Verbatim report of proceedings of 24 October 2016
Date: 2016-10-24
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, parliamentary debate








C_202402086EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C














15.3.2024







            24 October 2016
            VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF 24 OCTOBER 2016
            
         
(C/2024/2086)

Contents







1.

Resumption of the session
3










2.

Announcement by the President
3










3.

Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting: see Minutes
3










4.

Composition of Parliament: see Minutes
3










5.

Request for the waiver of immunity
4










6.

Composition of political groups: see Minutes
4










7.

Composition of committees and delegations: see Minutes
4










8.

Delegated acts (Rule 105(6)): see Minutes
4










9.

Signature of acts adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure (Rule 78): see Minutes
4










10.

Action taken on Parliament's positions and resolutions: see Minutes
4










11.

Questions for oral answer (submission): see Minutes
4










12.

Documents received: see Minutes
4










13.

Order of business
4










14.

Union legal framework for customs infringements and sanctions (debate)
6










15.

EU strategy towards Iran after the nuclear agreement (debate)
16










16.

Fight against corruption and follow-up of the CRIM resolution (short presentation)
37










17.

Human rights and migration in third countries (short presentation)
41










18.

Corporate liability for serious human rights abuses in third countries (short presentation)
46










19.

EU strategy for liquefied natural gas and gas storage (short presentation)
50










20.

How to make fisheries controls in Europe uniform (short presentation)
57










21.

Improving connection and accessibility of transport infrastructure in Central and Eastern Europe (short presentation)
61










22.

One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
66










23.

Agenda for next sitting: see Minutes
73










24.

Closure of the sitting
73




Verbatim report of proceedings of 24 October 2016
                  


VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ


Präsident


(Die Sitzung wird um 17.05 Uhr eröffnet.)

1.   Resumption of the session

Der Präsident. – Ich erkläre die am Donnerstag, dem 6. Oktober 2016, unterbrochene Sitzungsperiode für wieder aufgenommen.
               
2.   Announcement by the President

Der Präsident. – Meine Damen und Herren! Wie Sie sicherlich alle inzwischen wissen, kam es am Donnerstag der vergangenen Sitzungswoche, dem 6. Oktober, zu einem bedauerlichen Zwischenfall, in den zwei Abgeordnete unseres Hauses verwickelt waren.
               

                  Ich habe den Beratenden Ausschuss für den Verhaltenskodex der Mitglieder gebeten, die Angelegenheit zu untersuchen. Der Ausschuss wird nach Anhörung der betroffenen Mitglieder eine Empfehlung zum weiteren Verfahren aussprechen. Ich werde Sie hierüber im Laufe dieser Woche informieren.
               

                  Es handelt sich um den Vorgang, den Sie alle in den Medien gesehen haben, in den der Abgeordnete Woolfe in sehr unangenehmer Weise hineingezogen wurde. Ich darf Sie an dieser Stelle auf Artikel 11 Absatz 2 unserer Geschäftsordnung hinweisen, der besagt: ‘Das Verhalten der Mitglieder ist geprägt von gegenseitigem Respekt’.
               

                  Ich glaube, dass wir uns alle mit gutem Recht davon überzeugen konnten, dass in diesem Fall der gegenseitige Respekt wohl ein bisschen zu kurz gekommen ist, und dass sich jeder Abgeordnete in diesem Haus an die Grundsätze zu halten hat. Ich hoffe auch, dass ein physischer Angriff auf einen Abgeordneten ein Zwischenfall bleibt, den man als eine einmalige Entgleisung bezeichnen kann.
               

                  Ich werde Sie über den Fortgang der Angelegenheit und die Schlussfolgerungen des Beratenden Ausschusses unterrichten.
               
3.   Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting: see Minutes
4.   Composition of Parliament: see Minutes
5.   Request for the waiver of immunity
6.   Composition of political groups: see Minutes
7.   Composition of committees and delegations: see Minutes
8.   Delegated acts (Rule 105(6)): see Minutes
9.   Signature of acts adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure (Rule 78): see Minutes
10.   Action taken on Parliament's positions and resolutions: see Minutes
11.   Questions for oral answer (submission): see Minutes
12.   Documents received: see Minutes
13.   Order of business

Der Präsident. – Der endgültige Entwurf der Tagesordnung dieser Tagung, wie er in der Konferenz der Präsidenten in ihrer Sitzung vom Donnerstag, dem 20. Oktober 2016 gemäß Artikel 149 der Geschäftsordnung festgelegt wurde, ist verteilt worden. Zu diesem Entwurf wurden folgende Änderungen beantragt:
               

Montag: keine Änderungen.
               

Dienstag:
               

                  Aufgrund der Schließung des Flughafens von Malta beantragt die S&D-Fraktion, zwei Tagesordnungspunkte miteinander zu tauschen: Der Bericht des Kollegen Sant über das Europäische Semester, der zurzeit als zweiter Punkt am Vormittag vorgesehen ist, soll als vierter Punkt am Nachmittag auf die Tagesordnung gesetzt werden. Ebenso sollen die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zur inneren Sicherheit in der EU vom vierten Punkt am Nachmittag als zweiter Punkt auf den Vormittag gesetzt werden. Also: Tausch Bericht Sant und Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zur inneren Sicherheit.
               

Marco Valli (EFDD). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, io capisco benissimo la posizione e la situazione per l'aeroporto di Malta e per l'incidente che c'è stato e quella del relatore che giustamente vuole intervenire in Plenaria. Il problema è che spostando il discorso al pomeriggio su una discussione così importante come quella di semestre si vanno a ridurre considerevolmente i tempi di parola. Ecco, sulle questioni di governance, questo Parlamento dovrebbe discuterne ampiamente e tutti i gruppi politici dovrebbero avere tempo per farlo, in questo modo vengono dimezzati i tempi, in quanto, ad esempio, io ero relatore all'interno della discussione e mi è stato dimezzato il tempo di parola. Quindi, sono a favore di spostarlo, però non di dimezzare i tempi se questo appunto implica lo spostamento e per questo sono contrario se viene mantenuta questa linea, grazie
               

Der Präsident. – Ich gehe davon aus, dass der Antrag der S&D-Fraktion nicht bedeuten sollte, dass die Redezeit gekürzt wird, sondern dass wir unter Beibehaltung normaler Redezeiten beide Punkte tauschen. Dann wäre Ihrem Ansinnen auch Rechnung getragen.
               

(Das Parlament nimmt den Antrag an.)


Bruno Gollnisch (NI). – Monsieur le Président, je constate que nous avons à l'ordre du jour du mardi trois votes qui portent sur des levées d'immunité parlementaire de collègues: M. Le Pen, M. Borghezio et Mme Collins. Ce sont des décisions d'une extrême gravité et extrêmement importantes. Or je constate, une fois de plus, qu'il n'est pas prévu que l'on puisse débattre de ces questions en plénière. Je le regrette vivement parce que dans tous les autres parlements que je connais et, en tout cas, dans mon parlement national, tel ne serait pas le cas.
               

                  Cette absence de débat a d'ailleurs pour conséquence qu'il n'est même pas possible de faire connaître son point de vue par une explication de vote orale. Je considère qu'il s'agit là d'une situation extrêmement regrettable et extrêmement grave qui est relativement nouvelle. Ce n'était pas le cas autrefois dans ce Parlement, où j'ai participé à de nombreux débats sur des questions de levée ou de maintien ou de garantie d'immunité parlementaire. Cela traduit, d'une façon générale, les restrictions au droit et à la protection des députés pour lesquelles, je me permets de vous le rappeler, j'ai déjà obtenu que la Cour de justice de Luxembourg condamne notre institution. Je l'ai obtenu à regret, mais je l'ai obtenu sans équivoque dans le passé.
               

                  Je souhaiterais donc que ces questions soient déplacées à la prochaine session, de telle façon qu'un débat puisse s'ouvrir sur chacune de ces immunités.
               

Der Präsident. – Vielen Dank, Herr Gollnisch! Sie irren sich: Die Verfahren bei der Aufhebung von Immunitäten erfolgen immer gleich. Der hier eingegangene Antrag einer Staatsanwaltschaft auf Aufhebung einer Immunität wird hier im Plenum verkündet und dann unmittelbar an den Rechtsausschuss überwiesen. Das ist der erste Schritt.
               

                  Der Rechtsausschuss benennt einen Berichterstatter oder eine Berichterstatterin, der oder die das Dossier prüft. Über die Inhalte und die Gründe, die für oder gegen eine Empfehlung des Rechtsausschusses ans Plenum sprechen, wird im zuständigen Ausschuss – das ist der Rechtsausschuss – intensiv diskutiert, und zwar auf der Grundlage der Empfehlungen des Berichterstatters. Dann kommt der Rechtsausschuss zu einer Schlussfolgerung, nämlich entweder die Aufhebung zu empfehlen oder eben zu empfehlen, die Immunität nicht aufzuheben. Über genau diese Empfehlung wird ohne Aussprache hier im Plenum abgestimmt.
               

                  Das ist das ganz normale, übliche Verfahren, das übrigens ohne Ansehen der Person oder der Fraktionszugehörigkeit für jeden Abgeordneten oder jede Abgeordnete gleich Anwendung findet.
               

Mittwoch: keine Änderung.
               

Donnerstag:
               

                  Die Fraktion der Grünen hat beantragt, den Punkt am Donnerstagnachmittag ‘Umstellung zwischen Sommer- und Winterzeit’ auf den Vormittag zu verschieben und dort als zweiten Punkt der Tagesordnung zu behandeln.
               

Philippe Lamberts (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, j'ai beau être belge et francophone, je ne vais pas vous parler du CETA. Je voudrais donc, en effet, soutenir cette demande. Autant notre groupe estime, quand l'ordre du jour est plein, qu'il faut utiliser le jeudi après-midi, mais ce n'est pas le cas cette fois-ci. Nous avons parfaitement le temps de mener le débat sur le changement de l'heure d'hiver à l'heure d'été le matin. Ce n'est donc pas que nous manquons de temps. De plus, je rappelle que cette assemblée est souveraine pour l'organisation de son ordre du jour qu'elle adopte selon l'article 152, paragraphe 1.
               

                  Par conséquent, puisque c'est possible, que cela peut se faire sans trop de problèmes, quitte à commencer éventuellement à 8 h 30, nous demandons à avancer le débat de l'après-midi au matin.
               

Der Präsident. – Herr Lamberts, haben Sie einen anderen Punkt, den Sie für den Donnerstagnachmittag vorschlagen wollen?
               

Philippe Lamberts (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, rien ne nous oblige à remplir l'ordre du jour du jeudi après-midi. Selon nous, aucune obligation légale ne s'impose au Parlement. Le Parlement est souverain pour l'organisation de ses travaux.
               

Anne Sander (PPE). – Monsieur le Président, je ne suis évidemment pas d'accord. Je crois que nous avons de nombreux travaux qui nécessitent que nous poursuivions le jeudi après-midi.
               

                  Je voudrais d'ailleurs poser la question suivante: si notre ordre du jour nous permet de raccourcir la semaine de session à Strasbourg et que l'emploi du temps de notre Parlement n'est pas suffisamment chargé, ne devrions-nous pas nous interroger pour supprimer finalement les mini-sessions additionnelles à Bruxelles?
               

Der Präsident. – Das ist natürlich der Evergreen überhaupt. Wir haben feste Regeln einzuhalten. Es gibt auch absolute Urteilssprüche des Europäischen Gerichtshofes, an deren Einhaltung wir gebunden sind. Die sehen einen klaren Ablauf vor.
               

                  Ich mache das mal praktisch. Sie haben völlig Recht, Herr Lamberts. Natürlich ist das Plenum souverän, über die Tagesordnung zu entscheiden, so, wie es entscheiden will. Es könnte aber theoretisch jemand hingehen und sagen: Ich möchte, dass der Mittwochvormittag kein Sitzungstag mehr ist. Das könnten wir theoretisch hier beschließen. Ich wäre aber verpflichtet, es durchzuführen. Und deshalb: Natürlich können wir über die Struktur der Tagesordnung souverän entscheiden, aber nicht über die Sitzungszeiten selbst. Insofern bitte ich um Kenntnisnahme genau dieser auch von der Konferenz der Präsidenten so vorgeschlagenen Tagesordnung.
               

                  Gleichwohl ist der Antrag von Herrn Lamberts gestellt. Wir stimmen jetzt darüber ab.
               

(Das Parlament lehnt den Antrag ab.)


(Der Arbeitsplan ist somit angenommen.)

14.   Union legal framework for customs infringements and sanctions (debate)

Der Präsident. – Als erster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über den Bericht von Kaja Kallas im Namen des Ausschusses für Binnenmarkt und Verbraucherschutz über den Vorschlag für eine Richtlinie des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates über den Rechtsrahmen der Europäischen Union in Bezug auf Zollrechtsverletzungen und Sanktionen (COM(2013)0884 – C7-0461/2013 – 2013/0432(COD)) (A8-0239/2016).
               

Kaja Kallas,
rapporteur. – Mr President, I would like first to thank all the colleagues, and especially the shadow rapporteurs, who have worked on this file for the very constructive manner in which we have dealt with it.
The Customs Union is not talked about enough but remains one of the successes of the European Union. We should not take it for granted, and we should not think there is no room for improvement. An important piece of the Customs Union is, for instance, missing: we have the same rules but we handle matters in a completely different way when companies or individuals break these common rules.
It might not have been such a big problem before, because some Member States have big ports while some other countries have smaller trade flows and less resources to control. But the modernised Customs Code brought about a trade facilitation measure with the Authorised Economic Operator status, which can be lost if a company commits a serious repeated infringement. A company might lose its status in country A, while still working in country B. This will create distortion of the market and unfair competition. In addition, in the digital age, we have to have the objective of creating new opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises.
My goal in this report was quite different from the approach taken by the Commission as my focus was on improving compliance businesses with sometimes very complex rules, so that the system leads to fewer infringements and not more. Sanctions are the last resort when there is a lack of compliance, but the starting point cannot be that all companies are intending to break the rules. We need to treat the companies as partners. Circumstances matter and need to be acknowledged. So this has to be taken into account while determining the sanction.
I am really against the strict liability regime that is in place in several countries; it simply deters compliance. A strict liability regime also means that no degree of guilt needs to be determined, which raises a serious question of whether it respects the presumption of innocence. There should be a mix of non-criminal and criminal sanctions when it comes to infringements of customs law and there should be a greater effort by the Member States and the Commission to improve compliance, improve businesses' knowledge of customs legislation.
Last, but not least, it is very important to make sure that the system is fair and proportionate. It is not a fair system if you are a small company trading high-value goods and the sanctions kill your business because of your type of trade. Sanctions need to be about the consequences of the infringement and not strictly about the value of the goods.
I am very happy that Parliament has decided to take this file seriously. It is a very different matter in the Council, where they refuse convergence of a sanction system as a principle. Therefore, I hope that the Council will be a bit more constructive and will decide to work on this important pillar of the Customs Union, that is in compliance with European Union law.

Puhetta johti ANNELI JÄÄTTEENMÄKI


varapuhemies


Valdis Dombrovskis,
Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, first of all I would to thank Mrs Kaja Kallas for her work, and the work of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO), on the Commission's proposal to set up a legal framework for customs infringements and sanctions.
I am happy to note that the Commission and Parliament share common objectives. These objectives are to ensure a proper enforcement of EU customs law and to provide a level playing field for our economic operators. Since the internal market was set up, EU customs legislation has been fully harmonised in a single legal act. However, the consequences of violating the common rules vary across the Customs Union. They depend on the 28 different legal orders and the administrative or judicial traditions of the Member States.
In the absence of a common approach, there is a patchwork of responses to those who break the rules. Currently, Member States have widely different definitions for customs infringements and apply different types and levels of sanctions. Sanctions for certain infringements range from small fines in some Member States to imprisonment in others. The financial threshold for deciding whether an infringement is criminal or not ranges from EUR 266 to EUR 50 000, according to the country where it occurs. National time limits for sanctioning customs offences also vary widely – from one to 30 years – while some Member States have no time limit at all. This results in a lack of legal certainty for businesses, possible competitive distortions in the internal market and unfair advantages for those who breach the law where sanctions are the lowest. This in turn impacts negatively on revenues and the enforcement of policies, such as consumer protection or agriculture, when goods are imported or exported. It also raises questions about the uniformity of the Customs Union, which is a key obligation of the EU as a WTO member.
The legislative proposal follows the adoption of the Union's custom code, which came into force last May and which streamlines and modernises European customs rules and procedures. It is about building a common understanding among all Member States on how customs laws should be enforced. It is about trust and cooperation among EU Member States' customs administrations with different administrative cultures and legal orders but the same mission. This is why we need an effective, proportionate and decisive system for customs infringements and sanctions in the European Union. For such a system to be efficient and credible, there needs to be a common framework established at EU level.
Nevertheless, this is politically sensitive for some Member States, as it touches upon their national competences. Therefore I must express my gratitude to the rapporteur, Mrs Kallas, who, together with the shadow rapporteurs, came up with the proposal for amendments, which in many cases actually improve the text proposed by the Commission. I also understand that the first reading has not yet been completed. I am happy to say that the Commission finds many of the proposed amendments acceptable, although there is certainly room for discussion around the exact wording needed to ensure legal clarity and consistency in this complex field.
Nevertheless, there are some issues of concern, and I will briefly mention some of them. For example, in the view of amendments proposed by IMCO to limit the scope of the directive to non-criminal offences, the definition of the scope and the links to criminal law should be further clarified to ensure legal certainty. In addition, this Directive may not be the best instrument to impose reporting obligations on the Commission on aspects of customs enforcement that do not stem from this directive.
However, at this stage I wish to reiterate the Commission's flexibility and availability to discuss the improvements, as long as they maintain the objectives of, and add value to, the proposal. I would like to thank once again Parliament, and especially Mrs Kallas and IMCO, for the constructive approach to the proposal.

Franck Proust,
rapporteur pour avis de la commission du commerce international. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, en tant que rapporteur pour avis de la commission du commerce international, je me félicite que nous ayons pu participer à l'examen de questions douanières réservées habituellement à la commission IMCO. Cette approche a été à la fois efficace et complémentaire.
                  

                     Il est important de prendre en compte la place du marché intérieur dans un contexte mondial, car nos partenaires ont déjà pointé les incohérences de notre marché intérieur. Nous pouvons nous en inspirer. En effet, bien que l'union douanière soit considérée comme l'épine dorsale du marché unique, il n'y a toujours pas d'approche intégrée. Vouloir rapprocher des définitions et des sanctions en matière d'infractions douanières, quelle bonne idée ! Surtout en 2016. On devrait dire: ‘Il était temps’!
                  

                     Cependant, le sujet est coincé entre la compétence exclusive de l'Union européenne en matière douanière et le principe de subsidiarité des sanctions judiciaires ou administratives des États. Cet équilibre doit donc être préservé. Or, le manque de vision de certains politiques en Europe, qui ne comprennent pas les enjeux auxquels nous devons faire face aujourd'hui, est effarant.
                  

                     Seule l'Union européenne peut élaborer une approche commune pour mettre en application la législation douanière, n'en déplaise à M. Magnette, qui cherchera peut-être à compliquer la facilitation des échanges que nous mettons en place. Plus sérieusement, nous devons mettre en place une grande stratégie qui donne une orientation, un cap au monde économique de l'Union européenne. Ce type d'initiative est utile pour apporter de la cohérence à la fois au marché intérieur et à notre commerce extérieur.
                  

                     Nos douanes font un travail formidable. Elles doivent pouvoir compter sur une structure flexible et sur un cadre rigoureux, qui n'est pas uniforme en Europe.
                  

                     Soutenons ce genre d'initiative dont les objectifs de simplification, d'harmonisation, de justice et de fermeté doivent être mis en avant pour mieux faire comprendre les enjeux de l'Union européenne.
                  

Andreas Schwab,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Vizepräsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Auch ich möchte mich natürlich bei der Berichterstatterin und bei den Schattenberichterstattern für die hervorragende Arbeit bedanken.
                  

                     Ich glaube, es sind erhebliche Verbesserungen am Text gelungen, die Frau Kallas für das Parlament im federführenden Binnenmarktausschuss in Zusammenarbeit mit Franc Proust vom Ausschuss für internationalen Handel hinbekommen hat. Die Prinzipien, die der Kollege Proust gerade ausgeführt hat - Vereinfachung, Harmonisierung und weniger Bürokratie – sind Prinzipien, denen wir uns voll und ganz verschreiben können.
                  

                     Was wir allerdings im ursprünglichen Text der Kommission zu kritisieren hatten, war die Gefahr, dass am Ende das Zollrecht nicht zu einer harmonisierten vereinfachten Lösungsbox für Unternehmer wird, die globale Märkte erobern wollen, sondern zu einem bürokratischen Monster, das am Ende das Risiko, strafrechtliche verschuldensunabhängige Sanktionen zu erleiden, erheblich erhöht hat. Hier haben wir im Ausschuss die notwendigen Änderungen erreicht. Dafür danke ich allen, und ich hoffe, dass wir dafür auch eine breite Mehrheit bekommen können.
                  

                     Ich glaube, dass es zum Zweiten auch unter dem Gesichtspunkt der Bürokratie wichtig war, dass wir uns darauf einigen konnten, dass keine Mindestsanktionsgrenzen bei geringfügigen Verstößen entstehen sollten. Auch das ist aus unserer Sicht absolut in Übereinstimmung mit der WTO-Entscheidung, die Grundlage für die Erarbeitung bei der Europäischen Kommission war und deren prinzipielle Notwendigkeit wir im Parlament auch ausdrücklich anerkennen.
                  

                     Was die Umsetzung der Richtlinie zu den Zollrechtsverletzungen und Sanktionen betrifft, müssen wir jetzt beachten, dass die derzeit in den Mitgliedstaaten sehr unterschiedlichen Zollsysteme, deren Harmonisierung durch die andauernde Umsetzung des Unionszollkodex ja ohnehin ansteht, eine Hürde darstellen können. Ich möchte die Kommission an der Stelle noch einmal dringend darum bitten, hier eine Gesamtstrategie zu entwickeln, bei der alle Mitgliedstaaten entsprechend ihrer zollrechtlichen Verpflichtungen auch ihre Verantwortung wahrnehmen.
                  

Virginie Rozière,
au nom du groupe S&D. – Madame la Présidente, je voudrais remercier la rapporteure et tous les rapporteurs fictifs avec qui le travail mené sur ce dossier a été très efficace et très fructueux. C'était d'autant plus difficile qu'il s'agissait d'un sujet très technique sur lequel les compromis ont parfois été difficiles à obtenir, mais nous avons vraiment travaillé dans un état d'esprit très constructif. Je pense que nous pouvons nous réjouir du résultat obtenu.
                  

                     Nous avions accueilli la proposition de la Commission avec bienveillance parce que l'union douanière est la colonne vertébrale du marché intérieur, l'autre face du marché intérieur. C'est l'une des premières politiques harmonisées de l'Union européenne et l'adoption du code des douanes constitue le signal d'une intégration encore plus poussée en la matière. Pourtant, même s'il s'agit d'une politique très intégrée de l'Union européenne, des incohérences subsistent, en particulier pour ce qui est des sanctions. Car nous sommes devant le paradoxe suivant: les règles peuvent être identiques, mais selon le pays dans lequel vous accomplissez vos formalités douanières, vous pouvez, si vous enfreignez les règles, encourir des peines qui vont d'une simple amende dans un État membre à une peine de prison dans un autre État membre. On voit bien que cette situation d'incohérence et de disparités entraîne des possibilités de concurrence douanière entre les États au niveau non pas des règles mais des sanctions qui s'y rattachent. Par conséquent, pour empêcher ce contournement des règles communes du marché intérieur, qui entraîne plusieurs centaines de millions d'euros de manque à gagner en raison des fraudes, il nous semble absolument nécessaire d'harmoniser les sanctions. À cet égard, nous avons donc obtenu, selon moi, un très bon compromis qui permet d'éviter cette concurrence déloyale entre les États membres. Nous avons précisé et renforcé la base juridique. Nous avons clarifié des définitions, en particulier les notions de négligence ou de caractère intentionnel de la faute. Nous avons également clarifié un certain nombre de points sur la nature des sanctions. Nous avons écarté les sanctions pénales qui restent de la compétence exclusive des États membres, qui pourront en introduire s'ils le souhaitent. Enfin, nous avons aligné les sanctions et les seuils sur la directive sur la protection des intérêts financiers dans l'Union européenne. Cette harmonisation est, à mon sens, bienvenue.
                  

                     Quant au mode de détermination du montant des sanctions, je pense aussi que le compromis que nous avons atteint est satisfaisant, avec un plancher pour les infractions graves et un mode de calcul basé sur le montant des droits pour garantir une proportionnalité de la sanction. Mais je pense que nous aurions pu aller un peu plus loin, sur ce point, en précisant certains critères pour garantir le côté dissuasif de l'instrument.
                  

                     Nous soutenons aussi la possibilité laissée aux États membres d'introduire d'autres sanctions que des amendes, comme la suspension du statut d'opérateur économique ou la révocation d'une autorisation d'importation.
                  

                     En outre, la proposition de la Commission a été renforcée par l'introduction d'une différence entre infraction majeure et mineure, en fonction de facteurs objectifs et de facteurs de contexte pour pouvoir préserver les PME, dont les infractions seraient non intentionnelles en raison d'une méconnaissance des règles douanières.
                  

                     Enfin, nous saluons l'introduction d'une procédure de règlement amiable et le maintien du délai de quatre ans pour la prescription.
                  

                     L'harmonisation des sanctions douanières est de toute évidence indispensable pour mieux lutter contre la fraude, mieux garantir le respect des règles européennes et aussi mieux alimenter le budget de l'Union européenne pour lequel les droits de douane sont l'une des rares ressources propres.
                  

                     Dans ce contexte, on peut déplorer que le travail n'ait pas commencé au Conseil. Ce dossier est, à ce titre, malheureusement emblématique des contradictions trop fréquentes entre le discours des États membres, de manière générale, et les positions qui sont prises au Conseil. Dans le cas des sanctions douanières comme dans le cas d'autres politiques, à savoir les politiques fiscales ou sociales, on voit bien que le manque d'harmonisation qui induit une situation de concurrence entre États est délétère, nuit à l'application des règles communes et prive les citoyens de ressources légitimes.
                  

                     Le Parlement a donc maintenant une position solide, une position cohérente qui, selon moi, constitue une bonne base de travail. Il appartient maintenant au Conseil de prendre ses responsabilités et d'avancer dans le sens d'une harmonisation des sanctions douanières.
                  

                     Je remercie encore la rapporteure et mes collègues pour l'excellent travail accompli et je souhaite que le Conseil avance rapidement sur ce dossier.
                  

Daniel Dalton,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, I would like to thank the shadows but also particularly Kaja Kallas for her efforts to try and shape a better and more viable proposal. I know she has put a lot of work in and she has made the proposal better, especially in areas where it was inflexible and legally indefensible, like the presumption of innocence. However, despite her efforts, the ECR cannot support it.
The proposal seeks to do two things. One: to set a common approach for defining what a customs infringement is; two: to set common sanctions for those infringements. Now my Group can see the benefit of a common understanding and the need to reduce the complexity of different customs rules, but we disagree that this necessitates a mandatory set of harmonised Union sanctions.
This is a major infringement on subsidiarity, especially as there is little justification for such a move. I have yet to see a viable reason for the proposal. There is no evidence that importers calculate which Member State is the least onerous in terms of sanctions before they import into it. Even Parliament's Research Services' appraisal of the Commission impact assessment was unable to find any evidence of this.
However, when we look at the details of the proposal they are even more problematic. The Commission wants to treat a small or medium-sized company, or a home business, with no experience of customs rules, that accidently infringes those rules just as harshly as a multinational corporation with decades of knowledge and hundreds of staff. That is wrong. It risks killing the rapidly growing online cross-border trade and runs directly contrary to the Commission's aims in creating the digital single market.
At its heart, the original proposal was too prescriptive and inflexible, giving customs regimes no room to use common sense and to examine intent and capabilities when assessing infringement. This should be up to the Member States.
Now on customs sanctions, my Group cannot therefore agree with the rapporteur where she has gone beyond the Commission in some respects, particularly in Articles 11 and 12, with specific figures for specific infringements.
However, to conclude: greater consistency of custom rules for ease of trade, yes; prescriptive one-size-fits-all sanctions that infringe national sovereignty and Member States' legal systems and risk killing the digital single market, no, and therefore the ECR Group cannot support it.

Merja Kyllönen,
GUE/NGL-ryhmän puolesta. – Arvoisa puhemies, kiitoksia kaikille erittäin rakentavasta yhteistyöstä tämän tärkeän asian parissa. Pidän myönteisenä komission yritystä puuttua yhtenäisen tullialueemme heikkouteen eli havaittuihin tullirikoksiin ja niistä seuranneisiin rangaistuksiin. Rikkomuksista rankaiseminen jätettiin tullilainsäädännössä kansallisvaltioiden lainsäätäjien käsiin, ja valitettavasti se on johtanut siihen, että vaihtelevat rangaistuskäytännöt eri EU-valtioissa ovat houkutelleet yrityksiä myös tullishoppailuun, ja sitä kautta markkinat vääristyvät asiansa hyvin ja lainmukaisesti hoitavien yritysten tappioksi.
                  

                     Kun olemassa on yhteinen tapa tulkita, mikä on tullirikkomus, samoin kuin yhtenäinen rangaistusseuraamuskäytäntö, se lisää mielestäni tuonnin ja viennin läpinäkyvyyttä ja kaikenlaista tehokkuutta myös Euroopan unionissa ja laittaa kaikenkokoiset yritykset hieman paremmin samalle viivalle. Me tarvitsemme oikeudenmukaisen pelikentän myös tähän tulliasiaan, ja kannatan sitä erityisen lämpimästi. Pidän siitä, että esittelijä on nähnyt suuresti vaivaa löytääkseen yhteneviä ratkaisuja.
                  

Tiziana Beghin,
a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, a cosa serve vivere in una comunità se le regole non sono le stesse per tutti? L'Unione europea è anche un'unione doganale: non ci sono frontiere tra i paesi, ma solo frontiere esterne, quindi una merce che entra alla dogana romena arriva senza controlli nel mercato italiano e viceversa. Per questo è importante che le dogane europee applichino procedure, controlli e sanzioni simili. Il Parlamento sta per approvare a larga maggioranza una direttiva per armonizzare proprio il quadro delle sanzioni doganali.
                  

                     Attualmente chi non rispetta le regole deve pagare una multa e se questa multa varia a seconda del paese, ovviamente, farà entrare le merci dove paga di meno in caso venga ‘pizzicato’. Bisogna quindi armonizzare le sanzioni: il Parlamento in questo è quasi unanime, ma alcuni Stati dell'Est guidati dalla Germania e dall'Olanda fanno blocco perché non hanno intenzione di cambiare le cose, o meglio, perché non cambiare a loro conviene.
                  

                     La questione delle dogane però non si riduce soltanto alla questione delle sanzioni, anche i controlli e le procedure dovrebbero essere armonizzati, per questo in commissione INTA sarò relatrice di un grande processo di riflessione sul futuro delle dogane europee e credo che lo sblocco di questo dossier sia essenziale per poter continuare. Francamente mi sono stancata, e come me credo anche tanti, tanti cittadini, di un'Europa dove tutti mangiano, ma solo qualcuno pagano il conto. Un'Europa solidale soltanto quando le conviene: economia, immigrazione, tassazione e adesso dogane. È il momento di dire basta a chi usa l'Unione soltanto per i suoi interessi.
                  

Mylène Troszczynski,
au nom du groupe ENF. – Madame la Présidente, cette directive ambitionne de fixer un cadre juridique commun aux États membres de l'Union européenne afin de gommer les disparités entre les différents régimes nationaux qui sont appliqués. En d'autres termes, il s'agit d'harmoniser les applications nationales de la législation douanière pour achever de mettre en œuvre l'union douanière.
                  

                     Les disparités nationales dans la mise en œuvre de cette union douanière ont effectivement une incidence sur l'égalité des conditions de concurrence, en ce sens qu'elles fournissent un avantage à ceux qui ne respectent pas la législation dans un État membre dont le régime des sanctions douanières est plus indulgent. Le risque pour les contrevenants n'est donc pas le même en fonction de la porte d'accès au marché intérieur unique.
                  

                     Ces distorsions de concurrence sont factuellement monnaie courante au sein de ce marché intérieur unique, qu'elles soient de nature sociale, environnementale, financière, économique ou politique. Les Français en font chaque jour l'amère expérience. En somme, le schéma est simple. Les États membres continuent de transposer les directives européennes dans les lois nationales selon leurs propres intérêts. Alors que j'y vois un acte patriote, Mme la rapporteure explique quant à elle que certains États membres traînent des pieds. Pour la Commission et les institutions européennes, en revanche, c'est le péché mortel. Il faut au contraire plus d'Europe.
                  

                     Malgré la crise économique de la zone euro, l'amplification de la crise migratoire, le rejet évident de cette conception de la construction européenne par les peuples d'Europe, comme en témoignent le Brexit ou le rejet du CETA par la Belgique, la Commission Juncker préconise encore et toujours plus d'intégration. Comme dit le proverbe errare humanum est, perseverare diabolicum, l'erreur est humaine, l'entêtement est diabolique.
                  

                     Ce projet chimérique d'un marché unique harmonisé homogène se fracasse sur les réalités économiques, politiques, géographiques et donc nationales. Je trouve que c'est une excellente nouvelle pour l'avenir.
                  

Roberta Metsola (PPE). – Nixtieq nibda billi nagħmel referenza għat-traġedja li ġrat dalgħodu f'Malta fejn ajruplan żgħir iġġarraf hekk kif ħalla pajjiżna. Il-ħames persuni ta' nazzjonalità Franċiża li kienu abbord kollha mietu. L-ewwel rapporti mill-Gvern Malti jindikaw li dawn il-persuni kienu qed jaħdmu fuq operazzjoni tad-dwana. Il-ħsibijiet u t-talb tiegħi huma mal-vittmi ta' din it-traġedja u mal-familjari tagħhom. Grazzi ukoll lis-sokkorrituri li kienu fil-post minnufih u għamlu kull ma setgħu biex jimmaniġġjaw is-sitwazzjoni.
                  

                     Biex ngħaddi fuq id-dibattitu ta' llum, ir-rapport li għandna quddiemna jinkludi titjib pożittiv mill-proposta oriġinali tal-Kummissjoni Ewropea. Nixtieq nirringrazzja partikularment lir-relatriċi u x-Shadows kollha għall-kooperazzjoni tajba li kellna biex qegħdin fejn wasalna llum.
                  

                     Ħafna mill-punti li l-Grupp tagħna dejjem saħaq fuqhom ġew inklużi fil-pożizzjoni tal-Parlament Ewropew. Issa huwa ċar li infrazzjonijiet doganali jistgħu jiġu mħarrka darba biss. Neħħejna kull referenza għall-ksur doganali b'responsabbiltà stretta, xi ħaġa li kienet tmur kontra l-preżunzjoni tal-innoċenza. Il-fatt li sanzjonijiet doganali, fil-maġġorparti tagħhom, ser ikunu marbuta mal-valur tad-dazju li ma jkunx tħallas u mhux mal-valur tal-merkanzija, huwa pass pożittiv għall-SMEs, speċjalment dawk li jinnegozjaw b'merkanzija ta' valur għoli, kif ukoll it-tneħħija ta' kull referenza għal-livell minimu ta' sanzjonijiet fil-każ ta' infrazzjonijiet hekk imsejħa minuri, hija xi ħaġa li aħna sħaqna fuqha.
                  

                     Biex nikkonkludi, it-test li għandna quddiemna illum mhux perfett. Wieħed mit-tħassib tiegħi huwa li għad hemm nuqqas ta' ċarezza fejn l-Istati Membri jistgħu jimponu sanzjonijiet kriminali jekk il-liġijiet nazzjonali hekk jipprovdu. M'għandix dubju li din ser tiġi diskussa mal-Kunsill, meta u jekk tittieħed deċiżjoni biex imexxu dan id-dossier 'il quddiem.
                  

Evelyne Gebhardt (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin! Wie meine Kollegin Virginie Rozière vorhin sagte, ist dieser Berichtsentwurf, der gemacht wurde, eine gute Grundlage für die weitere Arbeit, und ich würdige genauso die Arbeit von Frau Kallas in diesem Bereich.
                  

                     Es scheint so etwas Technisches zu sein, aber hat ganz weit reichende politische Aussagen, die auch damit verbunden sind. Und in der Tat, wir haben einen Binnenmarkt. Das Zollrecht ist eine europäische Zuständigkeit, und dennoch haben wir in diesem Bereich immer noch die Kleinstaaterei. Das ist etwas, was eigentlich unerträglich ist. Deswegen ist es richtig und gut, dass die Europäische Kommission uns die Gelegenheit gegeben hat dafür zu sorgen, dass endlich gemeinsame Definitionen geschaffen werden, und dass auch im Bereich der Sanktionen und beim Vorgehen in diesen Bereichen gemeinsame Maßstäbe gesetzt werden. Das ist absolut notwendig, wenn wir dafür sorgen wollen, dass nicht wie bisher ein Flickenteppich an Regelungen, gerade was Sanktionen angeht, besteht und dadurch auch die Unternehmen, die eben nicht das Recht als das oberste Prinzip haben, eben die Gelegenheit erhalten, Forum-Shopping zu machen – sich den Staat herauszusuchen, in dem es am einfachsten ist, auch Missstände durchzusetzen.
                  

                     Das ist etwas, das ist unerträglich. Deswegen sage ich auch den Kollegen, die gemeint haben, dass wir da jetzt Subsidiarität haben müssten: Das ist falsch, schlicht und einfach falsch. Wir müssen gemeinsame Regeln schaffen, damit dieser Binnenmarkt auch tatsächlich ein Binnenmarkt ist und die Außengrenzen auch gemeinsame Außengrenzen und der Markt, der Handel, den wir mit der Außenwelt haben, auch ein gemeinsamer Markt ist, damit wir in der Europäischen Union auch wirklich das Bestmögliche daraus schaffen können und eben zur Kleinstaaterei Nein sagen.
                  

                     Ich sage den Mitgliedstaaten ganz klar: Bitte hört damit auf, sondern setzt euch zusammen und sorgt dafür, dass wir auch wirklich gemeinsame Politik – auch in diesem Bereich – gestalten.
                  

Margot Parker (EFDD). – Madam President, Britain and other nations suffer from the restrictions imposed by the Customs Union. As a member in our current standing Britain is unable to make its own trade deals and has to rely on unelected bureaucrats to negotiate on behalf of the whole of Europe. Just look at how this has worked out. TTIP is over, and CETA is on the rocks, with years and years of negotiating and nothing to show for it. Yet we hear scare stories from some who seem willing to make economic sacrifices to spite the will of the British people. May I remind those people that the impact which this could have on the EU and its businesses is enormous. In fact, experts have said that a failure by the EU to successfully negotiate a free trade deal with Britain could cost European Union exporters up to 13 billion a year.
Amongst the doom and gloom, however, is an exciting future for Britain. Since the vote our government has begun informal trade talks with prospering nations from around the world including Australia, New Zealand, India and many many more. This is Britain's chance to set a future precedent for other nations who are also considering leaving the European Union – free trade, cooperation without the necessity of a political union.

Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz (PPE). – Elnök asszony! Először is szeretnék a jelentéstevőnek gratulálni, mert nagyon jó megközelítéssel állt a témához, és nagyon jó javaslatot is fogalmazott meg, ami a közös jövőbeli együttműködésünknek, mármint a tagállami együttműködésnek nagyon jó kiindulási pontja lehet. Mindenki arról beszél – és abszolút egyetértek, az én kiindulási pontom is az – hogy a belső piac védelme érdekében elengedhetetlen az, hogy minden olyan esetben, amikor a vámügyi szabályaink, a közös szabályaink sérülnek, akkor fel kell lépni. Ezt kívánja a pénzügyi érdekeinknek a közös védelme, és ezt kívánja az együttműködés is.
                  

                     Ugyanakkor nagyon változatos, azt is mondhatnám, nagyon színes képet alkotnak a tagállami eljárási gyakorlatok, ami nem helyes. Úgy vélem, hogy ez a paletta, ez oly széles, és lehetőséget ad a csalásra, hogy mindenféleképpen szűkíteni kell. Abszolút támogatni tudom azt a harmonizált rendszert, annak a kialakítását, ami alkalmas arra, hogy a bürokráciát csökkentse, alkalmas arra, hogy sokkal jobban el tudjunk igazodni ebben a rendszerben, és alkalmas arra is, hogy meg tudjuk különböztetni azt, hogy ha valaki véletlenül sértette meg a jogszabályt, vagy éppen tudatosan és sorozatosan teszi ezt. Jó lenne tudni azt is, hogy ez egységes büntetési tételt jelent-e majd a tagállamokban. Gratulálok a jelentéstevőnek, és természetesen a jelentést támogatni fogom.
                  

Nicola Danti (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Vicepresidente, l'obiettivo primario di questa direttiva è l'armonizzazione a livello di Unione europea delle differenti norme nazionali relative alle infrazioni e alle conseguenti sanzioni doganali. La scarsa efficacia dei controlli doganali in punti di entrata chiave del mercato unico, infatti, favorisce oggi la circolazione di beni non conformi alla legge in tutto il territorio dell'Unione. Alcuni importanti porti marittimi d'Europa costituiscono, ad esempio, un approdo troppo facile per merci contraffatte.
                  

                     La realizzazione di una vera unione doganale è ostacolata dalla frammentazione e eterogeneità delle norme e standard che impediscono il corretto funzionamento del mercato unico europeo e mettono a rischio cittadini e consumatori. A questo proposito valutiamo positivamente che la determinazione delle sanzioni sia collegata, ove possibile, al principio del dazio evaso a garanzia di una maggiore corrispondenza alla gravità della violazione. Il futuro dell'economia europea dipenderà molto da come il nostro continente riuscirà ad intessere relazioni commerciali con altre aree del globo. Tutto ciò presuppone però un quadro giuridico che sia pienamente complementare con i principi e le migliori pratiche dell'OMC che, da una parte, faciliti gli scambi con i paesi terzi e che, dall'altra, garantisca la repressione di tutte quelle attività illecite che mettono a rischio la nostra sicurezza e la nostra competitività.
                  

Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já nejsem příznivcem zbytečných právních předpisů přijímaných EU. Zastávám princip subsidiarity, ale musím říci, že v tomto případě jsem přesvědčen, že přijetí právní úpravy má svůj smysl.
                  

                     Ve chvíli, kdy zde máme jednotné celní území, kdy zde platí jednotné celní hmotné právo, kdy zde platí celní kodex, pak je podle mého názoru logické, že zde má být také jedna úprava sankcí, které budou platit na celém území EU. Zkrátka a dobře, za konkrétní delikt má být na celém území EU, pokud možno, stejná sankce. Je to základní princip právního státu. Za podobný delikt má být podobná sankce. Takže to je důvod, proč já tu úpravu podporuji, proč s myšlenkou souhlasím, byť jsem obecně zdrženlivý k nové evropské legislativě.
                  

                     Podíváme-li se na konkrétní provedení, pak musím říci, že ten návrh, který předložila Komise, bohužel příliš dobrý není a tady stejně jako moji předřečníci chválím aktivitu zvláště zpravodajky výboru IMCO, které se podle mě podařila celá řada právních problémů té právní úpravy odstranit. S tím textem, který vzešel z výboru IMCO, já souhlasím. Alespoň jedna věc: sankce má být uložena za zaviněné jednání, objektivní odpovědnost, která byla v původním návrhu Komise, je podle mého názoru absolutně nepřijatelná a výrazně poškozovala podnikatele. Takže možná by to chtělo, pane komisaři, do budoucna kvalitnější legislativu, kterou zde navrhujete.
                  

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președinte, domnule comisar, vreau să încep prin a felicita raportoarea și raportorii din umbră și, sigur, și poziția colegilor care au luat cuvântul. Nici eu nu cred că putem vorbi de o uniune vamală atunci când avem o legislație pe deplin armonizată în întreaga Uniune Europeană, însă aplicarea și, mă rog, verificarea respectării normelor vamale și impunerea sancțiunilor ține de fiecare stat în parte. Și știm acum concret că avem diferențe - și diferențe mari, nu foarte mici. Acest lucru, din punctul meu de vedere, îi dezavantajează în primul rând pe cei mici, întreprinderile mici și mijlocii. Se completează aceleași formalități, aceleași documente, operatorul economic trebuie să facă aceiași pași, dar, în momentul în care trece printr-o vamă sau alta, sancțiunea este diferită în situația în care la un control lucrurile nu sunt în regulă. De aceea, eu sprijin principiul luării acțiunilor menite să conducă la un anumit nivel de aliniere în cele douăzeci și opt de state, pentru că de aceea avem o piață unică, să avem proceduri, sigur, naționale, dar să fie armonizat nivelul sancțiunilor pentru încălcările vamale.
                  

                     Cred că acest lucru oferă o securitate juridică pentru întreprinderi și ar putea crea condiții mai echitabile, care să încurajeze întreprinderile, în special IMM-urile, să investească în toate statele membre și să stimuleze creșterea economică. Personal, am făcut și eu amendamente și sper ca acest raport să fie votat și să facem pași, pentru că nu cred că terminăm cu uniunea vamală doar cu acest raport. Și mai cred, în același timp, că statele membre trebuie, și este și rolul Comisiei, să adopte o transparență mai mare și să vedem o mai bună aplicare a legislației vamale. Până la urmă, trebuie să mergem toți spre măsuri care să îmbunătățească și conformarea companiilor la respectarea a legislației vamale, dar să nu încurajăm trecerea doar a anumitor frontiere doar pentru faptul că sancțiunile sunt mai mici. Susțin raportul și o felicit pe doamna Callas.
                  

Jarosław Wałęsa (PPE). – Madam President, as we know, the aim of this proposal was to harmonise the approach to the enforcement of customs legislation and particularly to sanctions for infringements. At the moment, customs rules across the EU are the same under the Union's Customs Code, but when those rules are infringed, enforcement follows 28 different sets of legal rules and administrative traditions. That creates inconsistency within Member States and can generate uncertainty for businesses. I am happy with the text that we are going to vote on this week. First of all, there will be no fixed minimum sanction for minor infringements, and secondly, for both minor and serious infringements, the financial fine should be imposed as a percentage of the duties evaded. The report also allows for the possibility, where the nature and the gravity of infringements so require, for Member States to impose criminal sanctions in accordance with national laws instead of non-criminal sanctions as provided for by the directive . I believe that with this text we are ready for further negotiations with the Council and the Commission.

Sergio Gaetano Cofferati (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, è importante che ci sia così larga condivisione, come il Commissario ha sentito, sul tema che stiamo discutendo, perché io credo che l'Unione doganale sia oggettivamente un pilastro del mercato unico.
                  

                     Discutiamo in altri momenti e per altri provvedimenti dell'importanza di dare a questa parte del mondo regole che siano convergenti, superando le differenze che storicamente si son portate fino ai giorni nostri in ogni singolo paese e soprattutto cerchiamo di rendere visibile un'idea di Unione europea nella quale le diversità vengono superate. Una delle diversità più pesanti e più pericolose è proprio quella, che ancora permane, ma che cerchiamo di superare, delle differenze per quanto riguarda l'individuazione delle infrazioni doganali e poi delle sanzioni che ogni paese decide di applicare come vuole. Il passo in avanti che ci proponiamo è per questa ragione di grandissima importanza.
                  

                     Vorrei ricordare che le sanzioni hanno due effetti positivi. Il primo è quello etico: chi sbaglia deve pagare e deve pagare in proporzione dell'errore che commette oppure della violazione che scientemente mette in campo. Dall'altra parte la sanzione ha un valore deterrente: chi è orientato a far male, sa che deve pagare, per questa ragione qualche volta cambia la direzione. Un'ultima considerazione: bisogna fare in fretta. La condizione attuale è tale che produce alterazioni nella concorrenza, esattamente come la mancanza di comportamenti uniformi in materia fiscale.
                  

Pyynnöstä myönnettävät puheenvuorot


Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, sebbene l'unione doganale sia considerata uno dei fondamenti dell'Unione europea, nonché il pilastro del mercato unico, non esiste ancora un approccio integrato in materia di applicazione della normativa doganale, comprese le sanzioni. Attualmente si registrano, infatti, in caso di violazione difformità anche rilevanti nell'applicazione delle sanzioni all'interno del mercato unico.
                  

                     L'istituzione di un quadro giuridico relativo alle infrazioni e alle sanzioni doganale è fondamentale per migliorare la convergenza degli approcci degli Stati membri in fatto di applicazione della normativa doganale dell'Unione europea. Tuttavia, molto dipenderà da come gli Stati membri interpreteranno la direttiva. Il monitoraggio in tempo reale sull'osservanza delle norme svolto tramite tecnologie informatiche richiede una stretta collaborazione tra gli operatori per garantire la piena conformità, nonché l'attuazione, da parte degli Stati membri delle disposizioni sui sistemi elettronici contenute nel Codice doganale dell'Unione. Occorre che gli Stati membri rispettino l'impegno di prendere parte a un sistema comune di gestione dei rischi: si tratta di uno dei pilastri dell'approccio comune in assenza del quale non può costruirsi un efficiente sistema sanzionatorio comune.
                  

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, ο τρόπος λειτουργίας και ελέγχου των τελωνειακών αρχών αποτελεί σημαντικό παράγοντα για την ομαλή λειτουργία ενός κράτους και την εύρυθμη λειτουργία της εσωτερικής αγοράς. Τα κράτη μέλη της Ένωσης οφείλουν να πράξουν το καθήκον τους και να καταπολεμήσουν την απάτη στον τελωνειακό τομέα, συμβάλλοντας με τον τρόπο αυτό στην επίτευξη του στόχου της εσωτερικής αγοράς για διάθεση ασφαλών προϊόντων με γνήσια πιστοποιητικά προέλευσης και την καταπολέμηση των φαινομένων του ντάμπινγκ και της αναζήτησης ευνοϊκότερης δικαιοδοσίας.
                  

                     Δεν είναι λίγες οι φορές στις οποίες είδαμε προϊόντα να βαφτίζονται εγχώρια και να κυκλοφορούν αθρόα στις εθνικές αγορές. Στην Ελλάδα έχουν σημειωθεί πάρα πολλές περιπτώσεις παράνομων ελληνοποιήσεων προϊόντων, τα οποία περνούν πλέον τα σύνορα, βαφτίζονται ελληνικά, με αποτέλεσμα οι ήδη εξαθλιωμένοι από το μνημόνιο Έλληνες αγρότες να βλέπουν τα δικά τους προϊόντα να σαπίζουν. Είναι γνωστές οι αθρόες κάθε χρόνο ελληνοποιήσεις αμνοεριφίων από τα Σκόπια, όπως επίσης είναι γνωστό ότι λάδι από την Τυνησία βαφτίζεται ελληνικό. Απαιτείται λοιπόν η λήψη μέτρων για να σταματήσουν αυτές οι παρανομίες.
                  

Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE). – Gospođo predsjednice, želim naravno odmah na početku podržati izvještaj svoje kolegice, gospođe Kallas. Uvjeren da je ona, uočivši ovaj apsurd u svom izvještaju, da imamo zajednički carinski zakonik, ali da istovremeno svaka država sama sankcionira prekršitelje, odnosno ima svoje sankcije, 28 različitih zakonodavstava po tom pitanju. Definitivno sam siguran da je upravo jedinstveno carinsko tržište i taj dio veliki uspjeh Europske unije i po tome je prepoznata. Zato maksimalno to podržavam.
                  

                     Ono što želim dodatno naglasiti, što naravno u ovom izvještaju nije vidljivo, je potreba da pokušamo prevladati probleme s kojima ćemo se suočavati s proširenjem Europske unije na jugoistoku Europe. Dakle, ja pozivam da se može uključiti i to u izvještaj i da se razgovara o tome kako pregovarati sa zemljama koje će ući u Europsku uniju za pet, sedam, deset godina i da se u tim pregovorima pokuša također učiniti sve da nemamo dodatne muke po pitanju različitosti zakonodavstava.
                  

Ελευθέριος Συναδινός (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, μετά την εφαρμογή της Συνθήκης του Σένγκεν και βάσει της ιδρυτικής πράξης της Ένωσης ως Ευρωπαϊκής Οικονομικής Κοινότητας, το διασυνοριακό εμπόριο ακόμα αντιμετωπίζει τις στρεβλώσεις ενός πολύπλοκου μηχανισμού τελωνειακής νομοθεσίας. Είκοσι οχτώ διαφορετικά κράτη μέλη εφαρμόζουν αυστηρότητα κατά το δοκούν και επιβάλλουν διαφορετικές κυρώσεις. Αυτό όμως έχει άμεσο αντίκτυπο στο διασυνοριακό εμπόριο, με αποτέλεσμα την απώλεια εσόδων από τα κράτη μέλη. Το φαινόμενο αυτό είναι ιδιαίτερα αισθητό στις χώρες όπου εισάγονται προϊόντα προερχόμενα από χώρες εκτός Ένωσης και μετέπειτα μεταφέρονται στην υπόλοιπη Ευρώπη διασχίζοντας σύνορα κρατών μελών. Η Ένωση απέτυχε στις εξετάσεις επί των μειζόνων ζητημάτων: την οικονομία, το διασυνοριακό εμπόριο, τη λαθρομετανάστευση, την αντιμετώπιση της τρομοκρατίας. Τα κράτη μέλη, με εθνικιστικές κυβερνήσεις που θα διασφαλίζουν τα εθνικά τους σύνορα απαλλαγμένες από ιδεοληψίες και αγκυλώσεις, θα μπορέσουν να συνεργαστούν με σκοπό την αύξηση της αποτελεσματικότητας των τελωνειακών ελέγχων στα εμπορεύματα και να πατάξουν τη διαφυγή των εσόδων.
                  

(Pyynnöstä myönnettävät puheenvuorot päättyvät)


Valdis Dombrovskis,
Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you very much for this debate. The Commission remains open to further work on this directive and to clarify the points where necessary. I think today's debate clearly showed that the European Commission and Parliament share the same objectives to have a level playing field and to ensure uniform application of EU Customs Code.

Kaja Kallas,
rapporteur. – Madam President, I would like to thank all the colleagues who spoke on this matter. I agree with Mr Proust and Mr Schwab that we need a clear vision from the Commission: a strategy that includes the single market, the Customs Union and trade policy. In a world where everything is moving to be digital, it is very important that we make the rules very simple. We should also make sure that the authorities act as partners to the micro-businesses and not as obstacles.
On the inter-link between the administrative and criminal sanctions, the Commission wants to have more clarity. However, I point out that in the Commission's proposal the Member States could do whatever they wanted, so that was not clear either. In my report we do clarify that we need a harmonised approach towards the non-criminal sanctions, and we only leave room for the criminal sanctions if they need to be dissuasive.
We certainly need to support the Commission in the discussions with the Council to ensure that the criminal sanctions are not used for anything else than serious infringements. Regarding the ECR's comments: they raised the issue that the bureaucracy is a problem. Of course we agree, but don't you think that having 28 sets of different rules is a bigger problem for the micro-businesses than to have one set of rules? We definitely want to diminish the bureaucracy here.
Finally, I really ask the Council to do some work on this file, as we have addressed very many issues that were Member States' concerns in this report: for example, the strict liability issue. So the ball is in the Council's court.

Puhemies. – Keskustelu on päättynyt.
                  

                     Äänestys toimitetaan huomenna tiistaina 25.10.2016.
                  
15.   EU strategy towards Iran after the nuclear agreement (debate)

Puhemies. – Esityslistalla on seuraavana Richard Howittin ulkoasiainvaliokunnan puolesta laatima mietintö EU:n Iranin-strategiasta ydinsopimuksen jälkeen (2015/2274(INI) (A7-0286/2016).
               

Richard Howitt,
rapporteur. – Madam President, the Iran Nuclear Agreement was a big achievement for European and international diplomacy. It is an important signal that nuclear non-proliferation is possible in our world. The EU strategy which followed, fully supported by my report, is about Europe fully upholding our obligations under that agreement.
To do so, I support the opening of an EU delegation in Tehran and cooperation on maritime security in the Persian Gulf as a concrete step towards a new regional security structure for the whole region; setting the aim for a partnership and cooperation agreement for a bilateral investment treaty and of Iran joining the World Trade Organisation. Supporting the major deal for Airbus and efforts for banks themselves to support the lifting of sanctions; to restore our own interparliamentary dialogue with the Majlis.
Colleagues, this is a balanced and inclusive report incorporating 22 compromise paragraphs from no less than 139 amendments from different Members of this Parliament. I thank the shadows, and Mr Brok in particular, for their cooperation.
On human rights: the human rights NGO Reprieve called the language of my report ‘excellent’. Human Rights Watch said: it is ‘good language’. The words ‘human rights’ actually appears 34 times in my report. By focusing on ending the death penalty for children and for all drug offenses I am supporting efforts which are already under way in Iranian society itself and that I dearly hope will actually be agreed.
Those who say that my report ‘is not human rights enough’ simply impugn my own integrity and contradict the human rights organisations themselves. They knowingly imperil the leverage that we do have with Iran and make the improvements in human rights, which they say you want, less, not more, likely. They should examine your own conscience before you repeat that claim.
My report clearly called for non-interference in other countries and an end to support for armed groups. It specifically supports respect for peace and security for Israel and for Palestinians. It suggests that Europe can play a greater role in de-escalating tension between Tehran and Riyadh, and that this is the essential part of bringing to an end the terrible conflicts which afflict Iran's neighbours. There are those in this Chamber who want greater one-sided criticism of Iran's regional role. They say they are against proxy wars but you yourselves are acting as proxies; don't do it.
For those that are using this debate to wage these arguments, but who do so actually seeking to oppose the nuclear agreement: be honest in saying so. I will be honest with you about the consequences of the agreement's collapse: a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, heightened security fears, undermining reformists and shifting power to hardliners here and there, a return to sanctions in which ordinary innocent people in Iran are impoverished and lose hope, a potentially fatal attack on diplomatic attempts to end suffering, death and destruction in the bloody civil wars in Syria and in Yemen. Indeed, an attack on the very principle that diplomacy and negotiated agreement itself could be successful in our troubled world.
My report stands for peace, an active diplomatic role for Europe, and a belief that by identifying common interest where it exists, that it is possible to build on it. I ask for your support.

Miguel Arias Cañete,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I am honoured to be here today and thank you for the opportunity to discuss Iran this evening. This is a timely debate falling almost precisely on the first anniversary of the adoption of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which took place on 18 October 2015. It is important to recall that day, because it was one of the milestones of the nuclear agreement and an important step in restoring trust with Iran. The implementation day which occurred a few days later, after the IAEA confirmed Iran's compliance with its nuclear commitments, triggered the lifting of sanctions and effectively opened up the possibility to begin a new chapter in our bilateral relations.
In this context, I thank Mr Richard Howitt for his work on the report on the EU strategy towards Iran after the nuclear agreement, which I see as a valuable contribution in this latest stage of the European Union's relations with Iran.
This Parliament has shown a strong interest and active support throughout the negotiations of the nuclear deal with Iran. Today, one year after the JCPOA was adopted, I also welcome the broad support you are giving to our policy of balance and incremental engagement with Iran. We believe that this approach reflects the new state of European Union-Iran relations after the nuclear deal, as the title of Parliament's report that will be voted on tomorrow aptly points out.
The European Union has played a crucial role in the context of the JCPOA. We were perceived by all sides as an honest broker throughout the whole of the negotiations, and the High Representative and her representatives were entrusted with the role of coordinator of the Joint Commission which today oversees the implementation of the agreement. This is of value in itself, and we need to fulfil this role effectively, because our interests are also at stake, in particular the sustainability of the JCPOA.
Sustainability is crucial for the deal to hold, but sustainability can only be ensured if all sides properly implement the JCPOA and if the Iranian people, who strongly backed the deal, can feel its economic benefits and reconnect with the international community. The good news is that the implementation is on track. Iran has been delivering on its nuclear commitments and, since implementation day, the IAEA has issued three positive reports confirming this. But as I said, sustainability requires firm and longstanding adherence throughout the lifetime of the agreement.
The European Union has delivered on all its commitments. We have lifted the agreed economic and financial nuclear-related sanctions. We have gone beyond that and conducted an extensive outreach to our economic operators, informing them about and clarifying the new regulatory framework.
The initial reluctance by the financial and banking sector and wider business community to re-engage is a natural phenomenon, given that companies need to feel comfortable and confident to come back and invest in Iran again. The remaining United States primary sanctions – and we had a debate on this in July — and the poor business environment in Iran, are additional factors for hesitation. Iran also needs to do its part in terms of increasing transparency in its financial system and improving its efforts as regards anti-money laundering and counter-financing of terrorism framework and institutions.
Iran's commitment to take the necessary measures to comply with the Action Plan or the Financial Action Task Force is a step in the right direction. The European Union stands ready to share expertise with the Iranian authorities on this matter.
The nuclear deal has opened the door for renewed bilateral European Union-Iran cooperation. In fact we are already using the opportunities and have started working together in some areas of mutual interest. Commissioner Stylianides is in Iran, as we speak, to address the issue of Afghan refugees and access to humanitarian relief in the countries of the region affected by conflict.
Commissioner Bieńkowska was in Tehran last week with European Union business representatives and launched a European Union-Iran industrial dialogue. Just a few weeks ago, we received a high-level visit from Iran on the environment, and we agreed to launch cooperation on environmental protection. I know these are important issues for some of you.
On trade-related issues, our commercial exchanges went up by 42%, compared with the same period last year. And we have also been supportive of Iran's accession to the WTO, because we see a clear advantage in having Iran playing along with internationally-agreed rules.
The European Union has established cooperation also in other areas such as energy and nuclear safety, but also in education, culture and research. Indeed, our engagement allows us to foster people-to-people contacts. The young people of Iran are Iran's wealth, and investing in them means investing in the future of the country. We have therefore increased exchanges of students through Erasmus+ and of scientists and researchers in Horizon 2020.
Let me stress again that, while we proceed with this level of engagement, we do not lose sight of the issues where we do not see eye to eye. On the contrary, engagement in areas of mutual interest allows us to open channels of communication to address areas where we have differences. Human rights remain an obvious area of concern. The high number of executions and the restrictions to civil freedoms are worrying, and regular public statements are released in this respect. This is why when we negotiated a joint statement with Iran on the future of our relations, adopted last April during the visit of the High Representative to Iran, we said very clearly that human rights have to be an integral part of it, and this is materialising.
A dedicated delegation from the Iranian judiciary system will come to Brussels in early November, in the framework of the political dialogue, to hold exploratory talks on human rights. This will happen for the first time in more than 10 years. We also have differences with Iran on some regional issues where Iran's behaviour has not changed and remains problematic. We have been clear in calling for tangible steps that can lead to more constructive regional relations, in particular in the case of Syria.
High Representative Mogherini has been in regular touch with Foreign Minister Zarif on the European Union's humanitarian initiative and with a view to laying the ground for the resumption of an inclusive and Syrian-led political process under the auspices of the United Nations.
At the same time, we need to be aware of the domestic and political scene in Iran. The situation remains polarised, and a return to a period of confrontation with the international community is still favoured by some forces. Parliament's report on the European Union strategy towards Iran after the nuclear deal also needs to be seen in this light. It should be a contribution to our renewed balanced engagement.
I should not end without mentioning the important role that parliamentary contacts can play in fostering closer relations and conveying a message on these different issues. We now have a new Majlis in Iran after the February parliamentary elections. Engagement with parliamentarians is an important complement to the official diplomatic channels. When the High Representative visited Iran in April with a group of Commissioners, she framed our future relation as the ‘Four Cs’ dialogue: comprehensive in scope; cooperative where there is mutual interest; critical when we disagree, but constructive in nature. I am glad that the current text of the European Parliament resolution is endorsing this approach. I can only reiterate our willingness to continue working closely with you towards this goal in respect of the different mandate and functions of the institution.

Marietje Schaake,
rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on International Trade. – Madam President, together with shadow rapporteurs from the Committee on International Trade – and I would like to thank them – we focused on the trade and investment aspects of EU-Iran relations one year after the important JCPOA, otherwise known as the Iran Nuclear Deal, which of course must be implemented. Since then, several delegations travelled to Iran to explore the potential, which in theory is huge. But both the Iranian people and EU companies learned that doing business, in practice, in Iran is not only a matter of lifting sanctions, and it is not as easy as it seems. The high levels of corruption, the grey economy, as well as terror financing but also the lack of a truly private sector, with up to 70% state-controlled, make it difficult to do business, and trade and investment must of course be done according to the law and benefit the population, which has suffered enough and continues to suffer. The human capital is Iran's most valuable asset, so imagine what is possible when development goes hand in hand with human rights and fundamental freedoms, when labour rights are improved – including for women – and when environmental protection is upgraded. We must bring Iran under the rules-based system according to the Financial Action Task Force against money laundering and where possible explore the WTO path.

Elmar Brok,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herzlichen Dank für die Möglichkeit, für meine Fraktion einige Worte zu sagen.
               

                  Der Hauptgrund für diese Vereinbarung ist, keine weiteren Atomwaffenstaaten zu haben. Ich glaube, das ist gelungen, und gerade die Europäische Union hat mit Federica Mogherini und Helga Schmid einen großen Anteil daran, dass dies geleistet worden ist. Die gesamte Weltgemeinschaft möchte diese Vereinbarung haben. Der Sicherheitsrat der Vereinten Nationen hat das einstimmig unterstützt. Wir sollten uns in dieser Frage in die Weltgemeinschaft eingliedern, damit der Nichtverbreitungspakt wirklich Glaubwürdigkeit hat.
               

                  Wenn der Iran Atomwaffen bekommt, wird es kein Halten mehr geben. Das ist, glaube ich, unsere zuvörderste Verantwortung. Im Übrigen ist dieser Vertrag kündbar, wenn der Iran sich nicht an die Vorschriften hält, die Sanktionen können wieder eingeführt werden. Das ist alles im Vertrag geregelt, sodass wir auch da keine Sorge zu haben brauchen. Natürlich ist es wichtig, dass der Iran im Laufe der Zeit auch bestimmte Bedingungen erfüllt.
               

                  Deswegen bin ich Herrn Howitt – für den das offensichtlich der letzte Bericht ist hier in diesem Haus, weil er das Haus verlässt. Ich bedaure, dass du deine Entscheidung so getroffen hast. Ich hätte gern mit dir weiter zusammengearbeitet. – dankbar, dass in diesen Bericht, sicherlich nach langen Debatten zwischen den Fraktionen, inzwischen die Fragen der Menschenrechte, die Fragen der Nichthinnehmbarkeit der Todesstrafe, die Fragen der Verhaftungen, die aus politischen und sonstigen Gründen stattfinden, die Benachteiligung religiöser Minderheiten eingeflossen sind. Es ist auch deutlich gemacht worden, dass wir den Iran und Saudi-Arabien auffordern, mit ihrem Stellvertreterkrieg aufzuhören und keine terroristische Organisationen zu fördern – die Hisbollah ist ausdrücklich genannt worden – und auch die Finanzkreisläufe in diesem Bereich entsprechend zu stoppen.
               

                  Ich finde es wichtig, dass in dieser Frage auch klargestellt ist, dass die Sicherheit Israels für uns eine wesentliche Frage ist. Das kann man sicherlich auch noch stärken. Jedenfalls ist dies ein wichtiger Punkt, der deutlich macht, dass wir nicht unsere Werte aufgeben.
               

                  Wir wollen keine Atomwaffen. Deswegen ist der Deal wichtig. Wir wollen die ökonomischen Chancen dieser Vereinbarung nutzen, daran soll gearbeitet werden. Da gibt es noch viele Nachteile, die Frau Schaake benannt hat. Wir sollten die Frage unseres Kampfes gegen Terror, für Menschenrechte, gegen Todesstrafe, für religiöse Minderheiten jetzt zum Ausdruck bringen. Das wird mit diesem Bericht getan, und deswegen wird meine Fraktion diesen Bericht unterstützen.
               

Victor Boștinaru,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, a year ago I was very glad to see a breakthrough in the Iranian nuclear deal. The EU played an important role in this success. I trust the deal can be beneficial for all parties involved. This is significant progress for the security, stability and development of the entire region, but it still remains extremely important for it to be implemented thoroughly and in good faith by all partners as soon as possible. We should not forget that this deal goes beyond its technical details. It has already been celebrated by the Iranian people, who consider that this could represent a step forward in improving their living standards. It is essential for both sides to deliver on that. Only a successful implementation will allow us to show the benefits of multilateral diplomacy over the policy of obstructionism and confrontation.
One of our main worries is the fact that, in spite of the partial lifting of sanctions, EU companies are still facing great difficulty in accessing the Iranian market. This is mostly due to the fact that many American financial sanctions are still in place and have an extraterritorial impact. As far as I am aware of them, I share some of the concerns of my colleagues towards Iran, notably the ones linked to the use of ballistic missiles and human rights abuses and violations, including the use of the death penalty in Iran.
It is important to use all channels, in cooperation with the United States, to find and address at least a temporary solution to the difficulties faced by our companies. It is important to engage Iran in order to work together towards improving the environment for human rights and equally to win more regional stability and prosperity. Having said this, I will conclude with an important call on Iran to stop its interference in other countries in the region and to refrain from supporting armed groups, in particular its support for the Syrian regime, Hamas, al-Nusra and Hezbollah, and to play a more positive and constructive role in bringing back peace to the Middle East.

Charles Tannock,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, reaching an agreement with Iran last summer regarding its nuclear ambitions was a major diplomatic success for the European Union and US foreign-policy interests. The combined sanctions regime proved very effective in putting pressure on the economy and resulted in bringing the Tehran regime, and its electorate, to the conclusion that the country needed to reform and a government that was willing to be able to engage with the West and negotiate a deal.
The Iranian Government is not one that we in Europe share common values with. I too condemn its atrocious human rights abuses, including internationally banned juvenile executions, its sectarian politics, its development of a ballistic missile system, its interventionist regional policies in Syria, Yemen, Bahrain and Lebanon that are often counterproductive. These are differences that we should and will continue to voice our disapproval of and to argue that the peoples of Iran deserve and are capable of better.
Such concerns, however, should not dictate a policy of total disengagement. The negotiations were a final attempt to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and in turn hastening an inevitable nuclear arms race in the Persian Gulf region, without the use of force.
Many have argued that a military solution was, and remains, the one and only solution in the long term. The military experts have made it clear that such a policy would be hugely difficult to achieve without paying a huge personal price. This is nothing to say of the subsequent fallout which, I have no doubt, would be very damaging politically in an already volatile region.
This deal is only welcomed as a pragmatic one and its rejection would play right into the hands of regime hardliners. It does not mean that we have reached the end of the road. Close scrutiny that the terms are being adhered to and the will to reimpose sanctions at the slightest of violations are of utmost importance. It is unknown where this deal will take us over the next decade but I personally remain hopeful that it can build trust and allow time for a new political landscape to develop from that ancient Persian culture and to emerge from that.
I too would like to take this opportunity to extend my thanks to Richard Howitt. We come from very different political families, we have disagreed on many things, Richard, over many years, but I too would like to wish you luck in the next chapter of your life.

Marietje Schaake,
on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Madam President, it has been over a year since the nuclear deal was concluded, but of course it is better late than never to have the European Parliament's opinion as well.
Our Group welcomes the successful lead by the High Representative/Vice President and her team – consisting mostly of females – and the success of EU common diplomacy and international cooperation at times when this is more necessary but most rare. I have shared my thoughts on trade and investment and the possibilities offered when the deal is implemented. So now let us focus with equal resolve on the many remaining problems in our relationship: human rights and fundamental freedoms, from the high levels of executions – even of minors – to the torture in Iran's notorious prisons. Witness the lack of a fair trial for suspects and the general absence of equal rights for women, ethnic and religious minorities, and LGTBIs – and the list goes on, extending to the lack of free expression for journalists, academics, artists, people in general and politicians with critical views. Instead of making the lives of Iranian people better, the regime spends billions on supporting the Assad regime in its cowardice, murder and bombing of innocent people.
Focusing on our shared objective of fighting Daesh cannot hide the real differences between us. The EU lists the military wing of Hezbollah as a terror group; Iran supports it.
President, excuse me, it's my understanding that I have 2.5 minutes. Am I wrong?
Thank you, President.
The EU lists the military wing of Hezbollah as a terror group. Iran supports it. The emphasis on these key topics was lacking in the report, and we found it important to strongly and unequivocally condemn human rights violations and the damaging role that the Islamic Republic plays in the region.
Now this is not, Mr Howitt, an attack on the nuclear deal, its implementation or you personally. It is merely a matter of differences of opinion and priorities, which I think is entirely normal in a democracy.
My Group calls on Iran to be a part of the solution to the war in Syria and – as we are also asking of Saudi Arabia – to halt interference in the affairs of neighbouring partners, recognise Israel and stop denying the Holocaust. We should work together where possible on the basis of clear benchmarks, and we need an EU delegation on the ground.
Our Group sees opportunity to cooperate on environmental protection, on which what little civil society remains in Iran is bravely pushing for more action. We believe that people-to-people contact through exchanges is key, but people must be able to return safely to Iran when they have dual nationality. People-to-people connections also take place online. Therefore, the emergence of a free and open Internet in Iran, one that is not nationally and centrally monitored and censored, is key for young people likewise to come out of isolation.
I want to stress that it is time for a real step out of the dark, out of isolation, and that includes free and fair elections. Our Group seeks to balance this report and hopes that our key amendments will be adopted: otherwise, unfortunately, we will not be able to support this resolution.

Σοφία Σακοράφα,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας GUE/NGL. –Κυρία πρόεδρε, κύριοι συνάδελφοι, η συμφωνία του περασμένου έτους και η άρση των κυρώσεων για το πυρηνικό πρόγραμμα έβγαλαν το Ιράν από την απομόνωση που του είχε επιβάλει η Δύση. Περιμένουμε από το Ιράν να αξιοποιήσει εποικοδομητικά τον σημαντικό ρόλο που διαδραματίζει, όχι μόνο στη Μέση Ανατολή αλλά παγκόσμια, συνεισφέροντας στην ειρήνη, τη σταθερότητα και την ανάπτυξη. Από αυτήν την άποψη, η συμμετοχή του Ιράν στην επίλυση των συγκρούσεων και των πολιτικών κρίσεων είναι απαραίτητη και κρίνεται συνεχώς.
               

                  Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση οφείλει να αναπτύξει με το Ιράν έναν ανοιχτό, ειλικρινή, φιλόδοξο, πολυεπίπεδο, διατομεακό διάλογο σε κλίμα οικοδόμησης αμοιβαίας εμπιστοσύνης και σεβασμού, στη βάση της αξιολόγησης των κοινών συμφερόντων αλλά και των διαφορών, κατά τρόπο που να ωφελεί τόσο τον ιρανικό λαό όσο και τους λαούς της Ευρώπης. Σε αυτόν τον διάλογο έχουμε χρέος ως ευρωβουλευτές να συνεισφέρουμε ενεργά, και όχι μόνο στο στενό κοινοβουλευτικό πλαίσιο. Έχουμε χρέος να θέσουμε στον πυρήνα του διαλόγου και της συνεργασίας μας ζητήματα που αφορούν στην ασφάλεια και στην ευημερία των λαών μας, να εμβαθύνουμε σε έναν ειλικρινή και παραγωγικό διάλογο για τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα, να στηρίξουμε τις προσπάθειες για μεγαλύτερο έλεγχο στη διακίνηση όπλων, νόμιμη και μη, ώστε να μπει ένα τέλος στην αυξανόμενη στρατιωτικοποίηση της περιοχής. Έχουμε χρέος να διευρύνουμε τη συνεργασία μας σε όλους τους τομείς: του πολιτισμού, της εκπαίδευσης, του εμπορίου, της ενέργειας, της περιβαλλοντικής αειφορίας. Μια πολυεπίπεδη συνεργασία η οποία θα πρέπει να βασίζεται στον αμοιβαίο σεβασμό των διεθνών προτύπων και των αρχών.
               

                  Τέλος, κύριοι συνάδελφοι, οφείλουμε να ασκήσουμε πίεση στους εταίρους μας, τις ΗΠΑ, ώστε να αρθούν οι μονομερείς πρωτογενείς κυρώσεις εναντίον του ιρανικού λαού. Όχι μόνο επειδή στραγγαλίζουν τις ευρωπαϊκές επιχειρήσεις που θέλουν να επενδύσουν στο Ιράν, αλλά πρώτα και κύρια για τον αρνητικό αντίκτυπο που έχουν στα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα και ιδιαίτερα στο δικαίωμα του ιρανικού λαού στη διατροφή, στην υγεία και στην ανάπτυξη.
               

                  Προσωπικά, θεωρώ ότι η σημερινή έκθεση είναι ισορροπημένη και απαντά στις περισσότερες από τις προκλήσεις για την παραπέρα ανάπτυξη των σχέσεών μας με το Ιράν, και σε αυτό φυσικά συνέβαλε πολύ θετικά ο κύριος Howitt.
               

Klaus Buchner,
im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Dieser Bericht ist ein Ausdruck des Willens der Europäischen Union, mit der Islamischen Republik Iran zusammenzuarbeiten.
               

                  Der Bericht ist eine Kehrtwende in der Politik: weg von einer Politik der Isolation, hin zu einer Politik des Dialogs und der Annäherung. Das Nuklearabkommen ist ein Hoffnungsschimmer für viele Iranerinnen und Iraner, die sehnsüchtig auf eine Öffnung ihres Landes warten und vor allem auf eine Verbesserung ihrer gesellschaftlichen, sozialen und wirtschaftlichen Situation.
               

                  Ich darf einfach daran erinnern, dass es im Iran eine hohe Arbeitslosigkeit gibt und dass Teile der Bevölkerung in einer wirtschaftlich nicht sehr guten Situation leben. Da wird mir oft entgegengehalten, dass die Verbesserung dieser Dinge die alleinige Verantwortung der jeweiligen Regierung ist. Ich habe diese Meinung nicht, denn aus unserer eigenen Geschichte wissen wir, dass politischer Dialog und die daraus resultierende praktische und wirtschaftliche Kooperation sehr viel bessere Ergebnisse liefern kann als eine Politik der Isolation.
               

                  Die iranische Regierung hat mit dem Abschluss und mit der Einhaltung dieses Abkommens gezeigt, dass sie willens ist, mit uns zusammenzuarbeiten. Wie es sich in einem Gespräch mit dem Vize-Außenminister ergeben hat, hat es den Iran große Überwindung gekostet, diejenigen Teile des Nuklearvertrags zu akzeptieren, die sich eben nicht auf die kriegerische Nutzung der Kernenergie beziehen, sondern auf die kommerzielle Nutzung. Auch hier hat die iranische Regierung nachgegeben und ist unseren Forderungen nachgekommen.
               

                  Jetzt sind wir an der Reihe. Wir müssen das anerkennen und fördern, was sich im Iran an positiver, an etwas liberalerer Entwicklung zeigt. Trotzdem ist es klar, dass wir weit davon entfernt sind, im Iran selbst ideale Zustände zu haben. Deswegen hat der Bericht eine ganze Reihe von Forderungen, die sehr deutlich, sehr klar sind. Ich möchte nur einige herausholen, die mir persönlich besonders wichtig sind.
               

                  Wir fordern die möglichst sofortige Freilassung aller politischen Gefangenen, insbesondere natürlich auch derjenigen, die doppelte Staatsbürgerschaft haben. Wir fordern die Achtung der Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten und vor allem der internationalen Arbeits-, Sozial- und Umweltnormen. Das ist etwas, dass gerade die Sozialnormen oft nicht eingehalten sind, was stark betont werden muss. Wir fordern die iranische Justiz auf, das Recht auf faire und ordnungsgemäße Verfahren sicherzustellen. Wir fordern, dass der Umweltschutz und die Förderung einer ökologisch nachhaltigen Entwicklung, möglichst auch in europäischer Zusammenarbeit, vorangetrieben werden.
               

                  In diesem Zusammenhang möchte ich auf die Umweltkatastrophe um den Urmiasee herum aufmerksam machen, eine Katastrophe, die sich weit über die Grenzen des Iran hinaus auswirkt. Dann –es ist ja schon öfter erwähnt worden – fordern wir den Iran auf, ein Moratorium für die Todesstrafe einzuführen. Der Iran ist, gemessen an seiner Bevölkerungszahl, weltweit das Land mit der höchsten Rate von Hinrichtungen.
               

                  Der Bericht weist meiner Meinung nach in die richtige Richtung, kann eine Menge an Verbesserungen erwirken, und deswegen hoffe ich, dass er morgen mit großer Mehrheit angenommen wird.
               

James Carver,
on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Madam President, the Iranian nuclear agreement represented possibly one of the biggest shifts in Western-Middle Eastern relations for decades. Whilst the full repercussions of the nuclear agreement, as well as whether all sides can stick to it, remain to be seen, what is beyond doubt is that the agreement gives us further grounds to continue dialogue and continue building up mutual trust and respect.
If this is to prove fruitful, it must be done through existing international institutions and multilateral and bilateral dialogue. In this report, however, I must especially question its aim of an EU strategy. Once again the EU is showing its immaturity when it comes to diplomacy. I believe that the too much, too quickly approach taken in this report may actually prove to be counterproductive in the long term. As we all know, trust can take decades to build but be broken far more quickly.
I believe that the comments in this report on Syria are pointless. Middle Eastern diplomacy is – to make an obvious understatement – complex, with the multifaceted interests of major players globally and regionally. All parties represent legitimate national concerns, and it is only by coming to a reasonable accommodation that a lasting peace can be found. In short, I would suggest that we build slowly on the success of the dialogue before the nuclear deal. Let us agree where we can agree and agree to discuss differences where we can.
However, whilst my own concerns over the Iranian stance towards Israel remain relevant and topical in this context, let us not pressure Iran with an all-encompassing agreement that we know would be doomed to failure. For once let us stop posturing and see if we can actually bring some stability to the region. I would also like to pay tribute to Richard. Richard, you and I disagree on pretty much everything, but I think that the Foreign Affairs Committee will be a different place without you, certainly from a British viewpoint. I wish you all the very best for your future outside Parliament.

Jean-Luc Schaffhauser,
au nom du groupe ENF. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, pour une fois, nous devons constater qu'un parlementaire européen a fait un rapport qui essaie d'approcher le réel. C'est suffisamment rare pour être souligné. Il faut dire que, l'Amérique ayant exceptionnellement revisité sa politique, il ne nous restait qu'à suivre – c'est encore ce que nous faisons de mieux – les États-Unis, telle une Europe dépendante obéissant au maître.
               

                  Toutefois, il semble que cet apaisement ne soit pas du goût de tout le monde. Il se trouve plusieurs de mes collègues pour se plaindre et tenter de nuire malgré tout à l'Iran et aux relations que nos États doivent entretenir avec ce grand pays. Les va-t-en-guerre sont là. Plus ils sont issus, d'ailleurs, de petites puissances, plus ils sont souvent arrogants.
               

                  On nous parle des capacités militaires iraniennes qui nous inquiètent. Les armées de mercenaires que l'Arabie saoudite envoie au Yémen ne semblent pas, en revanche, nous inquiéter. Deux poids, deux mesures. On nous parle de la dureté de l'Iran à l'égard du trafic de drogue qui nous émeut, mais savons-nous qu'il y a entre 1,2 et 3 millions de toxicomanes en Iran sur une population qui n'atteint pas les 80 millions d'habitants? Savons-nous que l'Iran a perdu près de 4 000 douaniers dans sa guerre contre la drogue? Enfin, nous rappelons-nous que l'Iran est un État souverain qui peut décider de son système pénal? Deux poids, deux mesures également si on regarde la Turquie.
               

                  Enfin, on nous parle des droits de l'homme comme une incantation mais s'indigne-t-on autant en face du Qatar et de l'Arabie saoudite?
               

                  L'Iran est un partenaire incontournable. En remettant en cause les accords internationaux d'État à État, nous risquons de menacer, une fois de plus, la stabilité régionale et internationale. Soutenons ce rapport! C'est très important, car il va dans le bon sens. L'Iran apportera sa contribution à la stabilité régionale et Israël doit être rassuré par un soutien total du Parlement et de nos États.
               

Γεώργιος Επιτήδειος (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, δεν υπάρχει αμφιβολία ότι η συμφωνία της Ευρωπαϊκής Ενώσεως με το Ιράν σχετικά με το πυρηνικό πρόγραμμα της χώρας είναι μία σημαντική επιτυχία της εξωτερικής πολιτικής της Ευρωπαϊκής Ενώσεως και απελευθέρωσε το πεδίο της συνεργασίας των δύο πλευρών σε διαφόρους τομείς. Το Ιράν είναι η δεύτερη οικονομική δύναμη στον χώρο της Μέσης Ανατολής και σημαντικός παράγοντας στο εμπόριο της ενεργείας, διότι είναι η δεύτερη χώρα στον κόσμο σε αποθέματα φυσικών αερίων και η τετάρτη σε πετρέλαιο. Κατά συνέπεια η συνεργασία της Ευρωπαϊκής Ενώσεως με το Ιράν σε διαφόρους τομείς, όπως στο εμπόριο, στη βιομηχανία, στην ενέργεια είναι προς το συμφέρον των χωρών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ενώσεως, ούτως ώστε να μην εξαρτώνται από έναν προμηθευτή στον τομέα της ενεργείας.
               

                  Από πολιτικής απόψεως η συμφωνία αυτή είναι σημαντική και επετεύχθη, διότι, επιτέλους, η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση αποφάσισε να διαφοροποιηθεί στην εξωτερική πολιτική από εκείνη των Ηνωμένων Πολιτειών. Έτσι, μετά την πυρηνική συμφωνία, ήρε τις κυρώσεις κατά του Ιράν, κάτι το οποίο δεν έκαναν οι Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες, με αποτέλεσμα, σε συνδυασμό και με το ότι οι συναλλαγές με το Ιράν πραγματοποιούνται σε δολάρια, να υπάρχει πρόβλημα στις συναλλαγές της Ευρωπαϊκής Ενώσεως με το Ιράν που πρέπει να γίνονται σε ευρώ. Τέλος το Ιράν μπορεί να αποτελέσει σημαντικό παράγοντα σταθεροποίησεως στον χώρο της Μέσης Ανατολής, αλλά παράλληλα οφείλει να βελτιώσει και τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα και να καταργήσει τη θανατική ποινή στους νέους κάτω των δεκαοκτώ ετών και κυρίως στα παιδιά.
               

Cristian Dan Preda (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, la première version du texte du rapport de Richard Howitt avait l'air d'avoir été rédigée pour faire plaisir à Téhéran et j'avais critiqué ce penchant pro-chiite qu'avait pris le rapporteur socialiste. De même, nous étions nombreux à penser que le rapport n'était pas suffisamment incisif, en particulier sur la question des droits de l'homme.
               

                  Le texte issu de la commission des affaires étrangères que nous avons devant nous est plus équilibré et je tiens à remercier notre rapporteur du groupe PPE, Elmar Brok, pour ses efforts de recadrage du rapport.
               

                  Je suis particulièrement heureux de constater qu'un certain nombre de mes amendements ont été pris en compte, notamment ceux qui visaient à donner plus de tranchant à des questions comme la prise en compte des lignes directrices de l'Union européenne sur les droits de l'homme dans ses relations avec l'Iran ou encore la peine de mort. La peine de mort était considérée dans la première version de ce rapport comme une simple question de différence entre nous et l'Iran. Or, on le sait, c'est une question de principe fondamental pour l'Union.
               

                  Le rapport a été amélioré, mais j'aurais aimé y voir une condamnation très forte des appels répétés de l'Iran à la destruction d'Israël, une condamnation claire de son déni de l'holocauste, une condamnation claire du soutien de Téhéran au régime de Bachar Al-Assad ainsi que la dimension nécessaire des critères sur les droits de l'homme qui semblent pour l'instant tabou pour Richard Howitt.
               

Ana Gomes (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, o acordo nuclear com o Irão é decisivo, todos o esperamos, para a segurança e não proliferação a nível regional e global, resultado de negociações históricas em que as diplomacias europeia e americana se empenharam.
               

                  Abriu-se assim uma nova página nas relações União Europeia-Irão que não pode secundarizar a necessidade de diálogo numa área em que europeus e autoridades iranianas mantêm substanciais divergências, no respeito pelos direitos humanos, incluindo os direitos das mulheres, no uso e abuso da pena de morte e outros tratamentos degradantes.
               

                  Esse diálogo não é inútil, tem de ser franco, vigoroso, criativo: não cai em saco roto junto de um governo que está pressionado internamente por uma sociedade jovem, educada e desejosa de reintegração na comunidade internacional.
               

                  Oportunidades económicas e de comércio são potenciadoras também de maior intercâmbio entre os povos europeu e iraniano. O levantamento das sanções contra o Irão abre o mercado iraniano a empresas e investimento europeus. Porém, é preciso ainda que o Irão se comprometa e invista em cumprir as recomendações do Grupo de Ação Financeira Internacional para criar um ambiente económico transparente e responsável.
               

                  Mas sejamos claros: restringir o relacionamento euro-iraniano a objetivos económicos e comerciais é falhar estrategicamente. O Irão é potência regional que deve ser encorajada a desempenhar um papel na resolução de conflitos e não a agravá-los. O Irão pode ajudar a pôr fim à guerra na vizinha Síria, mas hoje combate ao lado da Rússia, para preservar o tirano Assad, à custa do massacrado povo sírio.
               

                  A União Europeia devia utilizar um novo relacionamento com o Irão e com outros atores regionais no sentido de dissuadir o confronto sectário Sunni-Shiita sobretudo alimentado pela Arábia Saudita, o Qatar e a Turquia de Erdogan.
               

                  Uma solução que dê paz e futuro aos sírios e a todos os povos na região é a única forma de a Europa e o Irão protegerem a sua própria segurança.
               

Anna Elżbieta Fotyga (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Na tle takich dokumentów jak raport Ban Ki-moona przedstawiony we wrześniu Zgromadzeniu Ogólnemu, rezolucja Kongresu Stanów Zjednoczonych czy liczne raporty think tanków, sprawozdanie, które Richard Howitt przedstawia Parlamentowi Europejskiemu, wydaje się niedostatecznie zrównoważone. Jako Polka szanuję i cenię Irańczyków, moje uwagi odnoszą się do reżimu Republiki Iranu. W 1988 r. doszło do masowych egzekucji przeciwników politycznych, tak masowych, że nosiły charakter ludobójstwa. Osoby odpowiedzialne za te morderstwa pełnią obecnie wysokie funkcje, a egzekucje przeciwników politycznych de facto trwają po dziś dzień, podobnie jak egzekucje osób młodocianych. Rolę Iranu, zarówno w regionie jak i globalnie, trudno określić jako stabilizującą. Ciąży na tym kraju zarzut finansowania terroryzmu. Kolegom, którzy kierują się wizją wymiany handlowej, chciałam przypomnieć, że sektor gospodarczy w Iranie jest zdominowany przez Gwardię Rewolucyjną, a takie organizacje jak FATF doradzają najwyższą ostrożność w podejmowaniu tego typu relacji.
               

Gérard Deprez (ALDE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, bien sûr, je me félicite que l'accord intervenu sur le nucléaire iranien semble réellement respecté. Bien sûr, je reconnais que cet accord ouvre de nouvelles possibilités et entraînera des avantages pour les deux parties en ouvrant le marché iranien aux entreprises européennes. Bien sûr, je veux ouvrir nos frontières aux jeunes Iraniens. Mais, Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, ce n'est pas parce que le régime iranien a cessé d'être un délinquant nucléaire que nous devons lui octroyer un prix d'honorabilité démocratique et humaniste. À mes yeux, l'ouverture aux échanges et à de nouvelles formes de coopération économique, que je soutiens, doit aller de pair avec des progrès réels dans le domaine des droits de l'homme.
               

                  Je rappelle que l'Iran est aujourd'hui le champion du monde toutes catégories pour ce qui est du nombre d'exécutions par rapport au nombre d'habitants. Je rappelle que l'Iran exécute des mineurs, violant ainsi la convention des Nations unies relative aux droits de l'enfant, qu'il a pourtant signée et qui interdit l'application de la peine capitale aux jeunes délinquants. Je rappelle que le régime iranien ne reconnaît pas l'Holocauste. Je rappelle qu'en Iran, toutes les femmes sont des citoyennes de seconde zone. Je rappelle, enfin, que l'actuel ministre de la justice s'est dit publiquement fier d'avoir pris part, en 1988, à la décision d'exécuter des milliers de prisonniers politiques. Personnellement, je qualifie ces exécutions de masse de crimes contre l'humanité.
               

                  Alors, Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, coopérer avec l'Iran, oui, fermer les yeux non!
               

Martina Anderson (GUE/NGL). – Madam President, the presence of nuclear weapons makes this world an unnecessarily dangerous and volatile place. The EU's strategies towards Iran should adhere to this basic concept. Iran stands as an example of how, ostracised by the international community, sanction states are driven away from international cooperation into a cave of isolationism.
Despite this, and unlike Israel, Iran became a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The sheer duplicity of nuclear-armed Western states criticising Iran for pursuing such objectives, while they sit on stockpiles of nuclear armaments capable of obliterating the earth several times over, would be comical if it was not so repulsive and dangerous.
Of course, the most vocal opponent of Iran's nuclear ambition was Israel; a nation with a non-declared stockpile of nuclear weapons, some of which it tried to sell to apartheid South Africa. All states in all regions should encourage and advance nuclear disarmament. The EU and Iran should ensure the terms of the agreement are fulfilled and all EU Member States should also begin unilateral nuclear disarmament and encourage non-EU nuclear-armed states to do likewise.
Sinn Féin, for our part, will ensure that we promote universal nuclear disarmament as a means to remove these immoral, military, useless and potentially Armageddon-creating weapons. To this end we will work to uphold Ireland's neutrality and to oppose the British Government's drive to renew its trident weapons of mass destruction. I also want to acknowledge the work of Richard Howitt and to wish him well in the future.

Fabio Massimo Castaldo (EFDD). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'accordo sul nucleare iraniano è sicuramente un grande successo diplomatico che riporta al tavolo delle negoziazioni un attore regionale fondamentale per gli equilibri dell'intero Medio Oriente, come l'Iran, forse uno dei pochi successi di questi ultimi anni. E il nostro sarà un voto senz'altro favorevole, un voto di incoraggiamento ai passi avanti che l'attuale esecutivo guidato da Haroni sta compiendo nel paese. Un voto che però non dimentica la grave situazione dei diritti umani, che non dimentica l'uso della pena di morte anche su minori, seppure, ricorda, che non è sicuramente il paese con il più alto numero al mondo, quello è la Cina, ma pare che tanti se ne dimentichino quando si parla di esempio del MES Cina; non dimentica neanche la censura e non dimentica la negazione l'Olocausto. Però, serve un'attitudine positiva, un'attitudine che ha portato alla conclusione del trattato stesso, un'attitudine che dobbiamo preservare affinché prevalga l'ala moderata nella sua battaglia contro l'ala conservatrice.
               

Edouard Ferrand (ENF). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, le rapport proposé présente des points de vue assez intéressants mais ne va pas, à certains égards, au bout de sa logique. Il ne s'agit pas de donner un blanc-seing à la République islamique d'Iran, loin de là. Toutefois, à partir du moment où l'on prête une attention particulière à ce point essentiel qu'est la lutte contre l'État islamique, il est clair que l'Iran devient un partenaire essentiel dans ce combat contre le terrorisme, ce qui n'est malheureusement pas le cas d'un certain nombre d'États d'Europe qui sont, justement, demeurés muets par rapport à cette lutte contre l'État islamique.
               

                  Je mets également en garde ici contre les initiatives hypocrites des États-Unis qui, quand il s'agit de certaines entreprises européennes, veulent maintenir un embargo. À partir du moment où l'Iran applique pleinement et réellement les accords de Genève, les sanctions doivent être corrélativement et proportionnellement levées à l'encontre de cet État.
               

Janusz Korwin-Mikke (NI). – Czy Państwo nie widzicie, że jesteście śmieszni? Unia Europejska, która ma siedem lat za sobą i trzydzieści miliardów długów, kłopoty wewnętrzne i zewnętrzne, poucza państwo, które ma cztery tysiące lat tradycji o tym, co ma robić? Pouczacie Iran, że ma znieść karę śmierci i przestrzegać konstytucji, a przecież konstytucja Iranu nakazuje stosowanie kary śmierci. Mówicie, że muszą się pozbyć atomu, ale przecież znamy państwa na przykład Pakistan, Izrael, Ameryka, które mają broń jądrową i są całkiem cywilizowane. Mówicie, że Iran ma znieść karę śmierci, ale przecież znamy państwa takie jak USA, Japonia – bardzo cywilizowane – które mają karę śmierci, bo macie mentalność kolonialną. Tak samo, jak żeście sto lat temu pouczali Afrykańczyków, jak mają żyć, tak samo pouczacie teraz dumnych Persów, jak mają żyć. Oni tego nie muszą na szczęście wysłuchiwać.
               

                  A co byście powiedzieli, gdyby Iran zrobił konferencję, przeczytał te dokumenty Unii Europejskiej i powiedział, że Unia musi przywrócić karę śmierci, żeby stać się znowu państwem cywilizowanym? A kto wam powiedział, że wartości unijne są lepsze niż wartości irańskie? Kto wam powiedział? Jesteście imperialistami, którzy nie tolerują odmienności, a poza tym sądzę, że Unia Europejska musi zostać zniszczona.
               

Janusz Lewandowski (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Porozumienie nuklearne z Iranem to była dobra wiadomość wśród wielu bardzo złych wiadomości z tego regionu i z całego otoczenia Unii Europejskiej. Dobra wiadomość to nie był tylko sam ‘deal’, ale proces implementacji, który był procesem budowy zaufania pomiędzy partnerami. Bezsporna w tym zasługa External Action Service. Cała wiedza, jaką zgromadziłem jako szef delegacji do spraw Iranu w Parlamencie Europejskim, mówi mi, że nie ma lepszej metody wspomagania sił, które nazywamy reformatorskimi, niż otwieranie Iranu na świat i współpraca na możliwie szerokich polach. Nie ma lepszej możliwości. Zaświadcza o tym także nowa kompozycja ‘match list’, czyli Parlamentu Europejskiego sformowanego już po zawarciu porozumienia. Teraz ważne jest, aby przeciętny człowiek, ‘man in the street’, w Teheranie odczuł skutki tego otwarcia w swoim poziomie życia.
               

                  Oczywiście nie jest łatwo znaleźć punkt równowagi pomiędzy interesami geopolitycznymi, gospodarczymi i obroną wartości, z których nigdy nie zrezygnujemy. Sprawozdanie pana Howitta jest szukaniem tej równowagi. Wskazuje pola współpracy – czyli gospodarka z nazwaniem wąskiego gardła, jakim są usługi bankowe, ochrona środowiska, energetyka, walka z przemytem narkotyków – ale mówi też o różnicach i nazywa je po imieniu: liczebność wyroków kary śmierci, potraktowanie mniejszości etnicznych i religijnych, niezadowalająca rola Iranu jako stabilizatora regionu. Jestem głęboko przekonany, że w relacjach z Iranem szanse przeważają nad zagrożeniami.
               

Damiano Zoffoli (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, grazie al relatore Howitt, intervengo per esprimere il mio appoggio a una relazione che va nella giusta direzione: si tratta di una proposta equilibrata che va letta e considerata in tutti i suoi punti, paragrafi, direi virgole comprese. Una presa di posizione del Parlamento europeo che sostiene il lavoro prezioso dell'Alto rappresentante Federica Mogherini che definì l'accordo sul nucleare, di cui questa relazione in qualche modo è figlia, un segno di speranza per il mondo in un tempo in cui la speranza sembra essere in crisi. Quell'accordo è basato sul rispetto delle regole su cui bisogna vigilare attentamente.
               

                  Ma non basta, bisogna ora creare un clima di fiducia reciproco fra Iran e Unione europea. Le relazioni devono essere sviluppate attraverso un dialogo a più livelli che coinvolga contatti politici, diplomatici, economici, accademici, tecnici, interpersonali, che comprendono gli attori della società civile, le ONG e i sostenitori dei diritti umani. Un dialogo, si diceva, di ampio respiro, aperto, franco, critico, quando necessario. Abbiamo interessi economici comuni, penso in particolare alla lotta contro i cambiamenti climatici. L'Iran è al secondo posto livello mondiale per riserve di gas, al quarto per petrolio. La cooperazione energetica può svolgere un ruolo significativo nella diversificazione delle fonti di approvvigionamento per l'Unione europea. L'Unione può affiancare l'Iran nelle sue diverse sfide ambientali, fra cui la scarsità d'acqua, la lotta contro la desertificazione.
               

                  Investiamo con fiducia nei giovani europei ed iraniani per avvicinare le società e le culture, aumentando gli scambi fra studenti e ricercatori. Voglio leggere infine testualmente l'invito del Parlamento europeo contenuto nella relazione: ‘invita all'Iran a rispettare, tutelare e osservare gli impegni assunti nell'ambito della Costituzione della Repubblica islamica dell'Iran, del Patto internazionale sui diritti politici e civili, della Convenzione sui diritti del fanciullo, del Patto internazionale sui diritti economici, sociali e culturali, rispettando libertà di espressione, di opinione, di associazione, di pensiero, di coscienza, di religione senza discriminazione etnica o sociale o di orientamento sessuale’. Su queste basi – ho finito Presidente – è possibile lavorare insieme per garantire pace, stabilità in Medio Oriente, combattere il terrorismo e prevenire la tragedia di milioni di profughi.
               

Mark Demesmaeker (ECR). – Collega's, ik zeg het maar meteen. Ik ben niet van plan mijn fiat te geven aan een verslag als dat in de handen van een theocratisch regime in Iran gebruikt kan en zál worden als een propaganda-instrument.
               

                  We hebben jaren over de nucleaire overeenkomst onderhandeld en ondertussen hebben we een dramatische stijging gezien van het aantal executies in Iran. Volgens de Verenigde Naties zijn er vorig jaar alleen al zo'n 1 000 mensen opgehangen. Dat is het hoogste aantal terechtstellingen per capita in de wereld.
               

                  Iran is ook recordhouder van het aantal executies van minderjarigen. Jazeker, onder druk van de strenge sancties van de Europese Unie werd Iran gedwongen om zijn nucleaire ambities terug te schroeven en om de nucleaire overeenkomst te aanvaarden, wat nodig is. Maar laten we niet naïef zijn. Dit betekent niet dat we nu plots te maken krijgen met een meer gematigd regime. De dagelijkse realiteit bewijst het tegendeel.
               

                  Een voorbeeld? Dezelfde functionarissen die in 1988 30 000 politieke gevangenen lieten executeren en daarmee een van de zwaarste misdaden tegen de menselijkheid begingen, bezetten nu nog altijd topposities in het huidige regime. Een daarvan is de huidige minister van Justitie. Hij verklaarde onlangs zelfs dat hij trots is op de rol die hij speelde bij het bloedbad!
               

                  We zien ook de destructieve rol van Iran in de conflicten in de regio. Iran levert de financiële middelen, de wapens en de militieleden voor z'n oorlogen bij volmacht in Syrië, in Irak, in Jemen, in Libanon en op andere plaatsen. Als Iran eindelijk een verantwoordelijke staat wil zijn waar ook wij zaken mee kunnen doen, dan moet het in de eerste plaats stoppen met dat soort schurkengedrag.
               

José Inácio Faria (ALDE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, há cerca de um ano atrás foi alcançado um acordo histórico com o Irão que representou um marco na luta contra a proliferação nuclear e um passo importante para tornar o mundo num local mais seguro.
               

                  Com o levantamento das sanções económicas e financeiras, relacionadas com o programa nuclear do Irão, a Europa tem procurado aproveitar as oportunidades de que um mercado com 80 milhões de pessoas representa, nem que para tanto tenha que fechar os olhos às constantes violações dos direitos humanos do regime ditatorial dos ayatolas.
               

                  Mas se é verdade que a Europa tudo faz para beneficiar dessas oportunidades, não deixa de ser menos verdade que a expansão das relações institucionais e comerciais deve ser estritamente condicionada aos progressos alcançados pelo Irão no campo da defesa dos direitos humanos.
               

                  Entendo, por isso, que a moção de resolução relativa ao Irão que foi votada este mês pela Comissão dos Assuntos Externos do Parlamento Europeu não traduz essa condicionalidade e mantém uma inaceitável postura do business as usual face a um regime opressor que sistematicamente manipula o processo democrático, detém um triste recorde de violações dos direitos humanos, é líder mundial das execuções per capita e de menores de 18 anos de idade, e é repressor de mulheres e de minorias religiosas.
               

                  Por tudo isto, Sr. Howitt, entendo que é nossa obrigação fazer com que esta resolução não se torne num mero instrumento de propaganda política para o regime teocrático de Teerão, que, sendo um regime que necessita deste nível de violência para reprimir os seus próprios cidadãos, mostra grandes fragilidades para se poder tornar num verdadeiro parceiro diplomático e económico credível e confiável para a União Europeia.
               

                  Caros colegas, os direitos humanos não são negociáveis, eles fazem parte da nossa responsabilidade coletiva enquanto seres humanos e europeus!
               

Merja Kyllönen (GUE/NGL). – Arvoisa puhemies, noin 30 vuotta sitten 30 000 poliittista vankia, mukana tuhansia naisia, teloitettiin Iranissa. Osa teloitetuista oli vain 15-vuotiaita, osa raskaana. Näihin rikoksiin syyllisiä on edelleen johtavissa toimissa, ja he jopa kehuskelevat ylpeinä näistä tekemisistään. Tällaiset henkilöt on välittömästi tuotava kansainvälisen tuomioistuimen eteen, eikä tällaista voida vain katsella sivusta, vaikka aikaa on kulunut.
               

                  On ymmärrettävä, että ei ole kyse vain ydinaseista. Kun lisäämme yhteistyötä, on meidän johdonmukaisesti vaadittava ihmisoikeuksien kunnioittamista. Yhteistyö hyödyttää kaikkia vain silloin, jos se tehdään oikeista lähtökohdista. Emme saa hylätä Iranin kansaa päästäksemme maan valtaville markkinoille. Emme, vaikka jotkut muut maat toimisivat toisin. Raha ei saa mennä demokratian ja ihmisoikeuksien edelle.
               

                  Meidän on muistettava, että uskonnollisten äärikonservatiivien valta on sementoitu iranilaiseen järjestelmään eikä demokraattisia uudistuksia voi viedä läpi ilman sen hyväksyntää. Iran ei ole ainoa epädemokraattinen ja ihmisoikeuksia polkeva valtio Lähi-idässä. EU:n pitää olla tasapuolinen. Vakautta voidaan rakentaa ainoastaan nykyistä johdonmukaisimmalla toiminnalla. Lännen on vihdoin pantava ihmisoikeudet ja rauhan rakentaminen kaikkien valtapelien edelle.
               

Barbara Kappel (ENF). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar! Nach Abschluss des Nuklearabkommens braucht die EU nun eine neue Strategie gegenüber dem Iran, denn das Abkommen bietet eine Chance für Reformen auf politischer, wirtschaftlicher und zivilgesellschaftlicher Ebene. Der Europäische Auswärtige Dienst trägt dem bereits Rechnung mit der Einrichtung einer Iran Task Force und der Eröffnung einer EU-Delegation in Teheran.
               

                  Von besonderer Wichtigkeit sind jetzt aber die Handels- und Wirtschaftsbeziehungen. Hier eröffnet sich großes Potenzial für europäische Unternehmen. Allein im ersten Halbjahr dieses Jahres wurde im Kontext des Abkommens das Handelsvolumen zwischen dem Iran und Europa um 43 % erhöht, 30 iranische Banken haben sich dem SWIFT angeschlossen.
               

                  Die iranische Regierung ist sehr ambitioniert und verfolgt das Ziel, ein jährliches Wirtschaftswachstum von acht Prozent zu erreichen. Dazu braucht das Land ausländische Direktinvestitionen. In den kommenden zehn Jahren werden allein 1 000 Milliarden Euro in den Ausbau der Infrastruktur investiert.
               

                  Der Iran ist auch die zweitgrößte Volkswirtschaft im Nahen und Mittleren Osten, und für die kommenden zwei Jahre wird mit einer Vervierfachung des aktuellen Handelsvolumens zwischen der EU und dem Iran gerechnet. Die EU war vor den Sanktionen der größte Handelspartner des Irans, und es muss jetzt unser Ziel sein, dass die EU diese Topposition wieder einnimmt.
               

Zoltán Balczó (NI). – Elnök Asszony! 2015 júliusában került sor a nukleáris megállapodás megkötésére Iránnal. Sajnos a szankciók feloldása azonban lassan és csak részben történt meg. Elsősorban az Egyesült Államok akadályozta a banki hitelezési együttműködést. Idézek a jelentésből: ‘A közös érdekek és különbségek realisztikus felmérésére van szükség.’ Igen, a különbséget is reálisan kell fölmérni, hogy egy más kultúrájú, más értékrendű országról van szó. A legtöbb kritika Iránt a kábítószeres bűncselekmények miatti kivégzések miatt éri. Vegyük figyelembe azonban az ország veszélyeztetettségét: az ópiumlefoglalások 86%-a Iránban történik. Egy módosító javaslat azt tartalmazza, hogy a gazdasági együttműködés feltétele a halálbüntetés eltörlése legyen. Ha ezt megszavazza ez a Parlament, akkor legyen következetes, és azonnal szüntesse be az Egyesült Államokkal a TTIP-tárgyalást, mert az Egyesül Államok államainak többségében most is van halálbüntetés.
               

Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señora Presidenta, el acuerdo de Viena sobre el programa nuclear de Irán ha abierto una nueva etapa en las relaciones de este país con la Unión Europea y con la comunidad internacional en general. La completa implementación del acuerdo debe seguir siendo una prioridad para nosotros, si bien su progresivo cumplimiento hace posible avanzar hacia una relación bilateral más amplia y constructiva.
               

                  Las verificaciones realizadas por el Organismo Internacional de la Energía Atómica nos permiten, hoy por hoy, trabajar sobre nuevos ámbitos de cooperación y aprovechar las oportunidades que se presentan, desde el diálogo político al comercio y las inversiones, pasando por la energía y el medio ambiente. Un diálogo en el que no debemos olvidar nuestros principios, por lo que también deben estar presente los derechos humanos, como usted mismo hace unos minutos nos confirmaba, señor Comisario.
               

                  Por otra parte, la importancia de Irán en el marco regional es evidente: su concurso es fundamental en la solución de las distintas crisis que vive en estos momentos Oriente Próximo. En particular, me refiero al conflicto en Siria y a la lucha contra el Dáesh.
               

                  Irán debe tener una actitud más constructiva en la búsqueda de la paz en Siria y también en la lucha contra el terrorismo; debe usar su ascendencia sobre algunos de los grupos y países que actúan en la región para evitar una escalada aún mayor de los conflictos regionales.
               

                  Necesitamos que Irán contribuya a la seguridad de la región y a la de los países que la integran, incluido Israel. No caben excepciones.
               

                  Irán, sobre la base del cumplimiento del acuerdo de Viena, tiene que seguir continuando ganándose la simpatía de la comunidad internacional y contribuir activamente a la paz, superando enfrentamientos religiosos y luchas por la hegemonía regional que están desgarrando Oriente Próximo y la comunidad musulmana.
               

Frédérique Ries (ALDE). – Madame la Présidente, ce n'est pas vraiment un rappel au règlement.
               

                  Je viens d'avoir une intervention, celle de mon collègue Millán Mon, sans aucune traduction en français. Je ne sais pas si c'est un problème avec l'espagnol ou la cabine française, mais j'aimerais comprendre et entendre la suite de notre débat.
               

President. — OK, we will try to get information, but now I will give the floor to Mr Mamikins.

Andrejs Mamikins (S&D). – Madam President, colleagues, Commissioner, I would like to thank rapporteur Mr Richard Howitt for a very balanced report. This report stresses all the positive changes that have happened in Iran recently, outlining future cooperation between the EU and Iran. But from the other side it contains criticisms and highlights the challenges that we face.
In spite of some unsolved problems, I would like to say that it is a success story for our diplomacy. In the last year Iranian and European diplomacy managed to raise our relations from a very low point and to give our relations a positive trend.
Iran is our partner in the fight against ISIS and al-Nusra, which are designated terrorist organisations by the United Nations Security Council. The European Parliament should play an important role in the process of establishing a friendly cooperation framework with Iran in which we can receive positive results in the issues we are interested in or resolve problems we are concerned about. In this way we should be wise and patient and try to avoid the temptation to use offensive language. Why? Because emotional criticism will lead us to the opposite direction. It helps Iranian conservatives, who are very strong and who resist any improving relations with the Western world.
I do not think that this is what we really want. That is why I would like to invite you to support Richard Howitt's balanced and wise approach.

Bas Belder (ECR). – Dit verslag pretendeert een EU-strategie voor Iran te geven. Hoe is dat echter mogelijk wanneer de leidende politieke krachten van de Islamitische Republiek Iran volledig buiten beschouwing blijven? Denk aan opperste leider Khamenei en de Iraanse Revolutionaire Garde. Mijnheer Howitt, een onbegrijpelijke omissie!
               

                  Dit verslag vormt één groot pleidooi voor 
                        ‘business as usual’
                      met Iran. De grootste profiteur van dit beleid zal echter niet de bevolking zijn maar de Iraanse Revolutionaire Garde, op grond van zijn dominante en verheven positie in 's lands economie. De destabiliserende, revolutionaire rol van dit machtsmiddel bij uitstek van opperste leider Khamenei, in de regio en daarbuiten, is evident. Opnieuw, een onbegrijpelijke omissie!
               

                  Dit verslag verzwijgt de Iraanse vernietigingsdrang jegens de Joodse staat Israël. Het verzwijgt ook de Iraanse ontkenning en zelfs ridiculisering van de Holocaust. Mijn amendementen, mijnheer de rapporteur, moffelde u weg, u verwierp ze: een min erbij! Voor de derde keer: een onbegrijpelijke, immorele omissie. Collega's, steun daarom het corrigerende amendement van mevrouw Schaake, dat ik zelf ook heb ondertekend.
               

                  Mevrouw de voorzitter, dit verslag geeft geen EU-strategie voor Iran. Het is politieke fictie. Het spoort de EU en haar lidstaten juist aan de ingeslagen, heilloze dwaalweg richting Teheran te vervolgen. De schade en schande voor de Europese Unie en voor de ondersteuners van dit verslag zal, vrees ik, niet gering zijn!
               

Beatriz Becerra Basterrechea (ALDE). – Señora Presidenta, señor Comisario, el acuerdo con Irán es un hito importantísimo, estamos de acuerdo. Pero este éxito diplomático, Señorías, no nos olvidemos, se ha hecho tratando con un Estado, con un régimen de terror. Un régimen fundamentalista, que sigue ejecutando de manera sistemática, que niega el Holocausto, que ejecuta a niños y que además perpetra de manera diaria la tortura.
               

                  Yo creo en el futuro de Irán porque creo en los iraníes. Conozco muy bien su amor por la libertad y su coraje milenario y por eso sé que un día se librarán de la tiranía de los clérigos.
               

                  Yo apoyo la iniciativa de la Alta Representante Mogherini y aplaudo su excelente trabajo diplomático.
               

                  Pero estoy absolutamente en contra de cualquier forma de apaciguamiento como el que pretende propagar la extrema izquierda, como mis colegas de Podemos. ¿Cuánto dinero ha recibido su líder de los mulás? ¿Cuánta financiación para ‘producción de televisión’ recibe cada semana de parte de un Estado que financia el terrorismo? ¿Por qué su líder no denuncia las ejecuciones y torturas en Irán? ¿Por qué su líder no condena y denuncia públicamente la violación sistemática de los derechos de la mujer o la atroz persecución y ejecución de homosexuales?
               

                  Hay quien está deseando aceptar el dinero de la tiranía iraní para sus propios fines. Es más, hay quien lo ha aceptado para financiar su propaganda, pero los europeístas, no podemos vender nuestros principios. No, Señorías, no podemos.
               

Javier Couso Permuy (GUE/NGL). – Señora Presidenta, el acuerdo nuclear firmado entre Irán y los miembros del Consejo de Seguridad de las Naciones Unidas en 2015 es una muy buena noticia. Fue una buena noticia para las relaciones internacionales. Solo que hay que comparar cómo se trataron las armas de destrucción masiva en Irak —sin diplomacia, sin hacer caso a los relatores o a los investigadores de las Naciones Unidas — y qué ha ocurrido cuando se ha puesto en marcha la diplomacia.
               

                  Es una buena noticia también para la estabilidad de la región y es una buena noticia para la no proliferación nuclear —algo que se debería aplicar también a Israel, que tiene más de trescientas cabezas nucleares, que incumple también los derechos humanos, y nadie le dice nada—.
               

                  Pero en este informe de estrategia de la Unión Europea con Irán volvemos a caer en los errores que enfangan las relaciones internacionales: no se pide el levantamiento total de las sanciones estadounidenses —sanciones unilaterales, extraterritoriales, que afectan también a empresas de la Unión, pero que afectan, sobre todo, al pueblo iraní—.
               

                  Poner a Hizbulá al nivel de Al Nusra es una locura o una miopía. ¿Por qué? Porque Hizbulá es una organización político-militar que forma parte del Gobierno libanés —tiene varios ministros—. Y, además, a la parte política no la hemos incluido en esas organizaciones terroristas. Y Al Nusra es Al Qaeda. No lo olvidemos, por favor.
               

                  Cuando se pide el respeto de los derechos humanos —refugiados, peticiones de asilo—, podemos estar de acuerdo, pero quizás primero tengamos que aplicárnoslo a nosotros antes de dar lecciones.
               

                  En resumen, señor Howitt, no es un mal informe pero, a mi juicio, se queda a un paso de lo que debería ser la base para un buen entendimiento entre naciones soberanas.
               

Udo Voigt (NI). – Frau Präsidentin! Ich halte diese Entschließung für eine Zumutung für den Iran.
               

                  Herr Howitt hat zu Recht darauf verwiesen, dass es einmal ein Prinzip der Nichteinmischung in die Angelegenheiten anderer Völker gab. Ich denke, an 34 Stellen halten wir hier dem Iran etwas vor, was wir sonst den anderen Ländern nicht vorhalten. Wie weit sind wir denn mit den USA? Mehrere Kollegen haben es angesprochen: Dort gilt nicht nur die Todesstrafe – in Israel gilt die Todesstrafe übrigens auch –, nein, in beiden Ländern praktiziert man auch die Tötung von Menschen, von Ausländern im Ausland ohne Gerichtsverfahren, ohne faires Verfahren, ohne Rechtstaatlichkeit, und niemand sagt, wir können mit diesen Staaten nicht verhandeln. Wie sieht es denn mit Saudi-Arabien aus? Wie sieht es aus: Wir kaufen Autos aus Südkorea und Japan, obwohl es dort die Todesstrafe gibt.
               

                  In Ziffer 34 wird die vollständige Achtung der Souveränität aller Staaten in der Region gefordert. Fangen wir doch mit der EU an! Unsere Flugzeuge verletzen doch Tag für Tag die vollständige Souveränität in dieser Region.
               

Eduard Kukan (PPE). – Madam President, like most of us I also welcome the nuclear agreement signed with Iran. After the agreement we need to find a way to reengage Iran with the international community. First of all we need to work on political engagement in Iran. Here we can contribute with inter-parliamentary dialogue between the European Parliament and the Majlis.
Before strengthening economic and trade ties, however – and I want to emphasise this – we have to make sure that Iran is fully respecting international standards, especially those concerning human rights. This includes changing the policy of the Iranian regime towards the death penalty, especially in cases of the execution of juveniles. It needs to be clear that the EU stands on the side of respect for human rights and human life. This has been central to EU human rights and foreign policy, and it has to stay like that in our future relations with Iran.
Although I believe that opening relations with Iran can be beneficial for the Middle East region and the EU, we have to remain vigilant in areas of security and the fight against terrorism. Relations with Iran are still very fragile. The EU can be an important partner for Iran; however, we will need to find mutual understanding beyond the use of nuclear energy.

Sergio Gaetano Cofferati (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, come è stato ricordato da molti colleghi, l'accordo firmato nel luglio del 2015 rappresenta un'opportunità unica per provare ad inserire l'Iran in un contesto internazionale. Non possiamo perdere questa occasione, perché senza l'Iran non ci sarebbe la possibilità concreta di creare una struttura di sicurezza in quella parte del mondo. Non sarà facile. I temi da affrontare sono quelli che sono stati ricordati, alcuni dei quali sono già stati positivamente risolti almeno nel primo impatto, e altri, invece, dovranno essere nuovamente ripercorsi per arrivare a delle soluzioni definitive.
               

                  Personalmente credo che per quanto concerne il tema dei diritti umani, questo sia oggettivamente la priorità del nostro lavoro futuro. Ciò che riguarda la pena capitale, la condizione dei minori e delle donne, la libertà di espressione e di religione, sono la chiave di volta di un assetto futuro che sia non soltanto condivisibile, ma che abbia i tratti e le caratteristiche di una civiltà che aiuta a garantire la sicurezza non soltanto a casa sua, ma per l'intero mondo. Dunque, su questo bisognerà lavorare. Bisogna però apprezzare i passi in avanti che anche su questi aspetti delicati sono stati fatti. La relazione ha per questo un tratto positivo che va riconosciuto e dovrà essere approvata con convinzione.
               

                  Vorrei aggiungere, da ultimo, che bisognerà poi che ci concentiamo nel futuro sul rapporto tra i parlamenti degli Stati europei e quello iraniano: non basta soltanto la relazione che si è già creata, bisogna consolidare anche altre ipotetiche relazioni che saranno utili per il nostro futuro.
               

Frédérique Ries (ALDE). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, j'ai bien entendu notre rapporteur, M. Howitt, et je le remercie pour ce travail dont on mesure bien ici la complexité et l'ampleur. Mais on a l'impression, tout de même, que l'on a fait un peu comme si les relations entre l'Union européenne et l'Iran étaient d'ores et déjà parfaitement normalisées après l'accord de Vienne. Les 51 paragraphes que compte le rapport sont à l'avenant, empreints d'un optimisme qui me paraît souvent démesuré et même, parfois, d'angélisme.
               

                  Certes, le pays s'ouvre. Il se rouvre, dirai-je, aux échanges, à la coopération, au tourisme même, mais je n'en oublie pas son côté pile. La République islamique, quoi qu'en dise son président Rohani, reste – et ce sont les faits rapportés par toutes les ONG présentes sur le terrain – une théocratie totalitaire qui ne connaît point les droits de l'homme.
               

                  Le paragraphe 41, à cet égard, est explicite: l'Iran détient un triste record, celui du plus grand nombre d'exécutions par habitant dans le monde. C'est également, comme cela a été dit ici, le dernier pays à mettre à mort des mineurs délinquants, ce qui est une violation flagrante du droit international et de nos valeurs fondamentales en Europe, tout comme les dénis de justice, le sort réservé aux femmes, la négation institutionnalisée de l'Holocauste, l'appel à la destruction d'Israël – pas un mot ici – et le pilotage à Beyrouth du Hezbollah, organisation terroriste qui joue un rôle de premier plan en Syrie aux côtés du régime de Damas.
               

                  Autant de raisons pour lesquelles je serai dans l'incapacité, demain, de voter ce rapport si la série d'amendements que j'ai déposée avec mon groupe et une série d'autres d'ailleurs, dont j'ai entendu parler aujourd'hui, ne sont pas acceptées.
               

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. ANTONIO TAJANI


Vicepresidente


Tunne Kelam (PPE). – Mr President, I would like to thank you, Commissioner Cañete, for your balanced and critical approach to this topic. First of all, we need to face some basic facts. For example, just now, Narges Mohammadi, a family mother and leader of Iran's human rights centre, was sentenced additionally for sixteen years' imprisonment for her human rights activities. Iran continues to rank first in the world considering executions per capita. The Iranian regime has been and continues to be one of the main sources of export of terrorism in the region and has contributed heavily in the emergence of Daesh.
These are some facts why the current EU approach can be seen as premature and unbalanced, where EU values and fundamental rights of Iranians are sidelined. The main EU asset is our economic potential, which mullahs desperately need to keep riding on the tiger. But the only way to have a positive impact is firm conditionality between economic relations and credible progress in respect of basic human rights. This is a key moment – conditionality – which this report lacks, with all due respect to our colleague Howitt for his serious work.
Iran continues to be one of the most brutal regimes in the world. And one fact: the current Minister of Justice has turned out to be responsible for the mass murders of 34 000 political prisoners in 1988. He claims he is proud of it. We cannot make deals with a person who has bloody hands.
Therefore I agree with colleague Schaake that if the ALDE amendments will not be adopted tomorrow, then it will be very difficult to vote for this report.

Jaromír Štětina (PPE). – Vážené dámy, vážení pánové, zítra budeme společně
                  

                     schvalovat zprávu o strategii EU vůči Íránu po jaderné dohodě. V bodu 12 hovoříme o íránském lidu. Apelujeme na EU, aby v zájmu zlepšení životních podmínek íránských občanů rozvíjela hospodářskou spolupráci s jejich zemí.
                  

                     Já bych rád apeloval na to, abychom na íránské občany mysleli prvotně v jiných ohledech. Opětovné navázání vztahů musí na íránské straně představovat příležitost a přínos nejenom pro vládní garnituru a byznys, ale také a především pro politické vězně. Pro obyčejné lidi, jejichž příbuzní byli v posledních letech nespravedlivě popraveni. Pro nejbližší těch, kteří jsou k podobnému trestu nespravedlivě odsouzeni nyní. Obávám se, že pokud je naším partnerem země, jež má nejvyšší počet poprav na hlavu na světě, vyplatí se být velmi obezřetní.
                  

                     A nyní mi, dámy a pánové, dovolte, abych mluvil anglicky.
                  

                     I want to commemorate 30 000 political prisoners in Iran who were murdered between August and October 1988. This is a crime against humanity that has remained unpunished. Those who committed those crimes are still at the top of the regime. Therefore, colleagues, please support the amendments to this report.
                  

Lars Adaktusson (PPE). – Mr President, it was with great concern that I read the rapporteur's original report. Not even once in the text was Iran condemned for its human rights abuses. Not even once was the support for terrorists mentioned. The Iranian policy of anti-Semitism and of calling for the destruction of Israel was completely left out. In the lead-up to the vote in the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Iranian embassies sent me and other Members of this Parliament a letter, a letter in which the agents of the regime expressed their great satisfaction with Mr Howitt's report. In fact the ambassadors representing one of the world's most brutal dictatorships expect us as Members of Parliament to support this text. At the same time, Iranian state media have reported that the EU will now, through this report, give its support to the regime and its actions.
The compromise amendments make the report slightly better, and I would like to thank the EPP shadow rapporteur, Mr Brok, for his efforts, but this Parliament has a long tradition of placing human rights at the very core of its relations with other countries. For that reason, I have decided to vote tomorrow for the amendments tabled by the ALDE Group, which will make the report somewhat more balanced.

Ramona Nicole Mănescu (PPE). – Domnule președinte, salut și eu acordul nuclear cu Iranul și sunt de acord că relația economică cu Iranul este foarte importantă, iar investițiile europene sunt cruciale pentru a pune în valoare potențialul său economic. Se știe, cooperarea economică este cea mai rapidă cale prin care pot fi generate schimbări pozitive într-o societate și reprezintă, într-adevăr, o ușă deschisă pentru îmbunătățirea situației drepturilor omului și a respectului față de dreptul internațional, mai ales că ne referim la Iran, un stat condus de un regim totalitar. Sunt absolut necesare implementarea unor măsuri clare economice, într-o economie transparentă, anticorupție și garantarea drepturilor și libertăților civile.
                  

                     În același timp, o abordare a relației cu Iranul exclusiv din punct de vedere economic, așa cum reflectă acum acest raport, este contraproductivă pe termen lung și nerealistă. În raport, se ignoră abuzurile și se trec cu vederea încălcările flagrante ale drepturilor omului. Această abordare cred că aduce deservicii cetățenilor iranieni, dar și relației pe termen lung între noi și Iran. Ca europarlamentar și european nu vreau ca dublul standard să devină o constantă a politicii noastre atât în interiorul Uniunii, cât și în afara acesteia. Regimul totalitar din Iran refuză să își recunoască greșelile și să implementeze reforme reale, fapt care ridică foarte multe semne de întrebare cu privire la viitorul relației între Iran și Uniunea Europeană. Discursul agresiv practicat de Teheran, mai ales în relație cu Israelul, și sprijinul acordat unor organizații teroriste nu oferă partenerilor internaționali garanția necesară pe o temă atât de sensibilă cum este cea nucleară. Vă mulțumesc.
                  

Anna Záborská (PPE). – Mr President, I fear that, without the amendments by our colleagues Mr Deprez and Mrs Schaake, the resolution on relations between the EU and the Islamic Republic of Iran would resemble a document by some European-Iranian chamber of commerce.
In this Parliament we regularly adopt urgent resolutions on unjustly imprisoned activists and victims of state violence. We award the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought. We would expect that, if we decided to take a stand concerning the Islamic Republic of Iran, we would harshly condemn the executions of thousands of women and young people, we would draw more attention to how the Iranian regime is persecuting people for their beliefs and, in particular, we would demand an investigation into the 1988 massacre in which the regime executed more than 30 000 political prisoners.
I understand that in politics it is sometimes necessary to show goodwill despite reservations, but even then we must not cross the red line that separates politics and diplomacy from faceless cynicism. That line is called human dignity. A state that does not respect human dignity can hardly become a trusted partner.

Fernando Ruas (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, neste dossiê difícil, gostaria apenas de deixar três ideias. Uma primeira, para me congratular pela assinatura deste acordo. Este plano de ação pode representar um marco importantíssimo no caminho para a estabilização política de uma região que tem sido marcada pela instabilidade e também pela existência de inúmeros conflitos que teimam em manter-se e em provocar um elevado nível de sofrimento a diversos povos deste amplo território.
                  

                     Em segundo lugar, gostaria de lembrar todos aqueles que rejeitam aproximações graduais, em que a mudança e a solidariedade se vão construindo passo a passo e à medida das realizações concretas e do estabelecimento de laços de confiança, de compreensão, de aceitação mútuos, que a nossa União Europeia foi projetada exatamente nestes moldes pelos pais fundadores, afirmando isto mesmo Robert Schuman na sua conhecida declaração.
                  

                     E é por isto e por acreditar que a mudança se opera mais facilmente, mais rapidamente e mais solidamente através da aproximação e não através da condicionalidade cega, da pura imposição, da absoluta negação do paternalismo eivado de preconceitos culturais, que concordo, genericamente, com a posição adotada pela Comissão AFET.
                  

                     Antes de terminar, gostaria de sublinhar que existem princípios universais sobre os quais não podemos transigir e a pena de morte é um deles. Inseri diversas alterações neste sentido e é por isso que insisto em plenário, apesar de já estar escrito na resolução, pedindo uma vez mais aos responsáveis iranianos que, como medida de demonstração do seu empenho nesta aproximação entre os nossos povos, imponham imediatamente uma moratória à execução das condenações à pena de morte no seu país.
                  

Adam Szejnfeld (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Omawiamy dzisiaj sprawozdanie, które dotyczy bardzo trudnej kwestii. Z jednej strony oczywiście jest ono skutkiem podpisanego rok temu w Wiedniu porozumienia z Iranem, skutkiem czego eliminujemy, mam nadzieję, jedno z państw, które może posiadać broń jądrowa i zagrażać innym.
                  

                     Z drugiej strony to porozumienie – i poświęcono temu dużo czasu – daje szansę na nasilenie współpracy gospodarczej między Unią Europejską a Iranem. Jest to sprawa niebywale ważna dla obu stron, także narodu irańskiego i narodów naszych państw członkowskich. Jednym i drugim potrzebna jest dywersyfikacja chociażby źródeł energii: gazu, ropy. To porozumienie daje ogromne możliwości w zakresie wzajemnych inwestycji, które idą być może nie w setki miliardów euro, ale nawet w biliony. Natomiast są wartości ważniejsze niż rozwój gospodarczy, a nawet niż nowe miejsca pracy, i tą najwyższą wartością jest niewątpliwie pokój. Iran nie jest jednak państwem, które do tej pory stwarzało bezpieczeństwo, wręcz przeciwnie, był to kraj, który zagrażał bezpieczeństwu w regionie i na świecie.
                  

                     Uważam więc, że trzeba dążyć do realizacji tego porozumienia i wzrostu wymiany gospodarczej, wymiany handlowej, wymiany inwestycji, ale też czujnie badać stan realizacji po stronie irańskiej. Państwo to bowiem żyje na bakier z wartościami, które są istotne dla naszej cywilizacji, w związku z czym dopóty nie będzie gwarantowało pokoju regionie i na świecie, dopóki sprawy gospodarcze nie będą mogły przeważać nad naszą współpracą.
                  

Urmas Paet (ALDE). – Mr President, the expansion of economic relations with Iran cannot come at the cost of ignoring other things that are of core value to the European Union. The improvement of the human rights situation is a must. Iran must improve the state of women's rights, freedom of expression and abolish the death penalty.
Iran has joined the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, under which it has the obligation to stop the execution of juvenile offenders. So this is what it must do: stop executing children. Iran also has to release all political prisoners and others that are unjustly detained. The harassment of journalists and the prosecution of Iranian dual nationals has to stop. It is important to guarantee access to fair trial, access to a lawyer and that there will be an end to the systematic torture in prisons.
The abolition of the death penalty is a key objective of EU human rights and foreign policy, and we cannot forget that in our relations with Iran. Iran has an important influence in the region, so it can – and should – play a stabilising role in the region. We call on Iran to play a constructive role in solving the political crisis in Syria and in Iraq, and so on, and cooperate with the EU in countering terrorism and violent extremism in the region.

Interventi su richiesta


Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, as a member of the Iranian delegation, I have had ample opportunities to have delegations coming, under our chairman Lewandowski, to discuss many of the issues raised here this evening. I think, on balance, we are getting the right approach. We have to say that the nuclear agreement – and the European Commission played a very important part in it – was one of the great achievements in recent times. That probably, and COP21, were the two greatest national agreements in recent times.
Iran has come a long way, because they stepped back from the nuclear armament because they trusted those of us who were involved in negotiating. Now we have to deliver in terms of economic cooperation but also, as has been pointed out very strongly, a very firm hand must be held with them with regard to human rights and especially the death penalty, which is over-used, without any doubt (if it can ever be justified), in their state.
So I think we are on the right track, but economic cooperation and human rights together is the best way forward.

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, lo storico accordo sul nucleare, firmato lo scorso anno a Vienna, ha rappresentato un traguardo importante per la diplomazia internazionale e per il processo di distensione dei rapporti tra Iran e Occidente. Un risultato notevole per la diplomazia multilaterale e per quella europea in particolare, ottenuto anche grazie, e forse soprattutto, al lavoro e alla tenacia dell'Alto rappresentante per la politica estera Federica Mogherini. Un risultato che deve consentire non solo un miglioramento sensibile delle relazioni Unione europea - Iran, ma anche la promozione della stabilità in tutta la regione. Se rispettato, quest'accordo può rappresentare una valida guida su cui costruire una nuova stagione di relazioni di pace tra l'Unione europea e l'Iran, in passato importante partner commerciale, ma affinché ciò possa accadere è fondamentale che l'Iran promuova la nuova stagione di rispetto dei diritti e delle libertà, partendo proprio da una moratoria delle esecuzioni capitali.
                  

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, το Ιράν μπορεί να αποτελέσει έναν σημαντικό εταίρο για τα κράτη μέλη της Ένωσης, καθώς αποτελεί μια οικονομία με μεγάλες δυνατότητες, αλλά και έναν εν δυνάμει πόλο σταθερότητας στην ευρύτερη περιοχή, υπό τον όρο όμως ότι θα σέβεται απόλυτα τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα. Άλλωστε η Ευρώπη ήταν ο πρώτος εμπορικός εταίρος του Ιράν πριν από την εφαρμογή των κυρώσεων. Η άρση των κυρώσεων προσφέρει λοιπόν σημαντικές ευκαιρίες. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Υπηρεσία Εξωτερικής Δράσης οφείλει να εργαστεί παραγωγικά, με στόχο την πλήρη αποκατάσταση των σχέσεων, με αμεροληψία και με μόνο γνώμονα τα συμφέροντα των πολιτών. Πρέπει να δώσει έμφαση στις προτεραιότητες που διαμορφώνονται στις δημόσιες και στις μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις, όχι μόνο στον τομέα της ενέργειας αλλά και σε άλλους τομείς. Ειδικότερα πρέπει να μελετηθούν οι δυνατότητες συνεργασίας στον τομέα των κατασκευών, διότι το Ιράν είναι μια χώρα που γνωρίζει ραγδαία ανάπτυξη, ενώ, από την άλλη πλευρά, σε χώρες όπως η Ελλάδα, ο κλάδος των κατασκευών είναι αυτός που έχει πληγεί περισσότερο λόγω της οικονομικής κρίσης και των πολιτικών λιτότητας. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση πρέπει λοιπόν να ενθαρρύνει την εξωστρέφεια, όχι μόνο στα λόγια και όχι μόνο εκεί που συμφέρει τις γερμανικές πολυεθνικές.
                  

Julie Ward (S&D). – Mr President, colleagues, tomorrow, 25 October, will be the second anniversary of the death of Reyhaneh Jabbari, executed for defending herself against sexual assault by an agent of the Iranian regime when she was 19 years old. We mourn her still, and so in her name I urge the EU External Action Service to set out a clear human rights framework as part of the EU's engagement with the Iranian Government going forward from this report. There must be a human rights impact assessment, benchmarks and a framework for monitoring and evaluation. This must cover ongoing human rights violations such as the use of torture, the imprisonment of political activists and human rights defenders, and the need to prohibit the execution of children and work towards the elimination of the death penalty. Real progress must be made on women's rights and the criminalisation of gender-based violence, such as acid attacks on women. The External Action Service must engage constructively with the Iranian authorities on human rights, put them at the core of the process and strive to achieve meaningful progress for people on the ground. Finally, I would like to call on the Iranian Government to free the Anglo-Iranian mother Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, who has been imprisoned and detained since April this year.

(Fine degli interventi su richiesta)


Miguel Arias Cañete,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, this has been a very useful exchange and I thank the honourable Members for speaking so clearly. From this debate I conclude that we all share a common interest in ensuring that the joint comprehensive plan of action works for all sides and ultimately that balanced bilateral relations can lead to Iran's reintegration into the international community, politically, economically and socially, as well as to building a more constructive real environment.
Let me reiterate that we are set to pursue this agenda of balance and incremental engagement, contingent upon the implementation of the joint comprehensive plan of action. But we know that implementation is an ongoing task and we need to be diligent and vigilant in our joint efforts throughout the lifetime of the agreement.
Many Members have referred to the important issue of human rights. Major differences on some issues persist, but we have an opportunity to engage with an influential political player, not least on issues on which we disagree. Human rights remain a matter of concern for the European Union, especially the high number of executions, including those of juvenile offenders and political prisoners.
I would like to close by expressing, once again, my appreciation of Parliament's role in bringing this important issue to the agenda. I would like, finally, also to repeat my thanks to Mr Howitt for all the work that he has done on this report. We wish him every success in the future.

Richard Howitt,
rapporteur. – Mr President, I would like to thank Mr Brok, Mr Tannock, Mr Carver, Ms Anderson, Mr Castaldo, Mr Lewandowski, Mr Mamikins, Mr Cofferati, Mr Kelly and Mr Caputo for their very kind words. I appreciate it. Thank you to Mr Buchner and others who have mentioned the issue of dual nationals. I have myself met the relatives of Mr Foroughi and Ms Zaghari-Ratcliffe and we do call for their – and others' – release in paragraph 47.
I have not engaged with the far right in 22 years and I will not start debating with them now, but I do take the questions from PPE and ALDE colleagues seriously. To my friends in the ALDE Group and with greatest respect to Ms Schaake, you say you support the nuclear agreement and the High Representative, yet you submit amendments that you know will undermine it. You have even rejected the compromise that I have offered you on the Holocaust, and you should think again about that.
You say that my report is lacking on human rights and on ending support for Hezbollah. There are 34 references to human rights. In reality, is there any number which would be high enough for you? Ending support for Hezbollah is there in paragraph 34. You cite free and fair elections, the justice system and the treatment of women, yet it is all there: paragraphs 39, 46 and 49. The truth is that I believe you are against the agreement and, if your Group votes against the report, I have to say that I believe it is you who are being illiberal, not me.
To Mr Preda, my report is strictly balanced in seeking to reject sectarianism and to support reconciliation between Tehran and Riyadh. For you to suggest that my Group is itself sectarian is beneath you. As fellow direct colleagues in this Parliament's Subcommittee on Human Rights, you know that I support human rights benchmarks, but choose to say otherwise. Look at my support for a return to a human rights dialogue and also for assessing investment according to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. When Mr Adaktusson says that my original draft did not have human rights at all – it is just wholly false. I have asked you to examine your consciences and you should do so before saying that.
To Mr Belder, sovereignty for Israel as well as other countries in the Middle East is there – in paragraphs 34 and 35 – and you should remember that I personally was author of the written declaration on responsibility for the Holocaust. To many Members, I am interested in how often the words ‘propaganda for a theocratic regime’ have been repeated across this debate. It does point to the lobbying interest behind many of the criticisms aired. To my friend, Ms Ries, the step-by-step process I describe in paragraph 4 is hardly what you called normalisation.
Mr Kelam paid me a compliment, for which I thank him, but he and others who referred to ISIS-Daesh must recognise that they are just as much an enemy of Iran as to us. To Mr Ruas and all who referred to the death penalty, I reiterate that my report clearly states that Iran has the highest per capita execution rate, that we oppose the death penalty and call for an immediate moratorium. I understand that you want to be associated with these calls, but this report hardly needs amendment to achieve them.
Finally, I remember sitting in an Embassy of a Member State in the Middle East, being told that the bombing of Iran was more likely than not. Another Middle East war with all the consequences. European diplomacy has helped avert that terrible fate and we should be very careful in this Parliament about acting irresponsibly in a way that could jeopardise it.

Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.
                  

                     La votazione si svolgerà domani, martedì 25 ottobre, alle 12.00.
                  


Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 162)



Ангел Джамбазки (ECR),
в писмена форма. – Санкциите бяха сериозно политическо лицемерие и двоен стандарт. ЕС продължава да търгува със Саудитска Арабия и Турция, където драстичните нарушения на човешките права са кърваво всекидневие. Подписването на споразумението с Иран е огромна стъпка напред в нормализирането на отношенията ни с тази държава. Иран е държава с огромен икономически потенциал и дълбоки традиции, единствената стабилна държава във взривоопасен регион. Иран може да бъде важен партньор на ЕС. Тази нормализация на отношенията трябва да бъде основана на взаимно уважение и зачитане на вътрешния ред и правото на всяка суверенна държава да гради своето общество на основата на своите традиции. Всяко т.нар. ‘всеобхватно споразумение’ с Иран, което ще изисква от страната да промени своето устройство и традиции или да изостави своите интереси в региона и на международната сцена, е напълно неприемливо, неуважително и е обречено на провал. Такъв провал не е в интерес на ЕС, а само и единствено на опасните и диктаторски режими в Турция и Саудитска Арабия. Именно затова ще гласувам против тази резолюция.
                  

Monica Macovei (ECR),
in writing. – The latest events show that the relationship between the EU and Iran has reached a detente. Iran is the second-largest economy in the Middle East with an estimated nominal GDP of 397 billion USD in 2015. EU trade with Iran currently stands at USD 8 billion and is expected to quadruple in the next two years. Half of Iranian households' energy needs are met by natural gas. Iran has on average 300 days of sunshine per year; we need to take into consideration the potential of developing renewable energies in Iran. Iran's ratification of the rights of the child prohibits child executions and Iran must ensure that that child execution, arbitrary and political executions stop. I also believe that joining the extractive transparency initiative is an effective measure. EU relationships with Iran must come with shared values on people's rights, with freedom for those politically detained, with real justice for the dead and with stopping the dictatorship. Any dictatorship based on fear and injustice is meant to fail. My call to the Iranian leadership is to stop the abuses and the imprisonment of the political opponents and to build a society based on freedom. Only free people can take a country forward.
16.   Fight against corruption and follow-up of the CRIM resolution (short presentation)

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la relazione di Laura Ferrara, a nome della commissione per le libertà civili, la giustizia e gli affari interni, sulla lotta contro la corruzione e il seguito dato alla risoluzione della commissione CRIM (2015/2110(INI)) (A8-0284/2016).
               

Laura Ferrara,
relatrice. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il Parlamento europeo oggi compie un significativo passo in avanti. Per combattere efficacemente la diffusione di corruzione e criminalità organizzata occorreva instaurare un dibattito a livello europeo, volto introdurre normative e misure di contrasto comuni in tutti gli Stati membri. Quest'Europa ha avuto, infatti, una grave colpa: ha relegato la lotta alla corruzione e alla criminalità organizzata, anche di stampo mafioso, a confini strettamente nazionali. La mancanza di consapevolezza della portata transnazionale di tale fenomeno ha così garantito gioco facile alla mafia e, più in generale, alle organizzazioni criminali che, avvalendosi anche della corruzione, hanno individuato nuovi business infiltrandosi nella gestione dei centri di accoglienza dei migranti o accaparrandosi gare d'appalto finanziate con fondi europei o investendo nelle principali piazze finanziarie, beneficiando così della mancanza di riconoscimento della pericolosità del fenomeno associazionistico in alcuni Stati membri.
               

                  Tutto ciò richiede urgenti e incisivi interventi normativi a livello europeo al fine di arrestare la diffusione delle organizzazioni criminali nel continente, combattere i reati più comunemente commessi dalle mafie e impedire le infiltrazioni delle associazioni a delinquere nell'economia legale. Il Parlamento europeo sta facendo con grande impegno e convinzione la sua parte, tra mille difficoltà che nascono soprattutto dalle differenze culturali e giuridiche, dai pregiudizi esistenti nei confronti delle diverse forme di organizzazioni criminali radicate negli Stati membri. Durante la scorsa legislatura è stata aperta la strada che oggi stiamo portando a termine, non solo per introdurre una nozione comune di reato di associazione a delinquere di stampo mafioso, ma soprattutto per adottare una strategia condivisa ed efficace di contrasto alla criminalità organizzata, alla corruzione e al riciclaggio.
               

                  L'auspicio è quello che anche le altre istituzioni europee comprendano pienamente la reale pericolosità di tali fenomeni ormai transnazionali, che non si concentrino solo sui reati fine ma si prenda la consapevolezza della pericolosità che deriva dall'appartenenza all'associazione. Fenomeni che non intaccano solamente l'economia legale, ma che intaccano l'intera convivenza civile su cui si fonda l'Unione europea.
               

                  Cari colleghi, permettetemi di ringraziare innanzitutto i colleghi relatori ombra per l'ottima collaborazione e per le interessanti e produttive discussioni che si sono tenute durante tutte le riunioni. Permettetemi di ringraziare anche il Centro di ricerca del Parlamento europeo per lo studio sui costi del mancato intervento dell'Unione europea in materia di lotta alla corruzione e alla criminalità organizzata, che è stato fondamentale per darci degli spunti e delle basi obiettive per procedere alla stesura della relazione. Un grazie va ad Eurojust che ha risposto al questionario che avevamo inviato fornendoci delle importanti informazioni su come migliorare la cooperazione e lo scambio delle informazioni tra Stati membri. Un altro grazie va ad Europol per i numerosi confronti che sono intercorsi e per le preziose informazioni fornite, in particolare sugli aspetti più pratici relativi al coordinamento tra le diverse procedure dei singoli paesi e su come poter superare le difficoltà incontrate. Un grazie va alla Commissione europea che si è resa sempre disponibile per confronti e dibattiti in tema di lotta alla corruzione e alla criminalità organizzata.
               

                  Un grazie va a quei cittadini che hanno contribuito alla stesura della relazione su internet e in particolare sul portale Rousseau del Movimento 5 Stelle, interessandosi così in prima persona e fornendoci importanti suggerimenti. Ringrazio, poi, tutti i colleghi che hanno presentato numerosi emendamenti alla relazione a riprova anche del fatto che il tema sia estremamente sentito a livello transnazionale e non sia un fenomeno di caratura nazionale. Ringrazio i relatori dei pareri delle commissioni DEVE e CONT e ringrazio, permettetemi di ringraziare, tutti i collaboratori, giovani e meno giovani, e tutti gli staff che, credendo nel lavoro portato avanti, hanno contribuito con passione ai lavori di questa relazione.
               

Interventi su richiesta


Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la criminalità organizzata rappresenta senza dubbio una minaccia di tipo globale e come tale richiede una risposta congiunta e ben calibrata da parte dell'Unione europea e degli Stati membri. A causa dell'evoluzione del modus operandi delle organizzazioni criminali non è ancora acquisita la piena consapevolezza della complessità di tale fenomeno e del pericolo derivante dalle infiltrazioni nel tessuto economico imprenditoriale e istituzionale e politico degli Stati membri. Alcuna legislazione europea dovrebbe dunque essere interpretata in modo da circoscrivere l'attività degli informatori. Questi ultimi infatti ricoprono un ruolo principe nella lotta alla corruzione e il loro operato è di fondamentale importanza per prevenire o scoprire gli atti illeciti. È di fondamentale importanza che l'Unione europea insista sul contrasto al reato associativo e che, nel quadro di un'autentica e completa strategia europea anticorruzione, siano concentrati sforzi e risorse sulla lotta al riciclaggio, alla corruzione e alla tratta di essere umani.
               

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κάθε χρόνο χάνονται 70 εκατομμύρια ευρώ από τη φοροδιαφυγή και τη φοροαποφυγή των πολυεθνικών. Σημαντικό στοιχείο για τη λανθασμένη πολιτική γραμμή που ακολουθεί η Ένωση αποτελεί και το γεγονός ότι μεγάλες επιχειρήσεις σε χώρες με υψηλή φορολογία πληρώνουν κατά μέσο όρο 30% λιγότερους φόρους σε σύγκριση με τις μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις. Χαρακτηριστικό παράδειγμα αποτελεί η Ελλάδα. Πολυεθνικές που δραστηριοποιούνται στη χώρα καταφέρνουν να αποφύγουν την καταβολή φόρων, καταφεύγουν σε φορολογικούς παραδείσους όπως το Λουξεμβούργο, ενώ ταυτόχρονα οι μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις κλείνουν η μία μετά την άλλη, μια και επιβάλλεται πλέον αβάσταχτη φορολογία από τους δανειστές.
               

                  Επιπλέον θα πρέπει να επαναπροσδιοριστεί ο ρόλος της OLAF, ούτως ώστε να γίνει πιο αποτελεσματικός και να χτυπηθεί η φοροδιαφυγή και η φοροαποφυγή. Τέλος, προκειμένου η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση να συμβάλει στην καταπολέμηση της φοροδιαφυγής, θα πρέπει να πάψει να στηρίζεται στα περίφημα πρότυπα του ΟΟΣΑ, τα οποία, ως γνωστόν, επιτρέπουν την ύπαρξη γκρίζων ζωνών, με αποτέλεσμα τη διευκόλυνση της φοροδιαφυγής και φοροαποφυγής των πολυεθνικών.
               

Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, borba protiv korupcije uvijek, svugdje i stalno. Podržavam ovo izvješće, jer cilja na ono što želimo: pokušati iskorijeniti korupciju u javnim službama Europske unije. Želim iskoristiti ovu priliku i podcrtati snažnu borbu protiv korupcije koja se već godinama vodi u Hrvatskoj. Trebamo isticati pozitivna iskustva. Rad USKOK-a, rad DORH-a, rad MUP-a u Hrvatskoj znači iskorjenjivanje korupcije, i to na visokoj razini.
               

                  I mislim da je važno da se takve stvari nađu također u izvješćima, jer znamo što znači jugoistok Europe i moguća korupcija na visokim razinama u raznim zemljama i zemljama kandidatkinjama. Piše se o tome, govori se o tome, ali ja želim ovdje upozoriti da upravo trajna borba protiv korupcije može biti jedino efikasna, ako je počinjemo od najviših nivoa, a u ovom slučaju to je Europska unija.
               

Caterina Chinnici (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il Parlamento europeo con la relazione dell'onorevole Ferrara riaccende i riflettori su un fenomeno, la corruzione, che ha ampliato le proprie zone di influenza superando i confini nazionali. La commissione CRIM ha contribuito a portare il dibattito sulla lotta alla corruzione sulla scena internazionale, fornendo indicazioni chiare sugli interventi legislativi da adottare. Ma quelle risposte che ci attendiamo dall'Unione si potranno avere solo partendo da una definizione comune di criminalità organizzata, essenziale per dare efficacia agli strumenti legislativi esistenti e a quelli futuri.
               

                  Oggi operiamo in un contesto disomogeneo non solo dal punto di vista della definizione della fattispecie, ma anche delle disposizioni per la lotta al fenomeno addirittura assenti in alcuni paesi, cosa che rende più difficile l'azione di contrasto a criminalità organizzata e corruzione. Sono convinta che la questione vada affrontata nell'ambito della cooperazione in materia penale all'interno dell'Unione lavorando sul riconoscimento reciproco degli ordini di sequestro e di confisca. E per colpire il vero centro di interesse della criminalità organizzata, l'azione più concreta è rappresentata dal congelamento e dalla confisca dei beni provenienti dal reato, anche se purtroppo oggi molti Stati non hanno ancora recepito la relativa direttiva del 2014.
               

Tibor Szanyi (S&D). – Elnök Úr! A rapportőr okkal hívja fel a figyelmet annak fontosságára, hogy megelőzzük a szervezett bűnözés és korrupció beépülését az egyes államok jogrendjébe és természetesen gazdaságába. Látni kell azonban, hogy a jelenlegi európai jog- és eszközrendszer nem képes kezelni azt a jelenséget, amikor a korrupciót egy adott politikai rezsim, illetve kormányzat a saját hatalma, és a vezetők személyes gazdagodása érdekében saját maga teszi rendszerszerűvé, öncélú jogszabályokkal körülbástyázva, mintegy legitimálva a kvázi állami korrupciós hálót.
               

                  Ma a legnyilvánvalóbb módon Magyarország gazdasága szenved ettől, amire az uniós jogrend nem talál érdemi választ. Például az OLAF hiába vizsgál és tár fel egy európai forrásokat is érintő korrupciós ügyletet, ha azt éppen annak a nemzeti hatóságnak, ügyészi szervezetnek kell további intézkedésre átadni, amelynek vezetője adott esetben rokonsága révén személyes haszonélvezője a bűncselekményeknek.
               

                  Az Európai Ügyészség felállítása persze fontos és sürgető feladat, amely részben választ adhat az ilyen jogi kihívásokra, de az ilyen kormányokkal szemben csak az Európai Tanács teljes egységét és politikai eltökéltségét feltételező közös tagállami fellépés lehet eredményes.
               

Ana Gomes (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, agradeço a Laura Ferrara este seguimento da resolução sobre o crime de 2013, reiterando o apelo à adoção de um plano de ação europeu de combate à criminalidade organizada, corrupção e branqueamento de capitais.
               

                  Não basta adotar legislação e ratificar tratados, precisamos de um plano concertado entre a Comissão e os Estados-Membros, de carácter multidisciplinar e holístico, que envolva as várias agências de combate ao crime, mas também as administrações dos Estados-Membros, os Parlamentos e a sociedade civil.
               

                  É preciso fomentar a confiança mútua e agilizar procedimentos de cooperação transfronteiriça. Exigimos a publicação do segundo relatório UE-anticorrupção, ainda sem data prevista. O acompanhamento das recomendações do relatório deve ser integrado nas recomendações do Semestre Europeu.
               

                  Por outro lado, as próprias instituições da União Europeia devem submeter-se à avaliação de integridade. A adesão da União ao Grupo de Estados Contra a Corrupção (GRECO) deve avançar quanto antes.
               

(Fine degli interventi su richiesta)


Miguel Arias Cañete,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mrs Laura Ferrara, for this report and all the shadows and associated committees for their contribution. The Commission has closely followed the discussions, as well as the work of the Special Committee on Organised Crime, Corruption and Money-Laundering in the past and the Parliament resolution that followed. It was a source of inspiration for the Commission's European agenda on security last year. The Agenda on Security identifies three priorities: the fight against terrorism and radicalisation, the fight against organised crime, and the fight against cybercrime. We must continue to move ahead on all three priorities of the Agenda on Security, and your report points up some of the key actions.
The Commission, together with Parliament and the Council, have made significant progress on key files relevant for the important areas covered by the report. To name but a few: the adoption of the European Union PNR Directive and adoption of the new European Union Data Protection Package in April earlier this year; the new Europol regulation adopted in May; and the new CEPOL regulation providing for better opportunities to train law enforcement that entered into force in July 2016. Good progress has been made on the Commission's proposal of last year for a directive on combatting terrorism, and we should be able to reach an agreement before the end of this year. The Action Plan on Wildlife Trafficking adopted in February this year and, last but not least, advancing negotiations on a European Public Prosecutor's Office to defend the financial interests of the European Union, which will enable Eurojust to focus on the fight against terrorist threats or other serious organised crimes.
There is not enough time to comment on each recommendation of the report at hand. Therefore, let me stress the ongoing and planned work in support of some of them. On money laundering: the fight against terrorist financing and money laundering is a high priority for the Commission. A new proposal to reinforce the fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive was tabled on 5 July 2016. As announced in the Action Plan on Strengthening the Fight against Terrorist Financing, we would propose by the end of the year a number of legislative proposals, such as a proposal for a directive on criminal offences and sanctions for money laundering, a proposal on illegal cash movement, a proposal on mutual recognition of confiscation and freezing orders of criminal assets to ensure efficient cross-border cooperation.
On the links between organised crime and terrorism, the Commission Action Plan on Terrorist Financing, adopted on 2 February 2016, acknowledges the close link between terrorist financing and organised crime. It announces a wide range of measures to cut terrorists off from their sources of revenue and to trace them through financial activities.
On the call for the European Union framework on corruption, the Commission takes very seriously the fight against corruption and will continue to work with Member States' authorities, including on experience-sharing in relation to integrity policies. This goes in parallel with our work in the framework of the European Semester of Economic Governance. At this stage the Commission is working with Member States to follow up and take forward the conclusions of the first anti-corruption report and will inform Parliament by the end of the year how the Commission sees this work progressing.
To conclude, the Commission welcomes the report and will take its recommendations closely into account. We will continue to update Parliament and the Council twice a year, as foreseen in the European Agenda on Security.

Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.
               

                  La votazione si svolgerà domani, martedì 25 ottobre, alle 12.00.
               


Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 162)



Pirkko Ruohonen-Lerner (ECR),
kirjallinen. – Olen varsin tyytyväinen siihen, että Laura Ferraran mietinnössä on huomioitu ne vakavat riskit, joita aiheutuu, jos rikollisjärjestöt soluttautuvat kansallisvaltioiden sosiaaliseen, taloudelliseen, liiketoiminnalliseen, poliittiseen ja institutionaaliseen rakenteeseen. Rikollisjärjestöillä on usein käytössään paljon rahaa, jota ne voivat ohjata esimerkiksi merkittävien poliitikkojen vaalikampanjoiden rahoittamiseen. Jos samat rahoittajatahot toimivat usein samojen poliitikkojen vaalikampanjoiden rahoittajina, syntyy automaattisesti rahan vastaanottajille kiitollisuudenvelkaa tukijoitaan kohtaan. Vaalikampanjan rahoittajat saattavat odottaa vastapalveluksia tukemiltaan poliittisilta puolueilta ja niiden läpimenneiltä ehdokkailta. Vastapalvelukset voivat olla mieluisan lainsäädännön valmistelua, toimialakohtaisia verohelpotuksia, tehokkaita asemakaavoja, erityisetuja, parhaita kauppapaikkoja jne. Siksi onkin erittäin tärkeää, että kaikki poliittinen vaalirahoitus on mahdollisimman läpinäkyvää.
               

                  Suomessa vaalirahoituslakia uudistettiin muutama vuosi sitten. Aukotonta siitä ei tullut, sillä lukuisat suuret vaalikampanjat jäävät edelleen täysin pimentoon. Esimerkiksi vuoden 2014 europarlamenttivaalien vaalirahoitusilmoituksen viranomaisille jättää vain valitut 13 europarlamentaarikkoa ja varasijoille jääneet 7 ehdokasta. Suomessa tämä tarkoittaa sitä, että 251 ehdokkaasta vain 20 jättää vaalirahoitusilmoituksen. Samanaikaisesti julkisuudelta täysin pimentoon jää suuria vaalikampanjoita, joissa rahaa kuluu lehtitietojen mukaan jopa yli 100 000 euroa. Pääsääntöisesti vaalikampanjoiden rahoittajat jäävät salaisuudeksi. Sama ongelma koskettaa myös eduskuntavaaleja. Tässä yhteydessä on syytä muistaa, että europarlamentti- ja eduskuntavaaleissa ehdokkaaksi pääsevät yleensä pitkän poliittisen uran tehneet henkilöt. Monet heistä ovat osallistuneet paikallis- ja valtakunnanpolitiikkaan, joten heillä on usein myös vaikutusvaltaa päätöksenteossa.
               

Patricija Šulin (PPE),
pisno. – Organizirani kriminal, korupcija in pranje denarja ne ogrožajo le svobode gospodarske dejavnosti in konkurenčnosti, temveč predvsem varnost in svobodo vseh državljank in državljanov. Če se želimo tako na evropski kot na nacionalni ravni uspešno zoperstaviti tem grožnjam, ki nas hromijo, ne smemo več odlašati s primernimi ukrepi.
               

                  Zaradi čezmejne razsežnosti kriminalnih združb potrebujemo enotno opredelitev kaznivih dejanj ter tesno sodelovanje med nacionalnimi organi in agencijami Evropske unije. Ustanovitev Evropskega javnega tožilstva, neodvisnega od nacionalnih vlad in institucij EU, je pravi korak v smeri učinkovitejšega boja proti korupciji.
               
17.   Human rights and migration in third countries (short presentation)

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la relazione di Marie-Christine Vergiat, a nome della commissione per gli affari esteri, sui diritti umani e la migrazione nei paesi terzi (2015/2316(INI)) (A8-0245/2016).
               

Marie-Christine Vergiat,
rapporteure. – Monsieur le Président, je voudrais tout d'abord remercier tout particulièrement les rapporteurs fictifs qui m'ont accompagnée sur ce rapport, leurs assistants et les conseillers des groupes ainsi que Marion, ma propre collaboratrice, sans qui ce rapport n'aurait pu se faire. Nous y travaillons depuis près d'un an, leur soutien m'a été précieux malgré les vicissitudes que nous avons traversées, dont la pire a été ce que j'appellerais l'épreuve des langues. En sous-commission DROI, les traductions sont en partie confiées à des services extérieurs, ce qui doit coûter relativement cher; on devrait en attendre un service rendu à la hauteur. Or, ce fut une horreur. Nous avons découvert que certaines d'entre elles étaient des traductions automatiques. C'est pourquoi, Monsieur le Président, je demande instamment que les instances ad hoc du Parlement européen fassent une enquête en la matière.
               

                  Ce rapport porte sur les droits de l'homme et la migration dans les pays tiers et ne porte donc pas sur les politiques migratoires de l'Union. Notre Parlement a fait un rapport sur ce sujet, celui de Mme Metsola et de Mme Kyenge, adopté à une large majorité, et en élabore un autre sur les politiques extérieures. Nous nous sommes donc concentrés sur la situation dans les pays tiers, avec la volonté de resituer les migrations dans leur contexte mondial.
               

                  Ce rapport insiste sur l'évolution des politiques migratoires, de plus en plus mondialisées mais aussi régionalisées, ainsi que sur leurs causes, de plus en plus multiples et complexes: 244 millions de migrants internationaux, soit 3,3 % de la population mondiale contre 2,9 % en 1990; 80 % des mouvements se font désormais entre pays aux frontières communes, et de plus en plus Sud-Sud. La plupart des pays du monde sont aujourd'hui des pays d'origine, de transit, de destination, y compris en Europe. Ces migrations concernent de plus en plus de femmes et d'enfants, et notamment des mineurs isolés et, donc, autant de personnes vulnérables qui ont droit à une protection particulière sur les routes de plus en plus dangereuses des migrations. Ils sont aussi de plus en plus diplômés: déjà 59 millions en 2010, et c'est l'Afrique qui paie le plus lourd tribut à cette fuite des cerveaux.
               

                  La question des réfugiés a une place toute particulière dans ce rapport. Le nombre de personnes déracinées, réfugiées et déplacées atteint désormais 65 millions selon le Haut Commissariat pour les réfugiés, avec une augmentation de 10 % en un an, surtout du nombre de déplacés.
               

                  Dans nos propositions, nous avons voulu partir du respect des droits de l'homme, tels qu'ils sont reconnus et protégés par les conventions internationales, et voir comment l'Union européenne, dans ses politiques de partenariat avec les pays tiers, peut agir pour un meilleur respect des droits de l'homme, y compris en montrant l'exemple sur son territoire et en faisant respecter les conventions internationales ad hoc.
               

                  La convention internationale sur la protection des droits de tous les travailleurs migrants et des membres de leur famille n'a été signée par aucun État membre de l'Union européenne. Tous les migrants ont des droits, quelle que soit leur situation, comme le dit régulièrement le rapporteur spécial chargé des migrants à l'ONU. Partir du respect des droits de l'homme, cela veut dire, par exemple, refuser les réadmissions forcées de migrants vers les pays où ils risquent mauvais traitements et tortures; refuser les expulsions collectives et les refoulements qui sont contraires au droit international; respecter le droit au regroupement familial et le droit de quitter un pays, y compris le sien, et de pouvoir y revenir, et ce dans tous les pays du monde.
               

                  Ce ne sont là que quelques exemples. Un tel souhait peut paraître un vœu pieux. Certains disent ici que ce rapport serait trop progressiste. Nous avons considéré majoritairement, au sein de la commission des affaires étrangères, que l'Union européenne devrait œuvrer davantage dans ce domaine, en travaillant avec ses principaux partenaires à la mise en œuvre de législations respectueuses des droits des migrants, en commençant par le droit d'asile.
               

                  Il nous semble que l'IEDDH est un bon instrument pour avancer et qu'il serait temps d'adopter des lignes directrices spécifiques pour les droits des migrants. Nous savons tous que les questions migratoires prennent une place croissante dans les dialogues de l'Union européenne avec les pays tiers. Nous savons aussi qu'une part croissante de ces politiques échappe au contrôle du Parlement. C'est pourquoi ce rapport propose notamment d'évaluer et de suivre tous les accords et fonds en ce domaine, en commençant par l'accord UE-Turquie et les processus de Khartoum et de Rabat.
               

                  Beaucoup d'autres sujets sont traités dans ce rapport, je ne peux les développer et je le regrette. Je terminerai, encore une fois, en remerciant tous ceux et, surtout, toutes celles – puisque la très grande majorité des rapporteurs fictifs étaient des femmes – qui y ont contribué.
               

Le Président. – Mme Vergiat, je vais répondre à la question que vous avez posée. Le problème de traduction était connu de tous, mais je vais informer aussi la présidence de votre demande, à savoir vérifier encore une fois ce qui s'est passé.
               

Interventions à la demande


Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, l'eccezionale ondata migratoria che investe l'Europa richiede risposte urgenti, concrete e in linea con la gravità della situazione: è il momento che gli Stati membri dell'Unione lavorino per dare un orizzonte strategico all'Europa, favorendo una politica integrata europea sul fenomeno migratorio. La maggior parte di queste persone sono costrette a fuggire dal proprio paese a causa di conflitti, persecuzioni, violazioni dei diritti umani e situazioni di miseria e spesso sono costrette anche a subire, nel percorso migratorio verso i paesi di transito, violenze di vario genere. È indispensabile migliorare lo scambio di buone prassi con i paesi terzi fornendo formazione di operatori umanitari, affinché possano identificare in modo più efficace le peculiarità, i contesti di provenienza e le varie esperienze dei migranti, in particolare quelli più vulnerabili. Insomma, è necessario che l'Unione europea, se davvero vuole affrontare in modo adeguato e coerente il problema della migrazione, riesca a costruire una vera partnership comune con i paesi terzi.
               

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, είναι δεδομένο ότι στο πρώτο μισό του αιώνα που διανύουμε θα γνωρίσουμε πρωτοφανείς μετακινήσεις πληθυσμών. Η δήθεν φιλανθρωπία που οδηγεί τους ανθρώπους να ζουν στοιβαγμένοι σε ακατάλληλους καταυλισμούς, όπως στα νησιά του Αιγαίου ή στη ζούγκλα του Καλαί, είναι στην πραγματικότητα απάνθρωπη και εξυπηρετεί μονάχα το κοινωνικό ντάμπινγκ που επιχειρούν οι πολυεθνικές. Για αυτό και πρέπει να αλλάξουν εδώ και τώρα οι αναποτελεσματικοί και άδικοι κανόνες του Δουβλίνου ΙΙΙ. Ειδικότερα, πρέπει να καταργηθούν άμεσα οι διατάξεις περί χώρας πρώτης εισόδου, που η γερμανική κυβέρνηση επιθυμεί να εφαρμόσει ξανά, τώρα που εισπράττει τον λογαριασμό της ανεύθυνης μεταναστευτικής της πολιτικής, μιας μεταναστευτικής πολιτικής της οποίας το βάρος επιχειρεί να φορτώσει στην Ελλάδα, επιστρέφοντας πίσω πρόσφυγες από τη Γερμανία. Έτσι σχεδιάζει, μια και στην Ελλάδα βρίσκει πάντα μια πρόθυμη κυβέρνηση του χεριού της, μια κυβέρνηση που τώρα μόλις κατάλαβε, έναν χρόνο μετά, ότι δεν εφαρμόζονται οι μετεγκαταστάσεις. Και όλα αυτά, ενώ κάποιοι προσπαθούν να δημιουργήσουν ένα κλίμα de facto ακύρωσης της γραπτής συμφωνίας για τις μετεγκαταστάσεις. Επομένως, πρέπει να απαιτήσουμε μετεγκαταστάσεις εδώ και τώρα για τους πρόσφυγες και τους μετανάστες και ισότιμη κατανομή μέσα στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Δεν θα πρέπει ο ελληνικός λαός να πληρώσει τις αντιπαραθέσεις και την κοντόφθαλμη πολιτική των κρατών μελών της Ένωσης.
               

Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, ono što želim istaknuti iz ovog izvještaja je činjenica da uz migraciju i migrante imamo ključni problem odljeva mozgova iz siromašnih zemalja, zemalja u razvoju. To je trajno uništavanje znanja, uništavanje neke zemlje kada mladi ljudi i obrazovani ljudi, ne moraju biti samo mladi, odlaze iz tih zemalja i te reperkusije ćemo tek osjetiti. To će stvoriti dodatne probleme i dodatne jazove u tim zemljama.
               

                  Znam da izvještaj nije vezan za trenutnu situaciju oko migrantske politike Europske unije, ali želim naglasiti još jedno dobro iskustvo koje Hrvatska ima u odnosima i sa Srbijom i s ostalima na zapadnobalkanskoj ruti, ali želim prosvjedovati protiv ponovnog dizanja žice na granici između Hrvatske i Slovenije.
               

João Pimenta Lopes (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, a maioria deste Parlamento Europeu prossegue a sua ação de branqueamento das responsabilidades e consequências das políticas da União Europeia nos fenómenos das migrações.
               

                  Internamente, intensifica-se, fruto das vossas políticas de austeridade e empobrecimento, do exterior, a gravíssima crise humanitária com centenas de milhares de refugiados que fogem da fome, da miséria, da perseguição e da guerra.
               

                  Oculta o papel da UE, dos EUA e da NATO na desestabilização do Médio Oriente e do Norte de África, nomeadamente impondo a guerra e a destruição. Prosseguem a defesa da Europa Fortaleza, da militarização da resposta humanitária, da política de retorno e externalização de fronteiras, da criminosa política europeia de migração que faz levantar muros da vergonha e mantém aprisionados dezenas de milhares de refugiados nas condições mais deploráveis e que faz milhares de mortos no Mediterrâneo. Políticas racistas e xenófobas que alimentam na Europa a extrema-direita e o fascismo.
               

                  A União Europeia é, hoje, uma referência internacional, uma referência na violação do Direito Internacional e dos direitos humanos.
               

Heidi Hautala (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, for me the most important accent on the report of Madam Vergiat is that it is based on the human rights-based approach to migration: it sees migrants as rights holders, and it equally emphasises our needs to respect our international obligations.
The second most important – and timely – point is that development cooperation should not be conditional on cooperation on migration-related issues, and I believe that we are now witnessing a very dangerous tendency in the EU financing instruments, which more and more divert aid towards security and towards preventing migration. Unfortunately we are witnessing this in many EU funding instruments at the moment, and this has to be dealt with.
Lastly, I would like to say that Madam Vergiat also made a reference to another report which is coming from the Foreign Affairs Committee. I do not understand why we have to produce another report after this one.

Ignazio Corrao (EFDD). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in realtà io avevo chiesto la parola per il punto precedente, la relazione della collega Ferrara. Però, bene, approfitto che me l'ha data per fare i complimenti alla collega Vergiat per il buon lavoro fatto, che è un lavoro che si va ad aggiungere ad altri che sono usciti già alla commissione LIBE in tema d'immigrazione, lavori che sono stati approvati, lavori anche sostenuti dalla commissione che però, purtroppo, non si sono mai risolti in niente di concreto. E noi, ancora oggi, dopo tanti dibattiti e dopo tanti atti approvati ci ritroviamo sempre con lo stesso problema: con l'incapacità di avere delle decisioni univoche, come Unione europea, e subendo quindi le decisioni dei singoli Stati. Detto questo, io ringrazio la relatrice per l'ottimo lavoro svolto.
               

(Fine degli interventi su richiesta)


Miguel Arias Cañete,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, first of all, allow me to congratulate the rapporteur on this comprehensive, balanced and deep analysis of the issue of human rights and migration in third countries.
No state or organisation can escape from its obligations under international human rights law to protect and ensure respect for the human rights of migrants, irrespective of their status. We live in a world of seven billion people, with dramatic demographic imbalances, where inequalities are still growing. Migration is here to stay. Migration is the new normal and is now an integral part of our political dialogue with partners, very much in line with the global strategy.
It took a while before Europe accepted its responsibilities, but we are finally doing so. Since 2015 our vessels have saved hundreds of thousands of lives in the Mediterranean. Operation Sophia is disrupting the traffickers' networks and bringing the smugglers to justice.
In Turkey, in Lebanon and in Jordan we are helping over half a million Syrian children go back to school. The protection of the most vulnerable – the women and children – is at the core of our action in each and every initiative we take. We remain the largest development donor and humanitarian actor. We are, despite criticism, leading by example.
Faced with so much human suffering, we need to respond and we are responding. But we know there is no quick fix to the issue of migration. Our new Partnership Framework (PF) approach reflects just this fact. It is an ambitious and innovative comprehensive approach, fully embedding migration in our overall foreign policy. It is not, as some wrongly believe, only about return or readmission. It is also about countering migrant smuggling and, not least, addressing the root causes of migration. The approach, being tailor-made and holistic, uses all our high-level instruments and leverage to achieve our goals. In fact it represents a new methodology based on genuine partnership.
The partnership addresses everything from security, return, readmission, resilience and job creation to infrastructure, investments and border management. First of all the PF approach, well received by our partners, has created a positive momentum in our dialogue with the countries in question. They do not see it either as us imposing a unilateral agenda; they do not see it as return becoming the only objective of our cooperation; and, rightly so, because the PF approach is indeed about mutually beneficial partnership and it marks a new way of engaging with our partner countries. The results we see are twofold, both in terms of better understanding European Union priorities and willingness to cooperate in practice and in terms of the specific tangible outcomes as you will have seen in the report of the EUCO.
Of course we do not operate in a political vacuum and European Union action must be seen as part of the bigger picture. The United Nations migration-related events during the UN General Assembly gave high visibility and great political momentum to the migration dossier. The New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants, adopted at the United Nations Summit on 19 September 2016 by all 193 United Nations Member States, forms an important step in providing for a global political framework to address large movements of refugees and migrants in all aspects. We are pleased to see the notion of responsibility-sharing and the importance of international cooperation in response to migration and refugee flows reflected in the outcome.
The establishment of a global compact for refugees and a global compact for safe, orderly and regular migration in the coming two years will be an important next step in moving this important agenda forward. The outcome documents closely reflect the European Union priorities and policies. We reaffirm our commitment to ensuring effective implementation of the political declaration and reaffirm our engagement in the upcoming negotiation of the global compact for migration, to be concluded by 2018.
The European Union was able to transmit a positive narrative and show in New York that it has done more than anyone else to address migratory challenges, as well as to demonstrate its commitment towards the principle of global responsibility-sharing through the partnership framework approach, supported by the new innovative European External Investment Plan. We shall now capitalise on this positive momentum and continue to show a strong, united European Union position also in the follow-up and the shaping of the future two global United Nations compacts.
All Member States therein also expressed their intention to expand the number and ranges of legal powers available for refugees to be admitted to or resettled in their territory. The Union Resettlement Framework the Commission proposed could facilitate this. This is about developing a harmonised approach to resettlement at European Union level, to provide safe pathways to Europe for people in need of protection, replacing irregular and dangerous migrant crossings and preventing the smugglers from taking advantage of the most vulnerable.
The contributions of each Member State under the annual Union resettlement plan will depend on Member States' contribution and engagement in the committee. We need the full support of Member States on this. We also need a robust asylum system that will be able to face, not only the challenges of today, but also those in the years to come. Keeping the status quo of our asylum system was not an option. The Commission has put all the elements on the table to reform it. Now it is time for the co-legislators to show their commitment to finding a long-term sustainable solution.
The inclusion of migration in the recently adopted 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda is therefore an important milestone. In this context the European Union continues to promote a development-oriented approach towards forced displacement. We want to increase the self-reliance and resilience of refugees in their host communities with the aim of ending dependence on humanitarian aid. Facilitating migration and improving migration policies, as called for in the 2013 Sustainable Development Goals, will allow livelihoods to be improved and will enhance access for refugees to education, job markets, health and housing.
As set out in the European Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2015-2019 and in line with the global approach to migration and mobility in the European Agenda on Migration, the European Union and its Member States are committed to enhancing human rights safeguards in all migration and mobility dialogues and cooperation frameworks with third countries and migration-related agreements, processes and programmes.
In line with the European Union Action Plan, the European Union also continues to address the issue of statelessness in relations with priority countries, namely speaking out on situations of statelessness that manifest an immediate and human rights problem and supports the UNHCR's mandate and activities. Migration and the fight against terrorism remain overwhelmingly the main priorities for European Union action, as confirmed at the informal GAC of 24-25 July this year.
The updated European Union Syria/Iraq regional strategy includes important projects in the fields of humanitarian aid, resilience and stabilisation. It calls for the respect of human rights and accountability, peace-building, gender and minority issues and condemns violations of international humanitarian law, the atrocities, killings and human rights abuses that Daesh is perpetrating.
Within the Gender Action Plan GAP II in European Union external relations for the period 2016-2020, gender is placed at the centre of all forms of European Union external relations. It commits the European Union to implementing actions ensuring girls' and women's physical and psychological integrity, promoting their economic and social rights. Together with like-minded partners, the European Union will work for the elimination of all forms of violence against women, including sexual and gender-based violence in conflict and for ending impunity. All perpetrators must be brought to justice.
As Ms Vergiat rightly pointed out, access to effective remedies for victims of migration-related human rights abuses is an issue on which further progress is still required. In this context, I would like to point out that the right to effective remedy is one of the issues dealt with in the new regulation on the European Border and Coast Guard. This regulation respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by Articles 2 and 3 of the TEU and reflected in the Charter. In particular, it seeks to ensure full respect for human dignity, liberty and security. Return of irregular migrants who do not have the right to stay in the European Union to their home countries in full respect of the principle of non-refoulement is an essential part of the European Union's comprehensive efforts to address migration.
In the implementation of the European Union Action Plan on return, the European Union seeks to be compliant with international human rights standards, in particular the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol.
A holistic approach to migration and the cross-cutting principle of non-discrimination are the conditions for the effective respect of the human rights of migrants. Our community needs to be based on integration and diversity and on the inclusion of social, cultural, linguistic and religious minorities. Xenophobia, discrimination, violence and hate speech have no place.
Let me thank the honourable Members once again for this important contribution to the debate on human rights and migration in third countries and for your excellent report.

Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.
               

                  La votazione si svolgerà domani, martedì 25 ottobre, alle 12.00.
               


Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 162)



Karol Karski (ECR),
na piśmie. – Kryzys migracyjny cechuje się dynamizmem, wymaga elastyczności i umiejętności modyfikacji naszej polityki. Z satysfakcją obserwuję dzisiaj zmianę pierwotnego stanowiska Niemiec i pozostałych państw Europy Zachodniej, które dostrzegły naiwność swoich pierwszych fatalnych posunięć: bezkrytycznego przyjmowania dowolnej liczby migrantów i forsowania programu przymusowych relokacji uchodźców do wszystkich państw UE. Lepiej późno niż wcale – chociaż Polska, Czechy czy Węgry powinny usłyszeć dzisiaj przeprosiny od tych, którzy jeszcze rok temu nazywali nas ‘egoistami’, którzy ‘nie dojrzeli do Europy’. Na tym tle, przedłożone sprawozdanie zadziwia swoją nieaktualnością. Sprawozdawca nie rozróżnia między uchodźcami i migrantami zarobkowymi, domaga się dalekiej unijnej ingerencji w systemy prawne państw członkowskich, lansuje potrzebę tworzenia ‘legalnych szlaków migracyjnych’ oraz krytykuje mechanizm readmisji na granicach UE, wzywając do ‘nadania pierwszeństwa powrotom dobrowolnym nad powrotami przymusowymi’. Tym samym sprawozdawca faktycznie apeluje, by UE zaprosiła na swoje terytoria tylu migrantów, ilu zechce tu przybyć, oraz by musiała zapewnić im opiekę socjalną, edukację i pracę.
               

                  Grupa ECR nie może podpisać się pod taką nieroztropnością. Wyrażamy solidarność z osobami, które są zmuszone do opuszczenia swojego państwa z powodu konfliktów, prześladowań czy skrajnego ubóstwa – jednakże rozwiązania trwającego kryzysu proponowane przez sprawozdawcę są krokiem wstecz i pokazują, że ostrzegawczy przykład ‘dżungli’ w Calais niektórych niczego nie nauczył.
               

Kati Piri (S&D),
schriftelijk. – Langzaam maar zeker zien we de laatste maanden dat de prioriteiten van het Europees buitenlandbeleid aan het verschuiven zijn. Waar de bescherming van mensenrechten en het versterken van de rechtsstaat belangrijke uitgangspunten zijn in onze samenwerking met derde landen, lijkt de focus zich nu steeds meer te verleggen naar het tegenhouden van migratie. Daarom roep ik de Commissie en onze ministers van Buitenlandse Zaken op om niet alleen met een anti-migratiebril naar ons buitenlandbeleid te kijken, maar om solidariteit te tonen met de landen in de regio die miljoenen vluchtelingen hebben opgevangen. Zo moet Europa haar humanitaire plicht nakomen door de meest kwetsbare vluchtelingen in die landen een veilige en legale route naar de EU te bieden door middel van grootschalige hervestiging. Niet als beloning voor het betreffende land, maar vanwege de bittere noodzaak.
               
18.   Corporate liability for serious human rights abuses in third countries (short presentation)

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la relazione di Ignazio Corrao, a nome della commissione per gli affari esteri, sulla responsabilità delle imprese per gravi violazioni dei diritti umani nei paesi terzi (2015/2315(INI)) (A8-0243/2016).
               

Ignazio Corrao,
relatore. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Commissario, con questa relazione il Parlamento europeo è chiamato a prendere posizione su una questione urgente e a dare avvio a un percorso normativo che porti a risposte concrete ed efficaci in materia. Il tema della responsabilità delle imprese per gravi violazioni dei diritti umani nei paesi terzi, ancora regolate da norme poco efficaci, tocca molto dei molti dei diritti fondamentali dell'uomo, come la protezione della salute e dell'ambiente o i diritti dei lavoratori, dei minori e delle donne.
               

                  Tra gli obiettivi principali che ci siamo posti con questa relazione, spicca quello di far sì che si agisca in modo urgente, coerente, continuativo ed efficace a tutti i livelli, affrontando concretamente i problemi giuridici derivanti dalla dimensione multinazionale delle imprese e del loro operato. Da tale dimensione dipende, tra l'altro, la frequente incertezza circa l'attribuzione delle responsabilità per le violazioni dei diritti umani e proprio da ciò discende troppo spesso l'impunità per gli autori di tali violazioni.
               

                  La relazione che sto presentando in Aula quest'oggi e che mi ha visto impegnato durante l'ultimo anno chiede a gran voce l'introduzione di norme vincolanti che ribadiscano il dovere per le imprese di rispettare i diritti umani ovunque e comunque. Chiede l'introduzione di norme che ribadiscano l'obbligo per gli Stati di proteggere, nell'ambito della propria giurisdizione, le persone fisiche che abbiano subito o che possano subire violazioni dei diritti umani, anche quando compiute al di fuori del proprio territorio. Chiediamo, dunque, agli Stati membri di stabilire norme chiare, volte a garantire che le imprese domiciliate nel loro territorio, che comunque operino nell'ambito della loro giurisdizione, rispettino i diritti umani in tutte le loro attività e in ogni paese e contesto in cui operano.
               

                  Ribadiamo con forza che, laddove siano lamentate gravi violazioni dei diritti umani, gli Stati membri debbano garantire alle vittime l'accesso a un ricorso effettivo, così come chiesto più volte da tutte le ONG e da tutti gli esponenti della società civile e accademica che abbiamo coinvolto durante la fase preparatoria della relazione. Chiediamo inoltre la creazione di norme penali minime che definiscano fattispecie e sanzioni anche per quei casi di violazione dei diritti umani ad opera di imprese che presentino una dimensione transnazionale.
               

                  Voglio, da ultimo, porre l'accento su una delle tante misure a costo zero, ma estremamente efficaci proposte nella relazione a mia firma. Mi riferisco alla creazione di un marchio europeo ‘abuse free’ che potrebbe rappresentare un grande cambiamento nella cultura d'impresa. Un marchio concesso alle imprese che volontariamente lo chiedano e che decidano quindi di sottoporsi a controlli efficaci e stringenti compiuti da organi indipendenti. In tal modo i consumatori saranno in grado di scegliere consapevolmente.
               

                  Tutte queste tematiche sono state al centro di un lungo, costruttivo ed appassionato dibattito tra le parti politiche. Sono fiero del fatto che una relazione su un tema potenzialmente così divisivo sia stato approvato in commissione affari esteri, quasi all'unanimità. A tal proposito ringrazio ancora i relatori ombra per il loro prezioso contributo e per la volontà mostrata in questi mesi di voler partecipare alla redazione di una buona relazione parlamentare su una tematica così importante.
               

                  Infine, ci tengo a ringraziare tutti gli attivisti del Movimento 5 stelle a tutti i cittadini che hanno voluto partecipare alla redazione di questa relazione. Grazie al sistema operativo Rousseau, un sistema che permette agli iscritti di partecipare alla vita politica in rete, tanti cittadini hanno avuto la possibilità di conoscere questo progetto di relazione e di esprimere la loro opinione. Tutte le loro osservazioni pervenute sono state attentamente vagliate e alcune di esse si sono trasformate in emendamenti a mia firma e sono state inserite nel testo votato in commissione. È la democrazia diretta, il cittadino che si trasforma in istituzione e partecipa alla costruzione di una legge o di una relazione d'iniziativa.
               

                  Questa relazione sarà votata domani da quest'Aula nell'auspicio che sia solo l'inizio di un vero cammino verso un'efficace e concreta lotta contro le violazioni dei diritti umani commesse dalle imprese in paesi terzi.
               

Interventi su richiesta


Andrzej Grzyb (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Sprawozdanie pana posła Corrao jest ważnym głosem w międzynarodowej debacie o społecznej odpowiedzialności przedsiębiorstw. Nie po raz pierwszy zresztą, również i na tej sali, ta debata przynosi efekty, bowiem pięć lat temu przyjęte zostały przez ONZ jednomyślnie wytyczne w sprawie biznesu i praw człowieka. W tej chwili trwa trudny proces wdrażania tych wytycznych i zgodzimy się, że Unia wraz z działającymi przedsiębiorstwami jest tutaj swoistym liderem. W ślad za tą rezolucją rozpoczęła pracę otwarta międzyrządowa grupa robocza do spraw prawnie wiążącego międzynarodowego instrumentu w tym zakresie i myślę, że co do zasady należy pozytywnie ocenić rozwiązania o zasięgu międzynarodowym, a nie tylko wyłącznie europejskim, bo wtedy tylko możemy mówić o ich skutecznym funkcjonowaniu. Należy też zwrócić uwagę, że nie należy przykładać jednej miary do wszystkich kategorii przedsiębiorstw, że to stwierdzenie ‘one size fits all’ tutaj nie pasuje, że największe korporacje międzynarodowe mają tu więcej obowiązków niż przedsiębiorstwa małe i średnie.
               

Caterina Chinnici (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, purtroppo, direi periodicamente, vengono scoperti casi di violazione dei diritti umani in paesi terzi da parte di imprese multinazionali e fra queste anche gruppi europei; circostanza questa particolarmente grave, perché essendo l'Unione europea fondata, fra gli altri, sul rispetto dei diritti umani, le imprese europee dovrebbero dare l'esempio a livello mondiale in materia di responsabilità aziendale. Condivido il documento. Mi rammarico solamente che il testo non abbia ancor più approfondito il tema dello sfruttamento del lavoro minorile, ancora largamente diffuso in alcune regioni del mondo. Da uno studio di Amnesty International emerge, ad esempio, che 16 multinazionali che vendono prodotti elettronici risultano clienti di aziende che producono batterie utilizzando il cobalto proveniente dalle miniere della Repubblica democratica del Congo, nella quale lavorano circa 40.000 bambini. È necessario, quindi, che tutte le imprese, europee e non, esercitino la cosiddetta ‘due diligence’ e che tutti i paesi dettino regole chiare per il rispetto dei diritti umani nelle attività d'impresa.
               

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, οι παραβιάσεις ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων από εταιρείες προκαλούν παγκόσμια ανησυχία. Όλο και περισσότερες επιχειρήσεις μεταφέρουν τα εργοστάσιά τους σε τρίτες χώρες, εκμεταλλευόμενες τα φτηνά εργατικά αλλά και ανύπαρκτα εργασιακά δικαιώματα. Ο σεβασμός των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων συνιστά ηθικό καθήκον και νομική υποχρέωση των εταιρειών και της διοίκησής τους, ανεξαρτήτως του χώρου δραστηριοποίησής τους. Δεν είναι λίγα τα φαινόμενα όπου διεθνείς εταιρείες υπερηφανεύονται για δήθεν εταιρική κοινωνική ευθύνη, ενώ ταυτόχρονα αποκομίζουν κέρδη από χαμηλό λειτουργικό κόστος, λόγω της εκμετάλλευσης της παιδικής εργασίας.
               

                  Η προστασία των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων πρέπει να αποτελεί προτεραιότητα για όλα τα κράτη μέλη και την Ένωση. Διαπιστώνουμε όμως ότι, παρά την ανακοίνωση της επιτροπής για την εταιρική κοινωνική ευθύνη από το 2011, αρκετά κράτη μέλη δεν έχουν ακόμη καθορίσει εθνικά πλαίσια πολιτικών για την προώθηση της εταιρικής ευθύνης ούτε έχουν δημοσιεύσει τα σχέδιά τους για τις επιχειρήσεις και τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα. Αν θέλει η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση περισσότερη εταιρική ευθύνη, θα πρέπει να πάψει να συντηρεί την εταιρική ανευθυνότητα και να κρύβεται πίσω από το δάχτυλό της. Θα πρέπει να καταπολεμήσει το κοινωνικό ντάμπινγκ και τη φοροαποφυγή και να περιορίσει τη δραστηριότητα των επιχειρήσεων που δεν σέβονται τους κανόνες για την προστασία της εργασίας.
               

Heidi Hautala (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, responsible business conduct can no longer be ignored, that is for sure, and I believe that the discussion on sustainable supply chains is here to stay, and the EU also must act accordingly.
Last month we discussed the case of Andy Hall, a British human rights defender and defender of migrants' rights in Thailand, and we saw that companies are ready to take responsibility, and they should be grateful for researchers and civil society organisations who inform them about wrongdoings and breaches of human rights in their supply chains. We have very good examples: the UK law on modern slavery is excellent, the French initiative on due diligence on supply chains as well. I would like to ask Commissioner Cañete if the EU is coming out with the promised action plan on responsible business conduct that we have been awaiting for months and months.

João Pimenta Lopes (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, abordando uma questão pertinente e justa, o relatório parte de uma premissa errada, a de que é possível humanizar o capitalismo. É na natureza do sistema capitalista, na sua vertente predatória e de exploração, que está a raiz do problema.
               

                  As grandes empresas e multinacionais exploram, direta ou indiretamente, em nome do lucro e de forma ávida, os recursos naturais dos povos de países terceiros, sem quaisquer pruridos de cometer os mais hediondos crimes ambientais contra as populações ou de explorar desumanamente trabalhadores.
               

                  Passam despercebidas ou são inexistentes referências à necessidade de elevação dos direitos dos trabalhadores, da regulação do trabalho, de uma melhor distribuição da riqueza ou do papel soberano dos Estados em protegerem os trabalhadores, povos e recursos da exploração do grande capital monopolista. Referência ausente também, a da necessidade de políticas comerciais que não se constituam como novos instrumentos neocoloniais, antes respeitem a soberania dos Estados e assentem no efetivo benefício mútuo entre partes iguais.
               

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, nel 2016 i diritti dei lavoratori nel mondo risultano indeboliti, non solo per il peggioramento delle condizioni di lavoro, ma anche per la restrizione alla libertà di espressione e di riunione. Un tema, quello dello sfruttamento del lavoro, che coinvolge le responsabilità dei governi e delle imprese, queste ultime spesso colpevoli di gravissime violazioni dei diritti dei lavoratori. In Medio Oriente e in Africa milioni di lavoratori vivono in condizioni di schiavitù. In molti paesi extraeuropei lavoratrici e lavoratori non beneficiano del diritto di sciopero, subiscono limitazioni nella libertà di espressione e di riunione e spesso sono vittime di violenza fisica e di minaccia. L'Unione europea deve operare affinché il commercio e i diritti umani possano entrambi rafforzarsi. La comunità imprenditoriale, in particolare nei paesi terzi, è tenuta a rispettare i diritti umani in tutte le declinazioni. L'Unione deve essere capace di stabilire una politica commerciale e di investimento con i paesi terzi basata non solo sulle esigenze di mercato, ma anche sui valori etici.
               

(Fine degli interventi su richiesta)


Miguel Arias Cañete,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, first of all allow me to congratulate Mr Corrao for this comprehensive, balanced, deep analysis of the issue of corporate social responsibility in third countries.
As the Council Conclusions of June 2016 show, business and human rights is a priority for the European Union. This year the Council also adopted Conclusions on Responsible Global Value Chains. As set out in the European Union Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2015-2019, the European Union's Member States are committed to make an advance on business and human rights.
Corporate respect for human rights is indispensable. As you do in your report, we consistently call on all business enterprises, both transnational and domestic, to integrate human rights due diligence into their operations, to better identify, prevent, and mitigate human rights risks.
The European Union supports the United Nations Guiding Principles. The proper implementation is good for the European Union and good for business. The European Union Member States have taken the lead internationally on developing and adopting national action plans to implement the Guiding Principles. As you rightly point out, Mr Corrao, access to effective remedies for victims of business-related human rights abuses is an issue on which further progress is still required.
In this context, I am pleased that the European Union Fundamental Rights Agency is currently working on an expert opinion on how to lower barriers for access to remedy at the European Union level.
I also welcome the recent adoption of the Council of Europe's Committee of Ministers' Recommendations on Human Rights and Business with a particular focus on access to remedy. The European institutions and Member States need to implement these recommendations. Furthermore, the European Union welcomes the initiative on enhancing accountability and access to remedy of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. This may provide best practices that can be implemented at the European Union and Member State level, including on improved cooperation between states in cross-border cases.
As regards our external policy, in line with the Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy, the EEAS and the Member States will continue to raise business and human rights in their contacts with third countries. This also includes human rights dialogues, as well as dedicated seminars and financial support aimed at the development of the national action plans on business and human rights. Also important is the need to build capacity, both within European Union delegations and Member States' embassies, to work effectively on business and human rights issues, including providing support to human rights defenders working on corporate accountability.
As regards the legally-binding instrument on business and human rights, the European Union has followed carefully the preparation of the Intergovernmental Working Group in Geneva. Since the start, we made our participation in the working group dependent on two principled conditions: first, ensuring that the scope of the discussion is not limited to transnational corporations, and second, making sure that the implementation of UNGPs is not undermined. This position was supported by a range of countries across different regions and by a number of civil society organisations.
In the run-up to the next meeting of the Intergovernmental Working Group on 24 October, the European Union has been actively engaged with the Chair-rapporteur and with all regional political groups with a view to addressing these issues and finding a solution that would entitle the European Union to provide a more active contribution to the works of the group.
I am pleased to inform the honourable Members that the European Union requests have been met by the Chair-rapporteur. The European Union therefore took the decision to participate in the Intergovernmental Working Group. The debate is now now open, and your contributions on how to improve the international legal framework for the protection of human rights in the context of corporate activities are all the more precious.
There was a direct question from Ms Hautala. What I can tell you is that the preparation of a paper on the Commission policy document on corporate social responsibility is currently ongoing.
Finally, let me thank you again for this important contribution to the debate on business and human rights and for an excellent report that represents a reference for our work.

Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.
               

                  La votazione si svolgerà domani, martedì 25 ottobre, alle 12.00.
               


Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 162)



Francisco Assis (S&D),
por escrito. – Este relatório, no qual trabalhei como relator-sombra em nome do S&D, é um relatório de teor claramente progressista, que procura responder aos desafios colocados no campo dos direitos humanos pela transnacionalização da atividade empresarial, incluindo de empresas europeias, em relação às quais temos, obviamente, uma responsabilidade acrescida.
               

                  Apela à inclusão sistemática de cláusulas sobre direitos humanos nos tratados comerciais celebrados entre a UE e países terceiros.
               

                  Apela à implementação a nível mundial dos Princípios Orientadores da ONU sobre Negócios e Direitos Humanos.
               

                  Apela a um maior empenhamento da UE no tratado internacional vinculativo que está a ser negociado na ONU.
               

                  Sublinha que as multinacionais devem ser legalmente responsabilizadas sempre que das suas operações em países terceiros resultem abusos de direitos humanos, e que têm o dever de compensar as vítimas desses abusos.
               

                  Incorpora recomendações de grande relevância, como a criação de um certificado da UE para produtos cuja produção não tenha envolvido abusos de direitos humanos.
               

                  Por sugestão minha, ficou vertido no relatório que tal certificado discrimine positivamente as empresas, habilitando-as a benefícios.
               

                  Em suma, este excelente relatório apresenta reflexões e propostas muito válidas para enfrentar alguns efeitos negativos da globalização, merecendo, quanto a mim, o apoio desta câmara.
               
19.   EU strategy for liquefied natural gas and gas storage (short presentation)

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la relazione di András Gyürk, a nome della commissione per l'industria, la ricerca e l'energia, sulla strategia dell'UE in materia di gas naturale liquefatto e stoccaggio del gas (2015/2059(INI)) (A8-0278/2016).
               

András Gyürk,
előadó. – Elnök Úr, tisztelt Biztos Úr, Képviselőtársaim! Engedjék meg, hogy jelentéstevői kötelezettségemnek eleget téve bemutassam Önöknek a cseppfolyósított földgázról és földgáztárolásról szóló jelentést. Büszkén mondhatom, hogy az árnyék-jelentéstevőkkel közösen sikerült egy olyan átfogó keretrendszert kialakítanunk, amely hosszú távon is képes lesz előremozdítani az európai gázpiacok fejlődését, és támogatja az ellátásbiztonságot.
               

                  Ez a stratégia nem önmagában álló, hanem szervesen illeszkedik a Parlament korábbi határozatai által felépített rendszerbe. Összhangban van az energiauniós csomag célkitűzéseivel, és figyelembe veszi a gázpiaci téli csomag többi jelentését. Úgy gondolom, hogy csak ezen keretek tiszteletben tartásával szabad nekifogni egy ilyen munkának, mi pedig ennek megfelelően cselekedtünk.
               

                  A jelentés elkészítésekor a következő célok lebegtek a szemünk előtt: élénkítsük a piaci versenyt a fogyasztói árak leszorításáért, támogassuk az ellátásbiztonságot a diverzifikáció növelésével, és végül, de nem utolsó sorban mindig tartsuk szem előtt a fenntarthatóságot.
               

                  A jelentés megannyi jelentős témát körüljár, de engedjék meg, hogy kiemeljem azokat, amelyek véleményem szerint a legfontosabbak ezek közül: elsőként természetesen a kiszolgáltatott tagállamok helyzete kell, hogy rendezésre kerüljön. Elengedhetetlen, hogy kimutassuk szolidaritásunkat azokkal a tagállamokkal szemben, amelyeknek nincs alternatív lehetőségük és kizárólag egy helyről képesek földgázt beszerezni. Megfelelő tározói kapacitás ideig-óráig segíthet ezeknek az országoknak, de hosszú távú megoldást kizárólag a forrásdiverzifikáció jelenthet, amelynek kiváló eszköze lehet a cseppfolyósított földgáz.
               

                  A második jelentős kérdéskör az infrastruktúra. Annak érdekében, hogy javítani tudjuk a meglévő eszközök kihasználtságát, elsőként el kell végeznünk az elszigetelt hálózatok összekötését. Az Európai Bizottság kiemelt projektjeinek listája olyan beruházásokat tartalmaz, amelyek képesek lennének létrehozni ezeket a kapcsolatokat, és feloldanák a legproblémásabb szűkületeket. Összefoglalva: annak érdekében, hogy igazán ki tudjuk használni a meglévő beruházásokat, először el kell végeznünk azokat, amelyek elmaradtak.
               

                  Harmadikként pedig ki kell emelni, hogy a fizikai infrastruktúra, a hardver önmagában elégtelen a szoftver nélkül. A szoftverek ez esetben pedig a tarifák, a szabványok, az eljárásrendek. Ezek összehangolása legalább olyan fontos, mint a fizikai összeköttetés.
               

                  Az említett témák mellett foglalkoztunk továbbá a cseppfolyósított földgáz közlekedésben és dekarbonizációban betöltött szerepével, illetve az Európai Unió lehetőségeivel a nemzetközi földgázpiac aktív szereplőjeként.
               

                  Befejezésül szeretném kifejezni legőszintébb köszönetemet mindazok számára, akik hozzájárultak ehhez a jelentéshez, különös tekintettel az árnyék-jelentéstevőkre. Úgy vélem, hogy a frakciók együttműködése nélkül nem tudtunk volna ilyen sokat elérni.
               

                  Tisztelt Képviselőtársaim! Hiszem, hogy ezt a jelentést érdemes támogatni, ugyanis a szöveg merít minden politikai frakció indítványaiból – és magában foglalva mindegyikük gondolatvilágát, úgy mondhatjuk tehát, hogy valódi kompromisszumról van szó – amely egyben egy újabb biztos lépés a közös cél, az energiaunió irányába. Köszönöm szépen a figyelmüket!
               

Interventi su richiesta


Λευτέρης Χριστοφόρου (PPE). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, πραγματικά οφείλω να συγχαρώ και να αποδώσω δίκαιον έπαινο στον εισηγητή αυτής της πραγματικά ολοκληρωμένης, αποτελεσματικής και ολιστικής έκθεσης για τα ενεργειακά, στον αγαπητό συνάδελφο, τον András Gyürk, ο οποίος ουσιαστικά άγγιξε όχι μόνο το ζήτημα του φυσικού αερίου, αλλά ευρύτερα και τα ζητήματα της ενεργειακής στρατηγικής της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης καθώς και το θέμα της Ενεργειακής Ένωσης. Υιοθετώ και στηρίζω αυτήν την έκθεση όχι μόνο γιατί μέσα στους ενεργειακούς της σχεδιασμούς περιλαμβάνει και τη δική μου πατρίδα, την Κύπρο, αλλά και ευρύτερα τη Μεσόγειο, που είναι σημαντικότατος παίκτης σήμερα, για να μπορέσει να ολοκληρωθεί το ζήτημα της ενεργειακής αυτάρκειας, του ενεργειακού εφοδιασμού και της ενεργειακής ενίσχυσης της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, αλλά, ταυτόχρονα, γιατί προτείνει και λύσεις όσον αφορά τον τερματικό σταθμό υγροποιημένου φυσικού αερίου, καθώς ουσιαστικά μια μικρή χώρα όπως η Κύπρος δεν μπορεί από μόνη της να επενδύσει και να φτιάξει ένα τόσο μεγάλο έργο και, για αυτό, απευθύνεται στο Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Στρατηγικών Επενδύσεων, το οποίο είναι σημαντικό να αξιοποιηθεί για αυτούς τους σχεδιασμούς.
               

                  Απευθυνόμενος στον Επίτροπο που παρευρίσκεται εδώ θα ήθελα να επισημάνω ότι τώρα είναι η ευκαιρία να αξιοποιήσουμε το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Στρατηγικών Επενδύσεων για την ενεργειακή αυτάρκεια της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Και η Ανατολική Μεσόγειος, όπως και άλλες περιοχές, προσφέρονται προς αυτήν την κατεύθυνση. Ταυτόχρονα, κλείνοντας, θέλω να χαιρετίσω την αναφορά που γίνεται στην έκθεση ότι η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση μπορεί να καταστεί πρωταγωνιστής στις ανανεώσιμες πηγές ενέργειας, να αξιοποιήσει το 100% των ανανεώσιμων πηγών ενέργειας, να πατάξει την ενεργειακή φτώχεια και να διασφαλίσει ουσιαστικά αυτό το βασικό ανθρώπινο δικαίωμα, δηλαδή η ενέργεια να αποτελεί κτήμα του κάθε ευρωπαίου πολίτη.
               

Miriam Dalli (S&D). – Mr President, thank you, Commissioner. From a small country to another small country – Malta. I would speak from the point of view of Malta because, yes, we do understand that, to reach the EU's energy and climate targets by 2030 (but most of all provide affordable energy), liquefied natural gas should be considered as an alternative fuel solution, particularly for certain Member States.
LNG not only cuts down radically CO2 emissions but is also a transitory link between the current fuel-based system and the futures' low carbon energy and transport scenarios, including also for vehicles and maritime vessels.
Coming from Malta, I believe that there is a clear potential for synergies – which are yet to be exploited – between the gas-rich North African region and the European Union. It is positive that this strategy acknowledges that LNG and gas storage will contribute towards ending energy isolation, which affects Member States, including Malta – more so since it is a key objective of the EU's Energy Union that all Member States have access to liquid gas markets. This is a mature technology where the global market is still booming, and the EU and its Member States should not stay behind.

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, ήρθε η ώρα να κοστολογηθούν οι απώλειες οι οποίες έχουν δημιουργηθεί και δρομολογηθεί λόγω της ιδεοληπτικής πολιτικής της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης για το θέμα της αγοράς φυσικού αερίου. Υπάρχουν περισσότεροι από 20 τερματικοί σταθμοί, πολλοί εκ των οποίων χρηματοδοτήθηκαν με χρήματα των φορολογουμένων, τελικά όμως χρησιμοποιείται μόνο το 20% των δυνατοτήτων των σταθμών αυτών και κάποιοι από αυτούς δεν λειτουργούν καν. Αυτό συμβαίνει για έναν πολύ απλό λόγο: το υγροποιημένο φυσικό αέριο παραμένει ακριβότερο από άλλες εναλλακτικές. Μόνη λύση για να μειωθούν επαρκώς οι τιμές θα μπορούσε να είναι η μαζική αύξηση εισαγωγών αερίου από τη Βόρεια Αμερική, αλλά αυτό είναι αντίθετο στις οικολογικές αξίες που έχουν θεσπιστεί στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, μια και το αέριο προέρχεται από την καταστροφική δραστηριότητα του ‘fracking’.
               

                  Κύριοι της Επιτροπής, οφείλετε να αναγνωρίσετε επιτέλους ότι ο πρωταρχικός στόχος της ανάπτυξης του υγροποιημένου φυσικού αερίου ήταν και παραμένει γεωπολιτικός. Εκεί οφείλεται και η αρχική αποτυχία της πολιτικής της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Η ανάπτυξη των υποδομών υγροποιημένου φυσικού αερίου μπορεί να γίνει αποδοτική, αρκεί η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση να εγκαταλείψει τις νεοφιλελεύθερες ιδεοληψίες και τις γεωπολιτικές της παρωπίδες.
               

Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, uvjeren sam da je konačno jedino ispravno rješenje energetska unija, a u tom kontekstu naravno i solidarnost sa zemljama koje imaju energetskih problema. Definitivno sam jedan od onih zagovornika koji vide LNG kao nešto što može razriješiti niz problema, konkretno na Jadranu.
               

                  Znamo da Hrvatska ima ozbiljan veliki projekt LNG terminala na otoku Krku kojega se, istinabog, radi već dva desetljeća ne baš najuspješnije, ali vjerujem da su zadnji koraci učinjeni, ono što je i sama Komisija pokazala podupirući taj projekt, da će se napokon i LNG na Krku ostvariti. Za to je, kao što znamo, izniman interes i drugih susjednih država. Međutim, stvari moramo postaviti realno ekonomski, pa djelomično i politički, ako želimo da taj projekt zaista uspije.
               

Νεοκλής Συλικιώτης (GUE/NGL). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, ήθελα πρώτα να συγχαρώ τον εισηγητή András Gyürk για τη δουλειά που έχει κάνει. Η στρατηγική για το LNG πρέπει να συμβάλει στη μείωση της εξάρτησης από τους αγωγούς και στη διαφοροποίηση των πηγών και των οδών εφοδιασμού για την καταπολέμηση πρώτιστα της ενεργειακής φτώχειας, αλλά και για την ενίσχυση της ενεργειακής ασφάλειας. Για να επιτευχθεί όμως αυτό, είναι σημαντικό να αξιοποιηθούν οι εγχώριες πηγές ενέργειας. Χαιρετίζουμε λοιπόν την αναφορά της έκθεσης στην ανάγκη να στηριχθεί η αξιοποίηση των κοιτασμάτων στην κυπριακή Αποκλειστική Οικονομική Ζώνη και ευρύτερα στην Ανατολική Μεσόγειο, καθώς και η δημιουργία ενός τερματικού LNG στην Κύπρο. Eίναι αναγκαίο η πρόταση αυτή να εισακουστεί. Και είναι ανάγκη, κύριε Επίτροπε, να δώσει άμεσα η Ένωση οικονομική αλλά και τεχνική υποστήριξη για την υλοποίηση των αναγκαίων υποδομών. Εξίσου σημαντικό είναι να στηριχτούν οι χώρες που αποτελούν ενεργειακές νησίδες, όπως η Κύπρος και η Μάλτα, ώστε να αρθεί η ενεργειακή τους από απομόνωση.
               

                  Δυστυχώς όμως οι θετικές προτάσεις στην έκθεση ακυρώνονται από τα μέτρα που προωθούνται για την επιβολή μιας κοινής ενεργειακής πολιτικής η οποία θα περιορίζει την κυριαρχία και την ευελιξία των κρατών και θα καθιστά την ενέργεια εργαλείο εξυπηρέτησης των αναγκών της αγοράς μέσω των συμφωνιών τύπου TTIP. Για την GUE/NGL, η στρατηγική για το LNG πρέπει να ενισχύει την εθνική ευελιξία, να προωθεί τις δημόσιες υποδομές με περιβαλλοντικά πρότυπα και να διασφαλίζει το δικαίωμα για ισότιμη και φθηνή πρόσβαση στην ενέργεια.
               

Davor Škrlec (Verts/ALE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, poštovani povjereniče Cañete, koristim priliku da kažem kako podržavam ovu europsku strategiju LNG-a i skladišta plina. Smatram da je to jako važno za tranziciju Europske unije prema nisko ugljičnom društvu.
               

                  Međutim, ono na što bih htio skrenuti pažnju je da smo mi definirali neke svoje ciljeve potpisivanjem Pariškog sporazuma, da smo to ugradili u rezolucije Europskog parlamenta kao ciljeve koje bi trebali postići do 2030. s pogledom na 2050. godinu, i da moramo upozoriti države članice kako prelazak na prirodni plin kao zamjenu za ugljen nije rješenje, jer to je samo 40 % smanjenja emisija i nećemo postići ciljeve koje smo obećali, zapravo potpisali u Pariškom sporazumu.
               

                  Smatram da je regionalan pristup jako važan i potpuno ga podržavam i upravo u tom kontekstu je terminal LNG na otoku Krku važan za izgradnju jer će konačno osigurati da jugoistok Europe ima diversifikaciju opskrbe i da ne ovisi samo o jednom opskrbljivaču prirodnog plina. Skrećem pažnju da je pored energetike i sektor transporta jako važan i da je jako važno povezati ovu strategiju LNG-a sa strategijom transporta.
               

Cláudia Monteiro de Aguiar (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, quero agradecer ao Colega Gyürk pelo seu trabalho nesta estratégia tão importante e, enquanto relatora do parecer na Comissão dos Transportes, obviamente que não podia deixar esta oportunidade de referir a importância do gás natural liquefeito para o transporte marítimo e para os veículos pesados como um combustível alternativo.
               

                  É essencial criar uma rede de infraestruturas de abastecimento e armazenamento, mas que não exclua os portos marítimos das ilhas, como referido na diretiva de combustíveis alternativos.
               

                  A solução passa também pela construção de infraestruturas de pequena escala e a utilização dos navios de cabotagem regular. Por isso, e tal como referido também neste relatório, propus a criação de um projeto comum, de corredores azuis de GNL para as ilhas, para as regiões ultraperiféricas do Atlântico, nomeadamente para a Madeira e para os Açores, e para que seja possível adaptar os portos, trabalhar as ligações marítimas e a reconversão dos navios.
               

                  Peço, por isso, também ao Senhor Comissário uma atenção especial e que se comprometa a apoiar e a disponibilizar fundos para a concretização deste projeto que é, sem dúvida, de interesse para Portugal mas também, sem dúvida, de interesse para a União Europeia.
               

Carlos Zorrinho (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, o gás natural liquefeito é uma componente muito importante para garantir a diversificação e a segurança energética e apoiar uma transição sustentável para um modelo baseado em energias renováveis e limpas. Fui relator na Comissão ENVI e o parecer destaca a otimização das redes existentes, a importância de apoiarmos a transição energética e, em particular, de descarbonizarmos os transportes pesados e os transportes marítimos.
               

                  Esta estratégia tem que estar alinhada com o Acordo de Paris e é muito importante aproveitar o GNL para esta questão dos transportes, dos transportes marítimos e dos transportes pesados. Por isso, queria salientar a recomendação neste relatório para que o arquipélago dos Açores, devido à sua localização geográfica, tenha uma estação de combustível para as rotas transatlânticas de transporte marítimo e é também muito importante que, nos seus vários instrumentos de financiamento, a Comissão Europeia preveja o financiamento de projetos deste tipo.
               

Μαρία Σπυράκη (PPE). – Kύριε Πρόεδρε, η ενεργειακή ασφάλεια, η ενεργειακή επάρκεια και η χαμηλότερη τιμή για τους καταναλωτές είναι πράγματι οι πυλώνες για τους οποίους οφείλουμε να εργαζόμαστε. Όμως πρέπει να είμαστε ταυτόχρονα και ρεαλιστές. Σε πολλά κράτη μέλη, όπως στην πατρίδα μου την Ελλάδα, είμαστε εξαρτημένοι από έναν και μόνο προμηθευτή για το φυσικό αέριο και έτσι είναι απαραίτητο να έχουμε μεγαλύτερη πρόσβαση σε υγροποιημένο φυσικό αέριο. Είναι επίσης μια ευκαιρία να δώσουμε πρόσβαση στους καταναλωτές σε φθηνή ενέργεια, καθώς, λόγω της υπερπροσφοράς του LNG, έχει μειωθεί σημαντικά η τιμή του. Παράλληλα όμως, πρέπει να δημιουργήσουμε και να ενισχύσουμε αμέσως υποστηρικτικές υποδομές αγωγών που θα συνδυάζουν όλες τις μορφές φυσικού αερίου. Ένα τέτοιο παράδειγμα, και θα ήθελα να το ακούσετε αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, είναι το έργο της ΔΕΠΑ για την Κεντρική και Ανατολική Μακεδονία και τη Θράκη· ένα έργο που μπορεί να δώσει φυσικό αέριο σε πρωτεύουσες νομών, σε μικρότερες πόλεις, σε βιομηχανικές ζώνες, σε μία από τις πιο φτωχές ενεργειακά περιοχές στην Ελλάδα και στην Ευρώπη· ένα έργο μήκους 1.128 χιλιομέτρων, που θα επεκτείνει την ενεργειακή αγορά της Ελλάδας κατά 0,4 δισεκατομμύρια κυβικά εκατοστά και θα προσελκύσει επενδυτές. Χρειαζόμαστε τη στήριξη όλων των χρηματοδοτικών εργαλείων της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, ώστε να δώσουμε στους Έλληνες καταναλωτές φθηνότερη ενέργεια.
               

Κώστας Μαυρίδης (S&D). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κατ αρχήν συγχαρητήρια στον εισηγητή για αυτήν την καλή και πράγματι σφαιρική εργασία. Με δεδομένες τις ενεργειακές ανάγκες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, την επιδίωξη για μείωση της εξάρτησης από έναν προμηθευτή και γεωγραφική διαφοροποίηση και τέλος τα σοβαρά προβλήματα ασφάλειας που υπάρχουν, αποτελεί επιτακτική ανάγκη η αξιοποίηση τόσο των πόρων εκτός Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, αλλά ειδικότερα - και αναφέρεται αυτό στην έκθεση - των εγχώριων φυσικών πόρων ενέργειας και, ειδικά, των κοιτασμάτων που βρίσκονται στην Ανατολική Μεσόγειο και εντός της κυπριακής Αποκλειστικής Οικονομικής Ζώνης.
               

                  Επίσης είναι σημαντική η δημιουργία τερματικού σταθμού υγροποίησης φυσικού αερίου στην Κύπρο. Τέλος, η Κύπρος παρέχει τη δυνατότητα συνεργειών μαζί με το Ισραήλ, τον Λίβανο και την Αίγυπτο. Και η χρήση του λεγόμενου σχεδίου Juncker μπορεί να θέσει σε προτεραιότητα μια χώρα μικρή όπως η Κύπρος, η οποία είναι και σε οικονομική κρίση, για να μπορέσει να αξιοποιήσει τα φυσικά της κοιτάσματα. Και τέλος, αγαπητέ Πρόεδρε, μια τελευταία παρατήρηση: η Κύπρος και η Μάλτα είναι απομονωμένες χώρες και θα πρέπει να βοηθηθούν.
               

Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, and thank you for taking us all in the catch-the-eye, because this is a very important topic for us, especially those who come from small countries like mine – Ireland, which is an island. With the exception of the temporary supply of gas from the Corrib gas field, we are totally dependent on our gas coming from one interconnector from the United Kingdom. What is going to happen us if and when the United Kingdom leaves the European Union?
For that reason LNG is so important to us, and there are proposals to build a terminal in Shannon, which has been very much helped by many of the far-sighted policies of Commissioner Cañete, and also the good work here of my colleague, Mr Gyürk.
Without doubt it is essential for us to diversify supply, secure supply and, of course, also avail of cheaper prices as a result of it. As has been said, we want to be the renewable capital of the world, but at the same time they are intermittent, and gas is the ideal backup to renewables. So it is a win-win, but we have to get LNG into as many countries in Europe as possible.

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'adozione di una strategia dell'Unione europea in materia di gas naturale liquefatto tenderebbe a realizzare una rapida transizione verso un sistema dell'energia sostenibile, sicuro e competitivo e porre fine alla dipendenza da fornitori di gas esterni. In questa valutazione, però, non è secondaria la considerazione che le infrastrutture per il GNL esistenti nell'Unione europea sono nettamente sottoutilizzate e che la domanda di gas continua ad essere sovrastimata. Occorrerebbe effettuare valutazioni di impatto ex ante sull'effettivo valore aggiunto della costruzione di nuove infrastrutture per il trasporto e lo stoccaggio di GNL, tenendo conto delle potenzialità dell'ottimizzazione dell'uso efficiente e sicuro delle infrastrutture di stoccaggio esistenti, compreso lo stoccaggio del gas. Ritengo che l'Unione europea e i suoi Stati membri dovrebbero concentrare la loro attenzione maggiormente sulle risorse rinnovabili e sul miglioramento dell'efficienza energetica, cercando di trarre il massimo vantaggio dalla capacità di produzione rinnovabile e limitando gli investimenti per nuove infrastrutture per il trasporto e lo stoccaggio di GNL alle zone di scarsa interconnessione e all'approvvigionamento degli Stati membri più vulnerabili.
               

Ricardo Serrão Santos (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, o gás natural liquefeito pode ter um papel importante na mitigação dos efeitos do gás de estufa e na realização de esforços de descarbonização contemplados no acordo alcançado na COP 21, onde, como sabemos, os transportes marítimos ficaram fora da equação. Esse apelo deve ser considerado transitório e não deve abrandar nem substituir os investimentos no desenvolvimento das energias renováveis e no abandono das energias fósseis, e deve questionar o uso da fraturação hidráulica em larga escala para a extração de gás natural, dados os efeitos ambientais negativos no local.
               

                  No entanto, estou em crer que esta aposta, enquanto transitória e a prazo, pode constituir para Europa mais uma solução alinhada com os desafios deste século e uma oportunidade para promover o desenvolvimento económico sustentado.
               

                  Por isso, saliento e registo como muito positiva a referência ao desenvolvimento de rotas marítimas em que o arquipélago dos Açores, dada a sua localização geoestratégica no centro do Atlântico, pode constituir um ponto-chave no abastecimento de navios mercantes com gás natural liquefeito.
               

Tibor Szanyi (S&D). – Elnök Úr! Annak ellenére, hogy a jelentéstevő által jelzett célokkal többé-kevésbé egyet lehet érteni, jómagam azért roppant kevésnek tartom benne a fenntarthatósági vagy az energiahatékonysági logikát, és különösen hiányolom a kellő kiállást, hogy a jövőt egy karbonmentes és ha lehet atomenergiamentes energiahasználatra kellene alapoznunk.
               

                  Ugyanakkor van egy sor rendezetlen kérdés: ki állja a különböző költségeket? Én például nem értek egyet a jelentésnek azzal az ajánlásával, amely szerint az Uniónak kell biztosítani a szükséges infrastruktúrát. Hogy egy példát is hozzak: Magyarország, az én hazám, ahonnan jövök, jelen pillanatban az Orbán-kormánynak egy mondatban összefoglalható az energiapolitikája: oroszoktól kell vásárolni földgázt, és oroszoktól kell vásárolni orosz hitelből orosz atomerőművet. Na, most ez így messzemenőleg szembemegy az európai stratégiákkal, s mindaddig, amíg az energiamix egyféle szent tehénként tagországi hatáskörbe van utalva, addig ezeknek az itt alkotott stratégiáknak viszonylag kicsi az értelme és hatékonysága. Ugyanakkor egy ajánlás még, amennyiben likvidgázról beszélünk, ebben az esetben az eredetre nagyon oda kell figyelni, nehogy palagázból legyen ez a likvidgáz.
               

(Fine degli interventi su richiesta)


Miguel Arias Cañete,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, let me start by thanking this House, and in particular the rapporteur, Mr Gyürk, for his important work on this crucial file. The Commission is fully in line with these conclusions and is ready to act upon the specific challenges highlighted in the report. As the report rightly outlines, this study can have a transformative effect on reinforcing our energy security and boosting our competitiveness by providing access to liquid hubs and a diverse range of gas sources. But before I go into some of the detail, I think it is worth recalling some of the principles which underpin our strategy.
First, the diversification of the natural gas supply is a strategic objective of the European Union as domestic production declines further down the road. The Commission's LNG and gas storage strategy aims to exploit the potential of liquefied natural gas and gas storage to make the European Union gas system more diverse and flexible, thus contributing to the key Energy Union objective of a secure, resilient and competitive gas supply.
LNG can also bring benefits in terms of competitiveness as gas markets become exposed to more competition from international suppliers. In some cases the impact can be significant, as in the case of Lithuania. Furthermore, LNG also has the potential in some cases to reduce environmental impacts, especially in the transport sector. Let me reiterate: the European Union's LNG strategy was conceived with our Paris climate commitments in mind. The truth is that natural gas is likely to remain an important source for our energy mix as one possible solution for a flexible energy system which includes responsive generation, demand response, grids and storage.
As we work on decarbonising our economy, renewables will become more prominent in the European Union's energy mix, while gas will maintain its role with around 24-25%, pushing out other more polluting fossil fuels. That is why achieving our goals on diversity of gas supplies in every European Union Member State or liquid competitive markets and in meeting the needs of citizens and industry is of cardinal importance.
We pursue this diversification objective on three priority axes: opening the southern gas corridor, developing an east Mediterranean gas hub, and taking the opportunity provided by the positive developments of the global LNG market. These axes together will considerably contribute to increased competition and a downward pressure on European gas prices. We believe that a functioning and fully-integrated liquid market is the best way to achieve our gas security objectives by making the European Union attractive for suppliers and keeping prices under control through enhanced competition. That is why this strategy focuses on completing the internal gas market, both in terms of infrastructure as well as market rules, in order to provide diversification to the most vulnerable regions of the European Union.
Now on to some of the specific points raised in the report. We welcome that Mr Gyürk's report also acknowledges the importance of the established regional high-level groups in these vulnerable regions. It is only through targeted action and cooperation that we can best meet the needs of each region. These same groups are also best placed to discuss the prioritisation of infrastructure projects that can address the particular challenges. There is a successful CESEC high-level group that brings together Member States and Energy Community Countries in central and south-east Europe, has identified six key priority projects and already approve an action plan of regulatory solutions that we propose in our LNG strategy to make them happen. The BEMIP high-level group is working on a similar action plan that we will deliver before the end of the year, but I could also mention the work of the South-West High Level Group in the Iberian Peninslua.
On stranded assets, let me say that we are fully aware of the risks here, given today's constantly changing environment. We need to be mindful of which infrastructure investment we follow through and should focus on only delivering those infrastructure projects that are absolutely essential to security of supply. This is also what we propose in this strategy. A limited number of key infrastructure mainly aiming at connecting to existing import terminals and a storage capacity and one LNG terminal in south-east Europe that will serve the whole region. Here we rely on the results of existing regional cooperation. The projects put forward in the strategy have all been agreed beforehand under the three high-level groups I mentioned before.
On climate and sustainability, I fully support the report's conclusions. We need to look at both the opportunities and challenges in the LNG value chain. On this point, let me stress that the Commission will work closely with international partners to reduce methane slip in the overall LNG chain. This is absolutely crucial to ensure that the positive aspects of using LNG will not be compromised by the adverse effects of methane slip.
As mentioned in the report, we should also highlight the potential of renewable sources of gas, also in the form of liquefied biogas. These sources can often utilise existing infrastructure, extending their useful lifetime further into the future. The strategy also recognises the great potential of LNG in the transport sector, in particular in maritime and heavy road transport, where it can replace more polluting fuels. Mr Gyürk's report also highlights the potential of small-scale LNG for local industry in islands, where gas can replace oil as a fuel for power generation or feedstock.
On storage, let me say that it needs to be able to compete on a level playing field. Operators should be able to easily develop the more flexible products to match market needs. Barriers to cross-border access should be eliminated and real cooperation on the efficient use for both business user and possibility of supply purposes should be stressed. In this regard you will be happy to hear that discussions on the gas tariff network codes have finished and the special role of LNG in the European Union market is well reflected in them.
Finally, let me turn to the international aspects rightly given prominence in the report. The study, which foresees the European Union as the second largest LNG importer in the world, will play a proactive role in the international efforts to promote a liquid and transparent global LNG market. We will work with our international partners to promote gas trading rules that lead to more flexibility and the convergence of global gas markets. LNG trade is already a subject in our energy dialogues with important consumers such as Japan and current and future suppliers such as the Gulf countries, the United States and Canada, and this will be a step up in the future.
Honourable Members, allow me to finish by once again by thanking the rapporteur and by stressing the importance the Commission attaches to this strategy. It can have a significant impact across all five dimensions of the Energy Union, and I look forward to working with the European Parliament to make that happen.

Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.
               

                  La votazione si svolgerà domani, martedì 25 ottobre, alle 12.00.
               


Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 162)



Krzysztof Hetman (PPE),
na piśmie. – Strategia Unii Europejskiej dotycząca LNG oraz magazynowania gazu jest ważnym działaniem na rzecz poprawy bezpieczeństwa i stabilności w zakresie energii. Chciałbym podkreślić, że jednym z najważniejszych wyzwań stojących przed Unią Europejską w ramach wspólnej polityki energetycznej jest zapewnienie wszystkim obywatelom oraz podmiotom gospodarczym ciągłego i konkurencyjnego dostępu do energii, w tym gazu ziemnego. Od lat zmagamy się z problemem różnic w cenach gazu na poszczególnych rynkach Unii Europejskiej. W Europie Środkowej ceny gazu są wyższe nawet o 23 %, a rynek w tych państwach jest zbyt słabo połączony wewnętrznie. Nie możemy mówić o bezpieczeństwie energetycznym, kiedy wiele państw członkowskich jest uzależnionych od jednego dostawcy, doświadczając przy tym problemów takich jak dyskryminacja cenowa czy zaburzenia w dostawach. Kluczową kwestią rozwiązującą te problemy jest zdywersyfikowanie dostaw gazu m.in. poprzez wykorzystanie LNG, a także rozwój infrastruktury przesyłowej i magazynowej. Pragnę zaznaczyć, że bezpieczeństwo energetyczne zależy nie tylko od konkurencji rynkowej, ale także od ustawodawstwa na poziomie Unii Europejskiej i porozumień strategicznych.
               

Carolina Punset (ALDE),
por escrito. – La estrategia europea para el gas natural y el GNL, no debe basarse en una sustitución del carbón por otro combustible fósil que sigue emitiendo CO2 y sobre todo metano, más de 80 veces peor que el CO2 para el calentamiento global. La Comisión ha pretendido desde hace años imponer el uso del gas en toda Europa, como un simple cambio de combustible, inflando predicciones de consumo sin tener en cuenta la mejora de la eficiencia energética ni la penetración de renovables. Esto ha traído como consecuencia exceso de inversión en instalaciones usadas al 25 % de su capacidad en Europa. Países como España tienen plantas que se cerraron en mismo día de su inauguración. Los importantes acuerdos del Clima, ratificados por la Unión, deben ser la base de toda estrategia energética, donde se debe anteponer la eficiencia energética y el uso de energías limpias a cualquier desarrollo de fuentes de energía con combustibles fósiles. El gas natural podría ser un respaldo transitorio para la entrada de renovables en los mix energéticos de Europa, pero se convertirá en un impedimento al desarrollo de las energías limpias si se promociona de manera cortoplacista como reducción de emisiones de C02.
               

Indrek Tarand (Verts/ALE),
in writing. – Having an adequate strategy for liquefied natural gas and gas storage is of key importance to Europe's energy security. Some Member States, such as Lithuania, have rightfully invested in a new LNG terminal, thereby decreasing their dependency on Russian gas, whereas others are wasting money on foolishly increasing their dependency on such an unreliable source. Russia has demonstrated on countless occasions that it is not a reliable partner to the EU and does not hesitate to wield energy as a political weapon. It would be extremely irresponsible to jeopardise our citizens' wellbeing by subjecting their energy security to the whims of the Kremlin. We must therefore strongly oppose the doubling of the North Stream pipeline. The current pipeline is used in only half of its capacity; therefore, the only reason to double it is to divert all gas transit away from Ukraine in order to further destabilise the country. Furthermore, we currently lack sufficient interconnections for that gas to make its way back to our eastern Member States; North Stream 2 would therefore put them in a much more precarious position. Some of those states are also landlocked, which further impedes their access to LNG brought in by ships.

PRZEWODNICTWO: RYSZARD CZARNECKI


Wiceprzewodniczący

20.   How to make fisheries controls in Europe uniform (short presentation)

Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia jest debata nad sprawozdaniem sporządzonym przez Isabelle Thomas w imieniu Komisji Rybołówstwa pt. ‘W jaki sposób ujednolicić kontrole rybołówstwa w Europie?’ (2015/2093(INI)) (A8-0234/2016).
               

Isabelle Thomas,
rapporteure. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, sur les quais des ports de pêche, les informations se propagent plus vite que sur les ondes, que ce soit pour critiquer les dernières réglementations ou pour commenter les prix de la pêche du jour. Écouter les quais permet souvent d'identifier de possibles dysfonctionnements de nos politiques. Or, depuis plusieurs années, et quel que soit le pays de l'Union européenne, on entend partout sur les quais la même rengaine: celle qui raconte que le contrôle des pêches serait moins sévère chez les voisins que chez soi.
               

                  Une rumeur n'a certes jamais signifié qu'il y avait un fond de vérité, mais sa persistance méritait que l'on approfondisse la question. J'ai donc mené l'enquête avec l'appui de mes collègues de la commission de la pêche du Parlement et rédigé, sur cette base, un rapport d'initiative. En effet, ce sentiment d'iniquité dû à l'application différenciée du règlement selon le pays pose la question non seulement de l'efficacité mais aussi de la crédibilité de l'Union européenne. Le règlement est censé s'appliquer à tous et il n'est pas acceptable que ce ne soit pas de manière identique. Le respect de la règle conditionne pourtant les résultats de durabilité et de modernité de l'activité de pêche.
               

                  Dans ce rapport, j'ai souhaité analyser les failles de la réglementation et de son application, failles qui conduisent à ce sentiment d'injustice. Le deuxième objet de ce rapport est de proposer des solutions pour harmoniser le contrôle de la politique commune de la pêche, dont je rappelle qu'elle est censée représenter l'une des politiques les plus intégrées en Europe.
               

                  Je me réjouis bien sûr du travail constructif mené en commission, où la contribution de chacun a permis de dresser un panorama presque complet de la situation du contrôle en Europe. Je remercie bien sûr plus particulièrement les rapporteurs fictifs.
               

                  Ce rapport souligne le caractère caméléon du règlement ‘contrôle’ au sens où, selon la couleur du pays, il s'applique différemment, qu'il s'agisse du champ d'application du règlement de contrôle ou des procédures et des stratégies.
               

                  Ce rapport révèle également que chaque État membre met en place ses propres référentiels de formation des contrôleurs, que les formations des pêcheurs sont disparates et qu'il n'existe d'ailleurs pas toujours de formation au contrôle.
               

                  Le mandat trop limité de l'agence de contrôle des pêches, dont le rôle principal devrait être, justement, d'harmoniser les pratiques, est aussi mis en lumière. Il apparaît donc pertinent de créer une formation européenne des contrôleurs et d'élaborer un référentiel unique en matière de contrôle.
               

                  La formation à destination des pêcheurs devrait également être renforcée. Il convient aussi d'européaniser les procédures et de renforcer le rôle de l'agence de Vigo en augmentant ses moyens et en élargissant son champ d'application.
               

                  Il me semble en outre urgent que les procédures de contrôle soient transparentes et standardisées, et que les différents corps de contrôle se coordonnent au sein d'une même zone géographique.
               

                  Mais le dysfonctionnement le plus grave, c'est que les États membre peuvent transposer différemment la réglementation du fait d'un grand nombre de dispositions facultatives à l'intérieur même du règlement ‘contrôle’ ainsi que de l'inapplicabilité de certaines d'entre elles, ce qui peut mener à une interprétation subjective des contrôleurs.
               

                  Il sera donc incontournable de supprimer les mentions facultatives et de clarifier mais aussi de simplifier la législation communautaire existante lors de la prochaine révision du règlement ‘contrôle’.
               

                  Les procédures juridictionnelles et les sanctions sont, elles aussi, différentes à travers l'Union. Pour une même infraction, la sanction peut être de nature administrative ou pénale. Il apparaît légitime de mettre en œuvre à l'avenir un règlement où la même sanction sera appliquée pour la même infraction et d'introduire des mesures incitatives.
               

                  Par ailleurs, les instruments, outils et moyens financiers utilisés pour réaliser les contrôles varient, eux aussi, d'un État membre à l'autre. D'ailleurs, le point le plus urgent, d'après les contrôleurs que nous avons entendus de tous les pays, concerne les données et la compatibilité des instruments.
               

                  Les bases de données utilisées par les États membres ne font pas toujours l'objet d'un partage, pourtant indispensable à l'évaluation des risques et à la stratégie de contrôle.
               

                  Je terminerai par la question de la plaisance, qui sera mise à l'épreuve durant les votes de cette semaine. Si nous voulons parvenir à l'adéquation entre les droits de pêche et l'état de la ressource halieutique, il est primordial que cette activité aussi soit contrôlée.
               

                  Rappelons que nous sommes à quelques encâblures de la révision du règlement sur le contrôle des pêches annoncée par la Commission. Je ne doute pas que les préconisations adoptées par le Parlement seront prises en compte dans la future proposition.
               

Pytania z sali


Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, I must say I learned an awful lot from listening to the rapporteur, Ms Thomas, and I congratulate her and thank her for what she said, because I have had several queries from fishermen and women in Ireland about the exact issues that she raised. And she explained why it is so: it is because the laws are transposed differently; there are voluntary aspects to it. Training is different for inspectors across Europe; training is different for fishermen; the penalties are different. Now, for what is called a common fisheries policy, that makes absolutely no sense. But it does explain the fact that, in my country at least, many of the fishing communities feel that the inspectorates especially go overboard and that these issues are probably gold-plated at national level. So there is need for harmonisation across Europe, and I think she has put her finger on the exact difficulty we have, and if we do that, then we can have a better and more equal system. I will just give you just one example. Recently dolphins were found dead off the Irish coast with ropes tied onto them, and the feeling is that the big super-trawlers are getting away with it while the smaller people are being pursued.

Ricardo Serrão Santos (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, é realmente importante criar uma estratégia para que o controlo das atividades da pesca na Europa se torne mais eficiente e mais justo. Como realça a relatora, a nossa Colega Isabelle Thomas, e que aproveito para congratular pelo trabalho realizado, há diferenças significativas na abordagem legal e o preço final entre os diversos Estados-Membros e que promovem injustiças e incompreensão.
               

                  Para além da harmonização a nível nacional, há outros instrumentos que poderão parcialmente mitigar este problema. Por exemplo, há que estabelecer propostas formativas com génese na Agenda Europeia de Controlo das Pescas a utilizar pelas pensões nacionais e regionais.
               

                  Parece-me também muito interessante reforçar a utilização de novas tecnologias e a cooperação internacional, incluindo a de países terceiros.
               

                  Por todas estas razões, irei apelar ao voto positivo do relatório proposto e volto a felicitar a relatora.
               

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η διασφάλιση ουσιαστικού ελέγχου των αλιευτικών δραστηριοτήτων είναι προϋπόθεση για την εξασφάλιση μιας βιώσιμης εκμετάλλευσης των θαλάσσιων πόρων, αλλά και για να υπάρξουν ισότιμοι όροι ανταγωνισμού μεταξύ των στόλων της Ένωσης. Προκειμένου να υπάρξει αυτός ο ανταγωνισμός και να διασφαλιστεί η ισότητα στη μεταχείριση των αλιέων, προτείνει η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση τη ρύθμιση ενός κοινού κανονισμού ελέγχου της αλιείας.
               

                  Ωστόσο, σε χώρες όπως η Ελλάδα, όπου οι αλιείς βιώνουν τις συνέπειες του αγροτικού μνημονίου της τρόικας, η Ένωση κάθε άλλο παρά ενισχύει τον αλιευτικό τομέα. Οι φορομπηχτικές πολιτικές, κύριε Vella, που επιβάλλει η Επιτροπή μέσω της τρόικας οδηγούν τους παράκτιους αλιείς στην υποβάθμιση, ενώ ο πρωτογενής τομέας πλήττεται όλο και περισσότερο. Είναι επομένως αναγκαίο η Ένωση να δώσει έμφαση στην ενίσχυση της γαλάζιας οικονομίας, στην αύξηση της χρηματοδότησης στον αλιευτικό τομέα, ενώ σε σχέση με την Ελλάδα, κύριε Vella, θα πρέπει επιτέλους να μπει φραγμός στη φορομπηχτική πολιτική που πλήττει τα εισοδήματα και τα συμφέροντα των αλιέων και τους έχει φτωχοποιήσει.
               

Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, desetljećima slušam kako se međusobno optužujemo na Jadranu. Uglavnom, naravno, mi smo iz Hrvatske vrlo nezadovoljni s onim što su desetljećima radili talijanski ribari, a sada u sjevernom Jadranu je naravno velika gužva, jer imamo i slovenske ribare i hrvatske ribare i talijanske ribare, a ribe je malo, školjaka je malo, more je malo, a potražnja za ribom je vrlo velika.
               

                  Zato podržavam ovo izvješće jer govori o tim problemima na jedan vrlo jasan i otvoren način, o delikatnim temama, jer ribari su, naravno, naša velika briga i definitivno sam siguran da je jedinstvena ribarska politika, a s druge strane i ono što mi želimo učiniti kad govorimo o nadzoru ribarstva, pravi put. Moramo zaštititi ribare, ali moramo zaštititi i ribe da bi ti isti ribari mogli dugo obavljati svoj posao.
               

Davor Škrlec (Verts/ALE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, povjereniče Vella, smatram da je ova tema jako važna zbog toga što zajednička ribarska politika sigurno treba definirati održivi razvoj ribarstva u Europskoj uniji i pogotovo onih država članica koje posjeduju to bogatstvo, ali i tradiciju.
               

                  Tu bih htio skrenuti pažnju na to da zapravo u okviru te zajedničke ribarske politike ne smijemo zaboraviti na to da bi ona zapravo trebala na neki način biti i usmjerena na to da imamo dijelove koji su orijentirani na tradicionalno ribarstvo, koje trenutačno u toj zajedničkoj ribarskoj politici nije prepoznato. Postoje određene kategorije naših ribara koji su upravo tim jednim zajedničkim rješenjem i ugroženi jer im ono zapravo predstavlja egzistenciju, odnosno egzistenciju njihovih obitelji.
               

                  Zbog toga smatram da je jedna zajednička platforma na kojoj treba graditi kontrolu svakako dobrodošla, ali da treba uvažavati i specifičnosti pojedinih država članica koje su već tradicionalno orijentirane na ribarstvo.
               

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, è fondamentale assicurare un controllo efficace delle attività di pesca per garantire uno sfruttamento sostenibile delle risorse biologiche marine e per mantenere condizioni di parità tra le flotte dell'Unione europea. Purtroppo va evidenziato che le diversità dei campi di applicazione dei controlli e i luoghi in cui essi vengono eseguiti determinano di fatto effetti discriminatori relativamente ai controlli. In alcuni Stati membri sono previsti controlli dal peschereccio alla tavola, in altri invece vengono controllati solo alcuni anelli della catena escludendo, ad esempio, il trasporto delle catture o la ristorazione.
               

                  Esistono troppe disposizioni sul controllo delle attività di pesca, al punto che alcune di esse risultano addirittura contraddittorie, così come sono previste troppe deroghe ed eccezioni. Auspicabile sarebbe dunque una semplificazione e rivisitazione del regolamento 1224, al fine di istituire un regime di controllo comunitario per garantire il rispetto delle norme della politica comune della pesca e di migliorare l'attuazione delle norme nei vari Stati membri favorendo innanzitutto una maggiore armonizzazione delle stesse. Congratulazioni alla relatrice, Isabelle Thomas.
               

Ruža Tomašić (ECR). – Gospodine predsjedniče, razgovarajući s ribarima često čujem kako se žale da se njihovo zanimanje kontrolira više no bilo koje drugo. Također, u pojedinim državama članicama kontrole ribarstva su puno strože u odnosu na susjedne države članice.
               

                  Neke članice provode kontrole počevši od ribolovnog alata pa do konzumacije, dok ostale naglasak stavljaju samo na neke dijelove opskrbnog lanca. Potrošači imaju pravo na informacije o podrijetlu hrane. Stoga smatram da bi odgovarajući sustav kontrole poboljšao sljedivost proizvoda ribarstva i povećao razinu povjerenja potrošača.
               

                  Zbog osjećaja nepravde potrebno je uskladiti kontrole ribarstva unutar Europske unije, respektirajući interese i nadležnosti pojedinih država članica. Prisutan osjećaj nepravde u sektoru ribarstva umanjio bi se pojednostavljenjem i poboljšanjem zakonodavstva Unije te smanjenjem postojećeg administrativnog opterećenja.
               

(Koniec pytań z sali)


Karmenu Vella,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, we greatly appreciate the report by Isabelle Thomas and the work of the rapporteur, the shadows and their teams.
Effective fisheries control is indispensable if we want to improve the governance of the oceans and we, the European Union, can only make a credible case for effective controls outside the EU if our own record is clean. Therefore the Commission is now evaluating the regulation on control of fisheries for assessing its implementation and the impact on the common fisheries policy five years after its entry into force. This makes the report very well timed and useful, as it complements the work carried out by the Commission. The findings and recommendations of the report will feed into our own work and will be taken into consideration in conceiving the next actions needed for improving the current system of control of fisheries.
The regulation on control of fisheries, which entered into force in 2010, changed significantly the previous control system, introducing the use of new technologies, a new management system and new principles and obligations. Thanks to this reform, the fishery control system has improved, and this has led to an overall increase in compliance with the common fisheries policy. However, if some good results have been achieved, still more should be done. Preliminary assessment of the regulation on control of fisheries shows that, while there is a good legal framework, improvements can be made, particularly on its implementation by the Member States.
In brief, the report stresses that the different implementation in the Member States and their diverse commitment in its application hinder – as was said by a number of speakers – the level playing field among operators and therefore their confidence in the system and respect of the rules. The implementation by Member States greatly differs in the sanctioning system and control procedures and methods in the management of control, the training of inspectors, technologies and tools used, IT development and data sharing and exchange. All these have been noted.
The principles embedded in the report go very much in the same direction as the Commission's policy. We all recognise that having a uniform and harmonised control system of fisheries contributes to ensuring a level playing field of operators across Europe. This is important, not only in terms of treatment, but in the very end fundamental for ensuring sustainable fishing.
Compliance with the common fisheries policy (CFP) cannot be achieved without awareness and support from fishermen and, in order to achieve this, we need to have their trust and cooperation. We agree with the report on the importance of continuing to fight illegal fishing and to strengthen the quality, completeness and reliability of catch data. We also agree on the underlying need to strengthen collaboration between Member States themselves and also between Member States, the Commission and the European Fisheries Control Agency, including the need to share control data in real time.
The contribution of the European Fisheries Control Agency to the level playing field in the control of fisheries is critical. Their activities and operational coordination, development of standards and training are greatly appreciated by all stakeholders. Compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy is improving. Its enforcement relies on a comprehensive and sound control system with dissuasive, proportionate and effective sanctions applied by Member States.
So effective actions by Member States remain essential. Let me thank you once again for this report and the fruitful discussion. We look forward to further working with the Parliament in a good spirit of cooperation.

Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.
               

Jarosław Wałęsa (PPE),
in writing. – This report was drafted in preparation of the forthcoming Control Regulation. In brief it could be said that controls are part of the regulatory conditions under which the exploitation of the fish resources may be conducted. Therefore it is important to ensure effective controls of fisheries activities in order to guarantee sustainable exploitation of living marine resources and maintain a level playing field among EU fleets. In that context Member States should ensure effective implementation of the Control Regulation. As we know the significant improvement in the control regime has been made thanks to the current legislation in force. That not only proves that European regulations make sense but also are crucial in combating degradation of our environment.
There is one point I truly want to underline: controls should not be intended as a measure where fishers are treated as criminals. The prime function of controls should be to increase compliance to agreed management measures by increasing deterrence and voluntary compliance and thus decreasing violations. A balance between enforcement and voluntary compliance should be achieved for each fishery. Participatory management involving fishers and other interested parties is a key tool required by all fisheries (artisanal, small-scale and commercial) in order to ensure an increase in compliance.
21.   Improving connection and accessibility of transport infrastructure in Central and Eastern Europe (short presentation)

Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia jest debata nad sprawozdaniem sporządzonym przez Tomasza Piotra Porębę w imieniu Komisji Transportu w sprawie usprawnienia połączeń i poprawy dostępności infrastruktury transportowej w Europie Środkowo-Wschodniej (2015/2347(INI)) (A8-0282/2016).
               

Tomasz Piotr Poręba,
sprawozdawca. – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni Państwo! Bardzo się cieszę, jestem bardzo rad, że dzisiaj tu, na forum Parlamentu Europejskiego, mogę przedstawić sprawozdanie dotyczące zwiększenia dostępności komunikacyjnej Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej. Myślę, że wszyscy, jak tutaj na tej sali siedzimy, zgodzimy się, że jeżeli w ostatnich latach – nie ma wątpliwości – doszło do integracji na poziomie politycznym w Unii Europejskiej, to jednak ta integracja na poziomie transportowym wciąż wymaga bardzo dużo wysiłku i pozostawia bardzo dużo do życzenia. To sprawozdanie traktuje właśnie o tym, pozycjonuje, wskazuje najbardziej strategiczne połączenia transportowe: drogowe, kolejowe, lotnicze, które w najbliższych latach Unia Europejska i kraje członkowskie leżące na jej wschodniej flance powinny budować i w które powinny być inwestowane europejskie środki.
               

                  Ale ktoś zada pytanie, jaka powinna być główna idea tego unijnego projektu, jakie kierunki powinny być w sposób szczególny brane pod uwagę? Otóż, w moim przekonaniu, wschodnia flanka wymaga mocnego doinwestowania w transport w kierunkach z północy na południe. To jest strategiczny kierunek, na którym w sposób szczególny powinniśmy się koncentrować. Bo czymże jest zwiększenie dostępności komunikacyjnej? Myślę, że każdy z państwa wie – mówią o tym badania, mówią o tym różne analizy, raporty – że to wzrost konkurencyjności, że to napływ inwestycji zagranicznych, że to wzrost, Drodzy Państwo, poczucia bezpieczeństwa, o czym bardzo często również w moich rozmowach wspominali komisarze Unii Europejskiej. Tak, poczucia bezpieczeństwa na wschodniej flance Unii Europejskiej, bo lepiej skomunikowana, dobrze zorganizowana sieć połączeń, dobrze skomunikowana wschodnia Europa to Europa bezpieczniejsza.
               

                  Jakie najważniejsze szlaki komunikacyjne, w które będziemy inwestować, powinniśmy inwestować w najbliższych latach, pozwoliłem sobie przedstawić w moim sprawozdaniu? Bez wątpienia, Drodzy Państwo, jest to szlak Rail Baltica i Via Baltica, łączący kraje bałtyckie, przez Polskę, z południowym zachodem Europy. Na pewno Via Carpatia – projekt, o który zarówno ja, jak i wielu moich kolegów zabiegamy przez ostatnie lata. To projekt kluczowy dla mieszkańców wschodniej flanki Unii Europejskiej, projekt, który ma szansę przyspieszyć jej rozwój, projekt, który ma szansę dać poczucie bezpieczeństwa mieszkańcom Europy Wschodniej, w tym Polski, w tym mojego regionu Podkarpacia. Mieszkańcy Rzeszowa, Niska, Stalowej Woli, Barwinka, Krosna czekają na tę drogę. Bez tej drogi wyrównanie szans rozwojowych nie będzie możliwe – nie doszlusujemy, nie dołączymy do zachodniej Europy bez tej drogi, bez drogi Via Carpatia.
               

                  Ale w moim sprawozdaniu wskazuję też ważne, istotne połączenia rzeczne, udrożnienie połączeń między Łabą, Odrą i Dunajem, między Dunajem a Renem, wskazuję istotne, ważne, potrzebne w przyszłości do inwestowania kierunki towarowe: Szlak Bursztynowy, szlak jedenasty, który ma wszelkie możliwości usprawnić rozwój i polepszyć rozwój, wymianę handlową między Polską, Węgrami Słowacją czy Słowenią. To są, Drodzy Państwo, te zapisy, które w tym sprawozdaniu się znajdują i które – tak jak powiedziałem – mają strategiczny charakter i taki bardzo, ale to bardzo, przemyślany format uzgodniony w dużej części również zarówno między grupami politycznymi, jak i z Komisją Europejską.
               

                  I na koniec, Drodzy Państwo, chcę podziękować kontrsprawozdawcom, sprawozdawcom z innych grup politycznych, którzy ze mną współpracowali nad tym sprawozdaniem. Jestem bardzo z tej współpracy zadowolony. Myślę, że wspólnie osiągnęliśmy znakomity efekt w postaci tego sprawozdania, które – powtarzam – ma szansę być strategicznym dokumentem na przyszłość dla Unii Europejskiej, jeżeli chodzi o rozwój transportu w jej wschodniej części.
               

Pytania z sali


Andor Deli (PPE). – Mr President, first I would like to thank the rapporteur and the other shadows for the very fruitful cooperation during the preparation of the report. It was evident from the beginning that despite the different political and geographical backgrounds, everybody was focusing on the interests of the CEE region.
The transport infrastructure in Central and Eastern Europe has undergone substantial modernisation with the help of the EU since the accession of the new Member States. Now it is obvious that we need a further boost to improve cross-border connectivity along the north-south direction in order to facilitate job creation and provide economic growth throughout the region, with special attention to projects such as Rail Baltica or Via Carpatia.
Creating viable transport ties will additionally contribute to sustainability and security along the outer borders of the EU towards the east and towards the Western Balkans as well. Finally, it is also essential to exploit synergies in funding between the different financial instruments of the European Union without losing sight of the principle of sustainability.

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, con gli orientamenti TEN-T di un meccanismo per collegare l'Europa sono state gettate le basi per l'attuazione della politica UE in materia di infrastrutture di trasporto per l'arco temporale 2020-2030. Gli Stati membri dell'Unione europea dovranno, dunque, cooperare in maniera proficua per ultimare la rete centrale strategica entro il 2030 e quella globale entro il 2050. Persistono, tuttavia, gravi lacune in termini di accessibilità e connettività delle infrastrutture di trasporto in tutta l'Unione europea centrale e orientale ed è importante risolvere tale problematica in tempi brevi, in particolar modo nelle zone rurali e nelle regioni di confine, cercando di arginare così il progressivo calo della popolazione. Ritengo che i collegamenti di trasporto sostenibili debbono essere intesi come un fattore di promozione della sicurezza e della stabilità del confine orientale dell'Unione europea e dei Balcani occidentali. Per raggiungere gli obiettivi previsti dal TEN-T vanno realizzati i collegamenti mancanti e, conseguentemente, eliminati gli ostacoli per i passeggeri e per le merci.
               

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, θα ήθελα πρώτα απ' όλα να συγχαρώ τον εισηγητή, τον κύριο Poręba, για την εισήγηση την οποία έκανε. Οι μεταφορές αποτελούν βασικό πυλώνα της οικονομίας μας, συνεισφέροντας 548 δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ και εξασφαλίζοντας περισσότερες από 11 εκατομμύρια θέσεις εργασίας. Οι μεταφορές όμως ταυτόχρονα ευθύνονται και για το 25% των εκπομπών αερίων του θερμοκηπίου, με πάνω από το 70% να προέρχεται από τις οδικές μεταφορές. Για τον λόγο αυτό, η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση οδηγείται πλέον σε εναλλακτικές μεταφορές, σε μέσα μαζικής μεταφοράς και ιδίως στον σιδηρόδρομο. Η ενίσχυση των σιδηροδρομικών μεταφορών θα επιφέρει σημαντική μείωση των κλιματικών επιπτώσεων, της ατμοσφαιρικής ρύπανσης, καθώς και των τροχαίων ατυχημάτων. Σύμφωνα με τα τελευταία στατιστικά, πάνω από 26.000 άνθρωποι έχασαν τη ζωή τους στους δρόμους της Ευρώπης το περασμένο έτος, αριθμός που σημειώνει αύξηση για πρώτη φορά μετά το 2001. Επομένως, εκτός από τη δημιουργία νέων υποδομών, η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση πρέπει να επενδύσει στον εκσυγχρονισμό, στην περάτωση των υφιστάμενων υποδομών και στην ενίσχυση των ελέγχων, προκειμένου να μειωθούν τα οδικά ατυχήματα, καθώς και να λάβει μέτρα για τη στήριξη των οδικών μεταφορών και των μεταφορέων.
               

Jasenko Selimovic (ALDE). – Herr talman! Om jag istället för att resa hit från Sverige kom med tåg från min andra hemstad, Sarajevo i Bosnien, skulle denna resa ta 48 timmar. Jag är väldigt tacksam att jag är svensk parlamentariker. Det är extremt mycket enklare att vara det.
               

                  Det här är naturligtvis orimligt. Brist på tåg- och vägförbindelser har skapat stora – enorma – kommunikationsproblem i östra Europa och har hindrat ekonomisk utveckling, skadat jobben, minskat rörligheten av varor, tjänster och människor och skadat turismen, skapat problem med energitillgången och försämrat klimatproblematiken. Därför måste vi göra något åt det.
               

                  Jag är väldigt glad att kommissionen redan har föreslagit ett paket, det är bara att välkomna. Men jag hoppas att det ska komma mer och hoppas att insatserna ska ske snabbt och att pengarna så småningom ska bli fler, så att utvidgningen i östra Europa blir mer omfattande och att uppföljningen sker tillräckligt ofta, så att resor i regionen inte längre känns som en absurditet.
               

Davor Škrlec (Verts/ALE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, koristim priliku zahvaliti izvjestitelju zbog toga što je u svom izvješću zbilja istaknuo vrlo važnu temu koja je za sve države članice i njihove građane jako važna, a to je prometna i transportna infrastruktura. Pogotovo što je istaknuo važnost regionalne željeznice, odnosno povezivanja među državama članicama koje trenutačno nedostaje i što je zapravo jako važno ne samo za promet, nego za razvoj poduzetništva i gospodarstva, odnosno gospodarske suradnje, prekogranične suradnje između tih država.
               

                  Također bih zahvalio što je u svoje izvješće uvrstio i to da treba jačati biciklističku mrežu EuroVelo koja je također jedna dobra alternativa, odnosno slijed prema održivom transportu.
               

                  Vezući se na tu željezničku infrastrukturu, evo osvrnuo bih se na onu interrail kartu koja bi se trebala mladima za 18. rođendan dijeliti da mogu besplatno putovati Europom i vjerujem da će upravo to pokazati kako mladi u jugoistočnoj Europi zapravo nemaju mogućnost da putuju željeznicom jer željeznica praktički postoji, ali željeznica 19. stoljeća.
               

Ruža Tomašić (ECR). – Gospodine predsjedniče, prometno povezivanje srednje i istočne Europe jedan je od najvećih infrastrukturnih izazova s kojima se Europska unija danas suočava.
               

                  Višedesetljetno zanemarivanje ključne prometne infrastrukture u nekadašnjim komunističkim državama, kao i izostanak strateškog planiranja u njihovom prometnom povezivanju sa susjedima zbog izolacionističke prirode bivših režima, ostavili su trag koji moramo izbrisati želimo li ujednačeni razvoj cijele Europske unije.
               

                  Kolega Poreba odradio je sjajan posao s ovim izvješćem i pokazao kako ovaj dom može predvoditi procese koji će dovesti do boljeg povezivanja država članica i lakšeg protoka ljudi i roba. Bez toga, uostalom, nikad nećemo moći iskoristiti sav potencijal jedinstvenog tržišta pa je ovo izvješće iznimno važno i u tom kontekstu.
               

                  Posebno pozdravljam preporuku o uvrštavanju hrvatske luke Rijeka u koridor Baltik – Jadran. Nadam se da će Komisija prepoznati važnost takvog poteza koji je od posebnog interesa i za Hrvatsku i za Europsku uniju.
               

Jozo Radoš (ALDE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, zemlje srednje i istočne Europe se susreću sa sličnim prometnim problemima kao i ostale zemlje Europske unije, samo što su ti problemi još teži. To znači zanemarenost željezničkog prometa, zanemarenost riječnog prometa, pogotovo kada se ima na pameti da Dunav prolazi kroz istočnu Europu i da jedan od koridora Rajna – Dunav prolazi, dakle, kroz istočnu Europu. Da ne spominjem da gotovo niti jedna zračna luka nema priključak na željezničku mrežu.
               

                  Zato sam pozvao zemlje da bolje međusobno surađuju i Komisiju da ih na neki način potiče na bolju suradnju kako bi se njihove razlike premostile i tako Europa bila bolje povezana. Važnost ovoga izvješća je zbog toga što se ono nastavlja na zemlje zapadnog Balkana koje su postale dio te mreže, a njihovo povezivanje će biti prometno povezivanje, što će značiti bolju povezanost s Europom i međusobno bolje razumijevanje.
               

Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, neću govoriti o velikim temama, govorit ću i zahvaliti se što je prihvaćen amandman gospodina Radoša i mene te je na taj način potencijalno sada i riječka luka postala dio mreže TEN-T. To je nešto što je od iznimne važnosti za transport na sjevernom Jadranu.
               

                  Želim govoriti o jednom malom detalju jer te mreže TEN-T završavaju negdje i ponekad dvadeset, pedeset kilometara rješava povijesni problem i zato želim naglasiti problem izolacije u željezničkom prometu grada Pule i istarskog poluotoka, gdje hrvatske željeznice ulaze u slovenske željeznice i nemaju direktni kontakt, nisu teritorijalno povezane. Pula ima plan napraviti morski putnički terminal, ima željezničku luku – idealan intermodalni promet se može stvoriti u ovom trenutku ako uključimo i željezničku liniju u mrežu TEN-T, a radi se o oko osamdeset kilometara.
               

                  Dakle, pozivam vas da razmislite i o tome, da i taj detalj riješimo i da onda imamo cijeli sjeverni Jadran uključen u koridore TEN-T.
               

(Koniec pytań z sali)


Karmenu Vella,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, on behalf of my colleague, Commissioner Violeta Bulc, I would first of all like to congratulate the Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) and specifically the rapporteur, Mr Poręba, on taking the initiative to present this report, which highlights the importance of connectivity across the EU.
The Commission has continuously promoted the improvement of physical connections between the Member States. They are crucial for fostering cohesion, for the proper functioning of the internal market and for generating economic growth and employment. This is the cornerstone of the TEN-T policy framework renewed in 2013. The TEN-T policy and its corridors take into consideration the specific needs of Central and Eastern European states to improve their connection with the rest of Europe.
I would just mention the North Sea-Baltic Corridor that integrates the Rail Baltica project or the Rhine-Danube Corridor that emphasises the development of the Danube. We welcome the report, acknowledging the hard work of the European coordinators in developing their corridors and strongly supporting their efforts. The Commission will continue to concentrate its efforts on the effective delivery of the priorities identified in the TEN-T framework. The process of reviewing this policy framework will start in 2023 only, to allow the stability needed for the corridors to be completed. As experience shows, there is still an unequal development of transport infrastructure across the individual modes, with great priority still being given to roads when allocating national and local public funds. The Commission will therefore continue to prioritise sustainable modes of transport in line with the objectives of our Transport White Paper and our commitment to combating climate change.
We acknowledge the need to continue providing funding support for the development of rail or inland waterways infrastructure in Central and Eastern European Member States. The European Union will continue to support relevant investments through the European Fund for Strategic Investments (ESIF) and the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF). The CEF uptake in the cohesion Member States has been exemplary after the second call. Several national envelopes have already been entirely used. The third call, launched on 13 October, will be an occasion for the other cohesion Member States to fully absorb their respective allocations.
However, since the pipeline of projects is well beyond the possibilities offered by the CEF budget, we welcome the report's call to mobilise further the key players to find additional sources of funding for key projects. We need to keep mobilising Central and Eastern European countries to fully use the potential of the opportunities offered by the Investment Plan for Europe. This is the new way forward for financing the infrastructure projects. We will thus continue to work closely with the EIB on the appropriate geographical coverage of the EFSI.
Finally, the Commission acknowledges the high complexity of the regulatory, administrative and permitting procedures entailed by the implementation of the transport projects. This particularly impacts infrastructure projects with a cross-border dimension. The Commission is therefore currently working on identifying solutions to streamline procedures and facilitate project implementation, thus generating more investment in the transport sector.

Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.
               

Andrea Bocskor (PPE),
írásban. – Csatlakozásuktól kezdve napjainkig az Unió keleti részén fekvő tagállamok közlekedési infrastruktúrája az EU folyamatos segítségével kétségkívül jelentős korszerűsítésen és fejlesztéseken esett át. Ugyanakkor – történelmi és földrajzi okokból – a nyugati tagállamokból érkező, illetve az azokba irányuló összeköttetések újjáépítését célzó projektekre esett a hangsúly. Ezt hivatott megváltoztatni és némiképp ellensúlyozni a tárgyalt jelentés. A kelet-nyugati közlekedési tengely mellett azonban rendkívül fontos az észak-déli összeköttetés fejlesztése, amely elsősorban a közép-kelet-európai tagállamok gazdasági fellendülését eredményezheti. A jelentés egyedülálló a maga nemében, hiszen egységes formában, egy dokumentumban foglalkozik a régión belüli kihívásokkal és a jövőbeni lehetőségekkel a közúti, vasúti, vízi és légi forgalom, valamint az ezek közötti átjárhatóság területén. Magyarország szempontjából jelentős az a tény is, hogy több, hazánkat is érintő lehetőség kiaknázását felveti. Ilyen többek között a Via Carpathia projekt továbbfejlesztése és útvonalának kiépítése az ország keleti felén északról-délre végighaladva, mely kiemelt helyet kapott a dokumentumban. A jelentés ugyancsak kiemeli a tagjelölt országok irányába történő kapcsolatfejlesztést, legyen szó Ukrajnáról vagy a nyugat-balkáni országokról. Az ambiciózus célok eléréséhez szükséges pénzügyi keret biztosítottnak látszik.
               

Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D),
písomne. – Kvalitné dopravné spojenia majú zásadný význam pre podporu podnikania, hospodárskeho rastu a súvisiacu tvorbu pracovných príležitostí. Ide o zvyšovanie kvality života našich občanov. Už roky počúvajú od rôznych vlád napríklad o potrebe dobudovania diaľničnej infraštruktúry. Situácia sa v poslednom čase nepochybne zlepšila. V porovnaní s okolitými štátmi je to však stále nepostačujúce. Nevyhnutná je aj výraznejšia podpora lepšieho vzájomného prepojenia dopravných sietí medzi štátmi V4, ako aj v celom regióne strednej a východnej Európy. Vyžaduje si to zintenzívnenie vzájomnej spolupráce a značné investície. Okrem štrukturálnych a investičných fondov na to Európska únia ponúka viaceré finančné mechanizmy. Tie možno využiť napríklad prostredníctvom Európskej investičnej banky, Európskej banky pre obnovu a rozvoj či Európskeho fondu pre strategické investície. Okrem prepájania cestnej a železničnej dopravnej infraštruktúry či podpory lokálnych letísk má región strednej a východnej Európy výrazný potenciál aj z hľadiska rozvoja vodnej dopravy.
               

Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska (PPE),
na piśmie. – Dostęp do wysokiej jakości połączeń infrastrukturalnych i transportowych ma nie tylko kluczowe znaczenie dla rozwoju gospodarczego Europy i zapewnienia spójności społecznej, ekonomicznej i terytorialnej, ale ma także olbrzymi wpływ na proces budowania idei silnej zjednoczonej Unii Europejskiej oraz dobrze funkcjonującego wspólnego rynku. Dzięki funduszom unijnym w krajach nowej Unii bardzo dużo się zmieniło – infrastruktura transportowa została w olbrzymim stopniu zmodernizowana, a przepływ towarów, ludzi i usług diametralnie się zwiększył. Niemniej jednak ze względu na uwarunkowania historyczne i geograficzne nadal widoczne są ogromne różnice w rozwoju gospodarczym między wschodem a zachodem Europy. Dlatego bardzo istotne jest, abyśmy w planach inwestycyjnych dotyczących wzmacniania nowoczesnego, konkurencyjnego i zasobooszczędnego europejskiego systemu transportowego uwzględnili przygraniczną część wschodniej Europy – zwłaszcza w kontekście zapewnienia dostępu do nowoczesnej infrastruktury kolejowej i drogowej – co pozwoliłoby na przyspieszenie rozwoju, wzrost inwestycyjnej atrakcyjności tego obszaru, spadek bezrobocia na tym terenie, a także wzmocnienie bezpieczeństwa na granicy.
               

                  Dlatego też zwracam się do Komisji Europejskiej, aby w swoich planach w zakresie przyszłej polityki transportowej w większym stopniu uwzględniła Europę Środkowo-Wschodnią.
               

Андрей Новаков (PPE),
в писмена форма. – Трансевропейската транспортна мрежа TEN-T предоставя основна инфраструктура за стимулиране на европейския туризъм. Развитието на туризма в Европа зависи основно от капацитета на държавите членки да инвестират в ифраструктура и в създаване на сигурен и безопасен транспорт за своите туристи. За България, развитието на железопътна и пътна инфраструктура и насърчаването на мултимодалния транспорт са от ключово значение за развитието на туризма. Изграждането на интермодален транспорт за достигане до туристически дестинации ще създаде по-лесен достъп до повече обекти и ще спомогне за по-разнообразна целева група от туристи. Важно е да се таргетират ‘умни инвестиции’, основаващи се на реалистични възможности за финансиране.
               

Claudia Țapardel (S&D),
în scris. – Raportul privind situația infrastructurii și conectivității din Europa Centrală și de Est reprezintă un pas important în direcția îmbunătățirii sistemului de transport la nivel european, recunoscând că există un decalaj semnificativ între estul și vestul continentului. Se trage astfel un semnal de alarmă cu privire la efectele pe care aceste diferențe de dezvoltare le au asupra economiei întregii Uniuni și asupra viitorului politicilor de coeziune. Reprezentând jumătate din Europa, țările din est au nevoie de sprijinul tehnic și financiar al executivului european pentru a facilita implementarea planurilor de infrastructură. De aceea, Comisia trebuie să vină cu o strategie clară pentru Europa Centrală și de Est care să integreze planurile mari de infrastructură, luând în considerare atât discrepanțele de la o regiune la alta, cât și nevoia unei mai bune cooperări între autoritățile naționale și instituțiile de la Bruxelles. Parlamentul European își exprimă sprijinul pentru o astfel de strategie și se recomandă crearea unei linii bugetare pentru infrastructura est europeană și pentru sporirea capacității administrative. Totodată, este necesară utilizarea corespunzătoare a fondurilor structurale și de coeziune. Pe fondul unei absorbții slabe a acestora, solicit ca țări precum România să primească asistență tehnică pentru elaborarea de proiecte și utilizarea instrumentelor financiare.
               

Romana Tomc (PPE),
pisno. – Visokokakovostne prometne povezave so temeljnega pomena za gospodarski razvoj v Evropi in za kakovost življenja evropskih državljanov. Prometna infrastruktura je v večini regij osrednjega in vzhodnega dela EU, v primerjavi z drugimi evropskimi regijami, še vedno manj razvita.
               

                  Povezanost in dostopnost prometne infrastrukture v tem delu pa je eden od ključnih načinov za uresničitev ciljev kohezijske politike. Tudi Slovenija je ena od držav, ki ima še kar nekaj nerešenih izzivov v zvezi z dostopnostjo ter povezanostjo prometne infrastrukture in bi se morala osredotočiti na odpravo vrzeli.
               

                  S tem ne bi omogočili zgolj nemotenega prometa, ampak bi zagotovili tudi nove poslovne priložnosti. Države članice in Komisija bi morale pri izvajanju projektov prometne infrastrukture zagotoviti tudi sinergijo in medsebojno dopolnjevanje sredstev iz instrumenta Connecting Europe, evropskih strukturnih in investicijskih skladov ter instrumentov Evropske investicijske banke in Evropske banke za obnovo in razvoj, da se bosta bistveno izboljšali njihova uporaba in diverzifikacija, saj gre za projekte, ki zahtevajo velike naložbe. Hkrati bi s tem krepili gospodarstvo in ustvarjali nova delovna mesta.
               
22.   One-minute speeches on matters of political importance

Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia są jednominutowe wystąpienia w znaczących kwestiach politycznych (art. 163 Regulaminu).
               

Iuliu Winkler (PPE). – Elnök Úr! Nem csak árvák lehetnek árvák. Ha egy gyermek testi, lelki, szellemi, fizikai integritása veszélyben van, akkor az a gyermek árva. Ebben az esetben egy civil vagy állami szervezetnek segítenie kell rajta.
               

                  ‘Minden gyermeknek joga van, hogy a kortársaival hasonló körülmények között nőjön fel’ – mondta Böjte Csaba atya, a dévai Szent Ferenc Alapítvány vezetője azon a konferencián, amelyet az Európai Parlamentben, Brüsszelben szerveztem meg ‘Jó gyakorlatok a gyermekvédelem és a szociális szolgáltatások területén’ címmel. Mindamellett, hogy a szociális rendszer működtetése tagállami kompetencia, Romániában sürgősen át kell venni az európai jó gyakorlatokat, mert ezek segítségével lehet megoldani azokat a rendellenességeket, amelyekkel az erdélyi magyar civil és egyházi szervezetek küszködnek. Az államnak segíteni, nem pedig akadályozni kell ezek nemes tevékenységét.
               

Tibor Szanyi (S&D). – Mr President, for many people in Europe and all over the world, the company name IronFX became a synonym for fraud. The number of complaints about withdrawal issues against IronFX has escalated over this year as the cyberspace foreign exchange trading company refuses to pay clients' deposits and profits for months. In such cases regulators will typically suspend the licence of the company until the discrepancies are corrected. Although IronFX was fined EUR 350 000 by the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission, it still operates, while the number of ongoing disputes and legal cases against the company continues to grow.
To a previous written question regarding this case, the Commission acknowledged that it had also received several complaints and said that although it does not have investigatory powers, it had asked the Cypriot authorities for more information on the matter. Europe has already seen the results of inadequate consumer protection in the field of financial services. Unfortunately the situation for small investors on the financial market is still particularly vulnerable. Therefore I call on all the authorities concerned, at national and European level, to fully commit themselves to protecting the rights of European consumers and small investors and to launch a detailed investigation into the IronFX case.

Urszula Krupa (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! W czasie debaty o prawach kobiet nie dopuszczono mnie do głosu, dlatego chciałabym w ramach wystąpień jednominutowych jako wieloletni nauczyciel akademicki i lekarz przypomnieć, że poczęte dziecko nie jest częścią ciała kobiety (jak głoszą niektóre panie przedstawicielki narodów Europy, które nie powinny przekazywać na forum Parlamentu Europejskiego nieprawdziwych informacji), kiedy już naukowo udowodniono, że w chwili zapłodnienia wraz połączeniem materiału genetycznego kobiety i mężczyzny powstaje nowy organizm, odmienny genetycznie od matki i od ojca, posiadający inny kod DNA, a nawet inny kolor włosów, skóry czy grupy krwi, a nawet skłonności do niektórych chorób. Dziecko jako odrębna istota ludzka nie jest jakimś nowotworem, który trzeba usunąć jako zagrażający życiu, ale jest potomkiem rodziców, którzy nie mają żadnego prawa decydować o pozbawieniu życia swojego dziecka na jakimkolwiek etapie jego rozwoju.
               

Jozo Radoš (ALDE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, kolegice i kolege, više puta sam naglašavao važnost koju integracija zemalja zapadnog Balkana u Europsku uniju ima za te zemlje, ali i za samu Europsku uniju, i to činim i sada. Uz sve standardne poteškoće koje se vrlo sporo rješavaju, najnoviji događaji ne bude optimizam.
               

                  To je ilegalni referendum koji je proveden u Republici Srpskoj, najava sličnih referenduma uključujući i onaj o odcjepljenju Republike Srpske, zatim nepriznavanje rezultata izbora od dijela opozicije u Crnoj Gori, a naravno ne budi optimizam ni najava druge zajedničke vojne vježbe Srbije i Rusije na teritoriju Srbije.
               

                  Pozdravljam aktivnosti Komisije, posebice povjerenika Hahna i Visoke predstavnice Mogherini, ali jednako tako pozivam Vijeće i Europski parlament na više političkih napora za stabilizaciju prilika na zapadnom Balkanu da taj prostor bude prostor mira i stabilnosti, a ne izvora nestabilnosti za Europu.
               

Maria Lidia Senra Rodríguez (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, na sexta-feira, no início da décima legislatura do Parlamento galego, em Santiago de Compostela, trabalhadoras e trabalhadores de Isolux Corsan e dos bancos Pastor e Popular erguiam a sua voz contra os processos de regulação de emprego que vão deixar sem trabalho 500 pessoas na Galiza e mais de 3 400 no Estado espanhol. Isto contradiz as promessas repetidas do Sr. Juncker, nesta Câmara, em relação a reduzir o desemprego.
               

                  Pedimos à Comissão Europeia e a este Parlamento que intervenha para pôr fim aos abusos das empresas amparadas pelas reformas laborais e para que ponham em prática medidas para acabar com estas situações graves e injustas e totalmente injustificadas que destroem emprego, aumentam o risco de pobreza e exclusão social e aumentam também a precariedade laboral. No Estado espanhol, nesta altura, uma em cada cinco pessoas trabalhadoras recebe menos de 300 euros.
               

Marcellesi, Florent (Verts/ALE). – Señor Presidente, Señorías, me gustaría dar las gracias a Valonia. A pesar de las presiones de la Comisión Europea, soy la voz de millones de personas en Europa que no aceptamos acuerdos comerciales que estén por encima de la democracia, de nuestros derechos y del planeta, como es el caso del CETA (AECG) entre Europa y Canadá.
               

                  Además, lo confieso, envidio a Valonia, una región donde quien decide sobre el CETA es su Parlamento. Porque en España quien ha firmado el CETA ha sido un Gobierno en funciones, sin ningún debate democrático en nuestro Congreso.
               

                  Además, un Gobierno con doble rasero: mientras firma el CETA, se declara incompetente para ratificar el unánime Acuerdo sobre el Clima de París. No es extraño. El CETA aumentaría radicalmente las emisiones de CO2. Así las cosas, no se puede estar al mismo tiempo a favor del CETA y del clima, a favor de las multinacionales y de la gente, servir a los mercados y a la democracia.
               

Margot Parker (EFDD). – Mr President, 10 000 migrant children are missing in Europe, say Europol. Many are in the hands of criminal gangs and traffickers, and it is the free movement of people that facilitates victims being moved across borders. Much more needs to be done and, of course, UKIP wants to help the vulnerable children at risk in Calais. But the pictures we initially saw of very mature-looking adults being brought into Britain really shows how little the Tories care about public feeling towards open-door immigration. Was it too much to ask to bring in actual young girls and boys, to help them and to reassure the British public? Clearly, the British Prime Minister does not want to control immigration or to have proper checks. Last year, a government report stated that nearly 100 000 children in the UK were in temporary housing after being made homeless. The Tories should put the needs of our own children first before opening the door to the rest of the world. Only UKIP will get control of our borders in a fair and ethical way.

Gilles Lebreton (ENF). – Monsieur le Président, après le Brexit, l'Union européenne n'est plus qu'un tigre de papier auquel les peuples et les nations résistent ouvertement. Le peuple hongrois dit ‘non!’ à sa politique de répartition des migrants. Les peuples français et allemands paralysent les négociations du TAFTA. C'est aujourd'hui au tour de la Wallonie – trois millions d'habitants – de jouer le village d'Astérix en bloquant l'adoption du CETA. Elle bloque cet accord parce qu'elle ne veut pas du libre-échange mondialisé et inhumain qu'il incarne. Elle le bloque parce qu'elle ne veut pas que, demain, les multinationales puissent attaquer les États devant un tribunal de quinze juges ultralibéraux qui seront à leur solde.
               

                  J'exprime mon soutien au peuple wallon qui incarne, en la circonstance, l'âme de la liberté européenne. L'ogre européen a dévoilé sa nature totalitaire en méprisant sa résistance et en lui adressant un ultimatum. Tenez bon, amis wallons! Face à l'Union européenne, vous faites revivre l'esprit des Grecs de l'Antiquité qui repoussèrent l'assaut de l'Empire perse.
               

Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, 2016 could well be remembered as the year of the populist, or maybe I should say the year of the destroyer, because there is not much difference between populism, as we see it, and destruction.
Brexit is an example: the motivating factor was to destroy the European Union and give the United Kingdom supposedly back its sovereignty. The result: sterling has dropped 18%; inflation on the rise; companies either leaving or planning to leave the United Kingdom; in my country, the threat to the peace process, which has been underwritten by the European institutions for so many years. The same is happening in America, with Mr Trump and his populism, talking about banning Mexicans and Islamists and building walls, appealing to the lowest common denominator.
Even here in Europe, we have it with CETA: the best trade agreement ever done, with one of the finest democracies in the world, and we cannot get through a local parliament, based again on unfounded fears. It is time to end populism.

Момчил Неков (S&D). – Г-н Председател, преговорите по CETA с Канада бяха приключени преди повече от две години. За това време Европейската комисия получи ясен сигнал от европейците, че механизми като арбитражните съдилища, съществуващи в сегашния си вид, не са приемливи.
               

                  Въпреки това обаче пак пред нас стои същият този механизъм в същата тази форма, нежелана от европейците. Със своето решение от миналата седмица валонският парламент се оказа единственият, който се вслушва в искането на своите граждани, и това е похвално.
               

                  Канада е петият най-голям производител на ГМО храни в света. В тази реалност на свободна търговия това ще доведе до навлизането на ГМО продукти и суровини без знанието и желанието на европейците.
               

                  Канада още продължава да изисква и дискриминира мои съграждани, що се касае до визите. Безотговорно е, ако страната, чиито граждани пътуват безвизово в целия Европейски съюз и която иска задълбочаване на отношенията си с Европа, обвързва безвизовия режим с подписване на СЕТА.
               

                  И от тази гледна точка призовавам българския премиер да не подписва споразумението с Канада.
               

Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-н Председател, поводът за това изказване е поредната провокация, извършена от турския президент Реджеп Таип Ердоган. Освен че непрекъснато провокира българската държавна граница с нелегални емигранти, които напоследък откриваме и във влакови товарни композиции, г-н Ердоган произнесе за втори път една реч, с която пряко заяви териториални претенции към държави, които са членки на Европейския съюз и НАТО. Говорим за Република България и Република Гърция.
               

                  Поименно бяха споменати градовете Кърджали и Солун, които са част от териториите на България и на Гърция. Ердоган спомена, че не можел да говори със сърцето си и да не прави разлика между Одрин, Кърджали, Солун, Скопие и други градове. Това за нас е непреодолима, невъзможна териториална претенция. Ние остро възразяваме на това поведение и се чудя защо другите колеги от останалите групи не осъждат тези преки териториални претенции. Това поведение на турския диктатор е още един повод на кажем, че Турция няма място в Европейския съюз, защото не е европейска държава.
               

Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, želim upozoriti Komisiju na alarmantno stanje u pojedinim zemljama zapadnog Balkana. Nezakoniti referendum u Bosni i Hercegovini, pokušaj državnog udara u Crnoj Gori, odnosi između Crne Gore zbog stanja na Kosovu i zbog onoga što opozicija čini na Kosovu, da ne govorimo o stanju u FYROM-u, odnosno u Makedoniji.
               

                  Međutim, to nije sve. Imamo problem na zapadnom Balkanu gdje jedna članica Europske unije, Slovenija, u ovom trenutku iz njoj poznatih razloga, ponovno diže zid, žicu prema Hrvatskoj, odnosno na hrvatsko-slovenskoj granici. Hrvatska prema Srbiji i prema Bosni i Hercegovini nije dizala zid, nije dizala žicu, niti za vrijeme prošle lijeve vlade niti namjerava sada prema najnovijim izjavama koje smo čuli od vladinih predstavnika.
               

                  Pitam se je li Komisija svjesna da je to dodatno dolijevanje ulja na vatru na takozvanu zapadnobalkansku migrantsku rutu, na jedan potpuno neprihvatljiv način.
               

Marina Albiol Guzmán (GUE/NGL). – Señor Presidente, la semana pasada, en el CIE de Aluche, en Madrid, treinta y nueve personas se rebelaban contra su encarcelamiento. Esta semana, decenas de personas se han puesto en huelga de hambre en el CIE de Barcelona pidiendo su libertad.
               

                  En los CIE, las condiciones de vida son inhumanas, pero creo que hoy no toca exigir, aquí, que les pongan letrinas en la celda para que no tengan que cagar y mear en bolsas por la noche; no toca pedir que no haya violencia sexual contra las internas; o que no se les deje morir como sucedió con Samba Martine. Y no lo vamos a hacer porque no queremos unos CIE en mejores condiciones: simplemente, no queremos CIE.
               

                  Son cárceles en las que se encierra a personas que no han cometido ningún delito. Simplemente están ahí por no tener papeles, porque esta Europa ha decidido que no tienen nombre y que su único apellido es el de ‘ilegal’. Están encerradas por una falta administrativa; están encerradas porque no murieron en el Mediterráneo; porque no fueron deportadas a Turquía o porque no se las devolvió en caliente en Melilla.
               

                  Solo hay una cosa que se debe hacer con los CIE: cerrarlos, para siempre.
               

Eleonora Evi (EFDD). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, buonasera Commissario Vella, sono contenta che sia qui questa sera perché vorrei parlare di accesso alla giustizia ambientale, partire da un caso concreto. Il 5 ottobre il tribunale amministrativo della regione Lombardia ha dichiarato inammissibile il ricorso dell'associazione cittadini Zibido San Giacomo contro un provvedimento che autorizza la costruzione di un pozzo per l'esplorazione di idrocarburi. Il giudice ha eccepito l'inammissibilità del ricorso per difetto di interesse e di legittimazione attiva, contestando il carattere occasionale dell'associazione e il fatto che essa non appare rappresentativa della comunità locale. Questo approccio riprende un orientamento giurisprudenziale piuttosto stringente. Tuttavia, omette ogni riferimento ai requisiti previsti dalla legge italiana che le associazioni devono soddisfare per ottenere uno standing davanti alla Corte. Pertanto, io mi chiedo, e vi chiedo, e le chiedo Commissario, quale spazio riconosciamo alle istanze ambientaliste che vengono dal basso e l'accesso alla giustizia ambientale in Europa è veramente garantito, perché evidentemente in Italia, ad oggi non è così.
               

Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Pane předsedající, v záplavě aktuálních zpráv bychom neměli zapomínat na dlouhodobé výzvy, proto chci připomenout, že za dva dny, 27. října, je den, který je organizací UNESCO věnovaný audiovizuálnímu kulturnímu dědictví. Toto dědictví má pro nás obrovskou hodnotu jak uměleckou v případě filmů, tak historickou v případě záznamů o událostech 20. století. Tyto materiály ale podléhají zkáze a jejich ochrana, archivace a kvalitní digitalizace by měla být tedy pro nás důležitou prioritou. Na jejich ochranu bychom neměli zapomínat.
               

                  V současné době v Evropském parlamentu projednáváme revizi směrnice o audiovizuálních službách, v rámci které řešíme také podporu evropských děl. Chceme zvýšit zastoupení evropské tvorby pro poskytovatele audiovizuálních služeb také na vyžádání, nejen pro rozhlas a televizi. A to z 10 na 20 %. Myslíme si, že je naší povinností nastavit pravidla tak, abychom v Evropě podpořili a motivovali tvůrce ke vzniku kvalitních audiovizuálních děl, která budou tradičními pokračovateli v bohatém evropském kulturním dědictví.
               

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, da una recente analisi dell'Osservatorio nazionale sulla salute delle regioni italiane emerge il triste primato della Campania come regione con l'aspettativa di vita più bassa d'Italia: ben due anni in meno rispetto alla vita media nazionale. Le cause principali di questo triste fenomeno sono da rinvenirsi nell'enorme diffusione dell'obesità infantile, nelle emergenze ambientali e negli scarsi investimenti in assistenza sanitaria, spesso legati a sperequazioni economiche esistenti tra le varie regioni italiane. Ma in Campania si registra anche la spesa sanitaria pro capite più bassa d'Italia a causa di un assurdo criterio di ripartizione del fondo sanitario nazionale basato sull'età media della popolazione regionale, che premia le regioni con un'età media più elevata e penalizza fortemente la Campania, ovvero la regione più giovane d'Italia. Un vero e proprio paradosso. Chiedo alla Commissione di avviare un programma di monitoraggio permanente per le aree europee a maggior rischio di esclusione, coinvolgendo il Parlamento e gli organi competenti degli Stati membri, così da consentire il miglior coordinamento possibile di tutti i soggetti chiamati a intervenire per l'attuazione di efficaci politiche integrate nelle aree depresse.
               

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η κατάσταση στα ‘hotspots’ των νησιών του Αιγαίου έχει φτάσει στο απροχώρητο. Οι συγκρούσεις μεταξύ των προσφύγων και των παράνομων μεταναστών είναι πλέον στην ημερήσια διάταξη. Αυτή τη στιγμή έχουν εγκλωβιστεί στα νησιά του Αιγαίου πάνω από 14.000 πρόσφυγες και παράνομοι μετανάστες. Ταυτόχρονα, η Τουρκία υποθάλπει τη λειτουργία δουλεμπορικών κυκλωμάτων που φέρνουν πρόσφυγες όχι μόνο στα νησιά του Αιγαίου αλλά και στον Έβρο, στη Θράκη. Στο πρόσφατο Ευρωπαϊκό Συμβούλιο υπήρξε πλήρης αποτυχία να δοθεί λύση στο προσφυγικό και να απαλλαγεί η Ελλάδα από το άχθος των χιλιάδων προσφύγων που κατακλύζουν κάθε γωνιά της χώρας. Από τις 66.400 μετεγκαταστάσεις προσφύγων που υποτίθεται ότι θα πραγματοποιούνταν από την Ελλάδα στις χώρες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, έχουν γίνει εδώ και ένα χρόνο μόνο 5.200. Πού θα πάει αυτή η κατάσταση; Πότε θα αρχίσει η δρομολόγηση των 6.000 μετεγκαταστάσεων μηνιαίως; Η φτωχοποιημένη Ελλάδα δεν αντέχει πλέον άλλους πρόσφυγες και παράνομους μετανάστες, δεν αντέχει τα παιχνίδια του σουλτάνου, δεν ανέχεται την προκλητικότητα της Τουρκίας, δεν ανέχεται την αδιαφορία των Βρυξελλών και την υποκρισία των δήθεν εταίρων μας.
               

Jasenko Selimovic (ALDE). – Herr talman! Innan den rättsvidriga folkomröstningen i Bosnien hotade EU-representanter med sanktioner mot de politiker som driver folkomröstningen. Kommissionärerna Mogherini och Hahn tyckte att folkomröstningen utmanar Bosniens suveränitet och integritet. Flera medlemsländer fördömde det också. Men sedan genomförde man folkomröstningen ändå, trots allt.
               

                  Och hur blev då EU:s reaktion? Blev det några sanktioner? Blev det några konsekvenser, några straff som man har hotat med? Ingenting.
               

                  Det enda som man kom överens är uttalandet från rådet, där man beklagar denna folkomröstning. Beklagar! Som om det vore en detalj. En felsägning. Man driver landet till splittring och rådet beklagar det?
               

                  Hotar man med något och sedan inte genomför det förlorar man auktoritet och skickar en signal om att man kan strunta i vad EU säger. Det är precis vad som har hänt. Separatistvågen sveper över Bosnien och hotar landets europeiska framtid, men EU tittar på.
               

                  Min fråga till kommissionären är: Kommer kommissionen att agera innan det blir för sent?
               

Martina Anderson (GUE/NGL). – Mr President, there is one thing for sure after today's Downing Street meeting: there is nothing united about the Kingdom. It is potentially breaking up from inside out.
The Good Friday Agreement was voted overwhelmingly by 90% of the people of Ireland in two referendums. The Irish Government repealed Articles 2 and 3 of its Constitution, letting go of its territorial right to the north of Ireland, and the British Government fully repealed the Government of Ireland Act, which was the Act that had partitioned Ireland. As co-guarantors of the Good Friday Agreement, the two Member States – the two governments – built into the Good Friday Agreement the principle of consent.
Well, the people in the north of Ireland did not give their consent to be dragged out of the EU. Fifty-six percent of the people voted to remain and the British Government is telling us that is going to lead the process of negotiations, that it will be between it and the EU and no one else, and the rest of us will do as we are bid. I don't think so, Theresa! What we are saying to the EU is that you have invested politically, financially and economically into the peace process in the north of Ireland; do not abandon the people of the north of Ireland or the peace process.

Ignazio Corrao (EFDD). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, voglio leggervi, colleghi, alcuni numeri riguardanti un'importante regione d'Italia e d'Europa che tutti conoscete, la Sicilia: ci sono 780 milioni di euro del FESR 2007-2013 non ancora certificati, il 56% di disoccupazione giovanile, 8.000 richieste di esecuzione di sfratto, 10.000 abitanti che lasciano l'isola ogni anno, 4.673 chiusure di attività commerciali, 500 euro per un volo per la Sicilia da Milano, in pratica di più che andare in Giappone da Milano. Per rimettere in cammino la Sicilia ci si dovrebbe occupare in maniera seria di questi numeri che ho appena elencato, programmando nel migliore dei modi e utilizzando in modo efficace tutte le risorse disponibili. Invece, in una situazione del genere, le proposte del governo regionale e nazionale sono a dir poco esilaranti: si propone come soluzione all'isolamento la costruzione del ponte sullo Stretto, opera dai costi allucinanti che piuttosto che unire due coste unirebbe, così come dice don Ciotti, due cosche con una terza magari composta da élite colletti bianchi pronti a trarne altro vantaggio economico. Bisogna monitorare e rispettare i diritti dei siciliani.
               

Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu (S&D). – Mulțumesc, domnule președinte, în 1921 se înființa, la București, Institutul de seruri și vaccinuri Ioan Cantacuzino, un centru științific ce a jucat un rol extrem de important în sănătatea românilor. Zeci de generații au primit imunitate în fața bolilor prin vaccinurile preparate la Institutul Cantacuzino, cunoscute și apreciate în întreaga lume. La nivelul Uniunii Europene, Institutul Cantacuzino face parte din rețeaua strategică de care depinde reacția promptă a Europei în fața unei epidemii generalizate sau a unui atac cu arme biologice.
               

                  Stimați colegi, după 95 de ani, Institutul Cantacuzino trage să moară, cauzele fiind managementul defectuos, lipsa de interes a actualului guvern și interesele afacerilor imobiliare. Ridic problema în fața dumneavoastră pentru că trebuie găsită o soluție împotriva unui dezastru previzibil care, în cazul unei pandemii continentale, îi poate pune atât pe români, cât și pe ceilalți europeni într-o situație fără ieșire. Simt că nu aș onora cum se cuvine profesia mea de medic, dar nici pe medicii specialiști ce activează în Cantacuzino, dacă aș trece cu vederea dezastrul desființării Institutului Cantacuzino. Acest eveniment trebuie oprit, pentru a preveni consecințe dezastruoase pe viitor și vă rog să mă susțineți în demersul meu de a explica actualului guvern consecințele acestui faliment.
               

Xabier Benito Ziluaga (GUE/NGL). – Señor Presidente, imagínense por un segundo un gasoducto debajo de la Torre Eiffel, o un gasoducto atravesando el Coliseo romano. ¿Se lo imaginan? Yo no. Y mucha gente tampoco.
               

                  Al igual que no nos imaginamos la extracción y el almacenamiento de gas debajo del Parque Nacional de Doñana. Pero Gas Natural sí se lo imagina. Y para ello cuenta con el visto bueno del Gobierno de España, que para eso da futuro a ex ministros del PP y del PSOE, como el otra vez famoso Felipe González.
               

                  Doñana es patrimonio de la humanidad. Y Doñana forma parte de la red de espacios protegidos de la Unión Europea. Protéjanlo, Señorías. Alberga especies únicas, como el lince ibérico, y es clave para la economía de 200 000 personas de la región.
               

                  Pedimos desde aquí a las instituciones europeas que no se duerman —que cada día cuenta—, que detengan ya las obras ilegales de Doñana, al menos de manera cautelar, hasta que se concluya el informe de impacto medioambiental íntegro —como manda la ley— y se evalúen las alternativas al almacenamiento de gas en el subsuelo de Doñana, que existen.
               

Andrejs Mamikins (S&D). – Godātie kolēģi! Pamatojoties uz lūgumrakstu, kuru parakstījuši vairāk nekā 20 000 Latvijas un Igaunijas iedzīvotāju, Eiropas Parlamenta Lūgumrakstu komiteja nākamā gada janvārī organizēs speciālu noklausīšanos, kur viena no galvenajām tēmām būs tā saucamo Igaunijas un Latvijas nepilsoņu stāvoklis. Tie ir cilvēki, lielākā daļa no kuriem visu mūžu nodzīvojuši šajās valstīs un pat tur piedzima.
               

                  Jau ceturtdaļu gadsimta gandrīz 15 % no Latvijas iedzīvotājiem un 8 % no Igaunijas iedzīvotājiem nav tiesību piedalīties vēlēšanās, tai skaitā arī Eiropas Parlamenta vēlēšanās. Lūgumrakstā tiek ietverts aicinājums izbeigt netaisnību pret šiem cilvēkiem, ļaujot tiem vismaz balsot Eiropas Parlamenta vēlēšanās.
               

                  Eiropas Parlaments beidzot ir vismaz sācis ievērot nekārtību pašmājās, jo nesen apspriestie tiesiskuma pārkāpumu jautājumi Ungārijā un Polijā ir radījuši precedentu. Līdz ar to ir laiks uzsākt nopietnu diskusiju Eiropā arī par Latvijas un Igaunijas nepilsoņiem.
               

Emilian Pavel (S&D). – Vă mulțumesc, domnule președinte, stimați colegi, permiteți-mi să încep prin a felicita din Parlamentul European succesul în cadrul EU Code Week 2016 de săptămâna trecută a uneia dintre cele mai bune școli din România. Este vorba despre Colegiul Național Emanuil Gojdu din Oradea, al cărui absolvent sunt și eu. Într-o singură săptămână, aproape toți elevii acestui liceu, peste o mie la număr, au participat la activitățile de coding organizate de catedra de informatică. Felicitări, dragi elevi, felicitări, dragi profesori. Code Week 2016 este o acțiune desfășurată la nivel european, anul acesta în perioada 15-23 octombrie. Ea promovează importanța dezvoltării abilităților digitale și a cunoștințelor de coding, indiferent de vârstă. Știm cu toții, deja, că abilitățile digitale vor deveni la un moment dat obligatorii pentru oricine va dori să se integreze cu succes pe piața muncii. Împreună cu abilitățile necesare însă în secolul al XXI-lea, precum spiritul de inițiativă, gândirea analitică sau creativitatea, cunoștințele de coding reprezintă o nouă alfabetizare. Îi rog pe toți colegii deputați și pe alți politicieni europeni din tot sufletul să încurajeze astfel de inițiative.
               

Julie Ward (S&D). – Mr President, I have just returned from a fact-finding mission in Turkish Kurdistan where I talked to communities living in a climate of fear and repression in Diyarbakir, Mardin and on the border with Syria. I saw the terrible state-sponsored destruction of the historic district of Sur, where dozens of young Kurds burned to death in basements. I talked to bereaved mothers in Nusaybin whose sons and daughters had perished because of the state's attacks on its own citizens, their bodies torn apart, impossible to identify. Many are still missing. I met the distraught families of teachers whose loved ones have been sacked, intimidated and imprisoned for attending union meetings. I met democratically elected politicians – many of them women like myself – but who have been stripped of office due to trumped up charges because of their Kurdish identity and their political affiliation. I met Yazidi refugees cared for, not by the state, but by the Kurdish community, all wondering when the world will remember them.
Independent media is being silenced and shut down in Turkey, and journalists and academics arrested, tried and imprisoned. The country is in the grip of a terrible dictatorial man. Erdogan is messing with democracy because he is afraid of democracy. The June elections proved that there is a multiplicity of voices in Turkey and many of these belong to diverse ethnic groups and progressive forces. It is time for the EU to recognise the true reality of the Turkish State and demand human rights norms for everyone.

Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Mulțumesc, domnule președinte. În anul 2019, România va deține președinția Consiliului Uniunii Europene. Acest moment este unul important, pentru că, pentru o perioadă, țara mea va putea să stabilească agenda europeană. În lumina interesului din ce în ce mai mare purtat viitorului Republicii Moldova, reiterez speranța mea ca anul 2019 să devină momentul în care vor începe negocierile de aderare la Uniunea Europeană. Nu este vorba despre simple intenții, ci despre ținte care se pot materializa cu un efort mare și multă muncă la nivelul guvernului și societății din Republica Moldova. De aceea, sunt bucuros că Partidul Social Democrat a propus pe locul întâi pentru Camera Deputaților la alegerile parlamentare care vor avea loc în luna decembrie un tânăr medic stomatolog din Republica Moldova, coordonator al ‘PES activists diaspora’, pe domnul Veaceslav Șaramet. Prin exemple pozitive, prin acțiuni ferme pro-europene, putem face ca viața cetățenilor din România și Republica Moldova să fie mai bună, iar legăturile care ne unesc să fie mai strânse ca niciodată și, de ce nu, în Uniunea Europeană.
               

(Aplauze)


Przewodniczący. – Zamykam dyskusję nad tym punktem porządku dnia.
               
23.   Agenda for next sitting: see Minutes
24.   Closure of the sitting

(Posiedzenie zostało zamknięte o godz. 22.55)



ELI: 
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)