Verbatim report of proceedings of 31 May 2017
Date: 2017-05-31
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, parliamentary debate








C_202402803EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series














25.4.2024







            31 May 2017
            VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF 31 MAY 2017
            
         
(C/2024/2803)

Contents







1.

Resumption of the session
3










2.

Statements by the President
3










3.

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










4.

Composition of Parliament: see Minutes
3










5.

Composition of committees: see Minutes
3










6.

Documents received: see Minutes
4










7.

Implementing measures (Rule 106): see Minutes
4










8.

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










9.

Action taken on Parliament's resolutions: see Minutes
4










10.

Questions for oral answer (submission): see Minutes
4










11.

Order of business: see Minutes
4










12.

Decision adopted on the Mobility package (debate)
4










13.

The new European Consensus on Development – our world, our dignity, our future (debate)
20










14.

Resilience as a strategic priority of the EU external action (debate)
30










15.

Combating anti-semitism (debate)
40










16.

Introduction of temporary autonomous trade measures for Ukraine (debate)
53










17.

Sri Lanka GSP+ (debate)
60










18.

Multiannual Framework for the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights for 2018-2022 — Multiannual Framework for the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights for 2018-2022 (debate)
69










19.

High-level UN Conference to support the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14 (UN Ocean Conference) (debate)
77










20.

Digitising European industry – Internet connectivity for growth, competitiveness and cohesion: European gigabit society and 5G (debate)
86










21.

One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
102










22.

Agenda for next sitting: see Minutes
105










23.

Closure of the sitting
105




Verbatim report of proceedings of 31 May 2017
                  


PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. ANTONIO TAJANI


Presidente

1.   Resumption of the session

(La seduta è aperta alle 15.10)

2.   Statements by the President

Presidente. – Oggi è la prima riunione plenaria dopo l'orribile attentato che ci ha colpiti a Manchester il 22 maggio. Purtroppo, dopo questo tragico evento, lo spargimento di sangue ad opera dei terroristi non si è fermato. L'Isis ha colpito in Egitto contro i cristiani copti e il terrorismo ha colpito ancora a Baghdad e a Kabul, dove decine di persone inermi sono state barbaramente assassinate.
               

                  A nome di tutti noi, condanno con la più assoluta fermezza questi atti di inumana violenza ed esprimo la nostra vicinanza e la nostra solidarietà alle famiglie delle vittime. Si tratta di persone innocenti che non hanno fatto nulla e che hanno perso la vita a causa della barbarie di cui purtroppo l'uomo è ancora capace e contro la quale la voce del Parlamento si è levata, si leva e si leverà sempre con forza. Vi chiedo per questo di unirvi a me per un minuto di silenzio in ricordo di tutte queste vittime innocenti.
               

(Il Parlamento osserva un minuto di silenzio in memoria delle vittime.)


                  Devo annunciare all'Aula la decisione presa da poco dal Presidente degli Stati Uniti Trump di ritirare il suo paese dagli accordi di Parigi. È una decisione che non trova il compiacimento della stragrande maggioranza di quest'Aula, di cui sono il portavoce, concorderò con il Presidente Juncker e con il Presidente Tusk le iniziative comuni da adottare insieme come Unione europea.
               
3.   Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting: see Minutes
4.   Composition of Parliament: see Minutes
5.   Composition of committees: see Minutes
6.   Documents received: see Minutes
7.   Implementing measures (Rule 106): see Minutes
8.   Delegated acts (Rule 105(6)): see Minutes
9.   Action taken on Parliament's resolutions: see Minutes
10.   Questions for oral answer (submission): see Minutes
11.   Order of business: see Minutes
12.   Decision adopted on the Mobility package (debate)

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la discussione sulla dichiarazione della Commissione sulla decisione adottata sul pacchetto mobilità [2017/2606(RSP)].
               

Maroš Šefčovič,
Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, today's Mobility package is a major milestone, one which is very much needed for the modernisation of our economy and for making mobility in Europe fit for the future. This package was not developed in a vacuum. It is the result of a long process of discussion both within the Commission and outside. I would like particularly to welcome the work of the European Parliament and to thank you for your great involvement in this topic. I am referring particularly to the resolution on road transport in the European Union.
I think it is particularly important to underline that this package affects many policy areas – and, together with Vice-President Jyrki Katainen, we have made sure that all aspects are well covered: first of all, transport, but also industry, climate change and energy, air pollution, urban policy, digital market policies, and employment and skills. I would therefore like to thank, in particular, the Conference of Committee Chairs, which invited me two weeks ago to discuss these cross-cutting links. That discussion and our exchanges were instrumental in crystallising the final proposal.
I would like to use this opportunity to thank all the Commissioners for their contributions to this package over the last month, especially Commissioner Bulc, who will talk to you in a second, but also Commissioners Thyssen and Arias Cañete with whom we have been working very hard to deliver this package.
Why is this package so important? My colleagues call it a ‘quadro-win’ – which means four wins – for consumers, for industry, for workers and, of course, for our planet. Consumers should benefit inasmuch as Europeans are pioneers in adopting new technologies and they have high expectations from a new, cleaner, connected economy, and especially from Smart Mobility.
Secondly, our industry: we must make sure that European companies remain world class, and today's package creates the opportunity for Europe's transport industry to renovate, innovate and rejuvenate. Europe's ambition must be that our transport and mobility sector remain world leaders, with world-class logistics, word-class infrastructure and, of course, world-class cars made in Europe, with world-class jobs and working conditions. We cannot afford a European ‘Kodak moment’, where we fail to embrace new technologies in time.
Thirdly, workers: we are improving drivers' working conditions and we want to make sure that our transport and automotive industries continue to create quality jobs and growth in Europe.
Finally, the fourth winner of today's package is climate, with air quality and innovation. Road transport has a major role to play. It represents 20% of our entire CO2 emissions here in Europe, and we have to remember that three times more people die from nitrous oxide and other forms of air pollution than from road accidents. Our prediction is that mobility is going to increase substantially by 2050. Fortunately, transport is also one of the sectors that is seeing the most exciting technological breakthroughs. I am convinced that we can and will grow the transport industry while, at the same time, reducing our CO2 emissions.
In conclusion, this Mobility package puts us on the right track, indeed the fast track. We had already delivered about 90% of the Energy Union legislation by the end of last year. With today's package and with the final mobility part, which we will present later this year and in early 2018, the Commission will have delivered 100% of the Energy Union proposals.
Concerning the news from the USA, I would like to assure you that we, as Europe, will continue on our path. We will continue to assume the leadership in the fight against climate change, and I am sure that the leaders of our three institutions will issue an appropriate statement in this regard.
I very much looking forward to our discussion but I will first give the floor to Commissioner Bulc, once again thanking her for her enormous work, her great dedication and the excellent results which we can present to you today.

Violeta Bulc,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, it is a great privilege and pleasure for me, together with my colleague Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič, to present to you the Mobility package adopted by the Commission today. This House has, on several occasions, called on the Commission to address the challenges faced by the road sector. Earlier this month you adopted a resolution to that effect. Thank you very much for your clear messages and support.
Over the past two years, the Commission has been very broadly and inclusively consulting all stakeholders on all the major issues that represent a challenge for the road sector in the EU. So what you have on the table today are carefully thought-out and balanced proposals. They address a broad range of issues. Let me point out three of the most important ones: first, fairer and more competitive mobility; second, cleaner and more sustainable mobility; and, third, connected mobility. I will address them quickly, one by one.
With regard to fair and competitive mobility, since the very beginning of this Commission's term of office, a fairer and deeper internal market has been at the heart of our agenda. President Juncker has also repeatedly underlined that there is no place for social dumping in the European Union. In this context, the Mobility package will provide a truly European solution, which includes the necessary protection of workers and, at the same time, aims to prevent fragmentation of the internal market.
One prominent and much awaited measure is the fight against letterbox companies, for which there is absolutely no place in the Union. I think everyone agrees that this is becoming a real problem. We must make sure that transport undertakings are established where they manage their business, and that national authorities are equipped to detect fraud. So these are the two elements we are stressing.
Another important issue which we are addressing relates to cabotage. Almost all stakeholders have said that the current rules are too difficult to enforce. The Commission has therefore decided to simplify those rules and to base them exclusively on time. Very importantly, the new rules will neither open nor close the cabotage market, but they will provide more flexibility for operators, while also facilitating controllers in doing their job. We propose to increase the controls and make them more targeted at the same time.
Today the Commission is also addressing the phenomenon of nomadic drivers. We propose to give drivers the possibility of returning home on a regular basis, at least every three weeks. Drivers must also be offered adequate accommodation when taking weekly rests away from home. Let me be clear that the Commission proposal does not require more or longer driving times, or fewer or shorter rest periods.
On the question of the application of the Posting of Workers Directive to the road haulage sector, the Commission has always argued that the rules on the posting of workers should apply to road transport. The fact that workers are highly mobile is not a reason to deprive them of the benefits of EU legislation. Having said that, there is a need for sector-specific rules. We propose to reduce the administration burden for road hauliers and, as a matter of proportionality, to establish that national rules on remuneration apply to international services after three days of accumulated time in one Member State.
Clean and sustainable mobility is the next topic. In line with the European Energy Union, and to meet the commitments we made in Paris, transport has to contribute by reducing its very high emissions of CO2 and pollutants. We therefore propose to adopt our common road charging principle to encourage the use of infrastructure in a more efficient manner, and to reward the use of cleaner vehicles. Very importantly, the Commission is proposing to bring passenger cars, vans and buses within the scope of the EU legislation on road charging. These vehicles are responsible for their share of CO2 emissions and congestion on our roads, and this will also address problems relating to discrimination based on nationality, notably for passenger cars.
Implementation of the ‘user pays’ and ‘polluter pays’ principles is another key objective of the Commission's proposal. The vignette system should be progressively phased out in road charges, and charging should be on the basis of distance. This is a matter of both fairness and efficiency. Distance-based charging is also a precondition for external-cost charging, which was requested in the recent resolution on road transport adopted by this House. It is also the precondition for rewarding the use of clean vehicles more effectively. For example, we propose to introduce a 75% toll discount for zero-emission vehicles.
On connectivity, what will the road initiatives do for connected mobility? Digitalisation is a very powerful means of achieving our various policy objectives. If we are to bring about more efficient road charging, Europe needs interoperability of national toll systems. Currently there are many different and independent charging systems in the EU, which are complicating cross-border transport. The Commission is proposing new rules which will provide for one on-board unit, one contract and one invoice to users.
Another important area in which we propose further to develop digitalisation is enforcement. At a time when enforcement capacity in Member States is being reduced, it is especially important to have modern and efficient tools available for controls. We propose to make better use of e-documents and digital tachographs, to improve the exchange of information between Member States and to ensure interoperability between their systems.
I look forwarding to discussing these proposals with you in the months to come. As we begin the discussions – in a spirit of openness and readiness to compromise, I hope – I would also like to urge everyone to keep in mind the actual problems which transport operators face on the ground. As you are all aware, these problems are quite substantial. So let us try to be pragmatic and find solutions that work and that are enforceable, for the road haulage sector and its workers on the one hand, but also for all our citizens – with reduced congestion and lower pollution and, above all, better road safety – and, last but not least, for the EU economy, so that relevant, efficient and competitive transport services can operate throughout the single market.

Wim van de Camp,
namens de PPE-Fractie. – De baby is geboren. Het heeft lang geduurd, het was blijkbaar een moeilijke bevalling, maar het kind is nu ter wereld. Ik feliciteer de Commissie met deze prestatie. Het is wel rijkelijk laat. We staan onder enorme tijdsdruk, maar we zullen proberen om het pakket nog tijdens deze zittingsperiode af te handelen. De EVP-fractie zal de voorstellen de komende weken bestuderen.
               

                  Op de eerste plaats wil ik dit zeggen: versterking van de interne markt, vereenvoudiging en een beter gelijk speelveld voor alle participanten in de transportwereld zijn allemaal heel goed. Maar dit mag niet ten koste gaan van de sociale aspecten. Het minimumloon en de cabotage zullen grote politieke onderwerpen worden in onze discussie. Met name de overgang van cabotage-acties naar cabotage-dagen wordt een stevige uitdaging. Commissaris Šefčovič zei het al: dat president Trump uit het klimaatakkoord stapt, wil niet zeggen dat wij niet doorgaan met duurzaamheid. Voorts houden wij het nieuwe Europese tolsysteem goed in de gaten. We gaan de burgers niet belasten als het niet nodig is, maar één systeem voor heel Europa lijkt me een goede zaak. Kortom, we zijn positief kritisch, maar er moet wel verdraaid hard gewerkt worden.
               

Ismail Ertug,
im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin, Herr Kommissar. Herzlichen Dank auch vonseiten der Sozialdemokratischen Fraktion für die Arbeit, die Sie vorgelegt haben.
               

                  Für die Sozialidemokratische Fraktion ist es wichtig, dass wir eine ausgeglichene Mischung haben, was letztendlich den freien Zugang zum Markt und den fairen Wettbewerb auf der einen Seite anbelangt, auf der anderen Seite aber auch die Umsetzung der sozialen Standards.
               

                  Unerlässlich ist dabei die Akzeptanz innerhalb der Europäischen Union, wenn es um Fairness und um die soziale Säule geht. Wenn ich nur der Pressekonferenz von Ihnen, Herr Šefčovič, einige Punkte entnehmen darf, dann finde ich das gut, dass Sie den Transportsektor mit in die Bestimmungen der Entsenderichtlinie aufgenommen haben – das ist ganz entscheidend. Dass bei der Kabotage die Bestimmungen der Entsenderichtlinie ab dem ersten Tag greifen, ist auch noch mal zu befürworten – dafür herzlichen Dank.
               

                  Was die Eurovignetten-Richtlinie anbelangt, Frau Kommissarin: 75 % Nachlass für Null-Emission – perfekt. Das wollen wir haben. In dieser Richtung müssen wir eben versuchen, gemäß dem, was der Kollege van de Camp gesagt hat, das Baby noch schöner zu machen.
               

VORSITZ: ULRIKE LUNACEK


Vizepräsidentin


Kosma Złotowski,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowna Pani Komisarz! Publikacja pakietu mobilności to rzeczywiście wydarzenie, na które od wielu miesięcy czekamy. Wspólna europejska odpowiedź na jednostronne czasami działania niektórych państw członkowskich w obszarze transportu drogowego jest bardzo potrzebna i oczekiwana zarówno przez przewoźników, jak i kierowców samochodów ciężarowych. Protekcjonizm to ogromne zagrożenie dla wspólnego rynku i uczciwej konkurencji między firmami transportowymi z Europy Wschodniej i Zachodniej, za które największą cenę w ostatecznym rozrachunku zapłacą przedsiębiorcy i konsumenci.
                  

                     Niestety mam wrażenie, że ten pakiet legislacyjny tylko częściowo odpowiada na pojawiające się wyzwania i nie rozwiązuje najbardziej problematycznych kwestii. Przedstawiona przez Komisję propozycja uznania kierowcy w transporcie międzynarodowym za pracownika delegowanego już po trzech dniach pobytu za granicą nie odpowiada realiom długodystansowych operacji transportowych. Podobne wątpliwości mam w przypadku zasad odbierania tygodniowego wypoczynku. Dumping socjalny – pojęcie, którego Pani użyła – jest bardzo zręcznym sformułowaniem, jednak zupełnie nie odzwierciedla rzeczywistości ekonomicznej w Unii Europejskiej.
                  

                     Mam nadzieję, że dzięki wspólnemu wysiłkowi uda się uwzględnić w ostatecznej wersji proponowanych rozwiązań także perspektywy firm transportowych z Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, które stanowią bardzo ważną część tego rynku, a których opinie i oczekiwania nie zostały należycie uwzględnione w tym pakiecie. Pani Komisarz deklarowała wolę kompromisu, przyjmuję to oświadczenie.
                  

Pavel Telička,
on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, I would like to thank you and to thank Commission Vice-President Šefčovič for the presentation. Wim van de Camp spoke about the ‘baby’ being born, so we will now see whether the baby is well developed, whether the legs are as developed as the arms, and especially whether it has a complex brain and if it is balanced for future development.
The philosophy with which you have approached this, Commissioner, and the concept sound good. It is a concept I can subscribe to, even though you referred to Jean-Claude Juncker's ‘no dumping’ statement. I would appreciate it if he had added a bit more about the market, and about the protectionism that we also see in Europe today. However, we need to give the package a chance and not only that: we need to develop it and make sure that it works in all the dimensions that you have presented. We also need to take into account that the backbone of the EU is the internal market, and the internal market has to function. There is no room for protectionism but there is also no room for misbehaviour or unfair treatment undermining the necessary social standards and environmental aspects. All that definitely has to be addressed.
I would now like to make a few comments to my fellow MEPs. This is a package – and we see on a daily basis various national measures which are, in fact, fragmenting the internal market – and it is high time for this package to be addressed, developed and approved in a balanced way. That means that we need to treat it as a package and we need to make sure the package is approved within this parliamentary term. There is no other way, because the consequences of any alternative would be to the detriment of the internal market, of the rights of our entrepreneurs, of our workers' social rights, and of the European Union.

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


Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D),
blue-card question. – The Council, that is helping you, should look in this room. They are not doing this, unfortunately.
I would like to ask our colleague and the Commissioner: what are we going to do with the strategy when the United States has withdrawn from the COP Paris agreement? Do you not think this will jeopardise European competitiveness? Do you not think that we have to completely reshape this strategy?

Pavel Telička (ALDE),
blue-card answer. – This is far too fresh, but I have a problem. We keep looking at the United States all the time, regardless of the issue. We should be mature enough to have our own policies and to make sure that these policies work for us, bearing in mind the external factors. I really believe that this has to be given a chance and I am ready to work on it. On the other hand, I regret that, on the same day that President Trump made the announcement, the German Government, the legislature, just a few days ago enacted something that is foreseen in the package and should be left at European level. That is of more concern to me at the moment.

Rina Ronja Kari,
for GUE/NGL-Gruppen. – Fru formand! Tak til Kommissionen for udspillet. Dagens udspil om transport og mobilitet kan gå hen og blive tæt på en katastrofe for de mange, der arbejder inden for transportsektoren. Fuld liberalisering og deregulering, jamen det er jo en kurs mod dårligere arbejdsvilkår, og Kommissionens forslag om, at vi skal have såkaldt mere fleksibel forståelse af chaufførernes arbejdstid, det kommer kun til at gøre det endnu værre.
                  

                     I virkeligheden er der jo brug for, at vi tager hånd om arbejderne. Vi burde alle sammen være skræmte over de historier, der er om chauffører, der lever i deres chaufførhuse uden ordentlige pauser og uden mulighed for at se deres familie.
                  

                     Det eneste lyspunkt, jeg umiddelbart kan få øje på, det er, at Kommissionen faktisk prioriterer udstationeringsreglerne. Og det vil jeg godt sige jer tak for. Men der er jo ikke nogen tvivl om, at når man kigger på den samlede pakke, så er det formålet at øge mobiliteten. Det er i sig selv fint, men det må aldrig nogensinde erstatte det at skabe lokale arbejdspladser, så borgerne faktisk selv kan tage stilling til, om de ønsker at rejse ud, eller om de ønsker at blive sammen med familien og arbejder der, hvor de er.
                  

Karima Delli,
au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, la part du transport routier continue d'augmenter, mais les nuisances aussi: la pollution, le dérèglement climatique, l'insécurité routière, le dumping social. Nous devons apporter des réponses concrètes à ces fléaux.
                  

                     Premièrement, il faut cesser de dégrader les conditions de travail et de sécurité des salariés par une libéralisation qui ne dit pas son nom. Nous voyons les conséquences de la pression à la baisse sur les coûts: temps de conduite non respectés, repos dans des lieux inappropriés, entreprises de transport qui usent et abusent du dumping social grâce aux bas salaires de travailleurs venus des pays de l'Est. Il y a même des cas de traite des êtres humains ici, en Belgique, avec le cas de l'entreprise Jost. Il est urgent de mettre fin à cette situation. Il est urgent d'agir.
                  

                     À la Commission, c'est bien beau d'instaurer un pilier social sur le papier, mais ce que nous voulons, c'est un pilier social dans la réalité. Il faut mettre fin à la concurrence féroce et déloyale des entreprises et, vous avez raison, Madame la Commissaire, mettons fin aux entreprises ‘boîtes aux lettres’. Affirmons le principe ‘à travail égal, salaire égal’.
                  

                     Allons plus loin, soyons ambitieux. Créons une agence européenne du routier pour garantir le respect de la législation européenne. Le routier contribue à hauteur de 20 % aux émissions de gaz à effet de serre dans l'Union européenne. Vous allez dans le bon sens avec la proposition de l'Eurovignette en basant les redevances sur la distance et non plus sur le temps. Sur ce point, je vous salue. Mais allez-y, n'ayez pas peur, soyez ambitieux! Il ne faut pas que ce soit volontaire, il faut que ce soit obligatoire, parce qu'on ne joue pas avec l'avenir de nos enfants. On ne joue pas avec la planète, ni avec la santé des citoyens.
                  

                     Enfin, la numérisation doit vraiment permettre l'amélioration du contrôle pour le respect de la loi, mais cela ne peut pas attendre 2034. Il faut absolument que les tachygraphes soient demain sur la table.
                  

                     L'enjeu de ce paquet, c'est la survie du projet européen. Nous avons une obligation de résultat ici et maintenant.
                  

Peter Lundgren,
för EFDD-gruppen. – Fru talman! I tre år har jag stått och talat om hur lätt det är att fuska med det nuvarande regelverket inom cabotagetransporter. Nu gör ni det ännu värre. Jag kan tala om för er exakt hur det här kommer att se ut när man tillåter fem dagar med ett antal transporter som inte räknas längre. Man kan köra hur mycket man vill.
                  

                     Måndag morgon kommer bilarna att rulla in i Sverige från Danmark. Sedan kommer man att ha fem dagar på sig att utföra inrikestransporter – hur många man vill, i fem dagar – innan bilen slutligen på fredag kväll återvänder till Danmark. Från Danmarks sida kommer det att bli samma problem. Där kommer cabotagebilarna att gå till Sverige på fredagkvällen för att återvända måndag morgon.
                  

                     Ni har öppnat portarna till något som är om möjligt ännu värre än vad vi har haft hittills. Ni kommer att se till att marknaden översvämmas av cabotagebilar som i mångt och mycket kommer att överta transporterna från alla hederliga företag som försöker betala avtalsenliga löner och ha justa villkor för sina chaufförer. Femdagarsregeln är mer eller mindre en katastrof!
                  

Markus Pieper (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, geehrte Kommissare! Was lange währt, wird endlich gut, fast, Lieber Wim van de Camp. Auf jeden Fall ist unser Paket zur Mobilität keine Sturzgeburt. Danke an die Kommission für die Vorschläge zur Eurovignette. Sie sind eine Grundbedingung für europaweit harmonisierte Mautsysteme. Allerdings kann ich schon jetzt ankündigen, dass wir alle Vorschläge rund um die finanziellen Belastungen durch neue Vorgaben für Umweltlärm oder Staus einem umfassenden Bürokratie- und Kostencheck unterziehen werden. Denn es kann nicht sein, dass wir eine ohnehin stark belastete Branche und auch die Nutzer durch immer neue Vorgaben überstrapazieren. Im Ergebnis darf die Einbeziehung dieser externen Effekte nicht zu höheren Kosten für die Branche führen.
                  

                     Meine zweite Bemerkung zu den Vorschlägen zur Unternehmenszulassung und zur Arbeitnehmerentsendung: Auch hier werden wir genau prüfen, aber wir begrüßen schon jetzt, dass die Regeln endlich klarer gefasst sind. Die klaren Arbeitszeitlimits werden helfen, Sozialmissbrauch einzudämmen, und wir müssen das mit den Vorgaben der Entsenderichtlinie dann auch vernünftig abstimmen.
                  

                     Allerdings müssen die Mitgliedstaaten dann auch stärker kontrollieren, und die Kommission muss als Hüterin der Verträge die Mitgliedstaaten kontrollieren, ob sie kontrollieren. Denn das machen sie wirklich nachlässig – das muss ich kritisieren.
                  

                     Zusammengefasst: Warnung vor zu hohen Mautkosten. Aufforderung, Sozialdumping einzudämmen. Vielen Dank.
                  

(Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’ gemäß Artikel 162 Absatz 8 der Geschäftsordnung zu beantworten.)


Michael Cramer (Verts/ALE),
Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’
                        . – Herr Pieper, Sie sagten, die Branche dürfte nicht weiter belastet werden – vor allen Dingen meinten Sie damit die Straße. Gilt das gleiche Recht für alle? Sie wissen, dass jede Lokomotive, jeder Zug auf jedem Streckenkilometer eine Maut bezahlen muss, die in der Höhe unbegrenzt ist. Auf der Straße ist es auch nach dieser Entschließung eine freiwillige Angelegenheit der Mitgliedstaaten, ob sie überhaupt eine Maut erheben. Ich halte das für unfair, weil 100 Prozent des Schienennetzes bemautet ist und nur ein einziges Prozent des Straßennetzes. Die umweltfreundliche Schiene wird so teuer gemacht und die klimaschädliche Straße so billig. Ist das okay?
                  

Markus Pieper (PPE),
Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’
                        . – Lieber Herr Kollege Cramer! Dass wir für die Schiene mehr tun müssen, darin sind wir uns einig. Aber ich denke, dass auch die Branche Straßentransport durch Ökosteuer, Mineralölsteuer und durch die ganzen CO2-Vorgaben in einem hohen Maße belastet ist und bei vielen Betrieben auch stark im internationalen Wettbewerb steht, sodass wir hier nicht überstrapazieren dürfen. Und wenn zur Maut jetzt noch die externen Effekte dazukommen, dann ist irgendwann auch eine Grenze erreicht, wo es an die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit geht. Deswegen werden wir das ganz sorgfältig überprüfen.
                  

Jutta Steinruck (S&D). – Ja, auf den ersten Blick und soweit ich das bisher beurteilen kann, bin ich tatsächlich positiv überrascht, wenn es um die Arbeitsbedingungen der Lkw-Fahrer geht. Der aktuelle Fall hier in Belgien hat ja gezeigt, wie Unternehmen jedes Schlupfloch nutzen, um Sozialabgaben und Steuern in Europa zu zahlen. Es ist wichtig, dass wir uns um menschenwürdige Arbeitsbedingungen für alle Berufskraftfahrer in Europa kümmern. Gut ist, dass Sie endlich die Bekämpfung von Briefkastenfirmen angehen. Und über nationale Kontrollen hinaus brauchen wir da zudem dringend internationale Arbeitskontrollen.
                  

                     Allerdings ist es für mich auch wichtig, dass alle Lkw-Fahrer ab dem ersten Tag unter die Entsenderichtlinien fallen. Da darf es keine Ausnahme geben, weil wir sonst eine nächste Umgehungsmöglichkeit aufmachen. Und sollten für die Kabotage die Löhne des Gastlandes Anwendung finden, wäre das ein erster Schritt in die richtige Richtung, aber nur, wenn das Günstigkeitsprinzip dabei festgelegt wird.
                  

                     Wichtig: Freie Fahrt für Lohn- und Sozialdumping muss ein Ende haben. Ich hoffe, das kommt am Ende dabei raus.
                  

Richard Sulík (ECR). – Pani predsedajúca, v posledných mesiacoch sme svedkami, ako viaceré členské štáty, napriek veľkým rečiam o solidarite a jednotnej Európe, bránia východoeurópskym dopravcom neférovými spôsobmi vstupovať na trh. Ide napríklad o minimálnu mzdu, ktorú zaviedlo Nemecko, Francúzsko, a vyplácané diéty nesmú byť jej súčasťou. Toto znevýhodňuje zahraničných prepravcov. Alebo napríklad zákaz stráviť týždenný odpočinok vo vlastnom kamióne. Sú tam otázky ohľadne poistenia, keď šofér ten kamión opustí, a množstvo ďalších. Alebo napríklad rôzna dokumentácia v národnom jazyku, ktorá dvadsať rokov nikomu nechýbala. Pripomínam, že napríklad Slovensko otvorilo svoje trhy, keď išlo o trh s potravinami, trh s pôdou, privatizáciu strategických podnikov. Naopak, západné krajiny uzatvárajú svoje trhy. Robia to rôznymi netarifnými opatreniami, vymýšľajú si prekážky a administratívne bariéry a sťažujú východoeurópskym dopravcom vstup na ich trhy. Pokladám toto za veľmi neférové. Európska komisia mala dávno konať. Mala už dva roky na otvorené infringementy a nekoná, spí a naťahuje čas. Ďakujem pekne.
                  

Dennis de Jong (GUE/NGL). – De Commissie had het erover dat er uitgebreid met de belanghebbenden is overlegd. Dat klopt. Ik heb dat vandaag ook even gedaan met een paar chauffeurs en ze gevraagd wat zij van de voorstellen vonden. De eerste reactie die ik kreeg, luidde: we verliezen gewoon, straks rijden we helemaal voor niks. Zo klonk het uit de mond van een zelfstandige rijder zonder personeel, die gewoon te maken heeft met de steeds slechtere arbeidsvoorwaarden in het wegvervoer. Wat de controles betreft, zei de chauffeur: ik word moedeloos van deze plannen. Dit is een vrijbrief om de boel nog meer te besodemieteren. De mazen worden steeds groter gemaakt.
                  

                     Ik denk dat dat waar is, dat die reacties terecht zijn. Als wij de cabotage gaan liberaliseren, dan wordt het er niet beter op. Wat wij hadden willen zien van de Commissie, is het gebruik van de slimme tachograaf en goede controles. Het is inderdaad goed om daar afspraken over te maken, maar ga dan niet met een risico-benadering werken, ervan uitgaande dat bedrijven die het in het verleden goed gedaan hebben, het ook goed blijven doen, want daarvoor staat de sector op dit moment te veel onder druk. Namens de chauffeurs zeg ik dus: we moeten opnieuw nadenken en opnieuw beginnen met deze voorstellen.
                  

Jakop Dalunde (Verts/ALE). – Fru talman! I arbetet med att uppnå det klimatmål som vi beslutade om i Paris är vägtransportsektorn en av Europas största utmaningar, då den står för över 20 procent av EU:s koldioxidutsläpp och kräver genomgripande lösningar för att övergången för ett hållbart transportsystem ska förverkligas. I förslaget till översyn av Eurovignette-direktivet erkänner man att vägtransportsektorn måste överväga kostnaderna för klimatförändringarna. Det är ett gott första steg, men de djärva förslagen för minskad klimatpåverkan lyser fortfarande med sin frånvaro.
                  

                     En princip för all EU-lagstiftning är den så kallade polluter pays-principen, dvs. det är förorenaren som ska betala. I kommissionens förslag vill man emellertid fortsatt att vägavgifterna ska vara frivilliga. Det är inte rimligt att tillträdesavgifter för järnvägen är obligatoriska – men frivilliga för väg.
                  

                     För att möjliggöra övergången till ett hållbart transportsystem är det avgörande att skapa lika villkor för att hantera den illojala konkurrenssituationen inom sektorn och samtidigt möjliggöra för medlemsstaterna att leda genom att gå före i den gröna omställningen.
                  

Daniela Aiuto (EFDD). – Signora Presidente, Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, nell'ottica di voler concretamente combattere la concorrenza sleale e le problematiche derivanti dall'applicazione scorretta delle regole del cabotaggio, occorre riportare al centro l'uomo e la persona.
                  

                     Il lavoro svolto dai conducenti di Tir è altamente usurante sia dal punto di vista fisico sia mentale. Gli autisti sono infatti costretti a lavorare in condizioni improbe, lontano da casa per lunghi periodi, senza possibilità di reali interruzioni; questo, abbiamo visto, sta a cuore al Commissario, almeno dall'esposizione che ci ha fatto risulta abbastanza chiaro. Quindi, ben vengano le proposte avanzate di voler intervenire sulla legislazione attuale in materia di cabotaggio, ma occorrono misure concrete, soprattutto attuabili, che non siano solo sulla carta.
                  

                     Oggi esistono norme minime che non sono sufficienti perché le autorità non hanno poi gli strumenti per poter effettuare controlli veritieri e sicuri. Noi abbiamo proposto, e la Commissione europea lo sta portando avanti, un progetto pilota sull'utilizzo dei sistemi GNSS per il monitoraggio dei veicoli pesanti ad uso commerciale. Crede il Commissario che una tecnologia del genere possa essere utilizzata e promossa nell'ambito di questo pacchetto mobilità o dobbiamo aspettare future evoluzioni del settore?
                  

                     Per noi la priorità è assicurare nel concreto che gli autisti possano lavorare in condizioni umane e rispettose, che abbiano la possibilità di tornare a casa. Questo deve avvenire unitamente ai mezzi di trasporto che devono rientrare presso gli stabilimenti per assicurare che l'attività principale di un'azienda avvenga nello Stato in cui è stabilita e non si pratichi una concorrenza sleale in altri paesi.
                  

Andor Deli (PPE). – Elnök Asszony! Az utóbb időben gyakran vitázunk itt, a Parlamentben a fuvarozásról, és egyértelműen leszűrhető ezekből a vitákból, hogy szükség van a fuvarozó sofőrök védelmére, munkakörülményeik javítására, de egyúttal szükség van az innovatív megoldások alkalmazására és a fuvarozó vállalkozások – elsősorban a KKV-k – hatékony segítésére.
                  

                     Anélkül, hogy részleteiben ismernénk a Bizottság közúti fuvarozók kiküldetésére vonatkozó szabályozását, az a tény, hogy lex specialisként van kezelve, bizalomra adhat okot. Ugyanakkor sajnálatos, hogy a mobilitási csomag későn, csak a kiküldetési irányelv felülvizsgálatának előrehaladott stádiumában került bemutatásra, mert azt mindenképpen el kell kerülni, hogy a kiküldetési irányelv általános szabályai gúzsba kössék a jogalkotók kezét a mobilitási csomag tárgyalása során.
                  

                     Ellenkező esetben megtörténhet, hogy a valóságtól elrugaszkodott és a szakmai és gyakorlati tapasztalatokat figyelmen kívül hagyó jogszabály születik. Mindezért nagyon nagy a felelősség a Bizottságon, de a Parlamenten és a Tanácson is, hogy az elkövetkező időszak intézményközi tárgyalásain olyan megoldásokat találjunk, amelyek életszerűek, figyelembe veszik a fuvarozás szolgáltatásának minden specifikumát, és gátat vetnek a fuvarozási piac további fragmentációjának annak érdekében, hogy maradéktalanul érvényesülhessen a szolgáltatásnyújtás alapszabadsága.
                  

Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D). – Dank u wel, Voorzitter. In de eerste plaats wil ik de Commissie bedanken voor dit omvangrijke en heel belangrijke pakket waar we in het Parlement nu eindelijk aan kunnen beginnen werken. Een van de uitgangspunten zijn duidelijkere en transparantere regels, de handhaving daarvan en de strijd tegen fraude. Dat sociale aspect is voor onze fractie ontzettend belangrijk, dat juichen we toe en dat gaan we heel hard ondersteunen. De vraag is natuurlijk of een en ander in de praktijk zal werken. Dat is de uitdaging. Maakt dit pakket het mogelijk om de sociale fraude op het terrein echt aan te pakken? Dat criterium zullen we zeker toetsen. Laat me duidelijk zijn: dit gaat niet om een strijd tussen Oost- en West-Europa. Het gaat erom ervoor te zorgen dat voor onze werknemers, of ze nu uit het westen of het oosten komen, dezelfde regels, dezelfde lonen en dezelfde sociale bescherming gelden. Dat is voor ons onwaarschijnlijk cruciaal.
                  

                     Ten tweede, op de dag dat Donald Trump uit het klimaatakkoord stapt, wil ik daar toch iets over zeggen. Dit pakket stuurt namelijk een belangrijk signaal uit. Transport vertegenwoordigt 20 % van de uitstoot en dat percentage gaat nog omhoog. Het is heel belangrijk dat we in Europa onze verantwoordelijkheid opnemen en dat we met de rest van de wereld, zij het dan misschien zonder de Verenigde Staten, allianties vormen om het klimaatakkoord boven water te houden.
                  

Jill Seymour (EFDD). – Madam President, I would like to thank the Commissioner for her statement. CO2 emissions across the transport sector need to be addressed. However, in the road haulage industry, where margins are very tight, it is extremely important that small- and medium-sized businesses are not run off the road and out of existence through unrealistic targets. I hear dangerous talk on cabotage, but some reassuring words on dubious letterbox companies that exploit workers. It is action, more than words, that can only work. May I suggest you allow each Member State to tackle the individual companies who blatantly abuse this system across the EU?
Fragmentation of the internal market should not be used as an excuse to harmonise road safety in Member States, especially when the UK and Sweden have the safest roads in Europe. The EU is constantly questioning the competence of national governments. May I state that the UK has been running very successfully its networks and transport infrastructure for many years, and certainly does not need any further interference from the EU? It will be a great day when we regain our independence and leave the European Union.

Luis de Grandes Pascual (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señor vicepresidente, señora comisaria, un sector de transporte fuerte es necesario para apoyar la economía de la Unión Europea en su conjunto, para aumentar la competitividad en nuestra industria y nuestra presencia global.
                  

                     El transporte puede tener un gran impacto en los costes logísticos, y la carretera es reina en este dominio, ya que el transporte de mercancías por carretera representa el 65 % de los fletes terrestres, según los estudios de la Comisión de 2014.
                  

                     La iniciativa de carretera para el sector del transporte es fundamental para que este funcione bien, sea competitivo, sea justo, sea limpio, sea innovador. En la Unión Europea, las conexiones de transporte eficientes han facilitado la creación y la profundización del mercado interior. Las inversiones en infraestructura de transporte impulsan el crecimiento económico, crean riqueza, mejoran el comercio, la accesibilidad geográfica y la movilidad de las personas.
                  

                     La demanda de transporte por carretera ha ido en aumento debido a su competitividad, a su capacidad para mejorar la accesibilidad y ajustarse a la demanda de sus clientes. Es por lo tanto nuestro trabajo y deber conseguir metas que se ajusten a los nuevos tiempos.
                  

                     El Parlamento se compromete a trabajar en todos estos informes, ya sean reglamentos, ya directivas. Va a ser, señorías, un largo camino —en ocasiones hasta arduo—, ya que este paquete viene cargado de temas sensibles, ya sean sociales, medioambientales o de innovación. Pero debemos garantizar que el resultado refleje una política de transportes terrestres que promueva una movilidad justa, eficiente, segura y respetuosa del medio ambiente y, además, sostenible.
                  

                     Estados Unidos tiene un camino; nosotros seguiremos otro que creemos que es más justo.
                  

Isabella De Monte (S&D). – Signora Presidente, Commissari, onorevoli colleghi, abbiamo atteso con trepidazione la pubblicazione di questo pacchetto mobilità. Ci siamo interrogati su come la Commissione dopo anni avrebbe deciso di trattare un tema così delicato e complesso come il trasporto stradale; purtroppo, le aspettative sono state in parte deluse.
                  

                     La linea della Commissione di liberalizzare ulteriormente il settore non aiuta di certo i lavoratori né tantomeno le piccole imprese che si troveranno sempre di più a combattere contro la concorrenza sleale. Ben venga, invece, la flessibilità in alcuni ambiti, come quello delle ore di guida, al fine di dare la possibilità all'operatore di rientrare a casa a riposare. Bene anche la lotta alle società ‘letterbox’ installate nei paesi dove il costo del lavoro è più basso rispetto ad altri, ma la liberalizzazione selvaggia del cabotaggio non porterà ad alcun beneficio, anzi si tramuterà in un ulteriore strumento di concorrenza sleale.
                  

                     Infine, anche questa riforma resterà lettera morta se non avremo controlli più efficaci.
                  

Massimiliano Salini (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Vicepresidente, Commissario, la struttura del pacchetto è una struttura che, come tale, risponde a tutti i punti di domanda in effetti presenti su un dibattito complesso come quello dei trasporti, tuttavia abbiamo alcuni elementi su cui il lavoro dovrà essere molto, molto rigoroso.
                  

                     Il primo è stato citato da praticamente tutti i colleghi che mi hanno preceduto: il tema del dumping, il tema del cabotaggio. Ecco, qui bisogna darsi una risposta più puntuale ad una domanda effettiva, il tema molto concreto dei ritorni a vuoto di cui spesso parliamo nelle nostre discussioni, molto concreto. Non è liberalizzando ulteriormente il cabotaggio che si risolve il problema dei ritorni a vuoto. I ritorni a vuoto ci sono perché vi è un problema di incontro tra domanda ed offerta, quindi è rinforzando il mercato che si risponde a quel problema, non indebolendolo o favorendo chi non rispetta le normali regole. E questo è il primo punto molto di contenuto su cui dovremmo essere assolutamente fermi e uniti.
                  

                     Dall'altro lato, il tema del combinato tra la strategia sulla mobilità a basse emissioni e il pacchetto strade. Noi abbiamo una grande sfida sulla partita del trasporto, abbiamo le più grandi responsabilità. Non distruggiamo la nostra industria anche nel tema dei biocarburanti, facciamo in modo che vi sia un passaggio graduale che risponda alle giuste esigenze di tutti i cittadini.
                  

Bogusław Liberadzki (S&D). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Wiceprzewodniczący Szefczovicz, Pani Komisarz Bulc! Spóźnili się Państwo z tym pakietem, spóźnili się Państwo z reakcją, ale ten pakiet jest. Chciałbym, żebyśmy zgodzili się co do motta ‘without trucks Union stops’. Musimy mieć sprawny system przewozów drogowych towarów. Jesteśmy jednak w sytuacji konfliktu. Jest to otwarty konflikt między przewoźnikami przynajmniej dwunastu, może czternastu, państw a pozostałą częścią Unii Europejskiej. Chodzi o różne rozumienie na przykład dumpingu socjalnego. Pojawia się pytanie: dlaczego kierowca ma być inaczej opłacany w Niemczech czy we Francji? Czy to oznacza, że polski albo słowacki kierowca, który pojedzie do Bułgarii czy Rumunii, ma mieć obniżoną pensję dlatego, że tam są niższe pensje? Nie zaproponowali Państwo póki co alternatywy i odpowiedzi na te pytania, tak że czeka nas debata. Obiecujemy rzetelnie współpracować, ale będą to naprawdę niełatwe dyskusje.
                  

Deirdre Clune (PPE). – Madam President, I would like to thank the Commissioners for coming to speak today on their new package. I very much welcome it. Clean, competitive and connected. I certainly share those ambitions, as we all do here in the Parliament, particularly in the Committee on Transport and Tourism. I am very much looking forward to getting involved and dealing with the various pieces of legislation and reports that will come through the committees.
On competitiveness and supporting workers on the working conditions which they experience, that is extremely important. In particular, we hear so much about the difficulty that road haulage companies have in attracting employees and ensuring that they stay with the job. It is an ageing profession and a profession that does not have enough women, so I very much welcome the fact that you are addressing that.
Regarding connected cars, Europe needs to be more ambitious, provide the necessary infrastructure and facilities to develop this whole area, and not let the rest of the world run away with it. It is very important that Europe is at the forefront in this whole area, while recognising that we also need a clean environment for all our citizens. It is a big challenge and they are big ambitions, but we have the capacity to do it. I am very much looking forward to getting stuck in and working in this area.

Inés Ayala Sender (S&D). – Señora presidenta, el mensaje de este paquete no puede ser percibido como contrario al sector europeo del transporte por carretera frente a otros sectores menos limpios, menos competitivos e incluso menos conectados. Y aún menos puede ser un mensaje en contra de los usuarios profesionales de la carretera. Por eso le agradezco a la Comisión —a los comisarios presentes— la oferta para una plena cooperación.
                  

                     Brevemente, la euroviñeta. En primer lugar, esperamos que se aclare cuanto antes el diferendo con Alemania en relación con la aplicación no discriminatoria del peaje. También en este sentido y respecto de la aplicación de una euroviñeta por distancia, exigimos una clara y suficiente atención a la compensación para países periféricos, cuyos productos tienen menos valor añadido, pues son más pobres, y de ahí que la carga añadida resulte insoportable.
                  

                     Nos preocupa también abrir la caja de Pandora en lo relativo a las horas de conducción y de descanso, pues costó mucho el acuerdo y esperamos no empeorarlo.
                  

                     En cuanto a los trabajadores móviles, esperamos también mejorar su situación, pero sobre todo conservar sus empleos y la vuelta a casa.
                  

                     Y combatiendo como combatimos el dumping social, preferiríamos atacar a las empresas culpables vía lista negra, pero sin poner la carga de la prueba en los trabajadores, en los camioneros.
                  

                     Finalmente, una ausencia que lamento: la seguridad vial. Señora comisaria, ¿para cuándo las infraestructuras y las multas transfronterizas?
                  

Georges Bach (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar und Frau Kommissarin! Ich denke, insgesamt haben wir jetzt im ersten Augenblick einen positiven Eindruck. Bekanntlich steckt allerdings der Teufel im Detail, und das müssen wir noch ein bisschen konsequenter analysieren.
                  

                     Zum Beispiel den Unterschied von Kabotage und Entsendung. Das haben Sie zwar eindeutig dargelegt. Aber das müssen wir noch analysieren. Mit Sicherheit wird sich da wiederum ein Schlupfloch finden.
                  

                     Dann die Neuregelung der Ruhezeiten: Wurden hier die Auswirkungen auf die Sicherheit betrachtet oder nicht?
                  

                     Verbesserung der Kontrollen: Das Ganze steht und fällt mit den Kontrollen. Ich hätte mir gewünscht, dass hier vielleicht auf die Digitalisierung, das heißt die Inanspruchnahme der modernen Tachografen, der intelligenten Tachografen, gesetzt wird und dass die hier stärker benutzt werden.
                  

                     Im Bezug auf Schlupflöcher: Es muss schnellstens ein Vorschlag kommen, um das Geschäftsmodell unter 3,5 Tonnen zu unterbinden.
                  

Claudia Țapardel (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnilor comisari, dragi colegi, dezbaterile privind pachetul rutier au generat emoții puternice în ultimele luni și mă bucur că avem în sfârșit un set de măsuri din partea Comisiei. Consider că pachetul publicat astăzi este un pas înainte și sper că va aduce clarificări în ceea ce privește concurența loială dar și asigurarea condițiilor de muncă decente și echitabile pentru cei care lucrează în acest sector.
                  

                     Pentru că suntem abia la început, aș dori astăzi să mă refer doar la câteva aspecte generale: pachetul rutier trebuie să ia în calcul particularitățile statelor membre și să dea o șansă tuturor operatorilor, indiferent de zona geografică din care provin. Din acest punct de vedere mă aștept ca varianta finală a propunerilor să nu împovăreze companiile de transport cu un număr mai mare de obligații administrative și nici să pedepsească statele periferice, care depind de operațiunile transfrontaliere și de cabotaj. Sper de asemenea că vom putea în sfârșit să ne concentrăm pe adevăratele probleme, cum ar fi companiile fantomă care exploatează nu doar lacunele legislative, ci și proprii angajați și regret că nu avem și nu am luat în considerare înființarea acelei Agenții europene pentru transportul rutier care ar fi putut duce la o rezolvare integrată a multora din problemele din acest sector.
                  

Christine Revault D'Allonnes Bonnefoy (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Vice-président, Madame la Commissaire, oui certaines propositions vont dans le bon sens, notamment pour garantir le retour des chauffeurs à leur domicile, lutter contre les sociétés boîtes aux lettres ou maintenir les règles de détachement pour les opérations de cabotage. Mais d'autres envoient un message négatif et contradictoire avec votre volonté affichée de lutter contre la dégradation continue des conditions de travail dans ce secteur.
                  

                     Exclure le transport international de la directive sur les travailleurs détachés, qui garantit justement le principe fondamental ‘à travail égal, salaire égal’ sur un même lieu, c'est faire le jeu d'une concurrence malsaine et du dumping social, qui cristallisent aujourd'hui le rejet du projet européen.
                  

                     Assouplir davantage les temps de repos et de conduite et la prise de repos en cabine, c'est aussi fragiliser les droits sociaux des travailleurs.
                  

                     Enfin, vous avez fait le choix – et je le regrette – d'aller contre la position de ce Parlement, qui a adopté le 18 mai une résolution appelant à rejeter toute forme de libéralisation du cabotage, y compris à travers la suppression du nombre limite d'opérations de cabotage.
                  

                     Comme je l'ai dit à plusieurs reprises, au-delà de l'enjeu sectoriel, c'est bien celui de notre capacité à mettre en œuvre l'Europe sociale qui est en jeu dans ce texte.
                  

Die Präsidentin. – Ich habe nun für das Catch-the-eye-Verfahren viel mehr Rednerinnen und Redner, als ich drannehmen kann. Ich werde von den zwei großen Fraktionen je zwei nehmen und von den anderen je eine Person. Ich bitte um Ihr Verständnis. Ich werde vor allem die drannehmen, die auch wirklich die ganze Zeit bei der Debatte anwesend waren.
                  

Catch-the-eye-Verfahen


Danuta Jazłowiecka (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Priorytetem dla nas, dla uzdrowienia rynku pracy, dla rzeczywistego przeciwdziałania dumpingowi socjalnemu jest walka z nielegalnym zatrudnieniem, które jest dwadzieścia razy wyższe niż legalne delegowanie pracowników. Nie robimy nic w tym zakresie w Parlamencie Europejskim. Natomiast wprowadzając przepisy coraz bardziej komplikujące delegowanie – które w prawie 70 % odbywa się w krajach Europy Zachodniej i między tymi krajami – zabijamy mobilność pracowników, a ta przecież w znacznej mierze sprzyja wzrostowi gospodarczemu całej Europy, tak dzisiaj potrzebnemu naszemu europejskiemu społeczeństwu. Delegowanie obejmujące szereg różnych sektorów samo w sobie jest bardzo skomplikowane. Transport międzynarodowy ma równie skomplikowaną specyfikę co delegowanie. Apeluję, byśmy nieco spowolnili prace nad delegowaniem pracowników i doprowadzili do sytuacji, gdy równolegle pracować będziemy nad rozwiązaniami transportowymi i rozwiązaniami dotyczącymi delegowania, a na koniec zaproponujemy państwom członkowskim najlepsze rozwiązania zarówno w zakresie delegowania, jak i transportu, nie zabijając przy tym europejskiej mobilności.
                  

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, durante la scorsa plenaria questo Parlamento ha insistito perché la proposta della Commissione riguardante il trasporto su strada mantenesse alte le ambizioni di un settore così cruciale per il progresso materiale e sociale dell'Unione.
                  

                     Mi sembra che il pacchetto adottato vada nella direzione giusta, anche se con qualche pecca, attraverso l'adozione di misure miranti ad accrescere l'utilizzo di energie pulite, ad incrementare la sicurezza stradale e ad affrontare la concorrenza sleale e lo sfruttamento del lavoro.
                  

                     Per quanto riguarda le distorsioni di mercato, particolare attenzione va posta al tema del cabotaggio stradale, che rimane uno degli aspetti che più minacciano la corretta esecuzione delle operazioni di trasporto.
                  

                     È fondamentale responsabilizzare le autorità locali chiamate a dare attuazione al pacchetto mobilità ed incoraggiarle a sviluppare soluzioni innovative e sostenibili con un approccio partecipativo. È giunto il momento di mettere in atto un piano armonico ed ambizioso sulla mobilità, che porti ad un rinnovamento del sistema dei trasporti che sia in linea con le reali esigenze dei cittadini.
                  

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η κινητικότητα είναι σημαντική για την Ένωση και κυρίως για την Ελλάδα που βρίσκεται στο νοτιοανατολικό άκρο της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Αυτό σημαίνει ότι απαιτούνται ειδικά μέτρα, ένα ειδικό καθεστώς για την ενίσχυση του κλάδου των μεταφορών στην Ελλάδα. Στο πλαίσιο αυτό, απαιτείται να ληφθεί σοβαρά υπόψη η νησιωτικότητα, προκειμένου να υπάρχουν φθηνές αεροπορικές και ακτοπλοϊκές μεταφορές για τη σύνδεση των νησιών του Αιγαίου και της Κρήτης με την κυρίως Ελλάδα.
                  

                     Επιπλέον, η ανάγκη ενίσχυσης των ελληνικών μεταφορικών επιχειρήσεων, αεροπορικών, ναυτιλιακών, χερσαίων και του ΟΣΕ πρέπει να τεθεί στην ημερήσια διάταξη, προκειμένου να ενισχυθεί η ανταγωνιστικότητα της ελληνικής οικονομίας η οποία βρίσκεται σε τεράστια απόσταση από τις μεγάλες ευρωπαϊκές αγορές. Μόνο με τη θεσμοθέτηση ενός ειδικού καθεστώτος για την οικονομική ενίσχυση του κλάδου των ελληνικών μεταφορών μπορεί να υπάρξει ανασυγκρότηση της ελληνικής οικονομίας η οποία έχει κυριολεκτικά διαλυθεί από την τρόικα και τα μνημόνια.
                  

Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE). – Señora presidenta, quiero agradecer la iniciativa y el esfuerzo que está haciendo la comisaria, a la que agradezco la claridad de su intervención para poder enfrentar un problema que está fragmentando el mercado interior.
                  

                     Cuenten con nuestra colaboración para acabar con el dumping social, para garantizar que se dignifiquen las condiciones laborales de los profesionales, que se fomente el descanso de los profesionales en su domicilio y que se resuelvan las incertidumbres que afectan al cabotaje. Estamos por simplificar los trámites, por reducir las cargas administrativas, por apoyar con programas concretos la descarbonización del sector y por ayudarle a aprovechar todas las oportunidades que ofrece la digitalización. Y, por supuesto, entre todos vamos a trabajar esta normativa con el sector afectado, que ofrece mucho empleo y es fundamental para la competitividad europea.
                  

                     Apelo a la responsabilidad de los Estados para que cesen sus iniciativas unilaterales y piensen, por una vez, en que una buena unión es buena para todos sus miembros.
                  

Paloma López Bermejo (GUE/NGL). – Señora presidenta, nos hubiera gustado tener más tiempo para estudiar la propuesta de la Comisión sobre el transporte por carretera. En cualquier caso, los sindicatos del transporte pedían algo muy simple para los conductores: su derecho a un salario mínimo, su derecho al descanso, y que se luche contra el fraude en la carretera. Y, aun así, nada de esto ha sido recogido.
                  

                     La nueva regulación permite expresamente que los descansos cortos se hagan en las cabinas y el descanso largo tenga lugar solo cada cuatro semanas. También se permitirán desplazamientos de hasta tres días y cabotajes de hasta cinco días sin recibir ni tan siquiera el salario mínimo. Pero, sobre todo, nos tememos que las reglas seguirán sin aplicarse correctamente para los trabajadores.
                  

                     Está bien simplificar las normas, facilitar la digitalización, etc. Pero lo que hay que hacer es obligar a los Estados y a las empresas a cumplir la ley y a garantizar los derechos laborales. Esperábamos una acción bastante más decidida y nos sentimos sinceramente decepcionados.
                  

Michael Cramer (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin! Ja, wir wollen Bürokratie abbauen, wir wollen die Kontrollen sichern – denn ein Gesetz ohne Kontrollen ist überflüssig –, und wir wollen die Sicherheit erhöhen. Dazu gibt es eine Maßnahme, denn es gibt den Tachografen, und bei allen neuen Lkws muss der Tachograf eingerichtet werden. Bei den existierenden Lkws lässt man sich aber 15 oder 20 Jahre Zeit.
                  

                     Meine Frage ist deshalb: Ist das diskutiert worden? Wir können dann sagen: Zehn oder 15 Prozent der Wochenzeit darf man im Ausland sein. Dann hätten sie sofort die Kontrolle ohne Bürokratie, und wir hätten die Sicherheit garantiert und den Missbrauch unterbunden. Denn auch bei diesem Gesetz, das sie jetzt vorgelegt haben, ist die Frage: Wie kann der Missbrauch praktisch unterbunden werden? Ich sehe das noch nicht. Deshalb, warum kein Tachograf? Das wäre ganz einfach, keine neue technische Lösung, das wäre einfach möglich. Warum passiert das nicht?
                  

Claudia Schmidt (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin! Wir haben jetzt zwei Jahre lang großartig auf das Road-Package gewartet – endlich ist es da.
                  

                     Zu meinem großen Erstaunen muss ich lesen, dass Sie, Frau Kommissarin, darin festgehalten haben, dass man jetzt für jeden Kilometer auf Autobahnen zahlen muss Also, das ist doch eigentlich ein Wahnsinn. Da gibt es gute Beispiele dafür, dass das eigentlich nur einen Umwegverkehr verursacht. Ich hoffe doch nicht, dass Sie schon irgendwelche Dinge in der Schublade haben, dass Sie auch die Gemeinde- oder vielleicht die Landesstraßen europaweit mit einem road pricing belegen wollen.
                  

                     Diese vorgeschlagenen Maßnahmen helfen weder der Umwelt, noch helfen sie den Anrainern – denen kann nur durch bessere Technik geholfen werden. Alles andere geht in die Taschen von den Finanzministern. Das kennen wir: Wir haben seit 40 Jahren Mineralölsteuer. Ich denke, die Finanzminister kassieren schon weitaus genug.
                  

                     Abgesehen davon – und das ist wirklich ein großer Vorwurf neben vielen anderen Dingen, die vielleicht gut sind – ist die EU nicht gegründet worden, um irgendeine grüne Verkehrserziehung zentralistisch durchzusetzen.
                  

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnilor comisari, sincer mă bucur că în sfârșit avem acest pachet. Mă bucur și de ce a spus doamna comisar, că doriți o piață a transportului mai corectă și mai competitivă. Eu cred în acest lucru, vin din industrie și cred că este nevoie. Creșterea sectorului de transport duce automat la creștere economică, dar sunt îngrijorată de modul cum vreți să rezolvați problema firmelor fantomă.
                  

                     Nu sunt de acord cu colegii de aici care au spus că fiecare stat să rezolve, eu consider că este necesară o propunere unitară pentru că dacă avem piață internă trebuie să avem și la transport o reglementare unitară și pun direct o propunere: credeți că firmele acelea care deschid așa-zisa filială, căsuță poștală, într-o țară unde salariile sunt mici dar nu efectuează absolut nicio activitate cu șoferii în acea țară ci toți șoferii sunt luați și duși în țările unde salariile sunt mai mari și plătiți cu salariile din țările din est. Credeți că puteți găsi o soluție să rezolvați? Eu nu aș da autorizație de transport firmelor care în țara respectivă nu au nici parc de mașini și nu execută transport în țara respectivă. Vă rog să vă gândiți, cred că asta este principala problemă, după care se rezolvă tot.
                  

Die Präsidentin. – Frau Kommissarin, Herr Vizepräsident! Sie haben einiges an Argumenten, an Fragen, an Kritik, aber auch am Zustimmung gehört.
                  

(Ende-des-Catch-the-eye-Verfahrens)


Violeta Bulc,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I would like to thank Members for their very open comments and questions, and also to for all the support that they have expressed by picking the right topics that need to be discussed in order to move forward on issues related to road transport in the European Union.
Addressing EU-wide problems with EU solutions is the right way to go, and the best way to avoid unilateral, uncoordinated national measures which fragment our internal market. With the proposal before you, we are trying to avoid that and to ensure adequate working conditions for drivers in a more enforceable way, while at the same time reducing administrative costs and burdens for operators. Let me now directly address a few of your concerns and questions and hopefully bring more clarity to the proposal and our further discussions.
Letterbox companies are illegal and are used to obtain cost advantage by some hauliers. That is a fact. We define here clear criteria to avoid letterbox companies and to better enforce this, in particular through enhanced cooperation between national enforcement authorities.
I have been asked on numerous occasions to do something about vehicles below 3.5 tons, especially the so-called white vans that are very often used to bypass European rules. My message here is very clear: yes vehicles and hauliers under 3.5 tonnes are included in this proposal, and the Commission is making sure that they are subject to certain European rules, as described in the package.
There were a couple of comments on a European road transport agency. At this point we are focusing on improving the existing enforcement tools and systems and on further enhancing cooperation between national enforcement bodies. I hope it is going to work. Experience to date with the implementation of social legislation does not show that cross-border enforcement is much more cost effective and more consistent when carried out by the Member State authorities within established framework structures.
A road agency could indeed be helpful but for the Member States and the Commission, in assuring consistent and efficient cross-border enforcement, we would first like to focus on the solutions proposed. But I remain open to developing this subject further, in cooperation with you.
Tachographs were mentioned several times. We propose to accelerate the deployment of smart technologies and smart tachographs, which will further facilitate the enforcement of social rules and avoid fraud. For example, operators equipping their vehicles with these modern digital tachographs before the deadline should be rewarded with fewer controls on European roads.
On driving and rest time, I would also like to repeat that the limits will remain the same. The flexibility to organise operations can in no way go against road safety and social protection. On the contrary, they will contribute to facilitating returns home. This is the approach proposed by the Commission. These rules could be complemented by additional social measures relating to working time but, for those, from today onwards the Commission is opening a social dialogue and will propose legislative proposals in the autumn in the second phase of the mobility package.
On charging, Member States are still free to decide whether they want to charge or not. They are free to decide what they want to charge, which roads they want to charge for and which not. But, if they decide to use charging systems, we have given them enough time to readjust their systems to a compatible, interoperable EU-based system.
On cabotage, let me underline once again that our new cabotage rules do not imply further market opening or further market closure. Market access and business opportunities will remain as they are today, but more flexibility will allow operators to optimise their operations, and simpler rules will certainly be of great help to controllers or enforcement officers in controlling illegal practices much better.
On proposal and posting, first for cabotage operations, these are operations whereby goods are loaded and unloaded within the same country. There is a clear and strong link with that country and, therefore, the drivers should be paid according to the rules of the country from day one onwards. Let us say that a Slovenian driver drops a load off in Milan and reloads in Milan to unload in Rome. For the time spent on the cabotage operation between Milan and Rome, Italian rules will apply.
Secondly, for international operations – these are operations where the loading and unloading take place in different countries – we clarify that there is a sufficient link with the country concerned only to the extent that the driver spends at least three days a month in that country. To put it simply, international journeys lasting less than three days are excluded from the Posting of Workers Directive.
Lastly, I would like to urge you all to focus not only on these particular issues. The road initiatives contain a very comprehensive list of measures that are well balanced and represent a substantial step forward in the management of road traffic in Europe, making it much more modern, fair, sustainable and future-oriented. We really need to improve the road sector in order to stay competitive and to make sure that Europe stays a social place.

Maroš Šefčovič,
Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, once again I appreciate the quality of the debate and I think it has been very clearly indicated what the points will be that we need to take care of, and on which we need to start daily contacts so we can work with you on speedy delivery.
First and foremost, however, I really appreciate, and would like to thank the House for, the positive spirit and the welcome for the package, and also for underlining the importance of attention to the bigger picture, and how much we are trying to transform this very important sector. We have 50 million people working in transport-related industries, and we need to bear in mind how important it is for the quality of life in our cities and our rural areas, and how big a contribution transport can make to modernising and energising Europe, and to a cleaner environment. I would agree with all the honourable Members who have been calling for consistency and for speedy progress in working on this package in Parliament and in the Council, and I would like to reassure you that we are absolutely ready to respond to those calls.
We had good experience, on the Clean Energy for All package, in working regularly with all the rapporteurs responsible for various parts of this package. I was invited to the Conference of Committee Chairs where we had a very good cross-sectoral discussion. I know how important it is to cooperate well with all the committees because what we are doing here does not belong to one committee only: it has real cross-sectoral impact.
To conclude, I would like to thank you for your strong encouragement and for the clear call to work together on providing leadership on climate change, because here I am absolutely convinced that we Europeans are on the right side of history. The calls for a clean environment, for energy efficiency, for renewables, for modernisation and technological advancement of the economy, and for a high level of public awareness and citizens' support, are very strong in Europe. Now we need to use this ‘first mover’ advantage to demonstrate our global leadership. I know that the world very much expects this from us, and I am absolutely sure that Europe will deliver.

Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.
                  


Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 162 GO)



Ivo Belet (PPE),
schriftelijk. – Het is onze plicht om eindelijk paal en perk te stellen aan de sociale wantoestanden in de transportsector. De recente gerechtelijke inval bij het Belgisch-Luxemburgse transportbedrijf Jost toont aan dat de strijd tegen sociale dumping in de transportsector eindelijk wat van de grond komt. De maatregelen die de Commissie voorstelt, zijn een stap in de goede richting, maar ze staan of vallen met effectieve controlemaatregelen. Alle trucks die internationaal de weg opgaan, moeten dringend met een slimme, digitale tachograaf worden uitgerust. Daarmee kan de inspectie snel nagaan of de chauffeurs zich wel aan de nieuwe arbeidsregels en rij- en rusttijden houden, welke afstanden ze afleggen en tegen welke snelheid. We willen geen uitholling van de regels rond rij- en rusttijden en de cao's in de sector. De veiligheid op de weg staat voorop.
                  

Enrico Gasbarra (S&D),
per iscritto. – Mi associo ai giudizi positivi già espressi dal Gruppo S&D, per l'annuncio del nuovo pacchetto mobilità presentato oggi dalla Commissione. Troviamo proposte di grande ampiezza strategica, che mi sembra possano porre le condizioni per un profondo miglioramento del quadro normativo, in molti aspetti del settore. Trovo molto pertinente l'attenzione al quadro sociale e societario, in materia di trasporti, visti i numerosi casi di abusi riscontrati e considerando le zone grigie ancora esistenti nel mercato interno. Sarà fondamentale ora garantire una piena attuazione delle proposte annunciate. Vigileremo affinché le attività di controllo nel settore (in particolare in quello stradale) siano efficaci, anche attraverso l'istituzione di organi ad hoc.
                  

Evelyn Regner (S&D),
schriftlich. – Beim Kampf gegen Sozialdumping droht die EU-Kommission mit ihren neuen Vorschlägen im Transportbereich einmal mehr falsch abzubiegen. Wir wissen um die teilweise katastrophalen Zustände auf Europas Straßen, und wenn die Kommission nun die FernfahrerInnen mit Kurzzeit-Varianten von der Entsende-Richtlinie ausnehmen möchte, kann sich die Situation massiv verschärfen. Was die Kommission vorschlägt, sind Entsendungen zweiter Klasse. Damit wird der Wettbewerb auf Europas Straßen wieder unfairer – das kann nicht sein. Positiv zu sehen ist, dass Briefkastenfirmen, die Unternehmen aus Westeuropa rein zur Aushöhlung der ArbeitnehmerInnen-Rechte in Osteuropa gründen, besser bekämpft werden sollen. Das reicht aber nicht. Wir müssen das Prinzip ‘Gleicher Lohn für gleiche Arbeit am gleichen Ort’ endlich zum Standard in der Branche machen. Dafür müssen wir Verstöße strenger sanktionieren und hohe Sozialstandards für alle ArbeitnehmerInnen durchsetzen.
                  

Olga Sehnalová (S&D),
písemně. – Na tzv. silniční balíček jsme všichni čekali až příliš dlouho. Byl opředen řadou mýtů a dohadů, ale také nervozitou a bezprostředními zkušenostmi řidičů i dopravců, kteří byli v posledních měsících v některých členských státech vystaveni značné nejistotě, neuvěřitelné administrativní zátěži a opatřením, která mají s vnitřním trhem málo co společného. Naším cílem by mělo být nastavení férových, jasných a hlavně v praxi vymahatelných pravidel, která mimo jiné přispějí ke zlepšení bezpečnosti a efektivnímu využívání kapacit a zdrojů. A v neposlední řadě k důstojnějším podmínkám řidičů, ať již pochází odkudkoliv. I dnešní debata na plénu Evropského parlamentu ukázala, že legislativní práce, která je před námi, nebude jednoduchá, ale konečně máme návrh Evropské komise na stole.
                  

Romana Tomc (PPE),
pisno. – Pozdravljam spremembe na področju mobilnosti, še posebej, ko gre za spremembe v cestnem prometu in cestninjenju.
                  

                     Menim, da je to le še korak v smeri poglabljanja enotnega trga. Res je, da to področje vsaka država članica ureja po svoje, zato moramo biti pri spremembah previdni, vseeno pa učinkoviti. Pomembno je, da evropski državljani potujejo nemoteno in da bodo predlagane spremembe prinesle več koristi kot ovir tudi v praksi.
                  

Carlos Zorrinho (S&D),
por escrito. – Saúdo o pacote de medidas tomadas pela Comissão Europeia para modernizar a mobilidade e os transportes europeus.
                  

                     Melhorar os transportes é uma componente essencial para uma gestão inteligente do território e para melhorar a qualidade de vida dos cidadãos. Constitui também uma oportunidade para que os centros de investigação e a indústria europeia possam liderar uma nova era tecnológica, tendo por pilares a transição energética (para a mobilidade elétrica) e a nova sociedade digital.
                  

                     Melhores transportes significam mais facilidade de interação entre as pessoas, mais fluidez na circulação das mercadorias, mais competitividade económica e melhor qualidade do ar, reduzindo também o ruído e protegendo o bem-estar das pessoas.
                  

                     Sublinho também o impacto destas medidas na articulação multimodal e transfronteiriça dos sistemas de transportes, promovendo a interoperabilidade e a complementaridade das soluções e alternativas.
                  

                     Este pacote de propostas é fortemente mobilizador de um plano de investimentos de nova geração, capaz de, citando a Comunicação da Comissão, constituir ‘um importante estímulo para a criação de uma mobilidade europeia limpa, competitiva e conectada no futuro’.
                  
13.   The new European Consensus on Development – our world, our dignity, our future (debate)

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zum neuen Europäischen Konsens über die Entwicklungspolitik – unsere Welt, unsere Würde, unsere Zukunft (2017/2586(RSP)).
               

                  Ich würde Sie gerne davon in Kenntnis setzen, dass wir hier heute eine erstmalige Situation haben: Wie wir wissen, hat Malta Wahlen, und insofern kann der maltesische Vorsitz nicht an dieser Mini-Tagung teilnehmen, und er wird vom kommenden estnischen Vorsitz vertreten. Ich weiß nicht, ob wir eine solche Situation schon je hatten. Ich finde es sehr begrüßenswert, dass hier im Trio sehr wohl zusammengearbeitet wird, und möchte in diesem Zusammenhang den stellvertretenden EU-Minister Estlands, Herrn Matti Maasikas, herzlich grüßen.
               

Matti Maasikas,
amtierender Ratspräsident. – Frau Präsidentin! Ich danke Ihnen sehr für diese sehr freundliche Einleitung.
               

                  I would like to thank the honourable Members for giving me the opportunity to address you all on this very important issue. Some of you might be surprised to see me here some weeks earlier than the actual start of the Estonian Presidency, but for the reasons explained by the Vice-President, the current Maltese Presidency was not able to attend this session.
               

                  The new European consensus on development has been amongst the priorities of the Council and will guide the EU's development cooperation for the years to come. As you know, our institutions have considerably accelerated the pace of the interinstitutional negotiations since February this year.
               

                  You will probably also recall that five intensive, yet very constructive, trilateral meetings between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, paved the way for the adoption of the consensus by the EU Development Ministers at their meeting of 19 May. Similarly, I look forward to the vote which will take place in this House tomorrow, and hopefully allow for all the pieces of this complex puzzle to be in place ahead of the joint signature during the European Development Days on 7 June.
               

                  Let me stress here that the Council is very proud of this common achievement. It was only possible thanks to the high level of commitment of all parties to come to a common understanding and a shared agenda for the future of EU development policy over the next 15 years. The primary aim will be the eradication of poverty. In line with the Lisbon Treaty and the EU global strategy on foreign and security policy, the consensus will also help to achieve the priorities of the EU's external policy.
               

                  As we all know, the EU remains the world's largest development aid donor, providing more than half of assistance world-wide. The adoption of the consensus is a key EU deliverable in the commitment to globally implement the 2030 Agenda and support partner countries in achieving the sustainable development goals. The EU is sending an important signal to the global community, notably to the UN High Level Political Forum in July, on how it will support partner countries in their endeavour to implement the 2030 Agenda and achieve the sustainable development goals.
               

                  The new consensus for development is articulated around the ‘five Ps’ of Agenda 2030: people, planet, prosperity, peace and partnerships. Our top priorities will be to work towards the eradication of poverty, to reduce inequalities and promote social inclusion, to promote good governance, to ensure human and economic development, to tackle global issues such as the fight against hunger, to protect the environment, as well as to preserve the world's natural resources. Social inclusion and gender equality will be central to the way we implement and define our policies.
               

                  In implementing these priorities, the consensus will have to respond to the main challenges that the world is facing today. The complexity and degree of interconnection between the economic, social and environmental dimensions of development policy – this can only be strengthened through a holistic approach.
               

                  The resilience of countries and societies should be put at the centre of our attention and the cross-cutting elements of the consensus – such as gender equality, youth, investment and trade, sustainable energy, climate action, good governance, democracy, rule of law and human rights, as well as migration and mobility – accelerate results, progress and transformation to achieve the sustainable development goals.
               

                  And this will bring me to the issue of implementation. The new consensus binds us all, the EU institutions and Member States alike. In this respect, we all need to work to the best of our abilities on its implementation. The coordination and coherence between the actions will be key. Effective results can only be achieved through a tailor-made approach with our partner countries, involving both state and non-state actors. Inclusiveness is therefore essential in order to increase the ownership of our development policy by our partners.
               

                  Last, but not least, on behalf of the Council I wish to thank this House, and in particular the two co-rapporteurs, Mr Neuser and Mr Wenta, as well as the Chair of the Committee on Development, Ms McAvan, for their dedication and constructive approach which resulted in an excellent agreement that is of benefit to both the EU and our development partners. The Council looks forward to the signature of the new European consensus during the European Development Days on 7 June.
               

Neven Mimica,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, over the past few months, since the Commission put forward its proposal for a new European Consensus on Development, we have been working together with Parliament and the Council towards a joint statement, a new collective vision and a common framework for action in development policy for the European Union and all its Member States.
The task of bringing 28 Member States, the Parliament with its different political groups, and the Commission together around such a far-reaching joint text is, without doubt, a formidable challenge. On many of the points for which Parliament has strongly advocated, the Commission would be willing to go even further. We have all had to seek compromises, but this only underlines the significance of what we are about to achieve. This text represents a genuine consensus, crafted through common effort and owned by us all.
The new Consensus endorsed in the Committee on Development's resolution also received unanimous support at a recent Foreign Affairs Development Council on 19 May. I would like to extend my sincere and wholehearted thanks to the Committee on Development and, in particular, the co-rapporteurs, Norbert Neuser and Bogdan Wenta, their colleagues, the shadow rapporteurs, and the Chair of the Committee, Linda McAvan, who have engaged systematically and constructively in our interinstitutional discussions on the new Consensus. I also want to thank honourable Members for all their previous contributions, including the resolution on the revision of the Consensus adopted by this House on 14 February this year, which is strongly reflected in the joint statement.
The new European Consensus on Development represents a profound shift in our development cooperation, guided by the vision of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The European Union, as the world's largest development actor, has a great responsibility in making sure that this vision is turned into reality. An ambitious new European Consensus for Development is a very important step in this direction, laying down a strong basis for maintaining the European Union's global leadership in development.
The new Consensus unequivocally reaffirms that poverty eradication remains the primary objective of EU development policy. I want to be crystal clear on that. We will work to reduce vulnerabilities, address inequalities and ensure that no-one is left behind. We will aim to reach those furthest behind first. With this clear objective in mind, the Consensus enables us to respond better to the more complex and interconnected challenges that the world faces today. It sends an important political message, namely that Europe is determined to work better together, making the most of the joint capacities of the EU institutions and the Member States.
Our new Consensus closely reflects the 2030 Agenda structured around the five ‘P's: people, planet, prosperity, peace and partnership. It integrates the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development and also underlines the links with other policies to make sure they take account of development concerns, including peace and security, humanitarian aid, migration, environment and climate. Therefore it also represents a significant contribution to the implementation of the Paris Agreement on climate change and the United Nations’ efforts to build sustainable peace for all.
As regards the Migration and Development Nexus, I am convinced that what we need to offer is more partnership and more cooperation rather than less. Migration is an issue of common concern, common responsibility and common actions, in particular with our African partners.
The Consensus takes a comprehensive approach to implementation, combining aid with other resources – public and private – sound policies and a strengthened approach to policy coherence for development. It explicitly reaffirms our collective Official Development Assistance commitments and guarantees that realistic and verifiable actions will be taken towards meeting them. We put strong emphasis on better tailored partnerships with a broader range of stakeholders and partner countries, stressing the importance of fully involving civil society, the European Parliament and the national parliaments in the implementation of the sustainable development goals. Through this Consensus, Europe strives to be not only the biggest but also the best and most effective development actor.
Your endorsement of the Consensus at this plenary will be a milestone for our development cooperation. It should allow for signature at the highest political level at the European Development Days next week and it will provide the European Union with a very substantial deliverable for the United Nations high-level political forum on sustainable development in July.
At a time when the values of multilateralism and solidarity are called into question and the commitment of some to sustainable development seems to be wavering, Europe must pull its weight and help to keep global efforts on the right track. This Consensus is proof of our determination to do exactly that.

Bogdan Brunon Wenta,
w imieniu grupy PPE. – Dziękuję Pani Przewodnicząca! A także dziękuję mojemu koledze Neuserowi, który dziś nie może być z nami, za jego świetną współpracę. Oczywiście specjalne podziękowania składam naszej przewodniczącej McAvan za wsparcie podczas tego długiego i skomplikowanego procesu negocjacji, jak i kontrsprawozdawcom, prezydencji, Komisji i przedstawicielom Europejskiej Służby Działań Zewnętrznych za zaangażowanie i pracę nad tym kluczowym z perspektywy polityki rozwojowej Unii i państw członkowskich dokumentem.
               

                  Jak już tu mówiono, głównym celem politycznym nowego konsensusu – który jest ściśle powiązany z programem działań na lata 2020-2030 i celami zrównoważonego rozwoju – jest walka z ubóstwem, dyskryminacją i nierównościami. W tym kontekście Parlament mocno zabiegał o uwzględnienie spójności polityk i efektywności w zakresie działań na rzecz rozwoju podejmowanych przez Unię i jej członków, a także przez innych darczyńców i organizacje. ODA ma kluczowe znaczenie dla polityki rozwojowej Unii. Dlatego osiągnięcie przez państwa członkowskie celu w wysokości 0,7 % dochodu narodowego brutto do 2030 roku jest ważnym zobowiązaniem.
               

                  Nowy konsensus odnosi się także do zwiększenia finansowania w polityce rozwojowej, w tym poprzez zwiększenie partnerstwa publiczno-prywatnego, oraz znaczenia sprawiedliwego i odpowiednio uregulowanego handlu. Związek między polityką rozwojową, migracją i bezpieczeństwem jest niezaprzeczalny, co mocno uświadamiają nam kryzysy spowodowane konfliktami i niestabilnością. Nowy konsensus będzie wskazywał kierunek rozwiązania problemu pierwotnych przyczyn migracji.
               

                  W dniu jutrzejszym zagłosujemy nad rezolucją w sprawie konsensusu. Gdy już zostanie zatwierdzona, również przewodniczący Tajani podpisze to wspólne oświadczenie podczas Europejskich Dni Rozwoju w przyszłym tygodniu. Jestem przekonany, że będzie to ważny sygnał ze strony Unii Europejskiej i państw członkowskich w zakresie podtrzymania międzynarodowych zobowiązań do likwidacji ubóstwa i osiągnięcia celów zrównoważonego rozwoju.
               

Linda McAvan,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, I want to join Bogdan Wenta in thanking Norbert Neuser, who cannot be here today, for the work he has done with colleagues to get the text and focus on why we need a new Consensus on Development.
We need one because we have to find a way for the EU to implement the sustainable development goals. We need one because we need a recommitment by the Member States today to tackle global poverty, and I think we need one most of all, today of all days, because we are hearing that Donald Trump will pull out of the Paris Agreement on climate change. That is a blow to sustainable development goals, a blow to what we want in Europe. So, today of all days, we should give a signal that Europe is prepared to step up and give the leadership we need, and that it will meet its global commitments to our collective future on this planet.
The important things for me and for my Group in this Consensus are that we recommit; that poverty eradication is the primary goal of European development policy; that we make the commitment again to reach our target of 0.7% aid; and, for the first time in the Consensus, that 0.2% of our collective GDP will focus on the poorest countries. We are hearing that Africa is losing out on aid. We have to recommit.
I know there are colleagues here, and colleagues I respect a lot, who are concerned about the emphasis placed by some governments on security and migration, and I know there is scepticism about whether or not countries will meet the 0.7%. I share some of those concerns and it is our job to hold governments to account and to make sure the consensus is implemented in the right way. But, above all, let us remember the other paragraphs in this text which talk about youth, unemployment, getting jobs and creating a future for the young people in developing countries. We need to send that signal today, and that is why I hope colleagues will support the Consensus.

Ελένη Θεοχάρους,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας ECR. – Kυρία Πρόεδρε, η αναθεώρηση της ευρωπαϊκής συναινετική σύμβασης του 2005 για την ανάπτυξη ήταν απόλυτη αναγκαιότητα, δεδομένου ότι πολλά άλλαξαν στον παγκόσμιο αναπτυξιακό χάρτη με την υιοθέτηση της Ατζέντας 2030 και των βιώσιμων αναπτυξιακών στόχων μπροστά στις νέες προκλήσεις που αντιμετωπίζει η ανθρωπότητα.
               

                  Η επίτευξη συμφωνίας είναι πάντοτε δύσκολη και οι συμβιβασμοί αναπόφευκτοι. Ευτυχώς, η νέα συναίνεση θέτει το πλαίσιο των κοινών αρχών και αξιών που πρέπει να εφαρμόζονται, τόσο από τους θεσμούς, όσο και από τα κράτη της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, για την κοινή αναπτυξιακή πολιτική της Ατζέντας 2030, διότι οι κίνδυνοι στους οποίους εκτίθενται οι φτωχοί πληθυσμοί από έλλειψη πόρων, τροφής, νερού, περίθαλψης, εκπαίδευσης και προστασίας είναι τεράστιοι και πρέπει να εξαλειφθούν.
               

                  Η ανάπτυξη και η δημοκρατική σταθερότητα, η προστασία των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων και η εξάλειψη της διαφθοράς είναι βασικοί παράγοντες για τη βελτίωση των συνθηκών διαβίωσης των φτωχών, για την αντιμετώπιση της ασυντόνιστης μετανάστευσης, για να δοθεί ελπίδα στους νέους και για να μη μείνει κανένας πολίτης πίσω, όπως είπε ο κύριος Επίτροπος.
               

Charles Goerens,
au nom du groupe ALDE. – Madame la Présidente, le consensus européen pour le développement, c'est comme les communiqués de presse de l'OTAN. Ne peuvent les comprendre que ceux qui les ont négociés.
               

                  La participation au trilogue sur le consensus a été très révélatrice de ce point de vue, et ce pour plusieurs raisons. Nous avons pu nous rendre compte, une fois de plus, des limites de la décision prise à l'unanimité. Ces limites sont dictées notamment par le moins-disant budgétaire d'un ou de plusieurs États membres. Pas étonnant donc que l'objectif de consacrer 0,7 % du produit intérieur brut à l'aide publique au développement soit devenu une arlésienne, à savoir l'événement toujours annoncé mais qui ne se produit jamais. Ne serait-il pas indiqué, dès lors, de changer de méthode, puisque cela ne fonctionne pas depuis bientôt 50 ans?
               

                  Pas une seule revendication essentielle du Parlement européen n'a reçu l'accord du Conseil, qui s'est montré intransigeant suite au chantage exercé par une minorité d'États membres, et notamment par un seul. Pourtant, le Parlement européen s'était prononcé à une très large majorité pour des engagements clairs et vérifiables, demandant aux États membres de lui rendre compte de leurs efforts en matière d'aide publique au développement.
               

                  Il n'en sera rien. Les quelques phrases sibyllines qui traitent de cette question dans ce document arrivent à peine à masquer la façon dont certains États membres méprisent le Parlement européen. Allez comprendre pourquoi tous nos États membres acceptent de s'exécuter devant le comité d'aide au développement de l'OCDE, d'informer les ambassadeurs du Japon, du Mexique, de la Nouvelle-Zélande, des États-Unis du contenu de leur politique et, en même temps, refusent d'en référer à notre commission du développement?
               

                  Les promesses concernant le 0,7 % ne semblent engager que ceux qui les reçoivent. Le consensus européen de développement consacre l'engagement de 0,7 % d'aide publique au développement, alors qu'en même temps plusieurs États membres ont annoncé des réductions substantielles de leur aide publique au développement avant la conférence d'Addis-Abeba. Faut-il, dès lors, croire ceux qui se prononcent pour le 0,7 % ou faut-il les croire quand ils annoncent vouloir aller nettement en deçà de 0,7 %? Avouez tout de même que nous sommes en présence d'un problème de crédibilité.
               

                  En outre, l'aide publique au développement revêt une dimension éminemment politique. Avec le Brexit, nous perdrons l'un des rares États membres qui y consacre 0,7 % de son PIB. Il ne suffit pas de nous gargariser à longueur de journée du fait que l'Union européenne soit le seul acteur mondial en matière de développement. Si nous voulons le rester après le départ du Royaume-Uni, nous devons laisser derrière nous cette mollesse qui accepte le laisser-faire et le laisser-aller des États membres en la matière.
               

                  Vous comprendrez donc que nous nous abstenions lors du vote sur le consensus et que nous votions notre résolution commune alternative.
               

Lola Sánchez Caldentey,
en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, son varios los aspectos del documento que ha salido de las negociaciones tripartitas que distan muchísimo de la posición votada por amplísima mayoría en esta Cámara el pasado mes de febrero.
               

                  El nuevo Consenso abre la puerta a utilizar la ayuda oficial al desarrollo para el control de flujos migratorios o, lo que es lo mismo, a externalizar el control de las fronteras europeas a terceros países, a países necesitados. En otras palabras, se condiciona la ayuda a que los países actúen como Estados tapón para que los migrantes forzados no lleguen a Europa, en vez de utilizarla para combatir las causas raíces que fuerzan a la gente a emigrar.
               

                  Este es solo un ejemplo donde se demuestra que se ha ignorado la posición del Parlamento durante las negociaciones. Otros, por ejemplo, son los relativos al objetivo del 0,7 %, la titulización de la ayuda o la cuestión de género.
               

                  Resumiendo: consideramos que se ha ignorado la posición del Parlamento; consideramos que el texto supone un retroceso enorme respecto al Consenso anterior y, por todo ello, presentaremos una Resolución alternativa que subraye todas estas posiciones.
               

Maria Heubuch,
im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Herzlichen Dank auch an unsere Kollegen Neuser und Wenta, die wirklich sehr viel Arbeit und Energie in diese Arbeit gesteckt haben.
               

                  Trotzdem muss ich sagen, für uns Grüne ist es ganz klar: Wir können diesen Konsens nicht mittragen. Zurzeit bestimmen die europäischen Innenminister unsere Außenpolitik. Sie machen aus der Entwicklungspolitik ein innenpolitisches Instrument. Die Kommission lässt die Mitgliedsstaaten gewähren, und der Auswärtige Dienst unterstützt sie hier sogar noch!
               

                  Es geht in erster Linie um die Eigeninteressen der EU, um mehr auf Fluchtabwehr, mehr Geld für Militär, mehr Flexibilität auch bei der regionalen Schwerpunktsetzung – dafür aber weniger für Armutsbekämpfung. Das findet sich eben in diesen Konsens wieder, und das können wir Grüne nicht mittragen. Für uns ist die Entwicklungspolitik ein Mittel, um eklatante Ungleichheit und Ungerechtigkeit auf dieser Welt zu entschärfen – ein Mittel der Armutsbekämpfung.
               

                  Es wurde gesagt: Das steht auch so im Lissabon-Vertrag, in Artikel 208. Dort steht eben nicht Migrationsmanagement und nicht Sicherheitspolitik. Die Verfechter des Konsenses haben es natürlich auch erwähnt, es steht im Text drin: Armutsbekämpfung. Ja, sicher, es steht auch drin. Aber wir dürfen nicht vergessen, Rat und Kommission sind Meisterinnen in der Rhetorik.
               

                  Gemeinsam mit ALDE, GUE/NGL und EFDD haben wir einen Entschließungsantrag eingereicht, der den Konsens ablehnt und auch begründet warum. Ich rufe alle auf, denen Entwicklungspolitik tatsächlich ein Anliegen ist, morgen für diesen Entschließungsantrag zu stimmen.
               

Raymond Finch,
on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Madam President, while this resolution talks about the laudable aim of reducing poverty worldwide, should the European Union not first look closer to home? For instance, in the UK between 2015 and 2016 there were 12.8 million people regarded as being in poverty, and the UK is one of the richest nations. When we come to the poorer nations in your Union, Commissioner, the figures are much worse. In 2015, 118.7 million – almost 25% of your population – were at risk from poverty. With the nations in real trouble, you see Bulgaria at 41%, Romania at 37%, and Greece at over 35%. Should you really be taking money from taxpayers in your own nation states, many of whom are already struggling with dire need, to further your own globalist ambitions?
Why do you not, instead of chaining poor nations to our wallets with aid dependency, liberalise trade with poorer nations and give them a chance to compete on a level playing field instead of punishing them with your customs union?

(Mr Finch declined to take a blue-card question from Ms Grapini)


Olaf Stuger,
namens de ENF-Fractie. – Vandaag valt in de Nederlandse pers te lezen dat de EU meer grip wil krijgen. Dat is natuurlijk een paniekreactie op de recente gebeurtenissen. Vandaag lezen we dat de Verenigde Staten zich terugtrekken uit het klimaatakkoord. Dat klimaatverdrag was eigenlijk het enige succes van de EU de afgelopen jaren. Daarnaast rent het Verenigd Koninkrijk hard naar de uitgang, terwijl Hongarije en Polen hun eigen koers varen en zich niets aantrekken van de regeldrift van de EU, zeer terecht trouwens. In de praktijk zal die grip voornamelijk een grip zijn op de portemonnee van de Nederlandse belastingbetaler. Want deze EU is erop uit om vat te krijgen op de honderden miljarden in de Nederlandse pensioenpotten, op het overige Nederlandse belastinggeld en op de Nederlandse wetgeving. Ik smeek u dus, Voorzitter, om dit kansloos mislukte project te stoppen.
               

José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra (PPE). – Señora presidenta, creo que tenemos que felicitarnos por esta declaración tripartita sobre este nuevo Consenso en materia de Desarrollo en el mundo, y me parece que el título de la comunicación es un título muy sugestivo: ‘Nuestro mundo, nuestra dignidad, nuestro futuro’.
               

                  Creo que a la vista de las cifras —la Unión Europea es el principal donante de ayuda al desarrollo, el principal donante de ayuda humanitaria—, nadie puede decir que nosotros nos configuramos como una Europa egoísta, aunque también es cierto, señor comisario, que cada euro que se invierte fuera de nuestras fronteras es un euro que se invierte también en Europa.
               

                  A mí me parece que este marco es un marco ciertamente adecuado que tiene que desarrollarse después en el tiempo y que sitúa la problemática, tanto en la dimensión interna Unión Europea-Estados miembros como en la dimensión externa en el ámbito de los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible de las Naciones Unidas. Distingue muy bien entre el corto y el largo plazo.
               

                  Y en este contexto, señor comisario, me gustaría trasladarle una preocupación por la situación de los países de renta media. Espero, señor comisario, que, como se ha anunciado en su Comunicación, se puedan encontrar, aparte del criterio de renta per cápita, otros criterios, porque en estos países hay también grandes bolsas de pobreza.
               

PRZEWODNICTWO: BOGUSŁAW LIBERADZKI


Wiceprzewodniczący


Elena Valenciano (S&D). – Señor presidente, la política de desarrollo puede desaparecer de la agenda internacional. No sería algo imposible, a la vista de lo que acaba de suceder con la decisión del presidente Trump y su apuesta por romper los acuerdos sobre el cambio climático. Podría desaparecer, y lo cierto es que, probablemente, sigue siendo más necesaria que nunca.
                  

                     Es, a lo mejor, la última de las posibilidades de modificar de verdad el orden de las cosas, que hace que la mitad de la humanidad viva en una situación de extrema pobreza. Este es un consenso. Desde luego, no es el consenso que hubiera hecho el Grupo socialista. Está muy lejos de lo que nosotros hubiéramos querido, pero este es el consenso que se ha podido construir teniendo en cuenta, además, el Consejo que en este momento tenemos, que no es un Consejo fácil para esta política.
                  

                     Así que, haciendo de la necesidad virtud, nuestro Grupo va a apoyar este consenso. Creemos que estamos en el momento de definición clave entre aquellos que quieren acabar con la política de desarrollo y aquellos que quieren convertir la política de desarrollo en cualquier cosa menos en política de desarrollo. Y por eso mi Grupo apoyará este consenso, aunque no sea el consenso que hubiera deseado.
                  

Joachim Zeller (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Seit die erste Erklärung zum Europäischen Konsens zur Entwicklungspolitik unterzeichnet wurde, sind mehr als zehn Jahre vergangen. In dieser Dekade hat sich die Welt stark verändert. Konfliktherde unmittelbar vor der europäischen Haustür haben eher zugenommen, als dass sie weniger geworden sind. Viele Millionen Menschen sind durch Kriege, Bürgerkriege oder Naturkatastrophen zum Verlassen ihrer Heimat gezwungen worden, und der Terrorismus bedroht weltweit das friedliche Zusammenleben. Die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit steht vor vielen neuen Herausforderungen.
                  

                     Das bedeutet, dass die Zusammenarbeit der Geberstaaten untereinander stärker vernetzt werden muss. Es bedeutet aber auch, dass neue Formen der Zusammenarbeit mit den sich entwickelnden Staaten gefunden werden müssen – z.B. auch auf dem Gebiet der Sicherheit, denn auch Armutsbekämpfung braucht Sicherheit. Der neue Europäische Konsens muss dafür den Rahmen schaffen. Das Europäische Parlament als Mitunterzeichner muss uneingeschränkt in die Umsetzung der Entwicklungsziele eingebunden werden. Vielen Dank.
                  

Enrique Guerrero Salom (S&D). – Señor presidente, han pasado muchas cosas en el mundo desde que hace más de una década aprobáramos el vigente Consenso Europeo sobre Desarrollo. Hemos cambiado los objetivos de desarrollo: los hemos hecho más globales y más ambiciosos. Hemos constatado crisis humanitarias de larga duración y conflictos asociados al cambio climático. Hemos comprobado que nos faltan recursos para financiar la cooperación al desarrollo.
                  

                     Es por tanto tiempo de revisar ese consenso y de dar un salto adelante con un consenso nuevo. En ese consenso nuevo tenemos que aplicar políticas diarias que van más allá del consenso para preservar que la política de desarrollo se dirija a luchar contra la pobreza, para asegurar que alcanzamos el 0,7 % y para seguir trabajando por que ninguna condicionalidad de carácter securitario pueda poner en riesgo la ayuda a aquellos países que lo necesitan, a aquellas poblaciones que están en situación de dependencia.
                  

Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D). – Mr President, we must ensure that eradicating poverty and fighting inequality remain at the heart of EU development policy, including in the new Consensus. The Member States must put every effort into the successful implementation of Agenda 2020 and the sustainable development goals.
I welcome the fact that commitments on agriculture are more detailed than in the previous Consensus and include support for smallholder farmers and pastoralists, recognising the role they play in combating hunger and malnutrition. I would also like to congratulate the negotiators for including commitments to promote decent work, corporate social responsibility and the importance of social and environmental standards for European investment in developing countries.
Last but not least, the withdrawal of the United States from the COP 21 Paris Agreement will jeopardise the influence and power of the USA in the world, and unfortunately in the long term it will affect the whole of mankind in a negative way.

Cécile Kashetu Kyenge (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la revisione del consenso europeo in materia di sviluppo ci offre una grande opportunità, quella di definire una posizione comune e coerente rispetto ad alcuni cambiamenti globali che si sono manifestati a partire dal 2005 sulla scena mondiale, sociale, economica e ambientale.
                  

                     Le sfide cui ci troviamo di fronte sono molteplici. Dobbiamo salvaguardare i valori e gli obiettivi della politica per lo sviluppo attraverso l'obiettivo primario della lotta alla povertà e, nel lungo termine, della sua eliminazione. Dobbiamo rispondere con lungimiranza ai cambiamenti in corso, assicurando la coerenza delle politiche in materia di pace e sicurezza, migrazione, commercio, ambiente e sviluppo e, infine, dobbiamo anticipare le tendenze che potrebbero emergere nei prossimi quindici anni.
                  

                     Ecco, se il quadro di riferimento sarà ambizioso, se prevarrà la logica della difesa dei diritti umani, della democrazia e della buona governance, se rafforzeremo il nostro ruolo della pace e della giustizia globale, potremo finalmente contribuire allo sviluppo sostenibile di tutte le aree del pianeta.
                  

Patrizia Toia (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, voglio ripartire da dove ha concluso l'onorevole Cécile Kyenge, con il cui intervento sono totalmente d'accordo, per dire che condivido questo documento, condivido questo approccio nuovo al consenso e trovo un po' ingiuste, se devo dire, un po' preconcette alcune critiche che qui oggi ho sentito. Forse tutti noi volevamo qualcosa di più e di meglio, ma questo è il punto a cui siamo arrivati e io non vorrei svilirlo, vorrei invece valorizzarlo.
                  

                     Viene ribadito che l'obiettivo primario è quello della lotta alla povertà. Viene ribadito che bisogna lavorare sullo sviluppo in tutte le sue dimensioni e implicazioni con la coerenza rispetto alle politiche commerciali, con il tema di tutti gli altri aspetti, compreso quello delle migrazioni. Io non credo che dobbiamo avere paura di riconoscere che se noi creeremo lotta alla povertà avremo successo, se creeremo sviluppo con tutta l'attenzione alle autorità locali, alle ONG, a tutti i processi che nascono dal basso, noi daremo anche un contributo per, come dire, rendere queste migrazioni, che oggi sono una tragedia prima di tutto per chi ne è vittima, non per i paesi d'arrivo, ma per chi ne è vittima, per renderle fenomeni più naturali che noi accetteremo e devo dire più umani per gli stessi protagonisti.
                  

                     Io non ho paura di vedere anche queste implicazioni. L'importante è che noi sappiamo qual è la priorità primaria di questo piano, di questo metodo del nuovo consenso, ma dobbiamo essere anche consapevoli, se non vogliamo vivere sulla Luna, ma vivere in questo secolo, in questa Europa con questa Africa e questo Mediterraneo, di quali sono anche le implicazioni, che dobbiamo governare e non subire. Governare mettendo i diritti umani e lo sviluppo delle popolazioni al primo punto.
                  

(L'oratrice accetta di rispondere a una domanda ‘cartellino blu’ (articolo 162, paragrafo 8, del regolamento)).


Charles Goerens (ALDE),
question ‘carton bleu’
                        . – Monsieur le Président, je voudrais demander à Madame Toia quel serait son jugement si elle avait assisté à cette négociation où nous avons, à juste titre, appuyé les ambitions de la Commission, du Conseil et du Parlement européen en la matière. En effet, chaque fois qu'il s'est agi de faire preuve de bonne volonté pour suivre les engagements, pour voir dans quelle mesure ils seront réalisés, pour assurer le contrôle parlementaire en la matière, nous avons toujours eu une fin de non-recevoir. Il ne s'agit pas là de dénigrer les finalités du développement mais de dénoncer le comportement insupportable d'un ou de plusieurs États au niveau du Conseil.
                  

                     Avec tout le respect que je dois à nos deux corapporteurs, je voudrais vous dire que Mme Linda McAvan et moi-même nous sommes heurtés à un mur: c'est lamentable que l'Union européenne procède de cette façon.
                  

Patrizia Toia (S&D),
Risposta a una domanda ‘cartellino blu’
                        . – Posso solo dire al collega che, avendo seguito molto i negoziati, so quanto sia doloroso a volte dovere accettare una durezza, un muro da parte di alcuni Stati membri o dell'intero Consiglio. Anch'io alcune volte ho dovuto soggiacere a certe prese di posizione molto dure di alcuni Stati membri. Se questo è il risultato possibile, io voglio prenderlo per un buon risultato, sapendo che poteva essere migliore.
                  

                     Ma non considero la partita chiusa, caro collega, e per quanto riguarda la posizione del Parlamento, il controllo del Parlamento, per quanto riguarda altri punti non tutto viene perso con la fine del negoziato, perché noi dovremo dare attuazione a tutto questo e potremo recuperare, uniti non separati, uniti tutti come forze parlamentari, potremo recuperare quello che abbiamo perso nel negoziato.
                  

                     Non è una partita definitiva, c'è sempre un secondo tempo e lì lavoreremo per migliorare ciò che non abbiamo ottenuto nel primo tempo.
                  

Paulo Rangel (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, gostaria de dizer o seguinte. O primeiro ponto fundamental é que, para este consenso sobre o desenvolvimento, é essencial que os países não entrem numa lógica puramente nacionalista e, infelizmente, aquilo que nós vemos é que os Estados Unidos ainda hoje deram um sinal a propósito do desenvolvimento sustentável de estarem apenas focados na sua agenda nacional.
                  

                     Ora nós, nações mais desenvolvidas e com mais capacidade económica, temos de estar abertos ao desenvolvimento e à cooperação com os Estados em que grande parte da população vive em grande pobreza. Erradicar a pobreza, criar classes médias nesses Estados é a nossa responsabilidade, não apenas como seres humanos de corpo inteiro, mas também como atores políticos, que podem, com isso, resolver muitos dos problemas, que não são apenas os dessas populações, são também os nossos.
                  

                     Se nós formos capazes de os ajudar, estamos a ajudar-nos a nós mesmos e é isso que este consenso que aqui conseguimos vai, naturalmente, potenciar.
                  

Zgłoszenia z sali


Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, di fronte alla crescente incertezza della politica mondiale, la comunicazione adottata dalla Commissione sul nuovo consenso europeo in materia di sviluppo definisce un quadro d'azione per rispondere alle attuali sfide nelle quali l'Unione dovrà svolgere un ruolo di primo piano.
                  

                     La politica di cooperazione europea dovrà puntare a favorire la crescita dei paesi in via di sviluppo sul piano economico, sociale e ambientale, con l'obiettivo primo di eliminare la povertà e contribuire a sostenere la democrazia, lo Stato di diritto e i diritti umani.
                  

                     È fondamentale agire tenendo presenti gli obiettivi dell'agenda 2030 per lo sviluppo sostenibile, che rappresenta la risposta della comunità internazionale alle sfide e alle tendenze globali in materia di sviluppo sostenibile. Il perseguimento degli obiettivi di sviluppo sostenibile dovrà avvenire in stretto coordinamento con l'accordo di Parigi sui cambiamenti climatici e altri impegni internazionali, al di là delle decisioni adottate dal nuovo Presidente americano.
                  

João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, o dito novo consenso da União Europeia sobre o desenvolvimento é bem revelador dos limites, das contradições e das perversidades das políticas levadas a cabo neste domínio nos últimos anos.
                  

                     Estamos perante uma visão geral que, em lugar de respeitar especificidades e legítimas opções soberanas dos países em desenvolvimento, pretende impor modelos de organização da sociedade e da economia. É, assim, com a defesa do papel do sector privado, o preconceito contra a propriedade e a gestão públicas ou com a imposição das parcerias público-privado, apenas para dar alguns exemplos. Modelos que tendem a perpetuar a dependência, a subordinação e o atraso.
                  

                     É a tentativa de impor a subordinação aos interesses geopolíticos das potências da União Europeia, às suas políticas ditas de segurança e migratórias, de indisfarçável recorte xenófobo e neocolonial.
                  

                     São as linhas de crédito em detrimento da genuína ajuda ao desenvolvimento. É o empurrar para mais dívida, em vez do reconhecimento do caráter injusto e ilegítimo da dívida, que exige o seu cancelamento.
                  

                     Um novo consenso que aponta, todavia, para um velho, muito velho caminho.
                  

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, στη δεκαετία του 1980, οι χώρες της Δύσης υιοθέτησαν την περίφημη ‘Συναίνεση της Ουάσινγκτον’, δηλαδή κανόνες υπό τους οποίους θα γινόταν η διεθνής και εσωτερική οικονομική πολιτική. Η Συναίνεση της Ουάσιγκτον στηριζόταν στην τραπεζοκρατία, στην απελευθέρωση των αγορών, στις μετεγκαταστάσεις επιχειρήσεων, στην παγκοσμιοποίηση, στις ιδιωτικοποιήσεις, στην οικονομία-καζίνο και στη λιτότητα. Η Συναίνεση της Ουάσιγκτον οδήγησε σε στρατιές φτωχών και ανέργων, διέλυσε τις κοινωνίες και διόγκωσε το ιδιωτικό και δημόσιο χρέος.
                  

                     Η νέα Ευρωπαϊκή Συναίνεση την οποία εδώ συζητούμε στηρίζεται και αυτή στις αποτυχημένες αρχές της Συναίνεσης της Ουάσιγκτον που διόγκωσε το παγκόσμιο χρέος. Αντί λοιπόν να αλλάξει η στρατηγική, επιμένετε στη συνέχιση της φτώχειας και της ανεργίας, η οποία δεν μπορεί να σταματήσει εάν δεν προχωρήσουμε στη διαγραφή του χρέους των αναπτυσσόμενων χωρών και στη διαγραφή του χρέους των χωρών του Ευρωπαϊκού Νότου, στην εγκατάλειψη της λιτότητας και στη βίαιη δημοσιονομική προσαρμογή.
                  

Ilhan Kyuchyuk (ALDE). – Mr President, the new European Consensus on Development is aimed at responding to current global trends and the challenges of globalisation. It has aligned the development policy of the EU and its Member States with the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Consensus has achieved one of the top priorities of EU foreign policy, namely increased coordination and coherence between the EU and its Member States.
Furthermore, in order to achieve more effective results and make a greater impact, it proposes a tailored and differentiated approach when working with partners to promote joint programming and implementation, with the full involvement of civil society and other actors. It highlights the importance of development effectiveness, transparency, mutual accountability, and ownership by all partners involved. Therefore, I fully support the new Consensus because it is an opportunity to make the EU even stronger and more prepared to tackle today's global challenges and promote sustainable development. Finally, let us be more ambitious.

Julie Ward (S&D). – Mr President, the European Union has been a global leader in sustainable development and it is right for Parliament, the Commission and the Council to now formulate a new position for this changing world. We need to make sure we have policy coherence so that our development cooperation, our trade and our economic policies all work together and, most importantly, align with international human rights norms. Coherence also requires taking into account the contribution of culture as a pillar of sustainable economic, social and human development and of peace and resilience building.
It is tragic to see my country, the UK, wasting its time with the chaos of Brexit while the EU continues to work towards a more prosperous sustainable future for all of us. The UK must continue its participation in EU development policy regardless of Brexit, and I hope that a Labour Government in Westminster will do just that.

Ελευθέριος Συναδινός (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η νέα ευρωπαϊκή κοινή αντίληψη για την παγκόσμια βιώσιμη ανάπτυξη προς εξάλειψη της φτώχειας, ως χρηματοδοτικό μέσο και εργαλειοθήκη δεν επιτυγχάνει τους στόχους που έχουν τεθεί. Οφείλουμε να σεβόμαστε ορισμένες βασικές αρχές, ιδιαίτερα όταν θέλουμε να ονομαζόμαστε εταίροι. Για παράδειγμα, η ανάπτυξη είναι αποδεκτή μόνο όταν δεν συντελείται εις βάρος άλλων ομότιμων μελών, όπως επίσης δεν μπορεί να πραγματοποιείται με μία ατζέντα η οποία επιβάλλεται καταχρηστικά και εκβιαστικά, έμμεσα ή άμεσα.
                  

                     Όσον αφορά τις αναπτυσσόμενες χώρες, αυτές που αναλαμβάνουν την κυριότητα των βιώσιμων αναπτυξιακών προτεραιοτήτων πρέπει να δεσμεύονται ως προς τα αποτελέσματα στο πλαίσιο της συναντίληψης, με ό,τι αυτό συνεπάγεται για τις διμερείς εταιρικές σχέσεις, εάν αυτός ο αμοιβαίος σεβασμός διαταραχθεί. Στόχος δεν είναι μια ανάπτυξη στηριζόμενη στη διάδοση της φτώχειας και της εξαθλίωσης, αλλά η στέρεη, βιώσιμη ανάπτυξη μεταξύ ίσων συναινούντων εταίρων, προς όφελος των πολιτών και όλων των εμπλεκομένων μερών.
                  

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule prim-ministru, domnule comisar, sunt total de acord, de la bun început spun, cu noul consens european privind dezvoltarea și mi-ați dat speranță domnule prim-ministru, m-am întors recent din țara dumneavoastră și am văzut ce ați putut să faceți acolo.
                  

                     Cred că ceea ce ați spus, primul scop, eradicarea sărăciei, sigur, trebuie să ajungă de la plan la concret. Ați spus-o și dumneavoastră, că trebuie să găsim cheia prin care conectăm planurile pe care noi le facem cu realitatea. Regret că anumiți colegi aici au pus problema absolut în mod extremist și o spun foarte deschis. Sărăcia trebuie eradicată, viața oamenilor este cel mai important lucru, avem copii în sărăcie, nu are importanță unde locuiesc acești copii, trebuie să vedem cum facem să nu mai fie disparități regionale, diferențe atât de mari între viața oamenilor dintr-o țară în alta sau chiar în cadrul aceleiași țări între rural și urban. Eu doresc succes Consiliului și Comisiei, și noi, Parlamentul European, să ținem cont că este important și nimic nu poate fi mai important decât viața oamenilor și creșterea nivelului de trai a tuturor celor care trăiesc pe pământ.
                  

(Koniec pytań zgłoszeń z sali)


Neven Mimica,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, today's intense debate underscores the political significance of the text that we have before us. The European Union was instrumental in shaping the global 2030 Agenda, which is consistent with our vision and has now become the world's blueprint for global sustainable development. The world is looking to us to live up to this role and lead the global implementation efforts by taking full account of the sustainable development goals in the European policy framework and in our priorities.
We should not shy away from this responsibility. Development policy, in the form of this new Consensus, will make a central contribution in this direction. The Commission will give the highest priority to this effort and we remain committed to working closely together with Parliament and our Member States as we move forward. Together we can achieve more and spur action that can change lives across the world for the better, helping to end poverty in our generation.
Please believe me that, without this Consensus, eradicating poverty, reaching our official development assistance (ODA) commitments, effectively tackling the root causes of migration, and ensuring the leading global role of the European Union in the implementation of the sustainable development goals will be much, much more difficult to achieve, if they are possible at all.
In conclusion, let me thank Parliament once again, and in particular the co-rapporteurs, for your contribution to this important joint endeavour.

Matti Maasikas,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, as Commissioner Mimica – and also Mr Goerens – highlighted very well, the challenges of reaching consensus among all the Member States are huge. I can assure you that all the amendments negotiated by the Maltese Presidency are factual and firmly in line with the Treaties.
Ms Sánchez Caldentey and Ms Heubuch raised the issue of the security sector. Firstly, as Ms McAvan so eloquently underlined, poverty eradication remains the primary objective of the new Consensus. At the same time, the security sector, subject to democratic governance and accountability, is – as we all know – essential to achieving peaceful and inclusive societies. Therefore I find the wording in the relevant paragraph a good compromise that opens new ways to include and firmly embed security in the overall sustainable development framework.
The debate today shows how important the new Consensus is for the future of our development policy. It paves the way for common implementation with all development partners over the years to come. While the negotiation process that is now behind us proved to be demanding in terms of identifying the main political priorities and the most efficient tools, and setting clear responsibilities, implementation will not be easy either. It will require a shared agenda and a joint effort from all of us, just as all three EU institutions have been able to cooperate while negotiating on the Consensus. I can assure you that the Council will take its share of responsibility for the implementation of the Consensus and I look forward to cooperating with Parliament in this important endeavour.

Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.
                  

                     Głosowanie odbędzie się w czwartek 1 czerwca 2017 r..
                  
14.   Resilience as a strategic priority of the EU external action (debate)

Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia jest debata nad:
               






—



                        pytaniem wymagającym odpowiedzi ustnej skierowanym do Rady przez Lindę McAvan w imieniu Komisji Rozwoju w sprawie odporności jako priorytetu strategicznego działań zewnętrznych UE ((O-000032/2017 - B8-0312/2017),
                     










—



                        pytaniem wymagającym odpowiedzi ustnej skierowanym do Komisji przez Lindę McAvan w imieniu Komisji Rozwoju w sprawie odporności jako priorytetu strategicznego działań zewnętrznych UE (O-000033/2017 - B8-0313/2017) oraz
                     










—



                        pytaniem wymagającym odpowiedzi ustnej skierowanym do wiceprzewodniczącej Komisji/wysokiej przedstawiciel Unii do spraw zagranicznych i polityki bezpieczeństwa przez Lindę McAvan w imieniu Komisji Rozwoju w sprawie odporności jako priorytetu strategicznego działań zewnętrznych UE (O-000034/2017 - B8-0314/2017)).
                     





Enrique Guerrero Salom,
autor. – Señor presidente, señora comisaria, señor representante del Consejo, la Unión Europea tiene ya en su balance un amplio catálogo de iniciativas en favor de la provisión de resiliencia en diversas partes del mundo: al principio de esta década reaccionando ante las crisis alimentarias y, poco después, aprobando un Plan de acción para la resiliencia, dirigido a aquellos países con crisis de carácter recurrente para el periodo 2013-2020.
               

                  El Consejo, el Parlamento y la Comisión hemos trabajado conjuntamente en la preparación de reuniones, resoluciones y decisiones y en la asunción de compromisos en distintas cumbres mundiales: empezando por la Cumbre de Sendai, relativa a la prevención de riesgos en desastres naturales; seguida por la Cumbre de Nueva York, cambiando la dimensión y la ambición de los objetivos de desarrollo; llamando la atención en la Cumbre de Adís Abeba sobre la falta de financiación al desarrollo; apoyando en la Cumbre de Estambul un compromiso mayor en la respuesta a las crisis humanitarias que asolan el mundo, y, finalmente, en París, donde un gran presidente responsable dio un salto para la prevención de riesgos de la humanidad —porque, con el cambio climático, no solamente arriesgamos cómo será nuestro mundo, sino incluso si existirá nuestro mundo—. Y, ahora, un pequeño presidente ha dado un salto atrás que pone en riesgo la resiliencia en el conjunto del mundo.
               

                  Con esta Resolución expresamos nuestra satisfacción por el reconocimiento de la importancia de la resiliencia en el marco de la estrategia global, como un elemento prioritario para la acción exterior de la Unión. Reafirmamos la necesidad de que los Estados miembros de la Unión cumplan sus compromisos en materia de ayuda al desarrollo, en especial alcanzando el 0,7 % de ese producto interior bruto.
               

                  Destacamos el carácter multisectorial de la resiliencia, que afecta, desde luego, a la dimensión económica, a la dimensión medioambiental, a la dimensión social, a la dimensión política y a la dimensión de la seguridad, pero cuyo centro y cuyo foco es el ser humano en medio de todos estos caracteres muy multidimensionales.
               

                  Instamos a la Comisión a que incorpore la resiliencia en su diálogo político con otros actores mundiales y subrayamos la posición especial de la ayuda humanitaria, que debe prestarse respetando al máximo los principios de humanidad, neutralidad, imparcialidad, independencia y protección de los derechos humanos. El respeto de estos principios es una condición esencial para poder exigir luego el acceso a las poblaciones necesitadas y para garantizar la protección de los agentes humanitarios.
               

                  Destacamos la importancia de la reducción del riesgo de desastres y pedimos a la Unión que garantice que la nueva Comunicación, que aparecerá en los próximos días, esté en consonancia con los compromisos asumidos en el Marco de Sendai y con el Plan de acción de desarrollo de este Marco.
               

                  Pedimos también que se formulen estrategias inclusivas de reducción del riesgo de desastres locales y nacionales. Pedimos que se ponga especial énfasis en la protección de los grupos más vulnerables, las poblaciones más pobres, las minorías, las familias, las mujeres, los niños, los migrantes, las personas afectadas por el sida, las personas LGTB, las personas con discapacidad.
               

                  Pedimos una programación con perspectiva de género, y destacamos también la necesidad de ampliar la Convención sobre el Estatuto de los Refugiados y la Convención de Kampala para proteger a las personas desplazadas. Subrayamos que la resiliencia se basa en el respeto de los derechos humanos, en la fuerza de la democracia, del Estado de Derecho, de la buena gobernanza y en la confianza en las instituciones. Todo ello constituyen objetivos que deben promoverse en aplicación de la Estrategia Global de la Unión Europea, y pedimos que abarque no solamente el marco territorial más cercano a nosotros, donde se desarrollan las crisis, cuyos efectos nos llegan más cerca, sino también en el marco geográfico global. Queremos atender a todas partes del mundo, con especial atención a los países más frágiles.
               

                  Y, por último, entendemos que proveer de educación a los niños en situación de crisis humanitaria no es solamente darles un derecho que les pertenece, sino prevenir mayores conflictos y restablecer la paz allí donde haya sido definitivamente rota.
               

Matti Maasikas,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, honourable Members, the global strategy for the European Union's foreign and security policy identified state and societal resilience as one of the five priorities of the Union's external action, with enhanced attention to the EU's near and broader neighbourhood. The Foreign Affairs Council in October 2016 called for the five priorities to be swiftly translated into concrete policy initiatives and action. Therefore, the Council very much looks forward to receiving the upcoming joint communication by the Commission and the High Representative on the strategic approach to resilience in the EU's external actions.
The Council stands ready to bring forward the discussions on this topic. The EU acknowledges the need to move away from crisis containment to a more structural, long-term and non-linear approach to vulnerabilities, with an emphasis on prevention and stabilisation. Indeed, we need an integrated approach to conflicts and crises, for thus we contribute to enhancing the EU's own resilience and that of our citizens.
The nexus between security and development and between the internal and external dimensions will be at the core of the new approach, with full respect for the EU's commitment to the observance of fundamental human rights and the rule of law.
I look forward to hearing the debate today.

Věra Jourová,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I would like to thank the honourable Members for this opportunity to continue the conversation on our common work on our global strategy. The strategy does not belong only to the Commission or the Council. It is a strategy for the whole European Union, for all our institutions, for all Member States and, most importantly, for all our citizens. This joint communication on resilience is no exception.
As you know, a wide consolidation process and a fruitful dialogue with Parliament preceded the writing of the communication. It should be adopted at the beginning of June. In the second half of the month, High Representative Mogherini will present a report on the global strategy's first year of implementation. The timing is no coincidence. When the work towards the strategy began, we decided that it should be not simply a security strategy but something much broader. The global strategy recognises that there is no security without resilience, human development, human rights and democracy for all, in Europe and beyond.
Since then, much of the media's attention has focused on the defence part of the social strategy's implementation. With this joint communication, we want to stress that our work on resilience is just as important and is also moving fast. We have, of course, not started from scratch. The joint communication builds on the experience gained since the 2012 Commission communication, the 2015 review of the European Neighbourhood Policy and the EU work on resilience on the ground. Today's EU resilience policies are supported by evidence of good practice from the Sahel and the Horn of Africa. Lessons learned will be set out in more detail in an accompanying staff working document. The joint communication will also ensure continuity with the 2013-2020 Action Plan for Resilience in Crisis-Prone Countries, which will continue to be implemented.
When we evaluate the implementation of the Action Plan, we can see that progress has been especially positive in some thematic areas such as food and nutrition security and sustainable agriculture, or in humanitarian programmes for a protracted crisis. We also see that significant changes are underway in other areas, such as urban resilience, predictable and flexible financing and social protection. At the same time, the old way of doing things is not enough. On the one hand, the challenges we face have evolved in nature and in scope. They require a stronger and more coordinated response from us. On the other hand, we finally understand that better coordination within the European Union and with our partners can create new opportunities for our citizens and our friends.
Let me go through some of the new ideas that shape the joint communication. Firstly, this is part of a global effort to improve the impact of our policies on sustainable development and resilience. The EU Consensus on Development also captures this idea and is key in this regard. With the joint communication we want to put at the core of our policies the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the 2015 Paris Agreement, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the commitments to action made at the World Humanitarian Summit last year.
The question now is how we secure progress towards these commitments in the face of a more fluid landscape of global challenges and risks. Strengthening resilience is part of the strategic response to this challenge. It helps to promote a way of working that moves us away from crisis containment to a more structural, long-term approach to vulnerabilities with an emphasis on prevention. Secondly, the joint communication aims at improving cooperation among all players inside our Union. This includes all institutions, the Member States and all political, development and humanitarian actors. For instance the joint communication will stress the need to streamline the current multiplicity of overlapping risk-assessment processes. Such a streamlined assessment would integrate, in a more systematic and dynamic way, information from our diplomatic network and from humanitarian and development actors, as well as the specialised knowledge about the external environment held by the EU's internal policies, DGs and agencies. With the global strategy, we have agreed on principles and objectives that we all share. We can now work to join forces towards pursuing these objectives as a true union.
Thirdly, in a world where power is much more diffused, we need to engage well beyond state actors. Resilience has to be addressed at multiple levels – not only at government level but also inside societies and communities. Local government and civil society are often the basis on which resilience can take root and grow at community level. We all know that, in every society, women are key factors of resilience as an engine for development, as problem solvers and as peacemakers. Nowhere is this truer than in fragile or conflict-riven societies. The communication too will fully recognise this.
When we talk about the resilience of states and societies, we know that the two must go hand in hand, so we will put more emphasis, not less, on engaging these non-state actors, including the private sector, as we are already doing with the European External Investment Plan.
Finally, our world is much more connected than it has ever been. Clearly our work begins in the European Union's vicinity. This is not surprising, given the special political commitments of the accession process and the European Neighbourhood Policy, but we also know that instability in our neighbourhoods can easily spill out. The only way truly to strengthen our immediate region is to look further and think globally. We believe this joint communication will help us to be more effective in our action on resilience, to the benefit of our partners and also in the interest of investing taxpayers' money more effectively.
So we really look forward to Parliament's engagement towards stronger EU action for a safer Europe in a more stable, prosperous and democratic world.

Joachim Zeller,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Ich begrüße sehr die für Juni angekündigte gemeinsame Erklärung des Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienstes und der Kommission zur Resilienz als einer strategischen Priorität des auswärtigen Handelns der Europäischen Union.
               

                  Die Erklärung kann die Grundlage dafür bieten, dass die diplomatischen Bemühungen, die Außenpolitik und die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit künftig gemeinsam an der Umsetzung von Zielen der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit wirken werden, um ihnen Nachhaltigkeit zu verleihen. Darüber hinaus können auf dieser Plattform unterschiedliche Politikfelder wie z. B. die humanitäre Hilfe, die Katastrophenvorsorge, der Klimaschutz und Entwicklungsmaßnahmen besser verknüpft und Innen- und Außenpolitik besser aufeinander abgestimmt werden.
               

                  Die Diskussion mit den Partnerländern – insbesondere des Cotonou-Abkommens – über eine Weiterführung der Zusammenarbeit über das Jahr 2020, das Ende des Cotonou-Abkommens, hinaus kann neue Impulse und Inhalte bekommen, und die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit kann so auf ein robustes Fundament gestellt werden.
               

                  Die Vorschläge des Europäischen Parlaments für diesen Prozess sind in dem Entschließungsantrag formuliert worden, und das Europäische Parlament ist hier zur weiteren Zusammenarbeit bereit.
               

Cécile Kashetu Kyenge,
a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, se vogliamo davvero che la resilienza diventi una priorità strategica dell'azione esterna dell'Unione europea, allora dobbiamo cogliere appieno il suo potenziale, quello di contribuire, nel lungo termine, alla promozione di uno sviluppo sostenibile non solo affrontando le conseguenze delle crisi sempre più ricorrenti, ma anche risalendo alle loro cause profonde.
               

                  Quello che chiediamo alla Commissione e al Consiglio è di conservare la natura multidimensionale della resilienza e dotarla di risorse finanziarie sufficienti. È essenziale che le azioni dell'Unione sulla resilienza vengano programmate di concerto tra assistenza umanitaria e assistenza allo sviluppo, anche al fine di garantire la massima complementarietà tra le azioni e fare in modo che gli interventi a breve termine pongano le basi per quelli a medio e lungo termine.
               

                  Nella prossima comunicazione, la Commissione dovrà garantire che resilienza e stabilità portino al rispetto dei diritti umani, al rafforzamento della democrazia, dello Stato di diritto e della buona governance, nonché alla promozione di servizi pubblici essenziali quali l'istruzione, la salute, l'acqua potabile e i servizi igienico-sanitari volti al miglioramento della capacità di recupero.
               

                  È importante che in questo processo ci sia il pieno coinvolgimento delle popolazioni interessate e della società civile, anche con uno sguardo particolare alla sicurezza alimentare, con un'attenzione particolare al ruolo delle donne, a un maggiore riconoscimento del loro ruolo e una migliore tutela dei loro diritti.
               

Ελένη Θεοχάρους,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας ECR. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, εκατομμύρια άνθρωποι ζουν σε τρομακτικές συνθήκες, τόσο στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, όσο και στον υπόλοιπο κόσμο, όπου οι πλείστοι κίνδυνοι είναι ανθρωπογενείς. Η δημιουργία κοινωνιών δυναμένων να αντιμετωπίσουν εσωτερικές και εξωτερικές απειλές είναι τεράστιας σημασίας. Η προσπάθειά μας πρέπει να είναι η ενίσχυση της ανθεκτικότητας των κοινωνιών, δηλαδή η στήριξη και προστασία των πληθυσμών από τις συγκρούσεις, τον βίαιο εκτοπισμό, τη φτώχεια, τις διακρίσεις, τη διαφθορά, τη δουλεία, τις κλιματικές αλλαγές.
               

                  Είναι σημαντικό η εξωτερική πολιτική της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης να έχει κεντρικό στόχο την προαγωγή της ανθεκτικότητας, με την ανάπτυξη συστημάτων έγκαιρης προειδοποίησης και ταχείας αντίδρασης, δηλαδή με την εμπλοκή σε πολιτικές πρόληψης των κοινωνικών και οικονομικών κρίσεων. Γι' αυτό απαιτείται στόχευση και αποτελεσματικότητα στην παροχή της αναπτυξιακής βοήθειας και έλεγχος στην παροχή της ανθρωπιστικής βοήθειας. Μόνο έτσι θα επιτευχθεί βιώσιμη ανάπτυξη και κάλυψη των αναγκών των φτωχών λαών τους οποίους θα προστατεύσει από την ανεξέλεγκτη και επικίνδυνη μετακίνηση και όλους τους συμπαρομαρτούντες κινδύνους.
               

Jasenko Selimovic,
on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, let me begin by saying that I share the concerns expressed by my colleagues. Resilience is indeed a concept that has progressively made its way into EU development policies: 2015 was a milestone year as regards development and the idea of resilience in the EU's eyes. The Commission rightly introduced a resilience marker in its humanitarian implementation plans. This was certainly a good step in a good direction.
Today's world is characterised by increasingly complex challenges – climate change, displacement, pandemics, extremism, population movements etc. Such challenges test the resilience of communities and institutions as well as the ability of regional and international organisations to support affected societies. Therefore, development and humanitarian aid should no longer be about responding to crises after they have occurred. They should also be about helping people and communities to withstand crises and shocks, and helping them to anticipate those and to be better prepared when they happen.
This is true not only for state institutions but also for the non-state actors, civil society, NGOs and individuals who have to learn how to cope with complex risks. Building resilience, particularly in a fragile state, is a long-term commitment. It has to be done not only when TV cameras are around but also when nobody can predict the next conflict, tragedy or poverty situation.
Let me conclude by emphasising that the EU Member States need to show stronger willingness to work in that direction and ensure that their words are matched by the requisite financial contributions.

Lola Sánchez Caldentey,
en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señor presidente, hemos escuchado hasta la saciedad cómo la incertidumbre refuerza la necesidad de promover nuevos modelos de gobernanza que fortalezcan la resiliencia.
               

                  Numerosos estudios han demostrado que las democracias resilientes disfrutan de más bajos niveles de violencia social y mayores índices de bienestar.
               

                  Por ello, estamos profundamente preocupados por cómo va a promover la Unión el alineamiento de esta nueva iniciativa con muchos de nuestros compromisos internacionales como la Agenda 2030, el Acuerdo de París o la Cumbre Mundial Humanitaria.
               

                  La construcción de la resiliencia debe superar las visiones estrechas basadas, por ejemplo, en la seguridad. Esta es una cuestión fuertemente vinculada a la totalidad de un sistema político y social. Por eso, más allá de los qués, nos importan los cómos.
               

                  La descentralización del modelo energético, la producción alimentaria, la promoción del conocimiento abierto o el avance en procesos de participación democrática son cuestiones cruciales para el cumplimiento de nuestros compromisos internacionales y, también, elementos indispensables para la construcción de sociedades verdaderamente resilientes.
               

Γεώργιος Επιτήδειος (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, ως ανθεκτικότητα νοείται η ικανότητα ενός κράτους να αντέχει σε πιέσεις και κλυδωνισμούς, να απορροφά αυτά και να ανακάμπτει γρήγορα. Στην παρούσα χρονική περίοδο, σε όλες τις ηπείρους υπάρχουν πολλά κράτη που αντιμετωπίζουν τρωτότητες τις οποίες η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση θέλει να εξαλείψει, στα πλαίσια του πρωταγωνιστικού ρόλου που θέλει να διαδραματίσει ως παγκόσμια οικονομική και πολιτική δύναμη. Έτσι ενδιαφέρεται να ενισχύσει την ανθεκτικότητα σε χώρες της Κεντρικής Ασίας, της Κεντρικής Αφρικής, στο Κέρας της Αφρικής, στην περιοχή του Σαχέλ, ακόμη και για την ανθεκτικότητα των χωρών των δυτικών Βαλκανίων και της Τουρκίας ενδιαφέρεται Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση.
               

                  Υπάρχει όμως και μία χώρα για την ανθεκτικότητα της οποίας, παρά το γεγονός ότι ανήκει σε αυτήν, η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση δεν ενδιαφέρεται. Η χώρα αυτή είναι η Ελλάδα. Για έβδομο συνεχές έτος, η Ελλάδα υποφέρει από την επιβολή των απαράδεκτων όρων του μνημονίου και την παρουσία εκατομμυρίων παράνομων μεταναστών σ' αυτή. Οι Έλληνες υποφέρουν, κινδυνεύουν με αφανισμό και η οικονομία της χώρας έχει καταστραφεί.
               

                  Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση δεν έχει τη δυνατότητα ή δεν θέλει να αντιμετωπίσει αυτή τη σύγχρονη γενοκτονία, διότι δεν μπορεί να αντισταθεί στις επιταγές της γερμανικής κυβερνήσεως, όπως αυτές εκφράζονται διά στόματος του κυρίου Σόιμπλε. Όχι στην ελάφρυνση του χρέους, ναι στη μείωση των αποδοχών, άρα και στην εξαθλίωση των Ελλήνων. Όχι στην απομάκρυνση των παράνομων μεταναστών και, φυσικά, ούτε λόγος να γίνεται για την αποπληρωμή του χρέους που έχει Γερμανία απέναντι στην Ελλάδα. Όσο εφαρμόζονται οι απαράδεκτοι όροι των μνημονίων στην Ελλάδα, συζητήσεις όπως η παρούσα θα γίνονται απλά για να εντυπωσιάζονται οι αφελείς και οι ανενημέρωτοι.
               

Bogdan Brunon Wenta (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Odporność to pojęcie, które często pojawia się w debacie publicznej na temat polityki rozwojowej i pomocy humanitarnej. To pozytywny sygnał, że Komisja zdecydowała się uwzględnić odporność jako strategiczny priorytet działań zewnętrznych Unii, a także zobowiązała się zaktualizować dokument z 2012 r. i kontynuować plan działań do 2020 r. Negatywne skutki konfliktów i katastrof mają długoterminowy i znaczący wpływ na gospodarkę, kwestie społeczne, zdrowie, kulturę oraz środowisko. Jest to szczególnie dotkliwe na szczeblu lokalnym i wspólnotowym. Społeczeństwa oraz państwa narażone na konflikty i klęski żywiołowe mają problemy w radzeniu sobie z ich skutkami, dlatego też w rezolucji apelujemy do Komisji, aby w komunikacji uwzględniła odporność jako główny element dialogu politycznego z krajami rozwijającymi się. Podkreślamy również znaczenie wspólnego programowania działań Unii związanych z odpornością w celu zapewnienia maksymalnej komplementarności i mniejszej fragmentaryzacji pomocy humanitarnej i rozwojowej.
               

Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D). – Mr President, building resilience means creating a more responsive Union, and is key to forging strong partnerships. We must reiterate our call to the Commission and the Council to incorporate existing EU policies in the new initiative and ensure their continuity. In addition, the new initiative should promote alignment with international commitments, comply with development effectiveness principles, promote a coherent EU approach to resilience and the complementarity of EU development, humanitarian, foreign and security policies, with a particular focus on the needs of the most vulnerable populations while highlighting the role of local actors and civil society.
It is fundamentally important to strengthen the resilience of states and societies by supporting good governance and accountable institutions and working closely with civil society.

Λευτέρης Χριστοφόρου (PPE). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, θα δώσω μια άλλη διάσταση για την ανθεκτικότητα που πολύ ορθά επεσήμαναν οι συνάδελφοι. Ανθεκτικότητα και σταθερότητα για την εξωτερική δράση της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης δεν μπορεί να υπάρξει εάν η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση δεν αποδείξει ότι μπορεί να προστατεύσει και να διαφυλάξει τα εξωτερικά της σύνορα, μπορεί να προστατεύσει και να διαφυλάξει την ειρήνη στα κράτη μέλη της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης.
               

                  Οι σημερινές παραβιάσεις από την Τουρκία και οι προσβολές στην κυριαρχία κρατών μελών, όπως της Κύπρου και της Ελλάδας, είναι ευθεία πρόκληση και προσβολή για την ίδια την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Και αν η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση δεν ανταποκρίνεται στο να διαφυλάξει και να προστατεύσει την αξιοπιστία της μέσα από συγκεκριμένη στρατηγική προστασίας των εξωτερικών της συνόρων, τότε δοκιμάζονται όλες οι πολιτικές της και δεν μπορούμε να μιλούμε για ανθεκτικότητα και σταθερότητα. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση οφείλει να εγγυηθεί σε κράτη μέλη όπως είναι η Κύπρος και η Ελλάδα, ότι δεν μπορεί μια χώρα υποψήφια προς ένταξη στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, η Τουρκία, να θίγει, ουσιαστικά καθημερινά, την αξιοπρέπεια και την αξιοπιστία της ίδιας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης.
               

                  Καλώ την Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπο της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, την κυρία Mogherini, όπως κατανοήσει επιτέλους ότι πρέπει να στείλει ένα ξεκάθαρο μήνυμα στην Τουρκία, τονίζοντάς της ότι δεν μπορεί να προκαλεί και να προσβάλλει την ίδια την αξιοπιστία της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και αυτό πρέπει επιτέλους να το κατανοήσουμε.
               

                  Κλείνοντας, θέλω να τονίσω ότι για να διασφαλιστεί η σταθερότητα χρειάζεται ειρήνη. Ο Πρόεδρος της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας, κυρία Πρόεδρε, έκανε μια πρόταση ειρήνης στην Τουρκία και στον κύριο Akıncı, για επίλυση του κυπριακού προβλήματος. Όχι μόνο δεν έγινε αποδεκτή, αλλά προσβλητικά η Τουρκία θέλει να συνεχίσει να είναι στην Κύπρο, τάχατες εγγυήτρια, και να διατηρήσει τα στρατεύματα. Αυτό είναι απαράδεκτο και …
               

(Η Πρόεδρος διακόπτει τον ομιλητή)


VORSITZ: EVELYNE GEBHARDT


Vizepräsidentin


Ana Gomes (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, construímos resiliência na ação externa. Precisamos de uma União Europeia com ferramentas e autonomia estratégica para assegurar segurança interna e externa aos cidadãos. Precisamos, por isso, de uma política externa europeia e de uma política comum de segurança e defesa, capacitadas com cooperação e partilha entre Estados-Membros, para dar resposta eficaz a ameaças transnacionais e globais. Precisamos de ação externa estratégica e coerente nas diversas vertentes, incluindo um consenso para o desenvolvimento, que dê prioridade à eliminação da pobreza, à capacitação das sociedades civis, ao empoderamento das mulheres, à democracia, ao Estado de direito, ao respeito pelos direitos humanos e princípios humanitários. Sem isso, não haverá boa governação, nem atingiremos os objetivos de desenvolvimento do milénio e o desenvolvimento sustentável.
                  

                     Trabalham contra a resiliência os governantes, que vão a reboque da retórica xenófoba que associa migrantes e refugiados a terroristas, quando, ataque após ataque, se verifica que os chamados foreign fighters são, de facto, cidadãos europeus. Tornar as nossas cidades resilientes, designadamente contra o terrorismo, implica mudar a narrativa anti-islâmica autoderrotista; combater a exclusão social, as desigualdades e a destruição de emprego. Implica também promover a convivência multicultural e a regulação global.
                  

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Gospođo predsjednice, na početku bih željela zahvaliti autorima na kvalitetnom tekstu te kolegama na kvalitetnoj raspravi o vrlo važnoj temi. Nama globalna strategija Europske unije za vanjsku i sigurnosnu politiku i upravo jačanje otpornosti i kapaciteta partnerskih država stavlja u fokus prioritete vanjskog djelovanja Europske unije kako bi one same bile sposobne riješiti interne i eksterne krize s kojima se suočavaju te osigurati normalno djelovanje civilne aktivnosti i jačanje razvojne učinkovitosti.
                  

                     Ono što smatram bitnim je da postojeći instrumenti pomoći moraju učinkovitije biti korišteni. Važno je naglasiti da treba osigurati bolju koordinaciju instrumenata za vanjsko djelovanje Europske unije s financijskim instrumentima ostalih međunarodnih, razvojnih institucija. Boljom koordinacijom osigurat će se sinergijski učinak, pomoći provedbi ključnih reformi te implementaciju važnih projekata koji bi mogli pomoći jačanju otpornosti u tim državama. No, prije toga, potrebno je provesti analizu te moguća preklapanja u financiranju prije nego što se postigne bolja koordinacija.
                  

                     Ovim putem pitam Komisiju što namjerava napraviti po ovom pitanju.
                  

Die Präsidentin. – Nun kommen wir zum Catch-the-eye-Verfahren. Ich haben sieben Wortmeldungen. Ich möchte gerne alle zu Wort kommen lassen. Voraussetzung ist allerdings, dass Sie sich bitte alle an die eine Minute halten.
                  

Catch-the-eye-Verfahren


Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in base ai dati OCSE un miliardo e mezzo di persone vive in 56 paesi identificati come fragili. La situazione di fragilità, determinata in gran parte da fattori umani, ha ripercussioni sulla vulnerabilità delle popolazioni a causa di conflitti e insicurezza, mancanza di accesso all'assistenza sanitaria, povertà estrema, crisi economiche ed ha conseguenze dirette e indirette sull'Unione europea, che deve necessariamente tenerne conto nell'implementazione della sua strategia di politica estera e di sicurezza.
                  

                     La nuova comunicazione congiunta deve riconoscere e sostenere la promozione della resilienza, quale elemento essenziale delle strategie di sviluppo sostenibile dei paesi partner, in particolare dei paesi fragili. Occorrono sforzi sistematici e azioni politiche coerenti volte ad alleviare le cause a monte della crisi e a potenziare la capacità di gestire l'incertezza e il cambiamento.
                  

                     Lo sviluppo della resilienza nei paesi partner è un processo a lungo termine che va integrato in ogni azione esterna dell'Unione, verificando che le politiche europee non pregiudichino gli sforzi dei paesi in via di sviluppo volti al raggiungimento degli obiettivi di sviluppo sostenibile.
                  

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η ανθεκτικότητα των κοινωνιών απέναντι στις σύγχρονες οικονομικές και κοινωνικές προκλήσεις είναι αναγκαία ιδιαίτερα στην παρούσα ιστορική φάση, που χαρακτηρίζεται από τη φτώχεια, την ανεργία, τις κοινωνικές ανισότητες και την πείνα που θερίζει τον πλανήτη. Για να υπάρξει όμως ανθεκτικότητα των κοινωνιών πρέπει να εξαλειφθούν τα αίτια που δημιουργούν την κατάσταση αυτή και όχι απλά τα συμπτώματα. Αυτό σημαίνει, δίκαιη κατανομή του παραγόμενου πλούτου, εγκατάλειψη της παγκοσμιοποίησης, της οικονομίας-καζίνο και της λιτότητας.
                  

                     Επιπλέον, απαιτείται διαγραφή του χρέους των αναπτυσσόμενων χωρών και των χωρών του ευρωπαϊκού Νότου και ιδίως της Ελλάδας, που έχει μετατραπεί σε αποικία χρέους με στρατιές φτωχών και ανέργων. Μόνο έτσι θα μπορέσει να ενισχυθεί η ανθεκτικότητα των κοινωνιών, διαφορετικά όλα τα άλλα θα συνιστούν μια ρητορική που χαρακτηρίζεται από τη γνωστή διγλωσσία. Δεν μπορεί η τρόικα να διαλύει την Ελλάδα και να μιλούμε για ανθεκτικότητα.
                  

Ilhan Kyuchyuk (ALDE). – Madam President, as we all know, the European Union global strategy refers to building state and societal resilience in the Union's neighbourhood as one of the key strategic priorities for the EU. In the context of EU foreign policy, building resilience in the neighbourhood has been understood as the capacity of different layers of society to withstand, adapt to and recover quickly from stresses and shocks.
The EU uses the concept of resilience as an answer to the growing complexity of the international security environment and the ongoing instability on its southern and eastern borders. Therefore, I call on the Commission to use the concept of resilience with nation states because they remain the key actors in societies capable of bringing about real changes and reform. In the long-term, placing more focus on nation states will increase the efficiency and credibility of EU foreign policy.

Kateřina Konečná (GUE/NGL). – Paní předsedající, vážená paní komisařko, přestože žijeme v době, která umožňuje mnohým žít v luxusu do té doby zcela nevídaném, 1,6 miliardy lidí se nachází v 56 zemích označovaných za nestabilní.
                  

                     Měli bychom se tázat: Jak se to vlastně stalo? A musíme si vždy zcela na rovinu říci, že se evropské koloniální mocnosti snažily tyto země hospodářsky vysát. Když pak tyto země opustily, smlsly si na nich nadnárodní korporace a drancování pokračovalo.
                  

                     Teprve v posledních desetiletích se tak začínáme konečně bavit o tom, kterak jsou posíleny základní veřejné služby, jako jsou školství, zdravotnictví, voda a hygienická zařízení, nutné ke zvýšení odolnosti těchto zemí. Dlouhé roky jsme je vnímali jako prostředky k budování bohatství a nyní musíme zajistit budoucnost, bez které se neobejdou, a to i z toho důvodu, že si nemůžeme dovolit nestabilitu a rozpadající se státy v blízkosti Evropské unie.
                  

Julie Ward (S&D). – Madam President, the phrase ‘resilience in external action’ might seem a little opaque to some, but what it means is crucial in today's changing world. Resilience means the ability of states and societies to withstand and recover from external and internal crises. What we are seeing throughout the world, from the economic crisis to the Arab Spring and democratic uprisings, is how important civil society organisations and democratic institutions are in keeping a society from breaking down.
When social tensions rise, the ability to organise and speak to one another becomes crucial. Arts and culture, artists, creators and journalists play a crucial role in societies in crisis by facilitating expression, communication and intercultural dialogue. They can often make the difference between peace and war. When conflict breaks out, artists, writers and thinkers can often lead the way to reconciliation, and this is why the EU must invest more in promoting cultural diplomacy and exchange.

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule prim-ministru, doamna comisar, vreau de la început să îi felicit pe autorii acestei întrebări. Era cazul să aflăm ce concept nou aveți privind reziliența, având în vedere schimbările globale care au loc și cred foarte mult că toate politicile de dezvoltare, umanitare, externe, de securitate, toate trebuie să ducă la respectarea drepturilor omului. Avem în lume și în Uniunea Europeană multe persoane discriminate, și nu mă refer numai la discriminarea de gen, mă refer la cetățenii, copiii, care nu au acces la educație, la hrană, la sănătate, copii din multe țări din zonele depărtate, mai ales din mediul rural, unde nu au șansa unei formări profesionale, unei pregătiri pentru o viitoare viață de familie. În acest sens cred că în contextul global instituțiile europene trebuie să se gândească împreună cu celelalte instituții cum mergem și la cauze, ce facem cu conflictele care creează probleme și duc în această situație copiii și familiile din multe locuri din lume.
                  

João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). – Senhora Presidente, para além de tudo o mais que a política externa e de segurança da União Europeia tem de inaceitável, há um certo cinismo, uma certa hipocrisia, nesta estratégia global que define a resiliência como uma das prioridades da ação externa da União Europeia. A União Europeia que promove a agressão, a ingerência, a desestabilização de países soberanos vem, depois, eleger como prioridade estratégica a resiliência estatal e societal dos agredidos. Voltada para o Leste e para o Sul, esta estratégia tem na Ucrânia e na Síria uma cabal e exemplar demonstração dos seus objetivos e das suas consequências.
                  

                     Melhor seria que a prioridade se focasse no respeito escrupuloso pelo Direito Internacional, pela Carta das Nações Unidas e pelos princípios nela inscritos: do respeito pelas soberanias nacionais à resolução pacífica dos conflitos.
                  

                     Melhor seria que não se procurasse fazer de uma suposta ajuda ao desenvolvimento o biombo para a afirmação da ambição imperial e dos interesses geoestratégicos das potências europeias e dos seus grupos económicos.
                  


(

Ende-des-Catch-the-eye-Verfahrens)


Věra Jourová,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I have very much appreciated this debate and the pertinent questions. This all shows that the question of resilience is central to our work and that Parliament is very aware of this.
In addition to what I said in my opening remarks, let me add some more information about our approach, which is in the joint communication. It deals not only with security, but also with economic and environmental resilience and, furthermore, the concept identifies state, societal and community resilience, which is closely linked to humanitarian and development aid. These means contribute to building democratic states and support societies.
We look forward to continuing the debate with you after the adoption of the joint communication on 7 June.

Matti Maasikas,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, I do not have much to add to what Commissioner Jourová said in her introductory remarks and just now in the concluding discussion. Both of us have, of course, taken careful note of this very useful discussion today. The Council, for its part, in its conclusions from October 2016, has already highlighted its support for action at EU level on resilience.
We very much look forward to the forthcoming joint communication by the Commission, and the High Representative and I look forward to continuing discussions in the European Parliament on that matter.

Die Präsidentin. – Zum Abschluss der Aussprache wurde gemäß Artikel 128 Absatz 5 der Geschäftsordnung ein Entschließungsantrag eingereicht.
                  

                     Die Aussprache ist damit geschlossen.
                  

                     Die Abstimmung findet morgen, Donnerstag, 1. Juni 2017, statt.
                  


Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 162 GO)



Birgit Collin-Langen (PPE),
schriftlich. – Ich unterstütze diese Entschließung, denn ich begrüße es, dass die Resilienz eine Priorität des auswärtigen Handelns der EU ist. Wir brauchen einen kohärenten politischen Rahmen für die Widerstandsfähigkeit unseres auswärtigen Handelns, insbesondere durch die Förderung der nachhaltigen Entwicklung, der Menschenrechte, des politischen Dialogs und zur Konfliktlösung.
                  

David McAllister (PPE),
schriftlich. – Die Vielzahl internationaler Krisen und Konflikte stellt die Widerstandsfähigkeit der Europäischen Union auf die Probe. In diesen Zeiten darf die EU nicht nur reagieren, sie muss aktiv gestalten, indem sie in einer immer komplexer werdenden Welt gemeinsam und entschlossen handelt. Mit der Migrationskrise, der weiterhin angespannten Lage in der Ostukraine, dem Krieg in Syrien und der instabilen politischen Lage in Nordafrika reicht es nicht mehr, sich auf sich selbst zu beschränken. Freiheit, Sicherheit, Demokratie und Menschenrechte sind kein Selbstzweck und bedürfen der Verankerung in unseren Nachbarregionen. Weniger entwickelte Länder und fragile Staaten müssen unterstützt und gefördert werden. Mehr als je zuvor ist deshalb ein koordiniertes Handeln der EU erforderlich, um diesen Herausforderungen begegnen zu können. Die Resilienzstrategie der Europäischen Union zeigt einen richtigen Weg auf, unsere Partnerstaaten in die Lage zu versetzen, durch effiziente Reformen künftigen Krisen standhalten zu können. Sie befähigt demokratische Regierungen, schnell und vereint zu reagieren, um Stabilität, Freiheit und Sicherheit zu bewahren, um so auch in der Migrationskrise zu helfen und Fluchtursachen zu bekämpfen. Deshalb gilt es mit ihr, eigenverantwortliches Handeln unserer Partnerländer zu stärken und sie auf dem Weg langfristiger und nachhaltiger Entwicklung zu begleiten und zu unterstützen.
                  

Czesław Adam Siekierski (PPE),
na piśmie. – Żyjemy w czasach nasilającej się globalizacji, która dotyka coraz większej liczby sektorów. Jest to proces, którego nie da się zatrzymać, należy jednak starać się go zrozumieć i kształtować, aby państwa członkowskie UE mogły odnaleźć się na konkurencyjnym rynku światowym. Wśród problemów nabierających coraz większego znaczenia oraz stanowiących poważne zagrożenie i czynnik ryzyka w kontekście właściwego funkcjonowania i rozwoju przedsiębiorstw, w tym również tych należących do sektora rolno-spożywczego, jest chociażby zmienność cen i różne przypadki nieuczciwej konkurencji.
                  

                     Zwiększenie odporności w poszczególnych sektorach oraz w ujęciu bardziej ogólnym, wyrażanym w różnych politykach UE zasługuje zatem na poważne potraktowanie również w kontekście licznych zawartych oraz negocjowanych umów handlowych prowadzonych przez UE z różnymi państwami trzecimi lub grupami tych państw (CETA, TTIP, negocjacje z Japonią, krajami Mercosuru, etc.). Wysiłki służb UE odpowiedzialnych za działania zewnętrzne UE powinny zatem skupiać się w sporej mierze na analizie zagrożeń występujących na szczeblu kraju i regionu oraz udoskonaleniu monitorowania wpływu czynników zewnętrznych, co umożliwi podjęcie we właściwym momencie odpowiednich działań. Aby usprawnić tego rodzaju działania i zwiększyć możliwości w zakresie zapobiegania kryzysom, przydatną inicjatywą byłoby również tworzenie międzynarodowych polityk i ustaleń w tym obszarze.
                  

Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (PPE),
na piśmie. – W kontekście zbliżającej się publikacji komunikatu wysokiej przedstawiciel / wiceprzewodniczącej Komisji Europejskiej Federiki Mogherini pt. ‘Odporność jako strategiczny priorytet działań zewnętrznych UE’ warto, by Parlament Europejski miał swój jasny wkład w opracowanie tego dokumentu. Zwłaszcza że chodzi o jeden z pięciu priorytetów wymienionych w globalnej strategii UE.
                  

                     Przygotowana z tej okazji rezolucja jest dobrym dokumentem, który wyjaśnia, jak pojmowane jest pojęcie odporności, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem jej znaczenia dla polityki rozwojowej. PE wskazuje w nim na wielowymiarowy charakter odporności, która jest czynnikiem zarówno ludzkim, jak i gospodarczym oraz politycznym, a także czynnikiem bezpieczeństwa. Wielokrotnie podkreślaliśmy już w tej izbie, że nie ma rozwoju bez poczucia bezpieczeństwa i stabilności politycznej, instytucjonalnej czy społecznej. Proces budowania odporności państw partnerskich jest działaniem długofalowym. Jego skutki rzadko są widoczne od razu. Jednak nie powinno to sprawiać, że zaczniemy wątpić w jego skuteczność. Dlatego należy zapewnić długoterminowe gwarancje finansowe dla tego typu przedsięwzięć. I o to chciałbym dziś zaapelować.
                  
15.   Combating anti-semitism (debate)

Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärungen des Rates und der Kommission zur Bekämpfung von Antisemitismus (2017/2692(RSP)).
               

Matti Maasikas,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak today on combating anti-Semitism. It is a topic of common concern to us all.
Let me start by expressing my deep concern about the current situation in Europe. Evidence from different sources, including the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights and the Council of Europe, shows an alarming increase in intolerance and hatred. There exists specific data collected by the Fundamental Rights Agency confirming that every fourth Jew in Europe has experienced verbal or physical violence. It is difficult to believe and understand that so many in our society reject the fundamental values of tolerance, respect and liberty, and instead choose to hate.
What can be done to address anti-Semitism? This issue was discussed in more general terms during the conference on positive narratives against hate speech, which the Maltese Presidency organised in April this year. Experts from Member States, international organisations, academia and civil society agreed that there was no single perfect remedy for hatred. As is often the case, we need a complex response that starts with education, data collection and analysis, and ends with condemnation and criminal sanctions.
Let me start with the measures I mentioned last, condemnation and criminal sanctions. The EU has adopted specific legislation on combating intolerance and hatred, namely the 2008 Framework Decision on combating racism and xenophobia. This decision outlaws Holocaust denial and anti-Semitic hate speech inciting violence. In particular, it prohibits under criminal law condoning, denying or grossly trivialising the Holocaust.
In June 2016, the Council stressed the importance of this legal instrument and invited Member States to ensure its effective transposition and implementation, in addition to other relevant hate crime laws at national level. Furthermore, the Council asked Member States to develop effective methods to report and ensure proper recording of hate crimes.
In the context of hate speech, the Council supports the Commission High Level Group, which seeks to develop, together with the Member States, concrete practices and tools to improve responses to racism, xenophobia and other forms of intolerance. This group is actually meeting today and tomorrow, and one of the items on the agenda concerns specifically the Week of Action on Combating anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim hatred. There will also be an opportunity to discuss the rights of victims of hate crimes. On several occasions, the Council has called on Member States to ensure the full and correct implementation of the EU legislation, notably the EU Directive on the rights of victims of crime.
I hope that the expertise from the High Level Group experts will bring us closer in our common endeavour. However, let me stress that all these countermeasures will be in vain if we forget the important role of education and youth work. More precisely, it is crucial to know the history of our continent to understand the value of tolerance and to be able to counter anti-Semitism when confronted with it. In the context of awareness-raising and policy advice, we are grateful to the European Fundamental Rights Agency for its continued monitoring of, and research into, discrimination and anti-Semitism and for offering evidence-based solutions and suggestions.
I would like to conclude by stressing once again how important it is to combat anti-Semitism. I would like to recognise the work of the first European Commission Coordinator on combating anti-Semitism, Katharina von Schnurbein. We have different tools: we have knowledge, we have education, we have counter-narratives, but we also have condemnation of any form of anti-Semitic violence, hate speech or discrimination. Accordingly, the responsibility rests with all of us – politicians, teachers, students, parents and, if need be, also judges and prosecutors. No one can close his or her eyes or ears and pretend not to see injustice, discrimination or hatred.
An important part of the exhibition in the recently opened House of European History, which was founded at the European Parliament's initiative, is devoted to the genocide of European Jews. It is the duty of our continent, and our shared responsibility, to remember and not to let it happen again.

Věra Jourová,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, combating anti-Semitism is indeed a very important and alarming topic, considering the statistical evidence which the Minister has just mentioned. I very much welcome Parliament's debate and the motion for a resolution. Increasing fear and high rates of verbal and physical violence against ethnic, religious and other minorities across Europe are a major concern, and it is our duty not only to discuss this but also to come forward with solutions.
Data show a clear spike in anti-Semitic incidents. There was more than one incident a day in Austria and three incidents per day in the United Kingdom in 2016, in both cases the highest numbers ever recorded. We are particularly worried about discrimination and harassment against Jewish youngsters, who are more likely to experience anti-Semitism in schools and universities. A hostile environment in schools will put the next generation at risk of exclusion. All of us, collectively and individually, have the duty to fight against intolerance and hatred and reject all expressions of them.
We welcomed yesterday's Joint Day of Action, with Parliament, on combating anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim hatred, which brought together Jewish and Muslim youngsters. Today we are opening two funding calls for applications, making available EUR 5.5 million to support civil society and Member States' authorities in better preventing and countering racism and xenophobia, including anti-Semitism and other forms of intolerance, hate crime and hate speech. Particular areas of attention include hate-crime training, empowering and supporting hate-crime victims, and improving recording, as well as data collection and methodologies.
Also, at today's meeting of the High-Level Group on combating racism, xenophobia and other intolerance I presented the results of the implementation of the Code of Conduct we concluded in May 2016 with major IT companies to combat illegal hate speech online. I can inform you today that significant progress has been made and all IT companies have been improving their reaction to notifications concerning manifestly illegal hate speech, including anti-Semitic hate speech.
Let me also inform you that I have asked the EU Fundamental Rights Agency to conduct a large-scale survey on the experience of Jews with anti-Semitism. We expect the results by early next year. It will be the first time that we have comparable data on trends around anti-Semitism across the EU, following an initial survey in 2013. On the occasion of this year's Holocaust Remembrance Day we made the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism available through our website. The Commission welcomes any useful tool that helps to prevent anti-Semitism. Several Member States, including the UK and Austria, which I have already mentioned, use this definition in their policymaking and training and in data collection on anti-Semitic incidents and hate crimes.
As you know, following our first Annual Colloquium on Fundamental Rights, the Commission appointed a Coordinator on Combating anti-Semitism, tasked with liaising with Jewish communities and with advancing and mainstreaming Commission action against anti-Semitism. She is here today.
We must learn from the past, in order to ensure that nobody is persecuted for what he or she is, stands for or believes in.

Heinz K. Becker,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin, sehr geehrter Vertreter des Rates! Das Europäische Parlament zeigt mit der vorliegenden Entschließung ein klares Zeichen von Verantwortung und politischer Entscheidungskraft. Wir können zukünftig europaweit den Antisemitismus effektiver bekämpfen. Ich möchte daher auch den Ko-Autoren der Entschließung – allen voran dem Abgeordnetem Aguilar und der Abgeordneten Wikström – herzlich danken, mit denen eine außerordentlich professionelle Zusammenarbeit ein ernsthaftes und exzellentes Ergebnis präsentiert. Aus Anlass einer steigenden Zahl antisemitischer Vorfälle in Europa ist dringender Handlungsbedarf gegeben. Es muss unser gemeinsames Ziel sein, dass die jüdische Bevölkerung in Europa ohne Gewaltakte und körperliche Angriffe, ohne Hassreden und Terror in sozialen Medien leben kann, Kinder in die Schule gehen, die Menschen zur Arbeit fahren, die Synagoge besuchen und ihre Freizeit ohne Angst und Bedrohung verbringen.
               

                  Ich bin zuversichtlich, dass immer mehr Mitgliedstaaten überzeugt werden können, dem Beispiel Großbritanniens und – zu meiner Freude – auch meines Heimatlandes Österreich zu folgen und mit der EU-weit einheitlichen Definition von Antisemitismus, nach jener der IHRA-Definition einen Startpunkt zu bilden, mit dem wir die Strafverfolgung antisemitischer Täter durch neue Polizeiarbeit und klare Rechtsprechung erfüllen können. Ich appelliere an alle Mitglieder des Europäischen Parlaments, diese Entschließung entschieden zu unterstützen, und danke dafür im Voraus.
               

Juan Fernando López Aguilar,
en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria Jourová, como constitucionalista, profesor de Derecho Constitucional y académico, como socialista y como representante de los ciudadanos, he trabajado siempre por los derechos fundamentales y contra toda forma de discriminación de personas o minorías por su pertenencia a una orientación sexual —LGBT—, por su pertenencia a una comunidad étnica —los gitanos, la población romaní—, y por su pertenencia también a una identidad cultural y religiosa, como es la población judía en Europa, en los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea.
               

                  Por eso promuevo esta Resolución y la he firmado con la plena convicción de que lanza una señal de solidaridad con las víctimas de la ola de atentados y de la creciente agresividad y ofensividad contra los judíos en Europa, de lo que dan testimonio los sucesos de Toulouse, Bruselas, París, Copenhague, con resultado de muerte en un buen número de casos y, sobre todo, el incremento espectacular que reporta la Agencia de Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea en sus informes anuales —del 40 % y del 48 % en los últimos años en Francia, Bélgica, Hungría, Reino Unido, Austria—.
               

                  Esto merece un mensaje de solidaridad, y es el que efectúa esta Resolución, apostando por una working definition, por una definición de trabajo, que no es jurídicamente vinculante, pero que está avalada por la International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance —la Alianza de Memoria del Holocausto, que es una organización intergubernamental que cuenta con representantes diplomáticos de la inmensa mayoría de los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea—, acerca de lo que es el antisemitismo como instigación del odio a los judíos por serlo y a la violencia, y, por tanto, a atentar contra los judíos por ser judíos en Europa.
               

                  Apuesta también por el refuerzo de la seguridad de las comunidades judías en Europa y por el establecimiento de mecanismos de acción parlamentaria, enviados especiales y compromisos específicos de los grupos parlamentarios contra el antisemitismo. Esta definición de trabajo no proviene de ningún lobby judío: proviene de la cooperación entre los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea y ha sido avalada por la Comisión, por la propia comisaria de Derechos Fundamentales y de Justicia, la comisaria Jourová; por la acción de la coordinadora contra las acciones antisemitas en Europa, la señora Schnurbein, de la Comisión.
               

                  Y mi último mensaje es que nada tiene esto que ver, lógicamente, con la sensibilidad que suscita la legítima crítica y el derecho a la crítica a los asentamientos y a las violaciones de los derechos fundamentales de la población palestina. Porque no es justo que se vincule la resolución del conflicto en Oriente Medio, que dura setenta años, y la ocupación de los territorios ocupados, que dura cincuenta años, con la condena que merece cada atentado contra los judíos en Europa y el mensaje de solidaridad y compromiso con sus derechos fundamentales que merece de este Parlamento. Por eso postulo un voto favorable para esta Resolución.
               

Branislav Škripek,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, as we speak today, we are facing an unprecedented increase in anti-Semitism in Europe. For years, hate speech and hate crimes against Jews were the domain of marginal groups and political movements. Unfortunately, anti-Semitism is becoming a strong political stream in Europe. It is accepted and followed by many, often in ignorance of its real impact on people in our communities.
Populist, anti-establishment movements use any kind of motivation to gain attention. This includes so-called ‘discussion’ of the Holocaust, and verbal and physical violence against Jews in European cities and the presence of Jews in the Middle East.
This dangerous political rhetoric, however, leads us back to dubious discussion and debate about the legitimacy of the State of Israel. Democracy cannot be an excuse for allowing undemocratic forces to act. Jews in Europe have the right to live freely without fear. The State of Israel has the right to exist and protect itself. Any kind of questioning of this legitimacy cannot be part of a debate in this House or anywhere else.
I call on my colleagues, in the first place, to unite and give a strong political message to the world: any kind of anti-Semitism, subtle or explicit, has to be rejected. I also call on Member States clearly to target grey areas in their educational systems. New generations of European citizens must be raised with awareness of this issue and be able to refuse from the very beginning the malign seed of anti-Semitism.

Cecilia Wikström,
on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Madam President, I will start with a quote by Simone Veil: ‘Human beings are so made that the ones who do the crushing feel nothing; it is the person crushed who feels what is happening. Unless one has placed oneself on the side of the oppressed, to feel with them, one cannot understand.’
               
I just need to say ‘Paris 2015’: four persons dead in a terrorist attack against a Jewish kosher grocery store. In this city, Brussels, four people were killed in a terrorist attack against Belgium's Jewish Museum. This resolution we are discussing today shows that we, the elected Members of European countries and citizens in this institution, do not tolerate anti-Semitism in our continent. The memories of the Holocaust should never be forgotten. We should do anything we can to combat anti-Semitism in all its ugly forms.
To do this is to accept the resolution. I am proud of it and I would like to reach out to my colleagues Mr Becker and Mr López Aguilar for having done such a great job on this. It is very important that we use the new tool, that we spread it, and that we encourage governments to use the tool and the new definition, because I am convinced that this resolution can actually send a very clear message to governments to do everything they can to prevent and combat anti-Semitic actions and to bring to court anybody, any perpetrator, performing them.
I encourage you to take this resolution to your hearts, digest it and vote in favour tomorrow.

Barbara Spinelli,
a nome del gruppo GUE/NGL. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la risoluzione maggioritaria punta il dito su un fatto innegabile: l'incremento di atti antisemiti in Europa.
               

                  Il mio gruppo ne è consapevole, ma è profondamente contrario alla definizione dell'antisemitismo presa in prestito dall'Alleanza internazionale per la memoria dell'Olocausto, perché essa tende a includere ciò che non va incluso: le critiche a Israele. Tale inclusione è una trappola perché tarpa la libertà di espressione e l'opposizione di gran parte della diaspora alle condotte israeliane. Insidiosamente si suggerisce che la fonte dell'antisemitismo può non essere nello sguardo dell'antisemita, ma nella persona guardata, compreso l'ebreo, se in disaccordo con Israele o con il sionismo.
               

                  Per definire l'antisemitismo ci basti dire che è l'ostilità verso l'ebreo in quanto ebreo, punto. È un'ostilità che precede la nascita di Israele. Tutti gli europei che hanno memoria di sé lo sanno, in Germania, Francia, Italia, Austria, Polonia.
               

                  Vi prego di esaminare gli emendamenti che abbiamo presentato con i Verdi. La nostra intenzione è quella di dar voce alle tante associazioni ebraiche critiche di Israele, è anche il tentativo di combattere tutte le xenofobie, islamofobia, antiziganismo perché l'antisemitismo è sempre precursore di altre fobie e stigmatizzazioni.
               

Bodil Valero,
för Verts/ALE-gruppen. – Fru talman! I dag är temat för vår debatt antisemitismen. Jag håller mig därför till att prata om de hatbrott och trakasserier mot den judiska befolkningen i Europa som aldrig har upphört helt utan snarare varit konstanta, blossat upp då och då eller legat och pyrt, men som ökat under senare år.
               

                  Särskilt har situationen förvärrats under de olika Gaza-krigen, då många i våra länder inte skiljer på staten Israel och den judiska befolkningen. Det har lett till att det inte längre bara är de med nazistiska sympatier som trakasserar, utan gruppen förövare har blivit så många fler.
               

                  Det gör också problemet så mycket svårare att hantera. Det är också därför mycket viktigt att vi gör en klar skillnad mellan berättigad kritik mot vad staten Israel gör – precis som vi kritiserar andra länder och även våra egna då det behövs – och hat och trakasserier mot judar. Det måste vara tillåtet att kritisera den israeliska statens agerande, bosättningspolitiken etc., utan att för den skull betraktas som antisemit.
               

                  I dag tar vi ställning till en definition av antisemitism som flera redan har tagit upp här. Det råder inte konsensus bland de judiska organisationerna om definitionen. De judiska fredsorganisationerna till exempel är klart emot, eftersom de anser att den riskerar att inskränka den fria debatten om politiken i Israel.
               

                  Den dag de olika judiska organisationerna kan enas kring en gemensam definition av antisemitism, så kommer jag med glädje att stödja den. Jag kommer däremot inte att ställa mig bakom den definition som det hänvisas till i dagens resolution. Det innebär inte att jag inte står bakom det nödvändiga arbetet mot antisemitismen och det mesta i övrigt i resolutionen.
               

                  Det måste råda nolltolerans mot alla former av rasism, mot andra folkgrupper, religiösa yttringar, etniska grupper. Detta måste vara och är målet för oss alla.
               

Gerard Batten,
on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Madam President, anti-Semitism is on the rise in Europe and this resolution does not attempt to understand the reasons behind it. Studies show that European Muslims are 10 times more likely to hold very unfavourable views about Jews than non-Muslims. There are two main reasons for the growth of the current strains of European anti-Semitism. The first is the anti-Semitic content of the Islamic tracts, the Qur'an, the Hadith and the Sunnah. The second is the dramatic growth in the number of Muslims in Europe over the last 50 years, a growth that is now spiralling upward.
The problem is that many Muslims take literally what is written in their works of fiction. These works are full of exhortations for discrimination, hatred and violence, and not just against Jews, but Christians too. These hateful passages are being propagated by imams in mosques paid for by Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries. These are not extremist forms of Islam: these are literalist forms of Islam. The passage that always sticks in my mind is the one from the Hadith which says: ‘Judgement day will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews. The Muslims will kill the Jews and the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees. The rocks and trees will cry out Oh Muslim, oh faithful servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me. Come and kill him.’
               
If European governments were serious about combating this problem, they would do two things immediately. First, stop all overseas funding of mosques and imams. Second, end the mass immigration of Muslims into European countries. Any future migration from Islamic countries should be on a highly selective basis only, and only those migrants prepared to make a solemn and binding pledge that they reject the passages of hatred and violence should be admitted.

Die Präsidentin. – Es gibt Menschen, die sprechen nur für sich selber und nicht für ein Parlament, würde ich sagen.
               

Mario Borghezio,
a nome del gruppo ENF. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, si è dovuto attendere l'intervento dell'onorevole Batten per sentir parlare di Islam.
               

                  Questi documenti e tutta questa discussione risentono profondamente e sono un grave esempio di linguaggio ‘islamicamente’ corretto. C'è un'autocensura inammissibile da parte del Consiglio, della Commissione e anche di questo Parlamento. Devo dare atto all'iniziativa del Presidente che è molto opportuna, dei colloqui e delle riflessioni che sono state fatte alle quali alcuni di noi hanno partecipato con vivo interesse.
               

                  Ma al di là di questo mi pare che si cerchi di sfuggire al cuore del problema. Forse non tutte le moschee predicano l'antisemitismo, forse non tutti i siti islamici e islamisti predicano antisemitismo, forse non tutti gli atti di violenza che vengono compiuti sono di origine islamica, ma moltissimi di essi lo sono. È assolutamente assurdo e anche demenziale nascondersi dietro il dito di una realtà che è sotto i nostri occhi. Basta uscire da questo Parlamento e prendere, per esempio, la direzione di rue de la Paix e vedere che nessun rabbino, nessuna persona religiosa, professante la religione ebraica mostrerebbe i segni della propria religione.
               

                  Credo sia necessario difendere il diritto in maniera molto più seria di questi documenti estremamente superficiali e generici, perché fa parte della nostra identità culturale.
               

Steven Woolfe (NI). – Madam President, as someone who has Jewish heritage in my family I am fully aware of the detrimental effect that racism can have on people. As someone of black heritage, too, I have felt that in the past.
I have spoken many times, in this Chamber and beyond, about the ways that Israel, a beacon of freedom across the globe, has been attacked from all quarters. But I am afraid that the definitions in this motion have caused me grave concern: my concern is that they will enhance those who wish to do the Jews and Israel harm. In particular, I am concerned about the adoption of the definition from the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. The definition is extremely broad and wide. Let me, for example, cite this quote to you: ‘Palestine belongs to the Arabs. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs.’ The author of this quote would have to be imprisoned if we adopt this definition. The author of the quote was Mahatma Gandhi.
There have been hundreds of politicians, writers and philosophers who have opposed violence but who would be caught by this definition. So I would say to those behind this motion: your definition may be well-meaning, but what you will be doing is preventing freedom of speech and creating a fear of speaking. That is why I would ask you to reflect. Go back to the drawing board, please.

Fulvio Martusciello (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Commissario, Lei ha parlato di incidenti che hanno riguardato gli ebrei.
               

                  Guardando la definizione di incidente vediamo che questo viene definito come un accadimento inatteso. Non c'è nulla di inatteso, non c'è nulla di imprevisto ogni volta che viene assalito un ebreo, ogni volta che viene compiuto un atto di antisemitismo, perché se noi prendiamo una mappa e segniamo con la matita dove ci sono gli episodi di antisemitismo e poi prendiamo un'altra mappa e disegniamo con la stessa matita dove ci sono gli episodi di terrorismo e poi prendiamo le due mappe e le sovrapponiamo l'una con l'altra, vedremo che questi punti coincidono.
               

                  Egregio Commissario, cari colleghi, dobbiamo comprendere che dove c'è antisemitismo c'è terrorismo. E allora non possiamo essere tiepidi, non possiamo essere troppo deboli nel condannare gli atti di antisemitismo. Le violenze che vengono compiute ogni giorno in tutte le parti d'Europa nei confronti degli ebrei noi non possiamo definirle incidenti, non sono accadimenti inattesi. Si sviluppano episodi di antisemitismo per la debolezza dei governi che non sono in grado di tutelare gli ebrei e quindi la libertà di espressione. Oggi accade agli ebrei, altrove accade ai cristiani.
               

Péter Niedermüller (S&D). – Elnök Asszony, Európa szégyene, hogy több mint 70 évvel a holokauszt felfoghatatlan tragédiája után még mindig él az antiszemitizmus – sőt nemcsak él, hanem több tagállamban erősödik is. Éppen ezért nekünk nemcsak politikai, hanem morális kötelességünk is mindent megtenni az antiszemitizmus ellen és zsidó polgártársaink biztonsága érdekében. Teljességgel elfogadhatatlan, hogy ma Európában valakit zsidó identitása, vallása miatt érjen bármiféle fenyegetés. Gyomorforgató, hogy magukat mérsékeltnek hirdető politikusok is használnak burkolt vagy néha nem is annyira burkolt antiszemita kliséket, néha még itt az Európai Parlamentben is. Támogatom, hogy tegyünk javaslatot az antiszemitizmus IHRA által megalkotott definíciójának széles körű használatára.
               

                  Hiszen enélkül aligha lehet monitorozni, követni, dokumentálni az antiszemitizmus terjedését, megjelenési formáit Európában. Ez a meghatározás semmilyen formában nem korlátozza a szólás szabadságát. És ami talán a legfontosabb, egyértelművé teszi: Izrael állam gyalázása ugyancsak az antiszemitizmus egyik formája, hiszen Izraelt zsidó állam volta miatt támadja. Ugyanakkor az éppen hatalmon lévő izraeli kormány politikájának esetleges bírálata nem antiszemitizmus. Nekünk nem valamely izraeli kormány, hanem az izraeli állam és a zsidóság mellett kell kiállnunk. Erre kötelez bennünket az európai hagyomány, és erre kötelez bennünket a holokauszt több millió áldozatának emléke.
               

Jussi Halla-aho (ECR). – Madam President, historically anti-Semitism in Europe has been connected to extreme nationalism. However, this historical background should not make us blind to what is going on today. The new rise in anti-Jewish hatred and violence is linked to immigration from Muslim countries. Research shows that anti-Jewish attitudes are mainstream in Muslim communities. Unfortunately these communities, together with the so-called liberals, have been very successful in portraying Muslims as victims and victims only, thereby placing them beyond justified criticism.
The Left, with their pathological anti-Israel agenda, is not very helpful. It is not enough to condemn anti-Semitism in general terms. The problem must be properly identified and recognised if we want to do something about it.

Reinhard Bütikofer (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin! Ich danke den Initiatoren der Entschließung. Ich möchte mich ausdrücklich für die vorgeschlagene Definition des Antisemitismus aussprechen. Ich distanzierte mich von der Behauptung, diese Definition würde es unmöglich machen, die Politik des Staates Israel zu kritisieren – das trifft nicht zu.
               

                  Ich sage das als jemand, der in einer Stadt aufgewachsen ist, in der 1104 die erste Synagoge gebaut wurde. Über mehrere hundert Jahre war meine Heimatstadt Speyer als Mitglied des SchUM-Bundes Hochburg jüdischer Gelehrsamkeit. 1349 wurde die Gemeinde ausgelöscht. 1435 noch einmal auf ewig aus der Stadt verbannt. Erst nach der Französischen Revolution entstand wieder eine jüdische Gemeinde in meiner Heimat. 1933 hatte sie noch 269 Mitglieder, von denen genau ein Jude die Nazizeit überlebte. Heute haben wir die vierte Synagoge in der Stadt.
               

                  Antisemitismus hat eine lange historische Geschichte, hat eine tiefe Wurzel. Wir müssen ihn weiter bekämpfen.
               

Beatrix von Storch (EFDD). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin! Es geht um Antisemitismus, und wir haben zwei Arten, die wir bekämpfen müssen.
               

                  Die erste finden wir bei vielen muslimischen Migranten und auch bei den muslimischen Minderheiten – bei uns, in unseren Staaten. Letzte Woche war ich in Ungarn. Ich konnte eine Synagoge besuchen und ein jüdisches Haus – keine Polizei weit und breit. Das ist in Berlin völlig undenkbar, da wird vor jeder Synagoge durch Polizei geschützt, sieben Tage die Woche, vierundzwanzig Stunden am Tag. Für jüdische Gottesdienste werden Straßen gesperrt. Für Deutschland und Europa wünsche ich mir ungarische Verhältnisse. Und es hat mit dem Islam zu tun.
               

                  Die zweite Art von Antisemitismus finden wir hier in diesem Parlament. Sie haben eine Kennzeichnungspflicht für Produkte israelischer Siedler beschlossen. Diese Brandmarkung widerspricht dem freihändlerischen Gedanken und ist außerdem geschichtsvergessen.
               

                  Lassen Sie uns Antisemitismus bekämpfen und am besten hier im Hause gleich damit anfangen – nicht durch leere Reden, sondern durch Taten. Jüdisches Leben gehört zu Europa, und es ist unsere Aufgabe, es zu schützen.
               

Georg Mayer (ENF). – Frau Präsidentin! Antisemitismus darf in Europa keinen Platz haben. Ich denke, das können wir alle außer Streit stellen. Und leider müssen wir immer öfter feststellen, dass jüdische Einrichtungen und jüdische Personen Angriffen ausgesetzt sind und die Dramatik ufert darin aus, dass heute Synagogen in Europa bewacht werden müssen. Das hat auch – und ich weiß, dass wollen viele von ihnen nicht hören – mit der Migrationskrise des vergangenen Jahres zu tun. Da ist durch unkontrollierten und völlig undifferenzierten Zuzug aus islamischen Ländern natürlich auch der radikale Islam in Europa eingewandert, und die leben natürlich ihre Ideologie hier auch aus.
               

                  Eine weitere Betrachtung muss auch die Türkei finden. AKP-Abgeordnete, die offen antijüdische Statements abgeben – das kann es nicht geben. Und die Kollegen Storch hat es gesagt: Es gibt auch vonseiten der Europäischen Union etwas, das nicht gerade zur Verbesserung des Klimas, auch in Europa, beiträgt, nämlich die Kennzeichnungspflicht jüdischer Produkte. Auch da sollten wir uns ganz schwer überdenken, ob das heute noch Sinn macht. Danke schön.
               

Lars Adaktusson (PPE). – Madam President, violence with anti-Semitic motives is on the rise. Terrorist attacks like those in Toulouse, Brussels, Paris and Copenhagen are aimed at individuals only because they are Jewish. Threats and harassment are also increasing. The situation in my home country, Sweden, illustrates what we are talking about today. Earlier this spring, the synagogue in the city of Umeå closed down due to systematic threats. In the city of Malmö, Jewish individuals risk being attacked if they wear a necklace with the Star of David around their neck.
In order to confront today's anti-Semitism in Europe, we have to acknowledge the problem and its roots. Tomorrow this House will vote on a resolution on this matter. The aim is to find a common European definition of anti-Semitism and to use the EU institutions for exchange of information in the fight against this kind of racism. The issue of definition is important because the lack of agreement on how to define anti-Semitism makes it impossible to monitor and prevent anti-Semitic hate crime, which is a precondition for an effective fight against these evil acts.
Finally, I would like to thank my colleague, Mr Becker, for drafting this very important resolution. Let us hope for a broad majority tomorrow and a vote across party lines.

Cécile Kashetu Kyenge (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'incitamento all'odio e alla violenza in tutte le sue forme e manifestazioni è incompatibile con i valori dell'Unione europea e, pertanto, sanzionato. Dobbiamo evitare di cadere nella trappola della gara alla vittimizzazione delle diverse forme di discriminazione. Non ne esiste una che va tutelata più dell'altra. Il razzismo e l'odio vanno affrontati con la stessa attenzione ed energia.
               

                  Oggi questa Assemblea condanna con forza ogni forma di odio e violenza contro i cittadini ebrei vittime di attacchi antisemiti, in continua ascesa in tutta Europa. Anche alla luce dell'atroce persecuzione contro milioni di cittadini europei ebrei, com'è possibile che in alcuni Stati membri l'invocazione di motivi fondati sulla razza, l'origine nazionale o etnica, la religione o il credo non costituisca ancora un'aggravante di reato?
               

                  Gli strumenti repressivi contro gli autori di crimini di odio e la tutela non solo fisica delle vittime sono senz'altro efficaci e, anzi, devono essere rafforzati. Tuttavia, se isolati non riusciranno da soli a ripristinare il clima di legalità. Per prevenire e combattere l'antisemitismo, così come tutte le forme di discriminazione, occorre anche investire a livello educativo e culturale nella promozione della tolleranza e del rispetto dei diritti dell'uomo, nonché promuovere il dialogo e la cooperazione tra le varie componenti della società a livello locale e nazionale, compreso il dialogo e la cooperazione tra le varie comunità culturali, etniche e religiose.
               

Anders Primdahl Vistisen (ECR). – Hr. formand! Stigningen i antisemitisme ud over Europa, som vi oplever i disse år, er en ganske alvorlig sag, som vi bør reflektere over, også i mit eget hjemland Danmark, hvor vi senest har set terrorangrebet, som både ramte ytringsfrihedsaktivister, men også den jødiske synagoge og den bar mitzva, der foregik der, hvilket er et frygteligt eksempel på, at antisemitismen i Europa ikke er noget, der kun tilhører fortiden. Modsat i fortiden ser vi i dag, at størstedelen af stigningen i de antisemitiske overfald kommer fra minoriteter i nogle muslimske miljøer, hvor man tydeligvis ikke vil acceptere den jødiske tilstedeværelse, hverken i de lande, man kommer fra, den kultur, man medbringer, eller i de lande, man er flygtet til eller rejst til i Europa. Derfor bør vi også adressere problemerne der, hvor de er flest, og derfor bør vi tage dette opgør med de kulturer, som ikke anerkender den jødiske religions plads i Europa.
               

Margrete Auken (Verts/ALE). – Fru formand! Jeg vil ikke tale på egne vegne, men på vegne af elleve jødiske organisationer i Europa, der har skrevet til os i dag. I har alle sammen modtaget brevet fra dem, og jeg vil gerne citere. De kommer fra bredt over Europa, det er først og fremmest fra Jødisk Stemme for Fred fra de forskellige lande, og lad mig her citere:
               

                  As Jewish organisations, we strongly believe that a commitment to tackling anti-Semitism and all forms of racism is essential. Racism and anti-Semitism are generally covered by specific legislation in each European country and should be dealt with resolutely under these statutes. Endorsing the highly contentious and flawed IHRA document will not aid our collective endeavour to combat anti-Semitism. In our view, endorsement would significantly undermine defences against anti-Semitism by expanding the concept in a politically motivated way. You should think twice about how these organisations look into this. It is important that they address us like this.
               

Bas Belder (ECR). –‘Bestrijding van antisemitisme’ heet dit debat. Dat roept een persoonlijke vraag op: wat doe ik en wat doet u tegen de uitingen van het grote kwaad van de Jodenhaat? Deze vraag klemt vandaag des te meer omdat antisemitisme ‘normaal’ is binnen de grenzen van de Europese Unie en dat al sinds jaren. Hoe ik dat weet? Door met open ogen en oren in onze samenleving te staan. Via de media, via studies, maar bovenal door persoonlijke contacten met de slachtoffers van antisemitisme. Al jaren merk ik in Straatsburg en hier in Brussel de normaliteit van het antisemitisme. De verhalen over het alledaagse antisemitisme tegen leden van de joodse gemeenschap in ons midden vragen ons allemaal om een helder antwoord. Vormen wij een levende muur om hen heen of accepteren wij de normaliteit van Jodenhaat, vooral dan die gangbare vorm van Jodenhaat tegen de staat Israël, ook hier? Laat dit debat niet ooit tegen ons getuigen.
               

Anna Elżbieta Fotyga (ECR). – Madam President, Holocaust denial has been penalised by the majority of EU Member States, yet recently voices have been raised questioning this legislation. Moreover, thousands of Jews, families of Holocaust survivors, have recently decided to leave the EU and move to Israel. They see no future here. I think that early warning is needed about the awful rise of anti-Semitism in Europe.

Ulrike Trebesius (ECR). – Frau Präsidentin! Aus einem im April dieses Jahres veröffentlichten Antisemitismusbericht einer Expertenkommission geht hervor, dass Juden in Deutschland sich zunehmend durch Muslime bedroht sehen.
               

                  Soziale Medien seien dabei ein zentrales Verbreitungselement von Hass und Hetze gegen Juden. Eine Studie der EU selbst aus dem Jahr 2013 belegt, dass die meisten antisemitischen Übergriffe aktuell von Muslimen verübt werden; gefolgt erstens von linksextremen und zweitens von rechtsgerichteten Tätern. Angesichts der anteilig immer noch kleinen muslimischen Bevölkerung in Europa ist diese Bevölkerungsgruppe aber bei den Tätern weit überrepräsentiert.
               

                  Diese heutige Entschließung benennt genau dies nicht. Stattdessen versucht sie, die multikulturelle Gesellschaft zu propagieren, und bietet Diversität als Lösung an. Das ist zwar gut gemeint, aber naiv. Noch heute erinnern mich in meiner Stadt Hamburg die Stolpersteine in den Gehwegen – kleine Messingplatten, die da eingebaut wurden – an jüdische Familien, die im Zweiten Weltkrieg ihr Hab und Gut und zumeist auch ihr Leben verloren haben. Lassen wir uns aus falsch verstandener Toleranz nicht dazu verleiten, Übergriffe auf jüdische Mitbürger einfach stillschweigend hinzunehmen.
               

                  Nur eine klare Analyse erlaubt uns, unsere Werte zu verteidigen. Ansonsten verkommt das Bekenntnis zu den europäischen Werten zur bloßen Spruchblase. Mit schönen Worten, wie in diesem Bericht der Fall ist, ist es einfach nicht getan.
               

PRZEWODNICTWO: RYSZARD CZARNECKI


Wiceprzewodniczący


Zgłoszenia z sali


Patricija Šulin (PPE). – Evropa temelji na judovsko-krščanskih koreninah in judje so bili in bodo del Evrope. A hkrati je žalostna resnica, da so bili in so še zmeraj preganjani ter izpostavljeni neprimernemu, nepotrebnemu in neupravičenemu nasilju, ne le verbalnemu, ampak tudi fizičnemu. Ne zato, ker bi oni osebno kar koli takega naredili, ampak samo zaradi dejstva, da so judje. Zato je izjemno pomembno te ljudi zelo konkretno fizično zaščititi.
                  

                     Zato podpiram resolucijo, še posebej v tistem delu, ki poziva k operativni definiciji antisemitizma. Ta je nujna, da bi lahko prepoznali antisemitska dejanja in se proti njim borili.
                  

                     Antisemitisti se dostikrat skrivajo in izgovarjajo oziroma zagovarjajo, da niso antisemitisti, ampak da samo kritizirajo dejanja in ukrepe izraelske države oziroma vlade, podobno kot smo kritični do vlad in držav v drugih državah.
                  

                     A meja tukaj je tanka in operativna definicija antisemitizma omogoča, da se soočamo s tem izzivom, da znamo bolje razkrinkati ljudi, ki širijo antisemitizem, in jih pri tem preprečiti.
                  

                     Svoboda govora je zelo dragocena pravica, ki ne sme biti zlorabljena za širjenje sovraštva.
                  

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'antisemitismo, purtroppo, non è un fenomeno da affidare alla memoria del passato. Esso, così come altri fenomeni di discriminazione razziale persistono e sono anzi in aumento anche in alcune parti dell'Unione.
                  

                     Da tempo l'atmosfera nel nostro continente è cambiata e un crescente numero di ebrei europei si pone domande sul proprio futuro. L'istigazione all'odio è divenuta una delle forme più diffuse di abusi dei diritti umani, con conseguenze negative gravi, sia nel mondo reale sia in quello virtuale. L'Europa sta forse sottovalutando la gravità del problema sorto nella parte orientale dei suoi confini, dove la situazione ha da tempo superato la soglia della tolleranza. Nulla può giustificare l'incitamento all'odio razziale, tantomeno se si alimentano sentimenti antisemiti.
                  

                     Si tratta di fenomeni che vanno perseguiti e puniti severamente con misure dure ed efficaci perché l'intolleranza è una violazione diretta dei principi di libertà, democrazia e rispetto dei diritti umani, principi sui quali è fondata l'Unione europea ed è bene che alcuni leader dell'Unione europea se ne facciano una ragione.
                  

Sajjad Karim (ECR). – Mr President, I am obliged to you for giving me the floor. It amazes me how we can be the best of parliaments and sometimes the worst of parliaments all in the same session. I have sat through this debate and listened to some of the most corrosive, divisive and cancerous language that I sometimes hear from time to time.
Equality is a cornerstone of the European Union. If we allow discrimination and its cancerous effects to take root, we are nothing. It particularly interests me that those colleagues here today who decided to speak about another one of our great religions in the way that they did actually share one thing in common, and that is a hatred for the European Union. They wish to cloak their arguments in Islamophobic rhetoric in order to attack Europe. That does not take us any further at all. As Europeans, we are equal. You attack one of us, on any basis whatsoever, and you attack as all.

(Applause)


Beatriz Becerra Basterrechea (ALDE). – Señor presidente, el antisemitismo ya no es patrimonio de la derecha. En España, setenta municipios gobernados por la izquierda se han sumado a la operación Boicot, Desinversiones y Sanciones, y algunas se han declarado ‘zonas libres de apartheid israelí’. ¿Apartheid en Israel? Israelíes y palestinos conviven incluso en los mismos barrios. Hamás y la ANP, en cambio, proclaman su intención de expulsar a todos los israelíes.
                  

                     El antisemitismo se camufla hoy como reivindicación de los derechos de los palestinos. Yo también quiero derechos para los palestinos, por eso exijo a Hamás y a la Autoridad Nacional Palestina que celebren elecciones democráticas y que garanticen los derechos de las mujeres y de todas las minorías.
                  

                     Me gustaría decirles a mis colegas de Podemos, si estuvieran aquí, que me explicaran si está bien aceptar el dinero de las tiranías iraní y venezolana, pero no comerciar con la única democracia de Oriente Medio.
                  

Marijana Petir (PPE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, oštro osuđujem svaku vrstu nasilja i govora mržnje. Nasilje i govor mržnje u potpunoj su suprotnosti s europskim vrijednostima i Europska unija mora učiniti sve kako bi ih iskorijenila.
                  

                     Ova rezolucija samo je jedan korak na tom putu. Ona nas ujedinjuje i pred nas stavlja borbu protiv antisemitizma u Europskoj uniji kao jedan od prioriteta. No, moramo promisliti o tome što se krije u korijenima modernog antisemitizma. Mnogi naši prijatelji Židovi porast antisemitizma u Europi doživljavaju kao izravan napad na samu državu Izrael. To također moramo jasno prepoznati i moramo snažnije poduprijeti postizanje mira na Bliskom istoku. Nužno je uspostaviti učinkovite pravne mehanizme kako bismo identificirali i procesuirali počinitelje zločina iz mržnje i osigurali zaštitu Židovima koji su građani Europske unije kao i pravo na slobodu vjeroispovijesti. Zločini iz mržnje na vjerskoj osnovi u Europi su u porastu. Sloboda vjeroispovijesti jedna je od temeljnih vrijednosti koju imamo u Europi i koju moramo očuvati.
                  

Maria Arena (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, ce projet de texte est effectivement important parce qu'il nous rappelle que l'antisémitisme est une forme grave et intolérable de racisme, qu'on ne peut en aucun cas banaliser ni accepter et contre lequel nous devons absolument lutter. Il contient, par contre, une référence à une définition contestée qui, par les exemples qu'elle cite, est particulièrement ambiguë sur l'amalgame qu'elle fait entre les faits évidents d'antisémitisme condamnable et les critiques formulées à l'égard d'une politique menée par un gouvernement israélien.
                  

                     Il eût été préférable de se limiter à une définition expurgée de ces exemples, qui n'apportent rien et qui, au contraire, créent de l'ambiguïté et affaiblissent l'excellent travail qui a été réalisé par nos collègues dans ce texte.
                  

Τάκης Χατζηγεωργίου (GUE/NGL). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, τασσόμαστε καθαρά εναντίον κάθε ενέργειας που ενισχύει ή και προάγει αισθήματα μίσους, εναντίον κάθε ρητορικής που ενισχύει τον αντισημιτισμό, που ενισχύει την ένταση και παράγει τη βία. Η παιδεία, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, και η ευημερία είναι τα βασικά εργαλεία που μπορούν να στηρίξουν την ειρηνική συμβίωση. Κάθε ενέργεια που στηρίζει τον αντισημιτισμό ή τον αντιμουσουλμανισμό είναι καταδικαστέα, όμως πρέπει να είμαστε καθαροί: αντισημιτισμός δεν σημαίνει αντι-ισραηλισμός και δεν πρέπει αυτά τα δύο να συγχέονται. Και τέλος, κάθε προσπάθεια επίλυσης του παλαιστινιακού μειώνει πολλά από τα προβλήματα που αντιμετωπίζουμε σε αυτόν τον τομέα.
                  

Evelyne Gebhardt (S&D). – Herr Präsident! Ich muss ehrlich sagen: Ich bin schon sehr erschrocken und erbost über einiges, was ich hier in diesem Plenum gehört habe. Es ist unerhört, wenn ich höre, dass Antisemitismus mit dem Semitismus gegen andere Religionen bekämpft wird. Eine Religion gegen die andere auszuspielen, ist das Übelste, was man überhaupt machen kann. Das ist das Gegenteil dessen, was unsere Grundwerte in der Europäischen Union bedeuten, nämlich Gemeinsamkeit zu schaffen, Frieden unter den Menschen zu schaffen und dafür zu sorgen, dass wir gemeinsam gut leben können.
                  

                     Meine Großmutter hat mir immer gesagt: Zeige nie mit einem Finger auf jemanden, denn mindestens drei Finger zeigen dann auch auf dich. Und diese Leute sollten auch mal auf diese drei Finger schauen, die auf sie zeigen.
                  

(Koniec pytań zgłoszeń z sali)


Věra Jourová,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, as I said at the beginning this is a very important debate on a very alarming topic. Some of you mentioned that it must be a matter of solidarity to help and to protect people who are affected by anti-Semitism, but I must say that solidarity is not enough. We need to ensure security for all people, and speaking about security, we are in the field of criminal justice.
Some of you mentioned that we need a legal framework. I can only inform you about something you know yourself, that the Member States are very well equipped with the necessary legislation because we have the framework decision on combating racism and xenophobia and the Member States are obliged to implement it in full – to to my regret, not all the Member States. In some Member States, the situation is not satisfactory because we still have some Member States where denial of the Holocaust, for instance, is not considered criminal wrongdoing under their criminal codes. We have many other problems with definitions and so on, but the Commission is pushing very hard on the Member States to have the legislation in place.
Speaking about criminal justice, I want to respond also to those who mentioned aggressive jihadism. This must be fought by means of criminal justice as well. We now have very strict legislation on combating radicalisation and terrorism. We have very strict rules and laws that enable our Member States to punish not only those who are the perpetrators of violent crime, but also those who are helping, who are supporting with finance, or who are supporting with information, shelter and so on. We are equipped and we have to act.
Speaking about criminal justice, however, I must say that for me, criminal justice is the last resort. We must do much more, because here in Europe we face the situation where we have a high number of people who are able to commit criminal offences against people of another race or another religion. Unfortunately, I have to say this is a happening in Europe due to the passivity of society and the silent acceptance by society.
This is something we have already witnessed several times in our history and we need to do much more than prohibit criminal wrongdoing. We need to act against this passivity and help society to be much more vocal, to say this is not only prohibited – this is totally unacceptable. I am speaking about all sorts of violence against groups of people and minorities. I would warn very strongly against some attempts to impose collective guilt in Europe because we must never do that again.
Today we had a very good debate with the IT providers, NGOs and the representatives of the Member States on combating hatred and hate speech online. You also mentioned it many times here and we agreed on the fact that we need to work together. We need to invest a lot and to use all our collective energy and determination against these phenomena, and we need to work in the direction of having a hate-free Europe. It is highly ambitious, but we have no other way. We have to do it and we have to try.
So thank you very much for all your comments. This debate has convinced me that we have to invest a lot of energy in combating not only anti-Semitism, but also all other kinds of hatred in Europe. It is something we have to do, and we have to do it together.

Matti Maasikas,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, let me once again assure you that the Council is determined to address anti-Semitism in all its forms – xenophobia, racism. Hate speech will be on next week's agenda of the Ministers of Justice for discussion.
Moreover, we need to ensure effective implementation of existing legislation and protect victims. Much is at stake here: responsibility for the history of our continent and the essential democratic rights that shape our societies today. Crimes motivated by racism and xenophobia affect not only the victim, but also society as a whole.
In the name of the Council, I have followed this debate very closely and paid particular attention to the views expressed. I wish this House all strength and wisdom for tomorrow's votes.

Przewodniczący. – Otrzymałem dwa projekty rezolucji złożone zgodnie z art. 123 ust. 2 Regulaminu.
                  

                     Zamykam debatę.
                  

                     Głosowanie odbędzie się w czwartek 1 czerwca 2017 r.
                  


Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 162)



Isabella Adinolfi (EFDD),
per iscritto. – Il problema dell'antisemitismo, si è negli ultimi anni intensificato, come viene riportato anche dall'Organizzazione per la sicurezza e la cooperazione in Europa (OCSE) e l'Agenzia dell'Unione europea per i diritti fondamentali (FRA). La lotta contro l'antisemitismo deve coinvolgere l'intera società, soprattutto noi politici, dobbiamo impegnarci per condannare pubblicamente e severamente qualsiasi tipo di gesto, affermazione e esternazione antisemita e promuovere la tolleranza nella coscienza della società civile. A tal proposito gli Stati membri devono assolutamente agevolare l'adozione di una definizione chiara e comune di antisemitismo, per creare un quadro ben preciso. Il Movimento 5 Stelle si è sempre impegnato nella lotta all'antisemitismo e continuerà a farlo, incoraggiando e promuovendo, il rispetto e la tolleranza, per contrastare l'incitamento all'odio.
                  

Miapetra Kumpula-Natri (S&D),
kirjallinen. – Antisemitismin vastustamiseen liittyvä aloite on hyvä ja tarpeellinen. Siinä on kuitenkin yksi suuri ongelma. Päätöslauselmassa esitetään, että antisemitismiä vastaan otettaisiin käyttöön kovempia keinoja, ja siinä kehotetaan jäsenmaita ryhtymään tuomitsemaan ihmisiä oikeudessa antisemitismistä ponnekkaammin kuin ennen. Tämä on hyvä asia. Ongelma on kohta 2, jossa antisemitismi määritellään. Määritelmä on kopioitu yhdistykseltä nimeltä IHRA eli International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. IHRA:n määritelmä on kaksiosainen. Ensin tulee lyhyt, yleisluontoisempi luonnehdinta siitä, mitä on antisemitismi. Se on hyvä. Seuraavaksi listataan esimerkkejä siitä, mitä antisemitismi voi esimerkiksi olla. Niissä on ongelmia. Niiden mukaan Israelin normaali arvosteleminen esimerkiksi maan rasistisista käytännöistä ja moni muu perustavanlaatuiseen sanavapauteen ja normaaliin kritiikkiin liittyvä asia olisi antisemitismiä. Tästä syystä esimerkiksi European Fundamental Rights Agency lakkasi käyttämästä IHRA:n määritelmää antisemitismistä. Toivon, että IHRA:n määritelmä poistetaan. Sen jälkeen aloite on mainio.
                  

Daciana Octavia Sârbu (S&D),
în scris. – În ultimul timp, comportamentele antisemite au început să devină un fel de nouă normalitate în Europa. Atacurile teroriste din Toulouse, Paris și Copenhaga au vizat instituții ale comunității evreiești și sunt dovada clară a proliferării recente a antisemitismului. Antisemitismul implică prejudecăți și atitudini care legitimează discriminarea, violența și ura.
                  

                     Azi, mai mult ca oricând, Uniunea Europeană trebuie să facă din combaterea antisemitismului și a discriminărilor pe baza etniilor, religiilor sau a naționalității, o prioritate. Din păcate, mediul online facilitează comunicarea și aderarea la grupuri extremiste și antisemite și conduce la banalizarea unor comportamente deviante.
                  

                     Comunitatea evreiască a avut un aport important la dezvoltarea, atât culturală, cât și economică și socială a Europei și trebuie să ne asigurăm că drepturile lor sunt respectate iar că siguranța lor este asigurată.
                  

                     De asemenea, este nevoie de o definiție a antisemitismului acceptată universal la nivelul statelor membre, iar următoarele președinții ale UE ar trebui aibă în vedere acest lucru.
                  

Monika Smolková (S&D),
písomne. – Znepokojujúce sú údaje OBSE a agentúry EÚ pre základné práva, ako aj iných subjektov, že počet protižidovsky motivovaných incidentov v posledných rokoch výrazne vzrástol. Nenávistné prejavy a všetky druhy násilia proti európskym židovským občanom sú v rozpore s hodnotami Európskej únie, preto za boj proti antisemitizmu musí zodpovedať celá spoločnosť. Veľmi dôležitú úlohu musia v boji proti antisemitizmu zohrávať občianske spoločnosti, vzdelávacie inštitúcie, novinári, náboženské a cirkevné organizácie, ale aj orgány štátnej moci, aby každý prejav extrémizmu, antisemitizmu a neznášanlivosti zaznamenali a riešili v zmysle platných zákonov. Keďže od konca druhej svetovej vojny uplynulo viac ako 70 rokov, vyrástli generácie, ktoré nemajú vedomosti o krutosti páchaných počas vojny, je potrebné, aby členské štáty presadzovali výuku o holokauste v školách a zaistili, že učitelia budú na plnenie tejto úlohy primerane odborne pripravení a schopní adekvátne reagovať na rozmanitosť žiakov v triedach. Taktiež Komisia v záujme boja proti antisemitizmu musí na medzinárodnej úrovni úzko spolupracovať s medzinárodnými aktérmi, ako sú ENESCO, OBSE a Rada Európy, ako aj s ďalšími partnermi.
                  

Tibor Szanyi (S&D),
írásban. – Közhelyként hangzik, de Európában nagyon is valós, drámai tapasztalat: a tömeges erőszak és gyilkosság a szavakkal kezdődik, a társadalmi tudatot mérgező gyűlölet és diszkrimináció hirdetése történelmi léptékű tragédiákhoz vezethet. Az antiszemita, rasszista közbeszéd és atrocitások mind gyakoribbá válása Európában sürgős cselekvésre kötelezi az Uniót és minden európai demokratát. Ehhez a tiszta beszéd, az antiszemitizmus fogalmának a közbeszédben azonosan értelmezett és a joggyakorlatban egységesen alkalmazott meghatározása szükséges, ezért meggyőződésem szerint ez a határozat idővel fontos hozzájárulásnak bizonyul majd e veszélyes folyamat megállításában. Okkal mutat rá a határozati javaslat a politikai vezetők, a kormányok kiemelt felelősségére az antiszemitizmus visszaszorításában.
                  

                     Már csak azért is, mert ma is vannak olyan európai politikusok, akik nem átallják nyílt vagy kódolt antiszemita megnyilvánulásaikkal megszólítani a szélsőséges, rasszista hajlamú szavazókat. Egy hónappal ezelőtt éppen ebben a teremben, előző, brüsszeli plenáris ülésünkön Orbán Viktor követte el ugyanezt, amikor kormánya minden bajáért az amerikai ‘milliárdos spekuláns’ Soros Györgyöt kárhoztatta. Kelet-Közép-Európában ez súlyos reminiszcenciákat ébreszt, mi jól értjük az ilyen célzásokban megbújó antiszemitizmust. Egy interjúja szerint pontosan így értette Timmermans alelnök úr is, csak helyzete akkor nem tette lehetővé, hogy reagáljon Orbán gyalázatos megjegyzésére. Mi azonban EP-képviselőként ne tűrjük el itt, vagy bárhol Európában az antiszemita beszédet felelős politikusoktól.
                  
16.   Introduction of temporary autonomous trade measures for Ukraine (debate)

Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia jest sprawozdanie sporządzone przez Jarosława Wałęsę w imieniu Komisji Handlu Międzynarodowego w sprawie wniosku dotyczącego rozporządzenia Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady w sprawie wprowadzenia w odniesieniu do Ukrainy tymczasowych autonomicznych środków handlowych uzupełniających koncesje handlowe dostępne na mocy układu o stowarzyszeniu (COM(2016)0631 - C8-0392/2016 - 2016/0308(COD)).
               

Jarosław Wałęsa,
rapporteur. – Mr President, in recent years Ukraine has faced unprecedented challenges, both political and economic. Despite the toll taken by the illegal annexation of Crimea and the Russian aggression in Donetsk and Lugansk, the Government has been conducting reforms on a scale that the country has never experienced before. The scope of the reforms is so ambitious that it is fair to say more has been done during the last two years than over previous decades. These processes happened while enormous economic strain existed due to the Russian embargo and transit ban.
The European institutions have always been supportive of the process of stabilisation and peace in the Ukraine. This has included not only support for the reforms but also micro-financial support, trade measures and, finally, the visa-free regime for Ukrainian citizens. Only yesterday, we heard that the Dutch Senate had voted on the ratification of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement. These are all signs that our partnership is going strong.
In September last year, the Commission issued a proposal for granting temporary additional trade measures to Ukraine in order to increase its trade flows and support the country economically. These asymmetrical preferences in the Commission's proposal include additional tariff rate quotas for agricultural goods and a reduction in duties for industrial goods. As the Commission did not provide for an impact assessment, due to the time constraints, this proved problematic for Members of the European Parliament.
At this point it should be remembered that those preferences are on top of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement that entered into force at the beginning of 2016. As the first report on implementation is underway, we are not yet able to assess whether the preferences already granted are sufficient. In the opinion of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, concern was expressed about the timing and the choice of products. According to the opinion, the preferences target highly sensitive agricultural products that were hit by the series of crises and the Russian embargo. Furthermore, last year EU farmers experienced a record low harvest, while the opposite was true for the world's other main exporters. I also received feedback from stakeholders regarding potentially sensitive products among industrial goods, which was reflected in their report.
Taking all this into consideration, I think we have managed to achieve a balanced outcome in the Committee on International Trade. My report proposes the deletion of two agricultural tariffs, wheat and processed tomatoes, and one industrial tariff, urea, from the annexes. The report also tackles a number of challenges to Commission proposals, such as the need for checks and inspections in order to issue a movement certificate, especially when products stem from territory not under the control of the Government, and also Ukraine's abstention from introducing discriminatory internal administrative measures, as well as the implementation of continued and sustained efforts with regard to the fight against corruption and illegal activities.
I also emphasised the right for European industry to initiate a safeguard procedure. In the end, I believe that a detailed assessment of the implementation of these temporary alternative measures is needed.
I am hoping for a strong majority tomorrow and a strong plenary mandate. Once this is obtained, my goal is to start the interinstitutional negotiations as soon as possible.

Cecilia Malmström,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, these autonomous trade measures that the Commission has proposed aim to express economic and political support for Ukraine, an associated partner and our neighbour, which is at a very difficult juncture. The Commission made the proposal in September and it is a reasonable and balanced proposal, granting better access to the EU market for certain agricultural products and certain industrial goods from Ukraine. The Commission has considered some sensitivities related to agricultural markets, for instance, and we have not included the most sensitive products such as poultry, sugar or fruits.
We propose to increase annual duty-free tariff rate quotas for eight agricultural products on top of what is already provided for in the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (DCFTA). In some cases these additional amounts are small and will have no impact whatsoever on the EU market. In the case of other products, for example honey, the additional preference to Ukrainian exports will most likely simply displace imports from other countries, such as China, without affecting prices or import flows to the EU. Moreover, honey and processed tomatoes are examples of export products that will benefit small and medium-sized Ukrainian companies immediately. And in this context Ukraine is a net importer of EU agricultural products. By the way, neither wheat nor processed tomatoes are subject to the Russian food ban, and when it comes to urea, that will actually benefit European farmers because it will replace imports of fertilisers from Russia and give us a cheaper alternative.
Furthermore, we have recent free trade agreements negotiated by the European Union with Peru, Colombia, Central America, Vietnam and Canada. Here we already provide unlimited duty-free access for some of the agricultural products covered by the proposal, so why should we not do that for Ukraine, our friend and economically integrated neighbour?
We also have in the proposal a specific safeguard that would suspend preferences to any of the products in the event of market distortion, and we are ready to consider reinforcing that clause, should you so wish, when we go into trilogue.
So in sum, this is very much a political gesture. It is about sending a positive signal of EU support to Ukraine, helping the economy of a country which is suffering from the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol and military conflict provoked by Russia in the eastern part of the country.
That is why I am very concerned about the report that the committee has adopted because it significantly reduces the scope of our proposal.
On the impact assessment that you have requested, let me just recall that the trade preferences cover a very small fraction of the preferences already in force in the DCFTA, so it is impossible to separate the two impacts. Moreover, the last sustainable impact assessment that we did for the DCFTA in 2007 forecast a deep market opening by the EU, and that is still valid. The economic parameters have not changed much, especially not on the Ukrainian side, and the impact assessed at that time was negligible for the EU market.
You suggest applying stricter rules of origin to the products from the territories which are not under effective control of the Government of Ukraine. That would unfortunately lead to two different types of rules of origin applying to exports of the same product. It would be cumbersome, it would create legal chaos both for exporters and for the customs authority, so we oppose these amendments.
This proposal, as I said, is a political gesture. I hope that we can work together, Parliament and the Council, in the trilogue so as to send a more constructive proposal to Ukraine and help its people and its economy in these challenging times.

Czesław Adam Siekierski,
autor projektu opinii Komisji Rolnictwa i Rozwoju Wsi. – Szanowni Państwo! Zaproponowane przez Komisję Europejską preferencje handlowe dla Ukrainy są niekorzystne dla niektórych bardzo wrażliwych sektorów rolniczych Unii.
               

                  Są to przede wszystkim zboża, ale też niektóre owoce i warzywa. Rynki tych produktów niedawno doświadczyły poważnych kryzysów i negatywnego wpływu rosyjskiego embarga. Dotyczy to w szczególności krajów Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, które są bramą do Unii dla produktów ze Wschodu. Aby uniknąć spotęgowania trudności, z którymi już mierzą się unijni producenci sektorów najbardziej dotkniętych obecnym preferencyjnym importem z Ukrainy, w swoim stanowisku w sprawie dodatkowych preferencji Komisja Rolnictwa zaleciła usunięcie proponowanych kontyngentów taryfowych na pszenicę (100 tys. ton), kukurydzę (650 tys. ton) i pomidory przetworzone (5 tys. ton) oraz zmniejszenie kontyngentu na jęczmień z 350 do 50 tys. ton.
               

                  Pomimo problemów politycznych i ekonomicznych, jakich doświadcza Ukraina, w obliczu obecnej trudnej sytuacji w rolnictwie europejskim w komisji nie mogliśmy poprzeć tak znacznego zwiększenia preferencji handlowych dla Ukrainy w obszarze rolnym. Unia wspiera i powinna nadal wspierać odbudowę ukraińskiej gospodarki, w tym rolnictwa, ale proponowane dodatkowe kontyngenty są wykorzystywane w bardzo krótkim czasie i przez nielicznych uczestników rynku. Pomoc ta nie trafia do większej grupy producentów, handlowców, a tylko do wąskiej grupy oligarchów. Należy wprowadzić inne formy pomocy, choćby w postaci transferu know-how czy różnych projektów pilotażowych, które wdrażałyby nowoczesne technologie na rynek rolny i wzmacniałyby normalnych rolników.
               

Jaromír Štětina,
za skupinu PPE. – Pane předsedající, Ukrajina si vybrala cestu sebeurčení. Věděla, že to pro ni bude politicky i ekonomicky nebezpečná cesta. Upřednostnila svobodu před jistotou vazalských časů. Ukrajina za svoje právo na sebeurčení zaplatila anexí Krymu Ruskou federací a krutými boji na východě Ukrajiny. Ekonomicky doplatila také. V roce 2015 poklesl podíl obchodu s Ruskem na 16 % v porovnání s 27 % v roce 2013.
               

                  Cílem projednávaného návrhu je zvýšit stávající obchodní toky mezi EU a Ukrajinou. Obávám se však, že návrh našeho Parlamentu oklešťuje příznivější návrh Evropské komise. Ukrajina je křehká, prochází transformací a je ve válce. Musíme se jí vynasnažit maximálně ekonomicky pomoci. Ukrajině bych však přál skutečnou obdobu Marshallova plánu.
               

Marita Ulvskog,
för S&D-gruppen. – Herr talman! Ukraina präglas fortfarande av svårigheter och svag ekonomi. Korruptionen är fortfarande utbredd och reformarbetet pågår men behöver definitivt intensifieras. De nuvarande handelsförmånerna förhandlades under helt andra omständigheter. Det var före Krim, före Donbass. Det nya förslaget om ytterligare handelsförmåner kan, även om det är ett försiktigt förslag, vara en signal som ändå markerar att det finns en framtid.
               

                  Jag och min politiska grupp har samtidigt varit tydliga med att de ytterligare handelsförmånerna måste åtföljas av fortsatta ansträngningar och reformer när det gäller arbetet mot korruption. Här krävs tydliga insatser från EU, framför allt från kommissionen – en uppföljning som också kan visa att insatserna gör skillnad, en positiv skillnad.
               

                  Jag är nöjd med att vi har fått in ett starkare språk i parlamentets text om just arbetet mot korruption och att vi har fått in hänvisningar till behovet att uppmärksamma ekonomiska och sociala effekter samt det tydliga kravet på uppföljning. Min förhoppning är att dessa extra handelsåtgärder ska påskynda landets reformarbete och utöver det sända ett budskap till Ukraina att vi finns här som vänligt sinnade grannar.
               

Zbigniew Kuźmiuk,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Pani Komisarz! Zabierając głos w tej debacie, chcę podkreślić, że Ukraina zasługuje na wsparcie ze względu na, z jednej strony, toczoną na jej terenie wojnę wspieraną przez Rosję i zajęcie Krymu, a z drugiej, prowadzone głębokie reformy gospodarcze i społeczne. Takie mocne wsparcie Ukraina otrzymała już w ramach podpisanego układu o stowarzyszeniu z Unią, ponieważ w jego części handlowej znalazły się hojne kontyngenty preferencyjne, m.in. dla pszenicy, kukurydzy i jęczmienia. W tej sytuacji wniosek Komisji o przyznanie Ukrainie dodatkowych bezcłowych kontyngentów dla aż ośmiu produktów rolnych jest zdaniem polskiej delegacji w ECR propozycją zbyt daleko idącą. Dlatego też zdecydowanie popieramy decyzję Komisji Rolnictwa i Komisji Handlu Międzynarodowego Parlamentu Europejskiego o wyłączeniu z bezcłowych kontyngentów pszenicy, przetworzonych pomidorów oraz nawozu sztucznego mocznika i mamy nadzieję, że Komisja i Rada uszanują tę decyzję Parlamentu.
               

Jasenko Selimovic,
on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, the Association Agreement between the EU and Ukraine was signed in order to support the European aspirations of the people of Ukraine. In recent years, in the most difficult conditions of war, occupation and prolonged conflict, Ukrainians have succeeded in delivering the unprecedented reforms we demanded of them. Now it is time for the European Union to show its support.
Due to the war, occupation and trade sanctions imposed by Russia, Ukraine has been losing markets in the East and faces economic hardship. In 2014 and 2015, GDP fell by almost ten percent and the reorientation of the Ukrainian markets towards the EU has been difficult. But now the economy is growing again – by 2.3% in 2016 — and it is a crucial moment to support Ukraine's economy and development. These additional preferences to Ukraine will support recovery and help combat the economic consequences of a war that is still going on in the eastern part of the country. Some measures are asymmetrical but my conviction is that it should be that way. The war and occupation is actually raging in Ukraine and not here. In this respect, I welcome the prolongation of restrictive measures against the Russian Federation as long as the terms of the Minsk Agreement are not fulfilled. I believe that the autonomous trade measures that the Commission has proposed are what we owe to the people of Ukraine and I sincerely hope that my colleagues are of the same opinion.

Eleonora Forenza,
a nome del gruppo GUE/NGL. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, stento a credere che in quest'Aula siano state proferite parole di questo tipo nei confronti del governo ucraino. La Commissione, il Commissario europeo, che pure dicono di fare molta attenzione al rapporto tra diritti umani e accordi commerciali, forse si stanno dimenticando di dire da chi è composto il governo di Poroshenko, da bandieristi che esplicitamente, ad esempio, si richiamano al terzo Reich.
               

                  La Commissione non ha presentato alcuna valutazione di impatto sui possibili effetti di queste misure nei confronti dell'Ucraina e non ha presentato una relazione sull'utilizzo degli enormi prestiti concessi all'Ucraina, forse finalizzati più che a finanziare l'economia, a finanziare la guerra.
               

                  Ora la proposta del Parlamento limita quella della Commissione, ma il nostro gruppo è fermamente contrario a qualsiasi forma di finanziamento al regime parafascista di Poroshenko.
               

Heidi Hautala,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, the changes introduced by the committees of the European Parliament have turned this attempt to support Ukraine into a missed opportunity. This will be a great mistake. It is very hypocritical to see what Parliament is doing to the Commission's proposal.
We should not forget that trade policy is a powerful instrument and should be used to strongly support the EU's foreign policy objectives, especially in the neighbourhood. In this neighbourhood, relations with our partners are unavoidably closer, and the values enshrined in our Treaties also play a significant role. The importance of our values is shown by the special emphasis that we have put on the fight against corruption in Ukraine. Progress has been made on this topic, but more needs to be made.
In decisions concerning our closest partners, we should not let tariffs or quotas obscure our vision, which is to help Ukraine, a country whose sovereignty has been blatantly violated by Russia, and which now sees how Parliament turning its back on the further development of its economic and social situation.

Philippe Loiseau,
au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, après la Tunisie, aujourd'hui l'Ukraine. L'Europe continue à jouer au bon samaritain et à octroyer des préférences commerciales comme on distribue des bons points à l'école.
               

                  Cet abattement des droits de douane sur les produits agroalimentaires est subordonné au respect des droits de l'homme par l'Ukraine, à sa lutte contre la corruption et autres grands principes. Le niveau de corruption a pourtant atteint des sommets en Ukraine. En réalité, l'Ukraine est une menace pour l'Europe.
               

                  Par ailleurs, qui va payer le prix de ces décisions idéologiques, mensongères et injustes? Je pense que les éleveurs seront les dindons de la farce et que les maraîchers seront une fois de plus pris pour des pommes.
               

                  Quant à ce Parlement européen, qui a autorisé la Tunisie à exporter son huile d'olive dans l'Union européenne sans droits de douane, une étude d'impact devait sortir dans l'année. Un an après, aucune trace de cette étude. Peut-être l'impact pour les producteurs italiens et français est-il trop désastreux pour être avouable…
               

                  Je vous donne rendez-vous l'an prochain pour dresser le même constat par rapport aux céréales ukrainiennes.
               

Pavel Svoboda (PPE). – Vážený pane předsedající, vážená paní komisařko, autonomní dodatečná opatření vnímám jako užitečný nástroj, který může podpořit Ukrajinu v těžké ekonomické situaci a v návaznosti na asociační dohodu podpořit její postupnou integraci s vnitřním trhem Evropské unie. Dnes projednávaná opatření vysílají silný signál, že Evropská unie je připravena Ukrajině pomoci.
               

                  Zpráva je však méně příznivá než návrh Evropské komise. Ze zahraničněpolitického pohledu není možné, aby na jednu stranu Evropský parlament deklaroval podporu Ukrajině, ale potom prakticky zprávu obsahově vyprázdnil a tím snížil důvěryhodnost Evropské unie jako partnera. Je pro nás rovněž důležité přijmout opatření s původním zněním od Komise co nejdříve, a tím co nejvíce podpořit Ukrajinu a rozvoj její ekonomiky, a to bez ohledu na hlasy Kremlu, které zaznívají i v tomto Parlamentu z extrémní pravice i levice.
               

Tibor Szanyi (S&D). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Méltányolom, hogy az egyoldalú kedvezmények gondolatát az európai agrártermelők pozícióit féltő néhány kollégám fenntartásokkal kezeli. Ugyanakkor emlékeztetnék rá, hogy ez az intézkedés egyszerre bír elvi, politikai és gyakorlati jelentőséggel, és érdemes ezeket kölcsönhatásukban mérlegelni. Képviselőként magam is különösen érzékeny vagyok az európai mezőgazdaság érdekeinek védelmére, de ebben az esetben a könnyítésben érintett ukrán exporttermékek listájának összeállítását valódi hatáselemzés előzte meg, és ezt tovább is lehet erősíteni. A jogszabály tervezete már most is megfelelő garanciákat ad az esetleges piaczavarás megelőzésére, hiszen konkrét esetben saját vagy tagállami kezdeményezésre a Bizottság bármikor közbeavatkozhat.
               

                  Ebben a helyzetben az Európai Uniónak késznek és képesnek kell lennie arra, hogy a szabad, európai Ukrajna iránti szolidaritásunkat kézzelfogható formában, jelen esetben kereskedelmi kedvezményekkel is kifejezze.
               

Edouard Ferrand (ENF). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, n'avancez pas trop vite. Un arrêt de la Cour de justice européenne du 16 mai dernier vous a déjà fait savoir, par un avertissement très sérieux, que l'Union européenne n'a pas de compétence exclusive en matière de commerce. Il faut apprendre à partager, et l'Union a ici un rôle partagé avec les États.
               

                  Sur le dossier aussi sérieux que l'Ukraine, je voudrais vous dire une chose, Madame: c'est la France qui vous parle, la France rurale, la France des agriculteurs. Nous avons connu une année 2016 très difficile en France, où la plupart des exploitations agricoles ont perdu plus de 30 % de leur chiffre d'affaires. L'année 2017, Madame la Commissaire, sera tout aussi difficile, parce que les problèmes de climat subsistent et que les cours continuent de baisser.
               

                  Or, pendant que les agriculteurs français et européens souffrent, vous faites vos traités, vous continuez vos accords de libre-échange. Après le Canada, la viande et les céréales, après le Mexique, le Mercosur, vous avez aussi engagé un dialogue avec l'Australie.
               

                  Aujourd'hui, il s'agit de l'Ukraine, qui est un vrai concurrent à l'agriculture européenne. C'est une très mauvaise nouvelle de voir ce traité arriver à un moment où l'agriculture européenne est en crise et à un moment où il faudrait justement, au contraire, aider les nôtres avant d'aider les autres.
               

Joachim Schuster (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte zunächst betonen, dass ich zusätzliche Handelszugeständnisse an die Ukraine ausdrücklich befürworte.
               

                  Allerdings will ich auch nicht verhehlen, dass es aus meiner Sicht dringend erforderlich ist, dass die Kommission eine Zwischenbilanz der europäischen Unterstützung vorlegt. Denn, und das ist die wichtige Begründung, die Daten über die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung und die soziale Lage in der Ukraine sind keineswegs zufriedenstellend. Sicher ist das zum Teil ursächlich dem militärischen Konflikt in der Ostukraine geschuldet. Deswegen ist es politisch hoch bedeutsam, dass wir alles weiter dafür tun, dass das Minsker Abkommen umgesetzt wird.
               

                  Aber ich glaube, wir müssen auch prüfen, welche ökonomischen und sozialen Auswirkungen die Umsetzung des Assoziierungsabkommens hatte und hat, und zwar unter der Fragestellung: Sind die bisherigen Maßnahmen erfolgreich und zwar ausdrücklich erfolgreich, im Sinne der Förderung der Entwicklung in der Ukraine, oder gibt es weitere oder andere Maßnahmen, die sinnvollerweise ergriffen werden sollen? Dabei ist es aus meiner Sicht wichtig, dass die Unterstützung nicht alleine bei Oligarchen ankommen darf, sondern die Lebenssituation breiter Teile der Bevölkerung verbessern muss. Deswegen brauchen wir, glaube ich, eine aktualisierte Basis für die Beantwortung der Frage, welche weitere Unterstützung für die Ukraine erforderlich ist.
               

Zgłoszenia z sali


Bronis Ropė (Verts/ALE). – Manau visi sutiksime, kad Ukraina yra svarbi Europos Sąjungos partnerė. Nerasime daug prieštaraujančių ir teiginiui, kad Ukrainai reikia padėti. Taip pat nesunkiai pasieksime konsensusą ir dėl to, jog Europos Sąjungos galimybės teikti finansinę pagalbą yra ribotos. Kalbant apie tai, kuo Europa gali padėti savo partnerėms, noriu priminti, kad net ir Sanglaudos šalys didžiausią naudą gauna ne iš Europos Sąjungos paramos, o iš bendrosios rinkos efekto. Būtent galimybė laisvai prekiauti didžiausioje pasaulio bendrojoje rinkoje, skatina jos dalyves modernizuotis ir didinti savo konkurencingumą. Įsileisdami daugiau Ukrainos į Europos Sąjungą, mes kartu pasieksime, kad didesnė Europos ekonomikos ir Ukrainos visuomenės dalis taps ne tik dar labiau suinteresuota prisiderinadama prie Europos, bet ir tuo, kad šalies valdžia neišsuktų iš Europinio integracijos kelio.
               

(Koniec pytań zgłoszeń z sali)


Cecilia Malmström,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I would like to thank the honourable Members, the rapporteurs and everybody who has been working on this very important issue.
We are aware in the Commission that some products in European agriculture are sensitive and that this has been difficult for many European farmers. That is why we are working, together with my colleague Commissioner Hogan, to support those farmers, and we are also trying to open new markets for farmers. That is one reason why we have such an ambitious trade agenda, in order create such possibilities. European agriculture is of a very high quality, it is in demand and there are a lot of offensive interests, as well, for European agriculture in trade.
When it comes to this specific proposal, it is – and I beg you really to read it – very modest. Fruit is not even in there and, when it comes to processed tomatoes and wheat, they are not subject to the Russian embargo. Please check your figures. I would also like to say that the urea will actually make it cheaper for European farmers to get access to fertilisers because we are lowering the tariffs there.
So this is a limited, but for Ukraine a very important, proposal. We have looked very carefully into what we think is possible. We have specific safeguards that would suspend the preferences if there were any disruption in the market and we will supervise and monitor this very closely. We can reinforce that clause when we discuss it in the trilogue that I hope will start very soon.
It is true that Ukraine has a lot of problems. Many of them are, of course, due to the conflict, but the country is also in the process of making painful reforms. They are working really hard to do that and a lot has been done in recent years. Yes, corruption is still high and, yes, there still a need to continue the reforms, but work is ongoing and we are supporting them and working with them.
Most of you say that we should support Ukraine. It is a neighbour, a friend and an ally, which has had a very difficult situation. One way of doing that would be to agree to this proposal. In July we will have an EU-Ukraine summit in Kiev, and having a political agreement on this proposal would be a great deliverable to bring with us to Kiev. It would show that we are on their side, that we do care and that we are here to support them.
I believe that this proposal strikes the right balance between protecting sensitive agricultural areas and sectors here in the EU and providing some extra market opportunities to Ukraine. So I hope that when you vote, you can take the broader picture into account – the political and the economic one – and that we can soon enter into a trilogue in order to get a balanced proposal.

Jarosław Wałęsa,
rapporteur. – Mr President, first of all, I say to the House: I would like to thank all of you for your valuable input in this debate. Your comments are very important to me, but I have to say that today's debate illustrated exactly the conditions I was forced to work in while I was working on this report. As you could hear, we have very extreme views in this House, from left to right, from one extreme to the other, and my goal from the beginning was very simple. I always had in mind help for Ukraine, but also I always remembered that protecting the interests of European farmers and producers is also important. So finding the proper balance was not as easy as it seems.
Here in the European Parliament a majority of us strongly support the reforms in Ukraine, and I believe that by introducing these additional trade measures we are helping Ukraine to develop, not only in the economic sphere but also politically. Keeping that in mind, I understand that we are going to have a very difficult time in the Council. I understand that the Council will present additional deletions of additional tariff lines, so we may have a problem with that, Madam Commissioner, and I hope that we can find a middle ground.
Tomorrow I hope that I will receive a very strong mandate, because this is the proposal of this House, and this is the starting point of the debate. I hope that we will be able to start the trilogue negotiations very soon, and I hold that we can conclude them as soon as we can. I am going to strongly defend the position of the European Parliament and in the end I hope that the position of Parliament is going to prevail.

Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.
               

                  Głosowanie odbędzie się w czwartek 1 czerwca 2017 r.
               


Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 162)



Andrea Bocskor (PPE),
írásban. – Az Európai Unióval kötött szabadkereskedelmi társulás által Ukrajna új lehetőséget kapott a fejlődésre. A vámliberalizációval bővülhet az Európai Unió és Ukrajna közötti jelenlegi kereskedelmi kapcsolat. Ennek köszönhetően új kapuk nyílhatnak meg a tőke Ukrajnába vonzására és a külföldi vállalkozók előtt, lehetőség nyílik Ukrajna Európai Unióval, szomszédos régióival történő együttműködésre, a határokon átnyúló közös projektek megvalósítására. Ezáltal új munkahelyek jöhetnek létre, gazdasági, infrastrukturális fejlesztések vehetik kezdetüket, melyek javítanák a lakosság életszínvonalát is. Az európai jó példát kell átvenni a gazdaság revitalizálására, mint amilyen például a 2015-ben alakult Tisza ETT, mely egy EU-s megye (Szabolcs–Szatmár–Bereg megye) és egy ukrajnai megye (Kárpátalja) között jött létre területfejlesztési célokkal. Az Európai Unióval történő kereskedelem beindításához elsősorban a határ menti infrastruktúra és a logisztikai, fuvarozási feltételek javítására van szükség. Sajnos az országban eddig megvalósított reformok számos társadalmi és gazdasági feszültséget idéznek elő. Így kiemelten fontos, hogy a kereskedelmi reformok és az ország gazdasági fejlesztései párhuzamosan történjenek. Fontos célkitűzés kell legyen az ukrán piacgazdaság megvalósítása és az uniós belső piacba történő további integráció. A gazdasági támogatások, reformok csak a korrupció teljes felszámolásával érhetik el maximális hatásukat.
               

Nicola Caputo (S&D),
per iscritto. – Ritengo opportuna la scelta dell'Unione europea di concedere ulteriori misure di sostegno all'Ucraina, sotto forma di preferenze commerciali supplementari. L'Ucraina sta portando avanti riforme senza precedenti e le riforme spesso, comportano anche difficoltà a breve termine, sul piano socioeconomico. Le misure proposte, garantiranno un reale sostegno economico e politico all'Ucraina, in una fase particolarmente delicata, pur con le dovute attenzioni e incentivi equilibrati, risultando al contempo ponderate nella copertura dei prodotti selezionati e nei rispettivi volumi e quote aggiuntive, oltre ad essere dotate di tutte le necessarie salvaguardie, per supplire ad eventuali distorsioni del mercato. È tuttavia essenziale, assicurare che qualsiasi misura di sostegno, serva agli obiettivi dell'accordo di associazione, di ottenere un'economia di mercato funzionante in Ucraina e di integrarla ulteriormente, nel mercato interno dell'Unione europea.
               

Mireille D'Ornano (ENF),
par écrit. – Ce texte porte sur un ensemble de concessions commerciales en faveur de l'Ukraine dans le cadre de la ‘zone de libre-échange approfondie’ qui s'applique provisoirement depuis le 1er mai 2016 du fait de l'accord d'association entre l'Union européenne et cet État.
               

                  Le rapport souligne le caractère asymétrique des concessions consenties par l'Union européenne, qui réduit les droits de douane plus rapidement que l'Ukraine. Cette asymétrie se justifierait par la situation difficile de l'économie ukrainienne, laquelle s'est contractée de 9,8 % en 2015.
               

                  Ces concessions consistent en des octrois de contingents exonérés de droits de douane pour certains produits agricoles: blé, orge, avoine, miel naturel, tomates transformées, jus de raisin et maïs. Certains produits industriels font également l'objet d'exonérations partielles.
               

                  Ces concessions menacent l'équilibre économique de certains secteurs. S'agissant du maïs, notamment, ce quota complémentaire de 650 000 tonnes par an pourrait provoquer une baisse des prix, puisque l'Union européenne est déjà déficitaire avec l'Ukraine sur ses importations de maïs.
               

                  Notons que l'accord d'association Union européenne — Ukraine est le symbole d'un déni de démocratie. Rejeté par le peuple néerlandais par référendum en avril 2016, l'accord a été, néanmoins, adopté le 30 mai dernier par la chambre basse des Pays-Bas.
               

Ilhan Kyuchyuk (ALDE),
in writing. – There is no doubt that the EU and Ukraine should cooperate more extensively in order to achieve a full implementation of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area between them. In light of this, the proposed additional preferences to Ukraine may further support the country's economic recovery efforts and the reorientation of its markets towards the EU. This is really needed, particularly in view of the ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine, Russian trade sanctions on Ukraine, the unfavourable global economic environment and the economic hardships which Ukraine faces nowadays. Here, it is important to note that I fully support further trade liberalisation with Ukraine but I cannot hide my concerns that additional trade preferences to Ukraine in practice have the potential to destabilise EU agricultural markets. Recently, I asked the Commission about Ukrainian sunflower oil, which is a product of unfair competition and which significantly threatens sunflower oil producers in the EU, notably those in Bulgaria and Romania. In conclusion, I call on the Ukrainian authorities to initiate and implement deep political and economic reforms in order to decrease negative sentiment for the developing integration process with the country both within the EU and Member States.

Eva Maydell (PPE),
in writing. – Although some would like to see Ukraine as an example of a failing state, the government has conducted considerable reforms in the past two years, bringing concrete results and improvements for their citizens. Civil society has been instrumental in bringing those reforms forward. Two aspects have been of particular concern to both politicians and civil society in Ukraine – the visa free regime, which we already established, and the full implementation of the DCFTA. I welcome the very mature position of the Dutch Government and the vote in the Dutch Senate yesterday, confirming the ratification of the Association Agreement with Ukraine.
I hope that the outcome of the trialogue on the introduction of temporary autonomous trade measures for Ukraine will be constructive and balanced. Increasing the trade flows with our neighbour is a step towards a closer cooperation – an economic but also a political gesture. The EU should, however, maintain its conditionality to be able to foster reforms in the country. Measures to eradicate corruption should be part of this conditionality for further accessions in trade.

Urmas Paet (ALDE),
kirjalikult. – Kestva konflikti ja Venemaa kaubandussanktsioonide tõttu on Ukraina majandus jätkuvalt raskes olukorras. Maailmamajanduse keeruline seis on samuti riigi olukorda tõsisemaks muutnud. EL saab Ukrainat majanduse turgutamise osas aidata, suurendes kaubavooge ELi ja Ukraina teatud ühepoolsete kaubandusmeetmete kehtestamisega. See annab Ukrainale võimaluse oma turge ELi suunas ümber korraldada (Venemaa turgude ära langemise tõttu). Positiivne on, et varasem sarnaste kaubandusmeetmete kehtestamine on praeguseks ELi ja Ukraina vahelisi kaubavooge juba suurendanud.
               

Indrek Tarand (Verts/ALE),
in writing. – Regarding the situation in Ukraine, where the Russian Federation has occupied the Crimean Peninsula and is constantly engaging in active warfare in Eastern Ukraine, there is definitely a need for Europe to support Ukraine in one way or another. Regarding this report on the temporary autonomous trade measures for Ukraine, and the idea to increase the trade flows concerning the import of certain agricultural products and to grant concessions in the form of autonomous trade measures in selected industrial products, this seems to be positive for the acceleration of the elimination of customs duties on trade between the EU and Ukraine. One must also reiterate that Ukraine must continue strengthening the rule of law, human rights and the separation of power in their country and actively fighting corruption and organised crime.
17.   Sri Lanka GSP+ (debate)

Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia jest oświadczenie Komisji w sprawie Sri Lanki GSP+.
               

Cecilia Malmström,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, this debate is about Sri Lanka. As you know, we are now granting the Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP+) to Sri Lanka and thereby we recognise and support the historic political change in Sri Lanka which began with the election of a new President and Government two years ago.
That resulted in a Government that launched an ambitious reform agenda, including reconciliation and justice, after the end of a very painful civil war. A major political priority was to re-engage with the international community and the EU, so Sri Lanka reapplied for GSP+ preferences. An unprecedented achievement was also that Sri Lanka decided to co-sponsor the United Nations Human Rights Council resolution on promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights. I welcome the vote here in plenary on 27 April on GSP+, which, I believe, signals Parliament's ambition actively to engage with Sri Lanka.
But of course this GSP+ is not a blank cheque. Just as with other GSP+ beneficiaries, the EU intends to hold Sri Lanka to its commitment to improve sustainable development, human rights and good governance. Sri Lanka will now be covered by one of the fundamental pillars of GSP+, the monitoring mechanism, which implies three things. Firstly, it implies written questions, the so-called scorecards, where we ask the GSP countries to detail how they are addressing shortcomings in the implementation of the relevant 27 international conventions. Secondly, we have regular dialogues with the authorities, as well as GSP missions and regular interaction with, for instance, the International Labour Organisation, the various monitoring bodies, business, trade unions and NGOs in order to have a broad and deep understanding of the situation in the country. Thirdly, we have a dialogue on human rights. With Sri Lanka we already have a well-functioning working group on democracy, good governance and human rights, and that is broader than the GSP+-related human rights conventions.
The information gathered during the GSP+ monitoring process is reflected in our biannual reports to Parliament and the Council. The next one will come by the end of this year. The European Parliament plays – you play – a very important role in this monitoring process because you submit relevant information to us and you use your political leverage to call for visible progress in GSP countries. So we will take the monitoring of Sri Lanka just as seriously as we take it for all the GSP+ beneficiaries. We are actually planning to do a first monitoring mission as early as next September to include Sri Lanka in the 2018 GSP+ implementation reports.
The fact that we are now granting them GSP+ status does not mean that we are fully satisfied with the situation. We have been explicit that there are a number of shortcomings that need to be addressed. I have raised this with the relevant Ministers personally and we expect movement and progress from the Government on these issues.
Some have doubts about the ability of Sri Lanka's Government to implement tough reforms. However, it is undeniable that the human rights situation has improved with the new Government. We have also seen that the Government is resolved to act on controversial issues, for instance repealing and replacing the controversial Prevention of Terrorism Act, and ensuring that persons arrested are not denied access to legal counsel. So I am confident that this measure, GSP+ for Sri Lanka, can help the country to develop its economy on sound foundations that respect human rights and labour rights, and that are environmentally sustainable. This is, of course, needed in a country which is struggling to find a way forward in a process of reconciliation after a very troublesome and difficult past.

Thomas Mann,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kollegen! Am Anfang meiner Rede steht die Anteilnahme für die Opfer der verheerenden Überschwemmungen und Erdrutsche in der letzten Woche in Sri Lanka.
               

                  Ist das Land reif für das APS+- Programm? Die EVP meint: ja. Es geht doch nicht nur um Zollermäßigungen und nicht nur um den leichteren Zugang zu den europäischen Märkten. Mit fast einem Drittel der Exporte ist die EU der größte Absatzmarkt für Sri Lanka. Es geht auch darum, durch ein zeitgemäßes Abkommen Reformen zu unterstützen, etwa die Stärkung der Rechtsstaatlichkeit und die Fortentwicklung der Menschenrechte.
               

                  Als Mitglied der Südasien-Delegation habe ich mehrfach Sri Lanka besucht und konnte mich von den Maßnahmen bei der Befriedung des Landes überzeugen. Minenaufräumarbeiten, Aufbau zerstörter Dörfer, Wiederansiedlung der Menschen in der einstigen Heimat. Sri Lanka ist engagiert im UN-Menschenrechtsrat und hat sich zur Wiederversöhnung verpflichtet. Die meisten ihrer Millenniums-Entwicklungsziele haben sie erreicht – bei der Bildung, im Gleichberechtigungsbereich und beim Thema Gesundheit.
               

                  Es gibt aber immer noch Probleme: Die Antiterrorgesetzgebung muss in Einklang mit Menschenrechtskonventionen kommen, Frauen- und Kinderrechte müssen weiter verstärkt werden, und viele Vorwürfe, die es gegenüber den Sicherheitskräften gibt, müssen untersucht werden. Da gibt es ein APS+- Kontrollsystem – es muss zum Einsatz kommen. Bei den EU-Handelspartnern sollen Menschenrechte nicht nur auf dem Papier stehen, sondern müssen im Alltag erlebbar sein – und zwar für alle Bevölkerungsschichten.
               

Agnes Jongerius,
namens de S&D-Fractie. – Onze fractie steunt in principe het toekennen van SAP+ aan Sri Lanka, want het land heeft zich na een verschrikkelijke burgeroorlog van een decennium ontzettend knap herpakt. De stappen die zijn gezet om vrede en harmonisatie te brengen, verdienen onze steun. De bevolking verdient een kans op welvaart en geluk.
               

                  Maar er zijn nog losse eindjes en nog niet geregelde zaken, bijvoorbeeld de terrorisme-wetgeving of de macht van het leger. Ook blijven we van de VN-rapporteur voor de mensenrechten horen dat de toestand nog lang niet helemaal in orde is. Daarom is mijn stelling: wij geven Sri Lanka het voordeel van de twijfel. Maar ik reken erop dat de Commissie, wat evaluatie en handhaving betreft, alles op alles zet om ervoor te zorgen dat al die andere losse punten nog op orde komen. Ik ben blij dat de commissaris gezegd heeft dat te zullen doen.
               

                  Laten we het SAP+-mechanisme gebruiken als wortel en stok, niet alleen voor Sri Lanka maar ook voor andere SAP+-landen, zoals de Filipijnen, om ervoor te zorgen dat zij zich aan hun afspraken houden. Dus ja, beloon Sri Lanka na een lange lijdensweg. Maar nee, geef de regering van het land geen vrijkaart om de broodnodige hervormingen verder uit te stellen. Een Nederlands gezegde luidt immers: van uitstel komt afstel. En van afstel komt dan het verlies van markttoegang en dat wensen we het land niet toe. Dank u wel.
               

(De spreker gaat in op een ‘blauwe kaart’-vraag overeenkomstig artikel 162, lid 8, van het Reglement.)


James Carver (EFDD),
blue-card question. – Thank you, Ms Jongerius, for taking my blue card. You criticised the delay in the new counter-terrorism bill, but do you not appreciate that this is a very sensitive piece of legislation? It was approved by Cabinet in April 2017. It is just about to be put before the Sri Lankan parliament and of course this is so sensitive that it has to be dealt with by various civil society groups across the political parties, across society, and across international organisations as well. This is a serious matter and I do not think it is fair to criticise the Sri Lankan Government for the delay. They are actually trying to do the job properly and make sure it is a good piece of legislation.

Agnes Jongerius (S&D),

                        ‘blauwe kaart’-antwoord. – Voor mij is het duidelijk. Wij hebben het besluit genomen om Sri Lanka de SAP+-status toe te kennen, hoewel nog niet aan alle 27 criteria is voldaan. Maar als we onszelf serieus nemen, moeten we ook ervoor zorgen dat een land dat deze handelsvoordelen krijgt, alle andere stappen zet. We moeten dus ook aanstippen dat de wetgeving op dit punt in de praktijk nog veranderd moet worden. Via de toekenning van handelsvoordelen geven we het land en de regering de juiste aanmoediging om door te gaan.
               

Sajjad Karim,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, may I start by agreeing with and underscoring every word of what was stated by Commissioner Malmström in her opening address. May I also on a personal basis as Chair of the South Asia Trade Monitoring Committee congratulate Sri Lanka on this achievement, and may I thank Christofer Fjellner, my colleague who chairs the GSP+ Monitoring Committee, for his attitude and the tremendous work he put into this file.
It is quite clear that Sri Lanka today deserves the support of the international community, and Europe must play its part in that. It is also clear that if every country had achieved all of the standards that we would like to see, there would be no need for the GSP+ scheme. This provides a genuine opportunity and an incentive. I have only two things to put to the Sri Lankan Government today. One, this is an opportunity for you to provide opportunity in those areas where it is most required in Sri Lanka and in those communities where it is most required, and secondly, please do not give this Parliament any opportunity to turn its back on the grant of the GSP+ to you in the future. The monitoring mechanism requires you to comply. Please ensure that you do.

Anne-Marie Mineur,
namens de GUE/NGL-Fractie. – De mensenrechtensituatie in Sri Lanka is op papier een heel stuk verbeterd. Maar in de praktijk nog niet. Ik was er begin april en ik heb veel verhalen gehoord die daarvan getuigen. Werknemers maken veel te lange werkdagen. Ze ontvangen geen leefbaar loon. Ze worden geïntimideerd als ze lid willen worden van een vakbond of als ze willen staken. Vakbonden kunnen niet deelnemen aan collectieve onderhandelingen en krijgen geen toegang tot de werknemers en de werkplekken. Dat is flagrant in strijd met de IAO-verdragen.
               

                  Sri Lanka heeft eerder de SAP+-status gehad en heeft toen laten zien dat de voordelen niet vanzelfsprekend bij de hele bevolking terechtkomen. De verdragen die het land heeft ondertekend, moeten worden nageleefd en daar kan de Europese Commissie een positieve rol in spelen. Ik wil van commissaris Malmström graag de toezegging dat zij samen met Sri Lanka een concreet stappenplan maakt voor een daadwerkelijke tenuitvoerlegging van de SAP+-voorwaarden. Er bestaat al een stappenplan van de vakbonden van Sri Lanka om de vakbondsrechten in te voeren en tijdens mijn bezoek heeft de minister van Ontwikkeling toegezegd dat 50 % van de voordelen van SAP+ ten goede moet komen aan de werknemers. U heeft mijn brief daarover gehad. Het voorwerk is al gedaan. Pakt u de handschoen op, Mevrouw Malmström?
               

(De spreker gaat in op een ‘blauwe kaart’-vraag (artikel 162, lid 8, van het Reglement))


James Carver (EFDD),
blue-card question. – Madam Mineur, are you not missing the whole point of the GSP+ programme being put back in place? It is actually to allow the process to begin, to allow wealth to be created, and to allow success, prosperity and wealth to pass down to all levels of the working cycle. The working man and the working woman will inevitably benefit from this. I cannot see why you are criticising it.

Anne-Marie Mineur (GUE/NGL),

                        ‘blauwe kaart’-antwoord. – Dank u wel voor uw vraag. Ik ben er uiteraard voor dat deze mensen werk krijgen. Ook de vakbonden zijn daar voorstander van. Maar Sri Lanka is een land waar vakbonden nauwelijks een rol kunnen spelen en waar vooral veel buitenlandse investeerders zitten. Die zijn vooral geïnteresseerd in Sri Lanka vanwege de erg lage lonen en de enorm hoge werkdruk. Daar hebben vooral die buitenlandse investeerders veel profijt van en niet het land zelf. Ik weet dat dit het systeem is waarin we werken, maar SAP+ is bedoeld om mensen in ontwikkelingslanden vooruit te helpen. Daarom wil ik dat er een gelijk speelveld komt waarbij iedereen aan ondergrenzen voldoet en mensenrechten en arbeidsrechten gerespecteerd worden. Daar dring ik op aan.
               

Jean Lambert,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, I am also speaking in my capacity as Chair of Parliament's South Asia delegation. GSP+, as we have been hearing, is a process of engagement and better market access to the European Union in return for implementation of the 27 international conventions.
The implementation of these international norms – and I stress that these are not European Union wish lists, these are international norms – will be to the benefit of all Sri Lankans in many areas of everyday life and help towards much-needed reconciliation.
But the Commissioner is right. Effective and stringent monitoring is key, not least because many of us fear that the progress promised by the current Government of Sri Lanka is slow, whether that is on changes to the proposed counterterrorism act to bring it into line with international norms, operationalising the office of missing persons, moving on constitutional change; there are a number of areas.
I am pleased to hear that Commission monitoring will engage with a wide range of institutions such as the National Human Rights Commission, and civil society across the island, including war-affected areas and communities. It must build on the UN reports, such as that of the Committee against Torture.
A timeframe for changes must be agreed with the government, and I would be interested to know what the Commission has identified as key objectives for the end of 2017. Sri Lanka knows from its own experience that GSP+ can be withdrawn but we hope that all will benefit after so much suffering in the country, but it is only going to happen if the government of Sri Lanka delivers on its promises to its people.

Tiziana Beghin,
a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ‘Commercio o diritti umani? Questo è il problema!’
               

                  Ho citato l'Amleto, ma qui non c'è nessun dubbio amletico da sciogliere. Perché vede, lo Sri Lanka è uno dei paesi che ha violato su più larga scala i diritti umani, tuttavia è stato premiato dall'Unione europea con dazi commerciali preferenziali. È vero, il paese sta lentamente ritrovando la strada giusta del diritto e della giustizia, ma non ha ancora fatto pace con il passato, ecco perché era importante non fare concessioni in questo momento, ma usarle per far leva sulle istituzioni e continuare il processo di riconciliazione.
               

                  Tuttavia le multinazionali europee bramano l'accesso privilegiato a questo paese e alla sua manodopera a basso costo ed ecco che in questo caso Commissione e Parlamento danno loro il via libera. Colleghi, so che per molti di voi non è così, ma tra il commercio e i diritti umani per me la scelta non è difficile.
               

                  Infine, lasciatemi esprimere la mia vicinanza allo Sri Lanka che è stato colpito da una grave alluvione monsonica, possiamo avere opinioni differenti, ma di fronte a queste catastrofi siamo tutti un unico popolo.
               

Bernd Lange (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin! APS+ ist ein Scheck für die Zukunft und nicht die Bezahlung einer Tat in der Vergangenheit. Insofern ist richtig, dass wir APS+ für Sri Lanka geben, aber mit einem klaren Monitoring.
               

                  Cecilia Malmström hat gesagt: Im September gibt es schon eine Monitoring-Delegation nach Sri Lanka. Ich würde einfach sagen: Man muss besonders darauf achten, dass die unterschriebenen und ratifizierten IAO-Konventionen 87 und 98, die eben gewerkschaftliches Engagement und das gemeinsame Verhandeln ermöglichen, respektiert werden. Und da haben wir viele Vorfälle in Sri Lanka, wo das genau nicht passiert.
               

                  Deswegen würde ich der Monitoring-Gruppe mit auf den Weg geben, dass vier Punkte besonders beachtet werden. Zum einen die Frage der Gründung von Gewerkschaften in Unternehmen. Der Schwellenwert von 40 % Mitglieder ist zu hoch, und die Registrierung ist zu kompliziert. Das muss geändert werden.
               

                  Zum Zweiten müssen wir sicherstellen, dass das Mindestalter für Gewerkschaftsmitgliedschaft das gleiche ist wie das Mindestalter für die Aufnahme der Beschäftigung. Es kann nicht sein, dass jüngere Beschäftigte keine Gewerkschaftsmitglieder werden dürfen.
               

                  Drittens müssen wir klarstellen, dass die Verantwortung für Arbeitsbeziehungen beim Arbeitsministerium liegt und nicht beim Board of Investment und anderen. Viertens müssen wir sicherstellen, dass Gewerkschaften und Arbeitnehmer das Recht haben, ihre Rechte auch vor Gericht einklagen zu können.
               

                  Nehmen Sie das mit, und versuchen Sie, das bei der Regierung von Sri Lanka durchzusetzen.
               

Zgłoszenia z sali


Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, στη Σρι Λάνκα, όπως ακούστηκε, υπάρχει μια τεράστια παραβίαση των ανθρωπίνων και θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων, υπάρχει ανεξέλεγκτος ρόλος του στρατού. Η Σρι Λάνκα είναι παράδεισος για τις πολυεθνικές οι οποίες και αποκομίζουν υπερκέρδη μια και εκεί υπάρχουν μισθοί πείνας, παιδική εργασία, παραβίαση των εργασιακών δικαιωμάτων, έλλειψη προστασίας σε θέματα υγιεινής και ασφάλειας και, φυσικά, περιορισμένα συνδικαλιστικά δικαιώματα.
               

                  Έτσι, με το ενισχυμένο καθεστώς των γενικευμένων προτιμήσεων, αυτοί που κερδίζουν πρακτικά είναι οι ευρωπαϊκές και άλλες πολυεθνικές. Και στην πράξη αυτό που γίνεται είναι να έχουμε ένα αθέμιτο ανταγωνισμό, να έχουμε αθέμιτες πρακτικές, να διαλύεται η Ευρωπαϊκή κλωστοϋφαντουργία, η βιομηχανία του ιματισμού και της ένδυσης.
               

                  Επομένως, αυτό που χρειάζεται είναι να ενισχυθεί η κλωστοϋφαντουργία της ίδιας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Μην περιμένετε στη Σρι Λάνκα να αλλάξουν και να προστατεύσουν τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα. Θα συνεχίζεται η εκμετάλλευση της παιδικής εργασίας. Χρειάζονται αποφασιστικά μέτρα και κυρίως στήριξη της ίδιας της ευρωπαϊκής βιομηχανίας της κλωστοϋφαντουργίας και του ιματισμού.
               

(Ο ομιλητής δέχεται να απαντήσει σε ερώτηση με γαλάζια κάρτα (άρθρο 162 παράγραφος 8 του Κανονισμού)


Sajjad Karim (ECR),
blue-card question. – I apologise profusely for blue-carding a colleague from my own group but, based upon the comments that have just been made, Mr Marias, would you accept that we have heard all of these arguments of protectionism for European industries presented in previous cases before in this very House? But when all the time we have tested those arguments against fact and experience that is carried out in the marketplace, they have always failed to live up to the claims that were made at the outset, and in fact our industries have not been disadvantaged by granting such schemes to other countries.

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR),
απάντηση ‘γαλάζια κάρτα’
                     . – Θα διαφωνήσω με τον κύριο Karim, γιατί αυτό που έχουμε δει και στη Σρι Λάνκα και στο Μπανγκλαντές και στις χώρες της Ασίας είναι μια υπερεκμετάλλευση των ίδιων των εργαζομένων. Έχουμε παιδική εργασία, δεν έχουμε τήρηση των εργασιακών δικαιωμάτων. Αυτό δημιουργεί έναν αθέμιτο ανταγωνισμό, δεν έχουμε θεμιτές και σωστές πρακτικές στο διεθνές εμπόριο. Φυσικά, έτσι παράγουν φτηνά εμπορεύματα τα οποία ανταγωνίζονται αθέμιτα τα ίδια τα εμπορεύματα που παράγονται στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Επομένως, δεν υπάρχει ούτε δίκαιο εμπόριο, ούτε ανταγωνισμός, αλλά παράνομες πρακτικές εις βάρος των ίδιων των εργαζομένων και των επιχειρήσεων της Ευρώπης.
               

Bronis Ropė (Verts/ALE). – Kalbėdami apie Bendrosios prekybos preferencijų sistemos taikymą Šri Lankai, turime atsižvelgti, manau, į du aspektus. Visų prima – Šri Lanka po trijų dešimtmečių pilietinio karo ir terorizmo yra viena sparčiausiai augančių ekonomikų pasaulyje. Jos augimas pernai siekė daugiau nei 16 procentų ir beveik dvigubai viršija atitinkamus rodiklius regione. Ir didele dalimi taip yra dėl Bendrosios preferencijų sistemos užtikrinamos prieigos prie Europos Sąjungos bendrosios rinkos. Atitinkamai, Europos Sąjunga, kaip vertybėmis pagrįsta bendruomenė, turi, sakyčiau, pareigą užtikrinti, kad valstybė, besinaudojanti Europos Sąjungos teikiamomis galimybės, nepažeidinėtų ir jos vertybių. Šioje vietoje esu įsitikinęs, kad Komisija turi puikią galimybę pradėti formuoti politikos precedentą, nuolat vertindama, kiek palengvintomis patekimo į Bendrąją rinką galimybėmis besinaudojančios šalys laikosi europinių vertybių.
               

Γεώργιος Επιτήδειος (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, είναι γεγονός ότι η κυβέρνηση της Σρι Λάνκα έχει σημειώσει κάποιες προόδους σχετικά με την αποκατάσταση της ειρήνης στη χώρα, μετά από μία δεκαετία εμφύλια σύρραξη, καθώς επίσης και στην προσπάθεια που καταβάλλει να διοικήσει δημοκρατικά τη χώρα αυτή. Το κατά πόσον βεβαίως θα μπορέσει να ανταποκριθεί στις δεσμεύσεις που έχει αναλάβει, σχετικά με την εφαρμογή των διεθνών συνθηκών για την προστασία των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων, καθώς επίσης και για την εργασία και τις μεταρρυθμίσεις που πρέπει να γίνουν όπως, παραδείγματος χάρη, στον περιορισμό των δικαιωμάτων του στρατού, στον αντιτρομοκρατικό νόμο και σε όλα τα άλλα, θα αποτελέσει αντικείμενο μιας εξέτασης την οποία οφείλουμε να έχουμε ως Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, γιατί της έχουμε χορηγήσει το ενισχυμένο καθεστώς των γενικευμένων προτιμήσεων και είναι μια ευκαιρία να μπορέσει να αναπτυχθεί οικονομία της.
               

                  Θα ήθελα όμως, στο σημείο αυτό και εγώ να επισημάνω ότι πρέπει να λάβουμε τα μέτρα μας, ούτως ώστε να μην δημιουργούμε συνθήκες αθεμίτου ανταγωνισμού για τους αντίστοιχους εργαζομένους της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και κυρίως του ευρωπαϊκού Νότου.
               

(Koniec pytań zgłoszeń z sali)


Cecilia Malmström,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you all for this very important debate. The EU is already today Sri Lanka's biggest trading partner, taking 30% of the country's exports. Therefore, the potential to boost exports in clothing, fisheries, tea, spices, machinery and other products, as well as to attract investment, is of course considerable. This would bring clear benefits to the people and the local communities in Sri Lanka.
Granting GSP+ to the country gives a clear political signal to Sri Lanka that we, the European Union, want to engage, to invest in its sustainable development, to support a government which has as its prime priority to re-engage with the EU and the United Nations system, and to rebuild and reconcile the country after so many years of terrible civil war.
Nobody denies that there are still problems in Sri Lanka. It takes time to reform a country like this. We will engage with the government as we have done and we will deepen that engagement. We will be watching to ensure that they respect the 27 international conventions that they have signed up to. We will be watching the anti-torture legislation and the terrorist legislation. We will be watching the labour laws. We will be watching the situation for LGTBI persons. We are concerned about the criminalisation of homosexuality, for instance. Experience shows that a positive engagement with a GSP+ country contributes to economic development and creates platforms and possibilities for dialogue on all these issues with the government, of course, as well as with business, trade unions and civil society organisations. This in turn builds the building blocks for improvement.
We will be dedicated to the monitoring and we will be looking forward to informing you on this process. As I said, we are already sending a mission in September this year, and I will be happy to report back when that mission has written its report. So thank you very much for your support on this. Thank you for this debate, and I am looking forward to working with you on Sri Lanka in the future as well.

Przewodniczący. – Zamykam dyskusję nad tym punktem porządku dnia.
               


Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 162)



Clara Eugenia Aguilera García (S&D),
por escrito. – En los últimos años, Sri Lanka ha dado pasos importantes para mejorar la gobernanza y el respeto de los derechos humanos, especialmente respecto a la investigación de los casos de personas desaparecidas, ofrecer una mejor protección a los testigos y a las víctimas, luchar contra el trabajo infantil y restablecer la independencia de instituciones clave como la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos. Sin embargo, quedan todavía muchos progresos por realizar. En particular, Sri Lanka debe garantizar que su legislación antiterrorista se ajuste plenamente a las convenciones internacionales de derechos humanos, poner fin al uso de la tortura por las fuerzas de seguridad y la impunidad conexa y adoptar políticas y procesos legislativos para mejorar los derechos de las mujeres, los niños y la población tamil. La concesión a Sri Lanka del régimen especial del Sistema de Preferencias Generalizadas de la UE (SPG+) ofrece el incentivo de mejorar el acceso comercial al mercado de la UE a condición de ratificar y avanzar en la aplicación de veintisiete convenios internacionales en materia de derechos humanos, condiciones laborales, protección del medio ambiente y buena gobernanza, estableciendo para ello mecanismos de seguimiento sobre la aplicación efectiva de los mismos.
               

José Blanco López (S&D),
por escrito. – En los últimos años, Sri Lanka ha dado pasos importantes para mejorar la gobernanza y el respeto de los derechos humanos, especialmente respecto a la investigación de los casos de personas desaparecidas, ofrecer una mejor protección a los testigos y a las víctimas, luchar contra el trabajo infantil y restablecer la independencia de instituciones clave como la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos. Sin embargo, quedan todavía muchos progresos por realizar. En particular, Sri Lanka debe garantizar que su legislación antiterrorista se ajuste plenamente a las convenciones internacionales de derechos humanos, poner fin al uso de la tortura por las fuerzas de seguridad y la impunidad conexa y adoptar políticas y procesos legislativos para mejorar los derechos de las mujeres, los niños y la población tamil. La concesión a Sri Lanka del régimen especial del Sistema de Preferencias Generalizadas de la UE (SPG+) ofrece el incentivo de mejorar el acceso comercial al mercado de la UE a condición de ratificar y avanzar en la aplicación de veintisiete convenios internacionales en materia de derechos humanos, condiciones laborales, protección del medio ambiente y buena gobernanza, estableciendo para ello mecanismos de seguimiento sobre la aplicación efectiva de los mismos.
               

Soledad Cabezón Ruiz (S&D),
por escrito. – En los últimos años, Sri Lanka ha dado pasos importantes para mejorar la gobernanza y el respeto de los derechos humanos, especialmente respecto a la investigación de los casos de personas desaparecidas, ofrecer una mejor protección a los testigos y a las víctimas, luchar contra el trabajo infantil y restablecer la independencia de instituciones clave como la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos. Sin embargo, quedan todavía muchos progresos por realizar. En particular, Sri Lanka debe garantizar que su legislación antiterrorista se ajuste plenamente a las convenciones internacionales de derechos humanos, poner fin al uso de la tortura por las fuerzas de seguridad y la impunidad conexa y adoptar políticas y procesos legislativos para mejorar los derechos de las mujeres, los niños y la población tamil. La concesión a Sri Lanka del régimen especial del Sistema de Preferencias Generalizadas de la UE (SPG+) ofrece el incentivo de mejorar el acceso comercial al mercado de la UE a condición de ratificar y avanzar en la aplicación de veintisiete convenios internacionales en materia de derechos humanos, condiciones laborales, protección del medio ambiente y buena gobernanza, estableciendo para ello mecanismos de seguimiento sobre la aplicación efectiva de los mismos.
               

Iratxe García Pérez (S&D),
por escrito. – En los últimos años, Sri Lanka ha dado pasos importantes para mejorar la gobernanza y el respeto de los derechos humanos, en particular en la investigación de los casos de personas desaparecidas, la protección a los testigos y a las víctimas, la lucha contra el trabajo infantil y el restablecimiento de la independencia de instituciones clave como la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos. Sin embargo, quedan todavía muchos progresos por realizar. En particular, Sri Lanka debe garantizar que su legislación antiterrorista se ajuste plenamente a las convenciones internacionales de derechos humanos. Debe, asimismo, poner fin al uso de la tortura por las fuerzas de seguridad y la impunidad conexa y adoptar políticas y procesos legislativos para mejorar los derechos de las mujeres, los niños y la población tamil. La concesión a Sri Lanka del régimen especial del Sistema de Preferencias Generalizadas de la UE (SPG+) ofrece el incentivo de mejorar el acceso comercial al mercado de la UE a condición de ratificar y avanzar en la aplicación de veintisiete convenios internacionales en materia de derechos humanos, condiciones laborales, protección del medio ambiente y buena gobernanza, estableciendo para ello mecanismos de seguimiento sobre la aplicación efectiva de los mismos.
               

Eider Gardiazabal Rubial (S&D),
por escrito. – En los últimos años, Sri Lanka ha dado pasos importantes para mejorar la gobernanza y el respeto de los derechos humanos, especialmente respecto a la investigación de los casos de personas desaparecidas, ofrecer una mejor protección a los testigos y a las víctimas, luchar contra el trabajo infantil y restablecer la independencia de instituciones clave como la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos. Sin embargo, quedan todavía muchos progresos por realizar. En particular, Sri Lanka debe garantizar que su legislación antiterrorista se ajuste plenamente a las convenciones internacionales de derechos humanos, poner fin al uso de la tortura por las fuerzas de seguridad y la impunidad conexa y adoptar políticas y procesos legislativos para mejorar los derechos de las mujeres, los niños y la población tamil. La concesión a Sri Lanka del régimen especial del Sistema de Preferencias Generalizadas de la UE (SPG+) ofrece el incentivo de mejorar el acceso comercial al mercado de la UE a condición de ratificar y avanzar en la aplicación de veintisiete convenios internacionales en materia de derechos humanos, condiciones laborales, protección del medio ambiente y buena gobernanza, estableciendo para ello mecanismos de seguimiento sobre la aplicación efectiva de los mismos.
               

Enrique Guerrero Salom (S&D),
por escrito. – En los últimos años, Sri Lanka ha dado pasos importantes para mejorar la gobernanza y el respeto de los derechos humanos, especialmente respecto a la investigación de los casos de personas desaparecidas, ofrecer una mejor protección a los testigos y a las víctimas, luchar contra el trabajo infantil y restablecer la independencia de instituciones clave como la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos. Sin embargo, quedan todavía muchos progresos por realizar. En particular, Sri Lanka debe garantizar que su legislación antiterrorista se ajuste plenamente a las convenciones internacionales de derechos humanos, poner fin al uso de la tortura por las fuerzas de seguridad y la impunidad conexa y adoptar políticas y procesos legislativos para mejorar los derechos de las mujeres, los niños y la población tamil. La concesión a Sri Lanka del régimen especial del Sistema de Preferencias Generalizadas de la UE (SPG+) ofrece el incentivo de mejorar el acceso comercial al mercado de la UE a condición de ratificar y avanzar en la aplicación de veintisiete convenios internacionales en materia de derechos humanos, condiciones laborales, protección del medio ambiente y buena gobernanza, estableciendo para ello mecanismos de seguimiento sobre la aplicación efectiva de los mismos.
               

Sergio Gutiérrez Prieto (S&D),
por escrito. – En los últimos años, Sri Lanka ha dado pasos importantes para mejorar la gobernanza y el respeto de los derechos humanos, especialmente respecto a la investigación de los casos de personas desaparecidas, ofrecer una mejor protección a los testigos y a las víctimas, luchar contra el trabajo infantil y restablecer la independencia de instituciones clave como la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos. Sin embargo, quedan todavía muchos progresos por realizar. En particular, Sri Lanka debe garantizar que su legislación antiterrorista se ajuste plenamente a las convenciones internacionales de derechos humanos, poner fin al uso de la tortura por las fuerzas de seguridad y la impunidad conexa y adoptar políticas y procesos legislativos para mejorar los derechos de las mujeres, los niños y la población tamil. La concesión a Sri Lanka del régimen especial del Sistema de Preferencias Generalizadas de la UE (SPG+) ofrece el incentivo de mejorar el acceso comercial al mercado de la UE a condición de ratificar y avanzar en la aplicación de veintisiete convenios internacionales en materia de derechos humanos, condiciones laborales, protección del medio ambiente y buena gobernanza, estableciendo para ello mecanismos de seguimiento sobre la aplicación efectiva de los mismos.
               

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D),
por escrito. – En los últimos años, Sri Lanka ha dado pasos importantes para mejorar la gobernanza y el respeto de los derechos humanos, especialmente respecto a la investigación de los casos de personas desaparecidas, ofrecer una mejor protección a los testigos y a las víctimas, luchar contra el trabajo infantil y restablecer la independencia de instituciones clave como la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos. Sin embargo, quedan todavía muchos progresos por realizar. En particular, Sri Lanka debe garantizar que su legislación antiterrorista se ajuste plenamente a las convenciones internacionales de derechos humanos, poner fin al uso de la tortura por las fuerzas de seguridad y la impunidad conexa y adoptar políticas y procesos legislativos para mejorar los derechos de las mujeres, los niños y la población tamil. La concesión a Sri Lanka del régimen especial del Sistema de Preferencias Generalizadas de la UE (SPG+) ofrece el incentivo de mejorar el acceso comercial al mercado de la UE a condición de ratificar y avanzar en la aplicación de veintisiete convenios internacionales en materia de derechos humanos, condiciones laborales, protección del medio ambiente y buena gobernanza, estableciendo para ello mecanismos de seguimiento sobre la aplicación efectiva de los mismos.
               

Javi López (S&D),
por escrito. – En los últimos años, Sri Lanka ha dado pasos importantes para mejorar la gobernanza y el respeto de los derechos humanos, especialmente respecto a la investigación de los casos de personas desaparecidas, ofrecer una mejor protección a los testigos y a las víctimas, luchar contra el trabajo infantil y restablecer la independencia de instituciones clave como la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos. Sin embargo, quedan todavía muchos progresos por realizar. En particular, Sri Lanka debe garantizar que su legislación antiterrorista se ajuste plenamente a las convenciones internacionales de derechos humanos, poner fin al uso de la tortura por las fuerzas de seguridad y la impunidad conexa y adoptar políticas y procesos legislativos para mejorar los derechos de las mujeres, los niños y la población tamil. La concesión a Sri Lanka del régimen especial del Sistema de Preferencias Generalizadas de la UE (SPG+) ofrece el incentivo de mejorar el acceso comercial al mercado de la UE a condición de ratificar y avanzar en la aplicación de veintisiete convenios internacionales en materia de derechos humanos, condiciones laborales, protección del medio ambiente y buena gobernanza, estableciendo para ello mecanismos de seguimiento sobre la aplicación efectiva de los mismos.
               

Inmaculada Rodríguez-Piñero Fernández (S&D),
por escrito. – En los últimos años, Sri Lanka ha dado pasos importantes para mejorar la gobernanza y el respeto de los derechos humanos, especialmente respecto a la investigación de los casos de personas desaparecidas, ofrecer una mejor protección a los testigos y a las víctimas, luchar contra el trabajo infantil y restablecer la independencia de instituciones clave como la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos. Sin embargo, quedan todavía muchos progresos por realizar. En particular, Sri Lanka debe garantizar que su legislación antiterrorista se ajuste plenamente a las convenciones internacionales de derechos humanos, poner fin al uso de la tortura por las fuerzas de seguridad y la impunidad conexa y adoptar políticas y procesos legislativos para mejorar los derechos de las mujeres, los niños y la población tamil. La concesión a Sri Lanka del régimen especial del Sistema de Preferencias Generalizadas de la UE (SPG+) ofrece el incentivo de mejorar el acceso comercial al mercado de la UE a condición de ratificar y avanzar en la aplicación de veintisiete convenios internacionales en materia de derechos humanos, condiciones laborales, protección del medio ambiente y buena gobernanza, estableciendo para ello mecanismos de seguimiento sobre la aplicación efectiva de los mismos.
               

Elena Valenciano (S&D),
por escrito. – En los últimos años, Sri Lanka ha dado pasos importantes para mejorar la gobernanza y el respeto de los derechos humanos, especialmente respecto a la investigación de los casos de personas desaparecidas, ofrecer una mejor protección a los testigos y a las víctimas, luchar contra el trabajo infantil y restablecer la independencia de instituciones clave como la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos. Sin embargo, quedan todavía muchos progresos por realizar. En particular, Sri Lanka debe garantizar que su legislación antiterrorista se ajuste plenamente a las convenciones internacionales de derechos humanos, poner fin al uso de la tortura por las fuerzas de seguridad y la impunidad conexa y adoptar políticas y procesos legislativos para mejorar los derechos de las mujeres, los niños y la población tamil. La concesión a Sri Lanka del régimen especial del Sistema de Preferencias Generalizadas de la UE (SPG+) ofrece el incentivo de mejorar el acceso comercial al mercado de la UE a condición de ratificar y avanzar en la aplicación de veintisiete convenios internacionales en materia de derechos humanos, condiciones laborales, protección del medio ambiente y buena gobernanza, estableciendo para ello mecanismos de seguimiento sobre la aplicación efectiva de los mismos.
               
18.   Multiannual Framework for the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights for 2018-2022 — Multiannual Framework for the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights for 2018-2022 (debate)

Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia jest wspólna debata na temat:
               






—



                        zalecenia sporządzonego przez Angelikę Mlinar w imieniu Komisji Wolności Obywatelskich, Sprawiedliwości i Spraw Wewnętrznych w sprawie zaleceń dotyczących projektu decyzji Rady ustanawiającej wieloletnie ramy prac dla Agencji Praw Podstawowych Unii Europejskiej na lata 2018-2022 (14423/2016 — C8-0528/2016 - 2016/0204(APP)) oraz
                     










—



                        oświadczenia Rady i Komisji w sprawie wieloletnich ramy dla Agencji Praw Podstawowych UE na lata 2018-2022 (2017/2702(RSP)).
                     





Angelika Mlinar,
rapporteur. – Mr President, I would like to start by expressing my sincere gratitude to the Commission, the Council and all the shadow rapporteurs for their cooperation and support during this process. As I have already said, I find the Council decision once again not to include police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the new Multiannual Framework for the Agency to be regrettable.
This is mainly for two reasons. First, I believe that from a legal point of view it is the wrong decision. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters have become part of European Union law and are therefore legally covered by the scope of the Agency's tasks. The second reason is related to the evolving reality in the field of fundamental rights. Including police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the Multiannual Framework would better reflect the needs on the ground, by giving the Agency the right of initiative in these areas.
Currently, the Agency for Fundamental Rights can act only upon request by the institutions to provide comprehensive analyses in these areas, which are of obvious relevance to fundamental rights. A change in this direction would send a very important signal, especially given the recent and ongoing legislative developments at EU level in this field. As already mentioned, this is not the first time that the Council has refused to include these areas of competence – as suggested by the Commission in its initial proposal – hiding its political will behind a legal argument. During the past month we have had a very constructive, open and transparent interinstitutional dialogue and, as rapporteur, I could not wish for a better working method.
However, I would like to remind the Commission and the Council that the result achieved is not the end of the process, but actually the beginning. Tomorrow, hopefully – and I am pretty sure that this will happen – Parliament will give its consent to the Council decision and will vote on a joint motion for a resolution, which I proposed with the support of the majority of my colleagues in this House. The goal is to strengthen the opinions expressed by the Council and the Commission in their respective written statements, which were Parliament's conditio sine qua non for giving our consent.
I really appreciate the will demonstrated by both institutions to improve the working procedures for the governance and functioning of the Agency for Fundamental Rights and to clarify that the Agency's competence also includes former third-pillar matters. However, fair interinstitutional cooperation will require additional action to be taken in the near future, starting with the Council and Commission agreement on the interpretation of the Agency's founding regulation. Moreover, without prejudice to its right of initiative, I warmly invite the Commission, once the external evaluation of the Agency has been concluded, to present the proposal for amendments to the Agency's regulation. This revision is necessary in order to improve the procedures for governance and for the functioning of the Agency, and to align the regulation with the Lisbon Treaty.
Last but not least, I would like to thank the Agency for its good cooperation and to reiterate the importance of its work and its key role in the promotion of fundamental rights across the European Union.

Matti Maasikas,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, I am very grateful for this opportunity to speak on behalf of the Council on the proposal for a Council Decision establishing a Multiannual Framework for the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the years 2018-2022.
Every five years the Council has to adopt this multiannual framework. It determines the thematic areas of the agency's work on the basis of the agency's founding Regulation (EC) No 168/2007. This is essential to ensure the continued functioning of the agency, which makes such an important contribution to fundamental rights in the Union, a work that the Council highly values.
I would like to inform you about the statement of the Council concerning the review of the Multiannual Framework 2018-2022 made in December 2016 and entered into the Council Minutes. I quote: ‘Under Article 30, paragraphs 3 and 4, of Council Regulation No 168/2007, an independent external evaluation of the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights will be carried out in 2017. As stipulated in Article 31(2) of this Regulation, the Commission, after having assessed the evaluation report and recommendations made on that basis by the Agency's management board, may consider submitting any proposals for amendments to the Regulation which it considers necessary. In this context, the Council agrees that it will consider carefully any proposals for amendments to the Regulation that the Commission may decide to submit, including those pertaining to the remit of the Agency to cover the areas of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. The Council further agrees that it will consider carefully any proposals to improve procedures for the governance and functioning of the agency.’
               
The Council trusts that this statement will enable Parliament to give its consent to the proposed next multiannual framework for the Fundamental Rights Agency. This framework will allow the agency to continue to deliver high-quality work in the area of fundamental rights in the year 2018 and beyond.

Elnökváltás: GÁLL–PELCZ ILDIKÓ


alelnök


Věra Jourová,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, first of all I would like to thank Ms Mlinar for her constructive dialogue with all parties concerned and for proposing that the European Parliament gives its consent to the Council's draft compromise text on the Agency's Multiannual Framework for 2018-2022.
Like the rapporteur, the Commission deeply regrets that the text agreed in the Council excludes the thematic areas of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, and indeed this is not for the first time.
The Commission has always insisted on the inclusion of these thematic areas in the Agency's Multiannual Framework. There is no reason why the Agency should not collect data on all aspects relating to the area of freedom, security and justice, especially in the current context. Police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters are extremely important in the fight against trafficking of human beings, organised crime and combating terrorism. There are also sensitive areas from the point of view of fundamental rights. It is important that the Agency can provide support through reliable and comparable data and the collection of best practices and initiatives.
We cannot ignore the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and its consequences. The pillars have disappeared, there is only one law of the Union. The Commission will thus continue to ask the Agency to carry out tasks in these areas, even if they are kept outside the Multiannual Framework.
The Commission made all efforts to have these thematic areas in the Fundamental Rights Agency's new framework, but the Council has unfortunately not achieved the unanimous agreement necessary. The Commission prepared a formal written declaration regretting the exclusion of the set thematic areas, which we will ask to have included in the European Parliament, as well as Coreper and Council, minutes.
Let me also underline that the external evaluation of the Fundamental Rights Agency is ongoing and will deliver its findings at the end of this year, and on that basis, the Agency's Management Board will make recommendations to the Commission. At the end of this process we will see whether any modification to the Fundamental Rights Agency founding Regulation will prove necessary. This being said, and as also expressed by Ms Mlinar, it is crucial that the new Multiannual Framework of the Agency enters into force as of 1 January 2018. The consent of the European Parliament is essential and I would like to express my full confidence that the plenary will vote to give such consent, allowing for the final adoption of the framework in the Council by the end of this year.

József Nagy,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, Commissioner, Minister, as the shadow rapporteur of the EPP, I would like at first to say thank you to our rapporteur Angelika Mlinar for her really great job and professional approach.
Let me remind that the mandate of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the next four years is to work in eight huge thematic areas, namely equality and discrimination based on sex, race, ethnic origin, or based on language, religion or political opinion. This Agency also produces research and surveys on discrimination based on disability, age or sexual orientation, or on membership of any national minority. The FRA will be responsible not only for the protection of personal data, but also for migration, asylum and integration of refugees and migrants. Other important issues are racism, xenophobia and related intolerance, as well as children's rights.
Last, but not least, the Agency takes care of the victims of crime and access to justice. However, some of you complained about their exclusion of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. Our legal services confirmed that the current legal basis does not allow such an addition. As Madam Mlinar pointed out, it would be a highly sensitive change, but there is a possibility to adjust the thematic areas by changing the establishing regulation of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights.

Soraya Post (S&D). – Madam President, I would like to thank Angelika Milnar and other colleagues for producing this report. As a shadow from the S&D Group, I wish you good luck, because you did this work very professionally and I liked cooperating with you.
I would like to start by thanking to FRA for their excellent work, which has become essential in recent years. Just as in all the other thematic areas, we need FRA's data and recommendations relating to the field of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters as well. That is why I would like to urge the Council and the Commission to make the necessary legislative changes to open the Agency's mandate to the former third pillar matters.
I would also like, before the Commission and the Council, to express my special appreciation for FRA's research into the situation of Roma in the EU, which is vital for monitoring the efficiency and shortcomings of the policies of the EU and those of its Member States. We especially welcome the Agency's research-based recommendations concerning successful ways of fighting anti-Gypsyism and securing the Roma people's access to, and enjoyment of, their human rights. It is essential that FRA continues its work in this much-neglected field.
To this end, I would like the Commission and the Council to encourage FRA to focus on anti-Gypsyism during their work on Roma issues, to prepare a study on anti-Gypsyism in the EU and in the candidate countries, and to monitor it in all the relevant fields.

Branislav Škripek,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, we can be proud of a Union which commits to preserving the God-given gifts of life and human dignity for all of us. We should deeply value fundamental rights for all, both in our nation-states and in our cooperation.
The Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) has a duty to gather data on how well we are doing and to offer solutions to the institutions and Member States seeking to safeguard them. They are servants of our Union. As such, we must carefully cost and evaluate the added value to be gained if new areas of competence are to be given to them or not.
In the past doubts have been raised over the methodology ensuring certain minorities, as we can read in the report on homophobia, transphobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity. Costly research was weakened by respondents being able to enter the data multiple times and without further checks. I cannot, therefore, support any expansion of FRA topics and I would question whether this would be given real value for taxpayers' money.

Nathalie Griesbeck,
au nom du groupe ALDE. – Madame la Présidente, je souhaite adresser mes premiers mots aux équipes et au directeur de l'Agence pour les remercier pour leurs travaux et pour leurs recherches, qui nourrissent indubitablement nos travaux parlementaires, pour l'expertise aussi qu'ils ont développée. Je voudrais rappeler – comme l'ont fait les collègues – l'importance de leur rôle dans la promotion des droits et des libertés fondamentales, et ce à travers toute l'Union européenne.
                  

                     Deux points rapidement. Premièrement, sur le cadre pluriannuel de travail de l'Agence – comme cela a été souligné par les collègues et comme cela a été évoqué par Mme la commissaire –, je regrette aussi vivement l'absence des deux thématiques de coopération policière et de coopération judiciaire en matière pénale dans le cadre pluriannuel de l'Agence, alors que ces thématiques sont de toute évidence pertinentes pour les droits fondamentaux et qu'il y a évidemment, aujourd'hui même, beaucoup à faire en termes de respect des droits dans ce domaine. Je le déplore d'autant plus que le programme démontre la capacité de l'Agence à s'adapter, en général, aux nouvelles réalités de notre société européenne.
                  

                     Et notre accord aujourd'hui, Madame la Commissaire, Monsieur le représentant du Conseil, ne vous est donné au fond qu'à une condition: que le règlement portant création de l'Agence soit modifié rapidement pour qu'elle soit enfin compétente dans tous les domaines touchant aux droits fondamentaux, c'est-à-dire à ces coopérations policière et judiciaire.
                  

                     Enfin, deuxièmement, notre Union est fondée sur des valeurs. Ces dernières font l'objet de menaces systémiques envers l'État de droit et je souhaiterais qu'on puisse accorder une plus grande indépendance à l'Agence, et qu'elle ait un pouvoir d'autosaisine et d'investigation, pour être véritablement, non seulement indépendante mais aussi impartiale et forte, et être ainsi à la hauteur de nos ambitions et de nos valeurs européennes.
                  

Marina Albiol Guzmán,
en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señora presidenta, las instituciones europeas no son las más cercanas a los ciudadanos y ciudadanas, la verdad, y por eso hay bastante desconocimiento de cómo funcionan. Por una parte, tenemos los informes legislativos, los que luego se convierten en directivas, reglamentos, que son de obligado cumplimiento, digamos, y, por otra parte, tenemos los informes no legislativos, las declaraciones, las recomendaciones, que no es que no sirvan para nada, pero más bien para poco. En realidad, en muchas ocasiones, para lo que sirven es para blanquear a la Unión Europea o para que parezca que determinados grupos políticos de esta Cámara son progresistas.
                  

                     Hoy, por ejemplo, tenemos aquí la Recomendación sobre el marco plurianual para la Agencia de los Derechos Fundamentales de la UE. Claro, este es de los del segundo tipo —de segunda clase—, y por eso habla de promover la igualdad, de no discriminación, de integración para las personas migrantes, de lucha contra la xenofobia y de lucha contra la gitanofobia. Y estarán de acuerdo con estas cuestiones las mismas personas que hace unas semanas votaban a favor de un informe —ese sí, legislativo— para deportar a las personas migrantes.
                  

                     El marco plurianual para la Agencia de los Derechos Fundamentales será estupendo. Y yo me alegro. Pero ¿de qué sirve? ¿De qué sirve si continúan construyendo vallas en las fronteras, si continúan obligando a las personas trans a la esterilización o si continúan segregando a los niños y niñas gitanos en las escuelas? La verdad es que no servirá más bien para nada. Servirá, en todo caso, para que parezca que a algunas personas de esta Cámara les preocupan los derechos humanos.
                  

Ulrike Lunacek,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, first of all, I would like to thank colleague rapporteur Angelika Mlinar and all the shadows for the very good cooperation and very proactive attitude in trying to get through what the majority here wants. I would also like to say a big thank you to the Fundamental Rights Agency for all the great work it has been doing, all the staff there, for supporting us in our work for fundamental rights inside the European Union.
What the Fundamental Rights Agency has been doing over these last years is something we definitely need. It is unique in providing reliable and comparative data, EU-wide data and studies, on all kinds of discrimination that human beings on this continent still face, be it because of being Roma, as has been mentioned already by my colleague Soraya Post, but also LGBTI people, asylum seekers and migrants. On data protection, the rights of children and disability too, we get such important material and studies for our work in all those fields from the Fundamental Rights Agency.
The case that we have here now – and it has been said by all of us who have been shadowing – is one of the examples where the Commission and Parliament have done a lot together to move ahead. It is the Council and the Member States that simply do not follow what has been on the table since the Lisbon Treaty. As both Commissioner Jourová and Angelika Mlinar have been saying, there is no reason why – in times of terrorism and the fight against terror and organised crime – police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters should not be included. There is no reason for that, so reluctantly my political group, the Verts/ALE, will give consent but I really want to see progress on that in the very near future, and I am addressing that to the Council.

Beatrix von Storch,
im Namen der EFDD-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Es geht hier jetzt also und das Mehrjahresprogramm für die Grundrechteagentur.
                  

                     Wir müssen uns mal fragen: Was macht diese Agentur eigentlich? Sie macht Umfragen und sie erstellt Statistiken. Das macht Eurostat auch. Die Frage ist: Was liefert diese Agentur für die Allgemeinheit? Meine Feststellung: Sie liefert nichts und auch keinen gesellschaftlichen Mehrwert.
                  

                     In erster Linie ist diese Agentur die Betreiberin und die Vorreiterin für die Gender— Ideologie und sie ist Steigbügelhalter für die LSBTTIQ Lobby. Dafür wird gearbeitet. Die EU will mit dieser Grundrechteagentur Werte und Normen steuern und auf Kosten der Allgemeinheit Werte und Normen formieren. Diese Werte-Planwirtschaft wird dann als Schutz der Grundrechte bezeichnet. Deswegen bin ich der Meinung, man kann diese Grundrechteagentur ohne größeren Verlust einfach auflösen.
                  

Auke Zijlstra,
namens de ENF-Fractie. – De Europese Unie legt eindeloos nadruk op het blijkbare recht van de hele wereld om zich hier te vestigen. Maar tegelijkertijd hoeft die immigrant zich niet cultureel of in gedrag te binden aan zijn nieuwe land en mag hij vervolgens ook zijn hele gezin ophalen. Voorzitter, we mogen onze grenzen niet meer beschermen en we kunnen nu zelfs onze eigen kinderen niet meer beschermen tegen het dagelijkse geweld van de islam, dat we zelfs nu nog importeren. Ondertussen moet er wel opnieuw geld naar een EU-Bureau voor de grondrechten, dat zich al sinds de oprichting drukker maakt over daderprofilering en islamofobie dan over de slachtoffers van de islam. De jihadist die in Manchester heeft toegeslagen, had recht op verblijf en het recht om zijn islamitische religie uit te oefenen, wat hij dan ook deed. Maar de kinderen, zijn uiteengereten slachtoffers, hadden geen recht op veiligheid. De lafheid en het wegkijken van onze politieke elite is onbegrijpelijk. Voorzitter, waar hebben we dit aan verdiend?
                  

Udo Voigt (NI). – Frau Präsidentin! Ich halte diesen Beschluss des Rates für Augenwischerei. Wie wollen Sie Diskriminierung, unter anderem wegen der Weltanschauung, der politischen oder sonstigen Anschauungen verhindern, wenn gleichzeitig in EU-Ländern wie Griechenland und der Slowakei unter Ihren Augen Parteiverbotsverfahren organisiert und Menschen wegen ihrer politischen Überzeugung verfolgt und inhaftiert werden und ihre berufliche Existenz vernichtet wird?
                  

                     Einer der größten politischen Prozesse in der Geschichte meines Landes, der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, ist gestern eingestellt worden. Das Verfahren gegen das Aktionsbüro Mittelrhein richtete sich anfangs gegen 26 Angeklagte und währte fünf Jahre. Viele der Angeklagten saßen fast zwei Jahre unschuldig in Untersuchungshaft.
                  

                     Ein ähnliches politisches Verfahren richtete sich in der BRD gegen den Juristen Horst Mahler, früher Rote-Armee-Fraktion, dann Verteidiger im NPD-Verbotsverfahren. 2009 wurde er nur wegen Meinungsäußerungen zu Freiheitsstrafen von insgesamt zwölf Jahren verurteilt. Heute soll der 81jährige, dem im Gefängnis der linke Unterschenkel amputiert wurde, durch halb Europa verschleppt werden, um die restlichen dreieinhalb Jahre hinter Gittern zu verbringen. Derartige politische Verfahren sind Belege dafür, dass es Ihnen, werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Christ- und Sozialdemokraten, die sich Europas Völker zur Beute machen, trotz Entschließungen und Beschlüssen in erster Linie darum zu gehen scheint, Opposition mundtot zu machen.
                  

                     Machen sie Ernst mit der Agentur für Grundrechte. Behandeln Sie endlich in Europa alle Menschen gleich.
                  

Csaba Sógor (PPE). – Elnök Asszony, az Alapjogi Ügynökség 2018-2022 közötti többéves keretének tematikus területei kapcsán a tanácsi határozattervezet – ellentétben a Bizottság javaslatával – tételesen tartalmazza az egyenlőség és megkülönböztetés-mentesség különböző fajtáit, ahogy az Alapjogi Charta 21. cikkében is szerepel. Így a nemzeti kisebbséghez tartozás és a nyelv alapján történő diszkriminációt is. Ez üdvözlendő tény, és ezért a tanácsi határozattervezetet támogathatónak tartom, ám fontos hangsúlyozni, hogy bár a mostani többéves keret tematikus területei között is szerepel a nemzeti kisebbséghez tartozás alapján történő diszkrimináció, a FRA 2017-es jelentése az alapvető jogokról egyáltalán nem foglalkozik a nemzeti kisebbségekkel.
                  

                     Az ügynökség évek óta úgy tesz, mintha ez a kategória egyáltalán nem létezne az Unióban, holott a kisebbségi nyelvekkel együtt 60 millió uniós polgárról beszélünk. Míg más kisebbségi csoportokkal külön alfejezetekben foglakozik a jelentés, a nemzeti kisebbségek problémái egyáltalán nem jelennek meg. Ideje belátni, hogy az egyenlő bánásmód nem jelent esélyegyenlőséget, az őshonos nemzeti kisebbségeknek pozitív megkülönböztetésre van szükségük a valódi esélyegyenlőséghez.
                  

Cécile Kashetu Kyenge (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, nella selezione delle tematiche per il 2018-2022 dell'Agenzia per i diritti fondamentali si è scelta la continuità, continuità con le materie precedenti che rispecchiano le priorità dell'Unione europea nel campo dei diritti fondamentali e consentiranno un proseguimento fluido del lavoro dell'Agenzia.
                  

                     Tuttavia, auspico che l'Agenzia, nell'ambito di queste tematiche stabilite, includa il tema specifico dell'afrofobia, discriminazione su base etnico-razziale degli afrodiscendenti, fenomeno in forte crescita nell'Unione europea, ma ancora poco conosciuto.
                  

                     Sono necessari dati e ricerche approfondite per documentare tutte le forme che l'afrofobia può assumere nei diversi Stati membri come marginalizzazione, ‘profilaggio’ etnico, discorsi e crimini d'odio, documentazione necessaria per poter elaborare strategie efficaci per la lotta contro l'afrofobia e per avanzare sulla legislazione antidiscriminazione con un approccio olistico.
                  

Gilles Lebreton (ENF). – Madame la Présidente, le respect des droits de l'homme est essentiel. La France le sait puisqu'elle les a proclamés dès 1789, mais fallait-il créer une Agence spécifique pour donner aux États des conseils en matière de droits de l'homme? Je ne le pense pas.
                  

                     L'Agence des droits fondamentaux de l'Union est un monstre bureaucratique qui nous coûte 22 millions d'euros par an pour des résultats quasi nuls. Au lieu de se remettre en cause, elle a tenté de s'accaparer deux nouveaux domaines: la coopération policière et la coopération judiciaire en matière pénale. Heureusement, le Conseil s'y est opposé.
                  

                     Le pire est que l'Agence a développé une conception communautariste des droits de l'homme qui est aux antipodes de la conception républicaine française. Dans son rapport 2017, l'Agence l'avoue au paragraphe 2.4, en recommandant aux États – je cite – de promouvoir l'inclusion, notamment en organisant l'expression du communautarisme religieux dans l'espace public.
                  

                     C'est contraire à la tradition française d'assimilation et c'est pourquoi je m'oppose fermement à cette Agence.
                  

Milan Zver (PPE). – Najprej bi se rad zahvalil Angeliki Mlinar za pripravo osnutka zakonodajne resolucije, tega priporočila. Čestitam tudi FRA, torej agenciji, za desetletnico obstoja.
                  

                     Tako kot poročevalka tudi sam pogrešam v tem novem večletnem okviru tematsko območje policijske in pravosodno sodelovanje v kazenskih zadevah. Poznam delo agencije, pred leti sem bil obiskal tudi predsednika, direktorja agencije in mu predstavil eklatantno kršenje človekovih pravic v primeru Patria v moji državi, vendar brez pravega, ustreznega odziva.
                  

                     Tako da se mi zdi, da bi bilo dobro, da bi agencija razširila svoje dejavnosti in tudi pristojnosti. Želel bi, da bi tudi delovala nekoliko bolj drugače. Morda bi bilo dobro, da bi poskušala opravljati izvirne raziskave, ne samo na podlagi uradnih podatkov in informacij, ki jih dobivajo od držav članic, ampak da bi opravila svoje izvirne raziskave o stanju demokracije in spoštovanju človekovih pravic in svoboščin v državah članicah.
                  


                           ‘Catch the eye’ eljárás


Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, ο Ευρωπαϊκός Οργανισμός Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων θα προσέφερε ιδιαίτερες υπηρεσίες αν είχε να ασχοληθεί με την παραβίαση των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων στην πατρίδα μου. Στην Ελλάδα, η τρόικα έχει επιβάλει μνημονιακές πολιτικές που έχουν οδηγήσει εκατομμύρια συμπολίτες μου στην ανεργία. Η τρόικα έχει πετσοκόψει μισθούς και συντάξεις, έχει επιβάλει φορολεηλασία στα εισοδήματα και στις περιουσίες των Ελλήνων, περιουσίες οι οποίες βγαίνουν πλέον σε πλειστηριασμό.
                  

                     Η τρόικα έχει βυθίσει πλέον στη φτώχεια τον ελληνικό λαό. Επομένως, το Εurogroup και η τρόικα, στην οποία συμμετέχει η Επιτροπή και η Ευρωπαϊκή Κεντρική Τράπεζα, παραβιάζουν τα θεμελιώδη δικαιώματα των Ελλήνων πολιτών, όπως προστατεύονται απ' την Ευρωπαϊκή Χάρτα Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων. Παραβιάζουν το δικαίωμα στην αξιοπρεπή διαβίωση, παραβιάζουν το δικαίωμα προστασίας της ιδιωτικής περιουσίας, παραβιάζουν το δικαίωμα στην εργασία μια και κλείνουν πλέον χιλιάδες μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις. Τι θα γίνει με το ζήτημα αυτό; Θα υπάρξει προστασία πλέον των θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων στην Ελλάδα;
                  

(A ‘catch the eye’ eljárás vége.)


Věra Jourová,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you, honourable Members, for all your contributions and once again I share your concerns and I very much regret the Council's position on the exclusion of cooperation in criminal matters and judicial cooperation.
I heard here the question: why do we have a Fundamental Rights Agency? I find it quite important in simple words to reiterate what the Agency does and why we have it. The Agency is doing targeted research, mapping the situation, explaining the trends, collecting data and providing all those findings to us, to politicians, so that we can take responsible political decisions. Too much is at stake now and we politicians must make proper and right decisions, especially now at a time of brainwashing of our society through fake news. I would even say that, maybe with some pathos, we said we have an existential need of truth-based evidence which will enable us to take the proper responsible decisions.
An hour ago here in this plenary session there was a very important debate about how to combat anti-semitism and we also spoke about the rise of hatred in the EU in relation to other groups of people, too. We spoke about anti-Gypsyism and about the hatred against the LGBT community and against other vulnerable groups of people, and so I would like to stress here that the Fundamental Rights Agency should deal also with the matters connected to this, especially criminal justice, because we need to make sure that all these groups of people are secure and safe in the EU, and we need to have the proper data to guide us in what we should do on this in the field of judiciary and police cooperation.
So this is why the Commission is now disappointed by the position of the Agency. Anyway, I would like to repeat my hopes that the European Parliament will vote positively on the Multiannual Framework of the Agency and we will look into the possibilities on how to improve the situation in the future for the FRA so that it can do the proper work which we all need so seriously.

COMMISSION'S WRITTEN STATEMENT

The Commission regrets the lack of agreement on the inclusion of the proposed new thematic areas of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights' Multiannual Framework for 2018-2022.
The Commission recalls that following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters have become part of Union law and are therefore covered by the scope of the tasks of the Agency, as all areas falling within the competences of the Union, under Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 168/2007.
If these thematic areas are not included in the Council Decision establishing a Multiannual Framework for the Agency for 2018-2022, the Agency will continue to carry out its tasks in these areas upon request from the European Parliament, the Council or the Commission, under Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 168/2007.
Following the external evaluation of the Agency in 2017, the Commission shall transmit the evaluation reports and recommendations to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions and make them public.
After having assessed the evaluation report and recommendations, the Commission may submit any proposals for amendments to Regulation (EC) No 168/2007 which it considers necessary, as provided in Article 31(2) thereof.

Matti Maasikas,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, let me first say again that the Council attaches great importance to the work done by the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) in the area of fundamental rights. At the same time the Council is not convinced that the scope of FRA's task should be extended before the evaluation exercise related to this agency. The exercise that is under way already has been concluded and evaluated, as highlighted by Commissioner Jourová.
For the future, the Council will consider carefully any proposals for amendments to the FRA Regulation that the Commission might decide to submit. This includes the possible amendments to extend the remit of the Agency also in the areas of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters.
I am not in a position to say more at this stage. I speak on behalf of the Council and therefore on behalf of all its members, but I can assure you that the Council will follow the debate closely, and I have paid particular attention to all the valuable opinions expressed here today.

Angelika Mlinar,
rapporteur. – Madam President, I would just to like to wrap up what you have all heard here. It is very clear that the work of the Agency for Fundamental Rights is highly appreciated in this House and that we really rely on all the information it provides. The quality of the Agency is beyond question, and this is something that we have to be aware of. We have a rare jewel here. I say this sincerely, also from my point of view as a human rights lawyer in a former life or when I had a different career.
You can see that you have a huge majority here in this House for the enlargement of its scope. I understand your position, but you can also be sure that we will not give up. I am quite well known for being persistent, so – with the support of the Commission, which we fully support in its approach – we will come back to you after the evaluation exercise, which will soon be over. I really hope that the Member States will then also appreciate the situation of the Parliament and the position here in the House, namely that we do not see this as an enlargement, but just an adjustment in the alignment of the scope according to the Treaty of the European Union.

Elnök asszony. – Egy állásfoglalásra irányuló indítványt juttattak el hozzám, melyet az eljárási szabályzat 123. cikkének (2) bekezdésével összhangban nyújtottak be.
                  

                     A közös vitát lezárom.
                  

                     A szavazásra 2017. június 1-jén, csütörtökön kerül sor.
                  


Írásbeli nyilatkozatok (162. cikk)



Lorenzo Cesa (PPE),
per iscritto. – Ritengo doveroso il sostegno alla relazione sul Quadro pluriennale per l'Agenzia dell'Unione europea per i diritti fondamentali, per il quale anche la commissione Affari esteri, ha espresso il suo parere favorevole. Credo tuttavia che, la mancanza di un accordo in seno al Consiglio, riguardo all'inclusione dei settori tematici della cooperazione di polizia e giudiziaria in materia penale, sia una grave lacuna per i poteri di questa Agenzia. Non sarà quindi possibile nei prossimi anni per questa istituzione, compiere di propria iniziativa, analisi nei settori che hanno un'evidente pertinenza con i diritti fondamentali. Ci auguriamo che prossimamente Consiglio e Commissione rivedano questa decisione, che permetterebbe di dare un segnale importante ai cittadini, in tema di diritti umani.
                  

Paloma López Bermejo (GUE/NGL),
por escrito. – Me alegro del amplio consenso parlamentario para apoyar la labor de la Agencia de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea (FRA). Al igual que la ponente, lamento que el Consejo de la UE haya dejado fuera del nuevo marco plurianual temas como la cooperación policial y judicial, que habían sido recomendados por el Consejo de Administración de la FRA, pero no dudo de que la Agencia sabrá orientar su actividad en el marco más general de la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales de la UE. Pongo como ejemplo el trabajo realizado por la FRA en su estudio de 2015 sobre la explotación laboral severa. Centrado en la situación de los trabajadores migrantes —quienes sufren desproporcionadamente las formas de explotación más grave (esclavitud, prostitución…) —, el trabajo ampliaba el foco a realidades como las de los sectores doméstico, agrícola, hotelero o de la construcción, en los que muchas formas de explotación laboral severa pasan generalmente desapercibidas. Las conclusiones, tales como el recurso al artículo 83, apartado 2, del TFUE para establecer normas mínimas europeas que permitan sancionar penalmente las infracciones en las políticas sociales, representan un ejemplo concreto de propuesta innovadora que reconoce que los derechos laborales son parte integrante de los derechos fundamentales que la UE debe proteger.
                  

Claude Rolin (PPE),
par écrit. – Monsieur le commissaire, mesdames, messieurs, chers collègues, je vous invite à soutenir le texte de cette résolution notamment parce qu'il prévoit l'inclusion des domaines de la coopération judiciaire en matière pénale et de la coopération policière dans le cadre pluriannuel.
                  

                     Ceci reflèterait non seulement les besoins concrets sur le terrain en ces temps troublés, mais permettrait encore à l'Agence européenne des droits fondamentaux d'entreprendre de sa propre initiative une analyse approfondie de domaines qui sont, de toute évidence, pertinents pour les droits de l'homme, au regard notamment de l'évolution que connaît l'Union européenne depuis peu sur le plan législatif.
                  

                     Je rappelle ici l'importance — sans cesse grandissante — de la mission de l'Agence et le rôle primordial qu'elle est amenée à jouer au quotidien dans la défense des droits fondamentaux au sein de l'UE.
                  

Janusz Zemke (S&D),
na piśmie. – Statutowym celem agencji jest dostarczanie instytucjom Unii oraz państwom członkowskim pomocy i wiedzy specjalistycznej w zakresie praw podstawowych przy wdrażaniu przez nie prawa unijnego. Dziedziny tematyczne działalności agencji są określane w wieloletnich ramach prac obowiązujących przez okres pięcioletni.
                  

                     W projekcie omawianej decyzji Rada zaproponowała, by w latach 2018-2022 agencja skupiała się m.in. na sytuacji ofiar przestępstw i dostępie do wymiaru sprawiedliwości, kwestiach równości i niedyskryminacji, zagadnieniach społeczeństwa informacyjnego, poszanowaniu życia prywatnego i ochronie danych osobowych, współpracy sądowej, z wyjątkiem spraw karnych, migracji i integracji uchodźców, a ponadto prawach dziecka i integracji społecznej Romów.
                  

                     Podzielam opinię sprawozdawcy, że Parlament powinien – w trakcie zamkniętych już negocjacji – silniej akcentować potrzebę włączenia do wieloletnich ram współpracy policyjnej i współpracy w sprawach karnych. Stanowiłoby to bowiem nie tylko odzwierciedlenie istniejących potrzeb lokalnych, lecz umożliwiłoby również agencji dostarczenie – z własnej inicjatywy – kompleksowej analizy w dziedzinach mających oczywiste znaczenie dla praw podstawowych.
                  

                     Uważam ponadto, że agencja powinna w nieodległej perspektywie przejąć od Komisji Weneckiej, będącej organem Rady Europy, zadanie dostarczania Komisji Europejskiej fachowej ekspertyzy w zakresie poszanowania praworządności w państwach członkowskich, a także analizy sytuacji ich obywateli (będących zarazem obywatelami Unii Europejskiej), których prawa podstawowe są również naruszane w efekcie sprzecznych z zasadami państwa prawa działań organów krajowych.
                  
19.   High-level UN Conference to support the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14 (UN Ocean Conference) (debate)

Elnök asszony. – A következő napirendi pont a Linnéa Engström által a Halászati Bizottság nevében a Bizottsághoz intézett, a 14. fenntartható fejlesztési cél végrehajtásának elősegítéséről szóló, magas szintű ENSZ-konferencia (az ENSZ óceánkonferenciája) szóbeli választ igénylő kérdésről folytatott vita (O-000031/2017 – B8-0311/2017). (2017/2653(RSP))
               

Linnéa Engström,
författare. – Fru talman! Tack, kommissionär Vella. Nästa vecka samlas många av världens ledare i New York för att diskutera hur vi ska samordna oss för att förvalta våra hav på ett ansvarsfullt sätt inom ramen för FN:s agenda för hållbara utvecklingsmål. Det är bara ett startskott för ett samarbete som kan bli en kraftsamling för haven, likt det arbete som pågår för att bromsa klimatförändringarna.
               

                  I oktober är EU värd för konferensen Our Ocean som ytterligare förstärker samarbetet för att rädda våra hav.
               

                  Klimatet på jorden och våra hav är intimt ihopkopplade. Två tredjedelar av vårt jordklot består av hav och en tredjedel av land. Vår planet hade inte varit beboelig om förhållandet hade varit det omvända. Haven behövs för att reglera just klimatet, för att förse oss med livsviktig föda, vatten och inte minst med syre. Vartannat andetag vi tar är syre som har producerats av havet.
               

                  För att haven ska kunna leverera alla ekotjänster måste vi behålla dem friska och livskraftiga. Vi får larmrapport efter larmrapport som berättar om avlägsna paradisiska öar i Stilla havet som är indränkta av plast, om plastpartiklar som ökar dödligheten och minskar reproduktionen hos små fiskar och kräftdjur – de som utgör själva basen i havens näringskedja – och om överfiske och illegalt fiske.
               

                  Hela 15 %, eller 26 miljoner ton av världens samlade fiske, är illegalt, enligt bedömningar av FN:s livsmedelsorgan FAO. Totalt är fisken värd 23 miljarder dollar. Den ‘svarta’ fisken skapar oreda på våra marknader och konkurrerar med fisk från fiskeföretag som gör rätt för sig. Dessutom drar det illegala fisket undan mattan för alla ansträngningar att bevara och förvalta våra gemensamma fiskeresurser på ett hållbart sätt. Att inspirera fler länder att ta steget att aktivt bekämpa det illegala fisket blir en av de viktigaste frågorna under nästa veckas FN-konferens.
               

                  Mer än tre miljoner människor har fisk som sin huvudsakliga proteinkälla, och i många utvecklingsländer är fisket den viktigaste sysselsättningen och inkomstkälla för miljontals medborgare.
               

                  När kampen om resurserna hårdnar måste vi försäkra oss om att vi förvaltar dem på bästa sätt och att de fördelas rättvist. Då finns det ingen plats för illegalt fiske. Utvecklingsländer är särskilt drabbade, eftersom de saknar resurser att kontrollera sina vatten och stoppa olagligt beteende.
               

                  EU har de senaste åren tagit fram ett ramverk av regler för att bättre kontrollera fisket utanför unionens gränser. Det innefattar kontrollförordningen, förordningen om olagligt, orapporterat och oreglerat fiske och förordningen om tillstånd för EU:s fartyg att fiska utanför unionens vatten.
               

                  Vad gäller den sista förordningen så är jag föredragande, och vi är just nu i slutförhandlingar med rådet om en ny lagtext som är mer omfattande än nuvarande förordning.
               

                  Vi tar ett helhetsgrepp på alla EU:s båtar som fiskar utanför unionens vatten, även de som fiskar genom direkta avtal mot tredjeländer och de som fiskar i det öppna havet – något som tidigare varit helt oreglerat. Detta är ett stort framsteg.
               

                  Förordningarna får emellertid inte stanna på pappret – de måste följas upp. Kommissionens egen utvärdering av kontrollförordningen och Europeiska revisionsrättens rapport som kom nu i veckan visar med all tydlighet att det fortfarande finns mycket kvar att göra innan vi kan säga att vi har full kontroll på EU:s fiskeverksamhet.
               

                  Det är helt oacceptabelt att vissa medlemsländer gör hemläxan medan andra kommer undan med att helt strunta i regelverket. Jag räknar med att kommissionen tar sin roll som väktare av fördraget på allvar och sätter press på dem som ännu inte lever upp till våra standarder.
               

                  Samtidigt kan vi med förordningen om olagligt fiske sätta press på de fiskenationer som inte lever upp till sitt ansvar som flaggstat, och som inte kontrollerar sina båtars aktiviteter. I sista hand kan EU stoppa import av fisk.
               

                  När EU, som är världens största importör av fisk, stänger sin marknad – då svider det. Tyvärr finns det dock fortfarande allt för många andra marknader som är mindre nogräknade, och den ‘svarta’ fisken hittar annan avsättning.
               

                  Därför vill jag uppmuntra och uppmana andra stater att följa EU:s exempel: att ta ansvar som marknadsstat. Det är dags att helt stänga marknaden för illegalt fångad fisk.
               

                  Ett första steg är att fler länder antar och genomför FAO:s avtal om hamnstatsåtgärder som trädde i kraft för precis ett år sedan. Det är ett regelverk som ger stater möjlighet att hålla båtar som fiskar illegalt borta från sina hamnar. Än så länge är det dock bara 46 länder som anslutit sig, och många av de stora marknaderna för fisk, till exempel Kina och Japan, saknas.
               

                  Det är nu väldigt bra och glädjande att världshaven och fisket är på den internationella agendan, där dessa frågor hör hemma. EU fortsätter sitt arbete för att komma åt det illegala fisket. Förhoppningsvis sätter sig resten av världen med oss i båten.
               

                  Vi måste fortsätta att jobba stenhårt för att bekämpa dem som ser våra världshav som en fristad för illegal verksamhet.
               

Karmenu Vella,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I would like to start by thanking Linnéa Engström for the question on the UN Ocean Conference which will be starting in five days in New York. The UN Conference, together with the Our Ocean Conference which will be hosted by the EU this coming October in Malta, will be the most important global ocean events this year. These two conferences are mutually reinforcing each other and will help us all to keep the momentum for action in the interest of our oceans. The UN conference will allow the European Union to showcase its leadership in making oceans safer, more secure, healthier, and above all, more sustainably managed. These are priorities for the European Union and its Member States, as set out in the joint communication on international ocean governance.
Sustainable Development Goal 14 can be a very strong driver for reinforcing ocean governance. This and other goals under Agenda 2030 are being actively pursued through many of the EU's policies, as we established in our communication in November on the next steps for a sustainable European future.
For example, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive provides a comprehensive and integrated approach to the protection of the marine environment and natural resources. This is based on an ecosystem approach aiming to achieve good environmental status of European marine waters. Our birds and habitats legislation provides for protection of the EU sea area through a network of marine protected areas – MPAs – as a part of Natura 2000. The European Union is tackling marine litter and pollution at source through its rules on waste management and prevention and port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues, as well as through the circular economy. We have also set up a system for ecosystem-based maritime spatial planning in Europe. We have revised our common fisheries policy, and many stocks are now recovering as a result.
Our rules against illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing ensure that our Member States implement their international obligations, keep illegally caught fish out of the European market and help us improve fisheries governance in third countries. Just last week we again showed our commitment to fight illegal fishing globally. We listed St Vincent & the Grenadines and the Comoros as uncooperative third countries. This is tantamount to issuing a red card which, amongst other consequences, effectively bans trade in fisheries products from these countries to the European Union. And we have also issued a warning, a so-called yellow card, to Liberia to encourage necessary reforms there.
I will also emphasise the importance of fighting IUU at the UN Ocean Conference on 9 June. The day after World Ocean Day I will host an event on the contribution of this fight to ensuring the long-term sustainability of fisheries resources. I will be joined by Ministers from Fiji and Guinea, two countries that benefited from cooperation with the European Union in the past.
Sustainable management and conservation of natural resources, such as biodiversity and fisheries, is also gaining importance in our trade and investment policy. For example we are including dedicated sustainability provisions in the relevant trade and investment agreements and we are also committed to eliminating harmful fisheries subsidies in line with target 6 of SDG 14. And that is why the European Union tabled a specific proposal at the WTO last October. We are now actively involved in WTO negotiations and hope to achieve a multilateral agreement on fisheries subsidies at the WTO eleventh ministerial conference in December in Buenos Aires.
Finally, I am pleased to announce that the Member States and Council two days ago endorsed a list of clear and concrete voluntary commitments that the EU will present at the UN Ocean Conference next week. These demonstrate the European Union's strong and common endeavours to make SDG 14 happen in practice.

Jarosław Wałęsa,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, coastal and marine resources contribute an estimated EUR 30 trillion to global [inaudible] ecosystem services, but those resources are extremely vulnerable to environmental degradation, overfishing, climate change and pollution. In this context, policymakers all over the world need to find a way to agree to ensure sustainable long-term use of the oceans.
Only yesterday, Members of Committee on Fisheries voted on my opinion concerning an agenda for the future of our oceans in the context of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. In this opinion, we recognised that the current framework for oceans governance is not effective enough. We therefore encourage more concrete actions in order to accomplish the Sustainable Development Goals. International oceans governance should apply the principles of decentralisation and regionalisation; it should involve all the stakeholders at all stages, from conception to implementation of the measures, and it should be based on environmental and strategic impact assessment.

Ricardo Serrão Santos,
em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, o mundo comprometeu-se com os objetivos para o desenvolvimento sustentável. Entre estes, o décimo quarto diz respeito aos oceanos.
               

                  O desenvolvimento sustentável engloba três pilares não hierarquizáveis. Tal como está previsto no texto integral das Nações Unidas, é necessário dar oportunidades de valorização às comunidades remotas e aos estados insulares.
               

                  Na próxima semana, na importante reunião que decorrerá em Nova Iorque, diversos Estados e organizações irão comprometer-se com o uso sustentável dos oceanos. Passar dos compromissos políticos para as ações concretas é essencial. A forma como a União Europeia e os seus Estados-Membros estão a envolver-se, de forma voluntária, fortalece o meu orgulho de ser europeu.
               

                  Sabemos que os Estados Unidos da América estão a bloquear entendimentos e decisões comprometidas com o desenvolvimento sustentável. Mais uma razão para que a União Europeia assegure a liderança e o empenho neste dossiê.
               

                  Este não é apenas um apelo meu, é um grito das gerações futuras.
               

Julie Girling,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, I would like to join with all of my colleagues in wishing the Commissioner, and indeed our team, every success at the Ocean Conference next week.
When I started to look at this, it made me realise how far we have come on this issue of sustainable oceans, and yet also how far we still have to go. We have had a change of mindset. Certainly the common fisheries policy, which has not always been universally admired, is beginning to change, but we need to be very vigilant. Indeed, just in these few weeks when we have been talking about external fishing fleets – as I have been, and the rapporteur, the author of this report, has also been involved – you are reminded, with every article you go through, about how you have to be vigilant and to make sure that you do not slip backwards. We have to go forwards when it comes to sustainable development.
So I would like to welcome this resolution. I welcome the opportunity for a delegation from this Parliament to go to the meeting and I wish them every success.

Norica Nicolai,
în numele grupului ALDE. – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, Agenda 2030 privind obiectivele de dezvoltare durabilă prezentată de Comisie este o agendă ambițioasă. Cele 14 acțiuni pe care Comisia le propune sunt sustenabile, responsabile și rezonabile, dar trebuie să ținem cont de faptul că în proporție de peste 30 % resursele noastre marine sunt supraexploatate.
               

                  Consider că în această agendă două acțiuni sunt vitale pentru viitorul oceanelor noastre: în primul rând, îmbunătățirea cadrului de guvernanță internațională a oceanelor, eliminarea lacunelor care există în cadrul existent și, în al doilea rând, pescuitul ilegal. Cele două acțiuni, în opinia mea, sunt interconectate, dar cred, domnule comisar, că va fi o bătălie foarte dificilă, bătălia cu pescuitul ilegal, în contextul în care există state din afara UE care încă nu au ratificat și aplicat Convenția ONU, și mă refer inclusiv la Statele Unite.
               

                  În contextul negocierilor privind viitorul acord internațional privind biodiversitatea marină în zonele din afara jurisdicțiilor naționale, care poate exista doar în contextul Convenției ONU privind dreptul mărilor, aș vrea să știu cum își propune Comisia Europeană să obțină un acord eficient, care să elimine lacunele din dreptul internațional, când știm foarte bine că există state hotărâte să nege existența schimbărilor climatice și nevoia gestionării responsabile a stocurilor de pește.
               

                  În ceea ce privește gestionarea sustenabilă a resurselor, din nou vorbim de nevoia unui sistem de organizații regionale de gestionare a pescuitului în baza unor acorduri internaționale care să aibă forță, susținerea și respectul necesar din partea statelor, pentru ca deciziile acestora să fie aplicate. În acest context, aș dori să întreb Comisia Europeană în ce măsură are un plan, altul decât agenda propusă anul trecut, pentru negocierea și înființarea unor organizații în spațiul arctic.
               

Maria Lidia Senra Rodríguez,
em nome do Grupo GUE/NGL. – Senhora Presidente, o objetivo 14 da ONU sobre os oceanos estabelece a prevenção e a redução da poluição marinha de que as pescadoras e os pescadores são as vítimas principais e aos quais não deve ser atribuída toda a responsabilidade de conservação dos recursos pesqueiros.
               

                  Neste âmbito, queremos fazer finca-pé, mais uma vez, na necessidade dos elementos de regeneração das rias e na paralisação das obras que ocasionam mudanças das correntes e impactos no meio.
               

                  No campo da prevenção, queremos chamar a atenção para os impactos do crescimento azul e incentivar este Parlamento e a Comissão a assumir a necessidade de impedir qualquer atividade que coloque em perigo a pesca.
               

                  Pedimos, expressamente, a proibição da mineração nos fundos marinhos, assim como a anulação da concessão mineira nos fundos marinhos em Papua-Nova Guiné e também o fim das prospeções petrolíferas.
               

                  Gostaria, Senhor Comissário, que a UE defendesse também esta questão.
               

Sylvie Goddyn,
au nom du groupe ENF. – Madame la Présidente, la question posée met l'accent sur l'aide apportée aux pays tiers pour lutter contre la pêche illégale, en mettant en avant le rôle joué par le règlement sur la pêche illicite, non déclarée et non réglementée.
               

                  Mais elle demande surtout de mieux coordonner la lutte contre la pêche illégale et les politiques commerciales. Nous sommes en effet le premier importateur mondial de produits de la mer et il est impératif de fermer notre marché aux produits issus de la pêche illégale.
               

                  C'est loin d'être le cas aujourd'hui. La Commission n'interdit pas suffisamment les importations en provenance de pays qui ne luttent pas contre la pêche illégale. Elle émet contre ces pays des cartons rouges, des cartons jaunes, avec parcimonie, alors qu'elle se montre beaucoup plus dure envers les pêcheurs européens qui ne respectent pas les règles.
               

                  Enfin, des ONG ont publié un rapport en mars dernier pour souligner la faiblesse des contrôles aux frontières et des vérifications portant sur les certificats de capture.
               

                  Je me réjouis, pour ma part, que l'on redécouvre l'intérêt des contrôles aux frontières et j'attends également que l'on améliore ces contrôles.
               

Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señora presidenta, celebro que próximamente tenga lugar la Conferencia de Alto Nivel de las Naciones sobre el objetivo 14 de desarrollo sostenible. Los océanos son clave para afrontar retos como el cambio climático y el hambre.
               

                  Me detengo ahora en la actividad pesquera para destacar que la flota europea es una de las más reguladas y más respetuosos con los océanos y sus recursos. Otros países también deberían asegurar un mejor control de sus flotas para lograr que, así, aumente el número de stocks explotados de manera sostenible. También, lógicamente, es necesario que las decisiones sobre el acceso a los recursos se basen en estudios científicos rigurosos.
               

                  Señorías, uno de los objetivos es acabar en el 2020 con la pesca ilegal no declarada y no reglamentada. La lucha contra la pesca INDNR es una prioridad a la que deben contribuir los Estados de abanderamiento, los ribereños, los Estados rectores de puerto, a través del acuerdo de la FAO, y los Estados de comercialización.
               

                  También celebro que otro de los objetivos sea garantizar a los pescadores artesanales el acceso a los recursos y a los mercados. Recuerdo que existen zonas y regiones pesqueras altamente dependientes de este tipo de pesca.
               

                  Según los datos de las Naciones Unidas, para más de 3 000 millones de personas, los océanos son su fuente principal de proteína. La sostenibilidad de los recursos es, pues, esencial. Pero también quiero lamentar que en Europa se desaprovechen cada año cuotas de especies que se encuentren en niveles seguros de explotación. Por ello, insisto una vez más en la necesidad de buscar mecanismos que redistribuyan las cuotas no utilizadas dentro de la Unión entre los demás Estados miembros.
               

Simona Bonafè (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, purtroppo in questa discussione non possiamo non partire dal fatto del giorno: l'annuncio di Trump di sfilarsi dall'accordo di Parigi, una linea che mina le fondamenta non solo della lotta al cambiamento climatico ma, più in generale, il raggiungimento dell'intera agenda per lo sviluppo sostenibile per il 2030, tema al centro della conferenza delle Nazioni Unite che si terrà a New York la settimana prossima e a cui parteciperò con la delegazione del Parlamento.
               

                  Doveva essere il primo importante appuntamento per passare da impegni politici ad azioni concrete verso gli obiettivi globali per lo sviluppo sostenibile e adesso, alla luce di quanto è successo, lo sarà ancora di più. Dobbiamo puntare al raggiungimento degli obiettivi che ci siamo dati, convinti che un sistema più sostenibile non fa bene solo all'ambiente ma fa bene anche all'economia, che oggi è sottoposta alla sfida dell'uso efficiente delle risorse.
               

                  Se questo discorso è valido in generale, lo è ancora di più per la gestione dei nostri mari. Una gestione responsabile dei mari è l'unica in grado di favorire appieno la biodiversità e al tempo stesso le potenzialità della blue economy: turismo e pesca.
               

Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE). – Madam President, in the current political climate and situation, the EU must take the lead on international ocean governance. These two upcoming conferences give us a good chance to take that role and gather broader political support. It could be that maritime ecosystems are actually under much greater stress than land ecosystems and that we are at the limits of the endurance of maritime ecosystems. Both demersal and pelagic systems are on the brink of extinction without the ability to recover and reproduce good and healthy fish stocks for the future. We would actually need a moratorium, at least in half of those systems used. Then there is the issue of micro-plastics, chemicalisation, dumping of waste, use of resources – like deep-sea mining, which was mentioned – and oil drilling. If we do not act now, it might be too late in five or ten years. There are of course the special challenges concerning the Arctic seas, which we discussed earlier here in the Parliament. So I hope that the Commission takes up this task and role.

José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Madam President, dear Commissioner, in 2016 the European Union set out the joint agenda for the future of our oceans. In 2015, the leaders of G7 agreed on a declaration that highlights the importance of oceans governance science? The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development proposes 17 sustainable development goals, amongst them SDG 14 – the oceans goal – which aims to conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development. However, only 2.18% of the world's oceans have been fully protected as of today.
Our oceans cover more than two thirds of the earth's surface and contain 97% of our planet's water. Over three billion people depend on marine and coastal resources for their livelihoods, the majority of world trade is conducted by sea and the importance of the blue economy cannot be ignored. Nevertheless, we take our oceans for granted. Eighty per cent of marine pollution and litter in oceans comes from land-based sources, and maritime CO2 emissions are projected to increase by 50% to 250% in the period up to 2050. Put simply, oceans, seas and coastal areas form an integrated and essential component of the earth's ecosystem. The ocean is a primary regulator of climate and weather.
Next month in New York the United Nations' first global conference on the oceans will take place with the aim of developing a robust implementation framework for our oceans. I believe that today, with the United States drifting away, the European Union should play an important role, on the basis of its experience, and not only through its environmental policy, in developing a sustainable approach to ocean management.


                        ‘Catch the eye’ eljárás


Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la prossima conferenza ad alto livello ONU per sostenere l'attuazione dell'OSS 14 è un'occasione unica per avviare un processo internazionale volto a migliorare la governance globale degli oceani.
               

                  Malgrado l'impegno a livello mondiale assunto per ridurre la pesca eccessiva entro il 2015, nel 2002 a Johannesburg il 31,4 per cento degli stock ittici mondiali è ancora oggetto di una pesca eccessiva. La pesca illegale, non dichiarata e non regolamentata, determina gran parte di questo depauperamento e pone in una condizione di svantaggio i pescatori onesti, indebolendo le comunità costiere, soprattutto nei paesi in via di sviluppo.
               

                  L'Unione europea ha il dovere di promuovere con più determinazione, nell'ambito della conferenza sull'oceano delle Nazioni Unite, un approccio globale per eliminare le scappatoie che permettono agli operatori illegali di trarre vantaggio dalle loro attività. Solo un approccio precauzionale, basato sulla salvaguardia degli ecosistemi, così come stabilito dai trattati e dalla politica comune della pesca, potrà aiutare il ripristino e il mantenimento degli stock ittici al di sopra dei livelli necessari per assicurare il rendimento massimo sostenibile.
               

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η βιώσιμη ανάπτυξη αποτελεί κλειδί για την επιβίωση του ίδιου του πλανήτη. Η διάσκεψη υψηλού επιπέδου του ΟΗΕ για τους ωκεανούς αποτελεί σημαντική ευκαιρία για την παγκόσμια κοινότητα να καταδείξει ότι τελικά το διεθνές δίκαιο θα τηρηθεί επιτέλους. Η Ιαπωνία θα πρέπει να αντιληφθεί ότι δεν μπορεί να γίνει ανεκτή η παράνομη φαλαινοθηρία που εξολοθρεύει χιλιάδες φάλαινες. Επίσης, η Κίνα πρέπει να σταματήσει την παράνομη αλιεία και να σταματήσει τη συστηματική εξαφάνιση των θαλάσσιων αποθεμάτων.
               

                  Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση οφείλει να λάβει πρακτικά μέτρα για την πλήρη και ολοσχερή απαγόρευση εισαγωγής των ψαριών που αλιεύτηκαν παράνομα. Η κόκκινη κάρτα, κύριε Vella, πρέπει να βγει προς διάφορες χώρες, συμπεριλαμβανομένης και της Κίνας. Μόνο έτσι μπορεί να υπάρξει προστασία των ωκεανών και ενίσχυση του δίκαιου εμπορίου. Μόνο έτσι μπορεί να προστατευθούν, κύριε Vella, οι αλιείς της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης απ' τις αθέμιτες πρακτικές των τρίτων χωρών. Ενισχύστε λοιπόν, κύριε Vella, τους ευρωπαίους αλιείς, γιατί υφίστανται αθέμιτο ανταγωνισμό από τις τρίτες χώρες που παραβιάζουν το δίκαιο για την προστασία των ωκεανών.
               

(A ‘catch the eye’ eljárás vége.)


Karmenu Vella,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I would like to thank honourable Members for their valuable contributions.
Starting with Mr Wałęsa, I agree that it is time to take more concrete action. That was the idea behind Vice-President Mogherini and myself launching the Ocean Governance communication last November. This is a very important way of moving forward, focusing our ocean governance strategy on three areas: first, to strengthen the legal framework; second, to reduce human pressures on the oceans; and, third, to continue investing in more research and more knowledge.
I agree with Mr Serrão Santos that it is important, again, to move from commitment to implementation and for the European Union not to take the lead but to continue to lead, especially in the absence of the USA. I also agree with Ms Girling that we have come a long way but still have a long way to go. This applies not just to the European Union, because this is a global issue and what we are doing is not only within the European Union: we are tackling this at a high global level.
I also agree with Mr Nicolai that Agenda 2030 is an ambitious agenda. I can assure you that, in the same way that we took the lead during the negotiation process, we will continue with that lead, even more importantly during the implementation phase as well. As I mentioned, eliminating gaps in the legal framework is one of our focus areas in the ocean communication.
Fighting illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU) is another important aspect of our second area of priority, reducing human pressures on the ocean. I also agree that we have to walk the walk when we say that all countries and all continents have to do the same. We cannot possibly move on more, better and stronger legal frameworks if some of us have still not ratified the existing legal framework, such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) – and we are doing our best to push the countries in question to start committing to and implementing the existing legal frameworks.
With regard to an instrument on biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ), a lot of progress has been made, and in the coming weeks one of the final preparatory meetings will take place. Again, we are pushing other countries for support.
With regard to international agreements, we all know what is happening in the USA. I have already mentioned elsewhere that international agreements are there to be honoured. We cannot discuss, commit to and then not honour our commitments.
With regard to marine litter, this is a scourge and we are also addressing this, among other things through the new Plastics Strategy, which will be coming out before the end of this year. We are trying not just to address what has already happened in the ocean but to address this issue at source. We call it ‘marine litter’ but it is actually all land litter that ends up in the sea.
Regarding encouraging blue growth, we recognise the ‘blue opportunities’ from the oceans, but we also recognise the environmental responsibilities that go along with this, and these environmental responsibilities come into play when we talk about deep-sea mining, drilling and so on.
Ms Goddyn, with regard to illegal fishing, using the red card is, I think, the most effective tool that we have – and we have used it. It has been effective because, when it comes to trade, we have seen countries which were traumatised when we used the red card but some of which, today, are our best partners when it comes to fighting IUU. Mr Millán Mon, it is true that our industry in Europe is one of the best regulated and, I should add, not just within European Union waters but in our external waters as well. One word of caution: we do, more than anything, want to support small-scale fisheries, but unfortunately – and I say this with a little sadness – small-scale does not always mean sustainable. I think we have to focus on what is sustainable and what is not rather than looking at what is big or small.
With regard to quotas and where stocks are, we are doing our best. At the moment, the only pending issue, where everyone is saying that the stocks are doing well and we can utilise a higher quota, is probably tuna. We are waiting for the new quotas to come out. New scientific advice will be coming out in the next few weeks as well.
Ms Bonafè again mentioned the fact that, unfortunately, President Trump is not complying. It was a very sad statement that we all followed today. My feeling is that this does not reflect what the whole of the USA is thinking because I know that NGOs there are totally supportive, as is a section of the private sector. I know that even some of states within the USA have already come up with their own plans for ocean governance and blue growth. Here again, the European Union is ready to take a stronger lead and I think this is the sentiment when we talk to other continents and other countries. They are not saying that if the USA is not taking on its commitment they will not take on theirs. No, it is the complete opposite of that: the sentiment is that, if a vacuum is created by the USA, we have to work harder and to do better to fill that vacuum.
Ms Pietikäinen, you said the same thing about taking a stronger lead, especially in terms of what we are seeing. I totally agree with you about the ecosystems. Very often, when we talk about ecosystems and biodiversity, we are referring to our biodiversity and ecosystems on land, yet we know that the oceans are home to more than 70% of the planet's global ecosystem. With regard to the Arctic, we are pushing through our Arctic policy – which we also launched last year – to have a fishing moratorium and to agree that no fishing will take place before there is scientific advice on this.
Mr Faria also mentioned the areas protected in the oceans. When it comes to protected areas, it is true that we have made more progress on land than we have in the ocean. On land we have managed to reach 18% to 20% of the surface area of the EU, whereas in the oceans we have barely reached 60%. So we have to do more work, not just to identify the areas but also to see how we are going to manage those areas because simply identifying the areas without having any management plans at all is not going to get us anywhere.
I agree with Mr Caputo that the coming conference in New York is a unique opportunity for everyone to start showing their commitment. I would add that the conference in Malta in October is also a very important one. As I said in my speech, the two events are complementary and mutually reinforce one another. We are looking forward to the sequence of the other ocean conferences, the fourth one being in October.
Mr Marius, yes, regarding our fight against IUU, you mentioned China. China is a special case because we can see that it wants to be committed and is making positive signs, with a lot of willingness to cooperate. Just to let you know, we have set up the EU-China Blue Year this year, and tomorrow we are going to have a Chinese delegation – another Chinese delegation within a period of three months – to continue working on our EU-China Blue Year and, as I said, we will continue pushing to turn their willingness into action.
I would like to thank everyone involved once again and I would like, in particular, to thank Ms Engström.

Elnök asszony. – Egy állásfoglalásra irányuló indítványt juttattak el hozzám, melyet az eljárási szabályzat 128. cikkének (5) bekezdésével összhangban nyújtottak be.
               

                  A vitát lezárom.
               

                  A szavazásra 2017. június 1-jén, csütörtökön kerül sor.
               


Írásbeli nyilatkozatok (162. cikk)



Norbert Erdős (PPE),
írásban. – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Idén, 2017 júniusában az ENSZ magas szintű konferenciát rendez az óceánok világszintű kezelésének fejlesztése érdekében, ami a 14. fenntartható fejlesztési cél végrehajtását segíti elő. Az óceánok és a tengerek központi szerepet játszanak életünkben, és kulcsfontosságúak jólétünk és jövőnk szempontjából. Tudjuk, a johannesburgi csúcstalálkozón a világ elkötelezte magát amellett, hogy 2015-ig visszaszorítja a túlhalászást. A világ halállományának 31,4%-a még mindig túlhalászott. Ez nemcsak egyes tengeri ökoszisztémákat veszélyeztet súlyosan, hanem komoly veszélyt jelent az élelmezésbiztonságra, valamint a part menti közösségek gazdasági és társadalmi fenntarthatóságára. Különösen a jogellenes, nem bejelentett és szabályozatlan halászat jelent komoly veszélyt a halállományokra. Az EU-nak – az Európai Bizottság vezetésével –átfogó megközelítést kellene kezdeményeznie és a partnerországokat meggyőznie az elfogadásáról, hogy hatékonyan vehessük fel a harcot az illegális halászat ellen. Kérem, támogassák az asztalra tett EP-jelentéstervezetet, amely a helyes irányt mutathatja meg az ENSZ–Óceánkonferencia résztvevőinek.
               

João Ferreira (GUE/NGL),
por escrito. – O Objectivo de Desenvolvimento Sustentável 14, definido pela ONU, diz respeito à ‘conservação e uso sustentável dos oceanos, dos mares e dos recursos marinhos para o desenvolvimento sustentável’. Esta é uma daquelas áreas em que se torna evidente a necessidade de esforços coordenados e partilhados no plano internacional. Os oceanos e os mares são, de facto, fundamentais para a nossa vida, para o nosso bem-estar e para o futuro da Humanidade e do planeta, tal como o conhecemos.
               

                  Os problemas em discussão – como o aquecimento e a acidificação dos oceanos, o branqueamento de corais, a pressão crescente sobre as populações de peixes e a quantidade cada vez maior de resíduos marinhos – são pertinentes e exigem discussão e ação, tendo em vista a proteção dos oceanos.
               

                  Sem aceitar que se erija a UE e suas políticas em paradigma de sustentabilidade, bem pelo contrário, acompanhamos a preocupação que está na origem deste debate, que consideramos necessário. Exige-se uma visão ampla sobre o conjunto de interações entre o homem e os mares e oceanos, bem como sobre as atividades que lhes estão associadas. A pesca é apenas uma das atividades a ter em conta. Outras existem, como a exploração de recursos minerais, entre outros exemplos, que têm vindo a ganhar acrescida centralidade.
               

Carolina Punset (ALDE),
por escrito. – Cuando hablamos del planeta nos olvidamos de que sus tres cuartas partes son mares y de que el calentamiento global afecta extremadamente a los océanos. Las corrientes marinas son el regulador térmico del planeta y pueden cambiar bruscamente el clima. El aumento de la temperatura, la acidificación, la subida del nivel y la acumulación de residuos y contaminantes en los fondos y superficies marinas afecta irreversiblemente a nuestro modo de vida, arriesgando la subsistencia de millones de personas. La falta de jurisdicción agrava el problema de la sobreexplotación de recursos, la pesca ilegal y los vertidos de todo tipo de residuos y contaminantes, y las autoridades internacionales no tienen los suficientes instrumentos legales para castigar estas acciones. Los avances tecnológicos, que permiten conocer de cerca el estado de los mares, son clave para la gobernanza de los océanos y tendrán que ser desplegados como medio de supervisión y control. La convocatoria urgente de la Conferencia de Alto Nivel de la ONU, centrada en la necesidad de actuar a escala planetaria para mitigar el impacto de las actividades humanas en los océanos, debería ser una señal clara para que los legisladores se conciencien ante el grave estado del medio marino.
               
20.   Digitising European industry – Internet connectivity for growth, competitiveness and cohesion: European gigabit society and 5G (debate)

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






—



                        a Reinhard Bütikofer által az Ipari, Kutatási és Energiaügyi Bizottság nevében készített jelentés az európai ipar digitalizálásáról (2016/2271(INI)) – (A8-0183/2017) ,
                     










—



                        valamint
                     










—



                        a Michał Boni által az Ipari, Kutatási és Energiaügyi Bizottság nevében készített jelentés a növekedést, a versenyképességet és a kohéziót célzó internetkapcsolatról: a gigabitalapú európai társadalom és az 5G (2016/2305(INI)) – (A8-0184/2017)
                     





Reinhard Bütikofer,
Berichterstatter. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Der Journalist der New York Times Thomas Friedman hat einmal gesagt: 
                        ‘The country that gets the greenest, the fastest, with the smartest technologies, that is the country that will lead the 21st century.’
                      Angesichts der disruptiven Wirkung, die die Digitalisierung schon heute in vielen Bereichen der Industrie hat, werden wir wohl hinzufügen müssen: Man muss genau die Entwicklung dieser Bereiche mindestens ebenso wichtig nehmen. Wir haben es hier tatsächlich mit einer fundamentalen industriellen Revolution zu tun.
               

                  Dabei haben die Länder Europas mit ihrer historisch gewachsenen industriellen Basis, Know-how und Forschungslandschaft, qualifizierten Arbeitnehmern und einem großen Binnenmarkt durchaus gute Voraussetzungen. Doch ob es uns gelingt, diese Voraussetzungen gemeinsam wirksam zu nutzen, im Wettlauf der verschiedenen wirtschaftlichen Großregionen um die Technologieführerschaft in diesem Digitalisierungsbereich vorne mitzulaufen, das steht aus.
               

                  Ich glaube, wir brauchen eine gemeinsame europäische Vision. Ich glaube, wir brauchen eine europäische Koordinierung. Wir brauchen bei Infrastruktur, bei Investitionen und bei Innovationen die richtigen Rahmenbedingungen. Wir brauchen einen Fokus auf Cybersicherheit als besonderes Profil der europäischen Entwicklung, und wir müssen die gesellschaftliche Dimension beachten. Eine integrierte Strategie für Digitalisierung der Industrie muss Wettbewerbsfähigkeit durch Gewinn – etwa bei Materialintensität oder effizienterem Ressourceneinsatz – genauso beachten wie Nachhaltigkeit – zu der Digitalisierung beitragen kann, etwa im Bereich der Energietransformation oder bei der Kreislaufwirtschaft – und gute Arbeit. Denn Digitalisierung kann dazu beitragen, Arbeitsbedingungen zu verbessern, sie kann z. B. genutzt werden, neue arbeitnehmerfreundliche Arbeitszeitmodelle zu schaffen, und sie kann sogar dazu beitragen, dass Jobs, die in andere Länder abgewandert waren, zurückkehren. Ausdrücklich müssen wir darauf achten – das wurde von allen Fraktionen in diesem Haus gemeinsam getragen gewesen –, dass die ökonomische Dynamik, die sich da entfaltet, nicht zulasten des sozialen und regionalen Zusammenhalts der Union geht.
               

                  Fünf Punkte sind bei der gemeinsamen Industriepolitik der EU zur Digitalisierung der Industrie wichtig. Erstens dass es in der Tat Teil einer europäischen Industriepolitik ist und nicht alleine versäult dasteht; dass wir bei Infrastrukturinvestitionen und —innovationen vor allem darauf achten, dass es den KMU zugutekommt; dass wir bei der Cybersicherheit, beim sicheren Datenfluss betonen, dass das das Profil sein soll, das wir in Europa besonders fordern; dass wir bei der Standardisierungspolitik nicht das Nachsehen haben und dass wir auch bestimmte Elemente unserer Wettbewerbspolitik neu formatieren müssen.
               

                  Die sozialen Herausforderungen, die Verwerfungen, die damit einhergehen können, dürfen wir nicht ignorieren. Deswegen benennt der Bericht diese Voraussetzungen, von denen die Bildung – die Weiterbildung, das Weiterlernen und Training – mit Sicherheit strategisch die größte Bedeutung hat.
               

Michał Boni,
rapporteur. – Madam President, Commissioner, I would like to thank all those colleagues who worked together on the report. I believe that we in the European Parliament are united and have a common aim to make a coordinated 5G Action Plan for Europe. We are sending a clear message to the Member States, regions and all stakeholders, that Parliament supports all efforts to reach a comprehensive approach for timely deployment of 5G. 5G is more than a mobile revolution; it will be an innovation engine, bringing disruptive change across industries, creating new quality networks and very high-capacity networks. 5G will enable new high-quality services, which will ultimately improve the customer experience for increasingly sophisticated and demanding digital users.
What do we need to make the vision of 5G real? We need the rules to be future-oriented, pro-investment, pro-innovation and in accordance with the principle of infrastructure-based competition. Investments are the key for achieving 5G goals. The simplification of the legal framework, flexible models for co-investments, and long-term certainty and predictability are required. We need a clear understanding of what 5G means for all of us. The next generation of ultra-high broadband infrastructure will support the transformation of processors in all economic sectors – healthcare, energy, utilities, transport, automotive industry, virtual reality – and provide flexible and highly personalised services that improve every citizen's life. We need 5G systems that are able to operate over a very wide frequency range, from below 1 GHz up to 100 GHz. The frequencies of 3.6 GHz and above 10 GHz should deliver extreme data rates and capacity in dense areas.
We need the cooperation of all stakeholders in order to fulfil all the conditions within the required timeframe. The key is to harmonise the spectrum allocation processes. The Member States should understand that we have to avoid the fragmentation of decisions and solutions if we want to achieve the 5G objectives. The effective collaboration of all – the European Commission, BEREC, the Member States, business, regions and regional authorities and consumers – is necessary.
We need to develop financing for the 5G Action Plan in the next Multiannual Financial Framework. It should be at the proper level and use financial instruments, as well as subsidies, if we want to solve the problem of high -quality Internet accessibility in rural areas. Of course, we need to incentivise private investments, but we also need to have public support. We need to ensure coherent and timely actions at regional and city level. It should encourage cross-sectoral innovation and foster an industry-wide economic cooperation framework.
The first step is key. The timely implementation of the changes in all national broadband plans with country-specific recommendations. We need to make sure that 5G will be developed as an integrated set of solutions, and there must be tests and large-scale pilots in all sectors and countries at the same time. The standardisation roadmap for each sector, relying on industry-led processes, is needed. All hands on deck. We need to facilitate SMEs' access to the 5G participatory broadband platform, which is key for using all of the resources for the best investment models. It is our obligation for the future.

Karmenu Vella,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, very high-capacity Internet connectivity, fixed and mobile, is essential to unleash the next wave of the European Union competitiveness opportunities and innovation potential and to allow Europe's businesses and citizens to harvest the full benefits of the Digital Single Market. The communications on a European Gigabit Society and the 5G Action Plan for Europe identify the tools needed to bring this about. The Commission has recently reported on the status of the initiatives presented in these communications as part of its mid-term review of the progress of the Digital Single Market.
The effectiveness of the proposed actions depends largely on the engagement of Member States and of the European institutions, in close cooperation with all relevant stakeholders, to provide the policy, regulatory and financial support that is required.
I also want to underline that, for achieving our vision of connectivity, we need to change the regulatory framework. The Commission proposed ambitious reform of electronic communication rules, which is essential for deployment of 5G and broadband, Without better coordination of spectrum, we would not be able to achieve connectivity that is needed for tomorrow. Your report also stresses the importance of mobilising the necessary financial resources, as well as the use of EU financial support to leverage public and private investments. We have to combine structural funds, national, regional and private funding. This report and the endorsement by the European Parliament of the new 2025 strategic objectives for internet connectivity in the Digital Single Market will be an important step. We look forward to working with the European Parliament and the Council on the key elements of the proposed strategy, in line with your resolution, as well as on the related legislative proposals, including the necessary investment-stimulating reforms in the European Electronic Communications Code.
All these steps are essential to make the European Gigabit Society a reality.
When it comes to digitising industry, the report by Mr Bütikofer very much highlights how to make the digital transformation a successful revolution, from developing digital infrastructure supporting businesses to helping workers acquire the right skills.
We presented our strategy to digitise European industry one year ago. Since then we have made substantial progress. As Vice-President Ansip has already informed you, €3.5 billion over the next 3 years will be allocated under the Horizon 2020 programme for investment in key technologies and their integration along the value chain, as well as for digital innovation hubs. At the Digital Day held in the Rome in March, we launched an EU-wide forum to coordinate national plans to digitise industry – the European platform of national initiatives on digitising industry. In Rome we also reached a very important agreement on high-performance computing. Today, scientists, researchers and engineers need access to world-class HPC to process vast amounts of data. It could be to simulate a complete airplane, for climate modelling, for genome sequencing or for understanding the human brain. Several EU governments committed to supporting the next generation of computers and we expect more Member States to join the initiative.
Your report rightly identifies that the big challenge ahead is the mobilisation of the necessary financial resources and the use of EU financial support to leverage public and private investments. We have to mobilise and pool structural funds, national, regional and private funding to achieve our objectives. I welcome your suggestion to study future sources of investments for industrial digitisation.
The report also highlights two important issues which are at the heart of the Digital Single Market review – data and cyber security. At present, data flows and access to data are often held up in the EU by localisation rules or other technical and legal barriers. Restrictions on localisation prevent the scaling-up up of SMEs providing cloud computing or data hosting services. As announced in the DSM midterm review, the Commission will present a proposal on the free flow of data in autumn. Regarding cyber security, as we saw less than three weeks ago, cyber attacks are a constantly evolving global threat. Later this year we will review the EU's 2013 cyber security strategy, present certification and labelling measures to make IOT devices more cyber-ready and review the role of the EU's Agency for Network and Information Security to make certain it can help EU countries respond adequately.
The European Commission is working on making sure European businesses and citizens can fully benefit from the digital transformation. We need to develop an inclusive digital society whilst boosting European competitiveness.

PRESIDE: RAMÓN LUIS VALCÁRCEL SISO


Vicepresidente


Marju Lauristin,
rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs. – Mr President, colleagues, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs was discussing this report with great interest and also concern, really, because for us the report is not only about digital industry, it is about the digital transformation of the whole of European society. We can have very nice figures about data, speed and machines, but the bottleneck, obviously, is in the lack of human resources for this big transformation. Already now we can say that the number of unfilled high-level digital jobs is approaching 800 000. If you look at the gap between the skills needed and the available skills, the gap in the level of education in different countries, it is really worrying. When we look at the labour market, one third of jobs will be deeply influenced by this transformation; this will require retraining of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of workers in Europe. That means that this EUR 3.5 billion that Mr Ansip is talking about should not be spent only on machines, but also at the same level on the development of human resources for Europe. That is a huge task and I am very glad that we in our committee and between committees, we all agree that this is crucial and in all opinions of committees I found that the Commission is really expected to put.

(The President cut off the Speaker)


Antonio López-Istúriz White,
ponente de opinión de la Comisión de Mercado Interior y Protección del Consumidor. – Señor presidente, Señorías, la Comisión de Mercado Interior y Protección del Consumidor aprobó el día 23 de marzo su opinión a un informe de la Comisión de Industria, Investigación y Energía, con una larga mayoría, y me complace comprobar que mi querido colega Michał Boni y la Comisión ITRE han incorporado muchas de nuestras sugerencias.
                  

                     Me gustaría destacar que pedimos lo siguiente: un calendario explícito de despliegue de 5G que incluya un enfoque de neutralidad tecnológica que neutralice la brecha digital; un entorno regulador orientado al futuro, proinversión, proinnovación, para fomentar la competencia; soluciones previsibles a largo plazo que puedan generar confianza en los inversores; una estrategia europea coherente del espectro con una mejor coordinación en la asignación del mismo y la aceleración de los esfuerzos de estandarización de la tecnología 5G; y, de cara a la creación de más empleo —que es lo que realmente también nos importa—, el desarrollo y la mejora de las competencias digitales, proporcionando al mercado mano de obra de calidad.
                  

                     Por último, quiero decir que internet ha hecho las distancias más cortas, más rápidas y más baratas. Pero que debemos aprender de nuestras experiencias previas, adaptarnos a la nueva era y abrazar de todo corazón las nuevas tecnologías 5G.
                  

Nicola Danti,
relatore per parere della commissione per il mercato interno e la protezione dei consumatori. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il futuro dell'Europa si giocherà anche sulla capacità che avremo di sfruttare al meglio le opportunità della rivoluzione digitale, rispettando al contempo il nostro modello sociale.
                  

                     Mi soffermo solamente su due temi messi in rilievo nell'opinione della commissione IMCO a questa importante relazione.
                  

                     Il primo: la necessità di assicurare che il processo di digitalizzazione dell'industria offra nuove opportunità ai consumatori in termini di maggiore scelta e qualità di beni e servizi. Inoltre, abbiamo sottolineato l'importanza di avanzare su interoperabilità e standardizzazione, sostenendo l'accesso a brevetti essenziali per le norme tecniche a condizioni eque e non discriminatorie e coinvolgendo gli stakeholder e le parti sociali nella definizione di nuovi standard.
                  

                     È quindi fondamentale che l'Unione europea si doti al più presto di un'ambiziosa ed efficace strategia per la digitalizzazione dell'industria, che rafforzi la competitività del tessuto produttivo europeo, a partire dalle piccole e medie imprese.
                  

Pavel Telička,
rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Transport and Tourism. – Mr President, Commissioner, there is one sector that has been a frontrunner in terms of utilising digital technologies, and that is transport. Before automated driving, all connectivity between vehicles has become a sort of trend issue. We already have solid experience in terms of utilising ERTMS in the rail transport and SESAR in aviation, and that has been a wholly positive experience. We know that the automation of transport and the use of digital processes are also beneficial for safety and the environment. The sector is moving in this direction, and that of course requires further support and incentives for the development of appropriate infrastructure and equipment. We need, as a matter of urgency, to deliver on network connectivity for innovation and training.
What we really need is a digitalisation in industry strategy, but that strategy is needed so that we can grasp all the opportunities. There are, I would say, three important criteria: firstly, it must be long-term and across perspectives; secondly, we need to concentrate the financial resources in EFSI; and thirdly, we need to monitor the implementation on behalf of the individual Member States. There are two issues that I would like to mention briefly: the first is integrated ticketing, and the second is cyber security. I would appreciate it if the Commissioner would focus on that.

Kosma Złotowski,
autor projektu opinii Komisji Transportu i Turystyki. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Komisja Transportu i Turystyki w swojej opinii dla komisji ITRE podkreśla szczególne znaczenie rozwoju sieci 5G dla budowania bezpiecznego, zintegrowanego i nowoczesnego systemu usług transportowych i turystycznych w Unii. Bez zapewnienia powszechnego dostępu do szybkich i stabilnych połączeń internetowych w tym standardzie nie będziemy mogli mówić o rozwoju w takich obszarach jak mobilność autonomiczna, zintegrowany europejski system biletowy czy automatyczne systemy powiadamiania o zdarzeniach drogowych.
                  

                     Niestety zauważamy duże różnice w procesie budowy odpowiedniej infrastruktury sieciowej między państwami członkowskimi oraz między poszczególnymi regionami. Szczególnie poszkodowane są tu trudno dostępne regiony górskie oraz regiony peryferyjne. Bez wątpienia inwestycje w infrastrukturę sieciową muszą być większe, a kolejne wieloletnie ramy finansowe i polityka spójności muszą w większym stopniu uwzględniać potrzeby wszystkich branż, których rozwój zależy dzisiaj od dostępu do szerokopasmowego internetu.
                  

Pavel Telička,
rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Transport and Tourism. – Mr President, [inaudible] my contribution because at one minute and fifteen seconds, I had two red lights. Just for the record, I had two minutes of speaking time. I had to shorten it, and I am afraid that I could not deliver it entirely, but no harm done. This is just for clarification.

El Presidente. – Perdone, pero yo tengo aquí anotado un minuto nada más.
                  

Ангел Джамбазки,
докладчик по становището на комисията по култура и образование. – Г-н Председател, поздравявам и г-н Теличка, който си тръгва и няма да изслуша този разговор, но все пак уважавам неговото мнение.
                  

                     На прага сме на нова и вълнуваща ера. Тези два файла представляват още две важни стъпки към една истинска цифрова Европа, към която всички ние се стремим.
                  

                     Дигитализацията е не само политическа, но и икономическа тема. Тя е част от всекидневния ни живот на всеки един от нас. Когато изработваме ново законодателство или призоваваме за дълбоко различен курс на действие, ще бъдем в състояние да подобрим още живота на гражданите и да предоставим на индустрията модерни правни рамки.
                  

                     Един от ключовите въпроси, върху които трябва да продължим да се фокусираме, е преодоляването на разликата между поколенията и преквалифицирането на трудовите сили, защото те са стълбовете на Европейския съюз.
                  

                     Казвайки това, бих искал да завърша приветствайки досиетата върху цифровата индустрия и програмата 5G, и се надявам скоро да видя необходимите промени и мерки, които ще бъдат приложени в държавите – членки на Европейския съюз.
                  

Silvia Costa,
relatrice per parere della commissione per la cultura e l'istruzione. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, nel nostro parere come commissione cultura abbiamo messo in evidenza alcuni aspetti.
                  

                     Intanto che lo sviluppo delle tecnologie 5G rappresenta un'opportunità unica per le imprese e gli innovatori culturali e creativi di competere sulla scena globale e di esaltare anche il loro talento, ma anche di ampliare un comparto che oggi rappresenta oltre il 7 per cento del PIL europeo. Ne beneficerà anche il settore audiovisivo che è coinvolto in questa transizione digitale, a condizione però che se ne tengano in considerazione le esigenze e le peculiarità.
                  

                     In secondo luogo, sarà molto importante che il piano previsto preveda effettivamente che entro il 2025 tutte le scuole primarie e secondarie, le università, le biblioteche e i centri di ricerca europei possano avere effettivamente accesso a Internet veloce anche con un investimento forte con il fondo naturalmente EFSI e anche, però, purché siano garantite le condizioni di sicurezza e con una forte azione per dare competenze digitali, questo va messo in evidenza, altrimenti rischiamo che ci sia un investimento infrastrutturale, ma non sulle infrastrutture che sono le risorse umane.
                  

                     Infine, penso che dobbiamo puntare a una vera e propria cittadinanza digitale inclusiva, abbiamo ancora un digital divide molto forte e quindi vorrei che gli aspetti legati alla formazione e anche all'inclusione delle zone rurali e delle zone periferiche siano molto presenti nella strategia del 5G.
                  

Massimiliano Salini,
a nome del gruppo PPE. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Commissario, la sfida della digitalizzazione dell'industria europea è incredibile per numeri e per portata storica e culturale. Si calcolano circa 110 miliardi di euro di fatturato annuo legato a questa evoluzione del processo industriale europeo, accanto ai quali abbiamo, ed è ancora più importante, circa 50 miliardi di euro all'anno di investimenti programmati. Quindi è una vera rivoluzione numerica e, ripeto, culturale.
                  

                     La relazione, e di questo ringrazio l'onorevole Bütikofer, è costruita toccando tutti i pilastri, il tema delle infrastrutture, peraltro con un'opportuna sottolineatura sulla necessità che all'interno del FEIS, quindi del piano Junker, vi sia una maggiore attenzione agli investimenti legati allo sviluppo della digitalizzazione industriale in Europa, il tema di una politica industriale digitale condivisa a livello europeo e il tema centrale di una giusta sinergia, costruita in modo puntuale e rigoroso, tra pubblico e privato nella politica di investimenti di cui parlavamo.
                  

                     Ma il nucleo di questa sfida è tutto legato, come i colleghi hanno detto, alla grande partita del capitale umano. Un tempo le proprie competenze duravano trent'anni nel mercato del lavoro, oggi in tre, cinque anni sono obsolete. Quindi, la prima sfida è costruire le condizioni perché il mercato del lavoro non sia rigido e protettivo, ma adeguato e flessibile perché vengano premiati sempre i migliori.
                  

Victor Negrescu,
în numele grupului S&D. – Domnule președinte, astăzi discutăm despre digitalizarea industriei europene și despre conectivitate. Mai exact, vorbim despre Europa digitală, de o societate, practic, digitală, în care toți cetățenii ar trebui să aibă acces la oportunitățile oferite de noile evoluții tehnologice. Intențiile sunt bune, ne dorim ca Uniunea Europeană să devină lider mondial în implementarea 5G până în 2025. Acest lucru ar aduce beneficii enorme, de aproape 141 de miliarde de euro, în întreaga Europă.
                  

                     Pentru asta, însă, trebuie să legiferăm cum trebuie și unde trebuie. Spre exemplu, ne trebuie o definiție a rețelelor de foarte mare capacitate în cadrul Codului european al comunicațiilor electronice.
                  

                     Pentru a profita de revoluția digitală, trebuie să implicăm toți actorii. De exemplu, guvernele ar trebui să se coordoneze mai bine și să integreze sisteme de securitate performante, orașele trebuie să aibă programe de dezvoltare coerente, IMM-urile și universitățile trebuie să aibă acces la inovație, iar fractura digitală trebuie combătută activ, prin măsuri ferme și clare de finanțare. Trebuie să acționăm rapid pentru că inovația și concurenta internațională nu ne așteaptă și e rolul nostru aici să luăm deciziile oportune.
                  

Zdzisław Krasnodębski,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Chciałbym podkreślić, że cyfryzacja – o czym wszyscy wiemy – jest wielką szansą na reindustrializację Europy. A my tyle o tej reindustrializacji mówimy, ponieważ cyfrowa rewolucja zmienia układ sił. Daje przewagę gospodarkom o dużych zasobach kadry inżynieryjnej, informatycznej, natomiast znaczenie niskich kosztów pracy będzie maleć, więc Europa ma szansę na odzyskanie sporej części produkcji z tanich rynków azjatyckich.
                  

                     Nie powinniśmy jednak zapominać o zróżnicowaniu wewnątrz Europy. I rewolucja cyfrowa jest też szansą na zmniejszenie różnic między poszczególnymi częściami Europy. Tylko trzeba tę szansę umieć wykorzystać, gdyż w przeciwnym wypadku istniejące nierówności raczej pogłębią się. Już teraz trzeba podejmować działania, które temu zapobiegną. Pan Bütikofer mówił o nowej rewolucji przemysłowej; chciałem przypomnieć, że ta pierwsza rewolucja przemysłowa trwale podzieliła Europę ze wszystkimi tego konsekwencjami politycznymi i gospodarczymi. Powinniśmy działać tak, żeby tego rodzaju podział nie pojawił się w tej rewolucji cyfrowej.
                  

Cora van Nieuwenhuizen,
namens de ALDE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, de wereld om ons heen verandert steeds sneller. Het is haast niet bij te houden. Alleen al het gebruik van internet overtreft alles wat er tot nu toe over werd voorspeld. Er zijn al 5 miljard mobiele telefoons voor 7 miljard mensen. Door de opkomst van communicatie tussen machines schieten we naar 50 miljard met elkaar verbonden apparaten. We gaan van een megabitsamenleving naar een gigabitsamenleving. Shang Bing, de voorzitter van China Mobile, zei het heel mooi: connectiviteit is als zuurstof, we kunnen niet meer zonder.
                  

                     Nog maar 25 jaar geleden werd de 2G-technologie geïntroduceerd, waarmee we naast bellen ook konden sms'en op onze mobieltjes. Met 3G kwamen er foto's bij, met 4G video's en nu groeien we door naar 5 G met virtuele realiteit. Eigenlijk draaide het tot 4 G vooral om het verbinden van mensen, terwijl 5G ook dingen gaat verbinden, het internet der dingen. We krijgen een industrie met slimme apparaten en geavanceerde zelfherstellende netwerken die 24 uur per dag alle informatie en producten leveren die we maar willen. Er worden extreem hoge aantallen transacties afgewikkeld en datastromen geanalyseerd. Deze digitale revolutie zet wereldwijd allerlei bedrijfsmodellen op z'n kop. Er ontstaan veel kansen om dingen beter, sneller en goedkoper te doen.
                  

                     Willen we in Europa ons partijtje mee blijven blazen in de wereldeconomie, dan moeten we zorgen dat we klaar zijn voor de 5G-samenleving en de juiste voorwaarden scheppen zodat ondernemers kunnen ondernemen. We moeten zorgen voor goede digitale infrastructuur en innovatievriendelijke regelgeving en tegelijk de juiste waarborgen bieden voor individuele vrijheid en privacy. We moeten de kansen grijpen die 5G biedt. Voor al die extra gigabits zal ik blijven vechten als een gigabitch.
                  

(De spreker gaat in op een ‘blauwe kaart’-vraag (artikel 162, lid 8, van het Reglement))


Tibor Szanyi (S&D),
Kékkártyás kérdés. – Képviselő Asszony! Ön elképesztő méretű technikai fejlődést vázolt föl, ami valószínűleg így van. Ugyanakkor Ön miben látja annak az okát, hogy mindeközben az európai vidék, elsősorban az európai falvak, illetve a városok közti digitális szakadék soha nem látott méretűre nőtt? És miben látja ennek az orvoslását?
                  

Cora van Nieuwenhuizen (ALDE),

                           ‘blauwe kaart’-antwoord. – Net voor plattelandsgebieden kan satelliettechnologie ontzettend veel hulp bieden. In een groot land als India gaan ze de hele connectiviteit alleen met satellieten verzorgen. Dus ook het platteland moeten we op die manier kunnen bedienen.
                  

Paloma López Bermejo,
en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señor presidente, la digitalización de la industria nos obliga a reflexionar sobre la transformación del mundo del trabajo. Hemos pasado de grandes centros industriales compactos, en los que todos los trabajadores pertenecían a una misma empresa bajo un mismo convenio, a una situación en la que la industria utiliza las nuevas tecnologías para externalizar y subcontratar tareas cada vez más descentralizadas y también más precarias, incluso mediante plataformas de falsos autónomos, mientras los núcleos tecnológicos de alto valor añadido se concentran cada vez más en unos pocos países, o incluso regiones, de la economía global.
                  

                     Por ello, el sector público no puede permanecer impasible y debe regular los cambios tecnológicos que se van produciendo, asegurando que la legislación laboral sigue aplicándose a los trabajadores dependientes y a las cadenas de subcontratas en igualdad de condiciones, porque si no generaremos un nuevo foco de desigualdad.
                  

                     Frente a la fragmentación del mundo del trabajo y nuevas figuras que van a surgir, ha de existir y reforzarse un marco legal que proteja la negociación colectiva y el derecho a la huelga; en resumen, que se garanticen los derechos. Para ello, es necesario contar con los sindicatos en una estrategia de desarrollo industrial ambiciosa, que asegure que las transformaciones tecnológicas van de la mano de la creación de empleo de calidad y la mejora de nuestro modelo productivo. Solo así podemos afrontar los retos tecnológicos que se avecinan.
                  

El Presidente. – Señora López Bermejo, perdone que le haya dado cierto toque de atención, ya que usted disponía —es verdad— de un minuto y medio.
                  

Barbara Kappel,
im Namen der ENF-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar! Einer neuen Studie des Beratungsunternehmens Boston Consulting zufolge können Industrieunternehmen in den nächsten zehn Jahren bis zu 40 % ihrer Herstellungskosten einsparen, wenn sie das volle Potenzial der Digitalisierung nutzen.
                  

                     Smarte Logistik, 3D-Produktionssimulation, Big Data, Cloud-Computing, Robotik und Advanced Analytics sind die Bausteine der Fabriken der Zukunft. Die Implementierung dieser und weiterer Schlüsseltechnologien wie 5G, künstliche Intelligenz und Quantentechnologien wird ausschlaggebend dafür sein, dass die Unternehmen an Wettbewerbsfähigkeit gewinnen und somit in der Lage sind, Wachstum und Beschäftigung zu schaffen.
                  

                     Der erfolgreiche Eintritt in die Gigabit-Gesellschaft ist allerdings mit hohen Kosten verbunden. Kosten für den Ausbau der digitalen Infrastruktur, für Forschung, Entwicklung und Innovation und Kosten für Ausbildung. Derzeit fehlen in Europa in etwa 180 000 IT-Fachkräfte. Die Vermittlung digitaler Kompetenzen muss deshalb auch verstärkt in die Lehrpläne von Schulen und Universitäten einfließen.
                  

                     Die Digitalisierung stellt im Moment die größte Herausforderung für den Wirtschaftsstandort Europa dar. Wir brauchen deshalb eine klare industriepolitische Strategie, damit Europa weltweit eine führende Rolle einnehmen kann, und nur so wird es auch möglich sein, das Reindustrialisierungsziel von 20 % zu erreichen.
                  

Ева Майдел (PPE). – Г-н Председател, благодаря на всички колеги за работата и усилията, вложени в този доклад за дигитализиране на индустрията. Благодаря и на водещата комисия, че прие позицията на комисията по вътрешния пазар и защита на потребителите, където бях докладчик за групата на Европейската народна партия.
                  

                     Важно е да говорим за дигитализация и то смело. Секторът в Европа дава работа на 6 милиона души и съставя 4% от брутния вътрешен продукт на Европейския съюз. Важно е да отбележим, че около една трета от растежа на промишлената продукция вече се случва благодарение на внедряването на дигитални технологии. С други думи, индустрията печели от дигитализация. Близо 100 милиарда евро годишно са очакваните приходи.
                  

                     Но този резултат няма да се постигне с единични усилия. Необходима ни е координация на национални и регионални инициативи и на обмени на добри практики, необходими са съвместни решения и общи стандарти, които да насърчават развитието на интернет на нещата и трансграничното движение на данни.
                  

                     Но освен с конкретни инвестиции и с добавена стойност за дигиталната инфраструктура, дигитализацията на промишлеността се нуждае и от подготвен човешки ресурс. Четиридесет процента от работниците в Европейския съюз нямат достатъчно дигитални умения. И точно за това се застъпихме в комисията по вътрешния пазар и защита на потребителите.
                  

                     Радвам се, че във финалния доклад са отразени тези наши позиции. Сега наистина е моментът за новите държави членки да покажем, че умеем да правим това най-добре –да превърнем промяната, да я прегърнем, да променим нашите индустрии и да прескочим етапа от цикъла на развитие, така както направихме с интернет инфраструктурата.
                  

                     Надявам се, че Европа може да бъде пример как да направим нашата индустрия по-ефективна и конкурентоспособна.
                  

Martina Werner (S&D). – Herr Präsident! Die Entwicklung von 5G und der Weg zu einer Gigabit-Gesellschaft haben höchste Priorität für uns Sozialdemokraten, denn flächendeckende zukunftsfähige Netze sind Voraussetzung für wirtschaftliche und gesellschaftliche Teilhabe.
                  

                     Dazu müssen wir vor allen Dingen mehr in Glasfaser investieren. Das gilt übrigens ganz besonders für Deutschland, weil wir nach einem OECD-Ranking ganz weit hinten landen. Auf dem Weg zu einer Gigabit-Gesellschaft brauchen wir deswegen eine ambitionierte Definition von VHC-Netzen und gesundem Wettbewerb. Bei der Digitalisierung der Industrie sind mir drei Punkte besonders wichtig.
                  

                     Erstens: Wir müssen KMU beim digitalen Wandel mitnehmen, z. B. durch bessere Cluster-Förderung oder Beratungsleistung.
                  

                     Zweitens: Für die gesellschaftliche Akzeptanz ist die Einbeziehung der Beschäftigten essenziell – auch mehr Engagement von den Betrieben.
                  

                     Drittens: Nicht erst die WannaCry-Attacke hat die Bedeutung des Themas Cybersicherheit deutlich gemacht.
                  

                     Zusammenfassend: Erstens: Konnektivität für alle sicherstellen. Zweitens: KMU und Beschäftigte mitnehmen. Drittens: Vertrauen durch Cyber-Sicherheit gewährleisten.
                  

                     Auf diese Eckpfeiler sollten wir unsere Aufmerksamkeit jetzt konzentrieren.
                  

Edouard Ferrand (ENF). – Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, le groupe Europe des nations et des libertés salue la démarche positive, mais encore trop timide, de notre collègue Bütikofer sur la question du contrôle des investissements étrangers dans le domaine numérique.
                  

                     Nous devons affirmer notre droit à la souveraineté numérique et protéger les entreprises européennes clés dans la chaîne de valeur de cette industrie, ô combien stratégique.
                  

                     Bruxelles a dû attendre que l'Allemagne soit touchée avec le rachat du fleuron de la robotique Kuka pour se réveiller.
                  

                     Alors franchissons le pas et protégeons-nous contre les appétits des puissances concurrentes américaines et asiatiques qui ont profité pendant tant d'années de l'aveuglement du libre-échangisme de Bruxelles.
                  

                     Mais les habitudes ont la vie dure. Le rapport de notre collègue Boni, lui, soutient sans réserve le PPP 5G. Or, dans la partie privée de ce partenariat, on retrouve des entreprises qui n'ont rien d'européen.
                  

                     C'est pour cela que nous refuserons que ce texte soit publié car nous pensons qu'il est important aujourd'hui de nous protéger contre les concurrences étrangères.
                  

Henna Virkkunen (PPE). – Arvoisa puhemies, digitalisaatio on megatrendi, joka muuttaa maailmaa nyt hyvin nopeasti, ja on tärkeää, että Eurooppa on tässä kehityksessä vahvasti mukana. Tiedämme, että digitalisaatio on merkinnyt uusia innovaatioita ja liiketoimintaa – paljon uusia mahdollisuuksia – ja yrityksille se tarjoaa myös mahdollisuuden toimia entistä energiatehokkaammin.
                  

                     Erityisesti on kaksi teemaa, joihin Euroopassa pitää nyt keskittyä, kun vauhditamme digitalisaatiota. Toinen on nimenomaan infrastruktuuri, siihen liittyvät innovaatiot, joista kollega Boni täällä vahvasti puhui, 5G-verkkojen muodossa. Mobiilidatan tarve lisääntyy 60-100 prosenttia joka vuosi. Ja on selvää, että tarvitsemme erittäin paljon investointeja nyt nopeisiin verkkoihin joka puolella Eurooppaa ja meidän on huolehdittava siitä, että Euroopassa on lainsäädäntöympäristö, joka kannustaa yrityksiä investoimaan Eurooppaan ja nopeisiin yhteyksiin Euroopassa.
                  

                     Toinen iso kysymys on ihmisten taitojen parantaminen. Tällä hetkellä jo 90 prosenttia eurooppalaisista yrityksistä ilmoittaa, että heillä on puutetta riittävistä digitaalisista taidoista, ja on erittäin tärkeää, että ihmisten ICT-osaamista kasvatetaan kaikilla tasoilla: lasten, nuorten ja jo työelämässä olevien aikuisten. Me emme voi olla kilpailukykyisiä maailmantaloudessa, jos meillä ei ole riittävästi osaavaa työvoimaa. Tähän täytyy nyt kiinnittää huomiota kaikissa jäsenvaltioissa.
                  

Carlos Zorrinho (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, debatemos hoje dois temas estruturantes da revolução digital a que estamos a assistir na União Europeia e no mundo.
                  

                     Para um mundo em transformação acelerada e cheio de incertezas, a Revolução Digital é uma oportunidade para refundar o projeto europeu.
                  

                     Saúdo o relatório sobre a digitalização da indústria europeia e o seu relator pela proposta de estratégia global, abordando as dimensões de infraestruturas, investimento, inovação e competências.
                  

                     Saúdo também o relatório sobre o 5G e o seu relator pela nova visão tecnológica que partilha, associando os instrumentos necessários para a concretizar.
                  

                     Esta semana, o Parlamento e o Conselho fecharam um acordo provisório sobre a iniciativa WIFI4EU. Como seu relator, deixei claro que no desenvolvimento da Sociedade Europeia a Gigabits, temos que garantir altos padrões tecnológicos, promover a inclusão, impulsionar a economia e a capacidade de gerar valor e emprego.
                  

                     Temos a oportunidade de voltar a posicionar a União Europeia no mundo como um projeto tecnologicamente líder e inclusivo e não a podemos desperdiçar.
                  

Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, the EU needs faster and higher quality connectivity for all Europeans. This is essential if we are to establish a digital single market. Ensuring access to broadband across all the Member States and implementing new-generation networks are two of the most important issues for the success of the digital agenda. The creation of a European society where all citizens have access to fast and high quality internet connection is essential in opening up the digital single market, not just for urban areas but everywhere.
In my own country, the digitalisation of rural Ireland is akin to the electrification of Ireland over half a century ago. The influence of the digital economy will be the driving force in balancing the rural economic environment. Leading the way, as a demonstration of what is possible if rural communities are given access to high-speed broadband, is the Ludgate Hub in my own constituency in Skibbereen in County Cork – a little town, by the way, that produced five European rowing champions last weekend.
The objective of the Ludgate Hub is to facilitate 75 digitally working entrepreneurs, thus creating a wealth of new jobs in the West Cork area. Already the effects of the initiative are producing clear results, with a number of start-ups and young entrepreneurs relocating to the area – an area that has seen a huge decline in population in recent times, as young professionals were forced to move away to larger towns and cities in search of employment opportunities.
We need many more Skibbereens. We need the digital single market. We need these proposals.

Miapetra Kumpula-Natri (S&D). – Arvoisa puhemies, meidän on saatava Euroopassa aikaiseksi nopeat ja kattavat verkot kaikkien ulottuville ja Euroopan on pystyttävä toimimaan edelläkävijänä 5G-teknologian käyttöönotossa. 5G on mahdollistava tekijä, kun digitalisoimme teollisuutta ja liikennesektoria, modernisoimme ja digitalisoimme eurooppalaista rakennuskantaa, lisäämme terveyspalvelujen vaikuttavuutta uusin keinoin ja mahdollistamme digitaalisten palvelujen ja sensoreiden käyttöönoton.
                  

                     Oleellista on osaava ja koulutettu työvoima. Se on yhä tärkeämpi korkean jalostusarvon ja teollisuuden ja palvelualan kilpailukyvyn tukijalka. Euroopassa syntyneet innovaatiot tuottavat talouskasvua, ja ne tarjoavat kasvualustan myös eurooppalaisille teollisille ratkaisuille.
                  

                     Tuen komission avauksia digitaalisista innovaatiokeskittymistä ja maailmanluokan alustoista ja kumppanuuksista. Resursseja tulee koordinoida paremmin, ja meidän tehtävämme on myös katsoa, että lainsäädäntö on yhteensopiva digitaalisen maailman kanssa.
                  

Theodor Dumitru Stolojan (PPE). – Domnule președinte, revoluția digitală schimbă fundamental modul în care se desfășoară activitățile economice, sociale, umane în toate domeniile. Iată de ce susțin inițiativele Comisiei Europene, recomandările din aceste rapoarte, care țintesc într-adevăr formarea unei piețe unice digitale europene.
                  

                     Literatura de specialitate ne arată foarte limpede că cine rămâne acum în urmă în aplicarea oportunităților, folosirea oportunităților generate de revoluția digitală rămâne în urmă pentru o lungă perioadă de timp. De aceea, avem responsabilitatea ca, la nivel european, să avem ca o prioritate adoptarea reglementărilor necesare revoluției digitale și, în mod deosebit, trebuie acționăm pentru educația digitală, astfel încât fiecare cetățean european, fiecare firmă să poată să aibă pe deplin capacitatea de a folosi oportunitățile create de revoluția digitală.
                  

                     Mă bucur că viitorul comisar european pentru piața digitală va fi o colegă de-a noastră, doamna Mariya Gabriel care are energie și căreia îi doresc mult succes.
                  

Intervenciones con arreglo al procedimiento de solicitud incidental de uso de la palabra (‘catch the eye’)


Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já jsem velmi pozorně poslouchal celou debatu, protože považuji tento bod za jeden z nejvíce důležitých. Je možná škoda, že tento bod projednáváme takto pozdě večer přímo na dodatečném zasedání. Tady jasně padlo a z toho já mám radost, že v zásadě všichni řečníci podporují digitální revoluci, respektive zapojení evropských struktur do této revoluce.
                  

                     Jsem přesvědčen, že bez koordinace Evropské komise, pokud každá země bude digitalizaci průmyslu řešit samostatně, tak příliš efektivní nebudeme. Je opravdu třeba, abychom na evropské úrovni řešili otázku zdrojů, obrovského navýšení peněz. Mě překvapilo, že my v Evropě vydáváme do oblasti digitalizace pouze třetinu zdrojů, například proti Spojeným státům americkým. Je třeba navýšit zdroje, mít společnou strategii, ale také získat pracovníky. Chybí nám pracovníci v IT, jak o tom někteří kolegové hovořili. Takže, pane komisaři, je to klíčové téma a je třeba na tom pracovat.
                  

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'industria riveste un ruolo fondamentale nell'economia dell'Europa, emergono nuove tecnologie come Big Data e l'intelligenza artificiale, con nuove sfide e una realtà eternamente mutevole, ma le nuove tecnologie pongono innanzitutto interrogativi etici; quando i dati sono incommensurabili e riguardano non la realtà naturale, ma sociale, storica, linguistica, i criteri di classificazione risentono dell'oggetto da classificare e tendono a confondersi con i fatti sociali stessi.
                  

                     La gestione di questi dati finisce per influenzare la vita sociale stessa sollevando gli interrogativi espressi nella relazione, e mi complimento con l'onorevole Bütikofer. È vero, infatti, che l'industria rimane competitiva solo coniugando innovazione con sostenibilità, ma deve essere chiaro che l'ubiquità e non rivalità dei dati espongono in modo subdolo il consumatore ad una vulnerabilità della privacy e alla possibile e progressiva violazione di regole antitrust.
                  

                     Non dovremo sorprenderci nei prossimi anni se i consumatori avranno, rispetto agli stessi beni, i cosiddetti prezzi personalizzati. Con la caratterizzazione dei consumatori c'è il pericolo che essi vivano in ambiti sempre più ristretti, dove la libera scelta è solo apparente.
                  

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). — Κύριε πρόεδρε, οι σύγχρονες προκλήσεις για την ευρωπαϊκή οικονομία απαιτούν μια ολοκληρωμένη στρατηγική ψηφιοποίησης της βιομηχανίας διότι μόνο έτσι θα ενισχυθεί η ανταγωνιστικότητα της ίδιας της ευρωπαϊκής οικονομίας και ιδίως της οικονομίας των χωρών του ευρωπαϊκού Νότου. Έτσι, αντίθετα με όσους θεωρούν ότι η Ευρωπαϊκή ανταγωνιστικότητα θα πρέπει να στηριχθεί στην κινεζοποίηση των μισθών, θα πρέπει να γίνει αντιληπτό ότι μόνο εάν ενισχυθεί η εκπαίδευση και η κατάρτιση και ενισχυθεί επίσης η ψηφιακή οικονομία, τότε μόνο θα είναι ανταγωνιστική η ίδια η Ευρώπη. Αυτό βέβαια χρειάζεται κονδύλια για την εκπαίδευση και την κατάρτιση του ίδιου του εργατικού δυναμικού και δεν μπορεί να γίνει αποφασιστικά καθώς με τη λιτότητα και την βίαιη δημοσιονομική προσαρμογή που έχει επιβληθεί επί των κρατών μελών, δεν υπάρχουν οι αναγκαίοι πόροι. Αυτό ισχύει πολύ περισσότερο για την Ελλάδα όπου έχουν μειωθεί οι δαπάνες για την εκπαίδευση μετά από την βίαιη παρέμβαση της ίδιας της τρόικας.
                  

João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, a mudança tecnológica constitui um importante motor de desenvolvimento. Todavia, os seus resultados concretos dependem do modo de produção que caracteriza a sociedade em que esta mudança se opera. Ela tanto pode ser aproveitada para melhorar as condições de vida dos trabalhadores e dos povos como pode ser utilizada para aumentar a exploração dos trabalhadores, as desigualdades, as injustiças sociais. Sob as condições da globalização capitalista, é a segunda hipótese que prevalece.
                  

                     A digitalização da indústria, inserida no âmbito do que alguns designam ‘a quarta revolução industrial’, alia à inovação e à automatização crescente dos processos produtivos plataformas tecnológicas globais assentes em redes de infraestruturas de comunicação digital.
                  

                     Os trabalhadores não podem ficar à margem destes processos. Devem beneficiar das transformações no plano dos salários e direitos. Estas transformações não devem ser usadas como pretexto para impor o retrocesso social. Importa não ignorar que, no quadro da manutenção das políticas neoliberais vigentes, estes processos tendem a cavar mais fundo as desigualdades sociais e nacionais.
                  

Csaba Sógor (PPE). – Elnök Úr, szeretném felhívni a figyelmet, hogy az ipari digitalizáció jelenlegi helyzete és jövőbeni kilátásai tekintetében óriási különbségek vannak Európa különböző régiói között. Fontos hangsúlyoznunk, hogy a digitalizáció során el kell kerülnünk, hogy a tagállamok és a régiók közötti szakadék növekedjen, még nehezebb helyzetbe hozva az elmaradottabb régiókat. A digitális technológiák és ezek ipari alkalmazása ugyanakkor az Európai Unió globális versenyképességének kulcsfontosságú tényezője, ezért az Uniónak és a tagállamoknak is támogatniuk kell a kkv-kat és a nagyobb ipari szereplőket, egészen egyszerűen azért, mert a világ más gazdasági központjaiban is ugyanezt teszik a saját vállalkozóikkal és ipari szereplőikkel.
                  

                     Az oktatási rendszerek reformja is ebben a keretben értelmezhető: ha nem biztosítunk releváns tudást és készségeket a fiataljainknak, nagyon gyorsan lemaradhatunk a globális versenyben, a felzárkózás pedig lassú és nehéz lesz.
                  

(Fin de las intervenciones con arreglo al procedimiento de solicitud incidental de uso de la palabra (‘catch the eye’))


Karmenu Vella,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I would like to thank all the MEPs for their contribution. The European Parliament's report on the gigabyte society and 5G Action Plan communications is an important step to make a reality of the strategy and of the concrete actions proposed. With regard to the 5G Action Plan, we are sure that it will encourage engagement by all stakeholders, including the Member States, in this ambitious work, which is more of a voluntary nature than of a regulatory nature. We also look forward to your support in the important ongoing regulatory procedures – in particular, concerning the better coordination of spectrum – that are essential to support the gigabyte society strategy, as well as in forthcoming financial discussions.
The European Parliament report on digitising European industry is also very encouraging. It shows that we share a common vision on creating the right infrastructures, as well as the right regulatory and innovation-friendly conditions, for the successful appropriation of digital innovations by any industry in any sector of the economy across the EU. Of equal importance is that we share similar views on the skills, social and work dimensions of digital transformation.
A critical mass of investments is required to achieve greater competitiveness for European industry through its digitalisation, in particular for smarter products, services, processes and business models, and this at all levels – EU, national, regional and from industry itself. This includes investments in, and coordination of, efforts on the development of the broad skills-set which is needed to master the digitalisation. To that end, we count on your continued support for significant investments in this financial framework and the next one.

Reinhard Bütikofer,
Berichterstatter. – Herr Präsident! Ich will meine Schlussbemerkungen auf vier kurze Punkte konzentrieren.
                  

                     Zunächst möchte ich Herrn Krasnodębski antworten, der zu Recht darauf verwiesen hat, dass wir aufpassen müssen, dass Europa über diese technologischen Veränderungen nicht erneut geteilt wird. Wenn wir das nicht wollen, Herr Krasnodębski, dann dürfen wir nicht Wagenburgmentalitäten in den einzelnen Ländern fordern, sondern wir müssen gemeinsam eine europäische Strategie entwickeln.
                  

                     Zweitens: Ich bin Herrn Sógor ausdrücklich dankbar dafür, dass er nochmal das Thema der kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen genannt hat. Ich glaube, das ist entscheidend.
                  

                     Drittens: Herr Ferrand hat auf die Frage des Schutzes europäischer Industrie abgehoben. Ich bin für einen solchen Schutz. Aber ich bin für einen Schutz ohne Protektionismus. Herr Ferrand hat von einem Schutz vor dem Wettbewerb gesprochen. Ich würde lieber von einem Schutz im Wettbewerb gegen unfaire Praktiken sprechen.
                  

                     Viertens: Der Bereich, der meines Erachtens in dieser Diskussion am meisten unterbelichtet blieb, war der Bereich der sozialen Implikationen. Ich bin den Kollegen von der Linken, Frau López Bermejo und Herrn Ferreira, ausdrücklich dankbar dafür, dass sie das wenigstens mal ins Zentrum gerückt haben. Ich bin auch Herrn Salini und Frau Werner dankbar, dass sie Probleme des Arbeitsmarktes benannt haben.
                  

                     Aber die Kommission, Herr Kommissar Vella, hat mich enttäuscht. Ganze zwei Sätze über die sozialen, gesellschaftlichen Implikationen dieses Themas haben Sie in zwei Beiträgen zustande gebracht. Das ist nicht besonders gut. Da müssen Sie nachsitzen und nochmal nachdenken.
                  

Michał Boni,
rapporteur. – Mr President, first of all, thank you very much for all the comments, I think that it is very important. I have a number of short points to make.
Firstly we need to have some kind of holistic understanding of what 5G means. This was raised during the discussion because while 5G is related to industries, to technologies and to infrastructures, it is related, first of all, to people. Through 5G, I think we can change our way of life and live in Europe with new services, a new healthcare area, new education reforms, and so on.
Secondly, we need to take comprehensive action, so we need to work at the same time with many sectors of industry, we need to cooperate with regions and cities and, first of all, we need closer cooperation among Member States because certain decisions will depend on Member States.
Thirdly and importantly, this is a way to create new competitive advantages for the European economy and European industry.
The last and most important point is that we need to avoid fragmentation, because I think recent years have shown us that, in areas related to digital issues, we are fragmented. So, in thinking about the digitalisation of industries and about the 5G action plan, if we can avoid fragmentation, and make it work together, I think we will achieve our goals.

El Presidente. – Se cierra el debate conjunto.
                  

                     La votación tendrá lugar mañana.
                  


Declaraciones por escrito (artículo 162 del Reglamento)



Fabio Massimo Castaldo (EFDD),
per iscritto. – La competitività dell'industria europea è centrale ed è quindi essenziale che l'Unione riesca a guidare la nuova rivoluzione industriale, tramite l'innovazione, e sulla base della sostenibilità. Infatti proprio qui, stanno alcuni punti forti del vecchio continente: detiene know-how, R&S, lavoratori qualificati, un grande mercato unico, una forte base industriale e una lunga collaborazione tra produzione e servizi. In questo contesto, l'Europa ha bisogno di una strategia di modernizzazione industriale ambiziosa, che ne digitalizzi la base manifatturiera. Ciò deve essere portato a termine con un approccio globale, che ponga in primo piano, tanto la sostenibilità ambientale, quanto pienamente, quella sociale. La digitalizzazione dell'impresa deve quindi essere concepita, come una strategia olistica, senza dimenticare nemmeno la necessità di norme di cybersicurezza. La direzione intrapresa pare quella giusta, vigileremo affinché il cammino proceda nel modo corretto.
                  

Λευτέρης Χριστοφόρου (PPE),
γραπτώς. – Το 5G σηματοδοτεί μια επανάσταση, μια νέα εποχή στον ψηφιακό κόσμο δημιουργώντας νέα δίκτυα υψηλών επιδόσεων, συμπεριλαμβανομένων δικτύων υψηλής ποιότητας και πολύ υψηλής χωρητικότητας. Συμμεριζόμαστε και στηρίζουμε τον στόχο της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής για γρήγορη ενεργοποίηση του 5G, κάτι που θα αποτελέσει πόλο ανάπτυξης και παραγωγής καινοτομίας. Επιπλέον, η ταχύτερη και καλύτερη σύνδεση στο Διαδίκτυο σε όλη την Ευρώπη, θα βοηθήσει στο να μειωθεί το ψηφιακό χάσμα και θα επιτραπεί η ανάπτυξη και προσφορά νέων καινοτόμων ψηφιακών υπηρεσιών, όπως τα συνδεδεμένα αυτοκίνητα ή η ηλεκτρονική υγεία, και αυτό όχι μόνο στις αστικές αλλά και στις αγροτικές και απομακρυσμένες περιοχές.
                  

Andor Deli (PPE),
írásban. – Elnök Úr! A Regionális Fejlesztési Bizottság tagjaként és a REGI által e témában kidolgozott vélemény néppárti árnyékelőadójaként szeretném felhívni a figyelmet a téma regionális aspektusaira is. Az új jogszabályok kidolgozásakor és az implementációs folyamatok során nem szabad megfeledkeznünk a területi és szociális kohézióról sem. A kevésbé fejlett vidékek digitális lemaradása igen nagy a városi területekhez képest. A statisztikai adatok alapján egyes régiók széles sávú lefedettsége 28%-os, ami majdnem 50%-kal kevesebb az átlagos lefedettségnél. A széles sávú internet és 5G technológia előnyeit kihasználva legyőzhető lenne ez a digitális szakadék. A vidéki lakosság is hozzáférhetne ugyanazokhoz a digitális tartalmakhoz és szolgáltatásokhoz (e-kormányzat, e-oktatás stb.) mint a városokban. E cél eléréshez szükséges a célirányos pénzügyi alapok létrehozása, amelyek ösztönözik a befektetést a fejletlenebb régiókban is. A területi mellett oda kell figyelnünk a digitális kohézióra is, hogy egyenrangú életfeltételeket biztosítsunk az európai polgárok számára, bárhol is éljenek az Unióban.
                  

Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D),
písomne. – Európska únia musí byť lídrom digitálnej ekonomiky. Jednotlivé priemyselné odvetvia sú kľúčovým zamestnávateľom vo väčšine členských štátov. Zaisťujú ekonomickú dynamiku, sú dôležité z hľadiska rozvoja sociálnej politiky a efektívneho zvládania veľkých spoločenských výziev, ktorým sme nútení čeliť. Sme súčasťou digitálnej priemyselnej revolúcie, ktorá prináša zásadné technologické zmeny. Tie ovplyvňujú obchodné modely, výrobu i spotrebu tovarov a služieb. V súčasnosti prebieha globálna súťaž o to, kto sa dokáže novým podmienkam najlepšie prispôsobiť a vyťažiť z nich. Európska únia si vybudovala istý náskok a má tak veľkú šancu byť lídrom digitálnej ekonomiky. Roky je v popredí v znižovaní energetickej náročnosti, podpore využívania obnoviteľných zdrojov energie, inovácií, či v obmedzovaní emisií CO2. Pre úspech tak bude dôležitá schopnosť ďalšej spolupráce členských štátov v ekonomických otázkach, rozvoj spoločného trhu a priemyselnej základne. Podpora nových technológií zároveň nesmie znamenať nárast sociálnej neistoty. Práve to zneužívajú populistické a extrémistické strany a hnutia. Sľubujú svojim voličom, že všetko zachovajú tak, ako je, prípadne sa ešte vrátia o desiatky rokov naspäť. To však určite nie je správna cesta. Naopak, zodpovedné vlády musia podporovať zamestnávateľov v príprave pracovníkov na uplatnenie sa v nových podmienkach.
                  

András Gyürk (PPE),
írásban. – Elnök Úr! Az elmúlt időszak történései megmutatták számunkra, hogy Európa nem engedheti meg magának többé, hogy fásultan kövesse a világ történéseit, és kívülről várja a megoldást saját problémáira. Saját kezünkbe kell vennünk a sorsunkat, és nem tehetünk mást, mint hogy a globális kihívások megoldásában az élre állunk, hogy a világ igazodjon a mi megoldásainkhoz. A negyedik ipari forradalom a szemünk előtt zajlik. Az új technológiák, a digitalizáció hatással vannak az eddig megszokott gazdasági modell minden egyes szintjére, és képesek alapvetően átrendezni a meglévő vagyoni viszonyokat. Ebben az átalakulásban betöltött szerepünk évtizedekre meg fogja határozni Európa versenyképességét és gazdasági erejét. Egy megfelelően megalapozott stratégiával képesek lehetünk új és erősebb alapokra helyezni az Unió gazdaságát, és újra bekerülhetünk a világ élvonalába. Egy ilyen jelentős átalakulás azonban egyszerre jelent lehetőséget és veszélyt. A gazdaság struktúrájának megváltozásával munkahelyek nem csak születnek, de meg is szűnhetnek. Megfelelő stratégiával képesek lehetünk kezelni a helyzetet, és még szélesíthetjük is a munkavállalók körét, de ehhez helyesen kell meghatároznunk, hogy mik azok az alapvető erők, amelyek mozgatják az átalakulást. Magyarországon mi úgy gondoljuk, hogy a műszaki és informatikai képzés fejlesztése és bővítése kulcsfontosságú ebben a helyzetben, hiszen jelenleg Európának körülbelül 180 ezerrel több informatikusra lenne szüksége. Úgy gondolom, a magyar példa példaértékű lehet.
                  

Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE),
napisan. – Digitalizacija europske industrije dovela je do mijenjanja načina proizvodnje i potrošnje, poslovnih modela te je samim time povećala globalno nadmetanje kao posljedicu novih tehnologija poput pete generacije mreže (5G).
                  

                     Nesporno je da Europska unija mora osigurati da njena industrija bude konkurentna i održiva kroz znanje, istraživanje i razvoj, ali i kroz jedinstveno europsko tržište koje predstavlja iznimnu prednost za napredovanje. Kako bi EU sustigla svjetsku industrijsku modernizaciju nužan je zajednički pristup država članica temeljen na jamčenju efikasne infrastrukture, promicanju istraživanja i razvoja te na dodatnim ulaganjima.
                  

                     Evidentno je da digitalizacija svjetske industrije dovodi sa sobom i velike izazove te stoga smatram da je od ključne važnosti da europske institucije i države članice s velikom ozbiljnošću uzmu u obzir sigurnosni aspekt razvoja digitalnog gospodarstva.
                  

Karol Karski (ECR),
na piśmie. – W sprawozdaniu na temat cyfryzacji europejskiego przemysłu słusznie zauważono, że aktualnie trwająca rewolucja przemysłowa jest szansą dla Europy na stworzenie konkurencyjnej i silnej gospodarki. Ważne jest, aby stworzyć spójną politykę, która ułatwi wprowadzanie innowacji, pobudzając inwestycje w gospodarkę i przyciągając światowych specjalistów. Uwagę trzeba skupić na wsparciu małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw.
                  

                     Strategia, która zostanie przez Unię przyjęta, musi być jednolicie wdrażana i stale monitorowana, tak aby nie dopuścić do powstania cyfrowej przepaści. W związku z tym powinniśmy zadbać o odpowiednie nauczanie cyfrowe oraz zapewnić uczniom jak najlepszy dostęp zarówno do komputerów, jak i do internetu, a także stale podnosić kwalifikacje nauczycieli. Jednocześnie zauważmy, że zmiany spowodowane cyfryzacją przemysłu niejako wymuszają dostosowanie ustawodawstwa do nowych form pracy związanych z pracą zdalną czy pracą poprzez platformy internetowe. Jeszcze jedną ważną kwestią jest cyberbezpieczeństwo, którego ramy powinny jak najszybciej zostać uregulowane i potraktowane priorytetowo.
                  

Ivana Maletić (PPE),
napisan. – U današnje vrijeme globalnog natjecanja u primjeni novih tehnoloških dostignuća poput 5G mreže, računalstva u oblaku, umjetne inteligencije i robotike, pitanje koje postavljamo je kako ih na što održiviji i socijalno prihvatljiviji način integrirati u poslovne modele, lance vrijednosti, proizvodnju i potrošnju? Odgovor na to EU mora tražiti u održivim inovacijama i prilagodbi obrazovnog sustava kako bi održao konkurentnost i postao predvodnik nove industrijske revolucije. U tom području prednosti EU-a su specifična znanja, povezana i ciljana ulaganja u istraživanje i razvoj, veliko jedinstveno tržište, jaka industrijska baza i iskustvo u povezivanju proizvodnje i usluga.
                  

                     Za napredak je ključna edukacija radnika i stjecanje informatičkih vještina jer bez ljudi s potrebnim znanjima nema niti značajnijih pomaka u digitalizaciji industrije. Isto tako digitalizacija znači potrebu za drugačijim radnim mjestima i novim znanjima. Samo dobro prilagođenim sustavom obrazovanja i znanosti možemo pripremiti naše građane za digitalno doba koje više nije budućnost. Kombiniranje digitalnih vještina sa strukovnim obrazovanjem i inženjerskim vještinama, pametna specijalizacija, povezivanje malih i srednjih poduzetnika, industrijskih subjekata, start-upova, znanstvenika i istraživača pravi je put za prilagodbu promjenama.
                  

                     Stoga je važna poruka za države članice kako se samo ulaganjem u vještine radnika i razvijanjem digitalne infrastrukture mogu premostiti postojeće razlike u digitalnoj razvijenosti.
                  

Vladimír Maňka (S&D),
písomne. – Piata generácia bezdrôtovej siete výrazne zlepší technológie závislé od rýchlosti prenosu dát. Zrýchlenie toku informácií výrazne ovplyvní kvalitu služieb vo všetkých odvetviach, možnosti obchodovania a podnikania a celkovú konkurencieschopnosť hospodárstva. Zavedenie 5G siete môže viesť k vytvoreniu až 2,3 milióna priamych a nepriamych pracovných miest v Únii a môže tak pomôcť riešiť problémy odľahlých regiónov. Podporujem dôsledné zavádzanie a uplatňovanie akčného plánu 5G siete zo strany členských štátov a Komisie tak, aby sa Únia stala svetovým lídrom pri zavádzaní štandardizovaných sietí 5G v rokoch 2020 až 2025.
                  

Laurențiu Rebega (ENF),
în scris. – Îmi manifest rezerva pe care o am față de tendința exagerată de a implica de pe acum instituții, guverne și alți stakeholderi într-un viitor proiect 5G, atât timp cât implementarea actualului standard 4G, care se derulează în prezent, nu este mulțumitoare. Cred că avem datoria de a duce mai întâi la bun sfârșit un proiect și apoi de a ne implica într-unul nou, mai mare și mai costisitor.
                  

Algirdas Saudargas (PPE),
raštu. – Norint, kad ES išliktų pasaulio pramonės lydere – būtina skatinti skaitmeninimą ir ypač atsiliekančiuose regionuose. Tad noriu atkreipti dėmesį, jog svarbu užtikrinti ES pramonės skaitmeninio valdymo sistemą, kuri sudarytų palankias sąlygas koordinuoti pramonės skaitmeninimo nacionalines iniciatyvas ir platformas. Todėl Europos Parlamento rezoliucijos pasiūlymui dėl Europos pramonės skaitmeninimo pateikiau pataisas, kuriomis noriu pabrėžti, jog gerai išvystytos kalbų technologijos gali padėti pramonei peržengti kalbos barjerus ir taip atverti galimybes skaitmeninės rinkos plėtrai. Kadangi kalbos barjerų įtaka pramonei iki šiol nėra pakankamai atspindėta ir įvertinta skaitmeninės rinkos dokumentuose, noriu paraginti kalbos technologijų plėtrą, kuri kartu su pramonės skaitmeninimu sumažintų Europos rinkos susiskaldymą ir padidintų įvairių paslaugų prieinamumą Europos Sąjungos piliečiams.
                  

Maria Lidia Senra Rodríguez (GUE/NGL),
por escrito. – Me gustaría manifestar aquí mi preocupación por los impactos de la digitalización en la deslocalización de la producción, en el empleo y la calidad del mismo; en los derechos de las y los trabajadores y en el aislamiento y despoblación del medio rural. Considero que es necesario que se garantice el acceso en igualdad de condiciones del medio rural y establecer medidas de protección del empleo. Querría saber en qué estudios se basa el ponente del informe para afirmar que es posible que se creen hasta 2,3 millones de empleos cuando la tecnología 5G se despliegue en su totalidad. También quisiera conocer si esos puestos de trabajo son netos; si este cómputo descuenta los empleos que se destruirán y cómo es el reparto en la UE; o si se controlará el uso de ‘falsos autónomos’, método utilizado actualmente por algunas empresas para precarizar el empleo. Debe protegerse el empleo en las áreas rurales y el generado por el comercio local. De lo contrario, estaremos utilizando los avances tecnológicos para, a través de una mayor velocidad, profundizar aún más el aspecto de personas meras consumidoras, fomentando las ganancias exclusivas de las grandes corporaciones por encima de nuestros derechos sociales y laborales.
                  

Ivan Štefanec (PPE),
písomne. – Digitalizácia je fenomén, ktorý v blízkej budúcnosti úplne zmení štruktúru priemyslu, pracovnoprávne vzťahy a podnikanie. Musíme sa na túto zmenu pripraviť, pretože nám rastie konkurencia v podobe rýchlo rastúcich ekonomík, ako je India alebo Čína. Tieto krajiny nás už dokonca v mnohom predbehli. Na úrovni Európskeho parlamentu sa nám podarilo presadiť zrušenie roamingových poplatkov, geoblokovania obsahu na internete a tiež zjednotiť pásma pre vysokorýchlostné pripojenia. To sú kľúčové kroky pre vybudovanie plnohodnotného digitálneho trhu v rámci Európskej únie. Národným štátom ostáva úloha reformovať vzdelávacie systémy, zákonníky práce a otvoriť cestu novým formám podnikania. S ľútosťou musím konštatovať, že Slovensko v týchto oblastiach výrazne zaostáva.
                  

Claudia Țapardel (S&D),
în scris. – Consider că digitalizarea este o condiție sine qua non pentru dezvoltarea unei industrii europene competitive, avantajele socio-economice ale acestui fenomen fiind evidente. Progresul tehnologic creează noi oportunități și formate de angajare, inclusiv pentru categoriile sociale vulnerabile, și facilitează un bun echilibru între viața personală și cea profesională. Toate acestea contribuie la creșterea participării pe piața muncii, având ca rezultat o îmbunătățire a capacității de producție și o creștere economică la nivel european.
                  

                     Regret însă că raportul de față nu subliniază suficient provocările digitalizării asupra aspectelor sociale. Lipsa competențelor digitale și timpul necesar industriei pentru se adapta pot duce la dezechilibre pe piața muncii, existând riscul ca drepturile și condițiile de muncă reglementate să fie afectate.
                  

                     În opinia mea, digitalizarea poate produce decalaje între companiile și statele membre care deja dispun de infrastructura necesară și cele care nu au aceleași posibilități de a investi în modernizare. De aceea, fondurile de coeziune, investițiile în regiunile subdezvoltate și stimularea sectoarelor vulnerabile trebuie să vină în completarea măsurilor de accelerare a digitalizării industriei.
                  

Marc Tarabella (S&D),
par écrit. – Alors que la 4G et la 3G avaient étaient créés pour répondre à un besoin de vitesse sur l'internet mobile, la 5G s'inscrit dans un projet plus global. Dans le futur, nous serons tous ultra-connectés: smartphones, tablettes, PC, objets connectés, domotique, voitures connectés, casques VR, réalité augmentée, intelligence artificielle.
                  

                     Dans 20 ans nous vivrons dans un monde que nous ne pouvons même pas imaginer aujourd'hui. Les industriels de ce monde, eux, doivent avoir une vision de ce futur, et nous y préparer. La 5G est ce réseau qui permettra à tous nos appareils connectés de communiquer entre eux. Un débit important est nécessaire, mais pas seulement. La 5G apportera également une meilleure autonomie pouvant atteindre des années.
                  

Miguel Viegas (GUE/NGL),
por escrito. – Os resultados concretos das mudanças tecnológicas dependem do modo de produção que caracteriza a sociedade em que esta mudança se opera. Ela tanto pode ser aproveitada para melhorar as condições de vida dos trabalhadores e dos povos, como pode ser utilizada para aumentar a exploração dos trabalhadores, as desigualdades e as injustiças sociais. Sob as condições da globalização capitalista, é a segunda hipótese que prevalece.
                  

                     A digitalização da indústria, inserida no âmbito do que alguns designam de quarta revolução industrial, alia a inovação e a automatização crescente dos processos produtivos a plataformas tecnológicas globais, assentes em redes e infraestruturas de comunicação digital. Os trabalhadores não podem ficar à margem destes processos. Devem beneficiar das transformações, no plano dos salários e direitos. Estas transformações não devem ser usadas como pretexto para impor o retrocesso social. Importa não ignorar que, no quadro da manutenção das políticas neoliberais vigentes, estes processos tendem a cavar mais fundas desigualdades, sociais e nacionais.
                  
21.   One-minute speeches on matters of political importance

El Presidente. – El siguiente punto son las intervenciones de un minuto sobre asuntos de importancia política (artículo 163 del Reglamento).
               

Ivan Štefanec (PPE). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, dámy a páni, som presvedčený, že na rovnakom spoločnom trhu musia platiť rovnaké pravidlá. V poslednom čase sme ale svedkami mnohých praktík, keď sa pod rovnakou značkou na európskom trhu objavuje iná kvalita.
               

                  Som presvedčený, že musíme proti takýmto praktikám zakročiť a že porušujú pravidlá nášho spoločného trhu. Naviac, v mladších členských krajinách EÚ sú takéto praktiky veľmi citlivo vnímané a ľudia sa považujú za občanov druhej kategórie. Dokonca niektorí populisti zneužívajú tieto praktiky na protieurópske nálady.
               

                  Preto som za to, aby sme poskytli vždy informácie spotrebiteľovi, podľa ktorých sa môže rozhodnúť. Som za to, aby sme pod rovnakou značkou zabezpečili rovnakú kvalitu. Som za to, aby sme sa touto témou zaoberali na európskej pôde.
               

                  Je dôležité vtiahnuť do tejto debaty aj výrobcov a obchodníkov, ktorí chcú súťažiť férovo, a je dôležité rozdeliť kompetencie medzi európsku a národnú úroveň.
               

                  Verím, že sa nám v tejto téme podarí pokročiť, pretože naši ľudia vnímajú európsku integráciu aj cez takéto témy.
               

Tibor Szanyi (S&D). – Elnök Úr, a városi élethez képest jelenleg igen korlátozott lehetőségeket kínáló falvakat Európa-szerte veszélyezteti az elnéptelenedés. Ez a folyamat már most is komoly kulturális, szociális és gazdasági problémák forrása, amelyek idővel csak még inkább felerősödnek. Főként, ha egyes tagállamokban olyan kormányok vannak, mint pl. Magyarországon, amelyek, úgy tűnik, nem ódzkodnak ellopni még az Uniótól élelmiszercsomagokra kapott milliókat sem. Éppen ezért az elkövetkezendő időszak egyik legnagyobb feladata az európai falvak újjáélesztése. Szeretnék utalni az Európai Parlament és az Európai Bizottság ‘okos falvak’ (smart villages) kezdeményezésére, amelynek célja az európai falvak újjáélesztése a vidéki lakosság életkörülményeinek lényeges javításán keresztül és elsősorban a fiatalokra fókuszálva.
               

                  Internet-elérhetőség, minőségi oktatás, fejlett egészségügyi szolgáltatások, jó közlekedés és természetesen érdemi munkahelyek elérhetősége. Jelenleg ezek a szolgáltatások a városi népesség kiváltságai. Az okos, úgynevezett ‘smart’ megközelítéssel falvainkat nem csak élhetőbb helyekké, de akár innovációs központokká is tehetjük.
               

Paloma López Bermejo (GUE/NGL). – Señor presidente, Parla es una ciudad de 125 000 habitantes con una de las rentas más bajas de la Comunidad de Madrid: 15 000 personas en pobreza severa, un 17 % de desempleo, 240 hogares en riesgo de desahucio. Un municipio castigado por la crisis y por los años de abandono de las distintas administraciones.
               

                  Frente a ello, vecinos, organizaciones sindicales y movimientos sociales agrupados en la plataforma Urge Parla han elaborado un plan de garantías y derechos que recoge planes de empleo, viviendas y comedores sociales, inversiones, servicios públicos, etc. Un plan al que la Unión Europea puede y debe contribuir a través de sus políticas y recursos contra la pobreza y la exclusión social.
               

                  Desde aquí, todo nuestro apoyo a la lucha de Parla por el empleo y por unos servicios públicos dignos para este municipio.
               

Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-н Председател, бих искал да изкажа своето възмущение от поведението на четири европейски държави. Това са Германия, Италия, Белгия и Франция, които се опитват да налагат протекционизъм в транспорта. Това е неприемливо. Протекционизмът в транспорта пречи на предприемачите от Източна Европа да могат да вършат своята работа. Налагането на ограничения в транспорта засяга стотици хиляди хора, които работят в Източна Европа и те се възползват от четирите основни свободи, а именно свободата на придвижване, свободата на идеи, свободата на хора и свободата на това да можеш да изпълняваш нещата, които си се опитал да направиш.
               

                  Затова възразявам срещу тази протекционистична политика в транспорта. Трябва да бъде спазвано основното право на хората, които работят и хората, които са предприемачи и се опитват да допринасят за общото благо.
               

Beatrix von Storch (EFDD). – Herr Präsident! Die Europäische Kommission hat heute also ihr Reflexionspapier zur Reform der Eurozone vorgelegt. Die Kommission will bis 2025 einen gemeinsamen Haushalt, Eurobonds und natürlich ein Euro-Schatzamt. Das Papier beginnt mit den Worten: ‘Der Euro ist mehr als eine Währung.’ Ja, genau das ist das Problem. Die Kommission will den Euro mehr als Werkzeug und nicht als Währung. Der Euro soll Frieden bringen, und er soll die EU auf Augenhöhe mit den USA und China bringen und ganz nebenbei natürlich auch noch den EU-Zentralstaat schaffen.
               

                  Das, was aus den Augen verloren wird, ist, wozu eine Währung eigentlich da ist. Die Menschen brauchen eine Währung, in der sie in der Gegenwart bezahlen können und in der sie für die Zukunft sparen können. Das mit dem Sparen, das geht schon lange nicht mehr. Wir haben Nullzinsen, und jetzt haben wir Negativzinsen. Eine Währung, in der man nicht sparen kann, muss scheitern und wird scheitern.
               

Κωνσταντίνος Παπαδάκης (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, την ώρα που η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση ενισχύει τη στρατιωτικοποίησή της και παίρνει μέτρα καταστολής στο όνομα της ασφάλειας, οι επικίνδυνες αποφάσεις της συνόδου του ΝΑΤΟ στις Βρυξέλλες προωθούν, μεταξύ άλλων, τη μεταφορά μεγάλων στρατιωτικών δυνάμεων του ΝΑΤΟ στη συνοριογραμμή με τη Ρωσία. Η μετατροπή της Ελλάδας σε κόμβο για τη μεταφορά νατοϊκών στρατευμάτων βάζει σε μεγάλους κινδύνους τον λαό μας. Η νατοϊκή άσκηση Noble Jump αποτελεί προβάδισμα σχεδίων πολέμου σε μια περιοχή που κρίνονται μεγάλα συμφέροντα για τον έλεγχο της ενέργειας και των αγορών. Η βάση της Σούδας αποτελεί στρατηγικής σημασίας ορμητήριο ιμπεριαλιστικών επεμβάσεων.
               

                  Η συγκυβέρνηση ΣΥΡΙΖΑ-ΑΝΕΛ φέρει μεγάλες ευθύνες. Για λογαριασμό του κεφαλαίου και στο όνομα της γεωστρατηγικής αναβάθμισης, εμπλέκει την Ελλάδα στους ευρωνατοϊκούς σχεδιασμούς. Ούτε γη ούτε νερό στους φονιάδες των λαών! Να κλείσουν όλες οι βάσεις! Καμιά διευκόλυνση διέλευσης ξένων στρατευμάτων, καμιά αλλαγή συνόρων, άμεση απεμπλοκή από ιμπεριαλιστικές επεμβάσεις και πολέμους! Αποδέσμευση από το ΝΑΤΟ και τους άλλους ιμπεριαλιστικούς οργανισμούς!
               

Daniel Buda (PPE). – Domnule președinte, fermierii din România se confruntă în prezent cu o criză acută a forței de muncă în toate sectoarele. Deși aceștia oferă salarii decente, nu reușesc să găsească lucrători, mai ales în sectorul creșterii animalelor, dar nu numai, fapt ce va conduce din păcate într-un viitor nu prea îndepărtat la închiderea acestor afaceri din acest domeniu. Fenomenul afectează mai ales fermele mici și mijlocii, cele pe care, de altfel, dorim să le sprijinim la nivel european.
               

                  Apreciez că nu este suficient să oferim doar suportul financiar pentru înființarea acestor ferme, ci este nevoie să le fie asigurată și buna funcționare pe termen cât mai lung. Ajutoarele sociale constituie principala cauză a acestui fenomen care afectează sectorul agricol din România. O bună parte din persoanele care ar putea munci în acest domeniu beneficiază de ajutoare sociale, astfel încât acestea preferă să nu muncească, ceea ce apreciez că este inadmisibil, considerând totodată că se impune intervenția de îndată în acest domeniu, astfel încât prin politicile care să fie făcute de la nivel european să fie stimulată angajarea în acest sector agricol.
               

Andrejs Mamikins (S&D). – Mr President, many in Western Europe were surprised to see the political events in Hungary and Poland when nationalist political forces came to power and started to attack the European project. This contradicts memories of huge demonstrations of people in Eastern Europe in the 1980s, who were protesting against the old undemocratic power and demanding freedom and democracy. Dear Western European colleagues, amongst those people who took part in those demonstrations there were not only democrats, but also many nationalists who were dissatisfied with the old power. The aim was not to establish a democratic society, but to clear the way to power. They killed the dragon because they wanted themselves to become a dragon, but not because they wanted democratic challenges.
In two days' time in my country, Latvia, there will be local elections to which 14% of the population with the status of Latvian aliens will not be admitted. For a quarter of a century, these people were not entitled to participate in any elections. It is happening in an EU country, and many of you do not want to see this inconvenient reality. Why, colleagues? Because it contradicts your perception of success. Wake up, colleagues, and see the reality. You have blindly supported nationalists and now you are getting the results, because the boomerangs are returning.

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, συμπληρώθηκαν επτά πέτρινα μνημονιακά χρόνια, κατά τα οποία η τρόικα και οι δανειστές διέλυσαν την ελληνική κοινωνία και τη μετέτρεψαν σε ένα απέραντο κοινωνικό νεκροταφείο. Η κυβέρνηση ΣΥΡΙΖΑ-ΑΝΕΛ, με το τρίτο και τέταρτο μνημόνιο, ολοκλήρωσαν τον σύγχρονο μνημονιακό Αρμαγεδδώνα που χτύπησε τον φτωχοποιημένο ελληνικό λαό. Το Εurogroup όμως, παρότι η μνημονιακή κυβέρνηση ΣΥΡΙΖΑ-ΑΝΕΛ νομοθέτησε όλα τα αντικοινωνικά μέτρα που απαιτούσαν οι δανειστές, αρνήθηκε εντούτοις να ολοκληρώσει τη δεύτερη αξιολόγηση, αρνήθηκε να καταβάλει τη δόση, αρνήθηκε την πολυπόθητη για την κυβέρνηση ρύθμιση του ελληνικού δημοσίου χρέους.
               

                  Στο ίδιο μήκος κύματος και ο Ντράγκι επέβαλε και νέους σκληρούς όρους για την ένταξη της Ελλάδας στην ποσοτική χαλάρωση. Ο Σόιμπλε και η τρόικα έχουν πλέον αποθρασυνθεί, μια και η κυβέρνηση σάλπισε ‘ισπανική υποχώρηση’. Όμως ο ελληνικός λαός δεν ανέχεται τις προκλητικές ενέργειες της τρόικας και των δανειστών και σύντομα θα τους πετάξει έξω απ' την πατρίδα μας, γιατί υπάρχει πλέον για την Ελλάδα ο άλλος δρόμος.
               

Kateřina Konečná (GUE/NGL). – Pane předsedající, dnes 31. května 2017 si připomínáme Světový den roztroušené sklerózy. Roztroušená skleróza je chronické celoživotní onemocnění, které postihuje centrální nervový systém. Toto onemocnění je nejčastěji diagnostikováno ve věku od 20 do 40 let s průměrným věkem nástupu 34 let a postihuje dvakrát více ženy než muže. Nemoc je vysoce nepředvídatelná a symptomy dvou pacientů se mohou lišit. V Evropě žije více než 700 000 lidí s roztroušenou sklerózou a existují zde velké rozdíly v přístupu k léčbě. Lidé, jež čelí problémům této nemoci, si zaslouží naši podporu. Mnoho jsme již udělali, ale je potřeba pokračovat. Potřebujeme zvýšit veřejné financování, které je k dispozici pro sestavení a údržbu specifických registrů nemocných pacientů. Analýza dat na evropské úrovni může v reálném životě pacienta poskytnout některé odpovědi, které požadují regulační orgány, plátci zdravotní péče, lékařské výzkumy a obhájci pacientů. To může nejen umožnit inovaci prostřednictvím lepšího pochopení výsledků léčby, ale také snížit náklady na systémy zdravotní péče a zlepšit přístup k lékům. Nezapomínejme na tyto pacienty a nepřipomínejme si tyto pacienty pouze tento den.
               

Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já chci této jedné minuty využít k tomu, abych vás informoval o situaci v České republice v oblasti zákona o elektronických komunikacích. Česká republika měla právní úpravu, která byla kritizována evropskými experty, že nedostatečně v této úpravě byla chráněna práva spotřebitelů.
               

                  Jsem rád, že 24. května tohoto roku přijala Poslanecká sněmovna změnu, novelu tohoto zákona, a že konečně čeští občané budou mít dostatečná práva ve střetu s operátory, kteří často zneužívají své dominantní pozice, své ekonomické síly, a nutí tak občany, aby třeba neodstupovali od smluv, nebo je jiným způsobem omezují.
               

                  Ta nová právní úprava už by měla splňovat kritéria evropské legislativy a měla by tak dostatečně chránit spotřebitelská práva. Chování operátorů dokládá například to, že v posledních několika dnech někteří čeští operátoři omezili služby roamingu bez toho, že by byl jasný důvod.
               

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, dedico questo one-minute speech per denunciare gli effetti diretti e indiretti di un cosiddetto gioco online, il Blue Whale, causa di decine di suicidi tra i più giovani.
               

                  Continuare a chiamare gioco l'agghiacciante fenomeno del Blue Whale significa sminuirne la gravità e relegare ad un ambito quasi ludico una pratica che affonda le sue radici in un disagio adolescenziale e sociale che non può e non deve essere sottovalutato. Molti media continuano a parlare del Blue Whale game nella maniera sbagliata: sensazionalizzare i suicidi è un errore e rischia di generare fenomeni emulativi. Occorre prestare maggiore attenzione perché le parole non solo descrivono la realtà, ma hanno il potere di modificarla.
               

                  Tuttavia, il principale ambito d'intervento deve essere quello familiare e sociale. Perché se decine di ragazzi pensano di trovare una propria identità diventando protagonisti di una pratica estrema, se vedono riconosciuto il loro valore solo nel superamento di prove assurde che portano ad un tragico epilogo, vuol dire che non vedono riconosciuto il loro valore altrove.
               

Martina Anderson (GUE/NGL). – Mr President, Sinn Féin has engaged with hundreds and hundreds of groups and organisations that are all concerned about the loss of EU funding post-Brexit. It is ironic that the only money that came to the north of Ireland through Brexit was dark, shadowy and unaccountable. The Democratic Unionist Party received an envelope stuffed with the grand total of GBP 436 000 to advertise support for Brexit in Britain but not in Ireland. The unanswered question is who paid the DUP? Did anyone fumble in a greasy till? The DUP has been asked to report on the original source of this money. There are concerns that the DUP allowed the money to be siphoned to avoid British electoral law and exploit a loophole. Serious allegations by openDemocracy linked the previously unheard of Constitutional Research Council and the well-known Saudi intelligence to the cash. Whoever the donors are, we know that the DUP took the Brexit money, but we will pay the price.

Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Domnule președinte, 1 iunie este ziua copilului în zeci de țări din Europa și din întreaga lume. Este un moment în care să aducem zâmbetul pe chipurile copiilor, să le dăm speranță în visurile lor și să arătăm că viitorul și trăirile lor sunt importante pentru noi. De aceea am invitat astăzi în Parlament European un grup de copii din diaspora românească din Belgia, cărora le mulțumesc pentru că mi-au arătat o nouă perspectivă asupra activității noastre.
               

                  Dar lucrurile nu sunt atât de simple: 26 de milioane de copii din Europa sunt afectați de sărăcie și excluziune socială conform Eurostat. Din păcate, Bulgaria, România și Ungaria conduc în topul sărăciei copiilor, de aceea avem nevoie de o garanție pentru copii la nivel european, care să asigure accesul acestora la educație, cultură sau nutriție corespunzătoare. Drepturile copiilor sunt drepturile omului, iar drepturile omului sunt drepturile copiilor. Children's rights are human rights and human rights are also children's rights. Haideți să le respectăm drepturile și ‘La mulți ani’ tuturor copiilor de 1 iunie.
               

El Presidente. – Con esto se cierra este punto.
               
22.   Agenda for next sitting: see Minutes
23.   Closure of the sitting

(Se levanta la sesión a las 23.15 horas)



ELI: 
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)