Doslovno izvješće

Utorak, 12. lipnja 2018. - Strasbourg

2. Priprema za sastanak Europskog vijeća 28. i 29. lipnja 2018. (rasprava)

  Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la discussione sulle dichiarazioni del Consiglio e della Commissione sulla preparazione del Consiglio europeo del 28 e 29 giugno 2018 (2018/2590(RSP)).

  Monika Panayotova, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, in June, leaders will take a strategic look at several important issues that will affect Europe in the coming years. A first topic is how, in today’s world, we as Europeans do more for our own security. The European Council will take stock of progress in a number of areas where we are deepening cooperation in security and defence.

The agreement we reached together on the European Defence Industrial Development Programme will allow the European Union to fund, for the first time, a programme on defence capabilities. We are also in favour of making headway on improving military mobility, and working to strengthen our resilience to chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear-related risks and our capabilities to address hybrid threats. The European Council will also assess progress in the field of civilian CSDP, and leaders will provide further guidance on PESCO and our important cooperation with NATO.

As you know, migration is also on the agenda. Much has been achieved over the past years in terms of strengthening our overall migration policy, with tangible results on the ground. There is broad agreement on most elements of our migration policy, including better protecting our external borders and controlling illegal migration.

As the Presidency, we have worked diligently on the reform of the Common European Asylum System to help bridge differences in approaches and develop concrete solutions. Intensive negotiations have taken place in the Council on the various proposals of this package. The Dublin reform remains difficult, but in most other files good progress has been made. The European Council will now look at the broader picture. To this end, President Tusk is currently conducting consultations with his peers.

The June European Council will also be the opportunity to spell out our vision for an innovative and digital Europe in the years ahead, following the leaders’ debate in Sofia. Technology-driven innovation is increasingly shaping our lives. The pace and scope of change that the next waves of innovation will bring are unprecedented.

To play an active part in this global transformation, we in Europe need to do better when it comes to the way we generate ideas, turn them into business and help businesses grow on the global stage. We need to deepen Europe’s innovation capability and nurture, in particular, breakthrough and disruptive innovation.

As we reinvent the way we do things, we should also stay true to ourselves and to our values. This is not only true with respect to innovation, but also in relation to our digital endeavours. By creating an environment where innovation can thrive while guaranteeing high standards for the protection of users, we will foster high levels of trust in technology.

The next Multiannual Financial Framework is a key tool to shape our common future. The European Council will discuss the future handling of the proposals concerning the MFF, including the timeline.

Turning to jobs and growth, the European Council will conclude the European Semester for 2018. It will also take stock of the leaders’ discussion on taxation held in March under the Leaders’ Agenda process. The European Council will also have the opportunity to address international developments, including the latest trade issues. As you know, the European Council is also expected formally to adopt the decision on the composition of the European Parliament, on which you will be voting tomorrow.

Finally, the European Council, in terms of Article 50, will meet on the next day to review the state of the negotiations with the United Kingdom.

In the margins, the Euro Summit will meet in an inclusive format. It will discuss measures on the Banking Union and to further develop the European Stability Mechanism, and will provide additional guidance on the way forward.

  Presidente. – Prima di dare la parola al Vicepresidente Timmermans, volevo ricordare al Consiglio che il Parlamento europeo, già da mesi, ha approvato una proposta di riforma di Dublino.

Dopo i risultati dell'ultimo Consiglio "Giustizia e Affari interni", credo che sia giusto affrontare ed esaminare attentamente il testo approvato da parte di uno dei colegislatori qual è il Parlamento europeo.

Io ho sottolineato, in tutte le riunioni del Consiglio, l'importanza di affrontare la questione di Dublino e l'importanza di esaminare come testo base quello del Parlamento europeo, che coniuga contemporaneamente fermezza e solidarietà.

Lancio un appello al Consiglio affinché non venga sottovalutata o ignorata la proposta seria che ha avuto un grande consenso da parte di questa Aula per una riforma di Dublino, cosa che mi pare, fino ad oggi, non sia stata fatta da parte degli Stati membri.

  Frans Timmermans, First Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, it’s an honour to address this House, this time on behalf of President Juncker, who is returning from G7 duty in Canada. I think I would be remiss if I did not start with what happened in Charlevoix. I’m not one to declare that the rules-based international system so carefully built up after the Second World War is now collapsing before our very eyes. However, it is the first time since 1945 that an American President has not seen it as an American strategic interest to work hard to ensure a vibrant and unified Europe and a robust transatlantic relationship.

This means that the EU needs to take its destiny more into its own hands and we should be confident about our ability to do so, because our foundations are strong. Our Union is built upon Member States that voluntarily and democratically decided to link their destinies and shape the future together. The basis for the shared destiny is a tripod of democracy, the rule of law and the respect for human rights. This is how one creates unity between big and small, how one creates unity in full respect of our diversity. It is in turn our unity that gives us strength globally to pursue better and more sustainable standards for everyone; to defend global trading rules; to boldly address climate change; to protect our citizens against geopolitical and/or geoeconomic challenges, and to better grasp the opportunities that globalisation has to offer.

And so, this month’s European Council comes at an auspicious time, and it is a good opportunity to show political will, decisiveness and unity. But we should look beyond the daily Twitter feed and also keep our eyes on the ball with regard to the work that lies ahead of us. Last December, leaders agreed to come back to a number of issues in March. In March, they agreed to come back to the same issues in June. While important decisions take time, we cannot postpone decisions indefinitely. The situation in the Mediterranean is a stark reminder that we cannot wish problems away. No fence is high enough and no sea is wide enough to render our countries immune to the greatest pull factor there is – the freedom, the prosperity and the stability of our Union.

In recent months, under the guidance of the Bulgarian Presidency, the European Union has shown what is possible when we are united and committed to finding European solutions. We agreed, for instance, on the difficult issue of the Posted Workers Directive, thanks in large part to this House. Equal pay for equal work in the same place will now become a reality for all Europeans. We made substantial progress on our digital single market with regard to the abolition of roaming and on clarifying and strengthening audiovisual media services or telecoms rules.

With regard to Brexit too, the EU is united. Our goal is to ensure we, together with our British partners, do as little harm as possible to either side and to work together towards an orderly process in the interest of all citizens in the EU and in the United Kingdom.

The European Council of June will take stock on a number of issues, in particular the question of Ireland and Northern Ireland, as well as the future relationship between the UK and the EU. We still have three more weeks to go, and it is important to use this time to achieve real progress in the interests of all. Parliament, Council and Commission are working together to deliver.

In the next months, we also have to deliver on the legislative files we identified as our common priorities under the two joint declarations. From plastics to migration, from energy to transport, from the European Solidarity Corps to the European Citizens’ Initiative. We’ve promised this to the European citizens before the next elections. It will be our collective achievement. The joint declarations guide our work, so let’s stick to our commitments.

As we approach the June European Council, this then is the spirit and the approach that all leaders must take. United by our values, linked by our interests and concerted in our actions.

Das gilt auch für die Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion. Denn je stärker diese ist, umso mehr verleiht sie der Union als Ganzes Kraft, was sich wiederum positiv auf den Lebensstandard der Europäerinnen und Europäer auswirkt. Deshalb ist es unsere Pflicht, den Euro zu stärken. Die Kommission hat bereits im Dezember ein umfassendes Paket vorgelegt, um unserer Gemeinschaftswährung zusätzliche Stärke und Handlungsfähigkeit zu verleihen. Wir haben außerdem vor wenigen Wochen konkrete Haushaltsinstrumente vorgeschlagen, um Reformen zu fördern und Investitionen im Euro-Raum selbst in Zeiten asymmetrischer Schocks zu gewährleisten.

Dass die Mitgliedstaaten die Vorschläge der Kommission diskutieren, ist ein erster wichtiger Schritt. Doch es reicht nicht, wenn wir lediglich feststellen, was notwendig und geboten ist. Wir haben zwar bereits Fortschritte gemacht und Lehren aus der Krise gezogen – sei es bei der Reduzierung notleidender Kredite im europäischen Bankensektor, beim Aufbau der Kapitalmarktunion oder bei der Einigung im ECOFIN-Rat im Mai, als wir Maßnahmen ergriffen haben, um die Risiken im Bankensektor weiter zu reduzieren. Das war ein wichtiger Schritt hin zur Vollendung der Bankenunion.

Der Gipfel im Juni – die Leaders' Agenda – ist der Moment, die Ideen und den politischen Willen endlich auch in konkrete Entscheidungen und Taten umzusetzen. Wir müssen uns endlich darauf einigen, dass der Europäische Stabilitätsmechanismus die Letztsicherung für den einheitlichen Abwicklungsfonds übernehmen kann. Und dafür müssen wir endlich auch beim Einheitlichen Europäischen Einlagensicherungssystem weiterkommen, das nicht nur über Nacht aufgebaut werden kann, sondern für das Vorbereitungen, Vorbedingungen zu erfüllen sind.

Gestatten Sie mir, auch den mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen zu erwähnen. Ich glaube, dass wir uns vor den nächsten Wahlen unbedingt einigen müssen.

En ce qui concerne la gestion des migrations, la situation n’est en rien comparable à ce qu’elle était il y a trois ans, mais ici également, nous avons encore du travail à faire pour compléter la mise en place d’une politique migratoire fondée sur la responsabilité et la solidarité, tout en assurant une meilleure protection de nos frontières extérieures. Les négociations ont déjà bien avancé sur une bonne partie des éléments proposés par la Commission pour réformer notre régime d’asile européen commun, notamment sur l’harmonisation des conditions d’accueil et les conditions standard de protection ainsi que sur un cadre commun de réinstallation pour renforcer les voies d’entrées légales.

Nous avons également accompli des progrès sur le renforcement d’Eurodac – la base de données de l’Union européenne contenant les empreintes digitales des demandeurs d’asile – et nous avons déjà un accord politique sur le renforcement de l’agent de l’Union européenne pour l’Asie.

Le Parlement s’est engagé dans toutes ces négociations avec détermination et a réussi à améliorer la qualité du texte et je voudrais saluer les efforts considérables accomplis par la présidence bulgare dans ce domaine. Mais pour finaliser un accord sur l’ensemble de la réforme de notre politique d’asile, il faut maintenant trouver un compromis sur le mécanisme de Dublin et je veux soutenir, avec tout l’appui de la Commission, les propos du président du Parlement à cet égard.

Là aussi, on peut noter des avancées, en particulier la création d’un volet préventif de ce mécanisme. Prévenir la crise future est aussi important que la gestion de la crise elle-même. Mais évidemment, il faut reconnaître et respecter les différentes positions et sensibilités qui existent dans nos pays sur ces questions très délicates.

Il est temps de résoudre ce problème. Tous les éléments sont sur la table, il est temps d’agir, je suis en parfait accord avec le président du Parlement européen. Ainsi, la Commission attend des chefs d’État et de gouvernement qu’ils se penchent sérieusement sur la question de Dublin et esquissent les orientations nécessaires pour parvenir à des solutions équilibrées qui aient l’appui de tous et qui soient des solutions solides et durables fondées sur nos valeurs communes. Nous risquons non seulement de perdre nos valeurs mais aussi de porter atteinte à notre humanité même si nous ne trouvons pas des solutions qui permettent de voir des personnes en crise comme des êtres humains qui ont besoin de notre aide.

(Applaudissements)

Étant donné l’importance de ce défi – existentiel, je crois, pour l’Union européenne –, la Commission proposera cet après-midi un renforcement ambitieux et important des moyens financiers pour soutenir notre politique commune au cours des prochaines années.

  Manfred Weber, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Herr Vizepräsident der Kommission, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die heutige Debatte wird angesichts des G7-Gipfels sicher von Unsicherheit und Instabilität geprägt sein. Deswegen möchte ich zunächst mit der positiven Meldung beginnen: Gerade erreichen uns alle auf unseren Mobiltelefonen die Meldungen aus Singapur. Wenn sich Kim und Trump darauf verständigen, dass es eine große Chance für ein nuklearwaffenfreies Korea gibt, für eine koreanische Halbinsel, die nuklearwaffenfrei ist, dann ist das ein großer Erfolg, und wir sollten froh sein darüber, dass es diese Ergebnisse gibt. Diplomatie wirkt, auch Sanktionen wirken. Aber ich hoffe, dass in Washington erkannt wird, dass Diplomatie nicht nur dann gut ist, wenn Donald Trump sie unterschreibt. Wir haben nämlich mit dem Iran-Abkommen bereits einmal ein sehr positives diplomatisches Ergebnis erzielt. Damals hat Obama unterschrieben, und das war genauso gut wie das jetzige Ergebnis, das uns für Korea vorliegt.

Wenn wir jetzt auf den Gipfel, auf den Europäischen Rat blicken, dann besteht vielleicht wieder die Gefahr, dass wir große Ziele beschreiben und am Ende vielleicht wieder mit wenigen Ergebnissen dastehen. Deswegen möchte ich mich darauf konzentrieren, zwei konkrete Punkte herauszugreifen, wo wir als EVP-Fraktion jetzt Klarheit und Ergebnisse einfordern und wo auch die Chance dazu besteht: Das erste sind die Handelsfragen – ein Thema, das viele umtreibt, die derzeit um ihre Jobs bangen. Da muss Europa der Europäischen Kommission volle Rückendeckung geben. Die Zölle auf Aluminium und Stahl sind ohne Grund verhängt worden. Und deswegen sind geschlossene Gegenmaßnahmen, so wie die Kommission sie angestoßen hat, der richtige Weg. Wir erwarten vom Rat, dass das voll unterstützt wird. Und wir sind auch der Meinung, dass das Gespräch richtig ist. Wenn Jean-Claude Juncker jetzt den Arbeitsauftrag bekommen hat, nach Washington zu fahren und über eine Welt ohne Zölle zu reden, dann ist das der richtige Ansatz.

Ich möchte noch ergänzen, dass derzeit für uns Europäer durch die Problematik mit Amerika auch eine Reihe von Chancen entstehen. Es ist so, dass wir in Kanada erlebt haben, dass es sechs zu eins steht. Wir haben also viele Partner, die nach wie vor für den regelbasierten Handel eintreten. Mit denen sollten wir reden, ins Gespräch kommen und schnellstens mit Japan, mit Mexiko, mit dem Mercosur die Verträge abschließen, die jetzt realistisch sind.

Ich möchte im Rückblick nochmal daran erinnern: Wir hatten ja hier im Parlament viel Streit über die Frage CETA – ich möchte das nochmal in Erinnerung rufen –, und wir spüren in der jetzigen Lage, wie dankbar wir sind, dass wir zumindest mit Kanada, mit einem Land, das unseren Werten verpflichtet ist, in der Lage sind, solche Verträge abzuschließen. CETA ist für uns nach wie vor ein Vorbild für die zukünftige Gestaltung der Handelspolitik.

Zu guter Letzt ein zweiter Punkt, nämlich die Euro-Diskussion: Auch hier reicht die Debatte. Wir können jetzt, glaube ich, zu Ergebnissen kommen. Der Europäische Währungsfonds ist zum Greifen nahe, damit wir zukünftig die Unabhängigkeit von internationalen Strukturen bekommen. Der backstop ist nahe. Wir werden die Parlamente stärker beteiligen können mit den Strukturen, die jetzt angedacht sind. Das heißt, diesen Schritt sollte man tun, genauso wie den Schritt, den die Kommission bereits im Dezember vorgeschlagen hat, mit dem Investitionsbudget jetzt voranzukommen. Nach dem Aspekt Reformen und nach dem Aspekt Budgetstabilisierung liegt jetzt der Schwerpunkt auf den Investitionen. Da sollten wir vorankommen.

Deswegen: Jetzt handeln, in diesen beiden Punkten! Rückenwind sollte uns geben, dass wir beim Euro große Erfolge haben. Seit Beginn der Krise haben wir in der Euro-Zone zehn Millionen neue Arbeitsplätze geschaffen und haben ein Wachstum von 2,5 % – deutlich stärker als die Amerikaner und übrigens auch die britischen Freunde. Deswegen sollte uns die Reformpolitik, die wir bisher praktiziert haben, dafür Rückenwind geben.

Ich wünsche mir, dass beim Rat jetzt nicht mehr geredet wird, sondern bei diesen beiden Punkten gehandelt wird!

  Udo Bullmann, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, this is the House of the European people and, having said that, I cannot avoid raising again and again the situation in the Mediterranean Sea. There is a boat in the middle of the sea. Many of those people – children, pregnant women – are in a disastrous situation, not for the first time and, unfortunately, perhaps not for the last time.

We have a general idea. Those who disembark in one of our countries disembark in the European Union. This is our principle. Article 80 of this Treaty speaks about responsibility and about solidarity. Yes, it is true that Italy has taken the lion’s share of the responsibility in the past, but – forgive me, dear colleagues, this is to Mr Salvini – if you need to demonstrate what you think is your strength at the expense of pregnant women and children, you have no idea how poor you are.

(Applause)

This is a change in Italian politics which is by no means defendable.

And let us talk about the re—emergence of the Spanish people and the Spanish Government. Yes, Pedro Sanchez, thank you. You gave grace to the European Union again and what you did was marvellous. This is the new style of the Spanish people and of Spanish politics and we appreciate that. Thank you to the new government and all those who support it.

But since this is not an isolated situation – and now we come to the Council – no, you don’t have time to postpone the issue of migration. No you cannot stay sleeping. No, there is no excuse for not doing anything and this is one of the major issues that have to be discussed in the next European Council. And this is also to Mr Kurz’s incoming Presidency. Mr Kurz, ask yourself whether you are happy. Are you still proud that you closed – this is one of your favourites – the Balkan route without any alternative? Are you still proud of your comradeship with Mr Orban, demonstrating it in each and every situation? No, we will not let him pass into this House of the People when he arrives in the second half of this year with a stance like that! This will not be the policy of my group, the Socialists and Democrats, and this will not be the policy of the European Parliament, dear friends. What we have to make clear ...

Und das bezieht sich auch auf meine Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Europäischen Volkspartei in Deutschland, lieber, verehrter Kollege Weber: Nein, das ist nicht drin! Wir können hier nicht pro-europäisch reden und zu Hause mit Orbán schäkern und die Europäische Union in einer zentralen Frage ohne Perspektive lassen. Das werden wir nicht tolerieren!

Und das müssen wir auch an Frau Merkel adressieren: Nein, Frau Merkel, der Enthusiasmus, den Sie zeigen, der Enthusiasmus in Lösungen der Probleme – man kann nicht weiche Knie kriegen, nur weil Trump mit dem Handelskrieg droht. Der Wirtschaftsminister in Deutschland muss das kapieren: Das reicht nicht, was da geliefert wird!

Und das gleiche gilt für unser Engagement, mit dem wir insgesamt die Europäische Union stark machen müssen. Auch Frau Merkel muss kapieren: Nur eine vereinte Europäische Union, nur eine starke Europäische Union wird in der Lage sein, unsere Gesellschaft in eine erfolgreiche Zukunft zu führen. Dafür steht meine Fraktion, dafür werden wir arbeiten. Und wir freuen uns auf die Diskussionen, die in diesem Haus zu dem Thema noch anstehen.

  Roberts Zīle, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, I will increase the number of languages used here so I will ask you to use the headphones, and also to symbolically extend the core of the European Union, I will speak Latvian.

Priekšsēdētāj! Protams, nav nekāds jaunums, ka nacionālo politisko uzvaru dēļ Eiropas Savienība un citas dalībvalstis bieži vien tiek izmantotas kā ringa pretinieks, un pēc šīm saldajām uzvarām tiek kronēts nacionālais čempions. Taču pēdējā laikā šī situācija sasniedz jaunu intensitāti, un uzvarām noder gan viesstrādnieku uzvaras — kaut gan īstenībā tie ir tikai pāris procentu no darbaspēka tirgus —, gan arī migrācijas jautājums un Dublinas konvencijas pārskatīšana. Tagad, gatavojoties Padomes sēdei, es faktiski pieskaršos tikai pāris punktiem no Eiropadomes dienas kārtības.

Pirmkārt, par migrāciju, Dublinas pārskatīšanu un kvotām kā sastāvdaļu no tām. Trīs gadu laikā, kopš Eiropas Komisija nāca klajā ar šo kvotu priekšlikumu, es domāju, ka visiem ir skaidrs, ka šī sistēma nevar un nevarēs strādāt arī nākotnē, jo faktiski migrantu un arī kontrabandas organizētāju kartē ir tikai dažas Eiropas Savienības dalībvalstis, kas ir galamērķis, kur šiem migrantiem nokļūt. Visas pārējās valstis ir vai nu tranzītvalstis, vai tādas, kuras vispār nav kartē, kā, teiksim, tās valstis, kas ir pārāk nabadzīgas, lai tur kādreiz kāds vispār nokļūtu. Teiksim, manā valstī, Latvijā, tika uzbūvēts simts vietu migrācijai — labas, iekārtotas, — patversmes bāze, kura parasti ir aizpildīta labi, ja ar vienu trešdaļu. Izpildot mūsu brīvprātīgās kvotas, cilvēki, kas tur nejauši nokļūst, pazūd ar dokumentiem vai bez dokumentiem jau burtiski nākošajās dienās. Tas nozīmē, ka šāda sistēma faktiski nedarbojas, un mēs joprojām trīs gadu laikā neesam atraduši citus risinājumus.

Otrs jautājums — daudzgadu finanšu budžets, par ko arī tiks runāts Padomē. Manuprāt, ir ārkārtīgi svarīgi akcentēt to, ka Eiropas Komisijas priekšlikums, neskatoties uz Brexit naudas iztrūkumu, tomēr rada lielākas iespējas kopumā šajā finanšu daļā, tajā pašā laikā ļoti mērķēts kohēzijas politikas samazinājums atkarībā no konkrētās dalībvalsts. Šajā gadījumā kāda ziņa tā ir paaudzēm, kas ir jaunā paaudze šajās valstīs? Mēs runājam par periodu no 2020. gada līdz 2027. gadam, kas faktiski nozīmē 10 gadu garumā daudzām jaunākām dalībvalstīm tā ir ziņa jaunajai paaudzei: “Jums nākotne ir vēl sliktāka nekā pašlaik šajās dalībvalstīs, un tas nozīmē, ka jums ir jābrauc prom uz tām valstīm, kuras ir turīgākas, jo tām pat subsidēs darbvietas jaunatnes nodarbinātībai”. Nav gan skaidrs, vai arī iebraucošajiem jauniešiem no citām valstīm vai tikai vietējiem jauniešiem.

Jāatceras tas, ka dažās valstīs t. s. universālā “universal income base” bāze ir augstāka nekā vidējā alga citās Eiropas Savienības dalībvalstīs, un visā šajā kopējā mērcē mums ir ļoti grūti uzrunāt Eiropas Savienības pilsoņus, ka ir kopīgas vērtības, kā Timmermans kungs teica, ka ir kopīga vienota izpratne par Eiropas vērtībām. Ir grūti un gandrīz neiespējami paskaidrot šādu valstu, Eiropas Savienības valstu, pilsoņiem, ka tā ir.

  Guy Verhofstadt, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, I have to say to you that if I hear Mr Weber and then Mr Bullmann afterwards, I ask myself whether there is a government in Berlin or have I missed something? I have not the impression that there is – in any way, on a number of issues – a common German position for the moment and that is one of the problems for the moment in the European Union, but that is not my item. Ms Panayotova, the next European Council can talk and talk and talk and discuss and write conclusions on whatever issue that you want, and there is a long list of issues – Brexit, the governance of the eurozone, the defence union, the Multiannual Financial Framework, the Trump and Kim Summit – you name it, but in my opinion – and Mr Bullmann has already said it – there is one item, one crisis, which I urge you not just to talk about this time, but to act on now, and it is this ongoing migration crisis in the Mediterranean Sea.

I think we all agree on this – you, the Commission, the whole Parliament, all the political groups – that what is happening there is a disgrace, it is a scandal, and already for years now. I am contradicting Mr Timmermans a little bit now when he says yes, it is not the same as in the past. No, it is not the same as in the past, but since the start of this mandate, Mr Timmermans, there will be more than 10 000 people who will have died in the Mediterranean Sea. And since the beginning of this year, there are 800 people, men, women and children, who have drowned in the Mediterranean Sea. And now it is the same with this boat – 600 people, seven pregnant women, pushed from country to country. It is a disgrace, it is a scandal.

I will not point my finger in this debate at one individual country, not at Malta, not at Italy. I do not think we have to point a finger at Mr Muscat and say it’s your fault, or at Mr Salvini even. I reject completely the ideas of Mr Salvini, but I think we have to point the finger not at you personally, so don’t take it personally, but at all of you, at the whole of the European Council which is not capable until this moment to take a position on this migration issue and on the reform of the Dublin system. It is a collective responsibility. I am always asking myself why we made the European Council an official institution of the European Union under the Lisbon Treaty. In the Lisbon Treaty we said, yes, the European Council has to become an official institution of the European Union, to take decisions, to steer the Union, and what we see today is exactly the opposite, the incapacity of the European Council to take a decision on this. So my question to you – I have only one simple question – is: when for God’s sake will the European Council take a decision on this migration issue, and when will you take responsibility?

I want also to urge you to do two things at the next European Council. I think there are two things you need to do. The first is to have this common position of Dublin; Mr Bullmann and others have already recalled this. But the second thing in my opinion is to do another thing, and that is to create as fast as possible, very urgently, what I call European reception centres in the transit countries so that we take our responsibility in these transit countries to give decent protection to these people, and that these people can ask in these reception centres for asylum, for protection, so that it is not necessary for them to jump into the arms and into the hands of these criminal gangs in Libya or in these gangs of human traffickers – because that is what needs doing at the moment.

And to media colleagues, the picture of the year – because everybody is talking today about what will be the picture of the year – will it be six European leaders humouring Mr Trump in Canada, or will the picture of the year be the handshake between Trump and Kim? I think, unfortunately, and to our disgrace, the picture of the year could be again another little Alan who is the victim of our bad policies on migration. I say to you Mr Tajani, I support you fully in what you said at the beginning of the debate. If the Council fails again at its next meeting, in my opinion we should really put the question if we have to invite Mr Tusk to our next meeting in July. Or more, I think we have to consider going to court under Article 265 of the Treaty. Article 265 of the Treaty will give the Commission and the European Parliament the possibility to go against the Council if the Council fails to act, which is the case here today.

  Ska Keller, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, the expectations for this summit were indeed rather high. A lot of things are to be decided at the summit. The eurozone reforms have been mentioned – and this would be high time because we have been having a kind of eurozone crisis since 2010, so it is not really early – and also Brexit. While this is a newer topic than 2010, it is also one with a very tight deadline just around the corner and a lot of problems to solve.

Then, of course, there is the migration issue that has already been addressed by many colleagues. We all know that the current Dublin rules don’t work. We have been saying this for years here in Parliament. We have been making proposals for years about how to fix it and it hasn’t been getting better. We all know the pictures of overcrowded camps in Greece. We all know about the refugees living on the streets in Italy. We all know this constant blame game between different countries – whichever it is at the moment – and it is outrageous how this is going. It is always countries trying to say that they want the lowest number of refugees possible so the only thing they can ever do is close the borders, but that is not a policy that we can carry out as the European Union if we value anything of our own and if we stand at all for the human rights that we tell other countries that they should adhere to.

So Dublin urgently needs to be reformed. This Parliament has shown how it can be done. The thing about this Parliament is that we are not some sort of weird extra—territorial something parliament, but we are the same parties, the same countries, present here as are present in the Council and as are going to be present at the summit. So I wonder why it is that if we – same country, same parties – can come to an agreement, why can’t the Heads of State and Government do that? I really don’t see any reason, except for lack of political will and a lack of will to lead somewhere, to help people and to really go to the heart of the matter.

Without solidarity, our common European asylum policy is bound to fail, and Member States are already engaged in this vicious circle of deterrence and responsibility shifting. So yes, it is outrageous that Italy cannot follow the principle – the most basic humanitarian and sea law – but also, Malta has not wanted to open its port for years. We didn’t hear anything from France. So I’m really thankful to Spain, but this cannot be the only solution. We also see in other countries – Austria, Denmark, Germany – that everyone is closing their borders; everyone is settling on deterrence.

So human rights have become a matter of campaigning in the European Union. We are doing politics – pretty much all parties are doing politics – on the back of those most vulnerable. I think that this is totally unacceptable in a European Union that is worth any of what Mr Timmermans mentioned before. It is also very interesting that the approaching Austrian Presidency has told the Bulgarian Presidency that ‘Dublin is dead’. That is probably also quite unprecedented.

On the eurozone reform – thank you for reminding us of that – it is urgent that we fix the problems there. The problems are known. There are solutions on the table and, while we Greens don’t agree with all the details of what Mr Macron has put forward, at least there is someone who has put proposals forward. So we should finally get somewhere and the German Government cannot hide any longer. They also need to get their act together, finally get real and offer something, because this is something that all Member States should understand. They should not hide behind what they call their national interests. Actually it is in their national interests to have a strong and functioning European Union and a strong and functioning eurozone. This is something that is in all of our interests. The world is turning less and less predictable. All the Member States should be so happy that they have a reliable and strong Union that they are part of and a strong partnership that they are part of, but they need to do something for it and they might even need to pay euro or two for it, but I think it is worth it.

  Gabriele Zimmer, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Wir reden hier im Europäischen Parlament wieder wenige Tage vor dem nächsten Gipfel miteinander, mit der Kommission und mit der gegenwärtigen Ratspräsidentschaft. Wir können eigentlich nur festhalten, dass es inzwischen eine ritualisierte Form ist, wir uns jedes Mal hier treffen, anschließend nach dem Gipfel wieder ein Treffen haben und konstatieren: Wir sind keinen Schritt weitergekommen!

Ich denke, das hat auch etwas damit zu tun, wie Politik sich sowohl in den Mitgliedstaaten, aber auch in den EU-Institutionen gegenwärtig darstellt. Wir nehmen viel zu wenig zur Kenntnis, was sich in unseren Gesellschaften, in den Mitgliedstaaten, in der EU tut und was sich auch außerhalb der EU tut. Ein Großteil der Menschen ist von außerhalb unserer Politikangebote, die wir unterbreiten. Und wir lassen es zu, dass letztendlich die gesamte Problematik, auch die der Migrations-, der Asylkrise, innerhalb der Europäischen Union, die Unfähigkeit, wirklich gemeinsame Solidarität zu entwickeln und sich verantwortlich zu fühlen, dazu führt, dass wir Rechten, Rechtspopulisten, Rechtsextremen, Nationalisten den roten Teppich ausrollen und sie letztendlich einladen, den Menschen, die in Armut leben, etwas weiszumachen, sie zu missbrauchen, ihre Not zu missbrauchen, um letztendlich zu sagen: Diese Gesellschaften sind gespalten, und wir müssen uns gegen den Solidaritätsgedanken zur Wehr setzen. Ich denke das kann und darf nicht so bleiben. Wir haben hier eine gemeinsame Verantwortung.

Und mit Blick auf das Schiff, die Aquarius: Ja, Dank an Spanien und auch – wie ich zwischenzeitlich gehört hatte – an die Landesregierung von Korsika, hier helfen zu wollen. Aber eines wird wirklich deutlich: Wir können nicht glauben, dass wir tatsächlich mit nur spontanen Rettungsaktionen in der Lage sind, eine nachhaltige Politik der Europäischen Union zu entwickeln, die sich dem weltweiten Problem der Migration überhaupt stellt. Wir können auch – da sehe ich durchaus auch Unterschiede zwischen uns –, wir können doch nicht glauben, dass wir im Zuge der Dublin-Verhandlungen meinen, ein Abschottungssystem aufzubauen, das auch die pauschale Ablehnung von Asylbewerbern, von Flüchtlingen aus sogenannten „sicheren Drittstaaten“ umfasst, z. B. aus den Maghreb-Staaten. Wir müssen ebenfalls zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass offensichtlich die Deals mit der Türkei und mit Libyen auch weiter sehr problematisch bleiben.

Herr Verhofstadt, Sie haben vorhin eine ganze Reihe von Zahlen genannt. Ich möchte eine hinzufügen: Seitdem wir diese Deals haben, sind 3000 Menschen im Mittelmeer ertrunken beziehungsweise gestorben. Das gehört genauso zu einer realistischen Einschätzung, was wir können, was wir tun müssen, wozu wir verpflichtet sind.

Die bulgarische Präsidentschaft hat versucht, einen Vorschlag zu erarbeiten, den ich ebenfalls für nicht gelungen halte. Ich glaube nicht, dass es funktionieren wird, in einem dreistufigen Verfahren zu sagen: Nur in bestimmten Situationen kann man von anderen Ländern erwarten, dass sie sich mehr beteiligen sollen oder dass sie stärkere finanzielle Leistungen übernehmen sollen.

Das Kernproblem wird weiter bleiben. Sind die Mitgliedsstaaten bereit, eine Mindestzahl von Flüchtlingen gemeinsam aufzunehmen und dafür zu sorgen, dass man in Krisensituationen gemeinsam und solidarisch miteinander handelt? Das muss unser Punkt sein! Dafür werden wir streiten! Dazu fordern wir alle auf! Wir brauchen die Lösung jetzt, nicht irgendwann! Wir können nicht noch weiter darauf warten, dass irgendwie eine Regierung sich erbarmt, ein Schiff aufzunehmen.

Wir haben grundsätzliche Regeln zu schaffen, und wir sollten Abstand davon nehmen, dass wir glauben, wenn wir Mauern errichten, dann richten sich diese Mauern nur nach außen – die richten sich auch nach innen. Was wir den einen nicht gestatten, ist auch eine Einschränkung von Freiheit in unserer Europäischen Union, in unseren Mitgliedstaaten.

  Gerard Batten, on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Mr President, one big problem facing the Council is, of course, Brexit and the big hole that it’s going to leave in the EU budget. But we’re not really any closer to leaving the European Union than we were the day after the referendum. Mrs May is a remainer who doesn’t really want to leave and, of course, as you found out, she couldn’t negotiate her way out of a wet paper bag. The whole process for the last two years has been about to delay and impede in the hope of eventually overturning the result of the referendum. This week the Commons votes on the Withdrawal Bill, and that’s entirely dependent upon this House voting on the Withdrawal Agreement later this year. Of course, you could vote against it. The whole thing then reverts to square one, like a game of political snakes and ladders.

But it doesn’t have to be that way. Under the right leadership, Britain could leave the European Union quickly and decisively, and this is how it should be done. First of all, forget Article 50 – that’s your device, not ours. Parliament should repeal the European Communities Act of 1973 as a first step, and then we would have left under our law, not your law. We can offer you a free trade agreement with everything except the free movement of people, or trade on WTO terms. It’s going to be your choice anyway: take it or leave it, one way or the other.

And we could easily reach an agreement on the reciprocal rights of citizens. Parliament can then repeal or amend all the EU-derived law in accordance with its own timescales and priorities, and I’m sure that can be done in a spirit of friendly cooperation with our good friends here in Europe.

Her Majesty’s government shouldn’t be asking the European Union how it can leave; it should be telling you how it’s going to work. But, of course, that is never going to happen under Mrs May. Mrs May should go now and make way for a prime minister who actually wants to leave the European Union. That would be good for us, but it would actually be good for you as well.

  Nicolas Bay, au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, en Italie, après le discours, voilà les actes!

Dimanche, le ministre de l’intérieur et vice-Premier ministre italien, notre ex-collègue Matteo Salvini, a pris une première mesure forte. Souverainement, au nom de son pays, il a décidé d’interdire l’accès aux ports italiens à un navire en provenance de Libye et gagné son bras de fer avec les autorités maltaises.

Affrété par une ONG soi-disant humanitaire, ce navire transportait plus de 600 migrants clandestins.

Les mafias de passeurs qui prospèrent sur le trafic d’êtres humains, encouragés par les discours irresponsables de certains dirigeants européens, Mme Merkel en tête, avaient promis à ces migrants un Eldorado européen qui n’existe pas, qui n’existe plus!

La seule solution face au défi migratoire, la seule solution véritablement humaine, juste et responsable, c’est la fermeté qui consiste à refuser cette espèce de chantage permanent aux droits de l’homme!

Trop, c’est trop! Nous ne pouvons plus accueillir de «migrants». Basta! No way!

Matteo Salvini applique ainsi la même méthode que l’Australie qui a permis d’assécher totalement les flux d’immigration clandestine à destination de ce pays.

Mais alors qu’attendez-vous? Qu’attendez-vous donc pour entendre enfin nos peuples qui vous demandent de mettre fin, une bonne fois pour toutes, à ces flux migratoires totalement anarchiques?

Il est urgent de protéger nos frontières nationales et de mettre en œuvre une véritable coopération européenne pour défendre efficacement les frontières extérieures en s’inspirant de l’action de la Hongrie hier et de l’Italie aujourd’hui.

Les moyens, qu’ils soient législatifs, technologiques, financiers ou humains, nous les avons! Ce qu’il nous manque, ce qu’il vous manque, c’est une réelle volonté politique.

  Diane Dodds (NI). – Mr President, the June European Council should be an opportunity to make strides towards the United Kingdom’s amicable and orderly exit from the European Union. Those who claim it is a last-chance saloon for a deal on the border limit what can be achieved. They fail to realise that agreeing future trade and avoiding friction on the border go hand in hand.

Yet, Mr Barnier continues to disrespect the integrity of the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom Government’s proposal on the backstop would apply to the entire United Kingdom. The Commission response has been to revert to the annexation of Northern Ireland as part of specific customs or regulatory arrangements. Let me be clear once again in this House: not only is this damaging to the economy of Northern Ireland, it is a position that the Prime Minister has said no British Prime Minister could ever agree to. Furthermore, it is damaging to community relations in Northern Ireland.

If a Brexit border solution is to succeed, it must find peace with both communities, and that includes the unionist community as well. This reflects a practical reality and is in line with the consent principle of the Belfast Agreement. We want to see a sensible solution without the infection of a political dogma, but our relationship must be about respect and reflect the realities of open trade.

  Presidente. – Signora Panayotova – mi rivolgo a Lei in quanto rappresentante del Consiglio ovviamente –, dopo aver ascoltato le parole di tutti i gruppi politici, visto anche quello accade con la vicenda della nave Aquarius, con i contrasti tra Italia e Malta, se il Consiglio avesse risolto il problema della riforma di Dublino, non ci sarebbe tutto quello che sta accadendo oggi. L'egoismo degli Stati rischia di far peggiorare la situazione invece di farla migliorare. Così non risolviamo né il problema dell'immigrazione, né il problema dell'Africa.

Come Lei sa, il Parlamento europeo ha anche approvato, in una delle ultime risoluzioni, un testo dove si insiste per avere più investimenti nel prossimo bilancio comunitario per l'Africa. Il problema dell'immigrazione è il problema dei problemi. C'è un forte ritardo.

Le chiedo, a nome di tutto il Parlamento, di fare in modo che il prossimo Consiglio non sia soltanto un Consiglio dove si discute formalmente della questione Dublino e migrazione. Mezzo miliardo di cittadini europei hanno bisogno di risposte e queste risposte purtroppo non sono arrivate e non stanno arrivando. Noi continueremo a far ascoltare la nostra voce finché non sarà risolta la questione immigrazione, finché non sarà risolto il problema della riforma di Dublino.

  Angelika Niebler (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Herr Vizepräsident der Europäischen Kommission, Frau Ratsvertreterin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich kann nahtlos an das anschließen, was unser Parlamentspräsident gerade sagte: Wir brauchen bei zwei Themen einen Durchbruch beim Europäischen Rat, beim Gipfel: Das ist das Asylthema, und das ist die Vertiefung der Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion. Beim Asylthema kann ich nur sagen: Wir brauchen gemeinsame Regeln, die die Zuwanderung steuern und begrenzen. Wir können nicht den Schleppern die Entscheidung überlassen, wer nach Europa kommen darf oder nicht. Ich hoffe sehr, dass jetzt dann beim Gipfel Fortschritte erzielt werden.

Ich möchte meine Redezeit dafür nutzen, um über die Vertiefung der Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion zu sprechen. Lassen Sie mich vielleicht damit beginnen, dass ich finde – zurückblickend –, dass die Väter des Euro vor über 25 Jahren mit dem Maastrichter Vertrag und mit dem Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakt eigentlich gute Arbeit geleistet haben, dass wir eigentlich einen funktionsfähigen, festen Rahmen geschaffen haben, dass vernünftige Regeln und Mechanismen entwickelt wurden, um den Euro stabil zu halten. Nach der Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise 2007 ist das weiterentwickelt worden. Aber ich glaube, der Rahmen, der damals gesetzt wurde, gilt noch heute, nämlich dass die Mitgliedstaaten auch für ihre Finanzen eigenverantwortlich sind. Das heißt, dass wir nicht übergehen sollten in eine Schuldenunion, in eine Risiko- oder Haftungsverlagerung. Ich glaube, wir sollten bei den Grundwerten der Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion bleiben. Für mich ist immer noch das Wichtigste, dass die Stabilitätsregeln eingehalten werden. Das ist der beste Schutz vor Krisen.

Wenn ich das vorausschicke, dann glaube ich, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, können Sie verstehen, dass ich den Vorschlägen zur Vertiefung der Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion nur in Einzelbereichen etwas abgewinnen kann. Ich finde es gut, wenn wir einen Europäischen Währungsfonds ins Leben rufen. Aber auch hier finde ich wichtig, dass Konditionalität gilt. Konditionalität ist für mich das A und O. Das heißt: Hilfen ja, aber eben gegen Strukturreformen, sonst funktioniert das einfach nicht. Wir müssen endlich mal an die enorme Reduzierung der Risiken bei den Banken herangehen. Ich möchte dazu einfach auch nochmal anregen und vielleicht auch die Kommission nochmal fragen, warum wir nicht endlich mal anfangen, wegzugehen von der Nullgewichtung der Staatsanleihen. Also ich verstehe bis heute nicht, warum wir hier die Kredite und die Staatsanleihen nicht entsprechend ihrem Risiko auch in Bilanzen gewichten.

IN THE CHAIR: MAIREAD McGUINNESS
Vice-President

  Maria João Rodrigues (S&D). – Madam President, the European Parliament is being very clear – the next European Council can no longer delay key decisions and must make very clear choices. The world is changing, it is so clear, and it is also clear that we need a strong Europe, a united Europe, to protect people. The solution is certainly not closing the borders, but neither is the solution to keep open borders without protecting people. We need to have a Europe which is open but protecting people.

This is the case when we organise the European border. Of course we need to ensure that we have a proper European asylum system to protect refugees who are looking for our help, but when we negotiate trade agreements we need to ensure we are open to the world but we need to protect our people and our standards.

If we want a Europe that protects, the next European Council must push the negotiations on the European budget also for a budget which will be there to protect people. I am concerned, on behalf of my group, that the current proposal on the Community budget does not ensure the proper level of economic and social vision of cohesion. This is too weak to ensure our unity. The same applies to the proposals to reform the eurozone, because we don’t have proposals to ensure strong investment to converge, to ensure that the social pillar is really applied everywhere. So this is missing, and we want to strengthen European unity on the internal front, with a united Europe, for us to be able to cope with external challenges. This is the solution the next European Council should adopt without any kind of hesitation.

  Anna Elżbieta Fotyga (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Według danych Eurostatu za 2016 rok Unia przyjęła średnio 4,6 imigranta na każdy 1000 mieszkańców. W Polsce było to 5,5 – Ukraińców, Białorusinów, Gruzinów i innych narodowości. Nie uzyskano zgody w sprawie przymusowego mechanizmu relokacji w Radzie. Pani Minister to nie powinno zostać wpisane do projektu konkluzji Rady.

I jeszcze jedno, budowa gazociągu Nord Stream I pozwoliła Rosji na aneksję Krymu. Co możemy spowodować, budując Nord Stream II?

  Cecilia Wikström (ALDE). – Madam President, we have been getting used to seeing the failures of summits lately. I regret it very much that the EU Heads of State have consistently failed to show leadership on asylum reforms, and only last week we saw President Trump crash the G7 Summit.

Leadership should now be exercised and the tyranny of low expectations should be left behind. It is now high time for Heads of State to rise above national egoism and show citizens all over the EU that we can deliver substantial, meaningful reforms of the Dublin Regulation, for which I happen to be the rapporteur. I know that some Member States – and also Members of this House – are tempted to declare the Dublin reform process dead and suggest instead some form of externalisation of responsibilities in the field of asylum, pretending that we can wave a magic wand and send the asylum seekers to faraway camps, which would of course be an enormous error for the simple reason that it would never work. Even if you ignore the obvious moral issues, there are still practical and legal issues. It would be a waste of time.

Instead, what we need today are practical solutions, not castles in the sky. It is now high time for the Council to join the European Parliament at the Dublin Regulation negotiating table. I can promise you that this House – and I, myself – stand ready for discussions. No more excuses and delays. It is high time to deliver. We owe it to the citizens of Europe.

  Molly Scott Cato (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, I’m sure I was not alone in feeling a cold shiver down my spine when I saw that chilling photograph of the world leaders at the G7. For those of us who believe in a rules—based international system, Trump’s deliberately disruptive behaviour in Quebec and at the United Nations, the World Trade Organization and now in Singapore is deeply disturbing. Trump’s treatment of Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau was despicable but typical of his bullying style. He doesn’t want to be isolated in a room-ful of cooperative world leaders, he wants to corner them one by one, so that he can make America great again at their expense.

If the UK does go ahead with leaving the EU at a time when the global rules—based system is being shredded by Trump faster than the promises made by Brexiteers, we face a very dangerous future. That’s why I will be marching twice in London in the next few months: first on 23 June to demand a people’s vote on the Brexit deal, and then again on 13 July to oppose the visit of President Trump to the UK.

Those of us who believe in democracy and the rule of law know that Brexit and Trump are two sides of the same coin – a coordinated attack on the global system that has ensured peace and prosperity since the Second World War. Both must be confronted and both must be overcome.

  Martina Anderson (GUE/NGL). – Madam President, we have perfidious Albion. The British Foreign Minister believes that worrying about Ireland is a folly. If Boris Johnson has his way then the border in Ireland will be hardened and strengthened. Positive and constructive proposals accepted by the British Government in December are rejected by them within days. Fantasy proposals are put in place instead. Perfidious Albion. And to buy a bit more time for the coalition agreement by the British Government and their allies in the Democratic Unionist Party – the Jurassic Party – agreements are torn up, and rights are denied.

Enough is enough.

The whole of the EU and Europe knows what needs to be done, and it is up to the Dublin government and to all of the EU Council Member to stand up to perfidious Albion in June and not to be persuaded by the disgraceful Irish Times editorial of yesterday, or by the nonsense by Diane Dodds MEP. The DUP do not speak for the people of the North on Brexit. The British Government does not care, unfortunately, about the people of Ireland – north or south – having to salvage ourselves from the Brexit wreckage.

  Laura Ferrara (EFDD). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in vista del prossimo Consiglio europeo, il mio pensiero non può che andare alla situazione del Mediterraneo, dove sta naufragando l'idea di riformare il sistema comune europeo di asilo, dove sta naufragando l'idea di riformare il regolamento di Dublino, che è profondamente iniquo rispetto ai paesi transfrontalieri, dove sta naufragando l'idea di rivedere radicalmente il progetto europeo e di dimostrare che nell'Unione europea esiste l'Unione.

Abbiamo i paesi transfrontalieri, come l'Italia, che continuano ad essere lasciati completamente soli. In Italia devono avvenire gli sbarchi, in Italia devono avvenire le identificazioni e le registrazioni. L'Italia deve farsi carico della prima accoglienza. Scatta il regolamento di Dublino: l'Italia deve essere responsabile per l'esame della domanda di protezione internazionale.

Cosa fanno gli altri paesi? Gli altri paesi sospendono Schengen, gli altri paesi reintroducono i controlli alle frontiere interne in modo da blindare tutti in Italia. Allora cosa c'è di più penoso in tutto questo dibattito? È il puntarsi il dito l'uno contro l'altro, senza capire che se siamo preoccupati dei sentimenti di odio, se siamo preoccupati dal deflagrare del progetto dell'Unione europea, allora dobbiamo dimostrare che l'Unione europea esiste e che c'è ancora tanto da fare.

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

  Nicola Danti (S&D), domanda "cartellino blu". – Io credo che la retorica non abbia fine in quest'Aula. Abbiamo ascoltato ora la rappresentante del governo italiano – quelli che adesso sono al potere in Italia, quelli che in quest'Aula hanno votato contro la riforma del sistema di Dublino, quelli che la settimana scorsa con il loro Ministro Salvini hanno affossato definitivamente in Consiglio la riforma di Dublino – dirci che è un problema dell'immigrazione in Italia.

Cara Presidente, io chiederei alla collega Ferrara quali solo le intenzioni del governo italiano la prossima settimana? Avete affossato Dublino la settimana scorsa, pensate di resuscitarlo questa settimana? Vergogna!

  Laura Ferrara (EFDD), risposta a una domanda "cartellino blu". – Ringrazio il collega Danti e restituisco immediatamente al mittente la vergogna, perché fossi in lei mi vergognerei molto nel non sapere quale sia stata la proposta del Consiglio europeo che penalizzava ulteriormente l'Italia e il motivo per il quale il Movimento 5 Stelle ha votato contro la posizione invece del Parlamento europeo. Una soluzione di compromesso che non vedeva un ricollocamento dei richiedenti asilo automatico, ma era un ricollocamento filtrato, filtrato da procedure di verifica sulla sicurezza e sul merito della domanda.

Noi invece vogliamo un ricollocamento automatico ed obbligatorio. Quindi stia tranquillo che noi le idee le abbiamo ben chiare, probabilmente siete voi che non le avete chiare e lo avete dimostrato con i vostri anni di governo finora in Italia.

  Mario Borghezio (ENF). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, bisognerebbe fare un monumento al Ministro degli interni Salvini e a tutto il governo italiano per aver gettato un sasso nello stagno, visto che finalmente ha provocato questa discussione e l'invito del nostro Presidente – al quale mi associo – perché il Consiglio adotti finalmente una decisione e si decida ad affrontare seriamente in fondo il problema dell'immigrazione.

Un monumento perché ha svegliato quest'Europa assente, disattenta e anche ipocrita, ipocrita perché siete per l'accoglienza, ma l'accoglienza da fare nelle case degli italiani, e gli italiani hanno ripreso la loro sovranità con questo governo, che non è né razzista né xenofobo visto che assiste i minori e le donne incinte molto meglio di quello, cioè niente, che avete fatto voi fino adesso.

Allora non facciamo il solito pateracchio nel prossimo Consiglio, ma esaminiamo delle soluzioni di decisione per non lasciare nessun paese come l'Italia nel dramma dell'immigrazione, esaminando per esempio la proposta che è stata formulata – a cui mi associo – di creare dei centri di accoglienza fuori dai confini dell'Europa per assicurare un filtro di coloro che meritano di essere accolti perché hanno diritto all'asilo e respingere quell'immigrazione economica che non è nell'interesse dell'Europa e che interessa forse solo a grandi interessi dei vostri amici...

(Il Presidente interrompe l'oratore)

  Bruno Gollnisch (NI). – Madame la Présidente, la hausse unilatérale des droits de douane sur l’acier et l’aluminium et le camouflet du président Trump au G7 vous ramènent enfin aux réalités. Enfin on entend dire ici qu’il faut nous affranchir de la tutelle américaine, jusqu’ici considérée par beaucoup comme bien confortable. Mais j’y croirai quand nous quitterons enfin l’OTAN, dont l’existence ne se justifie plus. J’y croirai surtout quand vous renoncerez au libre-échange négocié avec le monde entier pour revenir au principe de réciprocité inclus dans la charte de La Havane de 1948.

Quant à votre politique migratoire, j’y croirai quand l’examen des demandes d’asile se fera exclusivement à partir des pays d’origine et non dans nos pays, où toutes les mesures prises jusqu’ici ont eu l’effet d’un appel d’air pour de nouveaux flux d’arrivants. M. Bullmann et d’autres orateurs nous parlent des femmes enceintes et des enfants qui errent sur un bateau en Méditerranée; ce n’est pas M. Salvini qui est responsable de cette situation, ce sont plutôt les propos de Mme Merkel et les vôtres qui les incitent à risquer leur vie.

Quant au discours sur les droits de l’homme, j’y croirai quand les vrais réfugiés politiques, comme Edward Snowden ou Julian Assange, seront bienvenus dans l’Union européenne.

  Elisabetta Gardini (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, non mi voglio soffermare sul Mediterraneo perché abbiamo domani il dibattito su questo, ma vorrei soltanto dire che resto un po' sorpresa quando mi sembra di vedere tanto entusiasmo nel proteggere il diritto all'immigrazione, che è un sacrosanto diritto, ma molta reticenza quando qualcuno invece vorrebbe proteggere il primario diritto di ogni persona a vivere nella sua patria e a non emigrare. Quindi qui mi nasce qualche sospetto.

Detto questo, io penso davvero che il Consiglio debba fare una seria riflessione su come sta procedendo su tanti aspetti. Noi qui in Parlamento facciamo tanto lavoro e riusciamo a trovare delle sintesi, riusciamo a trovare delle soluzioni che spesso naufragano, quelle sì affogano, all'interno delle discussioni di un Consiglio che è bloccato nelle posizioni rigide di paesi che non riescono invece a trovare altrettanto una sintesi.

Io vedo tante cose che non funzionano. Qui abbiamo lavorato tanto per il PNR. PNR che però, anche se verrà attualizzato, con i buchi che ci sono nei vari paesi, sarà una coperta piena di buchi. Abbiamo lavorato per mettere in piedi qualcosa che costa al contribuente e che sarà una coperta piena di buchi. Stessa cosa per la interoperabilità tra le varie banche dati. Inutile avere tante banche dati, se poi non parlano tra di loro e anche qui tanti soldi del contribuente che forse non sono messi così a frutto.

La sicurezza è il primo tema per i cittadini, ma se vogliamo davvero coniugarlo con i nostri valori ascolti quanto ha detto prima il Presidente del Parlamento Tajani: date attuazione alla riforma del regolamento di Dublino votata dal Parlamento, miglioratela casomai, ma non fate quei passi indietro indecenti, indecorosi, che umiliano l'Unione europea e tutti i suoi cittadini.

Lei ha anche accennato alla protezione civile. Abbiamo lavorato a spron battuto, con un'agenda fitta, lei lo sa, per rafforzare la protezione civile e dare sicurezza ai nostri cittadini anche su questo fronte. Sembra che il Consiglio ancora non sia pronto per il negoziato. Ancora una volta, noi lavoriamo e voi rallentate. Non ve lo potete permettere.

  Josef Weidenholzer (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin! In den letzten Jahren gab es kaum einen Gipfel, der sich nicht mit dem Thema Flucht und Migration beschäftigt hätte. Das könnte man grundsätzlich als Indiz dafür betrachten, wie wichtig den Mitgliedstaaten eine Lösung der Frage ist. Wenn dem aber so wäre, dann müsste jedem Gipfel eine Serie von Maßnahmen folgen. Das ist leider nicht der Fall. Die ungelösten Probleme werden von Mal zu Mal mehr. Und wenn einmal etwas geschieht, dann wird es noch dazu schlecht kommuniziert.

Das alles hat bei der Bevölkerung ein Gefühl der Unsicherheit entstehen lassen, und viele Menschen fühlen sich von Europa im Stich gelassen. Es hat den Anschein, dass dieser Zustand manchen Regierenden gar nicht so unrecht ist, weil das Spiel mit der Angst schon längst zum erfolgreichen politischen Geschäftsmodell geworden ist. Das gefährdet aber langfristig die Existenz des europäischen Projekts, und es ist daher notwendig, dass die Staats- und Regierungschefs endlich diesen unerträglichen Lähmungszustand überwinden und sich mit uns auf konstruktive Verhandlungen über das Asylpaket einlassen. Wenn das wieder nicht passiert, dann sollten wir zu rechtlichen Schritten greifen.

  Bernd Kölmel (ECR). – Frau Präsidentin! Die nächste Ratssitzung sollte sich unbedingt mit der Eurokrise beschäftigen. Wir hören jetzt seit Jahren von unverantwortlichen Politikern, der Euro sei gerettet, der Euro sei eine Erfolgsgeschichte. Das ist glatt gelogen! Die Bürger Europas werden hier angelogen: Die Eurokrise ist mehr denn je da. Wir sehen das ganz aktuell an den Vorgängen in Italien, wo man sich zu Recht dagegen wehrt, dass der Euro ein Korsett anlegt, dem Italien nicht gewachsen ist. Der Euro wird derzeit künstlich am Leben gehalten durch eine Nullzinspolitik der Europäischen Zentralbank und Anleihekäufe. Das ist ein Betrug an den Sparern. Die Sparer werden um ihre Zinsen betrogen.

In diesem Parlament beschäftigen wir uns sehr intensiv und mit Recht damit, dass wir eine Million da oder dort ausgeben wollen. In dem sogenannten Verrechnungssystem TARGET2 im Euro werden jeden Monat Dutzende von Milliarden Euro an Garantien fällig, und kein Mensch beschäftigt sich damit. Dafür werden überhaupt keine Entscheidungen getroffen. Das ist nicht in Ordnung. Wir müssen uns endlich dieser Frage stellen und Ausstiegsszenarien schaffen, damit Länder den Euro geordnet verlassen können.

  Josep-Maria Terricabras (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, in the meeting of the Council at the end of the month, I hope that the Member States will take a more firm position on migration than they have done so far. Have they, for instance, the political will to effectively reform Dublin? We don’t need nice words with no real political content. What happened two days ago, against international law, with the boat in Italy and Malta is just the latest scandal in which the EU must intervene, if it still has the capacity of speaking on its own and wishes to be taken into account.

The reaction of Valencia or of Barcelona or of Corsica, offering themselves to receive those migrants in danger, is a good example of humanity and decent politics. I hope you will talk in your meeting about these things. I hope you will explicitly mention those who are not living up to their responsibilities and that you will mention those who feel responsible for the needs of others. Something is now clear and urgent. To talk about the future of Europe means to talk about the Europe of the future.

  Barbara Spinelli (GUE/NGL). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, premetto che concordo con l'inviato dell'ONU Cochetel: la solidarietà europea non va discussa mentre arriva una nave di migranti sofferenti; la priorità è dar loro subito il porto più sicuro, non farlo è illegale.

Al tempo stesso dobbiamo riconoscere che l'Italia resta il paese che per primo registra gli arrivi e che nessuna riforma di questa regola iniqua è in vista. Il blocco delle navi è frutto velenoso del blocco negoziale su Dublino IV e usa i migranti come ostaggi. Se il Consiglio europeo cercherà l'unanimità su Dublino, confermerà che c'è del marcio nell'Unione.

Al mio governo vorrei dire: fate propria la riforma del Parlamento; ha difetti, è vero, ma è la più avanzata possibile. Gran parte del Consiglio vuole ucciderla, guardatevi da alleati come Orban: non accetterà redistribuzione di quote, non è amico del governo italiano.

  Rolandas Paksas (EFDD). – Lyg skrajojantis olandas po Viduržemio jūrą blaškosi laivas nuo Libijos krantų. Jis ilgai negali plaukti į Europos Sąjungos uostus, nes nei viena Bendrijos šalis nebenori spręsti svetimų problemų, savų per akis. Kaip indėnų tamahaukas ore kasdien švytuoja kirvis, skelbiantis prekybos karą tarp Amerikos ir Europos Sąjungos. Vadinamąją teisės viršenybės politika nepatenkintos šalys savo „nesutinku“ reiškia vis garsiau. Laukia nesutarimai dėl naujojo Europos Sąjungos biudžeto po dvidešimtųjų. Apie visa tai bus kalbama, diskutuojama Tarybos posėdyje, tačiau vėl tik padiskutuota, nusifotografuota, ir vėl iki kito posėdžio. Lietuvos ir, manau, kitų Europos valstybių piliečiams reikia ne fotografijų, reikia gerų, ryžtingų sprendimų, o ne diskusijos dėl diskusijos.

  Janice Atkinson (ENF). – Madam President, you lot had better wake up. The world is moving on while you still sit there and discuss the same old thing, month after month after month. Trump and Kim: let’s celebrate it. Austria, Italy, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia: they’re all moving on. Your regime has become more and more irrelevant.

In London on Saturday, 20 000 people attended a rally to free political prisoner Tommy Robinson, and those 20 000 people supported Brexit. In May, another 10 000 people marched in support of free speech. They too support Brexit. 17.4 million people voted for Brexit. They still support Brexit. The majority of the people want the government to get on with Brexit.

You people entertain UK remoaners – the modern—day devil, George Soros: a foreigner kicked out of his own country, an open—borders billionaire who openly fights democracy. He openly pays MEPs to dance to his tune. You’re all suffering from DDD – democracy deficit disorder – and that’s why we’re marching again in London on 23 June. We want our country back.

  President. – Ms Atkinson, you are going too fast.

  Janice Atkinson (ENF). – Don’t cut me off.

  President. – Could I just ask – can you listen? Because I think we can both speak English, so we can be very clear. What I was trying to do was help you communicate. You are going far too fast for the interpreters.

  Janice Atkinson (ENF). – Yes, but do you know, I’m not speaking to all of them in here; I’m speaking to the UK. I’m speaking to Mrs May. I wasn’t sent here to talk to any of you. I was sent here to defend the British people.

Most of you understand English. English is the language of the world. English is the language of this Parliament.

  President. – Ok, let’s calm down. Could I ask you, Madam, to sit down, with respect, and could I just say to you, as somebody who speaks very clear English: in this Chamber we are all elected by citizens, and the one remark that I had some concern about was your opening line, where you said ‘You lot’. Because, as far as I am concerned, we are all elected by citizens to represent our citizens’ many points of view. Thank you for your contribution.

Colleagues, please, there’s no need for this. Stay calm. Madam is leaving the Chamber. Thank you and good morning.

  Steven Woolfe (NI). – Madam President, a class war is being waged across the United Kingdom and Europe, a class war that pits the snobbish sect of the upper classes against the working and unemployed masses. A snobbish sect that thinks the lower classes are too thick, too dumb, too stupid, for voting for populists and Brexit. A snobbish sect that pits the young against the old, the rich against the poor, the university-educated against those that didn’t go to university. A snobbish sect that have bribed and cajoled academics to support the EU with grants and awards, that have bribed lobbyist think-tanks and corporations with EU funding and subsidies and provided politicians with money and positions. A snobbish sect that today will unleash their crony cohorts of politicians in the UK Parliament to overthrow the Brexit bill. Well I hope those crony MPs and MEPs enjoy their 50 pieces of euro silver as they dump on the face of democracy and seek to deny Brexit.

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

  Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D), blue-card question. – Madam President, it seems that Mr Woolfe and Ms Atkinson are speaking only to the UK, to Mrs May and to the British people. Why are you here within the European Parliament? You should have to go home to speak, because here you speak to the Europeans, you speak to all the European Union countries and people. Why don’t you go home? Probably, it might be time.

  Steven Woolfe (NI), blue-card answer. – Madam President, I will be going home at the end of March 2019, thanks to the 17.4 million people that decided Brexit was a brighter future for Britain outside of the European Union. But I also do speak for those people up there who understand that there is a class war going on in Europe as well. A class war that is seeking to deny those who have been voted in in Poland and Hungary, in Slovenia. Those people who have voted for those in Germany in the AfD; for those in Holland, those in France, those who seek a different future for Europe, not an […]orientated future…

(Microphone suddenly cuts out)

… that you, and many MEPs in this Chamber, support.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE). – Senhora Presidente do Conselho, Senhor Vice-Presidente da Comissão, primeiro queria registar a forma como lamento aquilo que se está a passar no Mar Mediterrâneo. É absolutamente inaceitável aquilo a que assistimos. Não ouviram da minha parte uma condenação da Itália ou de Malta porque eu considero que os países - em particular a Grécia, a Itália, Malta, a Espanha - têm sido muito abandonados pela União Europeia no tratamento da questão da migração e, portanto, isso é uma responsabilidade coletiva dos 28. Nós não podemos deixar morrer seres humanos no Mar Mediterrâneo, nós temos de resolver esta questão de uma vez por todas.

Segundo ponto, queria chamar a atenção para que é essencial que o Conselho dê um sinal no avanço da reforma da zona euro para consolidar o projeto do euro, nomeadamente avançando definitivamente com a união bancária e avançando com um outro conjunto de reformas tendentes essencialmente a que haja um orçamento para a zona euro que permitam tornar esta moeda uma moeda amigável para todas as economias que fazem parte da moeda única.

Queria também dizer que é fundamental ser bastante firme na questão do Brexit e, nomeadamente na questão da fronteira irlandesa. Este é um ponto essencial que terá, aliás, desenvolvimentos esta semana, mesmo hoje no parlamento britânico.

Finalmente, já que o Sr. Vice-Presidente tocou no assunto, permita-me falar sobre as perspetivas financeiras. É inaceitável que haja uma política de coesão e convergência em que um país como a Lituânia perde 23% dos fundos e um país como a Finlândia recebe 5, um país como a Itália sobe 6 e um país como a Croácia perde 6. Isto não é convergência, isto não é coesão, isto é o contrário da convergência e da coesão, isto não pode ser aceite.

  President. – Apologies to Mr Jurek: you had indicated during the speaking time, so you have the floor for a point of order.

  Marek Jurek (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Artykuł 11 ustęp 3 Regulaminu zobowiązuje nas do wzajemnego szacunku posłów wobec posłów, ale tym bardziej do szacunku dla naszych wyborców.

Pani Przewodnicząca zwróciła uwagę pani poseł Atkinson, ale pan poseł Frunzulică, reagując na wystąpienie naszego kolegi posła Woolfe’a, zakwestionował legitymizm posłów reprezentujących wyborców brytyjskich, którzy głosowali za brexitem. Oni są dzisiaj ciągle takimi samymi obywatelami państwa Unii Europejskiej jak każdy. Jeżeli odmawiamy im prawa do reprezentacji, negujemy demokratyczny charakter Unii Europejskiej. Dlatego proszę Panią Przewodniczącą o reagowanie na tego typu antydemokratyczne wypowiedzi nacechowane zresztą brakiem szacunku, do którego zobowiązuje nas regulamin.

  President. – Mr Jurek, thank you for your point. The question allowed the speaker, Mr Woolfe, to respond, and he did so in due time. So I think we had quite a frank exchange, but thank you for your point.

  Elena Valenciano (S&D). –Señora presidenta, hemos llegado a un punto tan bajo en la gestión de la migración en Europa que una decisión humana, solidaria, inteligente y acorde con el Derecho internacional, como es la que ha adoptado el presidente del Gobierno de España, Pedro Sánchez, es una excepción que nos llena de esperanza.

Es verdad, como decían otros colegas, que en Italia, España, Grecia y Malta estamos solos en la gestión de la migración. Eso es cierto, pero al señor Salvini le decimos que la crueldad con otros seres humanos nunca puede ser una victoria.

Necesitamos hacer una política coordinada, y llevamos diciéndolo en este Parlamento años. Y al Consejo tenemos que decirle: «No hacen ustedes nada». Sí, hacen una cosa: darle gasolina a los xenófobos en Europa. La inacción del Consejo está convirtiendo la xenofobia en una galopada política incesante.

Hagan algo. Este Parlamento les ha dicho cómo tienen que reformar el Reglamento de Dublín. Hagan algo, porque este está siendo el principal problema de Europa: están socavando la credibilidad del proyecto y dándoles alas a todos los xenófobos y antieuropeos. Hagan algo, y felicitemos al Gobierno español por haber sido capaz de conectar con el sentimiento de muchos europeos solidarios.

(La oradora se niega a que se le formule una pregunta con arreglo al procedimiento de la «tarjeta azul» (artículo 162, apartado 8, del Reglamento))

  Sander Loones (ECR). – Dank u wel, mevrouw de Voorzitter. Anderhalf jaar is een lange tijd in de Europese politiek. Anderhalf jaar geleden was meneer Verhofstadt aan het onderhandelen met meneer Beppe Grillo. Hij wilde de Italiaanse Vijfsterrenbeweging in zijn ALDE-fractie. Intussen lijkt de liefde wat te zijn bekoeld.

Anderhalf jaar geleden ging het alleen over spreiden, spreiden, spreiden van migranten, alsof dat dé oplossing zou zijn voor de asiel- en migratiecrisis. Intussen praten we ook over wat anders, praten wij over sterkere Europese grenzen, praten wij over push backs, praten wij over meer en betere opvang in de regio. Stukje bij beetje komen de inzichten, komt het gezond verstand, ziet men in dat dit de enige manier is om massamigratie te controleren, om mensenhandelaars te kraken, en om die verdrinkingen in de Middellandse Zee eindelijk te stoppen.

Dat inzicht komt er, bij de lidstaten tenminste, maar bij dit Europees Parlement helaas nog altijd veel te weinig. Daarom worden de volgende zes maanden zo cruciaal. Dan zit Oostenrijk de Europese Raad voor. Ik wens meneer Kurz alvast bijzonder veel succes om deze realistische agenda verder door te duwen in de toekomst.

  Νεοκλής Συλικιώτης (GUE/NGL). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, παρ’ όλες τις κατά καιρούς διακηρύξεις για κοινωνική Ευρώπη, για θέσεις απασχόλησης, για καταπολέμηση της ανεργίας, για ανάπτυξη, η Επιτροπή και το Συμβούλιο ακολουθούν πιστά την άγονη και αδιέξοδη νεοφιλελεύθερη πολιτική της λιτότητας και της απορρύθμισης των εργασιακών σχέσεων, τις πολιτικές που οδηγούν στη διάλυση του κοινωνικού κράτους, στη διεύρυνση των κοινωνικών και περιφερειακών ανισοτήτων, στη φτωχοποίηση και τη στρατιωτικοποίηση.

Περικόπτονται συνεχώς κονδύλια από προγράμματα στήριξης της αειφόρου ανάπτυξης και της κοινωνικής συνοχής, χρηματοδοτούνται μόνιμοι μηχανισμοί εσωτερικής τρόικας στα κράτη μέλη, χρηματοδοτείται το νέο ειδικό ταμείο για την άμυνα προς όφελος της κερδοφορίας των στρατιωτικών μονοπωλίων. Επίσης χρηματοδοτούνται νέοι φραγμοί στα σύνορα στην πορεία για την Ευρώπη-φρούριο.

Ως Ομάδα GUE επιμένουμε ότι για να επιτευχθεί ανάπτυξη και να δημιουργηθούν νέες θέσεις εργασίας χρειάζεται επενδυτική στροφή προς κοινωνικές επενδύσεις και προγράμματα, χρειάζονται δημόσιες μακροχρόνιες επενδύσεις που να δημιουργούν μόνιμες και αξιοπρεπείς θέσεις εργασίας, επενδύσεις στην πραγματική οικονομία για επαναβιομηχανοποίηση των περιοχών που έχουν ανάγκη, επενδύσεις που να προωθούν την κοινωνική ανάπτυξη και την αλληλεγγύη μεταξύ των λαών.

  Peter Lundgren (EFDD). – Fru talman! Brexit är en av punkterna i dag, och det för mig osökt in på budgeten där man totalt ignorerar det inkomstbortfall som uppstår när Storbritannien lämnar detta hus. Istället ska höga avgifter tas ut från kvarvarande medlemsländer och egna inkomster ska skapas i form av tullar och dylikt. För Sverige föreslås en höjning med 15 miljarder svenska kronor. Låt mig vara mycket tydlig när jag nu säger att svenska skattebetalare inte är intresserade av att betala ytterligare avgifter till detta hus. Vi kräver att EU tar ansvar för skattebetalarnas pengar och vi kräver att ni tar hänsyn till inkomstbortfallet som uppstår när Storbritannien lämnar. Görs inte det är det den svenska regeringens skyldighet och ansvar inför svenska folket att begära en omförhandling av avtalet då vi nu mest blir utnyttjade som en kassako av EU.

(Talaren godtog att besvara en fråga (”blått kort”) i enlighet med artikel 162.8 i arbetsordningen.)

  Maria Grapini (S&D), Întrebare adresată conform procedurii „cartonașului albastru”. – Stimate coleg, în intervenția dumneavoastră, ați spus că după Brexit vom avea un buget mai mic - și așa este - și ați făcut referire la faptul că statele membre, cetățenii, ar trebui să contribuie mai mult. Nu credeți că s-ar putea ca, prin măsuri foarte coerente, Comisia să găsească alte resurse pentru suplinirea bugetului pe ieșirea Brexit? De exemplu, evaziunea din TVA și evaziunea din neplata taxelor în cadrul pieței interne? Mulțumesc.

  Peter Lundgren (EFDD), svar ("blått kort"). – Tack för frågan. Nej, det anser jag inte. Vad gäller moms och skatter är det en klar och tydlig nationell kompetens; det är ingenting som ska ligga på detta huset. Och EU ska inte ens söka möjligheterna att ha egna inkomstkällor; EU ska förhålla sig till de pengar de får in via medlemsavgifter. Vad gäller Sveriges fall har vi alltid varit en nettobetalare. Jag anser inte att vi får ut vad vi ska av det avtalet och därför bör det omförhandlas.

  Harald Vilimsky (ENF). – Frau Präsidentin, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Ich darf zunächst meiner Freude Ausdruck verleihen, dass seit über fünf Monaten – mit einer stark steigenden Zustimmung aus der Bevölkerung – in Österreich eine Regierung am Arbeiten ist, die den illegalen Migrationsströmen endlich Einhalt gebietet, die Islamismus bekämpft, die Kriminalität bekämpft und diesen Migrationsströmen, die seit 2015 Richtung Europa unterwegs sind, von österreichischer Seite Einhalt gebietet.

Vor diesem Hintergrund ist es eine hervorragende Sache, dass auch in Italien eine Person aus unserem Parteienbündnis, Matteo Salvini, als Innenminister am Werken ist. Und Recht hat Matteo Salvini, wenn er den über 600 Personen auf der Aquarius, diesem Schiff, endlich Einhalt gebieten möchte und ihnen die Einreise nach Italien verwehrt. Schlüssel kann doch nur sein, dass die Menschen, die hier nach Europa strömen, vor Ort Hilfe erhalten. Und wenn Schiffe versuchen, nach Europa zu kommen, den Menschen zu helfen, ihnen Lebensmittel zu geben, Medikamente angedeihen zu lassen, aber sie wieder heimzubringen in den Ursprungshafen und dort in ihren Regionen Hilfe angedeihen zu lassen und nicht alle nach Europa zu holen. Das ist der falsche Weg.

  Ελευθέριος Συναδινός (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση έχει καταντήσει ουραγός των εξελίξεων, τις οποίες περισσότερο ακολουθεί παρά διαμορφώνει. Αποδεικνύεται από την αναμενόμενη, αλλά ελλιπώς προετοιμασμένη σύγκρουση με τις ΗΠΑ, στη σύνοδο των G7, τις άστοχες και καταστροφικές αντιδράσεις της στην περίπτωση της προσάρτησης της Κριμαίας από τη Ρωσία, τον χειρισμό της Τουρκίας στον εκβιασμό της με όπλο τη λαθρομετανάστευση, την αντιμετώπιση του Daesh με αποτέλεσμα την αύξηση της τρομοκρατίας.

Σε όλα αυτά έρχεται να προστεθεί και ο υπόγειος εκβιασμός μιας ανύπαρκτης πολιτικά, εγκληματικής εθνικά, αριστερίζουσας ελληνικής κυβέρνησης, που λέει σε όλους «ναι», μόνο και μόνο για να κρατηθεί στην εξουσία. Ένας εκβιασμός από πλευράς της Ένωσης μέσω της Γερμανίας όσον αφορά στο θέμα της ονομασίας των Σκοπίων, που προωθείται χωρίς να υπολογίζεται ότι οποιαδήποτε οικειοποίηση του ελληνικού ονόματος της Μακεδονίας ενδέχεται να πυροδοτήσει ένοπλες συγκρούσεις και αστάθεια στα Βαλκάνια.

Αν επιθυμούμε μια ενωμένη Ευρώπη δεν θα πρέπει να στηριζόμαστε στην αρχή «διαίρει και βασίλευε» προς όφελος οικονομικών συμφερόντων συγκεκριμένων χωρών, αλλά στις ανάγκες και απαιτήσεις των πολιτών μας.

  Dubravka Šuica (PPE). – Gospođo predsjedavajuća, puno je tema na sljedećem summitu, od Brexita, višegodišnjeg financijskog okvira, obrambene unije. Ali, ipak mi se čini da tema koja će dominirati tom sjednicom jest tema migracija. Migracije nas najviše trebaju zanimati i ja sam uvjerena da se niti jedna zemlja ne može nositi sama s tim problemom i stoga s ovog mjesta apeliram na Europsko vijeće da se konačno upusti u donošenje Dublinske reforme i pravila za azil.

Veliki se problemi, to smo svi vidjeli, pojavljuju u Italiji, ali imate probleme ponovno i na tzv. balkanskoj ruti, imate probleme kroz Bosnu i Hercegovinu, gdje se događaju nove migracije i dolaze na granice Hrvatske. Vi znate da je Hrvatska država s 1300 kilometara vanjske granice Europske unije, a istovremeno imamo žicu na mađarskoj granici, na austrijskog granici, na slovenskoj granici. Mi mislimo da žica nije rješenje, stoga je potrebno da zajedno rješavamo taj problem putem sistema azila.

Isto tako mi se čini da je Schengen jako poljuljan. Ako mi stavljamo provjere unutar schengenskih granica, onda je istovremeno poljuljana cijela Unija. Stoga mislim da je rješenje da konačno i Hrvatska dobije političku privolu zajedno s Rumunjskom i Bugarskom da uđe u schengenski prostor i da na taj način zajedno rješavamo probleme. U svakom slučaju migracije će biti dominantna tema, ali se očekuje puno jači angažman od strane Vijeća i da se konačno Dublinska pravila donesu u skladu s onim što je Parlament već prije donio.

  Patrizia Toia (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, dico al Consiglio, con modo molto accorato: se non siete completamente incoscienti – e lo dico anche alla Commissione – voi avete il dovere, al vertice di giugno, di dare qualche risposta concreta per quanto riguarda almeno l'immigrazione, prendete una decisione.

Volete dare risposte – e il Parlamento in questo senso ha posto un punto fermo con la riforma del vertice di Dublino – o volete aspettare che tutti i governi populisti come in Italia reggano i loro conti, facciano campagna elettorale permanente, senza badare a un minimo di civiltà, a un minimo di valori, e prendendo in ostaggio la vita delle persone nel Mediterraneo, come stanno facendo, o portando persone a 1 400 chilometri di distanza? Guardate la cartina geografica: dove dista la località della nave al porto di Valencia?

È possibile questo? E di chi è anche la responsabilità? Loro, di quelli che fanno questa finta politica, queste vittorie di Pirro, ma è anche vostra. Se continuerete a non guardare la realtà, se non avete dato risposta agli appelli che abbiamo fatto, alle azioni parlamentari, alle azioni politiche che il precedente governo e noi parlamentari italiani abbiamo fatto, voi soccomberete sotto questa durezza, sotto chi usa gli esseri umani come pressione, vorrei dire come pallottole umane, con una pistola puntata contro l'Europa, quell'Europa in cui crediamo.

Noi non soccomberemo a questa deriva culturale e sociale. Però bisogna che questa Europa si metta in moto e che il Consiglio faccia la sua parte adesso, a giugno, e nella giusta direzione.

  Jussi Halla-aho (ECR). – Madam President, the Dublin reform should be forgotten. Distributing asylum seekers hasn’t worked and will not work. It only encourages more migration from sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere.

Recently, Italy refused entry to an NGO boat full of migrants. That was the right thing to do. In the Mediterranean, we are seeing a repetition of what happened at land borders in 2015. First, one Member State finds the courage to do the right thing and close the border, next that Member State is heavily criticised by everyone else. Finally, other Member States do exactly the same thing.

Systematic pushbacks at external borders, better returns policy and strict adherence to the first safe country principle are the only realistic way forward. Our obsession with relocation only postpones decisions that are both necessary and inevitable.

  Λευτέρης Χριστοφόρου (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, εμείς πιστεύουμε συνειδητά στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Πιστεύουμε στη δύναμη, στις δυνατότητες, στις αξίες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και θεωρούμε ότι χωρίς την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση η Ευρώπη δεν έχει μέλλον, δεν έχουν μέλλον ούτε οι λαοί ούτε οι χώρες μέλη της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Εμείς πιστεύουμε ότι η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση είναι το παρόν και το μέλλον όλων μας, γι’ αυτό την προασπιζόμαστε με όλες μας τις δυνάμεις. Όμως απαραίτητη προϋπόθεση για να συνεχίσουμε να έχουμε ισχυρή, δυνατή, αλληλέγγυη, αξιόπιστη Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση είναι να σέβεται η ίδια η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση τις αρχές και τις αξίες της.

Πολύ ορθά η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση επέβαλε κυρώσεις σε χώρες που δεν εφαρμόζουν τις αρχές, τις αξίες και τους κανόνες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Την ίδια στιγμή, όμως, από το 2005 χρηματοδοτεί με δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ μια χώρα η οποία παραβιάζει όλες τις αρχές του διεθνούς και ευρωπαϊκού δικαίου, μια χώρα που δεν αναγνωρίζει χώρα μέλος της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, την Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία, μια χώρα που σήμερα που ομιλούμε παραβιάζει ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα, απειλεί χώρες μέλη της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, την Ελλάδα και την Κύπρο, ενώ πρόσφατα απείλησε την Αυστρία αλλά και όλη την Ευρώπη με θρησκευτικό πόλεμο. Και εμείς συνεχίζουμε να την επιβραβεύουμε. Με αυτό τον τρόπο όμως η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση χάνει ουσιαστικά την αξιοπιστία της, τη δύναμή της, τις αρχές και τις αξίες της.

Αγαπητέ φίλε, αντιπρόεδρε της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής, κύριε Timmermans, εσείς ζήσατε την τουρκική αδιαλλαξία και προκλητικότητα και στο Crans-Montana, όπου εκεί πολύ ορθά υπερασπιστήκατε τις θέσεις του Προέδρου της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας Νίκου Αναστασιάδη ότι στην Κύπρο πρέπει να εφαρμοστεί το ευρωπαϊκό κεκτημένο, να αποχωρήσουν τα στρατεύματα, να καταργηθούν οι εγγυήσεις και τα επεμβατικά δικαιώματα. Μπορεί η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση να συνεχίζει να ανέχεται αυτή τη στάση και τη συμπεριφορά της Τουρκίας; Το ίδιο ερώτημα θέλω να απευθύνω και στο Ευρωπαϊκό Συμβούλιο, το οποίο επιτέλους πρέπει να αναλάβει την ευθύνη του και να διασφαλίσει στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση τον σεβασμό των αρχών και των αξιών της, εφαρμόζοντας τους νόμους και τους κανόνες για όλες τις χώρες.

  Sylvie Guillaume (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, tous les Conseils européens sont importants, mais celui de juin présente un caractère particulier. Il s’agit de l’ultime occasion de démontrer que l’Europe refuse de rester paralysée face à la question migratoire. C’est une question de crédibilité pour les 28, c’est leur responsabilité.

Le sujet sur lequel le Conseil doit sortir de l’ornière est la révision du règlement Dublin, tout le monde en a convenu aujourd’hui.

Nous y sommes parvenus au Parlement, alors que nous sommes bien plus nombreux et quelquefois bien plus divers, donc cela n’est pas une mission impossible. Mais pour cela, il faut que les chefs d’État cessent de se voiler la face. Les migrations ne vont pas s’arrêter du jour au lendemain, et ils sont dans l’obligation de trouver une solution partagée, sinon ce qui va se passer est assez simple: chaque État membre proche d’une route migratoire va continuer de dépenser son énergie à repousser les personnes de l’autre côté de la frontière ou bien en mer, sans trouver – ni même chercher, d’ailleurs – de réponse structurelle.

Dans ce contexte, il est assez clair que les élections européennes de 2019 seront le théâtre d’une exploitation politique hystérique du sujet de l’immigration, au détriment de tous les autres, et d’une certaine manière, je suis désolée, c’est aussi ce qui s’est passé aujourd’hui.

  Birgit Sippel (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin! Wie privat, wie geschützt ist unsere Kommunikation? Die Vertraulichkeit von Kommunikation ist ein Grundrecht, und mit der sogenannten – anderes Thema – ePrivacy-Verordnung soll dies endlich auch im digitalen Umfeld gelten. Das Parlament ist seit Herbst 2017 startklar, doch die Mitgliedstaaten im Rat stehen auf der Bremse, auch nach den Enthüllungen um Cambridge Analytica und millionenfachen Datenmissbrauch. Ein Termin letzten Freitag brachte wieder kein Ergebnis.

Der Rat lässt sich von den großen Konzernen beeinflussen und verhindert damit klare Regelungen auch für Plattformen wie Facebook. Privatsphäre und Grundrechte für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger scheinen für den Rat nicht von Bedeutung. Deshalb meine klare Aufforderung an die Regierungen: Bevor Sie sich in immer neue andere Gesetzgebungen stürzen, liefern Sie endlich auch Ergebnisse zu ePrivacy, zum Schutz von Kommunikation und letztlich Demokratie!

  Iratxe García Pérez (S&D). – Señora presidenta, hoy la vida de más de 600 personas corre peligro: niños y niñas —más de 120 menores no acompañados—, mujeres y hombres que llaman a las puertas de Europa huyendo de la guerra y del hambre. Y, ante esta realidad, la actitud del Gobierno italiano, negándose al rescate, muestra la cara más oscura de Europa: la que mira a otro lado, la que hace del populismo y de la xenofobia un peligro para Europa. Al señor Salvini habrá que recordarle que, por mucha victoria que cante, hay algo que no podrá recuperar y es la decencia y la dignidad.

Pero hay un espacio para la esperanza, y el Gobierno de España se ofrece a acoger a estas personas, cumpliendo compromisos internacionales y respondiendo ante una crisis humanitaria. Y con ello se gana la autoridad moral de exigir en el Consejo más política europea al respecto.

Hay quien se siente patriota por envolverse en una bandera. Hoy somos muchos más los que sentimos orgullo de país, orgullo de una España solidaria que atiende a quien más lo necesita.

  Richard Corbett (S&D). – Madam President, there are only three weeks to go to the next European Council, but there is no sign that the British will be at all ready for the discussion that will take place there on Brexit. Two years after the referendum, it does not even have a starting position for the negotiations as regards a key issue such as what kind of customs arrangements we might have for a future. It has now promised a white paper to set out its vision for the future, which will only be published after the European Council, well after two years after the referendum.

Only yesterday, Theresa May was forced to plead with her own Conservative MPs not to vote against her in the key votes that will take place today in the British House of Commons and tomorrow. She is desperately trying to avoid defeat at the hands of her own MPs. Personally, I hope enough of them will put country before career, patriotism before party and Britain before a bad Brexit.

  Elly Schlein (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, cari governi, sono due anni che avete la riforma di Dublino sul tavolo, è vergognoso che ancora non troviate accordo sulla solidarietà interna. I vostri egoismi tengono in ostaggio l'Unione. Il 28 giugno al Consiglio prendete esempio da questo Parlamento che, dopo un lungo negoziato, ha votato con una maggioranza storica per cancellare il criterio del primo paese di accesso e sostituirlo con il ricollocamento automatico che obblighi tutti i paesi europei a fare la propria parte.

La solidarietà finanziaria non basta e non accetteremo di negoziare i dossier che volete, senza cambiare Dublino. La vostra inerzia ha aperto le porte al rigurgito nazionalista e fascista nei nostri paesi. Presidente Macron, Cancelliera Merkel, se non volete che il vostro europeismo sia solo di facciata, sostenete la nostra proposta al Consiglio, l'unica davvero europea. Presidente Orban, non si possono volere solo i benefici di far parte dell'Unione senza mai condividere le responsabilità.

E il governo italiano la smetta di essere vigliacco: la battaglia si fa al Consiglio e non sulla pelle delle persone in mare. È il momento di dare sostanza alla solidarietà. Il tempo è scaduto e vi ricordo che tutti avete firmato i trattati che implicano il principio di solidarietà e di equa condivisione delle responsabilità.

  Knut Fleckenstein (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Themenwechsel: Der Rat wird sich auch mit dem westlichen Balkan beschäftigen, und wir sollten von hier aus noch einmal deutlich machen: Unserer Meinung nach ist es Zeit zum Handeln. In Mazedonien weht ein neuer Wind – der Vertrag mit Bulgarien hat es gezeigt –, und wir sollten uns anerkennend zeigen gegenüber dem, was die Regierung Tsipras und die Regierung Zaev an ernsthaftem Bemühen zeigen, um die Namensfrage zu lösen. In Albanien gibt es deutliche Fortschritte, und wenn es um Rechtsstaatlichkeit geht, entwickelt sich hier einiges besser als anderswo, auch in der EU.

Jetzt liegt es an uns, Wort zu halten. Eröffnen Sie die Verhandlungen mit diesen beiden Staaten! Eröffnen Sie neue Kapitel mit Serbien und Montenegro! Und denken Sie in diesem Sommer auch daran, dass Kosovo seine Bedingungen erfüllt hat, um Visafreiheit zu bekommen.

Parallel dazu müssen wir die EU reformieren – das wissen wir alle. Aber man kann es parallel tun, weil der Start von Verhandlungen ja nicht bedeutet, dass man automatisch hineinkommt und dass das sehr kurz sein wird. Der Rat muss jetzt beweisen, dass wir es ernst meinen, dass wir die Menschen aus dem westlichen Balkan wollen. Sie haben es verdient. Alle 15 Jahre ein Balkangipfel reicht auf jeden Fall nicht.

  Mercedes Bresso (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il problema dell'Unione europea è la lentezza nel decidere. Occorre che gli Stati membri se ne rendano conto e accettino di votare sempre a maggioranza, quando ciò è già possibile, e che utilizzino la clausola passerella, cioè il passaggio al voto a maggioranza in tutte le materie per le quali oggi si applica la regola dell'unanimità. Altrimenti non si riuscirà mai a decidere e noi abbiamo bisogno di un'Europa capace di decidere.

I temi sono molti. Prima di tutto, lo hanno ricordato quasi tutti i colleghi, il nuovo regolamento di Dublino. In secondo luogo, abbiamo bisogno che si decida sulle risorse proprie, che non sono sufficienti – la proposta della Commissione, peraltro avversata, non è sufficiente – e su un livello adeguato per il bilancio dell'Unione. Abbiamo bisogno che si decida su un pacchetto di politiche per la zona euro e, infine, vorremmo sapere, lo chiedo soprattutto al Vicepresidente Timmermans, i tempi e i modi per realizzare in modo il più possibile completo la roadmap sul futuro dell'Unione.

  Pier Antonio Panzeri (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, un grande pensatore moderno, Antonio Gramsci, nel 1930 dal carcere, descrivendo ciò che stava avvenendo in Italia e in Europa, scriveva che, quando il vecchio mondo muore e quello nuovo tarda a comparire, è proprio in questo chiaroscuro che nascono i mostri. Ed è un po' quello che sta avvenendo, e non per caso, in questo nostro vecchio continente e non ce ne stiamo accorgendo a sufficienza.

Mi preoccupa la cecità della classe dirigente europea, mi preoccupa l'indifferenza della politica europea, mi preoccupa la disarmante normalità dell'azione del Consiglio dinanzi a questi cambiamenti straordinari.

Cara rappresentante del Consiglio, Aquarius è semplicemente la punta dell'iceberg verso il quale sta puntando il Titanic europeo. Non c'è molto tempo per cambiare rotta e non farlo vi renderà storicamente responsabili di questa pericolosa deriva europea.

  Pervenche Berès (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le vice-Président, Madame la représentante du Conseil, le Parlement européen respecte l’existence du Conseil européen, de fait, mais j’ai l’impression que la réciproque n’est pas toujours vraie.

Vu l’enjeu de ce Conseil européen, je m’étonne quand même que M. Donald Tusk ne juge jamais utile de venir échanger avec la représentation parlementaire.

Car dans quel contexte sommes-nous? Nous venons de vivre un G7 où le président Trump semble ignorer ce qu’est la solidarité transatlantique ou même la bonne coopération transatlantique. Nous sommes dans un contexte où Mme Theresa May, après avoir pris la tête d’un gouvernement chargé d’organiser le Brexit, est incapable de dire ce qu’elle veut pour le futur de son pays. Tout cela fait peser sur l’avenir européen une responsabilité immense alors que ce Conseil devra traiter à la fois des questions de migration, de la question de la réforme de la zone euro et de la question de la défense.

Nous souhaiterions donc savoir comment M. Tusk compte proposer une feuille de route sur le futur de l’Union européenne pour obtenir un bon accord au regard de ces trois éléments indispensables, pour que chacun de nos concitoyens puisse continuer à avoir confiance en l’Union européenne et ne lui tourne pas le dos, comme nous venons de le voir en Italie.

Catch-the-eye procedure

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Paní předsedající, Rada má na svém programu několik témat, ale já se domnívám, že by se především měla věnovat otázce řešení migrace. Pokud skutečně chceme zastavit nárůst populismu a nárůst extremismu v členských státech.

Chci se tedy zeptat, EP přehlasoval menšinu, která nesouhlasila se zprávou LIBE v otázce společného azylového systému, tzv. Dublinu IV. Já se chci zeptat, kam míří Rada, jestli i Rada hodlá hlasovat o této otázce kvalifikovanou většinou. Jestli i Rada hodlá přehlasovat ty, kteří nesouhlasí a jsou v této věci zatím v menšině a chtějí stanovisko, které bude konsensuální, které nebude nátlakové a které bude řešit otázku migrace tak, aby zde byla flexibilní solidarita.

  Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il nuovo governo italiano ha chiuso i porti e non ha permesso l'attracco di una nave, l'Aquarius, con 630 persone a bordo, tra cui donne incinte e bambini, speculando politicamente sulla pelle degli ultimi e degli indifesi. Ringrazio sentitamente la Spagna e il suo nuovo Premier Pedro Sánchez per il suo gesto.

Ma l'Italia è stata lasciata da sola per troppo tempo a far fronte al flusso migratorio dal resto degli Stati membri, raccogliendo solo belle parole. Anche l'aumento dei fondi destinati all'immigrazione nel prossimo bilancio non servirà a nulla in queste condizioni. Sempre più spesso sentiamo dire che la colpa è dell'Europa, che l'Europa deve fare qualcosa, che l'Europa ha lasciato soli i paesi del Mediterraneo, ma sappiamo bene che non è così. Sono gli Stati membri che, per interessi politici, paralizzano l'Europa di Schuman, di Adenauer e di De Gasperi.

Questo Parlamento ha approvato la riforma di Dublino da mesi. Il Consiglio deve rispondere subito e concretamente, perché nel frattempo esseri umani muoiono e le forze populiste avanzano.

  Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, οι τελευταίες εξελίξεις με αφορμή το πλοίο Aquarius έδειξαν ότι το Ευρωπαϊκό Συμβούλιο οφείλει να δράσει άμεσα για την αντιμετώπιση των αυξημένων μεταναστευτικών ροών. Και αυτό σημαίνει ότι πρέπει να καταργηθεί εδώ και τώρα το Δουβλίνο ΙΙΙ, που έχει μετατρέψει την Ελλάδα και την Ιταλία σε μια απέραντη αποθήκη ψυχών.

Η Ελλάδα δεν αντέχει άλλους πρόσφυγες και παράνομους μετανάστες. Τα νησιά του Αιγαίου και ο Έβρος έχουν πλημμυρίσει από χιλιάδες παράνομους μετανάστες. Όμως μέχρις ότου αποφασίσει να δράσει το Ευρωπαϊκό Συμβούλιο, η Ελλάδα πρέπει να ενεργοποιήσει το άρθρο 72 της Συνθήκης Λειτουργίας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης για λόγους δημόσιας τάξης και ασφάλειας και να αναστείλει τη λειτουργία του Δουβλίνου ΙΙΙ, καθώς και τη λειτουργία της Συμφωνίας Σένγκεν, για να πάψει επιτέλους η Ελλάδα να αποτελεί μαγνήτη για τους χιλιάδες πρόσφυγες και παράνομους μετανάστες τους οποίους ο Ερντογάν και οι δουλέμποροι διοχετεύουν στην πατρίδα μας.

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE). – Señora presidenta, el Consejo Europeo y los Estados deben responder a las peticiones de solidaridad de la inmensa mayoría de la ciudadanía europea, que no acepta que dejemos morir a la gente en la mar. El Gobierno español ha decidido recibir al «Aquarius», y el lehendakari vasco se ha ofrecido a acoger en el País Vasco al 10 % de esas personas por dignidad y respeto a los derechos fundamentales.

Euskadi es un país pequeño. La solidaridad acogió a los vascos cuando buscamos protección o quisimos superar la pobreza, y se la debemos a quienes ahora necesitan lo mismo. Por eso, cuando se efectuaron los primeros repartos de cuotas, el País Vasco ya organizó una respuesta interinstitucional operativa y efectiva para asumir nuestra parte. No ha podido aprovecharse hasta hoy porque nuestro Estado miembro, sencillamente, había incumplido sus obligaciones en esta materia.

Señora Panayotova: hay medios para resolver este problema, solo hay que movilizarlos. Falta decisión y coraje político para enfrentar con humanidad y solidaridad la xenofobia y el antieuropeísmo. Señor Timmermans: abrir las fronteras europeas es una decisión global, pero acoger e integrar a los inmigrantes es un desafío al que responden las comunidades locales y regionales. ¿Para cuándo cree usted que debe integrarse plenamente este nivel en el diseño de la solución a la inmigración?

(La presidenta retira la palabra a la oradora)

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, a União Europeia demonstra a sua verdadeira natureza. Os migrantes que se afundam no Mediterrâneo, embarcações em risco com mulheres grávidas e crianças embatem na fria desumanidade de quem opta por criminalizar as organizações humanitárias envolvidas nas operações de busca e salvamento.

Faltam recursos para a coesão, para apoiar o investimento nos países que dela mais necessitam, para apoiar o emprego com direitos e o combate às desigualdades e assimetrias, mas como o vai demonstrar o próximo Conselho Europeu não faltam recursos para o complexo militar industrial europeu, para reprimir as migrações e os migrantes, não faltam recursos para insuflar ainda mais os lucros das multinacionais das principais potências europeias, nem faltam as ditas reformas estruturais. Outra forma de dizer: retirada de direitos e privatização das funções sociais do Estado.

A anunciada reforma do euro não é senão outra forma de apertar mais as amarras que impedem o desenvolvimento soberano dos povos. Derrotar a UE para salvar a Europa é uma exigência com reforçada atualidade.

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. DAVID-MARIA SASSOLI
Vicepresidente

  Henna Virkkunen (PPE). – Arvoisa puhemies, edessä oleva kokous on erittäin tärkeä. Vuosi ennen EU-vaaleja on tärkeää, että pystytään edistämään kaikkia niitä asioita, joista olemme viime vuodet keskustelleet ja jotka ovat välttämättömiä Euroopan tulevaisuuden kannalta.

Olemme edistyneet hyvin joillakin sektoreilla, kuten EU:n puolustus- ja turvallisuusalalla. Siihen on nyt esitetty myös rahoituskehyksessä entistä enemmän varoja, ja tiedämme, että monet toimet tällä alalla ovat edenneet erittäin positiivisesti. On tarpeen, että Eurooppa ottaa enemmän itse vastuuta omasta puolustuksestaan, ja turvallisuus on yksi tärkeimmistä sektoreista, joilla meidän on edistyttävä.

Sen sijaan toivon, että tulevassa huippukokouksessa puhutaan myös hyvin vakavasti eurooppalaisesta arvopohjasta eli siitä, että unioniin liittyessämme olemme kaikki sitoutuneet Eurooppaan ja puolustamaan yhteisiä demokraattisia arvoja. Nyt osa jäsenmaista on liukumassa näistä huolestuttavasti pois. Tämä asia on otettava nyt vakavasti esille myös päämiesten huippukokouksessa.

On erittäin hyvä, että tulevaisuudessa myös jäsenmaiden rahoitus aiotaan sitoa oikeusvaltioperiaatteen noudattamiseen. Se on erittäin keskeistä Euroopan tulevaisuuden kannalta.

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, trebuie să vă spun că sunt de acord cu tot ceea ce ați specificat aici. Uniunea Europeană se află la o răscruce de drumuri. Dumneavoastră ați prezentat că, pentru prima dată din 1945, avem un președinte american care ignoră relația cu Uniunea Europeană. De asemenea, ați spus Consiliului că trebuie să fie hotărât. Suntem de acord aici.

Problema este că, dacă Consiliul își pune pe ordinea de zi - și am fost foarte atentă la ce ne-a prezentat reprezentantul Consiliului - atât de multe subiecte și toate foarte importante, nu cred că se poate lua vreo decizie. Și este important să luăm decizii.

Dumneavoastră ați anunțat că s-au amânat anumite lucruri. Membrii, reprezentanții statelor membre trebuie să țină cont de interesul Uniunii Europene dacă vrem să o mai avem, dacă vrem să nu avem eurosceptici, nu de interese naționale. Și cred că aici este cheia succesului în reglementările pe care le luăm. Pentru că, da, noi aici ajungem la un consens și suntem 751. Nu înțeleg cum nu pot 28 de state, 27 de state să ajungă la un consens în ceea ce privește un interes al Uniunii, al pieței interne, al comerțului nostru, al protejării lucrătorilor și tot ceea ce am discutat astăzi aici.

  Miriam Dalli (S&D). – Mr President, here I respectfully address Council. I for one have had enough of meaningless speeches about addressing the immigration issue during Council summits – but then you do nothing. Frustration is understandable, and I place the blame on those Member States who want to do nothing about the immigration issue. No Member State – except two, Malta and Ireland – fulfilled their allocation of quotas from Italy and Greece. With all due respect, where are the others? What solidarity do you believe in?

I commend Spain’s decision to step in in the MV Aquarius situation, but that ended only this particular situation. Because boat crossings from Libya will not stop, particularly in the summer, and they will most likely increase. So let’s see how interested the Member States are in actually addressing this issue and not continuing to put it on the back burner, because so far they have not been prioritising this at all, and instead they preferred to pass the buck from one to the other.

  Marek Jurek (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Wiceprzewodniczący Komisji, pan Timmermans, przewodniczący grup, panowie Weber i Verhofstadt, wymieniali długie listy problemów stojących przed Unią, które należy omówić na posiedzeniu Rady Europejskiej. Była mowa o imigracji, o euro, o handlu, tylko nikt nie powiedział – być może z wyjątkiem naszej koleżanki Anny Fotygi – o Nord Stream 2 i o agresywnej polityce energetycznej wobec co najmniej jednej czwartej państw leżących na wschodzie Unii Europejskiej. Kiedy Amerykanie wypowiedzieli umowę nuklearną z Iranem, przedsiębiorstwa europejskie zaczęły się martwić, czy nie powinny brać pod uwagę stanowiska rządu Stanów Zjednoczonych. Natomiast Unia Europejska dużo mówi o solidarności, a nie potrafi w najmniejszym stopniu nakłonić niemieckich przedsiębiorstw do tego, żeby respektowały politykę naszych niestety dosyć fikcyjnych sankcji.

  Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE). – Senhor Presidente, a Europa está à deriva porque é um navio que representa a vergonha, é um barco que leva à singradura na indiferença do poder. Quero dizer ao Conselho e à Comissão que demonstrem humanidade ao ouvirem os xenófobos e racistas deste parlamento. Querem ser cúmplices destas políticas desumanizadas? Querem ser cúmplices de Estados que olham para o outro lado enquanto 600 seres humanos podem morrer no meio do mar? Mulheres grávidas e crianças que poderiam ser nossos filhos? Queremos ser um cemitério no mar?

Acelerem o Regulamento de Dublim. Precisamos de regras comuns para os requerentes de asilo. É necessário dar uma ordem humanitária na Europa para salvar vidas.

É tão difícil entendê-lo quando esta câmara está cheia de xenófobos e racistas que não têm humanidade - e isso há que dizê-lo! E devemos ajudar precisamente por razões humanitárias, para evitar uma catástrofe e para devolver à Europa um mínimo de dignidade, um mínimo de dignidade!

  Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le vice-Président de la Commission, chers collègues, tout d’abord en ce qui concerne la discussion autour de la coopération Union européenne/OTAN et des orientations pour la poursuite des travaux sur la défense, je souhaiterais souligner que le partenariat stratégique entre l’Union européenne et l’OTAN est fondamental pour relever les défis de sécurité et que les actions de ces deux organisations devraient être davantage complémentaires sur le plan de la sécurité afin de mieux faire face aux nouveaux défis sans précédent et multiformes en la matière, à l’est et au sud.

Enfin, je souhaiterais rappeler, pour ce qui est des aspects liés à l’emploi, à la croissance et à la compétitivité, l’engagement de renforcer les efforts afin de faire aboutir, à la fin du cycle législatif actuel, la stratégie pour le marché unique, la stratégie pour un marché unique numérique, le plan d’action pour un marché des capitaux et l’union de l’énergie.

L’Union européenne doit continuer d’œuvrer à l’achèvement d’un marché unique pérenne et équitable adapté à l’ère numérique et facilitant la compétitivité, l’innovation, la durabilité et la cohésion européenne, car c’est assez important pour les pays de l’Europe centrale et orientale.

  Elmar Brok (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich bin etwas erstaunt über diese Debatte. Angesichts der Tatsache, dass wir durch die chinesische Politik und deren klare strategische, politische und wirtschaftliche Interessen weiter zurückgedrängt werden, der Kriegspolitik Putins, des Verhaltens von Trump reden die Rechten über die Auflösung der Europäischen Union, und die Linken haben auch kein Konzept.

Wir brauchen auf diesem Europäischen Rat Entscheidungen, wie es mit der Verteilungspolitik weitergeht, wie wir das Asylrecht hinbekommen, wie wir eine anständige Afrikapolitik hinbekommen und dass wir dies alles mit Geld bezahlen müssen; dass man hier eine klare Regelung bekommt. Und wir brauchen auch eine krisenfestere Europäische Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion.

Das sind Aufgaben, die wir im Reformprogramm lösen müssen, um den Themen zu begegnen und gleichzeitig in der Lage zu sein, unsere Bürger für dieses Europa zurückzugewinnen. Und diejenigen, die dieser Linie nicht folgen, rechts und ganz links, müssen wissen, dass sie ihre eigenen Völker an die Amerikaner, an die Russen und an die Chinesen verkaufen.

  Γεώργιος Επιτήδειος (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, αναμένεται ότι και αυτή τη φορά το Ευρωπαϊκό Συμβούλιο δεν θα λάβει ουσιαστικές αποφάσεις. Άλλωστε μας έχει συνηθίσει να προσεγγίζει τα σοβαρά θέματα όχι πραγματιστικά, αλλά με μια φιλοσοφική διάθεση και με ευχολόγια. Το ίδιο κάνει και με το σοβαρό θέμα της παράνομης μεταναστεύσεως. Αντί να λάβει αποφάσεις και μέτρα ώστε να πάψουν οι συνεχιζόμενες ροές κυρίως προς την Ιταλία και την Ελλάδα, παρακολουθεί με απάθεια την κατάσταση, βλέπει ορισμένα κράτη να κλείνουν τα σύνορά τους και αφήνει τις χώρες εισόδου να αντιμετωπίσουν μόνες τους το πρόβλημα.

Τώρα οι περισσότερες χώρες στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση κατηγορούν την Ιταλία διότι έκανε το αυτονόητο για να προστατεύσει τη χώρα. Πριν τρεις ημέρες, όμως, όταν ο Ερντογάν κατήγγειλε τη συμφωνία με την Ελλάδα για την επιστροφή κάποιων παρανόμων μεταναστών, ουδείς αντέδρασε. Ποιος έχει το δικαίωμα να μετατρέψει την Ελλάδα σε ένα απέραντο στρατόπεδο εξαθλιωμένων, παρανόμων μεταναστών; Και αν κάποια στιγμή η Ελλάδα λάβει μέτρα και κλείσει και αυτή τα σύνορά της, τότε τι θα συμβεί; Θα κατηγορηθεί η Ελλάδα ως ξενοφοβική;

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE). – Mr President, there’s a lot of talk about borders this morning in this debate, and – rightly so – around migration. I want to talk about a border that isn’t a border, much closer to my home in the Republic of Ireland, as it borders invisibly with Northern Ireland.

I have to say that, while I welcome a paper from the United Kingdom on their proposals for a temporary customs arrangement, it is, to say the least of it, insufficient and incomplete, and I am really troubled that time is marching on. But we have to have faith in politics, and we will watch the UK House of Commons with great interest this week.

I listened very carefully to the exchanges on Ms Dodds, and can I say to her very directly: there is no disrespect to her position; there is no annexation of Northern Ireland; and indeed to Martina Anderson, both of whom have left this Chamber: could they please sit down in an assembly in Northern Ireland and properly represent the people of Northern Ireland, so that their voices can be heard in this vital debate?

(Fine della procedura "catch the eye")

  Frans Timmermans, First Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, I have been listening very carefully to the debate on migration, and having dealt with this issue over the last four years, I try to formulate for myself why it has been impossible to find a solution so far at the European level. I think the answer lies in the concept of moral hazard. There is a lack of confidence between the Member States that the other state will do what they agreed to do to find a solution. Indeed, Italy and Greece for a very long time complained and said ‘you’re leaving us alone; we need to find a solution; Dublin doesn’t work; we’re swamped; we’re overwhelmed by the numbers of refugees arriving’. And then for too long they got the answer ‘that’s Dublin, deal with it. It’s your task’.

And then of course, we arrived at a situation of waving through, and this led to a lot of suspicion in other Member States: they’re not doing their job; they’re waving through refugees in large numbers. So there is no state that can claim to be completely innocent in the situation we have found ourselves now.

I also believe there is some criticism possible if people in Italy keep saying ‘we were left completely alone; we were completely abandoned’. Yes, for a long time that was true, but I find it difficult to explain that when I go to Germany. Look at the numbers of refugees that were taken in in Germany. Look at the number of refugees that were taken in in Sweden. An incredibly vast problem is now the integration of these refugees in many countries.

As long as we keep refusing the idea that we have a collective problem that can only be tackled with collective solutions, we will not find a solution. As long as Member States just stick to their own solution and say ‘we are the only ones who are right’ and as long as the rest of the Union does not do what we do, we will not find a solution. And we will fail collectively.

Given the size of the migration challenge the world faces, not just Europe, given the developments in Africa, do you really think that building walls and fences and refusing to accept ships is going to bring a solution? Will that stop the pressure? Do you really think that if we do not stick together on this, individual Member States will be able to reach agreements with the states of origin to take back their migrants if they do not have the right to asylum? Do you really think that, individually, we can create a prospect for Africa that will allow young Africans to see a future in their own countries instead of feeling the need to come to Europe? Do you really think that if we take away a bit of the humanity of people on ships and say these are just migrants, that we will continue our policy on the basis of our values and human rights? Don’t you agree that by denying other people’s humanity, we take away part of our own humanity? Doesn’t that kill us morally if we continue like that?

I am not saying everyone who wants to come to Europe should be welcomed, but I am saying we need to put an end to the dying in the Mediterranean. This can only be done if Europe collectively devises stronger protection of our external borders; if we finally devise a common European asylum policy; if we finally make headway in having agreements with the countries of origin so that they take back the citizens; if we finally have a realistic plan of investment in Africa so that Africa develops in a way that makes people want to stay in Africa; and if we finally come to terms with the fact that in a time of crisis, and one or two or three of our Member States are overwhelmed, they should be able to count on the solidarity of all Member States.

The only way we will find a sustainable solution for the migration issue – which will not go away, whatever we do – is if we do all these things at the same time. According to your political preferences, you have a preference for one or other of the solutions, but none of you can close your eyes to the fact that you can only deal with it if all these solutions are part of our approach. And if we do not do this as Europeans, who else will? Member States will not be able to do it on their own, whatever their policies are.

Let me end on one point. We are at a risk, in this time of turbulence and huge challenges, of falling into the trap of entering into Faustian deals. To handle the migration issue, perhaps we should not have as much of the rule of law or the respect for human rights as is good for us. Please, please, stay away from that Faustian deal, because you will lose on all scores.

What is the price of unity of the European Union? Should the price of unity of the European Union be ‘let’s not make a point of the rule of law and human rights just so we can have unity’? I can guarantee you if respect for the rule of law and human rights is no longer a quintessential element of our Union, we will lose human rights, the rule of law and the European Union. That is a price that is far too high to pay.

(Applause)

  Monika Panayotova, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, I am here today to intervene on the state of play of the preparations for the European Council and to listen to your proposals, ideas, comments and remarks. I will bring all of them to the attention of the President of the European Council. I would like to thank the President of the European Parliament, Mr Tajani, for his remarks with regard to the important input made by the European Parliament in the discussion on the Common European Asylum System, in particular on the Dublin Regulation. I will bring his message to the attention of President Tusk.

You will also have heard that President Tajani will have the opportunity to express the views of the European Parliament to the Heads of State and Government at the opening of the European Council. Tomorrow, we will have a further opportunity to discuss the humanitarian emergencies in the Mediterranean and solidarity in the European Union.

All of you underlined that reform of the asylum system needs to strike the right balance between responsibility and solidarity. I can assure you that the Presidency also shares your sense of urgency. I would like to share with you that the Bulgarian Presidency has taken as its point of departure not only the conclusions of the European Council of October 2017, which tasked us with seeking consensus and with looking for ways to keep the right balance between responsibility and solidarity in order to ensure resilience to future crises, but also the results of the negotiations under the previous Presidencies, which called for a comprehensive approach to the whole area of asylum reform.

Based on this, we have built into the Dublin Regulation a new approach and a new crisis mechanism for managing the migration and asylum systems in the Union when under pressure. It tries to strike a balance between responsibility and solidarity by including clear criteria for determining the responsibility for asylum applicants which don’t shift or seize easily. The amended rules make the procedure more efficient so that pull factors and secondary movements are effectively prevented.

We believe that the text of the Dublin Regulation, resulting from the discussions led by our Presidency in the last five months, offers a good and fair basis for striking the requested balance between responsibility and solidarity. The process is now being led by the President of the European Council, and it will be up to him and the leaders to look for further compromises that will help reach a consensus in view of the meeting of the Heads of State and Government at the end of June. I am confident that the Council will make every effort to find a solution and an agreement on a mandate for negotiations with the Parliament, as we all agree that Dublin III needs to be revised.

In terms of the trade questions, I would like to say that the European Union is sending a strong message on its ambition for an open, rule-based trading system, and all trade and external relations are on the agenda. But I cannot prejudge the outcome of the leaders’ discussion.

In terms of the eurozone and the completion of the banking union, we also cannot prejudge what the leaders will decide at the June Euro summit, but I would like to say that the Presidency worked hard so that the Council could finally agree on a general approach on the banking package last month. The Council certainly looks forward to working with the Parliament to bring this file to implementation, hopefully still in the coming months.

Progress on the banking package gives me reason to be optimistic that the leaders can, later this month, reach concrete results around the issue of the common backstop to the Single Resolution Fund, likely in the context of the broader and not yet finalised work on the European Stability Mechanism. Progress on the European Deposit Insurance Scheme will take more time, but it has not been ruled out that the political discussions could still start in the coming months.

In terms of Brexit, I would like to say that unity among our institutions is paramount, and we value the contributions that the European Parliament is making through its resolutions. We expect this to continue until the end of the negotiations. We attach the utmost importance to safeguarding the rights of European Union citizens in the United Kingdom and vice versa, and to those citizens being able to effectively enforce their rights. The UK has given credible guarantees to this effect, as now translated in the text of the Withdrawal Agreement. It remains to ensure that this is implemented in a faithful and enforceable way.

There are actually many other important issues on the table for the leaders in June, and it would be really naive to expect that they can all be solved easily and rapidly. Some will require further time and effort, but it’s important to continue to build common ground. In accordance with well—established practice, President Tusk will be in plenary on 3 July 2018 for an open debate with you on the progress achieved on those topics, for, in the face of global turbulence, we should make sure not only that we remain united in dealing with the immediate consequences of instability, but that we – the three institutions together – also continue to work to shape the course of the years ahead in the interests of our citizens.

  Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 162)

  Birgit Collin-Langen (PPE), schriftlich. – Zur Vorbereitung des Europäischen Rates ist es mir wichtig, dass wir uns auf die wichtigsten Punkte konzentrieren. Europa ist umzingelt von Krisen und Problemen. Umso wichtiger ist es, dass wir auf dem Europäischen Rat keine großen Ziele beschreiben, sondern konzentriert an wichtigen Punkten arbeiten. Wir sind auf dem Weg in einen Handelskrieg. Hier brauchen wir eine klare europäische Linie. Die geschlossenen Gegenmaßnahmen der Kommission sind in meinen Augen der richtige Weg, das muss vom Rat bekräftigt werden. Wir müssen uns auf die Kernaufgaben konzentrieren. Im Moment ist nicht die Zeit für Visionen, sondern für pragmatische und solidarische Lösungen.

  Laurenţiu Rebega (ECR), în scris. – Ce preferați să mâncați: o porție mică preparată de șefi bucătari de prestigiu, din ingrediente naturale proaspete, sau un castron uriaș de junk food? Unde preferați să locuiți: într-o casă proiectată de un arhitect strălucit sau într-un Turn Babel ridicat de o mulțime de muncitori necalificați? Pe scurt: vrem calitate sau cantitate? Vrem o Uniune mai bună sau o Uniune mai mare?

În acest moment istoric, răspunsul e unul singur! Trebuie să ne întoarcem la ceea ce ne unește fără compromisuri și să lăsăm chestiunile divergente pentru mai târziu. Susțin cu tărie ideea ca Parlamentul European să transmită Consiliului un mesaj clar: deciziile privind viitorul Uniunii trebuie luate prin consens! Orice decizie importantă luată prin majoritate calificată slăbește unitatea, crește inegalitățile și corupția, subminează democrația și ne compromite viitorul.