Verbatim report of proceedings of 18 April 2019
Date: 2019-04-18
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, parliamentary debate








C_202403841EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series














21.6.2024







            18 April 2019
            VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF 18 APRIL 2019
            
         
(C/2024/3841)

Contents







1.

Opening of the sitting
4










2.

Announcement by the President : see Minutes
4










3.

A comprehensive European Union framework on endocrine disruptors (debate)
4










4.

European Maritime Single Window environment (debate)
8










5.

Disclosures relating to sustainable investments and sustainability risks (debate)
15










6.

Debate on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law (debate)
21










6.1.

China, notably the situation of religious and ethnic minorities
21










6.2.

Cameroon
29










6.3.

Brunei
35










7.

Resumption of the sitting
42










8.

Request for waiver of immunity: see Minutes
42










9.

Composition of Parliament
42










10.

Voting time
44










10.1.

China, notably the situation of religious and ethnic minorities (RC-B8-0255/2019, B8-0255/2019, B8-0256/2019, B8-0257/2019, B8-0258/2019, B8-0259/2019, B8-0260/2019) (vote)
44










10.2.

Cameroon (RC-B8-0245/2019, B8-0245/2019, B8-0247/2019, B8-0249/2019, B8-0252/2019, B8-0253/2019, B8-0254/2019) (vote)
44










10.3.

Brunei (RC-B8-0242/2019, B8-0242/2019, B8-0243/2019, B8-0244/2019, B8-0246/2019, B8-0248/2019, B8-0250/2019, B8-0251/2019) (vote)
44










10.4.

Eurojust-Denmark Agreement on judicial cooperation in criminal matters (A8-0192/2019 - Claude Moraes) (vote)
45










10.5.

Coordination of social security systems (A8-0386/2018 - Guillaume Balas) (vote)
45










10.6.

CO2 emission performance standards for new heavy-duty vehicles (A8-0354/2018 - Bas Eickhout) (vote)
45










10.7.

Promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport vehicles (A8-0321/2018 - Andrzej Grzyb) (vote)
45










10.8.

Use of digital tools and processes in company law (A8-0422/2018 - Tadeusz Zwiefka) (vote)
45










10.9.

Cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions (A8-0002/2019 - Evelyn Regner) (vote)
45










10.10.

European Defence Fund (A8-0412/2018 - Zdzisław Krasnodębski) (vote)
45










10.11.

Exposures in the form of covered bonds (A8-0384/2018 - Bernd Lucke) (vote)
45










10.12.

Covered bonds and covered bond public supervision (A8-0390/2018 - Bernd Lucke) (vote)
45










10.13.

InvestEU (A8-0482/2018 - José Manuel Fernandes, Roberto Gualtieri) (vote)
46










10.14.

European Maritime Single Window environment (A8-0006/2019 - Deirdre Clune) (vote)
46










10.15.

Disclosures relating to sustainable investments and sustainability risks (A8-0363/2018 - Paul Tang) (vote)
46










10.16.

Persistent organic pollutants (A8-0336/2018 - Julie Girling) (vote)
46










10.17.

Clearing obligation, reporting requirements and risk-mitigation techniques for OTC derivatives, and trade repositories (A8-0181/2018 - Werner Langen) (vote)
46










10.18.

Authorisation of CCPs and recognition of third-country CCPs (A8-0190/2018 - Danuta Maria Hübner) (vote)
46










10.19.

Promotion of the use of SME growth markets (A8-0437/2018 - Anne Sander) (vote)
46










10.20.

Negotiations with Council and Commission on European Parliament's right of inquiry: legislative proposal (B8-0238/2019) (vote)
46










10.21.

A comprehensive European Union framework on endocrine disruptors (B8-0241/2019) (vote)
47










11.

Explanations of vote
47










11.1.

CO2 emission performance standards for new heavy-duty vehicles (A8-0354/2018 - Bas Eickhout)
47










11.2.

Promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport vehicles (A8-0321/2018 - Andrzej Grzyb)
47










11.3.

Use of digital tools and processes in company law (A8-0422/2018 - Tadeusz Zwiefka)
48










11.4.

Cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions (A8-0002/2019 - Evelyn Regner)
48










11.5.

European Defence Fund (A8-0412/2018 - Zdzisław Krasnodębski)
48










11.6.

Disclosures relating to sustainable investments and sustainability risks (A8-0363/2018 - Paul Tang)
49










11.7.

Negotiations with Council and Commission on European Parliament's right of inquiry: legislative proposal (B8-0238/2019)
49










11.8.

A comprehensive European Union framework on endocrine disruptors (B8-0241/2019)
49










11.9.

European Border and Coast Guard (A8-0076/2019 - Roberta Metsola)
50










12.

Corrections to votes and voting intentions : see Minutes
50










13.

Petitions: see Minutes
50










14.

Documents received: see Minutes
50










15.

Dates of forthcoming sittings : see Minutes
50










16.

Approval of the minutes and forwarding of texts adopted: see Minutes
50










17.

Closure of the sitting
50










18.

Adjournment of the session
51




Verbatim report of proceedings of 18 April 2019
                  


PŘEDSEDNICTVÍ: PAN PAVEL TELIČKA


místopředseda

1.   Opening of the sitting

(The sitting opened at 8.30)

2.   Announcement by the President : see Minutes
3.   A comprehensive European Union framework on endocrine disruptors (debate)

President. – The next item is the debate on the Commission statement on a comprehensive European Union framework on endocrine disruptors (2019/2683(RSP)).
I would like to inform Members that, for this debate, there is no catch-the-eye procedure and no blue cards will be accepted.

Violeta Bulc,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, 20 years ago, the Commission adopted its first strategy on endocrine disruptors. We can be proud of the progress we have achieved together since then. We are recognised today as one of the global leaders in dealing with these substances.
Since 1999, we have banned or restricted many endocrine disruptors. Furthermore, we have been the first to establish regulatory criteria to identify endocrine disruptors in the legislation on pesticides and biocides. We have also provided funding for research and have supported international organisations. However, this is not enough. Today, endocrine disruption is still a global challenge and a source of concern for many citizens. We cannot rest on our laurels and we need to step up our approach.
This is why, last November, the Commission adopted its comprehensive communication on endocrine disruptors. Adoption by the Commission confirms that we remain committed to protecting EU citizens and the environment. It also delivers on the commitment undertaken when working on the criteria for pesticides and biocides. The EU approach to endocrine disruptors needs to remain based on science and on the application of the precautionary principle. We have three objectives in mind. First, minimising overall exposure to endocrine disruptors. Second, accelerating the development of science; and third, promoting an active dialogue with all stakeholders.
The Commission has identified a comprehensive set of actions with different timelines to achieve these objectives. These are outlined in our communication and I am pleased to inform you that work has started on all of them.
The cross-cutting fitness check on endocrine disruptors should be finalised in the first half of 2020, with a 12-week public consultation planned for this year. In 2019, we also aim to organise the first meeting of our annual stakeholder forum and to launch a new web portal. Other actions announced in our communication have a long time frame, for example in the area of supporting research.
Honourable Members, I know that some of you are disappointed by the idea of the fitness check. I can assure you that we are not simply trying to kick the can down the road. We are all committed to evidence-based policy-making and evaluations and the fitness check helps us make better policies. Today we have different approaches to tackle endocrine disruptors in different sectors. The Commission agrees that there should be coherence in the treatment of these substances. However, before proposing changes to the legislation we need to see whether and what changes are necessary. Different treatment of the same substance does not mean incoherent treatment per se.
We have already undertaken some useful evaluations, but none of these has covered all of the relevant issues. Furthermore, we need to look at some issues in a cross-cutting way, such as the criteria to identify endocrine disruptors and the different regulatory consequences. The fitness check will fill this gap and will pay special attention to those pieces of legislation that regulate products used in the daily life of consumers, including the most valuable ones. I'm thinking, for example, of the legislation on toys, cosmetics and food contact materials. Evidently the fitness check will not start from scratch, but will build on data already collected in the previous evaluation. We want to finish this quickly so that the new Commission will have the information at hand to make an informed decision.
Before concluding, I would like to say a few words about the significant work that the Commission services carry out on a daily basis to implement existing policies that are relevant for endocrine disruptors. These are in many cases particularly important to protect vulnerable consumers. Just to give two examples: the Commission is finalising a priority list of potential endocrine disruptors used in cosmetics for swift assessment and possible follow-up regulatory action; and second, in the area of food contact materials, we are waiting for further scientific advice in Bisphenol A (BPA) and fatalities, and we are ready to act as soon as this is finalised.
I am confident that by advancing coherently in all relevant policy areas, we will achieve the objective that we all share. I'm looking forward to hearing from you on this topic, and thank you very much for your attention.

Julie Girling,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, I'm actually speaking today on behalf of Mr Gieseke, who is not able to be with us. But I would like, on behalf of the PPE Group, to broadly support the motion that Parliament is putting forward. We are in line with the objective of formulating a comprehensive EU framework on endocrine disruptors.
The motion highlights a number of areas where work is required and I guess if this was a school report, it would have some phrases such as ‘must work a little bit harder’. We certainly need the pace of investigation and validation of data to be speeded up and, whilst I appreciate the Commissioner's points about the fitness check and I wholeheartedly support them, we are concerned about speed and we are concerned about making sure that we don't let this particular issue slip. There needs to be investment in the whole issue of substances (we have highlighted that in Parliament's text), substances used in mixtures and their joint and several effects. There is broad consensus on that.
It's been customary this week for Members to use their last speech in this Chamber and we've heard an awful lot of ‘this will be my last speech’. Well, I'd like to just go to that theme for a moment because for me, as a British MEP, I want to just mention one thing about Brexit and how it relates to this subject because Brexit has taught me a lot. It's taught me never to pursue with blinkers on anything that's ideological. Be very careful with decisions based on emotion, on gut feel, on belief. Be very careful about creating acts of faith, as opposed to action based on evidence. It can lead to disproportionate and damaging action that later causes regret and difficulties finding a way back.
What's that got to do with endocrine disruptors? Well, I think rather a lot because we do hear quite a lot of what I would call ideological hysteria about endocrine disruptors. I'm thinking here about Amendment 1, which is a good example. We will not be supporting it in the PPE. It calls for the same actions for suspected endocrine disruptors as for proven endocrine disruptors. This goes too far, it goes too quickly and it's not based on scientific evidence.
Secondly, on Brexit, we were told not to listen to experts. Well, on endocrine disruptors we must. We must look carefully at the scientific criteria and evaluate in a calm and systematic way. Broadly, we can support this statement. We do not support the amendments and we look forward in the next mandate to moving forward on this subject.

Miriam Dalli,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, postponing concrete action to regulate endocrine disruption is not a luxury we can afford. These chemicals are present in many products and materials around us, including plastic bottles, children's toys, cosmetics and food packaging. Europe must do everything possible to phase out dangerous substances, particularly those with endocrine disrupting properties. But in order to do so, we need the political will and we need concrete action.
We feel that the European Commission did too little too late, because we have the strategic framework. However, there is still a lack of concrete action to provide full protection for human health and the environment. We are saying this because, even with the strategy, we are still excluding, for example, toys and cosmetics, and this only leads to a fragmented patchwork of different national standards, which makes it difficult for everyone, both for consumers, who do not know what level of protection they can expect, and also for producers, who suffer from diverging standards.
We need a European course of action, and it needs to put people's health and the environment first. We expect the European Commission to expand the scope to address endocrine-disrupting chemicals also in materials and products such as toys, cosmetics and food packaging. As socialists and democrats, we are pushing for a legal framework that can help protect our citizens. We are also asking for a horizontal definition of E disease that is aligned with the WHO's definition. We believe that people have the right to know that their everyday environment and the products they use are not harmful to their health, and on behalf of the Socialists and Democrats I call on the European Commission to acknowledge the European Parliament's resolution and our legitimate concerns, as it is time to phase out endocrine disruptors once and for all.

Frédérique Ries,
au nom du groupe ALDE. – Monsieur le Président, je siège dans cet hémicycle depuis 1999 et, en 20 ans, on ne peut pas dire que le cadre européen sur les perturbateurs endocriniens ait évolué, alors que la science, elle, a avancé. Des chercheurs ont révélé l'impact de ces perturbateurs sur la santé humaine et animale, ainsi que leur lien avec certaines maladies chroniques, en particulier certains cancers, avec l'infertilité et avec certains troubles du développement neurologique. Ce lien est avéré.
               

                  L'Union européenne ne semble pas avoir pris la mesure de ce que l'OMS qualifiait, en 2013 déjà, de menace mondiale. Nous sommes très en retard. En 2015, la Cour de justice a condamné la Commission européenne pour son manque d'action en la matière. Quatre ans plus tard, on n'a pas beaucoup avancé, Madame la Commissaire, et cette nouvelle stratégie prend des airs d'acte manqué.
               

                  Par exemple, la définition des perturbateurs endocriniens ne s'applique qu'aux produits phytopharmaceutiques. On sait pourtant aujourd'hui que 80 % des expositions se font par voie alimentaire. Il faut donc les interdire dans les conserves, dans les barquettes, dans tous ces matériaux qui sont destinés à entrer en contact avec la nourriture, dans les cosmétiques, aussi, cela a été dit, ou encore dans les jouets. J'ai vérifié hier: seules huit substances sont répertoriées comme des perturbateurs endocriniens dans la base de données européenne. Il y en a plus de 1 000! Une étude publiée il y a quelques jours indiquait que des traces de 90 perturbateurs avaient été retrouvées dans une seule rivière en France!
               

                  C'est le grand écart: il faut accélérer les tests d'identification. Le bisphénol A, celui dont les effets néfastes sont les plus documentés, reste largement autorisé. L'Europe n'avance pas assez vite. Résultat: la Belgique, mais pas seulement, la France, l'Autriche, le Danemark, la Suède ont déjà commencé à avancer de leur côté et à légiférer. C'est sur ces sujets-là que la plus-value d'une harmonisation européenne prend tout son sens. Je vous engage à écouter les chercheurs pour protéger la santé et l'environnement des Européens. Cette stratégie ne va pas assez loin, nous devons agir plus vite et plus fort.
               

Kateřina Konečná,
za skupinu GUE/NGL. – Pane předsedající, já myslím, že je smutné, že zde dnes zase a znovu řešíme otázku endokrinních disruptorů. Komise svoji dlouhodobou nečinností ohrožuje zdraví celých generací svých obyvatel, kterým hrozí závažná zdravotní rizika. Od roku 1999, kdy Komise přišla s první strategií týkající se endokrinních disruptorů, jsme akorát promarnili čas, paní komisařko, ne že jsme udělali kus práce. Nebyli jsme schopni přijmout žádná vhodná opatření k minimalizaci expozice těchto látek vůči obyvatelstvu. Komise za celých poslední pět let neudělala v této věci nic, a to přesto, že jí to bylo soudně vytknuto jako pochybení.
               

                  Endokrinní disruptory jsou všude, v potravinách a ve vodě, v jejich balení, v naší kosmetice, v léčivých přípravcích a dokonce i v hračkách, které dáváme našim dětem. Neexistují žádné vědecké pochybnosti o mnoha škodlivých účincích, jež tyto látky mají. Dali jsme výrobcům dostatečně dlouhou dobu, aby s nějakým řešením přišli sami. Nepřišli samozřejmě s ničím. Naopak, přišli jsme na to, jak rádi manipulují s fakty a vědeckými studiemi. Konflikty zájmů vědců je zjevně potřeba řešit intenzivněji, než jsme dělali do teď.
               

                  Endokrinní disruptory musí být přísně regulovány stejně jako karcinogenní a mutagenní látky nebo látky toxické pro reprodukci. To znamená, že potřebujeme regulaci ve všech odvětvích, kde jsou v současné době přítomny. Musíme se ujistit, že je postupně co nejdříve úplně vyřadíme z používání. K tomu potřebujeme určit povinné požadavky na jejich testování a identifikaci. Musíme si uvědomit, že stejně jako v případě mutagenních či karcinogenních látek neexistuje žádná bezpečná prahová hodnota expozice vůči endokrinním disruptorům. Meze, které máme nyní, například pro bisfenol A, jsou stanoveny prostě příliš vysoko. Studie ukázaly nepříznivé účinky expozice bisfenolu A daleko pod těmito limity.
               

                  Kolegové, to, že bych Vás ráda poprosila o podporu naší rezoluce, je samozřejmostí. Také bych vás ráda informovala o tom, že jsme k rezoluci podali několik vylepšujících pozměňovacích návrhů, o kterých se domníváme, že lépe vyjádří frustraci, kterou v této době v souvislosti s nečinností Komise máme. Na závěr bych vám jen ráda řekla, že i pokud přijmeme další kritickou rezoluci, nebude to stačit.
               

Michèle Rivasi,
au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, j'avoue que cette législature est une occasion manquée sur les perturbateurs endocriniens.
               

                  Mes collègues l'ont dit, l'OMS parle depuis 2013 de menace mondiale. Des milliers de publications scientifiques nous expliquent que les perturbateurs endocriniens sont en cause dans de nombreuses maladies chroniques: certains cancers hormonodépendants, l'obésité, le diabète, la perte du quotient intellectuel chez les enfants – parce que les femmes enceintes ingèrent des perturbateurs endocriniens et que cela peut avoir une répercussion sur le métabolisme des enfants –, l'infertilité, etc. Et vous, la Commission, que faites-vous? Vous gagnez du temps. Franchement, vous nous aviez dit avoir une stratégie en 1999, mais depuis 20 ans, qu'avez-vous fait? Qui vous a fait évoluer? C'est le Parlement européen qui vous a fait évoluer! Il a fallu qu'une ministre suédoise et le Parlement saisissent la Cour de justice européenne pour dire à la Commission: ‘Faites votre travail!’. Vous étiez en dehors des traités européens pour définir, justement, ce qu'est un perturbateur endocrinien.
               

                  En tant que parlementaire, je me dis: heureusement que nous, les parlementaires, sommes là pour protéger la santé des citoyens européens. Que proposez-vous? Qu'on se serve du principe de précaution, qu'on minimise l'exposition des gens. Les rapports de Mme Demeneix, du CNRS, et de M. Slama, de l'Inserm, nous montrent qu'il y a une augmentation de l'exposition des femmes enceintes et de l'ensemble de la population, mais vous ne présentez aucun plan d'action précis. Cette résolution que nous vous proposons, elle vous dit: ‘Allons-y!’.
               

                  Il n'existe même pas, sur le plan législatif, de définition commune, horizontale, des perturbateurs endocriniens présents dans les cosmétiques, les jouets, les additifs, les contenants alimentaires. Il n'en existe que pour les biocides et les pesticides. Et puis il y a REACH. C'est quand même incroyable! Quant aux tests d'évaluation, ils ne portent même pas sur l'ensemble des demandes d'autorisation des substances. De qui se moque-t-on?
               

                  Je vous demande vraiment, pour la prochaine législature, d'avoir un plan d'action, de reprendre les propositions des parlementaires pour éliminer ces perturbateurs endocriniens, au même titre que les cancérigènes, les mutagènes et les reprotoxiques. Il en va de la santé des citoyens. Notre objectif n'est pas de faire prospérer les lobbies, mais de protéger la santé des citoyens… (le Président retire la parole à l'oratrice)


Violeta Bulc,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I would like to thank the honourable Members very much for all their comments.
Almost 20 years after the first Community strategy for endocrine disruptors, endocrine disruption remains a global challenge and a source of concern for many EU citizens, as you have all pointed out. While we have made significant progress to understand better and manage endocrine disruptors, I agree with you that it is important that together we step up the EU's efforts.
As I have already pointed out as well, the Commission's services have already started working on the different actions announced in the strategy adopted last year. At the same time, we will step up our implementation of existing policies that are relevant for endocrine disruptors. This is an area where coordination across different policy areas is essential. I count on the support of this House to help us to continue to protect our citizens and the environment while preserving an internal market that delivers for customers and where businesses can thrive.
At the end, please allow me, on behalf of my colleague, Commissioner Andriukaitis, and myself, to wish you all the best for whatever steps you are planning to take in the future.

President. – I have received one motion for a resolution to wind up this debate, tabled in accordance with Rule 123(2).
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on Thursday, 18 April 2019.


Written statements (Rule 162)



Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE),
kirjallinen. – Hormonihäiritsijäkemikaaleja on joka puolella arkielämässämme. Niitä on paistinpannuissa, kalusteissa ja kosmetiikassa. Vaikka ihminen kuinka yrittäisi, hän ei yksin pystyisi suojautumaan kemikaaleilta. Siihen tarvitaan lainsäädäntöä. Hormonihäiritsijäkemikaaleista ei mikään ole suoranaisesti vaarallinen. Tiedämme kuitenkin hormonitoimintaa häiritsevien kemikaalien kielteisistä vaikutuksista – olemme tienneet niistä jo pitkään. Tiedämme, kuinka nämä kemikaalit vaikuttavat hormonitoimintaamme. Tutkimustulokset osoittavat hormonihäiriköiden vaikutuksen sperman laadun heikkenemiseen. Muihin tunnettuihin seurauksiin kuuluvat hormonitoimintaan liittyvät syövät, rintojen varhainen kehittyminen ja tyypin 2 diabetes. Hormonaalisille haitta-aineille on ominaista se, että ne vaikuttavat erityisesti kehitysvaiheessa olevaan elimistöön. Sikiöt, lapset ja murrosikäiset nuoret ovat suurimmassa altistumisvaarassa. Haitta-aineiden vaikutukset ovat peruuttamattomia, ja ne voivat vaikuttaa sukupolvien yli. On mahdollista, etteivät vaikutukset näy altistuneessa sukupolvessa vaan vasta seuraavissa. Haitta-aineet voivat vaikuttaa erittäin pieninäkin annoksina, minkä vuoksi niiden riskitekijöitä on ollut vaikeampi löytää suurten altistusmäärien kokeissa. Parlamentti on jo pitkään vaatinut komissiolta kattavia ja kunnollisia kriteerejä hormonihäiritsijäkemikaaleista, ja on häpeällistä, ettei kriteereitä ole vieläkään laadittu.
               
4.   European Maritime Single Window environment (debate)

President. – The next item is the debate on the report by Deirdre Clune, on behalf of the Committee on Transport and Tourism, on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Maritime Single Window environment and repealing Directive 2010/65/EU (COM(2018)0278 – C8-0193/2018 – 2018/0139(COD)) (A8-0006/2019).

Deirdre Clune,
Rapporteur. – Mr President, thank you to the Commissioner and my fellow shadow rapporteurs on the file. I think this has been a very positive file for all of us, there has been very good cooperation on this file, the Maritime Single Window, which aims to facilitate the shipping industry, to facilitate the movement of goods through European ports, to ensure that when a ship comes to a European port that there will be a harmonised set of data with which it will have to comply or provide.
Currently the situation is fractured and it is not easy. A ship coming to any individual European port, even in individual countries, may and does find today that they have a different set of requirements, additional requirements at some ports, so the idea is to facilitate trade, make it more efficient and harmonise the set of data that is required. It's a simple path now, I would say. We've had cooperation from seaports, an opportunity to visit them – I certainly have myself – and to engage with them and to see what they have on the ground and some ports are at a very advanced stage and others are not so. But the idea is to bring every European port to the same level through a single Maritime Single Window.
As I said, we have had very good cooperation, in the trilogues as well, and I would just thank the Commissioner for her time at that and also the Romanian Presidency. It went very smoothly. One of the first meetings that I had in Parliament here, coincidentally, was with representatives from the shipping industry and, as I said, they outlined the burden and the challenges that they all face. So, for me it's particularly pleasing to be able to deliver now something that is to their benefit and the wider trade facilitation.
We've just seen this week the start, hopefully, of trade negotiations with the US; with Canada has been signed in this term of this Parliament, and other trade deals as well – the Japanese trade deal – they all mean business for our ports and business for the shipping industry and ultimately for European business and European consumers. This has been real and positive for the shipping companies and for the ports, so it's a win-win for everybody.
As I say, we are streamlining the systems and creating a Maritime Single Window with over two million port calls in the European Union every year. Some ports are still using paper and 1970s technology and this changes that. It will reduce the burden, first for the short-shipping, particularly, as well and improve its competitiveness which is very important. The harmonising reporting process will increase efficiency and it's expected to reduce the administrative burden by up to 720 million by the year 2030 by cutting the reporting time in half, and that can only be a good thing.
There have been a number of particular issues that we have addressed and number one is to recognise that what's existing at the ports already can be built upon. If, in some cases, there were additional data requirements and exceptional circumstances, that can be accommodated, but only for a limited period of time. Technology neutrality was part of our debate as well and we're happy that that has been referred to on the base of the Window. And also a governance dimension, that was very important I think, and maybe my fellow shadow rapporteurs will speak on that as well, but the governance dimension was very important for us and for shipping companies as well, so that we knew if these changes were implemented who was responsible and how could it be tracked.
The agreement has, as I say, been very positive and I very much look forward to the next phase of this implementation and to seeing the results in terms of the reduction in bureaucracy, time spent by shipping companies, and ultimately facilitating the smooth movement of trade into and out of European ports.

Violeta Bulc,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, the Commission is very happy that the legislators have reached a political agreement on this regulation establishing a European Maritime Single Window environment. We will finally now be able to respond to the long-standing request of the EU maritime industry for a fully-harmonised environment for ship reporting in all European ports.
I would particularly like to thank the rapporteur, Ms Clune, as well as the Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) shadow rapporteurs – it's great to see you all here today – for their work and determined efforts that allowed an agreement to be reached in a smooth and quick way.
Today, shipping operators spend around one to three hours per port calling for reporting. The new rules will cut the reporting time by 60%, saving about 2.5 million hours every year, and will hence reduce administrative costs by up to EUR 725 million for the shipping sector by 2030. This will be made possible by the adoption of a common set of data definitions and standards; the integration of the existing national maritime single windows in a common interoperable horizontal environment; and the third: the provision of a harmonised interface for such reporting.
The new environment will also facilitate sharing and reuse of data and implementation of the ‘reporting once’ principle. When fully implemented, the environment will ensure that a ship reports in the same way, no matter to which port in the EU she will be calling at. In addition, the entire logistics network will benefit from a more efficient flow of information.
The shipping sector considers this regulation one of the most relevant initiatives in terms of the improvement of operational efficiency and reduction of administrative burdens, and it has already expressed great satisfaction with the compromise text. I believe that the compromise text not only satisfies all the requests of the three institutions and of the maritime sector but will also benefit the entire logistics network by promoting digitalisation and a more efficient flow of information, which, of course, has a direct impact on competitiveness and the possibility for the maritime sector to be fully integrated in multi-modal solutions.

Wim van de Camp,
namens de PPE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, dank u zeer. Een bijzonder goede morgen, iedereen. Ook mijn dank aan Deirdre als rapporteur voor dit best wel ingewikkelde dossier.
               

                  De digitalisering in de transportsector gaat onverminderd door. Hopelijk zal dit leiden tot een efficiënter en schoner transportsysteem. Bij het maritiem éénloketsysteem, zoals dat zo mooi heet, praten wij over heel veel verschillende aspecten die samenkomen bij het aanmelden van schepen in de haven. Het gaat immers niet alleen om de havenpapieren. Het gaat ook om de douanepapieren. Het gaat om de gevaarlijke stoffen. En zo zijn er tal van elementen die hierin worden verenigd.
               

                  De eerlijkheid gebiedt te zeggen dat de richtlijn uit 2010 een beetje mislukt is. Daarom heeft deze Commissie een nieuwe richtlijn uitgebracht, die hopelijk wel meer uniformiteit en duidelijkheid schept.
               

                  Persoonlijk blijf ik mij zorgen maken over de samenwerking tussen de verschillende systemen, en dan met name de zogenaamde havencommunicatiesystemen. Hoe zal dat gaan in de praktijk? Ik hoop dan ook dat de commissaris duidelijk zal toezien op de implementatie van deze richtlijn.
               

                  Voorzitter, dit was mijn laatste speech in dit Parlement. Ik wil u allen hartelijk danken voor de buitengewoon prettige samenwerking, met name met twee echte liberalen, zijnde de heer Telička en mevrouw Bulc.
               

President. – Mr van de Camp, I think that if the House had been full now, which it unfortunately, is not, you would get significant applause as one of the key figures, not just in the Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN). And if I may just reciprocate, it was a real pleasure to work with you among the coordinators. I am sure this House will miss you, and thanks very much indeed.

Knut Fleckenstein,
im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte mich bei der Berichterstatterin, bei den Schattenberichterstattern, Kollegen und bei der Kommission für die gute Zusammenarbeit an diesem Dossier bedanken. Das Hauptziel dieser Verordnung war die Verringerung von Verwaltungsaufwand. Dieses Ziel haben wir mit Sicherheit erreicht. Die Verordnung bedeutet weniger Bürokratie für Reeder, für Schiffsbesatzungen, für Lotsen, für Hafenbehörden. Die vereinheitlichten Meldeformalitäten für Schiffe werden den Informationsaustausch zwischen Reedern und Hafenbehörden und zwischen den Hafenbehörden selbst deutlich vereinfachen. Außerdem haben wir gesichert, dass es für die Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter des Hafens, die an diesem neuen System beteiligt werden, ein gutes Training gibt – und wir wissen, dass das A und O für einen gut funktionierenden Hafen auch gut ausgebildete Mitarbeiter sind.
               

                  Wir haben aber nicht nur mit dieser Verordnung im Umfeld der europäischen Seehäfen Verbesserungen geschafft. In den letzten fünf Jahren gab es einiges, was wir auf den Weg gebracht haben. Ich denke natürlich an das Hafenpaket, das nun seit einigen Wochen in den Mitgliedstaaten angewendet werden muss. Mit dieser Verordnung haben wir Zwangsliberalisierung verhindert, finanzielle Transparenz geschaffen, Arbeitnehmerrechte gestärkt. Ich glaube, erst kürzlich mit der Richtlinie zur Entladung von Abfällen haben wir wesentlich zu mehr Umweltschutz in den Häfen beigetragen.
               

                  Am Ende dieser Legislaturperiode möchte ich mich für die gute Kooperation mit Ihnen allen bedanken. Und ein bisschen dürfen wir uns auch selbst loben: Wir haben dazu beigetragen, dass die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der europäischen Häfen gestärkt wird, und das ist gut – nicht nur für meine Heimatstadt Hamburg.
               

Gesine Meissner,
im Namen der ALDE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist tatsächlich so, dass sich für mich heute ein Kreis schließt, nicht nur weil das meine letzte Rede als Abgeordnete ist – ich trete nicht wieder an –, sondern als ich 2009 in den Ausschuss für Verkehr und Tourismus kam – ich kann mich noch genau erinnern –, da hat damals Dirk Sterckx, unser belgischer Kollege, gerade an dem Vorgängergesetz gearbeitet, nämlich an der freiwilligen digitalen Hafenfrachtpapierverordnung. Und da war es aber wirklich so, dass man sagte: Es soll ein national maritime single window geben, und es muss nicht überall angewandt werden.
               

                  Mittlerweile haben wir gemerkt, dass das nicht gut funktioniert hat, weder in Deutschland noch anderswo. Heute sind wir einen bedeutenden Schritt weitergekommen und haben jetzt wirklich die digitale Abfertigung von Hafenpapieren – auf dem Papier zumindest. Und sie wird dann umgesetzt werden, und ich denke, das ist ganz entscheidend, eine Verbesserung für schnelle Abfertigung in Häfen und für alle Beteiligten eine gute Sache.
               

                  Und Knut, jetzt hast du mir teilweise meine Rede weggenommen; ich wollte nämlich gerade darauf hinweisen, dass wir in dieser Legislaturperiode wirklich viele Sachen gerade für die Häfen erreicht haben: Angefangen mit deinem Bericht, mit dem Port Package, wo ich auch mitarbeiten durfte – das war eine schöne Kooperation –, dann kam gerade vor Kurzem meine Schiffsmüllbeseitigung, die wir beschlossen haben, und jetzt, Deirdre, dein Bericht von heute. Ich glaube, für die Häfen haben wir in dieser Wahlperiode wirklich eine ganze Menge erreicht.
               

                  Ich möchte mich auch, weil das jetzt meine letzte Rede ist, nochmal bei allen bedanken. Dazu nehme ich mir ein bisschen Zeit. Ich freue mich sehr, dass von den wenigen, die heute hier sind – wäre toll, wir wären mehr – vollkommen klar: wichtiges Thema, das sehen wir schon so – dass aber von denen, die hier sind, fast alle enge Vertraute von mir sind aus diesen letzten fünf Jahren, die ich hier war, viele sogar aus den ganzen zehn Jahren, die ich hier gewesen bin. Es hat mir sehr viel Spaß gemacht.
               

                  Ich finde, das Europäische Parlament ist das demokratischste, das es gibt. Ich war sehr gerne hier, ich höre jetzt aber auch gerne auf. Es kommen jetzt andere, und ich freue mich sehr, dass eben gerade Violeta Bulc als unsere Kommissarin heute da ist, und Pavel, ich freue mich auch sehr, dass du als mein ALDE-Transport-Kollege heute den Vorsitz hast. Also vielen Dank an alle, und wir sehen uns bestimmt wieder. Ich bleibe dem Maritimen treu!
               

President. – Dear colleague, what I have said vis-à-vis Mr van de Camp applies the same, and even more so, to you. I think that, once again, you are someone who is leaving a significant footprint here in Parliament. Once again, I need to say that many of us will miss you.

Jill Seymour,
on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Mr President, I appreciate the importance of this report in ensuring that reporting issues are streamlined. I am certainly pleased to see that the burden of red tape is finally being cut in the EU. However, my concern is the storage of data and the monitoring of its continued use. The EU is only as strong as its weakest link. The uniform transmission of data is not something that I could see as being beneficial to the UK ports, where the majority of UK ports are actually privately owned.
On a personal note, this may well be my last speech here in the Chamber. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the entire Parliament staff, including the ever-patient drivers, who have been polite and extremely helpful throughout my time here. Thank you so much.
I will always defend the right of those of you who wish to support the EU vision, if that is the desire of your country. I know many of you have struggled to understand why the UK wants to leave the European project. I will only say this: you should listen and find a way to communicate and be good neighbours, as the Brexit party is already leading in the polls.

Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE). – Arvoisa puhemies, satamat ovat aivan välttämättömiä EU:n toimivan talouden kannalta, ja niinpä kaikki, mitä voimme tehdä satamien paremman toiminnan eteen, on myös tärkeää koko taloutemme hyvinvoinnin kannalta. Siksi haluan kiittää sekä komissiota että esittelijöitä tästä erinomaisesta työstä. Tämä osoittaa yksinkertaisella selkeällä tavalla, mitä tarkoittaa, kun EU tekee enemmän yhdessä. Säästämme kustannuksia, tehostamme toimintaa ja tehostamme satamien käyttökapasiteettia. Samalla tämä on erinomainen esimerkki siitä, mitä digitalisaatio tarkoittaa. Käyttämällä digitalisaatiota raportoinnissa, valvonnassa jne. voimme myös välttää lisäkustannuksia ja parantaa toiminnan laatua.
               

                  Haluaisin kuitenkin näiden kehujen jälkeen nostaa esiin muutaman toiveen tietäen hyvin, että EU:n satamat ovat jo nyt kansainvälisessä vertailussa kovin ympäristöystävällisiä. Mielestäni meidän olisi tehtävä jatkossa kiertotalouden pohjalta satamille selkeä harmonisoitu odotuslista siitä, miten kaikki käyttökelpoinen materiaali uudelleen käytetään korkeimmalla mahdollisella tasolla. Tämä tarkoittaa esimerkiksi öljyn puhdistamista sen polttamisen sijasta. Ja miten esimerkiksi elektronisen valvonnan kautta voimme nykyistä paremmin seurata sitä, että laivasto todellisuudessa noudattaa ympäristönormia mereen laskemisten osalta, kalastusvaatimusten osalta tai esimerkiksi erilaisten jätteiden ja sivuvirtojen satamaan jättämisen ja kierrättämisen osalta.
               

Isabella De Monte (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'avvento delle nuove tecnologie sta mutando tutti gli scenari mondiali, compresa la mobilità. Bisogna coglierne la sfida e i benefici, perché l'Europa sia leader mondiale in questo campo. Le dichiarazioni e gli adempimenti che devono essere fatti ogni volta che una nave fa scalo in un porto sono molti ed è quindi necessario snellire tale formalità ed è essenziale introdurre una interfaccia unica di tali dichiarazioni.
               

                  Vi è in questo momento una totale mancanza di armonizzazione tra Stati membri e ciò provoca pesanti oneri amministrativi per gli operatori. Con questa interfaccia unica finalmente questi oneri si potranno ridurre, migliorando l'interoperabilità e l'interconnessione tra i diversi sistemi e incoraggiando la massima efficienza nell'uso dei dati.
               

                  Approfitto per ringraziare anch'io la Commissaria e il suo staff per l'ottimo lavoro, ringraziare i colleghi e dato che siamo l'Europa dei popoli, anche un saluto in sloveno Nasvidenje in hvala e un saluto anche in friulano che è un saluto anche in furlan, la me lenghe, e grazie a dut con un mandi.
               

President. – Of course Friulano is not only your mother tongue but an excellent white wine from Friuli, which I enormously enjoy.

Bogusław Liberadzki (S&D). – Panie Przewodniczący! Pani Komisarz! Byłem pytany w Szczecinie i Świnoujściu zarówno przez armatorów, jak i przez przedstawicieli portów: to cóż nowego nam zafundujecie? Myślę, że możemy odpowiedzieć, że zaproponowaliśmy Wam, drodzy portowcy, ludzie morza i rybacy, rzecz następującą: zunifikowany system nadzoru środowiskowego zarówno w wymiarze portowym, jak i w wymiarze żeglugowym.
               

                  Po drugie, proponujemy zintegrowanie tego w skali całej Unii Europejskiej. Chciałbym mieć przekonanie, że mówimy następująco: osiągniemy większy stopień czystości, wypełniając mniej biurokratycznych formalności, i że tym sposobem możemy osiągnąć poziom, który wszyscy uznają. Tak, chcemy chronić, ale za to będzie mniejszy wysiłek biurokratyczny.
               

                  Aby być w tym samym tonie co koledzy, chciałbym podziękować zarówno Wimowi van de Campowi, którego akurat w tej chwili nie ma, Gesine Meissner oraz Knutowi Fleckensteinowi i Tobie, Pavel, za naszą współpracę w Komisji Transportu i Turystyki. Pani Komisarz – dziękuję za pięć wspólnych lat! Pozdrawiam.
               

President. – Once again, best wishes to our esteemed colleague, Mr Liberadzki, not just from the Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN), but also from the Bureau. Best wishes to you.

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, attualmente gli operatori dei trasporti marittimi devono soddisfare troppi requisiti e fare diverse dichiarazioni ogni volta che una nave fa scalo in un porto. Il problema principale è rappresentato dalla mancanza di armonizzazione dei requisiti di dichiarazione nei vari settori e nei vari Stati e purtroppo ciò comporta notevoli costi aggiuntivi per l'industria.
               

                  Secondo le stime della Commissione, attualmente il personale del settore dei trasporti marittimi dedica ogni anno in totale circa 4,6 milioni di ore alle attività di dichiarazione, è troppo. Un'interfaccia di dichiarazione unica per le navi permetterà di ridurre sensibilmente questi oneri amministrativi, contribuendo ad agevolare ulteriormente il commercio, la digitalizzazione e a modernizzare la mobilità marittima.
               

                  Con questo regolamento si creano le condizioni per l'applicazione del principio una tantum affinché le navi possano fare in un unico porto una sola dichiarazione e riutilizzare quelle informazioni per i successivi scali nei porti dell'Unione europea.
               

Catch-the-eye procedure


José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, Colega Deirdre, as novas tecnologias estão a alterar rapidamente o panorama da mobilidade e, neste contexto, a União e as indústrias devem responder ao desafio de se tornarem líderes mundiais da mobilidade.
               

                  Fui relator do MRV sobre as emissões de CO2 dos transportes marítimos e, por isso, entendo que este regulamento era o passo seguinte para estabelecer as regras harmonizadas para a prestação de informações exigidas para as escalas portuárias, assegurando a transmissão de informações entre declarantes, autoridades competentes e prestadores de serviços portuários através da plataforma nacional única.
               

                  Estas plataformas nacionais para o setor marítimo devem ser mantidas e servir de base para o ambiente europeu de plataforma única para este setor que seja tecnologicamente neutro, interoperável e que permita a atualização tecnológica e dos requisitos formais de acesso portuário. Recairá agora na Comissão o desenvolvimento da interface, bem como das respetivas atualizações. Mas, para atingir este objetivo de manter e obter os requisitos de comunicação plenamente harmonizados, teremos que ter uma maior cooperação entre autoridades aduaneiras e marítimas, tanto a nível nacional como a nível da União.
               

                  Termino, Senhor Presidente, agradecendo a colaboração sempre excelente da Senhora Comissária Violeta Bulc, bem como de todos os colegas aqui do Parlamento, especialmente na Comissão de Transportes.
               

Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já jsem byl v poslední době dotazován různými provozovateli, zda se tato myšlenka, která je podle mě správná, nemůže zvrhnout do pozice, že se administrativa ještě ztíží. To je důvod, proč tady vystupuji, chci pochválit tuto myšlenku. Jednotný námořní portál má určitě smysl, je to oblast, kde má smysl harmonizovat, protože zde budou jasné jednotné požadavky na lodní přepravce.
               

                  Na druhou stranu Vás chci požádat, paní komisařko, říká se v Čechách, že cesta do pekel je dlážděna dobrými úmysly. Moc prosím, aby potom následné provedení tohoto námořního portálu nevedlo k tomu, že přepravci budou zavaleni další a další byrokracií. Pokud to uhlídáme a povede to ke sjednocení požadavků na přepravce a pokud ty požadavky nebudou přemrštěné, což je ten úmysl a je to tak napsáno v daném nařízení, pak si myslím, že to je správná cesta, že harmonizace na evropské úrovni zde má svůj smysl a povede k lepším podmínkám pro přepravce.
               

Bill Etheridge (EFDD). – Mr President, five years after I came here, there is a perfect symmetry. We started listening to arguments about more homogenisation and bringing things together, and in almost my last speech here, we are hearing more of the same. Whilst I understand this – as I've stated many a time before – I do think there is something special about uniquely-different places having different rules. I also think the idea of new regulation to get rid of less paperwork is a uniquely EU idea, but maybe it will work.
Whilst things here for five years haven't really changed and there's been a consistency outside of these walls, a wind of change is blowing all across Europe. I think it's important to be mindful that while it doesn't change in here, this wind is blowing in these coming elections. Whilst I may not be back, it may well bring some very different people here and different arguments.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Violeta Bulc,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, first of all, I would like to thank honourable Members for their comments. They are fully in line with our cooperation that led us to this point. Let me just restress how important I believe the adoption of this regulation is for a truly European maritime single window and maritime single area. The environment will profit, our organisation will profit, we will increase efficiency, and of course shipping will become even more competitive.
Just one additional clarification regarding the port community systems that Mr van de Camp raised: the Commission will not rule out other possible reporting channels, provided that the interfaces for the Single Maritime Window are available and operators are offered the choice. This will be a choice for the Member States. On the other hand, port community systems will be able to use data services and provide additional value added services in ports for maritime operators, of course if they comply with the technical specifications set out in the application of this regulation.
Finally, let me thank Ms Clune one more time for the excellent coordination, all the shadow rapporteurs and all colleagues for really constructive and focused work, which of course delivered this very important piece of legislation.
Mr President, I wish you well, as well, in the forthcoming elections. Honourable Members, this is also my last appearance in front of this Parliament and I would like to take this opportunity to really say how grateful I am for the not always easy, but very constructive, dialogues. What I really appreciate is that we never walked away from the negotiating table no matter how hard it was. I think this is a very strong message to all Europeans, as this is the spirit of democracy. No matter how hard it sometimes was to reach a final conclusion, we honoured the final conclusions as the result of democracy.
I would like to continue in this spirit. I would like to invite you to continue in this spirit, no matter where we engage, and make sure that we create a resilient, sustainable and very cooperative Europe based on democratic values. So thank you very much. It has been an extreme privilege to work with you and I wish you all well, no matter where the path leads you.

(Applause)


President. – Commissioner, I think the applause says it all. I think for all of us in the Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) it was a very pleasant period of five years. I still remember the very first days after you were nominated, to be the first nominee of Ms Bratušek, and I think that you and we have travelled a very long and, I believe, a very good path. I wish you in the coming months the very best. I am sure I speak on behalf of the House.

Deirdre Clune,
Rapporteur. – Mr President, I'm sure you'll have heard from the contributions across the floor today how welcome this piece of legislation, the regulation, is. As I said, it's a win-win for all, reducing the amount of time that shipping companies have to report – I think the Commissioner said to 60%, I have 50%. Well, that's great. It's a win-win for everybody so I think it's really positive.
Again, I'd like to thank everybody for their contributions and for their support in getting us to this point. I think it's a really positive example of what Europe can do when we pull together and when we work together on making things more competitive for our shipping industry and for those businesses that depend on the shipping industry to get their goods to market. So I think it's a really positive story. It's a great story to end up on, for me.
This is my last speech in this term. I hope I'll be back to make more of them, but that's up to the electorate in Ireland's south, where I come from. But I'd like to thank the Commissioner sincerely for her support to me. Commissioner, your time in the Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) in the work that I have been doing, certainly in the area of ports and the mobility package, has been very positive. I would say, personally, that I have followed the work you have done in terms of road safety and support it enthusiastically when and wherever I can, even though it's not part of today's debate.
I'd like to thank Wim van de Camp as my coordinator – we would call him the leader, but he doesn't use that term – in our PPE for his support, guidance and leadership over the last five years. Gesine Meißner, thank you too for the work and your commitment to the maritime area, certainly something that touches my heart. I am very happy to have been involved with you and I wish you well.
We have a lot of goodbyes today. I think this is a very positive moment for many of us to finish up on, a file that will actually do good and underlines exactly what Europe is about. It's about bringing together and making things more efficient. By working together, we can produce such very positive work as that.
Mr President, I wish you well too in your next venture.

President. – Thank you, and the same thing applies to you. What an atmosphere here today. Why couldn't we have at least 200 last days during the mandate? It would have been quite an atmosphere.
Once again, thank you very much, Ms Clune, for your excellent work and also cooperation with you in the Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN).
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on Thursday, 18 April 2019.
5.   Disclosures relating to sustainable investments and sustainability risks (debate)

President. – The next item is the debate on the report Paul Tang, on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on disclosures relating to sustainable investments and sustainability risks and amending Directive (EU) 2016/2341 (COM(2018)0354 – C8-0208/2018-2018/179(COD) (A8-0363/2018).

Paul Tang,
Rapporteur. – Mr President, climate activist Greta Thunberg was in the European Parliament this week and said: ‘let's save the save the planet like we are saving Notre-Dame’, and she's right. We have to step up to the big challenge of our time and come into action. We have to do it step by step, stone by stone, and this report, this regulation is an important building block to make the financial sector work, not just for profits but for people and planet, to make finance part of the solution of sustainability challenges and not part of the problem.
From the start, the idea has been radically simple: make sustainability part of the DNA of the financial sector. Let considerations of sustainability apply as broadly as possible to all financial products, to all financial institutions, for all sorts of impacts, and as always with radical ideas, it sounds simple but the implementation is not. But I still dare to say that the negotiation results still broadly reflects this idea.
Indeed, sustainable finance should not be stuck in the green corner, as a manifestation of goodwill while, at the same time, as an excuse for the bulk of non-sustainable investment. In fact, not in a green corner, but sustainability should be discussed in the boardrooms of banks, insurers, pension funds and asset managers. This means that sustainability considerations should be integrated in every step of the decision-making – in every step. This means everyone in the financial sector has to move.
So yes, this is what we need. We need a broad scope, an unlevel playing field, so that consumers who want to know what their product is, can learn to know that, and even more important, we need a broad scope so as not to punish the front runners and to benefit the slackers. We need a broad definition of sustainability. This is a broad concept encompassing a wide array of considerations, ranging from biodiversity to human rights, from emissions to working conditions, and we need a broad framework to manage risks and impact – not only the identification of impacts but also actions to prevent and mitigate them; not just disclosure but also due diligence. I think this report makes progress on all three fronts, and that is a big win. This resonates already with the mind-shift we see in part of the financial sector. A broad range of FSAs is already applying due diligence and, just this week, many of them subscribed to a call for mandatory due diligence. This enables them to show their social value but also to achieve a higher-risk adjusted return. Economics and values can go hand in hand.
I would like to call on the European Commission and the supervisor to use the openings in this regulation to work on standards for disclosures, to better define the social impacts of investments, to work on standards for due diligence: these are what we need to truly make the transition towards sustainable finance. The message from the regulation on disclosure and on the critical benchmarks should be clear to the financial sector: finance will become sustainable. Don't wait for it but start working on it.
Finally, I would like to thank the representatives of Parliament, the Commission and the Council for overcoming and bridging the significant differences we had in a short time. It has been a tremendous effort by all, and I would like to thank them from the depth of my heart. I deeply appreciate it.

Federica Mogherini,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, the Commission brought forward this proposal in March last year. This disclosure regulation is a key element of the Commission Action Plan on sustainable finance and it is an important capital markets union initiative to achieve climate neutrality by 2015.
It is also a very important step towards the overall objective that you just mentioned of connecting finance with the needs of a more sustainable economy. Our consultations showed that there is not enough transparency on how financial market participants integrate in their policies the negative impact of climate change and its related risks on the value of the investments, for example in assets located in flood-prone areas.
This can lead to distortions in the investment decision process and savings allocation. In Europe, we're facing a yearly investment gap of EUR 180 billion to reach our climate and energy goals. This goes up to EUR 270 billion if we include water and resource management. The Commission has proposed to devote a quarter of the EU's budget to climate-related action as of 2021, but public spending is not enough. The private sector has a key role to play in reorienting capital flows towards sustainable investments and reversing the negative effects of climate change.
The negotiations broadly kept the Commission's approach and added disclosure obligations on adverse sustainability impacts. The reason is that investment decisions and financial advice might contribute to negative material effects on environment and society, regardless of whether the investment strategy pursues a sustainable objective or not. For example, investments in assets that pollute water or devastate biodiversity. We support this extension, which represents an important improvement of the proposal as it would achieve more transparency and better information to end users on all types of financial products concerning sustainability aspects.
This agreement will increase the level and quality of information available on sustainability issues. It will also promote market discipline, discouraging greenwashing. We believe that it will bring behavioural changes in the financial markets to support the transition to a more sustainable economy.
How? First, financial entities will be incentivised to better manage sustainability risks. Second, better information on the sustainability of financial products and in financial advice will encourage a shift in retail investors' behaviour. Finally, the disclosure on the negative externalities on environment and society will gradually contribute to price in these externalities.
The Commission thanks the co-legislators for having taken up discussions quickly and for having achieved an agreement, and I want to congratulate in particular the rapporteur, Mr Tang, for steering this debate towards a very successful conclusion. This is not the last step as the Commission is working with the co-legislators on the remaining part of the May package proposal on climate taxonomy and on the implementation of the other actions part of the Sustainable Financial Action Plan.

Sirpa Pietikäinen,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, the financial markets are multi-fold compared to the real economy, so it really matters where those financial flows are directed. At this point we have about 30 trillion invested in unsustainable strained assets that are coal-dependent or otherwise climate- or environmentally-risky. But it is good news that we can guide that investment towards those challenges where we very well know what we have in investing for sustainability on combating climate change. We have more than enough money.
The question and the crux of it is the information. That's why I regard this regulation about these clauses as the mother of all sustainable finance regulations. It is the question how you disclose not only environmentally-friendly actions but the whole impact of your activities in the environment. So it is the negative, it is the positive, it's everything in between, and it is not only climate but it is all the others, like biodiversity, for example, indirect land use, water consumption and so on, to avoid this kind of palm oil investment crisis.
We have managed to turn the wheel in this direction now, and thank you for my colleagues and negotiation team for all this. And the next step is to broaden the scope, so that it touches the investing companies so that the investors do get the proper information, and that it touches all sizes and types of companies and all levels of the production chain, so we can talk about environmental accounting and that the information needs to be used on decisions on investments.

Matt Carthy,
on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – Mr President, it's a real pity, I have to say, that I'm not in a position to support this file. Despite the best efforts of the progressives within this Parliament, including the rapporteur (who I commend), the right-wing groups and the Council have limited the scope of this file so much that the disclosure requirement will now apply to only a tiny proportion of financial products – banks once again are let off the hook.
The Parliament's report was far superior to what's been forced upon us now by Member States who are determined to avoid taking any action at all against climate change, it seems. Disclosure isn't a big risk; it's the bare minimum we can demand from the finance sector that is doing so much to damage our economy and our environment.
So let me repeat once again: the scientific consensus is that we have until 2030 to act to make rapid and far-reaching transitions in all areas of our economies if we're to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees. That's just 11 years away. And just as we've seen in other votes on the sustainable finance package, conservatives who really, it has to be said, appear not to give a single damn about the future of our planet, are sabotaging the future of our children and their children.
This could be my last speech, but I want to say that I hope the next mandate of this Parliament will be used to reconnect with the people across Europe, and there's going to be big changes and big choices to be made in the next mandate. We have to decide whether we're going to actually pursue real climate action or whether we're going to just burden families with carbon taxes and pretend that we're taking real measures. We have to decide whether we're going to support families or whether we're going to continue to give a free rein to the vultures and the banks. We're going to have to decide whether we invest EU monies in creating real sustainable jobs and growth across the EU or whether we're going to actually invest EUR 13 billion in the creation of a European army.
I hope I'm back here fighting for Ireland and I hope that I'm here to work with all of you, so that we can create a better and a fairer European Union.

Molly Scott Cato,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, Matt is very welcome to join. It was a joy to hear the global climate hero, Greta Thunberg, speak here on Tuesday. She was electrifying. But she also condemned the hypocrisy of politicians who express concern about the climate while voting against action. Although it has been a political battle to make the progress we have, I hope she would be pleased by the EU's agenda on sustainable finance, one of the most important tools to ensure the promise of systemic change to halt climate breakdown.
I'm proud that, once again, the EU leads the world on environmental standards; this time by agreeing the world's first mandatory disclosure regime for a major financial market. Citizens should expect the same transparency when buying financial products as when we buy food. When people found horsemeat in their lasagne, it was a scandal, but we have not had the right to know whether our pension fund was invested in a windfarm or cutting down a rainforest to plant a palm oil plantation.
I deeply regret that the Council did not match Parliament's level of ambition and continued to insist that some of the sustainability risks and impacts of investments can be concealed from citizens. The inclusion of a regrettable comply and explain exemption means that companies can continue to choose to hide dirty and destructive investments, thus undermining the power of the sustainable finance agenda.
With thousands of climate demonstrators out on our streets, we call on our Parliamentary colleagues and Member States to listen to the will of the citizens, calling for a truly sustainable transition and to use our financial system to facilitate this.

Bill Etheridge,
on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Mr President, as this actually now is my last speech, I'm going to dispense with the formality and say I think probably combining politics with finance is not a good idea. You knew I'd say that, so I'll just get that done.
I want to say that it's been a great honour for the last five years to represent the West Midlands, an area that I love, in this place. There's been some good debates, there's been people on all sides that I've grown to respect, and I hope that everybody goes forward from here and thrives and does well – all of your independent nation, individual nations, all of you as people, I wish you all greater freedom and I wish you all happiness.
And I want to take this moment if I may, just to say that it's been a bumpy old ride for me particularly; I've found it difficult at times but I've been very lucky, I've had good friends, family and I most particularly want to embarrass by saying my Mum and Dad are still alive and with us and without their support – they're my true heroes, and they've helped me through these years. It's been wonderful, all the best to all of you, no matter what political shade you are. I wish you well.

President. – Mr Etheridge, I can only reciprocate and wish you all the best, but also to your parents, that they will be your heroes still for many years.

Babette Winter (S&D). – Herr Präsident, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich möchte zunächst meinem sozialdemokratischen Kollegen Paul Tang für die richtig gute Arbeit als Berichterstatter und für seinen unermüdlichen Einsatz für ein nachhaltiges Finanzwesen sehr danken.
               

                  Wir machen heute einen wichtigen Schritt, nämlich, dass alle Akteure im Finanzmarkt künftig Informationen zur Nachhaltigkeit auf Produkt- und auf Firmenebene transparent offenlegen müssen.
               

                  Es ist gerade schon erwähnt worden, dass vorgestern Greta Thunberg hier im Europäischen Parlament, im Umweltausschuss war, und sie hat deutlich gemacht, dass wir endlich handeln müssen, wenn wir ein Umwelt-, ein Klimadesaster vermeiden wollen. Dann reicht es nicht, wenn Herr Weber, der jetzt nicht da ist, ein paar nette Fotos macht für die sozialen Medien und gleichzeitig aber einen Auftritt der jungen Frau hier im Plenum verhindert.
               

                  Auch ohne Greta – wir haben doch kein Erkenntnisproblem, wir haben ein Umsetzungsproblem! Die Konservativen sagen: ‘Nachhaltigkeit ja, aber bitte nicht gegen den Widerstand der Industrie und der Finanzindustrie’. Wenn es darauf ankommt, wird deutlich, dass es oft um greenwashing geht und das unterstützt wird, und die Nachhaltigkeit eben nicht als echtes politisches Ziel verfolgt wird – nicht die ökologische Nachhaltigkeit, nicht die soziale Nachhaltigkeit. Wir haben es doch vor kurzem gesehen hier im Parlament: Da wurden beim Taxonomy-Dossier wichtige Änderungsanträge von uns, von den Sozialdemokraten, von der anderen Seite, den Konservativen, abgewiesen – Anträge, mit denen Definitionen verpflichtend geworden wären, was eigentlich nachhaltig ist, und vor allem, was nicht nachhaltig ist.
               

                  Was ist also zu tun? Erstens, an das neue Parlament, die Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die demnächst hier in Verantwortung sind, und an die nächste Kommission: Es muss weitergehen. Heute ist ein wichtiger Schritt, aber das ist noch nicht genug. Es muss weitergehen für eine nachhaltige Ökonomie. Dazu gehört, dass Banken auch Risikomaßnahmen vornehmen müssen, nämlich in Form von höherem Eigenkapital, und dass offengelegt wird, wenn Investitionen negative Auswirkungen haben. Das ist wichtig. Und zweitens, sich in der europäischen Wahl für die zu entscheiden, die für soziale, ökologische und ökonomische Nachhaltigkeit sind.
               

Pervenche Berès,
au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Vice-présidente, ce règlement est l'un des derniers textes qui va être voté par ce Parlement européen. Je ne sais pas ce que je vais défendre dans le bilan de la Commission sortante, mais je suis sûre que nous devons nous réjouir d'une chose: le mariage organisé entre les questions environnementales et la question de la finance. Nous le devons à un certain nombre de fonctionnaires et de hauts responsables au sein de la Commission européenne, y compris au vice-président Dombrovskis. Je crois que c'est un succès. Lors des négociations sous l'autorité de Paul Tang, nous avons progressé avec ce texte.
               

                  La partie la plus importante porte sur le champ d'application. Là-dessus, nous avons exigé que tous les produits financiers soient soumis à cette obligation de publication d'informations. Nous défendons une vision ambitieuse pour la finance durable. La proposition de la Commission était orientée vers la mise en place d'obligations de transparence pour les acteurs et pour les actifs qui faisaient partie du secteur financier vert: c'était un premier pas contre le greenwashing, mais cela risquait de renforcer la tendance de la finance durable à s'enfermer dans des niches où les gestionnaires de fonds investiraient marginalement pour se donner une image plus verte sans changer fondamentalement leur mode de financement.
               

                  Au contraire, nous demandons à l'ensemble du secteur financier de publier des informations sur l'impact environnemental de ses investissements, et particulièrement aux grandes entreprises, qui ont l'impact le plus significatif. Nous défendons aussi l'idée qu'il faut réformer la finance dans son ensemble.
               

                  Le rapport demande également aux investisseurs de faire preuve de diligence raisonnable dans leur gestion d'actifs, c'est-à-dire d'identifier l'impact de leurs choix sur l'environnement et d'intégrer ces informations dans leur processus de décision. Il s'agit d'être transparent, mais aussi de changer les pratiques des acteurs financiers. Il faut permettre aux consommateurs de mieux choisir leurs investissements. C'est une étape très significative et il faudra que le prochain Parlement européen poursuive dans cette voie.
               

Catch-the-eye procedure


Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, doamna comisar, doamna Înalt Reprezentant, stimați colegi, e păcat că suntem atât de puțini la dezbaterea unui regulament foarte important: investiții durabile și eliminarea riscurilor legate de durabilitate. Toți ne dorim acest lucru și știm că investițiile durabile în finanțare au o mare legătură cu durabilitatea investițiilor. Avem în politica Uniunii Europene o politică de reindustrializare. Evident că este legată de acest regulament și mă bucur foarte mult că pe ultima sută de metri reușim să votăm acest regulament.
               

                  Durabilitatea finanțelor nu trebuie blocată și nu trebuie să existe finanțări fără durabilitate. Dar avem nevoie, așa cum s-a spus aici, de informarea consumatorului, pentru că trebuie să știm tot înainte de a accesa o finanțare.
               

                  Apoi, sigur că trebuie să existe o mai bună gestionare a riscurilor. Dar nu poți să gestionezi bine riscurile, și mai ales riscurile pe termen lung, dacă nu deții informațiile. Mai multă transparență. Sigur că regulamentul va crește durabilitatea economică în general.
               

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Lieve Wierinck,
namens de ALDE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, beste collega's, na een lange weg afgelegd te hebben, ligt het resultaat op tafel. Een resultaat dat er zijn mag. Eerst en vooral wil ik de onderhandelaars van de Raad en de Commissie bedanken voor de goede samenwerking, voor hun koelbloedigheid en voor het geduld dat ze hebben gehad tijdens deze onderhandelingen, maar vooral voor hun visie en doorzettingsvermogen.
               

                  Beste collega's, het voorbije jaar hebben we onderhandeld met slechts één doel voor ogen: jaarlijks 180 miljard euro ophalen om onze klimaatdoelstellingen te behalen. De tijd zal uitwijzen of we hierin ook zijn geslaagd. Persoonlijk ben ik er rotsvast van overtuigd dat we vandaag de volgende bouwsteen voor een duurzame toekomst leggen. Een duurzame toekomst die onze kinderen en kleinkinderen dezelfde kansen biedt als onze generatie. Als we de klimaatbetogers mogen geloven, is het vandaag geen vijf, maar tien over twaalf. Ze hebben gelijk. Op het vlak van klimaat hadden we twintig jaar geleden moeten ingrijpen. Dit kunnen we niet rechttrekken door vandaag ondoordacht de financiële sector met deze last op te zadelen. Want laat één ding duidelijk zijn: op het einde van de rit betalen u en ik hiervoor de rekening. De enige oplossing is een structurele. Duurzaam investeren moet beloond worden. Alleen zo kunnen we de volgende financiële, economische en klimaatcrisis afwenden.
               

                  Ik dank de rapporteur voor de goede samenwerking. Dit is mijn laatste keer dat ik spreek in het Parlement. Ik dank iedereen voor de kansen die ik hier gekregen heb.
               

President. – Thanks very much indeed. Once again I reciprocate and thank you very much for being a very good colleague.

Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor presidente, onorevoli colleghi, è questo il mio ultimo intervento in questa legislatura e sono contento di trattare questo tema che si interfaccia con la sostenibilità ambientale a cui ho lavorato tanto in questi anni.
               

                  L'accordo di Parigi costituisce una formidabile opportunità di investimento che non possiamo permetterci di sprecare. La green economy rappresenta l'unica strategia possibile per la creazione di milioni di posti di lavoro. Il regolamento ci assicurerà che il sistema finanziario operi in questa direzione, rafforzando e migliorando la comunicazione delle informazioni che gli emittenti di prodotti finanziari e i consulenti finanziari devono fornire agli investitori finali. I partecipanti ai mercati finanziari e i consulenti finanziari, infatti, avranno l'obbligo di integrare nei rispettivi processi i rischi e le opportunità ambientali, sociali e di governance nell'ambito del loro dovere di agire nel migliore interesse dei clienti.
               

                  Le nuove norme, insieme all'agenda per la neutralità in termini di emissioni di carbonio e all'agenda UE per lo sviluppo sostenibile, collegano la finanza alle esigenze dell'economia reale, aiutando a realizzare gli obiettivi di sviluppo sostenibile delle Nazioni Unite del 2012 e i traguardi fissati dall'accordo di Parigi.
               

                  Ciao a tutti e arrivederci a luglio.
               

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Federica Mogherini,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, on behalf of the Commission, and in particular on behalf of Vice-President Dombrovskis whom I represent here, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Tang, all of you for your comments and contributions today, and I am confident that the resolution will be adopted today, and I also share personally the fact that this would be a major step forward and a good way of achieving and accomplishing good results on this file.
This will pave the way for a swift entry into force of the legislative package, which represents a political priority for us. It is critical to mainstream disclosure on the impact that an investment can have on the environment and society. By adopting higher sustainability standards, we will increase the transparency, reliability and attractiveness of sustainable financial products. It will also help to raise market awareness on sustainability issues and foster innovation in investment strategies and the design of this financial product. So our belief is that this has the potential to bring a behavioural change in financial markets and in investors, promoting investments into a more sustainable economy, and I think this will be a very important step forward in our sustainability agenda. So thank you very much once again and I am looking forward to a positive vote later today.

Paul Tang,
Rapporteur. – Mr President, let me start by saying that I am very glad that the Commission came forward with action plans for sustainable finance. I think that was a crucial change, led by Commissioner Dombrovskis, which I very much appreciate.
I'm happy to contribute, with others, on the first steps. Federica Mogherini is right: it's not the last step, far from it. This also to Matt Carthy: yes, we need to work on this further. But I hope that these first steps, as Ms Sirpa Pietikäinen said, are a clear signal to the financial sector that change is coming: we are changing towards sustainable finance. This is a credible step towards that, and further steps will follow. That's why I also now call on the Commission and the supervisors to keep on working on this file. I'm happy to work in the next Parliament and, if not, outside this Parliament on this change that we need.
Having been in this debate, I also learned that there's a change underway in the European economy. We need to break away from the Anglo-Saxon-American tradition of ‘move fast and break things’, in which companies and financial institutions are just actors in an economy driven by monetary incentives. We need to return to the European tradition where we take into account companies, financial institutions and the board takes into account the interests of all stakeholders. We need to return to the European tradition where firms, companies, financial institutions, banks and insurers are part of our society and act accordingly. This is the change that we need, and I think it's underway, because I can already see this change coming. I see front-runners. Maybe it's because I'm a politician and I'm always an optimist, but I see good signs for this change. I think it's very welcome to have this change to bring forward a fairer and more equal society.

(Applause)


President. – The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on Thursday, 18 April 2019.
6.   Debate on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law (debate)
6.1.   China, notably the situation of religious and ethnic minorities

President. – The next item is the debate on six motions for resolutions on China, notably the situation of religious and ethnic minorities (2019/2690(RSP)).

Bas Belder,
indiener. – Voorzitter, in mijn laatste plenaire bijdrage wil ik opnieuw de verdediging van godsdienstvrijheid in China bepleiten bij alle Europese instellingen. Het is mijn diep verlangen dat het Europees Parlement na de verkiezingen daarmee doorgaat. Want gezien de totalitaire antireligieuze campagne van president Xi van de afgelopen jaren dient het elementaire grondrecht van de geloofsvrijheid hoog op de agenda van komende Europees-Chinese topontmoetingen te prijken.
                  

                     Hoe kan president Xi zijn Chinese droom combineren met de massale opsluiting van Oeigoeren in heropvoedingskampen? Hoe denkt de Chinese communistische partij haar publieke gezag te handhaven door vorig jaar meer dan een miljoen christenen, waaronder tienduizend kerkleiders, omwille van hun geloof te vervolgen?
                  

                     Daarom roep ik het Chinese leiderschap met klem op menselijkheid te tonen, met respect voor de vrijheid van de Chinese burgers. Alleen in dat geval, mijnheer de voorzitter en mevrouw de hoge vertegenwoordiger, is er sprake van beschaving in het Rijk van het Midden en heeft de Chinese droom binnenslands en mondiaal uitstraling.
                  

                     Ik dank God voor zijn bijstand en ik wens u allen van harte Gods zegen toe.
                  

Helmut Scholz,
Verfasser. – Herr Präsident, Frau Hohe Vertreterin! In einer strategischen Partnerschaft ist es wichtig, den politischen Willen und den Mut zu haben, und auch die Weisheit, um Themen anzusprechen, in denen beide Partner unterschiedliche Ansätze und Herangehensweisen haben.
                  

                     Es erfüllt mich mit Sorge, wenn ich von Veränderungen in der Bedeutung der Menschenrechte in einem Land höre, dem ich seit Jahrzehnten freundschaftlich verbunden bin.
                  

                     Ermutigt durch das gemeinsame Bekenntnis zur Menschenrechts-Charta der Vereinten Nationen in der Abschlusserklärung des jüngsten EU-China-Gipfels vom 9. April möchte ich dafür werben, eine unabhängige internationale Delegation von Menschenrechtsexperten, eine fact finding mission, in das Uigurische Autonome Gebiet Xinjiang zu ermöglichen. Die UN-Hochkommisarin für Menschenrechtsfragen, Michelle Bachelet Jeria, sollte darin eingebunden sein.
                  

                     China kann es nicht nötig haben, sich die eigene Vielfalt zu versagen. Vertrauen in demokratische Teilhabe von Menschen an der gesellschaftlichen Entwicklung erfordert Transparenz. Die Vorgänge und Zustände in den Lagern von Xinjiang müssen untersucht werden – gerade aus Respekt vor dem Wortlaut wichtiger Artikel der chinesischen Verfassung sind doch auch Zustände in Lagern zu unterbinden.
                  

                     In einem Rechtsstaat darf keine Verwaltungs- oder Polizeiinstanz willkürlich oder aufgrund von konstruierten oder sehr geringen Verdachtsmomenten Menschen für lange Zeit in Haft nehmen. Ich höre Schätzungen von einer Millionen Menschen in Haft. Ich sehe darin einen problematischen Widerspruch zum modernen, sich für den Austausch unserer Ökonomien öffnenden China. Ich sehe auch die Notwendigkeit der Entwicklung gemeinsamer Standards für Datenschutz und Privatsphäre, gerade auch vor dem Hintergrund digitaler und technologischer Herausforderungen zukunftsoffener Gesellschaften.
                  

Reinhard Bütikofer,
Verfasser. – Mr. President, apologies for being a few seconds late. Ich möchte mich als erstes bei den Kolleginnen und Kollegen der unterschiedlichen Fraktionen dafür bedanken, dass wir in Sachen Menschenrechte gerade auch mit Blick auf religiöse und ethnische Minderheiten hier in diesem Haus einen großen Konsens haben. Wir formulieren vielleicht nicht immer ganz gleich, aber wir wissen gemeinsam, dass in den Beziehungen zwischen unserer Europäischen Union und der Volksrepublik China die Menschenrechte als ein Fundament, auf dem unser Selbstverständnis gründet, nie den zweiten Platz einnehmen können und nie vergessen werden dürfen.
                  

                     Ich möchte deswegen zwei Personen erwähnen: Ich möchte Herrn Präsident Tusk erwähnen, der beim letzten Chinagipfel deutlich gemacht hat, dass auch er das so sieht. Ich würde mir wünschen, alle europäischen Führerinnen und Führer würden so klar dazu sprechen wie er. Und ich möchte Herrn Diess erwähnen, den Vorstandsvorsitzenden von VW, der in blamabler Weise gegenüber der BBC erklärt hat, er wisse gar nichts von den Lagern in Xinjiang, von denen Kollegen Scholz gerade sprach. Diese peinliche, unterwürfige Art, nur um den eigenen Gewinn zu mehren, die Menschenrechte zu ignorieren – das geht in Europa nicht!
                  

Jo Leinen,
Verfasser. – Herr Präsident! Frau Mogherini, Sie erinnern sich bestimmt daran, dass ich Sie bei der ersten Sitzung dieser Wahlperiode gebeten habe, eine neue Chinastrategie für die Europäische Union zu erarbeiten – und das nicht nur für unsere wirtschaftlichen Beziehungen, sondern auch darüber hinaus für die politischen Beziehungen. Und ich muss Ihnen danken: Sie haben das ja gemacht. Wir haben eine erneuerte Chinastrategie der Europäischen Union, die etwas genauer hinschaut, was denn in diesem großen Land passiert und wie wir damit umgehen.
                  

                     China hat einen Wirtschaftsaufschwung, der weltweit einmalig ist – 700 Millionen Menschen aus der Armut herausgenommen. Das ist eine positive Seite. Aber was wir heute bedauern, ist der enorme Rückschritt bei den Freiheiten und den Möglichkeiten, die die Menschen dort haben. Wir wissen, dass seit dem letzten Parteitag die Partei alles bestimmt, in allen Lebenslagen bestimmen will und insofern die Möglichkeiten für die Menschen und für Gruppen innerhalb der chinesischen Bevölkerung sehr eng geworden sind. Und vor allen Dingen die Religionsfreiheit ist enorm unter Druck, obwohl sie in der chinesischen Verfassung steht.
                  

                     Wir haben kürzlich ja den Gipfel gehabt, und da steht drin: Die Menschenrechte sind universell und unteilbar, und ich glaube, die EU muss das gegenüber China einfordern. Es gibt nur noch wenige Instanzen in der Welt, die sich das wegen der neuen Macht, die China hat, zutrauen. Die EU muss ein Bannerträger der Menschenrechte sein, und Sie sollten das in Ihrer Politik auch immer wieder tun.
                  

Michaela Šojdrová,
Autorka. – Pane předsedající, máme před sebou návrh usnesení, který upozorňuje na žalostnou situaci náboženských a etnických menšin v Číně. Není to poprvé. Opakovaně se vracíme k nepřijatelné situaci, která panuje v Číně, v této nejlidnatější zemi na světě, v zemi, která má bohaté duchovní tradice.
                  

                     Jsem velmi ráda, že jsme našli tak širokou shodu a chci všem spoluautorům poděkovat za to, že jsme dokázali i přes různé přístupy najít opravdu koncensus. Je to velmi důležité, protože Čína je pro nás důležitá. Je důležité, aby Čína naplňovala svoji vlastní ústavu, právo na svobodu vyznání. Zatím je to naopak. Křesťané jsou perzekuováni, kostely ničeny, duchovní jsou zatýkáni. V mé vlastní zemi, v České republice, máme více než sto žadatelů o azyl z Číny.
                  

                     Toto usnesení upozorňuje na perzekuci etnických menšin, jako jsou Tibeťané a Ujgurové. Posledně jmenovaní jsou navíc obětí nedávno obnoveného systému koncentračních táborů a také elektronického sledování. V této souvislosti zmiňujeme konkrétní případy lidí a žádáme jejich okamžité propuštění. Za všechny uvedu například doživotně odsouzeného ujgurského ekonoma, intelektuála, ochránce práv lidu Ilhama Tohtiho. Dočkáme se někdy jeho propuštění? Snad ano, tak jako jsme se dočkali propuštění Nelsona Mandely nebo Václava Havla.
                  

                     Žádáme sankce pro osoby, které se podílejí na současných represích v provincii Sin-ťiang. Proto také souhlasím s vysláním nezávislé mise do této provincie. Šance, že čínský režim sám obnoví dodržování lidských práv, není velká. Proto Evropská unie musí trvat na svém.
                  

Nathalie Griesbeck,
auteure. – Monsieur le Président, le sommet UE-Chine d'avril nous a laissé un goût amer lorsque, dans notre dialogue avec le géant chinois, la question des droits de l'homme et des minorités religieuses et ethniques a été une fois de plus éludée.
                  

                     Si la Chine réaffirme bien timidement dans la déclaration que tous les droits de l'homme sont, dit-elle, universels, indivisibles, interdépendants, indissociables, on assiste pourtant à des pressions alarmantes sur les libertés des minorités, qu'il s'agisse du Xinjiang avec les Ouïgours, qu'il s'agisse des destructions d'églises, des actes de torture ou de répression, sous couvert de sinisation, ou qu'il s'agisse de la région autonome du Tibet, où Pékin a déployé des mesures de surveillance et de contrôle inouïes vis-à-vis des Tibétains et même interdit l'accès aux observateurs internationaux et aux journalistes. C'est ce que nous n'avons cessé de dénoncer avec Thomas Mann et l'intergroupe Tibet.
                  

                     Il appartient à notre continent européen non pas de donner des leçons, mais de montrer que les droits de l'homme ne sont pas négociables. C'est le sens de la résolution.
                  

                     Je voudrais profiter, cher Président, de cette intervention, qui sera ma dernière dans l'hémicycle, au terme de trois mandats, pour remercier chaleureusement et très sincèrement tous les collègues, toutes les équipes géniales avec lesquelles j'ai eu l'occasion de travailler, tous les services du Parlement. Ces 15 années passées au service de l'Europe ont été pour moi vraiment très riches grâce à eux tous et je poursuivrai ce combat au service de l'humanisme et de l'Europe.
                  

Tunne Kelam,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, this is one of the large last urgencies during this mandate and the message is very urgent. The human rights situation and religious freedom is more and more suppressed in Beijing. Freedom of conscience has reached a new low and religious groups are under strict control, and 7 000 crosses were taken down from churches during the last year. It looks like the Chinese Communist regime wants to establish absolute control over churches and beliefs.
Equally alarming is the situation of national minorities, especially Tibetans and Uyghurs, but the expression of concern is not enough. What is urgent is that the EU Council and Member States live up to their obligations to promote human rights, democracy and the rule of law in all external relations, without exception. We can make a difference by not being satisfied with a tasteless 37 rounds of human rights dialogue. By insisting on free access to Xinjiang Province and Tibet, applying the principle of reciprocity, by enforcing targeted personal sanctions against Chinese officials responsible for suppression of human rights and traditional freedoms.

Josef Weidenholzer,
im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wie sich China entwickelt und wie wir unsere Beziehungen zu dieser aufstrebenden Region gestalten, wird ganz wesentlich die europäische Zukunft bestimmen – nicht nur ökonomisch, sondern auch gesellschaftlich. Die Entwicklungen in diesem Land, das zum wichtigsten Akteur auf multilateraler Ebene geworden ist, sind besorgniserregend. Obwohl die internationalen Konventionen formal anerkannt werden, kommt es immer häufiger zu gravierenden Verletzungen der Meinungsfreiheit, die Grenzen des Möglichen werden laufend verschoben, wie etwa dieser Tage mit der Verurteilung von Benny Tai.
                  

                     Besonders besorgniserregend ist die systematische Verletzung der Religionsfreiheit. Sie trifft alle – Muslime, Christen, Buddhisten. Was momentan in der Provinz Xinjiang den muslimischen Uiguren widerfährt, wäre noch vor wenigen Jahren unvorstellbar gewesen. Erschreckend ist der Einsatz moderner Überwachungstechnologien und Repressionsmethoden. Nur wenn wir das jetzt stoppen, können wir verhindern, dass das Schule macht.
                  

Charles Tannock,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, discrimination against religious and ethnic minorities is not a new phenomenon in China, yet recent reports are so alarming that human rights defenders are comparing the Strike Hard Campaign in Xinjiang with the hard-line policies common during the Cultural Revolution. Over a million ethnic Kazakhs, Uyghurs and other minorities are being forced into re-education camps and placed under surveillance. It is a positive step, however, that EU diplomats in Beijing have been invited to visit the Xinjiang region. But such a visit would only be meaningful if unfettered access to re-education camps and their inmates were granted.
I would also urge the EU Special Envoy for the Promotion of Freedom of Religion or Belief to request a visit to the region. In the next mandate, the EU must continue to robustly act to promote full respect for the rule of law and human rights in the People's Republic of China, which under President Xi, sadly, seems to have taken a step backwards.

Marietje Schaake,
on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, as we speak, approximately one million people in China find themselves in arbitrary detention in camps that have been described by the UN as political indoctrination camps and no-rights zones, and we cannot look away or be blinded by the gold rush that our companies are seeing when they want to do business in China. Bit by bit, the Chinese Government is building up an extensive mass surveillance system over the Uyghurs living in the Xinjiang province and such measures, including the use of spyware, are heavy violations of the rights of privacy for these people.
The new EU-China strategy, which I think is urgent and welcome, should have as its first action to address issues of ‘shared concern’ and I believe human rights should really top the list. We need to look further than just talking, and consistently see concerns about human rights violations raised at the highest political level. I also believe it is urgent that we look at the commercial markets of surveillance technology.

Jordi Solé,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, the case of China and the repression of religious and ethnic minorities is a perfect example of the need for the EU to be consistent and strong when defending human rights, no matter how big, how powerful or how strategic the country where violations of human rights occur is.
Human rights are universal, and human rights violations are not more or less severe depending on the size of the country or its economic or political power. Whenever they happen and wherever they happen, we need to be vocal and we need to act consequently.
Regretfully, too many minority groups, national, religious or linguistic minorities are discriminated against and persecuted across the world just because they want to preserve their own identities and cultures. We must never turn a blind eye to assimilation policies usually carried out in the name of national greatness. Countries that impose on their people one identity, one language, one culture, or one religion might be big but they are not great.

Cristian Dan Preda (PPE). – Monsieur le Président, cela fait plusieurs mois que notre groupe essaye d'inscrire une résolution d'urgence sur ce sujet à l'ordre du jour. Je suis content que nous y soyons enfin parvenus pour cette dernière session de notre Parlement.
                  

                     Nous avons d'ailleurs signalé dans d'autres contextes les violations flagrantes des droits de l'homme en Chine. Différents cas ont déjà été mentionnés: les dix millions d'Ouïghours et de Kazakhs qui se trouvent en détention massive dans les camps de rééducation du Xinjiang, les Tibétains confrontés à des disparitions forcées, à des violences physiques, à des détentions prolongées sans procès ou à des arrestations pour leur pratique religieuse. Je me dois également de mentionner les chrétiens, qui se trouvent constamment harcelés. Leurs maisons et leurs églises sont démolies, leurs pasteurs et leurs prêtres arrêtés. Tout cela donne une image tout à fait différente de ce que Xi Jinping veut transmettre au monde entier.
                  

                     Je veux aussi profiter de cette dernière intervention pour saluer le travail que vous avez accompli, Madame la Haute représentante, durant ces cinq dernières années dans le domaine des affaires étrangères et des droits de l'homme, qui en sont une composante essentielle aux yeux de l'Europe. C'est, je crois, ce qui fait le propre de l'Europe et il faut continuer sur cette ligne-là.
                  

                     J'en profite enfin pour dire au revoir à mes collègues. Je quitte le Parlement et je vais suivre de loin ce qui va se passer ici. C'est vraiment une institution magnifique.
                  

Ryszard Czarnecki (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Ja się nie będę żegnał, startuję w wyborach europejskich ze stolicy mojego kraju, z Warszawy, i jestem optymistą, ale dzisiaj o sprawach ważniejszych niż mój udział w wyborach. Chodzi o prawa chrześcijan i prawa innych mniejszości religijnych w Chińskiej Republice Ludowej. To jest bardzo ważna kwestia, ja się cieszę, że ten temat jest poruszany. Ja jestem za rozwojem relacji Unia Europejska – Chiny, za rozwojem racji gospodarczych, to się nam powinno opłacać, to się opłaca. Natomiast to nie może być tak, że prawa ludzi wierzących będą przehandlowane za to, żebyśmy mogli robić biznesy z Pekinem. Tutaj chciałbym powiedzieć bardzo wyraźnie, że nie można kupować milczenia Europy w tej kwestii. Na koniec przypomnę debatę na temat Ujgurów sprzed paru lat, wtedy odrzucono poprawkę odnośnie chrześcijan. Na szczęście dzisiaj tak nie będzie.
                  

Thomas Mann (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Vor einem Monat habe ich den Dalai Lama in Dharamsala in Indien getroffen – am 60. Jahrestag des Aufstands der Tibeter gegen die chinesischen Besatzer. Vor circa 3 000 Menschen stellte ich die jahrelange Unterstützung des Europäischen Parlaments vor – für die Tibeter zur Wahrung ihrer Identität, Religion, Kultur. Unsere Entschließungen, Debatten, Konferenzen, unsere Ausstellungen, Demonstrationen und die monatlichen Treffen der Tibet Interest Group sprechen eine klare Sprache. Unter dem Vorwand, Sicherheit und Stabilität zu schaffen, haben die chinesischen Behörden die Lage in Tibet weiter verschärft. Wir protestieren gegen die willkürlichen Verhaftungen, die Misshandlungen, die Umerziehungslager.
                  

                     Dies ist meine letzte Rede nach fast 25 Jahren als Europaabgeordneter. Ich hoffe, die Arbeit der Tibetunterstützer wird fortgesetzt – mit der gleichen Leidenschaft meiner Kolleginnen und Kollegen wie Natalie Griesbeck, Tunne Kelam, Csaba Sógor, Cristian Dan Preda, Kollege Belder: Die haben sich so engagiert. Das Europäische Parlament ist und bleibt die Stimme der Menschenrechte. Tashi Delek!


Marek Jurek (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Sytuacja chrześcijan w Chinach jest ciągle dramatyczna, władze stosują tak drastyczne metody prześladowań jak na przykład utrudnianie wychowania religijnego dzieci, co stanowi fundamentalne naruszenie praw rodziny. Dochodzi do burzenia kościołów albo, tak jak w prowincji Hebei, do więzienia biskupów czy księży. Wiele miesięcy temu przed tym wszystkim przestrzegał kardynał Zen.
                  

                     Co możemy zrobić w tej sytuacji? Przede wszystkim możemy pokazać, że są to sprawy dla nas zasadniczo ważne. Wiem, jaką rolę w dyplomacji odgrywają gesty. I od dyplomatów reprezentujących Unię Europejską powinniśmy oczekiwać znaków miłości, szacunku, przywiązania do chrześcijaństwa, kontaktów ze wspólnotami chrześcijańskimi, a nie aprobować bezduszną neutralność czy obojętność. Co do polityki praw człowieka i polityki w ogóle: Chiny muszą wiedzieć, że ich stosunek do chrześcijan będzie rzutować na nasze relacje dwustronne.
                  

Krzysztof Hetman (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Sytuacja mniejszości etnicznych w Chinach, w szczególności chrześcijan, Ujgurów i Kazachów, jest bardzo niepokojąca, a nawet niekiedy określana jest przez badaczy mianem ludobójstwa kulturowego. W celu zniszczenia tożsamości narodowej mniejszości etnicznych ich konstytucyjne prawa do kultywowania swoich tradycji oraz wierzeń, a także wolności słowa i zgromadzeń są pogwałcone. Szczególnie niepokojąca jest sytuacja Ujgurów, którzy umieszczani są w obozach reedukacji, zaś ich dzieci są oddzielane od rodzin i umieszczane w sierocińcach. Wspominałem już o tym na tej sali pół roku temu i niestety sytuacja w Chinach nie uległa jakiejkolwiek zmianie. Dlatego jeszcze raz z całą mocą chciałbym podkreślić, iż Unia Europejska nie może zgadzać się na te praktyki i musi domagać się od rządu chińskiego natychmiastowego zamknięcia obozów, uwolnienia niesłusznie zatrzymanych osób oraz zaprzestania łamania praw mniejszości etnicznych.
                  

Mark Demesmaeker (ECR). – Voorzitter, in oktober vorig jaar debatteerden wij hier over de massale willekeurige detenties in de autonome regio Xinjiang. Ik citeerde toen het beginvers van een van de oudste Duitse protestliederen tegen de onderdrukking van de vrijheid: ‘De gedachten zijn vrij. Wie kan ze beletten?’.
                  

                     Toch is dat precies wat China probeert. Al wat niet past binnen het één-China-beleid, wordt platgewalst. In Xinjiang betreft het de Oeigoeren en Kazakken, in Tibet de Tibetanen. China hanteert een uitgekiende strategie: een zacht imago naar de buitenwereld, gericht op economische samenwerking, ook met de EU. Maar intern gaat men zijn gang met vele politieke gevangenen die men probeert te genezen van hun ideologische ziekte tot de gedachten zuiver zijn. Achter het China dat zich openstelt voor de wereld, gaat een meedogenloos staatsapparaat schuil.
                  

                     Daarom herhaal ik wat ik vorig jaar zei: de EU heeft de plicht om de Chinese autoriteiten in duidelijke taal te vragen de vervolging te stoppen, de gevangenen vrij te laten en de kampen te sluiten. Want, voorzitter, ‘de gedachten zijn vrij’ en geen overheid die dat uiteindelijk kan beletten.
                  

Pavel Svoboda (PPE). – Pane předsedající, dnes jsem si schválně vzal kravatu červené barvy, barvy krve, barvy utrpení lidí pronásledovaných komunistickou Čínou. Nejde jenom o Tibet, ale jde především o křesťany. Kostely jsou demolovány, bible jsou zabavovány, duchovní jsou vězněni. Odhadem padesát milionů, celá polovina čínských křesťanů je pronásledována. Duchovní se musejí hlásit na policejních stanicích, jako kdyby šlo o kriminálníky. Lidem mladším osmnácti let se brání v účasti na bohoslužbách.
                  

                     Za těchto okolností Evropská unie musí zřetelně a při každém jednání na vysoké úrovni učinit prohlášení odsuzující diskriminaci křesťanů v Číně. Evropská unie a členské státy také z tohoto pronásledování musí vyvodit důsledky, když čínští občané žádají o azyl v Evropě. Jinak nejsme Evropou, která si zakládá na ochraně základních práv.
                  

Catch-the-eye procedure


José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Mogherini, apesar de o Presidente Xi Jinping procurar passar para a opinião pública mundial a imagem de modernizador da China contemporânea, a verdade é, que desde que chegou ao poder, em 2013, se tem deteriorado a situação dos direitos humanos, intensificado a repressão das minorias étnicas que vivem num país de maioria Han.
                  

                     Face às graves restrições à liberdade de movimento, aos atos de tortura e à discriminação linguística de que são vítimas tibetanos e mongóis, aos sistemas de vigilância em massa que pretendem criar perfis raciais daqueles uigures que ainda escapam às tentativas de limpeza étnica e aos chamados campos de reeducação da Região Autónoma de Xinjiang, apenas para dar alguns exemplos, exige-se que a União alcance uma posição conjunta de condenação destas vastas campanhas de racismo e opressão e que os acordos bilionários assinados entre aquele país e alguns Estados-Membros não façam com que o dinheiro vença o respeito pelos princípios democráticos que estiveram na génese do projeto europeu.
                  

Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já se chci také přihlásit k navrženému usnesení. Stav lidských práv v Číně je opravdu katastrofální. Byli zde zmiňováni Ujguři, Tibeťané. Já bych chtěl, paní Mogheriniová, se s vámi podělit o informaci, že jsem jako zastupitel Prahy s ostatními kolegy z vedení tohoto hlavního města před měsícem přijímal premiéra exilové tibetské vlády. Ty informace, které nám poskytoval o tom, jaká je situace v Tibetu, jsou opravdu katastrofické. Je to destrukce tibetského národa, snaha převychovávat mladé Tibeťany, omezování práv rodilých Tibeťanů, preference Číňanů, kteří se do Tibetu přistěhovali, opravdu je to hrozné. Takže musím říci, že tento náš dojem nás vedl k tomu, že jsme v Praze oficiálně vyvěsili tibetskou vlajku a oficiálně jsme se k Tibetu přihlásili.
                  

                     Je dobře, že to je v duchu naší evropské politiky, musíme dělat vše pro to, aby se do budoucna politika Číny vůči etnickým a náboženským menšinám změnila. Je to naše morální povinnost.
                  

Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já bych se chtěl vyslovit jako moji kolegové k tomuto tématu, které je skutečně tíživé. Ty hrozivé zprávy, které jdou jak z ujgurské, tak tibetské oblasti, anebo potlačování náboženských menšin, to skutečně, myslím, musí na tomto plénu odsoudit každý z nás.
                  

                     Musíme volat po propuštění takto nezákonně držených občanů Číny a samozřejmě volat i po tom, aby byly dodržovány závazky, které na sebe Čína vzala. My bychom měli o těchto závazcích mluvit na našich setkáních s čínskými představiteli a zároveň na našich delegacích. Pokud vyrážíme do Číny, neměli bychom se skutečně bát mluvit o těchto tématech. Já mám někdy pocit, že záměrně z důvodů diplomatických o tom nehovoříme, ale kdo jiný má hovořit než poslanec Evropského parlamentu, i pokud je na delegaci v Číně. Toto bych chtěl, prosím, zdůraznit. Myslím, že bychom na to měli pamatovat i v následujícím období. Ta hrozivá situace v Číně se nezmění tím, že budeme mlčet.
                  

João Pimenta Lopes (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, assistimos mais uma vez ao exercício de hipocrisia da União Europeia na instrumentalização dos direitos humanos como forma de interferir e ingerir sobre países soberanos, procurando alavancar uma posição de domínio ou de condicionar o seu desenvolvimento. Uma União Europeia que não é referência nem tem legitimidade em matéria de direitos humanos, seja por violação grosseira, como é bem patente nas migrações, seja pela cumplicidade com a sua violação com os seus aliados como os Estados Unidos, Arábia Saudita e Israel, entre outros, na agressão a países e povos.
                  

                     A presente resolução não é mais do que uma subjugação e alinhamento à política de confronto de Trump contra a China e a operação de desestabilização interna daquele país.
                  

                     O que aqui hoje como sempre defendemos, à luz da Constituição da República Portuguesa, é a cooperação com países terceiros, baseada no respeito pela soberania e não ingerência, tal como inscritos na Carta das Nações Unidas. Esse é o caminho que melhor serve e salvaguarda, nomeadamente os interesses de Portugal nas relações com aquele ou qualquer outro país.
                  

Jean-Luc Schaffhauser (ENF). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, la Chine est un grand pays, un empire, c'est même l'empire du Milieu. Cet empire, au XIXe siècle, nous l'avons détruit, nous les Occidentaux: par la politique de la canonnière qui l'a obligé à ouvrir ses frontières, par l'opium imposé, par le marxisme idéologique qui a contribué également à détruire totalement ce pays.
                  

                     Et ce pays s'est reconstruit, malgré tout. Il s'est reconstruit grâce à une politique libérale organisée par l'État, orientée vers le développement économique.
                  

                     Alors qui sommes-nous pour donner des leçons? Certes, il y a le Tibet, les chrétiens – et je suis d'accord – mais qui sommes-nous, nous qui avons fait la guerre pour l'Alsace, nous qui avons fait deux guerres mondiales et plusieurs guerres de religion, nous qui nous sommes entretués pour des raisons politiques, sous couvert de la religion?
                  

                     Alors je veux bien qu'on critique la Chine, mais il serait peut-être profitable à ce Parlement qu'il s'en tienne à la charte des Nations unies.
                  

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Federica Mogherini,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, as some of you have mentioned, we have today, compared to five years ago, a new strategy with China, but most importantly, we have a new kind of relationship with China. I would say a more intense one, but also a more frank and open one, based on clear words, clear principles and also clear interests that we are not shying away from affirming in the clearest possible manner – trying to build some consistency in the approach the European Union and all its institutions are taking towards China.
Let me here make an appeal to each of you. You are representing here European citizens, but you're also representing political groups and national parties in political groups. Many of you that have taken the floor today, saying very reasonable and very important words – most, probably, of you also belong to parties that have government responsibilities in your own Member States. So I would like to hear those voices, those clear words also, in your addresses to your own governments whenever they meet their Chinese counterparts, to be straightforward as the European institutions are – as, I have to say, during the last summit last week in Brussels, we have been, both the Commission, the Council, myself – to the top leaders of the Chinese authorities on human rights and passing the clear message that to Europeans, human rights are not less important than economic interests. On the contrary, they are as important, if not more important, than our economic interests.
I think this is a message that we have to, consistently and in a coherent manner as Europeans, pass at all levels. The Parliament (and I thank you for that), the Commission, the Council and single Member States individually taken in their relations bilaterally with China.
China has made some progress in the field of economic and social rights, but the general human rights situation, as you have mentioned, continues to deteriorate, particularly on civilian and political rights. Human rights defenders and lawyers continue to be arrested and detained; fundamental freedoms continue to be violated. We've all seen the reports on the situation in Xinjiang, with political re-education camps targeting Uyghurs and other minorities; mass surveillance; restrictions on travel. And, as I said, we raise these issues, including some individual cases, with the Chinese authorities, both in our bilateral contacts and in our human rights dialogues. We also (here I should move to the other side of the Hemicycle – you will forgive me if I stay at this place), for the first time ever, invited to the Foreign Affairs Council the Foreign Minister, State Counsellor of China, Mr Yang Jiechi, and I was proud to see that, united, the Member States passed messages consistently at the level of foreign ministers on issues of relevance to our human rights dialogue.
But we also raise these issues in the context, in the framework of our counter-terrorism policies, and I stress how important it is for us to be consistent and coherent across the institutions of the European Union on these messages, because there might be the tendency in our interlocutors – not only when it comes to China, but also with others, when we talk about human rights – of thinking that it's the European Union institutions that raise human rights issues, and then Member States or individual Members of Parliament do business. I think it is very important that we are consistent in the messages we pass, and I think that we are making, possibly, some progress in this consistency and this unity, so that our Chinese interlocutors see that this is important for every single European, every single European Member State, every single political family of this Hemicycle.
I'm taking here the opportunity again, publicly, to urge China to allow meaningful access to Xinjiang for independent observers. Some of you have mentioned that. Let me add my voice once again on the call for independent observers, including for the UN and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Likewise, freedom of religion, of belief, is often violated in Tibet, and restrictions to access to the region are also in place. We have called on the Chinese authorities to allow reciprocal access to Tibet for European journalists, diplomats and families. We raise all these concerns at every occasion, as I said, at the highest level, including at our summit last week. Publicly and privately, this was clearly underlined.
We discussed the situation in Xinjiang, in Tibet, freedom of religion or belief and the rights of persons belonging to minorities. Also, during our latest human rights dialogue, just a few weeks ago, we raised the issue of the shrinking space for civil society also in the framework of the legal reform, and we addressed the autonomy of Hong Kong.
This exercise is often not an easy one – it is sometimes frustrating, and yet I believe this is the best tool we have to engage with our Chinese partners, to be clear, to be united in the messages we pass, and to promote a change of course on human rights. Our best tool is to keep engaging with China human rights in a respectful but extremely clear manner.
No other global power is doing this in the world today. The global trend on human rights is not encouraging at all. We've discussed this in this Hemicycle, many times. I believe this is exactly one more reason for us not to give up. We cannot afford, as Europeans, I think, to stop engaging. We will continue to advocate for the respect of human rights, be it in China, in a very clear manner, but also all around the word. I'm looking forward to the next discussions on these issues.

(Applause)


PRZEWODNICTWO: BOGUSŁAW LIBERADZKI


Wiceprzewodniczący


Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.
                     

                        Głosowanie odbędzie się po zakończeniu debat.
                     
6.2.   Cameroon

Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest debata nad sześcioma projektami rezolucji w sprawie Kamerunu (2019/2691(RSP)).
                  

Charles Tannock,
author. – Mr President, the response in Cameroon to a number of internal and external threats to security is one of an increasingly authoritarian nature, with rights to free speech and assembly currently being severely curtailed. The arrests in January of the opposition leader Maurice Kamto and some 200 of his party activists, in response to their protesting following the flawed presidential elections of 2018, is the latest incident of concern. Kamto remains in detention following charges of insurrection, rebellion and crimes against the nation.
Whilst Cameroon has been an important regional partner in the fight against terrorism, particularly Boko Haram, which has been active in the Far North Region of the country since 2012, there are many concerns about the misuse of anti-terrorist legislation passed in 2014. Reports regarding the extrajudicial killing of allegedly former members of the terrorist organisation and the activities of vigilante groups suggests also that a growing number of innocent civilians are in danger of being targeted. Meanwhile, the Government's response to the protests of its anglophone majority in the North-West and South-West regions is also of grave concern.

Miguel Urbán Crespo,
autor. – Señor presidente, en Camerún las fuerzas armadas están acusadas de cometer graves violaciones de derechos humanos contra la población civil. Están acusadas, también, de detener arbitrariamente a manifestantes que denunciaban irregularidades durante las últimas elecciones. En las regiones anglófonas, el ejército llegó a disparar a manifestantes desarmados desde un helicóptero, causando decenas de muertos.
                  

                     Hay evidencias de que armas europeas han sido utilizadas para ejecutar extrajudicialmente a decenas de personas. Hay vídeos que muestran cómo militares cameruneses han asesinado a dos mujeres y a sus bebés, por ser sospechosas de pertenecer a Boko Haram.
                  

                     Estados miembros, como España, están vendiendo armas al país, a pesar de que está prohibido por la Posición Común del Consejo de 2008. Pero esto no se ha querido mencionar en este texto. La Unión Europea y sus Estados miembros están proporcionando formación militar y ayuda logística, así como entrenamiento y equipamiento militar y de seguridad, a Camerún. Una ayuda que ha sido suspendida por otros países como los Estados Unidos, precisamente por las flagrantes violaciones de derechos humanos cometidas en Camerún.
                  

                     Exigimos a la Unión Europea que prohíba la asesoría militar y la venta de armas y de equipamiento militar a Camerún, porque mientras el respeto de los derechos humanos se quede en palabras y no en hechos seremos cómplices de sus delitos. Y no podemos serlo, señorías.
                  

Željana Zovko,
author. – Mr President, even on this last day of the final plenary session of our mandate, we show our commitment to fight for justice and a humane world. Today this brings us to Cameroon. Numerous reports from human rights monitors have documented the excessive use of force by security forces, and continued human rights violations against citizens. Several members of an opposition party, including its leader Maurice Kamto, and a large number of protesters and sympathisers are imprisoned. On top of that the authorities of Cameroon have repeatedly restricted freedom of expression by shutting down the internet and harassing and detaining journalists.
These actions are fundamentally against the values and standards that we promote on the international scene. For that reason we, as the European Parliament, must act. We must call upon the authorities of Cameroon to immediately and unconditionally release all political opponents, and any other citizens who have been detained solely for a political purpose. We need to condemn the use of excessive force and violation of the freedom of expression, and stress and request an independent and transparent investigation into this violating actions.
Looking at our own possibilities, the European Union can also make a difference. We should take advantage of the political leverage provided by the development aid programme to enhance the defence of human rights in Cameroon. Additionally, the European Union should also consider providing technical assistance and political support based on our experience in other conflict regions and development programmes in order to assist the development of a stronger democratic Cameroonian society. This motion works for a better future for the all Cameroon's citizens and deserves all your support.

Judith Sargentini,
indiener. – Voorzitter, in oktober 2018 waren er verkiezingen in Kameroen en president Paul Biya is opnieuw verkozen. Hij is al aan de macht sinds 1982. Hoe is het mogelijk? Het is dan ook niet vreemd dat mensen daartegen in protest gaan.
                  

                     Volgens mij is de kern van de resolutie van vandaag dat het Europees Parlement tegen Paul Biya zegt: laat Maurice Kamto en zijn mensen vrij. Democratisch protest hoort bij een land. Laat geen burgers voor een militaire rechtbank verschijnen, want daar horen burgers niet thuis. En hou op met het zoeken van de confrontatie en de verschillen omdat mensen verschillende talen spreken. Dat moet in dit Europees Parlement toch ook weerklank vinden.
                  

                     Het Europees Parlement besteedt niet zo vaak aandacht aan Kameroen. Maar het is goed dat we het nu doen. De situatie daar ligt in de handen van Paul Biya en hij kan verandering brengen.
                  

Marietje Schaake,
author. – Mr President, after the elections that have led to many questions in Cameroon, peaceful strikes and demonstrations escalated into violent clashes and security forces were involved in serious human rights violations. Hundreds of people have died, hundreds of thousands are displaced, and activists have been rounded up and jailed. Oftentimes, anti-terror laws and heavy security measures are abused to justify these crackdowns. There have been cases of torture, forced disappearances and extra-judicial killings. Freedom of expression is not respected, whether online or offline. So this is a very, very serious escalation. We urge the security forces in Cameroon to stop the use of this disproportionate violence and to respect the human rights of all its citizens. There need to be investigations into the allegations of excessive use of force and human rights violations, and it is very important that, under the leadership of the African Union, there will be peace talks that we, as the European Union and all of our leaders, need to support.

Juan Fernando López Aguilar,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, as we all know, Paul Biya happens to be one of the longest-serving rulers in the whole of Africa, competing with Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, and now only with Teodor Obiang in Equatorial Guinea – the seventh election leading to massive demonstrations against rigged elections – and Maurice Kamto, the leader of the Mouvement pour la Renaissance du Cameroun was detained and is now in prison facing charges, which could lead in a military court to nothing less than a life sentence or the death penalty.
So we urge, first of all, that this violence, harassment and banning of demonstrations be stopped. We urge credible, transparent and free elections through electoral reform. We urge the European Union, along with the African Union and the United Nations, to exert a role of mediation in order to secure the release not only of Maurice Kamto but also of 200 political party followers, who were also detained. Finally, of course, we urge the European Union to take measures in order to scale down the level of cooperation with a country which does not behave democratically.

Ryszard Czarnecki,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Pytanie: po co zajmujemy się Kamerunem, krajem odległym od Europy? To jest sensowne, ponieważ po pierwsze, jest to kraj, który kiedyś był kolonią jednego z państw europejskich, a więc określone państwo przez wieki czerpało z tego zyski, a więc jest jednak tutaj pewne moralne zobowiązanie. Po drugie dlatego, że my kierujemy do tego kraju także pewną pomoc na zasadzie humanitarnej, więc mamy prawo oczekiwać, że będziemy mieć komfort tego, że kierujemy tę pomoc do państwa, które przestrzega pewnych standardów, praw człowieka. Wydaje mi się, że ten nasz głos ponad podziałami politycznymi powinien zabrzmieć bardzo jednoznacznie, mocno, solidarnie, tak to jest czynione. Tylko wtedy nasz głos będzie usłyszany w Kamerunie, ale także w innych krajach afrykańskich, które chcą z nami handlować, a często nie pamiętają o prawach opozycji, nie pamiętają o prawach człowieka – tak być nie może.
                  

Ignazio Corrao,
a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Alto rappresentante, il Camerun è un paese che sta affrontando simultaneamente numerose e gravi sfide, le minacce di Boko Haram al Nord, problemi al confine con la vicina Repubblica Centrafricana ad Est e ribellioni armate di separatisti nelle regioni anglofone del Nordovest e del Sudovest e per questo ha tutta la nostra solidarietà.
                  

                     Tuttavia, oggi più che mai è importante ribadire con forza che a queste minacce non si può rispondere con un uso sproporzionato della forza e con la limitazione grave e sistematica dei diritti fondamentali. In particolare condanniamo con forza gli atti di tortura, le sparizioni forzate e le esecuzioni extragiudiziali compiuti dai servizi di sicurezza. Ciò poi è particolarmente grave quando la forza pubblica viene usata per reprimere il legittimo dissenso e perpetrare la permanenza al potere di un presidente che è in carica dal 1982.
                  

                     L'uso eccessivo della forza contro i manifestanti, l'incarceramento degli oppositori politici, la chiusura di Internet e gli attacchi ai giornalisti non possono mai e in nessun modo essere giustificati come mezzi per reagire alle pure importanti minacce a cui il Camerun è soggetto.
                  

Dominique Bilde,
au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, c'est tout d'abord un hommage appuyé que nous devrions rendre aux forces armées, ainsi qu'aux civils camerounais engagés dans une lutte sans merci contre Boko Haram,. Dd'autant que ce combat résolu contre le terrorisme, le Cameroun l'aura porté bien au-delà de ses propres frontières, dans le cadre du partenariat transsaharien, puis au sein de la force multinationale mixte. Et c'est en dépit d'une situation intérieure très difficile qu'il a longtemps accueilli des milliers de réfugiés nigérians fuyant la barbarie islamiste.
                  

                     Voilà les faits d'armes du Cameroun, à des années-lumière du portrait au vitriol que certains croient bon de brosser. Ce pays, gage de stabilité dans une région tiraillée par des tensions multiples, se prête mal aux simplifications outrancières.
                  

                     Tout d'abord, parce que les dissensions entre anglophones et francophones sont moins le fait d'antagonismes profonds que d'intérêts économiques bien compris. C'est au large des régions anglophones que gisent les principales réserves nationales d'hydrocarbures et la gestion des entreprises publiques qui les contrôlent constitue un enjeu avoué.
                  

                     Ensuite, parce que des réformes considérables ont été consenties par le gouvernement camerounais, je pense bien sûr à la commission pour le bilinguisme et le multiculturalisme, à l'ouverture élargie, au droit anglo-saxon au sein de la Cour suprême comme de l'École Nationale nationale d'Administration d'administration et de magistrature ou, enfin, au recrutement de professeurs bilingues. Du reste, la société camerounaise plurielle ne saurait se définir par cet unique clivage. Combien d'anglophones vivent aujourd'hui dans des territoires francophones et inversement. ? Tous communient pourtant dans les mêmes valeurs, les mêmes références culturelles et dans l'amour de la même patrie. C'est ce Cameroun-là que nous devons soutenir sans parti pris, sans ingérence et surtout sans condescendance.
                  

Cécile Kashetu Kyenge (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il Camerun sta precipitando nella violenza. Il regime trentennale di Paul Biya si sta sgretolando, i turiferari del potere reagiscono calpestando i diritti umani. Il governo organizza ed è accusato di frode elettorale per mantenersi al potere e arresta i leader dell'opposizione, inventando delitti da affibbiare loro. Inoltre, le due province anglofone sono in stato di guerra: il Nord del paese è infetto da Boko Haram, mentre l'Est subisce incursioni di milizie centroafricane.
                  

                     In questi teatri l'esercito governativo combatte contro feroci milizie e forze secessioniste dell'Ambazonia. Denunciamo le milizie, ma cerchiamo di capire le cause profonde del disastro camerunese: esse si chiamano immobilismo governativo, gerontocrazia, malgoverno, frodi elettorali flagranti, nepotismo e tribalismo. Questa è l'origine della crisi del paese e della migrazione di massa dei giovani camerunesi. Biya deve risolvere la crisi, invece di continuare ad organizzare elezioni e frodi elettorali ed arrestare leader onesti.
                  

                     Voglio ringraziare l'Alto rappresentante per il lavoro in un momento difficile, dove gli egoismi degli Stati membri si manifestano con il ritorno dei sovranisti e nazionalisti. Ringrazio inoltre il mio staff, tutta la squadra di interpreti, gli uscieri e gli autisti. Ognuno di loro mi ha trasmesso qualcosa e, se gli elettori italiani lo vorranno, tornerò qui a continuare il mio lavoro.
                  

Jean-Luc Schaffhauser (ENF). – Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, c'est ma dernière intervention dans ce Parlement. Je la fais pour un pays qui m'est très cher, que j'ai sillonné plusieurs fois et dont je suis aussi un peu le fils.
                  

                     Le Cameroun est une mosaïque ethnique, linguistique et religieuse très fragile. Paul Biya est sans doute allé trop loin dans le processus de centralisation, alimentant ainsi le ressentiment des populations anglophones de l'Ouest et le séparatisme musulman du Nord. Mais ce séparatisme est alimenté et instrumentalisé par des puissances extérieures.
                  

                     Paul Biya occupe le pouvoir depuis 37 ans. Ce sont toutefois, chers amis, 37 ans de stabilité. Quand je regarde les autres pays, le Cameroun fait bonne figure. Le président camerounais sait sans doute qu'il ne peut monopoliser le pouvoir jusqu'à sa mort, mais il est pris dans des logiques de pouvoir et de succession. Il sait que, pour l'intérêt de son pays, un processus de transition démocratique et de décentralisation, combiné à un plan de sécurité et de développement, est incontournable. Il faut donc l'y aider, mais de manière discrète et utile. Évitons donc de nous ingérer dans ce processus, à grand renfort de fanfare droit-de-l'hommiste, alors que nous appliquons toujours deux poids, deux mesures, selon les pays africains et selon nos intérêts.
                  

Zgłoszenia z sali


Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, ta debata, která zde proběhla, přesně popsala problémy, ve kterých se Kamerun nachází. My je asi těžko vyřešíme, ale to, co by mohlo být v silách Evropské komise a našich reprezentantů, je zvýšit tlak na současného prezidenta, který vládne od roku 1984, a donutit vládní špičky v Kamerunu, aby protikandidáta současného prezidenta pustili z vězení, aby zkrátka Maurice Kamto za to, že byl aktivista, za to, že si dovolil kandidovat proti současné hlavě státu, nebyl předmětem šikany, diskriminace a hlavně trestní represe, která v Kamerunu funguje. Kamerun se bohužel ani zdaleka neblíží principům právního státu.
                  

                     Tady si myslím, že bychom mohli udělat kus práce. Proto považuji to usnesení za dobré. Kdyby se nám, paní vysoká komisařko, podařilo přimět vedení Kamerunu k tomu, aby své politické oponenty nezavíralo na doživotí do vězení, byl by to alespoň malý posun. Jinak s ostatními věcmi, které zde byly řečeny, souhlasím.
                  

Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η σημερινή μου ομιλία είναι η τελευταία μου σε αυτήν την κοινοβουλευτική περίοδο. Ελπίζω και εύχομαι να είμαστε μαζί ξανά και στην επόμενη κοινοβουλευτική περίοδο, αλλά αυτό βεβαίως θα εξαρτηθεί από τους ίδιους τους έλληνες πολίτες και από το αν θα μου δώσουν την ευκαιρία να επανεκλεγώ στην επόμενη Ευρωβουλή. Σε κάθε περίπτωση, συμπληρώνω 2.532 ομιλίες και παρεμβάσεις εδώ στην ολομέλεια και θα ήθελα, με την αφορμή αυτή, να ευχαριστήσω όλους τους συναδέλφους, να ευχαριστήσω το Προεδρείο και εσάς, κύριε Πρόεδρε, τους διερμηνείς και όλους τους υπαλλήλους του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και να πω ότι θα συνεχίσω να αγωνίζομαι για τον ελληνικό λαό γιατί εγώ παίζω Εθνική Ελλάδος.
                  

                     Από κει και πέρα, σε σχέση με το θέμα μας, πιστεύω ότι πρέπει να στηρίξουμε το Καμερούν και πρέπει να επικρατήσει δημοκρατία σε αυτή την αφρικανική χώρα, για να μπορέσει πραγματικά να προχωρήσει ο λαός του Καμερούν και να επιλυθούν τα προβλήματα.
                  

Fabio Massimo Castaldo (EFDD). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, purtroppo in Camerun la tensione sta raggiungendo livelli insostenibili, quasi da farci temere il rischio di una guerra civile. Nel mese di gennaio circa 200 persone, incluso Maurice Kamto, capo dell'opposizione, sono state arbitrariamente arrestate per aver protestato pacificamente di fronte all'ennesima elezione farlocca di Paul Biya, al potere dal 1982.
                  

                     Ma il governo non si è limitato solo a questo, ha iniziato a dare la caccia anche ai giornalisti e ai media indipendenti disseminando un clima di terrore in tutto il paese. Alla dura repressione politica si sommano inoltre gli scontri sanguinosi nelle regioni del nord-ovest e del sud-ovest, tra esercito e gruppi separatisti armati, reminiscenze di un periodo postcoloniale forse mai veramente concluso. A rimetterci, come sempre, sono i civili, studenti, soprattutto, visto che il target di queste violenze sono spesso scuole e ospedali, distrutti in segno di protesta contro il governo.
                  

                     Chiedo quindi al governo camerunese di rilasciare immediatamente tutti i prigionieri politici e organizzare al più presto un dialogo politico inclusivo per una soluzione pacifica e duratura alla crisi nelle regioni anglofone. All'Alto rappresentante, che saluto e ringrazio, chiedo invece una maggiore pressione diplomatica e un impegno concreto per la difesa dei diritti umani. Non lasciamo che, come spesso accade, l'accordo di Cotonou sia soltanto carta e inchiostro.
                  

Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já bych chtěl ocenit, že i tento dnešní poslední den našeho jednání se věnujeme ochraně lidských práv, a jsem velmi rád, že tato sněmovna je v otázce jednoty lidských práv skutečně jednotná. Je to pro mě důležité poselství, že v tomto tématu vystupujeme takto společně. To skutečně oceňuji.
                  

                     Pokud jde o Kamerun, já bych se chtěl připojit ke svým kolegům. Nepochybně potlačování, zabíjení, mučení, trest smrti bez soudu, to jsou neuvěřitelná zvěrstva. Je to hrůza, nepřípustné porušování lidských práv, kterého se dopouští složky státní moci ve prospěch prezidenta, který je u moci od roku 1982. Je důležité říci, že je to pro nás skutečně nepřijatelné porušování lidských práv. Ačkoliv musíme vyzdvihnout, že Kamerun bojuje proti složkám Boko Haram, tak si nad tím příslovečně v rámci Velikonoc nemůžeme umýt ruce. Je to skutečně naše povinnost se v tuto chvíli ozvat.
                  

Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, is drochscéal an méid atá ag tarlú i gCamarún le déanaí, go háirithe a mhéid a bhaineann le cearta an duine agus, i gcás lucht an fhreasúra, go bhfuil siad á gcaitheamh isteach i bpríosún gan chúis – go háirithe, an ceannaire Maurice Kamto. Dá bhrí sin, is léir go bhfuil na fórsaí slándála ag dul i gcoinne a ndaoine féin. Tá a lán díobh tar éis a bheith díbeartha as a n-áit dúchais agus caite timpeall Camarún ar fad — suas le leathmhilliún díobh — agus tá 30,000 tar éis teitheadh chuig an Nigéir.
                  

                     Dá bhrí sin, is ceart go gcuirfimis brú ar na húdaráis i gCamarún: ar dtús, chun Maurice Kamto agus a chomhghleacaithe a shaoradh; ansin, chun daonlathas a bhunú sa tír, agus go háirithe, chun go mbeadh meáin agus preas saor agus neamhspléach ann. Murach san, ní féidir mórán dul chun cinn a dhéanamh.
                  

Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Pane předsedající, tato urgentní zpráva dává jasně najevo vládě Kamerunu, že Evropský parlament sleduje situaci a nesouhlasí s násilným potlačováním lidských práv a demokratické opozice. Evropská unie má diplomatické i finanční nástroje a my je musíme využívat i k této příležitosti. Já věřím, že paní vysoká představitelka zde slyší tyto výhrady a bude reagovat.
                  

                     Kolegyně a kolegové, já bych chtěla v této chvíli poděkovat všem za spolupráci. Po pět let jsme ve čtvrtek na plenárním jednání projednávali urgentní zprávy o stavu lidských práv a upozorňovali jsme a žádali jsme o propuštění vězňů, pronásledovaných vězňů kvůli svému přesvědčení či politické příslušnosti.
                  

                     Já bych chtěla poděkovat za tu spolupráci. Jsem přesvědčená, že měla velký smysl. Také proto chci obhájit svůj mandát, chci pokračovat a děkuji všem, kteří se i zde v Evropském parlamentu o nás starali.
                  

Csaba Sógor (PPE). – Mr President, just a few weeks ago the Vice-Governor of Tibet said that the human rights situation in Tibet is not just good, but very good. All ethnic groups in the region appreciate the Communist Party's work; they listen and follow the party. Apparently Tibetans never had it any better, enjoying the fruits of fast-paced economic development. Thousands of police and military patrol the streets to ensure they get all the help they need, or perhaps to make sure that they do not accidentally set themselves on fire.
But fortunately, it is not just the Tibetans who have it so good. The Uyghurs also enjoy all the benefits of the 21st century's most advanced artificial intelligence and digital surveillance technologies to make their lives easier and more comfortable. Arguably, they also have access to the world's most extensive lifelong-learning system in dedicated ‘education and training centres’. By the same measure, we could confidently say that the EU-China human rights dialogue is a successful instrument in promoting human rights and our values.
I'm sorry I missed my speaking time due to technical problems. Thanks for listening to my previous China debate speech. It was my last speech after 11 years in the Parliament.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)


Federica Mogherini,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, since the elections in Cameroon last October, we have witnessed tensions in the country, particularly in the so-called Anglophone regions; repression of demonstrations; and a narrowing of the political space. Key opposition figures are under arrest – they face military trials. More than 100 protesters or sympathisers are facing prolonged detentions, and defence lawyers claim that Cameroon's own legal procedures are not being respected. A de facto ban has been imposed on marches and protests of the opposition, which is clearly not in line with the constitutional rights of Cameroonian citizens.
We have been following the situation closely, constantly, on behalf of all the 28 Member States. We've asked for the release of detainees against whom hard evidence cannot be produced, and we have asked for an immediate halt to violence, to human rights violations and hate speech, and I insist on this message today. Thank you for putting this important debate on the agenda on the last day of your mandate, to stress this message in a unified manner.
Regarding the situation in the English-speaking regions of the north-west and south-west, we have consistently called for dialogue as the only way to achieve a sustainable solution, in a non-violent and inclusive manner, respecting fundamental rights and the rule of law. Regrettably, unlawful killings and atrocities continue to be reported regularly, allegedly involving both the security and defence forces and separatist groups. The humanitarian consequences of this situation are alarming, with about half a million internally-displaced people and over 32 000 refugees from Cameroon registered in Nigeria.
We have raised our call for restraint and dialogue directly with the authorities of Cameroon. In particular we are following closely the cases of the 47 Anglophone leaders that are in jail, insisting on the need for a fair and transparent trial.
These tensions add to the continuing attacks that some of you mentioned by Boko Haram in the far north, as well as in Chad, Niger and Nigeria. We know that Boko Haram is not invincible and has suffered major setbacks, yet we are seeing civilian deaths and also losses by the security forces in Cameroon.
Given that new refugees from Nigeria have recently arrived in the far north region of Cameroon, I wish to join the recent appeals from the UNHCR that the universal principle of non-refoulement has to be respected fully. These are the reasons why we need to continue our humanitarian support as part of the international humanitarian response on the different and various fronts.
If we consider both the internally-displaced people and the refugees that are coming from Nigeria and the Central African Republic altogether, there are about one million people in need of help, and I believe we have a humanitarian duty we need to respond to. This is something, obviously, we cannot forget when assessing our future support to the people of Cameroon.
At the same time, we will continue to push for the respect of human rights in Cameroon and to ask for light to be shed on human rights violations fully.

Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.
                  

                     Głosowanie odbędzie się po zakończeniu debat.
                  
6.3.   Brunei

Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest debata nad siedmioma projektami rezolucji w sprawie Brunei (2019/2692(RSP)).
                  

Barbara Lochbihler,
Verfasserin. – Herr Präsident! Brunei führte bereits 2014 das Scharia-Strafrecht ein, das nun am 3. April mit der letzten Umsetzungsphase in Kraft tritt. Gleichgeschlechtliche oder außereheliche sexuelle Beziehungen und Abtreibung werden damit beispielsweise mit Steinigung bestraft. Auf Diebstahl steht das Amputieren einer Hand, bei Diffamierung des Propheten Mohammed wird die Todesstrafe verhängt. Kinder ab sieben Jahren sind schon voll strafmündig.
                  

                     Brunei, ein Staat, in dem der Sultan sowohl Staatsoberhaupt als auch Ministerpräsident ist und über die gesamte exekutive Gewalt verfügt, muss dieses Scharia-Strafgesetz unbedingt wieder aufheben. Dieses steht in krassem Kontrast zu internationalen Rechtsnormen. Zudem muss Gleichheit vor dem Gesetz gelten, unabhängig von Geschlecht, sexueller Identität, Herkunft und Religion.
                  

                     In Brunei besteht seit 1957 ein De-facto-Todesstrafenmoratorium. Dieses Moratorium sollte weitergeführt werden als ein Schritt hin zur Abschaffung der Todesstrafe. Und nur, wenn Brunei das Scharia-Strafrecht in Übereinstimmung mit internationalem Recht überarbeitet, sollte die Europäische Union eine mögliche Fortsetzung der Verhandlungen über ein Partnerschafts- und Kooperationsabkommen überhaupt wieder in Erwägung ziehen. Die EU sollte auch dafür sorgen, dass die Menschenrechtssituation in Brunei, insbesondere die Rechte von LGBTIQ-Personen, auf die Agenda des nächsten ASEAN-EU-Dialogs gesetzt werden.
                  

Charles Tannock,
author. – Mr President, the introduction in Brunei of a revised penal code on 3 April is a deeply regrettable development. The new code widens the number of crimes that can now be punishable by death to include consensual same-sex acts, extramarital sex, abortion and the insult or defamation of the Prophet. These measures form part of a reform process started in 2014 that brings the Sultan's criminal code fully in line with Sharia law. These reforms also allow for the amputation of limbs as a punishment for those convicted of stealing.
These reforms are of particular concern to religious minorities, and the LGBTI community in Brunei will find themselves particularly at risk. Clearly, there is no place for such a harsh penal system in the modern world and it fails to respect Brunei's international human rights commitments. As an MEP for the UK, I'm particularly concerned to see these developments taking place in a fellow Commonwealth country.
This, sadly, is possibly my last speech ever as an MEP, and I say goodbye, after 20 years of service as a Parliamentarian. It's been a great honour and pleasure to serve in this House, and I say thank you, and a possible goodbye.

(Applause)


Malin Björk,
författare. – Herr talman! Lagstiftningen i Brunei som kriminaliserar HBTQ-personer och en rad andra mänskliga livssituationer, tortyr, dödsstraff. Jag är glad att vara med som en av dem som avfattat denna resolution. Precis som här hemma med vissa företrädare – också i detta hus – så används religion, i det här fallet islam, men hos oss i detta hus oftast kristendom, för att rikta hot och hat mot människors rättigheter, mot kvinnors rättigheter, mot HBTQ-personers rättigheter.
                  

                     Att hota och kränka HBTQ-personer, våra liv och våra kroppar på detta sätt borde inte ha någon plats i Brunei men inte heller här i Europa. Precis som resolutionen säger, ska det fördömas. Vi ska utfärda humanitära visum. Vi ska använda alla påtryckningar vi kan mot flygbolag, mot hotellkedjor med mera som är kopplade till denna envåldsregim i Brunei. Mänskliga rättigheter måste sättas först också i EU:s politik med andra länder.
                  

                     Detta hotande och hatande är emellertid en global rörelse. Alldeles nyss såg vi ett hatmöte i Colombia under kristen fana med europeiska och amerikanska deltagare där till och med högt uppsatta svenska politiker deltog. Så när vi slår oss för bröstet – för att vi försvarar mänskliga rättigheter i andra länder – borde vi nog också göra rent i eget hus. Att begränsa livsutrymmet, att hota och hata HBTQ-personer har ingen plats i Brunei, men det har faktiskt ingen plats här i Europa heller.
                  

Ignazio Corrao,
autore. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Alto rappresentante Mogherini, io prima di tutto vorrei dire che questo credo sia l'ultimo punto all'ordine del giorno dell'intera legislatura, quindi ringrazio tutti i colleghi qui presenti per il lavoro che abbiamo fatto in questi anni sul tema dei diritti umani, ricordando quanto è importante metterli sempre al centro delle negoziazioni commerciali con il resto del mondo.
                  

                     Chiudiamo con il Brunei che penso che sia uno dei casi più eclatanti. Un sultanato in cui il sultano può avere cinque mogli e può chiamare delle escort, secondo quello che si apprende dai giornali, però viene prevista la pena di morte per lapidazione per rapporti adulteri o viene prevista l'amputazione delle mani nel caso in cui si rubi.
                  

                     Io sono felice del fatto che abbiamo sospeso le negoziazioni con questo paese in cui le violazioni sono palesi e, fin quando non verranno rispettati i diritti umani, speriamo di non riprenderle. Detto questo, speriamo che nella prossima legislatura il tema dei diritti umani possa essere ancora più incisivo e possiamo raggiungere risultati ancora migliori rispetto a quelli raggiunti in questa legislatura.
                  

Soraya Post,
author. – Mr President, we are living in a crisis. The whole world is in crisis. We have the climate crisis. We have ultra-conservative, dark, evil forces growing closer and closer into our parliaments across the world, and we have a crisis when it comes to women's rights, LGBTI rights, and when it comes, in common human rights, respect for human rights is under attack as well as in Europe and across the world. The growing nationalism is a real crisis for our democratic values. So I would like to say to all of you up on the balcony, it is your responsibility to safeguard our democratic values on 26 May, and to all the people across the European Union, stand up for our values.
When it comes to Brunei and the new Sharia penal code, it is cruel, it is degrading and inhumane. It targets already vulnerable groups like women, children and LGBTI people, and deprives them of their human rights. According to the new laws, children as young as seven years old can be punished by flogging. Consensual same sex acts and abortion can be punished by death, by stoning. In civilized societies, human rights are respected. It is not a crime to be gay, lesbian or bisexual or to have an abortion. I demand an immediate end to this new Sharia penal code.

Tomáš Zdechovský,
Autor. – Pane předsedající, vážená paní vysoká komisařko Mogheriniová, já se připojuji k těm, kteří by chtěli poděkovat všem nám, kteří jsme pět let pracovali na takzvaných urgentních rezolucích.
                  

                     Velmi často se říká, co Evropský parlament nebo poslanec EP může udělat. V případě, kdy vidíme, že opravdu na základě té urgentní rezoluce došlo k propuštění vězně nebo došlo ke změně daného režimu, myslím si, že těch příkladů tady můžeme ukázat poměrně hodně. Těch konkrétních věcí, které se změnily, můžeme ukázat také poměrně hodně. Vždyť nedávno jsme v urgentní rezoluci kritizovali situaci na Maledivách. A najednou v září 2018 přišel nový vítr a ve volbách zvítězil opoziční kandidát, kterého jsme my poslanci EP podpořili. Proto věřím v to, že i síla našeho slova změní situaci v Bruneji.
                  

                     Já osobně dlouhodobě kritizuji státy, které se snaží zavádět právo šaría z důvodu toho, že právo šaría nemá nic společného s moderní demokracií a nemá nic společného s jakoukoliv pluralitou. Ať už se týká kohokoliv, můžeme vidět různé skupiny, včetně těch náboženských, které jsou za to, že někdo praktikuje jinou víru než tu, která je daná, diskriminovány nebo jsou ponižovány a trestány. Samotné odpadlictví od víry je vlastně ten největší zločin.
                  

                     Já bych chtěl proto na tomto našem posledním zasedání vyzvat vás, nás, abychom bojovali za pravdu a demokracii, protože to je to nejcennější, co my jako občané Evropské unie máme.
                  

Marietje Schaake,
author. – Mr President, High Representative and colleagues. Ten years ago, my first intervention in this plenary addressed the human rights violations in Iran. So it seems only fitting that today my last intervention calls again for more EU leadership to defend human rights. Because if not us, then who will? The newly introduced Sharia laws in Brunei are so extreme that they violate speech rights, women's sexual reproductive health rights and, particularly, the rights of LGBTI. Death penalty by stoning for homosexuality in 2019 is outrageous and barbarian, so we call for targeted Magnitsky-type sanctions for individuals and we can already see that our pressure is rendering results.
High Representative, colleagues, everybody, I urge you to continue to build a stronger Europe that is principle-based and that puts human rights first. Thank you.

Neena Gill,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, no one should face persecution or discrimination because of who they are and whom they love. However, as we've heard, on 3 April Brunei implemented Sharia law, including death by stoning, amputation of limbs and other forms of corporal and capital punishment. These laws didn't come about because there was a public demand for them but because the regime is unpopular. Its economy is failing. These measures were there to distract from the real issues affecting the people of Brunei. Therefore, it is critical that the European Union takes effective measures that condemn these barbarous practices, including a targeted visa ban for the regime and even sanctions against businesses owned by the Sultan.
Our objective must be to ensure that these draconian measures aren't implemented, and that can only happen if there is international condemnation, but also through political dialogue with stakeholders both inside and outside. High Representative, we need to stop being appalled. We need to act on these urgently. And finally, can I just say also to colleagues that this may be my last speech and I'd like to thank everybody for their cooperation.

Mark Demesmaeker,
namens de ECR-Fractie. – We laten vandaag terecht ons grote ongenoegen horen over de herziene strafwetgeving in Brunei. De amputatie van ledematen, openbare steniging, zweepslagen: deze middeleeuwse praktijken behoren voortaan tot het standaardarsenaal van vergeldingsmaatregelen voor ongewenst gedrag in Brunei.
                  

                     Staten zijn verantwoordelijk voor hun eigen regels, maar die regels zelf zijn onderworpen aan de principes van de universaliteit van mensenrechten, en meer bepaald het verbod op onmenselijke behandeling en marteling. ‘Respect voor de nationale context’ is geen excuus.
                  

                     In het bijzonder de rechten van vrouwen en kinderen, en van de LGBTI-gemeenschap worden fundamenteel geschaad.
                  

                     Collega's, voorzitter, mevrouw de hoge vertegenwoordiger, dit is mijn laatste toespraak in het laatste debat van deze zittingsperiode. Laten we goed onthouden dat mensenrechten nooit helemaal verworven zijn. Alleen politieke druk kan duurzaam iets veranderen als mensenrechten zwaar geschonden worden, zoals in Brunei. Het Europees Parlement doet dit vandaag. De Commissie, de EDEO en de lidstaten moeten erop aandringen om deze gecontesteerde draconische wetgeving in te trekken.
                  

                     Brunei kan dan wel een schatrijk land zijn, de morele armoede van zijn leider staat voor mij buiten kijf!
                  

Fabio Massimo Castaldo,
a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, non si tratta di un clamoroso scambio di persona, Hassanal Bolkiah, il sultano del Brunei, uomo più ricco del mondo per diversi anni, passato spesso alle cronache anche per i clamorosi eccessi tra cui un favoleggiato harem, è lo stesso che nel 2013 ha annunciato l'intenzione di introdurre nel suo paese un nuovo codice penale basato sulla sharia.
                  

                     L'entrata in vigore delle ultime disposizioni è avvenuta lo scorso 3 aprile. Da questa data i rapporti omosessuali, l'adulterio e l'aborto sono puniti con la lapidazione, gli insulti a Maometto con la morte e il furto con l'amputazione di mani e piedi. Il Codice si applica a musulmani e non, inclusi gli stranieri e soprattutto è applicabile anche ai minorenni. È risaputo che certe cose valgono solo per i sudditi, ma se incidentalmente questo codice dovesse essere applicato senza disparità di trattamento, credo proprio che la maggior parte della famiglia reale, incluso il sultano stesso, dovrebbe essere giustiziata. Cari colleghi, nel XXI secolo non c'è spazio per leggi di questo tipo.
                  

                     E approfitto di quest'ultimo discorso, in cui concludo questa legislatura come l'ho iniziata, quindi lottando e dando il mio contributo al rafforzamento dei diritti umani, per ringraziare ognuno di voi per il lavoro che abbiamo condiviso, per il percorso e per la forza con cui abbiamo difeso quei valori che possono e devono fare grande l'Europa nel mondo e spero proprio di continuare a lavorare con voi, con chi ci sarà nel prossimo mandato, e spero di esserci ovviamente anche io, e con chi invece tornerà magari a occuparsi di altro, per continuare insieme a dire a voce alta che la nostra azione dal punto di vista delle relazioni esterne deve essere sempre coerente con i nostri valori e che possiamo veramente essere quel faro di diritti e della difesa delle prerogative e dei diritti soprattutto dei più deboli, che sempre abbiamo ambito ad essere. Grazie di vero cuore e in bocca al lupo a tutti quanti voi.
                  

Jacques Colombier,
au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, au Brunei, ce n'est ni plus ni moins qu'un mal mortel. L'homosexualité masculine et l'infidélité sont punies, en application pure et simple de la loi islamique, par la lapidation à mort. Quant à l'homosexualité féminine, 40 coups de canne et une peine d'emprisonnement suffiraient – excusez du peu. Curieuse différence de traitement selon que l'on soit homme ou femme. Le ridicule le dispute à l'odieux, c'est cela la charia.
                  

                     De même, insulter le prophète mériterait la peine de mort. Or, à quelques mètres d'ici, la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme, dont vous êtes partie prenante, vient justement et scandaleusement, par l'arrêt E. S. contre Autriche, dénier tout droit de critique à l'Islam. Tant que la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme fera preuve d'une telle tolérance au profit de l'Islam radical, nous ne pourrons pas prétendre lutter ici contre des régimes odieux comme celui du Brunei. Une fois de plus, faiblesse et hypocrisie règnent dans cette institution. Laissez d'abord la liberté de penser s'exercer ici et ne nous donnons pas bonne conscience par ailleurs.
                  

                     Pour ma dernière intervention, je remercierai bien sûr tous ceux qui ont contribué au travail qui a été exécuté ici et je voudrais souhaiter bonne chance à mes successeurs qui œuvreront pour une alliance européenne des peuples libres et des nations souveraines.
                  

Elena Valenciano (S&D). – Señor presidente, mis colegas han definido muy bien lo que significa la crueldad que va a imponerse en Brunéi cada día más. Pero Brunéi es un ejemplo extremo —es verdad—, pero es un ejemplo más de muchos lugares del mundo en los que las libertades y los derechos retroceden, y de que avanza peligrosamente la teoría que relativiza el valor universal de los derechos humanos.
                  

                     Esta también es mi última intervención en este Pleno y quisiera dejar un mensaje en nombre de todos aquellos y aquellas que en los lugares más difíciles del mundo pelean por la dignidad, pelean por la vida, pelean por la libertad. Espero que esta Cámara nunca se olvide de esas personas que están lejos, pero que representan justamente los valores que nosotros y nosotras defendemos aquí.
                  

                     Somos pocos a veces en los debates sobre derechos humanos. Espero que cada vez sean más los miembros de esta Cámara que se sumen a esa defensa. Pero, sobre todo, cuando nos levantemos en este hemiciclo, en este lujoso hemiciclo, no olvidemos las cárceles, no olvidemos a los refugiados que se ahogan en el mar, no olvidemos a las mujeres que pelean por sus derechos. No olvidemos a los homosexuales, masacrados en muchos países, no olvidemos sobre qué valores se ha construido esta Unión Europea.
                  

Zgłoszenia z sali


José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Mogherini, esta é, de facto, a minha última intervenção nesta Casa e quero desde já agradecer-lhe a sua dedicação e a excelência do seu trabalho pelas causas humanitárias e desejar-lhe também felicidades, as maiores felicidades. Muito obrigado.
                  

                     Senhora Mogherini, depois das cláusulas abusivas do Código Penal terem sido amplamente condenadas pela comunidade internacional há cinco anos, o sultão Bolkiah tenta agora que elas entrem sorrateiramente em vigor, publicando-as no site da Procuradoria Geral, em dezembro passado, sem qualquer anúncio oficial.
                  

                     Num país em que é fácil esconder do seu próprio povo a entrada em vigor de punições medievais como as que preveem a condenação à morte por apedrejamento de homossexuais e adúlteras, o corte de mãos e pernas a quem for apanhado a roubar ou a flagelação por aborto, é impossível silenciar as vozes que, um pouco por todo o mundo, condenam estas práticas cruéis e desumanas em pleno século XXI.
                  

                     Senhora Mogherini, a União Europeia, onde o sultão Bolkiah possui importantes interesses económicos, deve ponderar incluir estes ativos numa lista negra e deve manter suspensas as negociações para um acordo de parceria e cooperação, caso esta legislação inaceitável não seja revogada e ajustada às normas internacionais.
                  

Julie Ward (S&D). – Mr President, when I was elected in 2014, I decided to be a voice for people who did not have a voice and here I am again speaking up, using this extraordinary platform that we have to stand up for human rights at a global level. I was shocked to hear that the Sultan of Brunei decided to impose the death penalty for homosexuality and adultery. The death penalty is always unacceptable and we must fight it under all circumstances, but this situation is particularly grave as it is anti-women and there is gender bias, which denies individuals the right to be themselves and to love who they naturally love.
When we talk about sexism and homophobia here in Europe, we must remember that every act of discrimination, even if it seems minor, contributes to a global climate of hate that leads to the death of many people either by mob violence or at the hand of the state. In the EU and everywhere we must continue fighting against the discrimination based on gender and sexual orientation. I call on the High Representative to use all diplomatic channels to urge the authorities of Brunei to withdraw these new medieval laws and work towards ending capital punishment in that country and elsewhere.

Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, one part of my work here in Parliament was also working for the defence of human rights and persons without a voice in Europe. Thank you to Ms Mogherini also for her commitment to the defence of human rights. We need to stand up for human rights. We need to condemn these attacks on human rights and fight against the death penalty and discrimination around the world, also in Europe.
The difficult situation of Brunei against homophobia needs our dignity and freedom to defend these people. They are alone. I belong to the LGBTI Intergroup of the European Parliament, and I am proud of that because the defence of persons around the world is also our responsibility. The fight for human rights around the world should be the fight for the freedom, for the respect and also for the dignity of human beings.
Thank you to all the colleagues for the defence of human rights. This is my last current intervention to you but I will be back!

Dobromir Sośnierz (NI). – Panie Przewodniczący! A Wy znowu to samo: znowu garstka posłów na pustej sali groźnie kiwa palcem w bucie i poucza cały świat, jak powinien urządzać swoje sprawy. Ja się za każdym razem pytam, co dały wszystkie poprzednie rezolucje, że piszemy następne. Nic nie dały. Czy naprawdę sądzicie, że ktoś to w ogóle czyta i ktoś się tym przejmuje? Co Państwo zrobiliby, gdyby dostali wiadomość od sułtana Brunei pouczającą Was na przykład, że powinniście przestać mordować własne nienarodzone dzieci w Europie albo głosować z użyciem przycisku, a nie oceniać większość na oko i ciągle się mylić. Chyba tak samo przejęlibyście się tym, jak sułtan Brunei przejmie się Waszymi pouczeniami z tej sali.
                  

                     W tej sesji Parlamentu pouczyliśmy już Libię, Sudan, Mozambik, Malawi, Zimbabwe, USA, Izrael, Rumunię, Brunei, Chiny i Kamerun w dniu dzisiejszym. Jak zaczniemy tworzyć czarną listę, to obawiam się, że na tej liście zostanie tylko parę państw członkowskich, bo zapewne nie wszystkie. Myślę więc, że jest to droga donikąd i powinniśmy po prostu zająć się z własnymi sprawami i przestać pouczać cały świat.
                  

Przewodniczący. – Niech mi wolno będzie tylko zauważyć, że sułtan Brunei przysłał wczoraj list adresowany do Parlamentu Europejskiego, gdzie próbował wyjaśnić niejako in advance swoją pozycję.
                  

Seán Kelly (PPE). – Mr President, we are highlighting today the inhumane breach of human rights in Brunei under the Sharia penal code. Certain punishments of this code amount to torture and acts of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. As Brunei, I'm sure, is fully aware, these punishments are prohibited by the United Nations Convention against Torture. The Sharia penal code effectively reintroduces the death penalty and will make homosexuality punishable by death by stoning. This is an abominable and savage practice, which must be resisted.
I'm proud to come from a country like Ireland, where in 2015 we were the first country in the world to legalise same-sex marriage by popular vote. While religious freedom and religious tolerance are extremely important facets of the world in which we live, it is important to move forward and not backwards, and ensure that basic human rights are respected. I urge the Brunei authorities to repeal the Sharia penal code and ensure that its laws comply with international law and standards, respect the fundamental rights of all citizens and insist on the decriminalisation of homosexuality, and I hope all other countries around the world will send a strong message to Brunei as well.

Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Pane předsedající, změna trestního zákoníku v Bruneji je skutečně příchod extrémů. Je to týrání lidí v rozporu s úmluvami OSN, rozšíření drakonických trestů. Usekávání končetin nebo usmrcování za cizoložství, za potrat nebo za homosexuální styk, to jsou věci, které jsou v 21. století naprosto nepředstavitelné. Tuto změnu zavádí náš partner, brunejský sultanát. Já nevím, pane místopředsedo, co vysvětloval ve svém dopise pan sultán, pokud nám píše. Já si myslím, že by si měl především zamést před vlastním prahem, protože se choval pokrytecky. O jeho orgiích víme asi všichni své, čteme to v tisku.
                  

                     Myslím si, že je důležité, abychom v případě spolupráce s ASEAN otevřeli i tuto otázku pro budoucí období, protože lidská práva jsou výkladní skříní Evropské unie, výkladní skříní Evropského parlamentu, a já jsem rád, že o těchto věcech mluvíme. Kdo jiný bude mluvit, když ne my?
                  

Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já jsem jenom chtěl reagovat na svého polského kolegu, který tady zpochybňoval význam debat o lidských právech. Já pocházím z Československa, dnes z České republiky, ze země, která byla zasažena komunismem. Vždycky mně moji přátelé disidenti, kteří bojovali proti komunismu, říkali, jak si vážili toho, když se jich někdo z demokratických západních zemí symbolicky zastal a vyjádřil jim podporu.
                  

                     Pane kolego, nezpochybňujte to, že debata o lidských právech má význam. Lidská práva jsou univerzální, a to, že my se zastaneme obětí v třetích zemích, kde jsou lidská práva popírána, má pro ty lidi velký smysl, je to morální podpora a vězte, že těm lidem to pomáhá v dalším boji. Českým disidentům pomáhalo to, že se jich západní politici zastávali, a všichni vzpomínají na to, jaký význam pro ně třeba měla snídaně s tehdejším prezidentem Mitterrandem. Takže je dobře, co děláme, a je třeba, aby brunejský sultán ustoupil od práva šaría.
                  

Przewodniczący. – Tą wypowiedzią zamknęliśmy w historii tej kadencji Parlamentu wystąpienia poselskie w formule ‘catch-the-eye’.
                  

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)


Federica Mogherini,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, on 3 April Brunei Darussalam went on with the implementation of the 2013 Penal Code Order. The court foresees, as you mentioned, punishments such as amputation, public flogging and death by stoning, which simply have no place in the world. Also, there is a clear expansion in scope for the potential application of the death penalty, and you know our principled, clear, strong position against that penalty everywhere in the world. We believe there is no justification for these kinds of punishments – no crime justifies an amputation or torture, let alone the death penalty and, for sure, no person should be punished for loving someone. That can never be interpreted as a crime.
These punishments – if applied – would constitute a violation of many of the international commitments undertaken by Brunei Darussalam. These acts are prohibited by the Convention against Torture and other cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment or punishment, which was signed by the country in 2015. They also go against the 2012 ASEAN Human Rights Declaration and they may also breach the country's obligations as a party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.
On the very day of the announcement, we reacted together with many of our international partners, starting with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet. We expect now the Government of Brunei Darussalam to make sure that the implementation of the Penal Court Order will not infringe human rights and will be fully consistent with all international human rights obligations undertaken by the country. I think this debate is a very important opportunity to stress the expectations we have.
We also expect the country to maintain its de facto moratorium on the use of the death penalty. Let me add that we have been following this issue for years. It is not just a few weeks ago that we started to react. When the 2013 Penal Code was adopted, we suspended negotiations on a partnership and cooperation agreement with Brunei, and since then we have raised the issue in all our meetings with the country's authorities and in our annual reports on human rights and democracy in the country.
It is now essential to prevent the application of such punishments. To this goal, we will first and foremost continue to put pressure bilaterally on the authorities of Brunei, both directly and through the Member States that are present in the country, and obviously the new EU Special Representative for Human Rights, Eamon Gilmore, will work on this. We will also continue to engage at the UN Human Rights Council, in particular within the ongoing universal periodic review, where Brunei will be reviewed, and we will raise the issue with our ASEAN partners, since this also represents a violation of a commitment taken by Brunei in the ASEAN framework. I will also have the possibility to raise this matter personally at our next annual European Union-ASEAN meeting next August.
The ban on degrading punishments is not simply about European values. I want to underline this point that many of you have raised: these are universal values cherished by people of all backgrounds and of all faiths all around the world. These are rights that are not at the disposal of any authority or any country. They belong to all people and No State can take them away. This is about the dignity of each and every human being, and we, the European Union, will continue to work for this dignity to be respected everywhere in the world, starting from Europe.
As this is the last debate of your mandate, I will maybe say a few words later, but let me thank each and every one of you for, in particular, the work we've done on human rights. I've appreciated this enormously. It has been incredibly helpful for the work of European Union diplomacy around the world, and I can only share the views of those that mentioned the fact that we hope that in the next mandate, there will be a growing number of Members of Parliament that will engage on the promotion and the defence of human rights inside the European Union and around the world.

(Applause)


Przewodniczący. – Pani Wysoka Przedstawiciel! Sądzę, że oklaski, które Pani otrzymała, częściowo na stojąco, są dowodem na to, że wysoko sobie cenimy współpracę z Panią, że to przyniosło efekty.
                  

                     Zamykam debatę.
                  

                     Głosowanie odbędzie się po zakończeniu debat.
                  


Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 162)



Michaela Šojdrová (PPE),
písemně. – Včera večer jsme obdrželi oficiální komuniké z brunejského velvyslanectví, které opakovaně zdůrazňuje, že Brunej je pokojná a mírumilovná země respektující všechny své občany bez ohledu na rasu, náboženství či pohlaví. Zároveň dodává, že pro nově zavedené tresty existují velmi přísná pravidla, například při trestu bičování na veřejnosti nesmí exekutor zdvihnout ruku nad hlavu, odsouzený má být oblečen a bičování mu nesmí poranit kůži. Trest smrti za homosexualitu, smilstvo a cizoložství vysvětluje, že jeho udělení je velmi nepravděpodobné, protože jeho podmínka, tedy svědectví čtyř bezúhonných a vysoce vážených muslimů, je jen obtížně splnitelná. Připomíná mi to pohádku, kde král pořádal popravy, těsně před exekucí je vždy zrušil a potom to i s odsouzeným oslavil. Chci zde připomenout, že kamenování, bičování, usekávání končetin a trest smrti jsou v rozporu s Úmluvou Spojených národů proti mučení, kterou Brunej 22. září 2015 podepsala. Zaváděním středověkého trestního práva vnáší do své společnosti rozkol, kterého bude jednou sama nejvíce litovat, a my s tím nemůžeme v žádném případě souhlasit.
                  

(Posiedzenie zostało zawieszone o godz. 11.44 w oczekiwaniu na rozpoczęcie głosowania)


VORSITZ: RAINER WIELAND


Vizepräsident

7.   Resumption of the sitting

(Die Sitzung wird um 12.00 Uhr wieder aufgenommen.)


*


Der Präsident. – Wir sind zutiefst bestürzt über das schreckliche Busunglück auf der Insel Madeira, bei dem gestern mindestens 29 Menschen ihr Leben verloren haben und viele weitere Menschen verletzt wurden. Unser Mitgefühl gilt allen Angehörigen und Freunden der Opfer dieser Tragödie. Ich möchte mich im Namen unseres Hauses auch für den unermüdlichen Einsatz der Rettungskräfte vor Ort bedanken.
               

                  Ich möchte Sie bitten, sich für einen Moment des Gedenkens zu erheben.
               

(Das Parlament erhebt sich zu einer Schweigeminute.)


José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Caros Colegas, tinha pedido para intervir no início desta sessão de votação para comunicar a tragédia, que o Senhor Presidente já comunicou, que se abateu ontem sobre a ilha da Madeira e que já ceifou a vida a cerca de 29 pessoas. Senhor Presidente, o capotamento de um autocarro que transportava turistas alemães foi uma tragédia que o meu país jamais esquecerá não só pela dimensão das vidas ceifadas, o que o torna, infelizmente, um dos mais graves acidentes ocorridos na Madeira, mas também por ter ocorrido num período que para nós, portugueses, é tão importante, a Quaresma.
               

                  Senhor Presidente, Caros Colegas, termino, lamentando as mortes e os feridos e pedindo que, em nome deste Parlamento, envie as mais sentidas condolências às famílias atingidas e agradecendo-lhe a si, Senhor Presidente o minuto de silêncio que concedeu em memória destas vítimas.
               
8.   Request for waiver of immunity: see Minutes
9.   Composition of Parliament

Der Präsident. – Im Anschluss an den Rücktritt von Frau Linda McAvan stellt das Parlament gemäß der Geschäftsordnung das Freiwerden ihres Sitzes mit Wirkung vom 19. April 2019 fest und informiert die zuständigen nationalen Behörden.
               

                  Meine Damen und Herren! Ich erteile das Wort der Vizepräsidentin der Kommission und Hohen Vertreterin für die Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik, Frau Mogherini, das Wort.
               

Federica Mogherini,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, I know this is a ritual to take the floor before the voting session, but as this is the last session of your mandate, I want to express on behalf of the entire Commission, of myself personally, and I am sure also on behalf of the Council, my profound thank you to each and every one of you, in all political groups, for an excellent five years of common work. I think we have shown that institutions of the European Union can work together effectively, in respect of the autonomy of the institutions and in respect of different political views.
I want to thank personally, in particular, those of you that have worked along this five years with me, in particular on foreign, security and defence policy issues, on human rights, and wish each of you all the best, either for the next mandate or in life. Wherever you will be, whatever you will be doing, I am sure you will bring the European flag in your heart and, as far as I am concerned, we still have a few months of mandate, we will try to build on the good results and the lessons learned from these five years of work together with you, and looking forward to working with the new Members of Parliament as soon as the new Parliament will start its work as of July.

(Applause)


Der Präsident. – Vielen Dank, Frau Kommissarin Mogherini! Ich darf Ihnen – ich glaube, im Namen des ganzen Hauses – für Ihre Arbeit danken und Ihre Wünsche sehr herzlich erwidern.
               

                  Sie haben es erwähnt: Wir haben heute die letzte Sitzung, und es gibt einige Kollegen, die sich gerne zu Wort melden würden, was mit der Geschäftsordnung nicht unbedingt vereinbar ist. Ich will versuchen, dass wir uns da gemeinsam ein bisschen durchsortieren.
               

                  Zunächst will ich Ihnen sagen, dass sich bei mir zwei Kolleginnen gemeldet und mir ihr Anliegen geschildert haben. Ich werde diesen beiden das Wort erteilen, ansonsten zu allgemeinen Anliegen nicht. Zunächst Frau Kollegin Costa.
               

Silvia Costa (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, sarò brevissima, voglio dire che oggi è la giornata mondiale dei siti Unesco che vorrei che dedicassimo naturalmente alla cattedrale di Notre-Dame e a tutta la ricchezza e il patrimonio culturale europeo.
               

                  Vorrei ricordare che, grazie al Parlamento, noi abbiamo avuto un anno dedicato che ha coinvolto oltre trenta milioni di cittadini su un fatto che è identitario e universale allo stesso tempo, ma vorrei ricordare che abbiamo adesso un grande lascito come Parlamento, perché abbiamo messo fondi per il patrimonio culturale in tutti i programmi europei, abbiamo un'agenda per la cultura europea e abbiamo un piano d'azione dedicato.
               

                  Credo che, lasciando, e di questo ringrazio tutti colleghi, dopo dieci anni questo Parlamento, penso che possiamo essere fieri dell'aver fatto e di aver dato una svolta nella politica culturale ed educativa del Parlamento. Ringrazio tutti i colleghi, naturalmente Lei, Presidente, ma anche il rapporto buono che c'è stato con la Commissione.
               

Françoise Grossetête (PPE) . – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, merci à vous qui êtes nombreux aujourd'hui à porter le symbole de ces jonquilles jaunes. Elles nous rappellent le souvenir de cet anniversaire terrifiant du soulèvement désespéré du ghetto de Varsovie. Durant plusieurs jours, des milliers de personnes à Varsovie portent ces fleurs qui viennent de tous les pays pour dire ‘plus jamais ça’.
               

                  C'est le dernier jour de session de ce mandat, cette jonquille nous rappelle le but principal de cette Europe que nous travaillons à construire: la paix et le respect de la dignité humaine. Je vous souhaite à tous de continuer à soutenir cette volonté partout, à l'avenir.
               

(Applaudissements)


Der Präsident. – Vielen Dank. Darf ich jetzt zunächst fragen: Gibt es Wortmeldungen, die wirklich zur Geschäftsordnung gewünscht werden?
               

                  Das ist nicht der Fall.
               

                  Dann möchte ich jetzt einigen Kollegen das Wort erteilen. Herr Cavada hat sich gemeldet, da ahne ich, um was es geht.
               

Jean-Marie Cavada (ALDE). – Monsieur le Président du Parlement, cher Rainer, je vais être extrêmement bref, parce que je sais que l'on n'aime pas les longs discours.
               

                  J'ai très peu pris la parole dans ce Parlement en 15 ans. J'avais promis au peuple français, aux électeurs, d'exécuter un travail acharné. J'espère y être arrivé, avec vous, grâce à vous. J'avais promis de n'accomplir que trois mandats, celui-ci est le troisième et je m'y tiens.
               

                  Je voudrais donc tous vous saluer et vous dire simplement, Monsieur le Président – et cela vous concerne en tant que voisin de la France –, une chose extrêmement simple: l'Europe vivra. L'Europe vivra malgré ceux qui voudraient replier nos pays derrière les frontières. Car l'Europe, c'est celle du Hongrois Joel Brand, qui a sauvé des dizaines de milliers de Juifs; c'est celle de Marek Edelman et du ghetto dont on vient de parler; c'est celle de Wałęsa et de Bałka, les deux Polonais magistraux qui ont libéré leur pays du joug du communisme; c'est celle de Helmut Schmidt et de Helmut Kohl; c'est celle de Gisi Fleischmann, la Slovaque qui a sauvé des vies humaines pendant la guerre, des enfants notamment; c'est celle de Václav Havel et c'est celle de mon amie Simone Veil.
               

                  Merci, chers collègues, de m'avoir appris à devenir un meilleur citoyen que je n'étais en arrivant. Même ceux qui se sont opposés à mon travail ont fini malgré eux par m'apprendre quelque chose. Je quitte en vous remerciant infiniment et j'emporte dans mon cœur la modestie et la vigueur du travail que chacun d'entre nous fait.
               

(Applaudissements)


Alojz Peterle (PPE). – Mr President, these are our last decisions in this mandate and I would like to thank you for five years of unity in diversity. It is our responsibility to keep Europe together and let's rebuild Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris and Happy Easter.

(The House accorded the speaker, who played the European hymn on his harmonica, a standing ovation)


Der Präsident. – Damit ist dieser Tagesordnungspunkt geschlossen.
               
10.   Voting time

Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Abstimmung.
               

(Abstimmungsergebnisse und sonstige Einzelheiten der Abstimmung: siehe Protokoll.)

10.1.   China, notably the situation of religious and ethnic minorities (RC-B8-0255/2019, B8-0255/2019, B8-0256/2019, B8-0257/2019, B8-0258/2019, B8-0259/2019, B8-0260/2019) (vote)

— Vor der Abstimmung:


Michaela Šojdrová (PPE). – Mr President, just briefly, our oral amendment of Recital A: ‘China's express interest in respecting international law and standards relating to human rights in its own development;’
                  
Thank you for your support.

(Der mündliche Änderungsantrag wird übernommen.)

10.2.   Cameroon (RC-B8-0245/2019, B8-0245/2019, B8-0247/2019, B8-0249/2019, B8-0252/2019, B8-0253/2019, B8-0254/2019) (vote)
10.3.   Brunei (RC-B8-0242/2019, B8-0242/2019, B8-0243/2019, B8-0244/2019, B8-0246/2019, B8-0248/2019, B8-0250/2019, B8-0251/2019) (vote)
10.4.   Eurojust-Denmark Agreement on judicial cooperation in criminal matters (A8-0192/2019 - Claude Moraes) (vote)
10.5.   Coordination of social security systems (A8-0386/2018 - Guillaume Balas) (vote)

Helga Stevens,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, in accordance with Rule 190(4) of the Rules of Procedure, I wish to propose on behalf of my Group that we adjourn the vote on the Balas report on the coordination of social security to a later parliamentary session. This is because the report is not at all ready for a vote in plenary and voting on it today would only highlight the serious divisions that exist among us on the last day of this legislature.
I really believe that we need to leave this file open, to enable the next Parliament to explore options in order to reach a good and solid agreement that will bring genuine added value to our citizens. I hope I can count on your support to postpone the vote, and I thank you for your attention.

Guillaume Balas,
rapporteur. – Monsieur le Président, cette demande est en fait une demande répétée, puisqu'elle a déjà été présentée lundi, mais que le Parlement, je le rappelle, l'a repoussée. Et maintenant la droite conservatrice tente de faire obstruction tout simplement à un débat et à un vote démocratiques. On a eu ce débat, il est maintenant temps de voter pour ne pas que ce Parlement, sur un sujet aussi essentiel que les droits des travailleurs, reste muet en cette fin de législature, ce qui serait un comble.
                  

(Das Parlament stimmt dem Antrag auf Verschiebung zu.)

10.6.   CO2 emission performance standards for new heavy-duty vehicles (A8-0354/2018 - Bas Eickhout) (vote)
10.7.   Promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport vehicles (A8-0321/2018 - Andrzej Grzyb) (vote)
10.8.   Use of digital tools and processes in company law (A8-0422/2018 - Tadeusz Zwiefka) (vote)
10.9.   Cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions (A8-0002/2019 - Evelyn Regner) (vote)
10.10.   European Defence Fund (A8-0412/2018 - Zdzisław Krasnodębski) (vote)
10.11.   Exposures in the form of covered bonds (A8-0384/2018 - Bernd Lucke) (vote)
10.12.   Covered bonds and covered bond public supervision (A8-0390/2018 - Bernd Lucke) (vote)
10.13.   InvestEU (A8-0482/2018 - José Manuel Fernandes, Roberto Gualtieri) (vote)

— Vor der Abstimmung:


Federica Mogherini,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, let me first of all thank the rapporteurs, Roberto Gualtieri and José Manuel Fernandes, for their excellent work on this file. But I'd also like to extend my thanks to their respective Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) and the Committee on Budgets (BUDG), the associated committees and all the shadow rapporteurs for their constructive work in a very limited amount of time. This House has continuously backed the Commission's initiatives in support of investments throughout this mandate. The Commission welcomes the agreement reached between the co-legislators and would like to read out in full the following statement (it's short, as agreed during trilogue negotiations):

                     ‘Without prejudice to the prerogatives of the Council in the implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact, one of contributions by Member States, either by a Member State or by national promotional banks, classified in the general government sector, or acting on behalf of a Member State, into thematic or multi-country investment platforms should in principle qualify as one-off measures, within the meaning of Articles 5(1) and 9(1) of Council Regulation No 1466/97 and Article 3(4) of Council Regulation No 1467-97. In addition, without prejudice to the prerogatives of the Council in the implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact, the Commission will consider, in future, updates of the implementation guidelines of the SGP, to what extent the same treatment as for EFSI in the context of the Commission communication on flexibility can be applied to invest-EU as the successor instrument to EFSI with regard to one of contributions provided by Member States, in cash, to finance an additional amount of the EU guarantee for the purposes of the Member State's compartment.’
                  
10.14.   European Maritime Single Window environment (A8-0006/2019 - Deirdre Clune) (vote)
10.15.   Disclosures relating to sustainable investments and sustainability risks (A8-0363/2018 - Paul Tang) (vote)
10.16.   Persistent organic pollutants (A8-0336/2018 - Julie Girling) (vote)
10.17.   Clearing obligation, reporting requirements and risk-mitigation techniques for OTC derivatives, and trade repositories (A8-0181/2018 - Werner Langen) (vote)
10.18.   Authorisation of CCPs and recognition of third-country CCPs (A8-0190/2018 - Danuta Maria Hübner) (vote)
10.19.   Promotion of the use of SME growth markets (A8-0437/2018 - Anne Sander) (vote)
10.20.   Negotiations with Council and Commission on European Parliament's right of inquiry: legislative proposal (B8-0238/2019) (vote)
10.21.   A comprehensive European Union framework on endocrine disruptors (B8-0241/2019) (vote)

Der Präsident. – Vor der letzten Abstimmung möchte ich mich bei Ihnen allen für die stets kooperative Zusammenarbeit des Plenums bedanken und auch für die Nachsicht, die Sie haben walten lassen, wenn ich mal Fehler gemacht habe. Sollte ich einzelnen Kollegen zu nahe getreten sein, bitte ich dafür um Entschuldigung.
                  

                     Ich wünsche Ihnen allen ein frohes Osterfest.
                  

                     Ich wünsche Ihnen, soweit Sie sich wieder bewerben, einen Wahlkampf, der sich im üblichen Rahmen bewegt und, wie ich das schon nach den Anschlägen von Straßburg hier gesagt habe: Wir sollten immer bedenken, dass es um die Meinungen und die politischen Auffassungen geht, um den politischen Richtungskampf, aber es sollte keiner einen Zweifel daran lassen, dass es nicht um den Menschen als Gegner geht, sondern um Politik und Demokratie. Das wünsche ich Ihnen allen.
                  

(Starker Beifall)


                     Damit ist die Abstimmungsstunde geschlossen.
                  
11.   Explanations of vote
11.1.   CO2 emission performance standards for new heavy-duty vehicles (A8-0354/2018 - Bas Eickhout)

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen


Dobromir Sośnierz (NI). – Panie Przewodniczący! Głosowałem przeciwko temu sprawozdaniu, ponieważ nie rozumiem logiki, która każe liczyć jeden pojazd jako dwa pojazdy, jeśli jest to pojazd zeroemisyjny, chociażby dlatego, że nie ma czegoś takiego jak pojazd zeroemisyjny, bo nawet hulajnoga emituje jakieś ciepło w postaci rozgrzanych mięśni jeźdźca, który na niej jedzie.
                  

                     W związku z tym jest to sterta bajek i niestety kolejna dyrektywa, nad którą nieodpowiedzialni posłowie głosują i nie mają do końca wyobrażenia jak te ich dyrektywy i zarządzenia będą potem wdrażane. Nie mają dostatecznej wiedzy na temat tego, żeby sprawdzić czy rzeczywiście środowisko zyska na tym, że samochody elektryczne nie emitują wprawdzie zanieczyszczeń w miejscu, w którym jeżdżą, ale emitują je w elektrowni. Czy mamy wystarczająco dużo zasobów w naszych sieciach energetycznych, żeby zacząć ładować znacznie powiększoną flotę samochodów elektrycznych? Co będzie z akumulatorami, z substancjami szkodliwymi zawartymi w tych akumulatorach? W Norwegii pojawia się już z tym problem. W związku z tym uważam, że jest to kolejna nieodpowiedzialna regulacja, która zagraża rynkowi samochodowemu w Europie.
                  
11.2.   Promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport vehicles (A8-0321/2018 - Andrzej Grzyb)

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen


Rupert Matthews (ECR). – Mr President, when this measure was first mooted, I was really unhappy with it. As is so often typical of this place, it was talking about more centralisation, more control, more rigid enforcement of rules from the centre. And in particular, in this case, it was placing massive emphasis on electrical vehicles as a way to reduce emissions. But if the green economy has taught us anything, it's that we don't know how the technology is going to develop, and for politicians to be sitting here to try and dictate how technology and how the industry should develop is absolutely nonsensical.
So, I'm very pleased that after a lot of hard work with the rapporteurs and shadow rapporteurs, we've managed to get this to be a much more flexible arrangement, we are placing less emphasis on just electrical vehicles, and we are going to allow technology to develop – quite right too.
11.3.   Use of digital tools and processes in company law (A8-0422/2018 - Tadeusz Zwiefka)

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen


Rupert Matthews (ECR). – Mr President, thank you for calling me to speak on this issue. I think this is very important. It is absolutely crucial that companies that wish to trade across borders, and wish to do so on the Internet or wish to do so electronically, are free to do so without restriction and without people trying to stop international competition. In the publishing industry where I come from, we publish a lot of e-books. They are for sale in most countries; anybody can go and download them; the payments are then processed, and things can carry on. So this measure, which makes it easier for companies to set up remotely and to do trade on the Internet is important – particularly, I think, removing the necessity that some have to actually physically go to another country. The whole point of the Internet is that you can do it remotely.
11.4.   Cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions (A8-0002/2019 - Evelyn Regner)

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen


Rupert Matthews (ECR). – Mr President, once again, I raise to talk about the need for international trade and how to make that freer. Once again, this particular message – I'm delighted to say – is making it easier to do so. Again, when this measure first came, we were talking about putting all sorts of restrictions on companies so that they would have to prove that they weren't doing all sorts of things before they could go ahead. With this, I'm delighted to say that that is no longer the case. It is a big step forward for international trade within the European Union. International trade boosts the economy, helps employment, and indeed helps understanding between the nations – and that has got to be a good thing.
11.5.   European Defence Fund (A8-0412/2018 - Zdzisław Krasnodębski)

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen


Marek Jurek (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Kierunek polityki, a nawet system wartości każdej wspólnoty politycznej można odczytać z liczb zawartych w jej budżecie. Decyzja o utworzeniu Europejskiego Funduszu Obronnego to może nieduży, ale wyraźny krok w kierunku, który definiowali tutaj, na tej sali pani kanclerz Merkel i możliwy przyszły przewodniczący Komisji Europejskiej pan Weber – droga w kierunku armii europejskiej. To nie jest właściwy kierunek budowy naszej współpracy. Większość naszych państw jest sprzymierzona w Przymierzu Atlantyckim. Nie zjednoczyliśmy się tutaj dla budowania siły politycznej, ale po to, żeby wspierać nawzajem niepodległość naszych państw. To jest właściwe powołanie współpracy europejskiej. Dlatego przestrzegam: nie idźmy dalej w tym kierunku!
                  

Eleonora Forenza (GUE/NGL). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ho votato con forza contro questa risoluzione perché ritengo che l'Unione europea debba radicalmente cambiare rotta, fondare un processo unitario sulla difesa delle persone, sulla difesa della vita, non sulla difesa delle frontiere, come ancora una volta con questa risoluzione andiamo a fare.
                  

                     Io credo che l'Unione europea stia rischiando di naufragare definitivamente nel Mediterraneo, dove ogni giorno contiamo vite messe in pericolo, dove ogni giorno contiamo morti. Credo che l'Unione europea debba finanziare le persone, contrastare la povertà, incrementare un sistema di tassazione europeo e progressivo. Credo che, invece, inseguire la costruzione di un esercito europeo significhi togliere risorse alla lotta e alle disuguaglianze e, ancora una volta, fondare l'Unione europea sulla frontiera e non sull'accoglienza.
                  
11.6.   Disclosures relating to sustainable investments and sustainability risks (A8-0363/2018 - Paul Tang)

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen


Alex Mayer (S&D). – Mr President, I think I'm the last Brit to speak in the Chamber at this session, but now I think perhaps not the last ever, happily. The financial sector cannot just be about making profits for the few and ignoring the consequences for everyone else and our planet. As a Labour MEP, I want the money that banks, insurance companies and pension funds invest to help create a more just society. Today's vote is an essential part in our efforts to connect finance with the sustainable development agenda. It is in everyone's long-term interests. A polluting fossil fuel is not a durable and stable investment, neither is ignoring health and safety, nor is using child labour. Today, we introduce new rules on how big banks and insurance companies need to not only consider the financial returns on investments, but also their effects on the environment, and issues such as the gender pay gap and stamping out corruption. Working together, we are building a fairer Europe for the many, not the few.
11.7.   Negotiations with Council and Commission on European Parliament's right of inquiry: legislative proposal (B8-0238/2019)

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen


Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, já jsem podpořil toto usnesení, protože je opravdu hanebné, že do dneška nemáme prováděcí právní předpis, který by jasně upravil podmínky, za kterých Evropský parlament realizuje své vyšetřovací právo.
                  

                     My jsme se o to pokoušeli po celou dobu tohoto mandátu, bohužel ze strany Evropské komise, ale zvláště Rady nebyla dostatečná odezva. Reakce Rady z podzimu minulého roku byla spíše negativní než pozitivní, hledaly se důvody, proč takovýto prováděcí předpis není možno přijmout. Budu tedy doufat, na závěr svého vystoupení zde v Evropském parlamentu, že v příštím volebním období bude větší snaha nejen Evropského parlamentu, ale hlavně Rady a Komise naplnit tuto chybu, kdy nemáme přijatý prováděcí právní předpis, a tento předpis bude přijat tak, aby Evropský parlament byl schopen efektivně vykonávat jednu ze svých dalších klíčových rolí vedle legislativy, a to ono vyšetřovací právo.
                  
11.8.   A comprehensive European Union framework on endocrine disruptors (B8-0241/2019)

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen


José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, as provas da toxicidade de substâncias com atividade de desregulação endócrina contam já com mais de 20 anos. O assunto tem maior gravidade quando pensamos que estas substâncias circulam no meio de nós e estão na origem de casos de infertilidade, obesidade e cancro, tanto em humanos como em outras espécies do nosso ecossistema.
                  

                     Até ao momento, tem havido uma avaliação caso a caso, baseada num alerta, e não existe, até hoje, uma medida verdadeiramente transversal que permita acabar com a presença destas substâncias. O caso do bisfenol A nos materiais de alimentação infantil foi mediático, mas quantas mais dessas substâncias temos nós em contacto connosco e com as crianças através da comida, do material didático, de brinquedos ou de produtos de higiene e cosmética.
                  

                     Votei a favor deste relatório porque é preciso que olhemos de forma sistemática para estas substâncias, bem como para outras, afins, que possam ser suspeitas de terem atividades desestabilizadora do sistema hormonal. É importante desencadear o princípio da precaução, uma vez que há muitas incertezas sobre mecanismos de ação, doses, exposição aceitáveis e efeitos combinados dessas substâncias.
                  

                     Queria deixar ainda uma nota final sobre a minha total dedicação neste mandato aos assuntos da saúde, ambiente e direitos humanos, que parecem confluir todos nesta minha última intervenção em plenário.
                  

Dobromir Sośnierz (NI). – Panie Przewodniczący! Tę rezolucję można streścić tak: w zasadzie nie wiemy, jakie są to substancje, jak szkodzą i czy na pewno szkodzą, ale na pewno wiemy, że możemy to uregulować i nikt tego lepiej nie zrobi niż Komisja Europejska. To pokazuje, że niczego się nie nauczyliście w tej kadencji, niczego się ten parlament nie nauczył z brexitu, z tego, że Brytyjczycy tak już mieli dość tych waszych regulacji, tej waszej arogancji, że zdecydowali się na trudny i bolesny proces rozwodowy, byle tylko dalej im nie podlegać.
                  

                     Nie widzicie, że cała Europa ma was dość i wkrótce ta cała lewicowa elita rządząca teraz Europą straci tutaj władzę. Nie wiem, jakie osiągnięcia tej izby upoważniają do takiego zarozumialstwa i do rozszerzania regulacji jeszcze dalej. Stworzyliście umierający kontynent, klub seniora, kolonizowany przez barbarzyńców, który nie potrafi sam się reprodukować i próbujecie ten swój nieudany eksperyment eksportować na cały świat, pouczając kolejne kraje, że powinny robić taką samą głupotę jak wy. Zniszczyliście Europę, chcecie zniszczyć świat, a ja uważam, że Unia Europejska powinna być zniszczona.
                  
11.9.   European Border and Coast Guard (A8-0076/2019 - Roberta Metsola)

Mündliche Stimmerklärungen


Eleonora Forenza (GUE/NGL). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, grazie Presidente anche per la comprensione. Io ho votato contro la risoluzione Metsola, perché credo che l'Unione europea abbia bisogno di salvare e non di continuare a respingere, abbia bisogno di interrompere gli accordi con la Libia, terra di guerra, di tortura, di stupro.
                  

                     Credo, in particolare, che il mio paese debba cessare con la politica di persecuzione e criminalizzazione delle ONG, ancora una volta, acuite dal governo che si accinge a votare una sorta di direttiva speciale contro la nave mediterranea. Credo che una delle azioni di cui sono più orgogliosa è di aver passato alcuni giorni sulla Open Arms, una ONG che salva vite.
                  

                     Infine, questo è il mio ultimo intervento in plenaria, voglio ringraziare tutte e tutti, perché in questi cinque anni ho imparato moltissimo. Spero di aver fatto il mio dovere, rappresentare le ultime, rappresentare gli ultimi e dare forza politica a loro perché l'inno alla gioia risuoni per tutte e per tutti alla stessa maniera.
                  
12.   Corrections to votes and voting intentions : see Minutes
13.   Petitions: see Minutes
14.   Documents received: see Minutes
15.   Dates of forthcoming sittings : see Minutes
16.   Approval of the minutes and forwarding of texts adopted: see Minutes
17.   Closure of the sitting

(Die Sitzung wird um 12.53 Uhr geschlossen.)

18.   Adjournment of the session

Der Präsident. – Ich erkläre die Sitzungsperiode des Europäischen Parlaments für unterbrochen.
               


ELI: 
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)