Posėdžio stenograma

Trečiadienis, 2022 m. liepos 6 d. - Strasbūras

1. Posėdžio pradžia

PRESIDENZA: ROBERTA METSOLA
President

(The sitting opened at 9.03)

2. Diskusijos dėl žmogaus teisių, demokratijos ir teisinės valstybės principų pažeidimų (paskelbiami pateikti pasiūlymai dėl rezoliucijų) (žr. protokolą)

3. Valstybių narių veto siekiant sutrukdyti įgyvendinti visuotinį susitarimą dėl pelno mokesčio (pateikti pasiūlymai dėl rezoliucijų)(žr. protokolą)

4. Tarybai pirmininkausiančios Čekijos veiklos programos pristatymas (diskusijos)

  President. – Good morning dear Prime Minister Fiala, dear colleagues. On 1 July we welcomed the Czech Republic at the helm of the Council of the European Union, and today it is a pleasure to have with us Prime Minister Fiala to present the programme of activities of the Czech Presidency.

Prime Minister, dear Petr, welcome to the European Parliament. Prime Minister, you, along with the Prime Ministers of Poland and Slovenia, were the first European leaders to visit Kiev when it was besieged, in a message of solidarity. We know that European unity with Ukraine and its people will be central to the Czech Presidency’s agenda. And this is why, with an illegal war on our continent, your Presidency comes at a turning point in history. So our next steps will be decisive for our common future.

This is not the time to backtrack on our ambitions. We need to address the economic and social consequences of the pandemic. This is why we must accelerate our digital and green transitions. And here, the Czech Presidency can count on the commitment of this House to make progress on the Fit for 55 package as well as the European Chips Act and the Artificial Intelligence Act.

Dear Prime Minister, dear Petr, just a few weeks ago, you welcomed us, together with all the leaders of the parliamentary groups, in Prague. And it is in this constructive spirit that the European Parliament will continue to work with your Presidency on the many important initiatives on the table.

On behalf of this House, I therefore wish you every success in the coming months. So, dear Prime Minister, I will now give you the floor.

  Petr Fiala, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, dear Roberta, dear Members of the European Parliament, Madam President of the Commission, dear Ursula, ladies and gentlemen, it is a great pleasure to be here today to present the Czech Republic’s plans for our Presidency of the Council of the EU.

This is the second Presidency for my country, but the first under the Lisbon Treaty. We are building on the excellent French Presidency. It has managed to complete a number of proposals successfully. It was not easy to find a compromise on such a difficult debate, like the Fit for 55 package in the area of climate, or on new rules for the digital economy.

But the most important thing that was achieved during the French Presidency was a united action in response to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. Our response was quick, it was tough and, most importantly, it was united.

Six packages of sanctions were not approved easily. A number of Member States had to give up their positions, some of their economic interests and some of their comfort. But, because we were convinced that it was right to stand up to Russia and to help our friend and ally – I mean Ukraine – we did it.

Together we also granted candidate status to Ukraine and Moldova. It gave them hope and faith in the future and in joining free, democratic Europe. Our Presidency wants to build on this work. And now, according to the European Parliament tradition, allow me to present the main priorities of our Presidency in my mother language, in Czech.

Paní předsedající, dámy a pánové, témata a priority, kterým se chceme věnovat, vznikaly po dobu mnoha měsíců, ale 24. únor 2022 otočil většinu plánů, které jsme měli, doslova vzhůru nohama. Naše priority tuto novou situaci odrážejí. Nacházíme se v době, kdy těsně za hranicemi Evropské unie probíhá válka. Klasický konvenční konflikt, o kterém si řada z nás myslela, že už je v Evropě minulostí. Ale kromě konvenční války vede Rusko i hybridní válku. Úmyslně vyvolává uprchlickou krizi, využívá energetické suroviny jako zbraň a cílenými útoky na infrastrukturu vyvolává potravinovou krizi.

Z našeho pohledu je dobře, že nás členství v Evropské unii a Severoatlantické alianci chrání před těmi nejtragičtějšími důsledky, kterým musí čelit ukrajinský národ. Když jsem 15. března společně s polským a slovinským premiérem navštívil prezidenta Zelenského v Kyjevě, viděl jsem na vlastní oči hrdinství Ukrajinců, kteří bojovali a stále bojují za právo na existenci a také za právo patřit k západním demokratickým zemím. To pro mě bylo připomínkou, že naše hodnoty nejsou samozřejmé a že je potřeba je denně hájit.

Hodnoty, za které dnes Ukrajina umírá, jsou hodnotami, které hájil i jeden ze zakladatelů moderního českého státu, prezident Václav Havel. A právě jeho inspirativní esej z roku 1996 nás přivedl k mottu našeho předsednictví, které zní „Evropa jako úkol“. A skutečně: Evropa má před sebou mnoho úkolů. A podobně má před sebou mnoho úkolů české předsednictví v Radě.

Tím hlavním úkolem v následujícím období bude nalézt jednotnou a silnou shodu na takových opatřeních, která negativní dopady současných krizí na naše občany co nejvíce zmírní. Protože inflace, nedostupnost energií nebo potravinová krize jsou hrozby, kterým musíme čelit a musíme jim čelit nejlépe společně. Já věřím, že v tomto bude jak Rada, tak Evropský parlament ve shodě.

Evropa jako úkol je pro nás závazkem. Není předem danou věcí, ale je něčím, na čem je potřeba neustále pracovat, co je potřeba zdokonalovat. A také musíme upravovat to, co nefunguje tak, jak jsme ze začátku plánovali. Evropa by měla vést příkladem – měla by dbát svého svědomí a postavit se čelem k výzvám. Ta řešení musí být ale vyvážená, aby přílišný důraz na jedno z nich nepoškodil nebo nezanedbal jinou oblast, například sociální smír nebo naše ekonomiky. Česká republika se bude vždy pečlivě snažit brát v úvahu všechny názory, které v našich diskusích zazní. Musíme předcházet rozdělování nás samotných. Musíme se vždy snažit najít co nejširší shodu. Musíme také více respektovat názory a pozice ostatních, i když s nimi třeba nesouhlasíme.

Havlova slova o Evropě jako úkolu vznikala v jiné době, v jiné Evropě, než jakou máme nyní, ale jejich základní sdělení je stále stejně silné. Za úkol si bereme heslo „rethink, rebuild, repower“, které odráží výzvy a problémy současné Evropy a naši reakci na ně. České předsednictví bude chtít budovat bezpečnou a prosperující EU. Takovou, která je věrná hodnotám svobody a demokracie. Takovou, která umožňuje všem občanům volně cestovat, pracovat či podnikat na vnitřním trhu. Takovou, která chápe, že máme odpovědnost životnímu prostředí, které musíme předat dalším generacím v dobrém stavu. Takovou, kde stavíme na tom, co nás spojuje a respektujeme to, co nás odlišuje. Takovou Evropskou unii chceme! A tomuto cíli odpovídá i pět pilířů českého předsednictví, které bych vám chtěl postupně představit.

První prioritou je zvládnutí uprchlické krize a poválečná obnova Ukrajiny. Ruská agrese přímo či nepřímo ovlivňuje všechny státy Evropy. Mezi její přímé důsledky patří i nejmasivnější uprchlická vlna od 2. světové války. Česká republika je jednou ze zemí s největším počtem ukrajinských uprchlíků na počet obyvatel. Ti tvoří přes 3,5 % naší populace. S ruskou imperiální politikou máme také svou trpkou zkušenost. Víme, co dokáže agresivní politika Ruska.

Česká republika je proto přesvědčena, že politická a vojenská podpora Ukrajiny ze strany Evropské unie je bytostným zájmem celé Unie se zásadním dopadem na další budoucnost našeho kontinentu. České předsednictví bude proto důsledně hájit a podporovat suverenitu a teritoriální integritu Ukrajiny za využití všech nástrojů, kterými Evropská unie disponuje. Důraz budeme klást na silný a jednotný postoj vůči Rusku, jakož i na maximální asistenci členským státům při poskytování vojenské podpory Ukrajině nebo při vyrovnávání se s následky migrační vlny.

Neméně důležité je hledět i do budoucna. Na poslední Evropské radě se nám podařilo schválit kandidátský status Ukrajiny a Moldavska. Jsem rád, že nás v tomto ohledu velmi významně podpořil i Evropský parlament a využívám této příležitosti, abych vám za to poděkoval. Zde ale ta cesta nesmí skončit.

Dalším důležitým úkolem českého předsednictví bude i příprava poválečné obnovy Ukrajiny. Musíme se zaměřit zejména na obnovu infrastruktury, zajištění základních služeb a hospodářskou obnovu a stabilitu a v tom musí hrát Evropská unie zásadní roli. To jsme koneckonců s paní předsedkyní von der Leyenovou společně demonstrovali v pondělí na konferenci o obnově a rekonstrukci Ukrajiny ve švýcarském Luganu. Cesta Ukrajiny do Evropské unie bude ještě dlouhá, ale společně se musíme snažit, aby byla úspěšná a aby Evropskou unii posílila.

Druhou prioritou je energetická bezpečnost. Současná krize plně odhalila, nakolik je pro budoucnost EU existenčně důležité zajistit si nezávislost na zemích, které ohrožují naši bezpečnost. Řeč je teď samozřejmě především o ruském plynu, ropě a uhlí. Cestou, kterou se chce české předsednictví vydat, je především práce na společných evropských projektech, které nás zbaví závislost na Rusku.

České předsednictví se zaměří na otázky energetické bezpečnosti, na urychlenou implementaci REPowerEU, jehož významnou součástí je také diverzifikace zdrojů. Jsme připraveni pracovat na koordinaci zásob plynu před nadcházející zimou. Podporujeme dobrovolné společné nákupy podle modelu, který se osvědčil už během koronavirové krize. Při tom všem musíme mít na paměti, že se brzy můžeme ocitnout v situaci, kdy bude více než kdy jindy potřebná solidarita mezi členskými státy. Nesmíme zapomínat ani na budování energetické odolnosti Evropské unie skrze rozvoj energetické infrastruktury. Musíme zároveň podporovat všechny domácí bezemisní zdroje energie, protože mají důležitou roli při zajištění energetické bezpečnosti Evropské unie, ale také při plnění klimatických cílů.

Dlouhodobý cíl dekarbonizace evropské energetiky jde totiž z velké části ruku v ruce s krátkodobým cílem derusifikace dodávek energií, a tak se na ty věci musíme dívat. Abychom se stali energeticky nezávislými na Rusku, musíme využít všechny možnosti, které nám naše geografické podmínky umožňují. A vzhledem k velikosti Unie a počtu členských států nemůžeme tady v tomto případě aplikovat jednotný vzor. Každý členský stát musí mít možnost zvolit si takový energetický mix, jaký jeho podmínkám nejvíc vyhovuje a pomocí kterého je schopen splnit jak klimatické cíle, tak zbavení se závislosti na ruských dodávkách energií. Pokud opravdu chceme klimatické cíle splnit, musíme je také být schopni v jednotlivých zemích financovat. Zmiňuji to i proto, že dnes, dámy a pánové, budete hlasovat o námitce proti tzv. taxonomii, kterou Evropská komise představila.

Chtěl bych zdůraznit, že to je velmi křehký návrh, návrh vyvážený, návrh, který vychází vstříc celé řadě zemí, které budou moci splnit své závazky vyplývající z plnění klimatických cílů pouze díky takto nastaveným kritériím. Chtěl bych vás proto při této příležitosti také požádat, abyste tento složitě dojednaný a křehký kompromis neodmítli. Jaderná energie a plyn jako dočasný zdroj z bezpečných zemí jsou pro řadu členských států jediným nástrojem, jak v následujících letech našich společných klimatických cílů dosáhnout.

Válka na evropském kontinentu ukázala také nutnost posílení evropských obranných kapacit a bezpečnosti kybernetického prostoru, což je naše třetí priorita. S ohledem na současnou geopolitickou situaci je klíčové posílení evropské bezpečnosti a obranyschopnosti. NATO je v této otázce pro Evropskou unii přirozeným partnerem a implementace klíčových témat v rámci Strategického kompasu představuje ten vhodný nástroj. Budeme pracovat na posílení evropské spolupráce při budování obranných kapacit členských států. Urgentní je také doplnění vojenských zásob v souvislosti s pomocí, kterou jednotlivé členské státy poskytují Ukrajině. Za nutné považujeme také rozvoj evropského obranného průmyslu, včetně investic do snížení technologické závislosti na nedůvěryhodných zemích. V dlouhodobém horizontu pak budeme pracovat na usnadnění společných nákupů vojenského materiálu.

S novou érou digitalizace se objevují i nové typy hrozeb, které jsou stále častěji využívány našimi protivníky a nepřáteli. Budeme se proto také věnovat kybernetickým hrozbám a posilování odolnosti Evropy vůči hybridním hrozbám zvenčí. Týká se to boje proti dezinformacím nebo bezpečnosti kyberprostoru a klíčové unijní infrastruktury, včetně institucí. To vše musíme dělat ve spolupráci s našimi partnery a spojenci.

Naší čtvrtou prioritou je strategická odolnost evropské ekonomiky. Už pandemie COVID-19 odhalila některé slabiny evropské ekonomiky a přílišnou jednostrannou závislost na některých zemích. Evropa musí být průmyslový a technologický lídr. Klíčem k tomu je dobře fungující vnitřní trh bez zbytečných administrativních překážek, který posílí konkurenceschopnost evropských firem.

Musíme proto lépe rozumět dodavatelským řetězcům, které jsou pilířem našeho hospodářství, a ideálně je co nejvíce zkracovat. Jenom tak dokážeme zajistit, že dostupnost strategických surovin a dílů bude pro nás vždy jistotou. Klíčovou roli v tomto hraje prohlubování volného obchodu s ostatními partnery, kteří sdílejí naše hodnoty. Čím více kvalitních smluv o volném obchodu budeme mít, tím více můžeme diverzifikovat naše obchodní vazby a dodavatelské řetězce. Důležitá bude také digitalizace a automatizace evropského průmyslu, který opět musí být lídrem v inovacích, vývoji a hlavně využívání nových technologií.

Do oblasti strategické odolnosti evropské ekonomiky patří také potravinová bezpečnost. Díky společné zemědělské politice se Evropská unie stala potravinově soběstačnou, ale válka na Ukrajině má dopady i na tuto oblast a Evropská unie na to musí reagovat. Nesmíme přitom zapomínat ani na nutnost zajištění dostatku potravin i v jiných částech světa, zejména v těch nejohroženějších. Nejenom proto, že destabilizace by představovala pro Evropu významnou bezpečnostní hrozbu.

Ronald Reagan kdysi prohlásil, že svoboda není nikdy dál než jednu generaci od svého zániku. A já dodávám, že totéž můžeme říct o demokracii. Proto je klíčová odolnost demokratických institucí vůči vnitřním i vnějším hrozbám. A to je naše pátá a poslední priorita.

Dlouhodobá prosperita a stabilita Evropy je založena na funkčních demokratických mechanismech. Naše společnosti jsou neustále cílem útoků od těch, kterým vadí naše hodnoty, kterým vadí svoboda a demokracie, kterým vadí lidská práva, kterým vadí právní stát. A my naopak takovéto hodnoty musíme bránit. Budeme proto vždy důsledně podporovat dodržování a posilování svobod, základních lidských práv a evropských hodnot. Budeme posilovat občanskou společnost, svobodná média a nezávislé instituce na celém evropském kontinentu.

Dámy a pánové, není pochyb o tom, že nás čeká nelehké období, a to nejenom s ohledem na krizi způsobenou ruskou agresí na Ukrajině. Potýkáme se s vysokou inflací, se stále rostoucími cenami energií. V některých našich zemích hrozí zvýšení nezaměstnanosti, některé možná čeká i pokles HDP. Nesmíme proto zapomínat ani na ty občany, na které to bude mít základní sociální dopad. Nesmíme zapomínat na chudé a potřebné. Mohu vás ubezpečit, že i těmto otázkám se v rámci předsednictví chceme a budeme systematicky věnovat.

Dear Madam President, dear Members of Parliament, ladies and gentlemen, the six-month Presidency is indeed a short time. However, I can assure you that the Czech Presidency is ready to take its role actively.

We are ready to focus on an open dialogue, to seek compromises and functional solutions in cooperation with other EU institutions. I believe that we will be able to deliver on our promises. I hope that, with our help, Ukraine will soon be on the way to full recovery. I also hope that we will be successful in the fight against inflation, in ensuring energy security, employment and increasing the competitiveness of our economies. I trust that we will be even stronger than we are now.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am convinced that we can count on the help of the European Parliament, which is a pillar of European democracy. We highly value democratic debates on this floor, and I am looking forward to our debate. Thank you very much for your attention.

  Ursula von der Leyen, Präsidentin der Kommission. – Frau Parlamentspräsidentin Metsola, liebe Roberta, Herr Ministerpräsident Fiala, lieber Petr, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren Abgeordnete! Ich glaube, wir haben alle noch die Bilder vor Augen zu Beginn der russischen Invasion in der Ukraine, als sich ukrainische Bürgerinnen und Bürger unbewaffnet den russischen Soldaten in den Weg gestellt haben. Die Menschen haben mit den Soldaten gesprochen, sie haben sie zum Teil auch angeschrien. Sie haben die Absurdität dieses Krieges in aller Offenheit angeprangert.

Und diese Bilder erinnern uns an eine andere Invasion und eine andere Phase des Widerstands Europas gegen Unterdrückung: Das war Prag 1968. Die unvergesslichen Szenen friedlicher Demonstrantinnen und Demonstranten, Männer und Frauen, Jung und Alt, die sich in den Straßen von Prag damals den sowjetischen Panzern in den Weg gestellt haben.

Und deshalb kann ich mir kaum ein anderes, besseres Land vorstellen, das gerade jetzt den Ratsvorsitz in der Europäischen Union übernimmt, als Tschechien. Die Menschen in Tschechien haben die Qual der Unterdrückung erlebt. Vor allem aber haben die Menschen in Tschechien die Macht des Widerstandes, die Kraft der Hoffnung und vor allen Dingen die unbändige Freude, wenn das Land dann wieder frei und demokratisch ist, erlebt.

Und mehr denn je brauchen wir heute dieses Streben nach Freiheit, dieses Streben nach Unabhängigkeit und Selbstbestimmung in unserer Europäischen Union. Und deshalb, lieber Petr, freue ich mich auf die Ratspräsidentschaft von Tschechien im nächsten halben Jahr.

The tasks ahead of us are enormous. You, Petr, have summed them up with three words: rethink, repower, rebuild. And of course, the word rebuild calls to mind, first and foremost, the reconstruction of Ukraine.

I’ve just returned – where I met you also, Petr – from the Lugano Reconstruction Conference. And I think we witnessed a very impressive presentation of Ukraine’s reconstruction plan. Representatives from more than over 40 countries and organisations agreed on the Lugano Principles: Ukraine—owned, reform—focused, transparency, accountability and rule of law, democratic participation, gender equality and inclusion, and sustainability, and I think these are good principles. Now we have to fill them with life.

And for doing that, we need the best and the brightest on reconstruction. And this is why, together with the German G7 Presidency, we will convene such a high—level conference after summer, because we all know never, ever before have we mastered such a colossal reconstruction challenge, so we need all hands on deck. And while we work in these days to help Ukraine win this war, we must also make sure that Ukraine wins the peace that will for sure come.

You, honourable Members, were the first to call for the European perspective for Ukraine. And this led to the historic decision to grant Ukraine candidate status. I think we can all take pride in this because our Union lived up to the moment. We did exactly what Václav Havel reminded us of in his speech, which also provides the motto for your Presidency. He has said, it is not that the united part of Europe would come to harm if it expanded, just the opposite. In the long run, it would come to harm only if it failed to expand. And I think in these days, that really sounds like a prophecy.

Now, the second task you, the Czech Presidency, identified is repower. The unity and the resolve we show towards Russia will also be key to repower Europe. And this means primarily to push forward the very ambitious agenda of our European Green Deal, because climate change will not wait until Putin’s war is over. And the unprecedented heatwave that recently struck Europe is just the latest reminder of that.

Now, I’m very glad that both Parliament and the Council have taken their positions on Fit for 55. So now, it’s up to the Czech Presidency to bring forward the trilogues. And I’m also very grateful for your commitment, dear Petr, to bring forward the REPowerEU package. With REPowerEU, we are mobilising substantive new resources for renewable energy. It is a EUR 300 billion plan to win independence from Russian fossil fuels, actually from any fossil fuels. And to do so, we are first and foremost diversifying our gas supplies away from Russia towards trustworthy, reliable suppliers. And our efforts are already making a big difference. I have reported several times here in Parliament about that, so let me update you about what the latest efforts are.

Since March, global LNG exports other than Russia, to Europe have risen by 75% compared to 2021. And LNG exports from the United States to the European Union have nearly tripled. I think even more important is that at the same time the average monthly import of Russian pipeline gas to the European Union is now sharply declining by 33% compared to last year – last year June, this year June, minus 33%. So we are making progress and that’s exactly what we wanted to have. But we know that all of this will only work, the diversifying away from Russia and having energy security of supply, if we speed up the transition to renewable energies. This is the key remedy.

Now, I observe that some say that in the new security environment after Russia’s aggression, we have to slow down the green transition. And this transition would come at the cost of basic security, they say. Just the opposite is true. If we all do nothing but compete around fossil fuels, the limited fossil fuels that are out there, the prices will just go through the roof and we will fill Putin’s war chest. And that’s exactly what we do not want to have. And therefore the best, the cleanest and safest way out of the dependency on fossil fuels is renewables.

So, the new security environment is the best argument to speed up deployment of renewables. Renewables are home—grown, they give us independence from Russian fossil fuels, they are more cost efficient and they are cleaner than anything else. So, let’s take the opportunity and really invest in the renewable energy.

Honourable Members, we also need to prepare now for further disruption of gas supply and even a complete cut—off of Russian gas supply. Just to give you a figure, today, 12 Member States are already directly affected by partial or total cut—off of Russian gas. So it is obvious Putin continues to use energy as a weapon. And this is why the Commission is working on a European emergency plan. We will present this plan and the necessary instruments by mid—July. Member States have their national contingency plans, that’s good. But I think we need European cooperation and we need common action as 27.

We need to make sure that in case of full disruption, the gas flows towards where it’s needed most. We have to provide for European solidarity. And we need to protect the single market as well as industry supply chains.

And here, honourable Members, we should never forget the bitter, bitter lesson that we learned at the beginning of the pandemic. You remember it very well. At the beginning, we had egoism and protectionism, closed borders, export bans, you name it, that led only to disunity and fragmentation. But with European unity and coordination we then, after a while, had the key remedies to overcome this brutal pandemic. So let’s keep these principles in mind. As always, let’s hope for the best but prepare for the worst. I know this is hard work ahead of us, but like in the last months, unity will be key to our success.

Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, vous le savez aussi bien que moi: dans tous les États membres, l’état de l’économie inquiète de plus en plus. La crise de la COVID a creusé les déficits. Puis, au moment où l’économie commençait à se redresser, la Russie a lancé sa féroce attaque contre l’Ukraine. Cela a accéléré l’inflation dans tous les secteurs, de l’alimentation à l’énergie. Dans le même temps, les investissements restent essentiels pour réussir la transition vers une économie verte, numérique et résiliente.

C’est pourquoi nous devons repenser. Repenser – et là encore, cher Petr, votre devise tombe à point nommé. Nous devons repenser la manière de créer de la croissance dans un environnement politique et économique très différent.

Prenez les règles de notre gouvernance économique. Il nous faut des règles qui concilient nos besoins d’investissement plus élevés et la nécessité d’une politique budgétaire saine. De fait, la viabilité budgétaire et la croissance vont forcément ensemble. Nous présenterons les résultats de notre évaluation de la gouvernance économique sous la présidence tchèque.

Ou bien prenez notre marché unique ou nos relations commerciales avec les partenaires puissants du monde entier. Vous l’avez déjà dit, ce sont là deux atouts majeurs en temps de crise. Ce sont les principaux moteurs de notre croissance. Nous devrions repenser la manière de les renforcer encore.

Le nouvel accord de libre-échange que nous avons conclu la semaine dernière avec la Nouvelle-Zélande est un excellent exemple. Ce nouvel accord contribuera à augmenter de 30 % les échanges commerciaux entre l’Union européenne et la Nouvelle-Zélande. De plus, pour la première fois, il contient des engagements sans précédent en matière sociale et climatique. Cela montre que, quand elles sont fortes, les démocraties obtiennent des résultats pour le bien de leur population.

Honourable Members, in his Aachen speech Václav Havel spoke about Europe as a task. The task of Europe today, he said, is to rediscover its conscience and its responsibility. It’s beautiful. And this is exactly what we will continue to do with the support of our Czech friends.

Dear Petr, I’ve seen it with my own eyes and heard what you reported to me when I visited Czechia last week. And thank you again for this wonderful reception. The Czech people opened their hearts and their homes to refugees. They do miracles to thousands and thousands of Ukrainian refugees hosted in the Czech Republic. And this is in the Havel sense – Europe with a conscience and taking its responsibility. This is Europe at its best. Long live Europe.

(Applause)

  President. – Thank you very much, dear Commission President.

(The debate was suspended)

5. Derybos prieš pirmąjį svarstymą Parlamente (Darbo tvarkos taisyklių 71 straipsnis) (tolesni veiksmai)

  President. – Before we go to the round of political groups I have one quick announcement in relation to the decisions by the IMCO and ECON Committees to enter into interinstitutional negotiations pursuant to Rule 71(1), announced at the opening of the session of 4 July. I have received no request for a vote in Parliament by Members or political groups reaching at least the medium threshold. The committees may therefore start the negotiations.

6. Tarybai pirmininkausiančios Čekijos veiklos programos pristatymas (diskusijų tęsinys)

  President. – We now resume our debate on the programme of activities of the Czech Presidency.

  Manfred Weber, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, I wish to welcome Prime Minister Petr Fiala and to thank you, Mr Fiala, so much for the presentation of the ideas of the Czech Presidency. The Czech Presidency comes at the right moment. Thanks to you Europe is, first of all, back in the Czech Government. As soon as you took office you appointed a Minister for European Affairs, sitting there next to you, Mr Bek. For the first time after 12 years there is again a Minister for Europe in the Czech Government, and that’s why I am convinced that the Czech Presidency will be a pro-European one, a good one and a successful one. And I also want to underline that this is a new government after the government of Babiš. It is also a symbol of the rule of law and also a symbol of separation between business interests and public interests.

The Czech Presidency comes at the right moment. Ursula von der Leyen reminded us already about the Prague Spring. I want to add their resistance against Nazi Germany and the peaceful revolution in 1989. The Czech Republic is the symbol that brave and determined fighting for democracy and freedom will be rewarded in the end. The Czech Presidency is the best suited to lead Europe when it comes to supporting Ukraine in its fight for democracy, freedom and justice. European democracy and freedom are breathing Czech spirit.

The Czech Presidency comes at the right moment when it comes to the future of Europe now. We can only survive in confrontation with Putin if Europe is the lighthouse of free democracies in the world. That is why we finally need a convention to renew the idea of European democracy. We must take the people of Europe seriously when it is about European decision-making.

The Conference on the Future of Europe made it clear we need to strengthen our democracy, and you spoke about this. The Czech Presidency wants to do so. We must introduce and live the lead candidate principle, that people have a say about who is in the future the Commission President. We must strengthen both the European Parliament and the national parliaments. We need a re-parliamentarisation of the European Union. The European Parliament should have full rights on legislative initiatives and decide on the EU budget together with the national parliaments. And that is why the Czech Republic can play there a key role, after the French Presidency had some leftovers for you to continue your work.

And let me be also clear on this political union idea. I think it’s good that we talk to each other, no doubt about this. But for me, it’s not yet clear what is the key idea behind this political union and I have also to say that this was not part of the debate here in Strasbourg in the Future of Europe Conference. So it’s a new idea. I think we should base our future ideas on the process of listening to people.

And finally, the Czech Presidency comes at the right moment when we have to focus on the most urgent tasks, and that is about inflation and especially energy security. As a first step, I support Draghi’s initiative to impose a temporary cap on the price that the European Union countries are willing to pay for Russian natural gas. Let us use our European economic power against Putin’s blackmail attempts.

When the crisis will probably arrive in winter and Nord Stream 1will probably not continue to deliver gas, we need a binding, a legally binding mechanism of solidarity in the European Union. And I think it is also needed, Mr Prime Minister, to go for an extraordinary European Council for this. We need decisions. We have to prepare for the crisis and not wait for the crisis.

The Czech Presidency comes at the right moment. You can fully count on your PPE Group to deliver. Europe needs your leadership, Europe needs a strong Czech Presidency.

  Iratxe García Pérez, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, señora presidenta Von der Leyen, señor primer ministro, arrancamos otra presidencia complicada. Ahora, con la guerra de Ucrania y sus consecuencias, parece incluso hasta que la COVID-19 es algo ya del pasado. Pero son crisis que se superponen y que nos obligan a mirar a fondo.

Los dos años que quedan por delante de la legislatura van a ser dos años decisivos. Sabemos que la inestabilidad va a continuar y por eso es tan importante mantener el rumbo para las grandes transformaciones, para la transformación verde, para la transformación digital y también para dar respuesta a las turbulencias inesperadas.

Señor primer ministro Fiala, apoyamos las prioridades de su programa: reforzar la libertad, la seguridad y la prosperidad comunes, la gestión de las crisis de refugiados y refugiadas, la recuperación de Ucrania tras la guerra, así como la seguridad energética y la contención de la inflación. Pero no podremos hacerlo sin tener en cuenta el impacto en las personas, es decir, las políticas sociales. Y eso es lo que le preocupa a nuestro grupo. Ayer echábamos de menos más menciones en su programa de trabajo a la cuestión social, pero también hoy tengo que congratularme de que haya aceptado nuestra petición de organizar una cumbre social para actualizar las políticas sociales que acordamos hace un año en Oporto. Es una excelente noticia, primer ministro, porque debemos protegernos de las amenazas exteriores, pero también de las interiores. Debemos protegernos de la injusticia, de la desigualdad y de la pobreza, porque esas serán amenazas también al proyecto europeo. Por eso es tan importante hablar de estas consecuencias sociales.

Otra cuestión importante es la igualdad de género, porque hemos avanzado mucho en este sentido, pero todavía queda mucho por hacer, por ejemplo, para alcanzar la igualdad salarial. Además, sería un buen gesto que su Gobierno ratificara el Convenio de Estambul, porque es el principal instrumento legal que tenemos para luchar contra la violencia de género.

También es fundamental el Estado de Derecho y, ahí, confío en que su Presidencia marque una diferencia. Praga es el corazón geográfico de Europa, es el símbolo de la lucha de un pueblo por sus derechos, por la libertad y por la democracia. Espero que interceda, en este sentido, en el Grupo de Visegrado. Ustedes saben bien que los valores no son negociables y que la Unión Europea no puede renunciar a la defensa del Estado de Derecho.

Bajo la Presidencia checa, el Consejo puede por fin organizar audiencias serias y eficaces sobre el deterioro del Estado de Derecho en Hungría y en Polonia, siguiendo los procedimientos del artículo 7. Para esto no es necesaria la unanimidad, solo voluntad política. El populismo autoritario es una amenaza para Europa y para todos sus países. No todos los Gobiernos de Visegrado son iguales, somos conscientes. Praga tiene la oportunidad de liderar un nuevo empeño por la libertad, una nueva primavera democrática.

En ese esfuerzo democrático debemos escuchar más a la ciudadanía. Por eso, echo en falta también alguna mención en su programa a la Conferencia sobre el Futuro de Europa. La ciudadanía espera mucho más y debemos acometer reformas necesarias, y eso pasa por superar la unanimidad en importantes áreas.

Por último, es necesario mirar de frente al reto de la migración. No podemos dejar pasar más tiempo. Europa tiene la oportunidad de darle contenido a la palabra solidaridad. Señor primer ministro, ha elegido un lema muy acertado para su presidencia: «Europa como tarea, Europa como misión». Aquella frase que pronunció Václav Havel en su discurso del Premio Carlomagno sigue reflejando lo que somos: un proyecto de solidaridad, un proyecto de futuro, un proyecto que construimos todos y todas juntos. Cuente con el Grupo Socialista para trabajar codo con codo en ese futuro de paz, de prosperidad y de libertad durante estos meses.

  Dita Charanzová, za skupinu Renew. – Vážená paní předsedkyně Evropského parlamentu, vážená paní předsedkyně Evropské komise, vážený pane premiére, české předsednictví začíná ve velmi složité době: pokračující válka na Ukrajině, nejistota jejího dalšího vývoje a zhoršující se ekonomická a sociální situace v Evropě. Já osobně vítám kroky, které Česká republika, české předsednictví hodlá učinit ve vztahu k Ukrajině. Podpora Ukrajiny je klíčová pro bezpečnost celé Evropy. Středobodem českého předsednictví však musí být občan a ten by měl být na prvním místě, ne na posledním místě, tak jak jste to měl v projevu. Proto ruku v ruce s naší podporou Ukrajiny musíte akutně řešit, jak zajistit tuto zimu dostatek energie pro domácnosti a firmy, jak odblokovat ukrajinské přístavy, abychom předešli celosvětové potravinové krizi a tím následným migračním vlnám, jak udržet konkurenceschopnost Evropy při drasticky se zvyšujících cenách energií a stále rostoucí inflaci. Česko musí být krizový manažer. Krizový manažer, který má krizový plán pro Evropu.

Pane premiére, když se v Bruselu zeptáte na první české předsednictví v roce 2009, na kterém jsem se osobně aktivně podílela, většina lidí si vzpomene na osobitý český humor, který tady kolegové v Evropském parlamentu znají. Světový tisk toto předsednictví ale pak zhodnotil tak, že jsme měli skvělé úředníky, skvělé diplomaty a špatné politiky. Vy máte teď příležitost tento obraz Česka vylepšit a byla by škoda, kdybyste tuto příležitost promarnil.

  Jordi Solé, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, Madam Commission President, Vice-President, thank you. Prime Minister, you are taking over the Presidency of the Council in challenging times. This is beyond doubt. One of these big challenges is our dependency on fossil fuels. You mentioned that environmentally, but also geopolitically, we are paying a high price for this dependency. Turning towards a green economy is key to tackling our climate challenges, but also to get rid of very inconvenient dependencies, as we see these days, and this should be the Council’s presidency goal, too. We have to be not only ambitious, but also consistent. And this is clearly not the case with the taxonomy proposal. This proposal does not live up to our ambitions, but also does not live up to the consistency of our policies for climate neutrality. That’s why I hope later today this Parliament will vote down this proposal.

Prime Minister, there are reforms like energy transition that we can undertake under the current Treaties, but others demand Treaty changes. In that sense, I must say that I regret that the Czech Government is one of the signatories rejecting the possibility to change the Treaties. As you know very well, this Parliament is indeed pushing for a convention to amend the Treaties and I hope that the Council will activate Article 48, the sooner the better.

Our demand is also in line with the Conference on the Future of Europe conclusions, which, amongst other things, asked for putting an end to national vetoes. And I hope you will help implementing what European citizens asked us to do.

And finally, I welcome that the programme of your Presidency includes efforts towards advancing negotiations on the Pact on Migration and Asylum. It is high time to close this deal. We urgently need a migration and asylum policy that strikes a fair balance between our demographic and economic needs, the need for solidarity between Member States, and the need to put fundamental rights at the forefront. I ask you, Prime Minister, to work in this direction.

  Marco Zanni, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signora Presidente, signora Presidente von der Leyen, signor Vicepresidente, signor Primo ministro Fiala, come ho già avuto modo di dirle nell'incontro che abbiamo avuto qualche settimana fa di utile confronto, in bocca al lupo. In bocca al lupo perché Lei e il suo paese arrivate a gestire la Presidenza del Consiglio in uno dei momenti più critici che questo continente, che questa Unione sta affrontando sia dal punto di vista esterno, la questione della guerra in Ucraina, e sia dal punto di vista interno.

Lei e i colleghi avete elencato i problemi che oggi i cittadini e le imprese dell'Unione stanno affrontando con grande fatica e condividiamo le priorità di questo programma ambizioso che in questi sei mesi la Presidenza ceca sta mettendo sul tavolo, ma ora abbiamo bisogno dei fatti, i cittadini ci chiedono fatti concreti e decisioni concrete. Troppo tempo abbiamo speso in questi mesi in una situazione sicuramente difficile nel trovare decisioni giuste e ancora oggi mancano risposte sui due temi fondamentali.

Sulla guerra, sappiamo che, finché non riusciremo a porre fine a questa guerra, l'inflazione non si abbasserà, i prezzi dell'energia non si abbasseranno, non riusciremo a salvare il popolo ucraino e non riusciremo nemmeno a salvare i popoli europei, i nostri paesi, i nostri cittadini. E su questo dobbiamo agire. Proteggere, difendere l'Ucraina con l'obiettivo finale che si arrivi a una pace il prima possibile, questo ci chiedono i cittadini ucraini, questo ci chiedono i cittadini europei.

Sull'economia, qui l'ho detto più volte, le istituzioni europee sono mancate. Oggi servono misure forti, eccezionali, perché la situazione è drammatica. I costi della bolletta energetica sono quintuplicati, decuplicati, le attività non riescono più ad arrivare alla fine del mese, a far quadrare i bilanci, le prospettive per la nostra economia sono grigie come non lo erano da tempo.

Le proposte sono sul tavolo, abbiamo bisogno di agire e subito. Il presidente Weber ricordava la proposta che il governo italiano ha messo sul tavolo anche all'ultimo Consiglio. Più tempo aspettiamo a mettere un tetto al prezzo del gas, più sarà difficile contrastare la Russia e più daremo spazio alla Russia per ricattarci sulle forniture di gas. E aggiungo un'altra proposta, che ha fatto in maniera molto intelligente il primo ministro polacco: mettiamo temporaneamente un cap anche al prezzo della CO2, allo schema degli ETS. Abbiamo bisogno di decisioni forti.

Chiudo dicendo che non sono d'accordo sul fatto che quanto portato avanti dalle istituzioni europee in tema di transizione verde non stia incidendo sul prezzo dell'energia e non sia una parte del problema. E non lo dico io, lo dice la Banca centrale europea, che ci ha confermato ufficialmente più volte in questi mesi che la pressione sull'inflazione è anche causa di alcune politiche che stiamo portando avanti.

Serve pragmatismo, servono decisioni concrete perché altrimenti non potremo parlare di Europa, altrimenti non saremo capaci di far percepire il valore dello stare insieme ai nostri cittadini e alle nostre imprese.

  Veronika Vrecionová, za skupinu ECR. – Vážená paní předsedkyně Evropského parlamentu, vážená paní předsedkyně Komise, vážený pane premiére Fialo, dovolte mi Vám velmi poděkovat za prezentaci plánů českého předsednictví. Myslím, že naprosto odpovídají problémům, kterým nyní Evropa musí čelit. Je evidentní, že klíčové budou dvě témata a obě souvisí s Ukrajinou. Tím prvním bude obnova Ukrajiny, protože fungující a prosperující země na východní hranici Evropské unie je důležitá nejenom pro samotné Ukrajince, ale také pro nás, členy Evropské unie. Schválení kandidátského statusu Ukrajině je dobrý první krok, ale je potřeba přijít s konkrétními plány obnovy. Sliby o pomoci, které slyšíme od řady států, se musí zhmotnit na bankovních účtech, ze kterých budeme obnovu platit.

S Ukrajinou také souvisí aktuální energetická krize, které Evropa čelí. Děje se to, před čím tento parlament řadu let varoval. Kolikrát jsme zde varovali před rizikem dostavby Nord Stream 2? Nyní musíme urychleně pracovat na tom, abychom měli dost cenově dostupné energie pro naše občany. Musíme si přestat nalhávat, že si ještě budeme moci vybírat, které zdroje se nám líbí a které pokládáme za málo zelené. Naším hlavním úkolem musí být mobilizovat všechny dostupné zdroje, alespoň v krátkodobém až střednědobém horizontu. Děje se tak například už i v Německu, které rozšiřuje výrobu elektřiny ze „špinavých“ uhelných elektráren. Přitom má možnost využívat bezuhlíkovou jadernou energii. Jádro využívat musíme. Musíme investovat do jeho rozvoje, do nových typů modulárních reaktorů. Dnes v poledne budeme hlasovat o námitce proti taxonomii. Na tomto hlasování se ukáže, koho zajímají občané, které zde zastupuje. Koho zajímá, zda si občané budou mít čím topit, svítit nebo jak dobít svůj elektromobil. Protože bez jádra a plynu zajistit dostatek energie nedokážeme.

  Kateřina Konečná, za skupinu The Left. – Paní předsedající, pane premiére, nestává se moc často, abych souhlasila s něčím, co připravila česká pravicová vláda Petra Fialy. Možná tak mnohé překvapím, ale 4 z 5 priorit naší vlády pro předsednictví považuji za správné.

Problém ovšem tkví někde jinde – realita je mnohdy tvrdší než vzletná slova české vlády. Je mnohem tvrdší a nelítostnější. Dokonce tak, že česká vláda hodlá potichu asistovat Bruselu ve zrušení práva veta pro členské státy. Energetickou bezpečnost pak ordinuje vláda českým občanům tak, že je nutí levně vyrobenou energii v České republice kupovat s několikanásobnou přirážkou. Čeští občané s třetinovými platy ve srovnání se západními sousedy už jsou nuceni platit mnohdy vyšší ceny než oni. Kybernetickou bezpečnost si představuje stylem, že vypne bez soudního rozhodnutí nepohodlné weby. A odolnost hospodářství posiluje tak, že chce privatizovat poslední zbytky státních a národních podniků. A zdražování je dvakrát vyšší než ve zbytku Evropské unie. Program pro těžce zkoušené rodiny nemá žádný a české podniky nechala i v souvislosti se zákazem prodeje spalovacích motorů na holičkách. A o demokratických institucích ve vládě, jíž tvoří strany, které jsou namočeny v megaskandálech korupce, snad nemá smysl ani hovořit.

Přála bych Radě EU a nám všem, aby se k ní česká vláda nechovala tak, jako ke svým občanům. Česká republika totiž potřebuje – a zvláště když předsedá Radě Evropské unie – vládu, která bude mít na prvním místě zájem občana a ne plná ústa výmluv, proč co nejde, když navíc jinde vidíme, že to jde. Ne podle slov, ale podle skutků poznáte je. Hodně štěstí nejen české vládě, ale nám všem.

  Balázs Hidvéghi (NI). – Tisztelt Miniszterelnök Úr! Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! A cseh elnökség egy olyan pillanatban veszi át az unió vezetését, amikor évtizedek óta példátlan gazdasági és biztonsági kihívásokkal nézünk szembe. Ebben a helyzetben végképp nem engedhetjük meg magunknak a megosztottságot, a fölösleges belső vitákat. Azt várjuk a cseh elnökségtől, mutasson józanságot és a valódi problémákra koncentráljon. A tagállamoknak most minden eszközre és forrásra szükségük van. Ezért kérjük, segítsék elő, hogy minden tagállam, beleértve Magyarországot és Lengyelországot is, mielőbb hozzájusson a neki járó uniós forrásokhoz. Nem csak azért, mert a keleti tagállamok az Unió történetének legnagyobb menekültválságával néznek szembe, és ők fogadják a menekülőket, hanem azért is, mert gazdasági recesszióval és energiaválsággal állunk szemben.

Bizakodásra ad okot, hogy a cseh elnökség az ellátásbiztonságra helyezi a hangsúlyt, hiszen az energiaellátás nem ideológiai, hanem fizikai kérdés. Vagy van energiahordozó, vagy nincs? Az európai emberek pedig mosni, mosakodni, fűteni és utazni szeretnének, az Unió vezetőinek pedig az európai emberek érdekét kell képviselniük. Köszönöm szépen, sok sikert kívánok!

  Petr Fiala, úřadující předseda Rady. – Paní předsedající, dámy a pánové, děkuji vám za vaše vystoupení, za otázky, za zájem o české předsednictví. A samozřejmě děkuji také za všechna ta slova podpory, která tady zazněla.

Když jsem představoval ta témata, tak jsem říkal, že jsme vybrali v rámci předsednictví klíčové věci. Těch pět priorit zahrnuje samozřejmě širší skupinu témat, která jsou v některých případech už součástí dlouhodobé agendy Evropské unie. České předsednictví na nich samozřejmě pracuje a bude pracovat. Existuje dokument k plánům v jednotlivých politikách podle formací Rady, na tento dokument vás také odkazuji, je volně dostupný na webových stránkách našeho předsednictví a uvidíte, že většinu těch témat, která jste třeba postrádali v těch základních prioritách, tam najdete a já jsem se jim tady třeba nevěnoval spíš jenom z časových důvodů.

Takže ještě jednou děkuji za ty podněty a teď se pokusím odpovědět na některé ty konkrétní otázky, které tady zazněly. Myslím, že z těch vystoupení je jasné, jak si všichni napříč politickým spektrem uvědomujeme ty obrovské výzvy, rizika, před kterými Evropská unie stojí, a ve většině vašich vystoupení zaznívaly požadavky po jasných krocích, společných krocích, rozhodném jednání Evropské unie, po tom, abychom mysleli na občany, kteří jsou vystaveni důsledkům války na Ukrajině, a všechny podobné záležitosti, o kterých jsem ostatně mluvil ve svém projevu a o kterých také mluvila předsedkyně Evropské komise Ursula von der Leyenová. Už jsem se v jednu chvíli polekal, že ta jednota je taková, že se mně snad dostane pochvaly i od komunistů. Nakonec se ukázalo, že tomu tak není, takže to mě ujistilo v tom, že jdeme správnou cestou.

Teď k těm konkrétním otázkám: Konference o budoucnosti Evropy, zmínil ji předseda Weber, zmínili ji někteří z dalších řečníků. Česká republika je samozřejmě plně připravena zapojit se do implementace výstupů z Konference o budoucnosti Evropy. Jsme si vědomi i zájmu Evropského parlamentu o svolání konventu a následně o zahájení postupu pro změnu Smluv. Ale musím tady říct, že se jedná o běh na dlouhou trať. A tady bych chtěl opravit jedno tvrzení od předsedy Solého, které tady zaznělo. My nejsme principiálně proti debatě o změně Smluv. My jsme jenom přesvědčeni, že to je skutečně běh na dlouhou trať a že nejprve musí proběhnout debaty, abychom byli na takovou hlubší diskusi o změně Smluv opravdu připraveni. Tak to potřebuje určitý čas. Jak ukazuje analýza proveditelnosti k výstupům z Konference o budoucnosti Evropy od generálního sekretariátu Rady, tak sdělení Evropské komise jasně poukazují na to, že i v rámci současného právního rámce bude možné poměrně rychle implementovat velký počet návrhů a na to se můžeme soustředit, ale svolání konventu a zahájení postupu změny Smluv není rychlý proces a naopak by mohl implementaci závěrů Konference o budoucnosti Evropy zablokovat na dlouhou dobu. Čili my se nevyhýbáme institucionálním otázkám, ale chceme postupovat i v této věci rozumně a tak, abychom dosáhli těch změn, které si občané států Evropské unie opravdu přejí.

S více úst nebo respektive paní Garcíová a někteří další jste zmínili důležitost sociálního rozměru, sociální politiky, sociálního rozměru předsednictví. Já musím říct, že v řadě těch priorit se odráží sociální rozměr. Jestli mluvíme o dostupných cenách energií, dostupných energiích, energiích za rozumnou cenu, energetické bezpečnosti Evropy, má to sociální rozměr. Jestli mluvíme o odolnosti evropské ekonomiky, o tom, abychom byli schopni zajistit, abychom nebyli tak závislí na surovinách, abychom nebyli tak závislí na některých výrobcích, na některých produktech, se kterými potom pracujeme v evropských zemích, tak to má taky sociální rozměr. Tady přece mluvíme o zaměstnanosti a o spoustě dalších věcí, které se přímo dotýkají života našich občanů. Takže už v těch našich prioritách se sociálnímu rozměru a sociálním problémům, kterým čelíme a můžeme čelit, věnujeme. Čili není to nějaká vyčleněná oblast v úvahách českého předsednictví, je to integrální součást těch agend, o kterých tady mluvím.

Mluvíme ale také o potřebě velkého balancování mezi environmentálními opatřeními, sociálním smírem, ekonomickým rozvojem. To je velká úloha příštích dní. A tady musíme reagovat na ty výzvy, před kterými stojíme. Protože když jeden z těch aspektů dáme příliš do popředí a nebudeme jej vyvažovat těmi dalšími a budeme ho upřednostňovat na úkor ostatních, tak se můžeme dočkat toho, že se nám sociální smír naruší. A to je to, co nikdo nechceme. Abych byl ale konkrétní, protože ty otázky na tu sociální problematiku zazněly, tak chci říct, že připravujeme několik konferencí na toto téma v Praze. K tématu energetické chudoby připravujeme konferenci dne 24. října, k problematice integrace osob se zdravotním postižením na trhu práce připravujeme konferenci ve dnech 20. a 21. září a konferenci k odstraňování dětské chudoby připravujeme teď na začátek července, takže věnujeme se i těmto otázkám. A tady jsem vám ukázal příklady konkrétních akcí, které v rámci českého předsednictví připravujeme a které se budou těmto otázkám věnovat.

Souhlasím s tím, že jsou potřebné silné a konkrétní kroky v oblastech jako energie, ekonomika a další věci. Ale nebyl bych tak skeptický v tom, že je neděláme a že jich nejsme schopni. Třeba byly zde zmíněny EU ETS, byly zde zmíněny emisní povolenky. Ano, to je dlouhodobý problém. Řada států je s fungováním systému emisních povolenek spokojena, řada států s ním spokojena není, dokonce jim způsobuje velké problémy. Mezi ně třeba patří Česká republika, ale v poslední době se nám podařilo dosáhnout zase určitého posunu, určitého kompromisu v tom, že se budou uvolňovat emisní povolenky na trh tak, aby nerostla skokově cena. A myslím si, že to je příklad toho, jak můžeme velmi rychle, pokud se opravdu snažíme, dosáhnout rozumného kompromisu, který nakonec může podpořit většina zúčastněných aktérů.

Pro mě jedna z největších, a jestli to mohu vůbec takto říct, nejlepších věcí na té obrovské tragédii, kterou je válka na Ukrajině a při všech těch následcích, kterým čelíme, tak jedna z největších a nejlepších věcí, která se nám v Evropské unii stala – já to vidím na jednáních Evropské rady – je, že jsme se naučili se navzájem poslouchat. A navzájem víc poslouchají země západní Evropy a jižní Evropy zkušenosti států střední a východní Evropy s ruským imperialismem a s těmi nebezpečími a hrozbami, které my vidíme, a my se zase učíme třeba poslouchat státy jižní Evropy, které mají obavy ze stabilizace v severní Africe a podobných věcí. A tady to naslouchání, to, že se bereme více vážně, to je nesmírně důležité.

Ale musíme se brát vážně i v oblasti energetické politiky. A já vás o to opravdu prosím. Jsou státy, které v Evropě vůbec nemají energetický mix složený tak, že by byly v čemkoliv závislé na Rusku. Jsou státy, které mají závislost extrémně vysokou, v případě ČR třeba v oblasti plynu 97%. Zbavit se této závislosti je náš prioritní úkol, ale prostě to trvá několik měsíců nebo několik let, a abychom to dokázali, potřebujeme solidaritu ostatních. Jsou státy, které se mohou opírat o obnovitelné zdroje, udělaly pro to hodně a jsou dneska v této věci docela daleko. Jsou státy, které toho hodně třeba neudělaly, klidně můžeme říct, že to je jejich chyba, ale také nemají takové přírodní podmínky, jako mají jiné země, a proto se musí zohledňovat jejich potřeby energetického mixu. A já tady znovu opakuji země, jako je Česká republika a i některé další, pokud nebudou mít možnost financovat jadernou energii jako čistý zdroj, nejsou schopny naplnit klimatické cíle, nejsou schopny se rychle zbavit závislosti na Rusku. A tohle, prosím, mějme také na paměti, ty výchozí podmínky, přírodní podmínky, spousta věcí nás prostě odlišuje a my se musíme snažit najít způsob plnění těch společných cílů a respektovat různé cesty, které k tomu povedou. Tak prosím i toto mějme na paměti. My se všichni shodujeme na těch cílech, ale jak jich dosáhneme zvlášť v této mimořádně těžké situaci? Můžeme jich dosáhnout jenom tehdy, když vytvoříme určitou volnost a svobodu pro rozhodování těch jednotlivých zemí a pro určitou rozdílnou rychlost, abychom opravdu naplnili to, co chceme. Pokud nebudeme takto rozumně postupovat, tak výsledky dobré nebudou.

A poslední poznámka, kterou si nemohu odpustit, bylo tady zmíněno, že v tom mém vystoupení byl člověk nebo občan až na posledním místě. Z úst české kolegyně. Není to pravda. Byl na prvním. Celé moje vystoupení se týká občanů evropských zemí. Ve všech prioritách na ně myslíme, a jestli nedokážeme dobře zvládnout uprchlickou krizi, jestli nedokážeme pomoci Ukrajině tak, aby zastavila ruskou agresi, kdo na to doplatí? Naši občané!

Když jste zmínila potraviny a zablokování potravinových cest, hned jste řekla slovo Ukrajina. Ano, tak úzce souvisí otázka Ukrajiny, otázka naší podpory Ukrajině. Otázka toho, aby co nejdříve skončila válka, abychom dělali všechno pro to, aby ta válka dopadla vítězstvím Ukrajiny, tak úzce souvisí prakticky s každou otázkou, o které zde mluvíme. A sama jste to, paní Charanzová, mimochodem řekla. Mluvíme-li o energiích, energetické soběstačnosti, snaze o to, abychom měli energie za dostupné ceny, koho máme na mysli? Občana, občany Evropské unie. Odolnost evropské ekonomiky má sociální rozměr. Posílení obranyschopnosti Evropy má sociální rozměr. Odolnost demokratických institucí samozřejmě také, kdo jiný ty demokratické instituce tvoří než občané. Takže máme občana a jeho dobro na srdci prakticky ve všech prioritách, které jsme tady představili.

Tak já ještě jednou děkuju za všechny otázky a podněty a doufám, že jsem na většinu odpověděl.

  Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Vážená paní předsedkyně, vážená paní předsedkyně Komise, vážený pane premiére, jsem upřímně ráda, že jste to právě Vy, koho zde dnes mohu přivítat. Priority českého předsednictví odrážejí realitu. Pokud chceme uchránit naši svobodu a bezpečnost pro budoucí generace, nemáme jinou volbu. Pomoc Ukrajině v boji za svobodu a nezávislost všemi dostupnými prostředky včetně pomoci ukrajinským uprchlíkům. To je naše jediná volba. Nemůžeme mít jinou prioritu než nezávislost na ruských energetických zdrojích a posílení evropských bezpečnostních kapacit. Musíme podpořit sociální soudržnost i potravinové zabezpečení a nesmíme ztratit důvěru občanů.

Vážím si toho, že jste se těmto výzvám postavili čelem. A Vám, pane premiére, chci poděkovat osobně za Váš příklad solidarity s Ukrajinou a chci poděkovat občanům České republiky, že i my jsme dnes pro Evropu příkladem účinné pomoci a integrace uprchlíků.

Evropská unie si stanovila ambiciózní cíle v boji proti klimatickým změnám. Ne proto, že bychom byli naivní, že my sami zachráníme svět, ale proto, že chceme být příkladem pro ty, kteří to skutečně mohou dokázat spolu s námi, jako je Čína, USA, Brazílie a další. Zde bude mít české předsednictví velmi důležitou roli při vyjednávání o legislativě a já jsem Vám chtěla na to téma položit otázku, zda jste připraveni dokončit jednání o legislativním balíčku a zda se domníváte, že je možné dosáhnout cílů pro klimatickou neutralitu a zároveň se zbavit závislosti na ruských zdrojích. Pane premiére, Vy jste mi na to ale odpověděl, takže tuto otázku v tuto chvíli nemusím pokládat. Myslím, že všichni slyšeli vaše jasné stanovisko. Dovolte mi, abych jen na závěr popřála panu premiérovi a předsednictví hodně sil. Myslím, že Evropa dnes více než kdy jindy potřebuje konkrétní činy. Evropa je náš společný úkol a já Vám děkuji, že Evropu s touto myšlenkou povedete.

  Radka Maxová (S&D). – Vážená paní předsedkyně, vážený pane premiére, vážené kolegyně, vážení kolegové, heslo předsednictví je „Evropa jako úkol“ a velký úkol nás opravdu čeká v těžké době. Evropská unie bude čelit těžkým výzvám. Čelíme válce na Ukrajině, energetické krizi, inflaci, pandemii. A Česká republika zdůrazňuje spolupráci a jednotu při řešení těchto problémů. Víceméně jednotní bychom měli být i v řešení sociálních otázek, v ochraně ohrožených skupin, rovných příležitostí a boje proti násilí. Kromě krizí, které jste zmínil ve svém projevu, bych ráda upozornila na body, které nejsou zmíněny v prioritách českého předsednictví.

Zažíváme krizi duševního zdraví. Kromě zřejmého dopadu na životy lidí nesou s sebou tyto problémy cenu více než 4 % HDP. A náročná doba si žádá důraz na ochranu duševního zdraví a na vytvoření evropské strategie k jeho ochraně. Prosím, zasaďte se o to. Nečinnost nás totiž může stát až osmdesát tisíc životů ročně, které v Evropské unii ztratíme v důsledku psychických problémů.

Druhou věcí, kterou bych ráda zmínila, je platová transparentnost. Ženy stále berou v Evropské unii méně, a proto je velká výzva pro české předsednictví zvládnout trialogy ke směrnici o platové transparentnosti. Věřte, že jako frakce sociálních demokratů vám budeme držet palce, ale také na vás budeme dohlížet, abyste sociální problémy nepřehlíželi.

  Marie-Pierre Vedrenne (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Vice-président, Monsieur le Premier ministre, vous l’avez dit, la présidence française du Conseil de l’Union européenne a permis des avancées historiques pour construire une Europe puissante.

Puissance climatique, avec l’adoption de nos positions sur le paquet climat. Puissance sociale et éducative, avec notamment l’accord sur un salaire minimum dans chaque État membre. Puissance commerciale, qui s’affirme et sort enfin de la naïveté. Puissance numérique, qui fixe les standards mondiaux de régulation des plateformes. Et surtout puissance géopolitique, aux côtés de l’Ukraine et des démocraties voisines dans leur combat pour la liberté et contre la Russie de Vladimir Poutine.

C’est sur cet excellent bilan que vous pouvez vous appuyer, et votre présidence arrive à un moment décisif où l’enjeu est de maintenir le cap fixé et l’unité – «unité», non pas «unanimité». Finaliser les négociations sur le paquet climat, sortir de notre dépendance énergétique ou encore adopter l’instrument pour lutter contre la coercition économique: le Parlement y travaille de manière déterminée.

Nous avons besoin de ce même engagement de votre côté pour construire l’Europe-puissance au service de tous les Européens. Monsieur le Premier ministre, succès à votre présidence.

  Daniel Freund (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, thank you. Dear Mr Fiala, you promised your voters that you would kick out the corrupt. That you will defend the rule of law. And you won against Andrej Babiš. Now you are taking over the Presidency of the Council. And I am sure you know that corruption is not only an issue in the Czech Republic, but in the entire EU. Where Babiš tried to prevent justice, the Polish Government is trying to take over the entire justice system, and where Babiš took millions, Orbán and his cronies are taking billions, not just millions. Autocrats are the biggest threat to the EU and I am very thankful that you are taking the autocrat that is invading our neighbour Ukraine very seriously. But I think you need to take those following the Putin playbook inside the EU equally seriously. It’s up to you to set this on the agenda and to make sure that the attacks on democracy and rule of law by the Polish and Hungarian Governments play a role in your presidency. And the decision on freezing funds to Hungary will come to the table during your presidency. Make sure that the promise you gave to your voters doesn’t stop at the Czech border and that you’re delivering on that promise also during your presidency.

  Dominik Tarczyński (ECR). – Madam President, Prime Minister, first of all, I’d like to thank you, Prime Minister, for your bravery. I would like to thank you for your presence in Kiev with Mr. Kaczynski and Mr. Morawiecki. That’s very important to everyone in Europe, I believe, so I would like to thank you for your bravery.

For your presidency, I would like to wish you bravery – because it’s needed. So I hope you will stay strong – because it’s up to you, up to your perseverance what is going to happen now in Europe. We do remember 1968, when the Soviets invaded your country. And I can assure you now you have our full support – because we do know how it is to be a slave of the Soviet Union and Russia. I can assure you, Poland will never be a slave of the Soviets. Poland will never be a slave of the Soviet Union and Russia. And I do believe the Czech Republic will never be a slave. And this is my wishes to you and to your people. Stay strong. Stay firm.

  Ioan-Rareş Bogdan (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, doamnelor și domnilor, excelențele voastre, Cehia este membră a Uniunii Europene din mai 2004 și din decembrie 2007 membră Schengen. Václav Havel, marele politician, spunea că, în general, petrolul nu ar trebui să fie mai important decât drepturile omului și nici decât drepturile națiunilor.

România este membră a Uniunii Europene din ianuarie 2007, iar patru ani mai târziu îndeplinise condițiile pentru aderarea la Schengen. Suntem în 2022, dar încă așteptăm. De 11 ani, românii mei sunt ținuți la ușa unui club exclusivist. Cel mai credincios popor din Uniunea Europeană, cel mai eurooptimist, cu multă suferință în mentalul colectiv, este tratat cu indiferență. Ni se refuză dreptul la libertatea deplină, deși avem tot dreptul la ea, și cultural, și istoric, dar și politic. Ne mai mirăm oare că apar mișcări politice care contestă eurosistemul?

Europa, cutremurată acum de războiul din Ucraina, ar fi trebuit să învețe că indiferența costă. Europa a tăcut nepermis la anexarea Crimeei și privește acum la saltul mortal rusesc din Ucraina. Românii nu sunt în niciun pericol, mulțumesc lui Dumnezeu, deoarece suntem membri NATO.

Pericolul e altul, să continue să plece masiv din țara lor, considerată de categoria a doua. Șapte milioane au plecat și am rămas 20 de milioane. Nu este corect, nu este moral, nici democratic, că regulile se aplică discreționar. Nu mai vorbim de democrație. Dar întrebarea mea și a poporului meu este: când va fi și România cu adevărat pe agenda de priorități a Uniunii Europene, dragii mei? Este inadmisibil ceea ce se întâmplă!

  Heléne Fritzon (S&D). – Fru talman! Kommission! Premiärminister! Det gläder mig att läsa att de tre ordförandeskapen Frankrike, Tjeckien och Sverige ska verka för ökad jämställdhet. Samtidigt blir jag väldigt oroad över att jämställdhetsfrågorna inte lyfts fram som en tillräckligt tydlig prioritering i det tjeckiska ordförandeskapet. Hotet mot jämställdhet och kvinnors mänskliga rättigheter är högst allvarligt. Pandemin har lett till ökat våld mot kvinnor. Aborträttigheter kränks inte bara i USA utan också i vår egen union.

Det beräknas ta tre generationer – tre generationer! – innan EU är jämställt. Jag har därför två frågor till premiärministern. När planerar Tjeckien att ratificera Istanbulkonventionen och hur kommer ni att driva på för att få EU att göra detsamma? Vilka är era viktigaste jämställdhetsprioriteringar under den här hösten?

  Nicola Beer (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin! Herr Ministerpräsident, er könnte nicht passender sein, der Moment der Übergabe. Bei Tschechien ist die Europäische Union in guten Händen, ist die Zukunft der Europäischen Union in guten Händen.

Tschechien steht für die EU-Erweiterung, Prag weiß zu vermitteln zwischen Ost und West, kann Krisen nutzen, um Chancen zu schaffen, Widerstandsfähigkeit stärken. Die Östliche Partnerschaft etwa, sie trägt tschechische Handschrift. Prag hat sie ins Leben gerufen, während des letzten Vorsitzes 2009, und hat so die Tür des Dialogs geöffnet zwischen der EU und unter anderem Armenien, Aserbaidschan, Georgien, Moldau und auch, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, mit der Ukraine.

Diesen Mut und diese Weitsicht, Herr Ministerpräsident, braucht die EU, die sich neu aufstellen muss – nach außen, Stichwort gemeinsame Energiepolitik, weniger Abhängigkeiten, kurz: geopolitisch, aber auch nach innen, im eigenen Maschinenraum. Wir müssen schneller und besser entscheiden können, um globales Gewicht zu haben. Und diese Reformen für die EU selbst, sie können nicht warten. Hier darf Tschechien nicht bremsen. „Rethink, rebuild, repower“ gilt auch für die Aufstellung der Europäischen Union. Hier muss Tschechien das Zugpferd sein, das die EU jetzt braucht. Ich bitte Sie, wirklich darauf zu achten.

  Marcel Kolaja (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear Prime Minister, dear Minister, dear colleagues, the Czech Government and the Czech permanent representation to the Union worked tirelessly to get ready for the Presidency of the Council. And I would like to thank them for that. It is only natural that the Presidency’s priorities react to the Russian aggression in Ukraine and its implications. Therefore, I believe that the Presidency’s priorities are well identified. At the same time, other urgent problems such as the climate emergency did not magically disappear. They are also reflected in the Presidency’s priorities and I am really happy that the Czech Government, under your leadership, Prime Minister, supports Fit for 55 and agrees that only zero- emission cars can be sold on the European market from 2035. And here comes my main question, Prime Minister. What is your measurable goal for Fit for 55? How many legislative acts do you plan to finalise in the negotiations by the end of the presidency? And please let me finish by reiterating how important the Presidency’s programme is. It is an important signal to Europe that Czechia, after years at the periphery, is back at the core of the European project, that Czechia is again dedicated to a strong, safe and united Europe. And last but not least, it is also a very important signal to us in this Parliament that voices of Members of the European Parliament, from your political group, who are, as a matter of fact, not overly present in this debate, are not the voice of the Czech Government. Thank you. And I wish you and us great success in our presidency.

  Dolors Montserrat (PPE). – Señora presidenta, damos la bienvenida a la presidencia de Chequia. Presidente, la Unión Europea debe hacer frente hoy a tres grandes desafíos:

En primer lugar, la unidad frente a Putin apoyando a Ucrania, preparándonos para ayudar a reconstruir un país destrozado y romper con la dependencia energética rusa, así como evitar que el tirano meta sus garras en la Unión Europea a través de ataques de desinformación y utilizando movimientos nacionalistas de euroescépticos que pretenden desestabilizar nuestras democracias europeas.

En segundo lugar, luchar contra la desorbitada inflación. Debemos pedir a los países que bajen impuestos para evitar una recaudación extraordinaria y desmesurada del Estado mientras las familias, las pymes y los autónomos se arruinan. También exigimos una ejecución rápida de los fondos europeos.

En tercer lugar, potenciar el liderazgo geopolítico de Europa en el mundo, aumentar las inversiones y las relaciones políticas y comerciales en Latinoamérica y África frente a China, que cada vez es más fuerte. Europa no puede ser un actor secundario. Debemos apoyar a esos lugares donde no hay libertad y se ha instaurado el populismo y el comunismo como Venezuela, Cuba o Nicaragua. Seamos ambiciosos y estemos a la altura.

  Marek Belka (S&D). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Premierze! Słowa Wacława Havla o Europie, którą powinniśmy traktować jako zadanie, są aktualne również dziś. Przez kolejne 6 miesięcy będzie to zadanie bardzo trudne. Dbając o jedność i nasze wspólne wartości, musimy nie tylko walczyć z rosyjskim zagrożeniem, musimy także skupić się na odbudowie naszych gospodarek, budowaniu strategicznej autonomii Unii, dbaniu o stabilność finansową i uniezależnieniu się od rosyjskiej energii. To również waszym zadaniem, drodzy sąsiedzi, będzie przyspieszenie dyskusji nad potencjalną rewizją zasad makrofinansowych. Czy tak trudne zadania są do zrealizowania na poziomie unijnym, gdy państwa członkowskie muszą radzić sobie także ze swoimi wewnętrznymi problemami? Obce są nam słowa znanej w Polsce i Czechach piosenkarki Ewy Farnej „Mamy tysiące własnych spraw, ale w oczach strach”. Priorytety Czechów w Radzie odpowiadają na wszystkie te wyzwania. Wiedzcie, że w tej instytucji znajdziecie przyjaciół, którzy będą was wspierać w stawianiu im czoła. Europa to zadanie do wykonania.

  Guy Verhofstadt (Renew). – Madam President, the Prime Minister said here in his intervention that the reform of the European Union and the change of the Treaties is a long-term exercise. That’s true. But if it is a long-term exercise, Prime Minister, you have to start early. Certainly to be ready for 2024. And as you know, the President of the Parliament has triggered Article 48, has sent you a letter, and my request to you and the request of the whole Parliament is that you react smoothly and swiftly to that request. It’s a limited request – to end unanimity and the national vetoes in the European Council because the war in Ukraine shows very well that that is the problem in the European Union for the moment. We need three months to have an oil embargo in the European Union – three months to decide that, because of national vetoes.

We have no agreement now on this minimum taxation, a multilateral agreement in an international framework, because of the blackmail and the veto of whom? Of Hungary. And at the same time we have the whole migration package in limbo because of what? Of national vetoes. So the war is showing that that needs to change.

So, my request to you is to smoothly say yes to the request of the Parliament to have a convention and not to play games about that, Minister – like yesterday preparing a letter with the other Member States, with a silent procedure, and saying, yeah, but, we wait for a more bold proposal of Parliament or Article 48. So the Council is now saying we cannot say yes to the limited proposal because they ask for a bold proposal! That’s playing games, Minister. Say yes to what the President of the Parliament has asked for. Don’t only use the words of Havel, act as Václav Havel.

  Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, I say to the Prime Minister, I am now going to do my very, very, very traditional and boring speech about the Article 7 procedure, which I do every new Council presidency, because this procedure is now in your hands and we have to rely on you to make things happen.

It was four years ago that this European Parliament launched Article 7(1) of the Treaties against the Hungarian Government about the situation of democracy, of rights and of freedom in that Member State. Since then, we have been working tirelessly with all EU presidencies to get the Council to move forward. Every time you delay the procedures, not only are you giving the Hungarian Government more leverage to dismantle the rule of law in their own country, but you are allowing them to threaten the whole European project. We count on the Czech Presidency to be one of those that show leadership and seek to break this cycle of inertia and lack of courage.

  Luděk Niedermayer (PPE). – Vážená paní předsedkyně, pane místopředsedo, pane premiére, z mého pohledu byl Váš projev výborný začátek českého předsednictví a doufám, že to půjde tak i dále. Velmi oceňuji vaše volání po vytvoření a udržení jednoty a hledání kompromisu, protože to je, jak víme, na čem Evropská unie stojí. Velice oceňuji reference k Václavu Havlovi jak od vás, tak od předsedkyně Evropské komise a motto „Evropa jako úkol“ je podle mě velmi dobře zvolené.

Tak mi dovolte připomenout tři úkoly, které považuji za stěžejní. První, o kterém jste mluvil, je udržet jasnou, srozumitelnou a tvrdou pozici vůči neodůvodnitelné agresi Ruska na Ukrajině a být připraveni na zastavení dodávek plynu, což je obrovský úkol. Druhý úkol pro naše předsednictví vidím v dokončení co nejvíce trialogů, zejména u těch nejdůležitějších spisů. Naše firmy, naši občané potřebují mít jistotu, jaké jsou naše cíle a jaké jsou naše politiky. Zejména dokončení klíčových spisů v oblasti „Fit for 55“ je podle mě úkol pro naše předsednictví a doufám, že v něm uspějete. Za třetí k tomu, abychom uspěli ve všem, musíme být, jak jste zmínil, schopni naslouchat si navzájem a hledat správné kompromisy. Mohu vás ujistit, že Parlament takto pracuje. Zároveň bychom neměli zapomínat na to, že tyto kompromisy musíme vysvětlovat našim občanům, vysvětlovat, proč jsou to řešení dobrá nejenom pro české občany, pro Estonce, Finy, Němce a Rakušany a pro všechny Evropany. Toto je jediná cesta, jak udržet potřebnou podporu Evropské unii a zároveň jak dosáhnout našich cílů s nejmenšími náklady. Přeji Vám hodně úspěchů.

  Sophia in 't Veld (Renew). – Madam President, I have three points for the Prime Minister.

First of all, on migration, the Council for years now has aimed for a minimal and incomplete package that is best summarised as ‘Fortress Europe’, whereas the European Parliament wants a coherent package that will allow us to actually manage migration.

We have asked the Council to commit, together with the European Parliament, to take the entire package across the finish line before the European elections. But the Council is hesitating. Will you here commit, together with the European Parliament, to finalising this package before the election?

Secondly, I agree with Guy Verhofstadt. You said on treaty change ‘oh, we need to go slowly, slowly’. But the world is changing at a dizzying speed and Europe is lagging behind. Intergovernmental Europe is spectacularly ill—equipped to deal with crises or to have a coherent vision for the future.

This European governance system is dangerously weak and outdated, and the European Council is becoming a threat to the future of the European Union if you keep blocking reforms. You have a responsibility to the citizens and not to national governments. I expect you to act in the interests of the future of Europe.

(Catch-the-eye procedure)

  Στέλιος Κυμπουρόπουλος (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε πρωθυπουργέ, είναι πολύ ουσιαστικές οι προτεραιότητές σας για το εξάμηνο που ακολουθεί, γιατί είναι αλήθεια πως η Ευρώπη αντιμετωπίζει ξανά μια απροσδόκητη πρόκληση με τον επιθετικό πόλεμο της Ρωσίας στην Ουκρανία, και έρχεται μετά από μια επίσης απροσδόκητη κρίση, αυτής της πανδημίας της COVID-19.

Είναι, λοιπόν, πολύ ουσιαστικό η υγεία να μπει στο επίκεντρο της πολιτικής μας και για αυτό χαίρομαι ιδιαίτερα που μεταξύ των προτεραιοτήτων σας έχετε θέσει ως πυλώνα και τα θέματα των σπάνιων παθήσεων. Και αυτή η διαδικασία έρχεται τη στιγμή που μέσα στην προεδρία σας θα ξεκινήσουν οι διαπραγματεύσεις για θέματα που αφορούν την υγεία, όπως είναι η αναθεώρηση της νομοθεσίας για τα ορφανά φάρμακα. Πρέπει η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση να βρεθεί στο επίκεντρο της καινοτομίας, έτσι ώστε να ηγηθούμε στις εξελίξεις και να παράγουμε την πρωτότυπη ουσία, εδώ, στο έδαφος της Ευρώπης. Αφορά την ποιότητα των πολιτών μας.

  Domènec Ruiz Devesa (S&D). – Señora presidenta, querida Roberta, señor primer ministro de la República Checa, muchas gracias por la presentación que nos ha hecho. Quiero sumarme a lo que han dicho otros diputados: lo importante que es para el Parlamento que avancemos en el capítulo institucional que, efectivamente, no se ha mencionado, tal vez tanto, en la presentación, pero nunca es tarde si la dicha es buena.

Confío plenamente en las capacidades de la Presidencia checa para abrir el debate en el Consejo, tal y como ya ha solicitado el Parlamento —la activación del artículo 48— en su Resolución del mes pasado, a fin de que el Consejo empiece a valorar estas propuestas que hemos hecho. Se trata de abrir el debate, desde luego, de tomar nota de nuestra Resolución sin mayor espacio a cualquier duda o confusión y, también, de que nos ayude a llevar adelante el importante trabajo de la nueva ley electoral europea, incluida la introducción de una circunscripción de ámbito europeo.

  Jordi Cañas (Renew). – Señora presidenta, entre las prioridades del programa de la presidencia —en el escrito— estaba el avance en las negociaciones o incluso la finalización y la ratificación de los acuerdos de la Unión Europea con terceros países, especialmente América Latina y el Indopacífico.

Me parece una idea muy buena, muy conveniente, después de la paralización de estos procesos durante la presidencia francesa. Pero me ha sorprendido muchísimo que, siendo este avance del capítulo comercial un elemento clave y muy importante en el futuro de Europa, porque necesitamos más mercados y más suministradores, ustedes en la intervención no lo hayan citado. Han obviado el capítulo comercial.

Entonces a mí eso me sorprende. Quiero creer que ustedes van a impulsar la ratificación de los acuerdos y van a cambiar el ciclo no virtuoso en el cual lleva instalada la Comisión desde el año 2019 por culpa de algunos Estados miembros.

Por lo tanto, me gustaría poder escuchar en este Parlamento que ustedes van a realmente impulsar esos procesos de ratificación, finalmente, de todos los acuerdos pendientes con América Latina, especialmente México, Chile y Mercosur.

  Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca, Panie Premierze! Europa jako zadanie. Jak ważne to zadanie, jak trudne to zadanie! Wydaje się, że ta debata też to nam wszystkim uświadamia. Jako przedstawiciel Polski chciałbym Panu bardzo serdecznie podziękować za spokój i głos rozsądku oraz odwołanie się do naszych doświadczeń, doświadczeń krajów Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, w rozumieniu Rosji. Ale jakże ten spokój kontrastuje z takim kabotyńskim pohukiwaniem, rozedrganiem, które zaprezentował przed chwilą chociażby pan Verhofstadt, próbując tak rezonersko pouczać Pana Premiera. Jakże to kontrastuje również z wystąpieniami tych z państwa, którzy wiedzę na temat Polski czy Węgier czerpią chyba z Russia Today albo ze Sputnika. Mówienie z mównicy Parlamentu Europejskiego o tym, że Polska malwersuje miliardy euro, ma się tak do rzeczywistości jak fakt, że Putin jest demokratą.

Ludzie, opamiętajcie się. Posłuchajcie głosu rozsądku tych państw, które wiedzą znacznie lepiej, czym pachnie Rosja. A kiedy pan premier Petr Fiala jechał do Kijowa, to w tym czasie wasi przywódcy – prezydent Macron, kanclerz Scholz – wisieli na telefonie, próbując omisiować i obłaskawić Putina.

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule prim ministru, apreciez, vă spun de la început, prioritățile președinției cehe și vă doresc succes. Vin din România, cunosc bine țara dumneavoastră. Eram copil când, în 1968, țara dumneavoastră a fost invadată de Rusia și m-am bucurat când părinții mei sufereau alături de Cehia și când țara mea s-a opus intrării Rusiei.

Dar, domnule prim ministru, ați vorbit aici de soluții, soluții rezonabile care să rezolve prioritățile dumneavoastră. Una dintre ele este piața internă, ați menționat-o și dumneavoastră. Este fragmentată piața internă, domnule prim ministru. Sunt vicepreședintă a Comisiei pentru piața internă, am ridicat această problemă la 16 președinții. Dumneavoastră sunteți a șaptesprezecea, sper să o rezolvați. Nu putem să aveți să avem două Europe, spațiul Schengen și non-Schengen. Nu putem să avem cetățeni de mâna a doua și vă rog, domnule prim-ministru, să nu mă decepționați ca președinția franceză, căreia i-am cerut acest lucru, pentru că, da, țara mea îndeplinește condițiile tehnice din 2011 și acest Parlament a votat de mai multe ori intrarea României și Bulgariei în Schengen.

Vă cer, așadar, domnule prim-ministru, completați-vă prioritățile și cu uniunea pieței interne, fără a mai avea două piețe interne, Schengen și non-Schengen.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)

  Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, dear Prime Minister, honourable Members of the European Parliament, allow me to address you in my mother tongue, because Czechs and Slovaks will forever be brothers.

Vážený pán premiér, veľmi dobre ste popísali obrovskú nádej, ktorú naši rodičia spájali s Pražskou jarou a beznádej, ktorú priniesli ruské tanky. Veľmi dobre vieme, že nádej sa do našich miest, do našich ulíc vrátila až o 20 rokov neskôr počas zamatovej revolúcie, ktorá vrátila demokraciu do strednej Európy a strednú Európu späť do srdca Európy.

V tomto príbehu je veľmi veľa paralel a podobností s dnešnou vojnou na Ukrajine, preto Ukrajine tak dobre rozumiete, preto sa viete vcítiť do ich situácie, do ich postavenia, a preto ste im preukazovali takú principiálnu podporu. Z dnešnej debaty ste určite nadobudli dojem a urobili záver, že vašich päť priorít je správne zvolených. Vyplýva to z precíznej prípravy vášho predsedníctva a pružnosti, s akou ste pristúpili k ich modifikácii vzhľadom na situáciu vo svete a hlavne na rozpútanú ruskú agresiu voči Ukrajine.

Chcel by som Vás menom Európske komisie ubezpečiť, že budeme spoločne pracovať na mnohých úlohách, ale určite hlavne na tých, ktoré boli spájané a budú spájané s rozpracovaním záverov z Lugana a spojené s plánom obnovy Ukrajiny.

České predsedníctvo, ale takisto aj nové členské krajiny, môže odovzdať veľmi veľa svojich skúseností z transformácií, z prípravy na členstvo, tak ako Ukrajine, tak aj Moldavsku, Gruzínsku, ako aj krajinám na západnom Balkáne.

Energetická bezpečnosť bude určite ďalšou veľkou skúškou, ktorý musí Európska únia, ktorú musí Európska únia zvládnuť. Uvedomujeme si potrebu jasných pravidiel, ktoré budú garantovať solidaritu medzi členskými krajinami v tejto zložitej situácii. Určite sa poučíme z krízy spojenej z prvých mesiacov počas covidu a v tomto zmysle pripravujeme na dvadsiateho júla konkrétny návrh, ktorý potom budeme samozrejme naďalej rozpracovávať s Európskym parlamentom, s českým predsedníctvom v rámci Rady.

Here I would like to underline the importance – and thank you, Prime Minister, for the priority you have given to Fit for 55, because here time is of the essence. The urgency is clear: just this week, we have seen the terrible melting of glaciers in Marmolada, heat waves and fires in Spain, I would say across Europe, and if you look at the calendar, 2030 is indeed around the corner.

Therefore, I would like to assure you that you will have all the support we can provide you with for the trilogues with the European Parliament, because now the positions and general approaches are approved, the votes in the European Parliament have taken place, so now we have to work on the compromise to make Fit for 55 happen.

I also would like to agree with you, Mr Prime Minister, that what we need is to strengthen the strategic resilience of the European economy and to work on Europe’s technological and industrial leadership. And part of a strong economy is strong economic governance. Therefore, our plan is that, already in the second half of this year, we will work on a new strong economic governance framework; we will provide orientation on possible changes to the economic governance of today, after the summer break, so it would be well in time prepared for 2023. We plan, together with the Czech Presidency, to foster consensus where we can, find the best possible solutions, how to deal with debt sustainability, how to make sure that we will work on sustainable growth through investments and reforms.

Speaking about the Conference on the Future of Europe, I would like to reassure the honourable Members that the concrete follow-up by the Commission will be presented to you in the first speech of the President of the European Commission in September, in her address on the State of the Union. Immediately, the follow-up would be worked into the next Commission work programme. And when it comes to the convention, once the decision is taken, the Commission will play its role to make Europe stronger and better in the future.

Pán premiér, za motto českého predsedníctva ste zvolili Havlove slová „Európa ako úloha“, Európa ako úkol, „Europe as a task“. Som presvedčený, že Česká republika tento „úkol“ úspešne zvládne a v Európskej komisii sa tešíme na úzku spoluprácu so skvele pripraveným a vysoko motivovaným českým predsedníctvom. Na záver by som Vám zaželal len veľa úspechov a veľa šťastia a tešíme sa na spoluprácu.

  Petr Fiala, úřadující předseda Rady. – Paní předsedající, já ještě jednou děkuji za tu opravdu živou diskuzi a spoustu podnětů a otázek. Myslím si, že všechno to ukazuje, a pro mě je to jasný signál toho, že priority českého předsednictví byly zvoleny dobře. Upozorňujete na některé další aspekty, které jsem vzhledem k vyměřenému času nemohl ve svém projevu zmínit, ale určitě se jim budeme věnovat a budeme vaše podněty brát vážně.

Já se pokusím velmi rychle a stručně odpovědět na některé konkrétní otázky, ale možná začnu tou obecnější, pokud jde o Konferenci o budoucnosti Evropy, pokud jde o určitou netrpělivost, která tady zaznívala nejvýrazněji s určitou emocí v projevu poslance Verhofstadta. Já musím říct, že rychlost a emoce nejsou někdy dobrým rádcem pro to, abychom dosáhli dobrého výsledku. Mně záleží na budoucnosti Evropy, záleží mně na dobré spolupráci evropských zemí. Záleží mi na projektu Evropské unie. Jako člověk, který se Evropskou unií zabývá třicet let, mám na paměti i věci, které se nepovedly. Když si vzpomenete třeba na evropskou ústavní smlouvu nebo některé projekty reformy Evropské unie, které třeba nebyly dobře připraveny nebo přišly příliš rychle, tak vedly spíše k problémům a oslabení podpory Evropské unie u lidí než k lepším výsledkům. Já nevěřím v to, že dosáhneme lepších výsledků, když budeme rychlejší. My musíme vést důkladnou debatu, musíme se navzájem poslouchat. Nemůžeme mít představu, že ten, kdo chce jít rychleji, je lepší Evropan než ten, kdo radí, abychom spíše diskutovali a našli to správné řešení a pak teprve postoupili dál. Když se budeme navzájem poslouchat a budeme se navzájem respektovat a budeme mít na paměti ten společný cíl, tak si myslím, že můžeme dokázat dosáhnout dobrých výsledků. České předsednictví nebude ničemu bránit, české předsednictví povede dál tu debatu. Ale povedeme tu debatu tak, aby mohla dojít k úspěšnému výsledku.

Chci reagovat na některé otázky, které zazněly, pokud jde o článek 7. České předsednictví bude postupovat tak, jak má předsednická země, tedy jako nestranný zprostředkovatel a moderátor, a bude vyvíjet úsilí směrem k smírnému řešení. To je náš úkol a tak má předsednická země postupovat.

Pokud jde o otázky, které se týkaly rovnosti mužů a žen, já schválně zmiňuji spíš to, co zaznělo ve více vystoupeních. V souladu s osmnáctiměsíčním programem Rady a deklarací předsednického tria k rovnosti žen a mužů bude naší prioritou také rovnost žen a mužů. České předsednictví bude usilovat o pokrok v trialozích s Evropským parlamentem u návrhu směrnice o zajištění transparentnosti v odměňování mužů a žen a zahájí proces projednávání návrhu na posílení role a nezávislosti orgánů pro rovnost, které hrají v tomto směru klíčovou roli. Na téma rovných příležitostí pro mladé muže a ženy na trhu práce v období postcovidového oživení ekonomiky zorganizuje české předsednictví v Praze ve dnech 3. a 4. října konferenci.

Pokud jde o tu specifickou otázku k problematice vzácných onemocnění, tak bude v Praze ve dnech 25. a 26. října uspořádána expertní konference zaměřená na zvýšení dostupnosti léčby pro pacienty se zvláštními onemocněními a diskuzi o evropském plánu pro vzácná onemocnění.

Hlavním cílem českého předsednictví, pokud jde o otázku, která se týká dohod volného obchodu, bude zlepšit schopnost EU dokončovat a uzavírat obchodní dohody. Jak dokládají data, Evropská unie tady zaostává za některými třetími zeměmi, a to samozřejmě chceme posunout kupředu. Klíčové jsou v tomto směru zejména regiony Latinské Ameriky, indicko-tichomořský region nebo regiony Afriky, kde Evropská unie svou případnou neaktivitou vyklízí pole systémovým rivalům. A to nechceme. A to, co je zmíněno v tom písemném materiálu, tak to samozřejmě pro české předsednictví platí.

Pokud jde o „Fit for 55“, tak v oblasti návrhu tohoto balíku se intenzivně připravujeme na další fázi vyjednávání. Známe pozice obou zákonodárců, Rady a Evropského parlamentu, a naším úkolem je zahájit jednání, a jak víte, tak jednou z priorit českého předsednictví je energetická bezpečnost.

Zazněla zde také opakovaně otázka na schengenský prostor, Bulharsko a Rumunsko. Já musím říct, že jsme už teď s vládami Chorvatska, Bulharska a Rumunska v kontaktu ohledně rozšíření Schengenu. Volný pohyb osob bereme skutečně vážně a doufám, že se nám tady podaří dosáhnout nějakého pokroku.

Vážené paní poslankyně, vážení páni poslanci, ještě jednou děkuji za možnost zde vystoupit a prezentovat priority českého předsednictví. Děkuji vám za vaše příspěvky, za vaši diskuzi, za vaše slova podpory, kterých si velmi vážím. Jsem rád a myslím, že to tak mohu shrnout, že Evropský parlament vidí věci podobně a já jsem tomu rád i proto, že chápu spolupráci Parlamentu a Rady jako klíčovou pro to, abychom dokázali splnit to, co po nás občané evropských zemí chtějí. A občané evropských zemí chtějí, abychom dokázali řešit, řešili a dokázali vyřešit důsledky a příčiny války.

Mnozí z nich to zmínili. Důsledky, to jsou rostoucí ceny energií, potravin, dalšího zboží, zničená Ukrajina, všechno to, co před nás staví nové úkoly. Příčinou je samozřejmě Rusko a jeho agresivní politika. I v této oblasti můžeme hrát velkou roli vytrváním v pomoci, kterou Ukrajině poskytujeme, a tlakem na Rusko, abychom zastavili jeho agresivní cíle.

Naším úkolem je skloubit všechny tyto činnosti dohromady. České předsednictví má na co navazovat, na úspěchy francouzského předsednictví, které jsem zmínil ve svém vystoupení. Ale samozřejmě ty výzvy, ty hrozby, to, čemu Evropská unie čelí, jsou obrovské.

Naším úkolem je skloubit všechny ty činnosti dohromady tak, abychom zlepšili život našich občanů a abychom zlepšili konkurenceschopnost evropských ekonomik, abychom zajistili bezpečnost našich zemí a zajistili bezpečnost celé Evropské unie. Já vám ještě jednou děkuji a těším se na spolupráci s Evropským parlamentem.

  President. – Thank you very, very much Prime Minister, and thank you dear colleagues, for this debate. We look forward to your Presidency, as you’ve seen from all the comments by the colleagues. Thank you and good luck.

The debate is closed.

Written statements (Rule 171)

  András Gyürk (NI), írásban. – Európa közvetlen szomszédságában háború dúl. A konfliktus és az elszabaduló energiaárak miatt háborús inflációs spirálba került az európai gazdaság, illetve küszöbön áll egy globális élelmiszerválság is. Ezek alapján kijelenthető, hogy a cseh elnökség rendkívüli helyzetben kezdi meg munkáját, amihez sok sikert kívánok. Fontos, hogy a kihívásokra józan, megfontolt válaszok szülessenek. Emiatt bizakodásra ad okot, hogy az energiapolitikában a cseh elnökség végre az energiabiztonságra helyezi a hangsúlyt. Az energiaellátás nem ideológiai, hanem fizikai kérdés: vagy van energiahordozó, vagy nincs. Azt várom a cseh elnökségtől, hogy ebben az irányban tegyen lépéseket. Másrészt pozitív, hogy a baloldallal szemben a cseh elnökség elismeri az atomenergia kiemelt szerepét az energiabiztonságban és a klímavédelemben.

Az atomenergia nélkülözhetetlen az európai energiamixben – ezért minden, alkalmazását előmozdító kezdeményezés üdvözlendő. Végül örömteli, hogy a cseh elnökség kiemelt figyelmet fordít a kudarcos brüsszeli energiapolitika miatt robbanásszerűen emelkedő energiaárak társadalmi és gazdasági hatásainak enyhítésére. Meg kell védenünk a polgárokat és a kisvállalkozásokat az energiaválságtól. Az emberek, Brüsszel egyre őrültebb ötleteivel szemben, mosni, fűteni és utazni szeretnének, ezért józan, észszerű javaslatokat várok a cseh elnökségtől a kérdésben.

  Lívia Járóka (NI), írásban. – Üdvözlöm Csehországot az Európai Unió Tanácsának soros elnökségi tisztjében! Az előttünk álló félév számos kihívást tartogat Európa számára, de egyben lehetőségek sokaságát is magában hordozhatja. Az elnökség által meghatározott prioritások, így 1.) a menekültválság kezelése és Ukrajna háború utáni helyreállítása, 2.) az energiabiztonság okozta nehézségek kezelése, 3.) Európa védelmi képességeinek és a kibertér biztonságának megerősítése, 4.) az európai gazdaság stratégiai rugalmasságának biztosítása és 5.) a demokratikus intézmények ellenálló képessége mind olyan pontok melyek mielőbbi közös fellépést, átgondolt uniós politikát és összehangolt cselekvést igényelnek az EU intézményeitől és a tagállamoktól egyaránt.

A jelenleg a szomszédságunkban zajló háború okozta gazdasági és biztonsági kockázat kiemelten nehéz helyzetbe hozta Európa legkiszolgáltatottabb közösségeit, így a deprivált és hátrányos helyzetű embertársainkat, a háború elöl menekülni kényszerülő nőket és gyermekeket, a kárpátaljai magyarajkú kisebbséget és Európa roma közösségeit is. Kiemelt prioritást kell élveznie az 1.) és 4.) pontban foglaltak tekintetében a nehéz helyzetbe kerültek megsegítése és a munkaerőpiacra való integrációja és reintegrációja. Így kérem Csehországot, hogy célkitűzései mentén ténylegesen tegyenek roma közösségeink jobbléte, és a háború kihívásaitól nehéz helyzetbe került állampolgárok jólléte érdekében. Hangolja össze az uniós intézmények cselekvési terveit, segítse a tagállamokkal való kommunikáció megkönnyítését és járjon el az Európai Unióba vetett bizalom helyreállításának érdekében!

  Adriana Maldonado López (S&D), por escrito. – Los socialistas españoles celebramos las prioridades del Presidencia checa en el ámbito de la gestión de las crisis de refugiados y refugiadas, la recuperación de Ucrania tras la guerra y la seguridad energética. Pero debemos también anticipar las consecuencias económicas y sociales que se avecinan por la sucesión de crisis en los últimos años y por las catastróficas consecuencias de la barbarie llevada a cabo por Putin.

Por eso celebramos que la Presidencia checa haya adoptado la propuesta socialista de organizar una cumbre social para actualizar las políticas sociales que acordamos hace un año en Oporto.

También es fundamental es la igualdad de género y el Estado de Derecho y hemos pedido a la Presidencia checa que ratifique el Convenio de Estambul y que lidere una nueva primavera democrática organizando las audiencias sobre el deterioro del Estado de Derecho en Hungría y en Polonia, siguiendo los procedimientos del artículo 7.

Por último, los socialistas españoles reclamamos que la Presidencia checa no relegue a un segundo nivel las negociaciones relativas al Nuevo Pacto de Migración y Asilo y que no deje de lado las conclusiones de la Conferencia sobre el Futuro de Europa y en particular, la activación del artículo 48.

  Beata Mazurek (ECR), na piśmie. – Szanowny Panie Premierze, serdecznie witam Pana w naszej Izbie Parlamentarnej. Niespełna 10 dni temu Czechy stanęły na czele Rady Unii Europejskiej, a dzisiaj gościmy Pana w celu wysłuchania programu prezydencji. Razem z reprezentantami Polski oraz Słowenii byliście pierwszymi europejskimi przedstawicielami w pogrążonym w walce Kijowie. Życzę, aby tak, jak podczas wspomnianej wizyty, również i teraz nie zabrakło Panu odwagi oraz motywacji do działania. Europa znajduje się w historycznym miejscu. Z jednej strony, widać za nami efekty wspólnej pracy oraz starań. Przed nami widmo bezpodstawnej, krwawej wojny, która została rozpętana w imię chorych ambicji prezydenta Rosji oraz historycznego imperializmu i może na stałe nas podzielić. Czeka Pana trudne zadanie, jednak jako Wspólnota Europejska pragniemy wyrazić naszą chęć i gotowość do pomocy. Życzę Panu wielu sukcesów w nadchodzącym czasie i powtórzę jeszcze raz, niech nie boi się Pan działać.

  Victor Negrescu (S&D), în scris. – Prioritatea Uniunii Europene pentru următoarele șase luni trebuie să fie protejarea cetățenilor europeni în fața multiplelor crize pe care le traversăm și în fața provocărilor ridicate de creșterea prețurilor la energie și alimente, inflație sau cele generate de războiul din Ucraina. Pentru a face față acestor situații nemaiîntâlnite, trebuie să păstrăm unitatea blocului european, respectând fiecare stat membru, asigurându-ne că, în același timp, avansăm agenda europeană pe subiectele importante.

O temă ce necesită atenția Președinției Cehiei la Consiliul Uniunii Europene este aderarea României la Schengen. Țara noastră respectă toate criteriile de aderare la spațiul Schengen. A demonstrat în ultimele luni că poate asigura protecția frontierelor externe ale Uniunii Europene și a arătat că are infrastructura și competențe necesare pentru a sprijini această zonă de liberă circulație.

Mai mult, în contextul actual, devine tot mai important ca produsele din această zonă a Europei să ajungă mai rapid în restul Uniunii Europene. În acest sens, solicit Președinției Cehiei la Consiliul Uniunii Europene să supună la vot, în următoarele șase luni, în Consiliul Justiție și Afaceri Interne, aderarea României la spațiul Schengen.

SĒDI VADA: ROBERTS ZĪLE
Priekšsēdētājas vietnieks

7. Komitetų ir delegacijų sudėtis

  Sēdes vadītājs. – Godātie kolēģi! Turpinām sēdi.

Paziņojums: grupa “Renew Europe” ir paziņojusi priekšsēdētājai lēmumu par izmaiņām attiecībā uz iecelšanu amatā komitejā.

Šo lēmumu iekļaus šodienas sēdes protokolā, un tas stāsies spēkā šā paziņojuma dienā.

8. 2022 m. birželio 23–24 d. Europos Vadovų Tarybos susitikimo išvados (diskusijos)

  Sēdes vadītājs. – Nākamais darba kārtības punkts ir debates par Eiropadomes un Komisijas paziņojumiem – Eiropadomes 2022. gada 23. un 24. jūnija sanāksmes secinājumi (2022/2707(RSP)).

Atgādinu, ka var brīvi izvēlēties vietu plenārsēžu zālē, izņemot pirmās divas rindas, kas rezervētas grupu vadītājiem.

Es domāju, ka mēs nevaram šoreiz strādāt ar zilajām kartītēm. Brīvā mikrofona procedūra paliks, jo mums nevajadzētu ļoti kavēt plenārsēdē balsojumu.

  Charles Michel, EurCouncil. – Mr President, the Kremlin’s barbaric war against Ukraine has marked a tectonic shift on our continent and created a new geopolitical reality.

Last week, with the 27 EU leaders, we took a number of major geopolitical decisions. First, we decided to recognise the European perspective of Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia. The future of these countries and their people lies within the EU. We also decided to grant candidate status to Ukraine and Moldova. This sends a strong message to their people and to our European Union citizens. We are also ready to grant candidate status to Georgia once the priorities, in the Commission’s opinion, have been addressed.

Since the Russian attack, we have responded with unity to support Ukraine, and we will stay right by their side for as long as it takes. We will continue to provide military support; we have already done a lot, but Ukraine needs more, so we talked about increasing military support for Ukraine. We will also continue to support Ukraine financially, and we count on the Commission to present soon a proposal to grant Ukraine new macro—financial assistance of up to EUR 9 billion in 2022. We are also committed to supporting Ukraine’s reconstruction, together with international partners. And work will continue on sanctions to make sure all our sanctions are effectively implemented, and to prevent as much as possible circumvention. In close coordination with our G7 partners – we were together in Germany a few days ago, we will consider sanctions on gold and we will also explore measures such as price caps to secure energy supply and to try to reduce price surges.

Ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, the European Union needs the Western Balkans as much as the Western Balkans need us, and this is why we met with the Western Balkan leaders just before our European Council meeting. It was a frank, open, but also a hard debate with the Western Balkan leaders, but it was also much needed. We decided how to re-energise our engagement with this region, and we reaffirmed our strong commitment to reviving the enlargement process and to see how to clear the obstacles along the way.

Opening accession talks with North Macedonia and Albania is a top priority. On the second day of the European Council, the Bulgarian Parliament voted to overturn its veto on North Macedonia beginning EU membership talks. Just yesterday and this morning, I was in North Macedonia for the second time in recent months to try to explain the Council’s proposal to pave the way to the opening of EU accession talks with North Macedonia. I would like to thank the French Presidency for their tireless efforts to help bridge the gap between North Macedonia and Bulgaria and for opening the possibility to move this process forward swiftly, both for North Macedonia and for Albania.

Ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, progress on bilateral and regional disputes is also urgent. Normalising relations between Kosovo and Serbia through the Belgrade—Pristina dialogue is of key importance. We have also had the occasion to reaffirm that we are ready to grant candidate status to Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Commission will report on the implementation of 14 key priorities set out in its opinion, with special attention to a substantial set of reforms.

Mesdames et Messieurs, ce Conseil européen a aussi été l’occasion d’aborder cette idée de mettre en place une communauté politique européenne. Nous avons eu un débat substantiel avec les 27 chefs d’État et de gouvernement sur ce sujet pour tenter de dessiner les contours d’une telle initiative. Nous avons tenté de répondre aux trois questions centrales qui se sont posées au départ de cette idée émise dans cette assemblée, le 9 mai, par le président Macron.

Qui a vocation à participer à une telle communauté politique? Nous pensons que toutes celles et ceux qui, sur le continent européen, partagent les mêmes intérêts et qui souhaitent se coordonner et coopérer dans toutes sortes de domaines ont vocation à être invités. Cela ne veut pas dire que ce sont nécessairement des pays qui ont vocation à rejoindre l’Union européenne. Certains d’entre eux n’ont pas ce souhait. D’autres, même s’ils avaient ce souhait, n’auraient pas vocation à nous rejoindre. Par contre, certains de ces pays ont vocation à le faire, et sont même déjà engagés dans des processus en lien avec l’adhésion à l’Union européenne.

La deuxième question est: avec quel but? Il s’agit de mettre en place une plateforme politique plutôt souple et flexible sur des thèmes comme l’énergie, la sécurité, les infrastructures, la santé, une pandémie. Si une telle plateforme avait existé au moment de la COVID-19, je suis totalement convaincu qu’un certain nombre de choses eussent été faites en associant plus directement des partenaires autour de nous, sur le continent européen.

Et puis la troisième question, c’est comment nous pensons. Et la tendance qui se dégage de nos débats, c’est qu’il n’y a pas la nécessité d’une structure institutionnelle lourde, en tout cas certainement pas dans un premier temps. Il y a plutôt la nécessité, à un rythme régulier, de mettre en place des réunions au niveau des leaders. Le mandat m’a été confié, ainsi qu’au Premier ministre tchèque dans le cadre de la présidence rotative, de préparer une telle initiative, qui pourrait déjà avoir lieu sous la présidence tchèque et en tout cas avant la fin de l’année.

Nous allons donc très certainement avoir l’occasion de revenir sur ce sujet dans les débats au Parlement, de vous en rendre compte lors des prochaines rencontres qui interviendront au sein du Conseil européen en lien avec ce sujet.

Un mot en lien avec la conférence sur l’avenir de l’Europe et le courrier qui m’a été formellement adressé, ainsi qu’à la présidence rotative tchèque, pour vous indiquer que ce point n’a pas fait l’objet de débats directs, mais que des conclusions ont été validées dans le cadre du Conseil européen qui s’est tenu. Je souhaite exprimer mon engagement d’être attentif à ce qu’un suivi approprié puisse intervenir sur ce sujet en lien avec nos principes institutionnels. Je suis certain que, là aussi, il y aura nécessité de revenir sur ce sujet. Le Conseil européen, dans ses conclusions, a pris en considération cet effort inédit de consultation citoyenne, qui a débouché sur un certain nombre de recommandations.

Enfin, je voudrais terminer ce compte rendu par un point central qui a fait l’objet de nos échanges le deuxième jour du Conseil européen, le vendredi. Il s’agit de la situation économique et des conséquences sociales de cette situation économique en lien avec la guerre qui a été déclenchée par la Russie. Nous mesurons bien, partout en Europe et partout dans le monde, que l’inflation, la hausse des prix, l’impact sur les produits alimentaires et sur la sécurité alimentaire mettent sous pression nos familles, nos citoyens et nos entreprises partout en Europe. Cela nécessite une mobilisation, une ambition de coordonner autant que possible nos politiques. Cela nécessite une ambition de pratiquer l’intelligence collective et de veiller à ce que les mesures de soutien qui sont prises sur le plan national soient le plus ciblées possible afin d’avoir un impact réel et d’éviter de provoquer un effet inverse à celui qui est souhaité. Nous voyons bien qu’il y a la nécessité de dialoguer, de coordonner, d’agir de concert, d’agir ensemble.

Et puis enfin, nous avons fait le point sur l’état d’avancement de deux projets que je crois extrêmement importants: l’union bancaire et l’union des marchés des capitaux, qui sont, je pense, des leviers potentiellement puissants, si on arrive dans les prochains mois à progresser davantage encore sur ces sujets afin de consolider cette capacité d’unité européenne et de renforcement de notre modèle économique.

Enfin, je conclus ce rapport en vous indiquant que l’Union européenne n’agit pas seule. Les dernières semaines ont été aussi le théâtre d’un agenda international, notamment avec la réunion du G7, qui s’est tenue en Allemagne, à laquelle nous avons participé de manière active pour nous coordonner avec nos partenaires, avec nos amis. Dans le même esprit, nous préparons les réunions du G20, qui auront lieu avant la fin de l’année en Indonésie, pour veiller à ce que les intérêts, les valeurs, les principes auxquels nous croyons puissent être portés et défendus.

Je conclus en vous disant que nous mesurons bien – et vous le mesurez bien – que les temps que nous vivons sont des temps troublés. Des plaques tectoniques sont en mouvement parce que cette guerre absurde, injustifiée, brutale et non provoquée a été décidée par le Kremlin. Plus que jamais, l’ambition de l’Union européenne, au travers de notre unité et de notre puissance, doit être l’ambition de la stabilité, de la sécurité, de la paix et de ces valeurs que nous souhaitons incarner. Cela va supposer que nous faisions preuve à la fois de lucidité, de sang-froid, mais aussi de capacité d’agir pour nous projeter dans l’avenir et pour défendre ce en quoi nous croyons, ces valeurs démocratiques auxquelles nous sommes tellement attachés et cette croyance fondamentale que le droit international est la meilleure garantie pour les libertés et pour les sociétés libres.

(Debates tika pārtrauktas.)

9. Oficialus pasveikinimas

  Sēdes vadītājs. – Es vēlētos sveikt diplomātiskajā galerijā Jaunzēlandes parlamenta delegāciju. Mūsu kolēģi šonedēļ ir Strasbūrā, lai piedalītos 26. Eiropas Savienības un Jaunzēlandes starpparlamentārajā sanāksmē.

Jaunzēlande ir draugs un sabiedrotais. Mums ir jāturpina stiprināt sadarbību un stiprināt mūsu politiskās un ekonomiskās saites, jo īpaši drošības, attīstības palīdzības, enerģētikas un klimata pārmaiņu jomā.

Es ceru uz produktīvu starpparlamentāro sanāksmi šodien pēcpusdienā.

10. 2022 m. birželio 23–24 d. Europos Vadovų Tarybos susitikimo išvados (diskusijų tęsinys)

  Sēdes vadītājs. – Turpinām debates par Eiropadomes un Komisijas paziņojumiem – Eiropadomes 2022. gada 23. un 24. jūnija sanāksmes secinājumi (2022/2707(RSP)).

  Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, dear President of the European Council, honourable Members of the European Parliament, honourable Members of the Parliament of New Zealand, it’s indeed a pleasure to participate in this debate, to report on a number of issues discussed by the leaders at the European Council in June, most notably on the next steps of prospective future members of the European Union.

To start with Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia, all three countries are an undeniable part of our European family and I am delighted that this was recognised by the leaders, who unanimously welcomed the Commission’s opinion and made the historic decision to grant candidate status to Ukraine and Moldova and a European perspective to Georgia.

These opinions were based on three sets of criteria: political, economic and the ability to assume the obligations of EU membership. The decision taken by the European Council underlines to the world our unity and strength, especially in view of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. One of the underlying reasons for the Kremlin launching its unjustified invasion was Ukraine’s desire to join the European Union. By answering this desire directly, our response has been loud and clear.

The European Council’s endorsement of candidate status acknowledges the immense progress that Kyiv has achieved since the Maidan protests of 2014. But now the hard work really begins, with the need for Ukraine to consolidate the reforms it has achieved and move forward with determination.

In the meantime, the EU again reiterated its full support for Ukraine in all dimensions as it courageously defends itself against Russian imperialism. Over the coming weeks, we will work on further military support for Ukraine as well as the new micro—financial assistance package. We will also soon table a full reconstruction package to rebuild Ukraine once it has won the war.

To return to enlargement, Moldova is on a genuine pro—reform, anti—corruption and European path for the first time since independence. It too still has a long way to go, with major improvements needed to its economy and public administration. But provided it stays the course, there is no doubt that Moldova has the potential to meet the requirements of EU membership. This is why it has been granted candidate status, on the understanding it continues along this path.

Georgia shares the same aspiration and potential as Ukraine and Moldova. Its application has strengths, particularly with regard to the market orientation of its economy. But to succeed in its application, Georgia needs to come together politically to set a clear path towards the necessary reforms, working with civil society. This is why Georgia has been granted a European perspective with a view to giving it candidate status once these reforms are achieved.

It is also important that the EU gives new impetus to the enlargement process in the Western Balkans. The unblocking of this process for North Macedonia and Albania is particularly welcome in this regard, and I would like to thank the President of the European Council and the French Presidency for all their efforts in this regard.

There has been a great deal of thought given to how we can best support Bosnia and Herzegovina on its European path. As requested by the European Council, the Commission will now report on the country’s implementation of the 14 priorities. Again, we will look to grant Bosnia and Herzegovina candidate status once the most substantial reforms have been implemented.

On the Conference on the Future of Europe – an issue that I know is important to this Parliament, just as it is important to the Commission and to me personally – it remains crucial that the ideas and the initiatives that emerged from the process and which we received from our citizens are properly acted upon. To that end, the leaders tasked the institutions with ensuring the proposals set out in the report on the outcome of the conference are followed up effectively, and I look forward to working with you on this important venture. It is critical not only that the recommendations of the citizens are taken on board, but that the Europeans everywhere are kept properly informed of the progress made.

Finally, with the war in Ukraine continuing to have an impact on Europe’s economy, not least on food and energy prices, we need to continue doing everything we can to shield the most vulnerable from the worst effects. And we need to be prepared for conditions to deteriorate, including possible further disruption of Russian gas deliveries. This means doubling down on our efforts to diversify supplies, including through ensuring that Member States’ national emergency plans are adequate for any challenges ahead.

It was agreed at the European Council to work on an EU emergency reduction plan with industry, to coordinate these national plans. The Commission will continue its efforts to ensure a united and cooperative approach to energy in Europe to make sure that the solidarity principle is fully implemented.

On the financial side, even as deficits and debts have soared after COVID, there is still a need for massive investment to build a greener and more digital future. So we will design rules reconciling these higher investment requirements with the need to safeguard sound fiscal finances.

Last but not least, Croatia has worked hard to meet all the requirements for taking the momentous step of adopting the euro, and we look forward to welcoming it into the eurozone on 1 January 2023.

So, Mr President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, there are a lot of very important, crucial topics which I’m sure we’ll have a chance to discuss now together in the plenary debate.

  Siegfried Mureşan, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, President Michel, Vice—President Šefčovič, welcome back to the European Parliament.

The decision of the European Council to grant candidate status to Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova and to offer this perspective to Georgia, once it fulfils the conditions, was correct. This is a decision supported by the European Parliament and it corresponds to the expectations of the people in these countries.

The people of Ukraine are defending European values with their lives in Ukraine and the people of Moldova have opened their houses to Ukrainian refugees. More Ukrainian refugees have entered the Republic of Moldova in relation to its population than any EU Member State.

We, as the European Parliament, have understood early that we can only live in safety and security within the borders of the European Union if the countries in our immediate neighbourhood borders are safe and stable. This is why we called already in March for Ukraine, and in May for the Republic of Moldova, to work towards granting this candidate status. Because in these times we have to act quickly, clearly without hesitation.

Dear colleagues, Members of the Parliament, thank you very much for the fact that Parliament stood united since the beginning of this war in supporting countries in our eastern neighbourhood. Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova still have a long way to go before they are ready for EU membership but, Vice-President Šefčovič, we have to make sure that we start this process at a technical level and we have to make sure that even before these countries are ready to join, we support them and we make sure that the people in these countries can start feeling the benefits of getting closer to the European Union.

The Council made the right decisions on Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, but the outcome on Western Balkans was disappointing. I was encouraged, President Michel, by your remarks today, and I believe we all have to work together so that we make sure that the Czech Presidency succeeds where the French Presidency has not managed to succeed, in offering a clear perspective to the Western Balkan countries.

Good news came from the European Council when it comes to the euro area. Thank you, President Michel, for endorsing Croatia’s readiness to become a member of the euro area on 1 January. We have yesterday voted with a large majority here to approve Croatia’s entry into the euro area on 1 January. Every single member of the four largest groups in the European Parliament, and many colleagues in the other groups, have voted in favour. So thank you very much dear colleagues, this shows us that Croatia’s path on strengthening its economy, on managing its budget with care, on getting closer to the euro area under the leadership of Prime Minister Andrej Plenković, was correct. It pays off. It is good news for Croatia. It is good news for the euro area. It will make the euro area stronger and it shows the trust in our common currency.

Last point, it is our duty, dear colleagues, to further strengthen the European Union. We have to equip the European Union with the tools it needs to overcome the problems that people are facing.

We held the Conference on the Future of Europe but, President Michel, the outcome of the European Council saying that ‘we take note of this and we are happy that there was an exchange with citizens’ is too little. We have to take the ideas of the citizens on board. We have to solve their problems and we have to do this together.

Council, Commission and Members of the European Parliament, we have to make the EU fit for the future. We have to make sure that it can make decisions, it can react fast, and it offers solutions to the problems that people are facing.

  Simona Bonafè, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, potremmo definirla una conclusione con luci e ombre quella dell'ultimo Consiglio europeo.

Sicuramente positivi sono i passi in avanti sulle richieste di adesione. L'Unione europea è la casa della democrazia. Siamo l'istituzione a cui sempre più paesi guardano come in grado di dare stabilità, sicurezza e pace.

Le ombre sono invece quelle che ancora vediamo sulle questioni energetiche ed economiche, in particolare sui temi della sicurezza degli approvvigionamenti di gas e sul contrasto all'inflazione, questioni che non possono non avere una risposta europea.

Le conclusioni del Consiglio, sebbene invitino la Commissione a proseguire con urgenza gli sforzi per assicurare l'approvvigionamento energetico a prezzi accessibili, rimandano però di fatto la decisione di fissare un tetto massimo europeo al prezzo del gas, che da subito potrebbe frenare l'inflazione che sta colpendo anche i beni di prima necessità.

A fronte del timore di alcuni che la Russia reagisca ad un price cap con ritorsioni, andrebbe ricordato che Putin sta già tagliando le forniture, proprio per evitare che l'Europa riempia i depositi, e aumentare così il ricatto nei nostri confronti nei mesi invernali, quando avremo più bisogno di gas.

E allora dobbiamo agire adesso diversificando gli approvvigionamenti, con investimenti massicci in energie rinnovabili, fissando da subito un tetto massimo europeo al prezzo del gas e aiutando famiglie e imprese strette nella tenaglia di bollette salate, caro benzina e inflazione in un contesto in cui ancora non siamo fuori dalla pandemia.

Il tempo stringe, non abbiamo bisogno di Consigli europei che rimandino le decisioni, ma di una Unione unita e solidale che sappia dare risposte concrete ed efficaci.

  Valérie Hayer, au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, les années passant, les Européens ont fini par oublier la plus grande réussite de notre Union: la paix.

Cette paix qui nous a permis de construire notre prospérité. Cette paix qui a débouché sur les échanges universitaires, qui a été le terreau fertile de nos libertés, la liberté de circuler, la liberté d'échanger, la liberté d'entreprendre, la liberté de vivre en paix. Cette liberté dont personne aujourd'hui ne voudrait se passer.

Ce modèle a fait notre attractivité. Et en voulant empêcher l'Ukraine de l'épouser, Vladimir Poutine n'a fait que renforcer sa volonté d'y adhérer. Chers collègues, l'extrême droite peut promouvoir la fin de l'Union. L'extrême gauche peut trouver le moindre prétexte pour la décrédibiliser et s'opposer à toute avancée. Mais nous, nous savons ce que nous devons à l'Europe et ce qu'il reste à faire pour la rendre indépendante et souveraine dans un monde toujours plus incertain, pour en faire une puissance stabilisatrice. Nous le ferons pour l'Ukraine, pour la Moldavie et pour tous les États partageant une volonté de paix.

  Ernest Urtasun, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, President Michel, Commissioner, we welcome that the Council has taken the historic decision and accepted the status of accession candidate for both Ukraine and Moldova, as called for by the European Parliament.

The war Russia is waging against Ukraine is one against European integration, and we must stand together. We do regret, however, the lack of progress towards the Western Balkans. While the countries joining, we know, have to undertake tough democratic reforms, the job is not theirs alone.

But where the European Council is disappointing a growing number of European citizens, President Michel, is when it comes to the debate on the future of the EU. While Parliament has already called for the establishment of a new Convention, the Council conclusions invite the institutions to follow up on the debates of the citizens only within their competences and within the current Treaties, which basically means the EUCO seems to have ruled out Treaty change and a new Convention.

It’s a big disappointment. A big disappointment that the French Presidency did not move forward the process of amending the Treaties, as requested by this House. Furthermore, in the programme we just discussed with the Czech Presidency, we only see a vague reference to continuing the debate.

President Michel, Europe may be ready to send a political signal for new members, and this is very much welcome, but the Council does not seem ready to address the issue of internal reform to make such commitment a real success. History is knocking at our doors. A real political union is more needed than ever. Please take up the challenge!

  Jordan Bardella, au nom du groupe ID. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président du Conseil, le dernier Conseil européen a clôturé une présidence française de l'Union européenne qui, au-delà de l'exercice trop souvent narcissique d'un président fuyant les campagnes électorales et les débats français, n'aura en rien remédié aux faiblesses et aux dérives inhérentes de Bruxelles.

«Nous devons passer à une Europe puissante dans le monde, pleinement souveraine, libre de ses choix et maître de son destin», annonçait modestement Emmanuel Macron il y a six mois. Jamais, peut-être, nous n'en avons été plus éloignés. Nous aurons certes un chargeur universel, ce qui est loin d'être inutile dans la vie de tous les jours. Mais qu'est-ce que cela représente au regard de la dépendance accrue aux Américains et à l'OTAN en matière de défense et de politique étrangère?

Faute d'avoir su maintenir des moyens militaires à la hauteur des défis et des dangers du monde, l'Europe est obligée de remettre son destin entre les mains d'autres qu’elle-même. Ceci est la négation même de la souveraineté et de la liberté. Au lieu de s'atteler à consolider et à réparer ce qui devrait l’être, l'Union européenne poursuit sa fuite en avant en faisant de l'élargissement un dogme, quitte à déstabiliser nos modèles économiques et sociaux. L'hypocrisie en matière d'écologie et d'environnement continue de plus belle, et la PFUE a profité de ses derniers jours pour faire un joli cadeau au dérèglement commercial en signant un nouvel accord de libre-échange avec la Nouvelle-Zélande. Enfin, malgré des coups de menton récurrents, Emmanuel Macron n'aura résolu aucune avancée significative en matière de protection de nos frontières face aux intrusions migratoires venues du Sud et de l'Orient.

Forts de 3 000 ans d'histoire, les États et les peuples européens méritent mieux que les incantations jamais suivies d'effets de chefs d'État cherchant à fuir la volonté populaire.

  Beata Szydło, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Przyszłość Europy i przyszłość Unii Europejskiej rozstrzyga się w tej chwili za naszą wschodnią granicą, na Ukrainie. I niewątpliwie decyzja Rady Europejskiej o nadaniu Ukrainie statusu kandydata do UE jest jedną z ważniejszych decyzji, którą Rada Europejska w ostatnim czasie podjęła. I dobrze, że tak się stało. Mamy nadzieję, że ten proces będzie postępował szybko i że Ukraina będzie miała cały czas wsparcie ze strony Unii Europejskiej, bo tego potrzebuje zarówno Unia, jak i właśnie Ukraina. Mamy również nadzieję, że bardzo szybko zostanie ta szansa dana pozostałym krajom, które ubiegają się o członkostwo w Unii Europejskiej, przede wszystkim krajom Bałkanów Zachodnich.

A druga kwestia, na którą chcę zwrócić uwagę i o której tutaj była również mowa, dotyczy tego, iż wydaje się, że w tej chwili z naszej perspektywy najistotniejszy dla Europejczyków – poza bezpieczeństwem, poza właśnie wojną toczącą się na Ukrainie – jest kryzys energetyczny, który może dotknąć wszystkie rodziny europejskie, związany z wysokimi cenami energii, z brakiem źródeł energii, z wysoką inflacją. I być może, panie przewodniczący, warto, by szczyt Rady Europejskiej zebrał się w najbliższym czasie nawet w trybie nadzwyczajnym i te dwa ważne dla Europejczyków tematy podjął.

  Manon Aubry, au nom du groupe The Left. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président du Conseil, je vais être cash. Je voudrais vous parler aujourd’hui d’un éléphant dans la pièce que tout le monde veut oublier: le changement des traités européens.

Alors oui, c’était bien à l’agenda du dernier Conseil, j’ai bien regardé. Mais pouf! Dans les discussions, petit tour de magie, le sujet semblait avoir disparu. Pourtant, notre Parlement avait été très clair sur ses attentes sur le sujet. Les citoyens consultés dans le cadre de la conférence sur l’avenir de l’Europe l’avaient été tout autant: ils attendent un changement radical des fondements mêmes de l’Union européenne. Que dire d’ailleurs d’Emmanuel Macron, qui paradait pour dire à qui voulait bien l’entendre qu’il faut un changement des traités, qu’il a bien enterré depuis – certainement depuis que les élections sont passées en France?

Les chefs d’État européens nous disent – je cite les conclusions du Conseil – qu’ils «prennent note des demandes des citoyens». C’est sympathique, mais comme vous refusez en même temps de débattre du changement des traités, j’ai le sentiment que vous prenez surtout les citoyens pour des imbéciles. Et si je résume, on félicite les citoyens qui veulent changer l’Union européenne de la cave au grenier; mais par contre, il faut être sérieux: tout le monde doit rentrer au bercail, la fête est finie, on ne touchera pas à une virgule des traités européens.

Nous alertons depuis le début de la conférence sur l’avenir de l’Europe qu’une énième parodie de démocratie serait très mal vécue par les citoyens, qui en ont assez qu’on les méprise. Et c’est pourtant exactement ce qui est en train de se passer. Non seulement la réforme des traités est remise aux calendes grecques, mais en plus l’UE s’entête plus que jamais dans son business as usual néolibéral. Je prends un exemple: la semaine dernière, bingo! Encore un nouvel accord de libre-échange, cette fois avec la Nouvelle-Zélande. Idée géniale, effectivement: du dumping écologique, des importations de l’autre bout de la planète, nos agriculteurs en danger. Bravo, continuez comme ça!

Et puis pourquoi s’arrêter en si bon chemin? Et si on allait accélérer le retour de l’austérité et de la fameuse règle des 3 % en pleine crise? Et si on s’entêtait encore plus dans les règles de la concurrence pour privatiser nos trains et nos services publics? Et si on laissait une banque centrale indépendante et sans aucun contrôle démocratique tenir entre ses mains le destin de 450 millions de citoyens, qui paieront directement les conséquences de ses décisions?

Je le redis ici avec force: les crises que nous traversons confirment plus que jamais la nécessité de modifier en profondeur les règles européennes actuelles. Notre Parlement doit se saisir de la question, demander des comptes, mettre le sujet sur la table. Nous sommes, ici au Parlement européen, les seuls élus au sein des institutions européennes. Alors, que le Conseil soit averti: nous ne cesserons d’exiger que la parole des citoyens soit respectée.

  Kinga Gál (NI). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Elnök Úr, Biztos Úr! A bővítés kérdése egy újabb lendületet vett az idén azzal, hogy egy szimbolikus fontosságú lépésként Ukrajna és Moldova tagjelölti státuszt kaphatott. Most mindent meg kell tennünk a béke elérése érdekében a térségben. A döntések ugyanakkor csalódást okoztak a Nyugat-Balkán országainak. A tagjelöltséget azonos értékek és feltételek mellett kell mérlegelni. Bosznia-Hercegovinának és Georgiának is meg kellett volna adni a tagjelölti státuszt. Szerbiával és Montenegróval nem haladtak előre a csatlakozási tárgyalások. Albániával és Észak-Macedóniával pedig még mindig nem kezdődtek el. A koszovói vízumliberalizáció sem haladt előre.

A mostani geopolitikai helyzetben az Unió elsődleges érdeke a Nyugat-Balkán stabilitása és biztonsága. Különösen most, amikor erősödik az illegális migránsok nyomása a nyugat-balkáni migrációs útvonalon. Minél előbb konkrét pozitív döntéseket kell meghozni a Nyugat-Balkán tekintetében, ha nem akarjuk átengedni a régiót harmadik országok befolyásának.

  Angelika Niebler (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Herr Vizepräsident der Kommission – der Ratspräsident hat hier schon das Parlament verlassen, sehr interessant –, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Der Ukraine und Moldau den Kandidatenstatus zu verleihen, ist richtig gewesen, ist ein großer, ein wichtiger Meilenstein. Wir im Parlament haben das ja auch als Erste gefordert, und auch die Ukraine und Moldau weiter zu unterstützen, wie das ja vorgesehen ist, ist genau richtig.

Es ist aber inakzeptabel, dass die Westbalkanstaaten schon so lange auf die EU-Beitrittsgespräche warten müssen und wir letztlich immer noch kein Stück vorangekommen sind. Wir haben gerade beim letzten Gipfel, glaube ich, in dieser Region sehr, sehr viel Vertrauen verloren.

Wie kann es sein, dass die EU nach 15 Jahren Nordmazedonien immer noch warten lässt? Wie kann es sein, dass die Beitrittsgespräche mit Albanien immer wieder verschoben wurden, obwohl Albanien doch schon seit 2010 Beitrittskandidatenstatus hat? Da ist einfach viel zu wenig passiert, und das Übel ist natürlich die Einstimmigkeit im Rat. Genau da müssen wir ansetzen, und deshalb ist es richtig gewesen, dass wir die Einrichtung eines Konvents gefordert haben, um endlich auch zu Vertragsänderungen zu kommen, um endlich für die großen, wichtigen Entscheidungen, gerade die außenpolitischen Fragen, von der Einstimmigkeit wegzukommen. Das geht nur mit Vertragsänderung, nur mit Konvent.

  President. – For those colleagues who complained that the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, has left, he announced that he has another appointment but he will follow our debate. So please take those apologies from his side into account.

  Pedro Marques (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, caros colegas, Senhor Comissário, Senhor Presidente do Conselho, agora ausente mas muito atento à distância, o Conselho Europeu tomou decisões históricas relativamente à candidatura à União Europeia da Ucrânia, Moldávia e Geórgia, mas frustrou, novamente, expetativas dos países dos Balcãs Ocidentais. E, sobretudo, tarda a agir quanto às consequências sociais desta guerra aqui na Europa.

Vamos esperar que a situação piore? Vamos esperar pelo desemprego ou pelo inverno, quando muitas famílias não conseguirem aquecer a sua casa? Não! É preciso agir a partir de agora! Limitar os preços especulativos da energia, apoiar as famílias e as empresas que sofrem mais com o preço do gás e dos combustíveis. Apoiar os que têm sido solidários com os milhões de refugiados ucranianos que merecem o nosso apoio.

Aos líderes, no Conselho Europeu, deixo um apelo muito simples: não esperem pelo Ocidente para meter as mãos no volante. O tempo de agir é agora.

  Hilde Vautmans (Renew). – Voorzitter, de beslissing die de Raad heeft genomen om Oekraïne en Moldavië de status van kandidaat-lidstaat toe te kennen, was eigenlijk de enige juiste beslissing. Er werden ook heel grote beloftes gedaan richting de Balkan. Maar wat mij verbaast, is dat er eigenlijk met geen enkel woord werd gesproken over hoe de Unie dan moet functioneren met 30 of 35 leden. De leiders hebben nota genomen van de conclusies van de Conferentie over de toekomst van Europa, terwijl we allemaal weten dat er toch wel wat dingen in Europa moeten veranderen. We weten toch nog hoe Orbán op de laatste top gebruikmaakte van die unanimiteit. We weten dat die unanimiteit een godsgeschenk is voor de autocraten in de Unie en buiten de Unie.

Hier in het Parlement debatteren we toch al jaren over een aantal tekortkomingen in de Unie. Vandaar dat wij – en wij als liberalen hebben daarvoor geduwd – geduwd hebben op die conferentie, geduwd hebben voor de conclusies, geduwd hebben voor die conventie. Daarom zou ik – maar hij is al weg – onze Charles Michel heel graag willen vragen: beloof me alstublieft dat u zal vechten voor die conventie en dat u zal vechten voor de afschaffing van de unanimiteit. Mijn steun hebt u.

  Harald Vilimsky (ID). – Herr Präsident, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Man hat angesichts dessen, was sich in der letzten Sitzung des Rates ereignet hat, der Geschehnisse parallel in der Kommission und auch der Mehrheitsverhältnisse hier im Haus den Eindruck, dass Sie diese Europäische Union mehr oder minder wie die Titanic in Richtung Eisberg navigieren. Genauso, wie man offensichtlich damals die Regeln der Navigation außer Acht gelassen hat, lässt man heute auch alle Regeln der Europäischen Union irgendwo beiseite liegen. Sie haben Maastricht längst beerdigt, die wichtige Frage einer Budgetdisziplin. Sie haben Schengen und Dublin längst beerdigt, wo jeder herumreisen kann in dieser Europäischen Union und hereinreisen kann, ohne entsprechende Kontrollmechanismen. Und jetzt die Kopenhagener Kriterien mit dem Umstand, dass die Ukraine und Moldawien hier in den Beitrittskandidatenstatus kommen.

Ähnlich ist es mit der Sanktionenpolitik: sechs Pakete, die hier verhängt wurden, und der Umstand, dass dann der Sanktionierte weitaus weniger betroffen ist als diejenigen, die die Sanktionen verhängen. Denn der Sanktionierte verkauft Öl und Gas Richtung Indien und China und verkauft es uns teuer zurück.

Ich kann nur an Sie appellieren: Beachten Sie das Regelwerk dieser Europäischen Union entsprechend und hören Sie auf mit Sanktionen, die nur uns treffen und ein Schuss ins Knie sind.

  Robert Roos (ECR). – Voorzitter, commissaris, beste collega’s, het is op vele vlakken crisis in Europa. Door gestegen kosten is het leven van miljoenen burgers binnen de Europese Unie onbetaalbaar geworden. Van energie tot voedsel, van wonen tot zorg.

En wat heeft de Europese Raad vorige week besloten? Niet dat de peperdure Green Deal on hold wordt gezet en dat betaalbaarheid en leveringszekerheid van energie als prioriteit worden gesteld. Niet dat de koopkracht van onze burgers moet worden gerepareerd. Niet dat we inzetten op extra grensbewaking om de immigranteninstroom te stoppen. Was dat maar waar! Nee, in plaats daarvan heeft de Europese Raad besloten om Oekraïne en Moldavië kandidaat-lid van de Europese Unie te maken.

Het zijn twee ontzettend arme landen, die grote problemen met corruptie hebben. De Europese Unie wordt wel groter, maar niet beter. Kwantiteit gaat boven kwaliteit. Mijn conclusie is dat deze EU niet in het belang van de eigen mensen werkt. In ieder geval niet voor de mensen in Nederland, die uiteindelijk weer de rekening van de torenhoge Brusselse ambities gepresenteerd krijgen.

  Andrea Bocskor (NI). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Az Európai Tanács június 23–24-i ülésén több fontos döntés született, hiszen az évek óta megrekedt bővítési folyamat végre elmozdult a holtpontról. Az, hogy az Unió állam- és kormányfői tagjelölti státuszt biztosítottak Ukrajnának és Moldovának, egy fontos szimbolikus politikai üzenet, melynek remélem szerepe lesz a mielőbbi béke és biztonság előmozdításában. Csak a béke hozhat megoldást arra, hogy ne haljon meg több ártatlan ember, hogy ne legyen több pusztítás és áldozat, hogy ne kelljen menekülni több millió nőnek és gyermeknek. A tagjelöltség azonban még nem jelent tényleges tagságot. Addig sok feladatot kell elvégezni, hiszen a Bizottság nyilvánvalóvá tette, hogy a csatlakozási folyamat egyforma kritériumok alapján valósul meg mindenki számára.

Ukrajna tagjelöltségének egyik feltétele, hogy az ország területén élő nemzeti kisebbségek számára garantálják a kisebbségi jogokat, hogy garantálják számukra a nyelvhasználati, oktatási jogokat, és megalkossák az új, kisebbségekről szóló törvényt is. A kárpátaljai magyarok mindig is lojális állampolgárai voltak Ukrajnának, támogatták az EU-s integrációt, ezért bízom benne, hogy Ukrajna európai uniós tagjelöltsége előmozdítja a kárpátaljai magyarok jogainak érvényesítését is.

  Antonio Tajani (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il Consiglio europeo scorso si è chiuso con luci e ombre.

Bene la decisione di continuare a sostenere l'Ucraina nel percorso di adesione all'Unione insieme alla Moldova, ma serve più coraggio. La nostra economia è in guerra, le famiglie sono in difficoltà nel pagare bollette e generi alimentari, le imprese devono far fronte anche all'aumento del prezzo delle materie prime. Insomma, servono misure nuove e urgenti.

Noi da mesi proponiamo un tetto al prezzo del gas, uno strumento indispensabile per difenderci dall'inflazione galoppante, lo ha affermato anche il G7 qualche giorno fa. Si potrebbe anche pensare di utilizzare una copia del programma SURE per sostenere quei paesi che aiutano i cittadini e le imprese a pagare bollette meno salate. Comunque, l'Europa deve uscire più forte da questa situazione.

Un grande europeo, Václav Havel, ha scritto che ciò che serve in politica è la sensibilità di sapere quando, dove, come e a chi dire le cose. Mi auguro che la nuova Presidenza ceca sappia coglierne l'eredità per costruire un'Europa nuova e coesa.

  Gabriele Bischoff (S&D). – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr Vizepräsident Šefčovič! Schauen Sie genau hin: Das symbolisiert die Haltung des Rates gegenüber dem Haus der Demokratie hier in Europa. Bei der Debatte zum Europäischen Rat ist man nicht mehr anwesend und entschuldigt sich, dass man andere Verpflichtungen hatte.

Und das ist genau die Haltung den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern gegenüber, die sich ins Zeug gelegt haben, die Vorschläge zur Reform Europas vorgelegt haben und die uns ins Stammbuch geschrieben haben, dass es Vertragsänderungen geben soll, und das erfordert einen Konvent. Und das Parlament hat Artikel 48 getriggert, und die Parlamentspräsidentin hat dies dem Rat auch noch einmal ins Stammbuch geschrieben und hat gesagt, dass sie handeln müssen. Und was tun sie? Sie sind bei der Debatte noch nicht einmal anwesend. Es ist immer wieder diese Angst des Torwarts vor dem Elfmeter, die die Zukunft Europas gefährdet.

Deshalb, sehr geehrter Herr Michel, falls Sie doch noch zuhören: Es ist wichtig, dass der Rat endlich handelt und auf dem nächsten Europäischen Rat seine Rolle wahrnimmt und einen Konvent einsetzt.

  Nicola Danti (Renew). – Signor Presidente, signor Vicepresidente della Commissione, onorevoli colleghi, come spesso accade, le conclusioni del Consiglio non ci lasciano del tutto soddisfatti.

Il riconoscimento dello status di paese candidato per Ucraina e Moldova è certo un messaggio importante di unità e di vicinanza, ma altrettanto non possiamo dire per due paesi che candidati lo sono già da tempo, come Albania e Macedonia del Nord, che ancora una volta vedono disattese le loro giuste ambizioni. Mai come in questo momento storico è necessario che l'Unione europea rappresenti affidabilità, sicurezza, stabilità. E ciò vale non solo per questi paesi, ma anche per i nostri cittadini.

Dobbiamo allora affrontare con misure eccezionali e urgenti il tema dei prezzi dell'energia, che stanno destabilizzando la nostra economia. L'ostinata opposizione di alcuni Stati membri alla proposta portata avanti dall'Italia e da altri paesi di fissare un tetto massimo al prezzo del gas non risponde alle aspettative delle famiglie e delle imprese europee.

Serve una svolta per far fronte alle speculazioni, continuiamo allora sulla strada tracciata dal REPowerEU e creiamo le condizioni per renderci davvero autonomi dai combustibili fossili della Russia.

  Marcel de Graaff (ID). – (begin van de redevoering naast de microfoon) ... haar conclusies opnieuw als hypocriet en vijandig ten opzichte van de burgers in de Europese Unie. De economische motor van Duitsland valt stil door de verregaande opgelegde sancties aan Rusland. De hele EU stort hierdoor in een diepe recessie. De EU-sancties schaden Rusland niet, maar wel de lidstaten. Benzine en gas worden onbetaalbaar voor burgers en bedrijven. Er komen steeds meer voedseltekorten.

Oekraïne krijgt ondertussen 9 miljard euro en volledige militaire steun, maar onze burgers moeten honger en kou lijden. En dat gebeurt om een oorlog die niet de onze is, hoe erg het ook is wat daar gebeurt. Dus de-escaleer, stop de sancties, stop de militaire en financiële steun aan Oekraïne, stop de toelating tot de NAVO en de EU. Begin te de-escaleren, begin met Rusland te zoeken naar een oplossing. Dat is wat de burgers willen.

  Nicola Procaccini (ECR). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il Consiglio europeo ha avuto un esito contraddittorio. Da un lato ha condannato la violenza dell'esercito russo e l'uso del gas per finanziare la guerra di Putin, dall'altro lato ha rimandato al prossimo autunno la possibilità di introdurre un tetto al prezzo del gas, consentendo così a Putin di venderne meno ma di guadagnarci di più.

Un anno fa il prezzo del gas era a 18 euro, ieri era a 170 euro per megawattora. Una situazione drammatica per imprese e famiglie, ma che evidentemente ad alcuni governi europei fa comodo, che poi è la stessa contraddizione per cui si ufficializza la candidatura dell'Ucraina nell'Unione europea, ma si tradisce la richiesta del governo ucraino di non escludere gas e nucleare dalla tassonomia delle fonti energetiche nel voto che stiamo per esprimere fra poco.

Mai come oggi servirebbe buonsenso nelle scelte geopolitiche, mai come oggi, al contrario, sembrano prevalere irrazionalità e ipocrisia.

  Tonino Picula (S&D). –Poštovani predsjedniče, prije svega zahvaljujem Vijeću i Parlamentu na podršci uvođenju eura u Hrvatskoj.

Vijeće je također prepoznalo izmijenjene geopolitičke okolnosti i konačno poslalo jasan politički signal o spremnosti Europske unije za daljnje proširenje. Europska perspektiva potvrđena je za tri zemlje koje to zaslužuju, a zbog otpora Putinovoj Rusiji podršku zaista i trebaju.

Međutim, o zapadnom Balkanu se može govoriti, nažalost, s manje optimizma. Zaključcima, osim donekle u slučaju Bosne i Hercegovine, nije registriran nikakav napredak. Europska perspektiva u ovoj regiji potvrđena je još prije 19 godina. Blokade početka pregovora s Albanijom i Sjevernom Makedonijom ugrožavaju europski kredibilitet. To samo dokazuje kako se i Europska unija mora paralelno reformirati kako bi mogla donositi efikasnije ovakve odluke.

Bosni i Hercegovini je ipak pružena određena šansa u izbornoj godini, ali vladajuće politike ne smiju ponavljati stare greške. Promijenjene geopolitičke okolnosti trebaju biti poticaj za promjenu političkih odnosa u zemlji, svakako nabolje.

Bosnu i Hercegovinu čeka mjesto u Europskoj uniji. Svaki stvarni pomak na tom putu imat će našu podršku.

Brīvā mikrofona uzstāšanās

  Henna Virkkunen (PPE). – Arvoisa puhemies, arvoisa komissaari, oli tärkeä askel huippukokoukselta, että Ukrainalle ja Moldovalle, samoin kuin tietyin edellytyksin Georgialle, myönnettiin jäsenehdokasmaan status. Nämä maat ovat osoittaneet vahvasti halunsa liittyä Euroopan unioniin. Ukraina taistelee parhaillaan vapauden ja demokratian puolesta. Sitä on tuettava kaikin keinoin. Samoin on tuettava näiden hakijamaiden polkua kohti Euroopan unionin jäsenyyttä, samoin kuin Länsi-Balkanin maiden polkua.

On selvää, että varsinainen jäsenyys edellyttää kaikilta merkittäviä uudistuksia ja suurta kehitystä, mutta myös Euroopan unionin on uudistuttava. Meillä on kohta kymmenkunta hakijamaata ja on selvää, että Euroopan unionin on vahvistettava talouden rakenteitaan, vahvistettava oikeusvaltioperiaatteen toteutumista ja lisättävä omaa ulkopoliittista päätöksentekokykyään, jotta olisimme valmiita tähän laajentumiseen. On erittäin harmillista, että jäsenvaltiot eivät ole tarttuneet tässä parlamentin aloitteeseen, jossa vaaditaan Euroopan unionin uudistuksia.

  Juozas Olekas (S&D). – Sveikinu Europos Vadovų Tarybos sprendimą dėl kandidačių statuso suteikimo Ukrainai, Moldovai ir Europos perspektyvos suteikimą Sakartvelui. Taip pat labai pritariu išsakytoms mintims, kad būtina pradėti stojimo derybas su Albanija ir Šiaurės Makedonija. Turime atsižvelgti į Europos piliečių nuomonę turėti stipresnę Europos Sąjungą, nedidinant demokratijos, tačiau stiprinant politinę platformą energetikos saugumo ir ypač sveikatos srityse.

Gerai, jog Vadovų Taryba pasisakė už tolimesnę politinę, finansinę ir karinę paramą Ukrainai, tačiau dabar numatytos lėšos nėra pakankamos, todėl turime ieškoti naujų instrumentų. Galiausiai reikia Europos Sąjungos lygiu pasirūpinti, kad Ukrainoje užaugintas derlius būtų transportuojamas į kaimynines šalis, ypač Šiaurės Afrikoje, taip pat amortizuoti V. Putino Rusijos karo sukeltą kainų šuolį Europos Sąjungos piliečiams.

  Λευτέρης Χριστοφόρου (PPE). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, τιμώντας την ιστορία της, τις αρχές και τις αξίες της, πολύ ορθά τάχθηκε ανεπιφύλακτα στο πλευρό του ουκρανικού λαού και της Ουκρανίας από μια βάρβαρη ρωσική εισβολή. Εμείς από την πρώτη στιγμή ταχθήκαμε ανεπιφύλακτα δίπλα στον ουκρανικό λαό και στην Ουκρανία, γιατί γνωρίζουμε τι σημαίνει εισβολή και είμαστε αναφανδόν υπέρ του διεθνούς δικαίου.

Όμως πρέπει να σας πω ότι αυτός ο μήνας, ο Ιούλιος, για την πατρίδα μου είναι μαύρος μήνας. Είναι εφιάλτης. Γιατί συμπληρώνονται 48 χρόνια από μια βάρβαρη τουρκική εισβολή, η οποία εδώ και 48 χρόνια κάνει τον κυπριακό ελληνισμό να υποφέρει και να δοκιμάζεται.

Απευθυνόμενος σήμερα στην Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή και στο Ευρωπαϊκό Συμβούλιο τους ρωτώ να μου πουν: τι μήνυμα θα μεταφέρω στον δικό μου δοκιμαζόμενο λαό, στους 200.000 δοκιμαζόμενους πρόσφυγες που βρίσκονται στους προσφυγικούς συνοικισμούς και περιμένουν την ώρα της επιστροφής, όταν σε αυτή την αίθουσα, η Τουρκία συνεχίζει να ονομάζεται στρατηγικός εταίρος, όταν η Τουρκία συνεχίζει να παίρνει χρήματα από την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση και όταν τα όπλα της Τουρκίας στρέφονται απέναντι στον δικό μας λαό.

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, quiero llamar la atención del Consejo sobre la necesidad de dar un impulso político al Nuevo Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo, que no aparece en las conclusiones, porque no hay un segundo que perder. Hay cinco reglamentos de 2022 y cuatro pendientes de la anterior legislatura. Es imprescindible que todos avancen de forma equilibrada, como señala la hoja de ruta que ha suscrito este Parlamento Europeo, de modo que no haya control de fronteras sin solidaridad vinculante, creíble y efectiva.

Además, me gustaría que diga con claridad que las fronteras exteriores de la Unión Europea son de una Europa unida, de una unión. Por tanto, no puede haber una perspectiva del norte que prevalezca sobre la del sur, o una perspectiva del oeste que prevalezca sobre la del este. Debe conseguirse un equilibrio, por tanto, que dé una respuesta, por fin, europea a la dimensión demográfica del fenómeno migratorio, a la dimensión humanitaria y, sobre todo, a la dimensión normativa, para que haya, por fin, una legislación europea que sea vinculante para los Estados miembros y acatada por todos los Estados miembros.

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, sigur, regret că nu mai avem Consiliul aici, probabil că este pe drum, undeva, domnul Președinte. Voiam să-i spun că ne-a informat aici că a pregătit o comunitate politică europeană. Voiam să-i amintesc că, istoric, Uniunea Europeană trebuie să fie o comunitate economică.

Și ce facem pentru asta: pentru oamenii din Uniunea Europeană, pentru statele care au rămas în urmă, pentru regiunile care au nevoie de mai multă coeziune, pentru cetățeni? Ce facem cu criza alimentară? Ce facem cu criza energetică? Și voiam să îl mai întreb pe domnul Președinte: ce se întâmplă în Olanda?

Țara mea a avut o rezoluție nedreaptă. În Olanda, văd că guvernele au scos forțele de ordine și trag în fermieri, în acei fermieri care ne asigură hrana noastră în Uniunea Europeană. Dar, din păcate, nu avem cui să ne adresăm. Domnule vicepreședinte al Comisiei, rog să informați pe doamna Președintă și vreau un răspuns. Avem sau nu avem o singură uniune? Va fi și țara mea în Schengen sau nu va fi?

  Costas Mavrides (S&D). – Mr President, I am glad that the Chamber is full now and that everyone will listen. In June’s conclusion of the European Council, there was another call on Turkey to respect international law and terminate its unilateral and aggressive actions in the Eastern Mediterranean. However, I would like everyone to remember that in March 2021, the statement of the European Council – I am reading straight from it – stated, ‘we call on Turkey to abstain from renewed provocations or unilateral actions in breach of international law.’

Would you affirm the determination of the European Union, in case of such actions, to use the instruments and options at its disposal to defend its interests and those of its Member States?

My final word: we stand with international law against Putin’s aggressive actions in Ukraine. We stand with the values of the European Union and we expect everyone to respect the values that are being violated in the Eastern Mediterranean against Cyprus and against Greece by a Turkish aggressive regime.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)

  Maroš Šefčovič, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, Mr Minister, honourable Members, I will be very brief because I know that we have a very important and exciting voting session ahead of us. So allow me just a few brief remarks.

First and foremost, I would like to thank all the honourable Members for the strong support for the candidate status of Ukraine and Moldova. I would like to respond to Mr Mureşan and others who have been pleading with the European Commission to make sure they will provide them all the necessary technical assistance so they will be prepared for the eventual opening of the enlargement negotiations and to prepare them for the necessary reforms. It was part of the debate we had with the Czech Presidency, in particular I think, that new Member States can share a lot of experience from the transformation process, from the process how to be best prepared for these negotiations.

Ms Niebler and Mr Olekas just a few minutes ago have been calling for more assertive, clearer policy towards the Western Balkans. I think it was clearly one of the conclusions and the feeling of the leaders after the conclusion of the summit with the Western Balkans, that indeed we have to do much more, because what the Western Balkan leaders would like to see is more tangible efforts, a clearer path to accelerated accession talks and clearer results which they can present to the citizens.

So we are, of course, reflecting together with you, with our Member States, on how to bring this new energy and new impetus into the whole process. You know that the Commission is wholeheartedly behind these efforts.

We have seen positive developments in North Macedonia. We hope that this process will unblock the further steps for North Macedonia and Albania, and if it comes to Bosnia and Herzegovina, will be working together with the Member States and with all of you and with Bosnia Herzegovina to make sure that these 14 very important criteria are appropriately fulfilled so it could open the doors for further steps for Bosnia and Herzegovina as well.

Ms Bonafè, Ms Aubry and Ms Vautmans have been referring to the importance of making sure that we would respect the citizens’ demands, proposals, propositions, requests which they presented during the Conference on the Future of Europe. I would like to reassure all of you that in the first speech the President of the European Commission will make in September on the State of the Union, you will see the reflection of how the Commission wants to respond and how the Commission wants to guarantee the follow—up to the results of the Conference on the Future of Europe and how we want to incorporate it into the Commission work programme already for next year.

On the crucial question of the Convention, again I would like to underscore our readiness. Once the decision is taken, we will do our utmost to play our part to make sure that our European Union is better and stronger.

The last two points. One, on energy related issues. We of course are heading towards a very difficult period – I think we see it every day – and therefore we are working around the clock to make sure that on 20 July we will adopt the set of measures which would constitute a European emergency plan for any eventualities which could meet us in this very difficult energy landscape.

We want to make sure that solidarity, of course, will be the anchor of all the rules and processes we would propose, and of course we’ll be very happy to share and discuss this with the European Parliament.

The last point and the clear answer to Ms Grapini – because I am sure that this House knows very well, but I think it’s worth repeating – is that if it comes to Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia, we are strong economies. They are prepared for Schengen membership and that should happen sooner rather than later, because it would make the European Union more secure and stronger.

  President. – Thank you very much, Mr Vice—President. The debate is closed.

Written statements (Rule 171)

  Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D), por escrito. – Los socialistas españoles defendemos que la UE debe continuar con su acción solidaria ayudando al pueblo ucraniano humanitaria, económica y militarmente, al tiempo que trabajamos en la puesta en marcha de medidas que eviten el escenario catastrófico de hambrunas y migraciones masivas a nivel mundial.

Pero, sobre todo, a corto plazo tenemos que ganarle la narrativa a Putin que nos hace culpables a los europeos de la escasez de alimentos en África y de las subidas de precios a nivel mundial.

Por último, lamentamos que la cuestión migratoria no aparezca en las Conclusiones del Consejo, a pesar de que no hay un segundo que perder. En la actualidad hay cinco Reglamentos de 2022 y cuatro pendientes de la anterior legislatura y es imprescindible que todos avancen para que logremos, finalmente, un control de fronteras solidario y efectivo.

Debemos de una vez asumir que las fronteras exteriores de la Unión Europea son de una Europa unida y que debemos avanzar hacia una dimensión humanitaria del fenómeno migratorio.

  Alfred Sant (S&D), in writing. – The Council meeting of 23–24 June has fast-tracked EU candidate status for Ukraine and Moldova and closer status for Georgia. The speed used for granting this status is tied to the ongoing Russian invasion. However, the long-term political implications must be kept in mind. On the basis of prevailing rules, the process for these countries to attain membership will take years, perhaps decades. The underlying political rationale could fade or alter with time. Consider Turkey, where claiming that only this country has shown bad faith in its accession process is not tenable. Disillusionment or worse bitterness could eventually colour the relationship between the EU and accession aspirants. As has happened with the EU’s candidacy outreach to the Balkan states. On a more fundamental basis, the EU needs to face out the strategic question that old-timer Henry Kissinger has clearly defined: post Putin and post the EU’s current leaders, Europe will still have to define what relationship it wants with Russia. Does it want Russia as a full partner in a European system or would it like Russia as an Asian power to be held at arm’s length? Mitterrand and de Gaulle also raised the question and their concerns were side-lined. How sad and short-sighted.

PRESIDENZA: ROBERTA METSOLA
President

11. Balsuoti skirtas laikas

  President. – The next item is the vote.

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

11.1. Parlamento darbo tvarkos taisyklių 216 straipsnio dėl komitetų posėdžių pakeitimas (A9-0203/2022 - Gabriele Bischoff) (balsavimas)

- Before the vote:

  Gabriele Bischoff, rapporteur. – Madam President, we are now voting on the amendment of the Rules of Procedure to allow for a hybrid committee working regime in the future.

The working group on the Rules of Procedure has been mandated by our President to prepare a report to implement the decision of the CoP of 2 June, and this decision was supported by all the political groups. We have prepared this report under a lot of time pressure and at short notice. Our working method is based on consensus, and we achieved a consensus in this working group. On this basis, we proposed my report that is presented today for vote. On Monday, it was supported by a broad majority in the AFCO Committee.

Dear colleagues, I now count on you also to support to amend Rule 216 of our Rules of Procedure and to respect the consensus that has been found first in the CoP, then in the AFCO working group, then in the AFCO, and I hope also here in the plenary.

11.2. Prieštaravimas pagal Darbo tvarkos taisyklių 111 straipsnio 3 dalį: Deleguotojo akto dėl taksonomijos pagal klimato srities tikslus ir Deleguotojo akto dėl informacijos atskleidimo pagal Taksonomijos reglamentą dalinis keitimas (B9-0338/2022) (balsavimas)

  President. – It is rejected. That means that Parliament has not objected to the Commission delegated regulation of 9 March 2022.

11.3. Prieštaravimas pagal Darbo tvarkos taisyklių 111 straipsnio 3 dalį: biržos prekių išvestinių finansinių priemonių pozicijų apribojimų taikymo ir tvarkos, kaip pateikti prašymą netaikyti pozicijų apribojimų, techniniai standartai (B9-0345/2022) (balsavimas)

  President. – It is rejected, so Parliament has not objected to the delegated regulation of 28 April 2022.

11.4. Rusijos invazija į Ukrainą: krizinės priemonės žvejybos ir akvakultūros sektoriuose (A9-0182/2022 - Nuno Melo) (balsavimas)

- Before the vote:

  Gabriel Mato, en sustitución del ponente. – Señora presidenta, tomo muy brevemente la palabra antes de abrir la votación porque, lamentablemente, los asuntos relativos a la Comisión de Pesca parecen no tener mucha importancia para algunos grupos que, sesión tras sesión, niegan la posibilidad de que se debatan y tengan visibilidad en el Pleno. Asuntos tan destacados y sustanciales como el informe que vamos a someter ahora a votación, elaborado por Nuno Melo.

Es urgente garantizar que la lucha contra el impacto negativo de la guerra en Ucrania se incluya en los objetivos del Fondo Europeo Marítimo, de Pesca y de Acuicultura. Los sectores de la pesca y de la acuicultura son cruciales en la Unión Europea y, por tanto, la Unión debe intervenir para minimizar este impacto y asegurar la supervivencia de las empresas y los puestos de trabajo. El paquete financiero que vamos a someter a votación permitirá el uso de medidas de crisis adicionales para apoyar a los sectores de la pesca y la acuicultura de la Unión en el contexto de la invasión rusa de Ucrania, pondrá a disposición financiación de la Unión para compensar los costes adicionales, la pérdida de ingresos y el almacenamiento de productos, así como el cese temporal de las actividades pesqueras, y extenderá las ayudas a las empresas que temporalmente no pueden continuar pescando debido a restricciones económicas.

La adopción final de esta propuesta legislativa proporcionará el apoyo que tanto necesitan los pescadores y el sector de la acuicultura en un tiempo récord y con efecto retroactivo, ya que las empresas serán compensadas por el impacto de la crisis a partir de febrero de este mismo año. El informe fue aprobado por unanimidad en la Comisión de Pesca y esperamos que hoy sea también ampliamente apoyado en el Parlamento.

11.5. 2021 m. ataskaita dėl Bosnijos ir Hercegovinos (A9-0188/2022 - Paulo Rangel) (balsavimas)

11.6. 2021 m. ataskaita dėl Serbijos (A9-0178/2022 - Vladimír Bilčík) (balsavimas)

- After the vote on Amendment 2:

  Vladimír Bilčík (PPE). – Madam President, in the light of the developments in the region last week, which have raised tensions in the region but also put into question the EU—facilitated dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, I propose to move the following oral amendment on the 2021 Report on Serbia. After paragraph 78, it should read as follows:

‘Regrets the rising tensions related to attempts at resolving the issues of licence plates and freedom of movement in Kosovo; reiterates the crucial importance of addressing all outstanding issues through the Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue transparently, consequently, timely and in good faith.’

(The oral amendment was not accepted)

11.7. 2021 m. ataskaita dėl Kosovo (A9-0179/2022 - Viola von Cramon-Taubadel) (balsavimas)

11.8. ES ir daugiašališkumo apsauga (A9-0172/2022 - Javi López) (balsavimas)

11.9. Aprūpinimo maistu problemos sprendimas besivystančiose šalyse (A9-0195/2022 - Beata Kempa) (balsavimas)

11.10. ES socialinės ekonomikos veiksmų planas (A9-0192/2022 - Jordi Cañas) (balsavimas)

11.11. Sąveikinė diskriminacija ES: Afrikos, Artimųjų Rytų, Lotynų Amerikos ir Azijos kilmės moterų socialinė ir ekonominė padėtis (A9-0190/2022 - Alice Kuhnke) (balsavimas)

Before the vote:

  Alice Kuhnke, föredragande. – Fru talman! Förenade i mångfald. Det är EU:s motto. Vi som sitter här inne speglar emellertid inte den mångfald som finns bland EU:s medborgare. Det beror delvis på att alla inte har samma möjligheter att ta plats och höja sin röst. Många diskrimineras, och vi vet att diskrimineringen är intersektionell. Flera olika diskrimineringsgrunder samspelar och begränsar människors möjligheter att ta plats och höja sin röst.

Det betänkande som vi nu ska rösta om är ett steg i rätt riktning. Med detta betänkande erkänner vi intersektionell diskriminering. Vi säger att vi ska göra mer för att bekämpa den, och vi lägger fram en rad förslag på verktyg hur detta ska göras.

Jag vill tacka för ett gott samarbete med alla från höger till vänster. Samarbetet och den konstruktiva stämningen har gett mig hopp.

11.12. Valstybių narių veto siekiant sutrukdyti įgyvendinti visuotinį susitarimą dėl pelno mokesčio (RC-B9-0339/2022, B9-0339/2022, B9-0340/2022, B9-0341/2022, B9-0342/2022, B9-0343/2022, B9-0344/2022) (balsavimas)

After the votes:

  Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, the Commission welcomes the swift adoption by the European Parliament and the Council of the amendment to the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, making specific support measures available to fisheries and aquaculture operators to alleviate the consequences of the military aggression of Russia against Ukraine and to mitigate the effects.

However, the Commission urges caution in the use of the measures providing compensation for the temporary cessation of fishing activities, as widespread use of temporary cessation could have the unintended consequence of exacerbating the disruption of the fisheries supply chain because of the drop in supply on the market. We have therefore forwarded a written statement to this effect for the inclusion in your minutes.

Written Statement by the Commission

The Commission welcomes the swift adoption by the European Parliament and the Council of the amendment to Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, thus making the specific support measures available to operators to alleviate the consequences of the military aggression of Russia against Ukraine on fishing activities and to mitigate the effects caused by that military aggression on the market of fishery and aquaculture products, including the additional costs of raw material, input and energy.

However, the Commission urges caution in the use of the measures providing compensation for the temporary cessation of fishing activities in cases where the Russian aggression ‘impedes the economic viability of fishing operations’. Indeed, temporary cessation is subject to the condition that all fishing activities carried out by the fishing vessel benefitting are ‘effectively suspended’, which means that the fishing vessel concerned has to stop any fishing activities during the period concerned by the temporary cessation.

The Commission encourages Member States to prioritise the measures that aim to compensate additional costs and income forgone incurred due to the market disruption caused by the military aggression of Russia against Ukraine and its effects on the supply chain of fishery and aquaculture products, which are better suited to keeping the supply chain of fishery and aquaculture products functioning. Widespread use of temporary cessation could have the unintended consequence of exacerbating the disruption of the fishery supply chain because of a drop of supply on the market.

  President. – That concludes the vote.

VORSITZ: OTHMAR KARAS
Vizepräsident

12. Jungtinės Karalystės vyriausybės vienašališkai pateiktas Protokolo dėl Šiaurės Airijos įstatymo projektas (diskusijos)

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zu dem Thema „Die einseitige Einbringung des Gesetzes über das Protokoll zu Nordirland durch die britische Regierung und die Achtung des Völkerrechts“ (2022/2744(RSP)).

Diese Aussprache findet unter denselben Rahmenbedingungen – Sitzplätze, Rede, blaue Karte – statt wie die vorhergehenden Aussprachen.

  Mikuláš Bek, President-in-Office of the Council. – Dear Mr President, honourable Members, it has not even been two years since the United Kingdom and the European Union entered into the Trade and Cooperation Agreement with the consent and support of the European Parliament.

The Withdrawal Agreement and its Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland, which is just over two and a half years old itself, is already at risk of being torn apart by the UK. The United Kingdom Government has proposed a law to unilaterally suspend the application of the protocol’s key provisions, and the bill is already advancing in the UK Parliament.

The Council is highly concerned about the situation. We remain fully united and mobilised to protect the citizens who benefit from the Withdrawal Agreement, to protect the Good Friday Agreement and to protect our single market. The European Parliament’s active engagement was of prime importance to bring the previous negotiations to a swift conclusion.

I trust that we will once again show our united front in the face of this unconstructive attitude by the United Kingdom. As always on Brexit, unity among Member States, but also among institutions, is our most precious asset. We need to send a clear signal to the UK Government. Let there be no doubt that the EU seeks to have a strategic, enduring and mutually beneficial partnership with the United Kingdom.

In the current geopolitical situation, the EU and the UK stand side-by-side in our response to Russia’s brutal and unjustified war against Ukraine. We are both peaceful democracies that insist on respecting international agreements. It is therefore unacceptable to take steps which violate international commitments. In the current circumstances, we must all hold ourselves to the highest standards, including respecting international agreements.

The Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland was the solution agreed with the current UK Prime Minister’s government to protect the Good Friday Agreement in all its dimensions, and to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland while protecting the integrity of the EU single market.

The EU stands fully united in rejecting a renegotiation of the Protocol as it is the agreed solution to the challenge posed to the island of Ireland by the type of Brexit chosen by the UK. In years of intense negotiations between the two sides, no better solution was found.

The UK Government must return to working jointly to solve the practical issues already identified within the context of the Protocol. This is also what stakeholders in Northern Ireland expect. Recent trade figures show that the protocol is working. The GDP in Northern Ireland is growing faster than in the rest of the UK.

The EU and the UK share a common responsibility to demonstrate that, instead of starting artificial confrontations, they can find durable solutions by working together pragmatically and in full respect of international commitments. Our evolving partnership must be based on respecting existing international agreements and by foreseeable actions taken within the joint bodies, further building up mutual trust. That is what our citizens expect from democratic leaders and institutions.

  Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, Minister, honourable Members, first and foremost, I am grateful for the opportunity to address you today and provide an update on the latest development regarding the Protocol – Ireland and Northern Ireland.

Let me start by reaffirming that the European Union wishes to have a positive and stable relationship with the United Kingdom. We are partners facing the same global challenges where upholding the rule of law is imperative. And I think it was very well described by Minister Bek just a minute ago.

Our relationship must be, therefore, based on the agreements that both parties negotiated, agreed and ratified: the Withdrawal Agreement and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. The Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland is an integral part of the Withdrawal Agreement. The Protocol protects the Good Friday Belfast Agreement in all its dimensions, avoids the hard border on the island of Ireland, while protecting the integrity of the island of Ireland and the integrity of the internal market, and respects the constitutional position of Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom.

Let us not forget that the Protocol was the only joint solution found to protect the hard-earned gains of the peace process in Northern Ireland, while addressing the challenges created by Brexit and the type of Brexit chosen by the UK Government.

So we need to be realistic. No alternative solution has been found and it is not needed. From the very beginning, we have shown a lot of understanding for the practical difficulties in the implementation of the Protocol and we demonstrated that solutions can be found within its framework. This is what we did, for example, with our medicines package. It was adopted in record time. And I would like to take this opportunity to thank you once again for your crucial role in it.

We also proposed solutions in the customs and sanitary and phytosanitary areas in order to further facilitate trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. We always insisted that we want to work towards joint solutions that are durable. Very importantly, we also made it clear that, whilst we stand ready to discuss facilitations, we will need firm guarantees as regards the protection of our internal market.

Throughout this time, we worked towards the joint outcome because only joint solutions would bring the legal certainty and predictability for the people and businesses in Northern Ireland. We made it clear that any unilateral action would only have the opposite effect, and it would erode trust between partners, which is the very basis for our work.

Despite all these efforts, the UK government tabled the so-called Northern Ireland Protocol Bill on 30 June. If adopted, this bill would disapply most provisions of the protocol, and this is unacceptable. There is no legal or political justification whatsoever for the UK to unilaterally change an international agreement.

First of all, there are other ways to solve the problems regarding the implementation of the Protocol together, and we proved that with our package of solutions we know how to do that.

Secondly, our interests and the other parties to the agreement are seriously harmed because this is about the conditions for Northern Ireland’s access to the EU’s internal market for goods. And it is simply legally and politically inconceivable that the UK Government decides these conditions unilaterally.

Let us not forget that the current trading arrangements between Great Britain and Northern Ireland are not in line with the protocol because of the unilateral grace periods put in place by the UK Government.

The European Commission reacted in a proportionate and gradual manner. First of all, you will remember that we had paused legal action over the past year in order to create a constructive atmosphere to identify joint solutions. This bill goes against this spirit, and for that reason we have relaunched our legal action against the UK for not complying with key parts of the Protocol.

In parallel and further to extensive engagement with businesses in Northern Ireland, we have published in greater detail our model for the flexible implementation of the protocol, based on durable solutions within the Protocol.

In a nutshell, our solutions were to create an express lane for goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland. They would reduce sanitary and phytosanitary checks and controls by more than 80%. They would cut customs paperwork in half. They would offer simplified certification, a single three-page document for the whole lorryful of different goods filled only once a month. And they would allow even the movement of certain goods that would otherwise be restricted, such as chilled meat.

This demonstrates that a solution exists. And as you just heard a few minutes ago from the Czech presidency, the European Union is united in this view. And I really would like to thank the French and Czech Presidencies for expressing the position and unanimous support of the Member States so clearly. And I want to express my gratitude to the European Parliament for its support to this approach as well.

I would like to close, honourable Members, by underlining that our door remains open to the UK for dialogue in order to identify joint solutions forward within the framework of the protocol, based on the solutions I have just mentioned. It is now for the UK to walk through that door, and I sincerely believe that with political will and genuine commitment, solutions are still within reach.

  Seán Kelly, on behalf of the PPE Group. – A Uachtaráin, Commissioner, colleagues, the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill marks a new low in relations between the EU and the UK. We mustn’t forget that the UK was a valued member of the European Union for 40 years and played a very constructive part. But breaching international law is just not acceptable, as Vice-President Šefčovič said. Also, it defies logic – because the protocol is working.

The majority of MLAs returned in the recent election are in favour of the protocol. The business people that I met in my capacity as rapporteur for the Trade Committee, the vast majority are in favour of the protocol and see the benefits of being in the single market of the European Union and the UK market.

Yesterday, I had the privilege of meeting a good friend of mine, former MEP now Under—Secretary Vicky Ford, and we had a robust discussion. I pointed out to her that if green and red lanes are a solution, come and negotiate, and we can see – because nobody has been more flexible than our good friend Vice-President Šefčovič.

I appeal to Boris Johnson, the British Government, to give over this Fawlty Towers—like approach to politics, because if they don’t, there is a danger that Basil would be confused with Boris. Regardless of the outcome in the volatile situation in Number 10, there is only one solution – put this bill aside, come and negotiate and we can reach an agreement. That is what democrats always do.

  Pedro Marques, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Vice-Presidente Šefčovič, não é raro neste Parlamento discutirmos a situação de países que infringem o direito internacional. O que é raro é que isso seja feito por uma das democracias mais antigas e respeitadas no mundo.

O desvario de um primeiro-ministro em queda não pode ser razão para quebrar o importante acordo que, com tanto custo, tinha sido possível alcançar. A agir assim, o Sr. Boris Johnson está a pôr em sério risco não apenas o acordo do Brexit, mas as relações entre o Reino Unido e a União Europeia. Está a pôr em risco a própria credibilidade do Reino Unido enquanto parceiro internacional. Mais, está até a pôr em risco, e isso é muito grave, os acordos de Sexta-Feira Santa, que trouxeram a paz à Irlanda do Norte.

Mais umas horas ou uns dias em Downing Street não justificam tudo. Boris Johnson tem que parar e tem que parar já.

  Nathalie Loiseau, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, I say to our dear British friends, we live in a time of anxiety: war has come back to Europe, inflation is growing and climate change has come into our lives. At such a time, we need to unite, not to be divided. We need to join forces, not to act unilaterally. We need to honour our commitments, not to breach them. And as always, we need to listen to the people.

What do people in Northern Ireland have to say? They elected a majority of MLAs who support the Northern Ireland Protocol, provided minor adjustments are made. This is precisely what the EU has offered. We all know there is a landing zone within the protocol. Today, the protocol is not the problem. Look at the numbers. Northern Ireland is faring better than the rest of the UK. There is no shortage, except for two essential goods: predictability and trust. The problem that Northern Ireland is facing, that the UK is facing, has a name. It is not the protocol. The name of the problem is Brexit and the type of Brexit which was chosen by the current British Government.

  Terry Reintke, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, dear colleagues, what the UK Government is doing right now looks, unfortunately, more like a group of reckless, privileged people trying to distract from their own mistakes by breaking international law, rather than serious governing. What we actually urgently need is calm and constructive discussions on the implementation of the Northern Ireland Protocol; to find practical solutions for the people on the ground, and not to play political games or to blackmail the other side.

To the people in the UK, I would like to say, rest assured that, despite all the difficulty and tension, this Parliament and the citizens in the European Union can still make a very clear difference between the UK Government and the people in the UK. We know that a majority of members of the Northern Ireland Assembly actually stand behind the protocol and want to find solutions. And we know that there are millions of people in the UK who want to have a close and strong relationship with the European Union, and we will continue to put all our efforts into making that possible.

  Geert Bourgeois, namens de ECR-Fractie. – Voorzitter, het Verenigd Koninkrijk en de Europese Unie zijn solidair verenigd in hun steun aan het Oekraïense volk. Tegelijkertijd is de Brexit echter nog altijd not done. Onze Britse vrienden weten dat we hun keuze respecteren, maar daar zijn consequenties aan verbonden. De integriteit van onze interne markt en de bescherming van onze consumenten zijn rode lijnen. We weten dat de EU zich flexibel en pragmatisch opstelt met het oktoberpakket van vicevoorzitter Šefčovič, maar het Noord-Ierse protocol en het terugtrekkingsakkoord moeten gehandhaafd blijven.

Ik stel vast dat beide partijen akkoord gaan met het principe van een express lane of green lane met betrekking tot goederen die alleen bestemd zijn voor de Noord-Ierse markt. Ik denk dat het op basis van dit principe mogelijk moet zijn om tot een akkoord te komen, op voorwaarde dat er sluitende garanties zijn dat de goederen alleen naar de Noord-Ierse markt gaan.

Ik vraag dus dat beide partijen daarover aan tafel gaan zitten en met goed verstand tot een akkoord komen, wat ons moet toelaten om verdere ambities te ontplooien: samenwerking inzake onderzoek en ontwikkeling, samenwerking in en rond de Noordzee, inzake energie, inzake CO2-opslag, zodat we kunnen werk maken van een duurzaam toekomstig partnerschap met onze aloude Britse vrienden.

  Chris MacManus, on behalf of The Left Group. – Mr President, a chairde, this debate is long overdue and one sought by The Left Group. The British Government are not only attacking the protocol; they are attacking the Good Friday Agreement. They must not succeed.

The north of Ireland has changed. People will not accept supremacy by regressive unionism from the DUP or their paramilitary allies. The protocol protects the north from the worst damage caused by Brexit. What the British Government cannot swallow is that the economy in the north is doing better than anywhere in Britain, but the illegal Protocol Bill is designed to drag the north down – the dual regulatory system would create an impossible bureaucracy for business.

Be clear: as he clings to his job, Boris Johnson will do anything. He systematically breaks international law. He undermines the Good Friday Agreement. He absolves the British military for crimes committed, denying grieving families the justice they deserve. He repeals the European Convention on Human Rights, the beating heart of the Good Friday Agreement. Britain is fast becoming a rogue state, acting unilaterally in the interests of its own elite, with no regard for the well—being of its people or the international rules—based order.

Unless Britain turns to legality, it deserves to fail, which is why Scottish people want to take control of their own future, and why a referendum on Irish unity, as provided for in the Good Friday Agreement, is increasingly on the agenda.

  David McAllister (PPE). – Mr President, the Northern Ireland Protocol bill tabled by the United Kingdom Government is a regrettable unilateral move. As it dis—applies core elements of the Protocol in Ireland and Northern Ireland, it creates more difficulties in Northern Ireland and undermines mutual trust. Unilateral actions deliberately contradicting an international agreement are not the way forward.

The Withdrawal Agreement, including the Protocol, was and is the necessary foundation for the EU—UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement. The European Union’s reaction to the Northern Ireland Protocol bill has been proportionate, firm and calm – and rightly so, Vice—President Šefčovič.

We want to have stable and positive relations with the United Kingdom based on our agreements, mutually negotiated, signed and ratified by the United Kingdom and the European Union. We remain partners with shared values. Therefore, I call on the UK Government to re—enter talks to facilitate the practical implementation of the Protocol. The Protocol is not the problem – it is part of the solution to a problem. The original problem is, and remains, Brexit.

  Thijs Reuten (S&D). – Mr President, Commission Vice-President, I thought the UK Prime Minister ‘got Brexit done’, but today we are not even sure how long he will be in office, while the UK Government is threatening to unilaterally rip up the Northern Ireland Protocol.

Mr President, to the people in Britain I want to say, we here in Europe are committed to our friendship with you. This is not about rehashing debates of the past, this is about making Brexit work for all UK citizens. Is the Prime Minister of Britain really willing to break up international law, jeopardise the Good Friday Agreement and axe trust between the UK and its most important trading partner?

I urge the UK Government to step back from the abyss. Flexible solutions for the people in Northern Ireland exist within the Protocol, and Commission Vice-President Šefčovič has those solutions. All it takes for the UK Government is to act in good faith.

  Barry Andrews (Renew). – Mr President, Vice-President Šefčovič, in the UK, the stigma against breaking international law, domestic law and constitutional norms has been significantly eroded since Boris Johnson became Prime Minister. The events of the last 24 hours demonstrate that for many, enough is enough.

Freedom House reported last year that it has been sixteen consecutive years of decline in global freedom. This matters because the pattern of decline has been gradual in most countries, and that’s why it is so important to call out the erosion of democratic norms at the earliest possible time.

The charge sheet against the UK is long. It was proroguing Parliament with the Internal Market Bill and now we have the Protocol Bill. Jonathan Jones described this as even more brazen than the Internal Market Bill and noted that the UK has shown the world that it is prepared to walk away from important treaty obligations on the flimsiest of pretexts.

In addition to that, despite what Minister Vicky Ford said yesterday, assuming she is still a minister, the European Convention on Human Rights is something the UK Government is proposing to walk away from, even though it is so firmly part of the Good Friday Agreement.

  Ciarán Cuffe (Verts/ALE). – A Uachtaráin, léiríonn na himeachtaí ó Londain go bhfuil muinín caillte ag muintir na Breataine ina rialtas, beirt airí sa rialtas sin ina measc. Tá níos fearr ná sin tuillte ag muintir an Tuaiscirt. Sáraíonn bille an Phrótacail dlí idirnáisiúnta, Comhaontú Bhéal Feirste, agus cuireann sé síocháin i dTuaisceart na hÉireann i mbaol.

Sa tréimhse éiginnte seo, caithfimid éisteacht agus oibriú le daoine i dTuaisceart na hÉireann. Caithfidh muintir Thuaisceart na hÉireann a todhchaí féin a shocrú agus caithfidh an Pharlaimint tacú leis sin.

  Anna Fotyga (ECR). – Mr President, Commissioner, it is for the first time in history that we try to implement the Withdrawal Agreement. With pain, and not all circumstances we were able to foresee while negotiating and signing it.

Surely, we did not foresee the vicious war so close to our borders, and necessity to focus on the security. I think there is room for compromise. Surely, the unilateral solutions are not the best ones. And I call on both sides to sit at the table and find this solution for the sake of future cooperation.

  Pernando Barrena Arza (The Left). – Mr President, with the creation of Northern Ireland in 1921, the British engineered a segregated statelet that denied the most basic rights to Irish nationals for decades. A system of social and political discrimination that sought to prevent their ever gaining proper representation and access to power.

The Good Friday Agreement of 1998 put an end to that situation and ushered in a new era of democratic transformation and shared government between Unionist and nationalist. Legislation announced by Boris Johnson could put the Protocol at risk and, furthermore, he said that the UK would proceed unilaterally.

There is no question that this would endanger the Good Friday agreement. It would endanger governance on the island of Ireland and it would endanger the progress made over the last 24 years in the peace process.

As we know, Sinn Féin won the last elections, but the DUP, led by Jeffrey Donaldson, is refusing to share power. They are playing a bad loser’s role. It’s time for them to abide by, and implement, the full rule of democracy and for the European Commission to increase pressure on the British Government so the peace legacy remains intact.

  Danuta Maria Hübner (PPE). – Mr President, the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill is not a trivial set of adjustments, as Prime Minister Johnson described it; it is a near-complete unilateral rewrite through domestic law of a binding international treaty voluntarily entered into by the UK Government. This is a clear breach of international law.

The bill would grant UK ministers extraordinarily wide discretionary powers to implement their alternative to the protocol without negotiating with the European Union. Some of the so-called fixes would actively undermine the unique status of Northern Ireland, depriving it of the best of both worlds. We must remember that the protocol provides access to the EU internal market for the goods coming from Northern Ireland. The bill brings major risk to this access.

The UK Government needs to accept responsibility for the protocol and return to the negotiating table as soon as possible. It is not too late to avoid new local elections in Northern Ireland and increased legal uncertainty.

  Pedro Silva Pereira (S&D). – Mr President, speaking as the European Parliament rapporteur for the implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement, including the Northern Ireland Protocol, my message to the British Government is clear: there is no such thing as a unilateral change to a bilateral international agreement.

The bill announced in the House of Commons they say to fix the Northern Ireland Protocol is no more than a confession of political will to breach the international law commitments recently negotiated and agreed by Boris Johnson himself.

Instead, the British Government should engage constructively in discussing the concrete proposals made by Vice—President Šefčovič and the European Commission to introduce additional flexibility in the implementation of the protocol, as is the wish of the majority of the elected representatives in Northern Ireland.

But make no mistake: this line of action will have serious consequences, forcing the European Commission to launch legal actions against the UK and possibly activate trade sanctions that would harm the smooth implementation also of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement.

  Frances Fitzgerald (PPE). – Mr President, I thank our colleagues for their unwavering support during the last number of years, and Vice-President, thank you for your work.

It is heartbreaking to see so much peace and progress built over such a long period – over decades, it is nothing less than heartbreaking to see that being put at risk at present. So much peace, so much developed relationships all really up for question at the moment.

Thirty years ago, if you travelled from south to north or north to south, you would have been met with checkpoints and police, barbed wire and guns. Today, there is an open border. There is a community and business doing well and the border barely exists. That is because of the Good Friday Agreement. It’s because of the EU’s Customs Union and is protected in the Withdrawal Agreement.

The EU exists to bring down borders. The UK Government’s action risks putting borders up again. Dialogue is crucial, but all sides must be willing to engage in good faith, and we are not seeing that at present. The UK cannot speak about abiding by international commitments if it is not willing to respect the values of international law. The European Union has shown that it is willing to engage. It is time for the British Government to step back from the brink and do the same.

  Katarina Barley (S&D). – Mr President, Vice-President, so Boris Johnson decided to withdraw from the Northern Ireland Protocol unilaterally, the Northern Ireland Protocol that he signed himself. He says it’s not working. Well, the Northern Ireland economy is doing better than the one of Great Britain. What is not working is Brexit, but everybody knew that from the start.

What is not working is obviously also the democratic understanding of the DUP, who now are blocking the formation of a government once they’ve lost the elections. Boris Johnson and the DUP, they’re only acting in their own interests. They don’t care about Northern Ireland or the UK. They only think about themselves and they need a scapegoat, so they use the one they have put up before – the European Union. They keep up this conflict, which is dangerous, especially regarding the specific history of the Good Friday Agreement.

I would like to thank Vice-President Šefčovič for his patience and firmness, facing a counterpart who is not even looking for solutions. And I want to say to all the people in the UK and especially Northern Ireland, we will keep a light on.

Spontane Wortmeldungen

  Željana Zovko (PPE). – Mr President, today is a very interesting day. We voted the report on Bosnia and Herzegovina, where an overwhelming majority rejected the Strategic Compass – the document that was intended to prevent and to start having a real policy on the security and safety of European Union.

We are discussing the Northern Ireland Protocol Agreement and the Good Friday Agreement. The UK Government is trying to play its part in the Western Balkans, and everywhere around, in order to cover up what they are doing in Northern Ireland.

So I think that we should start paying attention in respecting the Dayton/Paris Peace Agreement and the Good Friday Agreement, and to start to do preventive diplomacy and pay attention to power—sharing governments everywhere in the world, in order to preserve peace and security for all the citizens.

  Inma Rodríguez-Piñero (S&D). – Señor presidente, después del Brexit todos los augurios de que era una mala decisión, especialmente para los británicos, se han cumplido: las estanterías vacías, la falta de medicamentos, el fuerte incremento de las exportaciones de Irlanda a Irlanda del Norte, mientras se desploman las procedentes de Inglaterra, la victoria del Sinn Féin y, para terminar, el partygate y la propia oposición interna al primer ministro, Boris Johnson, que le han impulsado a presentar una ley que supone, como han dicho todos los que me han precedido en el uso de la palabra, romper unilateralmente los compromisos y el acuerdo internacional firmado con la Unión Europea.

Los acuerdos están para cumplirlos y el proyecto de ley de Boris Johnson es un claro incumplimiento, una ilegalidad para cambiar de forma unilateral un acuerdo que él había decidido que fuera así. Desde luego, no lo vamos a permitir.

El propio Protocolo —el propio Acuerdo— establece los mecanismos para resolver las diferencias y las discrepancias a través del diálogo. Pero no hay diálogo si uno de los dos no quiere.

  Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Mr President, I want to thank the European Union, the Parliament, the Commission, the Council and all the constituent parts that make up Europe for the solidarity they have shown to Ireland, not only the Member State that is remaining within the European Union, but also for the part of our island that has been excluded from membership of the European Union – and that’s a very fundamental thought to keep in mind.

We need to ensure that Northern Ireland is not punished, is not suffering, by leaving the European Union against the wishes of the majority of the people of Northern Ireland. The European Union has shown great flexibility, great patience and great perseverance through Maroš Šefčovič, in terms of their understanding of the importance of ensuring there is no hard border on the island of Ireland. In my lifetime – and I’m 54 years of age, I saw some harrowing events on my island. Most importantly, the protocol understands that and tries to address it to ensure there is no hard border on the island.

What we need now to do is to ask the British Government to come back in to the tent and sit down and negotiate in good faith, under the basic principles of the Withdrawal Agreement, the Northern Ireland Protocol, but more importantly, for peace and stability on the island of Ireland. Thank you Commissioner Šefčovič and thank you, Parliament, for your support and solidarity on this crucial issue.

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)

  Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, thank you very much and I fully understand that this debate is sometimes very emotional. Everybody who visited Belfast, who visited Flurrybridge, who saw the video of how that area looked 25, 30 years ago with the military watchtowers – and now there is a thriving business community and healthy cross-border trade, peace and a clear wish from the people of Northern Ireland and Ireland to cooperate, to work together and definitely not to have a hard border and definitely not to have a dual regulatory regime – everyone who’s been there or felt that history has to be a little bit emotional. That is because we need to protect the peace and we need to deliver what we promised the people of Northern Ireland – that we will be looking at how to offer them, in this very difficult post-Brexit situation, the best of both worlds: access to the European Single Market and access to the UK internal market.

This is what we are working towards and this is why I so much appreciate not only the unity among the Member States, but also the strong support from the European Parliament because we mean well: we want to solve the problem. We are bringing constructive solutions to the table. And I agree with all of you – Mr McAllister, Mr Silva Pereira, Mr Pedro Marques and many others – who said that this is definitely a time for showing unity among the countries who share the same values. We have one huge challenge to the east of our borders, and it is definitely not the time to breach international law.

On top of that, this House is very much rooted in democracy, in democratic values. It is a house of European democracy. So therefore, I also fully understand the clear expressions of the Members of the European Parliament who sometimes cannot understand, how come, when you have the majority of the Members of the Legislative Assembly in Northern Ireland supporting the Protocol, how come, when you have a majority of people in all opinion polls supporting the solutions we are bringing to the table, how come, when you have strong business support for dual market access, they are still struggling to get this done? I fully share the views of Mr Bourgeois, of Ms Barley and of others that the consequences of Brexit are palpable. But in the case of how we wanted to conclude it and find the best way forward through the protocol, Brexit in this case is clearly not complete. It is not done yet, and to use the London expression, the bill which we are discussing today, will not fix the Protocol; it will nix the Protocol, and it would reopen all the difficult discussions to which we know there is no other answer but the answer which we expressed in the protocol, in the Withdrawal Agreement and in the Trade and Cooperation Agreement.

On top of that, what is sometimes extremely sad, it seems that we share the same goals. If you are talking about a green line or an express line, what we want to achieve is to ease east-west trade as much as possible. We know that checking everything is not possible. But at the same time, we also know that checking nothing or the complete elimination of checks would simply open unguarded doors to the single market and would infringe upon the integrity of the single market, so that’s excluded. But to have a bare minimum of checks where, with the help of our UK partners, by accessing finally the IT systems, by doing checks on risk-based analysis, the bare minimum of checks, that would work, and we are ready to discuss it and this is the content of our protocol.

We offered also different easements for businesspeople on both sides of the border, through the expanded ‘trusted trader’ schemes.

All these proposals are on the table and I definitely would like to reassure the Members that we are ready to discuss them, but we want to have genuine negotiations that would be based on looking for a joint solution, which would avoid this unilateralism and which would not be some kind of window dressing where we are talking because we have to talk, bit the result is already given and it’s the bill because this is how the bill is drafted.

Therefore, I would like to reassure you that our door remains open. We hope that we will have these genuine negotiations, genuine talks, because this is what I believe that people in the EU, in Northern Ireland, in UK and in Ireland are expecting of us.

The last two things I would mention – because many of you appreciate it, there was a lot of creativity brought into our proposals. Indeed, we provided and suggested a lot of different technical solutions, but technical solutions will not do the trick if there is no political will on the UK side to engage and to look for a joint solution. So this is what we need. We have creativity, we need political will in London to actually have genuine talks, to restart and to work on joint practical solutions. If this would not be the case and if the bill, as drafted, would be adopted, of course, in that case, we would be forced to use the measures at our disposal, including the measures which are included in the Trade and Cooperation Agreement.

So I hope that we would avoid that situation and we will find a way to restart talks, to be constructive, and to find a joint solution which would be good for Northern Ireland, for the UK, for Ireland and for the European Union. Once again, thank you very much for this debate, for the opportunity to address you and for your unwavering support, which is so precious in these difficult days. Thank you very much.

  Mikuláš Bek, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would conclude by thanking the European Parliament for our joint efforts in upholding EU unity between all institutions; it remains our strongest asset. As Ms Loiseau said, this is definitely not the time to get divided.

As many of us said, the United Kingdom is our partner. We share the same values and currently we face together the same severe geopolitical situation. As Mr McAllister said, mutual trust is key. We need to send to the United Kingdom a single united signal. Workable solutions can only be found jointly. There is neither legal nor political justification for attempting to unilaterally legislate at the national level to absolve oneself from the binding terms of an international agreement. The steps taken by the UK are a breach of trust and international law.

The Council stands fully united behind the Commission’s approach. The unilateral approach chosen by the UK is harming our partnership which, especially in times like these, should be strengthened.

We need to react adequately to the UK’s unilateral steps, but at the same time we invite the UK Government to come back to the table to find joint pragmatic solutions together. This is how democracies work, to the benefit of their people and businesses. For the European Union part, we are ready.

Last but not least, I would like to thank Maroš Šefčovič for his immense efforts.

  Der Präsident. – Die Aussprache ist damit geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet während einer späteren Tagung statt.

13. Palankesnės sąlygos Ukrainos žemės ūkio produktų eksportui: esminė reikšmė Ukrainos ekonomikai ir pasauliniam apsirūpinimo maistu saugumui (diskusijos)

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgen die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zu dem Thema „Erleichterung des Exports ukrainischer landwirtschaftlicher Erzeugnisse: Schlüssel für die ukrainische Wirtschaft und die weltweite Ernährungssicherheit“ (2022/2745(RSP)).

Die Aussprache findet unter den gleichen Rahmenbedingungen statt wie die abgelaufenen Aussprachen, was den Sitzplatz, die Wortmeldungen, den Redeort und die blaue Karte betrifft.

  Mikuláš Bek, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, honourable Members, the global food security crisis affecting, especially, the poorest countries and low—income households is a matter of deep concern for all of us.

The main cause of the current situation is Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified aggression against Ukraine. We see Russia deliberately disrupting food exports and targeting food stocks. Many vulnerable countries are facing growing levels of food insecurity, and low—income households have to cope with food prices that have reached record high levels since Russia started its war of aggression against Ukraine.

Food prices will unfortunately remain high for the near future, and urgent action is needed to prevent millions of people being pushed into acute food insecurity. The EU is working closely with all our international partners to alleviate the immediate humanitarian needs and to prevent further escalation of the food crisis in the most affected countries.

We are all aware that Russia’s blockade of Ukraine and Black Sea ports is preventing the export of tons of Ukrainian grain. We are determined to help Ukraine bring back its agriculture production to world markets. The world needs Ukrainian grain urgently. We continue to support ongoing UN—led efforts to find a solution for reopening Ukrainian ports. In parallel, we will pursue our action to facilitate transport of Ukrainian grain overland through the solidarity lanes.

Replacing export capacity over sea is a huge challenge. Together, we are trying to do the utmost to increase transport and export capacity overland and in this context, I would highlight the agreements signed last week with both Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova to take road transport easier and subject to less administrative burden.

Beyond the immediate humanitarian needs, decisive action is needed to address the root causes of hunger and food insecurity in the world, in particular by reducing the dependency on food imports among the most vulnerable countries.

This is part of the overall approach we have developed to respond to the food crisis. We will continue to give the highest priority to coordinated EU action along three tracks. First, solidarity through emergency relief and financial support to the most affected countries and communities. Secondly, helping vulnerable, import—dependent countries build sustainable and resilient food systems. And third, easing tensions on global agricultural markets and promoting an open, transparent and predictable trade environment.

Effective international coordination is essential to ensure a comprehensive response. We are fully engaged in the G7 Global Alliance for Food Security and ready to make a substantial contribution, in particular through the EU’s global food security response and the Farm Initiative. The EU as a top agri-food producer will also continue to do its part in ensuring food security at the global level.

The overall outlook for EU domestic production is positive for this year and should allow us to increase cereals supplies to, in particular, countries in North Africa and the Middle East. Thank you for your attention.

  Kadri Simson, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, due to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine and the blockade of Ukrainian ports, Ukrainian grain and other agricultural goods can no longer reach their destinations. This is not only a European problem – it is a global one, and as a result, global food prices have risen drastically. Russia’s illegal, unprovoked and unjustified invasion of Ukraine has caused a big drop in food exports, and food prices have increased by up to 30%.

Before the war, Ukraine exported up to 5 million tonnes of grain per month, 90% through the Black Sea ports. These flows now need to be redirected through rail, road and inland waterways, and then onward towards new ports.

The Commission’s ‘solidarity lanes’ action plan, adopted in May, proposed 20 actions ranging from short—term ones to medium- and long—term ones; these are dealing with increasing connectivity and capacity, also with a view to the reconstruction of Ukraine.

As a first step towards the implementation of the action plan, the Commission has put in place a solid framework to manage the process. Member States have designated solidarity lanes contact points to act as a one-stop shop for requests regarding their respective country. The Commission has also directly reached out to the whole transport sector, which has responded massively.

A fully fledged matchmaking platform started operating on 23 May. It brings all parties around the table: the national solidarity lanes contact points, the Ukrainian authorities, the EU, and Ukrainian market players. On the business matchmaking platform, 460 companies have already registered, of which over 200 are from Ukraine. These numbers are still growing. Now that the platform has been started, the Commission is working round the clock to facilitate all potential alternative transport routes and to find solutions to best facilitate traffic along them.

We are working with the Member States to make checks and regulatory requirements as efficient as possible. This is particularly crucial for goods in transit. On 29 June, the EU signed temporary road transport agreements with Ukraine and Moldova. These will allow road transport to provide additional capacity.

Through close contacts with the Member States and the stakeholders, the Commission is mapping the capacity of our transport networks and increasing it. For example, we are cooperating with the Danube Commission to maximise the use of Danube route. We also look beyond Constanța, further north to the Polish and Baltic ports, such as Gdańsk and Klaipėda. There is also capacity in many ports that could be reached via Slovakia and Hungary, which still has some capacity for transit from Ukraine.

We also need to think of creative solutions, and we are glad to see that some of the Member States are already working on that. For instance, Romania has already set up dedicated convoys of trucks to smoothen the crossing of borders. In parallel, we are working on identifying which storage facilities in the EU are ready to take Ukrainian grain in order to ensure that a buffer is created.

Ukrainian authorities have strongly welcomed our work, and are participating actively in the implementation of the action plan. We already see the results that the alternative corridors on the ground are delivering: about 1.3 million tonnes of grain and oilseeds and related products were exported in April and around 2 million tonnes in May. The latest estimates from the Ukrainian Agriculture Ministry show that 2.5 million tonnes of these products were exported in June. This shows that our collective efforts are having a positive impact.

We will not be able to fully substitute Ukraine’s Black Sea ports; however, by increasing the agility, flexibility and resilience of the EU transport system we should be able to reach our goal of exporting at least 3 million tonnes of agricultural products per month from Ukraine.

  Norbert Lins, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, Herr Minister, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist richtig, Frau Kommissarin, dass wir in den letzten Wochen etwas erreicht haben durch die Solidaritätskorridore. Die neuesten Zahlen aus der Ukraine von heute Morgen sind 2,17 Millionen Tonnen, die im Juni exportiert worden sind.

Wenn wir aber genau hinschauen, welches Getreide, welches Sonnenblumenöl exportiert worden ist, dann sehen wir ganz andere und aus meiner Sicht sehr bedrückende Zahlen, nämlich dass im Wesentlichen Export in die Europäische Union hineinführt, dass aber kaum Export als Transit durch die Europäische Union in Drittstaaten führt. Gerade einmal 138 000 Tonnen Weizen – das ist ja das Brotgetreide schlechthin, das dann auch über die Europäische Union nach Afrika oder in den Nahen Osten gehen könnte – sind im Juni exportiert worden. Sehr viel Viehfutter – das ist nichts Unmoralisches, aber die Priorität muss beim Weizen liegen und bei unserer Sorge, wie wir für Ernährungssicherheit sorgen, wie wir den Welthunger stillen können, wie wir die Hungerkatastrophe zumindest abmildern können. Diese Sorge muss uns als Priorität gelten.

Deswegen brauchen wir da viel mehr in der Lieferkette. Es muss viel mehr passieren, vom Verlassen der Ukraine bis zur Destination. Deswegen war ich mit meinem Ausschuss an der polnisch-ukrainischen Grenze und habe mir das genau angeschaut. Ich werde morgen mit Kolleginnen und Kollegen nach Rumänien aufbrechen, um mir genau vor Ort anzuschauen, was passiert, was gut ist und was noch nicht gut ist.

Ich glaube, dass wir Versicherungsgarantien brauchen. Ich glaube, dass wir mehr Lagerkapazitäten brauchen. Ich glaube aber auch, dass wir überlegen müssen, als Europäische Union oder als Welternährungsprogramm den Weizen aus der Ukraine zu kaufen. Wir müssen die Sorgen der Landwirte auch in den Nachbarstaaten ernst nehmen. Das Getreide darf nicht nur da ankommen und dort verbleiben, sondern es muss weitergehen, insbesondere in die Drittstaaten. Also: Viel getan, noch viel mehr zu tun.

  Inma Rodríguez-Piñero, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, Ucrania es un país relevante política y comercialmente para la Unión Europea. Ya en 2021 era nuestro cliente número quince y la Unión Europea era su principal proveedor.

Ucrania ha llenado los mercados mundiales de algunos productos que son esenciales para la alimentación humana y que son imprescindibles también para la economía ucraniana, porque son la base de la misma. Es fundamental que ayudemos a que puedan seguir haciendo este papel. Que llegue a los mercados mundiales la producción de estos alimentos fundamentales. Hemos de facilitar efectivamente el tránsito a través de los corredores solidarios y desbloquear la situación en los puertos de salida en el Mar Negro.

Ucrania ya era nuestro socio. Ahora, además, es un país candidato a entrar a nuestra Unión Europea. Esta es una lección para Putin y para todos los gobernantes totalitarios. La Unión Europea ya ha demostrado recientemente su capacidad para hacer frente a una crisis sanitaria inesperada a través de la democracia, de la unidad y de la solidaridad entre nosotros y con otros. Ahora vamos a demostrar con esos mismos elementos que somos capaces de ganar a Putin, de ganar a las consecuencias de su guerra cruel, de la crisis energética y de la crisis alimentaria que se está empezando a generar. Ningún elemento puede pararnos. Mi grupo político puede tener seguridad de que siempre estaremos al lado de Ucrania.

  Dacian Cioloş, în numele grupului Renew. – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisară, dragi colegi, în ultimele luni, cetățenii europeni simt direct și dureros efectele războiului prin creșteri de prețuri, inclusiv la alimentele de bază, și simt cum ne este afectată puterea de cumpărare din cauza blocadei cerealelor pe care o face Rusia lui Putin.

Și dacă nu luăm măsuri urgente pentru a facilita exporturile stocurilor din Ucraina, impactul va fi enorm, prin creșteri necontrolate de prețuri la alimente, prin impact sever asupra celor mai vulnerabili, foamete care poate să declanșeze din nou migrație masivă către Europa, din Orientul Mijlociu și Africa de Nord sau Subsahariană.

Ca să nu se întâmple toate aceste lucruri, vă propun să lucrăm împreună cu Comisia și da, trebuie să punem presiune pe Comisie, să asigure o mai bună coordonare a ceea ce se întâmplă la frontiera cu Ucraina. Ceea ce noi, în task-force-ul pe care l-am creat în cadrul Grupului Renew pentru securitatea alimentară, propunem ca aceste coridoare verzi să existe în realitate și ele să fie urmărite de Comisie, dar și să simplificăm procedurile de vămuire la frontiera cu Ucraina, care iar întârzie foarte mult lucrurile.

Materie primă și ajutor pentru ca producătorii din Ucraina să-și continue activitatea și, de ce nu, chiar un fond financiar prin care să asigurăm achiziția producției pentru anul viitor, care să poată să fie distribuită pentru ajutor umanitar, pentru că va fi nevoie de asta. Deblocarea exportului de cereale din Ucraina va ajuta atât economia Ucrainei, dar și problemele de securitate alimentară din lume. De aceea, responsabilitatea Uniunii Europene este mare.

  Bronis Ropė, Verts/ALE frakcijos vardu. – Ar ne paradoksas, kad daugelis šalių gali atsekti medienos, mėsos kilmę, o negali to padaryti su iš Ukrainos pavogtais grūdais? Rusija iškrauna juos įvairiuose uostuose. Noriu paklausti Komisijos: kas yra daroma, kad šie kroviniai būtų sustabdyti? Akivaizdu, kad net ir dedant milžiniškas pastangas, visų grūdų pervežti iš Ukrainos į Europos Sąjungos teritoriją nepavyks. Kyla klausimų ir dėl grūdų, kurie jau pervežti per sieną. Mes kalbame apie Afrikoje gresiantį badą. Bet kaip grūdai pasieks tą žemyną? Ar nenutiks taip, kad Ukrainos grūdai liks Europos Sąjungos rinkoje ir bus parduoti žemiau savikainos? Kokias pasekmes tuomet turės mūsų žemdirbiams? Turime padėti Ukrainai, bet kartu ir neturime žlugdyti Europos Sąjungos žemės ūkio.

PRZEWODNICTWO: EWA KOPACZ
Wiceprzewodnicząca

  Angelo Ciocca, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, penso che non sia accettabile da parte di istituzioni europee che quando vi è un problema è sempre colpa di qualcun altro.

Il blocco delle esportazioni alimentari ucraine crea ovviamente degli effetti, ma anche delle colpe. Non possiamo non partire dal fatto che sono settant'anni che l'Europa gestisce le politiche agricole europee, forse con troppi idealismi e con pochi realismi, questo è il tema. Come la Farm to Fork, i semafori e altre situazioni che oggi purtroppo presentano il conto, e lo presentano ai nostri cittadini.

Il blocco delle esportazioni alimentari ucraine dovrà ovviamente tenere conto di alcuni effetti diretti e indiretti, purtroppo. La crescita del costo del cibo, e questo è un tema che prevede addirittura un aumento di poveri di 49 milioni. Io penso che la politica europea dovrebbe ridurre i poveri e non aumentare i poveri, e su questo, secondo me, serve anche capire chi ha sbagliato e cosa si può fare per correre ai ripari.

È chiaro che non possiamo sempre scaricare queste responsabilità dell'istituzione europea sui cittadini, sulle aziende agricole ucraine, sulle aziende agricole italiane o sulle aziende agricole europee. La carenza di prodotto alimentare, ovviamente, inciderà sui rincari dei bilanci delle nostre famiglie.

Però, dobbiamo capire che in questi anni abbiamo determinato che un paese capace di produrre come l'Italia è arrivato a produrre solo il 50 per cento del fabbisogno di grano, poi su tutti i pacchetti, su tutte le confezioni troviamo "grano italiano", qualsiasi grande multinazionale scrive "grano italiano", anche se il grano italiano poi non c'è. Ecco, io penso che il blocco delle esportazioni di grano sia un problema anche sul tema dell'immigrazione.

Questo sarà un altro dramma, il fatto che purtroppo la carenza alimentare porterà ancora a inasprire il tema dei flussi migratori tra l'Africa e l'Europa. E allora qui l'istituzione europea non può appaltare alla Turchia o a Erdogan, Erdogan è in grado di far transitare le navi dall'Ucraina alla Turchia e l'istituzione europea non riesce a ottenere questo. Questa incapacità europea della nostra diplomazia si scarica pesantemente sui cittadini e sulle nostre imprese.

  Bert-Jan Ruissen, namens de ECR-Fractie. – Voorzitter, mevrouw de commissaris, de Russische inval in Oekraïne laat zien hoe kwetsbaar onze voedselvoorziening eigenlijk is. Ondanks de solidariteitscorridors zijn er nog steeds grote hindernissen bij het transport van graan uit Oekraïne. Met alle gevolgen van dien, niet in de laatste plaats voor Afrika en voor landen als Libanon, waar de voedselschaarste zorgwekkende proporties begint aan te nemen.

Wat moeten we doen? Allereerst, alle hens aan dek om het graan toch uit Oekraïne te krijgen. Als het niet gaat via de havens, dan dus ook via de weg, waar de doorstromingscapaciteit echt nog verder omhoog moet. Ten tweede, zuinig zijn op onze landbouwgronden. Alleen al in mijn land ging de afgelopen jaren 25 000 hectare landbouwgrond verloren aan industrie, woningbouw en natuur. En ten derde, laten we ook minder afhankelijk worden van de invoer van grondstoffen, onder andere door hergebruik van nutriënten.

Onze boeren zijn onmisbaar voor onze voedselzekerheid, ons platteland en het beheer van ons landschap. Voedselproductie verdient de hoogste prioriteit.

  Eugenia Rodríguez Palop, en nombre del Grupo The Left. – Señora presidenta, suben los precios de los cereales y aumentan los gastos del combustible, del transporte y de la logística. Además, hay quien se aprovecha y especula con los productos agrícolas y alimentarios, precisamente porque los mercados permiten ese tipo de comportamientos. Esto afecta gravemente a los agricultores y a las familias con rentas más bajas en Europa, pero también a los países enteros, que pueden acabar enfrentándose a situaciones de hambruna.

Tenemos que adoptar medidas inmediatas para aliviar esta situación y frenar los catastróficos efectos que está teniendo la reducción de las exportaciones ucranianas. Pero no olvidemos que esta situación es, ante todo, el resultado de un modelo productivo insostenible y dependiente que deberíamos cambiar.

Necesitamos garantizar la soberanía alimentaria, acabar con la especulación, proteger la agricultura familiar de pequeña escala, que produce alrededor del 80 % de los alimentos a escala mundial, promover condiciones laborales dignas en el campo y cadenas de suministro cortas, y acabar con la concentración empresarial en el ámbito alimentario, que nos empobrece. Aquí estamos para garantizar derechos y el derecho a la alimentación tiene que ser ahora —tendría que ser ahora— nuestra prioridad.

  Tiziana Beghin (NI). – Signora Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, l'Ucraina è il granaio del mondo e la guerra sta affamando il pianeta. E se i prezzi di pane e pasta sono aumentati qui da noi, in Africa e in Medio Oriente c'è chi rischia di morire di fame, perché interi paesi dipendono al cento per cento dall'export ucraino, che rimane bloccato dalle mine e dalle bombe russe. Si tratta di quantità immense di cibo, perché delle 620 milioni di tonnellate di cereali commerciate nel 2021, l'Ucraina ne ha fornite da sola l'11 per cento.

Perciò dobbiamo agire subito, perché se gli stock globali di cereali scendessero sotto un certo livello, non solo aumenterebbe la fame nel mondo, ma ogni paese produttore reagirebbe con comprensibile paura limitando l'export di grano. Una misura che sembra sensata se vista individualmente, ma se decine di paesi la prendessero allo stesso tempo, l'effetto collettivo globale sarebbe un'esplosione senza precedenti del prezzo, che potrebbe raggiungere soglie mai viste.

Le grandi potenze devono quindi trovare un accordo per l'apertura urgente di corridoi alimentari marittimi, ma intanto l'Unione deve facilitare il trasporto via terra, stanziando risorse per l'acquisto e il noleggio di treni e autocarri e sostenendo gli operatori della logistica a far fronte agli ingenti costi assicurativi.

Bisogna poi finanziare già ora la costruzione di strutture di trasferimento del prodotto dai treni ucraini a quelli europei, che non sono interoperabili perché usano binari di diverse dimensioni.

Inoltre, gli esportatori mondiali non stanno più comprando grano ucraino, dato che sono giustamente preoccupati che il prodotto che comprano oggi non sarà mai consegnato. Per questo Commissione e ONU dovrebbero anche pensare di acquistare direttamente il grano dai produttori ucraini per poi rivenderlo agli esportatori.

Infine, dobbiamo coordinare gli sforzi, al G7, al G20, per evitare restrizioni che sarebbero catastrofiche per l'export di grano. Solo così il disastro umanitario che è questa guerra non si trasformerà in un disastro alimentare globale.

  Herbert Dorfmann (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich war vor rund zwei Wochen an der polnisch-ukrainischen Grenze und werde in den nächsten Tagen an der rumänisch-ukrainischen Grenze sein, und ich muss feststellen, der Export von Brotgetreide aus der Ukraine mit Destination Afrika findet derzeit schlichtweg nicht statt. Es wird zwar Getreide aus der Ukraine exportiert – das haben Sie, Frau Kommissarin, gesagt –, aber das sind halt eben fast ausschließlich Futtermittel für den EU-Markt. Weniger als 150 000 Tonnen Weizen haben die Ukraine im Juni verlassen.

Die Ursache ist klar – das Konzept der Solidaritätskorridore darf nicht nur ein Logistikkonzept sein. Tatsache ist, dass derzeit in der Ukraine Weizen zu Schleuderpreisen verkauft wird, weil man die Lager leeren muss. Tatsache ist, dass wir unsere Einfuhrzölle abgeschafft haben und damit natürlich die berechtigte Angst der Bäuerinnen und Bauern in den Grenzstaaten auf europäischer Seite, auf EU-Seite, besteht, dass die Importe aus der Ukraine den heimischen Markt kaputt machen.

Deshalb müssen wir garantieren, dass der Weizen auch effektiv dorthin gelangt, wo er gebraucht wird – im Nahen Osten, in Afrika, im Welternährungsprogramm. Und das, glaube ich, muss die Europäische Kommission so schnell als möglich auf den Weg bringen.

  Carmen Avram (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, de când a început războiul nu există stat european, aflat sau nu la frontiera cu Ucraina, care să nu fi făcut eforturi să ajute această țară însângerată. Fie că a fost vorba de sprijin umanitar, financiar, militar sau agricol, Uniunea Europeană a sărit în ajutor. Mai mult, liderii europeni au decis ridicarea barierelor administrative sau fiscale pentru ca sectorul agricol din Ucraina să își continue activitatea, criza alimentară să nu se adâncească în anumite părți ale lumii, iar în altele să nu devină realitate.

Deși afectată de criza energetică, de explozia prețurilor la alimente și de seceta prelungită, în urma căreia Dunărea, o importantă rută de transport, a devenit impracticabilă, țara mea face tot ce-i stă în puteri pentru a-și ajuta vecinii.

Comisia Europeană trebuie să înțeleagă, însă, că statele din preajma conflictului au nevoie de mai mult sprijin, logistic sau de altă natură, pentru a continua acest efort și pentru ca sectorul agricol din zonă să nu sufere. Europenii și lumea, în general, au nevoie de întreaga cantitate de hrană produsă care poate fi exportată în această perioadă.

  Petras Auštrevičius (Renew). – Madam President, Commissioner, Minister, this week Ukrainians began harvesting their vast, fertile fields. More than 40 million tonnes of grain are expected. Whether this and last year’s harvest will be delivered to the dozens of countries where this grain means starvation or life will depend to a large extent on our immediate action.

Russia will take no steps to prevent famine in many countries in Africa and the Middle East. Creating artificial famines is part of Russia’s legacy. In the 1930s, the last century, Soviet Russia perpetrated the inhuman Holodomor, starving millions of Ukrainians to death.

I urge the European Commission and the Member States to work together with the international partners to assist Ukraine in creating safe export corridors and restoring safe navigation through the Black Sea. Russia must be pressed and reasoned to accept an uninterrupted maritime corridor for agricultural products in order to alleviate the food crisis it has created.

  Tilly Metz (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, Commissioner, I had also the opportunity to join the mission of the Agricultural Committee to the Polish—Ukrainian border also two weeks ago, and I was impressed by how smoothly things were running. But to be honest, not much was running – almost no grain makes it to the EU borders.

But also no one had yet heard of the so-called ‘solidarity lanes’ announced by the Commission; idem for the matchmaking platform supposed to facilitate the export.

The cost of transporting the food via new routes and transport modes, in a country under attack, are sky high, and the prices Ukrainian farmers are getting are too low. This complicated issue needs a holistic, strategic approach.

If we really want to help save the harvest – which we should focus on right now – the EU needs to think bigger. The solidarity lanes should go from inside Ukraine to their final destination, especially to the countries outside the EU which really depend on these imports.

  Gilles Lebreton (ID). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, la facilitation de l’exportation des produits agricoles ukrainiens est vitale pour l’économie ukrainienne, mais aussi pour la sécurité alimentaire mondiale.

Selon un rapport publié le 29 juin par la FAO et l’OCDE, 19 millions de personnes supplémentaires pourraient souffrir de la faim dès 2023, principalement en Afrique, si la situation reste bloquée. Cela provoquerait de graves problèmes humanitaires, mais aussi un risque accru de submersion migratoire. Il faut donc tout tenter pour permettre à l’Ukraine d’assurer la reprise de ses exportations.

La priorité est de lever par la voie diplomatique le blocus des ports maritimes ukrainiens. C’est l’urgence, car avec le blocus, plus de 22 millions de tonnes de céréales sont déjà bloquées dans les entrepôts ukrainiens, avant même la nouvelle récolte. Quel que soit le succès de cette entreprise, il faut aussi créer de nouveaux corridors d’exportation, comme la Commission l’a déclaré.

C’est un défi logistique gigantesque, car on imagine mal comment on pourrait évacuer en camion 22 millions de tonnes de céréales. Il faut donc aussi recourir au transport ferroviaire, avec cette difficulté technique que les rails ukrainiens n’ont pas le même écartement que les rails européens, ce qui nécessite un transbordement à la frontière. À cela s’ajoute la nécessité de convaincre les États membres d’accélérer les contrôles douaniers et d’augmenter leur capacité d’entreposage des céréales ukrainiennes.

Ce sont autant de défis qu’il faut relever au nom d’un intérêt général prioritaire: celui d’assurer la sécurité alimentaire mondiale.

  Zbigniew Kuźmiuk (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Ministrze! Według szacunków ekspertów Ukraina stoi przed koniecznością wywiezienia w ciągu najbliższych dziewięciu miesięcy około 50 mln ton zbóż zeszłorocznych i tegorocznych zbiorów, czyli około pięciu milionów ton miesięcznie. Mój kraj, Polska, podjął już wszelkie możliwe działania dotyczące poprawy przepustowości naszej granicy, dzięki czemu przez cztery wydzielone przejścia graniczne jest możliwe przewiezienie około półtora miliona ton zbóż miesięcznie, ale możliwości te są wykorzystywane zaledwie w połowie. Trudności niestety są przede wszystkim po stronie ukraińskiej. Częściowo zniszczona infrastruktura drogowa i kolejowa, niedostosowany do wyzwań transport kolejowy, a w szczególności brak wagonów zbożowych i infrastruktury przeładunkowej na granicy oraz, co chcę podkreślić, rosnące lawinowo koszty obowiązkowych ubezpieczeń dla tego transportu, to tylko niektóre problemy obniżające wydajność tych zielonych korytarzy. W tej sytuacji wręcz dramatycznym wyzwaniem jest, moim zdaniem, odblokowanie drogi morskiej transportu zboża przez ukraińskie porty nad Morzem Czarnym z udziałem instytucji unijnych, ONZ, a może nawet także NATO. Bez tego, jak się wydaje, około 40 milionów ton ukraińskiego zboża nie zostanie wywiezione, a to grozi – o czym tu już była wielokrotnie mowa – klęską głodu krajów w północnej Afryce i na Bliskim Wschodzie, ze wszystkimi tego negatywnymi konsekwencjami dla nas wszystkich.

  Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez (PPE). – Señora presidenta, «Nuestra mayor esperanza es la hambruna». Con estas palabras resumía Margarita Simonyan, propagandista jefe de Putin, la enorme dependencia que tienen África y Oriente Medio del grano ruso y ucraniano. Tras amenazar con cortar el gas a los países europeos y con comenzar una guerra nuclear global, la última amenaza mortífera de Rusia es el bloqueo de las exportaciones de alimentos. Para evitar este chantaje ruso tenemos, primero, que buscar alternativas logísticas a los puertos del mar Negro de manera urgente. Y, segundo, debemos aumentar en Europa la productividad de nuestros cultivos para suplir la oferta ucraniana y controlar la inflación del precio de los alimentos, tal y como están pidiendo las Naciones Unidas. Objetivos precisamente contrarios a la Estrategia «De la Granja la Mesa», del señor Timmermans, que reducirá hasta en un 15 % la productividad y encarecerá los alimentos en un 10 %.

Continuar desarrollando esta Estrategia no es solamente una opción equivocada que sufrirán tanto agricultores como consumidores europeos. Es también una irresponsabilidad que puede acelerar la grave hambruna global que se avecina.

  Петър Витанов (S&D). – Г-жо Председател, г-жо Комисар, войната на Русия доведе до рекордно високи цени на храните, а постоянно растящата цена на торовете и енергията, както и вътрешната забрана на Русия за износ на зърнени култури поставя под риск прехраната на десетки милиони хора, особено в страните от Северна Африка, които разчитат на внос на пшеница от Русия и от Украйна.

И да, Европа трябва да противодейства с всички средства на използването на храната като оръжие и да способства за алтернативните транспортни маршрути на украинските пристанища, било то през Констанца, през балтийските пристанища, чрез железопътни коридори, включително и река Дунав, за да успее да освободи онези 22-23 милиона тона зърнени култури, предназначени за износ.

Но същевременно Европа трябва да помисли и за европейските производители, особено в съседните на Украйна държави като Полша, като Румъния и България, защото те могат да бъдат сериозно засегнати от евтиния, изключително евтиния внос на украински зърнени култури, защото пък в този случай, ако има фалит на местни производители, Европа е изправена пред две предизвикателства: веднъж - да помогне на Украйна и втори път - да помогне на местните европейски производители.

  Jérémy Decerle (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, Monsieur le Ministre, l’Ukraine souffre dans une guerre qui n’en finit plus d’être dévastatrice. Face à cela, le peuple ukrainien nous donne à tous une leçon de courage: il se bat sans relâche pour son pays, ses enfants, mais aussi son agriculture.

Une agriculture différente de la nôtre, mais solide et productive. Une agriculture qui mérite un soutien urgent de l’Europe pour sortir sa production du territoire. Le monde en a besoin pour se nourrir, l’Ukraine en a besoin pour sauver sa prochaine récolte. L’Europe doit aussi être plus visionnaire. L’Europe doit aider les Ukrainiennes et les Ukrainiens à rebâtir leur agriculture, à accompagner son évolution pour qu’elle se rapproche plus de la nôtre et pour commencer dès maintenant à dessiner l’avenir de nos modèles agricoles.

Une agriculture forte et durable: fondation d’une union Europe-Ukraine capable de répondre à l’enjeu de la sécurité alimentaire mondiale.

  Benoît Biteau (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, mes chers collègues, le débat que nous avons ici aujourd’hui est vraiment important. Dans l’état actuel des choses, évidemment, chaque tonne de céréales qui sort de l’Ukraine et qui arrive aux populations qui en ont besoin est un pas en avant dans la lutte contre la faim. Mais comment en sommes-nous arrivés là? Comment la stabilité alimentaire mondiale a-t-elle pu se retrouver à la merci des lubies de Poutine?

Notre système alimentaire mondial n’est pas résilient: c’est un château de cartes en équilibre précaire, vulnérable au moindre battement d’ailes d’un papillon. Nous traversons la troisième crise alimentaire en quinze ans. Le nouveau contexte structurel des crises climatiques et géopolitiques dans lequel nous entrons nous oblige à revoir ce fonctionnement. Nous devons sortir des vieux dogmes de Ricardo et remettre en question l’hyperspécialisation agricole des zones de la planète organisée par l’Organisation mondiale du commerce.

Mettons en place les conditions nécessaires pour que chaque pays puisse mener des politiques de souveraineté alimentaire, accompagnons le développement des pôles de stabilité alimentaire régionaux et restaurons les potentiels agronomiques trop souvent négligés.

  Daniel Buda (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, doamnelor și domnilor colegi, securitatea alimentară la nivel mondial este în pericol, iar războiul din Ucraina a pus pe masă o altă problemă spinoasă: transportul cerealelor.

În același timp, trebuie să ne asigurăm că cerealele sunt tranzitate către destinațiile finale. Rămânerea necontrolată a acestora, în interiorul Uniunii Europene, este de natură să creeze presiune asupra fermierilor europeni care se văd puși deja în situația de a-și vinde producția mult sub prețurile de cost.

România înțelege importanța tranzitului de cereale și face eforturi majore în acest sens. A crescut capacitățile de tranzit, a simplificat procedurile, a creat culoare speciale și a deschis noi puncte de frontieră. Aceste eforturi trebuie, însă, făcute împreună, cu ajutorul altor țări și cu sprijin direct de la Comisia Europeană. Este nevoie de mai multe vagoane de tren, de camioane și, bineînțeles, de vapoare.

Doamnă comisară, toate aceste lucruri le-am cerut, dar deocamdată nu am primit nimic. Cu alte cuvinte, este nevoie de acțiuni concrete și nu de vorbe goale sau de empatii sterile. Problemele globale au nevoie de măsuri globale, iar combaterea foametei la nivel mondial trebuie să fie obiectivul nostru major în viitor.

  Clara Aguilera (S&D). – Señora presidenta, como todos han repetido, la mayoría tenemos una obligación moral y ética que es garantizar la seguridad alimentaria en todo el mundo, no solo en Europa. Pero estamos viendo que esta guerra de Ucrania está trayendo muchos problemas, especialmente para que lleguen esas producciones.

El cambio en las rutas de transporte, especialmente el bloqueo de los puertos, está trayendo consigo que no llegue evidentemente esa gran producción. Por eso, bienvenidos sean los corredores solidarios. A ver si funcionan bien estos corredores solidarios.

Hemos visto ya un buen resultado en junio, cuando ha habido un incremento de salida de un 25 % de las producciones ucranianas, pero no son suficientes, porque no se pueden quedar en Europa, no se pueden quedar en Polonia, en Rumanía, tienen que salir fuera. Necesitamos que esos productos lleguen a África y a esos países para que no padezcan esa gran hambruna que todos nos anuncian.

Pero hay que mejorar también. Las aduanas de Polonia y de Rumanía están trayendo un retraso en el transporte de ocho días de logística. Por lo tanto, arreglemos esa situación y, sobre todo, también protejamos y ayudemos a los agricultores europeos.

  Elsi Katainen (Renew). – Arvoisa puhemies, arvoisa komissaari, arvoisa ministeri, Venäjän hyökkäys Ukrainaan ylittää kaikki ihmisyyden rajat. Venäjä käyttää tietoisesti aseenaan nälkää, kun se pyrkii estämään Ukrainan maataloustuotannon ja myös viljan viennin. Ukrainan vakava tilanne heijastuu koko maailman ruokaturvaan. Sadonkorjuu Ukrainassa alkaa olla käsillä, mutta varastot ovat jo täynnä. Mustallamerellä laivarahti on pattitilanteessa.

Turkin johtaja Erdoğan on ottanut vahvan välittäjän roolin Venäjän ja Ukrainan välisessä ruokavientikonfliktissa. Me emme saa antaa Turkin tai Venäjän sanella viljan viennin ehtoja. EU:n on toimittava niin, että viljan merikuljetukset saadaan käyntiin tinkimättä kuitenkaan satamien turvallisuudesta ja ukrainalaisten puolustuskyvystä. Solidaarisuuskäytävät ovat hyvä alku, mutta ryhdikkäämpiä toimia tarvitaan. Kysynkin komissaarilta: Kuinka komissio aikoo varmistaa viljan viennin jatkuvuuden ja siten vastata maailman ruokaturvasta eurooppalaisin toimin?

Zgłoszenia z sali

  Peter Jahr (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin! Putin kann Getreide als Waffe benutzen, Beispiel Weizen: Ukraine 18 Millionen Tonnen jährlich, Russland 35 Millionen Tonnen jährlich. Das heißt, Putin kann 28 % des Welthandels beeinflussen. Er kann die Strategie täglich wechseln, er kann die Warenterminbörsen durcheinanderbringen, er kann Hunger in Nordafrika produzieren, er kann einen neuen Flüchtlingsstrom nach Europa organisieren.

Deshalb ist es richtig, dass wir einen Solidaritätskorridor schaffen, der auch funktioniert. Aber wir brauchen auch noch einen anderen Appetitzügler für Putin. Das heißt: Die Europäische Union muss mehr Weizen produzieren und nach Nordafrika exportieren. Allein der Verzicht auf eine vierprozentige Ackerlandstilllegung könnte in der Europäischen Union 10 Millionen Tonnen Weizen zusätzlich produzieren.

Deshalb meine Bitte an die Kommission: Machen wir Putins Waffe wirkungslos, produzieren wir mehr Getreide in der Europäischen Union, setzen wir die Stilllegungsverpflichtung für Ackerland für das Jahr 2023 aus!

  Isabel Carvalhais (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, de facto a invasão da Ucrânia pela Rússia veio criar uma enorme pressão sobre a segurança alimentar mundial, já de si bastante fragilizada, como sabemos, desde o período da COVID-19 e, portanto, estamos a falar de um preocupante aumento do número de pessoas no mundo em situação iminente de fome. E se nós pensarmos que mais de 36, cerca de 40 nações em todo o mundo importavam mais de 50% dos seus cereais de países como a Ucrânia e a Rússia, percebemos bem a dimensão da catástrofe que se pode estar a adivinhar.

E, portanto, neste contexto, é importante estudarmos e agilizarmos as alternativas no terreno ao bloqueio dos portos ucranianos – e eu saúdo aqui os esforços que a Comissão tem desempenhado no sentido de abrir o funcionamento de corredores solidários, que facilitem o transporte de cereais e de mercadorias –, mas eu alerto que os relatos são muito preocupantes, inclusivamente de desconhecimento sobre o funcionamento desses corredores solidários, e em paralelo, para terminar, é importante monitorizar o funcionamento desses corredores e de outras vias para garantir que não há desestabilização do funcionamento dos mercados dos países de passagem.

  Isabel García Muñoz (S&D). – Señora presidenta, la invasión de Ucrania ha puesto de manifiesto la importancia de tener desarrollada una cadena logística resiliente preparada para hacer frente a posibles disrupciones. Es imprescindible para ello reforzar los corredores ferroviarios europeos y fortalecer puertos, aeropuertos y el resto de infraestructuras.

Putin sabía perfectamente lo que hacía al atacar los puertos ucranianos desde el primer momento, bloqueándolos, rompiendo la cadena de suministros europea y global y provocando una crisis alimentaria internacional que está desestabilizando el orden mundial. Necesitamos soluciones a corto plazo que mejoren la conectividad entre Ucrania y el continente europeo, como los corredores solidarios, y que permitan sacar productos agrícolas, pero también llevar ayuda humanitaria y productos básicos.

El Gobierno de España se ha puesto a la cabeza de uno de estos proyectos solidarios para sacar por ferrocarril el cereal almacenado en Ucrania y llevarlo a puertos españoles, desde donde se podrá exportar a otros países. Solidaridad y responsabilidad es lo que se espera de la Unión Europea y es lo que ya está haciendo el Gobierno de Pedro Sánchez.

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (Renew). – Señora presidenta, una de las consecuencias de la invasión de Ucrania es el efecto que está teniendo sobre la seguridad alimentaria del mundo. Esta república es una potencia mundial en la producción de cereales, y su exportación en las difíciles condiciones creadas por la agresión rusa es muy compleja.

Desde la Comisión de Transportes, tras escuchar al viceministro ucraniano de Infraestructuras, apostamos por una flexibilización y agilización de los trámites aduaneros para evitar las largas colas que ahora se siguen produciendo en algunos pasos transfronterizos. Hemos resuelto esta misma semana el problema de los permisos de los profesionales del transporte ucranianos. Es aconsejable, además, revisar todas las inversiones en redes transeuropeas que están centradas en mejorar las infraestructuras por las que se efectúa esta conexión.

Finalmente, apostamos por instaurar unos corredores especiales, como los que se habilitaron durante la pandemia para la circulación de material sanitario, para facilitar la movilidad de estas mercancías críticas. Esperemos que los corredores solidarios anunciados por la comisaria puedan ser implantados cuanto antes, porque no se puede esperar más.

  Janina Ochojska (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Wsłuchuję się uważnie w tę debatę i dotyczy ona niewątpliwie jednego z najważniejszych problemów, z jakimi możemy się zetknąć, mianowicie kryzysu żywnościowego. I dziwi mnie trochę takie małe zainteresowanie wśród posłów, a to między innymi od naszego zainteresowania zależy rozwiązanie tego problemu. I mam apel do koleżanek i kolegów posłów, poświęćmy więcej czasu temu problemowi i miejmy świadomość, że od nas bardzo wiele zależy.

  Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Madam President, the blockade of the Black Sea ports by the Russians and by Putin is not just an attack on the Ukrainian economy, it is an attack on the food supply and security of populations across the entire globe. North Africa, the Middle East and many other areas that depend on commodity-type products for their staple diet – like wheat, like barley and like corn – will be fundamentally challenged in feeding their populations in the short and medium term. So it is an attack on the world population and Putin must be called to account on that.

From our perspective, with the resources that the European Union has, I do welcome the announcement of ‘solidarity lanes’. But we have to ensure that the 30 million tonnes of wheat, barley and corn that are in Ukrainian-held territories can move swiftly through the European Union and flow into the world food supply system. Otherwise, we will be witnessing not just price increases of food, but we will be witnessing hunger and famine in the poorest regions of the world – and all because of the shameful illegal war of Putin in Ukraine.

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, eu am învățat de mică că o nedreptate nu o repari cu altă nedreptate, că solidaritatea trebuie să o faci în așa fel încât să nu creezi alte lucruri grave.

Și da, vorbesc din perspectiva țării mele, România. Noi am fost foarte deschiși să ajutăm refugiații. Acum suntem foarte deschiși să ajutăm la transportul cerealelor, dar avem probleme legate de calitatea infrastructurii, de cantitatea mijloacelor de transport, avem probleme chiar și cu resursa umană.

De aceea, România nu trebuie lăsată singură doar pentru că este la graniță și, după aceea, să fie acuzată că nu înlesnește transportul cerealelor. Și da, a doua problemă este legată de fermierii naționali, fermierii din țara mea, care au ridicat deja problema că nu există un control riguros al cerealelor care traversează pentru a fi exportate în țări terțe și cereale care rămân în interiorul țării noastre, în interiorul României, sau chiar în interiorul pieței interne.

De aceea, cred, doamnă comisară, că trebuie măsuri concrete. Toată lumea a spus să se rezolve, dar care sunt soluțiile? Soluțiile sunt foarte clare din punctul meu de vedere, bugete și susținere administrativă pentru a putea avea culoare speciale de traversare, dar și un control a ceea ce intră și iese din Ucraina.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)

  Kadri Simson, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, thank you for this very interesting debate. The Commission very much welcomes Parliament’s strong support for Ukraine and the ‘solidarity lanes’.

The EU-Ukraine solidarity lanes are not only an expression of EU solidarity, they also aim at salvaging a crucial sector of the Ukrainian economy and generally improving the country’s resilience. Solidarity lanes and the medium and long-term actions outlined in the Action Plan also aim at anchoring Ukraine closer to the EU, integrating it in the Trans—European Transport Network and facilitating its integration into world markets. The solidarity lanes are also a key contribution to the EU’s direct response to the consequences of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on global food security and, de facto, Russia’s disinformation campaign on this subject.

The EU is fully taking on its responsibility towards Ukraine and towards the rest of the world. You know that we do have significant grain production also here in Europe. EU production for cereals is forecasted at 286.4 million tonnes and this will ensure adequate supply for domestic consumption and also substantial exports. Also, EU exports of wheat are around 38 million tonnes, which is a positive contribution to global food security.

The grain which we will manage to transport out from Ukraine via alternative routes we will transport to EU ports for export. However, there is still potential for better coordination with Ukraine and Member States authorities to ensure a better governance of the logistic chain from Ukraine silos to EU ports and maximisation of the use of all infrastructure capacities. We know that there are strong margins for improvement there, and the same for the transport mode, so we need to maximise the use of all the capacities by rail, road and inland waterways. The Commission is working on that.

The recent trend shows a constant increase – 2.5 million tonnes exported in June. The Commission is in constant contact with the EU Member States and especially the frontline Member States. In our common efforts with the frontline Member States, we managed to reduce the red tape on the borders in Romania and Poland and we are looking into short-term solutions and investments in the Member States to manage the situation.

Last but not least, on the question you raised on tracking the stolen grain, we follow this issue closely through the G7 group. Ukraine provides updated reports and countries are taking all the necessary steps to trace and stop this trafficking.

To conclude, I have taken note of your comments and I will pass them to Commissioner Vălean.

  Mikuláš Bek, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, Commissioner Simson, honourable Members, while the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine continues, we will continue to work with our international partners to prevent further escalation of the food security crisis and to alleviate the immediate humanitarian needs.

We will continue to support ongoing UN—led efforts to find a solution for reopening the Ukrainian ports. In parallel, we will pursue our action to facilitate transport of Ukrainian grain overland through the solidarity lanes and continue our efforts to remove all obstacles that remain.

We also need to be firm in fighting disinformation by Russia. By blaming the EU sanctions, Russia tries to divert responsibility for the global food crisis. It has to be repeated again and again: it is not due to the European Union’s sanctions; the food crisis has been inflicted by Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. The real problem is not EU sanctions, but the disruptive impact that the Russian aggression has on global commodities markets, resulting in record—high prices for energy and grain, unstable trade connections and increased speculation on staple foods. We will continue to mobilise all available EU instruments to help the most vulnerable countries, and we will use all options to keep prices under control.

Beyond this food crisis and the immediate humanitarian needs, decisive action is needed to address the root causes of hunger, malnutrition and food insecurity in the world. We will step up our efforts to help vulnerable countries in making their food systems more resilient and reducing their import dependency.

  Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam debatę. Zawieszam posiedzenie. Zostanie ono wznowione o godz. 15.00 i zacznie się od debaty na aktualny temat poświęconej Inicjatywie Trójmorza – wyzwania i możliwości.

Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 171)

  Атидже Алиева-Вели (Renew), в писмена форма. – Подкрепям усилията на Съюза относно улесняване на износа на украински селскостопански продукти. Това е огромно предизвикателство и затова е от съществено значение да се координираме и да оптимизираме логистичните вериги, за да се въведат нови маршрути и да се избегнат, доколкото е възможно, "тесните" места.

Нашата комуникация е насочена към спешните решения, но също и към средносрочните и дългосрочни мерки за по-добро свързване и интегриране на инфраструктурата на Украйна с инфраструктурата на ЕС. За краткосрочни и дългосрочни решения ще работим с украинските власти в тясно сътрудничество. В средносрочен и дългосрочен план ще работим върху това увеличаване на инфраструктурния капацитет на новите експортни коридори и при установяване нови инфраструктурни връзки в рамките на възстановяването на Украйна.

Транспортната инфраструктура в Украйна се унищожава и черноморските й пристанища са блокирани от Русия. Очаква се да призовем за нови инициативи на ЕС за справяне с транспортните и логистичните разходи, предотвратяващи износа на украински селскостопански продукти, особено на пшеница, към световния пазар. За мен е важно да подпомогнем за осигуряването на храна за хората. Целта на този план за действие е да се преодолее блокадата на украинските черноморски пристанища от Русия и да се гарантира, че Украйна ще остане напълно интегрирана в световните селскостопански пазари и ще продължи да допринася за световната продоволствена сигурност.

  Cristina Maestre Martín De Almagro (S&D), por escrito. – La invasión de Ucrania por parte de Rusia ha traído el bloqueo de los puertos del Mar Negro y con ello la paralización del flujo de cereales y otras mercancías agrícolas. La situación amenaza la seguridad alimentaria mundial y existe una necesidad urgente de establecer rutas logísticas alternativas que utilicen todos los modos de transporte pertinentes.

Los socialistas damos la bienvenida a la implantación de corredores solidarios, que han permitido exportar de Ucrania este mes 2,5 millones de toneladas, pero entendemos que es necesaria una mayor coordinación entre Estados miembros, especialmente los fronterizos con Ucrania, y un seguimiento más estrecho para garantizar que el grano transita hacia el Norte de África y Oriente Medio. Pedimos que se agilicen los trámites en frontera y que se habiliten silos con la mayor urgencia posible fuera de Ucrania para no poner en riesgo la próxima cosecha.

Como europeos, tenemos la obligación moral de velar por la seguridad alimentaria dentro y fuera de nuestras fronteras, poniendo en pie todas las alternativas posibles que contribuyan a paliar al máximo la escasez de alimentos y el hambre que está provocando la invasión de Putin.

  Riho Terras (PPE), kirjalikult. – Ukraina on üks maailma suurimaid viljaeksportijaid. Seoses Venemaa sõjategevusega Ukrainas on vilja väljavedu tavapärastes mahtudes täna sisuliselt võimatu. Venemaa poolt on okupeeritud mitmed olulised sadamalinnad Musta ja Aasovi mere ääres. Vilja väljavedu Odessa sadamast ähvardab Venemaa rünnaku alla sattumine. Samuti on pidanud Ukraina enesekaitseks mineerima juurdepääsud sadamatele. Ukraina teravilja ja muu põllumajandustoodangu väljavedu läbi sadamate on tavapäraselt moodustanud 80% kogumahust. Ülejäänu on veetud välja peamiselt raudteid mööda üle läänepiiri. On selge, et kogu väljaveetavat mahtu pole võimalik raudtee- või maanteetranspordiga asendada. Ukrainaga piirnevatel EL riikidel on erinev rööpmelaius, mis tekitab logistilisi pudelikaelu piiridel. Nii raudtee- kui ka autotransport on väga palju kallimad ja lisavad vilja hinnale märkimisväärselt juurde.

Teine väga tähtis aspekt on, et Ukraina vili peab jõudma ettenähtud lõpptarbijani ning mitte sisenema naabruses asuvate ELi riikide turule. On täiesti mõistetav nende riikide põllumeeste mure, et odav Ukraina vili võib nende tootmisele negatiivset mõju avaldada. Euroopa Liidul seisab ees keeruline ülesanne leida koostöös Ukrainaga parimad võimalikud lahendused Ukraina vilja väljaveoks ja toimivate transpordilahenduste ning –koridoride loomiseks, tagamaks vilja jõudmise neile turgudele, kuhu see oli plaanitud jõudma. Lisaks tuleb jätkata jõupingutusi Venemaa poolt varastatud viljasaadetiste tuvastamiseks ja konfiskeerimiseks, et need jõuaksid samuti õigetesse sihtkohtadesse.

(Posiedzenie zostało zawieszone o godz. 14.35)

14. Posėdžio atnaujinimas

(Posiedzenie zostało wznowione o godz. 15.00)

15. Ankstesnio posėdžio protokolo tvirtinimas

  Przewodnicząca. – Protokół wczorajszego posiedzenia oraz teksty przyjęte są już dostępne.

Czy ktoś z Państwa ma jakieś uwagi? Nie widzę.

Protokół został przyjęty.

16. Trijų jūrų iniciatyva: iššūkiai ir galimybės (diskusija aktualia tema)

  Przewodnicząca. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest debata na aktualny temat (art. 162 Regulaminu) poświęcona Inicjatywie Trójmorza – wyzwania i możliwości (2022/2750(RSP)).

  Patryk Jaki, autor. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! Najpierw o inicjatywie Trójmorza: chciałbym ją Państwu przedstawić, przybliżyć, bo uważam, że ma ona niezwykłe znaczenie przede wszystkim dla Europy. Inicjatywa Trójmorza została powołana jako forum współpracy 12 państw: Austrii, Bułgarii, Chorwacji, Czech, Estonii, Litwy, Łotwy, Polski, Rumunii, Słowacji, Słowenii i Węgier. Obszar obejmujący państwa należące do inicjatywy Trójmorza stanowi łącznie 1/3 całkowitej powierzchni Unii Europejskiej i na tym terenie zamieszkuje 112 milionów obywateli.

Głównym celem Trójmorza jest wykorzystanie potencjału gospodarczego tej części Europy poprzez stworzenie lepszych wewnętrznych połączeń infrastrukturalnych, cyfrowych, energetycznych, budowy dróg, połączeń kolejowych, portów rzecznych, mostów oraz oczywiście szybkich światłowodów. Państwa Trójmorza odpowiadają za prawie 20% PKB całej Unii Europejskiej i mają średni wzrost gospodarczy lepszy niż średnia unijna. Przykładowo w latach 2015–2019 średnia wzrostu PKB w Trójmorzu wynosiła 3,5%. W tym samym okresie średnia wzrostu PKB dla całej Unii wynosiła 1,6%, co pokazuje, jaki potencjał tkwi w tym projekcie. Dlatego powstał fundusz Trójmorza o wartości jednego miliarda euro, a jego wsparcie w wysokości około trzystu milionów dolarów potwierdziła Ameryka. Ponadto siedem państw Trójmorza już stworzyło wspólny indeks giełdowy z największymi firmami w tych państwach. Inicjatywa Trójmorza jest w pełni kompatybilna z Unią Europejską. Wszystkie państwa tworzące inicjatywę są jednocześnie członkami Unii i aktywnie działają na rzecz jej rozwoju.

Inicjatywa Trójmorza jest też szansą naprawienia błędów. Po pierwsze, błędów historycznych, to znaczy oddania po II wojnie światowej krajów sojuszniczych na pastwę Rosji, przez co są dzisiaj biedniejsze, mają gorszą infrastrukturę i zbyt często się nimi pomiata. Można je w związku z tym dzisiaj szybko odbudować, naprawiając te błędy z pożytkiem dla całej Unii Europejskiej. Ale przede wszystkim jest to szansa naprawienia błędów energetycznych. Mianowicie model energetyczny Unii Europejskiej, Niemiec, oparty na gazie z Rosji i walce z węglem właśnie spektakularnie upadł. Groźba braku energii na zimę i wielka inflacja są tego najlepszym dowodem. Dlatego Trójmorze to projekt stworzenia sieci gazociągów, które mogłyby transportować surowiec na osi północ-południe, budowy terminali LNG, budowy i rozbudowy interkonektorów gazowych, zwiększenia przepustowości terminalu LNG w Świnoujściu dla dostaw gazu i kluczowego projektu Baltic Pipe, który jest już na ukończeniu – wszystko, co ma zakończyć możliwość rosyjskiego szantażu Europy oraz budować niezależność i suwerenność energetyczną na Starym Kontynencie.

Do tego agresja Rosji w Ukrainie pokazała, jak bardzo wizjonerski był to projekt budowy niezależności energetycznej, skutecznego zabezpieczenia infrastruktury przemysłowej oraz pogłębienia wzajemnych połączeń transportowych pomiędzy krajami Trójmorza – to są gwarancje bezpieczeństwa i dobrobytu Europy.

Na celowniku Rosji znalazła się też krytyczna infrastruktura Ukrainy, a poziom zniszczeń szacuje się na setki miliardów euro. Kiedy rosyjski agresor zostanie już odparty – wierzę w to i chciałbym, żeby tak się stało – Ukraina stanie przed żmudnym zadaniem odbudowy swoich dróg, kolei, szpitali, placówek edukacyjnych, usług telekomunikacyjnych, infrastruktury energetycznej i pól uprawnych, by wymienić tylko kilka przykładów. Krótko mówiąc, pakiet rozwojowy w stylu planu Marshalla będzie niezbędny, aby pomóc mieszkańcom Ukrainy, którzy walczą o pokojową przyszłość Europy. Od zdolności Ukrainy do odbudowy zależeć będzie również bezpieczeństwo energetyczne Europy.

Podsumowując, Trójmorze to wizjonerski projekt budowy silniejszej Europy z równym dostępem do infrastruktury i dóbr, bez niesprawiedliwych podziałów na starą i nową Europę. To projekt, który uniezależnia Europę od Rosji i odbiera jej możliwość szantażu. Oparty jest na współpracy gospodarczej bez ideologii, czyli na wszystkim tym, co kiedyś zbudowało siłę Europy. Dlatego właśnie Unia Europejska powinna zaangażować się w fundusz Trójmorza, przecież wojna toczy się za granicą Unii Europejskiej, a nie Stanów Zjednoczonych, a to jednak oni zdecydowali się zainwestować swoje środki w fundusz. Czas teraz na decyzję Unii Europejskiej. Jeżeli chcemy silnej i bezpiecznej Europy, musimy zadbać o równość, nie tylko płci, ale również infrastruktury drogowej, kolejowej, cyfrowej, energetycznej. Tu rozstrzyga się nasza przyszłość, w tej części Europy będącej zapleczem dobra w walce ze złem.

  Mikuláš Bek, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, honourable Members, ladies and gentlemen, let me start by thanking you for inviting the Council to a debate on an initiative that provides a useful platform for cooperation of the Member States between the Baltic, the Black and the Adriatic Sea.

The Three Seas Initiative is of particular relevance in the current volatile and uncertain geopolitical situation because of its strong focus on energy security and connectivity in Europe. In that respect, it is a project that brings added value to the region while complementing the overall EU objectives.

Allow me to develop a bit more on how we see the potential for cooperation among the Three Seas Initiative’s partners in the key areas of energy and connectivity. One of the priorities of the Initiative is that of energy security, in particular the diversification of routes and sources of energy supply across the region.

By focusing on these aspects, the Three Seas Initiative and its dedicated fund is directly addressing the priorities set by EU leaders – namely, the transition to alternative energy, the creation of sustainable and resilient energy infrastructure and the phasing—out of our dependence on Russian gas and oil supplies.

The Three Seas Initiative’s focus on connectivity is also related to the current geopolitical and economic environment. The goal of ensuring smart transportation corridors for the whole region and the development of digital infrastructure solutions will contribute to a more resilient and more autonomous EU.

  Kadri Simson, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, the Commission would like to thank the European Parliament for organising this topical debate on the Three Seas Initiative, which is highly relevant in the context of Russia’s unprovoked military aggression against Ukraine.

It has exacerbated the existing trends of a tightening of energy and food markets, triggering increased price volatility and energy insecurity across the globe. Contrary to Russia’s disinformation, it is Russia’s invasion in Ukraine that has caused these impacts, not the sanctions of the EU on Russia.

The current situation requires that we work together even closer, including with our strategic allies. The Three Seas Initiative is well aligned with the EU’s energy objective, and this political and economic cooperation can very usefully complement and give a substantial additional boost to the implementation of the REPowerEU plan.

In fact, REPowerEU is our response to the global energy market disruption caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Its key elements are to save fossil energy, replace it with renewables and diversify away from Russian fossil fuels. Close cooperation is particularly important for countries that are most exposed to Russian threats.

The organisation of energy infrastructure is key for European energy security, and in the Three Seas region the EU has provided strong support for energy, transport and digital infrastructure through its cohesion and infrastructure funds. We will continue to do so in the years to come, especially in order to support investments that contribute to a cleaner, more resilient and more digital future.

The war in Ukraine has also highlighted that, in the area of transport, there is a need to urgently provide better cross-border connectivity with our neighbours in the east. The Commission remains fully committed to this and is proactively working on finding solutions to bridge the connectivity gap.

Concerning the region covered by the Three Seas Initiative, you will be aware that it is an integral part of the core network of the Trans-European Transport Network, and more than half of the EUR 22.4 billion budget of the CEF 1 under the previous financial programming period has been invested in this region. Under the new MFF, the CEF 2 has already made additional EU co-funding available with a view to completing the core network by 2030.

As a regional cooperation platform, the Three Seas Initiative can certainly support the Union in our ambitions of realising the TEN-T, creating a ‘first of its kind’ a genuinely dense European network out of what was essentially a patchwork.

To this end, however, it is important that we continue to discuss how we can work together in shaping common objectives. Connectivity is also a key enabler for the digital transformation. Reaching the 2030 gigabit and 5G targets at the end of the digital decade is essential for sustainable digital economic growth.

Any digital project, and in particular investment in digital infrastructure, should be developed applying appropriate cybersecurity measures. This MFF is an opportunity to ensure that the countries of the Three Seas Initiative are on track to fulfil these objectives. The Commission expects Member States to invest in forward-looking, state of the art, fibre and 5G infrastructures that underpin a competitive and green economy.

We are pleased to see that Member States plan to devote more than 26% of their RRF funds to connectivity, and we will also support investments in connectivity with another EUR 2 billion from the CEF Digital Programme. The latter will target in particular backbone networks, as well as the cross—border segments of 5G corridors and 5G communities.

We are equally pleased to see regional endeavours such as the Three Seas Initiative with its corresponding fund, part of which is dedicated to digital capacities and infrastructures. Given that the fund intervenes in areas which are also supported by EU initiatives such as the RRF and CEF Digital, it is important to reflect on the possible synergies between the different sources of funding. A new call will be launched for CEF Digital later this year, and there will be more opportunities to finance investments in digital infrastructure.

On a personal note, I myself participated two weeks ago at the Three Seas summit that took place in Riga, so I thank you very much for this agenda point and I’m looking forward to an interesting debate.

  Marian-Jean Marinescu, în numele grupului PPE. – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, mulțumesc pentru intervenția dumneavoastră și, bineînțeles, a Consiliului. Interconectarea rețelelor naționale, transport, energie, digitale și integrarea rețelelor europene este o prioritate strategică.

Agresiunea Rusiei în Ucraina a demonstrat că o mai bună interconectare a rețelelor energetice și de transport ar fi redus insecuritatea energetică și chiar și pe cea alimentară. În actuala situație geopolitică, Inițiativa celor Trei Mări capătă un rol tot mai important. Conexiunea nord-sud este extrem de necesară, proiecte strategice importante în contextul crizei actuale: BRUA, Rail, 2-C, Via Carpatia, terminalele pentru ENGIE sau completarea rețelei TEN-T sunt incluse pe agenda de cooperare dintre cele 12 state membre și trebuie să salutăm și că la Riga, Ucraina a fost invitată să participe la această inițiativă.

Pentru ca fondurile europene, din Facilitatea de conectare a Uniunii, dar și pentru ca fondurile de coeziune să contribuie la interconectarea rețelelor, cooperarea între statele membre este vitală. Este necesar ca aceste proiecte să fie finalizate cât mai repede cu putință.

Solicit Comisiei să analizeze și să acționeze cu rapiditate pentru a evita eventualele blocaje produse de aspectele birocratice, mai ales la proiectele cross-border, pentru a utiliza flexibilitate referitor la prefinanțarea proiectelor, la asistența tehnică sau alte solicitări specifice ale statelor membre.

De asemenea, solicit Comisiei să analizeze posibilitatea de a propune o modificare a SEF 2 care să includă finanțarea liniilor de solidaritate absolut necesare pentru transportul produselor agricole din Ucraina.

  Alex Agius Saliba, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, the European Union’s strategic autonomy heavily depends on our democratic, social, technological and digital agendas.

Technological and digital sovereignty are key to ensuring a stronger, independent and competitive European Union in an increasingly digitalised world. Regional cooperation initiatives across our European Union, such as the Three Seas Initiative, are good examples of strategic importance of investing in regional interconnectivity that benefits the whole of the European Union. Like others of its kind, this initiative will help boost economic growth, improve the livelihoods of our citizens, create job opportunities, promote innovation and foster competitiveness. Investments in high—performance digital infrastructure and in developing innovative digital technologies are critical for achieving the Union’s strategic autonomous voice, continued economic growth and stability, and improved connectivity and security in Europe. We all know how important such initiatives will be for regions that are heavily affected by the pandemic and, because of their strategic geopolitical importance, are severely impacted by the war in Ukraine.

  Ivars Ijabs, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, all 12 member states of the Three Seas Initiative have had one chapter in their history in common, and this is the Iron Curtain, which denied the development and natural growth of this region for a half a century. It caused a distinct polarity between European regions in economic development but, most notably, it showed how ineffective and uncompetitive the regional infrastructure and energy market integration is. The infrastructure is far outdated, and therefore requires urgent investment.

We gladly acknowledge the significance of Union’s contribution, but unfortunately, the pace is still not rapid enough; it is limiting the country’s capabilities to compete fairly. Although the Three Seas Initiative is complementary to the European Union, I welcome very much the European Union’s, and especially the Commission’s, involvement in this forum, especially in the times of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, where we have to support Ukraine by all possible means.

So, together we can facilitate not only the progress and resilience of Central European region, but also deliver more on Union’s common targets by unlocking the full potential of integration, cooperation and fruitful competition.

  Ангел Джамбазки, от името на групата ECR. – Г-жо Председател, г-жо Комисар, инициативата „Три морета“ предлага уникален шанс за бързо развитие на държавите от Централна и Източна Европа. Множество инфраструктурни проекти, подобряването на дигиталната свързаност и, разбира се, проектите в сферата на енергетиката са трите стълба на икономическото развитие, върху които трябва да се фокусират държавите, които участват тази инициатива. В рамките й са включени много важни неща, някои от тях важни както за България, така и за Европа: инфраструктурни проекти като тунелите под прохода „Петрохан“ или тунел номер 8.

Разбира се, тази инициатива е повод за икономическо развитие на държавите от периферията. Защо се налага това? Не само заради руското нападение в Украйна. То е легитимен повод, разбира се, и трябва да бъде осъдено и ние всички го осъждаме така, както трябва. Но в Европейския съюз има видим двоен стандарт и разделение между център и периферия. Държави като България, като Румъния, като Хърватска не са допускани в Шенгенското пространство, а това пречи на нашите икономики да се развиват, това пречи на нашата сила, нашия транспорт.

По тази причина, за да преодолеем лицемерието на част от елитите на западноевропейските държави, които искат те да са по-равни между равните, и които искат те да са си по-добре, а останалите да бъдат малко обслужващ персонал, се налага да работим заедно в периферията или в Централна и Източна Европа и в това няма нищо лошо. Свързаността между България, Румъния, Хърватска, Унгария и Украйна ще бъде полезна, ще помогне на всички наши държави да преодолеят пробойните в своите инфраструктури и ще ги направи конкурентоспособни, и ще удари един лек шамар по двуличието и лицемерието на тези, които искат да са по-равни и да ни казват какво да правим.

  Henna Virkkunen (PPE). – Madam President, Minister, Commissioner, the Three Seas Initiative is a great example of cross—border cooperation in the areas of transport, energy and digital infrastructure to achieve interconnections.

It is now extremely timely and important for Europe to invest in modern and mass connections that combine digitalisation, clean energy and transport. We know that this is crucial for both an efficient single market as well as the international competitiveness of the Union.

Like it was said here already by my colleagues, the Russian attack on Ukraine has highlighted the importance of connectivity and infrastructure for the security of supply and public security. EU funding should be directed more towards the building and maintenance of cross—border infrastructure in the European Union.

Therefore, I am regretting that the Connecting Europe Facility funding did not receive more funding from the Member States. In particular, I want to mention the military mobility part, because the war in Ukraine highlights how military troops and equipment should be able to move more efficiently across the EU. This, in turn, requires more investments for infrastructure from the European Union.

  Łukasz Kohut (S&D). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Chciałbym do was posłowie i posłanki od Kaczyńskiego i Ziobry z tego miejsca zaapelować: przestańcie demolować Wspólnotę Europejską. Zajmijcie się pracą, a nie biciem piany i budowaniem alternatywnej rzeczywistości. Zamiast budować wspólnotę 450 mln Europejczyków, zajmujecie się bzdurami. Miał być Budapeszt w Warszawie, ale Orban was ograł jak dzieci we mgle. Miała być Turcja. Na razie jest turecka drożyzna w Polsce. Wszystko wam się pomieszało. Całe pokolenia polskich obywateli chciały być w Unii Europejskiej, a wy codziennie cynicznie próbujecie to zakrzyczeć.

Członkostwo Polski w Unii to polska i europejska racja stanu. Ci, którzy sądzą inaczej, są albo sojusznikami Putina, albo skończonymi głupcami. Bo jest lipiec 2022 r., a nie wrzesień 1939 r. Berlin jest naszym sojusznikiem, a nie wrogiem. A Ukraińcy giną za Unię i za wartości europejskie, które wy wyśmiewacie od siedmiu lat. Zostaliście wybrani do Parlamentu Europejskiego, a nie do sejmu Trójmorza. Unia Europejska potrzebuje silnej Polski, a nie Polski od morza do morza.

  Ilhan Kyuchyuk (Renew). – Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine makes the security, development and sustainability of Central and Eastern Europe even more strategic.

I would like to highlight that the Initiative brings high importance, taking the economic potential of the region. But also I am very glad to see that the Three Seas Initiative is developing. The investment fund is now fully operational and represents the expression of the highest political level will.

It is designed to promote connectivity among the countries with the ultimate goal of strengthening their security and economic vitality. The potential is huge, and we could extend the scope of the initiative by inviting non—EU countries that aspire to join.

Therefore, I would like to strengthen the potential, and express my gratitude that Ukraine was invited as one of those countries non—affiliated with the EU, and I’m looking forward to continue the project as such with the involvement of Ukraine, because with that we can only strengthen our potential together.

  Izabela-Helena Kloc (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca, Pani Komisarz, Szanowni Państwo! Nie ma w tej chwili dla Europy ważniejszej strategicznej inicjatywy niż wzmocnienie potencjału krajów Trójmorza. Te właśnie kraje tworzą logistyczne i militarne zaplecze dla walczącej Ukrainy. Tymczasem Komisja Europejska wobec największego kraju tego regionu zachowuje się jak obrażone pięcioletnie dziecko.

Jednego dnia przewodnicząca von der Leyen przyjeżdża do Warszawy i mówi, że Polska otrzyma pieniądze. Kilka dni później inna komisarz, komisarz Jurova, ogłasza, że dla Polski mamy zero euro, bo nam się nie podoba to i tamto.

Dlatego pytam, kiedy Komisja Europejska osiągnie emocjonalną i polityczną dojrzałość, aby stanąć w końcu po stronie całej Europy? Dziś, aby poważnie rozmawiać o realnej pomocy dla Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, trzeba jechać do Londynu lub Waszyngtonu. Jeśli nic się nie zmieni, wkrótce od nas, Polaków, będziecie mogli usłyszeć już tylko słowa Marszu Pierwszej Brygady Legionów J. Piłsudskiego: „Nie chcemy dziś od was uznania, ni waszych mów, ni waszych łez. Skończyły się dni kołatania do waszych głów, do waszych serc.” Liczę jednak na wsparcie pani komisarz Kadri Simson.

  Željana Zovko (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, the Three Seas Initiative has been established at the joint initiative of Croatia by our former President, Madam Grabar—Kitarović, and Poland during the inaugural summit in Dubrovnik in 2016. It’s encouraging to see the continued common commitment of the 12 Member States and their partner countries to boost cooperation in matters of energy, digitalisation and transport.

By joining forces in the investment of infrastructure we strengthen regional interconnectivity and mutual support while reducing the dependency on energy suppliers such as Russia. By strengthening the north—south axis and stimulating these countries’ cohesive economic development we also contribute to the strategic sovereignty of the European Union.

As an initiator of the format, Croatia has delivered on its promises by the construction of the LNG terminal on the island of Krk. At the latest Three Seas Initiative Forum, Prime Minister Plenković even announced Croatia’s commitment to increase its terminal’s capacity to more than double the current maximum.

We can only tackle the question of energy security and resilience through close cross—border cooperation, and the Three Seas Initiative offers concrete solutions.

  Matjaž Nemec (S&D). – Gospa predsedujoča!

Pobuda treh morij je pomemben forum dvanajstih evropskih držav Unije, ki ležijo med tremi evropskimi morji. Ta se je razvijala v upanju po večji povezljivosti regije ter v luči spodbujanja skupnih investicij, in sicer na področju infrastrukture, prometa, energije in digitalizacije.

Eden od ciljev iniciative je tudi zmanjšanje energetske odvisnosti držav srednje in vzhodne Evrope od Rusije na področju ter vprašanj energetske politike na splošno. Ravno z rusko agresijo v Ukrajini je ta dobila še večji pomen.

Pomemben premik pobude je bil narejen leta 2019, in sicer na Brdu, v Sloveniji, pod vodstvom predsednika Boruta Pahorja, in sicer bil je ustanovljen investicijski sklad. Ravno ta je zagnal še več velikih čezmejnih infrastrukturnih projektov.

Pobuda treh morij mora ostati pomemben forum za dialog in sodelovanje, a ta ne bo zaokrožena celota, dokler vanjo ne bodo vključene tako Ukrajina kot države Zahodnega Balkana, ter seveda samo skupaj lahko uresničimo pravi potencial in priložnosti, ki so nam dane na dlani.

  Valter Flego (Renew). –Poštovana predsjednice, poštovane kolegice i kolege, nove okolnosti traže, jasno, od nas i nove odgovore i uvijek trebamo razmišljati i djelovati na način da razmišljamo i djelujemo, rekao sam, par koraka, odnosno par godina unaprijed.

Zato, kao odgovor na nove geostrateške prilike i okolnosti, tvrdim da nam je povezivanje važnije nego ikada prije. Da, važno je energetsko povezivanje, ali i prometno, jer je promet krvotok gospodarstva neke zemlje i kretanja građana. Poštovani, u tijeku je revizija europskih prometnih koridora, takozvana TEN-T mreža koja mora biti europski odgovor na novonastale okolnosti.

Zato, poštovana povjerenice, pozivam i tražim od Komisije, ali i od svih 12 država članica ove hvalevrijedne inicijative „tri mora” da povežemo luku Rijeka na koridor Baltik - Jadran. Naime, zbog važne uloge koju Rijeka i Hrvatska imaju prema zemljama zapadnog Balkana, pozivam vas da u predstojećoj reviziji koridora damo Rijeci ulogu i status ulaznih vrata na tom koridoru i tako Europu učinimo još uspješnijom i još povezanijom.

  Kadri Simson, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members of the Parliament, thank you again for this interesting debate and your input on the challenges and opportunities of the Three Seas Initiative that I will also convey to my fellow Commissioners Mr Breton and Ms Vălean.

Connectivity with our neighbours in the east through energy, digital and transport infrastructure is highly relevant in the context of Russia’s unprovoked military aggression against Ukraine.

Allow me also a few words on Ukraine, a country bordering those of the Three Seas Initiative. Ukraine has long been a privileged partner of the Union, and this illegal invasion has strengthened the ties between us and accelerated the rapprochement between Ukraine and the EU. That’s why our REPowerEU plan also includes a REPowerUkraine initiative. It is a particular initiative aiming to ensure security of supply and a proper functioning of the energy sector, paving the way for future trade in electricity and renewable hydrogen.

As a clear signal of tangible support, we have also invited Ukraine along with Moldova, Georgia and the Western Balkans to the EU Energy Platform, and we are working within the framework of the energy community to integrate our energy markets, enhancing our energy security and resilience.

In view of electricity, already in March, the Ukrainian electricity grid was synchronised with the European continental grid and this happened with an unprecedented speed and efficiency. And as the next step, last week we started electricity trade with Ukraine. So despite the war, we managed to synchronise Ukraine and also Moldova and their electricity grid is a European one.

But there are still three EU Member States who remain in this acrimonious area with Russia and Belarus. These are the three Baltic countries, and the projects of the synchronisation of the three Baltic States with the European continental grid has been a priority for Commission. This is high on our political and financial agenda. The support is very strong and we hope that with co-financing – significant co-financing – from the Commission, this process of synchronising three Baltic States will be completed at least by the end of 2025.

  Mikuláš Bek, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, honourable Members, ladies and gentlemen, let me start with an observation. If we look at transport maps, even very present ones of Europe, we can still see some past centres of power gravity in Europe.

In the case of the Czech Republic, you can still see the orientation of the transport routes towards the past capital, Vienna. It’s a relatively fortunate occasion because we are members of the EU and the connections are very useful these days. But if we look at the eastern part of Europe in general, we can still see the Russian centre of gravity, which played an important role. The Three Seas Initiative for me is obviously a way how to get rid of this past, which does not correspond to the present geopolitical situation.

Thank you very much for this debate and all the views shared by the different political groups. Indeed, this debate is highly relevant in the current geopolitical situation. The Russian war of aggression against Ukraine gave the Three Seas Initiative a new, very topical substance. First, energy security, one of the initiative’s priorities, and the question of reducing our dependence on Russian fossil fuels, diversification of energy supply and transit routes. Or, secondly, the development of digital infrastructure and connectivity. All these are on top of the agenda.

The investment in new infrastructure projects in the context of the Three Seas Initiative will be highly beneficial not just for intra-EU connectivity, but also to develop better links to our neighbours to the east and south-east. Here I’m thinking of the expansion and modernisation of our highway and railway connections to Ukraine. New projects linking Three Seas Initiative members to Ukraine will certainly be instrumental for the future rebuilding of the country, but also to ensure that Ukraine can benefit from alternatives for its food exports – the issue which we just discussed an hour ago.

In this respect, the Three Seas Initiative can be seen as a real contribution to the further integration of our neighbours in the EU and to the stabilisation of the continent. Thank you very much for your attention.

  Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam debatę.

Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 171)

  Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR), na piśmie. – Inicjatywa Trójmorza powołana została jako forum współpracy 12 państw: Austrii, Bułgarii, Chorwacji, Czech, Estonii, Litwy, Łotwy, Polski, Rumunii, Słowacji, Słowenii i Węgier. Obszar obejmujący państwa należące do Inicjatywy Trójmorza stanowi prawie jedną trzecią całkowitej powierzchni Unii Europejskiej, które łącznie zamieszkuje 112 milionów obywateli. Polska postrzega Inicjatywę Trójmorza (3SI) jako najbardziej reprezentatywną formułę dalszej, pogłębionej integracji krajów członkowskich z flanki wschodniej Unii Europejskiej oraz wzmacniania więzi transatlantyckich.

Należy podkreślić, że dziesięciolecia zaniedbań w zakresie rozwoju infrastruktury łączącej zachodnią i wschodnią część kontynentu europejskiego udało się w dużej mierze uzupełnić. Tym, czego jednak nadal brakuje, są połączenia pomiędzy krajami regionu Europy Środkowej i Południowej. Brutalna agresja Rosji na Ukrainę uwypukliła fundamentalne znaczenie założeń, które legły u podstaw powołania 3SI. Budowa niezależności energetycznej, skuteczne zabezpieczenie infrastruktury przemysłowej oraz pogłębianie wzajemnych połączeń transportowych pomiędzy krajami 3SI są gwarantami bezpieczeństwa i dobrobytu w naszej części Europy.

W regionie Trójmorza konsekwentnie realizowaliśmy i nadal realizujemy projekty mające na celu dywersyfikację dostaw i integrację energetyczną. Uruchomienie gazociągu Baltic Pipe (planowane na październik 2022 r.), rozbudowa interkonektorów między Polską a krajami sąsiedzkimi i zwiększenie przepustowości terminalu LNG w Świnoujściu dla dostaw gazu w pełni wpisują się w koncepcję dywersyfikacji i niezależności energetycznej w UE.

  Anna Zalewska (ECR), na piśmie. – Wraz z realizacją przez Rosję agresywnej strategii ekspansjonizmu region Trójmorza (3S) stał się linią frontu pod względem zagrożeń cyber i hybrydowych, a jego znaczenie dla odporności całej UE i NATO jest i pozostanie kluczowe. Dlatego inicjatywie 3S należy nadać nowy impuls współpracy zorientowanej na bezpieczeństwo. Dodatkowo, przy bezprecedensowej transformacji cyfrowej i technologicznej, kraje 3S muszą stać się odporne i „gotowe na wyzwania przyszłości”, dlatego w ramach Inicjatywy 3S konieczne jest pogłębienie współpracy w celu budowania tzw. „cybersiły” regionu. Przez cybersiłę należy rozumieć nie tylko skuteczną postawę w obszarze cyberbezpieczeństwa, ale też innowacyjną postawę cyfrową i technologiczną.

Zacieśnianie współpracy powinno obejmować inwestycje infrastrukturalne w każdym z trzech filarów – cyfrowym, energetycznym i transportowym, a cyberbezpieczeństwo musi stać się ich nieodzownym elementem i stanowić kluczowy wymiar współpracy. Należy realizować wspólne projekty infrastruktury transgranicznej, w tym autostrady cyfrowe (np. 3 Seas Digital Highway), wspólne projekty chmur danych, które uzupełniałyby i integrowały regionalną infrastrukturę transportową i energetyczną (w tym centra przetwarzania danych) oraz rozwijać dojrzałą gospodarkę opartą na danych i przemysł 4.0. Należy budować innowacyjny ekosystem, aby wzmocnić zdolności technologiczne krajów 3S, w tym w przełomowych technologiach (AI, quantum, cyber), także z zastosowaniem ich dla bezpieczeństwa i obrony, oraz dążyć do polepszenia pozycji regionu w cyfrowym łańcuchu wartości, stymulować potencjał przestrzeni cyfrowej i budować odporność cyfrową.

ΠΡΟΕΔΡΙΑ: ΕΥΑ ΚΑΪΛΗ
Αντιπρόεδρος

17. 2021 m. metinis pranešimas dėl Europos investicijų banko finansinės veiklos - 2020 m. metinis pranešimas dėl Europos investicijų banko finansinės veiklos (diskusijos)

  President. – The next item on the agenda is the joint debate on:

– the Financial activities of the European Investment Bank – annual report 2021 (2021/2203(INI)) (A9-0165/2022); and on

– the Control of the financial activities of the European Investment Bank – annual report 2020 (2021/2235(INI)) (A9-0173/2022).

  David Cormand, rapporteur. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, voilà, c’est le rendez-vous annuel pour faire le rapport de la Banque européenne d’investissement. Mes collègues et moi sommes ravis, au nom de la commission des budgets, d’avoir cette interaction avec vous.

À Lugano, lors de la première conférence internationale sur la reconstruction de l’Ukraine, la BEI s’est engagée à participer à cette reconstruction. C’est l’occasion pour moi d’appeler à ce que cette reconstruction se fasse avec des critères qui, eux aussi, soient exigeants par rapport au monde d’après que nous voulons bâtir, en Ukraine bien sûr, mais également partout en Europe.

C’est l’occasion aussi d’attirer l’attention sur les transports, puisqu’un document de travail sera présenté le 13 juillet et que ce document, en l’état, permettra encore des investissements sur les routes et les autoroutes. Donc, il y a encore des travaux et des évolutions à faire.

Depuis 2019, notre objectif est de transformer la Banque européenne d’investissement en banque du climat. Des avancées ont été faites depuis lors, avec des changements importants dans les politiques de la BEI avec le Climate Bank Roadmap, qui a entériné plusieurs engagements importants, dont les 50 % de prêts pour le climat, et la fin du financement des énergies fossiles cette année, mais qui est un peu terni avec les centaines de millions d’euros qui ont été investis, durant la période de transition, sur des projets gaziers. Nos demandes spécifiques, c’est un travail de fond nécessaire sur les intermédiaires financiers qui servent de relais pour dépenser l’argent de la BEI, sur lesquels on n’a pas toujours la visibilité qu’on souhaiterait avoir.

Une attention particulière – et c’est une des nouveautés du rapport de cette année – a été portée à la question agricole, pour que nous accompagnions spécifiquement des projets agricoles qui soient compatibles avec les enjeux climatiques, mais aussi spécifiquement en ce qui concerne la condition du bien-être animal. C’est aussi quelque chose que mes collègues et moi avons souhaité inclure dans le rapport de cette année afin de ne pas financer des élevages intensifs.

Une autre question importante qui a fait l’actualité à Lisbonne il y a quelques jours: le non-financement de l’activité minière dans les fonds des océans. C’est quelque chose qui est extrêmement explosif mais qu’on doit vraiment surveiller, puisqu’il y a une tentation de continuer la conquête minière, y compris dans les fonds océaniques, alors que les océans sont déjà soumis à beaucoup de pression avec le changement climatique, qui altère leur capacité à accueillir la vie. Donc, bien sûr, les activités minières dans ces milieux fragiles seraient une catastrophe.

Enfin, je voulais finir sur de petits progrès qu’on pourrait faire sur la question de la transparence et des droits humains. Là encore, la BEI a évolué, mais il y a de nouveaux standards environnementaux et sociaux qu’on doit continuer à développer, de nouvelles politiques de transparence. Je sais notamment qu’en 2010 encore, quasiment 100 % des rapports qui étaient soumis au conseil d’administration de la BEI était publics trois semaines avant ce conseil d’administration. Depuis, le pourcentage a chuté et il se situe aujourd’hui à 60 %. Or, c’est très important d’avoir connaissance de ces rapports avant qu’ils soient soumis aussi au conseil d’administration de la BEI, afin de pouvoir vérifier en amont les impacts, notamment environnementaux et sociaux, que les engagements financiers de la BEI peuvent avoir. Donc, bravo pour les efforts qui ont été entrepris depuis 2019. Pour avoir une véritable banque du climat qui soit robuste, il y a encore du travail à faire, et c’est normal que ça ne se fasse pas en quelques jours ou en quelques mois. Mais nous avons des pistes et de nombreuses idées pour vous aider et vous accompagner dans cette évolution.

  Corina Crețu, rapporteur. – Madam President, Vice—President, President Hoyer, representatives of the EIB, colleagues, the report that we are discussing today clearly outlines that the European Investment Bank (EIB) is of great importance for the European Parliament, as it is the lending arm of the European Union. The EIB is the biggest creditor in the world, and it plays a special importance in our passing the tumultuous times in which we live, and here I am referring to the COVID—19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine.

The very foundation of Europe is based on solidarity between people. And today, more than ever, this solidarity must be shown by helping Ukrainian citizens who are suffering from the war. And I would like to mention that alongside the EU’s support, the EIB provided additional aid of 4 billion to improve housing, health, education and access to jobs for Ukrainian refugees. Of course, we all hope that the war will end soon and that peace will be established on our continent.

Today we are discussing the report on 2020, which was a very difficult year for all of us. I would like to show my appreciation that the EIB Group remained operational to carry out its activities despite the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

I welcome the efforts made by the EIB to overcome the global health crisis, to respond to the economic effects of COVID-19, because the health of our citizens is our priority. The EIB had made available funds for investments in the healthcare sector, which amounted 5.2 billion, of which 175 million were distributed in the research, and also supported countries outside the European Union, which I think is very important.

I would like also to underpin the support provided to the small and medium—sized enterprises, and also together with the European Investment Fund, you have launched the Skills & Education Guarantee Pilot to stimulate investments in education, training and skills. I think education is very important, and this initiative is well suited to address the upcoming needs for the labour market, giving special attention to the digital and green transition.

I note that in 2020, 34% of all EIB signatures within the Member States were for projects and beneficiaries located in the EIB cohesion priority regions, identified as less-developed regions and transitioning regions. Of course, as former Commissioner for European Regional Policy, I am grateful to the EIB for its support to cohesion. We are also aware that the economic consequences of the COVID—19 pandemic have deepened the differences between the Member States. We should assure that the most affected regions and countries can adjust to the new circumstances so that no one is left behind.

The coming years will be decisive in preventing severe impacts of climate change. And, of course, here I have to mention that in 2020 alone, the Bank invested a EUR 24 billion in climate action, confirming its position as being the largest multilateral financer of climate action.

As there is always room for improvement, I emphasise the need for even more integrity, transparency and accountability and reinforced mechanisms to fight fraud and corruption. I am convinced that the EIB will continue to carry out the project assessment in respect of technical, financial and economic-based indicators, making the projects’ qualities a decisive factor in deciding whether or not to grant financing.

I note that, concerning gender equality, the border is still 29.5% of management positions now taken by women. But this, I think, it’s the responsibility of the Member States because they are the ones who nominate the Vice—President in the Board of EIB.

At the end, I would like to congratulate President Hoyer for creating EIB Development Branch, and I believe that this can increase the positive impact that the EIB has outside of the European Union. This will help even more the countries with small and medium revenue to create sustainable growth, promote human rights, reduce poverty and inequality and improve human life. I believe the Branch will be in charge of many very important investments that will have a major positive impact on the life of the people.

  Werner Hoyer, EIB. – Madam President, distinguished Members of the European Parliament, dear Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it’s a great pleasure for me to be with you here today. The last time I had the privilege to address this House was almost one year ago. At the time, we were all very much focused on dealing with the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic, while simultaneously addressing the Digital and Green transformation.

These issues have not disappeared, but none of us imagined that Russia was planning a brutal war with global consequences and devastating effects for the Ukrainian people who have suffered until today and beyond. And we would not have imagined, probably most of us, that hunger would be used as a weapon, that the product of development work of decades would be destroyed and famine would return to big parts of the world.

We as Europeans had to react swiftly and in full solidarity with our Ukrainian partners and friends, and we did. We did react with determination and speed, which shows that we can be strong as Europe when we stand shoulder to shoulder.

Let me thank the rapporteurs of the two reports, Ms Corina Crețu and Mr David Cormand, for their excellent work and cooperation. Your reports are extremely relevant and cover the current key challenges the EIB and the EU have to face. I very much appreciate that you acknowledge that the EU’s bank is doing its part, and effectively so. Indeed, reacting when needed is part of our raison d’être.

When Europe turned its focus to attempt to address the climate crisis, we led the way among international financial institutions. In 2021, the share of EIB investments that went into climate action and environmental sustainability projects rose to a record EUR 27.6 billion or 51% of EIB business.

When COVID-19 struck, we responded quickly by rolling out a pan—European guarantee fund across the Union. During the years 2020 and 2021, the EIB Group supported around 850 000 SMEs. In addition, we helped finance COVID vaccines, diagnostics and treatments.

After the Russian war on Ukraine, the EU bank was the first international financial institution to provide financial assistance, disbursing EUR 660 billion within days after the Russian invasion. By the way, talking about Russia, we ended all activities in Russia – and there was a big partnership for modernisation – in 2015 after the annexation of Crimea. So there was no need to call on us to return from Russia.

We stand ready to do more, both in the short-term and in the post-war reconstruction, as we have already announced in Lugano this week with the setting up of the EU-Ukraine Gateway Trust Fund to mobilise funds for Ukraine. We have the experience, the expertise, the financial infrastructure in place to do more under the steering of the Council, the Commission and Parliament, Member States and contributing countries.

We should not forget that this is not a regional conflict. This is a crisis of global dimensions. I thank the rapporteurs very much for acknowledging the impact of the EU bank. I see it as a testament to the strength of the EU bank, of your bank, as an instrument of European economic policy. It’s also a testament of playing our part to what some call strategic autonomy or economic resilience.

Today, this work is again much needed, and the message I would like to convey to you is that we can turn challenges into opportunities if we take the right choices. The war in Ukraine is the strongest possible argument to show we are on the right course in greening our economies and accelerating our independence from fossil fuels. It is easy to hide behind the virus and behind the war when it comes to the climate objectives and GDPs. We will not backtrack on our climate action financing. On the contrary, my ambition is to further step up our work in the light of the current challenges. In particular, investment in green innovation and technologies will be key. Without new solutions, we will not be able to save our planet, nor will we achieve energy independence.

Of course, we also need to look into investments to address short-term needs, but the guiding principles must be the same. We cannot, we must not, invest our money in a way that locks us into an unsustainable path. This is not an idealistic position, nor an ideological one, but for a banker a very rational one. It simply would not be responsible banking, not to mention best banking practice, if you were to invest into assets today that we know we’ll have to write off in five years’ time.

This is where the EIB as a bank also needs to take a different stance from governance. In line with REPowerEU, we are currently developing an ambitious response to help reduce dependence on fossil fuels and fast—forward the Green Transition. I am convinced that we can do both.

Now, at this point in time, dear colleagues, this is no longer a matter of choice, but clearly an imperative. The war in Ukraine is also a reminder of the importance of having a dedicated arm for our activities outside the EU – EIB Global. This decision was spot on. Europe’s economic interests do not stop at its borders. Europe’s foreign policy cannot be separated from its economic interests. Energy, food security, life sciences, pharmaceutics and key information technologies are areas where Europe must be more autonomous.

Finally, let us not forget the backbone of our economies, the small and medium-sized enterprises representing more than 98% of all enterprises, employing almost 70% of all employees, and also often being the main source of innovation. It is in our key interest to further support these companies. We will, of course, keep Parliament informed closely about these developments and our activities in these areas.

I know that issues of accountability, integrity, or standards more generally are of high importance to you, and rightly so. As you mentioned in the reports, we are continuously improving our policies and practices in various fields through a revised transparency policy. The new tripartite agreement with the European Court of Auditors and the European Commission provides a code of conduct for members of the Management Committee and the new environmental and social sustainability framework and, of course, as a matter of top priority, policies related to the well-being of our staff, gender and diversity.

We have come a long way in many areas, but I fully agree with you that we cannot become complacent in this respect, and we take the recommendations in your resolutions very seriously. I am committed to raising the bar even higher. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for your attention and I am looking forward to the debate.

  Věra Jourová, Vice-President of the Commission. – Technology works, I will try to do the same. Thank you very much. Madam President, honourable Members, dear rapporteurs, dear President Hoyer, I would like to welcome the two reports and thank the European Parliament and in particular the rapporteurs for their hard and very relevant work.

The EIB Group is a crucial partner for implementing EU policies inside and outside the borders of the Union and I welcome the opportunity to discuss in the Parliament how the Bank can help the EU to further achieve our political priorities.

I would like to start by saying a few words on our joint efforts to support Ukraine. The appalling Russian invasion against Ukraine poses a fundamental challenge to Europe and our shared values, requiring us to respond decisively with coordinated EU actions. I appreciate that the EIB moved very fast to mobilise urgent financial support for Ukraine, which required very close cooperation with the Commission to grant necessary EU guarantees. Together with the microfinancial assistance provided by the Commission earlier this year and the commitment to present a proposal for additional exceptional macrofinancial assistance of up to EUR 9 billion in 2022, this should help to alleviate Ukraine’s short-term financial needs.

In the longer run, I am confident that the Bank will play a role in the context of the Rebuild Ukraine Facility proposed by the Commission to finance the reconstruction effort of Ukraine and the alignment of Ukraine’s economy to the EU. We will have to cooperate very closely in this area.

Now let me turn to the EIB and InvestEU in other areas. Beyond Ukraine, the EIB will also be a key partner in providing and leveraging investments aligned with EU policy priorities in many other areas, including the green and digital transitions. It is noteworthy that the Commission is now implementing all parts of the InvestEU programme, of which the EIB will execute 75% of the guarantee capacity. Priority has been given to the signature of the guarantee agreement with the EIB Group, which was signed on 7 March this year. Negotiations on guarantee agreements with several other implementing partners are already advancing and the Commission expects to be able to sign new agreements in autumn.

I am happy to see that the EIB and the EIF are moving forward and have already started to support investments under the InvestEU fund.

InvestEU, along with the Recovery and Resilience Facility, will help to shift EU growth to new green and digital sectors, strengthen our leadership in research, development and innovation, and boost the vibrant start-up ecosystem in the EU. The Commission is working very hard to make this possible and will strive to further enhance the cooperation with the EIB in these important areas.

On external action, I count on the EIB to closely cooperate with the Commission to align its operations with the EU’s external policy objectives and to build strong partnerships with other international financial institutions and national promotional banks.

On 10 May, the European Commission and the EIB signed under the EFSD a guarantee agreement through which the EU will provide a guarantee covering EUR 26.7 billion in financing to support investments in several sectors such as green energy, green infrastructure and health.

I highlight the new cooperation principle with the EIB enshrined in the EU guarantees under NDICI Global Europe and welcome the clear commitment to focus and align EIB global activities with EU policy priorities. The new approach is ‘policy first’, so that the EU can be even stronger and impactful as Team Europe. Together, we should strive to enhance our existing cooperation channels and to build on each other, promote a value-driven model to reach the transformative development with concrete flagship and Team Europe initiatives.

A final word on climate change. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has raised awareness about the importance of accelerating our independence from Russian fossil fuels and fast-forwarding the green transition. Increased investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency will be key for achieving this objective.

The EIB has been a frontrunner among comparable financial institutions in making climate action the key priority of its activity and I trust this will continue despite the current difficult global context. We look forward to continuing our close cooperation with the EIB to support EU policy goals. Thank you for your attention and I look forward to hearing your views.

  Angelika Winzig, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, sehr geehrter Herr Präsident Hoyer! Ja, danke zunächst einmal unseren beiden Berichterstattern für die hervorragende Arbeit.

Geschätzte Besucherinnen und Besucher! Die Europäische Investitionsbank ist die einzige internationale Finanzinstitution, die im Eigentum unserer Mitgliedstaaten steht und die mithilfe unserer europäischen Gesetzgebung dazu beiträgt, die gemeinsamen Ziele der Europäischen Union zu erreichen. Die Europäische Investitionsbank hat in diesen krisengeschüttelten Jahren hervorragende Arbeit geleistet. Im letzten Jahr, mit 95 Milliarden Kreditvolumen, konnten viele KMU in ihren Investitionen unterstützt werden und – Herr Präsident hat es schon erwähnt – auch diese wichtige Impfstoffforschung und -produktion von BioNTech/Pfizer.

Ja, jetzt im Februar kamen dann natürlich auf die Europäische Investitionsbank neue Herausforderungen zu, die wir jetzt in Zukunft lösen müssen. Die Europäische Investitionsbank hat sich schon lange dem Green Deal verpflichtet. Bereits 2025 sollen 50 % des Kreditvolumens in diese Klimafinanzierung gehen.

Wichtig für die Zukunft ist mir vor allem, dass Digitalisierung, Innovation und Forschung gerade bezüglich des Green Deals oberste Priorität haben. Denn Nachhaltigkeit bedeutet auch, dass der Transformationsprozess gelingt, das Beschäftigung und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der europäischen Betriebe auch in diesem Wandel gesichert ist.

Begrüßen darf ich die vom Europäischen Investitionsfonds durchgeführten Investitionen in Bildung und somit direkt in den Arbeitsmarkt. Wir sollten mit diesen Investitionen in Zukunft auch viel mehr die duale Ausbildung, sprich: die Lehre, unterstützen. Denn Deutschland, Schweiz und Österreich zeigen, dass dieses System das beste Mittel für Beschäftigung und vor allem gegen Jugendarbeitslosigkeit ist – nicht mit dem Europäischen Fonds für die Anpassung an die Globalisierung zu reparieren, wie wir das jetzt gerade in Spanien und Frankreich gemacht haben, sondern proaktiv in duale Ausbildung zu investieren; ich glaube, das hilft den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern Europas am besten.

Herr Hoyer, ich gratuliere Ihnen und bedanke mich bei Ihrem Team für Ihre hervorragende Arbeit.

  Maria Grapini, în numele grupului S&D. – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, domnule președinte, Banca Europeană de Investiții are un rol extrem de important în economia Uniunii Europene, mai ales acum, pe fondul crizei triple - aș putea să spun - pentru că am început cu pandemia, urmare a pandemiei, am avut o criză economică, evident, și acum criza războiului.

Am citit cu atenție raportul și apreciez în ansamblu activitatea BEI. Însă ca un om care vin din producție spun că și băncile, nu numai BEI, toate băncile trebuie să își adapteze instrumentele de lucru la situația concretă. Și iată, am câteva cifre aici. În 2020, și 66,1 miliarde, spune raportul, s-au concentrat în trei țări: Italia, Franța și Spania.

Ce înseamnă asta ? Înseamnă că țări din est, așa cum este și țara mea, România, are capacitatea administrativă și capacitatea financiară de a se împrumuta, dar nu are aceste capacități de a se împrumuta. Și asta ce înseamnă ? Înseamnă că disparitățile regionale cresc, înseamnă că nu avem acea coeziune pe care ne-o dorim, de fapt, toate instituțiile europene.

Consider că BEI trebuie să acorde prioritate în activitatea de creditare pentru proiecte sociale, pentru IMM-uri. Da, domnule președinte, ați spus că 850 de mii de IMM-uri au fost creditate în 2021, dar nici a 20-a parte, dacă ne gândim câte IMM-uri avem în Uniunea Europeană, nu au primit aceste credite și cred, de asemenea, că instrumentele pe care trebuie să le folosiți acum trebuie să sprijine în mod special proiectele sociale, proiectele IMM-urilor, microîntreprinderilor.

Iată, sunt țări, cum este și țara mea, în care dobânda de referință la bancă a ajuns 4,6 %. Înseamnă că întreprinzătorul, IMM-ul nu poate să suporte un cost al împrumutului la acel nivel. Și asta cred că trebuie să facem Comisia împreună cu BEI și cu statele membre, evident, să găsim soluții pentru a putea să ajutăm acum, în acest impas, în aceste crize suprapuse, mediul economic, pentru că, până la urmă, fără funcționarea mediului economic, nu avem buget nici la nivel național, nici la nivel european.

  Bas Eickhout, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, President Hoyer – good to see you again – first of all, I really would like to thank the EIB for its immediate readiness to provide support to Ukraine in this very difficult time. I think the immediate response of the EIB to Ukraine was really very important and very good. So thanks for that.

For the rest, we are, of course, always very thankful for the transformation that you have put into the EIB from an investment bank into Europe’s climate bank. I think the current energy crisis also very clearly shows the errors of the past that we are suffering from at this moment, because our failure to get rid of fossil dependency is something that we are paying for now on a daily basis still.

Energy independence is the answer to a strong geopolitical union. Meanwhile, climate change is still having very much effect on our daily life. I think these two together – energy independence and climate change – should be addressed together, and I think the EIB is on its way to that.

Still, though, you know very well that quite some Member States are pushing also the EIB to replace Russian gas with new long—term fossil investments, and that the EIB should help with that. You said: ‘we will not backtrack’. But I just would like to hear very clearly from you that when you are having your mid—term evaluation of the Bank’s energy lending policies, and the climate roadmap, that you will not put into question the end of fossil subsidies for gas, and stand up to those Member States pushing for new openings for EIB support for fossil fuel investments.

Thank you very much, and we keep on fighting and supporting you in the fight against climate change as the climate bank.

  Joachim Kuhs, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Vizepräsidentin, sehr geehrter Herr Präsident Hoyer, werte Kollegen! Ich muss leider etwas Wasser in den Wein gießen, denn auch in der EIB ist nicht alles Gold, was glänzt. Ich möchte zwei Punkte anführen:

Erstens den starken Rückgang der Transparenz, der schon erwähnt wurde. Im Jahr 2010 wurden 96 % aller Projekte drei Wochen vor der Genehmigung durch den Verwaltungsrat veröffentlicht. Im Jahr 2020 werden es nur 60 % sein. Das ist eine sehr bedenkliche Entwicklung, die nicht die klaren Forderungen unseres Parlaments nach Verbesserungen widerspiegelt.

Zweitens: Die Vereinbarung vom 11. November 2021 zwischen EIB, Kommission und Rechnungshof bietet keine zufriedenstellenden Lösungen. Der Status quo wird ohne nennenswerte Verbesserungen einfach aufrechterhalten. Es fehlt insbesondere die Erweiterung der Prüfungsbefugnisse des Rechnungshofs in Bezug auf die Tätigkeit der EIB, was ich übrigens schon seit Jahren einfordere.

In diesem Zusammenhang möchte ich aber noch auf eine fragwürdige Investition hinweisen – die wurde auch schon erwähnt: Die EIB investierte in den COVID-19-Impfstoff von BioNTech/Pfizer, indem sie im Juni 2020 eine Darlehensfazilität von 100 Millionen Euro unterzeichnete. Ich kann mir nicht vorstellen, Herr Präsident Hoyer, dass Sie nach Ihren Richtlinien befugt waren, da eine Entscheidung zu treffen und in einen experimentellen Impfstoff, der zudem noch keine Marktzulassung hatte, zu investieren.

Und falls Sie diese Entscheidung aufgrund des politischen Drucks getroffen haben, dann stellen Sie damit die Unabhängigkeit der EIB infrage. Wenn die EIB aber nicht mehr unabhängig ist, dann müsste sie vollständig der Kontrolle durch den Haushaltskontrollausschuss und durch den Rechnungshof unterstellt werden. Ich bitte, das zu bedenken.

  Ryszard Czarnecki, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Panie Prezesie! Szanowni Państwo! Składam gratulacje dla banku z filią w Luksemburgu, zwłaszcza za to, co zrobiliście w okresie pandemii, gdy połowę wypłat dla małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw wypłacono od razu w pierwszym roku, co pomogło w zachowaniu płynności małych i średnich firm. Za to, co zrobiliście też dla sektora zdrowia: ponad 5 mld euro –dokładnie 5,2 mld, w tym 175 mln na szczepionki: to są konkrety i za to dziękuję.

Chciałem również podziękować za to, co zrobiliście dla naszego kraju, mojego kraju, dla Polski: wypłacone rekordowe 6,4 mld euro w zeszłym roku, w tym roku podobnie, dla sektora publicznego, dla samorządów, dla sektora prywatnego. Ale mam wrażenie, że w jednej sprawie nie będzie między nami zgody. Są ważne priorytety, a więc wojna i covid, jednak przesłaniają, Panie Prezesie, kwestie ekologiczne. W tej sprawie będzie protokół rozbieżności, ale za inne sprawy bardzo dziękuję.

  Δημήτριος Παπαδημούλης, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας The Left. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κυρία Jourová, κύριε Hoyer σας καλωσορίζουμε και πάλι. Θα ήθελα να πω ότι θεωρούμε θετική την απόφαση της Ευρωπαϊκής Τράπεζας Επενδύσεων να μετατραπεί στην κλιματική τράπεζα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Αυτός ο προσανατολισμός πρέπει να ενισχυθεί, να ολοκληρωθεί και να μην νοθευτεί, με το επιχείρημα των νέων δεδομένων της αβεβαιότητας που δημιουργείται από την ενεργειακή κρίση.

Αντίθετα, η Ευρωπαϊκή Τράπεζα Επενδύσεων πρέπει να κάνει περισσότερα για να στηρίξει την επιτάχυνση των επενδύσεων για την ενεργειακή ασφάλεια της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, τη μείωση της ενεργειακής φτώχειας και την προώθηση της αρχής της ενεργειακής αποδοτικότητας. Να μη μείνει κανείς πίσω, να στηρίξει τις μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις αλλά και τη δημόσια υγεία και τις κοινωνικές πολιτικές και να κάνει περισσότερα πράγματα και στο εσωτερικό της, κύριε Hoyer, για την προώθηση της ισότητας των φύλων, της διαφάνειας και της βελτίωσης και των εργασιακών συνθηκών εντός της Ευρωπαϊκής Τράπεζας Επενδύσεων, όπου υπάρχουν κάποιες γκρίζες ζώνες που πρέπει να βελτιωθούν.

  Andor Deli (NI). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony, Biztos Asszony, Hoyer Elnök Úr! Amikor idén januárban a Költségvetési Bizottsághoz látogatott, még nem is sejtettük az előttünk álló nehézségeket és kihívásokat. Időközben a partnerség, az összefogás erősítése még inkább felértékelődött, a Beruházási Bank szerepe pedig folyamatosan növekszik. Ez igaz az új tagjelölteknél, Ukrajnában és Moldovában és a Nyugat-Balkán országaiban is, ahol máris komoly infrastrukturális beruházások valósulnak meg, ezzel is segítve az európai stratégiai érdekek megvalósulását. De a hatékony európai kapcsolattartáshoz elengedhetetlen az EU külső határátkelőinek fejlesztése, kapacitások bővítése. Erre égetően szükség van, hiszen jelenleg az utasok gyakran több órát, a kamionosok pedig akár napokat is várakoznak a határátkelőkön nagyon nehéz körülmények között. Ezúton is kérem Elnök Urat, hogy a bank befektetési prioritásainak meghatározásánál fordítsanak kiemelt figyelmet a határátkelőkre, és nyisson a különálló hitelvonalat erre a célra.

  Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE). – Madam President, the European Investment Bank has a pretty good track record for the last years and commitment, willingness and capability, including in environmental matters and considerations on its worth.

For that, I would like you to continue, to raise the bar, with the ambition – you have Parliament’s support on that – to stay tight that none of the Bank’s funds should go to ‘significant harm’ nor fossil fuel investments. Avoid incineration and start taking into account circular economy principles, low toxicity as well as the huge demands that we have on the biodiversity side. Because you have the capabilities, you have the money, you have Parliament’s support, and you have the duty to do it.

  Margarida Marques (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, o BEI desempenha um papel essencial enquanto banco público da União Europeia: o Banco do Clima. O Banco Verde. Queria congratular a Instituição na pessoa do seu Presidente.

O BEI esteve bem. Dou exemplos: financiamento sustentável como modelo operacional, com 43% dos empréstimos relacionados com o clima; quase 95 mil milhões de euros em matéria de alterações climáticas, coesão social e transformação digital; apoia mais de 430 000 PME que empregam 4,5 milhões de pessoas; apoia projeto-chave de investigação e inovação; em resposta à invasão da Ucrânia pela Rússia, foi aprovado um pacote de solidariedade de emergência.

É uma instituição financeira que se quer guiada pelos princípios e pelas prioridades e objetivos políticos comuns da União Europeia.

Mas o Parlamento Europeu quer mais: quer que tenha um papel nos esforços de reconstrução após a guerra na Ucrânia; quer maior investimento na segurança energética e no reforço da autonomia estratégica da União Europeia; quer que contribua para prevenir e conter crescentes desigualdades, seguindo políticas de crescimento sustentável e criação de emprego.

Finalmente, o Parlamento Europeu continua empenhado em reforçar a sua capacidade de escrutínio do BEI. É um elemento fundamental para assegurar mais transparência e mais democratic accountability.

  Alin Mituța (Renew). – Doamnă președintă, s-a spus deja aici, ultimii ani au fost dificili, iar Banca Europeană de Investiții și-a făcut datoria de a contribui la combaterea efectelor pandemiei și acum ale războiului.

Banca a investit în găsirea de vaccinuri și tratamente anti-Covid, dar și în păstrarea economiei pe, să zicem, linia de plutire. Și vă mulțumim pentru asta, domnule Hoyer. Sunt însă câteva domenii în care este, în mod clar, loc de îmbunătățiri.

Avem nevoie de mai multe investiții ale băncii în agricultură și dezvoltare rurală pentru asigurarea securității alimentare și a tranziției la o agricultură verde. Avem nevoie ca banca să asigure, de asemenea, un nivel înalt de transparență și etică prin adoptarea unui registru de transparență și prin măsuri proactive de prevenire a conflictelor de interese.

  Matteo Adinolfi (ID). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, sicuramente va dato atto alla Banca europea per gli investimenti di essere stata in prima linea nell'affrontare la crisi legata al Covid.

La BEI, con un programma di sostegno incentrato sui settori maggiormente colpiti dalla pandemia, ha offerto un aiuto fondamentale alle imprese che sono state particolarmente gravate dagli effetti della crisi.

Va sicuramente apprezzato, inoltre, l'invito a sviluppare misure volte a introdurre nuovi strumenti finanziari che promuovano l'accessibilità per il settore agricolo e per gli agricoltori più giovani.

Per contro, credo che vadano evidenziate alcune criticità. Nella relazione, infatti, si invita la BEI a dare priorità, attraverso le sue attività di prestito, ai progetti sociali, verdi e sostenibili. Il testo inoltre invita la BEI a sostenere il raggiungimento della neutralità climatica entro il 2050 per allineare le sue azioni al Green Deal europeo.

L'enfasi con cui la BEI viene investita del ruolo di banca climatica dell'UE in un momento storico nel quale dobbiamo fare i conti con il costo esorbitante dell'energia e con il caro bollette sembra quasi fuori luogo, considerando che tra gli obiettivi della BEI dovrebbe esserci la lotta alla disoccupazione giovanile, alla povertà e all'esclusione sociale, che paradossalmente sembrano lasciate indietro a vantaggio della transizione energetica.

  Andżelika Anna Możdżanowska (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! Krótko mówiąc, działalność Europejskiego Banku Inwestycyjnego w 2021 r. zasługuje na wielkie uznanie. Po raz kolejny EBI pokazał, że jest niezbędnym finansowym ramieniem Unii Europejskiej, które potrafi efektywnie wspierać nasze gospodarki także podczas kryzysu. Mój kraj, Polska, bardzo docenia relacje z Europejskim Bankiem Inwestycyjnym. W 2019 r. zwiększyliśmy swój udział w kapitale subskrybowanym do poziomu 11,4, stając się siódmym krajem pod względem udziałów. W 2021 r. bank zaangażował w Polsce rekordowe 6,3 mld euro i na rok bieżący przewiduje podobne kwoty, które obejmą pożyczki dla sektora publicznego, a także dla prywatnego i samorządów lokalnych.

Warto podkreślić dwie sprawy. Po pierwsze, zaangażowanie w walkę ze skutkami kryzysu pandemii COVID-19, gdzie 50% wpłat w tych projektach wypłacono już w pierwszej połowie roku, co mocno wsparło płynność małych i średnich przedsiębiorców. Po drugie, zaangażowanie EBI w pomoc Ukrainie przede wszystkim poprzez wsparcie państw członkowskich przyjmujących uchodźców wojennych. Należy także podkreślić zaangażowanie finansowe EBI w program InvestEU, który pozwala przezwyciężyć lukę inwestycyjną w Unii Europejskiej. Do czerwca 2020 r. bank zatwierdził operacje na poziomie 500 mld euro. Ważne jest, aby wypełniając swoje statutowe zadanie, jakim jest polityka spójności, EBI stosował podejście indywidualne, które pozwoli tym krajom również na wyrównywanie szans.

  Luke Ming Flanagan (The Left). – Madam President, there are many positive elements here, but one in particular is the focus on human rights due diligence in the new EIB Environmental and Social Sustainability Framework, calling for the development of a specific human rights strategy; a commitment that a gender perspective be at the centre of EIB activities; a strong focus on anti-money laundering and combating financing terrorism, including the fight against organised crime; a request for the extension of the right of access to info by the ECA in relation to operations implementing EU policies; and deploring that the new tripartite agreement between the Commission, the EIB and ECA do not represent an improvement to the situation with no enhanced role of the ECA in terms of auditing powers regarding activities of the EIB.

Sadly, there was a lot of watering down from what was there originally. In particular, excuses are given for the lack of provisions in the Code of Conduct of the Management Committee and Board of Directors excluding Vice-Presidents from overseeing operations in the countries of origins. I hope this doesn’t make it into the final report. Overall, it’s good.

  Mislav Kolakušić (NI). –Poštovana predsjednice, poštovane kolege, poštovani građani, Europska investicijska banka raspoređuje desetine milijardi eura koje su prikupljene od građana Europske unije.

Tvrdi se da se podupiru zelene politike. Brojne građane Europske unije, kao i mene, zanima koja je to točno europska zelena politika. Prije deset godina sve ste nas natjerali da izvučemo one obične klasične žarulje, zabranili smo proizvodnju žarulja od 60W i uveli one štedljive, navodno, od 10-15W. Deset godina kasnije, dakle, mi sad više ne štedimo električnu energiju, sada potičemo kupnju električnih automobila i financiramo njihovu proizvodnju, koji troše 100kW električne energije dnevno.

Dakle, što je zelena politika? Žarulja od 10W ili električni automobil od 100 kW potrošnje?

  Janusz Lewandowski (PPE). – Pani Komisarz! Panie Prezesie! W działalności EBI istnieje nieusuwalne napięcie pomiędzy misją quasi-publiczną a normalnym dążeniem do maksymalizacji wyniku finansowego. I w obu sprawozdaniach, które omawiamy, w gruncie rzeczy uwzględniono te szczególne zobowiązania EBI jako naszego private bank, który w tej chwili mierzy się z nowymi zasadami, głosowanymi dzisiaj, jako bank w służbie digitalizacji małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw czy spójności. Oczywiście bank reaguje również na nadzwyczajne wydarzenia, nadzwyczajne wyzwania, czyli wojnę w Ukrainie czy wcześniej pandemię. I na pewno odegra istotną rolę w odbudowie Ukrainy.

Natomiast dla mnie ważniejsze niż rozmaite sprawozdania z działalności są dowody uznania dla banku ze strony biznesu. Znam takie świadectwo. W 2018 r. prezes Hoyer został wyróżniony przez największą polską organizację gospodarczą na gali w Warszawie, a wcześniej wyróżnionymi byli Margaret Thatcher, Jacques Chirac czy José Manuel Barroso. Wydaje mi się, że ten najważniejszy sprawdzian jest dopiero przed nami, mianowicie ta dualna rola publiczna i komercyjna w nadzwyczajnie istotnych czasach niezwykłego wyzwania geopolitycznego.

  Vlad Gheorghe (Renew). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, domnule președinte, salut activitatea Băncii Europene de Investiții în ultimii doi ani de criză și mulțumesc președintei Băncii Europene pentru asta. Apreciez deschiderea pentru colaborare. Avem nevoie de rezultate, nu doar în rapoarte și în birouri, ci în comunitățile locale, unde cetățenii simt direct îmbunătățirea propriei vieți și capătă încredere în Uniunea Europeană.

Apreciez procentul ridicat de investiții în mediu, biodiversitate și sustenabilitate. Schimbările climatice sunt deja aici. Nu mai este timp să nu investim în proiecte verzi. Subliniez că banii europeni trebuie să fie protejați de corupție și fraudă. Colaborarea totală cu Parchetul European, condus de Procuroarea-șefă Laura-Codruța Kövesi, este esențială.

O ultimă remarcă privind bunurile apropiaților lui Putin și Lukașenko. Nu finanțăm direct sau prin terți războaiele de la granița noastră. Ne așteptăm la o raportare completă, respectarea fără excepție a sancțiunilor și oprirea imediată a legăturilor cu aceste regimuri și cu partenerii lor.

  Tomislav Sokol (PPE). –Poštovana predsjednice, povjerenice, kolegice i kolege, rasprava o godišnjem izvješću o Europskoj investicijskoj banci prilika je da u novim geopolitičkim okolnostima sagledamo njezinu ulogu u postizanju ciljeva Europske unije.

U tom kontekstu posebno pozdravljam činjenicu da su se u razdoblju od 2018. do 2021. povećala ulaganja EIB-a u energiji u Europi s 10 na 14 milijardi eura. Taj trend rasta ulaganja u energetiku mora se nastaviti jer je postizanje energetske sigurnosti Europske unije od ključne važnosti. Toga smo posebno svjesni u okolnostima u kojima visoke cijene energenata ugrožavaju životni standard građana. Projekti diverzifikacije energetskih pravaca, kao što je izgradnja ili povećanje kapaciteta LNG terminala, dio su odgovora na energetsku krizu i kao takvi moraju biti praćeni primjerenim financiranjem od strane Europske investicijske banke.

Sigurnost Europe i očuvanje našeg načina života izravno su povezani s postizanjem energetske neovisnosti EU-a i tome moraju biti podređeni svi izvori financiranja koji imamo na raspolaganju, uključujući kredite Europske investicijske banke.

VORSITZ: KATARINA BARLEY
Vizepräsidentin

  José Manuel Fernandes (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, caras e caros colegas, o Banco Europeu de Investimento é uma mais—valia e precisamos que continue a ser forte, competente e que seja ativo. E a situação económica assim o exige.

Os meus parabéns pelo facto de ter mobilizado mais de 95 mil milhões de euros em empréstimos para apoiar a economia e, sobretudo, o apoio a 430 000 empresas. O que eu peço é que se faça ainda mais e que se acelere, por exemplo, o InvestEU, que tem estado parado e que é um instrumento essencial.

Eu sei que a competitividade ou a análise dos projetos e a sua qualidade é essencial, mas registo com agrado que se dê também atenção à coesão territorial e às regiões menos desenvolvidas. Sublinho ainda que, através do InvestEU, é possível e é desejável que se criem instrumentos para a capitalização das empresas em termos nacionais. Eu recordo que o InvestEU tem um compartimento nacional. Eu sei que há Estados-Membros, como o meu, que não têm bancos de fomento, instituições financeiras de desenvolvimento musculadas. No entanto, eu peço ao Banco Europeu de Investimento para, em conjunto com os governos nacionais, ajudar a que se criem instrumentos para a capitalização das empresas, algo que é absolutamente necessário num momento como o atual.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – Madam President, as a rapporteur in the last mandate for InvestEU, I want to thank Mr Hoyer and the EIB and the European Commission for rolling out this very important instrument for the European Union.

Now I am a rapporteur for the EPP for the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive and the renovation of the EU’s building stock is a key Green Deal priority. However, at present, there is a funding gap of EUR 214 billion a year for green financing for residential buildings, which will require a greater input from bank loans. Currently, 72% of renovations are self-funded, while only 18% of consumers are taking loans to renovate their homes, because they are too expensive.

The Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, under Article 15, expands the toolbox for Member States. It includes energy efficiency loans and mortgages for building renovations.

So, a question, Mr Hoyer: does the European Investment Bank envisage the establishment of an EU-wide renovations guarantee fund, enabling credit institutions to reduce their risk exposure on green mortgage portfolios, and so improve access to renovation loans for vulnerable households?

Finally, I would like to thank the EIB also for their assistance for Ukraine – quick and positive.

  Věra Jourová, Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, President Hoyer, I would like to thank you for the interesting debate held here today.

The Committee’s reports testify that the EIB is overall on a very good path, in particular as a frontrunner in the area of climate action and as a role model for other international financial institutions in their quest to become Paris—aligned.

I also thank Parliament for its support to the discussions on the EIB’s role as the Union’s major partner implementing EU funds. I very much look forward to continuing this discussion and our close cooperation.

As Corina Crețu said as a former Commissioner for Regional Development, and I am the former Minister for Regional Development in my country, I want to thank the EIB for the very good cooperation. Because what we also hear at this place is that without the action and availability of the EIB, the focal funding of the structural funds, the structural policy and the cohesion policy would not be so successful as it is.

  Werner Hoyer, EIB. – Madam President, I thank you so much for this wealth of comments and questions. And I promise you one thing: I will not even try to answer them all. Simply too much and too diversified. But I promise you that we will come back to each and every one of you individually in order to give you the responses that you deserve.

I touch upon a few items, which I consider particularly relevant. First, I think it was Ms Grapini who first who mentioned the issue of SMEs and the need to emphasise our work on SMEs, in particular in cohesion countries. The fact is, that per capita, the work on SMEs in cohesion countries clearly outnumbers the activities in non-cohesion countries. So we are indeed particularly ambitious in this field.

The second issue, and I take that extremely seriously, is the transparency issue. We’ve been trying to get better there. We’ve been making progress here and there, sometimes making steps backwards first to do them. But, we try even when we need to acknowledge that the more we do private-sector business, the more we ‘suffer’ from confidentiality requirements imposed on us from the private-sector partners. That doesn’t make things easier, but we try everything in our talks with the promoters to come to an agreement to publish for all projects over EUR 50 million and give the necessary transparency to you. This critical issue is a flip side of mobilising private investments and support innovation, and this is key for the future of the European economy.

In this context, let me say that I was a little bit surprised by the remark about vaccine development and production. Surprised because it’s one of the areas where we in EIB are particularly proud. When I first heard of something coming up – and I was told in January 2020 this could be more than an epidemic situation, it could develop into a pandemic – I then read through the literature and found out that, okay, in these situations, maybe vaccinations would be useful if there is a vaccine, but that normally takes 5 to 10 years to develop. So we then talked to our life science experts in the Bank – and this is one of the unique features of EIB: we are a bank that is to a large extent, driven by natural scientists, by engineers and not by people who are good at counting numbers. That is necessary as well, of course.

But a lot of times people told us, well, President, are you aware that for a couple of years we are cooperating with the small team of researchers at the University of Mainz and we finance their development of a cancer medication on the basis of a new technology. Everybody now knows that technology. At that time, none of us did – mRNA, never heard of it. And that technology led these people to develop the BioNTech vaccine within six or eight months. It was clear miracle. But you need to be able to go into that risk. This is something a private commercial bank could not have done.

With the backing of the shareholders of EIB and the backing of the European Commission and support of this House, it was possible. You might go into losses with projects like that, and then it’s necessary to have a wider, broader portfolio that levels out positive and negative experiences. This, of course, was a very, very positive experience and nowadays, half the commercial world would have been happy to be the inventor of this medication and this vaccine. So you need to do these things. So therefore, I think I simply do not grasp the logic behind the criticism against the BioNTech vaccine.

Fourth point, so, I thought I can promise you we will not backtrack. And I’m not at all an ideologist when it comes to these things. But when we went out of fossil fuels in 2019, in the speech in the General Assembly of the United Nations, for which I did not have the backing of my own Board yet, I realised immediately that the bosses of BlackRock were doing the same thing vis-à-vis their private asset holders. They said, I cannot explain to my asset holders that we are investing in something, which looks very good, is very helpful in the short run, but we know that we need to write it off within 15 or 20 years, but it will be on our balance sheet for 40 or 30 years. This doesn’t fly with the private sector and one should not do it open-eyed in the public sector. No, no. The present crisis, as serious as it is – and we will have, in my opinion, two tough winters ahead in Europe – must lead us to an acceleration of our efforts in this field of energetic transformation.

Fifth point, we cooperate very well with the European Court of Auditors. I know that there are other ambitions, but the relationship between the EIB and the Court of Auditors is laid down and the competence of the ECA is laid down in the Treaty. It cannot simply be changed by an agreement. So that would be a very, very big issue to undertake.

So it goes without saying, of course, and therewith I come to an end, that we are in full compliance with applicable sanctions. Sometimes we were ahead of time when we closed our business in Russia immediately after Crimea. And when we acted on Ukraine within seven days after the beginning of the war and, to be honest, it was a very courageous step on the side of my shareholders and the Board members of the Bank that they agreed on behalf of their Member States to this proposal at a time when you are not so in full command of all the details in a country which is at war. And being at war is for all of us a new experience, and we must get used to it and hopefully overcome that situation soon.

Mr Kelly asked about a guarantee fund for green mortgages. I’m open to this. These ideas of bundling projects is a very interesting and useful one – in some countries of the European Union I would like to see more of it. For instance, when I was new at the Bank, we found out that the situation of the the buildings, the quality of the buildings for schools in Ireland were sometimes shameful. And individual local school owners or magistrates would come to us and say, can’t you do this or that? Well, we cannot do that for 500 schools individually. But then we arrived at the idea of school bundling, and within three years that thought, that thing had been taken care of by this project of school bundling. We can do that in other circumstances as well. And a guarantee fund for green mortgages might be an interesting means for that. Thank you very much for your interest and your support.

  David Cormand, rapporteur. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Président, merci pour ces échanges et ces débats. Je n’ai pas grand-chose à ajouter, sinon pour nous inviter à persister avec trois mots: la cohérence, la constance et le courage.

La cohérence, la Banque européenne d’investissement en fait preuve avec la question des investissements sur les problèmes écologiques. La cohérence, c’est de le faire jusqu’au bout et de ne pas, en même temps, financer des projets qui seraient encore de l’ordre du carbone. Mais nous allons sur le chemin de la cohérence.

La constance, c’est de persister dans l’effort, y compris quand il y a des situations d’urgence – j’y faisais allusion tout à l’heure par rapport à l’Ukraine. Même quand les choses sont à reconstruire après un drame comme celui que vit l’Ukraine, il faudra faire preuve de constance dans le fait de continuer à respecter ces critères qui nous sont chers.

Et puis le courage – vous en avez parlé à la fin –, c’est celui de faire des choix difficiles. C’est aussi de faire en sorte de toujours aller dans le sens de plus de transparence, de se challenger. Vous avez fait état des compétences scientifiques que vous aviez en interne à la Banque européenne d’investissement. Il y a peut-être aussi des besoins en personnel sachant établir des standards pour prendre en charge davantage la question des droits humains ou celle des questions de genre dans les financements, pour que les femmes bénéficient autant que les hommes des investissements de la Banque européenne d’investissement.

Donc, de la cohérence, de la constance, du courage, c’est ce que je vous souhaite et ce que je nous souhaite pour continuer à évoluer positivement avec la Banque européenne d’investissement.

  Corina Crețu, rapporteur. – Madam President, I would like to thank you all for this very fruitful debate.

As we can see, the war in Ukraine, this tragedy is dominating our life and also our debates. As President Hoyer put it, what we are doing today is our testament for the future, and of course, it is our duty to do our part as a Member of the European Parliament, as a member of the Commission or as members of the EIB, as the main investment arm of European Union.

I very much appreciated the emphasis in the report, Madam Commissioner, on the word ‘coordination’, and I think it is very crucial for our success in the future. And also thank you for defending cohesion policy, because now everybody is taking from that.

I would like to thank you all for the contribution. I know that despite all the challenges you took this duty to be an important pillar for the reconstruction in Ukraine. And I really think that it will be a very hard and important task. I wish you success on focusing on the main priorities such as climate change, environment and innovation, skills, infrastructure, small and medium—sized enterprises, cohesion, of course, and development.

  Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen. Die Abstimmung findet am Donnerstag, 7. Juli 2022, statt.

18. Rusijos vyriausybės ir diplomatinio tinklo santykiai su ekstremistinėmis, populistinėmis, antieuropietiškomis ir kai kuriomis kitomis Europos politinėmis partijomis karo kontekste (diskusijos)

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgen die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zu den Beziehungen der russischen Regierung und von russischen Diplomatennetzwerken zu extremistischen, populistischen, antieuropäischen und bestimmten anderen europäischen Parteien im Zusammenhang mit dem Krieg (2022/2743(RSP)).

  Mikuláš Bek, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, Members of the European Parliament, our values and democratic processes are constantly under threat from those who fear democracy, transparency and responsibility. The recent Russian aggression against Ukraine has confirmed just how far that fear can go. This is, therefore, a very timely debate, and I would like to thank you for inviting the Council to take part.

Fundamental rights and freedoms, political and media pluralism, the rule of law and free, fair and transparent elections are key elements of democracies, and we must scrupulously protect them from any hostile foreign interference. That is why the Czech Presidency decided to make the resilience of democratic institutions one of its key priorities. Any interference in our political processes is unacceptable, particularly in the current geopolitical climate, and also in the run-up to the 2024 European Parliament elections.

The tactics used to exert foreign influence are multifaceted and include covert donations and loans to political parties, coordinated disinformation actions, spreading false narratives, and elite capture or co—optation. At present, Russia is trying in particular to influence our political decision-making and to interfere with the information space in Europe and beyond.

In short, foreign interference can be overcome only by decisive action by all relevant stakeholders. The Council takes these varying trends very seriously and is actively seeking to implement an operational, legal and political framework to make our democratic systems more resilient.

I would like to focus on two areas of work: first, the financing of political parties, and secondly, a coordinated response to hybrid campaigns.

The proposal for a recast of the Regulation on the statute and the funding of the European political parties and European political foundations remains one of the priorities of the Czech Presidency. The Regulation intends to increase the transparency of the main financial flows. Citizens are entitled to know where financing received by the parties, who are supposed to represent them, comes from.

The proposal also states that participation in the governance and financing of European political parties should be limited to members from European Union countries in order to minimise the risk of foreign interference. The current context justifies such precautions. Of course, this does not prevent the European political parties from continuing to cooperate with their political partners beyond EU borders.

The Council is ready to start negotiations with Parliament on the basis of the partial general approach we adopted in March. I am sure we will find common ground so that the new legislation can enter into force in time for the next European Parliament elections.

As regards hybrid threats, the Council has just approved conclusions which, from June onwards, establish a policy framework for a coordinated EU response. It is a significant achievement that shows that we are well aware of the significance of the challenges in front of us.

The Council also started to work on conclusions on foreign information, manipulation and interference which, when approved, will clearly signal our will to cooperate with our partners both in our neighbourhood and beyond to counter this threat.

As a next step, the Council will develop the EU hybrid toolbox to maximise the tools already available at European level, and also to open the door to tools that could make us stronger, safer and better prepared. Possible restrictive measures are not excluded here. The toolbox will also allow us to systematically work on enhancing resilience of the EU and our partners.

The Czech Presidency will work very intensively on this toolbox from the very beginning. It is an important step that will enable the EU to tackle the issue of foreign interference more broadly and with a level of ambition that matches the challenge.

  Věra Jourová, Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, Minister Bek, honourable Members, thank you very much for organising this debate.

Democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights are the foundations on which the European Union is built. Democracy is a core European value which needs to be nurtured and protected.

The Russian unjustified invasion of Ukraine is a war against democracy. Russia has tried for years to destabilise Ukraine and take away from its people the aspiration for democracy. They failed and have now moved to the next stage with such brutal invasion.

This highlights once more the need for prompt actions to strengthen the resilience of our democracies and address vulnerabilities. Russian right—wing extremist groups have been known to have links to European groups, and there have been reports of Russia funding and training right—wing extremists, individuals and groups in EU Member States.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine offered violent right—wing extremist movements an opportunity to create new rhetorical connections with pre—existing divisive narratives and to exploit them with the aim of boosting anti—European sentiments.

The war has also had an impact on the extreme left and anarchist—wing infosphere. Its narratives attract the attention of militants and focus on crucial issues related to the nature and logic of the war.

The Commission is working with the Member States who have the key competences in these measures, to tackle the threat of violent extremism in the EU. We are doing this, for instance, via Europol, which is in close contact with authorities and partner agencies in the Member States, to continuously exchange information and gather intelligence to assess terrorist and right—wing extremist threats.

While the funding and governance of the national parties remains a competence of the EU Member States, the EU has the competence to regulate European political parties. One way of exercising influence on the European parties is via funding. As you recall, the Commission has recently put forward a recast proposal of the Regulation on European political parties and foundations. Our proposal contains strong safeguards against foreign interference – for example, very strict rules on donations, which would be totally forbidden if coming from outside the EU.

This being said, in the current political context, the Commission considers that it is important to send a strong political message of support and encouragement to those political parties outside the EU, which are often in the opposition to tough regimes and fight for democracy and human rights under very difficult circumstances. For them, belonging to a European political party and receiving its support internationally is important.

Finally, defending our democracies includes defending the foundations on which it stands, such as media freedom, open discourse and informed decisions by voters. And we are acting on all fronts.

Foreign information, manipulation and interference, including disinformation, takes many shapes, shades and dimensions. It is much more than the battle of narratives. As we speak, Russia is engaged in systematic and coordinated global information, manipulation and disinformation campaigns that, for example, blame the Western sanctions for the worsening global food security situation.

We cannot stand still on this. We need to continue our strong cooperation with all our multilateral and bilateral partners to ensure that the following message reaches global audiences: the sole responsibility lies with Putin’s regime.

The High Representative with his service, the European External Action Service, in close cooperation with the Commission and the Member States, is also developing the EU’s toolbox to tackle foreign information, manipulation and interference, including to impose costs on the perpetrators. This covers the entire spectrum, from situational awareness to resilience—building, regulation and diplomatic responses, as well as responses from the Common Foreign and Security Policy.

In addition, as part of the latest EU sanctions package, we are suspending the broadcasting activities in the EU of additional three Russian state—owned outlets. The Russian Government continues to use such outlets to manipulate information and promote disinformation about the invasion of Ukraine with the aim of destabilising Russia’s neighbouring countries, the EU and its Member States.

Let me make a point here. Russia does not pick one or another side of the opinion spectrum to support; it stands on both sides, as it is division, and chaos and instability it seeks to nurture in our societies and in the world. We shouldn’t allow ourselves to agree to that aim and actively seek a civilised dialogue without giving into extremist rhetoric and tactics.

Thank you for your attention, and I look forward to the debate.

  Frances Fitzgerald, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, across the world, democratic values are being challenged by authoritarianism. Often it takes place under the radar, through online and cyber activity, with spyware, propaganda, interference in elections, elite capture and the funding of political parties.

As politicians, the only people we should be answerable to is the voters and not regimes that seek to undermine our European values. We have seen high profile European politicians funded by loans from banks with close links to Putin’s regime. We have heard accusations of Pegasus spyware improperly used on public figures. We’ve also read about Members in this Parliament whose international footprints extend across some of the least democratic areas in the world. Their speeches are used as anti-Western propaganda in places like China, Syria, Iran and Russia. They praise Iranian State militias as freedom fighters or fraternise with convicted Russian spies.

This is shameful, I believe, to see Members supporting regimes that are capable of launching a missile at a shopping centre and whose troops rob from the homes of innocent civilians. I think this is a betrayal of human rights, values and self-determination, which we in this Parliament always want to uphold.

We need to protect our democracies. There is so much to do in all our countries. We have unfinished democracies everywhere. Last March, for example, the Parliament’s Special Committee on Foreign Interference in all Democratic Processes in the European Union, including Disinformation produced its wide-ranging report. It is time to put these recommendations into action.

  Pierfrancesco Majorino, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, erano trascorsi solo cinque giorni dall'invasione dell'Ucraina da parte di Vladimir Putin, cinque giorni, e Matteo Salvini era già all'ambasciata russa di Roma a discutere con l'ambasciatore Sergey Razov di un suo possibile viaggio a Mosca. Viaggio, peraltro, come dichiarato dalla stessa ambasciata, pagato dai russi per consentire di aggirare le sanzioni. Matteo Salvini ha quindi cercato di costruire un canale di dialogo con il regime di Vladimir Putin, all'oscuro del governo italiano guidato da Mario Draghi.

Questo è quanto è emerso alcune settimane fa e fa seguito alle vicende ancora tutte da chiarire, perfino in sede giudiziaria, che hanno visto, pochissimi anni fa, la Lega e altri partiti politici, nel caso della Lega attraverso il signor Savoini, intrattenere a più riprese rapporti con l'entourage di Vladimir Putin.

Parlarne qui e denunciare la gravità di tutto ciò è importante perché si tratta di chiarissimi episodi di interferenza, ingerenza nelle nostre democrazie. La Russia costruisce infatti, proprio nelle settimane dell'aggressione all'Ucraina, un canale di comunicazione, una diplomazia parallela, che infiltra le nostre istituzioni attraverso la stupida e grave complicità di settori della destra. Un'opera di infiltrazione che, chiariamolo, non serve minimamente a costruire la pace che in tanti desideriamo e invochiamo, e che invece consolida una relazione torbida tra alcuni settori della nostra politica e i regimi autoritari.

L'Unione europea deve condannare tutto ciò e deve farlo il Parlamento, perché interferenze, ingerenza e disinformazione sono nemiche della democrazia e su questi terreni nessuno può permettersi ambiguità.

Servono interventi chiari, ad esempio sui flussi di denaro verso la politica, come ripetiamo dalla commissione speciale sulle ingerenze straniere. Serve molta attenzione a snidare quelli tra noi che, attraverso operazioni lobbistiche, coltivano interessi opachi, interessi che non hanno nulla a che fare con il valore irrinunciabile del dialogo tra i popoli, ma che invece aiutano i dittatori.

  Nathalie Loiseau, au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, on peine à le croire, et c’est douloureux de le dire, mais il y a dans notre Union et dans notre Parlement des partis qui se déshonorent et qui déshonorent l’Europe.

On peine à le croire, mais il y a ici des députés qui n’ont pas voulu condamner les atrocités commises par le groupe Wagner, qui n’ont pas voulu sanctionner la Russie, qui n’ont pas voulu aider l’Ukraine ou lui donner le statut de candidat à l’Union européenne et qui n’ont voulu dénoncer ni l’empoisonnement d’Alexeï Navalny, ni la fermeture de Memorial. Certains de ces élus sont aujourd’hui députés à l’Assemblée nationale en France, d’autres siègent toujours sur nos bancs.

On aimerait que Jean-Luc Mélenchon n’ait jamais dit que Vladimir Poutine allait régler le problème en Syrie, qu’il n’ait jamais parlé – je cite – du «gouvernement néo-nazi de Kiev», qu’il n’ait jamais appelé – je cite – à «la patience, l’écroulement de l’économie ukrainienne, la désagrégation de ce pays qui a tant de mal à en être un: tout vient à point à qui sait attendre», comme il l’écrivait alors qu’il était député européen en 2015. On voudrait que Thierry Mariani n’ait jamais mis en doute les crimes de l’armée russe à Marioupol ou à Boutcha. On voudrait qu’aucun député n’ait voyagé en Crimée aux frais de l’État russe pour des opérations d’observation électorale bidon. On souhaiterait que le Rassemblement national ne soit pas débiteur d’une entreprise russe du secteur de l’armement qui commerce avec Bachar el-Assad.

On peine à croire que tout cela soit possible. Et pourtant, ce sont des faits et c’est une honte.

  Sergey Lagodinsky, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, here is the latest war news: in the middle of aggression and genocide, a leader of the extreme right in Italy has been meeting with the Russian ambassador four or five times in recent times. What for? To discuss what?

This is not the first time that the extreme right is cooperating and doing business with Russia. The name is Konstantin Malofeev. He is a Russian billionaire who has been investing in both the criminals of Donbas, but also in consolidating right—wing networks in the European Union.

But to be fair, this is not just a right—wing problem. We have left—wing politicians who have been apologising about Putin’s behaviour, and it doesn’t bring much to forbid foreign influence and foreign financing if Hungarian banks are now financing the right wing in France. How are we going to deal with that?

So we have to start de—Putinising ourselves and our parties and it should be an aim and a task for the extreme parties just as much as for the mainstream. Let’s question ourselves. Let’s do it better.

  Marco Dreosto, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, non vorrei che questo dibattito nasca dall'ossessione che alcuni esponenti del Partito Democratico italiano hanno per il mio partito, la Lega, e il suo leader Matteo Salvini.

Ecco allora non parole, ma dati inconfutabili. Secondo VoteWatch, in un'analisi sui voti al Parlamento europeo, risulta che siano stati proprio il Partito Democratico e il Movimento 5 Stelle ad avere tra gli italiani le posizioni più filorusse. Mentre, sempre secondo questa ricerca, come delegazione Lega abbiamo votato nell'83 per cento dei casi per posizioni di condanna nei confronti della Russia. Fatti, questi sono fatti e non parole.

Poi, vorrei sommessamente ricordare a quest'Aula come sia stato proprio l'attuale segretario del Partito Democratico, Enrico Letta, allora Presidente del Consiglio, a siglare tutti gli accordi energetici più importanti tra l'Italia e la Russia, legando di fatto il nostro paese a Mosca per la fornitura del gas.

Personalmente, proprio con una delegazione di quest'Aula mi trovavo a Washington, alla Casa Bianca, quel 24 febbraio, quando le truppe russe aggredirono l'Ucraina. Il mondo cambiò da quel giorno maledetto e sia in Italia che in Europa la Lega ha votato tutti, dico tutti i provvedimenti e supportato il popolo ucraino in favore dell'unità anche dell'Occidente.

Volete accusarci di qualcosa? Mi sa tanto che le vostre accuse servono a voler dimenticare, a dimenticare che voi siete gli eredi di quel Partito Comunista Italiano che esaltava il Cremlino, e quando al Cremlino c'era Stalin. E ancora oggi qualcuno di voi si presenta nelle piazze con la stella rossa sovietica. Perché voi non volete parlarci invece dei veri problemi che ci sono oggi, delle bollette, dell'inflazione e del caro benzina, di come abbassare le tasse.

Ecco, cari colleghi, cari amici del PD, levatevi dalla testa questa vostra ossessione per Salvini e per la Lega e dite qualcosa di sinistra, finalmente, i vostri elettori ve ne saranno grati.

  Charlie Weimers, för ECR-gruppen. – Fru talman! Låt mig berätta om det svenska Centerpartiet. Detta parti har länge förgiftat debatten hemma i Sverige med anklagelser om Putinvänlighet. För en månad sedan ifrågasatte deras ledare, Annie Lööf, det blågula konservativa blockets säkerhetspolitiska trovärdighet och krävde garantier för att det inte ska sitta på Putinister på höga regeringspositioner.

Sedan släppte VoteWatch sin granskning av Rysslandsvoteringar här i Europaparlamentet, som bland annat visar att Sverigedemokraternas partigrupp ECR konsekvent har varit mest Putinkritisk. VoteWatch visar också att Sverigedemokraterna är ett av de mest Putinkritiska partierna i hela Europa och det mest kritiska av alla svenska partier, följt av Kristdemokraterna och Moderaterna. Vänsterpartiet sticker ut som ett av de minst Rysslandskritiska i hela Europa, tätt följt av Socialdemokraterna. Centern har inte heller något att yvas över. Så tokigt det kan bli när påhittade narrativ möter verkligheten.

Det finns tyvärr partier både till höger och till vänster som inte vill kritisera Ryssland. De förtjänar kritik. Men att felaktigt måla ut politiska motståndare som Putinister, sprida desinformation samtidigt som man kan komma att bana väg för en regering innehållande landets minst Rysslandskritiska parti, Vänsterpartiet – det gör det svenska Centerpartiets ledare Annie Lööf. Gör inte som Annie.

  Manon Aubry, au nom du groupe The Left. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, dénoncer l’ingérence de Poutine est un combat nécessaire, qui mérite d’être mené avec autant de rigueur que de fermeté, notamment dans le contexte de la guerre en Ukraine. Depuis un mois, les libéraux et la droite – comme vient de le faire à l’instant Mme Loiseau, qui a manifestement quitté l’hémicycle – renvoient dos à dos la gauche et l’extrême droite en instrumentalisant ce sujet, la gauche et l’extrême droite que pourtant tout oppose; car ce sont bien les fascisants du FPÖ autrichien et de la Ligue du Nord qui signent des accords avec le parti de Poutine. C’est bien l’AfD allemand, le Fidesz d’Orbán, le Rassemblement national français qui partagent son idéologie nationaliste, raciste et réactionnaire. C’est bien Le Pen qui se finance auprès de banques russes et imprime des tracts l’affichant bras dessus, bras dessous avec Vladimir Poutine.

Alors comment osez-vous associer de près ou de loin notre groupe de la gauche, rempart historique face au fascisme, à ces idées nauséabondes? Ce petit jeu est extrêmement dangereux, alors que l’extrême droite menace nos démocraties partout en Europe. L’exemple de la France est frappant à ce titre. En jouant à ce jeu et en désignant la gauche comme l’ennemi public numéro un, il a permis l’élection de 89 députés d’extrême droite. Depuis, toutes les barrières tombent avec son gouvernement qui tend la main au Rassemblement national.

Jamais nous n’aurions imaginé soutenir, ici au Parlement européen, des vice-présidents d’extrême droite. C’est pourtant ce qu’a fait le camp d’Emmanuel Macron en France. Voilà pourquoi ce débat ne doit souffrir d’aucune confusion, car c’est de cela que l’extrême droite se nourrit. Et n’oubliez pas cette leçon de l’histoire: quand l’extrême droite prend le pouvoir, elle ne le rend que très rarement. À bon entendeur, salut.

  Milan Uhrík (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, kolegovia, diskusia o tom ako Ruská vláda vraj podporuje extrémistov v Európe mi príde trošku cynická.

Po prvé, pre Vás extrémistom je pomaly každý, kto má vlastný názor, ak to nesúhlasí s tým predpísaným názorom. Stačí, že človek povie, že si neželá tretiu svetovú vojnu s Ruskou federáciou alebo si neželá energetický kolaps Európy, automaticky je onálepkovaný ako extrémista, ktorého treba nejakým spôsobom zaškatulkovať.

Po druhé, vravíte tu o extrémistoch v Európe. A ja sa pýtam, kto sú tí na Ukrajine? Teraz nehovorím o bežných Ukrajincoch chrániacich svoju krajinu. Hovorím o milíciách ako Kraken, Freikorps alebo o batalióne Azov, ktorý má priamo v symbole logo nacistického, nacistickej divízie SS. A to zrazu nikomu nevadí. Im Západ, im Západ dodáva zbrane a peniaze.

Ak chceme byť féroví, tak odsúďme aj tento extrémizmus, pretože to je rovnako zlé ako všetok ten extrémizmus, ktorý tu spomínate. V opačnom prípade ide o obyčajné pokrytectvo.

  Javier Zarzalejos (PPE). – Señora presidenta, sería muy interesante saber cuántos miles de tuits, de fotos y de vídeos fueron borrados precipitadamente después de que Rusia iniciara su agresión contra Ucrania. Las redes sociales dejan constancia de que la influencia de Rusia y de Putin ha ido más allá de la captura de élites, de la financiación de fundaciones o de partidos, o de la penetración en medios y universidades.

Tenemos que hacer frente a la agresión rusa contra Ucrania y tenemos que hacer frente también, en la Europa democrática, a los proxies ideológicos de Putin. Unos ven en Putin el hombre de hierro, el patriota, el heraldo de valores, el representante de la virilidad y la esperanza de que sobreviva todo aquello que consideran condenado por la decadencia de Occidente. Otros, nostálgicos del comunismo, identifican a Putin con la supervivencia de ese viejo comunismo que, después de su derrota, se ha transformado en nacionalismo agresivo. Pues bien, frente a unos y frente a otros, sigamos investigando, sigamos dibujando el mapa de la interferencia rusa. Pero lancemos también una advertencia a los que quieran actuar como quinta columna de Putin, una advertencia a sus proxies ideológicos: sepamos quiénes son y confrontémonos con ellos para preservar la libertad y la democracia.

  Raphaël Glucksmann (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Vice-présidente, chers collègues, au sein de la commission spéciale sur les ingérences que j’ai l’honneur de présider, nous avons travaillé depuis deux ans sur le «comment». Il est temps aujourd’hui de se poser la question du «pourquoi».

Pourquoi Vladimir Poutine parraine-t-il des mouvements d’extrême droite partout en Europe? Pourquoi ses réseaux soutiennent-ils à la fois des panafricanistes anti-occidentaux et des suprémacistes blancs occidentaux, les indépendantistes catalans les plus radicaux et les nationalistes espagnols les plus virulents? Pourquoi les milices de Kadyrov, qui exaltent le djihad contre l’Europe, sont-elles soutenues de la même manière que les mouvements les plus antimusulmans au cœur même de nos cités? Pourquoi ces contradictions apparentes? Pourquoi les chaînes de propagande russes filment-elles le moindre incident dans nos pays comme s’il s’agissait du début d’une guerre civile? Pourquoi le Kremlin utilise-t-il l’arme du blé pour faire planer le spectre de la famine en Afrique? Pourquoi les hackers russes attaquent-ils nos hôpitaux en pleine pandémie? Il est vital de répondre à ces questions.

Nous sommes engagés malgré nous dans une confrontation qui sera longue et brutale. Et pour comprendre l’ambition et la stratégie de l’adversaire, nous devons sortir de nous-mêmes, abandonner les clichés sur le joueur d’échecs et cesser de croire que nos ennemis raisonnent de la même manière que nous. Nous aurions été moins surpris par le retour de la guerre sur le sol européen si nous avions lu, écouté, analysé les textes et les discours des dirigeants russes depuis 20 ans. Nous aurions compris alors qu’ils se sentent, eux, engagés dans une lutte à mort contre nos démocraties. Nous aurions été moins surpris si nous avions lu attentivement les récits de M. Sourkov par exemple, le polytechnologiste de Poutine, longtemps en charge de sa politique ukrainienne, et en particulier sa nouvelle «Sans ciel»: c’est l’histoire d’un peuple dont le ciel est littéralement tombé, qui vit dans la forêt et qui rêve de prendre sa revanche sur les habitants de la ville voisine – métaphore limpide de l’Union européenne –, non pour jouir de ses richesses, mais pour la plonger dans le chaos. Oui, la stratégie mise en place par Poutine, Sourkov et les dirigeants russes a un nom: c’est la stratégie du chaos. Peu importent les pertes et les contradictions, ce qui compte, c’est de propager le trouble. Le pari de Poutine est simple: nous ne saurons pas vivre dans le chaos et nous céderons.

Alors, arrêtons de rêver à un retour à la raison et préparons-nous à l’hiver qui arrive. Il n’y aura pas de paix, chers collègues, tant que les ingénieurs du chaos ne seront pas défaits.

  Nicola Danti (Renew). – Signora Presidente, signora Vicepresidente, onorevoli colleghi, la disinformazione in questi anni ha fortemente inciso sulle scelte politiche dei singoli Stati europei. Sono ormai acclarate le interferenze russe sul referendum sulla Brexit, così come sono fatti storici incontrovertibili quelli sull'esito del referendum costituzionale italiano nel 2016.

Questo purtroppo è stato possibile perché tanti, troppi partiti politici, mass media e mezzi di comunicazione si sono resi complici. In Italia le relazioni tra il Movimento 5 Stelle e la Lega con il partito di Putin, Russia Unita, sono emerse chiaramente nel tempo. E non è un caso che oggi tra le file di questi partiti assistiamo a pentimenti utili ma tardivi.

Prendere consapevolezza di questo problema con i fatti ha permesso all'Europa di adottare norme più adeguate e stringenti in molti campi, a partire dal digitale e in particolare dalle piattaforme e dal loro utilizzo; il DSA e il codice contro la disinformazione ne sono esempi concreti.

Presidente, l'interferenza russa ha avuto un grande e unico obiettivo in questi anni: indebolire il progetto europeo. Allora sta a noi tenere alta la guardia per preservare la nostra democrazia.

  Markéta Gregorová (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, Commissioner, Minister, Russian tactics to get into European democratic institutions are not very secret, nor are they very elaborate, if we look at the evidence we already have.

Last Monday, Ms Le Pen and Mr Salvini, together with other lesser-known Russian finest members, were roaming this House and advocating for Russia’s interests. Of course, this practice is ongoing, even after Russia started the war in Ukraine.

In our Special Committee on Foreign Interference, we outlined what should be done: Follow the money, overhaul Member States’ election finance laws, expose and deport known Russian agents.

Our reporters, investigative journalists, off-scene specialists and our police and intelligence services must also get all necessary means and support to continue to find and expose Russia’s attempts to poison our democratic systems.

The best defence against Russia’s tactics is transparency and the efforts of our collective European civil society.

A také v češtině, protože nevím, zda umí anglicky, si dovolím se obrátit na přítomného slovenského poslance. Spousta zemí má extremisty, zjevně spousta zemí má i hlupáky. Jenom jedna ale proti Evropě vede válku. A Ukrajina to opravdu není.

  Peter Kofod (ID). – Fru formand! Lad mig lige starte med at slå et par ting fuldstændig fast: Putins krig i Ukraine er usmagelig og total uacceptabel, og det skal have meget, meget hårde konsekvenser for Rusland at angribe et naboland! Men Putin har jo også vist sit sande ansigt som den krigsforbryder, han er, og jeg håber, at han og andre ansvarlige en dag må blive stillet til ansvar.

Ruslands krig i Ukraine har grundlæggende forandret Europa. Den debat, vi har i dag, afspejler desværre ikke alvoren tilstrækkeligt. Debatten i dag søger på en eller anden måde at kaste mistanke på nogle, pege fingre af andre, men hvis vi skal reflektere over krigen og over, hvordan vi håndterer den nye virkelighed bedst, så skal alle relationer til Rusland underkastes debat.

Problemet er jo langt bredere, end titlen på debatten tilsiger. For det var ikke de politiske yderfløje i Tyskland, der gjorde Europa afhængig af Putins gas. Det var ikke en kansler fra et ydrefløjsparti, der nærmest gik direkte fra kanslerboligen til direktionsgangen hos Gasprom. Og hvilken fransk regering var det egentlig, der for få år siden var meget tæt på at ville sælge krigsskibe - altså militært isenkram - til den samme Putin, som nu har angrebet Ukraine? Og sådan kunne jeg blive ved. Yderfløjene kan selvfølgelig ikke holdes til ansvar for alle disse ting. Når dette vigtige emne diskuteres, så vil jeg bare appellere til, at vi er blinde over for partifarve og vågne over for reelle handlinger og relationer, der kan skade vores lande og vores kontinent.

  Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! Rosyjska polityka zagraniczna staje się coraz bardziej asertywna w regionach, które Kreml w dużej mierze zaniedbywał w latach po zimnej wojnie. Mam na myśli tutaj przede wszystkim Bliski Wschód, Afrykę, Azję Północno-Wschodnią czy Amerykę Łacińską. Ale Europa to już zupełnie inna historia. Zawsze była zbyt ważna dla Kremla, by ją ignorować. Jest historycznym punktem odniesienia dla wielkomocarstwowych ambicji Moskwy, ważnym rynkiem zbytu dla rosyjskich węglowodorów oraz miejscem, w którym rosyjskie elity mogą lokować swoje rodziny i swoje bogactwa. Ale Europa jest również trwałym i rosnącym źródłem rosyjskiego braku poczucia bezpieczeństwa. Ryzyko, że Organizacja Traktatu Północnoatlantyckiego i Unia Europejska przesuną się w głąb przestrzeni postsowieckiej, od dawna jest w poczuciu elit moskiewskich rosnącym zagrożeniem właśnie tego poczucia bezpieczeństwa. To jest swoistego rodzaju geopolityczna wręcz obsesja Kremla. I wywołało to takie działania, których owocem jest dzisiaj to barbarzyństwo putinowskich siepaczy na Ukrainie.

I tutaj głos pod adresem jednego z moich przedmówców. Niech pan nie szuka nazistów po stronie ukraińskiej, bo to jest właśnie dezinformacja putinowska, ale pożytecznych idiotów – to powiedzenie ukuł Lenin: полезный идиот, useful idiot – nigdy w Europie nie brakowało. I próbuje się tutaj robić taką wyliczankę: skrajna prawica, skrajna lewica. Tych pożytecznych idiotów również dzisiaj niestety w tym miejscu nie brakuje, czego najlepszym przykładem dezinformacja chociażby wymierzona w mój kraj. Kwestia wojny hybrydowej na granicy polsko-białoruskiej. Ileż tutaj absurdów usłyszeliśmy pod adresem rządu polskiego. Pożytecznych idiotów również dzisiaj Putinowi w tym miejscu nie brakuje.

  Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, we’ve had loads of resolutions in here condemning Russia for repressing civil society and opposition figures for alleged connections with the West and now we’re doing exactly the same thing.

We’ve already heard people here – to score cheap political points in their own Member States – condemn as Putin’s puppets those who have never supported Putin or any authoritarian regime. It’s absolutely pathetic. We see increased trade union activity across Europe accused of helping Russia. People who oppose NATO are accused of disloyalty.

We talk about democracy, but where is this going to end up? Those who brand us populist and anti-European have a democratic right to disagree with you on the course that Europe is taking. What is being stoked up here is a scare. And just like the Red Scare, it’s being used to justify over-reach and repression, to undermine human rights, and to silence and harass radical voices. It’s intolerant, anti-democratic and authoritarian. You’d want to start asking yourselves what kind of Europe lies at the end of this road?

  Francesca Donato (NI). – Madam President, I am literally shocked by what I’ve heard here today. Are you really proposing to restrict the political activity of parties which democratically represent European citizens in their national dimension? Since when has the EU taken over, by totalitarian control, the political line of Member States’ national parties?

What we are discussing today is a dangerous and disturbing drift towards a deeply antidemocratic scenario with the false claim of protecting democracy. But doing this, we not only repress freedom of expression and freedom of opinion, but we deny the fundamental principle of democratic representation. If national governments don’t formally declare a state of war with Russia, there is no reason and no legal basis to forbid or restrict any political diplomatic relationship at the national level with Russian interlocutors.

The majority of Italian people do not support the ban to commercial, energetic and political relationship with Russia, and they definitely have the right to be represented in any field of political action. That’s it.

  Geoffroy Didier (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, à la violation intolérable des frontières d’un pays souverain, le gouvernement de Vladimir Poutine ajoute depuis quelques années un autre déshonneur: la désinformation chronique, qui vise à déstabiliser les démocraties occidentales.

Cette désinformation est savamment relayée par des partis politiques européens d’extrême droite. Les fausses rumeurs et deep fake ont naturellement toujours plus d’audience que les exactitudes et les analyses objectives. Fort heureusement, l’Union européenne a su réagir et a tenté de mettre un terme à ce Far West sur internet grâce à la législation sur les services numériques.

Présent en Ukraine ces derniers jours, j’ai pu voir à quel point la politique de Vladimir Poutine était devenue mortifère. Mais au-delà des morts et au-delà des vains mots pour leur rendre hommage, ce sont toutes nos valeurs qui sont battues en brèche. Il est urgent que l’Union européenne prenne les armes numériques pour défendre les valeurs les plus fondamentales dans les médias et sur les réseaux sociaux.

  Evin Incir (S&D). – Madam President, colleagues, that the populist movements in the EU are puppets of Putin is unfortunately nothing surprising, but it is horrific. Russia has long been a cash machine for the far—right political forces in our Union – even for the Sweden Democrats who were here just a couple of minutes ago in claiming that they were voting in a certain way, but at the same time they were revealed to have direct connections to the Kremlin! It is not enough to say that you are voting in a certain way. You also need to cut the umbilical cord to the Kremlin.

Russia and the anti-democratic movements in the EU and beyond meet in their mission of hate towards everything that we democratic forces believe in: women’s rights; LGBTI rights; migrants’ rights. These are basically democratic rights and the same rights that are a central part of the multilateral system we put in place after the Second World War, which Putin now wants to shatter. We promised ourselves that the horrific history of Europe would not repeat itself, but yet it has and it is.

We need a truth commission that reveals the connections between the Kremlin and the populists, extremists and undemocratic EU forces in this Parliament and the whole EU. Thriving on war crimes must at no time or at any place be accepted.

(The speaker declined to respond to a blue-card speech by Charlie Weimers)

  Jordi Cañas (Renew). – Señora presidenta, imaginen que el Gobierno de una región de la Unión Europea mantuviera contactos con la Rusia de Putin para ayudar a derogar el orden constitucional en ese territorio. Imaginen que en esa región la maquinaria de injerencia rusa trabajase desde 2017, agravando una crisis política con el objetivo de desestabilizar a la Unión. Imaginen que el presidente de esa reunión... Perdone, señora presidenta. Le agradecería que no gritase en medio de una intervención.

– Please, I think it’s better not to cry out when a colleague has to ... no?

En fin. Empezamos. Imaginen que el Gobierno de una región de la Unión Europea mantuviera contactos con la Rusia de Putin para ayudar a derogar el orden constitucional en este territorio. Imaginen que en esa región la maquinaria de injerencia rusa trabajase desde 2017, agravando una crisis política con el objetivo de desestabilizar a la Unión Europea. Imaginen que el presidente de esa región se reuniera con emisarios rusos días antes de declarar ilegalmente la independencia el 27 de octubre de 2017. Imaginen que esos emisarios presuntamente propusiesen el envío de 10 000 soldados y ayuda financiera para la independencia. Imaginen que ese presidente se hubiera fugado en el maletero de un coche para escapar de la justicia días después. Imaginen que, en 2017, el responsable de la oficina de ese expresidente y actual diputado del Parlamento Europeo viajara a Moscú para reunirse con miembros del entorno personal de Putin para, según sus propias palabras, no hablar ni de caviar ni de vodka, sino de asuntos que interesan en la creación de un Estado independiente en el futuro.

Bueno, pues no imaginen: la región es Cataluña, el presidente, expresidente y actual diputado de este Parlamento es Carles Puigdemont y los partidos son los partidos separatistas que se aliaron con la Rusia de Putin para intentar derogar el Estado de Derecho en un país europeo que se llama España.

  Heidi Hautala (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, Russia has used its actors within the EU institutions to try to legitimise its positions, to undermine sanctions policy and prevent international isolation.

Now one way of Russian influence over the past years is through propagating the so—called ‘traditional values’. And ‘traditional values’ mean that women’s emancipation is wrong, and rights of sexual minorities should not be realised.

But these restrictive and reactionary values that Russia tried so hard to push have been rejected time and again, also by our Eastern Partner countries, not least by Ukraine, that just recently ratified the Istanbul Convention on gender—based violence.

Russia has, of course, labelled this as ‘anti—family’, claiming Europe and the West are degenerated regions, whereas Russia is the cradle of civilisation with a great future.

We, of course, have these currents represented in the EU as well in the form of Orbán’s Hungary and others. We need to be quite strict on transparency and tighter rules on political funding, the funding of European political parties, because they are a challenge to these influences.

  Gilles Lebreton (ID). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, ce débat sur les prétendues relations du gouvernement russe avec les partis populistes de l’Union européenne n’est qu’un tissu de diffamations destiné à tromper l’opinion publique. Ce procédé de basse politique est voué à l’échec. On l’a vu en France: son utilisation par le président Macron n’a pas empêché le Rassemblement national d’obtenir un résultat historique aux élections législatives.

L’objectif plus profond de ce débat est de faire diversion pour tenter de dissimuler le rapport spécial présenté le 30 juin par la Cour des comptes européenne. Ce rapport dénonce le recours systématique par la Commission à des cabinets de conseil pour des sommes qui donnent le vertige: 1 milliard d’euros par an. La Cour y dénonce clairement le manque de transparence de ce procédé et le risque de conflit d’intérêts qui en découle.

Le Parlement européen devrait s’emparer de ce sujet, qui pose le problème de la bonne utilisation des deniers publics et de l’ingérence d’intérêts privés et souvent non européens dans la confection des lois européennes. Je constate, hélas qu’il préfère dissimuler ce scandale.

  Elżbieta Kruk (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Zapis tytułu debaty „Związki między Rosją a europejskimi partiami ekstremistycznymi, populistycznymi, antyeuropejskimi” to celowa manipulacja. Po pierwsze, Unia Europejska i Europa to nie to samo, a więc co to za partie antyeuropejskie? Chyba nie chodzi o partie islamskie propagujące wartości i obyczaje stojące w opozycji do tradycyjnych wartości europejskich. A może?

Po drugie, ma powstać wrażenie, jakoby tylko partie prawicowe utrzymywały przyjazne stosunki z Rosją. A co z socjalliberalną i prounijną partią prezydenta Francji Manuela Macrona? A co z partią socjaldemokratyczną kanclerza Niemiec Olafa Schulza? Największymi przyjaciółmi Putina, którzy marzą o powrocie do interesów z Rosją? Realny problem w obliczu wojny to ciągłe telefony prezydenta Macrona do Moskwy i dwuznaczna postawa Niemiec wobec agresji Rosji na Ukrainę. Przekonuje to Putina, że może zakończyć wojnę na swoich warunkach.

Rządzący w Niemczech i Francji mogliby przyspieszyć zakończenie wojny, jednak wolą w interesie Rosji blokować dostawy ciężkiej broni dla Ukrainy. Tylko zdecydowane stanowisko USA i NATO daje Ukrainie nadzieję na zwycięstwo.

  Λευτέρης Νικολάου-Αλαβάνος (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, είναι προφανής η σκοπιμότητα της σημερινής συζήτησης. Όψιμα αναθεματίζετε τον Πούτιν, όμως το 1991 χειροκροτούσατε την κλίκα Γκορμπατσόφ-Γιέλτσιν-Πούτιν, όταν διέλυαν τη Σοβιετική Ένωση, το σοσιαλιστικό κράτος όπου για δεκαετίες οι λαοί έζησαν αδελφωμένοι. Μέχρι τον Ιανουάριο, εγκωμιάζατε την κυβέρνηση Πούτιν, την επέμβαση στο Καζακστάν ενάντια στις μεγάλες λαϊκές κινητοποιήσεις. Η ελληνική κυβέρνηση πέρσι τη βράβευσε. Μόνο το ΚΚΕ εναντιώθηκε.

Η σημερινή Ρωσία, παρά τα προσχήματα για μάχη μεταξύ δημοκρατίας και αυταρχισμού, είναι καπιταλιστικό κράτος, όπως κι εσείς. Ο Πούτιν είναι ένας από σας. Οι ευρωατλαντικοί και η Ρωσία είστε συνένοχοι για τα πολεμικά σφαγεία, τα αντιλαϊκά μέτρα. Πριμοδοτείτε τον αντικομμουνισμό που θρέφει την ακροδεξιά, θωρακίζοντας το εκμεταλλευτικό σύστημα που υπηρετείτε.

Η ιμπεριαλιστική σύγκρουση στην Ουκρανία είναι ανάμεσα σε δύο στρατόπεδα ληστών: ΗΠΑ-ΝΑΤΟ-ΕΕ-αστική τάξη Ουκρανίας ενάντια στην καπιταλιστική Ρωσία για τον έλεγχο αγωγών και αγορών από τα μονοπώλια σε βάρος των λαών. Εμείς είμαστε με τους λαούς και την αυτοτελή τους πάλη ενάντια στα μονοπώλια, ενάντια στις συμμαχίες τους, για απεμπλοκή από το πολεμικό μακελειό τώρα.

  Radosław Sikorski (PPE). – Madam President, I am shocked that after the war crimes in Bucha, after the bombing of the trading centre in Kremenchuk, after the mining of Ukrainian ports, which makes it impossible to export the grain, there are still some pro—Putin sentiments in this House.

Colleagues from the left say that’s a false accusation. I hope you remember how the Russian judge justified the launch of this invasion – that the people of Donbas need to be ‘protected from gay parades’. I hope colleagues from the right now see what kind of defender of traditional sovereignty Vladimir Putin is – he has invaded another sovereign country – and what kind of a defender of tradition he is as a former colonel in the KGB!

It is not okay to appear on Russian propaganda outlets. It is not okay to mouth Russian propaganda. It is not okay to accept donations from Russian outlets. Now that Vladimir Putin has declared war on Western civilisation, it is treason. It is treason to the people of Ukraine, it is treason to Europe and it’s a treason to this House. I hope the people who engage in it will be defeated, will be punished for it by the electors.

(The speaker agreed to respond to a blue—card speech)

  Clare Daly (The Left), blue-card speech. – I made a very specific point. I think it’s interesting that a lot of the contributions here are from Member States’ deputies criticising their others in cheap political point scoring.

When I referred to that situation in my own country, I was talking about me. I’ve been accused of being an apologist for Putin. I have never once! I would like to ask you to pinpoint any scenario, any action, any word, any deed that I did to support Putin, who – as the former speaker said – is a right—wing capitalist, nationalist who would have nothing to do with anybody who is a socialist.

So my points were quite specific in that regard. I would like to put to you to produce any evidence that I or my colleague have supported Putin in any way.

  Radosław Sikorski (PPE), blue-card response. – I wasn’t referring to the honourable lady. I am prepared to accept that you regard Putin as a capitalist pig. But the real standard for me of your attitude is: do you or do you not support the right of the people of Ukraine to defend themselves and do you support giving them the means to defend themselves? That is the question.

  Brando Benifei (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, per accorgersi delle influenze russe nella nostra democrazia non serviva neanche sentire poco fa le parole in quest'Aula della collega Donato, basta guardare quello che accade nei nostri territori ogni giorno.

Faccio qualche esempio dall'Italia: l'allora assessore leghista Edoardo Rixi addirittura ha deciso di andare in missione ufficiale per la regione Liguria in Crimea subito dopo l'annessione illegale alla Russia, l'assessore di Fratelli d'Italia in Piemonte, Maurizio Marrone, per anni si è qualificato come rappresentante in Italia della Repubblica di Donetsk e tuttora non risponde quando interrogato su questo legame, e Salvini, oltre alle maglie con Putin, ha provato recentemente a organizzare un viaggio in Russia tramite l'ambasciatore russo in Italia all'insaputa del Presidente Draghi. Potrei andare avanti.

C'è una destra che, specie in alcuni paesi, non ha superato appieno le sue ambiguità nei rapporti con Putin e il suo entourage. Serve quindi continuare con indagini giornalistiche e giudiziarie e serve rafforzare gli strumenti di tutela della nostra democrazia, prima di tutto per farla funzionare e mostrare che, con la cultura dei diritti e della libertà, siamo più forti di ogni autoritarismo.

  Anna Júlia Donáth (Renew). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Ha ma Magyarországon valaki ránéz a Facebook-falára, vagy bekapcsolja a közmédiát, akkor nagy valószínűség szerint álhírekkel találkozik, olyan álhírekkel, amik a saját magát védő Oroszországról, ukrán agresszióról vagy náci ukránokról szólnak. Hogy lehetséges ez négy hónappal a háború kitörése után egy EU-s tagállamban? Úgy, hogy az eddigi uniós intézkedések nem bizonyultak elegendőnek. Vlagyimir Putyin ugyanis a vele közeli kapcsolatot ápoló szélsőjobboldali pártokon, illetve a közösségi médián keresztül továbbra is képes propagandájával gerjeszteni. Hiába tiltottunk ki több orosz médiumot is Ukrajnából, az Unióból, további lépésekre van szükség.

Először is, átláthatóvá kell tenni az európai pártok putyini kötődéseit. Másodszor is, ki kell tiltanunk az orosz propagandát a közösségi médiából. Harmadszor pedig, meg kell erősítenünk az uniós kibervédelmet. Ne hagyjuk, hogy Vlagyimir Putyin Ukrajna rombolása mellett megmérgezze az európai elméket is.

  Bernhard Zimniok (ID). – Frau Präsidentin! Bei diesem Thema geht es einigen Kollegen doch nur um eine faktenbefreite Diffamierung der Opposition. Es ist wenig verwunderlich, dass ausgerechnet wir rechten Parteien wieder einmal attackiert werden, weil wir die zahlreichen Verletzungen der Demokratie durch die anderen Parteien ans Licht der Öffentlichkeit zerren. Das sehen wir doch schon an den vielen erfolgreichen Klagen der AfD vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht gegen die Angriffe der Altparteien auf das Grundgesetz. Um uns zu verunglimpfen, wird jetzt die Phrase vom Putinversteher hervorgezogen.

Liebe Kollegen, in der internationalen Politik pflegt man üblicherweise Beziehungen zu allen Ländern, egal ob man mit deren System und Politik einverstanden ist oder nicht. Ein solcher Austausch ist in der internationalen Diplomatie üblich. Das macht einen noch lange nicht zu einem Versteher oder zu einem Freund.

Und im Gegensatz zu Ihnen spreche ich als ehemaliger Diplomat aus Erfahrung. Ich habe neun Jahre in Diktaturen gelebt, aber wenn man keine Ahnung von Diplomatie hat, lässt man sich eben von Emotionen leiten. Dann entscheidet man sich für Sanktionen, die jetzt den Bürgern auf die Füße fallen und die Wirtschaft langfristig ruinieren.

Wir hingegen haben das Wohl unserer Nation und das friedliche Zusammenleben mit anderen Ländern im Blick. Wenn man uns diesen Vorwurf macht, sagt das einiges über euch aus. Viele von euch haben sich jetzt schon weit von den Bürgern entfernt und huldigen der Hypermoral, statt die Interessen der Bevölkerung zu vertreten, von der Sie ja schließlich gewählt wurden. Denken Sie darüber mal nach.

  Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, domnule ministru, Rusia de astăzi nu este altceva decât o urmașă a Uniunii Sovietice, iar Stalin este mândru probabil de urmașul său, Putin, care vrea prin teroare, prin omor, prin agresiune nejustificată, să își lase urmele în istorie pătate de sânge.

Cred că nu este pentru nimeni un secret că Rusia subtilă nu mai este subtilă, ci acționează direct prin partide care luptă împotriva democrației, partide cărora le este străină libertatea de exprimare, partide care disprețuiesc Uniunea Europeană.

Pe ei trebuie să îi oprim, pentru că sunt un adevărat cancer al politicii europene. Acest populism trebuie eliminat și trebuie să luptăm, pentru că inclusiv în România, recent, președintele Zelenski s-a adresat Parlamentului. Cine credeți că a sabotat această activitate? Exact cei care gândesc ca Putin și luptă împotriva Europei.

  Maite Pagazaurtundúa (Renew). – Señora presidenta, ha quedado muy claro: hoy los proxies están callados, están mirando para otro lado, pero nada relacionado con la Rusia de Putin de los últimos años es ajeno a la invasión actual de Ucrania.

La gran mayoría de los que han jugado dentro de la estrategia de Putin para debilitar a Europa y para debilitar el Estado de Derecho liberal —ya sea a la izquierda, a la derecha o por secesionismo, como en el caso de Cataluña—, todos ellos antieuropeos, por ser antiliberales, se han puesto de perfil en esta Cámara desde la invasión de Ucrania el 24 de febrero.

Algunos se han quedado mudos, otros se han hecho pacifistas sin límites, para que, de esa manera, Ucrania diga: vale, pactamos; pactamos lo que quiera Rusia. No, tiene que defenderse, tiene que ganar el mundo libre.

Sabemos que Putin ha hecho captación de élites, que ha habido financiación en algunos partidos en Francia e Italia y que lo de Cataluña estuvo a punto de ser un caos para toda Europa, además de debilitar las instituciones con las mentiras, porque las víctimas pasaban por los malos y los delincuentes pasaban por las víctimas.

Las operaciones híbridas en nuestras democracias se larvan durante años. No somos ingenuos y entendemos el tablero. Vamos a defender el mundo libre y vamos a defendernos de cada mentira. Eso vamos a hacer: defendernos.

  Teuvo Hakkarainen (ID). – Arvoisa puhemies, ensiksi: Kuka määrittelee, mikä on ääripuolue? Äärioikeiston leiman saa helposti vastustamalla tuhoavaa maahanmuuttoa, vaikka sen vastustaminen on ainoa järkevä linja Euroopan pelastamiseksi. Nimenomaan tarkoitan näistä islamistisista maista, Lähi-idästä ja Afrikasta tulevia niin sanottuja pakolaisia.

En tunne Venäjän suhteita julkilausumissa mainittuihin puolueisiin. Todennäköisesti niitä on, mutta kunkin jäsenvaltion hallitus määrää diplomaattisuhteista. Onko yksikään maa vielä katkaissut diplomaattisuhteita Venäjään? Todennäköisesti ei. Ja onko jossakin maassa vallassa ääripuolue? Tietysti Venäjään täytyy kohdistaa kaikki mahdolliset keinot sen kuriin saamiseksi. Maa on todellinen uhka maailmanrauhalle.

  Dragoş Tudorache (Renew). – Madam President, dear Vice-President, dear Minister, dear colleagues, Russian diplomacy has been for long synonymous with propaganda. What is new now, and by far more effective, is its ability to manipulate our democracies, aided by the digitalisation of all social interaction. The thousands of emails we get every time we have an important vote in this House are mainly generated by Russian bots and troll farms. The political weaponisation of societal debates, from Brexit to vaccines to same-sex marriages, is actively supported and often instigated by Russia.

But the worst manifestation of Russian interest in our democracies are those political parties engineered, sponsored or radicalised by the Kremlin who act as their propaganda amplifiers in Europe. As the 2024 elections are coming closer, the question is, what can we do?

To start with, we must render our democracies more resilient. We must educate our public to differentiate, to critically filter the disinformation and manipulation they are exposed to. We need to also increase funding transparency for political parties to bring out in the open those politicians that pretend to defend our citizens’ interests while in fact surrendering them to the interests of Putin’s delusions and the Kremlin’s criminal strategies.

  Marcel de Graaff (ID). – Voorzitter, Russische televisiezenders zijn al verbannen. Gesprekken met de Russische regering of ambassadeurs worden nu gedemoniseerd. De hele EU raakt doordrenkt van de geur van de angst om de controle te verliezen over de propaganda die elke dag over ons wordt uitgestort. De EU-elite wil objectieve media, echte oppositie en kritiek onmogelijk maken. Dat gebeurde met de kritiek op de islam, op immigratie, met de pro-Brexit- of de pro-Trump-partijen, en dat gebeurde rond de coronapandemie. Dat gebeurt nu rond de invasie in Oekraïne.

We hebben het geld uit Rusland helemaal niet nodig om de democratie in de EU te ondermijnen. Daar hebben we het geld van Pfizer al voor. Eerst kwam er staatscontrole over social media en nu moeten er wetten komen om kritische partijen te beknotten en kritische oppositieleiders monddood te maken. En dat heet dictatuur. Dat heet onderdrukking. Dat is het ware, lelijke gezicht van de EU. En wij willen een vrij Nederland, een Nederland uit de EUSSR.

  Michal Šimečka (Renew). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, vážená pani komisárka, už skutočne nemôžeme byť naivní a musíme si otvorene priznať, že Vladimir Putin je vo vojne s celou Európou a rozleptáva našu demokraciu aj priamo zvnútra. Robí tak s jediným cieľom, a tým je zničiť európsky projekt, európske pravidlá, pretože sú preňho hrozbou. A nekoná tak sám, koná tak s pomocou celej siete extrémistických jednotlivcov, skupín rozmiestnených po celej Európskej únii. A nejde zďaleka len o extrémistické politické strany alebo dezinformačné weby alebo podobných aktérov. Často sú to aj verejní štátni funkcionári. V tomto kontexte mi nedá nespomenúť generálneho prokurátora v mojej krajine na Slovensku, ktorý podpisuje, podpísal tesne pred vojnou memorandum o spolupráci s ruskou prokuratúrou. To sú veci, ktoré už nemôžeme prehliadať a ak naozaj chceme Putina zastaviť, tak nestačí len si to pripustiť, ale aj sa musíme zamyslieť nad tým, ako sa s takýmito situáciami vysporiadať demokraticky a legitímne.

(Catch-the-eye procedure)

  Łukasz Kohut (S&D). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Farmy Trolli w internecie, kompletnie podporządkowane władzy media publiczne, te regionalne, przejęte przez koncern paliwowy, inwigilowanie opozycji przez oprogramowanie Pegasus, kłamliwa propaganda cudu gospodarczego i określanie Unii Europejskiej jako zgniłego Zachodu. Negowanie wartości europejskich i trójpodziału władzy. Czy to tylko specyfika Rosji Putina? Nie.

Bardzo podobnie jest w Polsce PiS, tak samo jak na Węgrzech Orbana. Co więcej, Amerykanie już w listopadzie poinformowali polskiego premiera o ataku Rosji na Ukrainę. Co zrobił? Zwołał do Warszawy proputinowską koalicję, tego samego Orbana, który teraz blokuje sankcje na Rosję i tę samą Marine Le Pen, którą Putin finansował. I właśnie dlatego musimy przywrócić w Polsce i na Węgrzech państwo prawa, trójpodział władzy i wolne media. Bo Polska to na szczęście nie tylko PiS. Widzieliście to wszyscy, kiedy otworzyliśmy granice serca i portfele dla uchodźców z Ukrainy. Ale najlepszą obroną przed Kremlem jest budowa bardziej zintegrowanej Unii Europejskiej i świadomego społeczeństwa obywatelskiego. Tego boją się wszyscy autokracji: Putin, Orban i Jarosław Kaczyński.

SĒDI VADA: ROBERTS ZĪLE
Priekšsēdētājas vietnieks

  Mick Wallace (The Left). – Mr President, this debate is testament to how authoritarian the EU has become. This McCarthyite hysteria is deeply anti-democratic and a bit scary. That there is a war at all is a monument to how inept, unqualified and compromised EU leaders and diplomats are right now. War is a failure of diplomacy, of dialogue and attempts at understanding. If we want to stop the bloodshed and destruction and all the terrible ramifications of the war, people need to sit around tables and talk.

But the US and NATO don’t want the war to stop. In the words of Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff, ‘The United States aids Ukraine and our people so that we can fight Russia over there and we don’t have to fight Russia here’.

We need more diplomacy, not less. We have two powers. The US and Russia have an awful lot in common. Both are run by monopoly capital, run by oligarchs on both sides. We have two imperialist powers fighting each other in Ukraine, and only working class people are dying.

But the EU has done nothing to stop it! So many people in here are glad the war is taking place. But the biggest threat to diplomacy and democracy in the EU today is coming from the people who pretend to defend it!

(End of catch—the—eye procedure)

  Věra Jourová, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, Minister, honourable Members, thank you very much for this discussion. We already had several discussions in the past, and I was listening carefully to the opinions of the honourable Members of Parliament. Always we can summarise the debate in the sentence ‘we have a serious problem in Europe’.

Every year we receive the reports from our Permanent Representations depicting the level or the impact of extremism, extremist parties on society. I have it here with me – 40 pages of really irritating, alarming reading. We see that the situation is worsening year by year. The extremists are exploiting the multiple crisis we go through: COVID and now the Russian invasion to Ukraine and its consequences on European Union citizens.

We see to that the extremists are, of course, exploiting also the possibility of using the digital space for spreading disinformation. You discussed it very broadly here. What we can read from all these messages, the message from the extremists is: the worse, the better in Europe.

That’s why I think that it’s very clear that we have to be active, and we have to not only analyse the situation or to collect the data, to do the mapping, but we have to take action. Most of the work still lies with the Member States because this is first and foremost an issue falling under the security area, but also the European Union has to do its work.

I would mention the proposal for a Regulation on transparency and targeting of political advertising. This is the regulation, which is now in the legislative process, which I believe might be very useful in disclosing who is behind the political ads. I think that the people should know what they read.

Also, the proposal to recast the Regulation on the statute and funding of European political parties. Indeed, by this piece of legislation, we cover only the European political parties, but also we say or give the message to the Member States: don’t you think it would be useful if you follow this example, and make stricter rules, for instance, for the donations from outside, and be more vigilant when it comes to the conditions for national political parties, and the financing of extremism.

It’s a great thing that you as co—legislators, vis—à—vis the Council, decided on the Digital Regulation, because I think that here we have very clear rules which might diminish or minimise the impact of illegal content and extremist content which falls under criminal law, and its appearance and amplification through digital tools.

I think that it’s also good that we have the new Code of Practice against disinformation. Here I have to react shortly on all those contributions which many were mentioning, of course, in fact on spreading disinformation, that we are introducing censorship in the EU. Because when you read through the Code of Practice against disinformation, this is mainly the mechanism which seeks to protect freedom of speech in the EU.

That’s why we did not take tough measures against disinformation, and that’s why we go through the voluntary mechanism and with the engagement of civil society researchers and many people in the European Union, who want to contribute to protection of facts.

We are looking at facts. We are not restricting anyone’s right to declare things and to share opinions with the society.

It’s important for me to emphasise when I work on this agenda, on fighting against disinformation, my job description in fact is also to protect your and everyone else’s right to state publicly their opinions. So I think that we should understand better this.

Last comment. We do not have still precise data. We should have better data about the impact of disinformation from the platforms by the end of this year. But the data we already have show that no country is immune against disinformation and against Russian war propaganda. Where the propaganda is most successful is in the countries where they have very agile proxies, the political forces, those who are helping to spread this propaganda, either for political or financial gain.

So this is the reality now, and that’s why it’s important that you had this discussion, and that we continue our cooperation with Parliament, because I think that, again, as I said at the beginning, the European Union has a problem which is very important to be addressed by practical, legislative and non—legislative responses.

  Mikuláš Bek, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, Vice-President Jourová, honourable Members, today’s debate definitely shows the complexity of foreign interference in our democratic life, whose principles and values are under constant attack from authoritarian regimes.

We must continue to work on defending our values, freedom and democracy, fundamental rights and the rule of law. At the same time, we must work on strengthening our resilience by strengthening our civil society, free media and independent institutions across our continent. Because the long-term prosperity and stability of Europe is founded on functional democratic mechanisms.

Voices warning against foreign interference have been there for a while and became stronger over the past years. The recent COVID-19 pandemic has further revealed new vulnerabilities in our societies, including in the information space. And indeed, the Russian war of aggression only confirmed the urgency of robust action on our side, now more than ever.

The Council as a whole attaches particular importance to protecting our democratic processes, institutions and societies from any foreign interference. And as you heard from our Prime Minister this morning, this is also one of the top priorities of the Czech Presidency.

The Council will continue to support the joint efforts made together with other European institutions to make progress on devising ambitious and determined European responses to these issues.

  Sēdes vadītājs. – Debates ir beigušās.

19. Energetikos įmonių nenumatytojo pelno apmokestinimas (diskusijos)

  Sēdes vadītājs. – Nākamais darba kārtības punkts ir debates par Padomes un Komisijas paziņojumiem – Enerģētikas uzņēmumu neplānoto ieņēmumu aplikšana ar nodokli (2022/2747(RSP)).

Atgādinu, ka var brīvi izvēlēties vietu plenārsēžu zālē, izņemot pirmās divas rindas, kas rezervētas grupu vadītājiem.

Tad varēsiet iesniegt ar brīvā mikrofona procedūru un zilo kartīti saistītus pieprasījumus, izmantojot balsošanas iekārtu, tiklīdz būsiet tajā ievietojuši savu balsošanas karti.

Turklāt vēlos atgādināt, ka sēžu zālē arī turpmāk būs jāuzstājas no centrālās tribīnes, izņemot gadījumus, kad uzstāšanās ir saistīta ar brīvo mikrofonu, zilo kartīti un Reglamenta neievērošanu.

  Mikuláš Bek, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, honourable Members, ladies and gentlemen, the idea of taxing the windfall profits of energy companies has emerged in the context of the current energy crisis, and it has been floated as a possible measure to compensate high energy prices.

The Czech Presidency is of the view that taxing the windfall profits of energy companies is indeed among the tax measures that could be considered in a context where both households and companies are suffering greatly from the steep rise of energy prices.

While in general taxation, especially direct taxation, is a national competence, some elements of taxation are covered under the current EU taxation framework, which also contains a few provisions for responding to exceptional situations. As you know, the European Council has stated that the temporary taxation of all regulatory interventions on windfall profits can be a useful source of national financing.

I am aware that also the European Parliament, in its resolution from May, shared the view of the European Council on the taxation of windfall profits and called on the Commission and the Member States to coordinate the design of windfall profit taxation schemes in the current context.

Member States are working hard to mitigate the current energy crisis and take up measures depending on the specific situations in their respective Member States. This is a topic that is very important also to the Czech Presidency. Tax measures, including taxing the windfall profits of energy companies, are certainly worth considering.

Some European countries, such as Portugal and Spain, have already started to tax the windfall profits of energy companies. Their experience is surely interesting to observe in order to see whether this measure fulfils its objective, has a real effect and proves useful. If so, I am sure other Member States could wish to take it up as well.

The Czech presidency will continue to monitor this issue and discuss with Member States how tax measures could counter the current EU energy price surge.

  Věra Jourová, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, Minister, honourable Members, Russia’s acceptable military aggression on Ukraine has not only caused a humanitarian catastrophe that is likely to worsen due to the food supply crisis worldwide, but has also had a disastrous effect on energy prices, putting households and businesses across the EU under big pressure.

Against a backdrop of strong post-pandemic demand, the unresponsive supply of gas and the uncertainty created by the war in Ukraine have driven gas prices and by extension, the prices of oil products such as petrol and gas oil used in road transport, up in Europe and globally.

In a global market and a unified European energy market, a higher price for gas translates into higher energy electricity prices overall. The impact of these gas prices increases against a backdrop of broader inflationary tendencies is most severely felt by vulnerable households, transport users and vulnerable micro enterprises.

As mentioned in the letter addressed by my colleague, Paolo Gentiloni, to ECOFIN Ministers in April, our policy response needs to be guided by the principles of effectiveness, consistency and equity. We should avoid going for seemingly convincing solutions that are easy to implement, whose effectiveness in helping those most in need to afford energy is questionable.

Let me also stress that we have a duty and commitment to tackle the climate crisis. Measures taken to address short-term issues of energy affordability or security of supply should not undermine but accelerate our long-term ambition for climate neutrality by 2050 and have to be consistent with the European Green Deal.

Thirdly, and more importantly, this is about equity. Yes, all of us are paying higher prices at the gas station, in our energy bills or in the supermarket. But not all of us require help to the same extent. We should strive to put in place measures that target those households that are most in need.

Today we discuss a specific proposal that is intensively discussed at the moment, both in academia and in the political debate – so-called windfall profit taxes. Indeed, there is growing evidence that some companies in the energy market, such as the infra-marginal electricity generators, currently obtain excessive extraordinarily high profits resulting from the current energy market situation. These are also known as windfall profits.

So what is a windfall profit tax? A windfall profit tax is a tax on companies that have seen their profits surge extraordinarily and unexpectedly, not because of any clever investment decision they have taken or an increase in efficiency or innovation, but simply because of a sudden favourable change in market conditions.

As economists explain, properly implemented taxes on these windfall profits is efficient because it raises revenues without affecting business decisions. Resources will still be allocated in order to maximise their economic potential and not to avoid taxation. Revenues raised in such an efficient manner again and should therefore be used to support vulnerable consumers as Member States can distribute such revenues among final consumers, offsetting the negative impact of current high energy prices. This can be encouraged as contrary to measures that directly intervene in the functioning of the market, that the taxation of windfall profits leaves markets’ economic efficiency intact.

Therefore, already in the REPowerEU Communication from March this year, the Commission stated that Member States may exceptionally consider implementing such a tax, but such a measure needs to be carefully designed to avoid undesirable market distortions and avoid discouraging investments in renewable energy.

The guidelines put forward by the Commission in March indicated in particular that the measure should not be retroactive, should be technologically neutral, and allow electricity producers to cover their costs, should protect the long-term market signals, and protect the carbon price signals of the EU emissions trading system. That is crucial for the decarbonisation of the power system.

Moreover, it should be time limited, a one off temporary measure. One of the key challenges, both from an economic and legal perspective, is the definition of excessive profits. The method for that calculation would have to be clearly specified and justified and should be directly linked to real additional profits generated by higher energy prices.

Since the March communication, a number of Member States such as Spain, Bulgaria, Romania and Italy have introduced temporary tax measures on such excessive windfall profits of some energy-generating companies to capture part of these extraordinary profits. But despite these measures and considerable efforts in other areas by both Member States and the Commission, we have to acknowledge that the many issues we are trying to tackle persist.

Other measures are discussed, including, as you are well aware, a gas price cap that has been recently discussed at the G7 summit in Elmau, possibly through coordinated purchases. Acknowledging the magnitude of the challenge means also developing a policy response, building on a mix of measures that are complementary and consistent.

As regards the windfall profit taxes, our services are intensifying the legal and economic analysis of such measures to see if there is additional scope for the Commission to help this coordinated and sensible approach in the EU to windfall profit taxes.

With this in mind, I would like to thank you for scheduling this timely debate on this important issue – a debate that I am sure will continue in the weeks to come.

  Markus Ferber, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Zunächst einmal hört es sich ja sehr charmant an: Da macht jemand überbordende Gewinne, und die müsste man ihm doch eigentlich wegbesteuern können. Und dann frage ich mich: Wer definiert eigentlich, was ein überbordender Gewinn ist? Gibt es da den überbordenden Gewinner des Jahres?

Wenn ich die letzte Firma in Deutschland nehme, die überbordende Gewinne gemacht hat, dann ist das BioNTech, ein Unternehmen, das einen Impfstoff zur Verfügung gestellt hat, der zunächst monopolartig zur Verfügung stand, und damit große Gewinne gemacht hat. Die Konsequenz ist, dass die Stadt Mainz heute schuldenfrei ist, was sie in ihrer Geschichte nie war. Die Konsequenz ist, dass das Land Rheinland-Pfalz plötzlich über Steuereinnahmen verfügt, die es in der Vergangenheit nie hatte. Und das zeigt: Auch ohne windfall profit taxation funktioniert unser Steuersystem. Wer Gewinne macht, zahlt höhere Steuern.

Und deswegen habe ich ein gewisses Zugangsproblem, weil ich ja auf der anderen Seite auch mit der Frage konfrontiert bin – und, Frau Kommissarin, Sie haben darauf hingewiesen: Wenn wir jetzt dringend Investitionen benötigen, dann müssen wir Unternehmen auch in die Lage versetzen, dass sie über die Mittel verfügen, um investieren zu können.

Wir haben eine Angebotsverknappung bei Nachfrageausweitung. Dass das zu steigenden Preisen führt – jedenfalls jemand, der sich mit Marktwirtschaft beschäftigt, versteht das. Vielleicht haben wir ein Problem, Marktwirtschaft zu verstehen. Aber die Wahrheit heißt doch: Wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass wir auf der Angebotsseite zu Verbesserungen und zu Veränderungen kommen. Dafür brauchen wir Investitionen. Wenn wir aber den Unternehmen, die investieren sollen, ihre Gewinne wegnehmen, damit sie sie nicht investieren können – soll die öffentliche Hand das dann auch wieder machen? Also, ich will nur mal fragen: Passt das überhaupt in sich zusammen?

Und wenn ich mir einen großen Gasversorger in meinem Land anschaue, dann hat er nicht das Problem, dass er windfall profits macht, sondern er macht big losses. Also so einfach ist es auch nicht, dass man da plötzlich riesige Gewinne macht, weil es halt gerade im Markt so ist, sondern es ist von Unternehmen zu Unternehmen sehr unterschiedlich.

Deswegen brauchen wir vernünftige Steuersysteme, die auch wirklich die Gewinne richtig besteuern. Dazu gehört die OECD Minimum Tax, dazu gehören andere Maßnahmen und nicht noch Zusatzsteuern.

  Aurore Lalucq, au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, bonjour à tous. Plus de 100 %: les profits des entreprises énergétiques explosent jusqu’à la nausée. Si tout allait bien par ailleurs ou si ces profits étaient le fruit d’innovations révolutionnaires, nous en serions ravis. Mais c’est le fruit, non pas d’une économie de marché, comme vient de le dire Markus Ferber, mais d’une rente.

Ces profits se font aujourd’hui sur le dos de l’écologie, des citoyens qui peinent à joindre les deux bouts, du souffle de la pénurie et de la guerre. Ce ne sont pas des profits exceptionnels, ce sont des profits anormaux, dérangeants, inacceptables. On sait les taxer, on les a déjà taxés pendant la Première et la Seconde Guerre mondiale. C’est pourquoi nous appelons au niveau européen à les taxer. Certains pays le font déjà, d’autres tardent, à commencer par mon pays, la France. À ces pays, nous disons que l’hiver sera rude sur le plan énergétique, avec des conséquences économiques, sociales et politiques qu’on peut aisément imaginer.

Ces entreprises énergétiques doivent de l’argent à la société. Elles doivent de l’argent aux citoyens qui alimentent ces profits. Ne pas les taxer serait une faute morale et une injustice dont nous risquons de nous mordre les doigts. Alors, taxons-les, au lieu de les laisser s’étouffer avec leur propre gloutonnerie.

  Rasmus Andresen, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Shell, ExxonMobil und Chevron – knapp 20 Milliarden Euro Gewinn haben allein diese drei Konzerne im ersten Quartal 2022 gemacht, mehr als doppelt so viel wie im ersten Quartal 2021.

Die großen Ölkonzerne machen Milliardengewinne. Während immer mehr Menschen ihre Energiekosten kaum noch bezahlen können, geht es einigen Konzernen sehr gut. Das ist nicht nur ungerecht, sondern auch ökonomisch brandgefährlich. Laut der Europäischen Zentralbank sind die Profite einiger Konzerne einer der Treiber für die massive Inflation. Auch deshalb brauchen wir Instrumente, die übermäßige Profite begrenzen.

Wir Grüne schlagen deshalb eine Übergewinnsteuer von 50 % auf exzessive Gewinne vor. Ein weiterer Teil der Gewinne soll in Investitionen in erneuerbare Energien fließen, die wir dringend benötigen. Wir fordern die EU-Finanzministerinnen und -Finanzminister dazu auf, gemeinsam diesen Schritt zu gehen. Spanien, Großbritannien und Italien machen es vor. Es sind gute Beispiele, aber sie reichen nicht aus. Länder wie Deutschland sollten folgen.

Die Wirtschaftskrise wird extrem hart, die Arbeitslosigkeit wird steigen, und Ungleichheit wird zunehmen. Deshalb brauchen wir die Übergewinnsteuer, und wir brauchen sie jetzt.

  Paolo Borchia, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, quando il saggio indica la luna, lo stolto guarda il dito; se si adottano soluzioni demagogiche, si rischia di peggiorare una situazione critica. Invece, la buona politica, quella buona, non quella ideologica, non insegue l'opinione pubblica ma, al contrario, riesce ad agire sui problemi strutturali e a fare autocritica, in particolar modo su anni di politiche energetiche che si sono dimostrate sbagliate.

Non possiamo infatti negare che le regole europee sul funzionamento dei mercati di energia e gas abbiano trasformato il fattore prezzo in una scheggia impazzita, costringendo i governi a fare debito per impedire alle imprese di chiudere, e tutto ciò senza avere certezze di cosa ne sarà del patto di stabilità. E soprattutto deve essere chiaro che gli obiettivi dovranno essere una maggiore autonomia energetica da un lato e il rigetto delle politiche di austerità.

Io, Commissaria, ho ascoltato attentamente il Suo intervento, però mi chiedo: se tassiamo gli extraprofitti, cosa facciamo con le perdite? Le tassiamo? Per quanto riguarda il Green Deal credo che vada ripensato invece l'impianto, anche alla luce di quanto sta succedendo ai prezzi negli ultimi mesi.

Infine, il price cap ritengo che sia un'idea apprezzabile, ma il potere negoziale per adesso è in mano a chi vende e non a chi acquista. Quindi, colleghi, ritengo che l'Unione debba essere attrattiva per gli investimenti e non diventare l'opificio di nuove tasse.

  Marc Botenga, au nom du groupe The Left. – Monsieur le Président, ma question est simple: pouvons-nous dire aux gens les choses telles qu’elles sont? Parce que ce à quoi nous assistons aujourd’hui, il faut le dire, c’est un braquage, un hold-up sur le portefeuille. Le portefeuille se vide, les prix explosent, mais où va cet argent? Où va-t-on le trouver? On va le trouver dans les caisses des multinationales qui font des surprofits, c’est-à-dire des profits supplémentaires en plus des profits qu’elles font déjà normalement. Donc elles font évidemment des surprofits sur l’énergie, mais aussi sur nos caddies, sur la bouffe, et cetera. Ça, c’est des milliards de surprofits dans la poche. Bingo, comme à chaque crise. C’est ça, le capitalisme! Face au désastre, il y a les gens qui douillent et il y a les multinationales qui nous dépouillent. Et là, ça suffit, basta! Rendons cet argent aux gens, taxons ces surprofits. Et la Commission européenne ne doit pas venir avec une proposition Canada Dry ou Coca Light: tout surprofit est inacceptable. On ne peut pas accepter de profiter de la misère de la crise. On ne laissera plus passer.

  Antoni Comín i Oliveres (NI). – Señor presidente, España es uno de los países de Europa con mayor experiencia en oligopolios energéticos, cosa que explica, entre otras cosas, que en un año el precio de la electricidad, de marzo a marzo, se haya multiplicado por diez. Con motivo de la guerra de Ucrania, las grandes empresas energéticas españolas tuvieron un incremento de sus beneficios de hasta el 226 % respecto al año anterior, 11 000 millones de euros.

En España, el propietario del agua, de los molinos y del gas suele ser el mismo. Y, por esto, hasta ahora las compañías eléctricas vendían agua a precio de gas, consiguiendo beneficios caídos del cielo desorbitantes. Ahora, con el tope al precio del gas y pagando el agua a precio de agua y el gas a precio de gas, en tres días ha entrado más gas en el sistema que en todo el mes anterior. Es un escándalo, es la prueba de que no hay transparencia, de que no hay juego limpio en materia de gestión energética.

Hay problemas estructurales en España que nunca se han resuelto. Hoy, igual que en el franquismo, el Gobierno sigue sin impedir los beneficios excesivos del oligopolio. Subvenciona el precio del petróleo, muy bien. Aprueba una tasa a los beneficios caídos del cielo, muy bien. Pero son medidas temporales y cargadas de excepciones.

La propuesta de este Parlamento de imponer una tasa a las ganancias caídas del cielo es un paso en la buena dirección, sin duda. Pero si no acabamos con los oligopolios en España y ... (el presidente retira la palabra al orador).

  Isabel Benjumea Benjumea (PPE). – Señor presidente, antes de iniciar mi intervención, me gustaría recordarles que el señor que ha tomado la palabra antes que yo es un prófugo de la justicia española y que espero que muy pronto esté rindiendo cuentas ante los tribunales españoles para que le puedan juzgar con todas las garantías por los delitos de los que se le acusan.

Estamos en un debate del que llevamos prácticamente toda esta semana hablando, es decir, el de que los ciudadanos están viviendo el impacto sobre su economía doméstica de una inflación desbocada que está teniendo también un impacto sobre el IPC y básicamente sobre su poder adquisitivo.

Hay dos soluciones: querer poner toda la culpa sobre, como en este caso, las eléctricas y decidir que la solución es gravar y gravar sus beneficios o aprovechar las herramientas que ya está poniendo en marcha la Unión Europea, como son los fondos Next Generation y REPowerEU para hacer las reformas que hacen falta, que incluyan bajadas de impuestos, que incluyan bonificaciones y que incluyan el invertir en aquellos proyectos que nos ayuden a ser independientes energéticamente. Y eso incluye la nuclear y el gas. Esa es la vía.

  President. – Thank you very much. I would like to ask colleagues to speak on—topic on issues.

  Nicolás González Casares (S&D). – Señor presidente, parece que algunos piden que se les bajen los impuestos a las energéticas, pero ya están casi en cero en casi todos los países y la Agencia Internacional de la Energía ha dicho que hay 200 000 millones de beneficios caídos del cielo para las empresas energéticas. Hay un fallo del mercado muy claro: si hay beneficios caídos del cielo, las reglas están mal. Si no podemos cambiar las reglas ahora, por lo menos tenemos que gravar esos beneficios caídos del cielo. Porque lo que no es decente es que, con esta inflación, el dinero de los ciudadanos, de millones de ciudadanos humildes, se acumule en muy pocas manos. Eso no es decente y tenemos que corregirlo. No puede ser que la guerra la sufran los más humildes, por el precio de la energía debido a esa inflación, y que los que más tienen tengan aún más. Por lo tanto, creo que las medidas tienen que ser drásticas en esta dirección.

Ahora mismo acabamos de saber que Francia acaba de nacionalizar por completo su principal compañía energética. Quizás no es el mejor ejemplo, porque ya era en buena parte del Estado, pero lo que sí está claro es que tenemos que gravar esos beneficios caídos del cielo y, después, cuando pase esta crisis, cambiar y reformar las reglas del mercado energético. Eso también está muy claro.

  Engin Eroglu (Renew). – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr Ratsvertreter, sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin! Wir diskutieren heute Zufallsgewinne oder Übergewinnsteuern, wie man es auch immer bezeichnen möchte. Ich möchte hier ganz klar sagen: Wer in der aktuellen Situation von einer Inflation von über 8 % über Steuererhöhungen diskutiert, der diskutiert über eine weitere Erhöhung der Inflation. Denn eins ist klar: Steuererhöhungen werden von Betrieben eingepreist und führen nur zu weiteren Kostensteigerungen von Produkten.

Bei all dem Ärger, bei all den Sorgen, bei all der Ungewissheit dürfen wir als Politik nicht in Panik geraten und auf einfachen Stimmenfang gehen und den Bürgern suggerieren, dass erhöhte Steuern dazu führen, dass in einer Inflation die Preise fallen. Wer das glaubt, hat in der achten oder neunten Schulklasse im Bereich der Marktwirtschaft nicht aufgepasst.

Was wir jetzt benötigen, ist eine ernsthafte Diskussion über Zinserhöhungen, eine ernsthafte Diskussion über Steuersenkungen. Die Menschen brauchen mehr Netto vom Brutto, um sich mehr leisten zu können.

  Ernest Urtasun (Verts/ALE). – Señor presidente, la alta factura de la luz injustificable que pagan nuestros ciudadanos tiene fundamentalmente dos motivos. El principal es nuestra dependencia endémica de los combustibles fósiles, que son mucho más caros que las renovables. Y, en segundo lugar, una deficiencia de nuestro marco regulatorio que debemos modificar urgentemente.

Una de las razones y uno de los efectos que está provocando este deficiente marco regulatorio es que, mientras la factura de la luz es extremadamente alta, los beneficios de las empresas energéticas son extremadamente elevados y extraordinarios. La Agencia Internacional de la Energía lo ha señalado: en 2022, 200 000 millones de euros de beneficios. Solo en España, por ejemplo, en el primer semestre, las dos grandes eléctricas, 1 471 millones de beneficios.

Esto es algo que no podemos tolerar y, por lo tanto, es imprescindible empezar a grabar estos beneficios extraordinarios, porque estamos no ante algo que tenga el origen en un mayor valor añadido, sino simplemente en un fallo regulatorio. Por lo tanto, está muy bien empezar a recomendar a los Estados miembros que empiecen a grabar esos beneficios extraordinarios, pero también, y le tomo la palabra a la señora comisaria, creo que la Comisión debe tener un marco de coordinación de estas medidas mucho más fuerte, y espero que la Comisión actúe en este sentido.

  Mathilde Androuët (ID). – Monsieur le Président, dans la résolution votée en mai, qui ouvrait la possibilité de créer une nouvelle taxe sur les bénéfices exceptionnels des entreprises du secteur de l’énergie, il était question de lutter contre la hausse des prix et de renforcer l’indépendance énergétique de l’Union européenne. La durée de cette taxe devait être limitée dans le temps et devait répondre à une crise spécifique. Dans le contexte actuel, cette taxe est nécessaire et doit être appliquée.

Cependant, nous ne pouvons ignorer certaines limites et urgences plus grandes. Les situations sont très différentes selon les États membres. Si l’Italie a pu récupérer quelques milliards à travers cette taxe, la France se refuse à utiliser une telle taxe, car les entreprises du secteur de l’électricité ont déjà contribué à compenser les effets de la crise. De plus, une telle taxe est de nature à compromettre les investissements, notamment si nous souhaitons réellement atteindre les objectifs de neutralité carbone.

Dans le même temps, l’Union européenne maintient des objectifs de lutte contre les émissions de gaz à effet de serre qui contraignent énormément nos industries européennes et, poussée par la nécessité, rouvre des centrales à charbon partout en Europe. D’un point de vue écologique, c’est une aberration, conséquence directe des sanctions envers la Russie. Cette situation aurait dû conduire à accentuer notre financement de l’industrie nucléaire, moins polluante et parfaitement compétitive. Sans soutien à l’industrie nucléaire, il va falloir choisir entre lutter contre la Russie par des sanctions ou lutter contre le réchauffement climatique. Cette même résolution souhaitait également la disparition rapide des subventions versées aux énergies fossiles: cela pourrait entraîner une hausse vertigineuse des prix.

L’accumulation des sanctions contre la Russie, le refus du nucléaire, le rejet des énergies fossiles et le blocage maladif de l’Union européenne à l’idée d’interroger le marché européen de l’énergie nous mènent droit vers l’explosion dramatique des prix qui mettra nos économies et même des millions d’Européens à genoux...

(Le Président retire la parole à l’oratrice)

  Nikolaj Villumsen (The Left). – Hr. formand! Lige nu eksploderer prisen på energi i Europa. For mange lægger det et voldsomt pres på økonomien. Den enlige mor kigger ængsteligt på elregningen. Hver en krone bliver vendt ved de lavtlønnede, og for flere og flere hænger økonomien slet ikke sammen. Mens vi oplever en akut energifattigdom rundt om i de små hjem, så eksploderer indtjeningen for energiselskaberne. Alene i 2022 forventes deres profit at være 1 400 milliarder kroner. Det er et uforståeligt stort beløb. Det er ikke fair, at nogen må tvinges til at slukke for strømmen, lukke for varmen eller gå sultne i seng, mens energiselskaberne skovler penge ind. Lad os beskatte de ekstraordinære profitter! Lad os hjælpe de laveste indkomster og lad os skabe fremtidens grønne og vedvarende arbejdspladser!

  Fabio Massimo Castaldo (NI). – Mr President, Commissioner, as inflation in the EU shot to a new record in June, cost increases are exacting a deep toll on the economy, eating into most Europeans’ wages.

But for many of our largest companies and their shareholders, it has been a very different story. The pandemic, the war and the supply chain bottlenecks have created a smokescreen that allows companies to pass on inflationary costs to consumers via price increases. Is it appropriate that during all this uncertainty that this be a moment in which large corporations continue to enjoy huge profits?

A temporary tax that would apply to excess profits of all multinational companies is for sure a good starting point. But the long—term solution must be to reform our laws to tax the companies that benefit most from the EU’s internal market, and to stop the corporate tax-dodging that is rampant today through a global minimum tax.

Let’s bring in the revenue we need to support working families, and accelerate the shift to renewable energies. And let’s make this year the last year any company with massive profits pays almost no corporate tax in the EU. Now it’s really time for change.

  Biljana Borzan (S&D). –Poštovani predsjedavajući, zahvaljujem, bogaćenje kada ljudi ginu, bogaćenje kada ljudi nemaju za hranu i režije, to je ratno profiterstvo.

Cijene energenata su otišle u nebo i sa sobom povukle sve ostale cijene. U kolikoj mjeri su ta poskupljenja opravdana, teško je reći. Znamo samo da su se cijene energenata za građane u nekim državama, unatoč mjerama udvostručile, a zarada energetskih kompanija upeterostručila. Neočekivana dobit europskih energetskih kompanija se procjenjuje na 200 milijardi eura. Još prije krize čak 34 milijuna građana nije moglo priuštiti si grijanje svojih domova. Bez hrabrih poteza nećemo biti spremni za jesen. Teret ove krize svatko treba podnijeti kako je pošteno, a ne da oni koji nemaju plate i za one koji imaju.

I još nešto želim poručiti ove govornice, tehnološki divovi- dolazimo i po vas!

  Eleonora Evi (Verts/ALE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, un pensionato che vive in una casa di 80 metri quadri in Italia pagava una bolletta nel febbraio/marzo 2021 di 75 euro, nel 2022 è schizzata a 380 euro. E invece un colosso del fossile come Eni passa da 50 milioni di utili nell'ultimo trimestre del 2020 a 2 miliardi nel 2021, un aumento del +3 780 per cento, e continua nel 2022, è impressionante.

Mentre le famiglie e le imprese vanno a gambe all'aria e molti non potranno accendere il riscaldamento il prossimo inverno, i giganti dell'energia si stanno arricchendo: solo in Italia quasi 50 miliardi di euro di extraprofitti. Tassarli, quindi, non dovrebbe essere neanche una domanda da porsi, ma una risposta decisa da parte della politica di fronte a questo dramma sociale, altrimenti si smetta di dire che si vogliono ridurre le diseguaglianze, che infatti continuano ad aumentare.

Il governo italiano prima introduce un contributo di solidarietà al 25 per cento – ridicolo – e dopo cancella la tassa sugli extraprofitti degli importatori del gas. Lo voglio dire in modo chiaro: gli extraprofitti vanno restituiti al cento per cento alle famiglie e alle imprese.

  Robert Hajšel (S&D). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, sme v bezprecedentnej kríze. Zatiaľ čo veľké podniky energetického druhu bohatnú a vytvárajú neočakávané zisky, stále viac a viac ľudí padá do energetickej chudoby. Preto návrh Európskej komisie na zavedenie tejto dane môže prispieť k zozbieraniu peňazí potrebných na financovanie boja s energetickou krízou, ale hlavne môže aspoň čiastočne tlmiť vysoké ceny za energie. Ale potom táto daň by sa nemala týkať iba energetických spoločností, ale mali by sme ju zaviesť aj na spoločnosti, ktoré napríklad profitovali aj počas pandémie koronavírusu, aj na veľké farmaceutické firmy, aj na digitálnych gigantov, predovšetkým na takzvanú päťku GAFAM.

Treba zdôrazniť, že naozaj už k takejto dani pristúpili v Taliansku, Spojenom kráľovstve, ale aj v Rumunsku, a všade sú rôzne na to, dá sa povedať reakcie. Je ale daň zo zvýšených energetických spoločností potrebná vo všetkých? Ja si myslím, že nie. Aj preto Európska komisia sa neodvážila navrhnúť nejakú celoeurópsku daň, ale iba povzbudila členské štáty ju zavádzať. Ľuďom je jedno, akou formou získame peniaze zo zvýšených ziskov energetického sektora, ale čakajú, že to urobíme hneď.

  Claude Gruffat (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, ils sont des dizaines de millions en Europe à voir leur salaire qui n’en finit pas de stagner et le prix de leurs courses qui explose, et ceci sans pouvoir agir.

En parallèle, il y a des entreprises comme Cargill, cette multinationale du blé, qui prospère depuis le début de la crise: près de 5 milliards de bénéfices depuis l’année dernière, uniquement dus à leur opportunisme économique. Je ne parle pas de Total. Des Cargill, des Total, il y en a des dizaines. Il est temps de faire payer ces profiteurs de crise. Une Union qui prétend placer les citoyens au cœur des politiques ne peut tolérer que quelques-uns prélèvent sur le dos des autres 99,9 %.

Une justice fiscale pour une justice sociale et un pouvoir de vivre pour tous. Madame la Commissaire, ne laissez pas les États seuls et divisés. L’Union européenne est le bon niveau pour ce cadrage.

  Paul Tang (S&D). – Voorzitter, de stijgende energieprijzen raken veel mensen hard. Maar naast verliezers zijn er ook winnaars. In heel Europa maken energiebedrijven 200 miljard euro extra winst. 200 miljard door de oorlog in Oekraïne, door de extreme prijsstijgingen. De dag dat Rusland Oekraïne binnenviel, hadden de energiebedrijven een winnend lot in handen.

Maar is het eerlijk dat zij hun lot incasseren terwijl Europeanen in de kou zitten? Of is hun winst juist een kans om de pijn van anderen te verzachten? Een belasting op toevalswinsten – windfall profits – is het eerlijke antwoord op deze crisis. De Commissie wil het, het Internationaal Energieagentschap wil het, en vijf lidstaten – met linkse en rechtse regeringen – hebben het al ingevoerd. Dus mijn boodschap aan de achterblijvers is: waar wachten jullie op? Kies voor een eerlijk Europa en voer een toevalswinstbelasting in.

  Jutta Paulus (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Es muss den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern wie Hohn vorkommen. Die Ukraine kämpft um ihr Überleben. Russlands Einschränkung von Öl- und Gaslieferungen lässt viele fürchten, im Winter im Kalten zu sitzen. Gigantische Steuersummen werden mobilisiert zur Unterstützung der Ukraine, aber auch zur Unterstützung der Wirtschaft, die unter diesen hohen Energiepreisen leidet. Aber diejenigen, die von den enormen Preissteigerungen profitieren, die sollen nicht zur Verantwortung gezogen werden können? Die sollen sich nicht beteiligen müssen?

Es gibt ja auf OECD-Ebene bereits Vereinbarungen, um genau solche Zufallsgewinne abschöpfen zu können. Denn es geht hier nicht um Innovation wie bei den Impfstoffen. Es geht hier auch nicht darum, dass jemand besonders klug gewesen ist. Es geht einfach, schlicht und ergreifend um ein Monopol, um die Menschen, die sich den Tankrabatt – den die deutsche Regierung ausgeschüttet hat, um den Leuten, die mobil sein müssen, zu helfen – größtenteils in die eigene Tasche gesteckt haben. Das hat überhaupt nichts damit zu tun, dass wir einen freien Markt brauchen, der auch auf solche Dinge reagieren kann.

  Erik Bergkvist (S&D). – Herr talman! Bästa ledamöter! Europa är inne i en djup energipolitisk kris. Många hushåll har svårt att klara kostnader för energi och livsmedel, dvs. det mest grundläggande. Samtidigt gör många energibolag stora vinster.

Det här skapar då möjligheter. En rätt – och då menar jag rätt – utformad skatt skulle kunna göra det lättare för de företag som vill och redan i dag gör gröna investeringar att föra över resurser från dem som inte vill vara med om den gröna omställningen på samma sätt. Den måste dock utformas rätt, annars riskerar den faktiskt att öka priserna ännu mer och att skada de företag som redan nu håller på med den gröna omställningen för fullt.

Om vi lyckas vi med det här, kommer vi inte att behöva ställas inför en sådan här kris igen, eftersom vi då har vi den gröna energi vi behöver. Det tycker jag vore väldigt bra.

Brīvā mikrofona uzstāšanās

  Manon Aubry (The Left). – Monsieur le Président, je voulais vous montrer ça: c’est juste le petit ticket d’un plein d’essence à plus de 100 euros. C’est le cas en France, mais c’est aussi le cas dans beaucoup de pays. Je ne sais pas si on se rend bien compte: 100 euros, c’est juste pour pouvoir se déplacer, pour pouvoir aller bosser et ça ne tient parfois qu’une semaine. C’est autant de sacrifices dans le budget de millions de gens pour manger, pour le centre de loisirs des enfants cet été, pour payer le loyer, pour se chauffer.

Bref, le prix de l’essence – on l’a tous senti – a augmenté en un an de 44 %. Dans le même temps, les bénéfices de Total ont augmenté de 42 %. Je ne sais pas vous, mais le problème a l’air assez évident. Rien que sur le premier semestre, Total a fait 5 milliards d’euros de bénéfices en France. Si on divise cette somme par le nombre de personnes qui prennent leur voiture pour aller bosser, ça fait 100 euros par mois. Alors ne nous dites pas que taxer les bénéfices de ces profiteurs de crise et bloquer les prix est impossible. Le Royaume-Uni de Boris Johnson l’a fait. Je ne pense pas qu’on peut dire de lui que c’est un bolchevique.

Madame la Commissaire, pour imposer des restrictions aux citoyens, vous savez faire. Alors, pour une fois, montrez que vous pouvez faire preuve de la même fermeté auprès des entreprises profiteuses de crise et taxez-les.

  Mick Wallace (The Left). – Mr President, a windfall tax on energy companies would be welcome, but it’s not a silver bullet; a windfall tax is just a short—term solution. It would be far better to remove windfall profits through price regulation than by taxing these.

France has one of the lowest inflation rates in Europe, at 5.8% annually up to May, compared to the EU average of 8.8% and an Irish rate of 8.3%. A big reason for this is the energy price controls France has introduced. Ireland’s electricity prices increased by 41% from January to May. The average EU electricity price increase is 29% for the same period. France is only 6.5%.

Energy poverty is first and foremost a political failure which requires an adequate political response which tackles the root causes of injustice while ensuring a fair and sustainable future for all. Energy is a public good, but we need to start treating it as such – because we haven’t been doing so.

  João Pimenta Lopes (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, nos primeiros meses de 2022 dispararam, escandalosamente, os lucros das empresas do setor energético. Por detrás destes lucros estão os aproveitamentos da atual situação, a especulação nos mercados, as consequências das sanções e a guerra. Mas estão também as privatizações, a liberalização do setor da energia e a desregulação dos preços praticados, há anos promovidas pela União Europeia.

Pagam os milhões de famílias que não conseguem pagar a fatura da energia ou as inúmeras micro, pequenas e médias empresas que não conseguem fazer face aos aumentos dos custos de produção e que se veem forçadas a encerrar portas. A opulência de uns é a miséria de outros.

Aos Estados deve caber, sem rodeios, tomar medidas concretas na tributação dos lucros obtidos inesperadamente, mas é preciso ir mais longe, regulando o setor, controlando e fixando preços, rejeitando medidas como a redução de impostos, sem fixar preços, colocando as receitas fiscais a subsidiarem os lucros das petrolíferas com efeitos perversos, como vemos em Portugal.

(Brīvā mikrofona uzstāšanās beigas.)

  Věra Jourová, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, Minister, honourable Members, let me thank you once again for this very timely debate.

EU citizens have seen the price of energy soar over the past few months, and we must continue to take action to alleviate that economic burden. In this context, I am glad to see that you concur with the Commission in considering that Member States may make exceptional use of windfall taxes on energy companies. Such a temporary tax on excessive profits may be an appropriate response to try to mitigate some of the social and economic consequences of Russia’s aggression of Ukraine.

The debate has been very interesting and rich, and you asked many relevant questions over the debate. And, for instance, Mr Ferber, the impact on ability and potential of companies to invest, or the level of uncertainty on the market, and many other questions.

What our services and our experts confirm is that, technically, designing and implementing a windfall tax is feasible, but it is not as straightforward as it may seem, because there are many different parameters to consider.

In addition to the technical specifications regarding the definition of extraordinary profits, and thus the tax base, as well as the time period during which it would apply and refer to, and the tax rate used, one would need also to decide how to use the revenues generated at national level, at EU level, whether as a kind of own resource or something in between.

We will also have to invest, consider how such a tax relates to national legislation. Many, many questions to be discussed. And as I said at the beginning of this debate, we will have to discuss further. We have to continue the debate in the weeks to come to assess thoroughly also the pros and cons of different options and different parameters.

But speaking about weeks to come, also, it was the opinion of many of you that we cannot discuss it forever, that it’s necessary to do something now because people, the citizens, are also getting the shockingly high bills for energy now as we speak.

I would like to conclude by underlining that I take good note of your calls for a more coordinated approach in the design of windfall profits taxation schemes. The Commission agrees that such coordination would be useful, and as indicated in my introductory remarks, our services are already examining whether there is scope for EU action on this matter.

  Mikuláš Bek, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, Vice—President Jourová, honourable Members, thank you very much for this debate.

As we discussed in this House yesterday, energy prices’ hikes are partially linked to the overall uncertainty on the market, which is constantly nurtured by the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. That is why our regulatory framework is developing so fast: the REPowerEU plan, Fit for 55 package, and so on.

Yesterday we discussed in detail ways of how to tackle rising costs of living that impacts severely the most vulnerable groups of citizens and households. It becomes clear that in the context of the current energy crisis, all measures deserve exploring, including taxation of the windfall profits of energy companies.

Experience gained in Member States which have started to use such a tax could contribute to the knowledge about the possible limits and opportunities provided by this measure. I remain convinced that taxation measures have their place among different measures that could be used in the current energy crisis, provided they are carefully designed, as Vice—President Jourová said.

In short, each Member State has an opportunity to opt for measures that are most appropriate in its specific situation. While respecting the provisions of the Treaties, the Council will continue to work with the Commission on this important issue.

  Antoni Comín i Oliveres (NI). – Señor presidente, efectivamente, entiendo que la diputada que ha hablado después de mí en este debate ha faltado a los artículos del Reglamento que exigen respeto entre los diputados y, por esta razón, pido a la presidencia de este debate que la llame al orden en aplicación del Reglamento de esta Cámara.

Señora Benjumea, yo no soy un prófugo de la justicia, como usted ha dicho, porque yo vine a Bélgica el 30 de octubre de 2017, haciendo uso de un derecho que tengo como ciudadano europeo, que es el derecho a la libre circulación. Y rindo cuentas ante la justicia, contra lo que usted ha dicho, porque yo rindo cuentas ante una justicia de verdad, que es la belga, una justicia democrática, como la belga, y no una justicia franquista.

Señora Benjumea, yo no soy un prófugo de la justicia como usted ha dicho, porque yo soy un eurodiputado elegido por los ciudadanos de mi país, que es Cataluña, que me votaron, que dieron a nuestra lista, que ganó las elecciones, más de un millón de votos. Y nosotros no somos prófugos de la justicia, nosotros representamos a más de un millón de ciudadanos. Pero ya sé que a usted esto seguramente no le importa nada, porque a usted no le importa nada la democracia, porque la derecha española tiene desde hace décadas un problema gravísimo con la democracia.

  President. – Thank you very much. Now the debate on this topic is closed. Would you like to speak on the procedure? Which rule are you referring to?

  Isabel Benjumea Benjumea (PPE). – Señor presidente, simplemente me quiero reafirmar en cada una de las palabras que he dicho en el uso de la palabra. El señor Comín es un prófugo de la justicia española y espero que muy pronto rinda cuentas... (el presidente retira la palabra a la oradora).

  President. – Sorry, you will not get the floor as you cannot name the procedural point. The rules speak about personal statements but not about other statements. The debate is closed. The vote will take place on Thursday, 7 July 2022.

Written statements (Rule 171)

  Eugen Jurzyca (ECR), písomne. – Zisky sú zdanené, očakávané aj neočakávané. Z vyšších ziskov sa už teraz platia aj vyššie dane. Tak vyzerá spoločenská dohoda v úspešných ekonomikách. Ak by sme ju chceli častejšie porušovať, napríklad tak, že pri náraste ziskov vyrúbime špeciálne dane, tak dlhodobo znížime investície do dotknutých podnikov a odvetví. Pod úroveň očakávanú podnikmi aj občanmi. Napríklad aj do čistejších a efektívnejších technológií.

20. Kotonu susitarimą pakeisiantis susitarimas (diskusijos)

  President. – The next item is the debate on the statements by the Council and the Commission on the Post-Cotonou Agreement (2022/2715(RSP)).

  Mikuláš Bek, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, honourable Members, ladies and gentlemen, our relation with the ACP countries is, as you well know, the longest—standing relationship with third partners that the EU has had. Its origins date back to the beginning of the history of our organisation, and over time our framework grew to the current membership of more than half of the countries of the world.

Recently we also witnessed a major and significant development on our partners’ side: the birth of the Organisation of African, Caribbean and Pacific States, with an ambition to become a global player. During the past years, both sides have worked hard on negotiating a new modern framework which responds to the many challenges of our age and which uses our bond in the most effective and efficient way to promote the many values and views we share in the global scene. These negotiations were driven by a common goal of exploring the potential of our partnership to shape multiple multilateral discussions to the benefit of our peoples.

The new agreement builds on the substantial and important acquis and experience we gained together with the ACP countries. It sets out a flexible framework with provisions applying to all parties, as well as regional partnerships focusing on the reality, challenges and needs of each region. The new institutional set—up is to ensure the flow of information between the regional and all ACP levels. Furthermore, the modernised parliamentary dimension has been strengthened considerably and is an important element of this new institutional framework.

The work of the Joint Parliamentary Assembly will be complemented by regional assemblies allowing for discussions, focusing on issues specifically relevant for the respective region.

The new agreement sets out an inclusive framework, increasing the presence and role of the different stakeholders, be it local authorities, civil society or private sector representatives. The creation of an open and transparent mechanism for structured cooperation will be an important, innovative element of the renewed partnership.

Honourable Members, ladies and gentlemen, work is well-advanced within the Council on the Council decision on the signing and provisional application of the new agreement, and the Czech Presidency is determined to continue efforts and to bring the process forward towards a conclusion so that the preparations for the signature of the agreement can start as soon as possible. Thank you very much for your attention.

  Virginijus Sinkevičius, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, I am glad that thanks to this House we are having today the opportunity to exchange on the Cotonou Agreement, the foundation of our strategic engagement with the African, Caribbean and Pacific regions.

These three regions, covering 79 states and inhabited by 1.5 billion people, constitute an international force and are of strategic interest to the European Union. We have all agreed that we wish to strengthen and deepen our relationship with those regions in order to better address emerging needs and global challenges – be it climate change and biodiversity, the pandemic or peace and security. On that basis, we negotiated a modern and ambitious agreement, reached a political deal in December 2020, and Minister Dussey from Togo and Commissioner Urpilainen initiated the draft new agreement in April 2021.

It lays down the common principles of our partnership for the next 20 years and marks a step towards a new era for the relationship between the EU and Africa, the Caribbean and Pacific regions. Our relations with these three regions are vivid and dynamic. Since the initiating ceremony, the EU deepened its partnership with Africa at the successful sixth EU—African Union Summit and renewed relations with the Indo-Pacific region at the Indo-Pacific Forum in February 2022. We are also working to reinforce our partnership with the broader Latin America and Caribbean region.

Honourable Members, we are, however, missing an important piece of the puzzle. We have still not signed and applied the draft post—Cotonou Agreement. This delay has not gone has not gone unnoticed. On 9 June, our partners expressed, in the Council of Ministers of the Organisation of the African, Caribbean and Pacific States, their serious concerns about the delay in signing the new agreement. They urged the concerned EU Member States blocking the approval to positively consider facilitating the normal functioning of relations. Given this circumstance, we had to extend the current Cotonou Agreement once again until June 2023 so as to avoid any legal vacuum in the relations with our partners.

It is high time that we follow through so that people in the EU, Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific will fully benefit from this agreement. This is also essential for unlocking the full potential of our global gateway and regional strategies.

I believe that the Commission and the European Parliament share the same sense of urgency to sign and apply the agreement as soon as possible. The ball is at the moment not in the Commission’s court. In order to apply and for the agreement to come into effect, it is for the Council to adopt the relevant decision on signature and provisional application. This should be a top priority for the Council of the EU, and we hope that it will adopt such a decision very soon so as to be able to move towards the signature of the new agreement swiftly.

The current geopolitical context, characterised by instability and insecurity makes this even more urgent. We just lived through a pandemic which left its mark on our society and economy. Now, Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine is further aggravating the situation. I firmly believe that in times of geopolitical instability and global challenges, strong partnerships are key in finding solutions. In this spirit, let me reiterate my call to the Council to take action and come up with a clear timeline detailing the steps towards the signature of the post—Cotonou Agreement.

  Tomas Tobé, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, as Chair of the European Parliament’s Committee on Development, let me be clear. The recent decision by the Council to extend the Cotonou Agreement until next year and the repeated failure to sign the modernised partnership agreement with the Organisation of African, Caribbean and Pacific States is very disappointing.

Parliament’s view is that this modernised agreement has the potential to enhance our political partnership since it covers crucial issues such as climate change, migration, and peace and security. It is clear that we do need to tackle these major challenges together. Today’s increasingly unstable and unpredictable geopolitical landscape makes it even more important for us to enhance cooperation with our partner countries.

Therefore, I once again call on the Council to overcome any remaining divisions internally. I do know that there is one country that is the problem. I don’t have to mention them but they have had elections now, so hopefully, hopefully, we can now come to that we can have this agreement signed and then Parliament will be ready to give its consent.

  Carlos Zorrinho, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, Senhor Presidente do Conselho, é inaceitável que o Conselho continue a não conseguir viabilizar a entrada em vigor do Acordo Pós-Cotonu.

Respeito a independência e a legitimidade dos diversos órgãos institucionais.

Não vou, por isso, pronunciar-me sobre as razões que levam a que o Acordo Pós-Cotonu continue na gaveta, depois de ter sido possível chegar a um acordo para avançar com a parceria multilateral entre iguais, com forte dimensão parlamentar, e alinhado com as grandes prioridades de desenvolvimento sustentável, num trabalho de grande proximidade e empenho da Comissão, do Conselho, do Parlamento Europeu e da Organização dos Estados de África, Caraíbas e Pacífico.

A verdade é que aguarda ratificação pelo Conselho, desde junho de 2021, e obriga a uma nova prorrogação do Acordo de Cotonu, que deveria ter expirado em fevereiro de 2020.

E há uma causa maior, Senhor Presidente do Conselho, que não nos permite silenciar o dano que o atraso desta ratificação e a entrada em vigor do novo acordo provoca. É que o mundo mudou.

A União Europeia geopolítica trava agora um combate brutal de relevância e sobrevivência, em nome dos seus valores e princípios estruturantes. E o Acordo Pós—Cotonu representa uma referência para o sentido de mudança da ordem global emergente.

Inclui 106 países de quatro continentes. Inclui a segunda maior assembleia parlamentar paritária do mundo, três assembleias parlamentares paritárias regionais que dão sequência à atual Assembleia Parlamentar UE-ACP, a que me orgulho de copresidir. Cobre áreas temáticas fundamentais. É fundamental para uma aplicação de instrumentos, como o Global Europe ou o Global Gateway.

Por isso, insisto: o Acordo Pós-Cotonou é uma referência crucial para o sentido da mudança. É urgente que entre em vigor.

Neste momento, é do Conselho que isso depende e deixo um apelo veemente para que tudo faça nesse sentido.

  Marie-Pierre Vedrenne, au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, Monsieur le Ministre, tout comme mes collègues, je voudrais vous rappeler l’urgence dans laquelle nous sommes. Il nous faut ratifier le nouvel accord entre l’Union européenne et les pays d’Afrique, des Caraïbes et du Pacifique.

Nous traversons une période de tensions qui éprouve tous les continents: guerres, pandémies, urgence climatique, et aujourd’hui le risque accru de famine et de pénurie alimentaire. Cela fait plus d’un an que nous avons un accord. Un accord à la hauteur des enjeux environnementaux, sociaux et numériques de notre siècle. Un accord qui renforce un partenariat gagnant-gagnant avec l’Afrique, les Caraïbes et le Pacifique. Il est temps de donner ce nouvel élan à nos relations et de construire une coopération plus forte, plus profonde et plus durable.

Ici, au Parlement européen, nous sommes prêts. Monsieur le Commissaire, vous l’avez dit, vous êtes prêts. Au Parlement européen, nous avons déjà, et à plusieurs reprises, rappelé l’urgence de finaliser l’accord post-Cotonou, comme en avril dernier à Strasbourg, notamment, lors de la 41ᵉ session de l’Assemblée parlementaire ACP-UE.

Alors comment expliquer que cet accord soit encore bloqué au Conseil? Comment expliquer que le veto hongrois n’ait toujours pas été surmonté? La Hongrie de Viktor Orbán ne peut, à elle seule et sous de faux prétextes, prendre en otage nos relations avec ceux qui font l’avenir de l’Union européenne. Cette situation n’a que trop duré, l’Union européenne doit envoyer un signal fort. Nos partenaires comptent sur nous et nous devons nous montrer dignes de cette confiance – pour nous, pour eux, pour tous.

  Tineke Strik, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, Council, Commissioner, the Cotonou Agreement has been successful in promoting sustainable development goals, and we therefore strongly support its successor. It also aims to promote human rights, EU values and to operate in a spirit of equality.

So these goals all serve the interests of the citizens of ACP countries, except one element that the EU insisted upon, which is the readmission clauses. If an ACP country does not comply with return and readmission of their citizens, EU Member States can suspend the benefits of the Agreement. But if the EU does not deliver in making remittances cheaper or in promoting legal migration, the ACP countries are left with empty hands because that is limited to good intentions. This does not reflect the principle of equal partnership. We need mutual and equally strong commitments.

So I urge the Member States to keep their promise to strengthen legal mobility of persons, solidarity in hosting refugees, facilitate remittances: these are all key to cooperation and development.

  Beata Kempa, w imieniu grupy ECR. – (początek wystąpienia poza mikrofonem) ...Afryki, Karaibów i Pacyfiku. Unia Europejska musi zmienić dynamikę wzajemnych stosunków z tymi krajami i wykroczyć poza tradycyjną współpracę na rzecz rozwoju, opierając się na partnerstwie na zasadzie równości. Obawiam się jednak, że niektóre zapisy, zwłaszcza te dotyczące migracji, mogą doprowadzić do negatywnych dla Europy skutków. Aktualnie kontynent mierzy się z kryzysem migracyjnym i nie może pozwolić sobie na dalsze tolerowanie nielegalnej migracji z państw trzecich. Trzeba też zwrócić uwagę, że mamy wojnę w Ukrainie, która będzie również ruchy migracyjne wyzwalać.

Ponadto projekt umowy post-Kotonu jest niezgodny z Traktatem o Unii Europejskiej, Traktatem o funkcjonowaniu Unii Europejskiej czy Kartą Praw Podstawowych w zakresie, w jakim zastępuje wyrażoną w tych traktatach zasadę równości między kobietami a mężczyznami, która jest oczywista, poprzez używanie pozatraktatowego wyrażenia „gender equality”. Zamiast narzucać tę ideologię krajom Afryki, Karaibów i Pacyfiku, powinniśmy skupić się na współpracy z tym regionem, który ma olbrzymi potencjał rozwoju, m.in. w zakresie sektora rolno-spożywczego, budowy infrastruktury i ochrony zdrowia.

  João Pimenta Lopes, em nome do Grupo The Left. – Senhor Presidente, o Acordo de Cotonu mantém o lastro de um legado colonial de séculos.

Nele vemos a exportação de modelos de governação estatal e económica, visando criar um quadro normativo e institucional que promova a liberalização dos mercados e escancare as portas ao grande capital europeu. Nele vemos a perpetuação de relações de dominação, aplicando medidas de condicionalidade que mais não são do que instrumentos de chantagem e subjugação. Nele vemos a desumanidade de uma política de migração que externaliza fronteiras, que ignora causas de fundo, com responsabilidades da União Europeia na desestabilização e agressão a países soberanos, violando direitos humanos e afrontando o direito internacional.

A União Europeia insiste num Acordo Pós-Cotonu que mantenha esse recorte neocolonial em favor dos interesses das suas principais potências e grupos económicos, sem contribuir verdadeiramente para o desenvolvimento soberano dos países ACP.

O desenvolvimento destes países será facilitado pelo cancelamento das suas dívidas estruturais, pela transferência de tecnologia, por serviços públicos universais, pela melhoria das infraestruturas e por apoio técnico e formação, alicerçando as estratégias soberanas destes países.

  Hildegard Bentele (PPE). – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Dass wir heute darüber sprechen, dass die Verabschiedung des Post-Cotonou-Abkommens zum dritten Mal um abermals ein Jahr verschoben werden muss, ist ein absolutes Armutszeugnis für die EU. Ich bin nie ein großer Fan davon gewesen, das AKP-Format fortzuführen, weil die drei Regionen sehr unterschiedliche Beziehungen zur EU haben und wir vor allem für Afrika besser eine eigene, sich am besten auf ganz Afrika beziehende echte Governance brauchen. Aber dieser Zirkus um ein gemischtes oder ein reines EU-Abkommen, den der Rat und hier besonders ein Mitgliedstaat aufführt, setzt dem Ganzen wirklich die Krone auf.

Wir dürfen uns angesichts einer Energie- und Hungerkrise doch nicht verzetteln. Alles was zählt, sind Existenzsicherung, Schaffung von Jobs, Infrastrukturprojekte und Klima- und Energiepartnerschaften. Mit diesem neuesten Manöver, meine Damen und Herren, wird Europa keine Geopolitik und vor allem keine glaubwürdige Afrikapolitik machen.

Ich appelliere eindringlich an die Ratspräsidentschaft, an den Hohen Vertreter und an die Kommissionspräsidentin: Schalten Sie sich auf höchster Ebene ein, bereiten Sie diesem unwürdigen Spiel ein Ende und arbeiten Sie an Europas Handlungsfähigkeit.

  Hannes Heide (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, geschätzter Vertreter der Ratspräsidentschaft! Dass das Post-Cotonou-Abkommen bis heute nicht unterzeichnet ist, ist die berechtigte Ursache für einen massiven Vertrauensverlust in den Beziehungen zwischen den Ländern Afrikas, der Karibik und des Pazifiks und der Europäischen Union. Dieser Zustand ist zum Schaden der Europäischen Union und spielt Putins Russland in die Hände.

Und gleich vorweg: Es geht nicht um eine ungehinderte Einwanderung, sondern vielmehr darum, dass jungen Menschen, allen Menschen in diesen Ländern eine Zukunft und Perspektive geboten wird. Es geht auch nicht um Geben und Nehmen, sondern um die Umsetzung gemeinsamer Ziele, um das Miteinander und auch darum, gegenseitig profitieren zu können. Die Verantwortlichen, die das Inkrafttreten des Abkommens verzögern, sind zu nennen, denn sie schaden der Europäischen Union und ihren Bürgerinnen und Bürgern.

Ein für mich besonders bedeutender Aspekt: Der Bildungsbereich muss oberste Priorität haben. Er ist Schlüssel zu Beschäftigung, Stabilität und einer nachhaltigen Perspektive für das Leben der Menschen in ihren Heimatländern. Überlassen wir die Länder Afrikas, der Karibik und des Pazifiks nicht dem Einfluss Putins und Chinas. Lassen wir Worten Taten folgen!

  Pierrette Herzberger-Fofana (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, les négociations de l’accord post-Cotonou s’articulent autour d’un socle commun et mettent l’accent sur les besoins spécifiques des régions, à savoir la démocratie et les droits humains, le développement durable, social et humain.

Aujourd’hui, nous avons la possibilité de mettre en œuvre notre programme, notamment celui d’un partenariat durable sur un pied d’égalité avec les pays ACP (Afrique, Caraïbes et Pacifique). En tant que vice-présidente de cette délégation, je suis ravie que l’amendement concernant le devoir de mémoire, que nous avions inclus dans les accords, ait été concrétisé par les mesures que mon État membre, l’Allemagne, vient de prendre en procédant à la restitution des bronzes béninois. J’espère que cela fera des émules. Ce geste témoigne également de cette volonté de vouloir assumer notre histoire commune dans un esprit de compréhension réciproque.

Nous souhaitons entamer un dialogue fructueux sur la base d’un respect mutuel et avoir des échanges constructifs avec une forte participation du Parlement européen et le soutien actif des États membres.

  Janina Ochojska (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Odnowiona umowa z Kotonu stanowi filar partnerstwa między Unią Europejską, państwami członkowskimi Unii Europejskiej oraz państwami AKP. Jej celem jest wyeliminowanie ubóstwa, zagwarantowanie praworządności, wspieranie zrównoważonego rozwoju gospodarczego i społecznego krajów partnerskich oraz stopniowa integracja ich gospodarek z gospodarką światową. Sytuacja globalna i nowe światowe wyzwania, takie jak kryzysy migracyjne czy zmiany klimatu, spowodowały, że podstawowe założenia partnerstwa musiały zostać zdefiniowane na nowo, co nie oznacza, że powinniśmy zrezygnować z paktu migracyjnego oraz legalnej migracji i z Zielonego Ładu, który pozwoli nam żyć w bezpieczniejszym świecie.

  Evin Incir (S&D). – Mr President, colleagues, in a time of polarisation globally, and when our multilateral corporations are under tremendous pressure, we need more cooperation, cohesion and trust—building. We have in the last month become fully aware that global threat requires joint actions, but it is also time to understand that global prosperity requires joint actions as well. The post—Cotonou Agreement is essential part of the continued strengthening of the cooperation between EU and the countries in Africa, Caribbean and the Pacific.

At the basis of trade and development cooperation must always be common values, democratic rights and a feminist approach, ensuring inclusion of women and girls and their rights. It is essential that we together fight climate change and put equality in the centre.

I totally agree with the rapporteur, Tomas Tobé, that it is disappointing – I would even say shameful – that we have a Member State that blocks important agreements. It is important that the Council swiftly sign it so that it can enter into force. Global prosperity requires joint actions. The failure of one EU Member State to understand it shouldn’t deprive the progress of basic human rights; it’s unacceptable.

  Eric Andrieu (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, Monsieur le Ministre, la décision prise par le Conseil de reporter la signature de l’accord est réellement difficile à accepter et je ne peux que regretter que mon pays, la France, n’ait pas pu arriver à la signature durant sa présidence. Je souhaite beaucoup de courage et d’abnégation à la nouvelle présidence pour ce faire.

Au moment où le monde traverse une méta-crise et où s’entrechoquent des crises sanitaires, alimentaires, environnementales ou encore géopolitiques, avec tout ce que cela sous-entend sur la fragilisation de nombreuses populations, il est temps de redonner à tous ces pays et toutes ces populations les moyens de l’autonomie alimentaire. Il faut aussi songer à la suspension du service de la dette ou au cadre commun pour la restructuration de la dette des pays pauvres. Pour ce qui est de l’environnement, l’accord post-Cotonou doit s’inscrire dans la perspective de la lutte contre le réchauffement climatique afin que leurs territoires ne deviennent pas inhabitables.

Nous devons repenser en profondeur les relations avec les pays en voie de développement et nous devons revisiter nos modèles de partenariat et être davantage dans l’écoute et dans l’accompagnement.

  Pierfrancesco Majorino (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, molte volte questo Parlamento ha ribadito la necessità di considerare strategici i rapporti con il continente africano, rapporti rispetto ai quali serve anche un cambio di rotta, passando dall'aiuto allo sviluppo a un vero partenariato, estraneo a qualsiasi forma di sfruttamento neocoloniale.

Il nuovo accordo di partenariato sottoscritto con l'Organizzazione degli Stati dell'Africa, dei Caraibi e del Pacifico proietta le relazioni commerciali e politiche con 79 paesi dell'area in un quadro rinnovato, rafforzando elementi importanti come la lotta alle diseguaglianze, il rispetto dei diritti umani, un maggiore coinvolgimento dei parlamenti e della società civile. Un accordo avanzato, che da più di un anno è ostaggio di un'ignobile battaglia di retroguardia da parte del governo ungherese, infastidito dalla previsione di canali illegali di migrazione, un argomento assolutamente strumentale.

Ancora una volta un ricatto fondato sull'ossessione della migrazione, sulle paure, su un'idea di un'Europa chiusa, di un'Europa fortezza, un ricatto inaccettabile e da rispedire al mittente, in particolare nel contesto della crisi sanitaria e alimentare.

  Virginijus Sinkevičius, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, thank you for this debate and I welcome your efforts to keep the Post-Cotonou Agreement high on the agenda. Today’s debate just confirmed that the Commission and Parliament are on the same page in this regard and I really appreciate the very strong support from this House in stressing the urgency on this matter.

To be credible towards our citizens, our partners, in our commitments to deepening relations with the African, Caribbean and Pacific regions we need to swiftly move forward with the signature and provisional application of the Post-Cotonou Agreement.

If there is one thing the current geopolitical context clearly shows us it is that we need to act swiftly and firmly, that we need to forge stronger relations with our allies, and that we have to do that together, unified as a Team Europe. So with this, I very much hope that we can count on the Council to sign the Post-Cotonou Agreement in the very near future.

VORSITZ: NICOLA BEER
Vizepräsidentin

  Mikuláš Bek, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner Sinkevičius, thank you for this debate and exchange of views. Yes, as many of you have said, the world has changed and has become more complex with many challenges, including an unprecedented war in our neighbourhood, with a serious impact in Europe and all over the world. And this concerns also African, Caribbean and Pacific regions and countries. Earlier today, we discussed the issue of food security crisis that impacts this region and the ways to tackle it.

In such troubled times, the value of alliances and partnerships increases even more. I understand the frustration that has been expressed here. And I can assure you that the Council will continue its work to find a solution and finalise the process. Timely implementation of the agreement and the strengthening of our partnership with the Organisation of African, Caribbean and Pacific States remain a priority for both sides, and the Czech Presidency will treat it as a priority.

The post-Cotonou Agreement demonstrates the value we attach to this partnership and its implementation will allow us to work better on solutions together with our partners. Thank you very much for your attention.

  Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

21. 2020 m. metinis pranešimas „Europos Sąjungos finansinių interesų apsauga. Kova su sukčiavimu“ (diskusijos)

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über den Bericht von Katalin Cseh im Namen des Haushaltskontrollausschusses über den Schutz der finanziellen Interessen der Europäischen Union – Betrugsbekämpfung – Jahresbericht 2020 (2021/2234(INI)) (A9-0175/2022).

  Katalin Cseh, rapporteur. – Madam President, Commissioner, Minister, dear colleagues, we have many debates in this House, but if there is one debate, one thing that should unite us all from left to right, it is the aim of protecting the European Union’s financial interests and strengthening our framework to monitor our EU funds. It is the aim of making sure that European taxpayers’ money actually reaches the ones who need it. And it has never been more important than now, with the cost of living crisis raging through Europe. Protecting the Union’s financial interests is also not an ideological issue, and it should not be a divisive one. This is basic common sense. So I certainly hope that this report can count on your wide support.

There have been many good improvements in the course of 2020 and this report welcomes these. The creation of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, the new Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation and the strengthening of OLAF have all been consequential, and it will help better protect our financial interests. But also we need to do more. As we talk to the representatives of these institutions, one common issue they raised was that more staff and more funds are needed for anti-fraud work. And it’s really a fair point. We have a historic new recovery fund. We have a much bigger budget. But our capacities to control this budget are not strengthened in parallel. Protecting our financial interests has costs, but spending more on anti-fraud is actually saving us money in the end, and also beyond that, we need to improve the interoperability of the existing systems to create a better exchange of information and to avoid overlaps.

We’re also calling for binding legal obligations for Member States to feed into the EU’s database of beneficiaries, which is called Arachne. It is really absurd that we don’t even have a transparent list of final beneficiaries of EU funds. EDES, a blacklist to exclude fraudulent applicants, is an important tool as well. But up until now it has not covered funds in shared management, and shared management covers 80% of all EU funds. We know it. So we were very, very pleased to hear that the European Commission has just rectified this in the new Financial Regulation.

And also, finally, what we desperately need now is credible enforcement from the side of the Commission. We can have the best, the most well-designed legal instruments, but they are all pointless if the Commission refuses to apply them. So just take the Recovery Fund as an example, the conditions are crystal-clear and the tools are there, but what about the enforcement? Non-transparent backroom deals will not get us the results. Why isn’t the public properly informed about the Commission’s negotiations? I hope this can change in the future.

So, colleagues, a box of shiny new tools does not make a good mechanic. And similarly, in the case of the protection of the EU’s financial interests, it is not just a toolbox that matters, but also what the Commission makes of it. So I am hoping to work together on this, also in the future.

  Virginijus Sinkevičius, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable members of the European Parliament, first of all, let me thank the rapporteur Ms Cseh and all colleagues involved for this thorough and well—balanced report that covers a range of important issues.

The Commission and Parliament agree that the protection of the EU budget, both in terms of expenditure and revenue, is of the utmost importance. And the efforts of the Parliament, Commission and Member States in the fight against fraud have been remarkable in recent years, and particularly given the challenges caused by the COVID—19 pandemic. To help Europe recover from the pandemic, the EU has set up an unprecedented financial package through the new multiannual budget and the Next Generation EU, amounting to more than EUR 2 trillion. Protecting this money from fraud, corruption and other illegal activities is key. We at EU level and with our partners in the Member States need to use all available tools to ensure we are more effective than ever before in ensuring that money is properly spent. We have no other choice. It is for this reason that the Commission, like the Parliament, welcomes the results achieved by the European Anti-Fraud Office in 2021 and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in its first year of activity.

Another of the latest additions to our toolkit is the Conditionality Regulation, which allows for measures when breaches to the principles of the rule of law threaten the EU financial interest. As you know, the Commission sent a written notification to one Member State and we are currently assessing the reply we got. We also continue assessing the situation across Member States. This regulation is the latest brick added to a revamped EU anti-fraud architecture, which has been built up in recent years, and comprises strengthened investigative functions for the European Anti-Fraud Office, the just mentioned European Public Prosecutor’s Office, the coordinating role of Eurojust, the support of Europol and close cooperation with and between the national authorities.

We must ensure that this architecture remains fit for current and future challenges. And I will highlight three main themes in this respect: coordination and harmonisation; digitalisation of the fight against fraud; and stepping up the fight against corruption and organised crime.

So first, our complex architecture needs coordination and harmonisation. All Member States against which the Commission has launched infringement procedures should swiftly take action and modify national legislation to correctly transpose the so-called PIF Directive. Furthermore, the Commission has made great efforts to promote the adoption of the national anti-fraud strategies. Their number is increasing and the Commission welcomes this development and has supported Member States with guidance and knowledge—sharing.

Secondly, digitalisation and the availability of quality data on the recipients of EU funds and their beneficial owners is also important. The targeted adjustments of the Financial Regulation will be an opportunity to enhance protection of the EU budget by reinforcing the use of the digitalisation of controls and audits, and improving interoperability and the quality of the data for controls and audits, including both through the use of a single integrated IT system for data mining and risk—scoring. It will also be an opportunity to enhance transparency and public scrutiny with regard to the use of the EU budget, notably by requiring Member States implementing the Union budget under the shared management to send information to the Commission on the recipients of Union funding at least once a year. The Commission would then centralise this information on a single website.

We have also proposed to extend the early detection and exclusion system to funds and the shared management for serious misconduct. The Commission’s anti-fraud strategy, adopted in 2019, has largely been implemented. The results will be included in the next report on the protection of financial interests. We are now considering a revision of the action plan accompanying the strategy in line with our high anti-fraud ambitions. Digitalisation will be an important topic.

Thirdly, fighting corruption is a key element of the European Semester, as reflected in country specific recommendations and in the measures included by Member States in their recovery and resilience plans. Concerning organised crime, we have developed a comprehensive and integrated approach under the EU Security Union strategy and the most recent EU strategy to tackle organised crime adopted in 2021. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office is also competent to investigate crimes affecting the Union budget committed by criminal organisations such as VAT carousel fraud. These initiatives are prime examples of our continuous engagement in the fight against fraud.

So I thank you for your attention and I look forward to a constructive debate.

  Petri Sarvamaa, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, honourable Member of the European Commission, dear Members, budgetary control is based, at least mostly, on two principles: on the one hand, ensuring that the EU budget is properly spent according to the rules and regulations and, on the other hand, protecting the Union’s financial interests and combating fraud. And at the end, of course, our most important task is to protect taxpayers’ money and be sure that we use our resources in an efficient way.

So that’s why the PIF Report is so important. And it’s good to see that this year’s report is maybe a little bit more solid than they are on average. Two reasons, of course, as we all know: COVID-19, 2020, and then, after that, the decision to launch Next Generation EU and the RRF. So the opportunities for fraudsters grew, I would say almost exponentially. We don’t even know, but maybe the tip of the iceberg at the moment.

So that’s why it is extremely important now not to lower our guard, but do exactly the opposite. And this is a message to the Commission that we really have to take good care of our resources, help our OLAF and EPPO in this very important task. And in the report, you find the main elements that the rapporteur is suggesting. So I will give my full support to this report.

  Caterina Chinnici, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, voglio ringraziare la relatrice e gli altri relatori ombra per il lavoro svolto insieme su questa relazione che, considerata l'eccezionalità dell'anno 2020, assume davvero un'importanza particolare.

La gestione della pandemia, infatti, ha ingenerato nuovi e maggiori rischi, sia in termini di entrate che di spese, e potenziali nuove opportunità per gli autori di frodi, compresi i gruppi della criminalità organizzata. È quindi necessario assicurare massima trasparenza, in particolare nella gestione del dispositivo per la ripresa e la resilienza, incrementando e rafforzando i sistemi di monitoraggio e controllo, che vanno armonizzati al pari delle definizioni.

E soprattutto va rafforzata l'architettura antifrode e anticorruzione dell'Unione europea, assicurando a OLAF, EPPO, Eurojust ed Europol strumenti e risorse necessari.

Occorre ancora intensificare sinergia e scambio di informazioni e complementarietà operativa agli organismi UE e nazionali, come sta avvenendo nell'ambito del Next Generation EU - Law Enforcement Forum, avviato congiuntamente da Europol e dall'Italia. Tutto per tutelare gli interessi finanziari dell'Unione europea.

  Ramona Strugariu, în numele grupului Renew. – Doamnă președintă, protecția intereselor financiare ale Uniunii înseamnă un cadru complex care include mecanisme de detecție, investigare, pedepsire, recuperare, dar și de prevenție.

Un rol extrem de important pentru detecție și prevenție, în special, în contextul achizițiilor făcute în perioada pandemiei, dar nu numai, îl au avertizorii de integritate. Ei sunt acei oameni verticali care, atunci când sesizează fapte de corupție în companiile sau instituțiile publice în care lucrează, au curajul să le denunțe. Pentru a semnala corupția, însă, avertizorii de integritate au nevoie de canale sigure și de o protecție sporită, garantată de lege.

Chiar Procuroarea-șefă a Parchetului European sublinia săptămâna trecută acest lucru, în contextul în care România nu a transpus corect și complet Directiva europeană privind protecția avertizorilor de integritate. Și nu este singura, a făcut asta alături de alte 17 state membre care încă nu au transpus corect această directivă.

Mai mult, în România, legea recent adoptată de Parlamentul României golește directiva de conținut. Asta pune în pericol și activitatea Parchetului European și cadrul de protecție a intereselor financiare ale Uniunii.

Le cer tuturor acestor state membre care nu au transpus directiva să facă acest lucru corect și cât mai repede, pentru că altfel nu protejăm interesele financiare ale Uniunii, ci opacitatea, frauda și corupția.

  Daniel Freund, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, the Commissioner spoke of the remarkable track record of the Commission in the fight against fraud. That’s quite a bold statement, I have to say, Commissioner. I mean, Transparency International says that in Hungary, for example, at least 25% of EU funds are frauded, embezzled, stolen, to a large extent by Orbán, his family and his friends, and saying that that is a remarkable track record – I would not agree.

Actually, this House does not agree. You spoke of the conditionality mechanism, which clearly shows that this is not a question of a lack of tools, it’s a question of a lack of political will, because this House sued your Commission last year for inactivity, for not using this tool of the conditionality mechanism. It took the Commission a year and a half almost to launch the procedure. Now we’re at the stage where the Commission has to decide how much of the EU funding is going to be frozen to Hungary.

Once again, Parliament did the homework for the Commission. We launched a study today that every single cent of Hungarian EU funds has to be frozen. Can I give you the study now? Show us that there is a real political will in the Commission to do something about fraud, not only in Hungary but in all EU Member States.

  Ryszard Czarnecki, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Mówiąc wprost, sprawozdanie, o którym mowa, nie ma tak naprawdę większego związku z dyrektywą PIF. To jest raczej taki spis oczekiwań Parlamentu Europejskiego wobec OLAF, wobec Komisji Europejskiej, wobec państw członkowskich, bez żadnych w gruncie rzeczy danych ilościowych i jakościowych. To spis, trochę – przepraszam – pobożnych życzeń, trochę jak w restauracji, gdzie przychodzimy i sobie wybieramy z karty dań, co nam się podoba. W zasadzie nie ma odniesienia do artykułu 25. Wydaje mi się, że jest to raczej akt strzelisty, raczej taki wishful thinking, niż odniesienie się do konkretnego projektu.

  Luke Ming Flanagan, on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, I think the draft report was a good basis with a good focus on the fight against corruption and the need for an enhanced approach at EU level to cope with the new challenges which emerged in 2020 with COVID-19 – the COVID-19 outbreak – and the new way of managing EU funds. Nevertheless, the report seems to me to lack some kind of substance in terms of recommendations and criticisms but, on the positive side, there are positive elements.

The report includes a clear request for transparency in the expenditure side, as well as the concerns on conflicts of interest. The report has a strong focus on corruption and the fight against organised crime, including the mafia type. It highlights the importance of the anti-fraud strategy in the Member States, as well as the need for an EU strategy on revolving doors. On anti-corruption reporting, the text regrets that the Commission decided to disrupt its report but takes note of the role of the new Rule of Law Report while asking for recommendations to be set by the Commission within this specific framework.

I will be supporting this report but I make one recommendation here. Can we get a clock in front of us so we can see how long we are speaking instead of one behind us?

  Ivan Vilibor Sinčić (NI). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, hvala vam, financijske prevare vezane uz sredstva iz EU fondova u Hrvatskoj su svakodnevica.

Jedan od najbezobraznijih primjera pljačke i nenamjenskog trošenja je Centar kompetencija za naprednu mobilnost. To je projekt istraživanja i razvoja čiji je korisnik DIV Grupa i još sedam partnera, među kojima i nekoliko fakulteta. Radi se o 205 milijuna kuna u razdoblju 2020. – 2023., a izvor sufinanciranja je Europski fond za regionalni razvoj.

Neki od istraživačkih projekata imaju dozu nadrealnosti te bi bili izazov i kompanijama Elona Muska, a ne za skromnog proizvođača vijaka. Ideja DIV Grupe nikada nije bila razvoj novih tehnologija, nego su CEKOM gledali kao bankomat. Fiktivno se prijavljuju radni sati, zapošljavaju se nekompetentni zaposlenici kojima se daju lažne dnevnice i piše izmišljeni napredak na projektima. DIV Grupa nije isplaćivala sredstva partnerima te je ostala dužna fakultetima. Sve ovo događa se uz blagoslov nadležnih ministara koji su sve pripremili i osmislili. Vladu, DIV Grupu i sve druge netko će uskoro pitati gdje je novac i koji je rezultat, a otkud, godina istraživačkih aktivnosti?

Konačno, ironično, najviše bi u CEKOM-u mogao istraživati upravo OLAF i Ured europskog javnog tužitelja.

  Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE). – Vážená paní předsedkyně, vážení kolegové, dámy a pánové, jako místopředseda Výboru pro rozpočtovou kontrolu bych rád na úvod poděkoval všem za úsilí, které v boji proti finančním podvodům vynaložili, také paní zpravodajce, protože finanční podvody se přímo dotýkají všech občanů. Rozkradené prostředky by mohly být investovány do školství, zdravotnictví nebo zlepšení životní úrovně občanů Evropské unie. Každý odhalený podvod je úspěch, ale je potřeba ten boj za finanční zájmy Evropské unie zintenzivnit. Pro organizované zločinecké skupiny jsou finanční podvody přitažlivější, protože zejména v oblasti zemědělství se špatně vyšetřují. Je to jako chobotnice, která má všude chapadla, nandají je do všech možných kapes daňových poplatníků a vysávají je. Proto zprávu z Výboru pro rozpočtovou kontrolu beru jako předpokládaná doporučení a opatření a apeluji na Komisi, aby důrazně tlačila na odhalování finančních podvodů.

A paní předsedající, já jsem přetáhl deset minut, vy tady přetahujete celou dobu půl hodiny, podívejte se, jak vám uběhl čas, kolik tady času naběhlo a tedy při deseti sekundách mi tady cvakat, to je prosím trošku, jako bych řekl, až příliš.

  President. – Please, you know me: the first round of speakers for all the group is a little more flexible, but if we do it for everybody, then we will be out. We will stick to the time please in the second round. If you are in the first round, no problem, but if you are not in the first round, then we stick to the time. I think this shows respect to the other speakers.

  Lara Wolters (S&D). – Madam President, given that I only have one minute on the broad topic of fraud in the EU, I will move straight to the item highest on our agenda. That is, of course, the topic of access of Hungary and Poland to European funds.

Let’s be clear, money, of course, is extremely important to authoritarian regimes because without it there is less to give away to friends, to supporters and to influence elections.

When, in a country, institutions are no longer independent and basic rule of law principles are violated in broad daylight, what we can expect is that this will affect all EU—funded programmes in one way or another.

That leads me to the following points. One: we must under no condition approve Hungary’s recovery plan. Two: the full power of the conditionality mechanism must be applied, meaning that, as per the report now on your desk, only a freeze of 100% of EU funding will sufficiently protect the EU’s financial interests. Third, on Poland: the Commission must honour the rule of law itself – i.e. the ruling of our Court of Justice on the immediate reinstatement of the suspended judges. Lastly, the approval of Poland’s recovery plan was a mistake.

I urge you, Commissioner, to join the resistance within the Commission. At the next round, when Poland asks for the first tranche, say ‘no’!

  President. – The speakers have more than one minute, but that you have to clear up in your group.

  Eugen Jurzyca (ECR). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, I will try to remember it, thank you for the floor.

Vítam, že Európsky parlament v tejto správe žiada, aby Komisia vyhodnotila efektívnosť rozpočtu za roky 14 až 20, aby sme sa na základe výsledkov dosiahnutých za európske peniaze v minulosti, poučili pri zostavovaní budúcich rozpočtov.

V správe však chýba myšlienka, že nultou podmienkou vyhodnotenia efektívnosti je, aby sme si dopredu určili presné kritériá a merateľné výsledkové ukazovatele, podľa ktorých budeme hodnotiť, či sme boli vo svojich cieľoch úspešní. Aj Európsky dvor audítorov v správe o výkonnosti rozpočtu na roky 14 až 20 upozorňuje, že bol orientovaný najmä na výstupy a že nedošlo k výraznému posunu smerom k meraniu výsledkov.

Myslím si, že meranie výsledkov je aj najlepšou ochranou pred podvodmi a korupciou.

  Andor Deli (NI). – Ebben a jelentésben a már megszokott ideológiai támadásokat láthattuk Magyarország és Lengyelország ellen, és egyértelmű, hogy a jelentéstevőt nem érdeklik a tények, például hogy Magyarország elsőként kötött együttműködési megállapodást az Európai Főügyészséggel, vagy hogy az OLAF-ajánlások alapján megtett vádemelések aránya Magyarországon 67%, ami közel kétszerese az uniós 35%-os átlagnak. Maga az európai főügyész többször is elmondta, hogy kiválóan tudnak együtt dolgozni a magyar hatóságokkal. De ha már tények, közismert tény az is, hogy az európai parlamenti munkában rendkívül fontos a hiteles, megbízható jelentéstevő szerepe, ezért elfogadhatatlan, hogy Cseh Katalin úgy foglalkozhat a csalás elleni éves jelentéssel, hogy saját maga is érintett egy, az uniós források terhére elkövetett súlyos csalási ügyben. Ez a tény az eljárást teljesen hiteltelenné teszi, és tovább rombolja az uniós intézményekbe vetett bizalmat. Ezért felszólítom Cseh Katalin jelentéstevőt, hogy adja vissza megbízatását.

  President. – Yes, but you are careful. If there are things which are not proven, they cannot be mentioned against one of the colleagues. So we continue with colleague Rookmaker.

  Dorien Rookmaker (ECR). – Voorzitter, er zullen altijd mensen zijn die de kluit belazeren. Als er een motief is en er bestaat een gelegenheid, dan kunnen velen de verleiding gewoon niet weerstaan. Vooral omdat het van de grote hoop gaat en de opvatting leeft dat het heel makkelijk is om te stelen van de EU.

In 2020 werd er voor een totaal van 371 miljoen euro aan fraude gemeld. Het gaat dus om serieus geld. En dit waren alleen de gemelde gevallen. Bij een gelijkblijvend beleid kunnen we uitgaan van een verdubbeling van dit bedrag per jaar in de toekomst. Samen met de niet gemelde fraude praten we dan over miljarden per jaar.

De aanpak van fraude binnen de EU moet dus beter. Nu is dit vooral instrumenteel gericht met veel regels en procedures en gericht op detectie en vervolging van de schuldigen. Er moet door de Commissie meer worden ingezet op het voorkomen van fraude, en dat kan door middel van transparantie. De techniek is daarvoor aanwezig. Het is alleen een kwestie van doen.

Ik zou graag zien dat alle uitgaven die de EU doet digitaal zichtbaar zijn, zodat iedereen kan zien waar EU-geld wordt besteed, met welk doel, welke partijen daarbij zijn betrokken en in welk stadium het project verkeert. Daar hebben we allemaal recht op en het verlaagt de zogenaamde cost of control. Het gaat tenslotte uiteindelijk niet alleen om het financieel belang van de EU, maar het gaat om de financiële belangen van ons allemaal.

  Virginijus Sinkevičius, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I would like to thank the honourable Members for today’s debate on this very important subject, and in particular the rapporteur for her extremely important work.

I think it’s clear to all of us that effective protection of the financial interests of the EU requires our collective and coordinated efforts. As we heard during the debate, allowing EU funds to land in the wrong pockets is not only about the intended recipients losing out. Misguided public funds can actually create additional harm. The Commission will, therefore, continue to do everything in its power to improve and increase the level of protection that is already in place. We will do so by developing all tools at our disposal, bridging sectors and work streams. We will work closely with our partners across the EU, both at European and at national level, to make sure that EU funds are protected from those that would do it harm.

I look forward to working with you to make sure that we are as good as we can be in this respect.

  Katalin Cseh, rapporteur. – Madam President, dear colleagues, thanks for this debate. And as I said in the beginning, protecting the Union’s financial interests is not an ideological issue. And certainly I hope it should not be a divisive one. Even the Hungarian Government is implicitly agreeing now, as they are back at the negotiating table trying to offer some concessions to the EU. It looks like some colleagues did not get the memo about this, nor do they respect the Parliament enough not to bring their Russian—style disinformation campaign to the plenary chamber or only to wait for the response after they staged such funny allegations.

But I have to say, arguing against the strengthening of our anti-fraud framework is not really a smart move politically. If a government has nothing to hide, then why are they running away from monitoring? It is almost an admission of guilt. So I certainly hope that the majority of the Parliament agrees and supports the text as it is, and works together for more ambitious reforms in our anti-fraud architecture and to protect our European money from the fraudsters. This is our common goal in this House, from left to right.

  Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet am Donnerstag, 7. Juli 2022, statt.

22. Diskusijos dėl žmogaus teisių, demokratijos ir teisinės valstybės pažeidimo atvejų (diskusijos)

22.1. Kardinolo J. Zeno ir pagalbos fondo „612“ patikėtinių suėmimas Honkonge

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über fünf Entschließungsanträge zu der Verhaftung von Kardinal Zen und der Treuhänder des 612-Hilfsfonds in Hongkong (2022/2751(RSP)).

  Miriam Lexmann, author. – Madam President, dear colleagues, let me begin by paying tribute to the brave Cardinal Zen, who is a true symbol of Hong Kong’s struggle for freedom and embodies Christian pursuit of freedom and love of one’s neighbour. It is in the intention of John Lee and his CCP masters to destroy the last remains of Hong Kong’s autonomy and freedoms and crush people’s hopes, and the moral strength of the 90-year-old Cardinal towering over the city.

That’s why it is no coincidence that Cardinal Zen and the other trustees of the 612 Humanitarian Relief Fund have been arrested and charged. The arrest is an attack on the freedom of religion and belief, as well as on all the freedoms guaranteed in Hong Kong’s basic law. Moreover, the CCP is keen to silence the Cardinal because he continues to stand and speak on behalf of the weak and oppressed across mainland China and Hong Kong. But it is this Christian mission that the CCP can never silence nor break. The faith of Cardinal Zen is that of the city itself. And our voice must be clear: we must urge the Hong Kong authorities to drop all charges against Cardinal Zen and the other trustees, as well as all the Hong Kongers whose only crime has been standing up for the city’s freedoms.

It is also time for the Council to fulfil and implement all the July 2020 conclusions. In particular, Member States should provide lifeboat schemes for Hong Kongers to end all the remaining extradition treaties both with Hong Kong and with the PRC. Hong Kongers and all fleeing persecution of the CCP must feel safe in Europe.

We must also ensure that our diplomatic representations and the EEAS provide support to the civil society and actively steps up trial observations, prison visits and human rights monitoring. Furthermore, it is essential that the Council finally place targeted sanctions under the EU’s Magnitsky Act against John Lee and all other Hong Kong and PRC officials representing the ongoing human rights crackdown in the city.

Given the destruction of Hong Kong’s autonomy, it is time to review the agreement between the EC and Hong Kong in customs matters, the status of the Hong Kong office in Brussels and Hong Kong’s seat at the WTO. The CCP should not profit from Hong Kong while destroying the city’s autonomy and freedoms.

Let me also stress the importance of working together with the Vatican and other religious leaders, as well as with our democratic allies, to defend freedom and human dignity and give a voice to the voiceless in mainland China and Hong Kong.

Finally, let me thank colleagues across this House for cooperation on this important urgency. It is a testimony to the strong cross-party unity in standing with the people of Hong Kong.

  Evin Incir, author. –Madam President, the everyday action of the Chinese communist regime speaks its own language: it is ruthless and it is cruel. There are no limits as regards attacks on freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of expression and freedom of religion and belief.

The unlawful arrest of Cardinal Joseph Zen, one of the strongest advocates of this city’s pro-democracy movement, and the other trustees of the 612 Humanitarian Relief Fund is an attack on fundamental freedoms, and the regime continues to step up its efforts to undermine Hong Kong’s strong autonomy. In practice, they have abolished the autonomy.

All charges against all political prisoners, including Cardinal Zen and the trustees, must be dropped immediately. The national security law must be renounced immediately. And the autonomy of Hong Kong must be respected by the communist regime of China. Nothing less is acceptable.

The EU must, at the same time, offer all needed support to the human rights activists in Hong Kong and to help protect their rights and freedoms. The EU should also, through the EU global human rights sanctions regime, introduce sanctions against those in Hong Kong and those in China that are responsible for the human rights violations.

  Bernard Guetta, auteur. – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, Kiev n’est pas Hong Kong, Taïwan n’est pas l’Ukraine, la Chine n’est pas la Russie. Nous le savons tous, c’est une évidence. Mais au-delà de ces différences de nation, de géographie, de culture, voyons la réalité.

La réalité, c’est qu’à Pékin comme à Moscou, nous faisons face à des régimes qui veulent détruire la démocratie, qui veulent assurer le triomphe de la dictature contre la liberté, qui veulent assurer le triomphe de l’ordre moral, policier, social, contre ce qu’ils appellent la décadence et ce que nous appelons la liberté.

Alors, Monsieur le cardinal Zen, soyez-en assuré: nous vous défendrons et nous défendrons à travers vous la cause que vous incarnez, celle des libertés de la Chine, avec autant d’acharnement, bec et ongles, que nous défendons la liberté de l’Ukraine.

  Reinhard Bütikofer, author. – Madam President, Vice—President, Commissioner, colleagues, the European Parliament has stood, and still stands and will continue to stand with Hong Kong. This Parliament continues to actively show solidarity with Hong Kong democrats against the Chinese Communist oppression.

Last week, several members of this House reminded us of the 25th anniversary of the handover of Hong Kong to the mainland authorities, and the second anniversary of the imposition of the national security law. This is the history of a betrayal, the betrayal of the trust of the citizens of Hong Kong and a betrayal also of the international community.

With this joint resolution, we strengthen our resolve to not forget and to not cease supporting. We want the charges dropped against Cardinal Zen, who is a towering figure but is also representing many, many other courageous Hong Kongers. We want the extradition agreements that still exist between EU Member States and the PRC and even Hong Kong terminated. We want lifeboat opportunities created for Hong Kongers that have to flee their city. And we want permanent monitoring of the human rights situation in Hong Kong through our offices there.

We will continue to stand tall. Only extremists from the left and the right do not join this call.

  Anna Fotyga, author. – Madam President, it is so painful to speak every time about Hong Kong, showing precisely the nature of atrocities against ordinary peace-loving and democracy-loving people who, as my colleague said minutes ago, were betrayed by neighbours. And that shows the real nature of the Communist regime, regardless of propaganda. The arrest and charges against an authority, a great authority, 90-year-old Cardinal Zen, shows how vicious, brutal this regime can be. We stand by him. We call on the international community to use every power possible to exert pressure on PRC to drop charges against Cardinal Zen and other people of Hong Kong who simply want to live in peace.

And we have to work with the Vatican. For me, a Pole, it is a reminder of the faith and brave behaviour of our leader, the Primate of Poland, Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński. It is the fate of leaders, of spiritual leaders, but we have to defend them by all our force.

  Michaela Šojdrová, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, I strongly support this resolution and I thank all co—rapporteurs, especially Miriam Lexmann, for your work.

It has been 56 days since Hong Kong’s national security police arrested the 90—year—old Cardinal Joseph Zen, one of Asia’s oldest and most outspoken Catholic clergy. He was arrested along with three other people from completely different fields of activity: singer and actress Denise Ho, lawyer Margaret Ng and scientist Hui Po Keung. Reason for the arrests: alleged collusion with foreign forces.

One thing they had in common – and as we know now, the thing that was the real reason for their arrest – was their role as trustees of the 612 Humanitarian Relief Fund. As political activist Nathan Law, a former student of the arrested scientist Hui Po Keung, said, when you want to punish someone, you always find an excuse. And this is doubly true for countries with an authoritarian regime. The arrests were the latest move by authorities in enforcing the controversial National Security Act, which was imposed on this city in June 2020.

I fully agree with what Labour’s Shadow Minister for Asia and the Pacific Catherine West said: that the arrests are further evidence of China’s effort to suppress the opposition in Hong Kong, which is completely contrary to the freedom promised to Hong Kong.

The activities of Cardinal Zen and the rest of his team were completely peaceful and lawful. Their arrest is an example of the appalling decline in respect for human rights that we are witnessing in China.

Support and respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law should be central to the EU’s relations with China. That is why the European Parliament calls upon the EU and its Member States to take all necessary steps to push China to end the breaking of human rights and ensure responsibility for these crimes committed.

We also reiterate our call on the Commission and the Member States to review the agreement between the European Community and Hong Kong, China on cooperation and mutual administrative assistance in custom matters, the status of the Hong Kong Economic and Trade Office in Brussels, and the Hong Kong seat at the World Trade Organization. Thank you for your attention and for the support for the resolution.

  Raphaël Glucksmann, au nom du groupe S&D. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, oser garder la tête levée quand tout vous pousse à courber l’échine: voilà ce qu’est le courage. Le cardinal Zen, à 90 ans, est aujourd’hui le visage et le nom de la dignité humaine, et avec lui Jimmy Lai, Joshua Wong et des centaines d’autres.

À Hong Kong, la liste des prisonniers politiques s’accroît chaque jour, les cellules sont pleines et les procès fantoches se succèdent. Collusion avec une puissance étrangère, incitation à la subversion, apologie du terrorisme, conspiration en vue de distribuer une publication séditieuse: Pékin criminalise le moindre désir de liberté. Le Parti communiste chinois entend édifier à Hong Kong le premier hub mondial pour les services bancaires et financiers. Il le fait sur le cimetière des espérances démocratiques d’un peuple.

Nos propres marchés financiers, nos banques, nos multinationales agissent en complices. Il est temps de mettre fin à ces complicités, de soutenir les démocrates de Hong Kong, y compris en envoyant des observateurs à chacun de leurs procès, et de faire écho dans cette enceinte à leur slogan: «Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times».

  Engin Eroglu, im Namen der Renew-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Kommissionsvertretung! Die Verhaftung des 90-jährigen ehemaligen Erzbischofs Kardinal Zen wegen angeblicher Verstöße gegen das umstrittene nationale Sicherheitsgesetz ist ein trauriger Tag und Beweis für die Verfolgung von Christen in China, die vermutlich verstärkt wird.

Mehr und mehr zeigt sich leider, dass China nicht bereit ist, die Menschenrechte zu beachten, die universal sind. Wir erleben das Ende von „ein Land, zwei Systeme“, das Ende von Hongkong und der Freiheit der Menschen in Hongkong. Wir sehen, dass China mit seiner eigenen Bevölkerung in Hongkong, Xinjiang, Tibet grausam umgeht, und wir haben mächtige Sorgen um Taiwan. Wir dürfen es nicht zulassen, dass sich diese Menschenrechtsverletzungen in China ständig ausweiten.

Wir müssen jetzt mit allen nationalen Vertretern alles tun, was möglich ist, um die Freilassung des 90-jährigen Kardinals Zen zu bewirken, um den Menschen in Hongkong und auf der Welt Hoffnung zu geben, dass es einen Ort gibt, Europa, wo sie in Frieden und Freiheit leben können.

  Joachim Kuhs, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, werte Kommission, werte Kollegen! Wir verurteilen wohl alle das Vorgehen Chinas im Blick auf Kardinal Zen und die vier Vertrauten. Und das ist gut so! Aber ich vermisse die Entschiedenheit des Parlaments und auch der Kommission, sich klar und deutlich gegen die Verfolgung von Andersgesinnten, insbesondere von Christen, zu stellen.

Wir finden scharfe Worte zur Entscheidung des Supreme Court zum Thema Abtreibung. Aber wir schweigen, wenn Christen oder Rohingya, Bahai und Sikh oder andere in China und Indien, in Birma und Nordkorea und vor allem in muslimischen Ländern verfolgt werden. Wir schließen lieber Geschäfte mit diesen Staaten ab.

Wir müssen uns alle darüber im Klaren sein: Unser Schweigen bedeutet für die Machthaber in diesen Ländern eine Ermutigung, ihren bedrückenden Weg weiter zu beschreiten. Und wir merken nicht, dass auch bei uns im Westen die Sprechverbote bedenklich zunehmen. Erheben wir unsere Stimme, damit dem Einhalt geboten wird. Damit helfen wir nicht nur Kardinal Zen, sondern Millionen von Menschen, die um ihres Glaubens willen verfolgt werden. Das alte Wort aus Schillers Don Carlos, „Sire, geben Sie Religionsfreiheit!“ ist wieder sehr aktuell.

  Bert-Jan Ruissen, namens de ECR-Fractie. – Voorzitter, commissaris, collega’s, de arrestatie van de 90-jarige kardinaal is een nieuw dieptepunt. Wat is er nog over van de vrijheid van godsdienst en democratie in Hongkong? Vrijwel niets. Erger nog, de benoeming van de nieuwe leider John Lee belooft weinig verbetering.

Je zult maar inwoner zijn van deze stad. De inwoners bevinden zich als het ware op een zinkend schip. De Europese Unie en haar lidstaten moeten een reddingsboei uitwerpen. Dat betekent dat ook van ons mag worden verwacht dat we een bijdrage leveren aan de opvang van politieke vluchtelingen uit Hongkong. En laten we zeker ook werk maken van het opleggen van sancties tegen John Lee en andere verantwoordelijken in China en Hongkong.

Dit is al de vijfde resolutie in twee jaar tijd over de verslechterende situatie in Hongkong. Ik hoop dat er geen zesde meer nodig is, maar ik ben toch bang dat we het er nog heel vaak over zullen moeten hebben.

  Virginijus Sinkevičius, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, 1 July marked the 25th anniversary of Hong Kong’s handover and China’s promise to guarantee for 50 years Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy and freedoms. With the imposition by Beijing of the draconian national security law in 2020, China broke its promise 27 years before the deadline it had agreed.

We have witnessed the rapid dismantling of one country, two systems. This is a breach of China’s international commitments, notably the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration registered at the UN as an international treaty. We have seen the rapid shrinking of space for civil society, the step-by-step shut—down of independent media, the silencing of voices of dissent. The law has been used to stifle political pluralism and the exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms that are protected under Hong Kong law and international law.

The arrests of 90-year-old Cardinal Zen, pro-democracy former lawmaker Margaret Ng, pop star Denise Ho Wan-see and scholar Hui Po-Keung for alleged conspiracy to collude with foreign powers marked another step in this grim trajectory. Another trustee of the 612 Humanitarian Relief Fund, former Legislative Council member Cyd Ho, was arrested on the same charges while already serving a prison sentence.

Hong Kong has moved from being a spatial administration region of China characterised by democracy, pluralism and a vibrant civil society, to hosting one of the fastest growing populations of political prisoners in the world: 1 014 political prisoners have been held in Hong Kong since June 2019. More than three quarters of them are under 30 years old.

The EU has spoken out repeatedly about the deterioration of the situation in Hong Kong. Last week, on 1 July, the EU again reiterated publicly its concerns at the removal of fundamental freedoms previously enjoyed by the people of Hong Kong. On the ground, the EU is committed to supporting the civil society that still remains, notably by attending hearings and trials such as the first hearing of the subjects of today’s debate.

China claims that what is happening in Hong Kong is an internal matter. We reject this. The EU has a strong stake and interest in Hong Kong and will not cease its support for universal values within and beyond its borders. We will continue to stand by the people of Hong Kong.

  Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet am Donnerstag, 7. Juli 2022, statt.

22.2. Čiabuvių ir aplinkos gynėjų padėtis Brazilijoje, įskaitant Domo Phillipso ir Bruno Pereiros nužudymą

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über sechs Entschließungsanträge zu der Situation von Verteidigern indigener Rechte und von Umweltschützern in Brasilien, einschließlich der Ermordung von Dom Phillips und Bruno Pereira (2022/2752(RSP)).

  María Soraya Rodríguez Ramos, Autora. – Señora presidenta, condenamos enérgicamente el brutal asesinato de Bruno Pereira y Dom Phillips y exigimos a las autoridades brasileñas una investigación independiente, exhaustiva e imparcial para esclarecer estos crímenes. Lamentamos profundamente que estos asesinatos no sean casos aislados. Brasil es el cuarto país más peligroso del mundo para los defensores ambientales. En los últimos años, estos ataques y esta violencia contra ellos no han hecho más que crecer. Por ello, la retórica agresiva, los ataques verbales y el discurso intimidatorio del presidente Bolsonaro, en este contexto, no es una anécdota, es una grave amenaza.

Lamentamos el desmantelamiento de la FUNAI y del IBAMA, las instituciones encargadas de vigilar los pueblos indígenas y los derechos ambientales. Por eso, pedimos en esta Resolución que el Gobierno de Brasil cumpla con sus compromisos y que reconozca y proteja las tierras indígenas y, con ellas, a las comunidades indígenas, protegiendo también la biodiversidad única para el planeta de la Amazonía.

  Anna Cavazzini, author. – Madam President, Dom Phillips, Bruno Pereira, Ari Uru-Eu-Wau-Wau, Maria da Luz Benício, Paulo Paulino Guajajara and many more: all killed in Brazil simply because they defended their home against destruction, against deforestation, against mining, or wanted to write about it, like Dom Phillips.

Brazil is the fourth most dangerous place in the world for environmental defenders, and this high number goes hand-in-hand with the highest destruction rates in the Amazon ever. In the first half of 2022 alone, 3 750 square kilometres of rainforest have been destroyed – gone forever. And this is not something that just happens. It is the consequence of an agenda of the Bolsonaro government, such as defunding institutions and weakening environmental legislation. It is the consequence of verbal attacks and intimidation towards environmental defenders by the President himself. And it is also the consequence of an extractivist model that also profits the EU. The EU is, for example, the second biggest importer of Brazilian soy, and thus adds more pressure on the ecosystems in Brazil. And this situation is unbearable and needs to stop.

The EU needs to put more pressure on the Bolsonaro government to better protect indigenous people and environmental defenders. The EU has to make its trade policy finally sustainable and its supply chains deforestation-free. And the Brazilian Government has to revoke the dangerous weakening of environmental law and better fund protection agencies. And I ask the Senate not to vote on a package of laws that will further weaken forest protection and indigenous people.

  Isabel Santos, Autora. – Senhora Presidente, desde que o governo Bolsonaro tomou posse, em 2018, o ritmo da desflorestação na Amazónia aumentou cerca de 75%. Durante este período aumentaram também os ataques e assassinatos de ambientalistas, defensores de direitos humanos, jornalistas e indígenas, bem como os casos de violência policial, as tentativas de legitimar a mineração ilegal e os exemplos de desrespeito pelas minorias.

Os brutais assassinatos de Dom Phillips e Bruno Pereira não podem ficar impunes. Mas temos que ir à raiz do problema. Não podemos ficar apenas pelo julgamento dos seus executantes. Estes crimes são também um dos efeitos da retórica agressiva e intimidatória do Presidente Bolsonaro e das suas políticas, que arruinaram a defesa dos povos indígenas e abriram a Amazónia à mais selvagem exploração económica. Algo que piorará ainda com a aplicação da infame lei da devastação. Há um autêntico ecocídio e etnocídio em curso na Amazónia. Não podemos ficar em silêncio. Temos de o travar. Não podemos também silenciar as constantes ameaças à democracia brasileira.

  Miguel Urbán Crespo, Autor. –Señora presidenta, los asesinatos de Dom Phillips y Bruno Pereira no son casos aislados. La persecución a indígenas y ambientalistas es parte de la política genocida y ecocida de Bolsonaro. Hoy, Brasil no solo es uno de los países más peligrosos para los defensores ambientales e indígenas, sino que también lidera los índices mundiales de deforestación. La agroindustria, la minería y la tala indiscriminada han crecido exponencialmente durante el Gobierno de Bolsonaro, expropiando y destruyendo los territorios indígenas. Un modelo extractivista y depredador del medio ambiente que se multiplicará si no frenamos la firma del actual Acuerdo Unión Europea-Mercosur. Pero esto no es solo culpa de la política criminal de Bolsonaro, sino que los países europeos deben responsabilizarse de los impactos que su modelo comercial está generando, porque no tenemos un planeta B, porque no tenemos otra Amazonía. Es fundamental rechazar tanto la necropolítica de Bolsonaro como el modelo económico extractivista y neocolonial del Acuerdo Unión Europea-Mercosur.

  Tomáš Zdechovský, Autor. – Paní předsedající, dodržování lidských práv je alfou i omegou veškerého fungování Evropské unie i všech demokratických společností. Věřím v respekt k lidským právům a ta by měla být pilířem i našich vztahů s našimi partnery.

Případ dosud nevysvětleného zabití novináře Doma Phillipse a odborníka na odloučené komunity Bruna Pereiry je zřejmým důkazem, že dosud existují místa, kde má lidský život jenom pramálo velkou cenu. Phillips i Pereira byli dlouholetými kritiky brazilské politiky odlesňování a zacházení s odloučenými domorodými komunitami. V Brazílii se toto povolání stává stále více nebezpečné a je zřejmé, že respekt k lidským právům, a zejména k právům aktivistů a ochránců domorodých komunit a životního prostředí se nijak nelepší. Ba naopak. To je důvod, proč jsme podpořili tuto rezoluci. Toto je totiž výstražný signál pro nás i pro celý svět. Amazonský deštný prales je nejenom zdrojem čistého vzduchu a vody, ale i domovem tisíců druhů zvířat a stovky mnohdy dosud málo kontaktovaných lidských komunit.

Odlesňování amazonského pralesa, plic naší planety, jehož tempo v minulém roce dosáhlo historického maxima, bezprostředně ohrožuje celou budoucnost našeho lidstva. Je potřeba si uvědomit, že potřebujeme odvážné lidi, kteří se postaví na stranu slabších a jasně se vymezí proti odlesňování a proti potlačování práv domorodého obyvatelstva. Zabití dvou takto odvážných lidí je proto nepřípustné a my žádáme, aby byla co nejrychleji prošetřena celá událost a zajištěna bezpečnost investigativních novinářů, aktivistů a všech, kteří se staví za práva a svobody těch, kteří se nemohou bránit. Brazilská vláda musí zlepšit situaci ochránců lidských práv a ochránců životního prostředí, aby zabití Doma Phillipse a Bruna Pereiry bylo poslední podobnou událostí.

Dámy a pánové, nestává se příliš často, že chci poděkovat kolegům ze všech politických stran, kteří se podíleli na této konstruktivní debatě a na této rezoluci. Děkuji vám.

  Hermann Tertsch, autor. – Señora presidenta, todos lamentamos profundamente la muerte de Bruno Pereira y de Dom Phillips, un ecologista y un periodista asesinados en Brasil. Dos hombres valientes que salieron a proteger el medio ambiente.

Como lamentamos la de Virgilio Trujillo Arana, de 38 años y miembro del pueblo uwottuja, asesinado el jueves en el Estado Amazonas. Eso en Venezuela, en el Arco Minero.

¿Por qué sabemos todos tanto de los dos primeros, de Pereira y de Philips, y no sabemos nada de Trujillo, que no ha salido en ninguna televisión, que no ha salido en la prensa, por el cual nadie ha pedido una resolución? Pues porque ha sido en Venezuela, ha sido en el Arco Minero, donde hay minas de oro propiedad de algunos socialistas europeos.

Porque allí están todos o están las FARC, está el ELN y están todos aquellos que alimentan al Foro de São Paulo para quedarse con Iberoamérica, para quedarse con el continente. Y lo van consiguiendo: han cogido Honduras, han cogido Perú, han cogido Chile, han cogido Colombia y ahora van a por Brasil, que es lo que les queda.

Eso es lo que estamos viendo, cómo la izquierda no está pensando en Pereira y en Philips, está pensando en la campaña electoral del señor Lula, el jefe del Foro de São Paulo, que debe tomar Brasil y derrotar a su odiado Bolsonaro. Eso es lo que a ustedes les importa.

  Andrea Cozzolino, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, non sprechiamo questa occasione per fare una discussione da campagna elettorale, non è questo il tempo di una campagna elettorale.

Negli ultimi anni in Brasile la condizione della popolazione indigena è drammaticamente peggiorata. Abbiamo assistito a gravi violazioni dei diritti fondamentali e tutto questo in un clima di impunità totale, anzi. Lo possiamo riconoscere con chiarezza, pronti a fare un confronto in ogni sede, che le scelte politiche adottate dal governo Bolsonaro hanno favorito l'emergere di questo clima di violenza e hanno aggravato le condizioni di sfruttamento della foresta amazzonica.

Diritti umani e tutela dell'ambiente in questo caso si intrecciano in un binomio indissolubile, la cui difesa assume la portata di un interesse universale, globale, mondiale. E questo interesse ci impone di assumere posizioni nette, non la prossima campagna elettorale.

È innanzitutto per fare chiarezza, piena luce sull'assassinio e sull'uccisione di un giornalista intelligente e curioso come Dom Phillips e dell'esperto indigeno Bruno Pereira.

Inoltre, chiediamo alla Commissione e al Consiglio di adottare tutte le iniziative necessarie per ottenere il rispetto dei diritti delle popolazioni indigene amazzoniche e dei difensori dell'ambiente, per assicurare la tutela di un bene comune fondamentale per l'intera umanità, la foresta amazzonica.

  Jordi Cañas, en nombre del Grupo Renew. – Señora presidenta, la tragedia de la muerte de Dom Phillips y Bruno Pereira, asesinados por su compromiso con la defensa del Amazonas y de los pueblos indígenas, se suma a la insoportable lista de más de veinte defensores del medio ambiente asesinados en Brasil desde el año 2020.

Pero, además de condenar, lamentar, hacer resoluciones —necesarias—, ¿qué más podemos hacer, aparte de la verborrea ideológica tradicional? Necesitamos instrumentos políticos para poder combatir y poder hacer algo efectivamente para luchar por los derechos de los pueblos indígenas.

Con las resoluciones ni se apagan los incendios forestales en el Amazonas, ni se evitan los asesinatos de activistas medioambientales. Lo siento mucho, las resoluciones no sirven para eso, sirven para hacer propaganda. ¿Qué podemos hacer? Utilizar los instrumentos políticos. ¿Y cuál es el instrumento político que tenemos, donde sí que se ofrece un sólido marco para abordar las cuestiones relativas a los pueblos indígenas? Se lo voy a decir: en el Acuerdo entre la Unión Europea y el Mercosur.

Y, para finalizar, miren, antes de dar lecciones, deberíamos exigirnos a nosotros mismos, porque, por ejemplo, hay países europeos que no han firmado el Convenio 169 de la OIT.

  Eleonora Evi, a nome del gruppo Verts/ALE. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ancora morti in Brasile. Bruno Pereira e Dom Phillips sono le ultime vittime di questa guerra condotta da Bolsonaro e dai suoi alleati dell'agrobusiness, ma c'è una causa, soprattutto, la nostra domanda di beni brasiliani. È per questo motivo che brucia l'Amazzonia, diciamolo chiaramente.

Bruno aveva ricevuto minacce di morte a causa del suo lavoro con le popolazioni indigene e la loro organizzazione Univaja, proprio per liberare le loro foreste da taglialegna illegali, minatori, bracconieri e trafficanti di droga.

Ecco perché servono regole europee stringenti per dire basta alle importazioni di prodotti che causano deforestazione e violano i diritti umani. Ed è quindi scandaloso che il Consiglio su questo si sia accordato per garantire scappatoie e limitare i requisiti di tracciabilità.

Inoltre, i popoli indigeni sono i migliori custodi della foresta, pertanto è necessario difenderli vigilando sul rinnovo delle ordinanze per la protezione territoriale.

Infine, ritengo che tutti gli Stati membri dovrebbero ratificare la Convenzione dei popoli indigeni e tribali del 1989, l'unica convenzione internazionale sui diritti delle popolazioni indigene.

  Younous Omarjee, au nom du groupe The Left. – Madame la Présidente, au Brésil, la réalité fait froid dans le dos. Chaque année, 13 000 kilomètres carrés de forêts sont incendiés. C’est 120 fois la ville de Paris.

Pourtant, ce sont les défenseurs des peuples autochtones et de la forêt qui sont pourchassés par un gouvernement criminel qui n’a qu’une seule politique: saccager, piller et détruire un héritage biologique de 55 millions d’années, bien commun de l’humanité.

Je le dis: le gouvernement raciste, xénophobe et néofasciste de Bolsonaro n’est pas seulement coupable de crimes contre la biodiversité. Il est complice d’une véritable persécution des peuples indigènes, à l’œuvre pour offrir la voie libre aux multinationales qui ne s’embarrassent pas du goût du sang et de l’odeur des arbres brûlés.

L’Europe gagnerait à entrer en action pour la sauvegarde des peuples autochtones et de la forêt. C’est un enjeu de civilisation.

  Pedro Marques (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, as trágicas mortes de Dom Phillips e Bruno Pereira não são um episódio isolado e casuístico. Integram-se numa cultura de violência contra os povos indígenas, ativistas de direitos humanos, ambientalistas, jornalistas, várias minorias, que cresceu exponencialmente com o atual governo brasileiro. Para isso tem contribuído uma linguagem conflituosa e até ofensiva do atual presidente, antagonizando essas pessoas e essas comunidades e gerando um clima de impunidade que propicia a violência.

Em vez de promover a proteção da Amazónia e das comunidades indígenas, como é a sua obrigação como presidente, Bolsonaro é conivente com a desflorestação descontrolada e está a cumprir a sua promessa de campanha de destruir a entidade pública de proteção aos povos indígenas.

Se a responsabilidade criminal deste homicídio tem de ser atribuída aos seus executores, a responsabilidade política e moral recai sobre as atitudes repetidas de Bolsonaro e do seu governo.

  Javi López (S&D). – Señora presidenta, hoy en este Parlamento, de forma solemne, queremos condenar los asesinatos de Dom Phillips y de Bruno Pereira en el Amazonas con toda nuestra contundencia y fuerza.

Pero lo queremos hacer también al lado del análisis de lo que está pasando en Brasil y la retórica del actual presidente Bolsonaro. Su retórica agresiva e intimidatoria a personas racionalizadas, defensores del medio ambiente, defensores de derechos humanos, mujeres y el colectivo LGTBI contribuye de forma decidida al acoso y a los ataques en el país.

Y todo esto pasa después de una muy deficiente gestión de la pandemia, pasa después de una nefasta política medioambiental en el Amazonas y pasa después de constantes ataques al sistema electoral de Brasil. Por eso es tan importante que hoy digamos alto y claro que tiene que acabar su retórica de odio, sus ataques a la democracia y sus ataques al planeta. Estamos seguros de que Brasil y el planeta entero merecen algo mejor.

Spontane Wortmeldungen

  Sandra Pereira (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, faz um mês que o jornalista inglês Dom Phillips e o indigenista brasileiro Bruno Pereira foram brutalmente assassinados na Amazónia que procuravam proteger. Duas vidas que se juntam a centenas de outras vidas que nos últimos anos têm sido ceifadas por se oporem à predação da floresta e dos seus recursos naturais.

A devastação dos biomas naturais brasileiros pelo fogo, pela poluição e pelas máquinas, o ataque a reservas indígenas e a apropriação ilegal de terras são mecanismos usados pelos que fazem da produção agrícola intensiva, da captura de espécies protegidas ou da mineração a sua forma de acumular riqueza.

São os seus interesses que a União Europeia, para lá das proclamações hipócritas, apoia quando insiste na liberalização do comércio ou na cumplicidade na desestabilização a forças golpistas no Brasil e na região.

Será o povo brasileiro que irá mudar as circunstâncias que permitirão preservar os ecossistemas naturais e defender as populações que deles dependem. Daqui expressamos solidariedade com as forças democráticas e progressistas brasileiras que lutam para retomar o caminho do progresso social, o desenvolvimento soberano da cooperação e da paz.

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)

  Virginijus Sinkevičius, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, the worsening situation of indigenous, environmental and human rights defenders in Brazil is a key concern for the EU, which is regularly addressed in the EU—Brazil mechanism for political dialogue and cooperation at different levels.

Brazil is one of the EU’s strategic partners, traditionally a strong advocate for human rights and a partner in multilateral fora. During the recent dedicated EU—Brazil dialogue on human rights held on 16 June, the EU’s Special Representative for Human Rights, Eamon Gilmore, stressed the deteriorating situation for human rights defenders in many parts of Brazil. He specifically addressed the brutal murder of Dom Phillips and Bruno Pereira and emphasised the need for a full investigation.

These specific, tragic cases highlight the need for a more comprehensive effort in Brazil to address the challenge of violence against indigenous and environmental defenders, including full and transparent investigations to bring those responsible to justice. Over the past few months, these concerns have been voiced in a series of high—level visits to Brazil, including by EU High Representative Borrell in November, by the EU’s Special Representative for Human Rights Gilmore in December, and by myself in April, when I visited Brazil to discuss in particular our legislative proposal on deforestation, which aims to protect the rich biodiversity of our forests, which as many of you tonight mentioned, are the lungs of our planet. And protection of our forests was also what Dom Phillips and Bruno Pereira were fighting for.

Our outreach encompassed meetings with the federal and state authorities, including the legislative and judiciary bodies, as well as with indigenous peoples’ organisations and human rights and environmental defenders. Diplomatic outreach is also carried out by the EU delegation in Brazil in a Team—Europe approach at all levels – federal and sub—federal, with state and non-state actors.

Continuous engagement with civil society, including human rights, indigenous and environmental defenders and organisations, is another important component of our ongoing work to show our support and to raise awareness. We also provide financial and technical support through our cooperation activities. Current EU cooperation to support indigenous peoples under the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights and civil society organisations and local authorities totals more than EUR 3 million. Our actions focus on the urgent protection of the rights of indigenous peoples and forest defenders, with a special focus on women, as well as on supporting indigenous groups, advocating for their rights at national and international levels, and promoting sustainable development.

In addition to the dialogue with human rights defenders across Brazil, the EU delegation also supports the National Human Rights Council to protect human rights defenders and freedom of expression.

I want to reassure this House and their families, to whom I reiterate my personal and sincere condolences, that the EU will continue to monitor closely the case around the brutal murder of Dom Phillips and Bruno Pereira. We recognise the European Parliament’s strong commitment on this important matter and reiterate the EU’s determination to work with Brazil in supporting the rights of indigenous people and human rights defenders, notably in the Amazon.

  Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet am Donnerstag, 7. Juli 2022, statt.

22.3. Padėtis Tadžikistano Kalnų Badachšano autonominiame vilajete

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über sechs Entschließungsanträge zur Lage in der Autonomen Provinz Berg-Badachschan in Tadschikistan (2022/2753(RSP)).

  Christian Sagartz, Verfasser. – Sehr geehrte Frau Präsidentin, geschätzter Kommissar, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Man fragt sich im ersten Moment: Was hat das Europäische Parlament mit der Menschenrechtslage in einem Land zu tun, das doch relativ weit von uns – scheinbar weit von uns – entfernt ist? Und trotzdem kann ich Ihnen gleich sagen: Zwei Gründe sind es, die mich immer wieder motivieren, auch im Bereich der Menschenrechte das Wort zu ergreifen.

Der erste Grund ist: Ich war ehemals tätig als Journalist, ich war Mitarbeiter einer Zeitung, und ich weiß, wie es ist, wenn man versucht, seine Arbeit als Journalist gut zu machen, objektiv zu berichten. Und es gibt eben viele Länder auf dieser Welt, da braucht es die Unterstützung, da braucht es mahnende Worte und den Blick von außen, um gerade Journalisten hier den Rücken zu stärken. So ist es auch in Tadschikistan und insbesondere in der Autonomen Provinz, wo die Staatsgewalt einfach die Spielregeln einer demokratischen Kultur mit Füßen tritt.

Hier müssen wir als Parlamentarier das Wort ergreifen. Denn wir haben sonst keine Waffen. Parlamentarier haben mit Worten und als Redner die Chance, einzugreifen. Wir können einen ganz klaren Fokus auf etwas legen. Ich vergleiche das immer mit einem Scheinwerfer. Wir haben heute die Möglichkeit, hinsichtlich der Menschenrechtslage für diese Menschen etwas zu bewirken und unseren Scheinwerfer der Aufmerksamkeit dorthin zu richten.

Unterdrückung von Meinungsfreiheit, Einschränkung von Demokratie, die Verfolgung von politisch Andersdenkenden in zahlreichen Ländern und heute ganz besonders in Tadschikistan – wenn wir heute darüber reden, dann geben wir diesen Menschen die Möglichkeit, ihre Anliegen der Öffentlichkeit – einer breiten Öffentlichkeit – kundzutun. Das ist unsere Verpflichtung als Mandatare. Wenn Menschen dort auf die Straße gehen und Angst haben müssen, dass Polizeigewalt sie daran hindert, ihre Meinung zu sagen, dann haben wir die Pflicht, als Parlamentarier einzuschreiten. Dann müssen wir ihnen die Stimme geben, die sie vielleicht so nicht haben.

Der zweite Grund, den ich spontan noch einwerfen möchte, ist die geopolitische Lage. Alle diese Staaten in Zentralasien haben gerade dieselbe Drucksituation. Russland wird massiv Druck ausüben auf diese Staaten, und gerade deshalb müssen wir ein Auge mehr auf diese Region werfen. Das ist es, was aus meiner Sicht Verantwortung als Parlamentarier bedeutet, nämlich für jene Menschen das Wort ergreifen, die selbst unterdrückt werden, die selbst diese Worte nicht sprechen können. Dieser Aufgabe möchte ich als Parlamentarier stets nachkommen.

  Karsten Lucke, Verfasser. – Frau Präsidentin! Ganz im Osten von Tadschikistan liegt die Autonome Provinz Gorno-Badachschan, die wahrscheinlich 99,x % der Bevölkerung Europas nicht kennen. Das ist kein Grund, dass dieses Parlament nicht auch dort die Lupe der Menschenrechte darüber hält. Es treibt uns eben nicht nur um, wenn irgendein Blut saufender Diktator eines großen Landes sein Nachbarland völkerrechtswidrig überfällt, sondern eben auch, wenn in einer unbekannten Region die dortigen Bürgerinnen und Bürger unter den menschenrechtsverletzenden Repressionen der eigenen Regierung zu leiden haben.

Im Osten von Tadschikistan passiert genau das: Presse- und Meinungsfreiheit werden dort mit Füßen getreten, und es kommt zu Gewalt, Folter und auch zu Tod. Deshalb legt dieses Parlament den Finger in die Wunde und benennt diese Missstände. Und deshalb fordern wir heute mit dieser Dringlichkeitsentschließung die tadschikische Regierung auf, wieder Ruhe und Frieden einkehren zu lassen und die Menschenrechte umfassend zu achten und zu schützen.

Damit es keine Missverständnisse gibt: Wir sagen das nicht, weil wir anderen vorgeben wollen, wie sie zu leben haben, oder wir uns in interne Angelegenheiten einmischen oder sonst etwas. Nein, hier geht es um etwas Universelles, nämlich die Einhaltung der Menschenrechte. Dafür werden wir immer die Stimme erheben, an jedem Ort und zu jeder Zeit.

  Engin Eroglu, Verfasser. – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar! Wir diskutieren heute Menschenrechtsverletzungen in Tadschikistan, und es ist Modell geworden unter den Autokraten.

Was ist passiert? Ein Zivilist ist im Polizeigewahrsam nach Verhaftung verstorben. Menschen, die unterdrückt sind, nutzen das als Ventil, gehen auf die Straße, demonstrieren für ihre Menschenrechte. Unter diesen Menschen auch Journalisten. Die Autokratie hat keine andere Lösung in der Hand, als mit scharfer Munition in die Menschenmenge zu schießen. Es sterben Zivilisten, es sterben Journalisten, und wir schauen zu.

Sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar, ich bitte Sie: Es kann nicht zum Modell werden, dass Autokraten mit scharfer Munition auf Menschenmengen schießen. Wenn wir doch etwas machen können, dann nehmen Sie das bitte mit in Ihre Agenda. Nehmen Sie es mit in den Rat.

Zumindest der Einsatz von Gummigeschossen wäre doch eine erste Lösung, um den Autokraten sozusagen zu sagen: Man muss Menschen nicht gleich erschießen, die um ihre Freiheit kämpfen. Das ist nicht die Lösung der Probleme, aber den Menschen vor Ort wird damit geholfen. Das wäre ein kleines Symbol. Eine Bitte an Sie: Nehmen Sie das mit. Bringen Sie das in die Gespräche ein.

  Ryszard Czarnecki, autor. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Jestem chyba pierwszym mówcą w tej debacie niemówiącym w języku niemieckim. To ważna sprawa. Przypomnijmy, gdzie to się dzieje. To się dzieje w Azji postsowieckiej, w jedynym kraju, gdzie realne wpływy historyczne, kulturowe i religijne ma Iran. Reszta krajów to w tej chwili taka piłka w grze między Turcją – bo tak jest w przypadku i Kazachstanu, i Kirgistanu, i Turkmenistanu, Uzbekistanu – a Rosją. Tym bardziej jest to bardzo ważny kontekst geopolityczny, choć oczywiście moi przedmówcy mają absolutnie rację. Tutaj trzeba mówić o prawach człowieka, trzeba mówić o pewnych standardach. Z tym jesteśmy jako Unia Europejska kojarzeni i to powinniśmy głosić, nie zapominając jednak jako politycy, że w tym wszystkim jest pewien mecz geopolityczny, w którym my jako Zachód szeroko rozumiany, my jako Unia Europejska, poszczególne kraje członkowskie Unii Europejskiej, też mamy swoje miejsce. A więc apel o to, aby widzieć na dwóch poziomach. Po pierwsze, poziom praw człowieka – i w tej sprawie oczywiście musimy być jednoznaczni, to jest biało-czarny film. A z drugiej strony kontekst geopolityczny, o którym też nie możemy zapominać nawet w trakcie debaty o prawach człowieka. Bo to jest istotne, aby Zachód był tam również obecny nie tylko w sensie standardów praw człowieka, ale jednak także w sensie gospodarczym i geopolitycznym.

  Sergey Lagodinsky, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, I will start with a quote on keeping silent against evil and keeping silent about evil. ‘We are implanting it and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future.’ This is a quote by Solzhenitsyn – a famous quote that also guides us in this debate. We want and we accept the moral duty to address the injustices happening in Tajikistan, in the autonomous region of Gorno-Badakhshan, where those who dare to speak out are branded as terrorists by the authorities, where human rights and freedoms are under unprecedented attack. Human rights defenders risk political prosecution, torture or even death.

That’s why we appeal to the European Commission to do everything possible to show and to signal that we do not accept ethnic cleansing under the pretext of fighting terrorism and do not accept closing our eyes on human rights violations against minorities, unlimited mass surveillance and information blockades. This is our duty. We are watching and we are speaking out.

  Virginijus Sinkevičius, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, last May, violent clashes occurred in the Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Region of Tajikistan. Protests started on 14 May, when several dozen residents of Khorog demanded, inter alia, the resignation of the governor of the region and justice for the November 2021 violent events. Tension continued to escalate in the following days and, on 18 May, the Interior Ministry announced the start of an anti-terrorist operation. Clashes continued until 31 May and have claimed up to 40 lives.

The EU Delegation in Dushanbe issued a joint statement with the embassies of Germany, France, the UK and the US on 18 May to express strong concern about the situation in the region. The statement regretted the loss of lives, called for de-escalation and urged the Tajik authorities to refrain from the excessive use of force.

The EU is constantly monitoring the situation in the Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Region and we are deeply concerned at the crackdown targeting activists and independent journalists in the region and more widely in the country. We urge the government of Tajikistan to ensure that law enforcement agencies act in strict compliance with the rule of law and respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, even in security-related crisis situations. The legitimate security concerns do not automatically mean that excessive use of force by security services should be employed. The shooting of protesters and continued arrests of local activists and civil society representatives are counterproductive, and disproportionate use of force contributes to the spiralling of violence. We remain concerned about the harsh sentences handed down to members of Commission 44, a group of lawyers and human rights activists established in the Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Region.

The EU urges the Tajik Government to allow the access of the International Committee of the Red Cross in the region to open an independent and effective investigation into the circumstances that led to deaths and injuries among civilian protesters. The EU will use the next round of the EU-Tajikistan Human Rights Dialogue and the GSP Plus fact-finding mission, both due to take place in September this year, to highlight these concerns and reminded the government that track record on human rights and fundamental freedoms – in particular freedom of association, peaceful assembly, expression and media freedom – are key elements for EU support to join the GSP Plus Scheme of Preferences.

  Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet am Donnerstag, 7. Juli 2022, statt.

23. Paaiškinimai dėl balsavimo

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgen die Erklärungen zur Abstimmung.

23.1. Prieštaravimas pagal Darbo tvarkos taisyklių 111 straipsnio 3 dalį: Deleguotojo akto dėl taksonomijos pagal klimato srities tikslus ir Deleguotojo akto dėl informacijos atskleidimo pagal Taksonomijos reglamentą dalinis keitimas (B9-0338/2022)

Mündliche Erklärungen zur Abstimmung

  Cristian Terheş (ECR). – Madam President, price is set by supply and demand. This is a basic economics and logic lesson taught in Western schools back in the days for a long time. It seems though that Ursula von der Leyen and Frans Timmermans missed this logical lesson. You cannot on one side close down supplies of energy and on the other side increase the demand and expect that the price of energy is going to go down.

I am pleased that today this Parliament rejected the proposal to stop the nuclear and gas energy and I hope that in the future we will support such proposals, because we clearly need cheap energy and sustainable energy, and nuclear energy and gas energy are the solution to this problem.

  Jessica Stegrud (ECR). – Fru talman! (inledningen ohörbar) ...förbud, effektskatt, subventioner till förnybart, politiskt tillsatt ledning på Vattenfall. Ja, listan på vad Socialdemokraterna med hjälp av Centern har gjort för att straffa ut kärnkraften kan göras lång, väldigt lång. Nu har dock verkligheten kommit ikapp. Det går inte längre att blunda för konsekvenserna av den förda politiken: skenande elpriser, osäkra leveranser och inflation. Med verkligheten så vänder opinionen, och med opinionen ”låtsasvänder” socialdemokratin. Det var nog ingen bra idé att avveckla kärnkraften och förstöra världens bästa energimix. Så, lagom till valet låtsas man göra en u-sväng.

Här i Europaparlamentet ser vi emellertid deras verkliga sida. Både Socialdemokraterna och Centerpartiet röstar nej till att inkludera kärnkraften i taxonomin. Man vill alltså fortsatt straffa ut kärnkraften som energikälla. Som vanligt säger man en sak, men gör något helt annat i verkligheten. Det går helt enkelt inte att lita på varken Socialdemokraterna eller deras stödparti Centern.

23.2. 2021 m. ataskaita dėl Serbijos (A9-0178/2022 - Vladimír Bilčík)

Mündliche Erklärungen zur Abstimmung

  Cristian Terheş (ECR). – Madam President, colleagues, Serbia is part of Europe, and we must help this country to pursue its goal in being part of the European Union.

I was in Serbia a few months ago during the presidential elections, and I talked to many Serbian citizens, as well as with the President of Serbia. Unfortunately, with our position here, we put this country in a situation without escape. On one side, we are pressuring this country to do certain things against its own interests. And on the other side, the only support that this country receives in the Security Council is from Russia because of the issue of Kosovo.

I think if we listen more to their problems and to their concerns, and we open our eyes to the actual situation in Balkans, we could help this country pursue its European goals.

23.3. ES ir daugiašališkumo apsauga (A9-0172/2022 - Javi López)

Mündliche Erklärungen zur Abstimmung

  Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, this report talks about preserving a system of multilateralism that we are presently busy destroying. What is multilateral about a block of colonialist countries, their colonial outposts, and their conquered and occupied puppet regimes conspiring together to maintain a dying global order? We unilaterally impose crushing sanctions regimes against out-of-favour states and their populations, sanctions that are killing tens of thousands of ordinary people each year. How can we even pretend the concept of EU respect for multilateralism or human rights has any meaning anymore?

The G7 and NATO-aligned countries, which collectively represent a minority of the world’s people, want to contain Russia and China and stop EU-Asia integration. The BRIC countries, which represent a larger portion of the world’s people, are not calling for this break – for isolation or for containment. They are clear that they want to maintain a world where multilateral institutions such as the UN are respected. The EU seems to want world domination. The Global South really wants genuine multilateralism. We should listen to them.

  Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, I voted against this report because, while there’s some good bits in it, overall it’s confused and deceptive. It purports to be a call to defend multilateralism, but instead it attempts to redefine it and turn it into its opposite.

Multilateralism in a multipolar world means working through genuinely inclusive bodies – such as the UN – on the principle of sovereign equality, where each country has a say. It means listening to the people that you disagree with. It doesn’t mean groups of so-called like—minded partners forming a little gang – be it the G7 or the G20 – and negotiating your own rules and then imposing them on the rest of the world. That’s the opposite of multilateralism, but that’s the way it’s defined in this report.

We should be calling instead for upholding international law. But instead this is about rules—based international order. That isn’t international law. That means the rich countries making up the rules and giving everyone else orders to follow. We couldn’t be more in need today of returning to genuine multilateralism, but unfortunately, this isn’t it.

23.4. Aprūpinimo maistu problemos sprendimas besivystančiose šalyse (A9-0195/2022 - Beata Kempa)

Mündliche Erklärungen zur Abstimmung

  Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, UNICEF reports that every minute a child is pushed into hunger in the 15 countries most ravaged by the global food crisis. And it’s an interesting list of countries. Four of them – Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali and Niger – long—suffering prisoners of France’s criminal colonial currency system in the Sahel, and for a decade dealing with the fallout from NATO’s war of aggression on Libya. Yemen, reeling from seven years of embargo and US/EU-made weapons intentionally dropped on their food and water production infrastructure. Haiti, whose last independent leader in 2004 was removed in a coup by France and the US. This country will never stop being punished for their revolutionary spirit. Afghanistan, who after 20 years of illegal occupation and bombing by NATO forces, was sanctioned and robbed by the US. Now 93% of Afghans are facing hunger and we can’t even help them.

Not only does this report ignore the fact that we imposed the sanctions that have caused the present food crisis, it also ignores the principal role the political West has played in ensuring that so many of these countries face hunger.

  Die Präsidentin. – Damit ist dieser Tagesordnungspunkt geschlossen.

24. Balsavimo pataisymai ir ketinimai (žr. protokolą)

25. Gauti dokumentai (žr. protokolą)

26. Deleguotieji aktai (Darbo tvarkos taisyklių 111 straipsnio 2 dalis)(žr. protokolą)

27. Įgyvendinimo priemonės (Darbo tvarkos taisyklių 112 straipsnis)(žr. protokolą)

28. Šio posėdžio protokolo tvirtinimas

29. Kito posėdžio darbotvarkė

  Die Präsidentin. – Die Sitzung ist geschlossen und wird morgen, Donnerstag, den 7. Juli 2022, um 9.00 Uhr mit der Erklärung der Kommission zu der jüngsten Hitzewelle und Dürre in der EU (2022/2746(RSP)) wieder aufgenommen.

Die Tagesordnung wurde veröffentlicht und ist auf der Website des Europäischen Parlaments verfügbar.

30. Posėdžio pabaiga

(Die Sitzung wird um 21.19 Uhr geschlossen.)