Posėdžio stenograma

Ketvirtadienis, 2023 m. lapkričio 9 d. - Briuselis

1. Posėdžio pradžia

VORSITZ: OTHMAR KARAS
Vizepräsident

(Die Sitzung wird um 9.00 Uhr eröffnet)

2. ES ir JAV aukščiausiojo lygio susitikimo rezultatai (diskusijos)

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zu den Ergebnissen des Gipfeltreffens EU-USA (2023/2924(RSP)).

  Ángeles Moreno Bau, presidenta en ejercicio del Consejo. – Señor presidente, señorías, señora vicepresidenta Jourová, les agradezco su invitación para debatir con ustedes el resultado de la cumbre UE-EE. UU. del mes pasado.

Como se menciona en la declaración conjunta de los dirigentes, desde la última cumbre, en junio de 2021, el mundo ha cambiado de una forma que no tiene precedentes, y la Unión Europea y los Estados Unidos han profundizado su cooperación para responder con pasos ambiciosos.

Quizás recuerden que, el día antes de la cumbre, el presidente de los Estados Unidos se dirigió a la ciudadanía estadounidense desde el despacho oval, por segunda vez en su mandato, para reconocer lo que describió como un punto de inflexión en la historia, en el que las decisiones que se tomen ahora tendrán consecuencias de gran alcance.

A la mañana siguiente, el presidente Biden se reunió con los dirigentes de la Unión Europea para tratar sobre la situación en Oriente Próximo, la guerra de agresión de Rusia contra Ucrania, China, la creación de asociaciones con economías emergentes y países en desarrollo y muchos otros asuntos. Esto demuestra claramente que la Unión Europea sigue siendo para el presidente Biden y su administración el socio indispensable al que los Estados Unidos recurren en primer lugar.

Permítanme hacer un rápido repaso de los principales temas del debate. Sobre Oriente Próximo, las posiciones de la Unión Europea y de los Estados Unidos coincidieron ampliamente. Esto se refleja en la declaración conjunta adoptada en la cumbre, que está muy en consonancia con la declaración de los miembros del Consejo Europeo sobre la situación en Oriente Próximo, publicada solo unos días antes de la cumbre.

En cuanto a la guerra de agresión de Rusia contra Ucrania, los dirigentes confirmaron con claridad que la Unión Europea y los Estados Unidos mantienen un apoyo inquebrantable y prolongado a Ucrania y que seguirán trabajando para lograr el mayor apoyo internacional posible a la fórmula de paz de Ucrania. Los dirigentes también trataron la cuestión de los activos inmovilizados rusos y se comprometieron a aplicar conjuntamente las sanciones y las medidas de control para evitar la elusión.

Las relaciones con China fueron otro tema importante. Ambas partes están dispuestas a forjar una relación constructiva y estable con China y reconocen la importancia de un diálogo franco con Pekín. Pidieron a China que actúe internacionalmente en ámbitos como la emergencia climática y la crisis de la biodiversidad, el apoyo a los países vulnerables, la salud mundial y la estabilidad macroeconómica.

En lo que respecta a la creación de asociaciones con economías emergentes y países en desarrollo, hicieron hincapié en la eficacia de los bancos multilaterales de desarrollo. Se comprometieron a aumentar el nivel de ambición para ofrecer un mayor margen de maniobra y más financiación en condiciones favorables para impulsar la capacidad del Banco Mundial de apoyar a los países de renta media y baja y de prestar más ayuda a los países más pobres.

En cuanto a la cooperación económica y el comercio, la cumbre reafirmó la importancia de la relación económica más dinámica del planeta y el papel del Consejo UE-EE. UU. de Comercio y Tecnología.

También se prestó atención al refuerzo de nuestra resiliencia y seguridad económicas. Aunque no pudimos lograr resultados concretos sobre el acuerdo mundial sobre el acero y el aluminio sostenibles ni sobre el acuerdo relativo a los minerales fundamentales, se avanzó en ambos expedientes y proseguirán las negociaciones, como siempre sucede con los viejos socios.

Permítanme detenerme un poco más en estos dos instrumentos, dada su importancia para nuestra relación económica con los Estados Unidos. Por lo que respecta al acuerdo mundial sobre el acero y el aluminio sostenibles, creo que ahora entendemos mejor las respectivas posiciones y la importancia que nosotros damos en la Unión Europea a la compatibilidad con las normas de la Organización Mundial del Comercio, manteniendo nuestra autonomía reguladora y respetando plenamente nuestra legislación. Aunque las conversaciones están en curso, debemos mantener la suspensión arancelaria en ambas partes.

Los trabajos sobre el acuerdo relativo a los minerales fundamentales están más avanzados. Alcanzar un acuerdo demostraría nuestra determinación de afrontar nuestras dependencias estratégicas y mejorar, al mismo tiempo, la resiliencia. Sería también importante para mitigar algunas de las consecuencias negativas de la Ley de Reducción de la Inflación estadounidense.

Por último, mencionaré los contactos interpersonales. Se trata de un aspecto de nuestra asociación a menudo olvidado, pero que, sin embargo, merece toda nuestra atención. La Unión Europea y los Estados Unidos se comprometieron a trabajar para lograr la exención de visado entre todos los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea y los Estados Unidos, y para aumentar significativamente el número de intercambios académicos transatlánticos entre nuestros ciudadanos en los próximos cinco años.

En definitiva, creemos que la cumbre UE-EE. UU. de este año fue muy fructífera y que mostró claramente la relevancia y la vitalidad de la asociación transatlántica en tiempos de incertidumbre mundial.

  Věra Jourová, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, the EU-US summit took place on the 20 October and marked the second meeting of its kind organised with the Biden administration. Our goal was clear: to consolidate and strengthen the relationship between the European Union and the United States, particularly as we approach elections on both sides of the Atlantic next year. I am delighted to report that this objective was fully shared by both the European Union and the United States.

The commitment to fortify our partnership was demonstrated by the high level of participation in the summit. President Biden was accompanied by four of his cabinet members, including Secretary of State Blinken, Secretary of Treasury Yellen, Secretary of Commerce Raimondo and Trade Representative Ambassador Tai. On the European side, Presidents Michel and von der Leyen led the way with the presence of High Representative Borrell, Executive Vice-President Dombrovskis and myself.

The summit can be deemed as a success. Our joint commitment to stand by Ukraine for as long as it takes was reaffirmed. We also underscored the critical importance of transatlantic ties, especially in the face of increasing geopolitical challenges. Notably, we made significant progress towards a global arrangement on sustainable steel and aluminium, and a Critical Minerals Agreement. We reiterated the importance of the EU-US Trade and Technology Council and agreed on the need to advance meaningful reform within the World Trade Organisation.

In the context of the steel and aluminium arrangement, we made substantial strides in identifying the sources of non-market access capacity and outlining the tools required to decarbonise the steel and aluminium industries. We are committed to continuing this progress in the coming months with the aim of fostering undistorted transatlantic trade in these sectors.

Negotiations on the Critical Minerals Agreement also advanced significantly and we will continue to engage with the United States and consult with our Member States to finalise an international agreement. This agreement will allow EU critical minerals to benefit from subsidies for electronic vehicles and help integrate transatlantic, critical mineral and battery supply chains. Moreover, the Critical Materials Agreement will enable us to jointly advocate for environmental protection and labour rights in trade and international supply chains of critical minerals.

President von der Leyen and President Biden highlighted the substantial progress made under the EU-US Trade and Technology Council. The cooperation within this Council has been instrumental in strengthening the trade-related aspects of our response to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, and effectively addressing trade irritants and disputes. It remains crucial for creating a resilient and green transatlantic marketplace. We look forward to seeing further progress at the upcoming Technology and Trade Council ministerial meeting before the end of the year.

Furthermore, we have agreed to collaborate in raising cybersecurity standards to protect consumers and businesses, reduce vulnerability to cyber-attacks, and lower trade barriers in this area. There is a strong interest on both sides on artificial intelligence, as reflected in the summit conclusions. We both want to reap the benefits of this transformational technology while addressing the risks. We have made substantial progress in our bilateral cooperation and the initiative for a Code of Conduct for generative AI, which was first launched at the TTC in May this year, was adopted by the G7 last year.

Our discussions also emphasised the need to enhance economic resilience and security, particularly by reducing supply chain vulnerabilities, especially concerning raw materials essential to the green and digital transition. We recognise the importance of bolstering transatlantic supply chains and addressing potential risks related to technology, security and technology leakage, while countering economic coercion.

  Rasa Juknevičienė, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, dear colleagues, today, more than ever, Europe and the United States share a common mission. Together, we need to overcome the axis of evil that has already caused two wars in our neighbourhood. This axis of evil, with terrorists Russia and Iran at its core, seeks to destroy democracies and take away people’s freedoms.

The EU and the US are capable of acting together strategically. We need to be united not only in a military NATO alliance; we also need a kind of economic NATO, by reviving the idea of TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership). We must not only agree on the response to Russia and Iran; we both face the same complex challenge of China. There is no alternative to a strategic partnership between the US and the EU.

I fully agree with Ursula von der Leyen as she said in her speech in the Hudson Institute last month – I quote: ‘What Europe and the United States are fighting for together is about freedom and democracy.’

  Tonino Picula, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, representative of the Council, colleagues, the US is the most fundamental partner for the European Union. How we address global challenges and our relations still sets the foundation of the multilateral order. Next month, we will adopt a report on EU-US relations, setting our expectations and goals ahead of the election year on both sides of the Atlantic.

We do share the feeling on how our relations got restored with the current administration, especially while joining together to assist Ukraine in its fight against Russian aggression. However, other challenges are emerging: escalation of conflict and humanitarian crises in the Middle East; our relations with China and the Global South; how to defend our democracies and make our economies more sustainable and resilient.

While we share the basics, we must also work closely to align our policies further to achieve them while strengthening ourselves. The European Union has to match its ambition with concrete reforms and investments, because a strong Europe is the best partner to the United States, and vice versa.

  Dragoş Tudorache, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, dear Vice-President, dear State Secretary, we always declare that our EU-US bond is about shared values, and yet we often get bogged down in semantics about irritants or low-hanging fruits. Even worse, we get confused about friends and foes.

The reality of today’s geopolitics must make us more clear-eyed than ever: together and well attached to our values, we can secure the resilience of our democracies and economies, maintain open and safe trade routes, advance on critical technologies and reinvest in building partnerships and alliances around the world.

Now the question, which I also want to raise to the Vice-President, is: how do we anchor the objectives set out in the summit declaration to weather the possible political highs and lows that next year’s elections might bring on both sides of the Atlantic? What are the concrete projects and what are the stakeholders outside or inside the political spectrum that might be ensuring continuity of purpose and delivery regardless of electoral outcomes?

Because the time for identifying those projects and for investing those stakeholders into existing processes such as the TTC, that time is now.

  Henrike Hahn, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, from an industrial policy perspective, the most relevant piece of news from the EU-US summit in October is what was not agreed about. So the agreement on critical minerals doesn’t include recycled materials, as we in the European Parliament call for. What a waste of opportunity. In the EU, we currently work on having circular and resilient supply chains for critical raw materials, and, of course, we should vote for covering recycled minerals in line with the objectives of the Critical Raw Materials Act. And we should not miss the chance to promote recycling capacities.

Additionally, we have this trade dispute on trade in steel and aluminium not solved yet and the EU and the US have agreed to find a solution for that. They didn’t. A future global steel and aluminium agreement should cover overcapacity and climate-related goals. This means emissions intensity thresholds for steel and aluminium production and consumption, or a common understanding on what can be permissible: green industrial subsidies that do not contribute to overcapacity.

My vision is to have a transatlantic climate alliance as a base for quick transatlantic, rational decisions pushing green economy and the fight against climate change, what is desperately needed. Let’s make that better next time.

  Assita Kanko, namens de ECR-Fractie. – Voorzitter, voor het eerst sinds ik mijn geboorteland Burkina Faso verliet, zie ik hier in Europa evenveel onveiligheid en een toegenomen censuur over bepaalde onderwerpen. Ik ben niet de enige. Vele medeburgers maken zich zorgen.

Europa en de VS moeten samen harder werken aan onze veiligheid en onze toekomst, aan een veiliger thuis voor onze burgers. In deze tijden van geopolitieke conflicten en toegenomen globale fragmentatie is deze alliantie cruciaal. We moeten inderdaad samen optrekken om terroristen en hun supporters bij ons thuis te bestrijden, Israëls recht op zelfverdediging in het Midden-Oosten te erkennen, humanitaire hulp aan Gaza toe te laten, de gijzelaars vrij te krijgen, betere partnerschappen met Afrika tot stand te brengen en het perspectief van een tweestatenoplossing in het Midden-Oosten weer terug te brengen.

Ook op economisch vlak is er nog veel te doen. Waarom zijn er nog geen akkoorden met Amerika over duurzaam staal en aluminium en over kritieke grondstoffen? Ik roep beide partners op om nog dit jaar tot akkoorden te komen en Europa ook om iets te doen, een adequaat antwoord te bieden op de Inflation Reduction Act.

  Marco Campomenosi, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signor Presidente, signora Commissaria, signora rappresentante del governo spagnolo, onorevoli colleghi, ovviamente questi incontri sono importanti e condivido assolutamente le parole pronunciate dalla Commissaria, però serve anche che noi, a livello europeo, maturiamo una consapevolezza su quali sono i nostri obiettivi politici e macroeconomici.

Continuare a perseguire, con una certa visione ortodossa, le visioni di un WTO che oggi non sono più attuali rischia di isolarci, perché gli Stati Uniti con l'IRA ci hanno dimostrato cosa si deve fare per attirare gli investimenti e la Cina, con la stretta sulle terre rare che esporterà sempre meno, ci creerà delle difficoltà. Quindi dobbiamo fare delle politiche che difendano la nostra produzione di acciaio e la nostra industria della difesa per attrarre anche noi investimenti e – attenzione – per proteggere catene del valore che, come ci insegna la crisi geopolitica gravissima che stiamo vivendo a livello mondiale, sono sempre più fragili. Ovviamente anche altri temi, come il ciberterrorismo, ci devono vedere protagonisti.

Attenzione anche a un altro aspetto: a livello legislativo abbiamo introdotto una tassazione delle emissioni alle imprese europee col sistema ETS e con altri strumenti, come il CBAM alle frontiere, che creeranno potenzialmente un rischio di competitività per le nostre imprese, perché i nostri partner internazionali ci hanno detto che questi strumenti non vorranno adottarli.

Quindi, secondo me, nei prossimi anni dovremo cambiare anche tipo di approccio: meno dirigismo e maggiore attenzione anche alle crisi sociali che ci saranno e che richiederanno un'attenzione economica e macroeconomica differente e meno attenta ai vincoli di mercati che non guardano all'impatto sociale di certe norme e accordi internazionali.

  Helmut Scholz, im Namen der Fraktion The Left. – Herr Präsident, Frau Vizepräsidentin, Frau Ratsvertreterin! 1985 Tage dauert der Handelsstreit der EU mit den Vereinigten Staaten bereits an. Auch der jüngste EU-US-Gipfel konnte die wesentlichen Differenzen nicht überbrücken. Im Streit um Schutzzölle auf Aluminium und Stahl ist keine Einigung in Sicht. In weiter Ferne verbleibt der Abschluss des für die Kommissionspräsidentin von der Leyen so wichtigen Abkommens zu kritischen Rohstoffen. Seien wir ehrlich, insbesondere aufgrund von Differenzen zu Umweltstandards und Arbeitnehmer- und Arbeitnehmerinnenrechten.

Was bleibt also von diesem Gipfel? Die Abschlusserklärung unterstreicht die Rolle des Handels- und Technologierats als Schlüsselforum für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und wird zum prinzipiellen Verhandlungsrahmen aufgewertet.

Was heißt das? Wo bleibt die parlamentarische Kontrolle, um die wir mühsam ringen? Zudem wollen die beiden Blöcke Regeln für die Technologien von morgen setzen. Multilaterale Foren werden so ums Neue umgangen und mit ihnen auch die Notwendigkeit klarer Mandate. Das aber ist bedenklich in einer sich rapide verändernden multipolaren Welt.

  Francesca Donato (NI). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, abbiamo sentito dalle parole della Commissaria un lungo elenco di progetti condivisi con l'amministrazione Biden da parte dell'Unione europea, alcuni dei quali non altrettanto condivisi dai popoli europeo e statunitense, come ad esempio quello del supporto militare e finanziario illimitato al governo ucraino, senza alcuno sforzo per arrivare a un negoziato, o come il perseguimento degli obiettivi climatici con modalità e tempistiche già dimostratesi insostenibili per il nostro sistema industriale, dal punto di vista energetico e commerciale.

Ciò che emerge dai risultati di questo vertice è il costante appiattimento delle politiche europee sugli obiettivi indicati dal governo americano, senza alcun dibattito né cura per i tanti punti di conflitto fra gli interessi dell'Unione e quelli degli Stati Uniti.

Il distacco e l'alienazione della dirigenza UE rispetto alle richieste dei cittadini europei aumenta progressivamente e di questo vedremo i risultati presto nelle urne.

  Radosław Sikorski (PPE). – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, by all accounts, the EU-US summit was successful enough. Congratulations. So let me make a larger point. Satrapies such as Russia, China, North Korea, Iran and Venezuela collaborate to harm us. Therefore, we need to stick together.

There are two things that keep me awake at night. Number one, if the election in the US goes the wrong way next year, we’ll be in real trouble. And I beg you, colleagues, we need to get serious about European defence. And secondly, the bill in the US Congress to supply arms and ammunition to Ukraine is having difficulty. We need to communicate to our American colleagues that this is crucial. This is what I think we should do.

  Bernd Lange (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin! Der Gipfel war im Bereich der Handelspolitik kein Erfolg: Wir haben kein Abkommen über Stahl und Aluminium, wir haben kein Abkommen über Rohstoffe. Das liegt daran, dass die USA ihre Interessen absolut setzen – das muss man so nüchtern sehen –, wie auch beim Inflation Reduction Act. Aber ich glaube, angesichts der geopolitischen Situation haben wir auch kein Interesse daran, zu eskalieren, also neue Zölle zu setzen oder sonstige Maßnahmen zu ergreifen.

Deswegen geht es meiner Ansicht nach um drei Dinge, die wir erreichen müssen. Zum einen müssen wir sicherstellen, dass zukünftige Abkommen nicht die WTO-Regeln unterlaufen. Wir stehen nach wie vor zum multilateralen System. Zweitens: Wir werden in unseren Verhandlungen mit den Vereinigten Staaten auch keine fundamentalen Positionen der EU aufgeben können. Auch das ist, glaube ich, klar. Und zum Dritten: Also geht es darum, den Status quo abzusichern und zu sehen, wie wir gemeinsam über die Zeit kommen – also keine absolut neuen Ambitionen zu entwickeln, sondern Stabilität zu organisieren.

  Anna Fotyga (ECR). – Mr President, I commend the timing, scope and importance of what I consider to be the most important bound partnership of the world. It is necessary to align our foreign policies in times of challenge, in times of multiple threats. And here there are really many details still to discuss.

Let me turn your attention to one thing, in particular linked to the war waged by the Russian Federation on Ukraine and our necessity to focus our attention on this, despite all the other challenges that we have to focus on as well. We need a kind of agriculture Ramstein to help Ukraine finance war and defence of the country. And it is not enough to absorb shocks, market shocks, just by the European Union. We need a much broader approach, also to support ...

(The President cut off the speaker)

  Ivan Vilibor Sinčić (NI). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, naime, kod osnivanja NATO-a britanski je časnik Montgomery i sam rekao da je ideja NATO-a držati Nijemce na koljenima, Ruse van Europe, a Amerikance unutra. Slična je logika i svih drugih organizacija koje su osnovane u to vrijeme, poput Vijeća Europe ili Europske ekonomske zajednice, preteče EU.

Stanje je isto i danas, nakon 70 godina. Politički, ekonomski i vojni utjecaj SAD-a u Europi je ogroman. SAD i EU, nažalost, nisu partneri, nego se radi o vazalnom odnosu. To se pokazalo kada su američke službe prisluškivale lidere Švedske, Norveške, Francuske i Njemačke, uključujući kancelarku Angelu Merkel, a ona nije smjela niti prigovoriti niti pisnuti - kao da se ništa nije dogodilo; pokazalo se kad je američka mornarica uništila Sjeverni tok, a vlada Njemačke se nije usudila prigovoriti niti tražiti istragu ili objašnjenje.

Uništena je kritična infrastruktura, kako se to ovdje naziva, i to najsnažnije zemlje EU-a, a ona se pravi kao da nema veze s time, kao da se ništa nije dogodilo. Nema tužbe, nema istrage, nema diplomacije, čak ni kritike - da se ne bi ljutili oni tamo preko oceana. Ovaj se kontinent mora osloboditi utjecaja moćnika iz Washingtona koji se projicira preko Bruxellesa i sam odlučivati za sebe po principu suradnje suverenih država. Ako se to ne dogodi, stradat će kao pijun na geopolitičkoj šahovskoj ploči.

  Miapetra Kumpula-Natri (S&D). – Mr President, the outcome of this EU-US summit is good because we had the life-saving news that both the USA and the EU continue their steadfast support to Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression.

Then also we had news that, despite the fact that the two sides could not come to an agreement on the steel and aluminium tariffs or broadening the understanding of the critical materials, so important for climate change and our future industries, that they will continue the negotiations. And we could read what the ambassador to the European Union Mark Gitenstein said that the US would not let the tariff rate quotas expire on 1 January, but is ready to continue the negotiations. So I wish good luck because this is what we least need in this time of geopolitical tensions: to start any more trade disputes.

But rather I also want to take the activity and needed transatlantic relationship that is more important than ever. Also last week, four European Parliament committees visited the United States and we do our best to keep on the same track for the future on this global crisis that we are facing.

  Svenja Hahn (Renew). – Mr President, I believe the EU-US summit has shown very clearly that we stand united in our fight for democracy and against the autocrats of this world. But the transatlantic partnership is so much more than just standing against autocrats. It is also working closer together than we do with other partners. It is also growing together. And the best way to do so is by trade. And in that regard, the result of the summit has been disappointing.

And in the EU, just like in the US, we want to strengthen our economic security. More trade with more partners will make us less dependent and more trade with more democratic partners will make our economies and our democracy stronger. And the dispute remaining from the Trump tariffs needs to be solved by the end of this year. We need to see the promised agreement on sustainable steel and aluminium, and we need to see an agreement on critical minerals to ensure fair competition for European companies. Let us strengthen the transatlantic partnership by abolishing tariffs, foster more cooperation through the Trade and Technology Council, and let us work towards a vision for EU-US free trade agreement.

Spontane Wortmeldungen

  Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señor presidente, celebro que finalmente tuviera lugar la cumbre con los Estados Unidos. Espero que la próxima no espere otros dos años. Deberemos volver al sistema anual de cumbres, vigente ya en la época de Clinton.

Los retos que compartimos con los Estados Unidos son muchos: Ucrania, Oriente Medio, la compleja relación con China, la inestabilidad en el Sahel, el Indopacífico, etc. La cooperación y la coordinación con los Estados Unidos —nuestro aliado más importante— son, por lo tanto, imprescindibles.

En el plano bilateral, desgraciadamente, los resultados de la cumbre no son destacados. Sigue sin cerrarse el acuerdo sobre minerales fundamentales, necesario para evitar los problemas que la Ley de Reducción de la Inflación estadounidense genera a los vehículos eléctricos europeos. El Consejo Europeo, hace pocos días, tuvo que insistir en este punto. Es una lástima, ciertamente —y lo reitero—, que no hayamos concluido la ATCI: ahora no estaríamos en esta situación.

Y deberemos encontrar una solución pronto a la problemática del acero y del aluminio. No cabe perder mucho tiempo: en menos de un año podemos tener en Washington una administración indiferente o menos comprometida, desde luego, con la Unión Europea.

Celebro, por último, que vaya a incrementarse la financiación de los programas Erasmus+ y Fulbright Schuman.

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, doamna comisară, stimați colegi, sigur, și eu sunt rezervată vizavi de rezultatele acestui Summit.

Și de ce sunt rezervată? Recent am făcut o vizită în calitate de vicepreședinte al Comisiei pentru piața internă în Statele Unite. Au mai fost și alte comisii prezente, foarte mult dialog, dar să ne amintim că în mandatul trecut nu am putut să finalizăm în administrația Trump TTIP-ul și speranța mea și probabil a multora, era ca în administrația Biden să finalizăm acest acord transatlantic.

Sigur, e bine că avem un Consiliu comercial și tehnic. Problema este să ne uităm la rezultate. Și da, vor fi alegeri în Statele Unite și cred că intrăm într-o nouă conducere a Statelor Unite fără niște rezultate concrete.

E foarte bine că s-a menționat și ridicarea vizelor, dar vedeți, țara mea, de exemplu, nu e beneficiară a ridicării vizelor și sunt doar declarații care nu sunt acoperite în fapte și cred că pe acest lucru trebuie să punem accent, doamna comisară și președinția Consiliului, să avem rezultate.

Statele Unite sunt un partener important pentru piața internă a Uniunii Europene.

  Jordi Cañas (Renew). – Señor presidente, el resultado de las cumbres se tiene que medir o por los éxitos alcanzados o por los acuerdos alcanzados. Cuando no se alcanza ninguno, decir que ha sido un éxito, seguir negociando, está bien.

Yo no voy a hablar de minerales raros. No voy a hablar de aluminio. Voy a hablar de algo mucho más humilde: las aceitunas negras, un producto al que, desde 2018, los Estados Unidos aplican unos aranceles que han sido declarados ilegales por la Organización Mundial del Comercio. ¿Se ha hablado de esto en la cumbre? No, hombre, no. Estamos para cosas mucho más elevadas. ¿Se ha resuelto algo? Qué va.

¿Desde cuándo los Estados Unidos incumplen sus compromisos de respeto a las decisiones de la OMC? Y, sobre todo, ¿desde cuándo ustedes siguen diciendo que la mejor forma de obligar a los Estados Unidos a cumplir algo es seguir negociando?

Y la pregunta es: ¿hasta cuándo van a seguir negociando? ¿Hasta cuándo los productores van a tener que seguir soportando unos aranceles ilegales? ¿Hasta cuándo tendremos la paciencia de no dar la respuesta que los Estados Unidos merecen por sus reiterados incumplimientos?

  Ljudmila Novak (PPE). – Gospod predsednik, spoštovana gospa komisarka, kolegice in kolegi! Pošteno in fer sodelovanje vedno podpiram. Jasno je, da Evropska unija potrebuje nove partnerje, žal nismo samozadostni pri razpolaganju s kritičnimi surovinami.

Ob tem pa ne smemo slepo zaupati ali slediti večjim in močnejšim partnerjem. Nekoč smo že bili preveč odvisni od partnerjev na področju energetike. Iste napake ne smemo ponavljati.

Podpiram sporazume tudi z drugimi državami, ki razpolagajo z redkimi surovinami. Oblast v državah se lahko zamenja, žal ne vedno na bolje. Skupaj z demokratičnimi državami pa si moramo vedno prizadevati za mir in humanost v politiki in tudi v vseh konfliktih.

  Domènec Ruiz Devesa (S&D). – Señor presidente, gracias a la secretaria de Estado, Ángeles Moreno Bau, que ha intervenido en nombre de la Presidencia española.

Yo quiero recordar a la Cámara que el 14 de agosto de 1941 se firmaba en Newfoundland la Carta del Atlántico entre los Estados Unidos y el Reino Unido. Era la posición común de los aliados frente a la amenaza del nazifascismo. Y en el año 1995, Felipe González, en representación también de la Presidencia española, firmaba con Bill Clinton la Nueva Agenda Transatlántica.

Desde entonces tenemos el sistema de cumbres anuales o bianuales con sus declaraciones, pero carecemos extrañamente de un marco conjunto omnicomprensivo de la relación, ya sea en forma de declaración —una nueva Carta del Atlántico— o de tratado bilateral o acuerdo de asociación.

Creo que tenemos que pensar en esta dirección para que podamos tratar todos los elementos de esta importantísima relación transatlántica: comerciales, económicos, de inversión y geopolíticos.

  Inma Rodríguez-Piñero (S&D). – Señor presidente, querida comisaria, querida secretaria de Estado, sin duda alguna, las relaciones transatlánticas son cruciales y son fundamentales, especialmente en este momento geopolítico que vivimos.

Pero, a pesar de mantener el diálogo del Consejo UE-EE. UU. de Comercio y Tecnología —que me ha parecido fundamental—, lo que me preocupa enormemente, y creo que lo más importante, es que la Unión Europea tenga más influencia y más capacidad de nivelación en las relaciones transatlánticas. Y, para eso, es crucial que la Unión Europea recupere el liderazgo tecnológico y la capacidad competitiva y que realmente podamos evitar en el futuro que leyes como la Ley de Reducción de la Inflación estadounidense se puedan aprobar sin tener en cuenta a un socio estratégico como es la Unión Europea.

Por eso, le quiero preguntar a la señora comisaria si tienen prevista, van a hacer o han hecho una evaluación del impacto que la Ley de Reducción de la Inflación tiene en las empresas y la economía europeas.

  Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, é muito importante que os Estados Unidos e a União Europeia trabalhem em conjunto para favorecer a sua resiliência económica e a sua segurança.

Por isso, temos que alinhar as nossas abordagens em questões muito concretas.

Precisamos, por exemplo, de combater as práticas que distorcem a concorrência, como a circulação de produtos fabricados com trabalho forçado. Os Estados Unidos têm já em vigor uma legislação muito ambiciosa. Será bom que a União Europeia aprove também a sua antes do final deste mandato.

Precisamos igualmente de trabalhar em conjunto para combater o uso indevido de técnicas de inteligência artificial e desinformação. A União Europeia está em vias de dispor de uma regulação com esses objetivos. Seria bom que os Estados Unidos fossem no mesmo sentido.

São problemas sem fronteiras que, em conjunto, podemos resolver melhor.

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)

  Věra Jourová, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, this debate confirmed that we understand the thing in the same way, the Parliament and the Commission: that it is imperative to recognise that the stability and prosperity of both sides of the Atlantic, and indeed beyond, depend on our ability to work closely and collaboratively with the United States. So, no dependency – I have to reject this, because I heard it here today – no dependency of the EU on the US. We are partners who have to work together. I think also the summit showed that this is the case.

We believe that the strength of our transatlantic partnership remains a deterrent to any who would seek to exploit weaknesses within it. The European Union and the United States share a profound and strategic relationship rooted in history, values and interests. We are firmly committed to nurturing and building upon this partnership beyond the upcoming 2024 election cycle.

Several of you asked about the concrete projects – Mr Tudorache, and several other honourable Members. So, I will go through the list of the concrete things we work on together.

First of all, many Members mentioned the slow progress, if any, on the agreement on steel and aluminium and critical materials. So, here I want to say that the summit resulted in important progress towards a global arrangement on sustainable steel and aluminium, and also Critical Minerals Agreement.

On GSA, the aluminium and steel, we made headway in identifying the sources of non-market excess capacity, and getting a better shared understanding of the tools we will need to decarbonise the steel and aluminium industries.

We are committed to continue making progress on the agreement in the next two months, including with a view to foster undistorted transatlantic trade in these sectors. So, once again, we have given ourselves an additional two more months to solve this. This is our objective and we continue to share a joint sense of urgency with you.

On the critical materials, we also advanced significantly. We will continue to engage with the United States, and also consult with our Member States, with a view to getting an agreement over the finishing line. Our objective is a full international agreement, which will allow EU critical materials to benefit from subsidies for electric vehicles under the Inflation Reduction Act, and help integrate transatlantic critical material, critical mineral, and battery supply chains. So, this is the update on these two agreements.

Now, back to the Technology and Trade Council, its technological part. One last comment on the Inflation Reduction Act. Ms Piñero, we recently adopted a communication as a reaction on the Inflation Reduction Act, the update of the response of the EU, and there is very relevant data being used for the communication.

I also want to mention, under the list of projects, the Clean Energy Incentives Dialogue, which is also connected with the Inflation Reduction Act, as you know. On the technology side, we have several priorities, which we confirmed; we will discuss them further still this year on the next session. Then we should have the last one under this administration – and it should be in spring – to wrap up, summarise the results of common efforts and discuss the possible future continuation. But, of course, the elections are coming, and so we have to work together till spring, and then to plan with some level of uncertainty.

At the same time, I want to mention four priorities under the technology side of TTC. First is the stabilisation of cooperation in the field of semiconductors, including supply chains. When I say stabilisation, I mean not ad hoc reactions on some shortages or some unexpected situations, but something more systematic, something more predictable, where we can rely on each other.

The second thing is cooperation on quantum and related technologies, especially common research, usage of Horizon-relevant programmes on the US side. The same or similar way ahead of us is for AI. Again, strong cooperation in the research field. As you may know, recently, Gina Raimondo announced the establishment of the institute on generative AI safety. She announced it in London. After we finalise the AI Act, we will also be able to announce a similar arrangement on the European Union side. Cooperation in research field is more than needed in the field of AI and generative AI, foundation models, and so on.

Also, we are continuing consultations when it comes to regulatory response on possible risks posed by artificial intelligence. Convergence of rules and common work on future global rules is a very important project still ahead of us. I am sure that if the democratic world joins forces and becomes the rules makers for the technologies, rather than rules takers, we will win a very important global battle, because the field of technologies is unfortunately, in the current world, a battlefield.

The third thing – or the last priority we have, under TTC technology part – is intensive cooperation and common projects to promote digitalisation and development of technologies and innovations in third countries. Plenty of work, a lot has been done; some things are still ahead of us, but I believe that by spring 2024, we will be able to announce very concrete results stemming from our mutual cooperation with the United States.

  Ángeles Moreno Bau, presidenta en ejercicio del Consejo. – Señor presidente, señorías, señora vicepresidenta Jourová, muchas gracias por sus intervenciones y comentarios. Estamos en un momento sin precedentes y el debate de hoy así lo confirma. La Unión Europea y los Estados Unidos se enfrentan a unos desafíos enormes: la guerra en Ucrania, la crisis en Oriente Medio, el cambio climático y la transición energética, por citar solo algunos ejemplos.

Con los Estados Unidos somos socios para defender la libertad y la democracia, nuestros valores comunes, y para buscar soluciones a los problemas sin fronteras de nuestro planeta, como muchos de ustedes han dicho. Ni la Unión Europea ni los Estados Unidos pueden hacer frente por sí solos a estos desafíos, y es evidente que el presidente Biden y su Gobierno están dispuestos y son favorables a colaborar con nosotros.

La cumbre ha desembocado en un programa ambicioso que marca el camino para hacer frente a estos desafíos. Ambas partes nos hemos comprometido a adelantar el trabajo y alcanzar soluciones en cuestiones esenciales en materia de comercio abierto. Colaboraremos para llevar a cabo este programa y apostaremos por la Asociación Transatlántica, que es fundamental para la prosperidad y la seguridad de nuestros pueblos y del resto del mundo.

Una vez más, gracias por su atención y por sus contribuciones, que serán muy útiles para guiar nuestro trabajo futuro y preparar futuras cumbres.

  Der Präsident. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 171)

  Urmas Paet (Renew), kirjalikult. – On oluline, et ELi ja USA toetus Ukrainale jätkuks, seda tippkohtumisel ka kinnitati. EL ja USA on teinud tihedat koostööd, et Ukrainat toetada nii poliitiliselt kui ka relvaabi andes. Oluline on hoida Ukrainas toimuvat pidevalt fookuses. Pingelist olukorda maailmas arvestades peab USA ja ELi koostöö jätkuma ka muudes valdkondades. On oluline, et nii USA kui ka EL töötaksid koos selle nimel, et olukord Lähis-Idas ei eskaleeruks veelgi enam.

3. Europos Sąjungos nuosavų išteklių sistema (diskusijos)

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über den Bericht von José Manuel Fernandes und Valérie Hayer im Namen des Haushaltsausschusses über den Vorschlag für einen Beschluss des Rates zur Änderung des Beschlusses (EU, Euratom) 2020/2053 über das Eigenmittelsystem der Europäischen Union (COM(2021)0570 - C-0034/2022)) (COM(2023)0331 – C9-0034/2022 C9-0211/2023 – 2021/0430(CNS)) (A9-0295/2023).

  Valérie Hayer, rapporteure. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, depuis 2019, nous avons repris avec José Manuel Fernandes, que je salue ici, le flambeau des ressources propres. Un dossier emblématique, et pour certains un serpent de mer. Je dois bien avouer que depuis tout ce temps, je me demande parfois comment les dirigeants nationaux dans les années 50 s’étaient mis d’accord dès le premier coup pour que l’Europe soit entièrement financée par de véritables ressources propres. C’était l’époque où les grandes entreprises actives dans les secteurs du charbon et de l’acier payaient une taxe directement à la CECA, à l’institution européenne. Une époque où l’autonomie financière de l’Europe était une volonté affichée des leaders nationaux. Cette volonté, elle avait même été renouvelée dans les années 60 avec les droits de douane.

Mais, il faut le reconnaître, cet esprit a fané avec le temps. Les contributions nationales se sont imposées comme la nouvelle norme. Les États ont repris la main. Résultat, il ne se passe plus une négociation budgétaire où les contributeurs nets ne tapent sur les bénéficiaires nets. Loin, très loin de l’esprit de solidarité qui a fondé et qui, je le crois toujours, caractérise notre Union. Quand on parle d’argent, ce sont les égoïsmes nationaux qui reprennent le dessus. La surdépendance aux contributions nationales nous a menés à une impasse, avec un budget bloqué à 1 % du PIB de l’Union pour, j’ai envie de dire, presque l’éternité.

Alors, chers collègues, je nous pose une question existentielle: est-ce que l’Europe sera capable de s’élargir, ou plutôt sera-t-elle capable de fonctionner dans ces conditions: avec encore plus de membres, mais avec les mêmes règles anachroniques, la même façon de financer notre avenir commun? Je ne veux pas, moi, d’une Europe où 35 ministères des finances nationaux, chacun avec leurs propres contraintes, tirent l’action de l’Europe vers le bas, faute de volonté politique.

Chers collègues, le temps est venu. Le temps est venu de faire respecter la promesse qui a été faite avec ce plan de relance. La dette contractée ne devra pas être remboursée par les États avec les impôts des contribuables. Il est aussi hors de question de passer par des coupes dans nos soins de santé ou encore dans Erasmus. Le temps est donc venu d’acter ces nouvelles ressources propres. Les droits à polluer du marché carbone européen qui existent depuis 2003, ils sont européens? Ils vont donc au budget européen. La taxe carbone aux frontières, elle est bien européenne? Elle va donc au budget européen. Les grandes multinationales prospèrent grâce au marché européen? Elles contribuent donc au budget européen. Sortons de cette fébrilité, et assumons avec force – imposons même – ce qui est une évidence et qui aurait dû le rester. Si une politique européenne génère de l’argent, alors cet argent doit revenir à l’Europe.

Et au-delà de l’évidence, de la cohérence, défendons ce qui est désormais devenu primordial. En 2028, dans un peu plus de quatre ans, l’Union européenne sera tenue juridiquement de commencer à rembourser la dette contractée pour le plan de relance. On parle de 20 milliards d’euros par an. Si les États ne se décident pas à franchir un cap politique, le cap politique qu’ils s’étaient engagés eux-mêmes à respecter en 2020, alors nous courons droit à la solution que personne, personne ne veut: un remboursement par les États. Et en votant ce rapport aujourd’hui, nous signalons aussi aux États qu’un tel scénario ne serait pas de la responsabilité des parlementaires.

  José Manuel Fernandes, relator. – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, Caras e Caros Colegas, em primeiro lugar, as minhas palavras vão para a corelatora Valérie Hayer, com quem temos feito um trabalho profícuo para este objetivo, este desiderato já antigo, que é o de termos novas receitas para o Orçamento da União Europeia.

Sempre foi um objetivo nosso e, aliás, há que referir que as receitas do Orçamento da União deviam ser genuínas. Ninguém se pode sentir o dono do orçamento, um orçamento onde todos são beneficiários, onde é inaceitável a distinção entre beneficiários líquidos e contribuintes líquidos.

Com esta proposta e em face da urgência do pagamento da dívida do Plano de Recuperação e Resiliência, nós temos uma solução que não penaliza os cidadãos europeus, uma solução que ajuda, inclusivamente, a que os objetivos políticos nas áreas ambiental e de justiça fiscal sejam também eles concretizados.

Convém referir que o pagamento da dívida do NextGenerationEU, que deu lugar aos Planos de Recuperação e Resiliência, tem um impacto brutal no orçamento da União Europeia. Esta dívida será paga até 2058. Não esquecer que está dentro do orçamento neste momento, o que lamentamos.

Se nós olharmos para 2021-2027, estavam previstos, só para juros, 15 mil milhões de euros. Pois bem, serão cerca de 30 mil milhões de euros. E depois de 2027 há que pagar também as amortizações e até 2058, o equivalente a cerca de 20% do orçamento da União Europeia.

Seria inaceitável não termos novas receitas cujo montante seja suficiente para o pagamento desta dívida.

Aliás, o Conselho, num acordo interinstitucional, assumiu um roteiro para a criação de novos recursos, com o objetivo, precisamente, de eles serem suficientes para pagar a dívida, de forma a não prejudicarmos nem cortarmos nos fundos e nos programas.

Seria contra as próximas gerações, contra o futuro, contra os agricultores e a coesão, se não tivéssemos novas receitas.

Parabéns à Comissão Europeia porque fez a proposta, cumpriu, tem um conjunto de três novos recursos próprios, baseados no mercado de licenças de emissão, no mercado de carbono e numa receita estatística, um recurso que já existe aplicado às multinacionais.

E com estes recursos nós conseguimos cerca de 45 mil milhões de euros anuais, um montante que é mais do que suficiente para pagar a dívida e para, inclusivamente, reduzir as contribuições nacionais.

Nós não podemos sobrecarregar os cidadãos europeus com mais impostos. Quem não paga, deve pagar. Quem mais beneficia do mercado interno, deve contribuir mais. E, depois, devemos ter receitas, recursos próprios, que ajudem também não só a uma justiça fiscal, uma competição leal, como é exemplo o mecanismo de carbono de ajustamento nas fronteiras, mas que, em simultâneo, também estes novos recursos permitam atingir objetivos ambientais globais e, por isso, o mercado de licenças de emissão e, por isso, o Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (Mecanismo de Ajustamento de Carbono).

O Conselho pode decidir, o Conselho tem tudo para decidir e esperemos que não tarde.

  Johannes Hahn, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, distinguished co-rapporteurs, honourable Members, indeed, really, thank you for your latest report, the opportunity to debate and, more generally, for your active role on new own resources in recent years.

Your draft consultative opinion on our proposal to amend the own resources decision constitutes yet another element in a series of favourable reactions to our proposals. Thereby, you are providing valuable support to the Commission’s initiatives and setting a constructive dynamic amongst partners in the legislative process. We highly appreciate this.

The Commission has proposed a comprehensive set of new own resources in the process which started in December 2021, adjusted and concluded in 2023. With the latest package, the Commission advanced its deliverables under our institutional agreement by one year for Member States to have all the elements needed for a decision on new own resources.

Right now, sectoral legislation is in place for all own resources proposals, including the CBAM regulation and the ETS Directive, which means that there are no further obstacles to stepping up negotiations on this front.

To recall, the Commission’s proposal of 20 June this year includes amendments for ETS and CBAM own resources, reflecting the sectoral legislation adopted and the new environment. It also includes a new element – a temporary statistical own resource based on company profits. This is not a tax and it will not increase the compliance costs of companies.

I do acknowledge that our adjusted proposal does not fully meet Parliament’s expectations. However, given the complexity and sensitivities of this file, we have to find a delicate, golden mean to ensure an agreement among and with Member States.

In the Council, the dynamic has not been as fast as anticipated. Also, more engagement is recently taking place. We understand Member States’ challenges. However, delaying an agreement on own resources will not make it easier to find a solution later. Overall, this adjusted basket strikes a good balance, delivers on the roadmap of the interinstitutional agreement, it is simple and it can be implemented quickly

To bring to fruition the efforts made so far, new own resources must be operationalised with no delay. An agreement on own resources will be understood as a sign of European cohesion and the ability to deliver on our commitments. An agreement would further reflect positively on the Union’s image on the capital markets, evaluation from rating agencies, and facilitate the repayment of NGO obligations.

Once again, we have a unique chance and a unique responsibility to deliver on our commitments. Importantly, the Commission will not put forward any additional proposals, but I am confident that an agreement on the existing basis is possible.

We will endeavour to support an acceleration of the negotiations and find an agreement before the elections next June. And I was reassured by the incoming Belgium Presidency that they are eager to find a solution and to engage on this subject. In this process, the support of the Parliament will be even more important.

IN THE CHAIR: DITA CHARANZOVÁ
Vice-President

  Siegfried Mureşan, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, rapporteurs, the introduction of own resources will make the EU financing more transparent, more predictable and less political. Instead of having politicians every seven years politically decide how we finance the European Union, this will be made in an automatic, in a transparent way. Citizens, enterprises, regions will know exactly that the financing of the Union is secure in the long term. This is why the introduction of own resources is the right path.

We are supporting it as a European Parliament and on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party, I would like to announce that we are supporting the report as is put forward by the two co-rapporteurs. They have the wide backing of Members of the European Parliament and we are expecting the Council to progress swiftly with work in these areas.

The introduction of own resources will likewise allow Member States to limit their direct contributions to the budget. We will collect the revenues through the own resources and it will also allow us to pay back NextGenerationEU in a stable, transparent way in the long term. This basket of own resources also allows for the responsibility, when it comes to revenues, to be in an equal, balanced manner between Member States and different categories of contributions. Full support for the report.

  Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, señor comisario Hahn, hoy debatimos una propuesta sobre nuevos recursos para el presupuesto europeo y es un primer paso, pero, evidentemente, es muy insuficiente. NextGenerationEU, Ucrania, Gaza, ampliación, autonomía estratégica, inmigración, apoyo a empresas, a jóvenes y a agricultores, inversiones en nuevas energías... son necesidades del presente. Y, por si nos parece poco, la Comisión ayer presentó un plan de apoyo a los Balcanes Occidentales de 6 000 millones de euros.

Querer afrontar todo esto dignamente con un presupuesto del 1 % del PIB es ridículo. Y ridículo también es escuchar a algunos países pedir recortes en políticas fundamentales para poder financiar todas estas nuevas necesidades porque no hay dinero. Los bancos y las eléctricas están teniendo beneficios récord; las transacciones financieras siguen sin ser gravadas; las grandes empresas pagan menos impuestos que cualquier ciudadano; los superricos pagan entre el 0 y el 0,5 % de su riqueza. Ahí está el dinero.

Así que sean valientes y hagan una propuesta para hacer nuestro sistema más justo y nuestro presupuesto más fuerte.

  Billy Kelleher, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, I have sat here many times and discussed a system of own resources, and each time I have to repeat myself.

I am firstly supportive of the EU having own resources. The NextGenerationEU fund was an innovative and essential initiative from the Commission and I strongly supported it. It mobilised over EUR 800 billion to support the EU’s recovery from COVID. But the deterioration of the economic situation in the EU has meant that borrowing costs have rocketed and we need to find a way to repay them.

All that being said, after reading the report again, I find that I have no choice but to vote against it. Despite all the well-known sensitivities around corporation tax, despite the huge efforts and engagement by Ireland and other Member States in signing up to the OECD Pillar I and Pillar II agreements, the Commission is once again trying to introduce a corporate tax without the ability to have proper negotiations and assess the impacts.

I recognise that there is and should be, a discussion on whether the elements of Pillar I and Pillar II should be contributed to the EU budget, but by proposing to introduce temporary own resources based on residual profits of the largest multinational enterprises, the Commission is risking undermining any future debate on a permanent solution.

The Commission has framed this own resource as a temporary statistical own resource, but it is effectively a precursor to BEFIT. Commissioner, I cannot support such a proposal without allowing Pillar I and Pillar II to be properly implemented in the EU Member States, so that we can have a full assessment on its impact.

  David Cormand, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Madame la Présidente, merci aux corapporteurs pour leur travail et le suivi sur ce dossier qui aura été l’un des fils rouges de cette mandature: la création de nouvelles ressources propres pour l’Union européenne.

Le Parlement a toujours été clair sur ses demandes: un budget européen fort pour une Europe forte. Pour cela, la solution la plus transparente, la plus juste, la plus démocratique, c’est de doter l’Union et le Parlement de réelles compétences fiscales. Après quatre ans de discussions, nous obtenons enfin de nouvelles ressources propres qui visent à couvrir le remboursement du plan de relance suite à la crise de la COVID. Mais ce paquet reste bien loin des attentes de notre Parlement. L’accord interinstitutionnel est pourtant clair en prévoyant un ensemble de ressources nouvelles bien plus importantes et plus équitables socialement que celles de ce premier paquet.

Nous attendons donc les nouvelles propositions de la Commission, à commencer par la taxation des entreprises. La proposition de ressources propres statistiques basées sur les profits des entreprises, environ 16 milliards d’euros par an, est un aveu d’échec face au Conseil qui traîne les pieds sur une fiscalité juste des multinationales. Elle sera remplacée à terme par la proposition législative BEFIT. Or, celle-ci rate la cible de la lutte contre les paradis fiscaux dans l’Union, qui est l’éléphant dans la pièce du Conseil, lorsque l’on veut atteindre une fiscalité juste et équitable.

Nous continuerons de porter la nécessité d’un paquet fiscalité juste, incluant une meilleure imposition de ceux qui échappent aujourd’hui largement à l’impôt, en proposant de mieux fiscaliser les plus-values, les rachats d’actions, la fortune, le kérosène et les transactions financières.

  Eugen Jurzyca, za skupinu ECR. – Pani predsedajúca, prvotným cieľom Next Generation EÚ bolo zmierniť socio-ekonomické dopady pandémie. To je moja prvá poznámka. V procese implementácie sa prešlo na ciele digitalizácie a Zelenej dohody. Neskôr sa zdroje využívali na riešenie energetickej krízy a na Ukrajinu. To svedčí skôr o tom, že ciele tohto balíka neboli od začiatku celkom jasné. Evidentne nebolo treba vytvoriť taký veľký fond na riešenie dopadov pandémie, keď sa peniaze nakoniec použili na iné účely. Skutočnými cieľmi zrejme bolo zvýšenie miery prerozdeľovania. Dôsledkom teraz bude zvýšenie daňového zaťaženia členských štátov Európskej únie a aj formou nových európskych daní, ktoré zaťažia nielen bohatých, ale aj chudobných.

Druhá poznámka. Dane sa majú zaviesť vtedy, keď je to efektívne, a tam, kde je ich výber efektívny s čo najmenšími škodami na ekonomiku. Renomovaný inštitút Bruegel identifikuje ako vhodnú európsku daň spomedzi návrhov komisie len európsky obchod s emisnými povolenkami.

Tretia poznámka. Uprednostňujem priame platby členských štátov pred novými daňami, lebo je to transparentnejšie.

Posledná poznámka. Všetky ďalšie projekty, ktoré zvyšujú daňové zaťaženie, musia prejsť dramaticky kvalitnejšími analýzami dopadov, než akými na začiatku prešiel Next Generation EU.

  Joachim Kuhs, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, werte Kollegen! Auch dieses Thema der neuen Eigenmittel treibt mir die Schamesröte ins Gesicht. Denn mit diesem neuen Finanzierungsplan beschleunigen Sie noch auf dem vor einigen Jahren falsch eingeschlagenen Weg in die Knechtschaft.

Seit Sie vor drei Jahren das System der neuen Eigenmittel in das Gesamtpaket aus NextGenerationEU, Sieben-Jahres-Plan und Rechtsstaatlichkeitsmechanismus gepackt und die Vetos von Polen und Ungarn auf wundersame Weise aus dem Weg geräumt haben – seitdem ist klar, was Sie wollen: Sie wollen eine neue EU, eine EU, die, anders als in den Verträgen vorgesehen, weitgehend unabhängig ist von den Mitgliedstaaten, wo es kein Veto mehr gibt und wo die Kommission Schulden machen und schalten und walten kann, wie sie will.

Aber, meine Damen und Herren, haben Sie auch die Bürger gefragt, was die wollen? Und da kann ich Ihnen sagen: Die wollen keinen EU-Superstaat, nicht einmal die braven Deutschen. Und wenn die Bürger wüssten, was Sie alles an neuen Eigenmitteln und sonstigen Grausamkeiten planen und welche Belastungen auf sie zukommen, dann würden Sie in den nächsten Wahlen hinweggefegt, dann würden Sie keinen Fuß mehr auf den Boden bekommen.

Da die Bürger aber dank der Kontrolle der Mainstream-Medien nichts davon erfahren werden, sage ich Ihnen voraus, dass spätestens, wenn den Deutschen das Geld ausgeht und wenn Sie die bankrotte Ukraine in die EU aufnehmen, dann viele Mitgliedstaaten das Schiff verlassen werden. Stoppen wir den Weg in die Knechtschaft, damit Ihr werter Landsmann, Herr Hayek, weiter ruhig schlafen kann.

  Δημήτριος Παπαδημούλης, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας The Left. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, στηρίζω την έκθεση της κυρίας Hayer και του κυρίου Fernandes, γιατί επαναλαμβάνει μία σταθερή πάγια θέση του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου που την υποστηρίζουμε από το Ευρωπαϊκό Λαϊκό Κόμμα μέχρι και την Αριστερά, με την αρνητική εξαίρεση της αντιευρωπαϊκής άκρας δεξιάς.

Γιατί στηρίζουμε αυτή την έκθεση; Γιατί πρέπει να τιμήσουμε και να υπηρετήσουμε το θετικό βήμα της δημιουργίας του Ταμείου ανάκαμψης και γιατί πρέπει τους στόχους που έχουμε δώσει στους πολίτες υπόσχεση να υλοποιήσουμε να μπορέσουμε να τους πραγματοποιήσουμε, χωρίς να χρειαστεί να περικόψουμε κονδύλια από τη Συνοχή, από την Κοινή Αγροτική Πολιτική, από την καινοτομία, από το Erasmus. Γι’ αυτό χρειαζόμαστε να υλοποιηθεί η διοργανική συμφωνία, για τη δημιουργία νέων ίδιων πόρων. Για να ξεφύγουμε επιτέλους από αυτήν την κατάσταση, όπου ο ευρωπαϊκός προϋπολογισμός παραμένει με ευθύνη του Συμβουλίου καρφωμένος στο εντελώς ανεπαρκές ύψος του 1% του ευρωπαϊκού ΑΕΠ. Με 1% του ευρωπαϊκού ΑΕΠ ευρωπαϊκό προϋπολογισμό, κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι και κύριε Hahn, γνωρίζετε και εσείς πολύ καλά ότι δεν μπορούν να υπηρετηθούν οι στόχοι που θέτει η Επιτροπή, που θέτει το Συμβούλιο, που ζητά ακόμη πιο φιλόδοξους το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο. Γι’ αυτό πρέπει να εγκρίνουμε αυτήν την έκθεση και γι’ αυτό πρέπει εσείς της Επιτροπής, κύριε Hahn, στηριγμένοι και στη στήριξη του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου, να πιέσετε το Συμβούλιο να σταματήσει τις καθυστερήσεις και να υλοποιήσει τη διοργανική συμφωνία για τα βήματα που έχουν συμφωνηθεί.

  Antoni Comín i Oliveres (NI). – Madame la Présidente, les fonds NextGenerationEU ont été financés par une émission de dette conjointe et donc la pandémie de la COVID nous a fait briser les tabous des banques européennes. C’était une grande avance, mais maintenant arrive le moment de rendre cet argent aux créanciers. Et nous savons qu’il n’y a que trois façons de faire ça.

Soit nous augmentons les contributions nationales, ce qui, nous le savons tous, génère un débat qui empoisonne facilement les relations entre les contributeurs et les bénéficiaires nets du budget de l’Union. Soit nous réduisons les programmes et les politiques du budget communautaire, ce qui est le rêve des eurosceptiques. Soit nous opérons une augmentation décisive, pour ne pas dire historique, des ressources propres de l’Union. Je suis heureux que ce Parlement soutienne la troisième de ces options, celle d’augmenter les ressources propres, et qu’il le fasse avec ces trois instruments fiscaux: une augmentation du pourcentage de ce qui est collecté sur les marchés européens dans les émissions de carbone, les mécanismes d’ajustement carbone aux frontières et une ressource propre basée sur les bénéfices des entreprises.

Ainsi, nous faisons les premiers pas vers un système fiscal européen. Mais c’est seulement le premier pas. Il faut aller beaucoup plus loin. Il ne faut pas oublier que l’Union ne peut pas fonctionner comme une union économique et monétaire sans une union fiscale. Cela doit être l’objectif final, et des réformes comme celles dont nous discutons aujourd’hui nous aident à progresser vers cet objectif.

  Jan Olbrycht (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Przede wszystkim chciałbym podkreślić, że należy wskazać z ogromnym szacunkiem na rolę sprawozdawców, którzy w sposób niezwykle konsekwentny realizują plan Parlamentu Europejskiego, żeby doprowadzić jednak do zasadniczych zmian. Warto to odnotować, ponieważ w polityce nie zawsze się zdarza, że ktoś jest konsekwentny i postępuje zgodnie z pewnym określonym planem.

Nowe dochody własne Unii Europejskiej – jak widać z dyskusji, która się toczy – mają swoje dwa oblicza. Po pierwsze, chodzi o pytanie, jak spłacimy ogromny dług na rynkach finansowych: czy będziemy mieli nowe źródła dochodu, czy też będziemy musieli zmienić w ogóle charakter budżetu europejskiego i zredukować finansowanie polityki europejskiej bądź zwiększyć składkę do Unii Europejskiej?

I drugie oblicze, które tutaj się pojawia, czyli pytanie dotyczące tego, jaka ma być Unia. Czy ma być zmieniona struktura dochodów? Czy Unia ma być silniejsza, bardziej niezależna i ważna na rynkach finansowych? I pytanie do Rady: który z tych elementów dla Rady jest ważny, jeżeli Rada nie podejmuje działań?

  Margarida Marques (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, o reembolso do NextGenerationEU e os alargamentos da União Europeia não são para amanhã, mas são desafios maiores e urgentes da União Europeia, um e outro com enormes implicações no orçamento da União Europeia.

Para reembolsar o NextGenerationEU, há um compromisso interinstitucional de mobilizar novos recursos próprios, com um calendário bem definido, também como instrumentos de políticas europeias no clima ou na justiça fiscal.

Para criar condições para novos alargamentos, é fundamental definir uma nova arquitetura orçamental da União Europeia. O modelo atual não serve. O orçamento da Europa a 27 é bem diferente do orçamento de uma Europa a 35.

E aqui, mais uma vez, os novos recursos próprios são fundamentais. Ou vamos cortar na coesão, nas bolsas Erasmus, no apoio às PME, na investigação, ou vamos pedir um maior financiamento aos Estados-Membros.

Desafios urgentes - todos nós conhecemos o tempo da decisão política democrática na União Europeia.

  Janusz Lewandowski (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Ja jestem żywą pamięcią poprzednich prób wprowadzenia nowych zasobów własnych Unii Europejskiej. Komisarz Hahn jest świadkiem, że nie były to próby udane. Co się udało zrobić od tego czasu? Uprościć VAT oraz wprowadzić podatek od nieutylizowanego plastiku. To nie jest zbyt wydajne źródło zasilania budżetu. W dodatku wymaga rekompensat dla takich krajów jak Polska, które źle sobie radzą z utylizacją plastiku.

Ten nowy pakiet jest opóźniony, ale on nie jest opcją. To jest pakiet, który jest koniecznością, by spłacić wielkie długi bez uszczerbku dla finansowanych obecnie programów Unii Europejskiej i dla kopert narodowych, więc jest to kwestia wiarygodności Unii Europejskiej. Mam nadzieję, że państwa, które zgodziły się na New Generation EU z pełną świadomością, że wymaga to nowych zasobów, są właśnie tego świadome.

Catch-the-eye procedure

  Ljudmila Novak (PPE). – Gospa predsednica, spoštovani gospod komisar, kolegice in kolegi! Lastna sredstva v Evropski uniji oziroma v njenem proračunu bodo vedno bolj pomembna in tudi potrebna.

Poročevalca sta dejala, da se egoizem v državah članicah povečuje. Bojim se, da se bo ta egoizem še povečeval, predvsem ob različnih krizah.

Ob predvidenih širitvah Evropske unije bomo imeli še več neto prejemnic. Kandidatke in potencialne kandidatke so manj razvite države, ki pričakujejo sredstva iz evropskega proračuna oziroma skladov.

Čeprav imamo vse članice Evropske unije veliko prednosti ob širitvah, pa bodo državljani, davkoplačevalci neto plačnic, vedno bolj glasni. Zato nujno potrebujemo stabilne lastne vire, ob tem pa je seveda treba obdavčiti tiste, ki imajo velike dobičke na račun evropskih davkoplačevalcev pa so do sedaj bili premalo ali skoraj nič obdavčeni.

  Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamna președintă, domnule comisar, stimați colegi, nimic nu poate fi mai important pentru funcționarea pieței interne decât resursele, resursele proprii. Și este bine că avem acest raport și facem o analiză, însă vreau să spun foarte clar: trebuie să încetăm să împrumutăm pe spatele cetățeanului bani.

Domnule comisar, avem niște agenții care trebuie să se ocupe, de la Europol, Curtea de Conturi Europeană, Parchetul European, care a fost înființat cu scopul de a diminua, dacă nu de a pune capăt evaziunilor fiscale, paradisurilor fiscale. Deci o politică bună pentru resurse proprii este să colectăm, nu să adăugăm taxe.

De aceea cred că este o sarcină foarte importantă, pentru că nu va putea funcționa o piață internă extinsă cu 35 de state dacă nu punem capăt politicilor de eludare până la urmă a legii și trecerea banilor în alte zone, în zone de paradis fiscal.

Cred că avem nevoie de o nouă politică, de o nouă gândire, dar mai ales de o implementare corectă a politicilor fiscale.

  Marc Tarabella (NI). – Madame la Présidente, l’Europe veut servir de rempart pour les citoyens contre les crises économiques, sociales et climatiques et, on le constate tous les jours, la question budgétaire dans ces combats est centrale. Nous devons nous engager pleinement dans la transformation profonde de notre modèle économique, un modèle dans lequel l’Europe peut s’appuyer budgétairement sur des ressources propres, un modèle dans lequel seraient pris en compte une réelle taxe sur les transactions financières, un impôt sur la fortune pour les particuliers, une extension de la taxe sur les bénéfices excédentaires à tous les secteurs ayant profité des crises mondiales, une taxe européenne minimale sur les plus-values et tous les éléments qui pourront permettre enfin d’établir plus de justice fiscale.

Il est impératif pour l’Europe d’avoir un système de financement du budget plus transparent, plus équitable, et de doter l’Union européenne de ressources propres. Continuer à dépendre uniquement des dotations nationales n’a aucun sens. Nous empêcher de prélever directement des rentrées constitue un handicap quasi insurmontable si l’on veut mener des politiques audacieuses, courageuses, solidaires, autonomes, qui vont dans le sens de l’intérêt général.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)

  Johannes Hahn, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, again, thank you for this valuable and supportive debate. I think your suggestions are legitimate and have always been extremely useful for us.

At the same time, as every new economic and political phase has its opportunities and threats, we must constantly evaluate, if not to say re-evaluate the context and reconcile all the elements and constraints. But building on the momentum and, of course, of agreed legislation for SEPA and ETS, but also on our swift and pragmatic proposal this last summer, we believe it’s high time to get new own resources and we will not spare any effort to support an agreement by June next year.

And, once again, thank you for your support. And it was said we should put pressure on the Council. I think we have to do it together, but I have no doubts on this. And, once again, thank you for this debate, but also for all your efforts and engagement on this subject.

  José Manuel Fernandes, relator. – Senhora Presidente, Caras e Caros Colegas, Senhor Comissário, o Parlamento Europeu dará hoje luz verde para a introdução de três novos recursos próprios, três novas receitas para o orçamento da União Europeia.

É urgente que o Conselho decida. É inaceitável que o Conselho adie.

O processo de decisão de recursos próprios é dos mais morosos. A Comissão Europeia fez a proposta, nós damos luz verde, o Conselho tem de decidir por unanimidade e os parlamentos nacionais ratificam segundo a respetiva Constituição.

Esta unanimidade tem de ser bem utilizada, tem de ser utilizada para que haja um equilíbrio. Não é aceitável também aquilo que é uma previsão minha. Há Estados—Membros, que, como de costume, vão usar a unanimidade para tentar ganhos noutros dossiês e chantagear a Comissão Europeia e os outros Estados-Membros. E isso será verdadeiramente inconcebível e inaceitável.

Estes três recursos próprios, um pacote de recursos, não há só um, isto não é só por acaso. Também não é por acaso, porque um toca mais um Estado-Membro, o outro toca mais outro Estado-Membro e o conjunto equilibra-se. Por isso, estes três recursos próprios, que devem avançar com celeridade.

Os desafios da União Europeia não param. Nós temos guerra na Ucrânia, guerra no Médio Oriente, a necessidade de ajuda humanitária, a necessidade da reconstrução da Ucrânia, o objetivo do alargamento. Cada vez mais desafios que não podem significar mais impostos sobre os cidadãos e, aqui, os próximos recursos próprios, para além do objetivo que defendemos em termos ambientais, em termos climáticos, também deverão contribuir para a justiça fiscal e para, e termino, Senhora Presidente, o objetivo do combate à fraude, elisão e evasão fiscais. E na União Europeia, contas da Comissão, é cerca do equivalente a sete orçamentos anuais, 1 bilião de euros que se perde por ano em fraude, evasão e elisão fiscais.

Nós podemos ter mais receitas, beneficiar todos os cidadãos da União Europeia, porque o orçamento da União Europeia beneficia todos e, em simultâneo, responder, afirmativamente e positivamente, aos desafios que temos.

  Valérie Hayer, rapporteure. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, notre débat n’a fait que renforcer mon intuition: le temps est venu de retrouver du leadership. Et pas n’importe quel leadership. Je parle du leadership d’antan avec les visions des pères fondateurs. Relever la tête, quitter des yeux les tableaux comptables pour regarder là où nous voulons mener l’Europe, nous les parlementaires, les chefs d’État, les ministres, la société civile, les Européens.

Les ressources propres, bien loin de leur aspect technique, sont avant tout une question politique. Ce sont elles qui détermineront la confiance que les marchés continueront à accorder au projet européen. Ce sont elles qui détermineront si oui ou non l’Union européenne aura les mains libres pour faire jeu égal avec les puissances américaines et chinoises dans les prochaines décennies. Ce sont les ressources propres qui définiront la réalité de l’Union européenne de demain: un club d’une trentaine de nations unies pour le plus petit dénominateur commun, ou bien enfin une entité géopolitique, industrielle et écologique forte.

Alors, Monsieur le Commissaire – j’aurais bien voulu le dire aussi à la présidence espagnole, qui n’est pas présente –, croyez en mon soutien et en notre soutien total au travail que vous menez. Il s’agit probablement d’un des combats techniques, politiques et idéologiques les plus durs qu’il soit à Bruxelles, et ce depuis des décennies. Alors, gardez bien à l’esprit que si vous réussissez, votre victoire n’en sera que plus belle.

  President. – The debate is closed and the vote will be held today.

Written statements (Rule 171)

  Klára Dobrev (S&D), írásban. – Régóta személyes meggyőződésem, hogy az Európai Unió erősödése – ahogy mi ezt otthon, Magyarországon mondjuk – az Európai Egyesült Államok létrejötte – érdekében különösen fontos, hogy az Európai Unió növelje saját, önálló bevételi forrásainak a hányadát. Emiatt is támogatjuk az Európai Bizottság javaslatát.

Távlati és közvetlen céljaink elérése szempontjából is kiemelkedő jelentőséget tulajdonítunk annak, hogy az Európai Bizottság az ETS alapú saját forrásarányát 25%-ról 30%-ra javasolja felemelni, és új saját forrást is javasol a vállalati nyereségek alapján. A javaslathoz kapcsolódó rövid távú hasznot pedig abban látjuk, hogy a javaslat megvalósulása esetén az Európai Unió az 2018-as árakon számolva évente körülbelül 36 milliárd euró, illetve a mai árakon számolva körülbelül 45 milliárd euró többletforráshoz fog jutni.

Természetesen ez a cél akkor válik nemessé, ha azt az Európai Unióban élő emberek javára fordítjuk. Ez az többletforrás nagyrészt elegendő lenne az NGEU költségek refinanszírozásához, és jelentős részét a Szociális Klíma Alapra fordítanák. Ez pedig egy olyan cél, amely a javaslatot méltóvá teszi a támogatásra. Ezt a csomagot ne tekintsük a saját források rendszer hosszú távú globális reformjának végpontjaként. A teljeskörű reformot továbbra is szükségesnek, sőt, elkerülhetetlennek tartom, mert ezt követeli meg az Európai Unió, és az itt élő 450 millió ember érdeke.

  Pirkko Ruohonen-Lerner (ECR), kirjallinen. – Keskustelemme komission 20. kesäkuuta 2023 päivätystä ehdotuksesta, jonka tarkoituksena on muuttaa EU:n talousarvion rahoitusta. Komissio haluaa muokata ja päivittää joulukuussa 2021 esittämäänsä suunnitelmaa omien varojen käyttämisestä tähän tarkoitukseen. Näillä hienosäädöillä on tarkoitus varmistaa, että päästökauppajärjestelmään (ETS) ja hiilirajamekanismiin (CBAM) liittyvät varat sovitetaan yhteen 55-valmiuspaketin neuvottelujen tulosten kanssa.

Yksi suuri muutos, jota komissio ehdottaa, on päästökauppajärjestelmään perustuvien omien varojen määrän nosto 25 prosentista 30 prosenttiin. Komissio ehdottaa myös uusia omia varoja, jotka perustuvat yritysten voittoihin. Haluan tehdä selväksi, että minulla on vakavia huolenaiheita tämän ehdotuksen suhteen. En kannata uusien omien varojen luomista, enkä sitä, että Suomea painostetaan entistä enemmän maksamaan takaisin EU:n elpymissuunnitelmasta aiheutuneita velkoja.

Lisäksi on syytä pitää mielessä, että vaikka Euroopan parlamentti yrittää löytää uusia tulonlähteitä, ei sillä ole paljon sananvaltaa näiden uusien omien varojen hyväksymisessä. Yhteenvetona totean, että on tärkeää löytää oikeudenmukainen tasapaino rahoituksen kestävyyden ja sen varmistamisen välillä, että jokainen jäsenvaltio kantaa kohtuullisen taakan.

  Alfred Sant (S&D), in writing. – The current financing system of the EU budget is structurally deficient. It needs ‘adjustments’. The EU has assumed new commitments and is consequently facing increasing financial pressures. The Next Generation EU programme already showed the limits of EU budgeting as money needed to be borrowed to finance projects. The COVID pandemic, followed by the Russia-Ukraine war, then the threat of stagflation within the EU, plus the possibility of a major conflict in the Middle East have compounded and reinforced financing requirements. Conceptually, I agree that we need to plan for the introduction of new own resources to cover ongoing and developing EU commitments. However, in this process, the economic sensitivities of each Member State must be respected. The Commission proposal does not take this approach. The introduction of new profit-based tax collection systems at an EU level is a problematic proposal for a number of Member States. Therefore it should not be up for discussion at this time. The constant attempt by major players to enhance EU own resources by imposing a uniform corporate tax at EU-level without the full consent of all Member States is unacceptable. This I cannot approve.

  Tom Vandenkendelaere (PPE), schriftelijk. – Met dit verslag zet het Europees Parlement het licht op groen om de financiële middelen van de EU te hervormen. De laatste jaren heeft de Unie zich sterk ingezet om de gevolgen van de COVID-19-pandemie en de Russische invasie van Oekraïne te verzachten. Via NextGenerationEU, het grootste herstelplan ooit binnen de Europese Unie, willen we onze economie groener, moderner en competitiever heropbouwen. Hiervoor zijn we gezamenlijke schulden aangegaan die de Unie moet kunnen opvangen. De nieuwe middelen die de EU hiervoor zal kunnen aanspreken, zijn afkomstig uit het emissiehandelssysteem, het mechanisme voor koolstofgrenscorrectie en een grotere bijdrage van multinationale technologiebedrijven.

Door de budgettaire slagkracht van de EU verder uit te breiden, zullen we in de toekomst meer ruimte hebben voor crisisbeheer en voor de verdere uitbouw van succesvolle programma’s zoals Erasmus of Horizon Europa. Hiervoor moeten we ook geen bijkomende inspanningen van de Europese belastingbetaler vragen. Grote vervuilers zullen daarentegen wel zwaardere bijdragen moeten leveren. Hiermee tonen we aan dat de Europese Unie slagkrachtig kan optreden wanneer nodig, iets wat ook de immer kritische burger niet mag en zal ontgaan.

(The sitting was suspended at 10.33)

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. PINA PICIERNO
Vicepresidente

4. Posėdžio atnaujinimas

(La seduta è ripresa alle 11:00)

5. Balsuoti skirtas laikas

  Presidente. – Passiamo ora alle votazioni.

5.1. Europos Parlamento kvestoriaus, pakeisiančio Moniką Beňovą, rinkimai (balsavimas)

  Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca l'elezione di un Questore del Parlamento europeo (in sostituzione dell'onorevole Monika Beňová) (2023/2928(RSO)).

Vi ricordo che, a norma dell'articolo 20 del regolamento del Parlamento, il nuovo Questore prende il posto del suo predecessore nell'ordine di precedenza.

Per l'elezione di un Questore in sostituzione dell'onorevole Beňová la Presidente ha ricevuto la nomina dell'onorevole Victor Negrescu, nominato dal gruppo S&D. Il candidato ha confermato il suo consenso alla nomina.

Poiché il numero di candidati non supera il numero di seggi da assegnare, il candidato è eletto per acclamazione, conformemente all'articolo 15, paragrafo 1, del regolamento, a meno che un numero di deputati non richiedano lo scrutinio segreto.

Devo quindi chiedervi, c'è una richiesta di scrutinio segreto?

Non c'è alcuna richiesta.

Dichiaro l'onorevole Victor Negrescu eletto alla carica di Questore del Parlamento europeo. Congratulazioni all'onorevole Negrescu per la sua elezione.

La composizione del nuovo Ufficio di presidenza sarà notificata ai Presidenti delle istituzioni dell'Unione europea.

Proseguiamo con le votazioni.

5.2. Prašymas ginti Stefano Maullu imunitetą (A9-0318/2023 - Ibán García Del Blanco) (balsavimas)

5.3. Prašymas atšaukti Patryko Jaki (Patryk Jaki) imunitetą (A9-0345/2023 - Adrián Vázquez Lázara) (balsavimas)

5.4. Prašymas atšaukti Beatos Kempos (Beata Kempa) imunitetą (A9-0346/2023 - Adrián Vázquez Lázara) (balsavimas)

5.5. Prašymas atšaukti Beatos Mazurek (Beata Mazurek) imunitetą (A9-0347/2023 - Adrián Vázquez Lázara) (balsavimas)

5.6. Prašymas atšaukti Tomaszo Piotro Porębos (Tomasz Piotr Poręba) imunitetą (A9-0348/2023 - Adrián Vázquez Lázara) (balsavimas)

5.7. Audito Rūmų nario skyrimas: Tony Murphy (A9-0294/2023 - Monika Hohlmeier) (balsavimas)

5.8. Audito Rūmų nario skyrimas: Bettina Michelle Jakobsen (A9-0292/2023 - Victor Negrescu) (balsavimas)

5.9. Audito Rūmų nario skyrimas: Alejandro Blanco Fernández (A9-0293/2023 - Gilles Boyer) (balsavimas)

5.10. Duomenų aktas (A9-0031/2023 - Pilar del Castillo Vera) (balsavimas)

5.11. Tam tikrų reglamentų dalinis keitimas dėl Europos bendro prieigos punkto sukūrimo ir veikimo (A9-0024/2023 - Pedro Silva Pereira) (balsavimas)

5.12. Europos bendras prieigos punktas: centralizuota prieiga prie informacijos, aktualios finansinių paslaugų, kapitalo rinkų ir tvarumo sritims (A9-0026/2023 - Pedro Silva Pereira) (balsavimas)

5.13. Tam tikrų direktyvų dalinis keitimas dėl Europos bendro prieigos punkto sukūrimo ir veikimo (A9-0023/2023 - Pedro Silva Pereira) (balsavimas)

5.14. Atsiskaitymo drausmė, tarpvalstybinis paslaugų teikimas, bendradarbiavimo priežiūra srityje, papildomų bankinio tipo paslaugų teikimas ir reikalavimai trečiųjų valstybių centriniams vertybinių popierių depozitoriumams (A9-0047/2023 - Johan Van Overtveldt) (balsavimas)

5.15. Europos aplinkos ekonominės sąskaitos: nauji moduliai (A9-0296/2023 - Pascal Canfin) (balsavimas)

- Dopo la votazione sulla proposta della Commissione:

  Pascal Canfin, rapporteur. – Yes, colleagues, I just have the pleasure to request the referral back to committee for interinstitutional negotiations, as a surprise, following Rule 59(4).

(Il Parlamento approva la richiesta di rinvio in commissione)

5.16. Išsaugojimo ir vykdymo užtikrinimo priemonės, taikytinos Žvejybos šiaurės vakarų Atlante organizacijos (NAFO) reguliuojamame rajone (A9-0279/2023 - Grace O'Sullivan) (balsavimas)

5.17. Elektros ir elektroninės įrangos atliekos (A9-0311/2023 - Anna Zalewska) (balsavimas)

- Dopo la votazione sulla proposta della Commissione:

  Anna Zalewska, Sprawozdawczyni. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Koleżanki i Koledzy! Dziękując kontrsprawozdawcom, doradcom i asystentom za bardzo intensywną i bardzo sprawną pracę, wnoszę o odesłanie do właściwej komisji, zgodnie z art. 54 ust. 4, w celu negocjacji.

(Il Parlamento approva la richiesta di rinvio in commissione)

5.18. ES ir Madagaskaro tausios žvejybos partnerystės susitarimas ir jo įgyvendinimo protokolas (2023–2027 m.) (A9-0299/2023 - Clara Aguilera) (balsavimas)

5.19. Motorinių transporto priemonių ir variklių tipo patvirtinimas (Euro 7) (A9-0298/2023 - Alexandr Vondra) (balsavimas)

- Dopo la votazione sulla proposta della Commissione:

  Alexandr Vondra, rapporteur. – Thank you very much to colleagues for endorsing my report for backing a measured approach to emission limits and testing procedures under Euro 7 and, therefore, in accordance with Rule 59, I kindly request that the report be referred back to the ENVI Committee for interinstitutional meetings.

(Il Parlamento approva la richiesta di rinvio in commissione)

5.20. Europos Sąjungos nuosavų išteklių sistema (A9-0295/2023 - José Manuel Fernandes, Valérie Hayer) (balsavimas)

5.21. Dalyvavimo teisės stiprinimas: rinkimų procesų legitimumas ir atsparumas neliberaliose politinėse sistemose ir autoritariniuose režimuose (A9-0323/2023 - Nacho Sánchez Amor) (balsavimas)

5.22. Rusijai taikomų ES sankcijų veiksmingumas (RC-B9-0453/2023, B9-0453/2023, B9-0454/2023, B9-0455/2023, B9-0456/2023, B9-0457/2023) (balsavimas)

  Presidente. – Il turno di votazioni è chiuso.

(La seduta è sospesa per qualche istante)

6. Posėdžio atnaujinimas

(La seduta è ripresa alle 11:43)

7. Paaiškinimai dėl balsavimo

  Presidente. – Procediamo ora alle dichiarazioni di voto.

7.1. Motorinių transporto priemonių ir variklių tipo patvirtinimas (Euro 7) (A9-0298/2023 - Alexandr Vondra)

Dichiarazioni di voto orali

  Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Doamna președintă, lupta împotriva schimbărilor climatice reprezintă în continuare o prioritate a Uniunii Europene, iar introducerea noilor standarde de emisii Euro 7 privind autoturismele, camionetele și vehiculele grele reprezintă un pas enorm către o Europă durabilă.

Este foarte important, totuși, ca aceste măsuri să aibă întotdeauna pe prim plan îmbunătățirea calității vieții cetățenilor Uniunii Europene. Tocmai de aceea, noile limite de poluare trebuie să fie unele realiste și care să asigure că industria auto europeană rămâne una competitivă și relevantă la nivel global. Mai mult decât atât, trebuie să ne asigurăm că economia europeană nu devine dependentă de lanțurile de aprovizionare ale țărilor terțe, mai ales în contextul politic global incert.

Consider că poziția Parlamentului cu privire la această propunere de regulament este una ambițioasă, dar echilibrată și realistă.

Astfel, am votat în favoarea unui nou set de reguli pentru atingerea obiectivelor climatice ale Uniunii Europene, fără a reprezenta o povară prea mare pentru cetățeni.

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-жо Председател, убедено гласувах против този доклад. Този доклад за пореден път въвежда законови изисквания, които ще доведат до несигурност в производството на автомобилите и ще доведат до по-високи цени на автомобилите. Въпреки поетите ангажименти да не се въвеждат повече стандарти, виждаме още веднъж опит за нова рестрикция, която ще направи автомобилите по-скъпи, която ще отнеме възможността на хората да притежават възможност за придвижване. Това е напомняне от старите съветски времена, когато не се позволяваше правото на лична, индивидуална частна собственост и европейските чиновници ще решават кой може да се придвижва и кой не може да се придвижва.

Пълна глупост, срещу всяка икономическа логика, срещу всяка пазарна логика. Това е един екологичен политически брюкселски балон, който за пореден път показва, че хората в Брюксел са загубили връзка с реалността и това, което правят е единствено насочено срещу интересите на потребителите.

  Rosa D'Amato (Verts/ALE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ho votato contro il regolamento Euro 7, che avrebbe dovuto essere un'occasione per ridurre l'impatto delle emissioni del trasporto stradale sull'inquinamento dell'aria e sulla nostra salute.

Ogni anno nell'Unione europea 70 000 persone muoiono prematuramente a causa del biossido di azoto emesso dalle auto, 140 al giorno in Italia. Ma invece di seguire gli esperti di salute pubblica, il Parlamento ha preferito ascoltare la campagna di disinformazione orchestrata dalle lobby del settore.

Il testo votato oggi è di fatto un Euro 6 bis, si guarda al 2050 con una tecnologia vecchia di dieci anni. L'industria e la maggior parte di questo Parlamento hanno cercato di farci credere che le case automobilistiche non abbiano le risorse per investire nella riduzione dell'inquinamento causato dai loro veicoli con motore a combustione e che gli investimenti si tradurranno in aumenti di prezzo insostenibili per gli acquirenti. Queste sono bugie!

I profitti delle principali case automobilistiche non sono mai stati così alti e i profitti delle auto negli ultimi anni sono aumentati principalmente a causa della scelta delle case automobilistiche di sostituire modelli piccoli con modelli pesanti e costosi.

Al contrario, con auto meno inquinanti potremmo risparmiare oltre 100 miliardi di risorse pubbliche in danno all'ambiente e alla salute e soprattutto potremmo salvare migliaia di vite umane.

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Paní předsedající, s radostí jsem podpořil tento kompromis. Podle mého názoru zvítězil zdravý rozum a ten návrh na jedné straně chrání přírodu, na druhé straně zachovává konkurenceschopnost evropského automobilového průmyslu. Ta původní verze předložená Komisí by vedla k tomu, že by pro střední třídu byly menší a střední vozy cenově nedostupné a poškodilo by to jak Evropany, občany, kteří si nekupují jenom velké luxusní vozy, tak samozřejmě i výrobce. Takže tento návrh je smysluplný. Jsem rád, že prošel. Děkuji zpravodaji, který toto vyjednal. Děkuji i české vládě, která na tom měla velký podíl a iniciovala v Radě posun názorů jednotlivých členských států a dohodu právě zemí, které pohlížejí na tento právní předpis racionálně a ne pouze ideologicky. Racionální pohled je důležitější než pohled ideologický a my opravdu musíme skloubit přírodu a evropský průmysl, a tím zabránit nárůstu čínského průmyslu.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, tá áthas orm beagánín a rá faoin tuarascáil seo, go raibh maith agat a Uachtaráin.

I voted for this proposal as it seeks to update the Euro emission standards to introduce more stringent air pollutant emission limits for internal combustion engine vehicles sold in the EU, with a view to meeting the European Green Deal’s zero pollution ambition – very important for the environment and for people’s health – while at the same time keeping vehicles affordable for consumers and, very importantly, also promoting Europe’s competitiveness.

In line with my previous position on the regulation on CO2 standards for cars and vans, I did not support the inclusion of carbon-neutral fuels and biofuels into the legislation. Introducing such provisions would weaken the ambitions of the file further, and could bring confusion and uncertainty to the market.

  Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Paní předsedající, tento návrh jsem podpořil, protože podle mého názoru nalezl rozumný kompromis mezi tím, že máme řešit dopady automobilového průmyslu a provozu na lidské zdraví a ochranu životního prostředí a na druhé straně konkurenceschopnost našeho automobilového průmyslu jako takového. Je důležité říct, že nárůst dopravy je opravdu alarmující. I emise, i když se neustále snižují u jednotlivých aut, tak díky nárůstu celkového objemu aut a výroby aut neustále rostou. A bylo důležité najít ambiciózní, ale realistické cíle, které také zachovají dostupnost malých a středních vozidel pro spotřebitele. Jsem rád, že došlo ke kompromisu v oblasti dusíku a prachových částic, které musí být sníženy. To je nesporné. Také, že jsme standardizovali zkoušky pro auta na zavádění emisí, respektive na kontrolu emisí jako takových. Jsem rád, že členské státy signalizují, že tento návrh podpoří, i proto jsem jej také podpořil.

7.2. Europos Sąjungos nuosavų išteklių sistema (A9-0295/2023 - José Manuel Fernandes, Valérie Hayer)

Dichiarazioni di voto orali

  Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Doamna președintă, întărirea autonomiei financiare a Uniunii Europene este interesul tuturor statelor membre, întrucât ne garantează resursele necesare pentru a depăși situațiile de criză.

Prin urmare, am votat pentru propunerea de a îmbunătăți sistemul de resurse proprii ale Uniunii Europene, pentru a-l face mai simplu, mai transparent, echitabil și neutru din punct de vedere fiscal pentru cetățeni. Diversificarea surselor de venit se impune, având în vedere cheltuielile în creștere, iar acest coș actualizat este așteptat să genereze venituri de ordinul a 45 de miliarde de euro pe an în prețuri curente, începând cu 2028.

Cu toții suntem beneficiarii bugetului Uniunii Europene și trebuie să ne asigurăm că acesta nu este un subiect folosit politic, așa cum s-a întâmplat de foarte multe ori.

Diversificarea resurselor proprii ale Uniunii Europene este o necesitate. Nu este motiv de ceartă politică între statele membre. Dimpotrivă, este motiv de mobilizare și responsabilitate, astfel încât să putem colecta la sursă fără a împovăra cetățenii europeni.

  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Paní předsedající, nepodpořil jsem tento materiál, a je dobré proto vysvětlit proč. Já se zkrátka obávám, že návrhy přerozdělování daní mezi Evropskou unií a členskými státy, kdy se posilují příjmy Evropské unie, nakonec povedou k nárůstu daní pro Evropany, protože členské státy budou muset nějakým způsobem zvýšit své příjmy, aby mohly tzv. poslat více peněz do společného, komunitárního rozpočtu. A to zkrátka nakonec zaplatí ten Evropan, evropské firmy, evropští občané. To někdo musí zaplatit. V takových případech jsem zdrženlivý. Proto jsem tento návrh nakonec nepodpořil, protože to, abychom takto nepřímo vytvářeli tlak na nárůst daní v Evropské unii, zvláště v dnešní době, v době, kdy řešíme nárůsty cen energií atd., mně nepřipadá úplně odpovědné. Je třeba o tom vést dále debatu, ale opravdu se zamýšlet i nad tím, kdo platí daně. Členským státům je musí platit vždycky občané a firmy.

  Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, revising the system of own resources for the EU is all about boosting the EU’s budget, ability to respond to growing demands and new crises, and dealing with the repayment of the NextGenerationEU debt.

A new common cooperation tax and a financial transaction tax are clearly good things that simply couldn’t function at an individual Member State level.

But what will this new basket of own resources be used for? The working people of Europe are on their knees with the cost of living crisis. Will we be helping the people of Europe with this? Very unlikely.

We will continue to fill the coffers of the military industrial complex. More and more EU money is going on military spend. The militarisation of Europe is increasing. We could not throw enough money at the war in Ukraine, making sure that didn’t stop, regardless of the number of working-class Russians and Ukrainians dying. We were oblivious to it, but we were promoting a war that suited the US/NATO political agenda, but it has done absolutely nothing for the citizens of Europe. This militarisation of Europe has nothing to offer the people of Europe.

  Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, I voted for this report because, in principle, I do not have a huge problem with the EU raising money through things like taxing corporate profits because somebody has to and, God knows, Member States like my own certainly are not going to do it.

But there is an elephant in the room, and that is the question of why the EU needs to raise all this money for itself. It just got a EUR 1 trillion budget two years ago. Where did all the money go? Well, we all know where it went: the EU blew all that cash on war and weapons, and now it is passing around the hat for more. It is not just the own resources.

The Commission has demanded that Member States cough up an extra 100 billion – 100 billion – to fatten up the budget that the EU blew on war and militarism. Half of that is for Ukraine, a country whose destruction we continue to cheerlead.

Well, shame on you because somebody is making money out of this. And it is certainly not the poor people in Ukraine or Europe. If the EU wants to find some money, there is an easy way to do it: back a ceasefire in Ukraine, stop the war and give that ruined country a chance to rebuild itself.

  Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, in principle, I am a great believer in own resources for the EU. I think it is a good thing. It means less direct taxation from Member States and that in itself will get rid of some of the populism we hear so often about Europe taking money from taxpayers directly from the Member States.

Own resources, especially in relation to ETS and CBAM, makes absolute sense, and it is essential to strengthen the Union and also create a sense of unity across the European Union, because we need that at this present time. People are always looking for more and more money from the EU, but at the same time, they are saying that they should not be paying into it, that someone else should pay for it. Well, by getting the own resources, this certainly will make it easier and particularly to pay back the debt in relation to COVID.

I would like to compliment Commissioner Hahn, my friends and colleagues, José Manuel Fernandes, Siegfried Mureșan and others, who have done great work on this, and that is something that we will continue to do to get in accommodation with all Member States.

7.3. Dalyvavimo teisės stiprinimas: rinkimų procesų legitimumas ir atsparumas neliberaliose politinėse sistemose ir autoritariniuose režimuose (A9-0323/2023 - Nacho Sánchez Amor)

Dichiarazioni di voto orali

  Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, I voted against this file. Promoting the right to participate is obviously a noble goal, but this report twists it into an excuse to pretend that we are somehow in charge to sit in judgement of global south elections and interfere if we don’t like the results. And to be honest with you, after the last month, I am finding it difficult to understand why anybody would think that the rest of the world would give a damn what we think.

For weeks, billions have watched us. Europe has stood lock, stock and barrel behind our friend apartheid Israel. We call Israel a democracy. In this democracy, 4.5 million Palestinians live under occupation with no rights at all, victims of dehumanisation, arbitrary checkpoints, settler violence, brutalisation by security forces, a military court system and no vote. This is what we call with a straight face the only democracy in the Middle East. Well it’s over. After the show Europe’s made of itself recently, don’t expect the rest of the world to be taking you seriously any time soon.

7.4. Rusijai taikomų ES sankcijų veiksmingumas (RC-B9-0453/2023, B9-0453/2023, B9-0454/2023, B9-0455/2023, B9-0456/2023, B9-0457/2023)

Dichiarazioni di voto orali

  Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Doamna președintă, sancțiunile impuse Rusiei sunt dovada capacității statelor membre de a se coordona atunci când siguranța Europei este amenințată.

Este regretabil însă că, în vremuri de crize istorice, această unitate este pusă în pericol de unele state, precum Austria, care și-a dublat schimburile economice cu mărfuri importate din Rusia încă de la începutul războiului din Ucraina. În 2021, valoarea produselor importate de Austria din Rusia a crescut cu 77%, iar în 2022 cu 98% față de cifrele înregistrate în 2019, înainte de impunerea sancțiunilor. Practic, Viena continuă să aprovizioneze regimul barbar de la Moscova cu peste 20 de milioane de euro pe zi.

În acest context, solicit Comisiei să răspundă sesizării pe care am făcut-o împreună cu colegul meu, deputatul Vlad Botoș, cu privire la aceste încălcări flagrante ale condițiilor de sancțiune în ceea ce privește Rusia.

  Anders Vistisen (ID). – Fru formand! Hykleriet driver jo ned af væggene, når man her i salen roser sig med sin stærke indsats mod den russiske okkupation i Ukraine. Lad os lige huske forhistorien; efter at Rusland havde taget Krim, hvem ønskede at sælge hangarskibe til Putin? Det gjorde Frankrig. Præsident Macron. Hvem ønskede at få mere russisk gas og afvikle sin egen atomkraft? Det gjorde Tyskland. Kansler Merkel. Der er intet, der viser, at EU er god til at håndtere udenrigspolitiske anliggender. Og de sanktioner, vi har stemt om her i dag, udstiller jo blot hykleriet, fordi vi har jo nægtet at tage opgøret med den russiske økonomi, hvor det gjorde ondt på os selv. Vi har jo stadigvæk importeret russisk gas. Vi har masser af huller i sanktionerne, og derfor ser vi jo også, at den russiske økonomi stadigvæk fungerer her små to år efter krigens begyndelse, fordi EU ikke tør tage opgøret, fordi man gerne snakker store ord og luftige principper. Men når det kommer ned til virkelig heden, så står man tilbage med den forkerte udenrigspolitik og med en tandløs ”approach”. Det er det, vi kan forvente, når man giver EU magten på udenrigsområdet.

  Ivan Vilibor Sinčić (NI). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, glasam protiv još jedne rezolucije o sankcijama, sankcije su propale, uništavamo samo sebe i nikoga drugoga. To me podsjeća na vrijeme prohibicije kad je u SAD-u bio zabranjen alkohol, a opet su ga svi pili; pa tako možemo čitati: Uvoz ruskog LNG plina porastao je 40% od invazije na Ukrajinu. I, dakle, Španjolska i Belgija postale su druga i treća zemlja uvoznica toga plina, odmah nakon Kine. Svaka vam čast, Evropo, pušete za vrat Kini, koliko sankcionirate. Naravno, taj plin nije ostao u tim zemljama, nego ide posvuda i kupuju ga, zapravo, svi. Ono što se promijenilo u odnosu na prije dvije godine najviše je knjigovodstvo. Energija više-manje dolazi, kao što je i prije, samo je sada puno skuplja i ide preko trećih zemalja pa se tako ogromne količine nafte uvoze preko Indije. Ruske nafte, naravno. Belgija - nije im bilo dovoljno 11 krugova sankcija da se odreknu ruskih dijamanata pa valjda im neće biti ni 12. Svatko, dakle, u Europi gleda sebe. Samo hrvatska vlada nikako da napravi nešto za vlastite građane koje uništava inflacija, nego se pokorava Bruxellesu.

  Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, the headlines are singing the same tune: the war in Ukraine is done; time for negotiations.

The best deal Ukraine can hope for is what was on offer in April 2022, when Zelenskyy and the Russians were willing to agree to postpone the Crimea issue, strong federalism or autonomy for eastern Ukraine with language rights – effectively, the platform Zelenskyy was elected on with 73% of the vote.

The peace deal in April 2022 was scuppered when Boris Johnson went to Kyiv, threatened Zelenskyy, and promised the EU and US sanctions would cripple Russia in a matter of months.

Ukraine is now destroyed. Over 200 000 Ukrainians and Russian soldiers are dead and millions displaced. Russia has overtaken the German economy, and is looking at 2 to 3% growth. Germany is heading for a recession that is having a knock-on effect on the entire EU, where millions are impoverished by inflation and a cost-of-living crisis – a complete and total abject failure by a murderously incompetent EU leadership.

When are we going to wake up and cop onto ourselves? We are not serving the interests of the ordinary people of Europe. We’re serving elites, and it’s going to come back to haunt youse.

  Presidente. – Questo punto all'ordine del giorno è chiuso.

8. Šios mėnesinės sesijos protokolų tvirtinimas ir priimtų tekstų perdavimas

  Presidente. – Il processo verbale della seduta di ieri e di quella odierna sarà sottoposto all'approvazione del Parlamento all'inizio della prossima seduta.

Se non vi sono obiezioni, procedo alla trasmissione immediata delle risoluzioni approvate nella seduta odierna ai loro destinatari.

9. Kitų posėdžių tvarkaraštis

  Presidente. – La prossima tornata si svolgerà dal 20 al 23 novembre a Strasburgo.

10. Posėdžio pabaiga

(La seduta è tolta alle 12:05)

11. Sesijos atidėjimas

  Presidente. – Dichiaro interrotta la sessione del Parlamento europeo.