Verbatim report of proceedings of 27 April 2017
Date: 2017-04-27
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, parliamentary debate








C_202402797EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series














25.4.2024







            27 April 2017
            VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF 27 APRIL 2017
            
         
(C/2024/2797)

Contents







1.

Opening of the sitting
7










2.

Situation in Venezuela (motions for resolutions tabled): see Minutes
7










3.

Annual report on the control of the financial activities of the European Investment Bank for 2015 — Annual report on the financial activities of the European Investment Bank (debate)
7










4.

State of play of the second review of the economic adjustment programme for Greece (debate)
24










5.

Voting time
43










5.1.

Request for waiver of the immunity of António Marinho e Pinto (A8-0163/2017 - Gilles Lebreton)
44










5.2.

EU trade mark (A8-0054/2017 - Tadeusz Zwiefka)
44










5.3.

Minamata Convention on Mercury (A8-0067/2017 - Stefan Eck)
44










5.4.

Hybrid mismatches with third countries (A8-0134/2017 - Olle Ludvigsson)
44










5.5.

Agreement on Operational and Strategic Cooperation between Denmark and Europol (A8-0164/2017 - Agustín Díaz de Mera García Consuegra)
44










5.6.

Nomination of a member of the Court of Auditors – Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz (A8-0166/2017 - Indrek Tarand)
44










5.7.

Annual report on the control of the financial activities of the European Investment Bank for 2015 (A8-0161/2017 - Nedzhmi Ali)
44










5.8.

Structural Reform Support Programme for 2017-2020 (A8-0374/2016 - Lambert van Nistelrooij, Constanze Krehl)
44










5.9.

European Year of Cultural Heritage (A8-0340/2016 - Mircea Diaconu)
44










5.10.

Union programme to support specific activities in the field of financial reporting and auditing (A8-0291/2016 - Theodor Dumitru Stolojan)
45










5.11.

Union programme to enhance the involvement of consumers in financial services policy making (A8-0008/2017 - Philippe Lamberts)
45










5.12.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Commission and executive agencies (A8-0150/2017 - Joachim Zeller)
45










5.13.

Discharge 2015: Court of Auditors' special reports in the context of the 2015 Commission discharge (A8-0160/2017 - Joachim Zeller)
45










5.14.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget - 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th EDFs (A8-0125/2017 - Younous Omarjee)
45










5.15.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Parliament (A8-0153/2017 - Dennis de Jong)
45










5.16.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Council and Council (A8-0131/2017 - Bart Staes)
46










5.17.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Court of Justice (A8-0136/2017 - Benedek Jávor)
46










5.18.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Court of Auditors (A8-0151/2017 - Benedek Jávor)
46










5.19.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Economic and Social Committee (A8-0144/2017 - Bart Staes)
46










5.20.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget – Committee of the Regions (A8-0141/2017 - Bart Staes)
46










5.21.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European External Action Service (A8-0122/2017 - Benedek Jávor)
46










5.22.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Ombudsman (A8-0142/2017 - Benedek Jávor)
46










5.23.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Data Protection Supervisor (A8-0140/2017 - Bart Staes)
46










5.24.

Discharge 2015: Performance, financial management and control of EU agencies (A8-0149/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
46










5.25.

Discharge 2015: Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) (A8-0147/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
46










5.26.

Discharge 2015: Office of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) (A8-0143/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
46










5.27.

Discharge 2015: Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union (CdT) (A8-0075/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
46










5.28.

Discharge 2015: European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) (A8-0145/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
47










5.29.

Discharge 2015: European Police College (CEPOL) (A8-0081/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
47










5.30.

Discharge 2015: European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (A8-0087/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
47










5.31.

Discharge 2015: European Asylum Support Office (EASO) (A8-0093/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
47










5.32.

Discharge 2015: European Banking Authority (EBA) (A8-0079/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
47










5.33.

Discharge 2015: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) (A8-0082/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
47










5.34.

Discharge 2015: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (A8-0086/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
47










5.35.

Discharge 2015: European Environment Agency (EEA) (A8-0085/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
47










5.36.

Discharge 2015: European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) (A8-0100/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
47










5.37.

Discharge 2015: European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (A8-0098/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
47










5.38.

Discharge 2015: European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) (A8-0106/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
47










5.39.

Discharge 2015: European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) (A8-0101/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
47










5.40.

Discharge 2015: European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) (A8-0127/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
48










5.41.

Discharge 2015: European Medicines Agency (EMA) (A8-0084/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
48










5.42.

Discharge 2015: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) (A8-0099/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
48










5.43.

Discharge 2015: European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) (A8-0130/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
48










5.44.

Discharge 2015: European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA) (A8-0115/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
48










5.45.

Discharge 2015: European Railway Agency (ERA) (A8-0128/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
48










5.46.

Discharge 2015: European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) (A8-0124/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
48










5.47.

Discharge 2015: European Training Foundation (ETF) (A8-0118/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
48










5.48.

Discharge 2015: European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice (eu-LISA) (A8-0105/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
48










5.49.

Discharge 2015: European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA) (A8-0116/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
48










5.50.

Discharge 2015: Euratom Supply Agency (ESA) (A8-0126/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
48










5.51.

Discharge 2015: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) (A8-0111/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
48










5.52.

Discharge 2015: European Union's Judicial Cooperation Unit (Eurojust) (A8-0129/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
49










5.53.

Discharge 2015: European Police Office (Europol) (A8-0107/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
49










5.54.

Discharge 2015: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) (A8-0146/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
49










5.55.

Discharge 2015: European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (Frontex) (A8-0137/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
49










5.56.

Discharge 2015: European GNSS Agency (GSA) (A8-0148/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
49










5.57.

Discharge 2015: Bio-based Industries Joint Undertaking (BBI) (A8-0103/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
49










5.58.

Discharge 2015: Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking (A8-0094/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
49










5.59.

Discharge 2015: ECSEL Joint Undertaking (A8-0113/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
49










5.60.

Discharge 2015: Fuel Cells and Hydrogen 2 Joint Undertaking (FCH) (A8-0109/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
49










5.61.

Discharge 2015: Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking (IMI) (A8-0083/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
49










5.62.

Discharge 2015: ITER Joint Undertaking (A8-0108/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
49










5.63.

Discharge 2015: SESAR Joint Undertaking (A8-0096/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
49










5.64.

Management of fishing fleets in the outermost regions (A8-0138/2017 - Ulrike Rodust)
49










5.65.

EU flagship initiative on the garment sector (A8-0080/2017 - Lola Sánchez Caldentey)
50










5.66.

State of play of farmland concentration in the EU: how to facilitate the access to land for farmers (A8-0119/2017 - Maria Noichl)
50










5.67.

Annual report on the financial activities of the European Investment Bank (A8-0121/2017 - Georgios Kyrtsos)
50










5.68.

Implementation of the Mining Waste Directive (A8-0071/2017 - György Hölvényi)
50










5.69.

Situation in Venezuela (RC-B8-0270/2017, B8-0270/2017, B8-0271/2017, B8-0272/2017, B8-0274/2017, B8-0275/2017, B8-0276/2017, B8-0277/2017)
50










5.70.

Objection to a delegated act: Scheme of generalised tariff preferences (B8-0273/2017)
50










6.

Explanations of vote
50










6.1.

Annual report on the control of the financial activities of the European Investment Bank for 2015 (A8-0161/2017 - Nedzhmi Ali)
50










6.2.

Structural Reform Support Programme for 2017-2020 (A8-0374/2016 - Lambert van Nistelrooij, Constanze Krehl)
52










6.3.

European Year of Cultural Heritage (A8-0340/2016 - Mircea Diaconu)
54










6.4.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Commission and executive agencies (A8-0150/2017 - Joachim Zeller)
57










6.5.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Council and Council (A8-0131/2017 - Bart Staes)
57










6.6.

Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Court of Auditors (A8-0151/2017 - Benedek Jávor)
57










6.7.

Discharge 2015: Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) (A8-0147/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
58










6.8.

Discharge 2015: European Banking Authority (EBA) (A8-0079/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
58










6.9.

Discharge 2015: European Medicines Agency (EMA) (A8-0084/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
58










6.10.

Discharge 2015: European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA) (A8-0115/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
59










6.11.

Discharge 2015: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) (A8-0111/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
59










6.12.

Discharge 2015: European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (Frontex) (A8-0137/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
59










6.13.

Management of fishing fleets in the outermost regions (A8-0138/2017 - Ulrike Rodust)
60










6.14.

EU flagship initiative on the garment sector (A8-0080/2017 - Lola Sánchez Caldentey)
61










6.15.

State of play of farmland concentration in the EU: how to facilitate the access to land for farmers (A8-0119/2017 - Maria Noichl)
62










6.16.

Situation in Venezuela (RC-B8-0270/2017, B8-0270/2017, B8-0271/2017, B8-0272/2017, B8-0274/2017, B8-0275/2017, B8-0276/2017, B8-0277/2017)
62










7.

Corrections to votes and voting intentions
64










8.

Decisions concerning certain documents: see Minutes
64










9.

Documents received: see Minutes
64










10.

Forwarding of texts adopted during the sitting
64










11.

Dates of forthcoming sittings : see Minutes
64










12.

Adjournment of the session
64




Verbatim report of proceedings of 27 April 2017
                  


Elnököl: GÁLL–PELCZ ILDIKÓ


alelnök

1.   Opening of the sitting

(Az ülést 08.30-kor nyitják meg.)

2.   Situation in Venezuela (motions for resolutions tabled): see Minutes
3.   Annual report on the control of the financial activities of the European Investment Bank for 2015 — Annual report on the financial activities of the European Investment Bank (debate)

Elnök asszony. – A következő napirendi pont közös vita a következő jelentésekről:
               






—



                        a Georgios Kyrtsos által a Gazdasági és Monetáris Bizottság nevében készített jelentés az Európai Beruházási Bank pénzügyi tevékenységeiről szóló éves jelentésről (2016/20099(INI)) – (A8-0121/2017) , valamint
                     










—



                        a Nedzhmi Ali által a Költségvetési Ellenőrző Bizottság nevében készített jelentés az Európai Beruházási Bank pénzügyi tevékenységeinek ellenőrzéséről szóló 2015. évi éves jelentésről (2016/2098(INI)) – (A8-0161/2017)
                     





Georgios Kyrtsos,
rapporteur. – Madam President, I would first like to welcome President Hoyer and, of course, Commissioner Moscovici. I would like to underline that President Hoyer shows an active interest in informing the European Parliament on the activities of the EIB. I would also like to underline the contribution of the shadow rapporteurs, numerous MEPs and the experts from the secretariat for the drafting of this report. We started with a rather brief report of almost 4 pages and we ended up with a report that contains 12 pages of evaluations and proposals. I tried to take into account most of my colleagues proposals because I do believe that they contribute to strengthening the role of the EIB and developing the institutional cooperation between the EIB and the European Parliament.
The report also incorporates parts of, and is supplemented by, the opinion of four parliamentary committees. I would like to contribute to the interesting discussion that will follow by underlining five major successes of the EIB in 2015 and emphasising five other points concerning its activities that could be strengthened or ameliorated. First, in 2015 the EIB played a major role in reducing the investment gap that characterises the European Union. Second, I am impressed by the support given by the EIB to countries like Greece that face major structural problems that have caused the collapse in investment. Third, I am encouraged by the fact that the EIB devoted 37% of the new lending granted in 2015 to the financing of small and medium-sized enterprises which altogether constitute the major collective employer in the European Union.
Fourth, I also welcome, along with my colleagues, who have approved the draft report of the ECON Committee, the strong and increasing EIB lending to innovative projects. Finally, I believe that the EIB acted as a catalyst in the fast and effective implementation of the EFSI.
Positive developments in 2015 go hand in hand with some other aspects of the activities of the EIB that have been underlined by the majority of my colleagues and could be strengthened or improved. First, we feel that the EIB group should try harder to adhere to the Commission stance on aggressive tax avoidance structures and we call on the EIB to end cooperation with intermediary countries and jurisdictions that are not following the rules on the market.
Second, we take the view that the EIB should develop its support for micro finance and go beyond the first successful steps in this direction. In this regard, we also think the EIB should devise a strategy to increase the financing of micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises in countries with unfavourable economic and banking environments.
Third, we also invite the EIB to further strengthen its investment in social housing projects and increase its social housing project lending in order to cope with the arrival of a large number of refugees in EU Member States.
Fourth, we encourage better coordination between the EIB and the Commission as far as the external lending of the bank is concerned so that projects financed by the EIB and third countries are in line with EU policies.
Finally, we reiterate our call for the signing of an interinstitutional agreement between the EIB and the European Parliament on the exchange of information, including the possibility for Members to address written questions to the President of the EIB. I believe that the economic, financial and investment environment in the EU is much better today than it was in 2015 and that part of the credit for that considerable improvement belongs to the EIB and its policies.

Nedzhmi Ali,
rapporteur. – Madam President, first of all I would like to thank the shadow rapporteurs from all political groups for their constructive attitude and valuable contribution during the preparation of this report. The European Investment Bank is a long-standing financing partner of the EU institutions, contributing to EU integration, economic and social cohesion and regional development through dedicated investment instruments. The European Investment Fund and the European Fund for Strategic Investments play a key role in complementing the EIB's interventions. The cathartic effect of the EIB's fund raising is a key element in defining EU debt added value and ensuring that Europe remains a leading player worldwide in terms of competitiveness, innovation, infrastructure and attractiveness.
Based on the above-mentioned, the main elements of the report are as follows: firstly, enhancing the sustainability of the EIB's investment policy. In 2015 there was EUR 77.5 billion worth of operations out of which EUR 69.7 billion went to EU Member States and EUR 7.8 billion went outside the EU. The consistency of the EIB's finance activities with the EU's general strategy and political priority areas is of indisputable importance.
The EIB is a core actor needed to revitalise the EU economy and maximise the effectiveness and value for money of available financial resources. It is necessary for the EIB to systematically pay attention to mid— and long-term effects when defining investment actions and its funding decisions and to investing in projects of systematic importance in the long term.
While there is a need to speed up economic recovery and to help certain economic sectors in geographic areas catch up, it is important to have a balanced strategy with a dynamic and transparent geographic distribution of projects and investments amongst EU Member States. Also, it is important that corresponding banks in the Member States, in order to facilitate small and medium-sized businesses, should act so as not to complicate the criteria and the rules.
Secondly, monitoring the EIB's impact in the implementation of key public policy areas, and the report on the results and impact of EIB operations inside the EU in 2015 reveals that the investments are in the following key areas: innovation and skills, small and medium-sized enterprises and mid-cap companies, infrastructure and environment. The EIB should continue to define its monitoring indicators, in particular with regard to supporting EU policies. With this comes also the importance of the EIB's contribution to the management of global issues.
Thirdly, monitoring of the EFSI's added value and additionality: thus EFSI aims at leveraging through the EIB a total of EUR 350 billion in extra investment, in new projects, and the EIB group is developing various new products that will allow for higher risk-takings. In this regard, result-driven investment should be regularly assessed through the scoreboard of indicators by the investment committee. The goal is to identify well— targeted projects in terms of their contribution to growth and jobs and to have an objective overview of their additionality, added value and consistency with EU policies.
Fourthly, deepening the EIB's transparency, accountability and international control is a prerequisite for better corporate governance. The EIB's operations must be accompanied by a greater transparency and deepened accountability so as to ensure genuine public scrutiny of its activities, project selection and funding priorities. Transparency in the implementation of EU policy leads to strengthening the EIB's overall corporate accountability and credibility. It also contributes to enhancing the effectiveness and sustainability of the funded projects, alongside the zero-tolerance approach to fraud and corruption in its loan portfolio.
It is important for the EIB to pursue its fight against tax evasion, tax fraud and avoidance, irregular activities and money laundering. Bearing in mind the role of the EIB to finance a broad spectrum of activities inside and outside the EU, and the significance of this financing for economic growth, it is important that this institution fulfil its activities to the highest possible standards. Finally, regarding the previous recommendations of Parliament, the EIB should report on their state of play and status, especially with respect to the impact of its lending activities.

Pierre Moscovici,
membre de la Commission. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Président, cher Werner Hoyer, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, Messieurs les rapporteurs, je suis heureux d'être aujourd'hui parmi vous pour un débat utile et même important sur les activités de la Banque européenne d'investissement.
               

                  La Commission salue les deux rapports du Parlement qui nous intéressent ce matin et je remercie tout particulièrement pour leur contribution les deux rapporteurs, M. Georgios Kyrtsos, pour la commission des affaires économiques et monétaires, et M. Nedzhmi Ali pour la commission du contrôle budgétaire.
               

                  Évidemment, je suis là ce matin pour dire à quel point le partenariat entre la Commission et la BEI est, pour nous, essentiel et particulièrement stratégique. Il est la clé de la mise en œuvre de politiques qui sont devenues majeures dans l'Union, particulièrement dans les domaines mis en avant par vos rapports.
               

                  Je pense par exemple au financement des infrastructures, au soutien aux PME, à l'emploi, à la lutte contre le réchauffement climatique, au soutien aux transports durables ou encore aux politiques externes de l'Union. Tout cela dit à quel point cette banque, qui est notre banque, a pris une ampleur, une extension importante.
               

                  Ses réalisations dans chacun de ces domaines sont, en réalité, des preuves que l'Europe est utile et qu'elle répond aux besoins de nos concitoyens ainsi qu'à leurs préoccupations. C'est l'Europe du concret qui se construit. Je me rends régulièrement dans nos territoires en Europe pour les mettre en lumière et pour dire ce que l'Europe fait et là où elle avance. À chaque fois la BEI est présente. Cela est particulièrement important dans le contexte difficile de la montée du populisme que nous connaissons. Voilà pourquoi je partage le point de vue de vos rapports.
               

                  La BEI doit poursuivre ses efforts pour soutenir les investissements dans l'Union et nous sommes à ses côtés. Cela passe d'abord, sans doute, par encore plus de soutien en direction des PME. Nous reconnaissons pleinement la nécessité de renforcer le soutien du groupe BEI aux PME, en particulier pour le financement de micro-entreprises. Une prise de risque plus importante pourra s'avérer nécessaire de la part du groupe BEI afin de financer les plus petites entreprises.
               

                  La Commission partage le point de vue du Parlement sur l'importance des programmes mis en œuvre dans le cadre de l'instrument européen de microfinancement Progress, qui doivent servir de base pour la conception des futurs instruments dans le cadre du programme de l'Union européenne pour l'emploi et l'innovation sociale.
               

                  Cela passe aussi par notre coopération. La Commission soutient la recommandation selon laquelle la BEI, la Commission, les autorités nationales, régionales et locales, avec les banques nationales de développement, dont le rôle doit également être salué, doivent renforcer leur coopération afin de créer encore davantage de synergies entre les Fonds structurels et les autres instruments financiers de la BEI. Les Fonds structurels peuvent particulièrement contribuer à la réalisation des objectifs du plan d'investissement pour l'Europe, à savoir le plan Juncker, et être complémentaires au soutien du Fonds européen pour les investissements stratégiques.
               

                  Nous rappelons également que la BEI, en étroite coopération avec la Commission, a mis en œuvre d'importantes initiatives en faveur de l'emploi des jeunes et on sait à quel point c'est un sujet prioritaire pour nos populations. Le programme ‘Compétences et emplois – Investir pour la jeunesse’ permet ainsi de couvrir un nombre important de projets d'entreprise tant publics que privés.
               

                  Enfin, la Commission soutient – et nous y avons beaucoup travaillé ensemble dans le cadre de l'approche des accords de Paris – l'ambitieuse stratégie climatique de la BEI, qui est conforme aux objectifs des accords COP21 de Paris, à la fois en ce qui concerne l'énergie et le climat. L'accent doit être mis sur des activités, des secteurs et des produits qui ont un impact important pour parvenir à ces objectifs. Nous devons promouvoir des instruments financiers nouveaux, innovants, qui nous permettront de lever des financements privés, en particulier à travers les obligations vertes, les fameux green bonds (obligations vertes).
               

                  Nous travaillons étroitement avec la BEI et les autres acteurs en vue de mettre en place de nouveaux instruments financiers qui faciliteront une mobilité durable. À titre d'exemple, pour développer ce marché, pour diminuer le recours aux énergies fossiles, la Commission et la BEI ont lancé en décembre 2016, ensemble, le programme pour des transports plus propres.
               

                  En ce qui concerne les actions extérieures, la décision actuelle sur le mandat extérieur de la BEI souligne la nécessité d'une forte cohérence entre les activités de la banque hors Union et les politiques, programmes et instruments de l'Union.
               

                  Dans le contexte que nous connaissons, de l'afflux de réfugiés et des migrations, l'initiative de résilience économique (IRE), la BEI doit être complémentaire avec la nouvelle initiative de la Commission de mettre en œuvre un plan d'investissement extérieur. Par conséquent, les initiatives convergent. L'initiative IRE permet à la BEI, grâce au mandat extérieur, d'accroître sa capacité d'intervention dans les États du voisinage méditerranéen et des Balkans occidentaux.
               

                  Le nouveau Fonds européen pour le développement durable, le FEDD, quant à lui, s'appuie sur des financements mixtes. Il vise l'Afrique subsaharienne, les pays du voisinage de l'Union. L'ambition de la nouvelle garantie du fonds FEDD est clairement d'aller au-delà des instruments existants en soutenant des modèles innovants de financement par le secteur privé, développés par des institutions financières partenaires.
               

                  La Commission n'a qu'à se féliciter de la coopération de plus en plus étroite avec une BEI qui couvre des champs de plus en plus larges, parce qu'elle est à la hauteur de nos ambitions, qui sont des ambitions partagées, pour plus d'investissement en Europe et des investissements qui sont capables de préparer notre futur dans ses différentes dimensions.
               

                  Le soutien du Parlement, votre travail quotidien, est utile – je pense que Werner Hoyer partagera mon point de vue – dans la promotion du rôle de la BEI dans le cadre de la poursuite des objectifs de l'Union, notamment en matière fiscale.
               

Werner Hoyer,
President of the European Investment Bank. – Madam President, Members of the European Parliament, Commissioner Moscovici, it is a great pleasure and honour for me to be here today to talk about the 16th Annual European Parliament debate on EIB activities, particularly as this year two reports have been drafted on the financial activities of the EIB in 2015. I would like to thank the rapporteurs Mr Kyrtsos and Mr Ali, as well as their colleagues for their thorough work.
I notably appreciate the explicit support of both reports for the EIB's work as a catalyst for financing solid, sound public and private long-term investments, as well as the acknowledgment of the bank's important role outside the European Union. But issues raised in the reports are also relevant for the future so, if you agree, I will not limit myself only to 2015.
Investment is recovering in the European Union, but large differences in regional and sectoral investment performance remain, and we need additional initiatives and projects in order to address this investment gap. Taking into consideration the current political and economic climate, it is unlikely that in the future we will have more, or even the same amount of resources available not only to support investment, but in fact for EU priorities in general. In addition, public funding and traditional instruments such as grants will not be able to solve all the existing and new challenges Europe faces. We must therefore find intelligent ways to maximise the efficiency and effectiveness of available public resources, namely by crowding in private investors and making full use of the capacity of financial institutions, consequently leveraging public money and making more funds available for the real economy. I insist on the wording ‘the real economy’, because this is where we work. We are not a monetary institution, we are a real economy institution, and this is why I believe our work matters.
I am firmly convinced that this calls for a further use of financial instruments. The EIB group, as the EU's Bank, stands ready to identify the areas where financial instruments can complement and probably release EU grants and to continue to implement such instruments for the benefit of the entire EU. Consequently, we vest our hopes in the ongoing revision of the Financial Regulation and 15 sectoral legislative acts, the so called ‘Omnibus’, which aims inter alia at simplifying and streamlining the implementation of financial instruments and budgetary guarantees.
To give you one concrete example, once adopted the Omnibus will facilitate the essential combination of EFSI with European structural and investment funds, which might simultaneously improve the absorption of ESI funds and bring more EFSI financing to some countries.
As highlighted in the reports, the EIB's activities have contributed to sustainable growth and employment in Europe and to stability in our neighbourhood. I am particularly proud that the EU bank continues to be the world leader in climate-related finance, as well as of the effect our financing has on young people. In 2016 alone, we financed 46 education projects to the tune of EUR 3.7 billion, improving conditions for 890 000 students. Also last year, EIB group financing sustained 4.4 million jobs in SMEs, which is where most young people find work, and since its launch in 2013 the EIB's skills and jobs ‘Investing for Youth’ programme has provided more than EUR 37 billion towards projects that support jobs and better skills for young people. I strongly support what Commissioner Moscovici has just said about the need to continue our engaged work in the fight against youth unemployment.
These concrete results show the impact of our work on Europe's future. Allow me to give you another concrete example where our innovative and financing products make an impact, in this case in a country hit by the financial crisis. Two weeks ago we activated the Trade Fund Facility 2.0 that will benefit Greek SMEs and mid-cap companies? This facility will enable Greek banks to provide trade and export finance services to Greek SMEs and mid-cap companies at a time when no commercial lines with private banks are available. Through this facility the EIB acts as a secure bridge between international and domestic banks, supporting trade and export finance and therefore having a direct concrete impact on the business of SMEs and, as such, in the real economy.
Talking of innovative instruments and in view of the forthcoming parliamentary reports on EFSI Implementation and EFSI 2.0, I would like to take the opportunity to mention EFSI and how it can finance investment, trigger growth and the creation of jobs. EFSI has been a success so far. To date, we can be proud that almost EUR 184 billion in total investments have been mobilised – that is to say 58% of EFSI's initial target of EUR 315 billion. We are very well on track.
Over 4 000 SMEs are to benefit from enhanced access to finance thanks to EFSI support and we have already approved 22 investment platforms, most of them being the result of a very fruitful cooperation with national promotional banks. Let me emphasise that in quantitative terms EFSI is not business as usual for the EIB. As a matter of fact it has changed our DNA. Two out of three promoters of projects which benefit from EFSI are new clients to the bank, and this clearly demonstrates how much EFSI has changed the EIB group.
I am aware that additionality, as we have just heard, is central to EFSI and that we need to do more to communicate and demonstrate it better, based on concrete examples of projects. Eligible projects rest on market failures or sub-optimal investment situations. They are only selected if they would not have been financed by the EIB group in the same period or to the same extent without EFSI support, as specified in the EFSI Regulation.
Another important aspect is geographical balance and the latest breakdown shows that EFSI favours many smaller EU countries and those hit hard by the economic crisis. I sometimes still read statistics from the very first beginning of the EFSI implementation which show a different direction, but nowadays it can be clearly said that EFSI projects are particularly where EFSI projects are needed most, and we are very proud of that. In any case I can assure you that we continue to work on this, working with a regional and local focus to facilitate EFSI support across the EU.
The central role we play in EFSI does not mean that we retreat from the rest of the world. On the contrary, out of the EUR 84 billion of EIB group financing in 2015, over EUR 8 billion went outside the Union, directly contributing to the implementation of EU policies and standards. In recent years, the world has become more integrated and more challenging than ever before. Those external challenges and the EU's objectives beyond its borders are best met through a stronger and more integrated EU response, ensured by enhanced coordination and joint action between the European Commission, the Member States and the EU bank. The EIB's external lending mandate is indisputably the most effective and efficient EU financing instrument and a powerful multiplier of EU external action. Its Guarantee Fund and portfolio structure allow the EU bank to support investment of around 30 to 40 times the EU budget demand provisions for the guarantee, thereby delivering concrete results and impact in third countries at minimal cost to the EU budget.
We are very grateful for the open and cooperative attitude of Parliament on this issue, especially for ensuring that sufficient resources are attributed to this instrument, which will allow the EU bank to continue its global level activities on behalf of the Union.
Also looking to the future, we should establish a clear complementarity and harmonisation of the different instruments that the European Union employs externally, namely: the External Investment Plan the Commissioner just mentioned; the External Lending Mandate of the ECB; the Resilience Initiative for countries affected by migration, and even the G20 initiative for Africa. Overlaps should be avoided and coordination should be demonstrated.
In relation to the EIB's Economic Resilience Initiative which comes on top of our normal lending to Africa and the neighbouring countries, a brief reference, to let you know, is that this is already there on the ground and is delivering results.
Both reports stress the importance that the EIB continues to be a financial institution of good practice. I can assure you that we put very strong emphasis on being a leading financial institution when it comes to issues such as due diligence, compliance, good governance, transparency and accountability. We are continuously in contact with other international financial institutions, NGOs and relevant authorities to ensure that we apply best banking practice.
Europe's citizens expect and deserve parliamentary oversight for their bank, and I say this with pleasure as a former parliamentarian. Last year I had the opportunity to address the plenary, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the Committee on Budgetary Control. There were also numerous hearings with other members of the Bank's management committee and services. We are ready to even expand our close cooperation with the European Parliament. In preparation for this plenary debate we also sent a state of play on the recommendations tabled in the previous report to the rapporteur, Mr Pirinski, the respective committee secretariats and the MEPs who were closely involved in the drafting process. The reports we are discussing today suggests that this oversight consists of a more structured exchange, and although in principle I have no objection to discussing the idea I believe we must discuss how future arrangements might work. We are ready to engage in this dialogue.
Let me therefore conclude by assuring you that the EIB stands ready to live up to its institutional responsibilities, both operationally and in terms of reporting, and we welcome our regular exchange with this Parliament on our activities and their impact on the ground. Thank you very much, and I am looking forward to the debate.

Eider Gardiazabal Rubial,
ponente de opinión de la Comisión de Presupuestos. – Señora presidenta, comisario Moscovici, presidente Hoyer, desde la Comisión de Presupuestos consideramos que el BEI juega un papel clave en la aplicación de un número cada vez mayor de instrumentos financieros. Se ha visto: el Fondo Europeo de Inversiones es una de nuestras herramientas fundamentales y confiamos en que continúe la colaboración del Banco, de la Comisión y de los Estados miembros para que este apoyo pueda llegar a todos los países y a todas las regiones.
               

                  Queremos insistir también, y lo ha hecho usted presidente Hoyer y el comisario, en la importancia de coordinar y complementar todas las acciones que estamos poniendo en marcha, sobre todo lo que tiene que ver con la acción exterior de la Unión: la iniciativa de resiliencia, el plan europeo de inversiones exteriores y la revisión del mandato exterior del BEI, que actualmente ya estamos negociando.
               

                  Pero hay un ámbito en el que me gustaría hacer hincapié y es en la necesidad de dotarse de una política fiscal responsable, que incorpore los requisitos de buena gobernanza, mejore la calidad de información de los beneficiarios últimos y excluya las transacciones con intermediarios con un historial negativo en transparencia, fraude o corrupción o que estén registrados en paraísos fiscales. Estamos convencidos de que gracias a su experiencia y a su posición única el BEI es un socio estratégico para lograr los objetivos de la Unión.
               

Bernd Lucke,
Verfasser der Stellungnahme des mitberatenden Entwicklungsausschusses. – Frau Präsidentin, meine Damen und Herren! Die EIB leistet gute und wichtige Arbeit im Entwicklungshilfebereich durch die Förderung von Investitionen, durch die Bekämpfung von Armut, durch die Förderung von Wachstum und Infrastrukturen. Das muss man insbesondere dann anerkennen, wenn man sieht, dass das Europäische Parlament der EIB natürlich auch noch jede Menge an Nebenbedingungen in Form von anderen politischen Zielen auferlegt, die die EIB getreulich bemüht ist, umzusetzen. Also dafür großes Lob. Gleichwohl ist es so, dass in der Arbeit der Europäischen Investitionsbank im Entwicklungshilfebereich sicherlich noch mehr an Fokus möglich ist.
               

                  Es gibt unterschiedliche Förderungswege, die unterschiedlich effektiv sind. Wir haben in unserer Stellungnahme darauf hingewiesen, dass insbesondere die Finanzierung durch Mikrokredite besonders hohe Wirkung in Form von Arbeitsplätzen hat erzielen können.
               

                  Wir schlagen vor, dass diese Mikrokredite weiter verstärkt werden. Es wäre mir auch ein wichtiges Anliegen, dass ein stärkerer geografischer Fokus im Bereich der Arbeit der EIB festgelegt werden könnte. Wir müssen, glaube ich, insbesondere aus der Perspektive der EU unsere südlichen und östlichen Mittelmeernachbarn stärken, fördern und stabilisieren. Da stehen wir großen Herausforderungen gegenüber. Dort mehr Mittel einzusetzen und mehr Förderwege zu erschließen, wäre sicherlich im Interesse dieses Parlaments.
               

Bogusław Liberadzki,
autor projektu opinii Komisji Transportu i Turystyki. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu Moscovici! Panie Prezesie Hoyer! Komisja Transportu bardzo pozytywnie ocenia sprawozdanie. Komisja Transportu bardzo pozytywnie także ocenia dotychczasowe osiągnięcia Europejskiego Banku Inwestycyjnego w tym sektorze, zwłaszcza w dziedzinie infrastruktury, w dziedzinie kreowania nowych technologii transportowych, efektywnego wykorzystania transportu, a także promowania publiczno-prywatnego partnerstwa w dziedzinie infrastruktury. Jest to właśnie bardzo ciekawa forma.
               

                  Co natomiast rzuca się w oczy? Europejski Bank Inwestycyjny, Europejski Fundusz Inwestycji Strategicznych i nierównowaga geograficzna, duża koncentracja, przewaga państw starej Unii Europejskiej – zaledwie 8% środków wydatkowanych w latach 2013-2016 to były państwa nowe. Co to rodzi? Zwiększenie dystansu. To rodzi także polityczne niezadowolenie w nowych państwach. To jest po prostu niebezpieczne. Natomiast chcemy bardzo wyraźnie podkreślić zalety: mając Europejski Bank Inwestycyjny, możemy dywersyfikować źródła finansowania, wprowadzać nowe instrumenty finansowe, a zatem środki Europejskiego Banku Inwestycyjnego, Funduszu Inwestycji Strategicznych, instrumenty gwarantowania razem pozwalają optymalizować finansowanie ważnych projektów.
               

Ivan Jakovčić,
izvjestitelj za mišljenje Odbora za regionalni razvoj. – Gospođo predsjednice, dozvolite mi da i ja u ime Odbora za regionalni razvoj iskažem svoju podršku ovome izvještaju o radu Europske investicijske banke i nema nikakve dvojbe da bi bez Europske investicijske banke ukupni financijski sektor u Europskoj uniji bio daleko siromašniji.
               

                  Ulaganja koja vidimo u srednja i mala poduzeća, u infrastrukturu, inovacije, sve ono što Europska banka čini zaista je iznimno pozitivno i ima našu kompletnu podršku. Ono na što želim ipak upozoriti je da očekujemo još bolju geografsku uravnoteženost, očekujemo i veća ulaganja u ruralna područja jer to je naprosto neophodno. Ruralna područja nemaju drugačijih kvalitetnih izvora nego što je to Europska investicijska banka.
               

                  Očekujemo ulaganja u tehničku pomoć, očekujemo dopunjavanje kohezijske politike i europskih strukturnih i investicijskih fondova, više sinergije s lokalnim i regionalnim vlastima, više sinergije svih zajedno i više sinergije s privatnim sektorom. I na kraju, također pozivam na agresivniju politiku preuzimanja rizika Europske investicijske banke.
               

Dariusz Rosati,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, President Hoyer, we are discussing the report on the Annual Report of the EIB for 2015, and let me say from the outset that this has been another successful year for the European Investment Bank.
In my opinion, the bank has been particularly successful and efficient in two areas. First, the implementation of the European Fund for Strategic Investment: as you said, after a difficult start, this has indeed been a success story. The second area is microfinance, which, indeed, with limited funds has been able to sustain a large number of jobs in the European Union. The focus of our report here in this discussion is how to increase investment, because investment is something which is very much needed in Europe.
In this context, let me raise two points. The first is that more attention should probably be paid to private-public partnerships. I think this is an important instrument to mobilise more resources, and is certainly a promising avenue to increase investment across Europe. The second point I would like to raise is geographical distribution, which I find still imbalanced. Much more money goes to the ‘old’ Member States, whereas the ‘new’ Member States account for less than 13% of total funding in 2015. I think we need a more balanced approach, especially as new Member States offer attractive investment opportunities in the Union, and that can be financed.

Cătălin Sorin Ivan,
în numele grupului S&D. – Doamnă președintă, Banca Europeană de Investiții joacă un rol foarte important, pentru că în acest moment în Europa investițiile sunt cele care lipsesc și nevoia de investiții este cea despre care discutăm în fiecare zi. Faptul că sub 10 % din aceste investiții susținute de Banca Europeană de Investiții se duc către țările abia intrate în Uniunea Europeană arată foarte clar că avem de-a face cu un dezechilibru geografic. Este foarte important ca eforturile Băncii Europene de Investiții să se adreseze către țările, zonele care nu au expertiză suficientă în a gândi și a finanța proiecte foarte mari, de a construi mixuri financiare și a gândi modalități inovative de a finanța proiecte mult mai mari de infrastructură. De asemenea, rolul Băncii Europene de Investiții ar trebui să fie și acela de a sprijini eforturile Uniunii Europene în lupta împotriva paradisurilor fiscale, a evaziunii fiscale și eu cred că Banca Europeană de Investiții ar trebui să refuze finanțarea proiectelor către companii care au activități offshore sau care lucrează cu intermediari având activități offshore.
               

                  De asemenea, vreau să salut decizia Băncii Europene de Investiții de a lucra mult mai aproape cu Parlamentul European. Eu cred că o comunicare mult mai apropiată între Parlament și Bancă este foarte importantă și prezența dumneavoastră, domnule președinte, mai des în Parlamentul European la Comisia ECON ar fi foarte utilă, cum, de asemenea, ar fi foarte utile evaluări din partea Băncii legate de sugestiile pe care Parlamentul le-a făcut în 2013, în 2014. Ne-ar interesa foarte mult poziția Băncii în urma acelor evaluări.
               

Nils Torvalds,
on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Madam President, I was the shadow rapporteur for the report by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. The original draft report had some issues, but that is pretty normal in this House. I am sorry to say that, unfortunately, the discussions in the shadow group did not improve it very much. Instead, it turned into the usual Christmas tree, and I have one point of information for the honourable Members of Parliament: we have eight months to go to Christmas. We also have some formulations in this report which are unfortunate, and information point number two is that the European Investment Bank (EIB) is a bank, not a charity.
By filing a report which is skewed in very many respects, and thus putting into the report things that actually should not be there, we did not actually help the EIB. Therefore, the ALDE Group decided to vote against this report, because we need to have an actual and more effective way of dealing with reports like this. That does not mean that we withdraw our acknowledgement of the good work in the EIB, but we need to have some order in this House.

Luke Ming Flanagan,
on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – Madam President, I tabled a number of amendments to this report on the basis that it was allowed, to then be informed by the services that it was not allowed, to then be informed again that it was allowed, to then being finally informed yet again that no, it would not be allowed, the nature of the beast here now, under the rules.
My concerns are based in a number of areas. First, there was a crossover of investment into the defence area. I am totally against this; Ireland is a neutral country, and we intend to stay so. I was also worried that in the area of new investments, and especially in PPS and in securitisation, the European Investment Bank (EIB) is not guarding against the added risks of socialising losses while privatising profits. I wanted cast-iron guarantees against conflicts of interest, especially in the area of disbarment policy, where the EIB falls well short of the standards set by the World Bank. On transparency also, the EIB falls well short of what I would like to see. Because of these and other concerns, I cannot recommend the discharge.

Bas Eickhout,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, I would like first of all to thank the rapporteur for the collaboration on this report, and I especially want to thank President Hoyer for being here and for reacting to our report.
I would like to focus on one crucial thing, and that is how we, as Europe, are going to reach the Paris Agreement. It is true that the European Investment Bank (EIB) in 2015 published a communication on climate change action, but after Paris we now know that decarbonisation is the aim. If we then look at the lending of the EIB, there is still a lot of fossil fuel lending – in 2013, at the level of EUR 2 billion; at 2015, at the level of EUR 2.5 billion – going up. In 2016 it was lower, but we know that two big gas pipeline projects are pending to the value of EUR 3 billion. That is big expenditure, and the issue is that investments in those infrastructures are there for decades. If we want to achieve zero emissions by half-time this century, then any investment in fossil fuel infrastructure should be considered very, very, very carefully. Especially as regards gas, which has always been promoted as a transitionary energy source, we know that if we take energy efficiency seriously, European gas demand will hardly increase. Why, then, do we continue to increase infrastructure? We know that every pipeline that you build is a lock-in. It is not a transition; it is a lock-in, and this is something the EIB should really pay attention to. It is why, in the report, we are asking the EIB to come up with a serious plan for phase-out fossil fuel lending, and I would very much like to hear the President responding to that. Hopefully we can work on such a plan, because what the EIB is doing in the end is instrumental for our future infrastructure, which should be fossil-free.

Marco Valli,
a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Presidente Hoyer, abbiamo presentato diversi emendamenti a queste risoluzioni sulla BEI, innanzitutto per aumentare i finanziamenti alle micro e piccole imprese, che riteniamo essere il tessuto di imprese fondamentale per il rilancio dell'economia dell'Unione europea, lavorare sulla trasparenza ed eliminare il conflitto di interessi negli organi di governo, nonché evitare che ci siano collusioni tra organi di governo della Banca europea per gli investimenti e mercato, in modo evidente come ci sono in alcuni progetti.
               

                  Siamo inoltre preoccupati per i progetti infrastrutturali finanziati dalla BEI e dall'EFSI. Chiediamo su questi trasparenza assoluta su appalti e subappalti, di non finanziare progetti sotto indagine per frode fiscale e corruzione – uno su tutti abbiamo il passante di Mestre in Italia –, e di effettuare valutazioni ex ante ed ex post indipendenti che certifichino il comprovato valore aggiunto sociale, economico ed ambientale. Infine, la BEI dovrebbe prestare ancora più attenzione alla rete di intermediari finanziari e verificare che non siano coinvolti in pratiche di elusione, evasione, corruzione e riciclaggio.
               

Barbara Kappel,
im Namen der ENF-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar Moscovici, Herr Präsident Hoyer! Ich möchte den Berichterstattern für ihre konstruktive Arbeit danken. Es konnten eine Reihe von guten Kompromissen in diesen Berichten erzielt werden.
               

                  Aus meiner Sicht ist besonders das Augenmerk hervorzuheben, das die EIB auf die Finanzierung von Klein- und Mittelbetrieben legt, denn diese sind das Rückgrat der europäischen Wirtschaft. Mit einer Bilanzsumme von über 600 Milliarden EUR ist die EIB einer der wichtigsten Geldgeber von KMU, aber auch von Mikrounternehmen. Allein 2015 wurden 37 % oder 28,4 Milliarden EUR für Neudarlehen an KMU vergeben.
               

                  Zu begrüßen ist auch die Bedeutung, die die EIB Forschung und Entwicklung, dem Klimaschutz, Innovation und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und der Bekämpfung der Jugendarbeitslosigkeit beimisst; 2015 wurde rund die Hälfte aller neuen Projekte dem Klimaschutzbereich gewidmet. Und, Präsident Hoyer sagte es, die EIB ist weltführend im Bereich des Klimaschutzes. Die EIB investiert 90 %in Europa. In diesem Zusammenhang findet sich im Kyrtsos-Bericht ein klares Bekenntnis für ein verstärktes Engagement in Investitionen zur Bewältigung der Migrations- und Flüchtlingsströme, also ein verstärktes Engagement in Nachbarregionen im Nahen Osten und in Nordafrika; die Resilienz-Initiative wurde angesprochen.
               

                  Eine neuerliche Kapitalerhöhung der EIB, wie im Kyrtsos-Bericht angesprochen, erscheint also als besonders zielführend, und das nicht nur im Kontext nachhaltiger Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, sondern zur Schließung der Investitionslücke in der EU. Denn es muss mehr in der EU investiert werden – öffentlich wie privat oder am besten gemeinsam. Die EIB, die Bank der Europäischen Union, kann etwas Wichtiges dazu beitragen.
               

Diane James (NI). – Madam President, this report includes two very fundamental proposals. One is for the EIB to demand more capital from shareholders – that's Member States – with that wedge entailing another big bill coming down the line for the United Kingdom, regardless of the Brexit vote. The second proposal is to increase the budget for external lending. Well, neither is justifiable given the EIB's performance to date. And let me remind you that the EIB lent almost EUR 80 billion last year in order that the EU can broaden and deepen its control. And, astonishingly, the Committee on Budgetary Control stated that the soundness of funded projects should not be assessed only in terms of economic relevance, confirming both the political nature of the EIB and that the EU does not have a grip on the realities of the market. Lending taxpayers' money without judging solely upon their economic viability is folly of the first order. And let us not forget the billions in soft loans doled out by the EIB to the car companies who cheated the system and polluted our air – hence why we've got the air quality problem. But thank you, Madam President, for allowing me to speak this morning.

Georgi Pirinski (S&D). – Madam President, may I first join in expressing my very sincere appreciation at the participation of President Hoyer in this morning's debate and at his general commitment to a very substantive ongoing relationship with Parliament.
One issue that you mentioned at the beginning of your intervention this morning, President Hoyer, has to do with the continuing significant differences as to regional gaps, having to do with the investment gap, and this clearly is a central challenge for the Union as such, since we face the existential over-arching challenge of increasing divergences. So we come to the subject of cohesion, and I have raised this issue in previous part-sessions. In this regard, I would like to express my appreciation for the information which you mentioned also coming from the Bank on issues raised in previous sessions. Regarding cohesion, I have received information which recognises that the 30% horizontal goal for cohesion investments has not been reached over the past two years. In 2015, it was 26.5% and in in 2016 it was 27%. Clearly there is awareness of the importance of this objective. However, I would invite you to consider whether enough practical steps have been taken to better manage cohesion objectives because it is not only a question of better reporting, but of very carefully looking into the way of actually interacting with the Commission, if you like, to devise the proper policy responses. Thank you for letting me make this point, I very much look forward to the ongoing discussion.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8))


Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D),
blue-card question. – Dear colleague, both of us come from countries in Central/Eastern Europe. How do you explain the low number of projects funded by the EIB in Central/Eastern Europe recently, and the lack of transparency, particularly in the selection of projects?

Georgi Pirinski (S&D),
blue-card answer. – Thank you for this question. You raise the issue of transparency, and I would extend it to include conflict of interests. In this regard, I would like to draw attention to two paragraphs in Mr Ali's report – paragraphs 75 and 76. One deals with the concerns of the European Ombudsman about the shortcomings in mechanisms to prevent possible conflicts of interest in the EIB, and the other (paragraph 76) makes the point that there should be a revision of the make-up of the Vice-Presidents, because they come from only some of the Member States.

Anneli Jäätteenmäki (ALDE). – Arvoisa puhemies, Euroopan investointipankki on merkittävä eurooppalainen rahoittaja ja sen päätöksillä suunnataan sekä alueellista kehitystä että Euroopan sisällöllistä kehitystä. On hyvä asia, että investointipankki on rahoittanut ilmastonmuutoksen torjuntaan tähtääviä projekteja. Tässä se olisi voinut olla vielä aktiivisempi, mutta on erinomainen asia, että nyt tulevina vuosina investointipankki on ottanut tavoitteeseen 35 prosentin osuuden ilmastonmuutoksen torjuntaan liittyvissä rahoituksissa vuoteen 2020 mennessä.
               

                  Toinen asia, jonka haluan nostaa esille on se, että tähän saakka investointipankin rahoituksesta pääosa on suuntautunut liikenneinvestointeihin. Nyt yhteinen haaste on se, että investointipankki suuntaa rahoitusta sellaisiin liikenneratkaisuihin, jotka eivät nojaudu fossiilisiin polttoaineisiin. Täytyy korostaa tässä investointipankin roolia, miten se rahansa suuntaa ja minkälaisiin projekteihin se rahaa antaa. Lisäksi peräänkuulutan investointien lisäämistä energiatehokkuuteen, uusiutuvan energian hankkeisiin sekä kiertotalouteen. Näissä on suuri potentiaali EU:n kilpailukyvyn parantamiseksi ja näillä hankkeilla vaikutetaan myös ilmastonmuutoksen torjuntaan.
               

Paloma López Bermejo (GUE/NGL). – Señora presidenta, me ha resultado difícil prepararme para este debate, porque la posición del Parlamento afirma una cosa y su contraria.
               

                  Dicen: ‘Debemos evitar la socialización de las pérdidas y la privatización de los beneficios’. Y, sin embargo, se anima al Banco Europeo de Inversiones a invertir en nuevos productos financieros especulativos.
               

                  Dicen: ‘El Banco Europeo de Inversiones debe respetar la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales en sus proyectos en el exterior’. Y, luego, queremos que refuerce la política europea de migración, que pretende convertir a Turquía y a Libia en cárceles para refugiados.
               

                  Dicen: ‘El BEI debe seguir expandiéndose’. Pero luego resulta que el crédito está estancado y que incluso el Tribunal de Cuentas duda de que iniciativas como el Plan Juncker hayan contribuido a financiar alguna inversión adicional.
               

                  Creo que tenemos claros cuáles son los principios que deben regir el BEI. Sin embargo, su realidad es otra. No lo olvidemos si queremos construir, realmente, un banco público que necesitan la Unión Europea y sus ciudadanos.
               

David Coburn (EFDD). – Madam President, when the President of the European Investment Bank came to the ECON Committee a few weeks ago, I asked him how the UK could repatriate the reported EUR 9 billion it has invested in the EIB. I suggested that an in specie distribution of some of the bank's UK loan book into a UK sovereign fund might be an idea. He didn't answer. It is crucial for the EIB to take Brexit into account when engaging in long-term commitments. For example, the EIB should not expect the UK to guarantee EIB bond issues. The existing contingent joint and several liabilities run to the order of some EUR 500 billion. That's a worrying sum when one considers the political motivations behind it. The EIB is propping up economies which are structurally unsound as a result of their membership of the euro – in Greece the EIB has invested 10% of Greek GDP – but worse, this report suggests the EIB should call for even more capital, and demand even more from the British taxpayer. This is a dangerous fantasy economic nonsense and for that reason we cannot support this report.

Theodor Dumitru Stolojan (PPE). – Doamnă președintă, ambele rapoarte arată activitatea bună a Băncii Europene de Investiții, iar rolul acestei bănci în lansarea proiectului Juncker a fost remarcabil. Susțin recomandările din ambele rapoarte, ca Banca să acționeze mai mult pentru accelerarea convergenței între statele membre și între regiunile din aceste state membre. În acest sens, consider că Banca trebuie să acorde mai multe resurse pentru asistența tehnică de care au nevoie statele membre mai puțin dezvoltate în pregătirea proiectelor de investiții strategice complexe, state membre printre care se află și țara mea, România.
               

Jonás Fernández (S&D). – Señora presidenta, en primer lugar me gustaría agradecer el trabajo del señor Kyrtsos, el ponente sobre el informe del BEI, porque yo creo que hace dos recomendaciones oportunas que el propio BEI debe tomar en consideración: mejorar la transparencia de la institución —pidiendo que este Parlamento pueda hacer preguntas escritas al propio BEI— y, por supuesto, evitar actividades financieras del BEI en paraísos fiscales.
               

                  Aun así hay terreno por delante que podemos acometer y es verdad que el BEI está en una buena dirección, pero Europa sigue teniendo un déficit muy importante de inversión. Y a ese déficit tan importante de inversión necesitamos darle una respuesta más activa, más contundente desde el BEI.
               

                  Necesitamos mejorar claramente las actividades de adicionalidad del plan Juncker. Necesitamos, de verdad, tener un enfoque territorial y sectorial más concreto, más directo, porque es verdad que se están financiando proyectos en algunos sectores o en algunos territorios, pero necesitamos una visión algo más holística.
               

                  Y necesitamos que la colaboración público-privada sea más eficiente. Las plataformas que permiten deducir las inversiones del sector público dentro del Pacto de Estabilidad y Crecimiento tienen que tener una mayor asistencia técnica por parte del BEI y, por supuesto, tenemos que dar un paso adelante en ese deseo de convertir al BEI en un auténtico banco de desarrollo preocupado fundamentalmente, como digo, por activar la inversión en Europa para mejorar el empleo, el empleo juvenil, y aportar a todos los territorios de la Unión.
               

Petri Sarvamaa (PPE). – Madam President, for the European Investment Bank to be able to perform its mandate successfully it needs guidance and control from the EU budgetary authorities. We have to aim to provide the EIB with the best solutions to achieve its policy objectives, to accelerate innovation and economic recovery and to promote employment, social, economic and environmental sustainability. We want the EIB to stand on firm and strong financial ground. The EIB should have a strong mandate with a strong investment portfolio, especially in the framework of the European Fund for Strategic Investments. This strong mandate requires strong monitoring. While the EIB should be mostly independent in its expertise to select the most appropriate beneficiaries, it also has to follow strict rules and guidelines monitored by the budgetary authority and the public in general.
There is always room for improvement and we hope that the relations between the European Parliament and the EIB will further deepen to ensure the strong mandate and effective activity of the Investment Bank. Enhancing the monitoring of the EIB's performance would be an important step towards a more accountable and effective Investment Bank.

Gabriel Mato (PPE). – Señora Presidenta. Gracias, señor Hoyer, por estar hoy aquí.
               

                  Todos somos conscientes de cómo los niveles de inversión, tanto pública como privada, se redujeron especialmente en los países de la periferia durante la crisis. Usted lo ha destacado y yo lo reafirmo como elemento clave: la financiación a las pymes —37 % de nuevos préstamos concedidos— que son, además, la columna vertebral de nuestra economía. Crean el 85 % de los nuevos puestos de trabajo, y, por tanto, esto es fundamental.
               

                  Por otra parte, la inversión en infraestructuras, en proyectos innovadores, sostenibilidad, y, lo más importante, empleo, deben ser asimismo áreas de atención para el BEI. Y no se olviden de fomentar las mejores prácticas sobre transparencia fiscal y fiscalidad efectiva, asegurando que las jurisdicciones no cooperadoras no puedan beneficiarse del proyecto de inversión del BEI.
               

                  Usted se ha referido al FEIE. Lo comparto y destaco que hay que garantizar la adicionalidad y una mayor transparencia en la selección de proyectos. Y termino animándole a que el BEI tenga una mayor colaboración con los bancos nacionales de promoción.
               

Thomas Mann (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin! Lieber Herr Hoyer, Sie erhalten heute ausgesprochen viel Lob, bis auf wenige Ausnahmen, und ich finde, völlig zu Recht.
               

                  Die EIB ist weltweit der bedeutendste multilaterale Darlehensgeber und hat sich markant entwickelt, weil sie praxisorientiert ist. Im Vorjahr hatte ich Gelegenheit, im ECON-Ausschuss für die EVP eine Stellungnahme mitzuverfassen, und kann heute weitere positive Tendenzen konstatieren.
               

                  Ich denke, das Wichtige dabei ist, dass Sie in schwierigen wirtschaftlichen Situationen, in Schwächephasen, eine Schlüsselinstitution sind bei der Vergabe von Krediten. Neben dem Investitionsvolumen und den Renditen wird auch ein Zukunftsszenario der Kunden entwickelt, und zwar sehr präzise. Ich plädiere erneut dafür, dass insbesondere die wettbewerbsfähigen und die dynamischen KMU mit Ambition gefördert werden. Sie machen das schon. Aber ich denke, da müssen Schwerpunkte gesetzt werden. Dafür sollten aus meiner Sicht die Kooperationen mit den regionalen Institutionen weiter optimiert werden. Diese Vorgehensweise ist aus meiner Sicht eine Stärkung des wirtschaftlichen und des sozialen Zusammenhalts in der EU.
               


                        ‘Catch the eye’ eljárás


Franc Bogovič (PPE). – Tudi sam pozdravljam obe poročili, kakor tudi delo Evropske investicijske banke. Mislim, da ste pomembna inštitucija, ki je orodje, pravzaprav, politiki izvajanja, na eni strani Komisija, Parlament, Evropska investicijska banka pa na terenu.
               

                  Moja prošnja ali na nek način priporočilo gre v tej smeri, da se usmerite še bolj na države, ki smo kasneje pristopile v Evropsko unijo. Prihajam iz Slovenije in sem trdno prepričan, da država, kot je naša, zelo potrebuje know-how, ki ga vaša inštitucija obvlada.
               

                  Poznam in kot župan sem sodeloval v projektih, ki so bili financirani iz evropskih sredstev, pregledani s strani Jaspersa, in tudi sedaj je zelo pomembno v okviru evropskega investicijskega sklada EFSI, da vaše inštitucije spodbudijo to miselnost partnerstva v vzhodnoevropskih državah, državah, ki smo se kasneje pridružile.
               

                  Mislim, da če se bodo te države bolje organizirale, na primer kot je v Sloveniji projekt Drugi tir, bomo tudi več sredstev iz Evropske investicijske banke porabili in imeli Evropo enakomerneje razvito.
               

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, sunt rapoarte foarte importante. Evident că BEI este un actor principal pentru realizarea agendei noastre 2030. Dacă vreți, toată strategia Uniunii Europene depinde de investiții, vrem conectivitate, vrem eficientizare energetică, vrem susținerea IMM-urilor.
               

                  Personal, fac parte din Comisia IMCO și sunt o susținătoare a IMM-urilor, nu cred că este suficient procentul de 38 % dacă ne gândim că avem 99 % la sută IMM-uri. Și apoi, aș recomanda BEI-ului niște linii roșii: în primul rând, zonele sărace, zonele care au nevoie de investiții dacă vrem coeziune socială, dacă vrem să nu mai fie un exod de creiere dintr-o parte în alta și să sărăcim și mai mult anumite zone.
               

                  Apoi, altă linie roșie: conectivitatea. Există infrastructură deficitară în foarte multe zone. Cum să vorbim de conectivitate în Europa dacă avem zone în care nu avem autostrăzi, nu avem cale ferată? Și, nu în ultimul rând, așa cum spuneam, IMM-urile, care sunt structura de bază a Uniunii Europene.
               

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Hoyer, κύριε Πρόεδρε της Ευρωπαϊκής Τράπεζας Επενδύσεων, αναφερθήκατε στην Ελλάδα, αλλά ξεχάσατε να μας πείτε ότι η Ευρωπαϊκή Τράπεζα Επενδύσεων έδωσε δάνειο 280 εκατομμύρια ευρώ στη γερμανική κρατική εταιρεία Fraport, προκειμένου να αρπάξει τα 14 περιφερειακά αεροδρόμια της Ελλάδας για 40 χρόνια. Ξεχάσατε να μας πείτε ότι η Τράπεζα της Ελλάδος, στο πλαίσιο της ποσοτικής χαλάρωσης, αγόρασε ήδη ομόλογα της ΕΤΕΠ. Αλήθεια, μήπως με τα χρήματα που πήρατε από την Τράπεζα της Ελλάδος τελικά δώσατε το δάνειο των 280 εκατομμυρίων ευρώ στη Fraport; Πρόσφατα δώσατε 100 εκατομμύρια ευρώ σε ελληνική τράπεζα η οποία λίγες μέρες πιο πριν, δήθεν εντελώς τυχαία, είχε δώσει δάνειο 284,7 εκατομμύρια ευρώ, επίσης στη Fraport. Μήπως τελικά χρηματοδοτήσατε και την International Financial Cooperation Βank και την EBRD, που επίσης έδωσαν 250 εκατομμύρια ευρώ στη Fraport;
               

Jean-Luc Schaffhauser (ENF). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur Hoyer, avec Philippe Maystadt, en 2012, on s'était posé la question: comment faire des transferts entre le Nord et le Sud, alors que ces transferts n'existent plus, ou à l'époque étaient mal faits? Nous avions pensé que la Banque centrale européenne pouvait jouer un rôle – elle le fait –, mais surtout la BEI.
               

                  Se pose donc la question d'une part du financement de la BEI. N'y aurait-il pas intérêt à aller directement à la Banque centrale et à ne pas aller sur le marché? Actuellement, la Banque centrale achète de la dette, il serait plus intelligent qu'elle investisse dans des projets.
               

                  Deuxièmement, est-ce que la Banque européenne d'investissement est adaptée au risque, c'est-à-dire à l'investissement dans le Sud?
               

                  Troisièmement, est-ce qu'elle peut particulièrement monter des projets de A à Z, quand il n'y a plus de marché et lorsqu'il faut faire une politique d'aménagement du territoire? Ne faut-il pas constituer au sein de la BEI une agence d'investissement particulièrement entre le Nord et le Sud?
               

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la crisi economica ha indebolito notevolmente la crescita economica europea e uno dei fattori principali è rappresentato proprio dal calo degli investimenti. Nei paesi più colpiti dalla crisi, il calo degli investimenti pubblici e privati, come dimostrano le conclusioni di Eurostat, ha raggiunto livelli allarmanti e i tassi di disoccupazione restano elevati.
               

                  La BEI deve contribuire a superare le disuguaglianze regionali, fornendo consulenza allo sviluppo di progettualità private ed individuando modalità più efficaci per sostenere lo sviluppo economico dei paesi in programma di stabilizzazione. L'accesso ai finanziamenti rappresenta il vero problema delle piccole e medie imprese. È indispensabile l'elaborazione di una nuova strategia che favorisca l'accesso ai finanziamenti per le PMI, anche attraverso programmi ed iniziative di facilitazione degli scambi, quali ad esempio lo strumento europeo Progress di microfinanza. Alla luce del ruolo strategico delle microimprese e delle PMI, la BEI dovrebbe innanzitutto sostenere le imprese dei paesi caratterizzati da un contesto economico e bancario sfavorevole. Ahimè, ciò sicuramente non accade nel modo più efficace.
               

Pirkko Ruohonen-Lerner (ECR). – Arvoisa puhemies, komissaari Moscovici on tänään kiinnittänyt huomiota myös kansalaisten tarpeisiin ja huolenaiheisiin, joten kerron Teille yhden tuoreen esimerkin Suomesta, jossa on keskusteltu Euroopan investointipankin johtajien suurista palkkioista ja korvauksista. Palkan lisäksi maksettavat korvaukset voivat nousta jopa satoihin tuhansiin euroihin. Niitä maksetaan myös kompensaationa tuottoisan työn jättämisestä, jos johtaja päättääkin vaihtaa työnantajaa sellaiseen työnantajaan, joka maksaa huonompaa palkkaa. Kyse ei ole edes välttämättä kultaisesta kädenpuristuksesta johtajan vaihdoksen sujuvoittamiseksi, vaan korvauksia maksetaan täysin oma-aloitteisesti lähteville johtajille.
               

                  Nämä oikeustajua haastavat korvaukset eivät ole rajoittuneet vain Euroopan investointipankkiin, vaan koskevat monia muitakin, kuten komissaareja. Pidättekö näitä piiloon rakennettuja korvauksia kohtuullisina? Eivätkö ne anteliaisuudessaan lähesty järjestelmän sisäänrakennettua korruptiota?
               

(A ‘catch the eye’ eljárás vége.)


Pierre Moscovici,
membre de la Commission. – Madame la Présidente, mesdames et messieurs les députés, je voudrais d'abord remercier chacune et chacun pour le débat fructueux que nous avons eu aujourd'hui. Je tiens à souligner à nouveau le travail réalisé par vos commissions et en particulier par vos deux rapporteurs.
               

                  Nous accueillons très favorablement le nouveau cadre de ce débat, avec la contribution de deux rapports parlementaires au contenu très riche, dont l'un porte sur le contrôle des activités financières de la BEI. C'est la conséquence du rôle économique croissant de la BEI et de ses capacités d'investissement renforcées, que la Commission européenne a souhaité et soutient.
               

                  La situation économique et financière de l'Europe exige une action politique très déterminée. Nous sommes convaincus que les activités de la BEI sont une composante cruciale des efforts de l'Union européenne pour rétablir une croissance durable et un meilleur niveau d'emploi en Europe, en particulier à travers le partenariat entre la Commission et la BEI dans la mise en oeuvre du plan d'investissement pour l'Europe. Nous n'avons qu'à nous réjouir de cette relation entre nous. La confiance que nous accordons à la BEI est tout à fait bien placée.
               

                  Je suis convaincu que l'avis du Parlement sur les activités de la BEI sera, l'année prochaine, aussi encourageant que celui qu'il a élaboré sur le rapport 2015 de la BEI et puis il prendra aussi en compte de nouveaux apports de cette banque, qui est notre banque.
               

                  Dans ce contexte, je me réjouis que se poursuive, sous le regard attentif et vigilant du Parlement européen, une coopération très étroite et très fructueuse entre la Commission européenne et la BEI pour le bien des Européens, pour plus d'investissements et plus d'emplois.
               

                  C'est vraiment le vœu que je forme.
               

Werner Hoyer,
President of the European Investment Bank. – Madam President, this was such a wide spectrum of interventions and opinions and issues that I certainly cannot respond to each and every one of them in the very limited time, so I promise to every Member of the European Parliament who has posed a question or made a remark that we will come back individually to those issues which I cannot immediately address.
I think a couple of issues are really of key importance for me now, because I heard the words ‘focus’ and ‘coordination’ again and again, and I can report to you that in the context of the economic resilience initiative for the Southern Neighbourhood and the Western Balkans, in connection then with the external investment plan of the European Union, and the G20 initiative on Africa, it is very evident that more and better coordination is absolutely urgent if we do not want to confuse our partners in the political and economic world.
Second point, I thank you very much for your remarks on the external activities of the European Investment Bank. It is only roughly 10% of what we are doing, but it is gaining importance because it becomes more and more evident that the European Union is sometimes serving its interests best if it looks beyond its own borders and takes activities outside the Union, and the EU bank is ready to support that. I believe in the future there will be more.
There is one big issue that has been the focus of the discussions in Washington last weekend, and that is climate change and sustainability, and I can tell you that the wind is not necessarily getting any more favourable to these issues. We have insisted also in the discussions with the other multilateral development banks and international financial institutions that we must not lower our ambitions on climate change mitigation and the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals which we subscribed to so happily only three years ago. I think it is a question of credibility also of the financial institutions that we do not forget what we subscribed to in New York two years ago and in Paris one-and-a-half years ago. The EIB is in the vanguard in this respect among the financial institutions.
There is one big issue within the European Union that we have to address and we will address it now with the New York Regulation for EFSI II, and that is cohesion. I think it has been a mistake in the original legislation, and you have something to do with that legislation by the way, for EFSI, because the combination of the ESIF and EFSI was very difficult in the old regulation and with the new one that is now on your desks, I think this will get better. I think we can be better on cohesion in the next couple of years. However, I want to get away from the impression that comes back in reports and questions again and again that we, so to speak, favour the old, big, strong Member States of the European to the detriment of the small ones. I shall read out the EIB's 2016 signatures as a percentage of GDP, and I shall just mention the list in the order of magnitude of the Member States. So investments per GDP: Estonia: 1; Malta, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Croatia, Poland, Slovakia, Finland, Portugal, Spain, Greece, Italy, Lithuania – these are the first countries on that list and I think that reflects the needs and the fact that probably roughly three times as much per capita goes into a country like Spain, and that in comparison to my own country shows that the European Union and the European Investment Bank are aware of our special responsibilities vis-à-vis those countries which are either relatively new in the Union or are in difficulties, and Spain is a wonderful example where the EIB could make a substantial contribution to a thorough improvement of the situation, and we are proud of that.
Then there has been a lot of worry about microcredit. I fully share that. We have lots of experience with microcredit outside the European Union and I think it is gaining in importance within it as well. I have heard well that you encourage us to take more risk. I agree with that as well. This is a cultural issue for a bank which invests, but it must not be overlooked that this bank is capital-market based. We are proud to say, and sometimes politicians are proud to say, the EU bank is the biggest multilateral lender in the world. It is. But we are also the biggest multilateral borrower in the world because we refinance by going to the capital markets for EUR 70-100 billion per year through the sale of EIB bonds, so we have an accumulated debt also of more than EUR half a trillion, and that means we have to be very serious when we talk about sustainability. That is a principle that goes beyond economics, of course, but also when it comes to the principle of economic viability and the concentration of social and environmental standards which we observe closely.
Finally, I know that questions of accountability are always of utmost importance and so are questions of transparency. Everything can get better, but if I compare this bank to its peers then I would like to say that we are second to none, and if the biggest one is second to none, then I think we are not completely on the wrong track.

Georgios Kyrtsos,
rapporteur. – Madam President, the discussion we have had was very interesting. A lot of issues were raised, in almost all cases in a constructive way.
I would like to complete my contribution to the discussion with a positive assessment of the future activities of the EIB and its institutional relations with Parliament. First, the EIB is functioning in a more favourable economic environment than in previous years. The eurozone economy grew in 2016 at a rate of 1.7%, which surpasses the USA's 1.6%. The economic dynamics are even better in the European Union of the 28 Member States. Public debt was reduced as a percentage of GDP in the eurozone and in the European Union as a whole. In addition, the budget deficit in the eurozone was reduced to 1.5% of GDP in 2016, much lower than the 3% limit. That means that the EIB is in a better position to collaborate with the Commission, the Member States, and the private sector to boost its investment activity. Second, Parliament has developed its constructive criticism concerning the activities of the EIB, and I am certain that President Hoyer and his collaborators will respond in a positive way. They have the managerial skills to further improve the operation of the EIB and President Hoyer, as a former parliamentarian, can grasp the political and social dimension of our criticism. Third, we have to be optimistic, because economic pessimism is usually proven to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Nedzhmi Ali,
rapporteur. – Madam President, I would like first of all to thank all the colleagues who took part in the discussion today for their contribution, and I would also like to thank all the colleagues who will take part during the whole process of work on the report, including the discussions in the meetings of the Committee on Budgetary Control, providing amendment suggestions that will be very useful for the finalisation of the report.
We have seen today during the debate that all the issues which had been raised by colleagues have taken their places in the in the report. I think that is why it was very useful.
I would like also to express my appreciation to the leadership of the European Investment Bank for the responsiveness of its representatives, who took part in the meetings and promptly provided, in detail, all the necessary information that was requested for the preparation of this report. Having in mind our enormous common goals, the shared level of cooperation between the European Parliament and the European Investment Bank should be increased, as has been stated by Mr Hoyer.
Thank you once more, and this cooperation will be beneficial to all European citizens.

Elnök asszony. – A vitát lezárom.
               

                  A szavazásra 2017. április 27-én, csütörtökön kerül sor.
               


Írásbeli nyilatkozatok (162. cikk)



Karol Karski (ECR),
na piśmie. – Szanowni Państwo! Grupa EKR akceptuje sprawozdanie z działalności finansowej Europejskiego Banku Inwestycyjnego, doceniając jego rolę zwłaszcza w zakresie akcji kredytowej i finansowania łączonego dla małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw. Dostrzegam jednak dwa aspekty działalności EBI wymagające szczególnej uwagi.
               

                  Pierwszym jest konieczność zwiększenia zaangażowania w finansowanie inwestycji typu greenfield na terenach krajów tzw. nowej Unii – terenach z dużym udziałem ziemi rolnej i nieużytków. Jednym z liderów wykorzystywania środków z tej puli jest Polska, w której liczba inwestycji typu greenfield rosła w ostatnich latach w średnim rocznym tempie 9 %. Jednakże za wzrostem takiego zaangażowania EBI powinno iść również ogólne zwiększenie zasięgu geograficznego projektów realizowanych w ramach Europejskiego Funduszu Inwestycji Strategicznych oraz stałe szkolenia eksperckie dla jego potencjalnych beneficjentów.
               

                  Przedsiębiorstwa z państw tzw. nowej Unii borykają się często ze stosunkowo niskim poziomem know-how w zakresie pozyskiwania dostępnych funduszy inwestycyjnych i nie mogą konkurować ze swoimi bardziej doświadczonymi zachodnimi sąsiadami, przykładowo z Wielką Brytanią – największym beneficjentem ostatnich inwestycji w ramach EFIS.
               

                  Jestem głęboko przekonany, że właśnie połączenie większego zaangażowania w inwestycje od podstaw w krajach nowej Unii z intensyfikacją szkoleń eksperckich w zakresie ich pozyskiwania będzie miało niebagatelne znaczenie dla skuteczności unijnej polityki spójności i wyrównywania szans rozwojowych pomiędzy państwami członkowskimi.
               

Vladimír Maňka (S&D),
písomne. – V kontexte EÚ je Európska investičná banka zásadným finančným nástrojom a inštitúciou na udržanie verejných a súkromných investícií v Únii. V roku 2015 dosiahla EIB prebytok 2,8 miliardy EUR. Len v oblasti dopravných projektov bolo investovaných 14 miliárd EUR. Aj do budúcnosti pokladám za dôležité, aby pomoc a podpora z EIB bola sústreďovaná na životaschopné projekty s vysokou pridanou hodnotou, ktoré pozitívne ovplyvnia rast zamestnanosti, podporia inovatívne projekty a využívanie domácich zdrojov energií a surovín. Pozornosť treba sústrediť na malé a stredné podniky a to aj v odľahlejších regiónoch, ktoré môžu rozhýbať ekonomiku, hospodárstvo a riešiť problém nezamestnanosti predovšetkým mladých ľudí. Zároveň EIB musí zodpovednou daňovou politikou a kvalitnými a dostatočnými informáciami o konečných prijímateľoch pomoci prispievať k zvyšovaniu daňovej disciplíny a predchádzaniu a odhaľovaniu podvodov.
               

Marian-Jean Marinescu (PPE),
în scris. – BEI trebuie să investească în proiecte care să realizeze o creștere sustenabilă în toate statele membre, iar în ce privește instrumentul FEIS – Fondul european pentru investiții strategice, trebuie să se analizeze cu atenție adiționalitatea proiectelor finanțate, dată fiind capacitatea suplimentară de asumare a riscurilor.
               

                  FEI și FEIS vor trebui să joace un rol crucial în materie de capital de risc și garanții pentru a completa activitățile BEI, în special în ceea ce privește sprijinirea IMM-urilor, dar și coeziunea economică.
               

                  Obiectivul efectului multiplicator al fondurilor de garantare trebuie să fie dublat de stimularea sectoarelor economice în declin și de recuperarea decalajelor din regiunile europene mai puțin dezvoltate. Nu este normal ca 73 % dintre împrumuturile acordate de BEI în 2015 să fie concentrate în doar șase state membre.
               

                  Simplificarea accesului la finanțare și combinarea granturilor cu creditele și instrumentele financiare sunt alte aspecte care trebuie realizate.
               

                  Cer BEI să țină cont mai mult de nevoia de consiliere în mod direct a beneficiarilor și de consolidare a cooperării cu băncile naționale de promovare sau instituțiile relevante.
               

                  Sper ca Inițiativa pentru IMM-uri demarată și în România să beneficieze de rezultatele scontate și cer FEI să prezinte în deplină transparență reușitele și eșecurile programului.
               

Claude Rolin (PPE),
par écrit. – Je vous invite à soutenir ce rapport. Car le texte soumis au vote encourage la BEI à poursuivre ses efforts en vue de surmonter le déficit d'investissement, les failles du marché et les lacunes sectorielles et à investir dans des projets et des opérations qui ont une réelle valeur ajoutée afin de parvenir à une cohésion européenne renforcée sur les plans économique, social et territorial, à un climat plus favorable aux investissements, à un taux d'emploi plus élevé et au rétablissement d'une croissance durable dans toute l'Union.
               

                  Il vient également rappeler — qui plus est — que le soutien à la reprise économique, à la croissance durable et au renforcement de la cohésion est un objectif primordial et que la BEI doit mieux anticiper les défis structurels, notamment ceux qui concernent la réindustrialisation de l'Europe et l'économie numérique fondée sur le savoir, afin de générer de nouvelles possibilités économiques et l'innovation et d'encourager le développement d'une économie circulaire et une meilleure utilisation des énergies renouvelables, conformément aux objectifs en matière d'environnement, de climat et d'énergie.
               

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. ANTONIO TAJANI


Presidente

4.   State of play of the second review of the economic adjustment programme for Greece (debate)

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la discussione sulla dichiarazione del Presidente dell'Eurogruppo sullo stato di avanzamento del secondo riesame del programma di aggiustamento economico per la Grecia (2017/2660(RSP)).
               

Jeroen Dijsselbloem,
President of the Eurogroup. – Mr President, it is an honour once again to participate in this exchange of views on the second review of the Greek adjustment programme. I regret not having been able to join you a few weeks ago; as I indicated in writing to you, Mr President, domestic political obligations prevented me from accepting your previous invitation. There was certainly no ill will intended on my part, and I very much value the regular exchanges that I have with Parliament and stand ready to work with you in the coming months.
Before turning to Greece, let me shortly address the issue of my remarks in an interview with the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung last month. In this interview, I made the point that respecting our agreed framework is crucial for maintaining confidence and solidarity in the eurozone. In the days following the interview, however, my words were linked to the situation during the crisis periods in certain southern European countries. This is very unfortunate as it was not what I said, and certainly not what I had intended to say. The crisis years have impacted societies throughout the eurozone and throughout the Union at great social expense, and solidarity has been justified.
The way I expressed myself has caused offence, and I regret this very much. It was, of course, never my intention to insult people. I have worked for the past four years to bring the eurozone closer together, and the last thing I want is to cause new divides. As Parliament stated in its recent resolution on the budgetary capacity, we can only successfully strengthen the monetary union if responsibility and solidarity are closely linked. I strongly believe in that, and I will continue to work for that.
One way to move forward in strengthening the EMU is to develop the ESM further into a European Monetary Fund. On my initiative, the EFSF and ESM programmes are being evaluated at this moment. The report is being drawn up by an evaluation commission led by Gertrude Tumpel-Gugerell and will be published in June, and I can imagine we will devote one of our future hearings to this report.
One important lesson is that we should keep and improve on the expertise that has been acquired over the crisis period, and to anchor it at the ESM. The ESM, in my mind, should be in the lead in designing, negotiating and monitoring future programmes. Also, the ESM could in the future have a broader preventive mandate in line with how the IMF does it now by developing its own country reports to assure objective macroeconomic analysis. In my view, the Commission should continue in its role as keeper of the pact.
Having said that, now let me turn to Greece. A lot has been accomplished in the first part of the current programme, such as reform in the financial sector, the setting up of an independent authority of public revenues, implementation of the first leg of an ambitious income tax and pension reform and the creation of a privatisation agency, etc. These steps proved to be instrumental in bolstering confidence, and have resulted in a return of deposits, a reduced dependency on ELA and in a much better than expected fiscal performance overall in 2016. Eurostat came out last Monday with a primary surplus figure of 3.9% for Greece.
Meanwhile, the second review is, admittedly, taking too much time. Therefore, at my initiative in February and following intensified high-level talks in March between the Institutions and the Greek Government, an over-arching agreement was reached earlier this month.
The authorities in the Institutions have agreed on the size, the sequencing and the timing of reform measures underpinning a growth-friendly rebalancing of the economy. In short, the authorities committed to legislating up-front further pension and income tax reforms, each worth about 1% of GDP. Pension reforms will become effective in 2019 unconditionally. Income tax reform is planned to become effective in 2020 in principle, unless front-loading is needed. We also agreed that the authorities can now legislate expansionary measures to implement as of 2019, provided of course that the medium-term targets are met. Apart from possible tax measures, it provides for improvements to the modernised social safety net that Greece is rightly developing.
Beyond this, recent discussions also concerned labour market reforms that balance the need for a flexible economy with the vital respect for workers' social rights in line with European best practices. This approach has allowed the institutions to resume their mission in Athens. They returned last Tuesday, and I am confident that an agreement on the whole package will be reached very soon. The Eurogroup will then also review Greece's medium-term fiscal trajectory and debt sustainability, and let me just say that I believe that the ten-year period of a primary surplus target of 3.5 per cent should be shortened.
In terms of the next steps, I expect that all of this will allow all institutions to come to the conclusion that the numbers add up, and the IMF to financially participate. I hope to be able to report to you the successful conclusion of the second review before the end of next month, allowing confidence to return to the Greek economy and for Greece to join all other eurozone countries in their ongoing process of economic recovery.

Pierre Moscovici,
membre de la Commission. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président de l'Eurogroupe, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, c'est dans un contexte particulièrement positif que je vous retrouve aujourd'hui aux côtés du président de l'Eurogroupe, pour partager nos réflexions, qui sont communes en vérité, sur un sujet essentiel pour la zone euro et pour l'Union européenne dans son ensemble.
               

                  Je veux saluer au passage l'action de Jeroen Dijsselbloem. Je peux porter témoignage, ayant été auparavant ministre des finances et étant maintenant commissaire, que, depuis son entrée en fonction, il travaille inlassablement pour trouver une solution aux difficultés de la Grèce. Il a aussi émis des propos sur l'avenir de l'Union économique et monétaire. Nous aurons l'occasion d'en parler.
               

                  La Commission européenne va elle-même fournir son propre document de réflexion d'ici quelques semaines et il faudra, en effet, réfléchir à l'articulation la plus harmonieuse entre le rôle du mécanisme européen de stabilité et la Commission comme gardienne de l'intérêt général.
               

                  Nous nous rencontrons ici à un moment qui tombe à point nommé, suite à la notification par Eurostat du chiffre du déficit 2016, en début de semaine, qui valide ce que la Commission dit depuis plusieurs mois, c'est-à-dire que l'économie grecque s'est montrée résiliente face aux turbulences de 2015 et aux effets du contrôle des capitaux. Selon la définition du programme, le solde primaire 2016 devrait s'élever à 4,2 % du PIB.
               

                  Il faut rappeler que la Grèce fait nettement mieux que l'objectif de 0,5 % du PIB fixé par le programme, neuf fois mieux tout de même. C'est encore, bien sûr, sous réserve de confirmation. Certains éléments font l'objet de discussions en cours avec les autorités grecques et Athènes, mais la performance est tout de même à saluer.
               

                  La Grèce est donc en voie d'atteindre son objectif de 1,75 % en 2017 et de 3,5 % du PIB en 2018. C'est ce que la Commission pense. Ces développements sont le fruit d'un paquet de consolidation budgétaire qui comprenait des mesures paramétriques de qualité, adoptées en 2015 et 2016, avec un rendement budgétaire cumulé. Il faut quand même être conscient du chiffre de l'effort fait de 4,5 % du PIB. De tels efforts ne doivent pas être oubliés ou ignorés. Ils doivent être ancrés et approfondis.
               

                  Ce sont là de bonnes nouvelles, mais nous devons pour autant nous garder de toute complaisance en ce qui concerne la situation économique et sociale de la Grèce.
               

                  Comme je vous l'ai dit la dernière fois que j'étais parmi vous, les tendances positives observées en 2016 semblent à présent marquer le pas, en raison en particulier des retards dans la culture de la deuxième revue du programme MES et nous savons que le chômage demeure à des niveaux inacceptables en valeur absolue, notamment le chômage des jeunes. L'investissement doit également être encore relancé pour soutenir la croissance.
               

                  La Grèce ne peut pas se permettre de perdre l'élan gagné en 2016. Cela nécessite un soutien constructif de tous pour accompagner le processus d'ancrage des réformes et la reprise, qui a commencé à apparaître.
               

                  Pour moi et pour la Commission, cela signifie que les autorités grecques, toutes les institutions, tous les acteurs doivent être encore plus vigilants. Nous devons travailler de manière constructive et collective pour clore au plus vite la deuxième revue.
               

                  Où en sommes-nous? Quelles sont les prochaines étapes? Je ne fais que reprendre ce qu'a dit le président de l'Eurogroupe. Tout d'abord, un accord sur le fond a été trouvé à La Valette, ce mois-ci, sur les paramètres budgétaires post-programme nécessaires à la conclusion de l'accord. Cela devrait également permettre de clôturer la revue et de combler les lacunes qui subsistent. Le train de mesures post-programme pour 2019 et pour 2020 sera fiscalement neutre si les prévisions sont exactes. Il consistera en de nouvelles mesures budgétaires à hauteur de 2 % du PIB.
               

                  Mais ces mesures reviennent dans le fond à une recomposition des finances publiques pour renforcer la croissance et la protection sociale. En effet, le paquet comprend également à hauteur de 2 % des mesures favorables à la croissance à mettre en œuvre si la Grèce atteint ses objectifs d'excédent primaire, comme nous pensons que ce sera le cas. Dans le même temps, la Commission continuera à suivre de près l'impact social du paquet, notamment sur les retraites.
               

                  L'accord de La Valette et les contacts qui ont été pris depuis ont permis aux institutions de retourner à Athènes cette semaine. L'objectif est partagé, c'est de parvenir à un accord technique rapidement. Cet accord est essentiel pour limiter les risques que poseraient des retards, notamment sur le résultat budgétaire positif enregistré en Grèce l'an dernier et pour faire face à l'incertitude, qui est le pire ennemi de l'économie grecque.
               

                  La Grèce et ses autorités ont accompli d'importants progrès sur les points du programme qui demeuraient inachevés. Je ne vais pas entrer ici dans le détail puisqu'ils ont été présentés au cours de notre discussion, lors de la dernière session plénière. Mais la mission en cours doit permettre de faire des progrès sur les éléments qui restent à traiter, tant en ce qui concerne la conditionnalité de la revue que les mesures post-programme.
               

                  Nous restons convaincus que, grâce aux réformes de fond et aux efforts à poursuivre dans le cadre de ce programme, l'économie grecque est capable de tourner la page d'une période longue et difficile, mais elle doit être soutenue, et non entravée par l'incertitude. La reprise doit, elle aussi, être soutenue et ancrée.
               

                  Dans le cadre des travaux de l'Eurogroupe, sous la responsabilité de son président, la Commission fait tout ce qui est en son pouvoir dans son rôle de facilitateur pour veiller à ce que le train de mesures équilibrées soit mis en œuvre fidèlement et rapidement. Une fois l'accord technique obtenu, les autorités grecques doivent mettre en œuvre une série de mesures préalables. Je note que certaines ont déjà été mises en œuvre, mais d'autres doivent être finalisées dans les jours et les semaines à venir sur les plans juridique et administratif. C'est une tâche qui n'est pas facile, mais nous sommes convaincus que nous pouvons y arriver.
               

                  Si tout se passe de manière constructive, l'évaluation de cette seconde revue doit permettre un accord formel – c'est ce que je souhaite lors du prochain Eurogroupe – et ainsi ouvrir ensuite la voie au déboursement des fonds.
               

                  Enfin, la Commission continuera aussi à soutenir les efforts visant à rendre la dette grecque plus viable. Nous pensons que c'est nécessaire et possible. Comme vous le savez, nous avons défendu l'idée depuis un certain temps qu'une trajectoire plus réaliste pour l'excédent primaire sera nécessaire après la fin du programme. C'est ce pourquoi nous nous battons. Sans une trajectoire plus crédible, les marchés ne seront pas disposés à prêter à des taux raisonnables et la Grèce continuera à dépendre excessivement du soutien de ses partenaires européens.
               

                  En fin de compte, il s'agit bien d'une question de partage des charges entre la Grèce et l'Eurogroupe. Dans ce cadre, la Commission est évidemment disposée à travailler pour dégager un compromis équitable. Je crois très sincèrement que c'est ce que nous sommes en train de parvenir à faire avec Jeroen Dijsselbloem.
               

Le Président. – Avant de commencer le débat, je vous informe que je n'accepterai pas de question ‘carton bleu’ aujourd'hui.
               

                  Nous sommes pressés car le vote va durer environ une heure et demie. Il faut donc que nous nous dépêchions. Je vous remercie de bien vouloir respecter les temps de parole au cours du débat.
               

Françoise Grossetête,
au nom du groupe PPE. – Monsieur le Président, tout d'abord, je vais bien sûr m'adresser à M. le président de l'Eurogroupe et lui dire que je regrette, comme beaucoup de mes collègues, les propos qu'il a pu tenir récemment sur les pays du Sud, parce que la détresse sociale que connaissent beaucoup de nos concitoyens mérite mieux que des caricatures et cela me paraissait être une injure pour tous ceux qui travaillent dans ces pays-là.
               

                  Parlons de la Grèce, où justement cette détresse sociale se fait sentir beaucoup plus fort que nulle part ailleurs. Près de la moitié des jeunes de moins de 25 ans sont au chômage, près de la moitié d'une génération est sacrifiée, des milliers de gens y souffrent véritablement et le système de santé est en difficulté. Nous devons tous faire l'effort de comprendre.
               

                  Bien sûr, comprendre ne veut pas dire excuser et, M. le commissaire nous l'a bien dit, il ne faut pas avoir de complaisance. Si la Grèce est aujourd'hui dans cette situation, il faut se rappeler que c'est en grande partie à cause de certains de ses dirigeants, tels que M. Tsipras qui, en raison de son manque de volonté de faire des réformes, au début de sa prise de pouvoir, nous a menés dans cette impasse populiste.
               

                  Aujourd'hui, on constate enfin qu'il y a un engagement sur des réformes. La situation s'améliore tout doucement. Il faut que nous arrivions à une amélioration durable et nous espérons bien sûr que la deuxième tranche d'aide puisse être débloquée avant l'été.
               

                  Les difficultés, que nous rencontrons aussi avec le FMI, sont peut-être l'occasion de reposer la question de l'indépendance de l'Europe en matière de surveillance macroéconomique et de prêts en dernier ressort. Nous ne pouvons pas continuer à prêter le flanc aux humeurs du FMI. À cette fin, je crois fermement qu'il faut faire évoluer le mécanisme européen de stabilité vers un véritable fonds monétaire européen.
               

                  Je pense que, pour la Grèce, pour la zone euro, pour le reste de l'Europe, c'est un enjeu d'avenir.
               

Roberto Gualtieri,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, I am glad to hear that Mr Dijsselbloem recognises that his words were inappropriate and says that they were misunderstood.
But now let us focus on Greece: the Greek economy is at a turning point. The primary surplus for 2016 has reached an astonishing level – far above the target of 0.5. IMF forecasts have proved to be wrong. Notwithstanding such an impressive fiscal consolidation, economic recovery is underway. The agreement reached at the last Eurogroup on the fiscal structural measures and the contingent expansionary package has been difficult, but now it gives us the concrete hope that this top-level agreement can be reached quickly, possibly in a few days.
On this basis, we expect – and urge – the next Eurogroup to conclude the second review and to address the necessary debt relief issues. It is evident, as you said, that the primary surplus of 3.5 can be sustainable only for a very limited period of time. We need a medium-term fiscal path which is economically realistic and credible and a package of medium-term debt relief measures that is consistent with such a revised path. This overall political agreement is urgent and essential, not only for allowing Greece to honour its financial commitment in good time, but is necessary to keep up the positive momentum of the economy and to allow Greece to return to bond markets and to be included in the ECB QE programme, which will be a powerful driver towards stability, confidence and growth.
Greek citizens deserve this. Europe deserves this. Let us not waste this opportunity; let us not miss the deadline again. Let us honour our duty and obligation of unity and solidarity and restore credibility and hope in the European project.

Νότης Μαριάς,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας ECR. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Dijsselbloem, ο ελληνικός λαός σάς στέλνει μήνυμα αγανάκτησης και διαμαρτυρίας για τις επονείδιστες και απαράδεκτες δηλώσεις σας. Δεν μας έπεισαν οι εξηγήσεις που μας δώσατε, διότι άλλα μας είπατε όταν τέθηκε το θέμα στην επιτροπή οικονομικών. Ο ελληνικός λαός σάς στέλνει επίσης μήνυμα διαμαρτυρίας για τις απαράδεκτες πολιτικές του Εurogroup, που έχουν μετατρέψει την Ελλάδα σε ένα απέραντο κοινωνικό νεκροταφείο. Με τα μνημόνια, κύριε Dijsselbloem, αντί να μειωθεί το δημόσιο χρέος, εκτοξεύτηκε στα ύψη· η φτώχεια έφτασε στο 40% του ελληνικού πληθυσμού, οι άνεργοι έφτασαν το 1,5 εκατομμύριο, η Ελλάδα έχασε το 25% του ΑΕΠ, οι μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις διαλύθηκαν, οι συντάξεις μειώθηκαν κατά 50%, οι μισθοί πετσοκόπηκαν, η δημόσια περιουσία εκποιείται αντί πινακίου φακής στους ξένους δανειστές, κι όμως δεν σας φτάνουν όλα αυτά.
               

                  Επιβάλλετε σε αγαστή συνεργασία με την κυβέρνηση και τέταρτο μνημόνιο, που μειώνει τις συντάξεις, μειώνει το αφορολόγητο, αρπάζει τη δημόσια περιουσία της ΔΕΗ. Επιβάλλετε πρωτογενή πλεονάσματα, δηλαδή δόσεις για χρεολύσια ύψους 3,5% για πολλά χρόνια, κι όλα αυτά χωρίς να δίνετε καν λεφτά, χωρίς να ρυθμίζετε το χρέος.
               

                  Τι θα γίνει κύριε Dijsselbloem με το υπόλοιπο των 19,5 δισεκατομμυρίων ευρώ απ' το τρίτο δανειακό πακέτο; Τι θα γίνει με τα χρήματα που πρέπει να επιστρέψετε, τα κέρδη της Ευρωπαϊκής Κεντρικής Τράπεζας απ' τα ελληνικά ομόλογα; Δίνετε λιγότερο δανειακό κεφάλαιο. Μειώστε λοιπόν τα μέτρα κατά 25%. Επίσης, η κυβέρνηση, αντί να μειώνει τις συντάξεις, οφείλει να μοιράσει ως κοινωνικό μέρισμα αυτό που αναλογεί λόγω της υπερκάλυψης του πρωτογενούς πλεονάσματος.
               

                  Κύριε Dijsselbloem, ο ελληνικός λαός σύντομα θα σας στείλει το μήνυμα, γιατί υπάρχει άλλος δρόμος.
               

Nils Torvalds,
on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, I will start with some remarks in English due to Mr Dijsselbloem's presence and then I will continue in my barbaric Swedish.
In this House, we usually use quite colourful language and as soon as anybody else uses some colourful language then all hell breaks loose. I, as a journalist and as an avid debater, have used words far worse than Mr Dijsselbloem. I think we should have some sense of humour when we reach out to each other. Even if you probably won't be very pleased by this exculpation, then I have a great understanding that we, under stress, and with a great heart, discuss things which are hard to discuss.
Vår mest grundläggande utmaning gäller inte bara Grekland utan nästan alla länder. Under de kommande veckorna kommer den utmaningen att gälla t.ex. Frankrike i högsta grad.
Alla våra medlemsländer slits i dag av en diskussion där man å ena sidan framför förändringsförslag som egentligen inte är förändringsförslag utan som sist och slutligen bara är ett sätt att försöka lägga skulden för egna försyndelser – försyndelser som inte har med kvinnor eller sprit att göra – på någon annan. Det är den diskussionen vi för i alla länder, och den är livsfarlig.
I dagens situation och i den situationen som kommer att uppstå, som redan har uppstått i Grekland och som kommer att uppstå inom några veckor i Frankrike, har vi en tidsram att lösa dessa problem. Den tidsramen kan vi ungefär bestämma. Vi ska klara av att skapa förtroende för detta system under månaderna och åren fram till parlamentsvalet 2019.
Om vi inte klarar av det, kommer vi att stå inför jättestora utmaningar. Klarar Frankrike inte av att lösa sina problem, så vet vi att det på den andra sidan av det politiska spektret kommer att finnas ett hänsynslöst arbete för att undergräva alla realistiska försök att lösa problemen. Samma sak såg vi också i Grekland.
Medan jag var inblandad i trojkarapporten stötte vi på den här oviljan att se realistiskt på våra utmaningar. Så länge vi inte ser realistiskt på våra utmaningar, kommer vi inte heller att klara av att lösa dem.
Vi har en jättestor förståelse för Greklands folk. Min far var som poet och journalist en stor vän av det folket och skrev en bok om det folket. Vi har alltså ett stort hjärta för Grekland, men vi ska ha ett lika stort hjärta för dem som försöker komma fram med de realistiska lösningarna.

Δημήτριος Παπαδημούλης,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας GUE/NGL. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κ. Dijsselbloem και κ. Moscovici, δεν υπάρχει άλλος καιρός για χάσιμο. Το Εurogroup στις 22 Μαΐου πρέπει να δώσει τον σχεδιασμό των μελλοντικών μέτρων για το χρέος και τα πρωτογενή πλεονάσματα. Το λέει ο πρόεδρος Junker και όχι εγώ, που ανήκει στο Ευρωπαϊκό Λαϊκό Κόμμα, κυρία Grossetête. Η Ελλάδα έχει κάνει τεράστια προσπάθεια και πρέπει να αναγνωριστεί έμπρακτα. Το λέει επίσης ο Junker. Το πρωτογενές πλεόνασμα για το 2016 έκλεισε εννιά φορές πάνω από τον συμφωνημένο στόχο, σαράντα δύο φορές πάνω από τις αιωνίως αποτυχημένες προβλέψεις του Διεθνούς Νομισματικού Ταμείου. Το λένε οι αριθμοί και το ομολογείτε και εσείς κ. Dijsselbloem και εσείς κ. Moscovici.
               

                  Επομένως Διεθνές Νομισματικό Ταμείο και ευρωπαϊκοί θεσμοί πρέπει να γεφυρώσουν επιτέλους τις διαφορές τους για το χρέος και τα πλεονάσματα, έτσι ώστε στις 22 Μαΐου να έχουμε συμφωνία. Το λέει ο Dobrovskis, που επίσης κυρία Grossetête ανήκει στο Ευρωπαϊκό Λαϊκό Κόμμα. Ο ελληνικός λαός έχει πληρώσει αρκετά, έχει κάνει τεράστιες αλλαγές όλα αυτά τα χρόνια, με ανεργία, με περικοπές, με θυσίες. Φτάνει πια με αυτό το πινγκ πονγκ στην πλάτη του ελληνικού λαού μεταξύ του Βερολίνου και του Διεθνούς Νομισματικού Ταμείου!
               

                  Κύριε Dijsselbloem, εσείς, ένας σοσιαλδημοκράτης, πώς θέλετε να μείνετε στην Ιστορία; Ως ο πρόεδρος του Εurogroup που συνέβαλε με πρωτοβουλία, με πίεση, να υπάρξει συνολικό πακέτο συμφωνίας στις 22 Μαΐου ή για τις ατυχείς δηλώσεις σας για τις γυναίκες και τα ποτά; Έχετε καιρό να το σκεφτείτε και να πράξετε ανάλογα.
               

Ska Keller,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, I would like to thank Mr Dijsselbloem, and I am happy he finally made it to our plenary. Welcome. Today we talk about Greece once again, and once again we talk about budget cuts. The Eurogroup that you chair, Mr Dijsselbloem, is insisting on yet another round of cuts: of cuts to pensions, and of taxing people who have as little as EUR 500 a month in their pocket. These measures will continue to suffocate the recovery in Greece and will also increase social disruption, but nevertheless the Greek government is actually doing what you wanted it to do. It is delivering all those things; it does its ‘homework’, as you like to call it, despite the most horrific social cuts. It is time to acknowledge that, and it is time to give Greece some time to breathe and to actually do the long-term reforms that we really need and that are really necessary.
But we also shouldn't forget the other side: it's also the Eurogroup that must deliver. It's actually you, Mr Dijsselbloem, who has to do his homework. Where is the debt relief that was already agreed for Greece in May 2016? Where is the end of the austerity paradigm that has brought so much suffering and very little success? What have you done as Chair of the Eurogroup, together with your fellow finance ministers, to end tax avoidance and tax evasions? By letting big companies avoid taxes, we lose EUR 70 billion euros each year, and that's roughly half of the EU's annual budget – money that we very much need to invest into Europe's future. We cannot be tough when it comes to cuts for poorer people and be lenient when it comes to the tax avoidance of big companies. Frankly, I think the Europeans deserve a change of that policy.
Let me also say something a little more personal, because I actually don't believe that this was colourful language which you have used, Mr Dijsselbloem. It is nice that you say you did not want to insult southern countries. Very nice, but you still don't understand that with your statement you have insulted half of the European Union population – all the women in this House, all the women everywhere in the European Union – because you say that women are an object that you either buy or spend money on. This is unacceptable, and I don't understand how you cannot even see that there is a problem. This has brought about a lot of problems – a loss of credibility to the European Institutions, to us, to the Commission, to you and to the Council, and this is now your legacy that you have to deal with. I find this unacceptable. Shame on you, Mr Dijsselbloem, for disrespecting half of Europe's population.

Marco Valli,
a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ringrazio il presidente Dijsselbloem per essere venuto qua, in questo Parlamento, a rendere conto di quelle che sono state le sue parole, perché riteniamo scandaloso che un ministro delle Finanze di un paese come l'Olanda, che di fatto è un paradiso fiscale e che adotta un surplus di più del 6 % da diversi anni, come la Germania, dia lezioni morali ai paesi del Sud, dicendo che spendiamo soldi in alcol e donne. In questo vorrei sapere se calcolassimo quello che è la differenza in competitività che è stata creata dal paese Olanda, o dalla Germania per il surplus e dall'Olanda sulla questione dell'evasione fiscale, o magari anche da Lussemburgo, vediamo che ci sarebbero tanti soldi da conferire ai paesi del Sud che stanno subendo quelle che sono le politiche legate alla tenuta della moneta unica e dell'Euro.
               

                  La Grecia sta continuando a fare sacrifici insostenibili nel conflitto di interessi su cui è fondata quest'Unione europea, perché l'Unione europea si fonda su un conflitto di interessi tra mercato e politica. Svendiamo porti e aeroporti, svendiamo tutti gli asset pubblici e il welfare del Sud Europa. In cambio di cosa? In cambio di niente, perché gli interessi su questi prestiti sono insostenibili. Quindi rendiamoci conto di quello che state portando avanti come politica, perché i popoli vi giudicheranno e vi continueranno a giudicare e l'Unione europea, fondata sul conflitto di interessi, in questo modo non andrà più avanti.
               

Marco Zanni,
a nome del gruppo ENF. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, oggi parliamo di Grecia, ma in realtà parliamo di tutta l'Eurozona e di questo progetto. Presidente Dijsselbloem – farei meglio a dire presidente uscente e ministro uscente –, lei dimostra e ha dimostrato con il suo operato tutto quanto di criminale e di distruttivo c'è nel progetto dell'Eurozona e nel progetto di Maastricht. La Grecia, come ebbe a dire un vecchio europeista e Primo ministro italiano, è esattamente la manifestazione e l'esempio del più grande successo dell'Euro, perché il vero obiettivo dell'Euro non è e non sarà mai la convergenza dei paesi e il benessere dei cittadini, ma è solamente la compressione dei diritti dei lavoratori e dei salari e la distruzione dei paesi, come è avvenuto in Grecia.
               

                  Le politiche che voi avete portato avanti in questo paese stanno dimostrando come l'insostenibilità di questo progetto e la dissoluzione di questo progetto sono solo questioni di tempo. Sono solo questioni che vengono portate avanti, ma che a un certo punto presenteranno il loro conto. Voi avete operato con le vostre politiche la distruzione della classe dei lavoratori, la distruzione dei popoli, non solo del Sud Europa ma anche di paesi come il suo, e i risultati elettorali l'hanno dimostrato, con un calo drastico dei socialisti non solo in Olanda ma in tanti paesi europei.
               

                  Cosa succederà adesso? La sua parabola e la parabola dei socialisti in tutta Europa dimostrano come questo progetto è destinato ineluttabilmente e inesorabilmente alla dissoluzione. Oggi potete anche gioire per delle vittorie di Pirro, come quella del Primo ministro Rutte o come quella del portavoce delle banche e della finanza Macron in Francia, ma le vostre politiche porteranno inesorabilmente alla distruzione di un progetto che è imperialista e colonialista, come oggi viene dimostrato con i risultati del terzo programma di aggiustamento – come voi lo chiamate – per la Grecia. La storia e i cittadini vi stanno già presentando il conto ed è solo questione di tempo prima che questo progetto giunga alla fine e finalmente i popoli e le nazioni europee potranno tornare a sperare in un futuro prospero senza Euro e senza Unione europea.
               

Γεώργιος Επιτήδειος (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, μετά από επτά συνεχόμενα χρόνια οικονομικής αφαιμάξεως των Ελλήνων και υλοποιήσεως μιας προσχεδιασμένη γενοκτονίας εναντίον τους με την εφαρμογή των μέτρων των μνημονίων, ποιος λογικά σκεπτόμενος άνθρωπος εξακολουθεί να πιστεύει στην ιλαροτραγωδία των συνεχών αναθεωρήσεων του προγράμματος οικονομικής προσαρμογής για την Ελλάδα; Ο πραγματικός στόχος των διεθνών τοκογλύφων είναι να εξαθλιώσουν οικονομικά τους Έλληνες, για να τους υποχρεώσουν να ανεχθούν να παραδώσουν οι κυβερνήσεις τους σε αυτούς τους τοκογλύφους το υπέδαφος και τον υποθαλάσσιο χώρο της πλούσιας σε ενεργειακές πηγές και πολύτιμα μέταλλα χώρας μας.
               

                  Το πρόβλημα λοιπόν της Ελλάδας δεν είναι οικονομικό. Είναι πολιτικό και θα επιλυθεί με πολιτικό τρόπο. Οι Έλληνες εθνικιστές δεν θα ανεχθούμε να συμβούν στην πατρίδα μας αυτά τα οποία συμβαίνουν στη Βενεζουέλα. Δεν ανεχόμαστε την εκχώρηση της εθνικής κυριαρχίας μας και τη μετατροπή της χώρας μας σε τριτοκοσμική για να διασωθεί το ευρώ και να δοθεί η δυνατότητα στις πολιτικές και οικονομικές ελίτ της Γερμανίας να κυριαρχήσουν στην Ευρώπη.
               

                  Τέλος, επισημαίνω ότι δεν ανεχόμαστε κανέναν κ. Dijsselbloem να απαξιώνει και να ειρωνεύεται το ελληνικό έθνος, που έδωσε στην ανθρωπότητα τον πολιτισμό. Δεν έχει ούτε το ηθικό ούτε το πολιτικό ανάστημα να το κάνει αυτό. Απαιτώ λοιπόν να ζητήσει συγγνώμη από τον ελληνικό λαό για τα όσα απαράδεκτα έχει πει εις βάρος του.
               

Burkhard Balz (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Herr Dijsselbloem, schön, dass Sie heute Vormittag bei uns sind, und Respekt für Ihre Erklärung. Ich möchte aber zur inhaltlichen Debatte zurückkehren, bei der Sie hier in diesem Haus auch durchaus Unterstützer für Ihren Kurs und den Kurs der Euro-Gruppe haben. Meine Fraktion, die EVP, ist wieder einmal sehr besorgt über die aktuelle Entwicklung in Griechenland. Die griechische Regierung spielt wieder einmal mit dem Feuer und setzt auf Zugeständnis in letzter Minute. Dabei möchte ich Folgendes klarstellen: Debatten über weitere Schuldenerleichterungen sind nicht nur vertragsrechtlich nicht möglich, diese Debatten werden das Problem auch nicht an der Wurzel beheben: Ein Fokus auf den Schuldenerlass alleine führt in die Irre.
               

                  Argentinien ist mit rund 60 % Schuldenlast in die Staatsinsolvenz gegangen. Japan ist mit einer Schuldenlast von rund 250 % immer noch an den Märkten. Eine grundlegende Reformierung der Wirtschaft, der Arbeitsmärkte und des Pensionssystems und Maßnahmen für mehr Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und effektive Privatisierungen sind das, was im Hinblick auf die Zukunft essenziell ist und essenziell bleibt. Wir benötigen einen ehrlichen Handlungswandel in Griechenland. Wenn allerdings die Vorwürfe des Internationalen Währungsfonds stimmen, nämlich dass die Überschusszahlen möglicherweise geschönt sind, sehe ich diesen Handlungswandel immer noch nicht.
               

                  Das sind keine guten Voraussetzungen für einen erfolgreichen Abschluss des überfälligen review. Ich appelliere deswegen an Sie, die review möglichst zügig und sachgerecht unter präziser Anwendung des geltenden Rechts abzuschließen.
               

Pervenche Berès (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Président de l'Eurogroupe, merci de vos mots d'apaisement. D'autant plus que, lorsque l'on vient d'entendre mon prédécesseur dans ce débat, je crois que votre rôle, pour conclure cette deuxième revue du troisième plan, est absolument essentiel. Nous comptons sur vous pour maintenir un équilibre raisonnable entre ceux qui veulent toujours plus d'exigences et ceux qui parlent de concessions excessives.
               

                  Il y a là une espèce de stratégie de négociation qui conduit à mettre la Grèce dans la position du dilemme du prisonnier dont vous devez nous aider à sortir. De ce point de vue, le temps joue contre nous. Il nous reste une chance de sortir de ce piège, de ce dilemme du prisonnier: c'est l'Eurogroupe du 22 mai. Votre responsabilité en venant ici, finalement, devant ce Parlement européen est d'arriver à cette conclusion, car ce qui est aujourd'hui à l'œuvre est dévastateur, nous le savons très bien. Non pas pour la zone euro mais d'abord pour l'économie grecque que nous prétendons remettre sur les rails. Quand on voit que 14 points de PIB ont été perdus entre 2009 et 2016, que le solde primaire a bougé de 17 points sur la même période et que rien n'a encore été fait sur l'allégement substantiel de la dette grecque, on voit bien où est le problème.
               

                  Enfin, je voudrais dire que personne ne pourra s'étonner qu'en poursuivant cette stratégie, la dette grecque insoutenable continue à augmenter. Monsieur le Président de l'Eurogroupe, merci d'être parmi nous aujourd'hui, mais nous comptons sur votre engagement total pour que l'Eurogroupe du 22 mai permette de conclure cette revue.
               

Pirkko Ruohonen-Lerner (ECR). – Arvoisa puhemies, minulla on kolme pointtia ja kysymys. Ensinnäkin Kreikan perusylijäämän kasvu ei todennäköisesti tule kestämään kovin pitkään. Kansainvälisen valuuttarahaston mukaan se johtui kertaluontoisista tekijöistä, kuten suuremmasta verokertymästä. Pidemmällä aikavälillä on tunnettujen professoreiden Panizzan ja Eichengreenin mukaan epärealistista odottaa Kreikan velan hoitamiseen riittäviä ylijäämiä.
               

                  Toiseksi, kuten Saksan valtiovarainministeri Wolfgang Schäuble on huomauttanut, Lissabonin sopimus kieltää euroalueen jäsenmaan nimellisen velan leikkaamisen, eikä velka edes ole Kreikan suurin ongelma, vaan kilpailukyky. Kolmanneksi kilpailukyvyn palauttamisen sijaan talouden sopeutusohjelmat ovat syventäneet köyhyysongelmia tuottaen sukupolvittain menetettyjä mahdollisuuksia, vaikka koko ajan on ollut olemassa nopea ja kivuttomampi tie ulkoisen kilpailukyvyn palauttamiseen, nimittäin eurosta luopuminen.
               

                  Onko rahalla meille suurempi arvo kuin vapaudella, tasa-arvolla, veljeydellä, eurooppalaisten hyvinvoinnilla tai muilla suurilla eurooppalaisilla arvoilla? Eikö ole aika tunnustaa euro siksi, mitä se oikeasti on, eli vaihdon väline?
               

Fabio De Masi (GUE/NGL). – Herr Präsident! Herr Dijsselbloem, schön, dass Sie uns die Ehre erweisen. Wir haben Sie etwas vermisst.
               

                  Ich will hier nicht zu viel über die Situation in Griechenland sagen, das Wesentliche ist ja bekannt. Der Kollege Balz hat ja selber mit Japan und Argentinien ein Beispiel geliefert, warum es völlig verrückt ist, sich einzig auf die Verringerung der Staatsverschuldung durch die Kürzung von Staatsausgaben zu konzentrieren. Ihre jüngsten ökonomischen Analysen waren sehr beeindruckend – die Probleme Südeuropas auf zu viel Alkohol und Frauen zurückzuführen! Weil mein Kollege Nils Torvalds etwas Humor eingefordert hat – wenn so etwas zum Chef der Euro-Gruppe befähigt, sagen Sie mir bitte, wo man sich für den Job bewerben kann.
               

                  Ich will daher nicht um den heißen Brei herum reden. Die Niederländer haben Sie mit etwa 5 % vom Platz geschickt, und die Kürzungspolitik war auch ein Programm zur Zerstörung der Sozialdemokratie in Europa – siehe etwa Frankreich. Dabei haben Sie aber verschwiegen, dass die Eurorettung eben auch eine Rettung nordeuropäischer Banken war, von den niederländischen Steuertricks von Konzernen ganz abgesehen, mit denen Finanzminister wie Sie den Europäern ins Portemonnaie greifen.
               

                  Die Eurozone braucht öffentliche Investitionen und eine demokratische Kontrolle der Euro-Gruppe. Sie haben Ihre Ausfälle gegen Südeuropa mit Calvinismus begründet. Deswegen habe ich einen christlichen Rat für Sie: Gehen Sie, aber gehen Sie mit Gott, Mann!
               

Ernest Urtasun (Verts/ALE). – Señor Presidente. Señor Dijsselbloem, mire, no nos haga trampas. En su original alemán usted habla de ‘países del norte’ y ‘países en crisis’. Usted está apuntando al sur cuando hace sus declaraciones en el original alemán; y por lo tanto, mire, yo le digo una cosa: un mal día lo puede tener cualquiera, no pasa nada. Pero usted lo tenía muy fácil. Usted pedía disculpas y cuestión zanjada. Pero no sé si es por su arrogancia, o, peor aún, por cálculo político, que no lo ha querido hacer. Y usted está incapacitado, después de haber dicho eso y no disculparse, para seguir como presidente del Eurogrupo.
               

                  Pero mire, no es lo que más me interesa hoy. Lo que más me interesa es la situación en Grecia, porque lo peor es que usted como presidente del Eurogrupo tampoco ha sabido gestionar esto. ¿Dónde está la renegociación de la deuda? Hubiéramos esperado de usted que hubiera ayudado y se hubiera situado al lado de la Comisión Europea, cuando esta ha intentado defender el Derecho europeo en Grecia frente al ataque de los demás y usted no lo ha querido hacer. Tampoco ha querido defender una senda fiscal racional. Y, mire, solo hay una conclusión: por su falta de respeto hacia los países del sur y por su pésima gestión como presidente del Eurogrupo, a usted solo le queda la dimisión.
               

Patrick O'Flynn (EFDD). – Mr President, there is a scene in the British sitcom, Fawlty Towers, in which Basil Fawlty is thrown into an illogical rage by his car breaking down yet again. He begins to whip it with a tree branch while swearing at it. Jeroen Dijsselbloem has surely become the Basil Fawlty of Europe. Instead of just admitting that the euro does not work and the engine is broken, he rains down abuse on the unfortunate people of southern Europe in an impotent display of ill temper.
We are nearly a decade on from the start of the crisis and yet we are still talking about keeping Greece locked in a currency union with Germany. This is unbelievable. The engine is faulty, the vehicle does not drive and all the state of denial is achieving is more human misery, more poverty, more unemployment, more damage to the social fabric and more deflation without end. A proud nation is being sacrificed to the ideology of integration at all costs and, from where I am sitting, that looks shameful.

Olaf Stuger (ENF). – Een warm welkom aan minister Dijsselbloem. Ik ga proberen, als populist, om me vandaag als enige aan de spreektijd te houden. De voorganger van de heer Dijsselbloem, Jan Kees de Jager, heeft op 15 september 2011 gezegd dat al het belastinggeld dat naar Griekenland is gegaan, weer terugkomt met rente. Deze uitspraken lijken nu wat surrealistisch, want zelfs met een kunstmatige injectie van 80 miljard per maand lijkt er geen verbetering op te treden in Griekenland. Aan de creativiteit van de bankiers van Goldman Sachs zal ooit ook wel een einde komen.
               

                  Voorzitter, volgens de regels van de ministeriële verantwoordelijkheid zal de heer Dijsselbloem dus rekenschap moeten afleggen over de houdbaarheid van de belofte van zijn voorganger en daarom vraag ik hem nu, de heer Dijsselbloem, op de man af: krijgt de Nederlandse belastingbetaler zijn geld, dat naar Griekenland is gegaan, terug met rente?
               

Κωνσταντίνος Παπαδάκης (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, το γεγονός ότι ο κ. Dijsselbloem, που πριν λίγες εβδομάδες έκανε προκλητικές δηλώσεις για τους λαούς, σήμερα δίνει τα εύσημα στην κυβέρνηση ΣΥΡΙΖΑ-ΑΝΕΛ για τις αντεργατικές μεταρρυθμίσεις της αποδεικνύει ότι η κυβέρνηση ΣΥΡΙΖΑ-ΑΝΕΛ, η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση και το Διεθνές Νομισματικό Ταμείο, όλοι τους μαζί, κάθονται στο ίδιο τραπέζι για την επιβολή νέων σκληρών μέτρων κατά των εργαζομένων. Στις ήδη πολύ επιβαρυμένες πλάτες του λαού η κυβέρνηση ΣΥΡΙΖΑ-ΑΝΕΛ προσθέτει νέα ασήκωτα βάρη με παραπέρα μείωση συντάξεων, αφορολόγητου, εργασιακή ζούγκλα, με διευκόλυνση των ομαδικών απολύσεων, πλήρη κατάργηση της κυριακάτικης αργίας, παράδοση φιλέτων ενέργειας, λιμανιών, αεροδρομίων στις επιχειρήσεις.
               

                  Αυτό θα είναι το επικαιροποιημένο μνημόνιο κατά των εργαζομένων, η απαραίτητη προϋπόθεση των ματωμένων πλεονασμάτων για την καπιταλιστική ανάπτυξη, την οποία θα πληρώνει ο λαός για να θρέφεται η ιερή αγελάδα της κερδοφορίας του κεφαλαίου και των στόχων του, για επενδύσεις, έξοδο στις αγορές, διευθέτηση του χρέους, που είναι ξένα και ενάντια στα λαϊκά συμφέροντα. Τα λεγόμενα αντίμετρα, που και πάλι οι εργαζόμενοι θα πληρώσουν, αφορούν νέα προνόμια στα μονοπώλια και συσσίτια για τους εξαθλιωμένους θύματα της αντιλαϊκής πολιτικής. Οι εργαζόμενοι να δώσουν απάντηση στην εργατική Πρωτομαγιά και με την πανεργατική απεργία στη συνέχεια.
               

Γεώργιος Κύρτσος (PPE). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, το οικονομικό και κοινωνικό κόστος της διαχείρισης της ελληνικής κρίσης μεγαλώνει όσο καθυστερεί η δεύτερη αξιολόγηση του Τρίτου Προγράμματος, η οποία ήταν αρχικά προγραμματισμένη –πρέπει να το θυμίσουμε αυτό– για τον Φεβρουάριο 2016. Η καθυστέρηση συντηρεί ένα κλίμα ανασφάλειας. Αναφέρω χαρακτηριστικά ότι τα 40 δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ που έφυγαν από τις καταθέσεις των τραπεζών στη διάρκεια της κρίσης του 2015 δεν έχουν επιστρέψει στις τράπεζες, καθώς οι αποταμιευτές δεν έχουν πειστεί ακόμη για την προοπτική της ελληνικής οικονομίας. Επιπλέον ένα μεγάλο ποσοστό των μικρών και πολύ μικρών επιχειρήσεων αποφεύγουν τις συναλλαγές μέσω του τραπεζικού συστήματος, γιατί δεν έχουν ρυθμιστεί κάθε είδους οφειλές τους που δημιουργήθηκαν εξαιτίας της κρίσης και φοβούνται ότι τα έσοδά τους θα δεσμευτούν και έτσι δεν θα μπορέσουν να συνεχίσουν τη λειτουργία τους. Η πραγματική οικονομία λοιπόν χρειάζεται μια πραγματική συμφωνία για τη δεύτερη αξιολόγηση, που θα δίνει πραγματικές λύσεις στα μεγάλα προβλήματα.
               

Udo Bullmann (S&D). – Herr Präsident! Herr Kommissar Moscovici, ich habe Ihnen zugehört, Herr Präsident der Euro-Gruppe, Herr Dijsselbloem, ich habe Ihnen zugehört. Und wenn ich dem Glauben schenken soll, was Sie beide sagen – und das tue ich –, dann ist das Problem der zweiten Überprüfung eigentlich gelöst. Ich frage mich aber: Warum werden dann eigentlich so viele Tage, so viele Wochen und so viele Monate vergeudet, um eine wirkliche Verbesserung im Interesse des Landes herbeizuführen? Das ist der Grund, Herr Dijsselbloem, warum wir Sie eingeladen haben im Dezember, in dieses Hohe Haus zu kommen.
               

                  Wir haben den Eindruck, dass in der Euro-Gruppe Spiele gespielt werden – Spiele, die nichts zu tun haben mit Griechenland, Spiele, die nichts zu tun haben mit der Eurozone und nicht mit der Wirtschaft in der Europäischen Union, sondern viel häufiger mit irgendwelchen Wahlen in anderen Mitgliedstaaten und mit der Aufrechterhaltung der herrschenden Auffassung, dass es sich bei den Griechen um ein Volk handelt, das angeblich keine Reformen will und angeblich auch nicht effektiv arbeiten will.
               

                  Ich sage Ihnen, Herr Dijsselbloem: Die Euro-Gruppe hat ein Problem, weil sie mit gespaltenen Zungen redet. Wie kann es denn sein, dass Sie sagen: Die Hausaufgaben sind gemacht, und der deutsche Finanzminister in der deutschen Öffentlichkeit erklärt, die Griechen hätten noch nicht einmal die Hälfte des Reformbedarfs abgearbeitet?
               

                  Diese Doppelzüngigkeit ist einer der Gründe, warum das Vertrauen in die Eurozone schwindet. Diese Doppelzüngigkeit ist einer der Gründe, warum die Menschen auch zunehmend antieuropäisch werden, und es ist Ihre Aufgabe, dafür zu sorgen, dass die Euro-Gruppe die Wahrheit sagt und anständig hilft, Probleme zu lösen.
               

                  Was Ihnen wirklich fehlt, ist eine effektive demokratische Kontrolle, eine parlamentarische Kontrolle. Wir sind sehr Ihrer Auffassung, dass wir einen ESM brauchen, der die Aufgaben eines Wirtschaftsfonds übernimmt. Wir sind sehr Ihrer Auffassung, dass die Kommission dabei das Sagen haben muss, aber Sie brauchen eine parlamentarische Begleitung, damit Eindeutigkeit in Ihre Sprache einkehrt.
               

Joachim Starbatty (ECR). – Herr Präsident! Ich stimme Herrn Bullmann zu. Was wir hier heute gehört haben, war mal wieder eine Märchenstunde.
               

                  Griechenland ist auf einem schwierigen Weg. Aber es bewegt sich vorwärts, es wird besser, und morgen wird es noch besser sein. Auch der IMF wirft ja der Kommission und den Verantwortlichen vor, dass sie super-optimistische Prognosen machen. Ich habe das mal prüfen lassen. Keine einzige Wachstumsprognose, die in den letzten zehn Jahren von der Kommission gekommen ist, war richtig. Was machen Sie? Sie machen Gesundbeterei nach der Methode Coué: Mir geht es gut, morgen wird es mir noch besser gehen und übermorgen noch einmal besser. Das führt zu nichts. Der IMF hat gesagt: Genau diese Gesundbeterei macht die Probleme in Griechenland schlimmer, weil sie so nicht zu einer Schuldentragfähigkeit kommen. Und dann stellt man sich hin und sagt: Der Erfolg ist der Primärüberschuss. Jeder Finanzwissenschaftler weiß, dass man das manipulieren kann. Was Sie damit machen, ist: Sie vergeuden das Zukunftspotenzial der Wirtschaft, weil keine Investitionen mehr stattfinden, weil keine Rechnungen mehr bezahlt werden, und darauf ist man noch stolz.
               

                  Und weiter sagte der IMF, er hätte den Euroaustritt mal auf die Diskussionsagenda gebracht, aber alle Verantwortlichen hätten davon nichts wissen wollen. Was ist das für eine Politik? Die Politik heißt: Augen zu und durch. Das kann doch nicht die Hilfe für Europa und die Eurozone sein. Man muss doch wirklich wissen, welche Probleme anstehen. Und was muss gemacht werden für Griechenland? Es ist ja einfach – jeder weiß es, wenn er nachdenkt. Der Dreiklang: Euroaustritt, Gewinne und wirtschaftliche Gesundung, Schuldentilgung und Anschubfinanzierung. Das ist notwendig.
               

                  Aber diskutiert dieses Parlament darüber? Ist das Parlament eine Kontrolle? Nein, das ist kein Parlament, das die Kontrolle der Kommission übernimmt. Es kommt nicht darauf an, eine fehlgeleitete Währungskonstruktion zu erhalten. Es kommt darauf an, für die Menschen in Europa zu sorgen. Das ist unsere Aufgabe!
               

Νικόλαος Χουντής (GUE/NGL). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Dijsselbloem, το 2013, τότε που το Εurogroup υπό την προεδρία σας είχε αποφασίσει το κούρεμα των κυπριακών καταθέσεων, σπέρνοντας αβεβαιότητα για την ασφάλεια των καταθέσεων σε όλη την Ευρώπη, σας είχα ρωτήσει εκεί στο Εurogroup: ‘Είστε ανίκανοι ή εξυπηρετείτε άλλους στόχους;’ Τώρα, βλέποντας την κατάσταση και της ελληνικής οικονομίας, η απάντηση που δίνω είναι: Εκτελείτε συμβόλαια οικονομικού θανάτου. Μαζί με τις πρόθυμες ελληνικές μνημονιακές κυβερνήσεις έχετε επιβάλει οικονομικό στραγγαλισμό και εξαθλίωση στους εργαζόμενους και στους συνταξιούχους. Διαμορφώνετε εργασιακό μεσαίωνα με υψηλή ανεργία. Οι ελπίδες της ελληνικής νέας γενιάς έχουν μετατραπεί σε εφιάλτη. Στο όνομα του χρέους και της ανασυγκρότησης έχετε μετατρέψει την Ελλάδα σε προτεκτοράτο των δανειστών με συνέπεια να λεηλατούν τη δημόσια περιουσία.
               

                  Όμως, κύριε Dijsselbloem, κύριε Moscovici, τώρα ξέρουμε: Η ανάταξη της ελληνικής οικονομίας, η δίκαιη ανάπτυξη της ελληνικής κοινωνίας και οικονομίας είναι έξω από τον θανάσιμο εναγκαλισμό των μνημονίων και του Εurogroup, έξω από την εφιαλτική ευρωζώνη και σε ρήξη με τη νεοφιλελεύθερη αντιδημοκρατική Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση.
               

PRÉSIDENCE DE MME Sylvie GUILLAUME


Vice-présidente


Sven Giegold (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin! Herr Moscovici, ich möchte Sie direkt ansprechen. Die jüngsten Veränderungen am Memorandum bei Steuern und Pensionen werden wiederum einseitig notwendige Reformen bei den Schwächsten abladen. Das heißt, wiederum werden Menschen mit niedrigeren Renten als auch mit niedrigen Einkommen von weiteren Reformmaßnahmen belastet. Sie haben versprochen, jedes Memorandum einer Auswirkungsstudie in sozialer Hinsicht zu unterlegen. Werden Sie das jetzt hier liefern, oder drücken Sie sich vor dieser Verpflichtung?
                  

                     Und an Sie, Herr Dijsselbloem, möchte ich nur eines richten. Sie haben hier im Grunde offen gesagt: Der ESM soll intergovernmental ausgebaut werden und die Kommission soll sich bitte aus diesem Bereich weiter heraushalten. Das bedeutet die Schwächung europäischer Demokratie. Herr Bullmann hat es angesprochen. Wir brauchen europäische Institutionen der Euro-Gruppe unter voller demokratischer Kontrolle – auch des Europaparlaments. Wenn Sie sagen, die Kommission soll sich raushalten, sagen Sie nichts anderes als: Auch das Europaparlament soll sich raushalten. So stelle ich mir einen Präsidenten der Euro-Gruppe in demokratischer Verantwortung nicht vor!
                  

Rosa D'Amato (EFDD). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, finalmente il Presidente dell'Eurogruppo ci degna della sua presenza in Aula, ma le sue dichiarazioni arrivano troppo tardi, un ritardo che è segno di maleducazione e scarsa attenzione per il ruolo che ricopre.
                  

                     Tutti sappiamo che il compito dell'Eurogruppo è quello di discutere questioni relative alla responsabilità e alla crescita dell'Eurozona, ma sappiamo anche che l'Eurogruppo fa il bello e il cattivo tempo in materia di politiche fiscali, monetarie e strutturali. Chiedetelo ai greci. La popolazione è povera e la gente non ha lavoro. E statene certi, i greci non hanno speso i loro risparmi in donne e in alcol, ma pagano il prezzo della troika. La tragedia greca si è conclusa con lo ‘all-in’ tedesco che, come un abile giocatore d'azzardo, si è impossessato a prezzi stracciati dei beni statali ellenici come porti ed aeroporti. L'Eurogruppo non fa certo il bene dei cittadini. Abbiate il coraggio di ammettere la verità e smettetela di prendere in giro milioni di vittime inconsapevoli.
                  

Gilles Lebreton (ENF). – Madame la Présidente, la Grèce est en faillite et pour longtemps.
                  

                     L'Eurogroupe lui a accordé en 2015 un troisième plan d'aide, d'un montant de 86 milliards d'euros. En contrepartie, il a exigé encore davantage d'austérité, alors même que la misère y est déjà intolérable. L'État a dû organiser la distribution de soupe populaire pour ceux qui n'ont plus rien et la mortalité infantile est en forte augmentation. L'Eurogroupe a aussi exigé des privatisations supplémentaires pour alimenter un fonds destiné à recapitaliser les banques. On croit rêver.
                  

                     La vérité, c'est que l'Union est largement responsable de la faillite grecque. Jamais elle n'aurait dû intégrer la Grèce dans la zone euro, car l'euro est une monnaie beaucoup trop forte pour elle.
                  

                     La seule solution pour sauver la Grèce est d'effacer une partie de sa dette et de la laisser reprendre sa monnaie nationale pour relancer son économie et notamment son tourisme. Mais cela, l'Union ne l'admettra jamais, car elle n'a ni la lucidité ni le cœur nécessaire pour s'y résoudre.
                  

Esther de Lange (PPE). – Ik wil graag de voorzitter van de Eurogroep danken voor zijn aanwezigheid hier op koningsdag, een nationale feestdag in Nederland. Laat ik naar aanleiding van de woorden van de voorzitter van de Eurogroep in de Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung maar de wijze woorden van onze koningin lenen: ‘Dat was een beetje dom.’ Heel erg dom zelfs. Maar ik waardeer uw verklaring en ik denk dat het belangrijk is dat we daar overheen stappen en ons richten op Griekenland.
                  

                     Want dat is waar we het nu over moeten hebben: Griekenland waar het ietwat beter lijkt te gaan maar waar toch een hosanna-stemming niet aan de orde is. Het is namelijk nog niet duidelijk of de verbeteringen die genoemd zijn, structureel zijn. Nog niet alle afspraken uit het memorandum van overeenstemming zijn nagekomen en een aantal belangrijke hervormingen, zeker de verbetering van de concurrentiekracht, laten toch nog op zich wachten. Waar nu behoefte aan is – dat ben ik met de beide heren van de zijde van de Commissie en van de Eurogroep eens – is dat er serieus gewerkt wordt, dat er geen tijd meer verloren gaat en dat er wordt voldaan aan de voorwaarden, zodat de volgende tranche ook daadwerkelijk snel aan Griekenland kan worden uitgekeerd.
                  

                     Waar geen behoefte aan is en dat zeg ik tegen collega Gualtieri en aan de Socialistische Fractie, is dat we nu prematuur een discussie starten over het uitbreiden van het ECB-opkoopprogramma naar Griekenland, een land dat nog zit te wachten op miljardentranches uit het steunprogramma. Daarvoor is dit opkoopprogramma niet aan de orde. Als Griekenland niet meer in de buitensporigtekortprocedure zit, welk land dan wel nog? Dus first things first en serieus aan het werk.
                  

Μιλτιάδης Κύρκος (S&D). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριοι Επίτροποι, εφτά χρόνια πριν έγινε φανερό πως το ασφαλιστικό στην Ελλάδα δεν είναι βιώσιμο λόγω των τεραστίων ελλειμμάτων. Η απάντηση της τρόικας ήταν ‘Κόψτε συντάξεις, αυξήστε εισφορές και φόρους’. Ακούγεται λογικό και πιθανώς ένα δωδεκάχρονο παιδί θα το δεχόταν και αυτό. Εφτά χρόνια μετά, με την επίσημη ανεργία εκτοξευμένη στο 24 % και 34 % των ανθρώπων να ζουν κάτω από το όριο της φτώχειας συζητάμε για δέκατη πέμπτη φορά μέτρα περικοπών συντάξεων και αυξήσεις εισφορών και φόρων. Όμως το παιδί που είπαμε πιο πριν έχει πάει πια στο πανεπιστήμιο και αυτό τουλάχιστον έμαθε ότι η εργασία είναι αυτή που στηρίζει την ασφάλεια και πως μόνο η ανάπτυξη θέσεων εργασίας εξασφαλίζει ένα βιώσιμο σύστημα. Η Ελλάδα χρειάζεται τρεις μεταρρυθμίσεις: δημόσια διοίκηση που φρενάρει κάθε επιχειρηματική προσπάθεια, φορολογικό σύστημα προς αναπτυξιακή κατεύθυνση και μηχανισμό πάταξης της διαφθοράς. Οι ελληνικές κυβερνήσεις δεν το κάνουν, γιατί αγαπούν το πελατειακό κράτος. εσείς όμως μέχρι πότε θα ικανοποιείτε τα λογιστικά παιχνίδια; Ανάπτυξη και μόνο ανάπτυξη πρέπει να είναι ο στόχος σας.
                  

Peter van Dalen (ECR). – Welkom op koningsdag, mijnheer Dijsselbloem. Uitspraken over drank en vrouwen zijn altijd onverstandig en omdat uw excuses zo lang uitbleven, zeurde de kwestie onnodig lang door, helaas.
                  

                     Wat de inhoud betreft, het beleid van de Eurogroep richting Griekenland is asociaal. Iedereen die wel eens de weg van het vliegveld naar het Syntagmaplein is gereden die weet dat ook. 60% van alle winkel- en bedrijfspanden staat leeg. Ze zijn failliet, de mensen die daar gewerkt hebben. Wat zie je? Het midden- en kleinbedrijf in Griekenland is weggevaagd. De motor van de economie bestaat niet meer. Veel Grieken zijn werkloos en mensen die het kunnen, verlaten het land. En kom dan niet met dat flauwekulrookgordijn dat Griekenland zoveel jaren een begrotingsoverschot heeft. Dat hebben meer landen in Europa die een grote schuld hebben, zoals Griekenland. De financieel-economische situatie van een land wordt door totaal andere factoren bepaald.
                  

                     Wat dan wel? Ik heb u al in 2013 een verslag gegeven: Griekenland uit de Eurozone, gedeeltelijk kwijting van de schulden en Griekenland blijft lid van de EU en recht houden op de fondsen. Gebeurt dat niet, dan zal het oordeel van de geschiedenis snoeihard zijn.
                  

Σοφία Σακοράφα (GUE/NGL). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, συζητάμε πάλι και σήμερα για το πρόγραμμα δημοσιονομικής προσαρμογής της Ελλάδας και τη δεύτερη αξιολόγηση που προβλέπει απαίτηση για θηριώδη πλεονάσματα 3,5 %, πράγμα που απαιτεί ανάπτυξη ρυθμών Κίνας, περικοπές, περαιτέρω μείωση συντάξεων, περαιτέρω μείωση κοινωνικού κράτους, ιδιωτικοποιήσεις, αναγκαστικές απαλλοτριώσεις δημόσιου πλούτου και φυσικών πόρων, τη στιγμή που το 36% των Ελλήνων βρίσκονται κάτω από τα όρια της φτώχειας και η ανεργία στους νέους βρίσκεται πάνω από το 50%, και σαν επιστέγασμα προκλητική περιφρόνηση κάθε έννοιας Δημοκρατίας και συνταγματικών θεσμών με την προνομοθέτηση, συνάδελφοι, μέτρων από την ελληνική Βουλή. Αυτό μας το παρουσιάζει στο Κοινοβούλιο, τον υπέρτατο δημοκρατικό θεσμό της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, ο κύριος που θεωρεί τους μισούς ευρωπαίους πολίτες τεμπέληδες, μέθυσους, γυναικάδες, ως πρόεδρος ενός άτυπου εξωθεσμικού οργάνου. Αναρωτιέμαι, αυτή είναι η ποιότητα των θεσμών και το όραμα για το μέλλον που προτείνουμε στον ελληνικό λαό αλλά και στους υπόλοιπους λαούς της Ευρώπης; Είμαι βεβαία, κυρία Πρόεδρε, ότι η κυρία Le Pen μπορεί να μας ευγνωμονεί για την αμέριστη βοήθεια που της προσφέρουν αυτές οι πολιτικές στην προεκλογική της εκστρατεία.
                  

Paulo Rangel (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Presidente do Eurogrupo, Senhor Comissário Moscovici, caro Senhor Presidente do Eurogrupo, tenho que lhe dizer olhos nos olhos que, se ninguém foi capaz de o fazer na reunião do Eurogrupo, eu aqui no Parlamento Europeu digo-lhe, cara a cara e olhos nos olhos, que nós não nos satisfazemos com um simples pedido de desculpas.
                  

                     O Sr. Presidente do Eurogrupo não tem condições para continuar como presidente do Eurogrupo porque, depois de ter feito as declarações que fez, mostra que tem um preconceito. Como é que pode estar aqui a falar sobre a Grécia, quando tem um preconceito relativamente ao povo grego, ao povo cipriota, ao povo português, que fizeram os maiores sacrifícios e que o fizeram com governos, curiosamente do PPE, quando foram os governos socialistas, da sua família política, que destruíram as nossas contas públicas e que puseram países como a Grécia, como Chipre e como Portugal na bancarrota, obrigados a fazerem um programa exigentíssimo?
                  

                     Acha que pessoas que fizeram imensos sacrifícios, que tiveram que abdicar dos seus salários, das suas pensões, são pessoas que gastam o dinheiro em copos e mulheres? É essa a sua conceção? Como é que alguém com esta mentalidade tem autoridade e legitimidade para vir aplicar programas e dar soluções para a Grécia, como é o caso de hoje, ou para Portugal, ou para Chipre, ou para outros países?
                  

                     Senhor Dijsselbloem, aqui, numa instância que representa os povos europeus, digo-lhe só tem uma saída: é demitir-se e demitir-se quanto antes.
                  

Εύα Καϊλή (S&D). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Moscovici, κύριε Dijsselbloem, η χώρα μου κοντεύει μια δεκαετία σε κρίση και σε έναν φαύλο κύκλο λιτότητας. Αναρωτιέμαι αν μπορείτε να μας διαφωτίσετε αν τελικά φταίει κάποιος γιατί μας δίνετε μία πλασματική εικόνα τελικής λύσης κάθε φορά, χάρις στο πετυχημένο σας πρόγραμμα, ενώ η βολική αυτή η κυβέρνηση συνεχίζει να ψηφίζει ό,τι της ζητηθεί για να παραμείνει στην εξουσία. Παράλληλα, ο Νότος ξοδεύει όχι μόνο τη νύχτα αλλά και τη μέρα ασύλληπτα ποσά σε εξοπλισμούς και σε φύλαξη συνόρων για την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, ενώ εταιρείες μεγάλων χωρών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης αγοράζουν σε τιμή ευκαιρίας τα τρένα μας, τα αεροδρόμιά μας, γη και περιουσίες Ελλήνων. Παράλληλα βλέπουμε και πλεονάσματα στην Ελλάδα. Αναρωτιέμαι όμως γιατί ζητούμε και νέα μέτρα. Δεν πιστεύετε ότι μπορούν να διατηρηθούν; Μήπως είναι τεχνητά; Μπορείτε να μας πείτε ποιος τελικά θα αναλάβει ευθύνες; Εσείς, το ΔΝΤ, ο Σόιμπλε ή απλώς μια πρόθυμη κυβέρνηση; γιατί κατά τα άλλα γνωρίζουμε ποιος θα πληρώσει το λογαριασμό. Οι σημαντικές μεταρρυθμίσεις και τα επαχθή μέτρα έχουν ψηφιστεί για την επόμενη κυβέρνηση, ενώ η εμπιστοσύνη σε όλη την Ευρώπη, με δεδομένα και τα αποτελέσματα των εκλογών, φαίνεται να έχει χαθεί και ο ευρωσκεπτικισμός να ανεβαίνει.
                  

Hans-Olaf Henkel (ECR). – Frau Präsidentin! Herr Dijsselbloem! Gestern wies Ministerpräsident Orbán darauf hin, dass noch vor 10 Jahren die Wirtschaft des Nicht-Eurolandes Ungarn auf ungefähr dem gleichen Niveau war wie die von Griechenland. Heute steht Ungarn aber viel besser da als Griechenland – höheres Wachstum, niedrigere Arbeitslosigkeit und vor allen Dingen auch geringere Neuverschuldung. Und das, Herr Dijsselbloem, gilt ja nicht nur für Ungarn, es gilt übrigens für alle Nicht-Euroländer der Europäischen Union. Haben Sie sich mal gefragt, warum?
                  

                     Diese Länder sind für sich selbst verantwortlich geblieben. Wegen des Euro haben in Griechenland Institutionen, wie zum Beispiel der IWF, die Kommission, die EZB, Merkel und Schäuble die Verantwortung übernommen. Und nicht nur das: Jetzt soll überall in der Eurozone die Verantwortung für Staatsschulden, für Bankschulden und natürlich auch für die Arbeitslosenversicherung vergemeinschaftet werden. Statt Ungarn nur Ratschläge zu erteilen, sollten wir auch mal von Ungarn etwas lernen, und das heißt: Wenn wir für alles alle Verantwortung tragen, trägt niemand mehr Verantwortung.
                  

Μανώλης Κεφαλογιάννης (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, για την Ελλάδα πρέπει να κάνουμε την κρίση ευκαιρία, να εκπλήξουμε θετικά τον ελληνικό λαό, τους εταίρους μας, τις αγορές. Ο πρωθυπουργός να συγκαλέσει το συμβούλιο των πολιτικών αρχηγών. Η Ελλάδα χρειάζεται εθνική συναίνεση, εθνική στρατηγική· να δείξει την επιμέλεια του καλού και συνετού οικογενειάρχη. Η Ελλάδα χρειάζεται γιγαντιαίες δημόσιες και ιδιωτικές επενδύσεις, τώρα που έφυγαν οι αυταπάτες και οι αριστερές ιδεοληψίες, τώρα που τα πρότυπα δεν είναι η Βενεζουέλα, ο Chávez, ο αριστερός δικτάτορας Maduro. Τώρα που το πρωτογενές πλεόνασμα δεν είναι λογιστικά της συμφοράς. Τώρα που το πρωτογενές πλεόνασμα δεν είναι η καταστροφή των νοικοκυριών, οι λιποθυμίες των παιδιών από ασιτία, οι παγωμένες νύχτες και οι πεινασμένες μέρες των συνταξιούχων, όπως μας έλεγε ο κύριος Τσίπρας. Τώρα είναι η ώρα να περάσουμε αυτή τη μεγάλη κρίση με το μικρότερο δυνατό κόστος.
                  

Paul Tang (S&D). – Madam President, and I am glad that today Mr Dijsselbloem shows regrets. I think apologies are called for, even though I do not doubt for any moment his good intentions.
There is much more today than unfortunate communication. The 3.5% surplus target is unrealistic for a longer period: that is one of the reasons that the IMF has consistently argued that, without debt relief, the Greek economy will be in the woods for many years – even decades to come.
Moreover, I find the contingency measures on the table disturbing and dangerous. It entails the importation of a pro-cyclical policy of engineering a downturn.
So let's be honest; let's not play games. What Greece needs is debt relief in combination with reforms and investments. Only then will Greece become independent and be able to build a better future for itself. So let us be sensitive but also honest in our communication.

Λευτέρης Χριστοφόρου (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η θέση του κυρίου Dijsselbloem είναι εξόχως πολιτική θέση και θα συμφωνήσω απόλυτα με τον αγαπητό πορτογάλο συνάδελφο, τον κ. Rangel, ότι μετά τις προσβλητικές, απαράδεκτες και απαξιωτικές θέσεις και δηλώσεις του για τις χώρες του Νότου, εξίσου απαξιωτικές και για το γυναικείο φύλο, το ελάχιστο που θα έπρεπε να κάνει θα ήταν να έχει υποβάλει ήδη την παραίτησή του. Και για όσους δεν γνωρίζουν ιστορία θέλω να του πω και να του τονίσω ότι χωρίς τις χώρες του Νότου η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση θα ήταν πολύ διαφορετική, για να μην πω ότι δεν θα υπήρχε Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, γιατί, αν γνώριζε την ιστορία της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, θα ήξερε πολύ καλά ότι οι χώρες του Νότου, που περιφρονεί, από το 1973 έως το 1995, εκείνη τη δύσκολη περίοδο για την Ευρώπη, που υπήρχε το σιδηρούν παραπέτασμα, το ανατολικό μπλοκ, μόνον τρεις χώρες εντάχθηκαν στην Ευρωπαϊκή Οικονομική Κοινότητα για να στηρίξουν την Ευρώπη: η Ελλάδα η Πορτογαλία και η Ισπανία.
                  

                     Ο ελληνικός λαός είναι περήφανος, κύριε Dijsselbloem, όπως και οι λαοί του Νότου, και πρέπει να σας υποδείξω ότι εγώ ως Κύπριος δεν θα ξεχάσω ποτέ τα σκληρά και άδικα μέτρα τα οποία λάβατε για την πατρίδα μου, ιδιαίτερα δε θα σας θυμίζω ότι και ο κύριος Junker ανέφερε ότι, αν ήταν στη θέση σας, ποτέ δεν θα έπαιρνε αυτή την απόφαση που πήρατε για την Κύπρο. Αλλά το ίδιο πράξατε και για τις άλλες χώρες του Νότου και οι δηλώσεις σας έρχονται να επιβεβαιώσουν ότι πράγματι δεν ήταν τυχαίες, ήταν δηλώσεις προκατάληψης, και δεν μπορεί κάποιος σήμερα να παραμένει σε αυτή τη θέση του Εurogroup με αυτή τη νοοτροπία και αυτή την αντίληψη. Η παρουσία σας στο Εurogroup δεν ωφέλησε ούτε το Εurogroup ούτε τη ζώνη του ευρώ ούτε τις χώρες του Νότου. Είμαστε περήφανοι για την καταγωγή μας και την προέλευσή μας από τον Νότο, αλλά σε καμία περίπτωση δεν είμαστε περήφανοι για τη δική σας παρουσία και τη θέση σας στο Εurogroup.
                  

Pedro Silva Pereira (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Dijsselbloem, fique claro que as explicações que veio dar a este Parlamento sobre as suas inaceitáveis declarações sobre os países do Sul chegam tarde, não apagam a gravidade dos seus insultos e não lhe devolvem nem a credibilidade nem as condições políticas para prolongar o seu mandato como presidente do Eurogrupo.
                  

                     Quanto à Grécia, esta demora na conclusão da avaliação do programa é intolerável, quando são evidentes os resultados alcançados pelo governo e pelo povo grego e quando a Comissão Europeia vem aqui elogiar os progressos feitos. A verdade é que a Grécia está a ser vítima de posições mais interessadas nas eleições da Alemanha do que em defender a zona euro.
                  

                     É urgente acabar com isto, parar de brincar com o fogo e finalmente fechar este programa, fazer justiça à Grécia e ao povo grego.
                  

Μαρία Σπυράκη (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Dijsselbloem, ειλικρινά το λέω, θα περίμενα να έχετε το θάρρος να ομολογήσετε ενώπιόν μας ότι όσα είπατε για τους πολίτες του Νότου, και ειδικά για τις γυναίκες, είναι απλώς απαράδεκτα και λυπάμαι που δεν το κάνετε και ελπίζω να το κάνετε, όσο είστε ακόμα πρόεδρος του Εurogroup.
                  

                     Στην ουσία τώρα, φιλοτεχνείτε μια εικόνα για την οικονομία της Ελλάδας που βασίζεται στη φωτογραφία της στιγμής και αποφεύγετε να βάλετε τον δάκτυλον επί τον τύπον των ήλων, που δεν είναι άλλος από τις διαρθρωτικές αλλαγές και την πορεία της εφαρμογής τους. Η πραγματικότητα είναι εντελώς διαφορετική: Οι μισοί νέοι Έλληνες είναι άνεργοι, το 35,7% των Ελλήνων είναι αντιμέτωποι με το φάσμα του κοινωνικού αποκλεισμού, το σύστημα υγείας καταρρέει, οι περικοπές των συντάξεων και του αφορολόγητου έρχονται και το πρωτογενές πλεόνασμα του 2016 φαίνεται πως δεν είναι βιώσιμο, γιατί βασίζεται σε μέτρα μιας χρήσης. Η ολοκλήρωση της δεύτερης αξιολόγησης είναι προφανές ότι δεν προσφέρει καμιά εγγύηση για την προοπτική ολοκλήρωσης του προγράμματος το καλοκαίρι του 2018, ενώ η δέσμευσή σας για τη διευθέτηση του κόστους του ελληνικού χρέους εκκρεμεί από τον Νοέμβριο του 2012.
                  

                     Η Ελλάδα χρειάζεται μια άλλη πολιτική με μείωση των φόρων, μείωση των δαπανών, που θα εφαρμόσει μια κυβέρνηση αφοσιωμένη στις μεταρρυθμίσεις. Κυρίως όμως εσείς, κύριε Dijsselbloem, και εσείς, κύριε Moscovici, μοιράζεστε την ευθύνη ώστε να έχουμε πλήρη πρόσβαση στις αγορές τον Αύγουστο του 2018. Θα είμαστε όλοι εδώ και φαίνεται πως τότε κανένας δεν θα μπορεί να βασιστεί σε μια μαγική εικόνα.
                  

Jonás Fernández (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señor Dijsselbloem, agradecemos las declaraciones iniciales que intentaban explicar sus declaraciones en la entrevista en el periódico alemán. Las agradecemos, pero es verdad que no podemos dejar de reconocer que muchos en esta Cámara nos sentimos profundamente decepcionados, no solo por la literalidad de las palabras, sino porque incidía en esa división entre el norte y el sur, entre los países acreedores y los países deudores, que necesitamos recomponer en Europa.
                  

                     Muchos estamos trabajando, y me consta que todos en esta Cámara queremos recomponer esos lazos de cohesión entre los países de la Unión Europea. Y la Comisión y el comisario Moscovici están haciendo un gran trabajo para recomponer y reconducir la política económica con mayor flexibilidad, con mayor espacio para las políticas fiscales.
                  

                     Estamos negociando ese tercer paquete con Grecia, y necesitamos aplicar esa filosofía de flexibilidad en la aproximación a Grecia. Y por lo tanto, más tarde que pronto habrá que revisar las condiciones de la deuda.
                  

Gabriel Mato (PPE). – Señora presidenta. Señor Dijsselbloem, gracias por comparecer en esta Cámara tras su última y desafortunada visita y la aún más desafortunada ausencia en la última sesión. Sus explicaciones llegan tarde —muy tarde— y mal —muy mal—. Hoy nos dice: ‘no es lo que dije’. Miente, y usted lo sabe. Sí es lo que dijo: dijo lo que dijo, y lo que dijo es inaceptable y le inhabilita definitivamente para la presidencia del Eurogrupo.
                  

                     Hablemos de Grecia. La prioridad del Gobierno griego y el objetivo de la Unión Europea tiene que ser que la economía griega recupere la competitividad perdida, y a través de esta crecer y crear empleo. Yo digo públicamente que recomiendo a Grecia que siga el ejemplo de España. Que tras duras reformas y el esfuerzo de los ciudadanos ha logrado recuperar la senda del crecimiento y la creación de empleo. España crece por encima del 3 %, y el último año ha creado más de medio millón de empleos. Es verdad que España no tiene, como Grecia, un gobierno populista. Tiene un gobierno popular y esa es una gran diferencia.
                  

                     Señor Dijsselbloem, ahora tendrá un nuevo turno de palabra. Tiene una nueva oportunidad, seguramente la última. Aprovéchela: pida perdón y anuncie su dimisión.
                  

Agnes Jongerius (S&D). – Zullen we beginnen met het goede nieuws? En dat is dat door het politieke akkoord begin april een verdere escalatie van de Griekse crisis is afgewend en dat is denk ik mooi. De vraag is alleen tegen welke prijs. Het is de vraag of de afspraken over belangrijke onderwerpen zoals armoedebestrijding of betere medische hulp aan Griekse ouderen ook echt werkelijkheid worden, want het lijkt alsof sociale bescherming niet hoog op het prioriteitenlijstje staat. Nu weten we sinds gisteren, dag van de presentatie van de Europese sociale pijler, dat sociale normen ook Europese normen zijn. Een van die normen is dat sociale partners zelf kunnen beslissen op welk niveau zij de collectieve onderhandelingen willen voeren. En mijn vraag is: kunnen we er nu voor zorgen dat die sociale normen niet onderhandelbaar zijn, niet nu, niet op 22 mei en ook niet later?
                  

Interventions à la demande


Franc Bogovič (PPE). – Tudi sam delim razočaranje mnogih kolegov, ki so ga izrazili glede vaših izjav, gospod predsednik, in paziti moramo vsi pri svojem delu, da ljudi ne delimo, da ne delimo Evrope na prvorazredno in drugorazredno.
                  

                     Podpiram solidarnost, ki jo Evropa izkazuje do Grčije, kajti mislim, da smo v časih, ko bo morala biti solidarnost na prvem mestu med nami, če želimo živeti v skupni Evropski uniji.
                  

                     Po drugi strani pa seveda pričakujemo tudi potrebne reforme, ki jih mora vsaka država narediti zato, da izboljša svojo gospodarsko sliko, da zagotovi rast, da zagotovi tudi nova delovna mesta. Potrebne so reforme na najrazličnejših področjih. Ni vedno samo varčevanje tisto, velikokrat je potrebno spremeniti tudi izobraževalne sisteme, spremeniti poslovna okolja in tudi prinesti nove modele poslovanja v države. In usmerite se v to. In to je izhod iz krize za Grke.
                  

Julie Ward (S&D). – Madam President, the right-wing leaders of the European Union have promoted dangerous austerity policies in Europe, especially in Greece. These policies have been self-defeating and they threaten to tear Europe apart, as they have now torn the UK away from Europe. Austerity has fed the cause of the rise of the far-right, divisive nationalism and dangerous xenophobia. These forces exploit the concerns that ordinary citizens have regarding economic policies that harm them, and so they resort to scapegoating others. But let me remind you what the European treaties say: Article 3 of the Treaty on the European Union says that the EU shall work for a social market economy and social progress, and promote social justice and solidarity among States. That is the spirit of the true European Union, and I believe that social justice in the UK and Europe is still possible, and we must choose it together.

Κώστας Χρυσόγονος (GUE/NGL). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Dijsselbloem, οι συκοφαντικές δηλώσεις σας για ποτά και γυναίκες αποδεικνύουν τη ρατσιστική προκατάληψη με την οποία αντιμετωπίζετε τους λαούς του ευρωπαϊκού Νότου, παρουσιάζοντάς τους συλλήβδην ως δήθεν άσωτους. Η προκατάληψη αυτή σας καθιστά ακατάλληλο για το αξίωμα του προέδρου του Εurogroup, ο οποίος οφείλει να είναι πρόεδρος για όλα τα κράτη μέλη της ευρωζώνης και όχι μόνο για τους δήθεν ενάρετους βόρειους. Εφόσον όμως αδιαφορείτε για την κατακραυγή και αρνείστε να παραιτηθείτε, οφείλετε τουλάχιστον να δείξετε έμπρακτη μεταμέλεια, προωθώντας άμεσα την ολοκλήρωση της δεύτερης αξιολόγησης του ελληνικού προγράμματος. Οφείλετε να σεβαστείτε τις τεράστιες θυσίες του ελληνικού λαού και να προχωρήσετε στη συγκεκριμενοποίηση των μέτρων ελάφρυνσης του ελληνικού δημόσιου χρέους. Σταματήστε επιτέλους την υποκρισία και δώστε στην Ελλάδα μια πραγματική ευκαιρία.
                  

Λάμπρος Φουντούλης (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Dijsselbloem, για μια ακόμη φορά επιβάλατε μέτρα που εξαθλιώνουν τους Έλληνες με μειώσεις συντάξεων και βάρβαρη φορολογία. Φυσικά συνεχίζετε την ίδια αποτυχημένη συνταγή για τη δήθεν διάσωση της Ελλάδας, αλλά όπως έχει αποδειχθεί μέχρι τώρα διασώσατε μόνο τα funds και τους τραπεζίτες. Bεβαίως είχατε πρόθυμους συνεργάτες στο ξεπούλημα και την υποθήκευση του εθνικού πλούτου της Ελλάδος στις μνημονιακές κυβερνήσεις που εξαπάτησαν τον ελληνικό λαό και έθεσαν τη χώρα υπό επιτροπεία. Κανονικά θα έπρεπε να απολογηθείτε ενώπιον του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου για την αποτυχία των προγραμμάτων σας, που αντί για ανάπτυξη έφεραν ύφεση, οδήγησαν στη φτώχεια τους έλληνες πολίτες, ενώ μαζί με την κυβέρνηση σήμερα ακολουθείτε την ίδια λάθος πολιτική συνταγή. Σας διαβεβαιώνουμε όμως πως, όταν ο ελληνικός λαός επιλέξει να έχει μία εθνική κυβέρνηση που δεν θα προδώσει την εμπιστοσύνη του, εσείς και όλοι οι εκπρόσωποι των θεσμών, όπως λέμε στην Ελλάδα, θα πάρετε πόδι. Όσο για τις περίφημες δηλώσεις περί γυναικών και αλκοόλ, χαρακτηρίζουν τον εαυτό σας και μόνο.
                  

Ελισσάβετ Βόζεμπεργκ-Βρυωνίδη (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Dijsselbloem, προσβάλατε τη χώρα μου, προσβάλατε τις ευρωπαίες γυναίκες, θα περίμενα να ανακαλέσετε, γιατί όπως ξέρετε οι δηλώσεις σας δεν παρερμηνεύτηκαν· απλώς δημοσιοποιήθηκαν. Θα το αντιπαρέλθω, για να σας εκφράσω τον εξής προβληματισμό, που απασχολεί τους πολίτες της χώρας μου –απευθύνομαι και στον Επίτροπο, κύριο Moscovici: Αφού και οι δυο σας παραδέχεστε ότι η χώρα παρουσίασε πλεόνασμα και υποθέτετε ότι αυτό το πλεόνασμα θα διαρκέσει και τα επόμενα χρόνια, τότε δώστε μια εξήγηση γιατί επιβάλλετε μέτρα τα οποία εξαθλιώνουν την κοινωνία και τον ελληνικό λαό, μέτρα όπως μείωση συντάξεων και αφορολόγητου, μέτρα που δεν έχουν αναπτυξιακό χαρακτήρα, και γιατί επιτέλους δεν συμβάλλετε ώστε να ρυθμιστεί το χρέος, μια υπόσχεση που έχετε δώσει στη χώρα μου από τον Νοέμβριο του 2012.
                  

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, domnule președinte al Eurogrupului, nu o să mă leg de declarațiile dumneavoastră, s-a vorbit foarte mult. Pe mine mă interesează însă cum veți face acea legătură între responsabilitate și solidaritate, ați declarat că doriți să faceți această legătură, și cum veți îmbunătăți experiența câștigată din criză? Vorbeați de un mecanism european de stabilitate. Cum îl aplicați ca mecanism de prevenire? Să nu uităm că aici nu vorbim de Grecia doar. Dacă veți avea un eșec în Grecia va fi un semnal de cum nu se poate pentru toate țările.
                  

                     Eu nu vă suspectez de lipsă de inteligență, dar aici este vorba de bună-credință, pentru că și cel care a făcut bomba atomică, a dinamitat-o, a fost inteligent. Este vorba de caracter și de bună inteligență. Doresc să ne răspundeți foarte clar cum veți face această ajustare pentru Grecia, pentru ca să nu mai avem și alte țări în situația Greciei? Și nu uitați că vorbim aici de viețile oamenilor și nu de niște hârtii pe care le faceți acolo.
                  

João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Presidente do Eurogrupo, houvesse da parte das instituições da União Europeia um pingo de respeito pelos povos dos países que o senhor ofendeu, e pelas mulheres europeias, e o senhor já não ocuparia esse lugar.
                  

                     Mostrar-lhe a porta da rua, como lhe fizeram os eleitores do seu país, seria, para não ir mais longe, um ato de elementar bom senso e civilidade. Mas o facto de ainda se sentar aí diz muito do estado miserável a que tudo isto chegou. Pior do que as suas deploráveis declarações é o que elas traduzem de uma realidade, a da zona euro, em que países e povos inteiros são submetidos a relações permanentes de dominação e subjugação que constrangem e impedem o seu desenvolvimento soberano.
                  

                     A incansável disponibilidade do lacaio para agradar ao chefe torna-se ridícula e desprezível. Mas apenas isso, o verdadeiro problema é bem maior do que esse. Sr. Dijsselbloem, apesar de ainda ocupar essa cadeira, não se iluda, aquilo que representa não tem futuro.
                  

Ελευθέριος Συναδινός (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, απαξιώ να αναφέρω το όνομα του κυρίου του Εurogroup και ήθελα να του πω ότι σαν σήμερα, 27 Απριλίου 1941, οι Γερμανοί του Τρίτου Ράιχ εισέβαλαν στην Ελλάδα. Επικράτησε κατοχή τριών ετών. Βρέθηκε ένας ήρωας εύζωνας Κουκίδης, που όμοιός του δεν θα υπάρχει στη χώρα του κυρίου, ο οποίος τυλιγμένος με την ελληνική σημαία έπεσε από τον βράχο της Ακροπόλεως. Αυτοθυσία! Αυτό δείχνουν οι ελληνικές ψυχές και σήμερα. Κάνουν υπομονή, διότι η κατοχή που επέβαλε η Γερμανία, το ΔΝΤ και ο κύριος, διανύουν τον έβδομο χρόνο και τελειωμό δεν έχουν οι αυτοκτονίες, η απόλυτη φτώχεια και το ξεπούλημα της ελληνικής περιουσίας. Κάποια στιγμή ο Έλληνας θα σηκώσει κεφάλι και θα του πει: ‘Έξω από εδώ, κύριε, και μας χρωστάς και δεν σου χρωστάμε τίποτα.’
                  

Νίκος Ανδρουλάκης (S&D). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, οι εκλογές στην Ολλανδία τελείωσαν. Ο πρώτος γύρος των γαλλικών εκλογών ολοκληρώθηκε. Ποιος είναι ο επόμενος πολιτικός σταθμός που πρέπει να προσπεράσουμε για να μας πείτε την αλήθεια; Τι συμβαίνει με την υλοποίηση του ελληνικού προγράμματος; Θα χρειαστεί να συζητήσουμε και για τέταρτη φορά τη δεύτερη αξιολόγηση; Γιατί καθυστερούμε; Ποια είναι τα συγκεκριμένα προβλήματα; Ξεκάθαρα, πείτε σήμερα, για να τελειώνουμε με τη μονταζιέρα και των Βρυξελλών και του Μαξίμου, που τα βλέπουν όλα πάρα πολύ ωραία, πάρα πολύ καλά στην Ελλάδα, όμως τα πράγματα πηγαίνουν ενάντια στα συμφέροντα του λαού μας και κάθε μέρα κατασπαταλούνται οι θυσίες των τελευταίων έξι ετών.
                  

(Fin des interventions à la demande)


Pierre Moscovici,
membre de la Commission. – Madame la Présidente, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, Monsieur le Président de l'Eurogroupe, je vous remercie au nom de la Commission pour vos interventions et observations.
                  

                     L'état d'avancement du programme de soutien à la stabilité de la Grèce est un débat très important et, vous l'avez tous souligné, il intervient à un moment assez critique, parce que la Grèce est aujourd'hui à un tournant.
                  

                     Après un an et demi de programmes de soutien du mécanisme européen de stabilité, il est temps maintenant d'asseoir les progrès accomplis à ce jour en Grèce, de soutenir la reprise économique qui a commencé à émerger en 2016, qui attend la conclusion de la revue, et donc d'assurer une sortie réussie du programme en 2018, comme prévu.
                  

                     La Commission se félicite à nouveau de l'accord intervenu au sein de l'Eurogroupe, le 7 avril dernier, à Malte. Je pense que cela devrait permettre au Fonds monétaire international (FMI) de rejoindre le programme. Le paquet post-programme – je le redis ici – sera neutre sur le plan budgétaire si nos prévisions sont correctes et je dis à ceux qui les ont critiquées ici que, de manière générale, pour ce qui est des surplus budgétaires, elles ne se sont pas trompées.
                  

                     Pour ce qui est de la croissance, c'est une autre affaire, parce que la croissance est étroitement tributaire précisément de l'avancée du programme et c'est ce dont nous devons tenir compte.
                  

                     Tout cela équivaut essentiellement à une recomposition des finances publiques pour renforcer la croissance et la protection sociale. Il reste, c'est vrai, une partie du travail à faire dans les jours à venir.
                  

(La Présidente interrompt l'orateur pour réclamer le silence dans l'hémicycle)


                     Cependant, je suis convaincu que la mission en cours peut permettre des progrès substantiels. Nous ne sommes pas très loin de l'objectif final.
                  

                     Par conséquent, des progrès rapides doivent maintenant être réalisés pour clôturer la revue du deuxième programme. Cela exige de parvenir à un accord au niveau technique dans les prochains jours. Les autorités grecques devront pour cela, je le redis, mettre en œuvre une série de mesures préalables pour l'ensemble du programme. Un accord sur l'achèvement de la deuxième revue, qui devrait aussi fournir des certitudes sur l'excédent primaire et sur la durabilité de la dette de la Grèce, devrait être rapidement trouvé entre les partenaires.
                  

                     Je suis persuadé qu'une reprise durable, que la stabilité économique et financière ne sont pas seulement dans l'intérêt de la Grèce et de ses citoyens, mais très clairement, c'est dans l'intérêt de tous, de l'Union européenne dans son ensemble, et nous sommes conscients que nous sommes extrêmement attendus dans ce moment précis.
                  

                     Nous devons tous être à la hauteur de l'échéance sans petites phrases, sans position idéologique mais avec un souci partagé qui est que la Grèce aille de l'avant, retrouve la croissance et la stabilité, crée des emplois et puisse tout simplement aller vers la sortie du programme. C'est la détermination absolue de la Commission que d'y contribuer.
                  

Jeroen Dijsselbloem,
President of the Eurogroup. – Madam President, first of all, many Members of Parliament have been very critical about my remarks in the interviews, and of course I fully accept that. The choice of words was unfortunate and people have been offended, and I regret that. The underlying debate still remains valid: that to build a community requires everyone to take responsibility, respecting agreements and frameworks, and, on that basis, moving forward together and strengthening solidarity in the Union and in the eurozone. That is the legacy that I would like to leave. That is what I have worked for and I think, looking back on the last four and a half years, the eurozone is in a much better state than when I came to the job as we are moving out of the crisis and many Member States are back into strong growth.
I stress again that my remarks were about the responsibility for all Member States, not some of them, and if the impression was that it was about some of them, I regret that. It was not my intention. I believe that all of us should take that responsibility. I will make one remark about my personal opinions on the development of the European Stability Mechanism (ESM): I believe it can play a stronger role, which would also allow the IMF not to be part of future programmes. I am not excluding them from being part of future programmes and I certainly hope we won't need any future programmes, but I feel that the ESM can play a leading role and that it should develop in that direction. That does not mean that I wish to take away responsibilities from the Commission. I made my remark about the Commission to underline that I feel that the Commission should stay in the lead as the guardian of the pact and the rules that we share.
Finally, on Greece, Parliament has my personal strong commitment that we will achieve that deal for Greece in May. It needs to be done in May. We have put in a lot of effort. The situation in Greece is not good enough; growth is falling back again where we need trust and growth to continue. So, yes, you have my personal commitment and I will come back to Parliament as soon as possible with that fair deal for Greece. I believe that, already in the package we are discussing now, the emphasis is not on austerity; it is about deep reforms that are necessary to create more growth, and any fiscal outcome of that can be reinvested in Greece and used for the positive policy initiatives so badly needed in Greece.
Finally, yes, we will discuss debt, and debt relief will be needed to find that solution. That is my opinion, and I believe that is shared in the Eurogroup. Last year we already gave that commitment to come back to the issue of sustainability of debt for Greece, because that is the only way that they will come back onto a sustainable path and a sustainable economic future.

La Présidente. – Le débat est clos.
                  

                     Les votes auront lieu dans un petit instant.
                  

                     Je suspends la séance pour quelques instants.
                  


Déclarations écrites (article 162)



Barbara Kappel (ENF),
schriftlich. – Die Beratungen zwischen Europäischer Kommission, Europäischer Zentralbank, Internationalem Währungsfonds, Europäischem Stabilitätsmechanismus und der griechischen Regierung werden fortgeführt. Der IWF drängt weiterhin auf einen Schuldenschnitt für Griechenland, während die europäischen Gläubiger mit einem Primärüberschuss von 3,5 % ab dem nächsten Jahr rechnen und somit die Schuldentragfähigkeit Athens als gegeben ansehen.
                  

                     Im Kontext der Umsetzung der im Rahmen des dritten Hilfspakets zugesagten Reformen ist ein Schuldenschnitt, so wie ihn der IWF fordert, auf der Ebene der EU-Mitgliedstaaten im Wahljahr 2017 politisch nicht umsetzbar. Ein indirekter Schuldenschnitt wurde den Griechen durch Zinssenkungen und Laufzeitverlängerungen ohnehin längst zugestanden.
                  

                     Die Wirtschaftsprognosen für das laufende Jahr sind gut, es fehlt Athen jedoch an Liquidität, um im Juli die nächste milliardenschwere Rückzahlungstranche zu leisten. Der Fortschrittsbericht des IWF-Europadirektors, basierend auf noch nicht voll ausgewerteten Daten, erscheint in diesem Zusammenhang kontraproduktiv, da er eine pessimistische Einschätzung über die Umsetzung von Strukturreformen und generell über die Zukunft Griechenlands abgab. Was Griechenland braucht, das ist ein zukunftsorientierter Ansatz, ein Befreiungsschlag in Form eines umfassenden Wirtschafts- und Stabilitätsprogramms, das Wachstum und Beschäftigung schafft, Anreize für Investitionen bietet und die Kaufkraft der Bevölkerung stärkt. Nur so kann die griechische Wirtschaft wieder wettbewerbsfähig und können Arbeitsplätze geschaffen werden.
                  

Theodor Dumitru Stolojan (PPE),
în scris. – Din nou, Grecia se află pe muchie de cuțit cu datoria sa externă scadentă în iulie 2017, în lipsa unei înțelegeri cu Fondul Monetar Internațional, Fondul european de stabilitate financiară și Comisia Europeană. Această situație se repetă cu insistență în ultimii ani. Cauza este una foarte clară: creditorii nu vor să își asume partea lor de responsabilitate pentru faptul că au permis ca datoria externă a Greciei să atingă dimensiuni neobișnuite (în prezent, 180 la sută din produsul intern brut al Greciei). În fapt, nu se respectă o condiție fundamentală pentru orice restructurare a datoriei externe a unei țări: realizarea unui nou echilibru între potențialul real al țării de a genera venituri (după adoptarea de reforme) și datoria scadentă în anii viitori. În cazul Greciei, este evidentă necesitatea ștergerii unei părți din datorie. Creditorii se opun, dar, până la urmă, vor trebui să accepte acest adevăr.
                  

Miguel Viegas (GUE/NGL),
por escrito. – Não existe, hoje, da parte da União Europeia e das suas instituições um pingo de respeito pelos povos e em especial pelas mulheres dos países que o presidente do Eurogrupo ofendeu. A sua demissão é, hoje, uma obrigação moral e a sua não realização demonstra o grau de podridão a que chegaram as instituições europeias. Mas o facto do presidente do Eurogrupo ainda se sentar aí não deixa de ser simbólico do estado miserável a que tudo isto chegou. Pior do que as suas deploráveis declarações, é o que elas traduzem de uma realidade, a da Zona Euro, em que países e povos inteiros estão permanentemente submetidos a relações de domínio e de subjugação, que constrangem e impedem o seu desenvolvimento soberano. A incansável disponibilidade do lacaio para agradar ao chefe torna-se desprezível e ridícula. Mas o verdadeiro problema é bem maior do que isso. Este é mais um sinal que mostra a evidência dos limites históricos deste modelo de integração que está condenado a ser desmantelado pelos povos em luta.
                  

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. DAVID-MARIA SASSOLI


Vicepresidente


Fabio Massimo Castaldo (EFDD). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, mi richiamo all'articolo 22, comma 4, del regolamento e mi rivolgo a lei, come nostro rappresentante nelle relazioni internazionali, per denunciare un drammatico caso di violazione dei diritti umani, il caso di Christian Provvisionato, un cittadino italiano rinchiuso da quasi due anni in una caserma, vittima incolpevole di uno scandalo inerente il commercio di un sistema di software di spionaggio e quindi detenuto nella caserma della Mauritania senza che gli sia stato contestato alcun reato. Un uomo gravemente malato di diabete che è stato debilitato fino a perdere trenta chili. Un uomo che ha perso ormai la speranza e che dal 1o maggio comincerà uno sciopero della fame a oltranza che potrebbe mettere a rischio anche la sua vita.
                  

                     Presidente, Christian è un cittadino italiano, ma è anche un cittadino europeo, e quindi chiediamo un sostegno e l'azione della Presidenza, dell'Alto rappresentante e di tutti gli Stati membri, perché riteniamo che Christian debba al più presto tornare a casa dai suoi cari e dalla sua compagna che doveva e deve sposare. Chiediamo Christian libero.
                  

Presidente. – Onorevole Castaldo, lei sa che questo non è un punto all'ordine del giorno, ma naturalmente trasmetteremo questa sua osservazione e questa sua richiesta.
                  
5.   Voting time

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca il turno di votazioni.
               

(Per i risultati delle votazioni e altri dettagli che le riguardano: vedasi processo verbale)

5.1.   Request for waiver of the immunity of António Marinho e Pinto (A8-0163/2017 - Gilles Lebreton)
5.2.   EU trade mark (A8-0054/2017 - Tadeusz Zwiefka)
5.3.   Minamata Convention on Mercury (A8-0067/2017 - Stefan Eck)
5.4.   Hybrid mismatches with third countries (A8-0134/2017 - Olle Ludvigsson)
5.5.   Agreement on Operational and Strategic Cooperation between Denmark and Europol (A8-0164/2017 - Agustín Díaz de Mera García Consuegra)
5.6.   Nomination of a member of the Court of Auditors – Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz (A8-0166/2017 - Indrek Tarand)

— Prima della votazione:


Indrek Tarand (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, to answer numerous calls to the governments of Member States to create more gender equality in European institutions, out of all 28 Democratic states the one we did not suspect, Hungary and Mr Orbán, finally made a move. Ms Gáll-Pelcz is nominated, and she is definitely the best candidate we can get from Fidesz.
Hence, I would like to advise the Members of Parliament to be cautiously supportive and give her the benefit of the doubt. She will prove it right with her future work in Luxembourg.
However, there is another side of the coin, which means that Madame Gáll-Pelcz leaves to Luxembourg and creates a vacancy in the Bureau of our Parliament. This vacation is not predestined to be filled by a member from Fidesz, nor from Hungary, and not even from the EPP Group. By acclamation. Au contraire, Article 20 of the Rules of Procedure stipulates clearly that we must have elections, not a cosy backroom deal. But if we are very much in love with our habitual practices of power sharing, my legal advice will be just a point: by acclamation, the Member who took part in our January elections and with the support of one-third of his parliament is first in line. Only modesty prevents me from calling his name.
5.7.   Annual report on the control of the financial activities of the European Investment Bank for 2015 (A8-0161/2017 - Nedzhmi Ali)
5.8.   Structural Reform Support Programme for 2017-2020 (A8-0374/2016 - Lambert van Nistelrooij, Constanze Krehl)
5.9.   European Year of Cultural Heritage (A8-0340/2016 - Mircea Diaconu)
5.10.   Union programme to support specific activities in the field of financial reporting and auditing (A8-0291/2016 - Theodor Dumitru Stolojan)
5.11.   Union programme to enhance the involvement of consumers in financial services policy making (A8-0008/2017 - Philippe Lamberts)

— Dopo la votazione:


Cristian Dan Preda (PPE). – Monsieur le Président, vous avez dit que c'est long. Par conséquent, je crois qu'il n'est pas nécessaire de lire le titre des rapports. Nous avons tous ces éléments devant nos yeux. Il suffit donc de mentionner le nom du rapporteur.
                  

Presidente. – Grazie del consiglio. Invece, sul discarico di bilancio abbiamo l'obbligo di citare che cosa stiamo votando.
                  

Günther Oettinger,
Member of the Commission, in writing.

Commission statement

As regards the sharing of information with the European Parliament and the Council in Article 9, the Commission notes that rules on access by the European Parliament to information held by the Commission are already defined in the Framework Agreement agreed by the European Parliament and the Commission. The Commission will therefore apply Article 9 in a way that is consistent with the Framework Agreement and without prejudice to any future general rules on access by the European Parliament and the Council to information held by the Commission.
5.12.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Commission and executive agencies (A8-0150/2017 - Joachim Zeller)
5.13.   Discharge 2015: Court of Auditors' special reports in the context of the 2015 Commission discharge (A8-0160/2017 - Joachim Zeller)

— Dopo la votazione sull'emendamento 15:


Richard Corbett (S&D). – Mr President, it is perfectly within your rights under the Rules of Procedure to take a block vote on all these amendments.

Presidente. – È proprio per questo, onorevole. Le ho già detto che il testo verrà votato articolo per articolo come è arrivato in Aula. Proprio perché ne ho la facoltà.
                  

(Il Presidente richiama l'on. Preda a un comportamento degno dell'Aula)

5.14.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget - 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th EDFs (A8-0125/2017 - Younous Omarjee)
5.15.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Parliament (A8-0153/2017 - Dennis de Jong)
5.16.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Council and Council (A8-0131/2017 - Bart Staes)
5.17.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Court of Justice (A8-0136/2017 - Benedek Jávor)
5.18.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Court of Auditors (A8-0151/2017 - Benedek Jávor)
5.19.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Economic and Social Committee (A8-0144/2017 - Bart Staes)
5.20.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget – Committee of the Regions (A8-0141/2017 - Bart Staes)
5.21.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European External Action Service (A8-0122/2017 - Benedek Jávor)
5.22.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Ombudsman (A8-0142/2017 - Benedek Jávor)
5.23.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Data Protection Supervisor (A8-0140/2017 - Bart Staes)
5.24.   Discharge 2015: Performance, financial management and control of EU agencies (A8-0149/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.25.   Discharge 2015: Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) (A8-0147/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.26.   Discharge 2015: Office of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) (A8-0143/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.27.   Discharge 2015: Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union (CdT) (A8-0075/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.28.   Discharge 2015: European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) (A8-0145/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.29.   Discharge 2015: European Police College (CEPOL) (A8-0081/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.30.   Discharge 2015: European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (A8-0087/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.31.   Discharge 2015: European Asylum Support Office (EASO) (A8-0093/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.32.   Discharge 2015: European Banking Authority (EBA) (A8-0079/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.33.   Discharge 2015: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) (A8-0082/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.34.   Discharge 2015: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (A8-0086/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.35.   Discharge 2015: European Environment Agency (EEA) (A8-0085/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.36.   Discharge 2015: European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) (A8-0100/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.37.   Discharge 2015: European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (A8-0098/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.38.   Discharge 2015: European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) (A8-0106/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.39.   Discharge 2015: European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) (A8-0101/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.40.   Discharge 2015: European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) (A8-0127/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.41.   Discharge 2015: European Medicines Agency (EMA) (A8-0084/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.42.   Discharge 2015: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) (A8-0099/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.43.   Discharge 2015: European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) (A8-0130/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.44.   Discharge 2015: European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA) (A8-0115/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.45.   Discharge 2015: European Railway Agency (ERA) (A8-0128/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.46.   Discharge 2015: European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) (A8-0124/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.47.   Discharge 2015: European Training Foundation (ETF) (A8-0118/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.48.   Discharge 2015: European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice (eu-LISA) (A8-0105/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.49.   Discharge 2015: European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA) (A8-0116/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.50.   Discharge 2015: Euratom Supply Agency (ESA) (A8-0126/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.51.   Discharge 2015: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) (A8-0111/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.52.   Discharge 2015: European Union's Judicial Cooperation Unit (Eurojust) (A8-0129/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.53.   Discharge 2015: European Police Office (Europol) (A8-0107/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.54.   Discharge 2015: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) (A8-0146/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.55.   Discharge 2015: European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (Frontex) (A8-0137/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.56.   Discharge 2015: European GNSS Agency (GSA) (A8-0148/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)
5.57.   Discharge 2015: Bio-based Industries Joint Undertaking (BBI) (A8-0103/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
5.58.   Discharge 2015: Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking (A8-0094/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
5.59.   Discharge 2015: ECSEL Joint Undertaking (A8-0113/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
5.60.   Discharge 2015: Fuel Cells and Hydrogen 2 Joint Undertaking (FCH) (A8-0109/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
5.61.   Discharge 2015: Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking (IMI) (A8-0083/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
5.62.   Discharge 2015: ITER Joint Undertaking (A8-0108/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
5.63.   Discharge 2015: SESAR Joint Undertaking (A8-0096/2017 - Miroslav Poche)
5.64.   Management of fishing fleets in the outermost regions (A8-0138/2017 - Ulrike Rodust)
5.65.   EU flagship initiative on the garment sector (A8-0080/2017 - Lola Sánchez Caldentey)
5.66.   State of play of farmland concentration in the EU: how to facilitate the access to land for farmers (A8-0119/2017 - Maria Noichl)
5.67.   Annual report on the financial activities of the European Investment Bank (A8-0121/2017 - Georgios Kyrtsos)
5.68.   Implementation of the Mining Waste Directive (A8-0071/2017 - György Hölvényi)
5.69.   Situation in Venezuela (RC-B8-0270/2017, B8-0270/2017, B8-0271/2017, B8-0272/2017, B8-0274/2017, B8-0275/2017, B8-0276/2017, B8-0277/2017)
5.70.   Objection to a delegated act: Scheme of generalised tariff preferences (B8-0273/2017)

Presidente. – Con questo si conclude il turno di votazioni.
                  

Elnökváltás: GÁLL–PELCZ ILDIKÓ


alelnök

6.   Explanations of vote
6.1.   Annual report on the control of the financial activities of the European Investment Bank for 2015 (A8-0161/2017 - Nedzhmi Ali)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Rosa D'Amato (EFDD). – Le attività finanziarie della BEI nel 2015 mostrano un incremento della propensione al rischio e la spinta verso strumenti finanziari speciali. Il risultato è ormai evidente: le risorse europee vanno sempre più spesso ad alimentare strumenti finanziari ad elevato rischio, con una ingegnerizzazione che rischia di portare presto all'esplosione di una nuova gigantesca bolla speculativa.
                  

                     Oltre a denunciare l'enorme fetta dei prestiti concessi dalla BEI a un paese esterno all'Unione e che viola palesemente i diritti umani, come la Turchia, voglio qui rilevare che la BEI supporta operazioni di finanziamento indiretto a favore delle piccole e medie imprese che sono spesso incardinati su fondi d'investimento speculativi e non perseguono l'obiettivo del consolidamento dell'economia reale.
                  

                     In generale, poi, la BEI è coinvolta nel sostegno a progetti infrastrutturali con grave impatto ambientale, con un riscontro estremamente ridotto sotto il profilo occupazionale e con uno scarso valore aggiunto dal punto di vista economico e sociale. In conseguenza di queste considerazioni, il mio voto è stato negativo.
                  

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, am votat acest raport, dar am avut observațiile pe care le-am expus și la dezbatere. În primul rând, consider că BEI este un actor important pentru strategia noastră de dezvoltare, de dezvoltare în ansamblu a Uniunii Europene, și avem nevoie de o mai bună centrare a fondurilor. BEI trebuie să își asume riscul să finanțeze acele zone unde avem nevoie de infrastructură, avem nevoie de susținerea IMM-urilor pe proiecte reale, pe dezvoltarea locurilor de muncă. BEI nu este ca orice altă bancă care să meargă pe un risc minim. De aceea, consider că în perioada următoare BEI trebuie să se supună unui control și unui raport în cadrul Parlamentului pentru a putea avea susținerea cu adevărat a dezvoltării zonelor și a crește coeziunea socială, a crește infrastructura, a îmbunătăți infrastructura și conectivitatea și a face ca locurile de muncă în Europa să sporească.
                  

Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D). – Madam President, I would first like to congratulate the rapporteur. I believe that the EIB can be the main instrument to fill the current investment gap within the European Union. Therefore I support the call for a more active policy from the EIB, especially to support strategic investment for growth, jobs and innovation. I also believe that it is necessary to strengthen its policy in the field of climate change action to achieve the EU commitments taken within COP 21.
Nevertheless, I would like to underline that there is also a need for increased parliamentary oversight of the EIB's activities, taking into consideration the lack of transparency, particularly in the selection of projects and the low number of projects in Central and Eastern Europe. Therefore I agree that an interinstitutional agreement between Parliament and the EIB could improve this aspect. Additionally, the EIB should improve its policy to fight against tax avoidance and tax evasion by applying all the EU rules on activities through a swift implementation of the relevant EU legislation and standards.

Seán Kelly (PPE). – Madam President, I voted in favour of this report, given its essential evaluation of the European Union's policy objectives in this area. In particular, I welcome the report's recognition of the principles of economic recovery, the promotion of youth employment, the fostering of innovation and SMEs in the sphere of entrepreneurship, and environmental sustainability and climate action.
Notably, I also welcome the report's recommendation for the monitoring of EFSI's added value and additionality, thus fostering the geographical spread of the programme as we move forward. There can be no doubt that the sum total of these efforts may result in greater economic and social cohesion across Member States, and I am very pleased that tomorrow in my own constituency, in the city of Limerick, I am hosting an information day for businesses, local authorities, agencies etc. on EFSI and the EIB, which recently opened an office in my own country in Dublin.

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Oggi ho votato a favore della relazione annuale sul controllo delle attività finanziarie della BEI per il 2015. Il rafforzamento del ruolo economico della BEI e l'aumento della sua capacità di investimento debbono essere accompagnati da una maggiore trasparenza al fine di garantire un reale controllo pubblico delle sue attività e della selezione dei progetti. Da migliorare è anche l'informazione sulle possibilità di finanziamento e sul servizio di consulenza offerto, al fine di aumentare il finanziamento dei progetti delle autorità locali e delle PMI, nonché di semplificare l'accesso ai suoi finanziamenti.
                  

                     Il sostegno alla ripresa economica, alla crescita sostenibile e al rafforzamento della coesione costituisce un obiettivo chiave delle politiche europee. Occorre affrontare meglio le sfide strutturali, in particolare quelle relative alla reindustrializzazione dell'Europa e all'economia digitale, per creare nuove opportunità economiche, promuovere lo sviluppo di un'economia circolare e migliorare l'utilizzo delle energie rinnovabili, in linea con gli obiettivi delle politiche per l'ambiente, il clima e l'energia.
                  

Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já bych chtěl úvodem říci, že jsem tuto zprávu podpořil. Je důležité sdělit, že skutečně je vidět ve výkazech Evropské investiční banky, že dochází k nárůstu rizikovosti. Obecně lze říci, že investiční banka by měla podstupovat jistou míru rizika, má na to ostatně pravidla a kritéria, podle kterých se rozhoduje.
                  

                     Já bych chtěl ovšem hovořit o tom, že ten proslulý Junckerův investiční fond měl být brán jako doplněk právě k činnosti Evropské investiční banky. To se bohužel příliš neděje. My bychom právě potřebovali, aby se i ten Junckerův investiční fond více zabýval rizikovými finančními nástroji, a ne příliš konkuroval strukturálním a investičním fondům Evropské unie. To si myslím, že je základní problém, kde potom následuje výkyv, například u činnosti Evropské investiční banky, která potom směřuje ty prostředky jinam. Takže toto by mělo být koordinováno na úrovni všech politik Evropské investiční banky a strukturálních fondů.
                  

Daniel Hannan (ECR). – Madam President, what is the purpose of a bank that is backed by the taxpayer and that intervenes in the private sector? The only possible justification is that governments know better than the market. If there is a good bet, investors will see that and will put their money in accordingly, but the notional justification for this kind of bank is that we know better than the market and will make better decisions.
As a matter of fact, as we have heard during this debate, that has not been the outcome of these EIB loans, and in fact it never is. If you take that argument to the extreme, you get East Germany rather than West Germany, and North Korea rather than South Korea. We have tested to its limits the idea that the State knows better than the market. The real purpose of a bank like this is that it opens the door for us to promote projects that we happen to like. It therefore inevitably opens the door to favouritism and cronyism. Yet the only solution we have heard today – the only criticism – of all the failings of the EIB is to bring it under more direct political control. In fact, we politicians should learn to do less.
6.2.   Structural Reform Support Programme for 2017-2020 (A8-0374/2016 - Lambert van Nistelrooij, Constanze Krehl)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Curzio Maltese (GUE/NGL). – Le cosiddette riforme strutturali sono in realtà state in questi anni delle controriforme che hanno tolto diritti e conquiste ai cittadini europei. La storia non ha insegnato nulla e ora c'è un nuovo programma per implementare, per aiutare teoricamente, ma in realtà per orientare gli Stati ad adottare quella che è stata la soluzione greca, che ha così tragicamente fallito in quel paese e che si vuole estendere.
                  

                     Questo programma è una specie di assistenza al suicidio sia dei singoli Stati sia dell'idea di Europa e quindi noi siamo decisamente contrari. Un obiettivo minimo che abbiamo cercato di ottenere con una grande maggioranza nella commissione per la cultura era di sottrarre almeno il campo dell'istruzione a queste cure draconiane, totalmente inutili a risanare i bilanci degli Stati, e neanche in questo ci è stato dato ascolto. Non c'è nulla di positivo da conservare di questi fallimenti.
                  

Момчил Неков (S&D). – Г-жо Председател, подкрепих предложението за регламент за създаване на програма за подкрепа на структурните реформи за периода 2017-2020 година. Голяма част от държавите членки са изправени пред предизвикателството на слаб икономически ръст след преживяната тежка криза. Точно затова провеждането на структурни реформи е от ключово значение за стимулиране на растежа и подкрепа на процеса на сближаване.
                  

                     Не само замислянето на дадено законодателство е важно, но и неговото ефективно приложение. В същото време твърдо отстоявам мнението, че бюджетът, предвиден за програмата, не трябва да създава прецеденти за финансирането на бъдещи инициативи от страна на Европейската комисия по линията на политиката за сближаване. Наред с това смятам, че трябва да бъде обект и на годишен мониторинг с оглед на нейната ефикасност.
                  

                     В заключение искам да добавя, че програмата трябва да бъде отворена и за регионални и местни власти, още повече че препоръките по линия на Европейския семестър понякога са директно насочени към тях.
                  

Adam Szejnfeld (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Program wspierania reform strukturalnych na lata 2017-2020 jest istotnym elementem wspierania, podnoszenia rozwoju państw członkowskich. Wpisuje się on w unijny system koordynacji polityk gospodarczych. Co prawda budżet tego programu nie jest duży, bo to nawet nie jest kwota 143 milionów euro, ale pamiętać trzeba, że ten program ma być tylko uzupełnieniem innych unijnych programów, a więc summa summarum uważam, że będzie dobrze działał na rzecz osiągnięcia celów, o które nam chodzi.
                  

                     Jedną z ważnych zasad tego programu jest zasada partnerstwa. Ma ona na celu włączenie władz regionalnych i lokalnych w realizację procesu reform i to jest moim zdaniem bardzo istotne.
                  

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, am votat acest raport, însă doresc să menționez ceea ce am spus în dezbatere: este foarte important ca acest program de sprijin pentru reforme structurale pe perioada 2017-2020 să-și atingă scopul. Să mergem să sprijinim autoritățile locale, cele din mediul rural în mod deosebit, pe parteneriate public-privat, banii care se iau să nu se ia de la alte fonduri structurale, pentru că atunci mutăm dintr-un buzunar în altul. Este foarte important să fie axat acest program de sprijin pentru asistența primăriilor, primăriilor mici, orașelor mici, comunelor, unde într-adevăr este nevoie de investiție, dar nu știu să folosească banii europeni. Și eu sper că acest program de sprijin pentru reforme structurale își va atinge scopul, dar cu aceste condiții pe care le-am spus, și cred că noi, Parlamentul, comisiile de specialitate, avem sarcina să verificăm dacă așa se întâmplă.
                  

Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE). – Reformy strukturalne 2017-2020 będą miały ważnego partnera. Tym partnerem będą samorządy dwóch szczebli: szczebla gminnego i szczebla regionalnego. Kwoty, które są tu przeznaczone, nie są duże, ale ważne jest, że to rozporządzenie kończy pewną debatę dotyczącą dużych środków dedykowanych właśnie regionom i samorządom.
                  

                     Cieszę się, że w dzisiejszym głosowaniu zaakceptowaliśmy – koniec końców – tę następną perspektywę, w której samorządy terytorialne szczebla gminnego i regionalnego będą tym kluczowym, ważnym partnerem. W poprzedniej dyskusji padło wiele uwag pod adresem systemów finansowania banków itp., dlatego że rzeczywiście w bardzo wielu kwestiach to rynek powinien decydować, na co te inwestycje są przeznaczane. Ale samorząd jest również rynkiem, samorząd terytorialny jest tym podmiotem, który jest najbardziej uwrażliwiony na społeczność lokalną, i bardzo się cieszę, że dzisiejszym głosowaniem kończymy tę debatę
                  

Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D). – Madam President, I welcome the fact that, in the Structural Reform Support Programme for the period 2017-2020, we included references to the core principle of cohesion policy – namely that the actions and activities under the new programme should also be able to contribute to social, economic and territorial cohesion. We also included cohesion as an area eligible for support, even though this was not originally proposed by the Commission. Finally, we struck a deal with the Council on involving regional and local players in Member States' reform processes. We succeeded in having increased scrutiny by Parliament, enhanced transparency which will enable us to access the programme's added value. Moreover, I welcome the focus on ensuring transparency in two stages – ex-ante and ex-post. When the disclosure of relevant information would not adversely affect the implementation of support measures, full information regarding cooperation and support plans should be provided to the Council and to Parliament.

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Il nuovo regolamento approvato quest'oggi sul programma di sostegno alle riforme degli Stati membri contribuirà all'attuazione di misure volte a migliorare le istituzioni, la governance, l'amministrazione, l'economia e i settori locali. Gli obiettivi specifici del programma consistono nel sostenere le iniziative delle autorità nazionali volte a strutturare le riforme in funzione delle priorità, migliorare la loro capacità di elaborare e attuare strategie di riforme e seguire un approccio integrato per garantire la coerenza tra obiettivi e mezzi di tutti i settori.
                  

                     Tra le azioni finanziate dal programma figurano seminari, workshop e conferenze, visite di lavoro, studi, ricerche, analisi e indagini. Gli Stati membri che desiderano ricevere sostegno a titolo del programma dovranno presentare una richiesta in tal senso nell'ambito del dialogo del Semestre europeo. La Commissione e gli Stati membri interessati garantiranno coerenza, complementarità e sinergie tra le azioni condotte nell'ambito del presente programma e quelle realizzate attraverso altri strumenti dell'Unione europea.
                  

Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já jsem tuto zprávu podpořil a byl jsem překvapen tím, co jsem slyšel při vysvětlování, že vlastně tento program je podle jednoho z kolegů zbytečný. To já považuji za velmi nesmyslné tvrzení.
                  

                     Za prvé, tento program má pomoci členským státům v provádění strukturálních reforem a je takové množství oblastí, kde Evropě dochází dech, že je nutné provést hluboké strukturální reformy. Za druhé, tento program je otevřen pro partnerství obcím, městům a regionům a toto partnerství je velmi důležité, protože pokud vláda nesplní makroekonomickou podmíněnost v rámci kohezní politiky, tak jsou za to potom trestány mimo jiné i obce a města. Je důležité, aby nemusely jenom přijít o peníze, ale zároveň se mohly podílet právě na provádění strukturálních reforem. Ten program není příliš bohatý, sto čtyřicet milionů EUR není velká částka, na druhou stranu může pomoci tam, kde skutečně, jak již jsem řekl na začátku, Evropě tak trochu dochází dech.
                  
6.3.   European Year of Cultural Heritage (A8-0340/2016 - Mircea Diaconu)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Curzio Maltese (GUE/NGL). – Io ho votato a favore. Voglio ringraziare il collega Diaconu per il lavoro svolto, anche se l'esiguità dei fondi messi a disposizione rende questa iniziativa più che altro simbolica. Comunque i simboli sono anche importanti e a questo proposito io mi impegnerò perché nelle iniziative non siano tralasciate le zone colpite da catastrofi naturali, come nel centro Italia dove esiste un grande patrimonio culturale.
                  

                     Il patrimonio culturale è un privilegio, ma è anche una fonte di doveri. Parafrasando un detto dei nativi americani, l'abbiamo ereditato dai nostri genitori e lo abbiamo in prestito dai nostri figli ai quali lo dobbiamo restituire. Oggi in molte aree d'Europa le politiche di austerità e i tagli hanno reso questo compito molto difficile. Mi auguro che quest'iniziativa, questo Anno europeo del patrimonio culturale, sia un primo passo per cambiare strada.
                  

Момчил Неков (S&D). – Г-жо Председател, подкрепих предложението за създаване на Европейска година на културно наследство през 2018 година, защото именно нашето богато културно наследство е движещата сила за социалното и икономическото развитие на Европейския съюз. Вярвам, че тази инициатива ще даде положителен тласък и видимост на сектора, който бе значително пренебрегнат заради финансовата и икономическата криза.
                  

                     Опазването на културното наследство трябва да залегне в политическия дневен ред и то не само през 2018 година. Културните и творческите индустрии създават 12 милиона работни места, което се равнява на 7,5% от работната сила на Съюза. Въпреки огромния икономически потенциал, с който разполагат, единствено програма ‘Творческа Европа’ и Европейският фонд за стратегически инвестиции посочват като приоритетен този сектор.
                  

                     Поради тази причина защитавам позицията, че за изпълнението на Европейската година на културно наследство трябва да се задели отделен финансов ресурс. Успехът на инициативата не трябва да е за сметка на други успешни програми в областта на културата.
                  

Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já bych chtěla zdůraznit, že je velmi důležité, že Evropský parlament dnes přijal rozhodnutí o Evropském roku kulturního dědictví, a to velkou většinou poslanců: 554 z přítomných. To je velká podpora pro příští rok a také podpora změnám, které oproti Evropské komisi Evropský parlament navrhl.
                  

                     My jsem navrhli, abychom zdůraznili rok 2018 jako symbolický rok 100 let od konce první světové války a také rok, kdy vzniklo před sto lety několik nových států v Evropě. Také jsme zdůraznili nutnost, abychom se poučili z historie, a lépe tak mohli rozhodovat o dnešku a budoucnosti společné Evropy. Evropský parlament také posílil rozpočet na tento rok na osm milionů EUR a já považuji za důležité, že již nyní mohou začít přípravy, aby ten rok byl skutečně úspešný.
                  

Krisztina Morvai (NI). – Elnök Asszony, nagyon nagy öröm az, hogy 2018-at az Európai Unió az európai kulturális örökség évének nyilvánította, de van valami bizarrul tragikomikus abban, hogy miközben egy vagon pénzt áldoz erre a célra, úgy dönt, hogy migránsok sokaságát tereli be az Európai Unióba és folyamatosan gyalázza azt a néhány országot, amelyik ennek ellenáll. Nem kell senkinek magyarázni, elég sétálni itt egyet, hogy hogyan veszélyezteti Európa kulturális örökségét a tömeges migráció. Annyit mindenesetre tudok ígérni a magyar emberek többsége nevében, hogy Magyarország lelkesen támogatni fogja ezt az európai kulturális örökség évet és továbbra is meg fogjuk védeni az európai kulturális örökséget oly módon, hogy megvédjük határainkat, saját államunk határát és az Európai Unió határát.
                  

Adam Szejnfeld (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Być może nigdy wcześniej taki program, który ma promować dziedzictwo kulturowe Europy, nie był ważniejszy i bardziej potrzebny niż teraz. Żyjemy bowiem w czasach, w których zamiast apelować i starać się, by stać – my jako Europejczycy – po jednej stronie, rosną w siłę ruchy, które chcą nas podzielić i zróżnicować. Dlatego uważam, że inicjatywa Europejskiego Roku Dziedzictwa Kulturowego jest bardzo ważna i powinna promować różnorodność kulturową i dialog międzykulturowy w Europie.
                  

                     Celem tego programu powinno być także podnoszenie wiedzy na temat historii Europy, wartości cywilizacyjnych, które Europa dała światu, abyśmy my Europejczycy – jak powiedziałem na początku – stali zawsze po jednej stronie.
                  

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, am susținut această inițiativă de la bun început și mă bucur că un om de cultură din România, Mircea Diaconu, este raportor și că astăzi am votat acest raport. Anul european al patrimoniului cultural coincide pentru țara mea cu sărbătorirea a o sută de ani de la independență și mă bucur de această coincidență, dar sper ca, în acest an, Anul european cultural, să facem ceva concret pentru diversitate, unitate în diversitate, așa cum este deviza Uniunii Europene, să facem concret ceva pentru conservarea valorilor și patrimoniului cultural în toate țările, în toate statele membre, să facem evenimente care să marcheze într-adevăr Anul european al patrimoniului cultural. Cred că ne cunoaștem insuficient culturile, reciproc statele membre și cetățenii, și cred că putem să facem acțiuni care să creeze punți, pentru că, până la urmă, cultura și educația fac legătura între oameni.
                  

Csaba Sógor (PPE). – Elnök Asszony, üdvözlöm, hogy 2018 a kulturális örökség európai éve lehet, és egyetértek azzal, hogy az európai év fő célkitűzése az európai kulturális örökség mint évszázadok történelméből fakadó, tagállamokat és az európai népeket egybefonó közös erőforrás megünneplése. Ugyanakkor ezt az évet jó alkalomnak tartom arra, hogy többet beszéljünk az európai népek múltjáról és történelemszemléletéről is, hiszen ennek a múltnak egy része ma is inkább elválasztja, és szembeállítja egymással az egyes nemzeteket. Azt gondolom, hogy az Európai Unió tagállamainak a történelmi megbékélésre kell törekedniük, ehhez azonban nyíltság, kompromisszumkészség és mindenekelőtt közös célok és törekvések kellenek. Az európai integráció hajnalán voltak ilyen közös célok az alapító tagállamok között, az EU egyik fő kihívása, hogy a tagállamok gondolkodásának horizontján ma is legyenek ilyen közös célok, amelyeket csakis összefogással, egymás iránti tisztelettel és egyenrangú államok együttműködésével érhetünk el.
                  

Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já jsem také podpořil toto usnesení, protože jsem přesvědčen, že projekty, které vedou k poznání našeho dědictví, naší evropské kultury, toho, co je evropské kultuře společné, ale i případných rozdílností podle jednotlivých států a národů, to si myslím, že je velmi prospěšné a důležité a vede to k přirozené výchově a k tomu, že vnímáme a identifikujeme se jako Evropané a vnímáme Evropu jako jeden kontinent, který má právě společné bohatství, společnou kulturu.
                  

                     Proto jsem tento návrh podpořil a doufám, že se podaří za – sice ne velké, ale alespoň nějaké – peníze uskutečnit několik zajímavých projektů v celé Evropě. Jsem rád, že byl vybrán rok příští, 2018, protože Československo v roce 1918 vzniklo jako samostatný stát, a my Češi si tedy připomínáme obnovení české, byť v té době československé, státnosti.
                  

Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE). – Mamy w Europie ogromną inflację różnego rodzaju rocznic, jubileuszy, lat dedykowanych określonemu wydarzeniu. Praktycznie w każdy weekend odbywa się ceremonia ku czci kogoś, czegoś lub określonego wydarzenia. Jeżeli pojawia się taki Europejski Rok Dziedzictwa dedykowany w 2018 roku dziedzictwu materialnemu i duchowemu, to trzeba pamiętać, że 6 mln euro na całą Europę to są środki więcej niż skromnie.
                  

                     Dlatego też przy okazji tego głosowania chcę przede wszystkim zaapelować do rządów poszczególnych państw, aby wzmocnić Europejski Rok Dziedzictwa własnymi środkami, własnymi inicjatywami, a także własnymi pomysłami i projektami, które dadzą wspólny mianownik i pokażą korzenie Europy, pokażą nasze dziedzictwo, pokażą system wartości, jego zmiany, ale także pozwolą promować europejskie dziedzictwo poza jego granicami.
                  

Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D). – Madam President, I welcome the fact that we have been leading this initiative for the establishment of a European Year of Cultural Heritage in 2018, keeping pressure on the Commission until the presentation of the proposal in September 2016. It was followed by an accelerated procedure, agreed among all political groups, to be able to have the position of the Parliament as quickly as possible in order to start negotiations with the Council. An agreement was finally achieved under the Maltese Presidency.
The European Year of Cultural Heritage 2018 will support cultural activities and projects in order to protect, safeguard, use, develop and promote Europeans' shared cultural heritage. Parliament has secured an EUR 8 million budget for these activities and managed to ensure Parliament's active involvement in the management of the Year. Our aim is to involve citizens in the recognition and promotion of their cultural heritage.
Și aș vrea să fac o referire la faptul că a fost aici o colegă care mereu folosește greșit în limba română termenul ‘președintă’. În limba română, președintă este defectiv de gen, există numai președinte.

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, καταψήφισα την έκθεση για το Ευρωπαϊκό Έτος Πολιτιστικής Κληρονομιάς σαν ένδειξη διαμαρτυρίας, διότι δεν αναφέρει τίποτε η έκθεση για την επιστροφή στον τόπο προέλευσής τους των κλαπέντων αρχαιολογικών θησαυρών, όπως ορίζει η οδηγία 93/7 ΕΟΚ αλλά επίσης όπως ορίζει και η Σύμβαση της UΝΕSCΟ του 1970. Κυρία Πρόεδρε, πέρασαν 76 χρόνια από τότε που, στις 27 Απριλίου 1941, τα ναζιστικά στρατεύματα κατοχής εισήλθαν στην Ελλάδα, εισήλθαν στην Αθήνα. Κατά τη διάρκεια της ναζιστικής κατοχής κλάπηκαν αρχαιολογικοί θησαυροί, οι οποίοι περιλαμβάνονται στον ειδικό τόμο που εξέδωσε το 1946 το ελληνικό Υπουργείο Παιδείας και στην ειδική έκθεση του βρετανικού Υπουργείου Πολέμου. Απαιτούμε την άμεση επιστροφή των αρχαιολογικών θησαυρών που κλάπηκαν από τους Ναζί κατά τη διάρκεια των ετών 1941-1944.
                  

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – La designazione del 2018 quale Anno europeo del patrimonio culturale rappresenta un'occasione preziosa per promuovere le nostre eccellenze culturali come risorsa condivisa, frutto di una storia secolare. In un'epoca caratterizzata da una crescente diversità culturale, il patrimonio culturale può svolgere un ruolo importante per la coesione della collettività. Dai siti archeologici all'architettura, dai castelli medievali alle tradizioni popolari, fino alle arti, il patrimonio culturale dell'Europa è il cuore pulsante dell'identità e della memoria collettiva dei cittadini europei e come tale va salvaguardato e protetto. Senza contare che sono circa 300 000 le persone impiegate direttamente nel settore del patrimonio culturale dell'Unione europea, che genera indirettamente 7,8 milioni di posti di lavoro.
                  

                     Sul mio territorio vivo l'esempio virtuoso della Reggia borbonica di Caserta e di Pompei, ormai volano per l'economia turistica di un'intera regione. Occorre darsi da fare, il 2018 è dietro l'angolo. Ognuno deve fare la propria parte affinché l'Anno europeo del patrimonio culturale si trasformi in una concreta opportunità per il rilancio dell'immagine del Vecchio Continente agli occhi del mondo.
                  

Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já jsem tuto zprávu podpořil a jsem velmi rád, že právě rok 2018 byl vybrán jako Evropský rok kulturního dědictví. My tím ukazujeme směr našich priorit, ukazujeme, že kultura je skutečně hodnotou, která má zvláště v těchto letech svůj velmi klíčový význam, a to myslím i pro budoucnost Evropy jako takové, protože kultura definuje nás, jací jsme, a odráží i naše okolí.
                  

                     Chci podpořit to, že se navýšil rozpočet, byť málo, ale zároveň chci ocenit to, že se rok 2018 kryje i s rokem oslavy české a československé státnosti, protože v roce 2018 si Česká republika (respektive Československo) připomene sto let od nabytí samostatnosti. Myslím si, že bude velkou výzvou pro vládu České republiky, aby našla dostatečná propojení na akce, které souvisí s evropským kulturním dědictvím. Zatím mám pocit, že se tomu tak příliš neděje.
                  

Marek Jurek (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Ogłoszenie Europejskiego Roku Dziedzictwa Kulturowego to bardzo dobra okazja, żeby przypomnieć o tym, że Europa istniała setki lat, zanim powstała Unia Europejska. Europa wyłoniła się po upadku Imperium Rzymskiego, wtedy kiedy w czasie wieków ciemnych św. Benedykt rozjaśniał jej przestrzeń swoimi klasztorami. I to o tej Europie św. Jan Paweł II powiedział w Gnieźnie na zjeździe prezydentów Europy Środkowej, że zawiera bardzo wiele dopływów ta rzeka, ale jej główny nurt to chrześcijaństwo.
                  

                     Jest jeszcze jeden powód, żeby przypomnieć potrzebę pamiętania o naszym dziedzictwie. Bardzo mało widzimy go w naszym gmachu Parlamentu Europejskiego, w obu naszych gmachach. Tu nie widzimy ani Karola Wielkiego, ani świętej królowej Jadwigi, ani soborów powszechnych, ani Bitwy Warszawskiej, kiedy nasi dziadkowie ocalili świat przed bolszewizmem. Pora sobie przypomnieć, że Europa jest rzeczywistością, której mamy służyć, to nie my ją stworzyliśmy, my ją możemy tylko chronić.
                  

Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, vótáil mé i bhfábhar na tuarascála seo agus dar ndóigh tá sé tábhachtach go gcuirimid béim ar ár gcultúr oidhreachta agus aontaím go mór leis an moladh atá ann go mbeadh an bhliain seo chugainn ina Bliain Chultúir Oidhreachta na hEorpa. Thabharfadh sin seans dúinn aird agus aitheantas a thabhairt dár n-oidhreacht agus, go háirithe, an pháirt a ghlacann cultúr i saibhreas ár saol i gcoitinne agus i bhfás gheilleagar na hEorpa. Freisin, ba mhaith liom nach ndéanfaimid dearmad ar scéalaíocht mar chuid den oidhreacht sin. Nílim ag caint faoi scéalta a dhéanann daoine suas, ach scéalaíocht a insíonn dúinn faoinár n-oidhreacht agus go háirithe ár n-oidhreacht Chríostúil atá an-saibhir san Eoraip agus a nascann sinn le chéile. Agus mar fhocal scoir, ná déan dearmad ar spórt mar chuid dár gcultúr oidhreachta chomh maith.
                  
6.4.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Commission and executive agencies (A8-0150/2017 - Joachim Zeller)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Zawsze będę bronić tych pozycji budżetowych, które są dedykowane młodym ludziom bez względu na to, czy dotyczy to edukacji, czy rynków kreatywnych, czy takich programów stypendialnych jak ‘Erasmus+’. Ważne jest, aby jednak te środki dedykowane właśnie najmłodszym, najmłodszym na rynku, najmłodszym zdobywającym edukację, były wydawane w sposób nie tylko racjonalny, ale zgodnie z ich interesami.
                  

                     Apelowałem wielokrotnie o przede wszystkim likwidację zaległości – zaległości wymagalnych i tych zaległości, które pojawiały się na skutek różnego rodzaju barier, także biurokratycznych. Cieszę się, że to sprawozdanie, które kończy 2015 rok, wykazuje zmniejszenie zobowiązań wymagalnych dedykowanych właśnie młodym ludziom bez względu na to, czy to jest program ‘Europa dla obywateli’, ‘Kreatywna Europa’ czy programy takie jak ‘Erasmus+’. Mam nadzieję, że w roku 2016 sporządzone zostanie podobne sprawozdanie.
                  

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, καταψήφισα την έκθεση απαλλαγής για τον γενικό προϋπολογισμό της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, ειδικότερα για την Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή, διότι θεωρώ ότι η δράση της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής διακατέχεται από αδιαφάνεια και κακοδιοίκηση. Ταυτόχρονα θα ήθελα να θίξω ένα ευρύτερο θέμα και να διαμαρτυρηθώ, διότι σήμερα ψηφίσαμε πενήντα δύο εκθέσεις απαλλαγής των οργάνων της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, και όλα αυτά, που είναι μια σοβαρή διαδικασία, η συζήτηση, ο έλεγχος, έγιναν χθες σε μία συζήτηση, λίγων ωρών. Είναι αδύνατον –είμαι βέβαιος– να υπάρχει σοβαρός έλεγχος της λειτουργίας των οικονομικών όλων των οργανισμών και να μπορεί κανείς να δώσει απαλλαγή. Εγώ καταψήφισα, δεν έδωσα απαλλαγή σε κανέναν από τους οργανισμούς, μεταξύ άλλων διότι δεν έχει καμιά σοβαρή συζήτηση, δεν έγινε κανένας έλεγχος, και είδαμε εδώ να ψηφίζουμε τη μία έκθεση πίσω από την άλλη σε μια διαδικασία που κατά τη γνώμη μου είναι όνειδος για τον δημοκρατικό έλεγχο που πρέπει να ασκεί το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο.
                  
6.5.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Council and Council (A8-0131/2017 - Bart Staes)
6.6.   Discharge 2015: EU general budget – European Court of Auditors (A8-0151/2017 - Benedek Jávor)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Monica Macovei (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, activitatea Curții de Conturi Europene este de mulți ani sub așteptări. Sigur, depinde de așteptările fiecăruia. De exemplu, Curtea de Conturi Europeană nu s-a ocupat de transparența financiară a instituțiilor europene, nu s-a uitat profund la modul în care se face managementul în toate instituțiile europene, de asemenea, conflictele de interese parcă nu au mai existat pentru Curtea de Conturi, politica de resurse umane, cum se fac angajările, promovările.
                  

                     Și, pentru că am o menționat conflictele de interese, sunt foarte îngrijorată că, din 2012, Curtea de Conturi Europeană nu a mai făcut niciun raport special privind conflictele de interese, mai ales pentru agențiile care lucrează cu industriile, și este vital pentru sănătatea și viața noastră să facă acest lucru și e vorba de agențiile din industria alimentară, agențiile din industria farmaceutică, cea chimică, cea de construcție de avioane. Toate acestea sunt esențiale, pentru că, atunci când e un conflict de interese între funcționarii europeni și industrii, noi toți avem de suferit. De asemenea, aș vrea să spun doar un singur lucru: în 2015, Curtea, deși a promis că reduce cu 5 % personalul, a făcut noi angajări.
                  
6.7.   Discharge 2015: Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) (A8-0147/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Monica Macovei (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, și în cazul acestei agenții, ca și la Curtea de Conturi Europeană, am votat împotriva descărcării de gestiune, pentru că personal am constatat nereguli. La ACER, Agenția pentru Cooperarea Autorităților de Reglementare din Domeniul Energiei, s-au înregistrat multe nefuncționalități și neregularități și, atunci, după cum am spus, nu am votat descărcarea de gestiune.
                  

                     Sunt probleme serioase în politica de resurse umane, politica de angajări, de exemplu, în 2015, Agenția a angajat un asistent de gradul 8, deși avea voie să facă doar o angajare pentru gradul 5. Asta înseamnă mai mulți bani, de unde i-a luat și de ce Curtea de Conturi nu o sancționează? Sau, un angajat care a câștigat un proces împotriva Agenției nu a mai fost angajat, deși Agenția era obligată să-l angajeze. Tot în 2014, șeful serviciului administrativ a fost reclasificat cu un grad foarte înalt, fiind în conflict de interese pentru că era tocmai membru în comitetul care a decis să facă aceste promovări. Prin urmare, nu am votat pentru …
                  

(președintele a întrerupt vorbitorul).
                  
6.8.   Discharge 2015: European Banking Authority (EBA) (A8-0079/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Krisztina Morvai (NI). – Elnök Asszony, ez az Európai Bankhatóság úgy hirdeti magát, mint aki a fogyasztóvédelemért felelős a bankok és ügyfelek viszonylatában. Nem vagyok pénzügyi szakember, de jogászként nem sokra értékelem a munkájukat, ha azt látom, hogy valahogy mégis csak létrejöhetett ez a rettenetes, csaláson alapuló ún. devizahitel-konstrukció, többek között ugye Magyarországon. Látom azt, hogy manapság is napról napra lakoltatnak ki brutális körülmények között embereket, és családok tízezrei rettegnek a kilakoltatás rémétől. Kérem szépen, hol van ilyenkor ez az Európai Bankfelügyelet vagy Bankhatóság? Ezek az emberek még mindig fogyasztók, még mindig bankoknak az ügyfelei, vagy volt ügyfelei, kerüljenek elő és segítsenek ezeknek az embereknek, védjék meg a jogaikat! És hol van az Európai Bankhatóság akkor, Elnök Asszonynak is jól ismertek ezek a fényképek, amiket azért átadok, a Ferihegyi repülőtéren rohanják le az embereket, kiszolgáltatott helyzetben, sietség közben, a járatukat keresve, három banknak a képviselete van ott, és iratnak alá megfontolatlanul, meggondolatlanul emberekkel elköteleződéseket. Kérem Elnök Asszonyt is személyesen, hogy járjon el ebben az ügyben!
                  
6.9.   Discharge 2015: European Medicines Agency (EMA) (A8-0084/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Monica Macovei (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, de data aceasta vreau să motivez de ce am votat pentru descărcarea de gestiune în cazul Agenției Europene pentru Medicamente și o să pornesc de la ceea ce multă lume spune, că industria farmaceutică ne conduce lumea. Dar nu trebuie să ne intimideze asta, noi trebuie să facem politicile care trebuie și legile care trebuie pentru cetățeni. Pierderile înregistrate din cauza medicamentelor contrafăcute se ridică în Uniunea Europeană la 10,2 miliarde pe an. Este o sumă enormă. Și, mai ales, avem medicamente contrafăcute care îmbolnăvesc oamenii, nu-i fac sănătoși. Din 2013 încoace Agenția a primit circa 40 de sesizări în această privință și cred că ar fi primit mai multe dacă putea să aibă un sistem care să îi protejeze pe cei care sesizează. Mă bucur că acum Agenția a adoptat anul acesta o astfel de reglementare care o ajută să verifice acuzațiile cu privire la nerespectarea standardelor medicamentelor și protejând, în același timp, avertizorii de integritate.
                  
6.10.   Discharge 2015: European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA) (A8-0115/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, καταψήφισα την απαλλαγή του 2015 του Οργανισμού της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης για την ασφάλεια των Δικτύων και Πληροφοριών του ENISA και εξηγούμαι γιατί. Ο οργανισμός ιδρύθηκε και εγκαταστάθηκε στο Ηράκλειο της Κρήτης αλλά από την πρώτη στιγμή η ηγεσία του ήθελε να φύγει από το Ηράκλειο της Κρήτης και μεθόδευσε διάφορους τρόπους, έτσι διέσπασε ουσιαστικά τον οργανισμό σε δύο τμήματα: σε ένα διοικητικό τμήμα και σε ένα τεχνολογικό, και το τεχνολογικό τμήμα το μετέφερε στην Αθήνα. Το διοικητικό τμήμα παρέμεινε στο Ηράκλειο, σε ένα χώρο 4,5 χιλιάδων τετραγωνικών, όπου είναι εγκατεστημένο και φιλοξενείται χωρίς να υπάρχουν έξοδα. Έχουν δημιουργηθεί έξοδα από την απόφαση να μεταφερθεί ο ENISA ή τμήμα του στην Αθήνα, πράγμα που επιφέρει έξοδα για τα διοικητικά και για τα κτήρια. Διαμαρτύρομαι γι' αυτή την απαράδεκτη κατάσταση! Δεν πρόκειται να δώσω απαλλαγή σε αυτόν τον οργανισμό και πιστεύω ότι πρέπει να ελεγχθεί άμεσα η δραστηριότητα της ηγεσίας αυτού του οργανισμού.
                  
6.11.   Discharge 2015: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) (A8-0111/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Paní předsedající, my jsme dnes hlasovali o padesáti dvou absolutoriích pro orgány a agentury Evropské unie. Já bych se chtěla vyjádřit ke dvěma. Tím prvním je Eurofound, což je agentura, se kterou mám konkrétní zkušenosti při využívání jejích studií a publikací ve Výboru pro zaměstnanost a sociální věci. Tato agentura hospodařila v roce 2015 s 20,86 miliardami EUR. Já se domnívám, že tyto prostředky jsou využívány efektivně. My se budeme snažit v rámci novelizace legislativního podkladu pro Eurofound ještě tuto činnost více zefektivnit. Myslím, že absolutorium bylo uděleno oprávněně.
                  
6.12.   Discharge 2015: European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (Frontex) (A8-0137/2017 - Inés Ayala Sender)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Paní předsedající, jedná se tedy o absolutorium pro agenturu Frontex, jejíž prostředky byly v roce 2015 navýšeny o 46 %. Já se domnívám, že vzhledem k prioritám Evropské unie, což je ochrana vnějších hranic, bylo toto navýšení naprosto namístě. Díky navýšeným prostředkům mohla agentura zachránit statisíce lidských životů, dokonce uvádíme číslo 250 000 lidí na moři.
                  

                     Pro další a co nejefektivnější činnost je však nutné rozdělit a definovat pravomoci mezi Frontexem a Fondem pro vnitřní bezpečnost, aby nedocházelo ke zbytečnému zdvojování aktivit, a tím pádem i plýtvání zdrojů. Je dobře, že tato agentura dostala zprávu Účetního dvora, která uvádí, že byly prostředky uhrazeny v souladu s vytyčenými cíly.
                  
6.13.   Management of fishing fleets in the outermost regions (A8-0138/2017 - Ulrike Rodust)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Ulrike Rodust (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin! Es hat zu meinem Bericht einen Änderungsantrag gegeben – ich habe diesen Änderungsantrag abgelehnt. Meine Gründe hierfür habe ich gestern im Plenum erläutert. Zusammengefasst ist dieser Änderungsantrag meiner Meinung nach mit der gegenwärtigen Gemeinsamen Fischereipolitik nicht konform. Da der Bericht jedoch hilfreiche Dinge beinhaltet, habe ich mich bei der Abstimmung über die Entschließung enthalten, statt gegen die Entschließung zu stimmen. Für den Bericht konnte ich in diesem Fall nicht stimmen, da ich in meinem ursprünglichen Berichtsentwurf eine Zweiteilung vorgenommen hatte: Was ist unter der gegenwärtigen GFP möglich, und was sollte bei einer potenziellen zukünftigen GFP berücksichtigt werden? Diese Zweiteilung wurde im Fischereiausschuss weggestimmt. Das heißt, die öffentliche Förderung soll nun unter der gegenwärtigen GFP garantiert werden. Eine Förderung auf Basis des Artikels 349 des Arbeitsvertrages unterminiert meiner Meinung nach die Kohärenz dieser gemeinsamen Politik.
                  

Rosa D'Amato (EFDD). – Le regioni ultraperiferiche sono state storicamente svantaggiate, non solo dalla loro condizione geografica ma anche da scelte politiche miopi e condizionate dagli interessi del Vecchio Continente. Per questo appoggio con favore la relazione Rodust perché tutela la piccola pesca e la salvaguardia dei pescatori. Nelle regioni ultraperiferiche i piccoli pescherecci rappresentano la stragrande maggioranza delle imbarcazioni immatricolate e spesso sono le sole a difendere i loro mari dalla pesca illegale delle grandi flotte extra UE. La pesca che si difende qui è la pesca sostenibile, quella citata nell'ultima riforma della politica comune e che non viene in nessun modo minacciata da queste imbarcazioni, che tra l'altro detengono solo una percentuale minima delle quote di pesca nei loro mari.
                  

                     Mutatis mutandis la stessa pesca che dovremo difendere nei nostri mari purtroppo è minacciata da grandi pescherecci del Nord Europa e non solo. È la pesca portata avanti da piccoli pescatori, troppo spesso con imbarcazioni improvvisate e proprio per questo anche poco sostenibili e sicure. Allora utilizziamo ciò che abbiamo, usiamo i fondi strutturali, usiamo il FEAMP per supportare i nostri pescatori. La politica comune della pesca non è perfetta, soprattutto per il nostro Mediterraneo, ma proprio per questo dovremo fare di tutto per supportare la pesca locale, nel pieno rispetto dei limiti imposti dalla legge e dalla sostenibilità ambientale.
                  

Igor Šoltes (Verts/ALE). – Mislim, da je trajnostni ribolov, pri katerem se uporabljajo tradicionalna orodja, podlaga za uspešne obalne skupnosti, prav tako pa to prispeva k prehranski varnosti v najbolj oddaljenih regijah.
                  

                     Zato je pomembno, da se cilje prehranske varnosti lokalnega prebivalstva vključi v lokalno ribištvo, saj je na žalost prehranska varnost v najbolj oddaljenih regijah danes preveč odvisna od uvoza. Poleg tega se v najbolj oddaljenih regijah nahajajo raznolike male skupnosti, ki močno slonijo na tradicionalnem obalnem in malem ribolovu in za katere je ribolov pogosto edini način zaslužka.
                  

                     Mislim, da je potrebno še posebno pozornost nameniti zaščiti morskih bioloških virov okrog najbolj oddaljenih regij in da je treba posebno pozornost nameniti seveda tudi ribolovu.
                  

                     Zato bi moral biti ribolov v vodah najbolj oddaljenih regij dovoljen le za ribiška plovila, registrirana v pristaniščih teh regij, in tu seveda mora tudi Evropska komisija narediti svoj korak in prevzeti za najbolj oddaljene regije neko odgovornost na pomorskem področju.
                  

José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, votei a favor deste relatório porque considero que a pesca sustentável, utilizando artes tradicionais, constitui a base da prosperidade das comunidades costeiras e contribui para a segurança alimentar nas regiões ultraperiféricas.
                  

                     As regiões ultraperiféricas encontram-se numa situação única no seio da União Europeia.
                  

                     Num contexto natural marcado pela insularidade, pelo clima tropical e por um relevo acidentado e vulcânico, estas regiões encontram-se muito afastadas do continente europeu, como é o caso, no meu país, dos Açores e da Madeira. Mas têm uma relevância histórica, desempenham um papel estratégico na proteção das rotas marítimas da Europa e na defesa das suas fronteiras exteriores.
                  

                     Nos últimos anos aumentou a pressão de pesca na zona económica exclusiva de algumas RUP, entre as 100 e as 200 milhas, sendo a pesca exercida predominantemente por frotas não pertencentes às respetivas RUP.
                  

                     A União Europeia, geograficamente projetada sobre quatro mares e dois oceanos e rodeada de ilhas, deve proteger os seus recursos biológicos marinhos e criar medidas de apoio aos seus navios de pesca artesanal e tradicional, dos quais depende a sobrevivência de muitas comunidades pesqueiras das RUP.
                  

                     Não nos podemos iludir, o que está aqui em causa é a defesa da sobrevivência do sector das pescas nas RUP.
                  
6.14.   EU flagship initiative on the garment sector (A8-0080/2017 - Lola Sánchez Caldentey)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Igor Šoltes (Verts/ALE). – Dejstvo je, da tekstilni in oblačilni sektor zaposluje kar 60 milijonov ljudi po vsem svetu in ustvarja veliko delovnih mest, zlasti v deželah v razvoju.
                  

                     Ampak vseeno je potrebno omeniti, da omenjeni sektor predstavlja najvišji riziko za kršenje človekovih in tudi pravic na področju delovnih razmerij, zato tudi številni delavci v sektorju oblačil ne zaslužijo plače, ki bi bila dostojna, tudi dovolj velika za preživetje.
                  

                     In večina kršitev tako delovnih pravic kot človekovih v tem sektorju je povezana z različnimi vidiki, tudi pravic delavcev, ki se jim odreka pravica do sindikalnega združevanja, pravzaprav tiste temeljne pravice, ki veljajo na delovnem področju, in tistih temeljnih delavskih pravic, vključno s krajo plač, prisilnim delom, prenizkimi plačami, samovoljnim odpuščanjem, nevarnimi delovnimi mesti, nezdravimi delovnimi razmerami.
                  

                     In tu seveda mora tudi Evropska unije prevzeti svoj del odgovornosti v smislu zakonodajnih predlogov, ki bodo onemogočali tovrstna razmerja.
                  

José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, votei a favor deste relatório porque me lembro bem de que em 2013 desabou um prédio de três andares onde funcionava uma fábrica de tecidos no Bangladeche, revelando o incumprimento das normas básicas de segurança e o lado obscuro da indústria de roupas internacionais.
                  

                     Nesta tragédia morreram 377 pessoas. A dura realidade é que, nos dias de hoje, a mão-de-obra da indústria do vestuário a nível mundial é maioritariamente feminina. Cerca de 85% dos trabalhadores do setor são mulheres que muitas vezes enfrentam condições de trabalho difíceis e muito mal remuneradas e onde o trabalho infantil é uma triste realidade.
                  

                     Por tudo isto, considero muito importante que a Comissão proponha legislação vinculativa no setor do vestuário, por forma a assegurar que a União Europeia e os seus parceiros comerciais e operadores cumpram a sua obrigação: respeitar os direitos humanos e as mais elevadas normas sociais e ambientais.
                  

                     Este relatório demonstra que a Europa reconhece a necessidade da existência de condições equitativas para proteger os trabalhadores do dumping ambiental e social.
                  

Adam Szejnfeld (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Rozmawiamy na temat bardzo ważnego sektora przemysłu, ponieważ zatrudnia on dziesiątki milionów ludzi na całym świecie, a szczególnie kobiety, które na rynku, zwłaszcza w krajach biednych, rozwijających się mają bardzo duży problem z uzyskaniem pracy.
                  

                     Przemysł ten dotykają różne patologie dotyczące łamania praw człowieka, praw pracowniczych, ochrony środowiska, BHP etc. Dlatego ważne jest, żeby Unia Europejska, jako lider walki o cywilizacyjne wartości, wprowadzała je w tamtych krajach. Musimy jednak pamiętać o tym, że te procesy muszą być ewolucyjne, a nie rewolucyjne, bowiem gdybyśmy chcieli wymagać od tych krajów natychmiastowych standardów, takich jakie obowiązują w Europie, moglibyśmy osiągnąć skutek odwrotny do zamierzonego.
                  
6.15.   State of play of farmland concentration in the EU: how to facilitate the access to land for farmers (A8-0119/2017 - Maria Noichl)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Момчил Неков (S&D). – Г-жо Председател, статистиката показва, че в Европейския съюз едва 3% от земеделците контролират 52,5% от земеделската земя. В България статистиката е още по-притеснителна – само 1,5% от всички регистрирани стопанства обработват 82% от земята в страната. В тези стопанства се концентрират основните финансови ресурси.
                  

                     Европейските субсидии трябва да достигат до по-голям брой бенефициенти, за да се постигне равномерен и справедлив растеж в Съюза. Земята може да бъде собственост, но е и публично благо, от което произтичат социалните задължения. Силно вярвам, че земи – държавна или общинска собственост, не трябва да бъдат продавани. Вместо това – единствено да се дават под наем: да се дават под наем на начинаещи фермери, млади фермери или да се дават за малки стопанства. Чрез запазването на земите се дава възможност при нужда да се върви точно в правилната посока.
                  

Krisztina Morvai (NI). – Elnök Asszony, nagy örömmel szavaztam meg ezt a jelentést a termőföldrablásokról. Világos, hogy két formája van. Az egyik – gondolom, bolgár képviselő társam is ezt alátámaszthatja – a külföldiek általi földrablás. Itt a megoldás, ahogy elmondtam a vitában is, az lenne, hogy ki kell venni a termőföldet a tőke szabad áramlása fejezetből, hiszen nem spekulációs célú tőkéről, hanem a helyi gazdák megélhetésének forrásáról van szó. A másik földrablási forma pedig a helyi oligarchák csaló pályázatok útján való csalárd földszerzése. Itt pedig kettős kötelezettség van. Az egyik az igazságszolgáltatásnak, a helyi igazságszolgáltatásnak a fellépése, ugye az ügyészségeknek fel kellene venni a munkát e vonatkozásban. A másik pedig, hogy ez az a terület, ahol az Európai Uniónak is fel kellene lépni, hiszen hatalmas hektáralapú támogatásokat, európai uniós közpénzeket kapnak ezek az emberek.
                  

Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já jsem tuto zprávu nakonec nepodpořil, zdržel jsem se, i když jsou tam některé dobré pasáže týkající se podpory malých a středních zemědělců na venkově. Já si opravdu nemyslím, že rolí Evropské unie je zasahovat do vlastnické struktury půdy na venkově. Toto je opravdu věc, která může být velmi nebezpečná. Nerad bych se dočkal toho, že zde budeme vyzývat k tomu, aby byl někdo vyvlastňován a něčí majetek byl na základě právních předpisů omezován.
                  

                     Myslím si, že bychom měli ctít právo vlastnické jako základní právo demokratického právního státu a měli bychom případně nechat na členských státech, zda v určitých případech nějakým způsobem omezí nakládání se zemědělskou půdou. Já toho nejsem příznivcem, a i když se mi třeba nelíbí, že se vlastnictví koncentruje v rukou pouze určitého procenta zemědělců, tak vlastnictví vždycky budu ctít, budu ho obhajovat a budu ho respektovat. Takže pozor, abychom se nedostali někam, kde bychom byli v rozporu s principy právního státu.
                  
6.16.   Situation in Venezuela (RC-B8-0270/2017, B8-0270/2017, B8-0271/2017, B8-0272/2017, B8-0274/2017, B8-0275/2017, B8-0276/2017, B8-0277/2017)

A szavazáshoz fűzött szóbeli indokolások


Igor Šoltes (Verts/ALE). – Vsaki državi, ki se znajde v težavah ali ekonomski krizi, je potrebno pomagati, priskočiti na pomoč in nuditi ustrezno podporo in to seveda velja tudi za Venezuelo.
                  

                     Seveda pa pri tem je treba uporabiti demokratične standarde, demokratične postopke in se seveda zavedati, da vsaka država seveda sama znotraj sebe odloča v bistvu o svoji prihodnosti. In najbolj demokratičen način izražanja, seveda, upoštevanja ljudske volje so volitve. In tudi v Venezueli ni nič drugače.
                  

                     Vsekakor pa je treba odločno obsoditi vsekakršno nasilje in pa seveda kršenje svoboščin in človekovih pravic, omejevanje pravic, svobode izražanja in medijske svobode in pa seveda tudi obsoditi vse tiste kršitve, ki namerno ali nenamerno rušijo oblast ne na demokratičen način, se pravi z nasiljem, ne pa s samimi volitvami.
                  

                     Pa mislim, da tu mora tudi Evropska unija narediti svoj korak, zato sem tudi pri tem poročilu se zadržal.
                  

Μαρία Σπυράκη (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, αυτό που συμβαίνει στη Βενεζουέλα σήμερα είναι βαθιά ανησυχητικό για όλους εδώ στην Ευρώπη και έχουμε καθημερινά νεκρούς. Νεκρούς που έχουν ξεπεράσει τους 26 τον τελευταίο μήνα, 437 τραυματίες, 1289 συλλήψεις. Δεκατέσσερις δημοσιογράφοι έχουν συλληφθεί και 106 έχουν δεχθεί επίθεση τις τελευταίες τέσσερις εβδομάδες. Οι φυλακές έχουν γεμίσει με στελέχη της αντιπολίτευσης, έχουμε περισσότερους από 100 πολιτικούς κρατούμενους και σε αυτόν τον κατάλογο περιλαμβάνονται όλοι οι ηγέτες της αντιπολίτευσης.
                  

                     Σήμερα, κυρία Πρόεδρε, στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο καταδικάσαμε τη συνεχιζόμενη αντισυνταγματική κατάλυση της δημοκρατικής τάξης στη Βενεζουέλα, καλέσαμε την κυβέρνηση της Βενεζουέλας και το Ανώτατο Δικαστήριο να σεβαστούν το Σύνταγμα, ζητήσαμε ανάμεσα στα άλλα διαφύλαξη της διάκρισης και της ανεξαρτησίας των εξουσιών και άμεση απελευθέρωση όλων των πολιτικών κρατουμένων. Είναι πράγματα αυτονόητα. Δυστυχώς όχι για την ομάδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Αριστεράς, η οποία αποφάσισε να μην προσυπογράψει το ψήφισμά μας και το ερώτημα είναι απλό: Μπορούν οι ευρωπαϊκές κυβερνήσεις να έχουν κοινές αξίες και κοινούς στόχους με την κυβέρνηση της Βενεζουέλας, να διατηρούν εκλεκτικές συγγένειες; Η απάντησή μας σήμερα είναι ότι κάτι τέτοιο αντιτίθεται στις βασικές αρχές που μας ενώνουν.
                  

Beatriz Becerra Basterrechea (ALDE). – Señora presidenta. Venezuela, señores, es hoy una tiranía. No hay comida, ni medicinas, pero el Gobierno liquida las últimas reservas de oro, dispuesto a armar a medio millón de milicianos.
                  

                     Al más puro estilo narco, el régimen chavista está ejecutando a sus propios ciudadanos. Y, sin embargo, los venezolanos no se rinden. No se rinden las mujeres desarmadas haciendo retroceder carros blindados. No se rinden los estudiantes atendiendo a sus compañeros tiroteados.
                  

                     Maduro, aislado y señalado como dictador criminal, aísla a Venezuela sacándola de la Organización de Estados Americanos. Maduro pertenece al club de Pinochet, Videla, Fujimori. Videla tiraba a los opositores al mar. Maduro les dispara a la cabeza.
                  

                     Europa, el mundo entero, todos tenemos que tomar partido, porque la democracia es la única esperanza que le queda a Venezuela. Restaurar el orden constitucional, liberar a los presos políticos y convocar elecciones. Este es el partido que toma Europa.
                  

                     Señores de Podemos e Izquierda Unida: o se está con la mujer desarmada que detiene al blindado o se está con quien da la orden de disparar. Ustedes eligen.
                  

Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já jsem podpořil toto usnesení, které jasně kritizuje současnou politickou situaci ve Venezuele. Jsem přesvědčen, že Evropa, resp. Evropská unie se nemá zabývat pouze vnitřním trhem, svými vlastními problémy, ale že má být strážcem lidských práv, svobody a demokracie i v jiných státech naší planety. A proto je dobře, že se zabýváme situací ve Venezuele a že přijímáme toto tvrdé usnesení, které kritizuje současného prezidenta, který udělal puč skrze nejvyšší soud vůči parlamentu a nerespektuje většinu v parlamentu, která je v opozici vůči prezidentovi Madurovi.
                  

                     I když naše usnesení bohužel spíše bude mít asi deklaratorní charakter a situaci ve Venezuele příliš nezmění, tak si myslím, že je velmi dobré – a to usnesení to jasně nastoluje – podporovat demokratické síly ve Venezuele, podporovat tam opozici proti prezidentu Madurovi a udělat vše pro to, aby tento tyran byl svržen a nahrazen alespoň trochu demokratickou vládou.
                  

José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, votei a favor da resolução sobre a Venezuela porque entendo que perante o aumento da intensidade dos confrontos verificados naquele país, e da brutal repressão do regime que já causou, num mês, mais de 20 mortes, esta é uma forma de esta casa condenar esta violência e apoiar o povo venezuelano e os portugueses que ali vivem nas suas legítimas aspirações a uma mudança de regime, que permita enfrentar a grave crise humanitária criada por Maduro, desarmar os coletivos armados, libertar os presos políticos, restabelecer a independência judicial e os poderes da Assembleia Nacional e, com a instituição de um governo de transição de salvação nacional, convocar finalmente eleições livres, gerais e democráticas, devidamente supervisionadas por observadores independentes.
                  

                     Hoje mesmo foi comunicada uma espécie de Venexit na sequência do anúncio de Maduro de retirar a Venezuela da Organização de Estados Americanos, isolando-se, assim, ainda mais da comunidade internacional.
                  

                     Não podemos ser cúmplices pelo silêncio ou pelo recurso a eufemismos de um regime totalitário que viola impunemente os direitos humanos e conduz o seu próprio povo a uma situação de miséria e de conflito social e político.
                  

                     Os venezuelanos, que tão generosamente acolherem durante décadas milhares e milhares de emigrantes europeus, precisam agora mais do que nunca do nosso apoio e da nossa solidariedade.
                  

Elnök asszony. – Ezzel lezárom a szavazáshoz fűzött indokolásokat.
                  
7.   Corrections to votes and voting intentions
8.   Decisions concerning certain documents: see Minutes
9.   Documents received: see Minutes
10.   Forwarding of texts adopted during the sitting
11.   Dates of forthcoming sittings : see Minutes
12.   Adjournment of the session

(Az ülést 14.05-kor rekesztik be.)



ELI: 
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)