Dobesedni zapisi razprav

Četrtek, 17. februar 2022 - Strasbourg

1. Otvoritev seje

ΠΡΟΕΔΡΙΑ: ΔΗΜΗΤΡΙΟΣ ΠΑΠΑΔΗΜΟΥΛΗΣ
Αντιπρόεδρος

(Η συνεδρίαση αρχίζει στις 8.30)

  Πρόεδρος. – Κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, καλημέρα. Αρχίζει η σημερινή μας συνεδρίαση. Πριν περάσω στην ανακοίνωση των αποτελεσμάτων της ψηφοφορίας, θα ήθελα να αναφερθώ σε ένα απαράδεκτο και απολύτως καταδικαστέο γεγονός που συνέβη χθες στην αίθουσα της Ολομέλειας του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου.

Σας διαβάζω επακριβώς την αντίδραση της Προέδρου του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου, Roberta Metsola, για αυτό το φαινόμενο:

Ένας φασιστικός χαιρετισμός στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο είναι απαράδεκτος. Πάντα και παντού. Προσβάλλει εμένα και όλους τους άλλους στην Ευρώπη. Εμείς υποστηρίζουμε το ακριβώς αντίθετο. Είμαστε το σπίτι της δημοκρατίας. Αυτός ο χαιρετισμός ανήκει στο πιο σκοτεινό κεφάλαιο της ιστορίας μας και πρέπει να μείνει εκεί.

Roberta Metsola, Πρόεδρος του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου

Είμαι βέβαιος ότι αυτή η δήλωση εκφράζει όλο το δημοκρατικό, συνταγματικό, κοινοβουλευτικό φάσμα του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και όχι μόνο το Προεδρείο του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου. Εμείς, ως Προεδρείο του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου, έχουμε εντολή, όχι μόνο από τους ευρωβουλευτές, αλλά από τη συντριπτική πλειοψηφία των Ευρωπαίων πολιτών που μας έχουν εκλέξει εδώ, να υπερασπιστούμε την κοινοβουλευτική δημοκρατία και το κράτος δικαίου· και αυτό θα κάνουμε και η Πρόεδρος και το Προεδρείο του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου, είμαι βέβαιος, με τη στήριξή σας.

2. Razglasitev izidov glasovanja: gl. zapisnik

  Πρόεδρος. – Θα ξεκινήσουμε με την ανακοίνωση των αποτελεσμάτων της δεύτερης ψηφοφορίας της Τετάρτης 16 Φεβρουαρίου 2022.

(Ο Πρόεδρος ανακοινώνει τα αποτελέσματα της ψηφοφορίας)1

____________________________________________

1Για τα αποτελέσματα και άλλες πληροφορίες σχετικά με τις ψηφοφορίες: βλ. Συνοπτικά Πρακτικά

3. Sestava odborov in delegacij

  Πρόεδρος. – Η πολιτική Ομάδα Ταυτότητας και Δημοκρατίας (ID) ενημέρωσε την Πρόεδρο για αποφάσεις σχετικά με αλλαγές σε διορισμούς και επιτροπές. Οι εν λόγω αποφάσεις θα αναφερθούν στα Συνοπτικά Πρακτικά της σημερινής συνεδρίασης και παράγουν αποτελέσματα από την ημερομηνία αυτής της ανακοίνωσης.

4. Suša in drugi skrajni vremenski pojavi na Iberskem polotoku in v drugih delih Evrope (razprava)

  Πρόεδρος. – Το επόμενο σημείο στην ημερήσια διάταξη είναι η συζήτηση επί της δηλώσεως της Επιτροπής σχετικά με την ξηρασία και άλλα ακραία καιρικά φαινόμενα στην Ιβηρική Χερσόνησο και σε άλλα μέρη της Ευρώπης (2022/2543(RSP)).

Η συζήτηση θα διεξαχθεί με έναν γύρο ομιλητών από τις πολιτικές Ομάδες.

  Helena Dalli, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I am concerned by the serious drought situation suffered in the Iberian Peninsula and in particular by the current situation facing some areas in the north and centre of Portugal. The EU is helping monitor the evolution of the situation through the European Drought Observatory of Copernicus.

Climate change will further increase water scarcity and drought hazard, affecting both its frequency and magnitude, not only in the Iberian Peninsula, but across southern countries and other parts of the EU.

Extreme weather events are expected to rise, and therefore we have to look at both the short- and the long-term solutions. Every year losses caused by drought amount to 9 billion euros in the EU. This is a very high figure, which is happening with an increase of temperatures by 1.1 degrees. With global warming at three degrees, droughts would happen twice as often, and the losses in Europe would increase to EUR 40 billion per year, with the most severe impacts in the Mediterranean and Atlantic regions.

This is why it is so crucial to accelerate the transition towards sustainable and resilient food systems and put our farmers on the path to climate neutrality. We should not pretend that current ways of producing food can continue unchanged. The new common agricultural policy provides opportunities to help the sector adapt, and the Commission will encourage Portugal and Spain to make use of the possibilities and the CAP strategic plans.

I call upon national authorities not only of the Iberian Peninsula, but of all the areas likely to get affected by droughts, to establish sustainable and climate-resilient water-management practices that fully reflect the available water resources and the needs of all users – including the environment in a given river basin; fully implement the Water Framework Directive and reach its targets at the latest by 2027 by utilising its means, particularly river basin management plans, drought management plans and the economic instruments for setting the right water price; make the most of the new CAP strategic plans to deal with water management challenges as the Commission has recommended; and ensure that irrigation projects strictly comply with the requirements of the CAP Regulation.

Some actions have already been taken. My understanding is that the Portuguese authorities are already defining national emergency solutions that may contribute to alleviate the worst drought episode experienced by Portugal in the last 17 years, and are also reflecting in medium-term initiatives that will help the agricultural sector to better adapt and thrive under the changing climate.

I also welcome the Portuguese-Spanish transnational cooperation concerning sustainable and climate-resilient management of cross-border rivers such as Miño, Lima, Douro, Tagus, and Guadiana; the future implementation of a system that will allow the exchange in real time of hydrologic and meteorological data; and also the ongoing discussions on new joint collaboration projects between Spain and Portugal that facilitate joint responses and should materialise in sustainable and climate-resilient management of the water resources.

Within the framework of the common agricultural policy, I am pleased to inform you that the Commission’s services are in contact with the Portuguese national and regional authorities looking into the support that the common agricultural policy can provide to face this national catastrophe.

I shall briefly sketch some of the most relevant lines of action through which the EU may provide support.

The CAP decoupled income support provides an annual safety cushion for farmers. The basic income support offers a basic layer of income support for farmers and can be complemented by additional income support targeting specific types of beneficiaries or specific issues, for instance sectors in difficulty. The Commission has always shown flexibility in relation to the level of advances for these payments. In this regard many of the sectors that traditionally are most affected by weather phenomena, such as drought, also undergo structural difficulties and as such may have access to the voluntary coupled support subject to a set of conditions which contemplate exceptions due to unforeseen extreme circumstances.

To put forward a concrete example, tomato producers in Spain and Portugal who already receive voluntary coupled support due to structural difficulties, may struggle to reach in this year the required minimum production level fixed in the eligibility conditions for the support due to the extreme weather conditions. Should the Member States’ authorities assessment of the situation confirm this, they may decide to still pay the support to the farmers concerned on the basis of force majeure circumstances.

The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the EU aid scheme for the fruit and vegetable sector under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund can be used by Portugal and Spain to help the farmers affected by extreme weather conditions. Support can be granted to beneficiaries if the relevant measures – in particular those for restoring agricultural potential and for compensating losses through risk management tools – are programmed in the corresponding rural development or operational programmes.

In particular, the rural development programme of 2014-2020 for mainland Portugal, where the drought situation is more severe, includes a specific measure to support investment for the restoration of agricultural land and production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events and catastrophic events.

In addition, for farmers participating in risk management tools of the rural development programmes, extreme weather events could trigger compensation for significant economic loss. This applies to farmers receiving support for participation in crop-, animal- and plant-insurance schemes and mutual funds for adverse climatic events, animal and plant diseases, pest infestations and environmental incidents. The production loss must amount to at least 20% of higher ceilings established in the rural development programmes. Article 4 of the delegated regulation also allows for a national response in cases where beneficiaries are unable to fulfil their commitments taken under the rural development measures for the same reasons.

There is also the possibility for the Portuguese and Spanish national authorities to grant, in the case of adverse climatic events, support to farmers from their national budget in line with the EU state aid rules, which enable Member States to grant state aid to compensate the damage suffered due to such events. Member States may decide to block-exempt such aid or to grant it as de minimis aid without the need for prior notification to and approval by the Commission.

There’s also the possible use of the EU solidarity fund to alleviate the drought situation in Portugal and Spain. The use of the EU solidarity fund may be requested by Portuguese and Spanish authorities, and notably in the event of severe natural disasters, in order to mobilise EU support to cover the costs of emergency and recovery operations incurred by public authorities.

An EUSF application can be submitted within 12 weeks from the occurrence of the disaster, showing that the total direct damage exceeds either 0.6% of gross national income or 1.5% of the gross domestic product of the affected region.

Drought is a progressively unfolding natural disaster, where a clear starting date cannot be determined. In such cases, the 12-week application deadline is counted from the date on which the public authorities of the affected state took official action for the first time against the effects of the natural disaster or from the date they declared a state of emergency or similar.

I must nonetheless underscore that private damages and assistance to the agricultural sector and farmers is not eligible under the EUSF, and that its application and budgetary processes are to undergo a legislative process involving the Council and the European Parliament that could take several months.

I must also underscore that with intensifying climate change, as well as the opening-up of the EUSF to pandemic related aid, the capacity of the fund to provide adequate solidarity relief will become increasingly curtailed, which again calls for prioritising structural adaptation solutions.

I would invite the Member State authorities to contact the concerned Commission services, DG REGIO, as soon as possible in order to further explore the existing possibilities and applicable conditions.

As you saw, the Commission and national authorities can do a lot of things to support affected farmers, but we need to underline that water resources are only going to be more scarce in the future in certain areas of the EU and that we have to plan for it.

  Álvaro Amaro, em nome do Grupo PPE. – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, Caras e Caros Colegas, a seca em Portugal e Espanha está a ter uma gravidade extrema. Estamos a aproximar-nos, cada vez mais, de uma situação similar à maior seca a que já assistimos em Portugal e que ocorreu em 2005.

Há 17 anos que não havia tantas zonas de Portugal em seca grave nesta altura do ano, o que traz enormes prejuízos a vários setores da nossa economia, ao ambiente, como por exemplo o turismo, e, particularmente, à agricultura. E quanto a esta última, Senhora Comissária, os agricultores desesperam e muitos já pensam em abandonar a atividade. Veem as culturas de outono-inverno praticamente perdidas.

Em Portugal, as barragens estão em níveis muito baixos para esta época do ano porque praticamente não choveu. A situação em muitas regiões de Espanha também é dramática, com cortes na oferta e limitações de consumo de água, especialmente na Extremadura, na Andaluzia, em Múrcia e Castilla La Mancha. Este problema acresce ao aumento dos custos de produção que os agricultores têm sofrido no último ano. A seca, a redução de efetivos e o abandono da atividade são terríveis e irão conduzir a um outro problema que é a antecipação da época de incêndios, infelizmente.

E é por todas estas razões, ouvindo a Senhora Comissária e apelando à conjugação de esforços entre os governos dos Estados-Membros e a Comissão, o que saúdo, mas que saúdo, Senhora Comissária, não apenas na questão estrutural. É, de facto, uma questão estrutural, de planear a prazo, é verdade, mas a verdade também é que estamos num momento crítico.

Neste curto prazo, era importante que a Comissão lançasse medidas de apoio financeiro, mas fora da política agrícola comum, porque esses já são apoios que, de direito, são dos agricultores. Que haja uma redução dos impostos sobre a eletricidade e dos combustíveis para os produtores agrícolas. E, a longo prazo, isso sim, que se promova uma estratégia para os países, em particular os países do Sul da Europa, que são assolados pelas secas, e que tenha como objetivo o aumento de captação, da retenção e do armazenamento das águas superficiais. Por exemplo, em Portugal, apenas se conseguem armazenar 20% de todas as afluências de água de que dispomos. É, de facto, muito pouco. Temos, por isso, muita margem para crescer.

E permita-me, também, fazer um pedido para o meu país: a Comissão deve incentivar o Governo de Portugal a criar um apoio específico extraordinário para estas regiões mais afetadas, não esquecendo questões imediatas de tesouraria para evitar o abandono da própria atividade; acionar uma medida de crise destinada ao apoio à aquisição de alimentos compostos para animais, devido à falta de pastagens; facilitar o acesso à água para abeberamento de gado e às regras de sobrevivência das culturas, através de apoios à armazenagem da água; uma linha de crédito para a realização de novos furos e charcas; isenção temporária de pagamentos à Segurança Social, nomeadamente a Taxa Social Única; aplicar, efetivamente, a legislação sobre a eletricidade verde, um apoio no mínimo de 30% da fatura, e reativar os contratos sazonais de eletricidade para a agricultura.

Senhora Comissária, ajudemos os agricultores, porque a agricultura é vida.

  Carlos Zorrinho, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, quero começar por sublinhar a oportunidade e a importância deste debate. Ele demonstra que, num momento de exceção, como é o caso da seca extrema, os cidadãos europeus podem contar com a solidariedade das instituições europeias a começar pela casa da democracia que é este Parlamento. O Fundo de Solidariedade da União Europeia está cá para isso, quando for necessário, complementando as ações dos Estados-Membros e das suas instituições.

Na próxima segunda-feira, no Conselho de Ministros Europeu da Agricultura e Pescas serão debatidas medidas concretas de mitigação dos impactos da seca em Portugal e Espanha, designadamente atividades pecuárias e agroalimentares, por solicitação dos dois Governos. Outras medidas de solidariedade no plano europeu serão debatidas e acionadas, se e quando necessárias.

Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, o clima não é um fenómeno constante. Anos húmidos e anos secos fazem parte dos registos meteorológicos. Anos secos não são novidade, mas a frequência e intensidade com que têm ocorrido em várias regiões da Europa, em particular na Península Ibéria, são uma prova evidente do impacto do aquecimento global. O índice de seca PDSI mostra que 45% do território português estava em seca severa ou extrema em janeiro de 2022, enquanto o índice de precipitação normalizada SPI evidencia que a maior parte do território espanhol se encontrava nesse mês numa situação classificada entre ligeiramente seca e muito seca.

A Agência Europeia do Ambiente, no relatório recente divulgado sobre riscos climáticos em mutação na Europa, adverte que o Sul da Europa deve preparar-se para verões mais quentes, secas mais frequentes e um maior risco de incêndio. Refere também que é provável que a Europa Central registe uma menor precipitação estival, fenómenos meteorológicos extremos mais frequentes e mais fortes, incluindo precipitação intensa, cheias, secas e riscos de incêndios.

A seca extrema e os fenómenos climáticos severos são estruturais, mas têm impactos conjunturais. Não são naturais no seu efeito nas pessoas e nos territórios. É preciso evitar que sejam os mais pobres e os mais vulneráveis a sofrer as consequências mais graves. É isso que têm feito os Governos de Portugal e de Espanha nesta circunstância. E é isso que é preciso continuar a fazer, sempre, nas respostas locais, regionais, nacionais, europeias e globais aos fenómenos climáticos extremos.

Esta evidência é uma razão acrescida para prosseguirmos o nosso compromisso forte com a descarbonização. Denuncio aqui o aproveitamento lamentável que alguns não se coibiram de fazer desta situação para contestar o fecho de centrais a carvão e outras medidas em curso para cumprir a Lei do Clima e os objetivos do Pacto Ecológico Europeu e do Pacote Fit for 55.

As respostas necessárias são também uma oportunidade e um desafio de modernização e adoção das melhores práticas na gestão dos recursos hídricos. Medidas concretas foram tomadas pelos Governos de Portugal e de Espanha, quer através de medidas próprias, quer através do reforço da cooperação bilateral na gestão das bacias hidrográficas comuns no âmbito do Convénio de Albufeira.

Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, termino: temos que combater com determinação as alterações climáticas, mas, ao mesmo tempo, temos de continuar a mobilizar a sociedade, o conhecimento, a tecnologia, a inovação, a partilha de boas práticas para garantirmos a segurança e a qualidade de vida e o desenvolvimento sustentável aos territórios respondendo aos novos desafios com que somos confrontados. Os agricultores têm que continuar a dispor de água para produzir de forma eficiente os bens de que necessitamos. A água tem que continuar a estar disponível nas torneiras para o uso racional. A indústria e os serviços precisam de água para disponibilizar produtos essenciais.

Os socialistas e democratas fazem disto um objetivo prioritário. Contem connosco em Portugal, em Espanha, onde quer que seja necessário salvaguardar os elementos sustentáveis ao serviço das pessoas e do planeta.

  María Soraya Rodríguez Ramos, en nombre del Grupo Renew. – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, gracias por este debate sobre el estrés hídrico, la sequía que sufre Europa, porque manifiesta de forma clara que las consecuencias del cambio climático son desiguales y asimétricas.

La mayor parte de la población europea que vive bajo estrés hídrico vive en los países del sur de Europa. Concretamente, en mi país, España, veintidós millones de personas que, desde el otoño, en el que ha empezado la época hídrica, miramos al cielo porque las lluvias han disminuido un 35 % y esperamos que esta situación cambie en los próximos meses, porque, si no, España entrará en lo que podemos llamar «ciclo seco».

Durante las sequías también miramos al suelo porque nuestros embalses están a un 44 % de capacidad y en la cuenca del Guadalquivir están, por ejemplo, por debajo del 28 %. Esto hace que las cosechas de secano se hayan perdido o estén muy afectadas, pero en las de la primavera la situación puede ser tremenda. Los agricultores de Jaén pueden perder el 80 % de su cosecha de olivar y, en las peores circunstancias, perderla toda. Por lo tanto, señora comisaria, sí se van a necesitar ayudas, pero no redirigir solo las que tenemos, sino ayudas adicionales.

Por otra parte, quiero manifestar en esta Cámara que nosotros somos los más ambiciosos a la hora de pedir medidas para cambiar el cambio climático, porque somos los más afectados, pero queremos también planes realistas. Por eso, no es normal que en el Reglamento sobre la inclusión de las emisiones y absorciones de gases de efecto invernadero resultantes del uso de la tierra España, un país afectado por la desertificación en buena parte de su territorio, sea, después de Suecia, el país más obligado a realizar estas reducciones.

Por eso les pido sensibilidad. Les pido que tengan en cuenta esta distribución asimétrica injusta de las consecuencias del cambio climático en Europa, en los países del sur, y que lo tengamos en cuenta en las medidas adicionales, pero, también, en las propuestas conjuntas para reducir las consecuencias del cambio climático.

  Jordi Solé, en nombre del Grupo Verts/ALE. – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, en la península Ibérica están saltando las alarmas porque, ciertamente, estamos atravesando un largo período de precipitaciones significativamente por debajo de la media. Las reservas están muy bajas. En el caso de Cataluña, que es el caso que mejor conozco, alrededor del 50 %, y hay preocupación por las cosechas. En algunos territorios la situación es alarmante y en otros, cuanto menos, preocupante.

Estos períodos de escasez de agua probablemente ocurrirán con mayor frecuencia a causa del cambio climático, aunque en el caso de la cuenca mediterránea algunos modelos apuntan a pocos días de lluvia, pero con mayor intensidad de precipitación. En cualquier caso, lo que sí es seguro es que las sequías en el sur de Europa no son nada nuevo. Hemos sufrido unas cuantas en las últimas décadas, por lo que sería difícilmente explicable que esta situación, relativamente recurrente, cogiera a los Gobiernos desprevenidos, no preparados para afrontar esta situación.

Y hay deberes que tienen que hacer los Gobiernos en materia de gestión del ciclo del agua —ampliar y actualizar los recursos técnicos, políticas de reutilización del agua en usos agrícolas e industriales, mejoras en el abastecimiento, captaciones, depósitos, reducir las pérdidas en la red, diversificar las fuentes a nivel local— con el objetivo de ganar margen de maniobra para poder anticipar las decisiones. No se trata de gobernar a golpe de decretos de emergencia sino de anticiparse y adaptarse a las situaciones potencialmente de emergencia y a las consecuencias del cambio climático. Por lo tanto, hay instrumentos, hay recursos, pero tiene que haber también la agilidad y la voluntad política de adelantarse a las situaciones de emergencia climática.

  Joachim Kuhs, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin! Vor einem Jahr redeten wir hier über die Frühjahrsfröste, die den Wein- und Obstbauern Südeuropas massiv geschadet hatten. Heute reden wir über Dürre und Trockenheit auf der Iberischen Halbinsel. Über was werden wir wohl nächstes Jahr reden?

Werte Kollegen, natürlich trauere ich mit den Landwirten – und selbst als Sohn eines Landwirts –, dass sie die herben Verluste hinnehmen müssen und es ihnen an Rücklagen fehlt, um diese Schäden auszugleichen. Gott sei Dank gibt es einen Hilfsfonds der EU für Naturkatastrophen, mit dem allerdings meiner Meinung nach nur die Kleinbauern entschädigt werden sollten.

Naturkatastrophen kommen und gehen. Die Iberer kennen Dürren seit Jahrhunderten, und sie haben ihre Art, Landwirtschaft zu betreiben, an diesen Dürren ausgerichtet. Davon zeugen die vielen Eichenwälder. Außerdem wussten sie, dass ein anderer für das Wetter zuständig ist und dass der, der das Unwetter schickt, diese Menschen nicht im Stich lassen würde.

Doch kehren wir zurück zum Thema. Was können wir tun? Was sollten wir tun? Lernen wir von Israel. Dort sehen wir, dass Dürren keine Katastrophen sein müssen, wenn man zum einen lernt, wie man Wasser aus dem Meer gewinnt – und die Iberische Halbinsel ist ja fast vollständig vom Meer umflossen –, und zum anderen die knappen Ressourcen durch ausgetüftelte technische Bewässerungssysteme effektiv und effizient einsetzt. Wie gut das funktioniert, habe ich mit eigenen Augen gesehen und das Ergebnis dieser Mühen, einen köstlichen israelischen Wein aus Samaria, genießen dürfen.

Liebe Iberer, lernen Sie von Israel, pflanzen Sie Weinberge, auch wenn das in diesem Haus nicht gern gehört wird. Und üben Sie den sparsamen Umgang mit Wasser. Dann werden Sie künftig keine Hilfszahlungen der EU benötigen, und ich kann mich freuen auf einen guten portugiesischen Wein.

  Jorge Buxadé Villalba, en nombre del Grupo ECR. – Señor presidente, España se enfrenta al año más seco desde hace diecisiete años: los embalses están por debajo del 40 % de su capacidad y en lugares como la cuenca del Guadalquivir, por debajo del 30 %. A partir del 1 de abril varias zonas de España, como el Campo de Gibraltar, anuncian restricciones al consumo de agua potable y los agricultores se enfrentan a un panorama devastador, unido a la subida de los costes de producción y a la entrada de producción extracomunitaria que compite deslealmente.

Cada año repetimos los mismos debates, pedimos las mismas ayudas, pero si llegan, cuando llegan, llegan tarde y mal. Estas situaciones demandan una previsión, inversiones y una estrategia a largo plazo.

En España faltan infraestructuras no solo para almacenar de forma eficaz el agua, sino también para garantizar la conexión entre todas las cuencas en un plan nacional. Resulta obsceno que infraestructuras como el caso de la presa de Rules lleven diecisiete años esperando las canalizaciones para llegar a los agricultores y productores de la Costa Tropical.

Los seguros agrarios contra la sequía son absolutamente deficientes y no tienen en cuenta las necesidades reales de los agricultores. Ustedes han puesto en marcha una PAC inundada de ideología verde, pero los agricultores quieren inundarse de agua y no de su ideología.

Exigimos, por supuesto, señora comisaría, un fondo específico para la sequía. La sequía supone la ruina de nuestros productores, agricultores y ganaderos, pero muy especialmente supone la ruina de un modo de vida de nuestros pueblos y de las zonas rurales. Son ellos los que están realmente sufriendo la desertificación de la tierra y las restricciones en el uso del agua.

Es decir, sí, la Unión y los Estados miembros tienen que reaccionar, apartar su ideología y centrarse en las necesidades reales de los productores.

  Younous Omarjee, au nom du groupe The Left. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, l’épisode de sécheresse extrême qui frappe l’Espagne et le Portugal en plein hiver vient s’ajouter désormais à la longue liste des catastrophes naturelles annuelles, chaque fois plus nombreuses et chaque fois plus intenses. En première ligne, aujourd’hui, face à cette sécheresse dans ces deux pays, des agriculteurs et les pouvoirs publics nationaux et régionaux, à qui je veux ici réaffirmer, au nom de notre groupe et au nom de notre commission REGI, notre plus grande solidarité. Tout ce que nous pourrons faire pour aider, nous le ferons et, bien sûr, nous demandons – comme vous l’avez dit, Madame la Commissaire – la mobilisation du Fonds européen de solidarité aussitôt que possible et l’aide d’urgence là où elle peut être nécessaire.

Plus largement, la Terre, l’humanité et le monde du vivant sont entrés aujourd’hui dans une zone de turbulence dont la sortie n’est pas pour demain: 50 °C en Amérique du Nord cet été, des feux de forêt qui frappent désormais jusqu’au Grand Nord, la terre qui s’est littéralement effondrée sous les pieds des habitants d’Erftstadt – nous irons, avec la commission REGI, la semaine prochaine dans cette localité, en Allemagne – des villages de Belgique et des Pays-Bas qui sont sous les eaux et des cyclones tropicaux de plus en plus violents dans les régions ultrapériphériques. Voilà la nouvelle donne qui est devant nous.

En tant que président de la commission REGI, j’ai mis sur la table une proposition: la création d’un nouveau fonds, le fonds régional d’adaptation au changement climatique, qui s’appuie sur une cartographie des risques et des besoins, et sur les plans nationaux d’adaptation au changement climatique. Ce fonds vise à aider les régions à investir, désormais, dans des infrastructures plus résilientes aux effets des catastrophes naturelles.

En effet, aujourd’hui, tous nos efforts sont tournés vers la mitigation et la réduction des émissions de gaz à effet de serre. Bien sûr, il faut le faire; mais nous devons aussi pallier l’absence d’une véritable stratégie européenne en matière d’adaptation aux changements climatiques, qui sont déjà en cours, et qui sont devenus irréversibles, compte tenu de l’inertie du modèle climatique.

C’est notre responsabilité de préparer l’ensemble des régions européennes à adapter désormais leur stratégie de développement et leur plan d’investissement en fonction de cette nouvelle donne, qui va bousculer, vous le savez, l’ensemble des secteurs et qui nécessite des milliards d’euros d’investissements dans tous les domaines.

La présidente von der Leyen s’est engagée – je termine, Monsieur le Président – à appliquer un droit d’initiative du Parlement. C’est ce que nous faisons avec cette proposition. Saisissez la balle au bond lancée par la commission REGI et présentez au Parlement européen une proposition pour la création de ce nouveau fonds régional d’adaptation au changement climatique.

  Helena Dalli, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, as the interventions from most political groups have highlighted, we urgently need to make our food systems sustainable and resilient. Extreme weather phenomena, such as this drought, do not only affect the agricultural production and impact the livelihood of millions of EU citizens who live in rural areas, but are also intimately interlinked with our common fight against climate change, our concerns about soil erosion in many European regions, the impact on biodiversity and water supply.

Within the framework of the common agricultural policy, the lines of action under which the EU may currently provide support, both under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), have shown their positive effects and should be implemented to help the affected farmers. The new CAP 2023—2027 strengthens the tools available, and the Commission services have encouraged Member States to use them to the fullest extent in their draft CAP strategic plans, considering that, in the future, more extreme weather conditions will be ushered in by the climate crisis.

Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 includes an array of measures benefiting from EU support, of which risk management tools allowing Member States the possibility to pay a farmer for the farmer’s contribution to a risk management tool, helping active farmers manage production and income risks related to their agricultural activity that are outside their control, interventions in the fruit and vegetable sector, the hop sector, the olive oil and table olive sector and the other sectors, and Article 47 providing support for harvest and production insurance that contributes to safeguarding producers’ incomes where there are losses as a consequence of natural disasters, adverse climatic events, diseases or pest infestations. Union financial assistance to the wine sector, Article 59. Due attention will be paid to how these possibilities for EU support have been considered under the Spanish and Portuguese CAP strategic plans for 2023—2027, which were submitted in December 2021 and are currently under the analysis of the Commission services.

As I stated earlier, we need to adapt to climate change. This is a call to all Member States that you’ll see more and more severe droughts. Make the most of the new CAP strategic plans to shift to less water—intensive crops and other measures recommended by the Commission, and make sure that irrigation projects comply with the safeguards requested by the Commission.

  Πρόεδρος. – Η συζήτηση έληξε.

Γραπτές δηλώσεις (άρθρο 171 του Κανονισμού)

  Clara Aguilera (S&D), por escrito. – La Península ibérica vive una de las peores sequías invernales de las últimas décadas. Las reservas de agua embalsada en las cuencas hidrográficas de España y Portugal afrontan su peor dato en años y no hay previsiones de que llueva en las próximas semanas. Entre el 1 de octubre y el 1 de febrero, las lluvias en España fueron un 36 % menores de la medida de 1981-2010. Los expertos en cambio climático advierten de que el calentamiento implicará una mayor evapotranspiración en la región mediterránea y que las reservas de agua disponible serán menores, repitiéndose con más frecuencia situaciones como la actual. Además, el riesgo de incendios será mayor y las cosechas sufrirán mayores impactos.

Los socialistas en el Parlamento defendemos la necesidad de apoyo de la UE, de cooperación entre Estados miembros, de la gestión eficaz y racional de los recursos hídricos, del Convenio de Albufera y de una Estrategia europea sobre desertificación. Asimismo, trabajamos para que las poblaciones más vulnerables y pobres no se vean más afectadas y nos posicionamos en contra del inviable objetivo de absorciones asignado a España en la nueva propuesta de Reglamento UTCUTS, que no tiene en cuenta los impactos del cambio climático.

  Sara Cerdas (S&D), por escrito. – Portugal vive uma situação de emergência climática devido ao período de seca que tem vindo a verificar-se nos últimos meses e com tendência a agravar. Segundo informações do Instituto Português do Mar e da Atmosfera (IPMA), janeiro de 2022 foi o sexto mês mais seco num período de 90 anos e o segundo pior desde 2000, com cerca de 35% do território a sofrer de seca severa e 12% de seca extrema. Secas e outros fenómenos climáticos extremos apresentam riscos consideráveis para a saúde humana, a agricultura, a biodiversidade, o abastecimento de água e a produção de energia hidráulica. É necessário estabelecer ou ativar mecanismos robustos para combater este tipo de fenómenos a nível europeu, mas com um claro enfoque nas circunstâncias de cada país, tais como as que se estão a verificar em Portugal e Espanha. Para tal, também deve ser assegurado financiamento adequado para a adaptação a este tipo de fenómenos, resultado da emergência climática. É absolutamente imperativo encontrarmos soluções que nos impeçam de chegar a um ponto de não retorno, em prol do nosso futuro.

  Estrella Durá Ferrandis (S&D), por escrito. – La Península ibérica vive una de las peores sequías invernales de las últimas décadas. Las reservas de agua embalsada en las cuencas hidrográficas de España y Portugal afrontan su peor dato en años y no hay previsiones de que llueva en las próximas semanas. Entre el 1 de octubre y el 1 de febrero, las lluvias en España fueron un 36 % menores de la medida de 1981-2010. Los expertos en cambio climático advierten de que el calentamiento implicará una mayor evapotranspiración en la región mediterránea y que las reservas de agua disponible serán menores, repitiéndose con más frecuencia situaciones como la actual. Además, el riesgo de incendios será mayor y las cosechas sufrirán mayores impactos.

Los socialistas en el Parlamento defendemos la necesidad de apoyo de la UE, de cooperación entre Estados miembros, de la gestión eficaz y racional de los recursos hídricos, del Convenio de Albufera y de una Estrategia europea sobre desertificación. Asimismo, trabajamos para que las poblaciones más vulnerables y pobres no se vean más afectadas y nos posicionamos en contra del inviable objetivo de absorciones asignado a España en la nueva propuesta de Reglamento UTCUTS, que no tiene en cuenta los impactos del cambio climático.

  Lina Gálvez Muñoz (S&D), por escrito. – La Península ibérica vive una de las peores sequías invernales de las últimas décadas. Las reservas de agua embalsada en las cuencas hidrográficas de España y Portugal afrontan su peor dato en años y no hay previsiones de que llueva en las próximas semanas. Entre el 1 de octubre y el 1 de febrero, las lluvias en España fueron un 36 % menores de la medida de 1981-2010. Los expertos en cambio climático advierten de que el calentamiento implicará una mayor evapotranspiración en la región mediterránea y que las reservas de agua disponible serán menores, repitiéndose con más frecuencia situaciones como la actual. Además, el riesgo de incendios será mayor y las cosechas sufrirán mayores impactos.

Los socialistas en el Parlamento defendemos la necesidad de apoyo de la UE, de cooperación entre Estados miembros, de la gestión eficaz y racional de los recursos hídricos, del Convenio de Albufera y de una Estrategia europea sobre desertificación. Asimismo, trabajamos para que las poblaciones más vulnerables y pobres no se vean más afectadas y nos posicionamos en contra del inviable objetivo de absorciones asignado a España en la nueva propuesta de Reglamento UTCUTS, que no tiene en cuenta los impactos del cambio climático.

  Ibán García Del Blanco (S&D), por escrito. – La Península ibérica vive una de las peores sequías invernales de las últimas décadas. Las reservas de agua embalsada en las cuencas hidrográficas de España y Portugal afrontan su peor dato en años y no hay previsiones de que llueva en las próximas semanas. Entre el 1 de octubre y el 1 de febrero, las lluvias en España fueron un 36 % menores de la medida de 1981-2010. Los expertos en cambio climático advierten de que el calentamiento implicará una mayor evapotranspiración en la región mediterránea y que las reservas de agua disponible serán menores, repitiéndose con más frecuencia situaciones como la actual. Además, el riesgo de incendios será mayor y las cosechas sufrirán mayores impactos.

Los socialistas en el Parlamento defendemos la necesidad de apoyo de la UE, de cooperación entre Estados miembros, de la gestión eficaz y racional de los recursos hídricos, del Convenio de Albufera y de una Estrategia europea sobre desertificación. Asimismo, trabajamos para que las poblaciones más vulnerables y pobres no se vean más afectadas y nos posicionamos en contra del inviable objetivo de absorciones asignado a España en la nueva propuesta de Reglamento UTCUTS, que no tiene en cuenta los impactos del cambio climático.

  Isabel García Muñoz (S&D), por escrito. – La Península ibérica vive una de las peores sequías invernales de las últimas décadas. Las reservas de agua embalsada en las cuencas hidrográficas de España y Portugal afrontan su peor dato en años y no hay previsiones de que llueva en las próximas semanas. Entre el 1 de octubre y el 1 de febrero, las lluvias en España fueron un 36 % menores de la medida de 1981-2010. Los expertos en cambio climático advierten de que el calentamiento implicará una mayor evapotranspiración en la región mediterránea y que las reservas de agua disponible serán menores, repitiéndose con más frecuencia situaciones como la actual. Además, el riesgo de incendios será mayor y las cosechas sufrirán mayores impactos.

Los socialistas en el Parlamento defendemos la necesidad de apoyo de la UE, de cooperación entre Estados miembros, de la gestión eficaz y racional de los recursos hídricos, del Convenio de Albufera y de una Estrategia europea sobre desertificación. Asimismo, trabajamos para que las poblaciones más vulnerables y pobres no se vean más afectadas y nos posicionamos en contra del inviable objetivo de absorciones asignado a España en la nueva propuesta de Reglamento UTCUTS, que no tiene en cuenta los impactos del cambio climático.

  Nicolás González Casares (S&D), por escrito. – La Península ibérica vive una de las peores sequías invernales de las últimas décadas. Las reservas de agua embalsada en las cuencas hidrográficas de España y Portugal afrontan su peor dato en años y no hay previsiones de que llueva en las próximas semanas. Entre el 1 de octubre y el 1 de febrero, las lluvias en España fueron un 36 % menores de la medida de 1981-2010. Los expertos en cambio climático advierten de que el calentamiento implicará una mayor evapotranspiración en la región mediterránea y que las reservas de agua disponible serán menores, repitiéndose con más frecuencia situaciones como la actual. Además, el riesgo de incendios será mayor y las cosechas sufrirán mayores impactos.

Los socialistas en el Parlamento defendemos la necesidad de apoyo de la UE, de cooperación entre Estados miembros, de la gestión eficaz y racional de los recursos hídricos, del Convenio de Albufera y de una Estrategia europea sobre desertificación. Asimismo, trabajamos para que las poblaciones más vulnerables y pobres no se vean más afectadas y nos posicionamos en contra del inviable objetivo de absorciones asignado a España en la nueva propuesta de Reglamento UTCUTS, que no tiene en cuenta los impactos del cambio climático.

  Alicia Homs Ginel (S&D), por escrito. – La Península ibérica vive una de las peores sequías invernales de las últimas décadas. Las reservas de agua embalsada en las cuencas hidrográficas de España y Portugal afrontan su peor dato en años y no hay previsiones de que llueva en las próximas semanas. Entre el 1 de octubre y el 1 de febrero, las lluvias en España fueron un 36 % menores de la medida de 1981-2010. Los expertos en cambio climático advierten de que el calentamiento implicará una mayor evapotranspiración en la región mediterránea y que las reservas de agua disponible serán menores, repitiéndose con más frecuencia situaciones como la actual. Además, el riesgo de incendios será mayor y las cosechas sufrirán mayores impactos.

Los socialistas en el Parlamento defendemos la necesidad de apoyo de la UE, de cooperación entre Estados miembros, de la gestión eficaz y racional de los recursos hídricos, del Convenio de Albufera y de una Estrategia europea sobre desertificación. Asimismo, trabajamos para que las poblaciones más vulnerables y pobres no se vean más afectadas y nos posicionamos en contra del inviable objetivo de absorciones asignado a España en la nueva propuesta de Reglamento UTCUTS, que no tiene en cuenta los impactos del cambio climático.

  César Luena (S&D), por escrito. – La Península ibérica vive una de las peores sequías invernales de las últimas décadas. Las reservas de agua embalsada en las cuencas hidrográficas de España y Portugal afrontan su peor dato en años y no hay previsiones de que llueva en las próximas semanas. Entre el 1 de octubre y el 1 de febrero, las lluvias en España fueron un 36 % menores de la medida de 1981-2010. Los expertos en cambio climático advierten de que el calentamiento implicará una mayor evapotranspiración en la región mediterránea y que las reservas de agua disponible serán menores, repitiéndose con más frecuencia situaciones como la actual. Además, el riesgo de incendios será mayor y las cosechas sufrirán mayores impactos.

Los socialistas en el Parlamento defendemos la necesidad de apoyo de la UE, de cooperación entre Estados miembros, de la gestión eficaz y racional de los recursos hídricos, del Convenio de Albufera y de una Estrategia europea sobre desertificación. Asimismo, trabajamos para que las poblaciones más vulnerables y pobres no se vean más afectadas y nos posicionamos en contra del inviable objetivo de absorciones asignado a España en la nueva propuesta de Reglamento UTCUTS, que no tiene en cuenta los impactos del cambio climático.

  Cristina Maestre Martín De Almagro (S&D), por escrito. – La Península ibérica vive una de las peores sequías invernales de las últimas décadas. Las reservas de agua embalsada en las cuencas hidrográficas de España y Portugal afrontan su peor dato en años y no hay previsiones de que llueva en las próximas semanas. Entre el 1 de octubre y el 1 de febrero, las lluvias en España fueron un 36 % menores de la medida de 1981-2010. Los expertos en cambio climático advierten de que el calentamiento implicará una mayor evapotranspiración en la región mediterránea y que las reservas de agua disponible serán menores, repitiéndose con más frecuencia situaciones como la actual. Además, el riesgo de incendios será mayor y las cosechas sufrirán mayores impactos.

Los socialistas en el Parlamento defendemos la necesidad de apoyo de la UE, de cooperación entre Estados miembros, de la gestión eficaz y racional de los recursos hídricos, del Convenio de Albufera y de una Estrategia europea sobre desertificación. Asimismo, trabajamos para que las poblaciones más vulnerables y pobres no se vean más afectadas y nos posicionamos en contra del inviable objetivo de absorciones asignado a España en la nueva propuesta de Reglamento UTCUTS, que no tiene en cuenta los impactos del cambio climático.

  Adriana Maldonado López (S&D), por escrito. – La Península ibérica vive una de las peores sequías invernales de las últimas décadas. Las reservas de agua embalsada en las cuencas hidrográficas de España y Portugal afrontan su peor dato en años y no hay previsiones de que llueva en las próximas semanas. Entre el 1 de octubre y el 1 de febrero, las lluvias en España fueron un 36 % menores de la medida de 1981-2010. Los expertos en cambio climático advierten de que el calentamiento implicará una mayor evapotranspiración en la región mediterránea y que las reservas de agua disponible serán menores, repitiéndose con más frecuencia situaciones como la actual. Además, el riesgo de incendios será mayor y las cosechas sufrirán mayores impactos.

Los socialistas en el Parlamento defendemos la necesidad de apoyo de la UE, de cooperación entre Estados miembros, de la gestión eficaz y racional de los recursos hídricos, del Convenio de Albufera y de una Estrategia europea sobre desertificación. Asimismo, trabajamos para que las poblaciones más vulnerables y pobres no se vean más afectadas y nos posicionamos en contra del inviable objetivo de absorciones asignado a España en la nueva propuesta de Reglamento UTCUTS, que no tiene en cuenta los impactos del cambio climático.

  Sandra Pereira (The Left), por escrito. – A situação de seca que se vive em Portugal é muito preocupante e exige apoios e medidas de fundo para enfrentar as consequências que já se anteveem, desde o abastecimento para consumo humano, a produção agrícola e de energia hidroelétrica ao setor do turismo. Na agricultura, por exemplo, o impacto nas explorações agrícolas, exigindo o recurso à rega, aumenta os custos de produção, no quadro da subida de outros fatores, como a energia e os combustíveis, do esmagamento dos preços na produção e da redução de rendimentos. Na discussão da PAC, temos proposto um Seguro Agrícola Público, financiado pelo orçamento da União que conferiria um nível de proteção mínimo, para todos os agricultores dos Estados-Membros. No nosso entender, seria uma forma de garantir um rendimento mínimo aos agricultores afetados por fenómenos meteorológicos extremos, por outras situações de catástrofe natural ou provocada pelo homem, incluindo incêndios florestais, doenças e pragas. A existência deste seguro não prejudicaria a existência de outros esquemas de seguros, específicos de determinados setores e garantiria uma proteção mínima aos agricultores. Na atual situação, em que ainda se carece de medidas de mitigação e adaptação às alterações climáticas, a criação deste seguro seria uma medida acertada. Infelizmente esta nossa proposta foi chumbada pela maioria neste Parlamento.

  Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D), por escrito. – La Península ibérica vive una de las peores sequías invernales de las últimas décadas. Las reservas de agua embalsada en las cuencas hidrográficas de España y Portugal afrontan su peor dato en años y no hay previsiones de que llueva en las próximas semanas. Entre el 1 de octubre y el 1 de febrero, las lluvias en España fueron un 36 % menores de la medida de 1981-2010. Los expertos en cambio climático advierten de que el calentamiento implicará una mayor evapotranspiración en la región mediterránea y que las reservas de agua disponible serán menores, repitiéndose con más frecuencia situaciones como la actual. Además, el riesgo de incendios será mayor y las cosechas sufrirán mayores impactos.

Los socialistas en el Parlamento defendemos la necesidad de apoyo de la UE, de cooperación entre Estados miembros, de la gestión eficaz y racional de los recursos hídricos, del Convenio de Albufera y de una Estrategia europea sobre desertificación. Asimismo, trabajamos para que las poblaciones más vulnerables y pobres no se vean más afectadas y nos posicionamos en contra del inviable objetivo de absorciones asignado a España en la nueva propuesta de Reglamento UTCUTS, que no tiene en cuenta los impactos del cambio climático.

  Marcos Ros Sempere (S&D), por escrito. – La Península ibérica vive una de las peores sequías invernales de las últimas décadas. Las reservas de agua embalsada en las cuencas hidrográficas de España y Portugal afrontan su peor dato en años y no hay previsiones de que llueva en las próximas semanas. Entre el 1 de octubre y el 1 de febrero, las lluvias en España fueron un 36 % menores de la medida de 1981-2010. Los expertos en cambio climático advierten de que el calentamiento implicará una mayor evapotranspiración en la región mediterránea y que las reservas de agua disponible serán menores, repitiéndose con más frecuencia situaciones como la actual. Además, el riesgo de incendios será mayor y las cosechas sufrirán mayores impactos.

Los socialistas en el Parlamento defendemos la necesidad de apoyo de la UE, de cooperación entre Estados miembros, de la gestión eficaz y racional de los recursos hídricos, del Convenio de Albufera y de una Estrategia europea sobre desertificación. Asimismo, trabajamos para que las poblaciones más vulnerables y pobres no se vean más afectadas y nos posicionamos en contra del inviable objetivo de absorciones asignado a España en la nueva propuesta de Reglamento UTCUTS, que no tiene en cuenta los impactos del cambio climático.

5. Varovanje delavcev pred nevarnostmi zaradi izpostavljenosti rakotvornim, mutagenim in reprotoksičnim snovem pri delu (razprava)

  Πρόεδρος. – Το επόμενο σημείο στην ημερήσια διάταξη είναι η συζήτηση επί της εκθέσεως της Stefania Zambelli, εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής Απασχόλησης και Κοινωνικών Υποθέσεων, επί της προτάσεως οδηγίας του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και του Συμβουλίου που αφορά την τροποποίηση της οδηγίας 2004/37/EΚ σχετικά με την προστασία των εργαζομένων από τους κινδύνους που συνδέονται με την έκθεση σε καρκινογόνους ή μεταλλαξιογόνους παράγοντες κατά την εργασία (COM(2020)0571 – C9-0301/2020 – 2020/0262(COD)) (A9-0114/2021).

  Stefania Zambelli, relatrice. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, finalmente dopo più di un anno di lavoro sono onorata di essere qui oggi per la presentazione della quarta revisione della direttiva 2004/37/CE sulla protezione dei lavoratori da sostanze cancerogene e da sostanze mutagene. È stato un lavoro lungo e alle volte complicato, ma ho agito con dedizione e impegno nell'apportare le modifiche alla direttiva di cui sono relatrice. L'ho fatto nella consapevolezza che l'Europa può concretamente agire per migliorare le condizioni di lavoro e di salute dei lavoratori.

La mia storia personale mi rende particolarmente sensibile alla questione: ho lavorato nell'ambito sanitario e negli ultimi anni ho dovuto affrontare la battaglia contro tre tumori e solo recentemente ho terminato i trattamenti. Queste esperienze hanno avuto un'influenza importante sul mio impegno politico sin dal primo giorno in questo Parlamento. Ho lavorato con dedizione e con la consapevolezza che il cancro si può sconfiggere e il mio impegno nella commissione speciale contro il cancro ne è un esempio. Ho discusso con tutti, con le parti sociali, con le aziende e con i sindacati. Ritengo indispensabile che questa relazione dia risposte concrete ai lavoratori e ai cittadini europei, che da troppo tempo attendono risposte in materia di sicurezza sul posto di lavoro.

Il cancro rappresenta la prima causa di morte correlata al lavoro nell'Unione europea. Infatti, il 52 % dei decessi legati al lavoro è dovuto a tumori professionali. La Commissione europea ha fatto della lotta contro il cancro una delle priorità del quinquennio 2019-2024. Secondo la Commissione, infatti, il 40 % dei casi di cancro in Europa si possono prevenire. Una maggiore protezione dei lavoratori, insieme a una diminuzione o eliminazione dei rischi, va nella direzione di ridurre l'esposizione dei lavoratori a sostanze pericolose.

Questa modifica rappresenta la quarta proposta legislativa della direttiva e si propone di stabilire nuovi valori limiti di esposizione professionale per tre sostanze: l'acrilonitrile, i composti del nichel e il benzene.

La nuova modifica della direttiva, come proposta dalla Commissione, vuole garantire un nuovo livello di protezione professionale a oltre un milione di lavoratori in tutta Europa. I settori coinvolti sono il settore petrolifero, il settore tessile, il settore manifatturiero, il settore edile e il settore chimico. Nel corso della discussione sono emerse nuove proposte, che sono state tutte prese in considerazione.

È con grande soddisfazione che la direttiva conosciuta come CMD sarà d'ora in avanti chiamata CMRD. Infatti, alle sostanze già previste, abbiamo aggiunto le sostanze reprotossiche, ossia sostanze dannose per la riproduzione. Non solo queste sostanze entrano a far parte dello scopo della direttiva, ma abbiamo stilato anche una lista di 11 sostanze che hanno effetti dannosi per la fertilità. Si tratta di una grande vittoria per la tutela della salute dei lavoratori, soprattutto per quelli che lavorano nel comparto della salute. Si stima infatti che almeno 2 milioni di persone in Europa siano esposte a queste sostanze.

Altro grande obiettivo raggiunto riguarda i medicinali pericolosi. Infatti, ci sono diversi medicinali, alcuni fondamentali per la lotta contro il cancro, che possono avere effetti gravi per chi li maneggia e per chi li prepara. Per la prima volta siamo riusciti ad aprire la discussione su questo argomento.

Questo è un enorme passo in avanti per tutto il comparto ospedaliero. Ogni anno, infatti, 12 milioni di operatori sanitari in Europa sono potenzialmente esposti a farmaci pericolosi. Penso ai medici, agli infermieri, ai tecnici di laboratorio, a tutti coloro che lavorano negli ospedali. A loro va il mio ringraziamento, perché in questi anni difficili sono stati in prima linea contro la pandemia. La Commissione dovrà dare una definizione di questi farmaci, preparare una lista e dare delle linee guida.

Abbiamo inoltre richiesto alla Commissione di preparare un piano d'azione per includere nella direttiva altre 25 sostanze e di affrontare il tema della silice cristallina, sostanza che può avere gravi effetti a lungo termine.

Nonostante le difficoltà nel portare avanti questa relazione, oggi siamo qui con un risultato eccellente, atteso da tutti gli attori coinvolti nel processo decisionale: lavoratori, aziende e governi. Abbiamo tutti agito con un solo obiettivo comune, la salute dei lavoratori, e credo che abbiamo fatto un enorme passo in avanti nel garantire maggiore protezione e sicurezza.

  Nicolas Schmit, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, fighting against cancer is one of the key priorities of the Commission and, I know very strongly, of your Parliament. It has to be a priority because today 52% of annual occupational deaths in the EU can be attributed to work—related cancers. These figures show the importance of the file we are discussing today. Improving workers’ health and safety in the context of rapidly changing economic, technological and work patterns.

This fourth update of the carcinogens and mutagens directive revises the limit values for three key carcinogens widely used in the EU, and we estimate that it will improve the protection of more than one million workers in the EU. And I’m very pleased to see that both the European Parliament and the Council supported these limit values throughout the discussions.

But we also went much further in this update, and I thank the Parliament and particularly the rapporteur, and I wish you all well, having listened to your personal experience, as well as the former president of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs for the very ambitious approach of the Parliament.

Firstly, the co—legislators agreed to include the reprotoxic substances in the scope of the directive. We will now be working further on putting in motion this amendment. Another substantial point of discussion was the protection of workers, including nurses, from the exposure to hazardous medicinal products. We all agree that as soon as these medicinal products have carcinogenic, mutagenic and reprotoxic properties, they fall within the scope of the carcinogens and mutagens directive.

However – and I must say, I appreciate that very much – your negotiators in the trilogue strongly defended the need to ensure a higher degree of clarity on this specific aspect, and for that reason, both the co—legislators and the Commission agreed on making statements to clarify this. The provisional agreement includes reinforced training measures and, among other elements, the publication of guidelines, and I am strongly committed to publish these guidelines by the end of this year.

We have to better protect those who every day take care of those patients who need these treatments. But we know now better than ever, the crucial role of health workers – and it has been mentioned by the rapporteur – who every day take risks to bring health to those who suffer from cancer, and it is not acceptable that they have to take these risks. So, these guidelines will be clear and they have not just to be there, they have to be implemented and their implementation also has to be controlled.

The third substantial point in this discussion, was the introduction of a new methodology for setting limit values at the EU level, a so—called risk—based methodology. On this issue, we all realised that we will still need time to assess the relevance of such an approach, and we will continue our work on this topic. This provisional agreement also provides that the Commission reviews the limit value for respirable crystalline silica and adopts an action plan this year for proposing, where appropriate, new or updates of limit values for an additional 25 substances.

And as I mentioned already, this is already the fourth revision of the carcinogens and mutagens directive, and since 2016, the Commission has submitted proposals to address 30 chemicals. In addition, as announced in the new EU strategic framework on health and safety at work, we have already planned the fifth revision addressing five additional chemicals and therefore such an action plan is fully in line with the Commission’s desire to constantly improve the protection of workers against occupational cancer.

Mr President, honourable Members, before concluding, I would like to highlight the key and constructive role again played by both the European Parliament and the Council because this proposal was adopted and approved at the Council level by unanimity, which shows that everybody now is aware of the importance of what we are doing here.

The provisional agreement we have before us today is ambitious and it is another significant step forward in improving the health of EU workers. And it shows also that Europe cares about the health of its citizens and workers. And, therefore, I am confident that you, Members of the European Parliament, will largely support this text so that it will turn into practical measures on the ground very quickly.

  Gilles Lebreton, rapporteur pour avis de la commission des affaires juridiques. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, les cancers, qu’ils soient ou non d’origine professionnelle, sont la deuxième cause de mortalité dans les pays de l’Union européenne, après les maladies cardio-vasculaires. Ils sont responsables d’environ un quart du nombre total de décès. Ils mettent aussi durement à l’épreuve les systèmes nationaux de santé et d’aide sociale, les budgets publics, la productivité et la croissance économique. Pour cet ensemble de raisons, il faut donc renforcer la lutte contre le cancer. Un consensus politique existe pour soutenir cet objectif.

C’est dans ce contexte que nous entreprenons aujourd’hui d’améliorer la protection des travailleurs contre les risques liés à leur exposition à des agents cancérigènes ou mutagènes au travail. Les cancers sont en effet à l’origine de 52 % des décès d’origine professionnelle enregistrés chaque année, et c’est beaucoup trop.

Pour réaliser cette amélioration, il est nécessaire de modifier la directive 2004/37/CE, qui constitue le texte de base pour protéger les travailleurs contre le cancer. La commission des affaires juridiques a voté quinze amendements pour apporter sa pierre à l’édifice. Parmi les principaux, l’un recommande, dans un but de transparence, de n’établir les prescriptions médicales qu’après consultation des acteurs économiques et sociaux concernés. Un autre suggère de profiter des plans de relance nationaux et européens pour financer les programmes de recherche sur les risques pour la santé des travailleurs. Un troisième attire l’attention sur le cas particulier des travailleurs exposés à un cocktail de substances dangereuses, qui nécessiterait de revoir à la baisse les valeurs limites pour tenir compte des effets combinés de ces produits. Dans la même optique, un quatrième souligne le caractère cancérigène du cobalt, qui devrait donner lieu à des valeurs limites spécifiques. D’autres amendements précisent des délais, notamment un délai d’au moins tous les cinq ans pour réexaminer les valeurs limites.

Je termine par deux considérations plus générales. La commission des affaires juridiques attire particulièrement votre attention sur le fait que les PME et les microentreprises disposent de ressources financières, techniques et humaines limitées. Il faut donc veiller à ce que l’application de la directive ne leur fasse pas subir de conséquences disproportionnées. La commission tient enfin à rappeler que la directive n’empêche pas les États qui le souhaitent de prévoir des dispositions encore plus protectrices.

En conclusion, la lutte contre le cancer est une grande cause européenne, à laquelle la commission des affaires juridiques est heureuse d’apporter sa contribution.

  Cindy Franssen, namens de PPE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, het is een historische week voor de strijd tegen kanker in Europa: we hebben gisteren het Europees kankerbestrijdingsplan goedgekeurd en stemmen vandaag over de vierde herziening van de richtlijn betreffende de bescherming van de werknemers tegen de risico’s van blootstelling aan carcinogene of mutagene agentia op het werk.

Bijna anderhalf jaar na het voorstel van de Europese Commissie voor een richtlijn kan het Europees Parlement een fantastisch resultaat voorleggen. Deze herziening is een ware mijlpaal in de strijd tegen kanker als gevolg van beroepsmatige blootstelling aan gevaarlijke stoffen. De richtlijn omvatte reeds grenswaarden voor beroepsmatige blootstelling aan dertig kankerverwekkende en mutagene stoffen en wordt nu uitgebreid met stoffen die schadelijk zijn voor de voortplanting en gevaarlijke geneesmiddelen. Hiervoor heeft het Europees Parlement zich sinds de eerste herziening van de richtlijn hardgemaakt.

Ons werk is hiermee echter niet af. Er sterven in de Europese Unie nog altijd tachtigduizend werknemers per jaar aan kanker als gevolg van beroepsmatige blootstelling aan de bovengenoemde stoffen. Daaraan moet in 2022 een eind worden gemaakt. De vierde herziening van de richtlijn moet daarom zo snel mogelijk door de Commissie worden opgevolgd met een actieplan voor het aanpakken van de volgende vijfentwintig stoffen op de lijst van gevaarlijke kankerverwekkende, mutagene en reprotoxische stoffen. Om dit te bewerkstelligen, moeten zowel de aanbevelingen van het verslag van de Bijzondere Commissie kankerbestrijding, waarover we gisteren hebben gestemd, als die van het in oktober 2021 in stemming gebrachte verslag over de bescherming van werknemers tegen asbest in wetgeving worden omgezet. Enkel zo kunnen we ervoor zorgen dat werknemers niet meer aan kanker sterven omdat zij simpelweg hun werk doen. Ik reken dan ook op massale steun voor dit verslag.

  Heléne Fritzon, för S&D-gruppen. – Herr talman! Kommissionär Schmit! För mig som socialdemokrat är det självklart: ingen ska behöva dö av sitt arbete. I Europa dör tio personer varje timme av cancer som orsakats av farliga ämnen och mediciner på jobbet. Det är hundratusen personer per år.

Det handlar om sjuksköterskor, som vårdar cancerpatienter och som riskerar att insjukna i cancer på grund av sitt jobb. Det handlar om brandmän, som riskerar att utsättas för bensen, som kan orsaka leukemi. Det handlar om någons förälder, syskon eller barn, som går till jobbet varje dag och som arbetar för att få mat på bordet och betala hyran. Det här är helt oacceptabelt.

Cancer är i dag den vanligaste dödsorsaken kopplad till arbete. Därför måste vi göra mycket mer för att skydda utsatta löntagare. Allt annat är oansvarigt. Därför är jag både glad och stolt över den överenskommelse vi ska anta här senare i dag. Den nya lagstiftningen säkerställer att reproduktionsstörande ämnen kommer att falla under samma arbetsplatsförebyggande regler som cancerframkallande och mutagena ämnen. Vi stärker skyddet för vårdpersonal och sjuksköterskor när det gäller exponering för farliga läkemedel. Det är en stor framgång.

Jag ser också fram emot kommissionens kommande handlingsplan om att inkludera ytterligare 25 ämnen i lagstiftningen. Med skärpta regler kan vi rädda tusentals liv varje år. Det här är viktigt för löntagares hälsa och säkerhet.

För mig är det självklart, EU ska inte konkurrera med dåliga villkor. Vi ska ligga i framkant med en trygg och säker arbetsmiljö. Jag vill säga att vårt mål är noll och jag vill tacka för ett gott samarbete med föredragande och övriga skuggor.

  Véronique Trillet-Lenoir, au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire – cher Nicolas Schmit –, hier, ce Parlement a largement adopté un rapport sur le plan cancer européen. De la prévention à la réinsertion, l’Union européenne va se doter d’un large plan de santé publique. Aujourd’hui, nous apportons la première pierre législative en nous attaquant aux inégalités de santé, car les risques ne sont pas les mêmes selon l’emploi et selon l’État et ne seront pas les mêmes si l’Union européenne n’harmonise pas vers le haut ses règles de prévention.

En démontrant qu’une action contre le cancer est un modèle pour d’autres pathologies et après trois révisions infructueuses, nous sommes parvenus à étendre le champ de cette directive aux substances toxiques pour la reproduction. C’est une grande avancée pour la santé reproductive, en particulier des femmes. C’est une étape importante dans la mise en place du pacte Simone Veil.

Enfin, nous affirmons que le plan cancer européen ne se fera pas seulement avec les soignants, mais pour eux. J’ai une pensée particulière pour les millions d’infirmiers et d’infirmières qui prennent soin de nos parents et de nos enfants contre le cancer. Je les connais bien. Cet engagement sans faille ne doit pas et ne peut pas se faire au détriment de leur santé. Or, certains médicaments sont eux-mêmes cancérigènes ou reprotoxiques.

Le texte que nous voterons aujourd’hui apportera des réponses très concrètes sur le terrain. Je voudrais chaleureusement remercier tous les collègues, tout particulièrement la belle négociatrice Lucia Nicholsonová. Si ce texte est un progrès, il fixe surtout le cap pour demain en portant l’ambition d’un plan d’action très vaste contre le cancer au travail. Monsieur le Commissaire, nous comptons sur vous.

  Katrin Langensiepen, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, dear colleagues, in front of you stands a proud Member of the Parliament. Thanks to the persistency of this Parliament, we achieved a big step forward in the protection of workers from occupational exposure to carcinogens, mutagens and reprotoxins. The biggest step forward entails the intention of the aforementioned directive with reprotoxic substances that adversely affect the ability of men and women to reproduce, and pose a threat to fertility.

Protection against exposure to these substances is now legally covered. This is important for almost two million workers across the EU prevailing in sectors varying from agriculture and care, to petrochemicals and maintenance services. This update also provides more and better training for care workers on the potential hazardous impact of exposure to hazardous medicinal products. This is highly important for the millions of carers handling these products, such as oncology nurses. They put their own health in danger for saving the lives of others, whereas there are ways to protect them.

But the work is not done yet. As Greens, we are looking forward to keep on seeking better protection. We look forward to future updates – 25 additional substances are still to be included and we need to establish a risk-based methodology to set exposure limits. We cannot allow that even one single worker gets sick or even dies due to a lack of protection. We need to care for those who care for us.

  Joanna Kopcińska, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Drodzy Koledzy! Statystyki dotyczące nowotworów pochodzenia zawodowego wciąż są zatrważające, a za każdą z tych statystyk stoją ludzie, którzy tracą życie i zdrowie. Ponad połowa zgonów związanych z pracą jest właśnie pokłosiem nowotworów, a wielu zachorowań na raka również związanych z pracą można uniknąć. Naszym obowiązkiem jest więc dokładanie wszelkich starań, aby istniały odpowiednie narzędzia do walki z rakiem pochodzenia zawodowego, aby ta walka była coraz skuteczniejsza.

Tekst końcowy, który przedstawia należycie wypracowane porozumienie, jest właśnie takim narzędziem i kolejnym istotnym krokiem naprzód w walce z rakiem. Zaktualizowanie dopuszczalnych wartości narażenia zawodowego czy uwzględnienie niebezpiecznych produktów leczniczych to kluczowe elementy tekstu, które nadadzą ton walce z rakiem na kolejne lata. Wspomniane niebezpieczne produkty lecznicze są szczególnym zagrożeniem dla pracowników służby zdrowia, którzy w okresie pandemii znaleźli się pod bezprecedensowym obciążeniem. Ich ochrona musi być jednym z priorytetów odbudowy i wyciągania wniosków z pandemii.

Trzeba jednocześnie pamiętać, że europejskie przedsiębiorstwa i przemysł będą potrzebować środków oraz czasu, aby nowe ambitne postulaty wdrożyć w sposób efektywny, właściwy i zrównoważony. Dlatego pragnę jeszcze raz podkreślić kluczową rolę okresów przejściowych w dostosowaniu się do nowych reguł. Bardzo dziękuję pani sprawozdawczyni i wszystkim kontrsprawozdawcom za bardzo dobrą pracę.

  Nikolaj Villumsen, for The Left-Gruppen. – Hr. Formand! Kommissærer! Kollegaer! Ingen bør få kræft af at gå på arbejde, men desværre sker det alt for ofte. Hvert år mister omkring 100 000 mennesker livet på grund af arbejdsrelateret kræft i EU. Andre mister muligheden for at få børn, fordi de udsættes for farlige kemikalier på deres arbejdsplads. Sådan bør det ikke være. Derfor har vi fra venstrefløjen og den europæiske fagbevægelse længe presset på for handling, og nu sker der noget. Jeg er både glad og stolt over det resultat, vi har fået forhandlet hjem. Det vil føre til bedre beskyttelse for rengøringsassistenter, industriarbejdere og sygeplejesker. Samlet vurderes det, at mere end én million lønmodtagere i EU vil blive bedre beskyttet, hvis forslaget bliver vedtaget i dag. For arbejdere i industrien betyder det bedre beskyttelse mod kræftfremkaldende stoffer. For sundhedspersonale vil det betyde bedre beskyttelse mod skadelige medicinske produkter. For mange kvindelige lønmodtagere vil det betyde bedre beskyttelse mod kemikalier, der skader forplantningsevnen og muligheden for at få børn. Jeg vil gerne takke for samarbejdet med de andre forhandlere. Det har været hårde forhandlinger, men det er lykkedes at få en stor og vigtig sejr. En sejr for hundredtusinder af lønmodtagere i EU. Så kære kollegaer, tak for samarbejdet. Lad os stemme for forslaget.

  Daniela Rondinelli (NI). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, in Italia registriamo 1 200 morti sul lavoro all'anno, in media tre persone al giorno, una vera mattanza quotidiana. Queste perdite si sommano a 8 000 morti all'anno per esposizioni a sostanze cancerogene sul posto di lavoro, che avvengono nel silenzio e nell'indifferenza più assoluta da parte di istituzioni, media e società.

Almeno il 5 % di questi tumori maligni è dovuto all'esposizione sul posto di lavoro a sostanze cancerogene; solo il 20 % di questi tumori viene individuato e riconosciuto come tale, con l'effetto di distruggere non soltanto la vita di chi ne è affetto, ma anche delle loro famiglie, spesso completamente abbandonate a loro stesse.

L'accordo che ci apprestiamo a votare rafforza i livelli di protezione dalle sostanze cancerogene, al fine di proteggere i lavoratori e prevenire la formazione dei tumori. E, finalmente, dico che lo facciamo con un approccio diverso, perché dalla pandemia abbiamo imparato che la salute non può essere considerata un costo, ma un investimento fondamentale per il benessere individuale e il bene comune.

Allora mai come in questa circostanza la giustizia sociale si fonde con il diritto inalienabile alla salute e alla dignità, premessa indispensabile per una ripresa davvero equa e sostenibile, che non lasci indietro nessuno.

  Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, anual doar în Uniunea Europeană, 2,5 milioane de oameni sunt diagnosticați cu cancer. Alți 1,3 milioane de cetățeni pierd bătălia cu această boală cruntă și sunt luați dintre noi. Aceștia sunt fie copii, oameni în vârstă sau ființe foarte dragi care lasă în urmă adevărate drame.

Datele colectate de către Comisia Europeană arată că mai bine de jumătate din decesele legate de locul de muncă au drept cauză cancerul profesional. Or așa ceva nu trebuie să mai permitem în Uniunea Europeană!

Mă bucur enorm că în cinci ani de zile discutăm deja de a patra propunere de modificare a Directivei privind protecția lucrătorilor împotriva riscurilor legate de expunerea la agenți cancerigeni sau mutageni la locul de muncă. Cetățenii noștri trebuie să știe că Uniunea Europeană lucrează continuu pentru bunăstarea și sănătatea lor. Sănătatea trebuie să rămână o prioritate pentru noi.

Propunerea pe care o dezbatem astăzi vizează reducerea expunerii profesionale la trei substanțe cancerigene și reprezintă un nou pas către o Europă mai sănătoasă și insist pe acest aspect pentru că este important să le explicăm cetățenilor că există lucruri care nu au preț și pentru care trebuie să luptăm continuu. Suntem deja în al treilea an al pandemiei de COVID-19, pandemie care ne-a demonstrat că întotdeauna sănătatea trebuie să fie pe primul loc.

De asemenea, trebuie să ne asigurăm că ne respectăm angajamentul de a crea o Uniune Europeană a sănătății și că lucrătorii, care poate nu au privilegiul de a lucra în confortul unui birou, sunt protejați împotriva oricăror factori dăunători sănătății. Este vorba aici de lucrători esențiali care au fost greu încercați în această criză sanitară, cum ar fi lucrătorii din serviciile de sănătate, cei din construcții, cei din rafinării sau din producția de materiale chimice. În acest sens, vreau să insist că este absolut vital să găsim cele mai bune soluții pentru a-i proteja pe toți lucrătorii expuși.

  Marianne Vind (S&D). – Hr. Formand! Kære kommissærer! Kære ordførere! Kære kollegaer! Hvert år får 120 000 europæere kræft af at passe deres arbejde. Det er blikkenslageren, der indånder asbest og får kræft i lungerne. Det er tømrerne, der udsættes for UV-stråling og får hudkræft og veterinærsygeplejersker, der tager røntgenbilleder af vores kæledyr og får kræft i skjoldbruskkirtlen, og mange andre faggrupper, som arbejder med stoffer eller i omgivelser, som øger deres risiko for kræft, og 80 000 af dem mister livet. Det er mødre, fædre, søskende, der dør, fordi de passer deres arbejde. Hvert eneste tilfælde er tragisk, men det samlede billede er decideret en skandale. Det er tid til, at vi skruer op for ambitionerne. Det er tid til, at vi bruger nogle af de redskaber, som vi ved virker. Det er tid til, at vi knækker cancer også på arbejdspladserne. Vores beslutninger i dag er et vigtigt skridt i den rigtige retning. Ingen skal få kræft af at gå på arbejde, og i mine øjne er én kræftpatient én for mange.

(Η συζήτηση διακόπτεται)

6. Prvi čas glasovanja

  Πρόεδρος. – Προτού συνεχίσουμε με τη συζήτηση και την επόμενη ομιλήτρια, θα προχωρήσουμε στην έναρξη της σημερινής πρώτης ψηφοφορίας.

Θα ψηφίσουμε επί των φακέλων όπως αναφέρονται στην ημερήσια διάταξη.

Η ψηφοφορία θα διαρκέσει από τις 9:45 έως τις 11:00.

Θα χρησιμοποιηθεί η ίδια μέθοδος ψηφοφορίας που χρησιμοποιήθηκε και στις προηγούμενες ψηφοφορίες.

Όλες οι ψηφοφορίες θα πραγματοποιηθούν με ονομαστική κλήση.

Κηρύσσω την έναρξη της πρώτης ψηφοφορίας.

Μπορείτε να ψηφίσετε έως τις 11:00.

Τα αποτελέσματα της πρώτης ψηφοφορίας θα ανακοινωθούν στις 13:00 σήμερα.

7. Varovanje delavcev pred nevarnostmi zaradi izpostavljenosti rakotvornim, mutagenim in reprotoksičnim snovem pri delu (nadaljevanje razprave)

  Πρόεδρος. – Επαναλαμβάνεται τώρα η συζήτηση επί της εκθέσεως της Stefania Zambelli (A9-0114/2021).

  Lucia Ďuriš Nicholsonová (Renew). – Pán predsedajúci, mala som tú česť viesť dialógy zo strany Európskeho parlamentu a zastupovať jeden fantastický vyjednávací tím Európskeho parlamentu. Všetkým kolegom sa chcem v prvom rade veľmi pekne poďakovať. Myslím, že sa nám podarilo dosiahnuť neuveriteľnú vec, aby sa do rozsahu pôsobnosti smernice o ochrane pracovníkov pred účinkami karcinogénov a mutagénov pri práci zahrnuli reprotoxické látky, a aby sa zabezpečilo, že všetci títo pracovníci, najmä v oblasti zdravotníctva, budú pri práci s nebezpečnými látkami oveľa viac chránení ako doteraz. To je veľká vec. Je to obrovský úspech Európskeho parlamentu. Celý ten čas tých ťažkých rokovaní sme mali všetci na mysli 12,7 milióna pracovníkov, vrátane 7,3 milióna zdravotných sestier, ktoré sú takmer každodenne pri práci vystavené karcinogénnym, mutagénnym a reprotoxickým nebezpečným liekom. Všetci vieme, že podľa odborných štúdií je u týchto zamestnancov trikrát vyššia pravdepodobnosť vzniku malígnych ochorení, ako je napríklad rakovina prsníka alebo rakovina krvotvorby. A u zdravotných sestier špecificky, ktoré sú vystavené citotoxickým liekom, je dvakrát vyššia pravdepodobnosť potratu, majú obrovské problémy s plodnosťou a s vrodenými postihnutiami svojich detí.

Preto hovorím, že je to obrovský úspech Európskeho parlamentu a všetkých týchto ľudí a pevne verím, že dnes to bude korunované masívnou podporou v tomto pléne. Všetkých kolegov k tomu vyzývam, pretože to všetci robíme pre zdravie ľudí v teréne, ktorých zdravie sa snažíme chrániť.

  Elżbieta Rafalska (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Koleżanki i Koledzy! Problem, o którym mówimy, nie wymaga oryginalnego podejścia, ale żelaznej konsekwencji. Skoro można zapobiec 40% nowotworów związanych z wykonywaniem pracy zawodowej, należy to zrobić jak najszybciej. W świetle kryzysu demograficznego, z jakim zmaga się Europa, kwestia substancji reprotoksycznych takich jak bisfenol A, tlenek miedzi, ołów czy rtęć jest szczególnie niepokojąca. Pracownicy są często narażeni w miejscu pracy na działanie mieszanki czynników chemicznych, które mogą powodować obniżenie płodności lub niepłodność albo wpływać negatywnie na rozwój płodu i laktację. Dlatego popieramy rozszerzenie dyrektywy o te właśnie substancje obok substancji rakotwórczych i mutagennych.

Słusznie podkreślany w sprawozdaniu jest również aspekt niebezpiecznych substancji, z którymi mają do czynienia pracownicy służby zdrowia. Pamiętajmy również o najsłabiej chronionych pracownikach mobilnych, delegowanych i migrujących zatrudnionych masowo w sektorze stalowym, chemicznym czy w sektorze usług sprzątania.

  Sandra Pereira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, os trabalhadores estão sujeitos, nem sempre de forma consciente, à degradação das suas condições de trabalho, da sua saúde e, no limite, à perda da sua vida. Proteger os trabalhadores tem de ser uma questão prioritária, de princípio, e não podemos aceitar que, em pleno século XXI, essa preocupação ainda não seja central.

É essencial garantir a proteção dos trabalhadores, o aumento dos seus direitos e salvaguardas, frequentemente inacessíveis ou postos em causa, devido à precariedade dos vínculos laborais, infelizmente demasiado na moda. Se, por um lado, é fundamental incrementar a vertente preventiva da exposição, por outro lado é imprescindível garantir, ao mesmo tempo, a justa reparação pelos danos sofridos por essa exposição.

Por último, convém recordar que não basta a lei ter estes direitos consagrados. É preciso que as autoridades nacionais de inspeção, onde demasiadas vezes os meios humanos e materiais escasseiam, tenham verdadeiras condições de fiscalização e intervenção para fazer cumprir a lei e os direitos dos trabalhadores.

  Ivan Vilibor Sinčić (NI). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, hvala vam kolegice i kolege, kad pričamo o zaštiti radnika od kancerogena, treba svakako spomenuti etilen oksid. Samo prošle godine 2021. ministarstvo poljoprivrede je povuklo 80 proizvoda u Hrvatskoj iz preventivnih razloga, iz dobrih standarda zaštite potrošača i zdravlja, bez da je bilo dokazano da on radi štetu. Međutim, taj standard ne vrijedi kada se radi o brisevima za testove. Ako učinite test jednom vjerojatno nećete imati nekih problema. Međutim, ako to radite svaki dan ili svakih nekoliko dana i sada već godinama, kakve će biti posljedice za radnike koji ne mogu do svog radnog mjesta bez testa ili za djecu, mi zapravo ne znamo jer istraživanja nema.

Etilen oksid je registriran kod Europske agencije za kemikalije pod brojem 75218 i smatra se toksičnim, kancerogenim i mutagenim. Prema tome, zašto ovi standardi predostrožnosti nisu iskorišteni i u ovom slučaju pošto se ova kemikalija koristi za sterilizaciju u velikom broju slučajeva. Postavljam pitanje agencijama i vladama: niste li zabrinuti za ovo što se dešava?

  Antonius Manders (PPE). – Voorzitter, de strijd tegen kanker is een belangrijke strijd die Europa niet alleen voor vandaag, maar ook voor de toekomst moet voeren. De bescherming van werknemers op de werkvloer tegen kankerverwekkende stoffen moet voor de Europese Unie een hoofddoel zijn. Deze strijd is een investering in toekomstige besparingen. Als mensen kanker krijgen, is dit namelijk niet alleen rampzalig voor hun familie, maar ook voor de maatschappij, vanwege de kosten die dit met zich meebrengt voor de zorg.

De helft van de bevolking is inmiddels vijftig plus en dit is een demografische ontwikkeling die doorgaat. De strijd tegen kanker is dus niet meer dan een onderdeel van een gezonde levensstijl, waaraan we veel meer aandacht moeten besteden; niet alleen op de werkvloer, maar overal. Gezonde mensen zorgen namelijk voor lagere zorgkosten en kunnen langer actief deelnemen aan de maatschappij en aan de arbeidsmarkt, langer zelfstandig wonen en langer voor anderen zorgen, hetgeen tot een gezonde economie leidt. Gezonde mensen zorgen voor de toekomst van de Europese Unie. Ik wil de Commissie daarom vragen gezonde levensstijl in het vervolg in alle voorstellen op te nemen als investering in toekomstige besparingen met het oog op een gezonde Europese toekomst.

  Marc Angel (S&D). – Mr President, the Socialists and Democrats welcome that today we can take another step forward in the protection of workers from exposure to harmful substances, which can cause cancer, infertility and many chronic diseases. We are also happy that beating cancer is at the top of the European agenda. We expect the Commission and the Member States to be ambitious in their measures against cancer at the workplace, and we are really looking forward to the updates of this directive because there is a continuous development in scientific research and we need to make sure that we protect workers accordingly.

We should also not forget about asbestos, which causes 80% of occupational cancer. I remind you that this Parliament voted for a strong resolution on asbestos, calling for a European strategy for the removal of all asbestos. Therefore, we also call today on the Commission to be ambitious and to quickly revise the Asbestos Directive with an exposure limit for asbestos to be set at 1 000 fibres per cubic metre. To achieve zero asbestos, we need a comprehensive approach, including an EU framework directive for national asbestos removal strategies, mandatory screening of buildings, provision of sealing and encapsulation of asbestos-containing materials, and, very importantly, better recognition and compensation of asbestos—related diseases to all exposed workers.

I would like to finish by thanking the rapporteur and all the colleagues who worked on this important work today.

  Vlad Gheorghe (Renew). – Domnule președinte, cancerul este pandemia fără valuri, fără restricții, fără să ne putem proteja cu măști sau cu mănuși. Cei care muncesc în prima linie: asistente, pompieri, livratori, cei care dezinfectează birouri, școli, spitale sunt mai expuși decât noi la substanțe cancerigene și la mutageni. Sunt 13 milioane de angajați europeni în contact zilnic cu substanțe periculoase.

Cancerul este principala cauză a deceselor profesionale în Uniune. Sunt 100 000 de cazuri noi și 80 000 de morți în fiecare an. Sunt oameni, nu statistici. Lasă în urmă copii, familii, prieteni, un gol pe piața muncii și în comunitate.

Nu cred că este vreunul dintre noi care nu a pierdut pe cineva drag în fața acestei boli nemiloase, dar peste 40 % dintre cazurile de cancer pot fi prevenite. Putem și avem datoria să facem mai mult.

Vă rog să susținem această propunere de directivă europeană! Vă rog să susținem Planul european de combatere a cancerului! Vă rog ca, indiferent de culoare politică, să susținem în țările noastre orice măsură previne, luptă și alină suferințele cauzate de cancer! Să fie foarte clar! Nu trebuie să mai fie loc în Europa pentru guvernele care nu investesc în cercetare, nu finanțează programe de screening, nu construiesc spitale, nu fac o prioritate din educația pentru sănătate, ignoră paliația și nu sprijină supraviețuitorii!

  Eugenia Rodríguez Palop (The Left). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, que los trabajadores y las trabajadoras deben estar protegidos contra las enfermedades y, en particular, contra las enfermedades laborales, es un derecho reconocido en la propia Constitución de la Organización Internacional del Trabajo.

Quiero señalar especialmente a las mujeres, porque han sido las grandes olvidadas en materia de prevención de riesgos laborales. El informe que hoy debatimos ha logrado un avance importante en esta materia al incluir las sustancias tóxicas para la reproducción en la Directiva. Un logro fundamental, desde un enfoque de género, porque la exposición a estas sustancias se da en sectores altamente feminizados, como el de la limpieza y la enfermería, y porque afecta de forma particular a la salud reproductiva de las mujeres. La exposición se da también en otros sectores, quizás no tan feminizados, pero donde las mujeres se encuentran en situación de especial vulnerabilidad, como el de las temporeras que trabajan en el campo.

Este informe es un paso adelante para las mujeres, los sanitarios, los trabajadores de la industria, miles de asalariados que ven reforzados sus derechos laborales y su derecho a la salud, porque nadie —ya se ha dicho aquí— tiene que enfermar o morir para ganarse la vida trabajando.

  Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, poštovani povjereniče, kolegice i kolege, čestitam prije svega svima koji su radili na ovom dosjeu. Jasno je više puta izrečeno ovdje da zdravlje i zaštita radnika treba biti apsolutni prioritet u svakom poslovanju.

Više od polovice smrtnih slučajeva povezanih s radom u Europskoj uniji na godišnjoj razini povezano je s rakom. Europski parlament jasno je definirao svoj stav u borbi protiv ove zloćudne bolesti i stoga ne možemo pristati na ništa manje od najviših standarda zaštite na radu. Predložene dopune direktivi predviđaju bolju zaštitu na radnom mjestu za milijune europskih radnika koji su profesionalno izloženi benzenu, spojevima nikla i akrilonitrilu. Uz to, izmjenom direktive nastoji se osigurati i veća transparentnost za radnike, poslodavce, kao i provedbena tijela, te pridonijeti ostvarenju ravnopravnih uvjeta za gospodarske subjekte o kojima također moramo voditi računa.

Pozdravljamo odlučne iskorake koje ova direktiva donosi, pogotovo u vidu proširenja opsega na reprotoksine, ali i najavom akcijskog plana Komisije kojim se predviđa uključivanje dodatnih 25 tvari u direktivu. Jednako tako, i uključivanje zaštite medicinskih djelatnika. Radi se o primjeru dobre prakse koji je naišao na odobravanje većine dionika iz relevantnih sektora. Međutim, naš posao kao zakonodavnog tijela još uvijek nije gotov. Potrebno je stalno prilagođavati postojeće zakonodavstvo u skladu s najnovijim saznanjima. Zato i pitam, povjereniče, može li se rok revidiranja graničnih vrijednosti s pet godina možda smanjiti? Treba vidjeti jer na raspolaganju su nam brojna druga znanstvena otkrića. Samo na taj način osigurat ćemo dodatne prednosti za zdravlje naših radnika. I ono što je strašno važno jest razmjena informacija, uspostava europskog registra opasnih lijekova.

Kolegice i kolege, zbog rada ničije zdravlje ne smije biti ugroženo.

  Gabriele Bischoff (S&D). – Verehrter Präsident, verehrter Kommissar! Mal ganz ehrlich: Europäische Sozialpolitik, da schalten doch viele ab und denken: Das hat doch mit mir nichts zu tun, das berührt mich doch nicht, das meiste wird eh auf nationaler Ebene entschieden.

Hier zeigen europäische Richtlinien, dass durch Europapolitik Menschenleben gerettet werden, hunderttausende von Menschenleben – im Zweifelsfall Ihre Kollegen, Ihre Freunde, Ihre Verwandten. Und deshalb ist es wichtig, dass wir hier zusammen die Botschaft geben: Wir haben hier schon viel erreicht, aber wir müssen viel weiter gehen, weil es immer noch viele Menschen gibt, die ihre Arbeit krank macht, die dadurch sterben, dass sie jeden Tag zur Arbeit gehen und ihren Job machen.

Und deshalb wollen wir sicherstellen, dass noch mehr Stoffe, die krebserregend sind, die genverändert sind, aufgenommen werden und dass wir hier sicherstellen: Unser Ziel ist es, dass wir null Tote haben, die durch ihre Arbeit sterben, denn Arbeit darf nicht krank machen, Arbeit darf nicht töten. Und deshalb müssen wir hier viel ambitionierter sein. In diesem Sinne: Unterstützen Sie die Richtlinie, machen Sie Druck!

VORSITZ: RAINER WIELAND
Vizepräsident

  Атидже Алиева-Вели (Renew). – Г-н Председател, правото на достоен живот и на здравословна работна среда е фундаментално и като такова, трябва да бъде принцип във всяка една политика.

Днес, за съжаление, все още не можем да овладеем напълно рака и затова усилията за борба с причинителите му трябва да продължат. На работното място работниците често са изложени на въздействието на вещества, които увеличават риска за здравето и могат да причинят онкологични заболявания, репродуктивни проблеми и безплодие. Особено важни са мерките за опазване на здравето на уязвимите групи, на работещите в здравния сектор, особено на жените, работниците от стоманодобивната и химическата промишленост, както и от сектора на почистването. Чрез разширяването на обхвата на директивата, с която се определят опасните вещества, вярвам, че предприемаме една решителна крачка за осигуряване на по-добри стандарти на работа.

Искам да подчертая, че спазването на актуализираните стойности за професионалната експозиция е гаранция за доброто здраве на всички работещи. Също така е важно държавите членки да гарантират, че всеки работник има право на обезщетение във връзка с професионални заболявания. Последователна съм в подкрепата си за политиките за опазване на здравето на работниците и ще продължа да бъда.

  Salvatore De Meo (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, proprio in questi giorni quest'Aula ha discusso e approvato la relazione per una strategia europea contro il cancro, affinché l'Unione europea rafforzi le sue azioni di ricerca, di prevenzione e di cura per combattere questa insidiosa malattia. Abbiamo tutti riconosciuto come la lotta al cancro debba essere una priorità e abbiamo condiviso la necessità di fare di più.

Nel frattempo, però, milioni di europei continuano ad ammalarsi o a morire di cancro. Ciò su cui vorrei che riflettessimo oggi sono i dati che sono stati enunciati dalla relatrice, dal Commissario e dai colleghi, dati impressionanti, dati che non possiamo accettare.

A distanza di poche ore dall'approvazione della relazione BECA, il Parlamento è chiamato a decidere su un altro provvedimento che, seppur apparentemente diverso, vede proprio nel cancro l'elemento di collegamento, facendoci capire quanto sia necessario intervenire su più fronti per debellare dal nostro continente questa malattia.

Il cancro è pericoloso soprattutto per i modi e i tempi in cui si sviluppa. La prevenzione diventa quindi l'arma più efficace per combatterlo, insieme a un potenziamento della ricerca e di azioni comuni, che possano essere meglio affrontate con un'azione congiunta dell'Unione e una legislazione a livello europeo capace di adattarsi ai nuovi pericoli a cui sono esposti i lavoratori.

Secondo le stime, le norme che oggi approviamo ridurranno di circa un milione l'esposizione dei nostri lavoratori europei alle sostanze chimiche cancerogene. Nel provvedimento apprezzo l'attenzione che è stata data ai lavoratori del comparto ospedaliero, da due anni in prima linea nella pandemia. Proprio gli operatori sanitari, infatti, hanno quotidianamente a che fare con medicinali pericolosi, metà dei quali reprotossici, per i quali è necessario avere una giusta e adeguata formazione per maneggiare questi prodotti.

Oggi quindi, con la quarta modifica che arriviamo ad apportare a questa direttiva, non solo aggiorniamo l'elenco delle sostanze cancerogene, che andrebbe ulteriormente rivisto con un lasso temporale minore, ma fissiamo anche un livello europeo di limiti di esposizione ad esse.

Oggi, cari colleghi, facciamo un altro passo in avanti per proteggere cittadine e cittadini europei che, anche sui luoghi di lavoro, devono sentirsi sicuri grazie a un'Europa che c'è e tutela la loro salute.

  Manuel Pizarro (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, os trabalhadores europeus têm direito a esperar de nós legislação que torne os locais de trabalho mais seguros e saudáveis, concretizando os princípios do Pilar Europeu dos Direitos Sociais, reforçados há menos de um ano na Declaração do Porto.

A União deve incorporar na legislação, de forma ágil, o conhecimento que vai sendo adquirido sobre substâncias tóxicas, em especial as que são suscetíveis de causar o cancro. A aplicação das medidas resultantes da diretiva que estamos a debater evitará centenas de casos de cancro e de outras doenças graves e merece total aprovação. É uma decisão justa e humanista.

Primeiro que tudo, acima de tudo, têm de estar as pessoas. Ao mesmo tempo, a União deve assegurar, no contexto dos acordos internacionais de comércio, que os países terceiros apliquem normas similares de proteção dos trabalhadores. Damos hoje mais um passo na direção certa, a direção da Europa social, na qual os cidadãos se reveem.

  Ilan De Basso (S&D). – Herr talman! Alla som kan jobba ska jobba, det är självklart, men då måste vi också se till att man inte riskerar sitt liv när man går till jobbet.

I Europa dör tio personer varje timme av cancer som orsakas av farliga ämnen och mediciner på jobbet. Det är hundratusen människor varje år, det är vanliga arbetare som går till jobbet för att kunna försörja sig själv och sin familj. Det här är helt oacceptabelt. Det handlar inte bara om ett folkhälsoproblem. Det är också ett stort misslyckande när vi inte lyckas lösa den sociala orättvisa och ojämlikhet som existerar i EU.

Vi har ett gemensamt ansvar att ta fram en tydlig lagstiftning och sätta högre press på arbetsgivarna. Vi behöver vända på varje sten och utforska varje möjlighet som på sikt leder till mindre exponering för farliga ämnen för vanligt folk i Europa. Utöver kommissionens förslag har vi nu ett mer skottsäkert direktiv som även täcker fler reproduktionsstörande ämnen och det ska vi vara stolta över. Nu ror vi detta i hamn. Inget jobb är värt att dö för.

  Brando Benifei (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, il gruppo dei Socialisti e Democratici è da sempre in prima linea nella protezione dei lavoratori dai rischi collegati all'esposizione a sostanze nocive sul posto di lavoro. L'accordo raggiunto tra il Parlamento e il Consiglio sull'aggiornamento della direttiva cancerogeni è un buon accordo, che supportiamo con convinzione.

L'applicazione dello stesso approccio rispetto alle sostanze tossiche per la riproduzione come agenti cancerogeni e mutageni assicurerà una migliore protezione per i lavoratori, una coerenza giuridica e parità di condizioni fra gli Stati membri.

La lotta al cancro richiede soluzioni ambiziose e un piano strategico chiaro, con misure che toccano tutti i fronti normativi, in linea con quello che abbiamo votato ieri nella relazione della commissione speciale per la lotta al cancro. L'aggiornamento è dunque una componente centrale per garantire posti di lavoro sicuri e salubri.

Chiediamo inoltre alla Commissione europea di mettere sul tavolo una revisione della direttiva amianto, una sostanza che è ancora presente in moltissimi edifici in Europa sebbene sia stata messa al bando già nel 2005. I cittadini europei hanno diritto ad avere un luogo di lavoro sicuro. Non esiste nessun lavoro per cui vale la pena morire.

  Nicolas Schmit, membre de la Commission. – Monsieur le Président, honorables Députés, d’abord, je tiens à vous remercier pour ce débat fondamental et très consensuel. Nous sommes souvent confrontés à une question que les citoyens nous adressent: que fait l’Europe? Eh bien, là, il s’agit d’une question de vie ou de mort, de santé ou de maladie, et l’Europe agit. Vous avez évoqué l’adoption, hier, du plan de lutte contre le cancer. C’est un plan ambitieux, qui va au cœur même des soucis de millions d’Européens et de leurs familles. Pouvons-nous vaincre le cancer? Soyons optimistes; mais nous ne le vaincrons pas uniquement à l’aide des médicaments: nous le vaincrons d’abord à travers la prévention.

Il n’est pas admissible qu’un travailleur soit exposé à ces risques et à ces dangers. L’Union européenne que nous sommes doit la même protection à tous les travailleurs, qu’ils travaillent en Suède, en Roumanie, au Luxembourg ou en Italie, dans une grande ou une petite entreprise. J’admets qu’il faut aider surtout les petites entreprises pour mettre en œuvre ces précautions et ces mesures, que j’espère que vous adopterez tout à l’heure.

Il ne s’agit pas uniquement, il est vrai, d’adopter des mesures; il faut les mettre en œuvre. Il y a donc une très grande responsabilité, non seulement du côté des partenaires sociaux et des entreprises, mais aussi des États membres, qui doivent mettre en œuvre les contrôles, donc renforcer les mesures et les moyens de contrôle, qui sont extrêmement importants.

Finalement, notre tâche n’est pas du tout terminée. Je ne dirais pas qu’elle commence, mais nous avons encore beaucoup de travail devant nous. Nous nous sommes maintenant engagés à agir et à proposer des limites sur 25 substances supplémentaires. Nous allons déjà le faire pour un certain nombre d’entre elles, le plus rapidement, dès 2024 – c’est peut-être là une des questions auxquelles il faut réfléchir.

Je vois dans nos procédures un rôle important, bien sûr, pour l’analyse scientifique – parce que nous ne travaillons pas au hasard, nous devons avoir une base scientifique solide – et pour les partenaires sociaux qui sont les nôtres. Malgré tout, j’aimerais que l’on puisse avancer plus vite et que l’on affecte plus de ressources à ce travail fondamental, qui est, comme je viens de le dire et comme beaucoup d’entre vous l’ont dit, une question de vie ou de mort.

La Commission va donc s’appliquer à accélérer ces procédures et j’espère que vous soutiendrez la Commission dans cette tâche. Vous avez évoqué effectivement l’amiante; grâce, aussi, au Parlement européen, nous allons présenter une stratégie pour l’amiante dès septembre.

Je crois donc que nous sommes sur une bonne lancée. Il ne faut plus changer de cap, à présent. Les Européens ne nous le pardonneraient pas, sinon.

  Stefania Zambelli, relatrice. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ho ascoltato con molta attenzione i vostri interventi. Credo che questa relazione fosse un atto dovuto nei confronti di tutti i cittadini europei che negli anni hanno contratto il cancro sul luogo di lavoro.

Ringrazio il Consiglio, ringrazio la Commissione, ringrazio tutti i miei colleghi. Ringrazio di cuore la ex presidente, per il lavoro che abbiamo svolto insieme. Grazie Lucia! Oggi insieme abbiamo aggiunto un importante tassello nella lotta contro il cancro, lasciando da parte i nostri colori politici. Oggi per i lavoratori europei è un grande giorno. Grazie.

  Der Präsident. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet heute, Donnerstag, 17. Februar 2022, statt.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 171 GO)

  Karol Karski (ECR), na piśmie. – Mimo naszych wspólnych starań, imponujących postępów w dziedzinach medycyny i technologii nowotwór nadal stanowi ogromne zagrożenie dla Europejczyków. Nie inaczej jest w miejscu pracy, jako że w UE ponad połowa zgonów związanych z pracą jest spowodowana właśnie przez nowotwór.

Frontów walki z rakiem jest wiele, a jedno proste rozwiązanie wszystkich problemów niestety nie istnieje. Bardzo ważna jest wczesna diagnoza – jak słusznie zauważyła sprawozdawczyni, poruszając temat konieczności systematycznych badań przesiewowych w kierunku raka – a także szybkie, skuteczne leczenie. Kluczowe są również działania prewencyjne. Wielu nowotworom można zapobiec i naszą wspólną odpowiedzialnością jest doprowadzenie do scenariusza, w którym diagnoza i leczenie nie będą tak często potrzebne, bo nowotwory będą po prostu występować znacznie rzadziej.

Jestem przekonany, że przyjęty tekst pomoże nam osiągnąć ten cel. Bardziej restrykcyjne normy wartości narażenia zawodowego – choć trudne do wprowadzenia ze względów technologicznych, administracyjnych i finansowych – są koniecznością i kluczowym narzędziem na rzecz ochrony pracowników.

Cieszy mnie też poruszony temat substancji reprotoksycznych oraz niebezpiecznych produktów leczniczych. Na obu tych płaszczyznach konieczne są dalsze działania, takie jak szkolenia pracowników, zwiększanie świadomości zagrożeń oraz oczywiście badania i analizy. Zdrowie Europejczyków musi być naszym priorytetem.

  Ádám Kósa (NI), írásban. – Sajnálatos módon az Unióban a munkavégzéssel összefüggő éves halálozások 52%-a munkával összefüggő ráknak tulajdonítható. A rákkeltő anyagok mellett a munkavállalók gyakran anyagok olyan kombinációjának vannak kitéve, amely káros hatást gyakorol reprodukciós rendszerükre, csökkent termékenységet és meddőséget okoz és károsan befolyásolja a magzati fejlődést és a szoptatást. Nagyon fontos a munkavállalók és gyermekeik megfelelőbb védelme, különös tekintettel a várandós vagy szoptató nők biztonságos munkavégzésére.

A munkahelyi prevenció megszervezésének ezért ugyanazt a megközelítést kell alkalmaznia a rákkeltő anyagokra, a mutagénekre és a reprodukciót károsító anyagokra, ezáltal biztosítva a jogi koherenciát és az egyenlő versenyfeltételeket a tagállamokban.

  Valdemar Tomaševski (ECR), raštu. – Labai gerai, kad Parlamentas greitai apsiėmė spręsti klausimą, kuris labai svarbus milijonams mūsų piliečių, t. y. priimti teisės aktus, skirtus geriau apsaugoti darbuotojus nuo kancerogenų. Būtina skubiai pakeisti dabartinę direktyvą. Juk vėžys yra pagrindinė su darbu susijusių mirčių priežastis Europos Sąjungoje. Remiantis duomenimis, profesinis vėžys sukelia maždaug 52 proc. su darbu susijusių mirčių. Ši nerimą kelianti statistika turi paskatinti ryžtingus įstatymų pakeitimus, kurie sustiprins darbuotojų apsaugą nuo grėsmės jų sveikatai. Palaikau Komisijos iniciatyvą, kad kova su vėžiu taptų 2019–2024 m. penkerių metų laikotarpiu vienu iš Sąjungos prioritetų, juolab kad, remiantis oficialiais duomenimis, net 40 proc. vėžio atvejų Europoje galima išvengti. Pakanka sukurti tokias teisines nuostatas, kurios neleis darbuotojams susidurti su mutageninėmis ar kancerogeninėmis medžiagomis. Toks būtų direktyvos pakeitimų tikslas.

Nepamirškime dar vieno svarbaus dalyko. Teigiami įstatymų pakeitimai, saugantys darbuotojų sveikatą ir gyvybę, turi būti tinkamai pristatyti darbdaviams ir jų organizacijoms, kad būtų gautas jų pritarimas veiklai, kuria siekiama efektyviai apsaugoti darbuotojus nuo su darbu susijusio vėžio. Todėl reikalingos atitinkamos konsultacijos ir susitarimas su visomis suinteresuotomis šalimis, kurias paveiks įstatymo pakeitimai. Tačiau prisiminkime, kad mūsų tikslas visada turi būti žmonių sveikata ir gyvybė.

8. Razprave o primerih kršitev človekovih pravic, demokracije in načela pravne države (razprava)

8.1. Nedavni dogodki na področju človekovih pravic na Filipinih

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über sechs Entschließungsanträge zu den aktuellen Menschenrechtsentwicklungen auf den Philippinen (2022/2540(RSP))1.

Ich erinnere die Mitglieder daran, dass bei allen Aussprachen dieser Tagung weder spontane Wortmeldungen noch blaue Karten akzeptiert werden.

Außerdem sind, wie auch bei den letzten Tagungen, Zuschaltungen aus den Verbindungsbüros des Parlaments in den Mitgliedstaaten vorgesehen.

Ich weise Sie auch darauf hin, dass Wortmeldungen im Plenarsaal weiterhin vom zentralen Rednerpult aus erfolgen. Ich ersuche Sie daher, die Rednerliste im Blick zu behalten und sich kurz vor Beginn Ihrer Redezeit zum Rednerpult zu begeben.

____________

1 Siehe Protokoll.

  Seán Kelly, author. – Mr President, I must say as an author the for the PPE Group, it was a pleasure to work with the other authors from the political groups. We got great cooperation. As a result, we have good compromises and a very strong resolution, which I hope the Philippine authorities will take note of, because there has been persistent impunity for human rights violations in the Philippines under President Rodrigo Duterte’s administration.

Since the so-called war on drugs was launched in 2016, thousands have been killed and there has been an unwillingness to investigate. Human rights activists have been branded as terrorists and equated with the armed wing of the Communist Party or ‘red-tagged’, many subsequently being killed. Now that the campaigning has kicked off for the presidential elections in May, fake news has become a particularly prevalent phenomenon in the country. Although the President is banned from seeking re-election, the son of former dictator Ferdinand Marcos is currently leading in the polls, whitewashing the thousands of atrocities of the Marcos regime in the 70s and 80s.

Given the scale of these deplorable human rights violations and the failure to bring the perpetrators to justice, efforts must be bolstered to ensure that the upcoming elections are fair and free.

Unfortunately, so far the Philippine authorities have not invited the EU to conduct an election observation mission. Election observation missions contribute to the strengthening of democratic institutions, building public confidence in electoral processes and would help to deter intimidation and indeed violence. The EU should be invited to observe elections to help ensure a high standard.

Since a successful application of the Philippines to the GSP+ in 2014, the Philippines has enjoyed greater market access to the EU, which has led to a significant increase in exports. However, this must be re-evaluated if human rights obligations are not observed.

I call on the Commission to temporarily withdraw GSP+ preferences if there is no substantial improvement and willingness to cooperate on the part of the Philippine authorities. It might be the best weapon to get them to mend their ways. Thank you very much again and it was a pleasure to work with my fellow authors.

  Javi López, autor. – Señor presidente, señores comisarios, desde que Rodrigo Duterte inició su mandato como presidente de Filipinas el país vive inmerso en violaciones masivas de los derechos humanos y ejecuciones extrajudiciales.

De hecho, la mal llamada «guerra contra las drogas» lo que ha llevado al país es a más de 30 000 asesinatos mediante la práctica del red tagging, que, de forma arbitraria, en la calle, o fruto de redadas policiales, ha sido fomentada por Duterte y acaba en asesinatos.

Entre estas víctimas, entre estas 30 000 víctimas que la sociedad civil en Filipinas está denunciando, hay ciento cuarenta y seis defensores de derechos humanos y veintidós periodistas. Ninguno de estos casos, ninguno, ha acabado en un juicio. Estamos ante el combate a los opositores políticos, a los activistas, a los periodistas, encarcelados de forma sistemática con acusaciones falsas o prefabricadas. El país vive instalado en la violencia, la represión y la impunidad.

Esa es la realidad. Y hoy el Parlamento Europeo quiere expresar su más enérgica condena.

En primer lugar, hace un llamamiento a las autoridades para que acabe con esta situación, cese el acoso y persecución política y garantice los derechos y libertades en el país, especialmente de sus minorías y de las mujeres, que los ven atacados.

En segundo lugar, pide a la Comisión Europea que utilice sus herramientas y, especialmente, la suspensión temporal del sistema de preferencias generalizadas. Es la quinta resolución que tenemos, la quinta, en cinco años sobre Filipinas. La Comisión Europea añade cláusulas en materia de derechos humanos cuando hacemos acuerdos comerciales. ¿Qué tiene que pasar para que se apliquen? Es la quinta vez que hablamos y condenamos esta situación.

Y, en tercer lugar, muestra nuestro apoyo al pueblo de Filipinas y espera que las próximas elecciones acaben con el cambio que necesita su pueblo y, sobre todo, que merece la gente de Filipinas.

(Aplausos)

  Svenja Hahn, author. – Mr President, since President Rodrigo Duterte took office, the human rights situation in the Philippines has eroded in a landslide. There has been an appalling number of extrajudicial killings and human rights violations. This has been going on for years. This House last asked the Commission to act in 2020, and it pains me that the Commission has in fact not acted.

The only thing that has happened since is that human rights in the Philippines have worsened. More Filipinos have suffered. In fact, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights estimates that between 12 000 and 30 000 people have been killed in Duterte’s so-called war on drugs. Around 6 000 people lost their lives during police drug raids alone. For me, as a democrat, it is unbelievable that President Duterte personally encouraged extrajudicial executions and even promised immunity to perpetrators.

Another way – and I’m sad to say this, but a popular way – to silence anyone who does not support the regime is the alleged fight against communism. The so—called red—tagging has even been institutionalised in the anti-terrorism law. This red—tagging is the procedure where the authorities link organisations and individuals to communist groups and use this as an excuse for killings, threats, warrantless arrests, harassment and sexual violence against human rights defenders, opponents and journalists.

One can ask now, what leverage does the European Union even have to react to this? Trade policy. The generalised system of preferences (GSP), the preferential access to the single market, is a tool to support less-developed countries in their economic growth. It is a tool to help communities and individuals enhance their opportunities through trade. But this access comes with conditions, and respect for human rights is the most important requirement a country has to meet to even qualify for these preferences. The Philippines does not respect the agreed human rights standards and still the regime profits from these trade benefits.

I have said it many times before, and I will repeat it today: the European Union is not yet the diplomatic power we strive to be, but we are an economic power, promoting value—based trade. But this will only stay true if, while we wholeheartedly advocate for free trade, we also make sure that the agreed conditions are actually met.

Colleagues, I’m going to be very precise. Today, we ask the Commission to set clear goals and benchmarks and, if there is no substantial improvement and willingness from the Philippines Government to actually meet their human rights obligations under GSP, then we expect you to withdraw the trade preferences. This House will no longer accept inactivity and we will not compromise on our European values.

  Hannah Neumann, author. – Mr President, some of you may remember it, 17 months ago, we already had a resolution on the Philippines. Like many of you, I spoke back then and for some reason my video was dragged all over Filipino news. Troll armies were sent out against me, I had 35 000 hate comments on my Facebook page and I have to admit I was glad I could just close my laptop and turn all of this off. I was glad I was not in the Philippines and it was just cyberattacks.

That’s a privilege our activist and politician colleagues in the Philippines do not have. My friend, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, Maria Ressa, faces dozens of lawsuits, so—called SLAPP cases made up just to intimidate her. And only yesterday she was once more denied to travel outside of the country. My training partner in the Parliamentarian solidarity programme of this Parliament, Sarah Elago, is being attacked. It means the government initiates campaigns against her to brand her as communist, as terrorist, even her minor siblings are drawn into it, with their pictures all over fake news sites. And we know that these kind of attacks lead to also attacks in real life and sometimes even murder.

The Philippines, the country that was once known for the most vibrant civil society in Asia, has seen more than 220 killed human rights defenders in the last six years. Maria Ressa often says democracy dies by a thousand cuts. Frankly said, this country has seen more than one thousand cuts.

In May, there will be presidential and parliamentary elections. They could bring about change if only the process behind it were free and fair. The EU has offered to send an election observation mission. I want to thank EAS for that. But the Philippine government has bluntly ignored this request. It’s important now that the EU delegation, but also the embassies of all Member States, do everything they can to support local election observations and raise problems that they observe with the Philippine authorities.

And it is important, and all my colleagues have underlined that, that we send a clear signal to any new government. If the human rights situation in the Philippines does not improve significantly, the country’s special privileges under the GSP+ scheme will be revoked. We have a very broad majority in the Parliament behind this. Last time, dear Commissioner, you ignored it. We will not let this happen again.

  Miguel Urbán Crespo, Autor. – Señor presidente, en Filipinas, bajo la supuesta guerra contra las drogas, se ha ejecutado extrajudicialmente al menos a treinta mil personas. Bajo la excusa de luchar contra el terrorismo, ahora se ataca, se asesina y se encarcela a sindicalistas, a personas defensoras de los derechos humanos y a líderes y lideresas políticos, como el camarada Tripon/Jojo, que fue recientemente asesinado. Y desde aquí quiero mandar un abrazo muy fuerte a sus camaradas.

Quienes se oponen al Gobierno son señalados como combatientes y, en muchas ocasiones, esto deriva en persecuciones y asesinatos. Agencias estatales, como el Grupo Operativo Nacional, para acabar con el conflicto armado comunista local, están encargadas de llevar a cabo estos señalamientos que terminan con asesinatos como el de Tripon. Los sindicatos son perseguidos de tal manera que la gente no se atreve ni a sindicalizarse. Y así una larga lista de violaciones de derechos humanos que, aparentemente, no son suficientes para que la Comisión suspenda los privilegios otorgados en el marco del sistema de preferencias generalizadas: cinco declaraciones en este Parlamento. Un sistema que, en teoría, está condicionado a la aplicación de veintisiete convenios de derechos humanos y laborales que, claramente, en Filipinas no se cumplen. Exigimos la suspensión del sistema de preferencias generalizadas y un embargo de tecnología que sirva para la represión del pueblo filipino. Toda nuestra solidaridad con el pueblo filipino.

  Jiří Pospíšil, za skupinu PPE. – Pane předsedající, dámy a pánové, já bych chtěl podpořit návrh usnesení, který připravili navrhovatelé. Chci poděkovat za mimořádně kvalitně odvedenou práci. Příklad Filipín je mimořádně smutný. Je to příklad toho, jak pod rouškou boje proti drogám je možné rozpoutat v zásadě téměř občanskou válku. Mimořádné násilí, tisíce mimosoudních poprav, zabíjení novinářů, politických aktivistů, zkrátka a dobře ta situace na Filipínách je mimořádně vyhrocená.

Platí to, co říkali zde kolegové. Já si pamatuji, také jsem byl účasten, že toto bohužel není první debata, kterou zde vedeme ohledně zvěrstev režimu současného prezidenta. Ta situace se bohužel nezlepšuje. Naše dosavadní slova končila tím, že jsme přijali usnesení, ale evidentně současný prezident a jeho vláda žádné změny v tomto směru nechystá. Ba naopak, dochází k dalším negativním posunům. Nepadlo tady ještě to, že současný režim na Filipínách odstoupil od Mezinárodního trestního tribunálu, to znamená naopak je zde snaha vyhnout se tomu, aby tato mezinárodní justiční organizace přezkoumala porušování lidských práv na Filipínách a odpovědnost současného prezidenta a jeho vlády.

Ta situace je velmi vyhrocená a my bychom měli jasně říci, že pokud toto bude pokračovat i po prezidentských volbách, tak to bude mít dopad na vzájemné hospodářské vztahy. Na jedné straně dochází k flagrantnímu porušování lidských práv na Filipínách. Na druhé straně se posiluje obchod mezi Evropskou unií a Filipínami, a to zkrátka není normální a není to přijatelné pro nás. Takže moc prosím, aby nezapadlo to, co říkali někteří moji kolegové, že pokud situace se nezlepší ani po volbách, které proběhnou na jaře tohoto roku, nedojde k vyšetřování těch tisíců mimosoudních vražd, pak musíme omezit přístup Filipín na náš vnitřní trh. Není možné zde o tom pouze takto řečnit a nečinit nic, protože to potom opravdu je ztráta času. Takže děkuji za návrh usnesení a prosím Komisi, aby v případě, že bude přijato, což bude, byly vyvozeny z toho důsledky.

  Evin Incir, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, since 2016, the Philippines has been experiencing a democratic crackdown. The government, led by President Duterte, has constantly intensified its attacks on the human rights of its people. The people are suffering today in a way almost unimaginable half a decade ago. Civilians are being subjected to extrajudicial killings justified by the government’s despicable war-on-drugs policy. Civil society organisations, human rights activists and aid workers are blacklisted and labelled as terrorists. Freedom of expression is continuously violated and journalists cannot do their work without fear, at the same time as the opposition is continuously being targeted.

Not even foreigners, who are throwing light on the government and its policies are able to move freely in the country, or even enter. I visited the Philippines in 2018, together with my friend, the Deputy Secretary-General of the Party of European Socialists but, to my surprise, he was deported back to Belgium just because of a statement made a couple of months before.

The Duterte regime must constantly be reminded that the world is watching, and we must never let ourselves be silenced, because what is going on right now is impunity of the worst kind. I hope that we will get rid of the horrific Duterte era in the upcoming elections, but for that to be possible, free and fair elections must be ensured. The International Criminal Court, at the same time, must continue its work on the investigations of crimes against humanity in the context of the killings during the war on crimes.

  María Soraya Rodríguez Ramos, en nombre del Grupo Renew. – Señor presidente, la violencia y la represión bajo el régimen de Duterte es calificado de crímenes de lesa humanidad, como lo ha hecho la Corte Penal Internacional en la investigación preliminar sobre la guerra contra las drogas, en la que se habrían causado más de 20 000 asesinatos desde 2016. Bajo el Gobierno de Duterte se registraron más de 166 asesinatos de defensores medioambientales. Filipinas es el país que encabeza este triste ranking.

Ha pasado un año desde la masacre de Tumandok, en la que las Fuerzas Armadas de Filipinas entraron en las casas de nueve dirigentes indígenas y los asesinaron a sangre fría. Las familias, la sociedad, esperan justicia, pero es imposible, porque en la Filipinas de Duterte la impunidad ha sido ley, y los intentos de buscar los hechos, buscar a los culpables ha sido imposible. Duterte ha hecho gala de no cooperar con la Corte Penal Internacional. Ha convertido la obstaculización a la justicia en eslogan electoral de esta campaña.

Por eso, en este contexto, es muy difícil pensar que las elecciones se realicen en un contexto de libertad. Por eso, la Unión Europea debe acompañar en estas elecciones a los observadores locales y, por eso, señora comisaria, debemos suspender el sistema de preferencias generalizadas. Debemos hacerlo ya, porque si no, la Unión Europea muestra una complacencia con esta violencia, con la represión de los derechos humanos de la población civil que hoy aquí estamos denunciando. Por eso creo que debemos suspenderlo ya, que debemos también apoyar claramente desde aquí el papel de la Corte Penal Internacional. La única garantía internacional para que dirigentes de los Estados puedan responder ante sus actos y no esconder en la alfombra de la soberanía nacional sus crímenes, como intenta hacer Duterte.

(Aplausos)

  Heidi Hautala, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, the winner of the upcoming presidential election in the Philippines will have a major task to reverse the dire human rights situation which has seen an appalling deterioration under President Duterte.

 

Since 2014 the Philippines has enjoyed tariff preferences under the GSP+ system. The EU is the fourth-biggest trading partner with the Philippines. However, the GSP+ scheme is up for review with the current arrangement coming to its end in 2023. Now, the EU must see a steep positive curve in the Philippines’ human rights situation to be able to accept its possible reapplication to the scheme by 2024. 

 

We demand an immediate end to extrajudicial killings, an end to red-tagging human rights defenders, journalists, trade union activists. The war on drugs is to end immediately. 

 

However, it is not only the GSP+ that is at stake. The EU is also increasing its requirements on companies’ human rights conduct throughout their value chains. Respect for human rights will be a key factor for any business in Europe making their sourcing decisions. It is only wise to consider creating enabling conditions for business to operate in an environment free of human rights or labour rights violations. 

 

Effective implementation of international human rights standards and fundamental ILO conventions will be a prerequisite for a trade deal to be concluded with the EU.

  Joachim Kuhs, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kollegen! Ich glaube, wir sind uns alle einig in der Analyse. Die ist leider sehr, sehr bestürzend, klar und eindeutig und beschämend für ein solches Land. Und die Frage bleibt jetzt offen: Was können wir denn hier überhaupt tun?

Die Philippinen sind ein Inselstaat, ganz weit weg von uns. Können wir hier wirklich eingreifen? Können wir hier wirklich Dinge verändern? Ich frage Sie von der Kommission. Wenn Sie etwas tun können, dann müssen Sie es tun, dann sollten Sie es tun.

Aber bitte prüfen Sie genau: Wen werden diese Maßnahmen treffen? Denn dort leben über 100 Millionen Menschen auf diesen vielen Inseln, und die können nichts dafür, dass sie so einen Präsidenten haben. Die können ihn natürlich abwählen, klar, aber Sie wissen alle: Das funktioniert da nicht so, wie es bei uns vielleicht funktioniert. Und deshalb bitte ich ganz inständig, prüfen Sie genau: Wenn Sie denn diesen privilegierten Status, den Marktzugang, wenn Sie den schließen sollten, wen treffen Sie dann letztendlich wirklich? Das ist die Frage, die alles entscheidende Frage.

Und ansonsten müssen wir leider zugeben: Wir können wenig tun. Wir müssen uns auch in einer gewissen Weise sagen: Wir können uns nicht einmischen und wollen uns auch nicht einmischen in Dinge. Wenn es uns selbst hier in der Nähe im Westbalkan nicht gelingt, zum Beispiel rechtsstaatliche Prinzipien durchzusetzen nach 20 Jahren – das hat der Rechnungshof in einer Studie festgestellt –, wenn uns das hier nicht gelingt, wie soll es uns dann auf den Philippinen gelingen? So bleibt letztendlich nur die Hoffnung, dass die Söhne nicht den Sünden ihrer Väter folgen und dass sie vielleicht ein besseres Regime abgeben.

  Ryszard Czarnecki, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Szanowni Państwo! Za trzy miesiące wybory na Filipinach. Ci sami Filipińczycy, którzy zdecydowali o tym, że ich prezydentem jest Duterte, rozstrzygną, kto będzie rządził ich krajem. To nie my, to nie Unia Europejska, będziemy o tym rozstrzygać.

Myślę, że to, co dzieje się na Filipinach, wymaga naszej uwagi, bo jest to kraj, który ma wiele związków, także kulturowych, a nawet religijnych, z Europą. To, że dzisiaj władza tego kraju walczy z handlarzami narkotykami, przekraczając prawo (o czym mówi nasza wspólna rezolucja), jest efektem tego, że poprzednie władze tego kraju nie przywiązywały w sposób skuteczny uwagi do tego wielkiego wyzwania i wielkiego problemu w tym kraju. Natomiast z całą pewnością warto szukać tego, co łączy. Pamiętajmy o współpracy z tym krajem, pamiętajmy jednocześnie o wartościach, które są wspólne.

  Maria Arena (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, on l’a dit, le président Duterte, en se justifiant à coups de lois antiterroristes, antidrogue ou anticommunistes, a créé un environnement propice aux attaques contre les défenseurs des droits humains et un climat de totale impunité. L’approche des élections aux Philippines laisse craindre l’augmentation des efforts pour faire taire les voix de la dissidence.

Or, l’Union européenne continue à octroyer aux Philippines des préférences commerciales renforcées dans le cadre du SPG+. Ce statut, on le sait, dépend de la mise en œuvre de conventions internationales sur les droits de l’homme, que les Philippines devraient respecter et se sont engagées à respecter.

Dans son rapport d’évaluation sur le SPG+ couvrant la période 2018-2019, la Commission a exprimé sa vive inquiétude concernant la situation des droits de l’homme aux Philippines. Alors, combien de résolutions d’urgence et combien de rapports d’évaluation devront être publiés, et, surtout, combien de défenseurs devront encore perdre la vie pour que nous bougions?

J’exhorte donc la Commission à engager immédiatement la procédure de retrait des préférences commerciales accordées aux Philippines. Nous devons arrêter d’être complices des violations massives des droits de l’homme dans ce pays.

  Ernest Urtasun (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, the human rights situation in the Philippines has gravely deteriorated under the presidency of Rodrigo Duterte. Between 12 000 and 30 000 people, including women and children, have reportedly been killed in the context of his ‘war on drugs’ campaign since 2016. According to prominent NGOs working in the field, this campaign could be considered as a crime against humanity carried out with near total impunity.

On the other hand, at least 146 human rights defenders and 22 journalists have been killed since 2016, as well as trade unionists, indigenous people and environmental activists. The government has so far failed to ensure independent and effective investigations and prosecutions against the perpetrators of those crimes.

In a climate of deteriorating media freedom and internal repression, the upcoming presidential elections in the country are at risk of not being held safely and democratically. In this regard, we regret that the Philippine authorities have not invited the EU to conduct an election observation mission.

A robust response is needed to reverse the downward trend of human rights in the country. The EU should suspend the GSP+ system without further notice until the human rights situation in the country improves significantly. The EU should stand on its core values and denounce the massive violations of human rights and support all mechanisms for accountability of the perpetrators of those violations while ensuring the reparations of the victims.

  Helena Dalli, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, we share the concerns of honourable Members over the situation in the Philippines. Concerning extrajudicial killings, the EU continues to receive reports of human rights violations in law enforcement operations in the so-called war on drugs and in red—tagging. We have repeatedly called on the Government to conduct impartial, transparent investigations of all such deaths.

During last year’s first Sub—Committee on Good Governance, Rule of Law and Human Rights under our Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, the EU called on the Philippines to address extrajudicial killings, provide remedies for victims and hold perpetrators accountable. The EU also raised concerns about restrictions of civil space, including reported attacks against human rights defenders, trade unionists and journalists. The Philippines recognised its obligations to respect freedom of opinion and expression, including journalists’ freedom of information. The Government also agreed on the need to protect human rights defenders and enable their work, in accordance with the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders. We will continue to press for this declaration to be fully implemented in practice.

There are also grave violations of labour rights with continued reports of extrajudicial killings of trade unionists and violations of fundamental International Labour Organization (ILO) Conventions on child labour. Intimidation and persecution of trade unionists impedes effective implementation of all fundamental ILO Conventions. We reiterate to the Government its human rights and labour rights obligations related to its commitments under the EU’s Special Incentive Arrangement, the Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP). A GSP+ monitoring mission will go to Manila shortly, providing an opportunity to engage government and civil society directly. The EU welcomes the UN—Philippines joint programme for cooperation on human rights, signed last July, and will provide financial support for its implementation, including on domestic accountability mechanisms.

Finally, next week marks the fifth anniversary of the imprisonment of Senator Leila de Lima. She will have spent five years in pre-trial detention, yet is standing again in the country’s general election. As former President Benigno Aquino said, if injustice could be done to Leila, a sitting senator, injustice could be done to anyone. So today we salute the Senator’s courage. Her rights to due process must be respected.

  Der Präsident. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet heute, Donnerstag, 17. Februar 2022, statt.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 171 GO)

  Tomasz Piotr Poręba (ECR), na piśmie. – Informacje na temat łamania praw człowieka na Filipinach są bardzo niepokojące. Tysiące osób, w większości niewinnych, straciło życie w ramach tak zwanej „wojny z narkotykami”, w wyniku działań prywatnych milicji i grup paramilitarnych. Obrońcy praw człowieka, którzy próbują szukać sprawiedliwości lub przeciwstawić się atakom, sami padają ofiarami przemocy. Władze prowadzą dochodzenia opieszale i jedynie w niewielkiej ilości spraw. Są też jednak wydarzenia dające nadzieję na pozytywne zmiany. Sąd Najwyższy uznał część obowiązującego prawa anyterrorystycznego za niekonstytucyjną. Parlament przyjął nowe przepisy zapewniające prawną ochronę obrońcom praw człowieka.

Umowa o partnerstwie i współpracy z Unią Europejską obowiązuje już czwarty rok i może być skutecznym instrumentem wywierania wpływu na władze w Manili, aby podjęły zdecydowane kroki na rzecz polepszenia sytuacji. Przede wszystkim należy ukrócić bezprawne działania grup paramilitarnych oraz zapewnić, że walka z narkotykami prowadzona jest zgodnie z przepisami prawa krajowego oraz międzynarodowymi standardami. Ludzie odpowiedzialni za masowe mordy powinni zostać osądzeni. Rządzący muszą też dołożyć wszelkich starań, żeby zaplanowane na maj wybory prezydenckie były wolne i uczciwe, a pozytywne zmiany, o których wspomniałem wcześniej – kontynuowane. Moim zdaniem powinniśmy optować za spokojną i rzeczową rozmową z władzami Filipin.

8.2. Smrtna kazen v Iranu

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über sieben Entschließungsanträge zur Todesstrafe in Iran (2022/2541(RSP))1.

__________

1 Siehe Protokoll.

  Javier Zarzalejos, author. – Mr President, dear colleagues, seven months ago the European Parliament demanded the Iranian Government the immediate release of Ahmadreza Djalali. Today we reiterate that for Djalali and for the thousands of political dissidents, protesters, activists and members of ethnic, religious and sexual minorities unfairly imprisoned and arbitrarily and summarily sentenced to death by the Iranian regime. But apart from Djalali, Muhammad Jawad, Narges Mohammadi, Akbari-Monfared and so many thousands of peaceful Iranians have no time to spare.

It’s a moral imperative that the European Union, with its High Representative at the helm, leads a strong response to the Iranian regime. The response must be followed by the commitment of all its Member States. A response that needs to include further targeted sanctions if necessary, and must include also a UN mission on the ground and an independent investigation into the violations of human rights in this country.

And let me say that I wonder if we are being too generous to the Iranian regime because when we speak of the death penalty, even with unreserved rejection of it as this is the case, I mean it suggests that previous judicial procedure, some kind of legality. That is not the case. In fact, there is no death penalty in Iran. There are sheer executions: state murder as a form of crime against humanity.

Look at the appalling repression, enforced disappearances and massive executions of political dissidents in the 1988 massacre and notice that there has been no investigation or accountability for these crimes that involve the current leader of Iran in a prominent role.

Look at the horrifying record of Iran in executions: at least 275 last year, including 10 women and two child offenders. We cannot turn a blind eye.

The European Union is not just another voice in the international arena. The European Union is in a unique position to advocate for the abolition of the death penalty and has a unique responsibility to do so. No other political community in the world carries the moral authority and the credibility to demand the end of this inhumane, irreversible and cruel punishment.

We take pride in our human rights standards. We demand respect for the rule of law. Well, we have to live up to the values we hold so dear. Respect for life is not a privilege, it’s a basic right. And where and when this right is violated in such an abhorrent and massive manner, those who suffer – and it is the case of the Iranian people – are entitled to expect from us our solidarity, our support, our awareness and our help.

SĒDI VADA: ROBERTS ZĪLE
Priekšsēdētājas vietnieks

  Jytte Guteland, författare. – Herr talman! Dödsstraffet är oåterkalleligt också i Iran. Minst 275 människor avrättades förra året. Iran avrättar flest människor per capita i världen, även personer som bara kräver sina grundläggande fri- och rättigheter. Falska erkännanden pressas fram under vedervärdig tortyr, vilket leder till rättsvidriga avrättningar.

Det finns ingen empiri för att dödsstraffet fungerar avskräckande. Tvärtom visar forskningen på det motsatta. Mellan åren 2009 och 2020 har Iran avrättat minst 67 ungdomsbrottslingar. 85 ungdomsbrottslingar är för närvarande dömda till döden. I Iran används fortfarande dödsstraffet mot hbtq-personer. Medieuppgifter gör gällande att två män nyligen avrättats och även om det inte har bekräftats från källor i Iran, så har det hänt tidigare. Jag hoppas att det här är falska nyheter förstås, men landet har verkställt sådana här domar.

Det finns inget humant sätt att avrätta en människa. Det finns bara brutala och ännu brutalare metoder. I Iran används hängning som avrättningsmetod. Till skillnad från andra länder, som använder avancerade anordningar för att bryta nacken med hängning, använder Iran enkla anordningar som orsakar död genom strypning. Offret kan plågas i upp till 20 minuter innan dödsögonblicket.

I somras förhandlade jag Europaparlamentets resolution om den svenske medborgaren Ahmadreza Djalali som dömts till döden i Iran. Återigen, han måste omedelbart friges så att han kan återvända till sin familj.

Dödsstraffet grundar sig på en medeltida människosyn. Upplysningens humanitära ideal bidrog till avskaffandet av dödsstraffet i Europa. En majoritet av världens stater har vänt ryggen mot dödsstraffet för gott. Jag hoppas att Iran är redo att göra detsamma. Fram till dess att Iran infört ett moratorium för dödsstraffet, vill jag uppmana EU att ta fram riktade sanktioner mot iranska regeringspersoner som är inblandade i utdömandet av dödsstraffet. Det är dags för Djalali att få komma hem.

  Søren Gade, stiller. – Hr. Formand! Kære kollegaer! I dag sender vi et stærkt signal til Iran om, at Europa-Parlamentet tager stærkest mulig afstand fra den iranske regerings brug af dødsstraf. Den betydelige stigning i brugen af dødsstraf, siden Raisi har overtaget magten i Iran, er både umenneskelig og uacceptabel. Jeg vil gerne takke mine kollegaer og især vores ordfører, David Lega, for at sikre, at vi i dag står sammen om at opfordre Iran til at sætte en stopper for anvendelsen af dødsstraf. Vi er forenet her i Parlamentet i vores opfordring til sanktioner mod den iranske regering, der er ansvarlig for disse grusomheder. Vi er forenet i vores opfordring til, at Iran, det iranske styre, løslader de politiske fanger og stopper forfølgelsen af journalister. Jeg har ingen illusioner om, at vores beslutning i dag vil stoppe drabene med det samme. Men dette parlament, Europa-Parlamentet, har pligt og ret til at sætte dødsstraf på dagsordenen og at holde dødsstraf på den europæiske dagsorden. Lad os aldrig stoppe presset på det iranske regime. De modige iranere, der tør tale deres kriminelle ledere imod. Ja, de fortjener i sandhed vores fulde støtte.

  Ernest Urtasun, author. – Mr President, in 2021, at least 275 people were executed in Iran, including two child offenders and 10 women. In Iran, the death penalty is used as a political tool that not only punishes those who have been sentenced to capital punishment, but also those who advocate for its abolition. It’s the case of Narges Mohammadi, who has recently been sentenced to another eight years in prison, or Nasrin Sotoudeh, the recipient of the Sakharov Prize in 2012, who was sentenced to 33 years and six months in prison in 2019. I would like also to stress that we continue to ask for the freedom of Djalali, as this Parliament already recalled in the past.

Today, we call again on Iran to fulfil its international obligations by abolishing the death penalty and implementing its human rights commitments. We also urge the immediate release for all unjustly jailed human rights defenders. As we speak, crucial negotiations are undergoing in Vienna to revive the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Even if the scope of these talks do not include a dialogue on the situation of human rights in Iran, the two are deeply interlinked. A successful negotiation of the JCPOA will provide the basis for the peace and development needed for a more stable country that over time improves the prospects for all Iranian citizens who, we shouldn’t forget, have been the most affected by COVID and the economic sanctions.

We need more dialogue with Iran, not less. The EU and other actors have already adopted a number of sanctions against individuals and entities responsible for human rights violations in Iran. Exercising further pressure has to go hand in hand with general political engagement, as some groups in this Parliament are advocating for. And this will, in a certain moment, help us as well to improve the situation of human rights in the country.

The EU should continue to monitor and raise human rights matters in the context of the EU—Iran high—level dialogue and reiterate that respect for human rights is a core component in advancement of EU—Iran relations. It is in our interest to support the talks, to return to the JCPOA, also to have more leverage to improve the human rights situation in the country.

  Anna Fotyga, author. – Mr President, over political divisions here in the European Parliament, we raise our voice in defence of the Iranian people. Since 1988, the massacre, there are ongoing crimes against humanity. We speak about the so-called death penalty, but what kind of penalty is that? In many cases it is just extra-judiciary crime and simply swift executions without even the pretence of judicial or court proceedings.

Words are not enough. Our action is needed because what we see in Iran – also with financing of terrorists outside and meddling in the region and even in our territories – requires our action and very strong sanctions.

  Susanna Ceccardi, autrice. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, le donne nei regimi fondamentalisti islamici sono coloro che pagano il prezzo più alto.

Ho negli occhi le immagini di un video scioccante, dove un marito che decapita la moglie diciassettenne, accusata di adulterio, gira per le strade sorridendo, esponendo la testa come un trofeo.

In Iran, un uomo che uccide la figlia di 14 anni rischia otto anni di carcere; una donna che si toglie il velo ne rischia fino a 24.

Ieri ho incontrato due donne coraggiose, che fanno parte dell'opposizione al regime iraniano, e mi hanno donato questo bellissimo libro. Mi hanno raccontato cose sconcertanti...

(L'oratrice mostra un libro e viene pertanto interrotta dal Presidente.)

  President. – It’s not allowed, according to the Rules, to show pictures during your speaking time here.

  Susanna Ceccardi, autrice. – In questo libro ci sono i volti dei giovani e sono soltanto alcuni dei 120 000 oppositori politici uccisi dal regime. 30 000 di loro sono stati giustiziati nell'estate del 1988, a seguito di una fatwa di Khomeini. Ragazzi e ragazze, in gran parte studenti, uccisi nel fiore degli anni da un regime senza scrupoli.

Queste donne che si battono per la libertà del loro popolo sono molto coraggiose, perché non possono neanche telefonare ai loro familiari in Iran perché rischiano di mandarli al patibolo.

Dalla scelta di Ebrahim Raisi alla carica di Presidente c'è stato un aumento significativo del numero di esecuzioni, con oltre 270 persone impiccate, di cui 11 donne. Raisi è stato membro della commissione della morte nel 1988, ha ordinato migliaia di condanne a morte e, nella sua qualità di capo della magistratura, ha ordinato la soppressione e l'uccisione dei manifestanti nel 2019.

Noi membri del Parlamento europeo chiediamo all'Alto rappresentante di ribadire all'Iran che qualsiasi miglioramento delle relazioni economiche deve essere condizionato alla cessazione delle eclatanti violazioni dei diritti umani da parte dell'Iran, compreso il suo uso arbitrario della pena di morte.

Pensiamo a molti prigionieri politici come la signora Maryam Akbari Monfared, in carcere per 13 anni, senza un solo giorno di congedo, perché si è opposta all'esecuzione del fratello e della sorella, scomparsi con la forza e giustiziati nel 1988.

L'Europa che fa? Fino a pochi anni fa aveva addirittura inserito l'opposizione al regime nella lista delle organizzazioni terroristiche, forse per interessi economici, perché il potere dell'ayatollah è molto forte e la propaganda arriva fino a casa nostra.

Soltanto l'ultimo scandalo. Ad agosto 2021, quando Ebrahim Raisi ha giurato come nuovo presidente dell'Iran, davanti a lui, oltre al Parlamento italiano e ai rappresentanti di 73 paesi tra cui la Cina, lo stato maggiore di Hamas, che ricordiamo sono terroristi, c'era pure un funzionario del Servizio esterno dell'Unione europea, il segretario Enrique Mora. Una vergogna!

Un'intera area, il Medio Oriente, è ostaggio dell'Iran che insiste nel mettere pressione e paura all'unico paese sul quale l'Europa può davvero contare: Israele. Non si può fare confusione tra i nemici e gli amici, tra gli alleati e gli avversari. L'Iran degli ayatollah non è e non sarà mai un paese sul quale noi potremo contare, lo dimostra la questione del programma nucleare. Perché l'Iran vuole la bomba, se non per usarla come arma del terrore?

Io vengo dalla Toscana, il primo Stato al mondo che, il 30 novembre del 1786, grazie al granduca Pietro Leopoldo di Lorena, abolì la pena di morte. La vita umana è sacra, e pensare che la potestà di uccidere sia in mano a uno Stato che, per di più, la usa per annientare il dissenso, è disumano.

La guerra per le risorse energetiche si sta facendo sempre più aspra. Non lasciamo che la potenza energetica iraniana prenda il sopravvento sui nostri valori, non rimaniamo sotto scacco di un paese pericoloso per la sicurezza internazionale.

  Cornelia Ernst, Verfasserin. – Herr Präsident! Als Präsidentin der Iran-Delegation kann ich gar nicht anders, als meine Stimme gegen die Todesstrafe im Iran zu erheben, weil die Todesstrafe jedes Menschenrecht abschafft. Sie gehört verboten, und im Übrigen überall: im Iran, in China, wo es die meisten Todesstrafen gibt, in Ägypten, in den USA, restlos überall auf der Welt.

Als Europaabgeordnete bin ich stolz darauf, dass ein solches Bestrafungsmittel in der EU abgeschafft ist, dass es das bei uns nicht gibt. Und als Deutsche – lassen Sie mich das sagen – mit einer langen Geschichte der Menschenrechtsverletzungen durch mein Land weiß ich das besonders zu schätzen. Wir sind tief besorgt über die Menschenrechtslage im Iran und fest an der Seite der Angehörigen der Opfer. Jedes Jahr werden Hunderte Menschen hingerichtet, Frauen, Jugendliche. Wir sorgen uns um die EU-Doppelstaatler, wo wir viel protestiert haben, aber nichts erreichten. Wir sorgen uns um Nasrin Sotudeh, um die vielen politischen Gefangenen.

Diese grausame Politik mit immer mehr und neuen Sanktionen bekämpfen zu wollen, ist trotzdem ein Irrweg. Der Iran gehört zu den am meisten sanktionierten Staaten der Welt. Und was hat es gebracht? Nichts! Viel wichtiger ist es, die Zivilgesellschaft kraftvoll zu unterstützen, keine Doppelstandards in der Politik zuzulassen, die Menschen im Iran angesichts der neuen COVID-19-Welle mit Medikamenten zu unterstützen und sie nicht hartherzig abzuweisen.

Und ebenso wichtig ist der Dialog, und da haben wir als Europäisches Parlament eine besondere Verantwortung. Ja, das ist ein mühseliger Weg, und manchmal erscheint er sinnlos. Und doch muss er gegangen werden, denn die Menschen im Iran brauchen offene Türen. Schlagen wir sie auch noch zu, haben die Hardliner für viele Jahre gewonnen. Ich will das nicht!

  Radosław Sikorski, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, colleagues, unlike some of you in this Chamber, I actually think that, at least historically, there were cases where the death penalty was fair and just. In Poland, we had the case of Rudolf Höss, the Commander of Auschwitz, where he killed over a million people with Zyklon B. Poland brought him back to Auschwitz and, in April 1947, he was hanged. I challenge anybody to tell us that we did the wrong thing.

It’s relevant to Iran because, at least for the clerical regime, the Holocaust is still a controversial matter. It did happen and one of its perpetrators got his just desserts. But in Iran, you can get the death penalty, at least according to Wikipedia, for homosexuality, burglary, incestuous relationships, fornication, sexual misconduct, prostitution, political dissidence, sabotage, apostasy, adultery, blasphemy, speculation, disrupting production, recidivist consumption of alcohol, pornography, cowardice, waging war against God, and spreading corruption on Earth, whatever that is. Iran is believed to execute the most people per capita in the world, and this is a country which of course doesn’t have a fair or independent judiciary.

I would appeal to the leaders of Iran, but the President of Iran was a member of the Death Commission in the 1988 massacre, in which 30 000 political prisoners were murdered, judicially. There are political prisoners in Iran who had dared merely to ask about that massacre, people like Maryam Akbari Monfared, Qolam-Hossein Kalbi, Saeed Massouri, Afshin Baeemani, Saeed Shahghal-eh.

Mr Raisi, the fate of these people is a testimony to your status as a butcher and you will be punished for it, in this world or the next.

  Maria Arena, au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, je veux tout d’abord rappeler que nos institutions se sont engagées à promouvoir la suppression de la peine de mort dans le monde entier. Il n’y a donc aucune justification à la pratique de la peine de mort, à plus forte raison en Iran, qui demeure le pays avec le plus haut taux d’exécution pour peine de mort dans le monde: plus de 250 personnes ont été exécutées en Iran l’année dernière.

Le système judiciaire iranien représente un vrai piège pour les défenseurs des droits de l’homme, qui sont arrêtés, détenus dans des conditions inhumaines, torturés et accusés lors de faux procès pour actes contre la sécurité nationale, propagande contre le régime, ou pour avoir tout simplement demandé le respect des droits et la fin des violations des droits humains.

Nous n’oublions pas non plus la situation dans laquelle vivent les familles de ces défenseurs, elles-mêmes trop souvent menacées et placées sous surveillance. L’Iran est aussi le pays dans lequel un nombre élevé de mineurs est condamné à la peine de mort, ce qui est là aussi en totale violation des obligations imposées par la Convention sur les droits de l’enfant.

Encore une fois, dans cet hémicycle, nous continuons donc à demander la libération d’un certain nombre de prisonniers aujourd’hui détenus ou qui encourent la peine de mort: Narges Mohammadi, présidente de l’ONG Defenders of Human Rights Center, qui se bat, elle, pour l’abolition de la peine de mort, mais aussi tous les journalistes, activistes et opposants qui continuent à subir les injustices, aujourd’hui, du régime iranien. Je citerai bien entendu Djalali, ce professeur de la VUB suédo-iranien, mais aussi Nasrin Sotoudeh, notre Prix Sakharov, que nous avons accueillie à plusieurs reprises par visioconférence et dont nous demandons l’annulation de la condamnation.

  María Soraya Rodríguez Ramos, en nombre del Grupo Renew. – Señor presidente, ya se ha dicho: la realidad de la pena de muerte en Irán es dramática, estando a la cabeza de los países del mundo con mayores ejecuciones. Podemos decir que hombres, mujeres, niños, nadie escapa a la pena de muerte en Irán; los niños esperan a cumplir su mayoría de edad para ser ejecutados.

Creo, además, que hay que vincular la pena de muerte en Irán con la situación de la justicia, de los juicios en los que son condenados. Son condenados por tribunales que carecen de independencia, de imparcialidad, con clara injerencia del Ministerio de Inteligencia. Son condenados sin derecho, tan siquiera, a un abogado de su elección. Y los abogados que les defienden son luego perseguidos, como Nasrín Sotudé. En estas condiciones, los tribunales se convierten en verdugos y la pena de muerte se convierte en ejecuciones y asesinatos.

Las mujeres no escapan a esta persecución. Hay que señalar la represión en la que viven: hoy pueden ser condenadas a pena de muerte también si ejercen sus derechos sexuales y reproductivos o su derecho al aborto.

Quisiera decir que la Unión Europea debe reforzar claramente este diálogo para la eliminación de la pena de muerte, dejando claro que el derecho a la vida es un derecho fundamental. No es negociable, no es una moneda de cambio en ninguna mesa de negociación. El respeto a la vida es el pilar fundamental en el que se debe sustentar cualquier diálogo internacional.

  Jordi Solé, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, the human rights record of the Iranian regime is appalling. The death penalty is one of the cruellest manifestations of this. Despite repeated calls from the international community, the authorities keep carrying out death sentences with an average of around one per day in 2021. The country is one of the few in the world that executes minors and juvenile offenders in clear violation of international law. The number of executions of citizens belonging to minorities, especially Baloch, Kurds, Arabs and Baháʼí, is disproportionately high. And the death penalty in Iran is, to a large extent, an instrument to intimidate, persecute and try to eradicate any kind of political opposition in the country.

I call once again on the Iranian authorities to release all political prisoners and all prisoners of conscience.

The situation has only worsened since Ebrahim Raisi took power last June, with executions rising to 271 – 11 of them women. No wonder, given his well-documented role in the 1988 massacre and in the brutal suppression of the November 2019 protests.

The culture of impunity has been prevailing in the country for too many decades. Iranian society deserves justice and reparation, and they also deserve to live in a free, inclusive and democratic country that respects human rights and dignity.

  Joachim Kuhs, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin! Ich bin dankbar für die Entschließung der ECR-Fraktion und auch über diese Debatte hier, dass wir über die Todesstrafe im Iran reden.

Und ich hoffe und bete, dass sie dazu dient, dass das Leben der politischen Gefangenen gerettet wird und dass wir auch sensibilisiert werden für das unsägliche Leid der verfolgten Christen und der Bahai. Ich kann mich aber des Eindrucks nicht erwehren, dass einige von uns, verehrte Kollegen, gar nicht so sehr oder nur halbherzig diese Entschließungen unterstützen. Und das verstehe ich nicht.

Sie sind doch auch gegen die Todesstrafe. Was für einen Grund könnte es geben, gegen die Entschließung zu stimmen? Wollen Sie etwa die Mullahs nicht verärgern und weiter mit ihnen lukrative Geschäfte abschließen? Machen Sie sich bitte ehrlich. Zeigen Sie diesem Regime, das weltweit terroristische Aktivitäten unterstützt und finanziert, endlich die rote Karte. Machen Sie klar, dass es keine weitere Zusammenarbeit, geschweige denn eine Finanzierung aus EU-Mitteln, geben kann, solange der Iran nicht von seiner menschenverachtenden Politik ablässt und auch von seinem Israelhass umkehrt.

Steuern wir hier einen klaren Kurs und helfen wir damit auch den verfolgten Christen im Iran, insbesondere den Konvertiten, dass sie wieder ohne Todesangst leben können. Und helfen wir auch den Bahai, die ihre Religion trotz zugesicherter Religionsfreiheit überhaupt nicht erst ausüben können.

Besonders schockiert hat mich übrigens der Ehrenmord an der 13-jährigen Romina Aschrafi, die von ihrem eigenen Vater im Schlaf hingerichtet wurde. Wie kaputt muss ein System sein, das so etwas zulässt bzw. unausgesprochen toleriert? Liebe Kollegen, bitte stimmen Sie dieser Entschließung zu, und beenden wir das Morden im Iran. Ich bin sicher, Gott wird es Ihnen vergelten.

  Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Mój kraj – Polska, jako członek Unii Europejskiej i Rady Europy, jest zaangażowany w działania na rzecz zniesienia kary śmierci na całym świecie. Celem jest sprzeciw wobec wykonywania kary śmierci lub, jako pierwszy krok, wprowadzenie moratorium. Popieramy wezwania do możliwie powszechnej ratyfikacji Drugiego protokołu dodatkowego do Międzynarodowego paktu praw obywatelskich i politycznych. Dlatego też aktywnie włączamy się w promowanie i lobbowanie na rzecz rezolucji przedstawianej co dwa lata przez Unię Europejską na forum Trzeciego Komitetu Zgromadzenia Ogólnego ONZ na rzecz moratorium na wykonywanie kary śmierci.

Mając na uwadze wrodzoną godność każdego człowieka, szczególnie trudno jest nam zaakceptować, że nadal w wielu krajach kara śmierci może być nałożona na dziecko lub na osobę niepełnosprawną umysłowo czy też z takich względów jak przynależność do mniejszości religijnych. Jesteśmy także poważnie zaniepokojeni nakładaniem kary śmierci jako sankcji za określone formy postępowania takie jak apostazja, bluźnierstwo lub cudzołóstwo.

Iran to piękny kraj, kraj pełen pięknych i dobrych ludzi. Polska doświadczyła tego serca Persów, Irańczyków po drugiej wojnie światowej, gdy ponad 120 tysięcy naszych obywateli znalazło oparcie i wsparcie wśród Irańczyków. Ta rezolucja, nad którą dzisiaj dyskutujemy, przybliża dzień, gdy do Iranu powróci pokój i praworządność.

  Clare Daly, on behalf of The Left Group. – Mr President, of course I condemn the death penalty in Iran, but I also condemn it in China, in Egypt, in Saudi Arabia, the United States and the 18 countries where the death sentence was carried out in 2020. I condemn it in the 54 countries which imposed a death sentence in that year, and areas like Taiwan and Qatar, which reintroduced the practice.

So why are we talking about Iran? It isn’t the main country where executions are carried out. In an overall sense, the numbers have been falling. There’s a discussion in the country about changing the Islamic Republic’s penal code, where it’s the family of the victim who decides.

And do you really think that some of the racist and geopolitical commentary that has been heard this morning is going to help that discussion inside of Iran? It’s a bit of a coincidence that this is being discussed at the same time as efforts to revise the JPCOA. If we’re really concerned about Iranians dying we need to stand up for the original terms of that agreement to stop the sanctions, which are also a death sentence on Iranians.

And while you’re at it, you might consider the irony of including a motion here about giving out about Iran’s courts and trials, and you give this platform to Iván Duque, where they gun people down in the streets without even a trial in the first place.

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já jsem velmi rád, že se mohu k tomuto bodu vyjádřit. Trestu smrti se věnuji léta ve své politické činnosti, bojuji proti němu a musím říci, že to, co se děje v tuto chvíli v Íránu, je naprosto nepřijatelné. A to číslo, které zde opakovaně zaznělo, 275 poprav za minulý rok, opravdu nemá obdobu. Vedle Číny je v této zemi trest smrti nejvíce využíván a je vhodné použít slovo zneužíván, protože často, jak to bylo již řečeno, je ukládán nezletilým, ženám, lidem, kteří jsou k doznání mučeni. Máme tu kauzy sportovců, kteří byli jaksi mučeni a popraveni jenom proto, aby tamní politický režim ukázal, že když viditelné a známé osobnosti podpoří v rámci občanských nepokojů opačný politický společenský názor, tak se jim to takto tragicky vymstí.

Je to katastrofa a to, jak je trestní právo v této zemi zneužíváno, pouze ukazuje na tamní politický režim, který podle mého názoru nemůže být partnerem Evropské unie. Já jsem přesvědčen léta a byly to i debaty v předchozím volebním období zde na půdě Parlamentu, že není možné s Íránem se dlouhodobě domluvit na nějaké formě spolupráce, protože je to země, která nectí vůbec elementární zásady lidskosti.

Padla zde jména aktivistů, profesora Džalaliho, atd. Těch jmen je celá řada, osobností, které buď byly popraveny, nebo čekají na výkon trestu ve vězení. My samozřejmě musíme maximum udělat pro to, aby ti, kteří dosud popraveni nebyli, se dostali na svobodu. Ale obecně jsem velmi skeptický k tomuto režimu a prosím, mějme to na paměti při různých debatách o tom, nakolik je možné s Íránem posilovat obchodní spolupráci, nakolik je možné s ním uzavírat další smlouvy. Můj názor je podobný jako zástupců státu Izrael, že s Íránem to zkrátka možné není.

  Evin Incir (S&D). – Herr talman! Kollegor! Rätten till liv är den mest grundläggande formen av rättighet. Att frånta en människa dess liv utgör den allra grövsta formen av kränkning av de mänskliga rättigheterna.

I Iran utfärdas detta oåterkalleliga straff, till och med mot barn. Från 2009 till september 2020 har minst 67 avrättningar av unga rapporterats. I januari i år inväntade 85 ungdomar verkställande av dödsstraff. Dödsstraffet används också för att förtrycka minoriteter. Det tillämpas i oproportionerligt hög grad på balucher, araber, bahá'íer och speciellt den folkgrupp som jag själv tillhör, kurder, bara för att de kräver rätten till sitt eget språk och sin egen kultur och identitet.

Kvinnors rätt till sin egen kropp och hbtq-personers rättigheter är dessutom diktaturers och förtryckarregimers värsta fiende för att de symboliserar frihet att få vara den man är, älska den man vill och få ha total kroppslig autonomi. I Iran utgör det grund för dödsstraff.

2017 dömdes den svenskiranske forskaren doktor Ahmadreza Djalali till döden på grundlösa anklagelser om att han skulle vara spion. Förtryckarregimen i Teheran måste frisläppa alla, samtliga, samvetsfångar och avskaffa det avskyvärda dödsstraffet omedelbart. Vi måste fortsätta använda samtliga verktyg som vi har i EU till vårt förfogande och utöka sanktionerna, snarare än dra dem tillbaka som vissa här i detta parlament vill, för att tvinga den iranska regimen att införa demokrati, mänskliga rättigheter och rättsstatens principer. Folket i Irans lidande måste få ett slut. Det iranska folkets sak är vår sak.

  Frédérique Ries (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, l’Iran a exécuté 275 personnes l’an dernier, et je cite ici un rapport des Nations unies. N’en déplaise à la gauche, c’est donc bien le plus haut taux d’exécution au monde: un couloir de la mort à ciel ouvert. Parmi les victimes, des femmes, des mineurs, des minorités ethniques et religieuses, boucs émissaires tout désignés, des journalistes et des avocats, coupables de faire leur métier, des hommes, aussi, dont l’amour fait trembler la République islamique.

Les années se suivent et se ressemblent au pays des mollahs: les droits de l’homme sont bafoués les traités internationaux les plus fondamentaux, comme la Convention des droits de l’enfant, sont méprisés la liberté d’expression est cadenassée, et l’arrivée au pouvoir du président Ebrahim Raïssi en juillet dernier n’a encore fait qu’accélérer les choses.

Ce Parlement dénonce – j’ai compté: quinze résolutions en dix ans, dont six pour défendre notre prix Sakharov, Nasrin Sotoudeh, et le professeur Ahmadreza Djalali, de l’Université libre de Bruxelles. Assez des discours! L’Europe doit hausser le ton: sanctions, on l’a dit, dont on peut – on l’a dit aussi – douter de l’efficacité; soutien, encore et toujours, à la société civile iranienne.

Nous avons certes peu d’espoir que nos textes fassent plier Téhéran – c’est juste un euphémisme –, mais il n’empêche, nous continuerons à faire pression pour obtenir ce moratoire sur les exécutions et pour obtenir la libération des prisonniers politiques.

  Ignazio Corrao (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, I am, as many of you colleagues, deeply alarmed by the increasing use of the death penalty against protesters, human rights defenders and dissidents, but also ethnic and religious minorities in Iran. In order not to seem only an external concern, I want to highlight the proposal in the joint motion that recognises citizen—led initiatives in Iran, such as petitions calling for an end to the death penalty and its disproportionate use against minorities and women.

Iran is also one of the few countries in the world that executes minors, in clear violation of international law. There appears to be a state policy of intimidating, prosecuting or silencing those who call for accountability, justice and truth, whether they are victims themselves, relatives, human rights defenders, lawyers or organisations.

The voices of Iranian citizens are brutally silenced by the regime, and yet these initiatives show that Iranian citizens want the death penalty practices to end. Because of this, the regime cannot claim that the demand to end the death penalty is only coming from outside Iran. Its own citizens want it to end. This is why the EU and the international community need to take urgent actions to let the voice of the Iranian people be heard and stop decades of impunity of those who are involved in human rights abuses.

  Michiel Hoogeveen (ECR). – Voorzitter, de resolutie waarin de doodstraf in Iran wordt veroordeeld, is gezien de situatie in Iran een sympathieke resolutie die wij steunen.

Waarom heeft het Europees Parlement echter uitgerekend nu besloten zich over deze kwestie uit te spreken? Het Parlement heeft gisteren namelijk nog een verslag aangenomen over de uitvoering van het gemeenschappelijk buitenlands en veiligheidsbeleid van de Europese Unie, waarin ervoor wordt gepleit het gezamenlijk alomvattend actieplan inzake Iran, beter bekend als de “Iran Deal”, nieuw leven in te blazen.

De resolutie is bovendien moeilijk te rijmen met de eerdere signalen die door de Europese Commissie zijn afgegeven: Josep Borrell heeft drie dagen geleden nog met de Iraanse minister van Buitenlandse Zaken gebeld over de hernieuwing van de Iran Deal en Enrique Mora heeft de EU vorig jaar vertegenwoordigd bij de inauguratie van Iraans president Raisi, bijgenaamd de “slager van Teheran”.

Wat voor signaal geeft dit af ten aanzien van de sancties, de mensenrechten en daarmee ook de doodstraf in Iran?

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, sa bhliain 2021, gearradh pionós an bháis ar ar a laghad 275 duine san Iaráin, ina measc, beirt a bhí faoi aois. Níl pionós an bháis ceart i gcás ar bith ach go háirithe i gcás daoine óga, daoine a céasadh chun admháil a bhaint astu, daoine nach bhfuair triail chothrom agus daoine nach raibh ach ag obair go síochánta ar son cearta daonna.

Mar a dúradh ag Feisirí ó chianaibh gearrtar pionós an bháis níos minice per capita san Iaráin ná in aon tír eile ar domhain. Tá an scéal ag dul in olcas, ach go háirithe do baill an phobail LGBTQ agus mionlach eitneach nó réigiúnach. Ní don chéad uair atáim ag impí go láidir ar údarás na hIaráine moratóir ó thaobh phionós an bháis a chur i bhfeidhm láithreach bonn. Ba mhaith liom mo thacaíocht agus mo mheas a léiriú do mhuintir na hIaráine atá ag obair trí Thionscnamh ó na Saoránaigh chun deireadh a chur le pionós an bháis – an dream is cróga ar fad.

Le déanaí sa Pharlaimint, tharraingíomar aird ar chás an Dochtúir Djalali nach bhfuair triail chothrom ach atá i bpríosúin ag fanacht go dtí go gcuirfear é chun báis. Ar mhí-ámharaí an tsaoil, níl feabhas tagtha ar an scéal seo. Arís, impím ar údarás na hIaráine an Dochtúir Djalali, buaiteoir an Duais Sakarov Nasrin Sotoudeh, agus gach uile duine eile atá i bpríosúin gan chúis a ligean saor. Chomh maith leis sin, táim ag iarraidh ar údarás na hIaráine fiosrúchán iomlán agus cothrom a cheadú maidir le céasadh agus úsáid foréigean marfach sna príosúin. Tá súil agam gur féidir linn níos mó brú a chur ar an Iaráin chun na héagóracha seo go léir a stopadh.

VORSITZ: KATARINA BARLEY
Vizepräsidentin

  Pierfrancesco Majorino (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in nessun caso e in nessuna parte del mondo la pena di morte può essere considerata una forma di giustizia, mai! Per questo l'abolizione della pena di morte in tutto il mondo deve rimanere tra i principali obiettivi della politica europea sui diritti umani, e questo deve valere sempre.

L'Iran rimane uno dei luoghi con maggiori esecuzioni capitali, con un codice penale che prescrive la pena di morte per diversi crimini, anche non violenti. Nel 2021 sono state giustiziate almeno 250 persone, forse anche di più, tra queste molte donne e minori. In questo inizio di 2022 sono già decine le persone giustiziate. Sono dati drammatici.

Dal Parlamento europeo deve quindi arrivare, senza alcuna ambiguità, una condanna durissima. L'Iran deve sospendere immediatamente tutte le esecuzioni e decretare una moratoria della pena di morte.

Abbiamo poi il dovere di non dimenticare di stare a fianco di chi, in Iran, si batte contro la pena di morte e si trova spesso perseguito e incarcerato. Dal Parlamento europeo deve arrivare un segnale di vicinanza totale a quei settori di società civile, a quelle voci libere che si oppongono a una barbarie che non ci potrà mai vedere in alcun modo capaci di sottovalutarne i drammatici effetti.

  Pierre Karleskind (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, «partout dans le monde […] où triomphent la dictature et le mépris des droits de l’homme, partout vous y trouverez inscrite, en caractères sanglants, la peine de mort». Ces mots, je les emprunte à Robert Badinter, qui fit abolir la peine de mort en France il y a quarante ans. C’est bien cela, la véritable signification de la peine de mort. Elle découle de l’idée, purement totalitaire, qu’un gouvernement dispose à tel point de ses citoyens qu’il peut leur retirer la vie. L’an dernier, l’Iran a retiré la vie à 200 de ses citoyens.

Ce débat n’aura pas de sens s’il se restreint à une simple critique du régime iranien. Il doit aussi nous servir à comprendre qui nous sommes, nous, les Européens. Nous appartenons, face à la barbarie, à un territoire d’humanité, où la dignité de chaque individu est respectée; face à l’arbitraire, à un territoire de justice, qui a tourné ses pages sanglantes et en a fini avec ses exécutions furtives, vengeresses et honteuses; face au totalitarisme, à un continent de liberté, où l’on ne craint pas d’être tué pour ce que l’on est, pour ce que l’on pense, pour qui l’on aime et pour ce en quoi l’on croit.

C’est cela que nous sommes et que ce débat doit nous rappeler, et c’est pour cela que nous devons nous battre: pour que, un jour, à son tour, le peuple iranien puisse fièrement se libérer du joug totalitaire et vivre dans un pays d’humanité, de liberté et de justice.

  Helena Dalli, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members. The EU has a strong, unequivocal and long-standing opposition to the death penalty in all times and in all circumstances, and aims at its universal abolition. The death penalty is a cruel and inhumane punishment, which fails to act as a deterrent to crime and represents an unacceptable denial of human dignity and integrity.

The EU follows the human rights situation in Iran very closely, and the current pace of executions in the country is a matter of concern, with more than 200 individuals executed every year, including juvenile offenders, dissidents and protesters.

The EU’s policy approach towards Iran is also well known. It is a balanced and comprehensive policy approach, with a view to addressing all issues of concern. This includes, of course, the use of the death penalty, which is regularly addressed in the exchanges with the Iranian authorities. The situation of juvenile offenders at risk of execution in Iran requires the most urgent attention. We strongly and publicly condemned the execution of Arman Abdolali last November. He was 17 at the time of the alleged offence.

We continue to urge Iran to respect its international obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which prohibit, in absolute terms, the imposition of the death penalty for crimes committed by persons aged under 18 years at the time of the alleged offence. The use of the death penalty against political dissidents and protesters is also a matter of great concern.

We continue to urge the Iranian authorities to guarantee the full range of fundamental rights for their citizens, irrespective of religion, belief or any other status, including the right to assemble and to express grievances in a non-violent manner. Fundamental rights, such as freedom of opinion and expression, must always be respected.

We also believe that it is imperative for the Iranian authorities to uphold the due process rights of the accused individuals and ensure that those who are under any form of detention or imprisonment are not subject to any form of mistreatment. I know many of you vividly remember the case of the Iranian wrestler Navid Afkari.

Since 2021, the EU has adopted restrictive measures related to violations of human rights, extended ever since on an annual basis currently until 13 April 2022. These measures consist of a travel ban and an asset freeze and a ban on exports to Iran of equipment which might be used for internal repression and of equipment for monitoring telecommunication.

In addition, EU citizens and companies are forbidden from making funds available to the listed individuals and entities. The list now comprises a total of 89 individuals and four entities.

In line with its traditional stance in multilateral fora, including the UN, the EU will spare no effort to urge the Iranian authorities to pursue a consistent policy towards the abolition of capital punishment, and we will also continue to publicly condemn the death penalty, in particular for juvenile offenders, protesters and dissidents.

The EU will continue to address, as appropriate, all issues of concern with the Iranian authorities as part of its balanced and comprehensive engagement with Iran.

  Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet heute, Donnerstag, 17. Februar 2022, statt.

8.3. Politična kriza v Burkini Faso

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über sieben Entschließungsanträge zur politischen Krise in Burkina Faso (2022/2542(RSP))1.

___________

1 Siehe Protokoll.

  Željana Zovko, author. – Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, in less than two years West Africa has known four coup d'état. This reflects the political challenges the countries in the region are coping with. Next to the effect on the local economy, the life of citizens and the institutional stability, this deteriorating situation creates a breeding ground for terrorists and extremist organisations that are already active across the Sahel region.

This morning, we have heard the official announcement of President Macron about the coordinated departure of French troops and their European allies from Mali. Although we cannot predict the consequences of this decision, as a security partner to Africa we should be cautious not to allow the extremists to take upper hand in the region.

In this light, I express my concern about the recent coup d'état in Burkina Faso. I call on the military leadership to continue working on the transition process and to return to a democratic system with respect for constitutional order. I also call for the immediate release from house arrest of President Kaboré.

The protection and safety of civilians is one of the key tasks of any government. Human rights should be respected. The authorities in Burkina Faso play a crucial role in combating terrorist organisations and in facilitating the work of humanitarian organisations. In both aspects, the country benefits from close partnership with the international community.

Today, the EU–African Summit starts in Brussels, and I call on the leaders to reconfirm their commitment to the security of the African continent and work together on the common challenges.

  Maria Arena, auteure. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, le coup d’État du 24 janvier au Burkina Faso s’inscrit dans un contexte régional tendu et caractérisé par la détérioration continue de la sécurité au Sahel. Le Burkina Faso est effectivement le pays qui a le plus souffert de l’augmentation exceptionnelle du nombre d’attaques terroristes. Ces dernières années, les données sont accablantes. Il suffit de penser aux 7 000 victimes, dont 3 000 civils, au déplacement de plus de 1,5 million de personnes, mais aussi à la fermeture de plus de 3 000 écoles dans la région.

On ne peut pas être surpris si les tensions n’ont fait qu’augmenter dans le pays. La population du Burkina Faso est fatiguée face au manque pérenne de sécurité et de stabilité. Comme celles des autres pays de la région du Sahel, elle vit dans un état de désillusion très forte vis-à-vis du système électoral, de la gouvernance, mais aussi de la présence des forces étrangères, qu’elle considère comme inefficaces pour ce qui est de régler les problèmes de sécurité dans cette région.

Nous devons donc insister, par cette résolution, sur le développement politique prioritaire, sans lequel il ne sera pas possible de revenir à une situation de stabilité, mais aussi de confiance dans les institutions.

Pour commencer, nous demandons une libération immédiate du président Roch Marc Kaboré, avant toute discussion avec les autorités en place. Ensuite, il faudra que toute la communauté internationale, y compris le Service d’action extérieure et la Commission européenne, s’engage à dialoguer avec les autorités burkinabè pour assurer une transition pacifique rapide entre le gouvernement militaire et un gouvernement civil, garantie du retour à l’ordre constitutionnel, en insistant sur l’importance de donner priorité à la mise en place d’un nouveau processus électoral qui repose sur les principes de l’inclusion et de la transparence.

Le Burkina Faso devra entreprendre la voie d’un dialogue inclusif qui associe la société civile sur la base d’une vision partagée pour le développement démocratique du pays. Il faudra que le respect des droits humains soit prioritaire dans toute discussion, et nous devons encourager la Coordination nationale pour une transition réussie, composée de sept organisations de la société civile, à superviser les autorités en place pour le développement du pays.

Il est clair que l’état de la démocratie dans plusieurs pays d’Afrique de l’Ouest est préoccupant. Nous sommes appelés à contribuer, par notre engagement politique, à une réflexion profonde sur la manière d’encourager les processus démocratiques dans la région, en nous assurant que les organisations des droits humains puissent y jouer un rôle très actif.

  Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Verfasser. – Hochverehrte Frau Präsidentin, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Frau Kommissarin! Es ist gerade schon angesprochen worden, dass die Situation im Sahel eine schwierige ist, einer Region, die von Instabilität geprägt ist. Zurzeit – es ist gerade schon gesagt worden – ist es der vierte Staatsstreich in einem Land der Region.

Und ich finde, dass wir als Europäer uns auch ein Stück weit fragen müssen: Was ist denn eigentlich die Rolle, die wir in der Region gespielt haben und in der Zukunft spielen wollen? Wir diskutieren die Frage dieser Rolle der Europäischen Union auf dem Gipfel gemeinsam mit der Afrikanischen Union. Und ich wünsche mir, dass wir als Europäische Union ein Partner auf Augenhöhe mit den afrikanischen Ländern sind und unseren Beitrag dazu leisten, dass die Region wieder zu Stabilität und Sicherheit zurückkehren kann.

Denn die Situation in Burkina Faso, über die wir heute sprechen, ist geprägt von einer Vielzahl terroristischer Angriffe. Es ist gerade schon gesagt worden von Maria Arena: etwa 7 000 Opfer, 1,5 Millionen Vertriebene in dem Land. Und diese Situation der Unsicherheit, diese terroristischen Attacken sind für die Bevölkerung eine unerträgliche Situation gewesen, sodass dieser Staatsstreich ein Stück weit eine Reaktion auf das Gefühl der mangelnden Sicherheit ist, die von der Regierung Burkina Fasos nicht gewährleistet werden konnte.

Ich möchte an dieser Stelle auch sagen, dass wir nicht vernachlässigen oder nicht aus den Augen verlieren dürfen, dass in der Region auch russische Söldner von der Wagner Group sehr aktiv sind und wir als Europäer aufpassen müssen, dass diese russischen Söldner nicht als Lösung für Sicherheitsprobleme gesehen werden. Denn, meine Damen und Herren, diese russischen Söldner sind keine Lösung für Sicherheitsprobleme, sondern sie verschärfen nur diese Probleme.

J’invite les Burkinabè à retrouver le chemin de la démocratie et à retourner à l’ordre constitutionnel. Je demande aux militaires qui sont au pouvoir actuellement de garantir une transition pacifique, avec un calendrier clair, pour le retour à des élections ou à un processus électoral clairs et démocratiques, pour que le Burkina Faso puisse rentrer dans le rang des démocraties. Sur ce chemin, dans cette quête, le Burkina Faso aura tout le soutien de l’Union européenne.

  Jordi Solé, author. – Madam President, as, today and tomorrow, leaders of Africa and the EU meet to discuss the way forward in EU—Africa relations, we in this Parliament have to regret and condemn again a coup d'état in an African country, this time in Burkina Faso. Three Western African states, Burkina Faso, Guinea and Mali, are now led by officers who came to power by the use of force. There have been more successful coups in Africa in the first two years of the 2020s than in the whole previous decade. This trend should worry us all.

The underlying reason behind Ouagadougou coup is a growing insecurity caused by the jihadist insurgency in the north, which the Government failed to contain, and indeed putting an end to terrorism in the country and in the whole Sahel region is a priority. But Burkina Faso is facing multiple crises resulting from the compounding effects of deep poverty, food insecurity, conflict, forced displacements, climate change, poor governance and equal access to basic services. Focusing only on security concerns will not pull the country out from its deep crisis.

The fact that the President Kaboré’s overthrow was rather met with contempt by a majority of the population does not make it a better kind of coup. Soldiers claiming to be better fit than civilians to take political decisions is never the right answer. The coup has to be rightly condemned, and we have to insist on the immediate release of President Kaboré, a swift return to civilian government, and the fact that the interim government respect its international commitments, notably as regards human rights, while also facilitating the work of humanitarian organisations.

Apart from that, we will have to react with a kind of principled pragmatism that can contribute to stabilising the country. We have join the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the African Union in demanding that the new government provides, with the shortest delay possible, a roadmap for a return to the constitutional order. We need to receive solid guarantees of that and, if we get them, we have to engage and maintain dialogue, as the resolution proposes, to make sure the new authorities live up to their promises. Otherwise, we might end up having the same situation as in Mali, where the regime made similar pledges after the coup yet it ended up hardening their stance, resorting to Russian help and postponing the return to democracy. This would be a bad outcome for the Burkinabé population, but also for the region at large.

  Assita Kanko, author. – Madam President, ne y beoogo, this is good morning in Burkina language. Just to greet these people who are suffering so much.

If Africa does not succeed, I can tell you one thing, Europe will fail, said President Macron. I welcome this statement, but I regret that Europe is 60 years late and is now still sleepwalking. Europe is a true zombie in Africa. Why don’t we believe reality when we see it?

Dear colleagues, we must not only stop paternalism, we must also believe reality when we see it. We were wrong yesterday to ignore it when it started in Syria, and we are wrong today to deny it when it keeps spreading in the Sahel.

Radical Islam, it’s a poison that eats a society faster than we take time denying it. But it has nothing to do with Islam – some people keep saying until it becomes too late. But I’m telling you civilisations do not collapse all at once, but gradually lose their building blocks and pillars until eventually an empty shell remains.

Today, Burkina Faso is even less than its own empty shell. Because of radical Islam, because of Western debt aid money that feeds corruption, because of global eyes shut while Islamism progresses everywhere, because of the western weakness towards China and Russia, because of paternalism like we still see today and tomorrow in the EU-Africa Summit.

All children should be able to play together beyond religious boundaries and know the warmth of a safe home, not the ordeal of a displaced life. Families should share meals over various religious celebrations, not fight over a vicious religious divide. Women and girls are persons, not objects. Businesses must have room to grow and give young people perspectives.

But today, the peaceful, joyful, secular Burkina Faso I have known as a child does no longer exist. The international community failed to anticipate. But as lawmakers, we do not have the right to be surprised, we should always anticipate. The first thing we must do now is to finally open our eyes because if the Sahel is defeated, it is us too who are defeated.

  Manu Pineda, autor. – Señora presidenta, Burkina Faso es un país profundamente afectado por el neoliberalismo y el imperialismo. Tenemos buenos ejemplos de ello, como el acaparamiento de tierras y recursos por multinacionales, la imposición de acuerdos de libre comercio que agravan la situación económica, o reformas neoliberales impuestas desde fuera con consecuencias desastrosas para el pueblo.

Sin duda es lamentable que en pleno siglo XXI debamos seguir condenando la injerencia y la explotación económica de las antiguas potencias coloniales y, en muchos casos, su contribución a generar conflictos o golpes de Estado.

Precisamente, los últimos procesos políticos en Burkina Faso habían contribuido a impulsar un gobierno de unidad nacional que ha sido derrocado por este golpe de Estado militar, alejando así la posibilidad de democratización del país, contribuyendo al auge de la violencia integrista.

Por ello, es imprescindible que desde esta Institución defendamos la soberanía de los pueblos y su derecho a gobernarse, y condenemos cualquier atentado o golpe a su decisión soberana.

  Dominique Bilde, auteur. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, des professeurs assassinés parce qu’ils enseignent en français plutôt qu’en arabe, ou parce qu’ils dispensent un cursus laïque et non coranique: voilà à quoi en est réduit un Burkina Faso en butte aux assauts du terrorisme islamiste.

S’y ajoutent, d’une part, les persécutions des chrétiens, qui constituent plus de 20 % de la population burkinabè, et, d’autre part, l’enrôlement de plus en plus fréquent des enfants par les groupes terroristes, justifiant l’ajout du pays au rapport annuel de l’ONU sur les enfants et les conflits armés. Une génération entière est ainsi en passe d’être privée d’éducation et, pour tout dire, d’avenir, outre le 1,3 million et quelque de personnes déplacées dans leur propre pays.

Tout ceci est désolant; mais à qui la faute? La France a porté courageusement et à bout de bras une vaste opération antiterroriste au Sahel depuis 2014. Barkhane aura coûté la vie à 58 de nos fils, sans compter les nombreux blessés, victimes des lâches attaques à l’engin explosif privilégiées par les terroristes. Tout cela pour se heurter à l’obsession haineuse de populations chauffées à blanc par les réseaux sociaux et à l’ingratitude sidérante de la junte malienne au pouvoir.

L’avenir dira si l’attitude du lieutenant-colonel burkinabè, déclaré hier président, sera à l’avenant. Reste que les attentats des mardi 8 et jeudi 10 février au Bénin, dont les auteurs ont été neutralisés au Burkina Faso, ont confirmé que la déstabilisation de ce pays recèle le risque d’embrasement de l’ensemble de l’Afrique de l’Ouest.

La France devra donc, à la suite de son retrait du Mali, reconfigurer son dispositif militaire. Quant à l’Union européenne et aux États membres, manifestement peu soucieux de la seconder dans cette périlleuse mission, ils devront tout du moins s’efforcer de ne pas souffler sur les braises en ajoutant au chaos sécuritaire l’impasse politique.

  Jiří Pospíšil, za skupinu PPE. – Paní předsedající, dámy a pánové, já bych chtěl také podpořit návrh usnesení, který se týká Burkiny Faso. Celá ta debata, která zde probíhá, jasně ukazuje, že to není pouze problém konkrétního vojenského převratu, byť ho správně odsuzujeme a vyzýváme k návratu k demokracii a k pokojnému dialogu mezi teď nově nastolenou vojenskou vládou a mezi obyvatelstvem, ale jasně to ukazuje zoufalství, ve kterém se ta země nachází, v obrovských ekonomických problémech. Bylo zde také řečeno, že to není pouze problém této země, ale celého regionu, celého Sahelu. Čtvrtý vojenský převrat v tomto regionu, v této části západní Afriky, za poslední dobu, obrovsky narůstající islámský radikalismus, fundamentalismus – to jsou problémy, které tento region, tuto oblast obrovsky tíží a vedou k takovým tragédiím, jako je 1,5 milionu obyvatel Burkiny Faso, které přišly v posledních několika letech o své domovy a jsou v zásadě uprchlíky ve vlastní zemi.

Je těžké najít řešení pro takovouto obrovskou sociální a ekonomickou katastrofu. Můžeme pomoci v nalezení cesty k demokracii, můžeme se účastnit onoho dialogu, ale je zřejmé, že to hlavní, s čím můžeme pomoci, je ekonomická pomoc, aby alespoň obyvatelé, kteří opouštějí venkov Burkiny Faso, který se čím dál více vysídluje i díky ekologickým a přírodním změnám, tak aby tito lidé alespoň tedy netrpěli tím nejhorším – hladem. Není to jednoduché řešení, je to opravdu velká tragédie a je třeba, aby Komise a obecně EU přemýšlela, jak tomuto regionu výrazněji pomoci. Ale opět opakuji, není to pouze o odchodu vojáků, kteří se i po protestech obyvatelstva, to je třeba říci, před několika týdny chopili moci.

  Evin Incir, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, almost eight years after the democratic revolution in Burkina Faso, we see today an unfortunate backlash with a military junta that forcefully grabbed power and imprisoned the democratically elected president Roch Marc Christian Kaboré.

In late spring 2014, I was in Burkina Faso as Secretary—General of the International Union of Socialist Youth to support the newly emerged party MPP, with its leader Kaboré, who today is the elected and legitimate leader of Burkina Faso. I remember the hope and joy that a better future can actually be possible after decades of dictatorship.

I am glad that my proposal for a resolution reached all the way to this session because the people of Burkina Faso cannot afford a silent world, and I have been in contact with many friends in Burkina Faso who are very thankful for us having the debate of today.

During the past two years, we have seen four military coups in West Africa, and the European Union must immediately act forcefully. And the first step is to never, ever legitimatise the military junta and demand that they immediately give power back to the people and release President Kaboré and all other political prisoners. Any upcoming government should and must understand that the universal rights are not for few to enjoy, they are the rights of all people.

As long as a fully—fledged democratic Burkina Faso is not ensured, long lasting peace will not be possible. And the struggle for democracy is crucial for and must go hand in hand with the struggle against terrorists and anti—democratic forces. We need to act. The Commission and the EEAS must put the need of the people, protection and safety of civilians in the centre of actions. Democracy, rule of law and human rights, along with social rights must be respected and upheld by any government.

The actions of the EU Commission, unfortunately, and the Member States have been far from sufficient until now. Today and tomorrow, the EU and African Union Summit should be used as a platform to address the people of West Africa’s right to their fundamental rights and together ensuring democracy and rule of law in the region. If any time, now is the time to also use our global human rights sanctions regime towards the coup makers because condemning is important, but actions are even more important.

  Joachim Kuhs, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, werte Kollegen! Ich erlebe heute schon wieder ein Déjà-vu. Wir unterhalten uns über Situationen in Staaten, die abgrundtiefe Probleme haben, und wir wundern uns, warum wir keine Lösungen anbieten können.

Wir sind offensichtlich eine kraftlose Organisation, denn wir können so gut wie nichts tun. Heute beginnen diese Gespräche mit der Afrikanischen Union – wunderbar. Aber wird es zu einer Lösung führen für Burkina Faso? Ich glaube nicht. Warum? Weil wir einfach gar keinen Hebel haben, an dem wir ansetzen können. Und ich glaube, darüber müssen wir uns Gedanken machen: Wie können wir diesen Menschen dort helfen, diesen 1,5 Millionen Vertriebenen? Das sind fast zehn Prozent der gesamten Bevölkerung. Das ist furchtbar. Und wir haben letztendlich keine Lösung.

Es nützt nichts, Geld hinzuschicken. Das wissen wir alle. Das landet in den Taschen der Militärs. Wir wissen auch, dass wir viele Dinge einfach nicht durchsetzen können. Es ist gut, Demokratie zu fordern. Nur, ich habe es heute schon einmal gesagt: Wir schaffen es nicht einmal im Westbalkan, wie wollen wir es in Afrika erreichen? Und deshalb: Wir müssen die Frage stellen: Welche Rolle spielen die Islamisten in dieser ganzen Geschichte? Warum kommt der Sahel nicht zur Ruhe? Was sind da für Lösungen notwendig?

Und ich glaube, es liegt eher darin, dass die afrikanischen Staaten sich selbst helfen müssen. Sie müssen von uns in die Selbstständigkeit entlassen werden. Wir haben so einen paternalistischen Ansatz, wie so eine Art von moralischem Imperialismus und Kolonialismus. Das muss endlich aufhören. Und wir dürfen sie auch nicht irgendwie abhängig machen vom Impfstatus, dass wir von diesen Staaten die Durchimpfung verlangen. Das muss aufhören, sonst können wir diesen Ländern nie helfen, und sie kommen nie zur Ruhe.

  Anna Fotyga, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, a few years ago here in the European Parliament, MEPs put aside their political divisions to discuss informally possibilities for really bad scenarios in Burkina Faso, as a potential place of changes in the Sahel. Unfortunately, COVID exacerbated this situation. Now we have a coup d’état but there is still a path to improve this situation.

We join the African Union and ECOWAS in appeals to a return to constitutional order, but obviously many changes should be done also in the mode of our support to Burkina Faso’s people and to the security of the country and the region.

Unfortunately, Burkina Faso is not present, as many as other coup d’état countries of the region, during this summit, but still we have to find a solution and we await the report from the High Representative / Vice-President as soon as possible.

  Mick Wallace, on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, the new coup leader in Burkina Faso was trained by the Americans, so was the 2015 one, and so was the one the year before. Eight successful coups in the region since 2008 were by US- and EU-trained soldiers: EU capacity-building in action.

Billions have been wasted militarising these societies, while the boot of neocolonialism stays pressed hard, like the CFA franc and crushing World Bank and IMF neoliberal reforms. This is how to spread violence and to promote the militias. As Director-General of the EU Military Staff, Admiral Bléjean, admitted at a meeting of the Subcommittee on Security and Defence recently, if governments fail to provide welfare to the population, this creates a space for insurgents to provide care and infrastructure, and so claim legitimacy in the eyes of the locals. There is no military solution.

The sooner we let go of the colonial noose, stop flooding the place with arms and start talking to the militias, we might have some chance. There is no other way.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Madam President, the current political crisis unfolding in Burkina Faso is deeply concerning. The instability of the last few months has caused untold suffering to the people of Burkina Faso and led to a considerable loss of life. The appointment of military leader Damiba as president following a coup on 24 January, as well as the placing of elected President Kaboré under house arrest, raises serious questions about the state of democracy in the region.

Indeed, it is a worrying trend that Burkina Faso joins the ranks of six other African nations who have experienced a coup in the last 18 months. Attacks carried out by insurgents and terrorists, such as the November attack in which 53 police officers lost their lives, have become an all too familiar part of life in the country.

This humanitarian crisis has been ongoing for many years, and it is estimated that more than 1.6 million people have been displaced in the country since 2015. Recent events, however, have led to a dramatic escalation in political instability and human suffering.

As EU leaders meet with representatives of the African Union this week in Brussels – a very important meeting – it is imperative that Europe works together with its partners in Africa to promote democratic processes across the continent. It is therefore essential that President Kaboré be released from house arrest and the elected government of Burkina Faso reinstated, to put a stop to this deepening political and humanitarian crisis.

A reasonable timetable mapping the return to civilian rule must now be a priority for the region. The European Union should offer every assistance it can to its partners in Africa in this regard. Democracy is the only way forward for Burkina Faso. Hope we can get it.

  Hannes Heide (S&D). –Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin! Für Europa ist schnelles Handeln das Gebot der Stunde. Damit in Afrika nicht weiterhin Putsch auf Putsch folgt und es zu keinem Dominoeffekt kommt, muss die Europäische Union die gewaltsame Machtübernahme durch das Militär in Burkina Faso entschieden verurteilen und reagieren, aber auch dazu beitragen, die Ursachen für diese Entwicklung zu bekämpfen.

Seit 2015 terrorisieren bewaffnete islamistische Gruppen die Bevölkerung mit Anschlägen. Tausende Menschen wurden bei gewalttätigen Angriffen in Burkina Faso getötet. Eineinhalb Millionen Menschen wurden vertrieben, vor allem ins Länderdreieck Burkina Faso, Mali und Niger. Diese Destabilisierung befeuert Unruhen und Proteste in der Zivilbevölkerung. Die lokalen Sicherheitskräfte konnten den Terroristen kaum etwas entgegensetzen. Unsicherheit und Angst vor dem islamistischen Terror erschüttern die gesamte Sahelzone und bereiten den Nährboden für antidemokratische Entwicklungen.

Das Ergebnis: Mit Burkina Faso hat ein weiterer Staat Westafrikas den Pfad der Demokratie verlassen. Die neue Militärführung hat zwar eine Kommission für die Rückkehr zur verfassungsmäßigen Ordnung eingesetzt, jetzt aber müssen Taten folgen. Der inhaftierte Präsident Kaboré und weitere politische Gefangene müssen umgehend freigelassen werden, ein konkreter Zeitplan muss für freie Wahlen festgelegt werden.

Burkina Faso muss jede Unterstützung bekommen, um seine Bevölkerung vor den andauernden Terrorakten der Dschihadisten zu schützen, damit die Menschen nicht weiter vor Gewalt, Hunger und Perspektivlosigkeit flüchten müssen.

  Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Szanowni Państwo! Sytuacja w Burkina Faso jest dramatyczna. U władzy jest wojskowa junta, następuje eskalacja przemocy. Odnotowuje się tysiące ofiar śmiertelnych. Tylko w ubiegłym roku półtora miliona ludzi zostało wewnętrznie przesiedlonych – oni musieli zostawić cały swój dobytek. Wśród wewnętrznie przesiedlonych szczególnie narażone na przemoc i wykorzystywanie seksualne są dzieci i kobiety. Proszę zwrócić uwagę, że następuje wzrost przestępczego procederu, jakim jest handel ludźmi. To wszystko dzieje się w Burkina Faso w XXI wieku. Na skrajne ubóstwo narażone są kobiety.

Co należy zrobić? Przede wszystkim zwiększyć wsparcie finansowe i pomoc humanitarną, by zaspokoić najpilniejsze potrzeby. Ale czas, by Unia zaczęła działać, żeby wyciągnęła wnioski ze swoich zobowiązań, jeśli chodzi o stosowanie systemu kontroli i śledzenia eksportu broni. Ta junta ma broń, do której ma nieograniczony niestety dostęp, i stąd ta eskalacja przemocy.

  Carlos Zorrinho (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, reitero nesta câmara a minha firme condenação do golpe de Estado no Burquina Fasso, uma condenação que já manifestei enquanto presidente da Delegação do Parlamento Europeu à Assembleia Paritária ACP-UE, em diferentes instâncias.

Saúdo as recentes decisões tomadas pela União Africana e pelos Chefes de Estado e de Governo da Comunidade Económica dos Estados da África Ocidental (CEDEAO) de suspender o Burquina Fasso de todos os seus órgãos e atividades até que a ordem constitucional seja restabelecida no país.

O presidente Kaboré e os membros do seu governo detidos devem ser imediata e incondicionalmente libertados. A junta militar deve preparar o rápido restabelecimento do exercício do pleno poder a um governo legítimo. A recente proclamação do responsável pelo golpe militar como presidente do país não pode afastar o Burquina Fasso do essencial, que é garantir a reposição urgente do Estado de Direito e assegurar um governo saído de eleições justas e livres.

A situação humanitária no Burquina Fasso é preocupante. Mais de um milhão e meio de deslocados no país, mais de metade das escolas do país encerradas, mais de dois milhões e meio de habitantes em risco de fome severa, a que se soma a insegurança e as limitações gritantes aos direitos, liberdades e garantias dos cidadãos, que minam o quotidiano deste país do Sahel.

A União Europeia deve, portanto, neste contexto ponderar seriamente medidas punitivas contra as entidades desestabilizadoras e criadoras desta situação no Burquina Fasso, sem afetar, como é evidente, a ajuda humanitária ou projetos que ajudem diretamente a sociedade civil. E, desta forma, podemos dar um sinal claro de intransigente defesa do Estado de Direito, eleições democráticas e da necessidade de dar estabilidade ao país e paz à região do Sahel, que tem vindo a viver num ambiente de instabilidade e ameaça terrorista permanente.

  Ryszard Czarnecki (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Koleżanki i Koledzy! Ja byłem w Burkina Faso. Pamiętam moje rozmowy z Europejczykami, którzy tam mieszkali od lat. Pytałem o relacje między większością chrześcijańską a mniejszością muzułmańską. Słyszałem odpowiedź „wszystko jest dobrze”. Tydzień po moim wyjeździe nastąpił pierwszy zamach islamskich terrorystów. Myślę, że nie można tego zamachu stanu, który jest złem, zrozumieć bez właśnie terroryzmu islamskiego. Terroryzm ten pokazywał słabość armii – armii, która się frustrowała. I myślę, że było to jedną z głównych przyczyn tego zamachu stanu. Jest on oczywiście jest złem, które należy potępić.

To, co dzieje się w Burkina Faso, a także w innych krajach Sahelu, jest też (o czym się może mniej na tej sali mówi) elementem rozgrywki prowadzonej przez Rosję, która tam eksportuje broń, ale także oferuje swoje usługi, usługi tych słynnych żołnierzy Wagnera.

  Karsten Lucke (S&D). – Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Der Putsch in Burkina Faso ist natürlich ein weiterer Rückschlag für die positive Entwicklung im Sahel. Das haben wir uns sicherlich anders gewünscht. Und natürlich tauchen Fragezeichen auf nach dem eigenen Engagement, nach den eigenen Investitionen, ob sich das lohnt. Und ich sage ganz kurz und knapp und eindeutig: Ja, wir müssen am Ball bleiben. Wir dürfen den Kopf nicht in den Sand stecken und hier womöglich ein Land oder eine Region verlassen und sie vielleicht auch im Stich lassen.

Natürlich braucht es wichtige Elemente, die wir hier haben – den Ausbau der Demokratie, die Menschenrechte und vor allen Dingen eine positive sozioökonomische Entwicklung –, damit wir überhaupt wieder einen fruchtbaren Nährboden schaffen, damit Bürgerinnen und Bürger mit ihrem Staat wieder in Einklang kommen. Und da habe ich von Terrorbekämpfung noch gar nicht geredet. Das wird natürlich am Ende des Tages alles ein bisschen langwieriger, es wird komplizierter, aber wir werden hier auch nicht für Einfaches bezahlt. Von daher sollten wir diese Aufgabe angehen.

Gestern hat der Junta-Chef bei seiner eigens inszenierten Einführung gesagt, und ich zitiere: „I swear in front of the people of Burkina Faso and on my honour, to preserve and respect, to uphold and defend the constitution, fundamental acts and the law, to do everything to guarantee justice for all the inhabitants of Burkina Faso.“ Da kann ich nur sagen: Herzlichen Glückwunsch, gut gesprochen. Und ich verrate Ihnen das Geheimnis, wie Sie das am besten hinbekommen: indem Sie die Macht zurückgeben an die demokratisch legitimierte Regierung in Burkina Faso.

  Beata Kempa (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Afryka to piękny i dumny kontynent, niestety ciągle szarpany kolejnymi niepokojami. Tym razem zamach stanu dosięgnął Burkina Faso. Kraj, który od lat walczy o stabilność makroekonomiczną i bezpieczeństwo, znowu znalazł się na rozdrożu. Z jednej strony wojskowa junta oraz rosyjscy najemnicy z grupy Wagnera aktywnie uczestniczący w puczu, ale z drugiej strony ataki na chrześcijan i niepokoje religijne, które mogą przerodzić się w kolejny krwawy konflikt religijny podobny do tego, który od lat trwa w Nigerii.

W parlamentarnej rezolucji dosadnie opisano problemy w zakresie bezpieczeństwa oraz udziału zagranicznych grup najemników. Natomiast brakuje w niej odniesienia do kolejnych ataków na chrześcijan w Burkina Faso i potępienia tych ataków. Tylko w ostatnich dniach doszło do kilku dużych incydentów, w tym profanacji seminarium duchownego im. św. Kizito. Stoją za nimi organizacje islamskich radykałów. Te same, które dążą do destabilizacji wewnętrznej Burkina Faso. Trzeba jasno potępić ich działanie oraz podjąć aktywne środki zaradcze, w tym sankcje, wobec międzynarodowych sponsorów terroryzmu działających w Afryce.

  Helena Dalli, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, the recent coup in Burkina Faso on 24 January concerns us all, not only because it is the third coup in West Africa in less than two years, but also because, since the fall of former President Compaoré in 2014, Burkina Faso was seen as an example of a successful democratic transition.

On 26 January the HR-VP strongly condemned this coup, calling in particular for the immediate release of President Kaboré, as well as for a rapid return to constitutional order. Since that date, we note that President Kaboré is still under house arrest, and the authorities are yet to announce a transition timetable.

In this context, it seems important to maintain a firm position. We need to encourage the authorities, under Lieutenant Colonel Damiba, who was just sworn in as the new President of Burkina Faso, to send positive signs to the international community, in particular by presenting a reasonable timetable for the transition and releasing President Kaboré.

On this point, we will closely follow the reaction of ECOWAS. Indeed, ECOWAS heads of state have suspended Burkina Faso from the regional organisation, called for the return to a constitutional order in the shortest time and put in place a monitoring mechanism.

All of this takes place in a difficult security situation. As you know, armed terrorist groups affiliated with al-Qaeda or the Islamic State operate almost freely on more than a third of Burkinabe territory. They have caused more than 1.5 million internally displaced persons who face a very difficult situation of shelter and food insecurity.

The EU will respond to the changing situation. We should aim to have a pragmatic approach with the objective of encouraging the rapid return to constitutional order. Our priorities include the terrorist threats in the region, as well as the protection and improvement of living conditions of the population.

I recall that we are entering a new cooperation cycle. All discussions on future programmes are on hold, including on budget support. How we will deal with ongoing programmes, in particular those which are of direct benefit to the state, will be evaluated together with Member States once we know the direction the new authorities are taking.

With all these elements, once the authorities in Burkina Faso have better outlined their approach, we will be able to define our response more clearly.

  Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet heute, Donnerstag, 17. Februar 2022, statt.

Die Sitzung ist unterbrochen. Sie wird um 13.00 Uhr mit der Bekanntgabe der Ergebnisse der ersten Abstimmungsrunde wieder aufgenommen.

(Die Sitzung wird um 12.30 Uhr unterbrochen.)

9. Nadaljevanje seje

(Die Sitzung wird um 13.00 Uhr wieder aufgenommen.)

10. Poimenska sestava delegacij

  Die Präsidentin. – Ich möchte dem Plenum mitteilen, dass die Präsidentin den Antrag zur Geschäftsordnung gemäß Artikel 195 erhalten hat.

Ich erteile Herrn Dzhambazki für eine Minute das Wort.

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-жо Председател, колеги, затова се обръщам към вас. Когато съм правил грешки в този Парламент и когато някой се е чувствал засегнат, винаги съм се извинявал. Но вчерашният случай не е такъв. Във вчерашния случай, в който аз просто поздравих вашата колега, която водеше заседанието, и й показах с ръка, че разбирам какво ми казва, беше интерпретирано дълбоко погрешно, изключително неправилно и беше направена световна новина. Световна новина, която твърди, че съм използвал забранени нацистки символи в този Парламент.

Не, госпожо Председател, не съм. Ако исках, щях да Ви кажа. Щях да го направя от трибуната, не излизайки от залата. Не използвам такива символи, защото съм дълбоко убеден, че тяхното място не е в обществото и в тази зала. Начинът, по който беше разпространена тази реакция, беше скандален, изключително груб и изключително обиден.

Затова аз ще искам извинение от всеки, който твърди такова нещо. Да свържеш едно просто помахване в знак на съгласие с ръка, то се вижда как е направено, и да кажеш, че това е нацистки поздрав, е ужасно глупаво. Моля Ви, дайте ми още малко време. Знам, че се спазва времето, но това е важно. Ние не използваме такива символи по много ясни причини. Но пак Ви казвам, ако исках да го направя, щеше да е тук. И днес целия ден слушам и гледам новини, обяснения. Това просто не е вярно, уважаема госпожо Председател, настоявам да се запише. Искам извинение. Благодаря Ви за търпението.

  Die Präsidentin. – Das nehmen wir zur Kenntnis. Das Verfahren nimmt seinen weiteren Gang.

Die Fraktionen und die fraktionslosen Mitglieder haben der Präsidentin die Ernennungen der Mitglieder der Delegationen mitgeteilt. Die Liste mit der namentlichen Zusammensetzung der Delegationen wird auf der Website des Parlaments veröffentlicht.

11. Razglasitev izidov glasovanja: gl. zapisnik

  Die Präsidentin. – Ich komme nun zu der Bekanntgabe der Ergebnisse der ersten heutigen Abstimmungsrunde.

(Die Präsidentin verliest die Ergebnisse der ersten Abstimmungsrunde.)1

Die Sitzung ist unterbrochen. Sie wird um 13.45 Uhr mit der Eröffnung der zweiten Abstimmungsrunde wieder aufgenommen.

________

1 Siehe Protokoll.

(Die Sitzung wird um 13.05 Uhr unterbrochen.)

PŘEDSEDNICTVÍ: DITA CHARANZOVÁ
místopředsedkyně

12. Nadaljevanje seje

(The sitting resumed at 13.44)

13. Članstvo v političnih skupinah

  President. – I have a small announcement. Mr Nicolas Bay has left the ID Group and now sits with the non—attached Members as from 16 February 2022.

14. Drugi čas glasovanja

  President. – We now come to today’s second voting session.

We will vote on the files as indicated on the agenda and the voting session will be open from 13.45 until 15.00.

The same voting method will be used as during the previous voting sessions. All votes will be held by roll-call vote.

I declare the second voting session open. You have until 15.00 to vote.

The results of the second voting session will be announced at 16.00.

(The sitting was suspended at 13.47)

15. Nadaljevanje seje

(The sitting resumed at 15.00)

16. Večje interpelacije (razprava)

16.1. Okrepitev sistema zaščitenih označb porekla (ZOP) in zaščitenih geografskih označb (ZGO) v EU po zadevi prosecco/prošek (G-001003/2021 - B9-0004/2022)

  President. – The next item is the major interpellation for written answer with debate by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission on strengthening the system for protecting PDO and PGI denominations in the EU after the Prosecco/Prosek case (G—001003/2021) (B9-0004/2022).

I would like to remind Members that for all the debates of this part-session there will be no catch—the—eye procedure and no blue cards will be accepted. Furthermore, as during recent part-sessions, remote interventions from Parliament’s liaison offices in the Member States are foreseen.

I would also like to remind you that interventions in the Chamber will continue to be made from the central rostrum. I therefore kindly invite you to keep an eye on the speakers’ list and to approach the rostrum when your speaking time is imminent.

  Mara Bizzotto, autrice. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il Prošek croato è una truffa ai danni del nostro Prosecco, del made in Italy e dei consumatori di tutto il mondo, che rischia di distruggere il sistema europeo dei marchi DOP e IGP.

Oggi, per la prima volta, la plenaria del Parlamento europeo si occupa della guerra Prosecco/Prošek, che è diventata un caso simbolo in tutta Europa. La Commissione europea ha tenuto un comportamento scandaloso: a settembre 2021 ha avviato l'iter per il riconoscimento del Prošek e, da allora, si è chiusa in un vergognoso silenzio, nonostante siano passati tre mesi dalla posizione ufficiale presentata dall'Italia.

Altrettanto scandaloso è che oggi, a parlare ufficialmente a nome della Commissione europea, non ci sia il Commissario all'agricoltura, ma un altro Commissario. Cosa avete da nascondere? Perché il Commissario all'agricoltura non ha il coraggio di venire in Parlamento e dire con chiarezza cosa vuole fare sul caso Prošek? A che gioco state giocando?

Giova ricordare che, già nel 2013, la Croazia aveva tentato di ottenere il riconoscimento del Prošek, bocciato dall'allora Commissario Cioloş. Cito testualmente le parole di Cioloş, in risposta alla mia interrogazione: "l'uso in commercio del termine Prošek può creare problemi giuridici, poiché la denominazione croata potrebbe entrare in conflitto con la protezione della DOP italiana Prosecco. Le autorità croate sono a conoscenza di questo problema giuridico".

Cosa è cambiato in questi nove anni per giustificare questo clamoroso voltafaccia della Commissione? Oggi come allora il Prošek croato è palesemente in conflitto con la DOP Prosecco, che protegge la qualità del nostro vino e il lavoro di 8 000 produttori italiani. Riconoscere la denominazione Prošek sarebbe una violazione gravissima delle normative europee, che tutelano i prodotti DOP e IGP da ogni tentativo di evocazione, imitazione e storpiatura del nome, anche quando il nome è tradotto.

Il sistema delle denominazioni d'origine e delle indicazioni geografiche protette è il pilastro della politica agroalimentare dell'Unione europea. Se l'Europa non vuole difendere il Prosecco, che è il vino italiano più famoso e più venduto al mondo, cosa succederà agli altri prodotti italiani europei a marchio DOP e IGP? L'Europa deve rafforzare gli strumenti che difendono i nostri prodotti, non scardinare il sistema delle DOP e IGP, usando il cavallo di Troia del Prošek.

Cara Commissione europea, è finito il tempo delle chiacchiere. L'Europa deve dire di no alla richiesta di riconoscimento del Prošek. L'unico vero Prosecco e quello italiano, prodotto in Veneto e in Friuli, riconosciuto e tutelato dalle denominazioni DOC e DOCG. Su questa partita l'Europa si gioca la faccia. Noi non molleremo di un centimetro, e siamo pronti alle barricate per difendere il nostro Prosecco e tutto il Made in Italy.

  Helena Dalli, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, good afternoon Honourable Members, Honourable Member of Parliament Bizzotto. So before addressing the two specific questions raised by this major interpellation, I shall first provide a brief update on the application for protection of the Croatian traditional term Prošek.

As it is customary, the publication for objection of the traditional term Prošek was preceded by cautious Commission scrutiny based on the applicable legal framework. Given that the Croatian application fulfilled all the relevant legal conditions, the Commission published the application on 22 September last year.

All interested parties had two months from the date of publication to submit an objection. The Commission received 12 objections. So according to EU rules, admissible objections will be transmitted to Croatia for observations. Then any observation provided by Croatia will be communicated to Italy.

Following these exchanges and on the basis of all available information of EU legislation and of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice, the Commission will take the final decision to protect or reject the traditional term Prošek through a Commission implementing regulation.

As regards the reform of the EU Geographical Indications System, the Commission services are currently working on a proposal to strengthen the system of geographical indications, which, as you know, is a major agricultural policy objective of the von der Leyen Commission. The Commission intends to adopt the legislative proposal in April and submit it to the co-legislators.

The Commission proposal will aim to strengthen the system of geographical indications for all agricultural sectors. It will contribute to the objectives of the common agricultural policy, addressing societal demands on food and health and thus the objectives of the European Green Deal and Farm to fork strategy.

The proposal will be underpinned by an impact assessment analysing and assessing options based on facts and evidence, and I can reassure you that the Commission is taking the concerns raised in this major interpellation into consideration. While the fundamental structure of the EU GI system is sound, its revision focuses on two general objectives: ensuring effective protection of intellectual property rights within the EU, including efficient registration processes to further reward producers for their efforts, and increasing the uptake of GIs across the EU to benefit the rural economy.

More specifically, the Commission intends to further enhance the protection of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications, including defining the scope of avocation. In addition to this, the whole system of protection against direct or indirect commercial use, misuse, avocation, imitation, should also apply to terms used in internet domain names, having regard to goods and services presented in the web page under that name.

Furthermore, the Commission also intends to introduce stricter rules on the use of GI names in the sale names of processed goods when the GI product is an ingredient of the processed product.

In relation to your second question, the EU has an extensive set of rules on official controls in the agrifood chain to provide efficient and stronger enforcement tools at national level. Member States’ competent authorities must control if the producers comply with the rules set forth for geographical indications and take the necessary steps to stop unlawful practices on their territories.

A network of food fraud contact points in the Member States has been set up to facilitate administrative assistance and cooperation in cases of cross—border violations. The European Anti-Fraud Office is a member of this network. It has launched several inquiries targeting in particular infringement of intellectual property rights, including geographical indications on its own initiative or to support the enforcement activities of competent national agencies against cross-border frauds.

The administrative assistance and cooperation system set up by the European Commission is providing a confidential network between the competent authorities, enabling Member States and, under specific conditions, stakeholders, to notify each other of suspected usurpations of geographical indications and to request action.

Moreover, to ensure monitoring of the control done by Member States, the Commission is auditing their official control systems and intervenes in case of systemic failure to apply EU law. The Commission also organises training sessions and seminars on control issues with regard to geographical indications in order to provide guidance and share best practices beyond our borders. The EU is fully committed to enhancing the international protection of EU geographical indications by including a comprehensive GI provisions in the intellectual property chapters in bilateral agreements. This way, a comparable level of protection and enforcement of GIs is guaranteed in the partner country to that of the EU. Each bilateral agreement protecting GIs lays down obligations on both parties to verify compliance of the products using these GIs with production rules, as well as specific enforcement mechanisms to apply on the party’s respective markets.

The Commission also engages with trading partners in intellectual property dialogues and intellectual property technical cooperation programmes, which promote the protection and effective enforcement of GIs in line with EU standards.

In addition, in accordance with Regulation No 608/2013 on customs enforcement of intellectual property rights, Member States’ customs authorities may act at the border and detain goods suspected of infringing PDOs and PGIs.

Regulation 608/2013 also gives OLAF a specific mandate for mutual assistance in fighting counterfeit goods imported from third countries. OLAF has been active in that field for several years, as illustrated by the dismantling of a fraudulent network producing fake rum.

Finally, counterfeit food is also the focus of regular cross-border operations between Member State law enforcement, such as through the OPSON operations within the framework of the EU Policy Cycle on serious and organised crime facilitated by Europol with the active participation of OLAF.

  Herbert Dorfmann, a nome del gruppo PPE. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, immaginatevi una richiesta per una menzione tradizionale che si chiama "champagnac" o forse "portolese". Vi sembra assurdo? Sinceramente anche a me. Ma tanto assurdo non sembra, altrimenti non si sarebbe arrivati a questo dibattito che abbiamo qui oggi.

Il Prosecco non è una denominazione qualsiasi in Europa. Con 600 milioni di bottiglie è il vino spumante più prodotto in Europa e nell'Unione europea e una delle denominazioni di origine più importanti, sia in numeri che in valore, conosciuta in tutto il mondo. È serio mettere in pericolo questa denominazione con la menzione tradizionale? Non lo è.

La Commissione avrebbe dovuto bloccare da anni questo attacco al Prosecco, anche perché la Croazia sinceramente, già in fase di entrata nell'Unione europea, ha sostanzialmente accettato di non voler rivendicare questa denominazione.

Durante un dibattito in commissione per l'agricoltura alcuni mesi fa, i rappresentanti della Commissione ci hanno detto che non c'è nessun pericolo, in quanto si tratta di prodotti molto diversi. Questo sarà vero per il mercato italiano, per il mercato croato, forse addirittura per i consumatori e il mercato europeo. Ma siamo sicuri che un consumatore a Tokyo o a New York capisca che il Prošek e il Prosecco sono due cose completamente diverse? Penso di no.

Mi rendo conto che il regolamento è poco chiaro, forse anche superficiale, quando permette la coesistenza della menzione tradizionale con la denominazione d'origine, e qui ci dobbiamo mettere mano, signor Commissario.

Ma se noi non ammettiamo questo, come facciamo a difendere domani seriamente le denominazioni, soprattutto quelle più conosciute al mondo, con il meccanismo che lei giustamente ha messo in evidenza? La questione potrebbe diventare un precedente per altre denominazioni importanti, sia del vino che dell'agroalimentare. Denominazioni, tra l'altro, falsificate in giro per il mondo, che cerchiamo di togliere dal mercato, come il Prosecco falso, il jamón iberico falso, la birra bavarese falsa. Cosa diciamo domani se accettiamo noi stessi, in casa, una situazione del genere?

Quindi blocchiamo questa assurdità! È troppo pericolosa, non solo per il Prosecco e per le denominazioni nel loro insieme, ma io penso che non sia un bene neanche per il Prošek, visto che la copia è sempre peggio dell'originale.

  Tonino Picula, u ime kluba S&D. – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, kolegice i kolege, dolazim iz Dalmacije gdje se prošek tradicionalno proizvodi stoljećima. Taj se stari naziv koristio davno prije nego što je prosecco zaštićen u Europskoj uniji. Reputacija prošeka proizlazi prije svega iz kvalitete koja je rezultat specifične lokalne tehnike proizvodnje.

Treba naglasiti neke bitne razlike između prošeka i prosecca jer to nisu i ne mogu biti izravni tržišni konkurenti. Ova dva pića lako je razlikovati po boji, okusu, sorti grožđa, načinu i regiji proizvodnje, veličini i obliku boce, kao i po cijeni. Prosecco se proizvodi u velikim, dok se prošek prodaje u malim količinama, i većinom na lokalnom tržištu. Razumno informiran potrošač, kako to propisi navode, ne može doći u zabunu. U ovom slučaju treba odbaciti nepotpune i netočne interpretacije kao i optužbe za zloupotrebu, imitiranje ili aludiranje.

Prošek nije novi proizvod označen kao prošek samo da pobudi asocijacije na prosecco. Sličnosti u imenu proizlaze iz bogatog povijesnog i jezičnog naslijeđa koje naše dvije zemlje dijele. Naslijeđe koje treba slaviti, a ne omalovažavati i zloupotrebljavati. Prosecco je aperitiv koji se poslužuje na početku obroka, dok se prošek, kao desertno vino, poslužuje na kraju. U skladu s tim, neka svako dobro jelo počne proseccom, a završi prošekom.

Želim zahvaliti Komisiji na dosadašnjem radu i na brzom odgovoru na moje pismo vezano uz neutemeljene pokušaje opstrukcije zaštite imena „prošek“. Podsjećam kako povjerenik Wojciechowski, u odgovoru na zastupničko pitanje, pojašnjava da je koegzistencija proizvoda moguća, čak i u slučaju dva homonimna pojma.

Prepoznavanje tradicionalnog prošeka ni na koji način ne može oslabiti postojeći sustav zaštite, može ga samo ojačati. To bi bilo ujedno i priznanje doprinosa autohtonih proizvoda novijih država članica, budući da treba poštovati načelo da smo ujedinjeni u različitostima.

Hrvatska i njezini proizvođači ne mogu i ne smiju biti diskriminirani zbog slučajeva jezičnih sličnosti, još manje zbog činjenice da je Hrvatska najnovija članica Europske unije. Mi se borimo za ravnopravnost, korektnost i nepristranost. To se upravo na ovakvim slučajevima dokazuje u praksi.

Zbog svega toga Europska unija mora zaštititi male tradicionalne proizvođače autohtonih proizvoda od velikih, koji pokušavaju zloupotrijebiti svoju dominantnu poziciju na tržištu. Bez takve ravnopravnosti nema ni zajedničke budućnosti.

  Valter Flego, u ime kluba Renew. – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, poštovana povjerenice, zbilja mi je jako drago što čujem da će se u budućnosti jačati sustav zaštite, odnosno zaštićene oznake izvornosti, i zaštite zemljopisnog podrijetla u cijeloj Europskoj uniji. To je, naravno, dobra vijest za naše vjerne poljoprivrednike i za bolju i jaču zaštitu kvalitetnih autohtonih poljoprivrednih proizvoda.

Ali, želim ovdje jasno i glasno reći da takozvani slučaj „prosecco- prošek“ ne postoji. Ni borba Hrvatske i Italije ni spor, a ni rat, kako ste vi spomenuli poštovana gospođo Bizzotto. Naime, prosecco i prošek su dva potpuno različita vina. Dok je prošek zrelo desertno vino, prosecco je mlado, svježe, pjenušavo vino. Ta dva vina u procesu proizvodnje imaju potpuno drukčiji tehnološki pristup, i to treba znati i razumjeti.

I zato poštovana gospođo Bizzotto, tu nema ni konflikta ni standarda, a ne daj Bože ni rata, kako vi kažete. Jer znamo jako dobro da vino treba i mora spajati ljude, a ne razdvajati. I naravno da je važno prošek zaštititi kako bi se spriječila nelojalna praksa za vino koje se prvi put spominje još 1844. godine. Ponavljam, 1844. godine: I kao što smo zaštitili kvalitetne autohtone poljoprivredne proizvode – maslinovo ulje, istarski teran, pršut – isto želimo učiniti i s prošekom. I ja tu ne vidim problem jer znam, nakon primjera i bitke za naš teran, da pravilnim označavanjem proizvoda ne dolazi do nikakve zabune potrošača. I zato se veselim jačanju oznaka izvornosti i zato sam siguran da će i prošek ponosno nositi u budućnosti tu oznaku.

Poštovana povjerenice, molim vas da vas takva razmišljanja vode pri vašim budućim aktivnostima, kako bi energiju trošili na zaštitu kvalitetnih poljoprivrednih, autohtonih proizvoda, i time pomogli i poljoprivrednicima i potrošačima. Živjeli s prošekom, alla salute con prosecco.

  Joachim Kuhs, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kollegin Bizzotto, werte Kollegen! Es ist wichtig und notwendig, dass die EU die Ursprungsbezeichnungen und geografischen Angaben schützt. Sie stellen eine Art Urheberrecht dar, und wir tun gut daran, dieses geistige Eigentumsrecht auch künftig zu schützen. Daher unterstützen wir unsere Freunde aus Italien in diesem Fall.

Diese Angaben sind ja keine protektionistischen Maßnahmen, wie manche behaupten, sondern eine Art Qualitätssiegel. Das dient übrigens auch dem Schutz der Arbeiter und auch dem Schutz der Verbraucher, damit sie wissen, was sie bekommen.

Sie sollten aber darauf achten, liebe Frau Kommissarin, dass Sie über die Ausgestaltung dieser Schutzrechte nicht neue bürokratische Hürden einführen, die den Binnenhandel erschweren und die letztendlich sogar geschäftsschädigend sind für den geschützten Hersteller. Wenn Sie das alles beachten, dann können Sie eigentlich nichts falsch machen.

Entscheiden Sie sich für Prosecco. Das ist mein Wunsch, denn ich habe in meinem ganzen Leben noch nie etwas von Prosek gehört. Tut mir leid, das sagen zu müssen, aber Prosecco habe ich schon sehr häufig getrunken.

Um einfach diese Verwirrung zu beenden, die damit in Verbindung ist, fordere ich Sie von der Kommission auf, hier Klarheit zu schaffen. Es kann nicht sein, dass diese beiden Begriffe nebeneinander stehen bleiben. Es führt nur zu Verwirrung.

  Ladislav Ilčić, u ime kluba ECR. – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, poštovane dame i gospodo, dobro je da Europska unija štiti originalne proizvode i na taj način spriječi da se neki novi proizvodi okoriste starim, originalnim, pravim autohtonim proizvodom. Obično ti novi proizvodi pokušavaju biti što sličniji onom originalnom proizvodu kako bi što lakše zavarali ljude, kao što je rekla gospođa Bizzotto.

No pogledajmo sad argumente. Prošek, dakle ne „prosek“ nego prošek, vino je koje ne samo, kao što je rekao gospodin Flego, da se spominje 1840. nego čak i u knjizi „Put po Dalmaciji“ koja je objavljena 1774. Dakle, prije 248 godina. Znači nikako nije riječ o novom proizvodu koji bi se htio okoristiti imenom prosecco. Osim toga, kao što smo već čuli, prosecco je pjenušavo vino, lako vino. Prošek je desertno vino, slatkasto vino. Dakle, potpuno dva različita proizvoda. Prošek se proizvodi u svega 200 hektolitara godišnje, prodaje se gotovo isključivo lokalno.

Prema tome, to su činjenice koje jednostavno daju prošeku sva prava da bude prepoznat, da bude zaštićen, kao i svi drugi autohtoni proizvodi.

  Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, povjerenice, kolegice i kolege, rasprava o razlikama i sličnostima hrvatskog prošeka i talijanskog prosecca vodi se u EU institucijama od razdoblja pristupanja Hrvatske Europskoj uniji, te talijanska strana sustavno opstruira zaštitu izvornosti prošeka i njegovo pozicioniranje na europskoj vinskoj karti i tržištu.

Talijanske tvrdnje da je prošek novi proizvod, odnosno kopija njihovog prosecca, te da zbog toga postoji rizik dovođenja potrošača u zabludu, kao i nelojalne konkurencije, u potpunosti su netočne. Hrvatski prošek je gusto i slatko vino koje spada u kategoriju desertnih, dok je talijanski prosecco lagano pjenušavo vino. Budući da se radi o dva proizvoda različite boje, mirisa i cijene, različite tradicije i običaja konzumacije, protest talijanske strane je bespredmetan. Naprosto ne postoje dodirne točke u okusu, načinu proizvodnje niti vrsti grožđa u usporedbi ova dva proizvoda, te prošek ima neprocjenjivo značenje u višestoljetnoj, povijesnoj i enološkoj tradiciji Hrvatske. Naglašavam – višestoljetnoj.

Pozdravljam činjenicu što je Komisija u svom pisanom očitovanju prošle godine zauzela razumno stajalište i dala do znanja da homonimija, odnosno sličnost naziva, nije dovoljna za odbacivanje hrvatskog zahtjeva, te da posebno s obzirom na lokalnu i tradicionalnu uporabu homonimi u tom smislu mogu koegzistirati kao u ovom slučaju. Također, drago mi je da je Komisija nedavno objavila hrvatski zahtjev za zaštitu tradicionalnog izraza prošek u Službenom listu EU-a te traje postupak donošenja konačne odluke.

S obzirom na navedeno, odgovorno tvrdim da hrvatski prošek i talijanski prosecco ne spadaju u istu skupinu vina. Hrvatska ima snažan povijesni i pravni legitimitet za priznavanje tradicionalnog izraza prošek na razini Europske unije. Usprkos talijanskim argumentima i opstrukciji Hrvatska, kao punopravna članica Europske unije, ima potpuno pravo zaštititi svoj tradicionalni autohtoni proizvod prošek, što i čini, te sam uvjeren da će Komisija u ovom slučaju donijeti za Hrvatsku pozitivnu odluku i tako potvrditi ravnopravnost svih pred pravilima zajedničkog tržišta.

  Helena Dalli, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, I thank you for this discussion, and the Commission services will abide by the current EU rules and the analysis of the Croatian application concerning the traditional term ‘Prosek’.

The Commission will base its final decision to protect or reject the term ‘Prosek’, taking into consideration all available information, the EU legislation and the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice, as well as the interests of all concerned parties. I insist on the fact that geographical indications benefit from a high level of protection at EU and international level. Further enhancing this level of protection is one of the key objectives of the upcoming revision of the system of geographical indications.

The Commission proposal is expected to be adopted in a few weeks, at the beginning of April, and I am sure that this will allow us some time to continue exchanging on this important topic, key to the competitiveness of our agricultural sector and to the capacity of the common agricultural policy to address societal demands on food and health.

  President. – The debate is closed.

16.2. Skokovita rast cen primarnih proizvodov in surovin v kmetijskem sektorju (G-001004/2021 - B9-0005/2022)

  President. – The next item is the major interpellation for written answer with debate by Martin Hlaváček, to the Commission on the surge in commodity and input prices in the agricultural sector (G-001004/2021) (B9-0005/2022)

  Vlad Gheorghe, în numele grupului Renew. – Doamnă președintă, am onoarea să vorbesc în numele colegului meu din Grupul Renew Europe, Martin Hlaváček, autorul acestei inițiative cu o cauză evidentă.

Fermierii europeni se confruntă cu o furtună perfectă. Tensiunile geopolitice, creșterea prețurilor la energie și criza economică post-pandemie au creat-o și o amplifică. Toate costurile producătorilor, îngrășămintele, semințele, furajele, transportul și distribuția au explodat, iar inflația este noua regulă.

În aceste condiții, fermierii au nevoie de ajutorul nostru urgent. Trebuie să rămână pe piață și să producă în continuare alimente sănătoase la prețuri competitive. Colegul meu, Martin Hlaváček, a lucrat la noua politică agricolă comună și cunoaște îndeaproape toate aceste aspecte.

De aceea, este firesc să întrebăm Comisia dacă are un plan să trateze în continuare fiecare criză punctual. Stingem foc după foc când arde sau schimbăm abordarea spre o strategie cuprinzătoare care să prevină crizele alimentare?

Prevenția și predictibilitatea permit actorilor din piață, din întreg lanțul, de la fermieri și până pe raftul magazinelor, să își planifice activitatea. Cu o pregătire corespunzătoare, scade impactul negativ asupra consumatorilor, agriculturii și sectorului alimentar. Împiedicăm astfel ca povara crizelor să fie suportată de cetățeni, care plătesc mai mult acum pentru hrană.

Pentru cetățenii europeni este cu siguranță important să afle dacă există o strategie clară de integrare a obiectivelor noastre de mediu, a celor agricole și energetice și pregătirea capacității Uniunii de a face față și de a răspunde la crizele alimentare viitoare. Sunt probleme grave, de la secetă și până la epidemii, care afectează anumite sectoare agricole. Fermierii care cresc porci, producătorii de carne de porc din statele membre sunt cei mai vulnerabili acum în fața creșterii prețurilor. Care sunt măsurile concrete pe care le pregătește Comisia pentru aceștia?

Din punctul meu de vedere, și în sectorul agricol, la fel ca în alte domenii, reacționăm mult prea lent, greoi chiar, birocratic și după ce crizele se întâmplă deja. Acesta este principalul reproș al cetățenilor europeni. Cu siguranță, primiți mesaje similare și dumneavoastră!

Eu merg mult pe teren atât în România, cât și în celelalte state membre și oamenii nu înțeleg de ce durează ani de zile să avem o directivă, un program sau noua politică agricolă comună. Pentru cetățeni, problemele sunt clare, le știu, le simt zi de zi. Nu au nevoie de studii, de consultări, de triloguri și negocieri.

Nu putem sări peste aceste etape firești în procesul legislativ european, bineînțeles, dar rugămintea mea pentru Comisie și colegi este să găsim soluția pentru intervenții rapide. Cetățenii trebuie să simtă că îi ajutăm acum, nu peste trei ani de când a apărut problema. Ca să crească încrederea în construcția europeană, trebuie să fie vizibile avantajele ei acum, nu doar în anii electorali.

Abia în 2023 intră în vigoare noua politică agricolă comună. Până atunci, mulți fermieri vor fi închis deja activitatea. Copiii lor părăsesc mediul rural, fermele mici și mijlocii sunt înghițite de marile companii. Toate acestea generează efecte în lanț pe care le vom gestiona prin noi și noi măsuri. Suferă toți cetățenii pentru mâncarea sănătoasă produsă local, care este din ce în ce mai greu de găsit și mult mai scumpă.

Închei cu rugămintea să nu îi ignorăm pe europenii care muncesc 10 până la 14 ore pe zi în sectorul agricol, fie ei lucrători sezonieri, fermieri mici și mijlocii sau doar angajați în agricultura de subzistență! Lecția cea mai importantă a ultimilor doi ani este redefinirea a ceea ce este esențial. Să nu uităm că acești cetățeni cu drept de vot au și foarte multe probleme, venituri mici, frustrări acumulate! Pe bună dreptate ei se îndreaptă acum către vocile care le spun răspicat ceea ce vor să audă.

Cu creșterea extremismului în Europa, cu posibile conflicte la graniță și criza post-pandemie, nu putem să continuăm să lucrăm ca până acum. Dacă nu înțelegem să fim aproape de oameni, cu măsuri concrete și comunicare adaptată, ne asumăm că vom auzi cuvântul „exit” tot mai des.

  Helena Dalli, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, the Commission is very well aware that the energy price crisis has important knock—on effects on the food sector.

Food and agriculture are exposed to energy costs, both directly and indirectly, from fertilisers to transport and freight. These knock—on effects concern both the farmers, who see their input prices increase, and consumers, who have to cope with higher food prices. Therefore, I welcome the opportunity to exchange views in this House on the challenges for our food system in the midst of this commodity price surge.

Energy and fertiliser prices have increased 3.5 times more than agricultural prices at global level. The Commission is analysing and following these inflationary pressure developments carefully, including farmers’ ability to recover higher input costs within the value chain in order to ensure that we maintain a resilient agri—food production system, which both protects farmers’ incomes and ensures affordable food prices. The prevention of, and the response to, market crises and negative impacts of the current import price surge on consumers, agriculture and the food sector require both short—term and long—term solutions.

In view of the central role of energy prices, most of these are clearly beyond the scope of the common agricultural policy. Firstly, to address the difficulties of the food sector, any short—term measures aiming at reducing energy prices and the factors that drive energy prices higher will immediately help the food sector by reducing input prices, relieving the squeeze in farm margins, and contribute to affordable food prices. As you know, many such measures are the responsibility of Member States in the form of taxation, both in energy and other input costs, for example relating to fertiliser, as well as in farm income or in state aid.

The Commission will also carefully assess its state-aid tools in this respect, taking into account the requests of Member States. Any longer-term measures that can contribute to reducing the energy dependence of the EU will obviously help. For example, the transition to green ammonia and the hydrogen—based fertiliser industry or the development of the circular bio-economy, more generally speaking. Such measures are identified in the Commission communication of October 2021 on tackling rising energy prices, which included a toolbox for action and support and which you debated on 20 October last year.

But also the new common agricultural policy has the potential to mitigate energy costs in the medium term through its future strategic plans, such as by supporting precision farming, which has the potential to reduce the use of fertiliser without compromising optimal crop growth, encouraging circular agriculture, and the use of organic manure, supporting better use of risk management measures.

Notwithstanding the outcome of the policy debate on short—term measures, the current crisis provides an opportunity for more lasting long—term solutions to these challenges in line with the Green Deal. An agricultural sector that is less dependent on external sources of energy does not necessarily imply lower production. It requires innovation through knowledge, technology and adoption of best practices. That can mitigate the significant pressure on production costs without hurting production capacity. This leads to progress rather than regression in productivity to achieve the green transition.

Finally, as to the current demanding situation in the pigmeat sector, this is the result of an imbalance between demand and supply aggravated by high input costs. After strong price declines in 2021, the pig market now shows signs of stabilisation. The Commission has repeatedly highlighted to Member States and to your Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development the options for specific market measures within the framework of the Common Market Organisation Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 and the other available measures under the rural development funds, the Temporary Framework for State Aid and de minimis rules.

In view of the specific situation in the pig sector in relation to African swine fever (ASF), in particular, CMO Article 220 allows compensation measures for market losses related to movement restrictions imposed by veterinary measures taken to fight against animal disease. It requires a specific request by the Member State concerned, which needs to co-finance it at 50%.

With regard to private storage aid, the Commission is of the opinion that this could postpone market adjustment or even make the problem worse because the relevant stocks would eventually have to find a market at a later stage. Import bans by China and other third countries make exports impossible for Member States affected by ASF. China’s reduced demand is also to be taken into account.

  Carmen Avram, în numele grupului S&D. – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, enorma criză energetică prin care trecem ne-a surprins fix în momentul în care ne luam avânt spre Green Deal. În paralel, fermierii noștri au avut de înfruntat și atacurile Rusiei asupra prețului la cereale și extinderea ei spre alte piețe și instabilitatea politică declanșată tot de ea. După doar câteva luni, bilanțul este deja dramatic pentru consumatorul european și pentru producătorii Uniunii.

Iată exemplul fermierilor din țara mea: la prețul input-urilor care a crescut de cinci ori față de 2021, se adaugă scumpiri de până la 60 % la prețul gazelor naturale și în jur de 20 % la electricitate și motorină. În ianuarie 2022, într-o singură lună, prețurile la energie electrică și gaz au crescut de 6-7 ori. Efectul se simte acut în prețul hranei, care este cu până la 25 % mai mare la alimente de bază. Așa stând lucrurile, în ferme s-a instalat teama zilei de mâine și, fără soluții, unii producători contemplă falimentul sau perspectiva înstrăinării muncii lor către speculanți, ceea ce va însemna mai ales distrugerea fermelor mici și mijlocii, exact cele plasate de PAC în centrul revoluției verzi.

În zootehnie, este și mai grav: la noile facturi, se adaugă prețul mărit al furajelor, care reprezintă aproape 70 % din costul de producție. Standardele de bunăstare a animalelor, deci, se mențin din ce în ce mai greu. Dar cel mai afectat este sectorul cărnii de porc, unde situația este catastrofală. Aici au lovit suplimentar pesta porcină africană și reducerea exporturilor către China. În acest domeniu, trăim un paradox: deși avem surplus de carne de porc pe piață, consumatorul european plătește, culmea, mai mult pe kilogram. Per total, marjele de profit ale industriei în Europa au fost la cel mai scăzut nivel din ultimul deceniu.

Și totuși Comisia Europeană continuă să lase în derivă sectorul, spunând - mulți se întreabă de ce cu atâta ușurință - că așteaptă ca piața să se regleze singură. Aceeași inacțiune a Comisiei și în restul sectoarelor din agricultură, unde s-ar putea repara câte ceva prin, de exemplu, eliminarea tarifelor de protecție și a taxelor antidumping pentru unele importuri de îngrășăminte. Fără intervenție, însă, agricultura europeană continuă să se învârtă într-o spirală a scumpirilor care ar putea-o îngenunchea în doar câțiva ani.

Doamnă comisară, este bine că la nivelul Comisiei se cunoaște situația. Totuși, cum se împacă această lipsă de sprijin pentru fermierul european cu pretențiile pe care Comisia le are de la el: de a transforma revoluția verde în realitate și la termen; de a lupta cu fenomenul de abandon al terenurilor și de a reconstrui zona rurală; de a atrage tinerii în agricultură și de a face din politica agricolă comună un brand de top?

  Bronis Ropė, Verts/ALE frakcijos vardu. – Gerbiama Pirmininke, gerbiama komisare, kolegos, tai iš tikrųjų ypatingos svarbos klausimas, nes, kaip žinome, maisto reikia kasdien ir ne po vieną kartą. Ir visi žinome, kad situacija šioje srityje buvo sudėtinga ir kad ji dabar dar prastėja. Tai vien tai, kad naujam laikotarpiui buvo skirta beveik 10 proc. mažesnis finansavimas negu praeitam laikotarpiui, taip pat apie 10 mlrd. skirta mokslo tyrimams, kurių rezultatų kol kas jokių dar nesimato, būtent žemės ūkyje. Tai iš tikrųjų kelia nerimą. Ir man, iš vienos pusės, labai malonu girdėti, kad Komisija žino situaciją, turi duomenis, bet, iš kitos pusės, vien turėti duomenis ir žinoti situaciją – mažai: pasakyti, kad jūs po dvejų, po penkerių metų galėsite tą ir tą padaryti, panaudoti kitokias trąšas ar kitokias technologijas. Žemdirbys negamina trąšų, žemdirbys negamina technikos. Žemdirbys naudojasi tuo, ką duoda pramonė. Žemdirbys naudojasi tomis technologijomis, kurios yra patvirtintos. Ir iš tikrųjų, jeigu nebus greitai priimtų sprendimų (jau nekalbu apie tai, kad atskirose šalyse žemdirbystė pakankamai prastėja ir traukiasi), tai mes sulauksime vis augančių kainų, nes žemdirbys arba gamins, arba jis atiduos į rinką didesnėmis kainomis – jis kitos išeities neturi. Šis klausimas yra labai svarbus ir sprendimų reikia šiandien. Ne tai, kad sulauksime naujos BŽP, naujų strateginių planų, bet jie nieko iš esmės nespręs, jeigu lieka tokios aukštos energetikos, trąšų ir kitų dalykų kainos.

Dar kitas dalykas. Jeigu vienoje šalyje galbūt mažesnis poveikis, tai kitoje šalyje gali būti labai didelis poveikis, nes paramos skirtumas tarp šalių šiandien siekia beveik iki trijų kartų. Tai reikia suprasti tokį dalyką, kad atskirose šalyse, pvz., mano šalyje, Rytų šalyse, išmokos siekia tik apie 70 proc. Europos Sąjungos vidurkio. Jeigu toms šalims, kuriose išmokos du kartus didesnės, sudėtinga, o energetikos kainos visur yra labai panašios, tai toms šalims, kuriose mažos išmokos, problemų dar daugiau.

Lygiai taip pat noriu pasakyti, kad mes turime atkreipti dėmesį į tai, kad kiekviena šalis pasigamintų tų būtiniausių maisto produktų, kurių reikia, kad mes jų nevežiotume iš vienos Europos Sąjungos šalies į kitą, kad pirmaeilis apsirūpinimas būtų toje šalyje.

Linkiu sėkmės ir laukiam sprendimų.

  Joachim Kuhs, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Nun, heute zum sechsten Mal, liebe Frau Kommissarin, verehrte Kollegen! Als Sohn eines Landwirts weiß ich sehr wohl, wie schwierig es ist, wenn nicht nur die Dürren, von denen wir es heute Morgen am Beginn hatten, sondern dann auch die Preissteigerungen das Leben eines Landwirts fast unmöglich machen.

Und dennoch: Wenn jetzt Antworten gesucht werden in die Richtung, Eingriffe in den Markt zu machen, dann kann ich nur davor warnen. Das würde das Problem nicht beseitigen, es würde es vergrößern. Was können wir tun?

Ich möchte an zwei Dinge erinnern: Wir haben eine EZB, die für die Inflationsbekämpfung zuständig ist. Was tut sie dagegen? Frau Lagarde beschwichtigt und sagt: Das ist nur eine Delle. Aber die Landwirte sagen: Das ist keine Delle, das ist ein Berg, das ist ein Himalaya. Und wir brauchen dringend Lösungen. Bitte, Frau Lagarde, bekämpfen Sie die Inflation.

Und das Zweite ist: Ich habe gestern einen Brief von meinem Gaslieferanten bekommen. Der Preis des Gases, das ich bekomme, wird um 70 % gesteigert. Was tun wir gegen die Gaspreise? Und da bitte ich, Folgendes zu berücksichtigen: Bitte öffnen Sie Nord Stream 2, damit endlich mehr Gas nach Europa fließen kann und der Preis sinken kann.

  Clare Daly, on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, and I think the question does correctly pinpoint one of the key reasons for the rise in commodity and import prices in the agricultural sector as being energy prices, in particular natural gas reaching a new high. And I think that is a correct point to make. But the solution, of course, is very clear. It’s Nord Stream 2.

Yes, we’ve had MEP after MEP getting up here yesterday condemning the project. We’ve had the German and French Governments singled out for particular attack for having the good sense to engage in dialogue with our Russian neighbour.

Look, I’m against fossil fuels, but until we can transition to renewables, well then Nord Stream 2 is a far better option than filthy, fracked US gas. It has the potential to provide a reliable, relatively clean and inexpensive solution to EU’s energy problems, including those of our farmers, with the added benefit of improving EU-Russian relations, more trade, reduced barriers and more cooperation.

But of course, that then means an end to US bases and an end to NATO, and that’s the reason for the so-called Ukraine crisis. And I would remind colleagues of the words of Victoria Nuland last month, when she said the only way left for US diplomats to block euro purchases is to goad Russia into a military response and then claim that avenging this response outweighed any purely national economic interest.

I think we have to snap out of it. Stop being used as a US pawn. Stand up for our own interests, beneficial cooperation for our farmers and our people, and a peaceful resolution with Russia.

  Luke Ming Flanagan (The Left). – Madam President, just reading the text on this, and it says every day the EU’s food supply chain provides 450 million people in the EU with high quality food. But as with everything, the devil is in the detail. In Europe, we import more calories than we export to the world. And still we claim we are feeding the world.

This policy leaves us unnecessarily exposed at times of crisis and bobbing around in an ocean of uncertainty when it comes to input prices. Ireland, which also claims to be feeding the world, can’t even feed itself. We import our main food stuffs: carrots, potatoes, wheat, sugar – I could go on.

The value of Ireland’s food energy net importing calories has at times exceeded the equivalent of the calorie intake of two and a half million people. We can’t even feed the type of livestock that we produce, so we import proteins. There’s talk, and that’s all it is, that we should produce our proteins in Europe. Only last week I noticed another tillage farm in Ireland converting to dairy, a dairy farm that will require imported protein. What could go wrong?

We’ve also created a system whereby those that produce the food get nothing whereas those companies that process it and sell it take all the profit. Even at that, their greed isn’t satiated. Even then, they move these companies to places like Luxembourg in order to avoid paying tax. The money never gets back to the community it was created in and as a result we have a broken system. Thanks for nothing Glanbia!

The system is broken. Not for the rich though, and that’s why it will never be bloody well fixed.

  Helena Dalli, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, I really appreciate this opportunity to exchange views in this House on the challenges for our food system in the midst of this commodity price surge.

The prevention of and response to market crises and negative impacts of the current input price on consumers, agriculture and the food sector requires both short-term and long-term solutions. The Commission and the Member States have several measures in our respective toolboxes, and the Commission will closely monitor the evolvement of energy, commodity and food prices in the coming months.

  President. – The debate is closed.

Written statements (Rule 171)

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR), в писмена форма. – Смятам, че за пореден път обсъждаме важен въпрос твърде късно. В България на това му казваме „след дъжд, качулка“. Сега тепърва Комисията ще проверява, ще обмисля и любимото на някои политици - „ще анализира“ какво и как да се направи. Тук е мястото да се каже, че правителствата на националните държави успяха да реагират много по-бързо и адекватно на предизвикателствата. Повишаващите се цени на суровините и електроенергията, както и галопиращата инфлация притискат селскостопанските производители и това се отразява на крайния потребител.

Достигнахме до там, че в България в момента е лукс да си направиш салата от домати и краставици, тъй като цената им се конкурира с цената на месото, например. Всичко това обаче е вследствие на безумните „зелени“ политики, неописуемия лобизъм и грешните решения, вземани години наред. Само преди месец-два, отново в тази зала, коментирахме въпроса за транспорта на животните и вие се надпреварвахте да говорите за нуждата от нови и нови регламенти, директиви и прочее, които ще допринесат за повишаване на цените на крайния продукт на селскостопанските производители. Вече половин година цените на енергията летят, бизнеси затварят, чакайки по-добри времена, а отговор от страна на Комисията липсва. Не вярвам, че тази Европейска комисия може да представи разумно политическо решение на поставените въпроси.

(The sitting was suspended at 15.52)

17. Nadaljevanje seje

(The sitting resumed at 16.00)

18. Razglasitev izidov glasovanja: gl. zapisnik

  President. – I will now move to the results of the second voting session of today, 17 February 2022.

(The President read out the results of the votes)1

_____________

1 See Minutes for details

19. Obrazložitve glasovanja: gl. zapisnik

20. Popravki in namere glasovanj: glej zapisnik

21. Peticije: glej zapisnik

22. Sklep o pripravi samoiniciativnega poročila: gl. zapisnik

23. Spremembe napotitev na odbore (člen 56 Poslovnika): gl. zapisnik

24. Pridruženi odbori (člen 57 Poslovnika): gl. zapisnik

25. Sklep o uporabi postopka s skupnimi sejami odborov (člen 58 Poslovnika): gl. zapisnik

26. Postopek odobritve (člen 105 Poslovnika): gl. zapisnik

27. Predložitev dokumentov: glej zapisnik

28. Sprejetje zapisnikov s tega delnega zasedanja in posredovanje sprejetih besedil

  President. – The minutes of the sittings of 14 to 17 February will be submitted to Parliament for its approval at the beginning of its next sitting.

If there are no objections, I shall forward forthwith the resolutions adopted at these sittings to the persons and bodies named in the resolutions.

29. Časovni razpored prihodnjih sej: glej zapisnik

30. Zaključek seje

(The sitting closed at 16.03)

31. Prekinitev zasedanja

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