# Eiropas Savienības C 332/2022

| | ISSN 1977-0952 |
| ---------------------------------------- | ------------------------- |
| Eiropas Savienības
Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 332 |
| European flag | |
| Izdevums latviešu valodā | Informācija un paziņojumi |

---

| Saturs | | Lappuse |
| ------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------- |
| | IV   Paziņojumi | |
| | EIROPAS SAVIENĪBAS IESTĀŽU UN STRUKTŪRU SNIEGTI PAZIŅOJUMI | |
| | EIROPAS PARLAMENTS2014.–2015. GADA SESIJA2014. gada 1.–3. jūlija sēdesSTRASBŪRĀ | |
| 2022/C 332/01 | 2014. gada 1. jūlija debašu stenogramma | 1 |
| 2022/C 332/02 | 2014. gada 2. jūlija debašu stenogramma | 17 |
| 2022/C 332/03 | 2014. gada 3. jūlija debašu stenogramma | 92 |

---

| Izmantoto simbolu saraksts
*
Apspriežu procedūra ***
Piekrišanas procedūra ***I
Parastā likumdošanas procedūra: pirmais lasījums ***II
Parastā likumdošanas procedūra: otrais lasījums ***III
Parastā likumdošanas procedūra: trešais lasījums (Procedūras veids ir noteikts saskaņā ar tiesību akta projektā ierosināto juridisko pamatu.)
Parlamenta komiteju saīsinājumi
AFET
Ārlietu komiteja DEVE
Attīstības komiteja INTA
Starptautiskās tirdzniecības komiteja BUDG
Budžeta komiteja CONT
Budžeta kontroles komiteja ECON
Ekonomikas un monetārā komiteja EMPL
Nodarbinātības un sociālo lietu komiteja ENVI
Vides, sabiedrības veselības un pārtikas nekaitīguma komiteja ITRE
Rūpniecības, pētniecības un enerģētikas komiteja IMCO
Iekšējā tirgus un patērētāju aizsardzības komiteja TRAN
Transporta un tūrisma komiteja REGI
Reģionālās attīstības komiteja AGRI
Lauksaimniecības un lauku attīstības komiteja PECH
Zivsaimniecības komiteja CULT
Kultūras un izglītības komiteja JURI
Juridiskā komiteja LIBE
Pilsoņu brīvību, tieslietu un iekšlietu komiteja AFCO
Konstitucionālo jautājumu komiteja FEMM
Sieviešu tiesību un dzimumu līdztiesības komiteja PETI
Lūgumrakstu komiteja DROI
Cilvēktiesību apakškomiteja SEDE
Drošības un aizsardzības apakškomiteja Politisko grupu saīsinājumi
PPE
Eiropas Tautas partijas grupa (Kristīgie demokrāti) S&D
Eiropas Parlamenta sociālistu un demokrātu progresīvās alianses grupa ECR
Eiropas Konservatīvo un reformistu grupa ALDE
Eiropas Liberāļu un demokrātu apvienības grupa GUE/NGL
Eiropas Apvienotā kreiso un Ziemeļvalstu Zaļo kreiso spēku konfederālā grupa Verts/ALE
Zaļo un Eiropas Brīvās apvienības grupa EFDD
Grupa Brīvības un tiešās demokrātijas Eiropa NI
Pie politiskajām grupām nepiederošie deputāti | * | Apspriežu procedūra | *** | Piekrišanas procedūra | ***I | Parastā likumdošanas procedūra: pirmais lasījums | ***II | Parastā likumdošanas procedūra: otrais lasījums | ***III | Parastā likumdošanas procedūra: trešais lasījums | AFET | Ārlietu komiteja | DEVE | Attīstības komiteja | INTA | Starptautiskās tirdzniecības komiteja | BUDG | Budžeta komiteja | CONT | Budžeta kontroles komiteja | ECON | Ekonomikas un monetārā komiteja | EMPL | Nodarbinātības un sociālo lietu komiteja | ENVI | Vides, sabiedrības veselības un pārtikas nekaitīguma komiteja | ITRE | Rūpniecības, pētniecības un enerģētikas komiteja | IMCO | Iekšējā tirgus un patērētāju aizsardzības komiteja | TRAN | Transporta un tūrisma komiteja | REGI | Reģionālās attīstības komiteja | AGRI | Lauksaimniecības un lauku attīstības komiteja | PECH | Zivsaimniecības komiteja | CULT | Kultūras un izglītības komiteja | JURI | Juridiskā komiteja | LIBE | Pilsoņu brīvību, tieslietu un iekšlietu komiteja | AFCO | Konstitucionālo jautājumu komiteja | FEMM | Sieviešu tiesību un dzimumu līdztiesības komiteja | PETI | Lūgumrakstu komiteja | DROI | Cilvēktiesību apakškomiteja | SEDE | Drošības un aizsardzības apakškomiteja | PPE | Eiropas Tautas partijas grupa (Kristīgie demokrāti) | S&D | Eiropas Parlamenta sociālistu un demokrātu progresīvās alianses grupa | ECR | Eiropas Konservatīvo un reformistu grupa | ALDE | Eiropas Liberāļu un demokrātu apvienības grupa | GUE/NGL | Eiropas Apvienotā kreiso un Ziemeļvalstu Zaļo kreiso spēku konfederālā grupa | Verts/ALE | Zaļo un Eiropas Brīvās apvienības grupa | EFDD | Grupa Brīvības un tiešās demokrātijas Eiropa | NI | Pie politiskajām grupām nepiederošie deputāti |
| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------- | --- | --------------------- | ---- | ------------------------------------------------ | ----- | ----------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------------------------------------------------ | ---- | ---------------- | ---- | ------------------- | ---- | ------------------------------------- | ---- | ---------------- | ---- | -------------------------- | ---- | ------------------------------- | ---- | ---------------------------------------- | ---- | ------------------------------------------------------------- | ---- | ------------------------------------------------ | ---- | -------------------------------------------------- | ---- | ------------------------------ | ---- | ------------------------------ | ---- | --------------------------------------------- | ---- | ------------------------ | ---- | ------------------------------- | ---- | ------------------ | ---- | ------------------------------------------------ | ---- | ---------------------------------- | ---- | ------------------------------------------------- | ---- | -------------------- | ---- | --------------------------- | ---- | -------------------------------------- | --- | --------------------------------------------------- | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | ---------------------------------------- | ---- | ---------------------------------------------- | ------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------- | --------------------------------------- | ---- | -------------------------------------------- | -- | --------------------------------------------- |
| * | Apspriežu procedūra | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| *** | Piekrišanas procedūra | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ***I | Parastā likumdošanas procedūra: pirmais lasījums | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ***II | Parastā likumdošanas procedūra: otrais lasījums | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ***III | Parastā likumdošanas procedūra: trešais lasījums | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| AFET | Ārlietu komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| DEVE | Attīstības komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| INTA | Starptautiskās tirdzniecības komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| BUDG | Budžeta komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| CONT | Budžeta kontroles komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ECON | Ekonomikas un monetārā komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| EMPL | Nodarbinātības un sociālo lietu komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ENVI | Vides, sabiedrības veselības un pārtikas nekaitīguma komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ITRE | Rūpniecības, pētniecības un enerģētikas komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| IMCO | Iekšējā tirgus un patērētāju aizsardzības komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| TRAN | Transporta un tūrisma komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| REGI | Reģionālās attīstības komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| AGRI | Lauksaimniecības un lauku attīstības komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| PECH | Zivsaimniecības komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| CULT | Kultūras un izglītības komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| JURI | Juridiskā komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| LIBE | Pilsoņu brīvību, tieslietu un iekšlietu komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| AFCO | Konstitucionālo jautājumu komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| FEMM | Sieviešu tiesību un dzimumu līdztiesības komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| PETI | Lūgumrakstu komiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| DROI | Cilvēktiesību apakškomiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| SEDE | Drošības un aizsardzības apakškomiteja | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| PPE | Eiropas Tautas partijas grupa (Kristīgie demokrāti) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| S&D | Eiropas Parlamenta sociālistu un demokrātu progresīvās alianses grupa | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ECR | Eiropas Konservatīvo un reformistu grupa | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ALDE | Eiropas Liberāļu un demokrātu apvienības grupa | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| GUE/NGL | Eiropas Apvienotā kreiso un Ziemeļvalstu Zaļo kreiso spēku konfederālā grupa | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Verts/ALE | Zaļo un Eiropas Brīvās apvienības grupa | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| EFDD | Grupa Brīvības un tiešās demokrātijas Eiropa | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| NI | Pie politiskajām grupām nepiederošie deputāti | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

| LV | |
| -- | |

---

IV Paziņojumi

EIROPAS SAVIENĪBAS IESTĀŽU UN STRUKTŪRU SNIEGTI PAZIŅOJUMI

EIROPAS PARLAMENTS 2014.–2015. GADA SESIJA 2014. gada 1.–3. jūlija sēdes STRASBŪRĀ

31.8.2022
LV
Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis
C 332/1 2014. gada 1. jūlijs2014. GADA 1. JŪLIJA DEBAŠU STENOGRAMMA. (2022/C 332/01) Saturs 1.
Sēdes atklāšana (jaunievēlētā Parlamenta pirmā sēde)
3 2.
Parlamenta sastāvs (sk. protokolu)
3 3.
Pilnvaru pārbaude (sk. protokolu)
3 4.
Eiropas Parlamenta priekšsēdētāja ievēlēšana
3 5.
Politisko grupu izveidošana (sk. protokolu)
11 6.
Parlamenta sastāvs (sk. protokolu)
11 7.
Priekšsēdētāja vietnieku ievēlēšana (pirmā, otrā un trešā balsošanas kārta)
11 8.
Padomes nosūtītie nolīgumu teksti (sk. protokolu)
16 9.
Saistībā ar Parlamenta rezolūcijām veiktie pasākumi (sk. protokolu)
16 10.
Nākamās sēdes darba kārtība (sk. protokolu)
16 11.
Sēdes slēgšana
16 2014. gada 1. jūlija debašu stenogramma PRESIDENZA: GIANNI PITTELLA Presidente 1.   Sēdes atklāšana (jaunievēlētā Parlamenta pirmā sēde) (La seduta è aperta alle 10.00) Presidente. - Conformemente all'atto del 20 settembre 1976 relativo all'elezione dei membri del Parlamento europeo a suffragio universale diretto, dichiaro aperta la prima seduta del Parlamento europeo successiva alle elezioni. Ascolteremo ora l'inno d'Europa interpretato dall'orchestra filarmonica di Strasburgo guidata dal maestro Rémy Abraham. 2.   Parlamenta sastāvs (sk. protokolu) 3.   Pilnvaru pārbaude (sk. protokolu) 4.   Eiropas Parlamenta priekšsēdētāja ievēlēšana Presidente. - Ringrazio il maestro e tutta l'orchestra. Ricordo che, ai sensi dell'articolo 14, paragrafo 2, del regolamento, sotto la presidenza del Presidente uscente non può aver luogo alcuna discussione il cui oggetto sia estraneo all'elezione del Presidente o alla verifica dei poteri. Tutti gli atti concernenti la proclamazione dell'elezione dei deputati saranno trasmessi alla commissione competente per la verifica dei poteri, che dev'essere costituita ai sensi dell'articolo 196 del regolamento. A norma dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 2, del regolamento, finché i poteri di un deputato non siano stati verificati o non si sia deciso in merito ad eventuali contestazioni, il deputato siede con pieni diritti nel Parlamento e nei suoi organi, purché abbia preventivamente reso la dichiarazione di non incompatibilità. Conformemente all'articolo 7 dell'atto relativo all'elezione dei membri del Parlamento europeo a suffragio universale diretto, i deputati che esercitano funzioni incompatibili con il mandato di deputato al Parlamento europeo non possono sedere nel Parlamento. I tre deputati che non hanno ancora firmato la dichiarazione di incompatibilità e che non godono ancora di pieni diritti sono invitati a farlo immediatamente presso il banco che si trova davanti all'ingresso dell'emiciclo, altrimenti non potranno votare. Onorevoli colleghi, amici, prima di procedere al nostro ordine del giorno, vorrei esprimere il mio grandissimo onore, ancor prima del mio piacere, di avere la possibilità di aprire i lavori di questa nuova legislatura nella veste di Presidente ad interim del Parlamento europeo. L'augurio che rivolgo a me per primo e a ciascuno di voi è di essere all'altezza delle aspettative di tanti cittadini che, con i loro voto, hanno lanciato un messaggio chiaro circa la necessità di cambiamento. L'auspicio è che tra cinque anni potremo dire a testa alta di aver contribuito concretamente con il nostro lavoro a un'Europa migliore, più equa e vicina alle esigenze dei cittadini. Conformemente alle disposizioni del nostro regolamento, questa mattina dobbiamo procedere all'elezione del Presidente. Ai sensi dell'articolo 15, paragrafo 1, del regolamento, le candidature alla carica di Presidente del Parlamento europeo devono essere presentate, con il consenso degli interessati, da un gruppo politico o da almeno quaranta deputati. Le istruzioni relative all'elezione del Presidente vi sono state distribuite. Ho ricevuto, alle condizioni previste dal regolamento, le seguenti candidature al Presidenza del Parlamento europeo: onorevole Iglesias Turrión, onorevole Karim, onorevole Lunacek e onorevole Schulz. 409 voti. I candidati mi hanno comunicato di accettare le rispettive candidature. Ai sensi dell'articolo 16, paragrafo 1, del regolamento ricordo che, per essere eletto, un candidato deve ottenere nei primi tre scrutini la maggioranza assoluta dei voti espressi. Le schede bianche o nulle non sono prese in considerazione ai fini del conteggio dei voti espressi. Prima di procedere all'elezione, do la parola a ciascun candidato per un massimo di cinque minuti in ordine alfabetico. Pablo Iglesias Turrión (GUE/NGL). - Señor Presidente, es un honor dirigirme a ustedes para presentar mi candidatura a la presidencia de esta Cámara. Este Parlamento está llamado a representar la soberanía de Europa y debemos, Señorías, estar a la altura de lo que ello significa hoy. El sueño de Europa ha sido sepultado muchas veces, pero siempre consiguió despertar de nuevo. Así sucedió hace casi setenta años: Europa volvió a despertar en la resistencia de sus pueblos contra el fascismo, en los supervivientes de los campos de exterminio, en quienes dieron su vida por la justicia y la libertad. Millares de compatriotas míos que habían luchado defendiendo la democracia en España participaron en esa lucha y en ese sueño de justicia. No se imaginan el orgullo que me produce como español que los primeros tanques que entraron a liberar París fueran guiados por combatientes españoles. Hoy, cuando la intolerancia y la xenofobia vuelven a amenazarnos, quiero reivindicar la memoria europea del antifascismo y la de todos los pueblos amantes de la libertad y la democracia. Señorías, lo mejor de nuestro continente y de nuestra historia común se forjó en las revoluciones que hicieron al pueblo sujeto de derechos, por encima de reyes, de dioses, de nobles y de grandes propietarios. El mejor patrimonio de Europa es la voluntad de sus ciudadanos de ser libres y no ser siervos de nadie. ¡No ser siervos de nadie, Señorías! Eso es la democracia. Por eso hoy debo decirles que los pueblos a los que debemos las libertades y los derechos sociales no lucharon por una Europa en la que sus gentes vivan en el miedo a la pobreza, a la exclusión, al desempleo, al desamparo frente a la enfermedad. La expropiación de la soberanía y el sometimiento al gobierno de las élites financieras amenazan el presente y el futuro de Europa. Amenazan nuestra dignidad; amenazan la igualdad, la libertad y la fraternidad; amenazan nuestra vida en común. La creación de nuevas instancias supranacionales no tiene que pagarse al precio de incapacitar a la ciudadanía. Nuestros pueblos no son menores de edad, ni colonias de ningún fondo de inversiones; no conquistaron ni defendieron su libertad para entregársela a una oligarquía financiera. No son términos abstractos, Señorías: todos ustedes conocen bien el problema. Es escandalosa la facilidad con la que se mueven aquí los lobbies al servicio de grandes corporaciones, así como las “puertas giratorias” que convierten a los representantes de la ciudadanía en millonarios a sueldo de grandes empresas. Hay que decirlo alto y claro. Esta manera de funcionar hurta la soberanía de los pueblos, atenta contra la democracia y convierte a los representantes políticos en casta. Señorías, la democracia en Europa ha sido víctima de una deriva autoritaria. En la periferia europea la situación es trágica: nuestros países se han convertido casi en protectorados, en nuevas colonias, donde poderes que nadie ha elegido están destruyendo los derechos sociales y amenazando la cohesión social y política de nuestras sociedades. De América Latina aprendimos que la deuda externa está diseñada para ser impagable y que los países que más han crecido lo hicieron con una quita sustancial y una auditoría pública de su deuda. Todos conocen en esta Cámara la deuda perdonada hace no tanto tiempo a Alemania. No es solo una cuestión de justicia: tiene que ver con la integración europea y con la democracia. La deuda es hoy un mecanismo de mando y saqueo a los pueblos del sur. Eso es lo que está sucediendo en países que con marcado racismo algunos denominan “PIGS”. Pero supongo que son ustedes conscientes de que no hay Europa sin sus pueblos del sur, como no la hay sin sus pueblos del este, sometidos también a duras condiciones de la Troika, cuyo rumbo amenaza con destruir el proyecto europeo dejando un rastro de miseria, de pobreza y de violencia. Pero hay otro camino, hay alternativa a las políticas de empobrecimiento y al secuestro de la soberanía. Este Parlamento, en esta hora crítica para Europa, debe estar a la altura. Debe demostrar sensibilidad y convertirse en el epicentro de una sacudida democrática en la Unión Europea, una sacudida que frene la deriva autoritaria de la Troika. Este Parlamento debe expresar la legitimidad democrática de origen que a todos nos reúne: la voz de los ciudadanos, y no los arreglos entre élites. El Parlamento no puede ser un premio de consolación ni una jubilación dorada. Señorías, hoy no me dirijo a una Cámara de cinco, de seis o de siete grupos parlamentarios. Tampoco me dirijo a maquinarias de partido. Me dirijo a ustedes, señoras y señores diputados al Parlamento Europeo, porque ustedes tienen un contrato de responsabilidad política firmado con sus pueblos. Me dirijo a los demócratas y a sus conciencias. Nuestra primera fidelidad, a la que todas las demás deben supeditarse, es para con los ciudadanos que nos han elegido. Ellos no están en los pasillos de este edificio, ni en los hoteles que rodean esta Cámara, pero recuerden, ellos son los soberanos y, tarde o temprano, pedirán cuentas de lo que se ha hecho en su nombre. Me dirijo también, y muy especialmente, a mis colegas eurodiputados de los países del sur de Europa. Ustedes han visto las consecuencias reales que tienen las políticas impuestas por la Troika. Ustedes saben que las políticas de austeridad han fracasado: nuestros países son hoy más pobres, con economías destruidas, con sociedades heridas de injusticia e instituciones cuarteadas por la corrupción y el descrédito. Ustedes saben que es hora de ayudar a nuestros países y ponerse de nuevo en pie. Les pido que, al menos hoy, voten como griegos, como irlandeses, como portugueses, como italianos, como checos, como polacos, como rumanos, como españoles. No solo para que puedan mirar a la gente a la cara cuando vuelvan a casa, sino porque así estarán defendiendo Europa. Les pido su voto, consciente de que muchos de ustedes no comparten este secuestro de la democracia, sabiendo que muchos de ustedes están sinceramente comprometidos con el bienestar de sus pueblos. Les pido el voto para frenar a la gran coalición que impone la austeridad y el totalitarismo financiero. Quiero dirigir mis últimas palabras a la ciudadanía y a los pueblos del sur de Europa que han salido a la calle estos años para defender la justicia social y la democracia. A los millones que habéis dicho “¡basta!” en las plazas europeas, quiero deciros que sois el orgullo, el corazón democrático de Europa. Los pueblos de Europa hemos pasado por peores situaciones y nos hemos sacudido a los déspotas. No sé si hoy podremos arrebatarle la presidencia de este Parlamento a la gran coalición, pero si nos seguís empujando, os aseguro que venceremos. El mañana es nuestro. Sajjad Karim (ECR). - Mr President, I rise to speak with a sense of duty. Like so many of you arriving here today for the first time, I came in 2004 with great hope and celebration: we were reunifying our continent after decades of division. But today, colleagues, if we choose to listen there is a message for us to hear, a message which requires us to change our ways. I am told this election is a foregone conclusion, that the deal has been done before a single vote has been cast, and that I and you should simply bow to the inevitable. Colleagues, there is nothing more sacred in the world of democratic politics than the right to vote: to cast a ballot for beliefs sincerely held, to express a choice that reflects the interests of all those who we have been elected to serve, to give a voice to cherished ideals and principles. But is that what we are being invited by some to do here today? What have we become if the Presidency of this House – an office that should rise above partisan politics and ordinary political ambition – is reduced to nothing more than a bargaining chip, a counter in a game, a consolation prize for failing to get a consolation prize, Plan D in a political life where Plans A, B, and C have failed? We were told in the recent election that this time it would be different, that transparency would prevail over secrecy, that principle would override expediency, that honest, democratic politics would triumph over the backward-looking backroom deal. But sadly, just a few weeks after the European elections, we are being invited to endorse a cosy consensus brokered behind closed doors. This is a shoddy, shabby, shameful vision of our Union. This is not a vision I could possibly share. It is a mandate to carry on exactly as before, a deaf ear to the message conveyed by the majority who felt compelled to stay away from the ballot and the millions who felt compelled to demonstrate in the only way left to them by turning to the extremes. As a former Commissioner once said, it is hard to respect a Parliament that does not respect itself. Well, I respect this Parliament. It embodies so many hopes for the future. I did not come into politics to defend the status quo or to secure high offices for the select few. I am sure you did not either. All my political life, I have espoused the vision of Europeans cooperating together in open, democratic and fair institutions. I am sure many of you also share this vision, in which one nation alone does not shape our paths and priorities, but we fight our battles and accept the results. We see this happening among our national leaders who, late last week, did not all agree but who have come together again to cooperate, as we too must do in order to respect the wishes of the electorate and deliver the change and opportunity they call for. Of course, while we share hopes for the future, we have many different views about the route to be chosen to fulfil these aspirations. Our institutions should not, however, be snared by one political faction or another or traded for control elsewhere. I believe that the President of Parliament should not use his office to express personal opinions or promote his personal interests or to advance his personal career. No, I have a more noble vision for the office of President of our House. The President should reflect the diversity of this House, as this House reflects the diversity of the peoples of Europe. The President should be fair to all, open to all, attentive to all. The President should represent this House with honour and dignity throughout Europe and indeed the world. That is the kind of President I aspire to be. I do not want to play politics: I want to enhance the reputation of our shared institution. I do not want to look after my interests, I want to look after yours. I do not want to return to the politics of backroom deals of years gone by, I want to reach out to all those Europeans who look to our institution with hope for the future. This is my dream for the European Parliament, but such dreams will not become reality if we allow the better angels of our nature to be defeated by political calculation or personal ambition. When you are about to cast your ballot this morning, and you stand alone with your beliefs and conscience in making your democratic choice, will you vote for the backroom deal, or will you vote for a Europe of openness, transparency, democracy and hope? I humbly ask for your support for my vision of a Presidency worthy of this House and worthy of the peoples of Europe. (Applause) Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE). - Mr President, firstly let me welcome all the newly-elected and re-elected MEPs to this House, to the European Parliament. An Austrian journalist said to me this morning in an interview on Austrian radio that the European Parliament has been strengthened by these elections, because we were the ones who took the procedure of the nomination and election of the Commission President into our hands and out of those of the Council. That is why we are standing here strengthened. But we need to be aware that we should not put this new strength that we have gained at risk by being less democratic internally than we should be. That is why I now stand here running for President, because I, and my political group, and so many others here, simply did not find it acceptable that the Council could tell us about ten days ago who to vote for as the President of this Parliament. That is our choice, and that is why my group, which originally nominated me as a Vice-President of this Parliament, also asked me to run for President – because that is what elections are all about, including internally. The European Parliament is the voice of European citizens, not the secretary of EU governments. As Parliamentarians who are directly elected, each and every one of us, we should not simply be presented with a pre-cooked deal to just rubber stamp. Everybody who knows me – and that means quite a lot of you – knows that the struggle for democracy is close to my heart inside the EU and inside this Parliament, but also outside the EU. I will say this now in the four languages that I speak: democracy is about choices; la démocratie est une affaire de choix; democracia consiste en elegir; Demokratie braucht Alternativen. That is why I also think that these elections signal change. That is why, as your President, I would try to give citizens an answer to what they wanted from these elections. One thing was to end austerity. We simply cannot have a continent with more and more poverty, especially among young people, where people do not see Europe as a promise anymore, but sometimes even as a threat. That needs to change, and I would want to invest in that as part of this European Parliament and as your President. Investing in jobs – green jobs –, renewables and energy efficiency is important, but the European Parliament also needs to be credible on the inside. We need to lead by example on energy issues, such as by making these buildings more energy efficient, and also on transparency. In this House we have a code of conduct that is not always monitored and implemented. We need a legislative footprint to make sure that it is clear who is influencing which law and that nobody can try to buy a law. We need to tell European citizens that we are serious about that. We also need a single seat. We Parliamentarians – and not the Council any more – need to decide where we meet. That is also something I want to change. The majority in this Parliament has voted that it should be we who decide in the future where to go. It is also clear that we must not fall into the trap of pandering to populism, inter-governmentalism or – worst of all – nationalism and extremism. The European Parliament has long been a champion of fundamental human rights and citizens' rights, and this must continue. We must face down the knee-jerk trend to intolerance, disrespect and second-class treatment of women, but also of minorities, whether racial, sexual, social or otherwise. The European Parliament can and must do more to defend core values on which this European Union is founded, and the next Parliamentary term will be decisive for Europe's future. If we do not get it right now, there will – with reference to the football championship going on at the moment – be no extra time and no replay. That is what citizens demanded from us in these elections, and it is also a question of democracy. I would like to end by sharing something with you that I deeply share with Mr Schulz, who will be speaking after me, so I will switch to German for that. Demokratie braucht Alternativen. Deswegen stehe ich heute hier. Martin Schulz (S&D). - Herr Präsident, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir sind eine einzigartige Institution. Die 751 Abgeordneten, die hier zusammen sind – wir, meine Damen und Herren –, repräsentieren die Völker von 28 souveränen Staaten. Wir sind eine Gesetzgebungskammer, die Gesetze beschließt für 507 Millionen Menschen in 28 verschiedenen Staaten. Das gibt es auf der Welt nur ein einziges Mal. Dieses Parlament ist einzigartig! Es ist einzigartig in seiner Existenz und es ist einzigartig in seiner Aufgabe. Die Tatsache, dass 750 Männer und Frauen, die, wenn ich richtig informiert bin, circa 300 Parteien repräsentieren, die die Nationen und 28 souveräne Staaten hier repräsentieren, die Tatsache, dass wir zusammensitzen und darüber diskutieren können, wer von uns an die Spitze dieser Kammer gestellt werden soll, alleine diese Tatsache, meine Damen und Herren, ist keine Selbstverständlichkeit. Sie ist eine der größten historischen Errungenschaften, die dieser Kontinent je errungen hat. Darauf sollten wir stolz sein, und das sollten wir zur Grundlage unserer Arbeit machen! (Beifall) Wer an die Spitze dieser Kammer gelangt, der hat eine Pflicht, nämlich genau aus dieser gerade von mir beschriebenen Aufgabe heraus zum Wohle dieser Menschen in den 28 Staaten zu arbeiten. Darüber, wie man das macht, kann man sehr unterschiedlicher Auffassung sein. Und die unterschiedlichen Strömungen sind hier in diesem Hause repräsentiert. Wir sind in der Zusammensetzung dieses Hauses verpflichtet, über die Grenzen von Fraktionen hinweg zusammenzuarbeiten. Keiner von uns allein hat eine Mehrheit. Das mag man bedauern, doch das ist der Wille von Wählerinnen und Wählern. Deshalb ist die transnationale Kooperation, die die Grundlage der Europäischen Union ist, hier auch eine Kooperation über die Grenzen politischer Strömungen hinweg. Deshalb ist die Debatte, die die Kandidatinnen und Kandidaten hier führen, eine Debatte über die Strömungen hinweg. Wir sind in der Wahlkabine frei. Hier ist kein Fraktionszwang gegeben. Hier kann jeder und jede entscheiden, wie er oder sie entscheiden will. Die Dunkelheit der Wahlkabine ist der Garant für die Demokratie. Deshalb bewerbe ich mich bei Ihnen allen um Ihr Vertrauen. Ich habe in den vergangenen zweieinhalb Jahren in diesem Hause als Präsident amtieren dürfen. Dies ist für mich die größte Ehre in meinem Leben gewesen, und ich möchte Ihnen deutlich sagen: Was wir in dieser vergangenen Wahlperiode errungen haben, ist, dass es keine Hierarchie mehr gibt in den Institutionen. Als ich hierher gewählt wurde, gab es sie noch. Da gab es die Ratsmitglieder, die sagten: “Na ja, das Europäische Parlament”, da gab es die Kommissionsmitglieder, die sagten: “Es gibt nur eine Institution, das sind wir”. Heute sind wir in einer Situation, dass an diesem Parlament, dieser einzigartigen Institution, keiner in der Europäischen Union, keiner auf der nationalen und keiner auf der europäischen Ebene mehr vorbeikann. Heute sind wir der Quell der demokratischen Legitimation in Europa. (Beifall) Dieser große demokratische Fortschritt, dass exekutive Macht demokratischer parlamentarischer Willensbildung entspringen muss, das haben wir erreicht. Das ist einer der größten politischen Wendepunkte, die es in der Geschichte der Europäischen Union gegeben hat. Dass ich daran mitwirken durfte, darauf bin ich stolz. Nun bewerbe ich mich erneut. Viele Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die mich zum ersten Mal als neu gewählte Kolleginnen und Kollegen hier sehen, wissen nicht, was die Kolleginnen und Kollegen der vergangenen Wahlperiode mit mir an Erfahrungen gemacht haben. Ich würde mal sagen, viele gute – aber ganz sicher machen Menschen auch Fehler. Ich bin der allerletzte, der sich für fehlerfrei hält. Ganz im Gegenteil. Ich bin ein Mensch mit seinen Stärken und seinen Schwächen. Ich bitte all diejenigen, die neu hier sind, um einen Vertrauensvorschuss, und diejenigen, die mich beim letzten Mal gewählt haben, bitte ich um einen erneuten Vertrauensvorschuss dafür, dass ich dieses Parlament auch in den nächsten zweieinhalb Jahren mit Würde repräsentieren und als demokratischen Ort der Debatte über die Zukunft Europas weiterhin vertreten darf. Vielen Dank! (Beifall) Beatrix von Storch (ECR). - Herr Präsident! Mein Name ist Beatrix von Storch, Alternative für Deutschland. Ich habe einen Antrag zur Geschäftsordnung. Ich beziehe mich auf die Artikel 15 und 182 der Geschäftsordnung und beantrage eine namentliche Abstimmung. Wir wollen den Bürgern zeigen, wer Herrn Schulz ins Amt hebt. Ich darf an die drei Dinge erinnern, die ja gerade angesprochen wurden. Der Haushaltskontrollausschuss hat ihm Amtsmissbrauch vorgeworfen, die Haushaltsentlastung ist ihm von allen Fraktionen verweigert worden. Er hat über Passagen aus dem kritischen Bericht eigenmächtig entschieden. Lasst uns den Bürgern zeigen, wer Herrn Schulz ins Amt hebt! Ich bitte um namentliche Abstimmung. (Beifall) Presidente. - Ai sensi del regolamento, la votazione sarà effettuata a scrutinio segreto. Procedo al sorteggio degli scrutatori. Onorevole Reda Julia. È d'accordo? Venga qui. Onorevole Girauta Vidal Juan Carlos. Presente? È d'accordo? Venga qui alla presidenza. Onorevole Chrysogonos Kostas. Grazie, venga qui. Onorevole Ferber Markus. Onorevole Ceballos Bodil. Prego. Onorevole Petersen Morten Helveg. Onorevole Flašíková Beňová Monika. Grazie. Onorevole Kyrkos Miltiadis. Si procederà ora allo scrutinio. Procediamo alla distribuzione delle schede di voto e delle buste. Conformemente alle disposizioni del nostro regolamento, procederemo all'elezione del Presidente. Vi sono state distribuite delle schede di voto e delle buste. Vogliate contrassegnare la casella corrispondente al nome del candidato prescelto. Potete votare per un solo candidato. Qualora vogliate cambiare il vostro voto, potrete chiedere al commesso un'altra scheda di voto, restituendogli quella sbagliata, che sarà distrutta. Saranno considerate nulle le schede sulle quali siano stati apportati segni o iscrizioni o sia stata contrassegnata più di una casella. Vogliate piegare la scheda in quattro prima di infilarla nella busta. Per coloro tra voi che desiderano utilizzarle, vi sono anche alcune cabine predisposte all'entrata dell'emiciclo. Siete pregati di recarvi all'urna corrispondente all'iniziale del vostro cognome. Non chiamerò i nomi dei deputati, mi limiterò a dichiarare aperto lo scrutinio. I nomi dei deputati che hanno partecipato a una votazione a scrutinio segreto devono figurare nel processo verbale; pertanto siete pregati di firmare l'apposito elenco prima di introdurre la scheda nell'urna. Ricordo che la busta contenente la scheda di voto va depositata nell'urna corrispondente all'iniziale del vostro cognome. Nel contempo, vogliate presentare un documento di identità al collega scrutatore. Gli scrutatori voteranno al termine dello scrutinio. Lo scrutinio è aperto. Bene, hanno votato tutti? Lo scrutinio è chiuso. Invito gli scrutatori a recarsi nella sala R1.1 per procedere allo spoglio delle schede. La seduta è sospesa e la sua ripresa sarà preannunciata dall'apposito dispositivo sonoro e segnalata sugli schermi. (La seduta, sospesa alle 11.15 per lo spoglio dei voti, è ripresa alle 12.05) Presidente. - Colleghe e colleghi, vi comunico il risultato dello scrutinio: votanti: 723; schede bianche o nulle: 111; voti espressi: 612; maggioranza assoluta: 307. Hanno ottenuto voti: onorevole Iglesias Turrión: 51 voti; onorevole Karim: 101 voti; onorevole Lunacek: 51 voti; onorevole Schulz: 409 voti. L'onorevole Schulz ha ottenuto la maggioranza assoluta dei voti espressi ed è dunque eletto Presidente del Parlamento europeo. Mi congratulo con molto affetto con l'onorevole Schulz per la sua elezione e gli porgo i miei migliori auguri per l'esercizio del suo mandato. Lo invito immediatamente ad occupare il seggio presidenziale. VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ Präsident Der Präsident. - Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Ich danke Ihnen für Ihr Vertrauen. Ich hoffe, auch das Vertrauen derjenigen gewinnen zu können, die sich heute nicht für mich entschieden haben. Ich danke Ihnen, Herr Kollege Iglesias Turrión, ich danke Ihnen, Frau Lunacek, und auch Ihnen, Herrn Kollege Karim, für diesen Wettbewerb. Ich danke denjenigen, die für mich gestimmt haben. Ich möchte Ihnen sagen, als erster in seinem Amt wiedergewählter Präsident weiß ich um diese außerordentliche Ehre. Ich bin mir bewusst, dass aus diesem erstmaligen Vorgang in diesem Hause eine besondere Verpflichtung für mich erwächst, und ich will mich dieser Verpflichtung stellen, ich nehme sie sehr ernst. Unser Parlament, meine Damen und Herren, ist das Herz der Demokratie in der Europäischen Union. Die Rolle, die unsere Kolleginnen und Kollegen auf der nationalen Ebene wahrnehmen, ist unsere Rolle auf der Ebene der EU, nämlich die Exekutive nach einer Wahl einzusetzen, sie in ihrer Arbeit durch die Gesetzgebung zu beauftragen, und die Durchführung dieser Arbeit zu überwachen. Was auf der nationalen Ebene als normal und selbstverständlich galt, fehlte auf der europäischen Ebene. Eine überwältigende Mehrheit hier in diesem Haus hat dies vor der Europawahl bemängelt und daraus die Konsequenz gezogen, dass nur jemand an die Spitze der nächsten Kommission gelangen soll, der sich zuvor als Kandidat bei den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern vorgestellt und um ein Mandat beworben hat. In meiner Sprache heißt ein solcher Mensch Spitzenkandidat. Dieses Wort hat erstaunlicherweise Eingang auch in viele andere europäische Sprachen gefunden, es ist ein europäisches Wort geworden. Einer dieser Spitzenkandidaten ist als Resultat dieses Prozesses vom Europäischen Rat am vergangenen Wochenende als designierter Kommissionspräsident nominiert worden und muss sich hier am 15. Juli einer Vertrauensabstimmung stellen. Ich glaube, meine Damen und Herren, dass dies ein großer Schritt für die Stärkung des Parlaments und des Parlamentarismus in der EU ist. Es ist ein Erfolg, auf den wir als Abgeordnete des Hauses stolz sein können! (Beifall) Ich glaube, dass das ein Prozess ist, der eine tiefe Veränderung in Europa bewirken wird. Aber, meine Damen und Herren, wir stehen nach wie vor vor großen Herausforderungen. Die dramatische Jugendarbeitslosigkeit, besonders der jungen Männer und Frauen unter 25 Jahren, schafft eine Hoffnungslosigkeit und eine Verzweiflung, die unsere Demokratie bedroht. Die Ungleichheit zwischen Ländern, zwischen Gruppen in der Bevölkerung, in der Gesellschaft, vor allen Dingen die immer noch bestehende Ungleichheit zwischen Frauen und Männern, darf uns nicht ruhen lassen. Die Vollendung der Reformen im Bank- und Steuersystem wird unser starkes Engagement bei der weiteren Gesetzgebung verlangen. Die Verhandlungen mit den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika über ein Freihandelsabkommen werden ganz sicher umfangreich und schwierig werden. Und wir sind uns, so glaube ich, über alle Fraktionsgrenzen hinweg einig, dass wir eine Charta der digitalen Grundrechte im 21. Jahrhundert brauchen. Wir brauchen eine humane Migrations- und Asylpolitik, die dazu beiträgt, dass die Tragödien, die wir erlebt haben im Mittelmeer, sich nicht wiederholen. (Beifall) Wir brauchen Gerechtigkeit für Menschen und für Unternehmen im Binnenmarkt. Wir brauchen eine Energiepolitik, die uns unabhängig macht, die aber auch Energie bezahlbar hält und die unsere Energieversorgung sichert. Und lassen Sie mich das ganz deutlich sagen, auch mit Blick auf die wirklich kurzfristigen Notwendigkeiten: Der Kampf für den Schutz unserer natürlichen Ressourcen und gegen den bedrohlichen Klimawandel bleibt auch in dieser Wahlperiode unsere Daueraufgabe, auch als Gesetzgeber. Es gibt eine lange Liste von Aufgaben, meine Damen und Herren, die wir gemeinsam anpacken müssen, und die 396 neu gewählten Kolleginnen und Kollegen – unter Ihnen viele junge Männer und Frauen, die zum ersten Mal hier sind –, werden sicher frischen Wind auch in unsere Abgeordnetenkammer bringen. Ihnen, den neu gewählten Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die ich in besonderer Weise willkommen heißen möchte, möchte ich eines sagen: Machen Sie sich keine Sorgen, Sie werden viel Arbeit im Europäischen Parlament finden. Es warten große Herausforderungen auf uns! Ein Parlament mit 751 Abgeordneten aus 28 souveränen Staaten mit Abgeordneten, die Regionen vertreten von den Azoren bis zur weißrussischen Grenze, vom Norden Lapplands bis nach Malta, ist schon durch seine Existenz ein Ort, an dem die kontinentalen Probleme, die wir haben, im Alltag sichtbar werden. Eine Institution, in der die sehr unterschiedlichen Sorgen und Bedrohungen spürbar werden. Und deshalb brauchen wir auch in diesem Hause eine seriöse Debatte über die internationale Rolle der EU und unsere Rolle als Parlament in dieser Debatte und über die internationalen Strategien, die die Europäische Union hat. Eine richtungsgebende Diskussion. Wir waren in den letzten Jahren innerhalb der Europäischen Union stark mit uns selbst beschäftigt, wegen der schweren Krisen. Diese Krisen dauern ja an. Aber um uns herum geschehen dramatische Dinge! Etwa der Bürgerkrieg in Syrien und die Flüchtlingsströme, die er auslöst. Das fordert uns heraus, und zwar jeden Tag. Der Zerfall des Irak, die Radikalisierung, die in den Nachbarregionen der Europäischen Union vor sich geht, der Zerfall ganzer Staaten. Wir dürfen das nicht unterschätzen. Und wir brauchen deshalb nicht nur eine Debatte über Flüchtlingsströme und wie wir die Flüchtlingsfrage regeln, wir brauchen vor allen Dingen – und ich sage das mit Blick auf die Revision der Finanziellen Vorausschau – mehr Geld für die Entwicklungspolitik, und wir brauchen eine konsequente Debatte über Waffenhandel. Wir werden die Fragen nur dann lösen, wenn wir die Probleme in den Regionen lösen, in denen die Probleme entstehen. Dieses Haus, meine Damen und Herren, hat sich mit der Ukraine in der vergangenen Wahlperiode in ich weiß nicht wie vielen Debatten befasst. Was dort geschieht, jeden Tag, und was geschehen ist in den vergangenen Monaten, hat dazu geführt, dass 100 Jahre nach Beginn des Ersten Weltkriegs und 75 Jahre nach Beginn des Zweiten Weltkriegs Menschen in Europa – Sie alle haben das im Wahlkampf ja gespürt – konkret Angst vor Krieg haben. Ich finde, das darf in Europa nicht sein, dass Menschen eine konkrete Angst vor Krieg haben. Wenn wir es ernst meinen mit der EU als Friedensmacht, dann muss die ökonomische Kraft, die wir haben, politisch so genutzt werden, dass diejenigen, die Handel mit uns treiben wollen, die Herrschaft des Rechts akzeptieren und nicht das Recht des Stärkeren praktizieren. Deshalb sind all diejenigen, die unter diesen Strategien leiden, die, die unserer Solidarität aus dem Europäischen Parlament besonders bedürfen. So gewinnen wir auch Vertrauen von Menschen zurück. Wenn die Menschen das Gefühl haben, die Europäische Union ist für sie da, sie schützt sie und sie stärkt sie. Die Grundlage der Herrschaft des Rechts, meine Damen und Herren, ist der Respekt vor der Würde des Menschen. Jedes einzelnen Menschen, unabhängig von seinem Geschlecht, seiner Herkunft, seiner Hautfarbe, seinem Glauben oder seiner Form zu leben. Ich bin fest davon überzeugt: Man kann eine Demokratie nur auf dieser Grundregel aufbauen, auf der Grundregel des Respekts und der Menschenwürde. Die Garantie von gegenseitigem Respekt und Menschenwürde muss deshalb die Leitlinie unseres Handelns sein. Und wir hier müssen sie zur Grundlage unserer Arbeit machen, in diesem Haus und durch dieses Parlament in den internen Prozessen der EU und durch die EU in der internationalen Politik. Ich weiß, dass die überwältigende Mehrheit der Mitglieder dieses Hauses hinter dieser Position steht. Ich sage deshalb aber auch zum Amtsantritt als Präsident des Europäischen Parlaments: Wer auch immer die Regeln von gegenseitigem Respekt und Menschenwürde in Frage stellt, trifft auf meinen energischen Widerstand. (Beifall) Meine Damen und Herren, es liegt viel Arbeit vor uns. Lassen Sie uns die Arbeit im kollegialen Geist, in kontroversen, aber konstruktiven Diskussionen anpacken, lassen Sie uns an die Arbeit gehen! Und lassen Sie mich Ihnen noch einmal sehr persönlich danken für dieses außerordentliche Vertrauen. Ich hoffe, ich werde mich Ihres Vertrauens würdig erweisen. (Anhaltender Beifall) Der Präsident. - Meine Damen und Herren, die Verspätungen, die wir uns heute Morgen erarbeitet haben, führen zu etwas veränderten Fristen, die ich Ihnen mitteilen muss. Die Frist für die Kandidaturen für die Vizepräsidentinnen und Vizepräsidenten unseres Hauses möchte ich auf 13.30 Uhr festlegen. Das würde bedeuten, dass wir die Wiedereröffnung des Plenums zum Wahlgang für Vizepräsidentinnen und Vizepräsidenten 15.00 Uhr vornehmen. Damit ist dieser Tagesordnungspunkt geschlossen. (Die Sitzung wird um 12.20 Uhr unterbrochen und um 15.00 Uhr wieder aufgenommen.) VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ Präsident 5.   Politisko grupu izveidošana (sk. protokolu) 6.   Parlamenta sastāvs (sk. protokolu) 7.   Priekšsēdētāja vietnieku ievēlēšana (pirmā, otrā un trešā balsošanas kārta) Der Präsident. - Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Wahl der Vizepräsidenten des Europäischen Parlaments. Ich habe die folgenden Kandidaturen erhalten: Fabio Massimo Castaldo Corina Crețu Ryszard Czarnecki Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz Sylvie Guillaume Alexander Graf Lambsdorff Ulrike Lunacek Mairead McGuinness Dimitrios Papadimoulis Olli Rehn David-Maria Sassoli Antonio Tajani Ramon Luis Valcárcel Siso Adina-Ioana Vălean Rainer Wieland Die Kandidatinnen und Kandidaten haben mir mitgeteilt, dass sie mit ihrem Einvernehmen vorgeschlagen wurden. (Da aus der ersten Stimmzählerrunde zwei Kollegen abwesend sind, werden zunächst durch den Präsidenten per Los zwei neue Stimmzähler bestimmt: Olle Ludvigsson und Peter Lundgren.) Da die Zahl der Kandidatinnen und Kandidaten die Anzahl der freien Sitze übersteigt, müssen wir gemäß der Geschäftsordnung eine geheime Wahl durchführen. Es gilt Artikel 17 Absatz 1 der Geschäftsordnung. (Der Präsident liest den genannten Artikel aus der Geschäftsordnung vor und erläutert anschließend das Vorgehen.) Die Abstimmung ist eröffnet. (Die Abgeordneten erheben sich zur Abgabe ihrer Stimmen.) Neena Gill (S&D). - Mr President, I was trying to get your attention earlier on to say that I think Rule 17 does not preclude us also hearing from the vice-presidential candidates, as we did from the presidential candidates. I would not say we needed as long as for the presidential candidates – I think one minute each would have been sufficient for us to get an idea of who exactly we are voting for – but I think that it would have been a very helpful thing to do in terms of transparency, because there is a huge number of new Members in this House. Der Präsident. - Frau Gill, wie Sie sehen, ist das jetzt nur noch eine theoretische Frage, die wir nicht vertieft erörtern können. Die Kolleginnen und Kollegen haben in ihrem Drang abzustimmen, nicht einmal abgewartet, bis ich den Wahlgang eröffnet hatte. Das zeigt, die Demokratie verschafft sich ihr Eigenleben. Sie hatten Recht, aber ich kann es jetzt nicht ändern. Die Abstimmung ist geschlossen. (Die Sitzung wird um 15.35 Uhr zur Auszählung der Wahl unterbrochen und um 17.05 Uhr wiederaufgenommen.) VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ Präsident Der Präsident. - Ich gebe Ihnen das Ergebnis der Wahlen für das Amt der Vizepräsidenten des Europäischen Parlaments bekannt. Abgegebene Stimmen: 729 Ungültige Stimmzettel: 12 Abgegebene gültige Stimmen: 717 Die absolute Mehrheit liegt dementsprechend bei 359 Stimmen. Ich gebe die Stimmenzahl entsprechend der alphabetischen Reihenfolge der Kandidatinnen und Kandidaten bekannt: Fabio Massimo Castaldo: 113 Stimmen Corina Crețu: 342 Stimmen Ryszard Czarnecki: 240 Stimmen Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz: 400 Stimmen Sylvie Guillaume: 334 Stimmen Alexander Graf Lambsdorff: 311 Stimmen Ulrike Lunacek: 222 Stimmen Mairead McGuinness: 441 Stimmen Dimitrios Papadimoulis: 153 Stimmen Olli Rehn: 327 Stimmen David-Maria Sassoli: 340 Stimmen Antonio Tajani : 452 Stimmen Rámon Luis Valcárcel Siso: 406 Stimmen Adina-Ioana Vălean: 394 Stimmen Rainer Wieland: 437 Stimmen Die absolute Mehrheit der abgegebenen Stimmen haben deshalb erhalten: Herr Tajani, Frau McGuinness, Herr Wieland, Herr Valcárcel Siso, Frau Gáll-Pelcz und Frau Vălean. Ich beglückwünsche diese Kolleginnen und Kollegen zu ihrer Wahl. (Beifall) Das bedeutet, dass bei der Wahl der Vizepräsidenten noch acht weitere Sitze zu besetzen sind. Es ist ein zweiter Wahlgang erforderlich. Wenn es keine Bemerkungen gibt, gehe ich davon aus, dass die Kandidatinnen und Kandidaten des ersten Wahlgangs ihre Kandidatur aufrechterhalten. Ich sehe keinen Widerspruch. Die Kandidaturen sind aufrechterhalten. Ich schlage vor, den zweiten Wahlgang jetzt gleich durchzuführen. Manfred Weber (PPE). - Herr Präsident! Ich möchte beantragen, die Sitzung für zehn Minuten zu unterbrechen, damit wir in der EVP-Fraktion und auch die anderen Fraktionen nochmals kurz beraten können, wie wir mit dem Ergebnis umgehen, sofern das möglich ist. (Die Sitzung wird um 17.10 Uhr unterbrochen und um 17.20 Uhr wieder aufgenommen.) VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ Präsident Der Präsident. - Meine Damen und Herren! Wir kommen nun zum zweiten Wahlgang. Der zweite Wahlgang findet mit elektronischer Abstimmung statt. Deshalb bedarf es einer Erläuterung, von der ich hoffe, dass ich sie so unkompliziert wie möglich hier vortragen kann. (Der Präsident erläutert die technischen Einzelheiten der elektronischen Abstimmung, gefolgt von einer technischen Probeabstimmung anhand einer fiktiven Kandidatenliste. Der Präsident fragt mehrmals nach, ob alle Mitglieder mit der Technik des elektronischen Wahlvorgangs vertraut sind.) Philippe Lamberts (Verts/ALE). - Monsieur le Président, s'agirait-il – le test n'a pas l'air de fonctionner – d'un nouveau concept de vote secret, dans le sens où nous ne sommes pas autorisés à savoir pour qui nous votons? Der Präsident. - Ich warte noch fünf Minuten. Ich weiß nicht, warum die Technik nicht funktioniert und bitte Sie um etwas Geduld. Der Präsident. - Wir kommen jetzt zu der elektronischen Abstimmung. Ich lese die Namen der Kandidatinnen und Kandidaten noch einmal in alphabetischer Reihenfolge vor: Castaldo, Crețu, Czarnecki, Guillaume, Lambsdorff, Lunacek, Papadimoulis, Rehn, Sassoli. Der Wahlgang ist eröffnet. Ismail Ertug (S&D). - Herr Präsident! Hier bei uns gab es noch Unstimmigkeiten, deshalb eine kurze Frage: Wenn wir acht Leute auf der Stimmliste haben, sind dann mindestens fünf zu wählen? Oder gibt es so etwas nicht? Der Präsident. - Sie können einen wählen, Sie können auch gar keinen wählen. Aber Sie können höchstens acht Stimmen abgeben. Nochmals zur Klarstellung: Wir haben neun Kandidatinnen und Kandidaten, aber nur acht zu vergebende Plätze. Deshalb sind neun nicht gültig. Der Wahlgang ist geschlossen. Ich gebe Ihnen das Ergebnis des zweiten Wahlgangs der Wahlen für das Amt der Vizepräsidenten des Europäischen Parlaments bekannt. Abgegebene Stimmen: 704 Abgegebene gültige Stimmen: 691 Ungültige Stimmzettel: 13 Die qualifizierte Mehrheit liegt dementsprechend bei 346 Stimmen. Ich gebe die Stimmenzahl der Kandidatinnen und Kandidaten bekannt: Corina Crețu: 406 Stimmen Sylvie Guillaume: 406 Stimmen David-Maria Sassoli: 394 Stimmen Olli Rehn: 384 Stimmen Alexander Graf Lambsdorff: 267 Stimmen Ulrike Lunacek: 244 Stimmen Ryszard Czarnecki: 243 Stimmen Dimitrios Papadimoulis: 210 Stimmen Fabio Massimo Castaldo: 115 Stimmen Wir brauchen also einen dritten Wahlgang. Ich frage zunächst die Gewählten, ob sie ihre Wahl annehmen, oder ob irgendjemand die Wahl nicht annehmen möchte. Damit sind alle so gewählt. (Beifall) Der Präsident. - Damit kommen wir mit dem gleichen Verfahren zum dritten Wahlgang. Ich mache darauf aufmerksam, dass im dritten Wahlgang die einfache Mehrheit genügt. Bernd Lucke (ECR). - Herr Präsident! Können Sie bitte erläutern, wie es möglich ist, ungültige Stimmen abzugeben? Der Präsident. - Sie können abstimmen. Dann registriert die Maschine Ihre Abstimmung. Anschließend können Sie alles löschen. Dann haben Sie keine Stimme abgegeben. Das wird dann als nicht gültig gewertet. Sie haben ja die Möglichkeit, Ihre Stimmabgabe zu verweigern. Das entspricht der Situation, wenn Sie bei einer Briefwahl oder einer Wahl per Stimmzettel einen leeren Stimmzettel abgeben, was auch als ungültig angesehen wird. Ich muss mich korrigieren. Ich bin gerade auf einen Fehler aufmerksam gemacht worden, der Herrn Rehn betrifft. Das war ein Fehler von mir. Ich habe hier eine falsche Zahl gelesen. Herr Rehn hatte 304 Stimmen, nicht 384 Stimmen. Ich bitte um Entschuldigung. Entsprechend war er nicht gewählt. Herr Rehn wird jetzt in diesem dritten Wahlgang als Kandidat aufgeführt. Ich weiß nicht, woran das lag. Es war ein menschlicher Fehler von mir. Ich nehme an, dass ich hier die falsche Zahl gelesen habe. Herr Rehn, ich bitte um Entschuldigung. Sie müssen sich dann leider nochmal im dritten Wahlgang bewerben. Herr Caspary, vielen Dank für diesen Hinweis. Der Wahlgang kann jetzt eröffnet werden. Die Namen sind angezeigt. Ich eröffne den dritten Wahlgang. Der Wahlgang ist geschlossen. Ich gebe Ihnen das Ergebnis des dritten Wahlgangs der Wahlen für das Amt der Vizepräsidenten des Europäischen Parlaments bekannt. Abgegebene Stimmen: 706 Abgegebene gültige Stimmen: 690 Ungültige Stimmzettel: 16 Die absolute Mehrheit liegt dementsprechend bei 346 Stimmen, jetzt reicht aber die einfache Mehrheit. Ich gebe die Stimmenzahl der Kandidatinnen und Kandidaten bekannt: Olli Rehn: 377 Stimmen Alexander Graf Lambsdorff: 365 Stimmen Ulrike Lunacek: 319 Stimmen Dimitrios Papadimoulis: 302 Stimmen Ryszard Czarnecki: 284 Stimmen Fabio Massimo Castaldo: 110 Stimmen Ich stelle fest, dass gewählt sind: Herr Rehn, Herr Lambsdorff, Frau Lunacek, Herr Papadimoulis und Herr Czarnecki. (Beifall) Nimmt irgendjemand die Wahl nicht an? Das ist nicht der Fall. Ich gratuliere allen gewählten Kolleginnen und Kollegen. Damit ist das Präsidium des Parlaments gewählt. Was die Wahl der Quästoren anbelangt, so schlage ich vor, die Frist für die Einreichung der Kandidaturen auf morgen, Mittwoch, 2. Juli 2014, 10.00 Uhr festzusetzen. Ich bitte, die Kandidaturen im Büro R00.101 – das ist der Büroraum der Präsidentschaft – im Louise Weiss-Gebäude, zu Händen des Generaldirektors der Generaldirektion Präsidentschaft zu hinterlegen. 8.   Padomes nosūtītie nolīgumu teksti (sk. protokolu) 9.   Saistībā ar Parlamenta rezolūcijām veiktie pasākumi (sk. protokolu) 10.   Nākamās sēdes darba kārtība (sk. protokolu) 11.   Sēdes slēgšana (Die Sitzung wird um 17.45 Uhr unterbrochen.)

31.8.2022
LV
Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis
C 332/17 2014. gada 2. jūlijs2014. GADA 2. JŪLIJA DEBAŠU STENOGRAMMA. (2022/C 332/02) Saturs 1.
Sēdes atklāšana
18 2.
Saskaņā ar parasto likumdošanas procedūru pieņemto tiesību aktu parakstīšana (Reglamenta 78. pants) (sk. protokolu)
18 3.
Kļūdu labojums (Reglamenta 231. pants) (sk. protokolu)
18 4.
Darba kārtība (sk. protokolu)
18 5.
Eiropadomes 2014. gada 26. un 27. jūnija sanāksmes secinājumi (debates)
18 6.
Pārskats par Grieķijas prezidentūras paveikto (debates)
44 7.
Eiropas Parlamenta kvestoru ievēlēšana (pirmā un otrā balsošanas kārta)
58 8.
Balsošanas laiks
60 8.1.
Komiteju skaitliskais sastāvs (B8-0001/2014) (balsošana)
60 9.
Iepriekšējās sēdes protokola apstiprināšana (sk. protokolu)
60 10.
Oficiāla sveikšana
60 11.
Padomes nosūtītie nolīgumu teksti (sk. protokolu)
61 12.
Itālijas prezidentūras darba programma (debates)
61 13.
Komiteju locekļu iecelšana (sk. protokolu)
91 14.
Nākamās sēdes darba kārtība (sk. protokolu)
91 15.
Sēdes slēgšana
91 2014. gada 2. jūlija debašu stenogramma VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ Präsident 1.   Sēdes atklāšana (Die Sitzung wird um 9.15 Uhr eröffnet.) 2.   Saskaņā ar parasto likumdošanas procedūru pieņemto tiesību aktu parakstīšana (Reglamenta 78. pants) (sk. protokolu) 3.   Kļūdu labojums (Reglamenta 231. pants) (sk. protokolu) 4.   Darba kārtība (sk. protokolu) 5.   Eiropadomes 2014. gada 26. un 27. jūnija sanāksmes secinājumi (debates) Der Präsident. - Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgen die Erklärungen des Europäischen Rates und der Kommission zu den Schlussfolgerungen des Europäischen Rates (Tagung 26./27. Juni 2014) (2013/2967(RSP)). Ich begrüße zunächst den Präsidenten des Europäischen Rates, Herrn Herman Van Rompuy, der der erste Redner in diesem Parlament in dieser Wahlperiode ist, der nicht dem Parlament angehört, sondern die Institutionen vertritt. Herr Präsident des Europäischen Rates, herzlich willkommen zur ersten ordentlichen Arbeitssitzung des Parlaments! Herman Van Rompuy,
President of the European Council
. - Mr President, let me begin by expressing my warmest congratulations on your election. Some of you have been here for a long time; many are new to this Chamber; others are returning after a period away – congratulations to you all. Together you reflect the changed experiences of the people of Europe who voted for you. Even compared to 2009, you all carry with you new expectations and new viewpoints on their behalf. Let me also of course congratulate President Martin Schulz on his unique re-election, and I am looking forward to continuing our close cooperation. Indeed, we live at a time where many things can no longer be taken for granted. Politics and prosperity at national and European level as we knew them, jobs, borders, geopolitical stability and the European idea: all have come under pressure. Our countries are leaving the worst economic period in a generation or more – a period for our Union in which solidarity and responsibility have been put to the test like never before and in which, for the first time, we have experienced the true extent of our interdependence as European nations. The euro – and with it the Union – has been saved from the existential threats of the financial crisis, and as President of the European Council, I am grateful for the constructive work of your predecessors in legislating for a more solid monetary union. The recovery is now slowly – but solidly – under way, and growth is returning to all our countries. But as Europe re-emerges, there are many challenges to be met. A thirst for hope, for tangible results – that was clear, again, in the results of this European election. Working for the recovery is our biggest task – restoring confidence and preparing our Union for the future. And it is with this goal in mind that, last week, the European Council set out the Union's priorities for the years ahead. It was an extraordinary meeting in many respects, not least because leaders met on Thursday in Ypres, at my invitation, to commemorate the outbreak of the First World War beneath the Menin Gate. It was not a ceremony about the end of the war, but about how it could start, about the mindless march to the abyss, the sleepwalking, and the millions killed on all sides. Four generations have passed, but the memories remain untouched of where we, as Europeans, come from, of what we have overcome, what we must build, and what we must prevent. This awareness remained very much with the Presidents and Prime Ministers in Ypres, on Thursday. In giving the Union a direction for the years ahead, my intention was not for the European Council to meddle in the day-to-day legislative work, but to play its role under the Treaties, namely, and I am quoting now, to “provide the Union with the necessary impetus for its development and define its general political directions and priorities”. We agreed unanimously on a programme of priorities for the next five years to guide the action and planning of the EU institutions over that period. It is important that all institutions organise their work accordingly, and also that national parliaments are kept closely involved. To this end, the European Council will hold a debate on 16 July in the evening on this programme with Jean-Claude Juncker, whom the European Council – after a formal vote – is proposing to this Parliament as next Commission President. The priorities we have set out are fivefold. First: stronger economies with more jobs; making the most of the single market; reinforcing the Economic and Monetary Union; promoting entrepreneurship, job creation and investment; and reinforcing our global attractiveness as a trading partner. This will be vital work. This means prioritising key goals, like the digital single market, strengthened economic coordination, smart regulation, and concluding the TTIP negotiations by 2015. It also means finding the right balance between fiscal discipline and the need to support growth – something which the inbuilt flexibility of our Stability and Growth Pact rules allows. All of these were key points during our discussions last week, not least as part of the European Semester; and leaders also stressed the importance of addressing overdue investment needs – in transport, telecoms, energy, innovation, education – by mobilising means and fostering a positive environment for long-term investments. Second priority: societies that are able to empower and protect all citizens. People expect Europe to defend their interests and keep threats at bay, but also to respect their identities and sense of belonging. Besides being a “great opener of opportunities”, the Union must also be seen as a source of protection. In short, it must be stronger outside and more caring inside. This is why the focus must be on fairness and life chances for all, on unlocking skills and talents, on safeguarding freedoms, and on tackling abuses and fraud, which not only affect societies but undermine trust. Third priority: a secure energy and climate future. This is one of the Union's major projects for the immediate future. We want to build an Energy Union to guarantee access to affordable, secure and green energy. The current context shows clearly the importance of reducing our energy dependency on, notably, Russian gas. Energy will be a major topic of our October European Council, when leaders are expected to decide the Union's 2030 climate and energy framework. Last week, we took stock of progress, and I am confident that we will achieve a good result in four months' time, in line with the Union's ambitious agreed targets for 2050. Fourth priority: a trusted area of fundamental freedoms. In this field also, cross-border issues call for cross-border solutions – whether on organised crime, justice matters, or migration flows. European citizens increasingly work, study, do business, get married or divorce across countries. The Union must do its best to accommodate these changes – above all, it must consolidate the decisions and work currently in progress. This message was also at the heart of our review last Friday of the strategic guidelines in the field of Freedom, Justice and Security, as required by the Treaty. On migration more specifically, it is important that our countries keep attracting talent and skills through legal migration, whilst dealing more robustly with irregular migration, notably through better cooperation with third countries. Fifth and final priority: effective joint action in the world. Maximising our global clout, engaging our global strategic partners, especially our transatlantic partners, and developing security and defence cooperation – these are all issues on which we, as a Union, must keep working these coming years. But the most pressing priority will remain being a strong partner in our neighbourhood. To our East, Friday's historic signing of Association Agreements with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine has opened up an ambitious path of cooperation. On Friday, after speaking with President Poroshenko, the European Council laid out a set of urgent and concrete steps on which our next decisions would depend. The Council will assess the situation and, should it be required, adopt the necessary decisions. The European Council leaders are committed to reconvening at any time for further significant restrictive measures. The years ahead are going to be essential for our Union – a time of consolidation, perseverance, a time of change. Let me conclude, therefore, by wishing you well. May these be good years for our Union too. (Applause) José Manuel Barroso,
Member of the Commission
. - Mr President, let me firstly congratulate you, President Schulz, on your re-election as President of the European Parliament. We all know about your very strong and sincere commitment to the European Union, and I would like to underline the excellent institutional, political and personal cooperation that we have had over the last two-and-a-half years. I wish you well. I believe more than ever that the European Parliament, the Commission and the Council must do everything in their capacity to work together to deliver concrete results for our European citizens. I would also like to congratulate you all – each and every one of you – on your election to this Parliament. I wish you success for this legislature. I believe that it is very important that, alongside our national parliaments, which have strong legitimacy and great experience of presenting our democratic states, we continue to build our European democracy. To believe that it is possible in the 21st century to progress in the European path without democracy is a fundamental mistake. This is the house of European democracy; fundamental to the democratic nature of the European Union; a unique institution, directly elected from across an entire continent. You are members of an institution that illustrates perfectly the very special nature of the European Union as a community of values for peace, democracy, tolerance, freedom, justice, the rule of law, and solidarity. As we have seen over the past mandate, with your election comes a responsibility to listen, to cooperate and ultimately to take the necessary decisions for the benefit of the citizens of our continent. Representing citizens from 28 different Member States, with 24 official languages, coming from 186 national parties reunited in seven European groups; a mix of nearly 50 % new Members and 50 % returning Members; with 65 years separating the oldest and youngest member of this House, and with more women than ever as part of the Parliament, I believe you are in a great position to give concrete expression to what Europe is – a Europe united in diversity. I want to underline what President van Rompuy just said about the special character of last week's European Council and to thank him for his initiative to start this European Council in Ypres. When I was standing at the ceremony in Ypres, I could not resist thinking that, whereas one hundred years ago young soldiers from our countries and many other countries all over the World were killing each other in the Flemish fields, this week leaders – North, South, East and West – were discussing our collective future together. The ceremony, very moving and very well organised, was a potent reminder of why the EU was created and why peace on our continent is our first and greatest common achievement. Regrettably, peace is not the case in all parts of the world, and also it is not happening in all parts of Europe. Peace cannot be taken for granted. This brings me to the issue of Ukraine. At the European Council, President Poroshenko shared with us an assessment of the situation in Ukraine. We praised his determination and commitment to de-escalating the crisis with his 15-point peace plan. But this ambition must be shared by all sides. That was the reason why, in the European Council, we welcomed the positive first step made by Russia in repealing the law on the use of force in Ukraine. We have said that this commitment should be backed up with action: action that will stop arms and more fighters from moving into the region, action to withdraw troops from the border and return the three checkpoints to the Ukrainian authorities, and action that ceases all separatist activity. In the meantime, President Poroshenko has terminated the unilateral ceasefire. We, of course, have some understanding for his decision, given the special circumstances in Ukraine, and the right of the legitimate authorities of that country to defend the integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine. That said, we continue to call for a permanent halt to any violence on all sides. For this, we expect Russia to fully exercise its influence on the separatists in order that they lay down their weapons. We have discussed not only the political and security situation, but also our economic and political support for Ukraine. That is why we are going to host next week in Brussels, on 8 July, a high-level meeting to coordinate international assistance to the country. I am happy that we can now build on the consensus that was achieved in the G7 meeting hosted by the European Union in Brussels, where it was clearly decided to go with this double-track approach: on one side, to show Russia that this behaviour is not acceptable and that we are ready to take, if necessary, additional measures; and on the other side, to show our determination to do everything that is in our capacity to support an independent, sovereign and hopefully democratic and prosperous Ukraine. So far we have disbursed EUR 750 million towards Ukraine. Last week, we also completed the Association Agreement and the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement with Ukraine, and signed similar agreements with Georgia and the Republic of Moldova. Quite significantly, President Poroshenko said at that signing ceremony that he was signing the agreement for Ukraine with the same pen that was used for the Vilnius Summit on the Eastern Partnership. That was a way of showing that history cannot be stopped. The Ukrainian people have the right to decide with whom they want to be in the future. These were historic agreements – the most ambitious negotiated so far by the European Union – offering a long-term political and economic commitment to our eastern neighbours. It is also recognition of the significant progress these countries have made since they became independent sovereign states over twenty years ago; recognition that they want to share the same vision for a prosperous, democratic model, and that they want to live by the European spirit and values, namely the sacred principle of freedom. They are an integral part of the Eastern Partnership, which we launched five years ago. The usual critics – the prophets of doom – have questioned our determination, but now they have seen that the determination of our partner countries is indeed there. After the Vilnius Summit last year, our resolve, and our partners' resolve, is to move closer together in terms of our joint agenda on prosperity, peace and shared values. During my recent visits to Georgia and Moldova, I underlined to our partners our commitment to this shared vision. But the task ahead is substantial. The success of the agreement first of all relies on our partners' willingness to carry out the reforms that they need to fight corruption and to establish a true rule of law; reforms that need to be endorsed not just by the governments, but also by the parliaments, civil society, the media, and the social partners in those countries. I believe that these agreements represent the beginning of a new journey on which the European Union and these partner countries are embarking together. Our relationship to Ukraine and the Eastern Partnership in general also underlines the importance of energy policy. I believe it is now time for all the governments of Europe to agree on what we have been proposing for some years, to have a truly European energy policy. If not now, when? In this field, the European Council has endorsed the Commission's proposal for an ambitious Energy Security Strategy and has asked for more work to be done on both energy security and the climate agenda ahead of the October European Council. Because both issues are the two sides of the same coin. We have to address energy concerns and the climate agenda. They need to be agreed together, because it will not be possible to have a sustainable economy, with more jobs, if we have an unsustainable environment, if we remain vulnerable to external shocks, like the current crisis in Ukraine, and suffer from energy insecurity. With our energy dependence estimated to increase to 27% by 2030 — importing 53% of the energy we consume – the solution is to create a low-carbon, competitive and energy-secure economy; one that moves away from our dependence on imports of crude oil and natural gas to one that diversifies our energy supply, both geographically and to include renewables; one that improves the efficiency of our energy consumption; and one that improves our energy infrastructure, our interconnectivity, and establishes a genuine energy single market by the end of the year. Our international partners are doing this. So must we. That is why the European Council has welcomed the review of our Energy Efficiency Directive on which the Commission will make further proposals in this month of July. It is good that the European Council has reaffirmed its desire to see ambitious European leadership, with our agreed 2030 climate targets, at the September UN Summit, with a view to next year's Paris international conference. Leaders of national governments nominated Jean-Claude Juncker as President-designate of the Commission. I have congratulated Jean-Claude in a personal capacity and on behalf of the entire Commission. We have been working together in different capacities at a national and European level for around 25 years. His European credentials and experience, his commitment to our Union and its values are beyond doubt. As the nomination process moves into its final stage, the European Commission and I are committed to ensuring the best possible transition to the new College, so that the European Commission can, together with the European Parliament, continue to deliver a European Union that is united, open and stronger. The European Council last week also agreed conclusions of the European Semester, showing that we have more enforced economic governance and co-operation at an EU level; and I would like to refer here to the REFIT programme for better commitments to better regulation as well as the programme on freedom, security and justice. Since I will have the pleasure to speak with you twice more today for the results of the Hellenic Presidency and for the next Italian Presidency, I will not now go into detail on those priorities. It was important that the European Council took the time to set out its own strategic priorities for the coming years. I very much welcomed this step both on the substance, but also on the process. It allowed the European Council to focus on where the European Union adds real value and to work on the priorities in the coming years. I am happy to see that it is now well accepted, the idea that I have been expressing to this Parliament, that the European Union needs to be big on big things but smaller on smaller things. The European Council priorities also demonstrate an evolutionary process. They are clearly based on important work and results achieved during the past mandate. In the past mandate we were able together to avoid an existential crisis to the European Union. When many people were predicting the end of the euro, even the disintegration of the European Union, it was possible, in very difficult circumstances, to avoid that. I believe now we have a basis to go forward during this legislature to make Europe strong, namely to focus with more attention on growth and jobs. Last but not least, the priorities show the respect for the division of labour as laid down in the Treaties, with the European Council setting a strategic agenda, with the European Commission assuming its right of initiative, and of course, with Parliament having the basic democratic responsibility, preserving the possibility to reach an inter-institutional agreement on our planning and programming for the next mandate. The European Union is working hard to learn the lessons of the economic crisis, as shown by the European Council's strong support for the country-specific recommendations and the European Semester process, our collective exercise of partnership in economic governance. We are also, as a Union, playing a crucial role in the Ukraine crisis. We are leading globally the debate on climate and energy and we are developing our vision for freedom, security and justice. All of this together shows that we are in touch with citizens' concerns, that we need to implement with ever more determination what we have set out to achieve these last few years. In the past five years there was no lack of decision. Sometimes there was lack of implementation. That is why I believe that, together, we should do everything that is in our capacity to make our European Union more united, open and stronger. (Applause) Manfred Weber,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion
. – Herr Präsident, meine Herren Präsidenten, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Da dies meine erste Rede in meiner neuen Funktion als Fraktionsvorsitzender ist, erlauben Sie mir zunächst eine allgemeine Anrede und auch die Frage in die Runde, wie die Kollegen, die wiedergewählt und gewählt worden sind, sich jetzt fühlen, wenn wir jetzt die ersten Tage im Europäischen Parlament zusammenkommen. Ich selbst empfinde es an solchen Tagen, wenn wir den neuen Wählerauftrag im Hintergrund haben, als eine Ehre, hier sitzen zu dürfen, und ich fühle natürlich auch die Verpflichtung gegenüber den Bürgern, die meine Partei gewählt haben, die die verschiedenen Parteien gewählt haben, jetzt hier die Verantwortung wahrzunehmen und europäische Politik zu gestalten. Das sollte bei uns im Haus zu einer Atmosphäre der Verlässlichkeit, des Einsatzwillens, der Verantwortung und auch des gegenseitigen Respekts führen. Das wären zumindest mein Wunsch und auch der Wunsch meiner Fraktion. Ich möchte zum Einstieg auch daran erinnern, dass die Tatsache, dass wir hier zusammenkommen – dessen sollten wir uns bewusst sein –, weiß Gott nicht so selbstverständlich ist. Die Generation meines Großvaters war die Generation, die noch Krieg führen musste auf diesem Kontinent, die Generation meines Vaters war die Generation, bei der zumindest weitgehend Frieden herrschte in Europa, aber die Hälfte Europas hinter dem Eisernen Vorhang in Unfreiheit leben musste. Und ich gehöre mit 41 Jahren einer Generation an, die erstmals in einem Europa wirken darf, in dem wir in Frieden und Freiheit zusammenleben dürfen. Deswegen sollten wir nie vergessen, dass es keine Selbstverständlichkeit ist, hier zusammenzusitzen. (Beifall) Ich möchte noch einen Satz zum Wahlausgang sagen. Wir hatten eine stabile Wahlbeteiligung, wir hatten ein klar pro-europäisches, starkes, demokratisches Ergebnis bei der Europawahl. Der Durchmarsch der Rechtsradikalen ist gestoppt; sie sind nicht einmal in der Lage, eine eigene Fraktion zu bilden. Zum 25. Mai gehört übrigens auch, dass die Ukraine pro-europäisch gewählt hat. Ich würde sagen, die Wählerinnen und Wähler in Europa haben Europa gewählt und haben das Miteinander in Europa gewählt. Das sollte für uns Auftrag sein! (Beifall) Ich möchte mich bei Herman Van Rompuy dafür bedanken, dass im Rat Jean-Claude Juncker nominiert worden ist. Der Vorschlag, den die EVP im Wahlkampf den Wählern präsentiert hat, ist nominiert worden. Ein herzliches Dankeschön dafür. Ich lehne es ab, von einem interinstitutionellen Kampf zu reden. Ich habe Respekt vor allen Institutionen auf europäischer Ebene. Aber klar ist, dass sich die Macht einer Idee durchgesetzt hat, nämlich der Idee, dass man vor Abstimmungen, vor Wahlkämpfen den Menschen sowohl Inhalte präsentiert als auch das Personal, mit dem man nachher diese Inhalte umsetzen will. Die Macht dieser Idee hat sich durchgesetzt. Und wenn in allen Bereichen von Europa in Europa die Rede von mehr Demokratie ist, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dann ist der logische nächste Schritt: Wenn Demokratie gefordert wird, dann sind die Entscheidungen, die für die Zukunft wichtig sind, in einem Parlament zu fällen. Das ist der logische Zusammenhang zwischen Demokratie und Parlament. (Beifall) Zu guter Letzt möchte ich noch einen Ausblick auf die Aufgaben, die auf uns zukommen, wagen. Der Europäische Rat, Herr Ratspräsident, hat eine wunderbare, inhaltlich gute Vorlage für die nächsten Jahre beschrieben. Für uns als EVP-Fraktion wird das der Rahmen sein, die Grundlage, auf der wir jetzt die Inhalte anpacken. Uns ist wichtig Wachstum, uns ist wichtig der Respekt vor der nationalen Ebene, uns ist wichtig, dass wir die Lektionen aus der Krise gelernt haben, die Bankenregulierung umsetzen und das Schuldenmachen in Europa beenden. Und uns ist wichtig, dass wir mit unseren Nachbarn Stabilität entwickeln, vor allem im Osten Europas. Der Grundsatz, den wir brauchen, um die Zukunft anzupacken, ist ein Bewusstsein und ein Werben bei den Bürgern in Europa dafür, dass wir offen sein müssen für Reformen. Reformen, Veränderungen sind der Schlüssel für die Zukunft. Wenn Europa bereit ist, aufzubrechen, wenn Europa bereit ist, sich zu verändern in den heutigen Rahmenbedingungen der Welt, dann wird Europa eine wunderbare Zukunft haben! (Beifall) Gianni Pittella,
a nome del gruppo S&D
. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, anche per me è la prima volta a parlare a nome del gruppo dei socialisti e dei democratici in questa Plenaria e quindi, prima di indirizzarmi al presidente van Rompuy e al presidente Barroso, voglio anch'io rivolgere un saluto caloroso a tutti voi ed in particolare ai colleghi presidenti degli altri gruppi politici. Con tutti voi spero di intrattenere un rapporto di positiva, leale e fruttuosa collaborazione. Voglio rinnovare i nostri auguri sinceri e calorosi al Presidente Schulz. Con il Presidente Schulz lavoreremo mano nella mano per promuovere e fortificare il progetto europeo, accrescere la fiducia e la partecipazione dei cittadini, rafforzare il ruolo e il prestigio di questa Istituzione. Il dato più significativo, direi storico, di questo Consiglio europeo, presidente van Rompuy, è stata la decisione di proporre Jean-Claude Juncker come Presidente della Commissione. Questo risultato è innanzitutto una vittoria della democrazia, frutto di una battaglia del Parlamento europeo. A riguardo voglio sottolineare con orgoglio il ruolo cruciale svolto dai socialisti e democratici, ruolo che ha dato impulso a questo processo. Diamo però merito al Consiglio di aver saputo superare le comprensibili difficoltà che comporta ogni passo avanti del processo democratico; diamo atto di non aver ceduto alla tentazione di un riflusso che avrebbe impedito all'Europa di raggiungere oggi questo storico risultato. Signor Presidente, questo però è solo il calcio di avvio della partita. La partita è tutta da giocare e può riservare delle sorprese. Ora tocca a Juncker convincerci con le sue proposte, il suo programma e il talento della sua squadra che sceglierà per realizzare questo programma. Il riconoscimento da parte del Consiglio della necessità di rendere più flessibile il patto di stabilità e di crescita è una boccata di ossigeno che sarebbe dovuta arrivare prima. Chiediamo ora che siano declinate con chiarezza e utilizzate appieno tutte le possibilità offerte da questa flessibilità. Il mio gruppo non firmerà assegni in bianco. Chiediamo risposte concrete su proposte concrete, chiediamo un'azione decisa, che permetta un rilancio dell'occupazione, un piano per la crescita, gli investimenti pubblici e privati indirizzati su grandi reti infrastrutturali ed energetiche. Penso anche ai Project Bond, ad un uso migliore del bilancio europeo e al suo maggior finanziamento. Chiediamo azioni in grado di salvaguardare e migliorare la qualità della vita dei nostri cittadini, un rafforzamento delle misure di solidarietà che permetta di invertire l'allarmante crescita della povertà e delle diseguaglianze sociali. Penso ai salari minimi garantiti a livello europeo, penso all'eguale trattamento per i lavoratori transfrontalieri. Chiediamo che l'apertura del Consiglio sul rafforzamento dei canali legali di ingresso dei migranti prenda forma concreta. Chiediamo che la solidarietà tra gli Stati membri divenga il fondamento di una nuova politica di immigrazione e asilo, nella quale vi sia un'equa ripartizione delle responsabilità. Chiediamo che l'asilo sia garantito, in sicurezza, a coloro che ne hanno diritto, utilizzando tutti gli strumenti a disposizione, compreso l'esame delle richieste dei paesi terzi o l'utilizzo dei visti umanitari. L'Unione europea deve raccogliere questa sfida e tornare a pensare al Mediterraneo, a questo grande mare spesso insanguinato, ma che è la nostra frontiera comune europea, luogo per un'intensa cooperazione a sostegno della democrazia, dei diritti fondamentali, della sicurezza, della mobilità umana sostenibile, dello sviluppo economico e sociale. Ultimo, ma non per importanza, l'accordo con l'Ucraina, la Georgia, la Moldova, che rappresenta un passo avanti cruciale. Il nostro impegno per costruire e garantire pace e stabilità duratura nell'area ci impone di considerare in un'ottica strategica il nostro programma di partenariato orientale e le nostre relazioni con la Russia. È in questa direzione che dobbiamo camminare. Noi socialisti e democratici faremo senz'altro la nostra parte. Auguri a tutti voi. (Applausi) William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFDD),
blue-card question
. – Mr Pittella, thank you for taking my question. In your speech, as conveyed by the interpreter, you described the nomination of Mr Juncker as a victory for democracy. At the next session of Parliament will Mr Juncker's name be the only name put forward for Parliament to vote on? If Mr Juncker's name is the only name put forward for Parliament to vote on (as has always happened in the past), how can this possibly be a victory for democracy – even for a Socialist? (Applause) Gianni Pittella (S&D),
Risposta a una domanda “cartellino blu”
. – Caro collega, le spiego con semplicità. Prima si riunivano i governi e indicavano il Presidente della Commissione. Questo non era una prova di grande democrazia. Per la prima volta nella storia si è fatta una campagna elettorale nella quale le grandi famiglie politiche europee hanno indicato le personalità e i cittadini si sono espressi anche in funzione di queste personalità. È risultato maggioritario il voto, il consenso all'onorevole Juncker e la conseguenza democratica è l'indicazione di Junker alla Presidenza della Commissione europea. Non è difficile da comprendere. Syed Kamall,
on behalf of the ECR Group
. – Mr President, I stand before you as the third new leader today – the third virgin on the front row, if you like, but the leader of the third-largest group here in the European Parliament. (Applause and gradually some laughter) They take a bit of time to warm up. Much has been said about the winners and losers in the recent European elections. Let me ask you to consider the real loser: the status quo. For a growing number of people believe that Europe cannot go on as it is. Europe has to change, and that change has to start now. They do not believe that the choice is between more Europe or No Europe: they want a better Europe, a Europe that allows our nation states to cooperate freely and not a one-size-fits-all European super-state; a Europe which embraces the future, not one that lives in the past; a Europe to meet the challenges of the 2050s, not the problems of the 1950s. And in the ECR we aspire to give these people a voice. So as the leader of this new, exciting, growing force, I want the ECR to become an exciting hub for new ideas for reform: ideas that make the EU fit for the challenges of the future in an interconnected global economy. But so far this week we have seen too much of the politics of the past – the type of politics that voters rejected in May. That is why, to all those new and re-elected MEPs across the House, I make this plea: let us turn our backs on the parliament of the backroom deal and the division of spoils. Let us reject a parliament of self-interest and personal ambition. Let us leave behind a parliament of intolerance towards minority views that challenge the conventional wisdom. Instead, let us build a parliament based on tolerance and respect. Let us build a parliament of passionate debates and stimulating ideas, and let us build a parliament that seeks fresh approaches and new solutions. Let me give you all this pledge. Our group will work together and form coalitions with others based on ideas for reform, and we take the nomination of Mr Juncker in the same spirit. Our concerns about the process are well known. They need not be repeated again today, because we are a group that wants to look forward, not back. But if this Parliament elects Mr Juncker, then we will work with him, and we will work with the Commission if he pursues a forward-looking agenda of reform; if he pursues a forward-looking agenda of decentralisation; and if he pursues a forward-looking agenda to face the challenges of the 2050s and not to look back to the ideas of the 1950s. Mr Van Rompuy, we welcome the fact that the Summit communiqué set out a number of priorities for the future. We welcome the reference to different paths of integration, recognising the diversities of our interests and our traditions in our different Member States, a flexible Europe of nation states cooperating where there is mutual interest and public support rather than that old dream of a one-size-fits-all European super-state. Let us turn those ideas from the European Council statement – of exploiting the single market, of creating a climate of entrepreneurship, of opening trade, of enhancing energy security and efficiency, of supporting our neighbourhood and of cutting bureaucracy – let us turn those ideas into the building blocks for reform. If you want to deliver real change in the EU, we look forward to cooperating with you. If you want to defend the status quo, we will urge you to embrace change. If you want to look back to the past, we will confront you with the challenges of the future. And that is the real division in this Parliament today: between those who want to prepare the European Union for the 2050s and those who cling to the ideas of the 1950s. The ECR is a new force with a modern agenda: to give Europe a fresh start. That is our belief and our mission. We will work with all of you who want to succeed, by embracing the challenges of the 21st century together. (Applause) Guy Verhofstadt,
on behalf of the ALDE Group
. – Mr President, first of all, welcome to the new Group leaders who are here, Mr Weber, Mr Pittella and Mr Kamall. You will see we are a funny club. There are the most sympathetic people – Mr De Backer, of course, and Ms Zimmer. The most outspoken one, naturally, is Mr Farage. And, as you will see, I am the most disciplined one in the House. (Laughter) Let us be honest about it, the most important outcome of this European Council was one thing: the nomination of Jean-Claude Juncker as candidate-President of the European Commission. I do not understand all the criticism that has been addressed to Mr Pittella, to the effect that the process is not democratic. The procedure is exactly the same as that for David Cameron's nomination in the British Parliament. So I don't see any problem. I recognise the British democracy as a real democracy, and it is time, too, to recognise that this Parliament is the real European-level democracy of the European continent. (Applause) So far from criticising it, I think it is a big victory for the European Parliament – and more so, in fact, for European democracy and Europe's citizens – that Mr Juncker has been proposed. We are now, in my opinion, entering what I see as the second phase of the process, because it is up to Mr Juncker now, in the same way that it works in the British Parliament and British democracy, to assemble a majority around him: to create a coalition. In my opinion, it has to be a broad coalition, a stable coalition, a pro-European coalition, creating a majority of people and groups who want to negotiate a programme and to have a new strategy for change for this European Union. When I talk about change, I am talking about real change – not what Mr Kamall is calling for. He used the word “change” at least 10 times, but what he calls change I call blocking progress. It involves leaving the euro, breaking up Schengen, stalling labour mobility and abandoning all European common policies – so less integration and less Europe, and that is not change, that is regression. (Applause) What does the word “conservative” mean? [Interjection from the floor] “Nothing”? Well, yes, that is a good explanation, but if it means anything it means the status quo. Conservative equals status quo, and that is what we do not want in the European Union today. This part-session and the next one will be two very important weeks. We have to decide on a new leader for the Commission and we also have to take a new step forward in our relationship with the Commission. Let us be honest, we have to replace Mr Barroso with a new President of the Commission, one who does not simply walk into this House, deliver a speech, without always listening to us, and then walk out and implement the wishes of the Council. That is what has mainly been happening over the past few years, and we have to change that. It is possible to do so because this new President of the Commission – and here lies the key change –will be backed by a coalition and will be accountable. For us it will be very important that the key priorities are in place. There has to be a new plan Delors. Austerity plus growth is necessary inside the Union. There should be a new approach on migration, on civil liberties, on LGBT rights and on privacy regulation and, most of all, we need a Commission that really uses its right of initiative every time we as Parliament ask it to do so. (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8)) Paul Nuttall (EFDD),
blue-card question
. – I would just like to clarify a point that Mr Verhofstadt made. Mr Cameron is actually a Member of Parliament for Witney, where he has been elected. Mr Juncker has not been elected by the people. That is the key difference, Mr Verhofstadt, and that is the reason why people are turning against the European Union. (Applause) Guy Verhofstadt (ALDE),
blue-card answer
. – I can only say one thing. I have seen Mr Juncker together with Mr Schulz and Ms Ska Keller, who is not here, and Mr José Bové, in all the debates for this European Parliament. He has been fully involved in this European election. I did not see you in this European election. I did not even see Mr Cameron in this European election. After the European election, he came forward to say that a number of things had to be changed, that Mr Juncker could not be nominated. So, in my opinion, this is real European democracy – these debates and this public opinion. Gabriele Zimmer,
im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion
. – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Ich möchte natürlich auch im Namen meiner Fraktion allen neu gewählten Kollegen und Kolleginnen hier viel Glück und gute Zusammenarbeit wünschen, und vor allem auch wünschen, dass wir als Europäisches Parlament klare und deutliche Signale aussenden, und zwar, dass wir hier tatsächlich die Stimme jener vertreten, die darauf warten, dass in der Europäischen Union eine Politik der sozialen Verantwortung, des solidarischen Miteinanders, der ökologischen Verantwortung und – ich sage das jetzt bewusst – auch des Tierschutzes, der Tierrechte betrieben wird. Meine Fraktion ist größer geworden. Ich bin stolz darauf, weil wir uns auch verbreitert haben. Das heißt, wir haben auch Parteienbewegungen in unserer Fraktion, die über unser bisheriges politisches Spektrum hinaus in der Lage sind, Stimmen von Menschen aufzunehmen, die bisher im politischen Establishment der Europäischen Union unter den Tisch gefallen sind. Das ist ein Zugewinn an Demokratie, wenn es uns gelingt, die Stimmen jener, die am meisten unter der Krise gelitten haben und leiden, hier in das Parlament zu bringen. Liebe Institutionen, Rat und Kommission, ihr seid gemeinsam mit uns verpflichtet, hier endlich eine andere Politik zu betreiben. Wir haben in den letzten Tagen gehört, dass der Gipfel ja vor allem eine Auseinandersetzung mit den Vorstellungen Großbritanniens darüber gewesen ist, wie es künftig weitergehen soll, wo doch die Personalie Juncker von Großbritannien nicht unterstützt wurde. Ich habe diese große Differenz zur britischen Politik im Rat nicht gespürt. Ich hatte eher den Eindruck, dass Thatchers Losung “There is no alternative” – TINA-Politik – einfach weiterbetrieben wird. Die ist doch die Grundlage für das, was der Rat in den letzten Jahren gemacht hat und was er offensichtlich auch nach der Europawahl weiterbetreiben will. Wo sind die Überlegungen, die Schlussfolgerungen, wie man mit dem Wahlergebnis umgeht, mit der Aussage von Millionen von Wählerinnen und Wählern, die sagen: “Wir wollen keine EU der Liberalisierung von Rechten, der Privatisierung, der drastischen Kürzungspolitik, die vor allem die Existenzrechte und Existenzmöglichkeiten von Millionen von Menschen bedrohen. Wir wollen Antworten haben!”? Wir wollen konkrete Antworten haben zur Bekämpfung der Arbeitslosigkeit junger Menschen. Wir wollen Antworten haben, wie die EU-Freihandelsabkommen geändert werden können. Wir haben dazu nichts zu hören bekommen. Wir haben nur gehört, dass letztendlich auch mit dem Beschluss zum Europäischen Semester der Druck auf die Mitgliedstaaten weiter erhöht wird. Hier möchte ich klar sagen: Wir wollen Antworten! Und wir werden in jeder Sitzung – das verspreche ich Ihnen jetzt schon –, mit jeder Rede eines unserer Abgeordneten genau darauf aufmerksam machen und den Finger weiter darauflegen. Und im Übrigen sind wir auch stolz darauf, dass wir es als einzige Fraktion geschafft haben, dass wir mit 26 Frauen und 26 Männern hier vertreten sind. Das ist auch ein Ergebnis! (Beifall) Rebecca Harms,
im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion
. – Herr Präsident! Auch von meiner Seite ein herzliches Willkommen an die neuen Kollegen an diesem Tisch! Auf eine gute Zusammenarbeit und hoffentlich auch auf Veränderungen! Und zwar Veränderungen, die bei Bürgerinnen und Bürgern ankommen, die sie verstehen, und nicht immer nur Reden über Veränderungen, die wir hier für notwendig halten und die sich dann am Ende doch nicht in dem Umfang verwirklichen lassen, wie wir das in der letzten Wahlperiode versucht, aber dann doch immer nicht geschafft haben. Ich habe, wie so oft, diesen letzten Gipfel beobachtet. Und ich fand, dass es eine gute Entscheidung war, nach Ypern zu gehen. Ich fand es natürlich gerade als deutsche Europäerin und deutsche Abgeordnete gut, nach Ypern zu gehen. Symbole zählen in der Politik. Gerade, wenn man einen Wahlkampf lang immer wieder gehört hat, dass die Vergangenheit doch heute gar keine Rolle mehr spielt, ist es gut, auch mit solchen Symbolen zu arbeiten. Es ist allerdings bedauerlich, dass, wenn ein so starkes Symbol gesetzt wird, am Ende ein Gipfel in Brüssel zusammenkommt, der gerade in der Auseinandersetzung über den Bruch der Friedensordnung in Europa überhaupt nicht gut entscheidet. Ich finde, dass wir uns sehr genau überlegen müssen, was da in Brüssel passiert ist und was da nicht passiert ist. Wir haben ein Treffen der Staats- und Regierungschefs gesehen. Wenige Tage zuvor war in Österreich ein neuer Vertrag mit Gazprom unterzeichnet worden. Wenige Tage nach dem Gipfel in Brüssel ist es so gewesen, dass 400 russische Marinesoldaten in Frankreich eingetroffen sind, um dort ausgebildet zu werden. Diese Widersprüchlichkeit der Europäischen Union in der Auseinandersetzung um die Ukraine und Russland könnte wirklich tragisch enden. Die Europäische Union muss endlich großen Selbstrespekt vor den eigenen Positionen aufbringen, damit uns die Unterschrift unter die Assoziierungsabkommen nicht in ganz große Schwierigkeiten bringt. Ich glaube nämlich wirklich, dass wir in einer Situation sind, in der es für Russland immer günstiger wird, durch Destabilisierung das, was wir im Osten der Europäischen Union zum Positiven verändern wollen, zu behindern – und ich weiß seit langer Zeit, dass es viel schwieriger und viel teurer ist, ein Land zu stabilisieren als es zu destabilisieren. Wenn die Europäische Union jetzt nicht wirklich bereit ist, Diplomatie mit konsequenten Wirtschaftssanktionen zu untermauern, dann mache ich mir ganz große Sorgen um die weitere Entwicklung im Osten unseres Kontinents. Ich bin, ehrlich gesagt, bestürzt gewesen darüber, dass Ratspräsident Van Rompuy die Entscheidung für Herrn Juncker nur mit einem dürftigen Satz erwähnt hat. Ich bin nicht bei denjenigen, die meinen, dass man mit dieser neuen Achse Martin Schulz/Jean-Claude Juncker – wie Martin Schulz das gerne sagt –, alles in Europa wird verändern können. Ich bin aber der Meinung, dass es wichtig ist, dass mit diesen Personalentscheidungen europäische Politik für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger erkennbarer werden kann, und dass es eine andere Verbindlichkeit geben könnte, wenn die beiden das ernst nehmen, was sie im Wahlkampf vertreten haben. Es wird unsere Rolle sein, darauf immer wieder zu drängen. Die Entscheidungen, die anstehen, sind bei diesem Gipfel in Brüssel wieder alle nur gestreift worden. Copy and paste ist inzwischen auch bei den Redenschreibern von Herrn Barroso und Herrn Van Rompuy eine bewährte Methode geworden. Die Energie-Union ist ein Projekt, das bisher nicht vorangebracht worden ist, das insbesondere vom Energiekommissar Oettinger in vielen Bereichen fälschlicherweise blockiert und verwässert worden ist. Es könnte das Zukunftsprojekt der Europäischen Union sein! Es könnte das Innovationsprojekt der Europäischen Union sein, wo wir auf das Neue setzen und uns vom Alten verabschieden! Aber ich sehe eben da, dass die Männer des Alten wieder nach vorne geschoben werden. Was ich wirklich bedaure, ist, dass nicht nur Martin Schulz Parlamentspräsident geworden ist – das finde ich eigentlich vielversprechend, weil er das zum zweiten Mal macht –, sondern dass die Entscheidung für Martin Schulz auch gleichzeitig eine Entscheidung gewesen ist für die Fortsetzung der Arbeit von Günther Oettinger. Der hat sich um dieses Zukunftsprojekt der Europäischen Union überhaupt nicht verdient gemacht, sondern er hat eigentlich den ganzen Innovationsmut, den sein Vorgänger, Herr Piebalgs, hatte, verbraucht. (Die Rednerin ist damit einverstanden, eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der “blauen Karte” gemäß Artikel 162 Absatz 8 der Geschäftsordnung zu beantworten.) Ivo Vajgl (ALDE),
Vprašanje, postavljeno z dvigom modrega kartončka
. – Spoštovana kolegica, vi ste opravičeno opozorili na to, da imajo vse države v takozvani vzhodni Evropi pravico same odločati o svoji bodočnosti in svojih povezavah. Vendar bi vas rad vprašal to: ali mislite, da je diplomacija in edina... edin način diplomacije, kako urejati naše odnose, evropske – zahodne odnose z Rusijo, uporaba sankcij ali je lahko diplomacija tudi nekaj bolj vsebinskega, nekaj bolj dolgoročnega, nekaj bolj v interesu miru in stabilnosti na našem kontinentu. Rebecca Harms (Verts/ALE),
Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der “blauen Karte”
. – Nachdem Russland bewusst die Friedensordnung des europäischen Kontinents angegriffen hat durch die Annektierung der Krim, ist die Europäische Union angesichts des Bruchs des nuklearen Abrüstungspakts, des Budapester Abkommens, tatsächlich gefordert, die Friedensordnung zu verteidigen, und zwar nicht mit militärischen Mitteln. Ich bin davon überzeugt, dass sich dieser Konflikt nicht militärisch lösen lässt. Aber ich sehe auch, dass wir, ohne bereit zu sein, unsere diplomatischen Bemühungen mit Wirtschaftssanktionen zu unterlegen, nichts erreichen können. Dabei geht es mir nicht um ein “Gegen Russland” und “Für die Ukraine”, sondern es geht für mich um die Entwicklung von Demokratie. Für Demokratie, für die Bürgerrechte, für die Rechtsstaatlichkeit in der Ukraine müssen wir bereit sein, auch mit Wirtschaftssanktionen zu arbeiten. Nigel Farage,
on behalf of the EFDD Group
. – Mr President, good morning, and what a privilege it is to address the three great Presidents of the European Union on behalf of my Group and on behalf of UKIP, which topped the poll in the United Kingdom. Not, of course, that it happened only there: right across Europe, on the left, the centre and the right, there are now more Eurosceptics in this Parliament than have ever been seen before. So imagine my surprise, on 27 May — heading to the Conference of Presidents' meeting in Brussels, where all the European leaders were sat in a room and I was not sure whether they would be nice or nasty to me, and whether they would accept that something fundamental had changed – when I found that, no, it was business as usual. Coming from the UK, we did not even realise that these elections were seen to be significant as far as the next Commission President was concerned. The Tories did not have a horse in the race; the British Labour Party disowned Martin Schulz; and, as for the Liberal Democrats – who, I am pleased to say, have collapsed to one Member – had you put old Verhofstadt on British television they would have lost the lot! So we were pretty unaware of what was going on. A victory for democracy? I am not sure. Who is the loser? Martin Schulz. He has become the President again of the European Parliament. It all looks like a bit of a stitch-up to me. Dave obviously misunderstood the mood. Not realising this, and after some initial encouragement from a few other Member States which he thought might block Mr Juncker, he then ran into the new golden rule of EU politics, which is that when Ms Merkel speaks the other Heads of State obey. And the support for us simply melted away. You would have thought it was time to apply the principle “When in a hole, stop digging” – but no, Dave kept on digging away, and I must say as the final vote approached it began to feel a bit like the Eurovision song contest where it does not really matter how good the British entry is: such is the dislike of our country around much of Europe that we are always going to lose. I wonder what the prospects are now for renegotiation. Well, Mr Juncker has had a rough ride in the British press: we are told that he drinks cognac for breakfast (that is not in the UKIP manifesto, I promise you); we are told he is “Juncker the drunkard”; we are told he is a smoker. My God, isn't that awful! Some have even said that he drinks endless cups of black coffee, which is why he looks so old. I cannot see him being in any mood to concede. To come back to Ms Merkel: she was quite clear, after the summit when Cameron challenged the principle of ever-closer union, and she very gracefully said that we are all allowed to move at different speeds towards ever-closer union, but we must continue in the same direction. We have a referendum coming up at some point in the not-too-distant future in Britain. There is one thing that would convince the British voters to vote to remain part of a European Union and that is a fundamental Treaty change that says we no longer have to accept untrammelled access for countless millions of people from across the whole of Europe. We need, and the British people – 80% of them – demand that we should get back control of our borders so that we can choose who comes to Britain. (Applause) Having lost 26:2 in the last vote in the Council of Ministers, we are going to need to succeed with this. To end total free movement we are going to need the support of the European Parliament. Are you going to help Britain to end the free movement of peoples? I do not think so. Are we going to win 28-nil in the Council of Ministers? I do not think so. It is not going to happen. We are whistling in the wind and we are closer now to exit than ever. As for the rest of the EU, I suspect the next five years will bring endless misery for the southern Mediterranean eurozone countries. That is perhaps reflected in the number of Italians we now have in our Group. And what have we seen in the last 48 hours? We have seen naked militarism, with the EU flag being virtually goose-stepped around the yard, we have heard the European anthem and, actually, I can tell you that we, the Eurosceptics, are now the progressives. The two gentlemen we have just heard had nothing to say today. It was the usual dirge-like, dull looking-back to a model invented 50 years ago. We are the ones who want democracy, we are the ones who want nation states, we are the ones who want a global future for our countries, and do not want to be trapped inside this museum. (Applause) (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8)) Philippe Lamberts (Verts/ALE),
blue-card question
. – Mr Farage, what are you doing here? What I heard is basically the speech of the leader of the opposition – (inaudible interruption by Mr Verhofstadt) — in the House of Commons. If you want to hold that kind of speech, get elected there. What are you doing here? (Applause) The reason why you are speaking here is that you have enlisted continental Europeans into your group just to be able to boast as a British citizen who wants to get out of the European Union. If you want to be considered as the leader of a European political group, then make speeches worthy of a European political leader. (Applause) Nigel Farage (EFDD),
blue-card answer
. – Mr Lamberts, I have to say that you sound like somebody from the old communist era saying that, if anybody else has a different point of view, clearly they are mentally ill or there is something wrong with them. What you are going to have to get used to – all of you – is the idea that across the political spectrum there are now more Eurosceptics in this Parliament than there have ever been, and many of them do not subscribe to ever-closer union, they do not subscribe to that flag and they do not want a European anthem. They want a modern Europe where we can trade together, cooperate together and have mutual respect for each other. I will tell you this, Mr Lamberts: do not worry too much about my presence, because within the next five years, I will not be here, all right? (Applause) Marine Le Pen (NI). - Monsieur le Président, à l'écoute des interventions des coprésidents du groupe unique PPE-S&D-ALDE, je me disais qu'il n'y a pas plus aveugle que celui qui ne veut pas voir. Car ne vous en déplaise, Mesdames et Messieurs, un vent nouveau souffle sur cet hémicycle – et ce n'est pas grâce à vous, M. Schultz –: un vent de fraîcheur, un vent de liberté, un vent de fronde aussi contre une Union européenne de plus en plus inefficace, antidémocratique, brutale, déconnectée et plus contestée que jamais par les peuples européens. Un vent de fronde aussi contre les manœuvres politiques fomentées dans le dos des électeurs: il en est ainsi du traité transatlantique, du traité dit “TISA”, comme hier d'ailleurs de l'ACAC et aujourd'hui de l'accord passé entre le PPE, les libéraux et le PSE ayant permis votre élection, M. Schultz, et la nomination de M. Junker à la tête de la Commission. Cela se produira d'ici quelques jours, mais c'est déjà fait quand on pense que pendant des semaines vous avez laissé croire aux électeurs que leurs votes auraient une influence sur la tête du Parlement ou la tête de la Commission. C'est à mourir de rire pour nous – évidemment pas pour eux – parce que les électeurs ont été floués une fois de plus. Je regrette que le vote soit secret: j'aurais aimé vous voir là tous ensemble, la main levée, devant les électeurs qui vous ont envoyé sur ces sièges élire le socialisme le plus sectaire, le pire du socialisme et le pire de l'ultralibéralisme. La bonne nouvelle est que nous sommes là et que nous serons là pour dénoncer sans relâche ces collusions tellement révélatrices. Nous nous battrons, M. Schultz, contre l'Europe de la pauvreté – la vôtre –, l'Europe du chômage, de l'écrasement, de l'austérité, du déni des libertés et des souverainetés que vous représentez vous et ceux qui, dans cet hémicycle, vous ont élu. Croyez-moi: ce mandat ne sera pas pour les eurobéats un long fleuve tranquille! Der Präsident. - Zur Geschäftsordnung hat sich Herr Kollege Glezos gemeldet. Εμμανουήλ Γλέζος (GUE/NGL). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, με ιδιαίτερη συγκίνηση ξαναβρίσκομαι ύστερα από 30 χρόνια στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο. Με έστειλαν Έλληνες ψηφοφόροι για να συνεισφέρω σε ένα σημαντικό γεγονός. Η ιστορία χτυπάει την πόρτα μας. Είμαστε σε θέση να ανοίξουμε αυτήν την πόρτα, ναι ή όχι; Με ιδιαίτερο ενδιαφέρον άκουσα την πλειονότητα των βουλευτών του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου να μιλάει για αλλαγή, για ανατροπή, για κάτι το καινούργιο. Πραγματικά, το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο βρίσκεται μπροστά σ' αυτήν τη νέα εποχή. Θα βοηθήσουμε ή δεν θα βοηθήσουμε να αποκτήσει η Ευρώπη τη δική της αυτόνομη, αυτοδιοικούμενη διοικητική ύπαρξη; Μια Ευρώπη των λαών, μια Ευρώπη της δημοκρατίας, μια Ευρώπη των πολιτών, μια Ευρώπη του πολιτισμού, της δικαιοσύνης – της πολιτικής και κοινωνικής δικαιοσύνης. Αγαπητέ Πρόεδρε, σε συγχαίρω για την εκλογή σου και περιμένω από όλα τα πολλά που είπες να πραγματοποιήσεις τουλάχιστον το 1%. Αξιώνουμε όμως από σένα να κάνεις πράξη και το υπόλοιπο 99%. Το σημαντικότερο όμως από όλα είναι το γεγονός ότι αυτή τη στιγμή ευρωπαϊκό έδαφος κατέχεται από ξένα στρατεύματα... (Ο Πρόεδρος διακόπτει τον ομιλητή) (Χειροκροτήματα) Der Präsident. - Vielen Dank, Herr Glezos. Ich konnte allerdings den Charakter Ihrer Wortmeldung zur Geschäftsordnung nicht ganz erkennen. Herbert Reul (PPE). - Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir bekommen jetzt einen Geschmack davon, wie diese neue Wahlperiode werden kann. Die Menschen haben mit großer Mehrheit – das ist das erste – die Parteien gewählt, die Ja zu Europa, zu diesem europäischen Projekt sagen. Eine riesige Mehrheit hat Ja gesagt. (Beifall) Es ist wahr, es gibt auch Stimmen, und zwar berechtigte Stimmen, die darauf hingewiesen haben, dass nicht alles, was hier passiert, dass nicht alles, was in Europa gemacht wird, richtig und perfekt ist. So ist das. Deshalb haben wir den Auftrag, an den Stellen, an denen die Menschen eine bessere Politik von uns erwarten, es besser zu machen. Aber die Menschen haben nicht Klamauk, Beschimpfung, Verunglimpfung gewählt. Und deshalb bin ich entsetzt über die letzten Wortmeldungen. Das wollen die Menschen nicht, dass wir uns hier gegenseitig beschimpfen, Parolen von vorgestern vortragen, uns gegenseitig diffamieren. Sie wollen, dass wir unseren Job machen, dass wir die Probleme lösen, dass wir uns darum kümmern, wie Wachstum in Gang kommt, wie Arbeitsplätze geschaffen werden, wie wir die Unruhen und die Kriege, die hier im europäischen Umfeld stattfinden, bekämpfen! Das ist unser Job! Darum haben wir uns auch auseinanderzusetzen. Jawohl, Auseinandersetzung gehört dazu. Aber, Herr Farage und Frau Le Pen, so etwas, was Sie hier vortragen – Clownereien, Beschimpfungen, Verunglimpfungen –, passt weder in dieses Haus, noch wollen die Leute das hören. Damit kommen Sie keinen Millimeter voran, da bin ich ganz sicher. Das, was gebraucht wird, sind ganz konkrete Entscheidungen. Und da gibt es eine super Vorlage vom Rat. Darüber wollten wir doch heute reden, über das, was der Rat vorgeschlagen hat. Er hat ein Programm vorgelegt von seiner Seite, wie in den nächsten Jahren Politik gemacht werden soll. Das ist eine perfekte, eine sehr gute Vorlage: Stärkung der Wirtschaft, mehr Beschäftigung, mehr Investitionen, Prioritäten in den Fragen, wie wir Handel verbessern können, den Binnenmarkt stärken, intelligentere Rechtssetzung, Haushaltsdisziplin. Das sind Stichworte, die jetzt konkret mit Inhalt gefüllt werden müssen. Dafür sind wir gewählt! Wir sind nicht gewählt, um hier solche Veranstaltungen zu machen, wie sie eben gemacht worden sind. Ich bin sicher, so wird es auch gutgehen. Wir haben eine riesige Chance, wenn wir uns zusammenreißen, gute Politik zu machen. (Beifall) VORSITZ: RAINER WIELAND Vizepräsident Udo Bullmann (S&D). - Herr Präsident, werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich bin Herrn Reul dankbar dafür, dass er langsam auf das Thema des heutigen Vormittags kommt, nämlich auf den Gipfel der Staats- und Regierungschefs, über den wir ja auch reden wollen. Aber lassen Sie mich mal den Ball verlängern in die Richtung von Herrn Präsident Van Rompuy. Herr Van Rompuy, ich habe eine schlichte Frage an Sie. Sie haben ja aufmerksam zugehört. Glauben Sie denn, dass wir diesen antieuropäischen Klamauk, den wir jetzt eine halbe Stunde lang gehört haben, hier in diesem Haus nötig hätten, wenn der Europäische Rat in den letzten Jahren einen anständigen Job gemacht hätte? Sagen Sie uns doch mal, in welcher Form Sie in die Selbstkritik gegangen sind über diese Initiativen, die nicht ergriffen worden sind! Dann will ich zum Papier sprechen, weil das sehr wichtig ist. Sehr viele wohlfeile Bemerkungen, sehr viele interessante Überschriften! Aber eine Strategie – das ist jedenfalls mein Verständnis – beschreibt einen Weg, wie man Ziele erreichen kann. Wo ist denn dieser Weg? Sagen Sie uns das doch mal! Wir haben in Europa eine Investitionslücke, die ist größer als der gesamte europäische Haushalt. Wie wollen wir die denn füllen? Wo ist denn der Beitrag des Europäischen Rates zu diesem Thema? Wir haben eine Jugendarbeitslosigkeit, die eskaliert, insbesondere in Südeuropa. Sagen Sie uns doch einmal, welchen Beitrag wir leisten können! Machen Sie doch das Semester verbindlich! Wir, das Europäische Parlament, sind gerne ein Partner dabei. Ihre vermeintliche Strategie tut so in den Worten, als sei dies die große Sprache von Jaques Delors. Was dahinter fehlt, sind der Geist, die politische Gestaltungskraft und die Courage von Jaques Delors. Dafür müssen wir arbeiten in diesem Haus! (Beifall) Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE). - Mr President, I too would like to say welcome to my new colleagues. Mr Van Rompuy, I have been listening to you and Mr Barroso this morning. I was expecting an exciting and inspiring speech that would give us plenty of new, innovative ideas. Instead, it feels like I am in Jurassic Park; I get an image of an ossified, paralysed Council that is stuck in the past. It is not driving change; it is trying to block it. And I have to say, Mr Farage, that this is with the enthusiastic support of your side of the House. You talk about your side of the House as Eurosceptics. Eurosceptics are people who think, who may have doubts about Europe. However, that is not actually the case, because over there I see a collection of people ranging from downright anti-EU to anti-immigration, homophobic and anti-Semitic forces – they are not just middle-of-the-road Eurosceptics. (Applause) It is indeed time for change. It is not the time to paralyse the EU even further or to dismantle it. We need to make it stronger and better able to act and respond adequately to the expectations of our citizens, in particular the ones who are going through very rough times at the moment. We need more democratic legitimacy, not less. Therefore, I would like to take up the words of Mr Kamall and say: Let us work together in this House, with the Commission and with the Council, across party lines and across borders, to make Europe stronger. Matt Carthy (GUE/NGL). - Mr President, voters across Europe – including Ireland – sent a very clear message to their governments and to the EU in May. That message, unfortunately, has been ignored by the recent European Council meeting. The austerity agenda that has been championed by European institutions has inflicted hardship on many families in Ireland and throughout the Member States. The European Council has missed an opportunity to change direction and to abandon the policies that have created mass unemployment and mass emigration, and that have hugely increased poverty levels and caused stagnation in domestic economies. Instead, the Council concentrated on a carve-up of top jobs in the European institutions and ignored the impact of their austerity agenda. It is time for a new Europe of equal states, working against austerity and for investment in jobs and public services. The four Sinn Féin MEPs, along with our colleagues in GUE/NGL, will continue to strive for that new Europe. Valentinas Mazuronis (EFDD). - Bandysiu kalbėti apie Vadovų Tarybos išvadas. 2014 m. birželio 26–27 d. Vadovų Tarybos metu buvo priimti sprendimai, kurie neabejotinai turi didžiulę įtaką tolesniam Europos Sąjungos vystymuisi, jos valstybių gyventojų gyvenimo lygiui, o tai reiškia, kad šie sprendimai darys įtaką mūsų ir visų Europos Sąjungos valstybių narių piliečių gyvenimui ateityje. Norėčiau išskirti du klausimus, kurie yra svarbūs visoms Europos Sąjungos valstybėms, bet Lietuvai ypatingai. Pirma, tai, kad Vadovų Taryba patvirtino Komisijos siūlymą nuo 2015 m. sausio 1 d. įvesti eurą Lietuvoje. Šis sprendimas neabejotinai svarbus tiek Lietuvai, tiek visoms euro zonos valstybėms. Mūsų kaimynės, Baltijos valstybės Estija ir Latvija, eurą jau turi. Šis sprendimas ne tik sustiprins Lietuvos ekonomiką, bet padidins mūsų valstybės konkurencingumą bei suteiks Lietuvai didesnį finansinį ir net politinį saugumą. Tačiau kol kas daugiau nei pusė Lietuvos piliečių nepritaria nacionalinės valiutos pakeitimui euru, ir tai yra rimtas iššūkis Lietuvos Vyriausybei, kuri privalo įtikinti piliečius šio žingsnio nauda. Ir tik tada, jeigu arba kai dauguma Lietuvos piliečių supras ir pritars, toks žingsnis bus sėkmingas. Antras Vadovų Tarybos sprendimas, turintis ryšį su valstybe, kuriai aš atstovauju, tai Europos Sąjungos asociacijos susitarimų su Gruzija bei Moldova, taip pat likusių ekonominių susitarimo nuostatų su Ukraina pasirašymas. Europos Sąjungos ir Ukrainos asociacijos susitarimas turėjo būti pasirašytas Vilniuje, tačiau dėl žinomų priežasčių tai neįvyko. Džiugu nors tai, kad ekonominė šio susitarimo dalis buvo pasirašyta tuo pačiu parkeriu, kuris buvo paruoštas pasirašymui Vilniuje. Manau, kad tai simboliška. (Kalbėtojas sutiko atsakyti į klausimą, pateiktą pakėlus mėlynąją kortelę (Darbo tvarkos taisyklių 162 straipsnio 8 dalis)) Jan Philipp Albrecht (Verts/ALE),
Frage nach dem Verfahren der “blauen Karte”
. – Sehr geehrter Kollege, ich habe Ihren Ausführungen aufmerksam zugehört und stimme mit Ihnen absolut überein, dass der Beitritt zum Euro, der nun geschafft ist, ein großer Fortschritt ist, und das es wichtig ist für die Wirtschaft in Litauen und in der Europäischen Union. Ich wundere mich allerdings, warum Sie dann einer Fraktion angehören, die ganz offen gegen den Euro und gegen die Europäische Union steht, gegen die Chancen dieses gemeinsamen Projekts Europas. Ich wundere mich auch – und diese Frage geht dann vielleicht auch an Ihre Nachbarn –, warum etwa Vertreter der Partei Five Star Movement in dieser Fraktion sind, die ganz ... (Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.) Valentinas Mazuronis (EFDD),
atsakymas į pakėlus mėlynąją kortelę pateiktą klausimą
. – Vienas iš pagrindinių tiesioginės demokratijos principų yra tai, kad visus pagrindinius sprendimus visos valstybės privalo suderinti su dauguma savo piliečių. Būtent tokios nuostatos šioje frakcijoje yra vienos iš pagrindinių. Būtent todėl aš ir esu šioje frakcijoje ir manau, kad tos nuostatos teisingos. Carlos Jiménez Villarejo (GUE/NGL). - Señor Presidente, simplemente quería comentar, ante la alusión genérica que el señor Van Rompuy ha hecho al problema de la inmigración como objetivo de la Unión Europea, que.. (El Presidente interrumpe al orador para recordarle la finalidad del procedimiento de la “tarjeta azul”.) Diane Dodds (NI). - Mr President, the recent European elections delivered a stark message to these institutions: across Europe, people went to the ballot box not to commend the EU for work done, but to express disillusionment and to call for radical change in how Brussels operates. That genuine desire for a better Europe must not be ignored. In the United Kingdom – but not solely in the United Kingdom – the consensus is that Europe is not working. People see an EU that has lost its way, that is obsessed with ever closer union rather than what it was intended for: trade, cooperation and friendship. After the European Summit and the anointing of Mr Juncker, and after listening to the tone of this debate, I fear that the European establishment intends to answer the people with more of the same. More of the same economic and monetary union, which has brought record unemployment and a generation of young people condemned to long term unemployment and loss of hope. Colleagues, it is time for change. Sadly the tone of this debate suggests business as usual. Alain Lamassoure (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président du Conseil européen, Monsieur le Président de la Commission, la délégation française du PPE se réjouit de la décision prise par le Conseil européen du 26 juin. Le Conseil a proposé le nom de Jean-Claude Juncker pour présider la Commission. Curieusement, M. le Président, vous ne l'avez mentionné que très brièvement, presque en passant. Or, c'est une décision historique. Chacun sait que ce choix n'était pas le souhait premier de certains membres du Conseil; pourtant, ce faisant, le Conseil européen n'a pas cédé à un soi-disant putsch du Parlement, évoqué par certains. Le Parlement ne votera pour sa part que dans deux semaines pour confirmer le choix du Conseil européen. En fait, le Conseil a cédé au vote des citoyens. C'est la grande innovation du traité de Lisbonne: le Conseil européen doit désormais prendre acte du vote des citoyens. Il ne s'agit pas d'une bataille entre les institutions: le Parlement, en l'espèce, n'est que le reflet du vote des citoyens. Les cinq grandes familles politiques européennes, de droite, du centre et de la gauche, l'ont bien compris: chacune a désigné son candidat et la campagne s'est organisée partout, dans la plus parfaite clarté, derrière eux. Plusieurs débats télévisés dans toute l'Europe ont eu lieu entre eux. Pour la première fois, l'élection européenne a donné lieu à une campagne à l'échelle de l'Europe et non pas simplement des vingt-huit États membres. Certains collègues ont critiqué le fait que Jean-Claude Juncker ne soit pas membre de ce Parlement, mais chacun de nos pays a des traditions parlementaires différentes: le Premier ministre français n'est pas systématiquement un parlementaire. Cet après-midi, nous recevons M. Matteo Renzi, Premier ministre italien, qui n'est ni député, ni sénateur dans son pays. Qui osera dire que l'Italie n'est pas un grand État démocratique? Chaque année, des dizaines de lois européennes s'appliquent à 500 000 000 de citoyens européens, qui ont désormais le droit d'élire ceux qui font ici ces lois ainsi que celui ou celle qui les propose et les applique. Cela s'appelle la démocratie! Roberto Gualtieri (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il collega Lamassoure ha perfettamente ragione: quello del Consiglio europeo è stato un vertice storico. Verrà ricordato nei libri di storia e ha segnato una vittoria non di un'istituzione contro un'altra ma della democrazia parlamentare, che delle forme di democrazia è forse quella più alta e sicuramente quella più efficace. Noi diamo atto al Consiglio europeo di aver agito saggiamente e di aver evitato la strada di una pericolosa crisi interistituzionale. Ma proprio perché riconosciamo questo, noi vorremmo anche capire dal presidente Van Rompuy quali aspetti di questo processo devono essere riconsiderati, visto che di questo parla un capitolo delle conclusioni del Consiglio europeo. Riteniamo legittimo che il Consiglio europeo faccia le sue considerazioni ma pensiamo altresì che ciò che è stato realizzato costituisca un punto di non ritorno. Noi non accetteremo nessun passo indietro rispetto a ciò che è stato una presa d'atto dello spirito e della lettera del trattato di Lisbona e del principio supremo della democrazia. Questo riguarda naturalmente anche la questione della integrazione differenziata. L'integrazione differenziata è un principio stabilito dai trattati. Su questo punto il Parlamento si è espresso: ma il fatto che alcuni paesi possano procedere più speditamente sulla strada dell'integrazione non significa che i diritti e i principi dei trattati già stabiliti possano essere messi in discussione. (Il Presidente interrompe l'oratore.) Francisco Sosa Wagner (ALDE). - Señor Presidente, hoy es el momento de festejar que el Parlamento Europeo es más fuerte, más relevante en el conjunto de las instituciones europeas. Ha sido larga la polémica acerca de la vinculación de los jefes de Estado y de Gobierno al resultado de las elecciones del pasado 25 de mayo. Voces atrevidas ha habido que han intentado ignorar el mensaje que las urnas han puesto de manifiesto, pero, al final, ha vencido la democracia, que es lo mismo que decir que ha triunfado la razón. Veremos cuál es el programa de Juncker para que, desde las filas liberales, podamos apoyarle con nuestros votos; veremos si se compromete con una política de crecimiento y estímulo que dé vigor a la economía, porque el fin es claro: se trata de hacer una Europa más eficaz, más sólida y más justa. Quizá convendría introducir en la práctica reglamentaria de este Parlamento una novedad, y es que, junto al debate que protagonizará Juncker, se admitiera que el presidente del segundo grupo más votado explicara a la Cámara, en nombre de dicho grupo, un programa que pusiera en claro ante la ciudadanía europea una alternativa fundada y sólida de gobierno. Nos parece que sería una forma viva y democrática de profundizar en nuestros problemas y atisbar entre todos soluciones adecuadas. João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). - Ainda mal refeitas do enorme abanão que as últimas eleições representaram, as forças do consenso da austeridade, direita e social-democracia deixam clara a intenção de prosseguir o seu projeto de retrocesso civilizacional. As orientações aprovadas neste Conselho Europeu são um cardápio de ataques de toda a sorte aos trabalhadores e aos povos: menos salários, menos direitos, menos serviços públicos, mais desigualdade na distribuição da riqueza. Um intolerável desrespeito pela soberania dos povos, com ingerências e afrontas a órgãos de soberania nacional, como é o caso do Tribunal Constitucional português. Com troica ou sem troica, perante o desastre que causaram, em lugar de arrepiarem caminho, seguem em frente! Aprofundam a destruição, o empobrecimento e as injustiças. Enfrentarão a luta determinada dos trabalhadores e dos povos, semente carregada de futuro que, mais cedo que tarde, trará consigo a derrota definitiva deste sórdido projeto! (O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta formulada ao abrigo do procedimento “cartão azul” (artigo 162. o , n. o 8, do Regimento)) Liisa Jaakonsaari (S&D),
sinisen kortin kysymys
. – Haluaisin kysyä, millä perusteella te väitätte, että sosiaalidemokraatit haluavat jatkaa samaa linjaa? Olemme koko ajan korostaneet sitä, että investoinneille täytyy raivata tilaa, talouteen täytyy saada happea, työllisyys täytyy saada paranemaan ja niin edelleen. Ja te kehtaatte täällä väittää, että me haluamme jatkaa samalla linjalla. Mikä on teidän perustelunne? João Ferreira (GUE/NGL),
Resposta segundo o procedimento “cartão azul”. – Senhora Jaakonsaari, agradeço a sua pergunta. Não me constou que os governos socialistas no Conselho Europeu tenham apresentado alguma objeção às recomendações aprovadas no âmbito do Semestre Europeu, como também não tiveram objeções à aprovação do tratado orçamental que consagra, ou que pretende consagrar, a austeridade para todo o sempre, como também não me parece que tenham tido aqui objeções neste Parlamento à aprovação da legislação da governação económica, que pretende também ela consagrar a austeridade. Objeções ao Semestre Europeu, a nada disto apresentaram objeções.. (O Presidente retira a palavra ao orador) Janusz Ryszard Korwin-Mikke (NI). - Mr President, among the major challenges mentioned in Appendix 1, I see the cost of energy. But this cost is generated by the EU, thanks to the war on global warming. This war, if effective, would harm the natural environment, because what plants need most for growth is carbon dioxide. Fortunately, this war has no effect at all, but the countries occupied by the EU have paid a tremendous price. Global warming, if it is real, is not anthropogenic – that is humbug – but it is the instrument to achieve a specific goal, namely “zero growth”. This goal, the clandestine dream of some people sitting among us, has been reached, with EUR 2 trillion spent and wasted. This is a felony! I hope that in January the Prosecution Office of the EU will be at last established and that the culprits – including the pseudo-scientists who have supported this lunacy in bad faith – will be found, named, duly prosecuted, tried and put in jail. Jacek Saryusz-Wolski (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! To był bardzo ważny szczyt. Był doniosły z trzech powodów. Po pierwsze, po raz pierwszy głosy obywateli zostały wysłuchane i miały wpływ – to precedens – na wybór władz wykonawczych Unii, czyli na wybór Jeana-Claude'a Junckera, przedstawiciela desygnowanego przez zwycięską partię polityczną – Europejską Partię Ludową. To krok milowy w kształtowaniu nowego ustroju Unii Europejskiej i zbliżaniu obywateli do niej oraz w redukowaniu deficytu demokracji. Drugi ważny powód, dla którego był to doniosły szczyt, to fakt, że unia energetyczna (czyli zasada solidarności w sprawach energii i bezpieczeństwa energetycznego) uzyskała polityczne poparcie i są szanse na to, że będzie wdrażana po to, aby Unia Europejska mogła mieć bezpieczną, tanią i konkurencyjną energię. Zerwie to polityczno-ekonomiczną zależność od monopolistycznego dostawcy oraz nie będzie, jeśli się ziści, powodowało, że wysokie ceny energii dławią nasz wzrost gospodarczy i zwiększają bezrobocie. I po trzecie wreszcie, osiągnięto wielki postęp, jakim jest wschodnie partnerstwo, wielki postęp jeśli chodzi o stosunki z naszymi wschodnimi sąsiadami, którzy wybrali europejskie wartości i byli gotowi płacić za to najwyższą cenę, cenę własnego życia. Podpisanie trzech najdalej jak dotąd idących umów z naszymi partnerami to więcej niż “półczłonkostwo”, to trwały związek, to szansa na demokrację i dobrobyt na Ukrainie, w Mołdawii i w Gruzji oraz na ich powrót do europejskiej rodziny narodów. To dowód również na to, jak wielka jest magnetyczna siła europejskiej cywilizacji, jej modelu, która wygrywa z czołgami, karabinami i świadczy o sile europejskiej demokracji. Glenis Willmott (S&D). - Mr President, last week the British Prime Minister suffered a humiliating defeat, outvoted 26 to 2. For someone who has staked Britain's membership of the EU on reforming Europe, he is certainly not very good at making friends and influencing people. Perhaps it was his decision to pull out of the EPP and away from the centre-right leaders across Europe; maybe it is the fact that he is now allied with the German version of UKIP, or maybe it is his constant threats that he will pull out of the EU if he does not get his own way. It is clear to everyone that whatever Cameron does is not really about trying to change the EU for the better but rather to appease certain sections of his own political party. It is not about the British national interest; it is about the interests of the Tory party. Yes, we need reform; the election results across Europe told us that people expect better – an alternative to relentless austerity. They expect us to prioritise jobs and growth, and they expect us to address some of the absurdities of the EU, such as travelling here once a month. I have no doubt that a majority of us in this Parliament are ready to take on those challenges, but we must ensure that the new Commission President is up to the job of making the reforms we desperately need. In order to achieve real reform, you have to build alliances and work together; grandstanding, posturing and threats get you nowhere. Europe started off divided over Mr Juncker, but Cameron's total incompetence has united Europe against him to the detriment of the British people. Harald Vilimsky (NI). - Herr Präsident, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren von den Mehrheitsfraktionen hier im Hause! Glauben Sie wirklich, dass Sie Ihre Staaten, Ihre Völker oder Ihre Kulturen repräsentieren? Wir hatten teilweise eine Wahlbeteiligung von unter 20 %, 80 % der Menschen verwehren sich längst und sagen, sie wollen mit dieser Form des europäischen Einigungsprozesses nichts mehr zu tun haben. Wären wir ehrlich und würden all die Sitze frei lassen für die Menschen, die nicht gewählt haben, dann wären vier Fünftel des Saales leer, und dieses Haus wäre in einer Art und Weise repräsentiert, dass deutlich wird, dass endlich Reformbedarf besteht. Ich komme aus Österreich. Ich bin nach acht Jahren im österreichischen Parlament jetzt hier, um eines klarzumachen: Mein Land, mein Volk, will Kompetenzen zurückhaben. Wir wollen unsere Souveränität zurückerhalten. Wir wollen uns nicht länger gefallen lassen, dass hier von einer europäischen Nomenklatura, die von 80 % der Menschen in Europa nicht einmal mehr gewählt wird, bestimmt wird, und nicht mehr in einer integren Art der demokratischen Willensbildung gehandelt wird. Mit dem Personalpaket, das hier geschnürt wurde, und wo ein Herr Juncker heute ... (Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.) Paulo Rangel (PPE). - Senhor Presidente, queria cumprimentar o Presidente Van Rompuy, queria também cumprimentar a Comissão e, dito isto, queria sublinhar aquilo que já vários colegas aqui sublinharam, que é o facto, que é verdadeiramente constitucional, num certo sentido até constituinte para o nosso Parlamento e para a União Europeia, de se ter escolhido o candidato vencedor das eleições para ser o candidato a Presidente da Comissão. Mas, como isso já foi muito sublinhado, eu gostava apenas de deixar aqui duas perguntas políticas importantes. A primeira é: quando nós ouvimos aqui, quer o grupo dos conservadores, quer especialmente os grupos mais extremistas criticarem a escolha do Senhor Juncker para Presidente da Comissão, eu pergunto: se ele não tivesse sido escolhido e tivesse sido outro, o que é que eles estariam a dizer da União Europeia, o que é que eles estariam a dizer do processo europeu hoje, aqui nesta Casa? Estariam a dizer que a União Europeia era o descrédito, que frustrava a vontade dos eleitores e que nós não tínhamos sido capazes de honrar a vontade dos eleitores e, por isso, eles têm um duplo padrão e uma dupla medida. Isto tem que ser dito. Portanto, a escolha de Jean-Claude Juncker é, contra tudo aquilo que nos disseram aqui, aquilo que eles não queriam que acontecesse, porque isso seria o descrédito da Europa e o descrédito dos partidos pró-europeus e, portanto, da confiança dos eleitores. Era este facto político, e não apenas o facto constitucional, que eu aqui queria deixar realçado na sessão de hoje. Enrique Guerrero Salom (S&D). - Señor Presidente, el Consejo Europeo nos propone que hablemos en los próximos años de crecimiento, de política emigratoria y de política climática. De acuerdo, pero ¿qué crecimiento? Un crecimiento que pueda resolver el problema de los veintiséis millones de europeos que están en paro; el de media generación de jóvenes que no tienen trabajo ni expectativas de futuro; el de 125 millones de europeos que están en la pobreza; el de tantos millones que están en situación de exclusión. Por tanto, crecimiento sí, pero también recuperación del modelo social y recuperación de la solidaridad europea. ¿Política de emigración? Por supuesto. Pero una política de emigración que, en primer lugar, provea de desarrollo y relaciones comerciales justas a los países emisores de emigrantes. Que luego ordene la emigración legal que necesita la Unión Europea. Que luego respete los derechos humanos en todas las fronteras de la Unión. Y que luego integre a todos esos ciudadanos en la misma situación que los ciudadanos de origen. ¿Política climática? Sin duda. Pero una política climática que sea sostenible. Una política climática que asegure para la Unión Europea provisión energética. Y provisión energética significa, en primer lugar, eficiencia, porque no hay energía más limpia que aquella que no se consume. Y, en segundo lugar, interconexión energética. Es una necesidad y es una decisión geoestratégica. Gunnar Hökmark (PPE). - Mr President, the crucial challenges we have are fundamental: to contribute to European security and stability, and to contribute and ensure that we can achieve growth and new jobs. It is difficult to see how we can do this without a strong Europe. I think we need a strong Europe in order to face the challenges of Russia's threat to European borders, tackle global climate change and ensure that we can have a strong European economy. I noted yesterday that some of our colleagues turned their backs to the opening ceremony and the European symbols. They are so right – they are so backward. I have never seen a truer political demonstration than when they turned their backs to what is happening in Europe. That is because they like the past, and they are trying to walk backwards into the future. I would like to thank them for having shown their political ideology, which is to look back. We need to look forward: to reform and ensure that the association agreements are met with commitment and openness, that we reform for competitiveness, and that we are opening up the internal market and the digital agenda with clear proposals and legislation in this House. Then we will move forward, and they will stay at the back. Pervenche Berès (S&D). - Monsieur le Président, vous avez tenu – Monsieur le Président du Conseil européen – le premier Conseil européen après ces élections du 25 mai. Dans ses conclusions, vous reconnaissez qu'elles ont marqué un certain désenchantement des citoyens européens partout en Europe. Cela est dû, d'abord et avant tout, à la situation économique et sociale que connaissent trop de nos pays et trop de nos concitoyens. Vous nous proposez pour y remédier cinq objectifs, au sein d'un “agenda stratégique” que notre famille politique a préparé au cours d'un sommet essentiel à Paris. La feuille de route que vous nous proposez nous semble porter de possibles éléments de dialogue mais nous vous demanderons d'aller plus loin: pour nous, l'orientation stratégique – le président de notre groupe l'a indiqué – suppose de mieux utiliser toutes les marges de flexibilité pour répondre aux défis qui se présentent à nous. Ces défis consistent d'abord à proposer un nouveau modèle de développement économique pour l'Union européenne qui ne repose pas seulement sur l'austérité, sur la troïka, sur les emplois précaires, mais bien sur notre premier défi, celui de la transition écologique. L'Union européenne a besoin pour ce faire d'investissements massifs, publics et privés, et les règles qui s'appliquent aujourd'hui à l'échelle de l'Union européenne ne permettent pas cette réorientation, dont nous avons besoin pour financer les solutions nous permettant de répondre aux défis énergétiques, climatiques, sociaux et d'emploi qui se présentent à nous. Tunne Kelam (PPE). - Mr President, 'growth' and 'jobs' are two key words but you cannot have growth by avoiding or delaying structural reforms and not boosting competitiveness. You cannot have growth by simply trying to change the existing rules. In this Chamber there are two recent Prime Ministers from Latvia and Estonia who have proved that balancing the budget, conducting reforms and restoring growth are complementary. It is doable. I have a question to the Commission. I am afraid Mr Barroso has left, but he said that we lack implementation. By 2014 — that is, by the end of this year – the internal energy market has to be completed. Is that doable? Can we hope that it will happen, or what are the problems? Lastly, on Ukraine: we cannot deal with Ukraine without addressing squarely our relationship with Russia. Russia has committed aggression against Ukraine. That aggression is continuing in the form of a proxy war to destabilise not only Ukraine but all our Eastern Neighbourhood policies. Until now, Putin has been allowed to set the agenda or to choose his tactics. Two measures are necessary: first, to stop all arms trade with Russia; and, second, to establish tight control over Russia's corrupt money which has invaded Europe. Ana Gomes (S&D). - Senhor Presidente, como explica o Conselho Europeu que, na agenda que aprovou, não identifique como prioridade combater dumping fiscal e paraísos fiscais, que são instrumentais para capturar governantes e administrações e constituem um sistema circulatório da crise, da fraude e evasão fiscais, da corrupção, do branqueamento de capitais e da criminalidade organizada para sugar recursos aos Estados e à União, desviando-os de crescimento e da criação de emprego? Nessa perspetiva, porque não olha o Presidente Durão Barroso para o nosso país, Portugal, onde a troica austericida não quis saber dos riscos de corrupção e deixou correr privatizações, PPP's, SWAPS e outros contratos ruinosos suspeitos de corrupção, como o que o seu governo, em 2004, celebrou para comprar submarinos, e deixou proteger, com obscenas amnistias fiscais, ricos e poderosos banqueiros que fugiram ao pagamento de impostos. Quando até o insuspeito esquerdalho FMI já veio admitir que melhor teria sido Portugal renegociar a dívida em 2011, o que espera o Presidente da Comissão Europeia para propor um plano europeu de mutualização da gestão das dívidas em excesso em 15 dos 18 membros da zona do euro ou, pelo menos, a renegociação.. (O Presidente retira a palavra à oradora) Catch-the-eye-Verfahren Georgi Pirinski (S&D). - Mr President, the June European Council has agreed a strategic agenda purporting to define the key priorities for the next five years. However, the substance of these priorities in fact spells out an approach that is, more or less, business as usual, with a certain amount of flexibility. This is the opposite of what the people of Europe sent us to this Parliament to achieve, namely change that delivers on the premise of a social Europe – a pledge enshrined in the Treaties. Regarding jobs and growth, the strategic agenda states – as the first priority – the need to fully exploit the potential of the single market by completing the internal market, yet Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union directly links the establishment of the internal market with the sustainable development of Europe, based on a highly competitive social market economy aiming at full employment and social progress. It is this vital link between economic efficiency and social equity that actually has been severed over the past decade. Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL). - Senhor Presidente, começa a ser penoso assistir àquilo que são as conclusões das reuniões do Conselho porque cada vez que falam em crescimento, temos mais desigualdade na União Europeia, cada vez que falam de criação de emprego, temos mais desempregados e é de facto penoso, porque estas conclusões podiam ter sido feitas há um mês, há um ano, há dois anos. É sempre a mesma receita e sempre a mesma tragédia. O que eu gostaria aqui saber é porque não se fala verdadeiramente dos problemas, este Conselho não teve uma palavra sobre a dívida. A dívida que é a chantagem e o garrote que é colocado sobre os povos para repor os lucros do sistema financeiro, nem uma palavra. Para quando a restruturação da dívida? Não houve uma palavra sobre democracia ou participação. Milhões de cidadãos abstiveram-se, não querem saber da União Europeia. Para quando envolvê-los na participação? Este Conselho só fala naquilo que não interessa. Este Conselho só serve aos mercados financeiros, não serve aos cidadãos, não serve aos interesses da União Europeia. Zoltán Balczó (NI). - Tegnap az egyik parlamenti alelnökjelölt felhívta a figyelmet arra, hogy az Európai Parlament az emberek hangja, nem pedig a kormányok hangja. A kormányfők, amikor jelölték Jean-Claude Junckert, akkor kifejezésre juttatták, hogy nem érdekli őket az emberek hangja. Hagyjuk azt a nevetséges állítást, hogy a Néppárt többségével egyben közvetlenül őrá szavaztak! De mi tudjuk, ki Juncker úr. Ő az a politikus, akinek az egész tevékenysége egy célt szolgál, egy föderatív állam, az “Európai Egyesült Államok” létrehozását. Holott Európa népei többszörösen, népszavazáson is elutasították, hogy egy olyan Európában éljenek, ahol 500 millió ember mindennapi életét akarják egy központból irányítani. A jelenlegi közvélemény-kutatások is ezt az elutasítást támasztják alá. Tehát, amikor mi legközelebb szavazunk az ő személyéről, döntenünk kell, hogy a kormányok hangját erősítjük fel, vagy pedig megfelelünk az európai lakosság elvárásának és elutasítjuk ezt a jelölést. Richard Corbett (S&D). - Mr President, the European Council is the most difficult of all the European institutions to be President of, because it cannot agree anything on policy matters without consensus from 28 very different presidents and prime ministers, many of whom are used to getting their own way in a national context. But none of them can get their way in this context without agreement from all 28 prima donnas around that table. So I would like to pay tribute to President Van Rompuy for the way that he succeeds, again and again, in getting at least some sort of consensus out of those 28 prima donnas. However, those consensuses are sometimes good and sometimes less good. The programme that has been agreed at this meeting for the future direction of the Union is good in its headlines – but the devil is in the detail. When we talk about EU reform – and we all talk about reform; there is not a politician in Europe who is not saying that we need to reform this European Union – there is a big divergence as to what reforms. Please do not go down the line of reform proposed by.. (The President cut off the speaker) Luke “Ming” Flanagan (GUE/NGL). - Mr President, thank you for this opportunity. I believe that putting Mr Juncker in this position completely and utterly ignores the results of the European elections. This was meant to be a community; it is no longer a community. I was a supporter of the European Union, but since we had bank debt socialised and put on our shoulders to the tune of EUR 70 billion, the Irish people have woken up to the fact that this Union is no longer a Union of the people. It is a Union for bankers and big business, but certainly not for the smaller person. As I said, I was a supporter of the European Union, but no more. When the Act of Union between Britain and Ireland took place, Lord Byron said the following: “There is only one relationship between a large state and small state, and that is the relationship between a boa constrictor and its prey”. I did not think I would ever come in here and say that, but sadly this Union has proven that we are for kicking, not for anything else so it seems.... (The President cut off the speaker) (Ende des Catch-the-eye-Verfahrens) Maroš Šefčovič,
Vice-President of the Commission
. - Mr President, this is my first intervention in the new House, and I too would like to congratulate all of you who have been elected or re-elected to the European Parliament. You have already witnessed a debate which was truly political. We have clearly seen what will be the new debating lines in this Parliament. It is clear that those who are for Europe must – and, I believe, they will – work together. Therefore I would like to say a big thank you to all the leaders of the groups – Mr Weber, Mr Pittella, Mr Verhofstadt and Ms Harms – and all of you who have been clearly supporting European ideals and European cooperation with a view to the future. I also believe that support for Europe in our Member States very much depends on how Europe is explained to citizens by the national leaders and on how effectively the national leaders can assume, at the same time, the role of European leaders. I think it is time to realise that these two roles cannot be separated: that the national leaders are also European leaders and that they have this dual responsibility – to both their own countries and the European Union. We also have to be clear that the election result was very much affected by the fact that we are emerging from what was the worst economic crisis since the Second World War. So of course citizens have been frustrated – and rightly so – because, to be honest, it has taken us too long to find an appropriate cure and appropriate solutions to the crisis. However, after all this, we can clearly say that we are rising to the challenge, we have to overcome the problems and we will work better if we work together on overcoming the remaining economic problems in Europe. We have introduced new economic governance, we have made our banks healthier and stronger and we have finally managed to cut them off from the taxpayers' purse. In that connection, I would like to remind our colleague Mr Verhofstadt that one of the architects of this new system, Mr Rehn, is now working in his group. I believe they will have ample scope for healthy discussions on how to progress in this area in the future. Several of you referred to the nomination of Jean-Claude Juncker for the Commission Presidency as a major achievement of the last summit. That is an accurate assessment because we have seen how the democratic will of the people was respected by the leaders and how that was reflected in this nomination. I believe this has paved the way for close and effective cooperation between the new President of the Commission and the European Parliament. We have also heard, in the statement by President Van Rompuy, that the European Council is looking for new ways to use the Treaty frameworks for even closer cooperation with this House. For the first time, we will probably use the articles providing for effective Union programming involving all the institutions. The European Council will be using the provisions on the new strategic guidelines, and I believe this will create new possibilities for cooperation among all the institutions. It will allow us to establish a new framework, in which we can act faster and adopt decisions much more speedily, and which will allow us to tackle what we see as one of the major problems in Europe, namely the “implementation gap”: the fact that we often make decisions but it simply takes us too long to implement them. To conclude, I would like to highlight the importance of all pro-European forces' working together. Why? Because we need to prevent Europe from becoming xenophobic and anti-minority, be the minorities national, religious, sexual, or ethnic. We have already seen several indications of such a trend in sections of this Parliament, and it is therefore very important that we defend fundamental freedoms and the freedoms for which Europeans have been fighting over many decades. Otherwise I fear we could end up in a Europe where we would again have discussions along national lines, emphasising national and, indeed, nationalistic borders. I simply do not think that is what Europeans deserve. What we need is to restore trust in Europe by supporting growth, giving back to young people the chance to get a job and to plan for a bright future. We need to work on ways of making the European Union more competitive and making our economy perform better, and of securing for Europe in that way a position of leadership in the world. The world and globalisation need Europe. They need our values and our respect for social justice, the environment and human rights. That should be the agenda to which all pro-European forces in this House should work during the next five years. Herman Van Rompuy,
Président du Conseil européen
. — Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, j'ai été, comme toujours, très attentif à toutes les interventions. Le débat était cette fois différent des autres fois puisque des échanges ont eu lieu entre vous, et pas uniquement avec la Commission ou le Conseil européen. Nous avons pris, la semaine dernière, des décisions au Conseil européen. Nous serons jugés, à l'avenir, pas sur nos discours, l'un plus poétique que l'autre, l'un plus inspiré que l'autre, certains comportant une envolée verbale plus marquée que d'autres, mais bien sur nos décisions, sur les résultats de notre politique. Nous avons pris certaines décisions lors de ce Conseil européen, le premier Conseil formel après les élections européennes, un Conseil européen spécial en raison de cette célébration très émouvante à Ypres. Premièrement, nous nous sommes accordés sur un “agenda stratégique”, à savoir un programme de priorité pour les années à venir, ce qui constitue une innovation. C'est la première fois que le Conseil européen fait l'effort de tracer les lignes d'un programme pour les années à venir, de fixer certaines priorités et même si ce n'est pas dans le détail, sans se limiter à des généralités. En fait, cette décision a été prise à l'unanimité: les vingt-huit premiers ministres et chefs d'État se sont accordés sur ce programme, à l'unanimité. D'autres décisions ont malheureusement dû être prises à la majorité qualifiée mais sur le contenu – ce qui est le plus important – nous nous sommes accordés. En fait, tous les premiers ministres et présidents autour de la table représentent – même si je n'ai pas fait le compte – plus de soixante ou soixante-dix partis politiques nationaux. Ils parlent donc au nom de beaucoup d'électeurs au niveau national. Ce programme est aussi important pour vous, puisque vous pourrez juger les institutions futures et leurs dirigeants sur la base de ce qui est convenu. Nous essayons de donner un contenu à ces mots, qui sont souvent des mots creux, comme les mots “changement” et “réforme”; tout dépend de quel sens nous donnons aux mots “changement” et “réforme”, sans quoi ce n'est qu'un discours, ce ne sont que des mots creux. Nous avons essayé de remplir les cases vides, de donner un contenu – dans des termes généraux, je l'avoue – à ces notions de “changement” et de “réforme”. Je crois savoir que le président désigné de la Commission européenne aura besoin de vos voix, pour être élu par vous. Ce président approuve, dans les grandes lignes et davantage même, cette approche. Je crois savoir qu'au sein des grandes formations politiques de ce Parlement, il y a une très grande convergence sur les lignes à suivre sur cet “agenda stratégique” pour toutes les institutions européennes. L'effort que nous avons fait pour nous accorder sur cet “agenda” de priorités pour les cinq années à venir est donc important. Deuxièmement, nous avons – bien sûr – proposé M. Jean-Claude Juncker à la présidence de la Commission européenne. Chers collègues, lorsque j'ai assisté à la Conférence des présidents en avril — il y a trois mois, quatre au plus –, j'ai dit à ceux qui dirigeaient alors les groupes que je m'efforcerais de faire deux choses: éviter un clash des institutions et avancer une proposition sur laquelle vous pourriez voter avant l'été. J'ai tenu parole. Oui, j'ai tenu parole. Cela n'a pas été facile. Il n'a pas été facile de réunir cette majorité très large autour du nom du futur président – je l'espère – de la Commission européenne. Je vous demande à nouveau ici de ne pas me juger sur le nombre de phrases et de mots que je prononce au sujet de cette décision. Je vous demande de me juger, moi ainsi que d'autres, sur la décision elle-même, qui est claire. J'espère que votre décision sera aussi claire que la nôtre. Nous nous sommes accordés – et avons pris une décision sur un accord d'association – avec l'Ukraine, la Géorgie et la Moldavie. Nous en avons certes bien discuté ici lors de cette période de session mais, pour ces pays-là, il s'agit d'un moment tout à fait historique: pendant des décennies, pendant des siècles, ils voulaient faire partie de la grande famille européenne. Grâce à cet accord d'association, le lien devient extrêmement concret. En Ukraine, à Kiev, des dizaines de personnes sont mortes en raison du refus de la signature de cet accord d'association. Nous l'avons fait. Oui, nous l'avons signé. J'espère que se dégagera une majorité stable, dans chacun de ces pays, pour ratifier cet accord, de sorte que ce lien étroit entre les vingt-huit États membres, l'Union européenne et la Géorgie, la Moldavie et l'Ukraine soit scellé pour toujours. Nous avons pris là une décision extrêmement importante. Troisièmement, nous nous sommes accordés, après le programme de Stockholm, sur les grandes orientations pour le domaine de la liberté, de la sécurité et de la justice. Les cinq années à venir seront, à cet égard, cruciales. Il se dégage toujours – et je m'en réjouis vivement – une très large majorité, au sein du Parlement européen, pour le projet européen, avec, certes, des nuances, des différences de contenu, mais une majorité particulièrement large se dégage pour le projet européen en tant que tel. Cependant, si nous ne parvenons pas à obtenir des résultats, surtout en termes d'emploi, de prospérité, de niveau de vie, je ne suis pas certain que se dégage une si large majorité d'ici cinq ans. Les cinq années à venir seront donc extrêmement importantes, non seulement pour les citoyens, mais aussi pour le projet européen et pour le fonctionnement des institutions européennes. Nous avons donc une obligation de résultat: une fois de plus, nous ne serons pas jugés sur la qualité – certes élevée – de nos discours, mais bien sur nos résultats. Les cinq années à venir seront aussi extrêmement importantes pour la stabilité et la paix en Europe. Pour la première fois depuis des décennies, elles se trouvent en danger: l'instabilité dans une partie de l'Europe pourrait affecter la stabilité dans une autre partie de l'Europe. Il faut donc tout faire, au cours des jours, des semaines et des mois qui viennent, pour rechercher une solution politique au conflit, en négociant bien sûr. Mais pour négocier, il faut être deux. Pour négocier, il faut être de bonne foi. Pour négocier, il faut tenir ses engagements. Pour négocier, il faut s'engager en faveur d'un résultat. Au besoin, nous devrons prendre les mesures nécessaires pour que cet engagement soit plus concret et plus durable. C'est pourquoi le Conseil européen a déclaré qu'il prendrait les décisions nécessaires, notamment des sanctions, pour que les négociations – et cette solution politique – puissent aboutir. Là encore, les cinq années à venir sont, à cet égard, tout à fait cruciales pour la paix et la stabilité en Europe. Chers collègues – j'en arrive à ma conclusion –, nous disposons d'un programme, défini par le Conseil européen. Le président désigné de la Commission européenne vous soumettra également son programme et en discutera avec vous. Je suis certain que ce programme sera en phase avec l'“agenda stratégique” sur lequel les vingt-huit chefs d'État et de gouvernement se sont accordés. Cependant, par la suite, il conviendra de l'exécuter, car – comme je l'ai dit – nous ne serons pas jugés sur la qualité de nos programmes, sur la qualité de nos discours, mais bien sur la qualité de nos décisions. Lorsque nous nous reverrons la prochaine fois – je m'adresse à vous pour la dernière fois à Strasbourg – à Bruxelles, la toute dernière fois que j'aurai l'occasion d'assister à un débat, je pourrai vous annoncer, sur un chapitre crucial, à savoir celui de l'union énergétique et de la lutte contre le changement climatique, les résultats et les décisions des vingt-huit États membres. Une voie nouvelle sera ainsi tracée pour la politique énergétique et une voie essentielle sera tracée pour la politique en matière de lutte contre le changement climatique. Je conviens que, à partir de cette crise, qui comporte des dimensions géopolitiques, nous devons saisir l'occasion pour faire un bond qualitatif en avant, notamment sur la politique énergétique, mais nous ferons aussi des progrès dans d'autres domaines. Ceci dit, pour ce qui est de la fin de mon mandat, le Conseil d'octobre sera consacré à cette politique énergétique et de lutte contre le changement climatique, et il s'agira du premier chapitre sur lequel nous prendrons des décisions. Les autres chapitres seront à la charge des nouveaux dirigeants des institutions européennes, qui en auront la responsabilité et qui vous en feront rapport lors de séances telles que celles de ce matin. Der Präsident. - Die Aussprache ist geschlossen. Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 162 GO) Indrek Tarand (Verts/ALE),
kirjalikult
. – Sellal, kui Euroopa Ülemkogul keskenduti tervenisti teoreetiliselt tühjale küsimusele, kellest saab Euroopa Komisjoni juht, saabusid 400 Vene Föderatsiooni mereväelast ristlejal “Smolnõi” Prantsusmaa Saint-Nazaire'i sadamasse, et alustada treeninguid kahe Mistral-tüüpi ründelaeva kasutuselevõtuks Vene merejõududes. Sellekohane müügileping sõlmiti pärast 2008. aasta Vene agressiooni Gruusia vastu ja näitab, et Pariisi meelest ei oleks justkui midagi juhtunud, ehkki president Sarkozy tegi tookord isiklikult pingutusi vaherahutingimuste kokkuleppimiseks. Kolm aastat hiljem kirjutas ta alla müügilepingule. President Hollande räägib, et tema lihtsalt täidab lepinguid ja kõik. Talle justkui ei tuleks meelde, et alles paar kuud tagasi okupeeris Venemaa oma iseseisva naabri Ukraina territooriumi, mida nimetatakse Krimmi poolsaareks ja mille pealinna Sevastoopoli nime Prantsuse-Vene relvatehing nii vaimukalt teisele Mistral-tüüpi laevale omistab. Territooriumi, mille kuulumist Ukraina riigile pidi garanteerima teiste suurriikide hulgas ka seesama Prantsusmaa. Kas suuremat silmakirjalikkust saab üldse eksisteerida? Ma olen öelnud, et Euroopa Liit võiks viimaks ometi hakata looma ühist julgeoleku- ja kaitsepoliitikat, mille keskne missioon Atalanta Aafrika Sarve juures vajaks just Prantsuse Mistral-platvorme. Ostkem need Pariisi valitsuse käest ära ja rakendagem neid korralikus Euroopa vaimus, kuid, jumala pärast, ärgem lubagem nende müüki agressiivsele Venemaale, mida juhib autokraatlikult endine KGB ohvitser. Ceterum censeo, Prantsusmaa kahetseb veel kibedalt oma rumalat otsust müüa relvi Venemaale. Miguel Viegas (GUE/NGL),
por escrito.
– As conclusões apresentadas esta manhã pelo Presidente do Conselho representam no essencial a continuação das mesmas políticas que estão na origem da recessão que afeta a Europa em geral e os países do sul em particular. Neste sentido, consideramos que estas conclusões representam um péssimo augúrio pois não se vê nenhuma análise crítica acerca do efeito destas políticas. Em vez de parar para pensar, assistimos hoje a uma glorificação absurda de opções erradas, omitindo-se deliberadamente os seus efeitos e insistindo na sua manutenção mas também no seu reforço. No caso português, a situação chega a ser delirante quando se continua a apostar num défice de 2,5% para 2014, passando por cima do facto de nenhum dos objetivos do ajustamento ter sido cumprido. O défice das administrações públicas no primeiro trimestre foi de 6%. A dívida pública já vai nos 132% do PIB e a última emissão de dívida pública a 10 anos foi realizada com uma taxa de juro de 5,2%. Neste sentido, não nos revemos nestas conclusões e condenamos o seu conteúdo porquanto elas representam uma ingerência intolerável na nossa soberania, impondo medidas que irão agravar ainda mais a situação de Portugal e dos portugueses. Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)
, por escrito.
– Muito se tem falado acerca da farsa em torno da designação do Presidente da Comissão Europeia saída deste Conselho Europeu. Manobras de diversão que escondem o essencial - a aprovação das recomendações do Semestre Europeu aos países, afirmando que os Estados-Membros devem respeitar as recomendações nas suas futuras decisões orçamentais, nas reformas estruturais e nas políticas sociais e de emprego. Recomendações cuja implementação, à semelhança do pacto de agressão (vulgo memorando da troica), será minuciosamente monitorizada pelo Conselho Europeu e pela Comissão Europeia. Recomendações essas que são a expressão clara do desrespeito da UE pelos órgãos de soberania nacional, pelo Tribunal Constitucional, pela Constituição Portuguesa e pela vontade de decisão do povo português. É que o Conselho Europeu afirma que, devido aos recentes chumbos do TC, o Governo poderá ter que vir a subir os impostos, instando Portugal a substituir as medidas de consolidação consideradas inconstitucionais pelo TC por medidas de dimensão e qualidade análogas, o mais rapidamente possível, ingerência inaceitável que o povo português não aceitará. (Die Sitzung wird für einige Augenblicke unterbrochen.) VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ Präsident 6.   Pārskats par Grieķijas prezidentūras paveikto (debates) Der Präsident. - Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgen die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zu der Bilanz des griechischen Ratsvorsitzes (2014/2610(RSP)). Meine Damen und Herren! Wir sind mit der Tagesordnung ungefähr eine Stunde in Verzug. Deshalb bitte ich darum, dass wir zügig weitermachen. Wir werden sicher auch für die Wahl der Quästoren einen anderen Zeitpunkt festlegen müssen. Ich schaue jetzt einmal, wie weit wir mit der Debatte kommen, und dann gebe ich eine präzise Uhrzeit für die Wahl der Quästoren bekannt. Ich begrüße den amtierenden Präsidenten des Europäischen Rates, Herrn Ministerpräsidenten Samaras. Αντώνης Σαμαράς,
Ασκών την Προεδρία του Συμβουλίου
. - Κύριε Πρόεδρε του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου, θέλω πρώτα απ' όλα να σας συγχαρώ για την εκ νέου εκλογή σας, αλλά και για τη συνέπεια, την αγωνιστικότητα και τη δύναμη της πίστης σας στην ενωμένη Ευρώπη. Θέλω επίσης να συγχαρώ τον παρευρισκόμενο κύριο Barroso για την προσήλωσή του στο ευρωπαϊκό ιδεώδες και την τόσο επιτυχημένη παρουσία του ως Προέδρου της Επιτροπής. Οφείλω να πω ότι χαίρομαι ιδιαίτερα που το Ευρωπαϊκό Συμβούλιο, τώρα με τη Συνθήκη της Λισαβόνας και τον νέο τρόπο εκλογής, πρότεινε στην Ευρωβουλή την υποψηφιότητα του Jean-Claude Juncker, ενός αφοσιωμένου Ευρωπαίου εγνωσμένης αξίας, πείρας και ικανότητας. Αγαπητοί φίλοι, Αισθάνομαι ιδιαίτερη συγκίνηση που βρίσκομαι σήμερα εδώ, σε ένα χώρο γνώριμο, που τον νιώθω πραγματικά σαν να είναι το σπίτι μου. Διότι υπήρξα ευρωβουλευτής σε αυτά ακριβώς τα έδρανα που βρίσκεστε εσείς. Ακριβώς πριν δέκα χρόνια. Πάλεψα για τα ίδια ιδανικά, δηλαδή για το κοινό μέλλον των λαών της Ευρώπης. Και μάλιστα, πολλά απ' αυτά που σήμερα θεωρούνται “δεδομένα” για όλους, τότε ήταν αδιανόητα για οποιονδήποτε. Γιατί το Ευρωπαϊκό εγχείρημα είναι ζωντανό! Έχει ελλείψεις, έχει αδυναμίες, προχωράει άνισα. Αλλά προχωράει! Και μάλιστα, πολλές φορές, με θεαματικά άλματα. Κι αυτό μπορεί κανείς να το διαπιστώσει, μόνον αν δει τα πράγματα από κάποια απόσταση. Πράγματι, υπάρχει αλματώδης πρόοδος από τη μια δεκαετία στην άλλη. Μέσα σε μια γενιά έγιναν όσα λίγοι πίστευαν κι ακόμα λιγότεροι περίμεναν μερικές δεκαετίες πριν. Κι ο ρυθμός της ευρωπαϊκής ενοποίησης επιταχύνεται συνεχώς. Με συγκίνηση, λοιπόν, σας καλωσορίζω όλους τους νέους συναδέλφους και εύχομαι καλή επιτυχία στη νέα σταδιοδρομία σας. Πολύ περισσότερο, που σήμερα βρίσκομαι εδώ για να σας παρουσιάσω τα αποτελέσματα της Προεδρίας μας, της Ελληνικής Προεδρίας. I will now switch, if you will allow me, to English. Our priorities for the six-month Presidency were the following: first, to tackle the euro architectural deficiencies as evidenced by the crisis, and mainly to deepen the EMU. So, the conclusion of the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM) regulation, together with the intergovernmental agreement on the single resolution fund (SRF), constitutes a major step towards the completion of the banking union. Our monetary union is now much better equipped to avoid future crises and better prepared to face them if they do happen. Then, on jobs and growth: the approval of the own resources legislative package will ensure timely and steady financing of EU policies. The adoption of legislation in the framework of the Single Market Act I and II has further contributed to improving competitiveness. It facilitates and safeguards the economic activity of our citizens and businesses. I will just mention here the regulation on e-business and e-commerce, the directives on the posting of workers, electronic invoicing in public procurement and the disclosure of non-financial information of businesses – also very important in fighting tax evasion. Further on, agreement was reached on the participation of the Union in the capital increase of the European Investment Fund. This means more liquidity to restore normal lending to the economy, and in particular to the most important part of our economy, which is the SMEs. Important investment files were also concluded while progress was made in the fields of telecommunications and infrastructure. Better funding, more market flexibility, more access to the markets for everyone, more access to liquidity for SMEs, more transparency across our Union. All these are different aspects of two things: more integration and more competitiveness. In other words, better prospects for job creation, employment, growth and prosperity, especially at times when huge unemployment levels threaten the fragile social cohesion in many of our Member States. Thirdly, border and migration management: this presents major challenges not only for the European South, but indeed for the whole of the EU, with far-reaching repercussions on economic growth and social cohesion. Important achievements here were the revision of the list of countries for which a visa was required to enter the EU – allowing the citizens of about 20 non-EU countries to travel to the EU without a visa – and the adoption of the directive on the conditions of entry and stay of third-country nationals in the context of intra-corporate transfer as well as, of course, the new FRONTEX Regulation. A major breakthrough was the adoption of the Post-Stockholm Strategic Guidelines in the area of Freedom, Security and Justice which focus attention on the implementation of the principle of solidarity in the areas of asylum, border and migration management, the linkage between migration and the Union's foreign policy – that is cooperation with third countries and the “more for more principle”, etc. – the development of effective return, readmission and visa policies, and continuous attention to an effective internal security framework. Fourthly, the horizontal theme of the Hellenic Presidency has been to redefine and re-launch EU maritime policies in all their aspects, including security, growth and energy. A key component is the European Maritime Security Strategy. This is the first time that the EU has developed a holistic, cross-sectoral strategy of this kind, which will result in better protecting and promoting security and the economic interests of the EU and its Member States at sea. It defines strategic interests and threats in the global maritime domain. The Strategy promotes EU principles and values, the rule of law, democracy, respect for human rights, energy efficiency and security and a rule-based approach to maritime security, as reflected in the UN International Law of the Sea. At the institutional level, the adoption of the Regulation on the statute and funding of European political parties and foundations is also a qualitative leap for European representative democracy, through truly European political parties. I congratulate Parliament for voting this through. Particular attention was also paid to enlargement, thus renewing relevant EU interest, while confirming the engagement of those countries to fulfill their accession criteria. A week ago, Albania was awarded candidate status, while five months ago accession negotiations started with Serbia. Concerning Turkey, in the framework of the EU-Turkey Association Council, it has been underlined that Turkey's EU path depends on her fulfilling her EU obligations relating to Cyprus. All in all, the Greek Presidency concluded 67 pieces of legislation and advanced another 15 legislative initiatives, where consensus was achieved between the Commission and the Council. This was done in four months, instead of the usual duration of six months, because of the European election. And we did it with a minimal budget of which not more than 40% was finally spent! Now, we are particularly happy that the next Presidency, the Italian Presidency, will take the lead and push all policies and initiatives further. We are very hopeful and optimistic that it will exceed all expectations so that 2014 will be regarded by everybody as a very successful, Mediterranean year; a proud year for every European citizen! In the last three years, my country has been seriously challenged. Europe was also challenged. Some were predicting the so called “Grexit”, the idea that Greece should exit the euro. Some were predicting that the euro itself would not make it either. We proved them wrong. Europe worked. Our Union has problems, but it also has the capacity to solve those problems and go ahead. We proved that our peoples across our Union can work together and construct their common future in times of prosperity, obviously, but also during trying and very difficult moments of crisis. We proved that peoples across our Union can change their countries in making them fitter and more competitive so that they can successfully demand change in our Union, to make it stronger, safer, with more competitive economies and more stable democracies. In the last European elections, the European peoples did not vote against Europe. On the contrary, they voted for more Europe and better Europe! I believe we have already started delivering although we have still a long way to go. But we have to do more than that. We have to bring our Union closer to the hearts of the Europeans. To prove that our Union is not a series of bureaucratic procedures nobody can follow, and that it is mainly about common prospects and common ideals that everybody shares and can understand right away. Just a hundred years ago, a devastating war started here. It was not the only one in the years to come; it was dreadful, but not the worst one, either. Our peoples suffered again and again – one tragedy after another for decades. Now Europe is the most united we have ever had. The most democratic we have ever had. The most prosperous and most stable we have ever had in centuries. Yet our people need to be inspired by our Union and by its prospects. They need to feel our Union closer to their hearts. I believe this is your first and foremost priority, here, in the European Parliament: to bring our Union closer to the hearts of our peoples! Because you, in our European Parliament, are indeed the very heart of our Union. José Manuel Barroso,
President of the Commission
. - Mr President, the end of the Hellenic Presidency marks the end of one parliamentary term and the beginning of a new one so it took place in a very specific situation. Also, these last months have coincided with the beginning of the exit from the deep crisis in the European Union, perhaps the most difficult we have had since the creation of the European Community in the 1950s. We have now started on the road to recovery, but there is still a long way to go. I think it is important that, precisely at this moment, a country like Greece, one of those most affected by the crisis, has been able – showing the European commitment of its leadership – not only to respond to the challenges at home but also to contribute constructively to our European agenda. I would like to thank personally Prime Minister Samaras for the way in which he and his competent and dedicated team have carried out their duties and responsibilities, leading the Council during this very specific and challenging time. Under his skilful captaincy, the Hellenic Presidency has worked extremely hard – across many issues – to put in place what was necessary and to bring important decisions to fruition, against extremely tight deadlines because of the European Parliament elections. Prime Minister Samaras has already mentioned many of these issues so I will not list them again. I would prefer to concentrate my attention on the big achievements in relation to the economic situation. The reality is that economic confidence has improved and is improving in Europe. Growth across the European Union is predicted at 1.6% this year, rising to 2% by 2015. Investment is rebounding. Our collective excessive deficits are now under the 3% mark for the first time since the beginning of the crisis. Six more Member States have now exited the excessive deficit procedure, bringing the total number down to 11, fewer than half of the 24 countries which were in this position in 2011. I believe this is progress; and it shows that the Stability and Growth Pact is working. During the last months, and following Ireland's successful exit from the programme and the successful implementation of the programme in Spain for the banks, Portugal too has exited its financial assistance programme with success. The situation in Greece and Cyprus has stabilised, with real signs of improvement, particularly in terms of the correction of very important imbalances. We all know this process has been painful. I would say that Prime Minister Samaras and his government know it better than anybody. However, after these difficult and necessary reforms, Greece has now seen a further reduction in its deficit; it has projected growth; it has corrected historic external imbalances; and, indeed, it is recovering its competitiveness. Despite the many prophets of doom, Greece has remained an integral, loyal, member of the euro area. I remember that, not so long ago, I personally had to discuss these matters not only with many in the European Union, but also outside the Union with those predicting a Greek exit and those predicting the implosion of the euro and even the disintegration of the European Union. It would be helpful if they could consider that they were wrong. Nobody denies that the recovery is still fragile and uneven. Growth is modest. Unemployment, particularly youth unemployment, is, the biggest challenge facing us. We cannot afford a jobless recovery or a lost generation. That is why we need to speed up the work that is now on the table of the Council and Parliament. In fact, it is now possible to make more progress in that direction because very important achievements have been realised during these last months. Some of these developments were considered unthinkable a few years ago. If you had asked analysts in Europe and outside Europe, just two or three years ago, whether it would be possible to have a Banking Union and to have European Central Bank competence over national banks, they would have said it was not realistic. I remember, when the Commission proposed the Banking Union in 2012, that when I used the words “banking union” many people said this was not realistic. They did not even accept the words. They said: “OK, something about financial stability, but do not talk about banking union” – and now we have a banking union. We now have agreement on both the Single Supervisory Mechanism and the Single Resolution Mechanism and Fund. This was a crucial sign of our commitment. It was a very important sign to the markets, and to our citizens, that Economic and Monetary Union is here to stay and is going to be completed. Alongside other important pieces of financial markets regulation, this will strengthen confidence and stability in the financial markets, and it will help to restore lending to the economy. Let us be honest: without stability any prospect of growth is impossible. If this work of stability had not been done we could not now consider, as we are considering, the ways to foster growth at European level. Another important issue is the European Semester. It is already in its fourth edition, it has now reached cruising speed. It has taken us further down the road of economic coordination, which is also a prerequisite given the high level of interdependence of our economies. On the country-specific recommendations agreed at the European Council last week, I want to underline that there was unanimous agreement, because sometimes I have the impression that those who agree at the European Council, or at Council level, then forget what they have agreed and say it is the others who have agreed. I repeat: the endorsement of the country-specific recommendations was unanimous in the Member States, so it combines all the governments, left, right, north and south. This exercise is now making real progress. We are now in a phase of moving Member States from crisis mode to a more forward-looking, reform-oriented perspective. The European Semester, too, was unimaginable a few years ago. If, some years ago, we had asked whether the Commission would one day have the power to look at the national budgets before they are adopted, people would have said it was impossible – and now it is not only possible, it is an obligation. Why? Because the crisis has highlighted how interdependent we are. The European Semester, unimaginable a few years ago, has become an established focal point in the European calendar and economic governance. We now have in place a genuine debate about national economic policy, about what is happening in each of the Member States, and I want to congratulate this House, the Member States and the national parliaments, for the constructive role they have played, against very tight deadlines, in securing agreement on the country-specific recommendations and completing this semester of economic governance. That said – and I want also to highlight this – the idea being popularised in some countries that these are impositions from Brussels, or from the Commission, is completely false. That is not at all the way it works. The Commission has the role of making proposals and is the initiator of the process. It is also the objective referee. The role of the Commission is to check whether recommendations have been implemented or not at national level. But the decisions, I repeat, have been taken by all the governments, by the finance ministers and, ultimately, by the prime ministers of all our countries. So, please, it is time to avoid these discussions putting the blame on Brussels for decisions that are taken by the governments themselves. I hope they will have the courage to stand by decisions they take collectively. We now need to focus specifically on implementation and there is no room for complacency because a lot of reforms are needed. We need to do more, for example, regarding employment, the Youth Guarantee, the fight against poverty and social exclusion, investment, taxation and, overall, on progress in terms of our competitiveness. These two developments – the European Semester process and the completion of the Banking Union – were among the most important during the last six months. However, there are many other areas where we need to speed up our work, and I believe that the Italian Presidency has a lot of work to do here in terms of more focused action regarding the fight against youth unemployment and making better use of our EUR 1 trillion budget for the next seven years. We hear talk of the “new Marshall Plan for Europe”, but what we have is much more than the Marshall Plan. We have a budget for the next seven years which, if properly managed, can help us very much in terms of the investment needs which some of our countries do not themselves have a sufficient margin to meet. Efficiency is another essential consideration, and that it why I was very happy with the results of the last European Council in relation to REFIT, the programme for regulatory fitness at European level. During the last six months, through our REFIT programme, we have further lightened the load of legislation that no longer serves any useful purpose. We have withdrawn 53 more proposals, making a total of 293 withdrawn since 2006. It is interesting that these figures never appear publicly. In the conventional wisdom today there is still talk of bureaucracy from Brussels. Let me tell you that if all the governments made the same effort that we are making at European level to reduce the administrative burden, we could have a much better environment for our citizens and for our SMEs. Let us not forget that 80% of the European budget is administered by Member States themselves, and one-third of the administrative burden linked to EU legislation comes from national implementation. Member States can and must play their role too, creating a more growth-friendly environment by cutting red tape, and this is a collective responsibility of the Commission, of this Parliament and also of the Council. We have discussed other important issues during this semester. I will not repeat what has been said already in relation to the important area of justice, freedom and security, and especially the issue of migration. Finally, let me say a word about enlargement because this has been a period in which we commemorated 10 years since the big enlargement of 2004. Let us not forget that at the beginning of 2004 — when, by the way, my first Commission took office – there were only 15 Member States. Now there are 28. We have almost doubled the membership. It is one of the greatest achievements ever, in terms of European history, to have this reunited continent. That is another reason why 2014 should be remembered: it is 25 years since the Iron Curtain came down, 70 years after D Day, 100 years since the First World War, and also, in May, we celebrated 10 years of the reunification of Europe. A Union of 15 has been transformed into one of 28 and is open for the future, bringing together rich and less rich, big and small, old and new, central and peripheral, north, south, east and west. Those Member States have grown stronger economically, politically and democratically. Latvia, which will hold the Presidency from the start of 2015, successfully joined the euro area at the start of the year. Lithuania – a country whose wealth has increased from 35% of the EU GDP average in 1995 to 78% – will become the 19th member of the euro area at the start of 2015. So, dear Members of Parliament, how can people still be negative about the enlargement and reunification of Europe? How can they fail to understand the great convergence machine, the great creator of opportunities that the European Union has been: not only working for those new Member States but also projecting stability and thus avoiding many Ukraines around us. For Ukraine illustrates what would have happened if we had not had enlargement at the right time. I firmly believe that Europe should remain open, particularly to the Western Balkans. It would be a complete mistake for Europe to suggest at this stage, because of current difficulties, the closure of our borders. We have to manage some specific challenges, yes: freedom of movement is a sacred principle. We should combat any kind of misuse or abuse of the rights of freedom of movement, but it would be a real mistake for Europe to close its borders. I have seen just recently, visiting Serbia and Albania, the progress that those countries, along with others, are making, and it would irresponsible on our part not to sustain the hope for those countries, if they meet the necessary conditions democratically and economically, of joining the European Union when they are ready. This has been a very important Presidency in very difficult times. Prime Minister Samaras and his team have demonstrated their commitment, capacity and experience – indeed, it was the fifth Hellenic Presidency – as well as their strong national traditions. I believe that those traditions, which were apparent in the course of this Presidency, can best be described by three Greek words that underline our European approach as we face the challenge of the 21st century. Logos implies pressing ahead with what is rational and right for Europe; pathos means listening to all sides and understanding the needs of our citizens, especially those who are suffering the most; and ethos, implies preserving our European values of freedom, justice, and solidarity. I thank the Greek Presidency and I thank you for your attention. Der Präsident. - Meine Damen und Herren! Bevor ich jetzt die Aussprache eröffne, teile ich Ihnen Folgendes mit: Wir sind mit unserer Tagesordnung ungefähr 35 bis 40 Minuten in Verzug. Deshalb setze ich jetzt die Wahl der Quästoren nicht für 12.30 Uhr, sondern für 13.00 Uhr an. Ich wäre dankbar, wenn das auf den Bildschirmen angezeigt werden könnte. Für all diejenigen, die jetzt zuhören, noch einmal: Die Wahl der Quästoren findet nicht wie angekündigt um 12.30 Uhr, sondern um 13.00 Uhr statt. Sollten wir mit der Debatte früher fertig sein, ziehen wir es vor. Aber jetzt zunächst einmal 13.00 Uhr. Wir kommen jetzt zur Aussprache. Μανώλης Κεφαλογιάννης,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας PPE
. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η Ευρώπη, από την ίδρυσή της, κάνει πάντα δυο βήματα μπροστά και ένα πίσω. Αλλά υπάρχει πάντα ένα βήμα μπροστά για να προχωρούμε στην Ευρώπη της ανάπτυξης, της αλληλεγγύης, στην Ευρώπη της ελευθερίας και της δημοκρατίας. Προς αυτήν την κατεύθυνση κινήθηκε, παρά τις αντίξοες συνθήκες σε Ελλάδα και Ευρώπη, η Ελληνική Προεδρία, για την εμβάθυνση της οικονομικής και νομισματικής ενοποίησης με την υιοθέτηση του Ενιαίου Μηχανισμού Εξυγίανσης, του Ενιαίου Ταμείου Εξυγίανσης, με την προώθηση της ανάπτυξης και της απασχόλησης, υιοθετώντας τις οδηγίες για την ηλεκτρονική τιμολόγηση των δημοσίων προμηθειών, για το e-banking, για το e-commerce, για την πάταξη της φοροδιαφυγής· με την προώθηση του τομέα της μετανάστευσης, την υιοθέτηση των οδηγιών για την ενδοεπιχειρησιακή μετακίνηση προς τρίτες χώρες, την υιοθέτηση του κανονισμού για την Frontex. Είναι αλήθεια αυτό που είπε ο Πρωθυπουργός ότι μόνο σε τέσσερις μήνες η Ελληνική Προεδρία ολοκλήρωσε 67 νομοθετικά κείμενα, πέτυχε συναίνεση με το Συμβούλιο σε 15 νομοθετικά άλλα κείμενα για το ξέπλυμα του μαύρου χρήματος, για την τρομοκρατία, για την Europol, για την προστασία των παιδιών σε ποινικές διαδικασίες. Η Ελληνική Προεδρία προχώρησε μπροστά τα πράγματα με την προώθηση πολιτικών για την αλληλεγγύη, με την υιοθέτηση του κανονισμού για το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Αλληλεγγύης για τις φυσικές καταστροφές, με τις προσπάθειες για την ολοκλήρωση των φακέλων για τη διεύρυνση σε Αλβανία, Μαυροβούνιο και Σερβία, με την προώθηση της διαφάνειας, με τη δημοσιοποίηση των μη χρηματοοικονομικών πληροφοριών για τις επιχειρήσεις. Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η Ιταλική Προεδρία παίρνει τώρα τη σκυτάλη. Ευχόμαστε κάθε επιτυχία στην Ιταλική Προεδρία, συγχαίρουμε την Ελληνική Προεδρία που πήγε μπροστά τα πράγματα για την Ευρώπη γιατί η λύση στην Ευρώπη είναι η διεύρυνση και η εμβάθυνση των δημοκρατικών θεσμών, όχι ο λαϊκισμός, όχι ο ευρωσκεπτικισμός. Εύα Καϊλή,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας S&D
. – Αγαπητέ Πρόεδρε και Πρωθυπουργέ της Ελλάδας, η παράταξή μου συμμετέχει στην Ελλάδα στην κυβερνητική συνεργασία η οποία, μέσω μιας ομολογουμένως επιτυχημένης Προεδρίας, όντως έθεσε ως προτεραιότητες τη στήριξη των νέων, των ανέργων, την ανάπτυξη αλλά και την ενίσχυση της τραπεζικής ένωσης, όπως είπε και ο κύριος Barroso, που θα αντιμετωπίζει ισότιμα όλες τις χώρες μέλη. Πήραμε και τα μηνύματα των ευρωεκλογών. Οι Έλληνες λοιπόν ζήτησαν ευρύτερες πολιτικές συμμαχίες αλλά και περισσότερη Ευρώπη. Και αυτό, παρά τις λανθασμένες επιλογές του Ευρωπαϊκού Συμβουλίου και τα στρατηγικά λάθη για σκληρή λιτότητα που έφερε ανάμεσά μας και ευρωσκεπτικιστές αλλά και ακροδεξιούς. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση όφειλε να επιλέξει ή έστω να εφεύρει έναν άλλο δρόμο για να μπορούμε να μιλάμε για την επιτυχία της Ευρώπης της αλληλεγγύης, καθώς η Ελλάδα ό,τι πέτυχε το πέτυχε με σκληρές θυσίες των Ελλήνων. Και αυτό θα πρέπει να προβληματίσει όλους μας καθώς βρεθήκαμε απροετοίμαστοι να προστατεύσουμε τους πιο αδύναμους Ευρωπαίους πολίτες. Ας ελπίσουμε πως η Ιταλική Προεδρία, που ακολουθεί την Ελληνική, θα συνεχίσει την προσπάθειά μας για την εύρεση ενός άλλου δρόμου με ευαισθησία αλλά και με ευελιξία στην εφαρμογή του συμφώνου καθώς και με την επαναφορά των κόκκινων γραμμών όπου αυτές παραβιάστηκαν. Γιατί δεν είναι πια αυτονόητα όσα θεωρούσαμε ότι είναι. Καλή επιτυχία στην Ιταλική Προεδρία! Νότης Μαριάς,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας ECR
. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, ως αντιπρόεδρος της ECR, της κατ' εξοχήν αντιφεντεραλιστικής πολιτικής ομάδας στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο, θα ήθελα να επισημάνω ότι η Ελληνική Προεδρία είναι ένα μνημείο αποτυχίας. Δεν πρόκειται βέβαια για κανένα “success story”, όπως δεν είναι “success story” η πολιτική που έχει ακολουθήσει στην πατρίδα μας την Ελλάδα, μια μνημονιακή πολιτική η οποία έχει διαλύσει τη χώρα. Από τον Μάιο του 2010 μέχρι σήμερα, η Ελλάδα έχει πάρει 214 δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ ως δάνεια, ένα τεράστιο ποσό πάνω από το 120% του ΑΕΠ. Και θα φανταζόταν κανείς ότι με αυτό το ποσό θα μπορούσε να είχε αναπτυχθεί η ελληνική οικονομία, να είχε απογειωθεί. Ποια είναι όμως η πραγματικότητα; Ενάμισι εκατομμύριο άνεργοι· χιλιάδες μαγαζιά κλειστά· έξι χιλιάδες αυτοκτονίες· 40% μείωση των μισθών και των συντάξεων· 40% του ελληνικού πληθυσμού κάτω από τα όρια της φτώχειας. Το δημόσιο χρέος ανέρχεται πλέον στο 175% του ΑΕΠ· δημοσιονομικό έλλειμμα 11,5%· PSI με το οποίο διαλύθηκαν τα ασφαλιστικά ταμεία· 50 δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ για να σωθούν οι Έλληνες ολιγάρχες οι οποίοι ήταν οι μεγαλομέτοχοι των τραπεζών. Η Ελλάδα λοιπόν μετατράπηκε σε κοινωνικό νεκροταφείο γιατί ο κύριος Σαμαράς ακολούθησε την πολιτική της Τρόικας. Χάσατε την ευκαιρία, κύριε Σαμαρά, να θέσετε όλα εκείνα τα θέματα που για δεκαετίες απασχολούν την Ελλάδα και η διεκδίκησή τους, εκτός από ιστορική επιταγή, είναι και άμεσης ζωτικής σημασίας για την οικονομική κατάσταση της πατρίδας μας. Χάσατε την ευκαιρία να ταυτιστείτε μαζί με το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο ενάντια στην Τρόικα, ενώ εσείς στηρίξατε την Τρόικα. Χάσατε την ευκαιρία να σταματήσει η πολιτική της λιτότητας, την οποία εσείς στηρίξατε ως κλασικά μερκελική πολιτική. Χάσατε την ευκαιρία να ανακαλέσετε στην τάξη την Επιτροπή, η οποία υπηρετεί τους δανειστές. Χάσατε την ευκαιρία να καλέσετε τον κύριο Draghi και την παρέα του να μην κερδοσκοπεί σε βάρος του ελληνικού λαού, ο οποίος πληρώνει στο 100% τα ομόλογα που αγόρασε η Κεντρική Τράπεζα με έκπτωση τουλάχιστον 40%. Μνημείο λοιπόν αποτυχίας η πολιτική σας στην Ελλάδα αλλά και σε επίπεδο Προεδρίας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. (Χειροκροτήματα) Σοφία Σακοράφα,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας GUE/NGL
. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, δυστυχώς η Συνθήκη της Λισαβόνας αποδυνάμωσε τον ρόλο της εκ περιτροπής Προεδρίας ώστε τελικά η προεδρεύουσα χώρα να καλείται να υλοποιήσει προειλημμένες αποφάσεις από τεχνοκράτες και εξωκοινοβουλευτικούς παράγοντες που μετέχουν στα διακυβερνητικά όργανα. Για ποιόν λοιπόν είναι επιτυχημένη ή αποτυχημένη μια Προεδρία; Τα ευρωπαϊκά διευθυντήρια μιλάνε για εντυπωσιακή δουλειά, εξαιρετικά αποτελέσματα και συνετή, σπαρτιατική σχεδόν, οικονομική διαχείριση, μιλάνε μάλιστα γι' αυτόν που στην αρχή της ανάληψης της Προεδρίας τον ανέφεραν σαν τον πλέον αδύναμο κρίκο. Αυτό για μας σημαίνει ότι η Ελληνική Προεδρία ακολούθησε πιστά τη νεοφιλελεύθερη πολιτική άκρατης λιτότητας χωρίς να θέσει το παραμικρό ανάχωμα, παρά τα τρανταχτά επιχειρήματα που είχε, δεδομένης της πρωτοφανούς ανθρωπιστικής κρίσης που βιώνει η χώρα και μάλιστα στην καρδιά της Ευρώπης. Και αυτό είναι απειλή για όλους τους λαούς της Ευρώπης, καθώς η Ελλάδα είναι πιλότος για όλα όσα θέλουν να εφαρμόσουν. Και θα αναφερθώ σε μερικά χαρακτηριστικά παραδείγματα: κατάργηση των συλλογικών διαπραγματεύσεων, πλήρης απελευθέρωση των απολύσεων, παντελής απουσία του κράτους από δαπάνες για υγεία, συντάξεις, κοινωνικές παροχές και πρόνοια· πλήρης απελευθέρωση της ασύδοτης δράσης των μεγάλων μονοπωλίων, ξεπούλημα του δημόσιου πλούτου στο όνομα της αποπληρωμής ενός μεγάλου χρέους, ενός χρέους που ποτέ δεν ελέγχθηκε και το οποίο φορτώθηκε ο ελληνικός λαός. Σε θέματα δε κυρίαρχης πολιτικής, όπως η τραπεζική ένωση, η δημοσιονομική εξυγίανση, οι μηχανισμοί οικονομικής διακυβέρνησης και άλλα, η απουσία στα κέντρα λήψης αποφάσεων ήταν κραυγαλέα. Θα κλείσω με δύο άκρως σημαντικές εξελίξεις κατά τη διάρκεια της Ελληνικής Προεδρίας που καταδεικνύουν ότι η πολιτική της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης αποφασίζεται ερήμην των κυβερνήσεων των κρατών μελών, των ευρωπαϊκών θεσμών αλλά και του ίδιου του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου. Και αυτό είναι κυρίαρχο θέμα δημοκρατίας και μας αφορά όλους. Αναφέρομαι στην ουκρανική κρίση και στο ζήτημα των χημικών της Συρίας. Και στις δύο περιπτώσεις τα οικονομικά συμφέροντα ήταν αυτά που καθόρισαν σε απόλυτο βαθμό την πολιτική συμπεριφορά των κυβερνήσεων που στηρίζουν. Για μας, μια τέτοια επιτυχημένη Προεδρία αποδείχθηκε καταστροφική για τον ελληνικό λαό, συνιστά απειλή για τους λαούς της Ευρώπης και είναι επικίνδυνη για το μέλλον της ίδιας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Δεσμευόμαστε από κοινού με τους Ιταλούς συναδέλφους μας να αγωνιστούμε ώστε η Ιταλική Προεδρία να μην έχει τα ίδια επιτυχή αποτελέσματα. (Χειροκροτήματα) Sven Giegold,
im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion
. – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Herr Samaras! Ich muss Sie enttäuschen, ich bin kein Grieche. Ich fühle mich schon ganz fremd in dieser Diskussion hier. Ich möchte trotzdem kurz ein paar Dinge deutlich machen bezüglich des letzten halben Jahres unter der griechischen Ratspräsidentschaft. Erst einmal vielen Dank für den Abschluss einer ganzen Reihe von Dossiers, die sehr wichtig sind für die Stabilität der Finanzmärkte, natürlich zu allererst der Abschluss der Bankenunion. Die Bankenunion ist der größte Schritt zur Stabilisierung des Finanzsystems in Europa, und in dieser Hinsicht haben wir wirklich für Europa einen großen Schritt nach vorne getan. Jetzt, wo die EU-Kommission in den Details daran arbeitet, betrachte ich allerdings mit großer Sorge, dass in Zukunft die Rettungsfonds überproportional von den kleinen Banken finanziert werden sollen und Investmentbanken davon weitgehend verschont werden sollen. Bedauerlich ist außerdem, dass die griechische Ratspräsidentschaft sich auf die Fahnen geschrieben hatte, die Euro-Zone mit einer ganzen Reihe von Maßnahmen zu vertiefen. Jenseits der Bankenunion ist aus den großen Plänen – das haben wir hier alles diskutiert: Blueprint der Kommission, Präsidentschaftspapier der vier Präsidenten – wenig geworden. Das Ergebnis war eine Politik, die sich einseitig an der Austerität orientierte, und im Bereich des aggressiven Steuerwettbewerbs ist leider nichts passiert. Wir haben zu wenig Investitionen, eine zu hohe Arbeitslosigkeit und einen Mangel an gerechter Finanzierung unseres öffentlichen Gemeinwesens, weshalb wir jetzt wieder über neue Schulden diskutieren. Hinsichtlich der unfairen Finanzierung, der Steuerflucht und des Steuerwettbewerbs hat die Ratspräsidentschaft wenig auf die Reihe gebracht, und ich hoffe, dass das im nächsten halben Jahr anders wird. Γεώργιος Επιτήδειος (NI). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, πριν από λίγο ο κύριος Barroso μίλησε και είπε ότι τώρα η Ευρώπη είναι περισσότερο ενωμένη και περισσότερο δημοκρατική. Όλοι γνωρίζετε ότι η αρχαία Ελλάδα υπήρξε το λίκνο της δημοκρατίας. Εκείνο που ίσως πολλοί από εσάς δεν γνωρίζετε είναι ότι στη σύγχρονη Ελλάδα, την ώρα που ο ελληνικός λαός υφίσταται τις συνέπειες της εφαρμογής των μνημονίων της Τρόικας, δηλαδή οικονομική εξαθλίωση, πείνα, φτώχεια, ανεργία, αβάσταχτη φορολογία και αυτοκτονίες πολιτών, μια ολιγαρχική συγκυβέρνηση των κυρίων Σαμαρά και Βενιζέλου, των επικεφαλής δηλαδή του δευτέρου και τετάρτου σε εκλογική δύναμη πολιτικών κομμάτων, όπως απέδειξαν οι πρόσφατες ευρωεκλογές, έχει καταργήσει τη διάκριση των εξουσιών η οποία είναι βασική αρχή της δημοκρατίας. Χειραγωγώντας τη δικαιοσύνη και παρεμβαίνοντας στο έργο της έχει καταστρατηγήσει θεμελιώδεις αρχές του Συντάγματος της χώρας μας. Συγκεκριμένα, προκειμένου να εξουδετερώσει τον ουσιαστικό και μοναδικό πολιτικό της αντίπαλο, το Κόμμα της Χρυσής Αυγής, την τρίτη πολιτική δύναμη της χώρας, επειδή δεν έχει πολιτικά επιχειρήματα για να το αντιμετωπίσει, φυλάκισε τον αρχηγό του και έξι από τους βουλευτές χωρίς να αποδεικνύονται οι εναντίον τους κατηγορίες. Σε όσους δεν έχει φυλακίσει απαγορεύει να συμμετέχουν στις εκδηλώσεις του κόμματος. Η κατάσταση αυτή είναι απαράδεκτη διότι προσβάλλει τις αρχές της δημοκρατίας και της δικαιοσύνης. Για τον λόγο αυτό, ο κύριος Σαμαράς όφειλε, παράλληλα με τον απολογισμό των πεπραγμένων της Ελληνικής Προεδρίας, να απολογηθεί ενώπιόν σας για την αντιδημοκρατική συμπεριφορά της κυβέρνησής του. Ζητούμε από όλον τον πολιτικό δημοκρατικό κόσμο της Ευρώπης να καταδικάσει τις παράνομες πρακτικές της Ελληνικής κυβέρνησης. Επιδίωξή μας είναι να σταματήσει η παράνομη πολιτική δίωξη και να αποφυλακιστούν άμεσα ο αρχηγός και οι βουλευτές του κόμματός μας. (Ο Πρόεδρος διακόπτει τον ομιλητή) Dubravka Šuica (PPE). - Gospodine predsjedniče, vidim kako se ovdje uglavnom javljaju s grčkog jezičnog područja kolege i raspravljaju o internim grčkim problemima. Ja želim zahvaliti gospodinu Samarasu i grčkom predsjedništvu na naporima, koje je usprkos internim problemima koje Grčka ima trenutno uspijevalo se baviti sa općim europskim problemima i sa svim onim vrijednostima za koje se svi zajedno zalažemo. Zato zahvaljujem gospodine Samaras. Javila sam se na početku vašeg predsjedavanja i bilo mi je drago što ste stavili akcent na pomorsku politiku obzirom da dolazim iz Hrvatske, iz vaše bliske regije. Također niste spomenuli u vašem uvodu osnivanje Jadransko-jonske makroregije. Bilo bi mi drago da nastavimo raditi na tome zajedno. Veselim se da će talijansko predsjedavanje, obzirom da smo susjedi, nastaviti raditi na tom projektu, a što se tiče svih ostalih postignuća koja ste spomenuli pozdravljam i bankovnu uniju i zajedničko tržište i sve ono što ste napravili u gospodarskom smislu. Međutim, ipak treba napomenuti da se nezaposlenost mladih i uopće nezaposlenost nije smanjila i da to ostaje trajni problem i slažem se s predsjednikom Barrosom koji je rekao da treba nastaviti na tome raditi jer Europa sada ima niz instrumenata koje može koristiti, koji prije nisu postojali i ja vjerujem da ćemo zajednički nastaviti raditi na istom problemu sa talijanskim predsjedništvom. Μιλτιάδης Κύρκος (S&D). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Πρωθυπουργέ, επιτυχημένη ή διαχειριστική η πέμπτη Ελληνική Προεδρία; Από τη μια πλευρά, η Προεδρία συνέχισε όλα τα ζητήματα της κοινοτικής νομοθεσίας που ήταν σε εξέλιξη. Σε μερικά δε από αυτά επήλθε συμφωνία. Σε αυτά συμπεριλαμβάνεται η πολιτική συμφωνία για τον Ενιαίο Μηχανισμό Εξυγίανσης και το Ταμείο του και, όσον αφορά τη θαλάσσια πολιτική, η συμπερίληψη της αναφοράς για τον σεβασμό στο δίκαιο της θάλασσας. Από την άλλη πλευρά όμως, η Προεδρία δεν ανέλαβε τις απαραίτητες πρωτοβουλίες σε θέματα που είχε θέσει η ίδια ως προτεραιότητες, όπως στο θέμα της ανεργίας των νέων, που τείνει να εξελιχθεί σε δομικό στοιχείο των κοινωνιών σε κρίση, και στο μεταναστευτικό ζήτημα, όπου περισσότερη αλλαγή στην πράξη είναι απαραίτητη εκ μέρους της Ένωσης. Σας προτείνω, κύριε Πρωθυπουργέ, να συνεργαστείτε στενά με την επερχόμενη Ιταλική Προεδρία για την ουσιαστική αντιμετώπιση του κοινού προβλήματος. Και ενώ δεν είδαμε συγκεκριμένες προτάσεις σε καυτά ζητήματα, η Προεδρία προώθησε το αμφιλεγόμενο ζήτημα των γενετικά τροποποιημένων οργανισμών παρέχοντας περισσότερα δικαιώματα στις πολυεθνικές εταιρίες. Ακόμη απορούμε γιατί. Εντελώς απούσα ήταν η Προεδρία στο πρόβλημα της Ουκρανίας, ενώ τα άλλα θεσμικά όργανα βρίσκονταν επί τόπου. Τέλος από μια χώρα που λειτούργησε ως πειραματόζωο για την αντιμετώπιση της τεράστιας κρίσης, θα περίμενε κανείς να αναληφθούν πρωτοβουλίες ώστε να ενισχυθεί η κοινοτική μέθοδος και η δημοκρατία στη σχέση Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής και κρατών μελών. Δυστυχώς δεν είδαμε κάτι τέτοιο. Η Ελληνική Προεδρία προσπάθησε με σοβαρότητα, όμως δεν άγγιξε σημαντικότατους στόχους που η ίδια είχε θέσει, ίσως γιατί επικεντρώθηκε στην πιο γραφειοκρατική - αν και αναγκαία - δουλειά. VORSITZ: RAINER WIELAND Vizepräsident Κωνσταντίνος Παπαδάκης (NI). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η Τρόικα εκπλήρωσε την αντιλαϊκή αποστολή που είχε αναλάβει, προώθησε περαιτέρω την αντιλαϊκή πολιτική της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης καταφέρνοντας νέα πλήγματα στα δικαιώματα των εργαζομένων στην Ελλάδα και σε όλα τα κράτη μέλη της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Ενίσχυσε το μεγάλο κεφάλαιο στα πλαίσια της νέας οικονομικής διακυβέρνησης και της λεγόμενης τραπεζικής ένωσης στρεφόμενη κατά των λαών. Η συγκυβέρνηση της Νέας Δημοκρατίας και του ΠΑΣΟΚ ανέλαβε δραστήριο ρόλο για λογαριασμό της ελληνικής αστικής τάξης στην προώθηση της ιμπεριαλιστικής στρατηγικής και τον σχεδιασμό της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Πρωτοστάτησε στην ανοιχτή ιμπεριαλιστική επέμβαση Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, ΗΠΑ και ΝΑΤΟ στην Ουκρανία, στη στήριξη της κυβέρνησης των φασιστικών δυνάμεων εκεί, διέθεσε το ευρωενωσιακό στρατηγείο στην Ελλάδα για τη διεύθυνση της ιμπεριαλιστικής στρατιωτικής επέμβασης της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης στην Κεντροαφρικανική Δημοκρατία, προώθησε τη στρατηγική θαλάσσιας ασφάλειας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης για τη συγκρότηση ναυτικής πολεμικής δύναμης πυρός της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης ενάντια στους λαούς. Απέναντι σ' αυτήν την ενιαία επίθεση, ενιαία πρέπει να είναι και η πάλη των λαών. Το Κομμουνιστικό Κόμμα της Ελλάδας θα παλέψει για να δυναμώσει ο αγώνας ενάντια στα αντιλαϊκά μέτρα, να οργανωθεί η λαϊκή αντεπίθεση για την ανατροπή της εξουσίας των μονοπωλίων .. (Ο Πρόεδρος διακόπτει τον ομιλητή) Μανώλης Κεφαλογιάννης (PPE). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, τρεις παρατηρήσεις: πρώτον, θέλω να υπενθυμίσω στους συναδέλφους, και ιδιαίτερα τους συναδέλφους από την Ελλάδα, ότι βρισκόμαστε στο Στρασβούργο, δεν βρισκόμαστε στην Αθήνα. Μπορούμε να διοργανώσουμε μια ημερίδα για να συζητήσουμε τα θέματα του εσωτερικού της Ελλάδας (χειροκροτήματα). Παρατήρηση δεύτερη: το πρώτο σύνθημα που είχε το Ευρωπαϊκό Λαϊκό Κόμμα στις ευρωεκλογές ήταν πολύ σωστά η μάχη εναντίον του λαϊκισμού. Αυτή τη μάχη θα τη δώσουμε στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο, θα τη δώσουμε ενάντια στους λαϊκιστές και θα προχωρήσουμε τις ιδέες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, αυτές που οδηγούν στην ευρωπαϊκή της ολοκλήρωση. Παρατήρηση τρίτη: η λύση στην Ευρώπη είναι περισσότερη Ευρώπη, είναι καλύτερη Ευρώπη, είναι διεύρυνση και εμβάθυνση των δημοκρατικών θεσμών. Και αυτός είναι ο στόχος μας. Και μια παρατήρηση που αφορά την κρίση: αν η Ευρώπη βίωσε την κρίση τόσο δραματικά είναι γιατί δεν είχε τα εργαλεία. Αν συγκρίνουμε την Ευρώπη με τις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες, οι Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες διαχειρίζονται το 6% του Ακαθάριστου Εθνικού τους Προϊόντος σε ομοσπονδιακό επίπεδο, ενώ εμείς το 1%· οι Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες έχουν τη δυνατότητα να βγάζουν ομόλογα, εμείς δεν μπορούμε· και στην περίοδο της κρίσης τύπωσαν χρήμα, έστω και λίγο πληθωριστικό, σε επτά τράπεζες. Εμείς λοιπόν πρέπει να δούμε το ευρωπαϊκό όραμα, την περισσότερη Ευρώπη, την καλύτερη Ευρώπη, να πάμε μπροστά. Η ειρήνη, η οποία κατοχυρώθηκε τα προηγούμενα 60 χρόνια, οφείλεται στον ευρωπαϊκό οραματισμό και η παγίωση της δημοκρατίας στις νότιες χώρες της Ευρώπης και τώρα στις ανατολικές χώρες της Ευρώπης οφείλεται στο ευρωπαϊκό όραμα και στο ευρωπαϊκό οικοδόμημα. Bogusław Liberadzki (S&D). - Panie Przewodniczący! Z dużą uwagą wysłuchałem słów pana premiera Samarasa i pana przewodniczącego Barroso, którzy powiedzieli, że pokolenie, które mija, dokonało wielkich rzeczy, rzeczy kiedyś niewyobrażalnych. Panowie, proszę pamiętać, że, jest to pokolenie dzisiejszych 50+. My wtedy, 25 lat temu, chcieliśmy tych wielkich zmian i one nastąpiły. Choć nam wtedy mówiono o osiągnięciach. To, o czym mówiliście również dzisiaj, o osiągnięciach sprzed 70, 25 i 10 lat. Natomiast dzisiejsi młodzi – 25+ — nie tyle chcą słuchać o osiągnięciach, ile nam mówią o swoich problemach, czyli bezrobociu, biedzie, niesprawiedliwości, braku perspektyw, wielu nierozwiązanych problemach, i mówią, że oni tracą wiarę w taką Unię Europejską. Zatem ukonstytuował się nowy Parlament, będzie nowa Komisja. Musi nastąpić nowy “relaunching” Europy, w przeciwnym razie problemy będą się tylko pogłębiały. Andrej Plenković (PPE). - Gospodine predsjedniče, zahvaljujem predsjedniku vlade Samarasu na iscrpnom izvješću i htio bih reći, budući da je Grčka imala predsjedanje 2003. kada je Hrvatska aplicirala za članstvo, lijepo je da na kraja vašeg drugog predsjedništva ovdje sjedimo već nakon drugih europskih izbora kao punopravna članica. Htio bih Vam čestitati na donošenju pomorske strategije Europske unije koja je bila horizontalni prioritet Vašeg predsjedništva, a osobito u kontekstu usvajanja Jadransko-jonske strategije za makroregiju koja mi se čini da je jednako važna budući da čini prioritetnim i povezuje četiri zemlje koje su članice Europske unije i četiri zemlje koje nisu i u tom smislu očekujem izuzetnu suradnju Hrvatske i Grčke. Cijenim također napor na dovršetku bankovne unije, a ujedno i na usvajanju Statuta europskih političkih stranaka koji je također jedno veliko postignuće nakon ovih izbora i pridonijeti će jačanju europskih snaga u Europskom parlamentu i Europi. Κώστας Μαυρίδης (S&D). - Θέλω και εγώ με τη σειρά μου να συγχαρώ τον Πρωθυπουργό της Ελλάδας για τα επιτεύγματα που έχουν πραγματοποιηθεί μέσα από τέτοιες δυσκολίες, παρόλο που, ομολογουμένως, έχουν γίνει και λάθη σ' αυτήν την πορεία. Όμως, ας σταθώ μόνο σε ένα σημείο το οποίο αφορά και την ευρύτερη περιοχή της Νοτιοανατολικής Μεσογείου: το θέμα των απειλών και το θέμα της ασφάλειας της θάλασσας το οποίο φυσικά συνδέεται με την ενέργεια και αφορά ολόκληρη την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Θεωρώ λοιπόν ότι τα μικρά κράτη που είμαστε ενταγμένα στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση προσδοκούμε στη στήριξη της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης για να μπορέσουμε να ασκήσουμε το κυρίαρχο δικαίωμά μας να αξιοποιήσουμε την Αποκλειστική Οικονομική μας Ζώνη για το συμφέρον των λαών μας αλλά και για το συμφέρον της ίδιας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Τέλος επισημαίνω ένα σημείο: στην πορεία της Τουρκίας προς την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση κανένα βήμα δεν μπορεί να πραγματοποιηθεί χωρίς την αποδοχή των αρχών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης... (Ο Πρόεδρος διακόπτει τον ομιλητή.) Ελένη Θεοχάρους (PPE). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Πρωθυπουργέ, κατά τη διάρκεια της Ελληνικής Προεδρίας, ο Τούρκος Υπουργός Εξωτερικών, στο πλαίσιο του Συμβουλίου Σύνδεσης της Τουρκίας, παρέδωσε στον Υπουργό Εξωτερικών Βενιζέλο έγγραφο 64 σελίδων στο οποίο αναφέρεται ότι η Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία, κράτος μέλος της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, δεν υφίσταται πλέον, είναι “κλινικά νεκρό”. Ποια ήταν η εκδήλωση αλληλεγγύης εκ μέρους της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης προς ένα κράτος μέλος το οποίο θεωρείται “κλινικά νεκρό” από ένα κράτος που διεκδικεί την ένταξή του; Και πώς αντέδρασε η Ελλαδική Προεδρία όταν η Τουρκία, καταστρατηγώντας κάθε έννοια δικαίου, ζήτησε την αναγραφή του τίτλου “Ελληνοκυπριακή διοίκηση” στα διαβατήρια εκείνων που υποβάλλουν αίτηση εισόδου στην Τουρκία; Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz (PPE). - Tisztelt Miniszterelnök úr! Először is szeretnék Önnek és az Elnökségnek a munkájához gratulálni. Úgy gondolom, hogy a munkájuk fókuszában a gazdasági növekedés, a versenyképesség, a munkahelyteremtés állt helyesen, mint a legfontosabb feladat, ami az Európai Unióban előttünk áll. Azt látom, hogy e szerteágazó területen értek el eredményeket. Négy hónapnyi jogalkotási munka alatt, úgy gondolom, büszkélkedhetnek eredményekkel. Különösen szeretném kiemelni a legfontosabb feladataink egyikét, a fiatalok munkanélküliségének, egyáltalán a munkanélküliségi helyzetének a javítását. Ezért tartom fontosnak az ifjúsági garancia program keretében elindított tárgyalássort. Ki szeretném még emelni a bankunió területén elért eredményeket, ami, úgy gondolom, szintén figyelemre méltó. Vannak még nyitott területek, amelyeken nem sikerült olyan mértékű előrehaladást elérni. Ilyen például: a belső piac területén maradtak nyitva kérdések, de összességében azt gondolom, hogy az Önök munkája megfelelő volt, és gratulálok hozzá. Jean-Paul Denanot (S&D). - Monsieur le Président, je n'avais pas demandé la parole mais puisque vous me la donnez, c'est avec plaisir que je la prends pour exprimer tout d'abord ma solidarité envers le peuple grec, pays que je connais par ailleurs pour y avoir séjourné. Je peux vous dire que les Grecs ont été extrêmement courageux et ont traversé une période particulièrement difficile, et je veux saluer leur capacité à rebondir et surtout à demeurer dans l'Union, à demeurer intéressés par l'Europe. Je voudrais dire combien il est important que les peuples européens se sentent solidaires de notre Europe à nous tous. Danuta Jazłowiecka (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Premierze! Chciałam podziękować prezydencji greckiej za bardzo dobrą pracę, a szczególne podziękowania chciałam złożyć za pracę nad najtrudniejszą dyrektywą w sprawie egzekwowania delegowania pracowników. Było to ostatnie dossier minionej prezydencji, a dodatkową trudność powodowała atmosfera zbliżającej się kampanii wyborczej. W tak trudnej atmosferze prezydencja grecka zdała egzamin w 100%, reprezentując Radę w negocjacjach tej “puszki Pandory”, jak potocznie nazywana była ta dyrektywa. W szczególności chciałabym zwrócić uwagę na doskonałą pracę Vassiliki Kokkori i zespołu negocjacyjnego reprezentującego prezydencję. Swoją pracę wykonali Państwo bardzo rzetelnie, odpowiedzialnie i z klasą. Serdecznie za to dziękuję. Jestem przekonana, że ta rzetelność i odpowiedzialność realizowana w Państwa kraju przyniesie wielki sukces całemu społeczeństwu i dobre wyjście z kryzysu, czego Grecji serdecznie życzę. Silvia Costa (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, voglio riconoscere alla Presidenza greca di avere lavorato, naturalmente in condizioni di grande difficoltà, per aprire quella che io spero sia veramente una stagione diversa della politica euromediterranea, anche attraverso alcuni importanti passi che sono stati compiuti. Penso al fatto che finalmente, anche attraverso la vostra azione, è stato posto in maggiore evidenza il fatto che non c'è Europa senza una vera politica mediterranea e in questo contesto deve collocarsi una nuova politica sull'immigrazione, che sia più solidale, più attenta ai diritti. Ma soprattutto c'è un capitolo, nell'ultima comunicazione del Consiglio e successivamente anche della Commissione, sulla cultura e mi auguro che questo sia un tema che la Presidenza italiana – anzi ne sono certa – farà proprio: parlo della questione della valorizzazione del patrimonio culturale, paesaggistico e ambientale come una delle grandi risorse per un nuovo modello di sviluppo, per la crescita, per un nuovo turismo culturale, per una economia che si basi anche sulla sostenibilità culturale e non solo sulla sostenibilità sociale, ambientale ed economica. Penso che questo passaggio e questa attenzione prestata dalla Presidenza greca, che riprendeva un pronunciamento della Presidenza belga nel 2010 — che invece aveva visto una notevole carenza nella strategia Europa 2020 — possa essere un elemento da tenere presente. Μαρία Σπυράκη (PPE). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Πρωθυπουργέ της Ελλάδας, η Ελληνική Προεδρία έδειξε ότι τα κατάφερε. Η Ελλάδα έδειξε ότι τα κατάφερε, αλλά τώρα που τα φώτα φεύγουν από μας χρειαζόμαστε στήριξη γιατί η ελληνική κυβέρνηση, κορμός της οποίας είναι η Νέα Δημοκρατία, το κόμμα που εκπροσωπώ εδώ στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο, προχωρεί στις διαρθρωτικές μεταρρυθμίσεις και μία από αυτές είναι η μερική αποκρατικοποίηση της ΔΕΗ, κόντρα σε παλιούς συνδικαλιστές και την Αριστερά. Χρειαζόμαστε όμως στήριξη, χρειαζόμαστε δουλειές, γιατί στην Ελλάδα δεν έχουμε, και τα project bonds είναι μια τέτοια ιδέα· χρειαζόμαστε σταθεροποίηση του οικονομικού τοπίου και η υλοποίηση της δέσμευσης για τη μείωση του ελληνικού χρέους που ελήφθη από τους εταίρους μας τον Νοέμβριο του 2012 πρέπει να πραγματοποιηθεί άμεσα, αφού προηγουμένως ολοκληρωθούν τα stress tests των τραπεζών από την Ευρωπαϊκή Κεντρική Τράπεζα με τους ίδιους όρους και τους ίδιους κανόνες. Κώστας Χρυσόγονος (GUE/NGL). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, με την πρακτική της, η Ελληνική Προεδρία αναδείχθηκε σε άξιο υπηρέτη της πολιτικής των ευρωπαϊκών ελίτ. Ακολουθήσατε την πολιτική της ευπειθούς συμμόρφωσης και σε ευρωπαϊκό επίπεδο, την ίδια που ακολουθείτε σε ελληνικό επίπεδο εκτελώντας τις επιταγές της Τρόικας. Η πολιτική αυτή όχι μόνο δεν έφερε κανένα θετικό αποτέλεσμα για την Ευρώπη· αντιθέτως, η τραπεζική ένωση, την οποία υποτίθεται ότι επιτύχατε, στην πραγματικότητα είναι μια τραπεζική διάλυση, θα μειώσει την εμπιστοσύνη προς τις τράπεζες της περιφέρειας ιδίως της ευρωζώνης παρά θα την αυξήσει, αλλά και γενικότερα είναι μια πολιτική η οποία μακροπρόθεσμα οδηγεί στη διάλυση της Ευρώπης, στην κατάρρευση της ευρωπαϊκής ενοποίησης. Χρειάζεται μια εντελώς διαφορετική πολιτική, μια άλλη Ευρώπη, μια Ευρώπη των λαών και όχι μια Ευρώπη των κεφαλαιαγορών, την οποία εσείς υπηρετείτε. Χρήστος Στυλιανίδης (PPE). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, θέλω να αναδείξω περισσότερο το γεγονός ότι η Ελληνική Προεδρία πραγματοποίησε αυτά τα σημαντικά επιτεύγματα, ειδικά όσον αφορά την τραπεζική ένωση και τις εργασιακές σχέσεις, σε μια περίοδο όπου η χώρα βρίσκεται σε πολύ δύσκολη κατάσταση και σε μια προεκλογική περίοδο. Αυτό αποδεικνύει ότι στάθηκε σθεναρά και πειθαρχημένα απέναντι στον λαϊκισμό. Αλλά και το εκλογικό αποτέλεσμα επιβεβαιώνει αυτήν την αρχή, δηλαδή ότι αν όλοι εμείς οι Ευρωπαίοι που θέλουμε να προχωρήσουμε στις μεγάλες μεταρρυθμίσεις για μια άλλη Ευρώπη, μια Ευρώπη της ευρωπαϊκής ολοκλήρωσης, θα πρέπει όντως να παραμείνουμε σταθεροί απέναντι στο λαϊκισμό. Συγχαρητήρια, κύριε Πρωθυπουργέ! Maroš Šefčovič,
Vice-President of the Commission
. - Mr President, honourable Members, Prime Minister, when we visited Greece at the beginning of the Greek Presidency, Mr Samaras, you highlighted how this Presidency would be important not only for Europe but also for your country. You called it the “come-back Presidency”, and I think that today we can all agree that this come-back was very successful. Your country returned to the financial markets; your country is returning to growth, and you achieved a structural surplus in your budget after many long years. On behalf of the Commission, I really would like to highlight the dedication that we observed in every member of your team to using every single minute which was left before the parliamentary recess to pass the important pieces of the legislation that would make Europe better served and stronger. I cannot agree with some of the comments I heard today to the effect that the Presidency is not important. This is not true. The Presidency is chairing nine of 10 sectoral councils, and the experts of the Presidency are chairing more than 100 working groups. Furthermore, I know that without the personal commitment, personal effort and determination to succeed, there is simply no success at the end of the Presidency. Therefore, I would really like to thank your Minister, Dimitris Kourkoulas, your Permanent Representative, Theodoros Sotiropoulos, and your Director-General, who is sitting behind you. I also want to thank all the experts with whom we have been working so closely. It was a very good team and collective effort which brought very impressive results. Several of the Members made a reference to the importance of the Banking Union, the Single Market Act I and II, the Posting of Workers Directive, the package concerning the modernising of administrations in Europe through e-government and new e-procedures, visa policy revision, the entire agenda related to justice and home affairs, and the historic steps which have been taken in the area of enlargement. All this was achieved thanks to your team and to the good cooperation with this Parliament and the Commission. I would like to give my personal thanks to your colleagues for their good work on the General Affairs Council, preparing the summits, discussing the horizontal issues and completing this very important file on the European political parties, which I believe will be quite instrumental for the next European Parliament elections. Your Presidency came at a very crucial time for Greece and for Europe. I believe now that we can say – six months after the beginning of your Presidency – that we managed to put Europe on a stronger, safer footing. I would like to thank you for that and wish your country and your citizens all the best on the continued come-back to economic recovery as well. Antonis Samaras,
President-in-Office of the Council
. - Mr President, I would like to thank the honourable Members for their positive comments on our Greek Presidency, especially on the European Maritime Security Strategy, which I have to say includes maritime zones and respect for the International Law of the Sea. I would also like to thank colleagues for talking about that the solutions that have been provided for the euro's architectural deficiencies. I am sorry that, as a colleague has said, emphasis was placed mostly on Greece and not on Europe. I think some answers are indeed deserved. In 2010, when the Greek debt crisis surfaced, our monetary union had no instruments with which to face it. We were totally unprepared. There was No ESM, EFSF, SRM or SRF – nothing. I believe that we are now better prepared to avert similar crises before they happen, or to face them if they do happen. If we were now to rewrite our roadmap out of the crisis, everyone agrees that we would do it differently. I was among those who criticised the policy mix from the very beginning. But my position, as Prime Minister of my country after July 2012, was not to criticise the policy mix or engage in an academic discussion about the perfect path to stabilisation; my problem was to save my country, given all the mistakes of the past and all the structural problems of the present. We modified what could be modified, we implemented what should be implemented, and we ended up delivering results. It was neither easy nor painless. We achieved the largest fiscal adjustment ever in the shortest time ever. We corrected our fiscal deficit by 8% of our GDP in two years, stabilised the collapsing economy, produced a primary surplus one year ahead of our programme and came out into the international markets much earlier than anybody could have thought only six months ago. Despite the strict austerity measures, we reversed the trend of unemployment, which is now falling. We are putting an end to a six-year-long recession and are now starting recovery, and robust growth for the coming year is forecast. Yes, the Greeks have suffered a lot; and, yes, people in my country are still suffering. This is the first thing I said every time I met a foreign leader during the past four years, but things are now improving. We came to power just two years ago. In a few years I believe this will be a bad memory. If you like you can take the opposite example of Argentina, a very rich country that went bankrupt back in 2002. Twelve years later, they are still in crisis today and are again on the verge of collapse, with much more suffering and no hope. This is what we did not want to happen in Greece, and we achieved our aim with the sacrifices and the maturity of the Greek people and the determination of my Government. Some people did not want anything to change in Greece. Some people are still doing everything they can to block changes, to block privatisation projects, to scare away investors, and to keep the country in the misery trap we are trying to escape from. Some people tried to use the Greek crisis as a pretext for bringing us out of the euro or to use the architectural defects of the euro as a pretext for demolishing the euro altogether. We did not let them do that, and we are very proud that we did not, because things are indeed improving in Greece, where we are coming out of the worst crisis we have had for decades. I would like to answer some MEPs by saying that I do not have to apologise to extremists or populists of any sort. I only serve the interests of my country, and I do not have to apologise to people who do not want anything to change and who tried to block – as I said before – investors and privatisations. I think it is beyond the dignity of my country and of any country to live on borrowed money. We have put an end to this. In doing so, I believe we have served the best interests of my country. Concerning something that we heard earlier, Greece is a democracy, and democracies persecute actions. Democracies do not persecute convictions. Members of Golden Dawn are persecuted by the independent judiciary because of their involvement in criminal acts. We take law and order very seriously. Without law and order, no democracy can stand. Golden Dawn is persecuted as a criminal organisation because of its alleged involvement in crimes. Greece suffered from a devastating occupation by the Nazis. Seventy years ago they were the worst tyrants the Greeks had ever known. Their admirers and their supporters are totally unacceptable, but I have to repeat that the leaders of Golden Dawn are persecuted for what they do, not for what they believe in. They are persecuted by justice, not by the Government. This is the way it should be for any democracy in the world. (Applause) May I add something I heard from somebody who was not very well briefed on GMOs. We are proud that, as a result of our Presidency, a Member State can now, for the first time, unilaterally ban genetically-modified products, as was decided two months ago by the General Affairs Council and by the Council of the Ministers of the Environment. I have one last point. Regarding the crisis in Ukraine, the Presidency, in close cooperation with the Commission and the External Action Service, followed the two-track approach, which is a political solution and more sanctions if required. I would like to finish by saying that we are already in continuous cooperation with the incoming Italian Presidency for the next semester, which I am sure will be – and must be – a very successful one. (Applause) Der Präsident. - Die Aussprache ist geschlossen. Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 162 GO) Tibor Jenő Szanyi (S&D)
, írásban. – A görög elnökség előző féléves prioritásai, a növekedés és munkahelyteremtés hatékonyabb európai ösztönzése és megvalósítása, az euróövezet megerősítése, valamint a migrációs kérdések mind sürgős és gyors megoldást igénylő kérdései Európának. Az elnökség sokat tett e területeken, és a pénzügyi stabilitás megerősítéséért is. Azonban az Uniónak a jobboldal eddigi elhibázott, megszorításokra alapuló politikája helyett végre tényleg mindent a munkahelyteremtés köré kellett volna már rendelnie. Ugyan a görög prioritások között szerepelt a fiatalok munkanélküliségének csökkentése, de nem sikerült elérni, hogy a megkezdett intézkedések számottevő eredményeket hozzanak az Unió fiatalságának. A valamennyi korosztályt érintő munkahelyteremtés az, melynek révén a gazdasági növekedés tartós és eddiginél jelentősebb mértékű biztosítása, valamint számos összeurópai kérdés is valóban kezelhetővé válik. Mi több, minél több az európai munkahely, annál kevesebb az éhező gyermek is. Elfogadhatatlan, hogy a szabadság, biztonság, igazságosság jelszavait zászlajára tűző Európai Unióban mintegy 25 millió gyermek éhezzen. Sajnos ennek leküzdésében a görög elnökség sem tudott hosszú távra szóló eredményeket biztosító kezdeményezéseket útnak indítani. Marc Tarabella (S&D), par écrit. – La Grèce avait un défi à relever sur la scène européenne et internationale. Elle a pris en janvier la présidence semestrielle de l'Union européenne après avoir symbolisé pendant des mois la crise de la zone euro. Même si la page de la crise n'est pas tournée complètement, la situation sociale en Grèce-même en atteste, le défi de la présidence tournante a, lui, été relevé. Athènes peut mettre à son actif quelques réussites, comme l'achèvement de l'union bancaire, l'un des enseignements de la crise justement, qu'elle partage avec la Commission, parce qu'une présidence tournante, quelle qu'elle soit, est un long travail diplomatique mené dans les coulisses avec toutes les institutions et les Etats-membres. Ces présidences s'inscrivent d'ailleurs dans l'agenda européen particulièrement chargé de ce premier semestre 2014, avec la gestion de la crise ukrainienne ou la tenue des élections européennes dans les 28 Etats-membres, qui a mis le travail de la présidence grecque entre parenthèse ces dernières semaines. La présidence grecque s'achève ce lundi. Athènes passe le relais à Rome jusqu'à la fin de l'année. L'Italie devra elle aussi s'inscrire dans cette période post-électorale qui verra notamment la mise en place du nouveau Parlement et de la nouvelle Commission. (Die Sitzung wird um 12.55 Uhr unterbrochen und um 13.00 Uhr wieder aufgenommen.) VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ Präsident 7.   Eiropas Parlamenta kvestoru ievēlēšana (pirmā un otrā balsošanas kārta) Der Präsident. - Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Wahl der Quästoren. Auch das ist eine elektronische Abstimmung. Ich habe folgende Kandidaturen erhalten: Catherine Bearder Cornelis de Jong Karol Karski Andrey Kovatchev Boguslaw Liberadzki Elisabeth Morin-Chartier Die Kandidatinnen und Kandidaten haben mir mitgeteilt, dass sie mit ihrem Einvernehmen vorgeschlagen wurden. (Der Präsident erläutert das Wahlverfahren und vergewissert sich, dass die Mitglieder mit den technischen Erfordernissen der elektronischen Abstimmung vertraut sind. Der Präsident eröffnet die Abstimmung.) (Das Wahlergebnis wird auf dem Bildschirm angezeigt, bevor der Präsident den Wahlgang für geschlossen erklärt hat. Der Präsident erklärt den Wahlgang für ungültig und ordnet die Wiederholung des Wahlgangs an.) Nuno Melo (PPE). - Senhor Presidente, é uma interpelação à mesa. Sr. Presidente, parece-me óbvio que quando o Sr. Presidente abre uma votação fixa o colégio eleitoral. Obviamente que num plenário há sempre deputados a entrar e deputados a sair. Não pode ser critério para prolongar uma votação o facto de estarem a entrar deputados porque há sempre deputados a entrar, e por isso, Sr. Presidente, terminando, repetir a votação pode subverter o resultado que foi conseguido. As pessoas formaram a sua vontade, decidiram e votaram. Não podemos alterar as regras do jogo quando o jogo já está concluído. Parece-me óbvio, Sr. Presidente. Der Präsident. - Herr Abgeordneter! In diesem Hause müssen Regeln eingehalten werden. Die Regel ist, dass ein Wahlgang dann geschlossen ist, wenn ich ihn für geschlossen erkläre. Ich hatte ihn nicht für geschlossen erklärt. (Beifall) Ich hatte diesen Wahlgang nicht für geschlossen erklärt. Wenn dann in diesem Haus irgendein Techniker eine Taste drückt, dann kann ich das nicht verhindern, aber es macht den Wahlgang nicht korrekt. Deshalb wiederholen wir jetzt diese Wahl. (Zwischenruf) Das ist ein berechtigter Hinweis. Ich habe aus Solidaritätsgründen mit den Kollegen, die teilweise in den Fahrstühlen waren, gewartet. Ich sage Ihnen jetzt “Wir eröffnen den Wahlgang”, dann gebe ich zwei bis drei Minuten Zeit zu wählen, danach schließe ich den Wahlgang. Erst wenn der Satz “Der Wahlgang ist geschlossen” erfolgt ist, können die Techniker in diesem Hause arbeiten. Ich bitte darum, dass das eingehalten wird. (Der Wahlgang wird durchgeführt.) Ich gebe Ihnen das Ergebnis der Wahl für das Amt der Quästoren des Europäischen Parlaments bekannt. Abgegebene Stimmen: 696 Ungültige Stimmen: 19 Abgegebene gültige Stimmen: 677 Die notwendige Mehrheit lag dementsprechend bei 339 Stimmen. Elisabeth Morin-Chartier: 452 Stimmen Boguslaw Liberadzki: 443 Stimmen Catherine Bearder: 425 Stimmen Andrey Kovatchev: 420 Stimmen Karol Karski: 288 Stimmen Cornelis de Jong: 152 Stimmen Gewählt sind also Frau Morin-Chartier, Herr Liberadzki, Frau Bearder und Herr Kovatchev. Herzlichen Glückwunsch zu Ihrer Wahl! (Beifall) Es ist ein zweiter Wahlgang erforderlich. (Der Präsident fragt Herrn Karski und Herrn de Jong, ob sie ihre Kandidatur aufrechterhalten, was beide bejahen.) (Der zweite Wahlgang wird durchgeführt.) Auf Herrn Karski entfielen 347 Stimmen, auf Herrn de Jong 261 Stimmen. Damit hat Herr Karski die notwendige absolute Mehrheit erhalten und ist gewählt. (Beifall) Damit haben wir alle erforderlichen Wahlen durchgeführt. Ich gratuliere allen Kolleginnen und Kollegen zu ihrer Wahl. 8.   Balsošanas laiks Der Präsident. - Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Abstimmungsstunde. (Abstimmungsergebnisse und sonstige Einzelheiten der Abstimmung: siehe Protokoll). 8.1.   Komiteju skaitliskais sastāvs (B8-0001/2014) (balsošana) — Angenommen Der Präsident. – Damit ist die Abstimmungsstunde geschlossen. (Die Sitzung wird um 13.10 Uhr unterbrochen und um 15.00 Uhr wieder aufgenommen.) VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ Präsident 9.   Iepriekšējās sēdes protokola apstiprināšana (sk. protokolu) 10.   Oficiāla sveikšana Der Präsident. - Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Bitte heißen Sie mit mir gemeinsam Herrn Ales Bialiatski auf der Ehrentribüne willkommen, den weißrussischen Schriftsteller und Vorsitzenden des Zentrums für Menschenrechte Viasna. (Beifall) Lieber Herr Bialiatski! Sie sind am 21. Juni nach fast drei Jahren Haft endlich entlassen worden. Dieses Haus hat sich mehrfach sehr intensiv für Ihre Freilassung eingesetzt und am Ende ja Gott sei Dank auch erreicht, dass Sie freigelassen worden sind. Sie sind in diesem Hause für den Sacharow-Preis für geistige Freiheit nominiert worden. Ich freue mich, gemeinsam mit meinen Kolleginnen und Kollegen sehr, dass Sie heute unserer Sitzung als freier Mann beiwohnen können. Nochmals herzlich willkommen und meine große Hochachtung für Ihren Mut! (Beifall) 11.   Padomes nosūtītie nolīgumu teksti (sk. protokolu) 12.   Itālijas prezidentūras darba programma (debates) Der Präsident. - Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgen die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zum Tätigkeitsprogramm des italienischen Ratsvorsitzes (2014/2609(RSP)). Ich begrüße deshalb sehr herzlich in unserem Hause den Ministerpräsidenten der Republik Italien, Herrn Matteo Renzi. Herzlich willkommen, Herr Ministerpräsident! Matteo Renzi,
Presidente in carica del Consiglio
. - Signor Presidente, onorevoli membri del Parlamento europeo, vi auguro di cuore buon lavoro e un in bocca al lupo da parte di tutto il popolo italiano e delle Istituzioni italiane per il mandato che vi accingete a iniziare. In bocca al lupo a Lei, signor Presidente, e complimenti per la Sua elezione, ma in bocca al lupo e complimenti per l'elezione a ciascuno di voi membri del Parlamento europeo. Avete una grande responsabilità: riportare fiducia e speranza nelle istituzioni europee e avete, da subito, avuto la massima collaborazione del Consiglio che ha scelto di rispettare, com'era doveroso e secondo me com'era politicamente giusto, le prerogative del Parlamento e il rispetto della campagna elettorale. Per tutti questi motivi, dunque, sono felice e onorato di rappresentare il mio Paese. (Applausi) Lascio alla Presidenza, signor Presidente, il documento scritto che affronta tutti i temi che vogliamo portare all'attenzione delle istituzioni nel Semestre italiano. Dunque non svolgerò un intervento scritto puntuale con gli adempimenti e le scelte che l'Italia ha fatto per questo semestre, lasciandolo alla vostra attenzione nel testo scritto che vi consegneremo. Provo invece a domandare a me stesso e a tutti voi che cos'è oggi il dibattito sulla politica europea dopo la crisi che tutti abbiamo vissuto e anche la crisi politica che stiamo vivendo. Lasciatemelo dire con una battuta: se oggi l'Europa facesse un selfie che immagine verrebbe fuori? Posso dirlo con estrema preoccupazione? Emergerebbe il volto della stanchezza, in alcuni casi della rassegnazione; se dovessi dirla in modo sintetico direi che l'Europa oggi mostrerebbe nel selfie il volto della noia. Eppure è incomprensibile: fuori da qui il mondo corre a una velocità straordinaria, il tempo ci offre delle occasioni meravigliose per comprendere quanto il futuro possa avere bisogno di noi. Voglio farvi un esempio concreto, farlo innanzitutto a me. Questa mattina avete chiuso il Semestre greco: quindi c'è un passaggio di consegne tra la Grecia e l'Italia. In tutto il mondo se ci fermiamo un secondo a riflettere e immaginiamo qual è il testimone tra la Grecia e l'Italia, pensiamo a cose straordinariamente affascinanti e ricche di suggestione. Qualcuno potrà pensare al rapporto tra Anchise ed Enea, qualcun altro tra Pericle e Cicerone, Grecia e Italia potrebbe essere l'agorà e il foro, il tempio e la chiesa, il Partenone e il Colosseo: invece, noi non pensiamo a questo quando in Europa discutiamo tra Grecia e Italia e non pensiamo nemmeno alle domande sul senso della vita nonostante Aristotele e Dante Alighieri o Archimede e Leonardo da Vinci. Noi pensiamo alla crisi finanziaria, allo spread, alle valutazioni economiche e alle difficoltà finanziarie. Perché? Perché è molto forte nel nostro corpo la ferita che ha lasciato la recente difficoltà congiunturale economica. Vorrei essere chiaro: non credo che possiamo sottovalutare la questione finanziaria e tra qualche istante ci entrerò in modo molto deciso e anche molto convinto. Esiste un grande tema economico e finanziario: ma l'Italia sostiene che la grande sfida del Semestre europeo non sia soltanto quella di elencare una serie di appuntamenti – che pure ci saranno e spero vedranno la partecipazione convinta delle parlamentari e dei parlamentari europei. No! La vera, grande sfida che ha di fronte a sé il nostro continente oggi è ritrovare l'anima dell'Europa, ritrovare il senso profondo del nostro stare insieme. Perché se dobbiamo unire le nostre burocrazie vi garantisco che a noi italiani basta e avanza la nostra di burocrazia. O c'è un'identità forte, profonda da recuperare insieme oppure perdiamo la sfida che abbiamo di fronte. Ho detto che non devo dare l'impressione – né voglio farlo – di sottovalutare le questioni economiche e finanziarie. Aggiungo e lo voglio dire con grande chiarezza e convinzione: qui rappresento un Paese fondatore dell'Unione europea e un Paese che continua ogni anno a dare economicamente un contributo importante alle istituzioni europee. Noi italiano siamo tra quelli che danno più di quanto ricevono e ne siamo felici e ne siamo orgogliosi perché il valore più grande non è quello economico. Però devo anche dire che rappresento, o meglio, sono uno dei non pochi esponenti di un partito politico che è il partito che ha preso più voti in tutta Europa: il Partito Democratico Italiano. Nessuno ha preso i voti del PD (Applausi) e vi dico che abbiamo preso questi voti non addossando all'Europa la responsabilità della crisi che stiamo vivendo bensì riconoscendo che in Italia i problemi nascono dall'Italia non dall'Europa. Noi abbiamo utilizzato un linguaggio di verità; abbiamo detto che “noi” dobbiamo fare le nostre riforme, che “noi” dobbiamo cambiare la burocrazia, la giustizia, il sistema fiscale, che “noi” dobbiamo cambiare le istituzioni e in questo momento, signor Presidente, il Senato italiano sta votando in commissione la riforma costituzionale che cambia le regole del gioco nel nostro Paese. Quindi noi sappiamo che prima di tutto dobbiamo chiedere a “noi” la forza di cambiare se vogliamo essere credibili. L'Italia non viene qui per chiedere all'Europa i cambiamenti che non è in grado di fare. (Applausi) L'Italia viene qui a dire che essa per prima ha voglia di cambiare e che crede nelle istituzioni europee. E viene per dirlo con la convinzione e la determinazione – vorrei dire il coraggio e l'orgoglio – di chi sa di rappresentare un grande Paese che quando entra nelle istituzioni europee non è per chiedere bensì per dare. È dunque chiaro che la questione economica che noi stiamo vivendo e la discussione che c'è stata anche nell'ultimo Consiglio non si riducono a una richiesta di alcuni Paesi rispetto ad altri di cambiare le regole. Noi siamo stati i primi a dire che vogliamo rispettare le regole e non chiediamo di cambiarle. Diciamo però che rispetta le regole chi si ricorda che abbiamo firmato tutti insieme, i nostri predecessori, un patto che si chiama “Patto di stabilità e di crescita”. C'è la stabilità ma c'è anche la crescita e la richiesta di avere la crescita come elemento fondamentale della politica economica europea non la fa un Paese: serve all'Europa non serve all'Italia. (Applausi) Senza crescita l'Europa non ha futuro, non è un singolo paese ad avere un problema. (Applausi) Per questo motivo nel Semestre che abbiamo di fronte – vogliamo dirlo con grande serenità – non chiediamo un giudizio sul passato; non ci interessa giudicare il passato: ci interesse cominciare il futuro. Subito. Il mondo fuori corre a una velocità doppia rispetto a quella che corre l'Europa. Abbiamo desiderio o no di recuperare questo gap? Abbiamo desiderio o no di essere all'avanguardia sulle tecnologie dell'informazione e della comunicazione, sui grandi investimenti in materia di cambiamento climatico in vista dell'appuntamento di Parigi del prossimo anno? Sull'importanza direi strategica della questione legata al capitale umano? Non ci sarà un'Europa degna di questo nome finché non ci sarà il Servizio civile europeo per i nostri ragazzi, per le nuove generazioni, che possano riuscire a vedere in questo continente l'occasione di crescita umana per sé. (Applausi) Non ci sarà nessun tipo di spazio per l'Europa se noi accetteremo di restare soltanto un puntino su Google Maps. Noi siamo una comunità, un popolo, non siamo un'espressione geografica – per utilizzare l'espressione che fu rivolta all'Italia da un grande uomo politico austriaco nel XIX secolo. Perché questo accada io credo che nel semestre a guida italiana dovremo essere capaci di affrontare con forza la questione della semplicità delle nostre istituzioni e della vita politica europea. Può sembrarvi strano che si utilizzi l'espressione “semplicità”: ma è una grande battaglia politica. E se in questa Smart Europe che noi vogliamo costruire tutti insieme saremo a fianco anche di chi ha idee politiche diverse, questo dovrà essere un fatto positivo, un fatto che ci inorgoglisce, non un fatto che ci indispone. Ecco perché io credo, caro Presidente, che un'Europa senza il Regno Unito non sarebbe semplicemente un'Europa meno ricca, sarebbe meno Europa, sarebbe meno sé stessa e faremo di tutto nel nostro semestre non per recuperare posizioni diverse, che ci sono state anche nell'ultimo Consiglio europeo, ma per affermare che quei valori di investimento su un'Europa diversa, che sono stati espressi anche nell'ultimo dibattito in Consiglio europeo, da posizioni diverse devono essere ricondotte tutte insieme a unità. Perché noi crediamo che l'Europa possa essere il luogo del futuro se abbiamo il coraggio di metterci in gioco adesso. Se abbiamo il coraggio di dire che l'Europa deve essere e deve tornare ad essere una frontiera. Lo è fisicamente, lo è geograficamente, lo è nella vita di tutti i giorni. L'Europa è una frontiera anche perché, se guardiamo insieme la cartina geografica, vediamo il Paese che ha il maggior numero di chilometri di coste rispetto all'estensione territoriale. Siamo geograficamente per forza una frontiera. Questo ci pone molti problemi e ne sappiamo qualcosa noi in Italia, in questo momento. In un momento nel quale le difficoltà che ci sono in particolar modo in Libia – non genericamente e generalmente nel Nord Africa – ma specificamente in Libia, stanno provocando una serie di stragi nel nostro Mare Mediterraneo, il Mare Nostrum dei latini, ai quali stiamo cercando di far fronte con operazioni italiane e ai quali, insieme ai capi di governo e sicuramente con la condivisione della Commissione, riusciremo a far fronte in modo più deciso per il futuro attraverso l'operazione Frontex Plus. Ma il problema non è soltanto quello dell'immigrazione o di che cosa accade in questo momento in Nord Africa: è provare a rovesciare l'approccio. È dirsi che l'Africa deve vedere un protagonismo dell'Europa, che forse dev'essere maggiore non soltanto nelle esigenze economiche, negli investimenti delle nostre aziende, nel tentativo di andare ad affrontare la questione energetica, ma anche – lasciatemelo dire – nella dimensione umana. Voi rappresentate, signori del Parlamento – quale grande responsabilità, quale straordinaria vertigine – voi rappresentate un faro di civiltà. Voi rappresentate, come Europa, la civilizzazione della globalizzazione. (Applausi) Se di fronte a una donna che si chiama Asia Bibi e il cui nome voglio sentire pronunciare in quest'Aula, che è in carcere da quattro anni perché cristiana, in Pakistan, non c'è l'Europa che si indigna, vuol dire che noi non stiamo corrispondendo alla nostra chiamata, al nostro destino. Se di fronte alle ragazze rapite in Nigeria da un gruppo fondamentalista che sta rapendo quelle ragazze per il solo fatto che vengono educate ai valori occidentali, se non c'è la reazione dell'Europa, se non c'è la vostra reazione, se non c'è la nostra reazione, non possiamo definirci degni della grande responsabilità che abbiamo. Se di fronte a una donna, Meriam, che partorisce in Sudan in carcere per la sua fede o alle ragazze della Primavera araba, noi continuiamo soltanto a utilizzare frasi fatte, slogan vuoti, parole retoriche, continuiamo a rinchiuderci nelle nostre frontiere senza avere il coraggio di affermare i nostri valori, noi non andremo da nessuna parte e noi perderemo la dignità del nostro essere politici europei. (Applausi) Lasciatelo ribadire, concludendo, signor Presidente: noi siamo una frontiera. L'Italia vuole vivere questo semestre immergendosi nello spirito della discussione europea con grande determinazione, portando la propria voce sulla politica estera in una cornice in cui noi diciamo con forza che non si può non ascoltare – è stato anche in questo caso oggetto dell'ultima riunione del Consiglio – la voce che chiede libertà, che chiede Europa, che arriva dall'Ucraina e dai paesi dell'Est del nostro continente e contemporaneamente vogliamo dire con grande decisione che non si costruisce un'Europa contro il nostro maggior vicino. Non possiamo essere ciechi di fronte a ciò che sta accadendo in questo momento in Medio Oriente, con dei ragazzi che hanno il diritto di crescere e – diciamolo con grande franchezza – l'Europa può e deve fare di più per affermare il diritto alla patria che ha il popolo palestinese e per dire che Israele non soltanto ha il diritto di esistere – lasciatemelo dire così – Israele ha il dovere di esistere, essendo una comunità che ricorda tutti noi il valore della memoria e del futuro. Dobbiamo continuare ad adoperarci, durante il nostro semestre, in occasione del vertice ASEM a Milano, il 16 ottobre, per affermare l'idea che la politica estera europea nei confronti dell'Asia deve avere uno scatto in avanti. Ecco, tutti questi temi, che sarebbe molto interessante approfondire uno per uno, ci portano a dire che il nostro semestre vuole essere un semestre nel quale noi non abbiamo paura di dire che la politica ha una sua dignità e che nella dignità della politica riscopriamo il senso profondo del nostro essere qui. Ecco perché qui non c'è un'Italia che chiede scorciatoie: qui c'è un'Italia che con coraggio e orgoglio offre la propria disponibilità per fare la propria parte. E c'è anche, lasciatemelo dire, una generazione nuova. Se dovessi concludere con un riferimento da cui sono partito nel rapporto tra Grecia e Italia direi che è la generazione Telemaco. C'è un'epopea bellissima nella letteratura su Ulisse, perché Ulisse è il grande personaggio che affascina e emoziona, e poi perché Ulisse ha animato non soltanto la letteratura antica ma anche, da Dante Alighieri a Joyce, il pensiero e la letteratura di tante parti del nostro continente. Nessuno parla di Telemaco: però Telemaco, se ci pensate, ha un compito che è ancora più difficile. Non a caso, all'inizio dell'Odissea, Atena lo chiama e gli dice: “Non potrai mica pensare di restare qui ad attendere”. Anche la nostra generazione, quelli che non avevano neanche diciott'anni alla firma del trattato di Maastricht – io non ero neanche maggiorenne a quell'epoca – ebbene la nostra generazione ha il dovere di riscoprirsi Telemaco. Ha il dovere di meritare l'eredità. Noi non consideriamo il grande frutto dei nostri padri un dono dato per sempre bensì una conquista da rinnovare giorno dopo giorno. E allora l'invito di questo Semestre europeo non è semplicemente a ragionare di questioni economiche, su cui – ve lo garantisco – ci faremo sentire con tutta la nostra forza, con la forza di chi è un grande Paese e di chi contribuisce al bilancio dell'Unione di più di quando incassa. Ma non è semplicemente nella moneta che abbiamo in tasca il nostro destino: il nostro destino è nel riscoprirsi eredi, nell'avere il diritto di chiamarci eredi, nel prendere la grande tradizione dalla quale veniamo e dire che assicureremo un domani a questa tradizione. Lo dobbiamo ai nostri figli, lo dobbiamo a coloro i quali sono morti nel corso di secoli perché l'Europa fosse non soltanto un'espressione geografica ma un'espressione dell'anima. In bocca al lupo a tutti noi. (Applausi) José Manuel Barroso,
President of the Commission
. - Mr President, allow me first to extend my warmest wishes to you, Prime Minister Renzi, for a successful Presidency of the Council. I would also like to congratulate you very sincerely on your speech, which was full of passion for our common European project. During this transition period, the Commission will do its utmost to support you in delivering your Presidency priorities, because time does not stand still. We have a collective responsibility to ensure a smooth transition and to continue to work together hand in hand: the Commission, the Council and its Presidency, as well as the European Parliament. I particularly want to welcome the clear commitment that you, Prime Minister, have made to taking forward further reforms in Italy as well as in the European Union. The world is changing. We cannot stand still, and your impetus for reform, both in Italy and in Europe, is of the essence for our collective success. Prime Minister, you spoke eloquently about the transition between Greece and Italy. In many respects, Greece and Italy have been together quite recently. Not so long ago, three or even two years ago, people were talking about “Grexit” – about Greece leaving the euro. Many Cassandras were predicting the implosion of the euro. I remember well when, in November 2011, several governments wanted to put Italy firmly under the supervision of the IMF, when Italy was on the brink of disaster. It was not just Greece or Ireland or Portugal or Spain that had financial sector problems: Italy, one of the biggest economies in Europe and indeed in the world, was very close to financial disaster, and it was possible to avoid that disaster. I am proud that the Commission, unlike others, always stood behind Italy, and always showed our commitment to, and confidence in, Italy as one of the biggest economies in Europe and the world. We have to build on this. During the terrible circumstances of recent years, we were able to avoid disaster, we were able to stand together to survive the crisis, we were able to provide the requisite stability, in spite of all those who predicted the implosion of the euro or even the disintegration of the European Union. Now we have the conditions in which to use all our collective experience, our ideas and our commitment to make Europe grow, to make Europe invest, and to enable Europe to generate the jobs that our people need and want. Together, across all our three institutions and with all our Member States, we need to ensure that we deliver what is required for our citizens. What they want most is results. What they want most is growth and jobs. As one of the original six signatories of the Treaties of Paris and Rome, Italy has played a fundamental role in shaping our Union from the very beginning. Alcide De Gasperi and Altiero Spinelli, as founding fathers of the European Union, understood the need to move Europe into a new phase of history after the tragedy of the first half of the 20th century. It is certainly refreshing today, here in Strasbourg, in the European Parliament, to listen to a Prime Minister of Italy who brings this commitment and this promise of reform, because we need a strong Italy at the centre of a strong European Union. That is why it is very important, Prime Minister, that you now bring this impetus for reform to the European Union. In this Presidency, Italy's twelfth, and at this important transitional moment, it was very fitting that you spoke less today about the economy – though I know well how important you believe this is for your country and for Europe – and instead, rightly, put the emphasis on reminding all of us that Europe is a community of values and that we should not be arrogant about this. We should not be arrogant about European civilisation, but rather be proud of what Europe has been giving to the world, and what Europe can still give to the world. This Presidency comes at the start of a new parliamentary term: a term that will be of critical importance for the future of the European Union; a term that will see the Union move into the next phase of recovery. It is a transitional moment that builds on the progress we have made – and we have made progress – ranging from stronger economic governance in the European Union and the Banking Union to concrete growth, investment and social justice, as was agreed last week by all the members of the European Council with the strategic priorities for the next five years. The challenge is great, but the reforms to which Italy is committed at home and the reforms it is now trying to bring to the European Union show that the ambition is there for building a better Union. It is a top priority to deliver on our objectives for a smart, sustainable, inclusive social market economy: to deliver on our goals for jobs and employment; to deliver on the fight against poverty and for social equality; to deliver on research and innovation, education and skills; and also on the very important climate and energy agenda. We have certainly made progress but, honestly, not enough. That is why, during this half of the year, we are taking forward the mid-term review of the Europe 2020 agenda, to examine properly how we are all doing and to explore what we need to change in a post-crisis period. Getting this right will require the utmost coordination between Member States and between the European institutions, because the lesson from European integration is that it works best when we work together and cooperate in close partnership. I support the main themes of the incoming Presidency: growth, citizens, external action. Starting with growth, because this is an issue of vital importance, allow me to highlight five concrete results that I hope we are going to achieve during the next six months. First and foremost is the task of tackling unemployment, especially youth unemployment. This remains our absolute number one priority and I welcome the Italian Presidency's particular focus on the issue. We simply cannot meet our long-term growth ambitions if we continue to have more than 25 million unemployed, a sixth of whom are under the age of 24. We need to ensure that the time lag between the economy picking up and businesses recruiting again is as short as possible. The Commission will be holding a technical seminar on this issue on 14 July. I would like to urge all Member States to join Italy and France in adopting operational programmes to take advantage of the Youth Guarantee and Youth Employment Initiative, the result of a collective decision taken by the European Council. The reality is that we are not completely delivering on the commitments made for our young people. Some countries are already advancing on the Youth Guarantee, others not really. Secondly, we need to use the seven-year budget smartly and without delay, and we need to agree the budget for 2015. Although it is smaller than some of us, namely the Commission and Parliament, wanted, the budget for the next seven years amounts to EUR 1 trillion, so it can be a major lever for growth. It needs to be fully exploited. The budget represents a large proportion of public investment in many Member States: more than 80% of public investment in many of our Member States, particularly those that have very little margin for national investment. So I would urge Member States to finalise the partnership agreements as a matter of priority. Thirdly, we need to support our small and medium-sized businesses and our industry through research funds and access to long-term financing. This remains critical in the European economy: there is not yet enough funding for our SMEs. Much as we need fiscal consolidation and structural reforms, we also need targeted investment for growth and jobs. SMEs represent 99% of Europe's private companies, employing two-thirds of Europe's total workforce. It is thus vital that we breathe life into them in order to inject growth into our economies, making the best use of our new Horizon 2020 research and innovation budget – at around EUR 80 billion it is one of the biggest research programmes, if not the single biggest, in the world – and working towards a situation in which our industry accounts for 20% of Europe's GDP by 2020. Let me now salute Vice-President Tajani, until now Vice-President in a Commission of just 28 Members and now Vice-President in a Parliament of 700 people. He was, in the Commission, one of those promoting this agenda for industry and SMEs and also making progress on dossiers such as pension funds, shareholder rights and access to finance. These will be critically important. Fourthly, we must continue to open up. I particularly enjoyed, Prime Minister, what you said about the idea of reform and openness. There are some people in Europe, in all political families, who believe that the best way to fight globalisation, or to respond to globalisation, is to close up, to be protective and to hide behind the table. This is not the Europe I want, and I think it is not the Europe that you want. We believe that European civilisation is a civilisation for globalisation, and that the message we have to send to our children is a message of confidence and openness, not one of being protectionist or chauvinistic, of being xenophobic, or being mediocre. This is the real debate in European politics today: are we going to embrace the possibilities of change or reform or are we going to give up to the negative forces of populism, chauvinism, protectionism and extreme nationalism? I believe we are on the right side if we go for an open Europe – a Europe which has confidence in itself. That is why it is critically important to deepen the single market, especially the Digital Single Market. We have to strengthen our trade relations, including with the United States, building the biggest free trade area in the world. Certainly we must address the concerns which have been expressed in that regard but we should not give up on Europe driving the world in terms of the economy: Europe being the number one trade bloc in the world, with a surplus in trade of goods, services and agriculture. Finally, turning to our climate and energy needs: we will be launching the review of our Energy Efficiency Directive this month. We will carry out stress tests on our most vulnerable countries to ensure that we meet our energy demands, and we will focus, at the UN conference in September and the October European Council, on our 2030 climate targets alongside our energy security strategy, to demonstrate European leadership ahead of next year's international conference in Paris on climate change. I know the Italian Presidency is absolutely committed to this twin goal: the energy union and the fight against climate change. The theme of the World Expo in Milan 2015, “Feeding the Planet, Energy for Life”, reflects the complementarity between Italy's priorities at home and those of its rotating Presidency of the Council of the European Union. Honourable Members, we also want Europe to remain a free, secure and just place for our citizens to live in. Significant progress has already been made over the past five years but work remains to be completed. The Stockholm Programme will come to an end this year; and the European Council has just endorsed the Commission's proposal on a future agenda. We must deal with our asylum and humanitarian challenges. Some Member States are significantly affected by migration flows into Europe, Italy being one of them. I was in Lampedusa, I remember what I saw there, and the Commission position has always been one of asking for more cooperation between Member States. The situation of sea refugees in search of a better future remains a source of deepest concern. Thus we must pursue our goal of a genuine common European migration policy with equitable burden sharing between the countries most exposed to migratory pressures. We must strengthen the tools we have and use them to their full capacity: we should fully enforce the recommendations of the Mediterranean Task Force; assure the exchange of information with third countries to tackle irregular migration flows; strengthen the Schengen area; defend the principle of free movement; and, at the same time, tackle all forms of abuses and address the new and serious challenges of cybercrime, cross-border organised crime, trafficking in human beings, violent extremism and terrorism. Honourable Members, we must ensure that we continue to have a strong global voice with our partners and neighbours. The current situation in Ukraine is well known and requires our attention as a priority, and there is also a new momentum now in the Eastern Partnership, where agreements have recently been signed with Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia. But the situation in the Middle East – in Libya, rightly highlighted by the Prime Minister, in Egypt and in the whole Mediterranean area – requires our fullest attention. It is crucial that we continue to work closely with these countries, as well as taking forward accession negotiations with the candidate countries, a task to which I know the Italian Presidency attaches great priority. Next year there will be another large international negotiation that will require our careful attention: the post-2015 Millennium Development Goals. The European Union and its Member States represent over half of the world's official development assistance – another thing that we should be proud of, and that our young people are proud of. We have a moral responsibility, as well as a strategic interest, to ensure that, on the basis of our values, we help our partners to improve their prosperity and their security. And ensuring a successful outcome at that conference next year requires preparation today. The same goes for Asia. There will be an important ASEAN summit in Milan during the Italian Presidency. I believe that Asia is a very important continent full of opportunities. We have a lot to gain if we engage with Asia and, at the same time, fight for the common standards that everyone should agree to if we want open markets and open economies. So there is a lot of work ahead of us. We need to build on the experience we have gained collectively and we need to show political will. Prime Minister, what I saw from your commitment today and from the Italian Presidency programme is precisely that political will: the idea that, more importantly than bureaucratic or technocratic decisions, we need the democratic consensus to go ahead with them. You have great authority precisely because of the results you have achieved in Italy. I believe the time has come in Europe for the forces from the left, the right and the centre – all those who believe that Europe can be part of our vision and that Europe has not only a market but also a soul – to work together and to work to reduce the gap that often exists between statements made and their implementation. In this way we can put an end to what has been too common, namely national leaders' taking decisions collectively in Brussels and afterwards putting the blame on Europe when they have not done their homework in their capitals. We need to work together at all levels to understand that this is a common task and that we are not going to succeed if the parliaments at national level blame the European Union or if the European Union blames the governments and the Member States. We can win only if you work together and if you understand that the European Union is not just part of the solution, but is fundamental to our solution. Prime Minister, since you quoted Odysseus, and so many figures of classical Greece and Rome, let me also conclude on that note. Europe is a never-ending project, so part of the frustration with Europe is that we are always thinking about it as some kind of completed building, whereas Europe is also a voyage. It is like Odysseus' voyage to Ithaca. We should make it happen step by step. We cannot constantly compare it with what will be a complete achievement. This process of European integration is something new. So let us do like Odysseus: let us enjoy the journey towards a stronger, open and free Europe. (Applause) PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. ANTONIO TAJANI Vicepresidente Manfred Weber,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion
. – Herr Präsident, meine Herren Präsidenten, Herr Ministerpräsident! Zunächst willkommen und auch Respekt für das Wahlergebnis. Es ist eine große Verantwortung, die Sie aus diesem Wahlergebnis herausziehen. Europa ist dann stark, wenn die Mitgliedstaaten stark sind, wenn Italien stark ist. Sie haben selbst eingeräumt und beschrieben, dass man dann als Ratsvorsitzender stärker ist, wenn man zuhause seine Hausaufgaben macht, die eigenen Reformen zuhause anpackt. Gratulation zu diesem Statement, zu dieser Aussage. Wir haben als Parlamentarier nämlich hier schon viele Reden, viele ambitionierte Zukunftsentwürfe gehört, und wir haben natürlich auch im Blick, wie dann die Schussbilanz der italienischen Präsidentschaft aussieht, was dabei herauskommt. Wir haben die Hoffnung, dass Sie vieles von dem, was Sie hier versprochen haben, auch anpacken. Der zentrale Punkt ist die Fragestellung, Wachstum zu erzeugen. Dafür brauchen wir Reformen. Meine Fraktion, die Europäische Volkspartei, hat da keinen Nachholbedarf. Wir haben in vielen Ländern – Portugal, Griechenland, Irland, Spanien – als Europäische Volkspartei die Verantwortung getragen, unseren Bürgern viel zugemutet und wurden trotz dieser schwierigen Entscheidungen als stärkste Fraktion bestätigt. Das heißt, wir haben den Weg der Reformen beschritten. Und jetzt liegt es an Ihnen, den gleichen Weg zu gehen. Da gibt es viele Punkte, bei denen wir uns einig sind. Konkret die Fragestellung Binnenmarkt schaffen – all die Punkte, die Sie im Programm beschrieben haben, die ganz praktisch europäischer Gesetzesalltag sind, darin sind wir uns einig. In einem Punkt, Herr Ministerpräsident, gibt es leider Gottes etwas Differenzen. Nämlich bei der Fragestellung, ob wir die Lektionen gelernt haben, die uns die Krise erteilt hat, die Krise der letzten Jahre. Eine der Lektionen war, dass wir die Finanzmärkte regulieren. Dazu wurden viele Gesetze gemacht, um die Banken, um die Finanzmärkte in den Griff zu bekommen. Kein Mensch würde heute auf die Idee kommen zu sagen: Weil die Finanzsituation sich beruhigt hat, weil die Märkte wieder stabiler sind, brauchen wir die Gesetze, die wir für die Finanzmärkte gemacht haben, jetzt nicht mehr so eng umzusetzen, wir müssen das jetzt etwas lockerer umsetzen. Nein, wir alle erwarten von der EZB, dass sie die Spielregeln hart durchsetzt! Das war die erste Lektion. Die zweite Lektion: Schulden machen keine Zukunft, sondern Schulden zerstören Zukunft. Das war die zweite Lektion, die wir in der Krise gelernt haben. Auch da haben wir gesetzgeberische Antworten gegeben: Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakt, Sixpack, Twopack, unsere Gesetze hier – die übrigens gegen die Stimmen der Sozialdemokraten durchgesetzt wurden. Das haben wir im Parlament mit verantwortet, dass wir stabiler werden, nachhaltiger werden. Und jetzt plötzlich, weil die Märkte etwas liberaler werden, hören wir, insbesondere von Sozialdemokraten und Sozialisten: wir müssen flexibler werden, wir müssen das neu auslegen, wir müssen das alles nochmals überdenken. Ich sage Ihnen, das ist der falsche Weg. Wir müssen die Lektion, die wir gelernt haben, umsetzen und ernst nehmen. Das ist der einzige Weg aus der Krise: nachhaltige Haushalte aufzubauen. Ich frage den Ministerpräsidenten von Italien: Bei einer Gesamtverschuldung von 130 % des BIPs, wo soll denn das Geld herkommen? Sie haben selbst gesagt, dass Sie Ihren Kindern Chancen hinterlassen wollen und nicht noch mehr Schulden aufbauen wollen. Lassen Sie mich noch weiter argumentieren. Es gibt nämlich das Argument, man würde dann Reformen machen, wenn wir mehr Zeit bekommen. Herr Renzi, die Botschaft höre ich wohl, aber bereits der amtierende Kommissionspräsident Barroso hat dem französischen Staatspräsidenten Francois Hollande mehr Zeit gegeben, um Reformen durchzuführen. Bisher können wir dort nicht erkennen, dass das Versprechen gehalten wird. Das heißt, wie sollten wir sicher sein, dass dann Reformen durchgeführt werden? Ich nenne noch ein letztes Argument: Wenn wir Italien und Frankreich mehr Zeit geben, wenn diese Länder mehr Schulden machen dürfen, wie sollen wir dann gegenüber Portugal, Griechenland, Spanien und Irland argumentieren, die ihre Hausaufgaben gemacht haben und ihre Lektion gelernt haben, die Belastungen auf sich genommen haben, dass man nur, weil es um einen G7-Staat geht, nur weil es jetzt um einen der Großen geht, plötzlich flexibler auftreten muss! Mein sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Regeln sind da, damit sie eingehalten werden. Da gibt es keinen Unterschied zwischen kleinen Staaten und großen Staaten in der Europäischen Union! Zu guter Letzt darf ich Ihnen zu diesem Themenfeld noch mit auf den Weg geben: Sie haben von Vertrauen gesprochen, das die Bürger uns entgegenbringen. Was ist denn, wenn Sie Ihrem Freund etwas versprechen, Regeln vereinbaren, und das nicht halten? Dann zerstört man Vertrauen. Und wenn wir in Europa nicht verstehen, dass wir das, was wir in Europa vereinbaren und beschließen, auch ernst nehmen und umsetzen müssen, so wie das der Kommissionspräsident gesagt hat, dann zerstören wir Vertrauen der Bürger. Das heißt, die wichtigste Lektion ist, dass wir Beschlüsse auch ernst nehmen und umsetzen, jeder in seiner Verantwortung! (Beifall) (Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der “blauen Karte” gemäß Artikel 162 Absatz 8 der Geschäftsordnung zu beantworten.) Ana Gomes (S&D),
blue-card question
. – Mr Weber, do you agree that the ECB stuck to the rules – or did not, but actually helped save the euro when it decided to do everything it had to do and when it decided to lend through the banks? That is quite difficult to accept when, at the same time, it is not directly lending to governments. Is it acceptable to you that the ECB helps save the banks and cannot help save the governments and the states? Is this the kind of rules that you want to be respected, or not? (Applause) Manfred Weber (PPE),
Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der “blauen Karte”
. – Zur EZB: Ich respektiere die Unabhängigkeit der EZB. Sie hat in der Krisenzeit in Europa stabilisierend gewirkt und ihre Verantwortung übernommen. Die zentrale Frage ist nicht, ob man manches Geldleihen gut findet oder nicht. Ich wiederhole mich: Die zentrale Frage ist vielmehr, ob wir das, was wir vereinbart haben – übrigens mit Unterstützung von sozialdemokratischen und sozialistischen Stimmen, etwa beim einstimmigen Beschluss über den Stabilitätspakt im Europäischen Rat, ernst nehmen oder nicht. Das steht im Mittelpunkt der Diskussion. Und wenn wir es ernst nehmen, dann schaffen wir Vertrauen. Das ist der Weg der Europäischen Volkspartei! (Beifall) Presidente. - Ringrazio l'onorevole Gianni Pittella per aver svolto brillantemente il ruolo di primo Vicepresidente per tanti anni e mi complimento con lui per il brillante risultato ottenuto all'interno del suo gruppo che lo ha nominato proprio ieri sera Presidente. Gianni Pittella,
a nome del gruppo S&D
. – Grazie, auguri anche a lei Presidente Tajani. Signor Presidente del Consiglio, Matteo Renzi, se io dovessi fare un tweet sul suo discorso, scriverei “autorevole, ambizioso, appassionato, concreto”. Lei non ha deluso le attese positive e devo dire che le sue posizioni trovano una felice sintonia nelle posizioni da sempre avute dal Gruppo dei Socialisti e dei Democratici. Perché sì, in questi anni di dura crisi economica e sociale noi socialisti e democratici ci siamo battuti, e continueremo a farlo, per un'Europa più equa, per un'Europa più democratica, per un'Europa capace di garantire a ciascuna persona un lavoro e un salario dignitoso. Un'Europa che non abbandoni i governi a se stessi quando si tratta di gestire i flussi migratori, un'Europa capace di far sognare i giovani. E lei oggi ha delineato quel sogno di pietra, quel futuro migliore che l'Europa deve ai giovani e ai cittadini, i cittadini che hanno detto nelle ultime elezioni: “O l'Europa cambia, o l'Europa muore”. E un primo passo di cambiamento lo abbiamo realizzato sul piano della designazione del Presidente della Commissione europea, prendendo atto del voto dei cittadini: un grande passo di svolta democratica. Ma restano due grandi questioni, tra le tante, che sono prioritarie: una è l'economia e l'altra sono i flussi migratori. Sull'economia, non possiamo non vedere qual è lo stato comatoso della società europea. Parlano le cifre, della disoccupazione, dell'emarginazione, della condizione in cui versa il ceto medio, che oggi è spappolato, è indebolito, è impoverito. Abbiamo da dare delle risposte su questo tema che è il tema prioritario, perché non esiste libertà se non c'è la libertà dal bisogno. E questa è una condizione prioritaria che noi poniamo. Non vogliamo “scassare” i conti pubblici, collega Weber: non siamo gli sfasciacarrozze delle finanze pubbliche. Ma non possiamo nemmeno accettare che si sfasci la società, la umanità che noi rappresentiamo, le persone in carne ed ossa, non i numeri. (Applausi) Dobbiamo aggiustare i numeri ma dobbiamo aggiustare la vita delle persone. Ciò significa usare tutta la flessibilità prevista dal patto. Non vogliamo cambiare, almeno per il momento, un punto di equilibrio: quel patto si chiamava “di crescita e di stabilità” ma è stato solo di stabilità e di austerità, aggiungo io, e non è stato di crescita. E quindi noi siamo fedeli alle intese: che gli altri non si tirino indietro, assumendo posizioni francamente da noi inaccettabili. (Applausi) E sull'immigrazione: abbiamo bisogno di praticare la parola “solidarietà”, che non può essere uno slogan, dev'essere praticata. Solidarietà verso chi ci chiede di aprire le nostre porte, solidarietà nei confronti dei governi e dei Paesi che subiscono una più forte pressione migratoria. Questo lo dobbiamo. L'Europa nasce come il condimento della solidarietà ma poi smarrisce e dimentica il significato concreto della solidarietà. Il Presidente Renzi ha detto delle parole chiare sia sul tema della flessibilità del patto e della necessità della crescita, sia sul tema della gestione europea dei flussi migratori. Il Presidente Renzi ha parlato di Mediterraneo, questo mare insanguinato, e ha ricordato che il Mediterraneo non è soltanto il mare dello scontro interreligioso, delle carrette della morte: è anche il mare di una grande civiltà millenaria, che ha fondato la democrazia. Eppure una politica piccola piccola si è permessa qualche anno fa di dire: “Ma che succede se la Grecia esce dall'Euro o dall'Unione europea? Non succede quasi niente”, dimenticando che l'Europa senza la Grecia sarebbe come un bambino senza il suo certificato di nascita. Ecco, l'Europa ha bisogno di recuperare grandezza e la politica ha bisogno di recuperare grandezza, ha bisogno di recuperare leader veri, non di cartapesta, come leader vero è il Presidente del Consiglio dei ministri italiano. Noi sosterremo il Semestre italiano, perché sarà un semestre di cambiamento vero. Grazie, Presidente Renzi, per quello che farà per l'Europa. (L'oratore accetta di rispondere a tre domande “cartellino blu” (articolo 162, paragrafo 8, del regolamento)) Bill Etheridge (EFDD),
blue-card question
. – We have heard a lot about philosophers today, and that has been very interesting. Are you aware of the great British philosopher who said that “the trouble with socialism is you sooner or later run out of other people's money”? You cannot create a recovery based on masses and masses of debt and bankruptcy for the whole of Europe. Otherwise, you will be bankrupt in the future. Can you not see this? Yannick Jadot (Verts/ALE),
question “carton bleu”
. – Monsieur Pittella, vous avez dit à quel point le Premier ministre Renzi avait le regard tourné vers l'avenir et voulait rompre avec le passé. L'Italie, aujourd'hui, va notamment devoir présider l'adoption d'un paquet climat-énergie et pour l'instant, l'Italie ne rompt pas du tout avec le passé puisqu'elle ne défend pas un objectif contraignant en matière d'énergies renouvelables et d'efficacité énergétique. Est-ce cela votre conception du regard vers l'avenir? Giulia Moi (EFDD),
Domanda “cartellino blu”
. – Io vorrei chiedere all'onorevole Pittella: lei ha detto: “Siamo fedeli alle intese”. Che cosa intendeva con questa affermazione? E vorrei che spiegasse come invece in Italia sono stati imposti i trattati e queste intese senza nessun coinvolgimento dei cittadini e senza nessuna democrazia. Gianni Pittella (S&D),
Risposta a tre domande “cartellino blu”
. – Anche chi non è laureato diciamo in matematica o specializzato in queste materie sa che senza crescita non si riduce il debito. L'esperienza di questi anni ha dimostrato che con la sola austerità il debito pubblico è cresciuto. Bisogna agire sulla riduzione della spesa parassitaria e, contemporaneamente, bisogna agire sul sostegno alla crescita – lei non deve interrompere perché io non l'ho interrotta e nessuno si permette di interrompere i colleghi – Dunque, è una pura illusione pensare di rimettere a posto i conti pubblici con crescita zero o sotto zero, perché i proventi dello Stato si riducono. Secondo: il governo italiano ha tutti i diritti di porre qui una questione relativa alla crescita. Voglio ricordare che l'Italia è il Paese dove c'è uno dei più alti avanzi primari del mondo e questo è il frutto di un'azione di governo lungimirante e coraggiosa. E voglio ricordare, ma lo farà il presidente Renzi nel suo intervento conclusivo, che c'è un programma di riforme strutturali che sono già state iniziate e che saranno portate avanti. Clima ed energia: io non penso che l'Italia sia un paese o abbia un governo insensibile a questi temi che riguardano la sostenibilità ambientale. Quanto alle intese, noi siamo fedeli ad una interpretazione del Patto di stabilità e di crescita in cui vi sono due termini: la stabilità e la crescita. Finora si è battuto soltanto sull'acceleratore della stabilità e dell'austerità e non su quello della crescita. Se stanno insieme va bene; se non stanno insieme non ci stiamo noi socialisti e democratici. Syed Kamall,
on behalf of the ECR Group
. – Mr President, I would like to welcome the Prime Minister to the Parliament. I am afraid that my speech will not be as flattering as the last one towards you. Europe is in crisis. We see little or no growth. You have identified that global competitiveness is in decline. We see high levels of unemployment, and the results of the European elections are clear. Whether you voted for the left or for the right in the last elections, Europe cannot go on as it is. Europe has to change. Europe needs reform now. Here in the European Parliament, I am proud to lead the European Conservatives and Reformists Group, a group committed to reform and to working with those who are prepared to take the tough decisions to meet the challenges of the 2050s, not look back to the 1950s. So, while we may not agree with the old idea of a United States of Europe, I very much hope and believe, Mr Prime Minister, that you are one of those modern politicians who seeks positive change to meet the challenges of the future. So, as you advance the agenda of your Presidency, we will give you our support when you make the case for reform. We will give you our support if you make the case for economic reform, and we will look to you to champion the single market and the digital economy, to reduce bureaucracy and to cut red tape, to open up markets and to stimulate trade. On the digital economy, let us no longer seek to second guess digital entrepreneurs or to engage in the Soviet-style economics that tells companies how much they can charge their customers. Let us instead lay down a framework for strong competition and for cross-border commerce. Then we should get out of the way and allow entrepreneurs to do what they do best: create jobs, generate wealth and improve our standard of living. That is why we welcome the Commission's second tranche of refit announcements to cut the burden on our businesses. But this Parliament can help by asking some questions. Where is legislation no longer needed? Where is legislation destroying jobs? Where is legislation standing in the way of economic growth? And do we really need all of the 180 proposals carried over from the last European Parliament? On trade, my group will work with you for an EU that is open to trade, not an EU of protectionism sheltering uncompetitive businesses behind barriers at a cost to the consumers. We should instead seek more trade agreements with negotiations which are as transparent as possible to prevent those with an anti-trade agenda from hijacking these discussions. Let us now turn to two vital political questions: the Mediterranean and energy. All of us in this House have been shocked by the tragedies that continue to occur in the Mediterranean. Frontex can clearly play a role by helping to secure the borders and by stopping those seeking a new life from falling victim to traffickers or to the roaring seas. But, in meeting this challenge, it should be about cooperation and not coercion – and not the erosion of sovereign Member States. Turning to energy policy, we should seek to reduce our over-dependence on regimes which do not share our values, whether in the Middle East or Russia. So let us not seek yet another rhetorical Union, but instead a functioning market identifying and eliminating the blockages in the single market and encouraging better interconnections. Prime Minister, you have a busy agenda. Where we disagree with your proposals, we will offer an alternative. Where you pursue the 1950s agenda of ever-closer union, we will urge you to look to the future but, where you look forward to the 2050s, we will work with you. We hope that a fresh face in the Council chair will see fresh ideas and a fresh break in the politics of the past. If you can deliver this, we look forward to working with you. (Applause) Guy Verhofstadt,
a nome del gruppo ALDE
. – Caro Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'Italia è un grande Paese fondatore dell'Unione europea e ha sempre difeso l'approccio comunitario in Europa e a causa della crisi è vero che l'Italia sta vivendo una forte pressione, un crescente sentimento antieuropeo. È innegabile. Allora, caro Presidente, contiamo su di lei per riaffermare l'impegno europeo del vostro Paese, per rilanciare anche il progetto europeo e il progetto così come lo immaginava Altiero Spinelli e per ridare all'Italia, nella buona tradizione di Romano Prodi, un ruolo centrale di motore dell'integrazione europea e non per sprecare tempo, come ha fatto Berlusconi che ha perduto dieci anni per parlare nel Consiglio europeo di donne e di calcio: non è questo importante, penso, in Europa. Mr President, this is a crucial time in Europe. I want to continue with the discussion we have been having here in the European Parliament. It is not the first time; if you come tomorrow we will be having exactly the same discussion: a discussion on austerity and growth, saying to public opinion that there is an opposition between them. I believe that there is no opposition between austerity, which is needed for sustainable growth in the medium term and the long term, and, at the same time, a strategy for growth in the future. There is no opposition. We are stuck and blocked in the European Union between the discussion between Mr Krügman on one side and Mr Ferguson on the other; between a Socialist government in France – Mr Hollande – and on the other hand Mrs Merkel of Germany, who are in fact opposing different positions. It is Merkel against Hollande, or maybe the other way round. What we need now is to recognise that austerity and growth are in fact two sides of the same coin, and that the only possibility is that you need austerity; you need to continue, and to apply the rules that Mr Weber is correct in asking for, but at the same time, the problem in Europe is that we did not have a growth strategy and a growth package. We have, for the first time, to be intelligent, and not to think in old schemes, or that it is by deficit spending – by making new debts at national level – that you can create sustainable growth. You have to use Europe for growth. We need to use a new package – a Delors package – in the new sectors of digital and investment in energy to have this growth. It is not at national level, with debt in Italy of 132 % of GDP – how can you create growth in Italy? It is not possible. We have – and that is the role you must now play – to say to the colleagues in the European Council and to ask the European Commission for a second Delors package, as we did in the 1980s – you will remember that there was also a crisis in Europe; there was no Euroscepticism, they were not there. There was eurosclerosis, which was even better than Euroscepticism at that moment. At that moment it was Delors who came forward with a package to create an internal market and to launch this internal market. We do not have it in a number of crucial sectors – not in digital, telecommunication, energy or capital markets – for the moment. The consequence is that small and medium companies have still to pay interest rates of 6-8 % while the banks receive money from the European Central Bank at a record, historically-low interest rate. That is your task now: to launch this kind of new Delors package. Then I am very sure that Europe can emerge from the crisis. Let us use the European Union as an engine of growth, as the engine to emerge from the crisis, and not believe any longer in the old style of deficit spending – programmes at national level – that are not sustainable, because the market will never accept them if countries are making new debt by simply increasing interest rates. I hope you can do that. You are a reformer, we know that. That is the way you have been elected at the head of the PD and then later as the Prime Minister in Italy, and you are also representing a fantastic country. You are representing Italy, which is the basis of the European Union. It is the basis of our conscience, of our history and of our civilisation. So make it work and make it true. (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8)) Eleonora Forenza (GUE/NGL),
Domanda “cartellino blu”
. – Chiedo scusa, sono appena arrivata. Ho sentito parlare di euroscetticismo anche da lei. Mi chiedo se lei e gli altri colleghi siano consapevoli di quanto l'austerità e le vostre politiche di austerità siano fonte di euroscetticismo e di quanto creino una disaffezione all'Europa. Abbiamo sentito parlare tanto del problema della disoccupazione giovanile dal signor Barroso: il presidente Renzi parlava della generazione “Telemaco”: vorrei chiedervi se vi rendete conto che questa generazione “Telemaco” è la più precaria dal dopoguerra ad oggi. Vi rendete conto di tutto ciò? E se ve ne rendete conto, perché è stato rinviato alla fine del semestre il vertice europeo sulla disoccupazione giovanile, che era previsto per luglio. Forse perché le contestazioni sono troppo poco fotogeniche? Guy Verhofstadt (ALDE),
blue-card answer
. – I think that what is happening with the youth in Europe is really a tragedy, let us be honest, certainly in Italy, in Spain and in all these countries. Today 25 % of young people are unemployed, but I do not think it is right to say to them “OK, by taking on more debt, you will find a job in the next five or 10 years”. That is not true. What we need to do in Europe is collect private savings. There is massive private money in private savings in Europe. Use it to invest, not what has been done with the project bonds of the European Commission. That is the Loch Ness monster of the European Union. Every time when we talk about growth and we go there, we have EUR 200 million in project bonds to launch. It is not like that. What we need is to invest massively in future bonds, in the future infrastructure of the European Union, in digital, in energy, in the capital markets – that is what we need. Then we can give hope to the young people, not by putting old stories on the table again. Barbara Spinelli,
a nome del gruppo GUE/NGL
. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ha detto il Presidente Renzi che l'Europa muore di noia se non cambia. Sarei d'accordo se alle parole corrispondessero progetti concreti. Tutto deve cambiare nell'Unione: le regole economiche, le istituzioni se si vuole che rinasca un'Unione solidale. Invece il Semestre italiano comincia con assicurazioni inquietanti: le regole economiche non sono ridiscusse anche se sono loro ad avere aggravato la recessione e una sfiducia senza precedenti in Europa; né è ridiscusso il credo liberista, le cosiddette riforme strutturali – lavoro sempre più precario, riduzione delle spese pubbliche, anche costituzioni sminuite – sono tuttora considerate condizioni indispensabili per la crescita. Tutto resta com'è: cambiano solo le parole per dirlo. Non c'è crescita senza rigore perché il rigore è premessa della crescita. Il sillogismo è divenuto intollerabile. Quel che chiediamo al Semestre italiano è un'Unione radicalmente rifondata. Non basta compiacersi delle flessibilità dei parametri sugli investimenti nazionali che nei fatti non ci è concessa: occorre un New Deal europeo, una svolta alla Delors o meglio ancora alla Roosevelt, non fittizie esenzioni negoziate tra Stati forti e deboli. Occorre un'Unione con risorse proprie adeguate perché il New Deal dia lavoro ai milioni che l'hanno perso. Può essere finanziato dalla Banca europea per gli investimenti, dalla tassa sulle transazioni finanziarie, dalla carbon tax, due tasse che predispongono a uno sviluppo ecologico. Investire nelle infrastrutture, nelle energie rinnovabili, nella ricerca: ecco il compito. Né va trascurata la proposta di una conferenza sul debito, simile a quella che nel '53 condonò gran parte dei debiti di guerra della Germania e le permise di rinascere. (Applausi) Compito è anche governare l'immigrazione non controllando solo le frontiere ma creando veri corridoi umanitari per i rifugiati: troppo tragica è la situazione. L'ultimo Consiglio dice altro: spetta solo ai Paesi del sud salvare le vite nel Mediterraneo. Né purtroppo ha avuto successo la proposta di Renzi sul mutuo riconoscimento dei richiedenti asilo. Compito è ascoltare i cittadini che esigono una netta rottura di continuità: rottura nelle politiche economiche e anche in politica estera. La pace in Europa non può più essere decisa negli Stati Uniti. Ai nostri confini con la Russia e nel Mediterraneo è di una pax europea che abbiamo bisogno. E anche con l'America occorre una svolta. Renzi promette di concludere presto il trattato sul commercio fra commissioni e multinazionali USA, il TTP: sembra ignaro dei pericoli, né pare battersi perché cessi la scandalosa segretezza dei negoziati. Quel che vogliono gli elettori è chiaro: che i dogmi liberisti vengano meno, non hanno funzionato. Keynes diceva che i politici sono generalmente schiavi di economisti defunti. Quel che chiedo a Renzi è di non farci credere che il nuovo consista nella denuncia degli euroburocrati e in una schiavitù ininterrotta da economisti defunti. Quel che chiedo al Parlamento europeo è di dare un forte segnale che l'inizio del cambiamento nasce in quest'Aula. Philippe Lamberts,
au nom du groupe Verts/ALE
. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président Renzi, ce que l'on m'avait raconté était donc vrai: vous exercez avec talent, avec passion et avec énergie le ministère de la parole. Vous avez de la chance car dans les six mois à venir, vous allez pouvoir nous faire la démonstration que vous exercez avec le même talent, la même passion et la même énergie le ministère de l'action! Au sujet, d'abord, de ce débat que vous avez eu sur la stabilité et la croissance – mot que j'ai banni de mon vocabulaire –, je veux simplement vous dire que vous avez de la chance car les textes de gouvernance économique européenne – le “two-pack”, le “six-pack”, la stratégie UE 2020 — viennent tous à échéance d'examen, à mi-parcours, de réexamen. Nous devrons, dans les six mois, examiner si nous n'avons pas fait fausse route et pourrons donc remettre en question ces politiques qui se résument finalement à une chose, à savoir l'austérité, c'est-à-dire comment faire payer aux plus fragiles le prix de la crise? Vous avez l'occasion de nous démontrer, en remettant ces textes sur le métier, comment vous voulez retravailler l'appareil de gouvernance économique européenne et il y a en tout cas trois domaines dans lesquels où vous pouvez selon moi marquer des points. Êtes-vous prêt à avancer pour rendre obligatoire des objectifs sociaux, par exemple la réduction de la pauvreté et des inégalités? Pour rendre contraignant – c'est déjà vrai partiellement – des objectifs environnementaux? On se pose aujourd'hui la question – Yannick Jadot l'a dit – d'objectifs contraignants en matière d'efficacité énergétique, en matière de réduction de CO2, en matière de renouvelable. Allez-vous rendre cet objectif contraignant parce que ce n'est que ce que l'on mesure que l'on obtient, que ce n'est que la contrainte qui nous fait avancer? Allez-vous également faire en sorte que cette gouvernance économique européenne redevienne démocratique? Aujourd'hui, la manière dont les choses se passent fait que les parlements ne sont plus, ni au niveau européen, ni au niveau national, réellement impliqués dans les choix de politique économique et sociale. Déficit démocratique, déficit social, déficit environnemental: il y a du pain sur la planche si vous voulez revoir la gouvernance économique! En matière de fiscalité, il n'y a pas de finances publiques soutenables sans dépenses responsables mais pas non plus sans recettes soutenables. Or, nous nous rendons bien compte qu'avec 1 000 milliards d'euros d'évasion et de fraude fiscales par an, il y a là aussi du pain sur la planche! Allez-vous, en qualité de Président du Conseil italien, faire en sorte que d'ici la fin de votre semestre, l'échange automatique d'informations soit la norme, pas seulement dans le domaine de la fiscalité de l'épargne mais de manière générale, entre les administrations fiscales européennes? Allez-vous faire en sorte que le dossier de l'harmonisation fiscale de l'impôt des sociétés, en commençant par l'harmonisation de l'assiette fiscale, soit bouclé? Je tiens surtout à m'adresser à vous, en votre qualité de responsable d'un des deux gouvernements réputés socialistes en Europe – celui de la France et de l'Italie –, parce qu'il me revient qu'en ce qui concerne la taxe sur les transactions financières, Rome et Paris sont les deux capitales qui font le plus d'efforts pour vider le projet de taxe sur les transactions financières de tout contenu. Partis d'un projet dont l'objectif était de rapporter plus de 100 milliards par an, nous en serons peut-être à 5 milliards: c'est devenu une petite stamp duty tax comme au Royaume-Uni, c'est-à-dire trois fois rien. En matière d'énergie et de climat: quelle Union de l'énergie? Allez-vous choisir la formule de Donald Tusk, qui consiste à monter une centrale d'achat commune pour acheter notre gaz en Russie, ou allez-vous faire de l'Union de l'énergie un projet dont l'objectif est l'indépendance de l'Union européenne par le recours au renouvelable et à l'efficacité énergétique? C'est à la fois une question stratégique, une question de climat et une question d'emploi. Enfin, je m'en voudrais de conclure sans évoquer l'Europe sociale. Si vous êtes un Président réputé socialiste – je ne sais pas si le parti démocrate est un parti socialiste, mais enfin peu importe –, allez-vous porter ce projet d'assurance chômage européenne, que votre collègue pousse de toute son énergie, avant la fin de son mandat à la Commission européenne? Autrement dit, vous avez du pain sur la planche. Nous vous attendons au pied du mur. Il paraît que vous avez encore beaucoup d'énergie; nous ne demandons qu'à en voir le résultat. Ignazio Corrao,
a nome del gruppo EFDD
. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Presidente Renzi, la campagna elettorale è finita ma noi in questa casa della democrazia abbiamo sentito parlare delle solite storie: sviluppo, crescita, flessibilità. Ma nessuna parola è stata rivolta verso quei milioni di cittadini esclusi sistematicamente da tutti i processi decisionali che li riguardano. Parlate di discontinuità: ma qual è la vostra concezione di discontinuità, di cambiamento, di nuova generazione? È forse la nomina di Jean-Claude Juncker a presidente della Commissione e di Martin Schulz a Presidente di questo Parlamento? Popolari e socialdemocratici uniti nella spartizione di potere e di poltrone con l'avallo di qualche piccolo gruppo. Noi vogliamo cambiare: noi vogliamo un'Europa diversa, un'Europa diversa innanzitutto nella tipologia di trattati, di accordi, di linea politica. Abbiamo sentito parlare con fervore di trattati come il Fiscal Compact, ma mai in queste istituzioni si è parlato di Social Compact o di una qualche misura sociale di riequilibrio, materia che a voi evidentemente non interessa. Vi abbiamo visto entusiasti nell'azionare il Meccanismo europeo di stabilità ma non abbiamo mai visto nessun entusiasmo nell'ipotizzare un Meccanismo europeo di stabilità sociale, in cui si predilige reddito, lavoro e dignità dei cittadini. (Applausi) E adesso sentiamo nelle vostre parole un grandissimo entusiasmo quando pronunciate l'acronimo TTIP, suona bene vero? Se davvero sarà data la possibilità alle multinazionali che operano nei mercati riuniti di poter agire in giudizio contro i governi nazionali, allora davvero si potrà dire realizzato il più perverso disegno della globalizzazione, ossia i governi che vengono controllati dai mercati. Avete un'idea di quali siano le conseguenze che comporta questa sigla TTIP, ossia accordo sul libero commercio e sugli investimenti tra gli Stati Uniti e l'Europa? Si fanno incontri segreti che escludono noi cittadini dalla discussione e si spalancano le porte a ristrette e potentissime lobby che decideranno tutto del nostro futuro, un futuro che regalerebbe completamente alle multinazionali il nostro mercato, il cibo che mangiamo, i farmaci con cui ci curiamo, l'aria che respiriamo. Con questo trattato, chi potrebbe impedire la vendita nei mercati spagnoli, italiani o portoghesi di un pomodoro OGM costruito in un laboratorio del Texas? Oppure di un Parmigiano Reggiano “Made in Minnesota”? Chi farebbe controlli e regolerebbe la tutela delle tipicità dei territori, e sulla base di quali norme? Un accordo ad appannaggio delle solite multinazionali che farebbe tabula rasa delle piccole e medie imprese e dei tanti lavoratori che rappresentano storicamente l'architrave del benessere della società europea. Ma questo trattato chi lo vuole? Chi lo sta portando avanti? Come Movimento 5 Stelle, già a partire da questo mese di luglio, in tutte le commissioni avvieremo con determinazione e coraggio un processo di trasparenza e di vigilanza sul trattato TTIP. I cittadini devono poter dire la loro. (Applausi) Noi, Presidente Renzi, ci aspettiamo da questa presidenza che venga intrapreso un percorso diverso rispetto a quello tracciato finora. Il modello della globalizzazione rappresenta per l'Unione europea quasi un dogma irrinunciabile e indiscutibile. Ma siamo davvero sicuri che non sia arrivato il tempo in cui è la stessa globalizzazione a controllare questi governi? Sono tanti i tavoli aperti per la globalizzazione economica e finanziaria. Ieri il Marocco, oggi gli Stati Uniti, domani la Cina, la Tunisia e poi chissà. Ma quelli per la globalizzazione dei diritti, Presidente? Avete mai aperto un tavolo, uno, per negoziare l'equiparazione dei diritti dei lavoratori, per garantire un'equa concorrenza in Europa e con i Paesi extraeuropei? Vi ponete la domanda delle condizioni dei lavoratori nei Paesi a cui chiedete il libero scambio? Chi dà una risposta all'agricoltore spagnolo, italiano o portoghese, che si trova sul mercato i suoi prodotti a metà prezzo ed è costretto a chiudere l'azienda? Come spiegate ai lavoratori sottopagati polacchi, agli sfruttati rumeni, ai milioni e milioni di disoccupati e disperati europei senza nessun reddito? Noi ci chiediamo, in qualità di cittadini europei, che futuro ha un'Europa che delocalizza le braccia dei lavoratori dove il costo del lavoro non conosce dignità, delocalizza i portafogli nei paradisi fiscali, spesso sede di multinazionali, e mantiene qui solamente la testa, ossia i centri amministrativi e finanziari, che pian piano vengono circondati però da rabbia sociale e da tanta miseria. E il Parlamento europeo cosa fa? Spende duecento milioni di euro l'anno per la trasferta qui a Strasburgo e allo stesso tempo destina pochi spiccioli per affrontare continue tragedie umanitarie, come i drammatici salvataggi di vite umane nel Canale di Sicilia. È questa l'Europa che volete, signor Presidente? Noi sinceramente no. (Applausi) (L'oratore accetta di rispondere a una domanda “cartellino blu” (articolo 162, paragrafo 8, del regolamento)) Brando Maria Benifei (S&D),
Domanda “cartellino blu”
. – Signor Presidente, vorrei chiedere al collega onorevole Corrao, che ha criticato la scelta del Consiglio europeo di indicare il nome di Juncker, come un compromesso inaccettabile – compromesso che io invece sostengo da federalista europeo convinto – quale sia la proposta alternativa che aveva in mente il suo gruppo politico, in quanto si è presentato alle elezioni senza presentare un candidato alla Presidenza della Commissione europea. Allora mi chiedo: questo progetto di rivoluzione che è stato esplicato nell'intervento, come lo si vuole realizzare senza concorrere al governo dell'Europa, che è quello che ha iniziativa legislativa? Ignazio Corrao (EFDD),
Risposta a una domanda “cartellino blu”
. – Bene, io ho criticato il fatto che viene indicata da questa Presidenza – o comunque nelle campagne elettorali – una certa discontinuità rispetto al passato o comunque una nuova generazione. A me non sembra che Juncker sia appunto l'espressione di un cambiamento o di una nuova generazione. Matteo Salvini (NI). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ci sono rimasto male, mi aspettavo di più. Forse è la stanchezza, forse il viaggio, forse stasera non si può fermare a parlare con i giornalisti perché c'è una trasmissione televisiva in Italia. Forse è il fatto che il dibattito è così interessante che il Presidente della Commissione europea se n'è andato. Secondo me è vergognoso che il Presidente della Commissione europea sia andato a farsi gli affari suoi e non sia in quest'Aula ad ascoltare le risposte di Renzi e gli interventi degli altri deputati. Io parlo al Presidente del Consiglio, parlo ai colleghi e parlo a chi ci sta guardando in diretta streaming: non mi sembra Barroso, sarà più carino però non mi sembra Barroso il signore che lo sostituisce. Non una parola sui marò. Ho sentito parlare dei diritti delle donne in Pakistan, giusto; dei cristiani perseguitati in Nigeria, giusto. Questo è il palazzo dell'ipocrisia e della menzogna perché ci sono due soldati, non italiani, ma europei da due anni in galera in India: non una parola sul tema. Ci occupiamo degli sfigati di tutto il mondo, dei poveri di tutto il mondo non di quelli di casa nostra. E questo è veramente deprimente dal mio punto di vista. Il corridoio umanitario – lo dico a qualche amico di sinistra – avrei voluto ci fosse per i 150 imprenditori italiani che si sono suicidati per la crisi economica l'anno scorso. Il corridoio umanitario lo vorrei per i pensionati massacrati in Italia e nel resto d'Europa perché lo chiede l'Europa. Il corridoio umanitario lo vorrei per quegli agricoltori e per quei pescatori distrutti, con esperienze di decenni buttate via, perché i regolamenti europei, decisi a tavolino da qualcuno che, pur non avendo mai visto un pesce o un'albicocca, decide come si va a pescare, come si fa agricoltura. Non una parola sull'agricoltura, non una parola sulla pesca. Non una parola sulle banche. Questo palazzo e la Commissione – fantasma – sta ingrassando un miliardo di euro alle banche senza che una lira arrivi ai risparmiatori, agli imprenditori, agli artigiani, alle famiglie. C'è in corso una strage: in Italia l'anno scorso si è avuto il record negativo di nuovi bambini nati. Non so come funziona nel resto dell'Europa però siamo tornati indietro di 40 anni in quanto a nuovi nati. Perché quest'Europa sbagliata e questa moneta sbagliata stanno rubando futuro e speranza. Quindi a me spiace che questo sia il palazzo dell'ipocrisia e della menzogna, che fa un minuto di silenzio quando annegano alcune centinaia di disperati, quando l'unica soluzione per evitare questi annegamenti è non farli partire. O qualcuno mi spiega che l'Italia e l'Europa possono accogliere un miliardo di persone oppure l'onorevole Pittella farà un minuto di silenzio, due minuti di silenzio, tre minuti di silenzio perché queste stragi si sono ripetute anche oggi, si ripeteranno domani, si ripeteranno dopodomani. Forse voi vivete su un altro pianeta: io a Telemaco rispondo con Bobby Sands che morì di sciopero della fame dopo 66 giorni dicendo: il nostro giorno verrà. Qua qualcuno sta ballando sul Titanic: verrà il giorno in cui quelli che non hanno arriveranno qua a riprendersi quello che è loro, a partire da una moneta sbagliata nel nome della quale state distruggendo la speranza di intere generazioni. Altro che generazione Erasmus! Elisabetta Gardini (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Primo Ministro, lei ha detto delle belle parole, bellissime parole, chi non le può condividere. Io vorrei continuare – ho soltanto due minuti e non posso – partendo da Telemaco, risponderle con il mito di Ulisse, con l'Antigone, che per me è la nascita proprio della nostra civiltà tra l'Italia e la Grecia. Spero che avremo occasione di farlo. Ma io mi preoccupa per quello che lei non ha detto, che probabilmente è in quel documento scritto che ha depositato, ma forse se lei avesse accennato a qualche cosa di concreto avremmo capito questi bellissimi valori come li intendeva incarnare e tradurre in azioni politiche. Perché io credo che qui noi abbiamo questa responsabilità, che lei ci ha ricordato, di ridare la fiducia all'Europa. Ma lei oggi ha la responsabilità più grande: di aprire i primi mesi di una legislatura che non può essere di routine ma che deve essere di cambiamento. E il cambiamento lei ce lo deve dare con azioni concrete. Questa è la sua responsabilità. E allora io avrei voluto tanto sentire parlare – sì ha parlato di immigrazione, lo diciamo con lei: basta all'Europa che gira le spalle – dicevo, avrei voluto sentire parlare di impresa, di occupazione, di crescita, del Made in, che il Parlamento europeo ha votato e che ora consegniamo al Consiglio, della riforma dei visti, del pagamento dei debiti della pubblica amministrazione, visto che dobbiamo rispettare le regole, dei nostri marò. Sì i nostri marò, signor Primo Ministro: riportiamoli a casa, perché dobbiamo chiudere questa pagina: è una pagina drammatica. Coinvolga gli organismi internazionali – lei sa quali – e riportiamoli a casa. Mettiamo fine a questa pagina veramente indegna di un Paese civile. Noi l'aiuteremo ad essere forte, sì, e l'aiuteremo anche a guardare all'Europa come a una grande opportunità, non soltanto come a un freno Però lei si deve impegnare con azioni concrete e non soltanto con belle, bellissime parole. David-Maria Sassoli (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Presidente del Consiglio, le porgo il benvenuto in quest'Aula a nome dei deputati del Partito Democratico. Il dibattito sta diventando troppo italiano ma io la ringrazio perché lei ha tracciato una visione all'inizio del Semestre italiano e senza visione, onorevole Weber, sarà difficile uscire dalla crisi e far diventare i nostri Paesi più forti. Certo, abbiamo bisogno che i nostri Paesi escano dalla crisi e diventino più forti per un'Europa più forte. Però non dimentichiamoci che possiamo esserlo soltanto con molta più solidarietà, molta più giustizia, con molta più uguaglianza. E allora abbiamo bisogno di cogliere tante sfide e di pensare che iniziamo tutti una legislatura. La inizia la Commissione, la inizia il Parlamento, tutte le istituzioni in questo momento sanno lo stato dell'arte dell'Europa. Su cosa dobbiamo concentrare la nostra comune attenzione? Innanzitutto sulla lezione che ci arriva da questi cinque anni di crisi: con il solo rigore, non usciremo dalle difficoltà. Pertanto dobbiamo metterci quello che è naturale ci debba essere: risorse. Risorse per cosa? Risorse per investimenti, per occupazione, per ricerca. Se pensiamo al futuro, come possiamo non investire nella ricerca? E questi sono obiettivi a vantaggio di tutti i cittadini europei. Abbiamo bisogno di cambiare le politiche e gli approcci alle politiche. Parliamo tanto e ci scandalizziamo giustamente per quello che accade nel Mediterraneo: ma fino a che noi non trasferiremo le politiche nazionali all'Europa noi non avremo una vera Europa che si occupa delle politiche dell'immigrazione. La vogliamo raccogliere tutti assieme questa sfida? Questo è per tutti i cittadini d'Europa e io la ringrazio, Presidente, per aver parlato di eredità: è importantissimo perché non dobbiamo mai dimenticarci da dove veniamo e dobbiamo ricordarci quello che diceva con sfiducia Paul Valéry durante la guerra, mentre il nazismo avanzava: “Che ne sarà dell'Europa? L'Europa diventerà quello che in realtà è, cioè un piccolo promontorio del continente asiatico”. No, non lo siamo diventati e non vogliamo diventarlo. E poi la ringrazio per avere parlato di destini incrociati.. (Il Presidente interrompe l'oratore.) (L'oratore accetta di rispondere a una domanda “cartellino blu” (articolo 162, paragrafo 8, del regolamento)) Steven Woolfe (EFDD),
blue-card question
. – Mr Sassoli, thank you very much for your speech. You made a suggestion that the Prime Minister of Italy has indeed had a vision for Europe. Well, I would like to ask you a question concerning the vision of Europe of the Italian Prime Minister when he made the following quote in this Chamber: that in Nigeria there were Africans who attacked the girls because they have Western values. Is it correct that we should have a leader of a European Parliament or a European government that suggests that Western values are better than African values? I do not accept .. (The President cut off the speaker) David-Maria Sassoli (S&D),
Risposta a una domanda “cartellino blu”
. – Non dimentichi mai che i valori della vita, i valori della dignità dell'uomo, il valore della libertà per noi sono non solo il motivo per cui ci troviamo in quest'Aula ma perché vogliamo un'Europa più forte, più giusta, più solidale e che sia improntata a uno spirito di uguaglianza. Noi dobbiamo fare in modo che questi valori siano condivisi anche dagli altri. Ryszard Antoni Legutko (ECR). - Mr President, Mr Prime Minister, the fact is that out of the many Presidencies over the last ten years, very few remain in the memory of the European people, and very few have made a difference. Most of them were simply indistinguishable from one another. People do not know who has the Presidency and a lot of them simply do not care. Most of your predecessors, Mr Prime Minister, were sitting in exactly in the same place, were making speeches that were highly predictable. They were saying: yes, we need development; yes, we need to grow; yes, we need to fight unemployment; we have to do something about energy, climate, and so on. There is one way to do it and that is more Europe, more unity and more Community method. This is a sort of rhetoric, which for my use I call the “Barroso rhetoric”. Your speech was different. We here liked it enormously, and I liked it enormously. It was well put; it was full of literary references; and it was beautifully articulated, but I am not sure if you are aware that you did not tell us much. I have not the slightest idea what you are going to do. I repeat what a colleague of mine said: if you are as good a doer as you are a speaker for at least 30 % or 40 % of the time, then this will be one of the Presidencies that will make a difference. Anyway, I wish Italy good luck. I hope that you have more luck than you had in football recently. Marielle de Sarnez (ALDE). - Monsieur le Président, cela fait du bien évidemment de vous entendre défendre une vision et un idéal européens ainsi que des valeurs communes. Dans le moment précis où nous nous trouvons, vous portez – comme nous d'ailleurs – une responsabilité particulière: il faut maintenant vraiment entraîner l'Europe vers de nouveaux horizons pour la rendre plus efficace, plus politique et plus démocratique. Je crois pour ma part que c'est au fond aux Européens, et à personne d'autre, de porter l'esprit de réforme pour retrouver – comme vous le dites – l'âme de l'Europe et surtout la confiance, que nous retrouverons à certaines conditions. Premièrement, il faut tenir un langage de vérité. Il faut que l'Europe cesse d'être le bouc-émissaire rêvé de tous les dirigeants nationaux. Il faut que chacun assume, dans son pays, dans son État membre, ses propres difficultés et ses propres réformes structurelles quand elles sont nécessaires. Deuxièmement, nous devons cesser – je vous le dis sérieusement – d'opposer en permanence la question de la stabilité à celle de la croissance: le pacte est un pacte de stabilité et de croissance. Sortons de ces débats idéologiques qui ne servent qu'à retarder le moment où nous progresserons enfin pour rendre l'Europe plus efficiente et plus efficace! Enfin – je vous le demande –, il ne faut, dans votre feuille de route, que peu d'engagements – pas un arbre de Noël – mais des engagements qui soient tenus, des engagements qui soient vérifiables. Il faut que nos concitoyens voient, comprennent, sentent, dans les semaines et les mois qui viennent, qu'il y a un changement en Europe, qu'il y a un esprit de réforme en Europe et que, désormais, aux questions de la croissance, de l'emploi, de notre sécurité, des flux migratoires, nous aurons des réponses. Τάκης Χατζηγεωργίου (GUE/NGL). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, θα ήθελα να σας πω κατ' αρχήν, με όλο το σεβασμό, ότι κάνατε μια σχεδόν κακή διαχείριση του χρόνου και ελπίζω τώρα να μην εξαντλήσετε τη δικαιοσύνη σας πάνω σε όσους έχουν μόνο ένα λεπτό. Κύριε Πρωθυπουργέ, είπατε, κατά την άποψή μου, πολύ ωραία πράγματα και θέλω ειλικρινά να σας συγχαρώ. Αλλά ταυτόχρονα πιστεύω - και έχω ακούσει πάρα πολλές ομιλίες σε αυτό το Κοινοβούλιο - ότι κανείς δεν ξέρει, ούτε εσείς με έχετε πείσει ότι ξέρετε πώς θα γίνουν πράξη όσα είπατε. Δεν ξέρετε αν μπορείτε – αλλά ακόμη και αν ξέρετε δεν μπορείτε - να βρείτε το χρήμα που χρειάζεται για να υπάρξει ανάπτυξη στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Αυτό είναι το πρόβλημα της Ευρώπης και συμφωνώ μαζί σας ότι υπάρχει ανία και κόπωση. Αλλά πέρα από τα λόγια πρέπει να μας πείτε με ποιο τρόπο θα υπάρξει ανάπτυξη στην Ευρώπη, θα δοθεί χρήμα στο Νότο, θα υπάρξει αναστύλωση του κοινωνικού κράτους, θα υπάρξει ένα σύστημα υγείας και ένα σύστημα παιδείας για όλους τους πολίτες της Ευρώπης, ισότιμο και ικανό, αυτό που μας αξίζει. Το Συμβούλιο Σύνδεσης Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης-Τουρκίας εξέφρασε τη θέση ότι η πλήρης και χωρίς διακρίσεις εφαρμογή του συμπληρωματικού πρωτοκόλλου συνιστά ...... της Ιταλίας θα καταφέρει να πείσει .... να εφαρμόσει τις υποχρεώσεις της. (Ο Πρόεδρος διακόπτει τον ομιλητή) Josep-Maria Terricabras (Verts/ALE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Presidente Renzi so che i sei mesi della sua Presidenza europea rappresentano un periodo molto breve, di fatto quasi simbolico. Ma noi sappiamo che i simboli sono importanti e le azioni e gli atteggiamenti ancora di più. Durante la sua Presidenza ci sarà un referendum sull'indipendenza della Scozia e il governo della Catalogna vuole convocare un referendum perché i cittadini possano pronunciarsi sul loro futuro che può essere l'indipendenza oppure un'altra soluzione politica. Adesso ho due domande: crede, come io credo, che l'espressione democratica del popolo sia la base, il fondamento assoluto, che la volontà libera dei cittadini sia quella che legittima la legge e la legalità? Che cosa pensa di dire e di fare perché i catalani possano esprimersi liberamente, pacificamente e democraticamente il prossimo 9 novembre? Mario Borghezio (NI). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il Presidente del Consiglio non si è degnato di ascoltare le eventuali domande dei parlamentari italiani, riunitisi appositamente e che lo attendevano, dato il suo ritardo, da tempo. È un precedente che non va bene, Presidente Renzi. È un precedente che segna male. Lei ha tempo per le televisioni, ha tempo per il gossip, per scherzare, per farsi vedere quando finge di colloquiare con la gente ma poi, nei fatti, lei fa gli interessi delle banche, col POS, obbligando il piccolo commerciante a comprarsi il meccanismo per registrare le spese superiori ai 30 euro. Lei è quello che copre le malefatte del suo partito col Monte dei Paschi di Siena, perché lei siede sui banchi di un partito che ha svuotato le casse di una banca straordinariamente importante della nostra tradizione bancaria sana, che è quella delle banche che servono il territorio, e non di quella che comanda qui in Europa, nel sinedrio di quest'Europa delle banche che finanziano solo i loro amici e che tosano. Lei non fa nulla, col progetto che attualmente è all'esame del suo governo, per bloccare le speculazioni sui derivati e le persone che conoscono la situazione nel nostro Paese sanno che siamo molto vicini allo scoppio di una nuova bolla finanziaria. Lei è un pagliaccio!.... (Il Presidente interrompe l'oratore e lo richiama all'ordine) Presidente. - Onorevole Borghezio, La prego di usare un linguaggio più consono a questa Assemblea, le critiche sono sempre ammesse, il dibattito politico è sempre amlmesso, ma La pregodi usare nei confronti del Presidente del Consiglio un linguaggio più consono a questa Assemblea. Herbert Reul (PPE). - Herr Präsident, Herr Präsident Renzi! Ich finde, das war schon eine interessante Rede. Den Eindruck erwecken, dass man sich um das Gute kümmert und um das Wichtige und das Wertvolle, so mit dem Hinweis darauf: “Wir brauchen uns gar nicht damit zu beschäftigen, ob das richtig oder falsch war, was wir in den letzten Jahren gemacht haben. Wir starten einfach neu.” Damit erweckt man den Eindruck, als würde alles, was bisher gegolten hat, auch gelten sollen. Dann tauchen solche Sätze auf wie “Es geht um Menschen, nicht um Zahlen”. Aber ich bitte doch, darauf zu achten, dass dann, wenn Wirtschaft und Finanzen nicht stimmen, wenn die Staaten in Schwierigkeiten kommen, den Menschen auch nicht geholfen werden kann. Das heißt, die Voraussetzung für alles sind geordnete Finanzen, die Voraussetzung ist, dass die Wirtschaft funktioniert, die Voraussetzung ist, dass Einnahmen erzielt werden. Sonst kann den Menschen auch nichts Gutes getan werden. Deswegen habe ich große Sorgen, dass Ihr Hinweis darauf, dass man manches hier neu starten will, der Hinweis darauf ist, dass man neu interpretieren will, dass man Wachstum anders versteht als viele in diesem Parlament es verstanden haben. Wir waren uns einig in allen Staaten und auch hier, dass wir eine große Mehrheit hatten, um sicherzustellen, dass die Stabilität der Finanzen die Voraussetzung dafür ist, etwas aufzubauen, und dass Wachstum nicht dadurch organisiert wird, dass man mehr Geld ausgibt, sondern dass man Strukturen schafft. Wir haben bei dem Fonds für Jugendarbeitslosigkeit zig Milliarden Euro zur Verfügung, und es werden keine davon abgerufen! Das Problem ist nicht weniger Geld, das Problem ist: Wie macht man es, wie setzt man das Geld so ein, dass daraus Wirkungen erzielt werden? Wie schafft man Strukturveränderungen, Strukturreformen? Wie schafft man Innovationen, und wie schafft man Forschung und neues Wagnis? Nicht dadurch, dass man mit neuen Regeln Unternehmen daran hindert oder sie bremst, zu investieren, sondern genau das Gegenteil ist der Fall. Die brauchen nicht mehr Geld und mehr Ausgaben, sondern die brauchen mehr Ideen, mehr Innovation, mehr Technologie, mehr Bereitschaft und Risiko zu Neuem. Den Weg muss man gehen in Europa! Elena Valenciano Martínez-Orozco (S&D). - Señor Presidente, se trata de respuestas concretas y de esperanza. Respuestas concretas son la creación de empleo. Esperanza es el cambio de un modelo económico y de crecimiento agotado, y que está produciendo muchísima injusticia. Usted, señor Presidente en ejercicio del Consejo, le ha devuelto la esperanza a millones de italianos. Yo lo que le pido es que haga lo mismo con millones de europeos. Devuélvales la esperanza a millones de europeos, a través de políticas concretas y a través de un cambio profundo en la política europea. Porque, por mucho que diga el portavoz del Grupo Popular, la austeridad a toda costa nos está matando. Está matando a muchos países europeos y a millones de ciudadanos que nos están mirando para que flexibilicemos nuestras normas —porque hay espacio para hacerlo— y creemos empleo y devolvamos los derechos a los trabajadores, y demos libertad a las mujeres, y hagamos posible que se luche de verdad contra una pobreza que es real y que está a la vuelta de todas nuestras calles. Eso es lo que necesitamos y por eso necesitamos para este semestre un Presidente como usted. Pero lo necesitamos todo el tiempo, porque la responsabilidad también es del Consejo Europeo. Verá, lo que tenemos que hacer es conseguir que los que quieren romper Europa pierdan y que los que seguimos pensando que Europa es la solución ganemos. Eso es lo que necesitamos en Europa. Por eso necesitamos a Renzi, por eso le necesitamos, por eso le deseo suerte, auguri e coraggio. (La oradora acepta responder a una pregunta formulada con arreglo al procedimiento de la “tarjeta azul” (artículo 162, apartado 8, del Reglamento)) Pablo Iglesias Turrión (GUE/NGL),
pregunta de tarjeta azul
. – Señora Valenciano, comparto buena parte de los argumentos que acaba de exponer, pero ¿no le parecen ligeramente incompatibles con pactar con los conservadores la votación de la presidencia de esta Cámara y de la Comisión Europea? Elena Valenciano Martínez-Orozco (S&D),
respuesta de “tarjeta azul”
. – Verá, señor Iglesias, las reglas de la democracia dicen que es importante construir en este Parlamento un sistema de funcionamiento posible. Hay que construir mayorías en esta Cámara para que se pueda escuchar la voz de los ciudadanos. Esta Cámara tiene que funcionar y, para que funcione, hay que construir mayorías. Estamos dispuestos a hablar con todos los grupos, pero esta mayoría ha permitido, por un acuerdo técnico, que esta Cámara funcione. Es lo que necesita Europa. También necesita que el Parlamento Europeo se haga oír, porque el Consejo necesita escuchar al Parlamento Europeo, y para eso tenemos que construir grandes mayorías, señor Iglesias. Krisztina Morvai (NI). - Miniszterelnök úr, az olasz elnökség egyik prioritása a növekedés. Szeretném megkérdezni Öntől, hogy mit értett pontosan növekedés alatt? Példát mondok arra, hogy miért nem egyértelmű ez a kifejezés. Az én hazámban, Magyarországon, a gazdasági élet szereplőinek nagy része külföldi, illetőleg multinacionális cég. Az ő profitjuknak a növekedése ugye növekedésnek számít egyfajta hagyományos értelemben, ugyanakkor nekünk, magyaroknak ebben nem sok örömünk van, hiszen a profitot az országból kiviszik. Ez az egyik probléma. A másik pedig, hogy az ő profitnövekedésüknek a magyar emberek többsége nem haszonélvezője, hanem áldozata, hiszen az ő profitnövekedésükhöz szükséges, idézőjelben mondom, hogy szükséges, a magyar munkavállalók minél nagyobb kizsákmányolása, a magyar kisgazdák és magyar kisvállalkozók minél nagyobb számban való tönkremenetele. Hogyan lehet tehát igazságosan mérni a növekedést? Köszönöm szépen! Franck Proust (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Premier ministre, nous vous avons bien écouté mais permettez-moi, au nom de la délégation française du PPE, de vous faire part de notre analyse sur des points particuliers auxquels nous attachons beaucoup d'importance. Pour ce qui est de la croissance, nous sommes persuadés que c'est au niveau européen que se trouve la solution. Pour relancer notre économie, nous croyons fermement que c'est en pariant sur les grands projets industriels européens, tels qu'Airbus, Copernicus et Galileo, que l'Europe parviendra à concurrencer les géants indien, brésilien, chinois ou américain. Il est également indispensable de définir une politique claire de réindustrialisation basée sur quatre ou cinq piliers, en investissement massivement dans l'innovation et dans la recherche. En ce qui concerne le traité transatlantique, nous disons “oui” sur le principe, mais pas à n'importe quelles conditions, et nous serons vigilants pour que cet accord ne soit pas conclu avec des normes au rabais, notamment dans le domaine de l'agriculture. L'Europe doit s'imposer et imposer ses prérogatives. Elle doit se faire respecter sur l'ensemble des accords de libre-échange et le principe de réciprocité doit devenir la règle absolue. De même, la relance de notre économie ne doit pas se faire au détriment de la discipline budgétaire. Nous ne pouvons pas faire croire à nos concitoyens que nous pouvons relancer notre économie tout en hypothéquant leur avenir. Ce serait leur mentir et cette schizophrénie que nous offrent certains discours politiques est un jeu dangereux. Sur la question migratoire, la Présidence française avait, dès 2008, montré la voie. Malgré cela, nous n'avons pas, depuis, enregistré d'avancées majeures. L'Europe subit une forte pression migratoire et l'Italie est bien sûr en première ligne. C'est en unissant nos forces que nous devons agir car là encore, c'est au niveau européen que nous pouvons résoudre notre problème en allant vers une immigration choisie et non subie. Au final, nous voulons une Europe des résultats, une véritable Europe politique qui pèse dans le monde, une Europe construite autour des citoyens et pour les citoyens. La tâche est certes ardue mais passionnante et, comme dans tous les domaines, il n'y a que les combats que l'on ne mène pas que l'on est sûr de perdre d'avance. Carlos Zorrinho (S&D). - Senhor Presidente, termos Martin Schulz como Presidente deste Parlamento é uma garantia de que a nossa tradição plural e humanista está salvaguardada. Da mesma maneira, essa garantia foi reforçada com a indigitação de Juncker para a Presidência da Comissão Europeia. Sr. Presidente, este ato democrático é um pequeno passo na ligação dos cidadãos europeus com as instituições, é um pequeno passo mas é um passo no sentido correto. Há muito tempo que não dávamos passos no sentido correto e, por isso, isto abre um novo caminho de esperança para o nosso projeto comum. Chegou agora, Sr. Presidente, o tempo de irmos mais longe, de tomarmos decisões e de fazer reformas que tornem melhor a vida das pessoas. A Presidência italiana ocorre num momento em que não há soluções intermédias: ou será um grande sucesso ou será um fracasso. A Europa tem que fazer escolhas. Queremos ser um museu, queremos ser um parque temático, queremos ser um casino ou queremos antes ser o laboratório do futuro? Precisamos para isso de ser capaz de liderar uma nova etapa de industrialização, de inovação limpa, um novo modelo energético, diversificado, criar emprego qualificado, em particular para os jovens, multiplicar paraísos empreendedores, onde possa nascer a nova geração da indústria europeia. Precisamos, Sr. Presidente, de ser inspirados pela aceleração e pela determinação que tem sido a matriz do seu governo. Temos que completar a arquitetura económica e monetária e promover o investimento inteligente. Quero fazer-lhe uma única pergunta: que plano tem o Sr. Presidente para dotar a zona euro de um orçamento que permita tornar tudo isto mais fácil e mais possível. Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE). - Señor Presidente, decía el Presidente Renzi que la fotografía de Europa sería una fotografía de aburrimiento. No creo que sea de aburrimiento, sino de preocupación, porque hay más de veinticinco millones de mujeres y hombres sin empleo, porque afrontamos una creciente presión migratoria, porque nuestro crecimiento económico es escaso, porque nuestras empresas tienen que afrontar una competencia creciente en los mercados globales y pierden competitividad, y sobre todo porque, además, tenemos un entorno en el que muchos ciudadanos europeos han perdido la confianza en la capacidad de los políticos para ofrecer soluciones efectivas. Por eso, la Presidencia italiana tiene un gran reto: es la primera tras las elecciones europeas, tiene que dar una respuesta a las inquietudes de los ciudadanos, y las respuestas no solo se dan con bellos discursos, sino con reformas estructurales muy importantes. El Consejo Europeo ha acordado las prioridades que deben guiar a la Unión Europea en los próximos cinco años, y dentro de ellas tendrá que moverse la Presidencia italiana. Pero yo quisiera que me aclarara cuáles van a ser las actuaciones de la Presidencia en tres ámbitos particulares. En primer lugar, en materia de inmigración. ¿Qué va a hacer Italia en este semestre para impulsar un compromiso renovado en favor de los países que tienen que afrontar una mayor presión migratoria y para que la Unión Europea coadyuve a poner a disposición de estos Estados cuantos medios sean necesarios para proteger la vida y los derechos fundamentales de quienes deciden dejarlo todo para alcanzar el territorio de la Unión Europea? Mi segunda inquietud es qué va hacer Italia en este semestre, en un contexto en el que tenemos una enorme inestabilidad política en la frontera oriental y meridional, para relanzar la política de vecindad mediterránea. Y, finalmente, en materia de política energética, ¿qué va a hacer la Presidencia italiana para garantizar que el Consejo Europeo, en octubre de 2014, sea capaz de tomar decisiones relativas al marco estratégico de energía y clima, decisiones sobre mejoras de seguridad energética y sobre objetivos de interconexión para el año 2030? (El orador acepta responder a una pregunta formulada con arreglo al procedimiento de la “tarjeta azul” (artículo 162, apartado 8, del Reglamento)) Amjad Bashir (EFDD),
blue-card question
. – Mr Arias, we have heard about the injustice done to a Christian woman in Pakistan, and it is correct to say that. But I must say that injustice in countries like that poor country happens to everybody – not just Christians – and it has to be deplored. What we in the European Commission need to do, to stop people dying off the coast of Lampedusa, is to have open trade with these countries in order to lift them out of poverty, so that they do not have to resort to asylum. Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE),
respuesta de “tarjeta azul”
. – Sí, efectivamente, para luchar contra la inmigración no solamente hay que garantizar la protección de las fronteras, sino que es verdad que tenemos que favorecer la política de desarrollo en los países de origen de la inmigración. Es evidente que la Unión Europea tiene la responsabilidad de concentrar su política de ayuda al desarrollo en estos países de origen de la migración y en los países de tránsito. Pero también creo que el desarrollo de estructuras comerciales y una política de vecindad inteligente en el Mediterráneo, como la que puede impulsar Italia, puede dar buenos frutos, también con estos países. Tanja Fajon (S&D). - V veliko veselje mi je bilo, gospod premier, slišati vaša navdihujoča sporočila. Potrebujemo vaš ambiciozni reformni program za drugačno Evropo. Kot poslanka, ki prihajam iz sosednje države Slovenije, kjer imamo volitve prihodnjo nedeljo, še bolj delim z vami skrb za gospodarsko rast. To je edina rešitev za delovna mesta. Potrebujemo odgovorno evropsko upravljanje, ki bo odpravilo trojko. Ustaviti moramo odtekanje na milijarde evrov v davčne oaze, razkrivati in kaznovati korupcijo. Zagotoviti moramo varne življenjske standarde, posebej za brezposelne, in okrepiti solidarnost. Kako naj bo Evropa zgled svetu, če na njenih obalah umirajo ljudje? Velik izziv bo vzpostavitev – to, kar ste omenili – nove, humanitarne politike priseljevanja. Slovenija je bila prva, ki je ponudila Italiji pomoč v akciji reševanja Mare nostrum. Kje so bile ostale države? Moja država ima še vedno zelo svež spomin na čustva ob vstopanju v Unijo. Širitev na države zahodnega Balkana mora ostati med nalogami vašega predsedovanja. Nujne reforme morajo biti ključ do uspeha. Imamo izjemno odgovornost, gospod premier. Ubraniti moramo naše ljudi, naše demokracije. Ne želim si, da nas bo v Evropi strah čez nekaj let ali da ji bodo mladi ljudje obrnili hrbet. Želim si, da bomo Evropejci imeli spet vse razloge, da začutimo dušo Evrope. To je naš cilj in imam dovolj razlogov, da z optimizmom zrem v vaše predsedovanje. Mariya Gabriel (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Premier ministre, votre discours dégage de la force politique, une volonté politique, une force d'action. J'aimerais aujourd'hui mettre l'accent sur plusieurs aspects importants et concrets. Premièrement, j'évoquerai la politique économique, la lutte contre le chômage des jeunes, la garantie pour la jeunesse. J'attire votre attention et vous invite à insister auprès des États membres pour que l'accent soit mis sur l'entreprenariat des jeunes. Développer l'esprit d'entreprise, c'est faire des jeunes les acteurs de la croissance. De même, j'attire votre attention sur le rôle des femmes dans l'économie – on aimerait l'entendre plus souvent. Des femmes entrepreneurs contribuent en effet grandement à développer en Europe ce potentiel encore inexploité. Il faut aussi œuvrer à une meilleure intégration des femmes sur le marché du travail, que ce soit en termes de salaire, de temps partiel/temps plein, ou de possibilités d'évolution de carrière. Deuxièmement, la politique de migration. J'évoquerai deux éléments clés à ce propos: solidarité entre les États membres et le renforcement de l'Agence Frontex. Mais il y a aussi un autre aspect important: notre politique commune de visas, qui pourrait être aujourd'hui un outil de meilleure gestion des flux migratoires. Il faut rapidement la mettre en œuvre telle qu'elle a été proposée en avril dernier par la Commission. Avant dernier point: qu'en est-il de l'adhésion de la Bulgarie et de la Roumanie à l'espace Schengen? Les conditions techniques sont remplies; j'espère que la Présidence italienne sera juste et s'engagera sur ce dossier. Enfin, en ce qui concerne l'Union en tant qu'acteur sur la scène mondiale, je suis d'avis que notre voix ne sera jamais entendue si nous ne sommes pas unis et si les réactions communes n'interviennent pas à temps. J'exprime tous mes vœux de réussite à la Présidence italienne, de laquelle les citoyens européens attendent beaucoup, tout comme les citoyens d'Afrique, du Moyen-Orient et d'Ukraine, qui aspirent à la démocratie. Tonino Picula (S&D). - Gospodine predsjedniče, gospodine premijeru, Europska unija još uvijek čeka oporavak od krize. A kriza je i ekonomska i kriza vizije. Stoga je tijekom predsjedanja opravdano razvijati inovativne programe za gospodarski rast, kao i poticati otvorenu raspravu o konceptima za samu Uniju. Ovo predsjedanje pada u tranzicijsko vrijeme jer će nova Komisija biti imenovana tek pred kraj vašeg mandata. Međutim, predsjedanje možete iskoristiti i za punu posvećenost postojećim programima. Jedan je i Jadransko-jonska inicijativa. Preko 70 milijuna ljudi gravitira tom prostoru, a inicijativa već uključuje prioritete poput investicija i energetske neovisnosti. Povezuje četiri zemlje članice i četiri zemlje koje to žele postati. Sličan model zajedništva članica i susjedstva bio bi koristan i cijeloj Uniji jer oporavak europskog projekta ovisi dobrim dijelom o stabilnosti i europskoj perspektivi naših susjeda. Zastupnik sam iz Hrvatske koju s Italijom povezuje mnogo toga. Ipak, ono što nas najbolje povezuje je naše Jadransko more. Pozivam Italiju da tijekom predsjedanja pokaže dodatan senzibilitet za ponosnu zajednicu malih ribara i prilagodbu europskog zakonodavstva njihovim potrebama, tradiciji i stilu života. Dopustite i da izrazim duboko žaljenje zbog nove imigrantske tragedije kod Sicilije kada je stradalo 35 ljudi. To je podsjetnik da nesretni ljudi iz nesretnih područja godinama gube živote u pokušaju da se domognu Europe. To je i novi alarm da imigracija i traženja azila u Europskoj uniji nisu odgovarajuće koordinirani ni definirani. Gospodine premijeru, želim da talijansko predsjedanje građanima Europske unije bude uvjerljivo jednako kao što je politika vaše vlade uvjerljiva građanima Italije. Giovanni La Via (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Primo ministro, nel corso del suo intervento lei ha parlato di un'Europa senz'anima, di un'Europa sbiadita, di un'Europa che chiaramente deve ritrovare il suo percorso e per questo crediamo che la Presidenza italiana possa riportare alla luce il vero progetto europeo, il progetto dei padri fondatori, il progetto che va verso gli Stati Uniti d'Europa. Ma dall'altro lato lei ci ha detto che senza crescita non c'è futuro e questo è perfettamente condivisibile. Abbiamo bisogno di una Presidenza, quindi, che investa sulla competitività, di una Presidenza che possa mettere al centro la ricerca, l'innovazione, la capacità di competere del nostro sistema economico nel futuro della nostra Europa. Ma d'altro canto, da siciliano, non posso che ricordarmi di quello che avviene sulle nostre coste. È chiaro che la politica dell'immigrazione deve essere una priorità della Presidenza e auspichiamo che, con la collaborazione di tutti gli altri Paesi che non possono rimanere insensibili, nel corso del semestre di Presidenza italiana si possa arrivare a risultati nuovi, visibili e concreti, perché questa mattanza che avviene sulle coste della Sicilia non può avere più seguito. La debbo poi ringraziare, da uomo del PPE, per il sostegno che ha dato, da lei che è Presidente socialista, alla candidatura di Junker in Consiglio. È un passo deciso verso la democrazia europea. Procedura catch-the-eye Tibor Jenő Szanyi (S&D). - Ha nem haragszanak, magyarul beszélek. Szeretnék javasolni egy konkrét projektet Renzi miniszterelnök úrnak. Minthogy Európában mintegy 25 millió olyan kicsi állampolgár van, 25 millió gyermek, akiknek nem jut rendes ennivaló. A 18 év alatti korosztályok alultápláltsága bizony olyan szégyen, amiről Európában nem, vagy nagyon keveset beszéltünk, és nem is szívesen beszélünk. Ez a 25 millió gyermek, akikkel foglalkoznunk kell, nem kölcsönösen gondolkodnak velünk. Nem érdekli őket, hogy ki tag, ki nem tag Európában, nem érdekli, hogy van-e növekedés, vagy nincs, de még az sem, hogy esetleg mekkora ostobaságokat mond egyik-másik képviselő. Miniszterelnök úr! Amit javaslok Önnek: próbáljon segítségünkre lenni, és vállaljunk fel egy olyan közös európai projektet, aminek az a neve: “No tax on food. Nulla imposta su cibo.” Charles Tannock (ECR). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, tanti auguri e buona fortuna Primo ministro Renzi e ministro Mogherini per la Presidenza italiana. Io sono un grande italofilo nonostante io sia inglese. Ho sempre amato l'Italia, adesso però parlerò nella lingua di Shakespeare, mi dispiace. The EU rotating presidency has a major role to play in the European neighbourhood policy and one of its members, Jordan, is now facing an existential threat from the terrorist onslaught by ISIS. What more can the European Union do during the Italian Presidency to support this moderate monarchy and key ally in peace with Israel and peace in the region and a two-state solution? Secondly, given Rome's traditional closeness to Moscow, we need some reassurances from you and your government that any further aggression by President Putin against Ukraine will trigger EU sectoral economic sanctions as a consequence. We cannot allow annexation and illegal seizure of territory to prevail with our Eastern Partnership partners of Ukraine, Moldova or Georgia. Lastly, given the crisis in Syria and Iraq, what do you think of the referendum announced by President Barzani for an independent Kurdistan? Javier Nart (ALDE). - Señor Presidente, he escuchado, señor Renzi —Presidente en ejercicio del Consejo—, lo que ha dicho sobre “no infravalorar la cuestión financiera” y “en cuestiones económicas haremos oír nuestra firmeza”. Yo, esa metafísica, la acepto, pero de la metafísica paso a la física y de la música paso a la letra. Y la cuestión es concreta: en la crisis que padecemos aún los ciudadanos europeos existe una definitiva responsabilidad en la ceguera y parálisis durante años de las instituciones europeas —entre ellas, de la Comisión Europea— frente a los flujos financieros especulativos, que son la antítesis de la economía productiva. Flujos financieros que, contradictoriamente, tienen en muchos casos su base operativa en países miembros de la Unión Europea que son, además, el origen y la base de numerosos paraísos fiscales. Y porque creo en la economía productiva de mercado al servicio de los ciudadanos y no de los parásitos, porque la crisis no ha sido una catástrofe inevitable, sino que ha sido consecuencia de acciones de las personas, mi pregunta es: ¿qué va a hacer usted para parar la economía especulativa? Εμμανουήλ Γλέζος (GUE/NGL). - Δεν σας κρύβω ότι ο λόγος σας δημιούργησε πολύ καλή εντύπωση. Παρ' όλα αυτά, υπάρχει μια απόσταση από τον λόγο στην πράξη και όλοι περιμένουμε να δούμε τις πράξεις σας. Σε ένα σημείο επικεντρώνω το θέμα: βρίσκονται αυτή τη στιγμή τουρκικά στρατεύματα εισβολής και κατοχής στην Κύπρο, δηλαδή σε έδαφος ευρωπαϊκό. Τι θα κάνετε για να εφαρμοστεί η απόφαση του Οργανισμού Ηνωμένων Εθνών και του Συμβουλίου Ασφαλείας με την οποία ζητούν την αποχώρηση των στρατευμάτων; (Χειροκροτήματα) Davide Borrelli (EFDD). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Signor Presidente del Consiglio, io vorrei che lei mi concedesse una battuta anche forse per stemperare gli animi e, mi creda, senza voler assolutamente offendere nessuno. Mi è molto piaciuta l'idea che lei ha dato del selfie di quest'Europa che fotografa se stessa. Io vorrei che lei facesse questa fotografia però mi dispiacerebbe se poi si sorprendesse se, anziché trovare un'immagine di noia, lei trovasse la faccia di Junker con dietro la faccia della Merkel che le fa “ciao ciao”. Eva Paunova (PPE). - Mr President, Prime Minister, in the document “A Fresh Start for the European Union” written by you and Mr Gauze, you talk about initiatives which are needed to finance growth in areas, such as energy, which could benefit strongly from a more European approach. Moreover, you stated that the single market for energy needs to be achieved by Europe-wide investments on interconnections and transmission grids. Last month, before the Bulgarian Government suspended the construction of the gas plant on its territory, you made it clear that Italy firmly supports the South Stream project. Alla luce di questo, voglio chiederle che cosa intende fare nello specifico per aiutare gli Stati membri dell'Est Europa a ridurre la loro dipendenza dalla fornitura di gas russo. Intende dedicare i suoi sforzi durante il semestre di Presidenza italiano ad aiutare questi Paesi per trovare il modo di diversificare i loro approvvigionamenti energetici al di fuori dalla Russia? Attualmente, la maggior parte dei gasdotti europei trasportano solo gas da Est verso Ovest. Si prega ad esempio di migliorare i gasdotti presenti sul suolo italiano e quelli ad essi connessi in modo da permettere anche un flusso di gas in direzione inversa ovvero da Ovest a Est. (Fine della procedura catch-the-eye) Maroš Šefčovič,
Vice-President of the Commission
. - Mr President, let me congratulate you on your election, and let me also tell you that on that high podium you look even more vice-presidential than before. Prime Minister, you started your Presidency in great style. You brought to this House what Europe needs so much: pro-European passion, Mediterranean temperament, energy and political will for change. European citizens send us a clear message: they want a Europe of growth, a Europe of jobs, a Europe of values, and a Europe which has a soul and cares deeply about her citizens. Your Presidency is the first one after the European elections. It is the Presidency which will oversee not only the institutional renewal, but also the setting-up of the priorities for all EU institutions for the next five years. We must make sure that these correspond to the major concerns of the European citizens – how we can restore growth; what about the worries of the unemployed; how we can address the fears of young people about their future; how we tackle poverty; how we deal with the migration pressures which are felt particularly strongly in your territory in the south of Europe. I am very glad that in your introductory statement you were very clear that your Presidency is going to look for answers in Europe, and here I agree with all the honourable Members – Mr Pittella, Mr Verhofstadt, Mr Weber and many others – who clearly underlined that we have not used the potential of Europe fully, and that there is still a lot we can tap into and can use, be it the European single market, our digital economy, renewal of our industry or the fact that we are the biggest trading bloc and the biggest economy in the world. We have to search for all the possibilities and look into all opportunities which Europe is offering in order to make sure that the enormous financial resources we invested in the financial industry to save our banks are actually transferred and channelled to the real economy to help our European companies to innovate, get our Europeans new, much-needed skills and help our enterprises to innovate through access to innovation, research and development programmes. I also believe that you can use project bonds much better. We can use new, innovative financing much better, because this is exactly what the European economy needs: renewal, real money for the real economy for real entrepreneurs. I am very thankful to you for reminding us of the important role that Europe must play in the process of globalisation. I am absolutely convinced that globalisation needs a European flavour. It should do more to reflect European values, and Europe must remain the world global leader to shape it better than before. You said that today's selfie of Europe would be one of a tired, bored continent, and I want to underline that the Commission is ready for full and close cooperation with you and your team, and I am also sure that, thanks to Italian energy, enthusiasm and reform, the selfie of Europe in six months' time will be significantly refreshed. Good luck with your Presidency. Matteo Renzi,
Presidente in carica del Consiglio
. - Signor Presidente, è stato molto istruttivo ascoltarvi. Vi sono grato. È stato anche molto interessante e porterò a casa alcune riflessioni. La prima è che l'Italia non ha paura dei giudizi, però io ho un po' paura di alcuni pregiudizi, alcuni pregiudizi che sono stati espressi anche in questa sala. Per esempio, domando come si possa pensare che la posizione italiana sull'ambiente è quella che è stata descritta da una blu card e poi dal capogruppo dei Verdi. Mi domando come si possa immaginare, ad esempio, che sul tema dell'energia non ci sia un'attenzione, quando noi a Roma abbiamo ospitato il G7 sull'energia su iniziativa italiana. E sono molto d'accordo con alcune delle riflessioni fatte sul tema delle interconnessioni, soprattutto dalla Spagna e Francia e tutto il tema del rapporto sull'energia non più soltanto a est o ovest, ma nord sud. Ci sarà modo, durante il semestre, di discutere nel merito di lavoro. Spero anche di Servizio civile, visto che non se n'è riparlato, e nemmeno dei grandi riferimenti ideali che abbiamo cercato di portare alla vostra attenzione. Dico all'onorevole Steven Woolfe, che non è presente e che è intervenuto parlando di valori occidentali, che non è una mia espressione ma sta nel comunicato di rivendicazione di Boko Haram. (Applausi) Spero che abbia chiara la differenza tra la nostra posizione e quella di Boko Haram e credo anche che si possa voltare le spalle all'inno, ma non si possa voltare le spalle ai problemi reali di questo continente. (Applausi) Ma vorrei chiudere semplicemente ringraziando per tutti gli interventi, in particolar modo, come sempre, non soltanto del mio gruppo politico, ma è sempre un piacere ascoltare tanti di voi – Verhofstadt su tutti. Lo ascolto fin da quando, da giovane cittadino condividevo la sua grande ansia europea, che è anche la mia. Sono però molto colpito – lo dico e mi dispiace parlare in sua assenza – dall'intervento del capogruppo del PPE, al quale probabilmente sfugge che una parte dei suoi deputati appoggia il mio governo, ma questo non è importante dirlo adesso qui. Sono sorpreso perché non ho capito se egli ha parlato in quest'Aula a nome del suo gruppo politico, nel qual caso – vedo qualche amico, ancorché di opinioni diverse – non dubito che il suo gruppo politico avrà negli anni scorsi spiegato ai propri aderenti tutte le brillanti riflessioni fatte sul debito e sulla politica economica dell'Italia, avendo il suo gruppo politico guidato il nostro Paese per lunghi anni e sono certo che a Weber glielo avrà spiegato. Così come sono certo che gli sarà stato risposto. (Applausi) Se invece, caro Presidente, il capogruppo Weber parlava a nome della Germania, vorrei segnalare a lei, che conosce molto meglio di me, per la sua esperienza e per la sua appartenenza, che proprio in questa sala, durante la scorsa presidenza dell'Italia alla guida del Semestre europeo, ci fu un Paese a cui non fu concessa la flessibilità bensì fu concesso di violare i limiti. Quel paese era la Germania, con il processo di riforme che ha consentito alla Germania oggi di essere un Paese che cresce. Allora voglio dirlo con molta franchezza: se si viene a discutere nel merito, noi caro Presidente Tajani, saremo felici di fare del nostro Semestre europeo una grande occasione di discussione, di riflessione, di confronto. Ma se si immagina di brandire l'arma del pregiudizio, senza conoscere, ad esempio, che, se è vero che l'Italia ha un debito pubblico molto alto, essa ha però una ricchezza pubblica e privata che è quattro volte quella del debito pubblico. Evidentemente c'è un problema che riguarda il nostro Paese per il quale noi non parliamo di “compiti da fare a casa”, ma parliamo di riforme che abbiamo condiviso con i nostri cittadini. L'atteggiamento di chi immagina di essere qui a fare la morale agli altri, senza aver ascoltato il discorso ma parlando di altro, è un atteggiamento che io credo sia un atteggiamento da respingere al mittente. Mi spiace dunque avere in assenza del capogruppo del PPE, il quale avrà avuto sicuramente impegni più importanti, dovuto rispondergli nel merito per dirgli che questo è un Paese – è un grande Paese – che ha dalla sua parte non soltanto la storia, ma il futuro, e che se qualcuno immagina di venire a fare le lezioni agli altri ha sbagliato posto. Questo è il luogo della democrazia e lasciatemi chiudere, di conseguenza, con un riferimento alla crisi finanziaria, non l'ultima, la prima. Sa dove è stata, Presidente? Lei lo sa meglio di me: è stata a Firenze la prima crisi finanziaria. E io mi onoro di essere l'ormai ex sindaco di una delle città più belle del mondo. Bene, in quel periodo, a causa della crisi finanziaria, le famiglie proprietarie delle banche pagarono gli Stati per salvare gli Stati: le famiglie fallirono, gli Stati furono salvati. Esattamente il contrario di quello che è accaduto con il Fondo salva Stati cui l'Italia ha contribuito, dove noi abbiamo invece salvato, comprensibilmente, non soltanto i Paesi, abbiamo salvato anche alcuni istituti di credito di importanti Paesi che avevano – con scarsa lungimiranza – investito in quei Paesi, in quelle banche, in quei titoli di Stato. Bene io vorrei ricordare la crisi finanziaria di Firenze non per dire che allora successe il contrario di quello che è accaduto oggi, ma per trarre una lezione positiva: da quella crisi finanziaria nacque il Rinascimento. Da quella crisi finanziaria si trasse una lezione e la grande lezione fu che educare al bello, educare all'insegnamento, educare nella scuola, nelle allora università, educare ai valori dell'uomo e della donna, era la chiave per tirare fuori una città – in quel caso un Paese, un'Europa adesso – dalle difficoltà. Allora, lo dico da ex sindaco di Firenze e lo dico da Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri italiano: noi non abbiamo paura di guardare in faccia alla crisi, perché sappiamo che l'orgoglio e il coraggio che abbiamo con noi sarà sufficiente per cambiare l'Italia. Ma non sono l'Italia e la Francia a chiedere diverse regole del gioco. A noi vanno bene le regole del gioco. Siamo tutti insieme a dire che soltanto investendo sulla crescita garantiremo ai nostri figli un futuro di prosperità. Continuando a restare fermi agli slogan, temo che non difenderemo più neanche i Paesi d'origine. Con questo spirito noi entreremo nel semestre, caro Presidente Tajani, e la ringrazio per il minuto supplementare, perché noi pensiamo che questo semestre sia una gigantesca opportunità per recuperare il gusto e la passione e anche – lasciatemelo dire, proprio pensando al Rinascimento – per fare rinascere non soltanto la nostra economia ma i nostri valori che sono la cosa più bella che abbiamo. Buon lavoro a tutti noi. Presidente. - La discussione è chiusa. Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 162) Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D),
raštu
. – Sveikinu Italiją, perėmusią pirmininkavimo Europos Sąjungos Tarybai vairą iš Graikijos. Iš tiesų, jūsų pirmininkavimas prasideda išskirtiniu metu – kartu su naujai išrinktu Europos Parlamentu ir dar besiformuojančia naujosios kadencijos Komisija. Vis dėlto tikimės, kad kartu galėsime nemažai nuveikti Europos žmonių labui ir kad būtent Italijos pirmininkavimas duos naują postūmį jau kurį laiką ES Taryboje užtrukusiems net keliems svarbiems teisėkūros failams: Motinystės atostogų direktyvai ir vadinamajai Antidiskriminacinei direktyvai. Ypač džiaugiuosi matydama, kad Italija savo pirmininkavimo metu yra numačiusi skirti daug dėmesio Europos Sąjungos socialinės politikos aspektams – skurdo, nedarbo, ypač jaunų žmonių nedarbo, mažinimui, taip pat įdarbinamumo skatinimui, ypatingą dėmesį skiriant mokslui, švietimui ir mainų programoms. Ypač pritariu, kad dėmesys būtų skiriamas nelegalaus darbo pažabojimui – džiaugiuosi matydama, kad pirmininkaujanti Italija ketina tęsti neseniai pradėtus darbus dėl Europos platformos kovai su nelegaliu darbu įsteigimo. Visiškai pritariu tam, kad kova su nelegaliu darbu yra vienas iš svarbiausių užimtumo ir augimo strategijos elementų, todėl inspekcijų vaidmuo turi būti stiprinamas ir jų veiklai turi būti skiriama daugiau dėmesio, taip pat ir Europos Sąjungos mastu. Noriu pasveikinti Italiją, išsikėlusią ambicingus tikslus, ir linkiu sėkmės bei stiprybės juos įgyvendinant. João Ferreira (GUE/NGL),
por escrito.
– A social-democracia recuperou posições de governo nalguns países da UE, sendo os casos mais visíveis os da França e da Itália. No primeiro caso, o tempo que decorreu de Presidência Hollande é sobejamente elucidativo quanto às opções e caminhos seguidos. O homem que prometia mudar a Europa e o mundo assumiu como suas as políticas da direita, consagradas em instrumentos como o Tratado Orçamental, o Pacto para o Euro Mais, a legislação da Governação Económica e o Semestre Europeu. Estas políticas foram alvo de um impressivo julgamento popular, com o PS/Hollande a sofrer uma estrondosa derrota nas recentes eleições para o Parlamento Europeu. É este o caminho, são estas as políticas da social-democracia europeia. É também este o caminho, são também estas as políticas da Presidência italiana. A retórica do crescimento e da mudança, com floreados sociais q.b., não esconde, quanto à substância, a identidade de posições com a direita europeia e a co-responsabilidade perante as políticas neoliberais que nos trouxeram à situação de desastre económico e social que hoje enfrentamos em muitos países, de que Portugal é um doloroso exemplo. O compromisso assumido com o comércio livre e desregulado, patente na intenção de concluir as negociações relativas ao tratado transatlântico UE-EUA, é apenas um entre muitos outros exemplos.. Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D),
písomne
– Taliansko je od 1. júla 2014 predsedajúcou krajinou EÚ a vystrieda tak na tomto poste Grécko. Predsedníctvo Talianska prichádza krátko po voľbách, ktoré boli poznamenané rekordne nízkou účasťou a výrazným posilnením pozícií pre extrémistické, krajne pravicové a ľavicové strany. Tento výsledok sa dal očakávať, pretože európske inštitúcie nedokázali dostatočne promptne reagovať na hospodársku a finančnú krízu a takisto sa nám nepodarilo presvedčiť obyvateľov členských štátov, že im dokážeme pomôcť s ich každodennými problémami. Občania preto logicky pociťujú čoraz menšiu dôveru voči inštitúciám EÚ. Som presvedčená, že medzi hlavné priority predsedníctva by malo patriť prehlbovanie menovej únie, ako aj hlbšie zameranie sa na stratégiu 2020. Je dôležité, aby prišlo k revízii politiky hospodárskej súťaže, pretože európske podniky potrebujú podať pomocnú ruku. V Európe pretrváva problém zamestnanosti mladých ľudí, a preto bude dôležité dozerať na to, aby bola správne vykonávaná záruka pre mladých, ktorá má priniesť toľko potrebné pracovné miesta. Netreba zabúdať ani na ukrajinskú krízu, problémy energetickej samostatnosti EÚ. Je teda zrejmé, že talianske predsedníctvo čaká náročných 6 mesiacov. Európska únia stojí pred novými výzvami a problémami, ktoré treba neodkladne riešiť. Spoločne musíme ukázať európskym občanom, že im sme schopní pomôcť s ich každodennými problémami a že stojíme na ich strane. Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz (PPE),
in writing.
– The message from voters to the Italian Presidency is clear: over the coming years, the shared priority has to be to create growth to reduce unemployment. In the previous legislature we drew the lessons of the crisis; this year, the Italian Presidency needs to get employment and social cohesion again. There are a number of major challenges that we need to face together: climate change, security in Europe, the situation in our neighbouring countries, immigration. In addition, we need a Europe that makes life easier for individuals and businesses. Therefore, we need now a presidency which is able to focus on a limited number of strategic priorities: to strengthen our industrial competitiveness, move towards energy independence and build a digital content. I hope that the European Parliament and the European Council can work together to bring to a successful conclusion a number of the initiatives that the Commission has launched but that remain to be adopted by the co-legislators. Maria Grapini (S&D),
în scris.
– Distinși colegi, doresc să salut debutul energic al președinției italiene a Uniunii Europene - președinție care intervine într-un moment în care proiectul european are nevoie de un imbold curajos pentru aprofundarea integrării. După anii crizei, ne confruntăm cu riscul permanentizării stagnării economice și al cronicizării șomajului și sărăciei în rândul tot mai multor cetățeni. Dificultățile social-economice au împins UE într-o gravă criză de identitate. Pentru prima dată, tendința anti-europeană ia proporții îngrijorătoare tocmai în rândul unor state fondatoare ale Uniunii. În aceste condiții, determinarea președinției italiene ne obligă la solidaritate activă în următoarele șase luni și la măsuri concrete pentru relansarea creșterii economice. În acest sens, consider că e nevoie, în primul rând, de crearea unui mediu favorabil pentru întreprinderile mici și mijlocii, prin crearea de instrumente de finanțare moderne și prin îmbunătățirea accesului la credite cu dobânzi accesibile, precum și pe piața achizițiilor publice. Krystyna Maria Łybacka (S&D),
na piśmie.
– W kontekście programu prezydencji włoskiej zwracam uwagę na kwestie innowacji oraz nauki. W wymiarze zewnętrznym, konieczne jest określenie priorytetów unijnej polityki zagranicznej i bezpieczeństwa w zakresie badań naukowych oraz opracowanie instrumentów jej implementacji. Liczę na wsparcie prezydencji w szerokim promowaniu programu “Horyzont 2020” tak, aby umożliwić udział w nim jak największej grupie osób oraz zidentyfikować już na poziomie przygotowań najlepsze pomysły innowacyjne. Istotne są również działania na rzecz wzmacniania ośrodków naukowych. W tym zakresie ważna jest promocja współpracy silnych ośrodków ze słabszymi, co pozwoli na utrzymanie tempa rozwoju inwestycji i badań i jednocześnie zapewni zrównoważony wzrost innowacji w UE. Niezbędne jest zapewnienie koordynacji krajowych polityk innowacyjnych na poziomie Unii, tak aby można było skutecznie budować wspólny unijny potencjał innowacyjno–badawczy. Nauka jest kluczowym czynnikiem budowy nowoczesnego społeczeństwa – apeluję do prezydencji o szczególne uwzględnienie tego priorytetu. Aby wzmocnić Europejską Przestrzeń Badawczą, potrzebujemy inwestycji w modernizację i rozwój nauki w Unii Europejskiej. Zwracam się również do prezydencji włoskiej, aby zgodnie z unijnym celem zachęcała państwa członkowskie do inwestowania w badania i rozwój 3 % swojego PKB do roku 2020, co pozwoli na stworzenie ok. 4 mln miejsc pracy. Inwestycje te nie powinny być jednak uwzględniane w obliczaniu limitu deficytu budżetowego krajów członkowskich. Gabriel Mato Adrover (PPE),
por escrito.
– Quiero dar la bienvenida al Primer Ministro de Italia, y desearle toda la suerte del mundo en esta presidencia que ahora estrenan. Va a ser una presidencia complicada, como lo es el momento que vivimos. En España lo sabemos bien y por eso hemos tenido que tomar decisiones, hacer reformas y pedir un enorme esfuerzo a los españoles. Hoy podemos decir que el esfuerzo está valiendo la pena. Me hubiera gustado escuchar cuales son los objetivos y el programa de la presidencia italiana pero en todo caso yo le insto a que lidere en su calidad de presidente de turno la política de recuperación y de generación de empleo, sobre todo juvenil, que los europeos están esperando. No es hora de lamentos ni de enfrentamientos partidarios. Es hora de que todos unamos nuestros esfuerzos para salir de la crisis. Hay otros muchos aspectos que, seguro, tendremos ocasión de analizar durante las próximas semanas. Monika Smolková (S&D),
písomne – Taliansko predstavilo veľmi ambiciózny plán svojho predsedníctva. Oceňujem, že v témach nadviazalo v mnohom na predsedníctvo Grécka a bude sa venovať téme rastu, nezamestnanosti a migrácií. Južné štáty nemôžu pri legálnej aj nelegálnej migrácií ostať osamotené, ale táto téma sa musí riešiť celoeurópsky. Je potrebné posilniť spoluprácu medzi krajinami pôvodu migrantov a tranzitnými krajinami, ale aj bojovať proti nelegálnemu prisťahovalectvu prostredníctvom súvislejšej politiky v oblasti legálnej migrácie. Pri stanovení priorít Taliansko veľmi jasne pomenovalo aj problém malých a stredných podnikov, a to je prístup k úverom a financovaniu. Vítam aj tému propagácie milánskeho Expa 2015 s témou “Potrava pre planétu, energia pre život” a dôraz na potravinársku politiku, označovanie potravín a riadenie potravinového reťazca a výživy. Vyjadrujem presvedčenie, že Taliansko v spolupráci s novým parlamentom zvládne svoju úlohu predsedajúcej krajiny veľmi dobre. Jutta Steinruck (S&D),
schriftlich. – Die italienische Ratspräsidentschaft hat im Bereich Soziales und Beschäftigung gute Prioritäten gesetzt: Die Themen Jugendarbeitslosigkeit, Arbeitnehmerrechte und die soziale Dimension der WWU finde auch ich zentral. Ich finde es gut, dass die Ratspräsidentschaft die Europäische Plattform gegen Schwarzarbeit voranbringen will. Zum Schutz der Arbeitnehmer ist eine klare Definition von Schwarzarbeit wichtig. Fälle entsendeter Arbeiter und Scheinselbständige müssen dabei miteingeschlossen werden. Die Plattform sollte nicht als Informationsaustausch dienen, sondern auch konkrete Aufgaben wie beispielsweise EU-weite Trainingsprogramme für Kontrolleure und die Organisation länderübergreifender Arbeitskontrollen übernehmen. Außerdem begrüße ich grundsätzlich, dass Arbeitnehmermobilität einer der Schwerpunkte der Ratspräsidentschaft ist. Allerdings muss Mobilität fair und freiwillig gestaltet werden. Im Rahmen der EURES-Reform müssen die Grenzpartnerschaften gefördert werden. Der Mangel an Information zu Arbeitsverhältnissen und Sozialversicherungen in anderen Mitgliedstaaten gehört zu den größten Hindernissen bei grenzüberschreitender Arbeitnehmermobilität. EURES sollte deshalb nicht der reinen Arbeitsvermittlung durch die Arbeitsagenturen dienen, sondern die Sozialpartner sollten wie bisher den erhöhten Informations- und Beratungsbedarf decken. Ich hoffe, dass diese Prioritäten nicht nur Absichtserklärungen bleiben. Gerade bei der sozialen Dimension der Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion ist es essenziell, dass wir verbindliche Ziele zum Beispiel zu Beschäftigung, Bildung und sozialer Exklusion festlegen. Nur dann können wir in Europa endlich wieder sozialen Fortschritt erreichen. Theodor Dumitru Stolojan (PPE),
în scris
. – Dezbaterea programului președinției italiene a Consiliului pentru a doua parte a acestui an s-a referit la multe probleme importante ale Uniunii Europene. A lipsit însă subiectul extinderii Uniunii prin admiterea de noi țări membre. Cunosc faptul că, în unele state membre ale Uniunii, campaniile electorale au avut ca temă înghețarea extinderii Uniunii în acest mandat de 5 ani. Consider că extinderea Uniunii a fost un succes, iar actualele țări candidate care doresc să devină state membre ale Uniunii, ca și alte țări din Europa care doresc să devină țări candidate, trebuie să aibă convingerea că Uniunea Europeană rămâne deschisă extinderii și în acest mandat 2014-2019. Evelyn Regner (S&D),
schriftlich. – Trotz freiwilliger Maßnahmen, die über Jahrzehnte hinweg sowohl auf nationaler, wie auch auf europäischer Ebene getroffen wurden, existiert bisher keine ausgewogene Vertretung von Männern und Frauen in Aufsichtsräten. Vorzeigbare Erfolge gibt es nur in den Ländern, in denen verpflichtende Regelungen eingeführt wurden, wie etwa in Italien. Bald steht diese Richtlinie zwei Jahre im Raum und wartet nur mehr darauf, vom Rat gemeinsam mit uns Parlamentariern zum Abschluss gebracht zu werden. Das Europäische Parlament hat nämlich seine Hausaufgaben gemacht, den Vorschlag weiter verbessert und im November letzten Jahres in erster Lesung abgestimmt. Die Minister müssen nun im Rat Farbe bekennen und unter Leitung der italienischen Präsidentschaft eine Einigung finden. Das Parlament ist mit seinen Änderungen realistisch geblieben und hat den Vorschlag vereinfacht und verbessert. Ich bin zuversichtlich, dass die italienische Ratspräsidentschaft ambitioniert die Stagnation im Rat auflösen wird und Gespräche im Rahmen von Verhandlungen mit dem Parlament und der Kommission aufnehmen wird. Schade für mich als Berichterstatterin ist nur, dass Herr Renzi in seiner Rede im Plenum des Europäischen Parlaments am 2.7.2014 auf dieses wichtige Dossier für eine Gleichstellung der Geschlechter in der Arbeitswelt nicht eingegangen ist. Gemeinsam werden wir die gläserne Decke des “Old Boys Networks” durchbrechen und 259 Millionen Frauen in Europa größere Chancen geben. Ελισσάβετ Βόζεμπεργκ (PPE), γραπτώς. – Είμαι νεοεκλεγείσα Ελληνίδα Ευρωβουλευτής, κύριε Πρωθυπουργέ της Ιταλίας, και σας συγχαίρω θερμά για την ομιλία σας και τη γνώση της Ελληνικής Ιστορίας. Αναφερθήκατε στον Παρθενώνα, στον Αριστοτέλη, στον Αρχιμήδη, στον Οδυσσέα και στον Τηλέμαχο, υποστηρίζοντας προφανώς ότι ο εχθρός του καλού είναι το καλύτερο. Παραλαμβάνετε λοιπόν μια υγιή και δυνατή σκυτάλη, γιατί κατά γενική παραδοχή η Κυβέρνηση της Πατρίδας μου είχε άριστα αποτελέσματα, με ελάχιστο κόστος και σε λίγο χρόνο: με 67 νομοθετήματα και 15 παρεμβάσεις, συμβάλλοντας καθοριστικά στην εμβάθυνση των ευρωπαϊκών θεσμών. Γνωρίζουμε ότι η Ιταλία γέννησε την Αναγέννηση, τώρα χρειάζεται αναγέννηση ιδεών και αρχών που έχει ανάγκη η Ευρώπη μετά την κρίση. Σας εύχομαι καλή επιτυχία και πιστεύω ότι με το πάθος που σας διακρίνει θα υπηρετήσετε τον κοινό μας στόχο που θέλει την Ευρώπη ουσιαστική πρωταγωνίστρια των εξελίξεων για τις επόμενες γενεές. Σωτήριος Ζαριανόπουλος (NI), γραπτώς. – Οι προτεραιότητες της Ιταλικής Προεδρίας χαρακτηρίζονται από τον ίδιο κοινό στρατηγικό στόχο που διαπερνάει το σύνολο της αντιλαϊκής πολιτικής της ΕΕ: την διασφάλιση της κερδοφορίας των ευρωενωσιακών μονοπωλιακών ομίλων, την ενίσχυση της θέσης τους στον παγκόσμιο μονοπωλιακό ανταγωνισμό. Η συζήτηση και οι αντιπαραθέσεις σχετικά με την διατήρηση ή χαλάρωση της περιοριστικής δημοσιονομικής πολιτικής δεν συνεπάγονται καμία χαλάρωση των αντιλαϊκών μέτρων για την εργατική τάξη και τα λαϊκά στρώματα. Αντίθετα προϋποθέτουν έντασή τους για να εξασφαλιστεί υψηλή κερδοφορία στα μονοπώλια. Η προσήλωση της Ιταλικής Προεδρίας στην προώθηση των καπιταλιστικών αναδιαρθρώσεων, οι επιδιώξεις της για την περαιτέρω ενίσχυση των μηχανισμών επιτήρησης και την ενσωμάτωση, στις Συνθήκες της ΕΕ, των αντιλαϊκών διακρατικών συμφωνιών του “Δημοσιονομικού Συμφώνου” και του “Ευρωπαϊκού Μηχανισμού Σταθερότητας” προετοιμάζουν κλιμάκωση της επίθεσης της ΕΕ και των κυβερνήσεων ενάντια στους εργαζόμενους. Βασική προτεραιότητα της Ιταλικής Προεδρίας αποτελεί η ενίσχυση της ΚΕΠΠΑ της ΕΕ και του πολεμικού βραχίονά της, της Κοινής Πολιτικής Ασφάλειας και Άμυνας, ιδίως στις περιοχές της Μέσης Ανατολής, Λιβύης - Βόρειας Αφρικής και Υποσαχάριας Αφρικής - Σαχέλ - Σομαλίας, που ενδιαφέρουν ιδιαίτερα την ιταλική αστική τάξη. Σηματοδοτεί έτσι νέο γύρο ιμπεριαλιστικών επεμβάσεων της ΕΕ, πολλαπλασιάζοντας τους κινδύνους γενικευμένων πολεμικών συγκρούσεων, με δραματικές συνέπειες για τους λαούς. Προμηνύει την ενίσχυση της καταστολής ενάντια στους μετανάστες. 13.   Komiteju locekļu iecelšana (sk. protokolu) 14.   Nākamās sēdes darba kārtība (sk. protokolu) 15.   Sēdes slēgšana (La seduta è tolta alle 17.45)

31.8.2022
LV
Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis
C 332/92 2014. gada 3. jūlijs2014. GADA 3. JŪLIJA DEBAŠU STENOGRAMMA. (2022/C 332/03) Saturs 1.
Sēdes atklāšana
93 2.
Iepriekšējās sēdes protokola apstiprināšana (sk. protokolu)
93 3.
Pieprasījums atcelt deputāta imunitāti (sk. protokolu)
93 4.
Parlamenta sastāvs (sk. protokolu)
93 5.
Īstenošanas pasākumi (Reglamenta 106. pants) (sk. protokolu)
93 6.
Lūgumraksti (sk. protokolu)
93 7.
Apropriāciju pārvietojumi (sk. protokolu)
93 8.
Balsošanas laiks (sk. protokolu)
93 9.
Dokumentu iesniegšana (sk. protokolu)
93 10.
Sēdē pieņemto tekstu nosūtīšana (sk. protokolu)
93 11.
Nākamo sēžu datumi (sk. protokolu)
93 12.
Sesijas pārtraukšana
93 2014. gada 3. jūlija debašu stenogramma VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ Präsident 1.   Sēdes atklāšana (Die Sitzung wird um 10.00 Uhr eröffnet.) 2.   Iepriekšējās sēdes protokola apstiprināšana (sk. protokolu) 3.   Pieprasījums atcelt deputāta imunitāti (sk. protokolu) 4.   Parlamenta sastāvs (sk. protokolu) 5.   Īstenošanas pasākumi (Reglamenta 106. pants) (sk. protokolu) 6.   Lūgumraksti (sk. protokolu) 7.   Apropriāciju pārvietojumi (sk. protokolu) 8.   Balsošanas laiks (sk. protokolu) 9.   Dokumentu iesniegšana (sk. protokolu) 10.   Sēdē pieņemto tekstu nosūtīšana (sk. protokolu) 11.   Nākamo sēžu datumi (sk. protokolu) 12.   Sesijas pārtraukšana Der Präsident. - Ich erkläre die Sitzungsperiode des Europäischen Parlaments für unterbrochen. (Die Sitzung wird um 10.05 Uhr geschlossen.)