Verbatim report of proceedings of 11 November 2021
Date: 2021-11-11
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, parliamentary debate








C_202405450EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series














10.9.2024







            11 November 2021
            VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF 11 NOVEMBER 2021
            
         
(C/2024/5450)

Contents







1.

Opening of the sitting
4










2.

The first anniversary of the de facto abortion ban in Poland (motions for resolutions tabled): see Minutes
4










3.

The outcome of the EU-US Trade and Technology Council (TTC) (debate)
4










4.

Statute and funding of European political parties and foundations (debate)
18










5.

Resumption of the sitting
26










6.

Voting time
26










6.1.

Request for the waiver of the immunity of Fulvio Martusciello (A9-0302/2021 - Manon Aubry) (vote)
26










6.2.

Request for the waiver of the immunity of Harald Vilimsky (A9-0303/2021 - Andrzej Halicki) (vote)
26










6.3.

Request for the waiver of the immunity of Nils Ušakovs (A9-0304/2021 - Andrzej Halicki) (vote)
26










6.4.

Disclosure of income tax information by certain undertakings and branches (A9-0305/2021 - Evelyn Regner, Ibán García Del Blanco) (vote)
26










6.5.

European Partnership on Metrology (A9-0242/2021 - Maria da Graça Carvalho) (vote)
26










6.6.

European Union Agency for Asylum (A8-0392/2016 - Elena Yoncheva) (vote)
26










6.7.

Serious cross-border threats to health (A9-0247/2021 - Véronique Trillet-Lenoir) (vote)
27










6.8.

EU/Australia Agreement: modification of concessions on all the tariff-rate quotas included in the EU Schedule CLXXV (A9-0306/2021 - Daniel Caspary) (vote)
27










6.9.

Strengthening democracy, media freedom and pluralism in the EU (A9-0292/2021 - Tiemo Wölken, Roberta Metsola) (vote)
27










6.10.

The European Education Area: a shared holistic approach (A9-0291/2021 - Michaela Šojdrová) (vote)
27










6.11.

An intellectual property action plan to support the EU's recovery and resilience (A9-0284/2021 - Marion Walsmann) (vote)
27










6.12.

Statute and funding of European political parties and foundations (A9-0294/2021 - Charles Goerens, Rainer Wieland) (vote)
27










6.13.

The first anniversary of the de facto abortion ban in Poland (B9-0543/2021, B9-0544/2021) (vote)
27










7.

Explanations of vote
27










7.1.

Disclosure of income tax information by certain undertakings and branches (A9-0305/2021 - Evelyn Regner, Ibán García Del Blanco)
28










7.2.

European Union Agency for Asylum (A8-0392/2016 - Elena Yoncheva)
28










7.3.

Serious cross-border threats to health (A9-0247/2021 - Véronique Trillet-Lenoir)
29










7.4.

Strengthening democracy, media freedom and pluralism in the EU (A9-0292/2021 - Tiemo Wölken, Roberta Metsola)
29










7.5.

The European Education Area: a shared holistic approach (A9-0291/2021 - Michaela Šojdrová)
31










7.6.

An intellectual property action plan to support the EU's recovery and resilience (A9-0284/2021 - Marion Walsmann)
31










7.7.

The first anniversary of the de facto abortion ban in Poland (B9-0543/2021, B9-0544/2021)
31










8.

Corrections to votes and voting intentions: see Minutes
32










9.

Modified referrals to committees (Rule 56): see Minutes
32










10.

Associated committees (Rule 57): see Minutes
32










11.

Decisions to apply the joint committee procedure (Rule 58): see Minutes
32










12.

Transfers of appropriations and budgetary decisions: see Minutes
32










13.

Documents received: see Minutes
33










14.

Approval of the minutes of the part-session and forwarding of texts adopted: see Minutes
33










15.

Dates of forthcoming sittings: see Minutes
33










16.

Closure of the sitting
33










17.

Adjournment of the session
33




Verbatim report of proceedings of 11 November 2021
                  


VORSITZ: OTHMAR KARAS


Vizepräsident

1.   Opening of the sitting

(Die Sitzung wird um 9.01 Uhr eröffnet)

2.   The first anniversary of the de facto abortion ban in Poland (motions for resolutions tabled): see Minutes
3.   The outcome of the EU-US Trade and Technology Council (TTC) (debate)

Der Präsident. – Der erste Punkt der Tagesordnung ist – wie Sie auch dem Internet entnehmen können – die Erklärung der Kommission zu dem Ergebnis des EU-US-Handels- und Technologierats (TTC) (2021/2934(RSP)).
               

                  Ich möchte Sie darauf hinweisen, dass Sie mit Ihrem Abstimmungsgerät spontane Wortmeldungen und blaue Karten beantragen können – also nicht mit der Hand, sondern mit dem Abstimmungsgerät –, nachdem Sie Ihre Abstimmungskarte in das Gerät eingeführt haben. Sie sollten deshalb Ihre Abstimmungskarte stets mitbringen. Im Plenarsaal liegt eine entsprechende Anleitung auf jedem Tisch. Wenn Sie sich für eine spontane Wortmeldung registrieren möchten, können Sie das ab sofort tun, ohne das Ende der Aussprache abzuwarten.
               

                  Ich möchte Sie außerdem darauf hinweisen, dass Redebeiträge im Saal nach wie vor am zentralen Rednerpult gehalten werden. Dies gilt nicht für die spontanen Wortmeldungen, blaue Karten und Wortmeldungen zur Geschäftsordnung. Ich möchte Sie deshalb bitten, die Rednerliste im Auge zu behalten und sich zum Rednerpult zu begeben bzw. dorthin begleitet zu werden, wenn Ihr Redebeitrag ansteht.
               

Valdis Dombrovskis,
Executive Vice-President of the European Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, before going to the Trade and Technology Council itself, let me first zoom out and outline why the year 2021 has been a landmark year for transatlantic relations.
We have successfully pressed the reset button with the Biden administration. After the grounding of the Airbus-Boeing dispute at the EU-US summit in June, we also agreed to hit the pause button on the steel and aluminium trade dispute. Our agreement includes starting discussions on the new global arrangement on sustainable steel and aluminium.
Of course, we remain attentive and active on a number of US policy developments that may affect EU interests. Those could be the increase of the US domestic content via the reinforcement of ‘Buy American’ or the use of tax incentives, for example for the purchase of electrical vehicles. But overall, it is clear that our trade and investment partnership remains a global engine of prosperity.
Beyond resolving our trade disputes, we must create space to find new avenues of cooperation and deal with the challenges and opportunities of the future. In this respect, the first meeting of the Trade and Technology Council (TTC) at the end of September represented an important step in the right direction, as well as an important political signal. We are ready to lead the way in setting the standards and rules for the technologies of the 21st century, putting our core values at the centre. We are addressing environmental challenges and market opportunities for clean technology, and we are ensuring more resilient and secure supply chains, in particular in semiconductors, pharmaceuticals and critical materials for our economies.
The trade component of the TTC is of particular importance, and we have determined shared principles and areas for export control cooperation, especially on dual-use technologies. We also agreed to cooperate on best practices in investment screening, for example, on risk analysis and risk mitigation, in relation to sensitive technologies.
There will be a special focus on SMEs and on policies that can accelerate their uptake of digital technologies. We will work together on global trade challenges like non-market economic policies and practices, the protection of labour rights such as combating forced and child labour, and addressing trade-related aspects of climate and environmental action will also be part of our work.
Finally, we aim at avoiding unnecessary barriers to trade in new technologies while respecting our regulatory autonomy. We have thus set in motion a whole range of work strands that we will now pursue with vigour. To ensure concrete progress, we will meet regularly at principals' level. The next meeting is scheduled for spring 2022 in the EU.
There is strong willingness on both sides of the Atlantic to make our cooperation in the TTC a success. We are counting on your support for this. Members of the European Parliament, but also national governments, are essential in raising awareness around the fact that the benefits we gain from transatlantic cooperation will also require some compromises. We are committed to providing the European Parliament with information on the work of the TTC and we are committed to a transparent and inclusive engagement with key stakeholders and civil society at large.
Stakeholder engagement also figured prominently in the first TTC meeting. Last month, the Commission also opened a One-Stop Shop to collect continuous stakeholder input on the platform called Futurium. I strongly encourage you to promote this point of contact among your constituencies and stakeholders. We also encourage stakeholders on both sides of the Atlantic to join forces and, wherever possible, work together to shape joint transatlantic positions.
Executive Vice-President Vestager will now provide you with more input on the technology side of the Trade and Technology Council.

Margrethe Vestager,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you very much for the invitation to come here with Valdis to have this exchange and to debrief you on the first meeting of the Trade and Technology Council (TTC).
Our digital partnership with the US plays an important role in enabling us to deliver on what we have set up for this digital decade. We have an opportunity to set a vision for a democratic and human-centred digital transformation, both at home and obviously also around the world. And following the successful first meeting in Pittsburgh on 29 September, I think it is clear that the TTC has a huge potential. We spent one and a half days together with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, US Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo and US Trade Representative Katherine Tai. We had positive, frank, direct discussions. We do not always agree on every topic, but I think that shows that we are not just a talking shop: we aim for concrete deliverables for making progress on the issues at stake.
Now the TTC will focus on the actions identified in the joint statements, where the 10 working groups have been given specific tasks. Valdis has taken you through a number of these very important points. So let me just briefly touch upon three areas of particular importance when it comes to the technology side of the Trade and Technology Council.
First, on artificial intelligence, we agreed in Pittsburgh to develop trustworthy AI to oppose the use of AI that violates fundamental rights. To achieve this, we will develop mutual principles, concrete implementation tools and also value-based innovation projects. And I think this outcome shows that there is no transatlantic contradiction between promoting innovation and protecting our fundamental values.
Second, on semiconductors, we will work on rebalancing global supply chains with a view to enhancing security of supply, both for the US and, of course, the European Union. We will, as a first step, jointly identify gaps and vulnerabilities behind the current chip shortage, sharing our assessment of information collected from industry. As the next step, we will discuss how to cooperate in our respective investment strategies. We both want to strengthen our domestic capacities while sharing the aim of avoiding a harmful and expensive subsidy race. We need to diversify our sources of supply to avoid single points of failure, ensuring that we can rely on them also in times of crisis. I think that is a very important lesson that we all learned from the pandemic.
Last, on platforms, the Pittsburgh statement shows that we have built consensus on a set of common challenges, but also shared concerns. These concerns have even been, I think, more relevant after the testimony of Frances Haugen in this House earlier this week. As a first step, we will work with the US on urgent topics such as algorithmic amplification, transparency and data access to platforms by researchers.
Both sides have committed to robust and continuous engagement with a broad range of stakeholders, including civil society, to ensure that there is sufficient buy-in, ownership, so the outcomes of the cooperation will have real effects on ground. For this to be successful, it requires the close involvement of the European Parliament, and as Valdis just said, we really welcome the strong support for the TTC, also shown by the visit of several committees to Washington DC last week. As Valdis said, next spring in Europe, the venue and the date have not been set yet, but it will be here within the Union. And of course we hope to keep our engagement with this House ahead of this meeting.

Radosław Sikorski,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, as Chair of the delegation for relations between the European Union and the United States I'd like to congratulate the Commission on the setting-up and launch of the Trade and Technology Council.
I believe it builds on the history of the successful Coordinating Committee from back in the 1980s and earlier, which stemmed the flow of modern technologies to what was then the Communist bloc.
In the 1990s, we were hoping that China and Russia would join the world of free research, free enquiry and freedom in general, and that they would at least abide by the rules of the World Trade Organization. This has not happened. Therefore, unfortunately, we have to stick together with our democratic allies to set minimum standards and to start stemming the abuses.
So well done. I pledge the full support of my delegation to your work.

Bernd Lange,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, I would say to the Executive Vice-Presidents that we indeed support the Trade and Technology Council.
Let me make three remarks. One, this is a discussion forum, as Executive Vice-President Vestager said, to have an open and frank discussion. It is not a T-TIP reloaded. It's a totally different child, and this is really important to have in mind and also to make public.
Second, it's really important to set the impact for the challenges of the future specific to the field of trade – so standards on artificial intelligence, the question of subsidies, the question of export controls. All this has to be discussed, to give also some input to global trade, to the World Trade Organization.
Thirdly, we will scrutinise this process as a parliament in the Committee on International Trade and in Parliament in general, because transparency and the involvement of stakeholders is really important in this process. That's also a lesson learned from the T-TIP exercise.

Liesje Schreinemacher,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, last week we visited the US, where we met with our counterparts in the US Congress, with high officials in executive branches and with European as well as American businesses. It was great to see the Trade and Technology Council (TTC) being embraced in such a great way, in a bipartisan way. If I didn't know any better, I would have thought that it was an American idea to begin with, which is great. A new transatlantic initiative that will allow us to work on the challenges we are faced with today. I look forward to strong cooperation on setting new digital standards on foreign direct investment (FDI) screening, on fighting unfair competition coming from non-market economies, to name a few.
But let's not forget that the same people who are shaking hands over the TTC now are also the ones in charge of negotiating the trade irritants and challenges that are still hanging over our heads, even if they may be suspended for two or five years. Of course, we know our interests will never fully coincide, but let's use this momentum of the TTC and stop fighting each other with unnecessary or illegal tariffs and join forces on working together on global trade challenges. So now we have to get beyond words and actually come to concrete and tangible deliverables. This would be my most important question to the Commissioners here this morning: what do you see as a concrete deliverable in the very near future? I look forward to your answer.

Reinhard Bütikofer,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, Executive Vice-Presidents, it is good that the Trade and Technology Council (TTC) had a successful start. The first TTC meeting in Pittsburgh, however, does not mark the end of our trade controversies with the US. It doesn't even mark the beginning of the end, but hopefully it marks the end of a new beginning in sorting out some of the issues. This assessment is borne out by what we see as a result of the recent trade and aluminium deal that you negotiated, Executive Vice-President. This is a welcome result, even though it is weaker than we had hoped and issues do remain.
Even more important strategically, I believe, is the standard-setting dimension going forward. Shaping the future, not just sorting out legacy issues. And there we have to work very diligently with the US because this is of geopolitical relevancy. And if you allow me to say that, in the spirit of geopolitical responsibility, wouldn't it make sense if there would not just be the American Secretary of State, but also our foreign minister?

Marco Campomenosi,
a nome del gruppo ID. – Signor Presidente, signori Vicepresidenti, onorevoli colleghi, anche io accolgo con favore il nuovo dialogo con gli Stati Uniti: cibersicurezza, digitale, gestione dei dati, le grandi sfide globali sono solo alcuni degli elementi importanti di cui discutere.
               

                  Ed è anche positivo il fatto che non stiamo parlando di un accordo commerciale di libero scambio, che su temi come l'agricoltura ci porterebbe lontano e ci porterebbe in conflitti difficilmente risolvibili, però abbiamo dei temi su cui è giusto riflettere.
               

                  Per esempio io ovviamente, come tutti, accolgo con favore le aperture americane sul tema dei dazi all'acciaio e all'alluminio, però in questo momento servono solo ad alcuni esportatori ma non faranno altro che aumentare la carenza di acciaio che c'è in questo momento per i nostri produttori in Europa, su cui secondo me avremo bisogno di intervenire ulteriormente.
               

                  E poi ci sono dei temi che riguardano la credibilità geopolitica di noi come istituzioni perché, da un lato, mi sembra – l'ho già detto altre volte – dobbiamo essere atlantisti sempre, anche quando governano i repubblicani, non solo quando governano i democratici.
               

                  E poi alcuni casi, come quello emerso da un'inchiesta giornalistica nei giorni scorsi che parla di motori tedeschi venduti alle navi da guerra cinesi, quando qua, anche in quest'Aula, ci sono dei deputati che sono stati sanzionati per le loro posizioni sulla Cina o altri che si sono recati a Taiwan pochi giorni fa.
               

                  Ecco, non vorrei che qualcuno confonda l'autonomia con l'irrilevanza, perché qui è in gioco la credibilità in un rapporto transatlantico che deve essere coerente in tutte le azioni che compiono l'Unione europea e gli Stati membri.
               

Geert Bourgeois,
namens de ECR-Fractie. – Voorzitter, ik ben zeer ingenomen met de resultaten van de eerste bijeenkomst van de Handels- en Technologieraad EU-VS en wil de Commissie hier dan ook uitdrukkelijk mee feliciteren.
               

                  Ik ben een fervent voorstander van de Handels- en Technologieraad: we moeten ernaar streven om als EU en VS samen de mondiale standaarden te zetten. Dit is een grote uitdaging. De Chinese standaardisering is momenteel in volle opmars. Als wij de toon niet zetten, zullen andere machten dat doen. Mijnheer Dombrovskis, dit moet inderdaad gebeuren vanuit onze gedeelde waarden en dat zal niet altijd even makkelijk zijn. We hebben enerzijds immers de VS, die een enorme voorsprong heeft op het gebied van gegevens en bovendien beschikt over een eengemaakte kapitaalmarkt, en waar nauwelijks regelgeving bestaat en veel ruimte is om te experimenteren, en anderzijds de EU, die niet alleen kampt met een grote achterstand, maar bovendien de neiging heeft te veel te willen regelen. De Commissie moet daarom stimulerende regelgeving vaststellen zonder onnodige belemmeringen.
               

                  Voorts sluit ik me aan bij het streven van mijnheer Dombrovskis naar een intenser partnerschap. We moeten alle problemen op tafel leggen: de protectionistische ‘Buy American Act’, de ‘Jones Act’ en ook de dreigende heffingen op elektrische voertuigen. Een duurzaam partnerschap moet stoelen op openheid en gelijkwaardigheid.
               

                  Ten slotte wil ik oproepen om verder te gaan dan de wetgevingsdialoog en de totstandkoming van een echte trans-Atlantische parlementaire coöperatie na te streven.
               

Helmut Scholz,
im Namen der Fraktion The Left. – Herr Präsident, werte Vizepräsidenten! Die Gespräche der Delegation des Handelsausschusses unseres Hauses letzte Woche in Washington verdeutlichten, der TTC ist der gegenwärtig wohl wichtigste wahrnehmbare beiderseitige Versuch, die Zusammenarbeit USA-EU neu zu ergründen.
               

                  Zugleich ist klargeworden: Das wichtigste Thema für die USA sind die USA – Buy American. Das zweitwichtigste Thema für die USA ist China – strategischer und systemischer Rivale. Die Bedeutung der Partnerschaft mit der EU wird daran bemessen, ob die EU als ökonomischer Wettbewerber bereit ist, amerikanischen Interessen zu folgen, und auch daran, wie sich die EU an der Seite der USA im Konflikt mit China aufzustellen bereit ist.
               

                  In diesem Rahmen wird nun der TTC platziert, und angesichts der planetaren Interessen – mit Blick nach Glasgow – müssen wir die verbleibende Zeit intensiv nutzen, um gemeinsame Interessen abzustecken. Der TTC wird nur fruchtbar sein, wenn er nicht zu einem Gremium der Absicherung globaler Vorherrschaft in Technologie und Industrie mutiert, sondern mit seinen Arbeitsgruppen, mit den geplanten breiten Stakeholdern, Beratungen und Meinungsaustauschen im wirklichen Sinn als Dialogforum für Nachhaltigkeit und Überwindung von Armut dient.
               

                  Warum sollten wir nicht gerade die amerikanischen Ideen für eine Handelspolitik aufgreifen, die ihre Arbeiterinnen und Arbeiter ins Zentrum stellt? Wir müssen sie nur so umgestalten, dass sie den Beschäftigten in allen Ländern der Welt dient.
               

                  Viele befürchten jedoch, dass das Format TTC von den traditionellen Macht- und Konzerninteressen gekidnappt werden wird. In TTIP war die geplante regulatorische Kooperation ein Schwerpunkt der öffentlichen Kritik. Mit TTC ist die Idee nun wieder da, bloß ohne Handelsabkommen.
               

Tiziana Beghin (NI). – Signor Presidente, signori Vicepresidenti, onorevoli colleghi, avere un forum aperto per confrontarsi con gli Stati Uniti dopo anni di chiusure e incomprensioni è un grande passo avanti, di cui mi congratulo con la Commissione.
               

                  Ho però alcune domande su cui spero i Vicepresidenti vogliano esprimersi, perché a distanza di quasi un mese dalla prima riunione io continuo ad interrogarmi su quale sia la vera natura di questo Trade and Technology Council.
               

                  Si tratta di un forum dove mediare su spinose questioni di legislazione, oppure di un luogo semplicemente in cui discutere? È uno strumento per scambiare idee o si vuole una base per un futuro accordo transatlantico?
               

                  Insomma, se gli impegni presi non sono vincolanti, come è stato più volte ribadito, qual è allora il livello di commitment e impegno dei partner, soprattutto vis-à-vis di alcune sfide collettive come le misure per la limitazione delle emissioni o l'intelligenza artificiale?
               

                  E infine, qual è il ruolo che la Commissione vede per il Parlamento in tutto questo? Poiché finora non siamo stati particolarmente coinvolti in questo forum.
               

Eva Maydell (PPE). – Mr President, I would like to be clear, I think that only together will the EU and the US influence global rules in the decades to come. I think that we currently see that our combined share of economic output is shrinking. Our democratic allies are fewer and fewer. And even after the election of President Biden, both of us engage in avoidable mistakes. I think we need each other, and this is why the Trade and Technology Council is too important to fail. Now it is up to us to use windows of opportunities. And I think one such window, as Executive Vice-President Vestager mentioned, is now open on artificial intelligence. Many experts agree that on AI, guidelines and the public also demand more oversight. So let's make AI and other digital matters our early successes, hopefully opening the door for other topics with more complicated pasts.
We, in the European Parliament, are ready to engage with Congress and citizens to make these issues a success.

Miapetra Kumpula-Natri (S&D). – Mr President, Commissioner, establishment of the Trade and Technology Council (TTC) between the EU and United States is highly welcomed. It provides a valuable platform to cooperate on the topical matters of today in tech and trade issues, as well as to strengthen transatlantic relations. We are living in the interconnected world, which underlines the importance of cooperation.
To give an example, the world is changing due to the emergence of AI. It is important that we discuss advantages of AI and ensure that it is utilised in a responsible, transparent way in accordance with universal human rights: AI that helps to protect democracy and not counteract it; human-centred AI that improves health and does not cause mental sicknesses. Another example to show that the world can't afford trade barriers that hinder green tech to help the climate crisis. Because the work of the TTC encompasses topics that are political and dealt with also in the European Parliament, it is crucial that Parliament be informed about progress and the work of the TTC.
Let me finish here, as the Vice-Chair for the US Delegation and Transatlantic Legislators' Dialogue, that committees involved have agreed to establish a subcommittee to follow the work on the TTC to complement the scrutiny work of the committees.

Dragoș Tudorache (Renew). – Mr President, I was also in Washington last week as Chair of the Special Committee on Artificial Intelligence in a Digital Age (AIDA) and with colleagues from across this aisle – an outreach mission, which we had wanted to do since the inception of the AIDA mandate.
Our aim was to set the basis of a dialogue with the US Congress on artificial intelligence in the impact of frontier tech on the world of tomorrow. But the launch of the Trade and Technology Council (TTC) just weeks before opened up a broader perspective of transatlantic leadership on technology, on a shared realisation that the future of our relationship will be more and more dominated by tech cooperation, by what we will accomplish in converging standards, research, data governance and on developing mutually beneficial projects. And I congratulate the Commission for the launch and for how the TTC was organised.
There are many commonalities at the heart TTC: common values, same challenges and opportunities, and most importantly, we see the geopolitics of technology in the same way. But there are also differences, which we need to acknowledge and learn to work with. We see the urgency in the form of regulating and digital platforms differently. We also have a different approach to how to prepare standards. We are more top-down while they work more bottom-up, co-creating together with the industry. We must accept these different regulatory cultures and in fact take the best from each other. I think we can and should work more with the business sector like the Americans do, while we can share with them the very good work that you the Commission has done in preparing the legislative landscape on digital issues. And most importantly, and we have made this point very forcefully, we must build a parliamentary dimension of the TTC, one where we can come together as legislators and exercise oversight and political guidance on the evolution of the council.

Anna Cavazzini (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, I think it is really good that we are debating today the Trade and Technology Council because this important body needs parliamentary oversight – a lot of colleagues have mentioned this already. As the whistleblower Frances Haugen told us this week in the European Parliament, we cannot face the huge power of Facebook, Google and co. on our own, so cooperation with the US is crucial.
I think the EU is really on the right track in fighting the harmful business models of big platforms that always choose profit over safety of effects. And of course, I think some things still need to be strengthened, for example, in the USA, when it comes to transparency of algorithms and tackling problems caused by targeted advertisement or strengthening the consumer angle – some of the things Frances Haugen also mentioned, and I hope this Parliament will do so.
But we are going in the right direction and this is good. And I want this positive tech agenda based on privacy, fundamental rights, consumer protections and values, to be the guiding principles when discussing and dialoguing with the US while keeping our regulatory autonomy.

Roman Haider (ID). – Herr Präsident! Zuerst einmal freut es mich, dass wir uns hier endlich wieder einmal mit einem der Kernthemen der EU beschäftigen, nämlich dem internationalen Handel – ist ja hier nicht immer so.
               

                  Es geht um die Stärkung der transatlantischen Partnerschaft zwischen den USA und der Europäischen Union in sehr breiten Feldern – Technologieaustausch und Handel. Und das ist gerade angesichts der zunehmenden Bedrohung durch China prinzipiell zu begrüßen, und insbesondere wegen der nicht marktkonformen Wettbewerbsverzerrungen durch China ist so eine Kooperation sinnvoll. Ich verweise nur auf chinesische Dumpingpreise, Dumpinglöhne, erzwungenen Technologietransfer bei Joint Ventures, Produktpiraterie und, und, und.
               

                  Insgesamt werden aber leider derartige Abkommen wenig nutzen, wenn die EU-Kommission mit ihren Plänen zur Zerschlagung der europäischen Industrie unter dem Deckmantel des Klimaschutzes weitermacht. Diese verantwortungslose Politik treibt Europa in Abhängigkeiten zu allen anderen Mächten und macht damit eine eigenständige europäische Politik unmöglich.
               

Dominik Tarczyński (ECR). – Mr President, I'd like to focus on the challenges, and not only on income, money and shaking hands.
The main challenge is China. So the question to the Commission is very simple: how can we combat China, I mean the lack of standards from China? Because when we had this conversation in Washington last week, everyone was happy to do it, and the Trade and Technology Council (TTC) is a beautiful thing. But what about China? We can still see people who are basically hypocrites. They are making the money, making the business as usual, they are talking about the TTC, about cooperation, they are talking about fighting for the people and combating the lack of standards, but that's still money coming from China.
So, what can we do and when can we do it? What concrete steps can be taken to protect our European economy? Because this is the most important part of the TTC as a future. If we want to be successful and safe, we have to make decisions – not just talking, talking and shaking hands.

Manuel Bompard (The Left). – Monsieur le Président, le Conseil du commerce et des technologies nous a été vendu avec les louanges habituelles sur la relation transatlantique que l'Union forme avec les États-Unis. Il semble donc que les pratiques déloyales et les humiliations des dernières années ne vous ont pas servi de leçon. En voici deux d'une longue liste.
               

                  En 2014, après un chantage inacceptable de la justice américaine, General Electric s'empare de la branche énergie d'Alstom. Il pille les brevets, renie ses engagements et laisse des milliers de salariés sur le carreau. Quel merveilleux partenariat!
               

                  Il y a quelques semaines encore, une alliance militaire avec l'Australie se forge dans le dos de l'Union européenne au prix de la rupture d'un très gros contrat passé avec la France. Quelle formidable coopération!
               

                  Soyons sérieux! Jusqu'à quand devons-nous accepter d'être les dindons de la farce? Il est temps de comprendre que les États-Unis ne sont pas nos amis, mais une puissance avec ses intérêts propres. Cessons d'être naïfs et protégeons nos emplois, nos industries et nos savoir-faire. Ayons le courage de l'indépendance.
               

Edina Tóth (NI). – Tisztelt Elnök úr, tisztelt Biztos asszony! Fontosnak tartom, hogy az EU és az Egyesült Államok rendszeres együttműködést alakítson ki, ezért üdvözlöm, hogy az EU–USA Kereskedelmi és Technológiai Tanács prioritásai között szerepelt a két térséget érintő chiphiány felszámolása. A koronavírus-járvány egyik előre nem látott következménye, hogy a félvezetők piacán világszerte hiány alakult ki, amelynek hatását leginkább az autóipar fogja megérezni. A chip előállításához szükséges nyersanyaghiány jelentősen megemeli a gépjárműgyártás költségeit, amely az előrejelzések szerint súlyos károkat fog okozni az iparági szereplőknek az elkövetkezendő években. Mindezek hatására a személygépkocsik ára drasztikusan emelkedhet. A krízis járulékos vesztesei pedig a vásárlók lesznek. Az ő pénztárcájuk lesz leginkább megterhelve. Remélem, hogy az Európai Bizottság is minél hamarabb cselekedni fog, és a fogyasztók érdekeit figyelembe véve fogja az új cselekvési tervét kidolgozni.
               

Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez (PPE). – Señor presidente, con 780 millones de habitantes y el 40 % del PIB mundial, Europa y los Estados Unidos hemos desarrollado la relación económica más importante del mundo.
               

                  Pero nuestra relación va mucho más allá del aspecto puramente comercial: Europa y los Estados Unidos somos los dos grandes pilares que sustentamos el orden democrático liberal y de Derecho; un orden democrático cada vez más amenazado por regímenes dictatoriales que cuentan con mayores capacidades tecnológicas y mayor peso económico. Si europeos y estadounidenses pretendemos conservar este orden liberal, la cooperación ya no es una opción sino una obligación.
               

                  Debemos apuntalar las instituciones compartidas que regulan el comercio y el orden internacional, pero también debemos mirar al futuro. Debemos diseñar las normas necesarias para proteger nuestra privacidad, preservar nuestra ciberseguridad y regular la inteligencia artificial. Ya no nos basta con el efecto Bruselas. Si queremos seguir liderando el siglo xxi, las democracias necesitamos el efecto Bruselas-Washington.
               

Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D). – Voorzitter, ik denk dat we het er allemaal over eens zijn dat we na Trump met de huidige regering-Biden moeten werken aan een positieve agenda voor de toekomst. Dit betekent niet alleen dat we problemen moeten oplossen, bijvoorbeeld op het gebied van staal en aluminium, maar ook dat we een positieve agenda moeten opstellen met kwesties die van belang zijn voor onze toekomst. De Handels- en Technologieraad EU-VS is daarom zeer belangrijk.
               

                  We weten allemaal dat technologie zoals artificiële intelligentie kan worden ingezet met het oog op het welslagen van onze toekomst en het welzijn van onze bevolking. Deze technologie kan echter ook voor een groot aantal andere doelstellingen worden gebruikt. Het is daarom van essentieel belang dat democratische samenlevingen zoals de Verenigde Staten en Europa op dit gebied samenwerken en dit niet overlaten aan samenlevingen die de desbetreffende technologie gebruiken voor spionage of grootschalig toezicht op hun bevolking.
               

                  Deze democratische controle moet ook vanuit het Europees Parlement kunnen plaatsvinden. Dit is van groot belang om het draagvlak verder te versterken.
               

Nicolae Ștefănuță (Renew). – Mr President, today is 11 November, it's Remembrance Day, the day that weapons stood still in Europe. I think it is time to remember that, because working together on trade and technology is also about peace, not only about the economy. It will help us win an international competition with China and neutralise its ever-expanding power on the world stage. It is time we fought together unfair trade practices such as theft of intellectual property. It is time we established clear and strategic standards for the use of artificial intelligence so that we have to fight human rights violations through mass surveillance.
The COVID-19 pandemic has shown us how fragile the global production systems are, and we need to build resilient and sustainable supply chains for tomorrow. I'd like to paraphrase the 1992 US elections by saying ‘it's not only the economy, stupid, it's also peace’.

Henrike Hahn (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident! TTC – der Handels- und Technologierat – ist ein Baustein zu einer transatlantischen Allianz für Klimaneutralität.
               

                  Beim Klimaschutz schauen USA und EU in dieselbe Richtung. Das konnten wir mit dem Industrieausschuss in Washington, D.C. letzte Woche ausführlich diskutieren und sehen, aber wir brauchen auf beiden Seiten noch viel konkretere Zielvorgaben für die Dekarbonisierung. Bei der Energiegerechtigkeit, beim gerechten Übergang und bei der Einbindung der von der Transformation betroffenen Menschen müssen wir auch global denken und gut zusammenarbeiten. Und der TTC soll als Forum dienen für die Versorgung mit Rohstoffen, für nachhaltige und belastbare Lieferketten, für die Schaffung von Märkten, für Sekundärrohstoffe und den Austausch von Know-how zu grüner Technologie.
               

                  Halbleiter sind wichtig für die Digitalisierung und für den Klimaschutz. Wir wollen europäische Kapazitäten dazu aufbauen als Partner und faire Konkurrenz, bei der wir Kompetenzen und Märkte berücksichtigen müssen. Und für globale Datenströme im Einklang mit Grundrechten benötigen wir vertrauenswürdige Partner – auch gerade die USA. Es gibt viel zu tun. Gemeinsam geht es am besten.
               

Virginie Joron (ID). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, Madame la Commissaire, 500 milliards d'euros en 2030: le marché mondial de l'informatique en nuage est un enjeu majeur pour la France et pour l'Europe. Mais ce marché ne va que dans un seul sens: vers les États-Unis.
               

                  Seules 5 % des données européennes sont stockées en Europe. Même le gouvernement français favorise Google et Microsoft. Données militaires et données de santé sont gérées par ces sociétés alors que des acteurs français comme OVH et Scaleway offrent des solutions souveraines.
               

                  Les négociations sur le DMA (la future législation sur les marchés numériques) doivent permettre à l'Europe de reprendre la main vis-à-vis de certaines pratiques des Google, Amazon et Facebook. Mais comment la Commission européenne pourra vérifier et inspecter hors de l'Europe ces entreprises? Les Américains, eux, obligent les fournisseurs de services à divulguer aux autorités toute information, qu'elle se trouve à l'intérieur des États-Unis ou à l'autre bout du monde.
               

                  Dans ce forum transatlantique, vous devez porter la voix des entreprises vraiment européennes qui font travailler des ingénieurs en Europe. N'écoutez pas uniquement le lobby Digitaleurope, car le Coréen Samsung, le Chinois Huawei, Facebook, Google et Amazon financent ce lobby. M. Chao-Muller, directeur du lobby Digitaleurope ne représente pas nos intérêts.
               

Michiel Hoogeveen (ECR). – Voorzitter, toen de Volksrepubliek China in 2001 toetrad tot de Wereldhandelsorganisatie, was het de bedoeling dat de handel zou toenemen en China langzamerhand een liberale marktdemocratie zou worden.
               

                  Dit is echter anders uitgepakt dan verwacht. China kiest zijn eigen koers en combineert staatskapitalisme met een zeer assertieve handelspolitiek. De bijeenkomst van de Handels- en Technologieraad EU-VS die onlangs in Pittsburgh heeft plaatsgevonden en waarbij de EU en de Verenigde Staten hebben aangetoond dat zij de technologische uitdagingen van de 21e eeuw aankunnen en dat zij deze het best op trans-Atlantisch niveau kunnen aanpakken, was dan ook van groot belang.
               

                  Om onze welvaart en manier van leven te beschermen, moet de technologische voorsprong van het westen behouden blijven. Nederland staat bijvoorbeeld bovenaan de wereldwijde markt voor halfgeleiders, wat een geopolitiek voordeel is. De huidige problemen in de toeleveringsketen moeten dus worden opgelost.
               

                  Een strategische, trans-Atlantische samenwerking betekent eveneens dat onze bedrijven dergelijke technologieën niet zomaar kunnen delen met landen die andere politieke belangen nastreven. Laat Pittsburgh dan ook het startschot zijn van een nauwere trans-Atlantische samenwerking, waarbij ook andere gelijkgestemde landen zich kunnen aansluiten.
               

Massimiliano Salini (PPE). – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, noi abbiamo una narrazione entusiastica, legittimamente entusiastica, nel commento che facciamo alla luce dell'accordo sottostante alla costituzione di questo Consiglio commerciale e tecnologico tra Stati Uniti ed Europa.
               

                  È legittimo l'entusiasmo, la soggettività politica dell'Unione europea consiste nell'appartenenza all'asse atlantico con gli Stati Uniti, ma questo accordo documenta anche l'esistenza di una ferita. La ferita che da tempo, politicamente, vede messo in difficoltà questo asse: sull'Afghanistan; sulla partita legata alla battaglia contro il cambiamento climatico; sulla difesa, con l'accordo AUKUS.
               

                  Allora il punto è, da un lato, il presidio tecnologico – trasparenza negli algoritmi e quant'altro – e commerciale, ma dall'altro chi si farà carico politicamente di condurre questa enorme partita. L'Europa, politicamente, da chi sarà guidata nello sfruttare il contenuto di questo nuovo accordo con gli Stati Uniti?
               

Tonino Picula (S&D). – Mr President, it has been an exciting couple of weeks for transatlantic relations. After a turbulent summer we are picking up on the positive momentum – from lifting the travel ban, joint environment commitments in Glasgow, meetings on the highest level, suspension of the aluminium and steel trade dispute, the Pittsburgh meeting – to name a few.
In my capacity as a standing rapporteur for relations with the US, I fully recognise the importance of the TTC for our overall relations. It's one of the key pillars. We want to see sustainable, ethical and inclusive digital and green transitions that benefit our citizens.
I would like to underline the issue of transparency and parliamentary cooperation. Even though the TTC is not negotiating a new comprehensive trade agreement, we learned our lesson from the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. This is why I join calls to involve parliamentarians from both sides in your work. We are ready to contribute to this positive agenda.

Dita Charanzová (Renew). – Mr President, while this Council is a major opportunity, there is no doubt that the European Union and the United States have a lot of potential for common action and cooperation. And our agenda is finally on the right track.
But we must ensure that this doesn't become just a talking shop. We need to prioritise. We need to make tangible suggestions. The goal of each meeting should be a concrete result and concrete action. The procedure to implement any decision will, however, take time, so we need to move quickly, or it may be too late. Some have pointed out that the TTC should not turn into just a China-bashing exercise. They are right, but we cannot ignore the geopolitical reality and who our main competitor is.

Anna-Michelle Asimakopoulou (PPE). – Mr President, as Vice-Chair of the Committee on International Trade (INTA), I support the Trade and Technology Council as a positive development in transatlantic relations, and Pittsburgh was a good starting point. The question is now what can we expect from the TTC? We know it will deal with trade and technology, so that takes care of the two Ts. But the essence of what we can expect can be described best by using words starting with the letter C, so we can expect that the TTC will be a forum where we can converse and collaborate, where we can minimise conflict, where we can compare and converge approaches, where we can reach compromises and aim for consensus – where we can find a way to deal with China, even though we avoid using the name.
But if I were to choose one word starting with the letter C to describe what a successful overall outcome would be of the TTC for the transatlantic relationship, I would choose the word ‘compatibility’. After all, in trade and tech, as in life, compatibility is the essence of solid and long-lasting relationships.

Karin Karlsbro (Renew). – Herr talman! Handel är en förutsättning för tillväxt, välstånd, utveckling och innovation, men den är också ett verktyg för att trygga fred och säkerhet.
               

                  ‘Trade needs democracy’, sa USA:s handelsminister när hon besökte oss i somras. Men demokratin behöver också handeln. När vi ser på världen med handelspolitiska glasögon blir det uppenbart att demokratier måste samarbeta, precis som EU och USA nu gör på områden som digitalisering och teknik.
               

                  Vi ska ha höga förväntningar på det här samarbetet, att det ska öka konkurrenskraften, leverera mindre krångel och mindre byråkrati – vilket gynnar både företag och konsumenter – och stimulera grön teknikutveckling som hjälper oss att minska utsläppen.
               

                  Vi förväntar oss att nya gemensamma regler ska bygga på demokratiska värderingar med respekt för mänskliga rättigheter och integritet. Varje nytt band som knyts mellan EU och USA är viktigt.
               

                  Världens ledande demokratier står starka. Ännu starkare står vi tillsammans.
               

Pilar del Castillo Vera (PPE). – Señor presidente, señora vicepresidenta, los Estados Unidos, por historia y valores, constituyen un aliado natural de Europa. Nuestras economías están muy entrelazadas ya, pero la necesidad de reforzar esa relación ha ido siendo mayor a medida que el mundo se ha hecho más global; el Consejo de Comercio y Tecnología ha abierto nuevas expectativas para reforzar esa alianza, especialmente en un área tan determinante como la digitalización.
               

                  Quiero incidir en cinco ámbitos en los que apremia desarrollar un esfuerzo común: buscar soluciones en la crisis de los suministros de semiconductores; promover el desarrollo de una inteligencia artificial que genere confianza; desarrollar políticas y acciones coordinadas en materia de ciberseguridad; trabajar en un área tan crucial, tan determinante, como los estándares, y avanzar hacia un espacio trasatlántico de datos que permita a nuestros investigadores y a nuestras empresas aprovechar todo su potencial.
               

                  Hace unos días una delegación de la Comisión de Industria, Investigación y Energía estuvo en Washington D. C., y quedó patente el interés renovado que hay: no se puede perder, señora vicepresidenta, este impulso, y el Consejo de Comercio y Tecnología tiene que empezar a dar resultados.
               

Jörgen Warborn (PPE). – Herr talman! Fru kommissionsledamot! Den globala handeln störs nu alltmer av protektionistiska vindar, och det måste vi omgående ändra på.
               

                  Global handel är lösningen för att tackla många av våra utmaningar. Människor, jobb och vårt välstånd är beroende av handel.
               

                  Jag välkomnar TTC som en nystart för att kartlägga våra gemensamma värderingar och för att fördjupa alliansen mellan EU och USA. Vi ska samarbeta med alla allierade som vill upprätthålla en fri, rättvis och regelbaserad handel.
               

                  Därför är det viktigt att vi nu väver ihop våra ambitioner, att vi upprätthåller säkra och motståndskraftiga leveranskedjor för digitala produkter och tjänster och att vi fullt ut stöder globaliseringen.
               

                  Av de tio arbetsgrupperna skulle jag vilja fokusera på den om småföretagare idag. Min fråga till kommissionen blir följande: Vad är kommissionens målsättning med arbetet i The Trade and Tech Council för europeiska småföretag?
               

Christophe Hansen (PPE). – Mr President, EU-US relations are back on track and that's exactly where they belong. With the grounding of the Airbus-Boeing dispute and the suspension of the Section 232, the tariff conflict, we can once again focus on building rather than on repairing.
It is the mark of good policy not to let the perfect be the enemy of the better. You have taken your responsibility in doing so and created the basis between punch-all effects from Trump's divisive trade policies for good. We look forward to seeing tangible results coming out of the TTC, in particular in the fight against distortive trade practices and subsidies. And we hope this can give impetus as well to the multilateral process on this.
I have said it before: when the EU and the US quarrel, Beijing and the Kremlin rejoice. But when the EU and the US work together on setting the standards for the 21st century, the world finally pays attention, and that is exactly the way forward.

ELNÖKÖL: KLÁRA DOBREV


alelnök



                           ‘Catch the eye’ eljárás


Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, na semana passada, fiz parte de uma delegação do Parlamento no Comité Especial sobre Inteligência Artificial e tivemos a oportunidade de discutir, aprofundadamente, a cooperação tecnológica com deputados, serviços da Presidência, Departamento de Estado e de Comércio, stakeholders e vários grupos de reflexão.
                  

                     Convergimos no propósito de acelerar a inovação. Convergimos até nos valores que precisamos de proteger, em nome de um modelo democrático para o digital. Mas existe ainda uma grande distância nos instrumentos regulatórios que devemos usar para esse efeito, para que os dados sejam protegidos de forma equivalente, ou na abordagem de risco de a Inteligência Artificial.
                  

                     Precisamos, por isso, dos dois lados do Atlântico, de estar abertos para a construção de pontes e soluções comuns, que não têm de ser exatamente iguais, mas que, no fim, nos permitam, como afirmou a Sra. Vice-Presidente, um espaço digital de confiança.
                  

Barry Andrews (Renew). – Madam President, I very much welcome the first meeting of the Trade and Technology Council, which took place in September — something that would have been inconceivable under the previous American administration.
I certainly welcome the first statement of the Council, which emphasised the importance of workers on both sides of the Atlantic, on shared values and also on SMEs and the working groups that have been set up under the Council. It is striking that some elements of open strategic autonomy are clearly there in the statement – for example, balancing the encouragement of foreign direct investment on the one hand, but also investment screening.
But advancing any trade agenda requires a high level of scrutiny and particularly parliamentary scrutiny. So I wish to add my voice to those who've already asked what the role of the European Parliament is in scrutinising the work of the Council and the working groups set up thereunder.
Finally, I would like to welcome the statement made by President von der Leyen yesterday reaffirming steadfast American support for the Good Friday Agreement and against the triggering of Article 16.

Bogdan Rzońca (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Dużo dobrych informacji napływa przy dzisiejszej debacie o współpracy między Stanami Zjednoczonymi a Europą. Dobrze byłoby rzeczywiście, żeby standardy w zakresie użycia nowych technologii i użycia handlu jako instrumentu rozwoju gospodarczego były narzucane właśnie przez współpracę Stanów Zjednoczonych z Unią Europejską – tu mamy naprawdę ogromną szansę. Dlatego chciałem zapytać o pewien możliwy aspekt tej współpracy. Zwracam się do pani komisarz: jakie miejsce według pani w przyszłości będzie miała współpraca Unii Europejskiej i Stanów Zjednoczonych w obszarze kosmosu? To jest to miejsce, gdzie możemy naprawdę dużo zaoferować światu, dobrze wykorzystać tę część świata – kosmos – w stosunku do wyzwań gospodarczych i współpracy międzynarodowej.
                  

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, cred că nimeni nu pune la îndoială necesitatea unui acord între Uniunea Europeană și Statele Unite. Am avut un eșec, din punctul meu de vedere, cu TTIP, sper să nu ajungem în același punct și sper să învățăm din ceea ce s-a întâmplat în negocierea TTIP.
                  

                     De fapt, lucrul pe care și acum îl văd încă neclar, este vorba de armonizarea standardelor, este vorba de renunțarea la principiul la care țin foarte mult Statele Unite, ‘Buy America’.
                  

                     Practic noi, piața Uniunii Europene, în calitate de vicepreședintă a pieței interne, spun că avem nevoie de acordul cu Statele Unite. În același timp, avem nevoie de echitate, de similaritate, avem nevoie de sprijinul IMM-urilor și mă bucur că s-a vorbit aici că veți ține cont.
                  

                     Dar vreau să știu care sunt pașii următori și cum vedeți lucrul cu Parlamentul European, pentru că eu cred că nu putem să ne bazăm doar pe ceea ce discutați acolo neluând decizii și când, care este termenul și care sunt pașii pe care îi urmăm pentru a ajunge la un asemenea acord.
                  

Dragoș Pîslaru (Renew). – Madam President, the TTC is a great achievement and EU-US relations are critical for the common future of both the US and the EU at global level.
Last week I was in Washington with the mission from the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and there was openness and a warm welcome on the part of our American counterparts. But I also felt a certain level of uncertainty or non-clarity relating to the immediate objectives in several of the ten Working Groups that have been set up. For instance, in Working Group 3 on Secure Supply Chains we are right now at the phase that we are doing mapping and the exchange of information. We are talking about the US and the EU Chips Act, but it's more like mirroring things rather than having an integrated approach.
So what I am kindly asking you is, how do you perceive the kind of cooperation that we had, for instance with Pfizer-BioNTech, when the subsidies played together? Is that the future that we can see in terms of objectives?

(‘Catch the eye’ eljárás vége)


Margrethe Vestager,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, dear Members, I'm really encouraged by this debate – with the warm support, but also with the level of detail and specificity. I think, in answering some of the questions, you have actually given part of the answers yourself.
One of the main questions, of course, is what actually is the Trade and Technology Council? Because it cannot be a place where we sort of prejudge what will be the opinions of this House. I think that must be absolutely clear. But that doesn't mean that it can be without effect. Just as a side remark, I'd say that actually I'm quite happy that we can shake hands again because I think that shows that we have moved quite some lines, both in terms of the pandemic, but also in getting to a better relationship with colleagues in the US.
I think what was said by Anna-Michelle Asimakopoulou was very precise as a description of what the TTC is. Because what we can do is we can exchange information, we can discuss things that we disagree on. We can align points of view and – I think very importantly – we can be specific. Let me take the question of semiconductors. Here what we have agreed is to collect information on both sides and then to establish a common analysis as to what are the reasons for the chip shortage that we are faced with right now. Obviously, it's really, really difficult to do something about it on short-term notice, but we can make our future, mid— and long-term actions, be informed by the causes for the short-term shortage that we are faced with right now. I think that those important insights will make our work also for the European Chips Act and for a European Chips Strategy so much more solid.
The ten working groups are indeed different because they have a different focus. Working groups, for instance, on standards, will not only be focusing on setting EU-US standards, but also on working together in multilateral standard-setting forums. I think it is not to be underestimated how important it is to have such early warning cooperation to know what is being brought up, what is at stake. Because we know that there are others who want to set their standards also in multilateral standards-setting organisations. So, we can coordinate our approaches to key global technology, to economic issues, to trade issues, and because of that we can deepen transatlantic trade and economic relations, basing this on politics where our shared values get a specific concrete expression in real life.
I think the second example of that is the work that we are doing on artificial intelligence. The first result was to align our point of view that the critical thing here is to have a risk-based approach, so that when AI is used in cases where fundamental values might be at stake, this is where we should focus. In order to make sure that we have an innovation-prone approach to artificial intelligence so that we can use it as much as possible.
So the first step is to align our way of thinking. The next step is to see if we can develop common tools in order actually to see if common principles are being upheld. Because there are thousands and thousands of producers, of coders, of programmers, of future users of AI, who would want to know how to make sure that they are on the right side of our principles. Here, of course, we have an obligation to develop tools that will allow that to happen.
As you'll also see, we have a working group as to how to enable small and medium-sized businesses to be part of the technological development. I think that is really important, because the work we do here is actually to open the market so that small and medium-sized businesses will have a much bigger chance based on their merits, on their talent, on their ideas, on their work ethics, actually to get to their customers – which also, of course, chips into the question of platforms that I mentioned in my introduction.
One of the things that I will mention to bridge into how the European Parliament can be involved is the One-Stop Shop that Valdis Dombrovskis mentioned in his introduction, because outreach to stakeholders and the scrutiny of the European Parliament is part of what can make the TTC a success. So, we have this website where one can both interact with us, but where also papers become available as soon as possible so that it is open as to what it is that we're doing. I think that is very important. I hope that you will promote this in your constituencies for the different stakeholders for whom it is important.
The meeting that we had under the leadership of a Member of this Parliament, Bernd Lange, with a number of other committee chairs being invited, is part of the answer to the question as to how the European Parliament can be involved. I think this debate is also part of how the European Parliament can be involved. And, of course, for us to prepare the next meeting, we will discuss in the set-up chosen by Parliament as to how Parliament can be involved in the preparation of the next meeting.
Last but not least, I share some of the remarks made about China. If you look at our AI proposal, you will see that there are use cases where we find it really crucial to say these uses are forbidden in the European Union, because this is not a place of surveillance. This is a place where data belongs to people and not to the state.
But I think the key to success of the TTC is that we want something with the Americans and they want something with us, because we have something really strong in common: old democracies, strong fundamental values, the respect of the individual with the integrity of their dignity as the starting point.
I think the only way to excel in this world is not to try to answer what other people are doing. It is to find our own way to excel, to over go, to show what we really are about. I think the TTC is part of that puzzle, next to all the many other things that this House is initiating, that this House is pushing the Commission to do, that this House enables Member States to do. Only in that respect can we deliver to European voters what has been promised. Thank you very much for the strong support and for this important debate.

Elnök asszony. – A vitát lezárom.
                  


Írásos nyilatkozatok (171. cikk)



Benoît Lutgen (PPE),
par écrit. – Les relations entre les États-Unis et l'Union européenne sont complexes et le lien fraternel qui nous unis ne peut être résumé en quelques mots. Ceci dit, il est important de noter que, même si avec le président Trump cette relation a souffert, l'ère Biden est prometteuse et permettrait, si l'Union européenne s'en donne les moyens, de reconstruire un lien fort. Ce lien est nécessaire à nos économies: en 2020 plus de 164 000 entreprises européennes ont exporté des biens pour une valeur de 353 milliards. Cette reconstruction de l'amitié américano-européenne, doit passer par le TTC. Il doit permettre d'aider les deux parties à régler leurs différends commerciaux. Il doit également être positif pour les citoyens tant pour en démontrer l'intérêt que pour renforcer nos valeurs communes. J'ai entendu certains de mes collègues s'inquiéter de notre implication dans la rivalité États-Unis-Chine. Il ne faut pas se voiler la face, la Chine représente une menace commune pour nos intérêts tant à l'étranger qu'au sein de nos frontières par leurs investissements. Occulter cette influence ne pourrait que nuire aux intérêts de l'Union.
                  

David McAllister (PPE),
schriftlich. – Letzte Woche haben die Vereinigten Staaten und die Europäische Union endlich den jahrelangen Streit um Sonderzölle auf Stahl- und Aluminiumimporte beigelegt. Nachdem verschiedene Entwicklungen der jüngeren Vergangenheit das grundsätzlich positive Verhältnis der EU mit den USA zuletzt belastet hatten, war dies eine weitere positive Nachricht. Die USA sind und bleiben unser wichtigster strategischer Verbündeter.
                  

                     Ebenso ist positiv, dass der neue Handels- und Technologierat vor gut einem Monat hoffnungsvoll gestartet ist. Ein intensiver Dialog stärkt das gegenseitige Vertrauen und Verständnis. Wir haben gemeinsame Interessen und stehen vor enormen Herausforderungen, auf die wir uns konzentrieren sollten. So werden wir nach gemeinsamen Lösungen für die Lücken in den Lieferketten für Halbleiter suchen. Die globale Halbleiterversorgungskrise ist vermutlich der größte Bremsklotz für die wirtschaftliche Erholung nach der Pandemie und kostet schon jetzt Arbeitsplätze, gerade auch in Deutschland. Die EU und die USA sollten dieses Problem zusammen angehen.
                  

                     Der Handels- und Technologierat sollte weitere drängende Fragen behandeln. Dazu zählen beispielsweise gemeinsame Regeln für Künstliche Intelligenz oder die Plattformökonomie, sowie unser Verhältnis zu China. Hier sollten wir uns strategisch enger mit Washington abstimmen. Jetzt gilt es, den Schwung des ersten Treffens mitzunehmen und die transatlantische Zusammenarbeit zu stärken.
                  

Ivan Štefanec (PPE),
písomne. – Politika novej americkej administratívy sľubuje zmenu prístupu k medzinárodným obchodným vzťahom a špeciálne posilnenie väzieb s Európskou úniou. Je pozitívne, že sa to začína diať práve v oblasti, ktorá bude mať pre budúcnosť obrovský význam, a tou sú moderné technológie. Ak sa s americkou stranou podarí dohodnúť na spoločných štandardoch, budeme lídrami, ktorých budú nasledovať aj iné krajiny. Bude dobrou správou, ak tieto rokovania otvoria základ pre obnovenie širokej obchodnej dohody.
                  

Marco Zanni (ID),
per iscritto. – Il dialogo con gli Stati Uniti su grandi sfide globali come la cybersecurity, l'intelligenza artificiale o la protezione dei dati, è fondamentale. È attraverso la collaborazione con i nostri partner atlantici che potremo ritagliarci un ruolo da protagonisti nello scenario tecnologico internazionale. Ci sono tuttavia temi su cui riflettere. Nonostante trovi positivo, che ci siano state delle aperture sul tema dei dazi all'acciaio e all'alluminio, ritengo che gioverebbero solo ad alcuni esportatori e rischierebbero di aggravare il problema di approvvigionamento, ormai caratteristico dell'era post-pandemica. Non dobbiamo poi essere ipocriti: un caso come quello emerso nei giorni scorsi su motori tedeschi, venduti alla Cina per le sue navi militari, ci fa apparire incoerenti e rischia di vanificare azioni importanti come la visita dei nostri delegati a Taiwan.
                  

                     Auspico che anche i prossimi incontri siano caratterizzati dalla collaborazione, per i nostri interessi e per fronteggiare il crescente potere di mercato della Cina.
                  

                     Ribadisco infine, quanto già detto in passato: il dialogo con gli Stati Uniti deve essere portato avanti in modo continuativo e coerente, slegato da tifoserie democratiche o repubblicane.
                  
4.   Statute and funding of European political parties and foundations (debate)

Elnök asszony. – A következő napirendi pont a Charles Goerens és Rainer Wieland által az Alkotmányügyi Bizottság nevében készített jelentés az európai politikai pártok és az európai politikai alapítványok jogállásáról és finanszírozásáról [2021/2018(INI)] (A9-0294/2021).
               

Charles Goerens,
rapporteur. – Madame la Présidente, les partis politiques sont des piliers indispensables dans une démocratie pluraliste. Libres de s'organiser, libres d'intervenir dans le débat politique et de l'animer, ils structurent le paysage politique tout en mettant en exergue leur spécificité et leur diversité. Leur liberté d'expression – il est devenu banal de le répéter – ne devrait pas être encadrée au point d'étouffer le débat politique.
               

                  Notre modèle européen est construit sur l'irréductibilité de la dignité de la personne. L'individu qui enfreint cette règle entre en conflit avec la loi, mais on ne voit pas pourquoi cette règle ne s'appliquerait pas non plus aux partis. Le présent rapport fait part à la Commission de la volonté du Parlement de permettre aux partis et fondations européens de se concentrer sur leur mission politique.
               

                  À cette fin, il fait tomber l'obligation pour les partis de publier leurs comptes en normes IFRS, obligation qui ne répondrait d'ailleurs à aucune nécessité et qui n'a jamais répondu à aucune nécessité.
               

                  Le rapport ouvre aussi la porte aux partis actifs dans des pays non membres de l'Union européenne. Les partis des États membres du Conseil de l'Europe pourront, s'ils le souhaitent, s'associer aux partis européens.
               

                  Aussi invitons-nous la Commission à faire figurer dans sa proposition législative la possibilité pour les partis de participer aussi financièrement à une campagne référendaire d'un État membre lorsque l'enjeu de cette campagne impacte le fonctionnement de l'Union européenne, notamment. Il ne s'agit bien entendu, en l'occurrence, que d'un exemple parmi d'autres, qui traduit la volonté des rapporteurs d'assouplir les dispositions et la réglementation existantes.
               

                  S'agissant du financement des partis et fondations européens, je ne vous cache pas qu'en tant que rapporteur, ma nette préférence va au modèle du soutien financier aux partis basé sur le nombre de députés qui siègent au Parlement européen sous la bannière de leur parti.
               

                  Finalement, pour me limiter strictement à l'essentiel, je rappellerai que le rapport fait référence aux listes transnationales qui ne pourront devenir réalité, bien entendu, que dans la mesure où la volonté politique pour ce faire soit au rendez-vous.
               

                  Je ne voudrais pas conclure sans une pensée amicale pour mon collègue corapporteur Rainer Wieland, avec qui j'étais d'accord sur presque tout, et mon merci, bien entendu, va aussi à mon équipe.
               

Rainer Wieland,
Berichterstatter. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, Herr Kollege Goerens, meine Damen und Herren! Ich darf den Dank an Kollegen Goerens zurückgeben, und ich will mit dieser Intervention in keiner Weise den Eindruck erwecken, dass wir einen großen Dissens haben. Ich glaube, wir haben am gleichen Strang gezogen, auch am gleichen Ende und in die gleiche Richtung.
               

                  Aber ich will nicht verhehlen, dass ich gerne noch ein Stück weitergegangen wäre, und das will ich auch versuchen, darzulegen. Ich will mich nicht auf die 98 % des Berichts konzentrieren, wo wir uns nicht nur zwischen den Berichterstattern, sondern auch über die meisten Parteien hinweg einig waren.
               

                  Ich will auf das eingehen, was vielleicht jetzt noch umstritten ist und was nachher auch streitig entschieden wird. Da ist zum Einen einmal die Frage des Logos, und das andere ist die Frage der transnationalen Listen – beides wichtige Fragen. Aber wir sind der Auffassung, dass das nicht in die Finanzierungsdebatte reingehört, sondern in die Wahlrechtsdebatte. Und ich glaube, dass das Haus ganz generell immer auch dazu neigt, überall die Duftmarken zu hinterlassen, auch dort, wo sie vielleicht nicht hingehören.
               

                  Zweitens: Wir wollen die Bildung der politischen Parteifamilien in Europa stärken – als wichtiger Teil der Sichtbarkeit, als wichtiger Teil einer europäischen Öffentlichkeit und damit auch als wichtiger Teil dessen, was uns gelingen muss – dass die Bürgerinnen und Bürger auch sehen, da findet ein Wahlkampf statt und da gibt es Unterschiede zwischen den Parteien – und da wollen wir den Parteien weniger Fesseln anlegen.
               

                  Ich würde allerdings gern etwas mehr haben, dass wir gegen Missbräuche vorgehen, die wir in der bestehenden Gesetzgebung hatten, und dass wir auch Parteien, die sich neu gründen, mehr Möglichkeiten eröffnen oder dass wir auch den Parteien helfen, die zwar Stimmen haben, vielleicht auch sogar ansehnliche Zahlen von Stimmen, aber eben keine Mandate.
               

                  Wir haben Missbräuche. Wir haben in der Vergangenheit gesehen, dass sich Abgeordnete mandatsbasiert zusammengeschlossen haben, Parteien gegründet haben und nach dem Motto ‘Greif Dir und renne!’, vorgegangen sind. Und dann, wenn das Parlament gesagt hat ‘Wir wollen Geld zurück’, war schon niemand mehr da, den man verantwortlich halten konnte. Ich glaube, der richtige Ansatz ist, dass man auf Stimmen setzt und dass die Stimmen, die in Parteifamilien erworben wurden, dass die auch Maßstab für die Unterstützung sind.
               

                  Und wenn eine Partei wechselt, eine Parteifamilie, dann gehen die Stimmen eben mit. Aber wir sollten das nicht mehr mandatsbasiert anlegen, weil zu viel Raum für Missbräuche da ist. Ich glaube auch, dass wir diejenigen honorieren sollten, die antreten bei Europawahlen, zu einer europäischen Parteienfamilie kommen. Und wenn Sie mal denken, in einem Land, in dem man sechs oder sieben Abgeordnete hat, dann braucht man über 10 % der Stimmen, um überhaupt ein Mandat zu bekommen. Ich glaube, wir sollten die Stimmen aus diesen Ländern auch honorieren, die nicht zu einem Mandat geführt haben, und den closed job, der uns oft vorgeworfen wird, nicht weiter unterstützen.
               

                  Leider sind sich insbesondere die Gruppierungen, die sonst vollmundig gegen den closed job zu Felde ziehen, sich hier nicht einig. Und ich erhoffe mir von dieser Debatte auch Begründungen dafür, warum man nun gerade diese Öffnung des vermeintlichen closed job, das sonst immer beklagt wird, warum man die bei dieser Weichenstellen-Gesetzgebung, die dann natürlich für 2024 Anwendung finden soll, warum man diese nicht unterstützt.
               

Věra Jourová,
Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, democracy is one of the fundamental values on which the European Union is founded. European political parties and the foundations linked to them fulfil an essential role in representative European democracy. They create a direct link between the citizens and the political system, thereby enhancing the legitimacy of the system itself.
A healthy European democracy needs well-informed and engaged citizens. Strong European political parties and foundations that can foster political debate across Europe are essential for creating a truly European public sphere.
The revision of the rules applying to the European political parties and foundations is one of the tangible deliverables of the European democracy action plan adopted by the Commission at the end of last year. From the very early phases of our preparatory work for this revision, the Commission has endeavoured to consult all relevant stakeholders to ensure that their analysis and ideas can be considered. I personally engaged in exchanges with the leaders of European political parties to hear what are the challenges to the existing situation and what can be improved.
We have aligned the timeline of our work on this file with the timeline of the Parliament's own-initiative evaluation report on the implementation of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1141/2014, so that we can also take the views of this House into account. The adoption of the Commission's evaluation report on the regulation is also in its final stage at this moment.
Our plan is to accompany the evaluation report with a legislative proposal for the recast of the regulation on European political parties and foundations to address loopholes and suggest improvements. The proposal will be part of a broader package of initiatives on democratic life and electoral processes in the EU, notably on the transparency of paid political advertising, which is also key for European political parties. The package is currently scheduled for adoption on 23 November.
Our aim is to ensure early adoption of the regulation to be in place in time for the European elections in 2024. Let me stress that the Commission agrees with the main findings of the Parliament's report, namely that the regulation provides a useful legal framework for the functioning of European political parties and their foundations, while a number of shortcomings hinder them from achieving their full potential as active players in European democracy.
The co-rapporteurs, Vice-President Wieland and Mr Goerens, whom I met on several occasions as well as other members of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, have documented a number of critical issues and made proposals, for instance, on the respect for EU fundamental values, the need for own resources to improve the financial viability of European political parties and foundations, the possibility for using EU funds in national referendum campaigns linked to the implementation of the treaties and the possibility of receiving contributions from members outside the European Union, to mention several main findings.
I can assure you that the Commission intends to take on board a number of key elements of your report. The Commission's proposal will also aim to clarify the cross-European character of European parties campaigning to avoid difficulties of the past. I would like to thank the co-rapporteurs and the Committee on Constitutional Affairs. We have had meaningful cooperation and fruitful exchanges in the course of our work, and I can assure you that the Commission is considering seriously your findings and recommendations. And now I look forward to our debate.

Isabel García Muñoz,
ponente de opinión de la Comisión de Control Presupuestario. – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, los partidos políticos europeos tienen un papel fundamental que desempeñar representando la voluntad y la diversidad de la ciudadanía europea y acercándola a las instituciones europeas.
               

                  Por eso es importante que tengan una adecuada financiación pública. Esta financiación debe ser transparente y cumplir con el principio de buena gestión financiera, puesto que forma parte del Presupuesto General de la Unión Europea. Para esto se necesitan normas claras, simples pero estrictas, que contribuyan a evitar errores y siempre bajo controles eficaces que permitan detectar cualquier abuso.
               

                  Nos satisface que la Autoridad para los partidos políticos haya desarrollado un conjunto de principios para hacer operativo el derecho a hacer campaña en las elecciones europeas, como solicitábamos en la Resolución de 6 de abril de 2011, por la importancia que tienen en el futuro de la Unión.
               

                  Por otro lado, debemos garantizar que los criterios de registro y afiliación permitan una representación democrática, genuina e inclusiva.
               

                  Y, lo más importante, los partidos políticos europeos deben respetar los principios fundacionales de la Unión recogidos en el Tratado de la Unión Europea y toda infracción debe ser sancionada de forma efectiva para evitar que actitudes antidemocráticas entren en las instituciones.
               

                  Como ponente de opinión de la Comisión de Control Presupuestario me complace ver que se ha recogido ampliamente nuestra opinión.
               

Vladimír Bilčík,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, European democracy must be more resilient, especially in this era when we are facing increasing foreign interference in our democratic processes, including through targeted and well-orchestrated disinformation campaigns that are often supported from abroad through illicit means and aimed at undermining our democratic fabric.
This is an important resolution, dear colleagues, with a number of points that can make political parties in Europe stronger and thus make democratic life of Europe both richer and more secure. However, we have to get the specific steps right. First and foremost, we must focus on making a better link between our voters and Europe. Let us be careful as we finalise this resolution. There is no single pan-European constituency in the EU.
If we want to turn the European Union into a fully-fledged representative democracy, we must respect its dual nature as the union of states and union of citizens. Geographical representation next to ideological representation is crucial. Any institutional steps that run against the principle of territorial representation and would put smaller Member States candidates at a competitive disadvantage compared to those of larger Member States would weaken democracy in Europe.
Second, we must increase the engagement of voters. When I look at the levels of turnout in European elections across Central Europe, we have a deep problem with low participation of voters. The key here is to make better links between European parties and national parties, including through votes-based funding schemes for political parties in European elections. We must work on a more pluralistic political environment at European level, and this resolution suggests a solid way forward.

Gabriele Bischoff,
im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin! Ich freue mich, als Schattenberichterstatterin hier zu stehen und festzustellen, dass wir als Europäisches Parlament ganz klare Vorstellungen davon haben, dass wir die politischen Parteien und Stiftungen in Europa stärken wollen, dass das wichtig ist, um auch wirklich eine europäische Öffentlichkeit herzustellen, dass eben auch die europäischen politischen Parteien eine größere Rolle spielen können, auch in den Mitgliedstaaten, und dass sie sichtbar sein können – und zwar nicht nur punktuell, wenn wieder einmal eine Europawahl ansteht.
               

                  Deshalb ist es für uns auch wichtig, dass man sich da entsprechend einbringen kann. Frau Kommissarin Jourová hat es gesagt: Für uns ist es auch besonders wichtig, dass die europäischen Parteien und Stiftungen die Werte, die wir als Europäische Union haben, achten und auch in ihrer Arbeit weitertragen. Deshalb kann es nicht sein, dass europäische Parteien oder Stiftungen, die europäische Gelder erhalten, zum Beispiel Veranstaltungen oder Kampagnen machen könnten, die diese Werte unterminieren und unterlaufen und nicht respektieren. Hierfür brauchen wir Mechanismen.
               

                  Es ist für uns auch wichtig, die Höhe der Spenden zu begrenzen, um hier Einflussmöglichkeiten zu reduzieren und wirklich auch Unabhängigkeit sicherzustellen. Ich kann für meine politische Gruppe sagen, dass wir gar keine Spenden annehmen, um eben das sicherzustellen. Aber die Begrenzung auf insgesamt 3 000 Euro ist ein wichtiger Schritt.
               

                  Ich möchte den beiden Ko-Berichterstattern danken. Herr Wieland hat es angesprochen: Wir haben nicht in allen Punkten übereingestimmt. Das ist aber ganz normal. Aber in den großen Linien, die europäischen politischen Parteien und Stiftungen zu stärken, dafür zu sorgen, dass sie präsenter sein können – da sind wir uns einig. Und ich danke auch meinen Schattenberichterstatterinnen und Schattenberichterstattern für die gute Arbeit und Zusammenarbeit.
               

François Alfonsi,
au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, la vie des partis politiques est un pilier essentiel de la démocratie européenne. Elle permet, au-delà des échéances électorales, d'animer les débats politiques et de construire les choix de nos concitoyens. Un règlement a été instauré pour encadrer la vie de ces partis politiques européens et notamment pour contribuer à leur financement.
               

                  Le rapport sur lequel nous allons nous prononcer fait le point sur l'application de ce règlement et formule des propositions pour l'améliorer. Plusieurs points sont soutenus par tous.
               

                  D'abord, la prise en compte par les partis politiques européens des membres issus d'anciens membres de l'UE, de futurs membres de l'UE et des partis de pays tiers de l'espace européen. Cette prise en compte est essentielle, surtout après le Brexit.
               

                  Ensuite, l'allégement des normes excessives qui pénalisent ceux des partis les plus petits qui ne peuvent en supporter la charge de travail et de financement.
               

                  Enfin, la simplification de la prise en compte des revenus des partis qui sont liés à leurs activités militantes telles que les ventes de documents, et l'élargissement de leur champ d'action leur permettant de s'impliquer davantage dans les campagnes politiques en Europe.
               

                  Un point a débouché sur un désaccord important: jusqu'à présent, le montant du financement de chaque parti politique est basé sur l'affiliation des députés. Notre rapporteur propose de le rattacher au nombre de voix exprimées lors des élections européennes. Cette proposition est inefficace et potentiellement dangereuse.
               

                  Elle est inefficace. Imaginer que le trésorier d'un parti politique puisse mobiliser des abstentionnistes en lançant un appel à renflouer les caisses de son parti est clairement plus qu'illusoire. C'est exactement une fausse idée.
               

                  Et ensuite, elle est dangereuse. Chaque élection génère des coalitions et c'est la liberté des partis de pouvoir passer des accords électoraux. Avec la proposition de M. Wieland, des composantes de ces coalitions – les composantes minoritaires – seraient clairement exposées à perdre leurs ressources si un désaccord surgit avec la représentation majoritaire de la coalition. Aussi, le risque d'une telle situation ne peut être pris. Ce serait attentatoire à la démocratie européenne.
               

Jean-Lin Lacapelle,
au nom du groupe ID. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, votre rapport sur les partis politiques européens croit soutenir vos obsessions fédéralistes et affaiblir les nationaux, vos seuls adversaires. Listes transnationales pour les élections européennes, respect obligatoire de vos valeurs empoisonnées par votre idéologie, tout y est. Vous osez même écrire que les partis politiques doivent être les porte-parole de la politique de l'Union européenne. Mais ce moment de triomphe prépare votre propre débâcle.
               

                  Sur le plan administratif, d'abord, ce rapport contredit des années de pratiques absurdes du Parlement européen, qui affirmait que les partis politiques ne devaient pas mener d'activités politiques, mais seulement travailler à l'édification du super État euro-mondialiste. Vous avez d'ailleurs persécuté nos élus sur cette logique démente. Aujourd'hui, vous admettez enfin cette évidence: nous sommes des représentants nationaux au Parlement européen qui devons mettre nos moyens parlementaires au service d'activités politiques.
               

                  Sur le plan démocratique, vous reconnaissez enfin le caractère essentiel de la diversité des idées. Mais dans cette Europe carcérale que vous avez construite, la seule voix divergente est la nôtre, celle des peuples et des nations opposées à votre vision mondialiste et libérale. Cette voix que vous combattez avec tant d'acharnement.
               

                  Le 2 juillet dernier, seize partis politiques à travers toute l'Europe ont signé une déclaration commune sur l'avenir de l'Europe qui nous met en équivalence avec les frères siamois que sont la pseudo-droite et les socialistes. Cette déclaration commune, dont les signataires sont au pouvoir ou sont sur le point d'y accéder, mettra un point d'arrêt à votre cauchemar fédéraliste pour ouvrir la voie à l'Europe des nations que nous appelons de nos vœux et que, demain, Marine Le Pen incarnera en France.
               

Clare Daly,
on behalf of the The Left Group. – Madam President, there should, of course, be more transparency in the financing of European political parties but we have to accept that the European political party system is not how you foster engagement with European politics.
Instead of complaining that citizens don't engage, we should look at the reasons why. The fact is that for European citizens, the EU is distant, undemocratic and indifferent to their concerns because the politics that people actually care about have no outlet here. The reforms that are necessary – the repeal of neoliberal policy, massive state investment to reverse the decline in living standards – are illegal under EU treaties and fiscal constraints.
Irish citizens voted No Nice, no to Lisbon. We were forced to change our mind and vote again. We were promised our neutrality would not be impacted yet we're galloping towards a NATO-backed European Defence Union. No matter how much funding you pump into propaganda campaigns from unfamiliar European political parties, they're not going to cut it. If we want European citizens to participate, we have to give them a stake and we should start by abolishing the treaties.

László Trócsányi (NI). – Tisztelt Elnök asszony, Biztos asszony! A politikai pártok a demokratikus kultúra szerves részét képezik. A demokrácia az emberek és közösségeik, nem pedig ideológiai képviseletét kell hogy jelentse. Az Európai Parlamentben az európai népek sokszínűségét kell, hogy megjelenítsük. A nemzeti politikai pártok adják az alapját az európai politikai pártok szerveződésének. Ahogy a Charta is előírja, alapvető fontosságú ezért, hogy széleskörű szabadság illesse meg őket programjuk és politikai identitásuk kialakítása során. A felettük lévő bizonytalan európai szintű ideológiai értékkontroll sérti a hatalomgyakorlás valódi demokratikusságát. Ezért minden olyan törekvés, amely az európai politikai párttérkép felülről lefelé történő meghatározását célozza, szemben a szubszidiaritás elvével egy európai föderalisztikus berendezkedés irányába hat. Különösen akkor, amikor a transznacionális választási rendszer bevezetését is megjelenítik. Aggályosnak tartom, hogy a politikai pártok felett egy hatóság olyan jogosítványokkal rendelkezik, amely európai szinten szerepet játszó tagállami pártok felett gyámsági feladatokat lát el. Ilyen jellegű hatóság nemzeti szinten nem létezik. Ideológiai ellenőrzéssel nem tudunk egyetérteni, de az EU-s pénzek felhasználásának törvényességi ellenőrzésének számvevőségi ellenőrzésével természetesen együtt tudunk élni és együtt is értünk velük.
               

Domènec Ruiz Devesa (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora vicepresidenta Jourová, muchas gracias, en primer lugar, a sus señorías, y amigos, Rainer Wieland y Charles Goerens por este magnífico informe de propia iniciativa que me parece políticamente muy sólido y que debe ayudar a la Comisión a preparar su propuesta legislativa. Creo que el Grupo socialista, muy bien representado por Gabriele Bischoff, ha hecho también aportaciones importantes a este informe.
               

                  Creemos que no debe ser solo la ocasión de hacer un planteamiento administrativo sobre los partidos políticos, sino también de reforzar su visibilidad —de ahí la cuestión de vincular o articular la financiación de los partidos políticos europeos también en función del uso de los logotipos de los partidos políticos europeos y de sus nombres—, y me parece también fundamental la aportación de tener que respetar los valores del artículo 2.
               

                  Querría tocar un último punto muy rápidamente: tampoco estoy de acuerdo con el sistema de financiación basado en los votos. Eso es muy complicado porque tenemos veintisiete sistemas electorales diferentes, y los votos no valen lo mismo ni se cuentan de la misma manera en todos los países; ahora bien, si tuviéramos una circunscripción electoral paneuropea donde se presentaran las listas de los partidos políticos, entonces sí tendría sentido ese sistema.
               

Pedro Silva Pereira (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, o estatuto e o financiamento dos partidos políticos são, em qualquer democracia, uma peça fundamental das regras do jogo democrático. A melhoria dessas regras, tal como proposto neste excelente relatório dos nossos colegas Goerens e Wieland, é, sem dúvida, um contributo importante para a qualificação da nossa democracia a nível europeu.
               

                  Para além da questão das regras de financiamento, que já aqui foi discutida, dois aspetos parecem merecer especial destaque.
               

                  Primeiro, a exigência de respeito pelos princípios e valores fundamentais europeus como condição de registo dos partidos europeus, o que deve ser monitorizado no âmbito do anunciado Plano de Ação da Comissão Europeia para a Democracia Europeia. E, segundo, o reforço da visibilidade dos partidos políticos europeus, incluindo através da associação dos seus logótipos nos materiais de campanha e outras formas de comunicação dos partidos nacionais.
               

                  Estas alterações seriam formas muito concretas de promover o reconhecimento pelos cidadãos de uma verdadeira democracia europeia.
               


                        ‘Catch the eye’ eljárás


Bogdan Rzońca (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! To była bardzo ciekawa dyskusja. Wydaje mi się, że czystość finansowania, przejrzystość finansowania partii politycznych to bardzo ważna sprawa. Musi być transparentność w tej materii i także wyborcy muszą wiedzieć, na jakie partie głosują.
               

                  Natomiast nie wyobrażam sobie takiej sytuacji, żeby ta rezolucja i dyskusja o finansowaniu partii politycznych była przykrywką do dyskusji o budowaniu federalnego państwa. Tak nie może być i musimy po prostu zabiegać o to, żeby w Parlamencie Europejskim i w parlamentach krajowych była reprezentacja narodowa, geograficzna i reprezentacja społeczna. I wtedy wszyscy będziemy mieć jasność, jak funkcjonuje demokracja w Unii Europejskiej i w Parlamencie Europejskim.
               

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, I find this a strange way to address the disconnect between the European institutions and the citizenry of Europe. I really think that you don't seem to understand why the citizens of Europe feel that distance with this place. We don't actually represent them very well and since the Nice Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty, this is a neoliberal club, and neoliberalism puts the interests of big business before those of the citizens.
Right now, we are increasing our spend on military in Europe. The militarisation of Europe is going off the Richter scale. So, we're increasing our spending on military, but not on housing, not on health, in comparison. I mean, what are our priorities? And we talk about our values all the time. The citizens don't know what are the fundamental values of the European Union. Are they supporting Israel's genocide of the Palestinians, the war in Yemen? Because you do support it and you are supporting the militarisation of Europe.
Are these our real values? The people are disconnected, for sure.

(‘Catch the eye’ eljárás vége)


Věra Jourová,
Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, I would like to thank once again both co-rapporteurs for this report, which is a very important contribution for the Commission at the final stage of the preparation of the electoral package.
As I said before, we are now working on the package to finalise it for adoption on 23 November. So, I can confirm again that I see very broad common ground, which will be reflected in our proposal. Common ground with the report which we are discussing today, and I want also to thank all the Members of the House who contributed to this debate.
So, I am looking forward to the adoption of the report and to discussing this file further with this House once the College adopts the proposal.

Charles Goerens,
rapporteur. – Madame la Présidente, juste quelques remarques à propos des réflexions qui viennent d'être faites par les orateurs qui m'ont précédé à cette tribune.
               

                  Premièrement, je crois que nous sommes tous d'accord: il importe d'éviter les abus et de tout faire pour les prévenir. L'autorité qui est en place veillera au grain et, le cas échéant, les cours nationales et la Cour de justice européenne pourront trancher en cas de désaccord.
               

                  Deuxièmement, j'ai entendu, ici, quelqu'un déclarer qu'il s'agit en l'occurrence d'une tentative de mettre au pas des partis eurosceptiques. Soyons extrêmement clairs: si un parti n'est pas d'accord avec les décisions arrêtées majoritairement par le législateur européen, c'est-à-dire le Conseil et le Parlement européen, c'est son droit le plus élémentaire. Ce n'est pas un motif d'exclusion du financement des partis.
               

                  Troisièmement, si quelqu'un déclare que les corapporteurs et la Commissaire ne sont pas très drôles et qu'ils sont les fossoyeurs de la démocratie. Ce n'est pas non plus très agréable, mais ce n'est pas non plus un motif d'exclusion du financement des partis. Les partis doivent tolérer énormément pour contribuer à une démocratie aussi pluraliste que possible mais il y a certaines limites. Et je voudrais inviter l'orateur qui a prétendu que nous sommes prêts à mettre au pas les partis eurosceptiques à réfléchir à ce qui suit. S'il y a un parti qui, au sein de ses rangs, tolère des nazis qui se réclament ouvertement de cette idéologie, qui incitent à la haine contre les minorités, n'êtes-vous pas d'avis qu'à ce moment-là, l'autorité responsable pour l'allocation de l'aide financière aux partis devrait être alertée et faire face à ses responsabilités. Et là aussi, si une décision non conforme aux souhaits et aux attentes des plaignants devait être prise, il serait toujours possible de faire appel aux cours nationales et à la Cour de justice européenne pour trancher.
               

                  Un dernier mot. Ce rapport n'est pas un rapport susceptible de préconiser les listes transnationales – personnellement, j'y suis favorable et même très favorable, je suis fédéraliste – mais ce rapport n'impose ni le fédéralisme ni le respect total du principe de l'instauration d'une liste transnationale. C'est le Parlement européen, avec le Conseil, qui va trancher sur cette question plus tard et notre collègue Domènec Ruiz Devesa est responsable de ce rapport au sein de la commission.
               

                  Merci de m'avoir permis de faire ces quelques rectifications et merci, bien entendu, pour toutes les contributions constructives qui viennent d'être faites dans le cadre de ce débat.
               

Rainer Wieland,
Berichterstatter. – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, meine Damen und Herren! Wir haben eigentlich eine ganz erstaunliche Debatte erlebt: Zustimmung im Grundsatz, aber um einen Kernpunkt – der werte Kollege Goerens ist gerade noch darauf eingegangen – um einen Kernpunkt haben sich alle Debattenredner herumgemogelt – nämlich um das Thema Missbräuche, grab and run, was ausschließlich möglich ist durch die gegenwärtige abgeordnetenbasierte Parteienfinanzierung.
               

                  Und es ist schon erstaunlich, dass der Kollege Lacapelle, der anschließend den Saal verlassen hat und nicht zuhört, was hier debattiert wird – dass der eine Abgeordnete genannt hat, die die Bedeutung der Demokratie hochhält, aber dass es genau diejenige Abgeordnete ist, die, wenn wir ein Ranking erstellen würden, bei wem das Parlament am meisten Gelder wegen Missbrauch hat zurückverlangen müssen, dann wäre diese Abgeordnete, die er genannt hat, diese ehemalige Abgeordnete, ganz oben.
               

                  Und deshalb werbe ich für einen stimmenbasierten Ansatz in der Zukunft. Das ist der einzige große Dissens, den wir haben. Es wird vielleicht jetzt nicht gelingen in diesem Papier. Ich will aber für meine Fraktion auch ankündigen, dass das Gegengeschäft, dass wir den Parteien mehr Leine geben, das Gegengeschäft, dass wir weniger kontrollieren über den stillen basierten Ansatz, dass wir die Eigenmittel von 10 auf 5 Prozent reduzieren – dass das für uns schon ein Paket ist und dass ich in einer entsprechenden Gesetzgebung noch nicht zusichern kann, dass die EVP-Fraktion bei dem anderen Teil der Überlegung dann auch mitmacht, wenn der eine Teil der Überlegung wegfällt.
               

Elnök asszony. – A vitát lezárom.
               

                  A szavazásra 2021.november 11-én, szerdán kerül sor.
               


Írásos nyilatkozatok (171. cikk)



Alin Mituța (Renew),
în scris. – Trebuie să recunoaștem că partidele și fundațiile politice europene mai au de parcurs un lung drum până să ajungă să reprezinte mai mult decât un concept vag pentru cetățenii europeni.
               

                  Prin regulamentul actual s-au făcut pași importanți, dar observăm obstacole administrative și politice care împiedică în continuare partidele și fundațiile politice europene să își valorifice pe deplin relația cu cetățenii și cu partidele naționale membre și să devină actori politici vizibili.
               

                  Comisia, care va elabora un nou regulament, trebuie să aibă în vedere că normele privind eligibilitatea cheltuielilor sunt prea stricte și partidele europene ar trebui să aibă posibilitatea de a finanța o gamă mai largă de activități. Spre exemplu, partidele europene ar trebui să se poată implica în campaniile referendumurilor din țările membre ce tratează probleme legate de Uniunea Europeană.
               

                  Brexit-ul este o lecție dureroasă din care trebuie să învățăm. De asemenea, cooperarea cu partidele naționale și cu grupurile politice din Parlamentul European trebuie încurajată, fiind o modalitate de a se apropia de cetățeni. Mai mult, cetățenii ar trebui să aibă acces la informații referitoare la situația financiară a partidelor, inclusiv a donațiilor, în cea mai mare măsură posibilă, și într-un mod ușor de utilizat.
               

(Az ülést 10.57-kor felfüggesztik)


PRESIDÊNCIA: PEDRO SILVA PEREIRA


Vice-Presidente

5.   Resumption of the sitting

(A sessão é reiniciada às 11h02)

6.   Voting time

Presidente. – Passamos agora à votação.
               

(Para os resultados e outros pormenores da votação: ver ata)

6.1.   Request for the waiver of the immunity of Fulvio Martusciello (A9-0302/2021 - Manon Aubry) (vote)
6.2.   Request for the waiver of the immunity of Harald Vilimsky (A9-0303/2021 - Andrzej Halicki) (vote)
6.3.   Request for the waiver of the immunity of Nils Ušakovs (A9-0304/2021 - Andrzej Halicki) (vote)
6.4.   Disclosure of income tax information by certain undertakings and branches (A9-0305/2021 - Evelyn Regner, Ibán García Del Blanco) (vote)
6.5.   European Partnership on Metrology (A9-0242/2021 - Maria da Graça Carvalho) (vote)
6.6.   European Union Agency for Asylum (A8-0392/2016 - Elena Yoncheva) (vote)

— Antes da votação:


Elena Yoncheva,
rapporteure. – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, aujourd'hui, nous votons pour une Union européenne plus forte, pour une Union qui reste solidaire face aux défis et aux difficultés. Votre soutien pour la nouvelle Agence européenne pour l'asile est un soutien pour une Europe plus efficace, solidaire et plus unie. Le nouveau règlement marquera le début de la réforme, si nécessaire, du régime d'asile européen commun. Le vote d'aujourd'hui garantit la mise en place d'une Agence européenne pour l'asile capable de fournir un soutien adéquat et équipée pour répondre aux défis sur le terrain.
                  

                     Chers collègues, nous avons passé de longues heures à débattre sur la question de savoir comment résoudre le problème de la migration, mettre à jour notre législation, garantir un futur régime d'asile. Après tous ces débats, il ne faut plus se contenter de parler. Aujourd'hui, il faut agir et contribuer enfin à une véritable réforme.
                  

                     Merci pour votre soutien. Ensemble – j'en suis sûre – nous pouvons réaliser un nouveau régime d'asile. Faisons-le aujourd'hui.
                  
6.7.   Serious cross-border threats to health (A9-0247/2021 - Véronique Trillet-Lenoir) (vote)

— Após a votação da proposta da Comissão:


Véronique Trillet-Lenoir,
rapporteur. – Mr President, I should like to thank my colleagues for their strong support on this crucial report for the health of our citizens.
Following the votes that have just taken place, I would like to request that the serious cross-border threats to health report be referred back to the committee responsible for interinstitutional negotiations, pursuant to Rule 59(4).

(O Parlamento aprova o pedido de envio à comissão competente.)

6.8.   EU/Australia Agreement: modification of concessions on all the tariff-rate quotas included in the EU Schedule CLXXV (A9-0306/2021 - Daniel Caspary) (vote)
6.9.   Strengthening democracy, media freedom and pluralism in the EU (A9-0292/2021 - Tiemo Wölken, Roberta Metsola) (vote)
6.10.   The European Education Area: a shared holistic approach (A9-0291/2021 - Michaela Šojdrová) (vote)
6.11.   An intellectual property action plan to support the EU's recovery and resilience (A9-0284/2021 - Marion Walsmann) (vote)
6.12.   Statute and funding of European political parties and foundations (A9-0294/2021 - Charles Goerens, Rainer Wieland) (vote)
6.13.   The first anniversary of the de facto abortion ban in Poland (B9-0543/2021, B9-0544/2021) (vote)

Presidente. – Está encerrado o período de votação.
                  
7.   Explanations of vote
7.1.   Disclosure of income tax information by certain undertakings and branches (A9-0305/2021 - Evelyn Regner, Ibán García Del Blanco)

Declarações de voto orais


Mick Wallace (The Left). – Mr President, this deal is yet another example of the EU putting the interests of big business before ordinary people. Real, transparent country-by-country reporting would force companies to report their profits on tax paid in every country they operate in, not just EU countries and those countries on the EU blacklist and greylist. The fact that information on other non-EU countries will only be available on an aggregate global basis is a bit of a joke. That's three quarters of the countries in the world. Not one of the world's worst 15 tax havens is on the EU blacklist. The fact that the reporting requirement will only apply to companies with an annual consolidated turnover above 750 million, will exclude 85-90% of multinationals. Yet the deal is better than nothing, but it does not make the EU a global leader in a fight against tax avoidance. We are going to let multinational corporations off the hook to continue dodging taxes by shifting the profits to tax havens outside of the EU.

Chris MacManus (The Left). – Mr President, it is with mixed emotions that I support this trilogue deal. On the one hand, I welcome any greater transparency over tax affairs. This is simply about openness and some level of public scrutiny of the tax affairs of companies, some of which have turnovers equivalent to the GDP of small countries.
However, I deplore the actions of the Irish Government and others in diluting and trying to block this legislation. Again without any logical reasoning, the Irish Government has set itself apart and sets its stall against transparency and fairness. We are now entering a new phase where the OECD deal gives us a new framework. The challenge now for Ireland is to repair its reputation, and opposing positive moves like this does the country no favours.

Go raibh maith agaibh go léir.

7.2.   European Union Agency for Asylum (A8-0392/2016 - Elena Yoncheva)

Declarações de voto orais


Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-н Председател, гласувах против доклада на колегата Йончева, защото в текста фигурират спорни въпроси. Например частта за прилагане на механизма за наблюдение, член 14, параграфи 4 до 6, и частта за намеса, свързана с него, член 22, предвиждат, че в ситуации на непропорционален натиск или неефективност на системите за убежище и приемане, и ако държавата членка не изпълни препоръките на механизма за наблюдение, Съветът може да изиска държавата членка да приеме разполагането на екипи на агенцията за европейския съюз в областта на убежището.
                  

                     Смятам, че това е непропорционална намеса във вътрешните работи на държавите членки и противоречи на договорите за Европейския съюз. Подкрепям засилени действия по контрола на границите и подкрепа за държавите, които се явяват външна граница на Съюза, и това трябва да бъде съобразено с нуждите на националните агенции и министерства. Освен това съм против задължението националните органи и Агенцията на Европейския съюз в областта на убежището да си сътрудничат с неправителствени организации по управление на кризата с нелегалната имиграция. Всички ние знаем, че част от тези неправителствени организации всъщност се занимават с трафик и незаконни действия, за да вкарат нелегални имигранти на територията на Съюза. Това не трябва да се подкрепя, нито легализира.
                  

Karolin Braunsberger-Reinhold (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Ich habe heute für die Schaffung einer europäischen Asylagentur gestimmt. Migrations- und Flüchtlingsfragen sind aktueller denn je, wie die Entwicklungen an der polnisch-weißrussischen Grenze zeigen. Daher ist es wichtig, dass die EU aus dem Asyl-Unterstützungsbüro eine vollumfängliche Agentur mit mehr Durchgriffsrechten schafft. Besonders wichtig ist für mich, dass die Agentur die grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit der Mitgliedstaaten bei Asylfragen koordiniert und so den Zusammenhalt unter den Mitgliedstaaten unterstützt.
                  
7.3.   Serious cross-border threats to health (A9-0247/2021 - Véronique Trillet-Lenoir)

Declarações de voto orais


Clare Daly (The Left). – Mr President, I voted for this report on serious cross-border threats to health because of the practical implications of the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement and the Northern Ireland Protocol in terms of the impact on the pharmaceutical industry and the serious potential impact on patient access to generic medicines in Northern Ireland and related issues in the rest of Ireland.
There really remains a high degree of uncertainty around the commissioner's recent proposals to help stable medicines supply into Northern Ireland when the current post-Brexit derogations end on 31 December, and really time is running out. At the same time, there's uncertainty regarding the UK's plans.
So patients deserve clarity now to stop them worrying and to stop the stockpiling or shortages. And I really think that the Commission needs to urgently confirm its commitment to continue the current temporary derogations on medicines rules to ensure a stable supply in Northern Ireland to ease patient concerns and help the medicine makers plan correctly.
The Commission has to give a deadline in which it will publish its legislative proposal to give effect to the solutions proposed in its non-paper of July 2016 entitled ‘Medicines and the implementation of the Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland’.

Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-н Председател, колеги, пандемията от Ковид-19 откри отново уязвимостта на Европейския съюз по отношение на общественото здраве, показа липса на готовност и липса на опит на Европейския съюз да се справи с кризи, да защити гражданите на държавите членки и се наложи държавите членки да се справят всяка според възможностите си, което ни струва хиляди животи. Днес тази заплаха не е отминала, но наред с нея Европейският съюз е изправен пред икономическа и съчетана с нея мигрантска криза.
                  

                     Подкрепих доклада, защото смятам, че за противодействие на кризи в такъв мащаб е необходимо да се впрегнат инструменти на европейското ниво. Необходимо е да укрепим координацията, така че да съумеем да помогнем на най-уязвимите държави членки, които дълго време стояха и все още остават в периферията на Европейския съюз. Важно е Европа да покаже, че слага здравето на своите граждани пред политическите и икономически интереси на определени държави. Така ще съумеем да върнем загубеното доверие на гражданите.
                  

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Mr President, early in the pandemic there was a serious lack of solidarity shown by the EU with certain Member States, particularly Italy, who were hammered by COVID and abandoned by the EU.
The vote today concerns the addition by Parliament of certain elements in relation to the European Health Emergency and Response Authority into the Serious Cross-border Threats Regulation. The amendment to ensure transparency in relation to the giant procurement of vaccines and therapeutics is certainly positive. Yet there is no reference to civil society oversight in relation to advance purchase agreements. Therefore, negotiations will continue to be carried on behind closed doors.
There is nothing in relation to future advance purchase agreements that would guarantee global access and affordability, as well as the transfer of manufacturing know-how. Vaccines should be a public good for everyone that wants it, including the global south. Doing secret deals with Big Pharma behind closed doors is really soul-destroying for the people of Europe.
7.4.   Strengthening democracy, media freedom and pluralism in the EU (A9-0292/2021 - Tiemo Wölken, Roberta Metsola)

Declarações de voto orais


Clare Daly (The Left). – Mr President, I was a shadow on this report, it is extremely important and timely because there is a serious threat to the media. But I have to say it is been weakened by the fact that the inclusion of the amendment on Julian Assange, which is actually the mother of all strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), did not pass. This is a publisher who bravely published information in the public interest in 2010 — exposing war crimes by the US military – being prosecuted for espionage. The publisher was working in an EU country. The US Government is exerting extraterritorial jurisdiction over journalism conducted in Europe. The intention was not just to silence Assange, it was strategic, to warn all other publishers worldwide of national security reporting about serious challenges to US power. Indeed, the incarceration of Assange has already resulted in that chilling effect, and it is regrettable considering that the European and international federations of journalists recognise this and have called for the case to be dropped. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe recognises it, the UN Human Rights Commissioner recognises it and many others. It is an awful pity that our motion didn't pass today.

Vlad Gheorghe (Renew). –
(începutul intervenției nu a fost făcut la microfon) … acest raport și l-am votat pentru că o comunitate a valorilor europene nu poate exista fără accesul la informație și liberă exprimare.
                  

                     Jurnaliștii, activiștii și ONG-iștii sunt paznici ai democrației. Ei devin țintele acțiunilor abuzive din partea celor corupți, acțiuni menite să intimideze și chiar să rănească. Sunt patru ani de când jurnalista Daphne Galizia a fost ucisă pentru că a demascat corupția.
                  

                     În România, jurnaliștii sunt acționați în instanță pentru investigații privind infracțiuni de corupție. La protestul din 10 august, jurnaliștii care urmăreau abuzurile forțelor de ordine au fost gazați și loviți. Jurnaliștii care scriu despre tăierile ilegale de pădure sunt constant amenințați și agresați.
                  

                     Nu mai putem sta deoparte. Fac apel la Comisie să recunoască amenințarea reală la adresa statului de drept a acestor practici. Nu mai putem întoarce privirea lăsând jurnaliștii singuri și expuși. Este nevoie de măsuri legislative de prevenire și combatere a acțiunilor abuzive, de magistrați pregătiți să le respingă și să protejeze libera exprimare.
                  

Mick Wallace (The Left). – Mr President, last November, my Independents 4 Change colleague, Clare Daly, tabled an amendment to the Annual report on the situation on fundamental rights in the EU. It stated: ‘whereas journalists and other media actors in the EU face multiple attacks, threats and pressures from state and non-state actors; whereas the detention and criminal prosecution of Julian Assange sets a dangerous precedent for journalists, as affirmed by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe’.
It was actually a factual amendment designed to protect journalists and whistleblowers, but it was voted down by almost all of the EPP, Renew and S&Ds. That gives you an idea of the flavour of this place.
I am voting in favour of this report. The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs have done good work here, and the principles aspired to in the text are to be lauded. If you share the view that journalism should be free to challenge power, and that this freedom helps create a vibrant democracy, then you must see the plight of Julian Assange as the most monumental media-freedom case in recent history.
And you should be campaigning for his release, and stop the persecution of Julian Assange.

Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Domnule președinte, am susținut acest raport pentru că este esențial ca acest for să rămână un paznic care trage semnale de alarmă atunci când libertatea de exprimare este pusă în pericol și avem astăzi în întreaga lume situații în care jurnaliștii sunt intimidați, în care clanuri care își dau mâna pe interese ce țin de corupție amenință jurnaliștii.
                  

                     Tocmai de aceea, pentru că acest raport pune accent pe acțiuni strategice în justiție împotriva mobilizării publice prin care sunt hărțuiți jurnaliștii, activiștii care luptă pentru adevăr.
                  

                     Din acest punct de vedere, este esențial ca Uniunea Europeană, Comisia să pregătească noi instrumente pentru a proteja jurnaliștii din Uniunea Europeană care se simt amenințați de către cei care împart puterea sau de grupurile de interese.
                  

                     Este fundamental să rămânem un for care apără acest drept fundamental precum libertatea de exprimare.
                  
7.5.   The European Education Area: a shared holistic approach (A9-0291/2021 - Michaela Šojdrová)

Declarações de voto orais


Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Domnule președinte, am susținut acest raport pentru că eu consider că educația este motorul progresului unei societăți. Copiii noștri merită să trăiască într-o Europă unită, iar unitatea și solidaritatea încep cu educația. Tocmai de aceea cred că este nevoie să fim solidari, să îi susținem pe cetățenii proactivi, nu pe cei care nu înțeleg misiunea pe care o are societatea noastră.
                  

                     Tocmai de aceea cred că este necesar ca Comisia, împreună cu statele membre, să creeze un cadru comun al învățării despre Uniunea Europeană. Toți elevii ar trebui să fie familiarizați cu instituțiile și principalele politici europene, cu drepturile și obligațiile inerente ale cetățenilor europeni.
                  

                     Avem nevoie de un sistem de educație paneuropean de calitate, care încurajează studierea istoriei și patrimoniului cultural al Europei, care promovează o memorie europeană colectivă și o conștiință istorică critică, bazată pe valorile fundamentale pe care se întemeiază Uniunea Europeană.
                  
7.6.   An intellectual property action plan to support the EU's recovery and resilience (A9-0284/2021 - Marion Walsmann)

Declarações de voto orais


Clare Daly (The Left). – Mr President, an intellectual property plan for the EU is certainly incredibly important for our recovery. But to achieve that, we need a healthy European Union IPO office, it's absolutely key.
I know the organisation has requested an extra 247 posts. This is unprecedented and would certainly help, but we also need to look at the issue of staff retention. I'm aware that high-level staff had contracts recently not renewed despite that. This is a well-established practice and there should only be exceptional reasons why this wouldn't happen.
I am acutely aware of the need to retain Irish staff, given that our numbers are falling across EU institutions, and it's very important that we retain women in senior positions. It's a fact that 50% of the internal audit team in the EU IPO are retiring over the next period, so we do need to retain a skill set if we're to achieve the ambition outlined in the plan.
A staff survey recently said many staff were afraid to speak out. There's no point in us waffling on about workers' rights in other institutions if we don't respect them on our own. We've got to have a clean EU IPO office if we're going to implement this plan.
7.7.   The first anniversary of the de facto abortion ban in Poland (B9-0543/2021, B9-0544/2021)

Declarações de voto orais


Leila Chaibi (The Left). – Monsieur le Président, ‘l'enfant pèse 485 grammes, pour l'instant à cause de la loi sur l'avortement, je dois rester couchée. Ils attendront qu'il meure et sinon je peux – génial – m'attendre à une septicémie. C'est l'horreur. Ma vie est en danger et je dois attendre.’
                  

                     Ce message, c'est celui qu'Isabella, 30 ans, une jeune Polonaise, a envoyé à sa mère. Isabella a dû attendre et elle en est morte. Elle est morte parce que les médecins lui ont refusé d'avorter alors qu'ils savaient que le fœtus qu'elle portait était mal formé.
                  

                     Isabella est décédée à cause d'une nouvelle loi inhumaine qui interdit de facto l'avortement. Et à cause de cette loi, des dizaines de milliers de Polonaises ont recours à des avortements clandestins, se procurent seules des pilules abortives ou doivent aller à l'étranger, mettant en péril leur vie et leur santé.
                  

                     Voilà où mènent les politiques d'extrême droite qui inspirent tant de réactionnaires et qui inspirent certains candidats à l'élection présidentielle chez nous. Ce combat est vital. Cautionner cette situation, c'est faire de la non-assistance à personne en danger. Chers collègues, il faut réagir! Et comme disent les Polonaises: pas une de plus!
                  

                     Ani jednej więcej.
                  

Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-н Председател, колеги, убедено гласувах против тази резолюция, защото тя е символ на крайна лява прогресивистка идеология, която се налага в тази зала. Не стига това, но и явно хобито на тази зала е да упреква за всичко правителство на Полша, което е консервативно, което е традиционно, което защитава семейството и традиционните ценности.
                  

                     Тази резолюция, както и много предишни, всъщност служат на тази идеология, която твърди, че едва ли не семейството и децата са някакво бреме, от което трябва да се отърсим, и че може да бъде въпрос на обществено обсъждане и на обществено настояване дали едно семейство да има деца или не. Всяка една държава членка има правото да определя своята политика в областта на здравеопазването и трябва да насърчава както майчиното здраве, така и здравето на децата, а не да бъде пропаганда, която да налага някакви противни, изключително опасни и вредни идеи. Освен всичко останало, тази резолюция противоречи на Европейските договори.
                  

Karolin Braunsberger-Reinhold (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Ich habe heute für den Entschließungsantrag des Europäischen Parlaments gestimmt, der das De-facto- Abtreibungsverbot in Polen mit deutlichen Worten kritisiert. Für mich stellt das Urteil des polnischen Verfassungsgerichtshofes, der seine politische Unabhängigkeit unter der autokratischen Herrschaft der PiS-Regierung seit geraumer Zeit verloren hat, einen eklatanten Eingriff in die sexuelle und reproduktive Gesundheit unzähliger Polinnen und auch Polen dar. Frauen und Mädchen, die sich vielleicht in einer schwierigen persönlichen Lage befinden, wird das Recht genommen, selbstbestimmt über ihren Körper zu entscheiden. Ich bedaure zutiefst, dass die polnische Regierung trotz internationaler Aufforderung immer noch keine Initiative ergriffen hat, diesen Menschen einen Zugang zu adäquater Gesundheitsversorgung zu ermöglichen. Dies zwingt Tausende von Frauen, ins Ausland zu reisen und sich dort Hilfe zu suchen. Die Kommission ist dringend aufgefordert, diese Diskriminierung abzustellen.
                  
8.   Corrections to votes and voting intentions: see Minutes
9.   Modified referrals to committees (Rule 56): see Minutes
10.   Associated committees (Rule 57): see Minutes
11.   Decisions to apply the joint committee procedure (Rule 58): see Minutes
12.   Transfers of appropriations and budgetary decisions: see Minutes
13.   Documents received: see Minutes
14.   Approval of the minutes of the part-session and forwarding of texts adopted: see Minutes

Presidente. – No que diz respeito às sessões de hoje e de ontem, as atas serão submetidas à aprovação do Parlamento Europeu no início da sua próxima sessão.
               

                  Caso não haja objeções, apresentarei imediatamente a resolução adotada durante este período de sessões às pessoas e aos organismos referidos na resolução.
               
15.   Dates of forthcoming sittings: see Minutes
16.   Closure of the sitting

(A sessão é encerrada às 12h05)

17.   Adjournment of the session

Presidente. – O período de sessões do Parlamento é interrompido.
               


ELI: 
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)