EU Member States that mask a lack of will. The test will be whether or not the Member States of the European Union fulfil their commitment to directing 0.7% of their GDP to official development assistance to strengthen cooperation with Africa.

8.4. Activities of the European Ombudsman in 2016 (A8-0328/2017 - Marlene Mizzi)

Mündliche Erklärungen zur Abstimmung

  Die Präsidentin. – Frau D'Amato! Sie haben zwei Minuten angemeldet, sowohl für den Bericht von Frau Mizzi als auch für den Bericht von Herrn López. Sie haben aber insgesamt nur drei Minuten. Könnten Sie mir sagen, für welchen der beiden Berichte die zwei Minuten sind und für welchen anderen die eine Minute ist, damit ich es für mein Protokoll habe?

  Rosa D'Amato, a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la relazione del Mediatore dimostra un lavoro svolto con attenzione ai diritti dei cittadini in rapporto alle istituzioni europee, a partire dall'impegno per un vincolo di maggiore trasparenza e un migliore accesso agli atti. È stato posto l'accento sulla necessità di applicare norme etiche più severe per i politici e per il personale dell'Unione, in modo da garantire integrità, discrezione e piena indipendenza del settore privato, senza che vi siano pericolose interconnessioni o conflitti di interesse.

È quindi essenziale che il Mediatore prosegua il proprio percorso per assicurare la pubblicazione dei nomi di quei funzionari o politici che abbiano approfittato delle cosiddette porte girevoli, passando rapidamente da un ruolo istituzionale a una dirigenza a livello privato o viceversa. Come non citare il pessimo esempio fornito dall'ex presidente della Commissione, Barroso, che ha assunto una carica presidenziale alla Goldman Sachs. Pur avendo rispettato il limite previsto di diciotto mesi, il Mediatore ha evidenziato come questo lasso di tempo sia troppo breve e debba essere rivisto con urgenza per salvaguardare i doveri di onestà e delicatezza che sono imposti da tale funzione.

Altro caso rilevante è l'atteggiamento della Commissione negli incontri con le lobby del tabacco, per le quali veniva richiesta maggiore trasparenza. La Commissione non ha addotto valide motivazioni per rifiutarsi di eseguire le raccomandazioni e quindi è rea di cattiva amministrazione.

Sotto la lente anche la Banca centrale europea, che deve rendere pubbliche alcune parti sul meccanismo di vigilanza unico, oltre alle lettere inviate alle banche e agli istituti sotto vigilanza. Si tratta quindi di una prima breccia nel muro impenetrabile della BCE che permetterebbe ai cittadini di guardare per lo spioncino della porta in attesa di ulteriori coraggiose iniziative che permettano di rendere trasparenti le strutture economiche e bancarie europee.

I cittadini percepiscono l'Unione con una struttura distante e impenetrabile. Gli sforzi del Mediatore devono proseguire con la stessa intensità e dipanare le ombre che avvolgono le istituzioni europee. Per questo motivo il nostro voto è stato positivo.

  Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE). – Paní předsedající, v úvodu chci vyzdvihnout činnost evropského ochránce práv, který je jednou z nezávislých kontrol správného fungování Evropské unie. Ve jménu transparentnosti, demokratičnosti a otevřenosti Evropské unie se jedná o důležitý úřad, který pomáhá jednotlivcům v ochraně jejich práv.

Je zřejmé, že tato instituce má smysl a svojí činnost dělá dobře, neboť v roce 2016 se obrátilo na úřad téměř 16 000 lidí o pomoc. Ano, nemýlím se. Na co však musím upozornit je to, že z tohoto čísla pouze necelých 2 000 žádostí bylo posuzováno jako stížnost, která je v kompetenci evropského veřejného ochránce práv. Proto je potřeba dále ukazovat, co je kompetence evropského veřejného ochránce práv a zvyšovat tak informovanost lidí. Myslím, že by bylo vhodné podpořit povědomí o úřadu a podpořit i samotnou činnost veřejné ochránkyně práv.

  Andrejs Mamikins (S&D). – Madam President, the European Ombudsman has the very important function of improving the quality or work of the European institutions. Let’s be frank, very often we can see examples of lack of transparency, conflicts of interest and red tape. Each such case discredits the idea of the European Union and gives strong arguments to the numerous Eurosceptics.

Ombudsmen should pay more attention to the revolving-door phenomenon in the European Union. Ombudsmen should insist on the creation of an independent ethics board which would decide which professional activities are subject to a conflict of interest. Ombudsmen should play a bigger role in order to make the European institutions more open, transparent and more understandable for Europeans. We should remember that it is very easy to lose the trust of people, but it is very hard to restore it. Of course, I voted in favour.

8.5. Environmental Implementation Review (EIR) (B8-0590/2017)

Mündliche Erklärungen zur Abstimmung

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamna președintă, de la bun început spun că am votat raportul. Sigur, am participat și la dezbatere. Cine nu poate să fie de acord, cine poate să se opună la protecția mediului, la măsuri pentru protecția mediului? Evident că am fost de acord, însă am venit și cu propuneri pentru că eu cred și nu cred doar pentru că așa gândesc, am verificat.

Există foarte multe probleme legate de posibilitățile financiare în unele state membre pentru a crea condiții de protecție a mediului și de aceea am solicitat în dezbaterea plenară comisarilor să se gândească și la anumite mecanisme noi pentru finanțarea proiectelor mari pentru protecția mediului în toate statele și în cele în care bugetele locale și naționale nu ajung.

De aceea, mă bucur că s-a votat acest proiect dar sper în același timp ca membrii Comisiei, Comisia Europeană, să găsească mecanisme de sprijin al statelor care nu sunt acum cu nivelul de protecție a mediului, cu mecanisme pentru protecția mediului, la nivelul corespunzător și pentru trendul care este până în 2030-2050.

8.6. Combating inequalities as a lever to boost job creation and growth (A8-0340/2017 - Javi López)

Mündliche Erklärungen zur Abstimmung

  Rosa D'Amato, a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, le divergenze in termini di reddito, occupazione e opportunità, che si sono enfatizzate con la crisi economico-finanziaria, sono evidenti e mortificano l'esistenza delle persone, poiché la sicurezza economica è importante per la realizzazione dei cittadini e per il loro benessere generale.

Oggi non basta semplicemente avere un lavoro per essere al riparo dalla povertà, perché varie tipologie contrattuali atipiche, molti tirocini non retribuiti, diverse forme di occupazione non convenzionali o non dichiarate, come la schiavitù del caporalato, impongono condizioni economiche al limite, se non al di sotto, della soglia di povertà.

Le disuguaglianze creano sconforto, portano malcontento e rabbia, creano un humus che alimenta instabilità e sfiducia nell'Unione europea. Eppure sono state nutrite dalla ricetta dell'austerity e dalle raccomandazioni specifiche per paese che l'Europa ha deciso di appioppare ai propri cittadini. Disoccupazione, tagli alle retribuzioni e alle pensioni oltre che al welfare hanno minato la vita di molte persone, e il tutto alla faccia della priorità del benessere dei popoli riconosciuta nei trattati europei.

Le risposte, quindi, non vanno cercate nelle raccomandazioni specifiche o nel Semestre europeo, non si può pensare di guarire un ammalato con le stesse medicine che lo hanno reso agonizzante. Se non si cambierà il metro con cui il sarto confeziona l'abito, fintanto che tutto sarà calibrato sul prodotto interno lordo, ci troveremo alle prese con vestiti stretti e soffocanti. Quando si adotteranno invece parametri che tengono conto del progresso sociale e del reale benessere dei cittadini, allora potremo vedere misure in grado di garantire occupazione e retribuzioni eque.

Ben venga quindi un autentico pilastro europeo dei diritti sociali, ben vengano azioni per il bilanciamento della vita professionale e privata, ma altre soluzioni proposte dal relatore non sono adeguate e per questo ci siamo astenuti.

  Alex Mayer (S&D). – Madam President, I welcome this report, especially the section on helping people with disabilities achieve secure employment. Four years ago, when Norwich’s Remploy factory shut, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) said that funding should be focused on helping disabled people into mainstream jobs, but where is that funding now? The replacement for the DWP’s work program has seen its funding slashed by three-quarters. The British Government has gone back on its word.

Remploy did as was asked and today helps people with disabilities find and keep mainstream jobs. What they do worked. When I spoke to them they told me about Milo, who secured a full-time job working on Cromer Pier, and Brandon, who said it is thanks to Remploy that he now feels that he has a future. But now Remploy in Norwich is set to close, and experienced employment coaches will lose their jobs. The British Government talks warm words about helping disabled people into work, but is high time that they put their money where their mouth is.

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-жо Председател, уважаеми колеги, гласувах против този доклад, защото въпреки някои от положителните предложения, залегнали в него, той не отчита една от основните за Европейския съюз разлики – това е разликата в доходите между така наречената „стара Европа“, или западната част на Европейския съюз, и Централна и Източна Европа, или новоприсъединените членове.

Тази огромна разлика в доходите и възнагражденията мотивира много млади хора от източната част на Европа да напускат родните си места и да се местят на запад, като по този начин предизвикват демографска криза в своите държави. А за тази голяма разлика в доходите са виновни до голяма степен и протекционистичните мерки, които вземат и които прилагат част от правителствата на държавите в тази част на Европа. Протекционистични мерки, насочени към недопускане до пазара на труда, недопускане на предприемачи, които да работят, да изкарват своите пари, да могат да плащат добри заплати в източната част на Европа и младите хора да стоят в дома си, а не да пътуват някъде на запад. Затова гласувах против.

  Andrejs Mamikins (S&D). – Madam President, we often try to solve a problem only when it becomes evident, but very often it is hard to find a good solution at this stage. Inequality starts in childhood. Different possibilities in education and health services for one group of children than for another start to create an equality gap. As people become older, accumulated inequality starts to give negative results in people’s work and social life. That is why it is so important to make a timely investment in children’s and young people’s education, skills and health.

One of the positive examples of such a programme is the Youth Employment Initiative. This programme shows positive results. It needs a higher funding level for the period 2017-2020, at least EUR 21 billion. Every additional euro spent on these purposes will be returned to society by people who will be integrated into society and fully realise their talents. I voted in favour.

  Момчил Неков (S&D). – Г-жо Председател, социалните неравенства станаха още по-осезаеми след тежката икономическа криза от последното десетилетие. Пропастта между бедни и богати се увеличи не само в държавите членки, но и между тях. Преките потърпевши се оказаха младите хора и нискоквалифицираните работници. Не можем да си позволим бъдещото младо поколение да живее по-зле от нас.

Бедността и липсата на възможности за професионална реализация прогони от България само за 2016 г. повече от 16 000 млади и образовани българи. Сега говорим за обезлюдяване на определени региони. След време с тези темпове ще говорим за обезлюдяване на цяла Източна Европа. Тази нова реалност предполага и нов тип отношение към проблема. Стагнацията в политиката на сближаване на европейско ниво няма как да спре миграцията от изток към запад. Не съм сигурен, че приоритизирането на инвестиции в инфраструктурни проекти ще накара българите в чужбина да се завърнат в родината си.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, vótálas i bhfabhar na tuarascála seo mar is dóigh liom go bhfuil cothromaíocht thar a bheith tábhachtach don Aontas.

and combating equality should take the form of a variety of mechanisms – support for employees, digitisation of the workplace, addressing the gender pay gap, reinforcing efforts to eliminate poverty and enhanced employment policies affecting young people. One of the European Union 2020 targets looks to reduce the number of people in or at risk of poverty and social exclusion by at least 20 million.

Inequality resulting from the economic crisis had a particularly negative effect on women, causing increased exclusion from the labour market and worsening poverty among women. Eurostat findings for 2014 showed an average EU gender pay gap of 16.7%, but Ireland’s pay gap was standing at 13.9%. I was very pleased that our new leader, Leo Varadkar, mentioned this as one of his priorities during his term as Taoiseach.

Inequality affects people from all walks of life but equality, on the other hand, benefits our societies, our nations and our Union.

Leanaimis ar aghaidh ag cothú cothromaíochta.

  Danuta Jazłowiecka (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! Jednym z pięciu celów strategii Europa 2020 jest zmniejszenie liczby osób zagrożonych ubóstwem i wykluczeniem społecznym o co najmniej 20 mln. Biorąc pod uwagę, że po kryzysie takich osób było o 1,7 mln więcej niż w 2008 r., możemy stwierdzić, że podejmowane działania nie przynoszą oczekiwanych rezultatów. Zbyt wysokie i rosnące nierówności powodują nie tylko bezpośrednie koszty społeczne, ale mogą również stanowić przeszkodę dla wzrostu gospodarczego. Zmniejszenie nierówności musi stanowić jeden z głównych priorytetów instytucjonalnych na szczeblu europejskim. Jest to warunek wstępny ożywienia gospodarczego, tworzenia miejsc pracy, zwiększenia spójności społecznej i wspólnego dobrobytu. Aktywność Unii nie może jednak zastąpić własnych wysiłków państw członkowskich, przede wszystkim w obszarze rynku pracy. Najlepszym instrumentem walki z ubóstwem jest tworzenie miejsc pracy i wyrównywanie szans na poziomie krajowym czy regionalnym. Tak więc należy sprzeciwiać się wszelkim rozwiązaniom przenoszącym odpowiedzialność na szczebel Unii, bowiem łamie to zasadę pomocniczości, a także przyczynia się jedynie do utrwalenia problemu, a nie jego rozwiązania, stąd też wstrzymałam się, głosując nad sprawozdaniem.

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamna președintă, de la bun început vreau să precizez că acest raport este un prim pas.

Nu rezolvă însă inegalitatea și problemele pe care noi le-am identificat, sărăcia copiilor, inegalitate de gen, venituri mici în anumite zone, mai ales în rural. Cred că de aici încolo Comisia are probleme foarte mari în a corela acest proiect și mă bucur foarte mult. L-am votat, l-am susținut alături de grupul din care fac parte. Eu sunt în țara mea într-un partid umanist. Nu putem să nu ne gândim la oameni.

Însă Comisia trebuie să coreleze pentru că fondurile de coeziune nu și-au atins încă scopul. Trebuie să continuăm cu alocarea fondurilor de coeziune într-un procent mai mare și mai ales spre zonele sărace. Sunt copii care se nasc săraci, rămân săraci, creează familii sărace, nu au acces la școală, nu au acces la educație, nu au acces la sănătate.

Este foarte complex acest subiect și, sigur, este bine că pilonul social a fost cuprins în semestrul european dar eu cred că trebuie să tratăm sistemic și Comisia trebuie să trateze sistemic în corelare cu alte rezoluții și alte directive și regulamente.

  Die Präsidentin. – Damit sind die Erklärungen zur Abstimmung geschlossen.

9. Corrections to votes and voting intentions : see Minutes

(Die Sitzung wird um 13.04 Uhr unterbrochen.)

PRZEWODNICTWO: RYSZARD CZARNECKI
Wiceprzewodniczący

10. Resumption of the sitting

(Posiedzenie zostało wznowione o godz. 15.03)

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

12. 2018 EU-China Tourism Year (debate)

  Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia jest debata nad pytaniem wymagającym odpowiedzi ustnej skierowanym do Komisji przez Petrę Kammerevert w imieniu Komisji Kultury i Edukacji w sprawie 2018: Rok Turystyki między UE i Chinami (O-000071/2017 - B8-0609/2017) (2017/2846(RSP)).

  Michaela Šojdrová, zastupující autorku. – Pane předsedající, pane komisaři, mám tu čest jménem Výboru pro kulturu a vzdělávání představit ústní otázku Komisi týkající se roku cestovního ruchu mezi Evropskou unií a Čínou pro následující rok 2018. Byla jsem iniciátorkou této otázky a jsem ráda, že ji podpořily všechny frakce v našem výboru. Spojuje nás společné znepokojení. Komise a její předseda Juncker v roce 2016 na jednání s čínským předsedou vlády Li Kche-čchiangem rozhodli, že rok 2018 bude rokem cestovního ruchu mezi EU a Čínou. Učinili tak bez konzultace s Evropským parlamentem. My jsme neměli možnost seznámit se s obsahem a podmínkami tohoto projektu.

Přitom to byl právě výbor CULT a následně celý Evropský parlament, který již v roce 2016 přišel s iniciativou, aby rok 2018 byl vyhlášen Evropským rokem kulturního dědictví. Máme pro to vážné důvody a očekávání. Evropská unie prožívá období nárůstu populismu, radikalismu a štěpení. Proto se chceme vrátit ke kořenům evropské civilizace. Chceme zejména mladší generaci připomenout to, že žijeme v historicky bezprecedentně dlouhém období míru, svobody a prosperity. To vše bylo vykoupeno miliony lidských obětí. Proto se můžeme v bezpečí těšit z kulturního bohatství, které nás vždy spojovalo. Cílem Evropského roku kulturního dědictví je tedy především podpora evropských hodnot a posílení naši sounáležitosti.

Právem se proto ptáme, co je cílem EU-China turism year? Naše otázky jsou:

1. Může Komise vysvětlit, proč je pro Evropu tak důležité, aby rok cestovního ruchu mezi EU a Čínou probíhal v témže roce jako Evropský rok kulturního dědictví?

2. Jak bude Komise současně řídit obě iniciativy?

3. Jak plánuje Komise vytvořit synergie mezi oběma aktivitami?

4. Jak hodlá Komise zajistit dostatečné zviditelnění obou aktivit?

Z těchto otázek jasně vyplývá, o co nám jde. Není nám zkrátka jasné, jak budou obě akce řízeny a propagovány tak, aby zejména rok Evropského kulturního dědictví nebyl oslaben. Z našeho pohledu se jedná o aktivity spíše nesourodé a vzájemně si konkurující. Zajímá nás, proč se Komise k tomuto tematickému a finančnímu rozmělnění iniciativ v kulturní oblasti rozhodla. Komise v případě roku cestovního ruchu vychází vstříc Číně v oblasti, která se rozvíjí velmi intenzivně i bez veřejné podpory. Přitom se Komise chystá vynaložit 8 milionů EUR na společnou propagační platformu. Zajímá nás, zda to je konečné číslo, nebo zda přislíbila ještě nějaké další financování. Cestovní ruch mezi členskými státy a Čínou se rozvíjí velmi rychle a není nutné jej podporovat z evropské úrovně, zejména pak ne finančně. I bez této podpory v loňském roce navštívilo Evropskou unii téměř 11 milionů turistů z Číny.

Kladu si otázku: Jak můžeme podpořit evropské hodnoty, když ve stejném období budeme spolupracovat s Čínou bez jakýchkoli podmínek v oblasti lidských práv? Připomínám, že v Číně je stále skoro 1 500 politických vězňů a masivně jsou porušována lidská i sociální práva desítek milionů lidí. V souvislosti s naší pondělní debatou o pronásledování křesťanů bych ráda dodala, že pokud Číňané chtějí navštěvovat křesťanské památky v Evropě jako turisté, musí přestat pronásledovat křesťany a také další náboženské menšiny u sebe doma. Taková by měla být výchozí pozice Komise při podobných iniciativách ve vztahu k Číně.

Z odborného hlediska vyvstává otázka, zda masový cestovní ruch je nějak zvlášť prospěšný pro uchování kulturních památek. Měla bych o tom své pochybnosti. To platí pro mnohá místa v Evropě, která čelí přetížení z přívalu turistů, ale platí to i např. pro Tibet pod čínskou správou, kde masový turismus ze Západu podporovaný Číňany má spíše destruktivní vliv na místní kulturu.

Pokusila jsem se zde předestřít hlavní otázky, které nás v této souvislosti znepokojují, a doufám, že Komise na ně odpoví. Nás výbor bude pochopitelně nápomocen při hledání pozitivního řešení.

A na závěr prosba. Prosím nepodezírejte nás z toho, že jsme proti spolupráci. To rozhodně ne. Ale chceme dát jasně najevo, že hodnoty lidských práv a svobod jsou součástí naší evropské politiky a nejsou na prodej. Děkuji za Vaši pozornost a těším se na odpověď, pane komisaři.

  Phil Hogan, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I am taking this point on behalf of Commissioner Bieńkowska. I would like to thank the honourable Member for the question on the 2018 EU—China Tourism Year and its relationship with the European Year of Cultural Heritage.

As you know, these two initiatives are very important for the Commission. We decided to have the tourism year with China in 2018 following the 2016 US—China Year and the 2017 Australia—China Year, and the reason is clear. These countries are our immediate competitors in this particular region, and in the tourism sector in particular. We needed to match their efforts to attract Chinese travellers. The Tourism Year is also a unique opportunity to restore the image of the European Union as a tourism destination in the face of growing global competition from other markets.

The two Years are pursuing different, but complementary, policy objectives. The main objective of the European Year of Cultural Heritage is the promotion and preservation of Europe’s cultural heritage and the values it embodies. The main objective of the EU-China Tourism Year is jobs and growth. The EU-China Tourism Year aims to attract more of the most desirable Chinese travellers. I am talking about those with high revenues, travelling off—season, not only to famous, but also to lesser—known, places. Overall, both Years contribute to developing sustainable cultural tourism. They make us consider how to preserve our heritage and help us find ways to finance its preservation in a sustainable manner.

Managing the two initiatives in parallel will not be a problem. The Commission services are coordinating our efforts to make sure that everything will go according to schedule. In addition, right from the start we have been working together intensively within the Commission, and I would like to give you one example. Under the European Year of Cultural Heritage, UNESCO was asked to develop four thematic itineraries between lesser—known world heritage sites in the European Union in order to attract tourists in a sustainable way, but it was also asked to conceive them for Chinese travellers especially and to promote them in China under the logo of the EU—China Tourism Year.

The two initiatives have dedicated budgets and will be advertised through separate means, targeting different audiences. This budget is EUR 4.3 million, not EUR 8 million. In the case of the EU—China Tourism Year, we have mainly targeted the EU travel and tourism industry. We will use business-to-business events to point to opportunities and ways to be more China-ready. In China, we are targeting a wider audience in addition to Chinese tour operators, thanks to events attracting the attention of the Chinese mass media. The 2018 European Year of Cultural Heritage targets the wider European public with a specific focus on young people between 15 and 25 years old.

So the two Years are pursuing different policy goals and targeting different groups, but there are complementarities and synergies on which we can build and we are making sure that these synergies are exploited. I want to assure the Member that this is the way in which we are proceeding and to inform the House that Commissioner Navracsics, the relevant Commissioner, has been in China in the past few days, making sure that the issues that are rightly addressed by the Member are being addressed and that complementarity is being achieved.

  Michaela Šojdrová, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, I would like to pass on to you my colleague, Mr Sógor’s, apologies. He had to leave earlier on because of the strike in France. I will now read his statement.

I think that at least once or twice in our lives many of us have already been confronted with the question of whether travelling to a country where human rights are violated is ethical or not. I believe that, as in most issues, it is the scale and the severity of the violation that matters. Even though many countries across the globe are far from perfect in this regard, China still stands out, but even in China there are regions that stand out.

Let us take the case of Tibet, which is at the rock—bottom of the freedom ranking list of Freedom House, a place where civil and political rights are non-existent. Now let us suppose that Tibet for a while is not closed to foreign tourists, let us suppose that with your passport – something that most Tibetans are not allowed to have – you can visit the region. Let us suppose that, as a foreigner, you can get past through police road checks and you can enter Lhasa, a city which ordinary Tibetans from outside the city are restricted to access.

You would find yourself in a place where draconian surveillance measures are implemented to enforce the so-called ‘stability’ of the region; where detentions, prosecutions and convictions of Tibetans for the peaceful exercise of their freedoms of expression, assembly and religious belief are carried out in alarming numbers; where many Tibetans set themselves on fire because they are denied their basic fundamental rights; or where state policies encourage migration from other parts of China in order to reduce the ethnic Tibetan share of the population.

In the light of this, I firmly believe that the conclusion of a tourism agreement with China, without a single human rights reference, is not ethical, nor is it in line with our universal and foreign policy values.

  Ангел Джамбазки, от името на групата ECR. – Г-н Председател, уважаеми г-н представител на Комисията, уважаеми колеги, така зададен въпросът, който сега обсъждаме, би трябвало да получи следния отговор: двете инициативи не трябва по никакъв начин да се противопоставят и да се сблъскват. Има ли интерес от Европейска година на културата? Да, разбира се. Има ли интерес от туризма в Европейския съюз от страна на гражданите на Китайската народна република? Да, разбира се.

Но когато започнем да поставяме въпроса за вътрешния ред в Китай, нека да не бъдем лицемерни тогава и да попитаме: търгуват ли европейски държави, да речем, със Саудитска Арабия? Нарушават ли се човешките права в Саудитска Арабия? Аз твърдя, че да. Само да напомня на вносителя на въпроса и на останалите колеги, че в Саудитска Арабия се извършват публични екзекуции на площада с меч. Отрязват се глави на хора. Но компании от държави от Европейския съюз продават и търгуват със Саудитска Арабия.

Какво е това – лицемерие, двоен стандарт? Как точно определяме коя държава е лоша, коя не е лоша и къде слагаме етикета за защита на човешките права? И в края на краищата, има международен правен ред. Има редица държави, които формират международния правен ред. Сред тях са Китай, сред тях е Саудитска Арабия, Турция. Търгуваме ли с Турция? Търгуваме. Има ли нарушаване на човешките права в Турция? Да, има. Защитават ли ги колегите? Защитават ги. Е, къде тогава е средното сечение? И къде тогава определяме коя държава повече нарушава човешките права и коя – не?

Твърдя, че ние имаме интерес от представянето на европейските държави в Китай. Има интерес от китайски туристи в европейските държави. Нещо повече, има интерес от развитие на търговията. Защото търговията, туризмът, икономиката са просперитет и дават възможности за по-голямо развитие, по-добър жизнен стандарт, просперитет и печалби. И затова мисля, че тази зала не е място, на което трябва да мерим с различни аршини къде повече се нарушават човешките права.

  Andrejs Mamikins, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, in my view, if we want to place the accent on one theme one year, it would be logical not to devalue it by creating another similar theme the next year. Such a policy could lead to the absurd ‘Year of Everything’. In my opinion, that is not our aim.

I understand that the EU—China Tourism Year is very important for the Commission in order to create better relations with China, but it could be better implemented in another form. I hope that in the future this consideration will be taken into account.

  Yana Toom, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, Europe is famous for its cultural pluralism and openness. Cultural ties with China are based on good political and economic relations. In the case of China, the link between tourism and cultural interests is obvious. Therefore the idea of carrying out the EU—China Tourism Year is welcomed.

Should the EU-China Tourism Year and the European Year of Cultural Heritage coincide in time? I believe that this is possible in so far as the Commission can ensure their adequate organisation. Although both initiatives are related to culture, their content will be different. In addition, the synergy between these activities is possible and desirable.

China and the EU are regional and world leaders with ancient cultural traditions that can mutually enrich our people. So I do not think that the EU-China Tourism Year can somehow prevent the promotion of European identity and values. Our similarities and our differences will be much more visible against the backdrop of our Asian partner.

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

  Andrejs Mamikins (S&D), zilās kartītes jautājums. – Liels paldies, Toom kundze, ka jūs pieņēmāt manu zilās kartītes jautājumu.

Šonedēļ, šeit, Eiropas Parlamentā, — īstenībā vakardien — mēs atzīmējām simtgadi boļševiku revolūcijai, un vairāki kolēģi nosodīja komunistisko režīmu, komunistisko partiju utt. Un tajā pašā laikā mēs šeit, Parlamentā, gribam draudzēties ar Ķīnu — valsti ar pusotru miljardu cilvēku, kuru vada komunistiskā partija. Jums nešķiet, ka tā zināmā mērā ir arī divkosība? Paldies!

  Yana Toom (ALDE), blue-card answer. – Thank you for the question. You know I spoke about this yesterday. For me it is a bit hypocritical. Yesterday, I reminded my colleagues that we have representatives of eight communist parties here and that we have pretty good relations with China’s communist regime.

  Molly Scott Cato, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, there is a deep irony in the fact that the EU-China Tourism Year and the European Year of Cultural Heritage will both take place next year. We will celebrate and promote European cultural diversity, while at the same time working to improve opportunities to increase economic cooperation, in the words of the European Commission, with a regime that represses such diversity in its own territory, often with the utmost brutality and with a blatant disregard for human rights.

I am thinking particularly of Tibet, where culture and religion have been the target of relentless oppression at the same time as their remnants are being used to boost Chinese tourism. We should not forget that while Tibetans themselves are not permitted to travel freely and while many Tibetans live in extreme poverty, the Chinese state-sponsored tourism industry reaps the benefits of the appropriation of Tibetan culture and history. In fact, Tibetans are rarely employed by this industry and are not even required to give their consent to huge infrastructure projects aimed at boosting tourism.

I have never been to China but it is clearly a diverse, rich and fascinating country. Neither have I visited Tibet, although what I have learned about the country and its culture through my work in the European Parliament is compelling. My own choice would be to avoid visiting an occupied country that is being deprived of its right to self-determination and I would urge others to follow this policy.

Much closer to home, in July this year Liverpool FC signed a controversial sponsorship deal with Tibet Water Resources Limited that exploits the natural resources of Tibet to the detriment of the local population and the environment. Such commercial agreements not only lend legitimacy to China’s occupation of Tibet but are, in fact, only possible because of it. This sponsorship deal puts the club and the city of Liverpool at the centre of China’s on-going occupation of Tibet. I know that this does not reflect the views of either the fans or the city, and I urge the club to reconsider this misguided and ill-considered deal. We also need to consider whether this is the kind of reckless international economic cooperation that we want to promote as EU institutions.

The unfortunate timing of the EU-China Tourism Year sends a signal that economic interests are once again being prioritised over human rights.

In concluding, I urge the Commission to put human rights firmly on the agenda with our international partners, for example by calling on Beijing to restart talks with the representatives of His Holiness the Dalai Lama that have been stalled since 2010.

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

  Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE), otázka položená zvednutím modré karty. – Vážená paní poslankyně, kvituji Vaši řeč i ten důraz na lidská práva, ale chtěl bych se Vás zeptat velmi pragmaticky a bez jakékoliv ironie nebo sarkasmů. Chtěl bych se zeptat: Jak byste tu situaci řešila? Jak byste řešila dneska vztahy s Čínou, co byste upřednostnila? Myslíte si, že bychom měli nějak přehodnotit třeba ekonomické vztahy s Čínou? Jak bychom měli třeba přistoupit k tomuto roku?

  Molly Scott Cato (Verts/ALE), blue-card answer. – Thank you very much for that question. I have a very pragmatic response which is to say that the Commission, when negotiating trade deals and when thinking about its economic partnerships, should place human rights and high social and environmental standards right at the heart. A good way to do that will be to support the binding Human Rights Charter for global corporations, which is currently being negotiated by the UN. Unfortunately, the EU has sided with the USA and with the corporations in not supporting that binding charter, but that is a very practical way in which we can defend human rights through our economic partnerships and through our trade policy.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, is dóigh liom go bhfuil moladh tuillte ag Feisire Sojdrova as ucht an cheist a chur ar an gCoimisiún agus an t-ábhar seo a chur ar an gclár anseo inniu. Ach d’fhreagair, ar son an Choimisiúin, an tUasal Ó hÓgáin í agus b’fhéidir nach bhfuil sé idéalach, ach is ceart dúinn glacadh leis agus bualadh ar aghaidh chun an dá rud a chur chun cinn, is é sin Aontas Sóirte, an tSín agus an tAontas agus Bliain Chultúrtha na hEorpa.

So the Commissioner’s answer, I think, will suffice. We have an opportunity to promote culture, and I know I come from a country with a rich cultural heritage: our language,

Bíonn seans agam í a labhairt sa Pharlaimint anseo.

our games, our music, our dance, our literature. I think the European Year of Culture will give us a great opportunity to promote that, as well as for other Member States. The synergies involved will actually help us to grow both an appreciation of our culture and also the jobs etc. associated with it.

But that does not mean we cannot promote the year of EU-China tourism as well. China is the second-largest travelling group in the world in terms of tourism. They have a huge expenditure of EUR 1.4 billion, and in my own country last year 60 000 Chinese came to visit us. So of course we should have a promotion of EU-China tourism.

Also , while I agree completely that human rights is a major issue – we just spent two hours discussing human rights issues this morning – you cannot say, on the one hand: because we are not happy with your human rights record we are not going to have any business with you; and, on the other hand, say: because Donald Trump pulled out of the climate change and now you have taken leadership, we are delighted with you and we are going to cooperate with you. So these are all issues to be taken in tandem, but I definitely think that these two can work together, as the Commissioner said, and I think it is going to be good for everybody.

  Isabella De Monte (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, credo che istituire l'Anno del turismo tra Unione europea e Cina sia una grande opportunità per la nostra Europa. Inoltre, lo stesso 2018 sarà anche l'Anno europeo del patrimonio culturale.

La combinazione di queste due importanti iniziative rappresenta un'occasione di crescita e una ricchezza per l'Europa in termini di sviluppo economico e occupazione, due priorità dell'Unione europea. Nonostante la crisi economica, il turismo è uno dei settori che negli ultimi dieci anni ha avuto una maggiore crescita a livello mondiale ed è la terza attività economica d'Europa dopo il commercio e il settore delle costruzioni. Il suo impatto sul prodotto interno lordo arriva al 10 % se si calcolano anche le attività indirettamente connesse.

Bisogna però tener conto del fatto che si tratta di un settore estremamente vulnerabile e soprattutto in costante evoluzione. A proposito della vulnerabilità, occorre tener conto dell'aspetto demografico, in quanto i turisti sono più anziani che nei passati decenni. In merito all'evoluzione, invece, riscontriamo l'arrivo di turisti da paesi emergenti come appunto la Cina.

Il turismo, inoltre, gioca un ruolo fondamentale per il potenziamento della crescita in molti settori come ad esempio quello dei trasporti. La nuova via della seta, che collega il nostro continente a quello asiatico, è di vitale importanza per avvicinare le differenti culture e agevolare gli scambi anche culturali. L'Europa è ad oggi la prima destinazione turistica mondiale per le sue bellezze naturali, paesaggistiche e culturali, ma per mantenere il primato è necessario avviare adeguate politiche di sviluppo.

Fondamentale in questo processo è la liberalizzazione dei visti turistici. Inoltre, sia Europa che Cina devono puntare al miglioramento dell'esperienza turistica, valorizzando le destinazioni meno note e più sostenibili, ovviando così al problema del turismo di massa. Di vitale importanza sono quindi buoni collegamenti aerei tra i due continenti, ma soprattutto interni. Essi, infatti, porteranno i turisti a scoprire non sono le mete classiche ma anche ad esplorare luoghi inconsueti.

Diversità culturale, ricchezza e storia dell'Unione europea non sono riscontrabili solo nelle capitali europee, ma in tutte le destinazioni, anche le più remote. Arrivare a tali località, anche grazie alla digitalizzazione, aiuterà i territori a trovare sostenibilità economica, evitare lo spopolamento e alleggerire l'afflusso dei turisti nelle destinazioni troppo affollate.

Le due iniziative che si svolgeranno contemporaneamente nel 2018 possono generare complicazioni. Auspico, dunque, che la Commissione sappia trovare una tabella di marcia comune e creare sinergie. Sono infine molto orgogliosa del fatto che entrambe le iniziative si svolgono nel mio paese, l'Italia. Infatti, l'inaugurazione dell'Anno europeo del patrimonio culturale si terrà a Milano e quella dell'Anno del turismo a Venezia.

  Urszula Krupa (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Podzielam wątpliwości autorki dotyczące łączenia obchodów europejskiego dziedzictwa kulturowego – które ma ogromne znaczenie dla historii europejskiego bogactwa kulturowego – z ogłoszeniem roku turystyki między Unią a Chinami, która oczywiście stanowi ogromną wartość, podobnie jak handel czy kontakty gospodarcze. Jednak Unia powinna przekonać Chiny nie tylko do ochrony środowiska, ale do przestrzegania uniwersalnych wartości, takich jak prawa człowieka, które są nadal łamane w Chinach, gdzie w ostatnich latach wzrosło prześladowanie chrześcijan z burzeniem kościołów, usuwaniem krzyża, aresztowaniem wiernych i kapłanów. Ponadto od wielu lat, mimo wystosowania różnych rezolucji z całego świata, także z Parlamentu Europejskiego, Stanów Zjednoczonych, Australii, Izraela czy Kanady, nadal trwa na ogromną skalę handel ludzkimi narządami pobieranymi od zabijanych więźniów wraz z czerpaniem zysków z tego procederu. Pieniądze czy turystyka nie mogą być ważniejsze od ludzkiego życia i jego godności.

  Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, malo me čudi logika ovog pitanja, moram reći. Veliki dio nas ovdje živio je u komunističkim državama, i voljeli smo putovati i voljeli smo turizam, i zato me malo čudi da prozivamo Kinu zbog njihovog režima. Ovdje govorimo o turizmu, ljudi moji.

Ja sam imao čast voditi Istru, najturističkiju regiju u Hrvatskoj, i znam što znači turizam za naše građane. Pa potaknimo turizam i iz Kine. Ja mislim da je to jedna sjajna inicijativa i čak povezana s godinom kulture koja se također priprema za narednu godinu.

Jednu stvar moramo znati. Datumi za kineske turiste su odlični za nas, na Mediteranu pogotovo, jer oni uglavnom putuju u postsezoni i predsezoni, jer su takvi njihovi datumi kad idu na godišnje odmore.

I zadnja stvar, evo ovo dokazuje što stalno tvrdim, treba nam agencija za turizam Europske unije. Moramo institucionalizirati ono što donosi 10 % bruto društvenog proizvoda Europske unije.

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

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE), otázka položená zvednutím modré karty. – Děkuji, že přijímáte otázku. Já jsem upozornila na to, že do Evropy za minulý rok, za rok 2016, přijelo 11 milionů čínských turistů. Domníváte se, že to je málo? Domníváte se, že musíme tomu dělat velkou evropskou propagaci? Nikdo nechce bránit agenturám, aby podporovaly turistický ruch, aby vozily turisty. Rozhodně tomu nechceme bránit, ale pokud Evropa dává něčemu podporu, pak to má spojit i s prosazováním svých evropských hodnot.

  Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE), odgovor na pitanje postavljeno podizanjem plave kartice. – Poštovana gospođo Šojdrova, hvala Vam na pitanju. Ja mislim potpuno suprotno od Vas. Ja mislim da bi Europska unija trebala institucionalizirati turizam, kao što sam rekao, trebamo imati agenciju za turizam kad već imamo toliko agencija jer turizam donosi 10 % bruto društvenog proizvoda Europske unije. To je strašno puno novaca.

I da, treba nam više turista iz Kine. Da, treba nam. Prije sam vam objasnio. Možda taj detalj niste znali. Za Mediteranski turizam kineski turisti su idealni jer dolaze u predsezoni i u postsezoni. Prije sam to rekao. Kada mi želimo turiste, jednostavno, hoteli su tu, hajmo ih napuniti, pa i s prijateljima iz Kine.

  Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já rozhodně tuto iniciativu vítám, a to z několika důvodů. Je důležité, aby probíhala nikoliv jenom ekonomická, ale zároveň i kulturní výměna mezi Evropskou unií a Čínou. Tato platforma pomůže nejen už zmiňovanému turistickému ruchu v méně známých oblastech a pomůže malým a středním podnikům, ale může také přivést dohromady různé instituce, které by se jinak nepotkaly. Univerzity, zástupce soukromého sektoru, může také přivést dohromady i lidi, kteří zde budou v budoucnu spolupracovat. Zároveň se tím zvednou zkušenosti a kvalifikace lidí pracujících v sektoru turismu.

Ať se nám to líbí nebo ne, Čína je a i nadále bude důležitým strategickým partnerem Evropské unie a je důležité uvědomit si, že tato iniciativa je pro Evropskou unii velmi důležitá i v tom, abychom pochopili, jak se čínský trh bude v budoucnosti chovat. A tím určitě nezmenšuji důraz Evropské unie na různá práva čínských občanů a tím si nemyslím, že by zde byl jakkoliv narušen apel na to, aby Čínská republika dodržovala lidská práva všech občanů Číny.

  Jozo Radoš (ALDE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, Europska godina kulturnog naslijeđa i zajednička Europsko-kineska godina turizma su dvije prilično različite manifestacije. Primjerice, obilježavanje Europsko-kineske godine turizma može donijeti znatne financijske, gospodarske koristi i ima čak i geopolitičke implikacije, što se za proslavu Europske godine kulturne baštine teško može reći.

Te dvije manifestacije će se i obilježavati na različite načine, zato me zapravo čudi prijedlog iz pitanja da se one objedine, ne vidim na koji način bi se te dvije manifestacije mogle objediniti. Očito je da promocija turizma može doprinijeti proslavi Europsko-kineske godine turizma, ali ne vidim kako bi to bilo obrnuto. No, svejedno podržavam onaj dio pitanja koji govori o tome da bi trebalo pronaći način da ove dvije manifestacije imaju sinergiju.

Zgłoszenia z sali

  Karol Karski (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Dziękuję za udzielenie głosu. Oczywiście sprawa jest istotna. Natomiast jeśli spojrzymy na nią w sposób bardzo pragmatyczny, to należy ocenić tę inicjatywę realizowaną przez Komisję Europejską w sposób pozytywny. Nawet ci, którzy zwracają na nią uwagę z punktu widzenia praw człowieka, spójrzcie Państwo, że wymiana turystyczna między Europą a Chinami przyniesie to, iż Chińczycy będą przybywać do Europy, zapoznawać się z naszymi standardami ochrony praw człowieka, naszymi standardami demokracji. Będą widzieli nie tylko własne państwo. Będą widzieli nie tylko rozwiązania, które są w innych częściach świata, ale ten najwyższy, najlepszy system, który jest tutaj realizowany. Z drugiej strony, przyjazd Europejczyków do Chin spowoduje, iż będą tam nie tylko ludzie, którzy prowadzą biznesy z tym państwem, którzy są zainteresowani zyskiem i wyjazdem, którzy są zainteresowani kontaktami z władzami, ale normalni ludzie, których obecność tam będzie także gwarancją tego, że władze chińskie będą musiały w jakiś sposób zwracać uwagę na to, co robią na swoim własnym terytorium. Może wpływ nie będzie wielki, ale zapewne pewien pozytywny akcent również będzie wartością dodaną. Więc ja bym nie odmawiał całkowicie racji temu pytaniu, które stało się podstawą tej debaty. Ale jednocześnie chcę wskazać tutaj na pozytywne aspekty tej naszej dzisiejszej debaty i tej inicjatywy, która jest realizowana w relacjach między Unią a Chinami.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)

  Phil Hogan, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, thank you to everyone who took part in this particular question. Can I emphasise on behalf of Commissioner Bieńkowska that these are two separate initiatives. One is about tourism, which is a decision that was made by President Juncker and Prime Minister Li on 12 July 2016 promoting the EU-China Tourism Year, and this decision was made one year before the decision to designate 2018 as the European Year of Cultural Heritage.

The decision that established the European Year of Cultural Heritage for 2018 was taken by the Council and the Parliament on 17 May this year. So the tourism dimension came one year earlier, and it was set up for the purpose of trying to encourage additional tourists and travellers to come into the European Union. While I listened to contributors here today, I got the impression that the European Union budget was promoting Chinese tourism. It is actually promoting European tourism. It’s about bringing more people into the European Union, not the other way round, so the question of human rights does not arise.

People have the freedom to travel, and we hope that visitors will come to the European Union and I am disappointed as some Members actually are trying to interpret this as some kind of an effort to say that Chinese travellers are not welcome. That is not the position of the European Union, and certainly not the position of the European Commission.

In relation to the European Year of Cultural Heritage, this is a particular initiative for 2018 that requires all of the various processes that we know well to be implemented. In September 2017 a call for proposals for heritage cooperation projects was launched under the Creative Europe Programme, with EUR 5 million allocated and the deadline is actually next week on the 22 November 2017, so people still have time to make applications on this cultural heritage initiative.

The European Year of Cultural Heritage is benefiting from many EU funding programmes which also support cultural heritage like Horizon 2020, COSME under the cultural tourism dimension, and Natura 2000. These are all programmes which will benefit from this particular fund.

As with other European years, the year of cultural heritage will be implemented through a series of initiatives and events at European level. National, regional and local levels are involved. It has nothing to do with promoting tourism or cultural tourism with China, it’s about promoting cultural heritage in the European Union at local, regional and national level. So it is very much a ‘bottoms-up’ approach or at national level, the year has been managed by national coordinators who were appointed by all 28 Member States. The Commission is also being assisted by a committee which comprises 35 representative civil society organisations that are active in the field of heritage, culture and youth. I welcome this particular programme very much and I hope that people will actually apply for it, but it has nothing to do with Chinese-European relations.

Finally, in relation to agriculture and the area of culture, the European Union and China are negotiating an agreement at the moment on geographical indications, which I am sure the House will welcome. Hopefully we will be able to reach agreement on this. This will promote European and Chinese culture around the issue of food and food heritage. I think that can only be beneficial for our rural areas.

I am glad to have the opportunity, on behalf of my colleague Commissioner Bieńkowska, to clarify these particular issues for Members today.

  Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.

13. Documents received: see Minutes

14. Implementing measures (Rule 106): see Minutes

15. Decisions concerning certain documents: see Minutes

16. Forwarding of texts adopted during the sitting : see Minutes

17. Dates of forthcoming sittings : see Minutes

18. Closure of the sitting

(Posiedzenie zostało zamknięte o godz. 15.47)

19. Adjournment of the session

  Przewodniczący. – Ogłaszam zamknięcie sesji Parlamentu Europejskiego.