Rapporti verbatim tad-dibattiti

Il-Ħamis, 30 ta' Jannar 2020 - Brussell

1. Ftuħ tas-seduta

VORSITZ: KATARINA BARLEY
Vizepräsidentin

(Die Sitzung wird um 9.00 Uhr eröffnet.)

2. Programm ta' Ħidma tal-Kummissjoni 2020 (dibattitu)

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärung der Kommission zum Arbeitsprogramm der Kommission für 2020 (2019/2965(RSP)).

  Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, it’s a real pleasure for me to be here today to discuss with you the first Commission work programme under the mandate of President Ursula von der Leyen, which we adopted yesterday.

This 2020 Work Programme is important for two reasons. First, because it will not just be the basis of our work for the first year of the mandate but also because it sets the vision, direction and pace for the next five years and beyond. Let’s take, for example, the biggest challenge of our generation: the twin ecological and digital transition, which will affect every part of our society and every one of us.

Secondly, because it has set in motion the special partnership with the European Parliament. If you allow me, I will start with the second point, which is important both institutionally and politically and very dear to me.

The adoption of the 2020 Work Programme was a joint exercise. The contribution of the European Parliament, your contributions at every stage were being taken into consideration. They were already instrumental in defining the political guidelines and now it is in these guidelines that we programme into action.

During this period, I have had the chance to discuss many different priority policies with you in different formats. A key institutional step in the process was the meeting between the Conference of Committee Chairs of this House and the Vice—President of the European Commission, which offered very good opportunity for in-depth discussion of our priorities and expectations, and I particularly appreciate the cordial and constructive atmosphere of these debates.

The discussion of the Conference of Presidents with President von der Leyen contributed to the fine-tuning of our Commission work programme just on Tuesday before we adopted it yesterday. So I would say that this special partnership clearly demonstrated how important it is, and it will continue all the way and will have to cover the entire policy cycle with this new approach and quality of relationship.

If you allow me now, I will turn to the first point, the content of our 2020 Work Programme. This year, we have programmed 43 policy objectives or packages. In these packages, 28 initiatives will be legislative, allowing sufficient time for their adoption and implementation. We have also examined all proposals that are currently awaiting decision by the Parliament and the Council, and after taking the suggestions from your house into account. In this case, we are proposing to withdraw 32 of them. Some of them do not mention the new Commission’s political ambitions; for others we will reflect on more efficient ways to fulfil the objectives, in consultations with this House and the Council. Finally, under the Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme REFIT, we identified 44 significant pieces of legislation proposed for re-evaluation or revision.

We have already presented to you the European Green Deal communication, our new growth strategy and the European Green Deal Investment Plan as well as the Just Transition mechanism to support territories most affected by energy transition. The next big step is the Climate Law, which will propose a binding climate—neutrality target for the EU in 2050. We will conduct an impact assessment until summer. The aim is to be ready for the Glasgow Conference of the Parties (COP) 26, scheduled for the end of October.

We will soon propose the 2030 biodiversity strategy to preserve and protect the natural environment and set out our ambition for the negotiations at the coming conference as well as the ‘farm to fork’ strategy, the new EU forest strategy and a comprehensive strategy for sustainable and smart mobility. The European Climate Bank will help bring together all these efforts, involving regions, local communities, civil societies, schools, industry and individuals.

We adopted yesterday our 5G communication, and will soon present a new European data strategy and a White Paper on artificial intelligence. We need to protect fundamental rights, but we want our industry to work with artificial intelligence and innovate.

Soon, the digital services act will reinforce the single market for digital services and help provide smaller businesses with legal clarity and a level playing field by updating the legal framework, including by updating the corporate tax system. On this, the Commission will push for a global solution, but if this won’t be possible, we will aim for a European one.

In parallel, we will present a new skills strategy. As regards our economy, we prioritise social fairness at the heart of the twin transitions, the green and digital ones, and as a part of this, we will refocus all our policies, including the European Semester, by incorporating the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. In consultation with social partners and all the relevant stakeholders, we are working on an initiative to guarantee fair minimum wages for workers in the EU while respecting the specific situations of each Member State.

The Commission will also review that economic governance framework and provide an overview on how fiscal rules have worked in recent years. The review will launch a broad consultation with Member States and other stakeholders to explore ways to improve the economic governance framework of the European Union. We will soon adopt an action plan to deepen the capital markets union, focusing on tackling regulatory barriers in existing legislation and structural barriers, and making sure that SMEs have access to finance, and this would become part of our wider SME strategy. The completion of the Banking Union, a strong and credible framework for preventing and fighting money laundering, the Unemployment Reinsurance Scheme and the European Youth Guarantee remain our priorities as well.

To make the geopolitical Commission a reality, we will invest in alliances and coalitions to advance our values, promote and protect Europe’s interests through open and fair trade. We will step up our engagement with the Western Balkans and we will also design a new eastern partnership strategy. As you know, we will soon launch a comprehensive strategy with Africa as a basis for our mutual partnership. The EU’s external policy should effectively address issues related to democracy and good governance, climate change, migration and human rights. In this perspective, it is equally essential to reinforce the rules—based multilateral order and as a part of this, the Commission will put forward proposals to update and reform the WTO.

We will present in spring our new impact on migration and asylum, which will be a comprehensive approach covering all aspects of migration, also addressing border security and ensuring more coherence between our internal and external policy. Under the same headline ambition of promoting our European way of life, we will present an action plan on integration and inclusion. We will also present a new security union strategy addressing both the digital and physical aspect of security as these are two sides of the same coin.

Another of our flagship initiatives will be Europe’s beating cancer plan – to support Member States in their efforts to improve cancer prevention and care.

I will also refer to the joint exercise of the three institutions and in close cooperation with national parliaments and our partners to organise a conference on the future of Europe. We are in the process of building the scope and the structure. By the end of 2020, we will present the European democracy action plan to address disinformation, political campaigning, free and independent media, and freedom of speech.

With regard to fundamental rights, technology needs to serve the people, not the other way around. Therefore, the Commission will update the Charter of Fundamental Rights to address emerging issues such as artificial intelligence and facial recognition.

Last but not least, on the rule of law, the Commission will intensify its preventive work, for example, with its first rule of law report, which will assess the situation in all Member States. This report will have a sound methodology and form the basis for future work on the rule of law.

We are also already working on embedding strategic foresight across all Commission policies by using all data at our disposal as regards the long—term trends and major shifts on the horizon to be able to design future—proof policies. To this end, I have already established a strategic foresight network within the European Commission and I am fine-tuning together with EU Member States and partners our coordination on this.

I count a lot on cooperation with you. The European Parliament, as I already found out, has a wealth of data and intelligence in all its committees.

This was a very quick overview of the initiatives included in our 2020 Work Programme. It took me a little bit more than 10 minutes, but I wanted to demonstrate to you that we are really delivering on what we promised to you: an ambitious yet realistic agenda of our shared priorities for the first year of this Commission.

The future partnership with the UK will, of course, be one of our main challenges for the next months and years, and I was here yesterday with you on the emotional farewell to our British colleagues, but this was the case during the negotiation of the Withdrawal Agreement. We want to reassure you that we have committed to the maximum level of transparency as regards the negotiation process towards the European Parliament. Together with my colleagues in the Commission, we are looking forward to working together on our special partnership of trust and turning our agenda into concrete actions.

We first have to join forces to ensure an appropriate, modern long-term budget that rises to our common challenges and from now on, we will all have to intensify the work on legislative decision-making with a view to delivering our priorities. The joint declaration on legislative priorities that will follow will serve as a concrete roadmap for our joint work, truly engaging all three institutions, and this will be followed by our first ever multi-annual programming that should capture our Common Strategic Agenda for Europe.

Thank you very much, Madam President, and I’m looking forward to the intervention of the honourable Members of this House.

(Applause)

  Jan Olbrycht, w imieniu grupy PPE. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Grupa Europejskiej Partii Ludowej popiera generalnie program roboczy Komisji Europejskiej na rok 2020. Dokument, z którym mieliśmy okazję się zapoznać (zakładając, że nie wprowadzono w nim żadnych zmian w czasie podejmowania decyzji wczoraj), jest dla nas bardzo ważnym źródłem informacji na temat tego, co Komisja zamierza konkretnie zrobić w roku 2020. Dla nas było istotne, żeby dokument ten nie zawierał tylko haseł, ale bardzo konkretne plany, i dlatego zdajemy sobie sprawę, że procedura, którą dzisiaj prowadzimy, jest specyficzna, gdyż jesteśmy po wyborach. W związku z tym w chwili obecnej odnosimy się już do decyzji Komisji Europejskiej, chciałem jednak wyraźnie powiedzieć, że pewne sugestie, które płynęły ze strony Parlamentu, również naszej grupy, zostały w Państwa dokumencie uwzględnione, chociaż trochę z innej perspektywy, co nie zmienia ich istoty. Zdajemy sobie sprawę i chcielibyśmy, żeby ta debata i wysłuchane głosy posłów do Parlamentu Europejskiego znalazły odzwierciedlenie we wspólnej deklaracji, którą podpiszą przewodniczący wszystkich trzech instytucji, a potem by znalazły odzwierciedlenie w programie wieloletnim.

Ten dokument jest dlatego tak dla nas ważny, bo pokazuje zarówno nowe inicjatywy, jak i te, które są w toku, i te, które zostają usunięte. Co prawda inicjatywy w toku (pending) w Państwa broszurce ładnie nazywane są „where we want the co-legislator to take the swiftest action”. Jest to dyplomatyczna zachęta dla Parlamentu Europejskiego, żeby pracował szybciej. Chcielibyśmy się odwdzięczyć tym samym: mamy nadzieję, że wszystkie instytucje będą pracować szybciej.

Natomiast jeżeli chodzi o samą strukturę dokumentu i sposób podejścia, odzwierciedlają one wyraźnie to, o czym Komisja Europejska mówiła: chce być komisją geopolityczną. Są to problemy, które mają co prawda charakter wewnętrzny, ale skutki zewnętrzne. Skutki w polityce zewnętrznej są dla nas niezwykle ważne, gdyż chcemy, aby przekładały się na język konkretu. Dla przykładu: zgadzamy się w zupełności, że podstawowymi elementami są kwestia Zielonego Ładu (Green Deal) i kwestia cyfrowa. Jest to o tyle interesujące, że Państwo w dokumencie dotyczącym Zielonego Ładu wskazują na pewne elementy, które ważne są również dla nas, jak na przykład gospodarka leśna. Dokument ten to nie tylko kwestia Funduszu Sprawiedliwej Transformacji, mechanizmu sprawiedliwej transformacji, choć potraktowano ją w nim dużo szerzej. Uważamy, że jest to dobry kierunek, żeby rzeczywiście realizować pewne określone zamierzenie.

To samo dotyczy gospodarki cyfrowej, ponieważ w gospodarce cyfrowej umieszczają Państwo na przykład kwestie badań naukowych, rozwoju gospodarczego. To nie jest tylko kwestia technologiczna. Uważamy, że dobrym kierunkiem jest patrzenie na tę kwestię bardziej horyzontalnie.

Jesteśmy bardzo zadowoleni, że zwrócili Państwo uwagę na kwestię rynków kapitałowych, żeby zwrócić uwagę na pewne elementy społeczne. Jest to dla nas bardzo ważne jako dla partii chrześcijańsko-demokratycznej. Odnotowujemy także bardzo istotne sformułowania, na przykład – o czym często mówiliśmy – „strategia dla Afryki” jest określana w Państwa dokumencie jako „strategia z Afryką” – strategy with Africa, not for Africa. Wydaje mi się, że to jest bardzo ważna deklaracja polityczna dotycząca sposobu, w jaki Komisja zamierza działać: w partnerstwie z Afryką, a nie dla Afryki. Wydaje mi się, że to jest bardzo dobre podejście i powinniśmy to brać pod uwagę.

Odnotowujemy również z uwagą fakt, że chcą Państwo opracowywać coroczne sprawozdania dotyczące rządów prawa dla wszystkich państw członkowskich. Uważamy, że jest to dobry kierunek i powinno być to realizowane.

Na końcu uwaga krytyczna – jeżeli Pan Komisarz pozwoli –WRF jest dla nas nie tylko i wyłącznie metodą, jest to jeden z istotnych, ważnych celów, ponieważ za nim kryją się polityki. U Państwa WRF jest jakby metodą, która kryje się za wszystkimi celami. Dla nas WRF jest po prostu celem, który chcemy zrealizować, i liczymy, że Państwo jako honest broker, będą pomagać, żeby zrobić to jak najszybciej, ponieważ WRF nie jest pracą księgowych. WRF jest dyskusją o polityce i o tym, co mają Państwo zrobić. Tak więc Europejska Partia Ludowa popiera Państwa plan działania na rok 2020 i będziemy się dokładnie przyglądać, w jaki sposób będzie on realizowany, deklarujemy jednak również pomoc.

  Iratxe García Pérez, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, señor vicepresidente, nuestra familia política valora positivamente que nuestras principales propuestas en materia de transformación ecológica, social y económica que la Unión Europea necesita hayan sido incorporadas en este programa de trabajo. Se trata de un excelente ejemplo de cooperación entre usted, señor Šefčovič, y este Parlamento.

En términos generales, la Comisión ha identificado correctamente los desafíos en los que se encuentra en estos momentos el proyecto europeo y las herramientas que necesitamos para poner en marcha las políticas. Pero como bien sabe usted, el diablo siempre está en los detalles, y también consideramos que la propuesta carece de precisión y tiene ciertas ambigüedades. Por lo tanto, nos gustaría recordar una cuestión: que el apoyo de nuestro grupo político a la Comisión no es un cheque en blanco, y por lo tanto vamos a estar muy atentos para verificar que realmente se cumplen todas y cada una de las propuestas que vienen reflejadas en este programa de trabajo.

Si bien el programa de trabajo incorpora los instrumentos necesarios para implementar el Pacto Verde a través de una transición justa en todas las regiones, lamentamos que no incluya el objetivo de la reducción de emisiones del 55 % para el 2030. La emergencia climática, recientemente declarada en este Parlamento, demuestra nuestro firme compromiso en la lucha contra el cambio climático, y el mismo compromiso esperamos de la Comisión y del Consejo. De lo contrario la neutralidad climática para el 2050 se quedará en una promesa vacía, y no nos lo podemos permitir.

También habríamos deseado por parte de la Comisión un enfoque más amplio que reconozca la oportunidad que la migración representa para hacer frente al desafío demográfico y al mantenimiento del estado del bienestar. Además, tenemos la obligación de abordar con humanidad la integración de los refugiados en nuestras sociedades. Ayer mismo este Parlamento celebraba un debate sobre la situación de los refugiados en las islas griegas, que creo que es el claro ejemplo de que no podemos esperar ni un minuto más. Estamos hablando de la vida, de la dignidad de miles de personas que están esperando una respuesta solidaria y responsable por parte de la Unión Europea.

Solidaridad también significa convertir el pilar europeo de derechos sociales y sus veinte principios en realidad, incluyendo la «garantía infantil» que erradique la pobreza y un marco jurídico que garantice salarios mínimos dignos para los trabajadores y trabajadoras.

Solidaridad también es hacer un esfuerzo en el proyecto europeo para con aquellos vecinos que han hecho un esfuerzo para abrazar nuestras leyes y nuestros valores. Por ello continuaremos defendiendo la necesidad de la apertura de las negociaciones de adhesión con Macedonia del Norte y con Albania.

Y solidaridad también significa la protección y el fortalecimiento de nuestras democracias, y de ahí la necesidad de un nuevo mecanismo para salvaguardar el Estado de Derecho.

Pero seamos serios. Esto solo se podrá conseguir si hay un acuerdo en el marco financiero plurianual. Y aquí quiero hacer un llamamiento a la responsabilidad del Consejo de asumir la necesidad de un acuerdo en esta materia para poder abordar todos estos retos; de lo contrario seremos incapaces de poner en marcha todas las herramientas que necesitamos en estos momentos. Tenemos el deber de cumplir con nuestras promesas. Por ello, pedimos responsabilidad a la Comisión y al Consejo para que, a través de un compromiso conjunto, hagamos posible la Unión que la ciudadanía necesita.

  Dacian Cioloş, în numele grupului Renew. – Doamnă președintă, domnule vicepreședinte, este un an de început de mandat pentru Comisie și pentru Parlament. Această Comisie împărtășește cu Parlamentul o viziune ambițioasă, cu cei doi piloni, Pactul verde și transformarea digitală, care vor reseta complet economia și modul de viață european.

Rezultatele acestui mandat vor depinde mult de capacitatea de a livra proiecte pe baza acestei viziuni, dar și de a identifica resursele care să permită punerea sa în practică. Este nevoie de un buget multianual ambițios și pe măsură, dar foarte probabil că acesta nu va fi suficient pentru a susține statele membre și sectorul privat să finanțeze restructurarea economiilor. Mă aștept, din partea Comisiei, la soluții de instrumente financiare integrate, dar complementare bugetului multianual.

Proiectele legislative pe care le așteptăm trebuie să vină cu soluții. Uniunea Europeană este percepută prea mult ca producătoare inflaționistă de norme și de reguli. Vom crește încrederea în valoarea adăugată europeană în măsura în care deciziile luate aici vor genera bunăstare, vor produce valoare adăugată, complementar cu ceea ce pot face statele membre individual, și aceasta este marea provocare a Uniunii Europene.

Grupul Renew nu va sta doar să aștepte propuneri și rezultate din partea Comisiei. Am venit deja cu idei despre cum credem că ar putea fi rezolvată problema migrației, despre cum ar putea fi pus în practică Pactul verde. În zilele următoare, vom prezenta și o viziune despre cum credem că ar trebui abordată susținerea, dar și reglementarea inteligenței artificiale.

Dincolo de bunăstare, Uniunea Europeană trebuie să asigure cetățenilor nu doar că pot circula, studia și munci pe întreg teritoriul ei, dar și că, în toate statele membre, valorile europene, statul de drept sunt respectate. Iar violarea statului de drept trebuie să aibă și consecințe, indiferent despre ce stat membru este vorba și, din acest punct de vedere, programul de lucru prezentat este insuficient, nu este suficient de clar.

Începând de săptămâna viitoare, Marea Britanie va deveni o țară terță. Trebuie să tragem toate învățămintele din ceea ce s-a întâmplat cu Brexitul și, poate, să ameliorăm modul de funcționare a Uniunii Europene, iar Conferința pentru viitorul Europei poate să fie generatorul acestor idei noi.

Ne dorim o Comisia Europeană care să fie partener al Parlamentului în punerea în practică a acestei dezbateri cu cetățenii, pentru că Uniunea Europeană pe care vrem să o împărtășim cu cetățenii care ne-au trimis aici trebuie să fie una care construiește viziune și oferă soluții.

  Ska Keller, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, this week is indeed a traumatic one for the European Union. It’s a dramatic event that a Member State would leave, and it’s an immensely sad one as well. But I refuse to accept this historic mistake as the end. It will neither it put an end to the friendship between the people of Great Britain and on the European continent, nor will we give up hope that the UK will return home at some point – here where it belongs, to the European family. But while this week is a very sad moment, it’s not a moment at all that brings us closer to any end of the EU, for example, as some who brought about Brexit might have wanted it to: quite the opposite. If we didn’t have the EU already, it would now be the perfect moment to invent it, and the Europeans have come together because there are problems that you can only solve together and because together they are stronger in whatever challenge appears in the world. And there are plenty of challenges today, and we need to address them together.

And that’s why it’s so important this week also to discuss the work programme. This work programme will be the chance to prove what we are worth. Commissioner, you mentioned in your speech the climate crisis, which is indeed a huge challenge that every state and every continent is affected by, and it’s high time for urgent action. We’re very happy that this Commission puts an emphasis on initiatives tackling the climate crisis as well as the dramatic loss of biodiversity on our planet. It is, of course, way too early to say if they’re going to be sufficient; that will depend on the details of your proposals. But also it will depend on whether a majority of this House will support ambitious climate legislation, not to mention the Member States as well, which we need to have on board. Therefore, it will depend on all of us how much climate action the EU will undertake and how much the EU will contribute to the global efforts to save the planet after having contributed – actually, a lot – to its destruction in the past.

The Commission is also the guardian of the Treaties, and you mentioned some action in that regard to make sure that Member States don’t deviate from the rule of law, and it is time to put our common commitment into action. This year will show which way the Commission is heading, and we need courageous steps forward into a new European Union.

  Nicolaus Fest (ID). – Frau Präsidentin! Ich möchte die Sitzungsleitung hier rügen. Ich habe keine Lust, irgendwie alle drei Minuten mit Saaldienern über die Flaggen zu ... (Die Präsidentin entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)

  Die Präsidentin. – Es ist nicht Ihre Position, die Sitzungsleitung zu rügen. Das ist nichts, was Ihnen zusteht.

(Zwischenruf)

Sie haben im Moment nicht das Mikrofon.

(Zwischenruf)

Diese Fragen werden wir klären. Aber eines ist ganz klar: Die Regeln sind geklärt worden, und wir haben das gestern auch bei der Brexit-Debatte so gesehen. Es erhält nur jemand das Wort, der sich an die Regeln hält. Die Regeln sind inzwischen mehrfach klargestellt worden. Wenn Sie mit den Regeln, so wie sie ausgelegt werden, nicht einverstanden sind, dann gibt es dafür die entsprechenden Wege, sich zu beschweren. In der Plenardebatte werden wir das jedenfalls nicht mehr diskutieren. Wer also die Flaggen auf dem Pult hat, bekommt nicht das Wort.

  Jérôme Rivière (ID). – Madame la présidente, j’aurais souhaité savoir à quel article du règlement spécifique vous faites référence pour pouvoir couper la parole ainsi à mes collègues.

  Die Präsidentin. – Der Kollege hat sich herausgenommen, die Sitzungsleitung zu rügen. Das ist nicht etwas, was einem Mitglied des Hauses in der Form zusteht. Es gibt keine förmliche Rüge eines Parlamentariers. Das hat etwas mit Respekt vor der Sitzungsleitung zu tun. Ich bin auf die inhaltliche Frage des Kollegen Fest eingegangen – auch nicht zum ersten Mal, wir haben das jetzt mehrfach geklärt –, und ich denke, wir sollten die Zeit jetzt anderweitig verwenden, und zwar für die Debatte.

  Harald Vilimsky, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Bislang habe ich die Europäische Kommission immer mit sehr deutlichen Worten kritisiert. Heute möchte ich eine Ausnahme machen und die Europäische Kommission entsprechend loben, weil das Programm, das die Europäische Kommission präsentiert hat, ein wahrlich magisches ist. Sie schaffen es, die komplette Asyl- und Migrationsthematik einfach wegzuzaubern. Sie schaffen es, die Währungsproblematik mit Null- und Minuszinsen einfach wegzuzaubern. Sie schaffen es, die Sozial- und Arbeitsmarktfrage einfach wegzuzaubern. Aber was Sie schaffen, ist, einen Green Deal herbeizuzaubern, mit dem Sie den Leuten noch mehr Geld aus der Tasche ziehen wollen. Man könnte, wenn man freundlich ist, sagen, es handelt sich hier um eine Harry-Potter-Kommission. Wenn man unfreundlicher ist, könnte man sagen: Sie bedienen sich politischer Voodoo-Methoden. Meine Damen und Herrn! Gestern haben die Briten hier diese Union verlassen. Ich kann nur an Sie appellieren: Wenn nicht das nächste Land diese Union verlassen soll, dann haben Sie sich auf die großen und die wichtigen Aufgaben zu konzentrieren. Das sind Migration und Asyl, Wirtschaft und Währung, Soziales und Arbeitsmarkt. Da erwartet man von dieser Gemeinschaft Leistungen, und nicht bei irgendwelchen herbeigezauberten Nebenthemen.

  Lucia Ďuriš Nicholsonová, za skupinu ECR. – Vážená pani predsedajúca, jedna vec sa nedá uprieť programu Európskej komisie, a to je to, že sa chce priblížiť k ľuďom. V niektorých prípadoch mám ale pocit, že ide o zbytočný populizmus. Takým je napríklad projekt európskej minimálnej mzdy. To je projekt, ktorý nás zamestná minimálne na dva roky, ale neprinesie reálnu pridanú hodnotu, pretože už dnes 22 z 28 resp. z 27 európskych štátoch má inštitút minimálnej mzdy. A, samozrejme, tie očakávania občanov sú veľké, hlavne pokiaľ ide o tie nové členské štáty. Ľudia očakávajú, že zo dňa na deň začnú dostávať oveľa väčšiu mzdu. Takže zákonite príde sklamanie a takéto sklamanie je potom voda na mlyn pre rôznych nacionalistov, ktorí chcú rozvrátiť úžasný projekt Európskej únie. Čo ale oceňujem na programe je to, že sa tam dostala digitalizácia, prispôsobenie sa demografickým zmenám a hlavne tzv. child-guarantee, lebo si myslím, že deti v Európskej únii musia mať prístup ku kvalitným službám. Nová Komisia sľúbila, že nebude váhať výrazne vymáhať európsku legislatívu. Chcem iba upozorniť, že na takýto prístup čakajú už viac ako rok slovenskí a iní občania v Rakúsku, ktoré začalo indexovať rodinné prídavky, a teda úplne neprávom dostávajú menej na svoje deti.

  Manon Aubry, au nom du groupe GUE/NGL. – Madame la présidente, cette semaine marque un tournant dans l’histoire de l’Union européenne avec le départ du Royaume—Uni. Le pire serait de n’en tirer aucune leçon et de continuer comme avant, sans prendre conscience de l’éloignement progressif entre l’Union européenne et les peuples européens. C’est ce défi qui devrait guider votre programme de travail pour l’année 2020 et, pour cela, écoutons directement la voix des citoyens européens.

Je voulais vous parler de Léa, que j’ai rencontrée lors d’une action de désobéissance civile sur le climat, qui espère une rupture totale avec le modèle économique qui détruit notre planète. L’ambition d’une loi climatique aurait pu la rassurer, mais quelle sera sa surprise quand elle découvrira que votre pacte vert poursuit le dogme de la croissance à tout prix, sans questionner son impact sur le climat.

Léa, comme tous les jeunes mobilisés pour le climat, demande de la cohérence. Imaginez son incompréhension face aux produits issus de l’agro—industrie, qui inondent son supermarché et qui sont financés par la politique agricole commune. Imaginez sa colère, aussi, face à la multitude d’accords de libre—échange que l’Union européenne prévoit encore de signer. À la place, Léa a espéré que l’Union européenne favorise le commerce de produits qui n’ont pas fait 3 fois le tour de la planète avant d’arriver dans son panier. Mais la taxe aux frontières a disparu de vos priorités pour 2020.

Léa aspire à un véritable Green New Deal social et écologique et cela nécessite des moyens. Votre révision du semestre européen doit donner aux États les leviers financiers pour investir dans la transition écologique.

Je voulais aussi vous parler de Marie, infirmière en grève depuis des mois pour défendre nos hôpitaux publics qui se meurent et mobilisée contre la casse de notre système de retraite.

Marie, elle, ne comprend pas pourquoi l’Union européenne a encouragé partout en Europe la privatisation de nos services publics et de nos protections sociales.

Pierre, lui, travaillait pour l’entreprise Castorama, mais a perdu son boulot, délocalisé en Pologne, car le coût du travail y est moins cher. Pierre est en colère contre cette compétition sociale et ne se contentera pas d’un salaire minimum européen au rabais qui refuse l’harmonisation sociale par le haut.

Kevin, aussi, livreur à vélo, a besoin, lui, d’une régulation européenne des plateformes pour que cesse l’exploitation de travailleurs ubérisés. Il est indigné que rien n’ait été fait depuis des années.

Léa, Marie, Pierre et Kevin ne comprennent pas non plus pourquoi leurs impôts augmentent alors que les multinationales ont arrêté d’en payer et n’en peuvent plus de voir l’influence des lobbys sur les décideurs européens.

Mais j’ai eu beau chercher dans votre programme de travail, aucune trace de l’autorité de contrôle éthique que vous aviez pourtant promise. Entendez ces colères, ces attentes, ces espoirs, aussi, et agissez. Si vous ne le faites pas pour notre groupe de la Gauche unitaire européenne ou pour les parlementaires ici présents dans cet hémicycle, alors faites-le pour Léa, pour Marie, Pierre, Kevin et tant d’autres citoyens européens qui ne vous pardonneront pas si vous vous entêtez à poursuivre cette année encore les mêmes recettes qui sont responsables de la crise climatique et de l’explosion des inégalités.

  Ivan Vilibor Sinčić (NI). – Poštovana potpredsjednice, komisare Šefčoviču, spomenuli ste u svom programu Komisije za 2020. godinu, među ostalim, ulogu demokracije u vanjskoj politici. Ovdje se bavimo, imamo često na dnevnom redu teme demokratkih standarda u Indoneziji, Hong Kongu, Boliviji, Venezueli, zemljama Afrike, međutim demokracija nije dovoljno razvijena niti u zemljama Europe, ovdje u našem dvorištu. Reći ću vam to na primjeru Hrvatske.

Naime, 2014. godine mi smo imali 500 000 više birača nego stanovnika. Znači pola milijuna više birača nego stanovnika na zemlju od nekih četiri i nešto milijuna stanovnika. Danas je situacija, uvjetno rečeno, nešto bolja, svega negdje 200 000 više birača nego stanovnika. Učestala su glasanja osoba koje su preminule, dakle, mrtvih, moguće je glasovati za druge ljude, možete doći na biračko mjesto sa nekoliko osobnih iskaznica, zaokružiti za te ljude, jer nigdje se ne potpisuje birač, da se stvarno dokaže da je taj i taj bio na biračkom mjestu.

Dalje, izborne jedinice rezultat su izbornog inženjeringa, nelogične su, čak postoji dakle mišljenje Ustavnog suda iz 2010. godine u kojem se naglašava da nije, dakle, jednako biračko pravo da su neke jedinice prevelike, neke premale.

Sve to je nešto što hrvatski establišment ne želi mijenjati jer iz toga on crpi svoju izbornu prednost. Upravo taj politički sustav je generator korupcije u Hrvatskoj, a samim time i u Europi. I zato je apsurd da je Hrvatska dobila komesara za demokraciju.

  Angelika Niebler (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Vizepräsident, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Ich denke, die Kommission hat ein wirklich ambitioniertes Programm für 2020 vorgelegt und auch die richtigen Schwerpunkte gesetzt, aber – es ist schon angesprochen worden – jetzt kommt es natürlich auf die Umsetzung an. Und dabei, sage ich, geht Qualität vor Quantität. Also Herr Vizepräsident, lieber eine Gesetzesfolgenabschätzung mehr als eine Regulierung, die dann bei den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern eher als Belastung ankommt.

Zu den Schwerpunkten: Über den grünen Deal ist ja schon viel gesprochen worden, das schenke ich mir heute. Ich möchte gern drei andere Punkte herausgreifen: Zum einen finde ich es gut, dass sehr bald schon eine Diskussionsgrundlage für künstliche Intelligenz und eine Datenstrategie vorgelegt werden. Auch habe ich mich sehr gefreut, zu lesen, dass die Übearbeitung der NIS-Richtlinie ansteht. Cybersicherheit ist auch ein Kernbestandteil, um hier sicheren Datentransfer in der Europäischen Union zu garantieren. Ich freue mich sehr, dass im März auch eine Industriestrategie vorgelegt werden soll, und vor allen Dingen freue ich mich, dass der Schwerpunkt dabei auch auf die kleinen und mittelständischen Unternehmen gelegt werden soll. In unseren Familienbetrieben, in unseren kleinen und mittelständischen Unternehmen, da sind die Arbeitsplätze, da werden Arbeitsplätze geschaffen, da werden unsere jungen Leute ausgebildet! Insofern finde ich es gut, dass die neue Kommission gerade auch auf die KMU in der Europäischen Union einen besonderen Schwerpunkt legt. Und last but not least: Migration ist eines der Kernthemen. Auch da bin ich zuversichtlich und warte auf die neuen Vorschläge. Wenn wir das Problem nicht lösen, dann haben wir auch in der Europäischen Union langfristig ein Problem.

  Simona Bonafè (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il nostro gruppo ha presentato nei giorni scorsi un programma di lavoro con le nostre priorità e non posso non salutare con piacere il fatto che molte di quelle cose sono oggi i punti fatti propri anche dalla Commissione.

Tuttavia, devo sottolineare come ancora su questioni per noi centrali ci aspettiamo di più. Ci aspettiamo di più su un nuovo patto sull'immigrazione, che metta al centro la solidarietà fra Stati e la creazione di canali sicuri e legali per l'ingresso in Europa. Ci aspettiamo di più su una tassazione più equa, che vada a colpire l'elusione fiscale delle grandi compagnie. E soprattutto ci aspettiamo di più sulle risorse, sul bilancio, cosa che sappiamo non dipende solo dalla Commissione ma anche dai capi di Stato e di governo.

Ma senza risorse, vicepresidente Šefčovič, si fa poco. Sul Green Deal, per esempio, su cui il mondo intero sta a guardare che cosa combiniamo, bene i mille miliardi previsti dalla Commissione, ma continuiamo a ritenere che servono più soldi freschi per il Just Transition Fund, che non vengano però dai fondi di coesione o sull'agricoltura. Continuiamo a ritenere che, se non coinvolgiamo gli Stati in questa trasformazione verde, che è anche la trasformazione del nostro modello economico, noi non avremo i risultati che speriamo.

In questo programma non c'è nessun impegno concreto sulla revisione delle regole del Patto di stabilità e crescita che dovremmo cominciare a chiamare patto di crescita per la stabilità. La nostra priorità è la crescita perché senza crescita non c'è stabilità e la crescita si realizza se diamo più flessibilità agli Stati per gli investimenti, soprattutto quelli verdi per la transizione ecologica scomputandoli dal calcolo deficit-PIL.

Vicepresidente, abbiamo grandi sfide davanti a noi e io sono convinta che insieme possiamo veramente fare di più.

  Malik Azmani (Renew). – Madam President, this week I was present at a commemoration in Auschwitz-Birkenau with a Renew Europe delegation, and yesterday we listened to the impressive words of Auschwitz survivor Liliane Segre. Her memories are a dark reminder of what a world without respect for liberal values looks like. They are a reminder that we cannot take these values for granted. Anti-Semitism still exists on our continent. The rule of law is still under pressure in the EU. Renew Europe welcomes the ambition of the Commission to make European values and rule of law a priority. But ambition is not enough. We need concrete action: a rule-of-law mechanism. And there are more challenges that deserve our attention. We urgently need a sustainable European approach to migration to regain control. A renewed Migration and Asylum Pact was launched a few weeks ago: a comprehensive answer. But we did our homework, and now it’s time for the Commission to act. The transformation of our economy into a competitive green digital and innovative powerhouse is another main priority for us. And on the world stage we should be leveraging our economic power, combined with strong diplomacy, security and defence policies. Only then do you become a stronger global actor, and I call upon the European Commission to embrace Renew Europe’s ambitions to deliver on the promise of Europe.

  Heather Anderson (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, I am so honoured to be able to speak to you this morning on behalf of the people of Scotland. I thank you for the warmth of your welcome over the last four weeks and I am so pleased to have settled status for four days as an MEP.

I wish with all my heart that we could continue to have the conversations we have started with you about the Green Deal, sustainable food and farming, a just transition, pesticide, reforming the common agricultural policy (CAP), but for now, we can’t. But I know you will do these discussions justice.

My plea today is for you to remember Scotland in your work programme. Just imagine how difficult it is for a country like Scotland, which has pledged its allegiance to the European Union on no less than three occasions, to be taken out against our will and without our consent. We do not live in a United Kingdom; we live in a disunited Kingdom, and Brexit is not the settled will of the Scottish people, but we are resilient and we have long memories. We have shared a long history with you in Europe, both before our current union with England and hopefully in the future.

Tomorrow, the Scottish Government will publish the strategic priorities for Scotland in the EU. We know our best future is with you, and when the people of Scotland have to choose between two unions, they are deciding to choose the European Union.

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächstes steht auf der Redeliste der Kollege Rivière. Der Kollege Rivière ist darauf hingewiesen worden, dass nur Kollegen das Wort erhalten, die sich an die Regeln halten. Er hat sich entschieden, sich nicht an die Regeln zu halten, und daher geht das Wort jetzt an den Kollegen Lundgren.

  Jérôme Rivière (ID). – Madame la Présidente, si j’incline à l’instant le drapeau français, ce n’est certainement pas pour rendre hommage à cette assemblée ni pour concéder une défaite, mais pour avoir l’occasion de m’adresser à la Commission et à mes collègues et prendre date.

Aujourd’hui, vous le savez, rien dans le règlement intérieur de notre assemblée n’interdit la présence de ce drapeau, qui est protégé par la Constitution française dans son article 2 et par une législation. Mais ce drapeau tricolore incarne tout ce que cette Commission et ce projet de l’Union européenne est venu à haïr aujourd’hui. Vous haïssez les nations tout autant que vous haïssez les peuples. Alexandre Soljenitsyne nous avertissait, il y a déjà longtemps: «L’Union européenne porte en elle les ferments du totalitarisme». Il savait de quoi il parlait.

Hier, chers collègues, nous avons tous écouté avec émotion Mme Segre. Et alors que nous commémorions la libération du camp d’Auschwitz, elle nous a expliqué son émotion d’être entrée dans ce Parlement européen. À deux reprises, elle a expliqué combien elle était émue d’avoir vu l’ensemble de ces drapeaux, drapeaux des nations, ensemble. Elle n’était pas émue particulièrement par le drapeau européen. Écoutez-là, entendez-là!

Votre projet s’effondre, les peuples n’en peuvent plus d’une bureaucratie qui les bâillonne. Et face au peuple, vous devez céder. Vendredi, les Britanniques quittent l’Union européenne. Vous avez réussi à les dégoûter.

Ce projet européen était un beau projet. L’histoire vous jugera et elle sera sévère: craignez que ce premier départ soit une immense brèche dans le mur totalitaire que vous êtes en train d’élever.

  Die Präsidentin. – Wie Sie sehen, haben wir auch nichts gegen Flaggen. Deswegen hängen sie auch alle hinter uns, sehr prominent und sehr groß. Wir sind alle stolz auf unsere Fahnen, aber eben gemeinsam und nicht auf jedem Tisch einzeln.

  Peter Lundgren (ECR). – Fru talman! Jag tänkte rikta mig mot punkten A new push for European democracy. Den ser vi prov på här inne i dag. EU:s vision av demokrati är EU:s – och endast EU:s. Några andra visioner av demokrati accepteras inte. Då anses man vara avvikande. EU avskyr djupt nationellt självbestämmande och gör allt för att slå sönder nationernas suveränitet.

Vi har nu fått en ny regel i kammaren att vi inte längre får ha några flaggor i lokalen. Då undrar jag om flaggorna ovanför talmanspodiet kommer att vara nedplockade när vi återkommer för omröstningen om ungefär en timme. Kommer EU-flaggan att vara bortplockad? Ett förbud måste man väl ändå vara ganska konsekvent med. Jag kan acceptera om det är så att vi inte får ha flaggor i denna sal. Då förväntar jag mig också att de flaggor som hänger här uppe, inklusive EU-flaggan, plockas ner.

  Die Präsidentin. – Ich darf erinnern, dass der Tagesordnungspunkt Arbeitsprogramm der Kommission für 2020 heißt und die Redner eigentlich gehalten sind, sich an dieses Thema zu halten. Aber es ist ja anscheinend so emotional mit den Flaggen. Wenn Sie dafür Ihre Redezeit verwenden wollen, dann ist das so.

  Malin Björk (GUE/NGL). – Fru talman! I går röstade vi om brexit – slutet på en flera år lång process som hade kunnat ge upphov, och borde ha gett upphov, till allvarlig självkritik. Ändå konstaterar jag att det för kommissionen är business as usual.

Jag har en väldigt allvarlig fråga. Varför bygger inte kommissionen sitt arbetsprogram på FN:s hållbarhetsmål? Är vi i Europa för märkvärdiga för att följa dem? Det är en väldigt allvarlig fråga. I stället hittar ni på egna titlar som ”ett starkare Europa i världen” och ”främja den europeiska livsstilen”, vad det nu är. Det är inte seriöst, och det blir inte heller bra.

Jag vill understryka tre saker. För det första: Klimatet och den biologiska mångfalden måste sättas först. Det räcker inte med en klimatlag för 2050. Vi ska ha bindande mål på 70 procent för 2030. Det måste ni ha med.

För det andra: Vi behöver en plan för jämlikhet – inte välgörenhet, inte minimi, inte smulor. Vi står inför en jämlikhetskris. Detta borde ha varit med.

För det tredje: Vi behöver en plan för demokrati- och rättsstat. Det är inte ett villkor som man kan välja bort. Det är grundläggande för vårt arbete. Det saknas.

  John David Edward Tennant (NI). – Madam President, after the historic vote yesterday, colleague Terry Reintke asked this Parliament to sing Auld Lang Syne. The people of Europe are our friends: they always have been and they always will be. We have no quarrel with the people of this incredible continent, but merely the political structures and the institutions to which we say good-bye tomorrow. We don’t forget old acquaintances, but we sing Auld Lang Syne on New Year’s Eve for a different reason. We remember the old year but we also look forward to the new. We don’t lose our old friends but we forge new relationships and make new resolutions for the future. In the coming months there will be intense negotiations, and they will dominate the Commission’s work programme to a great extent.

This will be, unfortunately, the last time I speak in this place, and I bid you all a fond farewell. However much we may have disagreed on issues, I bear no malice towards any of you. There’s so much I could say but so little time in which to say it. So I’ll mention only one thing that’s so close to my heart. I ask, in the spirit of cooperation, one simple thing of the Commission and the British Government, which is of vital importance to me: please do not use the fishermen of the UK and of the European Union as a bargaining chip, or the vast number of people employed in processing once those fish have been landed. Please do not sell out our fishermen. They have endured so much for all the last 40 years. Please do not put them through any more suffering.

So we say farewell to political union but hello to a new Britain, which will always be close allies to our new European neighbours. May our new relationship be everything it should be. Let us now work together to build that new harmonious relationship.

  Dolors Montserrat (PPE). – Señora presidenta, hoy conocemos el programa de trabajo 2020 de la Comisión, un programa fundamental que va a marcar el rumbo del proyecto europeo y que apoyamos. Pero ayer se materializó el Brexit y tenemos que aprender de nuestros errores. Europa es el mayor proyecto de progreso, paz y unión, pero el populismo, los separatistas y el euroescepticismo han ido creciendo en paralelo al proyecto europeo. Estos movimientos quieren romper lo que hemos construido juntos. No reduzcamos nuestro proyecto político solo a un plan legislativo. Hagamos política en mayúsculas con este programa de trabajo. Defendamos el Estado de Derecho, los valores de la Unión, la libertad, la igualdad y el progreso económico y social. La Comisión Europea es la guardiana de los Tratados y de todo el Derecho derivado comunitario, incluidas las decisiones del Consejo y sus reglamentos, que obligan en su totalidad a todos los Estados miembros.

El pasado 13 de noviembre de 2017, el Consejo adoptó un régimen de sanciones y restricciones de entrada al espacio Schengen aplicable a algunos miembros del Gobierno ilegítimo de Maduro, de Venezuela. El 25 de junio de 2018, el Consejo añade a la lista de personas objeto de restricciones a Delcy Rodríguez, vicepresidenta ilegítima del Gobierno de Maduro. El Gobierno de Pedro Sánchez ha sido quien ha vulnerado estos acuerdos del Consejo, pues ha permitido que esta señora pisara durante horas el suelo español, que es espacio Schengen. Ante la gravedad de estos acontecimientos, pedimos a la Comisión que recabe toda la información para saber la verdad, que exija a Pedro Sánchez que cumpla las resoluciones del Consejo, porque no podemos permitir que un Gobierno europeo incumpla al Derecho comunitario, porque, si no, pierde sentido lo que hoy estamos aprobando y nos alejaríamos de los europeos. Aquí venimos a defender todos juntos el futuro de Europa.

  Miriam Dalli (S&D). – Sinjura President, fil-fatt matul l-elezzjonijiet, imma anke fl-aħħar xhur bħala Soċjalisti u Demokratiċi, għamilnieha ċara anke mal-Kummissjoni Ewropea li rridu bidla soċjali, ekonomika u ambjentali.

U din hija proprju s-sena li matulha rridu nibdew it-trasformazzjoni li tkellimna dwarha u li emminna fiha. Għaliex aħna mhux biss noħolmu dwar bidla imma rridu nimplimentaw dik il-bidla. Id-deċiżjonijiet politiċi li ser nieħdu matul din is-sena għandhom iwittu t-triq għall-ekonomija li rridu fl-Istati Membri u ser jiggwidawna biex naraw f'liema teknoloġiji rridu ninvestu. Imma għandna bżonn lill-Istati Membri jadottaw dawn il-miżuri u din il-politika ġdida.

Huwa għalhekk li qegħdin ninsistu fuq politika serja li tnaqqas it-tniġġis, tinvesti f'industriji nodfa, fl-effiċjenza fil-qasam tal-enerġija, fit-trasport nadif, fit-tneħħija ta' fjuwils li jniġġsu, vapuri li ma jkomplux iħammġu f'portijiet u ajruporti li jniġġsu ferm u ferm anqas milli għandna llum.

Imma biex nagħmlu din il-qabża rridu l-fondi u rridu ninvestu permezz ta' Fond li jgħin lill-ħaddiema, lil dawk ir-reġjuni u l-pajjiżi li jridu jimxu minn industriji li jniġġsu għal oħrajn ferm aktar nodfa. Dan huwa il-futur, din hija d-deċiżjoni li rridu nieħdu għall-pajjiżi li nirrappreżentaw u wara kollox għall-familji tagħna.

  Искра Михайлова (Renew). – Г-н Комисар, преди всичко искам да изразя подкрепа за основното послание на Работната програма на Комисията. Посланието е преход, който предлага възможности. Възможности за всеки един гражданин на Европейския съюз, за всяка държава членка, за всеки регион. Възможности за справедлива, климатичнонеутрална и дигитална Европа, но и преход, който гарантира върховенство на закона, регулира процесите на миграцията, подкрепя търговските споразумения.

Европейските граждани очакват от нас конкретни действия – ефективна работа на европейските институции. Сътрудничеството по Работната програма е пример за такава ефективна работа. Ние заедно трябва да направим така, че тази амбициозна програма да бъде реализирана и да предложи на европейските граждани преход, който ще повиши конкурентоспособността на европейската икономика и ще подобри качеството на живот на всеки един гражданин на Европейския съюз.

  Petra De Sutter (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, I would like to thank the Commissioner for his presentation. Commissioner, your work programme is very exhaustive but I will only touch upon the issue of digitalisation. High-ranking jobs only being presented to male shopkeepers, people of colour being targeted by facial recognition technologies, or cancer being better detected in certain hospitals than others – that is what we might get if we do not interfere with automated decision making. That is why we need clear rules on the deployment of AI, and the same goes for rules on digital intermediaries.

Sadly, in the recent past, we had several examples of online posts that were clearly preaching hate or glorifying terrorism, or content unrightfully taken down or even being prevented from going online.

We should also, of course, preserve our freedom of speech. Private companies or their automated filters can never take the place of human judges in removing online content.

Commissioner, striking the right balance between protecting and allowing is of utmost importance for the democratic rights of our citizens and we will, accordingly, look forward to your proposals in this domain.

  Mara Bizzotto (ID). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, che dire, siamo davanti alla solita Europa che non vuole cambiare nulla, la solita Europa che vuole fregare l'Italia, con la complicità del governo PD-5 Stelle.

Sulla lotta all'immigrazione clandestina siamo allo zero. L'accordo di Malta sugli immigrati è un grande bluff. Sulla crisi della Libia, con il pericolo terrorismo islamico e di nuove ondate di immigrati, l'Europa non esiste. Sul MES siete pronti a tornare alla carica per mettere le mani sul conto corrente degli italiani e sul Green Deal avete costruito l'ultima grande fregatura: gli italiani pagheranno 900 milioni di euro e in cambio ne riceveranno solo 360.

Mi chiedo: ma Gentiloni, il Commissario nominato da PD e 5 Stelle, difende gli interessi degli italiani o difende quelli della Germania e della Francia? Non è questa l'Europa che vogliamo, non è questo il futuro che vogliono i cittadini italiani. L'Italia non morirà schiava di Bruxelles, di Parigi o di Berlino, sia chiaro!

  Hermann Tertsch (ECR). – Señora presidenta, enhorabuena a toda la Comisión realmente por el éxito de marketing en lanzar este programa que se basa fundamentalmente en el Pacto Verde. El Pacto Verde evoca ya ese lema del gran salto adelante de Mao Tse-Tung. Lo justifica absolutamente todo: la condena a la muerte o la liquidación de industrias de producción, imposiciones masivas, cambios obligatorios a comunidades y sectores, regulaciones y controles de conducta. Así han logrado que los europeos en sectores enteros en amplias regiones tengan miedo. Tienen miedo, pero nadie se queja porque es tachado de negacionista, y de ahí a la muerte civil hoy en día hay muy poco.

Nos vamos a gastar en esta aventura 260 000 millones de euros adicionales al año. Y todo por cuestiones realmente ideológicas. Hay unos inmensos retos en Europa, que son otros, y vamos a estar marcando, por cuestiones ideológicas, unas cuestiones que nos van a limitar las libertades ante todo.

  Márton Gyöngyösi (NI). – Madam President, Mr Commissioner, I was glad to see in your Work Programme the implementation of the social pillar identified as a top priority. As we all know, the European Union was founded on social solidarity based on economic cooperation. Now there is a growing concern in Member States of the periphery that benefits of the single market are severely uneven and that their single role in European cooperation is to serve as a source of cheap labour for old Member States. The functioning of the single market is in danger. Economic and social tension will only increase if we don’t face up to the challenges, and this will worsen with digitalisation, which you have identified as one of the mega trends of our times and of our era.

The solution can only be a determined fight against wage differences and against geographical differences across the European Union via a reformed cohesion policy based on social solidarity among Member States. If we don’t deliver then incompetence will feed into anti-EU populism. The recommendation that you have made that through social dialogue we try to draw in civil society in finding a solution is a correct one, but please let me put forward one recommendation. You should also consult regional and local municipalities because they are the ones that are closest to our citizens, they should be consulted in the decision—making process.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 171(8))

  Andreas Schwab (PPE), blue-card question. – In our fight against anti-EU populism, we agree. The question that I would like to ask you – because you mentioned that people in your constituency see that they are misused as a workforce – is that the European Union has also offered the citizens of your constituency a huge opportunity to earn more, and people in other Member States of the European Union may have exactly the different point of view that you have expressed, so how do you think we can come to an agreement, making the right choice and finding the right balance?

  Márton Gyöngyösi (NI), blue-card answer. – Thank you very much for your question. I think it is a valid point. The European Union does have an instrument which is there to close the differences between the Member States – it is called cohesion policy. My only problem is that cohesion policy is misused. Much of the cohesion funds that are received by Member States are either going to corruption channels or they are misused into projects which don’t help competitiveness. I think that the EU has a very important responsibility to oversee the management of the cohesion funds so that they go into research and development, into education, to improve the use of these funds, to improve the economies of these Member States.

  Nuno Melo (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, os projetos de interligação energética entre Portugal e Espanha e entre a Espanha e a França, que permitiriam a Portugal exportar gás natural para a Europa, saíram da lista de projetos prioritários da Comissão Europeia.

Estes projetos foram defendidos pela própria Comissão e foi-lhes atribuído o estatuto de projetos de interesse comum, tendo em conta o seu papel para garantir a segurança energética da Europa. Sabendo que, neste momento, cerca de uma dezena de países europeus depende da Rússia em 75% no que se refere ao abastecimento de gás natural, a retirada da lista de projetos prioritários constitui, em si mesmo, um contrassenso em relação ao interesse da segurança energética da União Europeia e muito gostaria que a Comissão Europeia explicasse o porquê desta retirada.

Finalmente, e em relação ao Quadro Financeiro Plurianual, que está num impasse, sabemos que é uma negociação complexa, dificultada pelo Brexit, e, caso não exista uma decisão política sobre o Quadro Financeiro Plurianual a tempo de ele entrar em vigor em 1 de janeiro de 2021, o Parlamento Europeu já se pronunciou pela necessidade de que exista um plano de contingência.

A questão que coloco à Comissão é clara: está a Política de Coesão em risco para o próximo ano?

Em relação a estas duas questões, portanto – a redução da dependência energética da União Europeia face à Rússia, que seria facilmente superada se as interligações através da Península Ibérica acontecessem, e os Fundos de Coesão, que são obviamente fundamentais para os Países de Coesão –, em relação a uma coisa ou outra, muito gostaria que a Comissão Europeia pudesse dar uma explicação, sendo que particularmente a situação que tem que ver com o gás é muito incompreensível.

  Heléne Fritzon (S&D). – Fru talman! Europa ska möta framtiden, en framtid som handlar om globalisering, ökad digitalisering och inte minst klimat- och miljöomställningen. Vi har stora utmaningar, men vi har också möjligheter.

Kommissionens program pekar ut ett starkare socialt Europa. Det handlar om att höja ambitionen, att göra det i genomförandet av den sociala pelaren. Det handlar om jämställdhetsstrategin. Det handlar om att inrätta en barngaranti.

Samtidigt finns det saker som jag saknar i initiativet. Vi behöver tydligare skrivningar om de otrygga anställningarna och deltiderna, inte minst för kvinnor. Vi behöver fler initiativ för en god arbetsmiljö, och vi behöver stärka den sociala dialogen. Europas medborgare vill att vi levererar. Vi har ett arbete att göra, och vi måste börja nu.

  Valerie Hayer (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, merci pour ce programme de travail qui répond directement au discours ambitieux d’Ursula von der Leyen, que nous soutenons.

Je voudrais revenir ici sur l’une des déclarations fortes de la présidente, qui concerne le droit d’initiative du Parlement. Le corollaire à ce droit, c’est le savoir, c’est l’information c’est la statistique. Or, en tant que nouvelle élue au Parlement européen, je m’étonne que nous recevions les informations parfois trop tardivement et parfois pas du tout. En voici deux exemples concrets.

Un exemple technique d’abord: le système ABAC de la Commission, c’est-à-dire le registre de toutes les dépenses des programmes européens, n’est toujours pas accessible au Parlement européen, alors que nous sommes l’une des deux branches budgétaires. Cherchez l’erreur.

Un exemple plus politique maintenant, avec la diffusion en décembre dernier, dans la presse, de chiffres extrêmement importants sur les bénéfices du marché intérieur pour chacun des États membres. Ce sont des chiffres précieux pour démontrer l’influence positive de la construction européenne et ce sont des chiffres sensibles quand nous connaissons les positions de certains États membres, notamment les États plus frugaux, dans le cadre des négociations actuelles sur le prochain budget pluriannuel.

Monsieur le Commissaire, nous poursuivons le même objectif. Le Parlement est un partenaire avec qui il faut compter, vous le savez. C’est pourquoi je vous demande aujourd’hui de nous garantir que la Commission s’engagera à fournir aux députés toutes les informations dont ils ont besoin.

(L’oratrice accepte de répondre à une question «carton bleu» (article 171, paragraphe 8 du règlement)

  Maria Grapini (S&D), Întrebare adresată conform procedurii „cartonașului albastru”. – Doamnă președintă, doamnă Hayer, vă mulțumesc pentru că acceptați întrebarea. Sunt de acord cu ce spuneți dumneavoastră. Vreau să vă întreb, însă, legat de transparența care există între Comisie și Parlament și vă dau un exemplu concret și vreau un răspuns concret.

Recent am făcut o dezbatere pe produsele cu dublă calitate și Comisia ne-a prezentat, în sinteză, un raport făcut de specialiști plătiți de Comisie, evident, din bugetul Uniunii Europene, dar a refuzat să ne pună la dispoziție raportul și analiza experților in extenso, spunând, Comisia, că este secret. Nu ne dă nouă, Parlamentului și Comisiei pentru piața internă, rezultatele acelui studiu.

Vi se pare corectă lipsa de transparență a Comisiei? Cum să fie plătit din bugetul Uniunii Europene un studiu și să nu-l primească... (Președinta a întrerupt vorbitoarea)... comisia de fond?

  Valerie Hayer (Renew), réponse «carton bleu». – Pardon, je n’ai pas saisi. Je prends acte de ce que vous dites, Madame, chère collègue.

  Sven Giegold (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Vizepräsident Šefčovič! Das Arbeitsprogramm der Kommission setzt grundsätzlich den richtigen Schwerpunkt, nämlich durch den Klimaschutz und das Angehen der ökologischen Krisen gleichzeitig zu neuer Stärke der Europäischen Union und auch unserer Wirtschaft zu kommen. Das ist richtig. Aber gleichzeitig zeigt das Arbeitsprogramm eine Schwäche. Es ist doch sehr sehr allgemein und schwach, wenn es um die Durchsetzung der Rechtstaatlichkeit in Europa geht. Viele Bürgerinnen und Bürger haben den Respekt verloren vor unseren Reden, dass Europa eine Werte- und Rechtsgemeinschaft ist. Wenn in Mitgliedstaaten grundlegende Rechte, wie etwa die Medienfreiheit, der Kampf gegen Korruption und auch die Stärkung der Demokratie mit Füßen getreten werden, dann darf das die Europäische Kommission nicht kalt lassen. Da reicht es nicht aus, Listen zu führen, sondern wir brauchen hier Durchsetzungs- und Sanktionsmechanismen. Die aber werden in Ihrem Programm leider nicht deutlich ausgesprochen. Wir erwarten, dass Sie hier endlich zu harten Maßnahmen kommen, denn sonst verlieren die Bürgerinnen und Bürger den Respekt vor unserer großartigen Europäischen Union.

  Guido Reil (ID). – Frau Präsidentin! Es geht heute auch wieder einmal um die europäischen Säulen sozialer Rechte. Eine dieser Säulen ist die europäische Arbeitslosenversicherung. Mit der europäischen Arbeitslosenversicherung machen wir uns immer schneller auf den Weg zur Transferunion, und so eine Transferunion hat nichts mit sozialer Gerechtigkeit zu tun. Ganz im Gegenteil: Sie ist „strotzunsozial“, denn sie belohnt die Staaten, die in der Vergangenheit viel falsch gemacht haben, und bestraft die, die viel richtig gemacht haben. Ich möchte das mal am Beispiel von Deutschland deutlich machen: Wir sind die größte Volkswirtschaft der EU und wir sind der größte Nettozahler. Aber wie sieht es bei uns mit der sozialen Gerechtigkeit aus? Die Nettolöhne in Deutschland sind seit Einführung des Euros um 10 % gesunken. Wir sind das einzige Land Europas, in dem die Nettolöhne gesunken sind. Die Altersarmut hat sich verdoppelt, und sie wird in den nächsten Jahren weiter dramatisch ansteigen. Immer mehr Leute in Deutschland leben auf der Straße, sie können sich keine Wohnung mehr leisten, weil viele viele viele Menschen in der Vergangenheit in den Niedriglohnsektor gedrängt wurden. Gleichzeitig sind die Mieten in den letzten Jahren um 50 % gestiegen – um 50 %! So sieht es aus in dem reichen Land Deutschland, dem größten Nettozahler und der größten Volkswirtschaft. Soziale Gerechtigkeit muss nationale Aufgabe bleiben.

  Ruža Tomašić (ECR). – Poštovana potpredsjednice, dosadašnje predstavljanje programa rada novog saziva Europske komisije puno je floskula, od socijalno pravedne tranzicije na europski zeleni plan preko gospodarstva u interesu građana do promicanja europskog načina života. Puno se priča o tome koliko je europski zeleni plan ambiciozan, ali se nerado spominje koliko će on koštati građane Unije.

Što se tiče gospodarstva u interesu građana, pa u interesu je građana svako ono gospodarstvo koje zapošljava i stvara proizvode i usluge koje zadovoljavaju potrebe potrošača i podržava kvalitetu života. Europsko je gospodarstvo to bilo zapravo i dosada.

Europski način života još je jedan u nizu romantičnih izraza iza kojeg se krije birokratska definicija koju Bruxelles nastoji nametnuti svim državama članicama. Taj naš način života treba biti onakav kakvim ga žele europski narodi, a ne briselska birokracija.

  Ivan Štefanec (PPE). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, Európska komisia si vytýčila množstvo ambicióznych cieľov. Chcem však upriamiť pozornosť na jeden, na ktorom mi obzvlášť záleží. Je ním boj proti podvodom pri eurodotáciách, viac právomocí pre spoločné kontrolné orgány a obmedzenie moci a vplyvu oligarchov. Hovorím o tom preto, lebo pred dvoma rokmi pre neuveriteľnú chamtivosť určitých ľudí, ktorí dnes, našťastie, už stoja pred súdom, vyhasli na Slovensku dva mladé životy: novinára Jána Kuciaka a jeho priateľky Martiny Kušnírovej. Ešte predtým bola zavraždená maltská novinárka Daphne Caruana Galizia. Zomreli preto, lebo odhaľovali pravdu a zločinci sa báli, že prídu o svoje nakradnuté peniaze. Veľa z nich pochádzalo aj z európskych zdrojov. Ak Únia rozdeľuje zdroje, má nielen právo, ale aj povinnosť kontrolovať ich toky a využívanie. A vymáhať dodržiavanie pravidiel. Bol by som rád, ak by sme na konci roku 2020 mohli v oblasti ochrany finančných záujmov Únie konštatovať výrazný posun. Komisia má v tomto podporu nielen moju osobnú, ale určite aj podporu celej Európskej ľudovej strany.

  Eric Andrieu (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, nous voulons devenir le premier continent sans carbone d’ici 2050 et le premier continent en matière de développement durable et être innovants en matière de protection de l’environnement. Nous serons à vos côtés pour que, tous ensemble, nous arrivions à ces objectifs. Mais je voudrais partager avec vous trois points d’inquiétude.

Le premier, c’est le budget. La Cour des comptes européenne estime à plus d’un milliard d’euros par an les besoins liés à la transition environnementale. Or, c’est ce que la Commission prévoit, elle, sur dix ans. Il faut que la Commission nous dise précisément comment elle va trouver les moyens pour permettre cette transition.

Le second point d’inquiétude, c’est la question de la cohérence. Nous ne pouvons pas, d’un côté, nous battre pour l’environnement et, de l’autre, continuer de signer des accords commerciaux complètement fous avec des régions de l’autre bout du monde. Faire parcourir, par exemple, 10 000 kilomètres à des viandes alors que le marché européen est saturé est une aberration environnementale.

Enfin, le troisième point d’inquiétude est primordial. Il s’agit de traiter en profondeur la question sociale. Écologie et social sont liés, ne serait-ce que par le bouleversement que ce changement de modèle économique va impliquer. Or, la question sociale n’est pas vraiment traitée dans vos propositions et cela, nous ne saurions l’accepter.

  Dita Charanzová (Renew). – Madam President, I wish to thank Vice—President Šefčovič for this work programme and, in particular, the importance given to the European digital transformation. We need ambitious digital policies to allow European companies to grow and innovate in Europe and for Europeans to harness the benefits of the digital transformation. We need to catch up now to other big players and so that it’s us who set the standards globally.

In addition to the Digital Services Act, I welcome the proposals on artificial intelligence and data, the review of cybersecurity and a Digital Education Action Plan. Deciding how we should regulate the digital world is a priority. This topic will surely not only dominate the 2020 agenda but also, I suspect, the entire mandate. We need to get it right, now, and remember the answer to our problems is not always more regulation but better regulation.

  Karima Delli (Verts/ALE). – Madame la présidente, Monsieur le vice—président, mes chers collègues, comme j’ai pu le rappeler hier, dans cet hémicycle et à maintes reprises, l’urgence climatique est là. Elle n’est pas là pour 2025 ou pour 2030. L’action relative à cette urgence climatique doit être prise en compte maintenant. On ne sauvera pas la planète avec un catalogue de belles paroles, je le dis. Nous ne pouvons plus donc attendre une année de plus: nous devons commencer cette année avec des mesures fortes, notamment dans le secteur des transports.

Ce secteur représente 30 % des émissions de gaz à effet de serre. Il s’agit du seul secteur en Europe qui ne réduit pas ces émissions. C’est la raison pour laquelle, Monsieur le vice—président, je voudrais que l’on boucle le dossier, notamment sur la redevance «poids lourds». Le Parlement a adopté une position ambitieuse lors du dernier mandat et l’on pourrait penser que nous serions conformes aux principes «pollueur/payeur» et «utilisateur/payeur» pour ces poids lourds. Et bien non! Le Conseil, incapable de parvenir à un accord, a torpillé le texte, et c’est inacceptable. En conclusion, je somme la Commission de présenter une nouvelle proposition forte pour avoir une redevance «poids lourds» à la hauteur.

  Gianantonio Da Re (ID). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il 2020 rappresenta un anno cruciale per l'Unione europea. La Commissione dovrà affrontare infatti grandi sfide: la Brexit e la negoziazione del bilancio europeo 2021-2027. La Commissione avrà solo undici mesi per finalizzare l'uscita del Regno Unito dall'Unione europea. Ritengo sia assolutamente necessario vigilare affinché nel corso delle negoziazioni venga tutelata la competitività delle nostre piccole e medie imprese e assicurato il riconoscimento dei marchi DOP e IGP dei nostri prodotti d'eccellenza.

Per quanto riguarda il prossimo Quadro finanziario pluriennale, la Commissione ha proposto di raddoppiare il bilancio del programma Erasmus, portandolo a 30 miliardi di euro. La Presidente von der Leyen, nel proporre il raddoppio del bilancio per il programma Erasmus, è consapevole dell'impegno assunto davanti ai cittadini? Le promesse sono facili da fare ma difficili da mantenere, come si dice da noi "tra il dire e il fare il c'è di mezzo il mare".

  Beata Kempa (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Mówi pani, że Komisja będzie Komisją geopolityczną. Tego właśnie trzeba dzisiaj Europie w konkurującym i zmieniającym się układzie strategicznym, więc od słów do czynów. Jakie środki podejmie pani, aby raz na zawsze zatrzymać budowę gazociągu NordStream – projektu, który dzieli Europę i wzmacnia nacisk Rosji na kraje naszej wspólnoty? Strategiczne przesyły gazu i ropy, bezpieczeństwo i rozbudowa to właśnie jedna z głównych bolączek zjednoczonej Europy. Warto, pani przewodnicząca, u progu działalności nowej Komisji odwołać się do wartości ojców-założycieli. I tu prośba: my chcemy być w Unii Europejskiej, bardzo chcemy być, ale chcemy, aby to była Unia, która przede wszystkim nakazuje wzajemny szacunek państw członkowskich, a nie dyktat. Więc jakim prawem dochodzi do wtrącania się w sprawy wewnętrzne i wewnętrznych reform i do powiązania tych spraw, które są wyłączną domeną krajów wewnętrznych, z budżetem? To jest, niestety, prosta droga do kolejnych podziałów. Wyciągnijmy lekcję z dnia wczorajszego.

  Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovana potpredsjednice, šezdeset i nešto je godina od Rimskih ugovora, kolegice i kolege podsjećam vas na to, a svijet je danas nestabilniji nego ikada prije. Klimatske, tehnološke i demografske promjene mijenjaju naše društvo i naš način života. Moramo se usredotočiti, gospodine povjereniče, na jednakost i stvaranje prilika za sve, i za žene i za muškarce, Europljane s istoka, zapada, juga ili sjevera, mlade i stare.

Europski zeleni plan, primjerice, sastoji se od 47 ključnih mjera. U sljedećih deset godina on će mobilizirati najmanje bilijun eura, dakle 1000 milijardi ulaganja očekujemo na području zaštite okoliša i klime. To je ona investicijska strana. Gospodarstvo u interesu građana koje navodite je načelo jednake plaće za jednak rad, koji će biti temelj za nove europske strategije za ravnopravnost spolova. Bit će to veliki izazov. Samo mali podsjetnik, žene u prosjeku zarađuju 16% manje od muškaraca, iako su obrazovanije. Konferencija o budućnosti Europe i nova tema, novi poticaj europskoj demokraciji, još je jedan od ciljeva. Tu bi posebnu ulogu trebali imati naši građani, naši mladi, civilno društvo i europske institucije kao ravnopravni partneri. Tko može govoriti o demokraciji bolje od kontinenta koji ju je utemeljio? No moramo vratiti povjerenje u ono što smo, tko smo i znati kuda idemo. Ovaj je program dobar put za to.

  Tonino Picula (S&D). – Poštovana potpredsjednice, pozdravljam predložene inicijative Komisije, ali očekujem ispunjenje visoko postavljenih ciljeva. Naročito tranziciju prema ekološkoj i održivoj Europi. Ključna će biti uloga regija i lokalnih zajednica koje treba uključiti u procese, pogotovo u Fond za pravednu tranziciju.

Podržavam inicijativu protiv gubitka biološke raznolikosti do 2030., što je prioritetno Hrvatskoj kao zemlji bogatoj prirodnim resursima. Zato pozdravljam i novu strategiju za europske šume. Jača orijentiranost prema ciljevima održivog razvoja kao dijela europskog zelenog dogovora je ujedno i izuzetno važna obveza prema građanima. Ohrabruje zalaganje Komisije za davanje prioriteta garanciji za mlade. Tako mladi ljudi dobivaju dodatne prilike za obrazovanje i zaposlenje.

Jaču geopolitičku ulogu Europkoj uniji, pogotovo u neposrednom susjedstvu, omogućuje jasno podržavanje otvaranja pregovora sa Sjevernom Makedonijom i Albanijom.

Nadam se da će najavljena nova metodologija potaknuti taj proces, pogotovo uoči zagrebačkog samita za što u ime Europskog parlamenta pripremam preporuku.

  Luis Garicano (Renew). – Madam President, today is a sad day, the last day for the United Kingdom. We will find out many of the negative consequences for us and for them over the next weeks. I want to point one out that is really particularly worrying. With the UK in, Europe is an education super power. Some of the best universities in the world are in the European Union. Without it, the European Union becomes relatively a minion. University College London, Imperial College London, Cambridge, Oxford, they all leave the European Union today. If you look at the most recent QS ranking of the 50 top universities in the world, there are 12 in Asia, 21 in the United States, 11 in the UK and Switzerland. There is one of the world’s top universities in Europe – the University of Delft at number 50. This is really a critical situation. We talk about innovation, we talk about the knowledge economy and yet we are not investing in our universities. The Work Programme of the Commission doesn’t even mention the word university. We have an archaic government. We have funding problems. We have a mobility problem. This is a real crisis for Europe. We need to become an education superpower if we’re going to succeed in a knowledge economy.

  Tineke Strik (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, the 2020 Work Programme is not yet decisive on the future of our common European Asylum System and that is because, at the moment, plans are designed for the new pact on asylum, which the Presidency has announced in a first speech already. The most important thing is that we find a solution for the deadlock of the distribution of asylum seekers. I would really urge the Commission and also the Member States to find a solution so that we finally really get a fair share of responsibility for asylum seekers in Europe, and that requires an immediate distribution of asylum seekers directly from the external borders. Many Member States are thinking now and proposing a kind of procedure at the borders, meaning that there’s an assessment, a screening of the asylum request. I would really encourage you not to go along with that route because that would mean more hotspot situations and lengthy procedures with lengthy detention. The Greens proposed to have an immediate distribution and, furthermore, really start enforcing the current rules that we have on reception, on qualification, so that we really get a harmonised system for asylum seekers, and fair responsibility sharing.

  Nicolaus Fest (ID). – Die Vizepräsidentin und deutsche Sozialdemokratin Barley gesteht den Abgeordneten des Europäischen Parlaments nur dann ihr selbstverständliches Rederecht zu, wenn diese gleichzeitig die Loyalität zu ihrer Heimat verleugnen. Das ist bezeichnend für die Vertreterin einer Partei... (Die Präsidentin entzieht dem Redner das Wort)

  Die Präsidentin. – Wir können jetzt hier eine neue Debatte über dieses Thema aufmachen. Ich bitte Sie jetzt darum, die Autorität der Sitzungsleitung zu respektieren. Das ist nicht meine Entscheidung, sondern das ist die Entscheidung des Präsidiums. Das ist bereits gestern so gehandhabt worden. Wenn Sie sich darüber beschweren wollen, dann tun Sie das bitte auf den vorgesehenen Wegen beim Präsidium. Das ist ja keine neue Debatte. Langsam ist es auch genug.

  Nicolaus Fest (ID). – Gut! Dann beziehe ich diese Kritik nicht auf Sie, sondern auf das Präsidium, sage aber auch, es ist bezeichnend für eine EU, die gerade gestern für die Rechte der indigenen Völker auf ihre Kultur, auf ihre Traditionen und auch ihre Flaggen einsteht, aber gleichzeitig die Rechte, die Kulturen und auch die Flaggen der europäischen Völker mit Füßen tritt. Die Briten haben daraus glücklicherweise inzwischen die Konsequenz gezogen und sind ausgetreten. Ich bin sicher, auch andere Völker werden diesem Beispiel folgen, und irgendwann dann hoffentlich auch Deutschland. Das wäre ein Grund zur doppelten Freude, weil damit nicht nur die Unterwerfung Deutschlands unter die immer selbstherrlichere EU endet, sondern damit würde auch ihre kleinliche und selbstherrliche Sitzungsleitung endlich enden.

  Die Präsidentin. – Jetzt haben Sie für diesen Auftritt auch noch elf Sekunden mehr bekommen, Herr Fest. Und betrachten Sie bitte nochmal die vielen schönen Fahnen hinter uns, auf die wir alle gemeinsam sehr stolz sind.

  Alexandr Vondra (ECR). – Madam President, yesterday we had a sad day, marked with a sad song, and the first impact is already here; we are losing English as our lingua franca, as our way of common understanding, and a language is at the core of a common understanding. And we can even use somehow the opportunity with Brexit because English becomes a neutral language – acceptable for us Czechs, for the Germans, for the French, but we see exactly the opposite: everybody speaks in their mother language, with some notable exceptions, and the others are not listening at all.

So, the Commission Work Programme is a full—of—ambitions goal, without any impact assessments, but there is nothing about promoting English as our lingua franca. So, my question is whether you are planning to do something to eliminate the Tower of Babel syndrome and to promote our common understanding at the core of our communication – that’s language.

  Bernd Lange (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Vizepräsident! Als ich mir das Arbeitsprogramm der Kommission und die Prioritäten ausgedruckt habe, habe ich gedacht, mein Drucker hat irgendrtwas nicht mitgedruckt, weil ich hinsichtlich der außenwirtschaftlichen Dimension nur Punkt 30, die WTO-Reform, sehe. Das ist ein Punkt, der irgendwann mal in der Zukunft vielleicht passieren kann, aber nichts mit einer außenwirtschaftlichen Absicherung des Green Deals zu tun hat, und auch nichts mit der Umsetzung der Nachhaltigkeitsziele der Vereinten Nationen in der Außenhandelspolitik. Also da frage ich wirklich die Kommission: Wo finden sich die Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung in der Handelspolitik wieder? Wie geht es weiter mit einem border adjustment fund, der sicherstellt, dass es keine Wettbewerbsnachteile gibt? Wo bleiben wirkliche Lieferketten, die so fair sind, dass Unternehmen ihre Verantwortung für die Nachhaltigkeitsziele global auch wahrnehmen können? Da müssen wir noch nacharbeiten.

PRESIDÊNCIA: PEDRO SILVA PEREIRA
Vice-Presidente

  Vlad-Marius Botoş (Renew). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, stimați colegi, am văzut că Programul de lucru al Comisiei pentru anul 2020 include mai multe inițiative legate de sănătatea și alimentația cetățenilor europeni. Avem inițiativele „Farm to Fork” Strategy, Europe's Beating Cancer Plan și altele.

Nu pot decât să fiu de acord cu acestea, dar trebuie să atrag atenția că lipsește, din programul Comisiei, o inițiativă extrem de importantă, care să le unească și, ceea ce este mai important, prin care se dă consumatorului puterea de a alege în cunoștință de cauză, puterea de a fi cel mai important factor în lupta comună pentru prevenirea îmbolnăvirilor. Trebuie să ne asigurăm că toți europenii, indiferent de pregătirea lor, au acces la informare corectă și eficientă în ce privește alimentele pe care aleg să le consume.

Tocmai de aceea subliniez aici necesitatea unei inițiative de etichetare alimentară semaforizată, care să țină cont de aportul nutritiv și de beneficiile alimentelor asupra sănătății oamenilor, pentru că cetățenii și sănătatea lor ar trebui să fie cel mai important punct pe agenda oamenilor politici europeni, pe agenda noastră, a tuturor.

  Robert Roos (ECR). – Voorzitter, de Europese green deal is onze nieuwe groeistrategie. Dat staat in het werkprogramma 2020 van de Commissie. Maar het enige wat daar nu over bekend is, is dat die 11.500 miljard EUR gaat kosten. Wát het inhoudt en wát dit voor burgers en bedrijven gaat betekenen, is volstrekt onduidelijk.

Ondertussen wordt de Green Deal in een wet gegoten, waardoor het proces onomkeerbaar wordt. Via taxonomie zal de economie worden gestuurd door de Europese Commissie. Een schimmig spel, want ongekozen eurofielen gaan bepalen wat “groen” is en wat “bruin” is. Het wordt meer controle, meer bureaucratie en vooral meer Europese Unie. Het klimaat wordt misbruikt om nog meer macht naar Brussel over te hevelen. Een planeconomie waar onze Oost-Europese collega’s dertig jaar geleden afscheid van hebben genomen.

Meer geld en meer macht. Brussel heeft nooit genoeg. De democratie is echt ver te zoeken. Dit is niet wat de burgers willen. En met dit beleid zullen meer lidstaten de Britten gaan volgen.

  Pedro Marques (S&D). – Mr President, one has to start by saying that our key priorities were taken on board by the European Commission. This is overall a good document – a job well done by you, Mr Vice-President. Make no mistake: this is indeed an important debate and an important document. But all words that could bring the European project forward have already been written or said. Now we must act. We must act to be at the forefront of decarbonisation and we must guarantee that no one is left behind. We can’t win the decarbonisation war with an army of unemployed people, and the transition we will not be just or effective if it does not stretch over our frontiers. We must be more solid. We do need an economy that works for the people, and we need to complete economic and monetary union. But for all of this to be of any relevance, we need to put our money where our mouth is. No more time for beautiful words. We need to find the money and we need to agree on a bold multiannual financial framework (MFF).

  Paul Tang (S&D). – Voorzitter en meneer Šefčovič. De Commissie trad aan als een geopolitieke commissie, maar bij de eerste geopolitieke gebeurtenis in Irak was u stil. En bij de dreigende straftarieven door Donald Trump vanwege de digitale-dienstenbelasting was u stil. Onze burgers hebben verwachtingen over duurzaamheid, sociale rechten en een eerlijke economie. Maar als die moeten worden verdedigd, blijft u dan stil?

De plannen van de Commissie zijn goed en ambitieus, maar ze zullen leiden tot conflict. Met Amerika, met China, maar ook met de Europese lidstaten, over bijvoorbeeld de Europese werkloosheidsverzekering, maar zeker ook over de begroting. Op elk van die punten vindt u ons aan uw zijde, maar alleen als u doorzet. De sociale markteconomie van Europa is vrijer dan China’s partijstaat en is eerlijker dan het Amerikaanse kartelkapitalisme. Dat behouden we alleen als we hard blijven vechten voor een eerlijk, vrij en duurzaam Europa. Een geopolitieke commissie, ja. Maar meer nog hebben we nodig: een spierballencommissie.

Intervenções “catch the eye”

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, sigur, ce ne-ați prezentat aici cred că e un program pe care nimeni nu-l poate contesta. Personal, eu cred că nu este realist să spunem că este programul pe 2020, poate fi un program pentru mandat. Sunt de acord cu toate punctele prezentate, însă vreau acum, punctual, să vă întreb legat de câteva lucruri. În fond, toate programele pe care noi le pregătim, dumneavoastră, noi, Consiliul, trebuie să pună în centru cetățeanul și, de aceea, aș vrea să detaliați.

Legat de Programul de coeziune, credeți dumneavoastră că, în urma măsurilor luate în mandatul trecut, s-a ajuns la diminuarea disparităților regionale? Ce veți face acum, concret, ca aceste disparități să dispară, să fim apropiați, cetățenii să aibă aceleași drepturi? Și, legat de transparență, pentru că am pus întrebarea, vă întreb concret. Ne-ați spus că aveți o metodologie solidă pentru statul de drept. Puteți să detaliați ce înseamnă metodologie solidă și dacă puteți să ne și prezentați această metodologie?

  Traian Băsescu (PPE). – Domnule președinte, am privit programul Comisiei. Dacă ne uităm la priorități, ne întrebăm de unde atâția bani. Avem ambiția să avem o Europă neutră din punct de vedere al poluării. Avem ambiția să lansăm programul 5G. Avem ambiția să facem armată europeană. Avem ambiția să implementăm Pilonul social. Nu pot crede în atâtea priorități simultan când privesc la câți bani sunt alocați.

De aceea, atenționez că acest Green Deal trebuie să fie privit responsabil. 1 000 de miliarde în zece ani este mult prea puțin, iar dacă vreți să vedeți efectele, veniți în România, în Valea Jiului, și vedeți închiderea de mine de huilă. A rămas de pe urma acelui program, făcut cu Uniunea Europeană, șomaj și sărăcie.

  Maria Manuel Leitão Marques (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, o programa da Comissão em matéria de better regulation, devo dizer-lhe, Senhor Comissário, é um pouco mais do mesmo. Enfim, tirando a plataforma Feeds for the future, não nos traz grandes novidades.

A minha pergunta é: como pensa a Comissão usar a tecnologia, a inteligência artificial de que fala tanto, para melhorar os seus próprios serviços, para modernizar a sua própria estrutura, por exemplo em matéria de fundos comunitários, para facilitar e agilizar o acesso, particularmente às pequenas e médias empresas, sem perder o controlo e a avaliação?

Também aqui a inteligência artificial e as novas tecnologias podem ajudar a ter instituições europeias mais próximas dos cidadãos.

  Tudor Ciuhodaru (S&D). – Domnule președinte, eu vin din Iași, un oraș la granița de est a Uniunii Europene, în România, și am trei solicitări urgente pentru România. În primul rând, vorbesc de Schengen. Nici măcar nu costă nimic și vă reamintesc faptul că îndeplinim toate condițiile și că nu am fost lăsați să intrăm nici astăzi.

În al doilea rând, vorbesc despre infrastructură și să știți că Spitalul Regional de Urgență din Iași și autostrada Iași-Târgu Mureș sunt printre prioritățile cetățenilor din România. Am reușit, în urmă cu o lună, să trimitem cererea de finanțare și sper să urgentați aceste proceduri de alocare de fonduri pentru că cei care m-au trimis în Parlamentul României s-au săturat de atâtea așteptări.

Și, în al treilea rând, reanalizarea și reechilibrarea subvențiilor de agricultură în așa fel încât să avem o echitate în toate țările Uniunii Europene. Solicit și celorlalți europarlamentari români aflați în sală să mă susțină în acest demers și sunt convins că vom găsi soluția sănătoasă pentru ca aceste trei obiective să devină prioritare și pentru Comisia Europeană.

  Domènec Ruiz Devesa (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, muchas gracias por su presentación. Yo apoyo firmemente el programa de trabajo de la Comisión. Celebro que se haya referido, también como una prioridad, a la Conferencia sobre el Futuro de Europa; yo sé que usted, personalmente, apoya que sea un ejercicio sustantivo y ambicioso. Y en ese sentido, creo que es importante también, como han dicho otros diputados, por ejemplo, Ska Keller, que está aquí presente, que lo que sucedió ayer con el voto que tuvimos que dar a favor del Brexit sea la ocasión para unirnos más como europeos y avanzar en la unidad política de Europa.

Yo creo que la Comisión tiene que apoyar la tendencia de los grandes grupos proeuropeos en este Parlamento, que creemos que ahora es el momento de dar ese salto cualitativo en la integración política, precisamente porque es lo que nos han dado como mandato los europeos en las últimas elecciones.

  Margarida Marques (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, eu gostaria de começar por agradecer ao Vice-Presidente Šefčovič ter-nos apresentado este programa de trabalho da Comissão com o detalhe necessário para que este parlamento consiga perceber exatamente qual é a ambição da Comissão Europeia para este primeiro ano.

Temos pena que não haja uma dimensão mais plurianual para o mandato da Comissão, mas temos a ideia daquilo que a Comissão pretende lançar neste ano.

Tenho duas questões de pormenor, pequenas, porque o tempo não me permite mais. A primeira tem a ver com o desafio com que a Comissão é confrontada de criar condições para que os cidadãos acreditem mais no projeto europeu. E, portanto, a questão da democracia é uma questão muito importante e a cooperação interinstitucional.

Um segundo ponto tem a ver com o financiamento destas políticas. Ou seja, nós, instituições europeias, só conseguimos ser credíveis se, de facto, os cidadãos entenderem que as propostas políticas que nós fazemos também têm a ambição financeira necessária e suficiente para implementar essas políticas. E aí nós gostávamos que a Comissão Europeia fosse aliada do Parlamento nesta negociação.

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, vicepresidente Šefčovič, entre las prioridades del programa de trabajo de la Comisión para 2020 hay dos —Nuevo Impulso a la Democracia Europea y Promoción de nuestro Modo de Vida Europeo— que afectan a las competencias de la Comisión de Libertades Civiles, Justicia y Asuntos de Interior que tengo el honor de presidir. Y le recuerdo algunos mandatos pendientes de cumplimiento.

El primero, establecer un mecanismo para la democracia, el Estado de Derecho y los derechos fundamentales que sea permanente, regular y objetivo y que incluya a todos los Estados miembros.

El segundo, actualizar el Reglamento sobre el acceso a los documentos y la transparencia, que tiene veinte años y está completamente obsoleto, además de incumplido.

El tercero, que haya de una vez un mecanismo vinculante de solidaridad que actualice el Reglamento de Dublín y que aproveche a fondo el capítulo presupuestario de migraciones y asilo para atender la crisis migratoria y la tragedia humanitaria que se están produciendo en Grecia.

El cuarto, que se derogue el artículo de la «Directiva de ayuda» que permite la penalización de la ayuda humanitaria. Y, en definitiva, que haya de una vez un impulso a ese espacio de libertad, justicia y seguridad que tiene pendiente la cuenta de solidaridad con los Estados que tienen una frontera exterior vulnerable de la Unión.

  Leszek Miller (S&D). – Panie Przewodniczący! Uważam, że obok wielu słusznych celów Komisja powinna w większym zakresie zwrócić uwagę na kwestie pracownicze i socjalne. Mam na myśli wprowadzenie w Unii sprawiedliwej płacy minimalnej oraz systemu ubezpieczeń na wypadek bezrobocia. W wielu krajach istnieje kategoria minimalnego wynagrodzenia, ale tu chodzi o relacje do przeciętnego wynagrodzenia, które w moim odczuciu powinny wynosić co najmniej 60% na terytorium całej Unii Europejskiej.

Ponownie apeluję do Komisji, by w ramach planu zwalczania oszustw podatkowych zajęła się wprowadzeniem podatku cyfrowego. Komisja mogłaby w tej sprawie wykorzystać istniejące mechanizmy traktatowe i odejść od jednomyślności państw członkowskich. Wydaje się to łatwiejsze do zrealizowania niż proponowane przyznanie inicjatywy ustawodawczej Parlamentowi, co bez rewizji traktatu i ograniczenia kompetencji Komisji niestety nie wydaje się możliwe.

  Mónica Silvana González (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, celebramos, por supuesto, que entre las prioridades del programa de trabajo de la Comisión para 2020 se incluya todo el Pacto Verde, dada la emergencia climática que declaró este propio Parlamento. Pero creemos que la Comisión también debería focalizar más el trabajo en la acción exterior, en cómo lideramos y defendemos el Derecho internacional humanitario, en cómo reforzamos más la cooperación al desarrollo y la ayuda humanitaria.

Sabemos que los países que menos han contribuido al calentamiento global y a la contaminación son los países que más están sufriendo los efectos del cambio climático y los efectos de esta emergencia climática. Otras regiones del mundo ya han avanzado en cómo proteger a las personas que se ven obligadas a desplazarse de sus lugares de origen a causa del clima, por ejemplo, a través de la Convención de Kampala o la Declaración de Cartagena en los países latinoamericanos.

Le pedimos, señor comisario, que en este programa de trabajo se avance hacia cómo denominar, cómo proteger a las personas desplazadas por el clima y se indique cómo avanzar en una protección europea hacia la figura del refugiado climático.

  Marek Belka (S&D). – Mr President, I’d like to continue this issue of the European Union’s fight on tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance. As we know, the discussion on this issue is now centred on the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). That’s fine with us. That’s fine with me. The problem is that we cannot hope for an outcome of these discussions that will be satisfactory for us. Some OECD countries will be against it. Well, one thing that we can do is make our European members of the OECD find common positions, which is not always the case. So let me call on the European Commission to use its political leverage to find a common position in the EU and strongly influence the outcome of the OECD discussions.

  Sandra Pereira (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, por muita propaganda verde ou social que reproduzam os vossos programas, os objetivos permanecem centrados no aprofundamento das políticas de empobrecimento dos povos, de asfixia ao desenvolvimento e assalto à soberania dos Estados, das políticas de ingerência e agressão sobre países terceiros. Promovem um pacto dito ecológico, omitindo o fracasso das estratégias de crescimento que precederam esta política e assentando nas mesmas premissas neoliberais, nos mecanismos de mercado, sem pôr em causa a exploração predatória de recursos que conduzem aos desequilíbrios ecológicos que enfrentamos.

Um pilar social que branqueia as políticas de exploração e ataca direitos sociais e serviços públicos, sendo essas políticas promovidas pela União Europeia com um nivelamento por baixo. Disso são exemplos as críticas feitas pela Comissão Europeia a Portugal por causa do aumento do salário mínimo ou dos contratos sem termo, no âmbito do Semestre Europeu, instrumento ao serviço da moeda única, que também pretendem aprofundar, impondo mais constrangimentos aos Estados.

Daqui continuaremos a denunciar ao povo português o gato que querem vender por lebre e as consequências nefastas para o país.

  Mick Wallace (GUE/NGL). – Mr President, the Commissioner said in his Work Programme that the Commission will present a European democracy action plan to help improve the resilience of our democracies and deal with external threats. Last week, I visited a prison in Spain where there’s a number of Catalan parliamentarians in prison for over two years and, among others, it’s a total breach of democracy what’s going on there. I mean, it isn’t someone from outside of Europe. It’s the Spanish Government – the Spanish judiciary – and a big problem with the separation of powers there. This is actually about that the denial of civil rights. Nothing else. It isn’t just about the independence of Catalonia; it’s the denial of civil rights. And it’s within the European Union. Tell me, Commissioner: what is the EU going to do about it? Because it’s a disgrace.

(Applause)

  Robert Hajšel (S&D). – Vážený páni predsedajúci. Pán podpredseda Európskej komisie, prezentovali ste naozaj veľmi ambiciózny program s veľmi ambicióznymi číslami. Keby sme ich dosiahli, bude veľmi dobre a budeme príkladom pre celý svet. Treba však urobiť všetko preto, aby táto transformácia bola čo najspravodlivejšia. Aby sme popri prechode na zelenšiu ekonomiku nezabudli aj na sociálne dôsledky, ktoré táto transformácia prinesie. Ponúkli ste také nástroje ako „Just transition Fund“, ktorý bude určite dobrým nástrojom, len bude zase treba, aby sa používal tak, že z neho budú profitovať naozaj tie regióny, ktoré to najviac potrebujú. A to znamená, ak štáty budú za tieto regióny predkladať projekty, treba im pomôcť v tom, aby sa naozaj dostali aj do krajín, ako sú Slovensko, Poľsko, Rumunsko alebo Bulharsko, čiže krajiny, ktoré sú touto transformáciou možno najviac postihnuté, keďže ich energetický mix sa skladá z plynu, skladá sa z jadra, a zároveň sa opierajú stále o ťažký priemysel, o ťažobný priemysel, a najmä o energeticky náročný priemysel. Urobme teda spoločne, spoločný silami a s členskými štátmi všetko preto, aby táto transformácia pre ľudí bola čo najznesiteľnejšou.

(Fim das intervenções “catch the eye”)

  Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, thank you very much for this very rich debate, for all your interventions and I’m glad that I can say that also this discussion has reconfirmed that our work programme reflects our common priorities. I really would like to thank you for all the words of encouragement, for pointing out certain details upon which we have to work even more and also on some of the things that you believe that are missing in the programme and upon which we will do our utmost to work together.

I think that the motive with which our President presented her new Commission is that this would be the geopolitical Commission, which would strive for more, and I believe that with your help, with your support, we can really achieve that. I would like to echo the words of Ms Niebler and Mr Marques, who said that to have an ambitious programme is a very good thing, but what would be even more important now is its proper implementation. I found an echo of this call in many of your interventions and I really would like to tell you that we take it very seriously and we hope that with the close cooperation with co-legislators, with you and the Council, we can deliver on this programme.

Ms Keller made a very emotional reference to yesterday’s discussion and we’ve all been here and I think that the emotions and the farewell bids to our British friends is still with us. Therefore, I think that her question on how to respond to the challenge of yesterday is clearly that we have to build an even better Europe, which would be more efficient, more competitive, greener, closer to the citizens. I believe that starting the constructive work on this joint ambitious programme would be the right first step forward to meet these ambitions.

To my compatriots, Ms Ďuriš Nicholsonová, who was highlighting the challenges around minimum wage setting, I would like to underline once again that what we are going to propose is to set a framework for minimum wage setting and that we are going to consult widely with the social partners, with our Member States, and we would respect, one hundred percent, the national tradition and collective bargaining, but we believe that everyone in the European Union deserves a fair wage and that we have to be socially just if it comes to this very basic human right, which is so important for Europeans on our continent.

On the infringement case against Austria, it’s ongoing. We are currently studying the response of Austria to our reasoned opinion and we will inform this Parliament accordingly once this study is completed.

Ms Aubry made reference to the carbon adjustment mechanism. I would like to reassure her that it’s already in our Commission’s Work Programme for 2021. As I’m sure many of you know, this is a rather complex task. It would require a lot of preparation, a proper mechanism and we have to be ready for quite intense international debate on this issue. We would like to see countries like China and many others who have an emissions-trading (ET) system as ambitious as we have, but if this would not be the case, we simply would have to consider a mechanism like carbon adjustment to make sure that we have a level playing field and that we would motivate also other big economies to make sure that they would work on lowering their carbon footprint for their economy and for their products.

Many of you insisted on the importance of the rule of law and I cannot agree with you more. I think that it’s quite clear that this Commission is really committed to ensuring respect for the rule of law equally in all Member States. Ms de Sutter, I also would like to assure you on one very important fact – that the Commission will also ensure full respect – and I would like to underline both words – of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in addressing emerging issues such as artificial intelligence and facial recognition.

In the context of the statement of Mr Azmani, thank you very much for your intervention. Among other and different constructive observations, you also referred to anti-Semitism, which again, we were debating yesterday and witnessing very emotional testimony of Holocaust survivors, and I am sure that I do not need to say how much I agree with you and how important this would be for the work of the European Commission.

Mr Garicano was referring to the Work Programme and to the fact that, with the UK leaving, a lot of the universities which have been part of the European Union educational area are going as well. But I also would like to assure him that we are looking for ways to maintain good contacts with our British friends within the framework of Erasmus, within the framework of research programmes. But on top of that, we want to make sure that the European education area becomes a reality by 2025, and we will work with equal intensity on our skills agenda, where we are going to present our programme and proposal already this year.

To Ms Hayer, I would like to reassure you that, for us, the impact assessment is a very important one. I’m responsible for that and there will be no important legislative proposals without a proper impact assessment being done – because we know that the impact assessment offers very often the best answers to the proper argumentation and the debates we would have, especially with those who are opposing our proposals. To make sure that we will respect full transparency, we are going to establish the interinstitutional evidence register by the end of this year – just to make sure that we will share this information with all of you.

When it comes to the issue of poverty, which was raised by several colleagues, we are going to address it through the social roadmap, through the framework for minimum wage setting, as I said, and we are going to work on the children guarantee, which several of you referred to as a very important measure. I hope that with your help and with proper funding, we will restart a renovation wave across the European Union. This would not only help us to tackle greenhouse gas emissions but increase the quality of life, especially for all those who are living in social housing, and that through this measure, thanks to energy efficiency, we would reduce the bills they have to pay electricity at the end of every month for heating, cooling or simply using.

To Mr Belka, I would like to say that we are very serious about tax evasion and we will be working very closely with our Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) partners and, if there will be a deal within the OECD, we will do all necessary and take all necessary steps to implement it. However, I also would like to assure you that in the absence of such agreement on the global level by 2020, the EU shall act alone. We just simply will not have more patience to wait for the continuation of avoiding paying proper taxes on the European territories.

I know, Mr President, that time is limited, but to Ms Fritzon I would like to say that we will consult very thoroughly with the social partners and respect all prerogatives of this social dialogue because this is how we know we will get the best results.

On enlargement, I think that we have been very clear on making sure that we will come with a new methodology. We will have a very important summit in Zagreb, organised thanks to the Croatian Presidency, where we want to bring a new impetus, new energy into this process and our commitment to Northern Macedonia and Albania is very clear, and that’s a priority for this European Commission.

On the transition fund and the multiannual financial framework (MFF), to conclude, Mr President, that was the point made by Ms Bonafè, by Mr Hajšel and many others, I want to assure you that when you are talking about EUR 7.5 billion for the Just Transition Fund, we are talking about fresh money. This is how the European Commission presented its proposal. It’s on top of the MFF proposals which you already tabled and with which you are so familiar and for which the Commission is ready to battle with the Council to make sure that we have proper financing for all the ambitious items which we have in our programme. Of course, it would be on all of us to make sure that we would use the Just Transition money where it’s most needed, for the people who need to be retrained, where we need to find new jobs for coal miners, for the people working in energy—intensive industries, to make sure that this transition is fair and that nobody is left behind, whether a person or a city, or a region.

I cannot agree more with all of you who’ve been highlighting the importance of an ambitious multiannual financial perspective. Mr Olbrycht, Ms Dalli, Mr López Aguilar, Ms Niebler, all of you have been referring to the importance to have a proper multiannual financial perspective. As you know, we will have an extraordinary summit where this would be the item on the agenda, so let’s hope and let’s make strong arguments towards our heads of state and government that we need an agreement, we need it very soon – because every month that we are late with the MFF, we are already putting our programmes in serious danger.

Once again, Mr President, honourable Members, thank you very much for all your points. I’m sure that now in the way of structured dialogues with your committees, you will have even more chance to debate all the programmes and all the items in greater detail, and we are very much looking forward to it.

  Nuno Melo (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, o Senhor Vice-Presidente da Comissão Europeia ter-se-á esquecido de responder a qualquer uma das minhas questões: uma sobre as interconexões energéticas com a Península Ibérica para reduzir a dependência em relação ao gás da Rússia e a outra relacionada com os Fundos de Coesão. Tendo em conta que eu coloquei duas questões – e não me respondeu a nenhuma, terá sido certamente por lapso –, se tiver tempo talvez queira dizer qualquer coisinha ao Parlamento Europeu.

  Presidente. – A Comissão certamente não deixará de responder às questões colocadas.

O debate está encerrado.

Declarações escritas (artigo 171.º)

  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D), raštu. –Komisija pateikė darbo programą 2020 metams. Socialinės Europos skatinimas privalo būti atspindėtas ir būsimose iniciatyvose. Labai svarbu stiprinti iniciatyvas jaunimui, todėl labai džiaugiuosi matydama , jog Komisija pateiks dar labiau sustiprintą jaunimo garantiją, kad kuo daugiau jaunų žmonių galėtų rasti darbą, mokytis, kelti kvalifikaciją. Tik įtraukdami jaunus žmones į darbo rinką galime tikėtis ilgalaikio darbo ir socialinės apsaugos sistemų tvarumo. Džiugu, kad Komisija pradėjo viešąsias konsultacijas dėl minimalaus atlyginimo dydžio nustatymo valstybėse narės. Iš tiesų, šio pasiūlymo labai laukia mūsų piliečiai, ypač tie, kuri vis dažniau atsiduria nepalankioje padėtyje ir kuriems gresia skurdo rizika net ir turint darbą. To Europoje neturi būti. Taip pat labai laukiame lyčių lygybės strategijos, kurios prašėme net penkerius metus, todėl labai džiugu matyti, jog naujoji Komisija imasi sudėtingų, ir ilgą laiką vilkintų sprendimų priėmimo.

  Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR), na piśmie. – Prowadzimy dziś debatę na temat programu prac Komisji na 2020 rok. Mówimy o nim dzień po tym, jak brexit został przegłosowany przez Parlament Europejski i staje się faktem. Czas ten jest zatem szczególny i okoliczności bezprecedensowe. Naturalne jest więc oczekiwanie, by wspólnie jak najlepiej uregulować wszystkie płaszczyzny dalszej wzajemnej współpracy ze Zjednoczonym Królestwem. Stawiamy przed sobą wiele bardzo ambitnych wyzwań, jak chociażby program Zielony Ład. Szukamy rozwiązania niezwykle trudnej sytuacji, jak np. na greckich wyspach i znajdujących się na nich hot-spotach, o czym również debatowaliśmy w dniu wczorajszym. Stoimy przed wieloma realnymi wyzwaniami i zagrożeniami, a tysiące ludzi czeka pilnie na pomoc, nie tylko na greckich wyspach. Dlatego apeluję do Komisji, by w tym szczególnym czasie nie szukała tematów zastępczych, nie trwoniła energii i cennego czasu na obsesyjne wręcz doszukiwanie się łamania zasad demokracji i praworządności tam, gdzie są one od dawna obecne i niezagrożone.

Niezrozumiałe jest dla mnie i dla milionów moich rodaków stosowanie podwójnych standardów wobec takich krajów, jak np. Francja czy Niemcy, a wobec Polski i Węgier. Czas i energię powinniśmy skoncentrować na mierzeniu się z realnymi problemami, przed którymi stoimy jako Unia Europejska, a nie uciekać w stygmatyzowanie za wszelką cenę wybranych krajów wewnątrz Wspólnoty.

  Λευτέρης Χριστοφόρου (PPE), γραπτώς. – Χαιρετίζουμε το φιλόδοξο πρόγραμμα εργασίας της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής για το 2020 στη βάση των πολιτικών κατευθύνσεων της Προέδρου von der Leyen. Το πρόγραμμα στοχεύει στην αντιμετώπιση των διαγενεακών προκλήσεων που αντιμετωπίζουμε σήμερα, όπως η κλιματική αλλαγή, η ψηφιοποίηση και η μετανάστευση. Μας χαροποιεί ιδιαίτερα η δέσμευση για υλοποίηση της Ευρωπαϊκής Πράσινης Συμφωνίας και για βελτίωση των ευκαιριών για τους πολίτες και τις επιχειρήσεις της Ευρώπης κατά τον ψηφιακό μετασχηματισμό.

  Josianne Cutajar (S&D), in writing. – I welcome the Commission Work Programme for 2020. While very dense, it provides us with meaningful inputs we – as co-legislators – need to take into account. Much has already been said on the European Green Deal, whose concrete implementation will start this year. It is definitely our new growth strategy. Nevertheless, I believe that it will not work if it fails to entail a strong social dimension. Its delivery must go hand in hand with a full implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights. No European citizen, no European region should be left behind. The fight against energy poverty and the upskilling of workers will be certainly helpful to make the transition towards a clean Europe a just one. Through its Work Programme for 2020, the European Commission has also pledged to present a Gender Equality Strategy. Women are indeed facing crucial challenges and I am ready to stand with the Commission to go forward and promote an effective gender dimension throughout all the European policies.

  Jarosław Duda (PPE), na piśmie. – Cieszę się, że Przewodnicząca Komisji podkreśliła, że warunkiem postępu i reform w Europie jest budowanie społeczeństwa włączającego, solidarnego i poszanowanie praw wszystkich obywateli. Z najwyższym zainteresowaniem będę śledził prace nad Action Plan on Integration and Inclusion. Bardzo liczę na ścisłą współpracę Komisji z Parlamentem w tym zakresie.

Spodziewam się, że ważną częścią Action Plan będą działania na rzecz poszanowania praw osób z niepełnosprawnościami i znoszenia barier w dostępie tej ponad stumilionowej grupy obywateli do włączającej edukacji, zatrudnienia na otwartym rynku pracy, dóbr kultury oraz usług i technologii wspierających niezależne życie. Sądzę też , że Action Plan będzie powiązany z pracami nad strategią w sprawie niepełnosprawności po roku 2020 i CRPD. Jestem też bardzo zainteresowany raportem o skutkach zmian demograficznych oraz pracami nad Green Paper on Ageing.

Chciałbym zwrócić uwagę , że planując rozwój Europy cyfrowej należy wziąć pod uwagę to, aby nowe rozwiązania technologiczne nie przyczyniały się do wykluczania osób starszych, ograniczania ich aktywności zawodowej, społecznej i ich niezależności. Przeciwnie, należy ukierunkować rozwój nowych technologii na wyrównywanie szans i kompensowanie deficytów związanych z wiekiem lub niepełnosprawnością. Uważam, że w pracach nad nowym programem na rzecz umiejętności powinno się uwzględnić działania adresowane do osób starszych.

  Lívia Járóka (PPE), írásban. – Üdvözlöm, hogy a Bizottság munkaprogramjában szerepel a romák társadalmi bevonásának akcióterve. Fontos, hogy az összeurópai roma stratégia megalkotásában mind a horvát, mind a német elnökségek aktív szerepet vállaljanak, hiszen szinte minden tagállamban aggasztó a romák helyzete. Saját prioritásomnak tekintem a romák, a leszakadók, a mélyszegénységben élők érdekeinek képviseletét, és kész vagyok tapasztalataimmal segíteni a Bizottság és a Tanács munkáját, hogy egy komplex, átfogó programot alkossunk.

Szeretném elkerülni azt a 2010-es rossz gyakorlatot, hogy javaslataimat hibásan veszik át az intézmények. Kérem, mind a Bizottság, mind a Tanács képviselőit, hogy folyamatosan egyeztessünk! A tét nagy: meg kell szüntetnünk az eddigi káros és nem hatékony programokat. A helyi szereplőket be kell vonnunk a tervezéstől az ellenőrzésig minden folyamatba, meg kell szüntetnünk a korrupciót, a túlszámlázást és a fölösleges bürokráciát. A Bizottság New Green Deal programja pedig útmutató, hogy a mélyszegénységben élőknek milyen alternatív és fenntartható fejlődési modellt tudunk kialakítani zöldmezős gazdasági projektekkel, megújuló energiaforrások bevonásával.

  Karol Karski (ECR), na piśmie. – Z zadowoleniem przyjmuję fakt, że Komisja poważnie podchodzi do tematu przestępstw podatkowych. Pieniądze wyłudzane z systemu przez przestępców, bo tak należy nazywać osoby zaangażowane w ten proceder, zabierane są przecież obywatelom poszczególnych krajów Unii Europejskiej.

Uszczuplenie środków budżetowych to mniej dobrych działań w zakresie służby zdrowia, bezpieczeństwa, rozwoju technologii i zapewniania godziwego życia dla wszystkich Europejczyków. Wreszcie uszczuplone budżety narodowe to także ryzyko presji na zmniejszanie budżetu wspólnoty. W 2017 roku doszło do wycieku 137 miliardów euro tylko z podatku VAT. Środki te mogły pomóc w podjęciu licznych problemów, z którymi będziemy się mierzyć. Koordynacja działań między państwami na poziomie UE ma duży potencjał.

Przy tej okazji podkreślę, że Polska w zaledwie kilka lat świetnie poradziła sobie z domknięciem luki VAT, a pozyskane środki wykorzystała m.in. na udane programy społeczne. Czy Komisja, proponując nowe prawo, czerpie z istniejących i dobrze funkcjonujących rozwiązań? Wynajdywanie koła po raz drugi będzie stratą czasu i pieniędzy.

Wreszcie chciałbym zaznaczyć niezwykłą wagę praworządności przy stanowieniu prawa w obszarze podatków. Zgodnie z traktatami propozycje podatkowe muszą uzyskać jednomyślność państw członkowskich. Próby kreatywnego omijania tego wymogu będą podważać wiarygodność Komisji i uderzać w podstawowe zasady działania naszej wspólnoty.

  Dan Nica (S&D), în scris. – Pentru a eradica sărăcia energetică, care afectează 50 de milioane de europeni, solicităm Comisiei să propună un plan de acțiuni cu ținte și direcții clare și să ia în calcul, în studiile de impact, efectele noilor propuneri legislative asupra combaterii sărăciei energetice.

De asemenea, solicit ca viitoarea politică industrială să conțină măsuri îndrăznețe, care să sprijine baza noastră industrială, să asigure competitivitatea industriei europene, să creeze și să încurajeze campioni europeni. Din păcate, nu am văzut nicio mențiune în programul de lucru al Comisiei cu privire la mecanismul de ajustare la frontieră a carbonului, măsură importantă atât pentru industria europeană, cât și ca sursă de noi fonduri.

Salut faptul că, în propunerea Comisiei privind Fondul de tranziție justă, România are alocată suma de 757 de milioane de euro, sau 10 % din cei 7,5 miliarde pentru perioada 2021-2027. Vreau să vă asigurați că regiunile și statele membre cele mai afectate vor beneficia la maximum de Mecanismul de tranziție justă, pentru a avea creștere economică și a crea locuri de muncă sustenabile.

Nu în ultimul rând, pentru că cercetarea și inovarea sunt cheia pentru a livra pe măsura ambițiilor pe care ni le propunem, susțin că un buget de 120 de miliarde de euro pentru Orizont Europa este necesar.

  Edina Tóth (PPE), írásban. – Üdvözlöm a Bizottság munkatervét, ugyanakkor fontosnak tartom azt is kiemelni, hogy az európai zöld megállapodás és a munkaprogram elemei úgy legyenek kialakítva, hogy egyetlen személy vagy régió se maradhasson le az előttünk álló zöld átállás során. Örömmel látom a fenntartható társadalmak felé vezető átmenetben járó váltásokban a polgároknak és vállalkozásainknak nyújtott eddigi javaslataikat, azonban úgy vélem, hogy egy valóban „méltányos” átmenet nem szabad, hogy nagy szennyezőket segítsen ki.

A Bizottság programjának elemei sok esetben ambiciózusok, azonban vannak olyan területek is, amelyek kevésbé átgondoltak. Erre jó példa a Méltányos Átmenet Alap, mely sajnos túl kevéssé van részletezve és alátámasztva. Ezeket a hiányosságokat a Bizottságnak orvosolnia szükséges! Az ördög a részletekben rejlik, melyek még váratnak magukra – feszülten fogunk figyelni, hogy lássuk, hogy a Bizottság minden egyes most hozott döntése a környezetet, a klímát és az igazságosságot helyezi előtérbe.

  Marco Zanni (ID), per iscritto. – Le ambizioni del programma non soddisfano le esigenze dei cittadini. La proposta sul Green Deal è una presa in giro e fa pensare all'ennesima operazione di marketing, che non porterà a risultati concreti. Senza un mea culpa dell'UE, sulle sue politiche fallimentari, è inutile continuare a discutere di riforme che trovano radici nel solo approccio ideologico. Nel metodo disastroso, la Commissione insiste anche sulla politica estera: basta l'onestà intellettuale per osservare che l'Europa continua a mostrare fragilità nel contesto internazionale. Nel quadro desolante troviamo anche la Conferenza sul Futuro dell'Europa, che vorrebbe coinvolgere i cittadini in un processo di presunto cambiamento, i cui attori principali tuttavia, saranno gli stessi che hanno portato il progetto europeo alla fase di precarietà in cui ci troviamo ora. Sulla Brexit poi, l'auspicio è, che nei negoziati col Regno Unito, fermo restando l'interesse per la tutela dei nostri cittadini e imprese, prevalga il buon senso, sulla volontà di ostacolare gli esiti della decisione pienamente democratica, di milioni di cittadini.

Spiace constatare che nel nuovo programma della Commissione, manchino le risposte ai temi che interessano ai cittadini europei: nessuna concretezza su immigrazione, sicurezza interna e rilancio dell'economia europea.

Di nuovo, questo programma, ha solo il nome.

  Carlos Zorrinho (S&D), por escrito. – O programa de trabalho apresentado pela Comissão Europeia para 2020 está em linha com o programa aprovado pelo Parlamento Europeu para o mandato. As prioridades refletem o objetivo de afirmar a União Europeia através da descarbonização, do crescimento e da convergência, no plano interno, e da afirmação dos seus valores no plano externo. O programa reflete uma evolução positiva na conceptualização do Pacto Ecológico Europeu, designadamente através de uma melhor articulação da transição digital e da transição energética, bem como da inclusão de uma dimensão social, ainda insuficiente, mas mais forte.

Realço também a preocupação com a robustez da democracia e o compromisso com medidas concretas e com a mobilização da cidadania através da participação ativa na Conferência sobre o Futuro da Europa.

A credibilidade e a confiança geradas pelo programa de trabalho são, no entanto, claramente prejudicadas pela continuada indefinição em relação aos mecanismos de financiamento em geral e ao Quadro Plurianual de Financiamento em particular. A chave do sucesso ou do insucesso deste programa está menos na capacidade da Comissão ou no apoio do Parlamento do que na disponibilidade do Conselho para assumir uma postura estrutural e ambiciosa na dotação de recursos financeiros que viabilizem o programa de trabalho.

3. Rispons tal-UE għad-devastazzjoni wara l-għargħar fi Spanja (dibattitu)

  Presidente. – Segue-se o debate sobre a declaração da Comissão sobre a “Resposta da UE às devastadoras inundações em Espanha” (2020/2537(RSP)).

Peço aos colegas que continuem a cumprir disciplinadamente o tempo para que possamos proceder às votações à hora prevista.

  Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, I think that the topic we are going to discuss now is just clear testimony to the fact that climate change is real, and its impacts are sometimes too real, too dramatic and too devastating. Extreme weather events are happening more and more frequently and with greater intensity. Drought and forest fires are no longer confined to the Mediterranean, tropical hurricanes travel up to the coast of Ireland and heavy rain and flash floods occur across the whole of Europe.

The recent flooding disaster in Spain caused by Storm Gloria is yet another example. Our thoughts are with the people of Spain suffering from this new disaster. In particular, our deepest condolences go to all those who lost loved ones. Europe stands with the people of Spain. We have a tool to provide assistance once serious natural disasters have occurred. The EU Solidarity Fund intervenes to assist the population with the recovery of essential infrastructure, with cleaning—up operations and with the safeguarding of the cultural heritage.

However, the Solidarity Fund is no emergency instrument and it takes some time to mobilise it. Most importantly, the European Parliament and the Council must approve the activation of the Fund and the budget resources once the Commission has assessed the application from the Member State. Once immediate assistance to the population in response to the disaster is under control, the Spanish authorities should assess the damage caused to see whether it succeeds the relevant threshold of 1.5 percentage points of the regional GDP. This is the essential condition for a successful Solidarity Fund application.

The Spanish authorities are well familiar with the conditions and procedures of the fund, but of course, the Commission services stand ready to provide further guidance and assistance as required. We are currently in the process of assessing an earlier Spanish application received in November, which includes the autonomous region of Valencia, Murcia, Castilla-La Mancha and Andalusia for the severe weather last September. Spain provided an important information update on this disaster only this week, and an advance payment of EUR 5.7 million is on its way, but in the future, we know that we must be prepared to do more.

What happened in Spain is, unfortunately, a foretaste of what is to come as a climate change continues. The EU Solidarity Fund brings welcome support after disasters have happened, but we must be more proactive. This is why in recent years, the Commissioner has been putting an increasing focus on prevention, climate adaptation and the risk management policies. For cohesion policy, disaster risk management is vital because local and regional authorities are the first to face the impacts of disasters because it is a cost—effective investment in preventing future losses and also because it contributes to sustainable development.

In this period, 2014—2020 Cohesion Policy is investing almost EUR 8 billion in climate change adaptation and risk prevention. This includes a broad array of support. Floods are the main risk addressed, followed by coastal erosions, forest fires, earthquakes and droughts. Prevention is the main focus of our investment. Actions to improve the modelling of risk, early-warning systems, preparation of strategies and guidelines, awareness raising, grey or green infrastructure for flood protection, sustainable land and forest management, et cetera. In this period, we have also seen a large focus on green infrastructure to manage risk, like flood plains and green urban spaces. The Commission also provides guidelines and it encourages Member States to compile national risk assessments, which are an essential and necessary tool to fight the impact of floods. Besides prevention, we also focus on preparedness with support for equipment, infrastructure and training for civil protection units.

European money also supports the development and improvement of the EU early-warning and information systems. Fed by a network of sensors and satellites, they provide reliable information about the development of extreme meteorological events, improving the prediction of the impact of events such as floods. These systems also enable the emergency—response community to monitor and share reliable information, to prepare to respond and to better coordinate response efforts.

Finally, we offer flexibility in our cohesion programmes. Programme amendments can be proposed and then swiftly agreed to shift resources towards areas that are most at need, so if changes need to be made, we can still do this within this funding period. The Commission’s proposals for cohesion policy after 2020 include disaster risk management and climate adaptation as specific objectives. Prevention and preparedness measures include infrastructure, equipment shelters, development of early—warning systems and training for civil protection units. Where appropriate, these measures cross borders.

  Dolors Montserrat, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señor presidente, no puedo empezar mi intervención sin recordar a todas las personas que han perdido la vida por el temporal, a sus familias y seres queridos. A las personas desaparecidas, a los heridos, a todos les traslado nuestro apoyo y nuestro cariño.

España ha sufrido las terribles consecuencias del temporal Gloria, pero hace pocos meses también de la DANA, donde tantos vecinos han visto cómo sus casas, sus coches, sus calles, sus empresas, sus granjas, sus campos, sus huertos, han sido destrozados. Hemos sufrido grandes pérdidas naturales y económicas en lugares necesarios para nuestro ecosistema y economía como el delta del Ebro —paraje único en Europa y tercer productor de arroz en España—, donde el crecimiento del mar ha provocado, además de daños ambientales, la desaparición de las cosechas por valor de más de cuatro millones de euros; o en lugares como la Comunidad Valenciana, donde los cítricos, las infraestructuras agrarias, las hortalizas de temporada y la ganadería han sufrido pérdidas de hasta 63 millones de euros; o como Baleares, que ha perdido sus playas, y tantas regiones españolas afectadas, como Andalucía, Murcia, Castilla-La Mancha o Aragón.

Los españoles afectados necesitan una respuesta rápida y efectiva por parte del Gobierno de España. Exigimos al Gobierno de España que evalúe las zonas afectadas con rapidez, que agilice las ayudas, que solicite el Fondo de Solidaridad a la Unión Europea y declare zona catastrófica a los municipios afectados.

La Unión Europea no se puede quedar atrás. Por ello debe activar el Fondo de Solidaridad y el Fondo de Cohesión. Debe trabajar por un mayor presupuesto en la nueva PAC para tener más recursos que financien la prevención de riesgos para nuestros agricultores y ganaderos.

Un Pacto Verde ambicioso, que proteja a nuestro medio ambiente ante fenómenos producidos por el cambio climático, que invierta en mejoras de las infraestructuras hidráulicas y la protección y limpieza de nuestros bosques y nuestros ríos, para prevenir futuros fenómenos meteorológicos.

Europa no puede mirar hacia otro lado y debe actuar. Los españoles que han sufrido el temporal no pueden esperar ni un día más, y el Partido Popular no va a descansar hasta que estas ayudas lleguen a los afectados. Estaremos siempre con ellos y nunca les dejaremos atrás.

  Cristina Maestre Martín De Almagro, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señor presidente, en apenas unos meses de legislatura, esta es la tercera catástrofe natural sobre la que debatimos en el Parlamento Europeo. Y mucho me temo que no será la última porque, ciertamente, el cambio climático es una realidad inequívoca, que se evidencia en temporales como los que hemos sufrido en España. De hecho, según los propios datos de la Comisión Europea, más de 500 000 personas en la Unión Europea están expuestas a estos fenómenos, a un riesgo cierto de inundaciones fluviales, y 2,2 millones de personas, también en la Unión Europea, corren el riesgo de verse afectadas por inundaciones costeras.

Por lo tanto, esto no es un problema de hoy, de España, sino que es un problema de todos. Y como es un problema de todos, tenemos que empezar a tomárnoslo en serio. Y por eso es muy importante que empecemos a aplicar medidas para evitarlo. Pero también es muy importante que de forma inmediata se aplique el Fondo de Solidaridad. Lo necesitamos para demostrar que esto también es cohesión y que nuestro país, al igual que otro país en cualquier momento, puede obtener el apoyo de la Unión Europea para compensar todos los agravios que ha provocado este terrible temporal.

Hay cosas que no se van a poder recuperar, como las vidas humanas, desgraciadamente. Pero también Europa podrá estar de nuestro lado para no dejar abandonadas a todas aquellas familias y también sectores que se han visto damnificados por este temporal.

Le agradecería, efectivamente como muy bien ha dicho, señor vicepresidente, rapidez y flexibilidad en la aplicación de este Fondo.

  Susana Solís Pérez, en nombre del Grupo Renew. – Señor presidente, gracias comisario por sus palabras. La borrasca Gloria ha golpeado duramente a España: catorce muertos, ochenta y tres heridos, dos desaparecidos. El balance es devastador. Hay municipios en Cataluña, en la Comunidad Valenciana, Baleares, Murcia, Aragón, que han tenido pérdidas millonarias en infraestructuras y en el campo. Han desaparecido paseos marítimos, playas, el cultivo de los cítricos ha sido dañado... Todo esto en regiones que dependen de la agricultura y del turismo. Y lo peor es que este no es un fenómeno aislado; acabamos de sufrir las consecuencias de la DANA, y los expertos nos avisan de que estos fenómenos van a ir en aumento.

Por eso yo le quiero pedir hoy aquí a la Comisión que tengamos unas propuestas eficaces. Yo le propongo tres acciones.

En primer lugar, el Fondo de Solidaridad. Tenemos que activarlo, pero también, si estos fenómenos van en aumento, necesitamos aumentar el presupuesto del Fondo de Solidaridad para que queden cubiertas todas las personas que sufren estas tragedias.

En segundo lugar, mejorar los trámites. No podemos pasar por largos trámites administrativos, y en España nuestros agricultores todavía están esperando las ayudas de la DANA.

Y en tercer lugar, mejorar a todos los niveles los sistemas de prevención de desastres naturales y de adaptación al cambio climático. Es fundamental para salvar vidas.

En definitiva, pongamos en valor uno de los valores fundamentales de la Unión Europea, la solidaridad, porque es ahora cuando más lo necesitamos.

  Diana Riba i Giner, en nombre del Grupo Verts/ALE. – Señor presidente, la semana pasada la tormenta Gloria tuvo efectos devastadores en Cataluña y en el resto del Estado. Perdieron la vida trece personas. Este fenómeno climático ha tenido un impacto ecológico y agrícola sin precedentes y es una clara consecuencia de los efectos del cambio climático. El paso de Gloria ha hecho desaparecer un gran número de playas e infraestructuras situadas junto al mar, y ha causado graves daños en el delta del Ebro, así como en las cuencas de los ríos Tordera y Ter. Según las primeras estimaciones, el impacto de los daños asciende, por ejemplo, a 74 millones solo en la demarcación de Barcelona, o a 16 millones en el sector primario catalán.

Ante la necesidad de una rápida reacción, pedimos a la Comisión Europea y al Gobierno español tres acciones: primero, que se activen urgentemente los recursos del Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional para cofinanciar las reparaciones de los daños; en segundo lugar, como bien habéis dicho, el Fondo de Solidaridad; pero, por último, también que se haga un plan de acción específico para la costa del Mediterráneo y del delta, en la línea de la declaración sobre la protección del delta del Ebro adoptada ayer por el Gobierno catalán y por agentes del territorio.

  Marco Dreosto, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, desidero innanzitutto esprimere la nostra solidarietà ai colleghi spagnoli e all'intera Spagna per le catastrofiche alluvioni che hanno subito nelle scorse settimane.

Proprio nel mio ruolo di relatore per il nostro gruppo nel dossier del meccanismo unionale di protezione civile, voglio sottolineare quanto sia importante lavorare alla prevenzione dei disastri naturali. Lo si può ma lo si deve soprattutto fare attraverso una nuova cultura dell'anticipazione e della prevenzione, attraverso strategie innovative, ma anche di lungo periodo che possano aiutarci ad evitare, o almeno a ridurre, i costi umani e/o sociali causati da queste drammatiche catastrofi.

Un altro fattore fondamentale è la formazione adeguata del personale, dei cittadini, ma anche dei volontari della Protezione civile e in questo senso approviamo quello che è stato proposto appunto nel nuovo regolamento.

Concludo ringraziando quei volontari che tutti i giorni si mettono a disposizione e rispondono sempre presente quando ci sono queste calamità.

  Idoia Villanueva Ruiz, en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señor presidente, el temporal Gloria ha golpeado con especial dureza el litoral mediterráneo de la península ibérica: Andalucía, Baleares, Cataluña, Murcia, además de la Comunidad Valenciana, son algunos de los territorios afectados. A día de hoy lamentamos catorce fallecidos y decenas de heridos. Gloria ha causado efectos devastadores en infraestructuras, mobiliario urbano, playas, cultivos, comercios y viviendas; daños agravados —que también hay que decirlo— por políticas del pelotazo y la especulación urbanística de gobiernos irresponsables y corruptos que tanto daño han hecho al litoral.

El cambio climático tiene consecuencias muy visibles ya. Este fenómeno está afectando de forma muy intensa a todo nuestro país, que durante 2019 ha sufrido graves riadas e inundaciones en todo el territorio, también en Andalucía, Euskadi o Navarra. Es pronto para tener un balance global de los daños, valorados en pérdidas millonarias que arrastrarán a nuestra economía y a la población.

Hoy solicitamos en este Parlamento un apoyo para activar el Fondo de Solidaridad por catástrofe; el cambio de criterios en los fondos para que no se recojan los casos del país individualizados, sino el número global anual de casos debidos a la misma causa: el cambio climático; medidas más contundentes contra la corrupción urbanística y una apuesta decidida por implementar las políticas contra la emergencia climática. No esperemos a la próxima catástrofe para actuar. Nos va la vida en ello.

  Antoni Comín i Oliveres (NI). – Señor presidente, la semana pasada, efectivamente, fue aciaga para las costas catalanas y valencianas, a causa de este temporal, llamado paradójicamente «Gloria», que también ha afectado a las Baleares o a la Cataluña Norte, en el territorio francés, o a comunidades autónomas españolas como Murcia, como Andalucía o como Aragón. En Cataluña, las comarcas de Girona y de las Tierras del Ebro se vieron especialmente devastadas.

Sin duda, es el cambio climático la causa principal de este temporal. Sin embargo, en el caso del Ebro, el impacto ha sido acrecentado por la situación previa del delta del río. Hoy toca recordar que España no cumple debidamente con la Directiva marco sobre el agua, que obliga a que los sedimentos acumulados en las presas del río se liberen o drenen hasta la desembocadura, para evitar la regresión del delta.

Hace años que los eurodiputados catalanes reclamamos el cumplimiento. Hoy el delta ha perdido más de ocho millones de metros cuadrados de terreno y, durante el temporal, el agua marina ha penetrado más de tres kilómetros tierra adentro. Gloria ha provocado catorce muertos en España, pérdidas en 15 000 hectáreas en Girona y 3 000 en las Tierras del Ebro. ¿Qué propone la Comisión para ayudar a la Generalitat a defender estas tierras heridas?

  Esteban González Pons (PPE). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, no se imagina el daño que sufre mi tierra. Una inundación es una catástrofe. Dos inundaciones en pocos meses es un cambio climático catastrófico. En el mes de septiembre los daños en la Comunidad Valenciana superaron los 1 500 millones de euros. En las últimas inundaciones aún no los hemos contado, pero solo en agricultura superan los 62 millones de euros. Se han perdido campos, carreteras, puentes. La albufera ha sufrido un daño gravísimo; se han perdido, sobre todo, vidas humanas.

Y las ayudas europeas, señor comisario, no llegan. El Fondo de Solidaridad para las inundaciones de septiembre todavía no se ha activado y el Gobierno de España ya lo ha pedido, y el Fondo Estructural no se ha destinado ni a la limpieza de barrancos ni a la corrección de cauces.

Necesitamos ayudas europeas, porque el cambio climático no nos va afectar solo a nosotros; estamos en la vanguardia, pero les va a afectar a todos. Déjeme que le diga que esto se va a repetir; que los daños, en buena medida, son evitables; que necesitamos un plan especial de actuación para la albufera de Valencia —un paraje natural irrepetible en el mundo y que se puede perder si no lo atendemos— y que los fondos de transición para la economía ecológica no solo deben tener en cuenta que la economía cambie, también tienen que tener en cuenta que la naturaleza tiene que adaptarse a esa nueva economía y que estos daños que se producen ahora tan a menudo en mi tierra tienen que estar contemplados con ayudas para que ni los agricultores ni los empresarios ni la gente vuelvan a perder ni sus negocios ni, sobre todo, sus vidas.

  Inma Rodríguez-Piñero (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, catorce personas han perdido la vida. Es la segunda vez en cuatro meses que nuestras playas, campos y ciudades se ven anegados, inundados, devastados por los implacables efectos del cambio climático en el litoral mediterráneo español, y muy especialmente en la Comunidad Valenciana, mi circunscripción, una zona de las más vulnerables de Europa.

Urge que la Comisión actúe con contundencia, que se ponga del lado de los ciudadanos y colabore con las autoridades españolas, aportando urgentemente todos los recursos establecidos en los fondos para combatir a corto plazo los efectos. Pero es fundamental actuar a medio y largo plazo para minimizar, en el futuro, los efectos del cambio climático.

Por eso, señor comisario, pido a la Comisión que elabore una estrategia climática específica para el Mediterráneo de carácter cultural. Se nos acaba el tiempo. La albufera de Valencia, el delta del Ebro, el mar Menor en Murcia son espacios de un altísimo valor ecológico, que necesitan ser protegidos y los recursos y la cooperación de todas las administraciones. Ni una vida menos. La ciudadanía nos espera y no podemos fallarle.

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já se pokusím velmi stručně také reagovat. Chci vyjádřit podporu španělskému lidu, maximální solidaritu. Je třeba, pane komisaři, abyste co nejdříve pomohli. Z vlastní země, z České republiky, mohu říci, že my jsme vždycky měli velmi dobrou zkušenost s Fondem solidarity. Ale jediné, co bych vytknul, je délka, kterou trvalo vyřízení žádostí. Takže Vás prosím, zkuste udělat maximum pro to, aby žádosti ze Španělska byly co nejdříve vyřešeny, protože sice Fond solidarity je velmi dobrým nástrojem, ale pokud čekáme nebo členské státy čekají více než půl roku na to, než přijdou reálné peníze, reálná pomoc, tak to bývá opravdu velké prodlení.

Já osobně si myslím, že bychom měli uvažovat o celkové reformě Fondu solidarity. Klimatické změny budou vyžadovat větší peníze, které budeme do budoucna poskytovat jednotlivým členským státům zasaženým klimatickými změnami, a bude třeba opravdu najít mechanismus, jak reagovat flexibilněji a pružněji. Ve chvíli, kdy vy několik měsíců vyhodnocujete konkrétní žádost na Komisi a poté teprve následně rozhoduje Rada a Parlament, tak pomoc přichází za 9 až 12 měsíců. Takže moc prosím, pomozte Španělsku, ale také řešte, jak do budoucna celý nástroj zefektivnit a zkrátit dobu, po kterou stát čeká, než dostane reálnou podporu.

Intervenções “catch the eye”

  Rosa Estaràs Ferragut (PPE). – Señor presidente, la borrasca Gloria azotó España y especialmente el mar Mediterráneo la pasada semana. Olas de catorce metros en mi tierra, las islas Baleares, golpearon viviendas, playas, carreteras; borraron paseos marítimos del Levante; se cerraron puertos en toda España, en Barcelona, en Valencia, en Mahón, en Ciudadela. Hubo muertos y desaparecidos, también en mi tierra, cuantiosísimos daños, desabastecimiento. Y eso tuvo una repercusión y tiene una repercusión humana, económica y social en toda España.

Manacor, San Lorenzo, Son Servera, Capdepera, Santanyí, Felanix, Pollensa, fueron algunos de los municipios de mi tierra, las islas Baleares, muy perjudicados por esa borrasca.

Solicito la activación del Fondo de Solidaridad. Fue objeto de una modificación hace poco, en la pasada legislatura, para que se eliminaran trámites administrativos. Es necesario enseñar el alma de la solidaridad europea más que nunca a España y más que nunca a estas regiones.

  Alicia Homs Ginel (S&D). – Señor presidente, la borrasca Gloria tiene que ser una llamada, una vez más, a la acción por parte de la Unión Europea. Los efectos del cambio climático se están cebando con el Mediterráneo español. En octubre de 2018, una intensísima tormenta dio la primera señal de alarma en mi región, en concreto en Sant Llorenç des Cassadar, en Mallorca. También, en octubre de este último año, una DANA recorrió la región y la semana pasada la borrasca Gloria azotó Baleares, Cataluña y Valencia, causando catorce muertos. Y en Baleares, dos personas siguen desaparecidas, a cuyos familiares les quiero mandar todo mi afecto desde este Parlamento.

Todo indica que estos intensos temporales van a ser cada vez más frecuentes. Por ello, las regiones que más sufrimos pedimos ayuda, tanto para recuperarnos de sus efectos, como para adaptarnos a la nueva realidad. El Fondo de Solidaridad debe disponer de mecanismos que puedan movilizar recursos con urgencia para las regiones afectadas.

En Baleares, las consecuencias del temporal, además, han sido dobles. A los daños materiales y humanos se ha sumado la interrupción del abastecimiento de alimentos. Y este es otro motivo más para que la Unión Europea se tome en serio la insularidad como una condición de desventaja que sufrimos los ciudadanos y ciudadanas de nuestras islas.

  Ellie Chowns (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, today I participate in my final debate as a UK MEP and, as a Green, it seems sadly fitting that this is a debate on solidarity within this Union in response to a disaster in Spain, and I’d like to express my personal sympathy and solidarity with all those affected. Floods such as this can no longer be called entirely natural disasters because, as we know, climate change is making these disasters, tragically, more frequent and more severe. In my seven months in this Chamber, I have pushed hard for stronger and faster European action to address the climate crisis. Today, in the gallery, I am joined by 28 young people from the West Midlands. Their voices and their generation’s voices have been heard loud and clear. We must take faster and stronger action on the climate and ecological crisis.

(Applause)

Although I will no longer serve in this House due to Brexit, I return to the UK to push for that strong action in my own country and I urge you, my European friends and colleagues, to increase your level of ambition in this area. I hope that the spirit of solidarity within this Union grows ever stronger, and I hope that together we can act in a spirit of global solidarity to tackle the challenges that we face together, ensemble, zusammen.

  Mazaly Aguilar (ECR). – Señor presidente, quería mostrar mi solidaridad con todas las víctimas del temporal Gloria que ha afectado con extrema virulencia a la costa Este de mi nación, España. Desgraciadamente ha habido víctimas mortales y cuantiosas pérdidas materiales, sobre todo en el sector de la agricultura. En septiembre pasado, como ya han dicho otros colegas míos, hubo otro temporal llamado DANA que provocó otros intensos daños en nuestra agricultura. Desgraciadamente los agricultores siguen sin percibir las ayudas que se les habían prometido.

El nuevo temporal Gloria no ha hecho sino perjudicar enormemente a estos productores de cítricos, hortalizas, ganaderos, que están absolutamente desesperados con esta situación. Agradezco las muestras de solidaridad de la Comisión Europea, pero me gustaría incidir en la necesidad de una serie de respuestas rápidas, contundentes y eficaces que yo diría por parte de tres instrumentos: la PAC, los Fondos de Cohesión y los Fondos de Solidaridad de la Unión Europea.

(Fim das intervenções “catch the eye)

  Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, it’s a pleasure to respond to the very emotional interventions of our honourable Members – especially from Spain – on the disaster caused by Storm Gloria in front of a full House because I think that this disaster clearly gives us another example that climate change can no longer be ignored because it has become a real climate emergency. Therefore, I absolutely agree with Ms Montserrat, who said that we must act quickly, with flexibility and the necessary speed. I would like to assure you, Mr President and honourable Members, that the new Commission has geared its political objective and the Work Programme to meet this challenge head—on in the years to come.

I would also like to underline that I very well understand the point made by Ms Maestre Martín De Almagro that, if it comes to the size and the scope of such a disaster imposed on the local economy, we fully understand the dramatic consequences. I would like to thank Mr González Pons for making a very plastic picture – how not one, not two, but a series of financial disasters can really devastate the whole region. At this point, I would like to reassure all of you that the Commission is committed to helping Spain and other Member States if they are affected by natural disasters in every way possible.

The only thing I would like to make clear here, as well, is that we all have to act much more swiftly because you know that the rules which have been approved by you require that first the application comes as quickly as possible so we can act very quickly in the Commission and mobilise the necessary funds. I want to reassure you that we would not delay it by one day: once we get the application, we act very quickly but, unfortunately, the mobilisation takes time because it needs approval of the European Parliament and also the Council. Therefore, we just mobilised the advance payments for the DANA (Depresión Aislada en Niveles Altos) disaster and we are waiting for the application which will be presented by Spanish authorities for the Gloria disaster.

At the same time, I would also like to highlight the fact that the Solidarity Fund is not the instrument that we have at our disposal. The CAP and Structural Funds could be used to alleviate the pressures caused by such a natural disaster. Maybe in the future, it would be one topic to debate: what can we do together to make sure that the Solidarity Fund could be mobilised much faster? And what other instruments can we use to help the people in such distress caused by the disasters, which unfortunately, we’ll probably see more often because of the climate emergency?

  Presidente. – O debate está encerrado.

Declarações escritas (artigo 171.º)

  Tudor Ciuhodaru (S&D), în scris. – Sunt medic și vreau să susținem orice pacient, oraș și țară aflată într-o situație critică. Acum avem puterea să o facem și în plenul Parlamentului European. Voi vota cu ambele mâini acest demers. Vă reamintesc doar că noul program RescEU (pe care l-am susținut în plenul Parlamentului European) a devenit realitate. Programul oferă noi oportunități de reacție europeană în situații de urgență (precum inundații, incendii, cutremure sau alte catastrofe). Plenul reunit de la Strasbourg a votat deja pentru alocarea celor 156,2 milioane de euro necesare acestui program.

Vreau: 1. Dezvoltarea mecanismului european de protecție civilă - ce presupune înființarea unor noi capacități medicale, tehnice și logistice, la nivel european - pentru a facilita accesul la tratament al pacienților critici (arși, politraumatizați) din statele membre, în situații de urgență. Vreau ca și Spitalul de Urgență din Iași să fie inclus în acest demers. 2. Elaborarea și punerea în aplicare a unui plan european de luptă împotriva cancerului - esențial pentru educația pentru sănătate, prevenție și diagnostic precoce, dar și pentru îmbunătățirea accesului la medicamente și tehnologii inovative. „Unitate în diversitate” (deviza Uniunii Europene) trebuie să însemne solidaritate și sănătate.

  Isabel García Muñoz (S&D), por escrito. – A pesar de los negacionistas, pasó por España la borrasca Gloria, con fuertes lluvias y nevadas que dejaron aisladas a miles de personas en mi región, Aragón. Ahora el deshielo amenaza a muchas poblaciones por el desbordamiento de los ríos. Se han visto afectados cerca de 4 000 km de carreteras y 142 municipios en las provincias de Teruel y Zaragoza, dejando a miles de personas incomunicadas sin luz, agua, internet ni cobertura. Ha habido daños también en edificios y naves, y graves pérdidas en el campo y la ganadería. La cooperación entre el Gobierno central y el regional ha sido fundamental y, junto con las fuerzas de seguridad, la UME, los servicios de emergencia regionales, ayuntamientos y vecinos están trabajando para dar respuesta a la excepcionalidad vivida. Esto pone de manifiesto aún más la necesidad de trabajar desde las instituciones europeas, junto a las autoridades nacionales, regionales y locales, por la cohesión territorial y socioeconómica y para buscar soluciones a los retos de zonas rurales y montañosas, que necesitan urgentemente mejorar infraestructuras de transporte y telecomunicaciones. Trabajemos juntos para paliar los efectos del cambio climático en las zonas menos favorecidas.

  Maria Grapini (S&D), în scris. – Situația din Spania este o urgență și la urgență trebuie să răspundem urgent! Problema nu este numai în Spania! Peste două milioane de cetățeni din Europa sunt expuși inundațiilor de coastă. Este nevoie de solidaritate în dezastre naturale, dar este nevoie și de măsuri de prevenție. Pe lângă mecanismul de protecție civilă, trebuie să avem un sistem de alertă care să funcționeze în toate statele membre și la care să poată apela toți cetățenii. De aceea vă propun ca în programul Comisiei să revizuiți modul de funcționare a măsurilor, a unităților de protecție și să sporiți măsurile de prevenție pe tot teritoriul UE.

  Sandra Pereira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. – Mais uma vez, um fenómeno climático extremo coloca, no seio do Europa, a nossa imensa fragilidade em evidência face aos fenómenos da natureza. O balanço do número de pessoas mortas, feridas e dos prejuízos materiais deve envergonhar-nos enquanto sociedade e deve levar-nos a agir. Também em Portugal, nos distritos de Castelo Branco, Guarda, Viseu ou Coimbra, a tempestade Glória deixou um rasto de destruição, com pessoas feridas, casas destruídas, inúmeras árvores arrancadas, carros esmagados e estradas interditadas. Queremos, daqui, enviar a nossa solidariedade a todos os afetados, em Portugal e Espanha. Pedimos que, sem demoras, a União Europeia possa acionar o Fundo de Solidariedade para compensar, de alguma forma, as perdas sofridas. E exigimos, fora dos anúncios altissonantes a que a UE já nos habituou a não dar sequência, que, na certeza de que estes fenómenos climáticos vão ser mais frequentes, se criem estratégias de resposta urgente, com meios adequados e com base em planos estratégicos de proteção civil definidos em cada Estado-Membro.

(A sessão é suspensa por alguns instantes)

IN THE CHAIR: DITA CHARANZOVÁ
Vice-President

4. Tkomplija tas-seduta

(The sitting resumed at 11.45)

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-жо Председател, остро възразявам срещу решението на председателя на Европейския парламент, г-н Сасоли, да тълкува член 10, точка 3 от Правилника, а именно, че членовете на ЕП са длъжни да не нарушават добрия ред в пленарната зала и да се въздържат от неуместно поведение, като не излагат на показ плакати или надписи – като забрана за използване в залата на наши национални знамена.

Националното знаме не е банер, националното знаме е символ, това е моето национално знаме, то не може да бъде просто банер, то не може да бъде забранявано. Още повече, позволявате на колегите понякога да излагат символи, които са, меко казано, спорни. Затова, уважаема г-жо Председател, настоявам на Председателския съвет да бъде отменено това срамно и спорно решение.

Сега си оставям знамето тук и, ако някой иска да го премести или да го махне, ще трябва да направи това насила. Добре дошъл!

  President. – Mr Dzhambazki, I will not open the discussion on this topic. I just want you to read carefully the current rules, especially Rule 10(3) where it is clearly mentioned that Members shall not display any banners and, generally, there is an obligation to respect the dignity of this Chamber. That is why the President decided to respect and follow this rule. That’s all I would like to say. Mr Dzhambazki, I will refer to the President on this issue but we will not discuss it today.

  Sophia in ‘t Veld (Renew). – Madam President, I would just like to request your attention for a few seconds on a matter relating also to parliamentary democracy, and also to relations between the European Union and Russia.

The day before yesterday, we learned that a Dutch MP who is very critical of the Russian Government, one of the driving forces behind the European Magnitsky Act, has been blacklisted, and had imposed an entry ban, like some other Members of this House. I would request that this House stand in solidarity with other elected representatives and contact Mr Borrell and ask him to intervene with the Russian authorities.

(Loud applause)

  President. – I will pass on this message to the President, Ms in 't Veld.

There is another point of order from Mr Lagodinsky.

  Sergey Lagodinsky (Verts/ALE). – It’s a point of order, according to Rule 195 referring to the violation of Rule 181, paragraph 1 by the President of Parliament.

Honourable chair, the President of Parliament deemed all our amendments to the Credentials Report by the JURI Committee as inadmissible. What is inadmissible about a statement that national electoral rules should be interpreted in the light of EU law? What is inadmissible in a statement that parliamentary procedures, according to the rules of this House, should be considered? There is nothing that is inadmissible here.

The President might not agree with that on the substance, but it’s not up to him to decide on substance, it is up to us to decide on substance. It’s up to the majority of this Parliament to decide on those issues. All he had to do is to decide whether it’s admissible or not, and in the amendment, there was nothing – no names, nor any other out of scope information – that would have been inadmissible.

Let me state this: the decision follows the path of politicising the behaviour and the decisions of Parliament regarding credentials, especially regarding Mr Junqueras.

The President overstepped yet again his authority in this case. He is not a king. He is a parliamentary president. We are in the European Parliament. We’re not in a constitutional monarchy, so please let us, as Parliament, decide on those issues.

(Applause)

  President. – Colleagues, I will just say that, according to the rules that we all have to respect, the decision on admissibility is a prerogative of the President.

  Isabel Wiseler-Lima (PPE). – Madam President, it’s about the flags. (The President cut off the speaker)

  President. – I am sorry, I said there won’t be any discussion on the flags. It was a decision of the President. I will refer back to him and there might be follow—up discussions, but not now.

  Brian Monteith (NI). – Madam President, it is in fact in regard to a point of procedure. This group, this party delegation, which was the largest in the elections, which represents over 5.4 million votes, more than the populations of some states that are members has been completely ... (The President cut off the speaker)

  President. – I am sorry, this is not a point of order either.

5. Ħin tal-votazzjonijiet

  President. – The next item is the vote.

(For the results and other details of the vote: see Minutes)

5.1. Il-kalendarju tas-sessjonijiet parzjali tal-Parlament – 2021 (votazzjoni)

5.2. Il-kalendarju tas-sessjonijiet parzjali tal-Parlament – 2022 (votazzjoni)

5.3. Verifika tal-kredenzjali (A9-0015/2020 - Lucy Nethsingha) (votazzjoni)

5.4. Ħatra ta' membru tal-Bord Uniku ta' Riżoluzzjoni (A9-0009/2020 - Irene Tinagli) (votazzjoni)

– Before the vote:

  Evelyn Regner (S&D). – Madam President, thank you very much for giving me the floor before these votes. I would like to remind all voting right now for a resolution on gender equality and economic institutions we made here in this House in March 2019. This resolution is referring to the fact that there has to be gender balance when doing these votes. All the candidates here are men and this is a reminder of this resolution.

5.5. Ħatra ta' membru tal-Bord Uniku ta' Riżoluzzjoni (A9-0011/2020 - Irene Tinagli) (votazzjoni)

5.6. Ħatra tal-Viċi President tal-Bord Uniku ta' Riżoluzzjoni (A9-0010/2020 - Irene Tinagli) (votazzjoni)

5.7. Ħatra tad-Direttur Eżekuttiv tal-Awtorità Bankarja Ewropea (EBA) (A9-0008/2020 - Irene Tinagli) (votazzjoni)

5.8. Oġġezzjoni skont l-Artikolu 111(3): Il-klassifikazzjoni, l-ittikkettar u l-imballaġġ tas-sustanzi u t-taħlitiet - diossidu tat-titanju (B9-0071/2020) (votazzjoni)

5.9. Ċarġer komuni għall-apparat radju mobbli (RC-B9-0070/2020, B9-0070/2020, B9-0072/2020, B9-0074/2020, B9-0075/2020, B9-0076/2020, B9-0085/2020) (votazzjoni)

5.10. Differenza fil-pagi bejn il-ġeneri (B9-0069/2020, B9-0073/2020, B9-0083/2020, B9-0084/2020) (votazzjoni)

  President. – Colleagues, since it’s the last vote with our British colleagues, I would like to thank them for all their work in the European Parliament and wish them all the best.

(Standing ovation)

That concludes the vote.

(The sitting was suspended briefly)

6. Tkomplija tas-seduta

(The sitting resumed at 12.13)

7. Kompożizzjoni tal-kumitati u tad-delegazzjonijiet: ara l-Minuti

8. Spegazzjonijiet tal-vot

8.1. Ftehim dwar il-ħruġ tar-Renju Unit tal-Gran Brittanja u tal-Irlanda ta' Fuq mill-Unjoni Ewropea u mill-Komunità Ewropea tal-Enerġija Atomika (A9-0004/2020 - Guy Verhofstadt)

Oral explanations of vote

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Paní předsedající, včera, když jsme hlasovali o dohodě o vystoupení Velké Británie z EU, bylo to pro mě nejtěžší hlasování za uplynulých pět let. Chci říci, že jsem nesouhlasila s vystoupením Velké Británie, ale hlasovala jsem pro tuto dohodu, protože je důležité, aby odchod Velké Británie byl na základě dohody, která umožní dobré postavení občanů EU v Británii a britských občanů v EU, dobrou přípravu na následující dobrou spolupráci a partnerství v EU. Proto jsem pro tuto dohodu hlasovala, přestože jsem velmi smutná, velmi nešťastná z odchodu Britů, budou nám zde chybět, ale já věřím, že to nebylo sbohem, ale na shledanou.

  Sheila Ritchie (Renew). – Madam President, today, many, many hundreds of thousands of UK citizens are grieving their loss of EU citizenship. I pray this House finds a way to be generous to them, to us. Do not treat, please, us as churlishly as our Brexiteers have treated you. I warn you all of the dangers of populism. We are the first victims; do not let there be more. I could not vote for this disgraceful agreement. It is, of course, better for the EU than it is for the UK: a fact which the UK seems to be blind to. I thank this House for its continuous courtesy. Goodbye.

  Barbara Ann Gibson (Renew). – Madam President, thank you for allowing me to speak. Today, I’m the voice of millions of UK citizens. I am heartbroken. The personal sense of loss is enormous; the loss of my freedoms and rights, the loss of my EU citizenship, part of my very identity that I value so much. I know in my heart that Brexit is a mistake, and I don’t think I will ever be able to forgive the self—serving politicians who have brought it upon us. Ours is a great nation, but we are greater in the EU. The UK should be leading in Europe, not leaving. I am heartbroken.

  Jane Brophy (Renew). – Madam President, yesterday in this Chamber, along with my Liberal Democrat colleagues, I voted against the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement. I did this because I believe this Withdrawal Agreement is a bad deal for Britain. There is no deal that is as good for the UK as remaining a member of the European Union. The next few months will bring us insecurity; not just for our country but also for European citizens living in the UK and British citizens living in Europe. This deal does not go far enough to protect their rights. I’m appalled that this issue was not at the forefront of Boris Johnson’s government negotiations and ashamed that it fell on the EU negotiation team to fight for. I hope that over the next few months our EU colleagues and friends will support us through these very difficult times. Please do not fall to the demands of Boris Johnson’s Government, weakening citizens’ rights. Hopefully, we will continue to work closely together as neighbours, continuing the fight to stop catastrophic climate change and keep peace in the world at these turbulent times. My hope is that we will remain close friends and allies, and one day we will be back.

  Matthew Patten (NI). – Madam President, I’m really proud to have voted for the Withdrawal Agreement and to uphold the democratic mandate of the British people to leave the European Union. While the Agreement is deeply imperfect, I was really heartened by the Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s promises on divergence, ending the rule of the European Court of Justice, fishing and promising no extension.

Mr Verhofstadt’s speech yesterday only confirmed my view that Britain leaving the EU is the right decision. He said the reason for Brexit was because the EU had given too much, too many opt-ins and opt-outs. His future is for the EU to take over complete sovereignty from its Member States. This is not the lesson of Brexit. The lesson is that the drive from an economic union to an overbearing political superstate, distant from the daily lives of its citizens, will always end in failure.

  Julie Ward (S&D). – Madam President, it’s been a privilege and a pleasure to serve here since 2014 for the northwest of England and particularly because, before I was in politics, I worked with young people and I participated in many programmes that were supported by Youth in Action, which became Erasmus+ and which brought young people together across boundaries.

Well, I voted against the Withdrawal Agreement because I cannot in good faith ratify a deal that will wreck the economy, weaken citizens’ rights and social protections, limit opportunities for those very young people, threaten peace, security and stability, and damage the UK’s international reputation. Many people will argue that it’s time for acceptance, but I think it’s time for truth telling and accountability. This has never been about my job as an MEP, but about the millions of jobs at stake because of Brexit and the families and the communities that will be adversely affected, and most of them are marginalised people in deprived communities to whom the EU held out a helping hand when our own government in Westminster ignored us.

  Belinda De Lucy (NI). – Madam President, it was not easy voting for the Withdrawal Act yesterday. However, Boris has made amendments and, thanks in huge part to the pressure from the Brexit Party, promised that there would be no level playing field, nor an extension beyond 2020 and these promises lent Boris a huge majority in the general election, which gave his Brexit strategy a democratic mandate that the Brexit Party must respect.

Over the next 11 months, Boris will have to prove he is a man of honour and deliver on his promises and, of course, we will be waiting in the wings. This beautiful democratic movement that is flourishing in the UK will act as an inspiration. An inspiration to those who feel their democratic agency and stake in the rules they have to live under are at risk. Our vote is an equaliser between prince and pauper. It is the safeguard between us, the people, and the establishment abusing its power. It is worth fighting for and I thank the patience of the millions of Brits who did not take to the streets in violence when their vote and voice were being dismissed, but with perseverance, fortitude and resilience proved to people all over the world that change can be enacted peacefully through the ballot box.

  Claire Fox (NI). – Madam President, I voted for the Agreement with a message from many Brexit voters in the UK: this is not goodbye but au revoir, as my T—shirt says. Not because we’ll be back in the EU, but because we will see you soon, as friends and equals in each and every nation state represented here. We don’t need the EU to manage our friendships and collaboration as European colleagues. Let’s keep in touch.

I am a proud European. I owe Europe, not the EU, for my politics and principles. I learned the best way to fight for individual citizens’ rights is through nation states; a lesson from Rousseau and the Enlightenment philosophers. I owe my love of classical music to Beethoven; his Ode to Joy is a hymn to freedom, not a faux EU anthem.

Finally, thanks to those of you who have listened and been open-minded on Brexit. Thanks to those of you on the left and right who value national sovereignty and democratic accountability. Good luck, au revoir, let’s keep in touch.

  Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Madam President, I voted in favour of the Withdrawal Agreement. The reason being is simply we need to have an orderly withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and to facilitate that, the Withdrawal Agreement allows for us to go into a negotiation phase around the future relationship.

If we were to reject it, obviously it would be a disorderly withdrawal and could have profound implications for citizens both in the UK and European Union, but from my perspective, on the island of Ireland.

We have now established that there will be no hard border on the island of Ireland, but I am certainly taking a leap of faith with regard to the issues of citizens’ rights and whether or not they will be whittled away in time after the future agreement is agreed.

So I want to put on the record here, today, that I have genuine worries that Irish citizens who want to remain European, who live in Northern Ireland, will have their rights and entitlements diminished if we do not ensure the continuation of the principles of the Good Friday Agreement throughout the negotiations on the future relationship between the European Union and the UK.

  Antony Hook (Renew). – Madam President, I want to thank every MEP singing with us yesterday, and the kindness shown to British MEPs. It has made a deep impression on the British people.

Brexit was close to being stopped. When the government lost its majority, a new government with a leader trusted by Labour, Liberal Democrats and sensible ex-Conservatives could have been formed and put Brexit back to the people.

It wasn’t done. Progressive people and parties have to put our common ground ahead of our disagreements and the mistakes of the past. Compromise is not bad, it’s the way people get things done. Attacks on each other help our opponents. We can win the chance for Britain’s young people to rejoin the EU. We can overturn Johnson’s majority in 2024. We can make Britain a great country again – if we have the courage to take each other’s hands, not just in this Chamber but in the future.

  Илхан Кючюк (Renew). – Г-жо Председател, подкрепих това споразумение за излизане на Обединеното кралство от Европейския съюз не защото го харесвам, не защото е добро, а защото е единственото възможно споразумение и няма друго решение в настоящия случай.

Първото, от което имаме най-много нужда, е спокоен тон, прагматичен разговор за това какви бъдещи отношения трябва да има между Европейския съюз и Обединеното кралство. Имаме нужда от подреден Брексит. Второто нещо, от което имаме нужда, е продължаване на добрия диалог и целта да бъде всеобхватно и задълбочено отношение между Европейския съюз и Обединеното кралство.

Въпросите са много, но главният е един. Може ли да имаме всеобхватни отношения с Обединеното кралство, когато имаме само 11 месеца да ги договорим. И отговорът тук според мен е един. Няма как да се случи. И моето притеснение идва от това. Безспорно ние ще разговаряме по важните теми, свързани със сигурността, екологичните въпроси, които стоят пред нас, икономическите отношения и други. Заедно с това обаче темата за правата на гражданите – и британските, и европейските – трябва да бъде част от дневния ни ред. Изключително е важно това и аз ще продължавам да работя по този въпрос.

  Rory Palmer (S&D). – Madam President, it was a sad day yesterday when the Withdrawal Agreement was approved by this Parliament. It was approved with a handsome majority and, sadly, we will leave the European Union tomorrow, but we will do so without my endorsement. I could not bring myself to vote for that agreement yesterday. But I accept the course of events. I accept that, sadly, we now leave the European Union. But if I can accept that, those who’ve championed the cause of Brexit in the Conservative Party and indeed in the Brexit Party as well, you must now accept full responsibility for what happens next and what follows from here. I genuinely now believe and hope that a path can be charted, a path can be trod that makes this work somehow for our country, but I genuinely fear that is an impossible challenge, an impossible task.

  Łukasz Kohut (S&D). – (start of speech off mike) ... Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union is a very unwelcome occurrence for the integration process of the Union. The UK has been a very valuable member of the European Union for many years. Even if there is sound evidence that during the Vote Leave campaign, a huge number of demonstrably false claims were made and fake news spread, the British people decided and now we have to look to the future, and I’m sure as a European federalist from Silesia that the future of the UK is in the European Union. We must be always ready for the UK to return. We cannot fail in assuring the Scottish, the Welsh, the Irish and the English that the arms of the European Union are open to welcome them back.

The last few words for all my friends from the United Kingdom: you will never walk alone.

  Samira Rafaela (Renew). – Madam President, my British friends, yesterday I was faced with an almost impossible choice, and in the end I voted for the protection of the rights of British and European citizens, at least for in the foreseeable future.

Nobody wins with Brexit and here in Parliament we lose colleagues and dear friends, and I will lose my neighbour here in the plenary. Luisa, we both arrived here in May, young and ambitious, and we both still had the hope of stopping Brexit. It has been a true pleasure to have sat next to you in all our Group meetings and here in Plenary, but above all, you have become one of my best friends. Brexit may raise a lot of barriers, but these will not hinder our friendship.

Thank you, and thanks to my British colleagues. I wish you all the best and I’m looking forward to the day when you will be again among us.

  Gilles Lebreton (ID). – Madame la Présidente, peu de votes sont historiques au sein du Parlement européen, mais il y en a eu un le 29 janvier pour ratifier l’accord du Brexit, et je suis fier d’avoir voté en faveur de celui-ci.

Le Brexit devait être accepté parce qu’il fallait respecter la souveraineté du peuple britannique qui le voulait absolument. Admirable peuple britannique, qui a manifesté une nouvelle fois sa légendaire capacité de résistance à l’adversité. Il a dû voter pas moins de trois fois pour obtenir son Brexit: une première fois en 2016 par référendum, une deuxième fois en mai 2019 en élisant massivement au Parlement européen les candidats du Parti du Brexit, et une troisième fois en décembre 2019 en donnant à Boris Johnson la majorité parlementaire dont il avait besoin. À chaque fois, il a résisté avec détermination à la propagande européiste et a brisé les vaines tentatives d’obstruction des Juncker, Tusk et autres Verhofstadt. Bravo, chers amis britanniques, et bonne chance pour cette nouvelle étape de votre histoire nationale!

  Leszek Miller (S&D). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Głosowałem za umową, ponieważ odsuwa ona zagrożenie chaosu prawnego, do jakiego by doszło wskutek twardego brexitu. Gwarantuje ponadto dotychczasowe prawa obywatelom Unii przebywającym w Wielkiej Brytanii, w tym moim rodakom z Polski, którzy stanowią na Wyspach największą mniejszość narodową. Wyjście Wielkiej Brytanii to niewątpliwie bardzo smutna chwila dla wszystkich zwolenników integracji. Czasem jednak trzeba zrobić jeden krok w tył, żeby znowu pójść naprzód.

Głosowałem za umową, ponieważ zapewnia ona w okresie jej obowiązywania stosowanie w Wielkiej Brytanii pierwszeństwa prawa Unii Europejskiej, w tym orzeczeń Trybunału Sprawiedliwości. Jest to moim zdaniem czytelny przekaz, jak w poszanowaniu zaciągniętych zobowiązań traktatowych oraz obowiązku lojalnej współpracy powinny zachowywać się wszystkie państwa członkowskie, nie tylko państwo opuszczające, lecz tym bardziej te kraje, które cały czas Unię Europejską tworzą.

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – (start of speech off mic) […] voted the Brexit deal and we had our final say. ‘Is it the final curtain, not yet written? How did it happen? How did we come to this?’ we heard in so many languages. The fact is that many of us S&D members would have gladly voted against – no – along with our beloved Labour friends.

But this is not the end. There is still a negotiation ahead and it touches upon many issues of the committee I chair – fundamental rights, citizens’ rights, data protection, border management, asylum, security matters, judicial cooperation. But in order to do that, there are two lessons to be learned. First, we’ve got to stay together to deal with that negotiation – that’s a fact – but also we’ve got to strike back. We’ve got to fight fake news and disinformation better to keep our Union together.

We won’t be missing the noisy Brexiteers but we will certainly be missing so much our beloved dear European British friends. Thank you for having been here. Thank you for your will to come back.

  Irena Joveva (Renew). – Gospa predsedujoča! Najlepša hvala. Po treh letih in pol, po dolgi sagi, neprestani politični drami, gre zdaj zares.

Seveda sem za obstanek Združenega kraljestva v Uniji, vendar sem morala glasovati za, ker sem naklonjena urejenemu izstopu, ne pa kaotičnemu no deal izstopu, ki bi sledil, če ne bi potrdili tega dokumenta.

Ampak z odhodom Združenega kraljestva se saga na žalost še ne zaključuje. Prehodno obdobje bo še bolj zahtevno in ključno za prihodnje odnose.

Jutri bomo pa izgubili pomembnega člana naše evropske družine, to je dejstvo. In dejstvo je, da bomo pogrešali naše partnerje, nekatere, ne čisto vseh.

Dogajanje, ki je vodilo do brexita, moramo vzeti vendarle kot nek jasen signal, razumeti ga moramo v luči sedanjega časa in stanja naših demokracij in poiskati rešitve, ki bodo preprečevale podobne dogodke v prihodnosti.

Upam, da smo se iz vsega kaj naučili, in upam, da se bomo zavedali tudi potrebnih reform Unije, poleg vsega, da bi jo približali državljanom ter zaustavili širjenje dezinformacij in političnih manipulacij v njej.

  Henrik Overgaard Nielsen (NI). – Madam President, the vote which took place yesterday on the Withdrawal Agreement was not an easy choice for me.

The Withdrawal Agreement as it stands, although improved from the original draft, is far from the Brexit which I had envisioned. Issues of the Northern Ireland border, the redaction of the Lord Dubs amendment on child refugees and the 39 billion all made me less than jubilant to vote in favour of the Agreement.

However I stood for election in May of last year on the principle of democracy and the return of sovereignty to the British Parliament. Boris Johnson won that mandate in December of last year. Therefore, it’s not the role for me or any other MEP to overturn the democratic decision of the British people: both the referendum in 2016 and the support given to Boris’s Brexit deal.

This is not to say that I have succumbed to the charms and promising words of the Prime Minister. Far from it. I remain sceptical of the promises which Boris has given to Brexiteers and his ability to ensure that the Brexit he delivers reflects the concerns of those across the whole country, and not just the Tory shires. I hope Boris won’t disappoint the 17.4 million.

  Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, stimați colegi, este un moment trist astăzi. Eu vin dintr-o țară din est și îmi pare foarte rău că Uniunea noastră, care a fost puternică tocmai pentru că și Marea Britanie a fost parte din această construcție timp de aproape 47 de ani, o Uniune care, împreună cu Marea Britanie, a reușit să ne scape pe noi, cei din est, din iadul comunist. Noi, cei care am venit mai târziu, trăim altfel această despărțire care, sper eu, să fie de scurtă durată.

Le mulțumesc tuturor politicienilor și diplomaților britanici care au făcut Uniunea puternică și care ne-au ajutat pe noi să fim astăzi împreună în aceeași familie. Am votat pentru acest acord, nu am votat cu inima împăcată tocmai pentru că știu că sunt peste 3,5 milioane de europeni în Marea Britanie. Peste 450 000 dintre acești 3,5 milioane sunt cetățeni români. Sper ca, în acest Acord, Comisia să aibă toate instrumentele pentru a-i apăra pe toți europenii aflați în Marea Britanie.

  Radosław Sikorski (PPE). – Madam President, I wanted to explain why I voted against the Withdrawal Agreement and that’s not because I don’t appreciate the work of Michel Barnier and our team; I think it was the only shape of the Withdrawal Agreement that is possible. I voted against because I think Brexit is a bad idea and that was the only way to give witness to that for our successors. It’s a bad idea; a result of 30 years of hounding against the EU in the British press, of misrepresenting the European Union and the cowardice of British politicians.

And I just have one request to people who brought it about: that whatever now happens in Britain, or between Britain and the European Union, you brought it about, you voted for it, you own it. Don’t blame us for what’s about to happen.

  Miapetra Kumpula-Natri (S&D). – Arvoisa puhemies, äänestin eilen toisin, kuin järkeni ja ymmärrykseni olisi antanut ymmärtää. Olen surullinen brittien puolesta, jotka haluaisivat pysyä osana yhteistyötä ja yhteisöämme. Ja olen surullinen äänestäjieni puolesta, jotka eivät olisi koskaan halunneet brexitin tapahtuvan.

Euroopan unioni perustettiin ja työskentelee joka päivä ihmisten puolesta, niin että meillä olisi parempi, turvallisempi elää ja eläisimme rauhassa. Erasmus on opiskelijoita varten, ilmastopolitiikka päästöjen oikeudenmukaista leikkaamista varten, roaming liikkumista varten, vanhempainvapaat lapsia ja perheitä varten, työntekijöiden oikeudet työntekijöiden arkea varten, kauppapolitiikka vaurautta ja työpaikkojen luomista varten ja oikeudenmukaisen maailman rakentamista varten.

Ihmisiä ei voida kuitenkaan erottaa. Kohtalomme ovat yhteen sidotut ja siksi toivon yhteistyötä ja tulen tekemään sitä aina. Toivotan Ison-Britannian takaisin, mutta teen aina hyvän yhteistyön eteen työtä.

  Mick Wallace (GUE/NGL). – Madam President, Ireland would have liked Britain to stay in the European Union, but I think it’s very important that the vote of the people of Britain in 2016 was respected. We voted ‘No’ to Nice, and we voted ‘No’ to Lisbon; it was deemed the wrong answer, and they made us vote again.

Well, as it turned out, the truth be told, the British people voted again as well in the election last month and if Jeremy Corbyn had stuck to his own principles – who has been very anti neo-liberal for a long time – if he had actually stuck to his guns and stood up to the Blairites in his own party, you know what, he wouldn’t have got the hammering he got, because the British people had already spoken. They had already made their choice. And they made it a second time.

Now, whether we like it or not, and I’d prefer it if they were here, we have a great relationship with the British people. We haven’t liked the whole lot of their governments, but we’re very fond of their people, and we will continue to be so.

And to be honest, I will actually miss; there have been some wonderful speakers from the Brexit group and I have great respect for a lot of the speakers that were in it and I will miss them.

  Antonio López-Istúriz White (PPE). – Señora presidenta, soy español, represento a España, un país que durante siglos ha tenido una relación muy problemática, si no de luchas constantes, con el Reino Unido. Ahora durante cuarenta años habíamos aprendido a convivir, a respetarnos mutuamente. Los españoles habíamos descubierto otro Reino Unido.

Lástima que, por la acción de unos cuantos, esto se acabe. Los mismos que ahora escribirán memorias —y cobrarán por ello— sobre cómo destrozaron la unidad de Europa —no de la Unión Europea, de Europa—, poniéndonos a todos en riesgo. Como han dicho compañeros míos, que asuman esa responsabilidad luego en el futuro. Que no se escapen como lo hizo, tras el referéndum, el señor Farage. Que den la cara cuando vuelvan los nacionalismos, cuando volvamos con nuestros odios, que ha provocado toda esta gente.

Nosotros seguiremos apoyando a nuestros amigos, a los verdaderos británicos, a los que tienen la lucha, el coraje en sus venas, lo que han demostrado durante siglos, incluso contra nosotros los españoles. Pero nosotros vamos a seguir trabajando juntos, porque os apreciamos y hemos descubierto vuestro verdadero ser dentro de la Unión Europea.

  Veronika Vrecionová (ECR). – Paní předsedající, já jsem včera dohodu s Velkou Británií o vystoupení stejně jako drtivá většina kolegů zde v sále podpořila. Odchod Británie mě sice mrzí, ale my bychom se všichni nyní měli snažit o to, aby naše budoucí vztahy byly co nejlepší. Ale brexit bychom měli také my, co zůstáváme v EU, brát jako varování. Stejná nespokojenost s vývojem EU, jako se projevila v Británii, se objevuje v řadě jiných členských zemí, i v České republice. Nedosahuje zatím takových rozměrů jako v Británii, ale my bychom si tuto nespokojenost měli uvědomit. A měli bychom ji brát v úvahu během jednání o budoucnosti EU, která se povedou v následujících letech. Měli bychom se zastavit a udělat revizi činností, které EU vykonává. Jistě najdeme řadu těch, které vykonávat nemusí a které by se měly vrátit na úroveň členských států.

  Catherine Rowett (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, it grieves me deeply that the EU negotiators and now the European Parliament have bowed to Boris Johnson’s threats and accepted a blank document on the false claim that it provides an orderly way out.

I voted against the so-called Withdrawal Agreement because it gives no basis for trust and contradicts the expressed wishes of our devolved assemblies. It sets an absurd timescale for achieving Brexit before 2021 and offers no safety net should that not be achieved.

Oh, Brexit, thou most wretched sad event!

Is this the taking back control they meant?

The vandals sought to smash the 28 ...

But soon they’ll find their Britain’s lost its ‘great’.

We came, we loved, we hoped, we fought, we lost.

There is no brighter dawn. We count the cost.

My parting gift is this small ring of verse.

We’ll meet again when things go well, not worse.

(Applause)

  Robert Rowland (NI). – Madam President, that was a wonderful ode to Brexit. A little bit depressing, but I enjoyed it nonetheless.

(Laughter)

I voted for the Withdrawal Agreement for the simple reason I believe in democracy. We’ve been going through the charade for almost four years and finally, we had an election that has cleared it once and for all. Brexit has finally been delivered. It took us, the Brexit Party, our colleagues here, to be elected into a chamber we don’t want to belong to, in order to change the course of history, and we have done that.

The Brexit Party deserves all the credit for what we’re seeing this week. It was only through our courageous stance against the establishment, against the two-party system that has finally delivered what this country, our great country, voted for – to leave the EU.

So I’m immensely proud of what we’ve achieved, all the colleagues here, it’s a beautiful achievement. I know there’s been some crocodile tears from the other side but don’t worry, the future is fantastic for Great Britain, we always show Europe the way and we will do in the future. God bless you all.

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já jsem včera podpořil v hlasování dohodu o vystoupení Velké Británie z Evropské unie. A chci v tuto chvíli v rámci vysvětlení jasně sdělit, že osobně nesouhlasím s tím, že Velká Británie opouští EU, považuji to za velkou škodu, už to zde říkali i moji kolegové. Velmi toho lituji. Na druhou stranu ctím rozhodnutí britského lidu jako demokratické rozhodnutí, které britský lid udělal v referendu, a v tuto chvíli mně nezbývá nic jiného než podpořit dohodu, která přináší nějaká pravidla tohoto rozvodu. A hlavně chrání občany EU, kteří žijí ve Velké Británii, proti případnému divokému rozchodu. Tedy toto řešení je v rámci reálné politiky dobrým řešením a já doufám, že do budoucna ošetříme i obchodní vztahy tak, abychom zůstali dobrými sousedy a vzájemně spolupracovali a podporovali se.

  Clare Daly (GUE/NGL). – Madam President, it doesn’t give me any pleasure to say that some of the speeches, and the singing and the tears, and the ‘we know best’ attitude of some of the UK Remainers show to me how disconnected you are from why you lost the general election and why we’re at the stage we are, where a major Member State has left the European Union.

And I listened to Guy Verhofstadt yesterday shrug his shoulders and say ‘Oh, how did it come to this’ and blame everybody else except the European Union itself. A Union which fails to recognise the problems that it has. A Union which allows fiscal rules to be broken for arms expenditure, but not for housing or to put roofs over the heads of people. A Union that talks about democracy everywhere else and stays silent when our Catalan colleagues lie in Spanish jails.

There are many reasons why this Union needs to look inside now. I voted for the Agreement. It’s the best of a bad lot. I don’t want a hard border on Ireland, but if there are problems after this, the Remainers and Europe can take a huge chunk of the blame for it.

  Frances Fitzgerald (PPE). – Madam President, we saw here this morning and yesterday, the depth of feeling amongst many other countries and Members at the loss of the United Kingdom from the European Union. That was genuine, and it was genuine because it brought to an end 47 years of membership, 47 years of peace-building, 47 years of cooperation and partnership, 47 years of breaking down borders and barriers. This was important, it was about building democracy and the UK played a very important part in that and I want to thank our UK colleagues for their contribution.

But let me say, it’s about the future now. Nobody knows the shape of the UK after Brexit, we await that – to see how the UK will fare.

But now is the time to build new relationships in that new context, and I hope that those negotiations will be approached in a way that will allow us to reach a deal, and that the UK will not diverge from the very standards that they played a key part in putting into place, whether it’s about food safety, the environment and so on.

But let’s put the interests of our citizens and communities and businesses first, who do want the closest, deepest and broadest possible relationship with the UK in the future.

  Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanuję suwerenną decyzję Brytyjczyków, dlatego głosowałam za umową. Niech wyjście Brytyjczyków będzie kubłem zimnej wody na rozpalone głowy federalistów. Zwolennicy brexitu wielokrotnie powtarzali, że obecnie parlamenty narodowe poszczególnych państw członkowskich Unii nie mają zbyt wielkiej możliwości blokowania unijnego prawodawstwa. Czas wyciągnąć wnioski z brexitu – należy zatrzymać niekontrolowaną migrację, przejmowanie kompetencji państw członkowskich, przeregulowanie, dominację Trybunału Sprawiedliwości.

Unia Europejska bez Brytyjczyków już nie będzie taka sama. Wyciągnijmy z tego lekcję. Z całą pewnością należałoby się zastanowić i stanowczo pokazać czerwoną kartkę tym, którzy myślą i dążą do federalizacji Unii Europejskiej.

  Jacek Saryusz-Wolski (ECR). – Madam President, I voted against the Brexit Agreement not to oppose the agreement but to oppose Brexit, at least symbolically. Brexit is, to quote Talleyrand, ‘worse than a crime, it is a mistake’. Brexit is a failure and mistake and a European drama of historical and strategic dimension with long—term geopolitical consequences we do not yet understand and grasp.

Both sides are to blame. I regret that there is no sign of reflection on the EU side as to why we lost the UK and why we betrayed the EU whole and free. The EU will be weaker and not complete without the UK. It will be weaker politically and it will be weaker economically – because the economy of the UK is equivalent to 19 economies of the small and medium—sized Member States – and will be weaker in terms of defence and military. A weaker EU will have to face ever—growing threats from the outside and inside. We should really go into reflection as to why all that happened.

  Jackie Jones (S&D). – Madam President, I want to thank the people of Wales, who gave me the opportunity to represent their views to remain in the European Union in this European Parliament. It has been the best of times and the worst of times; the best of times, ensuring that the rights, the values and the solidarity of the many are represented and the majority of people voting to remain in the European Parliament elections in Wales. All of the rights, including the measures on equal pay and the pensions gap, have been a real pleasure to be able to vote for. Looking to the future, Johnson must own the negative outcomes of Brexit now. Wales will take its place within the UK, Europe and the world and it will grow – because we have common values, rights and solidarity with the peoples across the European Union and the world. Finally, I’d like to say thank you to my colleagues, the staff in both my office and in the European Parliament and finally my son, for whom I did this in the first place and the next generation.

  Bogdan Rzońca (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Wczoraj głosowałem zgodnie z wolą obywateli Zjednoczonego Królestwa. My w Polsce dobrze wiemy, co to jest suwerenność, i dlatego szanujemy suwerenną decyzję obywateli Zjednoczonego Królestwa. Pamiętamy też w Polsce dobrze o tym, że to właśnie w Anglii powstał jeden z kluczowych dokumentów mówiących o wolnościach obywatelskich, czyli Wielka Karta Swobód. To było 805 lat temu, ale jutro też jest dzień. Jutro też rozpoczyna się okres przejściowy i bardzo wiele w tym Parlamencie możemy dobrego zrobić dla bardzo dobrych relacji między Unią Europejską a Parlamentem Europejskim. Będę namawiał polskich parlamentarzystów (bo będą takie okoliczności, że parlamenty krajowe będą regulowały relacje między Wielką Brytanią a parlamentami krajowymi), aby relacje te były jak najlepsze. A Wam, Państwu przedstawicielom Brytyjczyków, życzę wszystkiego najlepszego i miejcie w opiece również tych Polaków, którzy współtworzą gospodarkę Wielkiej Brytanii.

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-жо Председател, уважаеми колеги, гласувах в подкрепа на това предложение, защото това беше суверенната воля на британския народ, така решиха британските граждани. А те решиха така не защото някой друг им внуши невярно решение, а защото бяха принудени от многогодишната фалшива кампания на брюкселските бюрократи, които се опитваха да изземват все повече и повече национален суверенитет, които се опитваха да подменят националното самосъзнание, националната принадлежност, националните знамена.

Между другото, днешният дебат е много показателен. Това, с което започнахме – забраната на председателя да се излагат националните знамена. Тази недомислица е една от причините хората в Обединеното кралство да гласуват, за да излязат от него, защото не можеш да забраняваш някому да се чувства британец или поляк, или чех, или българин. Когато го правиш, ти притискаш хората. Когато притискаш хората, те решават да напуснат мястото, на което не са добре дошли. Защото можеш да им забраниш да си слагат знаменцата по трибуните, но не може да ги извадиш от сърцата им. Всеки носи знамето си, самосъзнанието си, името си вътре в сърцето си и го пази и това не научиха брюкселските бюрократи. Това трябва да научат, ако искат да има такъв Съюз.

  Brian Monteith (NI). – Madam President, you’ve got to get in to get out. That’s why I and my colleagues came here. The Withdrawal Agreement undoubtedly stinks, but I held my nose and voted for it because Nigel Farage won a personal commitment from Boris Johnson that there would be no extension of the transition after 31 December, because the UK would abandon the anti-competitive delusion of regulatory alignment.

Now by adopting these positions the UK has retrieved key bargaining power, leverage. We can walk away from a bad deal, we can protect our fisheries, our defences, make our own laws and hold our politicians to account. So Narcissus has been turned to a flower, a flower but with a sweeter perfume than at first bloom. That’s why I voted for it.

8.2. Il-kalendarju tas-sessjonijiet parzjali tal-Parlament – 2021

Oral explanations of vote

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já jsem podpořil tento rozvrh, ale přihlásil jsem se do možnosti vysvětlit svůj postup a postoj k danému problému. Stále si myslím, že při schvalování tohoto kalendáře nebyl brán zřetel na práci europoslanců v národních státech. Podle mého názoru – a proto tu poznámku tady činím takto na záznam –, je práce europoslance jako politika jak v Bruselu, ve Štrasburku, tak i v národní zemi mimořádně důležitá. A já pouze konstatuji, byť jsem podpořil ten kalendář, že pokud vnímám, že je nedostatek tzv. zelených týdnů, tak to není proto, že by chtěli poslanci více „volného času“, ale aby mohli více politicky pracovat ve svém národním státu. V některých státech EU, zvláště třeba u nás, v České republice, debatujeme o vzdalování se EU a jejích myšlenek normálnímu obyvatelstvu. Pokud poslanci nepracují ve svých národních státech a nemohou vysvětlovat myšlenky evropské integrace, tak to samozřejmě má i tento negativní dopad a nepřispívá to k vnímání evropské integrace.

8.3. Il-kalendarju tas-sessjonijiet parzjali tal-Parlament – 2022

Oral explanations of vote

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Paní předsedající, i pro tento další rok platí to, co jsem říkal, proto také opakuji, myslím si, že bychom měli do budoucna více posílit práci europoslanců ve svých národních státech. A že větší množství zelených týdnů a více času na práci doma není o tom, že by europoslanci měli méně pracovat, ale politická práce v národních státech je, podle mého názoru, mimořádně důležitá. A jak už jsem řekl, pokud nechceme, aby byly posilovány v národních státech protievropské tendence, tak je nutné, aby ti, co věří v myšlenky EU, to vysvětlovali i svým voličům, dětem na základních a středních školách a ve chvíli, kdy na to není dostatek času, tak samozřejmě to nasazení není tak veliké. Takže prosím zvažme do budoucna tuto myšlenku, že více zelených týdnů neznamená více volného času, ale více prostoru pro práci, pro politickou práci v národních státech.

8.4. Ċarġer komuni għall-apparat radju mobbli (RC-B9-0070/2020, B9-0070/2020, B9-0072/2020, B9-0074/2020, B9-0075/2020, B9-0076/2020, B9-0085/2020)

Oral explanations of vote

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já jsem se nakonec rozhodla podpořit toto usnesení. Souhlasím s výzvou, aby Komise začala konat, a to v relativně krátké době, aby doplnila směrnici o rádiových zařízeních. Komise by měla také pravidelně hodnotit inovace a podporovat rozvoj nových technologií. V roce 2016 každý Evropan vyprodukoval 16 kg odpadu. Zdůrazňuji, že elektroodpadu. To je o 10 kg více, než je světový průměr. Pokud chceme naplňovat námi přijatý Green Deal, univerzální nabíječka je jen jedním krokem, kterým můžeme přispět ke zlepšení životního prostředí, k šetření se zdroji. Musíme si uvědomit, že se nejedná pouze o nabíječky telefonů, ale i o nabíječky tabletů či čteček. Proto jsem tento návrh podpořila.

  Matthew Patten (NI). – Madam President, I voted for the recommendation to standardise power cables. What household doesn’t have boxes of unused, out—of—date, unwanted cables? I have four children. Over the years, with computers, phones, games consoles, toothbrushes – you name it – we have four boxes stuffed full of cables, wires and chargers.

Now, there are schemes to recycle these, but we worry that we might need them again, like every other household, so we don’t throw them away. Every time we update an appliance we get yet more cables and chargers and they are all different. It’s ridiculous, it’s unnecessary and it’s time to change.

  Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Oczywiście poparłam tę rezolucję w sprawie uniwersalnej ładowarki do przenośnych urządzeń radiowych, ponieważ uważam, że obecna sytuacja jest absolutnie nieracjonalna. Gromadzimy w swoich domach, biurach mnóstwo ładowarek, które już nie pasują do żadnych urządzeń. Konsumenci wciąż mają do czynienia z sytuacją, w której przy zakupie nowych urządzeń od różnych dostawców otrzymują różne ładowarki i nie mają innego wyjścia, jak tylko kupować czy otrzymywać kolejną nową ładowarkę przy zakupie telefonu komórkowego od tego samego dostawcy. Dochodzi do tak idiotycznych sytuacji, że ten sam dostawca, ten sam producent tego samego telefonu kolejny model wypuszcza na rynek z nową ładowarką. Jeśli chcemy w sposób realny mówić i działać na rzecz gospodarki opartej na obiegu zamkniętym, to jest to zdecydowanie krok w dobrym kierunku.

  Billy Kelleher (Renew). – (start of speech off mike) ... of the resolution as well. We have to accept at this stage that, in terms of environmental damage, the amount of cables and chargers littered across homes throughout the world is simply a scandalous idea at this particular juncture and we surely have the capacity, in terms of innovation technology, to ensure that we can develop a charger and a cable that is uniform and that can do what this particular motion and resolution sets out to do.

There is no doubt that there are drawers and cupboards across households, across the entire European Union, full of old cables and old chargers and like previous speakers have said, we hoard for fear that someday we might need it again, but it is never taken out and it lies there gathering dust with the hundreds of kilometres of cable and chargers in households, as I said, throughout Europe. So I urge the Commission to be proactive, to engage with industry and to ensure that the spirit of this resolution is enacted to ensure that we have a common mobile charger for domestic bliss, if not more.

  Antonio López-Istúriz White (PPE). – Señora presidenta, por fin, a ver si podemos llamar ya la atención a la Comisión para que ayude. Estas son las pequeñas cosas que nos ayudan: la revolución digital, aproximar más esta Unión Europea a la gente. Lo hicimos con el roaming, hagámoslo también con esta cuestión.

Dejemos de acumular, como decía mi colega, kilómetros y kilómetros de cables que nadie utiliza en sus casas, seamos útiles. Yo creo que esto va a ser muy bien recibido por la ciudadanía europea, porque todos sufrimos el mismo problema. Está la cuestión medioambiental, pero, sobre todo, la personal: cajas y cajas en casa y el hecho de ser utilizados. Yo estoy por la libertad de mercado, pero otra cosa es que me sienta utilizado, y este es el caso. Yo animo a que la Comisión, inmediatamente, se haga eco de lo que hemos hecho en el Parlamento Europeo y podamos tener algo sensato en cuanto a cargadores de móviles y demás instrumentos.

  Anne-Sophie Pelletier (GUE/NGL). – Madame la Présidente, alors j’ai voté en faveur de ce texte pour envoyer un message fort à la Commission. Depuis 10 ans, la Commission discute, palabre... Elle doit agir. Elle ne peut pas aujourd’hui se contenter de la bonne volonté des industriels du numérique. Je regrette pourtant que, dans ce texte, il manque quelque chose. Il manque des mentions concernant ces lobbys du numérique, qui ont fait pression sur la Commission et qui ont provoqué son inertie.

Le chargeur universel est une mesure écologique, sociale et c’est la plus simple aujourd’hui pour réduire nos déchets électroniques. Si nous n’arrivons pas à agir pour mettre en place le chargeur universel, comment arriverons—nous à agir pour la planète et l’urgence écologique? Alors, si la Commission veut s’habiller de vert, qu’elle agisse concrètement et immédiatement pour proposer des mesures contraignantes.

  Veronika Vrecionová (ECR). – Paní předsedající, já jsem pro toto usnesení nehlasovala. Osobně mi samozřejmě občas také vadí, že do nového telefonu nesedí stará nabíječka, ale tomu se říká technologický pokrok. Když se na ten velký posun, co se stal za posledních pět let, a to bez nějakého našeho usnesení, podíváte, uvidíte obrovský rozdíl. Nabíječek bylo třicet druhů a byly daleko větší, dnes jich je pár. Jednotná nabíječka zastaví vývoj a nové technologie, které budou k dispozici např. ve Spojených státech amerických nebo v Asii, nebudou dostupné pro občany Evropské unie. Neříkejme soukromým společnostem, co mají vyrábět a co mají prodávat. Tyto zásahy jsou ospravedlnitelné pouze v případě ochrany zdraví. A to není tento případ.

  Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovana potpredsjednice, podržala sam ovu rezoluciju, a želim podsjetiti da je klub Europske pučke stranke već prije deset godina zagovarao uvođenje jedinstvenog punjača za elektroničke uređaje. Jedinstveno tržište bilo je i ostalo osnova ekonomije Europe, kamen temeljac europskih integracija i pokretač rasta gospodarstva. U svijetu se stvori oko 50 milijuna tona e-otpada, a Europa je drugi najveći proizvođač s ukupno 12,3 milijuna tona.

U okviru europskog zelenog plana nastoji se smanjiti zagađenje okoliša kroz različite inicijative, jedna od njih svakako je jedinstveni punjač.

Potrebno je uzeti u obzir i nove tehnologije, primjerice bežično punjenje i rješenja koja oni nude. Svakom kupnjom novog uređaja potrošači su dužni, kao što znamo, kupiti i novi punjač što dodatno povećava troškove pri kupnji.

Jedinstveni punjač nije samo rješenje za pitanja okoliša, već je rješenje i za smanjenje troškova potrošača koje pritom štiti njihova prava i slobodu glasa.

Uvođenjem jedinstvenog punjača ne bi samo zaštitili potrošače, već i svijet u kojem živimo promičući svijest o zaštiti okoliša.

  Mick Wallace (GUE/NGL). – Madam President, almost 15 million tonnes of e-waste are generated globally every year, at an average of more than 6 kilogrammes per person. Total e—waste generation in Europe in 2016 stood at over 12 million tonnes, correspondent to an average of over 16 kilogrammes per person – so rationally three times the world average.

The huge variety of chargers on the market for mobile phones and other electronic devices drives consumers crazy, but has also contributed massively to e-waste. Voluntary industry agreements have failed to solve the problem and consumers are still obliged to buy new chargers for all new devices. It’s a crazy situation, given that we’re facing climate breakdown.

We all know that Apple has been actively lobbying not to introduce a mandatory common charger, and for too long now. The Commission has prioritised the interests of Apple over the interests of ordinary citizens and consumers, and the one time that the Commission did the right thing and ordered 13 billion of Apple’s monies to be paid back to the Irish Government we had a Fine Gael—Labour Government that refused to take the money, despite the fact that they needed it.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Madam President, I fully support this initiative, which the PPE Group has been calling for throughout my time as an MEP. It is simply common sense that we would have a common charger for all electronic devices, such as our mobile phones, our tablets, Kindles, Fitbits, etc. Not only does this cut down on waste and unnecessary electronic accessories, it achieves something that we, as MEPs, are elected to do: it makes life easier for European citizens. This is an opportunity to make a real difference to people’s lives. Everyone knows there are far too many cables and charges in our homes and this amounts to around 50 million tonnes of waste globally every year, as Mr Wallace just mentioned.

With this resolution, we are calling on the Commission to come forward with an ambitious and comprehensive proposal within the next six months that will establish a standard common charger for smartphones. This has been a long time in coming and has required a lot of work to get here, but I’m glad that we are finally seeing some progress on this important issue. This is a battle we must win, the same as we won the battle to end roaming charges.

  Gianna Gancia (ID). – Signora Presidente, non ho espresso voto favorevole alla risoluzione relativa alla possibilità di normare la produzione di caricabatterie per le apparecchiature radiomobili, per esempio come i nostri smartphone, in quanto sono convinta che ciò vada a ledere la libertà di scelta del consumatore.

Inoltre, lasciatemi esprimere cortesemente una considerazione di metodo. L'Unione europea, se vuole assumere un ruolo di leadership nello scacchiere geopolitico, deve rendersi conto che il suo ruolo non è quello di interferire nella libera iniziativa di coloro che sono i veri produttori di ricchezza – e sto parlando delle imprese – bensì di abbattere gli ostacoli che si frappongono alla circolazione di idee e merci europee. Pertanto, cerchiamo di non inseguire i falsi idoli del populismo ambientalista, ma imbocchiamo la via che porta alla salvaguardia dell'ambiente mediante politiche fondate sull'evidenza e sul metodo scientifico.

8.5. Differenza fil-pagi bejn il-ġeneri (B9-0069/2020, B9-0073/2020, B9-0083/2020, B9-0084/2020)

Oral explanations of vote

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Paní předsedající, rozdíl v platech mezi muži a ženami, který je v průměru v Evropské unii 16 %, je něco, co je velmi nespravedlivého, a přestože dochází v některých zemích ke zlepšování, je to posun velmi pomalý. Je pravda, že Evropská unie provádí řadu opatření, kterými pomáhá členským státům zlepšovat tuto situaci, protože je to věc subsidiarity a tlaku členských států a jejich opatření, aby tuto věc změnily. Já například velmi pozitivně hodnotím směrnici o slučování profesního a osobního života, která může pomoci rodičům věnovat se jak dětem, tak profesi, a tím nastartovat svoji kariéru, což je většinou právě důvod k velkým finančním rozdílům. Myslím si, že toto je správná cesta. Já jsem se nakonec při hlasování zdržela, protože nesouhlasím s tím, abychom z evropské úrovně příliš zavazovali jak soukromý sektor, tak národní státy, aby zásadním způsobem měnily svoji legislativu, zejména při omezování flexibility pracovních úvazků.

  Elena Lizzi (ID). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, nella scala dei valori europei l'uguaglianza fra uomini e donne è seconda solo alla protezione dei diritti umani. Noi dobbiamo ancora far cambiare la percezione che sia scontatamente a carico delle donne o non sia importante il lavoro di accudimento dei figli e di anziani svolto a sostegno della famiglia. Questa rivoluzione culturale permetterebbe alle donne di partecipare maggiormente all'economia, favorendone la crescita.

Non ho votato la risoluzione in esame perché, pur nello spirito condivisibile, sono proposti interventi specifici della Commissione su salari e su aree di competenza degli Stati membri, peraltro anche sulle piccole e medie imprese. Gli oneri dovuti al divario retributivo di genere non devono ricadere però solo sulle imprese, soprattutto se medie e piccole, ma devono essere sostenuti per un cambio culturale universale. Non si dovrebbe parlare solo di divario retributivo, ma anche e soprattutto di parità di trattamento e di politiche che favoriscano una maggiore inclusione delle donne nel mondo del lavoro.

  Matthew Patten (NI). – Madam President, I supported the resolution for fairer gender pay. Of course women should be treated fairly in the workplace and, as with so many of these issues, the UK is actually way ahead of the EU in this particular area. But why does the UK fail to recognise that the same equalities should extend to those from racial and ethnic minorities? I and others have consistently spoken up in this place about the institutional racism of the European Union: the fact that, despite 10% of European citizens come from a racial and ethnic minority, there has never been a black commissioner or senior member of staff. In my time here as an MEP, attending hundreds of committees and plenaries, no black person has ever been on a single presiding panel. This institutional racial discrimination is as unacceptable as gender discrimination, and for all its claims about protecting citizens’ rights, this Parliament, the Commission, the Council will never be united in diversity until it puts its own house in order.

  Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Jestem autorką rezolucji ECR jeśli chodzi o lukę płacową i problem ten jest zauważany nie tylko w Parlamencie Europejskim. Zarobki kobiet w stosunku do zarobków mężczyzn w Unii Europejskiej są wciąż niższe o średnio 16%. Polska, którą mam zaszczyt reprezentować w Parlamencie Europejskim, ma tę lukę jedną z najniższych pośród państw członkowskich.

Moja rezolucja zwracała uwagę na to, że powinniśmy wzywać do wzmożenia wysiłków poprzez egzekwowanie na szczeblu krajowym zasady równej płacy za tę samą pracę. Zwracałam uwagę, że obowiązek opieki nad dziećmi i chorymi członkami rodziny częściej spoczywa na kobietach niż mężczyznach. To panie częściej wybierają z tego względu pracę na część etatu, ponieważ starają się łączyć pracę zawodową z obowiązkami rodzinnymi.

Niestety zagłosowali Państwo przeciwko tej rezolucji, a poparli rezolucję, która narusza zasady pomocniczości i proporcjonalności oraz wskazuje na rozwiązania szkodliwe dla przedsiębiorczości.

  Leszek Miller (S&D). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Poparłem rezolucję, ponieważ Unia musi podejmować działania niwelujące nieuzasadnione zróżnicowanie wynagradzania ze względu na płeć. Z oficjalnych danych wynika, jak już mówiono, że kobiety w Unii Europejskiej zarabiają około 16% mniej niż mężczyźni. Oznacza to, że w porównaniu z mężczyznami pracują przez dwa miesiące bez wynagrodzenia. Przyczyny tego zjawiska są różne, kobiety pracują częściej w niepełnym wymiarze czasu pracy, borykają się z blokadą awansu, ponoszą też często główną odpowiedzialność za opiekę nad dziećmi. W konsekwencji, choć zasada równości kobiet i mężczyzn jest jedną z podstawowych wartości Unii, to de facto jest bardzo ograniczona. Dlatego musimy podejmować działania, które pozwolą osiągnąć konkretne rezultaty poprzez zwalczanie segregacji zawodowej i sektorowej, wzmocnienie praw pracujących rodziców i opiekunów, jak również wdrożenie innych działań, które będą niwelowały różnice w wynagrodzeniu kobiet i mężczyzn.

  Julie Ward (S&D). – Madam President, next week, after 47 years of being a strong, effective, socially-progressive force in the European Parliament, there will no longer be any UK Labour voices to champion the issues so many women still encounter today, such as the gender pay gap. I want to pay tribute to all past and present Labour MEPs, especially my Labour sisters who, like me, have been at the forefront of fighting for gender equality. They’ve inspired me, and they will inspire a future generation to ensure I am not the last Labour woman speaker in this Parliament. I therefore pay homage and respect to Janey Buchan, Barbara Castle, Ann Clwyd, Joyce Quin, Christine Crawley, Carole Tongue, Pauline Green, Christine Oddy, Mel Reed, Anita Pollack, Angela Billingham, Mo O’Toole, Veronica Hardstaff, Glenys Kinnock, Eluned Morgan, Susan Waddington, Arlene McCarthy, Linda McAvan, Neena Gill, Catherine Stihler, Mary Honeyball, Glenis Willmott, Lucy Anderson, Anneliese Dodds, Theresa Griffin, Judith Kirton-Darling, Clare Moody, Alex Mayer, and finally, Jackie Jones.

  Billy Kelleher (Renew). – A Uachtaráin, vótáil mé i bhfabhar an rúin maidir leis an mbearna phá idir na hinscní, toisc go gceapaim go bhfuil sé tábhachtach go leanfaidh an teach seo de na héagothromaíochtaí atá ann fós san ionad oibre a chur i bhfáth agus aghaidh a thabhairt orthu.

Mar athair ar bheirt iníonacha, is mian liom Eoraip a fheiceáil a dhéanann a gcearta comhionanna a urramú, tairbhí na héagsúlachta san ionad oibre a aithint, agus a dhéanann pá comhionann ar obair chomhionann a áirithiú.

Ní hamháin gur gá dúinn féachaint leis an mbearna phá a líonadh, ach is gá dúinn í a dhíothú.

  Antony Hook (Renew). – Madam President, in 2020 it should be anathema to treat men and women unequally and one measure of that is how much men and women in work are paid.

The gender pay gap in the EU is 16% and slightly higher in the UK. Some people argue that it is just because of a difference in jobs that men and women do. But why is it that the people who control the rates of pay, not least in the public sector or large organisations, have consistently preferred to better reward the jobs done by more men than women? Why is there a recruitment culture that has pulled more men than women into certain fields? In part, it’s because men dominate both corporate and trade union leadership and old inequality endures.

As an MEP, I have often been inspired in my work by thoughts of my baby daughter’s future and so, in my last speech in this Parliament, I appeal for equality between men and women.

  Antonio López-Istúriz White (PPE). – Señora presidenta, yo voté que sí, por supuesto, a esta Resolución, no por seguir la línea, por supuesto, de utilización política que hace esta izquierda retrógrada en Europa —que tenemos aquí, en el Parlamento, representada por compañeros nuestros— que utiliza el feminismo de forma prehistórica, sino precisamente mirando al futuro, como mi compañero Hook acaba de decir.

Yo tengo dos hijas, y estoy mirando por su futuro. Evidentemente, sigue habiendo injusticias en materia de brecha salarial para las mujeres. Yo oigo muchísimos casos en mi país, donde hay un Gobierno, por cierto, de izquierdas, que veo que todavía no está haciendo nada. En muchos países europeos hay miles y miles de mujeres que están sufriendo esa brecha salarial. Y en eso tenemos nosotros que dar nuestro apoyo lógicamente, y en eso estaremos desde el Partido Popular Español y el Partido Popular Europeo.

  Manuel Bompard (GUE/NGL). – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, cette résolution est nécessaire parce qu’elle rappelle l’inégalité économique structurelle entre les femmes et les hommes. Au sein de l’Union européenne, l’écart de salaire atteint 40 % si l’on inclut les taux d’emploi et de participation globale au marché du travail.

Cette inégalité existe aussi en matière de retraite: les pensions des femmes sont en effet de 37 % inférieures à celles des hommes. Or, au moment où nous votons cette résolution, une offensive a lieu en Europe contre nos systèmes de retraite sous l’impulsion de la Commission européenne. En France, malgré l’opposition majoritaire du peuple, le président Macron veut imposer sa retraite par points. Les femmes en seront les premières victimes.

En Suède, leurs pensions ont baissé de 90 % depuis l’introduction d’un tel système. J’adresse donc depuis cet hémicycle un message de soutien au peuple français en lutte depuis deux mois et je lui dis que notre délégation se battra partout où c’est possible pour obtenir le retrait de ce mauvais projet.

  Leila Chaibi (GUE/NGL). – Madame la Présidente, nous venons de voter un texte sur l’égalité salariale entre les hommes et les femmes et ce texte nous apprend que l’écart des pensions de retraite entre les hommes et les femmes au sein de l’Union européenne est de 37 %. Ce qui est en outre intéressant dans ce texte, c’est qu’il appelle les États membres, pour réduire ces écarts de pension, à garantir aux femmes un niveau de pension de retraite minimal décent.

Il se trouve que, dans mon pays, la France, le président Macron fait exactement l’inverse avec sa réforme du système de retraites. Dans son projet, les femmes sont les grandes perdantes, notamment parce que les pauses que font les femmes dans leur carrière, dues au fait qu’elles portent les enfants et qu’elles doivent s’arrêter en conséquence, et le fait qu’elles subissent le temps partiel imposé font que les femmes n’auront pas le nombre de points nécessaires pour avoir le droit à une retraite décente.

Aussi, depuis cet hémicycle, je voudrais, si vous me le permettez, lancer un appel au président français: Monsieur Macron, vous avez aujourd’hui deux possibilités. Soit vous continuez à faire le bon élève zélé de la Commission européenne, qui exige le démantèlement de notre système de retraite par répartition, soit vous écoutez ce Parlement qui est la seule instance de l’Union européenne démocratiquement élue. Je vous conseille bien évidemment la deuxième option. Abandonnez ce projet de réforme des retraites.

  Guido Reil (ID). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Worüber reden wir heute? Wir reden über den Grundsatz: gleiches Geld für gleiche Arbeit, und das unabhängig vom Geschlecht. Also für mich ist dieser Grundsatz das Normalste von der Welt. Aber leider war das nicht immer so. Gott sei Dank haben wir in der Vergangenheit viel erreicht. Das 20. Jahrhundert war das Zeitalter der Emanzipation. Gott sei Dank. Jetzt leben wir im 21. Jahrhundert und müssen tatsächlich feststellen: Frauen verdienen in der Europäischen Union im Schnitt tatsächlich noch 16 % weniger als Männer. Für mich ist das ein Skandal. Aber man muss fragen: Woran liegt das, warum ist das so? Es liegt in erster Linie daran – und da müssen wir mal ganz ehrlich sein –, dass Frauen Kinder kriegen, und Frauen deshalb mehr Teilzeit machen, dass Frauen deshalb schlechtere Chancen haben, befördert zu werden, und sich dementsprechend zu qualifizieren. Das ist der wahre Skandal. Wir brauchen eine vernünftige Familienpolitik. Frauen, die Kinder kriegen, müssen unterstützt werden. Das muss der Fokus unserer Politik in der Zukunft sein, endlich eine vernünftige Familienpolitik zu machen. Bezeichnend finde ich auch, dass diese Lohndifferenz in katholischen Ländern wie in Polen zum Beispiel viel viel niedriger ist als in Ländern, die links regiert werden.

  Clare Daly (GUE/NGL). – Madam President, I think it’s an absolute disgrace that in the EU in 2020 women are paid 16% less per hour than men. That’s before you even look at the unequal employment rates between women and men.

Of course it’s intolerable that women continue to have to pay the cost of maternity, unremunerated and unrecognised care work, domestic work, leading to a situation that, at the end of slaving your guts off, you’ve a 37% gap in your pension than men have. So there’s a lot of good in this resolution, but I abstained on it because it spent too much time dealing with the symptoms and not addressing the causes. Deregulation of work, the drive towards precarious work, disproportionately affects women and as long as this is unaddressed the gender gap will remain.

The motion failed to join the dots. We have to make it clear that women, as James Connolly said, ‘are the slaves of slaves’. We’ve got to connect the two or this issue will blight us forever.

  Mick Wallace (GUE/NGL). – Madam President, the statistics on the gender pay gap have been well pointed out here and they are, without any doubt, a disgrace. But it’s also important to acknowledge that the long—term effects of neo—liberal policies imposed by the EU are further increasing discrimination against women and inequality between men and women.

It’s important, too, to call on the Commission not to promote any policy recommendation that seeks to increase the precarious work relations, the deregulation of work and working hours, the reductions of salaries, the privatisation of public services and of social security systems, or those that undermine trade unions.

Misogyny is still very real. Look at how slow our own country, Ireland, was about recognising women’s reproductive rights, it took so long. But the root causes of the salary discrimination between women and men also derive from the broader context of labour deregulation and devaluation. Things must change.

  Frances Fitzgerald (PPE). – Madam President, the EU has always been a standard-bearer for equality, and no less so in this Gender Pay Resolution, and I want to thank those colleagues who supported it. It’s an important resolution and there’s been great cooperation amongst all of the parties, and the EPP strongly supports it. There was a recommendation in 2014, and what’s quite clear is that there has not been enough activity – not enough action – to reduce the gender pay gap as well as the pension gap, which is at 36%, and the pay gap at 16%. But I want to say to businesses out there, to firms, national and international, to governments, to media outlets: wake up, because there is a directive coming your way that is going to make it statutory for you to have more pay transparency, to have more audits, to give workers more rights about salaries, and to have more compatibility between different jobs. We absolutely need to have this, and this Gender Pay Resolution sends a strong message from this Parliament that we are serious about doing this, because it has even decreased the amount of pay to women in some Member States since that recommendation in 2014.

  Marcel Kolaja (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, we as a delegation of European Pirates voted in favour of the resolution because the gender pay gap is a serious issue that needs to be addressed.

We have, however, voted against particular text in paragraph 13 concerning binary gender quotas, which in our opinion are not a proper instrument for how to solve the gender pay gap. We believe skills and knowledge are the key aspects of qualification not belonging to a specific category.

As mentioned in our political programme, a long-term solution is needed to ensure equality, not quotas. Instead, we need to introduce measures to enhance pay transparency, invest in accessibility and affordability of childcare, create suitable working environments and promote agreements with sufficient flexibility to increase participation of women in the labour market. Thus, in the case of the opening of a debate on this, as suggested by paragraph 13, we will continue to speak against gender quotas.

  Jackie Jones (S&D). – Madam President, I want to say that I’m absolutely delighted that the last vote that I was able to take in the Parliament was in favour of this resolution. I’ve been working for 20-odd years on women’s rights and trying to close that pay gap and close the pension gap. We have a lot of work to do, but Labour has a very proud history of supporting equality, dignity, solidarity and workers’ rights, whether it’s here or back home or in Wales. So I think we’ll continue to do that. Let’s hope that the Johnson Government doesn’t take our rights away, that’s for sure.

Women and children are at the forefront of being very vulnerable when it comes to pay as well as ending violence, so we must do all we can to stop those instances. Finally, I just want to thank everyone who has supported us, and we continue our work for Wales across the world. And thank you, Callum, for letting your mum fight for equality and solidarity and dignity.

  John Howarth (S&D). – Madam President, chers collègues, it is very appropriate that our last vote as Labour MEPs is to support this report on the gender pay gap.

Much more needs to be done to bring justice and equality in a field that we regard as self—evident. Words are easy, but real equality means equal pay. But not everyone agrees. And here is the most important lesson of why this is our last vote, because whenever progress in society is taken for granted, that’s when the backlash begins. When the war is won, that’s when the next battle comes along.

The gender pay gap has been most acute where pay is low and jobs go unnoticed. Which brings me to some important thanks.

Ici, je vais prononcer quelques mots en français pour remercier ceux dans ce Parlement qui nettoient nos bureaux, les services de sécurité, les cuisiniers, le personnel d’entretien, le personnel chargé des voitures et les chauffeurs. Je voudrais vous remercier pour tout votre travail. Merci à tous, bonne chance, courage et au revoir. Gan canny.

  Claire Fox (NI). – Madam President, I abstained on this motion not because I don’t care about the gender pay gap, but because there are other pay gaps that are much wider and less discussed. Actually there’s a pay gap at the heart of this place: well-paid Eurocrats rule the roost, but behind the scenes, the underpaid and unrecognised heroes are all the staff: the ushers, the drivers, the cleaners, the admin staff, the fantastic translators – who have, by the way, been fabulously gracious and helpful and non-sectarian to all of us in the Brexit Party: a heartfelt ‘thank you’.

Can we talk about the class pay gap please, and admit that working-class people throughout Europe are getting poorer, often because of austerity policies that emanate from the EU? Their pay and their jobs are collateral damage to the economic decisions made in Brussels, dominated by the interests of big business, and anyone who kicks back, whether it’s the gilets jaunes or leave voters in the UK, are dubbed populist, traducers, ignorant, or far right. Let the lesson of Brexit be, in this last speech – my last speech, the last speech: don’t demonise your own citizens. Solidarity with the European working class when they fight back, and I hope they fight back with success.

9. Korrezzjonijiet għall-voti u intenzjonijiet tal-vot: ara l-Minuti

10. Dokumenti mressqa: ara l-Minuti

11. Modifiki tal-konsultazzjonijiet mal-Kumitati (Artikolu 56 tar-Regoli ta' Proċedura): ara l-Minuti

12. Trasferimenti ta' approprjazzjonijiet u deċiżjonijiet baġitarji: ara l-Minuti

13. Approvazzjoni tal-minuti tas-sessjoni li għaddejja u trażmissjoni tat-testi adottati: ara l-Minuti

14. Dati tas-seduti li jmiss: ara l-Minuti

15. Għeluq tas-seduta

(The sitting closed at 13.40)

16. Interruzzjoni tas-sessjoni

  President. – I declare adjourned the session of the European Parliament.