Relato integral dos debates

Segunda-feira, 17 de Maio de 2021 - Bruxelas

1. Reinício da sessão

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. DAVID MARIA SASSOLI
Presidente

  Presidente. – Dichiaro ripresa la sessione del Parlamento europeo interrotta giovedì 29 aprile 2021.

2. Abertura da sessão

(La seduta è aperta alle 17.02)

3. Declaração da Presidência

  Presidente. – Onorevoli colleghe e onorevoli colleghi, il 17 maggio si celebra la Giornata internazionale contro l'omofobia, la transfobia e la bifobia.

Oggi dovrebbe essere evidente a tutti che chi vuole amare ha il diritto di farlo come ha il diritto di essere amato.

Tuttavia, la cronaca ci propone ogni giorno atti di violenza intollerabili verso le persone LGBTI che affrontano ancora molti ostacoli nella vita di tutti i giorni e sperimentano pesantemente le conseguenze della discriminazione: i nostri diritti non dipendono dall'identità di genere o dall'orientamento sessuale.

Oggi celebriamo la diversità, ma soprattutto difendiamo insieme i valori dell'Unione, combattiamo la discriminazione e promuoviamo i diritti di tutti e delle persone LGBTI.

4. Aprovação das actas das sessões anteriores: ver Ata

5. Composição dos grupos políticos: ver Ata

6. Composição das comissões e delegações: ver Ata

7. Posições do Conselho em primeira leitura: ver Ata

8. Atos delegados (artigo 111.º, n.º 6, do Regimento): ver Ata

9. Assinatura dos atos aprovados em conformidade com o processo legislativo ordinário (artigo 79.º do Regimento): ver Ata

10. Seguimento dado às posições e resoluções do Parlamento: ver Ata

11. Entrega de documentos: ver Ata

12. Perguntas com pedido de resposta oral (entrega): ver Ata

13. Ordem dos trabalhos

  Presidente. – Il progetto definitivo di ordine del giorno, approvato dalla Conferenza dei presidenti a norma dell'articolo 157 del regolamento, nella riunione di mercoledì 12 maggio 2021, è stato distribuito.

A seguito delle consultazioni con i gruppi politici, sono state presentate le seguenti proposte di modifica:

Martedì

Mattina: la discussione relativa alle dichiarazioni del Consiglio e della Commissione sui recenti morti nel Mediterraneo e le missioni di ricerca e salvataggio in mare prende il posto della discussione relativa alla dichiarazione della Commissione su una strategia industriale riveduta per l'Europa e, pertanto, passa all'ultimo punto di martedì mattina.

Pomeriggio: la discussione relativa alla relazione dell'onorevole Strik sulla tutela dei diritti umani e la politica esterna dell'Unione in materia di immigrazione prenderà il posto della discussione relativa alla relazione dell'onorevole Sánchez Amor sulle relazioni 2019 e 2020 sulla Turchia e, pertanto, passa al primo punto di martedì pomeriggio.

Mercoledì

A seguito della proroga dei termini per la presentazione delle proposte di risoluzione relative al diritto del Parlamento di essere informato riguardo alla valutazione in corso dei piani nazionali di ripresa e resilienza, le votazioni sono state rinviate da mercoledì a giovedì. La votazione sugli emendamenti si svolgerà pertanto nel primo turno di votazioni di giovedì, mentre la votazione finale si terrà nel secondo turno di giovedì.

Venerdì

Tenuto conto del numero di emendamenti presentati e delle richieste di votazione per parti separate e distinte, è stato aggiunto un turno di votazioni nella giornata di venerdì, dalle ore 9.45 alle ore 11.00. L'annuncio dei risultati avrà luogo alle ore 13.00.

Di conseguenza la tornata di maggio è prorogata fino a venerdì 21 maggio 2021.

Desidero inoltre informarvi che, per quanto riguarda la raccomandazione per la seconda lettura dell'onorevole Daly sul programma in materia di scambi, assistenza e formazione per la protezione dell'euro contro la falsificazione monetaria per il periodo 2021-2027 (Programma "Pericles IV"), non è stata presentata alcuna proposta di reiezione della posizione del Consiglio, né sono stati presentati emendamenti a norma degli articoli 67 e 68 del regolamento. La posizione del Consiglio si considerata pertanto approvata e, di conseguenza, l'atto proposto è da ritenersi adottato.

Infine, desidero informare l'Aula che le votazioni sono state ripartite su diversi turni di votazioni, tenendo conto del numero di emendamenti che sono stati presentati e del numero di richieste di votazioni per parti separate e distinte. Questa ripartizione può tuttavia essere soggetta a modifiche; le informazioni relative alla ripartizione delle votazioni sono disponibili come sempre sul sito web del Parlamento europeo, nella sezione "Informazioni e documenti prioritari".

(L'ordine dei lavori è così fissato).

*****

Vorrei informare l'Aula che ho ricevuto una mozione di procedura e darò la parola alla collega Juknevičienė per un suo intervento sulla commemorazione della Giornata degli eroi della lotta al totalitarismo.

  Rasa Juknevičienė (PPE). – Mr President, almost two years ago more than 500 of us voted in favour of a resolution on the importance of European remembrance for the future of Europe. The resolution called to establish 25 May as the International Day of Heroes of the Fight against Totalitarianism. On that day in 1948, Auschwitz hero Witold Pilecki was executed by the Soviet authorities in occupied Poland. He has been a symbol of resistance against both totalitarian regimes ever since.

On that same day in 1948, liberated Europe had already gathered at the Congress of Europe to lay the foundations for the EU. Commemorating those who resisted both totalitarian regimes is a step forward towards one memory and one strong Europe with a common understanding: never again!

I thank you for the platform and would like to encourage the addition of the International Day of Heroes to our official days of commemoration in Europe.

14. Uma estratégia europeia para a integração do sistema energético - Uma estratégia europeia para o hidrogénio (debate)

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

– la relazione di Christophe Grudler, a nome della commissione per l'industria, la ricerca e l'energia, su una strategia europea di integrazione dei sistemi energetici

(2020/2241(INI)) (A9-0062/2021), e

– la relazione di Jens Geier, a nome della commissione per l'industria, la ricerca e l'energia, su una strategia europea per l'idrogeno (2020/2242(INI)) (A9-0116/2021).

  Christophe Grudler, rapporteur. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, je suis très heureux de présenter ce rapport d’initiative de la commission de l’industrie, de la recherche et de l’énergie sur l’intégration des systèmes énergétiques.

Ce rapport ne dresse pas un portrait imaginé ou imaginaire de notre système énergétique du futur; il présente des tendances qui sont déjà engagées partout en Europe et dans le monde. Il n’imagine pas non plus les défis d’un avenir lointain; il met en évidence les défis d’aujourd’hui, des défis bien réels. Alors que s’est-il passé depuis la communication de la Commission en juillet 2020?

Tout d’abord, l’Union européenne a manqué de peu l’objectif des 20 % d’énergie renouvelable dans son mix énergétique et n’a pas réussi à atteindre son objectif d’efficacité énergétique. Ensuite, huit États membres n’ont pas atteint leur objectif d’interconnexion de 10 % d’ici 2020. De plus, les pénuries de matières premières critiques dues à la crise de la COVID-19 ont provoqué un ralentissement dans des secteurs clés comme les supraconducteurs, les batteries, les panneaux solaires ou les turbines pour éoliennes. Enfin, la menace des cyberattaques sur les infrastructures énergétiques est devenue bien réelle: elles ont récemment touché, par exemple, un des principaux oléoducs des États-Unis et paralysé l’approvisionnement de l’Est de ce pays.

Dans le même temps, des changements remarquables et structurels ont été initiés dans notre production et notre consommation d’énergie. 2020 a confirmé la tendance de 2019: une nouvelle fois, les renouvelables ont surpassé les énergies fossiles dans la production d’électricité en Europe. L’énergie solaire est devenue la moins chère au monde et sa production a augmenté de 20 % en Europe en 2020. Le prix du carbone a entamé une hausse exponentielle depuis la fin 2020, et atteint aujourd’hui 56 euros la tonne de CO2. Les projets d’investissement dans l’hydrogène se sont multipliés en quelques mois et l’Europe est devenue le continent qui investit le plus dans ce secteur. 2020 a aussi vu une explosion des ventes de véhicules électriques et hybrides, les voitures à essence passant sous la barre symbolique des 50 % de part de marché.

Tous ces chiffres montrent bien que la transition énergétique est en marche en Europe. Nous savons maintenant de quoi notre mix énergétique sera fait dans les prochaines années et nous devons nous poser des questions nouvelles. Comment pouvons-nous adapter notre infrastructure à la nouvelle énergie renouvelable, très largement variable et qui augmente la pression sur nos réseaux? Comment pouvons-nous garantir la sécurité d’approvisionnement et assurer un prix juste aux citoyens européens? Jusqu’où peut-on adapter notre demande énergétique en la rendant plus flexible? Quels bénéfices peut-on retirer de la mise en place d’une plus grande circularité de notre consommation énergétique? Enfin, peut-on lutter efficacement et rapidement contre le gaspillage énergétique et les émissions provenant de nos bâtiments et de nos transports, sans pour autant exclure les citoyens les plus vulnérables de la transition verte et numérique?

Ce rapport complète la stratégie de la Commission, car il apporte des réponses plus concrètes à ces questions. Il montre aussi une véritable prise de conscience au sein du Parlement européen: si nous avons encore des différences d’opinion, nous avons tous la volonté de faire de la transition vers la neutralité climatique une réalité, et nous sommes conscients des défis qu’elle représente. Ces défis, nous savons qu’ils ne seront pas les mêmes d’un pays à l’autre; mais ce qui nous unit, c’est une vraie volonté de coopérer afin de les relever ensemble.

Notre rapport reconnaît le rôle fondamental du marché intérieur de l’énergie et des interconnexions à tous les niveaux pour équilibrer nos réseaux, notamment les réseaux électriques. Il met en lumière les possibilités extraordinaires que nous offre notre continent pour produire davantage d’énergie renouvelable, et les solutions encore peu exploitées qui doivent permettre, dès aujourd’hui, de mieux intégrer ces énergies renouvelables.

Enfin, il reconnaît que pour assurer notre approvisionnement et notre autonomie énergétiques, nous devons collaborer davantage afin d’innover plus rapidement et de faire émerger des technologies européennes qui nous placeront en première position sur les marchés, que ce soit pour le stockage, la conversion, le transport ou encore la réutilisation de l’énergie.

Cette stratégie est plus qu’une stratégie: c’est un véritable changement de vision. C’est pour moi la pièce manquante dans l’établissement d’une véritable union de l’énergie, un manifeste, en somme, de ce que nous avons fait depuis les premières heures du marché commun de l’énergie et de ce vers quoi nous tendons désormais.

Alors, en cette année européenne du rail, assurons-nous que l’Union ne prenne pas le train en marche, mais qu’elle soit en mesure de décider pleinement de la trajectoire, de la vitesse et des rails à construire.

Un célèbre homme politique français, Georges Clemenceau, disait: il faut savoir ce que l’on veut, il faut ensuite avoir le courage de le dire et de l’écrire, il faut enfin avoir l’énergie de le faire. Alors, chers collègues, tous ensemble, nous ne manquerons pas d’énergie pour y arriver.

Puhetta johti HEIDI HAUTALA
varapuhemies

  Jens Geier, Berichterstatter. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte im Zusammenhang mit dem Bericht zur Wasserstoffstrategie der Europäischen Kommission hier über fünf Dinge sprechen: über die Einsatzbereiche von Wasserstoff, über die Art, wie wir den Wasserstoff produzieren, über die Marktordnung, über die Infrastruktur und über internationale Aspekte.

Wasserstoff ist ein Energieträger und ein Energievektor. Zahlreiche Bereiche, in denen Wasserstoff angewendet werden kann, kennen wir schon heute. Und ich bin schon dafür, dass wir priorisieren, wie der Wasserstoff produziert wird, aber nicht so sehr, wo er zum Einsatz kommt.

Ich will Ihnen ein Beispiel sagen: Im Ruhrgebiet steht immer noch das größte Stahlwerk Europas – das ist auch gut so, dass es da noch steht –, und dort wird zurzeit damit experimentiert, bei der Eisenreduktion Kohle aus dem Hochofen herauszunehmen und sie durch Wasserstoff zu ersetzen. In der Folge kann die Emission von CO2 in diesem Stahlwerk erheblich reduziert werden – wir kommen einen Schritt näher an eine grüne Stahlproduktion. Wir haben also gerade in der industriellen Anwendung große Potenziale, und da das Klima, wie wir alle wissen, unter Druck steht, sollten wir Wasserstoff schnell in den Markt bringen.

Wasserstoff ist keine neue Entdeckung, aber den meisten im Industrieausschuss ist klar, dass wir am Ende einen Wasserstoff haben wollen, der aus erneuerbaren Energien stammt. Auch deswegen brauchen wir einen dramatischen Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energie. Wie wir das machen? Wenn wir bei der Neufassung der Richtlinie zu den erneuerbaren Energien beraten – ich kann mir dabei verpflichtende Zuwachsquoten für alle Mitgliedstaaten ziemlich gut vorstellen.

Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich bin überzeugt: Wenn wir Wasserstoff limitieren auf solchen, der aus erneuerbarer Energie erzeugt wird und nur aus Überschüssen dieser Energie, dann verschieben wir den Einsatz der Wasserstofftechnologie um viele Jahre, und dann nutzen wir die kurzfristigen Einsparpotenziale – z. B. in der Industrie –, von denen ich soeben gesprochen habe, eben nicht. Daher tun wir alles Notwendige dafür, um die Produktion von Wasserstoff aus erneuerbaren Energien zu unterstützen – aber lassen Sie uns auch bald mit der Produktion aus kohlenstoffarmen Quellen beginnen. Hier liegen erhebliche Chancen, nicht nur für den Klimaschutz, sondern auch für Wertschöpfung und Arbeitsplätze. Europa ist heute der Weltmarktführer in der Wasserstofftechnologie, und so soll es bleiben.

Damit das in Gang kommt, brauchen wir eine Marktordnung, und wir brauchen sie schnell, um für die Investitionen Sicherheit zu erlangen. Daher begrüße ich den Plan der Kommission, noch in diesem Jahr einen Entwurf vorzulegen. Transparenz für Kundinnen und Kunden und für Investorinnen und Investoren ist notwendig. Die Klassifizierung sollte entlang des Carbon-Fußabdrucks erfolgen, damit eine Nachfrage nach dem klimafreundlichsten Wasserstoff erzeugt werden kann. Wer Wasserstoff aus nachhaltig erzeugter Energie haben will, der soll ihn auch bekommen können.

Der Bericht begrüßt den Vorschlag der Kommission in der Wasserstoffstrategie, mit dem Aufbau der Technologie dort zu beginnen, wo die industrielle Nachfrage besteht. Wenn Wasserstoff in ganz Europa zum Einsatz kommen soll und wenn die Anwendung im Verkehr realisiert werden soll, dann brauchen wir aber auch zeitnah ein europäisches Wasserstoffnetz. Da, wo Gaspipelines mit öffentlichem Geld unterstützt werden, müssen sie wasserstofftauglich sein.

Schließlich: Ich glaube nicht, dass die EU jemals energieautark werden wird. Daher sollten wir zeitnah mit den Nachbarn der EU Verhandlungen über den Ausbau der Wasserstoffwirtschaft auch dort beginnen. Für den Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energie, den Abbau des Schadstoffausstoßes und für die soziale ökologische und ökonomische Entwicklung der Nachbarn der EU kann das nur gut sein.

Ich bedanke mich an der Stelle bei den Schattenberichterstatterinnen und Schattenberichterstattern für die konstruktive Zusammenarbeit. Ich bin mit dem Ergebnis sehr zufrieden und habe daher keine Änderungsanträge, die uns hier im Plenum vorliegen, zur Annahme empfohlen. Ich danke auch den Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern der Fraktion und meines Büros, ohne die dieser Bericht nicht hätte entstehen können.

  Hildegard Bentele, Verfasserin der Stellungnahme des mitberatenden Ausschusses für Umweltfragen, öffentliche Gesundheit und Lebensmittelsicherheit. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Impulse und der Rahmen, den die EU für die Entkarbonisierung unserer Industrieprozesse und Energiesysteme setzt, sind absolut entscheidend. Natürlich gibt es immer wieder Pioniere unter den Mitgliedstaaten, aber den benötigten quantitativen Effekt für Klimaneutralität erzielen wir nur, wenn wir uns in der gesamten EU schnell mit neuen Technologien aus dem fossilen Zeitalter verabschieden. Deshalb freue ich mich sehr, dass ich die große Mehrheit der Kolleginnen und Kollegen im Umweltausschuss davon überzeugen konnte, den ehrgeizigen Ansatz der EU-Kommission beim Aufbau einer Wasserstoffwirtschaft zu unterstützen.

Die Aufgaben für die EU liegen auf der Hand. Erstens: schnellstmögliche Zertifizierung von erneuerbarem und kohlenstoffarmem Wasserstoff, damit Investitionen getätigt werden können. Zweitens: Schaffung von Wettbewerbsgleichheit für Wasserstoff durch Überarbeitung und Anpassung der entsprechenden Richtlinien. Drittens: Unterstützung beim Bau von Infrastruktur und bei der Umrüstung von bestehenden Netzen. Viertens: Festschreibung von Sicherheitsstandards und Recyclingvorschriften von Anfang an. Und zuletzt: Ausbau und Aufnahme internationaler Partnerschaften zur Förderung erneuerbarer Energie und von erneuerbarem Wasserstoff, denn das Ziel einer CO2-freien stabilen Energieversorgung gilt weltweit, genauso wie unser Anspruch, Technologieführer zu bleiben.

  Έλενα Κουντουρά, Εισηγήτρια της γνωμοδότησης της Επιτροπής Μεταφορών και Τουρισμού. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, οι μεταφορές και τουρισμός έχουν κεντρικό ρόλο στη συζήτηση για την ενοποίηση του ενεργειακού συστήματος και βέβαια στην εκπλήρωση των κλιματικών μας στόχων. Αναφορικά στις μεταφορές, που απορροφούν το 30 % της συνολικής ενέργειας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, ο στόχος είναι η στροφή στην άμεση ή έμμεση ηλεκτροδότηση κατά προτεραιότητα, όπου αυτό είναι δυνατό. Για να επιτευχθεί αυτό χρειάζονται άμεσα τεράστιες επενδύσεις σε υποδομές ενέργειας στο οδικό μας δίκτυο, στα λιμάνια, στα αεροδρόμια αλλά ακόμα και στα σπίτια μας, ώστε να προετοιμαστούμε για την ηλεκτροκίνηση.

Κάθε χρόνο, τα κράτη μέλη δαπανούν 300 δισεκατομμύρια για να εισάγουν υδρογονάνθρακες. Οι πόροι αυτοί πρέπει να μείνουν στην Ευρώπη και να αξιοποιηθούν για την παραγωγή ανανεώσιμων πηγών ενέργειας με τη συμμετοχή όλων των πολιτών και όχι μόνο λίγων εταιρειών. Ένα πολύ καλό παράδειγμα που αναφέρεται στην έκθεση είναι οι ενεργειακές κοινότητες στον τομέα του τουρισμού και η γενικότερη μετάβαση του κλάδου προς τη βιωσιμότητα μέσω της παραγωγής ενέργειας και της υψηλότερης αποδοτικότητας. Είναι λοιπόν μεγάλη ανάγκη να αξιοποιηθούν οι πόροι του Ταμείου Ανάκαμψης προς αυτή την κατεύθυνση.

  Kadri Simson, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you for the opportunity to participate in this session today on the hydrogen and energy system integration own—initiative reports. These two reports and these two strategies were the first documents adopted by the Commission in the energy field and they establish the framework and the direction for transforming our energy system and ensuring a balanced and cost-effective path towards climate neutrality.

Parliament’s work is very timely. The Commission is currently preparing the ‘Fit for 55’ package – a revision of the energy efficiency and renewable energy directives that will translate into concrete measures. The policy guidelines presented in these two strategies, and your reports and their concrete recommendations are really important for this work.

I want to congratulate Christophe Grudler and Jens Geier on these two high—quality reports and their ability to strike successful compromises that enjoy broad support across the political spectrum. I agree with many of the points outlined in the reports.

Let me start with energy system integration. The strategy is about going beyond the established vision of the energy sector as isolated systems and imagining the new energy system of tomorrow. First, it is about having a system that is more efficient, circular and consumes fewer resources. Second, it is about integrating a large and growing share of renewable energy and promoting electrification. Third, it is about promoting the use of renewable gases and fuels, where electrification is not possible or is too costly. An integrated energy system needs to be based on well-functioning markets, modern infrastructure and on a higher level of digitisation. It is the precondition for the deployment of renewable gases, of which both our strategy and our report stress the importance.

In this context, we welcome the support for developing a comprehensive classification and certification framework for renewable gases, based on the full lifecycle of greenhouse gas emissions savings and sustainability criteria. At the same time, we take note of Parliament’s request that the additionality requirement for renewable hydrogen be extended beyond its use in transport to cover all renewable hydrogen. We also acknowledge your request to provide additional incentives for the development of smart-charging and vehicle-to-grid functionalities. This will be assessed as part of the revision of both the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive and the Renewable Energy Directive in July. Finally, we have also taken into due consideration the report’s proposals on the energy efficiency first principle.

Turning to the hydrogen report, I welcome the strong convergence with our strategy, notably on the role hydrogen can play in decarbonising hard-to-decarbonise sectors like industry, aviation, shipping and heavy-duty transport, and on the need to have ambitious targets for both 2024 and 2030. Our priorities are hydrogen produced from renewables, and I am glad to see that we are in line with Parliament. However, we recognise the role that low—carbon hydrogen can play in a transition period.

The Parliament’s report encourages us to go ahead in designing the rules for a truly European hydrogen market, which we will do through a revision of the Renewable Energy Directive and the hydrogen and gas markets decarbonisation initiative.

I would like to stress two other important points made in the report: the role of investment and the role of the transport network as enablers. Your report has some concrete proposals, which will be helpful in our ongoing work and our evaluation of national recovery plans.

The infrastructure network is another key enabler. We need to design a European backbone, building on the gas network that already exists. Last year, in our ten-year proposal, we included a dedicated hydrogen infrastructure category and the possibility of supporting large-scale electrolysers. We also included the repurposing of existing pipelines, especially at transmission level for exclusive hydrogen use. We count on the support of the European Parliament to preserve this important part of our proposal and to help conclude negotiations this year.

Finally, let me say that while the focus is on building a hydrogen ecosystem in Europe, we need to consider the international dimension as well. Last, but not least, I agree with the strong need to continue this research and innovation with our proposal for the Clean Hydrogen Partnership. We want to ensure that Europe remains the world leader in hydrogen technologies.

I could stress many other points, but I’ll stop here. I look forward to engaging with you today ahead of this important discussion.

  Angelika Niebler, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Ich denke, wir müssen viel mehr über Wasserstoff reden! Wasserstoff hat Riesenpotenzial: in der Industrie – vor allem in der energieintensiven Industrie –, als Energieträger, im Verkehr – vor allem bei schweren Nutzfahrzeugen –, in der Luft- und in der Schifffahrt und auch beim Heizen in den Gebäuden. Lassen Sie uns gemeinsam dieses gewaltige Potential nutzen! Natürlich muss eine Wasserstoffwirtschaft erst aufgebaut werden. Wir können nicht gleich von null auf hundert hochfahren, aber wir müssen jetzt die richtigen Anreize setzen, dass in Wasserstofftechnologien und in den Ausbau von Infrastruktur investiert wird, um den Wasserstoff transportieren zu können. Ich denke dabei insbesondere an das Ertüchtigen von Gasnetzen für den Transport.

Wenn ich von Wasserstoff rede, dann muss natürlich mittel- bis langfristig das Ziel erneuerbarer Wasserstoff sein. Aber für eine Übergangszeit brauchen wir dringend auch kohlenstoffarmen Wasserstoff – low-carbon hydrogen. Deshalb begrüße ich es, dass im Bericht des Kollegen Jens Geier, dem ich herzlich für seinen Entwurf danke, klar formuliert wird, dass wir in der Übergangsphase auf kohlenstoffarmen Wasserstoff nicht verzichten können. Wir haben uns als EVP dafür eingesetzt, dass der Grundsatz der Technologieneutralität in dem Bericht verankert wird. Nicht die Politik sollte die technologische Lösung vorgeben, sondern wir müssen das den Unternehmen überlassen, die global heute schon wettbewerbsfähig aufgestellt sind. Unsere Elektrolysetechnologie eröffnet Exportchancen, wir dekarbonisieren Sektoren wie Stahlerzeugung und chemische Industrie, und die internationale Wasserstoffkooperation schafft Chancen für unsere Energieversorgung.

Liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen, meine Damen und Herren, ich bin fest davon überzeugt: Wenn wir jetzt die richtigen Weichen stellen, kann Europa seine Führungsrolle beim Wasserstoff ausbauen. Hier haben wir die Chance, aus dem Green Deal einen echten Wirtschaftsmotor zu machen.

  Nicolás González Casares, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, en primer lugar querría agradecer a Jens Geier y a Christophe Grudler su papel como ponentes y, al resto de coponentes, su trabajo.

Hace nada acordamos la Ley Europea del Clima con objetivos que nos acercan al Acuerdo de París: estas dos estrategias, para la integración del sistema energético y para el hidrógeno, están sentando las bases para su cumplimiento.

La urgencia de actuar exige aprovechar las sinergias de todos los vectores energéticos, involucrando a los sectores y los consumidores, y hacerlo de la mano de la digitalización. Con la integración del sistema energético proponemos una mayor electrificación basada en las energías renovables y en la mejora de la interconexión de las redes. Reconocemos el papel limitado del gas natural, pero ello no puede ser una excusa que impida el necesario apagón de los combustibles fósiles o que fomente activos que se queden varados en el camino hacia la descarbonización.

Hay muchas expectativas con el hidrógeno, pero seamos claros: cuanto menor sea su huella de carbono, más sostenible y asequible será. Sin duda, la apuesta europea tiene que ser por el hidrógeno verde, producido con renovables, y es necesario ya que aclaremos con la Comisión esto de los colores. Tenemos verde, rosa, gris, azul… Necesitamos regular esto ya, porque vamos a destinar miles de millones de euros de Next Generation EU y debemos hacerlo de una manera eficiente.

Entre los objetivos de la estrategia para la integración está también asignarle un rol más activo al consumidor, convirtiéndolo en un gestor activo como productor, pero también con nuevos perfiles de consumo: tenemos que enganchar al consumidor a la descarbonización. No olvidemos que estamos avanzando en una nueva economía verde con todas sus oportunidades industriales: almacenamiento, movilidad, renovables… Hagámoslo también de un modo sostenible, circular, respetando los ecosistemas.

Ahora esperamos que la Comisión tome nota de la posición del Parlamento. Nos toca revisar la legislación de eficiencia y renovables de camino al 50 % para 2030, que es nuestro objetivo de descarbonización: no demos pasos atrás.

  Bart Groothuis, namens de Renew-Fractie. – Voorzitter, commissaris, de Europese waterstofstrategie is de grootste verdienste van de Green Deal. Ik heb dan misschien geen glazen bol, maar kan wel zeggen dat wij investeren in een zogenaamd no—regretscenario: we zullen er geen spijt van krijgen, want investeringen in waterstof zijn sowieso goed voor onze economie.

Er is geen alternatief voor onze zware industrieën en ons zwaar vervoer. Tegelijkertijd schept de waterstofstrategie nieuwe banen, versterkt zij ons concurrentievermogen en is zij goed voor onze munt. Dit huis vraagt erom waterstof op de wereldmarkt te laten verhandelen in euro’s. In deze strategie, die ik mede heb mogen onderhandelen, pleiten we dan ook voor een pioniersrol voor Europa op het wereldtoneel. We zijn immers niet alleen: in het Verenigd Koninkrijk wordt het gasnetwerk klaargemaakt voor het vervoer van waterstof, Japan, Australië, Saudi-Arabië en Brunei werken samen, Chili en Marokko werpen zich op als producenten en ook de Verenigde Staten worden wakker. Wereldwijd is niemand echter zo goed gepositioneerd als Europa.

Wij hebben een geïntegreerde energiemarkt en een bestaand netwerk van pijpleidingen, wij kunnen CO2 afvoeren en opslaan, en ons transport is snel en goedkoop. Samen kunnen we in Europa in rap tempo de vraag opdrijven, de kosten verlagen en, zoals de commissaris al zei, een waterstofhoofdketen aanleggen. Dit is bovendien goed voor Noord-Nederland, voor onze havens en voor onze industrie. We hebben het dus over volledige steun, maar willen evenwel het signaal afgeven dat er niet langer moet worden gewacht met investeren. Dat geldt ook voor onze regering in Den Haag.

  Paolo Borchia, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signora Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, questa è un'altra occasione sprecata. La leadership climatica non si conquista con le chiacchiere o con documenti lontani dalla realtà e, dopo anni passati a fantasticare su un'Unione europea capoclasse sul clima, stiamo arrivando al suicidio perfetto, consegnando il futuro delle tecnologie per l'energia alla Cina.

Prestate attenzione a quelle che sono le quote di mercato a livello globale detenute dalla Cina: capacità di raffinazione del litio: 90 %; litio e batterie: 70 %; solare: 70 % anch'esso; auto elettriche: – udite, udite – 60 %. Quindi una cosa è avere a disposizione una pluralità di paesi fornitori, un'altra cosa è invece infilarsi in un vicolo cieco e affidarsi a un unico monopolista.

Con una differenza: la Cina non accetta che vengano impartite tabelle di marcia sulla decarbonizzazione. Infatti, Pechino ha fissato la neutralità climatica per il 2060, avendo la tecnologia a disposizione, e Bruxelles per il 2050, senza tecnologia. È curioso, o sarebbe comico, se poi a pagare non fosse il mondo dell'industria o la piccola e media impresa europea.

In relazione all'idrogeno, l'idrogeno verde sicuramente è un'opportunità, è un obiettivo condivisibile ma al momento non è una tecnologia pronta. Il mio gruppo ha presentato emendamenti per dare un ruolo all'idrogeno prodotto con altre tecnologie a basso tenore di carbonio; emendamenti bocciati. Mi chiedo: ma i paesi che non hanno a disposizione una quota sufficiente di rinnovabili cosa dovrebbero fare?

Quindi non basta far uscire regolamenti e direttive, di termini come "transizione ecologica" o "resilienza". Sì, così facendo si segue la moda, però sicuramente non si vincono le sfide ambientali ed energetiche e, soprattutto, non si risolvono i problemi di chi lavora.

  Damien Carême, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, 58,6 millions d’euros, c’est la somme dépensée par les lobbies gaziers pour influencer la politique européenne sur l’hydrogène, selon l’observatoire Corporate Europe. Leur intense lobbying est très visible.

Un autre chiffre parlant: l’industrie de l’hydrogène a rencontré les commissaires européens Timmermans, Simson, Breton, leurs cabinets et leurs directeurs généraux à 163 reprises entre décembre 2019 et septembre 2020, contre 37 réunions avec des ONG sur la même période.

C’est très déséquilibré et cela se reflète malheureusement dans la stratégie proposée par la Commission. Cela se reflète aussi ici, dans ce Parlement européen. Alors que la stratégie hydrogène devrait plutôt encourager le développement massif et coordonné de l’hydrogène intégralement issu des énergies renouvelables, et donc développer massivement et très rapidement dans un premier temps les énergies renouvelables, ce Parlement s’apprête à adopter une résolution qui fait la part belle à l’hydrogène produit à partir de gaz fossile et de nucléaire. C’est un vote à rebours de l’histoire.

Il y a des enjeux climatiques et des choix forts que nous devrions faire dès aujourd’hui. Les spécialistes nous annoncent que nous atteindrions les 1,5 °C d’augmentation dès 2034. Qui souhaite-t-on écouter? Les lobbies, qui défendent les intérêts privés, ou bien les jeunes, qui se mobilisent pour le climat? Les représentants des énergies fossiles ou bien les scientifiques, qui s’accordent à nous dire que l’on fonce droit dans le mur? Comment croire ou faire croire que continuer à soutenir et à financer les gaz fossiles, grands émetteurs de gaz à effet de serre, ou le nucléaire, dont nous ne maîtrisons ni la complète sécurité ni les déchets, nous permettra d’atteindre nos engagements climatiques et environnementaux? Comment penser que cela nous permettra de protéger la biodiversité, protection pourtant indispensable si l’on veut éviter de nouvelles pandémies et lutter contre le changement climatique? La seule solution durable pour la décarbonation de notre industrie et pour la mise en place d’un bouquet énergétique 100 % vert, c’est l’hydrogène vert, celui produit à partir d’énergies 100 % renouvelables. Qui serions-nous pour hypothéquer l’avenir des générations futures en refusant de le faire?

Courber l’échine devant l’influence et l’argent des lobbies gaziers et nucléaires ne nous permettra pas de regarder nos enfants droit dans les yeux, en leur assurant que nous avons fait tout ce que nous devions faire. Notre responsabilité face à la jeunesse pour la planète est immense, soyons à la hauteur.

  Margarita de la Pisa Carrión, en nombre del Grupo ECR. – Señora presidenta, la energía es un bien básico que debe ser asequible para todos. Desde nuestro Grupo hemos trabajado para que así sea.

Sin embargo, esta estrategia aumentará el precio de la electricidad, lo que dificultará la viabilidad de nuestra industria y llevará a las familias a sufrir una dramática pobreza energética. Todo por imponer objetivos caprichosos para avanzar en su agenda ideológica verde.

La misión de la Unión debería ser garantizar una infraestructura energética con capacidad suficiente para que los Estados miembros puedan elegir un mix energético que asegure su suministro estable, sin depender de terceros países. Esta estrategia de supuesta integración, sin embargo, excluye fuentes como la energía nuclear, una fuente autónoma, con una producción a demanda y asequible, que ha reducido en más de sesenta gigatones las emisiones de CO2.

Si mañana este documento se aprueba, sean sinceros y, cuando se duplique el precio de la electricidad en sus países, confiesen a sus votantes que ha sido gracias a su voto a favor. Créanme que yo, en mi país, lo recordaré.

  Manuel Bompard, au nom du groupe The Left. – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, l’hydrogène peut jouer un rôle stratégique essentiel dans la décarbonation de nos processus industriels.

Ce vecteur énergétique peut être utilisé, par exemple, dans la sidérurgie ou pour assurer la stabilité d’un réseau électrique fondé sur le 100 % renouvelable. Mais l’hydrogène n’est pas une solution miracle: s’il est laissé entre de mauvaises mains, sa généralisation peut être une grande entreprise de verdissage de l’industrie gazière. Soyons conscients qu’une stratégie compatible avec nos objectifs climatiques ne peut s’appuyer que sur le développement de l’hydrogène vert, c’est-à-dire obtenu par électrolyse de l’eau à partir d’électricité renouvelable. Tout soutien financier à un autre type d’hydrogène nous enfermerait dans une dépendance mortifère.

Or, les énergies renouvelables et l’eau ne sont pas des ressources infinies. L’hydrogène vert demeurera donc une ressource limitée dont il faut strictement prioriser les usages par une planification publique et démocratique. Sa production doit se faire sans aggraver la pression sur les écosystèmes et notamment sur les ressources en eau; elle ne doit pas conduire à des projets fous comme le barrage Inga III en République démocratique du Congo.

Bien développée, la production d’hydrogène vert peut offrir un avenir à des sites industriels abandonnés. Mettons à profit cette possibilité, mais prenons garde aux apprentis sorciers qui veulent faire de l’hydrogène le nouvel eldorado du capitalisme vert.

  Andor Deli (NI). – Madam President, it is essential that the European Commission puts greater emphasis and financial support to hydrogen as an excellent zero-emissions alternative to traditional fuels. I think it’s very unfortunate that when it comes to infrastructure and filling stations, the EU is way behind in comparison to other developed parts of the world.

The Joint Undertaking for Fuel Cells and Hydrogen and its further support is crucial but they can’t do it alone. Despite the fact that technical neutrality is the official policy, if you look back, the Commission was way more open and supportive when it comes to battery technology and electric vehicles.

I think the time has come that hydrogen gets a similar boost from the Commission in order to create a solid basis for the future European hydrogen market. Electric vehicles have already planted their foot firmly, now it’s time that hydrogen and fuel cells do the same. I cannot imagine that the green transition can be achieved, especially in freight and long-haul transport, without hydrogen and fuel cells.

  Massimiliano Salini (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la strategia per l'integrazione dei sistemi energetici è una strategia della quale le Istituzioni europee decidono di dotarsi perché siano raggiunti gli obiettivi che ci siamo posti con il cosiddetto Green deal.

Obiettivi sfidanti ma obiettivi assolutamente alla portata di un'Europa che è l'area del mondo che più ha accettato queste sfide: le sfide della sostenibilità bilanciate con le sfide dello sviluppo economico, alla portata di tutti; quindi non sfide che si contraddicano tra di loro. A volte questo rischio lo corriamo.

Com'è possibile evitare di correre questo rischio? Com'è cioè possibile evitare che il green deal non sia la tomba dello sviluppo ma la culla dello sviluppo? Bisogna bilanciare, bisogna che prevalga il principio di realtà, per cui è corretto assumere l'efficienza energetica come grande pilastro ma l'efficienza energetica non può essere svincolata dalla dall'efficienza dei costi: i costi energetici devono essere alla portata della vita reale dei cittadini e delle imprese.

La sfida sull'idrogeno deve essere una sfida nella quale si arrivi al grande obiettivo dell'idrogeno verde attraverso fasi intermedie. Questo realismo è il nostro compito.

Per questo il Partito popolare europeo parla di "neutralità tecnologica": non possiamo innamorarci di singole soluzioni tecnologiche. Il sistema di impresa costruisce il paradigma dell'integrazione attraverso un rapporto equilibrato tra le varie soluzioni: non possiamo imporne una!

  Carlos Zorrinho (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, o combate às alterações climáticas não constitui apenas um desafio de civilização e de sustentabilidade. É uma oportunidade para dotar a União da Energia de um sistema baseado em energias renováveis que dê um contributo decisivo para a neutralidade carbónica, que apoie a competitividade da economia europeia e seja justo e eficaz na erradicação da pobreza energética.

Os relatórios que aqui debatemos são um contributo forte do Parlamento Europeu para uma aplicação bem-sucedida da lei do clima e das suas metas. A concretização das estratégias de integração do sistema de energia e para o hidrogénio exige uma visão e um quadro de relatório claro e de longo prazo, uma transição justa e uma aposta ambiciosa no desenvolvimento científico e da inovação tecnológica, na produção, armazenamento, transmissão e uso das energias renováveis e, em particular, do hidrogénio verde.

Não é apenas o sistema energético que estamos a transformar: é um novo modelo de organização económica e social que estamos a construir, um novo ciclo de oportunidades para criar riqueza, emprego e melhor qualidade de vida, assumindo a liderança europeia no caminho para uma sociedade menos desigual, mais sustentável e com mais qualidade de vida.

  Morten Petersen (Renew). – Fru. formand! Først og fremmest tillykke til vores to ordførere for disse to vigtige filer. Det haster med at bekæmpe klimaforandringerne, og EU skal gå forrest i det. Netop det at gå på tværs af sektorer, at koble sektorer sammen, er helt afgørende i det næste skridt i den grønne omstilling, for det er kun ved at gå på tværs af sektorer, at vi for alvor kan bekæmpe klimaforandringerne.

Udviklingen af grøn brint er fremtiden for mange af de sektorer, der ikke umiddelbart kan elektrificeres, såsom tung transport og industrien. Men brint kræver store mængder af grøn vedvarende energi. Som Europa-Parlamentets ordfører for EU's offshorestrategi arbejder jeg for, at vi udnytter potentialet på havene ved at lave en ambitiøs kobling mellem sektorer, så grøn brint kan produceres på basis af grøn strøm fra havvind, og ved at integrere vindenergi, gennem power-to-x og også i fjernvarmen, så grøn vedvarende energi kan fylde markant mere i vores energiforsyning, end det gør i dag. Der kan vi lade os inspirere af, hvad der sker i Skive i Danmark, hvor man har lavet det såkaldte GreenLab, der netop går på tværs af sektorer.

  Jutta Paulus (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin! Unser gemeinsames Ziel – jedenfalls das Ziel der meisten im Europäischen Parlament – ist eine klimaneutrale Europäische Union. Die Grundlage dafür ist, dass wir die erneuerbaren Energien in alle Bereiche bringen müssen: nicht nur Strom, sondern auch Wärme, Verkehr und Industrie. Dafür gilt es, auf der EU-Ebene den Rahmen zu schaffen. Wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass wir die Sektoren vernetzen, und zwar klug vernetzen. Es muss Schluss sein mit der Energieverschwendung, es darf keine Vergeudung von Abwärme geben, die Effizienz muss unsere erste Priorität sein. Und genau deshalb dürfen wir Wasserstoff nur in den Sektoren verwenden, die nicht elektrifiziert werden können, in denen uns also keine Wahl bleibt, als auf einen chemischen Energieträger zurückzugreifen, der natürlich nur unter Energieverlust aus erneuerbarem Strom produziert werden kann.

In unserem Energiesystem der Zukunft werden die Säulen Sonne und Wind sein, also fluktuierende erneuerbare Energien. Hier klafft leider noch eine große Lücke, denn um diese Energien klug zu nutzen und das System stabil zu halten, brauchen wir die digitale Vernetzung. Die Cyberangriffe auf die Colonial Pipeline in den USA haben gezeigt, dass wir unsere Infrastruktur vor digitalen Bedrohungen besser schützen müssen. Deshalb fordere ich die Europäische Kommission auf, hier rasch einen Vorschlag zu machen, denn sonst kann die Transformation nicht gelingen. Wir brauchen eine sichere Infrastruktur, und es ist höchste Zeit, uns darum zu kümmern.

  Beata Szydło (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Szanowni Państwo! Gospodarka wodorowa jest niewątpliwie ważnym elementem osiągnięcia europejskiej gospodarki klimatycznie neutralnej. Komunikat Komisji przyjęliśmy zatem pozytywnie, ale tekst sprawozdania komisji ITRE budzi już wiele wątpliwości i pytań. Po pierwsze, po raz kolejny w dyskusji na temat polityki energetycznej Unii Europejskiej chcę podkreślić, jak istotne i niezwykle ważne dla państw członkowskich i dla całej Unii jest przede wszystkim danie każdemu z państw członkowskich szansy dostosowania się do wymogów, które stawia Unia, w odpowiednim czasie, biorąc pod uwagę możliwości i etap transformacji, które przeżywa dane państwo. Po drugie, uważam, że powinniśmy wspierać te przedsiębiorstwa, które dzisiaj produkują tzw. wodór szary, wysokoemisyjny, a które przekształcają się i chcą dostosować się do tych wymogów. Musimy je wspierać, a nie pozwolić na to, żeby upadły, były zamknięte i żeby wzrastało w związku z tym bezrobocie. Dlatego uważam, że poprawki zgłoszone przez grupę ECR rozwiązują te problemy i są godne poparcia.

  Sandra Pereira (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, o longo processo de privatizações no setor da energia, promovidas e incentivadas pela União Europeia, atenta contra os interesses nacionais e tem contribuído para destruir o aparelho produtivo e o emprego qualificado, aumentando, assim, a dependência externa de países como Portugal.

Sob o pretexto de uma transição verde, já se vislumbram radicais encerramentos e reestruturações enérgico—industriais com vista à desativação precoce de unidades de produção baseadas em fontes energéticas convencionais com as nefastas consequências para a capacidade produtiva e industrial dos Estados e sem qualquer benefício ambiental.

Este é o caso, em Portugal, do recente encerramento da refinaria de Matosinhos, cujos trabalhadores daqui saudamos pela luta em defesa dos seus postos de trabalho.

Sobre a estratégia do hidrogénio, pergunto qual será o papel dos Estados. Terão apenas um papel notarial, facilitador do investimento privado, entregando mais uma vez as questões da soberania energética à mercê do sacrossanto mercado e deixando os Estados e os povos reféns dos interesses dos grandes grupos económicos e multinacionais do setor?

  András Gyürk (NI). – Elnök asszony! A megemelt klímavédelmi célkitűzések következményeként az európai energiapolitika történelmi léptékű átalakulás előtt áll. Ez a mai vita tárgya. A siker három tényezőn múlik: célorientáltság, technológiasemlegesség és az ideológiai viták elkerülése. A zöld átmenet csak a károsanyag-kibocsátás fenntartható csökkentése révén valósulhat meg. Ez az a cél, amelyet szem előtt kell tartanunk. Ennek eléréséhez minden hatékony technológiára szükség van. Az atomenergia és a földgáz ilyen megoldások. Szerepük a jövő energia- és hidrogénrendszerében vitathatatlan. Megbélyegzésük hátráltatja a klímavédelmet, figyelmen kívül hagyja a tagállami sajátosságokat, és az energiaszegénység növekedéséhez vezet.

Ezért fontos, hogy gátat szabjunk a baloldal radikális törekvéseinek, melyek az energiapolitikát hitvitává alakítanák. Az effajta gondolatok egy olyan jövő felé terelnék az Uniót, ami gazdasági stagnálást és a rezsiköltségek robbanásszerű emelkedését eredményezné. Ez kockázatos. Az európai emberek ennél jobbat érdemelnek.

  Maria da Graça Carvalho (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, uma economia neutra em termos climáticos requer uma política energética integrada que combine diferentes fontes de energia e faça uso das melhores tecnologias disponíveis, tecnologias que se querem limpas, a custos acessíveis e adaptadas às necessidades específicas de cada sector.

A investigação científica e a inovação serão centrais para alcançarmos estes objetivos, tanto para aumentarmos a eficácia das tecnologias existentes, como para desenvolver novas soluções.

O hidrogénio irá contribuir para a descarbonização, nomeadamente em processos industriais com utilização intensa de energia e nos meios de transporte de longa distância como o transporte marítimo ou a aviação. Mas devemos evitar saltos tecnológicos irrealistas. É arriscado apostar na utilização em escala real de tecnologias que ainda não foram verificadas em projetos-piloto ou de demonstração.

Neutralidade climática, segurança energética para enfrentar estes desafios, precisamos de coerência nas definições das nossas políticas e de eficácia na sua implementação.

  Mohammed Chahim (S&D). – Madam President, I would like to start by thanking the rapporteurs for their report. Both the energy system integration and the hydrogen strategy will play an important role in our plan to become climate-neutral by 2050, and I’m very happy that we choose green hydrogen as the future for Europe.

With this plan, we need to stimulate our heavy industry to invest in the most sustainable technologies. We ask them not to look at the short-term profit, but to look at the long-term benefits, knowing that we will do our utmost to increase supply and decrease the cost significantly. This transition will not be easy but, if we work together, we will preserve and create new sustainable jobs.

Finally, I would like to ask you, Madam Commissioner, especially in relation to green hydrogen, how you will explore the potential of international cooperation, and what opportunities you believe green hydrogen may bring to our neighbouring countries.

I truly believe that we can create win—win situations and accelerate reductions of CO2 globally.

  Mauri Pekkarinen (Renew). – Arvoisa puhemies, parlamentin vetymietintö tunnistaa aika hyvin vedyn mahdollisuudet hiilen korvaajana eräillä teollisuudenaloilla. Esimerkiksi raudanvalmistuksen muuttamiseksi päästöttömäksi tarvitaan vetyä, ja sen valmistamiseen puolestaan tarvitaan vihreää päästötöntä sähköä. Samalla kun vetyteknologia vähentää päästöjä energiatehokkuus kuitenkin heikkenee. Mielestäni on tärkeää, että energiatehokkuusnormit joustavat jatkossa silloin, kun vetyteknologialla tai miksei muilla vastaavilla teknologioilla voidaan saavuttaa suuria päästövähennyksiä teollisuudessa.

  Ville Niinistö (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, renewable power is the backbone of future energy systems. The future—proof option now is to build more solar and wind power. Besides being clean, they are increasingly more affordable and bring local employment and income.

Wind power is currently often the cheapest form of new energy investment in northern Europe, while solar is that in southern Europe. 90% of new power generation capacities will be renewable based on the most recent International Energy Agency analyses.

Hydrogen is a big chance for the European industrial future. It can help us with decarbonising steel production and it can help us with lorry and maritime traffic in achieving climate goals. But, we have to remember, hydrogen is just an energy carrier that will take renewables to sectors, but the most efficient option of direct electrification with renewables is not an option.

Without renewable energy, we won’t have any renewable hydrogen. We don’t have any sustainable hydrogen so there is no industrial leadership on hydrogen in Europe without increasingly focusing on increasing renewables in Europe. We must look at the energy system in a holistic way, not focusing on just one energy carrier. We should also forget fossil—based solutions, including fossil—based hydrogen, as they will only prolong the life of polluting assets, create stranded assets and lock—in effects. The future is here already today with renewables and we should go forward to it in haste.

  Kosma Złotowski (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Szanowni Państwo! Transformacji energetycznej nie może realizować w oderwaniu od kosztów społecznych i różnic między państwami członkowskimi. O wyborze konkretnej technologii powinna decydować efektywność i opłacalność, a nie ideologia.

Dotyczy to także wodoru, który jest ogromną nadzieją na stworzenie systemu niskoemisyjnego transportu towarowego i pasażerskiego. Powinniśmy obniżać koszty produkcji tego paliwa, uniezależnić się od dostaw spoza Europy i pozyskiwać wodór ze wszystkich możliwych źródeł, także z paliw kopalnych.

Cieszę się, że województwo kujawsko-pomorskie będzie odgrywać ważną rolę w tym procesie. W 2022 roku produkcja paliwa wodorowego rozpocznie się we Włocławku, kawerny solne w Mogilnie mogą być wykorzystywane do magazynowania tego pierwiastka, a we wrześniu PESA z Bydgoszczy przedstawi prototyp nowoczesnej lokomotywy wodorowej.

To nie tylko ważny wkład mojego regionu w transformację energetyczną Polski, ale także szansa na nowe inwestycje i nowe miejsca pracy.

  Jerzy Buzek (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Gratuluję naszym sprawozdawcom. Oczekiwania wobec obydwu strategii są ogromne: niezależność energetyczna Unii Europejskiej, odchodzenie od paliw kopalnych, a może przede wszystkim zwalczanie ubóstwa energetycznego i smogu, a także niższe rachunki za prąd i ciepło w Unii Europejskiej. Ogromne wyzwania. Tym razem musi nam się udać, bo poprzednie podejścia do strategii wodorowych nie bardzo wyszły. Moim zdaniem, trzeba spełnić trzy warunki, aby tym razem się udało. Po pierwsze, wykorzystanie obecnej i przyszłej infrastruktury gazu ziemnego. W tym celu trzeba mieć nowe, innowacyjne pomysły. Kłania się „Horyzont Europa”. Trzeba przeznaczyć jak najwięcej środków na innowacje, ale także na uruchomienie kapitału prywatnego i zadbać o odpowiednią legislację. Druga sprawa – wszystko rozegra się właściwie w legislacji sektorowej. Mówię tutaj o transeuropejskiej sieci energetycznej albo o dyrektywie energetyki odnawialnej, a także o wykorzystaniu funduszy strukturalnych czy wreszcie Funduszu Odbudowy. Tu trzeba, aby Komisja wyraźnie przyjrzała się, jak to jest zrealizowane w każdym kraju członkowskim. I po trzecie, co jest bardzo ważne, każdy kraj może mieć swoje inne koło zamachowe gospodarki wodorowej. W moim kraju, Polsce, to ciepłownictwo systemowe. Z tym wiążemy nadzieję. Potraktujmy indywidualnie te rozwiązania. Na pewno nam się uda. Musi się udać.

  Miapetra Kumpula-Natri (S&D). – Madam President, this is a very timely discussion on both the energy system integration and clean hydrogen production. Both are important for the EU to reach ambitious climate goals. Digitalisation has a crucial role in energy system integration. We need digitalised and smart solutions, AI and the ability to use data to optimise energy systems. Digitalisation also empowers consumers.

There are growing concerns – rightly – that digitalisation actually increases energy demand. However, studies show that harnessing ICT solutions helps us reach clear reductions. We need concrete tools, both at EU and at national level, to support the market update of renewable or energy systems, but also for hydrogen. But we can’t afford to exclude available carbon—free solutions if we want to boost hydrogen to replace dirtier energy solutions.

  Nicola Danti (Renew). – Signora Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, spetta a noi, alla nostra generazione, chiudere l'era dei combustibili fossili e raggiungere la neutralità climatica.

Per conseguire questo obiettivo dovremmo investire sull'idrogeno, che rappresenta la vera alternativa per decarbonizzare i processi industriali energivori, il trasporto aereo, marittimo e stradale pesanti e tutti quei settori in cui l'elettrificazione non sarà possibile.

Certo oggi è ancora una chimera ma grazie alle strategie messe in campo da Unione europea e Stati membri riusciremo finalmente a costruire un mercato competitivo per l'idrogeno.

In questo contesto giocheranno un ruolo decisivo le tecnologie di transizione come la cattura, lo stoccaggio e l'utilizzo del carbonio, che permetteranno, da una parte, di aumentare rapidamente la produzione e l'utilizzo di idrogeno e contribuiranno, dall'altra, a ridurre le emissioni di CO2 nel breve periodo.

La leadership europea in questo campo è possibile: non perdiamo questa occasione.

  Pilar del Castillo Vera (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, hoy debatimos dos informes importantes para la Unión Europea: tanto la estrategia para el hidrógeno como la estrategia para la integración del sistema energético trazan el camino a seguir en la próxima década si queremos cumplir con nuestros objetivos medioambientales, pero son importantes también porque garantizan que la industria europea, en especial las pymes, va a poder contar con una fuente de energía que facilita su competitividad global. Promover el desarrollo de un hidrógeno libre de emisiones, reconocer la importancia a corto y medio plazo del hidrógeno bajo en emisiones e incentivar la inversión en la infraestructura ya existente para adecuarla al hidrógeno nos indica la dirección que hay que seguir.

Por otro lado, reforzar el compromiso de la Unión Europea con los objetivos de interconexión eléctrica del 10 % para 2020 y el 15 % para 2030 es y ha sido de singular importancia, y lo es porque, sin un reforzamiento de las interconexiones, algunos países, entre ellos España y Portugal, no podrían exportar su producción de electricidad de origen renovable, y, como consecuencia de ello, el consumidor pagaría un sobreprecio por absorber esa producción: por eso hay que dar la bienvenida a vincular el volumen de producción renovable y el avance que van a tener y que deberían tener las interconexiones transfronterizas.

  Niels Fuglsang (S&D). – Fru. formand! I fremtidens Europa skal de store ressourcer i vores energisystem ikke være olie, kul og gas. Det skal være grøn strøm og brint, der kommer fra grøn strøm. Det kræver selvsagt en komplet ombygning af den måde, vi producerer energi på i Europa. I den forbindelse er jeg glad for, at de to strategier, vi diskuterer i dag, sætter den helt rigtige retning. Vi skal udbygge vores havvindenergi, bygge store ressourcer inden for havenergi, så vi kan få grøn strøm. Derudover skal vi integrere vores energisystemer og altså have fat i gravemaskinerne til at få udbygget vores kabler rundt omkring i Europa, der kan forbinde vores energisystemer. Og så skal vi satse på grøn brint. Vi ved fra forskning, at grøn brint om meget få år bliver økonomisk meget mere profitabelt end brint fra fossil energi. Derfor er det grøn brint, vi skal satse på.

  Ivars Ijabs (Renew). – Prezidentes kundze! Komisāres kundze! Dārgie kolēģi! Runājot par jauno Ūdeņraža stratēģiju, ir svarīgi nepazaudēt šo ūdeņraža plašāko lomu mūsu ekonomikas dekarbonizācijā. Atjaunojamais ūdeņradis ir svarīgs zaļās enerģijas avots, taču ūdeņradis būs ļoti svarīgs risinājums zaļajai enerģijai nozarēs, kurās tieša elektrifikācija nav tehnoloģiski iespējama, kā lielo attālumu aviosatiksme vai jūras satiksme. Eiropas pētniecības budžetam ir jāstimulē pētījumi un inovācija tieši šajās nozarēs — tur, kur dekarbonizācija ir vislielākais izaicinājums.

Tieši šis ceļš ir ejams, lai 2050. gadā ūdeņradis veidotu nevis 2 %, bet gan 20 % no Eiropas Savienības energoresursu struktūras. Šo nozaru pieprasījums tad arī varētu stimulēt atjaunojamā ūdeņraža tehnoloģiju izstrādes, piemēram, fotosintēze, aļģes un elektrolīze ar jūras ūdeni, jo pašlaik 95 % Eiropas Savienības rūpniecībā izmantotā ūdeņraža tiek iegūti no fosilā kurināmā, un mums strauji jāmācās apieties ar ūdeņradi drošā veidā, ieviešot šeit Eiropas paraugpraksi ūdeņraža drošuma jomā, un ūdeņradim ir jākļūst par konkurētspējīgu enerģijas avotu, un Eiropai šeit ir jāsaglabā sava vadošā loma — vispirms ar pētniecību un inovācijām, vienmēr esot soli priekšā mūsu konkurentiem.

  Pernille Weiss (PPE). – Fru formand! Energi - det er klimapolitik, det er miljøpolitik, det er industripolitik, og det er så sandelig også uafhængighedspolitik. Derfor er der mange meninger om energi, ligesom der er mange typer af energi. Brint eller hydrogen, som det også kaldes, er en af dem. Hydrogen vil i EU's fremtidige energimix være afgørende for, at især de energitunge industrier og den energitunge del af transportsektoren kan blive fossilfri. Teknologien er der, næsten, og investorerne står på spring i al fald. Derfor er det også i 11. time, at vi nu får en EU-strategi for netop hydrogen.

Af alle de mange forskellige forslag og krav, som Parlamentets betænkning indeholder, er der i særlig grad en ting, der er vigtig. Vi skal sikre, at der er rammer og vilkår til, at investorer og teknologier møder hinanden meget snart og i projekter, der er store nok og tværgående nok til at katalysere de oplagte forretningsmodeller, der ligger og venter på at overtage markedet fra enten importeret fossilenergi eller energi, der aktuelt forkæles af skæve markedskonjekturer i EU's energiunion. Lad os nu med EU's hydrogenstrategi vise resten af verden, hvordan man skaber et logisk, innovativt omkostnings- og ikke mindst energieffektivt energimarked.

  Petar Vitanov (S&D). – Madam President, I’m glad that both reports recognise the need to achieve highly energy-efficient, climate-neutral and renewable—based energy systems. The transport sector can be a significant facilitator of renewable energy deployment if we provide the right policy, sustainable investment criteria and financial tools. We need a favourable policy framework and ambitious targets based on the principle of technology neutrality on our way towards the decarbonisation of all passenger and freight transport modes.

We also need to adapt the electrification networks and infrastructure for alternative fuels, for European vehicle fleets and support other solutions. Priority should be given to building a renewable hydrogen supply chain in Europe and accelerating the decarbonisation of existing hydrogen production.

And last but not least, I also believe that the role of Power-to-X solutions will allow us to use climate—friendly based materials in fuels for air transport, heavy goods transport and maritime sectors as underlined in this report.

  Claudia Gamon (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin! Das Energiesystem von morgen muss und wird vollkommen anders ausschauen als das, was wir jetzt kennen. Dem Wasserstoff wird in dieser Transformation eine ganz wichtige Rolle zukommen. Und da geht es nicht nur um die Dekarbonisierung energieintensiver Sektoren – worüber wir ja sehr oft sprechen –, sondern auch um seinen Einsatz als Energiespeicher, weil man damit über einen langen Zeitraum hinweg große Mengen an Energie speichern kann und sie auch über längere Strecken transportieren kann.

Und während jetzt in der Forschung das Rennen um die effizientesten Technologien weitergeht, müssen wir aber zeitgleich auch in bereits marktfähige Lösungen investieren, und zwar in sauberen Wasserstoff aus erneuerbarer Energie. Für mich ist etwas ganz klar: Das Geld der Union, das Geld der europäischen Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler darf nicht mehr in fossile Technologien fließen. Wir müssen schauen, dass jeder Euro an Förderungen in die Zukunft des Energiesystems statt in die Vergangenheit geht, denn nur so werden wir die Ziele des Green Deal auch erreichen.

  Riho Terras (PPE). – Rohepöörde järel peab säilima Euroopa energiajulgeolek ja varustuskindlus, mistõttu vajab Euroopa kõikehõlmavat energiastrateegiat, mis katab kõiki energiatehnoloogiaid. On tervitatav ja oluline, et Euroopa Liidul on vesinikustrateegia, mis aitab koordineerida liikmesriikidevahelist koostööd. Niisamuti on oluline, et Euroopa Liit veab ja kaasrahastab kõrge potentsiaaliga vesinikuprojekte. Uudsete tehnoloogiate, nagu ka vesiniku arendamisel mängivad olulist rolli väikese ja keskmise suurusega ettevõtted, mis vajavad Euroopa tuge. Lõppude lõpuks on küsimus laiemalt Euroopa globaalses konkurentsivõimes uute tehnoloogiate arendamisel. Vesiniku abil on võimalik salvestada kõikuva taastootlusega taastuvenergiat ja seda transportida suures mahus, kuna torujuhtmete kapatsiteet on suurusjärgus 10 korda suurem kui kaabliühendustel. Samas on tähtis vältida rohepesu ehk halli vesiniku kasutust, mis vähendab rohelise vesiniku konkurentsivõimet ja ei ühti pikemaajaliste eesmärkidega. Vesinikutehnoloogiad ei lahenda kõiki energiaprobleeme, kuid targalt arendades annavad need märkimisväärse osa tuleviku puhta energia portfelli sisust. Ma tänan.

  Robert Hajšel (S&D). – Madam President, the EU needs to boost its strategic resilience in the post—COVID area and accelerate decarbonisation. We need to increase the share of renewables and invest our efforts in energy storage. Renewable hydrogen, despite not yet being competitive, can play a vital role in EU decarbonisation.

We voted for a clear commitment to phase out fossil fuels and it’s clear that green hydrogen has to be one of our priorities when investing in future clean energy. As Member States are not in the same starting position, low—carbon hydrogen can also play a bridging role in their decarbonisation. The repurposing of existing gas pipelines for the transport and storage of hydrogen can be a relevant option, at least in certain energy-intensive sectors. Therefore, a science—based assessment of the repurposing of existing infrastructure, as well as blending options, should be provided.

Green and digital transition will require huge investments and those shouldn’t only support a climate—neutral economy, but need to strengthen energy security, prevent energy poverty and secure the jobs of millions of European citizens, especially in the upcoming post—pandemic times.

  Caroline Nagtegaal (Renew). – Voorzitter, commissaris, we staan voor een enorme verduurzamingsopgave waarvoor ook mijn geliefde vervoerssector de ogen niet sluit. Om de ambities op dit gebied te verwezenlijken hebben wij, net als de vervoerssector, een aantal ingrediënten nodig.

Allereerst hebben we de juiste energiemix nodig, waarbij groene en blauwe waterstof een zeer belangrijke rol spelen. Voorts moeten we ervoor zorgen dat de veiligheidsnormen en infrastructuur op orde zijn om het gebruik van waterstof aan te kunnen jagen. Alleen dan gaan bedrijven en ondernemers dit echt omarmen. Kijk bijvoorbeeld naar binnenvaartschipper Harm Lenten met zijn drogebulkwaterstofschip of naar autofabrikanten als Volvo en Daimler, die de handen ineenslaan om vrachtwagens te ontwikkelen die op waterstof rijden.

Met dit soort partijen en deze ingrediënten hebben we wat mij betreft het recept in handen om van waterstof een succesverhaal te maken.

  Maria Spyraki (PPE). – Madam President, hydrogen is a central element of our Green Deal in order to achieve our zero-carbon economy by 2050. It is also important in order to decarbonise our industry. It is not a silver bullet for the decarbonisation of our energy mix, but it is the energy carrier that we have to invest more heavily in.

Emphasis should be given to hydrogen from renewable sources and that additional renewable energy demand from hydrogen will have to be taken into account in the future deployment of clean power generation capacity. However, the role that low-carbon hydrogen will have in the initial phase to scale-up production is important in order finally to increase the percentage of the production of Greek hydrogen until we are able to cover our needs with 100% green hydrogen.

In this regard, we have to take on board all the appropriate technologies, including carbon capture and storage (CCS) and carbon capture and utilisation (CCU), and at the same time we have to provide security to our citizens by addressing their concerns with responsibility.

Finally, as a Member of the European Parliament coming from Greece, I would like to ask all colleagues to support Amendment 26 underlining that we have to ramp up hydrogen production in less connected regions like isolated islands or regions in transition, such as Western Macedonia, while ensuring the development of related infrastructure, including repurposing and retrofitting the existing infrastructure.

  Kadri Simson, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you so much to the honourable Members for a great discussion. Your report is balanced and a timely contribution that allows us to finalise our proposals. It will allow us to integrate your input as we proceed in the finalisation of the Fit for 55 package.

Let me insist on one important point: these two strategies are important milestones on our path towards a climate-neutral society because they point to different ways in which we can achieve this objective in a cost-effective way. We must design a clean energy transition that is balanced, affordable and compatible with our competitiveness objectives. These two strategies show that this is feasible.

On the one hand, an integrated energy system will reap the benefits of circularity, greater efficiency, more electrification and more renewable fuels as a part of the net zero vision. On the other hand, the hydrogen strategy shows a clear path towards decarbonising sectors difficult to electrify and at the same time strengthening those sectors, create jobs and ensure growth in the post-COVID recovery. This is what we mean by saying that the Green Deal is a growth strategy for Europe and a strategy that works for all – the north, south, east and west of Europe.

I’m happy that your report agrees with our emphasis on hydrogen as an opportunity to collaborate with countries in our neighbourhood, promoting their economic and energy diversification and developing alternative export opportunities to those that come from the fossil fuel sector.

The two strategies set out challenging but achievable targets and objectives and I truly believe that together we can take up these challenges and make Europe a cleaner place and a global leader in clean energy technologies.

VORSITZ: NICOLA BEER
Vizepräsidentin

  Die Präsidentin. – Die gemeinsame Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung über die Änderungsanträge findet am Dienstag, 18. Mai 2021, statt, die Schlussabstimmung am Mittwoch, 19. Mai 2021.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 171)

  Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR), na piśmie. – Wodór wytwarzany ze źródeł odnawialnych ma duże znaczenie dla osiągnięcia neutralności klimatycznej. Gaz ten ma duży potencjał, aby ułatwić dekarbonizację trudnych do dekarbonizacji i energochłonnych sektorów przemysłowych, jak np. sektor stali. Europejska strategia w zakresie wodoru zakłada różne jego zastosowanie (np. paliwo ekologiczne dla transportu ciężkiego, dla którego obecne technologie akumulatorowe są niepraktyczne). Niestety tekst sprawozdania znacznie odbiega od ścieżki obranej przez Komisję w komunikacie i proponuje rozwiązania, które nie odpowiadają faktycznemu tempu rozwoju technologicznego ani realiom rynkowym. Dlatego złożyłam poprawki plenarne, które po pierwsze wzmacniają zasadę neutralności technologicznej. Po drugie, wnoszą o zagwarantowanie tego, żeby technologie niskoemisyjnej produkcji wodoru (np. taki jak wodór niebieski oparty na CCS) były rozwijane i otrzymywały wsparcie publiczne. Ponadto poprawki podkreślają, jak ważne jest rozwijanie różnych bezemisyjnych technologii produkcji wodoru, nawet tych, które oparte są na gazie naturalnym, np. pirolizę. Po czwarte, poprawki wnoszą, by zakłady, które obecnie produkują wodór wysokoemisyjny (tzw. szary = czyli praktycznie całość polskiej produkcji wodorowej, a mamy w Europie 3 miejsce), nie były zamykane, tylko otrzymały wsparcie potrzebne dla modernizacji w kierunku technologii niskoemisyjnych i bezemisyjnych. Ważne jest, by procesem certyfikacji był objęty importowany wodór niskoemisyjny, aby wodór importowany spełniał podobne wysokie standardy środowiskowe jak ten produkowany w UE.

15. Fundo para uma Transição Justa (debate)

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über den Bericht von Manolis Kefalogiannis im Namen des Ausschusses für regionale Entwicklung über den Vorschlag für eine Verordnung des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates zur Einrichtung des Fonds für einen gerechten Übergang (COM(2020)0022 – C9-0007/2020 – 2020/0006(COD)) (A9-0135/2020).

  Manolis Kefalogiannis, rapporteur. – Madam President, the Just Transition Fund (JTF) is the first legislative proposal implementing the European Green Deal. The European Green Deal is a project of EUR one trillion. It is Europe’s ambition to become the first climate neutral continent by 2050. This is a top priority for our continent. I am, therefore, deeply honoured and proud to be appointed as the rapporteur for the Just Transition Fund for the European Parliament.

JTF is a key tool to ensure that the transition towards a climate neutral economy happens in a fair way, leaving no one behind. If we add together the funds from the Just Transition Fund, InvestEU and the European Investment Bank, we will mobilise through the Just Transition mechanism more than EUR 100 billion.

The Just Transition Fund is for the European Union to lead the way for the implementation of the Paris Agreement adopting a fair and just green transition. Without Just Transition Fund intervention, regions could not make it on their own. They require investment for structural changes in energy support, supply and demand. Countries can spend their own JTF money in areas such as clean energy, training workers and assistance for job seekers, but they cannot spend JTF money to support any investment linked to fossil fuel, including natural gas.

In December 2020 a political agreement was reached. The European Commission announced the main elements of the compromise: the budgetary commitment for 2021—23, the voluntary transfers from the European Regional and Development Fund and European Social Fund Plus in a voluntary base, the broadening of the scope to address the social aspect of the transition, the exclusion of fossil fuel financing, the reward mechanism linked to the reduction of greenhouse gas emission, and not to forget the islands and the outermost regions which should be taken into account by the Member States.

The Green Deal and its social aspect, the Just Transition Fund, are the best examples that can inspire the whole world for the Paris Agreement and climate change. I have to address special thanks to the shadow rapporteurs of all parties, to the Committee on Regional Development (REGI) Chair, the REGI coordinators and the REGI Secretariat, to all colleagues and committees involved in the subject, to my APAs and my team. Special thanks to Commissioner Ferreira and the German Presidency for their goodwill and cooperation. And, of course, to the founder of the JTF, our colleague Jerzy Buzek. Their contribution, support, advice assistance and cooperation was invaluable. Thank you once more for your attention and for your cooperation.

  Siegfried Mureşan, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Budgets. – Madam President, this week is a very important week for the European Parliament and for the people of Europe because we are going to give the final vote on the creation of the Just Transition Fund. The message is clear: the people, the enterprises and the regions that will have to adapt most in the transition to the green economy will receive the most support from the European Union.

As rapporteur of the opinion for the Committee on Budgets, I can proudly say that we have initiated, and succeeded in, coupling the Structural Funds with the Just Transition Fund financing only on a voluntary basis. We rejected the initial proposal of the European Commission, which said that, if you want to access one euro from the Just Transition Fund, you have to bring EUR 1.50 from your own structural funds.

We rejected that because we have new objectives – ambitious objectives – in the transition towards the green economy and, if we have new objectives, we also need to provide adequate new funding, and this is what is happening now. We have new ambitious objectives in the transition to the green economy and we are providing new help for the people of Europe.

  Henrike Hahn, Verfasserin der Stellungnahme des mitberatenden Ausschusses für Wirtschaft und Währung. – Frau Präsidentin! Wir wollen Europa bis spätestens 2050 zum ersten klimaneutralen Kontinent machen. Genau dafür brauchen wir den Fonds für den gerechten Übergang als Kernelement des Green Deal, um unsere CO2—Emissionen auf null zu senken – mit einem ökologisch-sozialen Umbau der Wirtschaft.

Mit 17,5 Milliarden Euro – und ja, im ECON-Ausschuss haben wir wesentlich mehr gefordert, 40 Milliarden Euro, gerade weil wir realistisch rechnen können – soll der Fonds ganz besonders die Regionen beim Übergang unterstützen, die derzeit von kohlenstoffintensiven Industrien und fossilen Brennstoffen abhängig sind. Wir unterstützen die europäischen Kohleregionen auf dem Weg in eine neue Zukunft – durch Investitionen in Start-ups, in kleine und mittlere Unternehmen, durch soziale Projekte und kulturelle Einrichtungen, durch nachhaltige Arbeitsplätze, Umschulungen und Trainings.

Wir sagen damit: Veränderung ist möglich – und die Menschen dabei mitzunehmen, auch! Das ist uns Grünen ganz besonders wichtig: Beim Just Transition Fund wird kein einziger Euro für fossile Brennstoffe ausgegeben. Alles andere wäre auch klimatechnisch absolut widersinnig. Veränderung ist machbar, und die Zukunft eines klimaneutralen Europas beginnt jetzt!

  Mounir Satouri, rapporteur pour avis de la commission de l’emploi et des affaires sociales. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, quel plaisir de voir revenir ce Fonds encore plus juste, plus inclusif et puis surtout, sans le gaz.

Ce Fonds ne se limitera pas à accompagner les travailleurs dans leur changement d’emploi; il va accompagner toutes les personnes issues de ces territoires en reconversion. Il soutiendra les activités de formation et les infrastructures sociales, et aura une approche globale pour contribuer à une véritable transformation de la société, via des plans d’action régionaux de transition qui peuvent être élaborés en partenariat avec tous les acteurs et dans une concertation globale.

Je ne doute pas un instant que ce Fonds de transition juste participera positivement à la transformation des régions et de nos territoires en transition. Je souhaite d’ailleurs qu’il puisse inspirer d’autres dispositifs. Si nous voulons réussir les enjeux climatiques, il va falloir multiplier les outils qui puissent concilier enjeux climatiques, enjeux d’emploi et enjeux sociaux.

C’est avec bonheur, aujourd’hui, que je vois revenir ce dossier entre les mains du Parlement.

  Jerzy Buzek, autor projektu opinii Komisji Przemysłu, Badań Naukowych i Energii. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Gratuluję sprawozdawcy, koledze Manolisowi Kefalogiannisowi, a także innym sprawozdawcom. Fundusz na rzecz Sprawiedliwej Transformacji zrodził się z rozmów ze społecznościami lokalnymi, samorządami, zwłaszcza w takim regionie jak województwo śląskie – moim regionie – gdzie wyzwania są największe.

I to właśnie obywatele, mieszkańcy 41 regionów górniczych w Europie, są w sercu tego funduszu. Nie chcą nowych kopalń, smogu, zapadających się domów, ale nie chcą też wybierać między ochroną klimatu i pracą. Dlatego musimy stworzyć im szansę – dla nich, dla ich dzieci, dla całych regionów.

Chciałbym bardzo krótko poruszyć dwie kluczowe sprawy: po pierwsze, wygrać sposób wdrożenia funduszu zgodnie z planami społeczności lokalnych i regionalnych – bo to dla nich jest ten fundusz – i po drugie, pamiętać, że transformacja potrwa trzydzieści lat. Potrzebujemy takiej samej osobnej linii budżetowej przez następne trzy–cztery wieloletnie budżety Unii.

  Nicolas Schmit, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, yes, somebody said it already – today is a historic milestone, a historic moment: the first legislative element of the Just Transition package and under the Green Deal to be approved by the co-legislators, and this only three weeks after provisional political agreement was reached on the third and last legislative element of the Just Transition Mechanism – a public sector loan facility for Just Transition regions.

This journey started with a commitment taken by President von der Leyen in front of this Parliament in July 2019 and your vote today enables the journey to continue. It enables Europe to move forwards with our ambitious goal of becoming the world’s first carbon-neutral continent, and your vote today enables us to reach this goal while leaving no region, no worker, behind. Because in Europe, we do not compromise on our key goals – we will be carbon-neutral and we will leave no one behind. We will meet both goals together. And therefore I am very happy as a Commissioner – for Social Rights, by the way – to have the honour to be here this evening.

Commissioner Ferreira, whom I represent today as she’s currently on mission, asked me to pay tribute to Manolis Kefalogiannis and Younous Omarje, as well as to the shadow rapporteurs who already expressed themselves. My warmest of thanks also on her behalf for your fruitful cooperation during the interinstitutional discussions. You helped us reach agreement in record time. You also raised the quality of the proposal: amendments from the Parliament raised our ambitions, for example through the green rewarding mechanism.

The adoption of the regulation today paves the way for submission and approval of the territorial Just Transition plans. These plans are currently being prepared across Europe, with the help of EU technical support. The approval of the plans is critical for each territory to effectively access not only the Just Transition Fund, but also the other two pillars of the Just Transition Mechanism, namely the Just Transition scheme under InvestEU and the public sector loan facility.

It is important that eligible territories optimise the support of these various instruments to address all development needs and challenges stemming from the climate transition.

Today starts our common work in implementation, but today starts also our common work in making a success of the Just Transition Fund. Today starts our common work delivering on the ground, a green transition which leaves no region behind.

The Commission is fully committed to this. The Parliament is our key partner and ally in this work and has always been. We will keep you duly informed of progress.

  Vlad Gheorghe, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Transport and Tourism. – Madam President, I am glad we achieved a common position on the Just Transition Fund (JTF). At the same time, many would agree that the restriction on natural gas investments does not reflect Parliament’s position. It was done without a realistic assessment of its effects on the ground and might even jeopardise the just transition goal.

The JTF is primarily an instrument of solidarity. This means we need the finances to flow where they are most needed. Therefore, I invite the Commission to look very closely at the conditions on the ground. In some regions, transition efforts must be rewarded with quality roads, high-speed trains and affordable public transport. In other regions, with tourism and social infrastructure. In third regions, with district heating and better public services. In many regions of the EU depopulation and poverty represent a very high risk and we need the JTF to tackle it in a tailor-made way.

I would like the Commission to take very seriously the involvement of municipalities and cities in the implementation of the JTF resources.

  Isabel Carvalhais, relatora de parecer da Comissão da Agricultura e do Desenvolvimento Rural. – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, Caros Colegas, a aprovação pelo Parlamento do acordo sobre o instrumento legislativo do Fundo para a Transição Justa é um importante marco para a concretização dos objetivos do Pacto Ecológico Europeu.

A agricultura está na linha da frente dos setores afetados pelas alterações climáticas e é, portanto, um dos principais interessados numa transição justa e bem-sucedida para alcançar a neutralidade climática em 2050. A urgência da crise climática obriga-nos a uma ação global verdadeiramente ambiciosa, mas que, no imediato, também trará impactos sobre o tecido social, facto que não podemos ignorar.

O Fundo para a Transição Justa será, assim, um instrumento crucial para que a transição no caminho da neutralidade climática ocorra de uma forma socialmente responsável. É, por isso, com muito agrado que registo o facto de este Parlamento ter conseguido reforçar a dimensão social deste fundo, garantindo aspetos como a criação de emprego, de infraestruturas sociais e o combate à pobreza energética como centrais na ação deste instrumento.

  Андрей Новаков, от името на групата PPE. – Първо искам да благодаря на моя приятел и колега Манолис Кефалоянис за хубавата работа, за това, че направи такъв добър доклад, който, сигурен съм, ще получи много силна подкрепа в пленарна зала.

Чух много различни мнения за Фонда за справедлив преход. Едното беше, че трябва да обърнем гръб на всичко, което сме правили до момента, и да преследваме цели само за опазване на околната среда. Другото крайно мнение беше, че не трябва да променяме нищо, не трябва да се интересуваме какво се случва с околната среда. Най-умереното мнение беше да използваме Зелената сделка и Фонда за справедлив преход така, че да запазим работните места на хората, заети в сектора на енергетиката.

Подкрепям това мнение, но бих искал да направя крачка по-напред, да кажа – нека използваме Фонда за справедлив преход, да повишим заплатите на заетите в сектора на енергетиката, на миньорите, на инженерите, на всички техници там. Само тогава ще бъде истински справедлив преход.

Отказвам да кажа на миньорите, че трябва да бъдат зелени, но бедни. Ако една стотинка от този фонд отиде за опазване на околната среда, три трябва да отидат при миньорите, при инженерите и при всички, заети в сектора на енергетиката – в мините и в тецовете.

  Pedro Marques, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, I wish to start by thanking the Chair of our Committee, the Committee on Regional Development (REGI), Younous Omarjee, the German Presidency, and also our rapporteurs and shadow rapporteurs, particularly our rapporteur, Manolis Kefalogiannis, and Commissioner Ferreira.

This is indeed a great day. With the Just Transition Fund, the European Union starts to put into concrete action those words that we have said, ‘leave no one behind’. From now on, this should only be the first day because, in all the implementation of the Green Deal, this should be the principle. We will not have a green transition if the transition is not just, if we leave anybody behind. That is our goal is and that’s what we have expressed with the Just Transition Fund. We want more funds, but we want more policies going in this direction.

The European Parliament secured its priorities in the negotiation. We focused the Just Transition Fund on the social consequences of the transition, not just – although it’s important – the reskilling of workers but, far beyond that, investment in job creation at a local level in the most affected regions through economic diversification and SMEs, through the social infrastructures and services in the local communities, and by also tackling energy poverty, which is critical in many of our regions and in many of our countries. We also put climate conditionality into the fund. Half of this fund will only be available to those who commit to the climate targets and, yes, we put the Green Reward Mechanism in the instrument. We did well. This is the beginning of a great transition supported by European funds.

  Ondřej Knotek, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, I welcome the Commissioner. A few words as a shadow rapporteur of this very important file. Climate action is well needed but it represents a major challenge for many coal- and energy—intensive regions and this is also the reason why Renew Europe Parliamentary Group welcomes the existence of a Just Transition Fund, a tool which will simply help the challenged regions to remain attractive and competitive.

Myself, I would like to thank to the rapporteur, Mr Kefalogiannis, also to the Chair of the Committee on Regional Development (REGI) Mr Omarjee, the German Presidency team and, of course, to the European Commission, to the team of Elisa Ferreira. Together we have had three intensive and very fruitful trilogues, also very friendly ones, and together we have laid down a good basis for regulation, with which we will simply deliver the results, and will also enable us to address the specificities of the challenged regions.

Myself, coming from Czech Republic where are three coal regions, I’m very pleased that the topic of the Just Transition Fund has become a topic, not only of the local political talks but also of the public talks. The citizens are aware of the existence of this fund and they see it as a specific help for them. A very good message. Also, I’m amazed by the quality of some projects that are being put forward to help the regions in the transition.

My takeaway message is on the funding. The EUR 17.5 billion is a very good start. However, when I see the challenges of the regions, we will definitely need more in the future by 2027 and also in the time post—2027.

  Francesca Donato, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, votiamo oggi sul Fondo per una giusta transizione, misura dal nome altisonante che in realtà finanzierà progetti e opere che avrebbero potuto comunque essere finanziati attraverso il Fondo per lo sviluppo regionale.

A cosa è servito dunque, verrebbe da chiedersi, creare un nuovo fondo che aggiunge ulteriori oneri amministrativi per le regioni e i Paesi membri chiamati a redigere i piani per la transizione, che si aggiungeranno alla già fitta giungla di provvedimenti in cui le nostre piccole e medie imprese faticano a orientarsi?

Guardando a chi ci guadagna, la risposta che traspare dalla tabella delle allocazioni per Paese è mortificante per molti di noi, visto che evidenzia come due Paesi, Germania e Polonia, riceveranno quasi un terzo dell'intero pacchetto di fondi disponibili. E se a questi si aggiungono Romania e Cechia, quattro paesi riceveranno più della metà dello stanziamento complessivo. Non sembra certo un giusto trattamento per gli altri 23.

Ma, soprattutto, nonostante lo scopo dichiarato fosse quello di rifornire sostegno alla transizione energetica senza lasciare nessuno indietro, si è deciso di escludere dal Fondo le imprese in difficoltà, come l'Ilva di Taranto, la principale acciaieria d'Europa, che avrebbe potuto giovarsi dei finanziamenti europei per convertire la produzione secondo gli standard green, tutelando i posti di lavoro dei suoi oltre 8 000 dipendenti.

Inoltre, è stata totalmente esclusa ogni possibilità di finanziamento agli investimenti sul gas naturale, benché inizialmente riconosciuti ammissibili quale strumento e infrastruttura ponte per abbattere le emissioni e rispettare le scadenze previste nel percorso di transizione. Insomma, chi è stato più diligente nel riconvertirsi verso fonti rinnovabili riceverà pochi spiccioli, mentre chi ha tenuto aperte le miniere di carbone fino a oggi prenderà miliardi di euro.

Ci sono dunque molte ragioni per cui non siamo soddisfatti di come è stato definito questo fondo. Siamo però una forza di governo seria e responsabile e, per non negare alle nostre imprese un sostegno finanziario che può arrivare in piccola parte anche all'Italia, non ci opporremo.

  Niklas Nienaß, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, the JTF is the only social policy element in the Green Deal. The JTF is an insurance to all people that the transformation towards a climate-friendly economy will not only be compatible for everyone, but actually be beneficial for everyone. The JTF is the promise that no one will be left behind, and it’s the starting gun for the race towards climate justice. The JTF is therefore the most important component of the Green Deal and the best tool for piercing the thick board that is climate action.

Mr Schmit, dear colleagues, now in its final form the JTF will enable much-needed investments in a forward-looking economy and in social policies. Thanks to Green pressure in the Council and in Parliament, no money will be burned in gas investments. Instead, with the green rewarding mechanism we included an incentive to turbo-charge on climate protection. And the JTF is already having success before it has even been adopted: Poland has finally announced it would phase out gas by 2049 because it does not want to forego JTF payments. However, if we want to be in line with the Paris Agreement we need to include a 2030 target. The green proposal for this was sadly rejected. Well, at least the Federal Constitutional Court agrees with us here.

Overall, we are all satisfied to finally come to an end with such a convincing regulation and yet all of us here are also very immeasurably disappointed. Why? Because despite the need for climate-friendly social policy, despite the effectiveness of this very regulation, and despite the explosive nature of climate protection policy, the Council did not provide the JTF with the adequate resources to enable this tool’s piercing potential. EUR 17.5 billion is too little money to 100 regions all over Europe. The Commission asked for 40 billion in the first proposal for Next Generation EU, but the Council cut this more than in half knowing that this budget is not sufficient. It is simply a shame. The JTF is an efficient and sharp tool. Due to the Council, though, it’s just too small. So we Greens get the impression that the current EU climate policy is like drilling through the thickest board with the smallest drill.

  Raffaele Fitto, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, innanzitutto ringrazio il relatore Kefalogiannis, gli altri relatori ombra e i colleghi delle altre commissioni per il lavoro svolto in questi mesi per raggiungere questo accordo sul regolamento che voteremo domani.

Un accordo sul quale rimangono alcune nostre perplessità iniziali: le tempistiche e le modalità di attuazione, al fine di contribuire al raggiungimento dei target dell'Unione europea su energia e clima, sono troppo ambiziose e ottimistiche.

Non si è tenuto debitamente conto dei diversi punti di partenza dei diversi paesi, imponendo invece un concetto di taglia unica che, spesso, ha dimostrato di non funzionare. Avremmo optato per una visione più concreta e realistica, piuttosto che ideologica, su alcune tecnologie e risorse, come il gas naturale come importante compostabile ponte per raggiungere la neutralità climatica, in sostituzione delle fonti più inquinanti.

Tuttavia, a partire dall'incremento delle risorse a disposizione per gli Stati membri, nonché il coinvolgimento anche delle piccole e medie imprese, la volontarietà dei trasferimenti dagli altri fondi della politica di coesione e la considerazione delle conseguenze economiche e sociali della transizione, rendono il testo finale dell'accordo migliore rispetto alla proposta iniziale.

Importanti territori dell'Unione europea saranno oggetto di questi processi di transizione con ricadute su settori fondamentali dell'economia, quali ferro, acciaio e cemento. L'auspicio ora si rivolge ai piani che verranno presentati nei prossimi mesi e che vanno seguiti.

Ricordo che l'Unione europea ha solo il 9 % delle emissioni globali, mentre Stati Uniti e Cina hanno, rispettivamente, il 15 e il 30 %. I nostri territori e le nostre imprese stanno già pagando il prezzo altissimo della pandemia, subiscono la concorrenza globale: evitiamo quindi di imporre vincoli stringenti; sosteniamo e aumentiamo la loro capacità economica e produttiva; proteggiamoli sui mercati internazionali e facciamo sì che la sfida della transizione ecologica ed ambientale sia una vera opportunità e non si tramuti in un fallimento delle politiche europee, con ulteriori costi su cittadini e imprese.

  Martina Michels, im Namen der Fraktion The Left. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar! Der Just Transition Fonds ist ein guter Tropfen auf den heißen Stein, zumindest finanziell sind 17,5 Milliarden Euro für 108 Regionen ein wenig mehr als ein Symbol. Aber – er ist ein wichtiger Baustein zum Kohleausstieg.

Der JTF rückt aber auch die soziale Dimension des notwendigen Strukturwandels ins Licht: Herausforderungen in der Bildung, Ausbildung, bei Rentenfragen, Jobsuche, Energiearmut oder Infrastrukturproblemen. Eine klimaneutrale Produktions- und Lebensweise in Europa können wir nur zusammen mit den sozialen Bedingungen vor Ort schaffen, und zwar in und mit den Kommunen und Regionen. Dieser Fonds ist ein wichtiges Symbol dafür, dass wir den Ausstieg aus fossilen Energien perspektivisch – einschließlich Erdgas – als Teil des europäischen Green Deal ernst nehmen. Eine Abkehr von fossilen Energien wäre aber auch für alle anderen EU-Fördermittelinstrumente wichtig.

  Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, povjereniče, kolegice i kolege, Fond za pravednu tranziciju predstavlja ključan instrument za potporu područjima koja tranzicija prema klimatskoj neutralnosti najviše pogađa te za izbjegavanje većih regionalnih razlika. Prijedlog za održivije i zelenije tehnologije predstavlja priliku za razvoj europskog gospodarstva, ali, i tu moramo biti iskreni, i veliki trošak koji utječe na konkurentnost naših poduzetnika na globalnom tržištu.

Moramo se solidarizirati s najugroženijim europskim regijama kako bi prelazak na čišće oblike energije protekao što jednostavnije, efikasnije i bezbolnije. Tu posebno mislim na one regije koje zbog raznih razloga tehnološki zaostaju te ne mogu bez pomoći slijediti promjene koje nam europski zeleni plan nameće.

Potrebno je naglasiti kada govorimo o pomoći poduzećima ne govorimo pomoći gubitašima, gospodarskim subjektima koji u svakom slučaju ne bi mogli profitabilno poslovati. Suprotno, radi se o tome da Europska unija svojom regulativom stvara dodatne troškove gospodarstvu, a onda te troškove mora u velikoj mjeri sama i snositi.

Pri tome je važno da stvaramo nova radna mjesta visoke dodane vrijednosti, potičemo inovacije, jačamo našu energetsku neovisnost te pružimo sigurnost za gospodarstvo i za one koji su najvažniji, a to su naši građani. Naravno, što se iznosa iznosa tiče tu moramo biti svjesni da se radi o kompromisu, da bi bilo bolje da je usvojen onaj originalni prijedlog, ali sada smo jednostavno u situaciji u kojoj jesmo i treba iz toga izvući maksimum.

Globalna energetska tranzicija je neizbježna, pri čemu europskom gospodarstvu moramo osigurati kvalitetniji i održiviji rast i konkurentnost, našim građanima čišću i dostupniju energiju, a budućim generacijama zdraviji okoliš i očuvan planet.

  Rovana Plumb (S&D). – Madam President, the Just Transition Fund is historic and the first key element of the European Green Deal to ensure a fair socioeconomic transition towards climate neutrality by 2050.

We, the Socialists and Democrats, strengthened the social dimension throughout the negotiation process and ensured a just process in all relevant areas that we defend, including sustainable local mobility, sustainable tourism and energy poverty. We considered it essential to include social infrastructure, such as childcare facilities and those for elderly people, but also training centres for people looking for new skills and jobs.

We need to ensure that the Paris Agreement and the EU climate targets for 2030 and 2050 are achieved in a social and balanced way, so that no one and no region is left behind.

Congratulations to Younous Omarjee, the rapporteurs and the shadow rapporteurs.

  Susana Solís Pérez (Renew). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, en Asturias —mi región—, el cierre de las minas de carbón y las centrales térmicas ha obligado a muchos jóvenes a irse de zonas que se vacían por falta de oportunidades; la misma situación que viven muchas otras regiones en España y en Europa, comprometidas con alcanzar un futuro más verde y sostenible.

El reto que nos hemos puesto en Europa es enorme y debemos asegurarnos de que esta transición vaya acompañada de los medios necesarios para que ninguna región y ningún ciudadano se quede atrás.

Para eso, Europa nos ofrece el Fondo de Transición Justa, un fondo para atraer proyectos innovadores y para ayudar a las industrias y a las pymes a invertir en procesos más limpios, en energías renovables y en economía circular; y, sobre todo, debe ser un fondo dirigido a las personas, para crear nuevos empleos verdes y formar a los trabajadores afectados por esta transición, para que puedan adquirir las competencias que necesitan para los puestos de trabajo del futuro.

Ahora toca que estos fondos se usen y se usen bien. No cometamos los errores del pasado y hagamos de esta transición una oportunidad para nuestra sociedad.

  Mathilde Androuët (ID). – Madame la Présidente, intégré au pacte vert pour l’Europe, le Fonds pour une transition juste vise à soutenir la neutralité climatique en évitant les catastrophes sociales liées à la transition énergétique dans les régions les plus émettrices de CO2, surtout celles qui exploitent le charbon.

La France étant une des économies les plus décarbonées de l’Union européenne grâce au nucléaire, le nombre de projets éligibles au Fonds de transition juste sera probablement très limité en France. Ceci aggravera notre statut de contributeur net et contribuera encore à enfoncer la politique énergétique européenne dans ses incohérences et constituera potentiellement une injustice. En effet, comment allez-vous expliquer à des ouvriers de Haute-Silésie ou de Picardie que vous encouragez la désindustrialisation en fermant leurs usines polluantes, en lieu et place desquelles vous planterez des mâts d’éoliennes? Vous risquez de perdre la bataille économique et sociale en les privant de travail, et vous enlaidirez leur environnement, sans apporter de véritable solution durable, l’éolien étant certainement l’une des plus vastes arnaques énergétiques et écologiques.

La réglementation européenne interdit le financement du nucléaire, qui aurait pourtant pu être l’un des atouts sur le chemin de la neutralité climatique. Les États se retrouvent largement délaissés face à l’objectif colossal d’une économie décarbonée, que le Fonds pour une transition juste parviendra difficilement à soutenir.

De plus, quelle garantie avons-nous que l’usage de ce Fonds n’empiétera pas sur l’allocation des autres fonds comme le FEDER ou le FSE? La complémentarité entre les fonds de la politique de cohésion et le Fonds pour une transition juste pose question.

Après le départ du Royaume-Uni, contributeur net, et après la crise de la COVID qui plombe tous les budgets européens, forcer l’orientation des économies européennes à la neutralité climatique, en imaginant de maigres palliatifs au chômage plutôt que de vraies solutions écologiques et économiques, ne semble pas durable.

  François Alfonsi (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, le Fonds de transition juste, sur lequel nous allons voter durant cette session, répond à une demande ancienne de notre groupe pour favoriser la transition énergétique et aller vers une société bas carbone, y compris dans des territoires jusqu’ici caractérisés par une forte dépendance aux énergies fossiles.

Ce Fonds favorise une approche stratégique régionale pour l’Europe, en se concentrant sur les régions les plus en difficulté face aux objectifs de la lutte contre le réchauffement climatique. Le règlement final n’a pas oublié, parmi les territoires lourdement carbonés, la situation des îles de l’Union européenne, tant les régions ultrapériphériques que les autres îles plus proches du continent. C’est une problématique que nous avons régulièrement soulevée avec l’intergroupe SEARICA, et qui trouve une réelle prise en compte dans l’article 6 du règlement finalement issu des trilogues.

Avec un montant presque triplé grâce à la contribution du plan de relance adopté à la suite de la crise sanitaire, le Fonds de transition juste permettra de contribuer aux objectifs de limitation des émissions de gaz à effet de serre par l’Europe, particulièrement dans les territoires où la transition énergétique est la plus difficile.

  Anna Zalewska (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! W czerwcu na sesji głosujemy ostatecznie nad prawem klimatycznym, które mówi po pierwsze, że zapewnimy zeroemisyjność do 2050 r. na poziomie Unii Europejskiej. W prawie klimatycznym mówimy o solidarności, współodpowiedzialności i o tym, że każdy region będzie traktowany indywidualnie. Fundusz na rzecz Sprawiedliwej Transformacji jest pierwszym sprawdzianem tego, w jaki sposób będziemy wdrażać prawo klimatyczne. I niestety muszę Państwu powiedzieć, że Fundusz na rzecz Sprawiedliwej Transformacji wyklucza wiele regionów Polski. Komisja upiera się. Nie chce zaakceptować negocjacji i dyskusji między innymi nad dużym kompleksem dającym 80 tys. miejsc pracy w Turowie. Nie tylko nie chce zaakceptować planów i harmonogramów, ale również wspólnie z wieloma parlamentarzystami skutecznie upowszechnia nieprawdę na temat tego kompleksu. Fundusz na rzecz Sprawiedliwej Transformacji ma być tym, jak jest definiowany. Niech Turów będzie tego przykładem.

  Younous Omarjee (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, je veux tout d’abord saluer chaleureusement le rapporteur Manolis Kefalogiannis et l’ensemble des groupes politiques pour les efforts accomplis pour parvenir à ce résultat, que beaucoup considéraient comme impossible au départ. Et pourtant, nous avons su trouver une unité au sein de notre commission sur des positions qui, à l’origine, étaient très clivantes dans ce Parlement européen et que nous avons su dépasser en bonne intelligence et en responsabilité, avec l’appui précieux de la commissaire Ferreira, que je veux également remercier.

Le résultat est que nous aurons 17,5 milliards d’euros investis dans les régions les plus dépendantes des énergies fossiles pour la transition énergétique. Surtout, aucune énergie fossile comme le gaz ou le nucléaire ne sera finançable via ce Fonds.

Pour terminer, je veux dire que c’est un vrai succès politique pour notre commission du développement régional et, comme vous l’avez dit, Monsieur le Commissaire, nous plaçons la cohésion...

(La Présidente retire la parole à l’orateur)

  Salvatore De Meo (PPE). – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, come è stato detto, il Fondo per una transizione giusta è uno strumento fondamentale per il raggiungimento degli obiettivi climatici che ci siamo posti ma è anche uno dei mezzi che l'Europa mette a disposizione dei suoi cittadini per riprendersi e per ripartire, dopo le disastrose conseguenze economiche della pandemia.

Nel testo ci sono alcuni elementi che io considero imprescindibili per costruire un futuro economicamente sostenibile: garantire l'occupazione, l'indipendenza energetica e la sicurezza nell'approvvigionamento alimentare.

Una transizione rappresenta il passaggio graduale da una condizione a un'altra; una transizione giusta significa che si vuole garantire un passaggio senza traumi, accompagnando tutti verso gli obiettivi che ci siamo dati.

È stato detto: non bisogna lasciare nessuno indietro. Ed è per questo che io credo che bisogna rivolgere la massima attenzione ai giovani e alle donne, che ancora una volta sono stati i più colpiti dall'emergenza lavoro, così come bisogna aiutare le piccole e medie imprese che costituiscono la spina dorsale di moltissime parti della nostra Unione e che hanno subito più di altre la pandemia e non possono sopportare ulteriori costi.

Infine, desidero sottolineare la necessità di intervenire a favore delle aree rurali, affinché anch'esse, come le aree urbane, vengano interessate in maniera omogenea dalla transizione e di superare quella disparità economica che ha purtroppo contraddistinto l'Unione.

  Tonino Picula (S&D). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, gospodine povjereniče, podržavam Fond za pravednu tranziciju jer treba dati potporu klimatskoj neutralnosti područjima najviše pogođenim tranzicijom. Tako možemo spriječiti daljnje povećanje regionalnih razlika.

Tranzicija prema klimatskoj neutralnosti može biti pravedna samo ako je uključiva i stavlja poseban naglasak na tri dimenzije: gospodarsku koheziju s održivim rastom i zelenim radnim mjestima poštujući pritom potrebe različitih sektora, socijalnu koheziju s pravednom tranzicijom, socijalnom pravednošću, razumijevanjem energetskog siromaštva i posebnih potreba i teritorijalnu koheziju s razumijevanjem različitih potreba regija Europske unije, posebno otočnih regija.

Pozdravljam kompromis kojim su naglašene posebne potrebe otoka u ovom procesu. Pozivam zemlje članice da odrede dovoljno sredstava baš za pravednu tranziciju otoka.

Ovaj instrument bit će jedan od ključnih elemenata za ostvarivanje našeg cilja klimatski neutralne Europe do 2050. Čestitam kolegama na dogovor o isplati na temelju ostvarenih rezultata i mehanizmu za nagrađivanje zelenih projekata kao i uključivanju socijalnih i kulturnih projekata.

  Vlad-Marius Botoş (Renew). – Doamnă președintă, Green Deal, direcția ecologică a politicii Uniunii Europene este printre cele mai bune decizii luate la nivel european în ultimii ani, pentru că nu doar natura are nevoie de schimbarea radicală pe care acest pact o va aduce, ci mai ales noi, oamenii.

Trebuie să recunoaștem că există, în Europa, regiuni extrem de poluate, care au un impact deosebit asupra sănătății și vieții celor care muncesc și trăiesc în aceste zone. Aici vorbesc îndeosebi despre regiunile unde extragerea cărbunelui este activitatea economică principală.

Aceste zone, precum Valea Jiului din țara mea, din România, sunt cele care vor avea nevoie de cel mai mare ajutor din partea Uniunii Europene, pentru că activitatea economică trebuie să se îndrepte într-o cu totul altă direcție. Economia locală va trebui să găsească alte domenii de activitate, dar mai ales oamenii vor avea nevoie de sprijin serios pentru a se recalifica, pentru a începe o nouă meserie, o nouă carieră.

Fondul pentru o tranziție justă este o necesitate pentru ca aceste regiuni să se poată adapta politicii ecologice, pentru ca această tranziție să nu fie o povară tocmai (președinta a întrerupt vorbitorul) asupra celor care au mai mare nevoie de ele, minerii din minele de cărbuni.

  Elena Lizzi (ID). – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, sono stata relatrice ombra del gruppo ID per la commissione AGRI su questo fascicolo. Noi riteniamo che il Fondo per la transizione giusta sia uno strumento che, se usato in maniera intelligente, potrà portare seri benefici all'Europa.

Osserviamo però che la distribuzione dei finanziamenti del Fondo per una transizione giusta è iniqua, perché favorisce i paesi che fino a ora non si sono preoccupati dalla transizione climatica e hanno continuato a produrre carbonio e carbone, a discapito dei paesi più virtuosi.

Riteniamo pertanto che vada a penalizzare chi, come l'Italia, si è impegnato per raggiungere il mix energetico, ottemperando agli obiettivi e che, purtroppo, avrà solo una parte marginale di queste somme. Anche l'introduzione del Meccanismo di ricompensa verde sfavorisce l'Italia e premia chi è stato negligente negli anni.

Serviva un approccio meno idealistico e più pragmatico al tema ambientale, poiché è necessario considerare tutte le alternative per un raggiungimento graduale e progressivo degli obiettivi.

  Bogdan Rzońca (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Fundusz na rzecz Sprawiedliwej Transformacji jest ważnym narzędziem transformacji energetycznej – to oczywiste. Koszty tej transformacji będą jednak bardzo dokuczliwe – dla państw, dla firm, dla pracowników. I o tym musimy pamiętać.

Trzeba pamiętać, że biedniejsze, postkomunistyczne kraje będą miały bardzo kosztowną, długą i drogą drogę do transformacji energetycznej. Ktoś za to będzie musiał zapłacić. Koszty tej transformacji to jest utrata miejsc pracy, to jest bezrobocie, to jest pomoc społeczna. Musimy o tym pamiętać.

Mam wrażenie, że techniczni eksperci tego problemu nie widzą i to jest ogromny błąd. Techniczni eksperci stawiają szlachetne cele, ale nie widzą problemów społecznych. Musimy to podnieść jako politycy i zadbać o to, żeby nie było wykluczenia społecznego z tego tytułu.

Polska w ostatnich pięciu latach zadedykowała ponad czterdzieści procent więcej środków na ochronę środowiska niż w poprzednich latach. Mamy więc bardzo dużo wydatków, a transformacja energetyczna Polski to jest 240 mld EUR przy czterech (słowa niedosłyszalne) sprawiedliwej transformacji.

  Πέτρος Κόκκαλης (The Left). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κυρία Επίτροπε, το Ταμείο Δίκαιης Μετάβασης είναι ένα κρίσιμο εργαλείο για την απολιγνιτοποίηση των περιφερειών οι οποίες θυσιάστηκαν στον βωμό της οικονομικής ανάπτυξης και του εξηλεκτρισμού της Ευρώπης, με ανυπολόγιστες συνέπειες για το περιβάλλον και την υγεία των κατοίκων τους. Η αντικατάσταση της μονοκαλλιέργειας του άνθρακα με τη σύγχρονη παραγωγική ανασυγκρότηση των περιφερειών αυτών είναι το ελάχιστο που οφείλουμε στις γενιές των Ευρωπαίων, στις πλάτες των οποίων οικοδομήθηκε το ευρωπαϊκό όραμα.

Το αποτέλεσμα του τριλόγου μας ικανοποιεί αρχικά, γιατί αφήνει εκτός χρηματοδότησης το ορυκτό αέριο. Είναι μια μάχη που δώσαμε ως Ευρωπαϊκή Αριστερά και που κερδήθηκε. Θεωρούμε κρίσιμο τα χωρικά σχέδια μετάβασης να έχουν επίκεντρο τις τοπικές κοινωνίες και να μην περιοριστούν σε χρηματοδότηση μεγάλων επενδυτικών σχεδίων που δεν θα φέρουν προστιθέμενη αξία στις ελληνικές περιοχές. Ο Μηχανισμός Δίκαιης Μετάβασης αποτελεί πυξίδα για το σύνολο των πολιτικών δημοσίων επενδύσεων στον δρόμο για την κλιματική ουδετερότητα. Οφείλουμε να εξασφαλίσουμε ότι η πράσινη μετάβαση πραγματικά δεν θα αφήσει κανέναν πίσω, ότι δεν θα θέσει εργασιακά κεκτημένα σε κίνδυνο, αλλά θα δημιουργήσει συνθήκες συλλογικής ευημερίας και δεν θα δημιουργήσει νέες κοινωνικές και οικονομικές ανισότητες, αλλά θα θεραπεύσει τις υπάρχουσες και θα μας πάει όλους μαζί μπροστά.

  Λευτέρης Χριστοφόρου (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, σήμερα όλοι μας εδώ από το Ευρωκοινοβούλιο οφείλουμε να αποδώσουμε τα εύσημα και να απονείμουμε δίκαιο έπαινο στον αγαπητό συνάδελφο, τον Μανώλη Κεφαλογιάννη, για τη σκληρή μεθοδική δουλειά του. Χωρίς τη δική του τεράστια συμβολή σήμερα δεν θα μιλούσαμε γι’ αυτό το σημαντικό μέσο για τους πολίτες, για τις οικονομίες και για τις χώρες μας, το Ταμείο Δίκαιης Μετάβασης. Ουσιαστικά σήμερα είναι μια ιστορική μέρα για το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο. Είναι μια ιστορική μέρα γιατί ανάβουμε πράσινο φως για την πράσινη μετάβαση, για την πράσινη συμφωνία, για την πράσινη μετεξέλιξη της Ευρώπης.

Αυτή η Ευρώπη που πολλοί τη λοιδορούν είναι η μοναδική που χωρίς τυμπανοκρουσίες, χωρίς κούφια λόγια, χωρίς συνθήματα κάνει πράξη το όραμα πολλών γενεών ολόκληρου του πλανήτη και μεταβαίνει σε μια πράσινη Ευρώπη. Θέλω να τονίσω στον υπερθετικό βαθμό ότι το Ταμείο Δίκαιης Μετάβασης είναι αυτό που ουσιαστικά θα στηρίξει όλους εκείνους οι οποίοι θα υποστούν οποιεσδήποτε επιπτώσεις από αυτή τη μετάβαση. Πρόκειται για ένα ταμείο κοινωνικής κατεύθυνσης που αναδεικνύει και την κοινωνική Ευρώπη. Όπως ελέχθη, πρέπει να στηριχθούν και οι νησιωτικές περιοχές.

Η δική μου χώρα, η Κύπρος, είναι το νησί που μπορεί να μετατραπεί σε πράσινο νησί, κύριε Επίτροπε, κι αυτό το πρότεινα με πρόταση που απέστειλα στην Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή, και μπορούμε να την καταστήσουμε πράσινο νησί γιατί έχει συγκριτικά πλεονεκτήματα, γιατί μπορεί να έχει ανανεώσιμες πηγές ενέργειας και μπορεί να αξιοποιήσει τις δυνατότητες του Ταμείου Δίκαιης Μετάβασης.

  Cristina Maestre Martín de Almagro (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, señorías, en la voluntad de avanzar hacia una economía coherente con el cumplimiento de los objetivos climáticos de la Unión, no se podía cometer el error de obviar el enorme esfuerzo que se tendrá que hacer para conseguirlo: los territorios más afectados por su dependencia de los combustibles fósiles deben transitar hacia ese nuevo modelo con todo el apoyo y la garantía de que efectivamente sea una transición realmente justa, sin que pase por encima de la realidad económica y social de las sociedades que participan en este gran cambio.

Tampoco puede obviarse a aquellos que, ya incluso antes de tener este fondo sobre la mesa, han hecho un enorme esfuerzo previo para hacerlo posible; el Fondo de Transición Justa garantiza ese necesario apoyo que tendrán a su disposición pymes, microempresas, trabajadores, investigadores, sectores del conocimiento y también administraciones de proximidad. Se abren innumerables oportunidades a las nuevas inversiones productivas ligadas a la eficiencia energética, la digitalización, la innovación, la movilidad inteligente y otros nuevos sectores energéticos más sostenibles, y, en definitiva, las nuevas formas de producción y crecimiento que promueven una economía comprometida con el futuro del planeta y las generaciones futuras. Es un fondo verde, pero social.

  Maximilian Krah (ID). – Frau Präsidentin, meine Damen und Herren Kollegen! Der heutige Fonds ist der Versuch, die ersichtlichen Probleme, die der Ausstieg aus dem Kohlendioxid für die Europäische Union bringen wird, einigermaßen in den Griff zu bekommen. Es geht darum, den Regionen, die besonders leiden werden – und das sind sehr viele –, etwas zu geben in der Hoffnung, dass der Einbruch nicht zu schwer wird.

Aber es ist nicht zu erwarten, dass es keinen Einbruch geben wird. Und die Debatten, die wir hier führen, sind eben Eliten-Debatten, denn wir müssen uns darauf einstellen, dass insbesondere die Mittelschicht, die Arbeitnehmer in den nächsten Jahren ärmer werden. Sie werden deshalb ärmer, weil wir uns vornehmen, mit staatlicher Direktive und einem planwirtschaftlichen Modell das Wetter in 100 Jahren zu retten. Ich glaube nicht, dass die Mittel des Just Transition Fund die Enttäuschung derjenigen, die das letztlich bezahlen werden, aufheben werden.

  Hannes Heide (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar! Mit dem Just Transition Fund setzen wir einen wirklich spürbaren Schritt zu einem klimaneutralen Europa. Dieser Fonds für einen gerechten Übergang ist deshalb so herausragend, weil er Industrien und ihren Beschäftigten zugutekommen wird, genauso aber auch die gesamten sozialen Strukturen in den betroffenen Regionen Europas unterstützt. Investiert werden kann in kommunale und soziale Projekte wie Einrichtungen in der Altenbetreuung und Altenpflege, in energieeffizienten sozialen Wohnbau oder in Mobilitätslösungen und nachhaltigen öffentlichen Verkehr. Der Bau eines Kindergartens wird dabei genauso möglich sein wie die Förderung von Kultur und nachhaltigen Tourismusprojekten.

Die 17,5 Milliarden Euro des Fonds sind nur ein Anfang, die Europäische Union muss mehr Geld in die Hand nehmen. Die Zahl jener Regionen, in denen Mittel aus dem Fonds zur Verfügung stehen, muss größer werden. Keine Bürgerin, kein Bürger, keine Region Europas darf benachteiligt oder zurückgelassen werden.

  Josianne Cutajar (S&D). – Sinjura President, Sur Kummissarju, kollegi, Fond għal Tranżizzjoni Ġusta li jippermetti lill-Istati Membri kollha jindirizzaw il-konsegwenzi soċjali tad-dekarbonizzazzjoni tal-ekonomija tagħna huwa dak li neħtieġu biex nevitaw li l-aktar ħaddiema u reġjuni vulnerabbli jħallsu prezz proporzjonat għall-ġlieda urġenti kontra t-tibdil fil-klima.

L-opportunitajiet li ser joffri dan il-Fond huma ħafna, mit-titjib tal-ħiliet u t-taħriġ mill-ġdid fuq il-post tax-xogħol, għall-investiment biex tiġi appoġġjata l-mobbiltà intelliġenti u jinħolqu impjiegi ġodda. Napprezza r-rwol ta' dan il-Fond fit-tisħiħ tal-koeżjoni ekonomika, soċjali u territorjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea. L-aktar żoni periferali tal-kontinent tagħna, inkluż il-gżejjer, għandhom ikunu fiċ-ċentru tat-tranżizzjoni ambjentali.

Il-Fond huwa l-ewwel pass pożittiv. Iżda fadal ħafna xi jsir biex dan il-proċess isir verament inklużiv u ġust, u b'mod effettiv.

  Vera Tax (S&D). – Voorzitter, we zien in mijn regio nog steeds de negatieve gevolgen van de sluiting van de kolenmijnen in de jaren zestig van de vorige eeuw. Anno 2021 weten we dat het sluiten van de gasproductie in de regio Groningen zal leiden tot een verlies van 20 000 banen.

De oplossing is helder: we moeten investeren in nieuwe, schone energieproductie en daarmee in nieuwe banen. Met investeringen in nieuwe technologieën hebben we echter niet meteen mensen die kunnen werken in de banen van de toekomst. Dat heeft het voorbeeld van de jaren zestig ons geleerd en dat mogen we nooit meer vergeten.

Het is dus van groot belang om te investeren in de mensen die nu in de energiesector werken, en met name in de bijscholing, omscholing en begeleiding van deze mensen om ze klaar te stomen voor de banen van de toekomst.

Dit is precies wat we met het Fonds voor een rechtvaardige transitie doen en dat is een goede zaak. EU-regio’s ontvangen geld dat zij kunnen investeren in de mensen en banen van de toekomst.

  Manuel Pizarro (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, ao votarmos um Fundo para a Transição Justa, assumimos que os objetivos do Pacto Ecológico Europeu só podem ser alcançados se preservarmos a coesão social e se protegermos os que possam ser atingidos.

A empresa petrolífera portuguesa Galp anunciou recentemente o encerramento da sua refinaria em Matosinhos, junto do Porto. O encerramento é justificado com razões ambientais, mas vai aumentar muito o lucro da empresa e provocar o despedimento de centenas de trabalhadores.

É urgente desenvolver em toda aquela vasta área um projeto económico inovador e ambientalmente sustentável e apoiar a reconversão profissional dos trabalhadores. Esse trabalho pode e deve ter o apoio deste fundo. Mas, cuidado. Ao mesmo tempo é imperioso evitar abusos, para que a empresa não fuja às suas responsabilidades com os trabalhadores e com a descontaminação dos terrenos.

A União fica dotada de um novo instrumento para promover a justiça social. Saibamos levá-lo até às pessoas e comunidades que dela necessitam.

  Nicolas Schmit, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I want first to thank all the speakers because I noticed that there is a very large consensus that this transition fund really is an important tool to overcome difficult processes, because we are engaged in a great transformation of our economies that affects certain regions more than others. I think this is a tool of solidarity, this is a tool for transformation and this is a tool also for social justice.

I think we all have in mind that in the past there have been already transformations and restructurings in regions but that these have not always been handled in a fair and just way, that we had a lot of losers in these regions. This should not be the case this time and it’s right, as many speakers have pointed out, that we will be successful in combating climate change, successful on the transition, if we do not leave anybody behind, if we really are able to enhance these important transitions. I think social problems and climate problems, environmental problems, are very much linked and therefore thank you again very much for the support, and now it’s time for implementing.

A last remark. The amount of money was mentioned but this was before the decision on the recovery and resilience, because fundings have to work together, and the ESF, the European Social Fund, also has to be a complementary instrument to the Just Transition Fund, and the recovery and resilience facilities in the national plans – and by the way, 37% has to be dedicated to greening the economy – also have to go together with the implementation of the transition fund.

  Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet am Dienstag, 18. Mai 2021, statt.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 171)

  Daniel Buda (PPE), în scris. – Uniunea Europeană speră să devină, până în 2050, primul bloc comunitar neutru din punct de vedere climatic. Pactul Ecologic Verde cuprinde un set ambițios de măsuri menit să permită cetățenilor și întreprinderilor să realizeze tranziția către o economie verde și durabilă.

În acest context, Fondul pentru o tranziție justă reprezintă un instrument cheie în sprijinirea statele și regiunilor care se află în situații dificile pentru a reuși atingerea obiectivelor climatice. Principalele țări beneficiare sunt cele care au un sistem energetic bazat pe combustibili fosili și unde este nevoie de investiții mari pentru a ajunge la o economie neutră din punct de vedere al emisiilor de carbon.

Pachetul include 7,5 miliarde euro din cadrul financiar multianual 2021-2027 și 10 miliarde euro din Instrumentul de redresare. Prin acești bani, vom reuși să creăm noi locuri de muncă, mai prietenoase cu mediul, dar și protejarea celor existente. Este imperios necesar să fim solidari cu regiunile cele mai afectate din Europa.

În România, cele 1,95 de miliarde de euro din acest Fond vor fi folosiți pentru a ajuta locuitorii din regiunile miniere în tranziția energetică. Prin Fondul de tranziție justă vom reuși să creăm o Europă mai verde și să evităm adâncirea disparităților regionale.

  Andrea Caroppo (PPE), per iscritto. – Va certamente sostenuto il Fondo per una transizione giusta pensato per aiutare i Paesi UE a fronteggiare l'impatto sociale ed economico della transizione verso un'economia a emissioni zero e il passaggio a tecnologie meno inquinanti.

In questo percorso, peraltro, il governo italiano ha identificato due aree, Taranto e il Sulcis-Iglesiente, che rientrano tra quelle più danneggiate dagli effetti economici e sociali della transizione per le perdite occupazionali legate alla produzione di combustibili fossili e alla trasformazione degli impianti industriali con maggiore intensità di gas a effetto serra. Così come non vi è alcun dubbio in ordine alla rilevanza, sul livello europeo ancor prima che nazionale, dell'industria siderurgica localizzata in quei siti.

Tuttavia il precedente governo italiano non ha colto la disponibilità della Commissione UE (v. risposta del 26.3.2020 all'interrogazione P-001211/2020) a valutare l'inserimento nel piano anche dell'area industriale di Brindisi. Essa, infatti, risponde ai medesimi criteri e requisiti previsti dalla Commissione per partecipare agli investimenti del just transition fund, ovvero quantità di CO2 emessa dal settore industriale, uso fonti fossili e impatto della transizione energetica sull'occupazione del territorio.

L'area di Brindisi merita, però, quantomeno di essere considerata territorio eleggibile, quand'anche da ammettersi a una successiva fase di finanziamento.

  Robert Hajšel (S&D), písomne. – Schválením vytvorenia Fondu pre spravodlivú transformáciu dávame konečne nášmu prechodu na zelenšiu ekonomiku a boju s klimatickými zmenami aj sociálny rozmer, keďže v tejto náročnej transformácii nemôžeme nikoho nechať bokom, ale finančnú podporu musia dostať aj ľudia a regióny, ktoré budú negatívnymi dôsledkami transformácie najviac postihnuté. Konečné schválenie potrebnej legislatívy je pre mňa veľkým zadosťučinením, keďže som na nej pracoval ako tieňový spravodajca vo Výbore pre energetiku a priemysel. Som rád, že sa podarilo schváliť nielen odmeňovanie tých štátov, ktoré budú najrýchlejšie a najefektívnejšie napredovať v dekarbonizácii, ale aj moju požiadavku, aby sa na aktivity tohto fondu nemíňali peniaze z tradičných štrukturálnych fondov, ktoré by potom chýbali v iných, menej rozvinutých regiónoch, t. j. aby peniaze, ktoré dostane Horná Nitra, nechýbali napríklad Banskobystrickému kraju. Teší ma, že peniaze pôjdu nielen do podpory malých a stredných podnikov, ale že všetky investície musia poviesť k tvorbe pracovných miest a podpora pôjde aj seniorom a deťom v najviac postihnutých regiónoch.

  Elżbieta Kruk (ECR), na piśmie. – Fundusz na rzecz Sprawiedliwej Transformacji jest jednym z kluczowych elementów na rzecz zielonej transformacji w wymiarze zarówno energetycznym, jak i społecznym. Jest to fundusz dedykowany przede wszystkim dla sektorów i społeczeństw nierozerwalnie związanych z przemysłem górniczym, który ma rekompensować trudności i umożliwić tworzenie alternatywnych perspektyw zawodowych dla poszkodowanych nową polityką klimatyczną. Czy jednak jest to realnie możliwe, biorąc pod uwagę skalę i nierozsądne tempo tych zmian? Wedle wszelkich racjonalnych przesłanek Polska mogłaby faktycznie osiągnąć sprawiedliwą transformację do roku 2070. Przyznaję, że aktualny tekst dokumentu przedłożony pod głosowanie podczas obecnej sesji plenarnej został znacząco poprawiony względem wcześniejszych propozycji. Zakłada on, że pomimo wykluczenia możliwości inwestowania w infrastrukturę opartą na gazie ziemnym w ramach Funduszu, pakietowo przewidziano taką możliwość w przypadku EFRR/FS. Technologia oparta na gazie ziemnym jest absolutnie niezbędna dla państw takich jak Polska, które są silnie związane z węglem. Obawiam się jednak, że wsparcie finansowe przewidziane w ramach Funduszu w obecnej formule mało przystaje do realiów i jest zdecydowanie niewystarczające do przeprowadzenia tych drastycznych zmian, bez znaczącej szkody dla społeczeństw. Uważam więc za wielce szkodliwe forsowanie przepisów, które potencjalnie mogą dalej ograniczyć te środki.

  Alin Mituța (Renew), în scris. – Industria carboniferă a fost principala forță a majorității activităților economice din județe precum Gorj sau Hunedoara, care împreună concentrează 90 % din forța de muncă românească din acest sector.

Efectele crizelor succesive - economice sau climatice -, precum și proporția mare de persoane angajate în industrii poluante din aceste județe, reclamă necesitatea unei reconversii economice integrate, susținute de pachete de măsuri sociale. Diversificarea și reconversia economică se vor putea realiza inclusiv prin Fondul de tranziție justă (FTJ). Acest nou instrument financiar în cadrul politicii de coeziune va asigura o tranziție echitabilă și realistă pentru cetățenii și lucrătorii care trăiesc în aceste regiuni. FTJ va sprijini o gamă largă de activități care vor permite investițiile în IMM-uri, cercetare, inovare, tehnologii verzi și regenerabile, mobilitate inteligentă și durabilă, incluziune socială, reconversie profesională și incluziune pe piața muncii.

Deși Parlamentul European a susținut eligibilitatea finanțării inclusiv pentru proiecte de gaze naturale, Consiliul nu a susținut, din păcate, acest lucru. Cu toate acestea, finanțarea de proiecte de gaze naturale se poate realiza în continuare prin alte fonduri structurale precum FEDR. Trebuie să ne asigurăm că trecerea către o economie verde are loc în mod echitabil, respectându-se principiul potrivit căruia „nimeni nu este lăsat în urmă”.

  Dan-Ştefan Motreanu (PPE), în scris. – Fondul pentru o tranziție justă este primul instrument al Pactului verde european care ne va permite să decarbonizăm Europa începând cu regiunile cele mai poluante, care vor trebui totodată să depună și cel mai mare efort în tranziția către o economie fără emisii de gaze cu efect de seră.

Este regretabil faptul că bugetul de 40 de miliarde de euro propus de către Comisie Europeană a fost redus la numai 17,5 miliarde în Consiliu și subliniez pe această cale importanța de a asigura în viitor finanțare suplimentară din sistemul de resurse proprii ale Uniunii, precum veniturile generate din taxa pe materialele plastice, taxarea justă a marilor giganți digitali sau resursele care vor fi generate de viitorul Mecanism de ajustare la frontieră a emisiilor.

Nu în ultimul rând, Uniunea Europeană trebuie să garanteze reconversia social economică a regiunilor vizate și asigure totodată că se vor crea un număr de locuri de muncă sustenabile cel puțin la nivelul celor care vor fi desființate odată cu închiderea minelor și a industriilor mari poluatoare.

  Mihai Tudose (S&D), în scris. – Acest fond reprezintă o încercare de sprijinire a tranziției ecologice în statele membre. Regret însă diminuarea drastică a bugetului său de către Consiliu, în raport cu propunerile Comisiei și Parlamentului. Cele 17,5 miliarde de euro convenite sunt insuficiente pentru a acoperi nevoile social-economice ale schimbării de paradigmă energetică, de aceea consider că trebuie analizată posibilitatea suplimentării bugetare în 2024, în temeiul articolului 3, alineatul (3) privind resursele și al articolului 5 privind mecanismul de recompensare verde din Regulament.

Este vital să evităm deșertificarea economică și demografică a unor bazine carbonifere cu tradiție, precum Valea Jiului în România. De aceea, solicit o atenție specială acordată atenuării impactului în țările care se bazează pe combustibili fosili. În acest sens, atrag atenția asupra riscului unei tranziții cu mai multe viteze și, drept consecință, a agravării decalajelor între regiunile UE. Este nevoie de un mecanism pentru o tranziție echitabilă dincolo de orizontul anului 2027, pentru a susține într-o manieră eficientă și sustenabilă regiunile afectate. Ar fi fost mult mai realist dacă regulamentul ar fi confirmat cererea Parlamentului European, din septembrie 2020, de recunoaștere a gazului natural ca tehnologie de tranziție în procesul de decarbonificare.

16. Impacto das normas da UE na livre circulação de trabalhadores e serviços: a mobilidade dos trabalhadores no interior da UE como ferramenta para fazer coincidir as necessidades e as competências do mercado de trabalho (debate)

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über den Bericht von Radan Kanev im Namen des Ausschusses für Beschäftigung und soziale Angelegenheiten über die Auswirkungen der EU-Vorschriften auf die Arbeitnehmerfreizügigkeit und den freien Dienstleistungsverkehr: Arbeitskräftemobilität innerhalb der EU als Instrument zur Abstimmung von Anforderungen und Kompetenzen auf dem Arbeitsmarkt (2020/2007(INI)) (A9-0066/2021).

  Радан Кънев, докладчик. – Г-жо Председател, г-н Комисар, позволете ми първо да благодаря от сърце на всички колеги, с които работихме заедно по този доклад. Вярвам, че постигнахме добър компромис и то не компромис като самоцел, а наистина като средство, като път към най-доброто решение, най-добрата препоръка, която може Парламентът да отправи към Комисията и към другите европейски институции.

Вярвам, че постигнахме една много важна цел – да разглеждаме свободната трудова мобилност, свободата на полагане на труд и на предоставяне на услуги не като проблем за Европа, а като възможност и много по-важно – като право на отделния човек, на отделния европеец. Повече от 15 години от първото източно разширение през 2004 г. мобилността на труда твърде често е разглеждана като проблем, като повод за конфликт между Изток и Запад, между богати и бедни, между работодатели и синдикати, много често между влиятелни бизнес интереси, свързани с властта в отделни национални държави членки.

И тук възниква въпросът – защо правото на гражданите се превърна в проблем? Защо нашата сила и нашата свобода се оказаха повод за конфликт? Аз ще дам един необичаен отговор. Защото забравихме основополагащата римска максима, която стои в основата на конституционната ни демокрация, че законът е оръжие на слабия, че нашата законодателна и политическа дейност не трябва и не може да отразява предизборните интереси на ловки популисти, нито интересите на големия бизнес, близък до властта в отделни държави членки, нито дори интересите на големите синдикати на национално ниво.

Напротив, политиката на трудова мобилност трябва във всеки един момент да изхожда от интереса на слабия, на малкия, на този, който има затруднения да се реализира на пазара на труда, на този, който отчаяно търси своите възможности и шансове, който търси достоен път, за да осигури препитание, развитие и бъдеще на семейството си.

Ние сме пазар от половин милиард потребители и то най-заможните потребители на света. Ние сме пазар от милиони фирми, които би трябвало да бъдат най-свободните, най-динамичните. Фирми, които не са под политически натиск, фирми, които съществуват в една общност на върховенство на правото, където законът е еднакъв за всички. Този пазар може и трябва да осигури работа на всеки. На него няма и не може да има място за отхвърлени, за трайно безработни. Не може да има място обаче и за работещи бедни, за работещи в недостойни, нездравословни или опасни условия.

Целта на този доклад е да насочим погледа на законодателя не към интересите и конфликтите на големите, а към правата на малките. Да гарантираме, че работникът е защитен както от недобросъвестни работодатели, така и от безсърдечни бюрократи, че свободният професионалист, малката фирма са защитени от нелоялна конкуренция, но и от ненужни административни прегради. И знаете ли, в хода на този доклад ние видяхме, че това не е толкова трудно, че не се изискват безкрайни нови регулации и ограничения, а стриктно спазване на съществуващите правила. Но преди всичко еднаквото им спазване и прилагане от всички европейски държави. Че най-важното е не създаването на нови институции, а сериозният ангажимент на тези, които вече имаме, да използват правомощията, които договорите вече им дават. Защото Договорът за функционирането на Европейския съюз дава споделена отговорност при упражняването на социалната политика, отговорност, която общите ни институции не обичат да използват.

Можем да говорим дълго за уроците, които научихме по време на пандемията, и аз съм сигурен, че много от колегите в този дебат ще ги припомнят. Ще се спра само на един урок, един нов урок по солидарност – урокът, че проблемът на слабите лесно се превръща в проблем на силните, че безпомощността на слабообразовани сезонни работници да се справят с административния хаос на различни правила в различните държави се отрази на цените на хранителните продукти за всички ни, че нарушаването на елементарни правила за здравословни условия на труд и живот на нископлатени мобилни работници се превърна в здравна катастрофа за цели градове и цели региони.

Моят извод от този урок е, че най-важното право на пазара на труда през 21-ви век се оказа правото на информация, правото на леснодостъпна и ясна информация за условията, правата и особено за тяхната преносимост в различните държави членки. И това трябва да е първата задача на Европейския орган по труда – да използва силата на съвременните технологии в услуга на слабите на пазара на труда.

Колеги, независимо дали ни харесва на нас, а и на нашите избиратели, пазарът на труда ще става по-гъвкав, по-динамичен, а работата и предоставянето на услуги – все по-мобилни, най-малкото в рамките на единния пазар. Моето мнение е, че това е добре, че това ще даде шанс повече европейци да се развиват, обучават, да преодоляват езикови, образователни и културни бариери. Нашата задача е да ги защитим от злоупотреби, от нарушаване на социалните им права, от нелоялна конкуренция, от бюрократичен произвол.

И вярвам, че по този начин можем в този доклад да сложим само началото на политика за постигане на ключовата цел от срещата на върха в Порто – континент без трайна безработица и бедност, единен пазар, основан на социална пазарна икономика, която дава шанс на всеки. Нов прочит на благоденствие за всеки. „Wohlstand für Alle“ – концепцията, която създаде и разви успешния европейски модел.

PŘEDSEDNICTVÍ: DITA CHARANZOVÁ
místopředsedkyně

  Morten Løkkegaard, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection. – Madam President, as rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO), we in the Committee think that there are many good points in the final report. For example, the inclusion of passages on the freedom to provide services across the Union, the freedom of workers to move around and the digitalisation of data exchanges between Member States.

I would also like to thank the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs for its cooperation in trying to incorporate as much as possible from our IMCO opinion. I know there have been some technical difficulties.

However, personally, I would also like to take this moment to underline the importance of a free and functioning internal market. There are elements in this report that suggest that a free and functioning internal market is incompatible with fair working conditions and this is, in my opinion, simply not true. Personally, I therefore cannot endorse the full report as it stands now.

  Nicolas Schmit, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, let me start by thanking the rapporteur, Mr Kanev, and the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (EMPL) for this important report on labour mobility in the European Union.

Today’s discussions are under the best auspices. During the social summit in Porto, a new commitment was made to reinforce the social dimension of the EU. The leaders of the EU institutions, Heads of State and Government, and the European social partners and civil society organisations recognise that the European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan is our way forward and endorse the new EU—level 2030 targets on employment, skills and poverty reduction.

Labour mobility is a crucial element in the action plan and is at the heart of a well-functioning single market. I agree that mobility, the freedom of services, is a fundamental freedom of the European Union; but it has to be accompanied by fair working conditions. It has to be fair, and it has to be just for everyone.

We have also seen that the freedom of mobility is not an acquis which cannot be called into question, as it has been called into question by the COVID—19 crisis, which really brings new challenges. This crisis has highlighted the importance of ensuring the free movement of workers, in particular essential workers. It has also unveiled the harsh reality of strained working and living conditions, especially of seasonal workers.

The Commission has been working to ensure that the measures to mitigate the health emergency are non-discriminatory and proportionate. In March 2020, we issued guidance to safeguard the free movement of critical workers. In July, we presented guidelines on seasonal workers in order to stress the rights of seasonal workers, including information and social security, and to ensure decent working and living conditions by addressing occupational safety and health, accommodation and transport.

The posting of workers is another important element of free movement, as you have also highlighted in your reports. The revised Posted Workers Directive ensures a level playing field between local companies and those providing their services across borders. That is why the Posted Workers Directive is so essential in the context of the internal market. It guarantees a core set of equal rights for posted workers and local workers, for instance as regards minimum rates of pay, conditions of accommodation, and hiring through temporary work agencies. We are monitoring closely how this directive has been transposed into national legislation.

The modernisation of the social security coordination rules will also contribute to facilitating free movement and protecting the rights of mobile citizens. In this context, I also hope that, with your support, the co—legislators will find an agreement on the revised rules proposed by the previous Commission.

Looking ahead, in 2022 we will examine the working conditions of posted workers in subcontracting chains and others working across borders, including third—country nationals. This is a request the Parliament has put forward in resolutions and that I am keen to follow up. We need to protect and enhance mobile workers’ rights, while ensuring fair mobility based on a level playing field and the responsiveness of labour markets.

A key novelty is the establishment of the European Labour Authority (ELA). Still in its build-up phase, results are already tangible with better access to information and inspections. ELA is launching an action plan on seasonal workers within an awareness—raising campaign informing seasonal workers about their rights.

Labour mobility is one way of matching labour market needs and skills. The EURES network, an online platform connecting public employment services, employers and job seekers, is at the centre of the European labour market.

At the same time, we also have to make sure people can develop the skills that are needed in their regions. This is a precondition for a fair and resilient recovery and successful green and digital transitions. The European Skills Agenda sets out concrete actions to empower individuals to learn, including the upcoming initiatives on individual learning accounts. With the Pact for Skills, we are engaging public and private organisations to join forces to upskill and reskill people in Europe, and this paves the way to reaching the target of at least 60% of adults participating in training every year by 2030.

I welcome your resolution and this debate. We are striving to achieve the same goal: ensuring that the rights of mobile workers are protected and EU rules are enforced, and that a fair mobility is safe.

  Cindy Franssen, namens de PPE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, commissaris, de coronacrisis heeft meer dan ooit de sociale limieten getoond van de huidige interne markt voor 1 miljoen seizoensarbeiders, 1,5 miljoen grensarbeiders en 1,9 miljoen gedetacheerde werknemers. Aan het begin van de pandemie werden binnengrenzen plots gesloten en werden werknemers aan hun lot overgelaten. Schrijnende verhalen gingen Europa rond van werknemers die tussen de mazen van het socialezekerheidsstelsel vielen, tussen hun werkland en hun thuisland. Werknemers werd de toegang tot hun werkplek ontzegd en anderen bleven geïsoleerd in het buitenland achter zonder toegang tot sociale zekerheid. Besmette werknemers werden hun werkland uitgezet en bleken in hun thuisland niet verzekerd voor ziektekosten. Dit is onaanvaardbaar. Laat de huidige coronacrisis dan ook de ultieme waarschuwing zijn voor de sterke sociale bescherming van alle werknemers in Europa.

Europa heeft behoefte aan coördinatie op het gebied van sociale zekerheid zonder rancunes. Het is dan ook onbegrijpelijk dat de onderhandelingen muurvast zitten. Vrij verkeer van werknemers mag niet langer een vrijgeleide zijn voor sociale dumping. Er moet een einde worden gemaakt aan deze wanpraktijken. Onze werknemers verdienen beter en dit verslag is een goede start.

  Alicia Homs Ginel, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, comisario Schmit, en primer lugar, quiero agradecer al ponente, el señor Kanev, su trabajo en este informe. Cuando los grupos cooperan y trabajan —aun con sus diferencias— en una misma dirección, alcanzar un buen texto es mucho más sencillo. Y este informe es buena prueba de ello.

Con el informe de propia iniciativa que debatimos hoy, estamos dando un paso adelante y estamos avanzando hacia una movilidad laboral más libre, más justa y más segura. En esta Europa en la que casi un 4 % de sus ciudadanos y ciudadanas reside en otro país de la Unión Europea y en la que cada vez hay más trabajadores móviles y desplazados, no podemos permitir que el mercado único se utilice como pretexto para socavar los derechos y para perpetuar condiciones de trabajo precarias.

La Unión Europea debe redoblar sus esfuerzos y abordar de lleno temas tan importantes como la seguridad y la salud en el trabajo, el refuerzo del diálogo social, y la inversión empresarial en la formación formal e informal y el aprendizaje permanente. Y, por supuesto, debe terminar con las formas intolerables, las prácticas abusivas ligadas a la subcontratación, al empleo a través de agencias de trabajo temporal y las sociedades pantalla.

También debemos crear un marco legal para regular el teletrabajo, para asegurar condiciones de trabajo dignas. Y en cuanto a la Autoridad Laboral Europea, debemos asegurar que tenga un poder de inspección real en casos transfronterizos para terminar con el fraude, la explotación y los abusos en la Unión Europea.

En definitiva, solo acometiendo reformas en estos elementos que son clave podremos garantizar verdaderamente la igualdad de trato en el mercado interior, al tiempo que salvaguardamos el respeto de los derechos fundamentales y los modelos nacionales de mercado laboral.

  Marie-Pierre Vedrenne, au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, Monsieur le rapporteur, si ce rapport ne devait avoir qu’un seul message, ce serait que la mobilité des travailleurs doit faire partie de notre programme social.

Aujourd’hui, le constat est clair: nous sommes dans un marché unique, mais la liberté de circulation des travailleurs ne rime toujours pas avec portabilité des droits, reconnaissance des diplômes et des compétences, ni lutte contre le dumping social.

Aujourd’hui, la crise pandémique avec des restrictions sur nos déplacements démontre que la mobilité des travailleurs nous est essentielle. Nous devons être les défenseurs et les promoteurs de la mobilité et de la libre circulation dans l’Union européenne, mais pas de n’importe quelle mobilité: une mobilité encadrée et fondée sur la concurrence équitable.

Avec ce rapport, des pistes concrètes sont proposées. La nouvelle autorité européenne du travail doit disposer d’un mandat clair pour veiller à la mise en œuvre des législations européennes relatives à la liberté de circulation. Donnons-lui un pouvoir de mener des inspections de sa propre initiative, notamment dans les cas transfrontaliers.

Après la réforme du détachement des travailleurs, nous avons besoin d’un acte II. Créons un cadre européen pour lutter contre la concurrence déloyale. Au même endroit, travail égal et salaire égal doivent aller de pair avec coût du travail égal.

Enfin, nous avons besoin d’un numéro unique européen et numérique de sécurité sociale, pour faciliter la mobilité et assurer ainsi la portabilité de tous les droits de tous les travailleurs.

  France Jamet, au nom du groupe ID. – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, vous essayez encore, droite et gauche confondues, de nous faire accroire que la libre circulation des travailleurs détachés et des migrants profiterait à tous et c’est un mensonge éhonté.

L’ultralibéralisme ne fonctionne pas, mais il faut plus d’ultralibéralisme. C’est une logique implacable et absurde, un choix idéologique entraînant baisse des salaires et effondrement social des travailleurs, mais que vous appliquez systématiquement au détriment de l’enracinement et de l’intérêt des peuples et des nations.

Nous refusons le dogme euro-mondialiste. Ce que vous qualifiez, Monsieur Kanev, de marché du travail de plus en plus souple et dynamique n’est rien d’autre qu’un marché d’employés nomades, interchangeables et jetables.

Le projet que nous portons est celui du patriotisme économique et du localisme. Notre projet ne concerne pas seulement les biens et les services, mais aussi la liberté d’hommes et de femmes qui doivent pouvoir faire le choix de travailler dans le cadre sain et stable de leur pays. C’est tout le sens de la proposition de résolution alternative déposée par notre groupe, qui place au centre de son projet le droit des États à privilégier l’emploi de leurs propres citoyens.

  Sara Matthieu, namens de Verts/ALE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, iedereen die graag vlot door Europa reist kent de voordelen van het vrije verkeer van personen. Files aan de grensposten van Italië of Frankrijk zijn allang verleden tijd. Ook werknemers die de grens oversteken om in een andere lidstaat te gaan werken, maken gebruik van deze voordelen. Zo ook in mijn regio, in Vlaanderen, waar steeds meer werknemers uit andere lidstaten werken. Zij werken in cruciale sectoren, zoals de zorg, de landbouw of de logistiek. De huidige pandemie heeft het voor ons nog duidelijker gemaakt hoe belangrijk deze mensen zijn. Zonder hen hebben we namelijk geen volwaardige gezondheidszorg en liggen de Vlaamse asperges te rotten op de velden.

Helaas zijn er ook keerzijden. Een tekort aan mensen op onze arbeidsmarkt mag niet worden opgelost door de slimme koppen uit andere lidstaten weg te plukken. Dat kan de sociale samenhang van de Unie namelijk ondermijnen. Welvaartsverschillen tussen regio’s moeten we oplossen door banen te creëren waar mensen vandaag geen vooruitzichten hebben. Helaas wordt het feit dat werknemers in een andere lidstaat gaan werken vaak misbruikt om fundamentele arbeidsregels te omzeilen. Denk daarbij aan verpleegkundigen die hun sociale rechten zien verzwakken als gevolg van tijdelijke contracten, aan vrachtwagenchauffeurs die extreem lange uren moeten maken en aan schijnzelfstandigen in slachthuizen.

Zodra een werknemer de grens oversteekt, komen de fundamentele arbeidsregels op de tocht te staan. Dat moet anders. In Europa hebben alle werknemers recht op goede werkomstandigheden, een degelijk loon en volwaardige sociale bescherming. Europa moet dan ook veel actiever toezien op de naleving van de regels. Alleen zo kunnen we een sociaal Europa tot stand brengen met eerlijke banen voor iedereen.

  Elżbieta Rafalska, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Sprawozdanie kompleksowo odnosi się do unijnej mobilności zawodowej. Dotyczy utrzymujących się długotrwałych problemów unijnego rynku pracy i trafnie diagnozuje problemy. Dobrze też się stało, że zakres sprawozdania poszerzono o kwestię mobilności pracowniczej związanej z COVID-19. Pandemia z całą ostrością pokazała trudną, czasem dramatyczną sytuację pracowników transgranicznych, przygranicznych, delegowanych, a w szczególności pracowników sezonowych. Zamykanie granic, brak koordynacji ograniczeń, obciążanie kosztami testów, zagrożenia zdrowotne, brak zabezpieczenia społecznego – lista tych problemów jest długa. To się dzieje w fabrykach, rzeźniach, na farmach szparagowych i wymaga natychmiastowego rozwiązania. Należy zagwarantować skuteczną ochronę pracowników mobilnych. Kluczowe staje się zabezpieczenie społeczne i zakończenie prac nad 8 8 3. Nasilają się również tendencje do działań protekcjonistycznych. Mówimy też o potrzebie egzekwowania już istniejącego prawa.

  Marc Botenga, au nom du groupe The Left. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le rapporteur, «Oui, j’ai été traité comme un esclave». On est en 2021 et c’est Stéphane qui parle. Stéphane est un routier roumain qui a travaillé pour une entreprise basée en Belgique et qui doit conclure qu’il n’a pas reçu le salaire ni les conditions sociales et de travail auxquelles il aurait dû avoir droit.

Pour beaucoup de travailleurs aujourd’hui, c’est cela, l’Europe. Des entreprises qui embauchent des travailleurs, par exemple en Belgique, mais avec un contrat roumain ou polonais pour payer des salaires plus bas, parfois en dessous de 300 € par mois. Mettre les travailleurs en concurrence, généraliser les salaires les plus bas et éviter les cotisations sociales, c’est cela le dumping social. Il faut en finir et garantir à tous les travailleurs les salaires les plus élevés et les conditions de travail les meilleures, faire respecter les règles, mettre les moyens dans les inspections et dans les contrôles, et arrêter avec cette austérité.

Il faut passer aujourd’hui, finalement, du dumping social au progrès social et cela demande une vraie rupture.

  Daniela Rondinelli (NI). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la pandemia ci ha dimostrato quanto i lavoratori transfrontalieri e stagionali siano indispensabili per garantire la libera circolazione di beni e servizi, che rappresenta un elemento consolidato del mercato interno.

Al contrario, la libera circolazione dei lavoratori rimane ancora un'utopia, a causa di un quadro normativo che, da decenni, continua a essere una lista di buoni propositi.

Come Movimento 5 Stelle siamo soddisfatti di questa relazione e abbiamo contribuito a rafforzarla con i nostri emendamenti, perché si stabilisce la piena portabilità e tracciabilità dei diritti per contrastare il dumping sociale e salariale che alimenta la concorrenza sleale.

Dobbiamo ampliare allora le norme a tutela dei lavoratori, approvando quanto prima direttive chiave, come quella sui sistemi di sicurezza sociale e quella sul salario minimo, ma dobbiamo anche conferire all'Autorità europea del lavoro reali poteri, ispettivi e di controllo.

La mobilità lavorativa va senza dubbio incentivata, ma deve essere una scelta volontaria, mai legata alle scarse opportunità occupazionali offerte da un territorio. La neo-Europa può nascere solo da un rilancio concreto dei diritti alla mobilità e noi saremo i primi promotori affinché ciò avvenga.

  Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, cred că una dintre cele mai mari reușite ale Uniunii Europene este că le putem garanta cetățenilor noștri că se pot deplasa liber și să-și găsească un loc de muncă mai bine plătit dintr-o țară în alta.

Dar dincolo de aceste mari reușite, există o serie de probleme pe care pandemia COVID-19 le-a scos în evidență, și anume că muncitorii transfrontalieri, muncitorii detașați și cei sezonieri sunt cei mai expuși în fața vulnerabilităților prin care trec societățile noastre, tocmai de aceea pentru că vin dintr-o țară unde aproape patru milioane de concetățeni au ales să-și petreacă restul vieții într-un alt stat, beneficiind de alte facilități.

Cred că este extrem de important să le garantăm tuturor drepturile pe care legislația noastră le are. Este vital ca Autoritatea europeană a muncii să înceapă să-și desfășoare cât mai rapid activitatea pentru că avem un set de responsabilități față de acești cetățeni. Fiecare cetățean european trebuie să se simtă în siguranță la locul de muncă, trebuie să-i fie asigurată securitatea socială, iar Uniunea Europeană va fi puternică și va da un semnal de siguranță pentru fiecare cetățean atunci când normele noastre vor fi pe deplin aplicate de fiecare stat.

  Agnes Jongerius (S&D). – Voorzitter, commissaris, in een andere lidstaat van de EU mogen werken is een werknemersrecht. We moeten er echter voor waken dat arbeidsmigratie door werknemers uit derde landen naar de EU op basis van vaardigheden in plaats van kwalificaties wordt toegestaan.

Zowel in de logistiek als in de landbouw, de vleesindustrie en de uitzendsector worden momenteel Europese arbeidsmigranten uitgebuit. Vaak is de beloning van deze werknemers niet in orde, om over hun huisvesting maar niet te spreken. Als het dan ook eens nog makkelijker wordt om mensen uit Kazachstan, Moldavië, Nepal of zelfs de Filipijnen in te vliegen, weten we zeker dat de arbeidsvoorwaarden er niet beter op zullen worden.

We willen geen race naar de bodem. We moeten goede arbeidsomstandigheden garanderen voor iedereen die in Europa werkt.

  Атидже Алиева-Вели (Renew). – Г-жо Председател, докладът относно въздействието на правилата на ЕС в областта на свободното движение на работници и услуги цели да се превъзмогнат ограниченията. Правото на свободно движение е фундаментално право на всеки един гражданин и вярвам, че трябва да се осигурят недискриминационни условия за всички европейски работници, независимо дали работят извън родината си за по-кратък или по-дълъг период. Мобилността подпомага икономическото и социално сближаване и чрез нея бизнесът и потребителите получават по-богат избор от възможности за развитие. Тя винаги трябва да бъде плод на решенията на индивида, а не на принуда.

В този смисъл бих искала да уточня, че правото на свободно придвижване може да има само положителни последствия за политиките на държавите и не може да се определя като основна причина за т.нар. процес на изтичане на мозъци. За да се предотврати това, всяка държава следва да се старае да предоставя достойни условия на живот и конкурентни условия на труд.

  Guido Reil (ID). – (Beginn des Redebeitrags bei ausgeschaltetem Mikro) ... aus Polen würde in Deutschland das Gesundheitssystem morgen zusammenbrechen, ohne die Schlachter aus Rumänien würde bei Aldi nicht ein Schnitzel in der Kühltheke liegen, ohne die Erntehelfer aus Georgien würde unser Spargel in der Erde verrotten.

Und wie danken wir es diesen Menschen? Wir zahlen ihnen Mindestlöhne, meistens, oder manchmal noch weniger. Wie müssen sie hausen? Wir pferchen sie zusammen in Unterkünften, die an Sklavenunterkünfte erinnern. So danken wir es diesen Menschen. Dieses Problem ist seit Jahrzehnten bekannt. Hier haben unsere Regierenden, hier haben die Gewerkschaften und hier haben die Sozialverbände völlig versagt.

Aber jetzt wird ja alles gut! Jetzt kümmert sich die EU! Und wie will sie das machen? Natürlich wieder mit ganz vielen Regeln und wieder mit einer neuen Agentur, der Europäischen Arbeitsagentur und der Europäischen Agentur zur Überwachung der Arbeit. Das kann nur schiefgehen! Wir brauchen nicht mehr EU! Was wir brauchen, ist mehr Deutschland – Deutschland, wie es früher war, Deutschland, aber normal.

  Rasmus Andresen (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin! Corona trifft Grenzpendlerinnen und Grenzpendler besonders hart. Niemand leidet so sehr unter geschlossenen Grenzen und fehlender Koordinierung zwischen EU-Mitgliedstaaten wie Grenzpendlerinnen und Grenzpendler. Einer davon ist Karsten. Karsten lebt wie ich in Schleswig-Holstein und arbeitet in Kopenhagen. Dank deutscher Quarantäne- und dänischer Homeoffice-Regeln konnte er über mehrere Wochen nicht zwischen seinem Arbeits- und seinem Wohnort pendeln.

Grenzpendlerinnen und Grenzpendler werden in den Hauptstädten oft übersehen. Als die COVID-Testpflicht für Grenzpendlerinnen und Grenzpendler in unserer Region eingeführt wurde, gab es keine ausreichenden Testkapazitäten. Durch geschlossene Grenzübergänge und Staus vor Grenzkontrollen wurden die Arbeitswege von vielen Grenzpendlerinnen und Grenzpendlern immer länger. Grenzpendlerinnen und Grenzpendler haben oft die unsichersten Arbeitsverhältnisse und sind durch Versicherungslücken oft sehr schlecht abgesichert. Es wird Zeit, dass sich das ändert. Es wird Zeit, dass wir uns hier im Europäischen Parlament, aber auch mit Unterstützung der Kommission, dafür einsetzen, dass dies besser wird.

  Margarita de la Pisa Carrión (ECR). – Señora presidenta, en primer lugar, nos preocupa la deficiencia técnica y legislativa de este texto.

Está claro que la libre circulación de trabajadores y servicios es una ventaja de la que gozamos en la Unión, pero el reto es favorecer la movilidad mientras se respetan las normas y las leyes propias de cada Estado miembro. La ambigüedad de este modelo social da lugar a que la situación de los trabajadores móviles, ya complicada de por sí, se pueda confundir con la situación de los inmigrantes ilegales. Esto provoca que se incumplan los derechos de los trabajadores, que no haya un marco normativo que asegure condiciones adecuadas.

También nos oponemos al enfoque de la ideología de género, que desvirtúa de por sí las relaciones laborales. Remarcamos la intromisión de las instituciones europeas, ya que se está tratando de competencias de los Estados miembros. Abogamos por una regulación menos intrusiva y que atienda mejor a las necesidades de los europeos.

  Leila Chaibi (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, aujourd’hui s’ouvre le procès de Terra Fecundis. Cette entreprise, qui est basée en Espagne, a envoyé des milliers de travailleurs ramasser des fruits et des légumes dans le Sud de la France. Elle est jugée aujourd’hui pour travail dissimulé.

C’est le plus important dossier de fraude à la sécurité sociale jamais jugé en France. Cette fraude, c’est un manque à gagner de 110 millions d’euros pour la sécurité sociale française. Cela a été possible car la directive européenne sur le détachement des travailleurs autorise les sociétés d’intérim à envoyer des travailleurs basés en Espagne vers la France, tout en payant les cotisations sociales patronales espagnoles, qui sont 40 % plus basses que les cotisations sociales patronales françaises.

Ce système vide les caisses publiques des États et crée du dumping social. C’est pourquoi nous proposons d’abroger la directive sur le travail détaché pour faire en sorte que les travailleurs détachés soient intégralement traités dans les conditions du pays où ils travaillent, cotisations comprises. À travail égal, salaire égal et cotisations sociales égales.

  Ádám Kósa (NI). – Elnök Asszony! Sokáig természetesnek tekintettük az EU egyik legfontosabb alapelvét, a munkavállalók szabad mozgását, hogy hol akarnak dolgozni. A Brexit, majd a Covid-19 világjárvány idején azonban sokan nehéz helyzetbe kerültek, és sokan elveszítették a munkájukat is. A nehézség azonban segített abban, hogy új megoldásokat keressünk. A digitalizáció példátlan lehetőséget jelent a mobilitás elősegítésében. Magyarországon sikerült nem csak megőrizni, de bővíteni is a munkahelyek számát, a járvány ellenére is. Hazámban ma már 4,6 millió ember dolgozik, ami 41 000-rel több, mint a tavaly ugyanekkor. A foglalkoztatottsági ráta Magyarországon 2021 első negyedévében csaknem hetvenkét százalékos, amely szinte eléri a portói csúcson célul kitűzött 78 százalékos értéket. Ha munka van, minden van.

  Anne Sander (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, la libre circulation des travailleurs est une pierre angulaire du projet européen. Cette mobilité représente des perspectives d’emploi que nous devons encourager, parce que dans certaines régions d’Europe, il y a beaucoup de main-d’œuvre, mais peu d’emplois, donc il faut mettre en adéquation la main-d’œuvre avec l’emploi.

En effet, aujourd’hui, seuls 4 % des travailleurs usent de cette liberté en travaillant dans un autre État membre que celui dont ils ont la nationalité. Or, le marché unique doit être une chance pour tous. Dans les régions frontalières, qui représentent 40 % des régions en Europe, cette mobilité a encore plus de sens. En tant qu’Alsacienne, j’ai bien vu les conséquences de la pandémie de COVID-19 et les difficultés causées pour des milliers de travailleurs frontaliers passant les frontières tous les matins.

Tout l’enjeu pour nous, aujourd’hui, est de trouver un bon équilibre pour faciliter les déplacements sans ajouter de surcharge administrative, en particulier dans les régions frontalières. Il faut aussi trouver un équilibre pour faire en sorte d’avoir un traitement équitable pour tous les travailleurs. Enfin pour nos entreprises, il faut assurer des conditions loyales de concurrence.

Dans tous les cas, la crise que nous traversons remet la libre circulation au cœur des enjeux.

  Johan Danielsson (S&D). – Fru talman! Kommissionär Schmit! Arbetsplatsolyckor som mörkas, trasig skyddsutrustning, obetalda löner och felaktiga kontrakt.

I helgen kunde man i svensk media ta del av en skrämmande inblick i hur skogsnäringen fungerar, men det hade lika gärna kunnat handla om transport-, städ- eller byggbranschen.

Vi ser i dag hur ett system av fusk och utnyttjande breder ut sig på EU:s arbetsmarknad. Kolleger, på sikt hotar detta stödet för den fria rörligheten på EU:s inre marknad. Därför är jag glad att vi här i dag kan skicka ett tydligt budskap från parlamentet. Nu får det faktiskt vara nog!

Det krävs att fackliga rättigheter aldrig mer tvingas stå tillbaka för oseriösa företags fria rörlighet. Det krävs att de kryphål som skitföretag utnyttjar täpps igen, och det krävs ökade resurser i kampen mot arbetslivskriminalitet, både nationellt och till Europeiska arbetsmyndigheten.

  Nicolaus Fest (ID). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar! Der Kanev-Bericht ist ein Beispiel dafür, wie es in Brüssel läuft. Man beschließt irgendeinen tiefen Schwachsinn, hier die Arbeitnehmerfreizügigkeit – flankiert von der Entsenderichtlinie und Leiharbeitsregeln –, die zu dramatischem Lohndumping und Jobverlusten in vielen Branchen führt, und dann schaut man, wie man diesen Exzess-Kapitalismus wieder einfängt. Die Antwort heißt nie, den ursprünglichen Quatsch beerdigen, sondern immer mehr Geld ausgeben, mehr Bürokratie schaffen, mehr Vorschriften, mehr Verwaltung.

Was wirklich erschreckt, ist das Menschenbild, das dahintersteht. Frau Jamet hat es schon gesagt, hier werden die Arbeitnehmer als Arbeitsameisen behandelt, als Lohnsklaven, als Schachfiguren. Herr Kanev hat es ja gesagt: Wenn sie eben in ihrem Heimatland keinen Job mehr haben, sollen sie einfach woanders hinziehen. Nein, Herr Kanev, das sollen sie nicht, das wollen sie nicht. Die Leute wollen in ihrer Heimat, bei ihrer Familie, bei ihren Freunden arbeiten, und sie wollen nicht quer durch Europa geschoben werden, nur weil es der Europäischen Union so passt. Dies ist ein Fehler, und die Arbeitnehmerfreizügigkeit sollte umgehend beendet werden.

  Beata Mazurek (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Podstawową wartością jednolitego rynku jest swobodny przepływ pracowników i usług. To fundament i siła, bez których nie będziemy mogli mówić o jego sprawnym funkcjonowaniu. Działania, które już zostały podjęte, nie mogą być wystarczające, dlatego też potrzebujemy rozwiązań, które uproszczą cały proces i usuną bariery dla mobilności pracowników przy jednoczesnej pełnej ochronie ich praw podstawowych. W skali Europy problem ten dotyczy milionów mobilnych pracowników, którzy czasowo przebywają w innym państwie Unii Europejskiej.

Niestety trwająca pandemia skutecznie utrudniła wprowadzanie zmian, a polityka ochronna stosowana przez państwa członkowskie ma w dalszym ciągu negatywny wpływ na producentów towarów i usługodawców. Obecnie, kiedy Europa powoli wychodzi z pandemii, nasze działania muszą być skoordynowane i stanowcze. Skuteczne wdrażanie i egzekwowanie obowiązujących przepisów to odbudowa europejskiej gospodarki i przepis na szybsze wyjście z obecnego kryzysu. To nie czas na polityczne frazesy. To czas na zdecydowane działania.

  Λευτέρης Νικολάου-Αλαβάνος (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η έκθεση για τις «συνθήκες εργασίας» των μετακινούμενων εργαζομένων αποτυπώνει την ανάγκη των οικονομικών ομίλων να ενισχυθεί περαιτέρω η κινητικότητα με πιο φθηνά εργατικά χέρια, σήμερα, σε συνθήκες καπιταλιστικής κρίσης, όσο και στη συνέχεια, για την αύξηση της κερδοφορίας τους. Μέσα από το τεράστιο οπλοστάσιο οδηγιών και κανονισμών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης προωθούνται οι απάνθρωπες πρακτικές της ανασφάλιστης εργασίας, της απλήρωτης δουλειάς, των ατομικών συμβάσεων. Με την οδηγία Bolkestein αποδίδονται στη βάση της χώρας καταγωγής μισθοί και δικαιώματα γαλέρας, με την οδηγία 2008/104 πριμοδοτούνται τα δουλεμπορικά γραφεία, ενώ ο αντεργατικός ευρωπαϊκός πυλώνας γενικεύει τα ελάχιστα δικαιώματα.

Στο πλαίσιο της αντεργατικής ευρωενωσιακής στρατηγικής προωθείται και το νομοσχέδιο της κυβέρνησης της Νέας Δημοκρατίας για την κατάργηση του οκτάωρου, τη γενίκευση της απλήρωτης εργασίας, τη διάλυση των συλλογικών συμβάσεων, την κατάργηση της κυριακάτικης αργίας, το χτύπημα της συνδικαλιστικής οργάνωσης και της απεργίας. Οι εργαζόμενοι με την πάλη τους απαιτούν μαζικά να μην κατατεθεί στη Βουλή το νομοσχέδιο έκτρωμα, να καταργηθούν όλοι οι αντεργατικοί νόμοι Νέας Δημοκρατίας, ΠΑΣΟΚ, ΣΥΡΙΖΑ, να δυναμώσει η διεκδίκηση για σταθερό ημερήσιο χρόνο εργασίας, εφτάωρο, πενθήμερο, τριανταπεντάωρο.

  Nicolas Schmit, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I would first say that this report is really timely. It comes at a moment when, due to the pandemic, we have seen limitations to mobility. We have seen also a lot of abuses linked to mobility and so I’m very grateful for this report, for the proposals, and we still have to work on these issues of mobility, which is, as we have already said, a fundamental right of the European Union.

But I would not say that Europe is connected or responsible for social dumping. It’s the absence of Europe that leads to social dumping. It’s the absence of good regulations and rules, and especially the absence of sufficient national controls where we have European rules, so that’s why we have these situations which some of you have described.

We are all responsible for the same rights for everybody – for local workers, for migrant workers, for seasonal workers – they all have the same rights and they all have to be treated in exactly the same way, be it safety and health, be it wages, be it their freedoms to organise. So this is what we have to fight for. And this comes after the Porto summit and I think we have a new mandate for building a stronger social Europe. There will not be an integrated European economy, an internal market, built on unfairness, built on a mobility which treats seasonal workers as they have been treated in some cases, but we have also to acknowledge that mobility offers a lot of good opportunities. A lot of people have found good jobs for themselves, for their families, and believe me, I’m coming from a country which is very much depending on mobility, and there are a lot of people living there who have benefited from this European mobility, but certainly we have now to work on the Porto mandate to make mobility fair and to give all European workers – local, seasonal, mobile – the same rights.

  President. – The debate is closed.

The vote will take place on Wednesday, 19 May 2021.

Written statements (Rule 171)

  Beata Szydło (ECR), na piśmie. – Swobodny przepływ pracowników to zarówno jedna z podstawowych zasad UE, jak i istotny fundament jednolitego rynku. Niestety pracownicy transgraniczni, delegowani i sezonowi w UE wciąż doświadczają dyskryminacji ze względu na przynależność państwową w zakresie zatrudnienia, wynagrodzenia i innych warunków pracy. Zwłaszcza pracownicy transgraniczni i sezonowi zostali w sposób szczególny dotknięci z powodu pandemii koronawirusa. Pandemia jeszcze dobitniej uwydatniła ich trudne warunki pracy, bo to przecież grupy pracowników, które ucierpiały na nieskoordynowanym zamknięciu granic i przez restrykcje doświadczyły problemów z dojazdem do pracy i domu. A to właśnie te grupy pracowników o szczególnie słabej pozycji na rynku okazały się niezwykle ważne dla przetrwania unijnych systemów opieki zdrowotnej, łańcuchów żywnościowych, transportu i gospodarki. Dlatego apeluję, zacznijmy szanować i doceniać tych pracowników oraz ich pracę, trud i poświęcenie. Prawa pracowników mobilnych i delegowanych muszą być gwarantowane i chronione w taki sam sposób jak prawa pracowników krajowych. Uważam, że trzeba szukać takich rozwiązań, które będą poprawiać sytuację pracowników i wspierać ich swobodny przepływ w UE, ale które nie uderzają w konkurencyjność państw członkowskich i działalność przedsiębiorców, jak ma to miejsce w przypadku pakietu mobilności. Istotne jest także, aby wszystkie państwa członkowskie dążyły do pełnego wdrożenia i lepszego egzekwowania obowiązujących przepisów.

  Valdemar Tomaševski (ECR), raštu. – Šiandien kalbame apie koronaviruso krizės poveikį laisvam darbuotojų ir paslaugų judėjimui. Europos Parlamente pasigirsta nerimą keliančių nuomonių, kad dėl epidemijos šios laisvės turėtų būti ribojamos. Su tuo negalima sutikti. Nepmirškime, kad nediskriminavimas yra pagrindinis sutartyse įtvirtintas principas. COVID-19 krizė yra laikinas, o ne nuolatinis reiškinys, todėl pandemija negali būti naudojama siekiant apriboti laisvą žmonių, darbuotojų ir paslaugų judėjimą Sąjungoje, o tai yra itin svarbu naujosioms valstybėms narėms, tokioms kaip Lietuva. Šie principai ir laisvės yra Europos Sąjungos ramsčiai, jie yra įtvirtinti Sutartyse, o piliečių teisės negali būti atimtos remiantis pavaldžiais įstatymais. Laisvas darbuotojų judėjimas yra vienas iš pagrindinių Sąjungos principų, o vienodo požiūrio principas teigia, kad kalbant apie laisvą darbuotojų judėjimą negali būti jokios diskriminacijos dėl pilietybės, užimtumo ir atlyginimų srityje. Valstybių bendradarbiavimas bus prasmingas tada, kai Sąjunga palaikys socialinį teisingumą ir socialinę apsaugą visiems piliečiams be išimties. Todėl, priimdami naujus reglamentus, palaikykime aukštą užimtumo lygį, užtikrinkime tinkamą socialinę apsaugą ir kovokime su socialine atskirtimi. Taip pat turėtume visada prisiminti svarbiausią paslaugų direktyvos principą, kuris yra tikslinės šalies principas, ir šios nuostatos nereikėtų keisti. Laisvas paslaugų judėjimas turėtų vykti gerbiant darbo ir socialines teises, taip pat visada turėtų būti laikomasi vienodo požiūrio ir laisvo judėjimo principo.

17. Revisão do Fundo de Solidariedade da União Europeia (breve apresentação)

  President. – The next item is a short presentation of the report by Younous Omarjee on the review of the European Union Solidarity Fund (2020/2087(INI)) (A9 0052/2021).

  Younous Omarjee, rapporteur. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, par ce rapport, notre commission du développement régional réaffirme son attachement au Fonds de solidarité de l’Union européenne, qui, vous le savez, a été créé en 2002 à la suite des lourdes inondations qui avaient affecté l’Europe centrale.

Ce Fonds a une valeur toute particulière : il dit, à travers des aides financières apportées aux États et aux régions touchés par les catastrophes naturelles, ce qu’est la solidarité européenne. Depuis sa création, il a été mobilisé dans 24 pays européens pour une centaine de catastrophes naturelles majeures et un budget total de 6 milliards d’euros.

Plus que jamais, le Fonds de solidarité doit prendre une place centrale dans la politique de cohésion, car nous sommes aujourd’hui face à une nouvelle donne, celle du caractère devenu presque permanent des catastrophes naturelles en Europe. Il ne se passe plus une année sans que les régions continentales, insulaires et ultrapériphériques ne subissent des catastrophes naturelles majeures, que ce soit des inondations, des tempêtes, des incendies, des ouragans, des cyclones tropicaux ou des séismes. Et pour cause, puisque les changements climatiques sont en cours et qu’il est désormais irréfutable que ces phénomènes climatiques extrêmes iront grandissant en fréquence et en intensité. Ces risques sont aujourd’hui devenus systémiques dans le monde entier. En Europe, ces catastrophes ont représenté 500 milliards d’euros de pertes économiques et 90 000 vies humaines de perdues depuis 1980.

Or, cela reste, je crois, tout à fait sous-estimé dans l’ensemble de nos politiques. À l’évidence, les catastrophes représentent aujourd’hui un facteur de déstabilisation considérable de l’ensemble des politiques, et en particulier de la politique régionale, par les dégâts occasionnés sur l’ensemble des infrastructures que nous finançons à travers le FEDER, et que nous réparons aussi à travers le FEDER. C’est aussi pourquoi, dans nos règlements relatifs à la cohésion, nous appelons les régions à prendre en compte l’adaptation au changement climatique dans leurs stratégies de développement et dans leurs investissements.

Notre rapport souligne également les réformes successives qui ont permis à ce Fonds de s’adapter de mieux en mieux aux réalités de terrain et à devenir de moins en moins complexe. Il prend en compte la reconnaissance des catastrophes régionales, la nécessaire simplification administrative et la réduction du délai de versement des aides. Nous saluons aussi le fait qu’avec RescEU, l’Union européenne se soit dotée de forces d’intervention qui permettent d’aider les États membres à faire face aux catastrophes lorsque leurs capacités nationales sont dépassées, avec entre autres des Canadairs et des équipements de pompage hydraulique.

Mais il est temps aujourd’hui, Monsieur le Commissaire, d’aller plus loin et d’engager aussi une réflexion pour couvrir demain les catastrophes sanitaires, sans avoir à légiférer dans l’urgence pour faire face à l’urgence, comme nous l’avons fait durant la crise de la COVID-19. Nous devons en permanence repenser nos instruments et adapter nos choix budgétaires à ces réalités nouvelles. C’est le sens de l’ensemble des propositions contenues dans ce rapport de la commission du développement régional qui, je l’espère, sera adopté demain à une très large majorité.

  Nicolas Schmit, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, first I want to congratulate Parliament on this very comprehensive and thorough report, which contains a useful analysis and a lot of very important suggestions. I thank particularly the rapporteur and also his comments.

Solidarity is a core value upon which the Union is built. The European Union Solidarity Fund was created, as already mentioned, in 2002 to provide EU solidarity by contributing to post-disaster relief in Member States and accession countries confronted with devastating natural disasters and major public health emergencies. Between 2002 and 2020, the fund mobilised a total of over 6.5 billion for interventions in 96 disasters in 23 Member States and one accession country. Italy is by far the biggest beneficiary of the fund, with more than 3 billion received so far. The second biggest beneficiary is Germany, followed by Croatia, due to the devastating earthquake in Zagreb in March 2020.

The EU Solidarity Fund evaluation completed in 2019 confirmed the effectiveness of the fund and the synergies between the EU Solidarity Fund and other EU policy instruments for disaster risk management. It also concluded that EUSF brings clear EU added value and demonstrates EU solidarity in action.

As noted by the report, Member States and regions are increasingly confronted with natural disasters, which appear to be linked to climate change, as already mentioned by the rapporteur. In 2020 the EU Solidarity Fund continued to offer vital support, providing financial relief but, at the same time, a clear and tangible sign of European solidarity to the populations affected.

The solidarity principle is embedded in the nature of the instrument and its activation. The fund should intervene only when the exceptional nature of a disaster puts a particularly heavy burden on the country or region affected. Furthermore, support from the EU fund helps to increase the Member States’ and regions’ resilience and preparedness to address the consequences of these natural disasters.

In 2020, more than 969 million of assistance was awarded to six Member States in order to help them finance emergency and recovery operations after the natural disasters which affected those countries and the regions. In addition, in 2020 the Commission received nine new natural disaster applications. At the same time, as part of the Coronavirus Response Investment Initiative, the fund regulation was amended last year in order to extend its scope to major public health emergencies, and I take the proposal perhaps to deepen this aspect in case of sanitary or pandemic, like the one we are just in. As a result, the Commission has proposed an overall package of almost 530 million of the fund assistance to the efforts deployed by 17 Member States and three accession countries to fight the COVID-19 health emergency.

I would like to give a pertinent and recent example for EUSF assistance in the context of natural disasters. 2020 was extremely challenging for Croatia. The country went through two terrible earthquakes – one in March 2020, and later between December and January this year there was a series of earthquakes. The EU has shown genuine and quick solidarity with the people of Croatia from day one to provide emergency help in kind and in funds. The EU Solidarity Fund provided the total amount of 683.7 million assistance already in 2020 to Croatia after the first earthquake. This is the second highest absolute amount ever paid by the fund for emergency and recovery operations after a natural disaster.

It is clear, though, that a sustainable recovery in Croatia from such devastating earthquakes will take many years and considerable financial resources. Therefore, the Commission is advising to use the EUSF funding in complementarity with other available funding resources, for example the cohesion policy funding and the Recovery and Resilience Facility.

In recent years the Commission has put an increasing focus on prevention, climate adaption and risk management policies, and through its research programme Horizon 2020 and incoming Horizon Europe, new technologies are being developed to tackle these challenges. For cohesion policy, disaster risk management is vital, because local and regional authorities are the first to face the impact of disasters, because it is a cost-effective investment in preventing future losses and because it contributes to sustainable development.

In 2014-2020, cohesion policy invested almost 8 billion across the EU in climate change adaption and risk prevention in the EU. This includes a broad array of support. The Commission’s proposals for cohesion policy after 2020 include precisely disaster risk management and climate adaption as specific objectives.

  President. – That concludes the item.

The vote will take place on Tuesday, 18 May 2021.

18. Desafios enfrentados pelos organizadores de eventos desportivos no ambiente digital (breve apresentação)

  President. – The next item is a short presentation of the report by Angel Dzhambazki on challenges of sports events organisers in the digital environment (2020/2073(INL)) (A9 0139/2021).

  Ангел Джамбазки, докладчик. – Г-жо Председател, г-н Комисар, тази вечер може би за разнообразие няма да се скараме, което си е новина, а може би и е важна и темата на доклада. Спортът играе важна роля в обществото за социалния, културния и икономическия просперитет на държавите – членки на Съюза. Неслучайно мъдрият български народ е казал „Здрав дух живее в здраво тяло“. На всички е известно, че спортът е място за съревнование, за изграждане на характери. Развитият спорт означава силна и здрава нация. Освен това спортът насърчава и утвърждава ценности като взаимно уважение и разбирателство, справедливост, сътрудничество, гражданска ангажираност и същевременно допринася съществено за образователните и културните потребности на нациите на държавите членки.

Свързаните със спорта сектори представляват 2,12 процента от брутния вътрешен продукт на Съюза и 2,82 процента от заетостта в рамките на Съюза, а спортните събития имат значително териториално въздействие по отношение на участието, както и от икономическа гледна точка. Важно е да отбележим, че културата на привържениците на спорта е неизменна част от спортното изживяване, а не просто фон за представянето на един просто пазарен продукт. Днес най-важната част от приходите на носителите на права – около 80 процента – идва от излъчването на събития, които понасят вреди от незаконното излъчване на събитията, които се предават онлайн.

Пиратството онлайн на спортни събития е реален проблем, който според неотдавнашно изследване на Европол за 2019 година излага потребителите на реален риск да станат жертва на зловреден софтуер чрез безплатни приложения, кражби на данни за кредитни карти и т.н.

Проблемът с цифровото пиратство на излъчването на спортни събития непрекъснато се развива по отношение на мащаба на използваната технология, начините на предаване на информацията и на сигнала. Онлайн пиратството на спортни събития, предавани на живо, се извършва независимо от това дали спортното събитие е достъпно по безплатен телевизионен канал чрез абонаментни услуги. Съществуват различни източници и форми на пиратство, което води до различни възможни решения. Развитието на цифровата среда улеснява достъпа на всички привърженици до спортни събития, до всякакви видове устройства и насърчава развитието на нови онлайн бизнес модели, като същевременно това развитие улеснява незаконното предаване на спортни събития в рамките на Съюза и извън него.

За разлика от други сектори, по-голямата част от стойността на излъчването на спортно събитие на живо е, че то е на живо, и когато приключи, събитието губи своята стойност. Следователно е необходима бърза реакция, за да се сложи край на незаконното предаване на спортните събития. Именно това е фокусът на доклада. Тук използвам момента да благодаря на своите колеги, които са докладчици в сянка, за съзидателната работа и постигнатия резултат.

Искам да подчертая, че мерките следва да бъдат съсредоточени върху първопричините на излъчването на незаконно съдържание, а именно върху лицата, които създават възможност за дейността на незаконните уебсайтове, които извършват нарушения в големи мащаби. Не става дума за лицата, които неволно или несъзнателно участват в незаконното излъчване.

Друго важно уточнение е, че професионалното незаконно предаване на цялата спортна проява следва да се разграничава от кратки откъси, споделяни от привърженици и свързани с културата на привържениците, както и от съдържанието, което се споделя от журналистите с цел информиране на обществото, както е посочено в Директивата за аудиовизуалните медийни услуги.

Именно заради това докладът е съсредоточен върху основния проблем, който произтича от специализираните професионални уебсайтове с бизнес модели, финансирани от евтини реклами, като се дава достъп до незаконно спортно съдържание – дейност, която се извършва основно от престъпни организации и следва да се разграничава от привържениците, които споделят просто снимки.

Законодателството на Съюза предвижда обща уредба, която представя възможността за използване на мерки за гарантиране на прилагането на носителите на права, включително и извънсъдебни механизми. Въпреки съществуването на посочената уредба, механизмите за уведомяване и премахване на механизмите за проследяване на нарушения имат ограничения, особено когато става дума за събития на живо. Основният проблем за организаторите на спортни прояви е пиратството на тези спортни събития, които се излъчват на живо и чиято икономическа стойност се състои именно в излъчването на живо. Обикновено проблемът с настоящите мерки за гарантиране на прилагането е, че постъпват твърде късно. Гражданскоправните мерки за гарантиране на прилагането, например на механизми за уведомяване и премахване на разпоредби за преустановяване на нарушения, отнемат сравнително много време и действителното отстраняване или блокиране на достъпа до съдържание става твърде късно. Решението обаче не се състои в създаването на нови права на организаторите на спортни прояви, а в подобряване на гарантирането на упражняването на съществуващите права, за да постигне ефективно и пълно гарантиране на тези права.

Имам още какво да прочета, уважаема г-жо Председател, но няма време за това. Бих искал да изслушам Комисията и докладчиците в сянка.

  Nicolas Schmit, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I would like to thank first the rapporteur, Mr Dzhambazki, and the members of the JURI and CULT Committees for their work on this important report.

Indeed, piracy remains a serious challenge, both for sport event organisers and for broadcasters, in particular because of the value and the specificity of live sport content.

Let me recall at the outset that the Commission issued a declaration on the challenges of sport organisers in the digital environment in 2019 in the context of the adoption of the Copyright Directive and committed to assess these challenges. Such assessment has been already launched, and a mapping study tasked to the European Audiovisual Observatory should be completed within a few months. Moreover, the Commission also highlighted the need to better address online piracy in the recent Media and Audiovisual Action Plan and the Action Plan on Intellectual Property. In particular, the Commission indicated that it will work to see how existing remedies to fight against piracy can be made more efficient and easier to obtain – an important point made also in your report.

In this context, the Commission will look at how to foster the cooperation among national enforcement authorities and among stakeholders. The Commission will also assess how to improve legal offers of sport content online.

The report also covers other issues related to sport events, which are addressed in a horizontal way in the proposal for the Digital Services Act. This proposal is currently being analysed by the European Parliament and the Council. In particular, the Digital Services Act contains several general provisions on tackling all types of illegal content online, such as rules on notice and action procedures and on trusted flaggers.

While the Digital Services Act as a horizontal instrument is not the appropriate tool to address sector-specific proposals, once adopted, such a horizontal framework will serve as the basis on which specific proposals to tackle sport piracy could build. Therefore, it is all the more important to conclude the negotiations of the Digital Services Act as fast as possible. In the meantime, the Commission, as a priority, will fulfil the commitment taken up upon adoption of the Copyright Directive and complete its assessment of challenges of sport event organisers, building on the study I’ve just mentioned.

Be reassured that, as highlighted in the report, we will ensure that the impact on all parties involved and the balance of fundamental rights are taken fully into account. The Commission will also need to assess whether – and to what extent – intervention to improve existing enforcement remedies would also be relevant for content other than sport exposed to piracy.

To conclude, the Commission is fully committed to better address the issue of online support piracy and is already taking action. We will thoroughly assess the ideas presented in the report and indicate the specific follow-up actions we intend to propose, in line with our commitment in respect of Article 225 resolutions.

  President. – That concludes the item.

The vote will take place on Tuesday, 18 May 2021.

19. Inverter as tendências demográficas nas regiões da UE utilizando os instrumentos da política de coesão (breve apresentação)

  President. – The next item is a short presentation of the report by Daniel Buda on reversing demographic trends in EU regions using cohesion policy instruments (2020/2039(INI)) (A9 0061/2021).

  Daniel Buda, Raportor. – Doamnă președintă, în primul rând aș dori de asemenea să mulțumesc raporturilor din umbră, celor care a depus amendamente, dar și tuturor celor care au contribuit la redactarea raportului. Acesta pornește de la o realitate îngrijorătoare, respectiv de la faptul că depopularea zonelor rurale – a celor mai sărace – și supraaglomerarea centrelor urbane are un impact major asupra comunităților locale și afectează viața fiecărui cetățean european.

În Comisia REGI au fost depuse 288 de amendamente care se regăsesc în compromisuri, astfel încât documentul final să reflecte abordarea de către Parlament a problemelor demografice, raportul fiind aprobat în unanimitate. Au fost identificate două categorii de regiuni din punct de vedere demografic: regiuni exportatoare și regiuni receptoare, fiecare având nevoie de politici distincte. Există în prezent instrumente care contribuie la contracararea fenomenului depopulării sau a supraaglomerării și am subliniat aici investițiile teritoriale integrate în cazul zonelor izolate, sau programele LEADER în spațiul rural.

Comisia a publicat un studiu privind impactul schimbărilor demografice asupra regiunilor Uniunii Europene, iar datele dinainte de pandemie au arătat că, anual, aproximativ 5 % dintre cetățenii Uniunii Europene părăseau regiunile din care provin în căutarea de noi oportunități. Ceea ce este îngrijorător este faptul că ei reprezintă peste 25 % din populația activă aflată în țările din estul Europei.

Sigur, am plecat în acest raport de la faptul că libera circulație a persoanelor este o valoare fundamentală a Uniunii Europene. Tendința de migrare este mai accentuată în rândul populației mai educate sau a lucrătorilor care dețin specializări, fără însă a minimaliza migrația lucrătorilor necalificați, mai ales din sectorul agricol.

O problemă spinoasă a dinamicii demografice o reprezintă supraaglomerarea zonelor urbane sau a celor mai dezvoltate, unde ne confruntăm cu dificultăți generate de accesul limitat la servicii și costuri ridicate de viață.

Criza sanitară actuală a schimbat însă radical situația. Restricțiile de călătorie au redus semnificativ numărul celor care părăsesc țara în căutare de oportunități, dar după această pandemie, fenomenul migraționist ar putea să revină. Am constatat că unele autorități au venit cu soluții ingenioase și au contribuit semnificativ la diminuarea acestor tendințe. De exemplu o taxă mai redusă pe impozitul pe venit din sectorul IT face ca exodul creierelor din rândul celor din domeniul tehnologiei informației să nu fie atât de accentuat, dar nu putem spune însă același lucru despre personalul medical.

Dinamica demografică actuală are implicații asupra coeziunii sociale, economice și teritoriale, astfel încât investițiile Uniunii Europene ajung uneori să fie nesustenabile, adâncindu-se decalajul dintre regiunile mai dezvoltate și cele mai sărace.

Cerem Comisiei prin acest raport să elaboreze în viitor un acord pentru demografie care să cuprindă strategii subsidiare pentru rezolvarea acestei probleme pe modelul acordului verde în curs de implementare. Aceasta trebuie să se asigure de existența unor condiții de muncă decente și a unui echilibru între viața privată și viața profesională. Statele membre trebuie să utilizeze instrumentele politicii de coeziune pentru a aborda problemele demografice, iar în planurile naționale de redresare și reziliență, să fie cuprinse măsuri pentru a răspunde la schimbările demografice.

Politicile fiscale adecvate ar stimula crearea de locuri de muncă, iar autoritățile locale și regionale trebuie să faciliteze accesul la învățământ împreună cu crearea de politici eficiente pentru prevenirea exodului creierelor. Această problemă va reprezenta în viitor cu siguranță o provocare atât pentru statele membre, cât și pentru Uniunea Europeană în ansamblul său, astfel încât avem nevoie de soluții concrete.

  Nicolas Schmit, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I want to thank first the rapporteur for the presentation of this important report and also for his remarks. Indeed, the demographic challenge is a major challenge for Europe, because the working-age population in the EU has been shrinking for more than a decade and is projected to continue to shrink, and policies that improve employment rates and productivity will therefore be crucial to maintaining economic growth and improve quality of life. The success of our policies, however, should not be measured by whether it reverses this reduction in working age population. Given the current age structure of the EU population, further reductions are inevitable, and many people in the EU will continue to live in areas with a shrinking population.

The success of our policies should be measured by whether we can improve economic development and the quality of life in all territories. There are wide variations in demographic trends in Europe between, and within, Member States. Some regions will face sharp population decline, while others will experience steady population growth. To identify the various demographic trends in EU territories, the Commission produced a report on the impact of demographic change in Europe last June and recently launched the Atlas of Demography.

Splitting regions into sending and receiving regions, brain drain versus brain gain, is a bit simplistic. It suggests that every movement inevitably produces winners and losers in a Union where movement is one of the main four freedoms, and we had the opportunity to discuss already this important issue. Brain circulation through moves from one place to another can produce both individual and collective benefits. People take the experiences, the education and often their partner with them when they move to a new region or to the region they grew up in.

Movement within the EU is not a one-way street. The circulation allows all regions to benefit. In the EU, more people move to rural regions than move out. This shows that on average, rural regions are attractive places to live in, which also benefit from the experience, the income and connections of the people moving in.

One-size-fits-all approaches will not work. Regional responses to demographic change must include multiple interventions and integrated approaches. Both rapid growth and rapid decline should lead to adjustments of public services and infrastructure to the needs.

A word on cohesion policy instruments to tackle demographic challenges. This Commission is the first one with a portfolio explicitly dedicated to demography. It is already working on demographic change, including aging, and on developing a long-term vision, especially for rural areas, and this long-term vision aims at creating a new momentum specially for rural areas. The competences for relevant policies to deal with the demographic change are to a large extent in the hands of Member States. However, the EU, and cohesion policy in particular, provide key financial levers for structural reforms and support national, regional and local policy-makers in their search for policies dealing with these changes.

Cohesion policy already includes multiple provisions to address demographic change. Under the 2014-2020 framework, the specific needs of geographical areas which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps have been given special attention, and measures identified by Member States in cohesion programmes show varieties of responses to demographic challenges. They include measures for boosting connectivity and digitalisation, economic development, reinforcing sustainability by adjusting measures to population shifts, as well as essential infrastructure and services such as childcare facilities, health care and long-term care. Together with the valuable experience of other EU initiatives and structural reforms, rural development, research and innovation or education and training, they can provide inspiration and valuable lessons in order to make best use of all the resources available to support the socio-economic development of depopulated areas.

Cohesion policy in 2021-2027 will continue to invest, to tackle demographic challenges and aging in a place-based approach adjusted to the actual needs of territories; to support investments addressing causes and consequences of demographic change under all policy objectives: more competitive and smarter Europe through innovation and digitisation; green and low-carbon Europe – we had the discussion on the Transition Fund; more connected Europe, connectivity and accessibility; more social and inclusive Europe through social infrastructure and services; and finally, a Europe closer to citizens, integrating territorial approaches and local initiatives.

Cohesion policy also provides a flexible and adaptable framework to address demographic challenges in a targeted and coordinated manner, while ensuring the participation of territorial authorities and local stakeholders. Smart specialisation strategies help local partners identify regional assets and develop them in a cooperative process. Moreover, a dedicated policy objective and instruments to integrate territorial and local development will be available to support local actors and exploit new opportunities, developing links between rural areas and cities, economic diversification of rural areas through the common agricultural policy – access to services, including digital services, is of crucial importance to assist regions to become more innovative and competitive and improve the quality of life for citizens and especially keep these citizens in the territories, which is the major aim.

Negative population trends are often accelerated as a result of the decline of certain sectors, again coming back to the Just Transition Fund. Here we have really to use this tool to prevent that the decline of certain sectors goes together with the decline of population, causing regions to become a less attractive place to live and work. So this is what we have to do to give new opportunities to this region. Therefore the Just Transition mechanism is so important.

Cohesion policy can support investment in all these areas. Technical support through the Technical Support Instrument can complement cohesion policy to increase labour market participation of the long-term unemployed youth, older people or migrant integration in the labour market. The Commission can provide technical support to Member States that wish to undertake reforms in all these areas.

When developing their partnership agreement and programmes, affected Member States need to identify their demographic challenges and specific needs of regions and areas – in particular, disadvantaged areas – and set out an integrated approach to address them, depending on the resources and other policy measures. Member States will even have the possibility to earmark dedicated funding. As a result, causes and consequences of demographic change can be specifically addressed. It is now the responsibility of each Member State to propose a set of measures to tackle the challenges of depopulated areas during the negotiations of future cohesion policy programmes that are currently taking place in order to make best use of all the resources available to support the socio-economic development of all areas, and particularly of depopulated areas.

  President. – That concludes the item.

The vote will take place on Wednesday, 19 May 2021.

Written statements (Rule 171)

  Sara Cerdas (S&D), por escrito. – As atuais tendências demográficas que se observam na União Europeia constituem um problema a diferentes níveis. Este deve ser visto de forma global, mas as ações deverão ser implementadas ao nível local, com especial atenção para as áreas em que o clima é mais adverso e em que o acesso aos serviços é limitado ou inexistente, sem esquecer as especificidades dos territórios de baixa densidade populacional, assim como as regiões ultraperiféricas. Estas últimas sofrem duplamente com este fenómeno, quer seja com fluxos de migração internos, quer seja com a placa continental. Urge criar condições para combater este fenómeno. Neste sentido, e tendo em vista a fixação das populações em regiões de baixa densidade populacional, é preciso desenvolver soluções que promovam a atração e retenção das populações, em especial dos jovens. Precisamos de uma estratégia adequada para o desenvolvimento destas regiões, que proporcionem oportunidades, boas acessibilidades, acesso a serviços, empregabilidade e oferta formativa e educacional. Os instrumentos da política de coesão são fundamentais para alavancar projetos ao nível local e regional, aliados aos objetivos climáticos e digitais da União, que tenham como fim garantir oportunidades iguais em todas as regiões da União.

20. Garantir os objetivos da obrigação de desembarcar nos termos do artigo 15.º da política comum das pescas (breve apresentação)

  President. – The next item is a short presentation of the report by Søren Gade on securing the objectives of the landing obligation under Article 15 of the Common Fisheries Policy (2019/2177(INI)) (A9 0147/2021).

  Søren Gade, Rapporteur. – Fru formand! En stor tak til de politiske grupper for deres konstruktive samarbejde. Jeres velvilje til at indgå brede kompromiser har betydet, at betænkningen strøg igennem udvalget, og at ingen grupper har valgt at stille ændringsforslag. Det mener jeg, at vi alle kan være godt tilfredse med. Det sender nemlig et stærkt signal til Kommissionen, når Parlamentet står samlet på tværs af politiske grupper og lande.

Denne betænkning er som bekendt Parlamentets indspil til Kommissionens kommende evaluering af den fælles fiskeripolitik, og navnlig artikel 15 i den fælles fiskeripolitik, også kaldet landingsforpligtelsen. Landingsforpligtelsen har med god grund været meget omdiskuteret, og det på trods af, at intentionerne var gode og havde støtte fra alle aktører. Vi skal have et så bæredygtigt fiskeri som overhovedet muligt. Det er i virkeligheden essensen i det, man i 2013 prøvede at opnå ved at indføre landingsforpligtelsen. Desværre står landingsforpligtelsen i dag nogle gange i vejen for netop et bæredygtigt fiskeri. Reglerne er for rigide og virker ikke efter hensigten. Derfor er fiskeriet i dag helt afhængigt af undtagelser.

Implementeringen af landingsforpligtelsen har heller ikke været ubetinget god over hele Europa. Det giver desværre en række udfordringer i fiskeriet. Når vi har fælles regler, så skal vi også sørge for, at alle implementerer og håndhæver disse fælles regler. Jeg kommer fra et land, hvor mange fiskere føler, at de er underlagt strengere regler end deres kolleger i andre europæiske lande. Det kan jo ingen være tjent med. Derfor kommer betænkningen også med en del opfordringer til både medlemslandene og til Kommissionen. Vi skal blandt andet være langt bedre til at inddrage fiskerne. De er vores øjne og ører på havet. De har ekspertisen, og de har interesse i, at vores fiskeri er bæredygtigt, og at reglerne er indrettet på en måde, så de giver mening.

Betænkningen opfordrer også til, at mere selektive fangstformer støttes. Det skal vi blandt andet gøre ved at være hurtigere til at godkende nye fangstformer og ved at understøtte udviklingen af dem. Vi skal ligeledes belønne de fiskere, der driver udviklingen, og vigtigst af alt skal vi finde ud af, om landingsforpligtelsen rent faktisk virker. Derfor opfordrer vi Kommissionen til at iværksætte en grundig analyse af konsekvenserne af landingsforpligtelsen. Vi opfordrer ligeledes Kommissionen til at kigge på, hvordan landingsforpligtelsen kan forenkles og forbedres, for en ting er sikkert: den fungerer langt fra optimalt i dag. Det mest bekymrende er næsten, at vi ikke ved, om landingsforpligtelsen overhovedet har virket efter hensigten. Derfor fremhæver betænkningen også, at der ikke er videnskabeligt belæg for, at landingsforpligtelsen har ført til færre uønskede fangster.

Lad mig til sidst komme med en opfordring til Kommissionen. Vores fiskeri har aldrig været mere presset, delvist på grund af Kommissionens ringe forhandlinger på kvoteområdet, delvist på grund af brexit, men også på grund af alt det administrative bøvl, vi lægger ned over fiskeriet i Europa. Lad os nu for en gangs skyld prøve at gøre livet lettere for vores fiskere. Husk på, at meget fiskeri i dag er meget mere bæredygtigt, end det har været længe. Det burde vi anerkende og belønne. Det skal ikke straffes med flere regler og begrænsninger og administrativt bøvl. Så når den fælles fiskeripolitik nu skal evalueres, er det mit stille naive håb, at det for en gangs skyld ikke ender med endnu en bunke begrænsninger, øget overvågning, mere rapportering og flere regler for vores fiskere. Det er et trængt erhverv, og vi har en forpligtelse til at lytte til deres opråb. Vi har en forpligtelse til kun at pålægge regler, der giver mening og rent faktisk kan efterleves.

  Nicolas Schmit, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, let me start by thanking the rapporteur, Mr Gade, and also the rapporteurs in the Committee on Fisheries (PECH) for their work on this important report.

The common fisheries policy highlights the need for measures to reduce the levels of unwanted catches and to eliminate discards, since they constitute a substantial waste and negatively affect the sustainable exploitation of marine biological resources and marine ecosystems, and thereby the financial viability of fisheries. As your report rightly notes, the landing obligation is key in that respect by avoiding and reducing unwanted catches and by ensuring that catches are landed. In the management of the landing obligation, it is necessary that Member States do their utmost to reduce unwanted catches. To this end, the improvement of fishing techniques to make them more selective must have high priority.

The Commission is certainly aware that the full implementation of the landing obligation is a challenge for the fishing sector. That is why there was a phasing—in period, which would have allowed the industry to adjust and develop measures to avoid unwanted catches, notably by adopting more selective fishing methods. The phasing—in period also provided an opportunity for Member States to implement harmonised controls to ensure control and enforcement of the landing obligation during fishing activities at sea. Let’s not forget that, in 2013, when the common fisheries policy was reviewed, both co—legislators signed up for the landing obligation, and let’s not forget that this is what the European citizens had asked for to address wasteful practices of discarding unwanted fish.

I agree that, unfortunately, there continues to be little or no data on whether overall discard rates are reducing. This, and the lack of compliance, as indicated, for example, by the Commission’s audits, and the compliance evaluation reports of the European Fisheries Control Agency, make it difficult to assess whether or not the reality at sea corresponds to a real change in behaviour and the adoption of more selective fishing techniques, as should be the case.

However, intense cooperation and exchanges between Member States, fishermen and women, and EU scientists, the Parliament and the Commission have taken place and have helped us reach a better and, in some instances, a common understanding of both the challenges and solutions in implementing the landing obligation. Nevertheless, without effective control and enforcement, the landing obligation will not be successfully implemented. Traditional controls, such as inspections at sea, inspections at landing, inspections at marketing and aerial surveillance, are incapable of ensuring control and enforcement of the landing obligations.

It is the responsibility of Member States to ensure the detailed and accurate documentation of catches and to ensure control enforcement and inspections of activities. I fully share your concern that implementation of, and compliance with, the landing obligation remains too weak. I also share your conclusion that innovative control tools have an important role to play. The Parliament’s support of the Commission’s proposal on the revised control regulation in this regard is vital and I welcome the result of the vote in plenary last March in favour of mandatory CCTV for high-risk vessels above 12 metres, based on the risk analyses at regional level. There is no viable alternative to remote electronic monitoring systems.

The need for a regionalised approach is also central. Indeed, regionalisation is one of the cornerstones of the common fisheries policy. The principle of regionalisation also applies to the new technical measures regulation, which provides the necessary regional flexibility to change, amend and introduce measures that are adaptable to local specificities. This regionalised approach is also relevant when it comes to the financial support for Member States under our European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) for implementing the landing obligation. The new fund will support innovation and investments that contribute to the implementation of the landing obligation with a higher aid intensity rate than the one that applies to other operations. This covers investments in selective fishing gears with 100%, and in the improvement of port infrastructures and in the marketing of unwanted catches with 75% each.

As in every year, the Commission will soon report on the state of play of the common fisheries policy, including on the implementation of the landing obligation. With regard to your call for information on the socio-economic impact and the effects on safety and working conditions, let me stress that the Commission relies heavily on information provided by the Member States, and Member States need to ensure the reliability of this information.

With regard to your demand for legislative changes, I have to say that there are no plans to launch a reform of the common fisheries policy. We are seeing positive results in the current system and we must provide some stability to the way we manage fisheries in Europe. What we will do is to prepare, by 31 December 2022, the report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the functioning of the common fisheries policy. The landing obligation will be taken into account in this report as it is the cornerstone of our policy for achieving sustainable fisheries. In this regard, your report is very timely and relevant, and will be duly taken into account.

Thank you once again for this report. The Commission looks forward to our continued cooperation on this important aspect of our common fisheries policy.

  President. – That concludes the item.

The vote will take place on Tuesday, 18 May 2021.

(The sitting was suspended at 21.16)

PRESIDÊNCIA: PEDRO SILVA PEREIRA
Vice-Presidente

21. Reinício da sessão

(A sessão é reiniciada às 22h02.)

22. Impacto das alterações climáticas nas populações vulneráveis em países em desenvolvimento (debate)

  Presidente. – Segue-se o debate sobre o relatório da Deputada Mónica Silvana González, em nome da Comissão do Desenvolvimento, sobre o impacto das alterações climáticas nas populações vulneráveis em países em desenvolvimento (2020/2042(INI)) - (A9-0115/2021).

  Mónica Silvana González, ponente. – Señor presidente, señor comisario Lenarčič, primeramente, me gustaría transmitir la emoción que tengo en presentar hoy mi primer informe de iniciativa en este Parlamento y el agradecimiento a todas las personas que han participado en este trabajo y que me ayudaron a poner en agenda este tema de máxima actualidad.

La terrible pandemia que vivimos ha paralizado casi todo, pero no el cambio climático. El Banco Mundial, por ejemplo, estima que serán más de 143 millones de personas las que se desplazarán por el clima de aquí al 2050.

Gracias primeramente a los ponentes alternativos que han participado y han mejorado el texto —Frances Fitzgerald, Catherine Chabaud, Beata Kempa y Miguel Urbán—, como también a la ponente de la Comisión LIBE, Saskia Bricmont, y a los de las comisiones ENVI y FEMM, entendiendo que este informe no es todo lo ambicioso que nos hubiese gustado, pero es lo posible para ofrecer un mínimo marco de protección a las personas que hoy no lo tienen.

Gracias a la Comisión por el trabajo coordinado y de escucha activa de la DG INTPA, del equipo de la señora Urpilainen, y especialmente a usted, señor comisario Lenarčič, a su equipo de ECHO, por su predisposición a avanzar en mecanismos de protección para las personas con medidas concretas.

Llevamos tiempo debatiendo en este Parlamento sobre cómo avanzamos en la protección del medio ambiente y cómo nos volvemos más resilientes al cambio climático. Nos hemos dotado de un gran Pacto Verde con leyes tan importantes como la del clima, pero es urgente poner en agenda a las personas más vulnerables de los países en desarrollo.

Somos el actor más importante en ayuda humanitaria y en cooperación internacional y, por ello, tenemos una responsabilidad añadida. Con anterioridad, otros Parlamentos del mundo ya se han manifestado, como la Unión Africana con la Declaración de Kampala o Latinoamérica con la Declaración de Cartagena. Debemos abordar el cambio climático como causa de la migración y como un fenómeno que amenaza directa o indirectamente los derechos humanos, incluido el derecho a la vivienda, al agua, al saneamiento o a la alimentación.

Con este informe afirmamos que existe un vínculo directo entre los efectos del cambio climático y las migraciones, que existen situaciones de crisis más largas y más extensas a causa del cambio climático. Debemos, por lo tanto, desarrollar esta dimensión exterior del Pacto Verde, apoyar a los países socios y frenar sus impactos. Las sequías, inundaciones, huracanes, etcétera, están detrás de muchos de los conflictos que ocasionan estas crisis.

Hablamos pues de justicia climática. Los países que menos han contribuido al calentamiento global son los que más están expuestos a su padecimiento, los que menos están preparados para mitigar su impacto. Y la población más vulnerable, como, por ejemplo, los pueblos originarios, los pueblos indígenas, están entre los más afectados.

Este informe propone una estrategia integral y pedimos a la Comisión una comunicación concreta que incluya, por un lado, una política climática para aumentar la financiación internacional, la compensación de daños; en definitiva, reforzar el Mecanismo de Varsovia, tal como lo exigieron los países en desarrollo durante la pasada COP 25 en Madrid; aumentar el apoyo financiero a la prevención y preparación para los casos de desastres, según los acuerdos del Marco de Sendai, en particular en los pequeños Estados insulares a punto de desaparecer —como, por ejemplo, el de Kiribati—.

Segundo, una política de desarrollo y ayuda humanitaria para abordar vulnerabilidades geográficas, como la ubicación de las viviendas en zonas de riesgo, o las bases de los medios de vida como, por ejemplo, la pérdida de cultivos por las sequías o la subida del mar, mediante la promoción de iniciativas locales de agricultura sostenible y de seguridad alimentaria. Abordar vulnerabilidades personales, por ejemplo, mediante acciones climáticas con perspectiva de género para diseñar y aplicar programas de adaptación. Las mujeres deben estar en el centro de estas políticas, tanto por su vulnerabilidad como por ser agentes de cambio. Pedimos implementar un enfoque de «nexo» que sirva de puente entre las respuestas de emergencia y los objetivos a largo plazo para abordar el impacto en las personas y aplicar soluciones sostenibles.

Tercero, y muy importante, la política migratoria. Pedimos ampliar la protección de los mecanismos jurídicos existentes para asegurar los derechos de las personas que se ven obligadas a desplazarse internamente o a través de fronteras, basándose en la Iniciativa Nansen para la Protección de las Personas Desplazadas; que el riesgo para la vida amenazada por el cambio climático figure explícitamente entre los criterios de elegibilidad para la protección humanitaria, siguiendo la Resolución del Comité de Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas en el caso de Teitiota, como afirma la propia ACNUR.

Como propuesta estrella, un visado climático, un visado humanitario como medida de protección temporal que asegure vías migratorias legales y seguras para las personas necesitadas de protección por ser víctimas de desastres.

No podemos olvidar las acciones de concienciación que sirvan para explicar por qué y de dónde proviene tanta inmigración. Reconocer la contribución de los jóvenes a la sensibilización mundial, así como el trabajo de las ONG y de las organizaciones locales, los Gobiernos locales y regionales; potenciar el diálogo intercultural entre los migrantes y refugiados para concienciar y prevenir el racismo.

Todas estas medidas necesitan financiación. La Unión Europea, sus Estados miembros y el Banco Europeo de Inversiones son el principal contribuyente, pero no son suficientes y necesitamos involucrar al sector privado. Hemos logrado compromisos en el NDICI, en el nuevo Instrumento de Vecindad, Desarrollo y Cooperación Internacional, como destinar el 40 % de los fondos a la acción climática, pero ahora hay que programar, hay que aterrizar con medidas concretas a través de la programación y seguir contando con los países de renta media. Además, el Instrumento de Ayuda Humanitaria contribuirá a prevenir, prepararse y responder a los desastres naturales. Si hay voluntad, habrá fondos disponibles.

Colegas diputados y diputadas, en el futuro, las decisiones judiciales sobre el clima y la no deportación no serán un hecho anecdótico. Es una cuestión de tiempo y jurisprudencia la definición progresiva de qué eventos naturales concretos deban ser considerados y su vínculo con el riesgo a la vida. Por ello, os invito a votar a favor de este informe y a evitar las enmiendas que nieguen el vínculo entre el clima y las migraciones.

Por todo ello, este informe de iniciativa es más oportuno que nunca y estamos convencido de que, desde las instituciones europeas, podemos y debemos hacerlo. Espero que el trabajo de este informe continúe en la propia Comisión, a través de la DG ECHO y la DG INTPA, y también desde la Comisión LIBE, a través, por ejemplo, de los Reglamentos del Nuevo Pacto sobre Migración.

  Janez Lenarčič, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, let me first congratulate honourable Member of the European Parliament, Ms González, for her timely report on such an important topic.

Fighting climate change is a top priority for this Commission, and our capacity to respond to it will transform lives in the years to come. We are working across all policies, with Member States and like-minded actors, in developing a comprehensive approach that goes beyond managing disaster and displacements. Indeed, while addressing the immediate needs of displaced people, in parallel we need to support efforts to boost resilience, prevention and preparedness. The preparation of the EU chairmanship of the Platform on Disaster Displacement in 2022 is an important opportunity to work in this direction.

First, let me re-assert that leaving no one behind and addressing inequalities must be at the core of our external action, and I welcome that this is one of the guiding ideas of the report. Climate change is indeed a threat multiplier for inequalities. The NDICI (Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument) ‘Global Europe’ regulation will be our instrument to forge international partnerships, to tackle inequalities and work on global challenges. It is innovative in many ways and contains two new spending targets: a 30% contribution to climate action objectives and an indicative 10% for supporting management and governance of migration and forced displacement, as well as addressing root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement. Both targets mean spending significantly more than before.

With NDICI, we have a tool that allows us to have a lasting impact, and we must now focus on programming our future cooperation in line with our policy priorities. The Commission looks forward to the upcoming high-level, geo-political dialogue with the European Parliament to discuss this.

Second, the current discussion addressing the intertwined factors leading to population displacements is not new at global level and is a very difficult one. Given the scope of the Geneva Convention and other protection schemes in place, for instance the Nansen Protection Agenda, multilateral actors are focusing their work within the existing legal framework.

At EU level, the political sensitivity of ongoing discussions, notably in the context of the new pact on migration and asylum, also needs to be taken into consideration. The existing international and EU legal framework may provide solutions on a case-by-case basis, in particular with regard to the principle of non-refoulement. Of course, discussions on protection gaps in the legal framework should in any case continue, but in the meantime, I believe it is important that we act.

Finally, as this report highlights, climate change affects people differently, depending on a number of factors, including gender. As primary users and managers of natural resources, women play an essential role for climate change mitigation and adaptation and also on environmental protection.

The EU is determined to protect women from environmental degradation and climate change, particularly in the context of fragile situations. All of our external action is undergoing a gender-mainstreaming exercise, and at least 85% of new actions implemented under NDICI will have a significant impact on gender equality, in line with our Gender Action Plan III presented last year.

I would like to thank once again the rapporteur and the DEVA Committee for their important work, and I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts.

  Mick Wallace, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety. – Mr President, as the rapporteur of the Environment Committee’s opinion, I’m glad we’re acknowledging that only 10% of the global population is responsible for 52% of global emissions. We also acknowledge in this report that the EU has a historic and ongoing responsibility for climate system breakdown, but its those in the Global South who are still today paying most dearly for our exploitation and footing the bill for our climate debt.

I would start to take seriously the EU concerns about the impact climate change is having on vulnerable populations when it stops stealing trillions of euros from the Global South each year, shows tax evasion, transfer, mis-pricing, expenditure, debt and aid arrangements and also starts to take seriously EU concerns for human rights when they start protecting the human rights of Palestinians.

If we care about human rights we will suspend relations with the criminal apartheid state of Israel until they stop the genocide of the Palestinian people and until Palestine is free.

  Saskia Bricmont, rapporteure pour avis de la commission des libertés civiles, de la justice et des affaires intérieures. – Monsieur le Président, chaque année, les catastrophes naturelles ont forcé en moyenne 26 millions de personnes à migrer, soit trois fois le nombre de déplacés liés aux guerres et aux conflits.

L’instabilité politique, sociale et économique qui découle des changements climatiques, les îles englouties et la pollution sont autant de facteurs de migration désormais connus. En refusant l’expulsion d’un ressortissant bangladais vers son pays d’origine, à cause de la pollution de l’air, la décision de la Cour d’appel de Bordeaux fera date.

Interdire le refoulement au nom du droit fondamental à la vie, c’est garantir la protection humanitaire à toute personne qui voit ses moyens de subsistance détruits à cause du changement climatique. Le Parlement européen s’apprête à rejoindre cette position, si toutefois la droite conservatrice ne vide pas notre rapport de toute sa substance. Visas humanitaires, admissions temporaires ou de longue durée, définition de canaux de migration sûrs et réguliers, adaptation au changement climatique et protection des personnes déplacées internes dans les pays concernés sont autant de leviers dont dispose l’Union européenne pour assurer cette protection, et ce sans risquer de rouvrir la convention de Genève pour reconnaître une nouvelle catégorie de réfugiés.

Je vous remercie, Madame la rapporteure, pour votre travail.

  Alice Kuhnke, föredragande av yttrande från FEMM-utskottet. – Herr talman! För det första är klimatkrisen inte ett framtidshot. Klimatkrisen är här och nu. Människor får sina liv raserade, tvingas på flykt och dör på grund av klimatkatastrofer i dag.

För det andra finns all fakta på bordet. Vi vet att de som drabbas hårdast är de som minst bidragit till klimatförändringarna, nämligen de allra mest utsatta, de fattiga, kvinnor och flickor, urfolk.

För det tredje vet vi vad vi måste göra för att rädda både människorna och planeten. Vi måste förändra våra sätt att leva våra liv, hur vi bygger våra ekonomier, hur vi fördelar våra resurser.

Vi vet också att det går för långsamt. Just vi har köpt oss lite mer tid, men de allra mest utsatta dör på grund av vår livsstil. Vi måste göra mer – nu!

  Frances Fitzgerald, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, climate change is happening right now as we speak, across the entire world. It is a reality here in Europe and across the world in the lives of millions of people and we can see it with changing weather patterns and extreme weather events, such as floods and fires.

Yet some places, regions and communities are more vulnerable than others and many of these are the least developed countries and small island developing states. As the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Filippo Grandi, said last week when he appeared before the Committee on Development (DEVE) – and I agree with everything he had to say – we should focus our efforts on climate mitigation and adaptation efforts and, in my opinion, these must be at the top of our priority list. We must work on conflict resolution and increased support from the EU. We know that in Europe, we passed the Climate Law, a monumental step forward. In Ireland, the Climate Action Bill will do ground—breaking work. But these critical actions must also apply to what Europe does in other parts of the world, supporting LDCs and SIDS in tackling climate change.

So how should we do this? First, we should support – and we need to get support from both private and public sectors – to finance the change and invest in innovation. This will cost trillions. We must have innovation using new methods and tools and emerging technologies to tackle this monumental challenge. And in doing so, we must be mindful of what we seek to protect: equality, opportunity, a good quality of life, as the Commissioner said, leaving no one behind, a positive approach to health care and education for all.

This is a global challenge that will require global solutions. Europe is leading the way as the biggest contributor to climate finance in developing countries. We must continue to lead and take action now to support those populations that I have spoken about that are vulnerable to climate change in developing countries. We must do more. Europe is leading the way.

  Pierfrancesco Majorino, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il 10 % della popolazione mondiale, la parte più ricca del pianeta, è responsabile di più della metà, il 52 %, delle emissioni globali.

I Paesi in via di sviluppo sono i più esposti e le donne sono le persone che pagano i costi sociali più alti: siccità, inondazioni, frane e perdita di risorse naturali vitali stanno compromettendo gravemente le prospettive di sviluppo dei Paesi fragili e a basso reddito.

L'Unione europea deve assumersi le proprie responsabilità, anche elaborando una strategia globale sull'impatto della crisi climatica, una crisi a cui si deve rispondere con un maggiore sostegno finanziario.

Il rafforzamento e la coerenza con gli obiettivi di eliminazione della povertà è anche un riconoscimento del fatto che sfollamenti e migrazioni sono parte del problema: a chi fugge per gli effetti del clima che cambia è necessario assicurare con urgenza un permesso umanitario e c'è bisogno di costruire canali legali e sicuri di migrazione e tutto questo va fatto senza perdere tempo.

  Catherine Chabaud, au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, Madame la rapporteure, chers collègues, le sujet de l’incidence du changement climatique sur les populations vulnérables est un sujet bien plus complexe qu’il n’y paraît. Et pourtant, c’est un sujet et un enjeu majeurs, complexes parce que l’impact du changement climatique peut prendre l’habit d’une catastrophe dite naturelle – cyclone, coulée de boue ou incendie –, d’un événement alors subit pour lequel on va apporter une réponse humanitaire de circonstance. Mais il peut aussi prendre l’habit insidieux d’un territoire qui se désertifie peu à peu ou du niveau de la mer qui monte progressivement.

Le sujet est également complexe parce que lorsque l’on parle des populations vulnérables, on pense aussitôt à l’Afrique, à l’Asie, aux petits États insulaires du Pacifique, mais pas forcément à l’Amérique latine, aux populations arctiques ou encore aux populations vulnérables de notre propre territoire européen.

Complexe encore, parce que le lien entre le changement climatique et les conséquences en cascade comme les famines, les crises économiques et les conflits est d’autant plus difficile à faire qu’il s’étire dans le temps. Pourtant, les experts s’accordent pour mettre en lumière un lien entre changement climatique et la plupart des grands conflits qui secouent le monde aujourd’hui.

Complexe toujours, parce que de notre fenêtre européenne, la moindre allusion à des situations pouvant entraîner des déplacements de population, fussent-elles locales, engendre la crainte du migrant aux portes de l’Europe, qui arrivera bien sûr sans étiquette «attention, je suis un déplacé climatique».

Dans ce contexte, il y a urgence à toutes les étapes de ce processus, qui devrait concerner 200 millions d’individus en 2050: urgence à réduire nos émissions, urgence à anticiper les conséquences du changement climatique, à adapter les territoires notamment, et urgence aussi à reconnaître le statut de déplacés du fait du climat et à avancer sur une terminologie commune à l’échelle internationale.

L’Union européenne a une responsabilité et doit agir dans le cadre du pacte vert pour l’Europe et de toutes ses déclinaisons. Je voterai bien sûr, Madame la rapporteure, ce rapport.

  Maximilian Krah, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Was wir hier haben, ist eine Aufforderung, die Grenzen aufzumachen für jedermann, der in die EU einwandern will, weil ihm das Wetter nicht gefällt. Was wir haben, ist die Forderung nach offenen Grenzen und gleichzeitig eine Entschließung, dass man jedem, der das kritisiert, entgegentreten soll. Denn nicht anders kann man Ziffer 63 verstehen, die fordert, dass man gegen jede Diskriminierung von Migranten vorgehen soll.

Und in Ziffer 74 dritter Spiegelstrich fordern Sie uneingeschränkten Schutz für Klimaflüchtlinge. Uneingeschränkten Schutz haben ja noch nicht mal Bürgerkriegsflüchtlinge. Was, bitte schön, ist ein Klimaflüchtling? Es gibt derzeit keine. Alle entsprechenden Untersuchungen sind angezweifelt und stammen von linken Lobbygruppen. Es wird natürlich behauptet, es gäbe 140 Millionen Klimaflüchtlinge bis 2050. Selbst wenn dem so sein sollte: Wollen Sie die in die EU holen? Was Sie hier fordern, das sind offene Grenzen für jedermann. Und das ist eine Krise, wie sie selbst 2015 nicht dagewesen ist.

Sie können sich auf eins verlassen: Wir werden hiergegen massiv Widerstand leisten. Wir werden die Menschen informieren, und wir werden dafür sorgen, dass – Nation für Nation – die Parteien gewinnen, die diesem Wahnsinn entgegengetreten. Es gibt hier keine Kooperation. Es gibt hier nur eins, dass wir uns hinstellen und bei jeder nationalen Wahl klarmachen: Wer offene Grenzen für jedermann will, dem das Wetter nicht gefällt, der kann Sie wählen. Und wer möchte, dass sein Sozialstaat erhalten bleibt, wer möchte, dass sein Land seine Identität behält, und wer möchte, dass Europa europäisch bleibt, der kann uns wählen von der demokratischen Rechten.

Wenn Sie Wahlkampf haben wollen über Einwanderung, meine Damen und Herren, dann kriegen Sie Wahlkampf über Einwanderung, weil uns die Erhaltung unserer Identität und unserer Heimat wichtig ist und wichtiger ist als ihr Klimanonsens. Schlechtes Wetter ist kein Einwanderungsgrund und kein Asylgrund. Und wenn Sie etwas anderes wollen, dann lassen wir die Wähler entscheiden. Auf die Auseinandersetzung freue ich mich, auch wenn ich es unseren Heimatländern ersparen würde, dass wir darüber ringen müssen. Es sollte selbstverständlich sein.

  Caroline Roose, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, tout d’abord, je voulais remercier la rapporteure pour son travail sur ce rapport, qui va dans le bon sens.

Le changement climatique frappe de plein fouet les pays en développement, en première ligne de la crise climatique. L’actualité nous en fournit un exemple: la région du Grand Sud à Madagascar connaît actuellement sa pire sécheresse depuis 40 ans. Selon les Nations unies, plus d’un million de personnes dans le Sud du pays sont au bord de la famine. Dans certains districts de la région, plus d’un enfant sur quatre souffre de malnutrition aiguë. La fréquence et la durée de ces épisodes climatiques extrêmes sont amenées à augmenter et à menacer davantage les pays en développement, comme le Yémen, Madagascar ou encore le Sri Lanka, qui sont pourtant les moins responsables de la crise climatique.

Alors que faire face à cette injustice? Priorité doit être donnée aux mesures d’adaptation, encore largement sous-financées dans ces pays: l’Europe n’a pas respecté ses engagements pris il y a dix ans, lors de la COP 15. C’est pourquoi il faut des financements relatifs au climat nouveaux et additionnels sous forme de subventions. La nouvelle stratégie sur l’adaptation de la Commission européenne est l’occasion de prendre des engagements plus ambitieux. Il faut donc agir sur la dette des pays en développement, en prenant par exemple des mesures d’allégement et d’effacement de la dette. Les demi-mesures ne suffisent pas.

Au-delà du financement, il faut des mesures fortes pour protéger les droits et les terres des peuples autochtones, les premiers défenseurs du climat et de la biodiversité. Protéger les déplacés climatiques, notamment par la reconnaissance des migrations climatiques comme base juridique pour demander l’asile et la délivrance des visas humanitaires. Ce point est particulièrement important pour notre groupe: sans base juridique ni critères clairs, nous n’arriverons pas à protéger de façon complète les personnes déplacées.

Il faut soutenir l’agriculture paysanne, le pastoralisme et la transition vers l’agroécologie, soutenir la résilience des communautés côtières et des océans en arrêtant la surpêche dans les eaux des pays en développement, et réformer en profondeur nos accords de libre-échange, en particulier l’accord UE-Mercosur et ses conséquences dévastatrices en matière de déforestation, d’impacts sociaux et de droits humains.

  Beata Kempa, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Szanowna Pani Sprawozdawczyni! Szanowni Państwo! Bardzo dziękuję za olbrzymią pracę Pani Sprawozdawczyni. Rzeczywiście gratuluję. Zgadzam się z kwestią dotyczącą diagnozy i skutków. Ale są też kwestie, z którymi pozwolę sobie nie zgodzić się w ramach bardzo konstruktywnej dyskusji, która jest nam potrzebna. W sprawozdaniu faktycznie podkreślono, że skutki zmiany klimatu osłabiają perspektywy krajów rozwijających się, zwiększają ryzyko suszy, głodu, konfliktów, przymusowych wysiedleń i powiększają, pogłębiają istniejące zagrożenia. Podkreślono, że potrzebne są działania, ale nie tylko Unii Europejskiej, lecz również tych, którzy w sposób absolutnie spory do tych zmian klimatycznych się przyczyniają. Potrzebne są więc działania globalne, żeby były skuteczne. Bo chodzi nam o skuteczność. Zgadzam się, że kwestie ubóstwa i nierówności należy rozumieć bardzo szeroko jako brak dostępu do wszelkiego rodzaju zasobów niezbędnych do zapewnienia godnego życia. Dzisiaj skupiamy się na jednym z elementów, jakim jest klimat, który pogłębia tę sferę. Ale przecież mamy ich dużo więcej. To są przede wszystkim wojny, konflikty, a także różnego rodzaju zapóźnienia, które funkcjonują. I teraz rodzi się pytanie: czy tylko walka z klimatem będzie skutecznym remedium na owe ubóstwo, a także na wzmocnienie najsłabszych grup ludności w krajach rozwijających się? Otóż uważam, że nie, bo potrzebna jest pomoc niesiona przez Unię Europejską – Unia jest rzeczywiście największym donorem – a także pomoc niesiona przez takiego przedstawiciela, jakim jest nasz komisarz, który jest dzisiaj obecny i któremu bardzo serdecznie gratuluję. Rzeczywiście szczególnie teraz, w czasach covidu, komisarz wykonuje olbrzymią pracę i ma olbrzymie efekty. Ale w tej kwestii musimy to wszystko bardzo dokładnie równoważyć, dlatego że bardzo poważną sprawą jest migracja. Nie zgodzę się tutaj z twierdzeniem, że w ramach polityki migracyjnej powinniśmy obecnie popierać pomysł uznania migracji wywołanej klimatem za podstawę prawną przyznania azylu. To może być zaproszenie, tak naprawdę wyuczona bezradność. Nam potrzebne są działania rozwojowe wszędzie tam, gdzie trzeba umożliwić dostęp do wody. Trzeba umożliwić dostęp do projektów rozwojowych, bo nie wszyscy będą emigrować. I trzeba pamiętać też o tych ludziach – już kończę, Panie Przewodniczący – o tych krajach, które której dzisiaj w Unii Europejskiej mają wielki problem, tak jak Grecja, jak Włochy. Jest to bardzo poważny problem, który trzeba rozpatrywać wieloaspektowo.

  Miguel Urbán Crespo, en nombre del Grupo The Left. – Señor presidente, la verdad es que es una auténtica vergüenza que hayamos tenido que escuchar en esta Cámara al representante de la extrema derecha hablar de la emergencia climática como una cuestión de mal tiempo; es una vergüenza, y les debería de dar esa misma vergüenza a todos los diputados que van a utilizar sus votos para intentar vaciar con sus enmiendas este informe.

Y quería empezar justamente así, porque no necesita refugio solo quien es perseguido, sino también quien huye, y hoy el cambio climático expulsa a tanta gente como las guerras, la violencia o el hambre, pero también los conflictos medioambientales provocados por un sistema económico y comercial extractivista y depredador de recursos. La impunidad ecocida de empresas multinacionales europeas y de otros continentes es incompatible con los supuestos compromisos climáticos de la Unión Europea; el capitalismo verde no es una opción: solo cabe un cambio de modelo radical productivo de transición energética integral en clave ecosocialista.

Por eso necesitamos mecanismos vinculantes de sanción contra quienes cometan delitos medioambientales y mecanismos efectivos de protección para quien huye del cambio climático. Los refugiados climáticos son hoy, aunque lo intenten negar, una triste realidad que no para de crecer, normalmente por nuestras políticas: lo urgente no es denunciar las palabras de la extrema derecha o decir bonitas palabras en esta Cámara; lo urgente es convertir y traducir esas palabras en derechos, en derechos para esos refugiados climáticos.

  Hildegard Bentele (PPE). – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, sehr geehrte Kollegin González! Vielen Dank, dass Sie die verwundbarsten Gruppen auf der Welt in den Blick genommen und viele richtige Antworten herausgearbeitet haben. Es gibt nichts schönzureden. Die Ärmsten, diejenigen, die prekär beschäftigt sind, diejenigen, die ausschließlich von der Landwirtschaft leben – und unter ihnen vor allem Frauen –, spüren die Konsequenzen von Dürren, Überschwemmungen, Feuer, Rodungen, Artenverlust am deutlichsten. Oft verlieren sie mit ihrer angestammten Umgebung auch ihre Kultur und ihre Identität. Und ja, es ist so, dass wir in den Industrieländern viel schneller und viel mehr an Ressourcen verbrauchen und verbraucht haben als Länder, die noch nicht in die Ära der Industrialisierung und des Massenkonsums eingetreten sind.

Wir haben eine historische und moralische Verantwortung, der wir gerecht werden müssen. Letztlich ist diese Verantwortung für uns alle eine Überlebensfrage. Wir stehen jetzt am Anfang einer neuen Finanzperiode in der EU und können jetzt die Weichen richtig stellen. Wir müssen darauf achten, dass wirklich 30 % des neuen Finanzinstruments Global Europe für Klimaschutzmaßnahmen aufgewendet und zusätzliche Ausgaben für Biodiversität getätigt werden. Zusammen mit den anderen Industrieländern müssen wir die Zusage auf internationaler Ebene erfüllen, 100 Milliarden US-Dollar pro Jahr für Klimaschutzmaßnahmen in unseren Partnerländern zur Verfügung zu stellen. Außerdem braucht es technische Unterstützung für Katastrophenvorsorge, Krisenreaktionsmechanismen, Anpassungsmaßnahmen, Einbeziehung der lokalen Ebene, die wir leisten müssen. Was wir aber nicht brauchen, liebe Frau González, ist zum einen die Exkulpierung bestehender Konflikte um Land aufgrund der Ethnie, aufgrund von Korruption oder Unterdrückung mit dem Klimawandel. Wir dürfen nicht zulassen, dass die tatsächlich dafür Verantwortlichen die von ihnen verursachten Probleme jetzt auf den Klimawandel schieben.

Was wir ebenfalls nicht brauchen, liebe Frau González, ist, eine Debatte über neue Asylgründe vom Zaun zu brechen. Der UNHCR hat im Entwicklungsausschuss erst kürzlich öffentlich davor gewarnt. Deshalb bitte ich Sie: Stimmen Sie den EVP-Änderungsanträgen zu und lassen Sie uns damit uns auf konkrete Hilfe konzentrieren und keine Phantomdebatten führen.

  Milan Brglez (S&D). – Gospod predsednik, Evropska unija ima zgodovinsko odgovornost, da spoštuje svoje podnebne zaveze in da pomaga drugim, državam v razvoju, najranljivejšim skupinam in domorodnim prebivalcem.

To lahko stori na ta način, da najprej okrepi finančne instrumente glede svojega podnebnega ukrepanja pa tudi glede razvojnega sodelovanja in s tem krepi odpornost in pripravljenost ranljivih družb.

Prav tako morajo svoje narediti podjetja. Skozi celotno oskrbovalno verigo morajo poskrbeti za to, da bodo spoštovala načela družbene odgovornosti in dolžne skrbnosti.

In ker migracije, tovrstne migracije, postajajo problem, zaradi tega potrebujemo ustrezni pravni okvir. Ta pravni okvir mora znotraj prava EU harmonizirati standarde humanitarne zaščite, medtem ko mora glede mednarodnega prava potekati upoštevanje in razvoj mednarodne zaščite.

Končno bi se hotel zahvaliti tudi poročevalki na celovito poročilo.

  Anna Júlia Donáth (Renew). – Elnök Úr! A nélkülözésben élők kevesebb kárt okoznak a bolygónak, mint a túlfogyasztásban boldogságot hajszoló, magángépekkel utazó és luxusjachtokon nyaraló elitek. A klímaváltozás árát rövid távon nem a gazdagok fizetik meg, hanem pont azok, akik a legkevésbé tehetnek róla. A fejlett országok rászoruló rétegei és a fejlődő országok lakossága. De nemcsak a túlfogyasztás, a környezetvédelem is az elit kiváltsága napjainkban: organikus ételek, elektromos autók, tetőre szerelt napelemek. Ezek olyan dolgok, amit egy átlagember nem engedhet meg magának, miközben sokak számára a tiszta ivóvíz is luxusnak számít. Képviselőtársaim! Nem várhatjuk el a tömegektől a környezettudatosságot, és hogy viseljék a klímaváltozásnak a következményeit, miközben az elitek nem hajlandóak tenni a közös célért, jövőnk megmentéséért. Éppen ezért teljesen újra kell gondolnunk a társadalmi egyenlőség és az újraelosztás rendszerét. Olyan Európát kell építenünk, ami egyszerre igazságos és zöld.

  Gunnar Beck (ID). – Herr Präsident! Keine Plenarwoche ohne Hinweis auf die eminente Klimakatastrophe, auch nicht nach dem kältesten April seit 30 oder vielleicht 60 Jahren. Thema heute: die Auswirkungen des Klimawandels auf sogenannte vulnerable Bevölkerungsgruppen in der Dritten Welt. Dieser Bericht hierzu umfasst 54 Seiten, eine Fülle von Allgemeinplätzen, Halbwahrheiten und schlecht durchdachten Forderungen. Wir lesen: Die reichsten Staaten verursachen die höchsten CO2-Emissionen, 40 % der Weltbevölkerung hätten kaum Trinkwasser, Klimawandel treffe vor allem Frauen, und Frauen arbeiteten häufiger Teilzeit als Männer – stimmt alles.

Doch jetzt die keinesfalls so frohe Botschaft: Die EU müsse ihre Klimaziele verschärfen, weltweit Gerechtigkeit schaffen, vor allem für Frauen und Migranten, und Migration nach Europa weiter erleichtern. Richtig ist: Frauen werden in vielen Teilen der Welt benachteiligt, und viele der Ärmsten sind tatsächlich Frauen. Nur: Das Klima diskriminiert nicht, sondern Armut, nicht das Geschlecht verringert Lebenschancen, mehr als alles andere. Wie schon Friedrich Engels bemerkte: Das Leben der Ehefrau eines Fabrikanten hat mehr gemein mit dem Leben einer Fabrikantin oder dem ihres Mannes als mit der Existenz ihrer Arbeiter oder Arbeiterinnen. Die EU verursacht 6 bis 9 % der weltweiten CO2-Emissionen. Das heißt, was immer wir tun, hat null Effekt auf das Weltklima.

Tatsache ist ferner: In Afrika werden jede Woche rund 850 000 Kinder geboren. Als Sühne für Klimasünden fordern Kommission und Parlament immer mehr Migration – 70 Millionen allein bis 2035 laut Ex-Migrationskommissar Avramopoulos. Hier ein viel besseres Rezept für Sie: Wiederbewalden Sie 11 % der Erdoberfläche, wie es die Technische Hochschule Zürich zur Neutralisierung der CO2-Emissionen fordert. Leugnen Sie nicht weiter beharrlich Überbevölkerung als wahre Ursache von Armut weltweit, und beerdigen Sie endlich ihre unseligen Weltrettungsfantasien, denn die führen ins Elend und sonst nirgendwohin und nichts sonst.

  Grace O'Sullivan (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, the climate—related COVID crisis has given us all a wake-up call. Sadly, the world’s most vulnerable populations are already awake to the ravages of climate change. Climate change is a political and ethical issue. The most vulnerable suffer, while the world’s wealthiest countries set ambitious goals but do little to achieve them. Much of the developing world, shackled by crippling debt, is unable to adapt to the impact of rising sea levels, salinisation of water sources and extreme weather.

It’s time to redress this shameful imbalance, time for the more privileged inhabitants of this planet to stop rolling over and hitting the snooze button when the alarm bell rings. In this respect, I am disappointed to see that some of my colleagues are not prepared to recognise climate refugees’ rights to international protection. We call on all those in positions of power – the Commission, the Member States – to wake up, protect climate refugees and implement international debt forgiveness in the face of the climate and pandemic crisis. While the planet is being wrecked by unsustainable practices, the developing world picks up the bill, a bill they are paying with their lives, and this is obscene.

  Marlene Mortler (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In dem vorliegenden Entschließungsantrag spielt Ernährungssicherheit eine hervorgehobene Rolle. Zu Recht! Denn zu oft sind ausgerechnet die Bevölkerungsgruppen von Ernährungsunsicherheit betroffen, die auch unter schlechter Gesundheit, wirtschaftlicher Unsicherheit und Vertreibung leiden. Dabei spielt der Klimawandel eine entscheidende Rolle, weil er diese Menschen oft unverhältnismäßig hart trifft. Nachhaltige Ernährungssysteme sind also unabdingbar, um die Effekte des Klimawandels einzudämmen und schonend mit unseren begrenzten Ressourcen umzugehen.

Mit dem für September geplanten Food Systems Summit unternehmen die Vereinten Nationen einen entscheidenden Schritt, um solche Ernährungssysteme zu fördern und einen nachhaltigen Wandel bis 2030 herbeizuführen. Bereits am 22. Mai feiern die Vereinten Nationen den Internationalen Tag der biologischen Vielfalt. Diese beiden Ziele müssen wir als Europäische Union nicht nur teilen, sondern unterstützen. Wenn diese Transformation gelingen soll und kann, dann geht es nur mit den Frauen. Sie brauchen Schutz, sie brauchen Förderung. Frauenrechte sind Menschenrechte. Danke an die Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die das im Entschließungsantrag klar benennen. Wir alle müssen verantwortungsbewusst mit unserer Erde umgehen, um besonders schutzbedürftige Bevölkerungsgruppen in Entwicklungs- und Schwellenländern zu entlasten. Schrittweise Verbesserungen in den Bereichen Ernährungssicherheit, Gesundheit und so weiter können schließlich nicht nur unseren Partnerstaaten zugutekommen, sondern immer auch uns selbst.

  Delara Burkhardt (S&D). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Krisen lasten zu großen Teilen auf den Schultern von Frauen. Sie werden von den Auswirkungen überproportional stark betroffen, sie erfahren finanzielle und berufliche Nachteile, sie kämpfen in der vordersten Reihe. Die Klimakrise ist genau so eine Krise. Stärker getroffen haben Frauen gleichzeitig weniger Möglichkeiten, sich vor den Folgen zu schützen oder auch vor ihnen zu fliehen – vor allen Dingen Frauen im Globalen Süden.

Frauen sind aber nicht nur Opfer dieser Krise. Sie spielen eine Schlüsselrolle in der Bewältigung ebendieser. Es ist wichtig, dass ihr umfangreiches Wissen in die Strategien zur Abschwächung der Klimakrise und zu Anpassungsmaßnahmen einfließt. Das Problem: Frauen sind oftmals in der Entscheidungsfindung nicht beteiligt. Bei der Klimakonferenz von Paris waren nur 20 % der Verhandelnden Frauen. Klar ist: Ohne Geschlechtergerechtigkeit gibt es keine Klimagerechtigkeit! Die Klimakrise und die damit verbundenen Risiken sind nicht geschlechterneutral. Auf allen Ebenen muss den Stimmen von Frauen und Mädchen mehr Gehör verschafft werden. Das machen wir auch in dieser Entschließung deutlich. Danke, Mónica, danke an alle Beteiligten!

  Thomas Waitz (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, Commissioner, we have heard today already that Europe has a historic responsibility based on our emissions of fossil fuels. We were building our wealth in the last 100 years and we still one of the biggest emitters globally and the collateral damage is global warming, resulting in a climate crisis.

We’re talking about disappearing islands. We’re talking about desertification and droughts. And there is no doubt that these droughts and desertification are fueling conflicts, are triggering conflicts like they triggered the civil war in Syria and like this is a trigger in the Sahel zone. If we look at Nigeria, we think this is a religious conflict. The root cause is a land conflict because of the desertification of the landscape. It’s a conflict between animal holders and land farmers. So it’s also a climate conflict – but this does not excuse anyone who is violent and infringing human rights.

But we have to acknowledge that not only a person that is threatened by a Kalashnikov is threatened by death. We are ready to accept that with regard to asylum seekers. We should look into our situation and also accept citizens that are threatened by death by climate crisis. This is a historic responsibility of us in the European Union.

  Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni Państwo! Wszyscy mamy świadomość, że zmiany klimatu w znacznym stopniu dotykają kobiety i dzieci. To one stanowią większość uchodźców klimatycznych narażonych dodatkowo na przemoc, głód i śmierć. Są także pierwszymi ofiarami wojen o zasoby naturalne czy konfliktów zbrojnych. Wynika to w dużej mierze z istniejącej nierówności płci, której przejawem jest choćby trudniejsza sytuacja ekonomiczna kobiet, ich marginalizacja i dyskryminacja w życiu społecznym i politycznym, trudniejszy dostęp do kapitału, edukacji czy służby zdrowia.

Chciałabym podkreślić, jak ważne jest włączenie kobiet w kluczowe procesy decyzyjne i zapewnienie im reprezentacji w samorządach czy parlamentach narodowych. Z badań jasno wynika, że pełne i równe uczestnictwo kobiet w decyzjach dotyczących zrównoważonego rozwoju ma kluczowe znaczenie dla powodzenia walki ze zmianami klimatu.

Jako przewodnicząca Zgromadzenia Parlamentarnego AKP-UE, chciałabym również wyrazić nadzieję, że odnowione partnerstwo pomiędzy Unią a krajami AKP oraz nowa strategia współpracy z Afryką, o których także mowa sprawozdaniu, będą stawiały kobiety i walkę o równouprawnienie płci w centrum działań i wspólnych wysiłków na rzecz walki ze zmianami klimatycznymi.

Chciałabym również bardzo pogratulować pani przewodniczącej i wszystkim kontrsprawozdawcom. To bardzo ważny i aktualny temat. Mam nadzieję, że decyzja Parlamentu i to sprawozdanie, choć w niewielkim stopniu, przyczynią się do rozwiązania tych – jak podkreślam z całą mocą – ważnych i dotykających kobiety problemów.

  Carlos Zorrinho (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, os mais pobres e vulneráveis são os que mais sofrem com o impacto das alterações climáticas. Sofrem o impacto direto das catástrofes, da quebra da biodiversidade, da redução das colheitas.

São também, muitas vezes, os principais visados por processos de transição energética e económica que, sendo absolutamente necessários, não discriminam como deveriam discriminar, positivamente, os que mais necessitam. Processos que forçam as populações mais vulneráveis e os países em desenvolvimento a pagar o preço mais elevado da mudança, sem as devidas compensações dos mais abastados e dos países desenvolvidos.

Como pilar central da nossa ambição de liderança na transição energética e no combate às alterações climáticas, nós, União Europeia, temos que nos mobilizar e mobilizar a comunidade internacional para pôr em prática uma estratégia mais justa e mais eficaz, uma estratégia que reforce a contribuição dos países mais desenvolvidos para limitar os impactos das alterações climáticas nas populações mais vulneráveis através de medidas de apoio humanitário e do financiamento de intervenções estruturais, de mitigação, da formação e da qualificação económica e social, uma estratégia para o qual o relatório/debate dá um contributo profundo e que não pode ser ignorada.

  Janez Lenarčič, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I wish to thank the honourable Members for this very good discussion. Many of you have stressed that the most vulnerable populations are often the ones that are most affected by the effects of climate change. I’m convinced that together we can take forward the issues related to the impact of climate change on vulnerable people, including their displacement.

The European Union and its Member States are one of the most important players in the fight against climate change. In 2019 the European Union, its Member States and the European Investment Bank supported partner countries with almost EUR 22 billion in climate finance, and this included actively supporting vulnerable countries and vulnerable segments of populations in adapting to climate change and preparedness for disaster risk reduction. This makes the European Union a leading force in this domain.

Rest assured that the European Commission, with its external action, will continue to advocate and to take concrete steps for this priority issue, leaving no one behind.

  Presidente. – Está encerrado o debate.

A votação realizar-se-á amanhã.

23. Acelerar os progressos e combater as desigualdades a fim de erradicar a SIDA, enquanto ameaça para a saúde pública, até 2030 (debate)

  Presidente. – Segue-se o debate sobre a pergunta oral à Comissão do Deputado Tomas Tobé, em nome da Comissão do Desenvolvimento, sobre acelerar os progressos e combater as desigualdades a fim de erradicar a SIDA, enquanto ameaça para a saúde pública, até 2030 [2021/2604(RSP)] - (O-000027/2021 - B9-0015/21).

  Tomas Tobé, author. – Mr President, as Chair of the Development Committee, let me start by thanking Charles Goerens from Renew, who took the political initiative in our Committee, and also give my thanks to the whole Committee for supporting this and making sure that we could move quickly.

I think that today’s debate is very important, as it provides a timely opportunity to make a contribution ahead of the UN High Level Meeting on AIDS. It is a historic moment for AIDS response, as this year marks 40 years since the emergence of the first cases of HIV and 25 years since the creation of UNAIDS.

In 2019, 38 million people were living with HIV and approximately 12 million people did not have access to life-saving treatment. In 2019 there were also 1.77 million new infections, and 700 000 people died of AIDS-related causes globally. These data show that HIV and AIDS remains a global crisis. In 2020, targets set by the 2016 Political Declaration were missed by a huge margin, and due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many people have had no HIV or AIDS treatment, as HIV services have been severely disrupted. The COVID crisis has reversed the efforts made in fighting HIV and has also exposed social inequalities and health system weaknesses. It is therefore crucial that we use this opportunity of this upcoming high-level meeting to review progress and challenges, to make commitments, to accelerate action if we are to beat the disease by 2030.

In preparation for this important High Level Meeting, we would like to address three questions to the Commission. Firstly, how will the Commission ensure that the EU contributes to the adoption of forward-looking and ambitious commitments in the 2021 Political Declaration on HIV/AIDS? Secondly, what steps will the Commission take to accelerate efforts to end AIDS and support partner countries’ efforts to build resilient health and community systems? Thirdly, what will the Commission do to address inequalities fuelling the HIV epidemic at country level?

In the accompanying resolution, we also underline that the global AIDS response requires a multi-sectoral approach and multi-level cooperation. We state the need for partner countries to build strong and resilient health systems and for more EU funding to be devoted to global health and the fight against HIV. COVID-19 has also shown that countries need to invest in pandemic preparedness and responses. Evidence has also shown that progress in the fight against HIV is possible when human rights-based approaches are adopted and when services are responsive to the needs of key populations and other priority populations facing challenges in accessing HIV services.

We should use the implementation of the EU Human Rights Action Plan and Gender Action Plan III to address the fight against stigma and discrimination, criminalisation of same-sex relations and other punitive and discriminatory laws, as well as access to comprehensive sexuality education. I also believe that there is a need for renewed EU commitment to the global HIV response, with more determination, accountability and resources. For me it is abundantly clear that what we need to do is to increase our efforts and that the EU has a leading role to play.

  Janez Lenarčič, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members of Parliament, thank you for this opportunity to discuss this important issue. The debate is very timely, as was said by the author himself, in view of the decision of the UN General Assembly to convene a high-level meeting on HIV and AIDS in June.

As the world tackles the COVID pandemic, the devastating AIDS global pandemic continues. While the world focuses on overcoming the direct impact of COVID and laying the ground for recovery, the secondary health impacts, the disruptions to essential health services, including with respect to HIV, hepatitis, tuberculosis and malaria, are deeply concerning.

We all know that HIV is fuelled by inequalities and that it disproportionately affects vulnerable and marginalised populations. Worsening inequalities increase the spread of HIV as do armed conflicts and natural disasters. We need to work collectively to ensure that our response to the COVID pandemic tackles these inequalities, preserve the gains achieved during the last decade and secures access for key populations to the essential services.

This is why the Commission welcomes the new global AIDS strategy for 2021-2026, sharing many of its priorities, not least the focus on tackling inequalities, gender equality and human rights. Putting people at the centre, involving communities and ensuring that we learn from COVID, in particular to build sustainable health systems is fundamental. This is why we welcome the broad principles, reiterated commitments and strong calls contained in the resolution tabled today.

The European Union is actively involved in the negotiation of an ambitious and progressive new political declaration for the upcoming high-level meeting on HIV-AIDS. As with previous United Nations political declarations, the most sensitive issues will require delicate negotiations.

On behalf of the European Union, the Commission is recommending the inclusion, not only of new prevention, testing and treatment targets, but also of specific targets related to stigma, discrimination and human rights. I am convinced that the fight against HIV is closely linked to breaking down barriers, including working on legal issues ensuring equitable access of key populations to services and treatments and strengthening the overall health systems, accompanied by an enabling environment for sustainable financial resources, notably domestic.

The response to the HIV pandemic also requires further focus on adolescent girls and young women. Our new Gender Action Plan 3, puts the fight against gender inequality at the centre of our action. The Commission is a long-standing supporter of the fight against HIV. We are a major contributor to the global fund with EUR 550 million for the period 2020-2022 and we attach high importance to fighting HIV-AIDS globally. Our more recent support to the work of the act accelerator, notably its cross-cutting health system connector, is paramount to mitigating the indirect effects of the COVID pandemic and to strengthening the preparedness and response to current and future pandemics, and this includes HIV-AIDS.

The upcoming high-level meeting provides an important opportunity to remobilise the international community with respect to the fight against HIV-AIDS, and you can count on the EU’s engagement.

  Frances Fitzgerald, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, in the midst of this current pandemic, I’m reminded of another epidemic, the HIV-AIDS epidemic back in the 1980s. Back then, so many suffered such unnecessary stigma, uncertainty, pain and death. Thankfully, things are now brighter for those living with HIV. Men and women can be confident in the medical knowledge and the drug therapies available, and that the social stigma that the disease once carried is now decreasing, and of course we need to shift our focus to living well with HIV as it is now considered a disease which can be managed. People living with HIV are beginning to age and their health needs should be supported.

However, we do have an ongoing crisis, and there remain huge challenges, unnecessary deaths and infections. The incidence of HIV has been increasing in Ireland and elsewhere since 2011, despite greater public awareness and access to preventative treatments and policy commitments. Therefore, there is a responsibility on us as policymakers to ensure there is a framework in place. There can be a new impetus and a proper strategy politically. We can engage with relevant stakeholders – advocacy bodies, academia, infectious diseases experts, people living with HIV and the pharmaceutical industry – to finally end AIDS as a public health threat by 2030.

  Pierfrancesco Majorino, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'AIDS è una malattia terribile, uscita dalle nostre agende, spessissimo dimenticata ma assolutamente presente nella vita reale.

Il quadro, già ricordato dall'onorevole Tobé, è drammatico: nel 2019 le persone affette da HIV erano 38 milioni: di queste 12 milioni non avevano accesso alla terapia retrovirale salvavita. Il numero dei morti è stato di 700 000. L'Africa subsahariana continua a essere la regione più colpita, con il 57 % di tutte le nuove infezioni da HIV e l'84 % delle infezioni da HIV nei bambini.

Serve che la prossima Assemblea generale delle Nazioni Unite assuma un forte e rinnovato impegno globale per debellare questa malattia, come diceva già il Commissario. Si devono garantire quelle cure che sono troppo spesso bloccate dalle logiche del profitto.

Serve anche un'attenzione forte per garantire il diritto alla sessualità e per contrastare la discriminazione, la criminalizzazione delle persone omosessuali e transessuali, delle diseguaglianze di genere: ancora oggi, siamo di fronte, in alcune aree del mondo a una ghettizzazione che favorisce la malattia.

  Charles Goerens, au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, le contexte de la pandémie de COVID-19 risque de dévier notre regard d’un autre fléau, vieux de 40 ans: le SIDA. De ce point de vue, la tenue de la réunion de haut niveau des Nations unies, prévue du 7 au 10 juin 2021, tombe à point.

Les progrès réalisés avant tout lors des 20 dernières années sont considérables, notamment pour ce qui est de l’accès aux antirétroviraux. Néanmoins, l’éradication du VIH/SIDA risque de rester illusoire si nous n’y prenons garde. Si nous voulons rendre irréversible la tendance vers la contamination zéro, la communauté internationale doit donner une réponse globale structurée.

Si la détermination de l’Union européenne a été décisive pour engranger des résultats encourageants, celle-ci doit garder le cap et doper les structures existantes, au niveau tant de la production pharmaceutique que des transferts de capacité vers les pays en développement et des efforts pédagogiques indispensables à l’endiguement de la pandémie.

La Commission joue un rôle central dans la fédération de toutes les forces engagées dans la lutte contre le SIDA. Parmi ses partenaires, il y a lieu de citer les institutions internationales, le monde associatif, qui a joué un rôle pionnier en la matière, ainsi que le Fonds mondial de lutte contre le SIDA, la malaria et la tuberculose, qui est devenu entre-temps l’acteur central par excellence. C’est grâce à ce dernier qu’ont été mises en place des structures différenciées, à même de répondre aux besoins des malades dans tous les pays en développement.

Conscient que la Commission va marquer de son empreinte la réunion de New York, le Parlement européen l’encourage à persévérer dans cette voie. Si ces résultats escomptés pour la fin 2030 nous tiennent à cœur, il ne nous reste plus que neuf ans pour agir.

  Tilly Metz, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, en 2019, sur les 38 millions de personnes ayant le SIDA, 12 millions n’avaient pas accès aux traitements adéquats, et plus d’un tiers des nouveaux infectés sont des jeunes entre 15 et 27 ans. C’est pourquoi nous demandons, en Europe et partout dans le monde, un soutien inconditionnel aux associations qui œuvrent pour sensibiliser à la prévention du SIDA ainsi qu’au personnel de santé pour soigner les personnes atteintes du SIDA, et une aide ciblée aux populations vulnérables, notamment en Afrique subsaharienne.

Pouvoir vivre en bonne santé est un droit et l’on ne devrait pas pouvoir faire du commerce sur le dos des pandémies. Pour combattre le SIDA partout et pour garantir une accessibilité aux médicaments pour toutes et tous, une levée des droits de propriété intellectuelle est indispensable. Pour le SIDA, nous devons la maintenir; pour la COVID-19, nous devons l’instaurer.

  Beata Kempa, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Panie Przewodniczący komisji DEVE! Mimo wielu lat badań i milionów wydanych środków oraz tysięcy zaangażowanych osób, akcji informacyjnych, szkoleń lekarzy, wirus AIDS jest wciąż groźnym zagrożeniem dla świata. Obecnie na świecie żyje 38 mln osób z potwierdzonym zakażeniem, a wirus pochłonął już 78 mln istnień ludzkich. Co prawda w ostatnich latach udało się spowolnić jego rozprzestrzenianie, ale wciąż brakuje skutecznego leku pozwalającego na całkowite pozbycie się wirusa, a także szczepionki dającej dożywotnią ochronę. Szczególnie narażeni na zakażenia są mieszkańcy krajów rozwijających się w Afryce, Azji, Ameryce Południowej, ale nie możemy też zapominać o mieszkańcach Rosji i Ukrainy, gdzie wciąż notowana jest bardzo duża ilość zakażeń, co wiąże się z brakiem skutecznej opieki oraz dostępem do testów. To tam powinniśmy też kierować nasze wysiłki. Potrzebujemy wielosektorowej i globalnej odpowiedzi na ten światowy kryzys: z jednej strony – kampanii informacyjnej, a z drugiej – odpowiedniego wsparcia i dzielenia się istniejącymi lekami pomagającymi chorym w nierównej walce. Wirus HIV nie zna granic, tak jak i walka z nim nie zna i nie powinna znać granic. To właśnie na tym froncie Unia Europejska może pokazać swoją siłę i skuteczność i zwiększyć inwestycje w ramach UNAIDS, Globalnego Funduszu na Rzecz Walki z AIDS Gruźlicą i Malarią. Większe środki to istotna szansa na wynalezienie leku i – jeśli to możliwe – na wynalezienie szczepionki. Pandemia COVID-19 pokazała, że w stanach wyjątkowego zagrożenia możemy działać szybko i skutecznie. Dziś warto iść tą drogą, aby przynieść tak oczekiwaną zmianę.

  Miguel Urbán Crespo, en nombre del Grupo The Left. – Señor presidente, hoy en día, una de cada tres personas infectadas por el sida no tiene acceso a medicamentos retrovirales.

Como muchas otras enfermedades, el sida suele ser consecuencia y acelerador de desigualdades económicas, sociales y sanitarias. Con el coronavirus, los efectos devastadores del sida han aumentado, pero también han quedado invisibilizados. El mundo está lleno de crisis olvidadas; evitemos que esta sea una de ellas.

Frente a retos globales como una pandemia, solo hay una respuesta efectiva: sanidad pública universal. El acceso a la salud es un derecho humano fundamental; la vacunación y los medicamentos deben ser considerados como bienes públicos globales.

El mercado se ha mostrado incapaz de afrontar estos desafíos mundiales. No hay sitio para la iniciativa privada cuando está en juego la vida de millones y millones de personas. Hay que liberar las patentes y poner los derechos de todas y de todos por delante de los intereses privados. No nos cansaremos de repetir que nuestras vidas valen mucho más que los beneficios de un puñado de farmacéuticas.

  Marlene Mortler (PPE). – Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Nur wer sich schätzt, der schützt sich. Das gilt für jeden Einzelnen. Uns muss nicht jeder Lebensstil entsprechen, aber am Ende steht der Erfolg. Und wenn es Mittel und Wege gibt, um Krankheiten zu verhindern und Todeszahlen massiv zu senken, dann müssen wir diese Wege weltweit nutzen.

Auch in Europa haben wir noch gewaltige Unterschiede. Das heißt auch mal, altes Denken aufzubrechen, um neue Wege zu gehen. Als ehemalige Suchtbeauftragte der deutschen Bundesregierung wurde mir schnell bewusst, dass die Substitutionstherapie, zum Beispiel mit Methadon, immer besser als purer Heroinkonsum ist. So ist es bei AIDS: Wir haben Medikamente, Tests – wir müssen sie nur konsequent anwenden.

Jeder Mensch ist gleich viel wert und hat die gleiche Würde. Dieses ist der Schlüssel, um HIV global einzudämmen. Jahrzehntelange Erfahrungen und Erkenntnisse aus der HIV—Bekämpfung zeigen, dass Ungleichheiten – einschließlich bei der Gleichstellung der Geschlechter –, Stigmatisierung, Diskriminierung und fehlende Einrichtungen lokaler öffentlicher Gesundheitsdienste Fortschritte bei der Beendigung von AIDS verhindern.

Selbst in den Ländern, die die sogenannten 90-90-90-Behandlungsziele erreicht haben, werden immer noch zu viele Menschen zurückgelassen. Es ist deshalb von großer Bedeutung, diverse Ungleichheiten anzugehen, Synergien zwischen struktureller Prävention und Behandlung voll auszuschöpfen. Vierzig Jahre nach dem ersten Bericht über AIDS und HIV muss die Beendigung spätestens bis 2030 gelingen. Danke deshalb, Tomas, danke allen Initiatoren.

  Marc Angel (S&D). – Mr President, we Socialists and Democrats welcome the UNAIDS global strategy ending inequalities, ending HIV/AIDS. This new approach under the leadership of UNAIDS Executive Director Winnie Byanyima underlines the synergies and the links between HIV/AIDS and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals.

To win the battle against AIDS we need progress in almost all 17 SDGs. As a parliamentarian but also an activist since the 1980s, and a UNAIDS champion, I remind that we must not forget key populations and vulnerable populations such as prisoners, drug users, sex workers, men having sex with men, transgender persons, young women and girls, and victims of sexual abuse. We need to tackle key populations and their specific challenges. For this, we need to call on all stakeholders worldwide to step up their efforts to encourage governments to recognise and reach out to all key populations in full respect of human rights and dignity.

To end AIDS by 2030 we need sustainable funding. I call on the Commission and all 27 Member States to invest in global health. Please support UNAIDS and the global fund and all projects strengthening community health workers and projects empowering women and girls through good access to education and teaching them about their sexual and reproductive rights.

It is possible to end HIV/AIDS by 2030 as a global health threat so let’s make it happen. Thank you to the rapporteur Tobé, and all those who worked on this fantastic resolution.

  Engin Eroglu (Renew). – Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar! Die AIDS-Pandemie steht seit vierzig Jahren im Blickpunkt der Öffentlichkeit. Wichtig ist, dass wir durch Aufklärung und durch Forschung Teilerfolge erzielen konnten. Gerade in den Industrieländern haben sich die Zahlen reduziert. Es gibt gute Medikamente, aber leider noch kein Heilmittel.

In den Entwicklungsländern und global sieht es aber ganz anders aus. Fakt ist, dass jährlich über einhunderttausend Kinder und Jugendliche an AIDS sterben: eine erschreckende Zahl, und das damit verbundene Leid der Eltern – unerträglich! Wir dürfen es nicht zulassen, Herr Kommissar, dass dieses unerträgliche Leid in unserem Jahrhundert zur Normalität wird. Wir haben bei COVID bewiesen, was wir machen können in kürzester Zeit.

Sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar, nehmen Sie diese gute Entschließung im Juni mit zu den UN, und beenden Sie das Leid mit all dem, was wir in Europa dazu beitragen können.

  Kateřina Konečná (The Left). – Vážený pane předsedající, pane komisaři, v rámci cíle udržitelného rozvoje číslo 3 jsme se zavázali, my všichni, ukončit AIDS jako hrozbu pro veřejné zdraví do roku 2030. Z jeho naplňování jak v Evropské unii, tak mimo ni je mi však velmi smutno.

Jak dlouho budeme ve výboru ENVI ještě volat po novém akčním plánu pro boj s HIV/AIDS v Evropské unii? Ne, pane komisaři, neděláte dost. My to chceme. Platnost toho starého totiž vypršela již před lety a stále se nic neděje. Komise nečiní. Takhle tu nemoc u nás ani do roku 2030 nevymýtíme, že? Bohužel stejně jako u rakoviny se nějak zapomnělo, že AIDS je tady stále s námi.

Dovolte mi připomenout, že boj proti patentům na život zachraňující léky začal Nelson Mandela právě během prvních let pandemie HIV v Africe. Tento boj nás naučil, že k ukončení jakékoliv pandemie je třeba dát přednost zdraví před ziskem. Naše nečinnost zabíjí. Členské státy a Komise se konečně musí chytnout za nos, přijít s novým akčním plánem a změnit svoji pozici vůči návrhu Indie a Jihoafrické republiky na WTO, jinak se tady znovu za pár let sejdeme a budeme hořekovat nad tím, že se nic neděje a situace je špatná.

  Sara Cerdas (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, estamos esta noite a discutir um problema de saúde global que tem solução, mas não estamos a atuar corretamente de forma que o HIV-Sida seja eliminado.

Uma das missões da pandemia COVID-19 é que respondemos melhor se trabalharmos juntos e coordenados com uma visão global e estes bons exemplos devem ser seguidos para o combate ao HIV-Sida.

Para isso, temos de aumentar a literacia em saúde, melhorar os acessos aos serviços de testagem e rastreio, melhorar a acessibilidade aos medicamentos para tratamento, bem como para a prevenção, ao mesmo tempo que capacitamos os profissionais de saúde para melhor orientar para esta temática.

Temos que melhorar a acessibilidade a nível global, a um preço justo e de forma atempada, de forma a que não deixemos ninguém para trás.

  Alex Agius Saliba (S&D). – Sur President, il-pandemija affettwat il-ħajja ta' kull wieħed u waħda minna, iżda żgur li ħalliet impatt ferm aktar qawwi fuq dawk li diġà kienu jbatu minn kundizzjonijiet mediċi. Żgur li r-restrizzjonijiet ta' lockdowns kienu bżonjużi sabiex nipproteġu l-ħajja tan-nies però dawn l-istess restrizzjonijiet ħallew effetti devastanti fuq numru ta' pazjenti, fosthom dawk li jgħixu bl-AIDS u l-HIV, sabiex ikunu jistgħu jkomplu jieħdu, fost oħrajn, it-trattamenti tagħhom.

Xorta jibqa' l-fatt li, waqt il-pandemija, il-firxa tal-AIDS u l-HIV baqgħet sfida għaż-żgħażagħ u n-nisa, b'mod speċjali, f'diversi pajjiżi fost dawk l-anqas żviluppati. It-trattament universali għall-AIDS u l-HIV u kura ta' kwalità tista' ssalva l-ħajjiet ta' bosta. Tgħin sabiex tagħti ħajja kważi normali lill-pazjenti morda bl-HIV, filwaqt li tgħin ukoll sabiex inkomplu nrażżnu t-trażmissjonijiet.

Kulħadd għandu dritt għall-aqwa kwalità tas-saħħa u, kif ukoll, dritt li jgħix ħajtu b'dinjità. U għalhekk importanti li l-Ewropa trid taġixxi llum qabel għada sabiex tipprijoritizza l-ġlieda kontra l-HIV u l-AIDS; ġlieda li għandu jkollha l-ambizzjoni li telimina l-AIDS mil-lista ta' kriżijiet għas-saħħa pubblika sas-sena 2030.

  Janez Lenarčič, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, let me reiterate that the Commission has been a long-standing supporter of the fight against HIV and will remain on the frontline. The COVID-19 pandemic has taught us yet again the importance of multilateral partnerships in tackling global challenges. The world must draw lessons and be better prepared for future pandemics but also address ongoing global health challenges. The European Union is notably committed in this context to supporting the strengthening of health systems and universal health coverage everywhere.

And this will be at the heart of the Global Health Summit co-organised by the Commission later this week. We are very glad to be able to count on the support of this House for the next steps.

  Presidente. – Está encerrado o debate.

A votação realizar-se-á na quarta-feira.

Declarações escritas (artigo 171.º)

  Joanna Kopcińska (ECR), na piśmie. – Ogólna tendencja nowych zakażeń HIV wg. danych UNAIDS pokazuje, że epidemia HIV pozostaje światowym wyzwaniem z powodu problemów społecznych oraz braku dostępu do skutecznych narzędzi profilaktycznych. Nierówności, które napędzają epidemię HIV, zostały dodatkowo zaostrzone przez pandemię COVID-19. Cel strategii FastTrack polegający na zmniejszeniu liczby nowych zakażeń do poziomu około 200 tys. do roku 2030 oraz osiągnięcie zespolonego wyniku „90%–90%–90%”, zgodnie z którym prawie wszystkie osoby zakażone (90%) wiedzą o swoim zakażeniu, z czego 90% otrzymuje leczenie antyretrowirusowe i 90% z nich ma niewykrywaną, może być trudny do utrzymania w swoim globalnym założeniu w kontekście panującej pandemii COVID-19. Jakie kroki zamierza podjąć KE, aby przyspieszyć wysiłki na rzecz walki z AIDS – z jednej strony, zgodnie ze strategią FastTrack stworzoną przez UNAIDS, z drugiej strony przy konkretnym wsparciu wysiłków krajów członkowskich, we wsparciu ich własnych programów polityki zdrowotnej, budowania systemów opieki zdrowotnej oraz systemów niwelujących nierówności społeczne? Pamiętajmy, że celem strategii zwalczania epidemii HIV/AIDS i leczenia ARV jest nie tylko poprawa stanu zdrowia osób żyjących z HIV, ale również odbudowa ich sytemu odpornościowego, zmniejszenie ryzyka rozwoju AIDS, obniżenie poziomu zakaźności a przez to zmniejszenie ryzyka transmisji zakażenia na osoby niezakażone poprzez przerwanie transmisji w populacji.

24. Ordem do dia da próxima sessão: ver Ata

25. Encerramento da sessão

(A sessão é encerrada às 23h32)